ML17272A289

Amend 3 to Environ Rept

ML17272A289
Person / Time
Site:	Columbia
Issue date:	01/31/1979
From:	WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM
To:
Shared Package
ML17272A288	List: ML17272A286 ML17272A289
References
ENVR-790131, NUDOCS 7902060324
Download: ML17272A289 (47)

Text

'L~a WNP-2 ER AMENDMENT 3 I JANUARY 1 9 7 9 INSTRUCTIONS The following is furnished as a guide for insertion of Amendment 3 sheets into the WPPSS Nuclear Project No.2 Environmental Report-Operating License Stage.After inserting Amendment 3, place, the letter of transmittal and instruction sheets in the front of the Environmental Report to maintain a record of the changes.Discard Old Sheets Insert New Sheets Page xvii Lists of Tables and Fi ures Page xvii~hh QPgu;~l.1-6 thru 1.1-8 Zhigeaea 1.1-6 thxu 1.1-8/Page 2.4-9+age 2.4-9~~Figure 2.4-16.Page 3.6-3~Page 3.6-3~Pages 4.1-3 thru 4.1-5 Page 4.2-3~ages 4.5-1 and 4.5-2 ages 4.1-3 thru 4.1-5 age 4.2-3 Pages 4.5-1 and 4.5-2 ages 5.2-1 thru 5.2-12~Tables 5.2-4 and 5.2-5 Qables 5.2-9 and 5.2-10 Table 5.2-12~ables 5.2-14 and 5.2-15+ages 5.2-1 thru 5.2-11 gTables 5.2-4 and 5.2-5<Tables 5.2-9 and 5.2-10 y Table 5.2-12/Tables 5.2-14 and 5.2-15 qsozos~s~6 WNP-2 ER LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (continued)

Fi ure No.2.4-6 2.4-7 2.4-8 2.4-9 LOCATION OF INTAKE AND DISCHARGE LINES WNP-l, WNP-4 AND WNP-2 ELEVATION CONTOURS OF THE RIVER BOTTOM AT THE WNP-2 DISCHARGE (FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL)RIVER WATER SURFACE PROFILES FOR SEVERAL FLOW DXSCHARGES IN THE VICINITY OF THE PLANT SITE AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPERATURE COMPARISON FOR PRIEST RAPIDS DAM RICHLAND, FOR 10-YEAR PERIOD 1965-1974 2.4-10 2.4-11 COMPUTED LONG TERM TEMPERATURE ON THE COLUMBIA RIVER AT ROCK ISLAND DAM (1938-1972)

ONE HOUR DURATION FREQUENCY CURVE OF HIGH RIVER WATER TEMPERATURE IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT SITE 2.4-12 TWENTY-FOUR HOUR DURATION FREQUENCY CURVE OF HIGH RIVER WATER TEMPERATURE IN THE VXCINITY OF THE PLANT SITE 2.4-13 2.14-14 2.4-15 3.1-1 3~1 2 3.1-3 3.1-4 3.1-5 3.1-6 SEVEN DAY DURATION FREQUENCY CURVE OF HIGH RIVER WATER TEMPERATURE IN THE VXCINITY'OF THE PROJECT SITE SIMPLIFIED GEOLOGICAL CROSS SECTION OF THE HANFORD RESERVATION, WASHINGTON GROUNDWATER CONTOURS AND LOCATIONS OF WELLS FOR THE HANFORD RESERVATXON g WASHINGTON g SEPT 1 973 WNP-2 PLANT SITE WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM MECHANICAL DRAFT COOLING TOWER ELEVATION MAKE-UP WATER PUMPHOUSE ELEVATION WNP-2 MAKE-UP WATER PUMP HOUSE WNP-2 EFFLUENT RELEASE POINTS XVii WNP-2 ER LIST OF'LLUSTRATIONS (continued)

Fi ure No.3%2 1 3~2 2 3~2 3 3.2-4 3.2-5 3.2-6 3~2 7 3.3-1 3.4-1 3.4-2 3.4-3 3.4-4 3.4-5 3.4-6 3.4-7 3.4-8 CORE ARRANGEMENT TYPXCAL CORE CELL FUEL ASSEMBLY ENRICHMENT DISTRIBUTION STEAM AND RECIRCULATION WATER FLOW PATHS GE REACTOR SYSTEM HEAT BALANCE FOR RATED POWER DIRECT CYCLE REACTOR AND TURBINE SYSTEM NET PLANT HEAT RATE VARIATIONS VS.TURBINE BACK PRESSURE PLANT SYSTEMS WATER USE DIAGRAM MECHANICAL DRAFT COOLING TOWERS PLOT PLAN TOWER CENTER SECTION THRU FILL COOLING TOWER PERFORMANCE CURVE MONTHLY AVERAGE FLOW RATES AND TEMPERATURES INTAKE SYSTEM PLAN AND PROFILE MAKE-UP WATER PUMPHOUSE PLAN AND SECTIONS PERFORATED INTAKE PLAN AND SECTIONS PERFORATED PIPE INTAKE DISTANCE VS.INTAKE FLOW VELOCITIES 3.4-9 3.4-10 3.5-1 3.5-2 PERFORATED PIPE XNTAKE VELOCITY DISTRIBUTION 3/8" AWAY FROM SCREEN SURFACE RECTANGULAR SLOT DISCHARGE FLOW DIAGRAM PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM LIQUID FLOW DIAGRAM RADIOACTIVE WASTE SYSTEM EQUIPMENT PROCESSING TABLE 1-l-6 PUBLIC AGENCY-BPA ENERGY RESOURCES AND REOUIREMENTS (Ave rage Megawatts)

Probable Energy Date Scheduled Date Year Ending June 30 Estimated Requirements Estimated Resources~r Unsatisfied

~R**t WPPSS No.2 Unsatisfied Requirements w/o WPPSS No 2 Estimated Resources (Adjusted)

~2 Unsatisfied Requirements WPPSS No.2 Unsatisfied Requirements w/o WPPSS No 2 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 10, 675 11,200 11, 786 12, 162 12, 868 13, 010 13, 245 13, 542 13, 946 14, 356 14,786 10, 416 9, 477 10, 225 10, 897 11, 142 11, 243 11, 773 13, 023 13, 792 14, 306 14, 414 259 I, 723 I, 561 I, 265 I, 726 I, 767 I, 472 519 154 50 372 550 798 825 825 825 825 825 825 259 I, 72$I, 561 I, 815 2, 524 2, 592 2, 297 1,344 979 875 I, 197 10r 416 9, 477 10, 225 10, 402 11,018 11, 868 12, 367 12I 973 13, 976 14, 361 14, 414 259 I, 723 I, 561 I, 760 I, 850 I, 142 878 569 (30)(5)372 55 674 825 825 825 825 825 825 259 I, 723 I, 561 I, 815 2, 524 I, 967 I, 703 1,394 795 820 1,197 (I)-Blue Book Table 2 adjusted.for duplication in BPA tr Public Agency values occasioned by CSPE-Centralia resource, contracts between BPA and Public Agencies and exports to California.

(2)-Column 3 (Estimated Resources) adjusted for the difference in added resources between probable energy date and scheduled date of commercial operation adjusted to WPPSS significant Project events status as of 8-26-76.(3)-()denotes surplus resource over requirements.

TABLE l.1-7 WEST CROUP ENERGY RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS (Average Megawatts)

Probable Ener Date Scheduled Date Year Ending Jane 30 Estimated Re source s Estimated Requirements

~l~2 Unsatisfied Requir eznent with WPPSS No.2 WPPSS No.2 Unsatisfied Requireznent without WPPSS No.2 Es tiznated Resqurces Adjusted Unsatisfied Requireznent with WPPSS No.2 Unsatisfied Requirement without WPPSS No.2 WPPSS No.2 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987~~15, 736 16, 593 17, 533 18, 331 19, 250 19, 876 20, 540 21, 331 22, 251 23, 148 24, 132 14, 971 15, 158 15, 236 15, 955 16, 733 17, 284 17, 844 20, 068 21, 136 22, 507 23, 511 765 1,435 2, 297 2, 376 2, 517 2, 592 2,696 I~263 I, 115 641 621 550 798 825 825 825 825 825 825 765 1,435 2, 297 2, 926 3, 315'3, 417 3, 521 2,088 I, 940 1,466 I, 446 14, 971 15, 158 15, 236 765 1,435 2, 297 15,754 2,577 17, 047 18, 026 18, 471 2,203 1,850 2, 069 21, 334 22, 570 23, 511 917 578 621 19, 871~1~460 55 619 151 825 8'25 825 825 825 765 1,435 2, 297 2, 632 2, 822 2, 001 2,894 2,285 1, 742 1, 403 1,446 (I)-From 1976 Blue Book Table I, Line 3.(2)-From 1976 Blue Book Table I, Line 26.(3)-Blue Book Table I, Line 26 Adjusted frozn Probable Energy Date to Scheduled Date of Conunercial Operation as adjusted to WppSS Significant project Events Status as of 8-26-76.

