ML19323A161

Forwards Articles Re Methane Detection Using Lasers. Recommends Laser Fence Idea.Sys Would Act as Continuous Fence Under All Conditions Except Heavy Fog.W/O Encl

ML19323A161
Person / Time
Site:	Calvert Cliffs
Issue date:	12/26/1979
From:	Woodman D GTE SYLVANIA, INC.
To:	Pasadag W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML19323A157	List: ML19323A161
References
NUDOCS 8004170323
Download: ML19323A161 (1)

Text

, ,

5"Ti5i.a'nIalEicrocrated

1. sN PO Be= 103 Attachment 3

• Moun:3tn View CA 94042 i

U' -

4159e 3707 26 December 1979

.

__

.rq systems Fr. W. Pasadag Division of Operating Reactors Nuclear Regulatory Commission -

Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Walt:

I've enclosed some articles on methane detection using lasers.

As is often the case, the technology exists, however, no com-pletely developed instruments are commercially available. After a cursory look at the problem, I woul'd recommend the " laser fence" idea.- That is, place a string of HeNe lasers and receivers oper-ating at 3.39 microns between the LNG plant and the reactor. Con-centrations as low as natural background levels could be measured wi h transmitter / receiver separations of about 100 meters. The i system wculd act as a continuous fence under all conditions ex-l cept heavy fog. Under heavy fog the units would still function as point sensors.

A 100K program would be sufficient to develop a prototype of the laser fence approach. _.

- - - .

. ~ . --]_ ,

y .

- - -- ..:. . --

Yours truly,

, ,

'

,R Wess~

~

Douglas P. Woodman -

Eead, Laser Radar Section Electro-Optics Organi::ation _ _

_.

D?W:mo o

• t EnclosJres (as stated)

.-

I

!

1

- i

!. 8004170373 - . . .

e

.

- -

. Enclosura 2 ,

f[s -' %%, UNiiED STAT'Es y Vg # .

• h NUCLEAR REGUL ATORY COf.it.*lSSION r, a w-5g/. le we.smr.cic s. o. c. 2esss

%n. 'if.

, w.%f,

• • ..a ,.9

,

3,3 G30

.

MEMORA'JJM FOR: George W. Knighten, Chief. Environmental Evaluation Branch, 00R THRU: W. Pasedag, Sec .ian A Leader, Environmental Evaluation Brarch, 00R FRCM: M. Wohl, Environnental Evaluation Bran,ch 00R SU3JEC : aRIP REPCRT - VISIT TO CALVERT CLIFFS On February 27, 1980, I met with R. Olson, of the Baltimore Gas and Electric Ccepany, at the Calvert Cliffs site. The purpose of the visit was to survey on-site and near-site items of interest with respect to our review of the Calvert Cliffs L iG Contingency Plan.

Among' the items surveyed were the cooling water intake structure, the emergency diesel areas, the auxiliary transformer construction area, the Camp Conoy beach areas, local top: graphy in the brush areas SSE of the site, and the site access road.

The cc: ling . cater intake structure was judced sufficiently deep such that the likeitrocd of intake of any substantial quantities of LtiG following a spill ic small.

The e argency diesel rooms were located at least forty-five (45) feet above - -

~

the Chesapeake Bay water level. The diesel rooms have louvered openings ever the dcces leading to the outside. Moveable louvers would provide diesel recm isolability in the event of the very unlikely occurrence of on-site L::G vapor. ,

A survey of the Carp Conoy beach areas and brush areas SSE of the Calvert Cliffs site revealed topographic features advantageous to prevention of the transport of.Lt;G vapor frc 1 a Cove Point / tanker-related spill to the site area. At least two 50 to 70 foot deep canyons running approximately east-west in direction were observed in the land area between the Calvert Cliffs and Cove Point sites. These, the heavily ovorgrown hilly areas, and the Cliffs the selves would serve as partial deterrents to the migration of vapor due to an L:;G spill to the Calvert Cliffs site.

. 34.'id-M. 'r ohl Environmental Evaluation Branch .

Division of Operating Reactors cc: J. iiiller R. W. Reid -

g u.u.:,arrett c:..ner 3 l W. F:us on l J. Read 1

i goutvuolla oss

. .

• Enclosure 3

,

.

.

. -

Recuest for Additional Information Calvert Cliffs LNG Contincency Plan Review ,

.

1. Discuss your continuing efforts in the area of LNG vapor cloud detection technology.

'

2. Describe your experience with the monitoring of broadcast communication  ;

links with the Coast Guard. Discuss the status of progess of letters of agreement between the Coast Guard and Cove Point with respect to notifying the plant of any difficulty with LNG spills / handling.

3. a. Discuss your protective procedures assuming that an LNGs ' pill with an ensuing, fire exists. .

b. Discuss your protective procedures assuming that an LNG spill

with ensuing liquid pool spread and LNG vapor generation occurs.

-

4. Assume an LNG vapor cloud on-site.

a. Provide estimates of the duration of the plant's immersion in the

'

cloud, and correlate those estimates with the proposed emergency

-

actions. _. __ _ . _ , .

b. Discuss the basis and provide quantifiable decision criteria fo'r inhibiting the diesel generators from starting. .

c. Discuss the detection and means of purging the diesel rooms of '

vaporized LNG after the cloud disperses. ,

d. Discuss means of protection.of the battery and charger rooms'from . ,

-

LNG vapor hazards.

e. Discuss the criteria and procedures related to alternate power sources after the batteries are exhausted (including system /

componentsequencing).

f. Explain the reason for the two hour duration availability of the ,

,

D.C. (battery) power supply, and state why this is considered to l be adequate. .

g. Discuss the impact on the switchyard of detonation / deflagration of the LNG cloud.

h. Discuss the need for and availability of alternative access ways to the site if a cloud detonation / deflagration were to occur.

5. Discuss the various options for s:crage and assembly locations for breathing ap;aratus and methane. detection apparatus. State the-number of people to be precessed,. the number of airpacks on hand, .the time -

,

e ,

. .

2 -

.

required to implement use of the airpacks, and the modes of use of ,

the sniffing apparatus. <

6. 'n' hen addressing specific protective actions, reference the plant pro-cedures necessary to implement such action, and the appropriate review, evaluation, and implementation of such plant procedures.

,

n 9

-

!

t

__

^

_~ _ *[ K

-* ~ ~ - . . .

. . - - - . . _ - -

_ __ _ _

. - . . .. .

f G

&

-= = = = . . .--

~ __ - . _ _._ ,

a

-

-, -