ML20087P848: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| number = ML20087P848 | | number = ML20087P848 | ||
| issue date = 12/31/1983 | | issue date = 12/31/1983 | ||
| title = Annual Environ Operating Rept,1983 | | title = Annual Environ Operating Rept,1983 | ||
| author name = Crouse R | | author name = Crouse R | ||
| author affiliation = TOLEDO EDISON CO. | | author affiliation = TOLEDO EDISON CO. | ||
Latest revision as of 11:32, 13 May 2020
| ML20087P848 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1983 |
| From: | Crouse R TOLEDO EDISON CO. |
| To: | James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| References | |
| 1-409, A84-102B, NUDOCS 8404090427 | |
| Download: ML20087P848 (379) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:~
$$1 SON Docket No. 50-346 RcHano P. Cnoust License No. NPF-3 $7 14191259-5221 Serial No. 1-409 E 2.20.1.1 March 31, 1984 RR P-7-83-01 A84-102B Mr. James G. Keppler Regional Director, Region III United States Nuclear Regulatory Conunission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137
Dear Mr. Keppler:
.- Under separate cover, we are transmitting two (2) copies of the 1983 Annual Environmental Operating Report for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1. This report is submitted in accordance with Section 5.4.1 of Appendix B, Davis-Besse Technical Specifications.
- Very truly yours, f*
\ _ __ _
~~-
RPC:JSW:lah enclosure ec: Richard C. DeYoung, Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 (20 copies) Learned W.~ Barry, Director Office of Resource Management United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 (2 copies) Harold Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 (1 copy) DB-1 NRC Resident Inspector Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station f')s (( : w / - (1 copy) THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY EDISON PLAZA 300 MADISON AVENUE TOLEDO, OHIO 43652 8404090427 831231
- PDR ADOCK 05000346
(', R PDR ,
E s-'i TABLE'0F CONTENTS U LIMITING CONDITIONS FOR 0PERATION MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIAL 2.1.1 , BIOCIDES 2.3.1 pH MONITORING 2.3.2 SULFATES MONITORING 2.3.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE CHEMICAL USAGE .3.1.1.a.2 CHLORINE MONITORING 3.1.1.a.3 VEGETATION SURVEY FOR THE EFFECTS OF COOLING TOWER DRIFT -3.1.2.b.2 ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING 3.2 LAND USE AND MILK ANIMAL CENSUS RESULTS
)
SPECIAL SURVEILLANCE AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENTS AND ANALYSIS 4.1 METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING 1983 DIURNAL WINDROSE STUDY. 1983 LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL MONTHLY DATA COMPARISON 1983 ANNUAL WINDROSE REPORT f
.* g sv
_-H - . , . . _. . , . . . . . _ . . . . . . . , . _ . _ . . . . . . . , . . - - , _ . . _ - _ _ _
=, . + _
, ;i
..., //
3 ,
,a . (-
j ~
.i.
>'~
(
,.. f, -
t 4 , \.
.t >
)., *^f. l'
. ,c 1
s',"
\ ;l g \
5 . 4 sy i
/
/ ')
t .
\
. c, SECTION 2.1.1
(
. MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIAL 1
i h, s
? i 3 p
J t
'{ \
t
) '
, . i ,- yN l l, / ,
' ,i . I1
'... ') \'
l' {f ' i . 4 s
,I . \
le* Q
/
i i
\
s S I.
/ g
.(
t.
- g. \ q ,
i
. . - - .c \' - . . _ _ _ _ _ .
.O 2.1.1 TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIAL, 'F. 1983 1983 Minimus Maximum Average
. January 1 17 9 February 12 18 17 Karch 2 39 23 April 11 35 22 May- 9 28 18
' June 9 20 13 July 0- 16 5 August 0 6 '3 September- 1 13 3 October -1 18 10 November- 1 12 8
; December 7 15 10 w-4.
Ct _____ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _______.__.______m_.___,.__..____.__._m
l
t 1 . k; e ! s
=
5 f
- SECTION 2.3.1 BIOCIDES O
p
,e t '
. j o
t ie
s
!2.3.1 BIOCIDES
. Chlorine was the only biocide used in the circulating water at Davis-Besse during the 1983 period. Monitoring of chlorine residuals is covered by the Station's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit.
~
The free available chlorine limits of the permit.were exceeded at discharge 4
. point 001 on August 12 -1983. A letter of noncompliance was sent to the Environmental Protection Agency on August 15, 1983.
. f
~:
s 0
' S 4
l' l 1 l
\ k lu
,c
\
l '-
- ,.. . . , 1 . , . _. --_..... ._.-,._,,a._, . . - - - , . . . __. , . . . . . . _ , - _ , . . _ . .
re4J,a a-ap w a, a - m-- - - O l 1 I l l l SECTION 2.3.2 pH MONITORING g r t
.O
" ' ""- e ~, _- **~f"""vvp-g, _ '"
"TV' W *'y w -g , _
. . . ~ . ,_ -_ . . . -._. . . . .
O 2.3.2 pH MONITORING, 1983 1983 Minimum Maximum
~' January 7.7 8.5 February 7.9 8.5 March' 8.0 8.4 April. 7.8 8.9 May -6.8 8.6 June- 7.9 8.6 July. 8.0 8.6 August-' 6.4 8.6 l>
' September 7.2 8.6 October 8.1' 8.6
~
' November -8.0. 8.6 1 December 7.9. '8.6 The pH ' limit of 6-9.'was not' exceeded in 1983 b /
*7 4
I l.; .
,.le i
', )
- / , ,... _..... - _ , . . . . _ - _ . . . . . . . , . - . . , _ _ . , - _ _ , _ . . . . . . . , , , - . - , _ . - . _ - , _ _ . ~ . _ . . _ _ _ , , . , . . . _ _ _ .
M- -- --- 4 _ s._ - - - - - O i SECTION 2.3.3
- SULFATES MONITORING O
l l. I;O 1 l-f-
. _ - , . _ _ , _ . _ , . - . . . . . . . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ , - . , , - . _ , . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ . . _ _ _ _ ~ . , . . , _ _ _ . . -_ ~ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ . _ . . _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ , - . . _
A I l 2.3.3 SULFATE 1983 > - mg/l 1983 Minimum Maxiinum Average January 60 90 80 Februa y- 75 115 80
- March 65 120 85 April 60 160 99
'May 65 150 90 June- 60 90' 75 July- 55 150- 65
- August '50 75 58
. September 50 65 55 October 60 75 67 November 65 100~ 79
- December # 60 -105 78 The sulfate limit of 1500 mg/1 was.not exceeded during 1983 t h
- '35 4
-.,. 4-
' :,);
--.. , , t , _ ., ,_ _ , . . . . - . , . . . . . . _ , , - . _ . . . . . _ _ , . , _ ~ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . . _ . _ _ _ . . - - - . _ . ,
O-4 i 1 SECTION-3.1.1.a.2 L CHEMICAL. USAGE l- .. O. l. i I i l i ['. I-l. i l
,$'+-*Y+- ,-e>-m, n-,n.-w.,e w.w,,, , - .,,....--,mme -m.,s.--a,- .. ,,, ,. w _ , e v - m e w vww w uwms,m,wwy ym-r po, < - y -g ,, w mmm ye,wm. , e -ygmw-,
- , 3 - 7~ . ..
'u) lwi .J > -
Table 3.1-l' ~ DAVIS--BESSE ' NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
-UNIT NO. 1 CHEMICAL' USAGE FOR 1983 CHEMICAL SYSTEM USE QUAhTITY INTERMEDIAT FINAL
' Chlorine Circulating Water. Biocide 58232 lb N/A Unit discharge via l cooling tower blow
- down Chlorine Service Water Biocide 42917'1b Cooling Tower Unit discharge via Makeup cooling tower blow-down Chlorine . Cooling Tower Biocide None Cooling Tower Unit discharge via Makeup a Makeup cooling tower blow-down
.i. Chlorine Water Treatmen't Disinfection 2271 lb N/A Water Distribution
'7 System Sulfuric acid Demineralizers Regeneration 3512 gal Neutralizing Unit discharge tank for neutralization Sulfuric acid Water Treatment Stabilization None N/A Wata Distribution System ) Sulfuric acid Neutralizing . Neutralization None N/A Unit discharge i Tank i f Sure Cool Circulating Water. Scale '4918 gal N/A Unit discharge via 1332 Inhibitor cooling tower blow-down f a ] Only used when the unit is operating and service water is being returned to the forebay. I
Table 3.1-1 (Cont'd) CHEMICAL SYSTEM USE QUANTITY INTERMEDIAT FINAL Morpholine Component Cooling pH Control None N/A N/A Nalco 39L Turbine Plant Corrosion Cooling Inhibitor 550 gal N/A N/A Nalco 39L Chilled Water Corrision Inhibitor 1.6 gal N/A N/A Nalco 7320 Turbine Plant Microbiological Cooling Control None N/A N/A h' Nalco 7320 Chilled Water Microbiological Control None N/A N/A Sodium Turbine Plant Hydroxide Cooling pH Control None N/A N/A Nalco 810 Water Treatment Clarification None Sludge to the Supernatant from and softening settling basin the settling basin to the unit discharge Nalco 7330 Turbine Plant Microbiological 165 gal N/A N/A Cooling Control O O O
gg gs . k '( , Table 3.1-1 (Con't'd)
' CHEMICAL ' SYSTEM USE QUANTITY INTERMEDIA FINAL-Sodium Demineralizers Regeneration' 19208 gal. Neutralizing tank Unit discharge Hydroxide. for neutralization
-Sodium' Neutralizing tank Neutralization 12548 gal N/A Unit discharge Hydroxide Calcium' Water treatment -Clarification 40900 lb Sludge to the Supernatant from Hydroxide and softening Settling Basin the settling basin to the unit dis-charge Sodium Water treatment Clarification 1550 lb Sludge to the Supernatant from 6i Aluminate and softening Settling Basin the settling basin to the unit dis-charge Nalco 607 Water treatment Clarification None Sludge to the Supernatant from and softening Settling Basin the settling basin to the unit dis-charge Nalco 8103 . Water treatment Clarification 134.1 gal Sludge to the Supernatant from a and softening Settling Basin the settling basin to the unit dis-charge I
I i
T T;bla 3.1-1 (C:nt'd) CllEMICAL SYSTEM USE QUANTITY INTERMEDIATE FINAL Sodium Water Treatment Clarification 294 lb Sludge to the Supernatant from Ilydroxide and softening Settling Basin the settling basin to the unit dis-charge Sodium Water Treatment Disinfection 170 lb N/A Water distribution Hypochlorite , system Sodium Sewage Treatment Disinfection 1364 lb N/A Unit discharge Hypochlorite Hydrazine Secondary Coolant Oxygen Scavenging 790 gal N/A N/A Reactor Coolant Oxygen Scavenging None N/A N/A E Component Cooling oxygen Scavenging 0.3 gal N/A N/A Auxiliary Boiler Oxygen Scavenging 4.2 gal N/A N/A Heating System Oxygen Scavenging 0.6 gal N/A N/A Ammonia Secondary Coolant pH Control 52 gal N/A N/A Auxiliary Boiler pH Control 2.4 gal N/A N/A Boric Acid Reactor Coolant Neutron Moderator 7475 lb N/A N/A Lithium Reactor Coolant pH Control 8751 gm Li N/A N/A Ilydroxide Chlorine Sewage Treatment Disinfection 220 lb N/A Unit discharge O O O
\
O -
\
- SECTION 3.1.1.a.3
' CHLORINE MONITORING
- O t
I L I l
.O
I 3.1.1.a.3 CHLORINE MONITORING Chlorine was the only biocide used in the circulating water at
~
-Dav'is-Besse during the 1983 period. Monitoring of chlorine residuals is covered by the Station's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. The free available chlorine limits of the permit were exceeded at discharge point 001 on August 12, 1983. A letter of noncompliance was sent to the Environmental Protection Agency on August 15, 1983.
O L F 4 v-gw w- g-+ -y---sv - - - --o,w--w v y--m- --i-g-W- -v -g 's -dqs >-w -'dm - yy t-,y, -~m-
J O : 1 SECTION 3.1.2.b.2 VEGETATION SURVEY FOR THE EFFECTS OF COOLING TOWER DRIFT O i t I L
O VEGETATION SURVEY FOR THE EFFECTS OF COOLING TOWER DRIFT RESPONSE TO THE UNITED STATES 4 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGARDING APPENDIX B- TECHNICAL , SPECIFICATION 3.1.2.b.2 AND SECTION 4.2 OF THE PROPOSED O. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN FOR THE DAVIS-BESSE -NUCLEAR POWER STATION i THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY l l l l PREPARED BY: KELLY L. CLAYTON NASH JENNIFER SCOTT-WASILK ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING GROUP CHEMISTRY AND HEALTH PHYSICS l JULY 1983
r
, , .2 I
t
SUMMARY
J From:1973'to 1980, B'owling Green. State University under the direction of , . William B.LJackson, Ph'.D., Director of the Environmental Studies Center, conducted:an extensive study of the effects of cooling tower operation on the~ vegetation surrounding the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power-Station. The
~
purpose of these studies was the same as the aerial remote sensing vegeta-
~
stion survey outlined in the Proposed Environmental Protection Plan: to detect and assess the significance of damage, or lack thereof, as related
.to' cooling tower drift dispersions. These studies encompassed more than
~
'four: pre-operational years and three operational years. Three study
. locations _were chosen - one control. location and two indicator locations.
The control location was located 9.25 he west of the site in one of the
- least prevalent wind directions. The two indicator locations were located ii 0.30 km northwest and 1.8 km east of the cooling tower in the most preva-
. lent wind directions. ~These two indicator locations were thus good choices for observing' any effects of cooling tower operation on surround-ing vegetation. ;Upon completion of these studies in 1980, Bowling Green State: University. concluded that.no direct effects upon vegetation or community succession had been detected as.a result of cooling tower operation.
Therefore, "we con.clude: that' the. intent of Section 4.2 (Vegetation Survey-
. Aerial _ Remote Sensing) of the" Proposed Environmental Protection Plan has
'been' fulfilled;and that'further vegetation monitoring in the vicinity of
(. . the Davis-Besse Nuclear Station willinot result in the: generation of new
-info rmation.
. - ( }L f
.n-. J
."^ ;
$) ' -
e L s 9
1 z ~ INRC RESPONSE ADDRESSING COMMENTS =REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNICAL
- (9 -SPECIFICATION'3.1.2.b VEGETATION SURVEY
\_) .
INTRODUCTION , .Because a" cooling _ tower discharges large amounts of warm air and water vapor;from a relatively small area,.there~is the possibility that inadver-tent weather modification within the vicinity may occur. Theoretically, possible environmental impacts include. increased atmospheric and soil moisture andithe fallout of salts from plume drift (USNRC, 1975b). From August! 1973 to December 1980,. Bowling Green State University conduct-ed an extensive analysis of the plant communities within the vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear. Power Station' cooling tower. The purpose of these studies was-to determine the effect, if any, of cooling tower operation upon various sensitive plant species. Although the Bowling Green studies c were not performed to comply with specific requirements of the Appendix B-Technical Specifications,-these studies investigated the same environmen-tal affects which were required by the aerial infrared study in Sec-Ltion 3.1.2.b. . In particular,_this specification required the_use of aerial 1 infrared photography to; assess the impact of the power plant on
" vegetation cover types-on and-adjacent to the site". Furthermore, the
. ' Proposed Environmental Protection-Plan (Section 4.2 in letter from NRC dated December 21, 1982) specifies.that aerial infrared studies are to be performed to " detect and assess the significance of damage, or lack thereof, as related to_ cooling tower drift dispersions". The Bowling
~
, .- _ c
. ~'
Green studies, although.not aerial infrared, specifically address the b1(sj'r Lpurpose of these assessments as extensively as _the: aerial infrared stud-L ies. ,The' Bowling Green studies were also performed at the same time as p the aerial infrared.- . t7
' P
'4'
}
1 ' - ' w
4 BOWLING GREEN STATE UNIVERSITY VEGETATION ANALYSIS I < FO'. -To' assess the possible impact of-cooling tower operation at'the Davis-Besse
'Nuci ar Power Station, a vegetation study was started August, 1973 by Bowl 1 1 Green. State University. This study was performed for four years prior t i initial operation ~of the station and cooling tower and during sthree years of. actual operation.
During-1973,'all vascular plant species located on the Davis-Besse site were identified and cataloged (Jackson, 1974). From this survey, three specific vegetation monitoring sites were established. At these sites, vegetation, soil, and atmospheric conditiaas were monitored to locate any changes or impact ifrom operation of the Davis-Besse cooling tower. The s three. sites established.by Bowling' Green State University were the Cooling Tower Woods, Lost-Peninsula Woods and. Beach Areas, and a reference area located at the Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge (See Figure 1). These-
~
sites were chosen by Bowling Green State University due to their location
~
- and type of plant communities present. -Woody species'within the Cooling Tower Woods were identified as being very sensitive to soil moisture conditions for germination of their seeds and propagation of the species
-(Hamilton et al.,-1975). Due to the proximity of the cooling tower, the
- Cooling Tower Woods was ch~osen as a good indicator of any changes-in soil moisture conditions due to operation of the cooling tower. The Lost
' Peninsula areas were-selected, due to-their location and because these
- sites.were host to.different plant' species and communities than the
;- Cooling Tower Woods (Hamilton-et al., 1975). Within'the Lost Peninsula Woods 'and Beach areas,1 shrubs,- small' vascular plants, and herbaceous plant 1/]~'4 i- communities were monitored. Finally,;a third site.was chosen as a contr'ol'
- area having,similar' plant' species as the Coolin'g Tower Woods and Peninsula
~
areas, but outside of the range of impact-from cooling tower drift. This
. control area was located'six miles west of the Davis-Besse cooling tower within the Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge ~(See map of sites, Figure 1).
-Bowling Green State University began their analyses by locating.all .
. vascular plant species on the. Davis-Besse~ site, then mapping soil types a.
covering' the three -study sites. - Their' analyses . included four areas: , _~(A) Vegetation. Analysis,'(B). Soil Environments,.(C)3 Terrestrial-Fauna, and l(D) Atmospheric Environments. These four. areas are outlined in detail below: A A.' VEGETATION'ANALYSISL
=?The vegetation analysis included;. vascular plant species, distribution, density,-frequency,'and cataloging:of plant communities at all three-
- sites. Calculations of' relative! frequency,. density, and dominance were
- performed. These: relative figures'were then used to determine importance Evalues'which equal:
Relative Frequency + Relative Density + Relative Dominance 3. i/'S: climatic effects-upon vegetation communities were noted and.used to
~
, s h- I determine;impactiof. drift.from operation of the' Davis-Besse Cooling Tower
. .(Hamilton et al., 1974-80)- .
.-34 *
. k +
, y _ m ,.; # , ..,,..w,~ ,, m ,, , . , ,,_l.. , , , - .-%,-.-h..,,,,,., m .w w , -- y
B. SOIL ENVIRONMENTS Soil identification and mapping from aerial photographs at the Cooling O Tower Woods and Peninsula Beach areas were performed. The control area soil was not monitored. From the two sites, soil chemistry, moisture, cation exchange capacity, percent base saturation, sulfate, magnesium, and calcium levels were measured on a monthly basis. Soil samples were taken from 10, 20, and 50 cm depths (Limbird, 1973-80). C. TERRESTRIAL FAUNA Initially vertebrate species identification at the Cooling Tower Woods and Lost Peninsula areas included herptiles, small and large mammals, and birds. All of these species were monitored using live traps until 1978. The bird studies were continued throughout 1980. The vertebrate species were monitored as sensitive indicators of changes in food chains which might have caused a change in local vegetation (Vessey et al., 1973-78).
,D. ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENTS Meteorological monitoring was performed at four sites: the Cooling Tower Woods, the Lost Peninsula Areas, an on-site meteorological system, and a reference site located at Bowling Green State University. Meteorological data were averaged monthly from these parameters: solar radiation, precipitation, pH of precipitation, soil thermagraphs, relative humidity, dewpoint, wind direction, and wind speed measurements (Frey, 1973-80).
LOCATION AND WINDROSE DOCUMENTATION O To determine if any changes, alterations, benefits, or damage were the result of cooling tower drift, the study sites had to be located in areas where high plume drift would likely occur. In selecting the two vegeta-tion monitoring sites and the control area, Bowling Green State University used both location near the cooling tower and sensitive plant species as their criteria. The Cooling Tower Woods were located 0.30 kilometers northwest of the Davis-Besse cooling tower. Specifically, the Cooling Tower Woods were located within the northeast (NE) and north-northeast (NNE) compass sectors. The Lost Peninsula Woods and Beach areas were located 1.8 km from the cooling tower, in the east (E) and east-southeast
~
(ESE) sectors. The control site in the Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge was located.9.25 km from the Davis-Besse cooling tower in the west (W) sector (See Figure 1). To confirm that these locations were within areas of plume drift, Toledo Edison prepared a windrose study. Using wind data from the on-site Meteorological Monitoring System, windrose charts were graphed. Wind speed and wind direction data which were averaged hourly were combined-into yearly wind averages. Two wind sensor levels were used: at 10m and 100m above ground level. At the 10m level, yearly averages were combined into one windrose representing a two-year period from January 1, 1978, to December 31, 1979. O
x This J10m windrose_most' closely illustrates the effect of wind direction _and wind speed upon the plume drift at the base of the cooling tower (See
=
Figure 2). Using wind data from January 1, 1982, to December 31, 1982, a windrose at the 100m level was graphed. Wind speed and wind direction at the 100m - level most closely represent prevailing winds at the top of the Davis-Besse coolingLtower'(150m) from which the plume dissipates (See Figure 3). These windroses,-prepared and analyzed by Toledo Edison, demonstrate that
-the Cooling Tower Woods-and_ Lost. Peninsula area were located within areas where the drift is' blown by prevailing winds, while the control area is
--located within an area of low drift. influence. From the windrose charts, at the 10m level ~the predominant wind directions blow from the southwest (SW), south-southwest (SSW), west (W), and northwest (NW) the majority of the-time. Similarly, at the 100m level the prevailing wind directions blow from the west-southwest _(WSW), south-southwest (SSW), southwest (SW), ,
west.(W), and west-northwest (WNW) directions.
~From Figure 2, the wind direction at the 10m level b]cws toward the Cooling Tower Woods sectors 25% of.the time. While at the 100m level the winds blow toward the Cooling Tower Woods 22% of the time. At the Lost Peninsula Woods and Beach location, the 10m and 100m level wind directions-
~
; blew toward those areas 11% of the time. - In contrast, the least prevalent wind dire ~ctions from the north (N), north-northeast (NNE), southeast (SE),
and eact-southeast (ESE) were only. recorded an average of 4% of the time at 10m and 3% of the. time at 100m. Finally, the control area located in A - the west (W) compass sector-demonstrates _the drift was blown in that direction 8% of the time at the 10m level and 7% of the time at the 100m level. The highest wind speeds were'also recorded from the southwest and
, . northwest sectors towards the two vegetation monitoring sites. In the
~ dire'ction of the control area wind' speeds were not as high. ~Therefore, Ethe cooling tower plume at Davis-Besse would most likely drift toward~the -
sectors where the-Cooling Tower Woods and Lost. Peninsula areas were
- located,.but not towards the control area. 'These windrose data demonstrate the Cooling Tower Woods and Lost Peninsula Woods and Peach areas were located in the best areas for assessing possible plume' drift effects from
,the Davis'-Besse cooling tower. Furthermore, a. control area was used.for
- direct vegetation comparison, and again the windrose analysis demonstrates that_this control area was located within an area unlikely to be affected
-by_ plume ~ drift.
CONCLUSIONS LBN1ing Green State University monitored the vegetation, soil,-terrestri-al, and a_tmospheric conditions at highly sensitive areas near the Davis-Besse. cooling tower-during four years prior to its operation. From these studies,faldata' base was established for comparison after initial opera-
~
- tion of the: cooling tower. This data base included trends in. soil chemis-stry, moi sture, soil mapping of sites'and soil horizons, cation exchange complex, percent base saturation, and erosion.. Vegetation parameters.
included relative frequency, dominance, density, and importance. Limiting
'C factors were' determined to be light and soil moisture.~ Finally,
---.<r w ~ w r vv--r,+a- -m- <-r---v <-,-,.we - m e. < , em.,,-<r .-v,,- e--,-,-.x <-,.wn ,,,~ ~ .. w-- , - - . . . , - - ,, k-
atmospheric conditions on relative humidity, dewpoint, evaporation rates, precipitation, and pH of precipitation were established. Using this data base, the same studies were continued for three years after initial operation of the unit. Within the vegetation, soil, and atmospheric areas Bowling Green found similar results, operation of the cooling tower at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station had no effect upon surrounding vegeta-
' tion, soil, or atmospheric conditions. In 1979, Hamilton stated the following conclusions:
Up to the present time, we have not observed any influence from the initial cooling tower operation that has altered or disrupted such vegetation patterns and related plant survival or succession trends (Hamilton, 1979). Regarding soil analyses, Limbird made the following determinations in 1979: There has been a decline in the ppm calcium since 1979. The chemical analysis of the cooling tower circulation water were compared with soil analysis for Fulton soil of the Cooling Tower Woods for 1979 and average values for the six year reporting period. Once again, as in 1978, the circulating water had no apparent effect on the levels of calcium and magnesium in the Fulton soil of the Cooling Tower Woods. It does not appear at this time that the sodium, which may fall out from the cooling tower plume, is producing any cumulative effect on the soil (Limbird, 1979). Bowling Green State University noted from their studies, one change caused by the cooling tower plume. The pH of precipitation within the localized area of the cooling tower plume was caused to increase. This proved to be beneficial since the pH of the precipitation'within this area has been as low as 4.0 (Frey, 1979). Within the final conclusion on atmospheric monitoring, Frey states: The vapor plume affects the rain in the local area to the extent that pH readings reflect less acidity than normal rainfall (Frey, 1980). The rain would be closer to a neutral pH due to the plume drift. Finally, using the information collected and analyzed over the seven year time period, Bowling Green State University concluded. The results of improved" moisture conditions have been survival and growth of plants in the Cooling Tower Woods and Peninsula areas (Hamilton, 1980). From these studies, the conclusion can be made that there have been no t detectable impacts on terrestrial biota as a result of drift deposition from the operation of the cooling tower at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. g
The' vegetation studies performed by Bowling Green State University between (~S 1973 and 1980 clearly demonstrate that impact from the cooling tower drift
'~l at'the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station has been addressed. These studies were more comprehensive, than, and met the intent of Section 3.1.2.b of Appendix B Technical Specifications and Section 4.2 of the Proposed Environmental Protection Plan. The Bowling Green State University studies supplement previous aerial infrared photography and analysis performed at the Davis-Besse site. Furthermore, both the aerial infrared analysis and the Bowling Green State University studies concluded that operation'of the Davis-Besse cooling tower has not had any effect upon local vegetation.
Therefore, further vegetation monitoring is not nec'essary at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. O D sw - m)
.s r
lu _
References O -Frey, Glen R. 1980. " Atmospheric Environment", In the Davis-Besse Unit No. 1 Annual Environmental Operating Report, January 1, 1980 - December 31, 1980 Frey, Glen R. 1979. " Atmospheric Environment", In the Davis-Besse Unit No. 1 Annual Environmental Operating Report, January 1, 1979 - December 31, 1979 Frey, Glen R. 1979. " Atmospheric Environment", h the Davis-Besse Unit No. 1 Annual Environmental Operating Report, January 1, 1978 - December 31, 1978 Frey, Glen R. 1977. " Atmospheric Environment", in the Davis-Besse Unit No. 1 Annual Environmental Operating Report, January 1, 1977 - December 31, 1977 Frey, Glen R. 1976, " Atmospheric Environment", Inn the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs Semi-annual Report, July 1, 1976 - December 31, 1976, Volume VI. Frey, Glen R. 1976. " Atmospheric Environment", h the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs Semi-annual Report, January 1, 1976 - June 30, 1976, Volume V. Frey, Glen R. 1975. " Atmospheric Environment", In the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No.1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs, Semi-annual Report, July 1,1975 - December 31, 1975, Volume IV. O rrer ote- 1975 "^t e 9heric t=vire==e t". n the "evi -ne e ""c1eer Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs,
> er Semi-annual Report, January 1, 1975 - June 30, 1975, Volume III.
Frey, Glen R. 1974. " Atmospheric Environment", A the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs, Semi-annual Report, July 1, 1974 - December 31, 1974, Volume II. Frey, Glen R. 1974, " Atmospheric Environment", h the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs, Semi-annual Report, January 1, 1974 - June 30, 1974, Volume I-B. Frey, Glen R. 1973, " Atmospheric Environment", h the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental P.onitoring Programs, Semi-annual Report, January 1, 1974 - June 30, 1974, Volume I-B. Hamilton, Ernest R. 1981. " Plant Communities", In the Davis-Besse Unit No. 1 Annual Environmental Operating Report, January 1, 1980 - December 31, 1980 Hamilton, Ernest S. 1980. " Plant Communities", h the Davis-Besse Annual Environmental Operating Report, January 1, 1979 - December 31, 1979 Hamilton, Ernest S. 1979. " Plant Communities", In the Davis-Besse Annual Environmental Operating Report January 1, 1978 - December 31, 1978. Hamilton, Ernest S. and Steven R. Spaulding. 1978. " Plant Communities", h the Davis-Besse Unit No. 1 Annual Environmental Operating Report, January 1, 1977 - December 31, 1977.
Referene m , crntinued Hamilton, Ernest S. and Leonid Oserow 1977. " Plant Communities", In the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs Semi-annual Report, July 1, 1976 - December 31, 1976, g Volume VI. Hamilton, Ernest S. and Leonid Oserow. 1976. " Designation and Mapping of Plant Communities", I_n_ n the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs Semi-annual Report, January 1, 1976 - June 30, 1976, Volume V. Hamilton, Ernest S. 1975. " Designation and Mapping of Plant Communities", h the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs Semi-annual Report, July 1, 1975-December 31, 1975, Volume IV. Hamilton, Ernest S. and David Preston. 1975. " Designation and Mapping of Plant Communities", In the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs, Semi-annual Report, January 1, 1975 - June 30, 1975, Volume III. Hamilton, Ernest S. and David Preston.1974. " Designation and Mapping of Plant Communities", In the Davis =Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs Semi-annual Report, July 1, 1974 - December 31, 1974, Volume II. Hamilton, Ernest S. and David Preston. 1974. " Designation and Mapping of Plant Communities", In_ the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs Semi-annual Report, g January 1, 1974 - June 30, 1974, Volume I-B. Hamilton, Ernest S.1973. " Designation and Mapping of Plant Communities", In the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs Semi-annual Report, January 1, 1974-June 30, 1974, Volume I-B. Jackson, William B. 1980. " Preface - Annual Report, Terrestrial Monitoring Program", I_n n the Davis-Besse Annual Environmental Operating Report, January 1, 1979 - December 31, 1979. Jackson, William B. 1979. " Preface - Annual Report, Terrestrial Monitoring Program", In the Davis-Besse Annual Environmental Operating Report, January 1, 1978 - December 31, 1978 . Jackson, William B.1974. " General Introduction to the Annual Report - Davis-Besse Terrestrial Monitoring Contract", In the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No.1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs Semi-annual Report, January 1, 1974 - June 30, 1974, Volume I-B. Limbird, Arthur G. 1981. " Soil Environments", h the Davis-Besse Unit No. 1 Annual Environmental Operating Report, January 1, 1980 - December 31, 1980. 9 l
;p
' References,' continued
- Liabird, Arthur G.1980. '! Soil Environments", M the. Davis-Besse Annual Environmental Operating Report, January 1, 1979 - December 31, 1979.
~
.Liabird, Arthur G.!1979. " Soil Environments",.h the Davis-Besse Annual
- Environmental Operating Report January 1, 1978 - December 31, 1978.
Liabird,, Arthur G. 1978. " Soil' Environments", In the Davis-Besse Unit No. 1
; Annual. Environmental Operating Report, January 1,~1977 - December 31, 1977.
.Limbird,. Arthur,E1977."NoilEnvironments",'I_n_theDavis-BesseNuclearPower Station Unit No.1: Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs semi-annual Report, July 1~, 1976 - December 31, 1976, Volume VI.
ILimbird,. Arthur G. 1976.i" Soil Environments", I_n,the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power
. Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs
" Semi-annual- Report, January 1, .1976 -- June 30, 1976, Volume V.
Liabird,' Arthur G. 1975.1" Soil Environments", h the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power s
' Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs
{ : Semi-annual Report, July 1, 1975 -' December 31, 1975, Volume IV.
~ "Limbird, Arthur G. 197_5,' " Soil Environments", In the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No.-1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs l Semi-annual Report,= January 1,'1975 - June 30, 1975~' Volume III.
l Limbird,fArthur G.i 1974. " Soil' Environments", In the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. l' Pre-operational ~ Environmental' Monitoring Programs Semi-annual Report,fJuly.1, 1974 - December 31,--1974, Volume II.
- Limbird,: Arthur G. 1974 1" Soil Environment' Monitoring", M'the Davis-Besse l =~ -Nuclear Power Station Unit ~No.~liPre-operational Environmental Monitoring
[' i
. Programs Semi-annual Report, January 1, 1974 - June'30, 1974, Volume I-B.
<. .Limbird, ~ Arthur G.1973. Soil Environment Monitoringj-- Reactor Site", h
- the Davis-Besse Nuclear' Power. Station Unit.No. 1 Pre-operational
' Environmental Monitoring Programs Semi-annual Report,f January '1,1974 -
, JJune 30, 1974,; Volume'I-B.
- United States Nuclear _ Regulatory Commission. 1979. Davis-Besse Nuclear Power
-. Plant Unit No. 1 Technical Specifications Appendix "B", " License No. NPF-3,
'Rev.'O.
-United States: Nuclear Regulatory. Commission. 1975b. " Final Environmental
- Statement related to construction of Davis-Besse Nuclear Power, Station.
' Units,No.:2fand 3,; Proposed by Toledo Edison-Company." NUREG-75/083.
L sUnited Sta't'es Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 1975a. " Final Environmental N _ l Statement related to operationof. Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station p Unit No. 1, Proposed.by Toledo Edison Company." NUREG-75/097.
~
LVessey, Stephen H.1979. " Terrestrial Animals", In the Dasis-Besse Annual E _ Environmental-Operating Report,-January 1, 1978'- December' 31, 1978.
. s
^l .
~ 10- --
. ~F ,
References, continued Vessey, Stephen H., Steven Spaulding and Thomas Scott. 1978. " Terrestrial Animals", In the Davis-Besse Unit No. 1 Annual Environmental Operating Report, January 1, 1977 - December 31, 1977. Vessey, Stephen H., Steven Spaulding and Leonid Oserow. 1977. "Terree: rial Animals", In the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs Semi-annual Report, July 1, 1976 - December 31, 1976, Volume VI. Vessey, Stephen H., D. Flemming and Steven Spaulding. 1976. " Terrestrial Fauna", h the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs Semi-Annual Report, January 1, 1976 - June 30, 1976, Volume V. Vessey, Stephen H., Paul Mazur, Thomas Scott, James Schmunk, Steven Spaulding and Manfred Temme.1975. " Terrestrial Fauna", h the Davis-Besce Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs Semi-annual Report, July 1, 1975 - December 31, 1975, Volume IV. Vessey, Stephen H., Paul Mazur, James Schmunk, Craig DeCrane, Steven Spaulding and Thomas Scott. 1975. " Terrestrial Fauna", h the Davis-3 esse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs, Semi-annual Report, January 1, 1975 - June 30, 1975, Volume III. Vessey, Stephen H., Paul A. Mazur, James Schmunk and Craig DeCrane. 1974.
" Terrestrial Fauna", h the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No.1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs Semi-annual Report, July 1, 1974 - December 31, 1974, Volume II. h Vessey, Stephen H. 1974. " Terrestrial Fauna", h the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No.1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs Semi-annual Report, January 1, 1974 - June 30, 1974, Volume I-B Vessey, Stephen H. 1973. " Terrestrial Fauna", h the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Pre-operational Environmental Monitoring Programs Semi-annual Report, January 1, 1974'- June 30, 1974, Volume I-B.
9 L_ _
- -._ ,. _ . . _ _____,_ , , _ , , " ' ' ' ' "**"-*""~~u-_-_,4._ . , _ _ , . _ ,, ,_, ,
7,__._______,y
.. g y, e s -
, 4 s .
(; ' 4 4
\' .
'e
- g. ..
-a- ; . s s'
l 3 't . . I g, s n- s s s* s
% 4 \ l
, s2 r
\
s , . . t s i i i 4' A I J , [ Ns ! i. s s i 1, N y 4 , s , x , v- - i - ..p ,.. ,. ! g .( l I
. s ai n e s, < >
. s i I f' ' g s %- s I
, t
,. e ,
e
\*
I .h
.i .
j e FIGUR g s 4 ', ,
,l: * +
-y a 1+ 4 0
L g n
.h _ .. . '
.o b
's h(
?
1
'- S e l .>
5
-g y g- k ,y 9s ')
'g 4
x- , N- ,) i . .v .
.' *, Y
.a g- t t j,
. ., 3
( % g I l n ( ;i
. . -s -% sk' s %,-
V y A, . a
-~ . , ,
3 I
- h. )# ; i. , ,
. ,g '
t- '- 3 i s
. , ; i 3 .s
*-- \s.u ..5
; \
i
%. t -
)
5 k ' .g
' T '- s e *.
_'w , , .
~.
f O.' . yL 3 3 s ' h, , ~ ? 12
. [_ .
.y $ y Q
s .
+
?
s . I g r
- .e \ /
\
p ' is N. p [ r -# 1Ve '\ %. , 1 k, i - s ", , g ,, w y ,
- q. ., +
\ .
.f
\
s\ ' , ,' .%.. t. s t q. k. .s1.-
. - : ss ~ < v
-(- %c - <
s,
- A s
,- . 2N. y? 4 s.
. , _ ' _ _ . _ .(f f _ _ _ _ --w.---:Ah..-s.,,g,
.* , s, . , 3 _g ,, - ' .wmy.,,,.g,,, , - ,
- . ~ . . , . . ..m_.... ^
~ * * ' ' ' ' * * * *
%p eq upq r.q . i ; pi 'n g '-
i'x -- p - i -rw u - r sq - sq ,- i.pq i - pu r qn
-u u i y e
+* 's z' *
'I/ . d . . , ,x .
\ p x : .
9 O d
, N
#: I 2oc.-n.3cM4 M........ s; 4
. 2 13 -.
A g G. /;[.l i
.b' 's. g ek y- as a L...
- t. !.
t ~x b [/&t d' .ju w# ,T 4,
~
,. j- .(s,i
.a -
s p c. T -' p m . p' ., _
.. J .
r o-b
. . a. . J';
d g ,N 3: =-
.. . !p : .. 1,#. ,
h*!, 'N = mI '.{ ' ;',
-. . ~
?- : 1: : /, ..'
- e. f,
,, w .
- m
,,m. .
I
,yg -
' . .- ? T.,: -
/
u
\,b iN. \r , n
~
1 j V# p i$. - l p !g E e i s (%u\ , vp<L . \/ - i 3 u i
/.
a 5 "l : ./ I , I !
'h !- 2 *E z
0 m i i j - .n, t .l -- !@g i li n e s it lu l; ,g al i il 9
- a u
o
/2 E-
=
- ,3 J j" ; A \-
?,y :
- ."" l / t 3<
s' ff ql._ e 3 f
. h$-
~
-> (( ,'{ ,
~
l ? 'i'f 1
//wh;!}!/ s?M :
' i,1 b y
= L s ,., . .
. y
.Y,}<.s.
' . a v:--
ig
.1 (
g a Q- 9c c 3
.i i,
1 i._t p' a m f'l.;- . t.' ls b ~ e
.t
<v /!;= : - i-- w p-4r:la q
. , e
/tg sjs [
l
- ; ,}' . e-3 0:
g ei . . . I p,.;- . , t _\g '
- g. _ .
g ,
' =
1 e - w---.n p ) 0,! , , 7 .n .
---.-,.-y
~ '
t &3l 7 = E-y , b.,. . L L '
.. y .i___
v.t.
- g 1
- %(w !+
> ed
- m
~\.) . r g
Q+ .
. ti m
.g :
y
= -
1- !
., , I ur p) :**2( . _ q, - ?- - _ . ,. - - _ j .
P f - - - -%) i i ? _- fn ( f' - l't Figure 2 N
,,, C'-
j #~ ~
\
l .l*U f'Q E
% 'v_$
~
, f,' g -
,/
\)'\
3x
~ m x-N /,f'e < [ '
4'f 'N
\'"'
W b_ ' \ l gg e $' 9/ }g" *
\\
jj ,/
/
xy N s iSE
/
\ .
SE SE S
** %WtNO DIRECTION
" mon WIND SPEED DAVIS-BESSE SITE
" "IL*#' , 'Sa"""" '
JANUARY 1,1978 to DECEMBER 31,1979 Figure 3 N NNW ' NE NE
'l f
/ ENE 16 q 4 =
0
*t I. I fll
, \ ffQTL';"}"jo)~j' ESE SW g SS SE emmmmmme WIND SPEED moh
.,,4 WINO OtRECTION */o DAVIS-BESSE SITE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION
^'
o aNTIL" 4 M el' i O SECTION 3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING
I PTELEDYNE ISOTOPES MIDWEST LABORATORY 1509 FRONTAGE RD. NORTHOROOK. IL 60062 (3121 564 4700 REPORT TO TOLEDO EDIS0N COMPANY T0.LEDO, OHI.0 OPERATIONAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING FOR THE CAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT NO. 1 OAK HARBOR, 0ii10 ANNUAL REPORT - PART I
SUMMARY
AND INTERPRETATION (V~') JANUARY - DECEMBER 1983 . FOR SUBMITTAL TO THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY TELEDYNE ISOTOPES MIDWEST LABORATORY PROJECT NO. 8003 Approved by: w, , /. L. G.'Hp'ebler # GeneralWdnager
,3 1 February 1984
] PREFACt!
l
-i , .aff of Teledyne Isotopes Midwest Laboratory (formerly Hazleton Environ-mental Sciences) was responsible for the acquisition of the data presented in this report. Samples were collected by members of the staff of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station and by local sample collectors.
The report was' prepared by D. Cohen, Scientist, under the direction of L.G. Huebner, General Manager, Teledyne Isotopes Midwest Laboratory. He was assisted in this report prepsration by L. Nicia, Group Leader, and other staff members of this laboratory. I 4
-L-N_.) '^
3.2-11
,.- , , . . , - , ,, ,, , . , .. , , . , .. m., ym, e - - - - . , . ..v . , . . _ ,, . , ,,.,.,3---
~. . ..- - - .--- . . - ...- _...- - - , ._ - _ . _
4 1 J () TABLE OF CONTENTS
] .
No. Page 4 PREFACE ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
- List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv '
List of Tables ...................... y 1.0 - INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 12.0. EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM . . . . . . . 3 1
3.1- Methodology . .................... 3 . i 3.1.' 1 The Air Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 i 3.1.2 The Terrestri al Proo am . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
- 3.1. 3 _ The Aquat ic = Progr an, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
-3.1.4 Program Execution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.1.5 Census of Milch Animals . . . . . . .-... . . . 8 i
L (x )- 3.2 Results and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-3.2.1 JAtmospheric Nuclear Detonations . . . . . . . . 9 : c 3.2.2' The Air Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.2.3 The Terrestrial Environment . . . . . . . . . . 11 ! ,' 3.2.4, The Aquatic Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + L, 3.2.5 Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 1 . I FIGURES AND TABLES ..........-.......... 16-
;4.0 ,
5.0 ' REFERENCES' . . . . . . . . . . . . .-. , . . . . . . . . . 31'
-APPENDIX
{ I A. 'Crosscheck' Program Results. . . ._. . ... . . . . . .- A-1 j P'. r;;
~ 1 ;
i 4 y se
"_s l \-) ; >
I 4 4 3.2-iii
- 9. -e r % a w.. .-mw,, , +.-gr,i ..r..,s.v-_, ,g i.--. --yg+p e, y 3 e -g w,, -y ~ .,y,,.c,--#7 ,, .e-,,y w ,,r w 9- y4,.e - , ,-m,-w,p+-p%., y-..,p.- ,-
L . LIST OF FIGURES h Caotion Page No. 4-1 Sampling locations on the site boundary of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Powe.- Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 4-2 Sampling locations (except those on the site periphery), Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station . . . . . . . . . . . 18 O O 3.2-iv
.O .. LIST OF TABLES No. Title Paae 4.1 Sampling Locations, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1 . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . 19 4.2 Type. and Frequency of Collections . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 4.3 Sample Codes Used in Table 4.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 4.4 Sampling Summary ....................... 24 4.5 Environmental' Radiological Monitoring Program Sursary . . . 25
]
= .
3.2-v
,- , ;s .
10' 7 T l' t <
1.0 INTRODUCTION
DBecause 'ofl the many potential pathways of radiation ex,,osure to man from both
' natural and man-made sources, it 'is ,necessary to document levels of radio-activity _ and the variabi_lity of these levels which exist in an area prior to the anticipated reler.se of any additional radioactive nuclides.,
To meet tihis ~ objective, an extensive preoperational environmental radiological monitoring program _was initiated for the Toledo Edison Company in the vicinity-
~ of the Dayis-Besse' Nuclear Power Station site. This program included collec-tion' (both onsite- and offsite) and radiometric analyses of airborne particu-
- lates, airborne' io' dine, ambient gamma ~ radiation, ~ milk, groundwater, meat .and p
J : wildlife, fruits. and vegetables, animal and . wildlife . feed, soil, surface- .'S water, 3 fish, and . bottom sediments. . Approximately 5 yearsJof preoperational L . monitoring _were completed in April.1977 by the same laboratory that currently operates under the nah 41edvne. Isotopes Midwest Laboratory (TIML).
, ' Fuel (elements. were loaded in Unit 1-on 23 through :27 ' April: 1977 and the
^ initial . criticality. was - achieved - on - 12 August 1977. Unit 1 - achieved one
' hundred percent of its , operational capacity on. 4 April 1978. Approximately
'6-1/2 years of operational' mo'nitoring was completed by the end of December 1983.
~
This. report. presents!the ' sixth full . year of operational data for the Environ-l mental . Radiological Monitoring ati the - Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station.
;TheJ program was conducted l in accordance' with the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power -
~ Station Unit No. .1 Technical Specifications: Appendix B to License No. NPF-3,
,Section 3.2.- -
V r 4
.3.2-1
'[l
+, ,e , e , ,--,---..o- - - , - , . . , - ,-s- , , . . , -.,--.,,-,e~,,-ew,r,,,-- ,.e. -- ,-,., ,. N+ - , . , , .,e - ,
O J 2.0 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Operational Nuclear Stations are required by Federal Regulations to submit Annu'al Operational Reports to the U.S. NRC. -The reports must also include the results of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring-Program. This report summarizes the results of such a program. The program was conduc-
-ted in accordance with the~ Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit'No. 1 Technical Specifications: Appendix B to License No. NPF-3 Section 3.2. This program included collection (both onsite and offsite) and radiometric analyses of airborne particulates, airborne iodine, ambient gamma radiation, milk, p ground water, meat and wildlife, fruits and vegetables, animal and wildlife As feed, soil, surface water, fish, and bottom sediments.
Results of ! sample. analyses during the period January - December 1983 are summarized in Table 4.5. Tabulations of data for all samples collected during this period, additional statistical analyses of the data, and graphs of data - trends are presented in a separate report to the Toledo Edison Company (TIML 1984). L l Radionuclide concentrations measured -at indicator locations were compar,ed with ^)evels- measured at . control locations and in preoperational studies. The - compar.isons - indicate background-level radioactivities in all samples collected.. No station effect on the environment was indicated in any-of the sampling media collected and analyzed. f p, l3.2-2 ~
b= 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM
^
3.'l Methodology The sampling locations for the Preoperational Environmental Radiological. Monitoring Program at the Davis-Besse Ndclear Power Station are shown in Figures 4-1 and 4-2. Table 4.1 describes the locations, lists for each
~
its' direction and distance from the station, and indicates which are n indicator and which are control locations. iThe; sa;npling program monitors the air, terrestrial, and aquatic environ-l .. ments.1 The types of samples collected at each location and the frequen-cy of- collections ' are presented in Table 4.2 using codes. defined in
~
l
- Q_ ~
2 Table 4.3. The' collections and analyses that comprise the program are described in the.following.pages. Finally, the execution of the program in the current reporting annual . period (January - December 1983) is
- discussed.
3.1.1 The Air Program j . Airborne-Particulates' . The airborne particulate scmples are collec'ted on 47inm diameter membrane filters of 0.8 micron porosity at a volumetric rate. of - approximately one ' cubic foot per minute. The filters are l-(
. collected weekly from~ eleven locations (T-1, T-2, T-3, T-4, T-7, L. T-8, T-9, T-11, T-12, T-23, and T-27), placed in individual glassine protective envelopes, and dispatched ' by_ mail to -TIML L 4
^ for radiometric ~ analyses. . The filters' are analyzed for gross beta activity- approximately' five days after , collection--to allow :
~
- for _ decay of' naturally-occurring short-lived radionuclides.- The quarterly composites 'of -all air particulate samples from indica-i_
tor locations - (T-l', . -2, - T-3, : T-4, T-7, and T-8) .and of all air - particulate samples from control locations (T-9,.T-11, T-12, T-23,-.-and T-27) _ are gamma-scanned. and analyzed for strontium-89 7 and -90. L,h -
- 3.2-3 t
ey-v"+w, y. ,,,,,,,,,.,--__.,-,,,..,y,
, ,,,,,y,9,. , , _ _ , . , , . , , , , , , ,
v -r-r .-,,vrw- ,,, r,r- ,,w,s
Airborne Iodine g Each air sampler is equipped with a charcoal trap in-line after the filter holder. The charcoal trap at each location is changed at the same time as the particulate filter and analyzed for iodine-131 immediately after arrival at the laboratory. Ambient Gamma Radiation The integrated gamma-ray background from natural radiation is measured with thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD). Monthly and quarterly TLDs are placed at thirteen locations (the eleven air sampling locations and locations T-5 and T-24). On 1 January 1980 eighteen (18) new TLD sampling locations were added to the program. Twelve locations (T T-49) were established at the site boundary ranging in distance from 0.5 mi to 1.2 mi from the stack. Six locations were established at a distance of 3.7 mi to 5.0 mi from the stack. Since about 50% of the outer 5 mi ring is over Lake Erie, only six additional locations were required to cover all sectors on the land. Each shipment of TLDs includes controls which are stored in a $ shield at the station and returned with the field TLDs after their removal. In-transit exposures are measured by the control TL0s and subtracted from the field TLD measurements to obtain their net exposure. 3.1.2 The Terrestrial Prooram Milk Two-gallon milk samples are collected twice a month during the grazing period (May througn October) and monthly during the rest of the year from two indicator locations (T-8 and T-20) and one control location (T-24). The milk samples are analyzed for iodine-131, strontium-89 and -90, calcium, stable potassium, and are gamma scanned. Groundwater One-gallon well water samples are collected quarterly from two indicator locations (T-7 and T-17) and from one control location (T-27). The gross beta activity is determined on the suspended h and dissolved solids of each sample. The samples are also gamma scanned and analyzed for strontium-89 and -90, and tritium. 3.2-4
,b~, Edible ~ Meat Semi-annually, domestic meat samples (chickens) are collected from one indicator location (T-32) and one control location (T-34). and one' representative species of wildlife (muskrat or raccoon)_is collected onsite (T-31). -In addition, one woodchuck i species and- one snapping _ turtle are collected annually onsite
~(T-31) or in the site vicinity (T-33). Gama-spectroscopic '
analysis is performed on the edible portions of each sample.
