usnrc regulatory guide series regulatory guide 4.2, … · usnrc regulatory guide series regulatory...
TRANSCRIPT
USNRC REGULATORY GUIDE SERIES
REGULATORY GUIDE 4.2, REVISION 1
PREPARATION OFENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS
FORNUCLEAR POWER STATIONS
0
JANUARY 1975
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Revision 1January 1975
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGULATORY GUIDE
REGULATORY GUIDE 4.2
PREPARATION OF ENVIRONMENTALREPORTS FOR NUCLEAR POWER STATIONS
USNRC REGULATORY GUIDES Copies of publishid guides may be obtained by iequest indicating the divisionsdesirod to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commitlsion. Washington. D.C.
Regulatory Guides are Ilsued to describe and make available to the public Attention: Director of Standards Development. Comments and suggestions formethods acceptable to the NRC staff of implementing specific parts Of the Improvements in these guides are encouraged end should be sent to theCommilssion' regulation,, to delineate techniques used by the staff In Secretary of the Commission. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.evaluating p"ecIfic problems or postulated accidents, or to provide guidance to Washington. D.C. 2{•55, Attention: Dockeling and Service Section.applicants. Regulatory Guiodearo not substlitule for regulations and compliancevith them itint re0quired. Methods and salutiona different from those Wat out in The guides are Issued In the following ten broad divisions:rhe guaides will be acceptable it they ptrovide a barsi for the findings requisite tothe oatsamce or continuance of a permit or license by the Commission. 1. Power Reactors 6. Products
2. Research and Test Reactors 7. Transportation3. Fuels and Materials Facilities 8. Occupational Health
Published guides will be revlied periodically, ai appropriate. to accommodate .4. Environmental and Siting 9. Antitrust Reviewcomments and to reflect now Informatiln or experience. S. Materials and Plant Protection 10, General
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
A. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . .. . . 4.2-7
I. National Environmental Goals ........... ..................................... 4.2.7•2. Applicant's Environmental Reports .. .................................. 4.2-73. Federal Water Pollution Control Act ........ .................................. 4.2-84. Commission Action on Environmental Reports ........ ............................. 4.2-8S. General Considerations Reh)ted to.Environmental Reports ............................ 4.2-96. Preparation of Environmental Reports ...................................... 41.2-10
B. STANDARD FORMAT AND CONTENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS .................. 4.2-12
Chapter I. Purpose of the Proposed Facility and Associated Transmission ................... 4.2-12
1.1 Need for Power ........ ........................................ 4.2-12
1.1.1 Load Characteristics ........................................ 4.2-121.1.2 System Capacity .......................................... 4.2.121.1.3 Reserve Margins ................................. .......... 4.2-121.1.4 External Supporting Studies ... ................. ............. 4.2-13
1.2 Other Objectives ................................................ 4.2-13
1.3 Consequences of Delay ....... .................................... 4.2-13
Chapter 2. The Site and Environmental Interfaces .................................. 4.2-14
2.1 Geography and Demography ........................................ 4.2-14
2.1.1 Site Location and Description ................................... 4.2-142.1.2 Exclusion Area Authority and Control .............................. 4.2-142.1.3 Population Distribution ...................................... 4.2.142.1.4 Uses of Adjacent Lands and Water ................................. 4.2-15
2.2 Ecology ........ ............................................ 4.2-152.3 Meteorology .................................................. 4.2-162.4 Hydrology ............... ....................... . . . . 4.2-162.5 Geology ......... ............................................ 4.2-172.6 Regional Historic, Scenic, Cultural, and Natural Features ......... ........... . . . 4.2.17
Chapter 3. The Plant ......... ........................................... 4.2-19
3.1 External Appearance ............................................. 4.2-193.2 Reactor and Steam-Electric System .................................... 4.2-193.3 Plant Water Use ........ ........................................ 4.2-193.4 Hleat Dissipation System ........................................... 4.2-193.5 Radwaste Systems and Source Tem, ..... .............................. 4.2-20
3.5.1 SourceTerm ...................................... 4.2-203.5.2 Liquid Radwaste Systems ................... ............. 4.2-203.5.3 Gaseous Radwaste Systems .................................... 4.2-213.5.4 Solid Radwaste System ...... ................................ 4.2-213.5.5 Process and Effluent Monitoring ................................. 4.2-21
3.6 Chemical and Biocide Wastes ....... ................................. 4.2-213.7 Sanitary and Other Waste Systems ..................................... 4.2-21
4.2-3
Page
3.8 Reporting of Radioactive Material Movement.... . ........................ 4.2-22.3. 9 Transmission Facilities ......... ..................................... 4.2-22
Chapter 4. Environmental Effects of Site Preparation, Plant Construction, andTransmission Facilities Construction .................................... 4.2-24
4.1 Site Preparation and Plant Construction .................................. 4.2-244.2 Transmission Facilities Construction .................................... 4.2-254.3 Resources Committed ............................................ 4.2-254.4 Radioactivity ........ ......................................... 4.2.254.5 Construction Impact Control Program ...... ............................ 4.2-25
Chapter 5. Environmental Effects of Plant Operation ................................ 4.2-26
5.1 lil'kis of Opctttltlh ol I leat D,,patloi System ............. .. .. . .4.2.26
5.1.1 Effluent Limitations and Water Quality Standards ...................... 4.2-265.1.2 Physical Effects ....... .................................... 4.2-265.1,3 Biological Effects ...... ................................... 4,2.265.1A4 Effects of Hleat Disslpatloti Facilities .. ......................... 4.2.27
5.2 Radiological Impact from Routine Operation .............................. 4.2-27
5.2.1 Exposure Pathways ....... .................................. 4.2.275.2.2 Radioactivity In Environment ................................... 4.2-275.2.3 Dose Rate Estimates for Biota Other Than Man ........................ 4.2-285.2.4 Dose Rate Estimates for Man ...... ............................. 4.2-285.2.5 Summary of Annual Radiation Doses .............................. 4.2.29
5.3 Effects of Chemical and Biocide Discharges ............................... 4.2-295.4 Effects of Sanitary Waste Discharges .................................... 4.2.295.5 Effects of Operation and Maintenance of the Transmission Systems ................ 4.2-295.6 Other Effects ........ ......................................... 4.2-305.7 Resources Committed ............................................ 4.2-305.8 Decommissioning and Dismantling ..................................... 4.2-30
Chapter 6. Effluent and Environmental Measurements and Monitoring Programs ............... 4.2-31
6.1 Applicant's Preoperational Environmental Programs .......................... 4.2-31
6.1.1 Surface Waters ............................................ 4.2-316.1.2 Ground Water ....... ..................................... 4.2-326.1.3 Air .................................................. 4.2-326.1.4 Land .................................................. 4.2-336.1.5 Radiological Monitoring ...................................... 4.2-33
6.2 Applicant's Proposed Operational Monitoring Programs ........................ 4.2-336.3 Related Environmental Measurement and Monitoring Programs ................... 4.2-346.4 Preoperational Environmental Radiological Monitoring Data ..................... 4.2-34
Chapter 7. Environmental Effects of Accidents ........................ . .......... 4.2-35
7.1 Station Accidents Involving Radioactivity ................................ 4.2-357.2 Other Accidents ................... ....................... ...... .4.2-35
4.2-4
Chapte
Chapte
:r 8. Economic and Social Effects of Plant Cons
8.1 Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8.2 Costs ........................
r 9. Alternative Energy Sources and Sites
9.1 Alternatives Not Requiring the Creation of9.2 Alternatives Requiring the Creation of New
9.2.1 Selection of Candidate Areas . .9.2.2 Selection of Candidate Site.Plant A
9.3 Cost-Bencit Comparison of Candidate Site
Chapter 10.
10.110.210.310.410.510.610.710.810.9
10.10
Chapter I1.
Chapter 12.
Chapter 13.
Plant Design Alternatives ........
Circulating System ..............Intake System ................Discharge System ............Chemical Waste Treatment .........Biocide Treatment ..............Sanitary Waste System ...........Liquid Radwaste Systems .........Gaseous Radwaste Systems .......Transmission Facilities ...........Other Systems ................
Summary Benefit-Cost Analysis ......
Environmental Approvals and Consultation
References ...................
Page
truction and Operation .. ........ .... .. 4.2-36
.................................................. 4.236
......I........................................ 4.2-37
. . . ............................ 4.2-39
New Generating Capacity ........... 4.2-39Generating Capacity ............. 4.2-39
. . . ............................ 4.2-39Iternatives . . ................. 4.2-40
-Plant Alternatives ................ 4.2-40
... . . . . ...................... ..... . 4.2-42
. . . . .... ....................... 4.2-43
........................... 4.2-43
. . . ............................ 4.2-44
. .. ......................... 4.244
. . . ............................ 4.244
. . . ............................ 4.2-44
. . . ............................ 4.2-44
... ............................ 4.244
... ............................ 4.2-44
... ............................ 4.2-44
... ............................ 4.2-45
.... ........................... 4.2-46
. . . ............................ 4.2-47
TABLES
Table Page
1
2
3
4
Summary of Environmental Considerations for Uranium Fuel Cycle ..................... 4.2-48
Primary Benefits to be Considered in Cost-Benefit Analysis ........................... 4.250
Monetized Bases for Generating Costs ........................................ 4.2-5I
Environmental Factors to be Used in Comparing Alternative Plant Systems ................. 4.2-52
APPENDICES
APPENDIX I Data Retrieval System (Proposed) ................................ 4.2-66
APPENDIX 2 Data Needed for Radioactive Source Term Calculations for Pressurized Water Reactors ..... .4.2-67
4.2-5
Chapte
Chapte
Chapte
Chapte
Chapte
Chaptc
r 8. Economic and Social Effects of Plant Construction and Operation
8.1 Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8.2 Costs ...... ................................
r 9. Alternative Energy Sources and Sites ................
9.1 Alternatives Not Requiring the Creation of New Generating Capacity9.2 Alternatives Requiring the Creation of New Generating Capacity
9.2.1 Selection of Candidate Areas ....... .. ... ...9.2.2 Selection of Candidate Site.Plant Alternatives ..........
9.3 Cost-Benetit Comparison of Candidate Site-Plant Alternatives ....
r 10. Plant Design Alternatives ......................
10.1 Circulating System ..............................10.2 Intake System .................................10.3 Discharge System ..........................10.4 Chemical Waste Treatment ................. .........10.5 Biocide Tretment ................ .............10.6 Sanitary Waste System ............................10.7 Liquid Radwaste Systems ..........................10.8 Gaseous Radwaste Systems .....................10.9 Transmission Facilities ............................1.10 Other Systcms . ...............................
r If. Summary Benefit-Cost Analysis ......................
r 12. Environmental Approvals and Consultation ...............
r 13, References ...................................
Page
.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2-36
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.36
.. ........... 4.2-37
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2-39
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.39
. . ............ 4.2-39
. ............ 4.2-39
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2-40
. . . . . . . . . ... . 4.2-40
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2-42
........ ..... 4.2-43
. ............ 4.2-43
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.44
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2-44
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2-44
.. ... . .. ... .. 4.2-44
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2-44
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2-44............. 4.2-44
... ...... .... 4.2-44
. . . . . . .. . . . . . 4.2-45
.. ... ............. 4.2-46
.......... ... 4.2-47
TABLES
Table Page
1
2
3
4
Summary of Environmental Considerations for Uranium Fuel Cycle . . .
Primary Benefits to be Considered in Cost-Benefit Analysis .........
Monetized Bases for Generating Costs ......................
Environmental Factors to be Used in Comparing Alternative Plant Systems
... ............... 4.2-48
... ............... 4.2-50
... ............... 4.2-5 I
.. .............. 4.2-52
APPENDICES
APPENDIX I Data Retrieval System (Proposed) ...... ................................
APPENDIX 2 Data Needed for Radioactive Source Term Calculations for Pressurized Water Reactors ......
4.2-66
4.2-67
4.2.5
Page
APPENDIX 3 Data Needed for Radioactivc Source Temi Calculations for Boiling Water Reactors ....... .4.2.69
APPENDIX 4 Examples of Charts Showing Radiation Exposure Pathways ...................... 4.2-71
APPENDIX 5 Proposed Annex to Appendix D, 10 CFR Part 50. Discussion of Accidents in Applicants'Environmenial Reports: Assumptions ...... ............................. 4.2-73
4.2-6
A. INTRODUCTION
0i. National Environmental Goals
Prior to the issuance of a construction permit oran upcrating license for a nuclear power station, the U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission is required to assess thepotential environmental effects of that facility in orderto assure that issuance of the permit or license will beconsistent with the national environmental goals, as setforth by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969(Pub. Law 91-190, 83 Stat. 852). In order to obtaininformation essential to this assessment, the Commissionrequires each applicant for a ;permit or a license to sub-mit a report on the potential environmental impacts ofthe proposed plant and associated facilities.The national environmental goals as expressed bythe National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) are asfollows:
".... it is the continuing responsibility of the FederalGovernment to use all practicable means, consistentwith other essential considerations of nationalpolicy, to improve and coordinate Federal plans,functions, programs, and resources to the end thatthe Nation may-"(I) fulfill the responsibilities of each generation astrustee of the environment for succeeding genera-tions;"(2) assure for all Americans safe, healthful,productive, and esthetically and culturally pleasingsurroundings;"(3) attain the widest range of beneficial uses ofthe environment without degradation, risk to healthor safety, or other undesirable and unintended con-sequences;"(4) preserve important historic, cultural, andnatural aspects of our national heritage, and main-tain, wherever possible, an environment whichsupports diversity and variety of individual choice;"(5) achieve a balance between population andresource use which will permit high standards ofliving and a wide sharing of life's amenities; and"(6) enhance the quality of renewable resourcesand approach the' maximum attainable recycling ofdepletable resources."The Commission's implementation of NEPAW is
contained in 10 CFR Part 51, "Licensing and RegulatoryPolicy and Procedures for Environmental Protection."Other relevant information is contained in the proposedAnnex, "Discussion of Accidents in Applicants' Environ-mental Reports: Assumptions," to Appendix D, 10 CFRPart SO published in 36 FR 22851 and in the proposedSection F, "Consideration of Transportation in Appli-cants' Environmental Reports and AEC Detailed State-ments Pertaining to Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear PowerReactors," of Appendix D, 10 CFR Part 50 (36 FR22851).
'See also CEQ Guidelines (38 FR 20549) published August1, 1973.
2. Applicant's Environmental Reports
Part 51 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regula-tions discusses in § § 51.20 and 51.21, presented below,the general requirements for Environmental Reports(ERs).
"51.20 Applicant's Environmental Report-
Construction Permit Stage
-(a) Environmental Considerations. Each appli-
cant 2 for a permit to construut a productiun orutilization facility covered by §51.5(a) shall submitwith its application a separate document, entitled'Applicant's Environmental Report -ConstructionPermit Stage,' which contains a description u[ theproposed action, a statement of its purposes, and adescription of the environment affected, and whichdiscusses the following considerations:"(I) the probable impact of die proposed action onthe environment;"(2) any probable adverse environmental effectswhich cannot be avoided should the proposal beimplemented;"(3) alternatives to the proposed action;"(4) the relationship between local short-term usesof man's environment and the maintenance andenhancement of long-term productivity; and"(5) any irreversible and irretrievable commitmentsof resources which would be involved in the pro-posed action should it be implemented. The dis-cussion of alternatives to the proposed actionrequired by paragraph (a)(3) shall be sufficientlycomplete to aid the Commission in developing andexploring, pursuant to section 102(2) (D) of NEPA,,appropriate alternatives * * in any proposalwhich involves unresolved conflicts concerning alter-native uses of available resources.'"(b) Cost-Benefit Analysis. The EnvironmentalReport required by paragraph (a) shall include acost-benefit analysis which considers and balancesthe environmental effects of the facility and thealternatives available for reducing or. avoidingadverse environmental effects, as well as the en-vironmental, economic, technical and other benefitsof the facility. The cost-benefit analysis shall, to thefullest extent practicable, quantify the variousfactors considered. To the extent that such factorscannot be quantified, they shall be discussed inqualitative terms. The Environmental Report shouldcontain sufficient data to aid the Commission in itsdevelopment of an independent cost-benefitanalysis.
2Where the "applicant," as used in this part, is a Federalagency, ,ifferent anrangements for implementing NEPA may bemade, pursuant to the Guidelines established by the Council on
'Envronitiental Quality.
4.2-7
"(c) Status of Compliance. The EnvironmentalReport required by paragraph (a) shall include adiscussion of the status of compliance of the facilitywiih applicable environmental quality standards andrequirements (including, but not limited to, appli.cable zoning and land-use regulations and thermaland other water pollution Limitations or require-ments promulgated or imposed pursuant to theFederal Water Pollution Control Act) which havebeen imposed by Federal, State, regional, and localagencies having responsibility for environmentalprotection. The discussion of alternatives in theReport shall include a discussion whether the alter-natives will comply with such applicable environ-mental quality standards and requirements. Theenvironmental impact of the facility and alternativesshall be fully discussed with respect to matterscovered by such standards and requirements irre-spective of whether a certification or license fromthe appropriate authority has been obtained (in-cluding, but not limited to, any certification ob-tained pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal WaterPollution Control Act 3 ). Such discussion shall bereflected in the cost-benefit analysis prescribed inparagraph (b). While satisfaction of Commissionstandards and criteria pertaining to radiologicaleffects will be necessary to meet the licensingrequirements of the Atomic Energy Act, the cost-benefit analysis prescribed in paragraph (b) shall, forthe purposes of NEPA, consider the radiologicaleffects, together with the other effects, of thefacility and alternatives."(d) The info, iation submitted pursuant to para-graphs (a)-(c) of this section should not be confinedto data supporting the proposed action but shouldinclude adverse data as well."(e) In the Environmental Report required by para-graph (a) for light-water-cooled nuclear powerreactors, the contribution of the environmentaleffects of uranium mining and milling, the produc-tion of uranium hexafluoride, isotopic enrichment,fuel fabrication, reprocessing of irradiated fuel,transportation of radioactive materials, and manage-ment of low level wastes and high level wastesrelated to uranium fuel cycle activities to theenvironmental costs of licensing the nuclear powerreactor shall be as set forth in [Table 11. No furtherdiscussion of such environmental effects shall berequired."This paragraph does not apply to any applicant'senvironmental report submitted prior to June 6,1974."(f) Number of copies. Each applicant for a permitto construct a production or utilization facilitycovered by §51.5(a) shall submit 200 copies of theEnvironmental Report required by paragraph (a).
'No permit or license will, of course, be issued with respectto an activity for which a certification required by Section 401of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act has not been ob-tained.
"51.21 Applicant's Environmental Report-Operating License Stage
"Each applicant for a license to operate a produc-ticn or utilization facility covered by §51.5(a) shallsubmit with its application 200 copies of a separatedocument, to be entitled "Applicant's Environ-mental Report-Operating License Stage," whichdiscusses the same matters described in §51.20 butonly to the extent that they differ from those dis-cussed or reflect new information in addition tothat discussed in the final environmental impactstatement prepared by the Commission in con-nection with tile construction permit. The 'Appli-cant's Environmental Report-Operating LicenseStage' may incorporate by reference any infor-mation contained in the Applicant's EnvironmentalReport or final environmental impact statementpreviously prepared in connection with the con-struction permit. With respect to the operation ofnuclear reactors, the applicant, unless otherwiserequired by the Commission, shall submit the'Applicant's Environmental Revort-OperatingLicense Stage' oaly in connection with the firstlicensing action that would authorize full poweroperation of the facility."
3. Federal Water Pollution Control Act
As provided in the "Interim Policy Statement," 38FR 2679, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act(FWPCA) Amendments of 1972 (Pub. Law 92-500, 86Stat. 816) affects the Nuclear Regulatory Comission'sresponsibilities under the National Environmental PolicyAct of 1969 (NEPA). The Commission's NEPA respon-sibilities will be modified as various implementingactions are taken under the FWPCA, and appropriatechanges will be made in this guide. However, since theCommission will, in any event, continue to evaluateenvironmental impact, the basic scope and content ofthe information needed to prepare an environmentalreport, as set forth in this guide, will remain unchanged.
In cases where the proposed system in the appli-cation does not comply with thermal effluent limitationsunder Sections 301 and 306 of Pub. Law 92-500and nodisposition of any request for waiver under Section316(a) is expected until after issuance of a constructionpermit, the Environmental Report (ER) should clearlyidentify and provide supporting analysis for the mostfeasible alternative cooling system that would beselected in the event the request for modification isdenied.
4. Commission Action on Environmental Reports
As noted in §51.50, "Federal Register notices;distribution of reports; public announcements; publiccomment," of 10 CFR Part 51, the Commission places acopy of each applicant's environmental report in theNRC's Public Document Room in Washington D.C.- and
4.2-8
in a local public document room near the proposed site.The report is also made available to the public at theappropriate State, regional, and metropol;tan clearing-houses. At the same time, a public announcement ismade and a summary notice published in the FecleralRegister.
The applicant's environmental report, relevant pub-Lished information, and any comments received frominterested persons are considered by the Regulatory staffin preparing a "Draft Environmental Statement" con-cerning the proposed licensing action. The Regulatorystaffs draft statement and the applicant's environmentalreport are transmitted for information to the Council onEnvironmental Quality, and for comment to Federalagencies having jurisdiction by law or special expertise orwho are authorized to develop and enforce environ.mental standards, and to the Governor or appropriateState and local officials who are authorized to developand enforce environmental standards of any affectedState. Comments on the report and the draft statementare requested within a specified time interval. The draftstatement is made available to the general public in thesame manner as is the report. These activities are basedon § §51.22, 51.24, and 51.25 of 10 CFR Part 51.
As described in detail in §51.26 of 10 CFR Part 51,the Regulatory staff cunsiders the comments on thereport and on the draft statement received from thevarious Federal, State, and local agencies and officials.from the applicant, and from private organizations andindividuals and prepares a "Final Environmental ImpactStatement." The final statement is transmitted to theCouncil on Environmental Quality and is made availableto appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies andState, regional, and metropolitan clearinghouses. Apublic announcement is made and a notice of availabilityis published in the JRderal Register.
Subsequent hearings and actions as described inSubpart D, "Administrative Action and Authorization;Public Hearings and Comment," of 10 CFR Part 51 onthe environmental aspects involved in issuance of a con-struction permit or operating license are based on theapplicant's environmental report and on the Commis-sion's "Final Environmental Impact Statement" (FES).The environmental impact statement takes into accountinformation from many sources, including the appli-cant's environment report and its supplements, and thecomments of the various governmental agencies, theapplicant, and private organizations and individuals.
The applicant's environnental report is an impor-tant document of public record. Therefore, the applicantis urged to give full attention to its completeness.
S. General Considerations Related to Environmental
Reports
a. Cost-Benefit Analysis
The cost-benefit analysis referred lo in para-graph (b) of §51.20 (10 CFR Part 51)should consist oftwo parts. In the first part, alternative site-plant com-
binations and plant systems should be examined in orderto determine whether the proposed facility is the cost-effective choice, considering economic, social, and otherenvironmental factors, and any institutional (govern-mental, etc.) constraints.
Where the cost effectiveness of siting involvesquestions of population density, the cumulative popula-tion projected for the time interval between the date ofapplication for a construction permit and the end ofplant lifetime should be determined.
The applicant should refer to specific guidanceon population density criteria 4 which the Regulatorystaff will issue from time to time. Where populationdensity is critical to site acceptance, the applicant shouldprovide:
(1) An analysis of alternative sites.showing that the proposed site offers significant advan-tages from the standpoints of environmental, economic.or other factors.
(2) The cost of additional state-of-the-artengineered safety features that would be necessary toassure that the conservatively calculated consequences ofpostulated design basis accidents are significantly belowthe dose guidelines of 10 CFR Part 100, "Reactor SiteCriteria."
(3) A detailed study of projected eco-nomic and population growth patterns for the 10 yearsfollowing the date of application for the constructionpermit.
In the second part of the cost-benefit analysis,the benefits to be created by the proposed facilityshould be weighed against the aggregate of environ-mental, economic and other costs to be incurred.
b. Construction Permit and Operating LicenseStages
Sections 51.20 and 51.21d of 10 CFR Part 51require the applicant to submit two environmentalreports. The first is the "Applicant's EnvironmentalReport-Construction Permit Stage," which must besubmitted in conjunction with the construction permitapplication. The second is the "Applicant's Environ-mental Report-Operating License Stage," which mustbe submitted later in conjunction with the operatinglicense application.
The applicant should present, in the environ-mental report that is submitted with the application fora construction permit, sufficient information to permitRegulatory staff evaluation of the potential environ-mental impact of constructing and operating theproposed facility. In all cases, the site-specific environ-mental data presented at the time of filing for aconstruction permit (1) should fully document thecritical life stages and biologically significant activities
4"General Site Suitability Criteria for Nucleur PowerStations," Regulatory Guide 4.7, issued for comment September1974.
4.2-9
H ~.II.I I
• (e.g., spawning, nesting, migration) !hat increase thevulnerability. of the potentially affected biota at theproposed site and (2) should be adequate to characterizethe seasonal variations of biota likely to be affected bythe plant. An applicant wishing to accelerate the start ofplant construction by early submittal of the environ-mental report (according to the procedure set forth in10 CFR Part 50, §50.10(e), may submit an initialevaluation of environmental impact based on an analysisof at least six months of field data related to theproposed facility and suitable projections of the re-maining seasonal periods provided that the first of theforegoing conditions is met. If this is done, the applicantshould also make a commitment to furnish, within sixmonths of the time of filing, a final evaluation based ona full year of field data.
The "Applicant's Environmental Report-Operating License Stage" should, in effect, be anupdating of the earlier report and should:
(1) Discuss differences between currentlyprojected environmental effects of the nuclear powerplant (including those which would degrade and thosewhich would enhance environmental conditions) and theeffects discussed in the environmental report submittedat the construction stage. (Differences may result, forexample, from changes in plans, changes in plant design,availability of new or more detailed information, orchanges in surrounding land use, water use, or zoningclassifications.)
(2) Discuss the results of all studies thatwere not completed at the time of preconstructionreview and which were specified to be completed beforethe preoperational review. Indicate how the results ofthese st,,dies were factored into the design and proposedoperation of the plant.
(3) Describe the scope of the monitoringprograms that have been and will be undertaken todetermine the effects of the operating plant on theenvironment. Include any monitoring programs beingdeveloped or carried out in cooperation with State andFederal fish and wildlife services. The result of pre-operational monitoring activities should be presented insummary and interpretive form (refer to Chapter 6 ofSection B of this guide). A listing of types of measure-ments, kinds and numbers of samples collected,frequencies, and analyses should be provided and thelocations described and indicated on a map of the area.
(4) Discuss planned studies, not yet com-pleted, that may yield results relevant to the environ.mental impact of the plant.
(5) Propose environmental technicalspecifications. The format for these specifications will bepresented in a regulatory guide entitled ."Guide for thePreparation of Environmental Technical Specificationsfor Nuclear Power Plants," which is currently beingdeveloped. Detailed technical specifications may becomean appendix to the applicant's "Environmental Report-Operating License Stage," but the body of the report
need only include the required discussion of generalscope described in Section 6.2 of this guide. Interimguidance will continue to be provided on a case-by-casebasis.