~TABLE 1.1-8 WEST GROUP CAPACITY PEAK RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS (Megawatts)

Probable Ener Date Scheduled Date Year Ending June 30 Esthnated Resources Estimated Requirements

~3~2 Unsatisfied Requirement with WPPSS No.2 Unsatisfied Requirement without WPPSS No.2 WPPSS No.2 Estimated Resources (Adjusted)

~3 Unsatisfied Requirement with WPPSS~N.2 4 WPPSS No.2 Unsatisfied Requirements without WPPSS~N.2 4 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 25, 181 26, 759 28, 251 29, 561 31, 019 31, 947'33, 361 34, 634 36, 161 37, 754 39, 450 26, 325 27,467 30, 276 32, 069 32, 585 32, 834 33, 659 36.848 36, 360 38, 420 39, 496 (I, 144)(708)(2, 025)(2, 508)(I, 566)(887)(298)(2, 214)(199)(666)(46)I, 100 1, 100 I, 100 I, 100 I, 100 I, 100 I, 100 1~100 (I>144)(708)(2, 025)(1, 408)(466)213 802 (I, 114)901 434 1,054 26,325 27, 467.30, 276 31, 459 33, 075 34, 084 33,659 36, 848 37, 600 38, 420 39, 496 (I, 144)(708)(2, 025)(I, 898)(2, 056)(2, 137)(298)(2, 214)(I, 439)(666)(46)I, 100 I, 100 I, 100 I, 100 I, 100 I, 100 I, 100 (I, 144)(708)(2, 025)(I, 898)(956)(I, 037)802 (I, 114)(339)434 I, 054 (1)-From 1976 Blue Book Table 1, Line 3;(2)-From 1976 Blue Book Table 1, Line 26.(3)-Blue Book Table 1, Line 26 Adjusted from Probable Energy Date to Scheduled Date of Commercial Operation as adjusted to WPPSS Significant Project Events Status as of 8-26-76.(4)-()Indicates surplus resources over requirements.

0 f 0 WNP-2 ER The natural recharge due to precipitation over the low lands of the Hanford Reservation is not measurable.

The major artificial recharge of groundwater to the unconfined aquifer occurs near the 200 East and 200 West Areas.As is clearly shown in Figure 2.4-15, the large volumes of process water disposed to ponds at this site have caused the.formation of significant mounds in the water table.The points of'ignifi-cant withdrawals at the'present time are for construction purposes at the FFTF site (400 Area)and the WNP-1,-2 and-4 sites (see Figure 2.1-3).These are temporary withdrawals of groundwater and affect only the local groundwater flow patterns.Upon reaching the water table, chemical and radioactive contaminants from the 200 Area disposal sites are convected in the direction of groundwater movement.Nitrate (NO>)(2yng0) tritium (H)ions had reached the project site in 1972 Hyggver, the plume of gross beta emitters calculated as (Ru)does not reach the site at()gal present time and is not likely to do so in the future.East of the Columbia River is a very intensive 500,000 acre irrigated farming area (Columbia Basin Project area).The water table in that, region is 40 to 60 ft higher than the river elevation.

The water table in the region betygyn Eltopia and Pasco has risen 40 to 60 ft since 1960 due to an increase in irrigation in the area.Although nospecific studies have been conducted, it is apparent from the water table elevations that the flow of water is into the Columbia River.It is believed that there is a hydrau-lic connection between the unconfined aquifers under the Hanford Reservation and under the Columbia Basin project area.Groundwater east of the Columbia River may be contaminated by the agricultural activities.

However, the Columbia River acts as a discharge boundary for the unconfined aquifers.An underground disposal site for radioactive wastes is located immediately adjacent to the northwest corner of the WNP-2 site (Figure 2.1-3).The disposal site covers an area of 8.6 acres and was used between 1962 and 1967 to dispose of a broad spectrum of low-to high-level g$ioactive wastes, primarily fission products and plutonium.

Cartoned low-(level, waste was buried in trenches, and mediumto high-level waste was buried in caissons or pipe facilities.

The buried wastes are approximately 45 ft above the water table.Two standby wells with a combined maximum pumping rate of 500 gpm can provide potable and service water to WNP-2 during outages and in emergencies should the river water supply fail or be insufficient.

The wells are 234 and 244 ft deep and obtain their water from the unconfined aquifer in the Ringold formation.

2.4-9 Amendment 1 Nay 1978 WNP-2 ER TABLE 2.4-1 COLUMBIA RIVER MILE INDEX River Mouth Bonneville Dam The Dalles Dam John Day Dam McNary Dam Snake River Descri tion Zakima River WNP-2 Intake and Dischar e Proposed WNP-1 and 4 Intake and Discharge Existing Hanford Generating Plant Priest Rapids Dam Wanapum Dam Rock Island Darn Wenatchee River Rocky Reach Dam Chelan River Wells Dam Chief Joseph Dam Grand Coulee Dam Spokane River United States-Canadian Boundary River Mile 0.0 146.1 191.5 215.6 292.0 324.2 335.2 351.75 351.85 380.0 397.1 415.8 453.4 468.4 473.7 503.3 515.6 545.1 597.6 638.9 745.0

~0~oa pe I>>SI~0~stt ote~0~Q 000 00~~O~0~4 M~IŽI~ta~~0~~~~I~ooe~0~~If/0~~0~34OO~4~\~~~~Ie UMRI A 4IVTR~330~0~~~00~0~F 04~M~~g AO3~~M~00 0 00~~~~04~~iU 0 so~0~~I~OM~so~M~Sb~otb~04~04~0~~0 So~\~l4 ATO 00 j~te 4 M~Ol~~430~~oa CA+0400 flAI'g M M'0 00~~-)~04~~Sll io~~0 n'3O MAORI TN~ato a'at I[C~~so~04~se~0000 00~0 g 04 I lIO MO CO~~M 04~AAO ARI~04~I M~I~~~\0~4~0~I~~M 00 ft~///////i la<<sl~0~~~sa/330~a its (222IRA$Alt OUTCROP A4 WAITR TARIT~WAITR TARIT CONT 4$INITTT AWAIT MIAN STA IT'E%l~Ttttl 4 I 3~TAKIMA Rl VTR)~<<I 310~I~I~~~~I~~I a~~lt~I~~04 GROUNDWATER CONTOURS AND LOCATIONS WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM OF WELLS FOR THE HANFORD WPPSS NUCLEAR PROJECT NO.2 RESERVATION, WASHINGTON-Environmental Report SEPTEMBER, 1973 FIGHT 204-15 WNP-2 ER 2.5 GEOLOGY The basic geology of the site and region was described in the AEC Final Environmental Statement (December 1972).Additional geologic and seismic studies of the site area have been conducted in support of construction and safety studies for WNP-1 and WNP-4.Applicable results are reported in the WNP-2 FSAR.These additional studies have not indicated any need to further evalu-ate the interface between the plant and its operation, and the geologic environment.

2.5-1 WNP-2 ER Chlorine dosage will be automatically controlled so that a concentration of about 0.5 ppm will be present after the condenser, in the water going to the cooling tower, during periods of chlorinator operation.

A small portion of this'ill be dispersed to the atmosphere and the remainder ef-fectively consumed by the small quantities of organic matter present in the circulating water.During the time the chlo-rine is added, the cooling tower blowdown valve will closed.It will remain closed until the total residual chlorine concentration has been at or below 0.1 mg/1 for 15 minutes.The total cumulative operating time of the chlorination system will not exceed 2 hrs/day.Interrupting the blowdown flow during periods of chlorinator operation and for a short period afterwards, assures compliance with 40 CFR Part 423,"Effluent Limitations, Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Source Category,:

issued by the Environmental Protection Agency October 8, 1974.The anticipated composition of the cooling tower blowdown is, given in Table 3.6-1.This discharge flow will be essentially continuous during normal operation, except during periods of chlorinator operation and for a brief period afterwards.

'small portion of the circulating water will be lost from the cooling towers in the form of small droplets.This"drift" is of the same composition as the circulating water containing some dissolved and suspended solids (Table 3.6-1).Drift eliminators are incorporated in the design of the cooling towers so as to limit the drift to a maximum of 285 gpm, as discussed in Section 3.4.The total solids contained in the drift will amount to about.520,000 lbs per year, under full load conditions.

The deposition of drift in the vicinity of the cooling towers is discussed in Section 5.l.4.3.6-3 Amendment 1 May 1978 TABLE 3.6-1" WATER COMPOSITION

'COLUMB'IA RIVER,'EMINERALIZER WASTE,'COOLING TOWER BLOWDOWN D Demineralizer

" Columbi'a River Waste~cool in Tower Blowdown Calcium, Ca ppm++++Magnesium, Mg ppm+Sodium, Na ppm AvcC.23 Max.32 Min.18 309 1466 A~v 116 21 12 Max.160 34 24 Min.90 10 Bicarbonate, HC03 ppm Carbonate, CO3 ppm Sulfate, S04 ppm Chloride, Cl ppm Nitrate, N03 ppm Phosphate, P04 ppm 72 80 50 514 3495 56 32 15 28 10 1 2.6 0.2 0.24 0.62 0 0.03 0.13 0 92 236 1.24 0.06 92 92 415 109 3.1 0.63 13 1 Total Hardness ppm CaC03 Total Alkalinity ppm CaC03 pH 74 88 64 63 76 41 8.7 9.1 8-8.5 988 422 8.3 375 150 7.5 540 150 8.5 265 150 6.5 Silica, Si02 ppm Dissolved Soilds, ppm 87 115 72 76 30 435 45 600 15 360 WNP-2 ER The construction site is in the early state of recovery from the fire and provides limited food and cover for resident wildlife.Construction activities, destroying the habitats of small mammals (of which the pocket mouse is the dominant species), has not had any measurable effect on the transitory wildlife of the large shrubsteppe.

The pocket mouse population near the construction site has been monitored for three years as part of the monitoring program for WNP-1/4.~6~7~

There has been virtually no change in the population during that time.It appears that the pocket mouse is impacted only if directly within the disturbed construction area.The major disturbance and displacement of fauna, in the area occured as a result of the fire.The more productive shrub-steppe and riparian habitats are remote from the site, and construction appears to have had little influence on the wildlife associated with these habitats.Following the range fire in 1970, the construction site had a sparse cover of annual vegetation in early successional stages, which has partially stabilized the soil and provides only a marginal habitat for resident wildlife.The exposed area is subjected to wind erosion and consequently blowing dust occurs frequently.