- Fruits and Vegetables 1
Semi-annually, two varieties of fruits and vegetables are : collected from each of. the two indicator locations (T-8 and T-25) and from one control location (T-34). The edible portions l are gama scanned.and analyzed for strontium-89 and -90. . Green Leafy Yeaetables Monthly, during the harvest season, green leafy vegetables are collected from one indicator.' location (T-36) and one control
' location'(T-37). The samples are analyzed.for iodine-131.
- Should green leafy vegetables. from private gardens be unavail-
+
- s. -
- -
able, nonedible plants with similar leaf characteristics from
- i. the same vicinity may be substituted.
L [. _ inimal-Wildlife Feed ; Animal feed is collected s'emi-annually from one indicator location - (T-8) and one control location (T-34). Cattlefeed .is
= collected during the.first quarter-a'nd grass is collected during the third quarter.: Also,n once a year, a sample of smartweed is
, collected from - location - T-31 (onsite). . Gama-spectroscopic analysis is performed on all samples.
i Soil is
'Once a' year, s' oil ' samples - are'_ collected from all eleven air
~
' sampling locations; six-. indicator _ locations (T-1, T-2, T-3,.T-4, T-7 and T-8) and five control locations (T-9,-T-11, T-12, T-23, and T-27).. Gama-spectroscopic ' analysis is performed on _ all f ; samples.
om
~
3.2-5 . w
.Z, - , , '_- . . _ , , .~.a ,_.-.._...~.c.--._,,.._ ,,,,.~a.,,....~,__...-_...-..
3.1.3 The Aauatic Prooram h Treated Surface. Water Weekly grab samples of treated water are collected at one indicator location (T-28, Unit 1 treated water supply, onsite) and two control locations (T-11 and T-12, Port Clinton and Toledo filtration plants). The samples from each location are l composited monthly and analyzed for gross beta activity in l dissolved and suspended solids. Quarterly composites from each location are gamma scanned and analyzed for strontium-89 and
-90, and tritium.
1 Untreated Surface Water l Weekly grab samples of untreated water from Lake Erie are collected from one indicator location (T-3) and from two control locations (T-11 and T-12, Port Clinton and Toledo filtration plants, untreated water tap). In addition, hourly grab samples are collected from one in-plant water supply (T-28, Unit 1 untreated water scpply, onsite). The samples from each loci. tion are composited monthly and analyzed for gross beta activity in l dissolved and suspended solids. Quarterly composites from each iocation a-e gamma scanned and analyzed for strontium-89 and g
-90, and tritium.
Fish Two species of fish are collected semi-annually from each of two locations in Lake Erie; from one indicator location in the vicinity of the discharge .(T-33) and one control location greater than 10 miles from the plant (T-35; Lake Erie 15 mi NE of station). The flesh is separated from the bones and analyzed for gross beta and gamma-emitting isotopes. Bottom Sediments Semi-annually, bottom sediments are collected from three loca-tions in Lake Erie; at two indicator lecations, intake (T-29) and discharge (T-30), and at one control location about 5.3 miles WNW from the plant (T-27). The samples are gamma scanned and analyzed for gross beta and strontium-89 and -90. O 3.2-6
(3 .J 3.1.4 Program Execution Program execution is summarized in Table 4.4 The program was executed as described in the proceding sections with the follow-ing exceptions.:
'1. There were no airborne iodine-131 data from location T-23 for the period ending 5-02-83 because the charcoal sample was lost in the mail.
- 2. There were no gross bete in air particulate nor airborne iodine-131 data from location T-7 for the collection period ending 5-16-83 because of vandalism.
- 3. There were no gross beta in air particulate nor airborne iodine-131 data from location T-12 for the collection periods ending 5-25-83 and 8-01-83 because of loss of power.
4 There were no gross beta in air particulates nor airborne todine data from location T-23 for the collection period
.ending 8-15-83 because of a bad hose connection.
.( . 4
/**
' N _/ 3.2-7
3.1.5 Census of Milch Animals h In compliance with Appendix B, Section 3.2 of the Technical Specifications for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, the annual census of milch animals was conducted on June 24,1983 by the Environmental Monitoring Group personnel, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. Results The results are shown as follows: Sector Distance (meters) Animals SE 16,090 dairy goat SSE 4,000 beef cattle 24,140 dairy goat S 4,420 beef cattle 25,110 dairy goat SSW 1,610 beef cattle 24,620 dairy goat SW 4,970 beef cattle 11,910 dairy goat WSW 4,250 dairy cows 11,100 dairy goat WNW 16,580 dairy goat O 3.2-8
1 n C 3.2- Results and Discussion The results for the reporting period January to December 1983 are presented in summary form in Table 4.5. For each type of analysis of each sampled medium, this table shows the annual mean and range for all indicator locations and for all control locations. The location with the highest annual mean and the results for this location are also given. The discussion of the results has been divided into three broad categories; the air, terrestrial, and aquatic . envivironmerts. Within each category, samples are discussed in the order listed in Table 4.4. Any references to previous environmental data for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station refer to data collected by HES (or its predecessor companies, NALC0 Environmental Sciences and Indus-trial BIO-TEST Laboratories, Inc.). The tabulated results of all measurements made during 1983 are not included in this section, although references to these results are made in the discussion.
~
The complete tabulation of l the results is submitted to the Toledo Edison Company in a rd separate report. 3.2.1 ' Atmospheric Nuclear Detonations There were no reported atmospheric nuclear tests in 1983. The last reported test was conducted by the People _'s Republic of i China en 16 October 1980. The reported yield was in the 200
- kiloton to 1 megaton range.
3.2.2 The Air Er, fronment l- Airborne Particulates Gross beta measurements yielded annual means that were-nearly identical at the five control locations and the ! six indicator locations (0.020 pCi/m3 and 0.021 pCi/m3, respectively). The highest annual mean (0.024 pCi/m3) was measured at control location T-9, 6.8 miles SW of the station. A spring peak in beta activity had been observed almost annually for many years (Wilson et al.,1969). It had been attributed to fallout of r.uclides from the stratos-
- V,o phere (Gold et al.,1964). It was pronounced in 1981 and occured to--a lesser degree in 1982. However, the peak did not occur in 1983. This was similar .to the. years 1976 and 1979.
3.2-9
1 3 i Strontium-89 and strontium-90 activities were below their a ! respective LLDs of 0.0005 and 0.0001 pCi/m3 in all samples. W Gamma spectroscopic analysis of quarterly composites of air particulate filters yielded nearly identical results for indicator and control locations. The only gamma-emitting isotope detected was beryllium-7 which is produced continously in the upper atmosphere by cosmic radiation (Arnold and Al-S al i h , 1955). There was no indication of a station effect on the data. Airborne Iodine Weekly levels of airborne iodine-131 were below the lower limit of detection (LLD) of 0.02 pCi/m3 in all samples with the following exceptions due to power loss: T-7 on 9-06-83 and 1-03-83; T-1, T-2, and T-3 on 9-19-83; and T-27 on 12-27-83. In these cases the LLD varied between <0.03 to <0.07. Ambient Gamma Radiation At thirteen (13) regular locations the monthly TLDs measured a mean equivalent dose of 11.8 mR/91 days at the indicator locations and a mean of 13.1 mR/91 days at control locations. These results were in agreement with the values obtained by quarterly TLDs and were similar to the levels observed in 1982 g (13.5 mR/91 days and 14.4 mR/91 days, respectively). The highest annual means for. monthly TLDs (16.1 mR/91 days) and for
. quarterly TLDs (17.9 mR/91 days) occured at indicator location T-8.
At twelve special locations established at the site boundary, the mean equivalents were essentially identical to those measured at the regular indicator locations (12.7 mR/91 days and 13.3 mR/91 days, monthly and quarterly, respectively). Higher gamma radiation . levels measured at locations away from the lake were also observed in previous years and are attributed to the higher potassium-40 content in the soil. The annual mean dase equivalent for all locations measured by monthly and quarterly TLDs was 13.2 mR/91 days and was similar to that measured in 1980 (14.5 mR/91 days), 1981 (14.8 mR/91 days) and 1982 (14.3 mR/91 days). This is lower than the estimated average natural background radiation for Middle America,19.5 mrad / quarter which is based s.1 data on pp.71 and 108 of the report Natural Background Radiation in the United States (National Council an Radiation Protection and Measure-ments, 1975). The terrestrial absorbed dose (uncorrected for structural and body shielding) ranges from 35 to 75 mrad /y and averages 46 mrad /y for Middh America. Cosmic radiation and g cosmogenic radionuclides contribute 32 mrad /y for an average of 78 mrad /y or 19.5 mrad / quarter.
. 3.2-10
3.2.3 The Terrestrial Environment Milk A total of 54 analyses for iodine-131 in milk were performed during the reporting period. All samples contained less than 1.0 pC1/1 of iodine-131. Strontium-89 was below the LLD level of 3.0 pCi/l in all samples. Strontium-90 activity was detected in all samples and ranged from 0.6 to 4.5 pCi/l. The annual mean value for strontium-90 was the same at the indicator and at the control locations (1.5
-pCi/1). The location with the highest mean (1.8 pCi/1) was control location T-20. The mean values were similar to those measured in 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, and 1982.
fm d The activities of barium-140 and cesium-137 were below their respective LLDs in all samples collected. Results for potassium-40 were nearly identical at control and I indicator locations. (1300 and' 1250 pCi/1, respectively). l Indicator location T-20 had the highest Mean (1360 pCi/1). Since the chemistries of calcium and strontium, and potassium and cesium are similar, organisms tend to deposit cesium-137 in muscle. tissue and strontium-89 and -90 in bones. In order to detect potential environmental accumulation of these radionu-clides, the' ratios of the strontium-90 activity to the weight of calcium and of the cesium-137 activity to weight of stable potassium were monitored in milk. The measured concentrations of calcium and stable potassium were in agreement with previous-ly determined values of 1.16t0.08 g/l and 1.50i0.21 g/1, respec-tive'y (National Center. for Radiological Health, 1968). No statistically significant vntiations in the ratios were observed, g U - 3.2-11 ,
Groundwater (Well Water) $ Gross beta activities in suspended solids were below the LLD of 0.8 pC1/1 in all samples. Gross beta activities in dissolved solids averaged 3.7 pCi/l at the indicator locations and 5.4 pCi/l at the control location. The location with the highest annual mean was the control location T-27 and averaged 5.4 pCi/1. The range of gross beta activities were similar to those observed in 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, and 1982. Tritium activity was below the LLO of 330 pCi/l in all samples. Strontium-89 and strontium-93 activities were below their respective LLDs of 2.0 pCi/l and 1.0 pCi/1 in all samples. All samples were below the LLO of 10.0 pC1/1 for cesium-137 activity. The activities detected in well water were not significant when compared with the LLDs and were not attributable to the station operation. Edible Meat $ In the edible meat samples (chickens, woodchuck, muskrat, goose, and snapping turtle) the mean potassium-40 activity was 2.77 pC1/g wet weight for the indicator locations and 2.31 pCi/g wet weight for the control location. Cesium-137 activity was below the LLD of 0.043 pCi/g wet weight in all samples. Fruits and Vegetables Strontium-89 was below the LLD of 0.011 pCi/g wet weight in all samples. Strontium-90 was detected in one of twelve samples and was 0.011 pCi/g wet weight. The only gama-emitting isotope detected was naturally-occurring pot assium-40. The mean activities were 2.15 pCi/g wet weight for the indicator locations and 1.96 pCi/g wet weight for the contrcl locations. The activities detected were identical or similar to those detected in 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, and 1982. All other gamma-emitting isotopes were below their respective LLDs. Green Leafy Vegetables Green leafy vegetables (cabbage) collected during harvest season h were analyzed for iodine-131. All results were below the LLO of 3.2-12
E w; 4 S 0.0' 60 pCi/g wet weight. .All gamma-emitting isotopes except d potassium were below :: their respective LLDs. Pot assium-40 !u ' activity averaged 2.93 pCi/g wet weight and 2.15 pCi/g wet weight ifor indicator: and control locations, respectively. No station.effect was indicated.
' Animal-Wildlife Feed l In grass,'smartweed, and corn the only gamma-emitting isotopes
- detected were potassium-40 and berylium-7. The annual mean K-40 activity for the control location T-34 was 3.74 pCi/g wet weight compared to the mean value of 4.74 pCi/g wet weight for indicator. locations. Be-7 at location T-8 was 2.97 pCi/g . wet weight. A.11 other gamma-emitting isotopes were below their respective LLDs.
r p Soil Soil samples were collected in June 1983 and analyzed for gamma-emitting isotopes. The predominant activity was potas-stum-40 which .had 'a mean value of 12.0 pCi/g dry weight at the L
' indicator : locations . and 14.8 pCi/g dry weight at the control
- ' locations. Cesium-137,'activiy was above the LLD of 0.035 pC1/g in six.of the eleven samples. The mean activity at the indica-7; tor locations'was 0.19 pCi/g dry weight _and 0.80 pCi/g dry
- . weight at the control ' locations. The highest cesium-137 L, ' ' factivity, 1.03'pCi/g, was detected at the control location T-23,14.3 miles ENE of station. The level of activities and
. distribution pattern.was very similar to those observed in
'- 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, and 1982. L
- 3.2.4. 'The Aquatic Environment.
I Water Samples - Treated ) In treated water samples the gross 6efa activity in suspended F
-solids 4was below the LLD.of 0.7 pCi/1 in all samples. The mean L gross beta activity Lin dissolved:- solids -was identical at both l"-
indicator - and control locations (3.1 pCi/1). The values are
'similar to those measured in 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, Ps 1980, 1981, and u1982.- Tritium activity. was below the LLD of 330 pCi/1 in all samples.
,7.,
. Strontium-891 activity was L below the LLD levels of 2.5 pC1/1-0in all samples.: Strontium-90 was' detected'in three samples:and ranged from 0.9 to 1.0 pCi/1, barely above the LLD level of 0.8
- pCi/1.. .The di_fference is not statistically significant.
,J A . Cesium-137 levellwas below the .LLD of :10 pC1/1 in all samples. M~ '
. Essentially..similar results were obtained in 1979, 1980, L1981, and 1982.
p_
/ 3.2-13
Water Samples - Untreated h In untreated water samples the mean gross beta activity in suspended solids was near the LLD of 0.7 pCi/l at control and indicator locations (1.0 and 0.8 pCi/1, recpectively). In dissolved solids the mean activity was identical at both indica-tor and ceatrol locations (3.1 pCi/1). For total residue, the mean activities were 3.2 pCi/l at indicator locations and 3.3 pC1/1 at control locations. None of these results show statisti-cally significant differences between indicator and control locations. The tritium activity was below LLD of 330 pCi/l in all samples, the same as in treated water. Strontium-89 and strontium-90 activities were below the LLD level of 2.3 and 1.3 pCi/1, respectively, in all samples. Cesium-137 activity was below the LLD of 10.0 pCi/l for all locations. No plant effect was indicated. Fish The mean gross beta activity in fish muscle was similar for indicator and control locations (3.74 and 3.22 pCi/g wet weight, respectively). Potassium-40 was the only gamma-emitting isotope detected. The mean potassium-40 activity was 2.96 pCi/g wet weight for the indicator location and 3.04 pCi/g wet weight for the control location. Cesium-137 activity was below the LLD level of 0.041 pCi/g wet weight in all samples. The levels of activities were similar to those observed in 1978,1979,1980,1981 and 1982. No plant effect was indicated. Bottom Sediments The mean gross beta activity in bottom sediments was 22.8 pCi/g dry weight for indicator locations and 14.2 pCi/g dry weight for the control location. The location with the highest mean was indicator Location T-29 (26.2 pCi/g dry weight). Indicator Location T-29 also had the highest mean potassium-40 activity (22.4 pCi/g dry weight) which was the major contributor to the gross beta activity at all locations. h 3.2-14 ~ .. ..
f) Activities of strontium-89 and strontium-90 were below the LLD levels of 0.10 and 0.042 pCi/g dry weight, respectively, in all samples. Cesium-137 activity was not detected in any of the six samples above the LLD level of 0.075 pCi/g dry weight. Similar levels, distribution, and composition of detected radionuclides were detected in 1978,1979,1980,1981, and 1982. 3.2.5 Summary and Conclusions Results of sample analyses during the period January - December 1983 are summarized in Table 4.5. Tabulations of data for all samples collected during this period, additional statistical analyses of the data, and graphs of data trends are presented in a separate report to the Toledo Edison Company (TIML 1984). Radionuclide concentrations measured at indicator locations were compared with levels measured at control locations and in pre-operational studies. The comparisons indicate background-level radioactivities in all samples collected. No station effect on the environment was indicated in any of the sampling U,m media collected and analyzed.
,m .
3.2 - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-_s u.,.a g _. s-- w&A--- a w4 w -,&,- 44- a h.-A .-----A..2.aA- 4 1 64, A.4mA4A 4W-- a4- A. -- - - m.,wmMA n-.
, - A -oa.As-..-,,.1a i
I 'l 1 l-O i e i
; i 4 l i
l I r 1 4.0 FIGURES AND TABLES l LO t l i l l l r i l l 1 3.2-16
- 0
.. .i fT ">= .
.o o .
s .~,*
= : --
.c x ,
2 :
.5 C
.Q E .5 N%
(~ T
- m. ws '
k !, 8 7 %
# ' W W Gl -
s.: .
., C o
g.3 a m y m M.) '.
- j .
5-
... - *
- Q,r5 I *. ..t%... $
o
. . .. g
... . .* 5.
. . ...% - . m
.* l 6 e m
g% O .. . :
). -1 * *fl '.
. o
*\ .
c h, ,'. _ . -
*. ;; =
... m Wn.\\s\ 4 f.'.. ' C; ;1
.~..I,--*
2:
- 4. u e < ;'
. . . c) m w 4 ft:N. m v%-ow s.t-, . . . ' ..N t, . r. .. :* .
o gg 1. % * . . c:
. ;e- c .e.t. f... .~ , , -.
C ,g g .... .
* * *: ."- . p o e
$.ss.sss w l '*.
... r
- sg ts I C. *
,1 c....-1:: * * >
\s
* :. d* e m "3. % s I
==
n * .l . .44 !**... C
* *I o h,/ .*
,8 . .
~@s'8V *D -~
a: .! . ' .i : .=
. *e
- p. ..'.. ssac. ,,.9=
~: .- -
L( V *Q \ s, 'is,. .3 2E :i ., d o
.... w o e ><
,'i
*
- d:.
Di
.. Ja. s -2. ~
<2 .
*/ 5-so ::: ': ..o
* .c
*:ll.
.is.
\ 'O sc ... .
y ,.
*..r
.- p.
$o.
- O \s c *I*
(j'- ***
. ....,k, 5-s b.f* h .
s f.; .- v w % ;,, :::= .t, . *;8* k. . c,. I '< l 4 1 J...-
- e
...l.* 3 6-t m .u
.)\. M h a). .
.. i 4: -- :l *
. , e:
- .!- o i .
a : .*
... l *;* w
*8 .T . . .
i W M
..' .c
.. C= .- *
- J.. . #
\,,T) g.
..l . 8(
3 p,,,
=.a
%c=:, e .
==
t
.* % . c
.a. 7 *.s <% o
** e P E
~ k..s,*
.) m 1x .'
i
- .s 3
'.* . .4. . .
** g u3 y
m
-3 Cg 3s g
s i t-
'2 x; j% 5,.......- .l*
V./ ai
~
*8**
1,.
- O e
u g e o t
'2 E
l*.... Q f.*
* +J m
- l. *. .
. f. g
- a '8
- g .e
* ;f .
. U i o 1 cf J .e
,f ..* 5 ..
;y:q- # .
4..s. .f..: . .
- e. ' !, 5 , ,: _A._M r~n
@*rf. h' ce . . l' .E
(, '
< G. &
v Ve s. ,)-
\ :s 3-
' i.*.e.... -
... m
- , . __, m l*/ . . , -- .,,..
I ,
,"..)* *.
e a, {. . .
<i . .
t.. . I
** 'T Ci F.*.* .
in p K
- U' i i r - <.h. \@* , E
, 3 A. . ,* . . * . ./ .*
**- g
*.. .. ,... .. y .,,.
e DN . ,
. . . . . a .. u.
l' , 53, ,
- _ _ _ ______.____________________McN
$::' Y
.' h North ease id[ 0 J
j ff/
~'
Niddle sais I. s - 0 b i Toledo
, /' //
G 0regon *:.' \ s ml.
~ '
\ ) 9 '*'
f . 27 , . South Ball I. w V b: .u. wo i
.A.
,dk '
so . . t.3
..i'
,,,,,s \ okga liarbor sh 5 . . e. -
i - a i _ ,_g usf
,pt
- lomi .: -
y m ..~- 1,
..t;&<cN':
i 7-
- e d,, g.... ..
~'
a sanausty
.s.. , ,
Dowling Green ,5 ml l
$ 'N , '
/
5
,' rjo
',,1 i 20erJ. I'emont -
\l f
N 25 ml. k i!0' walk ,, -- l 23 ~ l \ 30ml : g '
. , f __
Fostorio } ! Figure 4-2 Sampling locations (exceptin9 those on the site periphery). Daitis'-Besse fluclear Power Station, Uni t flo. l . W
7 5
# _ 3 ,
6 6l . , ?
, 'W ' >
ix 3..R Table 4.1_ _ ' Sampling locations, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No.1.
~
Type of Code- Locationa
, T I ~ Site boundary, 0.6 miles NE of station, niar intake canal. 4
-T;2 - I- Site boundary 0.9 miles E of station.
T_-3 ' 1 % Site boundary, 1.4 miles SE of station, near Toussaint p River and storm drain.
-T-4. I, Site boundary, 0.8 miles S of station, near Locust Point and Toussaint River.
, . T-5 I- Main entrance to site, 0.5 miles W of station.
.T-7 I Sand Beach, 0.9 miles NNW of station.
T-8) I- Earl Moore Farm, 2.7 miles WSW of station. T-9 C Oak Harbor, 6.8 miles SW of station. - eort Ci4*oa, 9.5 miies SE of station.
- T-i KQ i. C.
-T-12 C Toledo Water Treatment Station, airborne particulate
, and iodine collected 23.5' miles WNW of station and water
- samples taken from Intake Crib 11.25 miles NW of station.
-T-17 .I. .Irv Fick's well_onsite, 0.7 miles __SW of station.
T-20. -I Gaeth-Farm, 5.5 miles WSW of station.
-T-23 '
,C' Put-In-Bay Lighthouse,--14.3 miles.ENE of station.
s<
-T-24 C Sandusky, '24.9 miles .SE'of station.
o ;
.)
j.; ~ .T-25 I Miller Farm, 3.7 miles S of station.
~T-27 C Magee Marsh, 5.3 miles'WNW of, station.
T-28 'I Unit I treated and untreated water supply, onsite. T-294 I- Lake Erie, intake area,1.5 miles NE of station. g - T :I Lake Erie, discharge area, 0.9 miles ENE of. station. x' ). 3.2-19 b -. ._
l Table 4.1 (continued) (l) Type of Code Locationa T-31 I Onsite. T-32 I Land, within 5 miles radius of station. T-33 I Lake Erie, within 5 miles radius of site. T-34 C Land, greater than 10 miles radius of site. T-35 C Lake Erie, greater than 10 miles radius of site. T-36 I The private garden or farm having the highest X/Q). T-37 C The farm 10 to 20 miles from the site in the least prevalent wind direction. T-38 I Site boundary, 0.6 ENE of station near lake. T-39 I Site boundary, 1.2 miles ESE of station near ditch to Toussaint. T-40 I Site boundary, 0.7 miles SE of station near ditch to Toussaint. lll T-41 I Site boundary, 0.6 miles SSE of station near ditch to Toussaint. T 42 I Site boundary, 0.8 miles SSW of station by ECC. T-43 I Site boundary, 0.5 miles SW of station along Route 2 fence. T-44 I Site boundary, 0.5 miles W of station by rai.iroad tracks. T-45 I Site boundary, 0.5 miles WNW of station on access road behind cooling tower. T-46 I Site boundary,- 0.5 miles NW of station along access road. T-47 I Site boundary, 0.5 miles N of station along access road by gate. O 3.2-20
~
[ Table 4.1 .(continued)' Type of
' Code' Locationa T-48 I Site boundary, 0.5 miles'NNE of station by lake.
T-49 .I - Site boundary, 0.5 miles NE~of station along access read by lake. T-50' I. Erie Indu'strial Park, 4.5 miles ESE of station by Water. Tower. T-51 .I Daup Farm, 600.Tettau Road, Port Clinton, Ohio
, 4.5 miles SSE of 'the station.
~
-T-52 I Miller Farm, 3.7 miles S of site.on West Camp Perry Western Road.
Y
-T-53. I Nixon Farm, 4.5 miles SSE of site on West Camp Perry , Western Road.
T-54. I- M. Beier Farm, 4.8 miles WSW of site on Genzman Road L'j f' Lenke Farm, 5 miles west ofLsite on Route 2. T-55' I'
~
aI-Indicator locations; C = Control locations. l 4 ? l s t,
- f)
(. L (( - 3.2-21 ^
%[ m
~-
Table 4.2 Type and frequency of collection. Sampling Annually Type' Weekly Monthly Quarterly Semi-Annually Location 50 1 I AP Al TLD TLD S0 2 I AP AI TLD TLD 50 3 I AP Al SWU TLD TLD S0 4 I AP Al TLD TLD 5 I TLD TLD S0 1 7 I AP Al TLD a TLD WW b c SO TLD M AF 8 I AP Al TLD VE S0 9 C AP Al TLD TLD S0 l 11 C AP AI SWU SWT TLD TLD 50 l 12 C AP Al SWU SWT TLD TLD 17 I WW a 20 I M SO 23 C AP Al TLD a TLD 24 C. TLD M TLD b VE y 25 I S0 TLD WW BS na 27 C AP Al TLD da 28 I SWU SWT
" BS 29 I BS 30- I SMW WL 31 I ME 32 I d WF ST F
33 I b c ME VE AF 34 C d F 35 C 36 I GLVc 37 C GLV 38-55 I TLD TLD a Semi-monthly during the grazing season, May through October. b Two varieties from each location. c Cattlefeed collected during the 1st quarter, grass collected during 3rd quarter. d Two species from each location. O O O
1 , Table 4.3 Sample codes used in Table 4.2. Code Description. AP Airborne Particulate "AI Airborne Iodine TLD (M) Thermoluminescent Dosimeter - Monthly
'TLD (Q) Thermoluminescent Dosimeter - Quarterly M Milk WW Well Water (Ground Water)
ME. Domestic Meat VE Fruits and Vegetables GLV Green Leafy Vegetables (') AF Animal' Feed (silage, grain, grass) SMW Smartweed SWT Surface Water - Treated SWU Surface Water - Untreated F Fish BS Bottom Sediments SO Soil WL' Wildlife (muskrat or. raccoon)
.ST. . Snapping Turtle g
.WF Water fowl (goose)-
h._/ 3.2-23
Tabla 4.4 . Sampling summary. Collection Number Nunber of Number of Sample Type and of Samples Samples Type Frequency, Locations Collected Missed Remarks Air Environment Airborne particulates C/W 11 568b 4 See text p. 3.2-7 Airborne . iodine C/W 11 567b 4 See text p. 3.2-7 TLDs C/M 31 372 0 C/Q 31 124 1 Terrestrial Environment Milk (May-Oct) G/SM 3 36 0 (Nov-Apr) G/M 3 18 0 Groundwater G/Q 3 12 0 Edible Meat
- a. Domestic meat G/SA 2 4 0
- b. Wildlife G/SA 1 2 0 (two species)
- c. Waterfowl G/A 1 1 0 w d. Snapping Turtle G/A 1 1 0 L Fruits and Vegetables G/SA 3 12 0 L
- (two varieties from each location)
Green leafy vegetables G/M 2 9 0 (during harvest season) Animal-wildlife feed
- a. Cattlefeed G/A 2 2 0 Collected 1st Q
- b. Grass or corn G/A 2 2 0 Collected 3rd Q
- c. Smartweed G/A 1 1 0 Soil G/A 11 11 0 Aquatic Environment Treated surface water G/WM 3 156b 0 Untreated surface water G/WM 3 156b o G/HM 1 52b 0 Fish (two species) G/SA 2 8 0 Bottom sediments G/SA 3 6 0 a
Type of collection is coded as follows: C/ = continuous; G/ = grab. Frequency is coded as follows: /HM = hourly grab composited monthly; /WM = weekly grab com-posited monthly; /W = weekly; /SM = semi-monthly; /M = monthly; /Q = quarterly,
/SA = semi-annually; /A = annually.
b Samples are sent to laboratory weekly. O O O
~ ., -
; f'g ; ,
p. (
^
./"[. Q
<\j s 3.;
! Table 4.5; 1 Environmental Radiological Monitoring Program Sunnary.
' Name of f acility Davis-Be*se' Nuclear Power Station Docket No. ' 50-346-Location of facility . ottawa, Ohio Reporting period January - December 1983 w
;(County, state)
Indicator . Location with Highest. , Control _ .
- Sample " :, Type and 4 -Annual Mean- '
Locattons- ' Number of Type- Number ofe
~Locatlon{
Mean(F) . Mean(F ) Mean(F) Non-routineL
'(Units)'
Analysesa -LLDb: RanceC. ?Locationd Range Range ' Results* Airborne- - GB 568 0.002.' O.021 (311/311) T-9,' Oak Harbor 0.024(52/52): 'O.020 (257/257) 0 ' Particulates (0.006-0.049) 6.8 at;SW (0.010-0.052) (0.003-0.057)
..(pCl/m3)
. Sr-89~ 8 0.0005 (LLD - -- <LLD .O~ Sr ' 8 0.00011 -(LLD -
- (LLD 0 d- GS- 8 .
sBe 0.0054 0.076 (4/4) NAf .
'i -.
0.089 (4/4) 0~ (0.061 0.091). (0.068-0.112)- f K-40 '0.0099
. (LLD . ;- -
' <LLD 0 T
,, . to 2-95 0.0016 ' <LLD ' .- - (LLD 0 l'" Zr-95' O.0016- (LLD - -
<LLD- 0
- ,Ru-103 0.0015 <LLD- .- - (LLD 0 ,
Ru-106' O.0057 - (LLD - - <LLD 0 Cs-134 .0.0006 <tLD - -
<LLD 0 Cs-137 0.0006 (LLD - -
(LLD 0
.Ce-141 0.0042 (LLD - - (LLD' O Ce-144 0.0050 ' <LLD - - <LLD 0 .
Airborne I-131' 567 0.029 (LLD - - (LLD 0
, ' lodine' (pC1/m3):
TLD' (Monthly) , Gamma 156 1.0 11.8 (84/84) T-8. Earl Moore Fars 16.1 (12/12) 13.1 (72/72) 0 . (mR/91' days) .(8.1-16.9) 2.7 mt WSW (15.1-16.9) (8.1-15.6) 2 TLD (Quarterly) Ganna 52' 1.0 13.0 (28/28) T-8,' Earl 11oore Farm 17.9(4/4) 14.6 (24/24) 0- D (mR/91 days) -(9.6-18.5) 2.7 at WW (17.3-18.5) (10.6-17.7). 1 1 Y9
- 9 -
n-
TaS12 4.5 (continued) Name cf Facility Davis-Bess 7 Nuclrar Power Station l Indicator Location with Highest g Control I Sample- Type and Locationg Annual Hean Locations Nunber of l Type lg Number of Mean(F) Hean(F) i Mean(F) Non-routine (Units) Analysesa LLDb RangeC l Locationd Range Range Results8 I T-45 Site boundary 0 TLD (Monthly) Gama . 144 1.0 12.7 (144/144) 17.8 (12/12) None (mR/91 days) ( 7.1-19.1) 0.5 at WNW * ( 16.1.- 19.1) (Inner Ring Site Boundary) TLD (Quarterly) Gama 48 1.0 13.3 (48/48) T-45 Site boundary 18.4 (4/4) None 0 (mR/91 days) (8.5-19.3) 0.5 at WNW (17.3-19.3) (Inner Ring Site Bour.dary) TLD (Monthly) i Gamma 72 1.0 14.5 (72/72) T-50, Erie Industrial 16.0 (12/12) None 0 (mR/91 days) ' Park, 4.5 mt ESE of (12.8-17.3) (14.6-17.3) (Outer Ring, app., Station by Water 5 mi distant) i Tower TLD(Quarterly) Gama 24 1.0 16.6 (24/24) T-50. Erie Industrial 18.1 (4/4) None 0 (mR/91 days)- (12.9-20.9) Park, 4.5 mt ESE of (17.5-18.7) (Outer Ring, app. Station by Water p 5 mi distant) Tower .Y
$ Milk (pC1/1) 1-131 54 1.0 (LL D - - (LLD 0 Sr-89 54 3.0 <LLD - - <LLD 0 Sr-90 54 0.5 1.5 (36/36) T-20, Gaeth Farm ' l.8 (18/18) 1.5 (18/18) 0 (0.6-4.5) 5.5 at WSW (0.9-4.5) (0.7-2.3)
GS Sa K-40 100 1300 (36/36) T-20, Gaeth Farm 1360 (18/18) 1250 (18/18) 0 (1060-1590) 5.5 at WSW (1210-1590) (1090-1710) Cs-137 10 <LLD - - <LLD 0 l j Ba 140 10 <LLD - - <tLD 0 (g/1) Ca 54 0.5 1.2 (36/36) No highest location, 1.2 154/54) 1.2 (18/18) O s (0.9-1.6) all are identical (0.9-1.6) (0.9-1.5) l I K 54 0.04 1.48 (36/36) T-20 Gaeth Farm 1.55 (18/18) 1.47 (18/18) 0 g (stable) (1.20-1.81) 5.5 at WSW (1.38-1.81). (1.24-2.45) (pC1/g) Sr-90/Ca 54 0. 5 ' l.3 (36/36) T-20, Gaeth Farm 1.6 (18/18) 1.1 (18/18) G (0.7-3.8) 5.5 mi WSW (0.7-3.8) (0.6-1.5) I (pct /g) Cs-137/K 54 8.3 <tLD - - (LLD 0 l O O O
~ ' ~=- c' "7
, g. - .
[**\ ;.' ~ rh
))
~
N).i
~
.f g
- b- ' -
.c.. :
;Taale14.5, '(continued) ' y . , .
Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Statton -
' fName of Facility .
.c _,
Indicator. Location with Highest Control- . .
.: Sample . Type ' and -- Locattong. Annual Mean Locations , ' Number of'-
' Type . -Number of. Meae(F) Mean(F). Non-routine.
Mean(F) E (Unitt) EAnalysesa LLDb - Range Locationd Rartoe Rance Results' ~ Well Water.- /G8,(55)'12 0.8 (LLO -e 4 L <LLD - 0~
.(pCl/l)
- G8 (DS). 12~ 'l.0 : 3.7(8/8) T-27 Ma9ee Marsh- 5.4 (4/4) 5.4(4/4)- 0
.(2.2-5.0). .5.3 at WNW (4.5-6.1) (4.5-6.1)
'G8 (TR) .12 :3.7 (8/8). 'T-27, Ma9ee Marsh 5.4 (4/4). 5.4 (4/4) 0
.(2.2-5.0) 5.3 el WNW (4.5-6.1) .,- (4.5-6.1)
L
'H-3 ' 12 330 (LLD -. .- (LLD 0 1Sr-89 .8' 12.0 (LLD- .-- -; (LLD- 0
-Sr.90 8 1.0 -<LLD - - . <LLD 0 GS 8-
-W 0 Cs-137 10.0 .<LLD - ..
<LLD g
e Edible Meat GS - -8 U .(pCl/g wet) K,40 ; 0.1 12.77 (6/6) T-31, Onsite' 3.13 (2/2) 2.31 (2/2) - 0 (1.92-3.83)' O.6 al NE - (2.43-3.83) .' (2.24-2.38)
?Cs-137: 0.043 <LLD ' - - (LLD 0 Fraits and Sr-89 12 - 0.011 <LLD' - -" (LLD' O-
- l. Vecetables 0
(p(1/g wet) : .Sr-90 . 12 0.004 0.'011 (1/8) T-25. Miller Farm 0.011 (1/4) (LLD
- 3.7 mi S . - -
GS ' 12 K-40 0.50 2.15 (8/8) T-8. Earl Moore Farm -2.21 (4/4) 1.% (4/4) 0 (l.01-4.09)' 2.7 at WSW - (l.26-2.80) (1.40-2.57) Nb-95 0.091 (LLD - -- <tL D 0 Zr-95 0.11 <tLD - - (LLD 0 Ru-106 0.38 (LLD - - (LLD 0 Cs-137- 0.039 (LLD -- - . <LLD 0 Ce-141 0.16 . <LL D - - <LLD 0 Ce-144 0.26' <LLD - - (LLD 0
. - - ~ .
Tabli 4.5 (cont inued ) Name cf Facility Davis-Besso Nucitar Power St at ion Indicat.r. Locati:n uith Highest Contr 1 Sample ' Type and Locationg Annual Mean Locations Number of Type Number of Mean(F) Mean(F) Non-routine (Units) Analysesa LLDb Mean(F) Range Locationd Range Range Resultse Green Leafy 1-131 9 0.060 <tLD - - <LLD 0 vecetables (pli/g wet) GS 9 K-40 0.1 2.93 (5/5) T-36, Miller Farm 2.93 (5/5) 2.15 (4/4) 0 (1.21-4.37) 3.7 al S (1.21-4.37) (1.30-4.25) Nb-95 0.057 (L*.D - - (LLD 0 Zr-95 0.086 <tLD - - (LLD 0 Cs-137 0.052 <tLD - - (LLD 0 Ce-141 0.070 <tLD - - <LLD 0 i Ce-ll4 0.34 (LLD - - (LLD 0 Antral-Wildlife G5 5 Feed (pCl/g wet) Be-7 1.05 2.97 (1/3) T-8, Moore Farm 2.97 (1/3) (LLD 0
- 2.7 mi WSW -
ro -1 Co K-40 0.1 4.74 (3/3) (2.39-6.71) T-31, Onsite 0.6 mi NE 6.71 (1/1) 3.74 (2/2) (2.42-5.07) O tb-95 0.10 (LLD - - (LLD 0 Zr-95 0.19 <tLD - - (LLD 0 Ru-103 0.15 (LLD - - <LLD 0 Ru-106 0.58 (LLD - - <LLD 0 Cs-137 0.071 <tLD - - <LLO 0 Ce-141 0.29 <tLD - - <LLD 0 Ce-144 0.42 <tLD - - <LLD 0 iSoil G5 11 (pCl/g dry) Be-7 1.4
<LLD - - (LLD 0 K-40 1.0 12.0 (6/6) T-12. Toledo Water 22.6 (1/1) 14.8 (5/5) 0 (7.2-18.6) Treatment Station (8.8-21.6) 0.26 .(LLD - <LLD 0 Zr-95 -
Nb-95 0.23 <tLD - - <LLO O O O O
- m. _
, y
- ( ' '
i f.
' u)
^
O' ,
)
- Tabla 4.5 (continued)- . .. .. ..
Name of Facility' Cawls-Besse Nuclear Peer Station Ind icator -- . Location with. Highest. Control , Sample _ iType and l Locationg Annual Mean Locations Nuuter of
-Type. Number of. i Mean(Fj Meany)- Mean(F) ' Non-routine ~
(untts) Analysesa I- LLDb Range 'Locatfond Range Range Resultse' Soll c rRu-103 0.'18 , (LLD. 1- -" ;<LLD- 0 , j (p(t/g dry) (cont'd)- Ru-106 1.28 ' <LLD - - (LLD 0
-Cs-137. 0.035. 0.19(2/6) -T-23, Put-in-Bay 1.03(1/1) 0.80(4/5) 0 ,
(0.15-0.23) . 14,.3 mi ENE - (0.38-1.03) Ce-141 0.32 (LLD .- - <LLD 0 Ce-144 ,. 0.52 (LLD - - <LLD 0 Treated Surface ~ G8 (55)136 .0.7-- l '(LLD. - - (LLD 0 Water (pt1/1), .G8 (D';) 36 . 1. 0 ' l 2.3 (12/12) .T-ll, Port Clinton 3.0 (12/12)' 2.7 (24/24) 0
, (1.9-2.8) 9.5 mi SE (2.4-3.6) (1.6-3.6)'
GB (TR) 36 1.0 . 2.3 (12/12) T-II, Port Clinton 3.0(12/12) 2.7(24/24) 0
'(1.9-2.8) 9.5 mi SE (2.4-3.6) (1.6-3.6) y H-3 12 330' .<LLD - - <LLD 0 Sr-89 8' 2.5 (LLD - - <LLD 0-Sr-90 8 0.8 1.0 (1/4) .T-28, Onsite 1.0 (1/4)~ 0.9 (2/4) 0 (0.9-0.9)
GS 8 Cs-137 10.0 <LLD - - <LLD 0 Untreated Surf ace G8 (SS).48- 0.7 0.8 (3/24) T-ll, Port Clinton 1.0 (2/12) 1.0 (3/24) 0
.(0.7-0.S',
Water
- 9.5 mi SE (0.8-1.2) .(0.8-1.2)
(pCl/1)
-T-12, Toledo Water 1.0 (1/12)'
. Intake 11.25 at W GB (DS) 48 1.0 3.1 (24/24) .T-ll, Port Clinton 3.4 (12/12) 3.1 (24/24) 0 (1.8-4.6) .9.5 mi SE- (2.5-5.0) (1.8-5.0)
G8 (TR) 48 . 1.0 3.2 (24/24) T-II, Port Citnton 3.6 (12/12) 3.3 (24/24) 0 (2.4-5.5) 9.5 mi SE (2.5-5.8) (1.8-5.8) H-3 16 330 <tLD - - (LLD 0 Sr-89 8 -2.3 (LLD - - <LLD 0
1 Table 4.5 -(continued) Name of facility Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Indicator Location with Highest Control Sample Type and Locationg Annual Mean Locations Number of Type Number of Mean(F) MeantF) Mean(F) Non-routine (Units) Analysesa LLDb RangeC Locationd Range Range _ Resultst Untreated Surface Sr-90 8 1.3 <tLD - - - <LLD 0 Water (pC1/1) GS 8 Cs-137 10 <LLD - - <LLD 0 Fish GB 8 0.1 3.74 (4/4) T-33, Lake Erie 3.74 (4/4) 3.22 (4/4) 0 (pC1/g wet) (3.30-4.37) 1.5 mi NE (3.30-4.37) (2.71-3.84) GS 8 K-40 0.1 2.96 (4/4) T-35, Lake Erie 3.04 (4/4) 3.04 (4/4) 0 (2.56-3.68) 15 mi NE (2.52-3.90) (2.52-3.90) C5-137 0.041 (LLD - - <LLD 0 w Bottom Sediments GB 6 1.0 22.8 (4/4) T-29, Lake Erie 26.2 (2/2) 14.2 (2/2) 0 m (pct /g dry) (12.8-33.2) Intake (19.1-33.2) (13.6-14.7) e 1.5 mi NE o 0.10 ( 0 Sr-89 6 <LLD - -
,LLD Sr-90 6 0.042 (LLD - - <LLD 0 GS 6 K -40 0.1 10.6 (4/41 T-29, Lake Erie 22.4 (2/2) 13.0 (2/2) 0 (13.4-27.8) Intake (16.9-27.8) (12.3-13.8) 1.5 mi NE Cs-137 0.075 (LLD - - <LLD 0 a GB = gross beta, GS = gamma scan, SS = suspended solids. DS = dissolved solids, TR = total residue.
b LLD = nominal lower limit of detection based on 4.66 sigma counting error for hackground sample, c Mean based upon detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in parentheses. (F). d Locations are specified by station code (Table 4.1) and distance (mlies) and direction relative to reactor site.
- Non-routine results are those which exceed ' ten times the control station value.
f Quarterly composites of all samples from indicator locations and control locations were gassa scanned separately. Thus, the location with the highest annual mean cannot be identified. 9 Six results have been excluded in the determination of the LLD of airborne iodine-131. The eleveted LLDs resulted from apparent pump malfunction or low volume.
~
O O G
, . =. . - - - _ - . - . .. - - . _ _- p , E . b ,
, U.
t
-5.0--REFERENCES
' Arnold,[J. R. . and H. A. Al-Salih.
. 1955. Beryllium-7 Produced by Cosmic Rays. : Science 121: 451-453.
' Gold,-S., H. W..Barkhau, B. Shlein, and B. Kahn. 1964. Measurement of
- Naturally - Occurring Radionuclides in Air, in the Natural Radiation
' Environment, . University ' of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois,- 369-382.
Hazleton Environmental Sciences, 1979.
~
- Operational -Environmental' Radio-
- logical Monitoring. for the ' Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Oak -
h _ Harbor, Ohio,; Annual Report,: January-December 1978. t
. 1980. Operational Environmental Radiological Monitoring for the Davis-Besse ~. Nuclear Power: Station, ~0ak Harbor, Ohio, Annual Report,
~ January-December 1979.
. . L1981. -Operational Envir'onmental. Radiological Monitoring for the ,
. Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1, Oak Harbor Ohio, Final Report _ .Part;;II', -Data Tabulations and Analyses. January -December
[n 1980.' Ug
. 1982.. Operational Environmental Radiological Monitoring for the Davis-Besse . Nuclear Power = Station Unit No.1, Oak Harbor, Ohio, Final
- Report c Part II,. Data Tabulations and Analyses. January-December c 1981~.
L . 1983. ;0perational Environmental Radiological Monitoring for the L Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No.1, Oak Harbor, Ohio, Final
. Report iPart II, Data -. Tabulations. and Analyses. January-December
'1982.
/
~
. NALC05 Environmental Sciences. 1978. . Preoperational and Operational Radio-t n 11ogical_. Monitoring for' the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Oak L Harbor, Ohio,' Annual' Report. -January-December 1977. .
l.# National { Center 'for : Radiological Health. 1968. Section 1. Milk and Food.
, Radiological-. Health Data and) Reports. Vol . 9, November - 12, 730-746.
National'; Council :on Radiation Protection and Measurements,1975 pp. '71 and .
,108.
L 0Teledyne I'sotopes' Midwest 1 Laboratory, 1984. Operational Environmental 1 Radiological Monitoring'for the ' Davis-Besse Nuclear Power - Station . Unit-
' No~.1,10ak ' Harbor,- Ohio, Final Report - -- Part II, Data Tabulations and
~
, 3p H. fNJ- . Analyses.: January-December 1983. Wilson, y D.(W. , s G. ? M. .-Ward, .: and L J. E. ! Johnson. 1969. In: Environmental
'~
Cont' amination' by - Radioactive -Materials, International Atomic Energy Agency,(p.'125 Y a -w- --, -
-o s
Appendix A Crosscheck Prograra Results O . 8
. A-1 .
.,.s {O ' Appendix A Crosscheck-Proaram Results
/Teledyne: Isotopes Midwest-Laboratories _~(formerly Hazleton Environmental
, Sciences);has participated in interlaboratory comparison (crosscheck) programs since the formu'ation of its quality control program in _ December 1971. These
. programs - are operated by agencies which supply environmental-type samples
.(e.g., milk!or water) containing concentrations of radionuclides known to the
~ issuing' agency but : not :to participant laboratories. The purpose of such a Eprogram is Jto provide an : independent check .on the laboratory's analytical
. procedures and to alert it to any possible problems.
-Participant laboratories measure the concentrations of specified radionuclides
.and 1- report them. to the issuing - agency. Several months later, the agency
_ reports the known values to the participant laboratories and specifies control
' limits. Results consistently higher or lower than the known values or outside the control -limits ~ indicate a. need to check the instruments or procedures Eused.,
The results in Table A-1 were obtained through participation in the environ-t 'h' L 1 mental sample crosscheck- program for milk and water , samples during the,pericd 1980. through 1983". 'Thi_s ' program has been conducted by the U. S.' Environmental ,
; Prot _ection Agency-_ Intercomparison and : Calibration Section, Quality Assurance
. Branch, . Environmental Monitoring _ and Support Laboratory. .-Las Vegas, Nevada.
J 1The'.results in. Table A-2 were- obtained for thermoluminescent dosimeters
.(TLD's) during thel period 1976, 1977, 1979, :1980,- and 1981 through parti-
. cipation in the Second, Third, Fourth .and Fifth International Intercomparison of' Environmental Dosimeters under. the: sponsorsh'ips listed in Table A-2.
