Text

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Renewal Application
	ML21336A780
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	12/02/2021
From:	Gayheart C; Southern Nuclear Operating Co
To:	; Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
	GA0004120, NL-21-1014
	Download: ML21336A780 (1)
	v • d • e

Cheryl A. Gayheart 3535 Colonnade Parkway Regulatory Affairs Director Birmingham, AL 35243 205 992 5316 cagayhea@southernco.com December 2, 2021 Docket Nos.: 50-321 NL-21-1014 50-366 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555-0001 Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant - Units 1 and 2 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Renewal Application Ladies and Gentlemen:

In accordance with Section 3.2 of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant (HNP) Environmental Protection Plan, Units 1 and 2, Appendix B to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-57 and NPF-5, enclosed is a copy of the permit renewal application package for HNP National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Number GA0004120 submitted to the Georgia Environmental Protection Division.

This letter contains no NRC commitments. If you have any questions, please contact Ryan Joyce at 205.992.6468.

Respectfully submitted, Cheryl A. Gayheart Regulatory Affairs Director CAG/tle

Enclosure:

Hatch NPDES Permit (No. GA0004120) Renewal Application cc: Regional Administrator, Region II NRR Project Manager - Hatch 1 & 2 Senior Resident Inspector - Hatch 1 & 2 RType: CHA02.004

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Renewal Enclosure Hatch NPDES Permit (No. GA0004120) Renewal Application

12/2/21, 7:21 AM GEOS - Public CONFIRMATION OF SUBMITTAL

1. Your application has been received and will be reviewed shortly.

2. Check your account, email and text message for system notification at various milestones.

Thank you for using the GEOS system.

Please click Here to print your receipt.

Submittal Summary Submittal ID: 608436 Submittal Name: Individual Industrial NPDES Permit for New or Existing Discharges Submitted Date: 12/1/2021 2:20:37 PM Submitted by: James Delano 3535 Colonnade Parkway Birmingham AL 35243 205-992-5419 jmdelano@southernco.com Status: Admin Review Start Submission Method: On-line submission Facility / Property Name: HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT Submittal Form List Part I Application Consolidation Individual NPDES Permits for new or existing discharges Sludge Addendum Form 2C_NPDES Exisiting Industrial Attachment List Topographic map (Required) -- Online NPDES_Permit_ GA0004120 _Renewal_App_Topographic Map.pdf (2) Source water physical data (Required) -- Online NPDES_Permit_ GA0004120 _Renewal_App_ Attach(2)_Source_Water_Physical_Data.pdf (3) Cooling water intake structure data (Required) -- Online NPDES_Permit_ GA0004120 _Renewal_App_ Attach(3)_Cooling_Water_Intake_Structure_Data.pdf (4) If applicable, Source water baseline biological characterization data (Required) -- Online NPDES_Permit_ GA0004120 _Renewal_App_ Attach(4)_Source_Water_Baseline_Biological_Characterization_Data.pdf (5) Cooling water system data (Required) -- Online NPDES_Permit_ GA0004120 _Renewal_App_ Attach(5)_Cooling_Water_System_Data.pdf (6) Chosen Method(s) of Compliance with Impingement Mortality Standard (Required) -- Online NPDES_Permit_ GA0004120 _Renewal_App_ Attach(6)_Method_of_Compliance_with_Impingement_Mortality_Standard.pdf (7) Entrainment Performance Studies (Required) -- Online NPDES_Permit_ GA0004120 _Renewal_App_ Attach(7)_Entrainment_Performance_Studies.pdf (8) Operational Status (Required) -- Online NPDES_Permit_ GA0004120 _Renewal_App_ Attach(8)_Operational_Status.pdf All information received as a result of any communication with a Field Office of the Fish and Wildlife Service and/or Regional Office of the National Marine Fisheries Service (Required) -- Online NPDES_Permit_ GA0004120 _Renewal_App_ NMFS_ COE NMFS Comments - SNC Response 5-9-16 (16-0735).pdf NPDES_Permit_ GA0004120 _Renewal_App_ NMFS_ Dredge Permit BA Addendum (15-2309).pdf NPDES_Permit_ GA0004120 _Renewal_App_ NMFS_Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact.pdf https://geos.epd.georgia.gov/GA/GEOS/Public/Client/GA_GEOS/Permit/Pages/Application/FormWizard/PrintableSubmissionSummary.aspx 1/2

12/2/21, 7:21 AM GEOS - Public Attach a line drawing showing the water flow through the facility. (Required) -- Online NPDES_Permit_ GA0004120 _Renewal_App_Flow Line Diagram.pdf Sludge (Required) -- Other N/A Anti-degradation report (Optional) -- NONE Other Attachment(s) (Optional) -- Online 316(b) Supporting Information - HNP Final.pdf Industrial Stormwater Benchmark Results.pdf 1 - NPDES_Permit_ GA0004120 _Renewal_App_Cover Letter _Final.pdf Laboratory Results (Optional) -- NONE Certification Receipt Certification I hereby certify that I am the owner, or authorized agent of the owner, of the described property. Further, I consent to the Statement: work to be done as described.

Certification what year and model (yyyy-name) was your first car?

Question:

Certification *******

Question Answer:

PIN Number: ************************

Responsible James Delano Officer:

Sender IP 146.126.61.241 Address:

Terms of Use l Privacy Statement

( Last modified Time: 2019-06-27 09:19 AM PID: 12PRDWEB121 )

https://geos.epd.georgia.gov/GA/GEOS/Public/Client/GA_GEOS/Permit/Pages/Application/FormWizard/PrintableSubmissionSummary.aspx 2/2

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

3535 Colonnade Parkway, BIN N-218-EC Birmingham, AL 35243 EV-21-H1201 December 1, 2021 Hatch Nuclear Plant NPDES Permit No. GA0004120 Permit Renewal Application Mr. Ian McDowell, Environmental Engineer Industrial Permitting Unit Watershed Protection Branch Environmental Protection Division 2 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive, S.E., East Tower, Suite 1152 Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Mr. McDowell, As required, Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (SNC) has submitted the Permit Renewal Application for NPDES Permit No. GA0004120 via the Georgia EPD Online System (GEOS) on December 1, 2021. This letter attachment provides a high-level summary of the changes between the current permit and changes deemed necessary based on the current plant design and operational procedures.

Changes to Permitted Outfalls:

1. Removal of Internal Outfalls 01J and 02B as they were deemed unnecessary.

2. Addition of Wood Flour at Outfalls 01B and 02C to assist with plant equipment thermal performance integrity.

3. Addition of External Outfall 018 due to comingling of industrial stormwater with discharges from the closed-looped circulating water systems combined with industrial wastewater.

If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Ben Rothschadl at (205) 992-6388.

Sincerely, James M. DeLano Environmental Affairs Manager JMD/BTR Enclosure - NPDES Permit No. GA0004120 Permit Renewal Application

STATE OF GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION For EPD Use Only Assigned Permit No GA0001420 Georgia National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Application Part 1 This application includes Information not subject to disclosure under Georgia Law. Yes ; No Please check all of the applicable box(s) and enter the associated information:

New ; Existing NPDES discharger Change of Information discharger Existing NPDES Permit GA0001420 No.

Describe Modification Requested:

POLLUTANT CHARACTERISTICS INSTRUCTIONS: Complete A through J to determine whether you need to submit any permit application forms to the EPA. If you answer yes to any questions, you must submit this form and the supplemental form listed in the parenthesis following the question. Mark X in the box in the third column if the supplemental form is attached. If you answer no to each question, you need not submit any of these forms. You may answer no if your activity is excluded from permit requirements; see Section C of the instructions. See also, Section D of the instructions for definitions of bold-faced terms.

Mark X Mark X Specific Questions Yes No Specific Questions Yes No A. Is this facility a publicly owned treatment works which results in a B. Does or will this facility (either existing or proposed) include a X discharge to waters of the U.S.? (FORM 2A) concentrated animal feeding operation or aquatic animal production facility which results in a discharge to waters of the U.S.? (FORM 2B)

C. Is this a facility which currently results in discharges to waters of the X D. Is this a proposed facility (other than those described in A or B above) X U.S. other than those described in A or B above? (FORM 2C) which will result in a discharge to waters of the U.S.? (FORM 2D)

E. Does or will this facility treat, store, or dispose of hazardous wastes? F. Do you or will you inject at this facility industrial or municipal effluent (FORM 3) below the lowermost stratum containing, within one quarter mile of the well bore, underground sources of drinking water? (FORM 4)

G. Do you or will you inject at this facility any produced water or other H. Do you or will you inject at this facility fluids for special processes such fluids which are brought to the surface in connection with conventional as mining of sulfur by the Frasch process, solution mining of minerals, in oil or natural gas production, inject fluids used for enhanced recovery of situ combustion of fossil fuel, or recovery of geothermal energy? (FORM oil or natural gas, or inject fluids for storage of liquid hydrocarbons? 4)

(FORM 4)

I. Is this facility a proposed stationary source which is one of the 28 J. Is this facility a proposed stationary source which is NOT one of the 28 industrial categories listed in the instructions and which will potentially industrial categories listed in the instructions and which will potentially emit 100 tons per year of any air pollutant regulated under the Clean Air emit 250 tons per year of any air pollutant regulated under the Clean Air Act and may affect or be located in an attainment area? (FORM 5) Act and may affect or be located in an attainment area? (FORM 5)

Page 1 Of 10

STATE OF GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION SECTION I. FACILITY INFORMATION Facility Type of Ownership: Corporation Please check the applicable box POTW Non-POTW Federal 2A - Municipal 2B - Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation and 2C - Industrial Wastewater Discharge Application Wastewater Discharge Aquatic Animal Production 2D - New Sources & New Dischargers Application ;2C - Industrial Wastewater Discharge Application 2F - Industrial Stormwater 2D - New Sources & New Dischargers 2F - Industrial Stormwater 2E - Non-Process Sanitary Wastewater 2E - Non-Process Sanitary Wastewater Wastewater Cooling Wastewater Wastewater Cooling Wastewater Permittee Organization Formal Name: Southern Nuclear Operating Company Permittee Mailing Address: 3535 Colonnade Parkway BIN N-218-EC Permittee City: Birmingham Permittee State: AL Permittee Zip Code: 35243 Permittee County:

Facility Site Name: HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT Facility Site Address: 11028 Hatch Parkway N Facility Site City: Baxley Facility Site State: GA Facility Site Zip Code: 31513 Facility Site County: Appling Is the facility located on Indian Lands? No Facility Site tribal land indicator: :

Facility Site Latitude/Longitude (ex. 34.543, -84.804): (31.938004 , -82.355055)

Program Facility Name : Program Facility ID :

If there are any NPDES Permits that are associated with this facility provide the corresponding NPDES Permit No. and check the applicable box(s).

EPA Major (check one): Primary Industry (check one): ; yes or no yes ; no unknown unknown SIC Code(s): SIC Code Indicator:

1. 4911 4911 NAICS Code(s): NAICS Code Indicator:

1. 221113 221113 Total Design Flow (MGD): 32.5 Annual Average Daily Flow (MGD): 30.1 Page 2 Of 10

STATE OF GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION SECTION II. CONTACT INFORMATION

1. Facility Contact Affiliation Type:

Owner Contact Contractor Permit Contact Engineer Facility/Project Contact Unknown Facility Contact First Name James Facility Contact Last Name: DeLano Facility Contact

Title:

Environmental Affairs Manager Facility Contact E-mail Address: jmdelano@southernco.com Facility Contact Phone: 205-992-5419 Address Line1: 3535 Colonnade Parkway Address Line2: BIN N-218-EC City: Birmingham State: AL Zip: 35243

1. Facility Contact Affiliation Type:

Owner Contact Contractor ; Permit Contact Engineer Facility/Project Contact Unknown Facility Contact First Name Benjamin Facility Contact Last Name: Rothschadl Facility Contact

Title:

Environmental Specialist Facility Contact E-mail Address: btrothsc@southernco.com Facility Contact Phone: 205-992-6388 Address Line1: 3535 Colonnade Parkway Address Line2: BIN N-218-EC City: Birmingham State: AL Zip: 35243

1. Facility Contact Affiliation Type:

Owner Contact Contractor Permit Contact Engineer ; Facility/Project Contact Unknown Facility Contact First Name Daniel Facility Contact Last Name: Carter Facility Contact

Title:

Environmental Specialist Facility Contact E-mail Address: dcarter@southernco.com Facility Contact Phone: 912-453-2383 Address Line1: 11028 Hatch Parkway North Address Line2:

City: Baxely State: GA Zip: 31513 SECTION III. OPERATOR INFORMATION Facility Organization Formal Name: Southern Nuclear Operating Company Is operator also the owner?: yes or ; no Status:

Federal State ; Private Public Other Operator Contact E-mail Address: btrothsc@southernco.com Operator Contact Phone: 2059926388 Page 3 Of 10

STATE OF GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION SECTION IV. OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS Table No. 1 - Provide the name and permit nos. for all permits issued to this facility.

Name of Permit Permit No.

Groundwater Withdrawal 001-0001 Surface Water Withdrawal 001-0690-01 Title V 4911-001-0001-V-04-0 Maintenance Dredge Permit SAS-1994-003873 Drinking Water-Plant PG001005 Drinking Water-REC NG0010011 Industrial Stormwater GAR05000 Construction Stormwater GAR100001 Solid Waste C&D Landfill 001-004D(L)(I)

Hazardous Materials Certificate of Registration 071621550097D

2. Does your facility require any additional permits not listed 2a. If yes, what are they and what is the timeframe to obtain them?

above?

Yes ; No SECTION V. NATURE OF BUSINESS Generation of electricity through the use of nuclear fuel. Plant Hatch is jointly owned by Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe Power Corporation, Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, and the City of Dalton, Georgia.

SECTION VI. OUTFALL IDENTIFICATION AND WATER QUALITY Note: Georgias 305(b)/303(d) list can be found on EPDs website at https://epd.georgia.gov/watershed-protection-branch/watershed-planning-and-monitoring-program/water-quality-georgia#_Guidance_Submit_Data Note: Georgias list of TMDLs can be found on EPDs website at https://epd.georgia.gov/watershed-protection-branch/total-maximum-daily-loadings/final-total-maximum-daily-loadings-tmdls Page 4 Of 10

STATE OF GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION SECTION VII. EFFLUENT LIMITS AND CONDITIONS

1. Is there an effluent limit, standard, guideline, or categorical pretreatment standard established for this type of discharge in 40 CFR Part 400-471, as amended or elsewhere pursuant to 301, 306, 307, 316, 318, or 405 of the Clean Water Act?

Yes No If you answered yes, to question No. 1 above, please complete the following table below by providing the name of the discharge category and the specific citation to the regulation, if applicable, that establishes the limitation or condition.

If you answered no to question No. 1 above, please proceed to Section No. VIII.