Since the construction activities are not visible to the general public, they have no aesthetic impact with the possible exception of an incremental dust burden to the air.Rainfall at the Hanford Reservation averages 6.25 inches per year.The surface soils are very permeable and minimal natural surface runoff occurs.Erosion control has been successfully accomplished by proper grading and terracing.

No known historical or archaeological sites are located within the WNP-2 site or the transmission corridors.

During the construction period a competent archaeologist is employed and his expertise has been utilized during excavation activities.

Archaeological sites south of the WNP-2 lease area along the river bank were roped off to avoid disturbance.

A discussion of findings is presented in Section 2.6.Sanitary wastes have been'and will continue to be disposed of through septic tanks and tile fields supplemented by temporary chemical toilets.The chemical toilets are serviced, when necessary, by an outside contractor.

This is in com-pliance with State of Washington Department of Labor and In-dustries Safety Standards for Construction Work, WAC 296-40-055-Sanitary Facilities.

Separate wash facilities are housed in a heated building, and the waste water is disposed of through a drainage tile field.Waste flow from these facilities is estimated at 15-30 gallons per day per person.No adverse affects on the environment have been experienced.

4.l-3 Amendment 1 Nay 1978 WNP-2 ER Combustible construction scraps were initially burned in a burn pit approximately 1/4 mile east of the main plant but are currently being buried.Petroleum wastes are not drained to the ground but have been accumulated in drums and dis-posed of off-site.Chemical wastes have been and will be accumulated in drums and returned to the manufacturer for disposal or otherwise disposed of in a manner determined to adequately protect the environment.

4.1.2.1.2 Future Construction Effects Future work, off of WPPSS's property, includes the completion and erection of the transmission lines and their associated access roads.Section 4.2 describes their construction effects.Major construction still to be completed at the site includes those major items listed in Figure 4.1-1.Future work at the WNP-2 site will continue to be controlled by the Construction Impact Control Program (see section 4.5)to ensure mitigation of possible environmental impacts.4.1.2.2 Water Use 4.1.).2.1 Past and Present Im acts In accordance with the site certification agreement with the Thermal Power Plant Site Evaluation Council (TPPSEC), con-struction activities involving work in the Columbia River was to be limited to the period from July 31 thru October 15, 1975.The reasoning being that, during those months the river level and velocity and migrant fish levels were low and construction impacts would be minimal.However, additional work to return the river bed to its natural contours required TPPSEC notification and rip rap repair in the vicinity of the intake"T"'s and the cooling tower blowdown line.This repair was performed during February 11 to March 15, 1976.Some turbidity and sedimentation during excavation is inevit-able, however mitigation of construction impacts was accom-plished with a large backhoe and the placing of excavated material just downstream of the trench.To further reduce possible biotic and water quality impacts during initial work and repair work, the small gravel used for pipeline bedding was screened and rip rap was placed via use of a clam shell.The water used during construction has been pumped from on-site wells at a combined maximum withdrawal rate of approxi-mately 350 gpm.This withdrawal rate has had no measurable effect on the ground-water profile, since ample recharge of the aquifer is available.

4.1-4 Amendment 1 May 1978 WNP-2 ER 4.1.2.2.2 Future Construction Effects There is no further construction or excavation scheduled to take place in the Columbia River.Well water withdrawal is not expected to exceed 5000 gallons per day, and as experi-ence has shown,<'no~'~:adverse environmental effects are expected.4.1.3 Final Site Construction and Restoration Landscaping will serve both a functional and an aesthetic purpose.Suitable grasses and hedges will be planted to fa-cilitate erosion and dust control plus the added benefits of the aesthetic appeal.Landscaping will integrate excess ex-cavated materials (spoils)with the site contours to ensure runoff away from all buildings and auxiliary structures.

Xn compliance with the WNP-2 security program, no landscaping is to be provided within an isolation area extending 20 feet on either side of the perimeter security line.Figures 3.1-2 and 3.1-5 are, an artist's conception of the finished plant and makeup water pumphouse showing the landscaping and plant facilities.

Amendment 1 May 1978 0P I IJ jri WNP-2 ER Where required, clearing will be by bulldozer; no spraying will be used to clear the rights-of ways.Section 4.2.4.3 discusses the effects of construction on identified endangered species, and Section 4.1 gives an estimate of land require-ments during construction.

The corridors do not cross any streams or come near the Columbia River and the substation will be located approxi-mately 3000 feet north of K3P-2 and 3 miles east of the Columbia River.Therefore, no environmental impacts on the river or streams will occur.Clearing the transmission routes and the substation site will not create noise noticeable to the general public.Erosion is discussed in Subsection 4.2.4.4.2.2 blethod for Erectin Transmission Line Structures Construction of transmission lines involves es'tablishment of.temporary construction access roads for movement of materials and heavy erection machinery to construction areas;clearing vegetation, structures, and other obstructions on the rights-of-way that might interfere with construction of the trans-mission lines;burning or otherwise disposing of cleared veg-etation;leveling areas necessary for tower sites and tower steel storage and staging areas;excavating for and install-'ng tower footings;erecting transmission towers;stringing and tensioning conductors; construction of permanent main-tenance access roads on and off the rights-of-way as dictated by terrain and other factors;and reseeding or otherwise re-vegetating disturbed soil areas where appropriate.

4.2.3 Access and Service Roads A total of 16.4 miles of new access and service roads will be constructed.

Ten and one-half miles of access roads will be on the rights-of-way, 5.5 miles will be off the rights-of-way, and 0.4 miles will be for the substation.

With the total length of the corridors being 20.9 miles, the remainder of the access roads will be comprised of existing access roads from other transmission lines and service roads from existing telephone lines.For example, through the sand dunes area, approximately 3 miles of an existing grav-elled telephone access road will be utilized.Short spur roads to the individual tower sites will be necessary.

4.2.4 Environmental

Effects 4.2.4.1 Erosion Wind erosion potential of the sandy loam soil in this dry 4.2-2 WNP-2 ER climate is extremely high.When vegetative cover is removed and soil is disturbed during construction and clearing of access roads and tower sites, wind erosion can be severe.In most areas, the fall germination of cheatgrass will re-stabilize the area in a few years.Blowouts, dunes, and other wind produced features found widely scattered across the area, however, attest to the chronic erosion potential in the absence of control measures.The lines cross 3 miles of sand dunes.Some sand dunes are not stable due to lack of vegetation cover and construction will impact.on these as well as on stabilized dunes with a high potential for additional erosion.Sand dunes are up to 30 feet high and capable of moving eastward at a rate of up to 1 foot per year.In order to minimize wind erosion caused by construction as many existing roads as possible will be used and gravel will be used to cover the principal new access roads.If possible, spur roads will not be graded.Existing roads that are well gravelled seem to be very stable with little wind erosion.It has also been found that in a disturbed area such as tem-porary access roads, grass will establish itself within 1 to 2 years and again be capable of minimizing wind erosion.Several temporary vegetation recovery study areas near WNP-2 are under investigation for grass and sagebrush regrowth.(Nineteen thousand acres of its vegetative cover was burned in July 1970.)These study areas (two burned and three unburned plots)are located approximately within a mile of the site in west, south, and east quadrants (see Figure 6.1-.2).Knowledge from these studies applies to construction impacts because the 1970 fire was extremely hot, destroying virtually all plant life and all seeds which would have normally germinated the next year.As with construction areas, revegetation of these areas depends on new seeds blowing in from unburned areas.Information on these plots is contained in Section 6.1.4.3.4.2.4.2 Loss of A ricultural Productivit The Hanford Reservation is owned and controlled by the Energy Research and Development A'dministration.

The 500 KV and 230 KV transmission lines will be entirely within the boundaries of the Reservation.

Most of the land (excepting Gable Mountain)is a shrub steppe with no other productive (agricultural and other)uses planned by ERDA.Therefore construction activities will have no foreseeable affect on agricultural productivity.

4.2-3 Amendment 1 May 1978 WNP-2 ER 4.5 CONSTRUCTION IMPACT CONTROL PROGRAM 4.5.1 Controls WNP-2 is located'i'n a shrub steppe region, consisting of several shallow rolling hills, with the eastern extremity having a general slope to the river.Surface drainage is good due to the open and dry nature of the area (average rainfall is 6.25 inches per year)and sandy soil types.During construction, contractors are required to maintain proper drainage and erosion control around the construction areas and especially in areas of excavation or fill.Con-trols are being employed to insure proper embankment slopes.These slopes were further recommended not to be cut steeper than one vertical on one and one half horizontal(1).

Borrow pits are prepared by grading to minimize wind and water erosion and to conform, where possible, to the natural topography.

Any accumulation of precipitation within the excavation area are allowed to infiltrate into the permeable soils.WNP-2 is located on the Hanford Reservation and the vast land area serves as a natural barrier to inhibit the impact of dust and noise upon major population centers.Public use of the reservation is currently limited to several highways which have further helped to mitigate any indesirable effects of dust and noise upon the public.Truck traffic, due to construction activities, is largely restricted to the reserv-ation, except for the transportation of supplies to WNP-2.Throughout the construction period stockpiles, site roadways, and storage areas are watered down by special sprinkler trucks as necessary.

to decrease the impact of windblown debris.Combustible construction scraps were initially burned in a burn pit approximately 1/4 mile east of the main plant, but are currently being buried.Petroleum wastes are not drained to the ground but are'ccumulated in drums and returned to the manufacturer for disposal.Non-combustible wastes (scrap metal, etc.)are accumulated in a pit and removed periodically from the site for recycling.