L 8 y+ , ) 7 _ A-2
. Table A-1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's crosscheck program, com-parison of EPA and Teledyne Isotopes Midwest Laboratory results for milk and water samples,1980 through 1983a, Concentration in oCi/lb Lab Sample Date TIML Result EPA Result Code Type Collected Analysis i2ac 130, n=1d STW-206 Water Jan. 1980 Gross Alpha 19.012.0 30.0i8.0 Gross Beta 48.0i2.0 45.0i5.0 S'TW-208 Water ~Jan. 1980 Sr-89 6.lil.2 ' 10.0i0.5 Sr-90 23.9tl.1 25.5tl.5 STW-209 Water Feb. 1980 Cr-51 112o14 101 5.0 Co-60 12.7i2.3 11 5.0 Zn-65 29.7i2.3 25i5.0 Ru-106 71.7 1.5 51i5 Cs-134 12.0 2.0 1015.0 Cs-137 30.0i2.7 30i5.0 STW-210 Water Feb. 1980 H-3 1800il20 1750t340 l T; STW-211 Water March 1980 Ra-226 15.710.2 16.0i2.4 LA . Ra-228 3.5 0.3 2.6i0.4 l
STM-217 Milk May 1980 Sr-89 4.4i2.69 5 5-l Sr-90 10.0 1.0 12 1.5 STW-221 -Water June 1980 Ra-226 2.0i0.0 1.7 0.8 Ra-228 1.610.1 1.7i0.8 STW-223 Water July 1980 ' Gross Alpha 31i3.0 38i5.0 Gross Beta 44i4 3515.0 o STW-224 Water . July 1980 Cs-137 33.9i0.4 35t5.0 Ba-140 <12 0 K-40 1350160 1550t78 I-131 <5.0 0 STW-225 ' Water Aug. 1980 'H-3 1280iS0 1210t329 l STW-226 Water' Sept. 1980 Sr-89 2211.2- 24i8.6 Sr-90 12i0.6 15i2.6 STW-228 . Water Sept. 1980' Gross Alpha' nae 32.018.0
- Gross Beta- 22.Si0.0 21.015.0
, .STW-235 Water. Dec. 1980 H-3 2420i30 2240i604 l (a~h ' l A-3 _ - _ . ._ . - _ . . _- _ . - . . .~ . _,
O Table A-1. (continued) h Concentration in aci/lb Lab Sample Date TIML Result EPA Result Code Type Collected Analysis tasc i30, n=1d STW-237 Water Jan. 1981 Sr-89 13.0 1.0 16i8.7 Sr-90 24.010.6 34i2.9 STM-239 Milk Jan. 1981 Sr-89 <210 0 Sr 15.7i2.6 20t3.0 I-131 30.9i4.8 26i10.0 Cs-137 46.912.9 4319.0 Ba-140 <21 0 K-40 1330iS3 15501134 STW-240 Water Jan. 1981 Gross alpha 7.3i2.0 9 5.0 Gross beta 41.0t3.1 44 5.0 STW-243 Water Mar. 1981 Ra-226 3.510.06 3.4i0.5 Ra-228 6.512.3 7.3fl.1 STW.245 Water Apr . 1981 H-3 3210 115 2710i355 STW-249 Water May 1981 Sr-89 51 3.6 36t8.7 O Sr-90 22.710.6 22i2.6 STW-251 Water May 1981 Gross alpha 24.0t5.3 2115.2 Gross beta 16.1 1.9 14i5.0 STW-252 Water Jun. 1981 H-3 2140i95 19501596 STW-255 . Water Jul. 1981 Gross alpha 20il.5 22 9.5 Gross beta 13.012.0 15i8.7 STW-259 Water Sep. 1981 Sr-89 16.Itl.0 23 5 Sr-90 10.310.9 11tl.5 STW-265 Water Oct. 1981 Gross alpha 71.I 19.1 80i20 Gross beta 123.3i16.6 11115.6 Sr-89 14.9i2.0 21 5 Sr-90 13.lil.7 14.4tl. 5 Ra-226 13.0i2.0 12.7tl.9 STW-269 Water Dec. 1981 H-3 2516t181 2700i355 O A-4 i
+
Table A-1. (continued) Concentration in pCi/lb
. Lab Sample Date TIML Result EPA Result
. Code Type Collected Analysis *2ac 13a, n=ld STW-270- Water Jan. 1982 Sr 24.312.0 21.0i5.0 Sr-90 9.410.5 12.0tl.5 STW-273 Water Jan. 1982 'I-131 8.6i0.6 ,
8.4tl.5 STW-275' Water Feb. -1982 H-3 1580t147 1820t342 STW-276 Water Feb. 1982 Cr-51 <61 0 Co-60 26.0t3.7 20i5 Zn-65 <13 15t5 Ru-106 <46 20i5-Cs-134 26.810.7 22 5 Cs-137 29.7tl.4 23i5
. STW-277 Wate'r Mar. 1982 'Ra-226 ll.9tl.9 11.611.7
(~i- STW-278 _W ater Mar. 1982 Gross alpha. 15.6tl.9 19i5
'4-) ~. . Gross beta 19.2i0.4 19i5
- STW-280 Water- Apr. 1982 H-3 2690t80 2860i360 STW-281 Water Apr. 1982 Gross alpha 75t7.9 85i21 Gross beta 114.li5.9 106 5.3 Sr 17.4tl.8 24i5-Sr 10.510.6 12*1.5 Ra-226 11.4t2.0 10.9tl.5 Co-60 <4.6 0' STW-284 Water May 1982 . Gross alpha- 3;.5 6.5 27.5 7 Gross beta 25.9i3.4 2915
'STW-285 Water June 1982 H-3 1970il408 1830i340 >
LSTW-286 Water June 1982' Ra-226 12.6*l.5 13.4t3.5 Ra-228 11.li2.5 8.7t2.3 fSTW-2871 Water June-1982' .I-131. 6.5i0.3 4.4t0.7
^
STW-290 Water Aug. 1982 H-3 3210i140 2890i619 STW-291: WaterL Aug. 1982- I-131- 94.6t2.5 871151 h A-5
+ . ..
Table A-1. (continued) llk Concentration in pCi/lb Lab Sample Date TIML Result EPA Result Code Type Collected Analysis i2ac i3o, n=1d STW-292 Water Sept 1982 Sr-89 22.7t3.3 24.5i8.7 Sr-90 10.9*0.3 14.5i2.6 STW-296 Water Oct. 1982 Co-60 20.0il.0 20i8.7 Zn-65 - 32.3i5.1 24i8.7 Cs-134 15.311.5 19.018.7 Cs-137 21.Dil.7 20.018.7 STW-297 Water Oct. 1982 H-3 2470i20 2560i612 STW-298 Water Oct. 1982 Gross alpha 32i30 55t24 Gross beta 81.7i6.1 8118.7 Sr-89 <2 0 Sr-90 14.li0.9 17.2 2.6 Cs-134 <2 1.8 8.7 Cs-137 22.7t0.6 20i8.7 Ra-226 13.6i0.3 12.513.2 Ra-228 3.9tl.0 3.610.9 lll STW-301 Water Nov. 1982 Gross alpha 12.0il.0 19.0i8.7 Gross beta 34.0i2.7 24.0i8.7
.STW-302 Water Dec. 1982 I-131 40.010.0 37.0t10 STW-303 Water Dec. 1982 H-3 1940i20 1990i345 STW-304 . Water Dec. 1982 Ra-226 11.710.6 11.0 1.7 Ra-228 <3 0 STW-306- Water Jan. 1983 Sr-89 20.0i8.7 29.2i5 Sr-90 21.7i8.4 17.2tl.5 STW-307 Water Jan. 1983 Gross alpha 29.014.09 29.0i13 Gross beta 29.3 0.6 31.0 8.7 STM-309 Milk Feb. 1983 Sr-89 35t2.0 37i8.7 Sr-90 13.710.6 18i2.6 I-131 55.7t3.2 55110.4 Cs-137 29tl.0 26i8.7 Ba-140 <27 0 K-40 163715.8 1512t131 O
A-6
. Table 'A-1. '(continued)
Concentration in pCi/lb Lab Sample- Date TIML Result EPA Result
' Code Type Collected Analysis i2ac 1 37 , n=1d
.STW-310 Water 'Feb. 1983 H-3 2470180 2560i612 STW-311 Water. March 1983 Ra-226 11.9tl.3 12.7*3.3 Ra-228 <2.7 0
- STW-312 Water March 1983 Gross _ alpha 31.6i4.59 ' 31i13.4 Gross beta 27.0i2.0 28t8.7-
.STW-313 Water April 1983 :H 3240i80 3330i627 STW-316 Water May 1983 Gross alpha 94i7 64i19.9 Gross beta 133i5 149 12.4 Sr-89 19tl- 24 8.7-Sr-90 12*1 13i2.6
~Ra-226 7.910.4 8.St2.25 Co-60 30i2 30t8.7 Cs-134 27*2 33f8.7
, Cs-137 29i1 27i8.7 STW-317 Water May 1983 Sr-89 59.7i2.1 5718.7 Sr-90 33.711.5 38i3.3 STW-318-: f Water May 1983- Gross alpha 12.E*1.5 1118.7 Gross beta 49.4t3.9' 5718.7 L l STM-320 Milk June 1983 Sr-89 20iG 25i8.7 Sr-90 10*1 16i2.6 I-131 30il. -30t10.4 Cs-137 52*2 .47t8.7
, K 1553i57 1486t129 STW-321 ..Water June 1983' H-3 1470189 1529tS83-4 STW-322
- Water- June' 1983 Ra-226 4.3i0.2 4.8t1'.24
, Ra-228 <2.5 0
, ; STW-323.; Water -July 1983 Gross alpha 311 7i8.7 Gross beta 21*0 22i8.7 STW-324l Water-- August 1983- 'I-131 13.310.6 14t10.4 x) - A-7' r'7- .n. , ,, -*-.,m,_m , _..,,' , , , .- 5 vwt *-=>,v-e p~ - e es- - - * -5 +=-w> ev.-+--' - -
- e.>re,
Table A-1. (continued) Concentration in pCi/lb Lab Sample Date TIML Result EPA Result Code Type Collected Analysis i2ac 3o, n=1d STAF-326 Air August 1983 Gross beta 42t2 36*8.7 filter Sr-90 1412 10i2.6 Cs-137 19t1 1518.7 STW-328 Water Sept. 1983 Gross alpha 2.3i0.6 Si8.7 Gross beta 10.7tl.2 918.7 STW-329 Water Sept. 1983 Ra-226 3.010.2 3.110.81 Ra-228 3.210.7 2.0i0.52 STW-331 Water Oct. 1983 H-3 1303132 1210i570 STW-335 Water Dec. 1983 I-131 19.611.9 20i10.4 1 Results obtained by Teledyne Isotopes Midwest Laboratory as a participant in the environmental sample crosscheck program operated by the Intercomparison and Calibration Section, Quality Assurance Branch, Environmental Monitoring
- and Support Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), Las g
Vegas, Nevada. b All results are in pCi/1, except for elemental potassium (K) data which-are in mg/1. c Unless otherwise indicated, the TIML results given as the mean i20 standard deviations for three determinations. d USEPA results are presented as the known values i control limits of 30 for n=1. e NA = Not analyzed. f Analyzed but not reported to the EPA. 9 Results after calculations corrected (error in calculations when reported to EPA).. 4 O A-8 =
~
n f'] c. . .g - v v Q ITable A-2. Crosscheck: program:results, thermoluminescent dosimeters-(TLDs).
. mR Teledyne. . Average 12o d
. Lab TLD .. . Result Known (all-
, Code. Type. Measurement. 12o a Value participants).
2nd International Intercomparisonb 115-2b CaF2:Mn Gama-Field 17.011.9 17.lc. 1s,417,7
, Bulb Gama-Lab 20.814.1 21.3c 18.817.6 3rd International Intercomparisone 115-3e CaF2:Mn., Gama-Field 30.7i3.2 34.914.8f 31.513.0
-Bulb y Gamma-Lab 89.616.4 91.7il4.6f 86.2124.0
- 4th International Intercomparison9 115-49 CaF2:Mn Ganna-Field 14'111.1'
. '14.lil.4f 16.09.0~
Bulb Gama-Lab' (Low) 9.311.3 12.212.4f 12.017.6 Gama-Lcb (High) 40.411.4 45.819.2f 43.9113.2 5th International Intercomparisonh ll5-5Ah CaF2:Mn . Gama-Fiel d 31.411.8 30.016.01 30.2114.6 Bulb Gamma-Lab 77.415.8 75.2i7.61 75.0140.4 at beginning !, Gama-Lab - 96.615.8 88.418.81 90.7131.2 at the end I s
n Table A-2. (Continued)
~
mR Teledyne Average i 2a d Lab TLD Result Known (all Code Type Measurement 120a Value participants) 115-5Bh LiF-100 Gamma-Field 30.314.8 30.0161 30.2114.6 Chips Gama-Lab 81.117.4 75.217.61 75.8140.4 at beginning Gamma-Lab- 85.4111.7 88.418.8i 90.71131.2 at the end i
, alab result given is the mean 1,2a standard deviations of three determinations.
A bSecond International Intercomparison of Environmental Dosimeters conducted in April of 1976 by the Health o and Safety Laboratory (GASL), New York, New York, and the School of Public Health of the University of Texas, Houston, Texas. cValue determined by sponsor of the intercomparison using continuously operated pressurized ion chamber. dMean 12o standard deviations of results obtained by all laboratories participating in the program. eThird International Intercomparison of Environmental Dosimeters conducted in summer of 1977 by Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the School of Public flealth of the University of Texas, Houston, Texas. f Value 120 standard deviations as determined by sponsor of the intercomparison using continuously operated pressurized ion chamber. 9 Fourth International Intercomparison of Environmental Dosimeters conducted in summer of 1979 by the School of Public Health of the University of Texas, Houston, Texas. hFifth International Intercompari' son of Environmental Dosimeter conducted in fall of 1980 at Idaho Falls, Idaho and sponsored by the School of Public Health of the University of Texas, Houston, Texas and Environmental Measurements Labcratory, New York, New York, U.S. Department of Energy. l I Value determined by sponsor of the intercomparison using continuously operated pressurized ion chamber. I l O O O
1983 LAND-USE AND MILK ANIMAL CENSUS by Gary G. Downing TOLEDO EDISDN COMPANY DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION July 1983 LO
'r% PURPOSE A
The Toledo Edison Company performs an annual land-use and milk animal census to satisfy the requirements of Section 3.2 of Appendix B
. Davis-Besse-Technical Specifications and Section IV B.3 of Appendix I, 10CFR50. The location of all dairy cows, meat animals and vegetable
'~ gardens within 5 miles of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station were
, determined. . Locations of dairy goats within a 15-mile radius were also determined.
$' ) .
h d
~
1983 LAND-USE AND MILK ANIMAL CENSUS Background and' Methods Appendix I-states "The licensee shall' establish an appropriate surveillance and monitoring program for evaluating doses to individuals from principal pathways of exposure.'? ~ Appendix B states "an annual census of animals producing milk for human consumption shall be conducted at the -start of the grazing season to-determine their location and number with respect to
-the' sit's." l Pathways are defined as any means by which radionuclides can get into the luman' food chain. _ Pathways recorded in the land-use and milk' animal. census are residences, vegetable gardens, milk animals, and beef
; animals.' All the pathway locations must be determined within a five-mile radius of the station. All dairy goats within a fifteen-mile radius of the' station must.also be located.
The 1983 land-use census field work was done'May 16 and 23 and June 20, 1983. The milk animal census was done June-24, 1983. Local agencies, such as
-the Goat _ Dairyman' Association, Lucas County Agricultural Society _and the Ottawa -County, .Sandusky. County and Lucas County Cooperative Extension 1 Agencies provided information on dairy goat owners in their areas.
1The Ottawa County agency confirmed the presence of all beef cattle, milk
, _ cows and milk goats reported within the five-mile radius of the station.
The most significant differences between the 1982 and 1983' census dealt
'with milk' goat locations. -The following changes were recorded in the 1983
' census:
i i NNE? sect'or.- A vegetable garden pathway at 900 meters has-been added.
,;SE sector - A dairy goat pathway at 16,090 meters (10 miles) has been added. ' The dairyL; goat is a 4-H project.
SSE sector.- A beef cattlejpathway-has been added at.4,000 meters. The dairy goat pathway changedEfrom 7,320 meters to'24,140 meters (15.0 miles) due to goats at closer location not being milked
~
l"
=
~1n~1983.- This was confirmed by goat owners. The' dairy goat
! located at 24,140 meters is a 4-H project. l: l f 'S sei: tor'- The vegetable. garden pathway changed from 1,610 meters to l L1,990 m'eters. LA dairy goat pathway _'at.25,110 meters ? .(15.6 miles)'has been added. The dairy goat is a 4-H' l- - .proj ect. _
' SSW sector - The dairy goat' pathway changed ~from 5,270 meters to 24,620.
~
1 " - meters (15.3 miles) . . This change was due to the 5,270 meter location not:being on-any dairy goat list provided
~
L; by.the: agencies _ contacted. ' Confirmation by the property owner could not_be obtained.. ' ' y,.} . [M' ..[SWLsectorL- A' dairy goat pathwayLat 11,910 meters-(7.4 miles) has been 2added.. The dairy goats is a 4-H project. t . _ e 1 g g g 1 g w
O
*WSW sector - A dairy goat pathway at 11,100 meters (6.9 miles) has been added. The dairy goat is a 4-H proj ect.
W sector - The beef cattle pathway is no longer located at 980 meters. The property owners no longer have meat animals on their property. The residence and vegetable garden pathways remain at that location.
*WNW sector - The vegetable garden pathway changed from 2,830 meters to 2,500 meters. A dairy goat pathway at 16,580 meters (10.3 miles) has been added. The dairy goat is a 4-H proj ect.
- NW sector - A vegetable garden pathway has been added to the 1,160 meter location. Therefore the vegetable garden pathway at 2,210 meters will be deleted from the 1983 pathway identification list.
Result s The results of the 1983 land-use and milk animal census are presented in Table 1. O - O TABLE 1 PATHWAY, IDENTIFICATION Sector' ' Distance (meters) Receptor - 4
~N 870 -
. residence v-NNE 870 res'dence i ,
.900 residence, vegetable garden NE- 900 residence ENE* - .. ,
E* -
- .ESE* - -
6 'SE 16,090 -residence, vegetable garden, dairy goat SSE' 2,030 residence
-2'680
, residence, vegetable garden .
i 4,000' . residence, vegetable garden, beef cattle 24,140 residence, vegetable garden, dairy goat
~
'S- 1,130 residence 1,990' residence,' vegetable garden lG ,- '4,420 residence, vegetable garden, beef cattle
-25,110 residence, vegetable garden, dairy goat
.SSW 1,000 residence, vegetable garden.
'1,610- ' residence, vegetable garden, beef cattle
--24,620 residence, vegetable garden, dairy goat SW, .990 residence, vegetable gar. den m
4,970 residence, vegetable garden, beef. cattle.
. . 11,910 residence, vegetable garden, dairy goat WSW 2,650 ~ residence, vegetable garden
.-4,2507 . residence,-vegetable garden, dairy cows
'11,100- residence, vegetable garden, dairy goat-residence, vegetable garden
~
W'. 980 WNWf 1,730 _ residence 2,500. residence, vegetable garden'. 16,580 resideace, : vegetable garden, dairy goat - NW 1,160 ' residence, vegetable garden 1.- NNW3 -1,250 residence, vegetable garden e
' 5 ectors S over Lake Erie:and marsh areas, n._ . -n 2-4 -
m
i I i SECTION 4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE IMPACT OF THE I DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION
.O
- = ...
ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE IMPACT i 0F THE-DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION JUNE 1983 O PREPARED FOR: TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY TOLEDO, OHIO SUBMITTED BY: ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. 240 Commercial Street Boston, MA O
~ ac. wa . .
. TABLE OF CONTENTS 'O Page
SUMMARY
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1 2.0 PREOPERATIONAL SURVEY 3 2.1 Measurement Locations and Conditions 3 2.2 Results and Discussion 3 3.0 PREDICTION OF NOISE LEVELS AT NOISE SENSITIVE LOCATIONS 5
~O 3.1 Prediction Techniques 5 l l3.2 Major Plant Noise Sources 6 3.2.1 Cooling Tower 6 3.2.2- Main Transformer 6 3.2.3 Ventilation System Noise 7 3.2.4 Power Relief Valves 3 3.3 Combined Predicted Plant Noise at Sensitive Locations 9 3.4 Comparison of Predicted to Preoperational Noise Levels 9 4.0 - FULL-'LO AD OPERATIONAL NOISE SURVEY 11 O
; m. m .
4.1 Survey Methods and Equipment 11 13 9 4.2 Results and Discussion 4.2.1 Power Plant Noise Characteristics and Noise Levels 14 4.2.1a Cooling Tower 15 4.2.1b Pump House 15 4.2.1c Transformer 16 4.2.1d Propagation to Site Boundary 17 4.2.2 Sensitive Location Noise Characteristics and Noise Levels 19 4.2.2a S2, S3 and S4 20 4.2.2b Nearest Resident, SS 22 lll 4.2.2c Nearest Wildlife Refuge, S1 23 4.3 Measured Operational L 50 N se Level Contour Map 25 26 5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS Carroll Township School, S3 26 5.1 Locust Point Cemetery, S4 27 ; 5.2 28 5.3 Magee State Marsh, S2 Ottawa National Wildlif e Refuge, S1 29 j 5.4 l Nearest Resident, SS 30 l 5.5 l (Bi c.
o6. 0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 32 Tables and Figures 35
. References 52
. - Map 1: . Measurement and Noise Sensitive Locations in'the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station - Map 2: Measured Operational L Co in the Vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuckhar~ntour Power Map Station Appendix A: Frequency Spectrum Analysis for Select Operational Measurement Points Appendix.B: .Sta,tistical Distribution Histograms for Select Operational Measurement Locations Appen' dix-C: Cumulative Percent Distribution Curves from Histogram Values for Select Operational Measurement Locations-L O: 4 e 'i\ )'
- ~c Tz:n ::e .
e .w, y 4. , . - . -.- , . ,# ..e-,, , . - ..-r --...-_,.---.--,4, , - . . . _ , , -+- .,..m.-..,_,.-me-,. - . . , - - - - - . . , ,_. .--m-. _ _ , - -
.- . =. _. _
)
LIST OF TABLES i TABLE TITLE I Preoperational Noise Sampling Locations II Meteorological Data for Preoperational Survey III Preoperational L un ressure 50 Level Measurements , IV- Location of Closest Noise Sensitive Areas L V Predicted Noise Levels at Sensitive Locations for Cooling Tower
.VI- Predicted Noise Levels at Sensitive Locations for Transformer
! VII Predicted Noise Levels at Sensitive Locations for Steam Relief Valves i VIII Total Predicted Noise Due to Full g, Load Operation of Davis-Besse l 3-)
.- -a ~n .atyn m-
i I IX On Site Noise Sampling Locations for Full Load Operational Noise Survey X Hourly Average Meteorological Data During Full Load Operational Noise Survey XI Results of the On Site Operational Noise Survey XII Results of the Operational Noise Survey at S 2, S3 and S4 XIII Results of the Operational Noise I Survey at SS XIV Results of the Operational Noise Survey at S1 O
- 8. . -.
SUMMARY
O Substantial ambient noise measurements and analyses have been u s'e d to judge'the environmental noise impact of the Toledo-Edison Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. This report was prepared by Acoustic Technology, Inc. (ATI) for the Toledo
' Edison Company as part 'of 'the environmental assessment required by the NRC-in Section 4.1 of Appendix B, Davis-Besse Technical Specifications. The ATI report and analysis 4
-includes:
- 1. A summary of the_ preoperational noise survey conducted by the NUS Corporation at the Davis-Besse site during May of 1974.
- 2. The prediction of noise emissions f rom - the major .
r-noise sources of the operating station and the x . . :<.v. -s_ . Likely impact of these noise sources at the_ nearest noise sensitive locations. 3.- An explanation of the operational noise survey _ conducted by.ATI during May 1983. The survey procedures, equipment and cresults 'are discussed.
- 4. An impact analysis based on the results of the operational and preoperational noise' surveys. This
=mc =mm u
i l l analysis considers absolute standards set by the EPA and the relative comparison of measured g preoperational noise levels to measured existing levels during plant operation.
- 5. A list of conclusions and recommendations based on the impact analysis and predictive methods. .,
O 1 O
~-- -
1
(G
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The noise impact of a power plant needs to be determined as
.part of- the NRC Licensing procedure. To assess the environmental noise impact -of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, a series of noise surveys and analyses have been conducted. A preoperational noise survey was performed by the NUS Corporation in May of 1974. As part of the operational; survey, Acoustic Technology,-Inc. (ATI) conducted a predictive analysis which. af f orded insight to the possible power plant noise sources and provided-a quantitative prediction as to the j effect- of the. operational power plant on the existing noise Levels.~ Further, ATI performed an extensive operational noise V(3 survey which provided a reliable, statistical statement as to the environmental noise conditions. Finally, with the data from-the' noise surveys and-predictions, ATI assessed the l
impact of the operational power station and made a number of - l conclusions and recommendations. This report begins with a brief summary of the NUS L ' preoperational survey and discusses the measurement locations, survey conditions and results. The next section - continues with .the predictive analysis. Each of the identified plant noise sources is considered and the absolute levels due to the plant operation are tabulated. The results of these k-w.) '
. ..; ; ., T ZC, , JC :cr
predictions are shown in Tables V through VIII. Chapter 3.0 concludes with a comparison of predicted to preoperational noise levels in the vicinity of the power station. Chapter O 4.0 continues with the full load operational noise survey. l The survey methods and equipment are described in detail and the results are discussed. The survey results are tabulated in Tables XI thru XIV. Appendix A contains typical frequency spectra from select measurement locations and times. Appendix B presents typical noise variation histograms.from the noise sensitive locations. Appendix C contains cumulative percent distribution curves derived from the histogram values of Appendix B. Chapter 5.0 contains the environmental impact analysis. Each of the five closest noise sensitive areas is considered in light of the EPA noise regulations, and the measured operational noise levels are compared with h preoperational noise levels. Chapter 6.0 outlines a number of conclusions and recommendations based upon the analysis of Chapters 3.0 thru 5.0. O e m 2 u1i:3 ~3s. ' ; C '.f ~ '
2.0. PREOPERATIONAL SURVEY 2.1 Measurement Locations and Conditions j l In order. to provide a reference point against which the operational impact of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station could be judged, a preoperational noise survey was conducted by the.NUS Corporation during May' of 1974. The survey included measurements taken during the periods of daytime (0700-1900 hr), evening (1900-2200 hr) and nighttime (2 200-0700 h r) . The preoperational measurement locations can be seen on Map 1 and a brief description of each site is Listed in Table I. The meteorological data obtained during the survey from the on-site meteorological tower and l .O suaatemented with data from nearby eirports are shown in Table II.- 2.2. Results and Discussion The .p rincipal noise sources during the survey were highway traffic along Route 2 and wave action along the shores of Lake Erie. The weekday daytime measurements included noise contributions from the construction of the plant itself. At the time of the survey, however, a large portion of the heavy outdoor construction was completed so that construction noise was . negligible compared to that of the principal noise sources. Other audible sources of noise during the survey L AT-
included wind, birds, rifle fire from Camp Perry and distant Lawnmowers. There were no intermittant or particularly annoying sounds which required octave band analysis. The L O 50 sound -levels at each measurement location and each sampling time are listed in Table III. O O
~
.. 12: :-
t 3.0 PREDICTION OF NOISE LEVELS AT NOISE SENSITIVE
/N.
LOCATIONS 3.1 Prediction Techniques The noise levels due to the operation of the Davis-Besse Nuclear. Power Station at each of the noise sensitive Locations around the plant (see Table IV and Map 1) can be predicted.
,This is'done by identifying major noise generating equipment on the-plant site and knowing the relative location of this equipment with respect to the noise sensitive areas. In doing the noise level predictions, four- pieces of plant equipment were considered as the major. contributors to noise in the ,
areas surrounding the power plant. These noise sources include the cooling tower, the main transformer unit, the ventilation system for the turbine and transformer, and the steam relief valves. With- specific information about this equipment,- both the equivalent sound levels and octave band sound levels due to each piece of equipment at each of the noise sensitive locations can be predicted. After the contribution of each noise source at each sensitive location has been determined, the Logarithmic sum of these separate c ont ributions can be taken to yield the total predicted noise level a t- each sensitive location due to the power plant , operation. 1 i- (7
~j -S-l I
l : U sna "ics::ct;O" W ;. i
3.2 Major Plant Noise Sources 3 . 2 .' 1 Cooling Tower The cooling tower on the Davis-Besse site is a natural draft, counter flow cocling tower. It has a full load operating capacity of 480,000 gallons of water per minute. Contribution of noise due to the cooling tower at each of the.five r.e a r e s t noise sensitive locations was predicted using a method developed by Capano and Bradley . The results of this predictive technique are tabulated in Table V. The noise from the cooling tower is a result of the cooling water splashing in the tower's collecting pool. The water enters the tower and -i s sprayed over vertical sheets of board-like fill material. The water flows through these sheets and is cooled g by the natural draft of air flowing upward through these same sheets. After the water passes completely through these vertical spaces, it drips into the collecting pool at the base of the tower. The splashing of the drops of cooled water into the collecting pool sounds like a waterfall and produces noise of the same nature: constant and continuous. f 3.2.2 , Main Transformer The main transformer on the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station is rated at 980 MVA and is 30.2 feet high, 31.6 feet long and 15.7 feet wide. Typical large transformers are potential
- ,2 rma t .
i
contributors to pure tones emitted'by the station. The pu re tones are generated in the core of the transformer by b magnetostrictive effects at the fundamental frequency of 120 Hz and its associated harmonics-of 240, 360.and 480 Hz. The contributions to the predicted noise levels and octave band Levels at the five nearest noise sensitive locations of the main transformer were calculated using a technique developed
.by Gordon . In propagating the acoustic predictions from the plant site to the noise sensitive locations, attenuations due to spherical wave divergence and atmospheric absorption were considered. The results of these calculations are shown in Table VI.
3.2.3 Ventilation System Noise A V The-significant fan noise emissions from the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power- Station are a result of the turbine building exhaust and ventilation systems. The turbine exhaust system i j consists.of 6 axial type fans operating at 485 RPM, 55,000 cfm l ! and a p r e s s u r e -- r i s e of 0.25 inches of water. The ventilation I system consists of 6 centrifugal type fans operating at 939 RPM, 10,000 cfm and 1.75 inches of wat'er pressure rise; plus' 4
' c e n t r i f u g a l- fans operated at 990 RPM, 10,000 cfm and a pressure rise of 2 inches of water. Fan noise is generated by the movement of air across the pressure differential created by the rotation of :the fan blades. The characteristic i frequency of the noise lies in the octave band containing the O l ;-4 CUS~ 0 iECHnctCGY WC i
- ,i w ,y --
w - yw - -,--z.- - - - - - , - . - . - 47y-9mp- m w- , 7
- m y -w
frequency which is a function of RPM and the number of blades
~
(i.e. f = RPM X no. of blades /60). The noise emitted from the fans was calculated using a method described by the Edison 0 Electric Institute . The results of these calculations suggest that fan noise will not be a contributor to the power plant noise impact at any of the noise sensitive locations. The fan noise Levels will be well below ambient noise levels and can be neglected as contributors to noise Levels at the sensitive locations. 3.2.4 Power Relief Valves The main power relief valves are used to dissipate excess steam which resuLts from unpredictable changes in station operating load. Davis-Besse Power Nuclear Power Station has $ two atmospheric vent valves in the steam system. Noise is generated from these valves because of turbulent flow from the valve orifice passing downstream through the standing shock waves, creating shock interaction noise, and from the turbulent jet exiting from the discharge pipe mixing with the atmosphere and causing jet mixing noise. The noise emitted from the power vent valves was calculated using a method described by the Edison Electric Institute . The 1 predictions based on this method are shown in Table VII for each of the octave band frequencies and for an equivalent sound level (L eq ) while steam is being discharged. These values are deceptively large because the valves operate only 9
~
m . _ _ - - . ____._mm_._. -- -
intercittently, end high noise levels for short periods of time wilL not effect the equivalent day-night sound level
.g v- i
'ndicator-required by the EPA.
3.3 Combined Predicted Plant Noise g Sensitive Locations Tables.V thru VII predict the separate noise contribution at ea'ch noise sensitive location-due to various noise sources on t h e ' Davi s-Besse site. -These values have been LogarithmicalLy
- summed to yield the composite total noise prediction at each noise sensitive location. The results of this summation are s
shown in Table VIII.~The octave band analysis and L noise levels were included at each sensitive location and these values reflect the combined predicted noise from the cooling t o w e r-. and s'ain transformer, the major continuous noise . Sources. 3.4 Comparison of Predicted to Preoperational Noise Levels t. E x a m i n a t i o.n o f '.'a b l e VIII shows that only three of the five i
. identified noise sensitive locations exhibit predicted noise i-Levels which are large enough to have a possible effect on
' ambient noise ~ conditions. Predicted noise levels for S2 and S3 are weLL below ambient levels. Of the remaining three, i
f sensitive locations S1 and SS are both on the Lakefront. The _9_
. m ,= :n n.
L
preoperational survey results suggest that because of wave and wind ambient noise, the predicted plant noise may be partially masked at these locations. The Locust Point Cemetery, S4, will be less effected by wave noise, but wind and traffic noise from Route 2 will have a great effect on ambient noise levels. Comparison with preoperational ambient noise levels suggestr that at this location, predicted plant noise may produce an audible pure tone at the 125 Hz octave' band, where predicted transformer noise slightly exceeds ambient levels. The noise attenuating effect of structuret between the transformer building and S4, however, will likely reduce this , noise to below ambient levels. The comparison of the predictive analysis to the preoperational survey suggests that the results of the full load operational s u'r v e y should yield the highest noise levels at S1 and SS. The absolute value of these levels will be dependent mostly on existing wind and wave noise and slightly on power plant noise. Also, S4 may exhibit noise levels in the 125 Hz octave band which slightly exceed ambient levels, but should not exhibit any large change from preoperational conditions. Finally, at sensitive locations S2 and S3 there wiLL-be absolutely no contribution to existing noise levels by the full load operation of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. O
~
- : c,5 r .: IL^:w:LCT! a C.
f 4.0. FULL LOAD OPERATIONAL NOISE SURVEY r) 'b 4.1 Survey Methods and Equipment A full load operational noise survey was conducted during May 23-25, 1983, by ATI consultants. The survey locations are shown on Map 1'and a brief description of each is provided in Table IV and Table IX. Because of the results of the p redicted noise level analysis (see Chapter 3.0), the bulk if the noise measurements where conducted at sensitive locations S1 and SS. Locations S2, S3 and S4 were visited at varying times of the day in order to verify the predicted impact. Finally, a number of on-site sampling locations were chosen so that the power plant noise could be characterized and its 8
) p ropagation to of f-site locations could be monitored.
The methodology used in conducting the ambient noise survey incorporates ANSI ~ S3W50, which establishes guidelines for the evaluation of multiple sound sources in community noise.
.The survey locations and periods were chosen to yield a statistical. statement of noise in the vicinity of the plant.
Also, requirements as outlined in the Proposed Environmental Protection Plan for the Davis-Besse. Nuclear Power Station (reference: NRC letter dated December 21, 1982) were considered when performing the noise survey. O C LE . .s.
At each measurement location and time, a Nagra IV-SJ instrumentation tape recorder was used to sample the typical ambient noise environment. The recorder complies with ANSI S6.1-1973 (Quelifying a Sound Data Acquisition System). The microphone used was a B&K (Bruel & Kjaer) Type 4165 condenser microphone with the proper windscreen attached to a B&K Type 2215 Sound Level Meter operated in the linear code. For each measurement location and time, a 1-3 minute tape-recorded sample was taken. Also, direct octave band, C-weighted and A-weighted sound level meter measurements were made. The - recorded samples were then analyzed using a B&K Type 4426 Noise Level Analyzer which samples the varying sound level ten times a second for the duration of each tape-recorded sample. The analyzer derives the A-weighted L 10' '50' '90 8"d 'eq sound. levels from these data, plus a statistical histogram of h the sound level variation. A B&K Type 2312 Alphanumeric Printer was used to produce the probability distribution histograms of select locations. All instruments are portable and battery-operated, requiring no power source. At the beginning of each tape, a calibration tone emitted from a B&K Type 4230 Calibrator was recorded. All recording adjustments were noted and recorded on the tapes. Any variancp from proper calibration was noted and proper correetions were made to the data. This procedure was followed in compliance with ANSI St.10-1966 (Calibration of Microphones). O
.nl ; 't . 1 :-
I
In order to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of the
~
. noise emitted from the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, its propagation and impact, a number of frequency spectrum plots were made using a B&K Type 2031 Narrow Band Spectrum Analyzer.
'The analyzer produces a spectral plot of frequency versus
, Lamplitude and reveals the frequency content of the analyzed sound signal. This allows the identification of any r'e c u r ri ng noise at specific frequencies and indicates if the characteristic fiequencies of the plant are audible at any of the noise- sensitive -Locations. ,
.4.2 .Results and Discussion l
. In -.'a c co rdance with the specifications- for the Environmental l
I Noise Survey of the Davis-Besse Unit No. 1, meteorological data { collected.by the on-site meteorological tower during the survey-are shown in Table X. The data include the date and time plus the hourly. average wind speed, wind direction, j . temperature, temperature lapse rate, dew point and relative I- humidity. .The collected noise data are shown in Tables XI thru XIV. These tables- include an identification code, the
-date, time, wind speed, wind-direction,_ L 10' '50' '90 and L l~~
I ' statistical descriptors-plus octave' band sound pressure levels L L at each location for each measurement time. These weather l l data' wyre compiled from 15 minute - average data collected at l- . the 10 meter-Levet from the on-site meteorological tower, p . I
' JST'C TEHNOLCG't IS '
I
]
except where noted. Frequency spectrum plots are included in Appendix A_for typical measurement locations and times. The plots are a representation of sound pressure levels at O different frequencies. These spectra will allow identification of plant noise sources and their impact at the noise sensitive locations. Appendix B contains typical histograms of the statistical distribution of varying noise levels at the identified noise sensitive locations. These histograms provide the range in sound levels that are found at the measurement points. Appendix C contains cumulative percent distribution curves derived from the histogram values in Appendix B. 4.2.1 Power Plant Noise Characteristics and Noise Levels G The on-site survey locations (shown in Table IX and Map 1) provide information useful in characterizing the full load operational power plant noise spectra and its propagation to the site boundaries. Table XI shows the date, time, weather conditions, L statistical descriptors plus 10' 50' '90 and L octave band noise levels for each on-site measurement location and time. The statistical data provide insight into the identification of the major noise sources. The octave band breakdown plus the frequency spectrum plots in Appendix A ] i provide information about the noise content of each piece of analyzed plant equipment. O _- n.
l 4.2.1a -cooling Tower ; b v The cooling. tower noise is characterized by measurement location C1. This measurement point (approximately 100 feet from the cooling tower) will, because of its close location to
~
the tower, provide noise information which will reflect only the contribution of noise from the tower itself. Table XI and Appendix A.1 suggest that the characteristic cooling tower noise is the same as was predicted; constant and continuous. The equivalent noise level (L ) is approximately 71. dB A at eq this close point. The octave band noise-levels and spectral analysis indicate that there are ne dominant frequencies which will cause pure tone impact or which will propagate to any of the noise-sensitive locations. Also, the predictive technique employed in Section 3.2.1 predicts a noise level of
.approximately-75 dBA at 100 feet away from the cooling tower.
l This suggests that the cooling tower predicted levels are ' f slightly high' (about 3-4 dBA) at each of the sensitive locations. Modifying Table' V by 3 dBA would result in, low L
,+ e4 values. This suggests no noise impact of the cooling tower at the noise sensitive locations.
4.2.1b Pump House The pump house noise can-best be characterized by looking at-the results of the measurements taken at G1, approximately 50 O feet east of the pump house. The pump house noise, regardless 7 t ;- - "5c x:; y r-
of weather conditions, seems to be very high, as is indicated by the statistical descriptors of Table XI. The frequency spectrum analysis, Appendix A.2 and A.3, suggest that the pump O. i 1 house noise has a large component at 967.5 Hz and its ) associated harmonics of 1935, 2902.5, 3870 and 4837.5 Hz. ! Examination of the octave band noise level breakdown verifies this. The octave band containing 967.5 Hz, the 1000 Hz band, shows a value 6-15 decibels higher than the neighboring octave bands. This suggests that if the pump house noise will have an impact at the nearest noise sensitive locations, it will be distinguished by a noticeable amplitude at the 967.5 Hz frequency and an apparent increase in the 1000 Hz octave band. 4.2.1c Transformer O The transformer noise is bent characterized by observing the results of the measurements taken at T1, approximately 50 feet north of the transformer. The statistical descriptors of Table XI suggest that the transformer noise is quite high. The equivalent noise level (L ) ranged from 72 to 76 dBA at 50 feet from the transformer. Also, the octave band noise levels indicate the presence of a harmonic in the 125 Hz band, as was predicted in Section 3.2.2. The frequency spectrum analysis (see Appendix A.4 and A.5) shows the clear presence of the harmoaic at 120 Hz and the associated higher frequencies of 240, 360, 480, 600, 720 and 840 Hz. The 967.5 Hz spike evident in Appendix A.4 and A.5 is the pump house
~
; . m S L _ I_
i j
fundacental frequency. The transforcer noise, as well as the pump- house noise, therefore, exhibits distinct frequency
,(
content. This allowed the identification of the contribution of the transformer noise to the noise leve'.s at each of the other measuring l o c a t i o n s' . 4.2.1d Propagation g Site Boundary In order to study the propagation of the identifiable plant noise to the site boundary, noise measurements were made along a line running north-east from the transformer (i.e. T2 and T3; see Map 1) and at the intersection of the site boundary with a'line connecting the transformer to the nearest resident (i.e. T4; see Map 1). l L The results of the measurements made at T2 suggest that the combined noise emitted from the transformer and pump house is a'ttenuated about 15 decibels in the 700 feet from T1. The statistical descriptors of Table XI, t he" o ct ave band noise levels (see Table XI) and the frequency spectrum amplitudes
-(see Appendix A ) ', are all attenuated after_ moving from T1 to
,. T2. The frequency spec'tra (see Appendix A.6 and A.7) still. exhibit pronounced' spikes at the transformer harmonics (120, 240, 360, 480, 600, 720 and.840 Hz) and the-pump house fundamental f requency. -(967.5 Hz). These spikes, though, are much lower:in amplitude than the measurements at T1. l lV D' - (
. '~ s . yf, c '
l l l I Moving even farther along this north-easterly line, measurement point T3 (approximately 2500 feet from the transformer) is encountered. At this measurement point, the l increased distance from the power plant center has only a slight attenuating effect on the statistical descriptors, L 10' L as is seen in Table XI. The contribution of 50' '90 and L , the power plant to the measured noise Levels at this -measurement location, however, has been largely attenuated by the increased distance. This is seen by comparing the octave band breakdown from T2 and T3 (see Table XI) and comparing the frequency spectra (see Appendix A) of the same locations (i . e. T2 and T3). The octave band noise levels in the ranges characteristic of the power plant (i.e. 125 and 1000 Hz) have been attenuated by between 5 and 20 decibels. Also, the frequency spectra (see Appendix A.8 - A.10) show decreases in g the a mp li tude of the harmonics at 120, 240, 360, 480, 600, 720, 840 and 967.5 Hz of at least 15 decibles. This suggests that the statistical descriptor noise Levels have remained between 50 and 60 dBA (which corresponds to an L dn *"9'
- 56 to 66 dBA at the site boundary) mainly because of ambient-noise sources and only negligibly because of the power plant noise sources.
Figure 1 is a three dimensional graph showing the frequency spectrum as a function of distance away from the transformer. This figure pictorially summarizes the changes in the f requency . spect rum of the plant noise as one moves away from
. u =
p tho plent. As was noted before, the amplitude of the dominant plant . frequencies noticeably decreases as the distance from the transformer increases. As the distance from the transformer approaches the distance of the nearest resident, SS, from the plant, the frequency spectrum suggests that the
~
power plant noise wiLL fall below the ambient noise level. , The results of the measurements taken at T4 further support this conclusion. All of the statistical noise levels (see Table XI) are quite low. This can be accounted for by the calm wind conditions which prevailed during the measurement and the increase in distance from the Lakefront (which wilL decreas~e wave noise) as compared to T3. The octave band noise Levels are consistent with ambient conditions (see Table XI)
] and the frequency spectrum analysis shows only one small spike L at 120 Hz (see Appendix A.11). Obviously, the dominant plant frequencies are not present and ambient noise is contributing, in large part, to the existing noise levels.
4.2.2 Sensitive Location Noise Characteristics and Noise Levels The off-site measurement locations (shown in Map 1 and Table
~
IV) provide - the required information in order to assess the operational impact of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station.
. Tables XII thru XIV show the date, time, weather conditions, L
10' 50' '90 and L,q statistical descriptors plus octave band O,.
\~d -:CUET'C TECH !CLCG/ 'J M '
noise levels for each of the measurement locations and times. The statistical data provide information concerning absolute (g) noise levels at each of the sensitive locations. The octave band analyses plus the frequency spectra in Appendix A provide insight to the source of ti e noise at each of the measurement points. 4.2.2a S2, S3 and S4 To best understand the noise evident a_t S2, a nearby wildlife refuge, the measurement locations and times S2A, S2B and S2C wilL be most informative. The weather conditions, date, time, statistical descriptors and octave band noise levels can be found in Table XII. The spectrum analysis of S2B and S2C can be found in Appendix A.12 and A.13. As can be seen from Map 1, the measurement location S2 is in close proximity to the Lakefront. From this, it is expected that the noise levels present at this location wilL be due I. a r g e l y to wave noise and wilL be strongly dependent on the wind speed. The results , ta.bulated in Table XII tend to support this conclusion. The statistical descr.iptors, 10, L 50' '90 and L,q are high for the measurement times with strong winds and relatively low for times with low wind' speeds. The octave band noise levels as welL as the' frequency spectra indicate that there are no pure tones and that the dominant power plant frequencies are not present.
)
O 1
S3A, S3B and S3C -censurement times provide detailed information concerning the ambient noise at s'ensitive location O S3, the Carrott Towashin Sc8eot (see aan 1>. Table x11 contains atL of the relevant information concerning the measurement site and times and Appendix A.14 'and A.15 are the frequency spectra for S3B and S3C respectively. The statistical descriptors, L 10' 50' '90 8"d 'n ' "Y L" (L eq worst cases are below- 50 dBA) so that little consideration needs to be given to the impact of full Load operation of the power plant. The octave band noise levels and frequency spectra show no pure tones or power plant characteristic frequencies. This suggests that, as was predicted, plant noise is not audible at tne nearest school. The ambient noise at the nearest- cemetery, S4, is best characterized by the measurement points S4A, S4B and S4C. Table XII contains relevant weather information, the statistical.descriptors L 10' '50' '90 *"d 'eq Pt"* th' "**"' band noise levels. Appendix A.16 and A.17 are the frequency spectrum plots for S4B and S4C respectively. Again, there is
- a. strong correlation between the wind speed and the L 10' 50'
'L 90
'"d
'n n ise levels. The higher the wind speed, the
! -higher the recorded noise levels. The measurement taken l ! during the calmest conditions, S4C, indicates that the absolute noise levels are very low. The L,q value is only 41 I dBA, with ~ cont ributions. enti rely from non-plant related noise sources. This conclusion is further supported by the Orm l m m .:c Te : m ote m c.
froqucncy spactrun plots and octavo bend noise levels. The spectrum analysis (see Appendix A) shows no dominant plant frequencies and the octave band noise levels (see Table XII) h show no pure tones in the frequency ranges of interest (i.e. 125 and .1000 Hz octave bands). This suggests that the plant provides a negligible contribution to the noise at the Locust Point Cemetery. 4.2.2b Nearest Resident, SS Table XIII contains all of the relevant 'information concerning the measurements taken at location 55. The table lists an identification code, the date, time, temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, wind direction, L 10' 50' '90 and L noise levels, plus the octave band analysis at each g measurement time. Typical frequency spectra can be found in Appendix A.18 through A.23. Because of the proximity of this location to the Lakefront, the measured noise levels wiLL exhibit a noticeable dependence on wind speed. This expectation is supported by the information contained in Table XIII. The statistical descriptors, L 10' 50' '90 *"d
'n are strongly dependent on wind speed. High wind speeds (approximately 12-20. mph) exhibit L values in the range of 55 to 65 dBA. Lower wind speeds (between 8-12 mph) provide L values between 50 and 55 dBA. Calm wind speeds (0-8 mph) exhibit a range of 45 to 50 dBA. This suggests that wind and wave noise account for the major portion of the measured noise
;m.m.
Levels. The octave band noise levels in Table XIII show no presence of pure tones which may be snnoying to the residents. The frequency spectra (see Appendix A.18 thru A.23) show that the noise measured at SS exhibits a slight dependence on the power plant.- The 120 Hz and 967.5 Hz frecuencies exhibit smalL constant spikes (about 40 and 30 dB respectively) in alL of the spectra. Toe annoyance potential of these pure tones is dependent upon the background noise levels. If the background noise levels are high, as with high winds, it is impossible to notice the plant noise. If the background noise levels are low, the plant noise can be observed in the linear frequency spectra. However, the human ear does not respond to noise in a linear fashion. Figure 2 shows three weighting scales which are used by acoustic engineers. The A scale-was
^
derived to simulate the frequency response of the human ear. Thi s' figure reveals that the human e a r. deemphasizes low f requencies. -(below 1000 Hz) and slightly favors frequencies between 1000 and 5000 Hz. This leads to the conclusion that, even with low ambient noise levels, the plant noise wilL have no annoyance effect on the residents at SS. 4.2.2c Nearest Wildlife Refuge, S1 The results of the measurements performed at the Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge' are contained in Table XIV. This i
' table Lists,.as before, an identificat' ion code, the date,
{v time, relative humidity, wind speed, wind direction, L 10' 50'
- -: 5 ' ,, T:C m :. 2G / -.
I l
L 90 and L,q noise levels, plus the octave band breakdown at every measurement time. Appendix A.24 through A.29 contain g frequency spectra for select measurement times and conditions. The measurement point S1, as with SS, exhibits noise levels which are dependent on prevailing wind and wave conditions. As before, high wind speeds (12-20 mph) produce L values in the 54-70 dBA range. Lower speeds (7-12 mph) provide L,q values in the range of 50-55 dBA. Very low wind speeds (0-7 mph) exhibit a range of 45-50 dBA as the L,q noise level. The octave band frequency breakdown shows no' unusual or noticeable pure tones. Lastly, the frequency spectra in Appendix A indicate smalL noise spikes of 45 and 30 dB at 120 and 967.5 Hz respectively. As at SS, these spikes are relativeLy constant over the cross section of conditions and times, and depending upon O become more or less potent' ally audible background noise levels. Hence, the power plant characteristic frequencies wilL be noticeable in the linear spectrum only under low background noise conditions. As was previously discussed, the response of the human ear to noise composed of different frequencies is not linear. The A weighting scale (shown in Figure 2) closely simulates the f actual human ear response. , Because of the deemphasis of low frequencies (less than 1000 Hz), the plant noise wilL not be noticeable to humans at the nearest wildlife refuge. O 3.
' ~
. .1
f . I 1 4.3 -Measured Operational [50 N se Level Contour Map ^ O-The operational measurement noise data for the Davis-Besse Nuclear. Power Station was used to estimate an A-weighted L 50 noise' Level. contour map (see Map 2). The contour Lines were estimated-by the ATI sound propagation computer model. The computer model takes into account sound propagation loss P i' factors. These factors are:
- 1. Atmospheric Absorption
- . 2. Spherical Wave Divergence
- 3. Ground Condition Effects j- 4 ~. . Local Barrier Effects, and.
! 5. Wind Effects.. I l To predict the sound contours, yearly average meteorolog'ical data (i.e.' temperature, relative humidity, wind speed and wind [- direction) were used. ALL ground conditions .and locat topographical features were obtained from direct readings of the appropriate USGS-maps. Actual measurement noise levels and locations were used by the computer modet.to extrapolate
~
'the measured noise levels-to encompass the entire vicinity of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. The results of this analysis provided~ the 40, 50, 60 and 70 dBA sound-contours and these-contours were then. drawn on..a site map.
750 ..,.CIACC G~: l
. a l
1 l 5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS h In order .to be able to objectively judge the operational the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station on the impact of conditions, two scales need to be environmental noise employed. One scale converts the equivalent sound Levels (L,q) to an equivalent day-night sound level (LDN) which adds a weighting for the more sensitive evening hours. The EPA (i.e. as a m'eans of judging uses this sound level L DN) absolute noise in a residential community. EPA guidelines require that the L DN f r a given community be less than 55 dBA. Comparing the preoperational to operational noise levels Stevens, Rosenblith .and Bolt suggest) provides another (as scale against which the impact of the power plant can be judged. If measured noise levels exhibit no appreciable increase due to the full load operation of the staticn, then it can be concluded that ambient noise is masking the noise produced by the operation of the plant. Finally, the HUD criteria of classifying noise environments as " acceptable",
"normally unacceptable", or "normally acceptable", " unacceptable" wiLL be considered [8, 9, 10] .
