ML20234C848
| ML20234C848 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1987 |
| From: | Leland W PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20234C672 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-CR-3054 IEB-81-03, IEB-81-3, OL-1, NUDOCS 8801060346 | |
| Download: ML20234C848 (137) | |
Text
6 y .
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5' before the ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD t
7" )
In the Matter of )
)
PUBLIC $URVTfiU COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-443 OL-1 NEW HAMPSHIRE, et al. ) No. 50-444 OL-1
.i )
(Seabrook Station, Units 1 ) (On-site Emergency and 2) ) Planning Issues)
)
.,7 c )
FFIDAV'f'L CF WINTiiROPE B. LELAND I, Winthrope B. 141and, being on oath, depose and say as f o l ,' o w s : 1 i
\ l
- 4. . I am the CheNistry and Health Physics Manager at Seabrook Staticai A statement on my professional qualifications is attighed hexeto and, m#tlud. as Attachment "A".
s, 2,. ; Theoperati.onhrthaSeabrookStationCirculatingand VSetiice Water Systems QSW and SW) started on August 25, 1985.
"C0acomitant h 41th thik was the initation of the Chlorination IJystgm operat(on. The Seabrook Station Chemistry Program a @'laus , Chaptcy A R , is the implementing document for the I Chlorine Management P)ogInm (CMP) which bases the long tern scheme for'chtcrane regime on biopanel inspections. The Seab' rook Stafion Chemistry Dopar tment inspects whenever )
possible, CW and SW systch camponents, monitors effectivass of
';'i biofouling control as well as ensuring compliance with NPDES j restrictions. N l
- 3. The chronoloay appended to this document lists the i inspections performed on th>3 CW and SW system and plant components using seawater, since operation in 1985. During the first five mont?k( of the circulating water system operation, the i system was. chlorinated. Biopanels in the intake and discharge transition structur'es shrwed no signs of any bio-settlement.
During January 1986, preparations for epoxy coating of the main t
1 800M60346B{()[g43 PDR ADOCn O PDR G ,
y N\
g
% s
, \ \'
, _ E \ t't i s' ,
J 1
4 0
condensers tube sheets allowed access to main condensers water boxes. This inspection showed no biofouling or settlement on the neoprene lining or the tube sheets. Inspection of the tidal interface line in the CW pump bay at this time also showed no signs of any biological activity. Between January and June, 1986 operation of CW and SW was intermittent, and for short periods. Biopanel inspections were performed during the first six months of 1986 with no fouling observed. Full CW operation and chlorination resumed in June 1986. Additional biopanels were deployed in May 1986 to provide added assessment capabilities. No settlements of mussels were noted until late July 1986 when the numbers increased from approximately 3 to about 200 per panel in two weeks. Chlorination was maintained through December 1986, and all but three specimens detached by January 1987. The detached specimens did not cause any blockage. During this period the dosing line to the SW pump bay was utilized to maintain chlorine levels in the SW system.
December 1986 inspection of SW pump house at the tidal interface showed no biosettlement other than green algae.
- 4. Starting in June of 1987, the following seawater components or heat exchangers were examined: SCCW, PCCW "A" and "B",
DGJCW "A" and "B", Main condensers, intake transition structure and CW pump bay. No biofouling was seen in any of these components. Limited barnacle settlement was observed in the condenser water boxes and the circulating water pump house.
However, none of these barnacles was alive.
- 5. In May, 1987 a particularly heavy barnacle settlement was noted on the biopanels followed later in June 1987 by a heavy mussel settlement. Chlorination was maintained, and by the end of July lo87, the mussel settlement had diminished by 50%.
There was look barnacle mortality with 90% of the dead barnacle she)ls detuched. The detached specimens did not cause any bAockage. By November, 1987 the mussel settlement hiso diminished to only a few specimens. Similar observations were made en inspection of the CW pump bay walls in September 1987;
!.o. dead barnacles detached but no mussel settlement.
Normandeau Associates, a biological consultant, also inspected the biopanels. Their conclusion was that the settlenent observed on tbn biopanels was insignificant when compared with 4 the open-ocean biopanels that they deploy in the vicinity and l outside the intake structures. Open-ocean biopanels were considerably fouled.
- 6. Thus far, no integrated growth measurements nor integrated mass measurement for mussels have been made on the biopanels because there have been no permanent settlements. Although the barnacle set showed growth during the first two months, these specimens died and the residual shells detached, diminishing the fouling effect. No biofouling of any kind has been observed in any component using seawater. Some shell fragments have been
___-_-_-__-_ a
7 ,
~
Q
,A
't i fokind.inseveraltubes;however, these shells were not blocking flow. V Rinally, biopanei ..neasurensnts have been confirmed by VAsual observation with bt tne pump bays. 'Ihese facts support our,* position that no biofouling exists in the SW system.
7.- As part of the ongoing cLirveillance test program required 3 by Tt;chnical Specification 4.0.5 and Japlemented in accordance 4 with ybv requirements of the ASME code,; Chapter XI, subsection IWP, and-Seabrook Safety Eva?uation Report (SSER) 6, all six of
' the Service Water system pumps (41A,.B,0C, and D and 110A and B) are tested quarterly as a mirimum. The" test consists of N s establishing a knoim system flow condition (flow pat:b cm3 flow rate) and recording data indicative of pump and systom performance. Because the differential pressure across the pump is verified to remain within an acceptable band for'the required flow rate, not onli'is peop performance being monitored but the
[' condition of the overall system is also tested. Should f ouling or any other phenorr.enon occur which would restrict sistem . flow, 1 it would be detected during the quarterly pump surver11ance test f as an unsatisfactory increase in the required pump differential pressure to' attain the required flow rate or an inability to achieve the espaired flow. All service water heat exchangers
, are on line and therefore Anonitored during each pump
' surveillance tsst. Because the six service water pumps are tested. quarterly, the system flow resistance is checked and verified to be satisfactory a total of 24 separate times each year,;12 times for'each train of Service Water.
- 8. Furthermore, the operations Department performs the following tasks to ensure that blockage or reduced flow does not
([ occur: 3
"* SW pump flow capacities are measured quarterly.
E The SW strainer immediately upstream of PCCW and DGJCW heat exchangers are cleaned after reaching a 6 psi differential pressure (normal psid J.s about 5 lbs.). ,
- Servic \ water flow is checked by an auxilary officer routinely during each shift, at a minimum.
s b
__.h _- _ _ _ . _ _ .
- _ _ . . - - _ - - -___ . - _ . - - - = . = _ =_...--_.:=-.==_=-_-.-
e
- 9. Controls established at the Seabrook Station ensure that the cooling water system will be effectively monitored for biofouling control.
lo" b- "
Winthrope B. Leland
~') STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
?< !. h #nt' ss. Decemb'er'd,1987 The above-subscribed Winthrope B. Leland appeared before me and made oath that he had read the foregoing affidavit and that the statements set.forth therein are true to the best of his knowledge.
Before me, 3 .
pu, d
/
+ / c,, : ++4 ~
Notary Public /
, c, '?
My Commission Expires: !d, [fG L A' .j / / //
-4 -
)
CHRONOLOGY 08-12-85 Inspection of cooling tower SW check valves no biofouling j noted. i
)
8-25-85 to Start-up of CW and SW Systems l l
12-24-85 and chlorination starts. Chlorine demand study.
12-24-85 Shutdown of SW and CW Systems.
01-21-86 Inspection of CW pumphouse, center bay.
No biofouling noted.
01-23-86 Inspection of condenser air removal heat exchangers. No biofouling noted.
01-27-86 Inspection of main condenser; no biofouling noted. Inspection of Water Box Priming pump heat exchangers; no biofouling noted.
01-86 CW/SW flow only for seven days.
02-86 SW flow only on 23 days.
03-86 SW flow only on 27 days.
04-86 CW and SW flow for 14 days.
05-86 CW or SW for 19 days.
06-86 CW and SW flow for 24 days. Chlorination System in operation with CW/SW flow.
07-86 to Chlorination System operation and CW flow. Dosing 12-86 direct to SW system during observation of increased biological activity.
07-86 Extra bio-panels added to CW and SW pumphouse.
12-23-86 Inspection of SW pumphouse. No biofouling noted.
06-04-87 Inspection of "A" PCCW heat exchanger.
No biofouling observed.
06-05-87 Diesel Generator Jacket Cooling Water l
heat exchanger inspection. No biofouling noted.
e 4
07-06-87 ' Barnacles noted in intake transition structure and on bio-panels.
Chlorination of CW underway.
07-10-87 to Heavy mussel set on all biopanels.
07-24-87 i 07-30-87 50% reduction in mussel set. 100%
barnacle mortality; 90% of barnacle shells detach from panels.
08-12-87 Inspection of main condenser. No biofouling noted.
09-11-87 Inspection of "A" SCCW heat exchanger.
No biofouling noted.
09-11-87 Inspection of CW pumphouse (dewatered).
Barnacle detached from walls just as on panels. No mussel settlement also paralleled on panels. No biofouling or significant level of debris.
09-25-87 Inspection of "B" PCCW heat exchanger.
No biofouling noted.
Inspection of "B" DGJCW heat exchanger.
No biofouling noted.
Inspection of SW pipe downstream of SW-V5.
A~few dead barnacles; no biofouling.
l l
L _ -__ - __ _ : _ _ _. _ _ _ - - _ - _ _ _ _ - - ..__ ___-_ _ _-_______-___ _ _--_ __ _ _ __- _ _ L
STATEMENT OF PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS Winthroce B. Leland QUALIFICATIONS: Sixteen years of experience in Chemistry and Health Physics disciplines.
Experience ranged from six years at the SIC Naval Reactors Prototype, 1 year at
.Argonne National Laboratory and 4 years at Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company.
EXPERIENCE:
Nov 1979 to present Public Service Company of New Hampshire.
Seabrook Station.
Job
Title:
Chemistry and Health Physics Manager - February to present Responsible for the coordination and direction of the Chemistry and Health Physics Departments. Advise Station Manager of plant radiological conditions and radiation protection program status.
Job
Title:
Chemistry Department Supervisor - May 1981 to February 1986 Responsibilities: Manage the Chemistry Department in planning, developing and implementing programs of chemistry and radiochemistry which result in the safe and efficient operation of the nuclear generating station.
Job
Title:
Chemist - November 1977 to May 1981.
Responsibilities: Supply technical and supervisory support to the Chemistry Supervisor. Implement current techniques, concepts and analytical methods necessary to support the efficient operation of the nuclear l
generating supervise chemistry and
' radiochemistry functions of the station.
1
-A-1
_ _ _ - - _ _ - ._________--________-_____m
'h:
4 Nov 1975 to Nov 1979 Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company, Haddam, CT Job
Title:
Chemistry and Health Physics Technician Responsibilities: Perform Chemical and Radiochemistry functions required for all phases of operation of a pressurized water nuclear plant. Provide Health Physics support during maintenance and operation of the plant.
Oct 1974 to Oct 1975 Argone National Laboratory, INEL, Idaho Falls, Idaho Job
Title:
Senior Health Physics Technician Responsibilities: Write procedures for Laboratory Health Physics Manual, administer radiation worker training l
course, introduce and train radiation worker in concepts of total containment devices, perform safety audits, provide radiation protection for EBR-II reactor maintenance, operate multi channel analyzer for detection of reactor fission breaks.
Jan 1971 to Oct 1974 General Electric Company, Knolls Atomic power Laboratory. SIC Prototype, Windsor, CT Job
Title:
Radiological Controls Technician l
Responsibilities: Maintain Qualification l
as Radiological Controls and Engineering Laboratory Technician (ELT) as specified by Naval Reactors. Performed and encountered technical aspects of:
monitoring radiation exposure, shield planning, liquid and solid waste disposal, thermoluminescent dosimetry, environmental monitoring, perform plant chemical and radiochemical analysis, operate and calibrate instrumentation, radiation and contamination surveys, first aid, audit radiological operations
- e.
n I
of Navy personnel and submit written reports of audits.
Jan 1969 to Jan 1971 Combustion Engineering - Naval Reactors Division, Windsor, CT (S1C Prototype, same facility as above)
Job
Title:
Radiological Controls Technician Responsibilities: Same as above under General Electric EDUCATION: Bachelor of Science in Chemistry from the University-of Hartford - August 1980 MISCELLANEOUS: Held "L" clearance with the Energy Research and Development Administration.
Member of the Health Physics Society.
i NN ommesenverrewHarrom**.
SEABl00KJiAT Engineering 0 1671 Worceste July 8,1981 FramWham, M SBN 168 i T.F. B4.2.5 )
i
)
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia , Pennsylvania 19406 Attention: Mr. Boyce H. Grier, Director
References:
(a) Construction Permits CPPR-135 and CPPR-136, Docket Nos.
50-443 and 50-444 (b) NRC IE Bulletin 81-03, dated April 10, 1981
Subject:
Response to IE Bulletin 81-03; " Flow Blockage of Cooling Water to Safety System Components by Corbicula sp. (Asiatic Clam) and Mytilus sp. (Mussel)"
Dear Sir:
The following information has been prepared in response to your specific request contained in Reference (b) for holders of construction permits.
Extensive sampling of the marine environment that will be used for
~
1.
Seabrook Station source and receiving water shows that Mytilus sp. is f ound there; Corbicula sp. , a f resh water bivalve is not. The planned method of Mytilus control will be a combination of thermal treatment for the main circulating water and low level chlorination for service water systems. Implementation date for detection and prevention of system flow blockage will be concurrent with system flooding. Because the intake structures are near mid-level in about 50 feet of water, the eff ect of water level (tidal amplitude of about ,
8 feet) should not influence the potential for intrusion of Mytilus into the system. The effectiveness of the planned methods for detection and prevention of Mytilus fouling is adequate judged from empirical information.
- 2. Presently, there are no cooling water systems flooded.
- 3. The 1.icensee has conducted a comprehensive environmental monitoring program beginning in 1969 and continuing through to the present. The collection of subtidal and intertidal hard substratee benthic organisms assures us of the presence of Mytilus. Monthly samples taken in May of 1981 showed Mytilus to be press'nt.
~^ ~'
-f' U.S. Nuclcor Regulatory Commission Attostion: Mr. Boyc3 H. Crior, Diroctor July 8,1981 Psgs 2 Items 3 (b), (c),
because no cooling water sys tems have been flooded.(d), and (e) are no report Thewasaanpowerten hours.expended in the conduct of the review and preparation o PSNH has been aware of the presence of Mytilus in the source and receiving water for Seabrook Station since the inception of its environmental monitoring program in 1969 and therefore did not require additional manpower to take corrective action vis-a-vis IE Bulletin 81-03.
contact If you desire this additional office. information regarding this response, please Very truly yours, 6
John DeVincentis Project Manager ec: Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS)
)ss MIDDLESEX COUNTY )
Then personally appeared before me, J. DeVincentis, who, being duly sworn, did state that he is a Project Manager of Yankee Atomic Electric Company, tha t he is duly authorized to execute and file the foregoing request in the name and on the behalf of Yankee Atomic Electric Company, and that the statements therein are true to thIt bes t of his knowledge and belie f.
_ .. Q " g g ...
g *** I
- 4j*. f'\ Robert H. Groce 2 -
Notary Public
- 4a"c. '? My Commission Expires September 14,198!.
. .o ', ' , 'Y ./O '
- i g-II' SgAAAOCMt STATION i
j y I Ergia==4ng Oh- )
a
~
1471 Warsmeer smed Pub 5c Serv 6ce of New Homperke F'**3aehem. M**wns 0170 t (417) . E72 8100 l
Warch 7, 1983 S RN-4 R A T.F. B4.2.5 United States Nuclear Regulatory Conmission Washington, D. C. 20555 Attention: Mr. Edwa rd L. Jorda n , Director Division of Engineering and Quality Assurance office of Inspection and Enforcement
References:
(a) Cons truc tion Pe rmi t s CPPP-13 5 and CPPR-136 Docke t Nos. 50-443 and 50-444 (b) USNRC Letter, dated April 10, 1981, "IE Bulletin 81-03, Flow Blockage of Cooling Water to Safety System Components by CORBICULA SP. (Asiatic riam) and FYTILUS SP. (Mussel),
B. H. Crier to W. C. Tallman (c) PSNH Letter, dated July 8 1981, "'esponse to IE Bulleria 81-03; Flow Blockage of Coo'.ing Water to Safety System Components by CORBICULA SP. (Asiatic Clam) and FYTILUS Sp.
( Mu s s e l ) , J. Devincentis to B. H. c.rier (d) USNRC Letter, dated January 24, 19R3, "IE Mulletin No.
81-03; Flow Blockage of Cooling Water to Safety Components by CORBICULA SP. (Asiatic Clam) and VYTILUS SP. (Mussel),
E. L. Jordan to J. Devincentis
Subject:
Additional Response to IE Bulletin 81-03; Flow R1ockage of Cooling Water to Safety System Components by CORBICULA SP.
(Asiatic Clam) and KYTILUS SP. (Mussel)
Dear Sir:
In response to your request f or inf ormation (Reference (d)], the materials relevant to the description of planned thermal treatment and chlorination practices, as well as information identifying all safety-related systems affected at Seabrook Station. have been presented in the followina or document:
NURF.C-0 A9 5, Fina l Envi ronment a l 9t a t ement related tn the operation nf Seabronk Station. Units 1 and 2, nneket Nos. 50-441 and 50-444, publir Service Comnany of New namrshire, et al., recember 19R2, 9ections 4.'.*,
.3.3.0, s.3.1 l
- 00 E- si 0 0 se. 330 . : : ere- .- : : :: -e e: : e ec x:.::::. . . :::: w l
l t _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _________ _ ____ o
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
-- -q r] l
^
l l
tinited States Nuclear Regulatory Fnmmissinn W i reti 7, jog)
. Attention. Mr. Edwa rd L. Jo rd.,n Page }
Additional information has also been prrevided in the followine, nocornets prepared by PSNH:
Response to RAI: 243.19 Seabrook Station environmental Report -
Operating License State, January 1982 i
Seahrook Station Applicants Fnvirnemental Panort - Operatinc 1.tcense Stage, Public Service Company of New Hampshire Volume 1, Sections 1.4, !
3.6 5.3, 10.5 Seabrook Station Final Safety Analvsjs Report, Public Service Company of New Hampshire, Volume 11, tection 10.6.5 Copies of the previousiv suhaitted -3*erials listed above are enclosed for your information.
Very truly vours, YA':KEr, A*nMIC r.LEC*RIC COMPANY f g j'. .. '-
,/*
J. ne rincent.4 Droject uanster ALL/fsf Enclosures ,
ec: Atomic Cafety and Licensing Board <ervice List l
l l
J
r
. I i
in January 1933. The quantities of radioactive natorial that the NRC staf f t , calculates will be released from the plant during normal operations, including f
anticipated operational occurrences, are presented in Appendix 0 of this state-l sent, along with examples of the calculated doses to individual members of the pubite and to the general population resulting from these ef fluent quantities.
l The staff's detailed evaluation of the solid radweste system and its capatility to accommodate the solid wastes expected during normal operations, including anticipated operational occurrences, will be presented in Chapter 11 of the
! SER.
As part of the operating license for this f a..ility, the NRC will require Tech-i nical Specifications limiting release rates for radioactive material in liquia and gaseous effluents and requiring routine acnitoring and measurement of all principal release points to ensure that the facility operates in conformance with the radiation-dose-design objectives of Appendix 1.
4.2.5 Nonradioactive Waste Treatment Systems With the exception'of the applicant's planned method for control of biofouling in the station cooling systems. there have been no changes to the nonradioactive waste treatment systems of Seabrook Station from those presented in the FES-CP.
The proposed biofouling control procedures are discussed below. As was indi-cated in the FES-CP, all station wastewaters, except stors water runoff and a portion of the nonradioactive floor drainage, will be routed to the station l- discharge tunnels for discharge of f shore with the station cooling water (respor to questions 291.20 and 240.20). Storm water ru.,off and nonradioactive floor drainage from the diesel generator building and the fire pumphouse will De routed, after treatment, to the Browns River. Table 4.3 is a summary of ex;ecte nonradioactive wastes. There will be no discharge of wastes to groundwater in the site vicinity.
In the FES-CP, the applicant identified several measures to control biofouling in the station cooling water systems. These were thermal backflushing, perio: :
shock chlorination of the circulating and service water systems, and mechanica' cleaning and antifoulant paint applications. The first two methods woule ce employed while the station is operating; the third method would be performe:
while one or both units were shut down (see FES-CP Section 3.4.5). The pro-posed procedure was to have employed circulating water-system flow-reversal heat treatment, producing temperatures at the system exits (that is, station intake structures) of about 110'F (43'C) for 1 to 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />. .This procedure -as projected to be used twice a month for the period June through October anc once every 2 months for the remaining months. Shock chlorination of the cooling water systems was to supplement the thermal treatments. Sequential treatrent of the station condensers was planned, with applications of sodium hypochlertte ;
solutions not exceeding 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> per day. Expected maximum free available oss-dant was 0.25 mg/l at the diffuser. The staff recommendation was that the station discharge be monitored for total residual oxidant and that the mani e concentration at the diffuser outlet be controlled to 0.1 ag/1.
The applicant has proposed" in the NPOES permit application that continuows 1c.
level chlorination of the circulating water system be used to control Dief od" l
- Letter from B. B. Beckley, P5 w to T. Landry, EPA, dated January 30. 1921 (NPOES permit application).
l Seabrook FE5 49
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ l
1 l
Table 4.3 Chemicals added to discharge t ,
Maxieue estimated Yearly discharge concentration in Chemica) (total Ib) effluent (spe)
Coerational j Chlorine (Cla) *5.5 x 105 0.2 Total residual oxidant 0.1 Sulfuric acid (50.8-) 1.9 x 105" Sodium hydroxide (Na+) 1.7 x 108" 0.1 Hydrezine (NgH.) 3.6 x 108 Morpholine (C.MeNO) 1.2 x 108 0.000007 Preoperational Hydroxyacetic acid 1.9 x 108 Formic acid 4.6 x 108 i Trisodium phosphate 7 x 108 Monosodium phosphate 3 x 108 Disodium phosphate 6 x 108 Sodium nitrite 2.4 x 104 Citric acid 1.2 x 10*
- Sased on regeneration of one train per day. '
(response to question 291,19), with supplementation, as necessary, by thermal backflushing. The applicant cites (letter of January 30, 1981 and response to question 291.19) the following economic, techical, environmental, and safety-related reasons for preferring biocide application (supplemented by thermal backflushing on an as-needed basis) for biofouling control in station systems over full reliance on thersal backflushing:
(1) The cost of continuous low-level chlorination during the fouling season at an injection level of 2.0 mg/l is estimated to be about $1.a militan per ,
year, while thermal backflushing is estimated to cost between 51.5 millien i per year and 53.0 million per year, depending on the frequency of backf1wsr ;
(2) The use of continuous low-level chlorination does not involve adjustments to station power level, cooling system flowrates,Allorofalternatives these aspects in of station cooling water flow paths or directions.
Seabrook Station operation would be affected by thermal backflushing.
Thus, the use of continuous low-level chlorination is judged by the applicant to be a simpler and more readily employable procedure for biofouling control at Seabrook Station than thermal backflushing.
(3) The use of continuous low-level chlorination s't the levels proposed initia11y and as modified by the chlorine minimization program required under the NPDES perelt is not espected to result in significant adverse effects on receiving water Quality such that designated uses for these waters would be jeopardized.
Additionally, the area to be affectec is a-10 Seatrook FE5
limited to the vicinity of the discharge diffuser and, to a lesser extent' the station thermal plume. Use of thermal backflushin1 would introduce periodic thereal stresses to the area around the intake structures in addition to the area already af fected by the normal station discharge.
(4) Finally, the use of thereal backflushing, unlike use of continuous low-level chlorination, has the potential for introducing hydraulic anc thermal gradients within the station cooling system that could adversely affect normal station operation. The return of both units to full power operation could incur costs approaching $1 million plus the loss of full station generating capacity during the period of repair and power level increase.
Concurrar.t use of biocide application and thermal treatment is not planned tu the applicant. Infrequent thermal backflushing may be performed at toe station for operator training and system test purposes.
Provisions have been made during the construction of the station for biocide injection into the cooling water flow at the three offshore intakes and at the intake transition structure, the circulating water pump house, the service water pump house, and the discharge transition structure. Sodium hypochlorite solu-tion would be added to the cooling water flow primarily at the intake structures, with the other injection points available for booster dosage should the offshore locations not provide a sufficiently high dose in the system heat exchangers to control biofouling (response to Question 291.19). Figure 4.5 is a block diagram of the system, showing system structures, biocide injection points, water flow rates, and travel times.
The applicant has statad (letter of January 30,1981) that no nessurable resic-ual oxidants are expected to be present at the station discharge. Althougn ne applicant does not state a reference minimum detectacle oxidant residual, for chlorine the minimum detectable concentration for compliance purposes is usually taken as 0.1 og/) total residual oxidant.
The preliminary draft MPDES permit for Seabrook Station (Appendix H) would re-quire that the use of biocide for biofouling control at the station be limitec to chlorine only, unless approval from the EPA Regional Administrator and the New Hampshire Water Supply and Pollution Control Commission (NHWS&PCC) Execut'.e Director is obtained for use of any other biocide (s). In addition, this perm t would restrict total residual oxidant discharges from the condenser and service cooling waters during station operation to 0.2 og/) maximum at.apoint prior to where the chlorinated streams six with any other discharge. The applicant plans to control total residual oxidant concentration in station cooling waters to this maximum value at the discharge transition structure (response to Question 291.19).
There is no limitation in the proposed draft NPO[$ permit on the duration of in-dividual applications or time of year that biocides say be used at the station.
However, the applicant asserts, and the staff concurs, that biofouling is likely to be a seasonal probles such that treatment of the entire intake side of the station cooling system with biocide may not be required throughout the year (response to Question 291.19). Control of slime buildup in station condensers and heat exchangers is anticipated to be a recurring need throughout the year.
Sentrook FE5 4 11 f
, u 6 1 t t
- 1 : _i : _i II 13 ii -
i n ._
a._ .._ <
~ s i TT 5:
T.T::
ET: :
E
- i --* + *
+-)
11 11 s
- ] 11 se t
., a n; .
a ..
=
s cr.
j u b ) !
[
b i
/
. ,: j."ji I
_ 1 -* ::)
=* :. s
. I 1 -., _. a y
_.4 i
I, , I A jil A o A3 '
a V a
V a 3 C a v .E
. .. 4. = :
- Tl i i '
=
l i.
I I _i t [1
~J
,e :
[1 pt j
e
& % ): j si e e-
%: a. n: .:
Y I c I I : .3 : 3
. E
!!NS 7 * : _g_g
}, *i I: *l '~
I: *!4 <
a g -f **l A - . . .
y 8 I I :: 6 : $
4 g
j -
- A.
i
- a% .
I: 3 366 ;.
I B1
.- 3 g !. ;_.
2 :
a
~
3 6 82 -
g 2 -",
[ '
a 3
- a
~
3 B :: 3 l : 1. t :
- 2
~ 33, 1 4_ 5 j ,_ E E g .l 3 - 4 - -
3 3 3 e.,,n a
.h g
I 5 l i =
l .
1 Seabrook FES -:'
l t
possibly requiring continuous chlorine appiteation to these systems year round.
- The resulting total residual oxidant concentration in the sta'.lon oischarge is proposed to be limited to 0.2 og/l by the draft MPDES permit. In accition, tnts permit would require the applicant to perform a biocide application minimization study, approved by the EPA Regional Administrator and by the NHWS&PCC Executive Director (NPDES Part I.4.e) that would detersine the sintoal discharge of bio-cide to the environment consistent with maintenance of suitable biofouling con-trol in the intake cooling water systes, condensers, and service water heat ex-changers. This requirement would tend to sinimize both the amount and duration of biocide discharges to the environment. The detailed progras description ano specif' cations for the minimization program have not yet been prepared by the i
applicant. The proposed program will be submitted to the EPA for approval be-fore implementation. A description of the general approach for such programs is appended to the Steam Electric Power Plant Ef fluent Limitations Guidelines (40 CFR 423) and is included in Appendix ! of this statement.
4.2.6 Power Transmission System The Seabrook transmission lines are described in the ER-CP (Section 3.9). in the FES CP (Section 3.8, and 4.1.2), in the ER-OL (Section 3.9), and in tne response to staff's questions (Question 310.2, ER 5ection 3.9). Discussions of transmission line rights-of way, land use, and impacts are in Sections 4.3.1.
5.2, and 5.5.1 of this statement. The transmission lines are divided into three ]
corridors: the Seabrook-Newington line; the Seabrook Tewksbury line; and the Seabrook-Scotte Pond line.
The Seabrook-Newington line, as noted in the constructive,n permit, was relocatec near the Packer Bog to avoid a stanc of Atlantic redars. South of this peint and on the west side of I-95, tne route was reic:sted to more nearly paralle1 I-95. Except for these changes, the corridor remains essentially the same as that outlined in the FES-CP.
The Seabrook-Tewksbury and the Seabrook-Scobie Pond lines, as proposed by t e applicant and outlined in the FES-CP, would share a common corridor weste ly from Seabrook for approximately 8 km (5 miles). Then the Seabrook-Tewks:. j line would head south to Tewksbury.
The Seabrook Scobie Pond line from the end of the joint corridor to its te-- i-tion near Scotia Pond has undergone one location change to date: a relocati:-
around Cedar Swamp, as ordered in the construction permit (see also FES-CP 5ections 3.8.5, 4.1.2, and 9.2.4). Seth the Seabrook Tewksbu'ry line and Pe Seabrock Scobie Pond line are awaiting final alignments as a. result of resc' -
tions pending before state hearing boards and/or court cases (Question 310.2.
ER Section 3.9). The seabroot-Nevington line has been constructed and ene ;::e:
Presently, the applicant indicates a schedule of completion of the Seabroer Tewksbury line for August 1983 and Seabrook-Scobie Pond for November 1985. :'
there are any changes in alignments along the NRC-approved Corridors that w: C:
result in a significant adverse impact that was not evaluated by the staff :r that is significantly greater than that which is evaluated in this statement.
the applicant will provide proper notification of such activities to the sta
for its evaluation.
Seabrock FES 4 13
I 4.3.3 Terrestrial and Aquatic Resources i -
l 4.3.3.1 Terrestrial Resc,urces The ecological communities are described in detail in the EE-CP (Section 2,7,1),
the FES-CP (Section 2.7.1), and the ER OL (Section 2.2.1). Construction of the station has resulted in the olisination of portions of the terrestrial biotic communities described in the FES-CP. The site still contains terrestrial fea-tures undisturbed by construction activities. In accition, certain~ plant com-eunities have been protected by fencing or other means to preserve their unique-mess as judged by the applicant (ER-OL p. 2.2.1). The surrounding spartina scrsh has received special attention, and it appears that construction activi-tie's have not harmed it.
4.3.3.2 Aquatic Resources This section reviews briefly the acuatic resources of the Seabrook site anc vicinity relative to station operation that have not been evaluated previously or that are related to areas of concern that are new since the publication of the FE5-CP.
The impacts to estusrine and marine biota and fisheries from operation of the cooling systems (intake and discharge) have been assessed and found to me acceptable. Because environmental concitions have not changed, the impacts will not be reevaluated in this environmental statement. Section 5.5.2 sum-marizes the previous assessments and fincings of the NRC and the U.S. Environ-mental Protection Agency.
Descriptions of acuatic resources includee in this environmental statement are related to the following matters that remain to be disclosed and assessed:
(1) The availability of recent information on the acuatic environment of tne SeaDrook site and vicinity.
(2) Changes in the aquatic environment that affect previous decisions.
(3) A proposal by the applicant to use continuous low-level chlorination of t.e cooling system (applied at the offshore intake structures) for biofoulia; .
control, rather than thermal backflushing. Thermal backflushing would ce j used, as necessary, to supplement low-level chlorination.
(4) upcating of recreational and coepercial fishery information, for use in l assessments of socioeconomic impacts and the consequences of accicents (5) updating of information en endangered and threatened specie's tincludec m Section 4.3.5 that follows)
Available Information on the Seatecok Site The ecology of the estuarine and marine environs in Thethe vicinity squatic of the Seac*::=
resources anc site was aescribed in the FES-CP (Section 2.7.2).
fisheries of Neopton Marcor and New Hampsnire waters of the Gulf of Maine were summarized in the NRC Alternative Site Study for Seatrock. The applicant anc a 22 l 5eserook FE5 i l
1 6
-~- ------~~-- --. __._____________
his consultants have been studying the aquatic environs near Seabrook since 1969. A detallec index of the stuc ces th-cugh March 1977 (Nelson) and a sum-eary document that describes the aquatic environment through December 1977 (Normandeau, December 1977) were prepared by the applicant. A listing of sur-ways of aquatic biota and marine environmental conditions conducted The sinceappli-the summary document was published appears at the end of this chapter.
cant's consultants have published several papers that resulted from the pre-operational studies conducted inER-0L The the vicinity of Seabrook; summarizes these the aquatic too are listec biological at the end of this chapter.
resources (Section 2.2.2) and recreational and commerical fisheries (Secti 2.1.3.4) of the site vicinity and the marine waters within an 80-km (50-mile)
The ER-OL also summarizes studies of the marine radius of the Seabrook site.
environment that are being conducted by agencies and organizations in New Hampshire, Maine, and Massachusetts (Section 6.3).
