Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: c0c5657a-82df-46c2-8cb5-fad0fd37fb58
Document Type: srp
Title: GASEOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS1
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0520/ML052070610.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 11
Section ID: 11.3
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
(15 mrem) to the skin and less 75 76 than 0.15 mSv (15 mrem) to any organ from releases of radioiodine, 77 tritium, carbon-14, and radioactive material in particulate form. 78 b. The staff has further determined that the calculated air doses from the gaseous effluents at any location near ground level that could be occupied by individuals in unrestricted areas will be less than 0.01 cGy (10 millirads) for gamma radiation and 0.02 cGy (20 millirads) for beta radiation.79 bc. Regarding Section II.D of Appendix I, the staff has considered the potential effectiveness of augmenting the proposed gaseous waste management systems using items of reasonably demonstrated technology and have determined that further effluent treatment will not effect reductions in the cumulative population dose within a 80 km (50-mile)80 DRAFT Rev. 3 - April 1996 11.3-14 radius of the reactor at a cost of less than $1,000 per man-rem or $1,000 per man-thyroid-rem.81 3. The applicant has met the requirements of 10 CFR Part 20 since the staff has considered the potential consequences resulting from reactor operation with "1% of the operating fission product inventory in the core being released to the primary coolant" for a PWR or "a fission product release rate consistent with a noble gas release rate to the reactor coolant of 3.7 MBq/MWt-sec (100 µCi/MWt-sec) at 30 minutes decay" for a BWR and determined that under 82 these conditions, the concentrations of radioactive materials in gaseous effluents in unrestricted areas will be a small fraction of the limits specified in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table II 2, column 1. 83 4. The staff has considered the capabilities of the proposed gaseous waste management systems to meet the anticipated demands of the plant due to anticipated operational occurrences and have concluded that the system capacity and design flexibility are adequate to meet the anticipated needs of the plant. 5. The staff has reviewed the applicant's quality assurance provisions