5.1 Carroll Township School, H i The impa~ct of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station at the nearest school (i.e. S3) . was predicted to be negligible. The g I Acoustic TECHNOLOGY INC.
recorded measurements performed at this location confirmed this fact. None of the measured L values, including those taken-with extremely high winds, exceeded 48 dBA. This converts to an L DN f 54 dBA. During calm winds, the L,q was
. recorded as 36 dBA which is equivalent to an L DN sound level of 42 dBA. Obviously, the operation of the power plant does Also, not effect the noise levels at this sensitive location.
the octave band sound levels indicate the lack of pure tones caused by the ~ station near the school. The measured noise levels at S3 are considered "normally acceptable" by HUD
, criteria. ,
5.2 Locust Point Cemetery, M t A l V The impact of the plant operation at the nearest cemetery can best be judged by comparing the preoperational survey results directly to the operational measurements. P4 and S4 are measurement points which are the same location tested before the plant started full Load operation and after full load operation - began. The preoperational survey results provide L sound levels in the 35-46 dBA range. Only under extremely 50 windy conditions (about 20 mph wind speeds) did operational survey results exceed chis range. Aside from this extremely high wind speed, the measured L sound levels are between 40 and 48 dBA. These values correspond to L DN sound levels of 4 and 54 dBA respectiveLy, both of which lie within the EPA The octave band analysis suggests that there p- requirements. V (fh Acoustic TECHNOLOGY
are no pure tones present at the cemetery. The noise measurements at S4 are classified as "normally acceptable" by O HUD criteria. 5.3 Magee State Marsh, S2 The Magee State Marsh is located very close to the shore cf Lake Erie. Because of this close proximity to the lakefront, it can be expected that measured noise levels will be high due to wind and wave noise. As Table XII indicates, the measured noise levels at S2 are rather high (L dn values range from H to 64 dBA) and do illustrate a correspondence with wind speed, (i.e. the higher the wind speed the higher the measured noise levels). Also, the predictive techniques employed in Chapter 3.0 suggest that S2 is too far from the power plant to notice h any effect from plant operation. This is confi.med by examining the frequency spectrum plots A.12 and A.13. None of the dominant plant frequencies are present, implying nn plant l impact. Hence, the high noise levels measured at S2 are due to conditions which existed before the plant began operations (i.e. ambient conditions). Because of this, the high L DN values are not attributable to pl' ant noise. The HUD criteria classify the measured noise levels at S2 as "normally acceptable". O Acousric TECHNOLOGY INC.
5.4 Ottewq Nationni Wildlifra Rtfuge, ,S1, As with S2, the Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge is very close to th6 shore of Lake Erie. This suggests that measured noise levels will be correlated to the wind speed. This is iltustrated to be the case as is shown in Table XIV and was discussed in Section 4.2.2c. Also, since preoperational survey location P1 corresponds to operational survey location S1, a direct comparison 'can be made. ALL of the i preoperational survey measurements were performed when the recorded wind speeds were less than 10 mph. The recorded L 50 noise levels with these weather conditions were between 48 and 56 dBA. The L perati nat survey results for wind speeds 50 less than,10 mph all lie between 45 and 54 dBA. This suggests that the-full load operation of the power station has had no effect on the noise conditions at the Ottawa Wildlife Refuge. For windspeeds less than 10 mph, the measured L noise levels range from 46 to 54 dBA. These equivalent noise levels correspond to L n ise levels of 52 and 60 dBA respectively. DN Once again, these equivalent day-night noise levels are not very informative because preoperational L DN * * "' " the same range. The measured operational frequency spectrum plots for location S1 (see Appendix A.24 through A.29) oc show slight indications of the presence of the dominant power station frequencies. Because of the response of the human ear to noise composed of different frequencies, however, it wilL not be a source of annoyance. Another means to judge the degree of impact of these dominant' plant frequencies is to observe the' octave band noise levels. Table XIV shows no Acoustic TECHNOLOGY lNC.
presence of noticeable increases in either of the octave bands of interest (i.e. 125 and 1000 Hz frequency bands). Hence, g the plant is a negligible contributor to the noise levels measured at the nearest wildlife refuge. The noise measurements at S1 are considered to be "normally acceptable" by HUD noise level criteria. 5.5 Nearest Resident, S_5, The nearest resident to the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station is located 2,900 feet due north of the transformer, about 200 feet from the shore of Lake Erie. This location suggests, as before, that measured noise levels will be strongly dependent on wind and wave noise. The preoperational survey location P3, though further from the plant site than SS, exhibits the same preoperational noise characteristics as SS. This comparison is valid because both locations are within very close proximity to the lakefront and they are surrounded by similar terrain with similar noise sources. The preoperational survey L 50 n ise levels at P3 ranged from 50 to 64 dBA for wind speeds between 0 and 10 mph. The operational survey results show L n ise levels which range from 51 to 64 50 dBA for wind speeds ranging from 0 to 20 mph. This suggests that the operation of the plant has had no effect on measured noise levels. The equivalent noise levels (L,q) for the operational survey under weather conditions where the wind speeds did not exceed 10 mph range from 44 to 55 dBA. This Acoustic TECHNOLOGY INC. 1
corresponds to a range of 50 to 61 dBA as an equivalent day-night.(L~DN) noise level as required by the EPA. As at S1, the'preoperational and full load operational L DN n se hvels Lie within the same range. This suggests that the plant is not.the cause of the recorded high L n ise levels. The DN frequency spectrum plots shown in Appendix A.18.thru A.23 exhibit slight dependence on the power plant dominant frequencies. This plant noise wilL not be an annoyance to humans because of the nonlinear response of the human ear to noise composed of different frequencies. Also, the extent of the measured dependence can be judged by observing the relative octave band frequency noise levels in the frequency ranges of interest (namely, the 125 and 1000 Hz frequency bands). Table XIII shows no obvious impact in either of the l two ranges of; interest Leading to the conclusion that there is no impact of full load operation of the power station at the nearest resident. The noise levels measured at SS are classified as "normally acceptable" by HUD criteria.
. Finally, it is worth mentioning the noise complaint history of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. Since the start of full Load operation of the power station, there have been no noise related complaints. This sugg'ests, as does this analysis, that the operation of the Davis-Besse Station has had no environmental noise impact in.the vicinity of the power station.
O
\d Acoustic TECHNOLOGY INC.
r , 1
6.0 CONCLUSION
S AND RECOMMENDATIONS i The preceding analysis of the environmental noise conditions at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station considered the preoperational noise levels previously measured, a prediction of the probable plant noise sources, an estimate of the likely impact of the noise generating equipment on ambient noise levels, the measurement of existing full load operational noise levels and a comparison of these full load noise levels to preoperational levels and the absolute standards set by the EPA. Based on this analysis, the following conclusions and recommendations are made:
- 1. The major preoperational noise sources included wind and wave noise. These noise sources were especially noticeable at or near the lakefront.
1
- 2. The noise levels at S3, the closest school to the power plant, are low and show no signs of impact caused by the operation of the plant, as predicted.
- 3. The nearest cemetery 'to the power plant, S4, exhibits somewhat higher noise levels. These levels are a result of wind, wave and traffic noise and negligibly due to plant noise. This conclusion is based on the comparison of preoperational to full load operational noise levels. This comparison hh Acoustic y TECHNOLOGY INC.
shows that measured operational levels are no higher n than preoperational levels. This conclusion was V also suggested by the predictive methods.
- 4. Location S2, the Magee State Marsh, has noise levels as predicted. The closeness of this location to the Lakefront suggests'that the high measured noise Levels are caused by wind and wave noise. Also, the large distance between S2 and the power plant makes it impossible for the plant to be contributing to existing noise levels. This observation is supported by the lack of dominant plant frequencies in the noise composition at 52.
, S. The measured noise levels at the closest wildlife refuge, S1, are high. The close p ro x i tai t y of this location to the Lakefront suggests that wind and wave noise are the major contributors to these levels. The comparison of preoperational noise Levels to full Load noise leveis shows that the plant operation has had Little effect on the noise levels at S1. The frequency spectra indicate the slight presence of plant noise, but taking into account the octave band analysis and allowing for the frequency response of the numan ear to noise shows that the effect is, in fact, negligible. O Acoustic TECHNOLOGY INC.
c
- 6. The nearest resident to the power plant, SS, has high measured operational noise levels. Again, the close location of this resident to the Lakefront leads to the expectation that wind and wave noise a r.e the key noise sources. The comparison of preoperationaL to operational noise levels shows that the plant is not effecting existing noise levels. The frequency spectra, octave band analysis and the known response of the human ear support this conclusion.
O O Acoustic TECHNOLOGY INC. m
Y TABLE I PREOPERATIONAL. NOISE SAMPLING LOCATIONS AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION MAY 16-18, 1974 LOCATION DESCRIPTION P1 On the Lakefront, in the northern most corner of the Ottawa National Wildlife
- Refuge P2 On the plant site, approximately 1000 ft due east of the cooling tower P3 On the l'akefront northwest of Sand Beach, approximately 1.3 miles from the plant P4 At the Locust Point Cemetery, approximately 2000 ft due west of Route 2 PS At the intersection of Route 2 and the main avenue in Locust Point l
P6 On the cove in-Locust Point P7 In a rural area south-southwest of Locust Point'on the south side of the Troussaint River, approximately 1.8 miles from the site l -. ('/ s_ r
- 3 s-
.4'. .
'Ie .
I
I TABLE II O METEOROLOGICAL DATA FOR THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE DURING THE PREOPERATIONAL BACKGROUND NOISE SURVEY MAY 16-18, 1974 Wind Wind Barometric Direction Speed Temperature Dew Point Pressure Time ( Fr. N.) (mph) ( F) ( F) (in. Hg.)
- Friday, May 17, 1974 1100 180 10 69 68 29.89 1130 200 10 71 68 1200 310 12 72 65 1230 340 7 73 64 1300 300 6 75 62 1330 320 7 79 62 lh 1400 030 8 65 55 1930 080 4 59 52 29.48 2000 070 3 59 52 2030 070 3 59 52 2100 080 2 59 52 2200 080 3 59 52 2230 060 3 59 52 2300 050 3 59 52 2330 090 3 59 52 29.45 i
i TABLE II - CONTINUED Wind Wind Barometric Direction Speed Temperature Dew Point Pressure Time ("Fr. N.) (mph) ( F) ( F) (in. Hg.) Saturday, May 18,1974-1000 060 7 58 41 t 1030 -040 7 58 41
,1100 030 9 -
59 41 29.43 1130 030 8 61 43
.1200 030 6 61 41 2000 060. 8 62 44 29.41 2030 050 6 62 44 2100 030 9 61 44 l ,2130 040 6 59 47 l v i 2200 030 6 59 48 l
2230 040 5 59 48 2300 030 6 59 48 29.44
- CC C.EC YICW _ ~C ~
u
TABLE III PREOPERATIONAL L 50 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS OBTAINED AT THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE, MAY 17-18, 1974 FRIDAY, MAY 17, 1974 SATURDAY, MAY 18, 1974 i LOCATION DAYTIME EVENING NIGHTTIME DAYTIME EVENING NIGHTTIME P1 48 50 49 54 56 54 P2 47 37 34 42 43 34 P3 50 56 52 63 64 61 P4 46 44 37 46 41 35 P5 50 42 37 44 42 36 P6 58 49 45 53 54 40 P7 42 44 33 40 43 35 O
- 3 8-O
;_ .CT*C ;2 0 :C:_ 3 .
E t TABLE IV O LOCATION OF CLOSEST NOISE SENSITIVE AREAS S1- Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge 4,000 ft east of cooling tower on Lake Erie 2,300 ft NE of transformer
$2- -Magee State Marsh (Wildlife Refuge) 11,000 ft W-NW of; cooling tower 12,600 ft NW of transformer
$3- Carroll Elementary School 18,000 ft SW of cooling tower 19,000 ft SW of transformer 54- Locust Point Cemetery 3,800 ft E-SE of cooling tower 5,000 ft E of transformer SS- Nearest Resident 2,700 ft NE of cooling tower
'2,900 ft.N of transformer L
I l i (~'h +
- - V - 3 9-l
_ccus :c Tso .c.:c
- s
O TABLE V PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS AT SENSITIVE LOCATIONS FOR NOISE CONTRIBUTION OF COOLING TOWER
-5 (dB, re: 2x 10 N/m2) (dBA)
Location 31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 L eq 1 S1 40 44 41 35 36 35 24 0 0 39 O S2 <33 <27 <34 <28 <31 <32 <30 <25 <16 <30 S3 <33 <27 <34 <28 <31 <32 <30 <25 <16 <30 i l S4 41 45 42 36 37 36 30 12 0 40 l SS 45 49 46 40 41 42 37 25 5 45 0 1
O r TABLE VI PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS AT 3ENSITIVE LOCATIONS FOR 4 NOISE CONTRIBUTION OF TRANSFORMER k (dB, re: 2x 10 ' N/m ) ~ (dBA) Location 31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Leq O s' o o 58 's 38 o o o o " S2 0 0 43 30 24 0 0 0 0 29 S3 0 0 40 27 20 0 0 0 0 26 1 S4 0 0 51 38 32 0 0 0 0 37 i SS 0 0 56 43 37 0 0 0 0 42 I ( .-
'C;U37:C IECHNOLCGY ',C.
I I
9 TABLE VII PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS AT SENSITIVE LOCATIONS FOR NOISE CONTRIBUTION OF STEAM RELIEF VALVES (dB re: 2x 10 ' N/m )
~
(dBA) Location 31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 16000 L eq S1 0 0 70 77 83 83 74 27 0 0 90 S2 0 0 50 54 51 43 '21 0 0 0 61 g S3 0 0 42 43 40 13 0 0 0 0 44 S4 0 0 63 70 76 68 59 12 0 0 83 55 0 0 59 66 72 66 59 26 0 0 80 l l l
- Ouring steam expulsion.
O
. .. 2-'
TABLE VIII TOTAL PREDICTED NOISE DUE TO. FULL LOAD OPERATION OF DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (dB, re: 2x 10 -5 g) 2 (dBA) Location 31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Leq i
----------------------------------------- ...-----v.---------------
S1 40 44 58 45 40 35 24 0 0 45 S2 Less than ambient noise levels
-S3 Less than ambient noise levels S4 41 45 52 40 38 36 30 12 0 42 SS 45 49 57 45 42 42 37 25 5 47 l
d V
..O - 4 3-e " ** * * % ' ,
._. .in.- ,. _ _ . _ . . . _ _ . . . _ . _ . , . _ , _ . . , . . _ _ _ , _ _ - _ . . . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ . _ , . _ _ . _ . . . _ . _ . . . _ . _ .
TABLE IX NOISE SAMPLING LOCATIONS ON THE DAVIS-BESSE PLANT SITE ll DURING FULL LOAD OPERATIONAL NOISE SURVEY, MAY 23-25, 1983 LOCATION Dc!*RIPTION Ti Approximately 50 ft due north of transformer T2 Extreme northeast corner of parking lot, near marsh, approximately 750 ft from transformer T3 On North Dike Road, 2500 ft northeast of transformer T4 On North Dike Road, in a line between transformer and SS, 2500 ft north of transformer G1 Between water treatment building and transformer C1 Approximately 100 ft from cooling tower O qg>
- 2r w +:w:
l
)
'^N - .
u q) (1
~
Table X: Hourly Average Meteorological Data at the 10 M Height Collected from On-Site Meteorologicat Tower During the Full Load Operational No18e Survey at the Davi8-Bo88e Nuclear Power Station. May 23-25.1983. , w e. n. wi n..e.e iesis. ., se.n.se u . t oe.e,..e
, se,.
9.
..,...... r...... . .
o.. ,p.e. e.s .e......u.se. .. . t i . n e o.a. -T s.. . c en n.3 te. r3 t... . n e i. (e. r3 (si ... se. 63 5-23 0800 10.3 267 59 -1.4 55 87 29.734 . 5-23 0900 ,12 3 255 40 -1.5 55 85 29.74+ 5-23 1000 14.2 259 at - 1. 8 - 54 79 29.76+ i 5-23 1100 l'.3 256 43 -1.9 ~55 75 29.77+ 5-23 1200
- 64 -1.8 53 49 29.78+
5-23 1300 *
- e5 -1.8 53 45 29.80+
5-23 1400 * *' 66 -1.9 51 59 29.79+ 5-23 3500 19.6 275 46- -1.9 49 55 29.20+ 5-23 1400 '18.9 275 67 -1.7 46 48 29.00+ 5-23 1700 15.7 271 e s 48, 50+ 29.81+ 5-23 1800- 20.2 287 47 -1.6 4e+ 546 29.85+ 5-23 1900 20.1 306 44 -1.7 47+ 40+ 29.84+ 5-23 2000 19.9 301- 41 -1 4 44+ ett 29.87+ 5-23 2100 17.1 291 58 -0.8 4e+ 64+ 29.894 5-23 2200. 17.2 302 58 -0.9 45+ 69+ 29.92+ 5-23 2300 19.3 322 50 -0.8 44+ 74+ 29.95+ 5-24 0000 18.1 320 55 -0.7 446 77+ 29.96+ 5-24 0100 14.3 321 54 -0.6 44+ 80+ 29.97+
-t 5-24 0200. 12.8 321 54 -0.5 42+ 86+ 29.97+
sr 5-24 0300 11.8 329 53 -0.3 42+ 93+ 29.97+ 44+ 936 T 5-24 5-24 0400 0500 6.5 5.9 292 278 51 50 tot 2.1 446 89+ 29 98+ 29.99+
.5-24 0600 6.1 313 51 1.2 41+ 93+ 30.0t+
5-24 0700 6.1 338 52 0.0 47+ 964 30.03+ 8 5-24' 0000 5.9 344 54 -1.4 49+ 89+ 30.04+ 5 0900 4.1, 334 38 -1.2 34 87 30.05+ . 5-24 1000 3.2 333 Se+ s 39 70+ 30.07+ 5-24 1100 3.4 041 59+ 4 37 44+ 30.07+
'5-24 1200 3.4 163 636 8 41 5e+ 30.0&+
5-24 1300 5.4 199 47+ e 44 426 30.03+ 5-24 1400 8.1 243 66+
- 45 52+ 30.02t
! 5-24 1500 8.7 250 e e 45 e 29.99+ 5-24 2300 5.7 230- 63+
- 44 48+ 29.95+
5-25 0000 5.1 228 42+ e to 54+ 29.93+
47 55+
5-25 0100 5.3 198 60+ 8 29.94+ 80+ [I gr 5-25 5-25 1000 1100 8.7 9.4 251 243 56+ 56+ o e 50 51 87+ 29.866 29.84+ l{ 5-25 1200 13.2 214 56+ + 52 tot 29.84+ j:;; 5-25 1300 13.0 214 5'+
- 53 87+ 29.93+
, ;t t
'M u ,
O r* ( *; 4 ut ava n t atile due to cogneseret celebratsor.
+ rrom meteorotestest tswer at Toledo Empress A6rport I.
T T-
I Table XI: Flesults of the On Site Full Load Operational Noise Survey of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. May 23-25, 1983. steessi6ces oesce.eises ossees maae aasivese n o e. ween tesa) seen rem. Hum, Speed Weed 8K ISK Leessions.o. Date T 6me tese F3 t it ) Empo) one. Le e Lee Lee Lee at es s es 360 $00 in 2K 4E 11 A 5-22 09 43 798 15 1 250 72 3 71.2 71.3 ?t.e et 7' S3 70 71 46 40 53 44 35 la D 5-24 8 596 448 2.5 235 77.5 74 0 ?4.0 /L./ 12 76 87 7e 72 69 58 41 40 34 ti A 5-23 1018 44 750 15.4 254 59.0 57.0 35 3 57.1 62 44 71 54 54 53 48 43 29 17 f2 D 5-24 1031 596 648 3.6 157 59.0 57.0 55.8 57.2 64 62 41 54 50 50 39 30 17 16 f3 A 5-23 1300 45 454 + 4 40.0 59.0 58.0 59.1 es 58 53 50 52 49 49 4e 34 30 f3 D 5-23 1638 e6 + 21.0 288 58.8 57.8 57.5 58.0 43 56 53 49 49 4e 43 39 32 72 f3 C 5-24 0433 54 944 c.2 344 51.5 50.5 50.0 50., 57 53 47 42 43 44 42 40 30 17
$i f3 0 5-24 1118 634 564 5.3 12w 49.5' 47.0 4e.? 47.7 52 55 51 45 41 40 38 27 '.! O to 13 E 5-25 1032 546 876 13.7 247 52.0 50.8 49.0 50.e 60- 57 52 48 48 44 41 35 25 19
'4 *-24 ve40 54 948 5.3 34w 50.8 48.3 47.3 50.2 58 52 45 39 40 40 3e 43 25 20 100* e? 756 15.1 250 85.3 31.6 78.5 22.5 Ee 79 71 'O 49 75 e6 40 47 32 41 A d-23 G1 b 5-24 1004 5Ys 646 2.9 78 87.8 84.3 81.0 84.' 79 79 /3 12 72 85 48 41 49 32 C 3-24 .350 32 546 5.3 188 7t.3 73.0 70.8 70.2 5e 59 58 55 11 43 64 43 59 46 I t
,*, 4 wb t a a r.e 6 tros hour 1v eversee me teos olsac al data
-- . us.av.tl ule setause of euunteent calib r a t t us, t, Se unrein@te ..
- a occ auw or tutusmer.t c.itbratae O O .
O
()
- 7. . f')
J: -Q l Table Xil: _Results of the Full Load Operational Noise Survey of the,Dawls-Besse Nuclear Power Station at Sensitive Locations S2. S3, S4. May 23-25.1983. . e sessisisees Deseriences ossee. eene aasireto n e s, wana tasal tes) Teme Hem. spese wtae Leestionf.D. Date - flate .(dog F) (S) (mph) Die. Lac LSO L90 Lee 32 83 925 260 500 IK 2K en SK ISK
'S2 A 5-23 1210 65 65s . ++ ++ 56.5 56.3 55.8 56.I' 68 58 54 44 43 45 40 34 29 23
+ S2 D- 5-23 2015 58 .64e 15.2 294 58.3 57 5 56.8 58.2 75 63 49 48 49 47 44 41 35 28 S2 C. 5-24 2230 . 63e 48s 5.3 229 57.3 49.5 46.3 52.2 54 50 53 47 to 40 35 24 16 16
. S3 A 5-23 1140 . 65 699 ++ ++ 48.3 47 5 46.8 48.0 58. 43 41 37 40 43 37 35 30 32 N
I S3 D 5-23 2038 58 649 16.6 308 49.3~ 47.8 47.0 48 1 .52 45 41 35 33 31 29 28 28 17
- S3 C 5-24 2250 63s 484 5.8 226 36.0 35.5- 35.3 36.0 48 42 40 30 27 20 14 14 14 16
!. S4 A 5-23 1317 66 590 17.0 286 47.8 46.5 4a.0 47.8 63 58 44 42 43 33 36 32 28 17
. S4 9 5-23 2053 57 646 19.9 316 55.8 55.5 55.5 55.8 54 49 45 41 40 38 35 29 22 17 S4 C 5-24 2308 66 544 4.6 202 41.5 39.8 38.3 40.9 52 49 47 37 36 3! 24 22 to 16
- obtained from hourtu av' rase meteorological data
,- + unavailable because of edvirment calibration
++ unreliable value because of eeu Poent. calibration 4
if il 4 .
- d G
i =
l Table Xill: Results of the Full Load Operational Noise Survniy of the Davls-Besse Nuclear Power Station at Sensitive Location SS (Nearest Residence). May 23-25, 1983. s e. .. i.e .i c . ..ne s e, e oe s..e ..e n est. .
, nos. we.. seen geel ,-
Temp Hum. spee. Wsee - L ea s ile s e.o. Date "t un e (see F1 att (man) 0 8#. Leo tso. , Lee Leg at sa ses 250 500 su en du em- ten SS 61 5-2! 0809 60- 87: 12.3 267 52.8 51.0 50.3 St.6 57 54 50 43 45 45 42 40 35 22 SS 81 5-23* 1045 64 - 758 ~.++ ++ 55.P 54.3 51.5- 54.3 57 55 50 43 42 41 43 42 33 29 55 C1 5-23 1230 67 654 +t 4+ 62.3 61.0 59.5 60.9 60 59 57 52 51 46 46 ' 47 37 30 SS D1 5-23 1332 66 594 18.0 276 54.0 53.0 52.0 53.3 54 56 55 47 51 49 46 46 36 23 55 El 5-23 1488 67 559 19.5 261 56.8 57.,9 52.5 55.1 55 55 53 51 51 52 to 50 40 34 S5 F1 5-23 1952 66 558 19.1 264 55.8 53.3 52.3 53.7 46 46 44 41 35 25 S5 G1 5-23 1507 67 488 f4.3 312 63.8 61.5 60.0 et.8 63 56 58 6055 535149 - 47 47 46 41 34 26 S5 HI 5-23 1600 67 50s 19.8 183 64.3 63.0 61.3 62.8 60 57 54 50 51 52 49 45 41 33 S5 11 5-23 1620 67 50* 19.8 283 53.0 51.3 50.0 53.3 58 53 52 47 46 to 47 45 41 33 S5 J1 5-23 1952 . 58 649 , 16.1 284 59.3 58.5 58.0 59.6 58 58 55 54 53 51 53 51 43 30 S5 kt 5-23 2000 58 644 17.9 291 60.5 58.8 58.5 59.3 60 56 54 53 53 55 52 50 45 31 55 L1 5-23 2200 56 49s 17.3 319 57.5 56.5 55.3 56.5 58 54 55 53 50 51 50 46 38 27 S5 M1 5-23 2207 56 748 17.3 319 60.8 59.8 58.6 60.6 62 54 52 51 50 51 50 44 38 27 g $5 N1 5-23 2228 55 744 6 19.2 318 65.0 63.5 61.0 63.4 65 57 59 55 52 52 53 52 46 32 4: 55 01. 5-23 2241 55 748 17.4 320 63.0 62 3 60.8 61.9 71' 42 59 55 53 52 53 49 41 29 Cf S5 P1 ' 5-24 0002 54 800 13.6 322 59.3 58.0 57.3 59.2 43 59 54 50 49 48 47 50 37 30 S5 01 5-24 0010 54 808 13.5 318 58.8 57.6 57.5 57.9 55 53 51 49 47 48 48 46 36 29 S5 Rt 5-24 ,0017 54 808 13.5 318 60.0 59.5 59.0 60.2 .0 58 54 51 53 53 51 49 39 2B SS St 5-24 '0027 54 804 13.6 321 58.3 57.3 57.0 57.4 63 55 53 50 48 49 46 44 37 30 S5 T2 5-24 0033 54 808 13.6 321 55.5 54.0 53.5 54.7 54 56 51 49 49 47 47 43 34 26 ,i S5 T1 5-24 0143 53 864 10.7 328 55.5 53.61' 52.5 54.4 54 52 51 45 47 47 45 44 34 22 SL Ut 5-24 0151 53 864 10.7 328 56.0 52.8 52.0 53.9 55 55 50 48 51 48 47 45 37 28 SS V1 5-24 0157 53 86s 10.6 325 53.3 52.0 51.0 52.8 63 54 53 48 50 49 48 46 38 27 SS ut 5-24 0208 53 93: 8.6 322 55.3 53.5 51.5 53.5 58 58 55 48 to 45 43 40 33 26 t S5 XI 5-24 0215 53 934 8.6 322 54.3 53.3 51.3 53.1 60 53 52 47 46 44 43 40 32 22 S5 Y1 5-24 0655 '54 968 4.3 324 52.3' 50.0 49.0 50.7 54 48 45 38 38 40 43 43 35 32 SL 21 5-24 0704 54 899 4.3 324 50.0 46.8' 48.3 50.6 55 50 46 42- 39 39 41 42 32 25 S5 A2 5-24 1842 638 568 5.9 225 47.0 43.0 41.5 44.2 57 53 48 37 37 3a 32 32 28 21 55 D2 5-24 1151 638 568 5.9 '225 49.8 45.8 43.8 46.7 54 50 48 38 35 34 33 28 20 16 S5 C2 5-24 1200 674 428 7.9 241 53.5 46.5 42.3 49.5 55 53 50 38 37 37 32 32 28 17 S5 D2 5-24 2330 628 54s 5.4 193 49.3 47.3 46.3 47.5 55 5C 49 44 44 43 40 32 -23 17 S5 E2 5-25 1051 Ses 878 9.4* 243t 56.3 54.3 53.0 55.1 40 53 50 44 46 44 45 44 38 28 l t 1 , l 8 obtained from hourtw averase meteorotostral data l t unavantable because of eeuipment calabretton
++ unrettable value because of eauarnent cattbration
( di r l l l
- O O O
3
)
{L J'
.rx ,--
, f-) . *- i V f g
N
$ - Table XIV: : Results of the Full Load Operational Noise Survey of the Dawls-Sesso Nuclear Powef Station at Sensitive Location S1 (Ottawa National Wildilfe Refuge). May 23-25.'1983.
so sasiness oesseseien. 8 osaave' sand Anaives. Ael. Wand (d8A) ' (dst Tome Mem. Speed w end 2K au SK 16K
. t es e tt e n 's.D. .Daio Tim e (seg F1 (st (mph). og,, LSO LSO L90 Le e 32 s3 126 250500:1K St; A1: Sa23 0910 '62 79e' 14.4 255 53.8 -50.5 49.5 50.7 59 56 52 44 44 45 43 : 41 34 20 St D1' 5-23 1105- 64 e94 +t it 58.0 54.5- 52.5 55.5 49 52 48 43 45 45 41' 42 36 26 '
St ct 5-23 1250 ' 66 654 6+ +6 58.3 56.8 56.3 57.4 62 56- Sg ~ 44 46 45 44 41 33 23 SI D1 5-23 1354 ~ 66' %98 t$.8 272 57.8 5/.0 56.5 57.1 53 55 5. 48 46 45 45 45 35 29 S1 ' Et- 5-23 1437 67 55e 18.8 271 56.5 53.8 '53.0 54.6 65 53 52 53 46 46 43 42 37 29
.St F1 ~5-23 1530 466 486' -20.4 271 58.8 57.5 57-.0 57.7 61 56 54 50 51 53 49 - 47 38 28
$1- 'G1 5-23 1543 46e 48e 23.0 273 59.5 59.0 57.3 58.2 40 65 '42 52 52' 55 52 51 38 Of St Hi 5-23 1648' 66 500 21.0 288 40.1 58.5 ' 57.8 58.8 on 55 54 47 48 48 46 45 Jt 21 St !! 5-23 1652 66 - 500 21.0 288 60.3 58.8 58.0 58.8 43 52 51 45 45 46 45 43 35' 22 St J1 5-23 1922 59 34s 18.5 297 '61.0 40.0 59.5 60.2 ~ 54' 56 57 53- 52 51 52 47 40 28 Si h1 5-23. 1930 58 646 15.9 239 62 5 40.0 59.5 40.4 57 55 55 53 51 52 49 4e 38 27 -
~ 51 Lt 5-23 -2108- 57 494 18.9 315 59.0 ~58.0 57.0 58.1 53 54 53 52 51 .52- 49 45 37 .24
- Si nt 5 2115 '57 696 18.9 315 :59.3 57.3 '56.0- -57.7 59 55 54 53 53 51' 50 48 41- 32 8
- S1' N1 5-23 2122 57 .494 18.9 315 58.3 56.8 55.3 59.0 53 55 55 53 51 50 47 43. 36 27 cr . . St .01 :5-23 2141- So .690 19.9' 322 59.3. 57.8 54.0 57.8 58 55 54 54 53 53 52 49 41 28 Nf .S1 Pt 5-23 2303- 55 779 17.4 320 75 5 60.8 57.0 49 5 58 57 55 52 52 .52 50 49 42- 32 S1 01: 5-23 2310 55 778 15.4 '321 61.8 60.3 59.5 60.4 59 54 53 53 52 52 ;2 50 47' 35 St R1 5-23 2324 54 778 14.4 319 40.3 59.3 58.3 59.7 57 55 55 53 53 51 48 47 40 29 -
151 S t -- 5-23 2331' - 54 77s 14.4 319 58.3 57.O' 55.8 57.3 70 54 53 52 50 ' 51 49 45 39- 31 St T1 5-23 2338 54 778 14.0 320 40.3 58.8 57.5 58.8 56 55 54 52 52 51 50 49 39 26 SI Ut 5-24 0053 54 80s .11.8 321 59.3 56.5 55.3 56.9 57 55 55 53 50 50 49 47 36 28 St ~V4 5-24 0058- 54 80s -11.8 321 59.8 58.8 57.3 58.9 ' 45 58 -55 54 52 50 51 " 49 3' 29 St W1_ 5-24 0110 54 866 13.0 324 56.5 '54.8 54.0 56.0 56 57 55 54 51 '50 46 45 4; 30
$1 XI '5 0116 54 . Bes . 13.0 324 58.0 57.0 55.8 56.9 54 54 55' 52 50 49 50 4B 41 30 S1 Y1 5-24 '0129 53 868 12.8 330 57.3 55.8 55.0 55.8 40 56 54 53 51 50 49 44 38 27 S1 21 5-24 0615 -54 966 7.4 351 55.0 54.0 53.3 54.3 65 54 51 51 47 48 47 44 37 24 St A2 5-24 0622 54 968 -7.4 351 54.3 53.5 53.0 53.4 . 65 58 54 50 48 48 48 45 38 27 St -92 5-24 .1051 598- 648 ' 3. 7 148 47.5 46.0 45.3 46.3 Se 53 50 45 42 39' 38 37 29 18 A St C2 5-24 1058 59s -64s. 3.9 152 47.8 46.0 45.0 46.5 56 54 49 44 41 3e 19 35 27 17
'I St- D2 5-24 1807 63t - 566 3.9 152 47.5 45.8 45.0 46.1 56 55 50 45 40 39 38 35 2s 21 l' 1 St - E2 .5-24 1024 56s 878 9.46 2434 49.0 40.3 47.5 48.1 58 56 53 43 42 42 39 35 26. 18 o,
)
Li g e obtairiec f rom hourtw averase meteorotosacat date
^--j t unavantable because of eautement calibratice.
6+ unrettable value because of eou s e ner.t ca11bretton r" g h tk
.D - -
['vI 120
~ -
240 sao 120 987.i-bl
~ ----- ---- --- ---- -
---------- 50 l
e 100 - 8 a 90 - --- ----- --- ---- --- --------- 750 80 - 4
~
Wo 70.- Eo-
.3 o . # o,- 60>-
1 l l l { 'f _ ' 5 0 - l 40 - 8 : m- '30 -
#p 20 , , , . . . . . . 2500 0 100 200300'400500600 700 8009001000 FREQUENCY (Hz) j ..
FIGU R E ~1: FREQUENCY SPECTRUM AS A FUNCTION OF. DIST ANCE .FROM TR ANSFORMER. i 1 ., ! -:0 E:i s:C'_C G ,< l-i
~ ,
I O CD 3 lin l 1 l -
' lA l W / / s f a anh, W 'G z _10 g f ,f O J /
W -20 /B / mcoutscv atsasts ron stu wcostmo cwanacttasTics g /
= /
g -30 g
-40
< /
a m -50 C O b o O O M M M M M N to O O O v- N to O O v" N 10 T" N FREQUENCY (HZ) O FIGURE 2: FREQUENCY-RESPONSE CH AR ACTERISTICS IN THE AMERIC AN N ATION AL STANDARDS SPECIFIC ATION FOR SOUND-LEVEL METERS. A N S I- S I .4 - 19 71. l
. = -.
L ..
REFERENCES I - [13 - Bassiouni, M.R.: " Outdoor Sound Propagation over Ground with Several Impedance Discontinuities" presented at the 104th Meeting ~f o the Acoustical Society of America, Orlando, Florida, November 1982. t
- b -, zy>
E23 Bassiouni, M.R.,'et al.: " Prediction and Experimental ^ Verification of Far-field Sound Propagation over Varying Ground Surfaces," Inter-Noise '83, 1983. [33 Bassiouni, M.R. and Sugumele, D.J.: " Prompt No.tification
= Siren System Design,-. Power Engineering, 87-3 March 1983.
l l 0 E43 Capano, G.A. and Bradley, W.E., " Noise- Prediction l: Techniques'for-Sitting Large natural Draft and Mechanical Draft Cooling Towers", Stone & Webster Engineering C o r p o r a t.i o n , Presented at the 38th Annual Meeting of the American Power' Conference, Chicago, Illinois, April 1976.
.E53 Gordon, C.G., "A Method for Predicting the Audible ~ Noise Emissions from Large Outdoors Power Transformers", Bolt, 4
Beranek and Newman Inc., Presented at the IEEE/ASME/ASCE
~
Joint-Power Gener.ating Conference, September 1978. V -s2-
, .mc remacc , c.
REFERENCES (Cont'd) g E6] Edison Electric Institute, " Electric Power Plant Environmental Noise Guide," Vo l. u m e 1, Prepared by Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., 1978, pp. 4.1-4.101. [7] American National Standards Institute, Measurement of Community Noise, ANSI S3-W-50, November 11, 1969. [8] U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, " Noise Abatement and Control, Department Policy, Implementation Responsibilities, and Standards," Circular 1390.2 (July 16, 1971)... [9] Environmental Protection Agency, "Information on the Development of Environmental Noise Requirements to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety," EPA 550/9-74-004 (March 1974). [10] Stevens, K.N., W. A. Rosenblith, and. R. H. Bolt, "A Community's Reaction to Noise, Can It Be Forecasted?", Noise Control, Vol. 1, No.1, pp 63-71 (January 1955). O
- 5 3-
~
_L; 9
- Y 8
" Y # z I
OJ *,a < 2 I e O e 2J o.
-g
~
a< z o o z< '; o w * "
% $=4 gE" gJ ; m al o =
":;' ::te = = .a
- ;*< -:'- , gg a o p .
wg . COm .
, g ,
'= .5 a o 35ya <
~ .
a'= _ .- o=-< a.w, t, 8 I 1 'l o w o o is U = -
. c'tt Ze>E2o
=oe
'p ' .!,%
o ._'L 0 - , e s zz w . o i f .
' II~i O h
p = $ -- - - - - {
, -u.y.
=
yi
/.
Sh, ~ q : g . on;g
. i N <5 A. e -
- l. -
~ wsz%_z<
o o.-
~
(de !
- l k- Add ':
- d. ~'myJ/* -
s . T..ws E i if . l'
.}q.7 ,
g rg . g j! . -q.___ , Y Sf, TN ! 3. M ^grf !E h.~; ;) 64 4 A -es ; g. 1.
; ., L M Mc: m (;?. .
L - A _ w_,;.;. 4 .'t 11 i ., u , 3 ; __ d, O '. h.. -[. _ _ ,-. c. _,e~g l/ I ( ) .. , . ). h_ y .,_ e -
- h. .- i
'i-.
cu.:# t s A' s .. - .. f.} . . . .
. . . _ _ _ j. '
s
- s-1 + .?
w
-_ I $ ,. (c' & n. f ,
g- V R
.. / ____. %,,
x, n. q- a l.r. _ ,I .. ,. m)g [
~
1 v h ~-
~
}
;[
=,- - - .! .l!
>N % j. ..
s
.,. .d, '7 8s .-
1
, =,. =-to , Y, ..
i f ____)N _ Yk .. ~
.t k i ? .
.-S \ 1.,
i N k f ( - . l. , U 1 .- y
~.
c-p l
* ----w '
p ""T'~~~~~~~' 3 1; .
] 7
. pk.:n
'* ....ih ::::Ili O ..
p- \
~"";i.e.[isi$.
,! /,4 f
= .gv _
45 iii.. / f4-i 3y. . ,
- r. 8 !T
"~
c . ,_) , , , , , u
\.A W.
-i , .
; . t ,,. j. s n -- p a. n' +
. l .-.a, .1 (Th~,lj?N
~
4 , h,"j Y
- (}/i"-Y
~/ d M!$3 d 9 .
1
, , ,7 M AP 2 ME ASURED OPER ATION AL 5.
A-WElGHTED L50 CONTOUR M AP IN THE VICINITY OF THE
' r4 E7 6 .,. I q - - - t .... e i- D AVIS-BESSE NUCLE AR O g s i l POWER ST ATION vi A lt E A 1 "'*~ as tewhl
! l k '
. % TOLEDO EDISON COMP ANY l i g
33 ,
,'[ .. _ _.} 5 a[ s.a4 u.ub
.- 34
"" - m ,,
as ., x.
, ...... g s. , .
f[ ff ,s i \
- . nn ,
) [1, auv-
-l -
. S Cl s
Wiif*. O l .i . M], j--- ,, ,_ s __n
,( 'g 7 4( .
f, ' a * ~ ' l O(> Q w,;t) g.__[3
-s- / u. ~
=
t T . f *
, . \.
\
. i . ., _ __
s g t p,f, c. '
... %' ,A/(',7
@. ,, .: . ;,{; . a .3.. ..o., . .. ., . . 3 ..,f___.v. .. .
g .- i l N y,
/
. y, l s' ' * = = 54'un i
- ,[, i
'l -
e
* .' d .. . J,, "'s ~ 'l- .\
- 'a '
,,,, c.- - - p.f .i, ..,u
.l '
. .. : i-l
,j ,
.r;
,..~ ,, ; _ . . .
- i. so g L . ,_ , _ , _ . _ '_ _ _ . \
, . .Jy, . . - g.JL'y
- l. _G.
4
- 4. :::.. .. - . , ,
R
' A.i::::. . ',,,,,
.g . , .y , . - - .
Y* - - , ' . ma s,., %
,, 0*,,
s g; , . w"g ~p/ .
.l, iW
' a '"
r
) L' n , ,, ,,
5 i r, o 7ff W: g. u 'i.N 'I,j _
. l.,h sans
('
$. }( ' l.
/..,
g .'m n 7 0 i@ - L t-- , hc4 ,.'
'Y'
, (
D h I l! y t . 3 6 [t.$ " N? $. 3 0.,. ~ '.1'.Y"*j',4 . , o :
'my
) W. .E. . . - c 1 ,,
9 O S
O Appendix A: Frequency Spectrum Analysis f or Select Operational Measurement P oint s l-
.O l
l l-I a l-1 i I i I
- O g Acoustic TECHNOLOGY INC
O O O AMBIENT NOISE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION C1 0 ("S e e Ta ble XI for relevant m e t.e o r olo gic al in f o r ma tio n) 90 ' T O / E D O E'D I S O N' C O M P A N Y Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station N E 80 z N o S 70 o S I E 60 m a V 50 L~
' ^ - - -
g %
+ .%---.._
.-+
J 4 w~
'~
@) g h n
o a m C Lu 30
$ C 5 n-l m 9 3 O
20
- z 1 o m o Tested Byi Q Acoustic Technoic gy, Inc.
__ 10 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 FREQUENCY (Hz)
AMBIENT NOISE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION G1 AO (OSoo Tablo XI for rolovant mot oor olo gical' inf orma tio n) 100 T O L E D O E'D I S O N ' C O M P A N Y
, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station N Environmental Noise Survey E 90 Z '
o d o 80 [~ 9 r o i uj - I m 70 ' l; f r y , l 190 6
> z i-
'l1 4 60 IN' ' l 2 02 8 Y f l 50 < I # 38.7 1 m
m
,w ,b).. -
.li N $ / ) w dt 4 ,[
H 4837.5 d.jh 8 m
-}
m yc l-
$ 40 hYm o Z .
!5 S Tested By:
@ Acoustic Technology, Inc.
g 20 l p o 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 FREOUENCY (Hz) e _ - _-- O O
'O O O-AMBIENT NOISE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION G1BO
~
. (" S e e T a b l e XI f or r elev a n t' m e t e o rolo gical in f orma tion) 100 '
TObeDO EDISON' COMP ANY D a vis-B ois se N u clea r P ow e r S tation e.v.,...e. ai N oi.e S.,v e,
~, ,,
Z 967 .5 o i 80 j o i[ l! ! 19G 5 ui ! l F 70 U I , CD i ! $
$ L_ ii ---- .
60 - rqq ,j :. : d j, ' j' t' i
'l 3870 W
a
./
8 4
.t t' I.
T I
' W ~k ! ,
h 4837.5 e
@ $ 0 MY djgi j l Q
W 40 'Hu re g) O a. m O O z i E D 30
? 8 i
l o Tesied By: Q Acoustic Technology, Inc. l ! y 20 l P o 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 FREQUENCY (Hz)
AMBIENT NOISE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION T1 AO (0 800 Tablo XI f or rolovent motoorological inf ormation) 100 TObED O E! DIS ON C O MP AN Y
,, Davis =-Beise Nuclear Power Station
" Environmental Noise Survey E go ,
Z o 120
$8 O
id
- 70 ,
40 0 m u 240 380
> Z '
' ~
j 60 , , e nn 8'O 961.5 J l 2 720 g rk th 980
$ \ j{ l 5
" %j r y & v't ;4 g
@ g i
o co ' y a a e e4
+
%w 5 o-N O l 30 h ] g O U) o -
Tssted By: Q Acoustic Technolo gy, Inc. 20 7 0 10u 200 300 400 500 700 800 900 1000 0 600 FREQUENCY (Hz) e_ O O
- .O
~
o O O AMBIENT NOISE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOC ATION T1B ("See Table XI f or relevant meteorological inf ormation) i TObEDO EfDISON' COMP ANY I Davis-Beise Nuclear Power ' Station N ' Environmental Noise Survey E go g 120 .l m o S 80 i O. 240
- o 1 uJ' l I T ',
-70 acu 4su '
O
- 720 967.5 y '
.8 4 0
> E
! si)O 960 6 60 I I
iu
> 'a !
i uj q l , ,, Q
=
D t N b :/ , j ! o w ( a __J[ m pg 40 (v N% d ' m O
- jp g m
30 : Tssted By:
@ Acoustic Technolqgy, Inc.
__ 20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 FREQUENCY CHz)
AMBIENT NOISE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION T2AO (O Soo Tcblo XI for rolovant motoorologicci inf ormation) 80 ' TObEDO EfDISON COMPANY c, o' Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station E , Environmsntal Noise Survey 70 Z 120 o I o 60 s . O (Q lil 240 967.5
- 50
'80 s n
- I z
O
- 0) ^ ,
'8 I
40 r 7'a -,a
; 7- -
w 30 : W&
.n 7-4 am a,
- %.M. pu r__ vJ -$
n a m 8 1Q E 5 a. m - 0 5 : o w o Tdsted By: Q Acoustic Technolo gy, Inc. $ 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 FREQUENCY (Hz) G G # .
O o , O AMBIENT NOISE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION T2B ("See Table XI f or relevant m e t e o r olo g'ic al in f o r m a ti o n) TO BED O E' DIS ON' C O MP A N Y Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station o2 , Environmental Noise Survey 120 8 o 60 967.5 240 m . jj I 50 U t to I 380 720
?
b 40 V* 480 g h( 6 00 ,! J h [ lAd on -L k i 1l40 I., L
-mv r g 1,
=
!g 20
' '% Apg(
y 6 o-5 1 i o 8 v> o
! Tdsted By:
Q Ac,oustic Technolo gy, Inc. 5 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 FREQUENCY (Hz)
AMB15NT NOISE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION T3BO (O Soo Tcblo XI f or relevant motocrological inf orma tion) TOLEDO dDISON' COMP ANY
, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station N Environmental Noise Survey E 70 z
o 60 , o uj 120
" h 50 N , > z 40 ! k.
80 d
! 380 m
30
\ J A vwwwy n a 8 m a E 5 o-m O h 10 o
e o Tested By: Q Acoustic Technolqgy, Inc. o o 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 FREQUENCY (Hz) e O O
O o O O AMBIENT NOISE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION.T3D (? S e e T a b l e X I f or relevant meteorological inf ormation) 70 ' TObEDO NDISON' COMP ANY m Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station
" '# ""*" "' '** "'**Y '
E -60 z } o j 120 o h
. o o
50 < r' l' o i . E m I
!
- 40 o Pp g
$ h 240 380
> ) h
[ so f ,g n 967.5 i qg e 20 N,. s. g' Mg-
. .} -
"VvNA .
I 1 D r i w w l w 10 m O.
. o ,
.. Z j r D o
- O b Tssted By:
i b Acoustic Technolqgy, Inc. l
-10 O 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 FREQUENCY (Hz)
= O O
C W c.,
. c O
o (' __
- . ) '
d
.5 O
w n - e Hc a m .
- x O g 2o ~
M G 0- O W CD O ~C 5- >i EE s'o r O
<' M2 3>.3 O O% CD OC S
- e-mo
- a 2" O". -
C$ O0If Eh O- Eo O g O z m2 30- N o O Z- H< EO" $ Ob D Q MCee Cp O m g O c -- _ _ . _ _ . h ~O mO$ O gg c a, O CD I v N oo O WE mSO , 0~ M>>
.- 3, O O O
CO c ONC t i -- m Z-w 2 3 om - r , D
- >-> 0 l' 00 2E - - o O
a W' o
=
om . O OO co W' O gx g . O co WO CD D OH % 0
~
Z o ]
/
- 1- to0 **
Z - ~ 9 O O WO
-v 4
E Y -- ._- o l O O O O O o O O O D D # D N w e l l (gW/N B0000~0 *BB sp NI) 7BAB 1 BBOSSBBd GNDOS A.10 (@) Acoustic TECHNOLOGY INC. I I
0 0 n 0 c 1 0 o I n i 4 t , a y 0 T )n g oNoOt i t S ry - l q o 0 9 n I a ee A h Tm Y c Ar N wvr w e 0 k ou :T 0 Co f P P S n
., y Bc 8
On Mr e i L i l O a es m ds eu t 0 Ra Cl o c i e t ss oc, 0 Oc i N uN TA 7 Fg o O Nl Ml o Ur Ro d ss S eta I D sn h ,> i 0 0 6
)
H z Te em ( Ce t OBn D sro Y Em Eii 0 C P [ vv 0 N t 5 E Sn Oan U a T DE Q Yv , E Ce 0 R l 0 Ne F 4 e,u E r Ur Qo Ef RI N 0 0 3 F X Ee l 0 Sb 0 I a 2 OT 1 N e 1 0 T e \ N S 0
\
E" ( I
, j 1 B
M . 0 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 5 4 3 2 1 O i[ u m zo u ED uE 9@m EE z i t Q >'- o[ qL. eb y
AMBIENT -NOISE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION S2BC' (OSco Tablo Xil f or rolovent motoorological inf ormation) 80 3 TObED O EfDISON' CO MP ANY m o' Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station E Environmental Noise Survey 70 z l E i 60 , o ui ' [ 50 (g E?
" \
40 y @g s % - A "w%%% R a 8 m 8 o e n. -1 o R z . i O 8 m o Tested By: Q Acoustic Technology, Inc. h o 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 FREQUENCY (Hz) e O O
O O O AMBIENT NOISE- FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION S20 0 (" S e e T a ble Xil f or relevant meteorological inf ormation) 70 ' TObED O El DIS ON' COMP ANY
, Davis-Besse Nuclear ' Power Station N Environmental Noise Survey E 60 z 1.
m S j j g 50 , i d ' J h 40 i j g1
]/
r, l
> .I M h b=
l 20
%.g g
m D to en j 6 m 10
- d c,
m n.