Section VII, Table No. 1 Part Part Name Subpart Code Subpart Name Description 423 Steam Electric Power Generating 423 Steam Electric Steam Electric Power Power Generating Generating

2. Are any of the applicable effluent limitations applicable to the discharge(s) expressed in terms of production?

Yes ; No If you answered yes, complete the following table below. For an existing discharge, list an actual measurement of your average or maximum level of daily production. For new discharges, list an average or maximum projected daily production. (indicate in the table whether the production figures given are average or maximum level.) Express the production in terms and units used in the applicable discharge limitation. If you answered "no" to question No.2 above, please proceed to Section VIII.

If you answered no to question No. 2 above, please proceed to Section VIII.

Section VII, Table No. 2 - Applicable Effluent Limit Guidelines

1. AVERAGE DAILY PRODUCTION 2. AFFECTED OUTFALLS

a. QUANTITY PER DAY b. UNITS OF MEASURE c. OPERATION, PRODUCT, MATERIAL, ETC.

Page 5 Of 10

STATE OF GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION SECTION VIII. 40 CFR 122.21(R) COOLING WATER INTAKE STRUCTURES Directions: Answer questions 1 through 4 below for your cooling water intake structure(s) (CWIS). If your answer to any one of these questions is No, then the requirements of 40 CFR 125.94 through 125.99 do not apply to your facility. However, the State reserves the right to establish BPJ requirements as allowed in 40 CFR 125.90(b) for facilities.

1. Do you own or operate a cooling water intake structure(s)?

Yes No If you answered yes to question No. 1 above, please proceed to question No. 2 below.

2. Is the cooling water intake structure(s) withdrawing cooling water from waters of the State?

Yes No If you answered yes to question No. 2 above, please proceed to question No. 3 below.

Note Obtaining cooling water from a public water system, using reclaimed water from wastewater treatment facilities or desalination plants, or

recycling treated process wastewater effluent as cooling water does not constitute use of a cooling water intake structure.

3. Is the facility-wide design intake flow (DIF) for all cooling water intake structures at the facility greater 3 a.

than 2 MGD?

Yes No DIF = 148.61 (mgd)

If you answered yes to question No. 3 above, please provide the facility-wide design intake flow (DIF) AIF = 63.13 (mgd) and actual intake flow (AIF) for all cooling water intake structures in box 3.a.

Note Actual Intake Flow means the average volume of water withdrawn on an annual basis by the cooling water

intake structures over the past three years

4. Is more than 25 percent of the water the facility withdraws on an actual intake flow (AIF) basis used for 4 a.

cooling purposes?

Yes No AIF = 100 %

If you answered yes to question No. 4 above, please provide the AIF percentage used exclusively for cooling purposes in box 4.a.

SECTION IX. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL EXISITNG FACILITIES

What type of facility are you?

Existing Facility New Facility New Offshore Oil and Gas Facility Page 6 Of 10

STATE OF GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION

Do you withdraw greater than 125 MGD actual intake flow (AIF), as defined at 40 CFR 125.92(a), of water for cooling purposes?

Yes ; No

Are you a new unit at an existing facility, as defined at 40 CFR 125.92(u)?

Yes ; No You will be required to upload attachments (2),(3),(4),(5),(6),(7),(8),(H)

Description of possible attachments (2) Source water physical data (3) Cooling water intake structure data (4) Source water baseline biological characterization data (5) Cooling water system data (6) Chosen Method(s) of Compliance with Impingement Mortality Standard (7) Entrainment Performance Studies (8) Operational Status (9) Entrainment Characterization Study (10) Comprehensive Technical Feasibility and Cost Evaluation Study (11) Benefits Valuation Study (12) Non-water Quality Environmental and Other Impacts Study (13) Peer Review (H) All facilities must also submit with their permit application all information received as a result of any communication with a Field Office of the Fish and Wildlife Service and/or Regional Office of the National Marine Fisheries Service.

Page 7 Of 10

STATE OF GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION SECTION X. BTA STANDARD FOR IMPINGEMENT MORTALITY FOR EXISTING UNITS AT EXISTING FACILITIES The final rule requires that existing facilities subject to this rule must comply with one of the following seven alternatives listed below identified in the national BTA standard for impingement mortality at 40 CFR § 125.92 (hereafter, impingement mortality standards).

Note: Please check the box under the applicable impingement mortality standard in which your facility currently has in operation or intends to install to comply with the referenced standard. Please also provide the appropriate documentation for the chosen alternative and attach it your application.

1. Operate a closed-cycle recirculating system as defined at 40 CFR § 125.92;

Currently in operation Request a compliance schedule NA

2. Operate a cooling water intake structure that has a maximum through screen design intake velocity of 0.5 fps or less; Currently in operation Request a compliance schedule ; NA

3. Operate a cooling water intake structure that has a maximum through screen intake velocity of 0.5 fps; a) In the case of Option (3), which EPA considers to be a streamlined alternative, the facility must submit information to the Director that demonstrates that the maximum intake velocity as water passes through the structural components of a screen measured perpendicular to the screen mesh does not exceed 0.5 feet per second.

Currently in operation Request a compliance schedule ; NA

4. Operate an offshore velocity cap as defined at 40 CFR § 125.92 that is installed before October 14, 2014; Currently in operation Request a compliance schedule ; NA

5. Operate a modified traveling screen that the Director determines meets the definition at 40 CFR § 125.92 and that the Director determines is the best technology available for impingement reduction; a) In the case of Option (5), the facility must submit a site-specific impingement technology performance optimization study that must include two years of biological sampling demonstrating that the operation of the modified traveling screens has been optimized to minimize impingement mortality. As discussed below, if the facility does not already have this technology installed and chooses this option, the Director may postpone this study till the screens are installed (see Section X.7 below).

Currently in operation Request a compliance schedule ; NA Page 8 Of 10

STATE OF GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION

6. Operate any other combination of technologies, management practices and operational measures that the Director determines is the best technology available for impingement reduction; or (a) In the case of Option (6), the facility must submit a site-specific impingement study including two years of biological data collection demonstrating that the operation of the system of technologies, operational measures and best management practices has been optimized to minimize impingement mortality. If this demonstration relies in part on a credit for reductions in the rate of impingement already achieved by measures taken at the facility, an estimate of those reductions and any relevant supporting documentation must be submitted. The estimated reductions in rate of impingement must be based on a comparison of the system to a once-through cooling system with a traveling screen whose point of withdrawal from the surface water source is located at the shoreline of the source waterbody.

Currently in operation Request a compliance schedule ; NA

7. Achieve the specified impingement mortality performance standard.

(a) The impingement mortality performance standard in (7) requires that a facility must achieve a 12-month impingement mortality performance of all life stages of fish and shellfish of no more than 24 percent mortality, including latent mortality, for all non-fragile species that are collected or retained in a sieve with maximum opening dimension of 0.56 inches and kept for holding period of 18 to 96 hours0.00111 days 0.0267 hours 1.587302e-4 weeks 3.6528e-5 months . The Director may, however, prescribe an alternative holding period.

The 12-month average of impingement mortality is calculated as the sum of total impingement mortality for the previous 12 months divided by the sum of total impingement for the previous 12 months. A facility must choose to demonstrate compliance with this requirement for the entire facility, or for each individual cooling water intake structure. Biological monitoring must be completed at a minimum frequency of monthly.

Currently in operation Request a compliance schedule ; NA SECTION XI. BTA STANDARDS FOR IMPINGEMENT MORTALITY AND ENTRAINMENT FOR NEW UNITS AT EXISTING FACILITIES The owner or operator of a new unit at an existing facility must achieve one of two compliance alternatives under the national BTA standards for impingement mortality and entrainment for new units at existing facilities at § 125.94(e) (hereafter, new unit standards).

Option No. 1 You must reduce AIF at the new unit, at a minimum, to a level commensurate with that which can be attained by the use of a closed-cycle recirculating system as defined at § 125.92(c)(1).

Option No. 2 You must demonstrate to the Director that it has installed and will operate and maintain, technological or other control measures that reduce the level of adverse environmental impact from any cooling water intake structure used to supply cooling water to the new unit to a comparable level to that which would be achieved through flow reductions commensurate with the use of a closed-cycle recirculating system. Under this alternative, the owner or operator of a facility must demonstrate entrainment mortality reductions that are equivalent to 90 percent or greater of the reduction that could be achieved through compliance with the first alternative entrainment standard for new units.

Page 9 Of 10

STATE OF GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION SECTION XII. Variance Requests Do you intend to request or renew one or more of the variances authorized at 40 CFR 122.21(m)? Check all that apply. Please consult with EPD to determine what information needs to be submitted and when.

a. Fundamentally Different Factors

b. Non-conventional pollutants

c. Water quality related effluent limitations

d. Thermal discharges

e. Not applicable CERTIFICATION Will you be uploading and attaching all of the required application documents (i.e. process flow diagram, maps, design development reports, analytical data; etc.) in the following section?

Yes No If No, all mailed or otherwise submitted required application documents not uploaded and attached to this application must include the certification statement as required in 40 CFR 122.22. Please click here to access, print, sign, and mail to EPD.

I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. Based upon my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.

Print Name: James M. DeLano

Title:

Environmental Affairs Manager Phone Number: 2059925419 Signature: James M. Delano Date: 10/14/2021 Page 10 Of 10

EPA I.D. NUMBER (copy from Item 1 of Form 1)

Form Approved.

Please print or type in the unshared areas only OMB No. 2040-0086.

Approval expires 3-31-98.

Form U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER 2C EXISTING MANUFACTURING, COMMERCIAL, MINING AND SILVICULTURE OPERATIONS NPDES Consolidated Permits Program I. OUTFALL LOCATION For each outfall, list the latitude and longitude of its location to the nearest 15 seconds and the name of the receiving water.

A. OUTFALL NUMBER B. LATITUDE C.LONGITUDE D. RECEIVING WATER (name)

(list) 1. DEG 2. MIN 3. SEC. 1.DEG. 2. MIN. 3.SEC.

01 31 56 16.34 -82 -20 -25.26 Altamaha River 02 31 56 16.34 -82 -20 -25.26 Altamaha River 03 31 56 16.17 -82 -20 -39.47 Altamaha River 03A 31 56 16.13 -82 -20 -38.58 Altamaha River 018 31 56 2.37 -82 -20 -19.25 Altamaha River II. FLOWS, SOURCES OF POLLUTION, AND TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES A. Attach a line drawing showing the water flow through the facility. Indicate sources of intake water, operations contributing wastewater to the effluent, and treatment units labeled to correspond to the more detailed descriptions in Item B. Construct a water balance on the line drawing by showing average flows between intakes, operations, treatment units, and outfalls. If a water balance cannot be determined (e.g., for certain mining activities), provide a pictorial description of the nature and amount of any sources of water and any collection or treatment measures.

B. For each outfall, provide a description of: (1) All operations contributing wastewater to the effluent, including process wastewater, sanitary wastewater, cooling water, and storm water runoff; (2) The average flow contributed by each operation; and (3) The treatment received by the wastewater. Continue on additional sheets if necessary.

2. OPERATION(S) CONTRIBUTING

3. TREATMENT

1. OUTFALL FLOW

c. FINAL DISPOSAL NO. a. OPERATION

b. AVERAGE b. WASTEWATER OF SOLID OR LIQUID (list) FLOW a. DESCRIPTION TREATMENT WASTES OTHER (list)

(MGD) UNIT CODES THAN BY DISCHARGE Unit 1 Final Plant Discharge to Surface Water and 01 20.62 4-A, 2-E N/A Discharge Dechlorination 72 MGD Max EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 1 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

Unit 1 Cooling Discharge to Surface Water and 01A 0.0 4-A, 2-E N/A Tower Blowdown Dechlorination 48.96 MGD Max Unit 1 Cooling Discharge to Surface Water and 01B Tower Flume 18.53 4-A, 2-E N/A Dechlorination Overflow 48.96 MGD Max Unit 1 Low 01E Volume Waste 0.0 Discharge to Surface Water 4-A N/A (Liquid Radwaste) 0.14 MGD Max Discharge to Surface Water, Sewage 01F 0.01 Disinfection, Drying Beds, and 4-A, 2-F, 5-H, 5-O N/A Treatment Plant Incineration 0.07 MGD Max Low Volume Wastes (Makeup 01G Demineralization/ 0.01 Discharge to Surface Water 4-A N/A Neutralization Tank) 0.94 MGD Max Low Volume Wastes (Pressure 01H Filter Backwash) 0.0 Discharge to Surface Water 4-A N/A Non-Contact Cooling Water 1.51 MGD Max EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 2 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 3

Unit 2 Final Plant Discharge to Surface Water and 02 15.58 4-A, 2-E N/A Discharge Dechlorination 72 MGD Max Unit 2 Cooling Discharge to Surface Water and 02A 0.0 4-A, 2-E N/A Tower Blowdown Dechlorination 48.96 MGD Max Unit 2 Cooling Discharge to Surface Water and 02C Tower Flume 15.58 4-A, 2-E N/A Dechlorination Overflow 48.96 MGD Max Unit 2 Low 02E Volume Waste 0.001 Discharge to Surface Water 4-A N/A (Liquid Radwaste) 0.14 MGD Max Intake Screen Discharge to Surface Water and 03 0.05 4-A, 2-E N/A Backwash Dechlorination 0.72 MGD Max Intake Strainer 03A 0.01 Discharge to Surface Water 4-A N/A Backwash 0.72 MGD Max EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 3 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

Draining of water from the chiller 04 0.01 Discharge to Surface Water 4-A N/A system to storm drains 0.72 MGD Max Stormwater comingled with draining of water from the chiller 018 system to storm 4.58 Discharge to Surface Water 4-A N/A drains and allowable non-stormwater discharges OFFICIAL USE ONLY (effluent guidelines sub-categories)

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 4 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 5

C. Except for storm runoff, leaks, or spills, are any of the discharges described in Items II-A or B intermittent or seasonal?

[X] YES (complete the following table [ ] NO (go to Section III)

3. FREQUENCY 4. FLOW B. TOTAL VOLUME

1. OUTFALL 2. OPERATION(s) a. DAYS PER b. MONTHS

a. FLOW RATE (MGD)

(specify with units) C. DURATION NUMBER CONTRIBUTING FLOW WEEK PER YEAR 1. LONG 1. LONG (in days)

(specify (specify 2. MAXIMUM 2. MAXIMUM (list) (list) TERM TERM average) average) DAILY DAILY AVERAGE AVERAGE This waste stream consists of the total volumes of liquid wastewater being discharged from Unit One. The maximum flow rate achievable is based on the total surface water pumping capacity on plant site. The 01 7 12 20.62 72.0 20.62 72.0 365 daily average discharge was calculated from the Unit One daily discharge flow rate during the duration of the previous permit period. Chemical metal cleaning waste may also be included.

