ML20237B418
| ML20237B418 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 08/11/1977 |
| From: | Jay Collins Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Reid R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8712160251 | |
| Download: ML20237B418 (23) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
p UNITED STATES
" OY
~
/
y*
1*
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMdl53lON g
g,p
- i.,)M( 2;f g
g WASHINGTON, D. C. 205G5 r
\\;* v /:,/
AUG 11 E77 Docket No. 50-271 MEMORANDUM FOR:
R. W. Reid, Chief, Operating Reactors Branch No. 4, DDR FROM:
J. T. Collins, Chief, Effluent Treatment Systems Branch, DSE
SUBJECT:
DSE EVALUATION OF VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, WITH RESPECT TO APPENDIX I TO 10 CFR PART 50 Enclosed is DSE's detailed evaluation of the radioactive waste treatment systems installed at Vermont Yankee, with respect to the requirements of Appendix 1.
The results of our evaluation are contained in the attached
" Safety Evaluation and Environmental Impact Appraisal." We have also l
attached a draft " Notice of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating l
Licenses and Negative Declaration."
Based on our evaluation, we conclude that the radioactive waste treatment systems installed at Vermont Yankee are capable of maintaining releases of radioactive materials in effluents to "as low as is reasonably achievable" levels in conformance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50.34a, and conforms to the requirements of Sections II. A, II.B, II.C, and II.D of Appendix 1.
On March 29, 1977, DSE transmitted to ELD an NRC Staff Report entitled,
" Application of Cost-Benefit Analysis Requirements of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50 to Nuclear Power Plants Whose Applications Were Docketed Before January 2,1971." This report provides the staff's justifica-tion for using the September 4,1975 amendment to Appendix I, rather than performing a detailed cost-benefit analysis required py Section II.D of Appendix 1.
In our transmittal memo we requested ELD review and recommen-dation as to the most expeditious way of incorporating the findings of this report into the licensing process. Todate we have not received their comments or recommendations.
Following ELD review we will provide you a paragraph to be inserted in the enclosed Safety Evaluation providing justification for using the September 4 option to the cost-benefit analysis.
8712160251 770811 PDR ADOCK 0500 1
P
s AUG 11 W7 R. W. Reid When the model effluent radiological Technical Specifications, currentik.
under development, have been approved they will be forwarded to you for transmittal to the licensee.
ORIGIRAL SIGNED BY l
J. T. COLLINS l
John T. Collins, Chief Effluent Treatment Systems Branch Division of Site Safety and Environmental Analysis
Enclosure:
DSE Evaluation cc:
H. Denton V. Stello R. Vollmer K. Goller D. Jaffee J. Siegel D. Eisenhut W. Kreger H. Hulman B. Grimes E. Markee F. Congel W. Burke J. Lee DISTRIBUTION:
CENTRAL FILES DSE READING NRR READING i
ETSB READING JTCOLLINS i
4 D,SE:SA;ETSB DSE:$TSB DSE:SA:ETSB DSEhA)g DSE:HMWA I))Mt A1WCBud'e
% 111ns WEKreger ](LiHulman 884-77 08-llV77 "08-// -77 08-//-77 08-// -77 4
SAFETY EVALUATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPRAISAL BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.
TO FACILITY LICENSE NO. DPR-28 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION DOCKET NO. 50-2,7_1 INTRODUCTION l
On May 5,1975, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced its decision in the rulemaking proceeding concerning the numerical guides for design objectives and limiting conditions for operation to meet the criterion "as low as is reasonably achievable" for radioactive materials in light-water-cooled nuclear power reactor effluents. This decision is set forth in Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50.III On September 4,1975, the Commission adopted an amendment to Appendix I to provide persons who have filed applications for construction permits for light-water-cooled nuclear power reactors which were docketed on or af ter January 2,1971, and prior to June 4,1976, the option of dispensing with the cost-benefit analysis required by Section II.D of Appendix I, if the proposed or installed radwaste systems satisfy the guides on design ojectives for light-water-cooled nuclear power reactors proposed by the Regulatory Staff in the rulemaking proceeding on Appendix I (Docket RM 50-2), dated February 20, 1974.