.a a ~!l Z l .
D 0 i r- O ! ! Tssted By: j C) Acoustic Technolqgy, Inc. r- -10 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 FREQUENCY (Hz)
AMBLENT NOISE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION S3B0 (0 800 Tablo Xll for rolovant mot e orological inf ormation) TObED O IdDIS ON' C OMP ANY m Davis-Boise Nuclear Power Station E 80 , Endronnsntal Noise nrvey Z-o 50' - q , f u3
- 40 I{ '
i
$ I
> z '
C h 30 L l l I' 3 iu ! b f Iq n g g 20 - y - yxvwg R 8
$ 10
$ m a a d m O . 0 8 c o u) > o i Tusted By: Q Acoustic Technolc gy, Inc. 7 -10 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 FREQUENCY (Hz) e -. . O G
O O O AMBIENT NOISE FREQUENCY . SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION S3CO (# See Table Xil f or relevant meteorological inf ormation) 80 ' TObEDO dDISON' COMP ANY Davis-Beise Nuclear Power Station Environmental Noise Survey z m t o 4'O s LLh [ ' 4 30 N i
- " z G 0 I I )
go a d w d i) T I il. l! f a jo m W hgg4 n_ i jo j m h w 0
. E
, ~' .
-10
]
g m Tested By:
.c Acoustic Technolo gy, Inc.
-20
, 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 000 1000 FREQUENCY (Hz)
.(O s o o ~ T o b l o X II IOf TOICV""t motoorological inf ormation) 80 TObEDO d,DISON iCOMP ANY I
N n Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station E Environm6ntal Noise survey 70 z a 0 S 60
- o. -
O W . 5 k 50 j u Z
;; 40 i w
Pu s i 5 O 8 (n tn m C 20 NkhWdA%m N o I D 10
- O i (n
i
' Tested By:
O gy, Inc. i - o Acoustic g Jechnolo z 9 o 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 FREQUENCY (Hz) \ O O O
O . O- o O A64BIENT NOISE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION S4C (# See Table Xil f or relevant meteorological inf ormation). 60 ' TObEDO dDISON' COMP ANY Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station
- N Environmental Noise Survey E Ey '
i z N i o 1 o 40 ' l O o i , Lb C 30 1 m L u t
> z Of gn , .
M d / w
.10 tu T
D t' . m w l?
<!j y O.
5 c.
-: o 6i z D _10
. q. O : O w F; Tested By: Q Ac,oustic Technolqgy, Inc. n- -20 5 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 FREQUENCY CHz)
AMBIENT NOISE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION S5B1 0
- s (C' S o o T c b l o, X I l l f or rolovant motoorological inf ormation)
,* .. ( '.,[ TObEDO dDISON' COMP ANY f (j.i
','N'
'A ,
- 1 Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Environmbntal Noise Survey l
ls E j,70 , I '
,' , z, ) - '
a + O 't .' S 60 ,
.\ o, O
s j x , m '
" SO -
i co N , u ( ,
? Z 120 5 40 .,
.J w
I w , 30 WM . a ^
^' ? " ' "* %WQQ
$gg)y fty) ,
2:. D . s
./ 0; ,
ex *
@ , (D .C' ,
w 20,
$ m o a ,
, m--l Dr ,> - ,
z < \ s 9 D. 10 s
,o z
1 o , co o i Tested By: Q Acoustic Technolo gy, Inc. f a 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 FREQUENCY (Hz) O O O
0 0 0 1 n 0
'c.
H o i n 1
- 5) i t ,
a y oSn Ni ' o t S l g q 0 0 9 o p t Oa ry n I m 'Y ee h Tr c N wv
. 0 Ao r e
ou t
- T 0 Cfn k P P S Bc y 8 Oi Mr a e i Ll Rc Oi g a
O Cl N uN esi c o m p d ts t TA eu so ec 0 0 7 F o l O Nl a
='
S -, Mor I et # 0 ) Uo D sn ' 0 z Re Nse e 6 H Tt e OBn em C C m D -o E Pt Sn a Eii b vv Oan sr W 0 0 5 Y C N E U v T DE Q Y e Cl mu E'N 'r e' h 0 0 4 E R F Ur o Qf E Rl l i
~ ';
0 0 3 F X a\ Ee 0 Sl b m 0 I m
' 2 OaT N 0 e 2 0 T e 1 0
NS 1 E" I B( M L0 ;. 0 A o 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 8 7 8 5 4 3 2 1
,NE Z N8o .o N* nu b" aW
- W[DwwW[Q. QzDOw L c O
[g
,; .la ,;
'i1 i 1.J
- j ; 3 ll :!Il .(,l1
(O Soo Tablo Xtil for rolovent motoorological inf orma tion) 80 TObEDO NDISON COMPANY N m Davis-Boise Nuclear Power Station E Environmental Noise Survey 70
- z N
S o 60 ' tu ( ' E 50 u T
'g 5 40 bl -
30 MW~%WWh" A :~ 0x - a >
. uc m'vv 8 w 20 E E O
N . 9 8 10 5 m 6 Tested By:
< Acoustic Technolo gy. Inc.
o z o 100 9 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 FREQUENCY (Hz) O O O
0 0 0 . 0 1 n c 1 T o I n 5 i S )n O Ni o t t t S a l y g q o 0 0 9 Oa ry n Y ee I m h Tr c wv N o r % e 0 Ao :T 0 Cfn k Pu P S y Bc 8 Oi Mr a e i t L ds Rc Oi g l a O es Cl N uN co i
% t eu so ec TA 0
0 7 F o O Nl S eta l Mor I 0 ) Uo D isn e 0 z Re 'E 6 H Tt om ( OBno Cem h D sr Y E Eii 0 C Pt b vv n 0 N 5 E Sn a Oan U Yv e Cl T DE
,W 0
0 Q E R F 4 oNeE'r Ur M~ Qo f 0 E l 0 Rl i 3 F X , E e 0 Sl 0 I b 2 Oa NT 0 e 2
^
- T 0 _. e '1 0 - N \ 1 E "S I - B( - M O A 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 7 6 5 4
- 2 1 O i*
u au $ on g ateWma.ozDo mNE z8o c J_ w - O e
! o i ;~ .'
l
,fd . J.
( Soo Tablo Xill f or rolovent motocrological inf ormation) 70 TObEDO hDISON' COMP ANY
,, Davis-Beise Nuclear Power Station N Environmental Noise Survey E e z
So
$ y .
9 ' 120 m ir i [ 40 N4 -
? "
z T' A'- M 30
% f
$ ~
w e Ug
- e 20
)p1 9l wvww we/W 967.5 y
g a v o a e a-5 N O . 9 D 0 2 O ' o en o Tested Byi Q Acoustic Technolo gy, Inc.
-10 ,$ 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 FREQUENCY CHz) e O O
0 0 0
- 5. I 0 2 n c 1 E o 7 I n
S i t 6 , 9 y S n a 0 O )o N t S l g q 0 9 i o Ot a r , n I Tm Y e* , h c Ar o N w o e 0 0
- T Cf kP P" y Bc 8
On i Mr a* i t L ds l Rac C l'c O e* eu t so 0 dc 0 Oi '
% TA 7 Nu F g o O N' A. -
Ml o S e" I m - 0 ) Ur Ds" l i 0 H z Ro Ns e 6 ( Te OB" M t Ce D s - Y Em Ei 0 C P b v 0 0 N St n a Oa" T D 4) 8 5 E U Q Yv _ 0 E Ce ' '
% 0 R
F ONl E U e r- , 9 4 r Qo Ef Rl
% 0 0
3 Fl i 'O X 4 E 2 0 Se I l 0 2 Oba , N T ' 0 T e 2 1
} y 0 0
Ne 1 ES ' _ I b B "( M -
'o A 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 3 2 1 7 6 mEz o O 5[
1 t no Z c- w$ w at o wm0 OzDo - O ?O
.'J8 c'
,< -, f' f
AMBIENT NOISE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION S1810 (C'S o o T c b l o X I V f or rolovant motocrological inf ormation) TO[EDO kDISON COMPkNY ' N
,, Davis-Beise Nuclear Power Station E
Environmental Noise Survey 70 Z o i o T ui C ' 50 (n ' u 120
? Z
% 40 s 2
\
48 0 ( 967.5 L.. J @ g : vy yq4 R 8 a a m g 20
%WNV
.5 o-M e -
! 8 "o Tested Byi Q Acoustic Technolo gy, Inc. - 0 .b 0' 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 FREQUENCY (Hz) e G G
0 0 0
~ 5 w 0
1 n c 1 H o 7 .d-. I n 6 e i t
) 9 y n a .- g 0 t .- q 0 o '
S Ni a l o 9 Ot a ry n I Tm Ar o Y N ee wvr ou M. c-
~:
h c e 0 0 Cf kP P S Bc 8 On i L i l Mr a e O es M_ ds t eu t 0 Rac Cl i - _- so c o ec 0 Oi N uN - TA 7 F g o O Nl a Mo S et l Ur I D sn M .' l 0 0
)
H z Roe d ss em 6 ( T t O Bn Ce D sr -o 0 Y C Em Eii 0 N P t b vv 5 E Sn Oan U a T DE Q Yv 0 E R 0 o'CNee l , 4 F Er Ur Qo 0 Ef 0 3 RV FI X E~ e 0 Sl . 0 i b l 2 Oa A NT 0 2 0 T e 1 0 Ne . 1 E *S I B(
.M
- i1
'o A 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 5 4 3 2 '
8 7 i_ u mDe)0tma O DO* mNE'z No o0 o d* mu z v t O
> ww .
_ge,.> ooc $aN9z$o .$
< ,- i' ; 4
0 AMBIENT NOI.SE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION S1K1 (C'S o o T o b i o X I V f or rolovent motocrologicci inf ormation)- 80 TOf EDO E'DISON' COMP ANY m Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station N Environmental Noise Survey E 70 2 o : S 60 , 9 o Ld * [ 50 m
\ i20 '
? E
\ *
% 40 tu raw- "TN %
@a n
.5 5
0-N O . O S o <n o Tested By: Acoustic Technolo gy, Inc. Q
$ 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 FREQUENCY (Hz)
O O O m
0 0 0 . 0 1 n c U o I n 1 i M 1 t y S )n a g 0 o t o 0 Ni t S l 9 o Oa ry n I Tm Ar o Cf kP On Mr Y N ee wvr o u P S W :T y Bc h i c e 0 0 8 W d ts i O a e L l es eu 0 R a t Cl i so c o c ec 0 Oi N uN TA 7 Fg O Nl o a Mo S et Ur l Roe 'E ie I D sn % 4 0 0 6
)
H ( z T em Ce t O Bn
-o Y E m P t D sr Eii b vv N- 0 0
5 C N E Sn Oan U a T DE Q Yv 0 E QCe R
~
0 F Ne l 4 E r U r Qo Ef g 0 0 R V 3 FI X E Se I l
~
0 0 2 b Oa NT 0 T e 2 0 1 0 NeS 1 E I B *( M i 0 A O _ 0 0 0 0 2 1 _ M 6 5 4 oo s 35 @ g $ g a y g
)
c O 8 )y
,"E 2 1 L /
QnOy5 MOO oQ h
AMBIENT NOISE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION S1B2 0 (0 S00 Tobio XIV f or rolovent motocrological inf ormation) 70 T O b E D O E'D I S O N C O M P d N Y
,, Davis-Beise Nuclear Power Station N nvir nmen al Noise Surny E 60 Z
o o 50 , - O, O , 1 [ 40 \ cn . T3 + 30 a j tu 20 % ,-v ~ - - s n a 8 m E 8 c-o
'N O '
!o l Tested By:
Q Acoustic Technology, Inc. I
-10 7
p o 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 FREQUENCY (Hz) O O O
O o e 0 AMBIENT NOISE FREQUENCY SPECTRUM FOR LOCATION S1E2 (#See Table XIV f or relevant meteorological inf ormation)
~
TObEDO NDISON' COMPkNY ' Davis-Beise Nuclear Power Station ( Z 60 Environmental Noise Survey o 19n S 50 o 1 o u.i j 40 . e 4
> Z 967.5 g C kpfQ 3.60
. 480
@MA_
~
d y b g y.. .. _ ,% 20 ! N 5 o U) l h y 10 i a a. m O O o 8 : u) o Tested By: i Q Acoustic Technolo gy, Inc. l -10 7 o 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 ! o FREQUENCY CHz)
I l 4 O < L v>-- 1 Appendix B: S t a tistic al Dis t ri'b u tio n His t o g ra m s ! f or Select Operational Measurement Locations i l I O . O J t o; [f'ff AccusTic TECHNOLOG
,U O, nv
~
Statisti$al Distribution Histogram of Noise Level Values m 50 -, i.
% of total l __. l l l l 1;0 f :- l l l l
-l l l ! samples which j-g.j I
=
30 - - ,_m l f all within each
=
I r E
,o l
-, l 2 dBA interval t - - --
___________ 2 22:22 22 22222 10 - : ::::::::: ::222: 0 __ _ _1_ _______ __u. ---- - ---- 80 90 10 0 110 dBA 30 40- 50 60 70 P Noise' Level (dBA) Histogram Values v & J' Measuromont Location: S181 D040.0DB=000.0% D060.0DB=004.2%
$ D042.0DB=000.0% D062.0DB=001.2%
O Number of Samples: 4 6 9 D064.0DB=000.0% m D044.0DB=000.0% Average: 53.8 dBA D046.0DB=000.0% D066.0DB=000.0%
$ D048.0DBeOOO.0% D068.0DB=000.0%
gi Standard D e v.iation: 2.49 dB D050.0DB=008. n_ D070.0DB=000.0% D052.0DB=035.3% b072.0DB=000.0% 0 D074.0DB=000.0% i D054.0DB=032.6%
D056.0DB=014.4% D075.ODB=000.0%
i 6-() D058.0DB=003.8% D078.0DB=000.0% O b
g Om
._ (U >
.C D "
G2
- 5 -
M .c
-- C
*'
- C ~ HHNNNNNNNN S
.O a
.O 3 g
< o. o. o. o. o.o. o. o. o.o .
y) - E u oooooooooo O - oooooooooo
@ m oooooooooo y $ m .m- m " 11 18 11 H 11 il li et il li ~
mmmmmmmmmm C2 C A Q c2 Q C2 A G Q
~
e k k k .$ k. emonvemony eesssssemm
== Oooooooooo g h
; o a o c c c a c2 ca c2 m f 3 o -
@ 9 j NNNNNNNNNN
, j; , E o. o. o. o...
o c) m. v.e. in. Q oooooyNMoo Q O o o o o 02 in M o o
@ O m oooooooooo
.- m o II il if H ll N ll il 18 11 mmmmmmmmmm O . ,,
** a c ch o a c a n a ch j- ... . .
I I emonvemone
'+-- v v in n io n in e o e o o oooooooooo m amamooms=a f**
C .______, (U n u _____ <
?'
O v
.y .__ _
- W e u Z ihio ..J i
________]ll$111 1 Il 3
$ o
- C ._______-___-_- i ll 1 11,1 3 .-
m I . Z u)
. C) 3 o ..
C < - OQ m __..__. ., , . _
.+.s c ..
O o o _
$T h .
J G h Q -l-
- E in O
- C C M o M .. c 0 E -
e u n o oe
'i: a gau q)
.- a C
=W G nG @6 Q (U N 3 y g $ o o 3>
* :s z<m O
b b Acoustic TECHNOLOGY INC. R.7
}
v v v Statistical Distribution Histogram of Noise Level Values
~
75 . .- : , ; _,jj. l
% of ' total 60
.' samples which
~ll . __
45 - tall within each
"_ !i.
= !
- 2 dBA interval 30 - -
-- i _.. _ _ . ____. .._
15 "S 30 40 50 60 70 80 00 10 0 110 dBA Noiso' Level (dBA)
] -
t
, Histogram Values Measurement Location: S1K1
> D046.0DD=000.0% D066.0DD=0CO.3%
8 c Number of Samples. 7 54 D048.0DB=000.0% D068.0DB=000.0% D050.0DB=000.0% D070.0DD=000.0%
$ Average: 59.3 dBA D052.0DB=000.0% D072.0DB=000.0%
O D054.0DB=000.0% D074.0DB=000.0% q Standard Devia1 ion: 1.57 dB D056.ODB=000.0% D076.0DB=OOO.0% D058.0DB=054.7% D078.0DB=000.0% I D060.0DB=027.7% D000.0DB=000.0% 8 D062.0DB=016.1% D002.0DB=000.0% g D069.0DB=000.9% D084.0DB=000.0%
? -
z 9
Statistical Distribution Histogram of Noise Level Values 75 .-+.-_ -
% of total S -
.; _,1 60 -r- i: ~
samples which j , _4.):. 71;{4 _U; I - _p
~
I,5 . # .__ f all within each Q l i- __I _. _
; ZZ EZZ_
~
2 dBA interva! 30 -- -t_ . _UZ g ._ _-_ i5
-s
" I 0 110 d8A 90 60 70 80 - 10 0 30 40 50 m
- Noise ~ Level (dB A) e= Histogram Values n Measuremont Location: 5101 p. D036.0DB=000.07 D056.0DB=053.3% 9 947 D038.0DB=000.0% D058.0DB=012.6% Number of Samples: D060.ODB=002.1%
.,I D040.0DB=000.0%
Average: 55.8 dBA D042.0DB=000.0% 0062.0DB=000.8% 1.54 dB D044.0DB=000.0% D064.0DB=000.0%
, Standard Deviation: D066.0DB=000.0%
D046.0DB=000.0%
;; D048.0DB=000.0% D068.0DB=000.0%
D056.0DB=000.0% D070.0DB=000.0% 0052.0Du=000.4% D072.0DB=000.0% D054.0DB=030.6% D074.0DB=000.0% rg 9 9 9 e
o v o ss o V Statistical Distribution Histogram of Noise Level Values 75 i = ' ~~
, -+ - . ,
r l __ - % of total 60 ~ -- i samples which 45 f all within each h_ 30 5 ._ 2 dBA interval 15 = , i E 2_.-." -- O t+ ~- - I E -l -
'lo 40 50 60 10 80 90 100 110 dBA P Noise' Level (dBA) u, Histogram Values
; :;,)
.f Measuremont Location: S 1 B2
> D030.0DB=000.0% D050.0DB=002.1%
fj D032.0DB=000.0% D052.0DB=001.0%
- f. Number of Samples.: 700 D034.0DB-000.0% D054.0DB=000.0%
i Average: 45.0 dBA D036.0DB=000.0% D056.0DB=000.0%
?;
D038.0DB=000.0% D058.0DB=000.0% Standard Deviation: 1.52 dB D040.0DB=000.0% D060.0DB=000.0% {" D042.0DB=000.0% D062.0DB=000.0%
- D044.0DB=062.0%
i D064.0DB=000.0%
, D046.0DB=030.8% D066.0DB=000.0%
D048.0DB=004.0% D068.0DB=000.0% (5
Statistical Distribution Histogram of Noise Level Values 75 -,
, ; , _7 , ,
% of total
'~
--t
~-
60 ii ._ . samples which q_ !._I_
._ _ _p ___, ,
l--
--- f all within each 2 dBA interval 30 -- -
A __. ___
~~ - ---
----- 2 I 15 '
--EiC ___.
0 -
< ! N 110 dBA 60 70 80 90 10 0 30 40 50 to Noise ~ Level (dBA) e, Histogram Values j ,
Measuromont Location: S1E2 i? D030.0DB=000.0% D050.0DB=000.6% D032.0DB=000.0% D052.ODB=000.0% Number of Samples: 1178 D054.0DD=000.0% n D034.0DB=000.0% J Average: 47.0 dBA D036.0DB=000.0% D056.0DB=000.0% Standard Deviation: 1.02 dB 9038.0DBa000.0% D058.0DB=000.0'.
-i D040.0DB=000.0% D060.0DB=000.0%
{ '; D042.0DB=000.0% D062.0DB=000.0%
.; D044.0DB=000.0% D064.0DB=000.0%
l; D046.0DB=049.4% D066.0DB=000.0% D048.0DB=049.7% D068.ODB=000.0% o G O e
v-55a C
~ >
Q w 3 f'i J 5m o o c-6 .5
- -4 nununnunun g .
G 3 m in o o o o o o o o o
= * * * =
o E - D < o' o' o' o o o' o o o o' O m N e oooooooooo U $ m _ V oooooooooo
" Il 11 Il il H fl it lI il N o m se CQ m m C"4 c3 CQ G2 CQ
@ omomomanno ll gi I
I :- I m o.o. o. o. o.o.o.o. o o. neeeoneemo ll l l o eeeeonosom O ----- ---- ooooooooeo y l; l g 3 m o c o c ca m o c o g g, O ll l l $ J ll 1 l
*nunununnnn
. :ll l l E O lg m o. o. o. o m. n.
. . e. m. ..
l l - ooooooonoo
.m_ ll l lo a oooo-neooo Im o oooooooooo O i 11 I , na nanann n n i I e mmmmmmmmmm Z -
lill I I comomomoom I!Ill g o. o.. o o.o. o. o . .o.o o. til
% ; illit n e o m o e: v e m o O 6 lill filo eveeinnnone lilm oooooooooo llll
;;;g ;;g c o n c o c o o c. c
.Illi Ill m ..._-..
- Illl ill n
u ._____- o e i lill lilo e u V o . i illi illi lil" Ill y _ g till lli e m
.. lill llI o u
.a lill Ill o ._
lll1 ll1." 'o ,- m C t.0 m 0 _llllllllElP
' m e ..-- ---- n 1 O -_______-___,_ - l o .. i e ..
,o I ill c e<e I
~
11 11 111 III
.2
+-
mmo - 48 r3 .. D +e II Ill o o u) Il lil o o .o o .e
.- i a m >
l Q ' ll lll' s S ,
~~l ll Ill .
C Eo S O I C ll lll o W l
- o ll i.11 E -
.- ll llo o o GG '5
& il j" w M -
l 3 e 5mD w e
. Li .L - - I I, ,o
*
- E S 5 C 8 9 R 2 o a > +-
- s z<m p
-v/
m., f1 C1IHIC ~,,' G 1 C ', - 'JC,
~'
B.7
Statistical Distribution Histogram of Noise Level Values 75 .
% of' total 60 ; i .i ,
samples which
._ t=ll 1
43 ; 5 '- f all within each
- ._ .i -
30 i,! [E 2 dBA interval
. _r g_ _ _ . . _....__
g._ -- - 15 ---- 0 -- 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 dBA m Noise Level (dBA) s Histogram Values Measuromont Location: SSH1 d D046.ODB=000.0% D066.0DD=001.0% O D048.0DB=0 0.0% D068.ODB=000.5% d Number of Samples: 580 D050.0DB=000.0% D070.0DD=000.0% 9] D052.0DB=000.0% D072.0DB=000.0%
;c; Average: 61.7 dBA D054.0DB=000.0% D074.0DB=000.0%
Standard Deviation: 1.32 dB D056.0DB=000.0% D076.0DB=000.0%
, o' D058.0DB=000.0% D078.0DB=000.0%
y D060.0DB=027.5% D080.ODB=000.0% D062.0DB=061.3% D082.0DB=000.0% liO84.'0DB=000.0% D064.0DB=009.4%
,i
'6 )
q f-5
~
O O O
r-- v g C - O N
.o
- CO >
w
.C (D g (D
~
C l'~'N (/)
'2* NNNNNNNNNN O -
tu -
< m e. m. o o. o. o.o o. o G 3 m oooooooooo oooooooooo O
O E _ u ooooo00000 Q ca
< Il la II H H 18 la 11 H fl g qfj N OJ c3 f%h Ch m CL M CQ m a GQ m
)
- V Q c A A 02 A Q Q C3 Q o
rrt W -
~
- o. o. o. o. o. o. o.o o..o . .
emoneemoNe I to eendosommm oooooooooO g a c C2 G Q Q A C3 C2 Q 1 3 o 9 O
@ > nuununnuun O g O. o. o. o. o.it) n. o.M. o.
o o c o o o N N.=*.=4 m
w N ocoooNoooo l ** Oooooooooo g o O II U 11 18 Il 38 11 Il 13 II
*~ m o mmammmmmma oaaaaaaaac O e.
Z o o.o o.o. o.o. o. o. o. emonwemons 1. i x e e n us in n n c e e
% oooooooooo O g smocomammo E '
m Q <
,, 6 r-----
' o CD (J i O
" v v
w - M I O
'" o u
$ o J
C
.]IllllllE10llllIll l l
h gl
-o
,g e
, o O ---
O m a
.- 2 cn 3 o .. e D
5 m< E (O O O w ___. a y ._ w .. . y a .m 0 W . o O _ . g
- _: a m
>e c E m ,o m
D o m E O o o O # e n o a'- e a e .o 5mu w c
+.* a gea o o a > ~
D
+'
R S T R $ 2 z<m
,, W l )
v
' $ hCCU6 TIC 3C.'CLCG7 b-! C .
s-g; B.9
ur g C - OM
.o
- M >
E C)
> O C NNNNNNNNNN 0 .{-
m, *Q M. W o _ . .O. O O. O . O.O . O.O.
,o - - A MOOOOOOOOO n 3: CD OOOOOOOOOO W ~
O E ::: u < 0000000o00 n n nn ua nnun b O M N m AAAAAAAMAG g $ M - u accQAAAQQQ O o O. O. O. O. O. O
. . .O. O O.
03 :- neomoneemo
> U3 c 4 c d N b N N .N CD COOOOOOOOO m Q C4 AAACCCG =="*
o
@ 3
> o S a NNNNNNNNNN O >
j O c. c.o. o. m.m. .o o. m
& OOOOOh@MMO OOOOOcNOOO o a
" OOOOOOOOOO 11 n a n il 11 11 a 18 11
@ o O AAAAAAAMMA
.- o> o commammaso Q M.
0000000000 Z ------ i z c, e, e, C,Dnnonne O N e d CD O 4-= t OoOoooOOOO cooaococcc O ' 8 E ! m Q < m E a G O w - m m
.- o V Z O e
J O
.O w a
i 3 h = 0 I LI o u) -
;; Jilliglilllil i il 11 z e 2
a ::
- c) < C
.O O cc (D o u
- u-
" u "m -----.
o o O a _a am pm
- , a Q - Em g C d m- o * .. u o E o e u
._ o a
o aa
~ - -
w
@ } h m
$mu ' c
@ m o e
m e O m m O o E a *>
- m -
-: Z <m u -
O
,- _, , " ,, y
-a.
B.10
O O O Statistical Distribution Histogram of ' Noise Level Values i
% of' ' total <
40 L samples which
== -
i M- --r 30 lll:-
- f all within each 20 - - 2 dBA interval 10 4:
__" "- Wile.E-0 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 dBA 30 . co Noise' Level (dBA) Histogram Values
- 3. . g Measuremont Location: SSA2 h D026.0DB=000.0% D046.0DB=011.2%
j.{ D028.0DB=000.0% D048.0DB=005.0% G Number of Samples: 811 D030.0DB=000.0% D050.0DD=000.2% 21 0032.0DB=000.0% D052.0DB=000.0% r; Ayerage: 42.6 dBA D004*0D8*000'U* D034"UD8"000 0*
, Standard Deviation: 2*28 dB D036.0DB=000.0% D056.0DB=000.0%
!f' D038.0DB=000.0% D058.0DB=000.0%
h! D040.0DB=026.1% D060.0DB=000.0% 1, D042.0DB=038.8% D062.0DB=000.0%
- i. D044.0DB=018.4% D064.0DB=000.0%
'j s)
Statistical Distribution Histogram of Noise Level Values
~
50 ; ,, , al % of' total 40 l-
-- samples which r- -
30 - f all within each 20 ----~~IIIIZZZ --------------- 2 dBA interval m_______ 10 ----------::E_ EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE ::::= 0 ________ 60 70 80 90 10 0 110 dBA 30 40 50 CD L Noise' Level (dB A) PJ Histogram Values
; o
- Measuromont Location: SSE2 D060.0DB=000.3%
D040.0DB=000.0% D042.0DB=000.0% D062.0DB=000.3% I}I D064.0DB=000.2% Number of Samples: 1645 D044.0DB=000.0%
'}~! D046.0DB=000.0% D066.0DB=000.2%
Average
- 53.3 dBA D048.0DB=000.0% D068.0DB=000.1%
Standard Deviation: 1.85 dB D050.0DB=002.9% D070.ODB=000.0%
-i D052.0DB=044.2% D072.0DD=000.0%
P, D054.0DB=040.8% D074.0DP=000.0% D056.0DB=008.5% D076.0DD=000.0% a D078.0DB=000.0% D050.0DB=001.7% N
.J 9 9 e
0 0 0 Statistical Distribution Histogram of ' Noise Level Values 50 ,
--- % of' total 40 '
samples which 30 f all within each 5.0 2 dBA interval 20 -
! ss __.
h 10 ,,, I ---_______________ 7 gg 7 g ________
'iime .I E un,_ $ -------------- --------
0 ---- - - - - 110 dBA 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 co Noise' Level (dBA) W
~
Histogram Values 9 Measuromont Location: S2C O D032.0DB=000.0% D034.0DB=000.0% D052.0DB=007.2% D054.0DB=001.5% M Number of Samples: 1126 D036.0DB=000.0% - D056.0DD=009.0% l D038.OuB=000.0% D058.0DB=004.9% r, A y e r a g e *- 49.1 dBA D040.0DB=000.0% D060.0DB=000.7% Standard Deviation: 3.90 dB D042.0DB=000.0% D062.0DB=000.0% N D044.0DB=008.8% D064.0DB=000.0% Y D046.0DB=024.6% D066.0DB=000.0%
. D048.0DB=026.9% D068.0DB=000.0% . D050.0DB=015.2% D070.0DB=000.0%
s>
.I e
il
r- i O 5>
.o
- (U C C) b
-. 5 g b b m g
.Y h 3O U (
Nm MNNNNNNNNN g . o E _ u n.o o.o. o.o. o.o.o. o . Q o g N m oooooooooo
$ m _ oooooooooo U V oooooooooo O 13 : ll l3 n n if H la at Q :- mmmmmmmmmm mmcomaamma
> gn o. o. o. o o.o. o.o.o o.
_ g @ CD o N T c CD o 03 e m T T W1/3 W W W d C C
- 3 oooooooooo
> g , mammmmmmmm g
O E nunununnun o E u o. o. o. o. O. b. CD. 4. c. P3 . m o G o o o o N 03 o o o o 0000000000 O O e oooooooooo Il n n n 18 il 18 il n it gg Z mmmmmmmmmm I x commmmmmam
% i o. o. o o. o o. o. o.o
. . . . o omon,emon, O . o
= nnnnnnneee oooooooooo ooaoooaooo
& m I
6 < o CD Q) " u a O
.w v
- < w o cD M
- u 5 o J
m
$ m C \
o O 5 m J
- z w a m
U _____. o c , - < . c. g O v- CD o 6 , u. ** c3 .. H y) -- o m en a 1
*~ - I o
O _j 3ay .~> Q , - Eo*
.-. ___m g g Q m --lUllIMHdNRAunusu i o w 0
o E e
-d" O
.=
y n oa W -- y y ('0 C D
.=
03 o
+' c E
- 8
- o >~
0 H 8 8 8 3 n lE a z<m O
=
'." ] ;,}* ', ,']
-[' S~((-]
B.14 .. l 1
l V' C) o LJ Statistical Distribution Histogram of Noise Level Values
-s- -
75 , , , ., ' l
% of' total 60 4 , -
sarnples which < _!. l _____._ 45 =l ; - f all w,th,n i i each um : -
~~~-
2 dBA interval 30 __ 15
;1 -j _
50 60 70 80 90 10 0 110 dBA 30 40 to
~
Noise' Level (dBA) w Histogram Values G .'4 z.y Measurernont Location: S' 4 C D032.0DB=000.0% D052.0DB=000.5% [i0 , D034.0DB=000.0% D054.0DB=000.1% Nurnber of Samples: 1139 D036.0DB=007.9% ,D056.0DB=000.0%
;Jj 9038.0DB=051.1% D058.0DB=000.0%
Average: 38.8 dBA D040.CDB=037.4% D060.0DB=000.0%
-; Standard Dev.i a t ,i o n : 1.94 dB 0042.0DB=000.5% D062.0DB=000.0%
LiO 4 4 . 0 D B = 000. 5% D064.0DB=000.0% D046.0DB=000.3% D066.0DB=000.0% D049.0DB=000.5% D068.0DB=000.0% 0050.0DB=000.3% D070.0DBm000.0% [ *! 6
. . . _ . . . - - =_ ... . . . ..
, i 1 s
i Q r. ' s
/ >
I Appendix C: Cumulative Percent. Distribution Curves From Histogram Values f or Select Operational Measurement Locations - s f .
- . , . ~-
- ~
./
f, -
.e I
l
~
O ' l m l-l
~a.
o A % P c x
~
, '.s ,
O- ,
+ '
i) ; Acoustic TECHNOLOGY lNC.
.. ~ '
__.-.r--.,..-,.., _ , .-_,_ , _ . , . . . _ _ , _ . . . - - - . . , . - . _ . - . . - - _ - . _
O O O 10 0. ~ - i 90 -- l l l 80 - m 70 - 0 4 60 - F z w 50 - O E 40 g , o. 30 - e 20 - \ 10 - \ 0 , , , , , , , , , 40 60 70 80 ff 20 30 50 R NOISE LEVEL IN dB(A) 8 . 9 o
, y CUMUL ATIVE PERCENT DISTRIBUTION CURVE DERIVED 1
FROM HISTOGR AM VALUES FOR LOC ATION S181 g (representation of the percentage of samples which 6 exceed a given noise level) O z P
100 , 90 - 80 - m 70 -
\
0 4 60 - g z \ w 50 0
$ 40 a.
30 - o L 20 - ; 10 .\ v 0 , , , , , , , , , 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 g N OIS E LEVEL IN dB(A) 8 9 q C-U M U L A T I V E PERCENT DISTRIBUTION CURVE DERIVED @ FROM HISTOGR AM V ALUES FOR LOC ATION S1H1 fo (representation of the percentage of samples which exceed a given noise level) 1-9 O O O
O O O 100 - 90 - 80 - f m 70 -
< k 60 -
g z \ w 50 -
@ 40 \
- a. -
30 - 20 - 10 - ze 0 , , , ; , , , L , , ifehy 20 30 40 50 80 70 80 N NOISE LEVEL IN dB(A) 8 9 CUMUL ATIVE PERCENT DISTRIBUTION CURVE DERIVED y FROM HISTOGR AM V ALUES FOR LOC ATION S1K1 g (representation of the percentage of samples which exceed a given noise level) z 9
100 - 90 - 80 - m 70 - \ 0 4 60 - m 50 o
" 40 g
c. 30 -
= 20 -
10 -
- e. 0 , , , , , , , ,
$s1H 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 N' NOISE LEVEL IN dB(A) 8 5 5 q CUMUL ATIVE PERCENT DISTRIBUTION CURVE DERIVED y FROM HISTOGR AM V ALUES FOR LOC ATION S1U1 g (representation of the percentage of samples which o exceed a given noise level) O r P O O O
O
~
O O 100 -
)
90 - . 80 - m 70 - 0 4 60 - z w 50 - O E 40 m
- a. -
30 - vi 20 --
\
10 -
\ -
aug o , , , , , , , , MS$ 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 N NOISE LEVEL IN dB(A) 8
- 8 o
--I CUMUL ATIVE PERCENT DISTRIBUTION CURVE DERIVED Q FROM HISTOGR AM V ALUES FOR LOC ATION S182 l 5 ( r e p r e s e n't a t i o n o f t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f samples which exceed a given noise level) j h
100 - 90 - 80 - m 70 - O
< 60 --
z m 50 - 0 C 40 a. 30 - o
- l 20 -
10 - \ 0 , , , , , , , , ,
@' j' 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 g NOISE LEVEL IN dB(A) 8 9
y CUMUL ATIVE PERCENT DISTRIBUTION CURVE DERIVED 1 FROM HISTOGR AM V ALUES FOR LOC ATION S1E2 g (representation of the percentage of samples which 5 exceed a given noise level) z P e 9 9
O O O 100 - 90 - 80 - --
- m. 70 -
e
< 60. )
z w 50 - ' O E 40 g
- a. '
30 - o u 20 - \ 10 - 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 ll
- y NOISE LEVEL IN dB(A) 8 9
C-U M U L A T I V E PERCENT DISTRIBUTION CURVE DERIVED I $ FROM HISTOGR AM V ALUES FOR LOC ATION SSBi 1 z (representation of the percentage of samples which 5 exceed a given noise level) l z 9
100 - 90 - - 80 - m 70 - 0 4 60 - z m 50 - O E 40 g c. 30 - o
'm 20 -
10 (
. .m o , , , , , , ; , , ,
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 g NOISE L E V'E L IN dB(A) 8 El q CUMUL ATIVE PERCENT DISTRIBUTION CURVE DERIVED
@ FROM HISTOGR AM V ALUES F O R L O C A T I O N 'S S H 1
-(representation of the percentage of s a rnple s w hic h
~
5 exceed a given noise level) z P e ---- - ---- _ -- G G
O O O 100.- 90 - so -
- m 70 -
c
< 80 -
I-z us 50 o E 40 g n. 30 - in e 20 - 10 - l C 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 fi N NOISE LEVEL IN dB(A) o CUMUL ATIVE PERCENT DISTRIBUTION CURVE DERIVED __i
,$ FROM HISTOGR AM V ALUES FOR LOC ATION S 5 J 1~
i
$ (representation of the percentage of samples which exceed a given noise level) z P
l 100 - T 90 - \ 80 - m 70 - 0
*C e0 -
t-z m 50 - O [ 40
- n. '
30 - 9
; 20 -
10 - 0 -
- 20 30 40 50 80 70 80 g NOISE LEVEL IN dB(A) 8 9
CUMUL ATIV E PERCENT DISTRIBUTION CURVE DERIVED R c FROM HISTOGR AM V ALUES FOR LOC ATION SST1~ g (representation of the percentage of samples which 5 exceed' a given noise level) r P e G G
O O' O 100.- - 90 - 80 - m 70 - 0
< 60 -
I-z m 50 E 40 i m
~
30 - \
\
.e 2 20 -
' \
~m,. 0 20
. i 30 i
40 ( 50
. i 60 70 80 g
t NOISE LEVEL IN dB(A) 8 9 q GU MU L ATIV E PERCENT DISTRIBUTION CURVE DERIVED l @ FROM HISTOGR AM V ALUES FOR LOC ATION SS A2 x g (repre sentation of the percentage of samples which 5 exceed a'given noise level) 5r P
100.- 90 - 80 - uj 70 - . 0 4 80 - z uj 50 i o
@ 40 a.
30 - P C 20 - 10 - 0 , , , , , , x, , , , , M6ih 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 N NOISE LEVEL IN dB(A) 8 8 o i OU MU L ATIV E PERCENT DISTRIBUTION CURVE DERIVED y FROM HISTOGR AM V ALUES FOR LOC ATION S 5'E 2 g (representation of the percentage of sample s which exceed a given noise level) {< E P O O O
O O O i 100 - 90 - 80 - \ m 70 - \
- 0
- < 60 --
- p -
z W 50 E
, 40 \
a. 30 - P w 20 -
~
\ t 10 -
4 0 .
. i . ;
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 g NOISE LEVEL IN dB(A) 8 8 CUMUL ATIVE PERCENT DISTRIBUTION CURVE DERIVED 8 FROM HISTOGR AM V ALUES FOR LOC ATION SEC l l fo (representation of the percentage of samples which
, exceed a given noise level)
- Q z 9
100 90 - 80 - m 70 - e
< 60 -
1-
.z uJ SO O
E 40 g n. 30 - O
; 20 -
10 - 0 (, 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 g NOISE LEVEL IN dB(A) i 8 a N q CUMUL ATIVE PERCENT DISTRIBUTION CURVE DERIVED 1 8 1 FROM HISTOGR AM V ALUES' FOR LOC ATION S3C g (representation of the percentage of samples which 5 exceed a given noise level) O r l ? e_- G G
O O- 0 100 , 90 - 80 - m 70 - \ 0 60 - 2 m 50 - E 40 \ m i 0-30 - . n i G 20 -
'o e
m, 0 , , , , , , , , , , (WS5AP 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 N ~ NOISE LEVEL IN dB(A) 8 9 C-U M U L A TI V E PERCENT DISTRIBUTION CURVE DERIVED
$ FROM HISTOGR AM V ALUES FOR LOC ATION S4C l h (representation of the percentage of samples which exceed a. given noise l e v e l-)
. 1
.O i
a 4
- -i 1 01 i
j-j. METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING ~ i- 1983 DIURNAL WINDR0SE STUDY b-1983 LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL MONTHLY.. [h l.
~
DATA COMPARIS0N 1983 ANNUAL WINDROSE REPORT , C a t u i -- l' i I. i a L (. I - i-1- , e d -- wa yo g- -+ pep-gy , w--g-- p--- g-3.-w* msg-g ' r?eh1r**-WeWP % W -eebw
- w m tw - Gr M W-T *t FN N h* W1' W WP "*H W T T M g
- p+ p- m T
- e? p -= rfM P-'P'T
I w 7o-I v 1983 DIURNAL WINDROSE STUDY
*g .
e
- A l10
- by Jennifer Scott-Wasilk Davis-Besse Nuclear Power' Station Annual Environmental Operating Report Toledo Edison' Company
(. January 1984 l' t .. - n l-a
; ,, - - . ~ . -e,--..-,---- , ., . , . , nn..,--- - - - , , - - - - - , , , . - , . ~ . .- ..-,.--,-,-,.n.-.,--,---~.. . . . - . - - . - - -. - , , - - - = ,-.- - , -
' Purpose LThe purpose of this project was to examine monthly windroses to determine if the Davis-Besse meteorological data exhibited any seasonal diurnal patterns which may have indicated possible lake effects.
Summa ry
,The diurnal windrose data provide evidence of wind flow reversals that are characteristic of lakebreeze effects. These data provide support for the lakebreeze and landbreeze flows that are modelled in the Emergency Plan Class A Mode 1.
O l
.f~k ,
- (._/ - .
"~w r w
'l l
Meteorological Monitoring System The. Davis-Besse Meteorological Monitoring System consists of three levels of instrumentation on two towers which are located about 1 km inland. av
.The Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station site is on the Lake Erie shoreline j 25 miles. east of, Toledo. On the' freestanding 100-m main tower, wind speed and direction.are measured _at the 75-m and 100-m levels, and dew point is measured at the 10-m and 100-m levels. Ambient temperature is measured at the.10-m, 75-m and 100-m levels with the temperature from the 10-m level
- being the only one recorded.
The.other two temperature; sensors.are used to determine the differential l temperature between the 10-m and 75-m levels, and between the 10-m and
.100-m levels.
.A 10-m satellite tower-is located about 35-m-from the base of the free-standing tower. Wind speed and direction are measured at the 10-m level.
Rainfall is measured at the base of this tower at the 1-m level.
, All: data are- recorded on strip charts and are also read by a DEC PDP 11/34 computer which calculated the. hourly averages used in this study. The hourly averages are stored on magnetic tape. Sunrise-sunset tables are
-incorporated into <the computer software to determine the diurnal phase.
. . Windrose Calculations 1 Windrose graphs' comparing average wind speed and wind direction persistence _ : .for the 16-compiss point sectors were prepared from hourly averages of the
- l. - meteorological data (Figuresi1-72). For each month, six windrose graphs were prepared. These graphs consisted of diurnal graphs (day and night) for.each of the three levels. 'The. data used to prepare the daytime
. diurnal windroses were for the hours from one hour after sunrise to one
- hour before cunset. For the nighttime graphs,-t e data were from one hour
-before - sunset t'o one hour after sunrise.
i l- .The determination of the directions from which lake and land breeze flows L:~ occurred was based.upon the Class A Model' work of'Dr. Ashok Kumar, Univer-s sity of Toledo. Land breeze flow was from wind directions of 133.5 degrees Lakebreeze flows were;from wind directions of 337.5 degrees
~
to 317.5 degrees.
. through 113.5 degrees'. Flow directions parallel t'o the Lake Erie shoreline were ftwa 113.5 degrees through 133.5 degrees and from 317.5 degrees
-through 337.5 degrees.' Those. compass sectors from which lakebreeze flows
_ occurred using-the above criteria were.the N, NNE, NE, ENE, E, and ESE
- sectors. .Those compass ~ sectors from whichLlandbreeze flows occurred.were the SE,-SSE, S, SSW, SW, WSW,.W, WNW and NW sectors. Only the NNW sector was" centered on a point.from which flows were parallel:to-the lakeshore.
LThis division of wind data was used. to prepare Table I.
'e V?
U Results and Discussion The windrose graphs can be seen in Figures 1 through 72. The flow rever- O sals which changed from lakebreeze during the day to landbreeze during the night can be seen in Table I. The most marked diurnal reversals in flow are seen in May, June, July, August and September. This flow reversal pattern can be seen at all three levels measured during these months. Consistent with the findings of Shearer and Kaleel (1982), during the winter months of January, November and December, a persistent landbreeze occurred both day and night. They found that during the winter months, especially in the Great Lakes region, the water temperatures are higher than over land. This results in very unstable atmospheres over water and can set up a persistent landbreeze when gradient winds are light. From Table II, the predominant diurnal wind directions for 1983 can be l seen. The most predominant landbreeze winds were from the S through WSW sectors. The most predominant lakebreeze winds were from the E and ENE i l sectors. Table II lists the predominant wind direction for each month, level and diurnal phase. For each windrose, the predominant wind direc-tion is the one which occurred with the greatest frequency. Also included 1 on the table is the percent persistence of that wind direction and tne 1 average wind speed for winds from the predominant direction. )
. O O
- . Acknowledgements
' Review assistance was provided by Kelly Clayton Nash. Jeff Lietzow and
-Mark Williams provided the computer programming. Gary Downing coordinated the maintenan'ce of the-meteorological monitoring system. Yvonne Leidorf prepared the windrose graphs.
References Shearer, D. L. and R. J. Kaleel. 1982. " Critical Review of Studies on Atmospheric Dispersion in Coastal Regions."' NUREG/CR-2754. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. l t z d 9
I i O l l i d Tables 1 - 2 Monthly Diurnal Windrose and Predominant Wind Directions S
.O L
-w+ n - -- - -e- _- --- ,,n-,--,--,---e ---.-- ww-,,,o w ,--- - -- - - ---mw..---,__-,-- - - - , ~ - .,, , - - - , ---,, - -
-h.
TABLE 1 Diurnal Windrose (1983) 10-m Day '10-m Night 75-m Day 75-m Night 100-m Day 100-m Night Paral- Paral- Paral- Paral- Paral- Paral-1el lel- 1el lel lel lel , :From- From to From From to From From to From From to From From to From From to Lake Land Shore Lake' Land Shore Lake Land Shore Lake Land Shore Lake Land Shore Lake Land Shore Jcn 26.0 71.0 3.0 18.5' 73.0 8.5 21.5 73.0 5.5 18.0 70.0 12.0 21.5 73.5 5.0 18.0 70.5 11.5 Fab 45.$ 53.0 1.5 38.5 56.0 5.5. 39.5. 57.5 3.0 37.0 59.5 3.5 37.5 59.0 3.5 35.5 59.0 5.5
. Mar 51.0 -43.0 6.0 49.5 44.0' 6.5 45.5 48.5 6.0 49.5 45.0 5.5 43.5 49.0 7.5 48.5 44.5 7.0 Apr 41.5 51.5 7.0 38.5 50.5 11.0 41.5 49.5 9.0 '39.0 51.0 10.0 39.5 50.5 9.0 36.5 53.0 10.5 Hzy 37.5 58.5 4.0 30.5 65.5 4.0 37.5 58.0 4.5 31.0 64.0 5.0 42.0 55.5 2.5 33.5 62.0 4.5 Jun 61.5 36.5 2.0 32.0 .67.0 1.0 60.0 37.5 2.5 34.5 64.0 1.5 57.0 40.5 2.5 32.5 66.5 1.0 Jul 38.0 56.5 5.5 21.5 76.5 2.0 36.0 58.0 6.'O 22.0 75.0 3.0 35.5 59.0 5.5 23.0 74.0 3.0 t'
Aug- 54.5 42.0 3.5 29.5 69.0 1.5 53.5 41.5 5.0 36.5 60.5 3.0 53.5 42.5 4.0 37.0 60.0 3.0 i
'Srp 36.0 .60.5 3.5 21.5 78.0 0.5 36.0 60.5 3.5 22.0 75.0 3.0 35.5 61.0 3.5 22.5 74.5 3.0 Oct 40.5 58.5 -1.0 35.5 60.5 4.9 40.0 58.0 2.0- 38.5 58.0 3.5 39'.0 58.5 2.5 39.5 56.5 4.0
- .Nov 20.0 71.5 8.5 20.5 74.0 5.5 17.0 73.5 9.5 19.0 74.0 7.0 16.5 74.5 9.0 19.0 74.5 6.5
- Dec 21.5 75.0 3.5 23.0 76.0- 1.0 22.5 75.5 2.0 23.0 75.5 1.5 * * * * *
- i 1
This table shows the percentage distribution of wind direction at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. The winds from the lake are from the N, NNE, NE, ENE, E and ESE sectors. The winds from the land are from the SE, SSE, S, SSW, SW, WSW, W, WNW and NW sectors. The winds parallel to the shore are from the NNW sector.
- Data Unavailable t
r .
TABLE II Prc.domin:nt Wind Directions (1983) 10-m 75-m 100-m Day Night Day Night Day Night WD % WS WD % WS WD % WS WD % WS WD % WS WD % WS J:n WSW 23.0 14.0 WSW 19.0 11.0 WSW 21.0 18.5 WSW 21.5 14.5 WSW 22.0 18.0 WSW 22.0 15.0 Fb SSW 17.0 9.5 ENE 12.0 12.5 SSW 16.5 12.0 ENE 12.0 19.0 SSW 19.0 12.5 ENE 11.5 20.0 Mar ENE 18.5 13.0 E 19.0 12.0 ENE 21.0 17.0 E 19.5 17.5 ENE 20.0 18.0 E 20.0 18.5 Apr E 19.5 14.5 E 12.0 12.5 E 18.0 21.5 E 11.0 19.5 E 18.0 23.5 NNW 10.5 18.0 May WSW 12.0 14.5 SW 12.0 9.0 WSW 13.0 17.0 SW 12.0 17.0 E 11.5 16.0 S 12.0 19.0 Jun ENE 18.5 9.5 SSW 17.5 5.5 ENE 20.5 12.5 SSW 15.0 15.0 ENE 21.0 12.5 SSW 13.0 16.0 Jul SSW 14.0 10.5 SSW 23.0 7.0 SW 12.0 14.5 SSW 17.0 15.5 SW 11.0 15.0 SSW 15.0 -18.5 Aug SW 15.0 8.5 SW 14.0 7.0 ENE 14.5 8.5 WSW 11.5 13.5 ENE 13.7 8.5 WSW 10.0 16.0 Srp SW 16.0 10.5 SSW 20.0 7.0 SW 17.0 16.0 SSW 15.0 18.0 SW 16.5 17.0 SSW 15.5 21.0 Oct SW 11.5 13.0 SSW 14.5 7.5 SW 11.5 17.0 E 10.4 19.5 SW 13.0 20.0 SW 13.0 22.5 SW 10.4 17.5 Nov WSW 17.0 18.0 WSW 14.0 14.5 WSW 16.5 24.0 WSW 13.5 21.0 WSW 17.5 25.5 WSW 14.0 23.5 Dec WSW 27.0 19.5 WSW 27.0 18.0 WSW 31.0 23.0 WSW 30.0 23.0
- 1-This table shows the cardinal compass direction from which the winds originate with the greatest frequency. This frequency l is expressed in terms of the percent (%) of time during which winds originated from the sector. Windspeed (WS) is in miles l per hour. Wind direction (WD) is degrees from North.