This waste stream consists of discharges from the Unit One closed loop circulating water system. Make-up water for the system is derived from non-contact auxiliary plant cooling water. The discharge originates at the circulating water pumps discharge and is the routed to 01A 0 0 0 48.96 0 48.96 365 the Unit One and Unit Two mixing chambers. The maximum flow rate achievable is based on the total pumping capacity of the plant service water systems. The daily average flow rate was calculated during the duration of the previous permit period.

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 5 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

This wastThis waste stream consists of discharges from the Unit One closed-looped circulating water systems. Make-up water for this system is derived from non-contact auxiliary plant cooling water. The discharge originates at the circulating water pumps discharge and is then routed to the Unit One and Unit Two mixing chambers. The maximum flow rate achievable is based on the total pumping capacity of the plant service water system.

The daily average flow rate was calculated during the duration of the previous permit period. Under the specific conditions, the emergent use of 1200 lbs. of untreated wood floor with no additives may be utilized in order to control thermal 01B performance. e stream consists of 7 12 18.53 48.96 18.53 48.96 365 discharges from the Unit One closed-looped circulating water systems. Make-up water for this system is derived from non-contact auxiliary plant cooling water. The discharge originated at the circulating water pumps discharge and was routed to the Unit One and Unit Two mixing chambers. The maximum flow rate achievable was based on the total pumping capacity of the plant service water system.

The daily average flow rate was calculated by dividing the total gallons discharged by the total minutes in the test period. The flow rate measurement of this waste stream was based on the best conservative estimate at the time of the subsequent discharge.

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 6 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 7

This waste stream consists of wastewaters generated primarily in the reactor and turbine building.

Examples of the wastewater sources are floor drains, laundry drains, laboratory drains, seal cooling water and bearing cooling waters. The collective wastewaters are filtered 01E and demineralized, then discharged 0 0 0 0.14 0 0.14 365 to the respective mixing chamber or reused in-plant depending on the chemical and radiological quality.

The maximum flow rate achievable is derived from the pump name plate data. The daily average flow rate was calculated during the duration of the previous permit period.

This waste stream consists of the plants domestic sewage effluent that is created by two aeration package treatment plants. Discharge from this facility is routed to the Unit One 01F mixing chamber. The maximum flow 7 12 0.01 0.07 0.01 0.07 365 rate achievable was calculated using the designed capacity of the aeration plants. The daily average flow rate was calculated during the duration of the previous permit period.

This waste stream consists of reverse osmosis reject water. The neutralization tank was discharged via gravity into the Unit One mixing chamber. The maximum flow rate 01G achievable was calculated using the 7 12 0.01 0.94 0.01 0.94 365 volume of the tank and the radius of the discharge pipe. The daily average flow rate was calculated during the duration of the previous permit period.

This waste stream consists of backwash water originating from four pressure sand filters that precede the demineralizer unit. The backwash waste gravity drains into the neutralization discharge line. The 01H 0 0 0 1.51 0 1.51 365 maximum flow rate achievable is based on backwash pump name plate data. The daily average flow rate was calculated during the duration of the previous permit period.

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 7 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

This waste stream consists of the total volumes of liquid wastewater being discharged from Unit Two. The maximum flow rate was achieved using the total surface water pumping capacity on plant site. The 02 7 12 15.58 72.0 15.58 72.0 365 daily average discharge was calculated from the Unit Two daily discharge flow rate during the duration of the previous permit period. Chemical metal cleaning waste may also be included.

This waste stream consists of discharges from the Unit Two closed loop circulating water system. Make-up water for the system is derived from non-contact auxiliary plant cooling water. The discharge originated at the circulating water pumps discharge and was routed to 02A 0 0 0 48.96 0 48.96 365 the Unit One and Unit Two mixing chambers. The maximum flow rate achievable was based on the total pumping capacity of the plant service water systems. The daily average flow rate was calculated during the duration of the previous permit period.

This waste stream consists of discharges from the Unit Two closed-looped circulating water systems. Make-up water for this system is derived from non-contact auxiliary plant cooling water. The discharge originated at the circulating water pumps discharge and was routed to the Unit One and Unit Two mixing chambers. The 02C 7 12 15.58 48.96 15.58 48.96 365 maximum flow rate achievable was based on the total pumping capacity of the plant service water system.

The daily average flow rate was calculated during the duration of the previous permit period. Under the specific conditions, the emergent use of 1200 lbs. of untreated wood floor with no additives may be utilized in order to control thermal performance.

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 8 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 9

This waste stream consists of wastewaters generated primarily in the reactor and turbine building.

Examples of the wastewater sources are floor drains, laundry drains, laboratory drains, seal cooling water and bearing cooling waters. The collective wastewaters are filtered and demineralized, then discharged 02E 7 12 0.001 0.14 0.001 0.14 365 to the respective mixing chamber or reused in-plant depending on the chemical and radiological quality.

The maximum flow rate achievable was derived from the pump name plate data. The daily average flow rate was calculated during the duration of the previous permit period.

This waste stream consists of river water being used continuously to backwash the plants traveling water screen. The river water used to backwash the intake screens is 03 gravity fed back to the river. The 7 12 0.05 0.72 0.05 0.72 365 intake screens are backwashed approximately twice per day per unit for a total run time of 120 minutes.

This flow rate was estimated using pump plate data.

This waste stream consists of river water being used periodically to backwash the plants intake pumps strainers. The river water used to backwash the intake strainers is fed back to the river via the Stillwell 03A 7 12 0.01 0.72 0.01 0.72 365 associated with the intake. The intake strainers (4 total) are backwashed approximately once per shift for a combined units total of 24 minutes per day. This flow rate was estimated using pump plate data.

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 9 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

This waste stream consists of discharges from the closed-looped circulating water systems combined with industrial wastewater. Make-up for these systems originates from the 04 plants potable water system. The 7 12 0.01 0.72 0.01 0.72 365 maximum flow rate achievable was calculated using pump name plate data. The daily average flow rate was calculated during the duration of the previous permit period.

This waste stream consists of stormwater comingled with internal 018 7 12 4.58 7.19 4.58 7.19 100 outfall 04 and allowable non-stormwater discharges.

III. PRODUCTION This section has been filled out on the Part I form.

IV. IMPROVEMENTS A. Are you now required by any Federal, State or local authority to meet any implementation schedule for the construction, upgrading or operations of wastewater treatment equipment or practices or any other environmental programs which may affect the discharges described in this application? This includes, but is not limited to, permit conditions, administrative or enforcement orders, enforcement compliance schedule letters, stipulations, court orders, and grant or loan conditions.

[ ] YES (complete the following table) [X]NO (go to Item IV-B)

1. IDENTIFICATION OF CONDITION, 2. AFFECTED OUTFALLS 3. BRIEF DESCRIPTION 4. FINAL COMPLIANCE DATE AGREEMENT, ETC. a. NO. b. SOURCE OF DISCHARGE OF PROJECT a. REQUIRED b. PROJECTED B. OPTIONAL: You may attach additional sheets describing any additional water pollution control programs (or other environmental projects which may affect your discharges) you now have underway or which you plan. Indicate whether each program is now underway or planned, and indicate your actual or planned schedules for construction.

[ ] MARK "X" IF DESCRIPTION OF ADDITIONAL CONTROL PROGRAMS IS ATTACHED V. INTAKE AND EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS A, B, & C: See instructions before proceeding - Complete one set of tables for each outfall - Annotate the outfall number in the space provided.

NOTE: Tables V-A, V-B, and V-C are included on separate sheets numbered V-1 through V-9.

D. Is there any discharge of pollutants present that are listed in Exhibit 2C-4?

[ ] YES [X] NO For every pollutant you list, describe the reasons you believe it to be present and report any analytical data in your possession :

VI. POTENTIAL DISCHARGES NOT COVERED BY ANALYSIS EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 10 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 11

Is any pollutant listed in Section V - Intake and Effluent Characteristics, Part C, a substance or a component of a substance which you currently use or manufacture as an intermediate or final product or byproduct?

[ ] YES (list all such pollutants below) [X] NO (go to Item VI-B)

VII. BIOLOGICAL TOXICITY TESTING DATA Do you have any knowledge or reason to believe that any biological test for acute or chronic toxicity has been made on any of your discharges or on a receiving water in relation to your discharge within the last 3 years?

[X] YES (identify the test(s) and describe their purposes below) [ ] NO (go to Section VIII)

A series of 7~ day chronic definitive bioassay tests were conducted using the water flea (C. dubia) and the fathead minnow (P.

promelas). The samples produced chronic No Observable Effect Concentration (NOEC) values of 16% effluent for the C. dubia test species in all tests. The samples produced chronic No Observable Effect Concentration (NOEC) values of 16% effluent for the P. promelas survival and 8% effluent for P.

promelas growth.

VIII. CONTRACT ANALYSIS INFORMATION Were any of the analyses reported in Item V. Intake and Effulent Characteristics performed by a contract laboratory or consulting firm?

[X] YES (list the name, address, and telephone number of, and

[ ] NO (go to Section IX) pollutants analyzed by, each such laboratory or firm below)

C. TELEPHONE D. POLLUTANTS ANALYZED A. NAME B. ADDRESS (area code & no.) (list) 11842 Research Circle, Alachua, Hydrosphere 386-462-7889 Chronic WET FL 32615 BOD, Volatile Organic Compounds, Total Organic Nitrogen, TOC, Total Metals, Surfactants, Sulfite, Sulfide, Analytical Environmental Services, 3080 Presidential Drive, Atlanta, Semivolatile Organic 770-457-8177 INC. GA 30340 Compounds, Nitrogen, Nitrate-Nitrite, Inorganic Anions, Color, Total Phenols, Total Cyanide, E.coli, Fecal Coliform, 2040 Savage Road, Charleston, Radiological (Alpha, Beta, GEL Laboratories LLC 843-556-8171 SC 29407 Radium 226, Total Radium)

COD, TSS, Oil & Grease, Georgia Power Company 2480 Manner Road Atlanta, GA Total Metals, Sulfate, 404-799-2100 Environmental Laboratory 30339 Fluoride, Ammonia, Total Phosphorus, Mercury, IX. CERTIFICATION EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 11 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

Will you be uploading and attaching all of the required application documents (i.e. process flow diagram, maps, design development reports, analytical data; etc.) in the following section?

Yes No If No, all mailed or otherwise submitted required application documents not uploaded and attached to this application must include the certification statement as required in 40 CFR 122.22. Please click here to access, print, sign, and mail to EPD.

I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.

A. NAME & OFFICIAL TITLE (type or print)

James M. DeLano / Environmental Affairs Manager C. SIGNATURE D. DATE SIGNED James M. DeLano 10/14/2021 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 12 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 13

PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE IN THE UNSHADED AREAS ONLY. You may report some or all of this EPA I.D. NUMBER (copy from Item 1 of Form 1) information on separate sheets (use the same format) instead of completing these pages.

SEE INSTRUCTIONS. OUTFALL NO.

V. INTAKE AND EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS (continued from page 3 of Form 2-C) 01 PART A -You must provide the results of at least one analysis for every pollutant in this table. Complete one table for each outfall. See instructions for additional details.

2. EFFLUENT 3. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE (1) (1) (1) d. NO. OF (1) b. NO. OF

1. POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES

a. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) <5.0 -- 1 <5.0 1

b. Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 21.5 3697.37 1 30.6 1

c. Total Organic Carbon (TOC) 12.6 2166.83 1 8.27 1

d. Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 24 4127.30 1 68 1

e. Ammonia (as N)

.27 46.43 1 .12 1 VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE

f. Flow (MGD) 20.62 1 -- 0

g. Temperature VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE (winter) 28.5 1 27.1 1

h. Temperature VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE (summer) 29.78 1 24.5 1 MINIMUM MAXIMUM MINIMUM MAXIMUM

i. pH (s.u.)

7.7 7.7 1 PART B - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVED BELIEVED (1) (1) (1) d. NO. OF (1) b. NO. OF (if available) PRESENT ABSENT CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES

a. Bromide (24959 9) X <1.0 -- 1 <1.0 1

b. Chlorine, Total Residual X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1

c. Color (PCU) X 90.0 -- 1 65 1

d. Fecal Coliform

(#/100mL) X 600 -- 1 70 1

e. Escherichia Coli (E.coli) (#/100 mL) X 24 -- 1 38 1

f. Enterococci (#/100 mL) X -- -- 0 -- 0

g. Fluoride (16984 8) X .132 13.69 1 .076 1 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 13 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVED BELIEVED (1) (1) (1) d. NO. OF (1) b. NO. OF (if available) PRESENT ABSENT CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES

h. Nitrate-Nitrite(as N) X .41 70.5 1 .159 1

i. Nitrogen, Total Organic (as N) X 1.2 206.36 1 <.5 1

j. Oil and Grease X <5.0 -- 1 <5.0 1

k. Phosphorus (as P),

Total (7723-14-0) X .101 17.37 1 .214 1

l. Radioactivity (1) Alpha, Total X .0035 .60 1 .003 1 (2) Beta, Total X .0076 1.31 1 .006 1 (3) Radium, Total X .0023 .40 1 .00092 1 (4) Radium 226, Total X .0012 .21 1 .00089 1

m. Sulfate (as SO4)

(14808-79-8) X 9.32 1602.77 1 5.04 1

n. Sulfide (as S) X <1.0 -- 1 <1.0 1

o. Sulfite (as SO3)

(14265-45-3) X <2.0 -- 1 <2.0 1

p. Surfactants X .153 26.31 1 <.10 1

q. Aluminum, Total (7429-90-5) X 1.26 216.68 1 2.12 1

r. Barium, Total (7440-39-3) X 0.0575 9.89 1 .0521 1

s. Boron, Total (7440-42-8) X <.05 -- 1 <.05 1

t. Cobalt, Total (7440-48-4) X .0011 .19 1 .0021 1

u. Iron, Total (7439 6) X 2.4 412.73 1 3.06 1

v. Magnesium, Total (7439-95-4) X 2.61 448.84 1 1.74 1

w. Molybdenum, Total (7439-98-7) X <.05 -- 1 <.05 1

x. Manganese, Total (7439-96-5) X .113 19.43 1 2.52 1

y. Tin, Total (7440 5) X <.05 -- 1 <.05 1

z. Titanium, Total (7440-32-6) X .0416 7.15 1 .0415 1 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 14 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 15

EPA I.D. NUMBER (copy from Item 1 of Form 1) OUTFALL NUMBER 01 PART C - If you are a primary industry and this outfall contains process wastewater, refer to Table 2c-2 in the instructions to determine which of the GC/MS fractions you must test for. Mark X in column 2-a for all such GC/MS fractions that apply to your industry and for ALL toxic metals, cyanides, and total phenols. If you are not required to mark column 2-a (secondary industries, nonprocess wastewater outfalls, and nonrequired GC/MS fractions), mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present.

