ML18227D917: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 84: | Line 84: | ||
Top'ography About Plant Site 3.0 3-1 Schematic Diagram Of 24 "As-Built" Gaseous Treatment System Components 4.0 Schematic Of "As- 55 Built" Liquid Treatment System Components | Top'ography About Plant Site 3.0 3-1 Schematic Diagram Of 24 "As-Built" Gaseous Treatment System Components 4.0 Schematic Of "As- 55 Built" Liquid Treatment System Components | ||
ABS TPAC'7 The Following report ex'amines''the'ompliance of. FLORIDA POWER and LIGHT COMPANY's; TURKEY POINT Plant, UNITS No. 3 and 4 with the NRC Staff's. position'n APPENDIX I, | ABS TPAC'7 The Following report ex'amines''the'ompliance of. FLORIDA POWER and LIGHT COMPANY's; TURKEY POINT Plant, UNITS No. 3 and 4 with the NRC Staff's. position'n APPENDIX I, 10CFR50. Based on the .model's. and subsequent analyses devel'oped in the report, the'"following con'clusions can be 'made | ||
: 1. The '"as-built" gaseo'u's wa'ste 'and liauid treatment systems. meet the''requirements of Paragraph II A,B, and C of APPENDIX I. | : 1. The '"as-built" gaseo'u's wa'ste 'and liauid treatment systems. meet the''requirements of Paragraph II A,B, and C of APPENDIX I. | ||
: 2. The augments. already included in TURKEY POINT's sys-tems have provided controls of effluent releases that have 'gone beyond the point of cost-effectiveness and respond fully to the requirements of Paragraph II D of APPENDIX I. | : 2. The augments. already included in TURKEY POINT's sys-tems have provided controls of effluent releases that have 'gone beyond the point of cost-effectiveness and respond fully to the requirements of Paragraph II D of APPENDIX I. | ||
Revision as of 11:42, 6 November 2019
| ML18227D917 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 06/01/1976 |
| From: | Florida Power & Light Co |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| Download: ML18227D917 (419) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKET NOS. 50-250 50-251
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
Door<etk Control 4 7
>~gg~op of Document.
RMNATMYDDggg F~g STEAM GENERATOR REPAIR REPORT le FLORIDA POWER 8 LIGHT COMPANY TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4
TURKEY POXNT PLANT:. UNITS No. 3 and No'.' .
Cpm 1'ia'nce'i.'th 'APPENDXX 'Z 'OCFR50 .
'Do'ck'e't Numbe'rs ::
a) UNIT No . 3: 5 0- 2 5 0 b )'NXT No , '4 : 5 0-2 5 1 Submitted By FLORXDA POWER and LXGHT COMPANY 9250 Wes't Flagler'treet Miami, Flori.da 33101 Date: June "1,,1976
' TAB'LE OF CONTENTS
'I SECTION ' ""PAGE NUMBER
- 1. 0 STATEMENT OF REQUIREMENTS 1.1 Introduction 1.2 The NRC's. FINAL OPINION Restated 2 2.0 INPUTS USED TO DETERMINE COMPLIANCE WITE APPENDIX I 2.1 Introduction 2.2 TURKEY"POINT PLANT CHARAC-TERISTICS 2.2.1 The Site 2.2.2 Centerline Distances To Site Boundaries And Nearest Activities 2.2.3 Plant Systems 7 2.3 Input Terms Fundamental To 10 UNITS No. 3 and No. 4
'2. 4 Calculational Models 2.4.1 Use of STAFF Regulatory Guides 17
- 2. 4. 2 Source Term Calculations 17 2.4.3 Codes For Individual And 17 Population Dose Calculations 2.4.4 Models For Meteorological Data 17 Inputs
- 2. 5 EFFLUENT RELEASE DATA 18
- 2. 6 ATMOSPHERXC DISPERSION DATA 18 2.7 POPULATION DATA 19 2.8 PATHWAY DATA 19 2,9 REFERENCES'.
19 0 DOSE DATA FOR "AS-BUILT" GASEOUS WASTE SYSTEM
- 3. 1 Introduction 22
- 3. 2 General Description of "As-Built" Gaseous 22 System
- 3. 3 Estimated, Releases From System 23 3.4 Inputs TO GALE Code And Source Term 25 Calculations 3.5 Environmental Pathways And Inputs 25
Table of Contents, Cont'p. Se'etio@ 3.5. 1 Rel'ation Of Atmospheric Dis- 25 persion To Individual Exposures 3.5.2 Rel'ation Of Atmospheric Dis- 35 persion To Population Exposures 3.5.3 Food Pathways 37 3.5. 4 Other Pathways, 42 3.5.5 Estimating Dose Data From 42 Environmental Inputs 3.6 Individual Doses From Gaseous Releases 48 3.7 Population Doses From Gaseous Releases 48 3.8 References 51
'7 4.0 DOSE DATA FOR "AS-BUILT" LIQUID TREATMENT 52
. SYSTEM 4.1 Introduction 53
'4.2 General Des'cription of "As-'Built" 53 Liquid Treatment Sys tern 4.3 Estimated Releases From The System 56 4 4
~ Input Terms And Resulting Releases 56 4.5 Environmental Pathways and Inputs 56 4.5.1 Distribution Of Isotopes From 61 Liquid Ef fluents 4.5.2 Mixing Ratios. 61 4.5.3 Sediment Accumulation 61 4.5.4 Recreational Activities 62
- 4. 5'.5 Aquatic Foods 64 4.5.6 Other'athways 64 4.6 Individual Doses"Prom Liquid"Releases 4.7 'opula't'ion Doses From Li'qu'i'd'el'eases 67 4.8 References 71 5.0 COMPLIANCE OF "AS-BUXLT" RADWASTE SYSTEMS 72 WITH'RC STAFF POSXTION ON I
APPENDIX I 5.1 Compliance On Individual Doses 73 5.2 Compliance On Population Doses 73 5.3 Compliance With More Than One 75 Reactor On Site " 5.4 Conclusions 75 5.5 Referen'ces " 78
iv gable of Contents, Cont'd. Sects;on Pa'e Number U 6.0 COST-BENEFICIAL ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE 79 GASEOUS AND LIQUID TREATMENT SYSTEMS 6.1 Introduction 80 6.2 Basis For Cost-Benefit Analysis 80 6.3 Alter'natives". For-The'aseous System 81
- 6. 3.1 Xnputs To GALE Code And 82 Source Terms 6.3.2 Changes In Population Doses 86 For Alternate Gaseous Systems 6.3.3 Annualized Costs Of Alternate 86 Systems 6.3.4 Cost-Benefit Ratios Of Alternate Systems 6.4 Alternatives For The 'Liquid Treatment 96 System 6.4.1 Inputs To GALE Code And Source 96 Terms 6.4.2 Changes In Population Dose For 104 Alternate Liquid Treatment Systems 6.4.3 Annualized Costs Of Alternate 104-Systems 6.4.4 Cost-Benefit Ratios. Of Alternate 104 Systems 6.5 Conclusions 104 6.6 References 105 SUP PLEMENTS A Data For Source Term Calculations B The Meteorology Program At TURKEY POINT PLANT C Food Productivity In Areas Surrounding Plant Site D Cost Estimating Metho'dology and Detailed Cost Estimates"
TiI.'ST 'OF, .TABIES 'Se'dtion 'ab'l'e'o. 'i'tie 'Pag'e'o. 2.0 2.1 Distances To Nearest Activities and Site Boundaries'.2 Functions Of Components Shared by UNITS 3 and 4 2.3 GALE Input Terms Common 16 To The Reactors Of UNITS 3 and 4 3.0 3.1 GALE Input Terms for "As- 26 Built" Gaseous System 3.2 Gaseous Releases From 27 "As-Built" Sys tem
- 3. 3 Vertical Stability Class 30 By Temperature Difference
'3. 4 Horizontal Stability Class 31 By Wind Variability 3.5 Air Plow Trajectory Regimes': 32 On-Shore and Off-Shore 3.6 Annual Wind Report 33 3.7 Dispersion Parameters 34 Applicable To Individual Dose Calculations (For Ground Level Release) 3.8 Projected Population Within 36 a 50-Mile Radius 3.9 Dispersion Parameters Ap- 38 plicable To Population Dose Calculations
Tables','on,t~d,
- 3. 10 Populati,on-Wei'ghted Disper- 41 Factors Used To Estimate
'ion Popu1ation Dose 'Prom Gase'ous Ef fluents 3.11 Input Data For Dose Calcula- 43 tions - LEAFY VEGETABLES 3.'2 Input Data For Dose Cal- 44 culations EXPOSED and ROOT VEGETABLES 3.13 Input Data For Dose Cal-culations - FRUIT 3;14 Input Data For Dose Cal- 46 culations MILK, BEEF, GtQK, POULTRY
- 3. 15 Consumption Rates and Occu- 47 pation Times For Individuals.
Use In Calculations Of Radia-tion Doses To Man Prom Gaseous Effluents 3.16 "As-Built" System: Maximum 49 Individual Doses From Exposure To Gaseous Releases All Pathways
- 3. 17 Population Doses From Gaseous 50 Releases Of "As-Built" System 4.0 4~1 GALE Input Terms For "As- 57 Built" Liquid Treatment System 4.2 Liquid Releases From 59 "As-Built" System 4.3 Concentration Of Liquid Effluent Isotopes In The Environment,
vii Tab 1'es 4 ~,4 Usage Data And Regional 65 Yiel'ds. Of Aquatic Foods: Used To Calculate Popu-, lation Doses From Liquid Effluents 4.5 Consumption Rates/Occu- 66 pational Times'. Of Indi-viduals For Ca'lculation Of Liquid Effluent Doses 4.6 Liquid Effluent Radiation 68 Doses To Individuals Near the Site 4.7 Liquid Effluent Doses To 70 The Regional .Population 5.0 5.1 Compliance With,'APPENDIX 74 I Comparison Of Dose To Individuals 5.2 Comparison of Population 76 Doses - 1984 Population Data vd 2020 Population Data 5.3 Site Compliance With NRC 77 Staff Position On APPEN-DIX I 6.0 6.1 GALE Input Terms For Al- 83 ternative Gaseous Systems 6.2 Emissions From Alternative 84 Gaseous Systems 6.3 Reduction Of Population Doses 87 Through Use Of Selected Alter-native Gaseous Systems 6.4 Annualized Costs Of Alternate 94 Gaseous Systems 6.5 Cost Benefit Ratios For Al- 95 ternate Gaseous Systems
'abXes 6.6 GALE Input Terms For Al- 97 ternate Liquid Treatment Systems 6.7 Reductions In Liquid Re- 99 leases Resulting From Alternate Treatment Systems 6.8 Changes'n Population Doses 102 Resulting From Use Of Al-ternate Liquid Treatment Systems 6.9 Annualized Costs Of Alter- 103 nate Liquid Treatment Systems
*As applicable, preceded by. eithe'r "TURKEY POINT PLANT" or ".TURKEY POINT PLANT, UNITS. 3 and 4."
'IST OF, PI'GURES.
Pa'cce'o.
2.0 TURKEY POINT PLANT: Top'ography About Plant Site 3.0 3-1 Schematic Diagram Of 24 "As-Built" Gaseous Treatment System Components 4.0 Schematic Of "As- 55 Built" Liquid Treatment System Components
ABS TPAC'7 The Following report ex'aminesthe'ompliance of. FLORIDA POWER and LIGHT COMPANY's; TURKEY POINT Plant, UNITS No. 3 and 4 with the NRC Staff's. position'n APPENDIX I, 10CFR50. Based on the .model's. and subsequent analyses devel'oped in the report, the'"following con'clusions can be 'made
- 1. The '"as-built" gaseo'u's wa'ste 'and liauid treatment systems. meet therequirements of Paragraph II A,B, and C of APPENDIX I.
- 2. The augments. already included in TURKEY POINT's sys-tems have provided controls of effluent releases that have 'gone beyond the point of cost-effectiveness and respond fully to the requirements of Paragraph II D of APPENDIX I.
SECTION 1. 0 STATEMENT OF 'REQUIREMENTS
- l. 0, STATEMENT 'OF REQU1REMENTS 1.3, 'ntroducti'on On April 30, 1975, the Nuclea'r Regulatory Commission issued its Final Opinion in the matter of the Rule Making Hearing (RM-50-2) on "Numerical Guides'or Design Objectives and Limiting Conditions For Operation To Meet The Criterion
'As Low As Practicable'or Radioactive Materials Xn Light Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Effluents". This. Final Opinion is the basis for this FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY's evaluation of TURKEY POINT PLANT UNIT No. 3-.:and No. 4's com-pliance with APPENDIX I requirements. 1.2 The NRC's FINAL OPINION Restated NRC's opinion provides'n part that the 'applicant shall provide reasonable assurance that, the following design objectives will be met: The calculated annual total quantity of all radar.oactive material above background (1) to be released from each light-water-cooled nuclear power reactor to unrestricted areas will not result in an estimated annual dose or dose commitment from liquid effluents for any individual in an unrestricted area from all pathways of exposur'e in excess of 3 millirems to the'otal body or 10 millirems to any organ. The calculated annual total quantity of all radioactive material above background to be released from each light-water-cooled nuclear power reactor to the atmosphere will not, result in an estimated annual air dose from gaseous effluents at any location near ground level which could be 'occupied by individuals in unrestricted areas in excess of 10 millirads for gamma radiation or 20 millirads Com- for beta radiation. Notwithstanding this guidance, the mission may specify, as guidance on design objectives,
quantity og radioactiye material above backgxound a gower to be'released'o 'the atmosphe're 'if'it appears that the use of the'ir dos'e rate 'des'ign objec'tives are 'likely to actually result in an estimated annual external dose from,gaseo'us effluents to any individual in an unrestric-ted area in excess of 5 -millirems to the total body or 15 millirems to the skin. The'alculated annual total quantity of all radioactive iodine and radioactive material in particulate form above background to be rel'eased from each light-water-cooled nuclear power reactor in effluents to the atmosphere will not result in an es'timated'nnual dose or dose commitment from such radioactive iodine and radioactive material in particulate form for any individual in an unrestricted area from all pathways of exposure in excess of 15 mil-lirems- to any organ. In addition to the provisions of the paragraphs above, the applicant shall include 'in the radwaste system all items of reasonably demonstrated technology that, when added to the system sequen'tially and in order of diminish-ing cost-benefit return, can for a favorable cost-benefit ratio effect reductions in dose to the population reason-ably expected to be within 50 miles of the reactor. As an interim measure and until establishment and adoption of better values (or other appropriate criteria}, man-the values $ 1000 per total body man-rem and $ 1000 per thyroid-rem (or such lesser values as may be demonstrated to be suitable in a particular case} shall be used in this cost-benefit analysis. ~ }Here and elsewhere in this APPENDIX I, background means radioactive materials in the environment and in the effluents from light-water-., cooled nuclear power reactions not gen'crated in, or attributable to, the reactions of which spec'ific account. is required in determining design objec'tive.
i SECTION 2.0 INPUTS USED TO DETERMINE COMPLIANCE WITH 'APPENDIX I
2,0 INPUTS USED TO DETERMINE COMPLIANCE WITH APPENDIX I 2.3,'NTRODUCTION TURKEY POINT PLANT's. UNITS No. 3 and No. 4 comply with the requirements of APPENDIX I. 'hi's compliance was initially demonstrated in Section 5.D of the PLANT's final environmental statement (1). The installed gaseo'us and'iquid waste 'treatment systems- also satisfy the cost-benefit analysis requirements of APPENDIX I'. However, to mee't the Commission's current needs for numerical guides, additional information and data have been acquired to extend previous characterizations of radioactive material sources, transport pathways and dose data for TURKEY POINT PLANT's UNITS No. 3 and No. 4. Thus, this Section 2 ' provides compilations of this information and data for use in computing the dose data reported in Sections 3.0 and 4.0 that follow. Each of these compilations have been developed on the basis of the supplemental information requested in Enclosure 2 of the Staff's letter of February 17, 1976 (2). SUPPLEMENT A provides the information requested in APPENDIX D- of Regulatory Guide 1.BB (3). The other data and information requested, e.g., the centerline distances of the nuclear units to the nearest activities, the onsite meteorological programs, topography, releases from intermittent sources, etc. appear in specific paragraphs of this section 2.0.
- 2. 2 TURKEY POINT PLANT CHARACTERISTICS In, March, 1966, FLORIDA POWER and LIGHT COMPANY initiated actions to construct a 2-unit nuclea'r power plant at the'URKEY POINT Generating Station located on, the western sho're of Biscayne Bay, south of Miami, Dade County, Florida.
Two gas- and oil-fired generating plants, TURKEY POINT UNITS No. 1 and No. 2, are 'also located on this site.'NIT No. 3 became 'operable in 1973 and UNIT No. 4 started its operations in 1974. These following characteris-tics are typical of the site and the operations of UNITS 3 an'd 4: 2.2.1 Th'e Si'te: UNITS 3 and 4 have 'been constructed near the western shore of Biscayne Bay on flat terrain that, has a gentle slope from an elevation of sea level at the shoreline of the Bay up to an elevation of about 10 feetnine (9) miles inland from the plant site. The land in and around the shoreline area of the site is made up mostly of mangrove swamps which extend 3 to 4 miles inland (clockwise SW to NNW). Open fields extend inland from the edge of these swamp areas. DADE COUNTY, Florida, is the principal land area surrounding the TURKEY POINT PLANT. It continues as flat terrain with its highest elevations on a ridge near the City of Miami. This ridge, which parallels the shoreline,'eaches an elev'ation of about 20 feet at a point. that is approximately 30 miles NORTH'f the plant site.'
FIGURF2.1 shows topopraphi;cal features about the
/
TURKEY POlNT. PLANT site. 2.2.2 Center3.ine D'istances To Site Boundaries and Nearest Activities; TABLE 2.1 provides data on the distances from the centerline 'of UNITS 03 and g4 to the 'nearest milk or meat animal and the neares't residen'ce and vegetable garden. The distances of these units at the'earest site boundary in each of the 22.5-degree radial sectors centered on the cardinal compass points are also presented in TABLE 2.1. All activities are at least five (5} miles from the centerline of UNITS 53 and 54. No milk, cows, milk goats, meat animals, residences, and vegetable gardens are located within three (3} miles of UNITS 53 and 94. The nearest activity of this kind is more than nine (9) miles distant (in the NW direction} from the plant site. Therefore, none of these activities will be affected by elevated radioactivity releases from the plant vent. are pressurized water reactors each. with a generating capacity of 2300 Mwt. The gross electrical power output of each unit is 760 Mw.'he units'team turbines are cooled with sea water from a multi-channel, single-pass, recirculating water system. This cooling canal system contains 36 channels that aggregate to a canal length of approximately 168 miles. Nith regard to TURKEY POINT, it is important to note that all of its liquid effluen'ts are 'discharged to the canal
g g lllh llll III NNNR IlhRWORRQR Mhm
~wl~mssllslERhh lllh isalL
'ABLE 2.3,
~ TURKEY POINT PLANT:
Dist'ances 'to Nearest A'ctivitie's 'and'Si'teo'un'da'ri'es Activity Nearest Nearest Nearest Nearest Nearest Site 'Direction-MUk -Ccar '- Beef'Cmr'. (miles)' '(miles) '- Milk Goat"' (miles}' Residence"Veg.. Garden, Boundary (milW)' 'miles) ' '(miles) N , 0;86,
- 0. 43
'.
0.40 .;
- 0. 95
- 0. 60=
- 10. 6 10. 6 0.48
- 0. 36 SW'.50 1.21 1.14 1.19
- 2. 76 3.09
- 12. 9 12. 9/(12. 1} 28 (10. 7) 10-5/Q2-4} (9-3) 2.16
- 0. 90 a} Wre than 1 milk goat this location
~
b} Mre than 1 milk cd this location
'c) More than one beef cd this location
10 J system. However, Section 4.0 ca'lculations account for releases to the other water areas. surrounding the PLANT. Certain,n components of the Auxiliary, Emergency and Waste Disposal Systems are shared by the two units-. TABLE '2.2 presents a functional evaluation of these 'shared components. SUPPLEMENT A', attached, extends this information as well as describes other operational functions and provides data that have been used in the 'calculations employed in determining UNITS 3 and 4's compliance with APPENDIX I. SUPPLEMENT A has been developed from the "guidelines established in APPENDIX D of Regulatory Guide 1.BB {3). 2.3 INPUT TERMS =FUNDAMENTAL'O UNITS No. 3'nd No. 4 There 'are 'certain design characteristics of both UNIT'o. 3 and UNIT No. 4 that become fundamental inputs to the calcula-tion of source terms by the GALE-PNR code.'hese inputs are 1 tabulated in TABLE 2.3 and are supported by other information appearing in SUPPLEMENT A. In addition, site-specific in, formation has been developed I for atmospheric dispersion, transient and resident populations, recreational activities, food pathways, and any other parameter pertinent to the intents of this evaluation of UNITS No. 3 and No. 4's compliance with APPENDIX I.
- 2. 4 CAL'CULATIONAL'ODELS The extensive calculations required to evaluate compliance with APPENDIX I made use of these following sources:
11
'TABLE 2.2 Page 1 of 5 TURKEY'POINT PLANT:
3 "Functions of Com'onents Shared'B UNITS 3 and 4.
\ Components Number
~Salem Shared Function 'Provided E lanation Chemical Boric Acid Storage of Three tanks are pro-and Volume Tanks boric acid vided such that all Control for refueling the boric acid re-System shutdown quired during the and normal operating cycles reactor makeup of both units may be stored in. them 'at 12% concentration. Each tank is capable of storing enough boric acid to shutdown one of the units at any time. Boric Acid Supply boric Two pumps are normally transfer acid solution used with each unit pumps to charging with each pump having pump suction the capacity to supply header and rated flow of boric boron in" acid to the charging
)ection tank pump suction header Batching keup of One 'tank is provided Tank fresh con- for the two units.
centrated It is seldom used boric acid after initial charg-solution ing. Hold-up Storage of Three tanks are pro-Tanks dilute boric vided to handle the acid prior to rejected chemical shim recycle pro-. solution from all cessing operating and ex-'ected start up transients for two unit operation. Recircula- Handling of Serves the common tion Pump tank inventory holdup tanks in-frequently
12 TABLE '2.2 cont'd) Page 3 of 5 Componen, ts Number'- ~S'seem Shared 'Function Provided
- Evaporator Remove trace "
2 demineralizers Condensate amounts of are; provided each Demineralizers boric acid with 'suf ficient cessed'ater'wocapacity from pro-one unit. to serve Primary Water Storage of Two tanks are pro-Storage Tank ', clean makeup vided adequately water sized to serve both units. Primary Supply misc- 4 Two pumps are makeup ellaneous normally used Water reactor with each unit. Pumps makeup Each pump has sufficient capacity to serve needs of one unit. One pump serves as a spare to the other. Concentrates Storage of One tank holds Holding Tank 'oric acid the production evaporator of concentrates bottoms for from one batch sampling of evaporator operation. Concentrate Discharge of 2 Two pumps provided'o Holding Tank boric acid service the Transfer Pumps solution from common concentrate concentrate holding tank holding tank Feedwater Auxiliary Provide a back 3 One steam driven System turbine- up supply of auxiliary feedwater driven feed- feedwater in pump will normally water pumps the event of supply both uni.ts loss of main with feedwater in feedwater the event of the supply to loss of main feed-either one or water pumps. both units.
13
'TABLE 2.2 cont'd) Page 2 of Components -" "" - /umber" .
'Shared Punction 'Provided'as Strip- Pumping of 3 Three'umps are pro-per Peed chemical shim vided each with Pumps solution to suff'icient capacity gas stripper/ to supply one boric acid processing train. evaporator One pump serves processing as a spare. train. Base and Remove pE , One ion exchanger Cation control provided for each Removal agent processing train. ion prior to Third ion Exchangers cation ion exchanger serves exchangers as a,shared standby. Gas Strip- Processing Two processing per Boric used chemical trains serve as Acid Evap- shim solution common equipment porator to produce for the two units. Train clean, re- One train serves usable reactor as a spare to makeup water the other although and con- both may be centrated operated simultan-boric solution. eously. Monitor ~ Reservoirs Two tanks are pro-Tank for processed vided to permit water for continuous analysis operation prior to of each storage in evaporator primary water train and so that storage tank. one may be filling while the other is examined and emptied. Monitor Pump water Two pumps are pro-Tank Pumps from the vided each with monitor adequate capa-tanks to city" to handle both the primary units. One pump water storage serves as a spare tank. to the other.
14 TABLE 2.2 (cont'd) Page, 4 of 5 e ~Setem 'Shared" 'unction Components Number:.
Provided e
lanati.on Engineer-. High head Supply coolant 4 A set of four high ed Safe- Safety In- to the core in S.E. pumps is 'ead guards jection Pumps the event of provided as common System either' LOCA equipment for the or a main steam two units. A.S.I. line break initiation signal accident from one unit will automatically direct the flow. from two of these pumps to that unit. Refueling Supply One tank is storage tanks ~ater for re- supplied for fueling and for each, unit with for delivery. the capacity to the core to safely following control a LOCA either a LOCA in the unit. or steam line rupture accident. Electrical Diesel Supply emer- Two diesel generators Sys tern Generators gency power in are supplied as the event of a common to both units. loss of the Each will have ade-A.C. power quate capacity to supply safely control a LOCA in one unit and a concurrent trip of the second unit to the hot shutdown condition Was te A common waste disposal system is Disposal used for the two un'.ts. Each containment structure has its own'reactor coolant drain tank, and containment pump, and each is serviced by two reactor coolant drain tank pumps. All other'aste disposal e
t 15 TABLE 2.2.'cont < d) Page 5 of 5 Components Number". 'Shared' 'unction equipment is sized to adequately serve two units and the common auxiliary and service building. This shared'quipment includes: Laundry and Hot Shower'anks Waste Gas Compressors Chemical Drain Tank Vaste Evaporator Train Vaste Holdup Tank Drumming Station Gas Decay Tanks Baling Station Waste Condensate Tanks Gas Manifolds Vaste Condensate Pumps Gas Analyzer
~ d
TABLE 2.3 t
~ ~
TURKEY'POINT PLANT; 'GALE Xn ut Terms Common'To'The Reactors of UNXTS 3 and 4 Card I
'No. ~S'Sees '~Ener 'Xtem 'Units 'ommen ts 1 33-60 Turkey: Point 3 6 4 Reactor Name 2 73-80 2300 Maximum Ther- Mwt mal Power 3 73-80 582 Mass Primary 10 lb Coolant 4 73-80 60 Purification gpm Letdown Flow 73-80 Cation Demin. gpm Flow. 6 73-80 No. o f Steam Generators 73-80 9.6 Total Steam 10 lb/hr Flow 3 73-80 6.6 Mass Steam 10 lb each, Generator 72-80 77.6 Mass Liquid 10 lb each Generator 3 10 73-80 1100 Total Mass 10 lb Secondary 37-44 120 Blowdown Rate 10 lb/hr Blowdown not 80 0 Blowdown recycled to Treatment Secondary 12 73-80 0 Cond. Demin. days No Cond. Regen. Time Demin. 13 73-80 0 Fraction Cond. To Demin. 14 73-80 1. 25 Annual Ave. 10 gpm Dilution Flow
0 N
17 2.4,3, 'se 'of STA'FF Re ulator Guides; Such, use was of the calculational model's and guidance provided by the USNRC Staff through 'its Regulatory Guides 1.109('4}, 1.110.(5}, 1.3,11(6) and 1.BB(3}. 2.4.2 S'o'urce Term Calcula'tions: The GALE-PWR code pro-vided by the Staff (3} was used to compute the source term releases of both the gaseous and liquid effluents from the f reactor. 2.4.3 Codes'or Individual And Po ulation'ose'a'lcula-tioos: These fou"r basic codes were developed by NUCLEAR SAFETY ASSOCIATES, Bethesda, Maryland, for -use 'in computing individual and population doses:
- a. The GASI Code - converts gaseous release data into doses to an individual;
- b. The GASP Code converts gaseous release data into population doses;
- c. The LINDY Code converts liquid release data into doses to an individual; and
- d. The LIP Code converts liquid release data into population doses.
Guidelines from Regulatory Guide 1. 109 (4) and data banks from parallel NRC codes were used to construct them. 2.4.4 Models For Meteorolo ical Data In uts: A straight-line trajectory model was assumed for the airflow transport and diffusion of gaseous effluents. The atmospheric disper-sion prev'alant in the entire region about TURKEY POINT PLANT was computed by the DAMES And MOORE LSD Codes {7). Details
18 about these codes and .their use in computing meteorological data applicable "to this compliance 'evaluation can be 'found in SUPPLEMENT B, "The Meteorology Program at, TURKEY POINT PLANT" 2.5 EFFLUENT RELEASE DATA The expected radioactivity releases from all gaseous and liquid sources are tabulated in Sections 3.0 and 4.0 that follow. Each release was calculated using the GALE code. GALE input, terms relative to these calculations can be -found in each designated Section. 2.6 'ATMOSPHERIC DZSPERS'ION DATA The atmospheric dispersion available at a reactor site is one of the most important factors governing potential doses to individuals and populations from the release of gaseous radionuclides by a reactor. Specific information about atmospheric dispersion at TURKEY POINT PLANT has been developed through the use of the calculational models cited in Paragraph 2.4.4 and SUPPLEMENT B. SUPPLEMENT B also describes the meteorological instrumentation used at TURKEY POINT PLANT to acquire the 4 various parameters to complete the atmospheric dispersion calculations. Its general discussion about, the basic equations used to construct the calculational models also provide back-ground information for staff interpretation of our methodology of reducing and analyzing the data acquired by these instruments.
19 The computed atmospheric dispersion data for TURKEY POINT PLANT are 'discussed and summarized in Paragraph 3.5.2 of Section 3.0 below.
- 2. 7 "
POPUL'ATION DATA Section II-5 of the Final En'vironmental Statement (1) gives estimates of and locates population groups in the region surrounding TURKEY POINT PLANT. These data have been adjusted as a result of a more recent survey and appear in Section 3.0 below as tabulations appropriate for use in com-puting the individual and population doses from gaseous ef-fluents.
- 2. 8 PATHWAY DATA The guidelines of Regulatory Guide 1.109(4) require that, pathway data be developed that are unique to the type of effluent release. These data have been developed from company-sponsored surveys and are tabulated in those respective sections of Section 3.0 or .4.0 that relate pathway(s) to the individual and'opulation doses from either gaseous or liquid effluents.
- 2. 9 REFERENCES
- l. United States Atomic Energy Commission, Directorate of Licen'sing, "Final Environmen'tal Statement Related To Operation of'URKEY POINT PLANT, Florida Power and Light Company (Dockets No. 50-250 & 50-251)"; July, 1972.
20
2.9 REFERENCES
(cont'd) 2.. 'TURKEY POINT PLANT Supplementary Information On APPENDIX I", 2(17/76 Letter from George 'Lea'r, NRC Division of Operating Rea'ctors, to R.E. Uhrig, FPL.
- 3. USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.BB, "Calculation of Releases of Radioactive Materials In Liquid and Gaseous Ef-fluents From Pressurized Water Reactors", 1975.
- 4. USNRC Reg'ulatory Guide '1.109, "Calculation of Annual Average Doses To Man From Routine Releases Of Reactor Effluents For The Purpose Of Evaluating Compliance I",
~
10CFR50, APPENDIX
'ith March, 1976.
- 5. USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.110, "Cost-Benefit Analysis For Radwaste Systems For Light,-Water-Cooled. Nuclear Power Reactors", March, 1976.
- 6. USNRC Regulatory Guide -1.111, "Methods For Estimating Atmospheric Transport. And Dispersion Of Gaseous Ef-fluents In Routine Releases From Light-Water-Cooled Reactors", March, 1976.
- 7. DAMES and MOORE, Suite 700, 7101 Wisconsin Ave, Washington, D. C.
SECTION 3.0 DOSE'ATA FOR '"AS'-BUILT" GASEOUS 1'r7A'STE'SYSTEM
i W 0
22 3.0: 'DOSE'ATA'FOR "'AS-BUILT"'ASEOUS WASTE SYSTEM
- 3. 1 'NTRODUCTION This section consists of (1) a general description of the "as-built" gaseo'us waste 'system, (2) the development of environmental pathways by which 'a rel'eased gaseous radioactivity might'. make 'its way back to an individual or a population group, and (3) the calculation of 'individual and population doses by coupling the pathway data with the radioactive source terms computed by the GALE code. The resulting data permits an evaluation of the gaseous waste *system's compliance with AP-PENDIX I'.
H ~ ~ * 'I 3.2 'ENERAL'ESCRIPTION OF '"AS-BUILT"'ASEOUS'YSTEM The Waste Disposal System is common to UNITS 3 and 4. During plant operation, gaseous wastes originate from:
- a. The degassing of reactor coolant discharge to the Chemical and Volume Control System,
- b. Displacement of cover gases as liquids accumulate in various tanks,
- c. Miscellaneous equipment vents and relief valves, and
- d. Sampling operations and automatic gas analysis for hydrogen and oxygen in cover gases.