- Data Unavailable O O O
LO e l i Figures 1 - 72 Monthly Diurnal Wind Distribution 9 4 t 10
. l 4
, ,-.w, m,-.-- r,-. , . w, , m-, , w. , . - . . - , ,,+,s , n-r -,w-..e,-mn , , - - , - - --,--w---,ga--w ,, eN--,-m---~we -
l' O NNW N NNE WNW ENE W ' o ' r , E [ l 10 g ,
} 1, * \ ,
)
wsw ESE SW ' SE SSW SSE S
- Wind Direction (%)
MMAI Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS , O JANUARY 1983 l 10 m LEVEL Figure 1
N I NNW NNE NW NE [ i l WNW ENE Calm W i o J I 'O WSW ESE SW SE SSW SSE E j m Wind Direction (%) wm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE ! MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION
~
~
. DIURNA-L-NIGHTTIME HOURS 0, JANUARY 1983 10- m LEVEL Figure 2
? . -
o n NNW g NNE ,- NW ._ NE I h g WNW [ ENE w l J. .. l i 10 m , gg-
~y 1r
't
[ I ~ g ,- Q o : + - f WSW q ESE SW SE ssW - SSE s
-Wind Direction (%)
rm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONT.HLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL-DAY HOURS lO JANUARY 1983 75 m level Figure 3
+
r =--* s--*- --9 - ' * "m *-'-
"--TrC' "' *""
l N ! NNW NNE WNW ENE W ' o
'~ -
- . xa E w ESE ssW SSE s
r m Wind (m ) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION
. DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS 0 JANUARY 1983 75 m LEVEL Figure 4
- \
O NNW N NNE , l NW NE
~
\ w
^
CNW ENE 1 I - w
+ J.. ,. / g- - 1 i a
[(}j 4
,o '
a o\c CSW
]
ESE SW ]. SE SSW SSE S m Wind D*rection (%) ydes Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION
.DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS O JANUARY 1983 100 m LEVEL-Figure S 4 ,.g ,--,m--. e,-- ,-.--,~e--.- w- --- , - - - * - - ,---e +----e-,r y p-- --
N h NNW NNE e NW NE f e h WNW ENE 0
, u.; ..,, un O F
+ 'Y r
?x' rf r e s' -
I 1 [j { WSW ESE SW SE SSW SSE S ununummes Wind Direction (%) wMm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS JANUARY 1983 0 100-m LEV EL Figure 6
l O u NNW NNE NW NE 7 l CNW ^ ENE
/ -
\
to If I 1 W ~ " Calm n \1 \ l o , , E i b 15 $ ;} ~ m , f) o t // WSW r ESE w sw / SE l SSW SSE S m Wind Direction (%) em Wind Speed (mph) L ( DAVIS-BESSE l MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION l DIURNAL- DAY- HOU RS 'O FEBRUARY 1983 10-m LEVEL Figure 7 ] mA
N $ NNW NNE NW NE r
\
Calm
\'? ' '
W * '" o a r E t + \10 k t , j)))) CSW ISE SW SE SSW - SSE s e eWd (m ) DAVIS- BES SE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS FEBRUARY 1983 9 10-m LEVEL Figure 8
r I i l l
- O u i NNW NNE NW NE
[
~
WNW ENE 0
, Calm- 1 i
$SI '
f l i s g 5 , WSW -3 ESE 4 SW SE ^ SSW SSE S l emuuuuum Wind Direction (%) wse Wind Sp d (mph) l DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION l DlURNAL-DAY HOURS !O FEBRUARY 1983 75-m LEVEL l Figure 9
- + - , , _ - - - - - - - - - . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _
l , l l ~ e NNW NNE l NW NE WNW - ENE
~
l
- - -- h Ca.lm
- . l u
q.\g;;' . 7 l WSW s ESE SW SE I SSW SSE S muunmuum Wind Direction (%) wse Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIUN AL-NIGHTTIME HOURS FEBROARY 1983 g 75-m LEVEL Figure 10
O ~ NNW NNE NW NE i
= .\
CNW ENE
.I ,
w y , "E"' e I
.s E
g 15
)
, O
\ l /
}
WSW ESE SW SE SSW SSE s - emummma Wind Direction (%) wsm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DlURNAL- DAY HOURS O FEBRUARY -1983 100-m LEVEL Figure 11 v --
. ,,--,-----,-n, - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - . - - , - - - - - - - , - - - - - , - , -
1 N NNW NNE WNW ENE w - - -- ' .
'a o -
.i c e 4
i t. 5
.__ , f C
- l 33W SSE s
r wd (m ) DAVIS-BESSE MON fHLY WIN b DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL NIGHTTIME HOURS FEBiliJARY 1983 9 l 100-m LEVEL Figure 12 l , l
~
I O ~ NNW NNE NW E f . A WNW - ENE 10 Ca m 1 g '
,a ame ,
,_ g i !10 I
\ s Q v WSW _
ESE SW SE SSW SSE S ' mumummum Wind Direction (%)
"MMA Wind Speed (mph)
! DAVIS-BESSE i MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION l DIURNAL-DAY HOURS l g' MARCH 1983 l 10-m LEVEL Figure 13
N NNW . NNE l ~ NW / 'NE A l ^ CNW ENE
- k
( -l_ _ h
,, Calm \ 1-I 5 l
e WSW ESE SW SE l SSW - SSE S
- Wind Direction (%)
rsss Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS- BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS MARCH 1983 - g 10-m LEVEL Figure 14 l .
O N NNW - NNE w NW NE E CNW ENE N 0
, .. L -. . . -
us- ;
'i .: l)j 15 I
5
; .g "l0 .
O WSW , ESE 5 SW SE SSW - SSE S ' ' - Wind Direction (%) em Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTH LY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-DAY HOURS
- MARCH 1983 lO 75-m LEVEL Figure 15 l
l N NNW NNE NW NE [gi e = i WNW ENE O Calm .
- W "
o - _ w i l E i 10 t lt s \ 1
^
asW ESE i SW SE l SSW SSE S summmmin Wind Direction (%) WA Wind Speed (mph) D AVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DlURNAL-NIGHTTlME HOURS MARCH 1983 9 75-m LEVEL ' Figure 16
i l O u NNW NNE w. NW NE
~
G} WNW -
- ENE N
15 } 3
}
5 I w . .. J. .. ..m , ujm , , g g 1 10 5 l ! o
-i
,o l
O
=*
.g 's" L
E _= SW . SE SSW . SSE S
- Iluuuuuuum Wind Direction (%)
"MMA Wind Speed (mph) l DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DlURNAL-DAY HOURS
'O MARCH 1983 100- m LEVEL Figure 17 l
N $ NNW NNE NW NE
=
f WNW ENE b g 0 1 1 I - i
, .. . . y \
, , e-
{
'N 1 1 2
- 0 g, ESE SW SE I
SSW SSE S i l m Wind Direction (%) ( FMM Wind Speed (mph) i DAVIS-BESSE l MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION ! DIURNAL-NIGHTTlME HOURS~ ! MARCH 1983 9' 100-m LEVEL naure is l
l l O N NNW NNE NW NE
=
WNW
'% ENE
( 5
. . . , w4 .
O ( WSW m ESE
.'s Y _.
l SW SE SSW SSE t S m Wind Direction (%) FMMs Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-DAY. HOURS O APRIL 1983 10-m LEVEL Figure 19 L
i l N NNW NNE NW NE
/
WNW ENE 5 W "
"d" j r- E
.l 10 I ik $ -
O s l
/
SW SE SSW SSE S
- Wind Direction (%)
rss Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESS E MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUT10N DIURNAL- NIGHTTIME HOURS APRIL '1983 $ 10-m LEVEL Figure 20
O u NNW NNE NW NE [ t WNW ENE 5 w j + f
%~ ,; 2 .. a l 10 t ,
)
O / WSW ESE N . 1 SW SE SSW ! SSE S *
. unummuum Wind Direction (%)
arece Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-DAY HOURS O APRIL 1983 75-m LEVEL Figure 21
N O NNW NNE N NW NE yk i WNW ' - ENE Calm \ W' ' o ,, v
\
E j' 10 WSW ESE
.2
~
/
SW SE SSW - SSE S m Wind Direction (%)
*m Wind Speed (mph)
D AVIS- BESSE MONTHLY WIND . DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS O APRIL 1983 75-m LEVEL Figure 22
O m NW NNE g NE [ L j WNW ! 5
,},,3 5 ! , 1. ,
i 3- 1 a e 4 1 10 5 ( 1 -:o O - ESE
'm 5
gg 'i SE 5 SSW j SSE S 9 annummmma Wind Direction (%) rsE Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE l MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DlURNAL-DAY HOURS O APRIL 1983 100-m LEVEL Figure 23
j N O\ NNW NNE NW NE m , WNW , ENE
\ }
" 'f m .. ., / ,
/ . g- <
15 .1. [ , j 1'O t 4 0 WSW ESE i 2 SW - SE SSW - SSE S
- Wind Direction (%)
erMM Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIURN AL- NIGHTTIME . HOURS APRIL 1983 g 100-m LEVEL l Figure 24 l
l l N O NNW NNE NW NE [ ~ 1 WNW ENE w " k ^ ' 5\ f )Il e
\\
I {) s\ \ t 15 A d --g O \ / WSW , ESE i SW SE i SSW SSE S '
- Wind Direction (%)
w?m Wind Speed (mph) L DAVIS- BESSE l MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL-DAY HOURS l0-1 l MAY 1983 10-m LEVEL Figure 25
- - % - -w -e-c, w+ -,-e-- y w - +y- ee-*------,-e-e--- , -
I N NNW NNE NW NE f WNW ENE 1 , , Ca m . i l l l l l I 5 L e WSW ESE SW SE SSW SSE S
- Wind Direction (%)
FMMs Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS 0 MAY 1983 10-m LEVEL Figure 26
i O N NNW NNE NW NE [ WNW ENE
~
\
\ 15 j }
w N'A "" '
?
*$* - - E i y, lo^ \'
o #
/
WSW ESE 2
~
m SW SE SSW SSE S
- Wind Direction (%)
rsAE8 Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL-DAY HOURS ! bs MAY 1983 . 75-m LEVEL Figure 27
-+ - - - . - - - _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - . . - --
l l N NNW -
% NNE
,a NW -
NE ?
^
WNW ENE Ca m hS i 1 ,,,,,
, l l y
I 15 s WSW ESE i
'n 2.
Sw SE SSW SSE S m Wind Direction (%) MEA Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS -0 MAY 1983 75-m LEVEL Figure 28
O' N NNW NNE NW NE [ m e = WNW " ENE
~
\
-g '
' N w 4 -
5 r l 1 l s 10 i t ('(f WSW ESE l 5 l l SW , SE l l SSW SSE s
- Wind Okection (%)
aardued Wind Speed (rnph) l DAVIS-BESSE-MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION i DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS lO-MAY 1983 l 100 m LEVEL l Figure 29
l N h NNW NNE r b NW m NE WNW ENE s 10 I -
, ; 1.2 . .
[' 1 \ 1 b.
\
A Q WSW q ESE 5 m: 1 SW SE SSW SSE l 5 mummum Wind Direction (%) rsss Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS ' O MAY 1983 100-m LEVEL Figure 30
'^1.
r '. O NNW N NNE NW NE 7 i
'l I
WNW C ENE f i 10 }
. ~
,1 n- ; .
A 5 { O
/
WSW , '[, ESE l
.. , , SW SE l
SSW SSE S assumet Wipd Direction (%)
""* Wind Speed (mph)
DAVIS-BESSE .- ,
- MONTHLY' WIND DISTRIBUTION DI. URN A L - D AY. HOURS O JUNE 1983 -
10:r m LEVEL .,', Figure 31
'N
- e. -. . - - --. .
.=-.1__ ____
N O NNW NNE I NW NE l l l WNW ENE g 1 $ ..
! Calm W
1 - I
, , , o r r a l 10 i k -
; ESE WSW l
sW - SE SS# ; SSE S h Wind Direction (%) wm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS g
' JUNE 1983 10 -m LEVEL Figure 32
i l O N NNW NNE NW NE [
' n WNW ENE J 1
} .}
' Ca m \ . .
\ \
- l 10 t 5
s 1 l , l 1 0 WSW - s ESE
\ f
/
sW e ' Ss
~
I -
.SSW SSE 5
1 m Wind Direction (%) l TMMe Wind Speed (mph) ! D AVIS-BESSE MON'rHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS , . bs JUNE 1983 75-m LEVEL. Figure 33 c.
N NNW NNE u NW NE [ A 7 WNW ENE 5 ' W l '
^Y ' '
o r r nur , 5 5 j
, {
# ESE WSW l
SW SE SSW SSE S
- Wind Direction (%)
erArm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS'-BESSE l MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS g' JUNE 1983 , I 75-m LEVEL Figure 34
i
'O N NNW NNE NW NE WNW -A '
ENE
\
Calm \ 1 W ' '" r o r-r ,
, ; E
( 5 O w WSW ESE sw sE l ssW ssE S ammuummma Wind Direction' (%)
"MMA Wind Speed (mph)
DAVIS-BESSE
- MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION
.DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS
'.O.- JUNE 1983 100-m LEVEL Figure 35
r N ] NNW NNE
]
l NW NE f r i WNW ENE q 0
'T \.
P 5 , g = 2m Ca m ). l l l
; 0 t i.
i l O WSW ESE y l 1
. j
/
sW SE SSW SSE S
- Wind Direction (%) ~
rse Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION ~ DIUBNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS g JUNE 1983 100-m LEVEL ) Figure 36
- l h
l O N NNW NNE NW NE I WNW , ENE
'O 5\ . !O I
I \ ' W , 1 "5" r l E j l 10 . , 5 ( ! \ _ 1
.3 WSW ESE SW SE SSW -
SSE l 5 l
- Wind Direction (%)
l wsA Wind Speed (mph) l DAVIS-BESSE ; l MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS O JULY 1983 10 m LEVEL. Figure 37
- -" '-- * -e - - - , _ - . . . . . . _ . _ . _ _ _ . , . _ _ . , , _ ,,._., , ,, ,. _ _,, _
^
\
I I N NNW NNE W ESE SSW SSE S m Wind Direcion (%)
'MA Wind Speed (mph)
DAVIS -BESSE l MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS 0 JULY: 1983 10-m LEVEL Figure 38
O N NNW NNE NW NE 7 WNW ENE 10 f;I . O W ' "" N
", "o* - ;
E
; ll 5
i ' O WSW , ESE 3 l SW SE SSW SSE s m Wind Direction (%) FTm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS O J ULY 1983 ! 75 m LEVEL Figure 39 ,
N $ NNW NNE t NW NE [ WNW ENE O 5
\
1 1 S}.
}
W l
'1 ' -
4 "E" - I--- , l E i 5 j
/ 9 WSW .
s ESE SW SE SSW SSE S
^ m Wind Direction (%)
wsm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY W.lND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS g-J.ULY 1983 75-m LEVEL Figure 40 L
)
l I Q N NNW NNE NW NE [ r WNW ENE 0 W I 1 f1I ' E i l/o 5\
\
t 5 i 4 WSW m ESE l
' /
SW SE 1 1 SSW SSE S unummulu Wind Direction (%) Nm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION n . .DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS V J U LY- 1983 100 m LEVEL Figure 41
I N NNW NNE NW N NE [- I WNW ENE Calm l W' ' 1 ' ' i fE
- 10 k jE \ l -
// e WSW ,l ESE SW SE SSW SSE ;
l l 5 l summuumus Wind Direction (%) ) rsm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION
. DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS 0 JULY. 1983 10 0 - m LEVEL Figure 42
1 l O N NNW NNE 7 o NW NE [ l WNW ENE
.. _ g- ji 'i /
If.
,i
} I y
' ~
; y ( '10 4 ,
O WSW ; ESE c I SW SE l l SSW SSE S
- Wind Direction (%)
MA Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION
.DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS O AUGUST 1983 10 m LEVEL Figure 43
_- - - - - , + . - - , . - - - , -
l N & NNW NNE [ NW NE [ WNW ENE
\
~
/
1 1 \ . j j i Calm \ W l
.. c E l
L 5 g A WSW , ESE SW SE l SSW SSE S ammmmums Wind Direction (%) rse Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MON.THLY WIND DISTRIBUTION l
. DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS g, AUGUST 1983 10 - m LEVEL Figure 44
- ]
i
7-l l O NNW-N l NNE-NW NE [ WNW '
- L ENE 4
0 f i i 1
.f I '
w .s. f. . .. g- ; , 'y , 5 t i
/
l 'n I {o \
-O /
WSW t EsE I _a i SW SE l ssW ssE S ' aummumme Wind Direction (%) ouwm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE L MONTHLY-WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL- DAY- HOURS lD AUGUST 1983 75 -m LEVEL i Figure 45 4-y- - s---+r" *v- =-,a3 e .--,,,...,,,,,_m..,-e..,,_wm,,,..m,,. . _ _ , , _ _ , _ _ , _ _ _ _ , _
f N NNW NNE NW NE [ WNW 7 ENE A4
'O
)
5 g i - .. 2 Djm - f ' E g h 5 WSW 3 ESE SW SE SSW SSE s ummmmmmuuna Wind Direction (%) rpm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION l DlURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS 0 AUGUST 1983 75-m LEVEL Figure 46 f
I~
.() NNW N
NNE NW NE [ WNW ENE
\
Q llN,1
\
l J.,,,],, Ca m 1 - l l , i l YO t s l-lD WSW ESE 5 1 SW SE SSW' SSE S l tumammann Wind Direction (%) l rgm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS !C AUGUST 1983 i 100 m LEVEL Figure 47
N $ NNW NNE NW NE [ WNW ENE i
\ 15 }
+ 10 I 5
il w o "8" .., E i 15
\ -
/ 9 WSW q ESE 1
SW SE SSW SSE S mummmuum Wind Direction (%) MMA Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION
. DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS g AUGUST 1983
.10 0- m. LE V E L 1 I
. Figure 48
t O NNW N NNE NW NE [ WNW ENE 1-g A 0 W ' (( "o" s 1
\'f '
1 I E
\ ' '
,\, s I
- O .
'WSW ESE SW SE I
l SSW SSE I S l ammmmmmma Wind Direction (%) l' wsA Wind Speed (mph)
- DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL-DAY HOURS lO
- SEPTEMBER 1983 10- m LEVEL Figure 49 l
N & NNW NNE l t NW NE [ WNW ENE I . dM Calm o \ \ l ' I E VJ , , i 15 ( ' e
\ ~
WSW ESE SW SE h SSW SSE l l s l - W'md Direction (%) r#m W*md Speed (mph) l DAVIS -BESSE MON _THLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DlURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS 0 SEPTEMBER 1983 10 - m LEVEL Figure 50 l l
^
l l C NNW N NNE NW NE [ l WNW ENE O
\
10 fSI - W ' '"
*E"
', E
\'
(- 'i s 10 l0 WSW ' ESE SW SE SSW SSE l m Wind Direction (%) ! - Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE l MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS O- . SEPTEMBER 1983 75 m LEVEL j Figure 51
l N h NNW NNE i NW NE [ WNW ENE 0 f1l;I ' 0 w l ~a T ' l I' l a
' k i 4 s 2
e WSW e ESE SW SE SSW SSE l
- Wind Direction (%)
m Wind Speed (mph)
- DAVIS -BESSE l MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION l . DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS SEPTEMBER 1983 O
( 75 m LEVEL Figure 52 L
O N NNW NNE NW - NE [ WE ENE 0 1 1! - W , i- a 7- , 1 "E" r r E
.g k 5 $, ^
1 mm O \ / l WSW i ESE i SW SE
- SSW - SSE S
ammmmmmmus Wind Direction (%) Mm Wind Speed (mph) - DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION
. DI.URNAL-DAY HOURS
. O SEPTEMBER 1983 100-m LEVEL Figure.53
i N h NNW NNE i NW NE [ WNW ^ ENE
\
0 1 1 \\- .. Ca m
\ l ,
I 15 i e
# ESE WSW i
- u SW SE SSW SSE S-
- Wind Direction (%)
ess, Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS ~ BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS 0 SEPTEMBER '.1983 100-m LEVEL Figure 54
O m NNW NNE NE [ WNW ENE 1 I.. W ' ' E l r j l 10 's - 0 .. famm I % WSW ESE I SW SE SSW SSE S annummune Wind Direction (%) esm Wind Speed (mph) DAVI S-BESSE-MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS ! O- OCTOBER 1983 10 m LEVEL Figure 55
- . , , , _ _ , . . . , . - . , - . , . - . _ , . . . , . , , ,r ,
l
. i N
NNW NNE NW NE [ N. WNW ENE 1 f } . W '
, 'l i i "E" r r l l E l
5
- a -
O l WSW ESE SW SE SSW SSE S muuuumus Wind Direction (%) wm Wind Spud (mph) l DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS 0 OCTOBER - 1983 10-m LEVE L Figure 56 -l
l-(
-O- m NNW NNE l
l t
- NE
[ w E
"" ENE M 0 W 4"
,1- ..- iI ' '
E st go 1 , ,
; 1 y
1 WSW -' ESE i d t SW SE l SSW SSE S
- Wind Direction (%)
rKMe Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS 1 O OCTOBER 1983 75-m LEVEL Figure 57 .
l-N NNW NNE l f NW NE l
/ - !
" ENE WNW
\1 ' 'I )
s, .. [ ... /ir g. . s1 'i_2
+ ,
l 10 - WSW ESE q l a N l
- SW SE SSW SSE S
- Wind Direction (%)
FXm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MON _THLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS 0 OCTOBER 1983 75- m LEVEL Figure 58
,. 7 , .,
,s " ~ # #
-7 - r~ *
.i , _
e # s l s' O. N NNW ~ NNE * [ , , - .,
.+ey -
-NW' NE
[ WNW ' ^ ' ' ENE N NN
'(
5\ w -- , 9- , , 1 , s
; y 10
\
\
WSW ESE 2 l f l SW , SE W l . L
, - SSW: , , SSE s
- Wdo:<emn kd,- '
rseum Wind Speed (mphl' - ,~'" l
~
~
~
DAVIS-BESSE _.
-MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS
, .O- OCTOBER 1983
- 100 m LEVE L Figure 59-f.
% O
- _ _ _ _ . - _ . . - . _ - - _ _ - - - - - _ _ _ . - . _ _ _ _ _ - - - . - - ----.s. - - - - . ..--n- - . - -
--,r - - - - - , - - -
N l NNW NNE f l
~ ..
NW NE f b
" ENE WNW W ** ' '
~o" A w , Y E 1
y .
# ESE WSW 1
5 9 m SW SE SSW SSE S
- Wind Direction (%)
"sm Wind Speed (mph)
DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION 1 DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS 0 OCTOBER 1983 l 100-m LEVEL Figure 60
O N NNW NNE NW NE f M w WNW ENE
.JL 15 t .
}
3 cafm
\ ) . , it 1 1 y
[ '5 !
]
I
.i ,w_
O \ N -
\
WSW = - ESE s SW SE I SSW SSE S
- Wind Direction (%)
l wsA Wind Speed (mph) l DAVIS-BESSE L MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS ! .O 1 noyeussa 1983 10-m LEVEL Figure 61 D
N $ l NNW NNE F NW NE
=
DNW ENE
- ,o
~
\
10 If I - w ' '
*s"' .- ,
a 5 \\' g 8 ' A . WSW _ ESE SW SE I ' / SSW SSE I l s amusummme Wind Direction (%) wM, Wind Speed (mph) l DAVIS -BESSE MON _THLY WIND DISTRIBUTION ' i . DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HO U RS 0 NOVEMBER 1983 10-m LEVEL Figure 62
O m NNW NNE NW .
. NS m
WNW ENE L \' , y, 1e . . cafm r r r y O 4 i f' \1 WSW ESE SW SE SSW SSE S m Wind Direction (%)
'FMM Wind Speed (mph)
L DAVIS-BESSE l MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION l DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS O NOVEMBER 1983 l 75 m LEVEL Figure 63
N NNW NNE [ i m WNW , ENE N 1 } - A Ca m i ljl j,llt g mm . i 5 I [
/ e-WSW ESE 9
A / l SW SE SSW SSE S summmmum Wind D'rection (%) arMA Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MON.THLY WlND DISTRIBUTION DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS 0 NOVEMBER 1983 75-m LEVEL Figure 64
O u NNW NNE
- g. "
NW _ _ NE 1 l WNW ^ ENE O
\
w '
--7
-- I .i l J- "5"' ,, .
,g .. .s.
L('kg{ . i 1 4 wW l C l l WSW ESE N .- SW N SE SSW SSE I S Eu'eaummum Wind Direction (%) FMm Wind Speed (mph) l DAVIS-BESSE l MON _THLY WIND DISTRIBUTION i b, DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS NOVEMBER 1983 100-m LEVEL Figure 65 i
r-N $ NNW NNE NW [ NE ! I i WNW -- . ENE
}
t
, m ..,
..L.,.,.,. ,
,r gm ,
1)j\ 15g , { 15
\l ,
e WSW , ESE I i SW SE SSW - SSE s (munuunus Wind Dkecdon (%) wMA Wind Speed (mph) l DAVIS- BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL-DAY HOURS NOVEMBER 1983 0 100-m LEVEL Figure 66
O N NNW NNE NW NE [ WNW ENE
\ .
[ Calm W " ' o - - , E {
\ 15 ) )
\ /
o \ WSW ESE
'n SW SE SSW -
SSE S sumsumus Wind Direction (%) '
- Wind Speed (mph)
DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DI.URNAL-DAY HOURS O DECEMBER 1983 10-m LEVEL Figure 67
" O unw NNE NE r
WNW .. ENE f j'o 'f f. l. [. _' co,o i i , . Y SSN SSE C Ea $$7"n$l DAVIS -BESSE l MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION
. DIURNAL-NIGHTTlME HOURS 0' DECEMBER 1983 10-m LEVEL Figure 68
O N NNW NNE i NW NE [ l
# L CNW ENE
~0 f Calm 10 5
fSI W I** ' ' '"' ' g x n T o .
,, ,)
l l '
, E l
l 10 t
\
s W ESE 9# SW SE SSW SSE s - unummmum Wind Direct 3on (%) l m2srM. Wind Speed (mph) l DAVIS-BESSE ! MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION ~ l ! DI.URNAL- DAY HOURS lO DECEMBER 1983 l 75 m LEVEL Figure 69 l
c-N NNW NNE NW NE 7 7 r = WNW ENE
-- N f).
1 I W ,
"5" P , . / JI.
L E 4 i t 5 ( _
/ /
WSW q ESE 5 SW SE l l SSW SSE S l N Wind Direction (%) FMMs Wind Speed (mph) l l DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION
. DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS l
DECEMBER 1983 O l 75-m LEVEL i Figure 70
)
. .- - - -~
l d ' . d i
- s. "
t i p ., f h-t i-e 1 1 i-t i ? l 1 .r e i,
- h. '
4 ? 1
': }
l' r' t t' [ t DAVIS-BESSE ; MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION ! DIURNAL-DAY HOURS.
.g, DECEMBER 1983 ~!
i
'W 100-m LEVEL i (Data not'Available).
~
s 1. i 4 - 4 i l-l' > I i lI i t g;
- i. . ,
(. ? 1-l
~
I-', :i f= p i t s 1 , s . l, Figure 71 I ,. . . 1
-i I .-
3
.s
> t i P l .Z ' J l cal,.:.....J,.,se.~,,...._,_.J........,...,,-,,..__.,-w,.,_.wn_m,,,.m+_ __.____,_. % w ,v- w-,,,,-.,y,, - y,, w. ,y.L y -w ,-
I O DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION I DIURNAL-NIGHTTIME HOURS DECEMBER 1983 100-m LEVEL (Data not Available) Figure 72 0
i i l f i i i v i
~
1983 LOCAL CLIMAT0 LOGICAL DATA MONTHLY COMPARISON by , l-Jeffrey Lietzow-Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station i Annual Environmental Operating Report Toledo Edison' Company January, 1984
- 4 r
o f l-i [. p. O l' I i-l' F l-w I we~wwwww , m + eem
. . . .. . . . . _ -- . . =. . . - - . . _ -
-. Purpose j
, Gr= -
- The-purpose of this investigation was to determine the comparability of the meteorological data from Toledo Express Airport., Cleveland Hopkins International Airport, and Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station.
' Summary
- The investigation showed that all three meteorological monitoring sites exhibit similar overall meteorological conditions with consistent varia-tions in temperature due to geographical location.
( I
's b
1 e l t
+
- y. .
2.
- Introduction I A' Th$ Local Climatological' Data (LCD) monthly summary is distributed through-
. the National 0ceanic and Atmospheric Administration...A comparison was completed using LCD's from Toledo Express Airport and Cleveland Hopkins
. International Airport.along with meteorological data obtained from the Davis-Besse Nuclear' Power Station meteorological monitoring system. This
~three-site meteorological data comparison consisted of a monthly compari-
~
son of-data from all-three locations in 1983 and the 1982 Toledo LCD data. The location of the'three' sites is important, because different terrain and proximity to bodies of water have significant effects on meteorological
. conditions.
Description of Monitoring Locations Toledo Express Airport is~ 1ocated at latitude 41'36' N and longitude 83'48' W. -The terrain is~ generally level and open. The airport is
. located approximately 33 miles inland and southwest from Lake Erie.
- Sensor location is at approximately 35 feet above ground level.
Cleveland Hopkins International Airport is located at latitude 41*25' N and longitude 81'52W. The terrain is gently rolling and open. The airport is located approximately 11. miles inland and~ southeast from Lake Erie.: Sensor: location is at approximately 35 feet above ground level, t, _ Davis-Besse Nuclear _ Power, Station is. located on the shoreline adjacent to
!(~$ Lake Erie near Locust Point at latitude 41*35' N and longitude 83*5' W.
e> The terrain is level andlopen. The meteorological monitoring tower is approximately one mile inland. Data for this comparison were taken from
- sensors located at 35 feet.
Results and Discussion The-Local _ Climatological Data monthly comparisons to the Davis-Besse; Nuclear Power Station meteorological data can be seen in Tables'l through
- 12. Generally, Cleveland ~and Toledo have similar maximus and minimum temperature. values. Davis-Besse h'as lower maximum and higher minimum.
- temperatures whien may_be attributed to lake effects. ~The~close proximity
, of theLDavis-Besse~ site to. Lake Erie moderates the temperature fluctua-tions~. .The values-for other parameters did'not show trends.which could be
; discerned _on the basis of_ the four data sets evaluated in this report.
9 y y 4
O i Tables 1 - 12 Local Climatological Data Monthly Comparison lO 1 I , O I r L
l TABLE 1 > LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA MONTHLY COMPARISON ; LOCATION:= Toledo
~-
YEAR: 1982- i MONTH: January AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL . AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD
.24.3 7.2 17.1 3.61 12.7 22 5.2
- i LOCATION: Toledo .
YEAR: :1983-MONTH: . January AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL . AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP- RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD
'33.6 21~. 6 12.0 0.88 9.7 -10 0.3
~ LOCATION: . Cleveland I YEAR:- 1983
., MONTH: January , ! AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN.L. AVG. TEMP . TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT ; DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP.- WIND SPD DAYS WIh3 SPD ' i
- p. 7 LOCATION:~ Davis-Besse .
YEAR: 1983-
-MONTE:. January AVG. MAX.- AVG. MIN.. -AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. .PRECIP. .RESULTAh7 DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP -RANGE PRECIP. < WIND SPD DAYS WIh3 SPD 33.1. 25.5 .7.6 10.77 10.7 6 3.6
-* Data not available: ,
j t E
;. } ,
t ,
. ..;...:.a. . .. .-.-~_,.....s_. . . . - . . , , . _ _ . . , _ _ _ _ . . - . ~ . - - , .
TABLE 2 LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA MONTHLY COMPARISON LOCATION: Toledo YEAR: 1982 h MONTH: February AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 27.6 12.8 14.8 1.15 8.8 10 1.7 LOCATION: Toledo l YEAR: 1983 MONTH: February AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 39.1 21.9 17.2 0.59 8.2 10 0.3 LOCATION: Cleveland YEAR: 1983 MONTH: February g AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 41.8 26.0 15.8 0.77 9.1 10 0.8 LOCATION: Davis-Besse YEAR: 1983 MONTH: February l AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 42.6 20.8 21.8 0.51 9.0 8 0.6 O
l TABLE 3 LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA MONTHLY COMPARISON
~
/ 'T V LOCATION: Toledo
-YEAR: 1982 MONTH: March AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP, RESULTANT AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN.
DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD DAILY TEMP 41.8 -24.9 16.9 ~3.74 10.9 16 3.2 LOCATION: Toledo YEAR: 1983 MONTH: March AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT l
. AVG MAX.
DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD DAILY TEMP 47.5 28.2 19.3 1.86 9.5 12 1.8 LOCATION: Cleveland YEAR: 1983 MONTH: March
.(~')
V AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT AVG. MAX. DAILY TEMP RANCE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD DAILY TEMP 49.3 32.3 ~17.0 3.54 11.2 12 1.0 t LOCATION: Davis-Besse , YEAR: 1983 MONTH: March AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT AVG. MAX.. RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP 44.1 31.6 12.5 1.73 11.1 11 2.5
. , s.
~
A E
TABLE 4 LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA MONTHLY COMPARISON LOCATION: Toledo YEAR: 1982 MONTH: April AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 54.0 31.3 22.7 1.53 12.5 8 3.5 LOCATION: Toledo YEAR: 1983 MONTH: April AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 52.9 35.4 17.5 4.28 10.8 15 1.9 LOCATION: Cleveland YEAR: 1983 MONTH: April h. AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 55.5 38.7 16.8 4.48 13.5 15 1.6 LOCATION: Davis-Besse YEAR: 1983 MONTH: April AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TENT RANCE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 49.8 39.3 10.5 4.04 12.0 14 1.3 O
TABLE 5-LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA MONTHLY COMPARISON
. LOCATION: Toledo' YEAR: 1982 MONTH: May AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP- TOTAL - AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANCE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 76.5 52.2 24.3 2.61 7.5 10 0.6 LOCATION: Toledo YEAR: 1983 MONTH: May AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT AVG.. MAX.
DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD j t 66.1- 43.5 22.6 3.98 10.4 13 2.0 LOCATION: Cleveland LO E E'
- j. '
AVG. MIN. AVG.-TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT b AVG. MAX.; DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD l- DAILY TEMP
- 65.9 45.4 20.5 4.17 11.7 14 2.8 l- .
i LOCATION: Davis-Besse .
-YEAR: '1983 MONTH: May I RESULTANT AVG. MAX.. AVG. MIN. AVG.' TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP.
RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP , 60.8 49.0 11.8 '3.88 .11.2 13 1.7 i e E I y , L2 _ _ , . _
TABLE 6 LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA MONTHLY COMPARISON LOCATION: Toledo YEAR: 1982 h MONTH: June AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 75.1 53.4 21.7 2.01 8.5 10 2.2 LOCATION: Toledo YEAR: 1983 MONTH: June AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 79.8 56.0 23.8 4.06 7.2 8 0.4 LOCATION: Cleveland YEAR: 1933 MONTH: June g AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. I RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 79.7 58.3 21.4 3.45 7.8 7 0.4 LOCATION: Davis-Besse YEAR: 1983 MONTif: June AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 75.0 63.2 12.0 3.86 7.5 9 2.3
TABLE 7 l LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA MONTHLY COMPARISON 1 LOCATION: Toledo YEAR: 1982 MONTH: -July AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT
; DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD
.84.3 .60.9 23.4 1.97- 6.7 7 2.1
, LOCATION: Toledo YEAR: l1983 MONTH: -July AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DATLY TEMP DAILY TEMP -RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD' DAYS WIND SPD 85.5 63.8' 21.7 3.39 6.8 9 2.5 LOCATION: Cleveland YEAR: 1983 _]v
-MONTH:~ July-AVG.-MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG.' TEMP TOTAL- AVG. PRECIP.- RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP- RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 85.7- 64.6- 21.1 4.16 9.5 7 -3.4 LOCATION: Davis-Besse
, YEAR: 1983 MONTH: July. AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN.- AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP- DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD [- 82.2' 69.1 13.1 2.73 7.8 6 1.5 p M r
TABLE 8 LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA MONTHLY COMPARISON LOCATION: Toledo YEAR: 1982 l MONTH: August 1 AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 79.8 55.2 24.6 1.38 6.6 6 2.0 l LOCATION: Toledo YEAR: 1983 , MONTH: August AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY. TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 84.6 62.9 21.7 2.15 6.2 9 1.4 LOCATION: Cleveland YEAR: 1983 MONTH: August g AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANCE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 83.6 63.7 19.9 3.15 8.2 7 1.9 LOCATION: Davis-Besse YEAR: 1983 MONTH: August AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 79.3 68.0 11.3 1.04 7.3 5 0.5 O
TABLE 9 LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA MONTHLY COMPARISON L(s/M LOCATION: Toledo YEAR 6 1982 MONTH:- September
' AVG. MAX.- AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD- DAYS WIND SPD, 74.2 49.6. 24.6- 2.03 6.9 12 1.9 LOCATION: Toledo YEAR: 1983 MONTH: September AVG.' MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 77.3 51.0 26.3 1.42 6.9 7 2.7 LOCATION: Cleveland-YEAR: 1933 h_ -MONTH:
September i AVG._ MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL' AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 75.9 54.3 21.6 2.87 10.2 8 4.5 LOCATION: Davis-Besse YEAR:' 1983
~ MONTH: September AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL' AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP- DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP . -- WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD
- 73.2 57.6 15.6 1.60 8.1 8 2,. 3 U
'i i
TABLE 10 LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA MONTHLY COMPARISON LOCATION: Toledo YEAR: 1982 MONTH: October AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 64.6 40.7 23.9 1.14 7.7 8 2.7 LOCATION: Toledo YEAR: 1983 MONTH: October AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP 10TAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 61.9 41.9 20.0 3.59 9.0 12 0.0 LOCATION: Cleveland YEAR: 1983 MONTH- October h AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT < DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 61.7 45.1 16.6 4.14 10.4 12 3.2 LOCATION: Davis-Besse YEAR: 1983 MONTH: October AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND.SPD 60.0 49.2 10.8 ' 27
. 10.8 12 0.9 O
, . . . -_. = , . ...
(rl . m. 7.. '
~
y7 .
~
(, TABLE 11
/
p LOCAI: CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA MONTHL't COMPARISON .
' ~
- O tocitto" YEAR: *
' 1 de
'1982-MONTH:/- # +
November b
+.
4 AVG..UAX.. AVG. MIN. . AVG. TEMP: TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP. RANGE PRECIP.~ WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD
~
s s - 49.0 / 34.3 14.5 6'.86 9.8 13 4.6
. ~,
y , LOCATION: Toled.o /' " YEAR:' 19'd3 - :~ MONTH: November AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN.- AVG. TEMP- TOTAL AVG.- PRECIP. -RESULTANT , DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP - RANGE ' ' - PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD
. r i e
. , ,yi LOCATION: Clevlla:td '
- YEAR:
- MONTH:
19g3-
]>
. November L
AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL. AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE = PRECIP. ' WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD [
. f , * ~~ '
LOCATI6N:7 Davis-Besse i , YEAR: ,, 1983 ,
' MONTH:' ' November.
G :-
*.- q-AVG. MAX. AVG.' MIN. ? AVG. TEMP .
_ . TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT
-WIND SPD
~
DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP- RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS 47.8 . 37.3- 10.5 4.'85 12.0 12 4.0
/
*Dat$ knot'available-j'
,I g.
- . . ' j I
c .
- - . ~
f 5 * .
+
t wy y --
$--g--w-t '**-+
M
TABLE 12 LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA MONTHLY COMPARISON LOCATION: Toledo YEAR: 1982 h MONTH: December AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 43.5 29.7 13.8 3.48 10.2 17 4.8 LOCATION: Toledo YEAR: 1983 MONTH: December 1 1 AVG MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD LOCATION: Cleveland YEAR: 19g3 MONTH: December g AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD LOCATION: Davis-Besse YEAR: 1983 MONTH: December AVG. MAX. AVG. MIN. AVG. TEMP TOTAL AVG. PRECIP. RESULTANT DAILY TEMP DAILY TEMP RANGE PRECIP. WIND SPD DAYS WIND SPD 26.4 16.0 10.4 3.69 13.3 12 7.2
- Data not available O
- C .
Y 4 , 1983 ANNUAL WINDROSE REPORT
- t. 1 j i
( t' i-
\ .
V ' DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION
-- ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT '
THE TOLEDO EDIS0N COMPANY
, JANUARY, 1984 l
p - p >'By: Kelly Clayton Nash l l
.i' 1'~ .
t f. { . t t
. 4 1
3 A I
'a e
t
,T-'
i
-> j )
t 1 .
PURPOSE D-I ,
"b -
The purpose of this windrose report.was to examine monthly averages of wind data from the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station meteorological tower-for trends and to compare 1982 wind data with 1983 wind data.
SUMMARY
Meteorological wind data _from the Davis-Besse meteorological monitoring system were prepared on windrose charts to give a visual representation of monthly wind patterns at the site. During 1983 the predominant wind direction was divided between two equally predominant wind directions. Thei two predominant directions were from_the south-southwest (SSW) and
-from the west-southwest (WSW). .The average wind speeds for each level during the year 1983_were very similar to the average wind speeds in'1982.
At:the 10-m level:the wind speed averaged 9.2 mph in 1982, and in 1983 the 10-m wind speed averaged 9.7 mph. A predominant easterly wind was : recorded during March and April in 1983. This is different than 1982, when a predominant easterly wind occurred in Mayfonly. 30 7 1; 1 4
.{
A_
/
4 L
?
b METEOROLOGICAL MONITO.JG SYSTEM - Onsite weather data were collected from one 100-m freestanding meteorological tower, one 10-m satellite: tower, and a 1-m above ground-level precipita-tion monitor. Meteorological sensors are located at 10-m, 75-m, and 100-m above ground level. The main meteorological tower has meteorological sensors at all three levels, while the satellite tower has wind speed and wind-direction sensors at 10-m. 'The meteorological data gathered from the main tower are: wind direction and wind speed from the 75-m and 100-m
~ levels; ambient. air temperature at all three levels; dewpoint at the 10-m and.100-m levels, and differential temperatures (AT) between the 10-m and
_ 75-m levels and the 10-m and 100-m levels. -Precipitation is measured by a y- ground level tipping bucket system located at the base of the satellite tower.
.The sensors send signals which are recorded on a Meteorological Data Processing System (MDPS) designed, installed, and maintained by an inde-pendent consultant. The analog signals are.then converted to digital signals by a microprocessor and sent to a DEC PDP 11/34 computer located in the Davis-Besse Administration Building. Software within the DEC PDP
- 11/34 computer system average and store the meteorological data each hour.
METHODS-Meteorological data on wind speed and wind direction at the Davis-Besse , Nuclear Power Stati;n site were obtained from three meteorological moni-
; y toring levels; the 10-m level, 75-m level, and the 100-m level. Wind
~
1 /s -speed and wind direction at each level are stored as-hourly averages. 1From these hourly averages the number of hours the wind direction was recorded'in each of the sixteen cardinal compass point sectors was deter-mined. The' wind direction hours were'then converted.into a percentage of
~ hours'(time)-the' wind was' recorded from each direction over a month's time.
~
total number of hours each wind' direction X 100 total-hours recorded in month
~
= percentage of time.for each' win'd direction-
-Similarly[ every month'the wind speeds-at.each of the sixteen wind direc-tions were averaged from the hourly. averaged recordings.
Wind speed land. wind direction data,'in the percentage of time for wind ' Edirection and in average miles .per hour -(mph) . for wind speed, were graphed into windrose charts, e
.RESULTS'
' ~
~
, The following observations were made from the monthly windroses for the
- three meteorological levels. During 1983, the predominant wind direction 3; .for' all three levels over.-the entire year was divided between winds from j'> j-
> the south-southwest (SSW):and; winds'from the west-southwest (WSW). The
- predominant wind-direction at the 10-m levels was from the south-southwest r '(SSW),atitheL75-m level from the south-southwest'(SSW),'and at the 100-m
~
- level'from;the" west-southwest (WSW) and southwest (SW) sectors,
^
t .