The Marine Ecosystem There have been no significant changes in the marine / estuarine ecology or biological resources of the Seabrook site vicinity since the previous assess- i ments discussed above that affect or alter previous conclusions.
Biofoulino Organisms l
The biofouling organisms of concern are those with the potential for fouling i or clogging of cooling system components, principally sussels (Mytilus spp.)
and barnacles (Balanus spp.), and to a lesser extent polychaete worms (for example, 5pircrb_is spp.), tunicates (for example, Molaula spp.), other solluse-and arthropod species, and some species of sacrea'gae.
Entry into the cooling system will occur with the cooling water atThe theplana-offshe e intake structures by the planktenic forms of the fouling organisms. '
tonic larvae of the principal foulers are present during spring through fall, with summer and early fall the periods of most active reproduction and settle-Barnacle larvae are present during March eent for the majority"of organisms.
and April, and mussel larvae are present during May through October or Novem The method of biofouling control considered Theinfrecuency the assessments and decisions of apph cation was t:
discussed above was thermal backflushing.
be approximately twice per month during the warmer sonths of April The througe present p-:-
November, and perhaps less often during the remaining months.
posal is to use continuous low-level chlorination applie thermal backflushing. It may not be necessary to continuously chlorinate tre entire intake side of the circulating water system year round, because bi is a seasonal phenomenon.
In September 1940, Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2, was shut downfic.
se water a'te covery that t.he unit failed to meet requirements for einimum set rate through the containment cooling units as a result of extens..v foul In April 1981, the NRC issued IE lulletic No. 81-03 freshwater bivalve cleas.
Flow tiockage of Cooling water to Safety System Components by Corbicu (Asiatic Clas) and Mytilus sp. (Mussel)." to holders of operatihg licenses Ine bulletin required the submittal to NRC of informat*
construction permits.
l l
a-23 Seabrook FE5 l f
en the known occurrence of fouling solluses in the vicinity of nuclear power plants and on inspections of plant equipment for fouling, as well as a oescrip-tien of methoc,a (in use or planned) for preventing and detecting fouling. The applicant responded to the bulletin on July 8,1981 (letter from J. Devincengt s
- P5884, to B. N. Grier, USNRC Region !) and acknowledged the presence of Mytilus ap. in the Seabrook site vicinity. Although the safety-related aspects of biofouling at Seabrook will be addressed in the safety evaluation report, the environmental impacts of biofouling control sessures on receiving water quality and aquatic biota are addressed in this environmental statement (Sections 5.3.1 sad 5.5.2).
Fisheries Fisheries of the Seabrook site vicinity were briefly discussed in the FES-CP and in more detail in the NRC Alternative Site Study for Seabrook. The ER OL (Section 2.1.3.4) and ER OL Revision 1 provide updated and detailed discussions of fisheries resources and harvests within an 80-km (50-mi) radius of seabroot.
The following discussion summarizes the recent information.
The coastal fishery resources within 80 km of Seabrook include harvests of fin-fishes, ao11uscs, crustaceans, and seaweeds free several counties within three states--New Hampshire (Rockingham Co.), Maine (York Co.), and Massachusetts (Essem and Suffolk Counties, and portions of Norfolk and Plymouth Counties).
Marine recreational fishing occurs throughout the region within 40 km of Sea-brook. Estimated harvests during recent years are shown in Table 4.5. The principal finfishes harvested have been cod, flounder, sackerel, pollock, smelt, cunner, herring, scup, and tomcod. Sof t sheM clams are harvested in all three states. Lobsters are harvested recreationally in New Hampshire and Massachusetts.
Lobstering in Maine is restrictee to coaucerciel harvesting. Within New Hampsnire, recreational harvests of finfish numoered 1,375,000 in 1979 (Table 4.5) anc 744,923 in 1980 (Table 4.6). The principal species taken were pollock, macte et, flounder, cod, haddock, smelt, and others (New Hampsnire 1981). The estimatec harvests from Hampton Harbor are shown in Table 4.7. Fish stocking programs are conducted by the State of New Hampshire for the purpose of managing and ennanc-ing the stocks of coastal anadromous fishes, such as American shad, coho salmon, and chinook salmon (ibid). About 1157 coho saloon were estimated to have ceea caught by anglers in tidal waters during 1980, compared with 314 during 1979 Harvesting of soft shell class is restricted to recreational fishing in New Hampshire. The number of recreational license holders was 2215 in 1979 and 5062 in 1980. An estimated 5000 bushels of class were harvested from Ham: ton Harbor during September 1940 through May 1981 (ER-OL Revision 1. Table 291.3 2).
During the period 1971 to 1976, recreational harvesting of class in Hampton Harter was intense and the stock was nearly depleted (Lindsay). The spatfall density of soft shell class in Hampton HarborDuring during1977 1976through was large and in-1980, the scat-creased 20 fold above that of 1975 (ibid).
fall density has been lower than in 1976, but improved compared with the leanee years of 1973-1975 (Normandeau R-353). Similarly, the densities of juvenile The and adult class have steadily increased through 1980 (Normandeau R-366).
spatf all during 1981 also was good, and the clan stock of Hrapton Harbor does
( a 2a 5eatrook FE5
5.3 Water Use and Hydrologic focacts ,
5.3.1 Water ituality The impacts of station chemical discharges on the quality of the waters in tne vicinity of the discharge structure in the Gulf of Maine were discussed'in the F(5-CP. The staff did not identify any adverse impacts on water que11ty nor any expected violations of the water quality standards established for the waters by the State of New Hampshire as a result of the discharge of sanitary systes wastes or industrial wastes (such Gs domineralizar regeneration solw-tions, reactor coolant chemicals, secondary coolant feedwater treatment chemi-cals, and preoperational cleaning solutions). Because the use, treatment, and !
discharge of these chemicals has not changed since the FES-CP was publishec, 1 the assessment therein remains unenanged. l As indicated in Section 4.2.5, the proposed treatment of the condenser anc i service cooling waters has changed signifir.antly from that presented in tne l FES-CP. The potential for this revised treatment scheme to adversely impact l site water quality is discussed below. ]
The addition of chlorine to the station cooling waters will likely result in l several organic and inorganic halogenated compounes being discharged to the j waters of the Gulf of Maine. The exact composition of the station discharge j will be affected both by the water auslity of the intake water--primarily the l I
pH, salinity, and ammonia content -and by the level to which the cooling waters are chlorinated (the halogen-to-am:mia ratio achieved in the waters). It is i possible, then, that the discharge composition from the station will vary in both types of compounds formed anc their concentration, depending on whether the station employs booster doses of biocide or is able to operate only on the i continuous low-level blocide application. l Studies of the site waters performed for the applicant indicate generally stable water quality conditions in the Seabrook area, but with some seasonal cycling of parameter values. Temperature is the most obv1ous of these varia-tions and is important in determining the onset of spawning and the subseque t settling of serine fouling organisms at the site. Thus, water temperature is likely to be the determining f actor in the initiation and termination of t e continuous phase of biocide application. The applicant has cited the blue aussel, Mytilus edulis, as the major fouling organism for the Seabrook site.
The identifies setting period for this organism is May through October wnen {
water temperatures range between 10*C to 15'C. Setting has been. reported in i l
New England, according to the applicant, at temperatures as low 44 8 to 9'C, however. The applicant, therefore, anticipates a need to continuously chier'- !
nate station cooling waters when the water temperature rises above 7.2*C (45'F) until the water temperatures fall below this value in the fall of the year (response to staff question 291.19). This would typically correspond to the May through October time frame (FE5 CP Section 2.5.1.3 and response to staf f question 291.19).
l Continuous application of biocide during these tf ais is designed to provide sufficient blecide presence in the cooling waters so that an environment nos-tile to aussel larvae attachment would exist throughout the station cooling water system. With an initial concentration of 2 og/1 total residwal omicant i
' (based on four chlorinators irjecting a total of 385.5 kg/hr (848 lb/ne) of a
5-2 Seabrook FES I
i
equivalent chlorine into a cooling water flow of 3119 m / 3min (824,000 spm)),
mussel setting is not likely to occur in the station intake piping. The degree and speed with which this initial biocide concentration is re.duced in the sys-tan piping are dependent on the initial compounds formed from chlorination and the chlorine demand of the intake water. (The entire demand of the intake water is not immediately satisfied by the station chlorinators because they utilize a sidestream of the intake waters and then six this treated wattr with the remain-ing intake water.) The type of chlorination products formed in the intake sys-tee may be deduced from the amount of chlorine added, the salinity, samonia concentration, and pH. Using the average values provided by the applicant, studies by Innan and Johnson (1978) and Sugam and He12 (1980) would predict that the oxidants formed would be comprised naarly entirely by hypobromous acid and brosamines (that is, in excess of 95-97% of the total oxidant formed).
Monochloramine formation would be extremely limited, if at all.
Assuming complete sixing at the initial injectiot; locations (the station in-takes), residual oxidant concentration degradation during the transit of the caoling waters from the offshore intakes to the intake transition structure at the station would be expected to range between 60 to 70%, (i.e. ,1.2 to 1.4 mg/l reduction) for one-unit operation, and 35 to 40% (i.e., 0.7 to 1.2 og/l reduc-tion) for two-unit opsration, using values available in the literature (Vong and Davidson, 1977, and Wong, 1980). Seabrook site-specific studies by the
. applicant (ER-OL Section 5.3.1) indicate values ranging free 0.8-to-1.24 mg/1, with an average of 1.0 mg/l over a 1 year period. The applicant expects that the chlorine demand experienced during station operation will exceed 1.0 mg/1.
Based on the values given above and the fact that these studies were conducted in seawater alone and, therefore, do not account for any additional demand that may be encountered in the station piping from biofiles surviving, the staff concludes that the applicant's characterization of the system oxidant demand is reasonable. This demand would seem to negate the need for booster doses of chlorine on the intake side of the cooling water system (at either the intake transition structure or the circulating and service water pump houses; see Figure 4.5). However, the studies by Wong and Davidson, 1977, indicate that oxidant demand occurs in two distinct phases of greatly differing rates, with the division in times between rates occurring at about 1 hr af ter oxidant introduction. Also, at this point in the cooling water system, biofouling ;-:-t rate is known to be considerably more vigorous because of the increased tet: era-tures experienced in the station condensers and service water heat exchange s.
addition, biocide exposure to the heat transfer surfaces is short (for eaa.?: 'e.
16 see in the main condenser) and operational experience (AHL/ES-12,1972) nas shown that the greatest effectiveness in this portion of the , system is attaiaec through exposure of the biofouling film to free available oxidant asThea result free of its greater oxidizing capacity over combined available oxidant.
available osidant residual would only be likely to occur in the condensers anc service water heat exchangers f rom a booster dose applied at the pump houses, Thus, during the period of the year that continuous chlorination is practiced.
additional biocide injection is considered likely to be necessary by the staff at the pump houses. During the remainder of the year, biocide addition would occur at these same points for the reasons cited above, unless thermal bact-flushing is employed. Booster dose oxidant concentrations have not been estimated by the applicant. However, it is stated (ER-0L Section 5.3.1) that the injection rate will be controlled so that the maximum tota' residual oxica" at the discharge transition structure will be 0.2 ag/l or less.
Seabrook FES 5-3
. Over the remaining 43 min travel time
- from the discharge transition structure to the station diffuser, additional decomposition of oxidant residual may occur.
Oxidant demand appears to be continuous and cent,inually cianging in rate over the time period experienced in station cooling system passage. Additionally, Wong's 1980 study showed an increase in oxidant demand with both water tempera-ture and initial oxidant concentration. The higher the water temperature for a given oxidant concentration, the greater the change in oxidant demand over time.
On this basis, the staff concludes that there is likely to be a decrease in the total residual oxidant ccncontration in the station discharge line from the level maintained at the discharge transition structure. The concentration at the station diffuser would likely be below 0.2 ag/l but a sore precise estimate of this concentration cannot be made on the basis of currently available information.
In addition to the presence of the active residual oxidant species in the sta-tion discharge sentioned earlier in this section, other halogenated compounds ,
may be formed and discharged as a result of cooling water chlorination at the station. Studies conducted by Sean, et al. (NUREG/CR-1301) indicate that tne principal haloform found in chlorinated seawater is brosoform. In samples of Pacific Ocean water collected near San Onofre with a pH of 8.3 and a calculatec. '
applied chlorine concentration of from 2.9 ag/l to 3.2 ag/1, brosoform concen-trations of 13.0 pg/l and 17.0 pg/l were seasured. Trace amounts (that is, less than 0.5 pg/1) of chlorodibromomethane were also sensured. (This latter com- -
pound, along with dichlorobromomethane and chloroform, was found in chlorinated estuarine samples comprised of about 50% fresh water.) Other volatile organic compounds, trichlorethylene, and toluene were also detected but their concen-trations were not noted. Similar sampling (Bean, Mann, and Neitzel, 1980) at the Millstone Nuclear Power Station (intake water pH = 8; chlorine injection concentration = 2 mg/1) indicated brosoform concentrations averaging 3.7 yg/l in the station discharge; chlorodibronomethane concentrations averaged 0.a ug/l (that is " trace" amounts similar to San Onofre sampling). The staff concluces from this field sampling that brosoform will likely be the principal halogenatec !
organic compound present in the Seabrook Station discharge. Available data support an estimate of about 15 pg/l for the concentration at the discharge structure.
Discharge of station cooling waters will be through a submerged offshore mu!*'-
ple port diffuser (Section 4.2.3). !apacts to the water quality and aquatic biota in the vic,inity of the discharge will be sitigated by the high discharge velocity and the rapid mixing of the effluent with unchlorinated water entrainec in the discharge plume. The applicant reports (ER-OL Section 5.'3) that tne dilution afforded the effluent in the receiving waters is 10 to 1 by the time the plume reaches the ocean surface. Expected total residual oxidant concentra-tion at this point in the plum is 0.02 ag/l or less, depending on the amount of degradation of oxidant residual occurring in the cooling water system beyond the last booster dose addition point or the discharge transition structure anc on the amount of reduction of residual through chemical interaction with the oxidant demand of the entrained ambient water. In a study (Normandeau Asso-ciates,1977) of the characteristics of the circulating water system and its performance under normal two unit operation, cn approximate 8-fold dilution of the discharge is projected to occur within 32 sec of discharge. The estimatec volume of water in the plume to this point in time and dilution is 3700 m3 "During two unit operation. travel time for one unit operation is 85 min Seabrook FES 5-4
(3 acre-ft). Ignoring demand reactions, this represents a residual oxidant can.
centration of about 0.025 mg/1 at the edge of this plume volume. seyone sni, point, concentrate m of residual oxidant would continue to decrease as 'a result of dilution, time-related natural decomposition, and reaction with exicant-demanding substances in the entrained ambient waters in the discharge plume.
The staff evaulated the applicant's far-field thermal plume predictions and estimated the centerline time of travel of the plume for weak ambient southern and weak ambient northern currents (0.15 knot) and moderate ambientThe northern current (0.40 knot), with average heat transfer rates in all cases.
0.01 ag/l and 0.008 og/l total residual oxidant isopleths at the plume canter-Ifne were calculated to exist at the isotherm locations identified in the appli-cant's study, ignoring oxidant ' eduction by chemical reaction. When these combinations of residual oxidant concentration are plotted against their flow time from the point of discharge, the resulting locus of points would indicate that entrained organisms in the discharge plume would experience exposures below both the acute and chronic toxicity thresholds identified by Mattice anc Zittel, 1976. However, this time-exposure assessment would only apply to organisms captive to the plume. Mobile organisas, such as fish, would be free to move in and out of the plume. Studies have shown (NUREG/CR-1350) that fisn have the ability to detect and in f act, given the opportunity, will avoid areas containing residual exidants at values as low as 2 pg/1 total residual oxidant (coho salmon).
Studies by Gibscn, et al. (NUREG/CR 1297) on the eastern hard clan (Mercenaria mercenaria) and the Atlantic senhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus) indicated snat tne inresholds for acute effects for these species from brosoform exposure are very much greater than the amounts that have been obse med to be produced in power plant chlorination. Sublethal effects were noted, but also at concentrations above those observed in power plant chlorination. The discharge of halogenatec organics free Seabrook Station is not believed likely to cause adverse effects on aquatic biota in the site vicinity.
5.3.2 Hydrologic Alterations and Floodplain Effects Construction at the site had already begun at the time Executive Order 11985.
Floodplain Management, was signed in May 1977. It is therefore the staff's conclusion that consideration of alternative locations for any structures identified as being in the floodplain is neither required nor practicable.
The floodplain is defined as the lowland and relatively flat areas adjoining inland and coastal waters, subject to a 1% or greater chance.of flooding in a .
given year. For the Seabrook site, the floodplain is in the low lying salt sarshes surrounding the tidal Zone in the estuary of Hampton Harbor, to the north, east, and south of the site. Flooding at the site would be caused by either heavy precipitation or a stars surge caused by northeasters or hurrica es The 100 year flood was conservatively estimated by the applicant to be 10 feet mean sea level (MSL), using the Federal Insurance Administration (FIA) stucy for Salisbury, Massachusetts. Although this study was performed for a coasta:
location 23 km (14 miles) f rom the Seabrook site, the water level is higher than that of the predicted 100 year floods at the site, at Portland, ME, anc Boston, MA. Table 5.1 shows a comparison between the applicant's estimatec 55 Seabrook FES
291 19 During the OL Stage Environmental Review sita visit, the applicant indicated that a continuous low levei chlorination system may be proposed f or biofouling control in the station circulating water system. Provision for such a system is being made during the station's construction. This systes would be used instead of the thermal backflushing systes currently described as the biof ouling control method in the ER. Provide a description of this chlorination system, as proposed, includings o frequency of blocide application o application points o expected duration of application o amount of biocide to be used during mach application o concentration of biocide to be attained in the systes o expected total residual oxidant to be present at the point of discharge o if intermittent application of irregular (e.g., seasonal) applications are anticipated. so describe o describe ar.y supplemental biof ouling control schemes (e.g.,
petiodic shock chlorination of all or part of the system)
Provide a discussion and bases, theref ore, of the expected environmental tapact that this chlorination system would have during station opetation.
RESPONSE: Systes Description The pref erred biof ouling control method f or the Seabrook Station circulating water system is continuous low-level chlorination.
Seabrook Station is designed with the ability to control biof ouling by either thermal backflushing or chlorination. A cost analysis f or both generating units indicates that backflushing on a schedule of twice a month during the f ouling season and once a month during the rest of the year would cost approximately $3 sillies per year. If a schedule of backflushing only once a month during the biof ouling season is possible, the cost will be reduced to approximately $1.5 million per year. Continuous low level chlorination during a similar f ouling season at an injection level of 2.0 mg/l vill cost approtisately $1.4 million per year.
While the costs f or backflushing and chlorination are similar f or the etnisis expected treatment, backflushing poses the potential of a euch greater economic loss. The procedure to reverse the circulating water flow is complex and has the potential of
. inducing hydraulic and therust transients which could result in a
- plant s hu t d o wn. The resulting loss of electrical generation could be considerable, approaching $1 million just to bring the two units back to 1001 power. Additional losses could also be
_1
_--____-_-__- _ b
Locurred including the delay required to realign sechanical and electrical systems before the plant could resume full power operation.
Sodium hypochlorite solution, the biocide to be utilised in chlorination, will be produced on-site by four hypochletite generators using 1,200 sps of seawater taken f rom the circulating water systes. These generators are capable of producing a total of about 843 pounds of equivalent chlorine per hour in a hypochlorite solution. This will be injected at a dosage of about 2.0 mg/l of equivalent chlorine into the circulating water systes. A block diagram showing water usage, chlorination injection points and residence times is provided in Figure 291 19-1.
The main injection point of the hypochlorite solution will be at the throats of the three of f shore intakes approximately three siles f rom the site. In addition, other injection points are available in the intake transition structure, the circulating water pump house, the service water pump house and the discharge transition structure should it be necessary to inject booster doses of hypochlorite solution to maintain the chlorine residual high enough to prevent biof ouling of circulating and service water systems.
There is the possibility that the injection of 2.0 as/1 of
' equivalent chlorine in a sodium hypochlorite solution continuously at the intake structures may not be suf ficient to prevent f ouling in some areas of the cooling and service water systems. The decay of chlorine in ambient seawater could reduce residual levels below those required f or ef f ective biof ouling control. As a result, the addition of booster
- shock" doses at the circulating and service water pumps may be tequired to maintain these portions of the
' system f ree of f ouling organissa. While the f requency and duration of booster dosage will be dependent on operational experience, it is expected that these will occur primarily during the warm water months when settling of fouling organisms is highest. A chlorine sinisitation program is expected to be conducted at Seabrook Station. Here the level of oxidant will be i monitored to provide ef f ective control of f ouling organissa within the coeltag water systems with einimal release of oxidant, to the receiving waters. If it is determined that chlorination is not completely ef fective in the control of fouling in the intake tsaael, backflushing vill be utilised occasionally to provide additional fouling control.
l Chlorine will be injected at a rate such that a concentration of 0.2 ag/l total residual oxidant and sessured as equivalent C12 is tot exceeded in the discharge trancition structure. During the 43-minute transit time (f or one unit operation, transit time is approximately twice as long) f rom the discharge tranettion structure to the discharge dif f user, the total residual oxidant i will continue to decrease through increased decay at elevated water temperatures. The total residual oxidant concentration release will then be diluted by the diffuser flow, approximately 2
j
,j I
\
10 to 1, .and f urther r'aduced through additional chemical reactMnp with ambient water.
Chlorination Chaelstry \ (
The chlorination of seawater resulta in an insediate conversion of hypochlorous acid (HOC 1) to be:h hypobronous acid (HOBr) and hypoiodous acid (HOI), yielding chloride ions (C1~). This results in no loss of oxidising capacity. EP11 (1980). reviewed literature ref arancing the reactions of chlorine in seawater. N Here, Johnson (1977), reported this initial reaction to proceaJ,to 50% completion within 0.01 minutes while Sugas and Hel (1977) indicated itgo be essentially 991 complete within 10 enyonds.
Ref erences by EPRI to Sugawara and Terada (1953) and Carpsneer and Macaldy (1976) revealed that iodine in seawater is in an oxidized state, as todate, and unavailable te> roact Meh hypochlorous acid. Bromide, on the other hand, is described as being {c ample supply, escinated at 68 ag/1,lattd ab1<a to conuume sore than 27 ag/l of chlorcine accordies ao 14wis (1966).
1 EypobronouJ ec.id under the ' conditions f aund at Seabrook, partially dissociates' lato bypnSroeit a tons (obr"). Both items are considered to be the f ree'available or residual oxidant. Free residual bromine is niorV rew:tive than f ree residual chlorine, yet enters into the same typta'tactions.
r 1 The decay %f chlorine in astmal seavster is extremely variable.
losses due toL:blerine r, Goldman, et al. (1978) demand decurred in twoindiep)ed Ntages a that first very rapid and significant demand hilswed by a contimous ioss at a reducedr eate. They y indicated' chat in natural's*Jawater, the two minute chlorine demand ranted frca 0.42 - 0.50 et/1 f ollowing an in2:ini chiscine dose of 1.02 ag/l and 2.88 mall, respectively. Hostgaard-Jensen (1977) indicated that in Den.aart, seawater reduced an initial chlorine dose of 2.0 mg/l to 0.5 mg/l within 10 minutes, andi to 0.2 as/1 after 60 minutes. Fava and Thomas (1977) described recent studies on chlorine dec.apd, ghing a value f or the demand in ,;1ean seawater of 1.5 mg/l in 10 minutes, and values f rom 0.035 to 0.41 as/1 with a 5-minute contact time to values of 0.50 to 5.0 mg/l with a 3-hour contact time in coastal waters.
Frederick. (1979) examined the decay rate of equivalent chlorine in saavster sasp'as at Seabrook. It was f ound that the decayed r
amount at any?tino appeared to vary f rom month to month over a f narrow range wd t. hat the amount of equivalent chlorine decayed. .I rose with either time or an increased inoculation, indicating that there way not be a fimod chlorine demand level. Based on a f 2.0 mg/l injection dose, the data indicates thet the chlorine decay in saavater af ter a 120-einute period averages 10 mg/l over a twelve-ecash period. Values ranged from 0.8 ag/l to 1.24 ag/1 a decay of 40 to 621, respectively. Further decay at Seabrook- )
Station is expected to occur due to the elevated temperatures within the cooling water system. Operational experience, however, will allow quantification of the chlorine decay in seawater. In i
j any case, tho chlorine injection rate will be such that 0.2 ag/l l
I l 1 1
i
.j
- l y\ s V) g i V T b j>
F .
,(. t
- l. ;
s or lessf total'ifildual oyidant'will be maintained at the discharge transpion struerure, t
(\
4
' ^ '
s he products f rom chlorination depend upon pH, salinity, the deqtyncration of ansonia-nitrogen and organic carbon in the s cocii.M/yrer, temperature. pressure, and the concentration of the 1
] applied khlorine. Normally, the conversion of hypochlorite to i hypobrosite prevents the production of chlersaines, yielding 1
), beiuseine analogs.
'I l Q -
-' i s IMd the sinception oiMesperature, the physical and chemical '
t ? paraesters of th e Atlantic Ocean at the intake and discharge R ,
t s
,~
( etructures do not ' vary sig taficantly throughout the year (Table 291.19-1). In the marius environnant, pH generally remains j
( constant due to natural buf f ering capacities; however, even within the narrow range of pH values at Seabrook (roughly 7.8-8.4), the i
I s, i >
s.T proportions of hypobromus seid and hypobrosite ions can be j
, .(i '
g i
- af f ar.ted.
s s i I The presence of aasmp in chlorinated seawater has a significant aihet on the conce/ titrion of residual oxidants. Sugaa and Halz
) ,
I (IM7) as ref erencedun IPR 1 (1980), determined that at pH 8 0 and J
, with a 15 ppt act itity, weswater containing 0.15 as/1 ammonia
( , dosed at 0.5 mg/l j:hbrine, would result in an equal formation of chloramires and hypobronaus acid-hypobroalte. A decrease in y b either pH or sa::mia~ nitrogen reduces the rate of chloramine production. Sugan and Helt slao found that in seawater with aussonia concentratioti of 0.01 ag/1, tribrenasine is the only x combined bromine fusitual formed. At ammonia concentrations of A,0 mg/l and a p3 of 8.0, the residual was computed to be entirely that of combined brosine (70% dibromanine, 25% sonobrosamine and
( '
5% tribrosamine). In normal seawater, the major residual exidants
)
f rom chlorinathu sould be either f ree bromine and tribrosamine or dibrosamine and sonochloramine depending upon the aussonia concentration and halogen-to-nitrogen ratios.
At Seabrook Station, f ree bromine and tribrosamine will dominate 3
as ansonia-nitregen levels are relatively low. 0.01 ag/l to 0.09 ag/l (FredericAL. 1979). Both dibrosamine and tribrosamine are
(,, unstable, detMUossng to nitrogen gas and bromide ions or nitrogen
! gas, broside ions and hypobronous acid, respectively.
Decomposition f rom tribonamine results is roughly 90% decay in approximately 30 minutes depending upon environmental conditions.
Based on th's chaaital reactivity of residual bromine, the 1; oxidation of orpoic carbon (anino acida) with f ree bromine to f
form organic bromaaines is another possible reaction.
( 0 tt
< ) Ersrirosphees (1981) indicated that aalinity and the toxicity to
\ d$b sWeted seaveler were positively correlated, described as a g' i lowM ad-hour and 48-hour LC50 (the concentration at which there is 50% mortality nf a species over a 24- or 46-hour exposure seriod. The causes of these lower values are unknown but k huspected to be related to the chemical interactions at higher q salinities and the physiology of the species. EPRI (1980) also reviewed data pert:.nent to salinity and toxicity. It was
\
t .c.
\ $
- s i i
( \,\ ,.
- - - - - _ - - _ ~ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
indicated that an evaluation between the two was complicated by the fact t ha t the chemical f orm, concentration and duration of residual oxidant species are also affected by salinity. At Seabrook Station, the salinity is relatively high and stable, however, the dilution and chemical reactions of biocides with ambient waters upon discharge and the subsequent limited period of exposure reduces these ef f ects.
- Wong (1980) indicated that for a given dosage and contact time, residual chlorine concentrations were seen to decrease systematically with increased temperatures. Higher temperatures were found to yield higher chlorine demands. He suggested that this increase in demand represents reactions with organic compounds that normally do not react at lower temperatures.
Various af f ects of temperature on the toxicity of chlorinated cooling water have also been reported. Investigations have found temperature ef f ects to range f rom producing no chaose in toxicity to where increased temperatures have increased toxicity. EPR1 (1980) suggesta that the synergistic interaction between temperature and chlorinated cooling water would not be great f or species residing in the area of the thermal plume.
The halogenated compounds expectcd to be released include small concentrations of hypobronous acid, hypobeosite ions, tribromasine, dibrosamine and sonochlerssine. The actual concentrations are expected to be extremely small and the percentages are expected to vary depending upon the environmental conditions, chemical reactions through recewsd ambient demands, dilution and photochemical conversions.
Biocides entering the receiving waters via the Seabrook Station discharge are diluted by a f actor nf 10 to 1, as described in Sections 5.1 and 5.3 of the Et-OLS. As previously sectioned, a total residual oxidant concentration of 0.2 ag/1, measured at the disenarge transition structure, will f urther decay during the 43-minute transit time through the discharge tunnel. Additions 1 reduction through the decay of oxidant is erpacted to occur upon the release f rom the cooling system into the receiving waters.
Losses of total residuals are espected through renewed.sabient chlorine decay throughout the water column and reactions between the oxidaat and ultraviolet light which results in a light induced oxidation of hypobrosite to bromate reducing the concentration of f ree brosinu.
Thus, is consideration of the total dilution factor and the reductions associated with chemical interactions within the receiving water, an equivalent chlorine concentration of 0.02 ag/l is expected at the surf ace approximately 70 seconds af ter d ischa rg e. Beyond this area, the concentrations would steadily drop off with increased dilution. Chemical and photochemical reactions promoted by solar 1rradiance will further reduce oxidant concentration in the receiving water.
t - . - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
\
y
. i .'
\ l.
o 4
- , u Foulina Consunity
' Marine f ouling organisse can be a'ivides into two geoet ek categories, sacrofoulers and sierofouiers. 'l Macrof oulers are those that cause #4ubstantial hydraulic-restrictions to cooling water flou-(primarily the blue aussel.
Mytilus edulis; the horse aussel, Hodiolus modiolus; barnacles, Balanus spp.; and hydroids. Tubularia app.). The microfoulers are those organians which f ors sats or filsa on heatfvachange surfaces. In the New gagland region, the blue aussel is generally ragarded as the sacrofouling organism of greatest concern.
Microfoulers, microscopic organic and inorganic particles, sierobes and microscopic animals and plants are also of concern, especially in condensers and heat exchangers.
Mytilus, the major sacrof ouling organiss f ound at Seabrook Station, is present as a planktonic rattling larvae from early Kay through late October. Heavy sets 'of larvas in February, however, have been reported north of Portlaad, Maine. As with all biological components, the f requency sud sagnitude of larval set is dependent on ens previously scutioned ptrfsical parameters of ,
the aquatic environment (sost cotably temperature).
Mytilus spawns primarily whe: the water temperature rises to between 100 and 150C. Af ter spawning, they rossin as planktonic larvae for 2 to 3 weeks or as 'ong as 3 months durica cold water periods. Settling generally occurs at this temperature range, but cae be seen at temperatures as low as 80 to 90C.
Also, resettlement has been f ound to occur af ter detachment from a surf ace. Control of f ouling is usually initiated in the spring whsn temperatures rise above 7.20C and continues until water temperatures drop below this value in the f all. , 4
. Environmental Assessment A level of 0.2 og/l totsi residual oxidant or less will be
' saintained at the discharge transition structure. While the concentration of chlorine injected to maintain this level depends upon organies settling and the chlorine demand of ambient water,
} It is tesestial that the systes be maintained free of' fouling l " organisme. The concentration of chloriae at the lip of the diffuser L3 expected to be lower than the 0.2 og/l seasured at the discharge .r.r aittien structure. An immediate reduction in c4ecarecetion dua to dincharg dilution f urther reduces the tottsityt of the chlorine in sabient waters.
To oveluate the ef f ect of this discharge on the biota in the vicinity of Seabrook Str,clon. a review of toxicity data from open literature f or local species was perf ormed (Table 291.19-2). An evaluation of this data has detarsined that the continuous release of total residual oxidants at concentrations of 0.2 og/l or loss at the dischstge transition attncture will not present f ur.sanageable nr.ress or alter the local indigenous marine l I
populations. Table ~92,k9-) and Figure 291.19-2 provided in the 6
i' l
i Final Environmental Statement f or Seabrook Station, summarise additional chlorine toxicity data on marine life. The lines J
enclosing the data points were arbitrarily drawn by the NRC staf f I and depict the short duration and chronic toxicity thresholds f or the species reviewed.
The erposure time must be considered in order to evaluate the toxicity of relsased chlorine to marine organisms. At the lip of the dif fuser, exposure time is extremely limited. Here, rapidly entrained ambient seawater and a discharge velocity of 15 f eet per second (7.5 f oot per second f or 1 unit operation) will prevent organisms f rom inhabiting this location. Entrained phytoplankton, zooplankton and ichthyoplankton, are unable to maintain themselves within the discharge plume or at the dif fuser lip over extended periods of time. Larger marine lif e cannot asintain themselves adjacent to the discharge in the direct path of the plume due to high current velocities. Therefore, a combination of very low concentrations and limited exposure periods prevents toxic ef f ects f rom occurring as a result of biocide discharge. Organisms entrained into the pluse will be carried away f rom the discharge structures where chlorine concentrations will be continually lowered through dilution and chemics 1 reaction.
