Duke Energy performed an analysis, or had a contractor (Hughes Associates) perform the analysis (depends on site), on DAW in a sealand or storage container similar to Beaver Valley. We took into account how much material burned and for how long for a "gaseous" release, and how long fire-fighting activities occurred for the liquid release portion.
Christopher C. Courtenay, P.E. Duke Energy Senior Nuclear Engineer * Fleet Scientific Services RP Technical Staff 526 S. Church St. Charlotte, NC 28202 * Mail Code: EC07F 980-373-1894 "To the optimist, the glass is half full. To the pessimist, the glass is half empty. To the engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be." From: Powernet [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paciello, Lara R via Powernet Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2018 3:56 PM To: [email protected] Cc: Paciello, Lara R <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Powernet] Radioactive Release Performance Criteria question *** Exercise caution. This is an EXTERNAL email. DO NOT open attachments or click links from unknown senders or unexpected email. *** No, we performed our NFPA 805 analysis using Dry Active Wastes, such as contaminated materials stored in a seavan in the yard area. For wet wastes, or liquids, you may want to consider requiring administrative spill prevention techniques to contain the waste. I believe we implemented use of foam extinguishing material and storm drain barriers. That detail goes into the fire plan/training for brigade members, not RP controls. Dr. Lara Renz Paciello, CHP Radiation Protection - Dosimetry Laboratory Beaver Valley Power Station 724-682-5857 From: Powernet <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of Beth Heyeck via Powernet Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2018 11:40 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Cc: Beth Heyeck <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Powernet] Radioactive Release Performance Criteria question We are assisting our fire protection engineers with the radioactive release performance criteria for the NFPA 805 safety evaluation. As part of that evaluation, we are looking at limits for radioactive materials in areas that are outside the containment/auxiliary building air handling systems. We have a large radioactive storage facility that meets this criteria. If you performed a similar calculation, did you consider Wet Solid Wastes (filters, resins, etc meeting disposal site WACs) to be combustible contaminated materials? Elizabeth Heyeck, CHP Senior Health Physicist D.C. Cook Nuclear Plant 269-466-2545 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> ________________________________ The information contained in this message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete the original message.
_______________________________________________ Powernet mailing list [email protected] http://hpspowernet.org/mailman/listinfo/powernet_hpspowernet.org