Sanitary wastes are disposed of through septic tanks and tile fields supplemented by temporary chemical toilets.The chemical toilets are serviced, when necessary, by an outside contractor.

This is in compliance with State of Washington Department, of Labor and Industries Safety Standards for Con-struction Work, WAC 296-40-055

-Sanitary Facilities.

4.5-1 WNP-2 ER The water used during construction is pumped from two on-site wells with an average withdrawal rate of approximately 5000 gpd.This withdrawal rate has no measurable effect on the ground water profile, since ample recharge of the aquifier is available.

In accordance with the site certification agreement with the Thermal Power Plant Site Evaluation Council, initial construc-tion activities, in the river, were limited to the period of July 31, 1975 through October 15, 1975.During these months river flow and velocity, and fish migration were at a minimum and construction activities had little effect upon aquatic life forms or the river flow.No blockage to the river or flooding occurred at any time during the construction period.Landscaping and final site construction wil3 serve both a functional and an aesthetic purpose.Suitable grasses and hedges will be planted to facilitate erosion and dust control plus the added benefits of the aesthetic appeal.Landscaping will integrate excess excavated material (spoils)with the site contours to ensure runoff away from all buildings and auxiliary structures.

4.5.2 Nature of Control Im lementation Control of the environmental quality protection requirements are implemented and maintained via two main methods: a.written direction to contractors through specifications and correspondence; and b.routine inspection of the site by an A.E.representative.

Construction activity impacts are controlled by the Site Certification Agreement between the State of Washington and WPPSS, the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers Construction Permit, the U.S.Atomic Energy Commission Construction Permit (No.EPPR-93), the Energy Research and Development Administration, and the State Environmental Policy Act.The requirements of these legal entities and documents are implemented by the Supply System thxough auditable contractual agreements between WPPSS and contractors., A.E.personnel who represent the Supply System, inspect construction activities to ensure contract adherence, and the Supply System in turn audits the A.E.through routine on-site inspection.

4.5-2 Amendment, 1 May 1978 NW 0.8 1.0 NE W 1.4 1.6 1.2 1.0 0.8 04~1.8 mi 0.465 mi 3.6 mi 4.4 mi 5.0 mi 5.3 mi 6.9 mi 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 0.1 SW 1.0 1.0 1.2 S SE WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM WPPSS NUCLEAR PROJECT NO.2 Environmental Repor t SALT DEPOSITION PATTERNS OUT TO 6.9 MILE (lb/acre/yr)

FIGHT 5.1-12 WNP-2 ER 5.2 RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT FROM ROUTINE OPERATION During normal operation of any nuclear plant, radioactive material is generated.

Regardless of the effectiveness of the advanced liquid and gas treatment systems it is a prudent design practice and an NRC design requirement that potential release paths be identified and any offsite effects evalu-ated.Details of the radwaste system and design assumptions regarding overall plant performance are described in Sec-tion 3.5 based on conservative~a~

assumptions regarding fuel failures and system leakage.The system is designed to meet the requirements of Appendix I to 10 CFR 50 and applicable sections of 10 CFR 20.Radiological impact calculations have been performed in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.109.5.2.1 Ex osure Pathwa s The potential release paths considered in the design of this nuclear plant include releases to the atmosphere as a gas or vapor and release to the river.Radionuclides released to the atmosphere would be primarily noble gases, which would not, be taken up by vegetation or animals.However, any radioiodine and particulates released may be deposited on or taken up by vegetation, from which they may enter into a food chain ending in man or other biota.Radionuclides in liquid effluents would be available for uptake in algae and other water plants, fish, clams, and crustaceans living in the river.Radionuclides may be accumulated by these organisms to concentrations greater than in the surrounding water.Predators of the more simple organisms, such as small.animals, fish and birds, may concen-trate these nuclides still further.In addition, some radionuclides may be deposited with the silt on the river bottom and shoreline and lead to external exposure of biota;Figure 5.2-1 shows the exposure pathways to biota from WNP-2.Radionuclides released into the plant liquid effluents reach man through a variety of pathways, involving both external exposure and internal exposure.Pathways of external expo-sure include such activities as swimming, boating and skiing on waters downstream from the plant, also hiking, fishing, etc., along the river shore.Pathways leading to internal exposure include the consumption of drinking water, fish and waterfowl from the river, produce from gardens irrigated (a)In this context,"conservative" assumptions are those which will increase the expected release of radioactive material.5.2-1 WNP-2 ER with river water, and animal products such as meat, eggs and milk from animals who eat irrigated feed or pasture grass.Exposure via the airborne pathways includes both external exposure to skin and total body from the noble gases and internal exposure from inhalation of tritium, radioiodines and particulates released from the plant.Also, internal exposures may be received from the consumption of foods produced from vegetation on which radionuclides'f plant origin may be deposited.

Such foods include fresh leafy vegetables from local gardens and'milk from cows foraging on pasture grass.In addition, direct exposure may be received from the transportation of fuel and radioactive wastes outside the plant boundary and from the plant itself.Figure 5.2-2 shows the exposure pathways to man from WNP-2.5.2.2 Radioactivit~in the Environment Table 5.2-1 lists the amounts of radio-nuclides and the associated concentrations in a blowdown flow of 5.76 cfs.A few feet downstream from the discharge point, the effluent will be diluted to 10%of its original concentration, while a few miles downstream the effluent will be entirely mixed in the river with a dilution of 1:20,000, assuming an average'river flow of 120,000 cfs.Table 5.2-2 lists the amounts of radionuclides that may be released to the atmosphere from WNP-2.Also listed in Table 5.2-2 are the associated concentrations in the effluent of WNP-2 which are discharged to the atmosphere.

The effluent is then diluted further by prevailing meteorological conditions.

Table 5.2-3 lists the annual average atmospheric dilution factors (x/Q')derived from 1 year of meteorological data collected at the site (see Section 6.1 for a discussion of the methodology and release point, assumptions used to determine the X/Q values).Effluents from WNP-1 and-4 used to calculate radiation doses from those plants in this report were taken from Section 5.2 of the Environmental Report for WNP-1 and-4.Table 5.2-4 lists concentrations of several radionuclides in various environmental media and foodstuffs.

The nuclides listed were chosen because they may be important in terms of radiation dose to man.Assumptions used in the calculations of radiation dose.to biota and to man are given in Tables 5.2-5, 5.2-6 and 5.2-7.The models used are outlined in Appendix II.5.2-2 Amendment 1 51ay 1978 WNP-2 ER 5.2.3 Dose Rate Estimates for Biota Other Than Man Using the source terms and assumptions noted above and models in Appendix II, doses were estimated for organisms living in or close to the water such a fish, clams, and crustacea which derive an internal dose from sorption of the water in which they live and from consumption of plankton.External doses are received from the surrounding water and sometimes from the mud on the river bottom.Animals and birds, which prey on these smaller creatures, derive an internal dose from the radionuclides contained in their diet.and external doses from air, water, and shoreline.

Some geese reside near the Hanford Reservation most of the year.These birds do not consume aquatic food and so receive most of their radiation dose from external exposure to contami-nated water or shoreline.

Animals such as deer, coyotes, and field mice that do not consume aquatic food or spend much time at the river bank, will receive their dose through direct radiation from the plant's gaseous effluent plume, ingestion of terrestrial vegetation and external doses due to exposure to contaminated ground.The dose from inhalation of radionuclides and consumption of terrestrial vegetation'ill be small.Animals such as deer may receive an external dose rate of less than 1 mrad/yr from PNP-2 if near the plant boundary 50%of the time.A slight additional dose may be received by such animals due to grazing.Table 5.2-8 lists dose rates to biota associated with airborne and waterborne releases of radioactive material from WNP-2.I Numerous investigations have been made on the effects of radioactivity on biota.No effects have been observed at dose rates as low as those associated with the proposed WNP-2 effluents.

Investigations of Chironomid larvae, bloodworms, living in bottom sediments near Oak Ridge, Tennessee, where they were irradiated at the rate of about 230 to 240 rad/yr for more than 130 generations, have shown no decrease in abundance, even though a slightly increased number of chromosome aberrations have occurred.~l~

Studies have shown that irradiation of salmon eggs and larvae from the Columbia River at a rate of 500 mrad/day did not affect the number of adult fish returning from the ocean or their ability to spawn.<2>Previously, when all the Hanford reactors were operating, studies were made on the effect of their released radionuclides on spawning salmon.These studies have shown that these salmon have not.been affected by dose rates in the range of 100 to 200 mrad/week.~3~5.2-3 Since the estimated doses to Columbia River biota from the radioactive effluents released by WNP-2 will be many times less than those'"m'entioned in the above studies, no percep-tible effect on the biota in the environs is expected.5.2.4 Dose Rate Estimates for Man Using the source terms and assumptions noted above and the models in Appendix II, doses were estimated for individuals living-near the plant and for the population within 50 miles of the plant.Tables 5.2-9 and 5.2-10 summarize the annual radiation doses to an individual which could be attributed to WNP-2 only and in combination with WNP-1 and WNP-4.5.2.4.1 Li uid Pathwa People may be exposed to the radioactive material released in the liquid effluent from WNP-2 by drinking water, eating fish, eating irrigated farm products and by participating in recreational activities on or along the Columbia River.Drinkin Water The population within 50 miles of the site utilizing Columbia River water for drinking includes the cities of Pasco and Richland.The city of Kennewick utilizes groundwater drawn from collectors placed along the Columbia River.Historically, the Kennewick city water has contained significantly lower concentrations of radionuclides of Hanford origin that the water in the Pasco municipal system immediately across the river.The water table slopes toward the river from the Kennewick highlands, channeling uncontaminated water into the aquifers adjacent to the river.The cities of Richland and Pasco have efficient alum-floe water treatment.

plants capable of removing a significant, fraction of the radionuclides in the incoming water.Samples of the water entering and leaving these two water treatment plants were collected and analyzed for several years under the AEC environmental monitoring program at Hanford.Results of these measurements have been used to define the removal efficiencies for specific radionuclides during the years 1960 through 1968.These data, which represent the fraction passing through the treatment plant, are summarized in Table 5.2-11 along with estimated values for chemically similar nuclides not measured.~4~

When estimating radiation doses, the radionuclide content of drinking water in the cities of Pasco and Richland was 5.2-4 WNP-2 ER calculated from the annual releases (given in Table 5.2-1)diluted in the average river flow.The resulting concentra-tions in the river were then reduced by the factors in Table 5.2-11 and decayed for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> travel time from the effluent discharge point downriver and through the water plant to the consumer.Assuming a consumption rate of 2.0 R/day of water, a typical adult living in Richland or Pasco would receive a total-body dose rate of 1.8 x 10 5 mrem/yr from this source.The total estimated population of consumers in 2020 (75,000)drinking an average of 1.2 R/day would receive an integrated total-body dose rate 2.1 x 10 3 man-rem/yr.