Mark X in column 2-c for each pollutant you believe is absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. If you mark column 2b for any pollutant, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant if you know or have reason to believe it will be discharged in concentrations of 10 ppb or greater. If you mark column 2b for acrolein, acrylonitrile, 2,4 dinitrophenol, or 2-methyl-4, 6 dinitrophenol, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for each of these pollutants which you know or have reason to believe that you discharge in concentrations of 100 ppb or greater. Otherwise, for pollutants for which you mark column 2b, you must either submit at least one analysis or briefly describe the reasons the pollutant is expected to be discharged. Note that there are 7 pages to this part; please review each carefully. Complete one table (all 7 pages) for each outfall. See instructions for additional details and requirements.

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES METALS, CYANIDE, AND TOTAL PHENOLS 1M. Antimony, Total (7440-36-0)

X <.00515 -- 1 <.00515 1 2M. Arsenic, Total (7440-38-2)

X .00095 .16 1 .00077 1 3M. Beryllium, Total (7440-41-7)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 4M. Cadmium, Total (7440-43-9)

X <.00103 -- 1 <.00103 1 5M. Chromium, Total (7440-47-3)

X .0021 .36 1 .0025 1 6M. Copper, Total (7440-50-8)

X .0102 1.75 1 .0027 1 7M. Lead, Total (7439-92-1)

X .0014 .24 1 .0021 1 8M. Mercury, Total (7439-97-6)

X <.00020 -- 1 <.00020 1 9M. Nickel, Total (7440-02-0)

X <.00206 -- 1 <.00206 1 10M. Selenium, Total (7782-49-2)

X .00026 .045 1 .00018 1 11M. Silver, Total (7440-22-4)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 12M. Thallium, Total (7440-28-0)

X <.02 -- 1 <.02 1 13M. Zinc, Total (7440 6)

X .0124 2.13 1 .0173 1 14M. Cyanide, Total (57-12-5)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 15M. Phenols, Total X <.005 -- 1 .00608 1 DIOXIN 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo- X -- -- 0 -- 0 Pdioxin (1764-01-6)

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 15 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - VOLATILE COMPOUNDS 1V. Accrolein (107 8)

X <.02 -- 1 <.02 1 2V. Acrylonitrile (107-13-1)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 3V. Benzene (71-43-2) X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 4V. Bis (Chloromethyl)

Ether (542-88-1)

X -- -- 0 -- 0 5V. Bromoform (75 2)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 6V. Carbon Tetrachloride (56-23-5)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 7V. Chlorobenzene (108-90-7)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 8V.

Chlorodibromomethan X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 e (124-48-1) 9V. Chloroethane (75-00-3)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 10V. 2-Chloroethylvinyl Ether X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 (110-75-8) 11V. Chloroform (67-66-3)

X .0018 .31 1 <.005 1 12V.

Dichlorobromomethan X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 e (75-27-4) 13V.

Dichlorodifluorometha X -- -- 0 -- 0 ne (75-71-8) 14V. 1,1-Dichloroethane (75 X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 3) 15V. 1,2-Dichloroethane (107- X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 06-2) 16V. 1,1-Dichloroethylene (75- X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 35-4) 17V. 1,2-Dichloropropane (78- X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 87-5) 18V. 1,3-Dichloropropylene X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 (542-75-6) 19V. Ethylbenzene (100-41-4)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 20V. Methyl Bromide (74-83-9)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 21V. Methyl Chloride (74-87-3)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 16 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 17

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - VOLATILE COMPOUNDS 22V. Methylene Chloride (75-09-2)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 23V. 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (79- X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 34-5) 24V.

Tetrachloroethylene X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 (127-18-4) 25V. Toluene (108 3)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 26V. 1,2-Trans-Dichloroethylene (156- X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 60-5) 27V. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (71-55 X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1

-6) 28V. 1,1,2-Trichloroethane (79-00 X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1

-5) 29V Trichloroethylene (79-01-6)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 30V.

Trichlorofluoromethan X -- -- 0 -- 0 e (75-69-4) 31V. Vinyl Chloride (75 4)

X <.002 -- 1 <.002 1 GC/MS FRACTION - ACID COMPOUNDS 1A. 2-Chlorophenol (95-57-8)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 2A. 2,4-Dichlorophenol (120-83-2)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 3A. 2,4-Dimethylphenol (105- X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 67-9) 4A. 4,6-Dinitro-OCresol (534-52-1)

X <.025 -- 1 <.025 1 5A. 2,4-Dinitrophenol (51-28-5)

X <.025 -- 1 <.025 1 6A. 2-Nitrophenol (88-75-5)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 7A. 4-Nitrophenol (100 7)

X <.025 -- 1 <.025 1 8A. P-Chloro-MCresol (59-50-7)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 9A. Pentachlorophenol (87-86-5)

X <.025 -- 1 <.025 1 10A. Phenol (108 2)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 17 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - ACID COMPOUNDS 11A. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (88-05 X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1

-2)

GC/MS FRACTION - BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS 1B. Acenaphthene (83 9)

X -- 0 -- 0 2B. Acenaphtylene (208-96-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 3B. Anthracene (120-12-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 4B. Benzidine (92 5)

X -- 0 -- 0 5B. Benzo (a)

Anthracene (56-55-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 6B. Benzo (a) Pyrene (50-32-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 7B. 3,4-Benzofluoranthene X -- 0 -- 0 (205-99-2) 8B. Benzo (ghi)

Perylene (191-24-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 9B. Benzo (k)

Fluoranthene (207 X -- 0 -- 0 9) 10B. Bis (2-Chloroethoxy) X -- 0 -- 0 Methane (111-91-1) 11B. Bis (2-Chloroethyl) Ether X -- 0 -- 0 (111-44-4) 12B. Bis (2-Chloroisopropyl) Ether X -- 0 -- 0 (102-80-1) 13B. Bis (2-Ethylhexyl)

Phthalate (117-81-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 14B. 4-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether (101 X -- 0 -- 0 3) 15B. Butyl Benzyl Phthalate (85-68-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 16B. 2-Chloronaphthalene (91 X -- 0 -- 0 7) 17B. 4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether (7005-72 X -- 0 -- 0

-3) 18B. Chrysene (218-01-9)

X -- 0 -- 0 19B. Dibenzo (a,h)

Anthracene (53-70-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 18 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 19

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS 20B. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene (95- X -- 0 -- 0 50-1) 21B. 1,3-Di-chlorobenzene (541- X -- 0 -- 0 73-1) 22B. 1,4-Dichlorobenzene (106- X -- 0 -- 0 46-7) 23B. 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine (91- X -- 0 -- 0 94-1) 24B. Diethyl Phthalate (84-66-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 25B. Dimethyl Phthalate (131 3)

X -- 0 -- 0 26B. Di-N-Butyl Phthalate (84-74-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 27B. 2,4-Dinitrotoluene (121-14-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 28B. 2,6-Dinitrotoluene (606-20-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 29B. Di-N-Octyl Phthalate (117-84-0)

X -- 0 -- 0 30B. 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine (as Azobenzene) (122 X -- 0 -- 0 7) 31B. Fluoranthene (206-44-0)

X -- 0 -- 0 32B. Fluorene (86 7)

X -- 0 -- 0 33B.

Hexachlorobenzene X -- 0 -- 0 (118-74-1) 34B.

Hexachlorobutadiene X -- 0 -- 0 (87-68-3) 35B.

Hexachlorocyclopenta X -- 0 -- 0 diene (77-47-4) 36B Hexachloroethane (67-72-1)

X -- 0 -- 0 37B. Indeno (1,2,3-cd)

Pyrene (193-39-5)

X -- 0 -- 0 38B. Isophorone (78-59-1)

X -- 0 -- 0 39B. Naphthalene (91-20-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 40B. Nitrobenzene (98 3)

X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 19 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS 41B. N-Nitrosodimethylamine X -- 0 -- 0 (62-75-9) 42B. N-Nitrosodi-N-Propylamine (621 X -- 0 -- 0 7) 43B. N-Nitrosodiphenylamine X -- 0 -- 0 (86-30-6) 44B. Phenanthrene (85-01-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 45B. Pyrene (129 0)

X -- 0 -- 0 46B. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene (120 X -- 0 -- 0 1)

GC/MS FRACTION - PESTICIDES 1P. Aldrin (309-00-2) X -- 0 -- 0 2P. a-BHC (319-84-6) X -- 0 -- 0 3P. -BHC (319-85-7) X -- 0 -- 0 4P. ?-BHC (58-89-9) X -- 0 -- 0 5P. d-BHC (319-86-8) X -- 0 -- 0 6P. Chlordane (57 9)

X -- 0 -- 0 7P. 4,4'-DDT (50-29-3) X -- 0 -- 0 8P. 4,4'-DDE (72-55-9) X -- 0 -- 0 9P. 4,4'-DDD (72-54-8) X -- 0 -- 0 10P. Dieldrin (60-57-1) X -- 0 -- 0 11P. a-Enosulfan (115 7)

X -- 0 -- 0 12P. -Endosulfan (115-29-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 13P. Endosulfan Sulfate (1031-07-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 14P. Endrin (72-20-8) X -- 0 -- 0 15P. Endrin Aldehyde (7421-93-4)

X -- 0 -- 0 16P. Heptachlor (76-44-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 20 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 21

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - PESTICIDES 17P. Heptachlor Epoxide (1024-57-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 18P. PCB-1242 (53469-21-9)

X -- 0 -- 0 19P. PCB-1254 (11097-69-1)

X -- 0 -- 0 20P. PCB-1221 (11104-28-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 21P. PCB-1232 (11141-16-5)

X -- 0 -- 0 22P. PCB-1248 (12672-29-6)

X -- 0 -- 0 23P. PCB-1260 (11096-82-5)

X -- 0 -- 0 24P. PCB-1016 (12674-11-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 25P. Toxaphene (8001 2)

X -- 0 -- 0 Outfall Number: 01 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

1. Asbestos X -- 0 -- 0

2. Acetaldehyde X -- 0 -- 0

3. Allyl Alcohol X -- 0 -- 0

4. Allyl Chloride X -- 0 -- 0

5. Amyl Acetate X -- 0 -- 0

6. Aniline X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 21 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

Outfall Number: 01 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

7. Benzonitrile X -- 0 -- 0

8. Benzyl Chloride X -- 0 -- 0

9. Butyl Acetate X -- 0 -- 0

10. Butylamine X -- 0 -- 0

11. Captan X -- 0 -- 0

12. Carbaryl X -- 0 -- 0

13. Carbofuran X -- 0 -- 0

14. Carbon Disulfide X -- 0 -- 0

15. Chlorpyrifos X -- 0 -- 0

16. Coumaphos X -- 0 -- 0

17. Cresol X -- 0 -- 0

18. Crotonaldehyde X -- 0 -- 0

19. Cyclohexane X -- 0 -- 0

20. 2,4-D (2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic X -- 0 -- 0 acid)

21. Diazinon X -- 0 -- 0

22. Dicamba X -- 0 -- 0

23. Dichlobenil X -- 0 -- 0

24. Dichlone X -- 0 -- 0

25. 2,2-dichloropropionic acid X -- 0 -- 0

26. Dichlorvos X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 22 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 23

Outfall Number: 01 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

27. Diethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

28. Dimethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

29. Dintrobenzene X -- 0 -- 0

30. Diquat X -- 0 -- 0

31. Disulfoton X -- 0 -- 0

32. Diuron X -- 0 -- 0

33. Epichlorohydrin X -- 0 -- 0

34. Ethion X -- 0 -- 0

35. Ethylene diamine X -- 0 -- 0

36. Ethylene dibromide X -- 0 -- 0

37. Formaldehyde X -- 0 -- 0

38. Furfural X -- 0 -- 0

39. Guthion X -- 0 -- 0

40. Isoprene X -- 0 -- 0

41. Isopropanolamine X -- 0 -- 0

42. Kelthane X -- 0 -- 0

43. Kepone X -- 0 -- 0

44. Malathion X -- 0 -- 0

45. Mercaptodimethur X -- 0 -- 0

46. Methoxychlor X -- 0 -- 0

47. Methyl mercaptan X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 23 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

Outfall Number: 01 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

48. Methyl methacrylate X -- 0 -- 0

49. Methyl parathion X -- 0 -- 0

50. Mevinphos X -- 0 -- 0

51. Mexacarbate X -- 0 -- 0

52. Monoethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

53. Monomethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

54. Naled X -- 0 -- 0

55. Naphthenic acid X -- 0 -- 0

56. Nitrotoluene X -- 0 -- 0

57. Parathion X -- 0 -- 0

58. Phenolsulfonate X -- 0 -- 0

59. Phosgene X -- 0 -- 0

60. Propargite X -- 0 -- 0

61. Propylene oxide X -- 0 -- 0

62. Pyrethrins X -- 0 -- 0

63. Ouinoline X -- 0 -- 0

64. Resorcinol X -- 0 -- 0

65. Strontium X -- 0 -- 0

66. Strychnine X -- 0 -- 0

67. Styrene X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 24 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 25

Outfall Number: 01 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

68. 2,4,5-T (2,4,5-trichIorophenoxyacetic X -- 0 -- 0 acid)

69. TDE (tetrachlorodiphenyl X -- 0 -- 0 ethane)

70. 2,4,5-TP [2-(2,4,5-trichIorophenoxy)propa X -- 0 -- 0 noic acid]

71. Trichlorofon X -- 0 -- 0

72. Triethanolamine X -- 0 -- 0

73. Triethylamine X -- 0 -- 0

74. Trimethylamine X -- 0 -- 0

75. Uranium X -- 0 -- 0

76. Vanadium X -- 0 -- 0

77. Vinyl acetate X -- 0 -- 0

78. Xylene X -- 0 -- 0

79. Xyenol X -- 0 -- 0

80. Zirconium X -- 0 -- 0

81. 2,3,7,8-TCDD X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 25 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE IN THE UNSHADED AREAS ONLY. You may report some or all of this EPA I.D. NUMBER (copy from Item 1 of Form 1) information on separate sheets (use the same format) instead of completing these pages.

SEE INSTRUCTIONS. OUTFALL NO.

V. INTAKE AND EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS (continued from page 3 of Form 2-C) 018 PART A -You must provide the results of at least one analysis for every pollutant in this table. Complete one table for each outfall. See instructions for additional details.

2. EFFLUENT 3. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE (1) (1) (1) d. NO. OF (1) b. NO. OF

1. POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES

a. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) <5.0 -- 1 <5.0 1

b. Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 14.7 561.5 1 30.6 1

c. Total Organic Carbon (TOC) -- -- 0 -- --

d. Total Suspended Solids (TSS) <6.0 -- 1 68 1

e. Ammonia (as N)

<.10 -- 1 .12 1 VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE

f. Flow (MGD) 4.58 1 -- 1

g. Temperature VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE (winter) 28.0 1 24.5 1

h. Temperature VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE (summer)

N/A 1 27.1 1 MINIMUM MAXIMUM MINIMUM MAXIMUM

i. pH (s.u.)

