ML20236H074
| ML20236H074 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Westinghouse |
| Issue date: | 07/23/1987 |
| From: | Nardi A WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP. |
| To: | Rouse L NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| References | |
| 28438, LA-87-49, NUDOCS 8708050053 | |
| Download: ML20236H074 (7) | |
Text
-
7g-//gf p
RETURN TU 39pgg
]
LA 87-49 Westinghouse Water Reactor pysp,y, g,nn,y,y,n,, g3g g3g Electric Corporation Divisions July 23, 1987 l
.l w
10 i
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission s
gg
}
, ATTN:
Mr. Leland C. Rouse Fuel Cycle Safety Branch
/.
41 Division of Fuel Cycle, Medical, Z[
gg g71 Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Y
$35k 7)h Academic, and Commercial Use Safety 3
D' Washington, DC 20555 9
ms Gentlemen:
SN D
0 IS87) ;
REF: SNM-1107, Docket 70-1151 2
hMSS Calcium Fluoride E
Doeg[c#h"" s '/
f,qq O
Westinghouse Letter Dated April 24, 1987 NRC Letter Dated May 12, 1987, Amendment 6
/
k sea In the above referenced letters, Westinghouse requested and rec approval to transfer calcium fluoride, below 30 pCi/gm, off-site for use as a mixer with steel flux forming materials.. When 'this approval was granted, it was assumed that the calcium fluoride generated at the Westinghouse Columbia Plant could be used directly by the briquettors in their briquetting process.
Subsequently, we were informed that the briquettor would like the flexibility of drying the calcium fluoride in a gas fired dryer.
Since this represents an unreviewed process, we have evaluated the drying operation for Mercier Corporation located in Gary, Indiana and have concluded that the drying operation represents an insignificant impact on the environment from a
personnel dose standpoint.
Attached are changed pages to Section 1 which provide ' the technical justification.
Westinghouse hereby requests approval to extend the original NRC approval to include off-site drying of calcium fluoride.
We also ' request that i
this approval be generic to any briquettor authorized to receive our l
calcium fluoride provided that Westinghouse perform a similar evaluation to assure that personnel doses are ALARA (less than 0.1 mrem /yr).
J We believe that a modification to Section 4.5 is not required because the 1
drying operation can be considered as part of the briquetting operation.
Enclosed in a check for $150.00.
]
If you have any questions, please write _.or teibphogg me at (803) 776-2610, Extension 3247.
pa a
c s
~~
Applican t. M............. O Very truly yours, a
Chacx No..
f?/...........
i;a.e cux Md..MfNh.l.l..
,a l C.
A. J. Nardi, Manager neccind L/. M..........,
NES License Administration WP157lF
- 1 so M {0
[k((
1 Enclosures C
i SCHEDULE OF REVISIONS Page Revision Page Revision-Number Number Number Number i
12 1.5-2 2
11 10 1.5-3 2~
111 13 1.5-4 2
iv 3
- 1. 5-5 2
.v 13 1.5-6 2
vi 10 1.6-1 2
vii 10 1.7-1 2
viii' 12 1.7-2 2
ix 13 1.8-3 2
1.0-1 2'
l.8-2 2
1 1.0-2 12 1.8-3 2
- I 1.1-1 2
1.8-4 2
1.1-2 2
1.8-5 2
1.2-1 2
1.8-6 2
j 1.3-1 2
1.8-7 2
1.3-2 11 1.8-8 2
1.3-3 2
1.8-9 2
(
1.3-4 2
1.8-10 2
1.3-5 2
1.8-11 2
1.3-6 2
1.8-12 2
1.3-7 2
1.8-13 2
1.4-1 2
1.8-14 2
1.4-2 2
1.8-15
.2 1.4-3 2
1.8-16 2
1.4-4 2
1.8-17 2
1.4-5 2
1.8-18 2
1.4-6 2
1.8-19 2
1.4-7 2
1.8-20 2
1.4-8 2
- 1. 8-21 2
- 1. 5-l '
2 1.8-22 2
Docket No. 70-1151 Initial Submittal Date:
4/30/83 Page No.
iii License No. StN-1107 Revision Submittal Date:
7/23/87 Revision No.
13
.]
1
_---=_:_.-__
l I
SCHEDULE OF REVISIONS Page Revision Page Revision Number Number Number
-Number l
1.9-49 2
1.9-83 2
1.9-50 2
1.9-84 2
1.9-51 2
1.9-85 2
1.9-52 2
1.9-86 2
1.9-53 2
1.9-87 2
j 1.9-54 2
1.9-88 2
l 1.9-55 2
1.9-89 2
.j 1.9-56 2
1.9-90 2
1.9-57 2
1.9-91 2
1 1.9-58 2
1.9-92 2
1.9-59 2
1.9-93 2
l l
1.9-60 2
1.9-94 2
l.9-61 2
1.9-95 2
1.9-62 2
1.9-96 2
1.9-63 2
1.9-97 2
1 1.9-64 2
1.9-98 2
1.9-65 2
1.9-99 2
1.9-66 2
1.9-1 00 2
1.9-67 2
1.9-101 2
1.9-68 2
1.9-102 2
1 1.9-69 2
1.10-1 2
1.9-70 2
1.10-2 2
1.9-71 2
1.10-3 2
1.9-72 2
1.11-1 10 1.9-73 2
1.11-2 10 1.9-74 2
1.11-3 10 l
1.9-75 2
1,11-4 10 1.9-76 2
1.11-5 10 i
1.9-77 2
1.11-6 13 l
1.9-78 2
1.11-7 13 1.9-79 2
1.11-8 13 1.9-80 2
1.12-1 11 1.9-81 2
1.12-2 11 1.9-82 2
1.12-3 11 1.13-1 12 1.13-2 12 1.13-3 12 Docket No. 70-1151 Initial Submittal Date:
4/30/83 Page No.