Following ELD review of the Generic Cost / Benefit Analysis, a paragraph will be added which will provide justification for using the September 4,1975, amendment to Appendix I for application for construction permits filed prior to January 2,1971.
Section V.B of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50 requires the holder of a license authorizing operation of a reactor for which application was filed prior to January 2,1971, to file with the Commission by June 4, 1976; 1) information necessary to evaluate the means employed for keeping levels of radioactivity
in effluents to unrestricted areas "as low as is reasonably achievable", and
- 2) plans for proposed Technical Specifications developed for the purpose of keeping releases of radioactive materials to unrestricted areas during normal operation, including anticipated operational occurrences "as low as is reasonably achievable."
In conformance with the requirements of Section V.B of Appendix I, the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation (VYNPC) filed with the Commission on June 2, 1976,(4) August 31,1976,(5) and October 12,1977,(6) the necessary information to permit an evaluation of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, with resrect to the requirements of Sections II. A, II.8, and II.C of Appendix I.
In these submittals, VYNPC provided the necessary information to show conformance with the Commission's September 4,1975 amendment to Appendix I rather than perform a detailed cost-benefit analysis required by Section 11.0 of Appendix I.
By letter dated
, VYNPC submitted proposed changes to Appendix A Technical Specifications for Vermont Yanke Nuclear Power Station.
The proposed changes implement the requirements of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50 and provide reasonable assurance that releases of radioactive materials in liquid and gaseous effluents are "as low as is reasonably achievable" in accordance with 10 CFR Parts 50.34a and 50.36a.
l DISCUSSION The purpose of this report is to present the results of the NRC staff's detailed evaluation of the radioactive waste treatment systems installed at
m Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station; 1) to reduce and maintain releases of radioactive materials in liquid and gaseous effluents to "as low as is reasonably achievable" levels in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Parts 50.34a and 50.36a, 2) to meet the individual dose design objectives set forth in Sectior.s II. A, II.B, and II.C of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50, and 3) to determine if the installed radwaste systems satisfy the design objectives proposed in Rt150-2 rather than an individualized cost-benefit analysis as required by Section II.D of Appendix 1.
I.
Safety Evaluation The NRC staff has performed an independent evaluation of the licensee's pro-posed method to meet the requirements of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50. The staff's evaluation consisted of the following: 1) a review of the information provided by the licensee in his June 2,1976, August 31, 1976, and October 20, 1976, submittals; 2) a review of the radioactive waste (radwaste) treatment and effluent control systems described in the licensee's Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR);I
- 3) the calculation of expected releases of radioactive materials in liquid and gaseous effluent (source terms) for the Vermont Yankee facility; 4) the calculation of relative concentration (X/Q) and deposition (D/Q) values for the Vermont Yankee site; 5) the calculation of individual doses in unrestricted areas; and 6) the comparison of the calculated releases and doses with the proposed design objectives of RM 50-2 and the requirements of l
Sections II. A, II.B II.C and II.D of Appendix I.
l 1
l a
The radwaste treatr'ent and effluent control systems installed at Vermont Yankee Station have been previously described in Section 8.0 of the staff's Safety Evaluation Report (SER) dated June 1,1971,(8) and in Section III.D of the Final Environmental Statement (FES) dated July 1972(9I.
Since the FES and SER were issued, the licensee has modified the gaseous radwaste systems to include the Advanced Offgas System (A0G), which processes radioactive gases from the main condenser air ejectors. The modification noted above was considered in the staff's evaluation.
Based on more recent operating data at other operating nuclear power reactors, which are applicable to Vermont Yankee Station, and on changes in the staff's calculation models, new liquid and gaseous source terms have been generated to determine conformance with the requirements of Appendix 1.