6. Preparation of Environmental Reports
a. General Organization
Section 2 of this Introduction, especially theparagraphs quoted from 10 CFR Part 51, providesgeneral information concerning the content of theapplicant's environmental report. To provide specificand detailed guidance, Section B of this guide, "StandardFormat and Content of Environmental Reports," hasbeen prepared. Although conformance is not required.the format and content described are acceptable to theRegulatory staff. Environmental reports with differentformats or content will be acceptable to the staff if theyprovide an adequate basis for the findings required forthe issuance of a license or permit; however, con-formance with the format and content will expeditestaff review. The Regulatory staff plans to provideadditional information on a data retrieval system (out-lined in Appendix I) in the next revision of this guide.
b. Content
In order to cover a wide variety of anticipatedsituations, the guide scope is comprehensive. In someinstances, requests for specific information may not beapplicable to a particular plant or site.
Some of the guide text (e.g., Section 7.1) hasbeen written with specific reference to light-waterreactors. For applicants proposing to construct andoperate other reactor types, guidelines on the recom-mended content of these sections will be provided on a,;wie-by-case basis. Similarly, offshore power systemswill, in general, require special guidelines for eachindividual case.
Some of the information to be included in theenvironmental report (e.g., that pertaining to demog-raphy, meteorology, hydrology) may have already beenprepared by the applicant during consideration of thesafety aspects of the proposed facility. In such cases, thisInformation (whether in the form of text, tables, orfigures) should be incorporated in the environmentalreport where appropriate to avoid duplication of effort.The presentation in the environmental report'of someinformation which also appears in the applicant's safetyanalysis report is necessary because these reports areresponsive to different statutory requirements andbecause each report should be essentially self-contained.
Descriptive and/or narrative text, as well astables, charts, graphs, etc., should be used in the report.Each subject should be treated In sufficient depth and
4.2-10
should be documenteds to permit a reviewer to evaluatet(e extent of (ie environmental impact independently.The length of an environmental report will depend onthe nature of tile plant and its environment. Tables, linedrawings, and photographs should be used wherevercontributory to the clarity and brevity of the report.Descriptive and narrative passages should be brief andconcise. The number of significant figures stated innumerical data should reflect the accuracy of the data.
Pertinent published information relating to tilesite, the plant, and its surroundings should be ref-erenced. Where published information is essential forevaluation of specific environmental effects of the plantconstruction and operation, it should be included, insummary or verbatim form, in the environmental reportor as an appendix to the report. In particular, waterquality standards and regulations relevant to the environ-mental impact assessment should be given in anappendix. Reports of work supported by the applicantwhich the applicant considers contributory to theenvironmental impact analysis may be included asappendi:es.
c. Other Facilities at a Site
The site for a nuclear power plant may alreadycontain one or more "units" (i.e., steam-electric plants),either in being or under construction or for which an
application for a construction permit or operatinglicense has been filed. The applicant, in preparing theenvironmental report relating to such a site, shouldconsider the effects of the proposed plant (and itsinservice schedule) in conjunction with the effects ofsuch additional plants. Furthermore, if the site containssignificant sources of environmental impact other thanelectric power plants, their interactions with the pro-posed plant should be taken into account.
Interplant effects are cor.sidered especiallyimportant as efforts to conserve resources such as waterfocus on the transfer and reuse of materials within plantcomplexes. In addition, because the control of radio-active effluents is solely a responsibility of the Com-mission, adjacent or contiguous facilities involving thepotential interchange of radionuclides should be treatedin considerable detail to ensure the applicant's fullknowledge of interrelationships with the proposed plant.
5 ,"Documentation" as used in this guide means presentationof evidence supporting data and statements and includes (1)references to published information, (2) citations from the appli-cant's experience, and (3) reference to unpublished informationdeveloped by the applicant or the applicant's consultants. State-ments not supported by documentation are acceptable providedthe applicant identifies them either as information for whichdocumentation is not available or as expressions of belief orjudgment.
4.2-11
B. STANDARD FORMAT AND CONTENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS
CHAPTER 1PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED FACILITY AND ASSOCIATED TRANSMISSION
In Chapter 1 of his environmental report, theapplicant should demonstrate the need for the proposedfacility with respect to the power requirements to besatisfied, the system reliability to be achieved, any otherprimary objectives of the facility, and hzow theseobjectives would be affected by a delay in the scheduledoperation of the proposed plant.
1.1 Need for Power
.This section should discuss the requirements for theproposed nuclear unit(s) in the applicant's system and inthe region, considering the overall power supply situa-dion, past load and projected load, and reserve margins.In addition, the applicant should consider the expectedeffects of national energy conservation programs on hisplanning effort. Apparent inconsistencies between thedata presented and that furnished to the Federal PowerCommission (FPC) or the regional reliability councilshould be explained.
1.1.1 Load Characteristics
In order to portray the relationship of the proposedfacility to the applicant's system and related systems,data should be provided on the following: (a) theapplicant's system, (b) the power pool or area withinwhich the applicant's planning studies are based, and (c)where available, the regional reliability council or theappropriate. subregion or area of the reliability council asfollows:
1.1.1.1 Load Analysis. The past annual peak loaddemands and the annual energy requirements for aperiod beginning ten years prior to the filing of theenvironmental report should be reported, as well as thefuture projected annual peak demands and energyrequirements for at least two years of the FPC reportingperiod following start of commercial operation of thelast unit with which this report is concerned. To theextent feasible, the applicant should also present futuredemands during the expected life of the facilities underreview. The relationship of the proposed facility to thecapacity increments specified in reports emanating fromFPC Order 383-3 should be detailed.
The applicant should present the expected annualload duration curve for the first two full annual FPCreporting periods for the proposed nuclear station inorder to show the relationship of the station to the shortterm system requirements.
1.1.1.2 Demand Projections. Demand projectionsshould show explicitly any assumptions made abouteconomic and demographic projections. Specifically, any
changes in demand expected on the basis of alternativeassumptions made about householf. formation, migra-tion, personal income, and industrial and commercialconstruction volume and location should be specified.Past and future growth trends should be compared andexplanations should be given for deviations in trends.
Monthly data for both actual and previously fore-cast peak load should be provided, as well as both actualand previously forecast total monthly kWh sales fromOctober 1972 through the most current month. A copyof the reports supplied to the FPC in accordance withFPC Order 496 should also be provided.
1.1.1.3 Power Exchanges. Past and expected futurenet power exchanges applicable at the time of the annualpeak demands presented above should be shown as theyrelate to demand estimates supporting the stationcapacity under review.
1.1.2 System Capacity
The applicant should briefly discuss power planning,.;ograms and criteria used as they apply (a) to theapplicant's system, (b) to the power pool or area withinwhich the applicant's planning studies are based, and (c)to the regional reliability council or the appropriatesubregion or area l. the reliability council. Systemcapabilities, both existing and planned, should be tabu-lated for the three respective areas to the extentapplicable at the time of the annual peak demand forfive years preceding filing of the environmental reportthrough at least five years beyond the start of com-mercial operation of the last nuclear unit with which the'report is concerned. Each generator with a capacity of100 MWe or over should be listed separately for theinitial reporting year, and capability additions thereaftershould be separately tabulated by date, including netnon-firm-power sales and purchases, retirements orderatings, and upratings. Each generator should. becategorized as to type (hydro, fossil, nuclear, pumpedstorage, etc.) and as to function (base load, intermediate,peaking, etc). Estimates of projected capacity factorranges for each unit tabulated should be provided. Smallpeaking units may be lumped into a single category forsimplicity.
1.1.3 Reserve Margins
The applicant's method of determining systemgenerating capacity requirements and reserve marginsshould be described including:
1. The method and criterion employed to deter-mine the minimum system reserve requirement, such assingle largest unit, probability method, or historical data
4.2-12
and judgment. if probabilistic studies are used as aQ planning tool, the results should be stated along with the
significant input data utilized, such as the load modelgenerating unit characteristics, unit availability, theduration of periods examined, treatment of inter-connections, and a general description of the method-ology employed.
2. The effect of operation of the proposed nuclearunit(s) on the applicant's or planning entity's capacityrequirements. In addition, the effects of present andplanned interconnections on the capacity requirementsshould be discussed.
3. The reserve margin responsibility of partici-pants in the regional coordinating council or power pool.
1.1.4 External Supporting Studies
Reports should be summarized and referenced orstatement(s) included that indicate the power require-ments in the overall area(s), as determined by responsi-ble officials in the regional reliability council and/or thepower pool or planning entity with which the applicantis associated.
The report or statements should include the follow-ing information or a statement that such information isnot available:
I. Description of the minimum installed reservecriterion for the region and/or subarea;
2. Identification, description, and brief discussionof studies and/or analyses made to assess the area-wideadequacy and expected reliability of power supply forthe first full year of commercial operation of the entirestation covered in this report; and
3. The minimum reserve requirement in the regionand/or subarea for the first year of operation of thecompleted nuclear station.
1.2 Other Objectives
If other objectives are to be met by the proposedfacility, such as producing process steam for sale ordesalting water, a description of these should be given.An analysis of the effect of other objectives on thestation capacity factor or availability of individual unitsshould be given.
1.3 Consequences of Delay
The effects of delays in the proposed project on thereserve margin of the power supply for the applicant'ssystem, subregion, and region should be discussed forincrements of delay of 1, 2, and 3 years. The effect ofno action to increase capacity should also be illustrated.
4.2-13
I II ....
CHAPTER 2
THE SITE AND ENVIRONMENTAL INTERFACES
This chapter should presen: the basic relevantinfonnation concerning those plisical, biological, andhuman characteristics of" the area environment thatmight be afj'cted by the constnwition and operation ofanuclear power plant on the designated site. To theextent possible, the information presented should reflectobsertations and measurements made over a period of'years.
2.1 Geography and Demography
2.1.1 Site Location and Description
2.1.1.1 Specification of Location. The site locationshould be specified by latitude and lonlgitudc o' thereactor to the nearest second and by Universal Trans-verse Mercator Coordinates (Zone Number. Northing.and Easting, as found on USGS topographdcal maps) tothe nearest 100 meters. The State and county or otherpolitical subdivision in which the site is located shouldbe identified, as well as the location of the aite withrespect to prominent natural and man-made featuressuch as rivers and lakes.
2.1.1.2 Site 6 Area. A map of the site area ofsuitable scale (with explanatory text as necessary)should be included; it should clearly show the following:
I. ]he plant property lines. The area of plantproperty in acres should be stated.
2. Location of the, site boundary. If the .. teboundary lines are the same as the plant property *.,ies,this should be stated.
3. The location and orientation of princyi.,., plantstructures within the site area. Principal structuresshould be identified as to function (e.g., reactorbuilding, auxiliary building, turbine building).
4. The location of any industrial, recreational, orresidential structures within the site area.
5. The boundary lines of the plant exclusion area(as defined in 10 CFR Part 100). If these boundary linesare the same as the plant property lines, this should bestated. The minimum distance from each reactor to tileexclusion area boundary should be shown and specified.
6. A scale which will permit the measurement ofdistances with reasonable accuracy.
7. True north.8. Highways, railways, and waterways which
traverse or are adjacent to the site.
2.1.1.3 Boundaries for Establishing Effluent Re-lease Limits. The site description should define the
'"Site" means the contiguous real estate on which nuclearfacilities are located and for which one or more licensees has thelegal right to control access by individuals and to restrict landuse for purposes or limiting the potential doses from radiation orradioactive material during normal 'operation of the facilities.
boundary lines of the restricted area (as defined in 10CFR Part 20, "Standards for Protection against Radia-tion"). If it is proposed that limits higher than thoseestablished by §2 0.106(a) (and related as low aspracticable provisions) he set. the information requiredby § 20.106 should be submitted. The site map discussedabove may be used to identify this area, or a separatemap of the site may be used. Indicate the location of theboundary line with respect to the water's edge of nearbyrivers and lakes. Distances from the plant effluent releasepoints to the boundary line should be defined clearly.
2.1.2 Exclusion Area Authority and Control
2.1.2.1 Authority. If ownership of all land withinthe exclusion area has not been obtained by theapplicant, those parcels of land within the area not soowned should be clearly described by means of a scaledmap of the exclusion area. and the status of proceedingsto obtain ownership or control over the land for the lifeof the plant should be specifically described. Minimumdistance to and direction of exclusion area boundariesshould be given for both present ownership and pro-posed ownership.
2.1.2.2 Control of Activities Unrelated to PlantOperation. Any activities unrelatezd to plant operationwhich are to be permitted within the exclusion area(aside from transit through the area) should be describedwith respect to the nature of such activities, the numberof persons engaged in them, and the specific locationswithin the exclusion area where such activities will bepermitted.
2.1.3 Population Distribution
Population data prewented should be based on the1970 census data and, where available, more recentcensus data. The following information should bepresented on population distribution.
2.1.3.1 Population Within 10 Miles. On a map ofsuitable scale which identifies places of significantpopulation grouping, such as cities and towns within a10-mile radius, concentric circles should be drawn, withthe reactor at the center point, at distances of 1, 2, 3, 4,5, and 10 miles. The circles should be divided into22-1/2-degree sectors with each sector centered on oneof the I6 cardinal compass points (with reference to truenorth (e.g., north.northeast, northeast, etc.). A tableappropriately keyed to the map should provide thecurrent residential population within each area of themap formed by the concentric circles and radial lines.The same table or separate tables should provide the
4.2-14
projected population within cach area for (I) theexpected first year of plant operation and (2)by censusdecade (e.g., 1990) through tie projected plant life. Thetables should provide population totals for each sectorand annular ring, and a total for the 0 to 10 milesenclosed population. The basis for population pro-jections should be described.
2.1.3.2 Population Between 10 and 50 Miles. Amap of suitable scale and appropriately keyed tablesshould he used in (ie same nianner as described above todescribe the population and its distribution at 10-mileintervals between the 10- and 50-mile radii fromi thereactor.
2.1.3.3 Transient Population. Seasonal and dailyvariations in population and population distributionresulting from land uses such as recreational or industrialshould be generally described and appropriately keyedto the areas and population numbers contained on themaps and tables of Paragraphs 2.1.3.1 and 2.1.3.2. If theplant is located in an area where significant populationvariations due to transient land use are expected,additional tables of population distribution should beprovided to indicate peak seasonal and daily popu-lations. The additional tables should cover projected aswell as current populations.
2.1.4 Uses of Adjacent Lands and Waters
On detailed topographical maps, show the locationsof the plant perimeter, exclusion area boundary, utilityproperty, abutting and adjacent properties, water bodies,wooded areas, farms. residences, nearby settlements,commercial areas, industrial plants, parks, dedicatedareas, other public facilities, valued historic, scenic,cultural, recreational, or natural areas, and transporta-tion links (railroads, highways, waterways). Indicate thetotal acreage owned by the applicant and that partoccupied or modified by the plant and plant facilities.Indicate other existing and proposed uses, if any, ofapplicant's property and the acreage devoted to theseuses. Describe any plans for site modifications, such as avisitors center or park.
Provide, in tabular form. ihe distances from thecenterline of thie first opertional nuclear unit proposedto the following for each of the 16 sectors described inSubsection 2.1.3 above:
I. Nearest milk cow (to a distance of 5 miles)2. Nearest milk goat (to a distance of 15 miles)3. Nearest residence (to a distance of 5 miles)4. Nearest site boundary5. Nearest vegetable garden (to a distance of 5
miles)Indicate which, if any, of the cow and goat
locations are dairy operations.Indicate (for the 5-mile.radius area) the nature and
extent of present and projected land use (agriculture,livestock raising, dairies, pasturelands, residences, wildlifepreserves, sanctuaries, hunting areas, industries, reerea-
tion, transportation, etc.) and art)y recent trends such asabnormal changes in population or industrial patterns. I1tthe area near tile plant site is zoned for specific uses, theapplicant should indicate the zoning restrictions, both atthe site and within 5 miles of the reactor buildinglocation and any local plans to restrict developilent tolimit population encroachment.
The information in this section should be organit.edin a manner that demonstrates coordination of theprincipal activities of the proposed station with thevarious uses of land and water outside the station. Theseactivities should include details of required offsite accesscorridors such as railroad spurs, rights-of-way for coolingwater conveyance, new or future roadways, and othercultural features that relate to the principal purpose ofthe facility. The discussion should include reference tothe reservation of rights-of-way for any future expan-sions that might be foreseen at the time of theapplication.
Indicate the nature and amounts of present surfaceand ground water use (water supplies, irrigation. reser-voirs, recreation, transportation, etc.) within the plantsite and environs. All locations o1" present and plannedpotential future water usage within 50 miles of the plantwhere the water supplies may be contaminated by planteffluents should be identified and the population assoc-iated with each use point given. In addition, allpopulation centers taking water from waterwaysbetween the plant and tile ocean, or such lesser distanceas the applicant can technically justify, should betabulated (distance, uses, amounts, and population).Sources which are river bank wells should be tabulatedseparately with their associated populations. The effectof consumptive water uses by the plant on the suppliesor vice versa should be identified.
2.2 Ecology
In this section, the applicant should describe theflora and fauna in the vicinity of the site, their habitats.and their distribution. This initial inventory will revealcertain organisms which, because of their importance tothe community, should be given specific attention. Aspecies is "important" (for the purposes of this guide) ifa specific causal link can be identified between thenuclear power plant and the species and if one or moreof the following criteria applies: (a) the species iscommercially or recreationally valuable, (b) tile speciesis threatened or endangered,' (c) the species affects thewell-being of some important species within criteria (a)or (b), or (d) tile species is critical to the structure andfunction of the ecological system or is a biologicalindicator of radionuclides in the environment.
'in the writing and reviewing of environmental reports.,specific consideration should be given to possible impact on anyspecies (or its habitat) that has been determined to be en-dangered or threatened with endangerment by the Secretary ofthe Interior and the Secretary of Commerce. New terminologydefining "endangered or threatened with endangerment" hasbeen promulgated in Pub. Law 93-205, 87 Stat. 884.
4.2-15
The initial inventory should establish the identity ofthe majority of terrestrial and aquatic organisms on ornear the site and their relative (qualitative) abundances.The applicant should identify the "important" speciesfrom this list and discuss in detail their quantitativeabundances. The discussion should include species thatmigrate through the area or use it for breeding grounds.The applicant should provide data on the count anddistribution of important domestic fauna, in particularcows and goats, that may be involved in the radiologicalexposure of man via the iodine-milk route. A map thatshows the distribution of the principal plant communi-ties should be provided.
The discussion of species-environment relationshipsshould include descriptions of area usage (e.g., habitat,breeding, etc.) for important species; it should includelife histories of important regional animals and aquaticorganisms, their normal seasonal population fluctua-tions, and their habitat requirements (e.g., thermaltolerance ranges); and it should include identification offood chains and other interspecies relationships, partic-ularly when these are contributory to predictions orevaluations of the impact of the nuclear plant on theregional biota.
Identify any definable preexisting environmentalstresses from sources such as pollutants. as well as anyecological conditions suggestive of such stresses. De-scribe the status of ecological succession. Discuss thehistories of any infestations, epidemics, or catastrophes(caused by natural phenomena) that have had a signifi-cant impact on regional biota.
Ambient noise data acquired in communities sur-rounding the proposed site should be reported, whereappropriate.
The information should be presented in two sepa-rate subsections, the first entitled "Terrestrial ecology"and the second, "Aquatic ecology." The sources ofinformation should be identified. As part of thisidentification, present a list of any published materialdealing with the ecology of the region. Locate anddescribe any ecological or biological studies of the site orits environs now in "?rogress.
2.3 Meteorology$
The following data on site meteorology should bepresented: (a) diurnal and monthly averages and ex-tremes of temperature, dewpolnt, and humidity; (b)monthly wind characteristics and all height(s) at whichwind characteristics data are applicable or have beenmeasured, including speeds and directions and theirfrequencies and joint frequencies of wind speed, stabilitycategory, and wind direction; (c) precipitation; and (d)frequency of occurrence and effects of storms accom.panied by high-velocity winds including tornadoes and
'Data for this section may be drawn from information inSection 2.3 of the "Preliminary Safety Analysis Report" asappropriate.
hurricanes. In item (b), the joint wind speed-stability-direction frequencies should be given as fractions whenusing 5-year National Weather Service (formerly U.S.Weather Bureau) summaries or as the number ofoccurrences when using only one or two years of onsitedata. The data should be presented for each of the 16cardinal compass directions, and the stability categoriesshould be established to conform as closely as possibleto those of Pasquill. Guidance on acceptable onsitemeteorological measurements and data forniat is pre-sented in Regulatory Guide 1.23.
Coverage should also include a discussion of clima-tology, existing levels of air pollution and their effectson plant operations, the relationship of the meteorologi-cal data gathered onsite to the data gathered on aregional basis, and the impact of the local terrain andlarge lakes and other bodies of water on meteorologicalconditions in the area. Attention should be directed tothe meteorological situation on a regional basis.
At the time of construction permit application,applicants proposing a wet, dry, or wet-dry coolingtower for main condenser cooling or service watercooling should furnish appropriate summaries of jointhumidity data along with the joint wind speed, stabilitycategory, and wind direction frequencies for heightsrelated to the estimation of cooling tower moisturedispersion for at least six months and preferably oneannual cycle in order to provide a basis for theestimation of the impact of tower operation on theenvironment. If the applicant does not have the detailedsite-specific meteorological data described above, he maypresent information applicable to the general site areafrom the National Weather Service (formerly the U.S.Weather Bureau) or other authoritative source. Thedetailed site-specific data may be scheduled in accor-dance with Section 5, "General Considerations Relatedto Environmental Rei ..,rts," of the Introduction of thisguide.
2.4 Hydrology9
The effects of plant construction and operation onadjacent surface and ground waters are of prime impor-tance. The applicant should describe, in quantitativeterms, their physical, chemical, biological, and hydrolog-ical characteristics, their typical seasonal ranges andaverages, and their historical lows and highs. Thehydrological parameters include temperature, flow rate,stage or water level, ground water table altitude abovemean sea level, chemical or saline stratification, tides,floods, currents, wave action, flushing times, and, ifsignificant to the establishment of a long-term watersupply, a forecast of other competing uses for wateravailable from framework studies of the appropriatebasin commission or planning agency having purview.
'Data for this section may be drawn from information InSection 2.4 of the "Preliminary Safety Analysis Report" asappropriate.
4.2-16
0Ttis information should be provided only for thosewaters that may affect plant effluents and plant watersupply or that may be reasonably assumed to be affectedby the construction or operation of the plant. For thosewater bodies and systems that may receive radionuclidesfrom the plant, the data should be supplied out to aradius of 50 miles from the site.
Include a description of significant tributaries aboveand below the site and the pattern and gradients ofdrainage in the area. Where pollution exists, tile appli-cant should identify, to tile extent possible, tile sourceof the pollutants, the nature of the pollutants (e.g..chenumcal species, physical characteristics such as color,temperature, etc.), the range of concentrations involved,and tile time variations in release, if any. Note thatinformation relating to water characteristics shouldinclude measurements, to the extent possible. made onor in close proximity to tile site.
For all plant systems proposing once-through cool-ing. tile relevant monthly maxima. mininia. and averagesof flow and water quality, based on not less than 10 yearsof record and preferably 25 years or longer, should bepresented for the water bodies that may be affected byconstruction or operation of the plant. Supplementaldata should he supplied for site-specific reaches ofreceiving water that relate to each other the currentspeed and direction, tidal stage or water surface eleva-tions, or other periodic changes. These data, to becollected by onsite measurement wherever possible, arenecessary to develop a systematic evaluation of tileinteraction of the proposed releases with the. receivingwater and to permit establishment of distributionalisopleths of temperature or chemical and radioactivecontaminants as detailed in Chapter 5 of this guide.
For systems involving forms of water storage, thesurface areas, flow rates (in and out). evaporation.drawdown, percolation, evapotranspiration, and net vol.umes should be provided. The applicant should providedata concerning any drawdown of ground water causedby withdrawals from neighboring major industrial andmunicipal wells and how they may result in tiletransport of material from the site to these or otherwells.
The manner in which volumes and areas of affectedwater bodies change with expected seasonal and otherlevel fluctuations should be included. Monthly values ofthese parameters should be presented as a minimum:daily or shorter increments should be provided wherethey are important in determining the basis for evalua-tion of environmental effects. Where a stream or otherwater body is to be used by the plant in any way, theobserved or estimated 7-day, once-in-ten-years low flowshould be presented in addition to observed minimums.Additionally, the period-of-record drought flow se-quence, transposed to the plant intake, should beprovided where water supply availability may be ques-tionable.
Vertical and areal variations of affected waterbodies should be established in the vicinity of the site asa basis for evaluating any proposed mixing zones.
Where features of a proposed'plant such as fIunda-tions, excavations. artificial lakes, and canals createartificial conduits for flow of groundwaters between andamong aquifers, the applicant should furnish sufficientsite-specific detail to justify his evaluation of the effectsof construction and operation of the plant on est.h-lished groundwater tables and usage. (Note that wateruse at the site is discussed in Subsection 2.1.4.)
2.5 Geology
A description of tile major geological aspects of tilesite and its immediate environs should be provided. Thelevel of detail presented should be appropriate to theproposed plant design and particularly the heat dissipa-tion system planned. For example. if holding or coolingponds are to be created, a detailed description of soiland bedrock types, etc. should be provided. Except forthose specific features that are relevant to the en'iron-mental impact assessment. the discussiont may be limitedto noting the broad features and general characterisiicsof the site and environs (topography. stratigraphy. andsoil and rock types).
2.6 Regional Historic, Scenic, Cultural, andNatural Fea-lures
Areas valued for their historic, scenic, cultural, ornatural significance may he affected. The environmentalreport should include !- brief discussion of the historic.scenic, cultural, and natural significance. if any. of theplant site and nearby areas with specific attention to thesites and areas listed in tile "'National Register ofHistoric Places" and the "National Registry of NaturalLindmarks.-
The "National Register of Historic Places" is pub.lished annually in the Federal Register; additions arepublished in the Federal Register on the first Tuesday ofeach month. The "National Registry of Natural Land-marks" appears in 37 FR 1496. Further guidance can beobtained from the National Park Service publication,"Preparation of Environmental Statements: Guidelinesfor Discussion of Cultural (Historic. Archeological.Architectural) Resources," August 1973.' 0
Also, the applicant should discuss his consultationwith the appropriate State Liaison Officer for HistoricPreservation concerning properties under considerationfor nomination to the "National Register of HistoricPlaces." The environmental report should contain evi-dence of contact with the Historic Preservation Officerfor the state involved, including a copy of his commentsconcerning the effect of the undertaking on historic,archeological, and cultural resources. Procedures for theprotection of historic and cultural properties (36 CFRPart 800) were published in 39 FR 3366 (Jan. 25.
10 Copies may be obtained from Chief Historian, Room 1226.National Park Service, I8th and C Streets NW, Washington. D.C.20240.
4.2-17
.-MMEMMOMMEN
1974). It should also be indicated whether or not thesite has any archeological significance and how thisconclusion was reached. If such significance or value ispresent, the applicant's plans to ensure its preservationor plans of or filed in a public agency for this purposeshould be described. In addition, the applicant shouldprovide an assessment of the visual effects of the plantand transmission lines on nearby valucd cultural, scenic,historic, park, and recreation areas. The assessment
should include drawings or modified photographs indi-cating the plant facilities and their surroundings if visiblefrom these nearby important vantage points and esti-mates of the number of people affected.