v License hs. StN-1107 Revision Submittal Date:
7/23/87 Revision No.
13
REVISION RECORD Revision Date of Number Revision Pages Revised Revision Reason 13 7/23/87 New pages 1.11-6 Added authorization for through 1.11-8.
off-site drying of calcium fluoride.
i i
l l
Docket No. 70-1151 Initial Submittal Date:
7/23/87 Page No.
ix License No. SNM-1107 Revision Submittal Date: 7/23/87 Revision No.
13 a_-_
i EVALUATION OF CALCIUM FLUORIDE DRYING OPERATION
'l INTRODUCTION Mercier Corporation located in Gary, Indiana at the Great Lakes Industrial Center Site fabricates a variety of briquette materials for end use in steel manufacturing and metallurgical foundry' industries.
One product requires them to purchase fluorspar or calcium fluoride.
Westinghouse will supply this need by shipping truckload ~ quantities of dewatered calcium 1
fluoride to Mercier for drying and fabrication of calcium fluoride j
l briquettes.
This heavy industrial site is bounded by the U. S. Steel site I
I to the north and the city of Gary to the south.
j
)
l METEOR.0 LOGY l
Assumptions:
)
l 1.
The emission rate of CaF2 equals 0.66 pounds per hour.
2.
The uranium contamination conservatively equals 12.6 ppm uranium at l
5.0 w/o U-235.
l l
3.
The specific activity is equal to 2.385 uCi/g.
4.
The ground level point-source release diffusion equation will be used l
conservatively as a worst case.
5.
Class D stability category is assumed at a wind speed of-3 m/s.
I 6.
The nearest resident is approximately 610 meters south of the discharge point.
I g _ 0.66#CaF2 X 454g CaF2 12.6 ugU 1 Hr.
_ 1.049 uoU.
X X
Hr Lb g CaF2 3,600 Sec Seu 1.049 gU X 10-6 X
2.50 X 10-6 uCi 2.385 uC1
=
Sec gU Sec Docket No. 70-1151 Initial Submittal Date:
7/23/87 Page No.
1.11-6 License No. SNM-llr7 Revision Submittal Date:
7/23/87 Revision No.
13 l
i C (X,0,0) =
TT u 6y d'z' C = 2.50 X 10-6 uCi/sec 2.46 X 10-10 uCi/m3
=
(3.14)(3 m/sec (45 m) (24 m)
-16 i
= 2.46 X 10 uCi/ml i
i Environmental Impact of-Exposure of Nearest Resident and Calculation of Dose I
i Assumptions:
l l
l 1.
Assume 80% residence time.
i l
l 2.
Assume the inhalation route of exposure represents the greatest hazard.
3.
Use the dose conversion factor for U-234 for inhalation i
6 1.3 X 10 rem /Ci from NUREG-0518.
j I
l I
Dose (mrem /yr) = (Airborne Concentration) (Dose Conversion Factor) (Volume of air breathed)
= 2.46 X 10-16 uCi X 1.3 X
X 9.6 X 10 ml X rem 1000 mrem 6
292 days ml UCi Rem li" yr
= 8.95 X 10-4 mrem /yr
= 0.000895 mrem /yr The 40CFR 190 dose limit equals 25 mrem /yr.
Therefore the_ drying operation can be considered to be of minimal radiological significance to tne nearest resident.
Docket No. 70-1151 Initial Submittal Date:
7/23/87 Page No.
1.11-7 License No. SNM-1107 Revision Submittal Date:
7/23/87 Revision No.
13 L
\\
_ _ - _ _ _ - - - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ ~
[,
65
. :y
-[Di~
g This dose can be considered conservative.for the following reasons:
The calculation assumes the drying operation operates continuously.
It 1
1
.is estimated that the dryer will operate only 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> / day.
3, i' ? ' ; 2.
Atmosphere modeling using ~ the ground level diffusion equation -is the most' restrictive calculation.
3;. Breathing rate will probably average less than the 20 liters / minute rate used in the calculation.
~\\
- f
(
l 1
j.i i,
6-j
(
)
l l
)
i r
Docket No. 70-1151 Initial Submittal Date:-
7/23/87 Page No._
1.11-8 License No. SNM-1107 Revision Submittal Date:
7/23/87 Revision No.
13
(
i l
E_
____.1______
!