ML20237B614
| ML20237B614 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png |
| Issue date: | 10/14/1977 |
| From: | Jay Collins Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8712170003 | |
| Download: ML20237B614 (25) | |
Text
y - - - - - . . - - - - . . . - . . . . - . . . - .
,%' 9 v _
A / , ,e c, , -a 00T 1 11977 Docket No. 50-213 MEMORANDtN FOR: J. Stolz, Chief, Operating Reactors Branch No.1, DDR FROM: J. T. Collins, Chief, Effluent Treatment Systems Branch, OSE
SUBJECT:
DSE EVALUATION OF HADDAM !!ECK HUCLEAP. POWEP. PLAtiT, UllIT NO.1, WITH RESPECT TO APPElIDIX I TO 10 CFP, PART 50 Enclosed is DSE's detailed evaluation of the radioacthe waste treatment systeres installed at Haddam Heck Huclear Power Plant, with respect to the requirements of Appendix I. The results of our evaluation are contained in the attached " Safety Evaluation and Environmental Impact Appraisal." We have also attached a draft " Notice of Issuance of Amendment tc Facility Operating Licenses and Negative Declaration."
Based on our evaluation, we conclude that the radioactive waste treatment systems installed at Haddam Neck 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 confores to the requirements of Sections II.A. II.B. II.C, and II.D of Appendix I. .
On fiarch 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 Pcwer Plants Whose Applications Were Docketed Before January 2,1971." This report provides the staff's justification for using the September 4, 1975 amendnent to Appencix I, rather than performing a detailed cost-benefit analysis required by Section II.D of Appendix I. On Au9ust 17, 1977, we received ELD coments on this report and we are currently preparing a 14UREG report which will doctacent our findings. When this report is empleted, we will forward to you a paragrar.h to be inserted on page 1 of the eaclosed Safet;y Evaluation, providing justification for the use of the September 4 option to the cost-benefit analysis.
Uhen the model effluent radiological Technical Specifications, currently under development, have been approved they will be forwarded to you for transmittal to the licensee.
J023 T. COLLIES l-gWna m%
p PDR John T. Collins, Chief Effluent Treatment Systems Branch Division of Site Safety and
/Q//s Environmental Analysis
,.= , ,
h //
DSE:Ek:YSB DSEv5 M. ,RB '
o,,,c . _DS. E : S .. S B . L.V
...D...S. 7_..
, 27 d
., PStoddart:do.. ke_ . . u ma.n.. ....REKte.9R.E.i..
l ,,, . 09/1_6/77 09/L /77 09/j /77 JT h_ lirls... . W 3./77 .. M'I/// /77 l . , e o., h .ov. m m - - . or,ic., 7.- a u w
J. Stolz OCT 11197I
Enclosure:
DSE Evaluation cc: H. Denton V. Stello R. Vollmer K. Goller D. Jaffee W. Russell D. Eisenhut N. Kreger H. Hulman B. Grimes E. Markee
. Congel W. Burke P. Stoddart i .iiam- i. -iieiei--i-m---- .-em--a
SAFETY EVALUATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPRAISAL BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. TO FACILITY LICENSE NO. OPR-61 CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY
) HADDAM NECK ATOMIC POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-213 INTRODUCTION On May 5,1975, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced its decision in 5 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.II} On September 4,1975, the Commission adopted an amendment to
}
Appendix I(2) to provide persons who have filed applications for construction permits for light-water-cooled nuclear power reactors which were docketed on or after January 2,1971, and prior to , June 4,1976, the option of dispensing with the cost-benefit analysis required by Section 11.0 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 (Dccket RM 50-2), dated February 20, 1974.(3) ,
A paragraph will be added which will provide justification for using the September 4, 1975, amendment to Appendix I for application for construc-tion 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
~
f 'a -
Q _
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 Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company (CYAPC) filtd with the Commission on June 4, 1976 I4) , and on November 1, 1976(5) , the necessary information to permit an evaluation of the Haddam Neck Atomic Power Plant, with respect to _ .. ..
the requirements of Sections II. A, II.B, and II.C of Appendix 1. In this l
I submittal, CYAPC provided the necessary information to show conformance with, l
l the Commission's September 4,1975 amendment to Appendix I rather than per-form a detailed cost-benefit analysis required by Section II.D of Appendix I.