#%-..e. . . e- ..m r , _. m
Using windrose data from each month the average wind speeds were totaled and an annual average for each meteorological level obtained. The annual wind speed average at the 10-m level was 9.7 miles per hour (mph) (15.5 kilometers per hour (kph)); at the 75-m level wind speeds for the year averaged 14.2 mph (22.8 kph); and at the 100-m level the annual average wind speed was 15.0 mph (24.0 kph). The highest wind speed average for a particular wind direction occurred during November 1983 with the wind direction being from the west-southwest (WSW). The lowest average wind speed for a particular wind direction for a month occurred during August with the wind direction being from the north-northwest (NNW). In 1982 there was one predominant wind direction for the whole year, being from the west-southwest (WSW); while in 1983 there were two predominant directions, the west-southwest (WSW) and the south-southwest (SSW). In comparing wind direction data each month the following trends were noticed: the predominant wind directions during January and February and June through December were similar for all three meteorological levels. However, during March, April, and May the wind direction patterns were different in 1982 compared with 1983. In 1982 a strong easterly wind direction was recorded during May. However, in 1983 a strong easterly wind direction occurred during March and April and not in May. In compar-ing the annual wind speed averages they were very similar for 1982 and 1983. At the 10-m level the annual wind speed average in 1982 was 9.2 mph (14.7 kph) and in 1983 was 14.7 mph (23.6 kph). Similarly, at the 75-m level the 1982 annual wind speed average was 13.7 mph (21.9 kph) and 14.2 mph (22.7 kph) in 1983; at the 100-m level the annual wind speed average was 15.4 mph (24.5 kph) comparing well with 15.0 mph (24.0 kph) in 1983. g O ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS o : Review assistance was provided by Jennifer Scott-Wasilk. Jeff Lietzow and Mark Williams provided the computer' programming. Gary Downing coordinated [ ,
.the maintenance. of the meteorological monitoring system. Yvonne Leidorf l
- prepared the windrose graphs. '
i I + 5 Y O t P p d 9 i 6 m 9 y - - , -
~...f.- . ,%-y v + y-,,,ep- .+-w,--- gwi-,-c..., e,wr-,-e.4ww-.-ev,--v.e-.-w-ww- --ve-e-~e- 'ew, ,w---
a +, a s - --w.n n-a n s. a a 2 - -- -,a - - -- .~s-a ,_-am, I l O 4 e e L TABLES 1-12 MONTHLY DAVIS-BESSE SITE AVERAGE WEATHER DATA e I t I. e
~
u O l l>
{} p ,, V h' . Table 1 DAVIS BESSE SITE AVERAGE WEATHER DATA JANUARY 1, 1983 THROUGH JANUARY 31e 1983 DAILY AVERAGES DAY 10M DEW PT 10M A TEMP 10M W SPD 10M W D1R 75M W SPD 75M W DIR 100M W SPD 100M W DIR 75M DELT 100M DELT t/ 1 .20.9 D F , .32.1.D F- 12.2 MPH 225.5 DEG 19.4 MPH 234.1 DEG 22.1 MPH 234.7 DEG -0.2 D F -0.3 D F
./ 2 22.2 D F 32.4 DF 8.6 MPH 300.5 DEG 13.0 MPH 313.5 DEG 13.9 MPH 314.0 DEG -0.6 DF -0.9 D F 1/ 3 15.4 DF 26.6 D F 8.8 MPH 263.0 DEG 12.6 MPH ~280.4 DEG 13.2 MPH 282.2 DEG -0.2 D F -0.5 D F 1/ 4 17.7 D F 28.9 D F 8.6 MPH 188.6 DEG 16.9 MPH 200.3 DEG 18.4 MPH 199.4 DEG 1.1 DF 1.3 D F
- 1/ 5 23.6 D .F 33.2 D F 8.8 MPH 222.5 DEG 15.0 MPH 229.6 DEG 17.1 MPH 229.6 DEG -0.4 DF -0.5 D F 1/ 6 27.4 DF 34.5 D F 9.3 MPH 201.9 DEG 14.5 MPH 210.8 DEG 15.9 MPH 211.2 DEG -0.9 D F -1.2 0 F 1/ 7 25.4 DF 36.3 D F 16.9 MPH 266.0 DEG 22.8 MPH 273.7 DEG 24.5 MPH 272.8 DEG -0.8 D F -1.2 D F 1/ 3 20.1-D F 32.5 D F 6.3 MPH 53.4-DEG 4.2 MPH 331.2 DEG 4.5 MPH 333.5 DEG -1.1 DF -1.5 D F 1/ ? 27.4 DF 34.1 DF 8.6 MPH 104.9 DEG 99.0 mph 99.0 DEG 99.0 MPH 99.0 DEG 0.0 D F 01DF
. 1/10 37.5 D F 44.3 D F 12.2 MPH 179.5 DEG 99.0 f.PH 185.4 DEG 99.0 MPH 185.8 DEG -0.5 D F -0.6 D F 1/11 28.4 DF 34.8 D F 17.1 MPH 252.0 DEG 12.9 MPH 258.7 DEG 13.2 MPH 257.8 DEG -1.1 DF -1 5 D F 1/12 12.8 D F 24.0 D F 12 9 MPH' 288 1 DEG 20.9 MPH 295.4 DEG 18.5 MPH 294.6 DEG -1.1 DF -1.6 D F 1/13 20.7 D F 28.4 DF 7.1 MPH 222.1 DEG 18.8 HPH 235.2 DEG 11.3 MPH 236.2 DEG -0.9 D F -1.3 D F 1/14 26.3 D F 34.1 DF 11.2 MPH 185.4 DEG 17.8 MPH 194.3 DEG 19.1 MPH 196.6 DEG -0.6 D F -0.8 D F 1/15 19.1 DF 26.5 D F 17.6 MPH 315.4 DEG 23.2 MPH 321.5 DEG 23.3 MPH 320.6 DEG -1.2 D F -1.7 D F 1/16- 10.0 D F 18.4 DF 10.3 MPH 270.5 DEG 21.0 MPH 279.3 DEG 13.4 MPH 279.3 DEG -1.3 D F -1.7 D F 1/17 7.1 DF 17.7 D F 13.3 MPH 311.4 DEG 18.1 MPH 320.8 DEG 18.5 MPH 320.0 DEG -1.2 D F -1.6 D F 1/18 -0.9 D F 12.5 D F 15.1 MPH 328.4 DEG 20.0 MPH 333.3 DEG 20.3 MPH 331.7 DFG -1.3 D F -148 D F t/19 .5.9 D F 14.9 D F- 6.8 MPH 341.6 DEG' 9.3 MPH 5.1 DEG 9.5 MPH 9.1 DEG -0.8 D F -1.2 D F 1/20 14 1 DF 22.4 DF 11.1 MPH' 68.8 DEG 15.2 MPH 70.7 DEG' 15.9 MPH 71.5 DEG -1.1 DF -1.4 D F 1/21 18.8 D F 30.8 D F 16.4 MPH 79.2 DEG 26.1 MPH 82.2 DEG 28.7 MPH 83.4 DEG -0.8 D F -1.0 D F 1/22 28.4 DF 32.9 DF 8.9 MPH 99.8 DEG 14.0 MPH 109.3 DEG 14.9 MPH 115.0 DEG -0.3 D F -0.3 D F 1/23 31.7 D F 35.0 D F 6.3 MPH 224.7 DEG 11.6 MPH 235.0 DEG 13.0 MPH 236.0 DEG -0.4 DF -0.4 D F 1/24 29.8 D F 33.7 DF 12.9 MPH 243.0 DEG 17.8 MPH 250.4 DEG 18.9 MPH 249.9 DEG -1.0 D F -1.3 D F 1/25 22.2 D F 31.5 D F 13.0 MPH 268.9 DEG 17.8 MPH 275.4 DEG 18.9 MPH 274.4 DEG -1.0 D F -1.5 D F 1/26 13.7 D F 24.7 D F 5.4 MPH ,47.5 DEG 5.7 MPH 53.8 DEG 5.7 MPH 51.7 DEG -1.3 D F -1.7 D F 1/27 14.9 D F 25.7 D F 6.1 MPH $2.6 DEG 7.5 MPH 58.7 DEG 7.7 MPH 60.2 DEG -0.9 D F -1.4 DF 1/28 19.3 D F 27.5 D F 6.3 MPH 173.4 DEG 11.2 MPH 175.3 DEG 12.6 MPH 175.9 DEG -0.6 D F -0.8 D F 1/29 28.4 DF 34.3 D F 7.5 MPH 168.4 DEG 14.6 MPH 176.4 DEG 17.0 MPH 178.0 DEG -0.2 D F -0.1 DF 1/30 30.9 D F 35.4 DF 15.1 MPH 227.2 DEG 21.8 HPH 233.4 DEG 23.5 MPH 233.3 DEG -0.7 DF -1.0 D F 1/31 22.4 D F 29.5 D F 10.8 MPH 248.0 DEG 13.9 MPH 256.0 DEG 14.3 MPH 256.1 DEG -1.2 D F' -1 6 D F
Table 2 DAVIS BESSE SITE AVERAGE WEATHER DATA FEBRUARY le 1983 THROUGH FEBRUARY 28, 1983 DAILY AVERAGES , DAY 10N DEW PT 10M A TEMP 10M W SPD 10M W DIR 75H W SPD 75M W DIR 100M W SPD 100M W D1R 75M DELT 100M DELT 2/ 1 ---.2 26 D F--..- 30.9 D F 11.3 MPH 84.2 DEG 17.7 MPH 69.1 DEG 19.1 MPH 68.6 DEG -0.4 DF -0.6 D F 2/ 2 37.3 D F 42.3 D F 10.6 MPH 141.9 DEG 20.6 MPH 157.7 DEG 22.5 MPH 162.6 DEG 1.o DF 2.0 D F 2/ 3 24.3 D F 31.4 DF 18.4 MPH 033.7 DEG 24.9 MPH 239.9 DEG 26.3 MPH 239.0 DEG -1.0 DF -1.3 D F 2/ 4 13.2 D F 23.5 D F 15.8 MPH 291.0 DEG 20.3 MPH 297.0 DEG 21.1 MPH 295.9 DEG -1.4 DF -1.9 D F 2/ 5 12.6 DF 20.8 D F 7.1 MPH 204.0 DEG 9.5 MPH 010.4 DEG 10.1 MPH 210.9 DEG -1,2 0 F -1.6 D F 2/ 6 17.7 DF 26.4 DF 6.5 MPH 103.5 DEG 8.6 MPH 103.1 DEG 8.8 HPH 102.2 DEG -1.1 DF -1.5 D F 2/ ' 19.9 D F 25.6 DF 10.0 MPH 297.6 DEG 14.9 MPH 310.4 DEG 15.6 MPH 311.3 DEG -0.5 D F -0.8 D F 2/ 3 13.2 D F 22.1 DF 6.7 MPH 205.3 DEG 9.4 MPH 223.8 DEG 10.2 MPH 225.2 DEG -0.3 D F -0.4 DF 2/ 2 16.7 D F 25.3 D F 11.9 MPH 91.5 DEG 16.3 MPH 94.2 DEG 17.2 MPH 95.0 DEG -1.1 DF -1.3 D F 2/10 14.3 D F 24.8 D F 16.5 MPH 73.8 DEG 23.8 MPH 76.2 DEG 24.7 MPH 76.9 DEG -1.3 D F -1.8 D F 2/11 14.2 D F 26.5 D F 16.3 MPH 56.9 DEG 22.4 MPH 40.3 DEG 23.7 MPH 60.8 DEG -1.2 D F -1.7 D F 2/12 14.0 D F 23.2 D F 6.4 MPH 32.9 DEG 6.9 MPH 46.3 DFG 7.1 MPH 49.2 DEG -0.8 DF -1.0 D F 2/13 18.3 D F 25.2 D F 6.0 MPH 190.4 DEG 12.2 MPH 205.9 DEG 13.0 MPH 205.7 DEG 0.9 DF 0.9 DF 2/14 24.0 D F 30.7 D F 7.2. MPH 219.8 DEG 13.0 MPH 232.0 DEG 14.6 MPH 232.4 DEG 0.2 D F 0.4 DF 2/15 31.3 D F 34.7 D F 4.0 NPH 176.5 DEG 7.3 MPH 324.3 DEG 7.7 MPH 358.7 DEG 0.3 D F 0.5 D F 2/16 33.3 D F 39.2 D F 6.6 MPH 145.0 DEG 11.1 MPH 182.1 DEG 12.3 MPH 188.0 DEG 1.2 D F 1.3 n F 2/17 30.4 DF 37.1 DF 10.9 HPH 275.7 DEG 15.9 MPH 289.2 DEG 16.9 MPH 291.0 DEG -0.6 DF -0.9 DF 2/18 27.9 D F 36.5 D F 4.8 MPH 190.1 DEG 8.1 MPH 201.2 DEG 8.8 MPH 201.3 DEG -0.2 D F -0.4 DF 2/19 31.6 D F 40.5 D F 6.7 MPH 137.8 DEG 11.5 MPH 163.3 DEG 11.4 HPH 171.0 DEG 2.2 D F 2.2 D F 2/20 32.3 D F 45.6 D F 6.3 MPH 147.7 DEG 13.6 MPH 185.6 DEG 15.3 MPH 186.9 DEG 4.9 D F 5.3 D F 2/21 34.5 D F 42.6 D F 6.7 MPH 102.4 DEG 14.4 MPH 348.7 DEG 16.0 MPH 350.4 DEG 1.7 D F 2.6 D F 2/02 33.7 D F 37.6 D F 5.5 MPH 76.2 DEG 7.8 MPH 76.0 DEG 8.4 MPH 103.0 DEG 1.4 DF 3.1 DF 2/?3 30.0 D F 38.4 DF 7.3 MPH 354.0 DEG 11.9 MPH 356.7 DEG 12.5 MPH 351.7 DEB -0.4 DF -0.6 D F 2/24 25.3 D F 32.4 DF 9.1 MPH 15.9 DEG 11.2 MPH 20.3 DEG 12.1 MPH 20.0 DEG -1.0 D F -1.3 D F 2/25 15.8 D F 26.1 DF 14.9 MPH 359.2 DEG 17.6 MPH 3.9 DEG 18.2 MPH 2.6 DEG -1.5 D F -2.0 D F 2/26 14.1 DF 25.8 D F 6.6 MPH 15.3 DEG 9.1 MPH 1.9 DEG 9.0 MPH 350.5 DEG -0.3 D F -0.4 DF 2/27 19.2 D F 35.2 D F 6.7 MPH 184.9 DEG 12.9 MPH 199.5 DEG 14.3 MPH 201.3 DEG 1.2 D F 1.6 D F 2/28 21.4 DF 38.6 D F 5 3 MPH 139.3 DEG 9.9 HPH 169.4 DEG 10.7 MPH 158.6 DEG 3.5 D F 43DF e O G
% . - - , _ m g al .
O
%/ . Q)
Table 3
-DAVIS BESSE SITE AVERAGE WEATHER DATA
- MARCH 1, 1983 THROUGH MARCH 31, 1983'
< DAILY AVERAGES DAY 10M DEW PT 10M;A TEMP 10M W SPD' 10M W DIR 75M W SPD 75M W DIR 100M W SPD. 100M W DIR 75M DELT' 100M DELT' 3/ t 31.7 D F :36.3 D F 3.6 MPH 74.7.DEG 5.3 MPH. 68.6 DEG 5.0 MPH 64.7 DEG 4.6'D F. 5.4 D F 3/-2 '32.0 D F' 39.0 D F 5.5 MPH 136.9 DEG 5.7 MPH 141.6 DEG 9.0 MPH 342.1 DEG 3.0 D F. 3.1 D F 3/ 3 33.2 D F 44.2 D F 7.2 MPH 115.5 DEG 14.0 MPH '135.5 DEG 15.1 MPH 147.5 DEC 4.9 D F 5.6 D-F.
3/ 4 40.6 D_F. 53.6 D F. 9.3 MPH 186.5 DED 16.8 MPH 198.0 DEG 18.8 MPH 202.6 DEG' 2.2 D F 2.9 D F,- 3/ 5 35.0 D F 39.6.D F 14 1 MPH- 85.8 DEG 22.5 MPH 89.0 DEG 25.1 MPH 92.8 DEG -0.2 D F 1.1 DF 3/ .6 44.1 DF 57.1 DF 10.6 MPH 1141.4 DEG 20.5 MPH 150.2 DEG 22.4_ MPH 152.1 DEG 2.6.D F 2.6 D F 3/ 7 45.6 D F 56.6 DF 7.6 MPH 150.0'DEG 15.0 MPH 182.5 DEG 17.5 MPH 189.9 DEG 3.0!D F 3.6 D F 3/ 9 A3.3 D F 49.5 D F 7.9 MPH 174.3 DEG- 13.3 MPH 189.9 DEG 14.3 MPH 199.3 DEG 1.2 D F 1.8-D F 3/ 9 28.o 3 F 37.0 D F 10.3 MPH 257.1 DEG -12 8 MFH' 258.5 DEG 13.2 MPH 257.2 DEG -1.2 D F -1.7'D F 3/10 28.0 D F 32.9 DF 11.5 MPH 301.7 DEG 15.3 MPH 305.1 DEG 15.7 MPH 305.9 DEG -1 1 D F -1.4 DF 3/11 25.4 D F 31.7 D F 18.6 MPH 352.3 DEG 24.7 MPH- 352.4 DEG 25.2 MPH 350.5 DF.G -1.4 D F. -1.9 D F 3/12 21.9 D F 35.6 DF 10.3 MPH 332.3 DEG 14.4 MPH 338.2 DEG 14.9 MPH 336.1 DEG -0.8 D F -1.2 D F 3/13 24.9'D F 39.8 D F .6.6 MPH 225.2 DEG 10.4 MPH 252.9 DEG 11.3 MPH 254.3 DEG 0.9 D F 1.1 DF 3/14. 34.6 D F 49.0 D F' 10.5 MPH' '243.3 DEG 16.8 MPH 245.7 DEG 18.4 MPH 246.8 DEG -0.7 D F -0.8 D F , 1/15 26.8 D F 40.4 DF 10 1 MPH . 1.6 DEG 12.8 MPH 0.1 DEG 13.2 MPH 357.6 DEG -1 4 DF -1.8 D F , 3/to 30.4 DF 38.1 DF 14.8 MPH 78.9 DEG 19.4 MPH 78.1 DEG 20.4 MPH 77.6 DFG -1.5 D F -0.0 D F 3/17 34 1 DF 42.2 D F 12.0 MPH 72 8 DEG 18.4 MPH 76.7 DEG 20.3 MPH 80.5'DEG -0.6 DF -0.4 DF 3/18 37.3.D F 41.7 D F 15.0 HPH ~ 79.0 DEG 22.9 MPH 79.7 DEG 24.9 MPH 81.5 DEG -0.9 D F -1.1 DF 3/19 36.3 D F 41.0 D F 13 0 MPH- 270.9 DEG 18.0 MPH- 275.4 DEG 19.4 MPH 272.6 DFG -0.9 D F -1.2 D F 3/20 .24.2 D F 31.3 D F 14.4 MPH 12.2 DEG 18.6 HPH 12.9 DEG 19.0 MPH 11.3 DEG -1.3 D F -1.8 D F 3/21 21.8 D F 27.5 D F 17.0 MPH 333.8 DEG 16.7. MPH 335.4 DEG 15.9 MPH 333.1 DEG -1.2 D F -1.7 D F i 3/22 12.8 D F 23.4 DF 16.0 MPH 283.1 DEG 999.9 MPH 284.7 DEG 999.9 MPH 284.7 DEG -1.2 D F -1.7 D F 3/23 10.0 D F 24.8 D F 11.4, MPH __309.4 DEG 12.6 MPH 311.5 DEG 12.5 MPH 311.3 DEG -1.2 D F -1.6 D F
- 3/24 12.9 DF 26 1 DF 10.4 MPH 19.9 DEG 11.7 MPH 21.0 DEG 12.2 MPH 19.9 DEG -1.5 D F -2.0 D F 3/25 15.3 D F 27.6 D F 10.4 HPH 66.3 DEG 12.5. MPH -65.0 DEG 12.9 MPH 65.0 DEG -1.4 DF -1.9 D F 3/26 21.4 DF 34.3 D F 14.2 MPH 94.6 DEG 19.4 MPH 94.0 DEG 20.5 MPH 94.5 DEG -1.4 DF -1.8 D F 3/27 37.6 D F 45.9 D F 11.7 MPH 161.1.DEG 18.9 MPH 164.5 DEG 20.8 MPH 167.3 DEG -0.4 DF -0.5 D F 3/28 32.4 D F 38.5 D F 11.9 MPH 286.4 DEG. 16.7 MPH 289.2 DEG 17.7 MPH 288.9 DEG -1.0 D F -1.5 D F 3/2' 16.3 D F 32.0 DF 11.9 MPH 42 8 DEG 13.4 MPH 42.1 DEG 14.4 MPH 40.9 DEG -1.4 DF -1.9 D F 3/30 '18.4 DF 31.4 DF 8.4 MPH 96.9 DEG 10.5 MPH 94.5 DEG 10.9 NPH 94.4 DEG -1.3 D F -1 8 D F 3/31 27.7 D F 37.0 D F 8.8 MPH 81.0 DEG 11.1 MPH 80.5 DEG 11.5 MPH 80.9 DEG -1.2 D F -1 6 D F i
I O
Table 4 DAVIS BESSE SITE AVERAGE WEATHER DATA CPRIL 1, 1983 THROUGH APRIL 30, 1983 DAILY AVERAGES DAY 10M DEW PT 10M A TEMP 10M W SPD 10M W DIR 75M W SPD 75M W DIR 100M W SPD 100M W DIR 75M DELT 100M DELT 4/ 1 32.9 D F 40.4 DF ....6 12 MPH..--- 90.4 DEG 18.6 MPH 93.6 DEG 20.9 MPH 97.5 DEG -1.0 D F -0.8 D F 4/ 2 37.9 D F 42.9 D F 17.9 MPH 99.1 DEG 28.5 MPH 100.7 DEG 31.7 MPH 103.5 DEG -0.4 DF -0.1 DF 4/ 3 40.6 D F 43.8 D F 8.0 MPH 195.7 DEG 12.8 MPH 201.3 DEG 14.1 MPH 199.2 DEG -0.5 D F -0.7 D F 4/ 4 35.3 D F 42.4 DF 10.1 MPH 245.3 DEG 13.6 MPH 251.5 DEG 14.4 MPH 252.3 DEG -0.8 D F -1.2 D F 4/ 5 34.0 D F. 41.5 D F 8.3 MPH 75.4 DEG 12.4 MPH 63.4 DEG 14.3 MPH 60.7 DEG -0.8 D F -0.8 D F 4/ 6 36.8 D F 40.4 DF 11.4 MPH 81.0 DEG 16.3 MPH 83.6 DEG 18.0 HPH 85.6 DEG -0.5 D F -0.5 D F 4/ 7 39.7 D F 46.2 D F 8.3 MPH 300.6 DEG 12.1 MPH 296.4 DEG 13.1 HPH 270.7 DEG 0.6 D F 0.3 D F 4/ 8 32.0 D F 40.6 D F 13.5 MPH 29.8 DEG 15.7 MPH 31.4 DEG 16.8 HPH 29.8 DEG -1.2 D F -1.7 DF 4/ 9 37.0 0 F 41.2 D F 18.2 MPH 89.8 DEG 26.6 MPH 89.8 DEC 28.8 MPH 90.7 DEG -0.9 LF -0.8 D F 4/10 36.4 DF 44.5 D F 9.2 MPH 216.7 DEG 15.2 MPH 220.8 DEG 16.9 HPH 222.1 DEG -0.7 DF -0.8 D F 4/11 34.8 D F 41.6 D F 8.7 HPH 257.7 DEG 11.9 MPH 263.4 DEG 13.1 MPH 264.7 DEG -1.0 D F -1.3 D F 4/12 34.5 D F 42.7 D F 9.0 MPH 68.2 DEG 13.5 MPH e6.6 DEG 14.8 MPH 67.3 DEG -0.7 D F -0.8 D F 4/13 43.0 D F 52.9 D F 13.2 MPH 155.5 DEG 21.7 MPH 156.5 DEG 24.1 MPH 158 1 DEG -0.7 DF -0.7 0 F 4/14 43.3 D F 53.6 D F 17.8 MPH 193.3 DEG 26.5 MPH 194.5 DEG 29.0 MPH 194.8 DEG -0.6 DF -0.4 DF 4/15 26.4 DF 37.8 D F 14.3 MPH 249.0 DEG 17.9 MPH 251.1 LEG 18.8 MPH 250.6 DEG -1.3 D F -1.7 D F 4/16 24.8 D F 37.9 D F 10.1 NPH 200.4 DEG 13.1 MPH 285.9 DEG 13.9 MPH 301.2 DEG -1.2 D F -1.5 D F 4/17 21.9 D F 32.4 DF 17.5 MPH 313.0 DEG 23.9 ePH 315.5 DEG 24.9 MPH 314.1 DEG -1.3 D F -1.3 D F 4/18 16.4 D F 30.6 D F 12.6 MPH 339.2 DEG 15.7 HPH 344.1 DEG 16.2 MPH 342.8 DEG -1.5 0 F -2.0 D F 4/19 16.6 D F 33.0 D F 11.9 MPH 325.1 DEG 15.9 MPH 330.8 DEG 16.4 MPH 329.6 DFG -1.2 DF - 1. e D F 4/20 17.4 DF 38.3 D F 13.0 HPH 308.9 DEG 17.7 MPH 317.3 DEG 18.4 MPH 316.6 DEG -0.9 DF -1.2 D F 4/21 20.4 DF 45.9 D F 13.3 MPH 272.7 DEG 19.8 MPH 285.2 DEG 21.5 MPH 287.2 DEG -0.2 D F -0.1 DF 4/22 32.0 D F 47.2 D F 7.0 MPH 145.9 DEG 10.3 MPH 328.4 DEG 10.0 MPH 334.4 DEG 1.? DF 2.7 DF 4/23 35.5 D F 47.6 D F 13.3 MPH 69.6 DEG 19.4 MPH 74.5 DEG 22.1 MPH 75.8 DEG -0.3 D F 0.1 DF 4/24 29.5 D F 44.8 D F 20.3 MPH 19.2 DEG 23.6 MPH 18.7 DEG 27.1 HPH 17.7 DFG -1.4 0F -1.0 DF 4/25 23.9 D F 46.8 D F 10.4 MPH 321.9 DEG 14.9 MPH 325.3 DEG 15.8 MPH 325.5 DEG -0.1 DF -0.3 D F 4/26 32.4 DF 60.2 D F 7.6 MPH 236.7 DEG 13.0 MPH 253.6 DEG 14.3 MPH 258.5 DEG 1.1 DF 1.3 D F 4/27 40.4 DF 66.8 D F 12.9 MPH 264.2 DEG 21.2 MPH 267.6 DEG 22.8 MPH 267.9 DEG C.6 D F 6.o DF 4/28 41.4 DF 51.2 D F 10.1 MPH 37.0 DEG 13.9 MPH 33.4 DEG 15.1 MPH 32.0 DEG -0.6 D F -".6 0F 4/29 40.5 D F 46.3 D F 7.8 MPH 95.7 DEG 9.3 HPH 97.6 DEG 9.4 MPH 102.2 DE G -1.3 0 F -1.3 0 F 4/30 50.5 D F 55.6 D F 10.9 MPH 102.4 DEG 16.9 MPH 133.5 DEG 18.4 MPH 159.9 DEG -0.2 P F 0.5 D F O O O
.- -_= ._ _ -
v} {
. (M
~
u Table 15 DAVIS BESSE SITE AVERAGE WEATHER DATA M AY - 1, 1983 THROUGH MAY 31, 1983 DAILY AVERAGES DAY 10M DEW PT-- 10M A TEMP 10M W SPD- 10M.W DIR 75M W SPD '75M W'DIR 100M W SPD' 100M W DIR 7.5M DELT -100M DELT' 5/ 1 44.7 D F 48.1 DF 14.1 MPH ~ 84.7 DEG 18.3 MPH 80.4 DEG' 22.2 MPH 86.1 DEG -0.7 D F -0.6 D F
!/ 2 50.8 D F 63.3 D F 19.6 MPH 228.3 DEG 29.6 MPH 229.0 DEG 32.1 MPH 229.3 DEG -0.8 D F -1.1 DF 5/ 3 41.4 DF 47.3 D F 10.1 MPH 351.8 DEG 12.5 MPH 351.6 DEG 12.9 MPH 349.5 DEG -1.2 0 F -1.7 D F 5/.4 38.9 D F 50.0 D F 12.8 HPH 258.0 DEG 17.0 MPH 263.3 DEG 19.8 MPH 264.1 DEG -0.8 D F -1.1 D F 5/ 5. 28.8 D F _47.2 D.F 10.7 MPH 321.4 DEG 14.3 MPH 322.7 DEG 14.4 MPH 317.3 DEG -1.0 D F -1.3 D F 5/ 6 38.7 D F' 58.0 D F 9.7 MPH 178.0 DEG 19.4 MPH 179.4 DEG 21.2 MPH 180.9 DEG 0.6 D F 0.8 D F 5/ 7 46.1 DF 64.6 D F 15.4 MPH 204.0 DEG 27.1 MPH -204.1 DEG 10.1 MPH 204.4 DEG -0.2 D F -0.4 DF 5/ 9 -32.5 D F 45.4 DF 19.1 MPH 10.6 DEG 22.5 MPH 10.2 DEG 23.6 MPH 8.4 DEG -1 6 D F -2.1 DF 5/ 9 23.3 D F- 45.4 DF -8.4 MPH 17.6 DEG 10.1 MPH 16.4 DEG 10.4 HPH '14.8 DEG -1.4 DF -1.9 D F 5/10 29.1 DF- 51.3 D F 5.4 HPH 222.3 DEG 9.3 MPH 217.9 DEG 9.3 MPH 215.2 DEG 0.4 DF 0.4 D F
'5/11 36.4 DF 57.9 D F 5.4 MPH 123.4 DEG 8.4 MPH 98.9 DEG 8.4 MPH 96.7 DEG 1.7 D F 2.1 D F 5/12 39.5 D F 58.7 D F 8.9 MPH- 102.9.DEG 15.0 MPH 108.6 DEG 17.8 MPH 113.0 DEG -0.2 D F' O.5 D F 5/13 45.2 D F -57.1 D F -10.0 MPH 93.0 DEG 15.8 MPH 95.9 DEG 18.4 MPH 99.4 DEG -0.3 D F 0.7 D F
'5/14 56.3 D F 65.6 D F 9.2 MPH 216.9 DEG 11.2 MPH 222.5 DEG 17.3 MPH 224.4 DEG 0.1 DF 0.4 DF 5/15 40.5 D F1 50.0 D F 12.2 MPH 40.0 DEG 14.0 MPH 38.9 DEG 14.6 MPH 37.3 DEG -1.2 D F' -1.7 D F 5/16 32.3 D F 47.6 D F 11.5 MPH .71.6 DEG 12.8 HPH 70.5 DEG 13.3 MPH 69.7 DEG -1.3 D F -1.8 D F 5/17 28.8 D F 48.3 D F 11.8 MPH 83.5 DEG 16.0 HPH 83 2 DEG 16.4 MPH 83.9 DEG -1.3 D F -1.8 D F 5/19 37.5 D F 52.3 D F .11.2 MPH 103.8 DEG 16.3 MPH 102.0 DEG 17.5 MPH 103.3 DEG -1.0 D F -1.2 D F 5/19 50.6 D F 61.6 D F 14.1 MPH 183.0 DEG 23.2 MPH 184.2 DEG 27.3 MPH 185.4 DEG -0.4 DF -0.6 D F 5/20 48.3 D F 61.9 D F 12.1 MPH 230.5 DEG 17.5 MPH 251.1 DEG 19.0 MPH 253.8 DEG -0.4 DF -0.6 D F 5/21 51.0 ~
D F4 ~ 61.6 D F 6.4 MPH 107.5 DEG 9.7 MrH.
~
118.6 DEG 10.4 MPH 119.5 DEG 0.7 D F 1.3 D F 5/02 56.0 D F 65.5 D F 14.6 MPH' 196.1 DEG 22.3 MPH 197.7 DEG 24.4 MPH 198.1 DEG -1.0 D F -1.1 D F 5/23 27.2 D F 61.0 D F 16.7 MPH -267.8 DEG 21.8 MPH 270.3 DEG 23.3 MPH 270.2 DEG -1.2 D F -1.6 D F 5/24 23.7 D F 50.3 D F 6.8 MPH 264.9 DEG 10.9 MPH 275.9 DEG 12.0 MPH' 351.0 DEG 0.2 D F -0.1 DF 5/25 45.1 D F 53.4 D F 11.3 MPH 251.5 DEG 18.9 MPH 257.4 DEG 20.9 MPH 356.2 DEG -0.7 D F -1.2 D F 5/26 30.9 D F- 39.0 D F 10.8_ MPH 316.8 DEG 14.4 MPH 322.2 DEG 16.2 MPH 320.8 DEG -1.2 D F -1.6 D F 5/27 39.3 D F 55.0 D F 64 MPH 139.8 DEG 10.0 MPH 130.6 DEG 10.5 MPH 130.2 DEG -0.7 D F -0.9 D F 5/28 41.2 D F 58.9 D F 6.5 MPH 186.3 DEG 13.1 MPH 137.0 DEG 14.7 MPH 187.2 DEG -0.9 D F -1.0 D F 5/29 49.4 DF 60.3 D F 9.6 MPH 227.2 DEG 15.7 MPH 229.8 DEG 16.6 MPH 228.6 DEG -1.0 D F -1.4 DF 5/30 .42 0 D F 54.1 DF 13.0 MPH 228.9 DEG 19.6 MPH 235.0 DEG 21.2 MPH 234.9 DEG -0.8 D F -1.1 DF 5/31 42.6 D F 55.2 D F 12.4 MPH 249.4 DEG 18.3 MPH 255.4 DEG 19.7 MPH 255.2 DEG -0.8 D F -1 2 D F i
Table 6 DAVIS BESSE SITE AVERAGE WEATHER DATA JUNE 1, 1983 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1983 DAILY AVERAGES DAY 10M DEW PT 10M A TEMP 10M W SPD 10M W DIR 75M W SPD 75M W DIR 100M W SPD 100M W DIR 75M DELT 100M DELT 6/ 1 43.6 D F 54.5 D F 7.1 MPH 323.6 DEG 9.7 MPH 339.4 DEG 9.4 MPH 341.5 DEG -0.0 D F -0.3 D F 6/ 2 46.2 D F 58.6 DF 5.3 MPH 202.5 DEG 8.9 MPH 205.8 DEG 8.8 MPH 205.8 DEG 0.7 DF 0.8 D F a/ 3 52.1 D F' 59.4 DF 5.3 MPH 160.3 DEG 10.2 MPH 164.7 DEG 11.1 MPH 168.3 DEG 0.1 DF 0.1 DF 6/ 4 54.7 D F 61.9 DF 5.6 MPH 302.1 DEG 7.8 MPH 322.6 DEG 8.1 MPH 319.9 DEG -0.5 D F -0.9 D F
'6 / 5 51.6 DF 65.5 D F 7.7 MPH 234.5 OEG 12.2 MPH 262.3 DEG 13.4 MPH 267.4 DEG -0.1 DF -0.1 DF 6/ 6 -51.6 D F 57.5 D F 8.0 MPH 83.7 DEG 11.2 MPH 80.6 DEG 11.6 MPH 97.6 DEG -1.0 D F -1.4 DF 6/ 7 46.0 D F 62 8 D F 10.2 MPH 258.8 DEG 15.5 MPH 188.4 DEG 17.2 MPH 265.0 DEG -0.5 D F -0.5 D F 6/ 9 42.7 D F 57.7 DF 11.2 MPH 85.5 DEG 15.0 MPH 85.4 DEG 15.3 MPH 140.2 DEG -1.3 D F -1.8 D F e/ 9 43.3 D F 67.2 D F 7.6 MPH 186.6 DEG 15.3 MPH 188.4 DEG 17.3 MPH 189.9 DEG 0.0 D F 0.2 D F 6/10 54.0 D F 69.7 DF 6.8 MPH 225.5 DEG 13.2 MPH 245.3 DEG 14 4 MPH 250.4 DEG 2.0 D F 2.8 D F e/11 56.5 D F 72.5 D F 4.5 MPH 128.0 DEG 9.3 MPH 142.7 DEG 9.7 MPH 142.6 DEG 1.7 D F 2.5 D F o/12 57.3 D F 75.1 DF 6.0 MPH 141.4 DEG 11.9 MPH 149.7 DEG 12.6 MPH 147.9 DEG 2.0 DF 2.8 D F e/13 59.3 D F 76.2 D F 6.6 MPH 134.9 DEG 13.4 MPH 137.1 DEG 14.9 MPH 137.0 DFG 1.2 D F 2.3 D F e/14 61.2 D F 75.9 D F 6.0 NPH 146.6 DEG 13.3 HPH 164.6 DEG 14.9 MPH 171.0 DEG 1.3 D F 2.2 D F o/15 59.4 DF 71.4 DF 5.8 MPH 170.9 DEG 10.5 MPH 200.6 DEG 11.2 MPH 215.2 DEG 0.3 D F 0.7 D F o/le 59.8 D F 73 2 D F 4.7 MPH 145.7 DEG 7.7 MPH 158.2 DEG 8.1 MPH 163.5 DEG 0.3 D F 0.5 D F 6/17 52.4 DF 70.6 DF 6.8 MPH 50.4 DEG 9.3 MPH 52.6 DEG 10.0 MPH 50.6 DEG -0.6 DF -0.8 D F o/18 56.8 DF 71.4 DF B.2 MPH 48.7 DEG 10.1 MPH 58.5 DEG 10.5 MPH 59.6 DEG -0.4 DF -0.6 DF 6/19 54.6 D F 66.6 D F 6.8 MPH 56.1 DEG 9.1 MPH 60.1 DEG 9.2 MPH 62.2 DEG -0.9 D F -1.3 D F 6/20 61.0 D F 70.7 D F 7.8 MPH 63.0 DEG 10.5 MPH 65.7 DEG 10.9 MPH 67.7 DEG -0.9 D F -1.3 D F 6/21 60.3 D F 72.7 D F 6.5 MPH 75.8 DEG 9.5 MPH 83.3 DEG 10.4 MPH 85.9 DEG -0.5 D F -0.7 D F e/22 61.5 D F 72.1 DF 7.6 MPH 93.3 DEG 10.6 MPH 106.0 DEG 11.4 MPH 108.7 DEG -0.5 D F -0.7 D F 6/23 62.0 D F 77.8 D F 6.0 MPH 179.5 DEG 11.1 HPH 188.6 DEG 12.3 MPH 193.2 DEG 0.9 DF 1.5 D F 6/24 57.0 D F 75.9 D F 8.5 MPH 31.8 DEG 11.1 MPH 28.0 DEG 11.7 MPH 26.1 DEG -1.0 D F -1.3 D F 6/25 56.9 D F ' 73.3 D F 6.8 MPH 100.3 DEG 10.0 MPH 88.0 DEG 10.4 MPH 87.9 DEG -0.0 D F -0.3 D F 6/25 55.5 D F 80.6 DF 9.1 MPH 205.9 DEG 16.3 MPH 211.1 DEG 18.5 MPH 230.9 DEG -0.2 D F -0.1 DF 6/27 64.1 DF 76.4 DF 9.1 MPH 212.3 DEG 15.2 MPH 232.0 DEG 16.7 MPH 233.3 DEG -0.2 D F -0.1 DF 6/28 62.0 D F 67.8 D F 13.0 MPH 100.1 DEG 19.7 MPH 100.0 DEG 20.7 MPH 99.1 DEG -0.9 D F -1.3 D F 6/29 59.6 D F 67.6 D F 13.1 MPH 88.2 DEG 19.7 MPH 88.8 DEG 20.1 MPH 89.3 DEG -1.2 D F -1.7 D F s/30 66.4 DF 73.0 D F 7.4 MPH 177.5 DEG 13.5 MPH 184.0 DEG 15.1 MPH 185.7 DEG -0.9 D F -1.0 D F O O O
,. - - - - . _ ,,- ._ . ~ ~ - .- - -, . . . . ~ , . . . . . . _ .
~ '
i i s. Table 7.' +
- DAVIS BESSE SITE AVERAGE WEATHER; DATA-JULY: -left983 THROUGH JULYs 31, 1983 .
1 DAILY' AVERAGES
. DAY. 10M DEW.PT- 10M.A TEMP. 10M W SPD 10M W DIR 75M W SPD 100M W SPD 100M W DIR 75M DELT' 100M-DELT
___..' '...________-..... __.__ ___.._____ ____ ...... ._________ -75M W DIR.
..________. _____.____ =_ ______ .._________- _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ - <
7/ 1: '67.4 D F< '74.1.D F'- 9.7' MPH 1204.7 DEG --17.7 MPH- 222.8 DES 19.5 MPH '223.9 DEG' -0.2 D F. -0.2 D F' 7/ 2 66.0 D F' 78.3 D F. :5.8 MPH 176.3 DEG 9.5 MPH 184.0 DEG' '10.2 MPH 188.1 DEG -0.5 D F -0.4 D F 7/ 3' 66.5 D F 79.8 D F. "10.5 MPH '201.8-DEG 18.8 MPH. 204.2 DEG 20.7 MPH 204.4'DEG. -0.8 D F -0.9 D F' 7/-4' 67.1 D F 74.9 D F^ 11.7. MPH 213.9 DEG '18.9 MPH .226.1 DES: 20.6 MPH '225.9 DEG -0.9 D F -0.9 D F 7/ 5 55 8 D'F. 46.8 D F; .10.8 MPH 324.4 DEG' 14.6 MPH- 329.3 DEG. 15.6 MPH' 331 0 DEG .-0.9 D F -0.8'D F 'I 7/ 6 44.0 D F .62.7 D F 9.0 MPH 34.5 DEG '9.7 MPH 35 1 DEG 10.2 MPH 35.0 DEG --1.4 DF -1.9 D F 7/ 7 50.6 D F' -45.8 D F. -5.0 MPH 202.4 DEG 7.5 MPH 205.6 DEG 7.5 MPH 201.1 DEG 0.5 D F 0.4 DF " 7/ 8 .52.3 D F- .70.6 D F 8.1 MPH- 214.1 DEG 14.5 MPH- 233.8 DEG. '15.6 MPH '235.4 DEG 0.9 D F 1.4 D F-7/ 9 60.1 D.F- '71.0 D F '6.6 MPH-. 62.3 DEG' 10.5 MPH 359.4 DEG 11.8 MPH 0.4 DEG -0.2 D F 0.2.D F . 7/10 -52.0 D F' -69.5 D F '8.0 MPH 84.5 DEG 11.3 MPH 1B1.7 DEG 11 3 MPH 82.1 DEG -1.0 D F~ -1.4 DF
'7/11 157.3 D F 74.8 D F . 6.9 MPH ' 187.1 DEG 14.2 MPH 204.1 DEG .15.9 MPH 204.6 DEG 0.6 D F 1.2 D F
-7/12 64.8 D'F. 80.3 D F 8.4' MPH 267.7 DEG 15.1 MPH -286.3 DEG 16.8 MPH 287.0 DEG 0.1 DF 0.4 DF 7/13. 61.1 D F -77.4 DF 5.3 MPH 60 3 DEG 8.0 MPH. -59.2 DEG 8.1 MPH 60.5 DEG. -0.0 D F -0.2 D F 7/14. 59.1 D F 78.6 D F 4.8 MPH :209.0 DEG 10.4 MPH 225.2 DEG' 10.7 MPH 229.0 DEG 1.9 D F 2.3 D F 7/15- 66.8'D F 83.7 D F 7.7 MPH 244.8 DEG 13.1 MPH 286.2 DEG 14.4 MPH 289.0 DEG .0.8 D F: 1.3 D F
'7/16 65.4 DF '82.9.D F :8.6 MPH ~277.1 DEG 13.5 MPH - 294.4-DEG 14.6 MPH 296.9 DEG 0.5 D F 0.6 D F
~7/17 67.7 D F 78.2 D F. 8.2. MPH 259.4 DEG ,13.0 MPH 273.4 DEG 14.1 MPH 274.9 DEG -0.2 D F -0.0 D F-7/18 69.3 D F 76.1 DF 5.5. MPH 119.3.DEG 7.7 MPH 12.7 DEG 8.2 MPH 14.9 DEG -0.0 D F 0.0 D F 7/19 68.8 D F 77.5 D F 4.6 MPH 217.2 DEG 6.2 MPH 252.8 DEG 6.4 MPH 295.4 DEG -0.4 DF -0.4 DF 7/20. -67.3.D F 81.0 D F 8.2 MPH ,245.6 DEG 11.8 MPH 262.6 DEG 11.9 MPH 265.6 DEG 0.3 D F 0.3 D F 7/21 69.7 D F 79.0 D F 8.9. MPH 268.0 DEG 13.2 MPH 297.5 DEG 13.8 MPH 299.8 DEG 0.0 D F 0.2 D F
.7/22 59.6 D'F 74.3 D F 9.8 MPH - 81.4 DEG 14.0 MPH 82.9 DEG- 14 2 MPH 84.1 DEG -1.2 D F -1.6 D F 7/23 66.3 D F 78.5 D F 9.2 MPH 282.6 DEG 13.4 MPH 276.9 DEG 14.4 MPH .270.1 DEG -1.1 DF -1.3 D F 7/24- 62.2 D F -75.2 D F 10.3 MPH 337.4 DEG 14.1 MPH 340.2 DEG 14.6 MPH 340.4 DEG -0.9 D F -1 2 D F 7/25 58.3 D F 74.5 D F 8.2 MPH 48.7 DEG 9.9 MPH 47.4 DEG 10.0 MPH '47.2 DEG -1.2 D F -1.4 D F 7/26' : 53.1 DF 75.1 DF 6.2 MPH I60.8 DEG 7.3 MPH- 58.3 DEG 7.4 MPH 52.0 DEG -0.8 D F -1.1 DF 7/27- 54.6 D F 73.7 D F .4.9 MPH 148.3 DEG 7.7 MPH 150.8 DEG 7.2 MPH 146.9 DEG 1.2 D F 1.4 DF 7/28 . 62s9 D F 79.2 D F '8.4 MPH .199.4 DEG 16.4 MPH 208.4 DEG 18.8 MPH 209.9 DEG 0.0 D F 0.5 D F 7/29 68 4.D-F. .77.9 D F 9.7 MPH 190.6'DEG 18.2 MPH 202.5 DEG 20.5 MPH 203.6 DEG -0.1 DF 01DF 7/30 68.4 DF- 76.5 D F 5.8 MPH 15.8 DEG 8.3 MPH 26.3 DEG 8.6 MPH 35.0 DEG 0.1 DF -0.1 DF 7/31 48.8 D F 74.8.D F 6 4 MPH' 205.6 DEG 11.4 MPH 216.5 DEG 12.7 MPH 219 6 DEG -0.4 D F -0.5 D F O
Table 8 DAVIS BESSE SITE AVERAGE WEATHER DATA CUGUST 1 1983 THROUGH AUGUST 31, 1983 DAILY AVERAGES-DAY 10M DEW PT 10M A TEMP 10M W SPD 10M W DIR 75M W SPD 75M W DIR 100M W SPD 100M W DIR 75M DELT 100M DELT 8/ 1 62.3 D F 75.4 D F 10.1 MPH 262.9 DEG 15.4 MPH 272.9 DEG 16.6 HPH 274.4 DEG -0.7 D F -1.0 D F 8/ 2 62.4 DF 72.5 D F 5.3 MPH 27.8 DEG 8.1 MPH 32.1 DEG 8.2 MPH 33.1 DEG -0.2 D F -0.5 D F 8/ 3 62.9 D F 75.9 DF 5.2 MPH 195.0 DEG 10.7 MPH 203.1 DEG 11.6 MPH 204.0 DEG 0.6 D F 0.9 DF 8/ 4 67.4 DF 76.1 DF 7.9 MPH 214.0 DEG 13.0 MPH 231.6 DEG 14.4 MPH 233.8 DEG -0.5 D F -0.5 D F 3/ 5 48.8 D F 76.5 D F 5.8 MPH 19.7 DEG 7.0 MPH 19.3 DEG 7.3 MPH 20.3 DEG -1.1 DF -1.5 D F 8/ o 69.5 D F 75.9 DF 3.7 MPH 330.5 DEG 5.8 HPH 35.3 DEG 5.7 MPH 40.8 DEG 0.2 D F 0.0 D F 8/ 7 47.4 D F 77.4 DF 4.7 MPH 230.3 DEG 6.4 MPH 264.6 DEG 6.6 MPH 274.1 DEG 0.3 DF 0.4 DF 3/ 8 64.5 D F 79.4 DF 10.5 MPH 231.8 DEG 15.e MPH 259.9 DEG 16.4 MPH 261.0 DEG 0.5 D F 0.8 D F 8/ 7 57.0 D F 72.8 D F 11.0 MPH 35.2 DEG 13 2 MPH 33.7 DEG 13.6 HPH 33.4 DEG -1.3 D F -1.8 D F 3/10 54.0 0F 70.3 D F 7.9 MPH 82.0 DEG 11.3 MPH 78.6 DEG 11.5 MPH 79.7 DEG -0.9 D F -1.3 D F 8/11 62.0 D F 69.7 DF 13.9 MPH 308.3 DEG 19.7 MPH 316.7 DEG 21.5 MPH 312.5 DEG -1.0 DF -1.3 D F G/12 51.8 D F 69.2 D F 13.2 MPH 34.3 DEG 15.3 MPH 33.4 DEG 16.3 MPH 33.5 DEG -1.2 D F -1.7 D F 8/13 55.8 D F 68.8 D F 5.3 MPH 117.5 DEG 7.9 HPH 89.6 DEG 7.9 MPH 87.9 DEG 0.7 D F 0.4 DF 8/14 56.4 DF 69.2 D F 4.5 MPH 137.0 DEG 8.5 MPH 124.9 DEG 8.7 MPH 124.2 DEG 0.7 D F 1.1 DF 6/15 57.5 DF 71.2 D F 4.4 MPH 123.7 DEG 8.5 MPH 117.2 DEG 9.0 MPH 121.0 DEG 0.4 DF 0.7 D F 3/16 02.5 D F 73.8 D F 4.7 MPH 125.3 DEG 8.5 MPH 120.0 DEG 8.7 MPH 130.4 DEG 0.3 D F 0.6 D F 8/17 65.2 D F 75.4 DF 8.3 MPH 209.9 DEG 15.1 MPH 222.3 DEG 17.0 HPH 225.6 DEG -0.0 D F 0.5 D F 8/18 69.4 DF 76.2 D F 5.9 MPH 179.9 DEG 9.0 MPH 202.5 DEG 9.7 MPH 207.0 DEG -0.6 DF -0.8 D F b'19 70.5 D F 80.5 D F 6.1 MPH 198.8 DEG 11.2 MPH 207.2 DEG 12.0 MPH 207.0 DEG 0.7 D F 0.8 D F 8/20 69.2 D F 00.1 DF 8.5 MPH 26.8 DEG 12.8 MPH 354.6 DEG 14.1 MPH 349.5 DEG -0.6 D F -0.7 D F 8/21 62.4 DF 75.0 D F 6.9 MPH 131.1 DEG 13.1 HPH 131.7 DEG 14.4 MPH 131.8 DEG -0.0 D F 0.1 D F 3/22 67.0 D F 7~.7 D F 10.2 MPH 299.0 DEG 15.3 MPH 303.4 DEG 16.5 MPH 302.8 DEG -0.9 D F -1.1 DF 8/03 60.4 DF 73.0 D F 9.0 MPH 65.1 DEG 12.0 MPH 65.2 DEG 12.2 MPH 66.1 DEG -1.0 D F -1.5 D F 8/24 62.5 D F 73.9 D F 8.3 MPH 76.1 DEG 12.1 MPH 75.2 DEG 12.3 HPH 76.2 DEG -0.9 DF -1.4 DF G/25 66.9 D F 74.6 D F 4.5 MPH 62.8 DEG 6.9 MPH 70.8 DEG 6.8 MPH 70.6 DEG 0.5 D F 0.3 D F 0/06 70.1 DF 77.2 D F 5.3 MPH 218.1 'F" 9.8 MPH 233.4 DEG 10.2 MPH 235.6 DLG 1.2 D F 1.4 DF 8/07 69.6 DF 78.6 D F 4.7 MPH 257.9 DEG 7.7 MPH 296.8 DEG 7.9 MPH 302.9 DEG 0.6 DF 0.8 D F 8/28 66.9 DF 77.0 D F 5.4 MPH 15.2 DEG 6.9 MPH 20.7 DEG 7.2 MPH 25.5 DEG -0.1 DF -0.3 D F 8/29 63.5 D F 73.4 DF 4.6 MPH 227.9 DEG 8.7 MPH 348.4 DEG 8.5 MPH 322.0 DEG 2.0 D F 2.0 D F 8/30 63.5 D F 55.8 D F 8.5 MPH 218.7 DEG 13.7 MPH 235.7 DEG 14.7 MPH 242.2 DEG 1.1 DF 1.9 D F 8/31 61.9 D F 67.9 DF 12.5 NPH 1.2 DEG 14.6 MPH 13.7 DEG 17.9 MPH 17.6 DEG -0.9 D F -1.5 D F e O O
l
. . . sk- ..
Table.9
. DAVIS DESSE SITE AVERAGE WEATHER DATA SEPTEMBER 1. 1983-THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 1983 DAILY' AVERAGES DAY. 10M DEW PT. 10M A TEMP 10M W SPD L10M W DIR .75M W SPD- 75M W DIR 100M W SPD .100M W DIR 75M DELT 100h DELT 9/ 1 57.5 D F 73.1 D F- 8.4 MPH 62.2-DEG 10.6 MPH 61.0 DEG- 11.0 MPH- 60.7 DEG -0.8 D F -1.2 D F H9/ 2 -55.6 D F 70.5 D F 4.0 MPH . 95 2 DEG 6.2 MPH 96.5 DEG 6.6 MPH 89.3 DEG 1.4 DF 1.5 ' D F -
9/ 3 58.5 D-F. 72.1 D F. 4.6 MPH 158.7 DEG 9.5 MPH 147.4 DEG 9.5 MPH- .145.0 DEG' 1.7 D F 2.6 D F 9/ 4 61.0 D F 76.7 D-F- 6.1 HPH 202.9 DEG 13.4 MPH -209.7'DEG 16.0 MPH 212.6 DEG .0.5 D F 1.4 DF 9/ 5 63.5 D F <78.5 D F 9.0 MPH 206.8 DEG 16.9 MPH 210.7 DEG~ .19.4 MPH 210.7 DEG -0.3 D F. -0.3 D F 9/ 6 - 62.9 D F 75.9 D F 12.7 MPH 229.1 DEG 20.2 MPH 233.8 DEG 22.6 MPH 232.3 DEG -'.7 O DF -0.8 D F 9/ 7 55.5 D F 69.3 D F 7.3 MPH 273.4 DEG -11.6 MPH 286.9 DEG 12.8 MPH 286.3 DEG -0.0 D F -0 0 D F 9/ 8 53.4 DF .67.2'D F 5.4 MPH 307.3 DEG 8.9 MPH 359.8 DEG 9.0 MPH 358.1 DEG. 1.2 D F- 1.1 DF 9/.9 56.6 D F -74.3 D F 7.8 MPH 208.9 DEG- 16.8 MPH- .211.0 DEG .19.8 MPH 210.5 DEG 1.0 D F 2.0 D F 9/10 60.8 D F B0.9 D F .10.3 MPH' 231.9 DEG '18.9 MPH 241.2 DEG 21.7 MPH. 240.8 DEG 0.6 D F 1.C.D F-9/11 56.1 DF 73.3 D F 6.8 MPH 312 7 DEG 10.9. MPH 326 1 DEG 11.9 MPH 324.2 DEG. -0.5 D F -0.7 D F 9/12 51.3 D F 69.6 D F 9.7 MPH 27.0 DEG 10.5 MPH '29.6 DEG 11.3 MPH 28.0 DEG -1.3 D F -1.7 D F 9/13 48.1 DF- -65.3 D F. 13.5 MPH 32.7 DEG 14.5 MPH 34.5 DEG 15.6 MPH' '32.1 DEG -1.4 D F- -1 9 D F 9/14 41.5 D F .41.3 D F 9.0 MPH 34.9 DEG 10.0 MPH 42.2 DEG 10.8 MPH 42.5 DEG -0.5 D F -0.8 D F 9/15 43.1 DF .60.6 D F 7.3 MPH 157.1 DEG 12.0 MPH 157.4 DEG 12.6 MPH 155.7 DEG 1.2 D F 1.1.D F 9/16 53.5 D F 62.1 D F 7.9 MPH 209.1 DEG 14.3 MPH 216.9 DEG 16.4 MPH 216.8 DEG -0.1 DF. -0.4 DF 9/17 50.5 D F 61.9 D F 7.3 MPH 245.5 DEG- 11.7 MPH 254.7 DEG. 12.9 MPH ~253.6 DEG -0.1 D F .