The new source terms, shown in Tables 1 and 2, were calculated using the model and parameters described in NUREG-0016.(10) In making these determinations the staff con-sidered waste flow rates, concentrations of radioactive materials in the primary system, and equipment decontamination factors consistent with those expected over the 30 year operating life of the plant for normal operation including anticipated operational occurrences. The principal parameters and plant conditions used in calculating the new liquid and gaseous source terms are given in Table 3.
1
ef fluents. Data on liquid and gaseous effluents are contained in the licensee's Semi-Annual Operating Reports covering the period of 1974 through 1976. A summary of these releases is given in Table 4.
4 Vermont Yankee reached initial criticality in March 1972, and commercial operation in November 1972.
Since the staff does not consider data from the first year of operation to be representative of the long term operating life of the plant, only effluent release data from January 1974 through December 1976 were used in comparing actual releases from Vermont Yankee with calculated releases.
Since the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station became operational in 1972, the licensee has operated with essentially zero liquid radwaste releases.
The staff's calculated release of 0.17 Ci/yr is based on one percent of the treated liquid radwastes being discharged to the environment due to plant operational upsets. The actual noble gas release of 3,400 Ci/yr for 1975 and 2,900 Ci/yr for 1976 as shown in Table 4 were lower than the calculated release value of 12,000 Ci/yr and the actual iodine-131 releases of 0.0028 Ci/yr for 1974 and 0.0022 Ci/yr for 1975 were also 1ower than the calculated release value of 0.63 Ci/yr. The lower actual releases of radioactivity experienced to date as compared to the calculated releases are due to better fuel performance than the staff assumed in its evaluation.
J Based on the above evaluation of operating data, the staff believes that the l
l calculational model reasonably characterizes the actual releases of radioactive 1
'e s
materials in liquid and gaseous effluents from Vermont Yankee. The calculated releases given in Tables 1 and 2 were used in the staff's dose assessment discussed below.
The staff has made reasonable estimates of average atmosphere dispersion con-ditions for the Vermont Yankee Site using an atmospheric dispersion model appropriate for long-term releases.I' The model used by the staff is based
}
upon the " Straight-Line Trajectory Model" described in Regulatory Guide 1.111.(
This evaluation is different from and replaces the evaluation given in Section V.D of the FES.(9) Using the guidance given in Regulatory Guide 1.111, the
/
releases of gaseous effluents from the plant stack were considered as elevated release and that the part of release from the turbine building were considered as ground level.
Non-continuous and intermittent gaseous releases were evaluated separately from continuous releases.
Comparisons between a variable-trajectory (Plume segment) model and the straight-line model indicated that no adjustments for spatial or temporal variation in airflows were necessary for ground-level releases; however, the comparisons did indicate that adjustments to straight-
~ '
line models were necessary for elevated releases.
Consequently, the straight-line model for elevated releases were adjusted for spatial and temporal varia-tions in airflow using Figure 2 of Regulatory Guide 1.111.
The one year of meteorological data used from April 1975 thru March 1976, collected from Vermont Yankee Weather Station, was selected by the staff and found to be reasonably representative of long term conditions expected at the site.
n
/
The staff's dose assessment considered the following three effluent cate-gories: 1) pathways associated with radioactive materials released in liquid effluents to the Connecticut River, 2) pathways associated with noble gases released to the atmosphere; and 3) pathways associated with radio-iodines, particulate, carbon-14, and tritium released to the atmosphere.
The mathematical models used by the staff to perform the dose calculations to the maximum exposed individual are described in Regulatory Guide 1.109.03)
The dose evaluation of pathways associated with the release of radioactive materials in liquid effluents was based on the maximum exposed individual.
For the total body dose, the staff considered the maximum exposed individual to be an adult whose diet included the consumption of fish (21 kg/yr) har-vested in the immediate vicinity of the discharge from Vermont Yankee Station into the Connecticut River, drinking 730 /yr of water taken from the river below Vernon Dam, and use of the shoreline for recreational purposes (10 hr/yr).
The dose evaluation of noble gases released to the atmosphere included a calculation of beta and gamma air doses at the site boundary and total body and skin doses at the residence having the highest dose. The maxi-mum air doses at the site boundary were found at 0.33 miles S relative to the Vermont Yankee Station. The location of maximum total body and skin doses were determined to be at the same location.