The concentration of total residual oxidant released by Seabrook Station is expected to be below that required to produce lethal effects (Tables 291.19-2 and 291.19-3). Rapid sizing, dilution and chemical reaction of released biocide with ambient water will further reduce any possible toxic concentrations. With increased distance f rom the discharge, chlorine concentration will drop as additional mixing, dilution and reactions occur. Planktonic organisms which passively drif t into the discharge plume will not be subjected to Lathal concentrations f or lorg enough durations to be affected. With rapid dilution and a diffuser designed to avoid bottom impact, benthic organissa will not be exposed to continuous levels of chlorine. Fish species are expected to be subjected to limited exposure times and einimal concentration which will sitigate possible ef f ects to discharged biocidas.
Mattice and Zittel report that aussel attachment is prevented at concentrations of 0.02 to 0.05 as/1 of chlorine, however no section is made as to the Lethod of analysis which could allow f or considerable variation. Since the integrity of both the cooling and service water systems depend upon then remaining f ree of obstructions, organisms entering the intake tunnel should not be allowed to settle. A consideration of the power plant entrainment time, the ambient chlorine decay and the delta-temperature which enhances halogen dissociation, allows for the injection of 2 0 mg/l of equivalent chlorine to ef f ectively control biof ouling while releasing minimal non-toxic levels of oxidant itto the environment.
It is concluded that the environmental impact of the continuous s release of oxidant at Seabrook Station will not adversely ef f ect the local indigenous marine populations. Operating experience coupled with a consideration of the cyclic nature of f ouling 7
organtees may minimise the use of biocides during perieds when biofouling is not as significant a probles. Sections 3.6, 5.3 and 10.5 of the Seabrook 3tation ER-OLS have been revLred accordingly to reflect the above inf ormation.
Raferences to 291.19 ,
l 1 Becker, C. D. and T. O. Thatcher.1973. Toxicities of Power Plant {
Cheatcals to Aquatic Lif e. ~ Ratte11e Pacific Northwest Laboratories f or j U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. - ]
1
- 2. Electric Power Research Institute, 1980. Raview of Open Literature on Ef f ects of Chlorine on Aquatic Organisms. EPRI EA-1491. Project 877.
- 3. Electric Power Rasearch Institute, 1981. Power Plant Chlorination - A
, giological and Chemical Assessment. EPRI EA-1750, Project 1312-1. Final taport. December 1981.
- 4. Enviroophore Company,1981. Chlorine Toxicity as a Punction of Environmental Variables and Species Tolerance f or Edision Electric Institute.
- 5. Pava, J. A. and D. L. Thomas, (1977). Use of Chlorine f or Antif ouling on Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) Power Plants. Proceedings of the Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) 51of ouling and Corrosion
, Symposium, August 1978.
- 6. Frederick, L. C., 1979. Chlorice Decay in Seaws:er. Public Service of New Hampshire.
- 7. Goldman, J. C. , e t al. (19 78) . Chlorine Disappearance in Seawater.
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution; Water Rassarch, Volume 13. pp.
315-323.
- 8. Hostgaard-Jensen, P., et al. (1977). Chlorine Decay in Cooling Water and Discharge into Seawater, Journal WPCF, August 1977, pp.1832-1841.
- 9. Ichthyological Associates, Inc., 1974. The Effect of Temperature and Chemical Pollutants on the Behavior of Several Estuarine Organisms.
Su11stin No. 11.
- 10. Lides, L. E. , et al. , 19 80. Ef f ects of Chlorobrosinated and Chlorinated Cooling Waters on Estuarine Organisms. Journal of Water Pollution Cottrol, Vol. 52, No.l.
- 11. McLean, R. I . , 197 3. Chlorine and Temperature Stress on Estuarine Invertebrates. Journal of Water Pollution Control, Vol. 45, No. 3.
- 12. Mattice, J. S. and H. E. Zittel, Site Specific Evaluation of Power Plant Chlorination: A Proposal (1976) Environmental Sciences Division. OENL.
- 13. Mattica, J. S. 1977. Power Pinot Dis charg es : Toward More Raasonable g
Ef fluent Limits on Chlorine. Nuclear Saf ety, Vol.18, No. 6, Nov.-Dec.
_g.
1
- 14. Middaugh, D. F. , et al. , 19 7 7. Responses of Early Lif e History Stages of the Striped Eass, 'Norone Saxatills', to Chlorination. Environmental Research Lab, Gulf Breeze, Florida.
- 15. Radian Corporation (1980), Development Document f or Froposed Ef fluent Limitations Guidelines, New Source Perf ormance Standards and Featreatment Standards f or the Steam Electric Point Source Category, prepared f or EFA.
- 16. Robe rt s , M. H. , et al. , 19 7 9. Ef f ects of Chlorinated Seavster on Decapod Crustaceans and Mulinia Larvae. Virginis Institute of Marine Science, EFA-600/ 3-7 9-031.
- 17. TEW, Inc., 1978. Aasessment of the Ef fects of Chlorinated Seawater f rom Power Plants on Aquatic Organisms. Industrial Environmental Easearch Lab., NC. Prepared f or the Environmental Protection Agency; EFA-600/ 7-7 8-221.
- 18. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission Directorate of Licensing (1974). Final Environmental Statement Related to the Proposed Seabrook Station Units 1 and 2, Public service Company of New Eampshire. Docket Nos. 50-443 and 50-444.
- 19. Wong , C. T. F. , (197 9-19 81) . The Fate of Chlorine in Seawater; Frogress Baport f or the Period November 1,1979 - January 31, 1981. Department of Oceanography Old Dominion University, Virginia. Prepared for the U.S.
t Department of Energy Contract No. DE-AS05-77EVC5572.
l
.g.
e l
. Tr4LE 291.19-1 Seewater Sample Faraseters
. Total Kjeldahl-N Temp. Salinity Ansonia-N Or8anic Carbon Date (as N/1) 18Q, ppt 25, (eg N/1) _ (eg C/1) 6/29/76 .12 15.00 32.16 8.4 .09 1.0 7/29/76 .17 9.71 33 34 8.3 .07 1.0 8/26/76 .11 14.92. 33.87 8 15 .04 8.5 9/28/76 .11 12.42 33.61 8.3 .07 24.0
/
10/26/76 .16 8.54 34.42 8.0 .08 18.0 11/30/76 .12 6.92 35 13 7.8 .09 2.5 12/30/76 .09 2.34 35.12 7.9 .07 7.0 1/26/77 .16 0.50 36 06 7.8 .09 3.0 I
2/23/77 .09 0.00 34.76 8.35 .05 1.0 3/29/77 .05 1.80 33.70 7.95 .01 10 4/27/77 .07 5.68 34.16 8.1 .02 16.0 5/26/77 .07 5.99 33.34 8.2 .01 3.5 6/30/77 .06 10.99 33.24 7.85 .04 9.0 Source: Frederick. 1979 l
f L____--_--_-____
l I iJl ll
)
. 3
- 7 )
9 6 1 7
, 9 ,
, (
e e 1 e e l 1 r ( l c i* 1* e a*
n t ) t)h . t )
e n6 n6 c l a
n6 r e7 e7 t e7 e C9C9 a C9 f /1/1 h )
t
)
/ 1 e )()(T e ) (
R 8 8 8 ,
8 8 7 .7 .& 7 7 7 .
9l 9l 9 e 9 9l 1 a1 ar 1 l 1 1 a
( ( e ( i ( (
- t tk t t WR eWec R e W
R n
e WR We R
T T B T c T T h _
t e e w e e e e t
c sh sho at at r ewewg sh at ew sh at ew sh at ew sh at ew e r o r o r o r oro r o f
f cr crd cr eg c r eg cr e g cr eg E egege a d d c d d d d t n nu n n n e o 1i1id %i 1i 1i 1l l
. 0 0 e 0 0 0 0
. B 5 5 R 5 5 5 5 c
i .
t a
u pQ m 0 0 1
0 T 'i e 2 1 q
A -
o t 7 r ) n 2
e t
1 1
o i) 0 4
1 5 0 4
0 4
0 4
0 4 _
9 a t n 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 1
w f ai 1 e o r e 1 1 1 1
. 1 e u(
9 S 1 D 2
d t E. e e
- t B
t e
- A a h n d n S o e -
T i ( i 5 t r t) 5 6 5 5 0 o o a1 9 4 2 9 3 n l
r/ 0 6 0 1 1 1 3 h t g - e C 0 0 s
- ne e(
0 0 4 0 0 i f
c 0 w o n r o e y h t C ' t i o c
- s i
x
- s o e e g _
T l S
a t )0 - nu )
8 e s 9 . l e 1 de n
! ( eu i m
t td d I oi a l R ns r o P e o t E er l k s th e e nienc e n n a i wea(
s t
u a
i i
e p
m u
e y
d e
r o
l u
t o
eh rrd d eft s t t eOa ul _-
t n r u c c o4 l d i
e n d t o i i d e e enal c c d r r esoua e e s t t seid e p s o o e e l tiR S e r o o enas
~ n c r e e t t cured r o n s e n t R e t o c c o e een n _
k o o n
t e t t e s rt el i a c e l l el cab l
o e e e f ust m l
p e h h h h ed ooo o
k S C C T T RACTC t
y * * *I 2 h
- _
P l' jil lll
- # M 4 G e e em
."a m a@m m a e a m y,
@' @ #4 95 On @ e e e m%
@ e@ @ @ w or .a p yg
- Ob et 96 @ 4 n 96 me e e mememese me one 9.se O.e .e ww wwwww w w w w g
e u . . . :
h a. u . .u n. .
a . e ee ea ea a ee e 40 eO O O e e wu me e eaee so ww e WWWWW W wm wm w p.
6 os 85 W.* en e ..e.s m =.
d e e d se d
- w *w av b k k he w b 6. 6, w .e a, e "
eeeee e e3 w3 e3 L a.
w www w w cacm Cm ww M M wM M U he be he >= he to aD .b
$5555 5 $ $ $ $$
hh a
wM se me e hh hM M &
h w
h e hh e e u m en w w *e ** **
m
- a en a e
.u ,.
wu u
w h. en ee e a c u .ee w,
e oeeuu w w 9 ee ea w e 4 mnahe en w he he w 2 % .ae ww C w uau o h. a.
w
. -y3 MM 88 e O. 3 . e gg
.S. .enwCO l, N O
M o I. Uoc# " w j
-e == O o O a o o
==
- h. OO ee M M es en aw 4 0.
- ee NN A.1" to RRRRR aa e- wt N
a
^
=^
COOON
.e N so N O
o O
o e*
No e
se*
w a =eeem N
.es
= w a= * ** "
0 ** 8 "" * "
- f..
~ $
" e W
.J , e
- se ,g a 9 4 m c W
>= w 0 w
= == o wa .
e N 0.e.
c e ,
ne %
C. O. O. O. O. an. o. O. N. O. To e w g m ao e e O O N == 0 O == e ce m O ==
ww
- 3 U O he C G O 4 V w 0
e e o e e h a j e he W )
es A **
e
- 3
$ 8 e m
e et * *
- W
- "U e C w W 3 ==
w9 3 ee aw e et ge he As & C
.e. M 96. e=
.me e M nC e C *e # C W g se 3 eaw
.e be to 9 w 9 e ine me e e e eA as **
e == ww eCe e w a m Oe 3 3 e U am 9
.ee . == e he eS e ==
se y a, e - e eeO $ e as e S W 6
& g 4
C. 9 e eW == *e w* 9 E m & ** 9 E ee e he ha O
Y 3 he G9 s e g
,e,,
ja l e D
e on C
G eC
- n G C
i l
e, O 6, w e a ==
- h. - C 4 0 y e on en G ** U e *C as w w 3 Cw 3 i y w w e9 0 0 0 !
.a > h 3 e
v
=
M C
- r z w < v >= v l
.c e w > ee e ese ce g == se e S e l
l
I d'% e $ m e .M .
das sa 6 sa.m m eeee %% %
.. a m N @ N.4 .* e e
.=% s .m ==
en e6 .N* N.* N.6 N.4 wwww P e e s.e .=
. m.h4 wwww C g . C y .
.=.
ww .... O O .
. . . O.
b -- . .- . ... .
- .t. . . .
. ~~~.. ~ w ww
..--.-. uooo 2 .,.,,
w.. ,
eeeee
. ~ ~ ~~ ~ 1
.e - . . .
g.....w.
- , w ,-w o www b b b .
..a 2aww ..
2 222 OOO332 b b b
=...==333uomEEEE .. .
Da >ghw .e =w> >= w h >= h h >g >= h >= >. h >. pg h w e wwwww* w wwwwww
., .es.==. - -# -
- u. w w .......
- m. ww 6 an he w w w me ww ww w w www w b b $ b b b b b b b b b b b b b M
88 M 8888888888888 MNO M N.M O M i
OO l m e =Oe em .= O in .O MenMm M MinMi M e inM inM in M M M M MOOOOOOOO.OO i -
to in % em j Ono n On OnOn
$.. NNN NN NNNN NM C
^ C
- N NNNCOnOOCANNO nOOOO e
" .o. ^ N 9 e C N.= N eeee
- wg .e 4
- e. O. e. e. e. e.
" - NC NNNN
. b 3
. . w -
s a M A
~
= . .
. . 1
.a g e 9
4 M C I
> '*'* .on 44 io h
w^ .* h e 0
.= in to e6 at. *. m . in am N@ N C
- 6. % p.
w g em. N. ==.TS e to. O *To O. e. N. . O. O. en. ==. .=. 0. C. .
= N O e - N O O == O N O O O O C .
.w O O .=. *..=.T N .
3 y . O c OO
- i o O b.
U 4 w
0 ,
A 3
.O e.i . .
%=
,9 r.= 3 .Ca
- 6. 9 5 s.s @ .= .
$5 Ehe
.. h.
W . 6. .Oa
- A S
em g.C.w 0.
U
. en. 9.*
- 4. &
- g wa
.e .s
.. ON '.3 g
W - N.*
y g S .
. . - ,3
. O .
,t, 8 - w i
. . S . .
w
( .
U S s
. . **c 6. E 9*
C l
- e. w **'**
g g te b.*.*8 b .S y g w 3 C w S g 0 0 0
. k 94UHU
=
E 1
o
. .. ..-~
O v -
. . . . _ . _ . _ _ . _ . . _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ ._ .J
!! i i 11
) ) )
) )
8 7
8 7
8 7 _
- 66 9 9 9
) 7 7 1 1 1 599 ( ( (
. 7 1 1 a 9(( W W R
W _
c 1 t R s
e
( . .
l r
/ /
T T
/
r e
.laa ))
33
)
3
)
3
)
l 3 f at t 77 7 7 7 e ee 99 9 9 9 R t 1 1 1 1 1 e , , (( ( ( ( _
eel n
,l nn n n aii aa a a a
- z t t ee e e e n nn LL L L L aee cc c c c LCC MM M M M y
t yyy i y y t t t yl t y t t iii t a i t i c l l l it l i l e aaa l r a l a f t t t r r r ao t r
a t f t m t r E ooo r o r o mmm o1 m2 m o m
m ZI1 1 Z 000 17 5 1 0 _
^ 7 55 49 2 0 8 p
mQ e
T 'i
) n 2 I o 009 50 0 0 5
- I i) 4 6 8 8 1 9 t n 4, 3 1 1 4 1 f ai o r m 1 u(
p21 9 4 D t
E e * .
L e
- B h A S n d T_ ( o e i 4 t t) 4 o a1 n r/ 005 . 55 5 0 5 t g - e
~ na 1 1 2 21 2 0 2 s
' e( 1 1 i c w n 0 r o e C h t
o
- i
- l s e t s g p e _
a u l t e n S N ) u' )
0 8 -e s 9 .l e 1 d e e
( eu t td n I oi e R ns r P e o E er l s th nienc i wee rrd
(
e d efi e _
i eh ml _
s n t t sOe e i i oa e i f c l d c ) f e . enel e d e d p
. p o
osowe p ' i p
. aeid e e o l t l R S t t _
- e r i m o eaae _
o o n s u cvr ed f c e u i e u
n een t t e n
e r _
( e h -
t e t e p s n rt el i s y d s m o e e el c ab d r o i m r l l f unt m o u p e o o c e ed ooo _
C a B RACTC p E i M C -
e h n .
p p r ** *12 o m e *
- C A B
- e i 111 ese
.n-e e e 33 2
233
- OO eee e O
e 0
e
- ~~~
000 O O O 3
. e e.. 8 '
N .e. . . . .e .e ,
! 8 1. 88 XXX X X X 0 1 2 a aaa t t !
g * ***
t.r e s s. a. s. n. .e -
... . . . S.22 te t. :. eoe e
. .e e
2 ee
. .F
. - - - - yy==
3 333 RRR R R R mmCE I
l Den Dt h b W. km h he >= h h h Dg
.&. M
. .u. a. .u. .M. .M. .u .u. .u. u .u .u. .o.
- e. . . --
E e .e -ee e e e sees
- t tt: : t t ette i 8 888 3 88 8 8 8 8888
- -~~ - - - - ~~~~
'. R RRR gRR - R R R RRRR e.du
- 8. **R
+H
^ s
. .. . e.
o
.e e e..e N. ,
..-- m nem I .
N..
s w g ,a, . e. so. ==
.e. ,
N g e.s S w e4 N *=
( .,
- 5
. ; e.
a j e. ,e
% e uh%
e.n. N ert O es N
Nm.
en m N N
N m
en N C.N.ON N in C
N .e#
u q e e e o e e e e e e e e e e o i es ** ew an O OOC C O C aa Q O .=
.e.
ow U
- k. .
C w
& W W W O e e e e e e > > > > e e h h. Ak hb h b. e e W as e e. as e e e e e T.e= 9 .e* ==
w e g em 9 ensa N N **'.,
C 3
W M M as *
^
.O e e 94 e se W am 4 5 S we9 ==
W 9 8 a g 5 m e e.
b se W O M e to a=
8 & et 9 C U e .Se ei.3 9 ew 3 g eb e. h 9 e F 9A ww S9 M en g e G
- a. OS 3 6. ,=m
. e . g as y 9 & e e Q 1y .* e e g >
En en eO ee .e. 9 9 on u m a w
( $
e 3
e a
6.
e e
& C ee W D h. W9 C
er S
& E W S
en g a b. 4 W ** "
y e o G *.* y e&
W g O en, 3 5 w 0 f g 0 0 0 e ==
7 4 4 W >* U Q at 4 1 . .
. e.
-N e
_. _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ ___w
e== m .
.= .= eD .
e em m m m l et en et N mAmmmaO 4, .9 O - --N w w w et in am .6 3 .
. ens%eeen m % % N .a8 es og
.at . . Ew og et qp 6e - .= 0
. .u == .e i es-.=-.h.s == . . . .
. wwwwwwW W , g-uw e.
a .=eg .
.e ==.m
. . es W^mmem e e e e so wwwwww W NN %%
eeee.W Ow^ W 0Wa .as .as e . .* N **@*.
he h he e 8 . . as - s es -c.Ps
= * *w A A 6e c. wwwww *
.e .e . . .
. . .. g . . es a.s e.e a a m a n a yw yw- 2 a a 5 5 5 5 $,
be 2-3===
= 2 D. m >,
h w h w e# >= >= Ds >= Ds >s >=>=h h w w ww w w D .se. .a.s . .m.# .m.e
. wwh
.t . .
w..
w w
w w .e e m w he 6. he he S . he he he he he w
" 3 he 3 3 be8 "g 3 M MQMggM 8 MM M
8 33888883"g MMMMMMMM O
e o.n.n e o ooo ooM
.- M C. C .C.O . -O O O e e o.n e e O
- d
- s. %% &- e
~
e- ws ,. ,e e 44 4 m O E momenOO -m 8 o o. e~
- o e o. o. -o 8 O - n
,4, -
w m ~
m
~
- 1 ~ e"
. =. ~
Aw _
w : .
.a 2
.O.
- u. ^ O - o~~~~ O O.
6e % e 4 w g m. m. m. in. em. im. N. N. . N. N. N. N. N. N. to. s
. O O C O O O .= O ooCOOCO-O .
.C w >
u he c W O A U me O
. G 9
. 9 0 09 9 0 e 9 . .
88 > > >> > > > .G*
he he he he hs 6. be
^
M O .
S . .
6 . e.e W 3.e N .
weS .
W9 5 s.s M . q. .
he he S 88 e he .O ==
9 wA 8
e 9E w gwu g 4 g ag 9 .b. .
g . eB M n'*
g g .a8 w S O W3
.e g g 6s W 9 G .* 9 y O b S S .
a w 8 4
& g S .9= w m
e .e W { . o.n a U y hs 99 eg .e C w5 G e s, ,'
w a 9 .
g 6 he ef S
& .* .8*
$ > W- V .S y e - 3 5 w w a.
eg O O a 5 4 V l'*
1 . . .-~
he
_.______________o
l i
%m
- A . . c . . . . Os eaem mm *=s m .e .e.e NN P=. eu. @@ e art ww N N N h m ei. . g
.On 4 . e.s et e.=n e s== a W
=
W W
- Ws e
.= e e.*sO O%N
==s ggam .
w w w w ==s ==..e w ww 0 0e en. )
.e . .e -e .
. - . .e 3 3 ept og .
W we .
wm e . .as .as ==
. . e wme.A
.@ 4 Ce ==
= he he ww W
W
.w
. .e. .e. QWh &N pt O
.N O 9%
. . . .e -e e WW . ..=
ens u w w w % == % .Ste % .=w ww & W 9 W W W . Aw^wm. &W 8=> W W es e. . .
M GO 9 8 80
= . e e e% % .% . . *% . =ggw w 0 t .=e & W 96 . . W W 0 0.0 Wn.e
. == .. S.e .*.eW4 .
--..ew
- - ww .O. .O.
I
., ., . . w w w w addam E 5 1L=w w. W W W C adm C=
- ow 24W .&
aaWaae
- y. . .
3 u u >= kg hh h h h >n >=
ene w w :J
- ww w w >m e
e == -e w
>m
.ene eh .e == ee .4 w e
- u. . - .e. .e -= = .e e e e W . . . . .. .
~ . m.
- e. w w . . w ww .w w Q O is, be w be he be he be he he w be W . g . 3 .g be O OO O
. 8 . O. O.
.M W WM M 8 MMM s . 8 8 be8M MMMM he C he O M M OOO OOOOM4 wOwOO O i
W3 .= W3 .= en n O ene n en en en =e w G. Al
.OUl en
&M M
5 COOOmm N e O O COO I C. .O4 ,== .= N www w4mN m
- w at. P'=.
8.'
s, .C. . . .
b* * * " " * * "" '^
. 8
\
e O gw ,
[
.N W
a , .
e E g 9 4 W3 8 ed b w 0 w e one one .e e o em m O we 0% m O em m m C
.m O em O em be %
w g N. en. e. e6. em. O. O. o O em.
N.
. o. O. N. em. e. ==. W
, C . O O s=e N N O OQN OOmOOO e Ww == .O4 3 U b C W O A U *e O
WWWW
. == ese se - .
. .e os e .e as te .
& C g g g C C ed
&WWW 3 3 **
e.e w
3 3 3 3 em go OO ^
C W > > 3 M 9999 g
8.
m *. .e
==
W C
w & 3 3
g e=e w O 9e E.
g W C . he y b W
, W W be .O.
hs la w .c
- h. .C e=
- t C.w U he he g g . 4 W ** =e .
WA g
a 9 w, .ON a.
, w == . .* O . 3 g g W ** U *=e 9 ee . g . 5 g .*
y g 2 So .* . . O 3 .
. g C . W ** N &
& 6. 6e
== w .e g
e g
g W
me g
. O C .5 U 3 he W "U
( g w
3, g 9
. e C
W .&EC .* =C W
C 'D be w td g W === U .A g g ==
w 3 Cw 5 C
y e . W W9 O O O w
A g
.J E E 4VHW t . . .-~
he
l!
)! Il! l!l!ll e*e*n*
))) )))
777777 . .
- 777777
)) 999999 o c c
o
)
e 77 (((
77 1 11(((1 11s s s s
5 7
c 99 A A 9
. n 1 1 eeeeee e (( ccccccl 1
(
r l f
e . nnaanna
.aiit Ii c a
c
)
) .
ll rrrerri 0 0 e aaFPFPFP g i
g ) )
7 7 l
a R o o 9 9 t
ee t&&&&&&l )l ) 7788 o4 o4 99 1
(
1
(
t e
, , n n n n a e y7 y7 1 1 s s ,
eaaeeeh9h9(
ssggggggt ( e e e 1 t 1 h
- eerrrrrrh h t eoooooooc(h( c WWRR sMMMMMMMI g
u g
u n
I T T H H 1 e.
yyyy y y yy y y _
t t t t yt yt y t t t t t c i i i i t i ti i i i t i e l l l l i l il e l l i l a
f aeaal al ac t t t t at at n a a l
a l
a t f t t E rrrrt oaoororor rt r e r r t
r t
r r
o memmomome m m f h
t oo mm o
m o
m m
%1E1 1 1 e a ZZ Z
, 30O01515 r Z Z 0 e 00 0 68S55959F D 55 5 0
5 5
p mQ e T 0
9 T *1 A6
) n 2
I o 57000000 I i )
4844 88 00 0 0 0 9 t n 93 4 4 6 1
f ai 4,8,4,4,8,8, 4, 4, rm 9
o D
u( 1 21 1 22 1 1 t
E e
- L e
- B h
- A S n T ( o .
i d I I 5 e t) 6 a1 r/ 33802366 1 1 331 21 25 0 9 5
80 0 0 1
t o
n t g 5 2 5 3 0
~ na e( 000001 008 0 01 0 0
- e 0 4 s c 0 n i o 0 g0 w C n r gggggg i e
h gggggg e l
r t
- EEEEEE ah e o e gg . . . . . k vt g g
a n uub n r hhhhh r r r r r. er nn eaoi s
s e
t oo - - - - - w1 mf l S YY222222 n I I ) u 0 )
8 e o 9 .l e 1 d e n
( eu t t d a
) t ol e R ne r d F e o t
I er l s t h e aiesc o l wee (
c rrd
( d eft s s e eh ul e a l t t sOa i i c d l i oa u e i i c l d p n t snei
- S e a esoes
) x seid e m e l tl R p d
' a s enae cured t
e i
e n t R e o
d i n een n c n o rt el i
( e r el cab M o f unt m h M ed ooo o RACTC l
F * *
- 3 2 t'1l
t t f ee t
e t
a a
r i
r i
r I nn a a a oo e F F F F CC t t t R , , , ,
hh g g h
g h
g
& & & & '0 '0 eee , , ,
u u u u n n n n && nnn a a a a a a a a ooo '
d d d d g g g g nnt t t d d d d r r r r nnr r r ii i i o o o o ii uuu MM M M M M M M CCBBB y
t yi y y y y y y y tl yyy d t t t t t t t i at t t t ei i i i i i i l t i i i c hl l l l l l l arl l l e c a a a a a a a t oaaa f t t t t t a r r r r t
r t
r t r mt t t f
o o r o rrr E h o o o o o m2 ooo m m m m m m m 5 mmm 2 I8 5 I 2 % I I I I 0 IZI
. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30000 35 3 5 5 5 5 5
< 6555 p
ml eS C TTTT Ti AAAA
) n 8 2 1 o 0 0 0 0 400
- 1 i) 8 8 4 4 24 9 t n 8, 8, 1 2 1 f ai - - -
4, 4, o r m - - - - 2 2 1 1 - -
a u(
p2 1 0 D 1
E t
- L e
- B e * .
A h n d T S o e
( i I 77 22 t t) 4 42 o a1 7 4 7 4 0 2 0 9 24 n r/ 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 1 223 21 t s - - e nm 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000 e e(
c n
< t u
r o e e C a e r h v l u t r e i reoere e o
- a a n uah a ua ra
- o l yvyeov vov uv ee s e y yoar avh r0rh r or a a s g r ard sdu a4 a eh a vv e a b dp I j 31 1 4t l rr ggg l t m 2 0 1 4 2 0 aaggg n S E2 1 3 2 7 LLEEE )' u
< 0 8 e 9 .l 1 d a
( eu td I ol
) R na d F e
' E er t s e aienc o l wee c rrd
( d efi eh s e t t sO e 1 i oa i 1 c c 1 snai e
p t s sou m aeid e S m l t
)
d a
s enaa c ur e n t t
n e
n ea n r t el o o el c a c r f u nt
( o ed ooo M R A Cf h
a * * *I l *
- F *
-~a
. a. L r .
a a, a - ~~ --
~~
... ~~ ,
~ ~~ O.
...S.O. 3. . . . ~. ~.
-,,e . .
i
- e. !
. .e - - -w ~NNN U . . . .w . -E E U. ". -
I
. - e .. , , . . . .
- a. u. a. u. u. u. u.
t m m;. .
g uuu
=
- * * . ...ree.. . .
l
~ ~ ~
553 1111212.9 88 w .
--- . . . LL ,
- u. -- . . a
&RR &&&ia&333 oo C l
- A h hhhhh hh w w
>= h w w he h me o > me m
.a4ue e .
e e..
e.n . .u .ue .u. .u .u.
.a. --. ... w
.e .u.
tw ww 6. te ww .ww www u n.
me ne se n. 6. 6. O o u.
a 8I MI M
' 8u M3 u"$w he33383 o " "
MM 3
MMO OMC MMMMM OO M O O mh OCOMOOOOO
-n-Gennen OO
-- e O
mA q A i 4
. %mm
- a. ml m. N. e=. N. er., im tOO N
8U De be be .
e
$. Mo l N h h m e.n en in.e - N
.e-.
a C en.
N - o at O O OCOOOODOO OO O e - = = ^ e N so @ @ @ @nm mm e w .NeNe e *et Oem~~ N
.es
= w . .a.e * * * * *
- M
. o n. 3 N N O.e .
N th to to e
5 w w d a .=
{
w - .
J W e .
a . e 9 4 A C &
>= M O N w w e. NNN NN
- ON m.
. O
- u. ^- =e m m e e e w w asW @ e N O
- S he % @ O u na O. O. O. . C. O. O. O. O. C. em. N* .* 6 e C E COO C00000000 Om es e
==
l
.w O. 3 u O u C
O &
W .C
. W w
.& . . W O e > > > .&. me .W .W .W. a e ne me me es es me ASS S S e W
e -t.e=*h.e.ee W 999 W -
W
. O OO > P > > > C w u ne hs 3 3 3 3 3 ^ 3 M 8. A. As 9 "5 *) *1 *"I ' m O -
e e
9% . .a
- 4 .
= 9 w e3 =e MM
- O .a E.
M S e n.
m G M he e h5 9 he .O u a e dC '
s 6. 3
.Se esv 1 e a e eew I W W ** u. hs 9 ae w O e 3 U - 1.e eR the es g .ee e e e ** 3 w& GO e
& es e
.=ag e
6e W
e we U
ee -g 3 es e
& ee W eS . we 9 w e > e eee3e
.m 3 3 et 9 9 M A R D 0 9.e w we 5 M S W S ee
^ u. U &. u 3 hs 4 9 4 C S
- k O O C & N
( w S
g s .C.
w O
he W e, w 6
eg ee C
V . me 6
O C w t .O O . . tw 3 sw u O.