Gaseous wastes also originate from the Auxiliary Building and the Spent Fuel Pits of both units. Most of the gas received by the Waste Disposal System during normal operations is cover gas displaced from the 'CVCS holdup tanks as they fillwith liquid. Since this gas
23 must be replaced when the tanks are emptied during processing, facilities are provided to return gas from the decay tanks to the holdup tanks. Gases from all of the components, except the UNIT No. 3 Spent. Fuel Pit, are vented to a vent header and flow to the waste gas compressor suction header and the gas decay tanks. Gases held in the decay tanks can either be returned to the CVCS holdup tanks, or discharged to the atmosphere through the plant vent if it has decayed sufficiently for release. The plant vent. is at the 33.52-meter level. The waste gases from UNIT No. 3 Spent Fuel Pit are vented through a pit vent. This gas flow is >>5% of the total gaseous wastes handled by the TURKEY POINT PLANT system. A detailed'description of the system and diagrams of the gas flow paths are given in ATTACHMENTS C and E of SUP-PLEMENT A. FIGURE 3.1 is a schematic display of the gaseous system. 3.3 ESTIMATED RELEASES FROM SYSTEM TURKEY POINT PLANT releases, through the plant vent, radioactive gases from (1) the purification of primary coolant, (2) air ejector discharge, (3) steam generator blowdown vent, (4) containment purgin, (5) ventilation of the Auxiliary Build-4 ing and (6) ventilation of the Turbine Building. TABLE B-2 of Regulatory Guide 1.BB was the basis for the numerical values used in estimating gaseous emissions from TURKEY POINT PLANT UNITS 3 and 4.
24 FIGURE 3. 1 TURKEY POINT: Schematic Dia ram Of "As-Built" Gaseous Treatment S stem Com onents
- 1. GAS DECAY SYSTEM Vol.
Control Decay To Vent System Canpressor Tanks I
- 2. 'TEAM JET AIR EJECTOR To Vent
'"<. 24ain Condensor
- 3. STEAM GENERATOR BLOWDONN Steam To Vent Generator
- 4. CONTAINMENT PURGE HEPA Containment Atmosphere Filter
- 5. AUXILIARY BLDG. VENTILATION Auxiliary Building Filter
4 0 0
25
~ ~ ~ < err ~
3.4 'INPUTS'O GALE'ODE 'An'd'OURCE TERM 'CALCULATIONS The 'gaseous em'ission source 'ter'ms for. the '"as-built" system were calculated by the 'GALE code 'and the guide-lines of Regulatory Guide 1.BB(1} . The 'fundamental input terms used in the GALE code 'to des'cribe the reactors at TURKEY POINT PLANT were 'given in TABLE 2.3. The additional input data required to describe the "As-Built" gaseous radwaste treatments are shown in TABLE 3.1.. The resulting gaseous releases by isotope for this system are shown in TABLE 3.2.
'I I' ~
- 3. 5 ENVIRONMENTAl PATHWAYS AND INPUTS The most important pathways for exposure to gaseous effluents are ingestion of foods which contain radioisotopes (particularly iodine) deposited directly on edible vegetables or in milk produced through animal consumption of pasture grass containing radioisotopes. Direct radiation exposure from radioisotopes in the gaseous effluent plume and those deposited 4
on, the ground are important contributions to environmental pathways. Other pathways recognized in the TURKEY POINT PLANT area contribute little to the radiation dose from gaseous effluents. For the purpose of evaluating individual and popu-lation doses from gaseous effluents, these environmental path-way data inputs were considered: 3.5.1 'e'1'atio'n'f 'A'tmos he'r'ic Dis 'e'r'si'on'o 'In- di'vidual'x 'o's'ure's: Our estimates of the atmosphe'ric disper-sion of gaseous effluents are deiived from the models described
0 TABLE 3.1 TURKEY POINT PLANT; Gale In ut Terms For "As-Built" Gaseous S stem Card 'No. ~saces Entx~ Item Units Comment 33 80 Letdown Stripping From Vol Control Tank 34 73-80 Holdup Time Xe days 35 73-80 Holdup Time Kr days 36 73-80 Collection Time days 37 39-41 Leave Blank Waste Gas Release No HEPA 38 47-49 Leave Blank Aux Bldg Release No Charcoal 56-58 Leave Blank Aux Bldg Release No HEPA 39 73-80 2.5 Containment Volume 10 6 cu ft 3 40 73-80 .20 Kidney Throughput 10 cfm 41 47-49 Leave Blank High Vol Purge No Charcoal 56-58 Yes HEPA 78-80 No per year 42 46-53 5000 Low Vol Purge cfm 63-65 Yes Charcoal 72-74 Yes HEPA 43 73-80 0 Steam Gen Blowdown Vent Not Vented to Atmos 44 73-80 Condenser Air Ejector No Charcoal
TABLE 3.2 Page 1 of 2 TURKEY POINT PLANT: Gaseous Releases Prom "As-Built" S stem As Curve year Blowdown Vent Gas Stri in Buildin Ventilation Off Gas Air Ejector Isoto es Shutdown Continuous Reactor Auxilia Turbine Waste Gas S stem(a) Exhaust 'otal
- 1. Noble Gases Kr-83m 3.0E+00 3.0E+00 Kr-85m 2.7E+Ol 2. OE+00 1 OE+00 3 OE+Ol Kr-85 2.0E+00 1.6E+02 3.0E+00 1.6E+02 Kr-87 8.0E+00 1.0E+00 9.0E+00 Kr-88 4.0E+Ol 4.0E+00 2.0Et00 4.6E+01 Kr-89 Xe-131m 2. OE+00 8. OE+00 1.0E+01 Xe-133m 4.3E+Ol 2.0E+00 1.0E+00 4.6E+01 Xe-133 2 'E+03 9.2E+01 5.8E+01 2.3E+03 Xe-135m Xe-135 1.0E+02 6.0E+00 4.0E+00 1.1Et02 Xe-137 Xe-138 2.0E+00 2.0E+00 TOTAL NOBLE GASES: 2.72E+03
TABLE 3.2, Cont'd Page 2 of 2 Blowdown Vent Gas Stri in Buildin Ventilation Off Gas Waste Gas Air Ejector Isotopes Shutdown Continuous Reactor Auxiliary Turbine System(a) . Exhaust - Total
- 2. Other Gaseous Nuclides:=
I-131 1.28-02 3.6E-02 9.18-03 2 'E-02 8.08-02 I-133 1.58-02 5.38-02 5.88-03 3.3E-02 1.1E-01 C-14 8.08+00 8.08+00 A-41 2.5E+Ol 2.58+01 1 SE+02 U 1.58+02 7.78+01 7.7E+Ol 4.6E+02 .
- 3. Airborne Particulate Materials:
Mn-54 2.28-04 1. 88-02 4.58-03 2.3E-02 Pe-59 7.4E-05 6.0E-03 1.58-03 7.68-03 Co-58 7.48-04 6.0E-02 1.5E-02 7.6E-02 Co-60 3.4E-04 2 '8-02 7.0E-03 3.48-02 Sr-89 1.7E-05 1.3E-03 3.38"04 1.68-03 Sr-90 F 08-06 2.48-04 6.08-05 3.08-04 Cs-134 2.2E-04 1.88-02 4.5E-03 2.38-02 Cs-137 3.88-04 3.0E-02 7.5E-03 3.88-02 a) Air particulates from waste gas system b) No entry indicates release of <0.0001 Cipyr
29 r
'
in SUPPLETION'7 B. summary og the atmospheric dispersion stabilities. Pasquill classifications. for. temperature differ-11 ence and wind variabilityf are 'recorded in TABLE. 3.3 and TABLE 3-4, respective3;y. TABLE 3-5 summarizes the airflow trajectory t
.
k regimes about TURKEY POINT PLANT. These data and hourly and average 'monthl'y meteorological data for temperature, pre-I cipitation, relative humidity and wind distribution at the 30-foot tower level'ave been used to compile., the annual wind I report shown in TABLE 3.6. In the calculation of doses to individuals max-imumly exposed to the gaseous discharges from TURKEY POINT PLANT,.'it was accepted that, all releases would be at. ground level and that exposure could occur at either of these sites: a) The 'Nearest Site Boundary with distances in all 16 cardinal directions being equal to those shown in TABLE 2.1, bJ Distance to Property Line in all, 16 cardinal directions, and cJ The potential of having each of the 16 cardi;nal sectors with a Nearest Residence (and thusly, a vegetable garden and/or milk-producing animal} . TABLE 3.7 summarizes our estimates for g/Q, depletion and de-position for these individual exposure situations. Some basic assumptions have been -made for individuals in those areas about TURKEY POINT PLANT, i.e. clockwise from NORTH to SOUTH-. EAST, that are part of Biscayne Bay and the Atlantic Ocean. At. the boundary and property line sites'n these sectors, it
30 TABLE 3. 3 TURKEY POINT PLANT 'e'rti'cal'S'tab'ilit Cl'ass
'
Tem 'e'r'ature Di'ffere'n'ce Pas uil'1'l'ass
~ \
De'seri ti'on'(F)00 feet Extremely unstable 2.1 Unstable -2. 0 to -l. 9 Slightly unstable -l. 8 to -l. 7 D Neutral -l. 6 to -0. 5 Slight'ly stable >>0.4 to +1.'6 Stable +1.7 to +4.4 Extremely Stable + 4.4
31 TABLE. 3. 4 TURKEY. POINT PL'ANT: 'o'ri'zontal'tabi'li't 'Class B'ind'ar iabi'1'i:t of'Standard Pas ui'll Cla'ss
- D'e's'cri'ti'on'angeD'evi'a'ti'on'('a','), De rees A Extremely Unstable 22.6 Unstable 22.5 to 17.6 unstable
'lightly 17.5 to 12.6 D Neutral 12.5 to 7.6 Slightly Stable 7.5 to 3.9 Stable 3.8 to 2.1 Extremely stable 2.0
32 TABLE 3- 5 PLANT TURKEY POXNT - Air F3.ow Trajectory Regimes: On-Shore and Off-Shore*
'I Win'd Dire'ction '~e'me HNE On-Shore NE ENE ESE SE SSE SSW. Off-Shore WSW NNW N" On-Shore
- From "Flordia Power'nd Light 1973 Annual Meteorological Summary-Turkey Point", Dames and Moore Job No. 4598-044-27, May l975.
33 TABLE'..6 ANNUAL WIND REPORT AVERAGE WIND WIND SPEED CLASSES'N M;P.'H. TOTAL SPEED SECTOR ,1<4 4<8 8<13 13<19 19<25 25-31 31+ PERCENT M.P.H. 0.36 1.19 0.78 0.54 0.58 0.08 0.00 3.52 10.54 NE 0.18 1,18 2.37 1.66 0.34 0.03 0.00 5.76 11.01 ENE 1.23 2.08 5.97 4.44 0.48 0.00 0.00 13.19 11;31 E 0.19 3.69 7.,74 3.20 0. 23 0. 00 0.00 15.03, 9.95 I ESE 0.41 3. 67 6.72 2.62 0. 08 0. 00 0. 00 13.50 9.45 0.23 1.97 4.64 1.78 0.25 0.00 0.00 8.87 10.05 SSE 0.18 2.04 2.75 0.74 0.08 0.00 0;00 5.78 8.89 0.16 1.84 1.27 0.53 0.14 0.00 0.00 3.94 8.58 SSW 0.16 l. 32 1.12 0.48 0. 34 0. 03 0. 00 3.44 9. 86 SW 0. 14 1.20 0. 60 0. 18 0. 03 0.00 0.00 2. 14 7.49 WSW 0. 08 0. 49 0. 29 0. 01 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 87 6. 64
- 0. 13 1.08 0.60 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 2. 01 7.49 0.28 '.13 1.02 0.09 0.00 0.00 0. 00 3.51 6.60
- 0. 66 2. 61 2. 320. 46 0. 01 0. 00 0.00 6.07 7.31 NNW 0.'38 3.57 2. 23 0.59 0.01 0.00 0.00 6.78 7.51 '.
N 0. 29 1.52 1.25 0. 31 0.00 0.00 00 3.37 7.57 CALM 0. 00 ..0.00 0.00, 0.00 0. 00 0. 00, .0. 00 0. 00 0;00 TOTALS 4.05% 31. 59% 41. 66% 17. 82% 2.55% 0.13% 0.00% 97.78% 9.16 VARIABLE 2.18 1. 80
..O.04 TOTAL 100.00 NUMBER OF VALID ANNUAL OBSERVATIONS = 7975 NUMBER OF ANNUAL INVALID OBSERVATIONS ~ 785
- a. -
All data for Wind Frequenccy Distribution are in "Percent" and are based on annual valid observations for wind speed at the'0-foot elevation.
TABLE 3. 7 TURKEY POINT PLANT: Dispersion Parameters Applicable To Individual Dose Calculations (For Ground Level Release) Nearest Site 4 Line>> Nearest Residence** Av. Mind Instance imiies) ~Q ~te 16tial ~m. itiee (miles) ~~ m~lleticn ~te itite 6.5E-10 D1stance (miles> ~a 7.7E-09
~Oe sean 3.3B-09
~Oe Zeae 1.3E-ll 10.5 0.43 2.8E-06 2.3B-06 5.6E-09 2.1E-07 1.5E 07 15 11.0 0.40 2.5E-06 2.0E-06 3.08-09 6.lE&7 4.6E-07 9.SE-10 2.2E-OS 1.2E-OS 2.7B-ll 11.3 0.95 1.8E-06 1.4E-06 2.2E-09 5.8E-07 4.4E-07 9.3B-10 1.6E-OS 8.2B-09 1.9E-ll 9.9 0.60 3.3E-06 2.6E-06 3.3E-09 1.3E-06 1.0E-06 1.7E-10 2.8E-OB 1.4E-OS e, 2.7E-ll 9.5 0.48 3.1E-06 2.5E-06 2.6E&9 3.0E-06 2.48-06 2.6E-09 1.2E-07 7.BE-OS 1.4E"10 10.1 0.36 4.3E-06 3.4E&6 3.8E-09 4.3E-06 3.4E-06 3.8E"09 1,1E-07 6.9EWB 1.38-10 8.9 1.21 1.0E-05 8.1E-06 9.2E-09 1.0E-05 8.1B-06 9.2E-09 1,7E-07 1.0E-07 2.2L'-10 8.5 1.14 6.2E-06 S.OE-06 5.6B-09 6.2E-06 5.0E-06 5.6E-09 6.7E-OS 3.SE-OS 8.2E-ll 9.9 1.19 1.6E-06 1.3E-06 1.9B-09 1.6E-06 1.3E"06 1.9E-09 5.3E-OS 3.4B-OS 9.2E-ll 7.5 1.50 1.2E-06 9.4E-07 3.3E-09 1.28-06 9. 4E-07 3.3B-09 5.9EWS 3.8E-OS 2.3E-10 6.6 2.76 8.3E-07 6.3E-07 3.6E-09 1.8E-07 1.2B-07 9. 3E-10 1.98-08 9.7E-09 7.4E-ll 7.5 3.09 1.3E-06 9.5E-07 5.3E-09 1.5B-07 9. 4E-08 6.7E-10 4.1E-OS 2.1E-OS 1.4E-10 6.6 2.28 1.9E"06 1.4E-06 8.3E-09 8.7E-07 6.4E-07 4.2E-09 5.1E-OS 2.8E-OS 2.1E-10 7.3 2.16 4.1E-06 3.3E-06 1.4E-OB 6.9E-07 5.0E-07 3.2E-09 4.8E-OB 2.7E"08 1.9E"10 7.5 0.90 3.8E-06 3.lE&6 1.5E-OS 2.0E-07 1.4E-07 1.2E-09 3.0E-OS 1.6E&8 1.5E-10 N 7.6 0.86 2.9E-06 2.4E-06 9.2E&9 4.48-07 2.7P;08 2.08-10 15 1.8E-OS 9.68-09 7.0E-ll
<<Assungtion made that an individual in NORH( to SOUHEhST (clockwise) sections couM bc there for reascns of fishing, boating, swimming, or lake recreational activity All other sectors are land areas
- Presums that in NORIH to SOUHEAST (clockwise) sectors individual couM be there as a resident cn a houseboat; no gardens or mi.lk-producing animal would be present. All other sectors are lard areas and ccuM have gardens ard animals.
35 is assumed that the'ndividual would be engaged in some recrea-tional activity. With 'regard to a residence 'at the 15-mile limit of these sectors,'t is assumed that the individual is on a houseboat or some other type of watercraft and that he would not have a vegetable garden or milk-producing animal nearby. 3.5.1 'elat'ion 'of 'A'tm'o'seric'is'rsion To 'o ulation'x osures: Withi'n a 50-mile radius of TURKEY POINT PLANT are all or portions of following counties: Dade, Monroe, Broward and Collier. Dade County is the dominant county; it covers 70% of the land area and accounts for 86% of the population. In 1974, there were 1,418,000 permanent residents in Dade County. That portion of Broward County con-tiguous to Dade County and within the '50-mile radius of TURKEY POINT continues to match Dade County growth. That area of Monroe County within the TURKEY POINT area is sparsely settled, having only a few hundred people living in the area. The 50-mile radial area encompasses only the southeastern corner of Collier County. Since this area is a part of the EVERGLADES, it is presently considered to be unpopulated. In, order to establish a base for our population calculations, a projection of recent survey data taken 'ose for SOUTH DADE PLANT ('2) was used to prepare the summary of population data that appears in TABLE 3 Noble gas immersion, ground plane deposition and inhalation factors were calculated for each sector and for each dispersion parameter.
3~8 KHUEY POINT PZANT "PIGjECTED POPULATION WITHIN A 50-MIIZ RADIUS. 1978 '1984 1990 2000 2010 *2020 '2030 1,948,248 2,175,532 2,424,090 2,786,959 3,029,578 3,191,271 3,290,060 Mid Estimate 1.984g531 2q242q148 2<517t321 2t909t520 3sl70i064 3t344i026 3t448e945 High Estimate 2~ 015'99 2g 303'70 2g 604~ 959 3g 027'09 3~306~ 880 3~ 493~ 895 3~ 605'77
37 The data given in TABLE 3.9 were combined with, the 1984 popu-lation distr'i'bution and the 'res'ulting population-wei:ghted dispersion factors summarized in TABLE 3.10 were determined. H the site of TURKEY POINT PLANT is made up of principally Dade County land area. The 'southern and western portions of this area are centers of agricultural productivity. SUPPLEMENT C emphasizes the variety and production/harvest levels of these activities: In order to add validity to the input data used in our dose calculations, all vegetable products were classified as follows:
- a. Leafy: Grown in open fields, exterior surface eaten; b; Exposed: Grown in open fields, exterior surface not eaten; and 1
- c. Root: Grown under the surface, exterior surface not usually eaten.
Vegetables such as potatoes and malangas which grow buried in the soil were considered root vegetables whose uptake of radio-isotopes from the soil is considered to be the most important factor in determining concentrations in the vegetables. Such vegetables and fruits as watermel'ons, limes, avocados and mangos, which normally do not have their skins eaten, considered to be exposed vegetables and fruits. -Tomatoes, cabbage 'and strawbeiries', which may be consumed in entirety, are treated as leafy vegetables.
I TABLE 3 9 Page 1 of 3 TURKEY POINT PLANT: DISPERSION PARAMETERS APPLICABLE TO POPULATION DOSE CALCULATIONS A. Relative Concentration Q sec m3 SECTOR AFFECTED CLOCKWISE PROM NNE DISTANCE (MILES) SECTOR .5 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5 7.5 15.0 25.0 35+0 45.0 NNE 5.608-06 5.708-07 2.00E-07 1. 10E-07 7.20E-OS 3.308-08 1.208-08 6.408-09 4.208-09 3.108-09 NE 7 '08-06 7.508-07 2.608-07 1 408-07 9.408-08 4.408-08 1.708-08 8.808-09 5.808-09 4.308-09 ENE 5.308-06 5.008-07 1.808-07 9.70E-OB 6.508-08 3.108-08 1.20E-OS 6.308-09 4.208-09 3. 108-09 8 9.308-06 8.708-07 3.108-07 1.70E-07 1.108-07 5.308-08 2.108-08 1.108-08 7.408-09 5 '0E-09 ESE 9.408-06 8.808-07 3.108-07 1.70E-07 1.108-07 5.408-08 2.108-08 1.108-08 7.40E-09 5.508-09 SE 1.30E-05 1.208-06 4.408-07 2.408-07 1.608<<07 7.608-08 3.008-08 1.608-08 1.108-08 7.808-09 SSE 2.308-05 2.108-06 7.40E-07 4.108-07 2.708-07 1.308-07 5.108-08 2.70E-OB 1.808-08 1.308-08 S 1.308-05 1.208-06 4.408-07 2.408-07 1.608-07 7.508-08 2.908-08 1.508-08 1.008-08 7.508-09 SSW 3.508-06 3.508-07. 1.308-07 6.90E-OB 4 50E-08 2.10E-OB 7.908-09 4.108-09 2.708-09 2.008-09 SW 3.S08-06 3.908-07 1.408-07 7 40E-08 4.808-08 2.208-08 8.10E-09 4.208-09 2.70E-09 2.008-09 WSW 6.608-06 7.108-07 2.508-07 1.308-07 8.40E-OB 3.80E-OS 1.408-08 7.108-09 4.608-09 3.408-09 W 1;408-05 1.508-06 5.408-07 2.80E-07 1.80E-07 8.308-08 3.008-08 1.608-08 1.008-08 7.508-09 WNW 1.408-05 1.50E-06 5.108-07 2.70E-07 1.80E-07 8.108-07 3.008-08 1.608-08 1.008-08 7.608<<09 NW 3..208-05 1 20E-06 4.408-07 2.308-07 1.508-07. 6.80E-OS 2.508-08 1.308-08 8.608-09 6 '08"09 NNW 7 508-06 7.808-07 2.708-07 1.508-07 9.50E-OS 4.308-08 1.60E-OB 8.30E-09 6 '0E-09 4.008-09 N 5.508-06 5.808-07 2.108-07 1.108-07 7.10E-OS 3.208-08 1.20E-OS 6.20E-09 4.108-09 3.008-09
TABLE 3. 9 (cont'd) Page 2 of 3 B. Relative Concentration ( /Ol 1 sec
~ m 3
SECTOR AFFECTED CLOCKWISE FROH NNE DISTANCE (HILES) SECTOR .5 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5 7.5 15.0 25.0 35.0 45. 0 NNE 4.70E-06'.408-06 4.308-07 1.408-07 7.308-08 4.608-08 1.908-08 6.108-09 2.70E-09 1.60E-09 1.00E-09 NE 5.608"07 1.90E-07 9.608-08 6.008-08 2 50E-08 8.208-09 3.708-09 2.108-09 1.408 09 ENE 4.508-06 3.808-07 1.208-07 6.508-08 4.10E-OB 1.80E-OB 5.90E-09 2.60E-09 1.508-09 1.008-09 E 7,908-06 6.608-07 2.20E-07 1 108-07 7.20E-OB 3.108-08 1.008-08 4.608-09 2.708-09 1.&OE-09 ESE B.OOE-06 6.708-07 2.208-07 1.108-07 7.20E-O& 3 '0E-08 1.008-08 4.608-09 2.708"09 1.808-09 SE 1.10E-05 9.408-07 3.108-07 1.608-07 1.008-07 4.408-08 1.508-08 6.60E-09 3.908-09 2.608-09 SSE 1.908-05 1.608-06 5 20E-07 2.70E-07 1.708-07 7.508-08 2.508-08 1,10E-OB 6.60E-09 4 40E-09 S 1.108-05 9.40E-07 3.10E-07 1.608-07 1.00E-07 4.408-08 1.408-08 6.40E-09 3.70E-09 2.508-09 SSW 3.008-06 2.708-07 9.008-08 4.608-08 2.908-08 1.208-0S 3.908-09 1.70E-09 9 90E-10 6 '0E-10 SW 3.20E-06 3.008-07 9.808-08 5.008-08 3.108-08 1.30E-OB 4.00E-09 1.708-09 1.008-09 6.608-10 WSW 5 60E-06 5.408<<07 1.708-07 8.708-08 5.40E-OB 2.208-08 6.808-09 2.908-09 1.708-09 1.108-09 W 1.20E-05 1.208-06 3.80E-07 1.90E-07 1.208-07 4.&OE-OB 1.508-08 8.508-09 3.708-09 2.408-09 WN'W 1.20E-05 1.108-06 3.608-07 1.S08-07 1.108-07 4.708-08 1.508-08 6 '0E-09 3.808-09 2.50E-09 NW 9.90E-06 9 40E-07 3.108-07 1.60E-07 9.708-08 4.008-08 1.208-08 5.508-09 3.208-09 2.108-09 NNW 6.30E-06 5 '08"07 1.908-07 9.808-08 6.10E-OB 2.508-08 7.808-09 3.50E-09 2.008-09 1.30E-09 N 4.708-06 4.408-07 1.408-07 7.308-08 4 '0E-OB- 1.90E-OB 5.90E-09 2.60E-09 1.508-09 9.70E-10
0 TABLE 3.9 (cont'd) Page 3 of 3 C. Avera e Concentration D 0 1 m SECTOR AFFECTED CLOCKWISE FROM NNE DISTANCE (MILES) SECTOR ~ 5 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5 7.5 15.0 25.0 35.0 45.0 NNE 1.208-0& 1 ~ 608"09 6.40E-10 3.40E-10 2.208-10 &.&08-11 2.508.11 9.608-12 4.908-12 2.908-12 NE &.308-09 1.208-09 4.60E-10 2.508-10 1.608-10 6.30E-11 1.&08-11 6.90E-12 3.60E-12 2.108-12 ENE 5.&OE-09 &.208-10 3.208-10 1.708-10 1.108-10 4.408-11 1.308-11 4.&08-12 2.508-12 1,508-12 8 &.408-09 1.208-09 4.60E-10 2.508-10 1.608-10 6.40E-ll 1.&OE-11 7.008-12 3.608-12 2.108-12 ESE 7.10E-09 9 908-10 3.908-10 2.10E-10 1.30E-10 5.30E-11 1.508-11 5.90E-12 3.00E-12 1.&08-12 SE 1.008-0& 1.408-09 5.70E-10 3.108-10 1.908-10 7. &08-11 2.208-11 &.608-12 4.408-12 2.60E-12 SSE 2.008-0& 2.90E<<09 1.108"09 6,00E-10 3.&08-10 1.508-10 5.508-11 1.708-11 &.708-12 5.208-12 S 1.208-0& 1.70E-09 6.50E-10 3.50E-10 2.208-10 9.008-11 2.608-11 9.908-12 5.108-12 3.008-12 SSH 4 '08-09 5.&OE-10 2.308-10 1.208-10 7.&08-11 3.108-11 9.008-12 3.408-12 1.&08-12 1.10E-12 SW 9.&OE-09 1.408-09 5.40E-10 2.90E-10 1.908-10 7.40E-11 2.108-11 &,208-12 4.208-12 2.508-12 WSH 2.30E-OB 3.208-09 1.30E-09 6.&08-10 4.308-10 1.70E-10 5.00E-11 1.908-11 9.&08-12 5.&OE-12 H 4.50E-O& 6.30E-09 2.40E-09 1.30E-09 &.40E-10 3.40E-10 9.608-11 3. 708-11 1.908-11 1.10E-11 WNH 4.708-0& 6.608-09 2.60E-09 1.408-09 &.90E-10 3.608-10 1.008-10 3.908-11 2.008-11 1.20E-11 NW OBOE-0& 5.30E-09 2.108-09 1.10E-09 7.108-10 2.908-10 &.20E-11 3.10E-11 1.60E-ll 9.60E-12 NNW 3.10E-OB 4.30E-09 1.708-09 9.10E-10 5.&08-10 2.308-10 6.608-11 2.508-11 1.308-11 7.&OE-12 N 1.908-0& 2.608-09 1.008-09 5.508-10 3.508-10 1.408-10 4.008-11 1.508-11 7.90E-12 4 '08-12
TABLE 3.10 TURKEY POINT PLANT: POPULATION-WEIGliTED SECTOR DISPERSION FACTORS USED TO ESTIMATE POPULATION DOSE FROM GASEOUS EFFLUENTS WIND x/0 DISTANCE X/Q DEPL DISTANCE REL DEP DISTANCE SECTOR PEOPLE (H/SEC) (SEC/H3) (H) (SEC/H3) (H) (M-2) (M) NNE 1168648. 3.49 4.51E-09 57215 1.87E-09 56954. 4,93E-12 56681. NE 2752. F 08 1.79E-OS '4211. 9.36E-09 24207. 1.79E-ll 24201. ENE 188. 2.68 2.3BE-OS 14388. 1.40E-OB 14276. 3.23E-11 14101. E 2. 2.32 5.60E-OB 12067. 3.50E-OS 12067. 6 '0E-11 12067.. ESE 2924. 1.56 6.53E-OB 9354. 4.08E-OB 9314. 7.67E-11 9243. SE 7~ 1.61 1.29E-07 7635. 8.10E-OB 7627. 1.55E-10 7611. SSE 6. 1.92 1.20E-07 12068. 7.00E-OB 12067. 1.40E<<10 12067. S 7693. 1.83 2.80E-OB 24113. 1.40E-OB 24111. 2.50E-11 24109. SSW 9372. 1.92 5.71E-09 37185. 3.18E-09 36630. 4.26E-12 35633. SW 3824. 2.99 2.38E-09 67989. 1.08E-09 67408. 3.11E-12 65159. WSW 3952. 3.53 5.57E-09 50925. 2.36E-09 50729. 1.21E-ll 50460. W 2620. 3.40 2.52E-OS 28312. 1,25E-OS 28075. 7.32E-ll 27902. WNW 8545. 3.44 2.91E-OB 26586. 1.49E-OB 26523. 8.52E-11 26334. NW 47844. 3.49 3.13E-OS 21199. 1 ~ 65E-08 20930. 1.07E-10 20806. NNW 71416 3.53 1.85E-OB 22703. 9.83E-09 22483. 7.65E-11 22231. N '269447. 3.40 5.81E-09 45723. 2.69E-09 44941. 1.29E-ll 43535.
42 The bi'oaccumulation factors established in Regu-latory Guide 1.109(3) are applicable here. The fraction of deposited activity transferred from the surfaces of the plant to edible portions is accounted for in the dose estimates, e.g., the removal of isotopes during food preparation(4) TABLES 3.11, 3.12, and 3.13 tabulate the input data used as parameters for exposures from leafy vegetable, root vegetables, and exposed vegetables and fruit. Similarly, input parameters for milk, U I beef, game and poultry production in the areas surrounding TURKEY POINT PLANT are given in TABLE 3.14. 3.5. 4 Other Environmental Pathwa s: The estimated dose to any organ of any individual (as shown in the tabulations that follow} is a small fraction of the typical total body dose II from natural radiation sources which totals about. 80 mrem/year in the Southeastern Florida area(5} . On the basis of an esti-mated regional population of 2.6 million p'ersons by 1984, this would amount to a whole body radiation dose of about 2000,000 man-rem/year from natural radioactive background. The gaseous effluents from TURKEY POINT PLANT could increase this exposure by about, 0.01%, which is an insignificant increase. 3.5.5 Estimatin Dose Data From Environmental ~In uts: Individual and population consumption rates and oc-cupation times assumed from. these ev'aluations are given in TABLE 3.17. Note that the population distribution is assumed to be 66% adult, 14% teen and 20% children and infants.
TABLE 3. 11 TURKEY POINT PLANT: In ut Data For Dose Calculations - LEAFY VEGETABLES SPECIES INPUT DATA TONATOES SQUASH ST!UIWBERRIBS BEANS CALABAEAS YUCAS CABBAGE
- 1) Yield, kg/yr 8.68+07 l. 18+06 0. 88+06, 8slE+06 2.0E+07 6.88+06 3.1E+06
- 2) Acreage (a) 1.38+04 3.78+03 1.38+02 5.88+03 3.08+03 1.0E+03 2.88+02 2 0.1 1.6 0. 35 1.7 1.7 1.9
- 3) Specific Yield, kg/m 1.6
- 4) Adsorption Modifier (b) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
,5) Time to Consumption, sec 1.218+06 1.218+06 1.21E+06 1.21E+06 1.218+06 1.21E+06 1.218+06
- 6) Preparation Modifier 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4
- 7) Location of Crop a) Direction from plant H H ~ H H H b) Distance, meters 3.2E+04 3.28+04 3.28+04 3.28+04 3.28+04 3.28+04 3.2E+04
- 8) Specific Deposition a) From Plant Vent 3.58-11. 3.5E-ll 3.58-11 3.58-11. 3.58-11 3.5E-11 3.58-11
- 9) Re 1- Conc s s X/(), sec/m 3 a) Plant Vent 1.28-08 1.28-08 1.28-08 1.28-08 1.2E-08 1.28-08 1. 28-08
- 10) Sector, Av. Hind Speed, meters/sec. 3.3E 00 3.3E 00 3.38 00 3.38 00 3.3E 00 3.3E 00 3.38 00 a) From SUPPLEMENT C b) Modifier applied to uptake term in plant uptake equations (See Ref. 4) c) Modifier applied to dose to allow for loss of activity in preparation of food (See Ref 4)
TABLE 3.12
'EXEAT".Y POIHZ'PLANT: Iri ut Data For Dose Calculations EXKSED and KOl.'EGl".TABLES SPECIES EXPOSED ROOT INPUT DATA "CORN POTATOES blALANGAS BATATAS
- 1) Yield, kg/yr .
3.8E+07 5.4E+07 2. OE+07 4.1E+07
- 2) Acreage 8.4H+03 6.6H+03 3.0E+03 6.0E+03 3} Specific Yield, kg/m 1.1 2.0 1.7 1.7
- 4) Adsorption Modifier Gram, III-6 Hoot, III-6 Root, III-6 Root, III-6
- 5) Time To Consumption 1.21E+06 :1.21H+06 1.21E+06 1.21E+06
- 6) Preparation Modifier(c) l. 0 1.0 1.0 1.0
- 7) Location of Crop:
a} Direction from Plant W W b) Distance, meters 3. 2H~04 3.2E+04 3.3E+04 3.3E+04
- 8) Specific Deposition a) Prom Plant Vent -3.5H-.11 3.5H-ll 3.5E-ll 3.5E-11
- 9) Rel Conc., X/Q, sec/m a} Plant Vent 1.2E-08 1. 2E-08 1.2H-08 1.2E-08
- 10) Sector, Av. Wind Speed,"Meters/sec. . 3.3E 00" 3.3E 00 3.3E 00 3.3H 00 0
a} From SUPPLEMENT C . b) Modifier applied to uptake term in plant uptake equations (See Ref. 4} c) Modifier applied to dose to allow for loss of activity in preparation of food (See Ref. 4)
TABLE 3.13 TURKEY POINT PLANT: In ut Data For Dose Calculations FRUIT SPECXES
'INPUT DATA 'LIMES 'VOCADOS MANGOS 1} Yield, kg/yr- 2.3H+07 2.9H+07 2.2E+07 2} Acreage ',8E+04 3.5E+04 2.6E+04 ~
- 3) Specific Yield, kg/m 2 2.3 2.0 2.0 4} Adsorption Modifier (b) Grain, III-6 Grain, IXX-6 Grain, XXX-6 5} Time to Consumption, sec 1.21E+06 1.21E+06 l. 21E+06
- 6) Preparation Modifier 1.0 1.0 1.0 7} Location of Crop a) Direction N b) Distance, meters ."3. 2E+94 3.2E+04 3.2H+04 2
- 8) Specific Deposition, 1/m '}
Plant Vent 3.5H-ll- 3.5E-'ll 3.5H-ll
- 9) Relative Conc , X/Q sec/m 3 a} P3,an.t, Vent 1. 2H-08 1.2H-08 1.2E-08 10} Sector Av. Ning Speed meters/sec
'
... 3.3H 00.. 3.3H 00 3.3E 00 a} From SUPPLHbgNT C b} Modifier applied to uptake term in plant uptake equations (see Ref. 4) c) Modifier applied to dose to allow for loss of activity in preparation of food (see ref. 4)
a TABLE 3.14 TURKEY POINT PLANT In't D'a'ta'or Dose Calcul'ations MILK,'EEP, GAME POULTRY t SPECIES INPUT DATA MILK BEEP GAME POULTRY 1} Yield, kg/yr 5.20E+06 2.40E+06 2.20E403 2.70E+06
- 2) Acreage. (a)
- 3) Specific Yield, kgfm 2
- 4) Adsorption Modifier (b) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
- 5) Time to Consumption, sec. 3.46E+05 1.73E+06 1.73E+06 1.73E+06 6} Preparation Modifier 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
- 7) Location a) Direction From Plant NNH NH b) Distance, Meters 5.63E+04 2.41E+04 4,82H404 2.41E+04 8} Specific Deposition a) From Plant Vent 7.9E-12 1.0H-10 1.8E-ll 6.6E-ll
- 9) Rel. Conc. g)Q, secfm 3 a) Plant'. Vent 4.5E-09 3.3E-08 7.1E-09 1. 7E-08
- 10) Sector Av. Hind Speed meters/second 3..4 3,4 3.5 3.5 a) From SUPPLEMENT C b} Modifier applied to uptake term in plant uptake equations (See Ref. 4}
c) Modifiex applied to dose to allow for loss of activity in preparation of food (See Ref. 4}
TABLE 3.15 CONSUMPTION RATES AND OCCUPATION TIMES FOR INDIVIDUALS USED IN CALCULATION OF RADIATION DOSES TO MAN FROM GASEOUS EPPLUENTS e ~Pa thea Units Adults ~Teena ers Children Infants
.'
Maximum Rates for Individual Dose Calculations Noble Gas Immersion (gamma} days/year 365. - 365. 365. 365. Noble Gas Immersion (beta) days/year 365. 365. 365. 365. Ground Plane Deposition days/year 365. 365. 365. 365. Inhalation a m3/year 7300. 5100.. 2700. 1900. Fruits & Vegetables kg/year 584. 672." 446. 0. Meat (contaminated forage} kg/year 110. ~ 65, '1. 0. Milk (Contaminated forage) li/year 310. 400. 330. 330. Average Individual Rates for Population Dose Calculations b Noble Gas Immersion (gamma) days/year 365. 365. 365. 0. Ground Plane Deposition days/year 365. 365.. 365. 0. Inhalation a m3/year 7300. 5100. 2700: 0. Fruits & Vegetables kg/year 190. 240. 200. 0. Milka li/year 110. 200. 170. 0. Beef kg/year 95. 59. 37. 0. a 59. 0. Game kg/year 95. 37. Eggsa kg/year 95. 59. 37. 0. a Values used only to apportion 50-mile radius food product yield over population groups, Population distribution is assumed to be 66% adult, 14% teen, and 20% child, b Population distribution is assumed to be 66% adult, 14% teen, and 20% child.
48 Usage rates. for calculation of maximum doses to individuals are standard factors from Regulatory Guide 1.109(3) except for any differences'rev'iously noted. Also, population doses are estimated on the quantities of foods produced and the locations at whi'ch 'they're produced. It is assumed also that all food produced is consumed and reshults in some exposure to populations remote from the plant.
- 3. 6 INDIVlDUAL'OSES FROM GASEOUS'ELEASES The gaseous rel'eases described in the previous paragraphs were combined with the environmental inputs pre-sented above in Paragraph 3.5 and the individual doses were calculated using the hGASZ code ('6) . TABLE 3.16 'lists the maximum doses an individual would obtain through all pathways from the gaseous relea'ses of TURKEY POINT's "as-built" system.
It is obvious that the "as-built" system. conforms to the indivi-dual dose requirements of APPENDIX I.
~ ~ ~ h ~
3.7 POPULATION DOSES FROM GASEOUS RELEASES Estimates of the maximum doses to individuals ex-posed to gaseous effluents were calculated using the GASP code ,(6). These results are shown in TABLE F 17. These data indi-cate that the dose "to any organ of any individual is lower than the design objective doses specified in APPENDI'X I.
TABLE 3.16 TURKEY POINT PLANT - "As-Built" System; MAXIMUM INDIVIDUALDOSES FROM EXPOSURE TO GASEOUS RELEASES.'-" ALL PATHWAYS Pathwa
Adult Teens Children Infants Nearest Resident ESE 8 17,063 meters Noble Gas Immersion 1.68E-03 1.68E-03 1.68E-03 1.68E-03
- Ground Plane Deposition 4.05E-03 4.05E-03 4.05E-03 4.05E-03 Inhalation 9,57E-04 5.34E 5.44E-04 5.80E-04 Fruits and Vegetables 4.54E-03 4.85E-03 7.66E-03 Meat 6.44E-04 3.93E-04 5.92E-04 Milk 4.68E-03 4.76E-03 5.39E-03 7.60E-03 Total 1.66E-02 1.62E-02 1.99E-02 1.39E-02
~Th rotd.
Noble Gas Ground Plane Immersion Deposition 1.68E-03 l. 68E-03 1.68E-03 1.68E-03 4.05E-03 4.05E-03 4.05E-03 4.05E-03 Inhalation 1.69E-03 1.15E-03 1.37E-03 2.01E-03 Fruits and Vegetables 8.70E-04 7.83E-04 1.33E-02 Meat 2.63E-03 1.79E-03 2.76E-03 Milk 2.85E-02 4.26E-02 8.47E-02 2.02E-01 Total 3.94E-02 5.21E-02 1.08E-01 2.10E-01 The maximum off-site ground-level air doses are 0.704 mrad/year for gamma radiation and 1.36 mrad/year for beta radiation at the SSE site boundary.
TABLE 3.17 POPULATION DOSES FROM GASEOUS RELEASES - OF "AS-BUILT" SYSTEM PATLNAY POPULATION DOSE (MAN-REM) ADULTS TEENAGERS QlILDREN INFANTS TOTAL POPULATION TNYROID TOTAL BODY TllYROID TOTAL BODY TNYROID TOTAL BODY TIIYROID TOTAL BODY TllYROID TOTAL BODY NOBLE GAS IMMERSION (GAMMA) 1,90E-Ol 1,908-01 4.038-02 4.03E-02 5.758-02 5.758-02 0, 0. '2.888-01 2,88E-01 GROUND PLANE DEPOSITION 3.338-01 3.338-01 7.088-02 7.088-02 1.018-01 1.01E-01 0 0, 5.208-01 5.20E-Ol INllALATION 3.608-01 2.00E-01 5.248-02 2.378-02 8.93E-02 3.468-02 0. 0. 5o028-01 2.59E-01 FRUITS AND VEGETABLES 1.258%0 6.848-01 3.64E-01 1.798-01 1.05E+00 4.868-'Ol 0, 0. 2.668+00 1.358+00 MFAT 1.53E-02 1.198-02 2.298-03 1.678-03 5.308-03 3.718-03 0. 0. 2.28E-02 1.73E-02 MILK 5.97E-03 1.25E-03 2.65E-03 4.478-04 7.778-03 1.138-03 0. 0. 1.64E-02 2.828-03 2.15E+00 1.42E+00 5 '28-01 3.16E-01 1.318%0 6.848-01 0. 0. 3.998400 2 '4E+00 a) All other doses are lover than thyroid.
Sl
- 3. 8 'EFERENCES USNRC, Regulatory Guide 1:BB. "Calculation of Releases Of Radioactive Materials Zn Gaseous And Liquid Effluents From Light-Water-Cooled Power Reactors" September 1975.
- 2. BROWN and ROOT, Znc. "Permanent Population Projections Within a 50<<Mile Radius of The SOUTH DADE PLANT", April 29, 1976.
3 ~: ( USNRC, Regulatory Guide 1.109. "Calculation Of Annual Average 'Doses To Man From Routine Releases Of Reactor Ef-fluents For The 'Purpose Of Evaluating Compliance With 10CFR50, APPENDIX I", March, 1976. J. E. Fletcher, et al., "HERMES Digital Computer
. Code For Estimating Regional Radiological Effects From The Power Industry". HEDL-TME-71-168, December, 1971.
- 5. C. T. Oakl'ey, "Natural Radiation Exposure In The United States", USEPA, ORP/SID 72-1, June, 1972.
- 6. Constructed by NUCLEAR SAFETY ASSOCIATES, Bethesda, Maryland.
52 SECTION '4.0 DOSE DATA FOR "AS-BUILT LIQUID TREATMENT SYSTEM
53 4.0 'OSE. DATA FOR "AS'-'BUIL'T"IQUIDTREATMENT 'SYSTEM
4.1 INTRODUCTION
This section establishes individual and population dose data for TURKEY POINT PLANT's "as-built" liquid treatment system. Parametric inputs'involving information derived from a general description of the system and the development of environmental pathways thr'ough which radioactivity in liquid t forms could make its way back to an individual or a population group are used to establish a base for computing individual and population doses. The resulting dose data permits an evaluation of the liquid treatment system's compliance with APPENDIX I. 4.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF'""AS-BUILT"'IQUIDTREAT-MENT SYSTEM The Waste Disposal System at TURKEY POINT PLANT is common to UNITS 3 and 4. During plant operation, drainage to the 'waste holdup tanks comes from these sources: Laundry and hot shower'rains, Floor drains, Tank overflows, Containment. pumps, Resin transfer flush water, Steam generator blowdown, Decontamination water, and Boron recycle waste water. The activity level of waste liquid from the laundry and hot shower drains will usually be low enough to permit dis-charge from the 'site witho'ut processing by pumping it to one of the waste condensate tanks where its activity can be deter-mined by a radiation monitor before being discharged to the
54 condenser cixculating water. 'f the activity level's are high, these 'liquids are either recirculated through the'aste polishing demineralizer or pumped to the waste holdup tank, for processing through, thewaste evaporator. All of the othex'aste liquids drain to the waste holdup tank by gravity flow. Zf the waste's low level, it will be handled in the same manner as the laundry and hot shower I liquids. However, any liquids requiring cleanup before release are processed in batche's by a waste evaporator. The concen-II trated bottoms are discharged to the drumming station where they are packaged for burial at a waste depository. The evaporator condensate is routed to one of two waste condensate tanks. Hhe'n one tank is filled, it is iso-lated and sampled for analysis while the second tank is in se'r-vice. Zf its activity is low 'level, the.'condensate is pumped through a flow meter and a radiation monitor to the condenser circulating water discharge. Zf the activity, level is high, it is recirculated through the waste polishing demineralizex'r returned to the waste holdup tank for reprocessing. Detailed descriptions of the system and the aug-ments it has acquired in the new TURKEY POZNT radwaste facili-ty are given in ATTACHMENT C of SUPPLEMENT A. Diagrams of the system and its flow. paths are also part of ATTACHMENT"C. FIGURE 4.l is used to schematically pxesent these diagrams in order'o use them as a base for the calculations required in this Section 4.0.
.
,
0
FIGURE 4.1 TURKEY 'POINT PLANT: Schematic of "As-Built." L'i uid Treatment- S stem Com onents Hold Filter Evap. Demin. Monitor 1.Floor Drains* Discharge Tanks Flash Discharge
- 3. Discharge Eva . Mnitor Ion 4 ~ Discharge Tanks (sundry, Lab Waste, Eguipnent, Floor, and Dacon)
56 4 3 ESTIMATED'ELEASES'ROM THE SYSTEM TABLE B-2 of Regulatory Guide 1.BB(l) was used as the basis. for estimating liquid effluent releases from TURKEY POINT PLANT, UNITS 3 & 4. Since the Waste 'Disposal System is common to both units, these data are representa-tive of the liquid effluents being emitted by the Plant and are applicable to the dose calculations that follow. ( ~" ~ I 8 ~~ 4.4 INPUT TERMS AND RESULTING RELEASES The GALE code uses certain fundamental input data terms which describe and are specific to the subject reactor. These common terms for TURKEY POINT PLANT UNITS 3 and 4 have been given in TABLE 2.3 above. The additional input terms re-quired to describe the "as-built" liquid treatment system out-L lined in Paragraph 4.2 above 'are shown in TABLE 4.1. The re-suiting liquid relea'ses by isotope for this system are shown in TABLE 4.2. 4.5 'NVIRONMENTAL PATHWAYS AND INPUTS The most important pathways for exposure of man from liquid effluents are consumption of aquatic organisms and direct radiation from isotopes deposited on stream banks and in shoreline sediments. Typically, this exposure occurs during recreational activities such as boating, picnicking, shore-fishing,'sunbathing
~ ~ ~
and swimming. Of these pathways, boating and swimming contribute little 'to the radiation dose an individual
'TABLE'4.1 Page 1 of 2 0 ~ ~ ~
'TURKEY POINT PLANT: 'GALE In ut Terms'For "As-Built" Li uid Treatment S stem Card No. ~Saces Ent~ item 15 17-33 Shim Paste Stream Bleed'00
'42-49 Volume gal/day 57-61 Blank Fraction Primary Cool-ant Activity 16 i 21-28 lE+04 I DF 34-41 2E+04 Cs, Rb DF's 47-54 lE+05 Other DF's 17 28-33 0 Collection Time days 48-53 0 Process Time days 72-77 0 Fraction Discarded 18 17-33 Equip Haste Stream Processed Drain with, Was te SHIM BLEED 42-49 200 Volume gal/day 57-61 1 Fraction Primary Coolant Activity 19 21-28 lE+04 I DF 34-41 2E+04 Cs, Rb DF' 47-54 1E+05 Other DF's 20 28-33 2 Collection Time days 48-53 0.5 Process Time days 72-77 0'.. 1 Fraction Discarded Clean Vaste Stream
'7~33 Equipment Vaste Drain 42-49 .0 Volume . gal/day Portion 57-61 0 Fraction Primary Coolant Activity 22 21-28 lE+02 I DF 34-41 1E+02 Cs, Rb DF's 47-54 lE+02 Other DF's
58 TABLE 4.1 cont'd: Page 2 of 2 Card Eo. '~Eaces 'n'ttn 'Item U'nits 'ommence 23 28-33 .0 , Collection Time days 48-5 3 0 Process Time days 72~77 0 Fraction Discarded 17-33 Dirty Waste Stream Floor Drain Was te Portion 42-49 l. 44 Volume .. . x10 gal/day 57-61 0. 082 Fraction Pr. Cool-ant Activity 25 21-28 1E+02 I DF 34-41 lE+02 Cs, Rb DP's 47-54 1E+02 Other DF's 26 28-,33 0. Collection Time days 48-53 0 Process TIme days 72-77 0 Fraction Discarded 27 73-80 1 Fraction Blowdown Proc. 28 21-28 1E+02 I DF 34-41 1E+02 Cs, Rb DP's 47-54 lE+03 Other DP's 29 28-33 0 Collection Time days 48"53 . 0 Process Time days 72-77 0 Praction Discarded 30 73-80 Blank Cond. Regen. Waste Vol. gal/day No Cond. Denim. 31 21-28 I DF No Such 34-41 Cs, Rb DF<s Treatment 47-54 Other DF's 1 re. by. Code 32 28-33 0 Collection Time days Entry is im-48-53 0 Process Time days material 72-77 ,0 Praction Discarded '5 73-80 Detergent Waste Treatment No treatment
59 TABLE 4.2 TURKEY POINT
- p. 1 of PLANT'i 2
uid Releases Prom "As-Built" S stem
~Isoto e Release Ci/ ) ~Zsoto e Release (Ci/ r)
H-3 1.58E+02 Y-92 Na-24 Y-93 P,-32 Zr-95 6.3E-05 Cr-51 1. 9E-03 Zr-97 m'-54 3.6E-04 Nb-95m Fe-55 1.9E-03 Nb-95 6.3E-05 Fe-59 1.1E-03 Nb-97m Co-58 1.8E-02 Nb-97 Co-60 2.4E-03 Mo-99 3.3E-02
.Ni-63 Tc-99m 3.2E-02 e
CQ-64 RU-103 4.4E-05 Br-83 2. 5E-05 Rh-103m 5.0E-05 Br-84 Ru-106 1.3E-05 Rb-86 8.0E<<05 Rjl-106 1.3E-05 Rb-88 7.5E-04 Sn-117m Sr-89 3.7E-04 Te-125m 3.1E-05 Sr-90 1.3E-05 Te-127m 3.1E-04 Y-90 Te-127 3.5E-04 Sr-91 3.1E-05 Te-129m 1.4E-03 Y-91m 1.9E-05 Te-129 9.5E-04 Y-91 7.6E-05 I-130 1.5E-04
e 60 TABLE 4.2 . Cont'd p. 2of 2
~Zsoto e Release (Ci/ r) ~Isoto e Release (Ci/ r)
Te-131m 4. 7E-04 Ce-141 7. OE-05 Te-131 1. 3E-04 Ce-143 4. 4E-05 ~ I-131 1. 9E-01 Pr-143 3. 7E-05 Te-132 1.2E-02 Ce-144 3. 7E-05 I-132 1.3E-02 Pr-144 3. 7E-05 I-133 5.0E-02 Nd-147 I-134 5.0E-05 W-185 t Cs-134 3.1E-02 W-187 I-135 5.7E-03 U-237 Cs-136 1.1E-02 Np-239 4. 1E-04 Cs-137 2.3E-02 Ba-137m 2.1E-02 Others Ba-140 1.8E-04 Total La-140 1.8E-04 (Less H-3) 4. 5E-01 No entry means the release is less than 1E-05 cuxies/year.
61 would receive from liquid effluents. 4.5.1 'ist'ributi'on of I'soto 'es'ro'm. L'i'i:d Zf- 'fluents: The TURKEY POINT PLANT liquid effluents will be di-luted with cooling tower blowdown in an average ratio of approximately 100 gpm liquid effluent to 2400 gpm of blowdown. This blowdown mixture will be surface-discharged to the recir-culating water canals. No,credit is taken for dilution of effluent isotopes:in the canal nor for the removal of isotopes by ion exchange in the soil of the canal system. f h to claim that no dilutent mixing occurs with the waters about TURKEY POINT, we have selected these mixing ratios (the inverse of dilution factors) inputs as being useful for our I dose calculations: a ~ A value of 0.01 for the estimation of population doses'rom aquatic food harvests and recreational activities near the site (i.e., Homestead Bayfront Park on Biscayne Bay); and
- b. A value of 0.001 for estimating population doses from recreational activities at Miami Beach.
4.5.3 Sediment A'c'cumulati'on: Isotopes discharged in liquid effluents may accumulate on sediments. Our estimate of the accumulation of liquid effluent isotopes on sediments follows the model described in detail in Regulatory Guide 1.109(2). Derived from transfer constant data taken at the mouth of the Columbia River and Tillamook Bay, Oregon, it
62 assumes-;buildup for 15 years and removal by radioactive decay only. Estimates of the .liquid effluents in sediments about the TURKEY POINT PLANT site are given in TABLE 4.3. Concen-trations at other locations may be estimated by multiplying thes'e concentrations by the mixing ratio at the location of interest. 4.5.4 Recreational Activitie's: Survey data show I that there were 165,334 visits in 1973 to Biscayne National Monument ( and Homestead Bayfront Park, two nearby recreational areas where swimming facilities are available. Using an assump-tion that 2 hours per visit..were spent in swimming, this swim-(.3) . In ming use would be 'as much as 330,668 person-hours/year our calculations this was increased to 500,000 person-hours/year to accommodate uncertainties and growth. Also, in 1973, there were 438,265 day visits and 66,294 overnight visits to Biscayne National Monument, Homestead Bayfront Park, Elliott Key, John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park, all of which are shoreline recreational areas within a 50-mile radius of TURKEY POINT. To account for potential shoreline sediment exposure, it was assumed that the day visits averaged 2 hours/visit and that the overnight visits averaged 4 hours per visit. This would total to about 1,100,000 person-hours/year; to accommodate uncertainties and growth thi.'s number was increased to 1,500,000 person-hours/year. For swimming and bea'ch use, including boating, in
) 63 TABLE 4.3
'URKEY POINT PLANT:
CONCENTRATION OF LIQUID EFFLUENT ISOTOPES IN THE ENVIRONMENT ISOTOPE CONCENTRATION DEPOSITION ZN ON WATER SEDIMENT (PCZ/L) (PCZ/M2) H 3 2.827E+04 7.242E+09 CR 51 l. 088E-ol 1.582E-01 3.020E+02 4.793E+03 MN 54 FE 55 3.269E-01 3.048E+04 FE 59 8.793E-02 3.955E+02 CO 58 2.124E+00 1 515E+04 CO 60 1.339E+00 2.219E+05 BR 83 4.825E-77 4.820E-76 RB 86 3.167E-03 5.900E+00 RB 88 0. 0. SR 89 3.330E-02 1.733E+02 SR 90 2.275E-03 7.221E+02 SR 91 1.108E-21 4 '64E-20 90 6.956E-07 1.860E-04 Y Y 91M 2.892-215 7.244E-03
- l. 004-214 4.260E+ol Y 91 ZR 95 6.354E-03 4. 132E+01 NB 95 4.360E-03 1.526E+01 MO 99 4.866E-03 1.364E+00 TC 99M 6.121E-30 1.524E-28 RU 103 9.996E-03 3.959E+01 RU 106 2.431E-01 8.921E+03 TE 125M 2.996E-03 1.737E+01 TE 127M 3.927E-02 4.279E+02 TE 127 3.849E-21 1.508E-19 TE 129M 9.289E-02 3.193E+02 TE ,129 2.513-155 1.203-154 TE 131M 3.811E-08 4.763E-06 TE 131 0. 0.
TE 132 3.906E-03 1.269E+00 I 130 5.318E-17 2.747E-15 I 131 1.773E+00 1.426E+03 I 132 2.248E-77 2.156E-76 I 133 1.218E-08 1.066E-06 I 134 1.061-206 3.828-206 I 135 2.211E-27 6.799E+00 6.197E-26 5.321E+05 CS 134 CS 136 2.705E-01 3 '18E+02 CS 137 6.826E+00 2. 190E+06 BA 140 4.237E-03 5 '13E+00 140 4.673E-07 7 844E-05 141 4 '88E-03 1.514E+01 143 1.843E-09 2.547E-07 144 5. 190E-01 1.469E+04 PR 143 1.129E-03 1.537E+00 PR 144 0. 0. NP 239 1.863E-05 4.374E-03
0 the Miami Beach/Key Biscayne area, an area which attracts many tourists, it was assumed that total beach 'plus water. use averaged one. person per meter, 8 hours per day, 200 days per year for 20 miles of usable beach and that 25% of the people are swimming at any time. The resulting estimates are 13,000,000 person-hours/year for swimming and 38,000,000 P person-hours/year for beach activities. No adjustment was made for growth because the potentials for growth are limited by the land space available. A summary of this usage data appears in TABLE 4.4. This is expressed further into adult, teen, children and infant occupational times in TABLE 4.4. I The standard rates (per RG 1.109, ref. 2) for swimming and
'I shoreline use have been doubled because figures approximating national averages are not considered representative of South-ern Florida.
the DADE County marine landings data given in TABLE V of SUP-PLEMENT C were totaled and distributed over age groups in a hypothetical population proportional to the population average fish consumption rates given in Regulatory Guide 1.109(2) . These consumption rates for aquatic foods are given also in TABLE 4. 5. Zn TABLE 4.5, these consumption rates are distribu-ted over a population distribution modeled after parameters given in Regulatory Guide 1.109(2}. Thi's distribution is:,
65 TABLE '4. 4 h ~ h ~ ~~ I
USAGE DATA AND REGIONAL YIELDS OF A UATIC FOODS'-'SED
~ ~
'TO CALCULATE POPULATION DOSES FROM'LI UID EFFLUENTS
~PaeBsa 'Uades' 'Ydeld Fish kg/year 3. 53E+06 0. 01 Shellfish kg/year 8.04E+06 0. 01 Biscayne- b Swimming man-hr/year 5 'OE+05 0. 01 Biscayne-Shoreline d man-hr/year 1. 50E+06 0. 01 Miami Beach- h Swi S g f man-hr/year 1.38E+07g 0.001 Miami Beach-Shoreline Activitiesf man-hr/year 3.80E+07g 0. 001 Time to consumption is assumed to be 10 days; a preparation factor of Q. 8 is also included in the dose calculations. b) Biscayne National Monument - Homestead Bayfront Park areas.
)Based on 2 hours per visit at parks with swimming facilities.
d))Biscayne National Monument Homestead Bayfront Park, Elliott Key-John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park areas. Based on 2 hours per day visi.t and 4 hours per overnight visit. Miami Beach/Key Biscayne area. g)See Paragraph 4.5.4 for explanation.
TABLE 4.5 ~petliwa Units Adults ~Teens ers Children Infants Maximum Rates for Individual Dose Calculations Salt Water Fish kg/yr 21.0 16.0 6.9 0. Salt Water Shellfish kg/yr 5.0 3.8 1.7 0. Discharge Canal Shoreline hr/yr 24.0 134.0 28. 0 0. Swimming hr/yr 104.0 104..0 58.0 0. Boating hr/yr 104.0 104.0 58. 0 0. Ayers e Individual Rates For Po ulation Dose Calculations Salt Water Pish kg/yr 6.9 5.2 2.2 ~ 0. Salt Water Shellfish kg/yr 1.0 0.75 0,33 0. Ocean Shoreline Deposits hr/visit 4.0 4.0 4.0 0. Tidal Basin Shoreline Deposits hr/visit 2.5 2.5 2.5 0. Ocean Swimming> hr/visit 2.0 2.0 2.0 0. Tidal Basin Swimming> hr/visit 2.0 2,0 2.0 0. a Values used only to apportion 50-mile radius food product yield over population groups. Population distribution is assumed to be 66% adult, 14% teen, and 20% child. b Values are best estimates of the number of hours spent per visit. Usage data for these pathways are most commonly ex-pressed in units of visits per year.
67 Adu2,ts: 6.6% Teens: 14% Chi;ldren Infants:
,
and 20% 4.5.6 No other pathways which would be likely to produce at least 10% of the dose calculated for those pathways described above were identified for the liquid effluent discharges of TURKEY POINT PLANT. 4.6 'ND'IVIDUAL DOSES'ROM LIQUID RELEASES Estimates of the maximum doses to individuals exposed to radiation from isotopes in liquid effluents are ( given in TABLE 4.6. These data have been computed by the LINDY Code (4) . The maximum dose to any organ of any indivi-dual is less than the design objective dose for light water reactors given in 10CFR50, APPENDIX Z. This estimated dose is also a fraction of the typical total body dose obtained from natural radiation sources. In Southern Elorida this totals about 80 mrem/year per individual (5) . 4.7 POPULATION DOSES FROM LIQUID RELEASES An estimation of the population dose from exposure to liquid effluent releases from TURKEY POINT PLANT are listed in TABLE 4.7. The LIP Code (4) was used in these computations. These data are well within the limits of APPENDIX I. If a 1984 population of 2.6 million persons receives 4 a whole body radiation dose of about 200,000 man-rem/year from natural radiation sources ('80 mrem/year/'individual; ref. 5), such dose rates would be 'expected to increase 'this exposure
TABLE 4.6 p. 1 of 2 TURKEY POINT PLANT: LI UID EFFLUEHT RADIATION DOSES TO INDIVIDUALS NEAR THE SITE (all values in area year) Pathway Hone Liver Thyroid Kidney Lung 0[-LLI Skin Total Body Adults: Salt Water Fish 6.18-01 1.4E 00 4.78-01 3. 68-01 5.78-01 5.38-01 8 ~ 68-01 Shellfish 6.8R-01 9.58-01 6 '8"01 1.8E 00 7.18-01 3.1E 00 3.88-01 Shoreline 2.9E-02 2.98-02 2.98-02 2.9E-02 2.98-02 2. 9E-02 3.48-02 2.98-02 Swieming 2. 6E-03 2.6E-03 2.6E-03 2.68-03 2.6E-03 2.6E-03 3.38-03 2.68-03 Boating 1.38-03 1.38-03 1.38-03 1.38-03 1.3E-03 1 ~ 38-03 1.68-03 1.3E-03 Total Adults 1.38 00 2.48 00 lr2E 00 2.28 00 1.3E 00 3.78 00 3.98-02 1.38 00 ~Trr: Salt Water Fish 5.98-01 1.38 00 4. OE-01 2. 7E-01 4.78-01 3.78-01 5.18-01 Shellfish 6.3E-01 8. OE-01 5. 98-01 1.48 00 5.48-01 2.48 00 3.08-01 Shoreline 1.6E-01 1.68-01 1.68-01 . 1.6E-01 1.6E-01 1.6E-01 1.9E-01 1.68-01 Swimaing 2.68-03 2.68-01 2.68-01 2.6E-03 2.68-03'.3E-03 2.68-03 3.38-03 2.6E-03 Boating 1.3E-03 1.3E-03 1.38-03 1.3E-03 1.3E-03 1.6E-03 1.38-03 Total Teenagers 1.48 00 2.1E 00 1.28 00 1.88 00 1.28 00 2.9E 00 2. OE-,01 9.88-01 Children: Salt Water Fish 6.78-01 9. 6E-01 4.18-01 l. 2E-01 2.58-01 1.78-01 2.2E-01 Shellfish 6.8E-01 5. 18-01 6. 5E-01 6.2E-01 2.58-01 '.1E 00 2.18-01 Shoreline 3.48-02 3.48-02 3.48-02 3.4E-02 3.48-02 3.48-02 4.08-02 3.48-02 Swimming 1.48-03 1.48-03 1.48-03. 1.48-03 1.4E-03 1.48-03 1.88-03 1.48-03 Boating 7.28-04. ~ 7.28-04 7.28-04 7.28-04 7.2E-04 7.28-04 9.18-04 7 '8-04 Total. Children 1.4E 00 1.5E 00 1.18 00 7.88-01 5.48-01 1.38 00 4.38-02 4.78-01
TABLE 4.6 Cont'd p. 2 of 2 Pathway Bone Liver Thyroid Kidney GI-LLI Skin Total Body Infants: Salt Water Pish 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Shellfish, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Shoreline 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Swimming 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Boating 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Infants 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
70 TABLE 4.7 TURK1H'OINT PLANT: Li uid Effluent Doses To The Re ional Po ulation . Total
~Pathwa ~Th roid Total Bod man rem/ r Salt Water Fish 3.6E-01 6. 6E-01 '1. OE+00 1
Salt Water Shellfish 6.6E>>01 1. 3E-02 6.7E-01 Shoreline Deposits 2.3E-01 2. 3E-01 4.6E-01 Shoreline Activities 2.1E-01 2. 1E-01 4.2E-01 Swimming 4.5E-04 4.5E-04 9. OE-04 TOTAL l. 46E+00 1.1E+00 2. 55E+00
71 by approximately 0.01 .percent, an insignificant increase.
4.8 REFERENCES
USNRC, Regulatory Guide 1.BB, "Calculation Of Rel'ease Of Radioactive Mater'ials In Liquid and Gaseous Effluents From Pressurized Water Reactors (PWRS) ", September, 1975
- 2) USNRC, Regulatory Guide 1.109, "Calculation Of Annual Doses To Man From Routine 'Releases of Reactor Effluents For The Purpose Of Evaluating Compliance With 10CFR Part 50, APPENDIX I", March, 1976.
BROWN and ROOT Study For FPL, April, 1976. Constructed by Nuclear Safety Associates, 5101 River Road,- Bethesda, Maryland. 5} Oakley, D.T., "Natural Radiation Exposure In The United States", USEPA, ORP/SID 72-1, June, 1972.
72 SECTION 5.0 COMPLIANCE OP "AS-BUILT" RADWASTE SYS~1S WITH NRC STAFF POSITION ON APPENDIX I
73 5 0 COMPX(RANCE. OZ;<(AS BUXLTn MDWASTE 'SYSTEMS'ITH NRC
'TAFF POSITION ON A'PPENDIX I..
With,'some 'conservatism, our analysis of TURKEY POXNT PLANT's compliance to the 'requirements of APPENDIX I assumed that all liquid effluents were discharged to open'water areas surrounding the PLANT rather than to its closed recirculating canal system, thenormal mode 'of PLANT operation. Thus, the data in Section 4.0 reflects thi:s conservatism and does not account for the operational functions of liquid-system compo-nents in the PLANT's new radwaste facility which will begin its operation in mid 1976. The usability of those components will greatly enhance the'otentials of minimizing 13.quid effluent releases. As a result, the "as-built" liquid treatment system demonstrates an operability that meets compliance with a con-siderable margin of safety. The gaseous treatment system also exhibits similar criteria. The'ollowing summations give . further credibility to these statements.
/
5.1 COMPLIANCE ON INDIVIDUAL DOSES A comparison (TABLE 5.1} of the individual doses com-it puted in Sections 3.0 and 4.0 above with APPENDIX I require-ment shows that the "as-built" gaseous and liquid treatment'ystems are effective systems for control of radioactive re-leases. 5.2 'OMPL'IANCE ON POPULATXON DOSES In like manner, the residual population doses, which
TABLE 5.1 TURKEY POINT PLANT: Com lienee 'Mith APPENDIX I-Com arisen of Doses To Individuals
~TBdl B d ~Th B ld Skin GI Tract Compliance APPENDIX Compliance APPENDIX Compliance APPEHDIX Compliance APPENDIX Releases PTP l PTP I PTP I PTP I A. Doses to ADULTS mrem/ ear Liquid-to Hax. Exposed 1.1E+00 3.0E 00 1.5E+00 1.DE%01 1.6E-03 1.0EW1 1.9E+00 1.0K+01 Individual Gaseous-to Individual at 1.7E-O). 5.0E 00 3.9E-01 1.5K+01 5.0E-03 1 ~ 5E+01 1 7E-Ol 1.5E+Ol Nearest Residence, 17,063 meters Gaseous-to Individual at 5.&E-01 5.0E 00 1.&E+00 1.5E+01 1B4E-01 1.5E+01 5.6E-01 1.5K%01 Nearest Cow, 20,750 meters MNM Gaseous-to Hypothetical 1.42E+00 5.0E 00 2.2E+00 1.5K+01 1.9E-01 1.5K+01 Individual at Site Boundary, 1 mile N.
B. Doses to CHILDREN mrcm ear Liquid-to Hax. Exposed 1.1E+00 3.0E 00 1.5E+00 1.DE%01 1.68-03 1.OR+01 1.9E+00 1.DE+01 Individual Gaseous-to Individual at 2.0E-OI 5.0E 00 1.1E+00 1 5E+01 5.0E-03 1.5E+Ol 2.0E-01 1.5K%01 Nearest Residence, K7B063 meters Gaseous-to Individual at 5.&E-01 5.0E 00 7.6E-01 1.5E+Ol 3.7E-03 1.5E+Ol 5.&E-01 1.5E+01 Nearest Cov, 20,750 meters MNM Gaseous-to )lypothetical 6 '8-01 5.0E 00 1.3E+00 1.5E+Ol 1.9E-01 1 ~ 5E+01 Individual at Site Boundary, 1 mile H.
75 might reau3,t from the operation of thy "as-built" systems over
~4 the 3,ifetime og. the plant~ are 'we3;3, within, the 'requirements of APPENDIX T. TABLE 5.2, compares dose values'a'sed on the 1984 population within 50 miles- of the 'plant with 'tho'se, based on the 'area's 2020 population.
- 5. 3 'COMPLIANCE'ITH NORE THAN ONE'EACTOR ON SITE TABLE 5.3 assumes that the'data compiled for UNITS 3 and 4 at TURKEY POINT could have occurred from each unit'oper-ating a separate and identical radwaste treatment system.
This shows that TURKEY POINT PLANT can still be in compliance with the NRC Staff position on APPENDIX I (E1-50-.2). 5-4 CONCLUSI'ONS It is clear from the above tabulations that the equip-ment of the "as-built" systems at TURKEY POINT can adequately maintain the dose requirements of APPENDIX I. No presently calculated individual dose exceeds APPENDIX I limits. Our option to dispense with meeting the requirements of Paragraph IID of APPENDIX I (the cost-benefit analysis}, has been met with 'the findings reported above, we believe that the gaseous waste and liquid treatment equipment installed at TURKEY POINT have gone far beyond the point of cost effective-ness. The PLANT is over-equipped to meet APPENDIX I compliance. Then, no modifications to the effluent treatment systems are either required or planned.
76 TABLE 5.2 TURKEY POINT PLANT: Com arison of Po ulation Doses 1984 Po ulation Data vs 2020 Po ulation Data* Dose, mrem/year ~Pa thwa ~Th roid Total Dose A. Releases To 1984 Po ulation 1;, Liquid Releases 1.46E+00 1. 10E+00 2.56E+00
- 2. Gaseous Releases . 2.15E+00 1.42E+00 3 '6E+00 I TOTAL Releases '3. 61E+00 2.52E+00 6.12E+00 B. Releases To 2020 Po ulation
- 1. Liquid Releases 1. 46E+00 1.10E+00 2.56E+00
- 2. Gaseous Releases 2. 69E+00 '1.80E+00 '4;49E+00 TOTAL Releases 4.15E+00 2.90E+00 7.05E+00
*Over plant lifetime
1 77 TABLE 5.3 TURKEY POINT PLANT: Site Com liance LB.th NRC Staff Position On APPENDIX, I UNIT UNIT NRC Staff No. 3 No. 4 Site Position
~Pathwa Release Release Release (RM-50<<2) a) Gaseous Releases:
Air Dose at Site Boundary
- a. Gamma, mrad/yr 1.42+00 l. 42-01 2. 8E+00 10 per site
- b. Beta, mrad/yr l. 7E&0 1. 7EWO 3. 4E+00 20 per site 2~ Air Immersion of Individual
- a. Total Body, 6.3E-02 6.3E-02 1.3E-Ol 5 per site mrem/yr
- b. Skin, mrem/yr 1.9E-01. 1.9E-01 3.8E-01 10 per site 3~ Prom Iodines and Particulates
- a. Total Body, 1.9E-01 1.9E-Ol 3.8E-01 5 per site mrem/yr
- b. Thyroid, mrem/yr 3. 4E-01 3.4E-01 6.8E-01 15 per site
- c. Total I-131 8.0E-02 8. OE-02 1.6E-Ol 1 per unit Release, Ci/yr b) Li uid Releases
- 1. Total Body Dose To 1.1E+00 1.1E+00 2. 2E+00 per site Individual, mrem/yr
- 2. Dose,To Any Organ, 1.9E+00 1.9E+00 ,3.8E+00 '
mrem/yr
- 3. Total liquid 4. 5E-01 4. 5E-Ol 9. OE-Ol 5 per unit Release, Ci/yr A conservative assumption that doses are completely additive.
Liquid doses are not additives, since liquid doses are concentration dependants and each unit has its own dilution water. GI-LLI of adult is the critical pathway. d Except 3 H and dissolved noble gases.
78
- 5. 5 'EFERENCES
'ompleted under contract'. with NUCLEAR, SAZETX ASSOCIATES, Bethesda, Maryland; A documen't covering this work will be issued in June,,1976."
79 SECTION 6.0 COST-BENEFICIAL ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE GASEOUS AND LIQUID TREATMENT SYSTEMS
80 6.0 " COST'-BENEFXCXAL ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE GASEOUS AND'LIQUID'REATMENTSYSTEMS 6.1 'NTRODUCTION On September 4, 1975, the NRC published in the FEDERAL REGISTER an amendment to APPENDIZ I which:permits an applicant, whose application was filed prior to June 2, 1970, the option to dispense with meeting the requirements of Paragraph IID of APPENDIX I, if it can show that its plant meets the final Staf f position of APPENDIZ X. This option does not in any way affect the need for the applicant to show compliance with paragraphs XXA, B and C. TURKEY POINT PLANT, UNITS 3 and 4, has "as-built" gaseous and liquid treatment systems that have been'emonstrat-ed in Sections 3.0 and 4.0, above,'o be in compliance with Paragraph IID. However, to emphasize the importance of this compliance, Florida Power and Light Company has elected to consider alternative systems. Thus, the cost-benefit data that follow for these systems add considerably to the conclu-a sions given in Section 5.0 above. 6.2 BASIS FOR COST-BENEFIT ANALYSES In order to carry out the sequential cost-benefit analysis required by Paragraph IID of APPENDIZ I, it is necessary to evaluate the addition or subtraction of a com-ponent from a system with respect to these principal costs: a". The capital and operating costs associated with the described change, and
81
- b. The resulting costs that could arise from increasing the capability of the system to meet more stringent environmental re-
~
quirements to reduce environmental doses. In our evaluation of each alternative system, estimations have been made of the capital and operating costs associated with each described change. The capital costs have been annualized and added to the annual operating costs to arrive at a total annual cost. Additional augments to the system increase these annual costs, which in turn must, be compared to the savings in environmental costs that result from population dose reductions. In those cases where eguip-ment is removed, the resulting costs are cost savings that must be compared to the increases in environmental cost which result from environmental dose increases. Under these con-ditions, the test is whether or not the ratio of the annual cost in dollars to the annual change in dose in man-rem shows an increase that is greater than $ 1.000. Most of the co'st estimates used in this evaluation of alternative systems are based on values given in Regulatory Guide 1.110(1). In those instances where it was necessary to use other sources of cost data and other methods of cost es-timating, an appropriate indication of the source is shown. SUPPLEMENT C describes the cost. estimating methodolgy used in these analyses and provides detailed cost estimates for use in computation. 6.3 ALTERNATIVES FOR THE GASEOUS SYSTEM These alternative systems for TURKEY POINT's
82 existing system have been evaluated: System -. Component. of Description Desi nation Gas'eo'us S stem A'ffected Gas Decay Tanks Increase size of gas tanks (1/3) A-2 Gas Decay Tanks Add HEPA filters Aux. Bldg. Ventilation Add charcoal adsorbers B-2 Aux. Bldg. Ventilation Remove HEPA filters Containment Purge Add charcoal adsorbers C-2 Containment Purge Remove HEPA filters D-l Steam Jet Air Ejector Add charcoal filters 6.3.1 In uts To GALE Code and Source Terms: The fundamental input terms which describe TURKEY POINT's reactors (See TABLE 2.6) also are applicable to each of these alternate systems. The GALE input terms specific to each system are . shown in'ABLE 6.1. The gaseous emission source terms for each of these systems were calculated using the PWR-GALE Code and the parameters outlined in Regulatory Guide 1.BB(2) . The result-ing source term for a specific nuclide in TABLE 6.2, represents the difference between its release by the "as-built" system and its release by the substitute system. It should be noted that when an augment is added to the system, the nuclide re-lease difference will be positive which represents a reduction in release. The elimination of an augment will result in a
83
'TABLE 6.1 TURKEY 'POINT 'PLAIT: GALE 'In 'ut "
Terms For'lternative Gaseous S stems System Chan es Re uired Desi ation ~Pur ose Card No. 'Lines, EntrE A-1 Increase Gas Decay Tank 34 73-80 12. 5 Volume By 1/3 35 73-80 12. 5 36 73-80 12.5 A-2 Add HEPA To Gas Decay 37 39-41 Yes Release Add Charcoal Adsorber 38 39-41 Yes To Aux. Building B-2 Remove HEPA From 38 56>>58 Leave Blank Aux. Building C-1 Add Charcoal Adsorbers 41 47-49 Yes To Purge C-2 Remove HEPA From 41 56-58 Leave Blank Purge D-1 Add Charcoal Adsorbers 44 73-80 0.1 To Condenser Air Ejector
TABLE 6.2 Page 1 of 2 TURKEY POINT PLANT: Emissions From Alternative Cas S stems (Reductions or Increases as Ci/Yrs) A-1: Increase A-2: Add B-1: hdd Charcoal B-2: Remove C-1: Add G;2: Remove . D-1: hdd Gas Decay Tank HEPA to Cas Adsorber to hux. HEPA From Charcoal Adsorber HEPA From Charcoal hdsorber Isoto e Sizes Deca Tank Train Buildin Aux. Bld to Pur e Pur e to Air E ector Kr-83m 0 0 0 0 0 0 Kr-85m 0 0 0 0 0 0 Kr-85 -1.0E+Ol -1.DE+01 -1.DE+01 -1.0K+01 -1.0K%01 -1.DE+01 Kr-87 0 0 0 0 0 0 Kr-88 0 0 0 0 0 0 Kr-89 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 Xc-131m -3. DE+01 -2.6Et01 -2.6K+01 -2. 6EM1 -2. 6E+Ol -2. 6EWl -2. 6K+01 Xe-133m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Xe-133 -6.0E+02 3e OR+02 -3.DE+02 -3.DE+02 -3.0E402 -3+OR&2 -3. OEW2 Xc-135m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Xe-135 Xe-137m Xe-137 A-41 C-14 I-131 +3.2E-02 +2.1E-02 I-133 +5.1E-02 +3.3E-02
TABLE 6.2 Cont'd Page 2 of 2 A-1: Increase A-2: Add B-1: Add Charcoal B-2: Remove C-1: Add C-2: Remove D-1: Add Gas Decay Tank HEPA to Gas Adsorber To HEPA Prom Charcoal Adsorber HEPA Prom Charcoal Adsorber Isoto e Sizes Deca Tank Train Aux. Bld . Aux. Bld To Pur e Pur e To Air E ector Hn-54 +5. OR&3 +1.8E-02 Fe-59 +1.5E-03 +6.0E-03 Co-58 +1.5E-02 +6.0E-02 Co-60 +7.0E-03 +2.6E-02 Sr-89 +3.0E-04 +1.2E-03 Sr-90 +5.0E-05 +2.3E-03 Cs-134 +5.0E-03 +1.8E-02 Cs-137 +8.0E-03 +3.0E-02 H-3 Total Nobld Gases: -6.3E+02 -3.26E+02 -3.26EM2 -3.26EM2 -3. 26K+02 -3.26Et02 -3.26E+02 Total Particulates: 0 +4.2E-02 +1.6E-01 Total Iodincs +8.3E-02 +5.4E-02
- Positive values are reductions in releases; negative values are increases in releases.
negative difference, or an increase in release. 6.3.2 Cha'n's'n Poul'at'ion'os'es"'For Al'tern'ate Gaseous' 'stems'o determine 'the population doses that could result from each of these gaseous systems, the environmental pathways and population data, considered in Section 3.0 above for the "as-built" system, were coupled with the source terms developed for each specific system described in Paragraph 6.2.1 above. The GASP Code(3} was used to compute these dose cal-culations. TABLE 6.3 compares the reductions in population doses that are potentially possible if any of these substitute systems are used for gaseous waste treatment at TURKEY POINT PLANT. 6.3.,3 Annualized Costs of Alternate S stems: TABLE 6.4 summarizes the annualized increased costs or the sayings that could result from the use of a specific alternate system. PART I, ATTACHMENT C, gives details about the cost estimates developed to compute these costs.
- 6. 3. 4 Cost-Benef it Ratios o f Alternate S stems '.
As it has been described in 6.1 above, a cost-benefit ratio for each system can be derived through a simple proportionality statement, i.e., Annual Costs In Dollars of Cost-Benefit
$
Annual Change In Dose (man-rem) Cost.-benefit ratio values, based on 1984 population data, for each of the alternate systems have been calculated in this manner and are listed in TABLE 6.5.
87 TABLE '6.3 Page 1 of 7 0 ~ TURKEY. POINT PLANT: 'Reduction 'of Po ulation Doses'Throu h
Use 'of Selected'lternat&re Gaseous S stems System Dose Rate* 'A-1 'Increase Deca 'Tank 'Sizes
~
Total ~Paahah ~Th ioid '~Bod 'Total POPULATION Fruits and Vegetables 0 0 0 Meat 0 0 0 Milk 0 0 0 TOTAL-Food Pathways 0 0 0 I
- 2. Po ulation Pathwa s Noble Gas Immersion +2 +2.1E-01 +4.2E-01 Ground Plane 0 0 0 Deposition Inhalation 0
~
0 '0 TOTAL-Pop. Pathways 0 0 0
- 3. TOTAL 1984 Dose Change: +2.1E-Ol +2.1E-01 +4.2E-Ol POPULATION
- l. Total Food Pathwa s (same as for 1984) 0 0 0
- 2. Po ulation Pathwa s Noble Gas Immersion +7.6E-01 +7.6E-01 +1.5E 00 Ground Plane 0 0 Deposition Immers ion 0 0 "0 TOTAL-Pop. Pathways +7.6E-01 +7.6E-01 +1.5E 00
- 3. TOTAL 2020 Dose Change: +7.6E-,Ol +7.6E-Ol +1.5E 00
- Dose Rate = man-rem/year; values are decreases in dose rate.
88 TABLE 6.3 .Cont'd Page 2 og 7 (/I ~ I 0 \ 0 0 % I )4 System - Dose Rate* 'A-'2:.'dd'HEPA To Gas Deca "Tank Total Th roid: '""'Bod """Total
~
'Pathwa A. FOR 1984:(FPL} POPULATION Fruits 6 Vegetables. 0 +4.7E-02 +4.7E-02. Meat 0 +1 ~ OE-03 +1.0E-03 Milk 0 +7;6E-03 '+7:6E-03 TOTAL-Food Pathways 0 +5.5E-02 +5.5E-02
- 2. Po ulation Pathwa s Noble Gas Immersion 0 0 0 Ground Plane +5.7E-02 +5.7E-02 +l. 1E-Ol Deposition Inhalation +5.'E-'04 +5.3E-04 TOTAL-Pop. Pathways 0'5.7E-02 +5.7E-02 +1. 1E-Ol
- 3. TOTAL 1984 Dose Change: +5. 7E-02 +1.1E>>01 +1.7E-01 B. FOR 2020 (NRC)
POPULATION
- 1. Total-Food Pathwa s (same as for 1984) 0 +5.5E-02 +5.5E-02 .
- 2. Po ulation Pathwa s Noble Gas Immersion 0 0 0 Ground Plane +2.2E-01 +2.2E-Ol +4.4E-01 Deposition Inhalation 0 '+2;OE-03 '+2; OE-03 TOTAL-Pop. Pathways +2.2E-01 +2.2E-01 +4.4E-Ol
- 3. TOTAL 2020 Dose Change: +2.2E-01 +2.8E-01 +5.0E-01
- Dose Rate = man-rem/year; values are decreases in dose rate.
i 89 TABLE 6.3'ont'd. Page 3 of 7 H System' Dose'ate* '"B-1: Add Chaicoal Ads. 'To,Aux.:Bld .
"- "- "" " "" Total "" '" "" "- ".
'Pathwa ' ,' Th roid 'o'd' Total A. FOR'1984 (YPL)
'POPULATION +4,5E-01 +5.7E 04 +4.5E-Ol Fruits & Vegetables +4.5E-01 +5. 7E-04 +4.5E-01 Meat +8.2E-. 03 +1,6E-05, +8.2E-03 Milk +4.4E-01 +9.'5E-'04 '+4.4E-'01 TOTAL-Food Pathways +9.0E-01 +1.5E-03 +9.0E-01
- 2. 'Po ulation Pathwa s Noble Gas Immersion +1.7E-08 +1.7E-08 +3.4E-08 Ground Plant +1.1E-04 +1.1E-04 +2.2E-04 Deposition Inhalation ~ +9:5E-02 +1;8E-'04 '+9.5E-02 TOTAL-Pop. Pathways +9.5E-02 +2.9E-04 +9.5E-02
- 3. TOTAL 1984 Dose Change; +9.5E-02 +1.8E-03 +9.5E-02 POPULATION
- 1. Total Food Pathwa s (same as for 1984) +9. OE-01 +1.5E-03 +9.0E-01
- 2. Po ulation Pathwa s Noble Gas Immersion +5.5E-08 +5.5E-08 +1.1E-07 Ground Plant +4.5E-04 +4.5E-04 +9.0E-04 Deposition Inhalation +3.5E-01 +6.3E-04 '+3.5E-01 TOTAL-Pop. Pathways +3.5E-01 +1.1E-01 +3.5E-01
- 3. TOTAL 2020 Dose Change: +l. 3E+00 +2. 6E-03 +1.3E+00
- Dose Rate = man-rem/year; values are decreases in dose rate.
90 TABLE 6.3 Canted. Page 4 of 7 System'- Dose Rate* B-.2':.Remove'HEPA From:.Aux.'.Bld
.,"Total Pathwa 'Th "roid ' B'o'd' ' ':
A. FOR'1984 (FPL) POPULATION 'Total'ruits and Vegetables'. -1.9E-01 -1.9E-01 Meat 0 -4 .OE-03 -4.0E-03 Milk 0 '-'3;1E-'02 -3;1E-02 TOTAL-Food Pathways 0 . -2.3E-01 .2.3E-01
- 2. 'Po ulation Pathwa s Noble Gas Immersion 0 0 0 Ground Plant -2.2E-01 -2.2E-01 >> -4.4E-Ql Deposition C Inhalation '-2:3E-'03 '*-2.3E-'03 TOTAL-Pop. Pathways
'0'2.2E-01
-2.3E-01 -4.6E-01
- 3. TOTAL 1984 Dose Change: -2.2E-01 -4.6E-01 -.6. 9E-01 POPULATION
- 1. Total Food Pathwa s (same as for 1984) 0 -2. 2E-01 -2.2E-01
- 2. Po ulation Pathwa s Noble Gas Immersion 0 0 0 Ground Plant -8.88-01 -8.8E-01 -1.8E-OQ Deposition Inhalation '0 '-7.6E-'03 '"-7.6E-03 TOTAL-Pop. Pathways -8.8E-01 -8.9E-01 -1.8E 00
- 3. TOTAL 2020 Dose Change: -8.8E-01 -1.1E+00 -2.0E 00
- Dose Rate = man-rem/year; values are decreases in dose rate.
91 TABLE 6.3 Cont'd. Page 5 og 7 Pathwa'C-l: System - Dose Rate*
'-'Th roid'
'dd Charcoal 'Ads.-'To Pur e
'
Bod'-' ' ': 'Total.
'otal.
FOR 1984'(FPL)
POPULATION Pruits & Vegetables" +3.5E-02 +7.0E-05. +3.5E-02
. Meat +1.0E-03 +2.0E-06 +1.0E-03 Milk '+5.'5E-'02 +1.1E-'04 '+5;5E-'02 TOTAL-Pood Pathways +9.5E-02 +1.8E-04 +9.5E-02 2.Po ulation Pathwa s Noble Gas Immersion +1.5E-09 +1.5E-09 +3.0E-09 Ground Plane "
+1.4E-05 +1.4E-05 +2.8E-05 Deposition Inhalation '+1;1E-02 +2.1E-05 '+1.1E-02 TOTAL-Pop. Pathways +1.1E-02 +2.1E-05 +1.1E-02
- 3. TOTAL 1984 Dose Change: +1.1E-01 +1.88-04 +1.1E-01 POPULATION
- 1. Total Pood Pathwa s (same as for 1984) +9.5E-02 +1.8E-04 +9.5E-02
- 2. Po ulation Pathwa s Noble Gas Immersion +5.4E-09 +5.4E-09 +1.1E-08 Ground Plane +5.5E-05 +5.5E-05 +1.1E-04 Deposition Inhalation '+4.2E-02 +7.6E-'05 +4.2E-02 TOTAL-Pop. Pathways +4.2E-02 +1.3E-04 +4.2E-02
- 3. TOTAL 2020 Dose Change: +1.4E-01 +3.1E-04 +1.4E-01
- Dose Rate = man-rem/year; values are decreases in dose rate.
92 TABLE 6.3'. Cont'd Page, 6,of 7 System - Pose Rate< 'C-'2:.:Remove HEPA From Pur e
'Total
'.Total"
'Bod '
'Pathwa
> ~ ~
A. 'FOR '984 'FPL) POPULATION Pruits 6 0 -9.9E-03 -9.9E-03 2.1E-04 -2.1E-04 Vegetables'iieat 0 Milk 0 '"-'1.6E-'03, '-'1.6E-03 TOTAL-Pood Pathways 0 -1.2E-02 -1.2E-03
- 2. Po ulation Pathwa s Noble Gas Immersion 0 0 0 Ground Plane -7.6E-03 -1.2E-02 -2. 4E-02 Deposition Inhalation ' "-l.'lE-04 -1."1E-04.
"..'0'7.6E-03 TOTAL-Pop. Pathways -1.2E-02 -2.4E-02
- 3. TOTAL 1984 Dose Change: -7.6E-03 -1.5E-02 -1.6E-02 B.'OR 2020 (NRC)
POPULATION
- 1. "Total'Food Pathwa s (same as for 1984) 0 -7.6E-03 -7. 6E-03
- 2. Po ulation Pathwa s Noble Gas Immersion 0 0 0 Ground Plane -3.0E-02 -3.0E-02 -6. OE-.02 Deposition Inhalation 0 2.'E-'04 <<'2;6E-04 TOTAL-Pop. Pathways -3.0E-02 -3.0E-02 -6.0E-02
- 3. TOTAL 2020 Dose Change: -3.0E-02 -3. 7E-02 -6.7E-02
- Dose Rate = man-rem/year; values are decreases in dose rate.
93 TABLE 6. 3 Cont'd. Page 7 of 7 System'ose Rate* D-1;'dd 'Charcoal Ada. to 'Air E'ector Total" 'Pathwa Th 'roid A. 'FOR'1985 '(FPL)
''od"Total'rui.ts POPULATION A~ ~
6 '+2. 3E-01 +4.7E-04 +2. 3E-01
+6.0E-03 Vegetables'eat
+6'OE-03 +1; 1E-05, Milk +3.2E-01 +6;3E-04, '"+3;2E-01 TOTAL-Food Pathways +5.5E-01 +1.1E-03 +5.5E-01
- 2. Po ulation Pathwa s Noble Gas Immersion +1. 3E-08 +1.3E-08 +2.6E-08 Ground Plant +1.1E-04 +1.1E-04 +2.2E-04 Deposition Inhalation +7.0E-'02 '2:3E-'04 +7;OE-'01 TOTAL-Pop. Pathways +7.0E-02 +2.3E-04 +7.0E-01
- 3. TOTAL 1984 Dose Change: +6.2E-02 +1.2E-03 +6.2E-01 BE FOR 2020 (NRC)
POPULATION
- 1. Total Food Pathwa s (same as for 1984) +5.5E-01 +1.1E-03 +5.5E-01 ulation
'4
- 2. Po Pathwa s Noble Gas Immersion +4.4E-08 +4.4E-08 +8.8E-08 Ground Plane 2E 04 +4.2E-04 +8.4E-04 Deposition Inhalation '+2.5E-01 '+4.6E-'04 '+2.5E-Ol TOTAL-Pop. Pathways +8.8E-04 +2.5E-01
- 3. TOTAL 2020 Dose Change: +8.2E-Ol +2. OE-03 +8.2E-01
- Dose Rate = man-rem/year; values are decreases in dose rate.
94
'TABLE '6.4 TURKEY POINT'PLANT: 'nnualized'Costs of
'Alternate 'Gaseous Waste S stems System
~Pur uee 'S/ACost ear A-1 Increase Size Decay Tanks 4, 100 A-2 Add HEPA to Gas Decay Trian 7,500 B-1 Add Charcoal to Aux. 111,200 B-2 from Aux. Bldg. (105,200)
Bldg.'emove HEPA C-1 Add Charcoal to High Vol. Purge 47,300 C-2 Remove HEPA from High Vol. Purge ( 52,500) D-1 Add Charcoal to Condenser Air Ejector 12,700 a) See PART II, SUPPLEMENT D, for details of cost estimating. Values in ( ) are cost savings.
TABLE 6.5 TURKEY POINT PLANT: Cost-Benefit Ratios For Alternate Gaseous S stems System Annual Annual Cost-Benefit Ratios Designa- dose a cost $ Cost per $ Saved Per tion ~Puz ose man-rem dollars Man-rem Saved hfan-rem Increase A-1 Increase Size Gas 6.62E-01 4,100 6.2E+03 Decay Tanks A-2 Add HEPA to Gas 2. 68E-01 7, 500 2.8E+04 Decay Train B-1 Add Charcoal to Aux. 1.31E 00 1115 200 8.5E+04 Bldg. B-2 Remove HEPA from Aux. (1. 06E 00) (105,200) 1. OE+05 Bldg. C-1 Add Charcoal to Purge 1.65E-Ol 47,300 2. 9E+05 C-2 Remove HEPA from Purge (3.56E-02) ( 52,500) l. 5E+06 D-1 Add Charcoal to Con- 9.88E-Ol 12,700 1. 3E+04 denser Air Ejector From TABLE 6.4 From TABLE 6.5 Values for ( ) in this column are dose increases. d) Values for ( in this column are cost savings.
)
6.4 ALTERNATIVES FOR THE LIQUID TREATMENT SYSTEM A similar approach was used to determine the po-tential cost. benefits that could result if the "as-built" liquid treatment system was replaced wi;th one of these alter-nate systems: System Component of Description S stem Affected of Ch'n e E-1 Steam Generator Add mixed bed Blowdown Treatment E-2 Steam Generator Add mixed bed Blowdown Treatment and cation bed Clean Waste System Remove evaporator F-2 Clean Waste System Remove demineralizer G-1 Dirty Waste System Remove deminerali zer G-2 Dirty Waste System Remove evaporator 6.4.1 In uts To GALE Code And Source Terms: The GALE input terms that relate the fundamental terms used to describe TURKEY POINT reactors (TABLE 2.6) to these alternate systems are given in TABLE 6.6. For each system, the resulting source terms can be represented as the differences between the releases by the "as-built" system and the releases by an alternate system. These differences are summarized in TABLE 6.7. In those sys-tems augmented by additional equipment, the difference is positive, representing a reduction in release. When a piece of equipment is eliminated, the difference becomes positive I
0 TABLE 6.6 Page 1 of 2 TU1KEY POINT PLANT: GALE In ut Terms For Alternate Li uid Treatment S stems System Card Changes Required Desi ation ~Pnr ose Card No. Lines ~Enrr E-1 Add mixed bed to Steam Generator Blowdown 28 21-28 1E+02 34-41 lE+01 47-54 lE+02 E-2 Add mixed bed and cation bed to Steam 28 21-28 1E 00 Generator Blowdown 34-41 lE+Ol 47-54 lE+01 F-1 Remove Evap from Clean Waste System 24 42-49 0 25 21-28 1 34-54 1 47-54 1 22 21-28 1E+01 34-41 2E 00 47-54 1E+01 F-2 Remove Demin from Clean Waste System 24 42-49 0 25 21-28 1 34-41 1 47-54 1 22 21-28 1E+03 34-41 1E+04 47-54 1E+04
TABLE 6.6 Cont'd Page 2 of 2 System Card Chan es Re uired Desi ation ~Pur ose Card No. Lines ~Enrr Remove Demin from Dirty Waste System 21 42-49 0 22 21-28 1 34-41 1
'47-54 1 25 21-28 1E+Ol 34-41 2E 00 47-54 lE+Ol Remove Evap from Dirty Waste System 21 - 42-49 0 22 21-28 1 34-41 1 47-54 1 25 21-28 lE+03 34-41 1E+04 47-54 1E+04 Remove Evap and Demin from Dirty Waste System
TABLE 6.7 Page 1 of 3 TURKEY POINT PLANT: Reductions fn Li uid Releases Resultin From Alternate Treatment S stems (all values in curie/year) E-1: Add E-2: Add M.xed F-1: Remove F-2: Remove G-1: Remove G-2: Remove G-3: Remove Mixed Bed 6 CationBed Evap Clean Demin Clean Demin Dirty Evap Dirty Demin & Evap from
~Isoto a H-3 Na-24 P-32 Cr-51 -1.2E-03 .1.1E-02 -l. OE-05 8.3E-03
, -7.5E-06 -2.4E-07 Nn-54 -2. 9E-04 -2. 5E-03 -2.3E-06 -1.4E-03 -1.3E-06 -4.4E-09 Fe-55 -1. OE-03 -1. 3E-02 -1.2E-05 -7. 2E-03 -6.4E-06 =
-6.3E-09 Fe-59 ..7.5E-04 -6. 7E-03 -6.1E-06 -4. 4E-03 -4.0E-06 -8.6E-08 Co-58 -1.0E-02 -1. 2E-01 -1.1E-04. -7.2E-02 -6.4E-05 -7.2E-07 Co-60 -1.3E-03 -1. 7E-02 -1.5E-05 -9. OE-03 -8.1E-06 -6.3E-09 Ni-63 Cu-64 Br-83 -3. 7E-03 -7.4E-04 -6. 7E-04 -1. 2E-03 -1. OE-05 -1.2E-06 Br-84 -6. 2E-06 -1.2E-05 Rb-86 .-5.6E-05 -5. 6E-05 '1.9E-03
.-3.5E-07 -1.7E-03 -3. OE-07 -1.3E-08 Rb-88 -2.0E-04 Sr-89 -3.0E-04 -2.4E-03 '2.2E-06 -1.6E-03 -1.4E-06 -2.7E-08 Sr-90 -8.2E-06 -8.4E-05 -4.5E-05 Sr-91 -1.1E-04 -1.1E-08 -9.8E-12 -9.4E-04 -8. 4E-07 -9.4E-08 Y-90 -8. OE-05 -1.0E-O5 Y-91m -1.2E-04 -7.1E-09 -6.3E-12 -6.1E-04 -5.5E-07 -6.1E-08 Y-91 -4.6E-05 -4.8E-04 -3.8E-07 -2.9E-04 -2.6E-07 -4.0E-09
~ Y-92 Y-93 -1.4E-05 -5.1E-05 Zr-95 -4.5E-05 -4.3E-04 -3. 9E-07 -2.7E-04 -2.4E-07 -3.8E-09 Zr-97
Table 6.7 (Cont-'d) Page 2 of 3 E-1: Add E-2: Add Mixed F-1: Remove F-2: Remove G-1: Remove G-2: Remove G-3: Remove Mixed Bed & Cation Bed Evap Clean Demin Clean Demin Dirty Evap Dirty Demin 6 Evap from ~lento e SG Slowdown SG Blowdown ~toasts S st ~Waste S st ~Haste S st Nb-95m Nb-95 -4. 3E-04 . -4.3E-04 -3.8E-07 -2.2E-04 -2.0E-07 -4.4E-10 Nb-97m Nb-97 Mo-99 -3. 9E-02 -3.9E-02 -'3. 5E-05 -3.0E-01 -2.7E-04 -2.8E-05 Tc-99m -3.7E-02 -3.7E-02 -3.3E-05 -2.4E-Ol -2. 2E-04 -2.2E-05 Ru-103 +3.3E-06 -3.0E-04 -3.0E-04 -2.6E-07 -2.0E-04 -1.8E-07 -4.3E-09 Ru-106 -8.2E-04 -8.2E-05 -4.5E-05 Rh-103m -3.0E-04 -3.0E-04 -2.6E-07 -2.0E-04 -1.8E-07 -4.5E-09 Rh-105 Rh-106 -8.2E-04 -8. 2E-05 -4.5E-05 Sn-117m Te-125m -1.5E-05 -2.1E-04 -1.3E-04 Te-127m -1.3E-04 -2.1E-03 -1. 9E-06 -1.3E-03 -l. 1E-06 -l. 1E-08 Te-127 -6.6E-04 -2.1E-03 -1.9E-06 -l. 9E-03 -1. 7E-06 -7.9E-08 Te-129m -9.1E-04 -8.8E-03 -1.0E-05 -'6. 2E-03 -5. 6E-06 -1.5E-07 Te-129 -9.5E-04 -5.7E-03 -5.1E-06 -4.0E-03 -3.6E-06 -1.1E-07 Te-131m -1.2E-03. -9.1E-05 -8.2E-08 -7.2E-03 -6.'5E-03 -7.2E-03 Te-131 -2.1E-04 -1.7E-05 -1.5E-08 -1.3E-03 -1..2E-06 -1.3E-07 Te-132 -1.5E-02 -1.7E-02 -1.6E-05 -'1. OE-Ol -9. OE-05 -9.0E-06 I-130 -8.1E-03 -3.7E-07 -3.4E-09 -3.7E-03 -3.3E-05 . -3. 7E-06 I-131 -2.0E+00 -7.2E-01 -6.6E-03 -1.1E+00 -1.0E-02 -7. 4E-04 I-132 -2.7E-01 -1.8E-02 -1.6E-05 -1.2E-Ol -6.3E-04 -7.0E-05 I-133 -1.8E+00 -2.5E-03 -2.3E-05 -9.3E-01 -8.4E-03 -9.3E-04 I-134 -1;9E-03 -1.2E-03 -1.1E-05 -1.2E-06 I-135 -4.9E-01 -3.2E-08 -2. 9E-10 -1.9E-01 -1.7E-03 -1.9E-04 Cs-134 -1.5E-02 -1.8E-02 -9.5E-01 -1.7E-04 -5.1E-01 -9.3E-05 -1.3E-07 Cs-136 -7.1E-03 -7.1E-03 -2.4E-01 -4.3E-05 -2.5E-01 -4.5E-05 -2.6E-06 Cs-137 -1. OE-02 -1. 1E-02 -6. 9E-01 -1. 2E-04 -3.7E-01 -6.6E-05
Table 6. 7 (Cont'd) Page 3 of 3 E-l: Add E-2: Add 5iixed F-1: Remove F-2: Remove G-L Remove G-2: Remove G-3: Remove Mixed Bed & Cation Bed Evap Clean Demin Clean Demin Dirty Evap Dirty Demin & Evap from ~isoto e SG Blowdown SG Blowdown ~[Taste S st Waste S st ~Haste S st ~Haste S st Dirt Waste Ba-137m -l. OE-02 -1.0E-02 -1.3E-01 -1. 2E-04 -3.5E-01 -6. 3E-05 Ba-140 -1.4E-04 -8.8E-04 -7.8E-07 -9.4E-04 -8. 4E-07 -4. 8E-08 La-140 -1.8E-04 -1.0E-03 -7.9E-07 -6.7E-04 -6. OE-07 -1.5E-08 Ce-141 -4.6E-05 -4.3E-04 -3.9E-07 -3.1E-04 -2. 8E-07 -8.0E-09 Ce-143 -2.2E-05 -2.0E-04 -2.0E-07 -2.2E-04 -2. OE-07 .-1.0E-08 Ce-144 ".. +3.3E-06 -2.9E-05 -2.7E-04 -2. 4E-07 -1.5E-04 -1.3E-07 *-5.0E-10 Pr-143 +3.5E-06 -3.2E-05 -2.3E-04 -2.0E-07 -2.2E-04 -2.0E-07 -1.0E-08 Pr-144 +3.3E-06 -3. OE-05 -2.7E-04 -2.4E-07 -1.5E-04 -1.3E-07 -5.0E-10 Nd-147 W-185 ~ W-187 U-237 Np-239 -5.9E-04 -3.6E-04 -3.2E-07 -4. 2E-03 -3. 8E-06 -3. 9E-07 Others Total -4.4E-02 -4.9E+00 -3.6E+00 -7.2E-03 -4. 6E+00 -2. 2E-02 -2.0E-03 Positive values are reductions in releases; negative values are increases in releases.
102 TABLE 6.8
'TURKEY'.POINT PLANT;'CHANGES'n Po ulation Doses
Resultin Prom Use of'Alternate 'Li uid Treatmerit 'S stkm
Po ulation Total Body" " " Total r
Doses'Thyroid..'" S stem 'MTR r ' mari-"rem/ 'man-rem/ r E-1: Add Mxed 3.8E-04 9.1E-03 9.5E-03 Bed To SG Blowdown E-2: Add Cation 1.9E+00 1.8E-02 1.9E+00 Bed To SG Blowdown F-1: Remove Evap. 7.2E-01 1.5E-Ol 8.7E-01 Cleanwaste System F-2 Remove Demin. 6.4E-03 6.5E-03 Clean Waste 1.5E-04'.0E-02 System G-1: Remove Demin. 1.1E+00 1.2E+00 Dirty Waste Sys tern G-2: Remove Evap. 9.9E-03 1.0E-04 1.0E-02 Dirty Waste System G-3: Remove Demin/ 1.1E+00 9.0E-02 1.2E+00 Evap - Dirty Waste System
103
'TABLE 6. 9 TURKEY POINT PLANT:
Annual Cost of Alternate S stems Desi nation ~Pur ase ACost fk/ r Steam Generator Blowdown Treatment E-1 Add Mixed Bed 105,000 E-2 Add Cation Bed (500) Clean Paste S stem Remove Evaporator 1,150 Remove Demineralizer 153,000 Dirt Waste S stem Remove Demineralizer (830) Remove Evaporator 1007000 Remove Demin/Evap (1200)'alues in ( ) are cost savings.
' 104 and represents ag, increase ig release, 6'. 4. 2 'Ch'a'n 'e's'Xn'o ulat:i'on Dose's.'For 'A'1'tern'ate Li. ui'd Tr'ea'tmen't S 'stems: The 'population doses. res'ulting from the liquid rel'eases of the 'alteinate systems are summarized in TABLE G. 8. The guidel'ines of Regulatory Guide 1.BB (2) were used in the'se 'computation's. Significant changes fn population doses could be anticipated from the use of some of these augmen'ts. 6.4.3 'Annualize'd'o'sts of Al'terna'te S stems: The resulting cost increases, or savings, for the alternative liquid treatment systems are given in TABLE 6.9. Data developed as 1975 dollars in PART II, SU?PLBIENT D, were 'used to compute these costs. The utility of these data need to be 'ev'aluated further with respect to the operations to be carried out by TURKEY POINT's new radwaste facility, a facility which will not become operable until'mid 1976 Cost-Benefit Ratios Of Alternate
'.4.4 S
evaluation of the cost-beneficiality of the alternative stems:'urther liquid systems is dependent upon the utility of some I of the liquid waste-handling components o f TURKEY POINT ' new radwas te facility. Therefore, ratios have not been fully developed for these substitute systems. 6.5 'ONCLUSIONS Con'ceivably, some of the alternative systems eval-uated above can aid in the operation of the "as-built" liquid
105 treatment system at gUJKFY 7O~T, However., with the augment-
- q~
ing og the. present system wi.th,'the components oZ the new rad-waste raci3,ity, it is expected that the'ose rates'ummarized in Section 4..0"above 'will be lowered. The 'gaseous treatment system wi3,1 maintain dose 'limits withi'n the requirements of 'APPENDI'X I. The'refore, the"as-built" system at TURKEY POINT will continue to be operated with 'its present equipment. Its compliance with the Staff's position on APPENDIX I does not now make it necessary to augment, it with any additional equip-ment, other than which will be placed in operation when the new radwaste facility becomes fully operable. 6~6 'EFERENCES
- 1. USNRC, REGULATORY GUIDE 1.3.00, "Cost.-Benefit Analysis For Radwaste Systems For Light-Water-Cooled Reactors", March, 1976.
Nuclear'ower
- 2. USNRC, REGULATORY GUIDE 1.BB, "Calculation Of Re-leases Of Radioactive Materials in Liquid and Gaseous Effluents From Pressurized Water Reactors (PWRs)",
September, 1975.
- 3. Constructed by NUCLEAR SAFETY ASSOCIATES, Bethesda, Maryland.
~ ' SUPPLEMENT A TURKEY POINT PLANT, UNITS NO. 3 AND NO. 4 Data For Source Term Calculations
ABSTRACT Turkey Point Plant Units No. 3 and No. 4 are pressurized water reactors. The guidelines of Appendix I to Regulatory Guide 1.BB have been used to pre'sent the data required for source term calculations. These are summarized in the following Table X.
TABLE I TURKEY POINT PLANT, UNITS 3 AND 4: Data for Source Term Calculations ITEM Data and/or Information Re uired Numerical Values References Remarks
- a. Plant capacity factor 80% Reg. Guide 1:112
- b. Fraction of Fuel Releasing Unit 3: 0.01% From PTP Operations Radioactivity Unit 4: <0.01%
- 1. Type fuel cladding Zircaloy FSAR Vol. 1, Table 3.2.1-1
- c. Fission product escape rate See Attachment A coefficient
- d. Corrosion product release rate See Attachment A coefficients
- e. Tritium release rate PTP Semiannual Reports: Annual Average for period of August,
- 1. Liquid 447.4 Ci/yr 1972 to June, 1975. Total for both units, as applicable.
2; Gaseous 4.6
- 2. Maximum core thermal power 2300 Mwt (each FSAR Vol. 1, Table 3.2.1-1 unit) 3~ Total mass of coolant in Primary 582,000 lbs FSAR Vol. 1, Tables 4.1-1 and System (excluding pressurizer (each unit) 4.1-3 and calculations using 1967 and primary coolant purification ASME Steam Tables.
system)
- 4. a. Total uranium metal in equi- Unit 3: 155,011 lbs From nuclear design data in FSAR librium core Unit 4: 155,232 lbs Vol. 1, Table 3.2.1-1
Table I Cont'd: Pa e 2 ITEM Data and/or Information Re uired Numerical Values References Remarks
- 4. b. Total mass of Pu in equi- 1100 lbs (each unit) Results from U-238 capture librium core
- 5. Percent Pu-238 enrichment in equi- All Pu results from U-238 librium core capture
- 6. Percent enrichment of U in equi- Unit 3: 2.57% From PTP Operations librium core Unit 4: 2.60%
- 7. Average Primary System letdown 60 gpm FSAR Vol 2, Table 9.2-2; rate to the primary purification actual rate is 50 gpm from system PTP laboratory records
- 8. Average flow rate through primary 6 gpm FSAR Vol. 2, Table 9.2-4; coolant purification system cation demineralizers seldom used demineralizers
- 9. Number and type of steam generators 3 Vertical; from FSAR Vol. 1, (each unit) Table 4.1-4
- a. Carryover factor for 5% Reg. Guide 1.42, Appendix A, iodine and nonvolatiles "Partition and Decontamination Factors" 6
- 10. Total system flow in Secondary 3.196 x 10 lbs/hr FSAR Vol. 1, Table 4.1-4 System (each unit) for 1 SG ll. Mass of steam in each SG 6,643 lbs FSAR Vol 1, Table 4.1-4 and calculations using 1967 ASME Steam Tables
- 12. Mass of liquid in each SG 77,609 lbs
Table I Cont'd: Pa e 3 ITEN Data and/or Information Re uired Numerical Values References Remarks etc.
- 13. Total mass of coolant in Secondary 1,100,000 lbs By calculation from data in Table System (each unit) 4.1-1; coolant volume = 9,343 ft
- 14. Average SG blowdown rate (total) 120 gpm By calculation
- 15. Regeneration frequency for conden- Units not equipped with condensate sate demineralizer demineralizers
- 16. a. Fraction of SG feedwater pro-cessed through condensate de-mineralizer
- b. DF's used in evaluation of the 0 condensate demineralizer 6
- 17. Flow rate of water used to dilute 1.25 x 106 gpm Average each unit; calculated from waste prior to discharge (1.80 x 10 gpm)* PTP Semiannual Reports, 1975.
~Operations reports this value using Units 1 and 2 plus Units 3 and 4. Units 1 and 2 have 4 pumps at 137,000 gpm each; Units 3 and 4 have 8 pumps at 156,000 gpm.
- 18. Average RCS letdown (shim bleed) 40-60 gpm From PTP Operations
- 19. Description of process system and See Attachment B and its attached flow diagrams Figures
- 20. a. Collection, processing and dis- Continuous; Direct to VCT or di-charge holdup times version (when required) to CVCS with return to primary 'systems.
Table I Cont'd: Pa e 4 ITEM Data and/or Information Re uired Numerical Values References Remarks etc.
- 20. b. Fraction of processed stream Continuous process, with no expected expected to be discharged over discharge life of the plant
- c. Capacities of tanks in RCS let- See Attachment 3 down system
- 21. Sources, flow rates, activities of None any other wastes processed with RCS letdown system
- 22. Description of system used to Not applicable process materials identified in Item 21
- 23. Holdup times, fraction discharged Not applicable and tank capacities of waste ma-terials identified in Item 21
- 24. Clean Haste Syst'm:- For this statement, the Reactor Cool-and Drain Tank is considered to be only clean waste source
- a. Average Flow Rate 200 gpm Two pumps each unit: 75/125 gpm (ea. unit)
- b. Activities in system nil Activity virtually nondetectable; less than 10- micro curies/ml
- 25. Description o f system used to The reactor Coolant Drain Tank (RCDT) process clean wastes serves as a drain collecting point for
Table I Cont'd: Pa e 5 ITEM Data and/or Information Re uired Numerical Values References Remarks etc.
- 25. the RCS and any other equipment lo-cated inside the containment. There is one tank inside the containment of each of the 2 units. Attachment C shows the position of the RCDT in the Waste Disposal System for liquids.
6
- a. DF's used in evaluation A'ssumed >10
- 26. Clean Waste System:
- a. Holdup times 0.008 day
- b. Fraction of stream dis-charged over plant life
- c. Capacity of RCDT tanks 350 gals One for each unit
- 27. Dirty Waste System: Input sources, See Attachment C average flow rates, activities of wastes processed
- 28. a. Holdup times of dirty Continuous processing; no planned waste system holdup times
- b. Fraction of the processed 100%
stream discharged
- c. Tank capacities See Attachment C
- 29. Description of and flow diagrams See Attachment C of dirty waste system
Table I Cont'd: Pa e 6 ITEi Data and/or Information Re uired Numerical Values References .Remarks etc.
- 30. Description of system used to See Attachment D maintain secondary coolant purity
- a. Primary-secondary system 4-5 gph Each unit leakage rate From PTP Technical Department
- b. Steam generator blowdown 50 gpm rate
- c. Condensate demineralizer 0 Systems do not have condensate demineralizers
- 31. Description and flow diagrams of No system being used by PTP units system used to process secondary wastes
- a. DF's used in evaluation Not applicable
- 32. Hold up times, fraction discharged Not applicable and tank capacities of Secondary System
- 33. Description of process for strip- See Attachment E ping FP gases from Primary Coolant
- a. Average stripping rate Continuous
- b. Number of Primary For cold reactor shutdown Coolant volumes stripped annually
- c. Reactor operation Base-load mode
Table I Cont'd: Pa e 7 ITEM Data and/or Information Re uired Numerical Values References Remarks
- 34. Process used to holdup gases See Attachments C and E
- a. Component Specifications
- 1. Tank capacities 4400 ft
- 2. Number -6 Shared between units
- 3. Storage pressures 100 psi
- 35. Volumes of gas stripped from 176,000 ft3 /yr primary coolant
- 36. Normal Operation of Waste Gas Processing system
- a. Number of tanks held in reserve for back-to-back shutdown
- b. Fill-time for tanks variable Dependent on letdown rate and rate of process of water letdown
- c. Minimum holdup time to Variable, dependent on operation; can be from 1 to 45 fill tank days. Assumed 3-day fill time
- 37. a. Primary Coolant leak rate to 25 lbs/day Auxiliary Building
- b. Iodine partition factor 0.001 Assumed from Reg. Guide 1.42
- c. Temperature of PC letdown line 300 F
Table I Cont'd: Pa e 8 ITEM Data and/or Information Re uired Numerical Values References Remarks
- 38. Treatment provided for Auxiliary No iodine treatment system on Building ventilation air to reduce units iodine prior to discharge and DF for charcoal adsorber
- 39. Total free volume of Containment 1,550,000 ft3 PSAR Vol.. 2, p. 5.1.2-1 Building
- 40. Description of system to reduce No continuous system; emergency airborne radioactivity from con- system available tainment building atmosphere, etc.
- 41. a. Number of containment purges 68/30 75/76 data: 75 data actual; 76 per year, Unit 3 data estimated Number for Unit 4 15/10
- b. Bed depth and I DF of charcoal adsorber
- c. PC leak rate to Containment Building
- 42. System for reduction of steam No Turbine Buildings at PTP leakage to Turbine Building
- 43. Description of treatment system to No treatment system on units reduce gaseous iodine release from Steam Generator Blowdown Plash Tank
- 44. Description of treatment system to No treatment system on units reduce iodine releases from the condenser air ejectors; fraction of iodine released
0 Table I Cont'd: Pa e 9 IT&1 Data and/or Information Re uired Numerical Values References Remarks
- 45. Solid Waste System description See Attachment C inputs, volumes, curie contents and sources; principal radionuclides, time of onsite storage prior to shipment, etc.
- 46. Process and instrumentation diagrams Pigures of these systems are for liquid, gaseous and solid rad- part of respective attachments waste systems cited above
- 47. Description of detergent wastes See Attachment C system treatment process
- a. Sources Laundry, decontamination and hot shower drains
- b. Plow Rate Normal: 200 gpd for both units
- c. Activities FP's and Activation Products
- d. Tank capacities See Attachment C
- e. DP's used in evaluation
12 ATTACHMENT A Fission Product Esca e Rate Coefficients
-1 6.5 x 10 Noble gases, sec Br, I and Cs isotopes, sec
-1 1.3 x'0 Te isotopes, sec -1 1.0 x 10
-1 2.0 x Mo isotopes, sec 10
-1 1.0 x Sr and Ba isotopes, sec 10 Y, La, Ce, and Pr isotopes, sec -1 1.6 x 10 Corrosion Products Released To Primar Coolant b
-1 Release Rate Coefficient (days )
Fe 8.3 x 10 Cr 3.3 x 10 Ni, Mn, Ti, Co, Zn, W, V 1-3 x 10 Mo 4.3 x 10
- a. From FSAR Table 9. 2-4
- b. From Reg. Guide 1: BB p B-19
ATTACHMENT B TURKEY POINT PLANT: CVCS Reactor Let'down'nd Makeu Control (a) (a) From FSAR, Vol. 2, pp. 9.2-10 to 9.2-14
14 1.0 'he Makeu S st'em This reactor system functions to maintain desired opera, ting fluid inventory in the volume control tank and to adjust reactor coolant boron concentration for reactibility and shim control. The makeup system also provides concentrated boric acid or primary water to either increase or decrease the boric acid concentration in the Reactor Coola-t System. To maintain the reactor coolant volume constant, an equal amount of reactor coolant is let, down to the holdup tanks. Should the letdown line be out. of service during operation, sufficient volume exists in the pressurizer to accept the amount of boric acid necessary for cold shutdown. Makeup water to the Reactor Coolant System is pro-vided through the Chemical and Volume Control System from the following sources: a) The primary water storage tank, which provides water for dilution when the reactor coolant boron concen-tration i's to be reduced b) The boric acid tanks, which supply concentrated boric acid solution when reactor coolant boron concentration is to be increased c) The refueling water storage tank, which supplies borated water for emergency makeup d) The chemical mixing tank, which is used to inject small quantities of'olution when additions of hy-drazi'ne or pH control chemical are nec'essary. Makeup is provided to maintain the desired operat-ing fluid inventory in the Reactor Coolant System. One primary water makeup pump and one boric acid transfer pump are normally
15 oper 8 ted g The system permits an automatic mode 'og operation, the pre-'sel'ection of a quantity of primary water make'u'p at a pre-'selected flow rate 'to 'the 'Reactor Coolant System, and the pre-selection of a quantity of boric acid solution at a pre-selected flow rate 'to the RCS. Dev'iations in water and con-centrated boric acid flow rate from the'ontrol set point are called to the operator's attention by alarm functions. Specifics describing the 'system in detail and its principal are described in PSAR Section 9.2, "Chemical and Volume Control System". Most of these components are common 4 to UNITS 3 and 4, and, as applicable, some components are shared. Three (3} holdup tanks contain radioactive liquid which enters the tank from the letdown line. The liquid is released from the RCS during startup, shut down, load changes and from boron dilution to compensate for burnup. The contents of one tank are normally being processed by the gas stripper and evaporator train while another tank is being filled. The third tank serves as a shared standby. The total capacity of the three (3) hold-up tanks is 300,000 gallons.
0 ATTA'CHMENT 0 k TURKEY'POINT 'PLANT: 'Ra'dioactive'as'te Man'a ement
17
- 1. 0 . 'URKEY POINT PL'MT, UNIT Ão'.: '3 'and '4'a'st'e
'a'n'a'e'm'e'nt 's tern 1.3. 'The Naste Management (or Haste Disposal} System at TURKEY- POINT PLANT is shared'y UNITS No. 3 and 4. Its equipment was designed to process all of the gaseous, liquid and solid wastes generated during the simultaneous operation of both nuclear power plants.
- l. 2 State-of-the art, augments are being provided to the existing system through a new waste handling facility which should become operable in mid-1976. This facility is described in detail in Section 5.0 below.
1.3 FXGURES of the principal components of both the existing and new waste handling facilities follow ATTACHMENT E.
18
- 2. 0 'he'Gaseo'us Na's't'e'S'st'em gaseous waste system during normal operations is cover gas displaced from the Che'mical and Uolume Control System holdup tanks as they fill with liquid. Since this gas must be re-placed when the tanks are emptied during processing, facilities are provided to return gas from the decay tanks to the holdup tanks. A backup. supply from the nitrogen header is provided for makeup. if return flow from the gas decay tanks is not available. To prevent hydrogen concentration from exceeding combustible limits during this type of operation, components discharging to the vent header system are res'tricted to those containing no air or aerated liquids. The vent header itself is designed to operate at a slight positive pressure (0.5 psig minimum to 2.0 psig maximum) to prevent in-leakage On the other hand, out-leakage from the system is minimized by using Saunders patent diaphragm valves, bellows seals, self contained pressure regulators and soft-sealed packless valves through-out the radioactive portions of the syst: em.
Gases vented to the vent header flow to the waste gas compressor suction header. One of the two compressors is
\
in continuous operation with the second unit instrumented to act as backup for peak load conditions or failure of the first compressor. From the compressors, gas flows to'one of six (6) gas decay tanks. The control arrangement on the gas decay tank inlet header allows the operator to place one tank in service
19 and to selec't one tank for backu'p if the tank in operation . becomes fully pres'surized. When, the tank in service becomes pressurized to 110 'psig, a pxes'sure 'transmitter automatically closes the inlet valve 'to that tank,'pens the inlet valve to the backup tank and sounds an alarm to alert the operator of this event so that. he may select a new'ackup tank'. Pres-sure indicators are supplied to aid the operator in selecting the backup tank. Gas held in the decay tanks can either be returned to the Chemical and Volume Control System holdup tanks, or dis-charged to the atmosphere if it has decayed sufficiently for release. Generally, the last tank to receive gas will be the first tank emptied back to the holdup tanks in order to permit the maximum decay time before releasing to the environment. However, the header arrangement at the tank inlet gives the operator freedom to fill, reuse or discharge gas to the en-vironment, simultaneously without restricting operation of the other tanks. During degassing of the reactor coolant prior to a refueling shutdown, it may be desirable. to pump the gas purged from the volume control tank into a particular tank and isolate that tank for decay rather than reuse the gas in it. This is done by aligning the control to open;.the inlet. valve to the desired tank and closing the outlet valve to',:the reuse header. However, one of the other tanks can be opened to the reuse header at this time if desired, while still another might be discharged to atmosphere.
20 Before a, t;ink, can, be 'emptied to the environment, it must be 'sampled and analyzed to det'ermine and record the activity to be relea'sed, and only the'n discharged to the plant vent at a controlled rate through a radiation monitor. Samples are taken'anually by opening an isolation valve to discharge from the gas decay tank to the gas analyzer and collecting the gas in one of the sampling'system gas sample vessels. After I sampling, the isolation valve in the line from the tank to the gas analyzer is closed, the isolation valve in the plant vent discharge line is opened and the tank contents are released through the plant vent if sampling has shown that sufficient decay has occurred. During release, a trip valve in the dis-charge line is closed automatically by a high activity level indicator in the plant vent or by loss of air flow from auxil-iary building exhaust fans. During operations, gas samples are drawn periodically from tanks discharging to the waste gas vent header as well as from the particular gas decay tank being filled at the time, and automatically analyzed to determine their hydrogen and oxygen content. The hydrogen analysis is for surveillance since the concentration range wi'll vary considerably from tank to tank. There should be no significant oxygen content in any of the tanks, and an alarm will warn the operator if any I sample shows 24 or higher by volume of oxygen. This allows ample time to take the required action before the combustible limits of hydrogen-oxygen mixtures are reached. Another tank is placed
21 in, seryice whi3,e the operator locates and eliminates the source of oxygen. 3 stainless steel'as decay tanks at a design pressure of l50 psi are 'shared by UNXTS 3 and 4. This tank storage permits 45 days decay of waste gas before discharge.
22 3.0 . 'h'e L'i; ui'd Treatme'n't: S stem 3.l 'xi's't'in'S ste'm 'Desi.': n'an'd O er'a'tion: Theex'isting Liquid Waste System is shown in the attached PIGURES. It is shared .by UNITS 3 and 4 with the 'ex-ception of the reactor coolant drain tanks and reactor coolant drain tank pumps. Zt collects and processes all potentially radioactive reactor plant wastes for removal from the plant site within limitations established by applicable governmental regulations. Before fluid wastes are discharged by the system, they are sampled and analyzed to determine the quantity of radioactivity, with an isotopic identification i,f necessary, and then processed as required. They are then released under controlled conditions. Radiation monitors are provided to maintain surveillance over the release operation. Permanent record of .Liquid Waste Disposal System releases is provided by radiochemical analysis of known quantities or waste. '-The system is capable of processing all liquid wastes generated during continuous operation of the Reactor Coolant System assuming that fission products escape from 0.01% of the fuel elements into the reactor coolant. At least two (2) valves must be manually opened to permit discharge of liquid waste from the Liquid System. One of these valves is normally locked closed. The control valve will trip closed on a high effluent radioactivity level signal. Activity release limits are given in the Technical Specifi.'cations for TURKEY POINT PLANT.
~ ~ 23 As secondary .junctions, system components supply hydrogen,'nd nitrogen to PCS 'components as required during normal operation and prov'ide 'facilities to transfer fluids from inside 'the 'containment to other'ystems outside 'the con-tainment. The system is controlled from a local control board in the auxiliary building with 'appropriate indicators and alarms. During normal plant operation liquids from the following sources are processed: a) Equipment Drains and leak-offs b) Rad,ioactive chemical laboratory drains c) Radioactive laundry and shower drains d) Decontamination area drains The sys tem also collects and trans fer s liquids from the following sources directly to the Chemical and Volume Control System for processing: a) Reactor coolant loop drains b) Pressurizer relief tank c) Reactor coolant pump secondary seals d) Excess letdown during startup e) Accumulators f) Valve and reactor vessel flange leadoffs. These liquids flow to the reactor coolant drain tank and are discharged directly to the CVCS holdup tanks by the re-actor coolant drain tank pumps which operate automatically from a level controller in the tank. These pumps also return water from the refueling canal and cavity to the refueling water storage tank. Waste liquids drain to the waste holdup tank by gravity flow. There are one reactor coolant drain tank and two reactor coolant drain tank pumps inside the containment of each
24 uni,t. Waste liquids- are 'collected thx'ough 'yarious drains and sumps. The'iquid drains. flow: by'ravity, or are pumped, to the waste hold-up tank.
'The activity level of waste liquid from the laundry and hot shower area'ill usually be low. enough to permit, dis-charge from the site without processing. If preliminary analy-sis indicates that the liquid is suitable for discharge, it is pumped to one of the waste condensate tanks where its activity can be detexmined for record before it is discharged through a radiation monitor to the condenser circulating water. Other-wise, the liquid is either recirculated through the waste polishing demineralizer or is pumped to the waste holdup tank for processing. Low level waste from the waste holdup tank can be bypassed around the waste evaporator.
Liquids requiring cleanup before release are pro-cessed in batches by a waste evaporator. The concentrated bottoms are discharged to the drumming room where they are packaged for removal to the disposal facility. The condensate is routed to one of two waste. condensate tanks. When one tank is filled, it is isolated and sampled while the second tank is in service. If analysis confirms the activity level is suit-able for discharge, the condensate is pumped through a flow meter and a radiation monitor to the condenser circulating water discharge. Otherwise it is recirculated through the waste polishing demineralizer or returned to the waste holdup
25 tank for reproces'sing, Althou'gh 'the'adiochemi.ca3. analysis forms the basis. for rec'ording activity releases,. the radiation monitor provides'urvei'llance 'over'he'peration by automatic-ally closing the'ischarge 'control valve 'if the liquid activity, level exceeds a preset value. 3.2 Sy'tem 'Com on'en'O'.S'i'z'e's:- The following tabulation gives information about the number of tanks and their capa-cities and other components of the liquid treatment system at TURKEY POINT. X. 'TANKS uolultte Design Design It Descri 'ti'on Nutaber:. ~e or Flaw Pressure T'etttEI. Neterisl Reactor Coolant Drain 1 per Horiz 350 gal 25 psig 267 ss unit Laundry 6 Hot Shcwer 2* Vert 600 gal Atm 180 ss Chemical Drain Vert i 600 gal Atm 180 ss Waste Holdup Horiz 3242 ft Atm 150 ss Spent Resin Storage Vert 300 ft 100 psig 150 . ss Waste Condensate Vert 1000 gal Atm 180 ss Reagent Tank 5 gal 180 ss II. Miscellaneous Waste Evaporator 1 > 3gpm Waste Polishing Demineralizer 1 20 gpm
- Shared by UNITS 3 and 4
26.
.4.0.. o'lid Haste 'Di's os'a,'1'tern The presen't Solid Waste ']Disposal System is designed to packa'ge 'all solid wastes'n standard 55 gallon drums for removal to disposal facilities'. Concentrates from the'waste ev'aporator are pumped into a battery of six drums previously filled with a mixture of filler and binder'. After filling, the drums are moved to a shielded storage area by a bridge and trolley crane and accumulated for shipment. The'ame crane is then used to place the drums on the carrier for removal to a disposal facility.
Spent resins are packaged in a similar manner. After resin in the storage tanks has been agitated by bubbling nitrogen through the tank .to the 'vent header, water is pumped through the tank at a controlled rate to sluice the "slurry to the drumming room. There it is received in a battery of six drums equipped with appropriate shielding. The slurry enters each drum and is de-watered and mixed with filler and binder. Spent resin drums are handled in the same manner as the concen-trates drums. Maximum dose rate for unshielded drums is 1 R/hr at one meter. Shielding is provided for each drum to reduce the dose rate in work areas. The basis for all dose rate cal-culations is for one cycle of core operation with one percent defective fuel in each unit. PTP's new WASTE,HANDLXNG FACXLXTY ( described in 5.0 below) will soon augment many of the operations of this portion of the original waste disposal system.
27
- 5. 0 . 'TURKEY POINT PIiANT 's'ea's te 'Han'd3,'in'a'ci'lit 5.3, 'Ge'n'er'al: A new. facili,ty for additional collection and storage 'capability for liquid and solid wastes produced during plant operations wi'll be placed in operation at TURKEY POXNT during l976. Its design objectives and general use plans follow. Flow diagrams are attached to describe its functions.
Gaseous wastes will be processed by the existing gaseous waste system. of a reinforced concrete building, a pipe tunnel to the existing auxiliary building and a cement batch plant. The main building houses the waste evaporator system, all portions of the solidi-fication system which handle radioactive material, a control room, solid waste storage areas, a truck loading and unloading area, and a decontamination facility. The facility design includes two shielded rooms with sufficient. storage capacity to permit operation of the plant for two months without, off-site shipments, which is approximately 8000 gallons of solidified evaporator bottoms. The building ventilation system discharges through the plant vent via its own duct work. Final release is through plant vent discharge stack which is monitored for radio-f'he active gases and particulates. There are two shielded rooms where the disposable containers are filled with wastes and two shielded storage rooms, one for high level waste storage and the other for low level
28 wa,ste .storage.'ach. ro'om has lead glass windows and a labyrinth, entrance 'and is readi3,y acces'sible to the 'operator or maintenance 'personnel'. The 'design is. to maintain the radiation dose rate in the 'operation area's .at less than 2.5 mrem/hr. There 'is a single trolley overhe'ad bridge crane with a 25-ton capacity auxiliary hoist. The crane is used for I handling the disposable containers and the shield casks. The crane is operated through a pendant control station. For low level wastes, containers can be .loaded with a motorized pallet into closed vans. For high level wastes, shielded trucks or shield casks are used. The shielded con-tainers are loaded with the overhead crane on .to a truck. The radiation dose rate from the containers of solidified waste, determines the necessity for shielding.
5.3 Li'i'd
Waste Proc'ess'in : This section is a general summary of the operations to be carried out in'this area of the facility: a) 'ources of Li uid Waste l) Normal plant drainage to the waste holdup tanks consisting of laundry and hot shower drains, floor drains, tank overflows, containment sumps, resin transfer flush water, steam generator blowdown, decontamination water, and boron re-cycle waste water.
- 2) Refueling water from fuel transfer canal and/or reactor cavity requiring drainage during re-fueling to facilitate equipment repair.
29 b). 'ua'n't:i'ties'. The Paste Evaporator processing system has been designed to handle the maximum expected waste quantities based on actual operating quantities which 'were 'processed during the 'first two years of operation. 2} The design capacity for the solidification system is 1,000 gallons of bottoms per'ay, equivalent to four batches of evaporator bottoms. This capacity is based on solidification of two complete batches in a day. Solidification at this rate will accommodate processing waste at 30 gpm,. concentrating from a boron concentration of 500 ppm to 22,000 ppm or at 7.5 gpm concentrat-ing from 2000 ppm boron to 22,000 ppm. 3} The system design will,allow processing of the water generated during refueling in approximately 15 days. Therefore, back-to-back refueling is possible with no delay due to processing waste water. c} S ent.Resin Sources The source of resin to be processed in the new solidi-fication system is the existing 600 ft3 storage tank in the Auxiliary Building. Resin to this storage tank comes from the following sources: CVCS reactor coolant system purification includ-ing mixed beds (Li-OH form), cation beds, and deborating (anion) beds,
- 2) CVCS boron recycle base and cation beds providing II cleanup prior to the boric acid evaporators and anion beds for cleanup of the boric acid evapora-tor condensate,
- 3) Spent fuel pit mixed bed demineralizers, and
- 4) Waste Evaporator system polishing demineralizers.
d) Quantities of S ent Resin 1} Anticipated quantities of spent resins is 600 ft 3 per year based on operating plant data. Maximum quantity to be processed is 100 ft per day 3 2) based on one batch processed in a holdup/mixing tank.
30
- 5. 4 . De's'c'ri: tio'n'o'f Hast'e'v'a 'o'rat'o'x S'stem: The waste'evaporator system portion of the waste handling facility consists of two slightly pres'sur'ized ev'aporator'ackages (5. psig) with associated monitor tanks, pumps, polish';ng de-mineralizers and filter's, a waste 'hold up tank, control panels, and process and utilities piping.
A new waste holdup tank, along with, the existing waste holdup tanks in the Auxiliary Building, serve as the collection points for all plant liquid wastes. The floor mount-ed cylindrical tank, of type 304 stainless steel, has a capacity of 10,000 gallons and is equipped with level instrumentation for remote readout. The liquid waste from the holdup tank is fed to two 15 gpm waste evaporators for concentration. Each 'is remotely operated and designed for a capacity of 15 gpm of distillate flow., The distillate is removed from the unit by a 25 gpm distillate pump. It is'assed through the distillate cooler and a radiation detector. If the detector should sense a con-
-2 centration above 2 x 10 yC/cc, the radiation monitor will signal a shutdown.
f A trip circuit will stop the distillate and secure the evaporator. The distillate from the evaporators can be pro-cessed through one of two polishing demineralizers. Each con-tains 30 cubic feet, of ion exchange resin to remove trace ionic contaminants.
31 Disti,llate'from the eyaporators can also be trans-fer'red'o any of three'wa'ste 'mon'itor'anks for'torage prior to further purification or discharge.'ach tank provides'he capability of storing 5,000 gallons of processed distillate. Two 35 gpm waste monitor tank 'discharge pumps are used to discharge'r transfer water from the monitor tanks. Concentrated wastes are pumped by a 35 gpm pump to the solidification system when sample analysis indicates one of the, following maximums has bein reached: 40 yCi/ml activity concentration, 12% boric acid or a total solids con-. centration of 20%. 5.5 " S'oli'di'fi;cati'on S stem: The radioactive liquid wastes solidification system consists of two subsystems: an evaporator bottoms processing subsystem and a spent resin pro-cessing subsystem. The two subsystems are designed to permit. simultaneous processing of spent resins and evaporator bottoms. Solidification of wastes is accomplished utilizing cement as the solidifying agent. The two waste holdup/mixing tanks are of stainless steel construction with a e capacity of 800 gallons each. The tanks are provided with level detectors and instrumentation to permit remote readout of the tank's liquid and/or spent resin volume. Automatic shutoff of feedlines when the tank is full and automatic shutoff of the tank pump when the tank is empty are also-provided. The tank vents are piped to the floor drain.
32 Fach, ho3,dug'mixing, tang is provided with a hori-. zonta3, centrifugal pump. .Rec'irculation lines with, air operated control valves 'are 'provided for recirculation of tank contents during waste 'processing. Cros's tie 'lines betwee'n'edundant equipment are located at key'oints in the system to permit continuous oper'ation in the 'event of equipment failure. The cement handling equipment consists of cement silos, batch tanks, rotary feeders, conveyors and mixers. The R equipment is arranged in two redundant trains to maintain sys-tem operation capability. All cement handling equipment is remotely operated from the control panel. Two cement silos of 500 ft capacity are located on the upper level of the cement handling building. The silos can be filled with cement from a bulk cement truck or from cement bags stored in a cement handling building at ground elevation. The cement silos are mounted on vibrators and are provided with rotary feeders to permit flow of cement into the two cement batching tanks. The cement batch tanks have a 100 ft3 capacity and are provided with load cells to indicate the amount of cement in the tank. Each batch tank is fitted with a vibrator and a bottom mounted rotary feeder which is variable speed for metering purposes. The rotary feeder discharges into a screw conveyor which transports the cement through the building wall to the container filling rooms.
33 A maximum of twen,ty 55-ga,lion drums or two 100 ft-
. 3 container's. og waste 'can be handled in a 24-hour period. A normal operating average is five 55-gallon drums per,day or one 100 ft -container ev'ery two days. These estimations are based on empirical data from op'crating the reactors, at Turkey Point.
34 ATTACHMENT D TURKEY POINT PLANT: Steam Generator Blowdown S stem
35 1.0 Steam Generator Blowdown S stem The steam generator blowdown system for each UNIT, shown in the attached FIGURES consists of a two-inch line from each steam generator, each line having a motor-operated valve and flowmeter, then headered together in a four-inch which enters the blowd'own tank below the normal water-
'ine line. The flashed components are discharged to the atmosphere.
The blowdown tank liquid overflow standpipe discharge goes to the circulating water discharge at the sealwell. A radia-tion monitor of 10 -5 uCi/cc maximum sensitivity in that line will actuate solenoid valves to direct high activity liquid to the radioactive liquid waste system and sound an alarm in the control room. Because the iodine preferen-tially remains in the liquid phase, the air ejector monitor would be less sensitive than the liquid effluent monitor to iodine activity. Blowdown will occur routinely, typically on a daily basis over a one to several hour period at which times a flow-rate of approximately 50 gpm is maintained. Assuming a persimmible limit of 624,000 gpm, and condenser cooling water iodine concentration at ten times MPC for a one-hour blowdown, then the allowable maximum primary 'to secondary leak rate will be 4-5 gph.
36 ATTACHMENT E TURKEY POINT PLANT: Gas Stri in of Reactor Coolant
37
- l. 0 Gas Stri in S stem Gaseous wastes consist primarily of hydrogen stripped from (1) coolant discharged to the CVSC holdup tanks during boron di-lution, (2) nitrogen and hydrogen gases purged for the CVCS volume control when degassing the reactor coolant and (3) nitrogen from the closed gas blanketing system. The gas decay tank capacity will permit 45 days decay of waste gas before discharge; however, in normal operations, the average time has been 7 days.
Two gas strippers are provided. Each removes nitrogen, hydrogen, and fission gases from the holdup tank effluent. The gas stripper consists of a preheater, stripping column with a reflux condenser and associated pumps, piping, and instrumentation. The gas stripper preheater, located upstream of the gas stripper, heats the liquid effluent from the holdup tanks from ambient temperature to approximately 20S F using the gas stripper bottoms. The bottoms are cooled in the pre-heater from approximately 220 F to 120 F. The preheater 1 is a regenerative type shell and tube unit constructed of austenitic stainless steel. The gas strippers consist of a hot well with heating coil to store stripped water, a stripping section packed with pall rings, a spray type liquid inlet header and an over-
38 head integral reflux condenser. Liquid flowing to the gas strippers is controlled to constant rate by a,flow controller. The gas strippers are designed for the same flow rate as the evaporator* and are designed to reduce the influent gas concentration by a factor of 10 5 Two gas stripper bottom pumps per gas stripper, operated from level control, transfer effluent from the gas stripper hot wells to the boric acid evaporator via the gas stripper perheaters. Each centrifugal pump is rated at the evapora-tor processing rate. The pumps are austenitic stainless steel and one is an installed standby for the operating pump. "Max. design 25 gpm; average flow 20-25 gpm.
39 'Com on'en'ts o'f The'ASTE MANAGEMENT
'SYSTEM For UNXTS'3'n'd'4-
0 Il'
~
40 a lt I ~W I ~ Its :OKJOL Sa I l~.~ ~aalwt
)'ro P I Ias S>>
'~ rw a Crt I>> ~ awt S C>>sal I WIJI la tl I
~ W
~
~ Iwt angra tw ~
~a rl I
~
I
~ rt ~ WWSW AS
""I3>>s I ~
I I I I i
~~
C. Iles Sl ~ r Sl I I asw A/I Lra ls I as a /w I
~
~ WC SSSC IWS sit '5 o I
~ oa r>>r W~ ~ I
~ g MlWW
'~dL SL~~.
I ~ ~ gf I ~JI /II'W~w SI/I I/rl t~ 'IjtII ~ St twwsr c
/lw as salt r-".
~ la$ 4IA "I dl"Ns
~
~
~ I IIISs I J I
I~ ~ ~ +II~ >>rrl ~ I>>t rr r I ~ ~ ow, >>
~
t~~
~
ws
~ ra st
~ >> Sacs
= "MS I Ia as>>
alI ~~.
~I wc>>I II
~ ~
L ' rw C Its>>sar ~ I II I I
~ r at SIIS pro AI
.Ol' rs r cwal I
I /I ~ ttt Sl II>>>> I w FM~3jp~ S
~ ~/t I I /I lit C srsa SSI >>ss r Slt ISSS SSC
~ rsls ~ sw S>> Ila Svo ~A
~ tss
~ IIW ww
~ aw I ~ fro I ~pJ
~
I I at was>> a>> I Wlm.tr SW l I't t IPN'L..I "4>> t PTP-I/SSSTS3 S %.
~
gacvoo I Itr E-SSSOI Coolant SI rE
0 riff ~> <<> <<CM 1
>>
~ t f C'1 Cr I 4 ~ W M ~<< ~ lt
/>> ~
CC I fs
~ I vcr .Irk Cr ~ I <<o C
~ I / ~o ~
Hr I P4IJ~~q I
~r >~ ~
M 4
~C f>V LI./~C I
~
Ill "XX~ C ~
'E
~
/
Miff<<1
/ H I
I MM +~( I
~
~ ~ I l
~ >I sl
~ ~I
~
1 IsI I r fr<< ( I II H J~P> II
~
~
~ o lt t/ I\ J gl 4 Mo>>
~ ~
<<a>>IIMC I
j ~ I I
p I <
f -I I J>JIOea r-- L~1 ~ QI)i'XCi <<<<M>> <> / rs I I CWC rMIM/ >M 1/OC << ~ ls lsrl I~ I I C / Ir 1 / H>> I I> r to 1/1 ~ 4/~ I I tl ~ I I I I mamma /I t ff I I II I I *I I I ~ I WC lr l I I Ipkt<<o ~ l>> I I J >~ rrl I ' I ~ I ~ 1 I I f H <<l Il M I I M I ~ tr\J gk I >I II s I I J ~ I sl I l I I Is I Q.M" I II II I I I <<M ~ >I 'e5 ~ c C J I<<rr>>t Hl rr ~ MM ~ ~ ~ ~ t>>M kll I '--1 I R~~IlI v'I. ~ I I I ~ I I I ~ I I r I I I I I I rt ~ l I W+ I Ittt ~ otto I I ~ Ckg ~ I ~ I I At> I 1 f> WtM <<>> -, ~ ~ ~ II krt/ ~ I I >>>>r/4 p I Ij I I I J I of I C I I H 4 >Mt J J I ~ W / >> I I ss' ~ f>>ro /wf ~ <<r tvr l<<r Wlf ~ A ~ I rl<< ~ o>> litt> lfo I I IC I<< Mr Ho I Crl CC/ ~ >M 'TP. 1>>r 1 A <<r r /<<H Ir trWW/ 1 1 ~ ~ list I ~ C> tlk <<t fkr~ MM> Mt ~ tAvsrs Svg &WSOS 4VZWCJJ JNOJIJ/tr CO>>rJOI. 4>CMIHC Irtt s>> '-tfe st -C ~ ~ CU I ~ se K ee ~ U heter I e Dew ~ Ie W s>> VICII ~ I Ar SIC Ie 4 r>>s I lff0 ~ 444 ~ AK fTA TAwf fe ~ I C 4 life TSet 4>>. ts ~0 ~ N tU>> IK >> 04 UUI 40U I>>e Dl ~ st U I ~sn>> ~ ~ Sle bfl ls r4 40 44 V 4 W It I 1st rv 44 C K ~ Ue ~ tie ~ lr KH C>>I ts I ~ err C>>U ~ l>> >>I r V tss>> ~I 4 4 4KI 44 A
- r. rn
~ ff g>> bets I~ slit I r +IK CX 4 CAI>>4 AU C>> ~ Arse IICU CSA TAN>> V>>Y S 114e 44I Itl 4 rbe \ ~ CIC t~ tw I~C ~ 4 -De-> 4&W 44 All 4~ ~ ~ K>> ~~US a IC~ ~ ~ ~~ lt0 s>>s -1 ~ ~ I>> IIIU l I ' DS lre C>>0 be >>r ASK inc l ~. I Iles VIS~ ~ 04>> er ~ IIU lr AA Ils VS Alt* I~ ~ >>U UH ~ tl $ >>s >>A >>4U Ie Vsl tnt ~ I KU LL I4 I tsel Iill KC SUI I Sf 4 AA Tsec 4* A fs>>444 ~ 04 ~ Lv rUV e>>C SKK I rett ! 14K tK K ~~ 4>>I I,ee ~ bbff~r2 srl UW ewe Cert tsU IK If I I 'f: 41 ~ Il ac: ~ 4 ~ r N II ~ I lett ~ ~ N CNA A I lt IH <<44 H AHA <<<<1 <<~/ 44 CHAIH~I Hrt~ ~ Mwtw rHra HH Alet CANC I 44 <<I 4 <<Clear tf <<lt Ar 4f44<<f l(tltet 4<<r A A <<H ~ m~r p 4 lit ~4 ~ HH HW 44 ~lWIH ft Hr lltVIe I ~ IA 4 M 4~ <<lt A AA 41 IIAA <<Hr ~ SIMHI ~ I 4 I* AHI 4 lt ~ t~ AC tg Ntt 4 MH 11 ~H rl<< C<<r t4 Mr 444-tfe ~ A LJ ere <<tl 4I I AW AIH Alt 4 ~ 4 elv t 4 4 ANC 1 L I L 0 4. 4 MA rH ~ I Nr I 44 ~ H Wl IIH <<i' 4 H AM<<kN terrrrr Nlt <<<<4 C44HHAIC lweM r rr tAIM ~ H ~ <<HA I CH ~ II4 AN ~ ~AW HAACIWle ~ Art ~ CAt 4 44 <<rH ~ \I f Hr t CMHrt ~Aa tee All SASCS Al 1 <<Ht C Agltw ff I AII~ I <<Ht t<< ~ A<<N W ~ I t<<e ~'s tv ~ H<<lt Arerpp 0" <<Af II I H'rW4 WHA r<<W II<< Ht Hr 444 <<H ~1 rt f Hl L N NH I4 4 N I L ~ J)gpss I I ~~ ~ 4 Hl E-+S ~I5 ttrtAer 7WH C PTP- Uutrs 3s4tt CVCS-SHEET 3 H ~I NA <<lr <<I ACM AN<<tl e gsS )gi ~ t et~I<< w<<ew I C~P~ It ~ C Clat I ja A I ~ Altw ~ e ~ e<<w ~ ~ A Ate ~ AlW IACL ~ Me ~ <<CA .Al ~ <<le ~ PA ~ ~M Ma I ~ Al I I a C P AA r I ~ ~ I te W cc<< ~4 ~ ~ Iel Al ~ I<< ~ ~ etc ~ le PP CAe CM ~ ~ ~I ta I I IAC r/<<I <<I ll, <<WM (" I 4 ~ IA CA PA C C. ~ r ~ CAC I t ~ ~lI ~ AA A MA AAMM re<<e paalw A ll~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ Iw Al ~ M IA l AP ~ ew ~ t ~ Aa ~ ~ e <<t LAerA ~ I~ AAAP l ~IA ~ c<<c<<aJICM' P C ~ A crea Awa ~ I I A P I ~ - .J 9 ~ ~ I cw c wl ~ ~ AM I Al A $ P4 ~A I W A AV w I ~ Ae rr Aw ~ CA ~ I crp w ~ <<IA M AAA W\ ' ~ CA ~ PAC ~ << tee AMMAcr ew~ ~ wt I ~ <<I~AIWC ~ ew<< e ~ ic At, ec 'Vtllt P ACA I Pe A AAW IIAWI<<<<seller I V' rr IAr lIMAHare ~ ~ ~ ~ etre ~ te ~ I ~ &PA I I ~ I I ~ AAC ~ l. i'A~a~> PP-e pe leI ~ e ~c rsppr Fust Per Cootcuo Srsrs C I AWW4 Jill<<44 I ~I ~ t w Ar I\tr I ~ ~S jW4 VrVN~ t<<f ~~ ~ aw ah cs (444 CN 44W I ~ IN Mt IA IV ~ RI A Atrw %4'I W I, Nri I S.II ~ A Wttt I Nr rrt wwr 4<< Wt r 0 Aw 4 I trt tttt <> AW ~ 4 l' raa ~ W IVIN AA A / ~ wl IIWN st av %%4 ~ I I~ A N Nt ~ ~ I I~ 444 %%4 4 At ~ A %W A r1 W II I ~ ~ Alt I Saw IIVI ~ ~ I Vrt I>>W I ~ r~~w I ~ ~ ~ ~~ Wr Httt I ( AW %%4 IIP A4 ltr I I ~e'CG}40 %<<r I I I I ~I IWI ~ N I N tW Crl IAWI f<<f r % S%4 '~S I/NtW I ~ err I NW Iw I C<< I ~ f~ I I Cwr QC Swarr A ~ u IN%4 ~t ~ 4ri 0 O I It 4W ~W JUIj ~JtlIwt Jlf}d VC IIWI I J I wwwlt csf I I trr VNVCSIICIIWICIW. Nwswwclrrcrwwt4>> GS IAN> wtt AtWt ~ I II VWI r~mV ~CS Iarrr NWNIVI \trWr VVI ~ CNICA ~I W ~ ta I~N CNNV 44 rr4 Nwt tr far n>> N 4r I I I rwa ~ VS}V r~rrs A ~ A4ww Cwawrrf WAsrs DrssrssAS Srsrsrr-GCS SSSGS. It ~ %4 St I 4 tt I =I t I ~ %4WN A ttt b 47 The'ew Nast'e'andlin Fa'cil'i't 'o'r UNITS'3 'and 4 IOSIZA ad Il t<<sa tsd Said I ~ I Naa Wt lail<<al OOOI I ~ <<s<<<<<<at NIN cca'I<<wats 9 ~ aaatw tts<<t ~ NQI I Cut Slooaa ~N <<S isla<<IC N WNN ~ l<<ls Nas <<NI W~ caar ~ NN Oats C ~ Ilu oca oaa atacau, aaoa<<sac@a\st asia t w IN'a NOON oca cata u OA v t ~ s<<NN assr ~ =- . ~ I r Ia la RI<<ua Js f; ~ NW It<<d a<<d Zd I it' QJ W / NNNI wa~i aau Il NIV I - ---- r-ONS aaaal ~I ~ ~ORBAL. ~ ISN ltt ot Laa<<C J+a CONN CO<<C Cl last CS SZII '~7. h Icr r aac II tc<<d IN<< CIINI
- i. I Nr N INN NNO Iv NIZuts t a~
'I AOWCLAS!C a N' st tt ra O a. ~ Icr oa cia<<c a<<N 4ICIIIIL COAPOkAIION aaa. tlIc IN<<NOCN Cl 5TN tlltllltlall ~ INOI coRtctt UQVO SCCSIK SOLOIFKAIION SIALCPC'I PLAN 4 SECIZZI KQIBLNS SAIO- IC - 54 . 3 FEE IAINBER "~ gl i va@ I EVIET ~ VII + ~ IIII g% at Jot ~ 00 as P~l, 1<<0 Walt ~ I N \ ~ Rl)NM I ) TV El ~ I IW ~ al 44 S)>>late el ~ ~ ~ ~ E 4 ~ II Ma 0 T 441 r>>3 44 II W.ns aa ~ oct at ta I llw I l<<t<< Wt ~ aa ~ N NN ~ vw>>0 4 ~ 0>>aa WNE >>WEE EIWE oe 14T ~ atf 4 <<) ~ 4 I>>et<< ~~) ~ aa ILV ~ NN 1 It <<IE ~4 E 4~ Ml ~ 44 ~ I ~ WN ~ << ~ ~ 01 WL N C ~ 0 <<00 Mat L la C lsl oo Vl~ Ea E leo P 1104 ~tMV ~ aa Ia>> ~ 4<< tao ~ ~ << 0 ~Ill>>a +Isla Ito ~ 4\ Vt Iso )0<<a T \Ia <<0 04 a S ~ 4 I VVI A 4 ea ta ~ >>lll Ied'ET ~ 4 ~ I>> 0>>N ~ 'I ., ~ Ma Ea ~1 t Q AC C M <<4 I na I 010 A ole I 1>>a'w ~ <<1 I\ n-ee ~ sa)>>a ~0 ) W ll EP C ~ ~ 3 W>> 4~ IMMIT <<0 ~ IN TW ~ gt 0>> I 4 ~ EWI ~ e t I ~ El ~ot ~' ~ >>4 re 44 ~W >>044~ 0 PIE ~ 4<< W>> ~ ~ Wt tW N LN C ~ <<0 ~ 'I Ve S M 0 te N~ ~ lr ~ aa ~ ~ ~ IPWI&q TL M ~ ~ I 41 ~ 1<<alp >> Ne ~ ~1 ~ 0 aa f la <<I <ol <<S aa SI )tie) Ig, s)cni)I co)coIAnon nn)II Inn) 1 Inn I tatan ww<<w Ie tips a nl lnatow aa w~ <<>>wow ~t) 14 EIMI PIP)NO DIRQRJn JIXNNI)00 I 1 MEPN NN w>>T 1 Iww asvwtlo ~ LE WEWE <<<<W tr tW Ne RIOORSTE EVEPCaeen STS'IEu PROCESS TIE~ S)ott~7 <<0 pwataa I ~ 'Tav 0>>T TINE I asa>>'ill )>>tata)at<<eall wT <<ata w<<T ~ 41 we4 T41 !TIII~ Iattntaeo ~ 'tll >>llllaWtTea II OI) TINI IesnAI SIPI 4 Ns' ~ 000 4 44 M<<I~ ~ I agaaota ~ lnelt Rat<<>>>> ) + )10 M I al ~ 0CRW ~ I I I ~o ~ IRIEEIIEWT1114l W) ,dt N~ W ~ I ~ '4 ~ NAI ~ <<W 0 0 ~ i 5 I~ I << ~ I ~ I I r'0>> tttca ~C 04 ~ I ) NN ~ As<< toa I tot taI AA I I ' I' V 1 ~ ~ Sa W 041 ~ 01 AIA Ts I ' I MN 000 It I~ ~ ' 4~ ' Ci004 ~ ao ~ << ~ V 4 V ~ I' NMI ~ S I <<0 ~ ~ ~ ~ N I'Wa >> ~ Ma 5 A MM-saa ar 44MIL 'V t 0>> SPASM"ST C<<t lt NN I to<<NII IS It<< A~ 0 A A' ~ >> la 4 NN E i'ca ~rl~ -4 c.<<lh <')a 0>>10 IT M ~ Ms >> 4 ~ OM ~SA0>>. N Ca \>> 1st 'I ~ N<< 01A Atl =. LI I->> 4 0044 I <<Its at<<l ~ 4 TO<< C>>0 <<0 ~ MV 4\1 I I~ 4 M ~ ~1 I'ot A -E
- CY At 44 .I 0 NM
~ ss Mtgort<<a S too 0>> ~ I>> M C IANta tS C.A. -MO ~ ~ II~ ~ ~0 I~ WJ,SI~~N ., ~4 'sl V ass>oowe <<Nt ossa oto 000<<<<41 M I ~AV~4 o ~ lt? 0 04 ar ~ N ts ~ W >>I ~ I ~ ~ M N<<A asNI>liat Isa>oat>> M>400<< Toattolo osrt srsoraol Naot ~ t<<40 ro<<t MTN 0001 0 4000s lar MTIIN, IA roocaao 0<<too<<a trsttrar. I<<roa, ~ To, 0<<ar 00 0000404 T41 7 gf Mlt Ml' I ONN CQKRZj ~ w 4 w '~ T,-..S ~ 40 404 I ~ ~ 0 A << 1044 2 A>> -5a fp IN + g>.<<as ~ ~ TCHTTT COTTOTATIOM ~ V lsl nta>ta '>tort ~ TRIT ctortrr-aa att >>IAO ~ IM ~ MN 5 As PIPIRO OIAORAIA >S> RAOCCASTE EVAPORATETI SYSTEII PROCESS TIEHH SHT. ZM 2 S.st I 'I I~ ~4>as N>NIM OA I IIIC~ Ct ol lao al Nltotllt I los IMNM4<< 011044<<Ill <<M>>M 54>0-IA.IT S ;IN'It NNMssa I al>>It&lit J ~ t<<t MAMOA ~ tMa>>AM'II I Co Mllooolhlrsoa I NIINts E .Mao I'>>0 WA <<* 51 tv e SV 4 Q UVC I<<OCCCS cc(vcaar r<<ccccs rlov ~ 1>> ~ CKUCAL AV 4 "4 ~ CCC ~ CLC la% (AVK:~(Lac CSO CAA SCIL ONV @NA 1cr III I I CAC ~ '(er( VlV CO<<II<<CCCKS v(4<<V(AS 'utuREI I << CCI 1 <<A ~ I >>CA(I VQ 4 lttbl ALLATT~ V4 IL AA(CAAAA SIPIIT rALDA[. t(4 CAIL<<lllIIAWQD II(I.(AMoalr(CLDCOI DOUKI 1l I SIALvlcaca ornalco IS IT r>>.e 1%4 ~ \<<4 fv>>vavl'Atfvttcr calo>>A [DALI ttIT (ICUVA'iavvc <<4 IV L I QA<< ICat et>i T (ICr. TITLE 4)
- .lt'F Clat( PDII
~ lvla Dll<<e ) '. h$ ~ .Crt v C[D ~Re ~ 'l~o, cts ga-I" <<49 I @ ! O.-e -e o ~c'"t'. $ + . If<< II .... 4 cco.v 4$ + gQ,+~/ OL , @~,.! 'Qs ,4 0" I 1 '~ ~ @4)1:, ~I~ etr c 1 <<I r,all~vrg ~CRII -@ OLD DAAACII Ih 0 u( L~~PPLTII CLC ell<< SV<<I(AD vof Q~ C I U ~ >SR I +$ ~ ~ 1 ". I 5'D I Aafrrl ~ I'44 VI .'Ical L4bi'">- J-. Ib> ! ~ I I I I I U ICI LI~ .I V<<cl I ~lI I OIILL VA'ZC(ATC 4 1 I <<vp ' I I4 NL'J. ~atilt aaat I I .."'T'"t@ Pf ~i j I I P'g 4[[NIT[ COttOAATIOH ~ .--r - a<<CA~I~I Tlllhl DID[i b [Ill[Clbtl!T HIA $ 1'caf ~ IE e~ab {I~ II Og.', I II<< CO( Ivv e., IL1IT, At RA[TAICSTE SOLPF[SVCN RAOCCASTE QSTQI Ifftrc b TRAI6F [R R b L tt<<<<AIACC . ~ NON DC<< .~ ., ....It(CADI.[a I II CICI >. IlOT 'r4 All EOIO II IC I -' I '. 4 ~ aaN aoocss fsoaa O'H AA al OA aa aa accfafaa>> NCCCSS faCAI facaCCC alAC Qf,ll alaaaaaC faacA aaoO fvaaaac ;M' IO AC fNCI 15 CIOJ cso (AC'AILcflN O IIIO I Il)a g aCAI SlO ccaacaf saaasa IAAA CICCNI 5IO 0 0 0 0 Ja ~ aaac AN( q .g<<<S ~ 5 Aa ISIS ~ lAIORfa I I I I(fai lfco aaaac cocc scc saaoAI aa S ~ q ( 5 \I ~ <<Oaa IIICAA (. JOAI ~ CC'~ CCCCAI @:@J ~fal I ~ -+ S.O) a I I L l4,N1 \aa I a I Sao ~ I CCA C Jul 8(JJ I - ICC VCAOmO 'CJCr CCNC COO I I afalA '~'O ~ 'e-4-%~ r-ao ; r ---------" SSCSN.fat<) OACA~ CNImOI I I I I I ~5'IJ a(cat I ~ @. ~ I aaccA AANaa alf ISCIC I I I I I I I ffas aaa ~ Clal (- I I ~ a I I I VO N aat CJ II'5 I I I I I I I CONVACC IIIAfsaaaQAO) I J 5.4r-~'-- > MQ. @ /Oaaaff ASCACIAIINI NN OJCICCJ fha ala >>i AS Irfa cl AAc Ia ICA ( a I ~S 4 CSIJ q Q I CAIC ~ I flVaal nl IOafJf ~q( .eX I ISICV~NI aa I L Nc aa SCSICSJfa'f ac 5 I aa O I d((H((L CORPORATION I I I aaaa (II .f%-4 ~ I CCCJIJC JCJCJ 5 aavA ~ avr NAANA CCCIJ CCSJIN vra I .I I ~ I~ I CJ%ICCCSTE SOLOO ICacll(N SYSTOJ Sl N I~ f ~ aYNat a l(QJ (KhGC( JSSJOLtfa 5 (CNPJCGC fLLJCa P. S I. BAGRMJ V~ afttAJ 5610 IC IS X~WivCL' FRE MJJJBKR SUPPLEMENT B THE METEOROLOGX PROGRAM -AT " TURKEX POINT PLA'NT THE 'METEO'ROLOGY 'PROGRAM AT 'URKEY POINT 'PLANT 1.0 'INTRODUCTION The data reported in thi;s evaluation of APPENDIX I compliance by TURKEY POXNT PLANT's UNITS No. 3 and No. 4 have been'cquired through FLORIDA POWER and LIGHT COMPANY's active program at TURKEY POINT PLANT since 1968. Supplementary infor-mation has also been obtained from the'OUTH DADE PLANT meteor-ology program, which was established in 1970 at a site approx-imatel'y 9 miles'SW of the TURKEY POINT PLANT. All of these data are analyzed by a reputable 'group of meteo'rologists (1). Periodic reports of -these analyses are made, e.g. the "1973 Annual Meteorological Summary, Turkey Point" ('2) . These onsite programs are commensurate with recom-mendations and intent of Regulatory Guide 1.23(3) . All meteor-ology data presented in this compliance evaluation should be representative of the expected long-term conditions at the TURKEY POINT PLANT site.
- 2. 0 XNSTRUMENTATXON 2.1 A meteorological tower, situated in an area of rela-tively g3,at, terrain, has. been in operation at TURKEY POINT since 1968.
2.2 Its instrumentation includes:
- a. Wind sensors mounted at 30- and 235-foot levels above grade. Wind direction and speed are contin-uously recorded on strip charts for both 'elevations;
- b. Dual Climet, shielpe4, aspirated, platinum thermometers installed at 32,'32 and 232 feet above "sea leveX which are 'continuously record-ing on 2 multi-point recorders;
- c. A standard ESSA weighing type, continuous re-corder, rain gauge;
- d. A hygrothermograph, recording relative humidity in percent; and
- e. A microbarograph recorder to measure atmospheric pressure in inches of mer'cury.
2.3 All of'he instrumentation is constructed of durable materials, suitable for accurate engineering estimates of the 1 diffusion climatology. Routine 'monthly instrument calibrations are conducted as part of the data acquisition program.
- 3. 0 ANALYSIS OF METEOROLOGY DATA 3.1 The'URKEY POINT PLANT meteorological data are re-corded on strip charts, reduced to mean hourly data and 'analyzed by the LSD Codes of DAMES and MOORE (1). These analyses in-clude data for these conditions:
- a. Wind direction at the 30- and 235-foot levels of the meteorological tower reduced to 16 car-dinal sectors of 22.5 'degrees;
- b. The range of the horizontal wind direction variability- to the nearest five degr'ees for the 30- and 235-foot level's;
- c. Wind speed, to the nearest mile per hour, for the 30- and 235-foot levels;
- d. The Vertical temperature lapse rates for the 232-foot level minus 32-foot level (to the near-est O.l degree Fahrenheit); and Precipitation, reduced to the nearest 0.01 of an inch.
,3. 2 A13, o f th,e meteoro3,ogica3, tower wind speeds were reduced to a specified level; (3;0 meters) by the (a} Pasquill definition of the ver'tical temperature lapse rates, (b) hori-zontal stabilities as a function of wind variability and (c) the following wind speed power'aw: 10 meters = yh(' 1'0 meters meters ) q 'cC.'1 Where: p = wind speed, mph h = he'ight q = 0.25 for Pasquill A,', C and D; or 0.50 for Pasquill E, F.and G. It should be noted that this is the NRC's recommended technique of standardization so that sites can be compared on ( equal terms. 3.3 The atmospheric dispersion potentials at TURKEY POINT PLANT have been determined by computing the hourly relative concentrations for a given period of time and then selecting the appropriate occurence level for the time period of interest. The relative concentrations at the minimum boundary distance were calculated by means of thi.'s equation: Ell 2 P(m vy o'z + CA Where. x/Q relative 'concen'tration, seconds per cm 3 average hourly wind speed, mps, a'djusted to the 50-meter elevation horizontal dispersion as determined by the standard deviation of the ho'urly horizontal wind variability in meters vertical dispersion as determined by the vertical temperature lapse rate, in meters one-half the minimum cross-sectional area of the containment structure = 1363m 2 3.4 Based on consecutive hourly observations, the fol-lowing equation was used to determine the monthly average relative concentrations, X/Q and depleted [X/Q] , for each of the 16 cardinal directions: X/Q] > 1 ER '.032 q u 3. a ZX.D ~ K~3 Where: average relative concentration in seconds per m3 for time period of interest for each sector I average hourly wind speed in meters per second with a minimum assignment of 0.447 mps (1.0 mph) zi vertical dispersion as determined by the vertical temperature lapse rate in meter's D the distance iq meters to the low..population zone distance:of 8,045 meters ng 1 the'ver'age 'time periods of 8 hours, 16 hours, 3 days and 26 days.
- 2. 032 a constant that incorporates a sector spread of 22.5 degrees, m/8 radians The atmospheric dilution factors from these data were tabulated in descending order of magnitude with the most con-f ser'vative 'dilution factor first.
3.5 The 'average 'annual values'f relative dilution were computed from this equation: . 1 <n ''''2.'032 Ecc. 4 X) (I n 2 cv i=1 ( z (P,X) Where: I = average annua 1 re 1 ative di 1 ution for Q( X each sector I and distance X (meter) z (P, X) = vertical dispersion coef ficient. (meters) u average hourly wind speed in the specific sector (mps} with a minimum assignment of 0.447 mps (1.0 mph) l distance in meters n, i the valid hourly data sample for 1 year. c = 0.5, a dimensionles's constant \ v = ver'tical height of containment. structure structure = '62.33 meters
- However,
'2 .."'2 '""cv '1 ' ~z(P X) Tr 2 z(P,X) e EQUATXON 4 was users to compute the ayerape annua3, II ya3.ues of re3,atiye dilution for the 16 cardina3, directions out to a, distance of at least 45 mi3,es. Xt should be noted that thi's'quation is a less conservative one than that recom-mended in the Staff's Regulatory Guide 1.42(4). 3.6 The onsite meteorological ) .program at TURKEY POXNT PLANT provides a dispersion climatology that can be used in planning safe releases of radioactive gaseous effluents and to determine 'appropriately conservative meteorology parameters that can be used in estimating the potential consequences of hypothetical accidents.
4.0 REFERENCES
(1) DAMES and MOORE, 7101 Wisconsin Avenue, Washington, D. C. (2) R. L. Lyer'ly and DAMES and MOORE, "Florida Power and Light, 1973 Annual Meteorological Summary, TURKEY POXNT", DAMES and MOORE Job. No. 4598-044-027, May, 1975. ('3) USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.23 "Onsite Meteorological Programs", February, 1972. (4) USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.42, "Xnterim Licensing Policy On As Low As Practicable For Gaseous Radio-iodine Releases From Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactors", June 1973.
SUPPLEMENT C TURKEY POINT PLANT: Food Productivit In Areas Surroundin Plant Site
Introduction TURKEY POINT PLANT is principally surrounded (up to 50 miles) by DADE COUNTY, Florida, portions of which contribute significantly to specific commercial food products. Since those parts of COLLIER and MONROE counties 'that are within this 50-mile radius, because they are mostly in the EVERGLADES, contribute little to the volume of these products, the TABLES that follow give emphasis to DADE COUNTY products only. Pertinent to this presentation arethese.'facts: a) DADE COUNTY is a principal growth center for potatoes, tomatoes, beans and strawberries and Cuban vegetables; b) It g'rows insignificant amounts of oranges and grapefruits; c) It produces no sugar cane; and d) It has very few established bee colonies; most of these are used in pollinating ground crops.
TABLES TABLE No. Title ~Pa e Ne. FLORIDA COMMERCIAL VEGETABLES Planting and Harvest Seasons II. FLORIDA COMMERCIAL VEGETABLES Estimated Net Weight of Shipment Units III. Commercial Vegetable Production In Vicinity of TURKEY POINT PLANT IV. Citrus Fruit, Avocado and Mango Harvests V. FLORIDA (DADE) MARINE LANDINGS: Foodfish, Shrimp and Shellfish
i TABLE I FLORIDA COMMERCIAL VEGETABLES-Plantin and Harvest Seasons () Most Active
~Secures Plantin Season Harvest Season Harvest Season Beans Aug. Apr. Oct. - June Nov. May Cabbage Sept. Mar. Oct. June Jan. May Corn July May Sept. July Nov. June Potatoes Sept. Mar. Jan. -July Jan. June Tomatoes July Mar. Oct. July Nov. June Strawberries Oct. Nov. Dec. ..May Feb. Apr.
Batatas (b) Dec. Apr. May Nov. Oct. Nov. Calabazas (b) Dec. Apr. May Nov. Oct. Nov. Malangas (b) Dec. Apr. May Nov. Oct. Nov. Yucas Dec. Apr. May Nov. Oc t. Nov. From "Florida Agricultural Statistics Vegetable Summary, 1974," Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, 1222 Woodward Street, Orlando, Florida 32803 (March, 1975) b Florida. From Dade County Cooperative Extension Department, Homestead,
TABLE II FLORIDA COMMERCIAL VEGETABLES-Estimated Net Wei ht of Shi ment Units Net Wt. Avera e Yield Per Acre
~Commodit Unit lbs./unit units lbs. ~ks ~
Beans Bushel 30 102 3,060 1,390 Cabbage Crate 50 480 24,000 10,909 Corn 42 237 9,954 4,525 Crate'ack Potatoes 100 181 18,100 8,227 Squash Bushel 42 149 6,258 2,845 Strawberries Flat 10. 25 1,321 13,540 6,155 Tomatoes Carton 30 (491) (14,730) (6,695) Batatas (b) Sack 50'0 300 15,000 6,818 Malangas (b) Sack 300 155000 6,818 Calabazas (b) Sack 50 300 15,000 6,818 Yucas (b) Sack 50 300 15,000 6,818 1974 data from "Florida Agricultural Statistics Vegetable Summary, 1974," Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, 1222 Woodward Street, Orlando, Florida, 1farch, 1975. b Florida. From Dade County Cooperative Extension Department, Homestead,
0, TABLE III Commercial Ve etable Production In Vicinit Of TURKEY POINT PLANT Acres Principal Production Harvested, Harvest 1@ss
~Kilo raus
'8.
~Count ~Sanies Center 1974 Pounds 'ade Beans Homestead, 5,810 17.'8 (6) 08 (6) Florida City Cabbage Goulds 280 6. 7 (6) 3. 05 (6) Princeton Corn 8,350 83. 1 (6) 37. 78 (6) Potatoes 6,550 118. 6 (6) 53. 89 (6) Squash 3, 730 23. 3 (6) 10. 60 (6) Strawberries 130 1. 7 (6) , 0.80(6) Tomatoes 12,800 188. 5 (6) 85. 70 (6) Batatas 67000 90. 0(6) 40. 9(6) Calabazas 3,000 45. 0 (6) 20. 4 (6) Malangas 3,000 45. 0(6) 20. 4(6) Yucas 1,000 15. 0 (6) 6. 8 (6) a As applicable, either Dade County Extension Department, Homestead, Flori-da, or from Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, 1222 Woodward Street, Orlando, Florida, data used. b ( } = to power of 10.
0 TABLE IV s Citrus Fruit Avocado and Man o Harvests (a) Units Harvest Unit Harvested, Weight ~Count Fruit 1975-197 6 Pounds ~Kilo raus Dade Limes Bushel 9. 4(5) 51;.7 (6)'3. 1(6) Avocados 55 1. 16 (6) 63. 8 (6) 29. (6) Mangos 55 47. 9 (6) 21. 8 (6) Citrus No marketable crop Specialty Limited crop crops (d) From FLORIDA CROP and LIVESTOCK REPORTING SERVICE, 1222 Woodward Street, Orlando, Florida. b ( ) = to power of 10. II c Includes oranges, grapefruit, tangelos, kumquats. d Includes cherries, guavas, papayas, sapodillos, lychees.
TABLE V p. 1 of 2 FLORIDA MARINE LANDINGS: Foodfish Shrim and Shellfish Weight Shrimp and Weight ~Count Fish ~(k s.) Shellfish ~(k s.) Dade j Amber ack 195 Shrimp (22,132,250) Blue fish 6,962 Clams Bluerunner 4,569 Blue Crabs 2,836 Bonito 405 Stone Crabs 20,274 Cobia 387 Lobster 2,448,416 Dolphin 1,810 Sponges 5,897 Grouper (Scamp) 26,233 Grunt 26,055 Hogfish 1,540 Jack (common) 530 Jewfish 1,076 Kingfish Mackerel 10,000 King Whiting 884 Black Mullet 2, 884 Silver Mullet 58,836 Pompano 1,190 Sea Trout 2,443 Snapper 122,588 Spanish Mackerel 67,640 Tilefish 538 Warsaw 4,589 UNCLASSIFIED 15,841
TABLE V continued: 1973 data from "Summary of Florida Commercial Marine Landings, 1973" Florida Department of Natural Resources, Division of Marine Resources, Bureau of Marine Science and Technology, Tallahassee, Florida. b Individual bait shrimp landed not food shrimp. c Total landed; no record made of lobsters harvested from international water (e.g., Bahamian Archipelago).
- p. 2 of 2
SUPPLEMENT D TURKEY POINT PLANT Cost Estimatin Methodolo and Detailed Cost Estimates
0 0
1.0 COST ESTIMATING METHODOLOGY AND DETAILED COST ESTIMATES This section discusses the methods used in estimating the cost of an alternate gaseous waste or liquid treatment syst: em for TURKEY POINT PLANT. 1.1 General Bases The cost estimates for each substitute system were prepared using wherever possible the cost bases and data presented in NRC Regula-
.tory Guide 1.110 (1) 1.2 Direct Installed Costs In most of the systems studied, Regulatory Guide 1.110 unit cost values were applied, with appropriate adjustments I
for size or capacity, to the augments considered. In many cases, the unit values were used directly as outlined in the Regulatory Guide. Approximately the same percentage or the same unit costs, as stated in Regulatory Guide 1.110 examples, were applied to the support facilities for each system, i.e., such as building space, piping systems, the electrical system(s) and like components. In some of the systems studied, the equipment sizes or component capa-cities were not sufficiently close to those of the typical equipment given in the Regulatory Guide to use its cost numbers directly. (1) The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Regulatory Guide No. 1.110, "Cost-Benefit Anal sis for Radwaste S stems for Li ht-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactors", March, 1976.
In these cases, the estimated costs of equipment were obtained from curves or graphs which, were constructed by using various Regulatory Guide 1.110 equipment cost/capacities as specific curve points. In other cases where only one Regulatoiy Guide 1.110 cost value was shown, estimated costs for the new equip-ment sizes were obtained by use of an exponential cost/size relationship .(such as the "0.6 power curve") which engineering
'ata or literature indicates to be appropriate for the type of equipment under consideration. These curves were projected using the Regulatory Guide 1.110 cost data as the base point.
In those cases where there was either no Regulatory Guide 1.110 data available or no actual construction cost data at, hand, the costs were derived in a standard estimating manner using equip-ment costs obtained from equipment manufacturers or reliable engineering literature.
~
In the above cases, the same approximate cost relationships for support facilities such as assigned building space, piping sys-tems, electrical systems, etc. that were used in the Regulatory Guide were then applied to arrive at the total estimated direct installed cost. 1.3 0 eratin and Maintenance Costs The annual operating and maintenance costs for the various aug-ments were derived from the Regulatory Guide 1.110 stated costs
for like equipment or systems. The approximate equipment capacity/ labor attention ranges .of Regulatory Guide 1.110 were used. The amounts of the maintenance materials, utilities and services used by a specific system were estimated. The unit costs of these requirements were the same as those outlined in the Regulatory Guide. 1.4 Indirect Costs and Annualized Cost of Ca ital The multipliera used to obtain the total capital cost of each al-ternate system and the annualized cost of capital were developed from these statements:
- a. Indirect Cost Factor TURKEY POINT PLANT UNIT 3 & 4's radwaste facilities are shared. Per Regulatory Guide 1.110, page 14, the Indirect Cost Factor is 1.75. The estimated installed direct cost for each alternate system evaluated is multiplied by this factor to obtain the total capital cost.
- b. Ca ital Recover Factor Florida Power and Light Company advises that the capital t
recovery factor to be used for its nuclear facilities is 16.35/
- c. Labor Cost Correction Factor This facility was constructed in FPC Geographic (b) Letter: Florida"Pow'er & Light Company to Dr. W. A. Rodger, NUCLEAR SAFETY ASSOCIATES, dated March 15, 1976; copy attached (ATTACHMENT A).
Region III. Per Regulatory Guide 1.110, page 13, the labor correction factor is 1.0. 1.5 Cost Presentation Direct cost totals are rounded to the nearest whole number; operat-ing and maintenance costs are rounded to the nearest tenth. All costs are expressed in year 1975 dollars.
- 2. 0 ORGANIZATION This section reports the cost estimates developed for the poten-tial use of alternative systems to the gaseous and liquid treat-ment systems at TURKEY POINT PLANT. Paragraph 2.1 gives data on substitute systems for the plant's gaseous waste system; Paragraph 2.2 develops similar data for alternate systems for the plant's "as-built" liquid treatment system.
4 2.1- PART I: ALTERNATE GASEOUS SYSTEMS For convenience, each system has been assigned a designated number, I and the augment (that is either added or subtracted from the "as-built" system) indicated and described. The alternate gaseous systems that have been considered in these cost-benefit analyses were: System Component of Gaseous Desi nation S stem Affected Descri tion of Chan e A-1 Gas Decay Tanks Increase size of gas tanks (1/3) A-2 Gas Decay Tanks Add HEPA filters Aux. Bldg. Venti- . Add charcoal adsorbers lation B-2 Aux. Bldg. Venti- Remove HEPA filters lation C-1 Containment Purge Add charcoal adsorbers C-2 Containment Purge Remove HEPA filters D-1 Steam Jet Air Add charcoal filters Ej ector Our calculations of the Operating and Maintenance Costs and Total Direct Cost Estimates for each of these substitute systems are given on pages 6 to 49.
. A-1 Reactor . System ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREA'Q1ENT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS A
Description of Augment increase three. resent as deca tank s ze
'OST (1975 $ 1000)
ITEM LABOR 'OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- l. OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISION, neg AND OVERHEAD
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND neg LABOR
- 3. CONSUMABLES, CHEMICALS, AND neg SUPPLIES
.4. UTILITIES AND SERVICES neg Waste Disposal Water Steam Ele'ctricity Building Services Other
ANNUAL OPERATING 6 MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET continued: ITEM LABOR OTHER TOTAL 'BASIS FOR COST ESTI>fATE
- 5. .TOTAL 0 AND M ANNUAL COST neg.
+per Reg. Guide. 1.110, p. 50.
- p. 2 of 2
p.-1 of 2 Reactor Turkey Point System A-1:,. TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADHASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-HATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment increase three resent as dec h DIRECT COST (1975 $ 1000) BASIS FOR ITEM .. LABOR E UIPMENT/1fATERIALS TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 1. PROCESS EQUIPMENT .7 5.1 5.8 increase th~ee tanks from 150 ft to 200 ft each'65 si CS ASME
- 2. BUILDING ASSIG1PKNT 4.6 2..3 6.9 ~
'. ASSOCIATED PIPING SYSTEMS neg '4. INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROLS neg
- 5. ELECTRICAL SERVICE neg
- 6. SPARE PARTS neg SUBTOTAL'.3 7.4 12'. 7
TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OP RADWASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM continued: BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR E UIPMENT MATERIALS- -"
~ - TOTAL COST ESTIMATE 7~ CONTINGENCY .5 '.8 1.3 10%
- 8. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 5.8 8.2 14. 0
+ cost, bases per Reg. Guide 1.110,- p. 49, and use of 0.6 power cost factor
- for size change.'se of same labor/equipment/support-facility distribution as Reg. Guide. .
- p. 2 of 2
e
- p. 1 of 2 Reactor System A-2 ANNUAL OPERATING AND }fAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADPASTE TREA'lMNT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-PATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of . Augment add HEPA filtration s stem to deca tank waste as rele se COST (1975 $ 1000)
ITEM LABOR OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- 1. OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISION, 1.9 20 min/day'lus 40 hr AND OVER}}EAD annual test
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND 0.15 }}EPA replacements LABOR
- 3. CONSUl'ENABLES, CHEMICALS, AND in items 2 6 4 SUPPLIES
- 4. UTILITIES AND SERVICES 0. 05 . 'HEPA disposal
"
Waste Disposal Water Steam
~ Electricity Building .Services Other
0 ANNUAL OPERATING & MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET continued: ITEM LABOR OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE 5.. TOTAL 0 'AND M ANNUAL COST 2.1
~ costs per Reg. Guide,l.llO, p. 40, values.
- p. 2 of 2
p..l of 2 Rea..tor Turkey Point TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment add E . traction s stem to deca tank waste as release DIRECT COST (1975 $ 1000) BASIS FOR ITEM, LABOR E UIPMENT/MATERIALS TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 1. PROCESS EQUIPMENT 1.0 ll. 0 12. 0
- 2. BUILDING ASSIGRKNT 1.9 1.0 2.9
'. ASSOCIATED PIPING SYSTEMS 0.7 0.3 1.0
- 4. INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROLS in item 1
- 5. ELECTRICAL SERVICE 0.7 0.5 1.2
- 6. SPARE PARTS 0.2 0.2 SUBTOTAL'.3 13.0 17.3
TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM continued:
,4'.3 . EASIS FOR ITEM LABOR EQUIPMENT'ATERIALS- -' TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 7. CONTINGENCY 1.3
- 8. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 4.7 14.3 19.0
*HEPA costs taken at approximately 50% of Reg. Guide 1.110, p. 39, values.
- p. 2 of 2
- p. 1 of 2 Reactor System B-l r
ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREA'QKNT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment add charcoal to aux bid vent COST (1975 $ 1000) ITEM LABOR : OTHER . TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- l. OPERATING LABOR; SUPERVISION, 1.6
~ AND OVERHEAD
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND 31.5 LABOR
- 3. CONSTABLES, CHEMICALS, AND SUPPLIES
- 4. UTILITIES AND SERVICES Waste Disposal 3.5 Water Steam
~
Electricity , 1.4 Building Services Other
ANNUAL OPERATING & HAINTENANCE COST ESTIHATE SHEET continued: ITEH LABOR OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIHATE
- 5. TOTAL 0 'AND H ANNUAL COST 38.0
- per detail .calculation sheet, next page.
- p. 2 of 2
16
- p. lof 2 Reactor Turkey Point
~ System ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATING AWa MAINTENANCE COSTS HEPA/Charcoal Filters for Ventilation System Detail.,Calculation Sheet * - ..", -.,= -,.'.,<'..;--.-. ~
.-,.:., - ~ ~ -: '..-. .. ~ - ~
Description of Augment add charcoal to aux bldg vent I. COST BASES per Reg Guide 1.110 dated 3/76'(p. 43.typical)
- l. Operating Labor, Supervisory and Overhead i I '7 b) 7 1/2 minutes/shift for charcoal bank 135 hours/year c) 40 hours HEPA bank annual test Total ~ 135 hours/year
- 2. Maintenance Material and Labor a) HEPA: one change every 2 years 8 $ 150/ unit b) prefilter: one change every 2 years 8 $ 150 /unit c) charcoal: one change every 2 years 8 $ 900 / unit
- 3. Consumables, chemicals'& supplies a) Costs/year ~ $0
- 4. Utilities & Services a) Waste disposal: 1) per HEPA unit: $ 50
- 2) per prefilter unit: $ 50
- 3) per charcoal unit: $ 100 b) Electricity Additional fan HP for filter Q.'0.5 kw/1000 cfm 9 $ 0.018 /kwh
$ 80 year*/1000 cfm; allow pro-rata $ 60 /yr for HEPA, $ 20 /yr for charcoal II. CALCULATIONS FOR ESTIMATE SHEET (per above bases)*
~/
- 1. OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISORY AND OVERHEAD hours/year 8 $ 12
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND LABOR 2a. X pref units x 0.5 unit/yr 8 $ 150 ea.
2b.- X HEPA units x 0.5 unit/yr 9 $ 150 ea ~ / r 2c. 70 char units x 0.5 unit/yr 9 $ ea. 3 Total
17 ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATING & MAINTENANCE COSTS HEPA continued:
- 3. CONSUMABLES,"'HEMICALS & SUPPLIES $ ~0/
'4. UTILITIES & SERVICES Wast'e Dis osal 4al. 4a2. X x pref units x 0.5 unit/yr 8 $ 50 ea. HEPA units x 0.5 unit/yr 8 $ 50 ea.
= $
~X./
4a3. 70 char units x 0.5 unit/yr 9-$ 100 $~~3500 r.
$~3500/ r.
t ea'otal Electricit 4a 4d. 70 kcfm 8 $ 20 /year/kcfm, = $~1400/ Notes: (1) HEPA unit ~ 1000 cfm unit; (2) Charcoal unit = 1000 cfm unit; (3) Bank = entire group of filters for the total ventilation stream (4) dollars year 1975 (5) *continuous operation basis
- p. 2 of 2
p..l of 2 Reactor'urkey Point System '-B"..1: TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OP RADWASTE TREA'QKNT SYSTEM EOR LIGHT-MATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of 'Augment add charcoal to aux bid vent 70 000 cfm DIRECT COST (1975 81000) BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR E UIPMENT/MATERIALS TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 1. PROCESS EQUIPMENT 17 151 168.
- 2. BUILDING ASSIGNMENT 23 35
- 3. ASSOCIATED PIPING SYSTEMS
- 4. INSTRAKNTATION & CONTROLS
- 5. ELECTRICAL 'SERVICE 13 20.
- 6. SPARE PARTS SUBTOTAL 56- 180 236
' 0
TOXAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADMASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM continued: BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR E UIPMENT MATERIALS- ~ - TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 7. CONTINGENCY 18 24 10%
- 8. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 62 198 256.
*per detail calculation. sheet, next page.
- p. 2 of 2
20 p', lof 2
. Reactor., Turke Point
. System ESTIMATED DIRECT COSTS Detail Calculation Sheet HEPA/Charcoal Filters For Ventilation Systems Description of Augment add charcoa1 to aux. bid . vent 70 000 cfm Cost Bases Reference
'I (1) Prefilter-HEPA-charcoal filter equipment ~ $ 5/cfm RG, p. 41 (2) Prefilter-HEPA-filter equipment only (w/o ~ $ 3/cfm RG, p. 36 charcoal)
(3) Charcoal filter equipment value, therefore ~ $ 2/cfm (1) - (2) (4) Heater for charcoal 8 $ 400/1000 cfm = $ 0.40/cfm RG, p. 41 (5) Building space assignment: (6) Prefilter-HEPA-charcoal: for 15000 cfm ~'6' 12' 12'pace
= 3840 cu ft ~. 0.256 cu ft/cfm RG8 p. 41-(7) Pref ilter-HEPA (w/o charcoal):
for 15000 cfm 16' 12' 12'pace
= 2304 cu ft'= 0.154 cu ft/cfm RGp p. 36 (8) Bldg. space assignment for charcoal . (6) (7) only, therefore, ~ 0.102 cu ft/cfm (9) Bldg. space value: Auxiliary Bldg. $ 5/cfm RG, p. 36 Turbine Bldg. = $ 3/cfm RG, p. 41 (10) CALCULATIONS FOR ESTIMATE SHEET (per above bases).
PROCESS EQUIPMENT 'I chare'oal filter: 70, 000 cfm 8 $ 2/cfm = $ 140,000 ~ heater for charcoal: 70,000 cfm 9 40 C/cfm 28 000
- 2. BUILDING ASSIGNMENT 8168,000 70,000 cfm 8 0.102 cu ft/cfm x $ 5/cu ft. - $ 5000
- 3. ASSOCIATED PIPING SYSTEMS in item 1
- 4. INSTRUMENTS & CONTROLS
$ 20,000 allowance
ESTIMATED 'DIRECT COSTS Detail. Calculation Sheet continued:
- 5. ELECTRICAL SERVICE
$ 8000 allowance
- 6. SPARE PARTS Notes: (1) RG ~ Reg.Guide 1.110 dated 3/76; (2) Dollars = year 1975 (3) Labor/material percentages taken at Reg. Guide values.
- p. 2 of 2
- p. 1 of 2 keector ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREAXMNT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment from aux bid vent COST (1975 $ 1000)
ITEM LABOR = OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- l. OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISION, AND OVERHEAD
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND 10. 5 LABOR
- 3. CONSUMABLES, CHEMICALS, AND SUPPLIES
- 4. UTILITIES AND SERVICES
'aste Disposal 3.5 Water Steam
. Electricity 4.2
'uilding Services Other
ANNUAL OPERATING & MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET continued: ITEM LABOR OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- 5. TOTAL 0 AND M ANNUAL COST 20. 2
*per detail calculation sheet, next page.
- p. 2 of 2
e
'4
- p. lof 2 Reactor Turkey Point System B-2 ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS HEPA/Charcoal Filters for Ventilation System Detail Calculation Sheet Description of Augment remove HEPA from aux bid vent I. COST BASES per Reg Guide 1.110. dated 3/76'(p. 43:, typical)
- 1. Operating Labor, Supervisory and Overhead a) 7 1/2 minutes/shift for HEPA bank ~ 136'.:. hours/year b) '7 1/2 minutes/shift for charcoal bank c) 40 hours HEPA bank annual test '40 hours/year Total ~ 176 hours/year
- 2. Maintenance Material and Labor a) HEPA: one change every 2 years 8 $ 150/ unit, b) prefilter: one change every 2 years 9 $ 150 /unit c) charcoal: one change every 2 years 8 $ 900 / unit C
- 3. Consumables, chemicals & supplies a) Costs/year $
4, & Services 0'tilities a) Paste disposal: 1) per HEPA unit: $ 50
- 2) per prefilter unit: $ 50
- 3) per charcoal unit: $ 100 b) Electricity Additional fan HP for filter 9.'0.5 kw/1000 cfm 9 $ 0.018 /kwh
$ 80 year*/1000 cfm; allow pro-rata $ 60 /yr for HEPA, $ 20 /yr for charcoal II. CALCULATIONS FOR ESTIMATE SHEET (per above bases)*
- l. OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISORY AND OVERED) 176 hours/year 8 $ 12 /yr
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND LABOR 2a. 70 pref units x 0.5 unit/yr 8 $ 150 ea. I
/r 2b.
2c. ~70 HEPA char units x 0.5 unit/yr 8 $ 150 units x 0.5 unit/yr 8 $ 900 Total ea ea.
~
$
5250 x 10 500 /yr
1 ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATING 6 MAINTENANCE COSTS HEPA continued:
~ ~0/
3 CONSUMABLES j "CHEMICALS 6 SUPPLIES - $
- 4. UTILITIES 6 SERVICES Wast'e Dis osal 4ai. ptai units x 0.5.,unit/yz', $ .50 aa. $ ~1750/
HEPA units x 0.5 unit/yr 8 -.0 l 4a2. 4a3. 70 I char units x,0.5 unit/yr 9
$ 50 ea.
$ 100 ea' Total 4a
$ ~Xr. 750/
$ ~3500/
Ital / / = $~4200/ Notes: (1) HEPA'unit = 1000 cfm 'unit; (2) Charcoal unit ~ 1000 cfm unit;
'(3) Bank = entire group of filters for the total ventilation stream (4) dollars year 1975- (5) *continuous operation basis s
- p. 2 of 2
e p..l of 2 Reactor Turkey Point ~ System ;B-2 TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SNEET OF RADWASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM FOR LIG1lT-HATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment remove HEPA from aux bid vent DIRECT COST (1975 91000) BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR E UIPMENT/kfATERIALS TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 1. PROCESS EQUIPMENT 21 189 210
- 2. -'BUILDING ASSIGNMENT 18 36 54
- 3. ASSOCIATED PIPING SYSTEMS
- 4. INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROLS
- 5. ELECTRICAL SERVICE
- 6. SPARE PARTS SUBTOTAL -'42 228 270
TOi'AL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADMASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM continued:
'I BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR E UIPMENT hfATERIALS.>> --TOTAL ESTIMATE
'OST
- 7. CONTINGENCY 23 27 10%
- 8. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 251 297
*per detail c'alculation sheet, next page.
- p. 2 of 2
28
.p~ 1 of 2 Reactor., Turke Point System- "B-2
'ESTIMATED DIRECT COSTS Detail Calculation Sheet HEPA/Charcoal Filters For Ventilation Systems Description of; Augment 'remove HEPA'"fr'om 'au
'I Cost Bases Reference (1) Prefilter-HEPA-charcoal filter equipment ~ $ 5/cfm RG, p; 41 (2) Prefilter-HEPA-filter equipment only (w/o ~ $ 3/cfm RG, p. 36 charcoal)
(3) Charcoal filter equipment value, therefore ~ $ 2/cfm (1) (2) (4} Heater for charcoal 8 $ 400/1000 cfm ~ $ 0.40/cfm RG, p. 41 (5) Building space assignment: (6) Prefilter-HEPA-charcoal: for 15000 cfm ~ 16' 12' 12'pace
~ 3840 cu ft =. 0.256 cu ft/cfm RGp p..41 (7) Prefilter-HEPA (w/o charcoal):
for 15000 cfm 16' 12' 12'pace 2304 cu ft = 0.154 cu ft/cfm RG- p. 36 (8) Bldg. space assignment for chare'oal (6) (7) only, therefore, = 0.102 cu ft/cfm (9) Bldg. space value: Auxiliary Bldg. $ 5/cfm RG, p. 36 Turbine Bldg. ~ $ 3/cfm RG, p. 41 (10) CALCULATIONS FOR ESTIMATE SHEET (per above bases)
- 1. PROCESS EQUIPMENT HEPA filter:, 70,000 cfm 9 $ 3/cfm $ 210,000
- 2. BUILDING ASSIGNAT 70,000 cfm 9 0.154 cu ft/cfm x $ 5/cu ft '
$ 53,900
- 3. ASSOCIATED PIPING SYSTEMS
$ 10",000 allowance; allocate 50% to HEPA = 50% x $ 10,000 = $ 5000
- 4. INSTRUMENTS & CONTROLS in base
- 29 ESTIMATED DIRECT COSTS Detail Calculation Sheet continued:
- 5. ELECTRICAL SERVICE in base.
6 'PARE PARTS
$ 1000 allowance .--.
Notes: (1) RG ~ Reg.Guide 1.110 dated 3/76; (2) Dollars = year 1975 (3) Labor/material percentages taken at Reg. Guide values.
- p. 2 of 2
0
- p. lof 2 Reactor ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREA'BKNT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment add charcoal adsorbers COST (1975 91000)
ITEM LABOR OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- l. OPERATING LABOR; SUPERVISION, 1.6
~ AND OVERHEAD
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND 18. 9 LABOR
- 3. CONS UMABLES, CH DECALS, AND 0 SUPPLIES
- 4. UTILITIES AND SERVICES Waste Disposal 2.1 Water Steam
~
Electricity .8 Building Services Other
ANNUAL OPERATINQ & MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET continued: ITEM LABOR OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE ~ 5. 'TOTAL 0 AND M ANNUAL COST 23.4 continuous operation basis Notes: per detail'calculation sheet, next page.'ince this purge system is. operated at infrequent
'intervals, the annual 0 & M costs are taken at approximately 10% of continuous operation costs".='
<<
~ =
- p. 2 of 2
'32 p.'1 of 2 Reactor Turkey Point:
System C-1 ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS HEPA/Charcoal Filters for Ventilation System
~, 4 e
e ,DetailCalculation Sheet: E b Description of Augment '
'dsorbers e e I." COST BASES per Reg Guide 1.110 dated 3/76'(p. 43'..typical)
l. Operating Labor, Supervisory and Overhead It 7 1/2 =.minutes/shift for HEPA bank = :; XOMiXX~~
')
b) 7 1/2 minutes/shift for charcoal bank hours/year c) 40 hours HEPA bank annual test I 136 XiltyiZE@tartT Total = 136 hourslyear
- 2. Maintenance Material and Labor a) HEPA: one change every 2 years (t $ 150/ unit b) prefilter: one change every 2 years 9 $ 150 /unit c) charcoal: one change every 2 years 8 $ 900 / unit
- 3. Consumables, chemicals & supplies a) Costs/year ~ $0
- 4. Utilities &'ervices a) Waste disposal: 1) per HEPA unit: $ 50
- 2) per prefilter unit: $ 50
- 3) per charcoal unit: $ 100 b) Electricity Additional fan HP for- filter 9.'0.5 kw/1000 cfm 8 $ 0.018 /kwh
$ 80 year*/1000 cfm; allow pro-rata $ 60 /yr for HEPA, $ 20 /yr for charcoal
.II. CALCULATIONS FOR ESTIMATE SHEET (per above bases)*
I l.
~/
OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISORY AND OVERHFM) 136 hours/year 8 $ 12
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND LABOR 2a. Z pref units x 0.5 unit/yr 8 $ 150 ea. =
2b. X HEPA units x 0.5 unit/yr 9 $ 150 ea-
~
, 2c. 42 char units x 0.5 unit/yr 8 ia Total $ 183900 /yr
33 a ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATING & MAINTENANCE COSTS HEPA continued: 3 '4. UTILITIES
.
4al. 4a2. 4a3. Electricit
~
CONSUMABLES $ CHEMICALS & SUPPLIES
&
Waste Dis osal 42 SERVICES pref units x 0.5 unit/yr HEPA units x 0.5 unit/yr char units x 0.5 unit/yr 8 $ 50 8 $ 50 9 $ 100 ea. ea. ea.'otal 4a
$
= $
$
~0/
~2/
x /
~2100 r
$~2100/ r.
4d. 42 kefm 8 $ 20 /year/kefm $ ~840/ Notes: (1) HEPA unit ~ 1000 cfm unit; (2) Charcoal unit ~ 1000 cfm unit; (3) Bank ~ entire group of filters for, the total ventilation stream (4) dollars ~ year 1975 (5) *continuous operation basis
- p. 2 of 2
- p. 1 of 2 Reactor Turkey Point System TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment DIRECT COST (1975 $ 1000)
BASES FOR ITEM LABOR E UIPMENT/MATERIALS TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 1. PROCESS EQUIPMENT 10 91 101
- 2. 'BUILDING ASSIGNMENT 14 21
- 3. ASSOCIATED PIPING SYSTEMS
- 4. INSTRlkIENTATION 6 CONTROLS
- 5. ELECTRICAL SERVICE 12
- 6. SPARE PARTS 5 SUBTOTAL 35 108 143
4 TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADMASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM continued: BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR EQUIP!lERT MATERIALS- -" - TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 7. CONTINGENCY 14 10X
- 8. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 38 129 157
*per detail calculation sheet, next page.
- p. 2of2
- p. 1 of 2 Reactor. Turke Point
, System "C-l ESTIMATED DIRECT COSTS Detail Calculation Sheet HEPA/Charcoal Filters For Ventilation Systems Description of Augment add charcoal, adsorbers Cost Bases Reference (1) Prefilter-HEPA-charcoal filter equipment ~ $ 5/cfm RG, p. 41 (2) Prefilter-HEPA-filter equipment only (w/o $ 3/cfm RG, p. 36 charcoal) Charcoal filter equipment I'3) value, therefore ~ $ 2/cfm (1) (2) (4) Heater for" charcoal 8 $ 400/1000 cfm ~ $ 0.40/cfm RG, p. 41. (5) Building space assignment: (6) Prefilter-HEPA-charcoal: for 15000 cfm ~ 16' 12' 12'pace
~ 3840 cu ft = 0.256 cu ft/cfm RGg p. 41 (7) Prefilter-HEPA (w/o charcoal):
for 15000 cfm 16' 12.' 12'pace
= 2304 cu ft ~ 0.3.54 If cu ft/cfm RG, p. 36 (8) Bldg. space assignment for charcoal (6) (7) only, therefore, ~ 0.102 cu ft/cfm (9) Bldg; space value: Auxiliary Bldg. $ 5/cfm RG, p. 36 Turbine Bldg. ~ $ 3/cfm RG, p. 41 (10) CALCULATIONS FOR ESTIMATE SHEET (per above bases)
- 1. PROCESS EQUIPMENT chare'oal filter: 42,000 cfm 9 $ 2/cfm ~ $ 84,000 heater for, charcoal: 42,000 cfm 8 $ 0.40/cfm 16 800
$ 100,800
- 2. BUILDING ASSIGN T 42,000 cfm x 0.102 cu ft/cfm 9 $ 5/cu ft $ 21,420
- 3. ASSOCIATED'IPING SYSTEMS-
$ 8000 allowance; allocate 50%. to charcoal $ 4000
- 4. INSTRUMENTS 6 CONTROLS in item 1
37 ESTIMATED DIRECT COSTS Detail Calculation Sheet continued:
- 5. ELECTRICAL SERVICE allowance = $ 10,000 plus 25% for siz'e increase $ 12,5000 6 SPARE PARTS allowance p,$ 5000 Notes: (1) RG = Reg.Guide 1.110 dated 3/76; (2) Dollars ~ year 1975 (3) Labor/material percentages taken at Reg. Guide values.
E
- p. 2 of 2
e
- p. 1 of 2 Reactor System C-2 ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREA'BKNT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment remove HEPA filters COST (1975 $ 1000)
ITEM LABOR OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- 1. OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISION, 2.1 AND OVERHEAD
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND 6.3 LABOR 0
- 3. CONSTABLES, CHEMICALS, AND SUPPLIES
- 4. . UTILITIES AND SERVICES Waste Disposal 2.1 Water Steam Electricity 2.5 Building Services Other
A%DUAL OPERATING & MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET continued: ITEM LABOR OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE .5. TOTAL 0 AND M ANNUAL COST 13.00 continuous operation bapis 4 1 y
'I "Notes: *per;.detail calculation. sheet, next page. Since this purge system is operated at infrequent intervals, the annual 0 & M costs are taken at appro'ximately 10% of continuous operation costs.
- p. 2 of 2 1'
40 p.'1 of 2 Reactor Turkey Point "System C-2 ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATING MD MAINTENANCE COSTS HEPA/Charcoal Filters for Ventilation System Detail.,Calculation Sheet. I Y J * , Description of Augment remove-HEPA filters I. per Reg Guide 1.110, dated -3/76 '(p. 43..typical)
'.
COST BASES . Opeiating Labor, Supervisory and Overhead "
')
a) 7 1/2 minutes/shift for HEPA bank 7 1/2 minutes/shift for charcoal bank c) 40 hours, HEPA bank annual test
~ 136."
40 hours/year hours/year Total ~ 176 hours/year
- 2. Maintenance Material and Labor a) HEPA: one change every 2 years 8 $ 150/ unit b) prefilter: one change every 2 years 9 $ 150 /unit c) charcoal: one change every 2 years 8 $ 900 / unit
- 3. Consumables, chemicals 6 supplies a) Costs/year ~ $
0'. Utilities 6 Services a) Waste disposal: 1) per HEPA unit: $ 50
- 2) per prefilter unit: $ 50
- 3) per chaicoal unit: $ 100 b) Electricity Additional fan HP for filter Q.:0.5 kw/1000 cfm 9 $ 0.018 /kwh
$ 80 year*/1000 cfm; allow pro-rata $ 60 /yr for HEPA, $ 20 /yr for charcoal II. CALCULATIONS FOR ESTIMATE SHEET'per above bases)+
- l. OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISORY AND OVERHEAD hours/year 8 $ 12
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND LABOR 2a. 42 pref units x 0.5 unit/yr 8 $ 150 ea. = $ 3,150 /yr 2b. 42 HEPA units x 0.5 unit/yr 9 2c. ~ char units x 0.5 unit/yr 8 X '/yr Total
e 41 ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATING & MAINTENANCE COSTS HEPA continued:
- 3. CONSUMABLES, CHEMICALS & SUPPLIES 0 ~0/
- 4. UTILITIES & SERVICES Waste Disiosal 4al. 42 pref units x 0.5 unit/yr 8 $ 50 ea- 8~1050/
4a2. 42 HEPA units x 0.5 unit/yr 9 $ 50 ea. 1 050/ 4a3.. X char units x 0.5 unit/yr 8 $ 100 8~Xr. Electricit ea'otal 4a 0-4d. 42 kcfm 9 $ 60 /year/kcfm. = $mzdy-Notes: (1) HEPA unit ~ 1000 cfm unit; (2) Charcoal unit ~ 1000 cfm unit; (3) Bank ~ entire group of filters for the total ventilation stream (4) dollars = year 1975 (5) +continuous operation basis
'
- p. 2 of 2
0
- p. 1 of 2 Reactor Turkey Point TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment remove HEPA filters DIRECT COST (1975 91000)
BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR E UIPMENT/MATERIALS TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 1. PROCESS EQUIPMENT 12 114 126
- 2. BUILDING ASSIGNMENT 21 32
- 3. ASSOCIATED PIPING SYSTEMS 4
- 4. INSTRAfENTATION .& CONTROLS 5.. ELECTRICAL SERUICE.
- 6. SPARE PARTS SUBTOTAL 36 127 163
TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADMASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM continued: BASIS FOR ITElf LABOR E(UIPMENT kfATERIALS- ~ ~-TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 7. CONTINGENCY 13 ~
16
- 8. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 39 140 179
*per detail calculation sheet, next page.
- p. 2 of 2
44
- p. 1 of 2 Reactor.: Turke Point System "C DIRECT COSTS 2'STIMATED Detail Calculation Sheet HEPA/Charcoal Filters For Ventilation Systems Description of Augment remove HEPA filters Cost Bases Reference (1) Prefilter-HEPA-charcoal filter equipment $ 5/cfm RG, p. 41 (2) Prezilter-HEPA-filter equipment only (w/o ~ $ 3/cfm RG, p. 36 charcoal)
(3). Charcoal filter equipment value, therefore - $ 2/<<m- (1) - (2) (4) Heater for charcoal 8 $ 400/1000 cfm ~ $ 0.40/cfm RG, p. 41 (5) Building space assignment: (6) Prefilter-HEPA-charcoal: for 15000 cfm ~ 16' 12' 12'pace
~ 3840 cu ft ~, 0.256 cu ft/cfm RGg p. 41 (7) Prefilter-HEPA (w/o charcoal):
for 15000 cfm 16' 12' 12'pace
~ 2304 cu ft'= 0.154 cu ft/cfm RG>> p. 36 (8) Bldg. space assignment for charcoal . (6) (7) only, therefore, ~ 0.102 cu ft/cfm (9) Bldg. space value: Auxiliary Bldg. $ 5/cfm RG,'p. 36 Turbine Bldg. $ 3/cfm RG, p. 41 (10) CALCULATIONS FOR ESTIMATE SHEET (per above bases)
- 1. PROCESS EQUIPMENT 42000 cfm 9 $ 3;cfm ~ $ 126,000 .
- 2. BUILDING ASSIGNMENT 42000 cfm x 0.154 cu f/cfm 9 $ 5/cu ft ~ $ 32,340
- 3. 'SSOCIATED PIPING SYSTEMS
$ 8000 allowance; assign 50% to HEPA = $ 4000
- 4. INSTRUMENTS & CONTROLS in item 1
ESTIMATED DIRECT COSTS Detail Calculation Sheet continued:
- 5. ELECTRICAL SERVICE in base.'-
- SPARE PARTS allow 1% -z equipment $ 1260..---
Notes:'1) RG ~ Reg.Guide 1.110 dated 3/76; (2) Dollars ~'year 1975 (3) Labor/material percentages taken at Reg. Guide values.
- p. 2 of 2
- p. 1 of 2 Reactor System D-1 ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-MATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of,, Augment add charcoal filter to steam BELABOR COST (1975 $ 1000)
ITEM 'THER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- 1. OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISION, 3.8 15 min/shift + 40 hr annual test ANP OVERHEAD
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND 2.0 includes replacement filter LABOR
- 3. CONSUMABLES, 'CHEIECALS, AND 0 in item 2 SUPPLIES
- 4. UTILITIES AND SERVICES
~ Waste Disposal neg Water Steam Electricity
'uilding .Services Other
0 e
ANNUAL OPERATING & MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET continued: ITEM LABOR OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- 5. TOTAL 0 AND M ANNUAL COST 5.8
- per RG 1.110.values,.p. 54.
- p. 2of -2
i p..l of 2 Reactor Turkey Point System D-l... ~ TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-MATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of A'ugment add charcoal filter to steam get ejector DIRECT COST (1975,$ 1000)'TEM, BASIS FOR
'.
LABOR E UXPMHNT/MATERIALS TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 1. PROCESS EQUIPMENT 3.0 7.5 . 10.5 chiller, heater, char-coal HEPA
- 2. BUILDING ASSIGNMENT 3.0 1.5 4.5
'. ASSOCIATED PIPING SYSTEMS 2.0 1.0 3.0 allowance
- 4. INSTRIBKNTATION 6 CONTROLS 0.5 1.5 2.0 -
allowance 5.. ELECTRICAL SERVICE 0.5 0,5 1.0 allowanc'e
- 6. SPARE PARTS .'- 1.0 1.0 SUBTOTAL'.0 13. 0 22. 0
0 0
TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OP RADWASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM continue'd: BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR E UIPMENT MATERIALS- -' - TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 7. 'CONTINGENCY 1.0 1.0 2.0 10% ..
- 8. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 10. 0 14. 0 24. 0
- per RG 1.110 values, p. 53.
- p. 2 of 2
50 2.2 PART II: ALTERNATE LI UID TREATMENT SYSTEM Like the alternate gaseous Systems, each system has been assigned a designated number and the augment (that is either added or subtracted from the "as-built" system) indicated and described. These were the liquid treatment systems evaluated: System Component"of System Desi nation S stem Affected Descri tion of Chan e E-1 Steam Generator Blowdown Add mixed bed E-2 Steam Generator Blowdown Add cation bed Clean Waste System Remove Evaporator F-2 Clean Waste System Remove Demineralizer Dirty Waste System Remove Demineralizer Dirty Waste System Remove Evaporator Pages 51 to 79 show our calculations of the Operating and Mainte-. nance Costs and Direct Cost Estimates for each of these substitute systems.
e 0
- p. 1 of 2 Reactor System E-1 ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET OP RADMASTE TREATtKNT SYSTEM POR LIGHT-HATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment add mixed-bed deminera COST (1975 $ 1000)
ITEM LABOR OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- 1. OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISION, 3.3 15 min/shift AND OVERHEAD 2.. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND 5.0 allowance LABOR
- 3. CONSUMABLES, CHEMICALS, AND 18.7 250 ft3 =
resin/yr 8 $ 75/ft SUPPLIES 3'4. UTILITIES AND SERVICES Waste Disposal 5.0 250 ft3 /yr 8 $ 20/ft 3 dis
'posal cost Mater Steam .
Electricity .* Building Services Other
l e
ANNUAL OPERATING 6 MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET continued: ITEM OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE 5.'OTAL 0 AND M ANNUAL COST 32.0
*per Reg. Guide 1.110 values, p. 75.
- p. 2 of 2
0 p..l of 2 Reactor Turkey Point
~
TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWA'STE TREATMENT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment add mixed-bed demineralizer to steam enerator blowdown DIRECT COST (1975 $ 1000) BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR E UIPMENT/MATERIALS TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 1. PROCESS EQUIPMENT 20 180 200 SS,ASME VIII, 150 psi, nonregenerative, with resin 2..'UILDING ASSIGNMENT 65 35 100
- 3. ASSOCIATED PIPING SYSTEMS 60 30 90
- 4. INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROLS 6.0 10.0 allowance
- 5. ELECTRICAL SERVICE 'neg
- 6. SPARE PARTS 10 10 SUBTOTAL 149 261- 410
TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREA'QfENT SYSTEM continued: BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR E UIPMENT'MATERIALS-~ - TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 7. CONTINGENCY 14 26 40
- 8. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 163 287 450
+approximate Reg. Guide values with adjustments for retrofit installation'at St. Lucie 1 6 2
- p. 2 of 2
0
- p. lof 2 Res.ctor Sys tern E-2 ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-HATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment add cation demineralizer to steam enerator b] d COST (1975 $ 1000)
ITEM LABOR OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- 1. OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISION, 3.3 15 min/shift
,AND OVERHEAD
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND 5.0 allowance LABOR l
- 3. CONStkfABLES, CHEMICALS, .AND SUPPLIES 11.2 .15 ft3 resin/yr 9 $ 75/ft 3
- 4. UTILITIES AND SERVICES
. Waste Disposal Water 3.0 150 ft3 /yr 8 $ 20/ft 3
disposal cost Steam
. Electricity Building, Services Other
I ~
ANNUAL OPERATING & MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET continued: ITEM LABOR OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- 5. TOTAL O'AND M ANNUAL COST 22. 5
"
- per Reg..Guide.1.110 values, p. 75,
- p. 2 of 2
- p. 1 of 2 Reactor . Turkey Point System -;E-.2
"
TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREA'QKNT
.SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS P
Description of Augment add cation demineralizers to SG blowdown treatment DIRECT COST (1975 $ 1000) BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR E UIPMENT/MATERIALS TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 1. PROCESS EQUIPMENT 20 180 200 SS, ASME VIII, 150 psi, nonregenerative, with
-resin
- 2. BUILDING ASSIGNMENT 65 35 100'.
ASSOCIATED PIPING SYSTEMS 60 30 . 90
- 4. INSTRMKNTATION 6 CONTROLS 6.0 10. 0 allowance 5., ELECTRICAL SERVICE neg
- 6. SPARE PARTS. 10 10 mis'cellaneous supplies SUBTOTAL 149 261 410
TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OP RADWASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM continued: ITEM 'ABOR E UIPMENT MATERIALS - - TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- 7. -'CONTINGENCY 14 26 4O
- 8. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 163 287 450
*approximate Reg. Guide'values with adjustments for retrofit installation at St. Lucie 1 & 2.
- p. 2 of 2
n
- p. 1 of 2 Reactor ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREA'BKNT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment remove eva orator from clean wa. t COST (1975 $ 1000)
ITEM LABOR . OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- 1. OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISION, 3.5 291'x 10 3 gpy
- AND OVERHEAD
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND 34.1 .
LABOR
- 3. CONSIBLES, CHEMICALS, AND SUPPLIES
- 4. UTILITIES AND SERVICES Waste Disposal 7.8 Water 5.2
.Steam 8.7
~
Electricity . neg Building. Services Other
e ANNUAL OPERATING & MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET continued: ITEM LABOR OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- 5. TOTAL 0 AND M ANNUAL COST 59. 3
*per" detail calculation sheet, page 10.7-A39.-
- p. 2 of 2'
61
.Reactor Turke Point
- p. lof 2 System F-J.
ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATXNG AND MAINTENANCE COSTS EVAPORATOR SYSTEMS e
. Detail Calculation, Sheet Description of .Augment remove eva orator 'from clean waste s stem X. COST BASES'(Typical values per Reg. Guide 1.110 dated 3/76, pp. 60-63)
- 1. OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISORY AND OVERHEAD')
clean. waste volume: 940 gpd x 310 days/yr 291 000 gpy b) Use 1 hr labor per 1000 gal waste handled (approx Reg. Guide
~ basis).
s
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND LABOR a) Use 7 1/2 % of estimated equipment cost
- 3. CONSUMABLES, CHEMICALS & SUPPLIES UTILITXES & SERVICES a) Waste disposal: 1) clean waste; use 100:1 feed/conc ratio
. (per RG)
- 2) - dirty waste; use 50:1 feed/conc ratio (per RG)
- 3) disposal cost $ 20/ft concentrate (per RG) '.
b) Water: 1) Use 4 gal cooling water per lb steam used (~ about 30 F rise)
- 2) Use water cost = $ 0.30/1000 gal (per RG) c) Steam: 1) 'se 10 lb steam per gal waste processed x 1.5 for heat losses, start-up, idling time allowance, etc. 3
- 2) Use steam cost 8 $ 2/10 lbs (p er RG)
II. CALCULATXONS FOR ESTIMATE SHEET (per above bases)
- l. OPERATXNG LABOR, SUPERVISORY AND OVERHEAD a) Operating labor hours:~2g hours 8 $ 12/hr
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND LABOR a) ' 1/2 2 x $ 650 000 x clean waste /yr b
- 3. CONSUMABLES, CHEMICALS & SUPPLIES
62 p,.-2 of 2 Calculation Sheet continued: UTILITIES & SERVICES a) Haste generated 9 100:1 ratio ~ 2910 gal/yr .'.5
~
ir I 388 ft /yr rr I 3
.r>>
b) - Cooling. water 9 4 gal/lb of steam used r 4 x 4365 x 3 3 10 lb steam/yr 17460 x 10 gal/yr 8 30 cents/ 3 10, gal $ 5 238 /yr c) Steam ~ 10 x 1.5 x 3 "3 3 291 x 10 gal waste/yr',4365 10 lb steam/yr 8 $ 2/10 lb ~ $ 8 730 /yr
'
x III'OTES Concentrate solidification chemicals are in item 4. Dollars = year 1975. Clean waste is approximately 70%of total waste. RG ~ Reg Guide 1.110 dated 3/76.
~ '
- p. 1 of 2 Reactor Turkey Point System -F-. 1 ~
TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADMASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-MATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of. Augment Remove eva orator fr m c DIRECT COST (1975 $ 1000) BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR E UIPMENT/MATERIALS TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 1. PROCESS EQUIPMENT 30 254 284 20 gpm evaporator
- 2. BUILDING ASSIGNMENT 74 38 112.
- 3. ASSOCIATED PIPING SYSTEMS 36 35 71
'. INSTRAKNTATION 6 CONTROL'S 12 12 24
- 5. ELECTRICAL SERVICE- 43 27 70
- 6. SPARE PARTS 30 30 SUBTOTAL 195 396 591
TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADMASTE TREADKNT SYSTEM continued: BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR EQUIPMENT MATERIALS ~ - TOTAL COST ESTIMATE 7~ CONTINGENCY 20 39 59
- 8. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 215 435 650 C
'+Bases per detail sheet page 10.7A41; same approximate labor/equipment/support/facility distribution as Reg; Gui'de.
- p. 2 of 2
- p. 1 of 2 Reactor System F-2 ANNUAL OPERATING AND 1fAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment remove demineralizer from clean w, COST (1975 $ 1000)
ITEM LABOR 'OT11ER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTI1fATE
- 1. OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISION, 1.3 clean waste, 291 x 10 3 gpy AND OVER11EAD 2.'AINTENANCE MATERIAL AND 1.4 allowance (clean waste)
LABOR 1.6 3 3~ CONSUHABLES CHEHICALS~ AND 1 change per yr 8 $ 75/ft x SUPPLIES clean waste assignment
- 4. UTILITIES 3 3 AND SERVICES 0:4 8 $ 20/ft disposal Waste Disposal cost x clean waste assignmant Water Steam .
Electricity Building Services Other
ANNUAL OPERATING & MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE S11EET continued: ITEH LABOR OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- 5. TOTAL O'AND M ANNUAL COST 4.7
*Cost bases per RG 1.110 p. 65..
- p. 2 of 2
- p. 1 of 2 Reactor Turkey Point ~
System F 2.:
-TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREA'QKHT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment remove demineralizer from clean waste s stem DIRECT COST (1975 81000)
BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR E UIPMENT/MATERIALS TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 1. PROCESS EQUIPMENT 4.0 20. 0 24. 0 30 ft3 , SS, ASME VIII, 150 psi nonregenera-tive, w/resin
- 2. BUILDING ASSIGNMENT 6.4 3.2 9.6
- 3. ASSOCIATED PIPING SYSTEMS 9.0 6.0 15. 0 2" piping
- 4. INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROLS 2.0 3.0 5 0 remote conductivity readout
- 5. ELECTRICAL SERVICE neg
- 6. SPARE PARTS 1.0 1.0 SUBTOTAL 21.4 33.2 54.6
0 TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE S1IEET OF RADUASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM continued: I BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR E UIPMENT MATERIALS- ~ - TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 7. CONTINGENCY 2'. 0 3.4 5.4 10% .
- 8. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 23.4 36. 6 60
.>Cost bases per RG 1.110 p.'64.
- p. 2of 2
- p. 1 of 2 Reactor System G-1 ANNUAL OPERATING AND ?fAINTENANCE COST ESTDfATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREATHENT SYST&f FOR LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS
~,
Description of,-Augment remove demineralizer from dir COST (1975 $ 1000) ITEN. LABOR OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIHATE
- 1. OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISION, 0.5 dirty waste AND OVERHEAD 135 x 103'gpy'..
HAINTENANCE HATERIAL AND 0.6 LABOR allowance (dirty waste)
- 3. CONSUMABLES', CHBfICALS, AND 0.7 1 change per yr 9 $ 75/ft x SUPPLIES dirty waste assignment .
- 4. UTILITIES AND SERVICES 2.0 '0 ft3 p 8 $ 20/ft 3
disposal-
"
Waste Disposal cost x dirty waste assignment-Water Steam
. Electricity Building, Services Other /
ANNUAL OPERATING 6 HAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET continued: ITEM LABOR OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE ~ 5m TOTAL 0 AND M ANNUAL COST 2.0
*Cost bases per iG 1.110 p. 65.'
'.
2 of 2
p..l of 2 Reactor Turkey Point -System TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SNEET OF RADWASTE 'JREATMENT
-SYSTEM FOR LIG1lT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment remove demineralizer fiom dirt waste s stem DIRECT COST (1975 $ 1000)
BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR E UIPMENT/MATERIALS TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 1. PROCESS EQUIPMENT 4.0 20. 0 24. 0 30 ft3 , SS, ASME VIII, 150 psi nonregenera-tive w/resin
- 2. BUILDING ASSIGAKNT 6.4 3.2 9.6 9.0 6.0 15.0 2" piping
- 3. ASSOCIATED PIPING. SYSTEMS
- 4. INSTRUMENTATION'& CONTROLS 2.0 3.0 5.0 remote coriductivity readout neg 5.. ELECTRICAL SERVICE
- 6. SPARE PARTS. 1.0 1.0 SUBTOTAL 21. 4 33. 2 54.6
TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OP RADMASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM continued: BASIS FOR ITEM LABOR E UIPMENT kQTERIALS ~ -'OTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 7. CONTINGENCY 2.0 3.4 5.4 10%
- 8. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 23.4 36.6 60. 0
*Cost bases per RG 1.110 p. 64.
- p. 2 of 2
0
- p. 1 of 2 Reactor System G-2 ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREA'AKNT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-MATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of Augment remove evaporator from dirt waste s stem COST (1975 $ 1000)
ITEM LABOR . OTHER TOTAL BASIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- l. OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISION, 1.6 dirty waste 135 x 10 3
gpy
.~ AND OVERHEAD
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND I
14.6... LABOR
- 3. CONSUMABLES, CHEMICALS, AND SUPPLIES UTILITIES AND SERVICES Waste Disposal 7.2 Water 2.4
~ Steam 4.0 Electricity, neg Building Services Other
AR.UAL OPERATING 6 MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE SHEET continued: ITEM LABOR OTHER TOTAL MSIS FOR COST ESTIMATE 5o TOTAL 0 AND M ANNUAL COST 29. 8
*per detail.:.,calculation sheet,. p. 10.7-A51.
.p. 2 of 2
75 Reactor Turke Point System G-2 ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS EVAPORATOR SYSTEMS Detail Calculation. Sheet . Description of Augment remove evaporator from dirt waste s stem I. COST BASES'.(Typical values per Reg. Guide 1.110 dated 3/76, pp. 60-63)
- 1. OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISORY AND OVERHEAD a) ~dirt waste volume: /$ 35 gpd x 3l0 days/yr 134 850 gpy b) Use 1 hr labor per 1000 gal waste handled (approx Reg. Guide basis).
- 2. ~%TENANCE MATERIAL AND LABOR a) Use 7 1/2 X of estimated equipment cost 3.'ONSUMABLES, CHEMICALS & SUPPLIES
- 4. UTILITIES & SERVICES a) Waste disposal: 1) clean waste; use 100:1 feed/conc ratio-
. (per RG)
..') ...dirty. waste; us'e 50:1 feed/conc ratio (per RG) disposal cost $ 20/ft concentrate
')
(per RG) b) Water: 1). Use. 4 gal cooling water'er lb steam used (= about 30 F rise)
- 2) Use water cost ~ $ 0.30/1000 gal (per RG) c) Steam: 1) Use'0 lb steam per gal waste processed x l.'5 for 'heat losses, start-up, idling time allowance, etc. ~
$
3
- 2) Use steam cost 8 $ 2/10 lbs (per RG)-
$
CALCULATIONS FOR ESTIMATE SHEET 1.
- 2. MAINTENANCE MATERIAL AND LABOR 1/2 x 8650 000 x dirty (per above bases)
OPERATING LABOR, SUPERVISORY AND OVERHEAD waste
$ $ /" -"
$
$ ~/
'14,625 /yr a) 7 %
'.
CONSUMABLES, CHEMICALS & SUPPLIES
I, 4
76
- p. 2 of 2 Calculation Sheet continued:
UTIL'ITIES & SERVICES a) Waste generated 8 50:1 zatfo. 2700 gal/yr
. 7.5 4
360 ft /yr 8 $ 20/ft disposal = $ 7 200 /yr b) .. Cooling water 8 4 gal/lb.of steam used sm 4 x 2,025 x 3 ' 10 lb steam/yr 8100 x 10 gal/yr 8 30 cents/ 3 10 gal 32 430 /yr 3 c) Steam 10 x 1.5 x
'
135 x 10 gal waste/yr ,20'25 x 3 10 1b steam/yr 8 $ 2/10 lb ' $ 4 050 /yr III. NOTES Concentrate solidification chemicals are in item 4. Dollars xg year 1975.
~Dirt waste 1s approx%mately 30% of total waste . RG ~ Reg Guide 1. 110 dated 3/76.
~ 8 t I',
-p. 1 of 2 Reactor Turkey Point Sys tern G-.2:. ~
~
TOTAL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SflEET OF RADWASTE TREA11KNT SYSTEM FOR LIGHT-MATER-COOLED NUCLEAR REACTORS Description of'ugment remove eva orator from dirt waste s stem DIRECT COST (1975 91000) BASIS FOR ITEM'. LABOR E UIPMENT/MATERIALS TOTAL COST ESTIMATE
- 1. PROCESS EQUIPMENT 30 254 284 20. gpm evaporator I
- 2. BUILDING ASSIG%iENT 74 38 112
- 3. ASSOCIATED PIPING SYSTIRS 36 35 '71
- 4. INSTRAKNTATION 6 CONTROL'S 12 '12 24
.
- 5. ELECTRICAL SERVICE; 43'7 70
- 6. SPARE PARTS 30 30 SUBTOTAL 195 396 591
0, 0'
TGl'AL DIRECT COST ESTIMATE SHEET OF RADWASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM continued: ITEM'ABOR E UIPMENT MATERIALS ~ - TOTAL MSIS FOR COST ESTIMATE
- 7. CONTINGENCY 20 39 59
- 8. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 215 435 650
- 0~
*Bases per detail sheet 10.7A53; same approximate labor/equipment/support-facility distribution as Reg.'uide.
'
p'. 2 of 2,
k W
ATTAVBKNT' March 15, 1976 Dr'. Walton A. Rodgex Nuclear Safety Associates 5101 River- Road Bethesda, MD 20016
Dear Walt,
Shelton 'Stanton has 'requested that we provide the fixed charge rate which FPL is using for its St. Lucie 2 and South Dade nuc3.ear plants. Mr. Roger DeVore of our Finance Department advises me that the most recently computed (January 76) charge rate for its nuclear plants (both St. Lucie and South Dade) is 16.35%, per year. This is the preferred number for determining levelized costs as opposed to the Capital Recovery Factor used in NRC Regulatory Guide 4.2. Yours truly,
~Wm/~
. 'arry Xdskvojan LLL:nch}}