The dose evaluation of pathways associated witn radioiodine, particulate, carbon-14, and tritium released to the atmosphere was also based on the maximum exposed individual.
For this evaluation, the staff considered the maximum
exposed individual to be an infant whose diet included the consumption of milk (3301/yr) from a cow grazing at 1.8 miles WNW of the Vermont Yankee Station. The evaluation further considered that the cow grazing at this location received pasture equivalent to 6 months per year total diet.
Using the dose assessment parameters noted above and the calculated releases of radioactive materials in liquid offluents given in Table 1, the staff calculated the annual dose or dose comitment to the total body or to any organ of an individual, in an unrestricted area, to be less than 3 mrem / reactor and 10 mrem / reactor, respectively, in conformance with Section II. A of Appendix I.
Using the dose assessment parameters noted above, the calculated releases of radioactive materials in gaseous effluents given in Table 2, and the appro-priate relative concentration (X/Q) value given in Table 5, the staff calculated the annual gamma and beta air doses at or beyond the site boundary to be less than 10 mrad / reactor and 20 mrad / reactor, respectively, in con-formance with Section II.B of Appendix 1.
Using the dose assessment parameters noted above, the calculated releases of radiciodine, carbon-14, tritium, and particulate given in Table 2, and the appropriate relative concentration (X/Q) and deposition (D/Q) values given in Table 5, the staff calculated the annual dose or dose commitment to any organ of the maximum exposed individual to be less than 15 mrem / reactor in conformance with Section II.C of Appendix 1.
k 5
The summary of calculated doses given in Table 6 are different from and replace those given in Tables V-3, V-4, and V-5 of the FES.
Rather than performing an individualized cost-benefit analysis required by Section II.D of Appendix I, the licensee elected to show conformance with
~
the numerical design objectives specified in the September 4,1975 amendment to Appendix I (RM 50-2). As shown in Table 1 the calculated release of radioactive material in liquid effluents is less than 5 Ci/yr, excluding tritium and dissolved noble gases. As given in Table 2, the calculated quantity of iodine-131 released in gaseous effluents is less than 1 Ci/yr.
The calculated doses are less than the dose design objectives set forth in RM 50-2, therefore, satisfies the requirements of Section II.D of Appendix 1.
CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing evaluation, the staff concludes that the radwaste
(
treatment systems installed at Vermont Yankee are capable of reducing releases of radioactive materials in liquid and gaseous effluents to "as low as is reasonably achievable" levels in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50.34a, and therefore, are acceptable.
4 The staff has performed an independent evaluation of the radwaste systems installed at Vermont Yankee. This evaluation has shown that the installed systems are capable of maintaining releases of radioactive materials in liquid and gaseous effluents during normal operation including anticipated opera-tional occurrences such that the individual doses will not exceed the
numerical dose design objectives of Section II. A, II.B, and II.C of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50.
In addition, the staff's evaluation has shown that the radwaste systems satisfy the design objectives set forth in RM 50-2 and therefore, satisfies the requirements of Section II.D of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50.
The staff concludes, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the revised Technical Specifications do not involve a significant increase in the probability of consequences of accidents previously considered and does not involve a significant hazard consideration, (2) there is reason-able assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
II. Environmental Impact Appraisal The licensee is presently licensed to possess and operate the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, located in the State of Vermont, in Windham County, at power levels up to 1665 megawatts thermal (MWt). The proposed changes to the l
liquid and gaseous release limits will not result in an increase or decrease in the power level of the Units.
Since neither power level nor fuel burnup 1
is affected by the action; it does not affect the benefits of electric power
production considered for the captioned facility in the Commission's Final Environmental Statement (FES) for Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Docket No. 50-271.
The revised liquid and gaseous effluent limits will not significantly change the total quantities or types of radioactivity discharged to the environment from Vermont Yankee Station.