By letter dated , CYAPC submitted proposed changes to Appendix A Technical Specifications for Haddam Neck Atomic Power Plant. 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.
DISCUSSION The purpose of this report is to present the results of the NRC st:ff's detailed evaluation of the radioactive waste treatment systems installed at I
the Haddam Neck Atomic Power Plant; 1) to reduce and maintain releases of l
radioactive materials in liquid and gaseous effluents to "as low as is l
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 Sections 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 RM 50-2 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 4,1976, and November 1,1976, submittals;
- 2) a review of the radioactive waste (radwaste) treatment and effluent control systems described in the licensee's Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR);
- 3) the calculation of expected releases of radioactive materials in liquid and gaseous effluent (source terms) for the Haddam Neck facilities; 4) the calculation of relative concentration (X/Q) and deposition (D/0) values for the Haddam Neck 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 Sections II. A, II.B, II.C and II.D of Appendix I.
4 4-The radwaste treatment and effluent control systems installed at the Haddam Neck Plant have been previously evaluated in Section III.B.5 of the staff's .
Hazards Analysis, dated March 13, 1964,( and have been described and evaluated in Section 3.5.2 of the Final Environmental Statement (FES) dated October 1973.( Since the FES was issued, the licensee has modified these systems to include: 1) an 84,000 gallon liquid waste holdup tank, a 15-gpm evaporator, and two 16,000 gallon test tanks to the aerated waste processing system, 2) an expanded offgas holdup system consisting of three 127 ft decay tanks, and 3) the addition of HEPA filters and charcoal adsorbers to the reactor containment purge system, the auxiliary and fuel storage building exhaust systems and the main condenser air ejector exhaust system. The modifications noted above were considered in the staff's evaluation. ,
Based on more recent operating data at other operating nuclear power reactors, which are applicable to the Haddam Neck Plant, and on changes in the staff's calculation models, new liquid and gaseous source terms have been generated to J 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-0017.I9I In making these determinations, the staff con-sidered waste flow rates, concentrations of radioactive materials in the primary l
l and secondary system and equipment decontamination factors consistent with I those expected over the 30 year operating life of the plant for normal opera-1 l tion including anticipated operational occurrences. The principal parameters I and plant conditions used in calculating the new liquid and gaseous source terms are given in Table 3.
The staff also reviewed the operating experience accumulated at the Haddam Neck Plant in order to correlate the calculated releases given in Tables 1 and 2 with observed releases of radioactive materials in liquid and gaseous e f fl uents. Data on liquid and gaseous effluents are contained in the licensee's Semi-Annual Operating Reports covering the period for January 1968 through December 1976.
l Haddam Neck Atomic Power Plant reached initial criticality on July 24, 1967, l
and commercial operation in January 1968. The licensee completed installation
- of the extensive radwaste system augments, described above, in mid-1974. The staff does not consider the releases for the period from January 1968 to June
/
1974 as being representative of current operating conditions at the Haddam ,,
Neck Plant. Only those releases reported for the period July 1974, through December 1976, were considered for comparison with calculated releases; how-ever, annual average releases for the period January 1969, through December 1973, were included in the summary shown in Table 4 to illustrate the reduction in effluent releases effected by installation of augments to the radwaste systems.
The actual average liquid release of 0.83 Ci/yr was somewhat greater than the calculated releases, however, the trend was toward lower releases and the actual liquid release for 1976 (0.13 Ci/yr) was slightly less than the calculated release of 0.16 Ci/yr. Prior to completion of the augments, liquid releases were on the order of 4.5 Ci/yr. ,
4
- The actual releases of noble gases in gaseous effluents averaged 390 Ci/yr, compared to the calculated release of 7,400 Ci/yr, as shown in Table 2.