8.14 8.14 1 PART B - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVED BELIEVED (1) (1) (1) d. NO. OF (1) b. NO. OF (if available) PRESENT ABSENT CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES

a. Bromide (24959 9) X -- 0 -- --

b. Chlorine, Total Residual X .23 8.79 1 <.01 1

c. Color (PCU) X -- 0 -- --

d. Fecal Coliform

(#/100mL) X -- 0 -- --

e. Escherichia Coli (E.coli) (#/100 mL) X -- 0 -- --

f. Enterococci (#/100 mL) X -- 0 -- --

g. Fluoride (16984 8) X -- 0 -- --

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 26 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 27

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVED BELIEVED (1) (1) (1) d. NO. OF (1) b. NO. OF (if available) PRESENT ABSENT CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES

h. Nitrate-Nitrite(as N) X -- 0 -- --

i. Nitrogen, Total Organic (as N) X -- 0 -- --

j. Oil and Grease X <5.0 -- 1 <5.0 1

k. Phosphorus (as P),

Total (7723-14-0) X 2.32 88.62 1 .214 1

l. Radioactivity (1) Alpha, Total X -- 0 -- --

(2) Beta, Total X -- 0 -- --

(3) Radium, Total X -- 0 -- --

(4) Radium 226, Total X -- 0 -- --

m. Sulfate (as SO4)

(14808-79-8) X -- 0 -- --

n. Sulfide (as S) X -- 0 -- --

o. Sulfite (as SO3)

(14265-45-3) X -- 0 -- --

p. Surfactants X -- 0 -- --

q. Aluminum, Total (7429-90-5) X -- 0 -- --

r. Barium, Total (7440-39-3) X -- 0 -- --

s. Boron, Total (7440-42-8) X -- 0 -- --

t. Cobalt, Total (7440-48-4) X -- 0 -- --

u. Iron, Total (7439 6) X -- 0 -- --

v. Magnesium, Total (7439-95-4) X -- 0 -- --

w. Molybdenum, Total (7439-98-7) X -- 0 -- --

x. Manganese, Total (7439-96-5) X -- 0 -- --

y. Tin, Total (7440 5) X -- 0 -- --

z. Titanium, Total (7440-32-6) X -- 0 -- --

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 27 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

EPA I.D. NUMBER (copy from Item 1 of Form 1) OUTFALL NUMBER 018 PART C - If you are a primary industry and this outfall contains process wastewater, refer to Table 2c-2 in the instructions to determine which of the GC/MS fractions you must test for. Mark X in column 2-a for all such GC/MS fractions that apply to your industry and for ALL toxic metals, cyanides, and total phenols. If you are not required to mark column 2-a (secondary industries, nonprocess wastewater outfalls, and nonrequired GC/MS fractions), mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present.

Mark X in column 2-c for each pollutant you believe is absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. If you mark column 2b for any pollutant, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant if you know or have reason to believe it will be discharged in concentrations of 10 ppb or greater. If you mark column 2b for acrolein, acrylonitrile, 2,4 dinitrophenol, or 2-methyl-4, 6 dinitrophenol, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for each of these pollutants which you know or have reason to believe that you discharge in concentrations of 100 ppb or greater. Otherwise, for pollutants for which you mark column 2b, you must either submit at least one analysis or briefly describe the reasons the pollutant is expected to be discharged. Note that there are 7 pages to this part; please review each carefully. Complete one table (all 7 pages) for each outfall. See instructions for additional details and requirements.

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES METALS, CYANIDE, AND TOTAL PHENOLS 1M. Antimony, Total (7440-36-0)

X -- 0 -- --

2M. Arsenic, Total (7440-38-2)

X -- 0 -- --

3M. Beryllium, Total (7440-41-7)

X -- 0 -- --

4M. Cadmium, Total (7440-43-9)

X -- 0 -- --

5M. Chromium, Total (7440-47-3)

X -- 0 -- --

6M. Copper, Total (7440-50-8)

X -- 0 -- --

7M. Lead, Total (7439-92-1)

X -- 0 -- --

8M. Mercury, Total (7439-97-6)

X -- 0 -- --

9M. Nickel, Total (7440-02-0)

X -- 0 -- --

10M. Selenium, Total (7782-49-2)

X -- 0 -- --

11M. Silver, Total (7440-22-4)

X -- 0 -- --

12M. Thallium, Total (7440-28-0)

X -- 0 -- --

13M. Zinc, Total (7440 6)

X -- 0 -- --

14M. Cyanide, Total (57-12-5)

X -- 0 -- --

15M. Phenols, Total X -- 0 -- --

DIOXIN 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo- X -- 0 -- --

Pdioxin (1764-01-6)

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 28 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 29

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - VOLATILE COMPOUNDS 1V. Accrolein (107 8)

X -- 0 -- --

2V. Acrylonitrile (107-13-1)

X -- 0 -- --

3V. Benzene (71-43-2) X -- 0 -- --

4V. Bis (Chloromethyl)

Ether (542-88-1)

X -- 0 -- --

5V. Bromoform (75 2)

X -- 0 -- --

6V. Carbon Tetrachloride (56-23-5)

X -- 0 -- --

7V. Chlorobenzene (108-90-7)

X -- 0 -- --

8V.

Chlorodibromomethan X -- 0 -- --

e (124-48-1) 9V. Chloroethane (75-00-3)

X -- 0 -- --

10V. 2-Chloroethylvinyl Ether X -- 0 -- --

(110-75-8) 11V. Chloroform (67-66-3)

X -- 0 -- --

12V.

Dichlorobromomethan X -- 0 -- --

e (75-27-4) 13V.

Dichlorodifluorometha X -- 0 -- --

ne (75-71-8) 14V. 1,1-Dichloroethane (75 X -- 0 -- --

3) 15V. 1,2-Dichloroethane (107- X -- 0 -- --

06-2) 16V. 1,1-Dichloroethylene (75- X -- 0 -- --

35-4) 17V. 1,2-Dichloropropane (78- X -- 0 -- --

87-5) 18V. 1,3-Dichloropropylene X -- 0 -- --

(542-75-6) 19V. Ethylbenzene (100-41-4)

X -- 0 -- --

20V. Methyl Bromide (74-83-9)

X -- 0 -- --

21V. Methyl Chloride (74-87-3)

X -- 0 -- --

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 29 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - VOLATILE COMPOUNDS 22V. Methylene Chloride (75-09-2)

X -- 0 -- --

23V. 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (79- X -- 0 -- --

34-5) 24V.

Tetrachloroethylene X -- 0 -- --

(127-18-4) 25V. Toluene (108 3)

X -- 0 -- --

26V. 1,2-Trans-Dichloroethylene (156- X -- 0 -- --

60-5) 27V. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (71-55 X -- 0 -- --

-6) 28V. 1,1,2-Trichloroethane (79-00 X -- 0 -- --

-5) 29V Trichloroethylene (79-01-6)

X -- 0 -- --

30V.

Trichlorofluoromethan X -- 0 -- --

e (75-69-4) 31V. Vinyl Chloride (75 4)

X -- 0 -- --

GC/MS FRACTION - ACID COMPOUNDS 1A. 2-Chlorophenol (95-57-8)

X -- 0 -- --

2A. 2,4-Dichlorophenol (120-83-2)

X -- 0 -- --

3A. 2,4-Dimethylphenol (105- X -- 0 -- --

67-9) 4A. 4,6-Dinitro-OCresol (534-52-1)

X -- 0 -- --

5A. 2,4-Dinitrophenol (51-28-5)

X -- 0 -- --

6A. 2-Nitrophenol (88-75-5)

X -- 0 -- --

7A. 4-Nitrophenol (100 7)

X -- 0 -- --

8A. P-Chloro-MCresol (59-50-7)

X -- 0 -- --

9A. Pentachlorophenol (87-86-5)

X -- 0 -- --

10A. Phenol (108 2)

X -- 0 -- --

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 30 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 31

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - ACID COMPOUNDS 11A. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (88-05 X -- 0 -- --

-2)

GC/MS FRACTION - BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS 1B. Acenaphthene (83 9)

X -- 0 -- 0 2B. Acenaphtylene (208-96-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 3B. Anthracene (120-12-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 4B. Benzidine (92 5)

X -- 0 -- 0 5B. Benzo (a)

Anthracene (56-55-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 6B. Benzo (a) Pyrene (50-32-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 7B. 3,4-Benzofluoranthene X -- 0 -- 0 (205-99-2) 8B. Benzo (ghi)

Perylene (191-24-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 9B. Benzo (k)

Fluoranthene (207 X -- 0 -- 0 9) 10B. Bis (2-Chloroethoxy) X -- 0 -- 0 Methane (111-91-1) 11B. Bis (2-Chloroethyl) Ether X -- 0 -- 0 (111-44-4) 12B. Bis (2-Chloroisopropyl) Ether X -- 0 -- 0 (102-80-1) 13B. Bis (2-Ethylhexyl)

Phthalate (117-81-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 14B. 4-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether (101 X -- 0 -- 0 3) 15B. Butyl Benzyl Phthalate (85-68-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 16B. 2-Chloronaphthalene (91 X -- 0 -- 0 7) 17B. 4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether (7005-72 X -- 0 -- 0

-3) 18B. Chrysene (218-01-9)

X -- 0 -- 0 19B. Dibenzo (a,h)

Anthracene (53-70-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 31 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS 20B. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene (95- X -- 0 -- 0 50-1) 21B. 1,3-Di-chlorobenzene (541- X -- 0 -- 0 73-1) 22B. 1,4-Dichlorobenzene (106- X -- 0 -- 0 46-7) 23B. 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine (91- X -- 0 -- 0 94-1) 24B. Diethyl Phthalate (84-66-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 25B. Dimethyl Phthalate (131 3)

X -- 0 -- 0 26B. Di-N-Butyl Phthalate (84-74-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 27B. 2,4-Dinitrotoluene (121-14-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 28B. 2,6-Dinitrotoluene (606-20-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 29B. Di-N-Octyl Phthalate (117-84-0)

X -- 0 -- 0 30B. 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine (as Azobenzene) (122 X -- 0 -- 0 7) 31B. Fluoranthene (206-44-0)

X -- 0 -- 0 32B. Fluorene (86 7)

X -- 0 -- 0 33B.

Hexachlorobenzene X -- 0 -- 0 (118-74-1) 34B.

Hexachlorobutadiene X -- 0 -- 0 (87-68-3) 35B.

Hexachlorocyclopenta X -- 0 -- 0 diene (77-47-4) 36B Hexachloroethane (67-72-1)

X -- 0 -- 0 37B. Indeno (1,2,3-cd)

Pyrene (193-39-5)

X -- 0 -- 0 38B. Isophorone (78-59-1)

X -- 0 -- 0 39B. Naphthalene (91-20-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 40B. Nitrobenzene (98 3)

X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 32 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 33

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS 41B. N-Nitrosodimethylamine X -- 0 -- 0 (62-75-9) 42B. N-Nitrosodi-N-Propylamine (621 X -- 0 -- 0 7) 43B. N-Nitrosodiphenylamine X -- 0 -- 0 (86-30-6) 44B. Phenanthrene (85-01-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 45B. Pyrene (129 0)

X -- 0 -- 0 46B. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene (120 X -- 0 -- 0 1)

GC/MS FRACTION - PESTICIDES 1P. Aldrin (309-00-2) X -- 0 -- 0 2P. a-BHC (319-84-6) X -- 0 -- 0 3P. -BHC (319-85-7) X -- 0 -- 0 4P. ?-BHC (58-89-9) X -- 0 -- 0 5P. d-BHC (319-86-8) X -- 0 -- 0 6P. Chlordane (57 9)

X -- 0 -- 0 7P. 4,4'-DDT (50-29-3) X -- 0 -- 0 8P. 4,4'-DDE (72-55-9) X -- 0 -- 0 9P. 4,4'-DDD (72-54-8) X -- 0 -- 0 10P. Dieldrin (60-57-1) X -- 0 -- 0 11P. a-Enosulfan (115 7)

X -- 0 -- 0 12P. -Endosulfan (115-29-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 13P. Endosulfan Sulfate (1031-07-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 14P. Endrin (72-20-8) X -- 0 -- 0 15P. Endrin Aldehyde (7421-93-4)

X -- 0 -- 0 16P. Heptachlor (76-44-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 33 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - PESTICIDES 17P. Heptachlor Epoxide (1024-57-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 18P. PCB-1242 (53469-21-9)

X -- 0 -- 0 19P. PCB-1254 (11097-69-1)

X -- 0 -- 0 20P. PCB-1221 (11104-28-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 21P. PCB-1232 (11141-16-5)

X -- 0 -- 0 22P. PCB-1248 (12672-29-6)

X -- 0 -- 0 23P. PCB-1260 (11096-82-5)

X -- 0 -- 0 24P. PCB-1016 (12674-11-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 25P. Toxaphene (8001 2)

X -- 0 -- 0 Outfall Number: 018 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

1. Asbestos X -- 0 -- 0

2. Acetaldehyde X -- 0 -- 0

3. Allyl Alcohol X -- 0 -- 0

4. Allyl Chloride X -- 0 -- 0

5. Amyl Acetate X -- 0 -- 0

6. Aniline X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 34 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 35

Outfall Number: 018 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

7. Benzonitrile X -- 0 -- 0

8. Benzyl Chloride X -- 0 -- 0

9. Butyl Acetate X -- 0 -- 0

10. Butylamine X -- 0 -- 0

11. Captan X -- 0 -- 0

12. Carbaryl X -- 0 -- 0

13. Carbofuran X -- 0 -- 0

14. Carbon Disulfide X -- 0 -- 0

15. Chlorpyrifos X -- 0 -- 0

16. Coumaphos X -- 0 -- 0

17. Cresol X -- 0 -- 0

18. Crotonaldehyde X -- 0 -- 0

19. Cyclohexane X -- 0 -- 0

20. 2,4-D (2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic X -- 0 -- 0 acid)

21. Diazinon X -- 0 -- 0

22. Dicamba X -- 0 -- 0

23. Dichlobenil X -- 0 -- 0

24. Dichlone X -- 0 -- 0

25. 2,2-dichloropropionic acid X -- 0 -- 0

26. Dichlorvos X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 35 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

Outfall Number: 018 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

27. Diethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

28. Dimethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

29. Dintrobenzene X -- 0 -- 0

30. Diquat X -- 0 -- 0

31. Disulfoton X -- 0 -- 0

32. Diuron X -- 0 -- 0

33. Epichlorohydrin X -- 0 -- 0

34. Ethion X -- 0 -- 0

35. Ethylene diamine X -- 0 -- 0

36. Ethylene dibromide X -- 0 -- 0

37. Formaldehyde X -- 0 -- 0

38. Furfural X -- 0 -- 0

39. Guthion X -- 0 -- 0

40. Isoprene X -- 0 -- 0

41. Isopropanolamine X -- 0 -- 0

42. Kelthane X -- 0 -- 0

43. Kepone X -- 0 -- 0

44. Malathion X -- 0 -- 0

45. Mercaptodimethur X -- 0 -- 0

46. Methoxychlor X -- 0 -- 0

47. Methyl mercaptan X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 36 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 37

Outfall Number: 018 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

48. Methyl methacrylate X -- 0 -- 0

49. Methyl parathion X -- 0 -- 0

50. Mevinphos X -- 0 -- 0

51. Mexacarbate X -- 0 -- 0

52. Monoethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

53. Monomethyl amine X -- 0 0

54. Naled X -- 0 -- 0

55. Naphthenic acid X -- 0 -- 0

56. Nitrotoluene X -- 0 -- 0

57. Parathion X -- 0 -- 0

58. Phenolsulfonate X -- 0 -- 0

59. Phosgene X -- 0 -- 0

60. Propargite X -- 0 -- 0

61. Propylene oxide X -- 0 -- 0

62. Pyrethrins X -- 0 -- 0

63. Ouinoline X -- 0 -- 0

64. Resorcinol X -- 0 -- 0

65. Strontium X -- 0 -- 0

66. Strychnine X -- 0 -- 0

67. Styrene X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 37 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

Outfall Number: 018 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

68. 2,4,5-T (2,4,5-trichIorophenoxyacetic X -- 0 -- 0 acid)

69. TDE (tetrachlorodiphenyl X -- 0 -- 0 ethane)

70. 2,4,5-TP [2-(2,4,5-trichIorophenoxy)propa X -- 0 -- 0 noic acid]

71. Trichlorofon X -- 0 -- 0

72. Triethanolamine X -- 0 -- 0

73. Triethylamine X -- 0 -- 0

74. Trimethylamine X -- 0 -- 0

75. Uranium X -- 0 -- 0

76. Vanadium X -- 0 -- 0

77. Vinyl acetate X -- 0 -- 0

78. Xylene X -- 0 -- 0

79. Xyenol X -- 0 -- 0

80. Zirconium X -- 0 -- 0

81. 2,3,7,8-TCDD X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 38 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 39

PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE IN THE UNSHADED AREAS ONLY. You may report some or all of this EPA I.D. NUMBER (copy from Item 1 of Form 1) information on separate sheets (use the same format) instead of completing these pages.