6 v w 0 C ** . .g OO E O M U m at U >*
A e e eN e e e
=e t.
e
e TABLE 291.19-3 ex-me, of as . , eso e. m.se ,
$sume amme h SIWu emmmen thus Ethst pumeene 8%se Gammusare al Dummmmesememums 4.81 Se er ses esp pose e N
^
Ek 4J 8 10 man Thus tag a samt e efemus ammmmeus ts 9 ease Cherumshoe SadhuemIrmee 39 Sesammanus ameseum 4 498 M ts 885msprose e M Dsammmmms emmastam e e 4 63 8 mas es se esem en e
, pese tJ.3J 8 ame Dese 33 CHammets asas 4 Ata se es act same pese e m Chasemmme eausmus e se > ee age esp posen a 5 ftmmmmmmmm mmemmasta 4.190 Se er $gs map pone e m Thammmmme sunum eJ3 > 48 ASS esp pose e 8JJ 31 -
semens M as sessep pose e M Gmemuse eseyenum & L18 M hr GSE esp poses e 39 Duummes samtweesus 42 M tr age map poses e N N pommes ee le am act enee pese e 38 Osammans amas eJ eae as ass may pose e 33 Saammmmme emissem eJ sea em agg see poeta e 33 Oscammes emmleasen 6e ante aus Istesopose e C3ppassesume as ame taham e il > te ses ese pes't e 33 teemertr7m W GI le er aos ase, p e*** e ftsmenris 8 thmesyns prrWee geester Seit 3 esps SS-ilt a gemeesrestems sutustans 3 89 8-1 esse 30 106 4 phesasyeaham supeaums e ammes Omeare Samme he 91eesumf aJ 8 to samme #
5e asummmes IA 18 esos samme e basses 3 uses ammes tsumme tA Il este test manaher e IJ l eere f eet merieh47 e 10 8 3 este left metaker a C,emamse somme creas e as ? % susems /
IA 1 bas pumeng /
31 ce== asses meses spue eJ ene3mmmapsummens g iA afie 3 as map seem a IA hop smessmg ammmmassey 3 3A hop poemame amamenesy g N
Camphuma o f she esamme aman, ems 3J ele een 9 meneemt efte 4
> 18 1A e 60 man 4 ansessor the e le A ele aus e samises, ahm
> to 94 unme ammes eastures 1J l Is Ist outsBup. 8 bass amies ans 8 man a3 Csammans symme ansmems 3J B> 399 mannene she 8 M to 1 seren amms Caumend i 48 em 11's amasamy Eb ien t* 21 es' twas a g 3A kJ aus pt mensasr e e4A 4J aus sps amness 4 l
e e
TABLE 291.19-3
^
ammme mas samme mammesetan Ttus h pas amus sammmen h gegyg .as 18 amme samma thaumme u 8 aus 8BS emesary a ammene nae 8 tr Pamudestagnemas ensamese Chomsms aa M es Ins emes e u te am 19Emmemer e 8A 8as SS emmalsy e 88 8 u en 386 muutamp e i be Semannsse anes Csessme iA 340 mas $14 estaasp a j h amemme basemmis eJ le man 1885 edIns s essesas iA te aus 10mune summ a ans per e It seeman amassamm Swenes W 8 "" #
afts 3 he ie tweses iA 88 esse than end e 6 Cassums - Insuus $ses esmap 3 It see FF5 emm e e le $ een - 889 enemmy e 88
^-
smen Gmus ansene u 3 as set muussy a afum 96 tr Emmesses 3 tusum o u 48 hp 196 assemy a 64A to tu IWS assommer e Omsess aermesa e ganguen er. IA $ esas 156sumahp e 3J I es, lWo meinast e asA est test menner e Tamuse l SawyGus a le le Is 195 mortaast e seems
^
e _ :s Wises As=mse t 11 aus 96 eneaur e 3J e 1 ena et ammses, e ae e i ens iSS samesap 4 iea e 28 sw SPS emises, e ptomsmenusammmes stume hammee IGA 6 3) em SS emnmeer e ammenenaus is Ptmessene smeses taries ,Phas ees ees see see esammy a phemmamie steens hamns
^
Phmus SI3 It aus $35 esenew /
pimens em 4J8 3 enre CIImmW med i Ii _ - _ taumme Caso esame ei 3 esrs Ommes tsas a p Owweresem naseveses Ommmes e es is espo Quemas >=1 a 40 Oesureraman smemes 0 el la ears Otmed sue sessim Ash IA numa sumans f musamm
't I easse. *fensus, se samme Gueusmus of Psm Chmsens aus Oampuneas Caesmenes is le voie.' Ea - _ possumsse assess. au emas thses emmes, tan, simpas tapan.199s.
88 E lause and E W sue"Wum emen, came6* sumamsen ont 63.C arwee vene Oesus Cemens emme.nosa .
- E Ihnemes aus L mummm *tuheems of ungh Tangestese ses 4 ndens Chennes as tiseums phytestsacieh* aly Aust1 391 31311970%
8L L Mabma,h Tanummme of the femased ardret
- Sanne fecesensas Osmesets $a il 379 3 39 (1913b 8tL & huak S. IL Sepumulk auf A. C Santmed. Themsem ens las e ' ^ ,___ _ em se Feukse Feeummisuus e Oss Wene Camsam*
est fas Osun e 4W488409e0E.
/> $ SchumE.'Samme etOssas e
- UJ Pw ass Utme least Smet of tameur. as test se6 It 3 an.19a6.
4 9.Waus. 1 as atm Samme at Oswas en ens Lae=s of Opmes (Once enmas LJ as tereen Whmsmme aussmer ausgsinL*
den deptSant M 888-e0(Ittek 88 at Csumes Umummemams See6 $sulsammusuial bearums asumer. Imposes tenaam Dese Omasse tseesseos. sem sessum 31. lefL 8E I asetent Ctaamme ans fememname Seem en lauwam toersaaream6' A meses Amass Came Fat as s31.te (tptta
% asemens 1Muus of Ese Commmmunes of fsm Chamass se Las oss Larus of f%na Aswuneus anseen L
- gn333 333 m m Agamens aus am less at by a asema, Fae, ptansg teus femme 6 bas t. lasse. Essensa, I913.
atL a semeses, a L Lammer. L 9 sasummmm..as v & mariass.*feem Ofhse af ensnam and husgass Daemumme am Vamme tusum aus Tsum*
Wann Suns 7ask. Sa tus mak 3.S.ee so,19es.me, m r e w mses.m u immemm6.m O c assimm m i,s.ne ae.mmai in.mm *n nn, ane. iri ees.ses noe a
' Source: Seabrook Station TES ; 197.'. {
-n 4
4 y2 1
5 9 0
5 E:e n
r eo e
r u eg ** .
m4 gi e t r t V
s t '
r
- o o
V at h e c n s
o h a '
- B o c s e B s '
i r
- i DT D
' '0 4 1 e 2
N 1
)l J
.~ _ e s
r e
r e
r e
e s e r ,
e r u =, 1 s ,e 8 s t
e , c eo t n ,n cr u
- s o i e "
6 o vt h r ap i t e ,e 1 o i e o vt h 6 n o v 6 '
id
,dCon e g 1
B r a p r eW mu nn eW mu d e 1
S Uo S n S P C o y P C
> > N
- , p e4 3
Q-
, 0
- 3 l e
c e
I C
0
)
l ,1 9 1 s 0 e t 1 r A , 4 8 c 9
4 r r e e e e *
- t ps t O s mu 6 s
o PH uo d o o P, o o Pt o B s g e g
g 4
N 5 4
g n
u n o n n o o i o r o l i r et et e et F t o { k i r h t t k t c t a. e j st 6 s ] at r e i eee t n t t e o t e e j n t mm ne s n n o nn n o I r e e I e B s I e t eii T o t r a M TT i r W
i 8 S c T c T e e g
n n
i i n
3 t t 8ii 1 ee
> 1 9
9 e
9 1
9 e hd i r r nm m d l o o oe .e i n i m n o l l 8 8 r r I I T o I T o o h h 0TT C c I C c C C C 1 I t e I t e T" " T t s T t s A3I . A e A e R8* B n 8 n 8 y E 46 . E e 8 R
E e 8 P99 P r 2 P r 2 O
Ti2 m O T 5 O T 5 o n g! f t t v 1
T i
e o
v 2
I A o m T
- L i i nn - u I 2 e o I 4 U'
- - u 8
n 8 8 k I I 8 *
= it L 1 e n U 1 "
DUU s
- n o
l I
t n
i t
n l I C o C
e
- > c f e>
I 9 e C 3 g 8 9 g 3 g 8
1 f!
- ' J: ' r-* _
i
- P a4 , i, , , ,
I i si i ,
se a . . . . .
i p
3 i
s.
- ne u! I l !ll l E '
g I Du 6 i i **
-=
8 hll6l t ; *
%, _ _ I.,, -
1.
g ' ' 't M b i kikk '
cm wsf t 6 .
l I !! l ! iiII ! 16i,
! I!
e e d d d d d twenim v== i i FIGUR" 291.19-2. 5.sunry of chlorias tastetti data en seriae life.
Source: Seabrook Station FES; 1974 l
i
4 il1&2 ER-01.5 3.4 ,REAT DIS $!PATION SYSTEM 3.4.1 System Concept and Reasons Tor Selection The information presented in the Seabrook Station 14 2 gR-CPS regarding the once-through systes concept and reasons for selection is unchanged.
goes changes, however, have been made to systas specifications resulting from regulatory actions [9,10,11) and are described below.
3.4.2 Description of Heat Dissipation System 3.4.2.1 General Specifications The quantity of heat dissipated by each of the two units at Seabrook Station, the resultant circulating water condensor toeperature rise, and the quantity of ocean water provided to each unit, including the additional flow for l the service water heat enchanger, are the same as originally proposed (ER- l CPS, Section 3.4.2). The location of the intake and discharge structures, as well as the tunnel disseters, however, have changed.
Aa illustrated in Figure 3.4-1, the intake and discharge tunnels, each with a 19 foot inside disseter, extend to about 7,000 and 5,500 feet of f shore from Hampton Beach, respectively. Travel time through the 17,160 foot long intake tunnel from the intake structure to the pumphouse is 44 minutes at the nominal flow rate of about 6.5 f t/see, which is 412,000 sps for each unit, including 22,000 sps per unit for the service water (324,000 sps total). The nominal discharge tunnel travel time is 42 minutes from the condenser to the discharge structure 16,500 feet away at 6.5 f t/sec. Travel time across the condenser is only 16 seconds.
A cross-sectional profile of both the intake and discharge systesa is shown in Figure 3.4-2. Each tunnel is const ructed with a 0.5 percent slope toward the land to allow for gravity flow of water seepage toward the plant during construction and, if necessary, during dewatering of the tunnel. The intake and discharge tunnels, for example, have centerline elevations of -175 and
-163 feet below mean sea level (MSL) respectively at the ocean end, whereas the respective centarline elevations at the plant for the intake and discharge tunnele are -243 and -250 f eet Mst. Each tunnel is connected to the surface at the plant by a vertical riser shaf t.
3.4.2.2 Intake systes The " velocity cap" concept originally proposed in the ER-CPS has been maintained, and was chosen because of its low potential for fish entrapoent as experienced for sie11st coastal structures [1, 2, 3, 4).
Figure 3.4-1 illustrates the general layout of the intake structures in 3.4-1
i
.- SS 1 & 2 ER-OLS relationship to the discharge structure, whereas Figure 3.4-3 presents the l dimensions as well as the elevation and plan views of the structures.
The maniaal flow rate at the outer edge of the " velocity cap" is 1.0 (ps.
Each of the three intake structures is connected to the 19 foot ID intake tuneel by a 10 foot ID riser shaft. The pumphouse circulating water pumps, general layout, etc., are unchanged from that outlined in ER-CFS Section 3.4.2.1.
3.4.2.3 Discharse Systes various hydrothermal model studies [6, 7, 8] have resulted in the selection of a submerged multiport dif fuser as the discharge structure. Figure 3.4-1 shows the general layout of the discharge system and its relationship to the intake systes, whereas Figure 3.4-4 illustrates the diffuser design.
As shown, the 1000 foot long diffuser is connected to the 19 foot ID discharge tunnel by eleven vertical riser shaf ts, each 4.5 feet in disseter, spaced about 100 feet apart. Atop each riser shaf t are two 2.65 foot ID nossles, which in turn are approximately 7 to 10 feet above the sea floor in depths of water from 50 to 60 feet. The discharge flow rate through each of the 22 nossles is 15 fys.
3.4.2.4 Minisiestion of Thermal Shock to Karine Life Refer to ER-OL5 Section 5.1, Effects of Operation of the Heat Di s sipa tion system.
3.4.2.5 Control of Marine Fouling and Debris Renoval j I
Refer to ER-0!J Section 3.6 for a. complete description of sarine fouling control; debr',e removal is unchanged f rse that presented in the ER-CFS.
3.4.2.6 Disposal of Debris Collected in the circulating Water Systes l
Information for this section is unchanged f rom that presented in the same section of the ER-CPS.
3.4.2.7 Service Water Systes During normal operation, the service water system operation is unchanged f rom that described in the ER-CFS. However, during heat treatment J (backflushing) operation, the service water is valved to perform independently of the circulating water systes as a completely closed systes utilising a mechanical draf t evaporative cooling tower. FSAR Sections 9.2.1 and 9.2.5 contain a complete description of the cooling tower and its o pe ra tion.
k 3.4-2 i I
l t
_. _. ._. ._-_____-__________O
4 55 1 & 2 ER-OLS 3.4.3 Mydroaraphic Survey and Hydrothermal Model Studies Refer to ER-C13 Sections 2.4.1 and 6.1.1.1 for a description of hydrographic results and surveys conducted for the heat dissipation systes, sad section S.1.2 for a description of hydrothermal model results and studies perf ormed.
O 1
1 1
3.6-3 4 l
551&2 E R-01.5 3.4.4 References
- 1. Weight, Robert R., *0cean Cooling Water System for 800 MW Power Station", Journal of the Power Division Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers - Proceedings Paper No.1888, Deceabdr 1958.
i
- 2. Downs D. D. and Meddock, K. R. ,
- Engineering Application of Fish l Behavior Studies in the Design of Intake Systees for Coastal Cenerating Stations", Paper delivered to Amer. Soc. of Chee. Eng. Conference, l
January 1974. <
l l
- 3. Schuler, v. J. and Larson, L. E. , " Experimental Studies Evaluating Aspects of Fish Behavior as Parameters in the Design of Cenerating Station Intake Systems", Paper delivered to the Amer. Soc. Chem. Eng.
Conference, January 1914.
4 Schuler, V. J. and Larson, L. E. , "Ieproved Fish Protection at Intake Systems", Jour. Env. Eng. Div. ASCE. 101 (EEC ), 1975.
- 5. March, Patrick A. and Nyquist, Roger C.. " Experimental Study of Intake Structures Public Service Company of New Hampshire Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2", Alden Research Laboratories Report 131-76/M296DF, November 1976.
- 6. Teyssandier, R. C., Durgin, W. W., and Hecke r, C. E. , "Hyd rothereal Studies of Diffuser Discharge in the Coastal Environment: Seabrook Station", Alden Research Laboratory Report 86-74/M2525, August 1974
- 7. March, Patrick A. and Seith, Peter J. , " Experimental Study of Discharge Structures, Public Service Company of New Hampshire Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2", Alden Research 1.aboratory Report 130-76/M296CF, November 1976.
- 8. Nyquist, Roger C., Durgin Willias W., and Hecker, Cecrge E.,
" Hydrothermal Studies of Bifurcated Dif fuser Nozzles and Thereal Backwashing: Seabrook Station", Alden Research Laboratory Report 101-77/M296BF, July 1977.
- 9. U.S. Envirorusental Protection Agency,
- Decision of the Administrator, Case No. 76-7, Public Service Company of New Hampshire, el g." Douglas Costle, Administrator, Washington, D.C. , June 10, 1977.
- 10. U.S. Envirosesental Protection Agency, " Modifications of Determinations, Case No. 76-7, Public Service Company of New flampshire, et al.", Douglas Costle, Administrator, Washington, D.C., November 7,197U ~
- 11. U.S. Envirotusental Protection Agency, " Decision on Resand, Case No.
76-7, Public Service Company of New Hampshire, et, d.". Douglas Castle, Administ rator, Washington, D.C. , August 4, 1974.
3.4-4 I
. \
(
. l se, s ,
- 1 8
. . . . d' i
., s, ,
3 l \
- ,- n _ > ,-4 ,r e / , ,
g i 1 / /
/
i II *O +-
/ \ l i.
% I d /
/
i i
uAwTON y
/ ,,,,[. s sits
/,;d '(I
~
SEACH I
}',a (y,-j f)) , l", %
, ,',- ,1 I , s_fe s ', l
/,) , t" ~ ' .
,urans *****' k' gamem== = g vv. s6 's ' s\ *C' s . I..*,di N f ".2 ~j
'b*" ===== me . , , s< /.
s t ; t' s'1% f-sits oisca^ a os
.1.a
,, >C ruuns6 OW ,, , ,,,, / .istmanos
,1 * , f ,y-p svaa 's a
sits * 'e / I f*
,fa, N:
nocas
",1 [/ 3[/ s p
i,,,
ng i\
, -4 'f_/ , 6_ 'wt,g '-
/ suusa3 i n l <
svaa l D
\
i '
accas saasaoom r- woos 6 1*
u wits SEAlmOOK SEACH 0
) 3CALE - FEET l
i
+
- i PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE LOCATION OF SEABROOK STATION SEABROOK STATION . UNITS 1 & 2 INTAKE AND DISCHARGE STRUCTUAE5 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE ST AGE l OGumE ::
I:
o- i S I, $, !
Ig i i a c'!
I =E i g!
.gl tf[! ' j 10 i B
' : 5 o
, I ! -
! J5!
h
~
'I;
( Jl s*s e
~,
d f\ t n y l 5 l
5 5
I 5 y f 3
I
- Y
\
w lI N
i: !
1 (i' '
S l s a
!il R
b 7 22 gl
? E II 5 I L s1 s b \
g l$!!!24gI a
a I e e a e e s
l PUBLIC SERvlCE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHI AE PROFILE OF SEABROOK STATION SEABROOK STATION . UNITS 1 & 2 CIRCULATING WATER SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE l FIGu AE 3 4 2
=
i
)
- N '
( )
I i(:
,.N
~
1
- g. : , .:' -
'j
% g. -
'~
- . I i % ,pib* ) -
~ g ..=.
~a .~. .~jc :. s .
~ ..~ ' ': -s==xa-
- m. . - .- - ~ ~ -
s
- e. * .*
'q. . ' .'. ' y
,s,A' * .
'^. -
\
i s . (
, '/, ' j $. *
.,,, - .1: A { '
- - maamme t
G *
, . --g .
/ *E ..
g 2:f: .
e er p$$, -
w I ~N-w g ** a .
5 * .: ..
$N I
$ t!3
, f.
XM
, w s
-m @
- l ~ ~
. . q' '
{
1 t ..
~,........,
,O ... _
........g
'o* *
. + ,
e l
. . f
, , .........s
..... .y n - s
~
e- .
w s
S gma
, e i
.q ,e * .
.,l 3
" .s-
.' ~
% d,f
== . L - .0L ~ ?'l PUBLIC SEAviCE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHI AE DIAG AAM SHOWING SEABROOK STATION SEABROOK ST ATION . UNf TS 1 & 2 ENVIRONMENT AL REPORT VELOCITY CAP INTAKE STAUCTURES OPERATING LICTtNSE, STAGE l AGUAE 3 41 o
9 L
Revision 1 F
./ 3 ,
February 1982
/ 't' .'
\'
. g j <s -
\, 4 b f /
h L
, , y' t
( / Q, ~ '
- j i ,9.
g J g ')[
s A3' ,,
NOZZ.E ASSEMBLY CENTERLINE ANGLE
, $\ ,
69' ,, ,
1
'. 64* M' 2% '
t" '
- j. -
c N,!1 3 .' j' y ,
( g.,q i( i
+/yg + l N d
ii . ' , -
- g6 43'
- r -
'\ 's. \ <
'8'
- ( %9 8
DIFFU5EP LENGTH 1000 FEIT 45' 2 NOZZLE $ PER RISER SHAFT NOZZLE DIAMETER 165 FEET d5' Ol5CHA2M "ELOC'ITY 15 F1 fECJ g
),\
4,.
i' , ,
100' 11 45' t TYP
\,
s l
't '
s i REFERENCE UE &C DRAWING 9763 F 103000
- 9. 3.. 5 i,
, 's s( '
i o
l
\
\
f PUBLIC SERvlCE COMPANY OF NEW H AMPSHIRE OlAGRAM $HOWING SEA 8 ROOK ST ATICN SEABROOK STATJON . UNITS 1 & 2 MULTIPORT DIFFUSER ENvtRONMENY AL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE j
( + l FIGUAE 3 4 l ,
j 1
f i
/ !.
[s J
I .
53 1 & 2 Ravision 2 El-OLS June 1982 3.6 CMDf1 CAL AND SIOCIDE SYSTDt3 3.6 1 Circulating and Service Water Systees l The taformation in this subsection is changed from that presented in the l
Seabtook Station ER-CFS as noted below.
l The preferred biofouling control method for the Seabrook Station circulating and service water systems is continuous low-level chlorination. Sea brook l
Station is designed with the ability to control biofouling by either thermal backflushing or chlorination.
Sodium hypochlorite solution, the biocide to be utilised in chlorination, will be produced on-site by four hypochlorite generators using 1,200 gpa of seawater taken free the circulating water systes. These generators are capable of producias a total of about 868 pounds of equivalent chlorine per hour in a hypochlorite solution. This will be injected at a dosage of about !
2 as/1 of equivalent chlorine into the circulating water system. A block diagras showing water usage, chlorination injection points and residenes times is provided in Figure 3.6-1.
The sain injectica potat of the hypochlorite solution will be at the throats of the three of fshore totakes approximately three siles from the site. In addition, other injection points are available in the intake transition
( etructure, the circulating water pump house, the service water pump house and the discharge transition structure should it be necessary to inject booster doses of hypochlorite solution to esintain the chlorine residual high enough to prevent biofouling of circulating and service water systems.
There is the possibility that the injection of 2.0 og/l of equivalent chlorine i in a sodium hypochlorite solution continuously at the intake structures may not be sufficient to prevent fouling in some areas of the cooling and service water systees. The decay of chlorine in ambient seavster could reduce residual levels below those required for ef fective biofouling ccatrol. As a result, the addition of booster doses at the circulating and service water pumps may be required to maintais these portions of the systes free of fouling organisms. While the frequency and duration of booster dosage will be ,
dependent en operational esperience, it is espected that these will occur primarily during the wars water months when settling of fouling organissa is
)
highest. A sklertne minisisation program is espected to be conducted at Seabreek Staties. Bere the level of oxidant will be sonitored to provide ;
effective aestrel of fouling organisms withis the coettag water systems with sistaal release of osident to the receiving waters. If it is determined that chlorinates is set completely effective in the control of I fouling to the intake tunnel, backflushing will be utilised occasionally to provide additional feeling control.
Chloriae will be injected at a rate such that a concentrattee of 0.2 as/1 total residual osidaat and sessured as equivalent C12 te not escoeded in the discharge transition structure. During the 63-minute transit time (one unit operation transit time approstaately twice as long) from the discharge transition structure to the discharge diffuser, the total residual oxidant i 3.6-1 l
l l
L_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . _
- I SB 'l & 2 R3 vision 2 i ER OLS . June 1981' l 6*
will continua to decrease through incrassed decay at elevated water t oo pe ra t o ry s. The total residual oxidant concentration will then be
, diluted by the diffuser flow, appririnately 10 to 1. and further reduced through addivisaal chemical reactiosa with ambient water. ,
I t
Antitcaling paint has been applied to the intate' r,tructures and acceepatjing .
verti441 riser shaf ts to reduce biofouling prio? te plar,t opeestion. These strucseres will not be subject to fouling untti they art spened near the d.14(gr.ated station start up.
- The estreme dilution and the slow lasching rate of the copper ions from t
- ne antifaaling, peint will produce very low concentrations.
giofouling (.astrol for the exterior of the offshore ioteke structure has been
, , provided 0 / *,hs uss ' of copper-sickel sheathing. As with the copper based kh paints, the turching rate of copper loss from the Cu-Ni sbaathing is not
, expected to stssuce any detrimental environmental effe. cts. The discharge sessies wilt also be saintained free of marine fou1164;. i:be control method.
hivvever, tvu ' sot Jet been established.
Information on the cheetcals discharged during the preoperational sne operational stagee of the Seabrook ifrLion and their effects on the environment eso be found in Sectiouc 3.6 and 5 5.2.3 of the Final Environmental Statement (FES) tad Section 5.3 of the YR-OLS for the Seabrook Station.
[
3.6.2 Industrist Vaste System The inforestion in this subsection remains unchanged f rom information presented is the $cabrook Station El-CPS.
A l
3.6-2 l
- a. .. .. . - . .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _________________j
l Ilovtston :
4 June 1962 I. L L:
i ={ 3:{ Es 25 85 25 n =, 4 4.
b k i Er.T Er.T ErJi' .
e: : e: -
l 2:
- --+ J: &" + 21 %*
- += I ::
EC 1
5
- 1 BC g h h3 .,h .,A 2
r) f3 ~3 t ;O I. :
_i ijH .:
i
-+ bi .i:
!J 8
1+ I!2 -
f 18 f; 3 :}
a Ii! j 2*! }
i V h a M
a
- h 4s
- % : e % %
- 'E 2
. : 7 h. 2 %. - 5 I : . : . :
.I IA 4=j I II 4= 5
- I a II 68 +=j l
ML. b, d(
~ 0 a a g_ s s
}* 1._ 23 25 5 $ : l r- 31
- 2% @~
- 3. ! . 2- II 3: *I
&3 =
-1. :1 4m= 3 . *!
j
- 2 a as - 1 : : :
t I I
! :II A d%
1 3
g d4 2
- a
- 1 s I, b66 g,, g 3
e 3
i =
51 i J6 gg
- 3 8
- e B
- 1 -
- a = = .
1 ' t 'g I E3
~
s s.
g 3 . -l C
a 8
j +l 5 j + ;l
- - - e 3 3 eh -
.h
.h 5- 5
- 5 h._ ___
SLOCK OI AGRAM OF CHLORIN ATION PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHiAE OF COOLING WATER SYSTEM SEABROOK ST ATION . UNITS 1 & 2 ENVIRONMENT AL REPORT 1 OPERATING LICENSE STAGE 36 l FIGUAE l
1
55 1 & 3 Rovision a ER-OLS June 1982
. }
s-l IB 5.3 EFFECTS OF CNFJf1 CAL AND B10 CIDE DISCMARCES The inf ormation tu this section is changed from that presented in Section 5,4-of the Seabrook Station ER-CFS as noted below.
5.3.1 chemical and 31ocide Dischernes i
The effects of the chemical constituents being discharged through the circulating water system were discussed in the ER-CFS Section 5 4 for sembroo's Staties. Additional information on the discharge concentrations of these chemicals as well as their ef fects is available in the Seabrook Station Final Environmental Statement secties 3.6 and section 5.5 2.3, respectively.
Discharge of all chemicals will be in accordance with applicable regulatory agency permits.
The chierinaties of seavster results in an immediate conversion of hypochlorous acid (ROC 1) to both hypebronous acid (50Sr) and hypoiodous acid (M01), yielding chloride ions (C1"). This results in no loss of ealdising ca pacity. EF11 (1980) reviewed literature ref erencing the reactions of chlorine is seawater. Bere, Johason (1977) reported this reaction to proceed to 501 completion within 0.01 sinutes vtile suges and Kels (1977) indicated it to be essentially 991 complete within 10 seconds. References by IFRI to Sugawara and Terada (1958) and Carpenter and Macaidy (1976) revealed that todiae in seaweter is in an oridized state, as todate, and unavailable to react with hypochlorous acid. Broside on the other hand is described as being in aspie supply, estimated at 68 ag/1, and able to consume more than 27 ag/l of chlorise according to Lewis (1966).
Eypobronous acid under the en, editions found at Seabroek, partially dissociates into hypobrosite ions (0Br"). Both itees are considered to be free available er residual osident. Free residual brosine is more reactive than f ree residual chlorine, yet enters into the same type reactions.
J. C.
The decay of chierine in natural seawater is estremely variable.
Goldman, et al. (1978) indicated that losses due to chlorine demand occurred in two stages; a first very rapid and significant demand followed by a continuous less at a reduced rate. They indicated that in natural seawater, the 2- sinute chlorise demand ranged from 0.42 - 0.50 as/1 follovias an initial chierine dose of 102 as/1 sad 2.88 as/1, respectively.
Bostgaard-Jesces (1977) indicated that la Denmark, seawater reduced an initial chlorine dose of 2.0 as/1 to 0.5 mg/l within 10 stoutes, and to 0.2 as/1 af ter studiss on chlorine 60 simetes. Fava and Thomas (1977) described recent demand, giving a value for the demand ta clean seawater of 1.5 mg/l ta 10 stoutas, and values free 0.035 ag/l to 0.61 as/1 for a 5-minute contact time te values of 0.50 to 3 0 mg/l with a 3-hour contact time in coastal waters.
Frederick (1979) esasised the decay rate of equivalent chlorise is seaweter samples at Seabreek. It was found that the decayed amount at any time appeared te very free sonth to sooth over a narrow range and that the amount of equivalent chlorine decayed rose with either time or en increased innoculatten level, indicating that there may not ha a fined chlorine demand 5.3-1 1
i Sg i & 2 Revision 2 ER-Ot.5 June 1982 s
1 but suspected to be related to the chemical gPg1 (1980)interactions slao reviewed at higher salinities data pertinent and the physiology of the species,It was todicated that an evaluation between the two to salinity at d tonicity. !
one complicated by che fact that the chemical fors, concentration and duration At Seabrook of residual oxidant species are also af fected by salinity.
station the es11mity is relatively high and stable, however the dilution and cheetcal reactions of biocides with ambient waters upos discharge and the J subsequent limited period of exposure reduces these effects. l Wong (1980) ledicated that for a given dosage and contact time, residual chlorine concentrations were seen to decrease systematically with increased tospera ture s.
Eigher temperatures were found to yield higher chlorine dema nd s .
Es essgested that this increase in demand represents reactions with organic compounds that oorsally do not react at lower temperatures.
Various af fects of temperature on the toxicity of chlorinated cooling water have also been reported. Investigations have found temperature ef fects to range from producing no change in toricity to where tecreased temperatures have lacreased toxicity. gF31 (1930) suggests that the synergistic interaction between temperature and chlorinated cooling water would not be great for species residing in the area of the thermal plume.
The halogenated compounds espected to be released include osall concentrations of hypobronous acid, hypobrosite ions, tribrosamine, dibromasine a sonochloramine.
and the percentages are espected to vary depending upo photochemical conversions.
Biocides entering the receiving waters via the Seabrook Station discharge are diluted by a f actor of 10 to 1, as described in Sections 5.1 and 5 3 of the Eg-0LS. As previously sentioned, a total residual otidant concentration of 0.2 ag/1, seasured at the discharge transition structure, will further decay Additional during the 43-elouse transit time through the discharge tunnel. I reduction through the decay of osident is espected tolasses occur upon theresiduals of total release l from the cooling systee into the receiving waters. the water are expected through renewed ambient chlorine decay thro in a light-leduced osidation of hypobrosite to brosate reducing the coecestratios of free brosine.
Thus, la consideration of the total dilution f actor and the reductions i associated with chemiest interactions withis the receistag water, an equivalent chlertse concentration of 0.02Beyond eg/1 isthisespected area, theat the surface appremisately 70 seconds after discharge. Chemical and {
concentrations would steadily drop of f with tecreased diluttes. j photochemical reactions promoted by solar irradiance will further reduce i oxidaat concentration la the receiving water. li Estimates of other effluent concentrations at various distances free discharge structure are derived in the same fashion as those for thermal l f
i 5.3-3 i
a SB1&2 Revision 2 ER-OLS June 1982 i
To evaluate the ef fect of biocides on the biota in the vicinity of Seabrook Station, a review of toxicity data free open literature for local species was perfereed (Table 5.3-2). An evaluation of this data has detereatned that the continuous release of total residual oxidants at concentrations of *0.2 es/1 or less at the discharge transition structure will not present unmanageable stress or siter the local indigenous populations upon release to ambient waters. Table 5.3-3 and Figure 5.3-1 provided in the Final Environmental Statement for Seabrook Station, summarite additional chlorine toxicity data on marine life. The lines enclosing the data points were arbitrarily drawn by the NRC staf f and depict the short duration and chronic toxicity thresholds for the spectee reviewed.
To evaluate the toxicity of released chlorine to marine organisse, the espesure time must be considered. At the lip of the dif fuser, espesure time is estremely limited. Mere, rapidly entrained ambient seawater and a discharge velocity of 15 fset per second (7.5 feet per second for 1 unit operation) will prevent organises f ree inhabiting this location. Estrained phytoplankton, soeplankton and ichthyoplankton, are unable to maintain themselves within the discharge plume or at the diffuser lip over extended periods of time. Larger marine lif e cannot osintain thesselves adjccent to the discharge in the direct path of the plues. Therefore, a combination of very low concentrations, and limited exposure periods prevents toxic effects from occurring as a result of biocide discharge. Organises entrained into the plume will be carried away from the discharge structures where chlorine concentrations will be continually lowered through diluttoo and cheetcal reaction.
The concentration of total residual oxidant released by Seabrook Station is expected to be below that required to produce lethal effects (Tables 5.3-2 and
- 5. 3- 3) . Kapid mixing, dilution and cheetcal reaction of released biocide with sobtent water will further reduce any possible toxic concentrations. With increased distance from the discharge, chlorine concentration will drop as additional sizing, dilution and reactions occur. Planktonic organises which passively drif t into the discharge plume will not be subjected to lethal concentrations for long enough durations to be affected. With rapid dilution and a diffuser designed to avoid bottoe impact, benthic organises will not be esposed to continuous levels of chlorine. Fish species are expected to be subjected to limited espesure tLees and minimal concentration which will sitigate possible effects to discharged blocides.
Mattice sad 11ttel report that aussel attachment is prevented at concentrations of 0.02 to 0.05 mg/l of chlorine, however ao mention is made as to the method of analysis which could allow for considerable variation. Since the integrity of both the cooling and service water systee6 depends upon thee remaining free of obstructions, organises entering the intake tunnel should met be allowed to settle. A consideration of the power plant estraimment time, the ambient chlorine decay, and the delta-temperature which enhances halogen dissociation, allows for the injectica of 2.0 eg/l of equivalent chlorine to ef fectively control biof ouling while releasing etalmal non-toxic levels of oxidant into the environment.
It is concluded that the environmental 1spect of the continuous release of 5.3-5
_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-__ a
SB1&2 Revigion 2 !
EA-OLS June 1982 l
- 2. Electric Power Research Institute,1980. Review of Open Literature on i Effects of Chlorine on Aquatic organises. eft 1 EA-1691, froject 877 I
- 3. Electric Power Research Institute.1981. Power Plant Chlorination - A Biological and Chemical Assessment. EPt1 EA-1750, Project 1312-1, Final Esport, December, 1981.