The lower release rate is due to better fuel performance than the staff assumed in its evaluation. The average noble gas release for the five years prior to installation of the augmented offgas system was 990 Ci/yr.
The actual releases of iodine-131 in gaseous effluents averaged 0.0008 Ci/yr,
~
As in the
~
or about 20% of the staff's calculated release of 0.0039 Ci/yr.
case of noble gases, the lower release rate is due to better fuel performance than the staff assumed in its evaluation. Prior to completion of augments, .
iodine-131 releases were on the order of 0.011 Ci/yr.
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 Haddam Neck Site using an atmospheric dispersion model .,
appropriate for long-term releases.(10) The model used by the staff is based upon the " Straight-Line Trajectory Model" described in Regulatory Guide 1.111.(II This evaluation is different from and replaces the evaluation given in Section 5.4 of the FES. Using the guidance given in Regulatory Guide 1.111, the staff considered that gaseous effluents from the reactor building were e
a mixture of elevated and ground-level releases and that all releases from
.e l
.~ ,
the turbine building were at ground level. Non-continuous and intermittent gaseous releases were evaluated separately from continuous releases. The calculations also include an estimate of maximum increase in calculated relative concentration and deposition due to the spatial and temporal varia-tion cf the airflow not considered in the straight-line trajectory model.
The contributions of the variations are discussed in Regulatory Guide 1.111.
The staff used meteorological data collected onsite between January and December 1975; these data are reasonably representative of long term conditions expected at the site.
l The staff's dose assessment considered the following three effluent cate-l gories: 1) pathways associated with radioactive materials released in liquid effluents to the Connecticut River, 2) pathways associated with noble-l
- 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 1.109.02)
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 Haddam Neck Plant into the Connecticut River and use of the shoreline for recreational purposes (10 hr/yr).
l
3 f:'
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 0.32 miles NNW relative The location of maximum total body and r to the Haddam Neck Station.
skin doses were determined to be at the same location.
The dose evaluation of pathways associated with 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 a child residing 0.39 miles NNW of the Haddam Neck Station and consuming vegetables (520 Kg/yr) from a garden at the same loca-tion. .
Using the dose assessment parameters noted above and the calculated releases .
of radioactive materials in liquid effluents given in Table 1, the staff calculated the annual dose or dose commitment 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 f 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 I. + -
i 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/0) 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.
The summary of calculated doses given in Table 6 are different from and
! replace those given in Table 5.13 of the FES.
Rather than performing an individualized cost-benefit analysis required by l Section II.D of Appendix I, the licensee elected to show conformance with l
l the numerical design objectives specified in the September 4,1975 amendment' to Appendix I (RM 50-2). The dose design objectives contained in RM 50-2 are on a site basis rather than a per reactor basis while the curie releases are on a per reactor basis. As shown in Table 1 the calculated release of radioactive material in liquid effluents is less than 5 Ci/yr/ reactor, ex-cluding tritium and dissolved noble gases. As given in Table 2, the calcula-ted quantity of iodine-131 released in gaseous effluents is less than 1 Ci/yr/
reactor. The calculated doses for the Haddam Neck Plant are less than the dose design objectives set forth in RM 50-2, therefore, satisfy the require-ments of Section II.D of Appendix 1.
l 1
CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing evaluation, the staff concludes that the radwaste treatment systems installed at the Haddam Neck Plant, 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 require-i ments of 10 CFR Part 50.34a, and therefore, are acceptable.
The staff has performed an independent evaluation of the radwaste systems /
installed at Haddam Neck Atomic Power Plant. 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 operational 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, satisfy the requirements of Section 11.0 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.