The revised Technical Specifications implement the requirements of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50 and provide reasonable assurance that releases of radio-active materials in liquid and gaseous effluents will be "as low as is reasonably achievable."
If the plant exceeds one-half the design objectives in a quarter, the licensee must: (1) identify the cases, (2) initiate a program to reduce the releases; and (3) report these actions to the NRC. The revised Technical Specifications specify that the annual average release be maintained at less than twice the design objective quantities set forth in Sections II. A, II.B, and II.C of Appendix 1.
Conclusion and Basis for Negative Declaration On the basis of the foregoing evaluation, it is concluded that there would be no significant environmental impact attributable to the proposed action.
Having made this conclusion, the Commission has further concluded that no environmental impact statement for the proposed action need be prepared and that a negative declaration to this effect is appropriate.
Dated:
/
REFERENCES 4
1.
Title 10, CFR Part 50, Appendix I.
Federal Register, V. 40, p.19442, May 5,1975.
2.
Title 10, CFR Part 50, Amendment to Paragraph II.D of Appendix I, s -
Federal Register, V. 40, p. 40816, September 4,1975, and revised as of January 1,1976.
3.
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission Concluding Statement of Position of the Regulatory Staff (and its Attachment) - Public Rulemaking Hearing on:
Numerical Guides for Design Objectives and Limiting Conditions for Operation to Meet the Criteria "As Low As Is Reasonably Achievable" for Radioactive Material in Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactors, Docket No. RM 50-2, Washington, D.C., February 20, 1974.
4.
" Supplemental Information for the Purposes of Evaluation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I," for Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Vermont Yankee Letter of Transmittal WVY 76-62, dated June 2,1976.
5.
Amendment 1 to " Supplemental Information for the Purposes of Evaluation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I," for Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Vermont Yankee Letter of Transmittal WVY 76-104, dated August 31, 1976.
6.
Amendment 2 to " Supplemental Information for the Purposes of Evaluation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I," for Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Vermont Yankee Letter of Transmittal WVY 76-125, dated October 20, 1976.
7.
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation, Final Safety Analysis Report -
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, December 1969.
8.
Staff of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, " Safety Evaluation in the Matter of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station," Docket No. 50-271, Washington, D.C., June 1,1971.
9.
Staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, " Final Environmental Statement Related to the Operation of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station," VYNPC, Docket No. 50-271, Washington, D.C., July 1972.
- 10. NUREG-0016, " Calculation of Releases of Radioactive Materals in Gaseous and Liquid Effluents from Boiling Water Reactors (BWR-GALE Code),"
April 1976.
11.
Sagendorf, J.F. and Goll, J.T.,1976: X0000Q, Program for the Meteorological Evaluation of Routine Effluent Releases at Nuclear Power l
St ations, (DRAFT).
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of l
Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Washington, D.C.
1 f
/
/
e 2_
12.
Staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 1.111, " Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion of Gaseous Effluents in Routine Releases from Light-Water-Cooled Reactors," March 1976.
- 13. Staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 1.109, " Calculation of Annual Average Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Implementing Appendix 1," March 1976.
4
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKET NO. 50-271 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has issued 1
Amendment No.
to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-28 issued to l
l Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation, for revised Technical Specifica-tions for operation of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, located near Vermont, Windham County, Vermont. The amendment is effective as of the date of issuance.
These amendments to the Technical Specifications will (1) implement the requirements of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50, (2) establish new limiting conditions for operation (LCO) for the quarterly and annual average release rates, and (3) revise environmental monitoring programs to assure conformance with Commission regulations.
The application for the amendments complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendments. Prior public notice of these amendments was not required since the amendments do not involve a significant hazards considerations.
l l
/
. The Commission has prepared an environmental impact appraisal for the revised Technical Specifications and has concluded that an environ-mental impact statement for the particular action is not warranted because there will be no significant effect on the quality of the human environment beyond that which has already been predicted and described in the Commission's Final Environmental Statement for the facility dated July 1972.
For further details witn respect to this action, see (1) the application for amendment dated
, (2) Amendment No.
to License No.