The radiation dose rate to the individual adult thyroid from consumption of 2.0 R/day of drinking water was estimated to be 1 x 10 4 mrem/yr.When WNP-1 and WNP-4 begin operation, the calculated radia-tion dose to a typical adult in Richland or Pasco would be 1.8 x 10 3 mrem/yr to the total-body.(he calculated popula-tion total-body dose would be 8.3 x 10 man-rem/yr.

Fish and Waterfowl Because fish will concentrate most radionuclides from the water they inhabit, the potential radiation dose from con-sumption of Columbia River fish was estimated for both the individual and the population within 50 miles of the plant.There is some waterfowl hunting around the perimeters of the Hanford Reservation.

Some of these waterfowl could conceiv-ably derive part of their diet from fish or aquatic plants from water downstream of the plant, but most waterfowl eaten by people (i.e., ducks and geese)consume primarily grains.Based on the assumptions found in Table 5.2-6()the internal dose rate to the individual fisherman would be 2.2 mrem/yr to his total body due to effluents from WNP-2.Integrated dose rate to the population would be 3e9 x 10 man-rem/yr from fish consumption.

After WNP-1 and WNP-4 have begun operation, the fisherman would receive a total-body dose of 2.3 mrem/yr.The)otal-body dose rate to the population would be 4.3 x 10 man-rem/yr.

The radiation dose to an individual on the population due to consumption of waterfowl will be insignificant.

Water Recreation Aquatic recreation is a popular pastime in the stretch of the Columbia River below the plant site.Swimming, boating, water skiing and picnicking along the shore or on islands 5.2-5 could gysult in small incremental doses to the local popula-tion.(~>Using the assumptions listed in Table 5.2-6 the total-body dose rate to an individual from external exposure would total about 9.3 x 10 2 mrem/yr.The population dose received during water recreation activities(6) can be estimated on the basis of the assumptions listed in Table 5.2-6.Under these conservative assumptions, the integrated popula-tion dose rate from water sports would be 3.0 x 10 4 man-rem/yr, principally from exposure to the contaminated shoreline.

No detectable increase in radiation dose will result from this pathway when WNP-1 and WNP-4 begin operation.

Irri ated Farm Products ,Estimates were made of doses derived from consuming food products produced on farms and gardens downstream from the plant using irrigation water from the river.It was assumed the individual will eat food that will be grown directly under such irrigation plus eggs, milk, and meat from animals consuming feed grown under irrigation.

Table 5.2-12 lists the food paths considered along with some typical parameters used in the calculation of the dose to the individual.

The dose to the population was estimated using these assumptions, except that the consumption rates were reduced by.one-half.

The holdup is the period between the release of the radionuclides and deposition on the ground or on plants plus any time periods between harvest and consumption.(~In the case of eggs, beef or pork, when the animal will eat grain, the holdup also includes the time (a).Consum tion is the amount of the food eaten per year by an a.ndzvx ual.sprinkler to the crop per unit area in 1 month;typical rates for the Columbia Basin were used.Yield is the amount grown per surface area of ground.In tEe case of animal products the yield refers to the pasture or feed of the animal.Growin eriod is the period during which plant leaves are presented to the air.In the case of milk, it is the time elapsed until the cow returns to the same part of the pasture to graze.5.2-6 between the grain harvest and its consumption by the animal as well as the time between the slaughter of the animal (or egg laying)and consumption of the animal product by an individual.

For the forage-milk pathway, the holdup includes the time between deposition.

on plants and consumption by the cow as well as the time between milking and consumption of milk by an individual.

The total dose rate estimated from this pathway will be very small, 5.9 x 10 5 mrem/yr to the total-body of an individual from the consumption of all 13 food types which are irrigated.

At the present time, the nearest, point at which Columbia River water is withdrawn for irrigation of farm products downstream of the site is at the Riverview District.Other irrigation water used either adjacent to the site or in the Kennewick area comes from the Grand Coulee Dam area or the Yakima River.The total land available for irrigation in the Riverview District is about 5300 acres.~>Xt is doubt-ful that this amount, of land could produce food for more than a few thousand people.Since some additional irriga-tion occurs near Burbank using Columbia River water, it was conservatively assumed that a maximum of 10,000 persons could consume irrigated food products for this population dose estimate.The point at which water is taken from the river for irrigation in the Riverview District is about 12 miles from the plant outfall.This coupled with the fact that there are several islands between the outfall and the point of withdrawal will give complete mixing of all efflu-ents in the river.From these assumptions the annual whole-body dose to the population from irrigated food products is estimated to be 1.6 x 10 4 man-rem.When WNP-1 and WNP-4 begin operation, the radiation dose to an individual from this pathway will be 2.3 x 10 3 mrem/yr to the total-bodv.

The annual total-body population dose would be 8.0 x 10>man-rem/yr.

5.2.4.2 Gaseous Pathwa s People may be exposed to radioactive material released to the atmosphere by WNP-2 via inhalation, air submersion and ingestion of farm products.Air Submersion The maximum exposure at the site boundary line occurs at a location approximately 0.5 mile southeast of the WNP-2 where the average atmospheric dilution factor is 3.8 x 10 sec/m.The estimate'd total-body dose rate to an individual 3 at this location would be 6.7 x 10 4 mrem/hr while his skin 5.2-7 dose would be 1.2 x 10 3 mrem/hr.However, since the loca-tion is now on Federally-owned land (the Hanford Reserva-tion), the general public would not.ordinarily be allowed access.A more probable location for occupancy by the general public would be a point just offshore from the plant about 2.5 miles ESE, where a fisherman might fish from a boat.Here the atmospheric dilution factor at the shoreline is the greatest, 4.6 x 10 7 sec/m3.The external total-body dose rate to the fisherman at this point is estimated to be 8.2 x 10 5 mrem/hr.An avid fisherman remaining here 500 hr/yr would receive an annual total-body dose of 4.1 x 10 mrem;his skin dose would be approximately 7.3 x 10 2~At present the closest point, to the plant at which people reside is across the river at Ringold Flat, approximately 4 miles ENE of WNP-2.However, the atmospheric dilution factor is greater at the second closest residence across the river at Taylor Flat, approximately 4.2 miles ESE of the plant.Airborne radiation doses were estimated for an individual occupying this location (Taylor Flat)all year.The atmospheric dilution factor was estimated to be 3.0 x 10 7 sec/m3 at this location.The total-body and skin dose rates from external radiation were estimated to be 0.16 mrem/yr and 0.32 mrem/yr, respectively.

When WNP-1 and WNP-4 begin operation, the individual at Taylor Flat would receive 0.18 mrem/yr to the total-body and 0.72 mrem/yr to the skin.The annual total-body air submersion dose to the estimated 2020 population residing within a 50-mile radius of the plant was estimated.

Table 5.2-13 shows that the estimated 270,000 persons living within the region in 2020 would receive an annual external dose of only 1.6 man-rem from the radioactive gaseous effluents released into the atmosphere by WNP-2.With the later addition of WNP-1 and WNP-4, a total-body dose would increase to 2.1 man-rem/yr.

Inhalation An individual residing at Taylor Flat would receive a dose to the total-body of 9.4 x 10 4 mrem/yr due to inhalation of radioiodines and particulates and absorption of tritium through the skin.The radiation dose to the thyroid of this individual would be 9.0 x 10 mrem/yr.The fisherman located 2.5 miles from the plant for 500 hours0.00579 days <br />0.139 hours <br />8.267196e-4 weeks <br />1.9025e-4 months <br /> during the year would receive a total-body dose of 7.9 x 10 5 mrem/yr via this pathway.The annual total-body radiation dose to the population within 50 miles og WNP-2 due to inhalation/

transpiration would be 2.3 x 10"~man-rem.5.2-8 When WNP-1 and WNP-4 begin operation, an individual at Taylor Flat would receive a total-body dose of 4.4 x 10 and a thyroid dose of O.ll mrem/yr.At that time, the annual total-body radiation dose to the population would be O.ll man-rem/yr.

Farm Products Estimates were made of radiation doses received from consum-ing farm products produced in the vicinity of the plant which might be affected by airborne effluents.

Table 5.2-12 lists the 14 food items considered along with some typical parameters used in the calculation of dose to the individual.

The dose to the population within 50 miles of the site was estimated using these same assumptions, except that the consumption rates were reduced bj one-half.The dose rate from this pathway for an individual residing at Taylor Flat would be 1.0 x 10 mrem/yr to the total-body and 2.1 mrem/yr to the thyroid.For the population dose estimate, it was assumed that all land not, on the Hanford Reservation or in an urban area could be used for agriculture and that the entire population within 50 miles (270,000)might eat food grown in this area.Using these assumptions, the annual total-body dose to the population from this pathway would be 7.0 x 10 2 man-rem/yr.