1 II. Environmental Impact Appraisal 4
The licensee is presently licensed to possess and operate the Haddam Neck Atomic Power Plant, located in the State of Connecticut, in Middlesex County, at power levels up to 1825 megawatts thermal (MWt). The proposed changes to the liquid and gaseous release limits will not result in an increase or decrease in the power level of the reactor. Since neither power level nor fuel burnup is affected by the action; it does not affect the benefits of electric power production considered for the captioned facility in The r
Commission's Final Environmental Statement (FES) for Haddam Neck Atomic Power Plant, Docket No. 50-213.
l The revised liquid and gaseous effluent limits will not significantly change-l the total quantities or types of radioactivity discharged to the environment from Haddam Neck Atomic Power Plant.
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 3ections II. A, II.B, and II.C of Appendix I.
gI
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 statemer,t for the proposed action need be prepared and that a negative declaration to this effect is appropriate.
Dated: -
l
UNITED STATES HUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKET S0 50-213 CONNECTICUTYA*ff ATOMIC POWER COMPANY NOTICE OF ISSUANC. i~ AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERAT M LICENSES AND NEGAT1M DECLARATION The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has issued i
Amendment No. to Facility Operating License No. DPR-61, issued to Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company, for revised Technical Specifica-tions for operation of the Haddam Neck Atomic Power Plant, located near Haddam, Middlesex County, Connecticut. The amendments are effective as of the date of issuance.
l These amendments to the Technical Specifications will (1) imple-1 ment the requirements of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50, (2) establish l
l 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 1
not involve a significant hazards considerations.
~
/
r "
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 October 1973.
For further details with respect to this action, see (1) the application for amendment dated , (2) Amendment No. to License No. DPR-61, and (3) the Commission's related Safety Evaluation and Environmental Impact Appraisal. All of these items are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N. W., Washington, D. C.,
and at the Russell Library,119 Broad Street, Middletown, Connecticut, 06457.
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.
l Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this day of FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION John F. Stolz, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #1 Division of Operating Reactors
/
,e , c-
.' =
REFERENCES
- 1. Title 10, CFR Part 50, Appendix 1. Federal Register, V. 40, p. 19442, May 5, 1975.
- 2. Title 10, CFR Part 50, Amendment to Paragraph II.D of Appendix I, 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. " Demonstration of Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, Part 1, Volume 1" for Haddam Neck Station, Docket No. 50-213. Letter of Transmittal, June 4,1976.
- 5. " Demonstration of Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, Part 2,"
for Haddam Neck Station, Docket No. 50-213. Letter of Transmittal, November 1, 1976.
- 6. Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company, Final Safety Analysis Report .
for Haddam Neck Plant, July 19, 1966.
- 7. Staff of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, " Hazards Analysis by the Research and Power Reactor Safety Branch, Division of Licensing and Regulation, in the matter of Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company l Nuclear Plant, Unit No.1, Haddam, Connecticut," Docket No. 50-213, March 13, 1964.
l
- 8. Staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, " Final Environmental Statement Related to the Haddam Neck Atomic Power Plant," Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company, Docket No. 50-213, Washington, D.C.,
October 1973.
- 9. NUREG-0017, " Calculation of Releases of Radioactive Materials In Gaseous and Liquid Effluents From Pressurized Water Reactors (PWR-GALE Code)," April 1976,
- 10. Sagendorf, J.F. and Goll, J.T.,1976: X00D00, Program for the Meteorological Evaluation of Routine Effluent Releases at Nuclear Power Stations, (DRAFT). U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Washington, D.C.
f..
r lh
. . . +
l 11. Staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 1.111, l " Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion of Gaseous i Effluents in Routine Releases from Light-Water-Cooled Reactors,"
l March 1976.