SEE INSTRUCTIONS. OUTFALL NO.

V. INTAKE AND EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS (continued from page 3 of Form 2-C) 02 PART A -You must provide the results of at least one analysis for every pollutant in this table. Complete one table for each outfall. See instructions for additional details.

2. EFFLUENT 3. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE (1) (1) (1) d. NO. OF (1) b. NO. OF

1. POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES

a. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) <5.0 -- 1 <.05 1

b. Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 44.3 5756.22 1 30.6 1

c. Total Organic Carbon (TOC) 16.5 2143.96 1 8.27 1

d. Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 20 2598.74 1 68 1

e. Ammonia (as N)

.52 67.57 1 .12 1 VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE

f. Flow (MGD) 15.58 1 -- 1

g. Temperature VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE (winter) 28.5 1 24.5 1

h. Temperature VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE (summer) 28.2 1 27.1 1 MINIMUM MAXIMUM MINIMUM MAXIMUM

i. pH (s.u.)

8.1 8.1 1 PART B - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVED BELIEVED (1) (1) (1) d. NO. OF (1) b. NO. OF (if available) PRESENT ABSENT CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES

a. Bromide (24959 9) X <1.00 -- 1 <1.0 1

b. Chlorine, Total Residual X <.01 -- 1 <1.0 1

c. Color (PCU) X 110 -- 1 65 1

d. Fecal Coliform

(#/100mL) X 9000 -- 1 70 1

e. Escherichia Coli (E.coli) (#/100 mL) X 8 -- 1 38 1

f. Enterococci (#/100 mL) X -- -- 0 -- 0

g. Fluoride (16984 8) X .151 19.62 1 .076 1 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 39 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVED BELIEVED (1) (1) (1) d. NO. OF (1) b. NO. OF (if available) PRESENT ABSENT CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES

h. Nitrate-Nitrite(as N) X .506 65.75 1 .159 1

i. Nitrogen, Total Organic (as N) X 1.7 220.90 1 <.5 1

j. Oil and Grease X <5.0 -- 1 <5.0 1

k. Phosphorus (as P),

Total (7723-14-0) X .229 29.76 1 .214 1

l. Radioactivity (1) Alpha, Total X .0028 .36 1 .003 1 (2) Beta, Total X .0079 1.03 1 .006 1 (3) Radium, Total X .0011 .14 1 .00091 1 (4) Radium 226, Total X .00084 .11 1 .00089 1

m. Sulfate (as SO4)

(14808-79-8) X 12.3 1598.23 1 5.04 1

n. Sulfide (as S) X <1.0 -- 1 <1.0 1

o. Sulfite (as SO3)

(14265-45-3) X <2.0 -- 1 <2.0 1

p. Surfactants X .171 22.22 1 <.10 1

q. Aluminum, Total (7429-90-5) X 1.35 175.42 1 2.12 1

r. Barium, Total (7440-39-3) X .0627 8.15 1 .0521 1

s. Boron, Total (7440-42-8) X <.05 -- 1 <.05 1

t. Cobalt, Total (7440-48-4) X .0011 .14 1 .0021 1

u. Iron, Total (7439 6) X 2.61 339.14 1 3.06 1

v. Magnesium, Total (7439-95-4) X 3.14 408.0 1 1.74 1

w. Molybdenum, Total (7439-98-7) X <.05 -- 1 <.05 1

x. Manganese, Total (7439-96-5) X .146 18.97 1 2.52 1

y. Tin, Total (7440 5) X <.05 -- 1 <.05 1

z. Titanium, Total (7440-32-6) X <.05 -- 1 .0415 1 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 40 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 41

EPA I.D. NUMBER (copy from Item 1 of Form 1) OUTFALL NUMBER 02 PART C - If you are a primary industry and this outfall contains process wastewater, refer to Table 2c-2 in the instructions to determine which of the GC/MS fractions you must test for. Mark X in column 2-a for all such GC/MS fractions that apply to your industry and for ALL toxic metals, cyanides, and total phenols. If you are not required to mark column 2-a (secondary industries, nonprocess wastewater outfalls, and nonrequired GC/MS fractions), mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present.

Mark X in column 2-c for each pollutant you believe is absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. If you mark column 2b for any pollutant, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant if you know or have reason to believe it will be discharged in concentrations of 10 ppb or greater. If you mark column 2b for acrolein, acrylonitrile, 2,4 dinitrophenol, or 2-methyl-4, 6 dinitrophenol, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for each of these pollutants which you know or have reason to believe that you discharge in concentrations of 100 ppb or greater. Otherwise, for pollutants for which you mark column 2b, you must either submit at least one analysis or briefly describe the reasons the pollutant is expected to be discharged. Note that there are 7 pages to this part; please review each carefully. Complete one table (all 7 pages) for each outfall. See instructions for additional details and requirements.

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES METALS, CYANIDE, AND TOTAL PHENOLS 1M. Antimony, Total (7440-36-0)

X <.00515 -- 1 <.00515 1 2M. Arsenic, Total (7440-38-2)

X .0011 .14 1 .00077 1 3M. Beryllium, Total (7440-41-7)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 4M. Cadmium, Total (7440-43-9)

X <.00103 -- 1 (.00103 1 5M. Chromium, Total (7440-47-3)

X .0019 .25 1 .0025 1 6M. Copper, Total (7440-50-8)

X .0123 1.6 1 .0027 1 7M. Lead, Total (7439-92-1)

X .0015 .19 1 .0021 1 8M. Mercury, Total (7439-97-6)

X <.0002 -- 1 <.00020 1 9M. Nickel, Total (7440-02-0)

X <.00206 -- 1 <.000206 1 10M. Selenium, Total (7782-49-2)

X .00031 .04 1 .00018 1 11M. Silver, Total (7440-22-4)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 12M. Thallium, Total (7440-28-0)

X <.02 -- 1 <.02 1 13M. Zinc, Total (7440 6)

X .015 1.95 1 .0173 1 14M. Cyanide, Total (57-12-5)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 15M. Phenols, Total X <.005 -- 1 .00608 1 DIOXIN 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo- X -- -- 0 -- 0 Pdioxin (1764-01-6)

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 41 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - VOLATILE COMPOUNDS 1V. Accrolein (107 8)

X <.02 -- 1 <.02 1 2V. Acrylonitrile (107-13-1)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 3V. Benzene (71-43-2) X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 4V. Bis (Chloromethyl)

Ether (542-88-1)

X -- -- 0 -- 0 5V. Bromoform (75 2)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 6V. Carbon Tetrachloride (56-23-5)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 7V. Chlorobenzene (108-90-7)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 8V.

Chlorodibromomethan X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 e (124-48-1) 9V. Chloroethane (75-00-3)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 10V. 2-Chloroethylvinyl Ether X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 (110-75-8) 11V. Chloroform (67-66-3)

X .0056 .73 1 <.005 1 12V.

Dichlorobromomethan X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 e (75-27-4) 13V.

Dichlorodifluorometha X -- -- 0 -- 0 ne (75-71-8) 14V. 1,1-Dichloroethane (75 X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 3) 15V. 1,2-Dichloroethane (107- X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 06-2) 16V. 1,1-Dichloroethylene (75- X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 35-4) 17V. 1,2-Dichloropropane (78- X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 87-5) 18V. 1,3-Dichloropropylene X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 (542-75-6) 19V. Ethylbenzene (100-41-4)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 20V. Methyl Bromide (74-83-9)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 21V. Methyl Chloride (74-87-3)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 42 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 43

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - VOLATILE COMPOUNDS 22V. Methylene Chloride (75-09-2)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 23V. 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (79- X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 34-5) 24V.

Tetrachloroethylene X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 (127-18-4) 25V. Toluene (108 3)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 26V. 1,2-Trans-Dichloroethylene (156- X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 60-5) 27V. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (71-55 X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1

-6) 28V. 1,1,2-Trichloroethane (79-00 X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1

-5) 29V Trichloroethylene (79-01-6)

X <.005 -- 1 <.005 1 30V.

Trichlorofluoromethan X -- -- 0 -- 0 e (75-69-4) 31V. Vinyl Chloride (75 4)

X <.002 -- 1 <.002 1 GC/MS FRACTION - ACID COMPOUNDS 1A. 2-Chlorophenol (95-57-8)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 2A. 2,4-Dichlorophenol (120-83-2)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 3A. 2,4-Dimethylphenol (105- X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 67-9) 4A. 4,6-Dinitro-OCresol (534-52-1)

X <.25 -- 1 <.25 1 5A. 2,4-Dinitrophenol (51-28-5)

X <.25 -- 1 <.25 1 6A. 2-Nitrophenol (88-75-5)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 7A. 4-Nitrophenol (100 7)

X <.025 -- 1 <.025 1 8A. P-Chloro-MCresol (59-50-7)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 9A. Pentachlorophenol (87-86-5)

X <.25 -- 1 <.25 1 10A. Phenol (108 2)

X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 43 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - ACID COMPOUNDS 11A. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (88-05 X <.01 -- 1 <.01 1

-2)

GC/MS FRACTION - BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS 1B. Acenaphthene (83 9)

X -- 0 -- 0 2B. Acenaphtylene (208-96-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 3B. Anthracene (120-12-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 4B. Benzidine (92 5)

X -- 0 -- 0 5B. Benzo (a)

Anthracene (56-55-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 6B. Benzo (a) Pyrene (50-32-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 7B. 3,4-Benzofluoranthene X -- 0 -- 0 (205-99-2) 8B. Benzo (ghi)

Perylene (191-24-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 9B. Benzo (k)

Fluoranthene (207 X -- 0 -- 0 9) 10B. Bis (2-Chloroethoxy) X -- 0 -- 0 Methane (111-91-1) 11B. Bis (2-Chloroethyl) Ether X -- 0 -- 0 (111-44-4) 12B. Bis (2-Chloroisopropyl) Ether X -- 0 -- 0 (102-80-1) 13B. Bis (2-Ethylhexyl)

Phthalate (117-81-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 14B. 4-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether (101 X -- 0 -- 0 3) 15B. Butyl Benzyl Phthalate (85-68-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 16B. 2-Chloronaphthalene (91 X -- 0 -- 0 7) 17B. 4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether (7005-72 X -- 0 -- 0

-3) 18B. Chrysene (218-01-9)

X -- 0 -- 0 19B. Dibenzo (a,h)

Anthracene (53-70-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 44 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 45

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS 20B. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene (95- X -- 0 -- 0 50-1) 21B. 1,3-Di-chlorobenzene (541- X -- 0 -- 0 73-1) 22B. 1,4-Dichlorobenzene (106- X -- 0 -- 0 46-7) 23B. 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine (91- X -- 0 -- 0 94-1) 24B. Diethyl Phthalate (84-66-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 25B. Dimethyl Phthalate (131 3)

X -- 0 -- 0 26B. Di-N-Butyl Phthalate (84-74-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 27B. 2,4-Dinitrotoluene (121-14-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 28B. 2,6-Dinitrotoluene (606-20-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 29B. Di-N-Octyl Phthalate (117-84-0)

X -- 0 -- 0 30B. 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine (as Azobenzene) (122 X -- 0 -- 0 7) 31B. Fluoranthene (206-44-0)

X -- 0 -- 0 32B. Fluorene (86 7)

X -- 0 -- 0 33B.

Hexachlorobenzene X -- 0 -- 0 (118-74-1) 34B.

Hexachlorobutadiene X -- 0 -- 0 (87-68-3) 35B.