- 4. Envirosphere Ceepany, 1981. Chlorine Toxicity as a Function of Environmental Variables and Species Tolerance for Edison Electric tastitute.
- 5. Fava, J. A. a nd D. L. Thoma s (197 7 ) . Use of Chlorine for Antifouling on Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) Power Plants. Proceedings of the Ocean Thereal Energy Conversion (DIEC) Biofouling and Corrosion Symposius, August, 1978.
- 6. Frederick, L. C., 1979. Chlorine Decay la Seawater. Public Service Ceepany of New Maopshire.
- 7. Goldman, J. C., et al. (1978). Chlorine Disappearance in Seawater.
Woods Mole Oceanographic Institution; Water Research, volume 13. pp.
315-323.
- 8. Rostgaa rd-Jensen, P. , e t al. (197 7) . Chlorine Decay in Cooling Water and Discha rge into Seawa ter, Journal WFCF, ' August, 1977, pp. 1832-1841. l
- 9. Ichthyological Associates, Inc.,1974. The Ef fect of Temperature and I cheetcal Follutants on the Behavior of Several Estuarine Organisse. l 1 Bulletin No. 11.
- 10. L1 den, L. N., et al., 1980. Ef fects of chlorobrosinated and Chlorinated ,
Cooling Waters on Estuarine Organises. Journal of Water Follution Control, vol. 52, No. 1.
- 11. McLean, R. I., 1973. Chlorine and Temperature Stress on Estuarine Invertebrates. Journal of Water Follution Control, Vol. 45, No. 5.
- 12. Mattica, J. 5. and M. E.11ttel, site Specific Evaluation of Power Plant !
Chlorinates: A Proposal (1976) Environmental Sciences Division. ORNL.
- 13. Mattice, J. S., 1977. Power Plant Discharges t Toward More tassonable i Efflueet Liette on Chlorine. Nuclear Safety, Vol.18 No. 6. Nov.-Dec.
- 14. Middaugh, D. F., et al., 1977. Responses of Early Life Mistory Stages of ;
the Striped base, 'Morone Samat111s', to Chlorination. Environmental Research Lab, Oulf Sreese, Florida, j
- 15. Radian Corporatten (1980), Development Document for Proposed Ef fluent ,
tiettations Guidelines, New Source Performance Standards and Retreatment '
Standards for the Steam Electric Point Source Category, prepared for EPA. 3 i
l 5.3-7
0 SB 1 & 2 Revision 2 ER-OLS June 1982 TABLE 5.3-1 Seawater Sample Paraseters ,
Total Kjeldahl-N Teep. Salinity Ammonta-N orSanic Carbon Date (eg N/1) (8C) ppt pH, (as N/1) . (eg C/1) 6/29/76 .12 15.00 32.16 8.4 .09 1.0 7/29/76 .17 9.71 33.34 8.3 .07 10 8/26/76 .11 14.92 33.87 8.15 .04 8.3
.11 12.42 33.61 8.3 .07 24.0 9/28/76 10/26/76 .16 8.54 34.42 8.0 .08 18.0
.12 6.92 35.13 7.8 .09 2.5 11/30/76
.09 2.34 35.12 7.9 .07 7.0 12/30/76
.16 0.50 36.06 7.8 .09 3.0 1/26/77
.09 0.00 34.76 8.35 .05 1.0 2/23/77
.05 1.80 33.70 7.95 .01 1.0 3/29/77
.07 5.68 34.16 8.1 .02 16.0 4/27/77
.07 5.99 33.34 8.2 .01 3.5 5/26/77
.06 10.99 33.24 7.85 .04 9.0 6/30/77 Source: Frederick, 1979 I
1 i
l 551&2 gevision 2 ER-OLS June 1982 I 1
I 1111L L L ;;~ j
..... . L. L. . ,
l l ..... . . e . 22 3
~~
3 I
= .*8
- q. . .-
3 . . .e a .
. . . I b I to to to es n. ,
. t.o h.e . E. ..E3 3
. . . . ... . E 23 333&& 3 ~ &&
m
- = m .
m.
e.
m .m.
... 4
- t. - e.s 1
. . .I ,
3I .
e
. . 8 3 . X
$1 -I =3= I 1 - - II i 8 8 !:*f
..O --
OO
.e .e .O 6 sieE- 8 J4 . . es sh e I
e ..
G6 .m= es ce 2..9 RRRRR 44 O C O
.e. e O O O. O.
em e M O o M .O e . e . e
. ~ - -e a
. g em., M p
M M.6 8 S e.n a
.e a h.
e
., e .
- em e. .e* S an.
- e. O pe O. T8 .
.n. g O O. O. O. O. .=. .
e 3 O m O O em ew ese m e .O. O
- Y O o
W &.,
8 e.
g 9.a E.
3 A - 1 -
0
. e Os e .e.
M.,
e S. 9
.* 9 8 e e 5 4e as
.a Op N 9 to 9 9 n
a 9 an A 3 8 es as 3 to h e.,.5 .w
.e
. 9 to .9e S FM g .& .O m s SOg
- 94 F
. . .Se "e* W e. 9 y hs O g $ .
.O*
O G$ .S 9 O .g g .*O 2 9
.m m & 9 see es m S G to
.e. 989 9. g g W
. y en. 5 g g e .G j
3
- 98 8 .
g g e S to $s .m e j g . .e = as v as {
g e. . . .* S $ em S f'
.e. p e. 2 .m 0 A W .Ef - E E E4w 9A * .9 W
- : . . .-~
3 . l l
l l
SB1&2 32 vision 2 ER*018 June 1982 amt - een h h Lt2 a
2 2 , ,
200 g O..
-2 RR !
7.. 20 0
- O J **
E =
- o. gg -- - - -
J==
3 s}s 3 33 :: 3 3"-
na a n 3
1 0 i 000 m: O . O
- "3 : :- : :
g :
- : --:: 1.~
a
- ..=_.' .
=
1 n
tr -
O ! gS. eO g o -
e
- -
- 7 .* 2 -
f
- 1 ~
~
e i g.
M i ;
- I 5 4 d
- I 30 ** * * * .
. 'f ?**
--- .. ~ . . .
E V 4 i o 3 a .
E S
- a g T. ,
t .:
31.1 E.
2.
s : 1 .
e-. .
5 1
-E:4- -.
1 3.3 5%
. 4 5
e i 4 i
- I '
- :-*3 3 s
- )
1 i .
- . v ..
.: -t . : :::_.
Ie 2- : : j 1 .p 1 :a ss a :: 54] 4
),
}.
j :;-~
1 1
i
4 55 1 & 2 Revision 2 I
ER-OLS June 1982 I
L LLL ... . . . 33 2 Ett : : : : ==
2 Stt 23
- 2 3
- ~~~
- 0 0 0
))
- i. avv v v v ::
2 1.
111 asa E:s:~... .C :~ ~:
- g
- * *
- lit; 3:3 *
! ! : *:0 IIE"R&B
$[: . e: 2
& R & El..sC
. ~~~ t . .. . ....
4
~ ~~~ ~~
. ~ ~ ~~~~
- *:: t : : ::::
" "I
- Ill O il I I I IIII m e e tr-saa i
~
8 a saa :Es. a. s. :. cas: -
( :s .;-
n e
2 g-W
~-
j i s :~
- n ~
3%2 % % 0 2*02 I
- % OR
- i. f 4 424 444 4 4 4 4d44 I f.
V 3 1
. . . . i 2 : #. 2 .
t g.3:Sainia 2 a .:- - - - -
8 i
. T 24j
_g 3
i 1
2 , _I :
". .t " 2.,
3
-2g..4~
r* 12*j}
1
- g
- 20.p .2
),
);
} .
3 .
- .g22]
[*f-I:
- -.g.-
it.2 l 2 2 .....
1
.. 1 8 I i
l l
- --- .-_ _ __._ ._.______ _ _____ ___ b
SB 1 & 2 Revision 2
- ER-OLS June 1982 LL AALL 1" LL:*
200 22 em em
"*.. nn
. 00002 2 2 00 00 : -
t ...:
....8.3=3.3. t:L5m .. .
y
. . e - -
3 15512 2020
..2.2.:
31-
.2 5%. 1%
- :2:- 22:. : : ! .! .,
.i..-tt. s. : vs.a..ypla: st .-
saase e E: sse t
D Om . === ==== m V . . . ... .... .
" 3 3 : 3 :8 I I w
Ill 8888I 8 "S
.. .:"S
.e =o R . =. =o =oo..====.w.
RoRRw.
e e
o o oo -
.$. - e.
. ~ oo
.. o. o.o.e~
( #
e 1 :. --- -e
=
. Ew E
- 1li 5 4*
M
(
- 2
% eeee ao *Reeme i
~**** *
- e o con oo-ooo
?*"*--
2.
'I . . . . =
- - 3w h 1 o 3 I
. .... Iy. 2
! !!t: .
4A i 3 4444 3 -
7 8..
e g -i O i .l .
i.. I. -
- 5....2 . . . .
8
=
. . ,2 t: 4.
. g t "r
. 33 gJ, -
t Ien a
9 g IJ.
.o
.S
. g.g mg ,I .
yb w9 g
c~ 2
- t
- 1. .". A.
. T ,
g g 8 .
p
.J g4 kw
. ..-~
t i
SB1&2 12visien 2 u-OLS June 1982 OO O O A A A A A*... ,
23 2 2 : 2 ==EEE '
00 O O : : :
g
- 000 .
. # # k 3 II*JJ 2 5% 5 % j 0 t 3 .. . 6 * * .J.J;";*;*
at a e e e e so,,,
FF . . . . weIII 33 g . . .
44 . F F F II"::
EE E E & & & & GG228 m
m" O O D E O D E ""ODb "8 3: : : : : : : ~ :::
- :. : . : : :. : . :I:::
" ,.I I I I .I I I , ... III AR R R R R R R g RRR v d --
[ >>>>
w 4444 O 3 2 *R *:
- J
~ ~
7 . -
- ~
- a 1 ti il I i 4 4 - - 11 as o
&~
W :
~i -
i
- ~ ~*
i-
- - 35 3 3 2 : R : 44 I
- i. f di 4 4 4 4 4 4 &&d44 :
v -
N E o i I . :. ..I...
% m m t m! . ..
F . 41 J' I.J.J 2 4 :. 4A .212.2 .' E2 f B*... *B.. 2 s -
R Q = "
- 33222 -
s.2 1
E
. d. "1 I
-g:: I e 2 *
"t".3 1 a s. s. a :
3
~. 1 2. *. ~E 2
" ... J O.
) e
"..:"3a.
1:3
! l !113
& Li l:2 3 1 ...--
53 1 in 2 tevision 2 e
ER-01.5 June 1982 Table 5.3-3 (Sheet 1 of 2)
_ mm. e.m . _
Spame came 83'"um Gemens thumme negam,,
phne enummase 38 emmee asumamms SJt > at assamepeso e N Semesemumme e iJ 8 44 aus Thus to e puse e asami enemmes e 9 espe h
emmmuummeums sheammmmm ammmun taDe as er astestpuse e se ea 448 8 man assess asum en a M esmaammme smaamme ymme IJalJ Sam Base M OmmeAs mas Sala 3 er $88asepuse a e le as as 888 ase poses e De Osamamme emmmmes 4.799 as es 955 amp pese e 3 Thommmmans amemmamed 30 amp puso N Thumusuman seus 4J8 Se es e ammummes pommun tas as es aps me ymme e 39 assamppuse 3 themamme sepamm &J 84 to to e tJ > se aft me pose e 3p annamme ammasumus ad be um SSEemppuse e 3 asumemmeAs psumme ut amp puse e si W aus &J SJ ett e ses se ageameymme e 3 Sennammenammmmm set amp puse 13 Smemmen ammemusma 64 aIES em e emymmen,emme til De er NBamp pose e 3 h tumma MS ase p*** e 3 sammmetrre immet eJ as as Stummum 7w 6 s sammaryma presen suus ter 8.se t erre es.tst gammen,ertem sammemme 6 40 $ f essi 86 1P% 6 gmaname maman summummes a emmat Camase .
a emmse comuman Apesmal eJ 8 to amme is emps e he naammme 18 samme samemme e tumus 68 $$ esos lWS nurimp, 3 spean aangis 8J S eri fert aeemer e test ampumasr e 40 4 S enri h sammus Sumur 8as 1 Pumane sm8mm8 I as t aus peammig /
h M AAm I can amp semens 8 I pt Guse sanan temme
.. m__ . j
_ t.m s ,
M hup *=eumumus W #
Abenents t muumEmp ahe 6
>g 9es esamms ammaamme M est aus 38 Im M ett aus 4 mummy mass 4 as as 06 4 ele aus e asummy she De et apt emner.
- te name sum ammenal M $ to Smme esses ahm 8em Gamese apaus assened M 8 18 38 emuBT 88m 8 34 et to 9 emme ammus W 8 M
E x8B 4 ein 185 memEls 39J9 asumet 8 84 SJ een WG mamment 4 sed SJ ems 334 amammy e l
l
.__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _______ )
Revision 2 !
. Juno 1982 e
4 I
s' . .g__ .e-e. ,_g ,
h .
.. I ***n' i ,,i . , t. .
i .i., i iisi. I !i. i
- i .. . , i
- l iill- I ur l - e iiji.. .. Ii s c. . Ie i
- ti i..
s e.- I i
= g --
l .h! ! h l ! l!ll.
w as ; .
!3 w'il m- II '
I ,
- 1. f I .6 e j
- . i : ' i.i !r i.
i i i i i i.d i e i i > >. i I r ! : il ki' l l ! !
%r- -
l , ,
i- .
1 ' 4- _
- ,i ;
I !' l.
~
lI il '
lti.l i ;!:
(
e., 1 Ill ! lllijk l I ililll I l! IliI .
Ilil; c' d d d & d d c ome t=.c i .
Source: Seabrook Station TIS; 1974 PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
SUMMARY
OF CHLORINE TOxlCITY SEASROOM STATION . UNITS 1 & 2 OATA ON MARINE LIFE ENVIRONMENTAL RE' ORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE l FIGU A E 531
__--____ _ _ _ _ _ -______----______--._-_-._-----.__J
SS 1 & 2 tsvisica 2 ER-OLS June 1982 10.5 BiocIng sisTINS ne information in this section has chassed from that presented is the Seabroek Station 1 and 1 ER-CPS, as seted below.
The method of biofouling control selected for the circulattag and service unter systems for Seabrook Staties is continuous low-level chlorination. As described La secties 3.6 of the ER 4LS for the Seabrook Station, sodium hypochlorite soluties will be produced on site by four hypochlorite generators using 1,200 spe of seawater taken from the circulattag water system. i Injesties of about 2 ag/l of equivalent chloriae as hypochlorite solutica at the threats of the three of fshore intake structures will provide for the main injecties potete. Additiemal injection points are located is the transition structure, the circulating water ymp house, the service water pop house and the discharge transition structure should it be necessary to inject booster deoes to maintain an effective antifouisat chlorias residual.
A cost sealysis for both generattag units indicates that backfiseking en a schedule of twice a oesth during the fouling seasos and esce a esath during the rest of the year would cost approminately $3 millies per year. If a schedule of backflashing only once a sooth during the biofouling sessee is possible, the cost will be reduced to approminately $1 5 millica per year.
Continuous low- level chlorination during a similar fouling season at sa
- injection level of 2.0 mg/l will cost approximately $14 million per year.
Sodius hypochlorite will be injected at such a rate as to maintain a level of 0.2 as/1 er less of total residual oxidaat eensured as equivalent C12 I" "h*
discharge transition structure.
While the costs for backflushing and chlorisatios are stellar for the slaisus espected treateest, backflushing poses the potentisi of a such greater oceassic loss. The procedure to reverse the circulattag water flow is complex and has the potential of inducing hydraulic and thermal transients which could result is a plaat shutdows. The resulting loss of electrical generation could be considerable, approaching $1 million just to bring the two units back to 1001 power. Additteesi 1 esses could also be incurred tocludlag the delay required to realiga mechanical and electrical systese before the plant could t
resume full power operettee.
Additional informaties is presented la Sections 3.6 and 5.3 ef the El-OLS for Seabreek Staties.
2.
t 10.5-1 m.
- _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ D
d o '
. sa 1 & 2
,. FSAR When all the valves are out of service, the steen generator safety valves provide the relieving capacity required to maintain the steam system within the design limits. ,
No effects of pipe breaks are considered, since all piping is located in the turbine building where the effect of pipe breaks will not jeopardise the safe shutdown of the plant.
10.4.4.4 Tests and Inspections During preoperational and initial startup testing, the stese dump system will be tested to verify proper valve performance and overall systes dynamic response as described in Chapter 14 10.4.4.5 Instrumentation Requirements The stese dump system is controlled by a system which compares turbine power to reactor power by amans of temperature and pressure inputs. The specific mode of operation (Tavs or steam pressure) can be selected through a selector switch sounted at the main control board (MCB). Valve position indications are also available at the MC3. The steam dump control system is discussed in Subsection 7.7.1.8, and is analysed for the following control modes:
- a. Lead rejection
( b. Plant trip
- c. Steam header pressure Interlocks are provided to block steam dump operations on low-low Tavs to prevent excessive cooldown of the primary plant and to protect secondary plant equipme n t if the condenser is unavailable, as sensed by the condenser pressure switches and the circulating water pump breaker positions. Figure 7.2-1 ( Sheet 10) shows the functional details and the interlocks pertaining to the stone dump control system.
10.4.5 Circu1stian Water System The circulating water systes providas cooling water to the main condensers to remove the heat re}ested by the turbine cycle and auxiliary systems.
Discussions pertaining to the interface between the circulating water systes, the service water system and the ultimate heat sink are found in Subsections 9.2.1 and 9.2.5.
10.4.5.1 Desian leses
- a. The circulating water systes design is based on sa average ocean water temperature of 550F, a combined condenser heat lead for the two units of 1.6 a 1010 Stu/hr during normal full-lood operating I conditions, and an average discharge water temperature increase of
( , 39er for normal operation with both units.
10.4-11 I
1
. SB 1 & 2 Amandment 45 '
e FSAR June 1982 s i
- h. The design of the system also includes the capability for furnish-ing cooling water to the service water systes, and returning it to the circulating water discharge flow.
- c. Thecirculatingwatersystesisdesignedtooperatesafekyat. ,
estreme high tide and minieue predicted tide (see Subsection l 2.4.11.2), and to permit operation of the turbine generator during condenser steam dump conditions without occurrence of a condenser low vacuum trip.
- d. provisions for continuous low-level chlorination (as shown on Figure 10.4.3A), and heat treatment of the tunnels are included for control of fouling by marine organisms. 4,
- e. The design of the circulating water system structures is non-seismic Category I, with its components also non-seismic Category I and non-safety related.
10.4.5.2 system Description The general arrangements of the various structures and components comprising the circulating water system are shown in Figures 1.2-46 through 1.2-48 and 1.2-52 through 1.2-55. The circulating water system consists of the following principal structures.
- 1) Two tunnels connecting the plant site with three submerged offshore (
intakes and a multiport discharge diffuser.
- 2) An intake transition structure.
- 3) A pumphouse.
- 4) A pair of fluees which join the intake transition structure to the pumphouse.
- 5) A discharge transition structure.
- 6) An underground piping system, interconnecting the pumps in the pumphouse, the condensers, and the transition structures.
The flow disgree of the circulating water system is shown in Figure 10.4-3.
During normal operations, the circulating water system provides a continuous flow of approsisately 390,000 spa to the condensers of each unit and 21,000 spo per unit for the service water systes.
Starting 260 feet below the plant level (240 feet below mean sea level), at the bottom of vertical 19'-0" finished disseter land shafts, two tunnels extend out under the ocean at an ascending grade of about 0.5% until they reach their respective offshore terminus locations about 160 feet below the ocean's surface. The tuneels, which are eachine bered through bedrock to a 22'-0" diameter, are concrete-lined to provide the finished 19 foot diameter.
(
10.4-12 2
o
- S51&2 Amendment 45
, FSAR June 1982 P,
- e
)
The intake tunnel is approelaately 17,000 feet long, and is connected to the ocess by means of three 9'-10%" finished diameter concrete-lined shaf ts, !
spaced between 103 sad 110 feet spart and located approximately 7000 feet i off the shoreline la 60 feet of water. A submerged 30'-6" diameter concrete intake structure ("veltsity cap") is mounted on the top of each shaf t to minimise fish entrapoeat by reducing the intake velocity.
The discharge tunnel is approximately 16,500 feet long, and is cosaected to the ocean by means of eleven, S'-1" finished inside dieneter concrete-lined shaf ts, spaced about 100 feet apart, located approximately 5000 feet of f the geabrook Beach shoreline in water up to 70 feet deep. A double-nostle fixture is attached to the top of each shaft to increase the discharge velocity and dif fuse the heated water.
The circulating water portion of the pumphouse encloses sis la' wide circu-1 sting water traveling screens (3 per unit) and six circulating water pumps (3 per unit). A seismic Category I reinforced concrete well separates the circulating water portion fram the service water portion of the pumphouse structure. The water is pumped through two 11 ft diasecer pipes (1 per unit) leading to the condensers, and is returned through two 10 f t diameter dis-charge pipes (1 per weit) connected with the tunnel transition structures.
Water to the service water section of the pumphouse is supplied by two pipe-lines branching off each of the tunnel transition structures.
Fouling by growth of marine organisse is expected to occur from the point l where the sea water enters the intake structures up into the condenser. Con- l trol of fouling in the intake structures and inlet tunnel will be by con- l tinuous low-level chlorination. In addition, heat treatment, where the direction of flow in the tunnels is temporarily reversed, and the discharge A*
temperature raised by recirculation is also available as a means of control-ling marine growth. In this mode, the wars water from the condenser is returned to the ocean through* the intake tunnel, while the discharge tunnel '"
is used to supply ocean water to the plant. To heat treat the discharge pipes and tunnel, the temperature of the condenser outlet water is temporarily raised by recirculating some of the dischstge water back to the condensers through the pumphouse.
The pumphouse, pipes leading to the condensers, and the condensers can be dewatered, inspected, and cleaned as required to control fouling.
10.4.5.3 safety Evaluation
,g Since the circulating water system is considered non-safety related, the safety evaluation, therefore, concerns itself with the ef fect of a f ailure of this system or say of its components on safety related systems or components.
If the circulating water flow race falls below the minious required amount due to a malfunction in the systes, the main condenser may no longer be able to edequately condense main stess, but there will be no effect on the safe shutdown capability of the plant.
l 10.4-13
l
~~
NUREG/CR-3054 I PARAMETER IE-138
{
Closecut of IE Bulletin 81-03: ;
Flow Blockage of Cooling Water "
to Safety System Components by Corbicu/a sp. (Asiatic Clam?
and Myti/us sp. (Mussel) i DateYu shed Ju e 1 1
J. H Rains W. J. Foley, A. Hennick !
i Elm Gr ve, I I22 Prepared for 3 Division of Emergency Preparedness and Engineering Response Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i' Washington, D.C. 20555 NRC FIN B1013
_-____a
i 'A d
I -- .
l' I-ABSTRACT
.i -On April 10, 1981, the Office of Inspection and Enforcement (IE) of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory-Commission (NRC) issued Bulletin l 81-03 requiring all nuclear generating unit licensees to assess the potential for biofouling of safety-related-system components as a. result of Asiatic clams (Corbicula:sp.) and marine mussels (Mytilus sp.). Issuance of.the Bulletin was prompted by the shutdown of Arkansas Nuclear One,' Unit 2 on September 3, 1980, as al result of flow blockage of safety systems by Asiatic clams. Licenseefresponses to Bulletin 81-03 have been compiled and evaluated to determine'the magnitude of existing biofouling
-problems and potential for future problems. An assessment'of the areal extent of Asiatic clam and marine mussel infestation has been made along with an evaluation of detection and control procedures currently in use by licensees. Recommendations are provided with regard'to adequacy of detection, inspection and L prevention practices currently in use, biocidal treatment L programs, and additional areas of concern. Safety implications and licensee responsibilities are discussed. Of 79 facilities licensed to operate, 17 have reported biofou'ing problems, 21.
are judged to have-high biofouling potential. 17 are judged to have low or future potential. and 24 are judted to have little or no potential.. For 49 facilities under co: struction, the number of units for matching conditions of b afouling are 3,.25, 15, and 6 in the same decreasing order of severity. The Bulletin has bcen close,d out for 85 of 129 current facilities.
Followup needed to close out the Bulletin for 21 operating.
facilities and 23 facilities under construction is proposed in Appendix C.
l-i tii ask.- --
! I i
i i
k l
TABLE OF CONTENTS Pane Abstract.................................................. 111 1.0 Introduction........................................... 1 2.0 Assessment Rationale................................... 2 3.0 Summary................................................ 5 3.1 Biofouling Status Summary.......................... 6 3.2 Detection and Control Practices.................... 8 4.0 Conclusions............................................ 11 5.0 Recommendations........................................ 12 6.0 Remaining Areas of Concern............................. 13 7.0 Definitions............................................ 13 8.0 References Cited....................................... 14 Appendix A IE Bulletin 81-03 Background Information IE Information Notice 81-21 Appendix B Documentation of Bulletin Closeout Appendix C Proposed Followup Items Appendix D Abbreviations I
V I
L-. l
___ ._ _. _ _ _ _ _ - ~ ~ - - ' - ~ ~ - - -
1 i
CLOSE0UT OF IE BULLETIN 81-03: I Flow Blockage of Cooling Water to Safety System Components by Corbicula sp. (Asiatic Clam) and Mytilus sp. (Mussel)
I
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1 In accordance with the Statement of Work in Task Order 15 under Contract NRC-05-80-251 and Task Order 34 under Contract NRC-05-82-249, this report provides documentation for the closeout status of IE Bulletin 81-03. The following !
documentation is based on the records obtained from the IE File, the NRC File. Document Control System and the Cognizant Engineer's On April 10, 1981, the Office of Inspection and Enforcement (IE) of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Bulletin 81-03, requiring all nuclear generating unit licensees to assess the potential for biofouling of safety-related component systems at their facilities and to describe actions taken to detect and mitigate (Corbiculaflow blockage as a result of fouling by Asiatic clams of the bulletin sp.) and the marine mussel (Mytilus sp.). Issuance was prompted by the shutdown on September 3, 1980, of Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2 because service water flow through extensive the containment fouling by Asiatic cooling clams.units was partially blocked by blockage to cooling and safety-relatedSimilar occurred at systems occurrences also have of flow sources, resulting nuclear facilities from utilizing the mussel marine cooling water Mytilus 81-03 was issued, numerous other licensee event Since Bulletin sp.
reports (LER) have been mussel filed regarding fouling. The flow blockage resulting from clam or in the following excerpt from Pageof3these significance events is explained of IEB 81-03:
"The event at ANO is significant to reactor safety because (1) the fouling represented an actual common cause i.e.,
inability of safaty system redundant componentsfailure, to perform their licensee was not intended safety functions, and (2) the fouled. aware that safety system components were Although the fouling at ANO-2 developed over a number of months, neither the licensee management control i system detected northe periodic failure." maintenance or surveillance program
, All utilities holding operating licenses or construction permits I were required to make an assessment of biofouling problems at their respective facilities detailed in Bulletin 81-03 (see Appendixin accordance A). The with variety specific andactions appropriateness of utility responses ranged considerably as a result because ofofindividual the interpretation of actions required and did not always apply necessary preciselygeneric wording of the Bulletin which j to each power plant.
1
4 Consequently, a majority of licensee responses to the Bulletin were judged to be deficient in one or more items and those respondents were required to provide clarification or additional t t
information.
This report represents an assessment of the biofouling problem as it affects nuclear generating facilities throughout the United States based on licensee responses to Bulletin 81-03 and The a review of technical literature pertinent to the problem.
contents of this assecsment are in response to Task Orders 15 and 34 issued by IE for the performance of the following specific objectives:
- 1. To review licensee responses to the Bulletin and arrive at a final evaluation of each licensee's response based on initial and supplemental replies and Bulletin closeout criteria;
- 2. To develop a complete list of followup actions which will be necessary to bring deficient licensees up to acceptable closeout status;
- 3. To prepare a summarization of the extent of the pro-blem including a detail of facilities presently having either species in their vicinity, facilities reporting fouling of safety-related systems, and facilities where potential infestation exists;
- 4. To summarize detection and control practice currently proposed by licensees; and
- 5. To provide recommendations for insuring tha- detection and prevention programs are properly carrie out by licen-sees, and to evaluate detection and control technology considered effective 10 prevention of biofouling due to Asiatic clams or marine mussels.
2.0 ASSESSMENT RATIONALE Evaluation of licensee responses, both initial and supplemental, was conducted individually in consideration of the fact that conditions and modes of operation differ greatly for each facility. Final disposition for each generating unit was arrived at through careful consideration of several ju'dgment factors developed in direct response to Bulletin closecut criteria established by IE. Each licensee's response to Bulletin 81-03 was assessed and a final disposition status determined based on the following Bulletin closeout criteria:
- 1. Facilities which have been cancelled, indefinitely deferred, or indefinitely closed.
- 2. Facilities which have submitted an acceptable pro-gram for detecting and preventing future flow block-age or degradation due to clams or mussels or shell debris and which meet one of the following:
1 l l I i
2 q l
- rmm
_--_-- J
i i
a.
Facilities bicula sp.which do not or Mytilus sp.have either Cor-in the vicinity of the station in receiving water bodies.
either the source or i
- b. Facilities which have either Corbicula sp.
or Mytilus sp. present in the vicinity of the station in either the source or re-ceiving water bodies and which have per-formed an acceptable sampling of compon-ents which verifies that the station is not infected.
c.
Facilities which are infested.with either Corbicula sp. or Mytilus sp. and which have performed an acceptable program to confirm adequate systems.
flow rates in the safety-related Judgment factors utilized in arriving at a final disposition for each licensee closed cycle), varied depending on mode of operation (open or source of service water, operational status (operational, low power testing, construction phase, construction presence of eitherhalted, cancelled),
Asiatic clams or and the likelihood of the water. marine m' ,sels in the source The adequacy of licensee programs for determ: .ing the presence of eitherorspecies whether not in their vicinity was basec primarily on sampling for environmental monitoring programs included benthic macroinvertebrates and mussels. Those licensees acknowledging the presence of either Asiatic clams or marine mussels in their vicinity were considered responsive to the Bulletin without providing descriptive detail regarding environmental monitorin8 In the case of those facilities where neither species was reported to occur, descriptions of the specific to mussel or macroinvertebratefield monitoring programs communities should have been provided, absence as well as the date of last of this information, sampling. In the to satisfy closecut criterion a2(a). licensee could be considered not Evaluating the adequacy of licensee inspection and flow performance programs was considerably more subjective, depending on operational status, mode of operation, source water supply, and relative abundance of fouling clams or mussels in the vicinity.
Minimal inspection programs (annual inspection of l selected components, safety-related systems were inspections during refueling outages) of facilities which do not presently considered adequate for those have either species in their i vicinity; however, inadequate for a such a minimal program was considered !
facility having a history of clam or mussel I
3 i l
infestation, or a facility under construction where service water supply was densely populated by either species. A similar distinction was used in evaluating licensee flow performance testing procedures. Subjectivity came into play most commonly for those facilities where the present or future probability for fouling problems was perceived to be intermediate between these two extremes. Although no minimum acceptable inspection or flow performance programs were established, reviewers took into consideration the existing or potential future level of infestation at a given facility in arriving at an assessment.
Judgment factors used to evaluate the adequacy of licensee programs for detection and prevention of future flow blockage or degradation due to clams or mussels were also somewhat subjective based on the perceived severity of past fouling programs and the potential for future complications. Detection programs typically consisted of maintenance inspections of various safety system components and routine performance monitoring of differential pressure or temperature. Acceptance or rejection of a licensee's detection program was primarily based on existing or potential future fouling and the frequency and intensity of component inspections and performance monitoring. Those facilities free from clams or mussels in their vicinity were not expected to adopt a r gorous detection program; however, facilities having a history of biofouling or a high potential for future infestation were evtluated as described above.
Due to the considerable amount of research and technical literature available on'the control of Asiatic clams and mussels, assessments of licensee prevention programs were far more objective. Conventional biocide applications for control of algal and bacterial growth were generally considered unacceptable for clam or mussel control. Such applications are usually at too low a dose level or too infrequent to adequately control clams and mussels. However, several biocide treatment programs have been developed by researchers and licensees which are specific for clam and mussel control, and appear' effective in preventing flow blockage to safety system components. These programs were given careful consideration and are discussed in Section 3.2 of this report. Scheduled manual cleaning of fouled system components, adopted by several licensees, was not viewed as a preventive procedure but rather corrective maintenance after the fact.
Final disposition of each licensee's response to Bulletin 81-03 is tabulated and presented in Appendix B. No further explanation is provided for those facilities whose status is classified as " closed". Facilities classified as " closed" have satisfied all requirements of the Bulletin, with particular 4
n r~31=ncv v.. sun d
r 3 reference to the closecut criterion identified for each. Those facilities whose status is classified as "open" have not satisfied all Bulletin requirements. An "open" classification '
generally indicates that a licensee response was deficient in ;
some area, or that the final assessment _vas in disagreement with J the licensee's evaluation of biofouling problems or his proposed '
control / prevention practices. All facilities whose Bulletin.,
status has remained "open" have proposed followup items 7 described in Appendix C. Within Appendix C, followup items are s grouped by NRC region and listed alphabetically by plant within each region.