I I
- 12. Staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 1.109,
" Calculation of Annual Average Doses to Man from Routine Releases of l Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Implementing Appendix I," March l 1976. l l
l l
l l
1 l
/
s TABLE 1 CALCULATED RELEASES OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIALS IN LIQUID EFFLUENTS FROM HADDAM NECK ATOMIC POWER PLANT Nuclide Ci/yr Nuclide Ci/yr I Corrosion and Activation Te-131m 4(-5) '
Products l I-131 6.4(-2)
J C r-51 5(-5)a,b Te-132 5l(-4) l Mn-54 1.l(-4) I-132 5.3(-3)
Fe-55 4(-5) I-133 5.6(-2)
Fe-59 3(-5) I-134 2(-5)
Co-58 8.4(-4) Cs-134 4.6(-3) l Co-60 9.3(-4) I-135 1.4(-2) '
! Zr-95 1.4(-4) Cs-136 9.4(-4)
Nb-95 2(-4) Cs-137 4.7(-3)
Np-239 2(-5) Ba-137m 2.2(-3)
Fission Products Ce-144 5.2(-4) -
^ ** '
Br-83 7(-5)
Sr-89 1(-5) tr iu 1.6(-1)
Mo-99 2(-3) Tritium 5500 f Tc-99m 3.8(-3)
Ru-103 1(-5)
Ru-106 2.4(-4) -
Ag-110m 4(-5)
Te-127 2(-5)
Te-129m 4(-5)
Te-129 3(-5)
I-130 2.4(-4) -5 a = Exponential notation; 5(-5) = 5 x 10 Nuclides whose release rates are less than 1 x 10-5 Ci/yr are not listed individually, but are included in the category "All Others",
i l
3 l . .
TABLE 2 CALCULATED RELEASES OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL IN y GASE0US EFFLUENTS FR0fi HADDAM NECK ATOMIC POWER PLANT Reactor Auxiliary Turbine Air Decay Radio d Nuclide Building Building Building Ej ec'cor Tanks Total Kr-83m a a a a a a Kr-85m a 2 a 1 a 3 Kr-85 28 1 a a 170 200 Kr-87 a a a a a a Kr-88 a 3 a 2 a 5 Kr-89 a a a a a a Xe-131m 8 1 a a 89 98 _
Xe-133m 4 3 a 2 9 18 l Xe-133 630 240. a 350 6600 7100 1
Xe-135m a a a a a a Xe-135 1 5 a 3 a 9 Xe-137 a a a a a a Xe-138 a a a a a a TOTAL N0BLE GASES 7,400 I-131 4.3(-4)b 1.4(-3) 1.2(-3) 8.4(-4) a 3.9(-3)
I-133 a 2.3(-3) 1.4(-3) 1.4(-3) a 5.1(-3).
Mn-54 1.2(-4) 1.8(-4) c c 4.5(-5) 3.4(-4)
Fe-59 4.l(-5) 6(-5) c c 1.5(-5) 1.2(-4)
Co-58 4.1(-4) 6(-4) c c 1.5(-4) 1.2(-3) -
Co-60 1.9(-4) 2.7(-4) c c 7(-5) 5.3(-4)
Sr-89 9.4(-6) 1.3(-5) c c 3.3(-6) 2.6(-5)
Sr-90 1.7(-6) 2.4(-6) c c 6(-7) 4.7(-6)
Cs-134 1.2(-4) 1.8(-4) c c 4.5(-5) 3.4(-4) '
Cs-137 2.l(-4) 3(-4) c c 7.5(-5) 5.8(-4)
TOTAL PARTICULATE 3.l(-3)
H-3 70 c c c c 70 C-14 1 e c c 7 8 Ar-41 25 a a a a 25 a = less than 1.0 Ci/yr/ reactor for noble gases and carbon-14, less than 10-4 Ci/yr/ reactor for iodine, b = exponential notation; 4.3(-4) = 4.3 x 10-4 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. .