-0.1 DF 9/18: 56.1 DF 74.5 D F 12 1 MPH 207.3 DEG 22.5 MPH 211.3 DEG. 26.0 MPH 210.6 DFG 0.1 DF 0.4 DF
'9/19. 59.2 D F 76.4 DF 7.4. MPH 208.4 DEG 15.6 MPH 217.1 DEG 18.3 MPH 218.6 DEG 0.8 D F 1.2 D F 9/20 60.3 D F 74.4 DF 13.3 MPH 212.2 DEG' 23 1 MPH 212.0 DEG 25.5 MPH 210.8 DEG -0.7 0 F -0.9 DF 9/21 41.7 D F' 53.1 DF 13.7 MPH 284.3 DEG 19.1 MPH 290.9 DEG 20.4 MPH. 287.8 DEG -1.1 DF -1.5 D F ,
9/22 35.9-D F- 46.0-D Fl 11.9 MPH 258.6 DEG 17.5 MPH' 268.7 DEG 19.2 MPH 266.8 DEG .-0.7 D F -0.9 D F 9/23 38.2 D F 47.4 D.F .7.9 MPH 265.0 DEG 12.5 MPH 285.3 DEG 14.1 MPH 284 1 DFG -0.0 D F -0.1 DF 9/24 36.4 DF 51.9 DF 5.6 MPH' 198.8 DEG 11.2 MPH 211.4 DEG 12 2 MPH 200.0 DEG 24 DF 2.5 D F' 9/25 38.0 D F 57.3 D F 5.9 MPH 196.3 DEG 14.4 MPH 201.7 DEG 17.8 MPH 202.2 DEG' 1.0 D F 1.9 DF 9/26 50.9 DF 61 1 DF 5.6 MPH '227.3 DEG 9.5 MPH 257.9 DEG 10.7 MPH 258.4 DEG 0.5 D F C .5 D .F 9/27 52.7 D F 61.8 D F 4.8 MPH 173.1 DEG '9.4 MPH 198.8 DEG 9.6 MPH 203.2 DEG 2.8 L F 3.4 DF 9/28 54.3 D F 62.3 D F 5.0 MPH 121.6 DEG 9.2. MPH 116 4.DEG 9.5 NPH .116.4 DEG 14 LF 14 0F 9/29 57.4 DF 64.6 D F .5.4,HPH 80.4 DEG- 9.2 MFil 84.7 DEG 10.0 MPH 84.6 DEG -0.4 DF -0.6 D F l 9/30 55.6 D F 64.5 D F B.2 MPH 58.9 DEG 11.5 MPH 62.4 DEG 12.6 MPH 63.2 DEG -1.5 D F -1.8 D F = i i + i I i o _ - x-- .
Table 10 DAVIS BESSE SITE AVERAGE WEATHER
- DATA OCTOBER 1, 1983 THROUGH OCTOBER 31e 1983 DAILY AVERAGES DAY 10M DEW PT 10M A TEMP 10M W SPD 10M W DIR 75M W SPD 75M W DIR 100M W SPD 100M W DIR 75M DELT 100M DELT 10/ 1 55.7 D F 64.7 D F 5.3 MPH 132.3 DEG 9.1 MPH 137.0 DEG 10.0 MPH 139.8 DEG -0.9 DF -1.1 DF 10/ 2 49.6 D F 67.5 D F 6.4 MPH 206.4 DEG 14.0 MPH 217.9 DEG 16.1 HPH 219.8 DEG 0.7 D F 1.1 DF 10/ 3 48.8 D F 72.0 D F 12.2 MPH 209.9 DEG 22.2 MPH 216.3 DEG 25.4 MPH 216.2 DEG 0.2 D F 0.6 D F 10/ 4 54.8 D F 68.6 DF 10.1 HPH 214.7 DEG 17.6 MPH 220.9 DEG 19.8 HPH 220.2 DEG -0.4 DF -0.5 D F 10/ 5 53.0 D F 61.3 D F 9.0 MPH 287.2 DEG 13.9 MPH 296.8 DEG 15.1 MPH 296.2 DEG -0.3 D F -0.4 DF 10/ o 41.6 DF 57 1 DF 10.9 MPH 277.1 DEG 18.1 MPH 289.0 DEG 20.0 MPH 287.5 DEG 0.1 DF 01 DF 10/ ? 37.6 DF 58.1 DF 7.4 MPH 203.2 DEG 13.7 MPH 191.4 DEG 15.4 MPH 184.5 DEG 0.9 D F 1.1 DF 10/ 8 43.9 D F 58.3 D F 13.5 MPH 326.0 DEG 18.9 MPH 327.1 DEG 21.4 MPH 323.7 DEG -0.8 D F -1.0 D F 10/ 9 40.9 DF 52.2 D F 15.7 MPH 53.2 DEG 18.8 MPH 57.4 DEG 19.3 MPH 56.0 DEG -1.3 D F -1.9 D F 10/10 44.1 DF 55.5 DF 8.7 MPH 94.8 DEG 12.7 MPH 94.9 DEG 13.4 MPH 93.9 DEG ~1.1 DF -1.5 D F 10/11 49.4 DF 62.5 D F 11.1 MPH 159.7 DEG 20.0 MPH 164.7 DEG 22.3 MPH 164.3 DEG -0.7 D F -1.0 D F 10/12 57.4 DF 63.8 D F 8.7 MPH 167.1 DEG 15.3 MPH 171.6 DEG 17.0 MPH 173.0 DEG -0.6 DF -0.9 D F c 10/13 45.6 DF 49.6 DF 13.1 MPH 293.6 DEG 18.6 MPH 290.3 DEG 20.0 HPH 288.0 DEG -0.8 D F -1.2 D F 10/14 35.0 D F 45.3 D F 16.4 MPH 235.3 DEG 24.2 MPH 243.0 DEG 26.4 MPH 240.3 DEG -0.6 D F -0.7 D F 10/15 41.8 D F 50.8 D F 6.2 MPH 149.1 DEG 11.4 MPH 139.1 DEG 12.7 MPH 103.7 DEG 0.9 D F 1.6 D F 10/16 43.6 D F 58.8 DF 6.1 MPH 183.4 DEG 13.5 MPH 192.7 DEG 16.0 MPH 192.2 DEG 0.5 D F 0.8 D F 10/17 43.0 D F 53.8 D F 6.7 MPH 294.9 DEG 10.4 HPH 314.0 DEG 10.9 MPH 316.8 DEG -0.1 DF -0.2 D F 10/10 39.7 DF 53.9 DF 8.9 MPH 58.2 DEG 12.6 MPH 61.2 DEG 13.0 MPH 59.9 DEG -0.8 D F -1.3 D F 10/19 39.8 D F 52.7 D F 14.0 MPH 66.3 DEG 21.8 MPH 68.3 DEG 22.8 MPH 68.0 DEG -1.0 D F -1.5 D F 10/20 41.2 D F 52.7 D F 16.1 HPH 86.0 DEG 25.0 MPH 86.7 DEG 26.1 MPH 86.5 DEG -1.0 D F -1.5 D F 10/21 42.4 DF 54.0 D F 14.2 MPH 105.9 DEG 22.9 MPH 106.2 DEG 24.0 MPH 106.0 DEG -1.1 DF -1.5 D F 10/22 46.1 DF 50.5 D F 10.0 MPH 151.5 DEG 16.4 MPH 156.5 DEG 18.3 MPH 156.7 DEG -0.8 D F -1.2 D F 10/23 51.4 0F 54.3 D F 6.5 MPH 159.5 DEG 10 3 MPH 162.8 DEG 11.8 MPH 165.8 DEG -0.8 D F -1.0 D F 10/24 47.9 DF 51.7 D F 13.7 MPH 39.1 DEG 15.9 MPH 39.9 DEG 17.1 MPH 39.7 DEG -1.1 DF -1.5 D F 10/25 41.2 D F 49.5 D F 8.7 MPH 306.3 DEG 12.8 MPH 315.4 DEG 13.6 MPH 313.0 DEG -0.7 D F -1.1 DF 10/26 34.7 D F 41.1 DF 7.1 MPH 280.2 DEG 11.9 MPH 299.8 DEG 13.9 MPH 300.3 DEG 0.1 DF 0.2 D F 10/27 32.6 D F 44.8 D F 9.7 MPH 246.6 DEG 15.9 MPH 263.9 DEG 17.5 MPH 263.6 DEG 0.9 D F 0.8 D F 10/28 41.7 D F 58.8 DF 21.0 MPH 254.4 DEG 31.5 MPH 259.7 DEG 34.2 MPH 257.2 DEG -0.3 D F -0.5 D F 10/29 29.9 D F 45.6 DF 12.1 MPH 23.2 DEG 15.7 HPH 24.4 DEG 16.3 MPH 21.9 DEG -1.1 DF -1.6 D F 10/30 31.6 DF 42.8 DF 4.8 MPH 130.8 DEG 7.4 HPH 111.3 DEG 7.9 MPH 108.4 DEG 0.5 D F 0.2 D F 10/31 36.9 D F 46.9 D F 5.6 MPH 117.4 DEG 11.6 MPH 104.1 DEG 13.0 MPH 104.3 DEG 1.1 DF 1.3 D F G G G
, ,. - - m . , _ .,_ _ ,- . .
)
- Table 11' :
DAV'IS DESSE SITE. AVERAGE WEATHER DATA NOVEMBER .le[1983.THROUGH HGVEMBER 30e~ 1983-
. DAILY AVERAGES
, DAY 10M DEW PT. 10M A TEMP ION W SPD 10M W DIR .75M W SPD .75M W DIR 100M W SPD 100M W DIR 75M DELT- 100M DELT-11/ 1. 49.4 D F 56.9 D F 5.5 MPH -173.7'DED 13.5 MPH- 189.9 DEG 16.6 MPH 193 4 DEG c o.8 D F ' 1.4 D F 11/ 2- -52.2 D F 57.4 DF 6.4 MPH '210.3 DEG- ,14 3 MPH 219.5 DEG 16.9 MPH 221.6 DEG~ 0.3'D F 0.4 DF 11/ 3 .37.0 D F, 46.2 D F 15.5 MPH 346.8 DEG .20.1 MPH f350.9 DEG 21.6 MPH 348.9 DEG -1.1 DF -1.5 D F 11/ 4- 25.6 DF 38.7 D F 16.9 MPH 346.0.DEG' 22.3 MPH -349 6 DEG- 23.1 MPH 347.3 DEG -1.2 D F -1.7 D F 11/ 5 31.1 DF 41.8 D F 11.5 MPH 329.0 DEG 15.8 MPH 337.0 DEG 16.2 MPH 335.0 DEG -0.5 D.F -0.9 D F 11/E6 34.3 D F ;41.9 D F- 7.8 MPH. 241.9 DEG 13.6 MPH 257.5 DEG 15.4 MPH 260.1 DEG 0.3 D F 0.8 D F 11/:7 41.1 DF 49.0 D F 3.7 MPH 181.4 DEG 7.5 MPH 217.2 DEG 8.3 MPH 218.9 DEG 0.5 D F 0.5 D F 11/ 3- 34.6 D F 50.8 D F< 6.6 MPH 203.5 DEG 14.4 MPH. 214.6 DEG' 16.8 MPH 216.6.DEG. 1.5 D F 2.5 D F 11/ 9 '38.9 D F 51.4 DF 5 1 MPH 153.6 DEG 15.5' MPH 174 3 DEG 16.3 MPH. 178.8 DEG 5.2 D F 62DF 11/10 45.1 D F 51.0,D F 9.9 MPH 83 1 DEG 18.0 MPH. 104.4 DEG 20.4 HPH 112.4 DEG 1.7 D F 2.4 D F.
i 11/11 29.7 D FJ 35.6 D F 25.8 MPH 339.5 DEG- 33.9 MPH 342.6 DEG 33.3 MPH 340.3-DEG -1.2 D F -1.5 D F , .11/12 :16.1 DF 29.0 D F 12.9 MPH 302.'1~. DEG - 17.4. MPH 320.5 DEG '17.1 MPH 319.8 DEG -0.5 D F -0.9 D F 11/13 20.4 DF 31.2 D F. 3.5 MPH 221.3 DEG 4.8 MPH 215.9 DEG 1.0 MPH 202.8 DEG 0.6 D F 0.4 DF 11/14 25.2 D FJ 36.2 D F 7.0 MFH 161.1 DEG 13.4 MPH 170.7 DEG 17.1 MPH 170.7 DEG 0.5 D F- 0.6 D F 11/15 ~32.4 DF 39.2.D F 9.6 MPH 80.6 DEG' 14.7 MPH 81.6 DEG 15.7 MPH 83.4 DEG -0.6 D F -1.0 D F 11/16 31.3 D F- 36.6-D F 20.8 MPH 312.9 DEG '29.0 MPH 317.0 DEG 30.4 MPH 314.6 DEG -1.0 D F -1.5 D F j 11/17 26.2 D F R36.1 DF- 11.9 MPH 286.3,DEG 17.2 MPH 297.7 DEG 18.0 MPH 295.5 DEG -0.3 D F -0.7 D F 11/18 34.1 D F 42.5 D F 7.2 MPH 185.2 DEG 15.0 MPH 196.0 DEG 17.0 MPH 196.9 DEG 0.4 DF 0.7 D F i 11/19 45.8 D F 50.2 D F.. 7.2 MPH -152.2 DEG 14.9 MPH 149 2 DEG 17.3 MPH- 174.4 DEG 2.1 D F 2.3 D F 11/20 ~43.1.D F 53.2 D F. .16.5 MPH 195.6 DEG 26.3 MPH 201.2 DEG- 29.1 MPH 201.5 DEG 0.1 DF -0.0 D F , 11/21 36.0 D F- 48.9.D F 15.8 MPH 226.9 DEG 25.0 MPH 232.8 DEG 27.7 MPH 231.0 DEG 0.0 D F -0.0 D F
-11/22 37.9 D F 45.6 D F 5.9 MPH 168.6 DEG 11.9 MPH 188.0 DEG 11.9 MPH 180.4 DEG- '2.2 D F 2.9 D F l' .11/23 45.6 D F 52.6 D F 14.5' MPH 145.9 DEG 25.4 HPH 153.6 DEG 27.3 MPH 157.2 DEG 1.6 D F 2.3 D F
- 11/24 '24.9 D F 34.7 D F 17.5 MPH 255.3 DEG. 22.0 MPH 259.0 DEG 23.0 MPH 256 2 DEG -1.3 D F -1.9 D F i 11/25 24.5 D F -33.3 D F 12.7 MPH 236.4 DEG 19.0 MPH. 245.6 DEG 20.9 MPH 245.7 DEG -0.4 D F. -0.5 D F
! 11/26 .32.5 D F 43.9 D F 10.0 MPH 225.2 D2G 18.4 MPH 237.3 DEG 21.0 MPH 237.2 DEG 0.8 D F 1.0 D F l 11/27 37.7 D F 42.1 D F 14.5 MPH 65.9 DEG 22.2 MPH 68.3 DEG 24.1 MPH 69.1 CEG -1.1 DF -1.4 D F 11/28 37.4 D F 44.9 D F 15 1 MPH 179.9 DEG 23.6 MPH 187.9 DEG 25.8 MPH 188.8 DEG -0.4 DF -0.5 D F 11/29 23.1 DF 33.7 D F 20.7 MPH 237.7 DEG 27.1 MPH 240.8 DEG 28.8 MPH 238.6 DEO -1.2 D F -1.7 D F
-11/30 15.7 D F 28.3 D F 20.6 MPH 259.5 DEG 26.4 MPH 263.3 DEG 27.6 MPH 260.8 DEG -1.4 DF -1.9 D F i
- j.
- d i I t
Tabe 12 DAVIS BESSE SITE AVERAGE WEATHER DATA DECEMBER 1, 1983 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1983 DAILY AVERAGES DAY 10M DEW PT 10M A TEMP 10M W SPD 10N W DIR 75M W SPD 75M u DIR 100M W SPD 100M W DIR 75M DELT 100M DELT 12/ 1 16.2 D F 25.7 D F 14 2 MPH 251.0 DEG 18.0 MPH 254.5 DEG 19.1 MPH 251.9 DEG -1.4 DF -1.9 D F 12/ 2 22.9 DF 28.6 D F 8.1 MPH 220 7 DEG 12.3 MPH 224.0 DEG 13.9 MPH 223.2 DEG -1.2 D F -1.6 D F 12/ 3 22.3 D F 33.0 D F 10.3 MPH 70.6 DEG 15.2 MPH 69.8 DEG 16.2 MPH 69.7 DEG -1.0 D F -1.5 D F 12/ 4 32.9 D F 35.7 D F 10.8 NPH 309.1 DEG 16.1 MPH 318.8 DEG 17.4 MPH 312.7 DEG -0.9 D F -1.3 D F 12/ 5 34.5 D F 37.7 D F 6.7 MPH 203.2 DEG 10.6 MPH 210 1 DEG 12.6 MPH 208.4 DEG -0.9 D F -1.2 D F 12/ 6 31.7 D F 34.8 D F 15.9 MPH 358.7 DED 11.9 HPH 349.3 DEG 24.3 MPH 3.4 DEG -0.7 D F -0.9 D F 12/ 7 16.5 D F 25.4 DF 17.2 MPH 264.2 DEG 21.9 MPH 272.9 DEG 23.8 MPH 270.8 DEG -0.9 DF -1.3 D F 12/ 8 21.6 D F 27.5 D F 7.4 MPH 236.3 DEG 10.0 MPH 232.7 DEG 10.8 MPH 227.5 DEG -0.8 D F -1.1 DF 12/ 9 27.9 DF 31.3 D F 6.1 MPH 207.2 DEG 10.8 MPH 215.1 DEG 12.3 MPH 216.7 DEG -1.0 D F -1.3 D F 12/10 26 1 DF 31.2 D F 7.1 MPH 11 2 DEG 10.4 HPH 14.6 DEG 10.8 MPH 16.7 DEG -1.3 D F -1.3 D F 12/11 32.7 D F 38.0 D F 16.3 HPH 104.3 DEG 28.0 MPH 106.0 DEG 30.5 MPH 107.1 DEG -0.3 D F -0.4 DF 12/12 37.9 D F 41.9 D F 9.9 MPH 252.3 DEG 16.1 MPH 262.4 DEG 18.0 MPH 260.8 DEG -0.7 D F -1.0 D F 12/13 30.7 D F . 35.5 D F 9.0 MPH 53.9 DEG 12.6 MPH 55.4 DEG 13.5 MPH 56.1 DEG -1.1 DF -1.5 D F 12/14 34.7 D F 37.5 D F 11.7 MPH 105.9 DEG 17.4 MPH 114.6 DEG 18.8 MPH 118.4 DEG -0.5 D F -0.7 D F 12/15 20.8 D F 30.8 D F 18.3 MPH 232.1 DEG 24.2 MPH 233.7 DEG 26.1 MPH 231.8 DEG -1.2 D F -1.7 L F 12/16 15.3 D F 24.2 D F 19.4 MPH 241.6 DEG 23.7 MPH 246.0 DEG 24.7 MPH 243.8 DEG -1.4 DF -2.0 D F 12/17 10.4 DF 17.9 D F 13.9 MPH 250.0 DEG 17.3 MPH 254 2 DEG 18.0 MPH 259.0 DEG -1.4 DF -1.9 D F 12/18 7.7 D F 17.1 DF 11.5 MPH 266.6 DEG 14.4 MPH 265.9 DEG 14.8 MPH 278.7 DEG -1.3 D F -1.8 D F 12/19 7.5 D F 10.3 D F 14.2 MPH 348.9 DEG 16.8 HPH 354.4 DEG 20.5 MPH 8.7 DEG -1.4 DF -1.8 D F 12/20 9.1 DF 17 3 D F 7.1 MPH 93.0 DEG 13.2 MPH 101.4 DEG 14.2 MPH 119.8 DEG -0.5 D F -0.8 D F 12/21 19.2 D F 25.8 D F 11.9 MPH 134.2 DEG 17.8 MPH 136.9 DEG 17.2 MPH 150.3 DEG -0.8 D F -1.0 D F 12/22 13.3 D F 20.4 DF 18.5 MPH 242.7 DEG 25.0 HPH 246.4 DEG 26.2 MPH 256.8 DEG -1.1 DF -1.5 D F 12/23 -7.0 D F 0.2 D F 17.3 MPH 236.7 DEG 20.6 MPH 240.7 DEG 21.0 MPH 250.1 DEG -1.5 D F -2.0 D F 12/24 -10.8 DF -9.3 D F 28.0 MPH 246.6 DEG 35.0 MPH 254.4 DEG 35.9 MPH 263.5 DEG -1.4 DF -2.0 D F 12/25 -3.0 D F -6.6 D F 24.3 MPH 245.0 DEG 30.9 HPH 252.3 DEG 31.2 MPH 263.5 DEG -1.4 DF -1.9 D F 12/26 -1.6 D F 3.6 D F 19.3 MPH ~ 228.4 DEG 25.4 MPH 235.0 DEG 26.7 MPH 245.7 DEG -1.3 D F -1.7 D F 12/27 7.9 D F 18.9 D F 12.8 MPH 213.1 DEG 17.8 MPH 217.8 DEG 19.0 MPH 227.7 DEG -1.2 D F -1.6 D F 12/28 18.0 D F 23.1 DF 9.5 MPH 315.5 DEC 13.5 MPH 325.1 DEG 14.7 MPH 315.6 DEG -1.0 D F -1.3 D F 12/29 -2.9 D F 4.4 DF 14.8 MPH 242.9 DEG 21.4 HPH 251.4 DEG 23.5 MPH 262.4 DEG -0.3 D F -0.4 DF 12/30 -10.7 DF -2.2 D F 12.0 MPH 219.7 DEG 20.1 MPH 227 4 DEG 22.7 MPH 239.0 DEG -0.4 DF -0.4 DF 12/31 0.8 D F 12.3 D F 9.9 MPH 202.6 DEG 18.4 MPH 211 9 DEG 21.1 MPH 225.2 DFG -0.3 D F -0.2 D F e O O
.--(.--, ~. .
.O l I
I I l l i I 1 I l 1 + TABLES 13-24 MONTHLY DAVIS-BESSE SITE' PRECIPITATION DATA e 1 4 Y i 5 t l l' t i l ( l l' t i
- r. _ . - _ . - _ . _ _ . . . . . _ _ . . . . - - - _ . _ _ _ . - _ _ _ _ _ . . , . - . . , _ _ , . - - . . . _ , _ . . - _ _ _ . . . . , _ _ _ _ _ .
i Table 13
'() DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA JANUARY 1, 1983 THROUGH JANUARY 31, 1983
~ DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL 1/ 1 0.00 IN.
1/ 2 0.00 IN. 11/ 3 0.00 IN. 1/ 4- 0.00 IN. 1/ 5 0.00 IN. 1/ 6 0.00 IN. 1/ 7 0.00-IN. 1/ 8 0 00 IN. 1/ 9 0.00 IN. 1/10 0.14 IN. 1/11 0.02 IN. 1/12 0.00 IN. 1/13 0.00 IN. 1/14 0.00 IN. 1/15 0.02 IN. 1/16 0.00 IN. 1/17 0 . 0 5 ..I N . t i 1/18 0.00 IN. 1/19 0 06 IN. i l 1/20 0.00 IN. l 1/21 0.00 IN. 1/22 0.39 IN. 1/23 0.01 IN. 1/24 0.00 IN. 1/25 0.00 IN. 1/26 0.09 IN. 1/27 0.00 IN. 1/28 0.00 IN. 1/29 0.00 IN. 1/30 0.12 IN. 1/31 0.00 IN. l l i: I h
Table 14 DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA Bh FEBRUARY in 1983 THROUGH FEBRUARY 28, 1983 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL 2/ 1 0.00 IN. 2/ 2 0.27 IN. 2/ 3 0.03 IN. 2/ 4 0.00 IN. 2/ 5 0.00 IN. 2/ 6 0.07 IN. 2/ 7 0.02 IN. 2/ 8 0.00 IN. 2/ 9 0 00 IN. 2/10 0.00 IN. 2/11 0.00 IN. 2/12 0.00 IN. 2/13 0.00 IN. 2/14 0.01 IN. 2/15 - 0.00 IN. 2/16 0.02 IN. 2/17 0.00 IN. 2/18 0.00 0.01 IN. IN. lll l 2/19 2/20 0.00 IN. 2/21 0.00 IN. 2/22 0.00 IN. 2/23 0.08 IN. 2/24 0.00 IN. 2/25 0.00 IN. 2/26 0.00 IN. 2/27 0.00 IN. 2/28 0.00 IN. O 1
l l l Table 15 DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA MARCH 1,-1983-THROUGH MARCH 31, 1983 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL 3/ 1 0.00 IN. 3/ 2 0.00 IN. 3/ 3 0.00 IN. 3/ 4 0.00 IN. 3/ 5 0.00 IN. 3/ 6 0.22 IN. 3/ 7 0.08 IN. 3/ 8 0.17 IN. 3/ 9 0.00 IN. 3/10 0.11 IN. 3/11 0.00 IN. 3/12 0.00 IN. 3/13 0.00.IN. 3/14 0.00 IN. 3/15 0.00 IN. 3/16 0.00 IN. 3/17 0.02 IN. 3/18 0.06 IN.
' 3/19 0.14 IN.
3/20 0.16-IN. 3/21- 0.33 IN. 3/22 0.00 IN. 3/23 0 00 IN. 3/24 0.00 IN. 3/25 0.00 IN. 3/26- 0.00 IN. 3/27 0.41 IN. 3/28 0.03 IN. 3/29 0.00 IN. 3/30 0.00 IN. 3/31 0.00 IN. l [.l L i . L-L.
Table 16 DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA k APRIL 1, 1983 THROUGH APRIL 30, 1983 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL 4/ 1 0.00 IN. 4/ 2 0.51 IN. 4/ 3 0.08 IN. 4/ 4 0.00 IN. 4/ 5 0.01 IN. 4/ 6 0.23 IN. 4/ 7 0.36 IN. 4/ 8 0.00 IN. 4/ 9 0.56 IN. 4/10 0.03 IN. 4/11 0.01 IN. 4/12 0.00 IN. 4/13 0.53 IN. 4/14 0.51 IN. 4/15 0.00 IN. 4/16 0.00 IN. 4/17 0.06 IN. 4/18 4/19 0.00 0.00 IN. IN. lll 4/20 0.00 IN. 4/21 0.00 IN. 4/22 0.00 IN. 4/23 0.00 IN. 4/24 0.00 IN. 4/25 0.00 IN. 4/26 0.00 IN. 4/27 0.00 IN. 4/28 0.62 IN. 4/29 0.03 IN. 4/30 0.50 IN.
Table 17 L() DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA MAY 1, 1983 THROUGH MAY 31, 1983 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL 5/ 1 0.83 IN. ' 5/ 2 0.19 IN. 5/ 3 0 12 IN. 5/ 4 0 23 IN. 5/ 5 0.00 IN. 5/ 6 0.00 IN. 5/ 7 0.13 IN. 5/ 8 0.46 IN. 5/ 9 0.00 IN. 5/10 0.00 IN. 5/11 0.00 IN. 5/12 0.00 IN. 5/13 0.00 IN. 5/14 0.11 IN. 5/15 0.11 IN. 5/16 0.00 IN. 5/17 0.00 IN.
/'N. 5/18 0.00 IN.
-5/19 0.16 IN.
5/20 0.10 IN. 5/21~ 0.00 IN. 5/22 0.69 IN. 5/23 0.00 IN. 5/24 0.00 IN. 5/25 0.32 IN. 5/26' O.00 IN. 5/27 0.00 IN. 5/28 0.00 IN. 5/29 0.29 IN. 5/30 0.00 IN. 5/31 0.14 IN. l l . . .
~
Table 18 DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA llh JUNE 1, 1983 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1983 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL 6/ 1 0.00 IN. 6/ 2 0.00 IN. 6/ 3 0.19 IN. 6/ 4 0.00 IN. 6/ 5 0.13 IN. 6/ 6 0.60 IN. 6/ 7 0.00 IN. 6/ 8 0.00 IN. 6/ 9 0.00 IN. 6/10 0.11 IN. 6/11 0.00 IN. 6/12 0 00 IN. 6/13 0.00 IN. 6/14 0.00 IN. 6/15 - 0.38 IN. 6/16 0.00 IN. 6/17 0.00 IN. 6/18 6/19 0.00 0.03 IN. IN. lll 6/20 0.00 IN. 6/21 0.00 IN. 6/22 0.00 IN. 6/23 0.00 IN. 6/24 0.00 IN. 6/25 0.00 IN. 6/26 0.00 IN. 6/27 0.78 IN. 6/28 1.22 IN. 6/29 0.00 IN. 6/30 0.42 IN. O
l Table 19 () DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA JULY 1, 1983 THROUGH JULY.31, 1983 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL 1Nr 1 - 0.00 IN. 7/ 2 0.00 IN. 7/ 3 0.00 IN. 7/ 4 0.85 IN. 7/ 5 0.00 IN. 7/ 6 0.00 IN. 7/ 7 0 00 IN. 7/ 8 0.00 IN. 1Nr 9 0.00 IN. 7/10 0.00 IN. :
-7/11 0.00 IN.
7/12 0.00 IN. 7/13 0.00 IN. 7/14 0.00 IN. 7/15 0.00 IN. 7/16 0.00 IN. 7/17 0.11 IN. j 7/18 0.07 IN.
-s 7/19 0.00 IN.
I 7/20 0.00 IN. l , 7/211 0.19 IN. 7/22 0.00 IN. 7/23- 0.00 IN. 7/24 0.00 IN. 7/25 0.00 IN. 7/26 -0.00 IN. 7/27 0.00 IN. 7/28 0.00 IN. 7/29 0.36 IN.
.7/30 0.00 IN.
7/31 1.15 IN. A
~~~
---_-~+..-._-e--. . _ _ _ _ _ _
',.:n *
, . i t!
, fr. ,
-Table 20
DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA h AUGUST is 1983 THROUGH AUGUST 31, 1983 DAILY TOTALS
- DAY' RAIN FALL 8/ 1 0.00 IN.
8/ 2 0.00 IN. 8/ 3 0.00 IN. 8/ 4 0.05 IN. 8/ 5 0.00 IN. 8/ 6 0.00 IN. 8/ 7 0.00 IN. 8/ 8 0.00 IN. 8/ 9 O.00 IN. 8/10 0.12 IN. 8/11 0.70 IN. 8/12- 0.00 IN. 8/13' O.00 IN. 8/14 0 00 IN. 8/15 0.00 IN. 8/16 0.00 IN. 8/17 .l 0.00 IN. 8/1'8 8/1? .
/ 0.00'IN.
O.00 IN. g
<- 0.00 IN.
8/20 , 8/21 0.05 IN. 50/22 , 0.00 IN. 8,f 23 < 0.00 IN. f8/24 1 0.00 IN. 8/25 ' p ' O.00 IN. S/26 , 0.12 IN. 8227 .\ O.00'IN. 8/28
- 0.00 IN.
8/29 , /, , ,I j ', i O.00 IN. ' 8/pp \ ' , I \. ' 0.00 IN. 8/3'1 \' O.00 IN. i. a f
\
. ,3
/ '
t.
/ # I
- I 7
( , \
* \'
\
q c '
, 4.; ~;
e ,l , ,: '
. ' l ' { l. I, c '-
r t.
. 1
/-- :,%
,6 y'\ %. f, L
Table 21 ()' DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION' DATA SEPTEMBER 1, 1983 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 1983 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL. 9/ 1- 0.00 IN. 9/ 2 0 00-IN. 9/ 3 'O.00 IN. 9/-4 0.00 IN. 9/ 5' O.00 IN. 9/ 6' O.16 IN. 9/ 7 0.00 IN. 9/ 8 0.00 IN. 9/ 9 0.00 IN. 9/10 0.00 IN. 9/11 0.00 IN. 9/12 0.00 IN. 9/13 0.00 IN. 9/14 0.00 IN.
'9/15 0.00 IN.
9/16 0.24 IN. 9/17 0.17 IN. _ C, - 9/18' O.02 IN. 9/19 0.00 IN. 9/20 0.70 IN. 9/21 0.24-IN. 9/22 0.05 IN. 9/23 0.02 IN. 9/24 0.00 IN. 9/25 0.00 IN. 9/26 10 00 IN. 9/27 0.00.IN. 9/28- 0.00 IN. 9/29 0.00 IN.
.9/30 0.00 IN.
0
- , --- . . - - . . - r-, - ,- , . , - , ,- , -
Table 22 DAVIS DESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA llh OCTOBER in 1983 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 1983 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL 10/ 1 0.00 IN. 10/ 2 0.00 IN. 10/ 3 0.00 IN. 10/ 4 0.03 IN. 10/ 5 0.45 IN. 10/ 6 0.00 IN. 10/ 7 0.00 IN. 10/ 8 0.26 IN. 10/ 9 0.00 IN. 10/10 0.00 IN. 10/11 0.00 IN. 10/12 0.22 IN. 10/13 1.35 IN. 10/1'4 0.03 IN. 10/15 0.00 IN. 10/16 0.00 IN. 10/17 0.00 IN. 10/18 10/19 0.02 0.00 IN. IN. ll) 10/20 0.00 IN. 10/21 0.00 IN. 10/22 0.70 IN. 10/23 0.10 IN. l 10/24 0.02 IN. 10/25 0.00 IN. 10/26 0.08 IN. 10/27 0.00 IN. 10/28 0.00 IN. 10/29 0.00 IN. 10/30 0.00 IN. 10/31 0.00 IN. O
Table 23 (} DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA NOVEMBER in 1983 THROUGH NOVEMBER 30, 1983 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL 11/ 1 0.01 IN. 11/ 2 0 60 IN. 11/ 3 0.00 IN. 11/ 4 0.00 IN. 11/ 5 0.00 IN.
~
11/ 6 0.00 IN. 11/ 7 0.00 IN. 11/ 8 0.00 IN. 11/ 9 0.00 IN. 11/10 0.55 IN. 11/11 0.61 IN. 11/12 0.00 IN. 11/13 0 00 IN. 11/14 0.00 IN. 11/15 0.83 IN. 11/16 - 0.23 IN. 11/17 0.00 IN. l 11/18 0.00 IN. 11/19 0.61 IN. 11/20 0.08 IN. 11/21- 0 00 IN. 11/22 0.00 IN. 11/23 0.38 IN. 11/24 0.00 IN. 11/25 0.00 IN. 11/26 0.00 IN. 11/27 0.43 IN. 11/28 0.47 IN. 11/29 0.05 IN. 11/30. 0 00 IN.
)
Table 24 DAVIS BESSE SITE PRECIPITATION DATA DECEMBER 1, 1983 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1983 DAILY TOTALS DAY RAIN FALL l 12/ 1 0.00 IN. 12/ 2 0.01 IN. 12/ 3 0.00 IN. i 12/ 4 0.97 IN. 12/ 5 0.15 IN. 12/ 6 1.09 IN. 12/ 7 0.00 IN. 12/ 8 0.00 IN. 12/ 9 0.10 IN. 12/10 0.00 IN. 12/11 0.35 IN. 12/12 0.03 IN. 12/13 0.00 IN. 12/14 0.10 IN. 12/15 'O.00 IN. 12/16 0.00 IN. 12/17 0.00 IN. 12/18 0.00 IN. llk 12/19 0.00 IN.- 12/20 0.06 IN. 12/21 0.44 IN. 12/22 0.11 IN. 12/23 0.00 IN. 12/24 0.00 IN. 12/25 0.00 IN. 12/26 0.00 IN. 12/27 0.00 IN. 12/28 0.32 IN. 12/29 0.00 IN. 12/30 0.00 IN. 12/31 0.00 IN. O
4 4 i 1 1 4 a f i T . t ! I N i- Figures 1 - 36 ! Monthly Wind Distribution ( 1 . t l i t t [ t b 4 t t t i t i 1 I p I b a e O e
O m NNW NNE NE 7 L ENb O
' If
;1 $
"= Il I w i - -
l i < S\ , o x WSW ^ ESE SW SE SSW SSE l s N Wind Direction (%)
"MMJ Whd Speed (mph) i DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION J ANUARY 1983 0 .
30_u egygt Figure 1
l l l l l N O NNW NNE ' NW NE f rk , L
" ENE WNW i
O 10 f.; I-W '
' ^ ^ E * '
-r E
i 5 8
)
WSW ESE l I t l l l SW SE SSW SSE s l
- Wind Direction (%)
rssa Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION JANUARY 1983 O, ' 75-M LEVEL Figure 2
O u NNW NNE NE 7 h WNW $ ENE
~
k 0 5 w i ., - u E mr r { g 0 37 l f'
'\ 'N ,
O
.WSW - ESE 5
s l SE 83W - SSE S N Wind Direction (%) Nm Wirtd Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTH'LY WIND DISTRIBUTION J ANU ARY 1983 !O _100-M LEVEL - Figure 3
O1 N 1 NNW NNE NW NE [ CNW ,AQ ENE N N
==1 0
' g9 5 i ' I w g7 ";"' . s O I 15
{ lt a WSW ESE N SW SE SSW ; SSE' S asumammum Wind Direction (%) FMJEP3 Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBLITION O FEBRUARY 1983 10-M LEVEL Fftsure 4
l N NNW _ _ NNE NW NE [
- s WNW ENE T
1 ~ 5 - W '" f a pr -- E I 5 lO . WSW 5 ESE s SW SE SSW SSE S ummmmma Wind Direction (%) rMAur2 Wind Speed- (mph)- DAVIS -BESSE
. MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION FEBRUARY 1983' O 73_u ugyst Figure 5 ,
N l NNW NNE NW NE [ I WNW ENE
, am, , , ,, ,), Calm )
10
; {l
\ : e WSW ESE 1
I SW SE SSW SSE S
- Wind Direction (%)
sumarA" Wind Speed (mph)- DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION FEBRUARY 1983 g 100-M LEVEL Figure 6
l
. l NNW NNE N
NW NE. [ l WNW ENE w 1 W - J "o * - , I E I 5\ ) { .a h O / WSW ESE SW SE SSW SSE S
- Wind Direction (%)
rsMe Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION i MARCH 1983 lO ,o_uteyst Figure 7 F
[ l N NNW NNE NW NE WNW ENE Calm n 1 w .( -
. i e
7 e , i 5 4 WSW ESE
/
\ - t SW SE SSW SSE S Egmuunu Wind Direction (%) FM- Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE
' MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION MARCH 1983 75- M LEVEL 0
Figure 8
N NNW NNE NW NE [ r a WNW ~ ". ENE
\\ '
W ' ' " ~' " /'
$* , (e t)
' l E
j l 10 '
\ -
^
O WSW i ESE a p i SW SE SSW - SSE S m Wind Direction (%) ese Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION ,O MARCH 1983 100- M LEVEL : l Figure 9 1
I~ ,,
'l N
NNW NNE l w NW NE CNW ENE
, \
5 }
- s 10 }
' \ N
, , , , Calm ;. l
'( l b i O
WSW ESE SW SE
/
SSW SSE S p Wind Direction (%) rMm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTIONS 1.0- M LEVE L APRIL 1983 O Figure 10
0 O u NNW NNE NW NE [ M, WNW ENE ! O 10 . I Calm I il l g . 2 , l l l 10 I 5
'g 1 -
i WSW m ESE 1 y I 1 gw - SE SSW SSE annumusum Wind Direction (%) ess. Wind Speed (mph) l-DAVIS -BESSE l MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION APRIL 1983 O 75- M LEVEL Figure 11
l N NNW NNE E r g-1 5
, Ca m \ ' It }l \ \ t , , 1 3
i- 1
' f
5 / 1 e 1 WSW ESE SW ; SE SSW SSE r eWd (m ) ' DAVIS -BESSE
. MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION APRIL 1983 g 1oo-M LEVEL Figure 12 -
y ._ _- N NW NNE NE k g_ Ww ' k ENE
~
5 , O l W l ' I am .a 2. , Ca m I$ , 0 {
'I 5 0
WSW
\ \
l
/ ESE SE I
83W ' SSE S N Wind Direction (%) wMe Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION M AY 1983 O ' 10-M LEVEL Figure 13 k.
N NNW ~ NNE NW NE [ 5 7 = WNW =- ENE 0 carni i l 1 fSI ' W '""" r
,ll E
l 10 ;
+
4 1 1 .
//
. L 9 WSW q p ESE 3
SW SE SSW SSE S unmusumumm Wind Directbn (%) MA Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION M AY 1983 75-M LEVEL 0 Figure 14
V O N , NNW NNE I i NW NE
/ f a, .
WNW ENE
$I 1 If i g 6 mm ., j , ,
Calm i l j l l 1 5 I
))
\'h j
o ' WSW
// ESE
{ SW SE SSW SSE l = summmmuum Wind Direction (%) ( umder2e Wind Speed (mph) l DAVIS -BESSE l MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION ! M AY 1983 'vm - 100-M LEVEL Figure 15
N $
. NNW NNE NW NE
[ WNW . ENE O O I I p'q Calm 1 ij w- l l l i s 1
; , ,. o , ,
10 g i 5
) ,
WSW ESE SW SE SSW SSE S nummunmus Wind Direction (%) exs/.m5 Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION JUNE 1983 0 10-M LEVEL Figure 16
S O u . NNW NNE NW NE l 7 WNW ENE
,k '
0
\ 15 }
}
5 W f ll E {"
, o
( .f 5 o \ \ ; WSW ESE SW SE i l SSW SSE L s
- Wind Direction (%)
FMA Wind Speed (mph) , DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION JUNE 1983
~
'O - 75-M LEVEL Figure 17 l-
N & NNW NNE NE [ % WNW ENE 1 I
- . E i to 1 t .
O WSW ESE i l SW SE SSW SSE S r Wcd (m DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION JUNE 1983 g 100-M LEVEL Figure 18
O N NNW NNE l NW NE f WNW ENE
~" 0 10 fhI W ' '" 4-
"'d* , ,
E l 10 k [
~
l l 9 -
^ .
WSW , . ESE SW SE SSW SSE S emuutums Wind Direction (%) FMA Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION l . JULY 1983 0 - 10-M LEVEL Figure 19 ________L
l N NNW NNE NW NE [ WNW ' ENE o f I-W '
/ '
7 '
, E i 15 g -
g - / . WSW ESE l
- SW SE SSW SSE s
inuuuuuuuum Wind Direction (%) rs se Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE . MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION JULY 1983 75-M LEVEL 0 Figsr'e 20
O u NNW NNE l l NW NE [
"A WNW ENE
\
If II W , f' d '" r,, T10 . E-l 10 i
.f 15 J i
^'
lO . CSW ESE N SW SE SSW - SSE . S m Wind Direction (%) w Ms Wind Speed (mph) - DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION JULY 1983
- 0 -
100-M LEVEL Figure 21 r, - - - - ,- - , - . . ,- - , - . , ,,- __
N .h NNW NNE NW NE [ 0 I.'" calm \ j ; W ' o r ,
\ 1 1 E
j' l 10 j i ,
/
g WSW ESE SW SE SSW SSE S nummuunne Wind Direction (%) rsXe Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION . AUGUST 1983 g 10-M LEVEL Figure 22
.Q:-)t f
- i ';
. ~~1 L' :- *
/
, s O. m NMN NNE
.7 NW NE 7 '
_~ f ._ m WNW ENE
~~ (
i ' Calm \\ W ', - E i i o , , Y
}
\ Q s l j ;
O . WSW ESE s
# ' ~
- 3 s
I S m WindlOsec5cri-!%), em> Wind t: peed (cphi DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY- WIND DISTRIBUTION .
, AUGUST 1983 O s
~
\ '75- M LEVEL ,
t Figure 23 1 E
N h NNW _ NNE NW E [ WNW . ENE l 15 1 , L
%,/ ,
A
- y. :
e WSW ESE SW SE SSW SSE S unummmun Wind Direction (%) Me Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION AUGUST 1983 g 100-M LEVEL Figure 24
/
t O ' u NNW NNE 7 NW NE yn-WE ENE
\- ,
\ *0 1
6, Ca m \ , t 1 10
-{ 5 1
\ -
l0 WII ESE
. SW SE SSW . -
SSE S
- Wind Direction (%)
we Wind Speed (mph)
-,. DAVIS -BESSE
. MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION
. SEPTEMBER 1983 f-)
L ' 10-M LEVEL s Figure 25 3 f
,i
N h NNW NNE NW NE [ WNW i ENE b 10 f I- - i ! Calm Il i l I l E I ( 5
/ e WSW ESE 5
SW SE SSW - SSE S summuumus Wind Direction (%) wsm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION SEPTEMBER 1983 75-M LEVEL e Figure 26
O N NNW NNE NW NE [ WNW ENE
\'
10
;I 30 '
w
.. \ ;
af. , , L j 5 4 - 1 (O WSW ESE l r! - l .' SW SE L SSW SSE l ununummum Wind D'esction (%) wsm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE
. MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION SEPTEMBER 1983 lG 100-M LEVEL I
Figure 27 e
N h NNW NNE NW NE [ ;
' L WNW ENE O
W a i o
- s+fh\ -
g ,
\
E I
.(
kN ] e WSW ESE SW SE SSW SSE S w 'ind (m h) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION OCTOBER 1983 10-M LEVEL Figure 28
O N NNW NNE NW NE M-7 i WNW ENE
/
f 5 w :- ~r - ' a a s - - _. {
! 5 j o \
WSW ESE 2 SW , SE
~
SSW SSE S , ammumum Wind Direction (%) esde Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE
. MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION
. OCTOBER 1983 O -
75-M LEVEL Figure 29
~ ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ w- , - -
w
l N h NNW NNE WNW ENE WN ESE SSW SSE S l e Wed (m DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION OCTOBER 1983 g 100-M LEVEL Figure 30
l O u NNW NNE NW NE [ t i i WNW . ENE 0 w
- c - '
1 1I , , s
! 5 o -
WSW ESE SW SE SSW -
- SSE S
numusumu Wind Direction (%) muures W'wid Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE
. MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION NOVEMBER 1983 .O- jo.u tsyst Figure 31
_ _ , - _s v, , - ., .-- ,- w -,, e---- r, e--e a, se-- ----www-v-o--* w- '---------~*w w '
N $ NNW NNE NW " NE 1 l ~ WNW INE _ O 10 I.. W k ;' "6 -' , ( "
$" - !I r. , ,
E {- h 5 j g , -
/- ,
WSW ESE s-I
. J'
- SW SE SSW SSE S
- Wind Direction (%)
rsss Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION NOVEMBER 1983 75-M LEVE L 9 Figure 32 , o - -
O NNW
~
NNE NW NE f 5 WNW ' ENE 1 , W b " 'J " i"' "" " " \ ,') J I E
$ 4
! 5
{ l - !O WSW s , ESE
=
u, a SW SE SSW SSE - S ,f ammmmmmes Wind Direction (%)- FM.wd Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION I g. NOVEMBER 1983 . l-100-M LEVE L 1 Figure 33 1
NNW N h NNE NW NE [ I WNW ' ENE l
\0 i i
, Ca m \ 1. 1'$ '
{ l 15 1 l l WSW ESE sW SE 1 ssW SSE E ummmmmma Wind Direction (%) Farm Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DECEMBER 1983 . . 10-M LEVEL Figure 34
h NNW N NNE l 7 l NW NE [ N f r ; - WNW " ENE 0 w < l v l
,. 3- , \1
'0
.(
_';1i
}
- l 10
{ (' l o WSW ESE v a f l SW SE SSW SSE S I amummmmmuu Wind Direction (%) WMe5 Wind Speed (mph) DAVIS -BESSE . i MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DECEMBER 1983
.Q- ,
75- M LEVEL Figure 35 i e i
- - - - - . . , , . . . , , , .,.a .-,, -
O l DAVIS-BESSE MONTHLY WIND DISTRIBUTION DECEMBER 1983 100-M LEVEL (Data Not' Available) l l I Figure 36
.e, .---..,.s...,.u~ ...-< au n m- 1.g u ws., e e . .
mam m a v- - us as n am u.as u _ nw ann- w u .u ap...s-. 11f ? .
- h
- n. p.
f., kC e, - , t,'., r .; f 5: i t:* e, . ,
. .+: 5 1
4.. .- t - 1^.'-.; J, p. t..,
. rit
+ $ [_ \ l~ i f ' f.-
- 3
, -..+2 {.' I h ._ I 'e j, . v.
. , s. -- I 2 _.
- e. o I
$t J l I e l
-r l .-
~-
t.-
+
- k k b y
g .xr r v-e , ., , o 7. d 2- < 4 - t f_
.p 4 ,
f~ 5
-l I
h i b B L
- l..- ' s s .' i f
-t -
- f. e- )
b l
- .bb e1 4 P
, F
-f
< - t s
i: ; t 1
.~
( 'N k
.-l
, 'c
- l
- j. S .
^
h.a b 5 e
..( T
[ ;: . .- i \ .u = I
~:~ .m - , ,
~
1 - h- - 4 _ 1
- < - - s s
's 4 .
'a- -
4..
%i* h
, i-' -
. , p
* ^ [h; *
~ L
( l ' '. .,-
.s.. ... ., ,. . . . -'- -
- i i--,.,.,.. . --
y m v., - -. - =.---~w- , . w.____w_.~."._.j
-;^, ,
Ek TOLEDO u '" ' At&nu sWf %:n EDISON Docket No. 50-346 3/RA y' gEA ]7 Ricsano P. CAOUSE License No. NPF-3 " "J - A0 j C U ".322,
,43,3,33
-3 Serial No. 1-409 A 7Q F E 2.20.1.1 F i g g' March 31, 1984 RR P-7-83-01 A84-102B Mr. James G. Keppler Regional Director, Region III United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137
Dear Mr. Keppler:
, Under separate cover, we are transmitting two (2) copies of the 1983 Annual Environmental Operating Report for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1. This report is submitted in accordance with Section 5.4.1 of Appendix B, Davis-Besse Technical Specifications.
Very truly yours,
.bY-f Yh , -
RPC:JSW:lah enclosure , cc: Richard C. DeYoung, Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 (20 copies) Learned W. Barry, Director Office of Resource Management United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 (2 copies) Harold Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 (1 copy) DB-1 NRC Resident Inspector , Davis-3 esse Nuclear Power Station
-(1 copy)
THE TCLECO ED: SON COMPANY ED; SON FLAZA 300 MADISON AVENUE TOLEDO, OHIO 43652 APR 4 1984 ({ f @ I
--% '\, .
,, a j m E TABLE OF CONTENTS
~
LIMITING'CONDITIONNFOROPERATION MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIAL _ 2.1.1 BIOCIDES - 2.3.1 ~ pH MONITORING 2.3.2 SULFATES MONITORING - 2.3.3
"~" - '-
ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE' # '
~
~
I CHE'ICAL M USAGE - 3.1.1.a.2
'~
CHLORINEMONITditING , 3.1.1.a.3 VE'GETATION SURVEY FOR TH5TEFFECTS'0FI ~ ~ ' .- - -. COOLING TOWER DRIFT n ., . u . -
. x -3.1.2. b . 2 e . .. .r
~
ENVIRONMENTALRADIOLOGICALMONITbRING 3.2 9 LAND USE AND MILK ANIMAL CENSUS _RESULTS SPECIAL SURVEILLANCE AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENTS AND ANALYSIS 4.1 METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING
~
1983 DIURNAL WINDROSE STUDY 1983 LOCAL CLIMATOLOGICAL MONTHLY DATA COMPARISON 1983 ANNUAL WINDR0SE REPORT ,
/
(:n-w a i}}