DPR-28, and (3) the Commission's related Safety Evaluation and Environmental Impact Appraisal.
All of these items are available for public inspection at l
the Commission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.
W., Washington, D.C.,
and at the (Brooks Memorial Library, 224 Main St., Brattleboro, Vermont).
A copy of items (2) and (3) may be obtained upon request addressed to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D. C. 20555, Attention:
Director, Division of Operating Reactors.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this day of FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Robert W. Reid, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #4 Division of Operating Reactors
v TABLE 1 CALCULATED RELEASES OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIALS IN LIQUID EFFLUEhTS FROM VERMONT YANKEE Nuclide Ci/yr Nuclide Ci/yr Corrosion 6 Activation Products Fission Pr.oducts Na-24 2.5 (-3) a, b g,,gg g 7(,4)
P-32 1.1(-4)
Tc-99m 3(-3) l Cr-51 2.9(-U Ru-103 1(-5)
Mn-54 3f~5)
Rh-103m 1(-5)
Mn-56 1.5(-3)
Ru-105 1.5(-4)
Fe-55 5.8(-4)
Rh-105m 1.5(-4)
Fe-59 2(-5)
Rh-105 7 (-5)
Co-58 1.2(-4)
Te-129m 2 (-5)
- Co-60 2.3(-3)
Te-129 1(-5)
- 7. 5 (-3)
Te-131m 4 (-5) 2n-65 1.2(-4)
I-132
- 8. 2 (-3) 2n-69 5.6(-4)
I-133 6.9(-2)
Np-239 3.3(-3)
I-134
- 1. 4 (- 3)
- ~
( )
Fission Products I-135
- 2. 9 (-2)
Br-83 9.1(-4)
Cs-136
- 5. 6 (-4 )
Kr-84 1(-5)
Cs-137 2 (-3)
Sr-89 6(-5)
Ba-137m 1.9(-3)
Sr-91 7.9(-4)
Cs-138 9 (-5)
Y-91m 5.1(-4)
Ba-139 7(-5)
Y-91 3(-5)
Ba-140 2.2(-4)
Sr-92.
3.3(-4)
La-140 5(-5)
Y-92
- 9. 2 (-4)
La-141 4 (-5)
Y 93 8.3(-4)
Ce-141 2(-5) a = Exponential notation; 2.5(-3) =
La-142 5 (-5) 2.5 x 10-3 Ce-143 1(-5) b = Nuclides whose release rates are less Pr-143 2(-5) than 10-5 Ci/yr are not listed indivi-All Others 5(-5) dually, but are included in the category "All Others".
Total (except Tritium) 1.7(-1)
Tritium Release 4 (0)
TABLE 2 CALCULATED RELEASES OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL IN GASEOUS EFFLUENTS FROM VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Ci/yr Mechanical eac r Aux ary ur n Ar a waste Gland Vacuum Radi d