4 9
3
F TABLE 3 PRINCIPAL PARAMETERS AND CONDITIONS USED IN CALCULATING RELEASES OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL IN LIQUID AND GASE0US EFFLUENTS FROM HADDAM NECK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Reactor Power Level (MWt) 1820 l Plant Capacity Factor 0.80 l Failed Fuel- 0.12%a Primary System l'
j Mass of Coolant (lbs) 4 x 10 5 ,
Letdown Rate (gpm) 130 Shim Bleed Rate (gpm) 1.5 /
Leakage to Secondary System (1bs/ day) 100 Leakage to Containment Building b Leakage to Auxiliary Bui1 dings (1bs/ day) 160 Frequency of Degassing for Cold Shutdowns (per yr) 2 Secondary System 6
! Steam Flow Rate (lbs/hr) 8.2 x 10 Mass of Steam / Steam Generator (lbs)
Mass of Liquid / Steam Generator (1bs) 5.3x10f 5.9 x 10 Secondary Coolant Mass (lbs) 1.5 x 10 35 Rate of Steam Leakage to Turbine Bldg (1bs/hr) 1.7 x 10 4 Blowdown Flow Rate (1bs/hr) 1.6 x 10 6 "
Containment Building Volume (ft3 ) 2.2 x 10 .
Annual Frequency of Containment. Purges (shutdown) 4 Annual Frequency of Containment Purges (as power) none Iodine Partition Factors (gas / liquid)
Leakage to Auxiliary Building 0.0075 Steam Generator 0.01 '
Main Condenser Air Ejector (volatile species) 0.15 Decontamination Factors (liquid wastes)
Shim Bleed & Eq. Drain Misc. Wastes Steam Gen. Blowdown 6
I 1 x 10 4 1 x 10 1 x 10 Cs, Rb Others 2 x 10 5 1 x 10 2 x 10f 1 x 10 2x10l7 1 x 10 All Nuclides Except Iodine Iodine 4 3 Miscellaneous (Dirty) Waste 10 10 Evaporator DF 3 2 Shim Bleed & Equipment Drain 10 10 Evaporator DF Anions Cs, Rb Other Nuclides Letdown Coolant Waste Demineralizers DF 10 2 10 Evaporator Condensate Polishing
! Demineralizers DF 10 10 10 /
Evaporator Condensate Polishing 2
Demineralizers DF 10 10 102
TABLE 3 (continued)
Main Vent Charcoal Adsorber DF and Containment Recirculating Cleanup System 10 Charcoal Adsorber DF Main Vent HEPA Filter DF and Containment Recirculating Cleanup System HEPA Filter DF 100 1
i
a TABLE 4
SUMMARY
OF OPERATING EXPERIENCE FOR RADI0 ACTIVE EFFLUENT RELEASES FROM HADDAM NECK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Docket No. 50-213 l Ci/Yr Previous * (
Liquid Effluent Release Data A era Average U c 1974a 1975 1976 (2-1/2 yr (1969-Radioactive Waste (6 months) period) 1973)
Total Fission & Activation 0.73 1.2 0.13 0.82 4.5 Products ,
Total Tritium 1,600 5,600 4,800 4,800 5,600 Gaseous Effluent Release Data ,
Radioactive Waste ,
Total Noble Gases 5.8 480 500 390 990 Total Iodine-131 None 8.9(-4)d 7.3(-4) 6.5(-4) 1.l(-2)
Total Particulate
-~
None 3.6(-3) 8.9(-4) 1.8(-4) 1.4(-2)#
f Total Tritium 0.21 69 740 320 50
. p a
From data in the Semi-Annual Operating Reports for Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Plant, 3rd and 4th quarters 1974, Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company, b
From data in the Effluent and Waste Disposal Semi-Annual Reports for Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Plant, 1st and 2nd quarters 1975, and 3rd and 4th quarters 1975, Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company.
c From data in the Effluent and Waste Disposal Semi-Annual Report for Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Plant, 1st and 2nd quarters 1976, and 3rd and 4th quarters 1976, Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company.
d Exponential notation; 8.9(-4) = 8.9 x 10-4
" Data from Semi-Annual Operating Reports for Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Plant for 1972 and 1973, Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company.
Data 1972-1973 only; data for previous years not available.
1
) 8 7 8 " 8 7 7 0 2 - - - - ' - - - -
- 0 0 0 01 D 0 0 0 0 s 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 Qr
/e x x x xV x x x x Dt e 4 5 7 2 3 0 m .
- 8. ~~ 8 1a t 1
5
( 6 1 1 6 4 1
)
3 ,
s 5 5 5 '5 5 5 5 5 r - - - s - - - -
e 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 Qt 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
/e .