Each followup item identifies the deficiency or; disagreement jn the licensee's response and describes the followup needed for bulletin closeout.
3.0
SUMMARY
The principal objective of this summary is to assess the extent of biofouling of safuty-related systems attributable to Asiatic clams or marine mussels and to evaluate the potential for future fouling problems at bo (1 operational and construction-phase facilities. The second objective is to summarize and evaluate existing and proposed detection and control practices for all facilities responding to Bulletin 81-03. Inasmuch asBulletin 81-03 was issued specifically with regard to Asiatic clams and marine mussels, it is beyond the scope of this task to assess existing and pctential' biofouling problems associated with other fouling organisms.
i Background information relating to range, odes of infestation and controlling environmental factors for siatic clams and marine mussels is provided in Appendix A. While both organisms
.1 generally interact with nuclear facilities in the same manner (i.e. through entrainment of larvae), there are several obvious distinctions between the two. Marine mussels (Mytilus sp.) are indigenous to both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the United States and limited in distribution to cool, marine environments. Nuclear generating facilities sited along the upper east coast and along the west coast, which utilize sea water as their primary service water source, have generally taken biofouling by marine mussels into close consideration during plant design. Asiatic clams (Corbicula sp. ), in contrast, are exotic to North America and highly adaptable to a wide variety of aquatic environments. Following their introduction into the Columbia River in 1938, Asiatic clams have expanded their range to include all major drainages on the west coast, Gulf coast, east coast northward to the Delaware River 4 and extensively throughout the Mississippi and Ohio River '
drainages. Recent accounts of Asiatic clam distribution throughout the United States are reviewed by Isom (1983) and McMahon (1982). Unlike other Ircsh-water mussels, Asiatic clams do not require an intermediate fish host for transformation of larvae into adults and typically dominate mussel communities T ,
5
'*' -~
q- y ',, _,,..-,,,,.e. re w ~
\ /
- ( ,
y, t i
l - d ,
\
.i
,s l
L where conditions are itvorabip Asiatic clams have received considerably nure attention f]ns the utility industry than i
' marine mussels by virtue of the facts that they are greatly expanding their range and are not easily While controlled,by marine mussels have a conventional biocidal treatments.
well defined rurg*, Asiatic clams continue to invade new aquatic systems and in sope instancey where only marginally present now, l
populations may e2pand to prbblem levels in subsequent years.
Biofouling'of safe'ty-related systems at nuclear generating facilitfer typicali;soccurs in widely varying degrees in essenthel/ service s < ate r system components and fire protection systeese Essehtial service water systems are further broken down into emergenc'y cooling water systems, service Because water design systems, or essential raw cooling water systems.
speciitcations differ widely between individual nuclear facillties, the oppst'tunity for and severity of biofouling range consAiorably. An extvA ive examination of engineering factors l
' affecting biofouling of nuclear facilities has recently been g
completed by Johnren et a'.(1983) and is not reviewed within this text. Suffice it to say that individual facility design, service water supply, and existing population levels of Asiatic
/ cleas or marine mussels necessitated an independent assessment
- c. biof ouling potential 'e r each facility cove ed under this Jolletin.
3.1 BIOFOULING STATUS .SyNMARY A total of 163 nuclear venerating units were requested to respond to Bulletip81.p3.
Seventy-nine of these units are operational as vi this uc i ting , 49 are under construction and 1 The remaining 34 units were is licensed for low power testing.
closed out from the Bulletin because their status is either
" cancelled", " construction halted", or " shut down indefinitely", Consequdatly, the following summary concerns only those 129 facilities considered active at this time.
Individual facility bulletin closeout status A is provided closed Bulletin in status Appendix P for all 16$ nuclear units. status for 44 units.
was selechadfor85unitsandan"open" All units /vhose status has remained "open" have beenThis provided final a
proposed followup action as listed in Appendix C.
disposition of licenste responses to Bulletin 81-03 should not be interpreted to infbr that a " closed" classification is Likewise, an indicative of no fouling problems or potential.
"open" classification does not automatically indicate an immediata foul [ngproblem.
The general location, operational status and presence of fouling i clams or mussels for all 129 current facilities is presented in Figure 1. While the presence of either Asiatic clams or marine mussels at any given facility does not necessarily indicate 1
6 t s t
S
~
l existing fouling problems, it is readily apparent from this figure why a majority of active nuclear generating units have documented the presence of either Asiatic clams or marine mussels in their source water supplies. The Asiatic clam was the most commonly reported fouling organism, due primarily to the fact that the majority of all nuclear facilities utilize freshwater as their principle cooling source and that Asiatic clams have successfully invaded most major river systems within the United States.
Final evaluations of biofouling status for operational and construction-phase facilities are summarized in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. Seventeen operational units have experienced varying degrees of flow degradation in safety-related systems at one time or another, 9 due to Asiatic clams and 8 due to marine mussels (Table 1). An additional 21 operational units were considered to have a high potential for fouling, 19 due to Asiatic clams and 2 due to marine mussels. Seventeen operational units were ranked as low or future potential fouling due either to a very low incidence of occurrence of Asiatic clams or marine mussels or the fact that Asiatic clams are likely to become established in the source water supply in the near future. Those 24 operational units ranked as having little or no fouling potential were so designated reause it appeared unlikely that either fouling species would ; cur in the near future.
Facilities under construction were also evaluated and categorized with respect to existing or potential fouling problems (Table 2). Only three construction-phase units reported existing fouling problems; however. 25 units under construction were considered to have a high potential for fouling when they became operational. The relatively low number of units reporting existing fouling was assumed to be related to the degree to which construction had advanced. If a plant had
-no safety systems completed and filled with water, they could not have a fouling problem. As construction advances and systems are filled with raw water for a sufficient length of time to allow infestation of fouling organisms, a unit's fouling status may change. Fifteen units under construction were a considered to have low or future fouling potential for the same reasons cited for operational units, while only six units were ranked as having little or no fouling potential.
Although only 20 units (15.5 percent) of all 129 current facilities have actually reported flow degradation of safety system components due to Asiatic clams or marine mussels, these 20 units combined with those facilities believed to have a high probability for fouling problems represents a total of 66 generating units. Based on this assessment, 51 percent of all 129 current nuclear generating units have a high potential for 7
experiencing flow degradation in safety-related systems as a direct result of biofouling from Asiatic cJums or marine mussels. This figure is further compounded by the possibility that Asiatic clams will broaden their range and increase their populations at several facilities presently cated as having only low or future potential fouling problems. Bulletin.81-03 was issued specifically with regard to Asiatic clams and marine mussels; however, it must also oe recognized that several f acilities have experienced substantial fouling problems due to other organisms not covered by the Bolletin. Results of this assessment indicate that biofouling of safety system comp 1nents by Asiatic class and marine m'tssels af f the ectsUnited a significant States,number and of nuclear generating units throughout precautionary and corrective actions are warranted to ensure reactor safety and reliability.
3.2 DETECTION AND CONTROL PRACTICES Licensee responses to Bulletin 81-03 included a variety of procedures for the detection of biofouling in safety system compouents both in direct reply to the Virtually Bulletin and all as part of licensees their routine performance monitoring. monitoring of safety-related ^
indicated adherence to performance systems equipped However, with differential several pressure licenseesor temperature st .ed that instrumentation.
additional instrumentation would be of result added to th se performed inspections systems most in susceptible to fouling as a response to the 3ulletin. Most licensees utili ed visual inspections as we_1 as performance monitoring fr detection of t biofouling; however, the frequency and intensity of visual inspections ranged widely. Varying inspection efforts at operational facilities were to some degree based on recognition of the potential severite cf the problem and historic records of In a few system performance and maintenance inspections.the performance of instances, little effort v2 = expended in visual i.nspections of safety system components for theidetection of biofouling. Detection practices at construction-phase facilities were limited by the stagePlanned of completion and the detection practices number of safety systems filled.
were often parallel to those adopted by sister units currently ,
in operation.
Detection practices propove'd by licensees ranged from simply in checking with downstream facilities to determine any advance Asiatic' clams in a particular drainage area, te a rigorous program _ involving frequene daily performance checks and quarter.Ly visual inspections of key detection safety system components.
practices would !
Numeroes licensees indicated that consist of r o a t .i n e performance checks and visual inspections refueling outages. The L
performed during required maintenance or 8
_ .. _ _ 4:=. I I .
A s
acceptability of a licensee's detection program was assessed individually and deficiencies noted as followup actions in Appendix C.
Biofouling control pract1ces proposed by licensees were considerably more diverse than detection procedures. Again, the acceptability of a licensee's control procedures was assessed individually based on the perceived probability of fouling problems at a particular facility. For example, several licensees stated'that no control practices were in effect_at present but that appropriate methods would be considered when and if necessary. In the absence of Asiatic clams or marine mussels and the'unlikely probability of their occurrence in the near future, such responses were considered acceptable and no followup actions were recommended.- However, numerous facilities affected by Asiatic clams or marine mussels. inhabiting their source water or occurring only occasionally within plant systems
-failed to adopt any specific actions for biofouling control.
'f f Several other affected facilities appear to have taken a " wait and see" attitude to biofouling rather than developing' effective l' control methods to avert a potential fouling problem. In these o cases, specific followup actions have been proposed in an effort to emphasize the potential severity of the p oblem.
The most commonly referenced control method mployed by utilities was chlorination, which was to be xpected since most facilities were equipped for chlorination as a biocidal
- treatment for other fouling agents. Other control methods utilized included heat treatment, backflushing, manual and
/ mechanical cleaning, ffne mesh strainers and asphixistion.
Virtually every unit specifying an existing or planned biofouling control program utilized more than one technique.
For purposes of this. evaluation, manual or mechanical cleaning of fouled safety systems was not considered a control technique, but simply corrective maintenance.
The relative effectiveness of various clam and mussel ;ontrol programs has received considerable attention from ut'ility personnel in recent years. The control method which has undergone the greatest amount of changes is chlorination. It has become generally accepted that conventional chlorination procedures, which usually consist of intermittent applications for short time periods (less than 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> per day) at varying dosages have been proven to be relatively ineffective as a
' biocidal ~ treatment for clams or mussels. Most fouling organisms are able to endure these dosages by minimizing feeding and ,
respiratory functions'and by burrowing into the sediments.
Regulatory restrictions have also played a major role in modifying chlorination procedures. Effluent limitation for steam electric power plants established by EPA (40 CFR Parts 125 L
9
'/ ',
L
and 423, Vol. 25, No. 200, October 14, 1980) proposed that total
{ residual chlorine (TRC) shall not exceed 0.14 ppm at the point of discharge and that TRC may not be discharged from any point source for more than 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> per day. However, power plants that can demonstrate the need for chlorine to control biofouling may discharge the minimum amount of TRC necessary to effectively control fouling as determined through a chlorine minimization
- study. Several licensees have performed these studies and it may well be in the best interest of other licensees to do so, as there appear to be chlorination procedures which are effective
- in controling biof ouling f rom clams and mussels.
i
' Boston Edison Company has initiated a mussel control program at l Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station which has nearly eliminated serious mussel fouling problems (Marine Research Inc. 1983).
The program basically consists of continuous chlorination of the salt service water system at 250 ppb TRC coupled with periodic heat-treated backwashes of the intake structure and traveling screens using temperatures of about 40*C for 0.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> duration. TVA has also developed a program for control of Asiatic clams which has met with apparent success at Bellefonte 1 and 2, Watts Bar 1 and 2 and Sequoyah 1 and 2. TVA's clam control program includes straining of all ra. service water through 1.26 mm media, continuous chlorinati n using sodium hypochlorite injection in all safety-related systems at concentrations of 0.6 to 0.8 ppm TRC during the entire clam spawning season (inlet temperature above 15.3 C) and frequent monitoring of TRC concentrations throughout each system. Other minor considerations have also been included into TVA's clam control program (Isom et al. 1983).
One of the most effective means of clam and mussel control appears to be heated water backflushing. Numerous experiments on Asiatic clams performed by TVA concluded that exposure or veligers and adults to 47'C water for 2 minutes resulted in 100 percent mortality (Goss et al. 1979). Recent studies by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (Mattice et al. 1982) further concluded that heated water was equally as effective in killing Asiatic clams as combined exposure to heated water and short term chlorination. Northeast Utilities reported in their response to the Bulletin thct thermal backflushing with water heated to 45*C for 20-minute periods has apparently been successful in controlling mussel fouling at Millstone Power Plant. Several marine facilities have incorporated heat treatment capabilities in the design of their cooling water systems for mussel control, but few nuclear facilities utilizing freshwater appear to have such capabilities Several other fouling control methods also show promise for the control of clams and mussels. Recent studies by Mussa111 et al.
10
h (1983) indicated that fine mesh strainers in conjunction with controlled releases of Tributyl Tin Fluoride (TBTF) may be an economical means of controlling biofouling by Asiatic clams and mussels. Asphyxiation of Asiatic clams, throu8h application of sodium-meta-bisulfite as an oxygen scavenger, has been used successfully by Illinois Power Company at their fossil-fueled Baldwin Station (Smithson 1981). Along this same line, Commonwealth Edison Company (1983) is experimenting with carbon dioxide injection as a means of Asiatic clam control.
Preliminary results indicated that exposure of clams t o CO2 concentration of 500 mg/l for over 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> causes-mortalities in excess of 50 percent.
It has become obvious durin8 this assessment that biofouling control of safety-related systems due to Asiatic clams or marine mussels can be accomplished through a variety of methods, either alone or in combination. Numerous licensees appear keenly aware of potential safety problems that could result from ineffective control programs and some have implemented extensive biofouling control procedures. However, a large number of licensees have not adopted any firm plans or procedures for effective biofouling control. In view of the high percentage of facilities having strong possibilities for fouling problems, the lack of specificity towards clam or mussel control was unacceptable.
Implementation of effective biofouling cont: 1 programs at any given facility undoubtedly necessitates cons deration of existing problems, environmental limitations. system adaptability for retrofitting and economic c.sts of retrofitting and operation. Nevertheless, failure to effectively control biofouling of safety-related systems could result in serious reactor safety problems and incur economic costs far in excess of appropriate control technology.
4.0 CONCLUSION
S NRC's issuance of Bulletin 81-03, following events at Arkansas Nuclear One, has effectively alerted the nuclear power industry to a potentially serious problem in reactor safety Hofouling of safety system components by Asiatic clams and mai - mussels is a recurring problem affecting nuclear generating units throughout the United States. Biofouling represents a potential common cause (or common mode) failure of safety systems which may go undetected until the systems are inoperable.
A careful assessment of licensee responses to the Bulletin has indicated that existing and potential fouling problems are generally unique to each facility. Surprisingly, 51 percent of all active nuclear generating units were considered to have a 11 M -~W''w
_- M m , , , , , -
i .
high potential for biofouling of safety-related systems due to I
Asiatic clams or marine mussels. It is concluded that the potential for biofouling affects a significant number of facilities across the country and that appropriate precautionary
. and corrective actions are warranted to ensure reactor safety j and reliability.
2
! Licensee activities for biofouling detection and control ranged
- . widely and, in many instances, were judged inappropriate to i ensure safety system reliability. Effective methods for control
- of clam and mussel fouling have been devised and other promising techniques are in various stages of development. However, too few facilities having a high potential for biofouling have adopted effective control programs. Those facilities with
, existing fouling problems and those with a high potential for i fouling should develop and implement effective clam or mussel control programs as soon as practicably possible. It is recognized that cost for retrofitting and implementation of such control programs could be considerable; however, concern for reactor safety and reliability far outweigh the cost for i effective control programs.
q Marine mussels have a well defined range and can easily be accounted for; however, Asiatic clam populati ns are expanding 4 '
their range into new stream systems. Consequ~ntly, these facilities judged as having low or future fou;ing potential should be urged to adopt effective detection programs to ensure i that corrective actions can be taken before fouling problems develop.
I 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Inasmuch as the majority of all 129 current nuclear generating facilities have reported the occurrence of either Asiatic clams or marine mussels and the fact that 51 percent of these units have been judged to have a high probability for fouling problems, the question of reactor safety and system reliability should not be taken lightly. It is recommended that each of the 44 followup items listed in Appendix C be addressed accordingly and that final disposition for these licensees should be acceptable to the Office of Inspection and Enforcement before licensee status is considered " closed".
It is further recommended that NRC develop a compulsory inspection / detection program for all owners of operational and construction-phase units. Such programs should be of sufficient magnitude and frequency to ensure early detection of potential fouling problems and implementation of appropriate control procedures. The magnitude of this program should vary relative 12
~ - , _ _ _ ..n.p n ,muumuusw
y I.
! to each facility,' based upon historical problems, presence of either fouling organism and whether the unit is operational or under construction. For example, periodic sampling of the source water body or annual inspections of safety. systems may be Judged adequate currently present; for a facility where fouling organisms are not .
I however, for those facilities having existing problems'or.high potential, NRC should consider an extensive quarterly inspection program that covers all safety-related systems including fire protection systems.
6.0 REMAINING AREAS OF CONCERN The only remaining area of concern not previously addressed in this report relates to the specificity of Bulletin 81-03 as originally issued.Bulletin 81-03 r'equested all licensees to assess potential fouling of safety-related systems.by Asiatic clams (Corbicula sp.) and marine mussels (Mytilus sp.); however, during'this assessment it was apparent that a number of facilities located in estuarine environments and semi-tropical marine areas.were not affected by either. Asiatic clams or marine mussels. They were, however, affected by other fouling l
organisms such as oysters, barnacles, bloodarks, etc.. for which no assessment was required.
Concern rises from the fact that since rather-extensive fouling from these organisms has occurred at some facilities, perhaps it has also occu: red at other facilities but was not reported in response o Bulletin 81-03.
In the interest of reactor safety, NRC shoul. request that_these licensees perform a similar assessment of fot. ling problems attributed to organisms not originally covered under Bulletin 81-03. In this regard, on July 21, 1981, IE Information Notice 81-21, " Potential Loss of Direct Access to Ultimate Heat Sink",
was issued to advise nuclear power plants of other examples of fouling problems.
7.0 DEFINITIONS Indigenous - an organism which is native to a designated area.
Exotic - an organism which is not native to a designated area.
Ecosystem - a community of animal and plant life along with non-living elements of the environment which function together to support life.
Density - the number of organisms living within a given area.
Habitat - a specific combination of environmental qualities in which a given organism or plant is typically found, i.e. ter-restrial, aquatic, freshwater, saltwater, temperate, trop-ical.
13 5
l 1
j I
High biofouling potential - fouling organisms are present in the environment adjacent to a unit and may be found in low numbers within plant systems. Severe fouling could occur i with a large increase in density of fouling organisms or with 1 I
a breakdown in control mechanisms.
Lov or future fouling - fouling organisms are not in the immedi-ate vicinity of the plant but could possibly become established in the near future..thereby posing a threat for severe fouling if left unchecked; er fouling organisms are i present in the environment and may be in the plant, but the f fouling organisms do not appear to be dense enough to pose a {
serious biofouling threat. '
Little or no fouling potential - fouling organisms are not pre-sently found in the environment of the plant, nor are they likely to occur in the future.
Plankton - minute animal and plant life suspended in the water column which are incapable of removing themselves from suspension and are, therefore, susceptible to prevailing currents, temperature and other water quality parameters. ]
Entrained - to be indiscriminately drawn into a facility as a part of the intake water.
8.0 REFERENCES
CITED Commonwealth Edison Company. 1983. Additional .nformation concerning IE Bulletin No. 81 Attachment, Part I: 3 pp.
mimeo.
~
Goss, L. B., J. M. Jackson, H. B. Flora, B. G. Isom, C. Gooch, S. A. Murray, C. G. Burton, and W. S. Bain. 1979. Control studies on Corbicula for steam-electric generating plants, pp.
139-151. In J. C. Britton, J. S. Mattice, C. E. Murphy, and L.
W. Newland (eds.), Proc. First International Corbicula I Symposium. Texas Christian University Research Foundation, Fort Worth, Texas.
Isom, B. G. 1983. Historical review of Asiatic clam (Corbicula) invasion and biofouling of waters and industries in the Americas. 23 pp. mimeo. Draft report presented at the Second International Corbicula Symposium, Little Rock, Arkansas, June 1983.
Isom, B. G., C. F. Bowman, J. T. Johnson, and E. B. Rodgers.
1983. A conceptual plan for controlling Corbicula manilensis !
Phillippi in complex power plant and industrial water systems.
9 pp. mimeo. Draft report presented at the Second International Corticula Symposium, Little Rock, Arkansas, June 1983. I 14
.. = = __ -._._.,m.m_ _
____f
I l
i i
1 l
l Johnson, K. I., C. H. Henager, T. L. Page, P. F. Hayes. 1983.
Engineering factors influencing Corbicula fouling in nuclear service water systems. 25 pp. mimeo. Draft report presented at the Second International Corbicula Symposium, Little Rock, Arkansas, June 1983.
~
Marine Research, Inc. 1983. Biofouling control studies at
' Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, April 1981-April 1982. Final Report prepared for Boston Edison Company, Boston, Massachusetts. 24 pp. plus appendices.
Mattice, J. S., R. B. McLean, M. B. Burch. 1982. Evaluation of short-term exposure to heated water and chlorine for control of the Asiatic clam (Corbicula fluminea). Oak Rid8e National Laboratory, Environmental Sciences Division, Pub. No. 1748.
ORNL/TM-7808. 34 pp.
McMahon, R. F. 1982. The occurrence and spread of the introduced Asiatic freshwater clam, Corbicula fluminea (Muller), in North America: 1924-1982. Nautilus 96(4):134-141.
Mussa111, Y. G., I. A. Diaz-Tous, and J. B. Sickel. 1983.
Asiatic clams control by mechanical strainin and organotin toxicants. 13 pp. mimeo. Draft report presen.ed at the Second International Corbicula Symposium, Lit tle Rot k , Arkansas. June 1983.
Smithson, J. A. 1981. Control and treatment of Asiatic clams in power plant in tak e s. Proc. American Power Conference. Vol. 43:
1146-1151.
Environmental Protection Agency, Protection of Environment.
Title 40, Parts 125 and 423, Vol. 25, No. 200, Code of Federal Regulations, 10-14-80.
15
G e
g m i; au g
EE B 'E 5 t.
a '
_-j*g %"
o I 55 M~. ,-
,no .
,T 5 < q S
3" E" o -
(,
st 8
O w-m ,
e t
' <' h I \
a o
s
/
1
\~
W
$l
! W &
\
i
.t: ~"
1 oe So s
la sa O M e t, u o.r- os a j%
73 ec w bb
". S gt*
(-2 15e G*
OtaS I%E y*8 3:6
$i*
% gS {4C w
p p[:YA#
w homw'
e
_ 1
- l 3 1 41 4 t 3 , t 2 , .
t t n 2 n ,
3 e 40 i g n r i i 1 e1 23 Ln i e a t o *
- tk i o vk r k n P h 12 nne e hl P i cV ci c2 i aw r t ul Ri eo esa eeoY o u o i oa k2 r . NPel eeniiP R2 t t wfi c ,l tt eidB occ t - ,
u ot o1 aaS mnnMa suuyne1 f d sin R t p aaau st nLL eoe e tB e k szt ndi aeini k mk n r s i t goyt rndd wnl i b . .rrno o n noo i orioianeiaoot t ueai
. e UNP BCCFFGHIKNPPRSSTVYZ m w c e o i l l L b o s s 1
- r a t 2 p h n rg d ,
a on 3 n 1 a ,
1 i ,
a 5 g
~. wl n 1 2 l s e n r
ou L o i o1 d n m 1 1 s I
f f
7Lb 12 i
t e f t el u ooa i y s w h o asoo ot cne l *
- a e o til at snh l t enl C22 m t P iB a l S erl el oS ai , ,
w i u BA aseB hM st1 1 s r r et cr - Csc ee ur u e a srn i ese oihh ue l emy l w e t ue b pi nt rt ccqe i ver i o l i tt rovarCnansr tll r t p c nuo ooauoaoeauh y aau y u UFP CCDDFLMPRST MCSS M w N o r
l e
_ o n
r i 2 a o N ,
l f
- 1 u ys h 1 2 c d t e g 2 d , i e nt i y ,
n1 b s ea H e 1 3 a ek r n vt l 2 ,l s ee 6 o e eS h g l 2 ,a2 se k e .C c
_ S t nl aa , 21 1 n ,I i nr 1 6 i d ii a l V1 ,
n1 t1 aC 22 n l f e wli u 1 eeA ei sY a ot ut cry l r eiCrn u r h s i son i eehl ih er ea l ee t i .
sn tf e b vl caut nid mj i nt l uU i ot rartSG roaamo t i s r h a t nio oeaaacocruur y ay e ci ae UBP CBFHLMNOPQST MMO h i t th t h n St o we t
gn s s ,o ni m 3 m 1 p i e ,
s l e e l 2 3 i f g ut v b , ,
n l n
_ oa a o 1 2 a ui f r H r 22 , 5 g Gl oe P 2 y 2 , , 1 .r u i p hd ,r3 , 1 1 71 o d o BO ceg 1 r ,1 e 1 2 nf
_ i cn a e2 k e1 r g ao cn n
. h ni l sF h f ri 1 W el ua na siomo ti Gb
_ i u cssey uwti n nl e sro i nnd o l ssrO l eu :
l t ef b awsu i nl g aco e
_ b i po rk oeq t ul l n t rF t a nxi orr re y riia oe o T UEB CABDS MBMPS TP* N
_ i1 N' jl3
o
_ e 2 l 3 t t ,
t n2 2 i g i , .
L n o1 62 i 2P 1 hl , e t ul 1 ed i oa l r wfi di e ot nMV
. sin a tB e l eo i t d nl noo ii a UNP MNP s rg 2 t on ,
6 n i 1 .
a wl S0 l ou k 2 I 3 P L o a 2 1 1 f - e ,
a3 r h o 1 P 1 n k k e til a2 1 2 nd e e w iB a l ,y e k , ar e e o w i u1 anh2 c1 h or sr P et c woc i efC uC sr n i nat niryur l rs t ue b ol namer qef i e ae i t t r rl i mr mr st l t p et nuo oyal oeieuao y o l a UFP CBCCCFLPSWW Ml l ct uS N
d ee nt 2 i i ,
0 N n h 2 2 2 1 .
U g 2 , ,
51 y i y ,2 1 1 2 n 25 t e i l e1 , 1 ,
o2 rh l 1 1 s 1 y ,
ot h g l e 2 1 d a2 n1 F t nl aat d ,21 nx ,3 r a n ii a l V no1 1 1 ee1 ,a Ck m f i wl i u oo e BT 2B s oa o ut crf wsl e e ,
uooh n son i eedil l rhl 1 s l l re so tf e b vl i r ab et t t i bb r ui i ot r al arS r v u gP t t aao t t nio oeer aaaiooN a yi eh ac UBP CBBBiLMRSVWW l MDSS t u S r t
gs s nn m i o e l C e l u v b or a o f e l l r 1 od P .
i n hd 2 3 36 BU ceg ,
i cn a1 e
. h ni l n 2 W el ua so t iu cb ut n e sro i w l s l e l t ef b a i l ac b i po rt t l t r a nxi oa yi oe T UEB CC MM TP I.
5? : 51
SS8NS No.: 6820 Accession No..
8011040289 '
IEB 81-03 UNITED STATES '
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 April 10, 1981 .
IE Bulletin 81-03 : FLOW BLOCKAGE OF COOLING WATER TO SAFETY SYSTEM 1 l '
COMPONENTS BY CORBICULA SP. (ASIATIC CLAM) AND MYTILUS SP. (MUSSEL)
Description of Circumstances:
On September 3,1980, Arkansas Nuclear One (AND), Unit 2, was shut down after the NRC Resident Inspector discovered that Unit 2 had failed to meet the technical specification requirements for minimum service water flow rate through the containment cooling units (CCUs). After plant shutdown, Arkansas Power and Light Company, the licensee, determined that the inadequate flow was due to extensive plugging of the CCUs by Asiatic clams (Corbicula specins, a non-native fresh water bivalve mollusk).
I water piping at the coolers. Clams were The licensee disassembled the' service found in the 3-inch diameter supply piping at the inlet to the CCUs and in the cooler inlet water boxes. Some of the clams found were alive, but most of the debris consisted of shells. The size of the clams varied from the larvae stage up to one inch. The service water, which is taken from the Dardanelle Reservoi , is filtered before-it is pumped through the system. The strainers on the service water pump discharges were examined and found to be intact. Since these strainers have a 3/16-inch mesh, much smaller than some of the shells found, it appears that clams had been growing in the system.
Following the discovery of Asiatic clams in the containment coolers of Unit 2, the licensee examined other equipment cooled by service water in both Units 1 and 2. Inspection of other heat exchangers in the Unit 2 service water system revealed some fouling or plugging of additional coolers (seal water coolers for both redundant containment spray pumps and one low pressure safety injec-tion pump) due to a buildup of silt, corrosion products, and debris (mostly clam shell pieces). The high pressure safety injection (HPSI) pump bearing and seal coolers were found to have substantial plugging in the 1/2-inch pipe service water supply lines. The plugging resulted from an accumulation of silt and corrosion products.
Clam shells were found in some auxiliary building room coolers and in the auxiliary cooling water system which serves non-safety-related equipment.
Flow rates measured during surveillance testing through the CCUs at ANO-2 had deteriorated over a number of months. Flushing after plant shutdown initially resulted in a further reduction in flow. Proper flow rates were restored only after the clam debris had been removed manually from the CCUs.
The examination of the Unit 1 service water system revealed that the "C" and "D" containment coolers were clogged by clams. Clams were found in the 3-inch inlet headers and in the inlet water boxes. However, no clams were found A-1
---s.. . _.
ms-. .
==n...-
Y
1 1
I 1
l l
APPENDIX A IE Bulletin 81-03 Back8 round Information IE Information Notice 81-21 l
On April 10, 1981, the Office of Inspection and Enforcement of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued IE Bulletin 81-03 titled: " Flow Blockage of Cooling Water to Safety System Components by Corbicula sp. (Asiatic Clam) and [fytilus sp. (Mussel)." A copy of this Bulletin and its included
" Description of Circumstances" follows.
Supplementary background information is provided to describe distribution, mode of infestation and safety systems affected.
On July 21, 1981, NRC/IE issued following IE Information Notice 81-21 to inform utilities about biofouling situations not discussed explicitly in IEB 81-03.
i 1
l
)
-1 l
y
- IEB.81-03 April 10, 1981 Page 2 of 5 l 1
1 in the "A" and "B" coolers. This fouling was not discovered during surveillance I testing because there was no flow instrumentation on these coolers.
The service water system in Unit I was not fouled other than stated above, and the licensee attributed this to the fact that the service water pump suctions are located behind the main condenser circulating pumps in the intake structure j It was thought that silt and clams entering the intake bays would be swept i through the condenser by the main circulating pumps and would not accumulate in the back of the intake bays. In contrast, Unit 2 has no main circulating pumps in its intake structure because condenser heat is rejected through a cooling tower via a closed cooling system. As a result of lower flowrates of water through the Unit 2 intake structure, silt and clams could have a tendency to accumulate more rapidly in Unit 2 than in Unit 1. During the September l outage, clams and shells were found to have accumulated to depths of 3 to 4-1/2 feet in certain areas of the intake bays for Unit 2.
{
t
, The Asiatic clam was first found in the United States in 1938 in the Columbia River near Knappton, Washington. Since then, Corbicula sp. has spread across 1 the country and is now reported in at least 33 states. The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) power plants also have experienced fouling caused by these
- clams. They were first found in the condensers and service water systems at the Shawnee Steam Plant in 1957. Asiatic clams were later found in the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant in October 1974 only a few months after it went into operation. This initial clam infestation at Browns c erry was enhanced by the fact that, during the final stages of construction, the cooling water systems i , were allowed to remain filled with water for long periods of time while the systems were not in use. This condition was conduc ve to the growth and accumulation of clams. Since that time, the Asiati
- clam has spread across the Tennessee Valley region and is found at virtually all the TVA steam-electric and hydroelectric generating stations.
4 Present control procedures for Asiatic clams vary from st: tion to station and in their degree of effectiveness. The use of shock chlorination during surveil-lance testing as the only method of controlling biofouling by this organism appears to be ineffective. The level of fouling has been reduced to acceptable levels at TVA stations by using continuous chlorination during peak spawning periods, clam traps, and mechanical cleaning during station outages.
The results of a series of tests on mollusks performed at the Savannah River facility showed that mature Corbicula sp. had as much as a 10 percent survival rate after being exposed to high concentrations of free residual chlorine (10 to 40 ppm) for up to 54 hours6.25e-4 days <br />0.015 hours <br />8.928571e-5 weeks <br />2.0547e-5 months <br />. When the clams were allowed to remain buried in a couple of inches of mud, their survival rates were as high as 65 percent.
In studies on shelled larvae, approximately 200 microns in size, TVA reported preliminary results indicating that a total chlorine residual of 0.30 to 0.40 ppm for 9t. to 108 hours0.00125 days <br />0.03 hours <br />1.785714e-4 weeks <br />4.1094e-5 months <br /> would be required to achieve 100 percent control of the Asiatic clam larvae.
6 A-2
- "" , ,.m... . . . . . . , . _
IEB 81-03 April 10, 1981 Page 3 of 5 Corbicula sp. has also shown an amazing ability to survive even when removed from the water. Average times to death when left in the air have been reported for low relative humidity as 6.7 days at 30 C (86 F) and 13.9 days at 20 C (68 F) and for high relative humidity as 8.3 days at 30 C and 26.8 days at 20'C.