luclide Building
__ Building Building Ejector Building Seal Pump Total sr-83m a
a a
a a
23 a
23 Kr-85m 3
3 68 320 a
41 a
430 Kr-85 a
a a
130 a
a a
130 Kr-87 3
3 120 a
a 140 a
280 Kr-88 3
3 230 70 a
140 a
450 Kr-89 a
a a
a a
590 a
590 Xe-131m a
a a
28 a
a a
28 Xe-133m a
a a
2 a
2 a
4 Xe-133 66 66 250 3100 10 56 2300 5800 Xe-135n.
46 46 650 a
a 17 a
760 (e-135 34 34 630 a
45 150 350 1200 Xe-137 a
a a
a a
730 a
730 Xe-138 7
7 1400 a
a 560 a
2000 12000 Total Noble Gases 1.7(-1)b 1.7(-1)
- 1. 9 (- 1) a 5(-2) 2.4(-2) 3(-2) 6.3(-1)
I-131 I-133 6.8(-1) 6.8(-1) 7.6 (- 1) a 1.8(-1)
- 9. 2 (- 2) a 2.4 2r-51 3(-4) 3(-4) 1.3(-2) c 9 (-3) c c
2.3(-2) in-54 3(-3) 3 (-3) 6(-4) c 3(-2) e c
3.7(-2)
Fe-59 4(-4) 4(-4) 5(-4) c
- 1. 5 (- 2) c c
1.6 (-2)
':o-58 6(-4) 6 (-4) 1.7(-4) c
- 4. 5 (- 3) c c
6.3(-3) lo-60 1(-2) 1(-2) c c
9(-2) e c
1.1(-1)
In-65 2(-3) 2 (- 3) c c
1.5(-3) c c
5.7(-3) 3r-89 9 (-5) 9(-5) 1.7(-4) c 4.5(-4) c c
6.6(-3) 3r-90 5(-6) 5 (-6) 6(-6) c 3(-4) e c
3.3(-4)
Zr-95 4(-4) 4(-4) 2.9(-5) c 5 (-5)
.c c
9.5(-4)
Sb-124 2(-4) 2 (-4) 9(-5) c 5 (- 5) c c
7.5(-4)
Cs-134 4(-3) 4 (-3) c c
- 4. 5 (-3) c c
- 1. 3 (-2)
Cs-136 3(-4) 3(-4) 1.5(-5) c 4.5(-4) e c
1.1(-3)
- 5. 5 (-3) 5.5(-3)
- 1. 7 (-4) c 9 (-3) c c
2.1(-2)
Ba-140 4 (-4) 4 (-4) 3(-3) c c
c c
1.2(-2)
Ce-141 1(-4) 1(-4) 1.7(-4) c 2.6(-3) e c
- 3. 4'(-3) 25 Ar-41 25 25 9.5 C-14 37 H-3 18.5 18.5 a - less than 1.0 Ci/yr/ reactor for noble gases and carbon-14, less than 10-4 Ci/yr/ reactor for iodine.
l b - exponential notation; 1.7(-1) = 1.7 x 10-1 c - less than 1% of total for this nuclide d - radionuclides not listed are released in quantities less than those specified in notes a and c from all sources
TABLE 3 PRINCIPAL PARAMETERS AND CONDITIONS USED IN CALCULATING RELEASES OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL IN LIQUID AND GASEOUS EFFLUENTS FROM VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Reactor Power Level (FMt) 1665 Plant Capacity Factor 0.80 Offgas Release Rate Noble Gases, Ci/sec After 30-min. Decay 60,000 Iodine-131, Ci/yr, Downstream of Main Coudenser Air Ejectors 5
Primary Coolant System 5
Mass of Coolant in Reactor Vessel (1bs) 3.2 x 10 4 Mass of Steam in Reactor Vessel (1bs) 1.7 x 10 4 Cleanup Demineralized Flow (Ibs/hr) 5.5 x 106 Stehm Flow Rate (Ibs/hr) 6.8 x 10 6 Condensate Demineralized Flow (1bs/hr) 6.8 x 10
~
Number of Main Condenser Shells 2
Air Inleakage to Main Condenser, cfm/shell 10 Building Ventilation System Decontamination Factors llEPA Filter, Particulate 100 2" Charcoal Adsorbers, Iodines 10 Gaseous Waste lloldup Times Krypton (days) 1.2 Xenon (days) 22 Gland Seal Vent (hrs) 0.03 Decontamination Factors (DF)
I Cs,_Rb Other Nuclides Equipment Drain System 102 20 102 Floor Drain System 102 20 102 l
l
TABLE 4 SUhNARY OF OPERATING EXPERIENCE FOR VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION DOCKET NO. 50-271 Liquid Effluent Release Data 1974" 1975" 1976" (Ci/yr)
Radioac_tive Waste Total Fission and Activation Products 0
4 (-6) 5.1(-4)3 Total lodine-131 0
0 0
Total Tritium 0
0 1.6 Gaseous Effluent Release Data (Ci/yr)
Radioactive Waste Total Noble Gases
- 6. 4 (+4)
- 3. 4 (+ 3) 2.9 (+ 3)
Total Iodine-131 3.5(-1) 2.8(-3) 2.2(-3)
Total Halogens 4.7(-1) 1.2(-1) 1(-2)
Total Particulate 1(-2) 2(-3)
- 5. 7 (-3)
Total Tritium 4.1 7.1 14 a - From data in the Semi-Annual Operating Reports, Docket No. 50-271, 1974, 1975, and 1976, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation.