Zm /
x x x x. x x x x c 3 1 5 4._
7 8 4 5 S e . . .
E s 2 S 6 3 1 3 4 2 U (
L A s s g g s
)W s s g g s oM hs V
s r r u r r u N u p p u p p o O o u o u I
T u r r n h h it n( m u r r n n b h i I
SS e i
t 8 5 tdn ru i t 8 5
- - t n
ON p y
n 4 o 4 cC e o or n 4 o
o c
PO 4
EI T c 4 2 - t c 4 2 TDT - -
N ADL A e s
gd 3 - - -
g LNU a t t t d l t t t d 5
PAC L l e n n n l e e e B B n n n e e e B l
K)A e V V V c V V V E CQC R e e 1 L t t t n ;n t t t n B
A E (S N /r E n n n i b a a a n n n i a a a b r
T M O bru 'w l l l l l l AND P P P P P P u DO T T T DI R m 3 m ATO 5 0 HAF /
3 R 6 - 6 TD NE ES e)
- d CU cs 2 9 N ne 3 3 O al .
C ti 0 0 E
sm i(
V D I
T A
L E
R n
o i
t c W W e N N r N N i
D n
e d
e y r p r a y a G T d /
n e r u c o o n t B e p d e e i c t s e i e R S R
t t tt t t t i ii i i i i
s n n nn n n n
. e u u uu u u u s / / // / / /
D. o r r rr r r r I 3 D y y yy y y y I / / // / / /
N d m m dd m m m N M e e e aa e e e OO U t r r rr r r r TI L a m m mm m m m T O l I C C u 3 1 47 2 2 2 E c 7 9 XS l 0 0 56 3 9 1 I a 1
Pa A) l 75
_ i ee e e e T9 s e e t I 1 e t t tt t t W v i i ii ss i
s i
s i
s
, i s s
,g t / / // / / /
T ) 2 c r r rr r r r NY5 b e y y yy y y y xj // / / /
AA7 N / /
m m m LM9 M eb m m dd e
aa e e P(1 U nO e e r r L n r r rr r O An m m mm m m m R C.4 E C g 5 5 00 5 5 5 6 WI i 1 2 1 .
OI R s 1 y
E P E e . r L DB D ,
5 o B CNM 7 g A I AE
- 9 e T M T 1 t O ,P a E c T
A B. S I(
5 4 KI s t t tt t t t 7 s C X e i i ii i i i 9 r i E ,E v n n nn n n n 1 e h a i u u uu u u u b t N A. N N I t / // / / / ,
m MI A 1 c r r rr r r r 5 e o AI xe y y yy y y y t t D N ij / / // / / / y p DS M db m m dd m m m a e d AN U nO e e aa e e e M S e ll O L e r r rr r r r d I O pn m m mm m m m 2
6
, d a
FT C pg Ai 3 0 00 5 5 5 4 1 OC 1 2 1 4 8 n E s 1 1 9 0 e NS e 1 4 e 0 D -
. b S , y I 0 o p p
l e i
R5 n v A d a , ,
o a PT R e m 0 0 h MR h o 4 4 s OA rt r e m CP e f . . s u R ys s y n h o V V a i d yny s r t t n g t F dl a C oaaa t iroa O a , , i b wgw n aib uf d g r r e r 0 n s h rh e a d o d e r e e l T 1 o t l t ot u n l i ns os t t s
b o
i n aa a l inavn aa y s d r e t pyp f itiil e ya i i n n e u o n f e odk a sl nw g g e o a
t l tl al E set nsu eg ah e i f l l os i d nR e t R R t 4 r f oaoa s d oo oi i r oa d 1
C E t t a dt nt v d s e t p l l -
m m G a a i oeh a a e n d eoeo mae ed id p el r r t o i s rsr e mt sf sn cis sl e e i b u of of l aeoooi il o oa d d m r q D D b GBD D d cm D e e i a i o a ut F F L C L N R nA a b C d