Corbicula sp. on the other hand, has shown a much greater sensitivity to heat.
Tests performed by TVA resulted in 100 percent mortality of clam larvae, very young clams, and 2mm clams when they were exposed to 47*C (117 F) water for 2 minutes. Mature clams, up to 14mm, were also tested and all died at 47*C following a 2 minute exposure. A statistical analysis of the 2 minute exposure test data revealed that a temperature of 49 C (120'F) was necessary to reach the 99 percent confidence level of mortality for clams of the size tested.
To date, heat has been shown to be the most effective way of producing 100 percent mortality for the Asiatic clam. At ANO, the service water system was flushed with 77 C (170 F) water obtained from the auxiliary boiler for approx-imately one half hour; 100 percent mortality was expected.
A similar problem has occurred with mussels (Mytilus sp.). Infestations of mussels have caused flow blockage of cooling water to safety-related equipment at nuclear plants such as Pilgrim and Millstone. Unlike the Asiatic clam, mussels cause biofouling in salt water cooling systems.
The event at ANO is significant to reactor safety because (1) the fouling represented an actual common cause failure, i.e, inacility of safety system redundant components to perform their intended safety functions, and (2) the licensee was not aware that safety system components were fouled Although the fouling at AN0*2 developed over a number of montns, neither the licensee management control system nor periodic maintenance or surveillance program detected the failure.
ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN BY LICENSEES Holders of Operating Licenses:
- 1. Determine whether Corbicula sp. or Mytilus sp. is present in the vicinity of the station (local environment) in either the source or receiving water body. If the results of current field monitoring programs provide reason-able evidence that neither of these species is present in the local environment, no further action is necessary except for items 4 and 5 in this section for holders of operating licenses.
- 2. If it is unknown whether either of these species is present in the local envire nment or is confirmed that either is present, determine whether fire 3rotection or safety-related systems that directly circulate water from the station source or receiving water body are fouled by clams or mussels or debris ccasisting of their shells. An acceptable method of confirming the absence of organisms or shell debris consists of opening and visually examining a representative sample of components in potentially affected safety systems and a sample of locations in potentially affected A-3
+
=waw- y> .n:
.;a.:::.. n r - . V. - . . _ _ w.m x- n.. ..
IEB 81-03 April 10, 1981 Page 4 of 5 fire protection systems. The sample shall have included a distribution of components with supply and return piping of various diameters which exist in the potentially affected systems. This inspection shall have been conducted since the last clam or mussel spawning season or within l the nine month period preceding the date of this bulletin. If the absence
! of organisms or shell debris has been confirmed by such an inspection or j another method which the licensee shall describe in the response (subject to NRC evaluation and acceptance), no further action is necessary except for items 4 and 5 of actions applicable to holders of an operating license.
- 3. If clams, mussels or shells were found in potentially affected systems or their absence was not confirmed by action in item 2 above, measure the flow rates through individual components in potentially affected systems to confirm adequate flow rates i.e., flow blockage or degradation to an unacceptably low flow rate has not occurred. To be acceptable for this determination, these measurements shall have been made within six months of the date of this bulletin using calibrated flow instruments. Differ-ential pressure (DP) measurements between supply and return lines for an individual component and DP or flow measurement, for parallel connected individual coolers or components are not acceptable if flow blockage or degradation could cause the observed DP or be masked in parallel flow paths.
Other methods may be used which give conclusive evidence that flow blockage or degradation to unacceptably low flow rates nas not occurred. If another method is used, the basis of its acceptance for this determination shall be included in the response to this bulletin.
If the above flow rates cannot be measured or indicate significant flow degradation, potenti, ally affected systems shall be inspected according to item 2 above or by an acceptable alternative method and cleaned as necessary.
This action shall be taken within the time period prescribed for submittal of the report to NRC.
- 4. Describe methods either in use or planned (including implementation date) for preventing and detecting future flow blockage or degradation due to clams or mussels or shell debris. Include the following information in this description:
- a. Evaluation of the potential for intrue'on of the organisms into these systems due to low water level .c.1 high velocities in the intake structure expected during worst case conditions.
- b. Evaluation of effectiveness of prevention and detection methods used in the past or present or planned for future use.
- 5. Desc"ibe the actions taken in items 1 through 3 above and include the following information:
I a. Applicable portions of the environmental monitoring program including l i last sample date and results.
A-4
. - u.
7_ar=wsume'erK . r 77 M l j
IEB 81-03 April 10, 1981 Page 5 of 5
- b. Components and systems affected,
- c. Extent of fouling if any existed.
- d. How and when fouling was discovered.
- e. Corrective and preventive actions.
]
Holders of Construction Permits:
- 1. Determine whether Corbicula sp. or Mytilus sp. is present in the vicinity of the station by completing items 1 and 4 above that apply to operating licenses (OL).
- 2. If'these organisms are present in the local environment and potentially affected systems have been filled from the station source or receiving water body, determine whether infestation has occurred.
- 3. Describe the actions taken in items 1 and 2 above for construction permit holders and include the following information:
- a. Applicable portions of the environmental monitoring program including last sample date and results.
- b. Components and systems affected,
- c. Extent of fouling if any existed.
- d. How and when fouling was discovered.
- e. Corrective and~ preventive actions Licensees of facilities with operating licenses shall provide the requested report within 45 days of the date of this bulletin. Licensees of facilities with construction permits shall provide the report within 90 days.
Provide written reports as required above, signed under oath or affirmation, under the provisions of Section 182a of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. Reports shall be submitted to the Director of the appropriate Regio'nal Office and a copy forwarded to the Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement, NRC, Washington, D.C. 20555.
This request for information was approved by GAO under a blanket clearance number R0072 which expires November 30, 1983. Comments on burden and dupli-cation should be directed to Office of Management and Budget, Room 3201, New Executive Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20503.
A-5
- m. . . . . . - - . ~ ___ . .mm g,mmm _ f )
1 f
1
(
BACKGROUND INFORMATION The circumstances prompting the issuance of Bulletin 81-03 are of a biological nature. This requires an entirely different set j
of investigative procedures than normally utilized when '
investigating mechanical failures of nuclear power plants.
Mechanical problems are usually more easily identified, described, and resolved because they are based on specific physical qualities The Corbicula/Mytilus biofouling problem, however, deals with living organisms which are capable of responding to a given situation in a multitude of ways, depending on numerous factors which can influence their reactions. The following discussion details some pertinent t
aspects of power plant fouling with either Corbicula or Mytilus,
- 1.0 Distribution I Corbicula is found only in freshwater and therefore would not be l* capable of infesting a power plant which utilizes saltwater. An interesting aspect of Corbicula's distribution is that it is still spreading to new areas where it has not been previously reported. Corbicula is fairly widespread in the United States (Figure A-1, Page A-9), although it has only been known to exist 1
in the continental United States since 1938 when it was I discovered in the Columbia River alon8 the west coast of Washington. Since then it has spread southward, eastward and northward until most states have reported he presence of Corbicula. Only north Atlantic, northern ;1ains and northern Rocky Mountain states do not have Corbicul t yet. Comprehensive 4
historical reviews of the invasion of Corb.cula into the United States are presented by Isom (1983) and McMahon (1982).
, Two interesting facts about Corbicula's distribution in the freshwater habitats of the United States are particularly
, pertinent to power plant fouling. First, Corbicula is no doubt still extending its range. Therefore, power plants which presently do not have Corbicula in natural freshwaters adjacent to the facility may encounter its presence in the future.
Second, Corbicula may increase its density several magnitudes in just a few years in areas where it has recently become established. Corbicula will continue to expand its range and increase its population density until it has reached the extent of its limiting environmental factors and until it has reached a balanced population within the ecosystem in which it becomes established.
These facts become quite significant when attempting to determine the extent of Corbicula fouling in the future.
History proves that any prediction as to the exact extent of Corbicula's range can only be an estimate of reality, at best.
When evaluating the potential for fouling, a cautious approach is warranted, as this may lead to the prevention of a serious, unsuspected fouling problem.
A-6
- -n m .;;_ 3 .. _ a5 ..a ..
.~
In contrast to Corbicula, the marine mussel Mytilus is'a native of North American saltwater habitats and its range is well established. It is distributed along the Atlantic seacoast from Maine south to Cape Hatteras, North Carolina. South of Cape Hatteras, summertime maximum temperature may exceed the 27*C thermal limit of Mytilus. Mytilus is found along the entire
-Pacific coast where the maximum summer temperature is cooler.
Since the range of Mytilus is well established, it can be predicted accurately whether or not there is a fouling potential at a given site.
$ 2.0-Mode of Infestation i Corbicula and Mvtilus release numerous (thousands per mature adult) larvae during the spawning season in the warmer months.
These larvae are less than 200 microns long and become planktonic, or suspended in the water column, when released by the adult. Because they are planktonic, they are transported by water currents and are therefore susceptible to entrainment (indiscriminate 1y being swept into a power plant as part of the intake water). It is during this larval life' stage that most fouling individuals enter a power plant.
Once carried into a power plant, the larvae would easily be swept through the entire system.and discharged back into the environment, except for a unique feature o ^ these larvae.
Corbicula and Mytilus larvae have the abil ty to lay down a byssol thread which is a sticky threadlike structure extending beyond the opening of the developing she13. Once inside the power plant, the larvae can settle out in .n area of low flow and attach themselves to a firm substrate by means of the byssol thread. There they continue to grow and develop their calcareous, hard shell, filtering their food and oxygen from the passing water. At this point they become dangerous threats to fouling. If they begin to be transported along the system, eventually their shells may become lodged in a constricted area and begin to clog the system. Corbicula larvae do not normally settle out and attach themselves in the area where they
, eventually cause fouling and then begin to grow until they clog the pipes, but rather they attach themselves upstream from a critical area. Eventually living or dead shells are swept into 4 critical areas and begin to foul the system (Corbicula Newsletter 8(2)1983).
3.0 Safety Systems Affected Once established within a power plant, Corbicula and Mytilus are capable of infesting non-safety as well as safety-related areas of the plant. However, for the purposes of evaluating responses to Bulletin 81-03, it is necessary to identify only those areas that are safety-related. Corbicula and Mytilus have the potential of fouling any safety system which utilizes raw water A-7 I
inhabited by these organisms. As described by Johnson et a l '.
(1983), these systems include the essential service water system and the fire protection system. The essential service water system cools components within the reactor building which are required for safe shutdown. The fire protection system is used infrequently and is, therefore, a basically stagnant system.
The fire protection system normally draws its water directly from the service water system or from the same intake structure.
In order for Corbicula and Mvtilus to infest the essential service water system or the fire protection system, the artificial environment within these systems must simulate a natural environment capable of supporting clam or mussel life.
This requires a suitable combination of critical environmental factors within the tolerance range of the organisms. These factors include: 1) flow velocity, 2) food availability, 3) oxygen, 4) substrate, 5) water temperature, and 6) chemical water quality. Flow velocity is most conducive to clam growth when it is at a steady, low rate of flow. This usually provides adequate oxygen and food, and allows particulate matter to settle out, providin8 substrate material for the burrowing instinct of these organisms. Water temperature can vary considerably and still permit clam or mussel growth.
Temperatures between 18 and 25'C are most conducive to settlement and growth, while prolonged temperatures above 33'C would kill most clams or mussels. Chemical s ter quality is usually suitable for clam or mussel growth 11 raw water is drawn directly into the systems without any injecti n of biofouling control agencies, such as chlorine. A more d tailed discussion of some of these environmental factors and he nuclear power plant engineering design affects these factors is presented by Johnson et al.(1983). -
References Isom, B. G.
1983. Historical review of Asiatic clam (Corbicula) invasion and biofouling of waters and industries in the Americas. 23 pp. mimeo. Draft report presented at the Second International Corbicula Symposium, Little Rock, Arkansas, June 1983.
McMahon, R. F. 1982. The occurrence and spread of the introduced Asiatic freshwater clam, Corbicula fluminea (Muller), in North America. 1924-1982. Nautilus 96(4): 134-141.
Johnson, K. I., C. H. Henager, T. L. Page, and P. F. Hayes, 1983. Engineering factors influencing Corbicula fouling in nuclear service water systems. 25 pp. mimeo. Draft report presented to the Second International Cor bicula Symposium, Little Rock, Arkansas, June 1983.
A-8
. m. . . . m .
~ - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ -
j ji 3 3 i s
r, * .* :
,* ~ . :
g i
. ~ . *
. i n
(p - rt ea _
wr oe pp o
nr -V r
ay el l e _
cv ui nt c
r oa t
3, s S ' pe R ii ht si O
nl oi T i ic ta C _ ~
l af A. '
n ey rl E rO n
R i h e.
m {
R t3 d9 .
8 E ('
,W n1 n a w W seh et s so O ga P
R I 7 ~ -
1 j
nt e aSr r a s en d
A - s_O- , t
[l i l
u to ii nt E -
t y
Mer Uc u
L _J ht C . dts n n ano U ic N e g
l a
u re sr n e g
c od a i t n R n b cu a r a a R o er l C ro s s u s m
s mc si l u
s i sib i 1 mn m n r t -
s a i g is ag o y M
A n r n r C e a
g o a g o r r g o n r o o n [ b u
. i i
[ g
', gl n u ql[
n u b*,
i F
.- . V** i o i ol
.;.. ... l f nl f
- l u o u a ot i ot
- , .2
- nf u o o t f u c o
!'.. i h h uh h
. . t a i r
e t
w w ti t r t t s w w i i n
oA/\
l Op3l C
4 i- -
.l) j(I l
i SSIN No.: 683S Accession No.
810330402 i IN 81-21 i UNITED STATES i
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 0FFICE OF INSPECTION AHO ENFORCEMENT WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 July 21, 1981 IE INFORMATION NOTICE NO, 81-21: POTENTIAL LOSS OF DIRECT ACCESS TO ULTIMATE HEAT SINK l 1
Description of Circumstances:
IE Bulletin 81-03, issued April 10, 1981, requested licensees to take certain actions to prevent and detect flow blockage caused by Asiatic clams and mussels.
Since then, one event at San Onofre Unit 1 and two events at the Brunswick Station have indicated that situations not explicity discussed in Bulletin 81-03 may occur and result in a loss of direct access to the ultimate heat sink. These situations are:
- 1. Debris from shell fish other than Asiatic clams and mussels may cause flow blockage problems essentially identical to those described in the bulletin.
- 2. Flow blockage in heat exchangers can cause high pressure drops that, in turn, deform baffles, allowing bypass flow and reducicg the pressure drop to near normal values. Once this occurs, heat exchanger flow blockage may not be detectable by pressure drop measurements.
- 3. Change in operating conditions. (A lengthy outage with no flow through seawater systems appears to,have permitted a buildup of mussels in systems where previous periodic inspections over more than a ten year period showed no appreciable problem.)
We are currently reviewing these events and the responses of the licensees to IEB 81-03. We expect licensees are performing the actions specified in IEB 81-03 such that cooling water flow blockage from any shell fish is prevented or minimized, and is detected before safety components become inoperable.
On June 9,1981, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit No.1 reported that as a result of a low saltwater coolant flow rate indication and an apparent need for valve maintenance, a piping elbow on the saltwater discharge line from component cooling heat exchanger E-20A was removed by the licensee just upstream of butterfly valve 12"-50-415 to permit visual inspection. An examination revealed growth of some form of sea mollusk such that the cross-sectional diameter of the piping was reduced. The movement of the butterfly valve was impaired and some blockage of the heat exchanger tube sheet had occurred. Evaluation of the event at San Onofre is continuing.
However, the prolonged (since April 1980) reactor shutdown for refueling and steam generator repair is believed to have caused the problem since previous routine inspections conducted since 1968 at 18 month intervals had not revealed mollusks during normal periods of operation.
A-10
-__m_ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ __m_______,_ _ -__m_ __
4 IN 81-21 July 21, 1981 Page 2 of 3 Two events at Brunswick involved service water flow blockage and inoperability of redundant residual heat removal (RHR) heat exchangers, primarily due to oyster shells blocking the service water flow through the heat exchanger tubes.
On April 25, 1981, at Brunswick Unit 1, while in cold shutdown during a maintenance outage, the normal decay heat removal system was lost when the single RHR heat exchanger in service failed. The failure occurred when the starting of a second RHR service water pump caused the failure of a baffle ;
in the waterbox of the RHR heat exchanger, allowing cooling water to bypass '
the tube bundle. The heat exchanger is U-tube type, with the service water inlet and outlet separated by a baffle. The copper-nickel baffle which was welded to the copper-nickel tubesheet deflected and failed when increased pressure was produced by starting the second service water pump. The redundant heat exchanger was inoperable due to maintenance in progress to repair its baffle which had previously deflected (LER 181-32, dated _May 19, 1981). The licensee promptly established an alternate heat removal alignment using the spent fuel pool pumps and heat exchangers.
As a result of the problems discovered with Unit 1 RHR heat exchangers, a special inspection of the Unit 2 RHR heat exchangers was performed while Unit 2 was at power. Examination of RHR heat exchanger 2A using ultrasonic techniques indicated no baffle displacement but flow testing indicated an excessive pressure drop across the heat exchanger. This heat exchanger was declared inoperable. Examination of the 2B RHR heat exchanger using ultrasonic and differential pressure measurements indicated that the baffle plate was damaged. The licensee initiated a shutdown using ne 2A RHR heat exchanger at reduced cap city (LER 2-81-49, dated May 20, 1951).
The failure of the baffle was attributed to excess se differential pressure caused by blockage of the heat exchanger tubes. Tne blockage was caused by the shells of oysters with minor amounts of other types of shells which were swept into the heads of the heat exchangers since they are the low point in the service water system. The shells resulted from an infestation of oysters growing primarily in the 30" header from the intake structure to the reactor building. As the oysters died their upper shells detached and were swept into the RHR heat exchangers where they collected. Small amounts of shells were found in other heat exchangers cooled by service water. Most of the operating BWRs use U-tube heat exchangers in the RHR system. (The heat exchangers used at Brunswick were manufactured by Perflex Corporation and are identified as type CEU, size 52-8-144.)
The observed failures raise a question on the adequacy of the baffle design to withstand differential pressures that could reasonably be expected during long term post accident cperation. However, it should be noted that since the baffle <, at Brunswick are solid copper-nickel as are the tubesheets and the water ooxes are copper-nickel clad, the strength of the baffles and the baffle we'ds is solaewhat less than similar heat exchangers made from carbon steel. Taerefore, heat exchangers in other BWR'i may be able to tolerate higher differential pressure than that at Brunswick without baffle deflection.
(Brunswick opted for copper-nickel due to its high corrosion and fouling resistance in a salt water environment.)
l A-11 w ._ - _ . _ , __ ., .m ,, . _ .
APPENDIX B Documentation of Bulletin Closeout O
1 I
h $
f* ,
I IN 81-21 July 21, 1981 Page 3 of 3 The use of differential pressure (dp) sensing between inlet and outlet to determine heat exchanger operability should consider that baffle failure could give an acceptable dp and flow indications and thereby mask incapability for heat removal. However, it is noted that shell blockage in a single pass, straight-through heat exchanger can readily be detected by flow and dp measurement.
Evaluation of the events at Brunswick is still continuing. Under conditions of an inoperable RHR system, heat rejection to the ultimate heat sink is typically through the main condenser or through the spent fuel pool coolers.
This latter path consists of the spent fuel pool pumps and heat exchanger with the reactor building closed cooling water system as an intermediate system which transfers the heat to the service water system via a single pass heat exchanger. These two means (i.e. , main condenser or spent fuel pool) are not considered to be reliable long term system alignments under accident conditions.
This information is provided as a notification of a possibly significant matter that is still under review by the NRC staff. The events at Brunswick and San Onofre emphasize the need for licensees to initiate appropriate actions as requested by IEB 81-03 for any credible type of shell fish og other marine organisms; e.g. , fresh water sponges, (not only asiatic clams and mussels). In case the continuing NRC review finds that specific licensee actions would be appropriate, a supplement to IEB Bulletin S1-03 may be issued. In the interim, we expect that licensees will review this information for applicability to their facilities.
No written response to this information is required. If you need additional information regarding this matter, please contact t. e Director of the appro-priate NRC Regional Office.
l l
A-12
' ^
- . ,,a - - _ _ _ _ . . - - -
]
Sr e (
c
(
c
(
a /)c
<_(2 (
c
(
c
(
c
(
c t t 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ui
_ or d d d d d d d d d
_ eC e e e e e e e e e s n n sn n s s sn n s s s s s e
_ od e oe e o o oe e o o o o o l np p l p p l l l p p l l l l l CaO O CO O C C CO O C C C C C e
ys 1 31 311 31 31 31 31 1 331 33131 313131 3 888888888888888888888888888888
_ t n - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
i o l
222276499878769889886161 616060 pe2222021 0001 01 200200222222221 21 i st - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
t ea53537 5272727257237235353535252 URD000000000000000000000000000000
_ n e o
i C g I II I R eV NRI V
I I
I I I I
I I
I II I I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I,
I
- m y
t i s l u it ca at L L DL P P P LP P i L L L .i FSO O CO C C C OC C o O O 0 rO
_^
t r3 8 74 2 8 9 56 7 0 6 5 4 ee1 6 63 1 3 3 55 5 5') ' 6 9 -
2 2 s kb3 3 33 4 4 4 1 4 4 2 2 2 3 3 u cm - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
t ou0 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 a DN5 5 55 5 5 5 55 5 5 5 5 5 5 t
S t y u t O o i C c l L L S O O L L s i & & P A A C C A A A & 8 o itP P IL L V V PE E V V V P P l l A A ND D T T CC C T T T C C-C n
i t
e 1 l 1 2 l t 1 2 3 u y y n B e e 1 2 i y y y l l o1 2 r r r 1 2 1 2 l l e e P r r r 1 a a t t d d e e e k k
. y s s 1 V V n n k o o F F F c c B t a a o o co o i i i s s yr r f f ow w s s s w w e l n n l e e e e Rd d n n n s s l i a a l v v l l i i w w w n n b ck k i a a l l ga a o o o u u a ar r ae e le le i r r r r r r r T FA A l I B B l l lib B B B B B B
- wJ _
Q ! : .',j
+8f; ,
j
3 s
u -
t n ao ti ) ) ) ) ) )) ))
- Sr a a a a a aa aa e ( ( ( (
t' t 1 2 2 1 1 1 21 2
(
2
((
22
((
22
_ ui or dd d d d dddd d dd dd eC ee e e e eeee e ee ee
. s n n nss s n n s s s s.s s s ssnss od e e eoo o e e o o oooo o ooeoo l n p p pll l p p l l ll ll l ll pl l Ca O O OCC C O O C C CCCC C CCOCC e 1 331 331 11 31 31 331 331 31 3311 1 31 311111 ys t n 8888888888888888888888888888888888 i o 9889887777778768768787744626288962 l pe 00200200020201 1 01 1 01 011 1 1 222222222 i st - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
_ t ea 7237237751 51 7397397171 1 77636355555 URD 0000000000000000000000000000000000 n
o i
_ Cg 1 I I I II II I
_ R e 1 I 1 I I I I I IIIV V IIVII
_ NR I I 1 1 I I I I I I IIII I IIIII y
. t i s l u i t
_ ca I 1 ! l
_ at P P PiL) L P P l l
1 1 l pip l l P LLLL1 ,
FS C C CCO O C C C 0 CCCC C OOOO0 t r 4 5 367 8 3 4 1 2 31 25 6 56826 ee 5 5 881 1 1 1 9 9 9664 4 1 1 904 kb 4 4 4 4'3 3 4 4 4 4 4444 4 33233 cm - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ou 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000 DN 5 5 555 5 5 5 5 5 5555 5 55555 y
t_
i O O O O O 0 0 OO l O O E E C C C C C C C CCD O i C C & & P P P P P G G EEP C t E E EEG G U U U U UPPU U MMPPE UC C UUB B D D D D DIIT T IINFT
)
d 1 2 t 1 2 3 n s s n o f f k k or1 c f f a a i e
( i i e e t ve 1 2l l 1 2 3 P P ais 1
y C C 1 2 1 2 tR s
. yy e e e e e S e B t 1 2 aat t a a e e ennh h l B i wwr r b b k k k ooc c 1 2 ra-e l n n aae e w w o o ot t n n et s l i o o l l v v a a r r rnna a kk psi b c r r l1 l 1 t t e e eiim m oooyv a a y y aaa a a a h h hll o o ooora T F B B CCC C C C C C CCCC C CCCCD mi"
, ,i C' 5 l ,
lI1III I j' s
u t n ao ti ) ) )))) )
Sr a a aaac a e ( ( (((( (
tt 1 2 212222 1 2 ui or d d dddddd d d cC e e eeeeee e e s nns n n s n n n ssssss s s od eeo e e o e e e oooooo o o l n ppl p p l p p p llllll l l Ca OOC O O C O O O CCCCCC C C e 1 11 231 2331 2331 31 231 31 31 111 131 313 ys 88888888888888888888888 t n 888888888 i o 1 1638638863888869262782 222525224 l pe 22220220222021 222222002 220020220 i st - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
t ea 77582582358235350353725 556636354 URD 00000000000000001 000000 000000000 n
o i
Cg I I I I I R e I I I I I I I VV I I NR VVI I I I I I I IIIIII I I y
t i s l u it L ca I T I a t_P P D L L L L L P LDLLLP H L
, O O O O O ' OCOOOL C O FS_CCS t r 530 7 9 1 8 4 1 335746 7 3 ee 721 3 4 3 4 6 4 368641 1 1 kb 230 2 2 3 3 3 3 332224 4 2 cn - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ou 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000 0 0 DN 555 5 5 5 5 5 5 555555 5 5 y
t O O i C YL C l EEO O O P O O O N&DCEL L P i 8&C C C L C C C SPPC&& & A t GGE E E E P P E ACPSGP P Y U PPC C C I A A D PJOPRM M C
)
d t 1 2 n 1 n o nn i c oo d rna 1 2
( yy l k eur k nn o cvoV f f c 1 aa1 2 3 n iih l l e
. y CC r I 2 rRl . u u N B t n n n A 2 t at G G i ooe e e y y adCS m e l ll d d d e e e i P e ad d a l i bb s s s n l l m zk tt nn n d b c aae e e a r r r t rrrna a d a a iir r r u a a e i oooir r a T F DDD D D D F F F FFFFGG G l I
m1 s ' b f, a
ao t i) ) ) ) ) )) )
Srb b b b a aa a e( ( ( ( ( (( (
t t2 2 11 1 1 1 I 2 2 21 1 221 1 2 ui '
ord d ddddddd d ddddd1 dd -
eC e e eeeeeee e eeeeeeee s s s sssssss s ssssssssn n n od o o ooooooo o ooooooooe e e l nl l l lll l l l p p p CaC C CCCCCCC l
C l ll l l l ll-CCCCCCCCO ;
O O O e 1 3131 1 1 1 1 11 2331 2331 1 1 1 1 11 31 331 331 31 3 ys 88888888888888888888888 8888888888888 t n - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
i o 05050088882582258244929 6859889884848 l pe1 21 21 1 000021 1 021 1 022022 21 1 00200201 01 i st - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
t ea7373777777561 6561 666655 5537237236363 UlD00000000000000000000000 0000000000000 n
o i
C R e1 f- I I I 1 I I 1 I 1 II I I I I I I
NR1 I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 I I VI1I III I I I y
t i s l u i t c a l l l l I at P P DDil l i L l l l l L PDDL1 DI . t t .L L P P FSC C CCCCCCO O C C S O 0 C uO O C C t r0 1 238901 1 6 453766759 3 4 2 ee0 0 001 1 222 6 553481 1 00 7 7 5 kb4 4 4455553 3 331 225534 3 3 3 c m - - - - - - - -
ou0 0 0000000 0
- - - - - J - - - -
000000000 0 0
i-f DN5 5 5555 53 5 5 555555555 5 5 S y
t i
GG dYO0 l L L .L O O O
& & nSIEE N C,0.S l
i & & &&AAAA EE& C C C t P UC C P PPVVVVP CCTTTTG P SSG o A I 1,1 PP E E E G PPPCPL1 WD C C P
) _
d t
n 1 21 2 323 o - - - -
c AABB 1 2 yt t
( ann 1 2 eeee kkBii 1 1 ll l l ee oot t 1 2
. y1 2 34ll l l eetPP rree k B t i i i i 1 2 r rd ooes e e c i s s ssv v vv CCl nnppn s l l i e l i i i i ssssh h oaassuo l l r l i r r rrt t t t c c eeb i i eear a a e b c r r rrrr rrt t ppmdd mmwc S S m a aa a iaaaaaaa a oounnaaea a a i T FH i l l I l l I
l I
l I
l l
i l
l I l Hi I I JJKL l l L L L m[
t ia )))))) )) ) )
S rb aaccca aa b b e( (((((( (( ( (
t t2 222222 22 ui 1 I 2 2 ord dddddd dd ddd eC e d eeeeee ee eee e s s n n n n ssssss ssn n sss s od o e e e e oooooo ooe e ooo o l nl p p p p l l l l l l l l p p ll l l C aC O O O O CCCCCC CCO O CCC C e 1 31 1 1 1 1 31 31 1 1 1 1 1 31 1 1 331 331 ys 1 1 31 1 31 t n 88888888888888888888888888 888888888 i o 1 0303021 21 0022221 292242248 l pe23020221 21 3322222202222220 291 291 29 202202202 i st - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
t ea53787852526655553575335337 573573573 URD00000000000000000000000000 000000000 n
o i
C g I I I I 1 R e I I I I I1 1 I I III I NRI I I I I I 1 II I 1 I I I I III I y
t i s l u i t ca atL P P L L PPLLPL LPL n DDL L FSO C C O O CCOOCO OCO o CCO O t r9 6 7 9 0 905633 008 9 459 ee0 4 4 6 7 0
234326 21 3 3 006 7 hb3 5 5 3 3 332342 243 3 442 2 cm - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ou0 0 0 0 0 000000 000 0 000 0 DN5 5 5 5 5 555555 555 5 555 5 y
t O i C O O O O OOO O l P C C C C CCC C i A I I P P CC P PPP l' PPP P t Y S S U U PPUUUS MME :
I EEU U UM P P D D CCNNNN NNV V VVD D
)
1 2 d
t t t n nn o 1 2 i i c e oo1 2 34
( e 1 1 1 23 PP k 1 1 o a a aa 1 n 1 1 1 2 1 2 eeel een n nn
. y a 1 1
1 nnnl l l n n nn1 B
1 2
t Y e e dd oooe iia A AA i e e r r nnt t t c MM e e e l e l l i i aasssi h h hh e e l i n b b u u l l l l l t eet t t t n n b ci r r G G nnr
_ a aa a a c c ddl l l n r r ro o i iiii o ii o o ooc c T FM M M M M MMMMMM NNN N NNO O T*
!!! 1i ' ;k j i4 l
!li
i; I;!
s u
t n ao ) ) ) )) ) ))
ti Sr a a a aa c aa e ( ( ( (( ( ((
tt 2 2 2 1 11 221 1 2 22 ui or d d d dddddddd dd eC e e e eeeeeeee ee n
s n sn n n s s ssssssss ssn n n od e oe e e o o oooooooo ooe e e e p l p p p l l ll l l l l ll l l p p p p l n Ca O CO O O C C CCCCCCCC CCO O O O e 1 31 1 31 31 31 31 31 1 1 1 11 1 1 31 1 1 31 31 331 33 ys 8888888888888888888888888888888888 t n - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
i o 9463838382727888888858222222688688 0012222222202202 l pe 22201 01 01 21 21 0001 1 i st - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
t ea 5256363635353777667702555353523523 URD 000000000000000000001 0000000000000 n
o i
Cg I II III I I I 1 I III I1 I II I I I R e I III I I I NR I I V V V I I 1 I 1II I1I y
t i s l u i t l I ca , ,
D D D P 1' ll l L l
. . 1 ,
L , ,
at 1 1 .P P P 1 1 i1 1 1 FS 0 0C C C 0 0 CCCCCCCO u00 O 0 0 0 7 8 89001 343 01 2 6 4 5 t r 9 58 9 5 6 ee 1 52 2 3 7 7 88944559 608 0 2 25 5 5 2 2 44444552 232 3 2 2 kb cm - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ou 0 00 0 0 0 0 00000000 000 0 0 0 5 5 5 55555555 555 5 5 5 DN 5 55 5 y
t i
O O O OOO OO l
1 8 C C C O O CCC O CC O O i P CS S S C C PPPI IAAC PPP P C C P P E E UUUEEVVE EES S E E t C PP U J CA A A P P DDDCCTTB WWN N C C
)
1 2 d
t 2 3 d d n 1 1 2 I 2 n n 1 2
_ o a a c k 1 2 3 m m
( e o o dd hhl l s s e e e e t t nn ccs s e e 1 r sd d d t t 1 23 ee1 aaI I i i
. y C er r r o o BB ee t t B t d e e e B B sss1 2 m BB e e i i i r aV V V nnn ssi i i C C -
e s h iii yyppr t t r r e l h kkk r rppg nni i d d l i t i o o o c c b c s l l l l a a r r r r riil i i a a a a y aa a a e e eeeeehhi oor r u u a a PPP P Q Q PPPPPPPP T F O PP P P P P m4 _
- - i
.I' y, 4 1
- ao ti) ) )))))) ) ) ) )
- S rb a aacccc c c c e( ( (((((( ( ( ( (
t t2 1 2 222222 2 2 2 ui 2 ord d d dddddd d d d d eC e e e eeeeee e e e s s n s s ssssss s s s n n n od o e o o oooooo o o o e e e l nl p l l l l l l l l l l l p p p l C aC O C C CCCCCC C C C O O O C e
ys 1 31 1 331 1 331 31 1 1 1 1 1 31 31 31 31 231 31 31 t n 88888888888888888888888888888888888 i o 98044604462822477878761 l pe21 1 1 1 21 1 1 61 701 91 91 1 88 i st - - - - - - - - - - 220220000000222203201 01 000 t
ea42792079205255677737353537347272672 URD0000O1 0001
. 0000000000000000000000000 n
o i
C g R e V V I 1 I V V I NRV I I I 1 1 VVVI I 1 I I I I I y
t i s l u i t ca I at L P !