When WNP-1 and WNP-4 begin operation, an individual at Taylor Flat would receive a dose rate to the total body of 4.5 x 10 mrem/yr and 2.5 mrem/yr to the thyroid.The total-body dose rate to the population at that time would be 0.27 man-rem/yr.

Milk The air~grass+cow+milk pathway, which for some nuclear plants is quite critical because of milk cows actually pastured on or near the fenceline, is of less importance for these projects because cows are not pastured very close to the plant.Since the plant is on ERDA property and natural pasture is sparse, it is very unlikely that milk cows would be pastured at the fenceline in the foreseeable future.The closest point at which a milk cow is now pastured is across the river 5 miles southeast of the site at Taylor Flat.The atmospheric dilution factor at this location is estimated to be 2.6 x 10 7 sec/m.The estimated thyroid dose rate to a child consuming 1 R of milk each day from cows pastured 5.2-9 9 months of the year at this farm would be 9.0 mrem/yr.The dose rate to an adult consuming the same amount of milk would be 1.6 mrem/yr.When WNP-1 and WNP-4 begin operation, these doses would increase to 11 mrem/yr to a child's thyroid and 1.9 mrem/yr to an adult's thyroid.5.2.4.3 Direct'a'di'a'ti'on'rom Facil'i't Radiation From Facilit Wastes from WNP-2 will be stored in tanks within concrete buildings so that radiation levels to workers within the plant boundaries will be below applicable standards.

In addition, tanks containing low levels of activity will be situated and shielded to reduce dose rates at the site boundary to very small levels.Since the plant is located inside the Hanford Reservation it is not.expected that the general public will be close to the plant site long enough to receive any measurable radiation exposure from turbine shine.Trans ortation of Radioactive Materials Since the locations of fuel facrication plants, reprocessing plants and waste disposal facilities have not been determined, transportation routes have not been decided.However, a generic study~8>'as estimated that radiation dose rates to the general public from transportation of radioactive mate-rials will not exceed 5 man-rem/yr per unit.Therefore, until transportation routes are chosen for plant radioactive materials, this average value will be used.It is expected that the value estimated from the actual routing of the plant's radioactive material transport will be lower than this since much of the route will be through low populated regions of the western United States or the waste may not be transported outside of the Hanford Reservation.

5.2.4.4 Conformance With A endix I Desi n Ob'ectives Radiation dose calculations were made to demonstrate compli-ance with 10 CFR 50 Appendix I.The analytical models used to calculate radiation doses consider the cumulative effect of all sources and pathways from the plant.The potential land use, water use and food pathways which could exist during the life of.the plant were used to calculate radiation doses to an individual living near the site.Assumptions used to calculate these radiation doses have been discussed in the 5.2-10 WNP-2 ER preceding sections.A discussion of the models used for these calculations is included in Appendix II.The doses calculated for this report include the effect of possible environmental accumulation during the life of the plant.The radiation dose from all exposure pathways due to liquid effluents could result in a radiation dose to an individual of 2.3 mrem/yr to the total body, 0.34 mrem/yr to the thyroid and 1.7 mrem/yr to the bone.The annual radiation dose to air from noble gases was computed at a location approximately 0.5 miles southeast, of WNP-2 ghere the average atmospheric dilution factor is 3.8 x 10 sec/m.At this location, the annual air dose due to releases from WNP-2 are 1.9 mrad/yr from beta radiation and 2.9 mrad/yr from gamma radiation.

The radiation dose to an individual located on the shoreline 2.5 miles ESE of WNP-2 would be 0.71 mrem/yr to the total body and 1.3 mrem/yr to the skin.The highest radiation dose to an individual due to release of radioiodine and particles to the atmosphere would be 9.2 mrem/yr to a child's thyroid.This infant was assumed to drink 1 R/day of milk from the nearest cow and live at the nearest residence.

These radiation doses all comply with limits specified in 10 CFR 50 Appendix I, Section II, A, 8, and C.5.2.5 Summar of Annual Radiation Doses Table 5.2-14 lists the annual radiation doses received by individuals residing near the site from the major pathways.It is conceivable that one individual residing at.Taylor Flat could be exposed simultaneously via several pathways.If this individual were an avid fisherman, drank milk from the nearest cow and ate farm products affected by plant effluents (liquid and airborne), he might receive a total-body radiation dose of 2.5 mrem/yr, a thyroid dose of 2.7 mrem/yr and a bone dose of 1.9 mrem/yr.The estimated annual doses to the population affected by the operation of the WNP-2 and the combined operation of WNP-2, WNP-1 and WNP-4 are given in Table 5.2-15.The total popula-tion dose estimate includes the transportation of radiomaterials (spent fuel and wastes)from the plants as well as the doses received via the air and water pathways.The dose to the population from the direct radiation from the plants is assumed negligible, since the closest point to 5.2-11 the site continuously occupied is more than 3 miles away from any one plant, and the point occupied intermittently by a fisherman is more than 2 miles.The annual population dose from all sources attributable to all three plants operating simultaneously is 18 man-rem.By comparison the background radiation dose rate from natural sources in this region is approximately 105 mrem/yr,<a)resulting in an annual dose of 28,000 man-rem to the same population.

Therefore, routine operations of the WNP-1, WNP-2 and WNP-4 operating simultaneously at this site, will contribute a very small increment to the total-body dose already received as a result of the natural background radiation.

Construction workers at WNP-1 and WNP-4 will receive some radiation dose due to the operation of WNP-2.If an indi-vidual were to work 0.5 mile from WNP-2, he would receive total-body dose of 2.5 mrem/yr from N-16 turbine shine.~This worker would also receive about 0.7 mrem/yr due to the airborne release of radioactive material from WNP-2.When WNP-2 begins operation, approximately 3200 construction workers will be building WNP-1 and WNP-4.lf these workers are located an average of 1 mile from WNP-2, the total-body radiation dose to those workers would be 4.4 man-rem/yr.

/.25 mrem/yr from internal sources (mostly K-40)~8)5.2-12 WNP-2 ER TABLE 5.2-]RELEASE RATES AND CONCENTRATION OF RADIONUCLIDES IN LIQUID EFFLUENTS FROM NNP-2~Zeoto e H-3 Na-24 P-32 Cr-51 Mn-54 Mn-56 Fe-55 Fe-59 Co-58 Co-60 Ni-65 CQ-64 Zn-65 Zn-69m Zn-69 Br-83 Br-84 Rb-89 Sr-89 Sr-90 Sr-91 Sr-92, Y-90 Y-91m Y-91 Y-92 Y-93 Mo-99 Release~(Ci/)12.0 6.6E-3 2.6E-4 6.7E-3 8'E-5 7.1E-3 1.4E-3 4.0E-5 2.7E-4 5.5E-4 4.0E-5 2.0E-2 2.7E-4 1.4E-3 1.5E-3 3.7E-4 3.0E-S 2.1E-4 1.4E-4 7.0E-5 2.2E-3 1~5E-3 7.OE-5 1.4E-3 7.0E-5 3.1E-3 2-3E-3 2 3E-3 Concentration in Plant Effluents (ci/a)2-3E+3 1.3 5~lE-2 1.3 1-6E-2" 2~7E-1 7.8E-3 5.2E-4 1.1E-l 7.8E-3 3.9 5.2E-2 2.7E-1 2'E-1 7.2E-2 5.8E-3 4.1E-2 2'E-2 1.4E-2 4.3E-1 2.9E-l 1.4E-2 2.7E-1 l.4E-2 6'E-1 4.5E-1 4.5E-l Amendment 1 May 1978 TABLE 5.2-3 ANNUAL AVERAGE ATMOSPHERIC DILUTION FACTORS (X/0')Direction from Sources 1~5 Hl 2~5 HI 3'HI 4'HT Range (mile)7'Hl 15 HI 25 HI 35 Hl 45 HI TOTALS N NNE hf EN t.E E.SK SE SSE 3'4E-06 2'5K-06 2'0E-Pb 2'4E,-oe 1~9BE-06 3'3E 06 3'2t-pe 3 51E pe 8~OCE-07 6~72E.07 b>>47E-O'I 5~36E-07 b>>loc 07 Bo 73E-07 1~03E 06 9~SBF.-07 4'0E 07 3'4t 07 2'0E-07 2'5t-07 2'9E-07 4'3t.07 b,sot 07 5'3t.07 2~83E-Ol 2~3 1K-01 1~90E-07 I~Bef-01 1~75E-07 3'3K-OI 3'dt.-07 3'bE-0'1 2~07t.-o l l>>67t.07 1~38t-07 1~35t.-07 1~27E-07 2'0K-07 2~64E.~O I 2>>47t-01 1~OBE-01 8'bf 08 7 BRISK-OB 6'9K-08 6>>48E-08 1~13t.-01 1~37'-01 1~29E-01 4>>40E-08 3'5E-08 2'5K-08 2'8E-08 2'4K 08 4'5E 08 5'0K-08 Se 21E-08 2'2E 08 1~72E 08 1~41E 08 1~38K-08 1~25E-08 2'0K 08 2'5F 08 2~61E 08 1>>40E-08 1~QBE-08 8'2E-09 B>>60E 09 7'9K-09 1~37E 08 I~72K-08 1~64K-08 9>>92K 09 7'9E-09 6~18E-09 6'3E 09 5'5E-09 9~SBE-09 1~21K-08 1~16E-08 4>>97E-06 4'3t:-06 3>>39E 06 3~31E-06 3~17E-06 5~39E-06 6'4E 06 5'0K-06 5 SSW SW WSW WNW NW NNW 3~1 lf-06?~38E-06 2>>13E-06 1~BSE-Ob 1~3BE-oe 1~eef-pe 1~75E-Ob 2'5E-06 8,33E 07 e>>52K-07 e.olf-nl 5 ADOBE<<07 3~8IE 07 4'3K-PI 4~41E, 07 7~11E 07 4'9t, 07 3~Ssf-07 3'lt: 07 2'7t 07 2'8t 07 2,3IE 01 2>>22t.07 1~84K-07 2'8t 07 1>>30E 07 2~'30t:-07 1 sot"0 l 2~3bt O'I 1 eb4E.-01 3~82t.07 2>>b2E 0 l 2~1St'.-07 1~74E 07 l.e4t-pl 1~36E-07 1~02t.-07 1~10E.-07 I~12t-07 1~84t-07 1~15E.-07 9>>2SE-OB 8~lst-08 7'9E.-OB 4'8E 08 3'9E 08 3'2E-08 2'4K-OB 5~39K-08 2'0E-08 5>>69E-08 2'7K~08 5'4K-PB 2'8K-08 9'7E 08 3'2K 08 2'5E-08 1~91K-08 1~83E-08 1>>48E-08 I~1oE-ne 1~12E-08 1'3K-08 1~9BF-08 1~48E 08 1~21E 08 1~16E-08 9'2K-PP e.92E-o9 7~QIE 09 7~QBE 09 1~25K-08 1~04E-08 8>>49K-09 8~17E-09 6'6K 09 4'7E-09 4~91E-09 4'7E-09 8'2E-09 S~12E 06 3'7E 06 3~61E 06 3'BE-06 2'0K-06 2'9E 06 2~Bot.-06 4'6E-06 TOTALS 3~95E-05 1 Obf-Ob b o2t-05 3 6 IE 06 2~71E-Ob 1 41E-06 5~69E-07 2~BbE<<07 1~79E-07 1 26E 07 CUH TOTL 3'5E 05 5~OOE Ob b 56t 05 5'3t Qb 6 20t.05 6'4E.Oo 6'9E 05 6'2E 05 6'4E 05 6'5K 05 e.4st;-os.e.45E-QS TABLE 5.2-4 CONCENTRATIONS OF IMPORTANT RADIONUCLIDES IN VARIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL MEDIA River Water at Point of 7(ir at Sedis)ent Soil at Fish at Drinking Water Vegetation at Niik fros)eggs Neat at Irrigation Taylor Flats at outfall Taylor Flats Outfall Coots at Richland Taylor Flats Nearest Cow Taylor Flats Taylor Flats N lid INC~((~(d~(J3~(~(k)~l(k)~lddj(k~l~((k()~((I~I(~k~('IJN~(k()~Id~(pl H-3 Na-24 P-32 Nn-56 Co-60 Kr-87 Kr-88 Sr-89 Sr-90+0 I-131 I-132 I-133 I-135 Xe-135 Xe-138 Cs-134 Cs-136 Cs-137 Cs-138 ea-140 1.1E-1 2.4E-6 5.1E-6 1~3E-6 6.5E-7 6'E-5 6.9E-S 4,4E 5 1.6E-4 4.98-6 6.5e-l 1.3E-4 1.9E+0 2.2E+0 5.8E-S 2.7E-7 4.4E-3 1.68-2 1.OE+1 1.4E+1 4.2E-S 6.0E-S 1.1E-4 1.9E+0 9'E+0 1.4E+2 8.1E+0 1.3E-1 1.6E-3 8.1E-4 2.0E-1 7.7E-2 1.7E 2 1.8E-1 7.7E-4 2.1E+3 2.1E+3 1.3E+2 1.3E+2 1.5E+1 1.5E+1 S.SE+2 S.SE+2 5.4E+0 5,4E+0 2.9E+3 2.9E+3 1.8E+3 1.8E+3 6.6E+3 2 8E+3 4.1E-1 6.6E+3 2.8E+3 4.1E-l 8.2E 1 8.2E-1 4.1E-1 4.1e-l 1.9E+1 1.9E+1 l.oe+1 1.0E+1 S.OEtl S.OE+1 2.38+1 2.3e+1 S.SE-S 3.3E-S 1.08-7 2.6E-7 1.3E-7 4.8E-S 2.6E-S 1.3E-4 5.9E-S 6.3E-S 3.9E 5 1.4E-4 6.1E-S 2.0E-6 7.4E+1 3.6E-2 1.4E-2 2.3E-4 4.3E+0 1.3E+0 1.2E-2 1.7E-2 1.5E-2 3.6E+1 1.1E-3 2.4E+0 I 3.6E-1 3.0E-3 4.4E-3 1.5E+1 8.5E-6 1.78-1 2.48-2 3.1E-4 3.5E+1 0 3.3E-6 1.4E-1 1.8E-3 3.5E-3 WNP-2 ER TABLE 5.2-5 ASSUMPTIONS USED FOR BIOTA DOSE ESTIMATES Fish, Clam, Crustacea In equilibrium with 10%plant effluent Effective radius=2 cm Bioaccumulation factors listed in Appendix II Muskrat Spends 33%of time in 10%plant effluent;33%in riverbank den;33%on land Effective radius=6-cm Body mass=1 kg Consumes 100 g/day aquatic vegetation growing in 10%plant effluent Raccoon Spends 25%of time on shoreline washed with 10%plant effluent Effective radius~14 cm Body mass=12 kg Consumes 20 g/day fish living in 10%plant effluent (10%of total diet).(The other 90%of his diet is assumed to be free of radio-nuclides of WNP-2 origin.)Coot Spends 50%of time floating in 10%plant effluent and 50%of time on shoreline washed with 10%plant effluent Effective radius=5 cm Body mass=1 kg Consumes 100 g/day aquatic vegetation living in 10%plant effluent Heron Spends 33%of time standing in 10%plant effluent;33%on river-bank washed with 10%plant effluent Effective radius=ll cm Body mass=4.6 kg Consumes 600 g/day fish living in 10%plant effluent Goose Spends 50%of time floating in 10%plant effluent and 50%of time on shoreline washed with 10%plant effluent Effective radius=10 cm Body mass=3 kg Consumes 500 g/day of grain External dose to muskrat, coot and heron from gaseous effluents are received at shoreline 2.4 mi ESE of the containment building.External dose to raccon from gaseous effluents are received at shoreline (25%)and at closest plant boundary located 0.5 mi SE (75%).

WNP-2 ER TABLE 5.2-6 ASSUMPTIONS USED IN ESTIMATING DOSES FROM THE LIQUID PATHWAY Drlnkin Water Fish Liquid effluent diluted by annual average river flow (120,000 cfs)24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> delay between release of radionuclides and consumption of water (plus holdup in water plant)Fractions of radionuclides passing through water plant were those given in Table 5.2-11 Consumption rate of 2.0 L/day (730 L/yr)for maximum individual and 1.2 L/day (440 I/yr)for the average individual.

Total population consuming drinking water downstream from the plant is approximately 75,000 Fish caught in waters containing plant ef'fluent diluted by a factor of 0.1 for maximum individual and by annual average river flow for population average.One<<day delay between harvest of fish and consumption for population and 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> for maximum individual.

Consumption rate of 40 kg/yr for maximum individual>

and 1.4 x 104 kg/yr (edible weight)for population living in the 50-mile radius of the plant.(The approxL-mate edible weight of sportfish harvested from the river between Ringold and Boardman.(5))

No losses in preparation of fish.RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES Maximum Individual Recreation in or near waters containing 10%effluent.0.1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> delay between release and location of shoreline activity, swimming and boating.500 hrs/yr shorelLne activities.

100 hrs/yr swimming (complete immersion) 100 hrs/yr boating or water skiing (surface)Avera e Individual Members of the Po ulation Recreation in or neqr waters containing plant effluent fully diluted in the annual average river flow.<<)4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> delay between release qf gadionuclides and location of recreation.

17 hrs/yr shoreline activities

<10 hrs/yr swimming (complete immersion) 5 hrs/yr boating and water skiing (surface)Total population using Cglumbia River downstream from the plant for recreation is approximately 193,000.<<)Irri ated Food Products (b)(c)~Irrigation water contains effluent nuclides diluted with annual average river flow.~Radionuclide buildup period in soil is 30 years.~25%of radionuclide which falls out is retained on crops.~All radioiodine released is in inorganic form.~Environmental half-life of deposition on plants Ls 14 days.~Holdups, Individual Consumptions, Irrigation Rates, Yields, and Growing Periods are listed in Table 5.2-12~Average member of population is assumed to eat 1/2 of consumptions listed in Table 5.2-12~Population consuming irrigated foods assumed to be 10,000.time to southwest Benton County was ignored.The ma)ority (over 50%)of the exposed populatLon resides in the vicinity of'he Tri-Cities, (Pasco, Kennewick, and Richland).Receptor assumed 3 ft above infinite plane.Resulting dose decreased by factor of 0.2 to account for finite width of shoreline.

The population within 50 miles of the site in the sectors between the NNE and the SW directions, inclusive, are the persons who travel to the Columbia River downstream of the plant for their aquatic, recreation.

This population is estimated to total 192,710 persons in 2020.

TABLE 5.2-9 ESTIMATED ANNUAL DOSES TO AN INDIVIDUAL FROM THE LIQUID AND GASEOUS EFFLUENTS OF WNP-2 LIQUID Pathwa Annual~kx oenre Location Dilution'nnual Doses (mrem)to an Adult Factor Tota~or/d Skin~nod Gr-knr T~kroid Bone Drinking Water Fish Water Recreation Irrigated Food Products: Produce Eggs Milk Meat Ground Contamination (b)(b)(b)(b)4,400 h Riverview Area Riverview Area Riverview Area Riverview Area~Riverview Area 730 i Richland 40 kg Near Outfall (a)Near Outfall 1/20,000 1/10 1/10 1/20,000 1/20,000 1/20d000 1/20,000 1/20,000 2.7E-5 5.4E-7 2.48-5 7.6E-6 l.1E-S 4.1E-7 5.0E-6 1.6E-6 6.5E-5 2.7E-6 1.68-4 4.9E-6 2.5E-S 5.4E-7 l.98-5 6.3E-6 2.28-4 1.9E-4 (1.9E-4)(1.9E-4)(1.9E-4)1.88-5 1.2E-5 1.1E-4 7.9E-6 2.2 2.0E-1 2.5E-1 1.6 1.18-1 9.3E-2 (9.38-2)(9.3E-2)(9.3E-2)AIR Air Submersion 8,766 h Inhalation/Transportation 7;300 m 3 Food Products: Taylor Flat Taylor Flat 3.0xlo 3.0xl0 3.2E-l 1.68-1 9.4E-4 (1,6E-1)I'9.9E-4 (1.6E-1)9.08-2 (1.68-1)2.7E-4 Produce Eggs Milk Meat Ground Contamination (b)(b)(b)(b)4,400 h Taylor Flat Taylor Flat Taylor Flat Taylor Flat Taylor Flat 3.0xl0 3.0x10 7 2'xlO 3.0xlO 3.0xl0 6.5E-3 6.18-3 6.88-5 6.0E-5 3.4E-3 2.48-3 3.1E-4 2.78"4 6.9E-1 1.0E-2 1.4 1.9E-2 2.0E-3 2.48-5 3.1E-3 6.58-5 4'.98-3 3.98-3:(3.9E"3)

(3.98-3)(3.98-3)(a)(b)(c)See Table 5.2-6 for exposure rates for water recreation.

See Table 5.2-12 for consumption rates for farm products.Parentheses around a number indicate that the radiation dose to an internal organ is due to an external source and is estimated to be equ'al to the external total-body dose.

TABLE 5.2-l 0 ESTIMATED ANNUAL DOSES TO AN INDIVIDUAL FROM THE LIQUID AND GASEOUS EFFLUENTS OF WNP-2, WNP-1 and WNP-4 LI{}UID Pathwa Annual E~xoenre Location Annual Doses (mrem)to an Adult Total Skin~Bod GZ-LLZ T~h roid Bone Drinking Water Fish Water Recreation 730 R Richland 40 kg Near Outfall (a)Near Outfall l.8E-3 l.8E-3 l.9E-3 7.9E-6 2~3 2.6 3.1E-1 l.6 1.1E-1 9.3E-2 (9.3E-2)((9.3E-2)(9.3E-2)c)Irrigated Food Products: Produce Eggs Milk Meat Ground Contamination (b)(b)(b)(b)4,400 h Riverview Area Riverview Area Riverview Area Riverview Area Riverview Area 2.2E-4 1.3E-3 6.9E-5 6.6E-4 2.3E-4 1.9E-4 l.3E-3 6.9E-5 6.5E-4 2.2E-4 1.3E-3 6'E-5 8.1E-4 2.3E-4 2.5E-5 5.4E-7 1.9E-5 6.3E-6 (1.9E-4)(1.9E-4)

(1.9E-4)AIR Air Submersion Inhalation/Transportation Food Products: 8,766 h 7,300 m Taylor Flat Taylor Flat 7.2E-1 1.8E-1 4.4E-3 4.5E-3 1.1E-1 3.0E-4 (1.8E-1)(1,8E-1)(1.8E-1)Produce Eggs Milk Meat Ground Contamination (b)(b)(b)(b)4,400 h Taylor~Taylor Taylor Taylor Taylor Flat Flat Flat Flat Flat 5.1E-3 3.4E-2 3.2E-4 9.2E-3 1.6E-3 4.0E-3 3.2E-2 8.3E-1 3.1E-, 4 1.3E-2 7.9E-3 1.6 1.5E-3 2.3E-2 2.2E-3 2'E-5 3.4E-3 7.2E-5 (4.0E-3)(4.0E-3)

(4.0E-3)a (b)(c)T1 See Table 5.2-12 for consumption rates for farm products.Parentheses around a number indicate that the radiation dose to an internal organ is source and is estimated to be equal to the external total-body dose.due to an external WNP-2 ER ,~TABLE'.2-11 FRACTION OF RADIONUCLIDE PASSING THROUGH WATER TREATMENT PLANTS'(Element Fraction Element Fraction H Na Cr Mn Fe Co Ni Cu Zn Br Rb Sr 1.0 0.9 0.4 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.4 0.8 0.9 0.2 0.2 Mo Tc Ru Rh Te Cs Ba La Ce Pr Np 0.9 0.7 0.5 ,0.5 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.2"0.2 0.9 0.7 TABLE 5.2-12 ASSUMPTIONS FOR ESTIMATING DOSES FROM CROPS AND ANIMAL FODDER SUBJECT TO DEPOSITION OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS RELEASED BY THE PLANT Produce Food T es Irrigation Atmospheric (b)Growing Holdup Consumption Rate Dilution Yield Period Leafy Vegetables Beans, Peas, Asparagus Potatoes Other Root Vegetables Berries Melons (water)Orchard Fruit Wheat Other Grain (sweet corn)Eggs Milk Meat Beef Pork Poultry 1 1 10 1 1 1 1 10 1 15 15 30 30 110 72 30 40 265 80 8.3 30 274 40 40 18 200 160 180 1SO 180 180 180 0 (c)150 150 200 160 150 140 3.0x10 3.0xlo 3.0xlO 3.0x10 3.0xlO 3.0xlO 3.0x10 3.0x10 3 Oxlo I 3.0x10 2.6x10 3.0xlO 3.0xlO 3.0x10 1.S 0.4 2.7 1.4 2.1 0.72 1.4 0.66 1.3 2.0 0.69 0.66 70 70 100 70 60 100 90 70 100 130 30 130 130 130 W those quantities.(b)Typical irrigation rates for the region.(c)No irrigation of wheat.population member is assumed to eat one-half of WNP-2 ER TABLE 5.2-13 CUMULATIVE POPULATION, ANNUAL POPULATION DOSE, FROM SUBMERSION IN AIR CONTAINING RADIONUCLIDES FROM THE WNP-2 AND COMBINED RELEASES OF WNP-2 AND WNP-1 AND-4 Radius (miles'Cumulative Population (2020)Cumulative Annual Population Dose (man-rem)Annual Average Dose (mrem)Com oned 0 0 WNP-2 Combined WNP-2 10 20 30 40 50 130 12,650 108,060 157,760 201,270 267,790 0.44 0.56 1.3 1.8 1.5 1.5 1.6 2.1 2.1 2.2 0 0.0086 0.010 0 0.066 0.035 0.012 0.078 0.045 0.016 0.0093 0.013 0.0075 0.010 0.0058 0.0081 WNP-2 ER TABLE 5.2-14 ANNUAL DOSES RECEIVED VIA MAJOR PATHWAYS FOR WNP-2 AND FOR WNP-2, WNP-1 AND-4 COMBINED Annual Dose (mrem)Appendix I WNP-2 WNP-1&-4 Combined Limits er Reactor AIR PATHWAY Air Submersion Total Body Skin 0.71 1.3 0.38 0.60 1.9 5 15 Child's Thyroid(9.2 Nearest Resident (c)1.6 15 Thyroid Total Body LIQUID PATHWAY Drinking Water Total Body Fish Consumption Total Body Bone 2.4 0.18 1.8E-5 2.2 1.6 0.37 6-8E-2 1.8E-3 6.2E-2 4.0E-8 2.8 0.24 1.8E-3 2.3 1.6 15 10 3 10 Nearest Resident (d)Total Body 0.10 All Others<0.10 AIR DOSE (mrad/r)Gamma Air Dose 2.9 Beta Air Dose 1.9 2.9E-2<3.0E-3 0.13-0.1 3 10 10 20 a (b)(c)(d)(e)Milk and inhalation at nearest residence.

Inhalation, air submersion, ingestion of farm products, contaminated ground.Swimming, boating, shoreline, ground contamination, ingestion of farm products.At the site boundary 0.5 miles southeast of the plant.

TABLE 5.2-15 ESTIMATED ANNUAL POPULATION DOSES ATTRIBUTABLE TO WNP-2 AND COMBINED RADIONUCLIDE RELEASES OF WNP-l, WNP-2 AND WNP-4 Total Body Dose Man-Rem Pathwa WNP-2 Combined Remarks AIR Submersion in Cloud Direct Radiation 1-6 2.1 No credit taken for shielding.

Inhalation/Transpiration Farm Products 7.OE-2 2.7E-l 2.3E-2 l.1E-1 WATER Fish Consumption Drinking Water Water Recreation Irrigated Farm Products TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS 3.9E-4 2.1E-3 3.0E-4 1.8E-4 4.3E-4 8.3E-2 3.OE-4 8.OE-3 15 Complete mixing in river was assumed.Complete mixing in river was assumed.Complete mixing in river was assumed.From reference 7.

Gaseous Effluents Liquid Effluents Consumption C.0 C Direct Irradiation Seafood Consumption

, b),--,N Immersion~n/o Plant Consumption A;~.-pe'~~r I/(~Immersion C.0~I g.I Ingestion~p WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM WPPSS NUCLEAR PROJECT NO.2 Environmental Report EXPOSURE PATHWAYS FOR ORGANISMS OTHER THAN MAN FIGHT 5.2-1