It should be stated whether the proposed transmis-sion line right-of-way from the plant to the hookup withthe existing system (Section 3.9) will pass through ornear any area or location of known historic, scenic,cultural, natural, or archeological significance.
4.2-18
CHAPTER 3
THE PLANT
The operating plant and transmission system shouldbe described in this chapter. Since environtmental effectsarc o] primary' concern in the report, the plant effluentsand plant-related systems that interact with the environ-nient should be described in particular detail.
3.1 External Appearance
The building layout and plant perimeter should beillustrated and related to the site maps presented inSection 2.1. The plant profile should be sho•Wn to scaleby line drawings or other illustrative techniques. Arecent oblique aerial photograph or graphic representa-tion of the completed station should be included.
The applicant should describe efforts made inlocating facilities on the site to use existing terrain andvegetation to achieve seclusion and sight screening asappropriate to the toppography. In addition, the archi-tectural design efforts made to integrate the facilitiesinto their environmental setting and to create aestheti-cally pleasing buildings and grounds should be noted.
The location and elevation of release points forliquid and gaseous wastes should be clearly indicated bya system of (x.y) coordinates related to the centerline ofcontainment of the first nuclear unit covered by thisproposal.
3.2 Reactor and Steam-Electric System
The reactor type (BWR, PWR, HTGR, etc.), manu-facturer, architect-engineer, number of units, and kind(make) of turbine generator should be stated. The fuel(cladding, enrichment, etc.) should be described. Rated(license level) and design ("stretch" level) electrical andthermal power of the reactor, as well as the in-plantelectrical power consumption, should be given.
The relationship of plant heat rate to the expectedvariation of turbine back pressure for 100%, 80%, and60% unit load should be furnished for design circulatorflow, and ranges of operational variation should begiven.
3.3 Plant Water Use
A quantitative water-use diagram for the plantshowing maximum and average water flows to and fromthe various plant water systems (heat dissipation system,sanitary system, radwaste and chemical waste systems,process water system, etc.) should be presented. Thesources of the water for each input should be described.The maximum and average consumptive use of water bythe plant should be shown. The above data whichquantify plant water use should be tabulated for variousplant conditions including maximum power operation,minimum anticipated power operation, and temp,'-aryshutdown, with and without cooling towers and cooling
ponds (if seasonal usage is planned). To avoid excessivedetail on the diagram, refer to other sections (e.g.,Sections 3.4, 3.5. 3.6, and 3.7) for relevant data.
The station usage above should be compared withthe low-flow (drought) periods of record on rivers orvariable lakes. Based on historical low-flow recoids.provide the estimated frequency and duration o" stationoutages and emergency systems usage resulting fromninsufficient supply of operational cooling water. ItI' on-site reservoirs are to be created, describe level fluctua-tions and the consequences of such fluctuations on suchenvironmental factors as vegetation, aquatic food chains.and insect breeding.
3.4 Heat Dissipation System
Heat-removal facilities for norial operation shouldbe discussed in detail. Process flow diagramns and scaledrawings of intake and outfall structures should bepresented. The reasons for providing the particularfacilities (such as water resources limitations or reduc-tion of thermal effects) should be noted. The source ofthe cooling water should be identified. (its naturaltemperature, including monthly changes and stratifica-tion, should be described in Section 2.4.)
Topics to be covered include quantity of heat dis-sipated; quantity of water withdrawn: consumptive use,return, design, size, and location of cooling towers,cooling lakes, or spray ponds: air and water flow rates,pertinent temperatures, estimates of quantity of driftand drizzle (and methods used in making estimates) forcooling towers; blowdown volume, rate of discharge. andphysical and chemical characteristics for towers andponds; temperature changes. rate of changes, mad holduptimes in cooling ponds or artificial lakes: rate of evapora-tic, of water (by months) from towers, ponds, lakes, orother related cooling facilities; infonnation on danis ordikes where a cooling reservoir is created to includeessential features of the interior hydrodynamics; designand location of water intake systems or structures, in-cluding numbers, types, and sizes of screens, waterdepth, and flow and velocity at design conditions andfor any anticipated conditions of reduced circulatorflow; number and capacity of pumps at intake structure;temperature differences between withdrawn and re-turned water, including consideration of operationalvariation of circulator flow; time of travel across con-denser and to the end of contained discharge lines,canals, etc. for different months and flows; point ofaddition and flow rate of any diluent added to thecooling water stream; and details of outfall design,including discharge flow and velocity and the depth ofthe discharge structure in the receiving water. Descrip-tions should include operational modes of importantsubsystems. Ranges of operating conditions involvingspecial conditions, such as operating with reduced circu-
4.2-19
lator flow, should be described.Procedures and schedules for removal and disposal
of blowdown, of slines and algal growth in die system.and of trash collected at the intake structures should bedescribed. Data on relevant chemical constituents shouldbe presented in Section 3.6.
Seasonal and operational variations in all dischargesshould be described. This should include deicing, back-flushing, and pump maintenance downtime underworst-case operating conditions.
3.5 Radwaste Systems and Source Term
Provide the radioactive source term and describethe liquid, gaseous, and solid radioactive waste (rad-waste) treatment systems. Show the origin, treatment,and disposal of all liquid, gaseous, and solid radioactivewaste generated by die plant under normal operationand anticipated operational occurrences. Show theinstrumentation provided to monitor all effluent releasepoints.
3.5.1 Source Term
Provide the sources of radioactivity which serve asinput to the liquid, gaseous, and solid radioactive wastetreatment systems for normal operation and anticipatedoperational occurrences. Describe the calculationalmodel used to determine the specific act!.ity of eachradioisotope in the primary and secondary (PWR)coolant. The fraction of fuel releasing radioactivity intothe primary coolant or the fission product noble gasrelease rate used as a design basis should be consistentwith operating experience.
Provide a complete derivation of the concentrationsof activated corrosion products used in the source termcalculations. Provide the bases for all assumptions usedin the derivation. The activation of water and con-stituents normally found in the reactor coolant systemshould also be taken into account. Identify sources ofisotopes (e.g., N-16, Ar-41), together with the concentra-tion of each isotope.
To meet the requirements of this section regardingcalculational models and parameters used to derivesource terms for normal operation and anticipatedoperational occurrences, reference may be made toappropriate sections of the SAR and to informationsupplied in response to Regulatory Guide 1.70, "Stan-dard Format and Content of Safety Analysis Reports forNuclear Power Plants."
Identify sources of tritium in the reactor coolant.Describe the management of tritiated liquids duringnormal operations and anticipated operational occur-rences. Identify release points for tritiated liquids andgases and the quantity of tritium (curies) expected to bereleased annually by each pathway. Describe specialprovisions incorporated in the plant design to reduceairborne tritium concentrations in the containment andthe fuel pool area during refueling.
Calculate the concentration of radioactive materialsin the fuel pool and describe provisions to purify thefuel pool water. Provide the source term for radioactivematerials in gaseous effluents evaporating from the fuelpool. Provide the bases for the values used. Cite perti-nen t operating experience.
For purposes of evaluating die effluent from thevarious ventilation systems, provide estimates of theleakage rates from the reactor coolant system and otherfluid systems containing radioactivity into buildings andareas serviced by the ventilation systems. Tabulate thesources of leakage and estimate their contribution to tiletotal quantity. Provide estimates of the releases of radio-active gases and radioiodines from each leakage sourceand describe their subsequent transport and release path.Provide the bases for the values used. Cite previous perti-nent experience from operating reactors. Discuss leakagemeasurements and special design features to reduceleakage.
Identify all sources of ra tential effluent releases ofradioactive material that are not normally consideredpart of the radioactive waste management systems, e.g.,the steam generator blowdown system, building ventila-tion exhaust systems. containment purging, and theturbine gland seal system. Provide estimates of therelease of radioactive materials (by radionuclide) fromeach source identified and describe tie subsequent trans-port mechanism and release path. Identify plannedoperations and anticipated operational occurrences thatmay result in release of radioactive materials to theenvironment. Consider leakage rates and concentrationsof radioactive materials for both expected and designconditions. Provide the bases for all values used. Identifyparameters that differ from those specified in DraftRegulatory Guides' ' entitled "Calculations of Releasesof Radioactive Materials in Liquid and Gaseous Effluentsfrom Pressurized Water Reactors ('PWRs)" and "Calcula.tion of Releases of Radioactive Materials in Liquid andGaseous Effluents from Boiling Water Reactors(BWRs).' Differences in parameters should be justified.Describe changes from previous designs that may affectthe release of radioactive materials to the environment.
Provide answers to the source term questionnaireswhich appear as Appendices 2 and 3 of this guide.
3.5.2 Liquid Radwaste Systems
Describe the liquid radwaste systems and theircapabilities to control, collect, process, handle, store,and dispose of liquid radioactive wastes generated as theresult of normal operation and anticipated operational
'I'These two guides were published in "Attachment to Con-cluding Statement of Position of the Regulatory Staff, PublicRulemaking Hearing on: Numerical Guides for Design Objectivesand Limiting Conditions for Opcration to Meet the Critcrion 'AsLow As Practicable' for Radioactive Material in Light-Water.Cooled Nuclear Power Reactors, Draft Regulatory Guides forImplementation," February 20, 1974. Docket No. RM-SO-2.Available from U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washing-ton D.C. 20555, Attention: Director of Regulatory Standards.
4.2-20
occurrences. Provide piping and instrumentation sche-matic drawings (P&IDs) and flow diagrams for liquidradwaste systems. Show lank capacities, system flowrates, and design capacities of components. Show allinterconnections with other systems and all potentialbypass paths. Identify the nonnal mode of operation.Provide estimated quantities and flow rates from allsources, expected decontamination factors, and holduptimes. Estimated quantities should be given in terms ofgallons, total curie content, and activity concentration inpCi/Wl.
Indicate which systems are used separately andwhich are shared with other units at the site, as appro-priate. Provide a summary tabulation of all radionuclidesthat will be discharged with each effluent stream, andprovide the expected annual average release rate. Datashould be consistent with the recommendations fur datain the Draft Regulatory Guides cited in Subsection3.5.1.
3.5.3 Gaseous Radwaste Systems
Describe the gaseous radwaste systems and theircapabilities to control, collect, process, handle, store,and dispose of gaseous radioactive wastes generated asthe result of normal operation and anticipated opera-tional occurrences. Include ventilation systems thatpotentially exhaust radioactive materials to the environ-ment. Indicate systems that incorporate high-efficiencyparticulate air filters and/or charcoal adsorbers in thetreatment of building effluents. Provide P&IDs and flowdiagrams for all gaseous radwaste systems. Show systemand component capacities. Provide calculations for gasholdup systems, indicating holdup times, decay factors,and reserve capacity. Identify the normal mode of opera-tion. List estimated quantifies and flow rates from allsources, expected decontamination factors, and holduptimes. Estimated quantities should be given in terms ofcubic feet, total curie content, and activity concentra-tion in pCi/cc.
Indicate which systems are used continuously andwhich are operated only under specific circumstances.Indicate those systems that are shared between separatebuildings and also those that share a common effluentrelease point. Identify all gaseous radioactive effluentrelease points including heights above station grade.
3.5.4 Solid Radwaste System
Describe the solid radwaste system and its capabilityto solidify liquid waste concentrates and to handle,store, and package for shipment the solid radioactivewastes generated as a result of normal operation andanticipated operational occurrences. Include any tanksdesigned to receive concentrated liquid wastes, sludges,or resins prior to processing in the solid radwaste system.Describe interconnections with liquid radwaste systems.Describe provisions for the compaction or baling of drysolid wastes. List estimated quantities from all sources.Estimated quantities should be given in terms of cubicfeet of solid product (as processed and prepared for ship-
ment), total curie content, and activity concentration incuries per package, or curies per cubic foot. Indicate ifthe solid radwaste system is shared with other units atthe site.
Describe provisions for the storage of packaged solidwastes. Estimate tie decay time provided in storageprior to shipment offsite.
Provide P&IDs and flow diagrams showing theorigin, treatment, storage. and shipment provisions forall solid radwaste generated by the plant under con.sideration. Show system and component capacities.Identify the normal mode of operation.
3.5.5 Process and Effluent Monitoring
Identify all radioactive effluent release points andindicate which points are continuously monitored.Indicate those monitors that automatically tenninateeffluent discharges upon alarm. Indicate thosc monitorswhich, upon alarm, automatically actuate standby oralternative treatment systems or which automaticallydivert streams to holdup tanks.
3.6 Chemical and Biocide Wastes
The applicant should describe normal and expectedmaximum discharges of chemical additives (includingcorrosion inhibitors, chemical and biological an tifoulingagents, and cleaning compounds), corrosion products.waste streams or discharges from drains, laundry wastesystems which may also contain radionuclides, and otherstreams that may enter the local environment as a resultof plant operation. Maximum and average concentra-tions of chemicals and solids in any brines or coolingsystem effluents should be given. Quantities of chemicalsdischarged with treated or partially treated wastestreams not covered by 40 CFR Part 423, "EffluentLimitations Guidelines and Standards for the SteamElectric Power Generating Point Source Category,"issued by the Environmental Protection Agency shouldbe specifically listed.
Ground deposition and airborne concentrations ofchemicals and solids entrained in spray fallout should beestimated and the methods and bases for the estimatesstated.
The discussion should include a description ofprocedures by which all effluents will be treated, con-trolled, and discharged to meet EPA effluent guidelinesand standards of performance. The expected nominaland maximum concentrations for each permitted dis-charge and the quantities that will be discharged eachyear should be given. Seasonal and operational variationsin discharges should be described as they relate to ef-fluent limitations and standards of performance. A flowdiagram (which may also be combined with the liquidradwaste system flow diagram) should be included.
3.7 Sanitary and Other Waste Systems
The applicant should describe any other nonradio-active solid or liquid waste materials such as sanitary and
4.2-21
0
occurrences. Provide piping and instrumentation sche-matic drawings (P&IDs) and flow diagrams for liquidradwaste systems. Show tank capacities, system flowrates, and design capacities of components. Show allinterconnections with other systems and all potentialbypass paths. Identify the normal mode of operation.Provide estimated quantities and flow rates from allsources, expected decontamination factors, and holduptimes. Estimated quantities should be given in terms ofgallons, total curie content, and activity concentration in/ACi/illl.
Indicate which systems are used separately andwhich are shared with other units at the site, as appro-priate. Provide a summary tabulation of all radionuclidesthat will be discharged with each effluent stream, andprovide tile expected annual average release rate. Datashould be consistent with tile recommendations for datain the Draft Regulatory Guides cited in Subsection3.5.1.
3.5.3 Gaseous Radwaste Systems
Describe the gaseous radwaste systems and theircapabilities to control, collect, process, handle, store,and dispose of gaseous radioactive wastes generated asthe result of normal operation and anticipated opera-tional occurrences. Include ventilation systems thatpotentially exhaust radioactive materials to the environ-ment. Indicate systems that incorporate high-efficiencyparticulate air filters and/or charcoal adsorbers in thetreatment of building effluents. Provide P&iDs and flowdiagrams for all gaseous radwaste systems. Show systemand component capacities. Provide calculations for gasholdup systems, indicating holdup times, decay factors,and reserve capacity. Identify the normal mode of opera-tion. List estimated quantities and flow rates from allsources, expected decontamination factors, and holduptimes. Estimated quantities should be given in terms ofcubic feet, total curie content, and activity concentra-tion in pCi/cc.
Indicate which systems are used continuously andwhich are operated only under specific circumstances.Indicate those systems that are shared between separatebuildings and also those that share a common effluentrelease point. Identify all gaseous radioactive effluentrelease points including heights above station grade.
3.5.4 Solid Radwaste System
Describe the solid radwaste system and its capabilityto solidify liquid waste concentrates and to handle,store, and .package for shipment the solid radioactivewastes generated as a result of normal operation andanticipated operational occurrences. Include any tanksdesigned to receive concentrated liquid wastes, sludges,or resins prior to processing in the solid radwaste system.Describe interconnections with liquid radwaste systems.Describe provisions for the compaction or baling of drysolid wastes. List estimated quantities from all sources.Estimated quantities should be given in terms of cubicfeet of solid product (as processed and prepared for ship-
ment), total curie content, and activity concentration incuries per package, or curies per cubic foot. Indicate ifthe solid radwaste system is shared with other units atthe site.
Describe provisions for the storage of packaged solidwastes. Estimate the decay dine provided in storageprior to shipment offsite.
Provide P&IDs and flow diagrams showing tileorigin, treatment, storage. and shipment provisions forall solid radwaste generated by the plant under con.sideration. Show system and component capacities.Identify the normal mode of operation.
3.5.5 Process and Effluent Monitoring
Identify all radioactive effluent release points andindicate which points are continuously monitored.Indicate those monitors that automatically tenninateeffluent discharges upon alarm. Indicate those monitorswhich, upon alarm, automatically actuate standby oralternative treatment systems or which automaticallydivert streams to holdup tanks.
3.6 Chemical and Biocide Wastes
The applicant should describe normal and expectedmaximum discharges of chemical additives (includingcorrosion inhibitors, chemical and biological antifoulingagents, and cleaning compounds), corrosion products,waste streams or discharges from drains, laundry wastesystems which may also contain radionuclides, and otherstreams that may enter the local environment as a resultof plant operation. Maximum and average concentra-tions of chemicals and solids in any brines or coolingsystem effluents should be given. Quantities of chemicalsdischarged with treated or partially treated wastestreams not covered by 40 CFR Part 423, "Effluentlimitations Guidelines and Standards for the SteamElectric Power Generating Point Source Category,"issued by the Environmental Protection Agency shouldbe specifically listed.
Ground deposition and airborne concentrations ofchemicals and solids entrained in spray fallout should beestimated and the methods and bases for the estimatesstated.
The discussion should include a description ofprocedures by which all effluents will be treated, con-trolled, and discharged to meet EPA effluent guidelinesand standards of performance. The expected nominaland maximum concentrations for each permitted dis-charge and the quantities that will be discharged eachyear should be given. Seasonal and operational variationsin discharges should be described as they relate to ef-fluent limitations and standards of performance. A flowdiagram (which may also be combined with the liquidradwaste system flow diagram) should be included.
3.7 Sanitary and Other Waste Systems
The applicant should describe any other nonradio-active solid or liquid waste materials such as sanitary and
4.2-21
chemical laboratory wastes, laundry solutions, anddecontamination solutions that may be created duringplant opcration. The description should include esti-mates of the quantities of wastes to be disposed of, theirpollutant concentrations, biochemical oxygen demandsat points of release as appropriate to the system, andother relevant data. The manner in which they will betreated and controlled and the procedures for disposalshould also be described. Means for control and treat-ment of all systems subject to effluent limitations andstandards of performance under FWPCA should bedescribed.
The applicant should describe any other gaseouseffluents (e.g., from diesel engines, gas turbines, heatingplants, incinerators) created during plant operation,should estimate the frequency of release and describehow they will be treated before release to the environ-ment, and should estimate the total quantity of SO 2 andNOx pollutants to be discharged annually.
3.8 Reporting of Radioactive Material Movement
The transportation of radioactive materials mayhave environmental effects. In this section, the radio-active materials to be transported to and from the siteshould be described.
A description of the type of fresh fuel to be usedand the quantity of fresh and irradiated fuel to beshipped to and from the site each year should be pro-vided. The form of fuel, enrichment, cladding, totalweight per shipment, expected form of packaging, andthe estimated number of shipments per year should bediscussed.
The applicant should estimate the weight of ir-radiated fuel to be shipped from the site each year, thenumber of shipments per year, the average and maxi-mum burnup for each shipment, the cooling time re-quired prior to each shipment, and the form of pack-aging expected to be used.
Estimatesof the annual weight, volume, and activityof radioactive waste materials (e.g., spent resins and airfilters) to be shipped from the site should be provided.The applicant should categorize the wastes according towhether they are liquid, solid, or gaseous. Any pro-cessing required before shipment, such as compacting orconsolidating with vermiculite and cement, should bedescribed.
The applicant should provide a table of the principalshipment categories, the types of transportation systemsto be employed, and the estimated vehicle miles for eachcategory and transport mode for the first five full yearsof commercial operation f6llowing activation of the firstunit of a station.
The information supplied by the applicant will beused by the Commission to estimate (per trip and peryear) the radiological dosages, if any, to drivers, helpers,
and population along the transport route for fresh fuel,irradiated fuel, and radioactive wastes.' 2
3.9 Transmission Facilities
The environmental report should contain sufficientinformation to permit evaluation of the environmentalimpact of transmission lines and related facilities that areto be constructed between the proposed nuclear installa-tion and an interconnecting point or points on theexisting high-voltage transmission system or are requiredelsewhere in the system for stability or power distribu-Lion purposes directly related to the proposed nuclearinstallation. For material useful in preparing this sub-section, the applicant is advised to consult the Depart-ment of Interior/Department of Agriculture publication,"Environmental Criteria for Electric TransmissionSystems;" the Federal Power Commission publication,"Electric Power Transmission and the Environment;"the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) book,"Transmission Line Reference Book, 345KV andAbove," (scheduled publication date, late 1974);' 3 andthe National Electric Safety Code.
Adequate descriptions of proposed line-relatedfacilities, such as substations, should be included in thereport. Sufficient information should be provided on theexternal appearance of the transmission structures topermit an assessment of their aesthetic impact.
This portion of the report should describe theproposed transmission system and include basic designparameters such as voltage, capacity under normal andemergz-ncy load conditions, conductor type and con-figuration, ruling spans, and electrical clearances. Illus-trate the type of structures, provide profile drawings ofthe conductors and structures to be located in highlyvisible areas, and indicate the dimensions, materials,color, and finish.
The applicant should supply contour maps and/oraerial photographs showing the proposed rights-of-wayand identifying substations or other points at which thetransmission lines will connect with the existing high-voltage system. The lengths, widths, and acreage of theproposed rights-of-way should be specified. The appli-cant should characterize the land types to be crossed bytransmission lines and indicate the present and expected
13A general analysis of the environmental impact of trans-porting radioactive materials to and from a light-water-coolednuclear power reactor has been issued by the Commission. See"Environmental Survey of Transportation of Radioactive Mate-rials to and from Nuclear Power Plants," WASH-1238, Direc-torate or Regulatory Standards, USAEC, December 1972, and 38FR 3334, Feb. 5, 1973. Copies of WASH-I 238 may be obtainedfrom the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office, Washington, D.C. 20402.
1 Copies can be obtained from Fred Weidner and Son,Printers, 421 Hudson St., New York 10014, when published.
4.2-22
usage of such land. Any area where construction of thetransmission lines will require permanent clearing oftrees and vegetation, changes in topography, or removalof man-made structures should also be indicated, as wellas areas where the transmission lines will be placedunderground. Indicate where highways, railways, waterbodies, and areas of archeological, historical, and recre-ational interest will be crossed. Where transmission linesoffer potential hazard to aerial navigation, appropriateFAA standards should be referenced.
Identify alternative rights-of-way and terminal loca-tions considered, and provide a brief discussion of therationale for the selection of the proposed rights-of-way.
Provide sufficient information (including selectioncriteria) for assessment of the alternatives.
This portion of the report should identify andevaluate parameters of possible environmental signifi-cance, including radiated electrical and acoustic noise.induced or conducted ground currents, corona effects.and ozone production, and what mitigating actions willbe taken to minimize these effects.1 4 Appropriate Stateand Federal standards should be referenced as appli-cable.
" Details of the controls and effects atre requested in Section5.5.
4.2-23
CHAPTER 4
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF SITE PREPARATION, PLANT CONSTRUCTION,AND TRANSMISSION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION
This chapter of the applicant "s einvironmental reportshould discuss the expected effects of site preparationand plant and tranzsmissio'l facilities construction. Theeffects should be presented in terms of their physicalimpact on the resources and populations described 4,1Chapter 2. AMeans selected bY the applicant to measw.eatnd innimize related environmental effects should heoutlined. Pffects that are primarily economic or social incharacter should be discussed in Chapter 8.
The preparation of the site and tie construction ofa nuclear power plant and related facilities will in-evitably affect the environment; some of the effects willbe adverse and some will be beneficial. Effects are con.sidered adverse if environmental change or stress causessome biotic population or natural resource to be lesssafe. less healthy, less abundant, less productive, or lessaesthetically or culturally pleasing, as applicable; if thechange or stress reduces the diversity and variety ofindividual choice, the standard of living, or the extent ofsharing of life's amenities; or if the change or stress tendsto lower the quality of renewable resources or to impairthe recycling of depletable resources. Effects are con-sidered beneficial if they cause changes or stresses havingconsequences opposite to those just enumerated.
In the applicant's discussion or adverse environ-mental effects, it should be made clear which of theseare considered unavoidable and subject to later ameliora-tion and which are regarded as unavoidable and irrevers-ible. Those effects that represent an irretrievable com-mitment of resources should receive detailed considera-tion in Section 4.3. (in the context of this discussion,"irretrievable commitment of resources" alludes tonatural resources and means a permanent impairment ofthese, e.g., loss of wildlife habitat; destruction ofnesting, breeding, or nursing areas; interference withmigratory routes; loss of valuable or aesthetically trea-sured natural areas as well as expenditure of directlyutilized resources.)
4.1 Site Preparation and Plant Construction
The applicant should organize the discussion interms of the effects of site preparation and plant con.struction on both land use and water use. The conse-quences to both human and wildlife populations shouldbe considered and identified as unavoidable, reversible,etc. according to the categorization set forth earlier inthis chapter.
In the land use discussion, describe how construc-tion activities may disturb the existing terrain andwildlife habitats. Consider the effects of such activitiesas creating building material supply areas; buildingtemporary or permanent roads, bridges, and service lines;disposing of trash and chemical wastes (including oil);excavating; and land Idling. Provide information bearing
on such questions as: How much land will be torn up?For how long? Will there be dust or smoke problems?What explosives will be used? Where and how often?Indicate the proximity of human populations. Identifyundesirable impacts on their environment arising froiunoise and from inconvenience due to the movement ofmen, material, and machines, including activities asso-ciated with any provision of housing, transportation, andeducational facilities for workers and their families. Thesite activities that are planned for initiation prior toreceipt of a construction permit and those that would beperformed in the event the applicant is granted a limitedwork authorization (10 CFR Part 50. §50.10e). April24, 1974) should be described. This description shouldinclude the schedule for the start and finish of eachactivity.
An annual schedule of Lhe estimated work force tobe involved in site preparation and plant constructionshould be presented. Describe any expected changes inaccessibility of historical, cultural,'" and archeologicalsites and natural landmarks in the region.
The discussion should also include any effects ofsite preparation and plant construction activities whoseconsequences may be beneficial to the region, as, forexample, the use of spoil to create playgrounds and/orrecreational facilities.
The discussion of water use should describe theimpact of site preparation and construction activities onregional water (lakes, streams, ground water, etc.). Theoverall plan for protection of water bodies (recreation,reservoir, etc.) that may be affected by plant construc-tion should be discussed. Activities that might affectwater use include the construction of cofferdams andstorm sewers, dredging operations, placement of fillmaterial in the water, and the creation of shoresidefacilities involving bulkheads, piers, jetties, basins, orother structures allowing ingress to or egress from theplant by water. Examples of other pertinent activitiesare the construction of intake and discharge structuresfor cooling water or other purposes, straightening ordeepening of a water channel, operations affecting waterlevels (flooding), construction, dewatering effects onnearby ground water users, etc. The applicant shoulddescribe the effects of these activities on navigation, fishand wildlife resources, water quality, water supply,aesthetics, etc., as applicable.