l L LLLLLP P L f. P P P L FSO C C O OOOOOC C O o C C C O t r2 8 9 1 21 61 23 4 7 8 2 8 9 5 ee1 5 5 6 71 0664 4 2 2 2 9 9 3 kb3 4 4 . 2 232334 4 3 3 3 4 4 33 cm - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ou0 0 0 0 000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DN5 5 5 5 555555 5 5 5 5 5 5 55 y
t i
GG O l D L && l i
l i C P P i U U U & EEEEEN N A A L & & LL t M S S P SSCCCS S V V I L L PP US G G C PPSSSP P T T L I I
I I FF
)
d t
n o 1 1 2 c 1 2 1 23
( o s s 1 c d d 2 eee1 2 1 2 a a 1 e n n r rr x x e
. yS e e n f ff k k h h m e e ii B t B B o 1 2 oooo o a a a T T c i o s n nno o y y h u e l h r r n mmOOOr r o o e h h LL l i c e e i ee b b u u r t t b c n v v b l l nnna a q q o u u .
a aa i i o aaaaae e e e h o o t T FR R R R SSSSSS S S S S S S SS mi"
\ j ,'
s . _ .J, , j . L ;.o ," '
- eJ'
s u
t n ao ) ))) ))))) ) ) ) ) )
ti ) )))
+
S r b aaa c aaa ccccc c c c a a e ( ((( ( ((( ((((( ( ( ( ( (
tt 2 222 1 2 222 222221 12 2 2 2 2111 ui or d ddd dd ddd dddddddd d d d dddd cC e eee ee eee eeeeeeee e e e eeee s s nnsss ss sss ssssssss s s s ssss od o eeooo oo ooo ll l oooooooo l o
l o
l o oooo l n l pplll l l l lllllll llll Ca C OOCCC CC CCC CCCCCCCC C C C CCCC e 11 311 1 1 131 11 1 1 1 111 111 1 1121 31 313111 1 ys 88888888888888888888888888888888888 t n - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
i o 92722772796088548876878731111 916887 l pe 000221 11 0222221 01 1 00000022222022001 i st - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
t ea 79255666255755567777777717373735776 URD 000000000'30000000000000010000000000 n
- o i
Cg I R e 1 II II II V I I V III
~ . NR 1 II I I I IV III IIVVVVVI ] I I IIII y
t i s A -
l u it
- . ca I PPPPPDDP P P P ll Ll i D at L LLLPL DL LLL l l a FS O OOOCO SO OOO CCCCCCCC C C C OCCC t r 5 01 789 04 01 1 45078392 0 1 2 9678 ee 9 88888 24 557 226901 08 9 9 8 2665 kb 3 22332 33 222 44435553 3 3 4 0553
^
cm - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
0 0
0 0000 ou 0 00000 00 000 00000000 DN 5 55555 55 555 55555555 5 5 5 5555 y
t d d i G OO E E SSSSS O l 8 CCLL - - P SSSSSL E C E i E PPR&t tE LLN PPPPPM A A & EAAK t C EEPP e eG PPY PPPPPPPP V V G AVVG U S VVPPM MP FFV GGWWWWWL T T K YTTC
)
1 d
t n 34 e 12
_ o 1 2 e 1
_ _ c ttk 1 kk
_ ( aa nnn 3 1 2 eee nn ii a k wee
_ 1 nn ooY d r r e orr
. y 1 aa PP 1 2 r a a e RCC1 B t 1 2hh t o B B r -
i r ee n yyn ee f C ewwr e l e yyuu1 2 a eeo ll 1 2345 r s s eooe
_ l i m rrqq j kk m t t e t t f kll m b c m rr ssI I o rrr g gP P P P P t t t l nll m a a u uuuuM Mr uue ooNNNNN a a a o aeei T F S SSSST TT TTV VVWWWWWW W W W YYYZ rs 7*
,i lll1lIjilI) ,jjli]l !!l1li)1ll1iI ]ijji Iljljl!
w s
2 h t -
s' 8 . c y- o y u 9 d i y t rn ht t n 1 : e gh t i e ce ao ) s snw i nps if ti ) a s r e oi n i i ha Sr a ( u n e i l td i ce ws e ( 2 t 3 o b l cnn c i vn tt 2 a 8 i o p ea i vao d e ui d t 9 t t p yv v hi nh or d e S 1 c c a l es e t at eC e s u O eri e hh a s s o . r r a t pr h t ct 'pi. n s e od o l t d i i b t i s _
l n l C r b s e r nd e nh s Ca C : o m n h e i nd n i we s s t e o s t f a i h s e t c c C i i e l tdt u t r a e l r d gl . nn l a e 1 1331133 o e D . b c nne p eat i r ys 88888888 p R s u iih s ,s a t t n - - - - - - - - e ,
t P g t s sesh y w i o 64886488 ~r g 2 n n rc s eret M o l pe 20022001 n 1 a , i oer u i pi l i st - - - - - - - - C i l 2 w t o l d d s rf t ea 56235623 R t . P o , e i o . oe o URD 00000000 N a o . l dd s t b pb i e r N r o l e l y s f .t g e e N o rre M r ri pa n- p , w f ros es er su i O 7 o ,
ef s rt u t e q n w P 6 e f u oal av a e o o d . h emm wi w l d i l e l r . t d a . t h u a Cg l I l s o a l rr pgy gc c R e l I o n V e o f ygo snM ni i m NR I I f e l V o l o _ i ih b r c , c ers a vrvw r i e i 0 u , e t pm l i oi o f h L 2 N 0 n i a u e es C n y t 0 3 o nel c c . ct o t ,0 ,0 il c i epen rc i s n n - n0 h fb b rsre e l u o oG o- c eao r n h o i t iE iG i dtt o ra ro t t ca d sR sE h np C ol op i at L L e sU sR w i ee u m em FS O O s iN iU cu rec eo a a m mN o ,
cd eci cc h r b m ,
m t d a h rb r t g o3 o . e n t ur uf io s C8 C2 y l no i oo oo wrp t r 5 4 i - 8 t l ai esc s ee 9 0 y0 y/ i e t g d kb 2 3 1 r3 r0 l cd a eeren ee cm - - . o- o3 i ned vh ehi t l ou 0 0 B t1 t/ c at a athtl sb DN 5 5 a1 a6 a ct r h t p e i.
e l l 0 t f i g rirm f t l uf go u u nme t eeea np b gf o a ebd g oh h s i .
y a e eo e eu n nt et c t T R s R s r b sri i vie er i a s o o ow oeael r a l O O n r ra l f ee o d h b a i C C i aa a C vvel n na n t E E et ea d a a gl hihit h a .
U C C d l a l t n e hh ao c c p c s e cD ca i s kf i nine i d m t u uD t o hhc h ohoc h ee
) o N . N e l ccoe wiwic wmt
. n t . l c iilh t t a rs d sr st l hhbt sasa soy t s eo er u s ww et et n . ef s n u t p t o B i wf i si s a d i r o t ae ap ssoo t t et ed c a tR t e r n eel i eiedti pe
( t S SR o i iif e lhlh ecl t s y f t tt n itit meiea 1 d r d s e ii eo c c rf cvl
. y y ea eu a l ll r af af onaae B t t t m t t i l ii ut FoFofiFh r i 1 2 i i m i a r u cct e e l l nu nt e B aaue . . .
l i n n i US US t FFf m a b c b c o o c i e a a i i a . . r h . .
T F Z Z F 1 2 C T 12 _
a -z1 l: l
+ g, ;i! j ,k l,j- . - f i l
i APPENDIX C Proposed Followup Items Region I
- 1. Beaver'Vallev 1 Utility personnel-responded to Bulletin 81-03 on May 26, 1981 and February 14, 1983, indicating that detection and
. prevention of Corbicula fouling would be accomplished through
. periodic ~ flow performance tests and visual inspection, with no mention of any biocide application.
Followup is suggested to verify that planned performance testing and visual inspections are: performed with sufficient frequency to adequately detect and prevent ~ fouling by Corbicula.
-2. Beaver Vallev 2 Utility. personnel responded to Bulletin 41-03 on July 9, 1981 and February 9, 1983, indicating that detection and preven-tion of Corbicula fouling would be accor.plished through periodic flow performance tests and. visual inspection, with no mention of any biocide application.
~
Followup is suggested to verify that planned. performance testing and visual' inspections are performed with sufficient frequency to adequately detect and prevent fouling by Corbicula.
- 3. Limerick 1 and 2
' Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on June 4, 1981 and March 18, 1983, indicating that recent benthic studies in the vicinity of'the plant had confirmed the pres'ence of Cor-bicula. No mention was made of inspection or detection pro-cedures to be implemented as a result of these recent find-ings.
Followup is suggested to verify that procedures have been developed for routine inspection and performance testing of safety-related systems prior to and following plant operation. 1 q
l i
l C-1
- , r.- e .. ,, c.,y-f os. .. , , . _ , , _
. _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . .. _ . . . . . . _ _ _ . . 1
.t.
- 4. Oyster Creek 1 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03-on May 29, 1981
-and February 24, 1983, indicating that some fouling due.to Mytilus had been detected and that an effective inspection program was being developed along with a chlorination feasi-bility study.
Followup is suggested to verify that a comprehensive i
inspection / monitoring program has been implemented and that provisions for effective biocidal treatment have been addressed.
- 5. Shoreham Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on. July 7, 1981, March 30, 1982 and April 21, 1983, indicating that mussel' control would be accomplished through hypochlorite application.
Followup is~ suggested to verify that an effective hypo-chlorite treatment program has been developed and to obtain details of the program.
Region II
- 1. Catawba 1 and 2 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-'3 on July 8, 1981, March 17, 1983, and September 16, 19e3, indicating that Corbicula fouling had occurred in some systums inspected but that preventive maintenance would consist only of period-ic inspections and backflushing. No biocide application was in effect at that time other than in the fire protection systems.
Followup is suggested to verify that performance testing and inspections are conducted on an adequate number of system components frequently enough to preclude blockage due to
-biofouling; and, in the event Corbicula fouling becomes a significant problem, followup is needed to verify that adequate clam fouling preventive measures, such as biocide application, are implemented.
- 2. Farley 1 and 2 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on May 26, 1981, October 29, 1982 and March 22, 1983, indicating that an extensive examination of mainly non-safety-related heat ex-changers in Unit 1 found no evidence of Corbicula fouling and that flow performance tests for Unit 2 were sufficient due to its' similarities to Unit 1.
C-2 2
--=**4' *-=r,,-,,,.__si.4--_ ,,3,'-~
Followup is suggested to verify that additional repre-sentative safety-system components for both Units 1 and 2 have been inspected and performance tested, and that such inspections and performance rests will continue to be performed with sufficient frequency to prec1 4de any' incidence of flow blockage.
- 3. McGuire 1 and-2 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on May 22, 1981 and February 11, 1983, indicating that Corbicula were present in the Stand-by Nuclear Service Water Pond but that no. formal program existed for inspection and no biocide treatment of the Nuclear Service Water System was planned to be imple-mented.
Followup is suggested to verify that the licensee has taken appropriate action with respect to potential fouling of the.
Nuclear Service Water System. Fouling may have a high potential in this system in light of the moderate fouling in the Fire Protection System and the presence of Corbicula in the service water pond.
4 North Anna l'and 2 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on May 22, 1981, March 22, 1983 and March 24, 1983, indicating that, while Corbicula were present in Lake An: i and.the Service Water Reservoir, no. evidence of fouling nad occurred within safety' systems. No mention was made of 1y existing or planned biocide treatments or other control procedures should i Corbicula infest s,afety systems in the future.
Followup is suggested to verify that the licensee has developed contingency plans for clam fouling control for safety systems receiving raw service water.
- 5. Surry 1 and 2 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on May 22, 1981, indicating that (a) salinity is too low for Mytilus, (b) salinity is too high for Corbicula except during periods of high rainfall in the James River Basin, (c) no Corbicula fouling had been observed at the plant and (d) additional en-vironmental sampling and observations would be performed during periods of extensive rainfall.
Followup is suggested to obtain and evaluate a description of the safety system visual inspection program, including all components examined and scheduled inspection frequency. This additional information was requested by NRC/IE January 21, 1983.
C-3
-MMM* % ~= -
f Region III
- 1. Braidwood 1 and 2 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on July 9, 1981, February 8, 1983 and March 28, 1983, indicating that.
no significant population of Corbicula existed in the Braid-wood Cooling Lake.
l Followup is suggested to verify that continued monitoring of the cooling lake adequately addresses Corbicula infestation and that effective biofouling preventatives are included in safety-system plans for each unit.
- 2. Byron 1 and 2 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on July 9, 1981, February 8, 1983 and March 28, 1983, indicating that no known populetion of Corbicula existed in the Rock River in the vicinity of the Byron facilities.
Followup is suggested to verify that monitoring of the river for possible future Corbicula infestation is continuing and that appropriate provisions for biofouling control are in-
. cluded in safety system plans for each unit.
- 3. Callaway 1
! Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on July 7, I
- 1981, indicating that flow performance for the Fire Sup-ression Water System (FWS) would be tested monthly, with no mention of testing frequency for the Essential Service Water System (ESWS).
Followup is suggested to verify that performance testing for for the ESWS is of sufficient frequency to preclude fouling by Corbicula and that appropriate provisions for biofouling control.are included in the FWS and ESWS plans.
4 Dresden 2 and 3 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on May 26, 1981, August 23, 1982, February 8, 1983 and March 28, 1983, indicating that Corbicula fouling of several heat exchangers had occurred but that control through annual cleaning, in-termittent hypochlorite injection and periodic flow reversal had precluded any performance problems.
o Followup is suggested to verify that installation of all pressure gauges has been completed; that performance test-ing and biocidal treatments are of sufficient frequency to preclude flow blockage to any saf ety-related system; and that vacuum dredging of intake bays during down time is carried out.
C-4
-n- - ~ ~ - . ~ - ~ ~ , . - , ..
e
~
}
- 5. Fermi 2 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on July 7, 1981 and February 8, 1983, indicating that a quarterly detection program for Corbicula infestation was being developed, with-out mention of any source water body or cooling tower basin sampling.
Followup is suggested to verify that the planned detection program has been implemented and that selected sampling locations include the source water body and the cooling tower basin.
- 6. Lacrosse Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on May 18, 1981 and March 15, 1983, indicating that no known population of Corbicula had occurred upstream of the facility and that routine monitoring in the plant vicinity would note any oc-currence of Corbicula. No mention was made of sampling methodology for determination of Corbicula presence.
Because Corbicula have been reported upstream from Lacrosse, followup is suggested to verify that monitoring activities include appropriate sampling techniques for determining the presence of Corbicula in the plant vicinity.
- 7. LaSalle 1 and 2 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 1-03 on July 9, 1981, February 8, 1983 and March 28, 19e , indicating that Corbicula had been found in the cooling ake and that a further assessment of their infestation .ould be conducted during Spring 1983 to determine the extent of the population.
Followup is suggested to verify that this assessment has been performed and to determine if followup actions (in-plant inspections / performance testing) are warranted.
- 8. Marble Hill 1 and 2 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 61-03 on July 3, 1981 and August 20, 1981, indicating that Corbicula were present in the source water body but that firm plans for biocide treatment and detection had not been developed.
Followup is suggested to verify that the permit holder has implemented a program for routine flow performance testing and inspection, and that provisions for biocide application have been made.
- 9. Prairie Island 1 and 2 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on May 22, 1981 C-5
- * * " ' Aeq.vgA le**#.ad f**
,. .p as _ _
4 and March-22, _1981, indicating that since their initial re-sponse to the bulletin Corbicula had been encountered at the plant.
Followup.is suggested to verify-that chlorination practices-and annual in-place inspections are sufficient to detect and prevent.possible future fouling of safety systems by
.Corbicula.
10 ' Quad cities 1 and 2 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on May 26, 1981, February 8, 1983 and March 28, 1983, indicating that evidence of minor Corbicula fouling had occurred.in some non-safety-related systems but that no fouling was observed in any safety-related system components. No provision had been made for biocide treatment of any systems not already so equipped.
Followup is suggested to. verify that inspection schedules and performance testing of safety system components are per-formed frequently enough to detect and prevent flow block- i age'by Corbicula and that planned biocide applications are adequate for Corbicula control. The potential for more serious fouling appears significant enough to warrant care-ful examination.of detection procedures.
Region IV
- 1. Arkansas Nuclear One-Units 1 and 2 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on May 22, 1981 and March 22, 1983, indicating that chlorination for control of Corbicula in service water systems would be performed once every 14 days when service water is between 60*F and 80*F.
Followup is suggested to verify that such chlorination practices have been effective in control of Corbicula fouling.
- 2. Cooper Station Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on May 29, 1981, indicating that no environmental monitoring to detect the presence of Corbicula has been performed since 1979.
Followup is suggested to determine whether monitoring of the Missouri River for the presence of Corbicula should be renewed.
- 3. River Bend 1 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on July 10, 1981, September 14, 1981 and February 14, 1983, indicating l
C-6
.. .- l'
e b
that a routine surveillance schedule was being developed which would be designed to detect flow blockage by Corbicula in potentially affected systems.
Followup is suggested to ve. fy the details of this program j and document its implementation.
l 4 South Texas'I and 2 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on July 9, 1981
'and February 11, 1983, indicating that only portions of the Essential Cooling Water System (ECWS) were subject to pos-sible fouling by Corbicula but that quarterly flow monitoring-and intermittent chlorination would be utilized to detect and prevent flow degradation.
Followup is suggested to verify that planned performance monitoring and chlorination practices are adequate for detection and prevention of possible future clam fouling of the ECWS Region V
- 1. Diablo Canyon 1 and 2 Utility personnel responded to Bulletin 81-03 on July 21, 1981, indicating that Mytilus fouling was controlled by using rejected condenser heat on a monthly basis; however, no de-tailed description of the heat treatment ,rogram was pro-vided as requested by NRC/IE January 21, .983.
Followup is suggested to verify specific details of the mussel heat t r e a t m e n't procedures including all safety-related systems receiving such application.
- 2. Palo Verde 1, 2 and 3 Utility personnel reponded to Bulletin 81-03 on June 3, 1981 andLMarch 18, 1983, indicating that no monitoring effort or inspection program had been or would be initiated to deter-
~
mine the presence of Corbicula in the storage res,ervoir, due to the fact that all cooling water used at the plant was treated sewage effluent and as such Corbicula would not be ,
able to survive in such an environment. I Followup is suggested to verify that the aquatic environment of the storage reservoir is presently free of Corbicula and and that opportunities for future colonization are monitored.
C-7 K ..,.,ku.-.-r,. . . . . .s_w __ _ _ , ,
4 . __ _
e e
9 11<ENDIX D Abbreviations ANO Arkansas Nuclear One APCO- Alabama Power Company AP&L Arkansas Power & Light Company APSCO Arizona Public Service Company BECO Boston Edison Company BG&E Baltimore Gas and Electric Company.
C Centigrade CCU Containment Cooling Unit CD Cancelled CECO Commonwealth Edison Company CEI Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company CFR Code of Federal Regulations CG&E Cincinnati Gas-and Electric Company 1 CHI Construction Halted Indefinitely CO Carbon Dioxide Coned Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
CP Construction Permit CPC Consumers Power Company CP&L Carolina Power & Light Company CR Contractor's Report CYAPCO Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company DECO Detroit Edison
- Company DL Duquesne Light-Company
[ DP Differential Pressure DPC Dairyland Power Cooperative DUPCO Duke Power Company ECWS Essential Cooling Water System EPA Environmental Protection Agency i ESWS Essential Service Water System FP Florida Power Corporation FPL Florida Power & Light Company FWS Fire Suppression Water System GAO Government Accounting Office GP Georgia Power Company
- GSU Gulf States Utilities Company HL&P_ Houston Lighting & Power Company HPSI High-Pressure Safety Injection HQ Headquarters IEB Inspection / Enforcement Bulletin IELPC0 Iowa Electric Light and Power Company D-1
- - -. ~ mw, -n 3.g ( _
g Q .g c_______-___
l 4 VYNP Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation WEPCO Wisconsin Electric Power Company WNP Washington Nuclear Project WPPSS Washington Public Power Supply System WPS Wisconsin Public Service Corporation YAECO Yankee Atomic Electric Company 1
J !
D-3 m
- 'W'* **".GJ S M'WpFWM , P *Tp _ __
., E N AC PocM 336
'" 'n U.S. NUCLE AR REGULATOQY COMMISSION
- 1. REPOQT NUMCEQ IAupav& OOC /
BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET NUREG/CR-3054 4 TITLE ANO SU8 TITLE Lace votume No. docorwrantes PARAMETER IE-138 2 it,po osent Closecut of IE Bulletin 81-03: Flow Blockage of Cooling Water to Saf ety System Components by Corbicula sp.(Asiatic Clam) and Mytilus sp.(Muste bciPiENT 3S ACCESSION NO 7 AUTHOR (Si J. H. Rains, W. J. Foley, A. Hennick 5 D ATE REPORT CDMPLE TEO v om May I nan 1984 9 PE RFORMING ORGANIZATION N AME AND M AtuNG ADDRESS (teavae 2 0 Cooes DATE' RE PORT ISSUED PARAMETER, Inc. **
13380 Watertown Plank Road June I"3984 53122 Elm Grove, Wisconsin 6 ILeave Dianho s lleave Oranal 12 SPONSORING ORGANIZ ATION N AME AND M AILING ADDRESS Uncavar 2,o Coon)
Div. of Emergency Preparedness and Engineering Response TasIor^[e "do". 34 l
Office of Inspection and Enforcement i, ns No ;
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccxmtission Washington, DC 20555 B-1013 13 TY PE OF REPORT PE ReoD Covt RE D flactusere adres/
Technical September 18, 1981 - May 25, 1984 15 SUPPLEMENT ARY NOTES 14 (Lene uras 16 ABSTR ACT (200 -oras or eessl On April 10, 1981, the Office of Inspection and Enforcement (IE) of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Bulletin 81-03 requiring all nuclear generating unit licensees to assess I
the potential for biofouling of safety-related system components as a result of Asiatic clams (Corbleula sp.)
and marine mussels (Myt ilus sp.). Issuance of the Bulletin was prompte' by the shutdown of Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2 on September 3,1980, as a result of flow blockage of safet , systems by Asiatic clams. Licensee responses to Bulletin 81-03 have been compiled and evaluated to determe the magnitude of existing biofoulang problems and potential for future problems. An assessment of the areal itent of Asiatic clam and marine mussel infestation has been made along with an evaluation of detection d control procedures currently in use by licensees. Recommendations are provided with regard to adequacy of stection, inspection and prevention practices currently in use, biocidal treatment programs, and additional areas of concern. Safety implicat tor ,
and licensee responsibilities are discussed. Of 79 facilities licensed to operate, 17 have reported biofoul-ing problems, 21 are judged to have high biofouling potential,17 are judged to have low or future potentia and 24 are judged to have little or no potential. For 49 facilities under construction, the number of unit, for matching conditions of biofoulang are 3, 25,15, and 6 in the same decreasing order of severity. The Bulletin has been closed out f or 85 of 129 current f acilities, followup needed to close out the Bulletin fe' 21 operating facilities and 23 facilities under construction is proposed in Appendia C.
1 17 KE Y WORDS AND DOCUMENT AN ALYSiS 17e DE sc rip T O R S 17ti IDEN Tt FIE RS OPE N E N DE D TE RYS 1
is AuiL Asiuf, sT ATevEst se a a r . . ,..q s , r s ,com i so es PAacs Unclassified Unlimited :o sgggsg io,- 22 ja.ce
.c o.v m uo l
4'T4
REACTOR _ COOLANT SYSTEM 3/4.4.5 STEAM GENERATORS s
LIMITING CONOTTION FOR OPERATION ___
3.4.5 Each steam generator shall be OPERABLE.
APPLICABILITY: MODES 1, 2. 3, and 4.
Q:
With one or more steam generators inoperable, restore the inoperable generator (s) to OPERABLE status prior to increasing 7,,,above 200*F.
SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENT $
4.4.5.0 Each steam generator shall be demonstrated OPERABLE by performance of l the following augmented inservice inspection program and the requirements of Specification 4.O.5.
4.4.5.1 Steam Generator Samole Selection and Inspection - Each steam generator shall be determinec OPERABLE during shutdown by selecting and inspecting at i least the minimum number of steam generators specified in Table 4.4-1. l 4.4.5.2 Steam Generator Tube Sample Selection and Inspection - The steam generator tube minimum sample size, inspection result classification, and the corresponding action required shall be as specified in tad 1e 4.4-2. The inservice inspection of steam generator tubes shall be performed at the fre-quencies specified in Specification 4.4.5.3 and the inspected tubes shall be verified acceptable per the acceptance criteria of Specification 4.4.5.4. The tubes selected for each inservice inspection shall include at least 3% of the total number of tubes in all steam generators; the tubes selected for these inspections shall be selected on a random basis except:
- a. Where experience in similar plants with similar water chemistry indicates critical areas to be inspected, then at least 50% of the ;
tubes inspected shall be from these critical aress; '
- b. The first sample of tubes selected for each inservice inspection (subsequent to the preservice inspection) of each steam generator shall include:
SEABROOK
- UNIT 1 3/4 4=13 m_____________._____.__
4 REACTOR COOLANT SY$T[M
, $ TEAM OENERATOR$
_ SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS _
I 4.4.5.2b. (Continued)
- 1) All nonplugged tubes that previously had detectable wait penetrations (greater then 205),
- 2) Tubes in those areas where experience has indicated potential problems, and
- 3) A tube inspection (pursuant to Specification 4.4.5.4a.8) shall be performed on each selected tube. If any selected tube does not permit the passage of the eddy current probe for a tube inspection, this shall be recorded and an adjacent tube shall be selected and subjected to a tube inspection,
- c. The tubes selected as the second and third samples (if required by Table 4.4-2) during each inservice inspection may be subjected to a partial tube inspection provided:
- 1) The tubes selected for these samples include the tubes from those areas of the tube sheet array where tubes with imperfections were previously found, and
- 2) The inspections include those portions of the tubes where imperfections were previously found.
The results of each sample inspection shall be classified into one of the following three cate0eries:
Category inspection Results C-1 Less than SE of the total tubes inspected are degraded tubes and none of the inspected tubes are defective.
C-2 One or more tubes, but not more than 1% of the total tubes inspected, are defective, or between 5% and 105 of the total tubes inspected are degraded tubes.
C-3 More than 105 of the total tubes inspected are degraded tubes or more than 1% of the inspected tubes are defective.
Note: In all inspections, previously degraded tubes must exhibit significant (greater than 105) further wall penetrations to be included in the above percentage calculations. !
SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 4-14
gACTOR COOLANT SYS7EM STEAM GENERATORS i SURVE!!, LANCE REQUIREMENTS 4.4.5.3 Insoection Frequencies - The above required inservice inspections of steam generator tubes shall be performed at the following frequencies:
e
- a. The first inservice inspection shall be performed after 6 Effective Full-Power Months but within 24 calendar months of initial criticality.
Subsequent inservice inspections shall be performed at intervals of not less than 12 nor more than 24 calender months after the previous inspection. If two consecutive inspections, not including the pre-service inspection, result in all inspection results falling in Cate-gory C-1 or if two consecutive inspections demonstrate that previously observed degradation has not continued and no additional degradation has occurred, the inspection interval may be extended to a maximum of once per 40 months;
- b. If the results of the inservice inspection of a steam generator conducted in accordance with Table 4.4-2 at 40-month intervals fall in Category C-3, the inspection frequency shall be increased to at least once per 20 months. The increase in inspection frequency shall apply until the subsequent inspections satisfy the criteria of Specification 4.4.5.3a.; the interval may then be extended to a maximum of once per 40 months; and
- c. Additional, unscheduled inservice inspecticas shall be performed on each steam generator in accordance with the first sample inspection specified in Table 4.4-2 during the shutdown subsequent to any of the following conditions:
- 1) Primary-to-secondary tubes leak (not including leaks originating from tube-to-tubesheet welds) in excess of the limits of Specification 3.4.6.2, or
- 2) A seismie occurrence greater than the Operating Basis Earthquake, or
- 3) A loss-of-coolant accident requiring actuation of the Engineered Safety Features, or
- 4) A main steam line or feedwater line break.
1 SEABROOK UNIT 1 3/4 4-15 l
l
REACTOR C00LANT SYSTEM
$ TEAM GENERATORS 4
$ SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 4.4.5.4 Ac,qeptance Criteria
- a. As used in this specification:
- 1) Imperfection means an exception to the dimensions, finish, or contour of a tube from that required by fabrication drawings or specifications. Eddy current testing indications below 20% of the nominal tube wall thickness, if detectable, may be considered as imperfections;
- 2) Degradation means a service-induced cracking, wastage, wear, or !
general corrosion occurring on either the inside or outside of a '
tube;
- 3) Decraded Tube means a tube containing imperfections greater i than or equal to 20% of the nominal wall thickness caused by degradation;
- 4) % Degradation means the percentage of the tube wall thickness af f acted or removed by degradation;
- 5) Defect means an imperfection of such severity that it exceeds thie plugging limit. A tube containing a defect is defective;
- 6) Pluccino Limit means the imperfection depth at or beyond which the tube shall be removed from service and is equal to 40% of the nominal tube wall thickness;
- 7) Unserviceable describes the condition of a tube if it leaks or contains a defect large enough to affect its structural integ-rity in the event of an Operating Basis Earthquake, a loss-of; coolant accident, or a steen line or feedwater line break as specified in Specification 4.4.5.3c., above;
- 8) . Tube _ Inspection means an inspection of the steam generator tube from the point of entry (hot leg side) cospletely around the U-bend to the top support of the cold leg; and
- 9) Preservice Insoe: tion means an inspection of the full length of each tube in eac3 steam generator performed by oddy current ;
techniques prior to service to establish a baseline condition i of the tubing. This inspection shall be performed prior to l initial POWER OPERATION using the equipment and techniques expected to be used during subsequent inservice inspections. ] ;
SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 4-16
REACTOR COOLANT $YSTEM STEAM GENERATOR $
4 5 SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS
=_ -
4.4.5.4 (Continued)
- b. The steam generator shall be detemined 0PERA8tE after completing the corresponding actions (plug all tubes exceeding the plugging limit and all tubes containing through wall crack.s) required by Table 4.4-2.
4.4.5.5 Reports
- a. Within 15 days following the completion of each inservice fnspection of steam generator tubes, the number of tubes plugged in each steam generator shall be reported to the Commission in a $pecial iteport pursuant to Spec!fication 6.8.2;
- b. The complete results of the steam generator tube inservice inspection shall be submitted to the Commission in a Special Report pursuant to Specification 6.8.2 within 12 months following the completion of the inspection. This Special Report shall include:
- 1) Number and extent of tubes inspected.
- 2) Location and percent of wall thickness penetration for each indication of an imperfection, and
- 3) Identification of tubes plugged.
- c. Results of steam generator tube inspections which fall into Category C-3 shall be reported in a $pecial Report to the Commission pursuant to Specifiestion 6.8.2 within 30 days and prior to resumption of plant operation. This report shall provide a description of investi-getions conducted to determine cause of the tube degradation and corrective measures taken to prevent recurrence.
SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 4-17 f
~
l
\
TABLE 4,4-1 MIMIMJM NUMBER OF STEAM GENERATORS TO BE e
INSPECTED DURING INSERVICE INSPECTION No. of Steam Generators per Unit Four Preservice inspection Four First Inservice inspection Two Second & Subsequent Inservice Inspections one (1)
TABLE NOTATION (1) The third and fourth steam generators that were not inspected during the first inservice inspection shall be Inspected during the second and third inspections, respectively. For the fourth end subsequent inspections, the inservice inspection may be limited to one steam generator on a rotating schedule encompassing 12% of the tubes if the results of the previous in-spections of the four steam generators indicate that all steam generators are performing in a like manner. Note that under some circumstances, the operating conditions in one or more steam generators may be found to be more severe then those in other steam generators. Under such circumstances, the sample sequence shall be modified to inspect the most severe conditions.
l i
SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 4-18
.- i l b }l i E! .
- I i 1 531 I i i 1 : :n 2 : : : : I
!d I I I
~l I .] z
! } '< j ! D j P 51 I :
~
! !I i !! l!1 .
l!1 lb.j'IElii }
- 1 a ,
ij R ] I 3 2 2 Og jj,jjgh, s 'g '
y .---
1 Q E 2 84 3 l$,5 5 j,)i l
} h j{jd s ,
I I !! l!!lki }
E g i s2 2 y
h h [ zYe
} <je m vf 5
SEABROOK - UNIT 1 3/4 4-19
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ - _ - -