ML12334A743: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter: | {{#Wiki_filter:United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Official Hearing Exhibit Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. | ||
In the Matter of: | |||
ASLBP #:07-858-03-LR-BD01 Docket #:05000247 l 05000286 Exhibit # | (Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3) c:..\,.~p..R REGlI~;. ASLBP #: 07-858-03-LR-BD01 NYS000221 Submitted: December 16, 2011 | ||
*l~'~. | |||
Docket #: 05000247 l 05000286 Exhibit #: NYS000221-00-BD01 Identified: 10/15/2012 | |||
* 0 Admitted: 10/15/2012 Withdrawn: | |||
~ ~ | |||
....,,1- | |||
? ~ | |||
0.... Rejected: Stricken: | |||
****il Other: | |||
IPRenewal NPEmails From: Palla, Robert Sent: Thursday, October 29,2009 1:07 PM To: Stuyvenberg, Andre\A,f Cc: iPRenewai NPEmaiis | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Weather Runs 1029 09.doc Attachments: Weather Runs 1029 09.doc FYI NRCPA00079060 | |||
Email Number: | Hearing Identifier: IndianPointUnits2and3NonPublic_EX Email Number: i838 Maii Enveiope Properties (8C658E9029C9i D4D90C6960EF59FCOD60258FOF749) | ||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
INeaiher Runs 1029 09.doc Sent Date: "10/29/2009 1 :07:29 Pivi Received Date: 10/29/2009 -1 :07:30 Pivi From: Paila, Robert Created By: Robert.Palla@nrc.goY Recipients: | |||
INeaiher Runs 1029 09.doc "10/29/2009 1 :07:29 Pivi 10/29/2009 | "IPRenewal NPEmails" <IPRenevval,NPEmails@nrc.gov> | ||
-1 :07:30 Pivi Paila, Robert Robert.Palla@nrc.goY "IPRenewal | Tracking Status: ~~one "Stuyv8nbarg, AndrsV',," <Andre'y'y,Stuyv8nb8rg@nrc.gov> | ||
Tracking Status: "Stuyv8nbarg, AndrsV',," <Andre'y'y,Stuyv8nb8rg@nrc.gov> | Tracking Status: ~~on8 Post Office: HQCLSTR02.nrc.gov Fi!es Size Date & Time MESS,a.GE 5 10/29/2009 1:07:30 PM | ||
Tracking Status: | \lVeather Runs 1029 09.doc 224878 Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Rep!y Reqltf~sted: NQ Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: | ||
Post Office: HQCLSTR02.nrc.gov Fi!es Size MESS,a.GE 5 \lVeather Runs 1029 09.doc Options Priority: | Recipients Received: | ||
Return Notification: | NRCPA00079061 | ||
Rep!y Sensitivity: | |||
Expiration Date: Recipients Received: | Indian Point Weather Weather data were reviewed and are of interest because the consequences for a given release of radioactive material would be different if the release Percent by Dire-c:tion occurred at different times of the 1 year and under different ambient vJeather conditions. Entergy averaged 5 years of meteorological data and used the 5 year average as input data in ihe iviACCS2 analysis raiher than using the standard approach of sampling over a year of data. The process used to average the data was 9 | ||
provided in the MACCS2 Meteorological Input File I-Igure 1. Piot of Entergy 5 Year Averaged Weather from Generation Report the site; 0 meter tower showing direction wind is blowing | |||
Entergy averaged 5 years of meteorological data and used the 5 year average as input data in ihe iviACCS2 analysis raiher than using the standard approach of sampling over a year of data. The process used to average the data was provided in the MACCS2 Meteorological Input File | (! PEC001 03877 thru toward. | ||
IPEC00103889). The MACCS2 input file metLinp includes 8,760 | |||
'vvas averaged did not provide insights into why the wind rose IS predominantly | [lourly weather samples (365 days x 24 hours/day) from tile January 2000 to December 2004 iPEC 10 meier mei tower data. The resuits of the averaged weather generate a wind rose predominantly in the northerly direction as shown in Figure | ||
: 1. Review of the process describing ho\"! | |||
the \'''Veather | |||
Figure 2. Plot of Weather for Years 1999 -2002 from the site 10 meter tower showing direction wind is blowing toward. (percent by direction) information provided in the | 'vvas averaged did not provide insights into why the wind rose IS predominantly I1___.. '~-::F-IQ | ||
An analysis is needed using discrete years of weather data for each or at least some of the 5 years, without averaging weather, to understand the effects of weather on the SAMA conclusions. | ,.** II northerly. 1m *2[80 I I*k 1U1I I The averaged I C".~Il*" I L~.:.*L weather data Figure 2. Plot of Weather for Years 1999 - 2002 from the site 10 were compared meter tower showing direction wind is blowing toward. (percent by to the \vind direction) speed/direction information provided in the Indian Point annual effluent reports for 1999 though 2002 (ML031220099, ML021260723, ML011240172, ML003714664), also for the 10 meter met tower. A wind rose was developed for each year from 1999 through 2002. Each of the weather iiles ior the years i999 thru 2002 are relatively similar, and the wind rose ior each year of weather shows in Figure 2 that the northern and southern directions are October 29, 2009 NRCPA00079062 | ||
Data Needs The inputs and assumptions regarding the v-leather input file vvere not described | |||
,"ve!! enough to fully understand whether the application of these \tvere appropriate for the analysis. | dominant Thus, the MACCS2 input of averaged weather used in the analysis does not appear to reflect the annual weather conditions. An analysis is needed using discrete years of weather data for each or at least some of the 5 years, without averaging weather, to understand the effects of weather on the SAMA conclusions. | ||
In order to confirm the SAMA analysis is conservative and consistent with current industry practice and modeiing techniques, additionai information is needed inciuding the foiiowing: | Data Needs The inputs and assumptions regarding the v-leather input file vvere not described ,"ve!! | ||
: 1. Additional information is needed in the form of consequence analyses using annual, rather than averaged, weather data. An analysis of at least one specific weather year should be conducted using the 10 meter weather information available from the site. Use of the 10 meter station may be expected to show a greater likelihood of wind in the northerly and southerly directions following the river. It may be beneficia! | enough to fully understand whether the application of these \tvere appropriate for the analysis. In order to confirm the SAMA analysis is conservative and consistent with current industry practice and modeiing techniques, additionai information is needed inciuding the foiiowing: | ||
to also perform an analysis using the weather data from the 120 meter station available from the site. 'v"v'hen performing the analysis using the specific weather year, it may be beneficial to revise some other parameters. | : 1. Additional information is needed in the form of consequence analyses using annual, rather than averaged, weather data. An analysis of at least one specific weather year should be conducted using the 10 meter weather information available from the site. Use of the 10 meter station may be expected to show a greater likelihood of wind in the northerly and southerly directions following the river. It may be beneficia! to also perform an analysis using the weather data from the 120 meter station available from the site. | ||
* NUREG; ;50 vaiues of 50 rem in ;2 hours and 25 rem in 24 hours as the input criteria for Hotspot and Normal Relocation. | 'v"v'hen performing the analysis using the specific weather year, it may be beneficial to revise some other parameters. | ||
These values lead to higher dose to individuals than current practice would indicate. | * NUREG; ;50 vaiues of 50 rem in ;2 hours and 25 rem in 24 hours as the input criteria for Hotspot and Normal Relocation. These values lead to higher dose to individuals than current practice would indicate. Values used in current MACCS2 analyses are based on EPA protective action guides (pAGs) of 1 rem in 12 hours and 0.5 rem in 24 hours. | ||
Values used in current MACCS2 analyses are based on EPA protective action guides (pAGs) of 1 rem in 12 hours and 0.5 rem in 24 hours. | * A single plume segment was modeled by Entergy which can limit the effect of weather changes. There may be a benefit to using the more current approach of multiple plume segments. Using hourly plume segments takes maximum advantage of v/ind shifts that occur in the | ||
* A single plume segment was modeled by Entergy which can limit the effect of weather changes. There may be a benefit to using the more current approach of multiple plume segments. | 'vveather data, but this vv'ould require using VVinMACCS rather than the oldei MACCS2. | ||
Using hourly plume segments takes maximum advantage of v/ind shifts that occur in the 'vveather data, but this vv'ould require using VVinMACCS rather than the oldei MACCS2. October 29, 2009}} | October 29, 2009 NRCPA00079063}} | ||
Latest revision as of 19:28, 11 November 2019
| ML12334A743 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 10/29/2009 |
| From: | Palla R NRC/NRR/DRA/APLA |
| To: | Stuyvenberg A Division of License Renewal, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| RAS 21571, 50-247-LR, 50-286-LR, ASLBP 07-858-03-LR-BD01 | |
| Download: ML12334A743 (4) | |
Text
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Official Hearing Exhibit Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
In the Matter of:
(Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3) c:..\,.~p..R REGlI~;. ASLBP #: 07-858-03-LR-BD01 NYS000221 Submitted: December 16, 2011
- l~'~.
Docket #: 05000247 l 05000286 Exhibit #: NYS000221-00-BD01 Identified: 10/15/2012
- 0 Admitted: 10/15/2012 Withdrawn:
~ ~
....,,1-
? ~
0.... Rejected: Stricken:
- il Other:
IPRenewal NPEmails From: Palla, Robert Sent: Thursday, October 29,2009 1:07 PM To: Stuyvenberg, Andre\A,f Cc: iPRenewai NPEmaiis
Subject:
Weather Runs 1029 09.doc Attachments: Weather Runs 1029 09.doc FYI NRCPA00079060
Hearing Identifier: IndianPointUnits2and3NonPublic_EX Email Number: i838 Maii Enveiope Properties (8C658E9029C9i D4D90C6960EF59FCOD60258FOF749)
Subject:
INeaiher Runs 1029 09.doc Sent Date: "10/29/2009 1 :07:29 Pivi Received Date: 10/29/2009 -1 :07:30 Pivi From: Paila, Robert Created By: Robert.Palla@nrc.goY Recipients:
"IPRenewal NPEmails" <IPRenevval,NPEmails@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: ~~one "Stuyv8nbarg, AndrsV',," <Andre'y'y,Stuyv8nb8rg@nrc.gov>
Tracking Status: ~~on8 Post Office: HQCLSTR02.nrc.gov Fi!es Size Date & Time MESS,a.GE 5 10/29/2009 1:07:30 PM
\lVeather Runs 1029 09.doc 224878 Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Rep!y Reqltf~sted: NQ Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date:
Recipients Received:
NRCPA00079061
Indian Point Weather Weather data were reviewed and are of interest because the consequences for a given release of radioactive material would be different if the release Percent by Dire-c:tion occurred at different times of the 1 year and under different ambient vJeather conditions. Entergy averaged 5 years of meteorological data and used the 5 year average as input data in ihe iviACCS2 analysis raiher than using the standard approach of sampling over a year of data. The process used to average the data was 9
provided in the MACCS2 Meteorological Input File I-Igure 1. Piot of Entergy 5 Year Averaged Weather from Generation Report the site; 0 meter tower showing direction wind is blowing
(! PEC001 03877 thru toward.
IPEC00103889). The MACCS2 input file metLinp includes 8,760
[lourly weather samples (365 days x 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />s/day) from tile January 2000 to December 2004 iPEC 10 meier mei tower data. The resuits of the averaged weather generate a wind rose predominantly in the northerly direction as shown in Figure
- 1. Review of the process describing ho\"!
the \Veather
'vvas averaged did not provide insights into why the wind rose IS predominantly I1___.. '~-::F-IQ
,.** II northerly. 1m *2[80 I I*k 1U1I I The averaged I C".~Il*" I L~.:.*L weather data Figure 2. Plot of Weather for Years 1999 - 2002 from the site 10 were compared meter tower showing direction wind is blowing toward. (percent by to the \vind direction) speed/direction information provided in the Indian Point annual effluent reports for 1999 though 2002 (ML031220099, ML021260723, ML011240172, ML003714664), also for the 10 meter met tower. A wind rose was developed for each year from 1999 through 2002. Each of the weather iiles ior the years i999 thru 2002 are relatively similar, and the wind rose ior each year of weather shows in Figure 2 that the northern and southern directions are October 29, 2009 NRCPA00079062
dominant Thus, the MACCS2 input of averaged weather used in the analysis does not appear to reflect the annual weather conditions. An analysis is needed using discrete years of weather data for each or at least some of the 5 years, without averaging weather, to understand the effects of weather on the SAMA conclusions.
Data Needs The inputs and assumptions regarding the v-leather input file vvere not described ,"ve!!
enough to fully understand whether the application of these \tvere appropriate for the analysis. In order to confirm the SAMA analysis is conservative and consistent with current industry practice and modeiing techniques, additionai information is needed inciuding the foiiowing:
- 1. Additional information is needed in the form of consequence analyses using annual, rather than averaged, weather data. An analysis of at least one specific weather year should be conducted using the 10 meter weather information available from the site. Use of the 10 meter station may be expected to show a greater likelihood of wind in the northerly and southerly directions following the river. It may be beneficia! to also perform an analysis using the weather data from the 120 meter station available from the site.
'v"v'hen performing the analysis using the specific weather year, it may be beneficial to revise some other parameters.
- NUREG; ;50 vaiues of 50 rem in ;2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and 25 rem in 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> as the input criteria for Hotspot and Normal Relocation. These values lead to higher dose to individuals than current practice would indicate. Values used in current MACCS2 analyses are based on EPA protective action guides (pAGs) of 1 rem in 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> and 0.5 rem in 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
- A single plume segment was modeled by Entergy which can limit the effect of weather changes. There may be a benefit to using the more current approach of multiple plume segments. Using hourly plume segments takes maximum advantage of v/ind shifts that occur in the
'vveather data, but this vv'ould require using VVinMACCS rather than the oldei MACCS2.
October 29, 2009 NRCPA00079063