Where it is proposed to create a cooling water lake,describe the effects on the local ecology, including the
' Depending on location, the construction of a nuclear powerstation and associated access toads, docks, landscaping, etc., mayhave an impact on monuments of the National Geodetic ControlNetworks. The applicant should list all known markers in theconstruction area in his review and independently notify theNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NationalGeodetic Survey (NGS) of any impending damage to markers sothat efforts can be made to relocate them prior to destruction.
4.2-24
loss of flora and local migration of fauna from the areathe lake will occupy. In addition, the expected establish-ment and development of aquatic plant and animal lifeshould be described. This discussion may reference anyavailable data based on studies of similarly sited artificiallakes.
4.2 Transmission Facilities Construction
The effects of clearing die right-of-way and in-stalling transmission line towers and conductois on theenvirons and on the people living in or traveling throughthe adjacent area should be discussed in this section.(Refer to Section 3.9 for the basic information.)
The following topics may serve as guidelines for thisdiscussion, but the applicant should include any addi-tional relevant material.
1. The proposed techniques for clearing the right-of-way and any resulting temporary and permanentchanges that will be induced in the physical and biolog-ical processes of plant and wildlife through changes inthe hydrology, topography, or ground cover or the useof growth retardants, chemicals. biocides, sprays, etc.during construction and installation of the transmissionlines.
2. The methods to be used for erecting the trans-mission line structures and for stringing conductors,including related environmental effects.
3. Number and length of new access and serviceroads required.
4. Erosion directly traceable to constructionactivities.
5. Loss of agricultural productivity and otherpresent uses of right-of-way.
Briefly discuss the effects of construction on anyidentified endangered species (as defined in Section 2.2).
4.3 Resources Committed
Discuss any irreversible and irretrievable commit-merits of resources (loss of land, water, nonrecyclablebuilding materials, destruction of biota, etc.) which areexpected if site preparation and construction of plantand transmission facilities proceed. Such losses should beevaluated in terms of their relative and long-term net andabsolute impacts. (See Section 5.7 of this guide for moredetailed consideration.)
4.4 Radioactivity
For multiunit stations, provide the estimated annualdoses at various locations in a new unit construction area
from onsite radiation sources such as the turbine sys.teins (for BWRs). the auxiliary building, the reactorbuilding, and stored radioactive wastes and from radio-active effluents (direct radiation from the gaseous radio-active plume, etc.). Provide estimated annual doses toconstruction workers due to radiation from thesesources from the adjacent operating unit(s) and theannual man-rem doses associated with such construction.Include models, assumptions, and input data. If the-Safety Analysis Report" (SAR) has already been sub-mitted or will be submitted simultaneously with theapplicant's ER, reference may be made to the analysiscontained in die SAR.
4.5 Construction Impact Control Program"
The construction permit may require certain actionson die part of the applicant to ensure that etiviron-mental controls to minimize impacts are carried out. Inaddition to the discussion of the effects of site prepara.tion a." construction, die applicant should furnishdetails of the site-related environmental quality controlprogram with which he plans to monitor these activities.The applicant should state die specific nature of hiscontrol programs and the control procedures he intendsto follow as a means of implementing adherence toenvironmental quality control limits as applicable.
The applicant should describe measures designed tomitigate or reverse undesirable effects such as noise.erosion, dust, truck traffic, flooding, ground water leveimodification, and channel blockage. The descriptionshould include plans for landscape restoration, protec-tion of natural drainage channels or development ofappropriate substitutes, installation of fish ladders orelevators or other habitat improvement, augmentedwater supply for affected surface and ground waterusers, and flood and pollution control.
Precautions for handling of fuels, lubricants, oilywastes, and other chemical waste shjuld be included.Describe procedures for disposal of slash and unmer-chantable timber and for cleanup and restoration ofareas affected by clearing and construction activities.
Describe any other measures planned for the protec-tion of fish and wildlife during construction.
I'Applicants awe encouraged to make use of -GeneralEnvironmental Guidelines for Evaluating and Reporting theEffects of Nuclear Power Plant Site Preparation. Plant and Trans-mission Facilities Construction"' (published February 1974) asinterim guidance. Copies may be obtained from the AlomicIndustrial Forum, Inc., 475 Park Avenue South. New York, N.Y.10016.
4.2-25
CHAPTER 5ENVIRONMiI.TAL EFFECTS OF PLANT OPERATION 0
This chapter should describe the interaction of theplant and transmission facilities (discussed in Chapter 3)and the environment (discussed in Chapter 2). To theextent possible,. the applicant should avoid repeating thematerial presented in Chapters 2 and 3. Measuresplanned to reduce an v 'mndesirable effects of plan t opera-tion (including the transmission facilities) on theenvironment should be described in detail, in the dis-cussion of environmental effects, as in Chapter 4, effectsthat are considered unavoidable but either inherenthvtemporary or subject to later amelioration should beclearit, distinguished from th. ve regarded as unavoidableatid irreversible. Those cj/h,.tihat represent an irretriev-able commitment of rc.,,urces should receive detailedconsideration in Section S. 7
The impacts of operation of the proposed facilityshould be, to tlie fullest extent practicahle. quantifiedand systematically presented.' 7 In the discussion of eachimpact, the applicant should make clear whether thesupporting evidence is based on theoretical, laboratory,onsite, or field studies undertaken on this or on previousoccasions. The source of each impact-the plant subsys-tem, waste effluent-and the population or resourceaffected should be made clear in each case. The impactsshould be distinguished in terms of their effects onsurface water bodies, ground water, air, and land.
Finally, the applicant should discuss the relationshipbetween local short-term uses of man's environment andthe maintenance and enhancement of long-term pro-ductivity. As used in this guide, "short term" may betaken to refer to the operating life of the proposedfacility and "long term" to time periods extendingbeyond this life. The applicant should assess the actionfor cumulative and projected long-term effects from thepoint of view that each generation is trustee of theenvironment for each succeeding generation. This meansconsidering, for example, the commitment of a watersource to use as a cooling medium in terms of impair-ment of other actual or potential uses, and any otherlong-term effects to which the operation of this facilitymay contribute.
5.1 Effects of Operation of Heat Dissipation System
Waste heat dissipated by the system described inSection 3.4 alters the thermal conditions of the environ-ment. Since the heat transfer is usually effected throughthe surface of a river, pond, lake, estuary, or ocean or bythe evaporation of water in a cooling tower, the meteo-rology and hydrology of the environment (Sections 2.3and 2.4) and the aquatic ecology (Section 2.2) are of
"'Quantification of environmental costs is discussed inChapter 10.
primary importance in determining what effects therelease.- heat will have on the aquatic environment.
5.1.1 Effluent Limitations and Water Quality Standards
Describe applicable guidelines (40 CFR Part 423)and the thermal standards or limitations applicable tothe water source (including maximum permissibletemperature, maximum permissible increase, mixingzones, and maximum rates of increase and decrease) andwhether and to what extent these standards or limita-tions have been approved by the Administrator of theEnvironmental Protection Agency in accordance withthe Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.Indicate whether the discharge could affect the. qualityof the waters of any other State or States.
5.1.2 Physical Effects
Describe the effect that any heated effluent, in-cluding service water or closed-cycle system blowdown.will have on the temperature of the receiving body ofwater with respect to space and time. Describe changesin temperature caused by drawing water from one depthand discharging it at another. The predicted characteris-tics of the mixing zone and temperature changes in thereceiving body of water as a whole should be covered.Include seasonal effects. Discuss any model studies andcalculations that have been performed to determinethese characteristics, giving references to reports thatprovide supporting details. Details of calculationalmethods used in predicting thermal plume configura-tions should be given in an :!ppendix to the report. Theresults should be portrayed in graphic form, showingisotherms in three dimensions for a range of conditionswhich form the basis for the estimation of ecologicalimpact.
Where releases are determined to be affected bytides and winds, a probability rose relating directions,extent of modification, and time should be included.Both a daily and an annual probability rose should bedeveloped where tides are operative.
5.1.3 Biological Effects
Describe the effects of released heat on marine andfreshwater life. Give the basis for the prediction ofeffects. In this discussion, appropriate references to thebaseline ecological data presented in Section 2.2 shouldbe made. Expected thermal effects should be related tothe optimum and tolerance temperature ranges forimportant aquatic species (as defined in Section 2.2) andthe food base which supports them. The evaluationshould consider not only the mixing zone, but also theentire regional aquatic habitat potentially affected byoperation of the proposed plant.
4.2-26
Potential hazards of the cooling water intake anddischarge structures (described in Section 3.4) to fishspecies and food base organisms should be identified,and steps planned to measure and minimize tie hazardsshould be discussed. Diversion techniques should bediscussed in the light of information obtained fromecological studies on fish population, size, and habitats.
The effects of passage through the condenser onzooplankton, phytoplankton, meroplankton, and smallnektonic forms such as immature fish and the resultantimplications for the important species and functionalgroups should be discussed.
The applicant should discuss the potential biologicaleffects of modifying the natural circulation of the waterbody, especially if water is withdrawn from one regionor zone and discharged into another. This discussionshould consider such factors as the alteration of thedissolved oxygen and nutrient content and distributionin the receiving water, as well as die effects of scouringand suspended sediments. Where natural salinity ismodified by plant water flow, the effects should bequantitatively investigated.
Plant-induced changes in the temperature of the dis-charged water subsequent to environmental stabilizationcan affect aquatic life in the receiving body. Ac-cordingly, the applicant should discuss the possibleeffects of reactor shutdown (and other temporaryrelated conditions). including the dependence of effectson the season in which shutdown occurs. An estimate ofthe number of scheduled and unscheduled shutdownsper year should be given. Refueling schedules should beindicated, particularly where the rate and magnitude oftemperature change in the receiving waters are likely tobe large (e.g., as a result of refueling in winter). Describeprocedures for reducing thermal shock to aquatic orga-nisms during shutdown or refueling. A discussion ofoperation with reduced circulator flow or increasedtemperature differentials should be specifically ad-dressed to timing and extent to provide a basis for com-parison of the effects of such operation with those ofstanidard operating modes.
5.1.4 Effects of Heat Dissipation Facilities
Discuss the expected effects of heat dissipationfacilities such as cooling towers, lakes, spray ponds, ordiffusers on the local environment and on agriculture,housing, highway safety, recreation, air and water traf-fic, airports, or other installations with respect to meteo-rological phenomena, including fog, icing, precipitationmodification, humidity changes, cooling tower blow-down and drift, and noise. Where cooling towers areconsidered either as a design basis or as an alternative,the discussion should include estimates of the dimen-sions of the visible plume under various stability classes(Pasquill) and the probability distribution of wind direc-tions, air temperature, and humidity expected at thesite. If fog clouds or icing may occur, the estimatedhours per year, distances, and directions should bepresented, along with transportation arteries (includingnavigable waters) potentially affected and measures to
mitigate such effects. Consider possible synergisticeffects that might result front mixing of fog or drift withother effluents in dte atmosphere. (Environmentaleffects of chemicals discharged from cooling tower blow.down and drift should be discussed in Section 5.3.)
In addition to the meteorological effects rioted,other local environmental impacts may occur. Theseshould be described. Fur example, if a cooling pond orlake is created or where ground water is a source ofstation water supply, the effects on ground water maybe substantial; consequently, the alteration of watertable levels, recharge rates, and soil permeability shouldbe discussed.
5.2 Radiological Impact from Routine Operation
In this section, the applicant should consider im-pacts on man and on biota other than man attributableto the release of radioactive materials and to direct radia-tion from the facility. The biota to be considered arethose species of local flora and local and migratory faunadefined as "important" in Section 2.2, and whose ter-restrial and/or aquatic habitats provide the highestpotential for radiation exposure. Estimates of the radiol-ogical impact on man via the most significant exposlrepathways should be provided.
5.2.1 Exposure Pathways
The various possible pathways for radiation expo-sure of the important local flora and local and migratoryfauna should be identified and described in the text andflowcharts. (An example of an exposure pathway chartfor organisms other than man is given in Appendix 4.)The pathways should include the important routes ofradionuclide translocation (including food chains leadingto important species) to organisms or sites.
The various possible pathways for radiation expo-sure of man should be identified and described in textand flowcharts. (An example of an exposure pathwaychart for man is given in Appendix 4.) As a minimum,the following pathways should be evaluated: externalradiation from swimming, shoreline fishing (radionu-clides deposited in sediments), immersion in airborneeffluents, and radionuclides deposited on the ground sur-face and vegetation, and internal exposure front inhala-tion of airborne effluents and from ingestion of milk,drinking water, fish and game, invertebrates, and plants.
5.2.2 Radioactivity in Environment
In Section 3.5, the radionuclide concentrations inthe liquid and gaseous effluents from the facility arelisted. In this section, the applicant should consider howthese effluents are quantitatively distributed in theenvironment. Specifically, estimates should be providedfor the radionuclide concentration (a) in all waters thatreceive any liquid radioactive effluent, (b) on land areas,and (c) on vegetation (on a per unit area basis) in theenvirons.
If there are other components of the physicalenvironment that may accumulate radioactivity and thus
4.2-27
result in the exposure of living organisms to nuclearradiations, they should be identified and their radio-activity burden estimated. In addition, information con-cerning any cumulative buildup of radionuclides in theenvironment, such as in sediments, should be presenteda.us discussed. Information concerning any relocation ofcontaminated or potentially contaminated materials inthe physical environment, such as occurs in dredgingoperations. should be provided.
Estimate the expected annual average concentra-tions of radioactive nuclides (listed in Section 3.5) inreceiving water at locations where water is consumed orotherwise used by human beings or where it is inhabitedby biota of significance to human food chains. (If dis.charges are intermittent, concentration peaks as well asannual averages should be estimated.) Specify the dilu-tion factors used in preparing the estimates and the loca-tions where the dilution factors are applicable.. From meteorological data, estimate the dispersion
parameters (x/Q) at points of potential maximum con-centration outside the site boundary and at points ofpotential actual maximum individual exposure. Assumemeteorological conditions during releases which are con-sistent with expected periods of release. For example,assume annual average meteorological conditions for aBWR and limiting meteorological conditions for a PWR.Identify tie locations of points of release (stack, roofvent, etc.) used in calculations. Provide estimates of theannual average X]Q values for 16 radial sectors to a dis-tance of 50 miles, using appropriate meteorological data.
A summary of data, assumptions, and models usedin determining radioactivity concentrations and burdensshould be provided. Guidance on atmospheric diffusionmodels is given in Regulatory Guide 1.42.
5.2.3 Dose Rate Estimates for Biota Other Than Man
From considerations of the exposure pathways andthe distribution of facility-derived radioactivity in theenvirons, the applicant should estimate the maximumradionuclide concentrations that may be present inimportant local flora and local and migratory fauna andthe internal dose rates (millirad/year) that may resultfrom those concentrations. Values of bioaccumulationfactors' B used in preparing the estimates should bebased on site-specific data if available; otherwise, values
'The bioaccumulation factor is the equilibrium value of theratio: (concentration in organism)/(concentration in water).Values of bloaccumulation factors can be obtained from suchreferences as S.E. Thompson, C.A. Burton. D.J. Quinn, and Y.C.Ng, "Concentration Factors of Chemical Elements in EdibleAqueous Organisms," University of California, LawrenceLivermore Laboratory report UCRL-50564 (Rev. 1), October1972 (revision of an identically titled document, dated Decem-ber 30, 1968, by W.H. Chapman, H.L Fisher, M.W. Pratt andA.M. Freke); and A.M. Freke, "A Model for the ApproximateCalculation of Safe Rates of Discharge of Radioactive WastesInto Marine Environments," Health Physics, Vol. 13, p. 734,1967.
from the, literature may be used. The applicant shouldtabulate and reference tie values of bioaccumulationfactors used in the calculations. Dose rates to importantlocal flora and local and migratory fauna that receive thehighest external exposures should be provided alongwith a description of the calculational models.
5.2.4 Dose Rate Estimates for Man
5.2.4.1 Liquid Pathways. Provide data on recreationaland similar use of receiving water and its shoreline, e.g.,swimming, fishing, picnicking, hunting, clam digging.Include any persons who spend the major part of theirworking time on the water adjacent to the site. andindicate the amount of time spent per year in this activ-ityq.
Data on irrigation usage of (ie receiving watershould be included, such as the amount of water used,the number of acres irrigated, locations at which irriga-tion water is withdrawn (downstream from the site),types of crops produced on irrigated soils within 50miles downstream. of the site, and the yield per acre ofeach crop.
Where downstream users may ingest waters drawnfrom mixing zones or areas of limited dilution, providedata on means to provide temporary water supply fromstorage or alternative sources, Provide data on the com-mercial and recreational fish and seafood catch (numberof pounds per year of each species within the region).Include any harvest and usage of seaweed or otheraquatic plant life.. Determine the expected radionuclide concentrationsin aquatic and terrestrial organisms significant to humanfood chains. Use the bioaccumulation factors given inSubsection 5.2.3, or supply others as necessary. If signi-ficant hunting occurs on land adjacent to or near the siteof the nuclear plant and the flesh is eaten by the localpopulace, annual weight and radionuclide concentrationsin such flesh should be estimated.
Calculate, using the above information and anyother necessary supporting data, the total body andsignificant organ (including GI tract, thyroid, skin, andbone) doses (millirem/year) to individuals in the popula-tion from all receiving-water-related exposure pathways,i.e., all sources of internal and external exposure. Pro-vide details and models of the calculation as an ap-pendix.
5.2.4.2 Gaseous Pathways. Estimate total body andsignificant organ doses (millirem/year) to individualsexposed at the point of maximum ground-level con-centrations offsite.
Estimate dry and wet deposition of radioactivehalogens and particulates on food crops and pasturegrass. Consider also the effect of the type, frequency,and magnitude of precipitation in the area. Consider themaximum ground-level deposition on pasture grass, eventhough milk cows or goats may not be grazing there atthe present time. Estimate the total body and thyroiddoses (millhrem/year) and significant doses received by
4.2-28
other organs via such potential pathways.' 9 includingdirect radiation from surface-deposited radionuclides.
Provide an appendix describing tie models used inthese calculations.
5.2.4.3 Direct Radiation From Facility. The applicantshould provide an estimate of the total external dose(tnillireiln/year) received by individuals outside thefacility from direct radiation, e.g., gamma radiationemitted by turbines and vessels ,'or storage of radioactivewaste. In particular, die applicant should estimate theexpected external dose rates at the boundary of theexclusion area (as defined in Subsection 2.1.2 of thisguide) and the dose rate at die most critical nearbyhouses, as well as schools, hospitals, or other publiclyused facilities within one mile of the proposed nuclearunit(s). A summary of data, assumptions. and •nodelsused in the dose calculations should be given.
5.2.5 Summary of Annual Radiation Doses
The applicant should present a table that suni-marizes the estimated annual radiation dose to (1) on-site radiation workers and (2) die regional population(during commercial operation of the facility) from allplant-related sources, using values calculated in previoussections. The tabulation should include (a) the total ofthe whole-body doses to die population (man-rein/year)from all receiving-water-related pathways and (b) thetotal of the whole-body doses to the population (man-rein/year) attributable to gaseous effluents out to adistance of at least 50 miles from the site. This summaryshould reflect data inclusive of points of accumulationor concentration..
5.3 Effects of Chemical and Biocide Discharges
Chemical and biocide discharges are described inSection 3.6. Water resources and use are discussed inSections 2.4 and 3.3. In this section, the specific con-centrations of these wastes at the points of dischargeshould be compared with natural ambient concentra-tions, with allowable release concentrations under appli-cable effluent limitations (40 CFR Part 423), and withapplicable water quality standards.
Dilution and mixing of discharges into the receivingwaters should be discussed in detail, and estimates ofconcentrations at various distances from the point ofdischarge should be provided. Include a detailed descrip-tion of the method of calculation. The estimated area inthe receiving body of water enclosed by contours cor-responding to water-quality-standard values should begiven. Variation of concentrations with changes in condi-tion (e.g., stream flow, temperature) of receiving water
"Models and assumptions for calculating doses are describedin a guide entitled "Calculation of Annual Average Doses to Manfrom Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose ofImplementing Appendix I," which is currently under develop-ment.
should be discussed. The effects on terrestrial andaquatic environments from oil or chemical wastes thatcontaminate surface water o0 ground water should beincluded.
The effects ott the enviionment of chemicals inicooling tower blowdown and drift should also he coil-sidered in this section. Using the contaminant concentra-tions allowed by effluent guidelines (40 CFR Part 423).estimate die resulting stream concentrations and therelationship of these concentrations to water qualitystandards at various distances and water flow variations(including the average 7-day once-in-ten-years low flow,the lowest control flow, and die lowest recorded mini-mum for the receiving water body). Include a descrip-tion of die method of calculation.
Any anticipated chemical or biocide contaminationof domestic water supplies (from surface water bodies orground water) should be identified and discussed. Rateof percolation of each contaminant into the water sup-ply, travel time from the station to points of publicwater supply, dilution factors, dispersion coefficients.and the resulting concentrations in die water should beestimated.
Resulting concentrations should be compared withapplicable effluent limitations (40 CFR Part 423) andrelated water quality standards. Systems considered hereshould include roof and yard drains and all other mniscel-laneous low-volume discharge systems.
5.4 Effects of Sanitary Waste Discharges
Sanitary waste systems are described in Section 3.7.The expected discharges should be discussed as in Sec-tion 5.3 and compared with appropriate effluent guide-lines and water quality standards for municipal systemsunder 40 CFR Part 133, "Secondary Treatment Infor-mation."
5.5 Effects of Operation and Maintenanceof the Transmission Systems
The environmental effects of operation and maii-tenance of the transmission system required to tie in theproposed facility to dte preexisting network should beevaluated. The evaluation of effects should make clearthe applicant's plans for maintenance of the right-of-wayand required access roads. Plans for use of herbicides andpesticides should indicate types, volume, concentrations,and manner and frequency of use. Include references toauthoritative guidelines assuring that the applicant'sprocedures are acceptable. Resulting effects on plantlife, wildlife habitat, land resources, and scenic valuesshould be evaluated.
New access roads may increase the exposure oftransmission line corridors to the public. The applicantshould consider the effect of this increased exposure onresident wildlife.
This section of the report should also discuss thepotential environmental impacts of any electrical effects
4.2-29
identified in Section 3.9 and any operating and main-tenance practices which will be adopted to minimizethese.
5.6 Other Effects
The applicant should discuss any effects of plantoperation that do not clearly fall under any single topicof Sections 5.1 to 5.5. These may include changes inland and water use at the plant site, interaction of theplant with other existing or projected neighboringplants, effect of ground water withdrawal on groundwater resources in the vicinity of the plant. and disposalof solid and liquid wastes other than those discussed inSections 5.3 and 5.4. Any features of thie plantproducing noise levels outside the suggested levels 20
should be specifically identified and discussed in relationto adjacent occupancy, both day and night, based onmeasurements of preconstruction ambients.
5.7 Resources Committed
Any irreversible and irretrievable commitments ofresources due to plant operation should be discussed.This discussion should include both direct commitments,such as deplet~n of u:anium resources, and irreversibleenvironmental losses, such as destruction of wildlifehabitat and consumptive use or diversion of water.
In this discussion, the applicant should consider lostresources from the viewpoints of both relative impactsand long-term net effects. As an example of relativeilr.-.Jct assessment, the loss of two thousand fish of agiven species could represent quite different degrees ofsignificance, depending on the total population in theimmediate region. Such a loss, however, in the case of a
2 *See "The Industrial Noise Manual," American IndustrialHygiene Association. Detroit. Mich,; "Noise Abatement andControl: Departmental Policy Implementation Responsibilityand Standards." HUD Circular 1390.2 (1971);and "Informationon Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect PublicHealth and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety," EPA,SSO9-74-004. U.S. Superintendent of DocumenLw. Washington,D.C.
small local population, could be less serious if the samespecies were abundant in neighboring regions. Similarly,the loss of a given area of highly desirable land should beevaluated in terms of the total amount of such land inthe environs. These relative assessments should ac-cordingly include statements expressed in percentageterms in which the amount of expected resource loss isrelated to the total resource in the immediate region andin which the total in the immediate region is related tothat in surrounding regions. The latter should be speci.fled in terms of areas and distances from the site.
In evaluating long-temi effects for their net conse-quences. dte applicant may consider, as an example, theimpact of thermal and chemical discharges on fish. Theremay be severe losses in the local discharge area. The localpopulation change may or may not be a net loss, There-fore, changes in population of important species causedby or expected to be caused by the operation of theplant should be examined with the view of determiningwhether they represent long.term net losses or long-termnet gains. The considerations are also applicable toChapters 9 and 10 of the report.
5.8 Decommissioning and Dismantling
The applicant should describe his plans and policiesregarding the actions to be taken at the end of theplant's useful life. Information should be provided onthe long-term uses of the land, the amount of land ir-retrievably committed, the expected environmentalconsequences of decommissioning, and an estimate ofthe monetary costs involved. The applicant should alsodiscuss the consideration given in the design of the plantand its auxiliary systems relative to eventual decommis-sioning, the amount of equipment and buildings to beremoved, and the expected condition of the site afterdecommissioning. It is understood that the plans andintentions of applicants for a construction permit maynot be fully developed at the time of filing. However,since the environmental impact of terminating plantoperation is, in part, determined by plant design, appli-cants should give attention to the subject in the projectplanning.
4.2-30
CHAPTER 6
EFFLUENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTSAND MONITORING PROGRAMS
The intent of this chapter is to describe in detail themeans by which the applicant collected the baseline datapresented in other chapters and to describe the appli-cant's plans and prograins for monitoring the environ-mnental impacts of site preparation, plant construction,and plant operation.
Section 6.1 (below) is addressed to the proposedprogram for assessing the characteristics of the site andthe surrounding region (including transmission corridors)before plant operation. The purpose of this program isto establish a reference framework for assessing subse-quent environmental effects attributable to site prepara-tion, plant construction, and plant operation.
The applicant's attention is directed to two con-siderations pertinent to Section 6.1. First, a givencharacteristic or parameter may or may not requireassessment prior to site preparation and plant construc-tion, depending on whether that particular characteristicmay be altered at these stages. Second, in most instancesthis guide indicates the specific environmental effects tobe evaluated; consequently, the parameters to be mea-sured are apparent. In some cases, the applicant mayconsider it necessary to establish a monitoring programbased on identification of potential or possible effectsnot mentioned in the guide. In such instances, theprogram should be described. The applicant should care-fully review plans for the measurement of conditionsexisting prior to site preparation to ensure that theseplans include all parameters that must be subsequentlymonitored during plant operation (discussed in Section6.2), as well as during site preparation and plant con-struction.
If the applicant chooses to make an early separatefiling of environmental data and as permitted by§2.101(a) 39 FR 14508 a tentative evaluation prior toreceiving and evaluating a full year's data, particularattention should be paid to the description of samplingdesign, sampling frequency, and statistical methodologyand validity (including calibration checks and standards)in order to justify the scope of the program, the timingand scheduling of the data collection, and other tech-nical validation that will assure the review staff thatsufficient information will ultimately be available for thepublication of the FES. In cases in which the earlyseparate filing of environmental data is to be made andan authorization requested under 10 CFR Part 50,§50.10(e), it is to the applicant's benefit to file apreliminary monitoring program design in advance offiling the full environmental report in order to expeditestaff review for the Draft Environmental Statement(DES).
This is especially critical if the timing of partialpresentations under the procedure may be related toseasonal ecological factors such as migration or otherphases of critical biological activity.
In all cases, the applicant should estimate the statis.tical validity of any proposed sampling program in orderto avoid unnecessary time delay during staff reviewwhich might be associated with incomplete descriptions.invalid sampling locations, and level of sample replica-tion. Information should be provided on instrumentaccuracy, sensitivity, and (especially for highly auto-mated systems) reliability. Where standard analytical orsampling techniques can be identified. they need only beso identified and referenced.
For quantitative description of each area of interestand each time of interest, descriptive statistics shouldinclude, unless justifiably omitted, the mean. standarderror, and a confidence interval for the mean, and ineach case the sample size should be clearly indicated. Ifdiversity indices are used to describe a collection of lakeor terrestrial organisms, the specific diversity indicesutilized should be stated.
6.1 Applicant's Preoperational Environmental Programs
The programs for collection of initial or baselineenvironmental data prior to operation should bedescribed in sufficient detail to make it clear that theapplicant has established a thorough and comprehensiveapproach to environmental assessment. The descriptionof these programs should be confined principally totechnical descriptions of technique, instrumentation.scheduling, and procedures.
Where an effect of site preparation or facility con-struction may alter a previously measured or observedenvironmental condition, the program for determiningthe modified condition should be described. Refer to thediscussion in Section 4.5, as appropriate.
Where information from the literature has been usedby the applicant, it should be concisely summarized anddocumented by reference to original data sources. Wherethe availability of original sources that support impor-tant conclusions is limited, the applicant should provideeither extensive quotations or references to accessiblesecondary sources.2 In all cases, information derivedfrom published results should be clearly distinguishedfrom information derived from the applicant's fieldmeasurements.
6.1.1 Surface Waters
When a body of surface water may be affected bythe proposed facility or a practicable alternative, the
21 Any rcports of work (e.g., ecological surveys) supported bythe applicant that are of significant value in assessing the envi-ronmental impact of the facility may be included as appendicesor supplements to the environmental report if these reports arenot otherwise generally available.
4.2-31
applicant should describe the programs by which thebackground condition of the water and the relatedecology were determined and reported in Section 2.4.The applicant should have sufficient data to permit staffverification of any predictive computations or modelsused in the evaluation of environmental effects.
6.1.1.1 Physical and Chemical Parameters. The pro-grams and methods for measuring physical and chemicalparameters of surface waters which may be affected byconstruction or operation of the facility should bedescribed. The sampling program should be presented insufficient detail to demonstrate its adequacy withrespect both to spatial coverage (surface area and depth)and to temporal coverage (duration and sampling fre-quency), giving due consideration to seasonal effects.This discussion should include a description of thetechniques used to investigate any condition that mightlead to interactions with plant discharges, such as howthe presence of impurities in a water body may reactsynergistically with heated effluent or how the heatedeffluent may restrict mLxing and dispersion of radio-active effluents.
In addition to describing the programs for obtainingthe data, tie applicant should describe any computa-tional models used in predicting effects. The applicantshould indicate how the models were verified and cali-brated, and what error limits apply to the predictionadjusted seasonally or diurnally as appropriate.
6.1.1.2 Ecological Parameters. The applicant shoulddescribe the preoperational program used to determinethe ecological characteristics presented in Section 2.2.Those portions of the program concerned with deter-mining the presence and abundance of important aquaticand amphibious species (identified in Section 2.2)should be detailed in terms of frequency, pattern, andduration of observation. The applicant should describehow taxonomic determinations were made andvalidated. In this connection, the applicant shoulddiscuss its reference collection of voucher specimens orother means whereby consistent identification will beassured.
A description should be provided of the methodsused or to be used for observing natural variations ofecological parameters. If these methods involve indicatororganisms, the criteria for their selection should bepresented. The discussion of methods should includeestimates of standard error in making reported determi-nations.
The applicant should discuss the basis for his predic-tions of any nonlethal physiological and behavioralresponses of important species which may be caused byconstruction or operation of the facility. This discussionshould be appropriately correlated with the descriptionof the monitoring program, including estimates of thestandard error for each correlation.
Parameters of stress for important species (as de-fined in Section 2.2) that could be affected by plantdischarges should be identified. The methodology for
determining such parameters should be reviewed withrespect to applicability to actual local conditions antici-pated during operation, including interactive effectsamong multiple effluents and existing constituents ofthe surface water body concerned.
6.1.2 Ground Water
In those cases in which the proposed facility or apracticable design alternative may potentially affectlocal ground water, the program leading to assessment ofpotential effects should be described.
6.1.2.1 Physical and Chemical Parameters. Theproperties and configuration of the local aquifer shouldhave been defined in sufficient detail (in Section 2.4) topermit a reasonable projection of the effects of plantoperation on the ground water. Where inferred trans-missibilities or permeabilities are estimated because ofincomplete field data, the basis for the estimate and theerror limits of the estimate should be included in thediscussion of the field data program and experimentdesign. Methods for obtaining information on groundwater levels and ground water quality should be de-scribed.
6.1.2.2 Models. Models may be used to predict ef-fects such as changes in ground water levels, dispersion ofcontaminants, and eventual transport through aquifersto surface water bodies. The models should be describedand supporting evidence for their reliability and validitypresented.
6.1.3 Air
The applicant should describe the program for ob-taining information on local air quality, if relevant, andlocal and regional meteorology. The description shouldshow the basis for predicting such effects as the disper-sion of gaseous effluents and alteration of local climate(e.g., fogging, icing, precipitation augmentation, or otherphenomena) and should present the methodology forgathering baseline data.
6.1.3.1 Meteorology. The applicant should identifysources oi meteorological data reported in Section 2.3.Locations and elevations of observation stations, instru-mentation, and frequency and duration of measurementsshould be specified, both for the applicant's measuringactivities and for activities of governmental agencies orother organizations on whose information the applicantintends to rely. For applicant's preoperational and oper-ational program, include descriptions of instruments,performance specifications, calibration and maintenanceprocedures, data output and recording systems and loca-tions, and data analysis procedures.
6.1.3.2 Models. Any models used by the applicant,either to derive estimates of basic meteorological infor-mation or to estimate the effects of effluent systems,
4.2-32
should be described and their validity and accuracydiscussed.
6.1.4 Land
Data collection and evaluation programs concerningthe terrestrial environment of the proposed facilityshould be described and justified with regard to bothscope and methodology.
6.1.4.1 Geology and Soils. Those geological and soilstudies designed to determine the environmental impactof the construction or operation of the facility should bedescribed. The description should include identificationof the sampling pattern and the justification for its selec.Lion, the sampling method, preanalysis treatment, andanalytic techniques. Other geological and soil studies(e.g., conducted in support of safety analyses) should bebriefly summarized if relevant.
6.1.4.2 Land Use and Demographic Surveys. Theapplicant should describe his problem for identifying theactual land use in the site environs and for acquiringdemographic data for the region as reported in Section2.1.
Sources of information should be identified. Meth-ods used to forecast probable changes in land use anddemographic trends should be described.
6.1.4.3 Ecological Parameters. In this section, theapplicant should discuss the program used to assess theecological characteristics of the site, with primaryreference t6 important terrestrial biota identified inSection 2.2. In general, the considerations involved aresimilar to those suggested in connection with aquaticbiota (Paragraph 6.1.1.2). However, the differences inhabitat, differences in animal physiology, and otherpertinent factors will, of necessity, influence the designof the assessment program. The applicant shouldpresent, as in Paragraph 6.1.1.2, an analysis of theprogram in terms of taxonomic validation, rationale forits predictive aspects, and the details of its methodology.
6.1.5 Radiological Monitoring
The preoperational program should be described indetail in the Environment Report-Construction PermitStage. Specific information should be provided on (a)the types of samples to be collected, (b) sampling loca-tions, (c) analyses to be performed on each sample, (d)general types of sample collection equipment, (e) samplecollection and analysis frequency, (f) the analyticalsensitivity,2 for each analysis, and (g) the approximatestarting date and duration of the program. The discus-sion should include the justification for the choice ofsampling sites, analyses, and sampling frequencies. Re-
-The lower limit of detection (LLD) as defined in IIASL-300(Rev. 8/73).
view of this description will be facilitated if the appli-cant includes maps of sampling locations, as well astabular sumnmary of the program. The applicant shouldalso describe how he expects to extend the preopera.tional program into the operational phase and in whalmanner the results of the p)reoperational program maybe used to affect the design of die operational program.Guidance for both the preoperational program andoperational program is provided in Regulatory Guide4.1. "Measuring and Reporting of Radioactivity in theEnvirons of Nuclear Power Plants." Additional guidancewill be provided in a regulatory guide currently beingdeveloped. "Guide for the Preparation of EnvironmelntalTechnical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants." Inaddition, EPA report ORP/SID 72-2, "EnvironmentalRadioactivity Surveillance Guide." recommends meth-ods for conducting a minimum level of environmentalradiation surveillance outside the plant site boundary oflight-water-cooled nuclear power facilities.
The applicant should summarize any infomiationavailable from the literature regarding background radi-ological characteristics of the site which were consideredin designing the program (reference may be made toSection 6.3 as appropriate). 2 3
The "Environmental Report -Operating LicenseStage" should discuss the preoperational program whichhas gone or will soon go into operation. Any changes inthe program (relative to die description supplied at theconstruction permit stage) should be discussed and therationale provided for such changes.
6.2 Applicant's Proposed OperationalMonitoring Programs
Operational monitoring programs may not be fullydeveloped at the time of applying for a constructionpermit. The applicant should, to the extent feasible,describe the general scope and objectives of his intendedprograms and provide a tentative listing of parameterswhich he believes should be monitored for detailedevaluation. This listing should include numerical ex-cerpts from the water, air, or radiological standardsagainst which the proposed monitoring program will bemeasured as understood at the time of initial submissionof the environmental report.
The "Guide for the Preparation of EnvironmentalTechnical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants" willdescribe information to be submitted with an applica-tion for an operating license.
In the "Environmental Report-Construction PermitStage," the operational program need only be discussedto the extent that it is expected to differ (if at all) fromthe ongoing preoperational program. If in the "Environ-mental Report-Operating License Stage," there are no
2 3A report on this subject by Scientific Committee 43 of theNational Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements isin preparation. When copies become available, they may be ob-tained from Publications, NCRP, P.O. Box 30175, Washington,D.C. 20014.
4.2-33
differences between the preoperational programs (asfinally formulated) and operational programs, the appli-cant need only make a statement to that effect andprovide a commitment to conduct the operational pro-gram. If there are differences in the operational program.the applicant should describe the reasons for the dif-ferences. The applicant should also discuss any plans andrationale for updating the program during plant opera-tion.
Final approval of the operational program, as de-scribed completely in the proposed environmental tech-nical specifications, will be given at the end of thetechnical specification review process.
6.3 Related Environmental Measurement andMonitoring Programs
When the applicant's site lies within a region forwhich environmental measurement or monitoring pro-grams are carded out by public or other agencies notdirectly supported by the applicant, any such relatedprograms known to the applicant should be identifiedand discussed. Relevance of such independent findings
to the proposed facility's effects should be described,and plans for exchange of information, if any, should bepresented. Agencies responsible for the programs shouldbe identified and, to the extent possible, the proceduresand methodologies employed should be briefly de-scribed.
6.4 Preoperational Environmental RadiologicalMonitoring Data
Data from the preoperational program may not beavailable at the time of submission of the "Environ-mental Report-Construction Permit Stage." Ac-cordingly, the applicant should submit for Section 6.4,as a later supplement to the "Environmental Report-Operating License Stage," 6 to 12 months2 4 of pre-operational environmental radiological monitoring data.
"4The minimum amount of preoperational data may be
submitted if it includes data from a crop harvest and a completegrazing season. All media with a collection frequency less thansemiannual (e.g., annual or once in three years) should be in-cluded in the 6 to 12 months of data submitted.
4.2-34
CHAPTER 7
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF ACCIDENTS
In this chapter, the applicant should discuss thepotential environmental effects of accidents involvingthe station.
7.1 Station Accidents Involving Radioactivity
The detailed requirements for analysis of accidentsare contained in the proposed Annex to Appendix D of10 CFR Part 50. This Annex is reproduced as Appendix5 of this guide.
Applicants may, for purposes of environmentalreports, take the option in the calculation of x/Q valuesof using either of two meteorology assumptions for allaccident cases:
1. X/Q values may be determined from onsitemeteorological data at the 50% probability level or
2. x/Q values may be determined at 10% of thelevels in Regulatory Guide 1.3 or 1.4.
7.2 Other Accidents 2 5
In addition to accidents that can release radio-activity to the environs, accidents may occur that, al-though they do not involve radioactive materials, haveconsequences that may affect the environment. Suchaccidents as chemical explosions, fires, and leakage orruptures of vessels containing oil or toxic materials canhave significant environmental impacts. These possibleaccidents and associated effects should be identified andevaluated (see Regulatory Guide 1.70.8, "AdditionalInformation-Nearby Industrial. Transportation. andMilitary Facilities".)
2 Tht Commission's Environmental Statement will discussthe environmental impact of accidents that may occur duringtransport of fresh and spent fuel, irradiated fuel, and radioactivewastes. See WASH-1238. "Environmental Survey of Transporta-tion of Radioactive Materials to and from Nuclear PowerPlants." USAEC, Directorate of Regulatory Standards. Decem-bcr 1972, and 38 FR 3334. February 5. 1973.
04.2-35
CHAPTER 8
ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS OF PLANTCONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION
The purpose of this chapter is to present the appli-cant's assessment of the economic and social effects ofthe proposed facility.
There are, of course, limitations on the extent towhich the applicant can evaluate all the social and eco-nomic benefits and costs of the construction and opera-tion of a nuclear facility that may have a productive lifeof 30 years or more. The wide variety of benefits andcosts are not only difficult to assess, but many are notamenable to quantification nor even to estimation incommensurable units. Some primary benefits such as thegenerated electrical energy are, to a degree, measurable,as are the capital costs and operating and maintenancecosts of the proposed facility. On the other hand,numerous environmental costs and their economic andsocial consequences are not readily quantified.2 6
Second- and higher-order costs or benefits (i.e.,impacts flowing from first-order social and economicimpacts) need be discussed by the applicant only wherethey would significantly modify the aggregate of costs orbenefits, thus affecting the overall cost-benefit balance.
8.1 Benefits
The primary benefits of the proposed nuclearfacility are those inherent in the value of the generatedelectricity delivered to consumers. The applicant shouldreport, as shown in Table 2, the expected average annualkilowatt-hours of electrical energy to be generated.Further, a breakdown of the expected use of 6ectricityin the applicant's service area should b. provided for themajor classes identified in the Federal Power Commis-sic,:. publication, "National Power Survey."' 7 Thesebenefits may be optionally expressed in dollars byshowing expected average annual revenues. If furnished,the basis of assigning dollar values should be clearlystated. The year-by-year forecasts of such revenues forthe life of the plant should be discounted to presentworth, using a nominal discount rate reflecting the-average cost of capital.
The importance of the proposed facility inproviding adequate reserves of generating capacity toensure a reliable supply for the applicant's service area(and associated power pool, if any) is discussed inSection 1.1. The increase in the probabilities of theextent and duration of electrical shortages if the
2 6The estimate of generated electrical energy should reflect
the outages consistent with the applicant's forced outage ratioexperience and should include outages induced by naturalphenomena such as floods, droughts, tornadoes, or hurricanes(see Sections 2.3 and 2.4).
"2Copies may be obtained from the Superintendent ofDocuments, U.S. Government Printing Orfice, Washington, D.C.20402.
proposed plant (or its equivalent capacity) is not builtby the proposed date should be estimated, and the appli-cant should appraise the likely social and economicimpacts of such shortages. The benefits in averting theseimpacts should be related to regional experience, if any,with brownouts and emergency load-shedding and theapplicant's plans or procedures for meeting such emer-gencies.
Other prinary benefits of some nuclear electricalgenerating facilities may be in the form of sales of steamor other products or services. Revenues from such salesshould be estimated. The use of waste or reject heat fordesalination or for other processes could expand thebenefits of nuclear plants. Such benefits, if claimed,should be accompanied by an estimate of the degree ofcertainty of their realization.
There are other social and economic benefits whichaffect various political jurisdictions or interests to agreater or lesser degree. Some of these reflect transferpayments or other values which may partially, if notfully, compensate for certain services, as well as externalor environmental costs, and this fact should be reflectedin the designation of the benefit. A list of examplesfollows:
• Tax revenues to be received by local and Stategovernments.
* Temporary and permanent new jobs createdand payroll.
* Incremental increase in regional product(value-added concept).
* Enhancement of recreational values throughmaking available for public use any parks, artificiallycreated cooling lakes, marinas, etc.
* Enhancement of aesthetic values through anyspecial design measures as applied to structures, artificiallakes or canals, parks, etc.
* Environmental enhancement in support of thepropagation or protection of wildlife and the improve-ment of wildlife habitats.
* Creation and improvement of local roads,waterways, or other transportation facilities.
• lncrea.-d knowledge of the environment as aconsequence of ecological research and environmentalmonitoring activities associated with plant operation,and technological improvements from the applicant'sresearch program.
* Creation of a source of heated discharge whichmay be used for beneficial purposes (e.g., in aquaculture,in improving commercial and sport fishing, or in in-dustrial, residential, or commercial heating).
* Provision of public education facilities (e.g., avisitors' center).
The applicant should discuss significant benefitsthat may be realized from the construction and opera-tion of the proposed plant. Where the benefits can be
4.2-36
expressed in monetary terms, they should be discountedto present worth. In each instance where a particularbenefit is discussed, the applicant should indicate, to theextent practical, who is likely to be affected and for howlong. In the case of aesthetic impacts that are difficult toquantify, the applicant should provide pictorial drawingsof significant station structures or environmental modifi-cations visible to the public and also of parks or otherrecreational facilities on the site which will be availablefor public use. The details should be drawn from infor-mation presented in Sections 2.6 and 3.1.
8.2 Costs
The economic and social costs resulting from theproposed nuclear facility and its operation are likewisecomplex and should be appraised.
The primary internal costs are: (a) the capital costsof land acquisition and improvement; (b) the capitalcosts of facility construction; (c) the incremental capital
costs of transmission and distribution facilities, (d) fuelcosts, including the cost of spent fuel disposition; (e)other operating and maintenance costs, including licensefees and taxes; (f) plant decommissioning costs; and (g)research and development costs associated with potentialfuture improvements of the facility and its operationand maintenance. As in the case of benefits, the appli-cant should discount these costs to present worth.
The applicant should provide the types of infor.mnation listed below for nuclear and alternative powergeneration methods. If the applicant includes a coal-firedplant as a viable alternative to a nuclear power plant.infornation should be provided for both a coal-firedplant with sulfur removal equipmunt and one that burnslow-sulfur coal.
Items (1) through (5) are necessary to run the CON-CEPT code used by Regulatory staff. Inclusion of thisinformation in the applicant's environmental reportcould expedite the staff's review process, Item (6) would
riiiiilicitI L11111 t
Information Requested
(I) Interest during con-struction
(2) Length of construc-tion workweek
(3) Estimated site laborrequirement
(4) Average site laborpay rate (includingfringe benefits) ef-fective at month andyear of NSSS order
(5) Escalation ratesSite laborMaterialsComposite esca-lation rate
(6) Power Plant Costa
Dket Costs
a. Land and landrights
b. Structures andsite facilities
c. Reactor (boiler)plant equipment
d. Turbine plantequipment notIncluding heatrejection sys-tems
e. Heat rejectionsystem
%/year,compound rate
hours/week
man-hours/kWe
__ S/hour
%/year....... %/year
__ _%/year
f. Electric plantequipment
g, Miscellaneousplant equipment
h. Spare parts al-lowance
i. Contingency al-lowance
Subtotal
indirect Costs
a. Constructionfacilities, equip-ment and serv-ices
b. Engineering andconstructionmanagementservices
c. Other costsd. Interest during
construction
year)
Escalation duringconstruction(@ - %1year)
Total Plant Cost,@ Start of Com-mercial Opera-tion
Unit I Unit 2
aCost components of nuclear plants to be included in each costcategory listed under direct and indirect costs in Part (6) aboveare described in "Guide for Economic Evaluation of NuclearReactor Plant Designs," U.S. Atomic Energy Commission,
_ NUS-531, Appendix Bl.
4.2-37
permit the staff to compare detailed cost categories todistinguish any significant differences which might existbetween the applicant's estimate and the CONCEPTmodel.
In order to supplement the economic infonr.ationprovided in Chapter 9 of the environmental report, thefollowing cost information should be provided for (1)coal-fired units (one use which would utilize low-sulfurcoal and a second which would use high-sulfur coal withstack gas cleaning). (2) oil-fired units, and (3) nuclearpower units.
The environmental report should include the esti-mated cost of generating electric energy in mills per kilo.watt-hour for the proposed nuclear plant and for alterna-tive fossil-fired plants in tie detail given below. It shouldbe stated whether the costs of fuel and of operation andmaintenance are initial costs or levelized costs over someperiod of operation and, in tie latter case. what assump-tions are miade about escalation.
There are also external costs. Their effects on theinterests of people should be examined. The applicantshould supply, as applicable, an evaluation plus sup-porting data and rationale regarding such exteral socialand economic costs as noted below.2 a For each cost. theapplicant should describe the probable number and loca-tion of the population group adversely affected, the esti-nmated economic and social impact, and any special mea-sures to be taken to alleviate the impact.
Temporary external costs29 include: shortages ofhousing; inflationary reaitals or prices; congestion oflocal streets and highways: noise and temporary aesthet-ic disturbances; overloading of water supply and sewagetreatment facilities; crowding of local schools, hospitals,or other public facilities; overtaxing of community serv-ices; the disruption of people's lives or the local corn-
munity caused by acquisition of land for the proposedsite.
Long-term external costs30 include impairment ofrecreational values (e.g., reduced availability of desiredspecies of wildlife and sport fish, restrictions of access to
-- land or water areas preferred for recreational use);deterioration of aesthetic and scenic values; restrictionson access to areas of scenic, historic, or cultural interest,degradation of areas having historic, cultural, natural, orarcheological valte: removal of land from present or con-templated alternative uses: creation of' locally adversemeteorological conditions (e.g.. fog and plumes fromcooling towers, cooling ponds. etc.); creation of noise,especially by mechanical-draft cooling towers: reductionof regional product due to displacement of persons fromthe land proposed for the site; lost income from recrea-tion or tourism that may be impaired by environmentaldisturbances; lost income of commercial risliennenattributable to environmental degradation; decrease inreal estate values in areas adjacent to the proposedfacility: increased costs to local governments for theservices required by the permanently employed workersand their families. In discussing the costs, the applicantshould indicate, to the extent practical. who is likely tobe affected and for how long.
' ' For convenience of treatment, the listed cost examrles have
been divided into long-term (or continuing) costs and thetemporary costs generally associated .with the period of construc-tion or the readjutment of the lives of persons whose jobs orhomes will have been displaced by the purchase of land at theproposed site.
2"Refer, as appropriate, toChapter 4.
" Refer. as appropriate, toChapter 5.
the information presented in
the information presented in
Mills/Kilowatt-Hour Mills/Kilowatt-Hour
Fixed Charges"Cost of moneyDepreciationInterim replacementsTaxes
Fuel-Cycle CostsbFor fossil-fired plants.costs of high-sulfurcoal, low-sulfur coal,oil. or gas
For nuclear plants:Cost of U3 08(yellowcake)Cost of conver-sion and enrich-mentCost of conver-sion and fabrica-tion of fuel ele-mentsCost of pro-cessing spent fuel
Carrying chargeon fuel inventoryCost of waste dis-posalCredit for plu-tonium or U-233
Costs of Operation andMaintenancec
Fixed componentVariable component
Costs of InsuranceProperty insuranceLiability insurance
aGive the capacity factor assumed in computing these charges,and give the total fixed-charge rate as a percentage of plant
binvestment.Include shipping charges as appropriate. Give the heat rate inBtu/kilowatt-hour.
CGive separately the fixed component that In dollars per year
does not depend on capacity factor and the variable componentthat in dollars per year is proportional to capacity factor.
4.2-38
CHAPTER 9ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES AND SITES
The intent of this chapter is to present lte basis forthe applicant's proposed choice of site and tittclear fuel
amnong [1e available alternative sites and encrgy sources.Accordingl,, the applicant should discuss the range ofpracticable alternatives and should demonstrate thatnone of these is clearli, to be preferred to t/w proposedsite-plant combinationt It is recognized that planihnng,methods differ among applicants. IHowever, the appli-cant should present its site-plant selection process as theconsequence of an analy*sis of alternatives whose eni-ronmiental costs and benefits were evaluated and com-pared and then weighed against those of the proposedfacility.
This chapter should encompass information relevantboth to the availability of alternatives and to their rela-tive merits. Two classes of alternatives should be con-sidered: those that can meet the power demand withoutrequiring the creation of new generating capacity andthose that do require the creation of new generatingcapacity.
9.1 Alternatives Not Requiring the Creationof New Generating Capacity
Practicable means that meet the projected powerdemand with adequate system reliability and which donot require the creation of additional generatingcapacity should be identified and evaluated. 3 ' Suchaltematives may include purchased energy, reactivatingor upgrading an older plant, or base load operation of anexisting peaking facility. Such alternatives should beanalyzed in tei-s of cost, environmental impact, ade-quacy, reliability, and other pertinent factors. If suchalternatives are totally unavailable or if their availabilityis highly uncertain, the relevant facts should be stated.This analysis is of major importance because it supportsthe justification for new generating capacity.
9.2 Alternatives Requiring the Creationof New Generating Capacity
In this guide, an alternative constituting new gener-ating capacity is termed a "site-plant combination" inorder to emphasize that the alternatives to be evaluatedshould include both site and energy source options. Asite-plant combination is a combination of a specific site(which may include the proposed site) and a particularcategory of energy source (nuclear, fossil-fueled, hydro-electric, geothermal) together with the transmissionhookup. A given site considered in combination withtwo different energy sources is regarded as providing twoalternatives.
'If transmission facilities must be constructed in order tosecure the energy from alternative sources, this should be dis-cussed.
9.2.1 Selection of Candidate Areas3 '
In this section the applicant should present an initialsurvey of site availability using a screening processwhich, after identifying areas containing possible sites.eliminates those whose less desirable characteristics arerecognizable without extensive analysis. The purpose ofthis screening is to identify a reasonable number ofrealistic siting options. In assessing potential candidateareas, the applicant may place primary reliance oil pob-lished materials.
The geographical regions considered by the appli-cant may be within or outside the applicant's franchiseservice area. It is expected that each area considered willbe'small enough for any site developed within it to haveessentially similar environmental relationships (i.e..thermal discharge to dte same body of water, proximitvto the same urban area). The areas considered should notbe restricted to those containing land actually owned bythe applicant.
If a State, region, or locality has a power plant sizinglaw, the law should be cited and any applicable con-straints described.
The applicant should display the areas being ap-praised by means of maps and charts portraying thepower network,3 3 environmental and other features,and other relevant information. (A consistent identifica-tion system should be established and retained on allgraphic and verbal materials in this section.) The map ormaps should be clearly related to the applicant's servicearea (and adjacent areas if relevant). Th-y should displaypertinent informiation such as the followilg:
1. Areas considered by the applicant;2. Major ccntcrs of population density (urban.
high density, medium density, low density, or similarscale);
3. Water bodies suitable for use in cooling sys.terns;
4. Railroads, highways (existing and planned), andwaterways suitable for fuel and waste transportation;
5. Important topographic features (such as moun-tains, marshes, fault lines);
6. Dedicated land-use areas (parks, historical sites.wilderness areas, testing grounds, airports, etc.);
7. Primary generating plants, together with effec.tive operating capacity in megawatts, both electrical andthermal, and indication of fuel (all plants of the sametype at the same location should be considered a singlesource);
8. Other generating additions to the network to beinstalled before the proposed facility goes on line;
"1As used in Chapter 9. the term "area" is defined as several
square miles (large enough to contain several sites).
"To avoid repetition, the applicant should refer, as appro-priate, to material presented in Section 1.1.
4.2-39
9. Transmission lines of 115 kV or more, andtermination points on the system for proposed andpotential lines from the applicant's proposed facility,and
10. Major interconnections with other power sup-pliers.
Maps of areas outside the applicant's service areashould include the probable transmission corridor to theapplicant's system.
Suitable correlations should be made among themaps. For example, one or more of the maps showingenvironmental features may be to the same scale as amap showing power network configurations: or presentgenerating sites and major transmission lines may beoverlaid on the environmental maps, if this is helpful tothe discussion.
The applicant should briefly discuss the availabilityof fuel or other energy sources at the areas considered. Itis recognized that conditions with regard to alternativesto nuclear fuel vary for different applicants. Oil and coalmay be readily available in many areas, although limita-tions on maximum sulfur content or transportation costsmay restrict or prevent their use. (Where supplies areadequate and its use is otherwise appropriate, natural gasmay be an alternative in some areas.) Hydroelectric andgeothermal sources should also be considered if avail-able. In some situations, combinations of energy sources(e.g., coal-fired base-load plant plus gas-turbine peakingunits) may be practical alternatives. The discussionshould clearly establish the energy-source alternatives.
Using the materials described above, the applicantshould provide a condensed description of the majorconsiderations which led to the final selection of thecandidate areas.
The following remarks may apply in specific in-stances:
1. The first general geographic screening may bebased on power load and transmission considerations.
2. Certain promising areas may be identified assuitable for only one type of fuel- others may be broadlydefined at this stage of analysis (e.g., a stretch of coast-line) and may admit several fuel-type options.
3. Only the determining characteristics of theidentified areas need be discussed. Specific tracts neednot be identified unless already owned by the applicant.
4. If areas outside the service area are not con-sidered during this phase of the decision process, thereasons for not considering them should be provided.
5. If certain fuel types are eliminated in selectingcandidate areas because of predicted unavailability orbecause of economic factors, supporting informationshould be supplied.
6. In eliminating a fuel type at a site on thegrounds of monetary cost, the applicant should makeclear that the excess cost over a preferred alternativeoutweighs any potential advantages of the eliminatedfuel type with respect to environmental protection.
7. The compatability with any existing land-useplanning programs of the development of each candidatearea should be indicated and the views, if any, of local
planning groups and interested citizens concerning use ofthe candidate area should be summarized.
8. If it is proposed to add a nuclear unit to astation where there are already thermal electric gener-ating units under construction or in operation, the localand regional significance of concentrating a large blockof thermal generating capacity at one location should begiven specific consideration.
9.2.2 Selection of Candidate Site-Plant Alternatives 34
At this point, the number of suitable areas will havebeen reduced, making possible investigation of a realisticset of alternative site-plant combinations. These alterna-tive combinations should be briefly described. Thedescription should include site plans indicating locationsconsidered for the plant, access facilities, and any trans-mission considerations that significantly affect sitedesirability.
The criteria to be used in selecting the candidatesite-plant alternatives are essentially the criteria used inselecting candidate areas. Application of these criteria ingreater depth may be required, however, since therelative merits of the various site-plant combinationsmay be less obvious than those of the initially identifiedareas. Furthermore, although a particular area may bejudged unsuitable because of one major overriding dis-advantage, establishment of the suitability of a givensite-plant combination may require balancing both favor-able and unfavorable factors (benefits versus environ-mental and other costs).
The applicant is not expected to conduct detailedenvironmental studies at alternative sites; only prelimi-nary reconnaissance-type investigations need be con-ducted. Neither is it expected that detailed engineeringdesign studies will be made for all alternative plants orthat detailed transmission route studies will be made forall alternatives.
9.3 Cost-Benefit Comparison of CandidateSite-Plant Alternatives
A cost-effectiveness analysis of realistic alternativesin terms of both economic and environmental costsshould be made, to show why the proposed site-plantcombination is preferred over all other candidate alterna-tives for meeting the power requirement. In presentingthe cost-effectiveness analysis, the applicant should use,insofar as possible, a tabular format showing side-by-sidecomparison or alternatives with respect to selectisicriteria.
Quantification, while desirable, may not be possible-for all factors because of lack of adequate data. Undersuch circumstances, qualitative and general comparativestatements supported by documentation may be used.
"4 The range of candidate site-plant alternatives selected bythe applicant should include other energy source options (coal,oil. gas, hydro, geothermal) as practicable.
4.2-40
Where possible, experience derived from operation ofplants at the same or at an environmentally similar sitemay be helpful in appraising the nature of expectedenvironmental impacts.
Various criteria have been suggested in this guidelinefor use in comparing the alternatives and the proposedfacility. The criteria chosen by the applicant shouldreflect benefits and costs3" which were evaluated inselecting die site-plant candidates. The following item-ization of evaluatory factors may be helpful as a check-list:
Engineering and Environmental Factors:MeteorologyGeologySeismologyHydrologyPopulation density in site environsAccess to road, rail, and water transportationFuel supply and waste disposal routesCooling water supplySensitivity of aquatic and terrestrial habitats af-
fectedCommitment of resourcesDedicated areasProjected recreational usageScenic values
"The applicant may usc, if the necessary data are available,the method for calculating generating costs discussed in Chapter10. The analysis should highlight significant environmental dif-ferences among alternative sites which can be balanced againstdollar cost differentials.
Transmission Hookup Factors:Access to transmission system in placeProblems of routing new transmission linesProblems of transmission reliabilityMinimization of transmission losses
Construction Factors:Access for equipment and materialsAccess, housing, etc., for construction workers
Land Use Factors, including compatibility with zoningor use changes.
Institutional Factors (e.g., State or rcgiunal site certili-cation).
Cost Factors:Construction costs including transmissionAnnual fuel costsAnnual maintenance costs
Operating Factors:Load-following -.IpabilityTransient response
Alternative Site Cost Factors:Land and water rightsBase station facilitiesMain condenser cooling systemMain condenser cooling intake structures and dis-charge systemTransmission and substation facilitiesAccess roads and railroadsSite preparation including technical investigations
0
4.2-41
CHAPTER 10
PLANT DESIGN ALTERNATIVES
171t, applicant sl/en/d, in this chapter. show how theproposed plant dt'sign was arrived at throihgl considera-fion if alternati'e designs of" identifiaIthl syslt'lls andthrough thlir co'mpli/arativ'e aSS(.SSpltil .
The significant environmental interfaces of a nuclearpower plant will be assuciated wilh the operation of'certain identifiable systems. The applicant's proposedplant should incorporate a combination of these identi.liable systems, each otf which has been selected througha cost-effectiveness analysis (see discussion in SectionA, "Introduction") of economic and other factors as thepreferred choice within it-: category. In some instances.tlhe interaction of these systems may be such as torequiire their selection on the basis of a preferredcombination rather than on the basis of individualpreferred systems. For example, an alternative coolingsystem may have to be evaluated in combination with apreferred chemical effluent system that would be usedwith it.
The applicant's discussion should be organized onthe basis of plant systems and arranged according to thefollowing list:
* Circulating water system (exclusive of iatakeand discharge)
0 Intake system for circulating water0 Discharge system for circulating water0 Other cooling systems (including intake and
discharge where not treated in the preceding three items)" Biocide systems (all cooling circuits) 3 6
* Chemical waste treatment 3 6
* Sanitary waste system" 6
* Liquid radwaste systems (see Section 10.7)" Gaseous radwaste systems (see Section 10.8)" Transmission facilities* Other systemsThe following should be considered in preparing the
discussion:
a. Range of alternatives. The applicant's discus-sion should emphasize those alternative plant systemsthat appear promising in terms of environmental protec-tion. Different designs for systems that are essentiallyidentical with respect to environmental effects should beconsidered only if their costs are appreciably different.The applicant should include alternatives that meet thefollowing criteria: (I) they provide improved levels ofenvironmental protection (in the case of systems subjectto 40 CFR Part 423, the analysis should focus on alter-native systems which comply with 40 CFR Part 423 butwhich are a better environmental solution taking intoaccount impacts on air quality, aesthetics, etc.), and (2)although not necessarily economically attractive, they
"Systems that meet effluent limitation guidelines of 40 CFRPart 423.
are based on feasible technology available to the appli-cant during the design stage.
It cases where the proposed system in tihealppllcation does not comply with thermal effluent If1wita-tions under Sections 301 and 306 of Pub. Law 92.500and no disposition of ziiy request for waiver underSection 316a is expected until after issuance of a con-struction permit. the environmental report shouldclearly identify and provide supporting analysis for themost feasible alternative cooling system that would beselected in the event the request for modification isdenied.
b. Normalization of cost comparison. Alternativesshould be compared on the basis of an assumed fixedamount of energy generated for distribution outside theplant. (Thus, any effect of an alternative on plant powerconsumption should be discussed.)
c. Effect of capacity factor. The projected effectof alternatives on plant capacity factor should be givenand explained for capacity factors of 60, 70, and 80percent.
d. Monetized costs. The acquisition and operatingcosts of individual systems and their alternatives (as wellas costs of the total plant mad transmission facility andalternatives) should be expressed as power generatingcosts. The latter will be derived from cost elements com-pounded or discounted (as appropriate) to their presentvalues as of the date of initial commercial operation andwill be converted to their annualized values. The methodof computation is shown in Table 3. The individual costitems in this table should be used as applicable. The totalcost will be the sum of:
0 Capital to be expended up until thescheduled date of operation. 3 7
* Interest to the date of operation on allexpenditures prior to that date.
* Expenditures subsequent to the scheduleddate of operation discounted to that date. In calcula-tions, the applicant should assume a 30-year plant life.3 s
In computing the annualized present value ofplant systems and their alternatives, the following costelements are suggested:
* Engineering design and planning costs" Construction costs* Interest on capital expended prior to
operation* Operating, maintenance, and fuel (if
applicable) costs over the 30-year life of the plant
"'For operating license proceedings, costs should be based oncapital to be expended to complete the facility.
34 Use 30-year life for steam-electric generating plants. Forother types of electric generating plants, use generally acceptedvalues.
0
4.2-42
* Cost of modification or alteration of anyother plant system if required for accommodation ofalternatives to maintain plant capacity (see item babove)
0 Maintenance costs for the transmissionfacility (if applicable)
* Cost of supplying makeup power during adelay resulting from an alternative design choice whichwill not meet the power requirement by the scheduledinservice date
e. Environmental costs. Environmental effects ofalternatives should be fully documented. To the extentpracticable, the magnitude of each effect should bequantified. Where quantification is not possible. qualita-tive evaluations should be expressed in terms of coni-parison to the effects of the subsystem chosen for theproposed design. In either case. the derivation of theevaluations should be completely documented.
Table 4 presents a set of environmental factorswhich should be considered in comparing alternativeplant systems in the cost.effectiveness analysis. Althoughincomplete, the factors listed are believed to representthe principal environmental effects of power plant con-struction and operation that can be evaluated by gen-erally accepted techniques. The table provides for threekey elements of environmental cost evaluation:
I. A description of each effect to be inea-sured (column 3).
2. Suggested units to be used for measure-ment (coluni 4). The AEC recognizes the difficulty, ifnot the impossibility, of using the assigned units forevery item in Table 4 in each case, given the currentstate of the art. The applicant may elect to use otherunits, provided they are meaningful to the infonrmedpublic and adequately reflect the impact of the listedenvironmental effects.
3. A suggested methodology of computation(column 5). Computation of effects in response to eachblock in Table 4, e.g., 1.1, 1.2, etc., should be givenwithout adjustment for effects computed in other blocksfor the same population or resource affected. However,provision is made in Table 4 (i.e., 1.9 and 4.9) toaccount for combined effects that may be either lessthan or greater than the sum of individual effects.
In discussing environmental effects, the appli-cant should specify not only the magnitude of the effect(e.g., pounds of fish killed or acres of a particular habitatdestroyed) but also the relative effect, that is, the frac-tion of the population or resource that is affected. Seediscussion in Section 5.7.
In some specific cases, accurate estimation ofan effect which the applicant believes to be very smallmay require a data collection effort that would not becommensurate with the value of the information to beobtained. In such cases, the applicant may substitute apreferred measure which conservatively estimates envi-ronmental costs for the effect in question, provided thesubstituted measure is clearly documented and realis-
tically evaluates the potentially detrimental (i.e., worstcase) aspects of the effect, and provided the measure isapplied consistently to all alternatives.
f. Supporting details. In the following subsec-tions. the applicant should discuss design alternatives foreach of the relevant plant systems (i.e., cooling syvstem.intake system, etc.). The discussion should describe eachalternative, should present estimates of its environmentalimpact. and should compare die estimated impact withthat of the proposed system. The assumptions and calcu-lations on which the esrimates are based should bepresented. Engineering design arid supporting studies.e.g.. thermal modeling. performed to assess the irnpactof alternative plant systems should be limited in scope tothose efforts required to support the cost-effectivenessanalysis dtat led to selection of the proposed design.
g. Presentation of alternative designs. The resultsshould be tabulated for each plant system in a fornatconsistent with the utilization of the definitions inTable 4.
The monetized costs of the proposed systemsand alternatives should be presented on an incrementalbasis. This micans that the costs of the proposed systemshould appear as zeroes in appropriate columns of sum-mary tables and costs of the other alternative systemsshould appear as cost differences, with any negativevalues enclosed in parentlheses. The environmental costsare not incremental, and the tabulations should there-fore show these as total costs, whether monetized ornot. (If an environmental effect is considered beneficial,the entry should be enclosed in parentheses.)
In addition to the information displayed in thetables, the applicant should provide a textual descriptionof the process by which the tradeoffs were weighed andbalanced in arriving at the proposed design. This discus-sion may include any factors not provided for in thetabulation.
10.1 Circulating System (exclusive ofintake and discharge)
The applicant should identify and describe alterna-tives to the proposed cooling system design. Estimates ofenvivonmental effects should be prepared and tabulated.Where cooling towers are discussed, the analysis shouldinclude variations in drift and blowdown and o;"ionalcontrol ranges that might minimize the environmentalimpact to the receiving air, water, or land with respect totine or space.
10.2 Intake System
The applicant should identify and describe alterna-tives to the proposed intake system design. Estimates ofenvironmental effects should be prepared and tabulated.Alternatives should be referenced to any requirementsfor Intake systems imposed under PL 92-500.
4.2-43
a Cost of modification or alteration of anyother plant system if required for accommodation ofalternatives to maint-in plant capacity (see item babove)
* Maintenance costs for the transmissionfacility (if applicable)
* Cost of supplying makeup power during adelay resulting from an alternative design choice whichwill not nieCt the power requirement by the scheduledinservice date
e. Environmental costs. Environmental effects ofalternatives should be fully documented. To the extentpracticable, the magnitude of each effect should bequantified. Where quantification is not possible, qualita.tive evaluations should be expressed in terzms of com-parison to the effects of the subsystem chosen for theproposed design. In either case, the derivation of theevaluations should be completely documented.
Table 4 presents a set of environmental factorswhich should be considered in comparing alternativeplant systems in the cost-effectiveness analysis. Althoughlincomplete, die factors listed are believed to representthe principal environmental effects of power plant con-struction and operation that can be evaluated by gen-erally accepted techniques. The table provides for threekey elements of environmental cost evaluation:
i. A description of each effect to be inca-sured (column 3).
2. Suggested units to be used for measure-ment (column 4). The AEC recognizes the difficulty, ifnot the impossibility, of using the assigned units forevery item in Table 4 in each case, given the currentstate of die art. The applicant may elect to use otherunits, provided they are meaningful to the informedpublic and adequately reflect the impact of the listedenvironmental effects.
3. A suggested methodology of computation(column 5). Computation of effects in response to eachblock in Table 4, e.g., 1.1, 1.2, etc., should be givenwithout adjustment for effects computed in other blocksfor the same population or resource affected. However,provision is made in Table 4 (i.e., 1.9 and 4.9) toaccount for combined effects that may be either lessthan or greater than the sum of individual effects.
In discussing environmental effects, the appli-cant should specify not only the magnitude of the effect(e.g., pounds of fish killed or acres of a particular habitatdestroyed) but also the relative effect, that is, the frac-tion of the population or resource that is affected. Seediscussion in Section 5.7.
In some specific cases, accurate estimation ofan effect which the applicant believes to be very smallmay require a data collection effort that would not becommensurate with the value of the information to beobtained. In such cases, the applicant may substitute apreferred measure which conservatively estimates envi-ronmental costs for the effect in question, provided thesubstituted measure is clearly documented and realis-
tically evaluates the potentially detrimental (i.e., worstcase) aspects of the effect, and provided the measure isapplied consistently to all alternatives.
f. Supporting details. In the following subsec-tions, the applicant should discuss design alternatives foreach of the relevant plant systens (i.e., cooling system.intake system, etc.). The discussion should describe eachalternative, should present estimates of its environmentalimpact, and should compare the estimated impact withthat of the proposed system. The assumptions and calcu-lations on which the estimates are based should bepresented. Engineering design and supporting studies.e.g., thermal modeling, performed to assess the impactof alternative plant systems should be limited in scope tothose efforts required to support the cost-efflectivenessanalysis th~at led to selection of the proposed desigr.
g. Presentation of alternative designs. The resultsshould be tabulated for each plant system in a fonuatconsistent with the utilization of the definitions inTable 4.
The monetized costs of the proposed systenisand alternatives should be presented on an incrementalbasis. This means that the costs of the proposed systemshould appear as zeroes in appropriate columns of stim-mary tables and costs of the other alternative systemsshould appear as cost differences, with any negativevalues enclosed in parentheses. The environmental costsare not incremental, and the tabulations should there-fore show these as total costs, whether monetized ornot. (If an environmental effect is considered beneficial.the entry should be enclosed in parentheses.)
In addition to the information displayed in thetables, the applicant should provide a textual descriptionof the process by which the tradeoffs were weighed andbalanced in arriving at the proposed design. This discus-sion may include any factors not provided for in thetabulation.
10.1 Circulating System (exclusive ofintake and discharge)
The applicant should identify and describe alterna-tives to the proposed cooling system design. Estimates ofenvii-onmental effects should be prepared and tabulated.Where cooling towers are discussed, the analysis shouldinclude variations in drift and blowdown and o-'r;,nalcontrol ranges that might minimize the envirornentalimpact to the receiving air, water, or land with respect totime or space.
10.2 Intake System
The applicant should identify and describe alterna-tives to the proposed intake system design. Estimates ofenvironmental effects should be prepared and tabulated.Alternatives should be referenced to any requirementsfor intake systems imposed under PL 92-500.
4.243
10.3 Discharge System
The applicant should identify and describe alterna.tives to the proposed discharge system design. Estimatesof environmental effects should be prepared and tabu-lated. Appropriate graphic illustrations of visible plumesor hydraulic mixing zones (air or water as applicable)should be included.
10.4 Chemical Waste Treatment
Alternative chemical systems that meet EPAeffluent guidelines but involve differing external environ-mental impacts associated with ultimate waste disposalof end products should be evaluated. Management ofcorrosion and resulting corrosion products released withcooling tower blowdown should be treated in detail. Thedescr.ption should include selecification of both maxi-mum and average concentrations and dilution sources.(If a discharge is not continuous, the discharge scheduleshould be specified.) Any toxicity and lethality toaffected biota should be documented for all potentialpoints of exposure. Specifically, information should besufficient to define the impacts to entrained organismsat their points of exposure, as well as the impactsbeyond the point of discharge. Estimates of environ-mental effects should be prepared and tabulated.
10.5 Biocide Treatment
The applicant should describe alternatives to the useof biocide for control of fouling organisms, includingboth mechanical and chemical methods where such alter-natives may be expected to have less severe environ-mental effects than the proposed system. The infor-mation provided on chemical biocidcs should be similarto that specified above for chemical effluent treatment.Estimates of environmental effects should be preparedand tabulated.
10.6 Sanitary Waste System
Alternative sanitary waste systems which meet EPAguidelines for municipal waste treatment should beidentified and discussed with regard to the environ-mental implications of both waste products and chemi-cal additives for waste treatment. Estimates of environ-mental effect on receiving land, water, and air should beconsidered and tabulated to the extent that measurableeffects can be identified.
10.7 Liquid Radwaste Systems
For proposed light-water-cooled reactor installationsin which the quantities of radioactive material in ef-
fluents will be limited to levels that are within thenumerical guides for design objectives and limitingconditions of operation set forth in the Commission'sproposed amendments (dated February 20, 1974) to 10CFR Part 50 and embodied in a new Appendix 1,39 nofurther consideration need be given to the reduction ofradiological inpacts in fornulating alternative plantdesigns. If the reactor is not a light-water-cooled reactor,the possibility must be explored of an alternative rad-waste system that reduces the level of radioactivity inthe effluents and direct radiation to the levels proposedin Appendix I. In any case, for reactors to which theproposed Appendix I does not apply, the applicantshould demonstrate sufficient consideration of alterna-tive radwaste systems and of their radiological output toassure that releases from the proposed facility will be aslow as practicable.
10.8 Gaseous Radwaste Systems
Consideration of systems for the disposal of gaseousradwaste is subject to the qualifying condition noted inSection 10.7 above.
10.9 Transmission Facilities
The applicant should discuss the cost and environ-mental effects of alternative routes for new transmissionfacilities required for tie-in of the proposed facility tothe applicant's system. The documentation shouldinclude maps of the alternative routes. These mapsshould clearly indicate topographic features importantto evaluation of the routes and boundaries of visuallysensitive areas. The applicant may frind the documentscited in Section 3.9 helpful in this analysis. Estimates ofenvironmental effects should be prepared and tabulated.
10.10 Other Systems
Any plant system, other than those specified above,that is associated with an adverse environmental effectshould be discussed in terms of practicable and feasiblealternatives that may reduce or eliminate this environ-mental effect.
S'"Final Environmental Statement Concerning ProposedRule-Making Action: Numerical Guides for Design Objectivesand Limiting Conditions for Operation to Meet the Criterion "AsLow as Practicable" for Radioactive Material in Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Effluents," WASH-1258, Vol. 1,pp. 1A-3 to IA-5, prepared by the Directorate of RegulatoryStandards, US. Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D.C.20545.
4.2-44
CHAPTER 11
SUMMARY BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS0 . This chapter should demonstrate through a benefit-cost analysis of the proposed plant why in the appli-cant's /udgmnent the aggregate benefits outweigh therjggregate costs. The Commission will independenit'prepare a cost-benefit analysis of the proposed plant inthe Environmental Statement: nevertheless, the appli-cant should perform his own analysis in order to aid theCommission itn its evaluation.
Although the benefit-cost analysis approach dis-cussed in this guide is conceptually similar to thebenefit-cost approach classically employed in a purelyeconomic context, the method recommended differsfrom it procedurally. This is because the benefits andcosts to be evaluated will not all be monetized by theapplicant. The incommensurable nature of the benefitsand costs makes it virtually impossible to provide a con-cise assessment of benefits vs. costs in classical quantita-tive terms. Even though a simple numerical weighing ofbenefits against costs is clearly not feasible here, theapplicant can evaluate the factors on a judgmental basis
that is consistent with the underlying concept ofbenefit-cost analysis.
The following considerations may be helpful to theapplicant in preparing the analysis. As indicated above, itis incumbent on the applicant to demonstrate that thebenefits of the proposed facility are considered to out-weigh the aggregate costs. Beyond this, the degree towhich the benefits may outweigh the costs is a factorwhich will be considered in the Commission's "Environ-mental Statement." In selecting each proposed plantsystem from a set of alternative systems, the cost-effectiveness analysis of Chapter 10 will have maximizedthe net benefit (i.e., aggregate of benefits minus thecosts).
In presenting the cost-benefit analysis, the applicantshould first consider the benefits identified and de-scribed in Chapters I and 8. Secondly, generating,environmental, and other cost items identified inChapters 4, 5, 8, and 10 should be considered; thesecosts should be summarized in tabular form.
4.2-45
CHAPTER 12
ENVIRONMENTAL APPROVALS AND CONSULTATION
List and give the status of all licenses, permits, andother approvals of plant construction and operationsrequired by Federal, State, local, and regional authoritiesfor the protection of the environment.
List all laws or ordinances applicable to theproposed transmission system and the status of ap-provals that must be obtained. Indicate any publichearings held or to be held with respect to the proposedtransmission system.
The listing should cite the relevant statutory orother authority requiring approvals with respect to theconstruction and/or operation of the plant and shouldbe categorized by the environmental impact to whichthe approval is addressed. These categories could in-clude, for example, air, land, and water use andplanning, fish diversion, and construction effects.
Discuss the status of efforts to obtain a waterquality certification under Section 401 and dischargepermits under Section 402, of the Federal Water Pollu.tion Control Act, as amended. If certification has notalready been obtained, indicate when it is expected. Ifcertification is not required, explain. Any other actionssuch as a pending request based on Section 316(a) of
Public Law 92-500 for effluents limitation or standardsmodification should be explained.
If a discharge could alter the quality of the water orair of another State, indicate the State or States thatmay be affected and their applicable linitations, stan-dards, or regulations.
In view of the effects of the plant on the economicdevelopment of the region in which it is located, theapplicant should also note the State, local, and regionalplanning authorities contacted or consulted. OMB Cir-cular A-95 40 identifies the State, metropolitan, andregional clearinghouses that should be contacted asappropriate. (A listing of the clearinghouses that serve aparticular site area may be obtained from the NRC.)
Where consumptive water uses involve permits oradjudication, applicants should show evidence of suchwith respect to State, Federal, or Compact or Com-mission authorities having purview over the proposeddiversion.
4 * Inquiries concerning this circular may be addressed to theOffice of Management and Budget. Washington, D.C. 20503.
4.2-46
CHAPTER 13
REFERENCES
The applicant should provide a bibliography ofsources used in preparation of the environmental report.
References cited should be ke'.ed to the specificchapters to which they apply.
0
4.2-47
TABLE 1
.SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR URANIUM FUEL CYCLE(from 10 CFR Part 51, §51.20)
(Normalized to model LWR annual fuel requirement)
Maximum effect per annual fuel requirementNatural resource use TotalMWe LWR
Land (acres):Temporarily committed ...............
Undisturbed area ..................Disturbed area..... ................
Permanently committed ...............Overburden moved (millions of MT) ......
Water (millions of gallons):Discharged to air .....................
Discharged to water bodies .............Discharged to ground ..................
T otal .......................
Fossil fuel:Electrical energy (thousands of MW-hour)..
Equivalent coal (thousands of MT) .....
Natural gas (millions of scf) ............
Effluents - chemical (MT):Gases (including entrainment):a
SO x ...........................
N O xb ...........................
Hydrocarbons .....................CO .... .... .... ....... .....Particulates .......................
Other gases:F" ... . .. .. . °... . . ... . . . .. ... . ....
Liquids:SO 4 ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NO ..................... ...Fluoride .........................C a* .... ........................Cl-........* *° .,.°..........Na÷ ..........................
NH 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ...Fe ...........................
6345184.62.7
156
I 1,040123
11,319
317115
92
4,400
1,177
13.528.7
1,156
0.72
10.326.712.95.48.6
16.911.50.4
Equivalent to 90 MWe coal.fired powerplant
Equivalent to 90 MWe coal-fired powerplant
- 2 pcrcent model 1,000 MWc LWR withcooling tower.
<4 percent of model 1 ,000 MWe LWR withonce-through cooling.
<5 percent of model 1,000 MWe LWR output.Equivalent to the consumption of a 45-MWecoal-fired powerplant.
<0.2 percent of model 1 ,000 MWe energyoutput
Equivalent to emissions from 45-MWe coal-fired plant for a year.
Principally from UF6 production enrichment andreprocessing. Concentration within range ofstate standard-below level that has effectson human health.
From enrichment, fuel fabrication, and repro-cessing steps. Components that constitute apotential for adverse environmental effect arepresent in dilute concentrations and receiveadditional dilution by receiving bodies ofwater to levels below permissible standards.The constituents that require dilution andthe flow of dilution water are:
NH 3 - 600 cfsNO3 - 20 cfsFluoride - 70 cfs
(continued)
4.2-48
-00-AMMMMOM."
TABLE 1 (continued)
Natural resource use Total Maximum effect per annual fuel requirementof model 1,000 MWe LWR
Tailings solutions (thousands of MT) ...
Solids .............................
Effluents- Radiological (curies):Gases (including entrainment):
R n-222 ..........................R a-226 ..........................Th-230 ..........................U ranium .........................Tritium (thousand) .................Kr-85 (thousands) ..................1-129 ...........................1-13 1 .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. .. . .. .Fission products and transuranics .....
Liquids:Uranium and daughters ..............
Ra-226 ..........................T h-230 ..........................
Th-234 ..........................
R u-106 ..........................Tritium (thousands) ................
Solids (buried):Other than high level ...............
Thermal (billions)Transportation (man-rem):
Exposure of workers and generalpublic .........................
240
91,000
750.020.020.032
16.7350
0.00240.0241.01
From mills only -no significant effluents toenvironment.
Principally from mills--no significant effluentsto environment.
Principally from mills-maximum annual doserate <4 percent of average natural back-ground within 5 mi of mill. Results in 0.06man-rem per annual fuel requirement.
Principally from fuel reprocessing plants-Whole body dose is 4.4 man-rem per annualfuel requirements for population within 50 miradius. This is <0.005 percent of averagenatural background dose to this population.Release from Federal Waste Repository of0.005 Ci/yr has been included in fissionproducts and transuranics total.
2.1 Principally from milling--included in tailingsliquor and returned to ground-no effluents;therefore, no effect on environment.
0.0034 From UF6 production-concentration 5 per-0.0015 cent of OCFR Part 20 for total processing of
27.5 model LWR annual fuel requirements.0.01 From fuel fabrication plants-concentration 10
percent of 10CFR Part 20 for total processing26 annual fuel requirements for model LWR.
0.1 5C From reprocessing plants-maximum concentra-2.5 tion 4 percent of 10 CFR Part 20 for total
reprocessing of 26 annual fuel requirementsfor model LWR.
601
3,360
All except I Ci comes from mills-included intailings returned to ground-no significanteffluent to the environment, I Ci from con-version and fuel fabrication is buried.
<7 percent of model 1,000 MWe LWR.
0.334
2Estimatcd effluents based upon combustion of equivalent coal for power generation.bl. 2 percent from natural gas use and process.C(s-137 (0.075 Ci/AFR) and Sr-90 (0.004 Ci/AFR) are also emitted.
4.2-49
TABLE 2
PRIMARYa BENEFITS TO BE CONSIDERED INCOST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS
Direct Benefits
Expected average annual generation in kW h .........................................................C apacity in kW ...................................................... ........... ........... ...Proportional distribution of electrical energy
(Expected annual delivery in kWh)Ind ustrial .. ... .. . .... . ... .. . .. . ... . .. .. ... . ... .. ... ... .. ... . . .. .. .. .. . . . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .C om m ercial .............................................................................R esidential . .......................... ..................................... ..... .... .....O th er . .. .. . .... .. ... . .. . ... . .. ... ... .. ... .. .. ... .. .. .. ... . . .. . .. .. .. . . .. . . ... . .. .. .. .. .
Expected average annual Btu (in millions) of steam sold from the facility ..................................Expected average annual delivery of other beneficial products (appropriate physical units) .....................Annual revenues from delivered benefits:
Electrical energy generated ..................................................................S team sold . ..... ......... ..... ....... .. ..................... ............................O ther products ...........................................................................
Indirect Benefits (as appropriate)
Taxes (local, State, Federal) .....................................................................R esearch ....... ....... ....... ....... ................................... ............... ..... ..R egional product ..............................................................................Environmental enhancement:
R ecreation ................................................................................N avigation ................................................................................Air Quality:
S O 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NOX .............................. I .................................................Particulates .......................................................................... ...O th ers .... .. . .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. ... .. .. ... .. ... .. ... .. .. .. .... . .. .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. .. ...
E m ploym ent .................................................................................E ducation ...................................................................................O th ers .. ... .. .. . ... ... . .. .. . .. . .. ... ... .. .. .. ... .. .. ... .. .. ... .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. . . .. .
aSee Section 8.1
4.2-50
I
TABLE 3
MONETIZED BASES FOR GENERATING COSTSa
Item Symbol Unit Item Description
Total outlay required tobring facility to operation
Annual operating cost
C'
ot
$ All capital outlays including interest expense to be investedin completion of the facility compounded to present valueas of the scheduled inservice date of operation.
$ This is the total operating and maintenance cost of plantoperation in year t.
Annual fuel cost S This is the total fuel cost in year I.
Cost of makeup powerpurchased or supplied inyear t
Discount factor
Total generating cost-present value
Total generating cost-present value annualized
Pt
V
GCP
GCa
S Cost of power purchased or supplied internally in year t tomake up deficiency of power associated with anyalternative which introduces delay. h
P = (I + i)- where i is the applicant's estimated averagecost of capital over the life of this plant.
30 30S GCp = CI +• v(Ot + Ft) + E vtPt
t=1 t=!
s GC= =GC Xi(l+i)3P (1 + i) 30 - I
apor conventional (nuclear or fossil fuel) steamclcctric plants.bDelay to be computed from the time of filing for.a construction permit (10 CFR Part 51, § 51.20)
4.2-51
TABLE 4 (continued)
Population or Unit of Method ofPrimary Impact Resources Affected Description Measurea Computation
4.7 Transmission lineoperation
4.7.1 Land Use Land preempted by right-of-way %, dollars.may be used for additionalbeneficial purposes such asorchards, picnic areas, nurseries,hiking and riding trails.
4.7.2 Wildlife Modified wildlife habitat mayresult in changes.
Qualifiedopinion.
4.8 Other land impacts
Estimate percent of right-of-wayfor which no multiple use activitiesare planned. Annual value ofmultiple use activities less cost ofimprovements.
Summarize qualified opinion in-cluding views of cognizant localand State wildlife agencies whenavailable.
The applicant should describe andquantify any other environmentaleffects of the proposed plant whichare significant.
Where evidence indicates that thecombined effects of a number ofimpacts on a particular popula-tion or resource are not adequatelyindicated by measures of theseparate impacts, the total coni-bined effect should be described.Both beneficial and adverse inter-actions should be indicated.
See discussion in Section 5.7.
t~J6%Uh
4.9 Combined orinteractive effects
4.10 Net effects
APPENDIX 1
DATA RETRIEVAL SYSTEM (PROPOSED)
With a view toward improving the usability of. datapresented by applicants, an outline format for a stan-dardized data retrieval system for storage in a computer
center is planned as an Appendix in a future revision ofthis guide. Specific use categories will be developed forthe following guide outdine topics:
Data Categories
1.0 Station purposei.1 Demand analysis1.2 Energy conservation1.3 Reserve margins1.4 Supporting references
2.0 Site and resource interfaces summaries2.1 Geography and demography2.2 Ecology2.3 Meteorology and climatology2.4 Hydrology2.5 Geology2.6 Aesthetic and cultural data
3.0 Station and unit data summaries3.1 Building and grounds data
3.23.33.43.53.63.73.83.9
Reactor and steam-electric systemWater useHeat dissipationRadiation dataChemical effluentSanitary waste dataTransportation dataElectrical transmission
6.08.09.0
10.012.013.0
Preoperational program summarySocioeconomic data summaryCost-benefit summaryDesign altematives summaryPermit and certification summaryReference list
4.2-66
APPENDIX 2
DATA NEEDED FOR RADIOACTIVE SOURCE TERMCALCULATIONS FOR PRESSURIZED WATER REACTORS
The applicant should provide the types of infor-mation listed in this appendix. The information shouldbe taken from the contents of the safety analysis reportand the environmental report of the proposed pres-surized water reactor. The appropriate sections of theSAR and ER that contain a more detailed discussion ofthe required information should be referenced. Thisinformation constitutes the basic data required in calcu-lating the releases of radioactive material in liquid andgaseous effluents (the source terms).
1. The source term model used in the calculation ofradioactive source terms (give reference) and the valuesused for the following parameters:
a. Plant capacity factor.b* Fraction of fuel releasing radioactivity in the
primary coolant (indicate the type of fuel cladding).c. Fission product escape rate coefficients.d. Corrosion product release rate coefficients.e. Tritium release rate (Ci/yr).
2. The maximum core thermal power (MWt) evaluatedfor safety considerations in the SAR. (Note: All of thefollowing responses should be adjusted to this powerlevel.)
3. The total mass (lb) of coolant in the primary systemexcluding the pressurizer and primary coolant purifica-tion system.4. The total mags (lb) of uranium and plutonium in an
equilibrium core (metal weight).5. The percent enrichment of uranium in reload fuel.6. The percent of fissile plutonium in reload fuel.7. The average primary system letdown rate (gpm) to
the primary coolant purification system.8. The average flow rate (gpm) through the primary
coolant purification system cation demineralizers.(Note: The letdown rate should include the fraction oftime the cation demineralizers are in service.) If cationdemineralizers are not used, describe the method em-ployed for controlling cesium and lithium concentra-tions in the primary coolant purification system; includethe average flow rate assumed for cesium and lithiumcon trol.
9. The number and type of steam generators and thecarryover factor used in your evaluation for iodine andnonvolatiles.10. The total steam flow (lb/hr) in the secondary sys-tem.11. The mass of steam in each steam generator (lb).12. The mass of liquid in each steam generator (lb).13. The total mass of coolant in the secondary system(Ib). For recirculating U-tube steam generators, do notinclude the coolant in the condenser hotwell.14. The average total steam generator blowdown rate(gpm).
15. The regeneration frequency (days) for the con-densate demineralizers. The type of resins used (deep-bed demineralizers or Powdex filter/demineralizers).16. The fraction of the steam generator feedwaterprocessed through the condensate dcmineralizers and theDFs used in your evaluation of the condensate demnin-eralizer system.17. The flow rate (gpm) of water used to dilute liquidwaste prior to discharge.18. The average shim bleed flow (gpm).19. System description of the process used for shimbleed. A process flow diagram of the system indicatingall of the decontamination factors considered in yourevaluation.20. The shim bleed holdup times considered in yourevaluation for collection, processing, and discharge. Thefraction of the processed stream expected to be dis-charged over the life of the plant. The capacities (gal) ofall tanks considered in calculating the holdup times.21. The sources, flow rate (gpd), and expected activities(fraction of primary coolant activity. PCA) of any otherwastes which are processed with the shim bleed.22. Description of the system used to process the wastesidentified in Item 21. Identify the differences betweenthe processing of these waters and tie shim bleed.Provide the DFs used in your evaluation.23. The holdup times used in your evaluation for thecollection, processing, and discharge of the wastesindicated in Item 21. The fraction of the processedstream expected to be discharged over the life of theplant. Provide the tank capacities (gal) and flow rates(gpd) used in your evaluation.24. The input sources, average flow rates (gpd), andactivities (fraction of PCA) of wastes processed throughthe clean waste system.25. Description of the system used to process the cleanwastes. The process flow diagram for the clean wastesystem, indicating all of the decontamination factorsused in your evaluation.26. The clean waste holdup times used in your evalua-tion and the fraction of the processed stream expectedto be discharged over the life of the plant. The capacities(gal) of all tanks considered in calculating the holduptimes.27. The sources, flow rates (gpd), and activities (frac-tion of PCA) of wastes processed through the dirtywaste system.28. Description of the system used to process the dirtywastes. A process flow diagram for the dirty waste sys-tem, indicating all of the decontamination factors usedin your evaluation.29. The dirty waste holdup times used in your evalua-tion. The fraction of the processed stream expected tobe discharged over the life of the plant. The capacities
4.2-67
0APPENDIX 2
DATA NEEDED FOR RADIOACTIVE SOURCE TERMCALCULATIONS FOR PRESSURIZED WATER REACTORS
The applicant should provide die types of infor-mation listed in this appendix. The information shouldbe taken from the contents of the safety analysis reportand the environmental report of the proposed pres-surized water reactor. The appropriate sections of theSAR and ER that contain a more detailed discussion ofthe required information should be referenced. Thisinformation constitutes the basic data required in calcu-lating the releases of radioactive material in liquid andgaseous effluents (the source temis).
1. The source term model used in the calculation ofradioactive source terms (give reference) and tie valuesused for the following parameters:
a. Plant capacity factor.b. Fraction of fuel releasing radioactivity in the
primary coolant (indicate the type of fuel cladding).c. Fission product escape rate coefficients.d. Corrosion product release rate coefficients.e. Tritium release rate (Cilyr).
2. The maximum core thernmal power (MWt) evaluatedfor safety considerations in the SAR. (Note: All of thefollowing responses should be adjusted to this powerlevel.)
3. The total mass (ib) of coolant in the primary systemexcluding the pressurizer and primary coolant purifica-tion system.
4. The total mass (lb) of uranium and plutonium in anequilibrium core (metal weight).5. The percent enrichment of uranium in reload fuel.6. The percent of fissile plutonium in reload fuel.7. The average primary system letdown rate (gpm) to
the primary coolant purification system.8. The average flow rate (gpm) through the primary
coolant purification system cation demineralizers.(Note: The letdown rate should include the fraction oftime the cation demineralizers are in service.) If cationdemineralizers are not used, describe the method em-ployed for controlling cesium and lithium concentra-tions in the primary coolant purification system; includethe average flow rate assumed for cesium and lithiumcontrol.
9. The number and type of steam generators and thecarryover factor used in your evaluation for iodine andnonvolatiles.to. 'rhc total steam flow (lb/hr) in the secondary sys-tern.11. The mass of steam in each steam generator (lb).12. The mass of liquid in each steam generator (lb).13. The total mass of coolant in the secondary system(Ib), F:or recirculating U-tubo steiam Fatiorattrs, do notIrielihldo ihl coohItIl II liae twiltdoll•or hItwoll,14, T'heo vrotage olal to1llt 4141 Wuralt)r blowdulW| rFte0(Opm).
15. The regeneration frequency (days) for the con-densate demincralizers. The type of resins used (deep-bed demineralizers or Powdex filtcr/demineralizers).16. The fraction of the steam generator feedwaterprocessed through the condensate demineralizers and theDFs used in your evaluation of the condensate delnin-eralizer system.17. The flow rate (gpm) of water used to dilute liquidwaste prior to discharge.18. The average shim bleed flow (gpm).19. System description of the process used for shimbleed. A process flow diagram of the system indicatingall of the decontamination factors considered in yourevaluation.20. The shim bleed holdup times considered in yourevaluation for collection, processing, and discharge. Thefraction of the processed stream expected to be dis-charged over the life of the plant. The capacities (gal) ofall tanks considered in calculating the holdup times.21. The sources, flow rate (gpd). and expected activities(fraction of primary coolant activity, PCA) of any otherwastes which are processed with the shim bleed.22. Description of the system used to process the wastesidentified in Item 21. Identify the differences betweenthe processing of these waters and the shim bleed.Provide the DFs used in your evaluation.23. The holdup times used in your evaluation for thecollection, processing, and discharge of the wastesindicated in Item 21. The fraction of the processedstream expected to be discharged over the life of theplant. Provide the tank capacities (gal) and flow rates(gpd) used in your evaluation.24. The input sources, average flow rates (gpd), andactivities (fraction of PCA) of wastes processed throughthe clean waste system.25. Description of the system used to process the cleanwastes. The process flow diagram for the clean wastesystem, indicating all of the decontamination factorsused in your evaluation.26. The clean waste holdup times used in your evalua-tion and the fraction of the processed stream expectedto be discharged over the life of the plant. The capacities(gal) of all tanks considered in calculating the holduptimes.27. The sources, flow rates (gpd), and activities (frac-tion of PCA) of wastes processed through the dirtywaste system.28. Description of the system used to process the dirtywastes. A process flow diagram for the dirty waste sys-tem, indicating all of the decontamnination factors usedIII your evaluation.29) 'ITle dilty wo"1e hwldu0 p th10 11"d II your evaltia-IItit, 'The I'rtcI lhrt of thelp Iprocookod ht101n 0XpI)OUto It,io dilscharged over the life of the plant, TIh'li captacitlos
4.2-67
(gal) of all tanks considered in calculating the holduptimes.30. Description of the system used to maintain second-ary coolant purity, e.g., steam generator blowdown. Theprimary-to-secondary-system leakage rate (gpd) used inyour evaluation. The parameters used for steamn gen-erator blowdown rate (gpm) or condensate demineralizerregenerant wastes volumes (gpd).31. Description of the system used to process thesecondary system wastes, e.g.. the stcan generator blow-down purification system or regenerant waste treatmentsystem. A process flow diagram for the system, indi-cating all of the decontamination factors used.32. The holdup times used in calcalating releases fromthe secondary system. The fraction of the processedwaste stream expected to be discharged over the life ofthe plant. The capacities (gal) of all tanks considered inthe calculation of the holdup times.33. Description of the process used for stripping fissiongases from the primary coolant. The average continuousgas stripping rate (gpm). The number of primary coolantvolumes stripped for cold reactor shutdown. Indicatewhether the reactor will operate in a base-load or load-follow mode.34. Description of the process used to hold up gases fornormal operations and for shutdown strippings from theprimary system. A process flow diagram of the system,indicating the capacities (ft 3 ), number, and design andoperating storage pressures for pressurized storage tanks.35. The volumes (ft 3 /yr) of gases stripped from theprimary coolant.36. Description of die normal operation of the wastegas processing system, e.g., number of tanks held inreserve for back-to-back shutdown, fill time for tanks.The minimum holdup time used in your evaluation.37. The primary coolant leakage rate (lb/day)_to theauxiliary building used in your evaluation. The tempera-ture of the primary coolant in the letdown line as itenters the auxiliary building. The iodine partition factorused in calculating releases from the auxiliary building.38. Description of the treatment provided for auxiliarybuilding ventilation air to reduce iodine prior to dis-charge. The decontamination factor for the charcoaladsorber used in your evaluation.39. The total free volume (ft 3 ) of the containmentbuilding.40. Description of the system used to reduce airborne
radioactivity from the containment building atmosphereprior to personnel entry and purging of tie containment.The recirculation rate (103 cfm), operating tine of theinternal cleanup system, tie bed depth and decon-tamination factor of the charcoal adsorbers, and themixing efficiency used in your evaluation.41. State the number of containment purges per year. Ifcontainment ventilation air is purged through charcoaladsorbers, provide the bed depth and the iodine decon-tamnination factor. Primary coolant leak rate to the con-tainment building used in your evaluation.42. Description of special design features used to reducesteam leakage to the turbine building and the leakagerate used in your evaluation.43. Description of the treatment system used to reducegaseous iodine releases from the steam generator blow-down flash tank and the fraction of iodine releasedthrough the system vent used in your evaluation.44. Description of the treatment system to reduceiodine released from the condenser air ejectors and thefraction of iodine released through the system vent usedin your evaluation.45. Inputs to solid waste system: volumes, curie con-tents, and sources of wastes. Principal radionuclides,onsite storage times prior to shipment. Description ofsolid waste processing system.46. Process and instrumentation diagrams for liquid,gaseous, and solid radwaste systems along with all othersystems influencing the source term calculations, i.e.,primary coolant purification system, steam generatorblowdown purification system.47. Sources, flow rates (gpd), and activities of detergentwastes. Description of treatment process, volumes ofholdup tanks, and decontamination factors used in yourevaluation.48, Process and instrumentation diagrams for fuel poolcooling and purification systems and for fuel pool venti-lation systems. Provide the volume of fuel pool andrefueling canals, identify the source of makeup water,and describe the management of water inventoriesduring refueling. Provide an analysis of the concentra-tions of radioactive materials in the fuel pool waterfollowing refueling, and calculate the releases of radio-active materials in gaseous effluents due to evaporationfrom the surface of the fuel pool and refueling canalsduring refueling and during normal power operation.Provide the bases for the values used.
04.2-68
APPENDIX 3
DATA NEEDED FOR RADIOACTIVE SOURCE TERMCALCULATIONS FOR BOILING WATER REACTORS
0
The applicant is required to provide the types ofinformation listed in this appendix. The informationshould be taken from the contents of the safety analysisreport and the environmental report of tile proposedboiling water reactor. Tile appropriate sections of theSAR and ER that contain a more detailed discussion ofthe required information should be referenced. Thisinformation constitutes the basic data required in calcu-lating tie releases of radioactive material in liquid andgaseous effluents (the source terms).
1. The source temi model used in the calculation ofradioactive source terms (cite reference) and tile valuesused for the following parameters and their bases:
a. Plant capacity factor.b. Isotopic release rates of noble gases to the
reactor coolant and at 30 minutes decay (/pCi/sec).c. Concentrations of fission products in the re-
actor coolant (,uCi/g).d. Concentrations of corrosion and activation
products in the reactor coolant (uCi/g).c. Tritium release rate (Ci/yr).
2. The maximum core dtermal power (MWt) evaluatedfor safety considerations in the SAR (Note: All of thefollowing responses should be adjusted to this powerlevel).
3. The total steam flow (lb/hr).4. The mass (Ib) of primary coolant in tile reactor
vessel.5. The average flow rate (gpm) through tie reactor
coolant cleanup demineralizer. The type of resins used,i.e., deep bed demineralizers or (Powdex) filter/demin-eralizers. The DFs used for the cleanup demineralizers.
6. The total mass (lb) of uranium and plutonium in anequilibrium core (metal weight).
7. The percent enrichment of uranium in reload fuel.8. The percent of fissile plutonium in reload fuel.9. The regeneration frequency (days) for tihe con-
densate demineralizers, The type of resins used. i.e..deep bed dernineralizers or (Powdex) filter/demin-eralizers. The DFs used in the evaluation for the con-densate demineralizers.10. The flow rate (gpm) of water used to dilute liquidwaste prior to discharge.11. The input sources, average flow rates (gpd). andactivities (fraction of PCA) of wastes processed throughthe high-purity waste system.12. Description of the system used to process the high-purity waste. The process flow diagram for the high-purity waste system, indicating all decontaminationfactors used in the evaluation.13. The high-purity waste holdup times used in theevaluation and the fraction of the processed streamexpected to be discharged over the life of the plant. Thecapacities (gal) of all tanks considered in calculating theholdup time.
14. The input sources. average flow rates (gpd). andactivities (fraction of I'CA) of wastes processed throughthe low-purity waste system.15. l)escription Of the system used to process the low-purity waste. The process flow diagramn for the low-purity waste system, indicating all of tie decontamina-tion factors used in tile evaluation.16. The low-purity waste holdup times used in theevaluation arid the fraction of tile processed streamexpected to be discharged over the life of the plant. Thecapacities (gal) of all tanks considered in calculating theholdup times.17. The input sources. averag,: tlow rates (gpd), andactivities (fraction of I'CA) of water processed throughthe chemical waste system.18. Description of the system used to process thechemical waste. Tile process flow diagram I'r thtechemical waste system. indicating all decontaminationfactors used in the evaluation,19. The chemical waste holdup times used in the evalua-tion and the fraction of the processed stream expectedto be discharged over the life of tile plant. The capacities(gal) of all tanks considered in calculating the holduptimes.20. The steam leakage rate (lb/hr) to "- turbinebuilding considered in the evaluation. Description ofspecial design features used to reduce steam leakage. andthe fraction of iodine released. If ventilation air istreated through charcoal adsorbers. the bed depth aridthe iodine decontamination factor used.21. The steam flow (lb/hr) to the turbine gland seal andthe source of the steam (nonradioactive steam from anauxiliary boiler, water from tile condensate storage. ormain steam).22. The mass (ib) of steam in tie reactor vessel.23. The design holdup time (hr) for gas vented from thegland seal condenser, tie iodine partition factor for thecondenser. and the fraction of iodine released througlhthe system vent. Description of the treatment systemused to reduce iodine releases from the gland seal sys-tem.24. The primary coolant leakage rate (lblday) to tilereactor building, the temperature of the coolant, and theiodine partition factor used in calculating releases fromthe reactor building in tile evaluation.25. Description of the treatment provided for tilereactor building ventilation air to reduce iodine prior todischarge. The decontamination factor and the beddepth of the charcoal adsorber used in the evaluation.26. The holdup time (hr) for offgases from the maincondenser air ejector prior to processing by the offgastreatment system.27. Description and expected performance of thegaseous waste treatment system of the offgases from thecondenser air ejector. The expected air inleakage per
4.2-69
condenser shell, the number of condenser shells, and theiodine partition factor for the condenser.28. The mass of charcoal in die charcoal delay systemused to treat tie offgases from the main condenser airejector, the operating temperature of the delay system.and the dynanic adsorption coefficient for Xe and Kr.based on the system design used• in calculating therespective holdup times.29. Description of cryogenic distillation system, frac-tion of gases partitioned during distillation, holdup insystem, storage following distillation, and expectedsystem leakage.30. Inputs to the solid waste system: volumes, curiecontents, and sources of wastes. Principal radionuclides,onsitc storage times prior to shipment. Description ofsolid waste processing system.31. Sources, flow rates (gpd), and activities of detergentwastes. Description of treatment process, volumes of
holdup tanks, and decontamination factors used in theevaluation.32. Process and instrumentation diagrams for liquid,gaseous, and solid radwaste systems and all other sys-tents influencing tie source term calculations, e.g.,primary coolant purification system.33. Process and instrumentation diagrams for fuel poolcooling and purification systems and for fuel pool venti-lation systems. Provide die volume of fuel pool andrefueling canals, identify the source of makeup water,and describe die management of water inventoriesduring refueling. Provide an analysis of the concentra-tions of radioactive materials in the fuel pool waterfollowing refueling, and calculate the releases of radio-active materials in gaseous effluents due to evaporationfrom die surface of the fuel pool and refueling canalsduring refueling and during nomial power operation.Provide the bases for the values used.
4.2-70
APPENDIX 4
EXAMPLES OF CHARTS SHOWING RADIATION EXPOSURE PATHWAYS
Is 'liii IF~J ~*
Figure 1. Generalized Exposure Pathways for Man
4.2-71
Figure 2. Generalized Exposure Pathways for Organisms Other Than Man
4.2-72
APPENDIX 5PROPOSED ANNEX TO APPENDIX D, 10 CFR PART 50
DISCUSSION OF ACCIDENTS IN APPLICANTS' ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS:
ASSUMPTIONS
"This Annex requires certain assumptions to bemade in discussion of accidents in EnvironmentalReports submitted pursuant to Appendix D by appli-cants' for construction permits or operating licenses fornuclear power reactors.2
"In the consideration of the environmental risksassociated with the postulated accidents, the prob-abilities of their occurrence and their consequences mustboth be taken into account. Since it is not practicable toconsider all possible accidents, the spectrum of ac-cidents, ranging in severity from trivial to very serious, isdivided into classes.
"Each class can be characterized by an occurrencerate and a set of consequences.
"Standardized examples of classes of accidents to beconsidered by applicants in preparing the section ofEnvironmental Reports dealing with accidents are setout in tabular form below. The spectrum of accidents,from the most trivial to the most severe, is divided intonine classes, some of which have subclasses. The acci-dents stated in each of the eight classes in tabular formbelow are representative of the types of accidents thatmust be analyzed by the applicant in EnvironmentalReports; however, other accident assumptions may bemore suitable for individual cases. Where assumptionsare not specified, or where those specified are deemedunsuitable, assumptions as realistic as the state of knowl-edge permits shall be used, taking into account thespecific design and operational characteristics of theplant under consideration.
"For each class, except Classes I and 9, the environ-mental consequences shall be evaluated as indicated.Those classes of accidents, other than Classes I and 9,found to have significant adverse environmental effectsshall be evaluated as to probability, or frequency ofoccurrence to permit estimates to be made of environ-mental risk or cost arising from accidents of the givenclass.
"Class I events need not be considered because oftheir trivial consequences.
'Although this annex refers to applicants' EnvironmentalReports, the current assumptions and other provisions thereofare applicable, except as the content may otherwise require, toAEC draft and final Detailed Statements.
2Preliminary guidance as to the content of applicants'Environmental Reports was provided in the Draft AEC Guide tothe Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear PowerPlants dated February 19, 1971, a document made available tothe public as well as to the applicant. Guidance concerning thediscussion of accidents in environmental reports was provided toapplicants In a September 1, 1971, document entitled "Scope ofApplicants' Environmental Reports with Respect to Transporta-tion, Transmission Lines, and Accidents," also made available tothe public.
"Class 8 events are those considered in safetyanalysis reports and AEC staff safety evaluations. Theyare used, together with higidy conservative assumptions,as the design-basis events to establish the performancerequirements of engineered safety features. The highlyconservative assumptions and calculations used in AECsafety evaluations are not suitable for environmental riskevaluation, because their use would result in a sub-stantial overestimate of the environmental risk. For thisreason, Class 8 events shall be evaluated realistically,Consequences predicted in this way will be far less severethan those given for the same events in safety analysisreports where more conservative evaluations are used.
"The occurrences in Class 9 involve sequences ofpostulated successive failures more severe than thosepostulated for establishing the design basis for protectivesy-.tems and engineered safety features. Their conse-quences could be severe. However, the probability oftheir occurrence is so small that their environmental riskis extremely low. Defense in depth (multiple physicalbarriers), quality assurance for design, manufacture, andoperation, continued surveillance and testing, and con-servative design are all applied to provide and maintainthe required high degree of assurance that potentialaccidents in this class are, and will remain, sufficientlyremote in probability that the environmental risk isextremely low. For these reasons, it is not necessary todiscuss such events in applicants' EnvironmentalReports.
"Furthermore, it is not necessary to take intoaccount those Class 8 accidents for which the applicantcan demonstrate that the probability has been reducedand thereby the calculated risk to the environment madeequivalent to that which might be hypothesized for aClass 9 event.
"Applicant may substitute other accident classbreakdowns and alternative values of radioactive mate-rial releases and analytical assumptions, if such substitu-tion is justified in the Environmental Report."
ACCIDENT ASSUMPTIONS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Accident1.0 Trivial incidents.2.0 Small releases outside containment.3.0 Radwaste system failures.
3.1 Equipment leakage or malfunction.3.2 Release of waste gas storage tank contents.3.3 Release of liquid waste storage tank contents.
4.2-73
4.0 Fission products to primary system (BWR).4.1 Fuel cladding defects.4.2 Off-design transients that induce fuel failures
above those expected.5.0 Fission products to primary and secondary sys.
tems (PWR).5.1 Fuel cladding defects and steam generator
leaks.5.2 Off-design transients that induce fuel failure
above those expected and steam generatorleak.
5.3 Steam generator tube rupture.6.0 Refueling accidents.
6.1 Fuel bundle drop.6.2 Heavy object drop onto fuel in core.
7.0 Spent fuel handling accident.7.1 Fuel assembly drop in fuel storage pool.7.2 Heavy object drop onto fuel rack.7.3 Fuel cask drop.
8.0 Accident initiation events considered in designbasis evaluation in the safety analysis report.
8.1 Loss.of-coolant accidents.8.1(a) Break in instrument line from primary system
that penetrates the containment.8.2(a) Rod ejection accident (PWR).8.2(b) Rod drop accident (BWR).8.3(a) Steamline breaks (PWRs outside contain.
ment).8.3(b) Steamline breaks (BWR).
(c) Consequences should be calculated by weight-ing the effects in different directions by the frequencythe wind blows in each direction.
3.2 Release of waste gas storage tank contents (in-cludes failure of release valve and rupture disks).
(a) 100% of the average tank inventory shall beassumed to be released.
(b) Meteorology assumptions: xIQ values shall be1/10 of those given in Safety Guide No. 3 or 4.
(c) Consequences should be calculated by weight-ing the effects in different directions by the frequencythe wind blows in each direction.
3,3 Release of liquid waste storage tank coter~ts(a) Radioactive liquids: 100% of the average stor-
age tank inventory shall be assumed to be spilled on thefloor of the building.
(b) Building structure shall be assumed to remainintact.
(c) Meteorology assumptions: x/Q values shall be1/10 of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 3 or 4.
(d) Consequences should be calculated by weight-ing the effects in different directions by the frequencythe wind blows in each direction.
ACCIDENT-4.0 FISSION PRODUCTS TOPRIMARY SYSTEM (BWR)
4.1 Fuel cladding defects.Release from these events shall be included and
evaluated under routine releases in accordance withproposed Appendix i.
4.2 Off-design transients that induce fuel failuresabove those expected (such as flow blockage and fluxmaldistributions).
(a) 0.02% of the core inventory of noble gases and0.02% of the core inventory of halogens shall be as-sumed to be released into the reactor coolant.
(b) 1% of the halogens in the reactor coolant shallbe assumed to be released into the steamline.
(c) The mechanical vacuum pump shall be assumedto be automatically isolated by a high radiation signal onthe steamline.
(d) Radioactivity shall be assumed to carry over tothe condenser where 10% of the halogens shall be as-sumed to be available for leakage from the condenser tothe environment at 0.5%/day for the course of the acci-dent (24 hours).
(e) Meteorology assumptions-x/Q values shall be1/10 of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 3 datedNovember 2, 1970.
'Copies of such Guide(s) dated November 2, 1970, areavailable at the Commission's Public Document Room, 1717 HStreet N.W., Washington, D.C., and on request to the Director,Division' of Reactor Standards, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission,Washington, D.C. 20545. (These two guides have been revisedand reissued as Revision 2, Regulatory Guide 1.3, and Revision2, Regulatory Guide 1.4, both dated June 1974. Copies of theseguides may be obtained by request from the U.S. Atomic EnergyCommission, Washington, D.C., 20545, Attention: Director ofRegulatory Standards.)
ACCIDENT ASSUMPTIONS
ACCIDENT- l.0 TRIVIAL INCIDENTS
These incidents shall be included and evaluatedunder routine releases in accordance with proposedAppendix 1.1
ACCIDENT-2.0 SMALL RELEASE OUTSIDECONTAINMENT
These releases shall include such things as releasesthrough steamline relief valves and small spills and leaksof radioactive materials outside containment. Thesereleases shall be included and evaluated under routinereleases in accordance with proposed Appendix I.
ACCIDENT-3.0 RADWASTE SYSTEM FAILURE
3.1 Equipment leakage or malfunction (includesoperator error).
(a) Radioactive gases and liquids: 25% of averageinventory in the largest storage tank shall be assumed tobe released.
(b) Meteorology assumptions-XJQ values are to be1/10 of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 3 or 4.2
136 FR 11113, June 8. 1971.
4.2-74
(f) Consequences should be calculated by weight-ing the effects in different directions by the frequencythe wind blows in each direction.
ACCIDENT--5.0 FISSION PRODUCTS TO PRIMARYAND SECONDARY SYSTEMS(PRESSURIZED WATER REACTOR)
5.1 Fuel cladding defects and steam generator leak.Release from these events shall be included and
evaluated under routine releases in accordance withproposed Appendix i.
5.2 Off-design transients that induce fuel failureabove those expected and steam generator leak (such asflow blockage and flux maldistributions).
(a) 0.02% of the core inventory of noble gases and0.02% of the core inventory of halogens shall be as-sumed to be released into the reactor coolant.
(b) Average inventory in the primary system priorto the transient shall be based on operation with 0.5%failed fuel.
(c) Secondary system equilibrium radioactivityprior to the transient shall be based on a 20 gal/daysteam generator leak and a 10 gpm blowdown rate.
(d) All noble gases and 0.1% of the halogens in thesteam reaching the condenser shall be assumed to bereleased by the condenser air ejector.
(c) Meteorology assumptions: X/Q values should be1/10 of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 4.
(f) Consequences should be calculated by weight-ing the effects in different directions by the frequencythe wind blows in each direction.
5.3 Steam generator tube rupture.(a) 15% of the average inventory of noble gases and
halogens in the primary coolant shall be assumed to bereleased into the secondary coolant.
The average primary coolant activity shall be basedon 0.5% failed fuel.
(b) Equilibrium radioactivity prior to rupture shallbe based on a 20 gallon per day steam generator leak anda 10 gpm blowdown rate.
(c) All noble gases and 0.1% of the halogens in thesteam reaching the condenser shall be assumed to bereleased by the condenser air ejector.
(d) Meteorology assumptions: xIQ values shall beI/1 0 of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 4.
(e) Consequences should be calculated by weight-ing the effects in different directions by the frequencythe wind blows in each direction.
ACCIDENT-6.0 REFUELING ACCIDENTS
6.1 Fuel bundle drop.(a) The gap activity (noble gases and halogens) in
one row of fuel pins shall be assumed to be released intothe water. (Gap activity is 1% of total activity in a pin.)
(b) One week decay time before the accidentoccurs shall be assumed.
(c) Iodine decontamination factor in water shall be500.
(d) Charcoal filter efficiency for -iodines shall be9K%.
(e) A realistic fraction of the containment volumeshall be assumed to leak to the atmosphere prior toisolating the containment.
(f) Meteorology assumptions: X/Q values shall be1/10 of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 3 or 4.
(g) Consequences should be calculated by weight-ing the effects in different directions by the frequencythe wind blows in each direction.
6.2 Heav.v object drop onto fuel in core.(a) The gap activity (noble gases and halogens) in
one average fuel assembly shall be assumed to be re-leased into the water. (Gap activity shall be 1% of totalactivity in a pin.)
(b) 100 hours of decay time before objecl isdropped shall be assumed.
(c) Iodine decontamination factor in water shall be500.
(d) Charcoal filter efficiency for iodines shall be99%.
(e) A iealistic fraction of the containment volumeshall be assumed to leak to the at-nosphere prior toisolating the containment.
(f) Meteorological assumptions: XIQ values shall be1/10 of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 3 or 4.
(g) Consequences should be calculated by weight.ing the effects in different directions by the frequencythe wind blows in each direction.
ACCIDENT-7.0 SPENT FUEL HANDLING ACCIDENT
7.1 Fuel assembly drop in fuel storage pool.(a) The gap activity (noble gases and halogens) in
one row of fuel pins shall be assumed to be released intothe water. (Gap activity shall be 1% of total activity in apin.)
(b) One week decay time before accident occursshall be assumed.
(c) Iodine decontamination factor in water shall be500.
(d) Charcoal filter efficiency for iodines shall be99%.
(e) Meteorology assumptions: x/Q values shall be1/10 of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 3 or 4.
(f) Consequences shall be calculated by weightingthe effects in different directions by the frequency thewind blows in each direction.
7.2 Heavy object drop onto fuel rack.(a) The gap activity (noble gases and halogens) in
one average fuel assembly shall be assumed to be re-leased into the water. (Gap activity is 1% of total activ-ity in a pin.)
(b) 30 days decay time before the accident occursshall be assumed.
(c) Iodine decontamination factor in water shall be500.
(d) Charcoal filter efficiency for iodines shall be99%.
(e) Meteorology assumptions: XJQ values shall be1/10 of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 3 or4.
4.2-75
. (f) Consequences should be calculated by weight-ing 'the effects in different directions by the frequencythe wind blows in each direction.
7.3 Fuel cask drop.(a) Noble gas gap activity from one fully loaded
fuel cask (120-day cooling) shall be assumed to be re.
leased. (Gap activity shall be 1% of total activity in thepins.)
(b) Meteorology assumptions-×/Q values shall be1/10 of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 3 or 4.
(c) Consequences should be calculated by weight-ing the effects in different directions by the frequencythe wind blows in each direction.
ACCIDENT-8.0 ACCIDENT INITIATION EVENTS CONSIDERED IN DESIGN BASIS EVALUATION
IN THE SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT
8. I Loss-of-coolant accidents
Small Pýpe Break (6 in. or less)
(a) Source term: the average radioactivity inventory inthe primary coolant shall be assumed. (This inventoryshall be based on operation with 0.5% failed fuel).
(b) Filter efficiencies shall be 95% for internal filtersand 99% for external filters.
(c) 50% building mixing for boiling water reactors shallbe assumed.
(d) For the effects of Plateout, Sprays. Decontamina-tion Factor in Pool, and Core Sprays, the followingreduction factors shall be assumed:
For pressurized water reactors-0.05 with chemicaladditives in sprays, 0.2 for no chemical addi-tives.
For boiling water reactors-0. 2.(e) A realistic building leak rate as a function of time
shall be assumed.(f) Meteorology assumptions: x/Q values shall be 1/10
of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 3 or 4.(g) Consequences should be calculated by weighting the
effects in different directions by the frequency thewind blows in each direction.
Large Pipe Break
(a) Source term: The average radioactivity inventory inthe primary coolant shall be assumed. (This inventoryshall be based on operation with 0.5% failed fuel), plusrelease into the coolant of:
For pressurized water reactors-2% of the coreinventory of halogens and noble gases.
For boiling water reactors-0.2% of the core inven-tory of halogens and noble gases.
(b) Filter efficiencies shall be 95% for internal filtersand 99% for external filters.
(c) 50% building mixing for boiling water reactors shallbe assumed.
(d) For the effects of Plateout, Containment Sprays,Core Sprays (values based on 0.5% of halogens inorganic form), the following reduction factors shall beassumed:
For pressurized water reactors -0.05 with chemicaladditives in sprays, 0.2 for no chemical addi-tives.
For boiling water reactors-0.2.(e) A realistic building leak rate as a function of time
and including design leakage of steainlinc valves inBWRs shall be assumed.
(f) Meteorology assumptions: X/Q values shall be 1/10of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 3 or 4.
(g) Consequences should be calculated by weighting theeffects in different directions by the frequency thewind blows in each direction.
8.1(a) Break in instrument line from primary systemthat penetrates the containment (lines not provided withisolation capability inside containment).
(a) The primary coolant inventory of noble gasesand halogens shall be based on operation with 0.5%failed fuel.
(b) Release rate through failed line shall be as-sumed constant for the four-hour duration of the acci-dent.
(c) Charcoal filter efficiency shall be 99%.(d) Reduction factor from combined plateout and
building mixing shall be 0.1.(e) Meteorology assumptions-xjQ values shall be
1/10 of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 3.
(f) Consequences shall be calculated by weightingthe effects in different directions by the frequency thewind blows in each direction.
8.2(a) Rod ejection accident (pressurized water re-actor)
(a) 0.2% of the core inventory of noble gases andhalogens shall be assumed to be released into the pri-mary coolant plus the average inventory in the primarycoolant based on operation with 0.5% failed fuel.
(b) Loss-of-coolant accident occurs with break sizeequivalent to diameter of rod housing (see assumptionsfor Accident 8.1).
8.2(b) Rod drop accident (boiling water reactor)Radioactive material released
4.2-76
(a) 0.025% of the core inventory of noble gas and0.025% of the core inventory of halogens shall bc as-sumed to be released into thc coolant.
(b) 1%17 of the halogens in the reactor coolant shallbe assumed to be released into the condenser.
(c) The mechanical vacuum pump shall be assumedto be automatically isolated by high radiation signal onthe steamline.
(d) Radioactivity shall be assumed to carry over to
the condenser where 10c% of the halogens shall be as-sumed to be available for leakage from the condenser tothe environment at 0.5%/day for the course of the acci.dent (24 hours).
(e) Meteo.-,uogy assumptions: x/Q values shall be1/10 of those given in AIC Safety Guide No. 3.
(0 Consequences should be calculated by weight.ing the effects in different directions by the frequencythe wind blows in each direction.
8.3(a) Steamline breaks (pressurized water reactors -, outsile contaiwnn t)lireak size equal to area of safety, ralhe throat.
Small break Large break
(a) Primary coolant activity shall be based on operationwith 0.5% failed fuel. The primary system contributionduring the course of the accident shall be based on a 20gal/day tube leak.
(b) During the course of the accident, a halogen reduc-tion factor of 0.1 shall be applied to the primary cool-ant source when the steam generator tubes are covered;a factor of 0.5 shall be used when the tubes areuncovered.
(c) Secondary coolant system radioactivity prior to theaccident shall be based on:
(a) 20 gallons per day primary-to-secondary leak.(b) Blowdown of 10 gpm.
(d) Volume of one steam generator shall be released tothe atmosphere with an iodine partition factor of 10.
(e) Meteorology assumptions: x/Q values shall be 1/10of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 4.
(0 Consequences shall be calculated by weighting thdeffects in different directions by the frequency thewind blows in each direction.
8.3(b) Steamline breaks (boiling water reactor)
(a) Primary coolant activity shall be based on operationwith 0.5% failed fuel. The primary system contributionduring the course of the accident shall be based on a 20gal/day tube leak.
(b) A halogen reduction factor of 0.5 shall be applied tothe primary coolant source during the course of theaccident.
(c) Secondary coolant system radioactivity prior to theaccident shall be based on:
(a) 20 gallons per day primary-to-secondary leak.(b) Blowdown to 10 gpm.
(d) Volume of one steam generator shall be assumed tobe released to the atmosphere with an iodine partitionfactor of 10.
(e) Meteorology assumptions-x/Q values shall be 1/10of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 4.
(f) Consequences shall be calculated by weighting theeffects in different directions by the frequency thewind blows in each direction.
Small pipe break (of 1/4 ft 2 ) Large break
(a) Primary coolant activity shall be based on operationwith 0.5% failed fuel.
(b) The main steamline shall be assumed to fail, re-leasing coolant until 5 seconds after isolation signal isreceived.
(c) Halogens in the fluid released to the atmosphereshall be at 1/10 the primary system liquid concentra-tion.
(d) Meteorology assumptions-x/Q values shall be 1/10of those in AEC Safety Guide No. 3.
(e) Consequences shall be calculated by weighting theeffects in different directions by the frequency thewind blows in each direction.
(a) Primary coolant activity shall be based on operationwith 0.5% failed fuel.
(b) Main steamline shall be assumed to fail, releasingthat amount of coolant corresponding to a 5 secondsisolation time.
(c) 50% of the halogens in the fluid exiting the breakshall be assumed to be released to the atmosphere.
(d) Meteorology assumptions-×/Q values shall be 1/10of those in AEC Safety Guide No. 3.
(e) Consequences shall be calculated by weighting theeffects in different directions by the frequency thewind blows in each direction.
4.2-77
(a) 0.025% of the core inventory of noble gas and0.025% of the core inventory of halogens shall be as-sumed to be released into t(ie coolant.
(b) 1% of the halogens in the reactor coolant shallbe assumed to be released into the condenser.
(c) Tile mechanical vacuum pump shall be assumedto be automatically isolated by high radiation signal onthe steamline.
(d) Radioactivity shall be assumed to carry over to
the condenser where 10% of the halogens shall be as-sumed to be available for leakage from tile condenser tothe environment at 0.5%/day for the course of the acci.dent (24 hours).
(e) Meteorolugy assumptions: y/Q values shall be1/10 of those given in AIC Safety Guide No. 3.
(f) Consequences should be calculated by weight-ing the effects in different directions by die frequencythe wind blows, in each direction.
8.3(a) Stendline breaks (pressurized water reactors.- outside con tainment)Break size equal to area of safe i'O vahe throat.
Small break Large break
(a) Primary coolant activity shall be based on operationwith 0.5% failed fuel. The primary system contributionduring the course of the accident shall be based on a 20gal/day tube leak.
(b) During the course of the accident, a halogen reduc-tion factor of 0.1 shall be applied to the primary cool-ant source when the steam generator tubes are covered,a factor of 0.5 shall be used when the tubes areuncovered.
(c) Secondary coolant system radioactivity prior to theaccident shall be based on:
(a) 20 gallons per day primiary-to-secondary leak.(b) Blowdown of 10 gpm.
(d) Volume of one steam generator shall be released tothe atmosphere with an iodine partition factor of 10.
(e) Meteorology assumptions: x/Q values shall be 1/10of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 4.
(f) Consequences shall be calculated by weighting theeffects in different directions by the frequency thewind blows in each direction.
8.3(b) Steartline breaks (boiling water reactor)
Small pipe break (of 1/4 ft 2 )
(a) Primary coolant activity shall be based on operationwith 0.5% failed fuel.
(b) The main steamline shall be assumed to fail, re-leasing coolant until 5 seconds after isolation signal isreceived.
(c) Halogens in the fluid released to the atmosphereshall be at 1110 the primary system liquid concentra-tion.
(d) Meteorology assumptions-x/Q values shall be 1/10of those in AEC Safety Guide No. 3.
(e) Consequences shall be calculated by weighting theeffects in different directions by the frequency thewind blows in each direction.
(a) Primary coolant activity shall be based on operationwith 0.5% failed fuel. The primary system contributionduring the course of the accident shall bc based on a 20gal/day tube leak.
(b) A halogen reduction factor of 0.5 shall be applied tothe primary coolant source during the course of theaccident.
(c) Secondary coolant system radioactivity prior to theaccident shall be based on:
(a) 20 gallons per day primary-to-secondary leak.(b) Blowdown to 10 gpm.
(d) Volume of one steam generator shall be assumed tobe released to the atmosphere with an iodine partitionfactor of 10.
(e) Meteorology assumptions-x/Q values shall be 1/10of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 4.
(Q Consequences shall be calculated by weighting theeffects in different directions by the frequency thewind blows in each direction.
Large break
(a) Primary coolant activity shall be based on operationwith 0.5% failed fuel.(b) Main steanmline shall be assumed to fail, releasing
that amount of coolant corresponding to a 5 secondsisolation time.
(c) 50% of the halogens in the fluid exiting the breakshall be assumed to be released to the atmosphere.
(d) Meteorology assumptions-X/Q values shall be 1/10of those in AEC Safety Guide No. 3.
(e) Consequences shall be calculated by weighting theeffects in different directions by the frequency thewind blows in each direction.
04.2-77
(a) 0.025% of the core inventory of noble gas and0.025% of the core inventory of halogens shall be as-sumed to be released into the coolant.
(b) 1% of the halogens in the reactor coolant shallbe assumed to be released into the condenser.
(c) The mechanical vacuum pump shall be assumedto be automatically isolated by high radiation signal onthe steamline.
(d) Radioactivity shall be assumed to carry over to
the condenser where 10% of the halogens shall bc as-sumed to be available for leakage from the condenser tothe environment at 0.5%/day for the course of the acci.dent (24 hours).
(e) Meteorz;ugy' assumptions: XJQ values shall be1/10 of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 3.
(f) Consequences should be calculated by weight-ing the effects in different directions by the frequencythe wind blows in each direction.
8.3(a) Steantline breaks (pressurized water reactors-outside contaimnent)Break size equal to area of safety valve throat.
Small break Large break
(a) Primary coolant activity shall be based on operationwith 0.5% failed fuel. The primary system contributionduring the course of the accident shall be based on a 20gal/day tube leak.
(b) During the course of the accident, a halogen reduc-tion factor of 0.1 shall be applied to the primary cool-ant source when the steam generator tubes are covered;a factor of 0.5 shall be used when the tubes areuncovered.
(c) Secondary coolant system radioactivity prior to theaccident shall be based on:
(a) 20 gallons per day primary-to-secondary leak.(b) Blowdown of i0 gpm.
(d) Volume of one steam generator shall be released tothe atmosphere with an iodine partition factor of 10.
(e) Meteorology assumptions: x/Q values shall be 1/10of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 4.
(0 Consequences shall be calculated by weighting threffects in different directions by the frequency thewind blows in each direction.
8.3(b) Steamnline breaks (boiling water reactor)
Small pipe break (of 1/4 ft2)
(a) Primary coolant activity shall be based on operationwith 0.5% failed fuel.
(b) The main steamline shall be assumed to fail, re-leasing coolant until 5 seconds after isolation signal isreceived.
(c) Halogens in the fluid released to the atmosphereshall be at 1/10 the primary system liquid concentra-tion.
(d) Meteorology assumptions-xjQ values shall be 1/10of those in AEC Safety Guide No. 3.
(e) Consequences shall be calculated by weighting theeffects in different directions by the frequency thewind blows in each direction.
(a) Primary coolant activity shall be based on operationwith 0.5% failed fuel. The primary system contributionduring the course of the accident shall be based on a 20gal/day tube leak.
(b) A halogen reduction factor of O.5 shall be applied tothe primary coolant source during the course of theaccident.
(c) Secondary coolant system radioactivity prior to theaccident shall be based on:
(a) 20 gallons per day primary-to-secondary leak.(b) Blowdown to l0gpm.
(d) Volume of one steam generator shall be assumed tobe released to the atmosphere with an iodine partitionfactor of 10.
(e) Meteorology assurnptions-X/Q values shall be 1/10of those given in AEC Safety Guide No. 4.
(f) Consequences shall be calculated by weighting theeffects in different directions by the frequency thewind blows in each direction.
Large break
(a) Primary coolant activity shall be based on operationwith 0.5% failed fuel.
(b) Main steamline shall be assumed to fail, releasingthat amount of coolant corresponding to a 5 secondsisolation time.
(c) 50% of the halogens in the fluid exiting the breakshall be assumed to be released to the atmosphere.
(d) Meteorology assumptions-x/Q values shall be 1/10of those in AEC Safety Guide No. 3.
(e) Consequences shall be calculated by weighting theeffects in different directions by the frequency thewind blows in each direction.
4.2-77