-4 b - Exponential notation; 5.1(-4) 5.1 x 10
=
/
TABLE 5 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION RELATIVE CONCENTRATION (X/Q) AND DEPOSITION (D/Q) VALUES USED FOR DOSE CALCULATIONS D/
Receptor Distance Release X/Q (mg) 3 Type Direction (Miles)
Type (sec/m )
Site Boundary Turbine
-5
~
South 0.33 5.8 x 10 4.1 x 10 and Residence Vent Stack
~
9.6 x 10 '
2.7 x 10
~
Continuous Stack 2.5 x 10~
S.8 x 10 Purge Cow NNW 1.8 Turbine
-6 1.4 x 10 6.1 x 10" Vent Stack
-6 1.7 x 10 1.6 x 10' Continuous Stack
-5 1.1 x 10 1.0 x 10 Purge O
h l
O
r r
rr r
r r
D y
y yy y
y y
N d
/
/
//
/
/
/
A 3
e m
m dd m
m m
t s e
e aa e
e e
^
N ae r
r rr r
r r
)
M l s m
m mm m
m m
5 U
uo 7
L cD 4
3 31 2
3 0
1 2
9 O
l 32 2
4 5
1 C
a 0
0 C
I B5 IWYA NM O(
I T C.b A
)
TI 5 SI 7 9
c RD1 se EN WA v
O i
,4 2
t P
R c
r r
rr r
r r
R B. E N
e y
y yy y
y y
AI B 1
xj
/
/
//
/
/
/
D eb m
m dd m
m m
EI M IL nO e
e aa e
e e
L
,ET O
n r
r rr r
r r
C P
C An m
m mm m
m m
U A.E 6
N g
E I S i
5 5
00 5
5 5
yr L
EI (
s 1 2 1
1 B E e
5 o
A KSX D
7 g
T NNE 9
e YI N 1
t AON ac TA TC 5
4 7
s NE 9
r i
0 S D.
1 s
1 e
h U
I
,I e
b t
m E0I v
V5 1
" i 5
e o
N I t r
r rr r
r r
t t
FTO N
c y
y yy y
y y
y p
ORI M
xe
/
/
//
/
/
/
a e
d AT U
i j m
m dd m
m m
M S
e NPC L
db e
e aa e
e e
dd O
E O
nO r
r rr r
r r
SRS C
e m
m mm m
m m
2 6
a I F pn 4
1 RC pg 3
0 00 5
5 5
4 8
n A
Ai 1
1 2 1
1 9
0 e
1 4
e b
M1 e
y O
D CO p
p l
e T
n v
o a
1 m
0 0
h o
4 4
s X
rd r
e m
I s
ee f
s u
y n
h s V
V a
i D
5 ys y
"s r
dl a t a n
g t
N d yna E
oaaw t i roa O ed a
i P
b w gh n aib uf l e g
r r
e r
P s
h rt e
a d o d er r e
e l
T A
t l t oa u n l i nR e os t
t b
n n
aa p
l i navn a
h y
s s
o d
o e
t py f
i tiil sp ya i
i n
n i
u o
nl f
e odk a ses nw g
g a
r l
tl Al E set nsu ed o ah e
e o
e f
l a
os i
d nim t
R R
t 4
t f
oao s d oo oi il t oa 1
i E
t t m a
dt nt v d cA t p l
l d
r m
o G a a
i ou a
a e
n C
d eoer mae ed i ne el r
r t
o i
s rsf e mt sf s n ooh sl e
e i
b u
of o l
aeoooi iit oa d
d m
r q
D D
b GBD D
dd D
e e
i a
i o
aao F
F L
C L
N RRt a
b c
d