Hexachlorocyclopenta X -- 0 -- 0 diene (77-47-4) 36B Hexachloroethane (67-72-1)

X -- 0 -- 0 37B. Indeno (1,2,3-cd)

Pyrene (193-39-5)

X -- 0 -- 0 38B. Isophorone (78-59-1)

X -- 0 -- 0 39B. Naphthalene (91-20-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 40B. Nitrobenzene (98 3)

X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 45 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS 41B. N-Nitrosodimethylamine X -- 0 -- 0 (62-75-9) 42B. N-Nitrosodi-N-Propylamine (621 X -- 0 -- 0 7) 43B. N-Nitrosodiphenylamine X -- 0 -- 0 (86-30-6) 44B. Phenanthrene (85-01-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 45B. Pyrene (129 0)

X -- 0 -- 0 46B. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene (120 X -- 0 -- 0 1)

GC/MS FRACTION - PESTICIDES 1P. Aldrin (309-00-2) X -- 0 -- 0 2P. a-BHC (319-84-6) X -- 0 -- 0 3P. -BHC (319-85-7) X -- 0 -- 0 4P. ?-BHC (58-89-9) X -- 0 -- 0 5P. d-BHC (319-86-8) X -- 0 -- 0 6P. Chlordane (57 9)

X -- 0 -- 0 7P. 4,4'-DDT (50-29-3) X -- 0 -- 0 8P. 4,4'-DDE (72-55-9) X -- 0 -- 0 9P. 4,4'-DDD (72-54-8) X -- 0 -- 0 10P. Dieldrin (60-57-1) X -- 0 -- 0 11P. a-Enosulfan (115 7)

X -- 0 -- 0 12P. -Endosulfan (115-29-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 13P. Endosulfan Sulfate (1031-07-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 14P. Endrin (72-20-8) X -- 0 -- 0 15P. Endrin Aldehyde (7421-93-4)

X -- 0 -- 0 16P. Heptachlor (76-44-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 46 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 47

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - PESTICIDES 17P. Heptachlor Epoxide (1024-57-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 18P. PCB-1242 (53469-21-9)

X -- 0 -- 0 19P. PCB-1254 (11097-69-1)

X -- 0 -- 0 20P. PCB-1221 (11104-28-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 21P. PCB-1232 (11141-16-5)

X -- 0 -- 0 22P. PCB-1248 (12672-29-6)

X -- 0 -- 0 23P. PCB-1260 (11096-82-5)

X -- 0 -- 0 24P. PCB-1016 (12674-11-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 25P. Toxaphene (8001 2)

X -- 0 -- 0 Outfall Number: 02 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

1. Asbestos X -- 0 -- 0

2. Acetaldehyde X -- 0 -- 0

3. Allyl Alcohol X -- 0 -- 0

4. Allyl Chloride X -- 0 -- 0

5. Amyl Acetate X -- 0 -- 0

6. Aniline X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 47 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

Outfall Number: 02 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

7. Benzonitrile X -- 0 -- 0

8. Benzyl Chloride X -- 0 -- 0

9. Butyl Acetate X -- 0 -- 0

10. Butylamine X -- 0 -- 0

11. Captan X -- 0 -- 0

12. Carbaryl X -- 0 -- 0

13. Carbofuran X -- 0 -- 0

14. Carbon Disulfide X -- 0 -- 0

15. Chlorpyrifos X -- 0 -- 0

16. Coumaphos X -- 0 -- 0

17. Cresol X -- 0 -- 0

18. Crotonaldehyde X -- 0 -- 0

19. Cyclohexane X -- 0 -- 0

20. 2,4-D (2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic X -- 0 -- 0 acid)

21. Diazinon X -- 0 -- 0

22. Dicamba X -- 0 -- 0

23. Dichlobenil X -- 0 -- 0

24. Dichlone X -- 0 -- 0

25. 2,2-dichloropropionic acid X -- 0 -- 0

26. Dichlorvos X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 48 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 49

Outfall Number: 02 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

27. Diethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

28. Dimethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

29. Dintrobenzene X -- 0 -- 0

30. Diquat X -- 0 -- 0

31. Disulfoton X -- 0 -- 0

32. Diuron X -- 0 -- 0

33. Epichlorohydrin X -- 0 -- 0

34. Ethion X -- 0 -- 0

35. Ethylene diamine X -- 0 -- 0

36. Ethylene dibromide X -- 0 -- 0

37. Formaldehyde X -- 0 -- 0

38. Furfural X -- 0 -- 0

39. Guthion X -- 0 -- 0

40. Isoprene X -- 0 -- 0

41. Isopropanolamine X -- 0 -- 0

42. Kelthane X -- 0 -- 0

43. Kepone X -- 0 -- 0

44. Malathion X -- 0 -- 0

45. Mercaptodimethur X -- 0 -- 0

46. Methoxychlor X -- 0 -- 0

47. Methyl mercaptan X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 49 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

Outfall Number: 02 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

48. Methyl methacrylate X -- 0 -- 0

49. Methyl parathion X -- 0 -- 0

50. Mevinphos X -- 0 -- 0

51. Mexacarbate X -- 0 -- 0

52. Monoethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

53. Monomethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

54. Naled X -- 0 -- 0

55. Naphthenic acid X -- 0 -- 0

56. Nitrotoluene X -- 0 -- 0

57. Parathion X -- 0 -- 0

58. Phenolsulfonate X -- 0 -- 0

59. Phosgene X -- 0 -- 0

60. Propargite X -- 0 -- 0

61. Propylene oxide X -- 0 -- 0

62. Pyrethrins X -- 0 -- 0

63. Ouinoline X -- 0 -- 0

64. Resorcinol X -- 0 -- 0

65. Strontium X -- 0 -- 0

66. Strychnine X -- 0 -- 0

67. Styrene X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 50 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 51

Outfall Number: 02 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

68. 2,4,5-T (2,4,5-trichIorophenoxyacetic X -- 0 -- 0 acid)

69. TDE (tetrachlorodiphenyl X -- 0 -- 0 ethane)

70. 2,4,5-TP [2-(2,4,5-trichIorophenoxy)propa X -- 0 -- 0 noic acid]

71. Trichlorofon X -- 0 -- 0

72. Triethanolamine X -- 0 -- 0

73. Triethylamine X -- 0 -- 0

74. Trimethylamine X -- 0 -- 0

75. Uranium X -- 0 -- 0

76. Vanadium X -- 0 -- 0

77. Vinyl acetate X -- 0 -- 0

78. Xylene X -- 0 -- 0

79. Xyenol X -- 0 -- 0

80. Zirconium X -- 0 -- 0

81. 2,3,7,8-TCDD X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 51 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE IN THE UNSHADED AREAS ONLY. You may report some or all of this EPA I.D. NUMBER (copy from Item 1 of Form 1) information on separate sheets (use the same format) instead of completing these pages.

SEE INSTRUCTIONS. OUTFALL NO.

V. INTAKE AND EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS (continued from page 3 of Form 2-C) 03 PART A -You must provide the results of at least one analysis for every pollutant in this table. Complete one table for each outfall. See instructions for additional details.

2. EFFLUENT 3. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE (1) (1) (1) d. NO. OF (1) b. NO. OF

1. POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES

a. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) <5.0 -- 1 <5.0 1

b. Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 16.9 7.05 1 30.6 1

c. Total Organic Carbon (TOC) -- -- 0 -- --

d. Total Suspended Solids (TSS) <6.0 -- 1 68 1

e. Ammonia (as N)

.10 .042 1 .12 1 VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE

f. Flow (MGD)

.05 1 -- 1

g. Temperature VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE (winter) 31 1 24.5 1

h. Temperature VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE (summer)

N/A 1 27.1 1 MINIMUM MAXIMUM MINIMUM MAXIMUM

i. pH (s.u.)

7.19 7.19 1 PART B - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVED BELIEVED (1) (1) (1) d. NO. OF (1) b. NO. OF (if available) PRESENT ABSENT CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES

a. Bromide (24959 9) X -- 0 -- --

b. Chlorine, Total Residual X -- 0 -- --

c. Color (PCU) X -- 0 -- --

d. Fecal Coliform

(#/100mL) X -- 0 -- --

e. Escherichia Coli (E.coli) (#/100 mL) X -- 0 -- --

f. Enterococci (#/100 mL) X -- 0 -- --

g. Fluoride (16984 8) X -- 0 -- --

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 52 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 53

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVED BELIEVED (1) (1) (1) d. NO. OF (1) b. NO. OF (if available) PRESENT ABSENT CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES

h. Nitrate-Nitrite(as N) X -- 0 -- --

i. Nitrogen, Total Organic (as N) X -- 0 -- --

j. Oil and Grease X -- 0 -- --

k. Phosphorus (as P),

Total (7723-14-0) X -- 0 -- --

l. Radioactivity (1) Alpha, Total X -- 0 -- --

(2) Beta, Total X -- 0 --

(3) Radium, Total X -- 0 -- --

(4) Radium 226, Total X -- 0 -- --

m. Sulfate (as SO4)

(14808-79-8) X -- 0 -- --

n. Sulfide (as S) X -- 0 -- --

o. Sulfite (as SO3)

(14265-45-3) X -- 0 -- --

p. Surfactants X -- 0 -- --

q. Aluminum, Total (7429-90-5) X -- 0 -- --

r. Barium, Total (7440-39-3) X -- 0 -- --

s. Boron, Total (7440-42-8) X -- 0 -- --

t. Cobalt, Total (7440-48-4) X -- 0 -- --

u. Iron, Total (7439 6) X -- 0 -- --

v. Magnesium, Total (7439-95-4) X -- 0 -- --

w. Molybdenum, Total (7439-98-7) X -- 0 -- --

x. Manganese, Total (7439-96-5) X -- 0 -- --

y. Tin, Total (7440 5) X -- 0 -- --

z. Titanium, Total (7440-32-6) X -- 0 -- --

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 53 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

EPA I.D. NUMBER (copy from Item 1 of Form 1) OUTFALL NUMBER 03 PART C - If you are a primary industry and this outfall contains process wastewater, refer to Table 2c-2 in the instructions to determine which of the GC/MS fractions you must test for. Mark X in column 2-a for all such GC/MS fractions that apply to your industry and for ALL toxic metals, cyanides, and total phenols. If you are not required to mark column 2-a (secondary industries, nonprocess wastewater outfalls, and nonrequired GC/MS fractions), mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present.

Mark X in column 2-c for each pollutant you believe is absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. If you mark column 2b for any pollutant, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant if you know or have reason to believe it will be discharged in concentrations of 10 ppb or greater. If you mark column 2b for acrolein, acrylonitrile, 2,4 dinitrophenol, or 2-methyl-4, 6 dinitrophenol, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for each of these pollutants which you know or have reason to believe that you discharge in concentrations of 100 ppb or greater. Otherwise, for pollutants for which you mark column 2b, you must either submit at least one analysis or briefly describe the reasons the pollutant is expected to be discharged. Note that there are 7 pages to this part; please review each carefully. Complete one table (all 7 pages) for each outfall. See instructions for additional details and requirements.

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES METALS, CYANIDE, AND TOTAL PHENOLS 1M. Antimony, Total (7440-36-0)

X -- 0 -- --

2M. Arsenic, Total (7440-38-2)

X -- 0 -- --

3M. Beryllium, Total (7440-41-7)

X -- 0 -- --

4M. Cadmium, Total (7440-43-9)

X -- 0 -- --

5M. Chromium, Total (7440-47-3)

X -- 0 -- --

6M. Copper, Total (7440-50-8)

X -- 0 -- --

7M. Lead, Total (7439-92-1)

X -- 0 -- --

8M. Mercury, Total (7439-97-6)

X -- 0 -- --

9M. Nickel, Total (7440-02-0)

X -- 0 -- --

10M. Selenium, Total (7782-49-2)

X -- 0 -- --

11M. Silver, Total (7440-22-4)

X -- 0 -- --

12M. Thallium, Total (7440-28-0)

X -- 0 -- --

13M. Zinc, Total (7440 6)

X -- 0 -- --

14M. Cyanide, Total (57-12-5)

X -- 0 -- --

15M. Phenols, Total X -- 0 -- --

DIOXIN 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo- X -- 0 -- --

Pdioxin (1764-01-6)

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 54 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 55

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - VOLATILE COMPOUNDS 1V. Accrolein (107 8)

X -- 0 -- --

2V. Acrylonitrile (107-13-1)

X -- 0 -- --

3V. Benzene (71-43-2) X -- 0 -- --

4V. Bis (Chloromethyl)

Ether (542-88-1)

X -- 0 -- --

5V. Bromoform (75 2)

X -- 0 -- --

6V. Carbon Tetrachloride (56-23-5)

X -- 0 -- --

7V. Chlorobenzene (108-90-7)

X -- 0 -- --

8V.

Chlorodibromomethan X -- 0 -- --

e (124-48-1) 9V. Chloroethane (75-00-3)

X -- 0 -- --

10V. 2-Chloroethylvinyl Ether X -- 0 -- --

(110-75-8) 11V. Chloroform (67-66-3)

X -- 0 -- --

12V.

Dichlorobromomethan X -- 0 -- --

e (75-27-4) 13V.

Dichlorodifluorometha X -- 0 -- --

ne (75-71-8) 14V. 1,1-Dichloroethane (75 X -- 0 -- --

3) 15V. 1,2-Dichloroethane (107- X -- 0 -- --

06-2) 16V. 1,1-Dichloroethylene (75- X -- 0 -- --

35-4) 17V. 1,2-Dichloropropane (78- X -- 0 -- --

87-5) 18V. 1,3-Dichloropropylene X -- 0 -- --

(542-75-6) 19V. Ethylbenzene (100-41-4)

X -- 0 -- --

20V. Methyl Bromide (74-83-9)

X -- 0 -- --

21V. Methyl Chloride (74-87-3)

X -- 0 -- --

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 55 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - VOLATILE COMPOUNDS 22V. Methylene Chloride (75-09-2)

X -- 0 -- --

23V. 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (79- X -- 0 -- --

34-5) 24V.

Tetrachloroethylene X -- 0 -- --

(127-18-4) 25V. Toluene (108 3)

X -- 0 -- --

26V. 1,2-Trans-Dichloroethylene (156- X -- 0 -- --

60-5) 27V. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (71-55 X -- 0 -- --

-6) 28V. 1,1,2-Trichloroethane (79-00 X -- 0 -- --

-5) 29V Trichloroethylene (79-01-6)

X -- 0 -- --

30V.

Trichlorofluoromethan X -- 0 -- --

e (75-69-4) 31V. Vinyl Chloride (75 4)

X -- 0 -- --

GC/MS FRACTION - ACID COMPOUNDS 1A. 2-Chlorophenol (95-57-8)

X -- 0 -- --

2A. 2,4-Dichlorophenol (120-83-2)

X -- 0 -- --

3A. 2,4-Dimethylphenol (105- X -- 0 -- --

67-9) 4A. 4,6-Dinitro-OCresol (534-52-1)

X -- 0 -- --

5A. 2,4-Dinitrophenol (51-28-5)

X -- 0 -- --

6A. 2-Nitrophenol (88-75-5)

X -- 0 -- --

7A. 4-Nitrophenol (100 7)

X -- 0 -- --

8A. P-Chloro-MCresol (59-50-7)

X -- 0 -- --

9A. Pentachlorophenol (87-86-5)

X -- 0 -- --

10A. Phenol (108 2)

X -- 0 -- --

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 56 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 57

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - ACID COMPOUNDS 11A. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (88-05 X -- 0 -- --

-2)

GC/MS FRACTION - BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS 1B. Acenaphthene (83 9)

X -- 0 -- 0 2B. Acenaphtylene (208-96-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 3B. Anthracene (120-12-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 4B. Benzidine (92 5)

X -- 0 -- 0 5B. Benzo (a)

Anthracene (56-55-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 6B. Benzo (a) Pyrene (50-32-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 7B. 3,4-Benzofluoranthene X -- 0 -- 0 (205-99-2) 8B. Benzo (ghi)

Perylene (191-24-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 9B. Benzo (k)

Fluoranthene (207 X -- 0 -- 0 9) 10B. Bis (2-Chloroethoxy) X -- 0 -- 0 Methane (111-91-1) 11B. Bis (2-Chloroethyl) Ether X -- 0 -- 0 (111-44-4) 12B. Bis (2-Chloroisopropyl) Ether X -- 0 -- 0 (102-80-1) 13B. Bis (2-Ethylhexyl)

Phthalate (117-81-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 14B. 4-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether (101 X -- 0 -- 0 3) 15B. Butyl Benzyl Phthalate (85-68-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 16B. 2-Chloronaphthalene (91 X -- 0 -- 0 7) 17B. 4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether (7005-72 X -- 0 -- 0

-3) 18B. Chrysene (218-01-9)

X -- 0 -- 0 19B. Dibenzo (a,h)

Anthracene (53-70-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 57 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS 20B. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene (95- X -- 0 -- 0 50-1) 21B. 1,3-Di-chlorobenzene (541- X -- 0 -- 0 73-1) 22B. 1,4-Dichlorobenzene (106- X -- 0 -- 0 46-7) 23B. 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine (91- X -- 0 -- 0 94-1) 24B. Diethyl Phthalate (84-66-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 25B. Dimethyl Phthalate (131 3)

X -- 0 -- 0 26B. Di-N-Butyl Phthalate (84-74-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 27B. 2,4-Dinitrotoluene (121-14-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 28B. 2,6-Dinitrotoluene (606-20-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 29B. Di-N-Octyl Phthalate (117-84-0)

X -- 0 -- 0 30B. 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine (as Azobenzene) (122 X -- 0 -- 0 7) 31B. Fluoranthene (206-44-0)

X -- 0 -- 0 32B. Fluorene (86 7)

X -- 0 -- 0 33B.

Hexachlorobenzene X -- 0 -- 0 (118-74-1) 34B.

Hexachlorobutadiene X -- 0 -- 0 (87-68-3) 35B.

Hexachlorocyclopenta X -- 0 -- 0 diene (77-47-4) 36B Hexachloroethane (67-72-1)

X -- 0 -- 0 37B. Indeno (1,2,3-cd)

Pyrene (193-39-5)

X -- 0 -- 0 38B. Isophorone (78-59-1)

X -- 0 -- 0 39B. Naphthalene (91-20-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 40B. Nitrobenzene (98 3)

X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 58 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 59

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS 41B. N-Nitrosodimethylamine X -- 0 -- 0 (62-75-9) 42B. N-Nitrosodi-N-Propylamine (621 X -- 0 -- 0 7) 43B. N-Nitrosodiphenylamine X -- 0 -- 0 (86-30-6) 44B. Phenanthrene (85-01-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 45B. Pyrene (129 0)

X -- 0 -- 0 46B. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene (120 X -- 0 -- 0 1)

GC/MS FRACTION - PESTICIDES 1P. Aldrin (309-00-2) X -- 0 -- 0 2P. a-BHC (319-84-6) X -- 0 -- 0 3P. -BHC (319-85-7) X -- 0 -- 0 4P. ?-BHC (58-89-9) X -- 0 -- 0 5P. d-BHC (319-86-8) X -- 0 -- 0 6P. Chlordane (57 9)

X -- 0 -- 0 7P. 4,4'-DDT (50-29-3) X -- 0 -- 0 8P. 4,4'-DDE (72-55-9) X -- 0 -- 0 9P. 4,4'-DDD (72-54-8) X -- 0 -- 0 10P. Dieldrin (60-57-1) X -- 0 -- 0 11P. a-Enosulfan (115 7)

X -- 0 -- 0 12P. -Endosulfan (115-29-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 13P. Endosulfan Sulfate (1031-07-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 14P. Endrin (72-20-8) X -- 0 -- 0 15P. Endrin Aldehyde (7421-93-4)

X -- 0 -- 0 16P. Heptachlor (76-44-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 59 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - PESTICIDES 17P. Heptachlor Epoxide (1024-57-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 18P. PCB-1242 (53469-21-9)

X -- 0 -- 0 19P. PCB-1254 (11097-69-1)

X -- 0 -- 0 20P. PCB-1221 (11104-28-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 21P. PCB-1232 (11141-16-5)

X -- 0 -- 0 22P. PCB-1248 (12672-29-6)

X -- 0 -- 0 23P. PCB-1260 (11096-82-5)

X -- 0 -- 0 24P. PCB-1016 (12674-11-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 25P. Toxaphene (8001 2)

X -- 0 -- 0 Outfall Number: 03 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

1. Asbestos X -- 0 -- 0

2. Acetaldehyde X -- 0 -- 0

3. Allyl Alcohol X -- 0 -- 0

4. Allyl Chloride X -- 0 -- 0

5. Amyl Acetate X -- 0 -- 0

6. Aniline X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 60 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 61

Outfall Number: 03 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

7. Benzonitrile X -- 0 -- 0

8. Benzyl Chloride X -- 0 -- 0

9. Butyl Acetate X -- 0 -- 0

10. Butylamine X -- 0 -- 0

11. Captan X -- 0 -- 0

12. Carbaryl X -- 0 -- 0

13. Carbofuran X -- 0 -- 0

14. Carbon Disulfide X -- 0 -- 0

15. Chlorpyrifos X -- 0 -- 0

16. Coumaphos X -- 0 -- 0

17. Cresol X -- 0 -- 0

18. Crotonaldehyde X -- 0 -- 0

19. Cyclohexane X -- 0 -- 0

20. 2,4-D (2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic X -- 0 -- 0 acid)

21. Diazinon X -- 0 -- 0

22. Dicamba X -- 0 -- 0

23. Dichlobenil X -- 0 -- 0

24. Dichlone X -- 0 -- 0

25. 2,2-dichloropropionic acid X -- 0 -- 0

26. Dichlorvos X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 61 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

Outfall Number: 03 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

27. Diethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

28. Dimethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

29. Dintrobenzene X -- 0 -- 0

30. Diquat X -- 0 -- 0

31. Disulfoton X -- 0 -- 0

32. Diuron X -- 0 -- 0

33. Epichlorohydrin X -- 0 -- 0

34. Ethion X -- 0 -- 0

35. Ethylene diamine X -- 0 -- 0

36. Ethylene dibromide X -- 0 -- 0

37. Formaldehyde X -- 0 -- 0

38. Furfural X -- 0 -- 0

39. Guthion X -- 0 -- 0

40. Isoprene X -- 0 -- 0

41. Isopropanolamine X -- 0 -- 0

42. Kelthane X -- 0 -- 0

43. Kepone X -- 0 -- 0

44. Malathion X -- 0 -- 0

45. Mercaptodimethur X -- 0 -- 0

46. Methoxychlor X -- 0 -- 0

47. Methyl mercaptan X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 62 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 63

Outfall Number: 03 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

48. Methyl methacrylate X -- 0 -- 0

49. Methyl parathion X -- 0 -- 0

50. Mevinphos X -- 0 -- 0

51. Mexacarbate X -- 0 -- 0

52. Monoethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

53. Monomethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

54. Naled X -- 0 -- 0

55. Naphthenic acid X -- 0 -- 0

56. Nitrotoluene X -- 0 -- 0

57. Parathion X -- 0 -- 0

58. Phenolsulfonate X -- 0 -- 0

59. Phosgene X -- 0 -- 0

60. Propargite X -- 0 -- 0

61. Propylene oxide X -- 0 -- 0

62. Pyrethrins X -- 0 -- 0

63. Ouinoline X -- 0 -- 0

64. Resorcinol X -- 0 -- 0

65. Strontium X -- 0 -- 0

66. Strychnine X -- 0 -- 0

67. Styrene X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 63 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

Outfall Number: 03 PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

68. 2,4,5-T (2,4,5-trichIorophenoxyacetic X -- 0 -- 0 acid)

69. TDE (tetrachlorodiphenyl X -- 0 -- 0 ethane)

70. 2,4,5-TP [2-(2,4,5-trichIorophenoxy)propa X -- 0 -- 0 noic acid]

71. Trichlorofon X -- 0 -- 0

72. Triethanolamine X -- 0 -- 0

73. Triethylamine X -- 0 -- 0

74. Trimethylamine X -- 0 -- 0

75. Uranium X -- 0 -- 0

76. Vanadium X -- 0 -- 0

77. Vinyl acetate X -- 0 -- 0

78. Xylene X -- 0 -- 0

79. Xyenol X -- 0 -- 0

80. Zirconium X -- 0 -- 0

81. 2,3,7,8-TCDD X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 64 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 65

PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE IN THE UNSHADED AREAS ONLY. You may report some or all of this EPA I.D. NUMBER (copy from Item 1 of Form 1) information on separate sheets (use the same format) instead of completing these pages.

SEE INSTRUCTIONS. OUTFALL NO.

V. INTAKE AND EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS (continued from page 3 of Form 2-C) 03A PART A -You must provide the results of at least one analysis for every pollutant in this table. Complete one table for each outfall. See instructions for additional details.

2. EFFLUENT 3. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE (1) (1) (1) d. NO. OF (1) b. NO. OF

1. POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES

a. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) <20 -- 1 <5.0 1

b. Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 14.7 1.23 1 30.6 1

c. Total Organic Carbon (TOC) -- -- 0 -- --

d. Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 9 .75 1 68 1

e. Ammonia (as N)

<.10 -- 1 .12 1 VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE

f. Flow (MGD)

.01 1 -- 1

g. Temperature VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE (winter) 28.5 1 24.5 1

h. Temperature VALUE VALUE VALUE VALUE (summer)

N/A 1 27.1 1 MINIMUM MAXIMUM MINIMUM MAXIMUM

i. pH (s.u.)

6.87 6.87 1 PART B - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVED BELIEVED (1) (1) (1) d. NO. OF (1) b. NO. OF (if available) PRESENT ABSENT CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES

a. Bromide (24959 9) X -- 0 -- --

b. Chlorine, Total Residual X -- 0 -- --

c. Color (PCU) X -- 0 -- --

d. Fecal Coliform

(#/100mL) X -- 0 -- --

e. Escherichia Coli (E.coli) (#/100 mL) X -- 0 -- --

f. Enterococci (#/100 mL) X -- 0 -- --

g. Fluoride (16984 8) X -- 0 -- --

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 65 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVED BELIEVED (1) (1) (1) d. NO. OF (1) b. NO. OF (if available) PRESENT ABSENT CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES CONCENTRATION (2) MASS ANALYSES

h. Nitrate-Nitrite(as N) X -- 0 -- --

i. Nitrogen, Total Organic (as N) X -- 0 -- --

j. Oil and Grease X -- 0 -- --

k. Phosphorus (as P),

Total (7723-14-0) X -- 0 -- --

l. Radioactivity (1) Alpha, Total X -- 0 -- --

(2) Beta, Total X -- 0 -- --

(3) Radium, Total X -- 0 -- --

(4) Radium 226, Total X -- 0 -- --

m. Sulfate (as SO4)

(14808-79-8) X -- 0 -- --

n. Sulfide (as S) X -- 0 -- --

o. Sulfite (as SO3)

(14265-45-3) X -- 0 -- --

p. Surfactants X -- 0 -- --

q. Aluminum, Total (7429-90-5) X -- 0 -- --

r. Barium, Total (7440-39-3) X -- 0 -- --

s. Boron, Total (7440-42-8) X -- 0 -- --

t. Cobalt, Total (7440-48-4) X -- 0 -- --

u. Iron, Total (7439 6) X -- 0 -- --

v. Magnesium, Total (7439-95-4) X -- 0 -- --

w. Molybdenum, Total (7439-98-7) X -- 0 -- --

x. Manganese, Total (7439-96-5) X -- 0 -- --

y. Tin, Total (7440 5) X -- 0 -- --

z. Titanium, Total (7440-32-6) X -- 0 -- --

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 66 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 67

EPA I.D. NUMBER (copy from Item 1 of Form 1) OUTFALL NUMBER 03A PART C - If you are a primary industry and this outfall contains process wastewater, refer to Table 2c-2 in the instructions to determine which of the GC/MS fractions you must test for. Mark X in column 2-a for all such GC/MS fractions that apply to your industry and for ALL toxic metals, cyanides, and total phenols. If you are not required to mark column 2-a (secondary industries, nonprocess wastewater outfalls, and nonrequired GC/MS fractions), mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present.

Mark X in column 2-c for each pollutant you believe is absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. If you mark column 2b for any pollutant, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant if you know or have reason to believe it will be discharged in concentrations of 10 ppb or greater. If you mark column 2b for acrolein, acrylonitrile, 2,4 dinitrophenol, or 2-methyl-4, 6 dinitrophenol, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for each of these pollutants which you know or have reason to believe that you discharge in concentrations of 100 ppb or greater. Otherwise, for pollutants for which you mark column 2b, you must either submit at least one analysis or briefly describe the reasons the pollutant is expected to be discharged. Note that there are 7 pages to this part; please review each carefully. Complete one table (all 7 pages) for each outfall. See instructions for additional details and requirements.

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES METALS, CYANIDE, AND TOTAL PHENOLS 1M. Antimony, Total (7440-36-0)

X -- 0 -- --

2M. Arsenic, Total (7440-38-2)

X -- 0 -- --

3M. Beryllium, Total (7440-41-7)

X -- 0 -- --

4M. Cadmium, Total (7440-43-9)

X -- 0 -- --

5M. Chromium, Total (7440-47-3)

X -- 0 -- --

6M. Copper, Total (7440-50-8)

X -- 0 -- --

7M. Lead, Total (7439-92-1)

X -- 0 -- --

8M. Mercury, Total (7439-97-6)

X -- 0 -- --

9M. Nickel, Total (7440-02-0)

X -- 0 -- --

10M. Selenium, Total (7782-49-2)

X -- 0 -- --

11M. Silver, Total (7440-22-4)

X -- 0 -- --

12M. Thallium, Total (7440-28-0)

X -- 0 -- --

13M. Zinc, Total (7440 6)

X -- 0 -- --

14M. Cyanide, Total (57-12-5)

X -- 0 -- --

15M. Phenols, Total X -- 0 -- --

DIOXIN 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo- X -- 0 -- --

Pdioxin (1764-01-6)

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 67 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - VOLATILE COMPOUNDS 1V. Accrolein (107 8)

X -- 0 -- --

2V. Acrylonitrile (107-13-1)

X -- 0 -- --

3V. Benzene (71-43-2) X -- 0 -- --

4V. Bis (Chloromethyl)

Ether (542-88-1)

X -- 0 -- --

5V. Bromoform (75 2)

X -- 0 -- --

6V. Carbon Tetrachloride (56-23-5)

X -- 0 -- --

7V. Chlorobenzene (108-90-7)

X -- 0 -- --

8V.

Chlorodibromomethan X -- 0 -- --

e (124-48-1) 9V. Chloroethane (75-00-3)

X -- 0 -- --

10V. 2-Chloroethylvinyl Ether X -- 0 -- --

(110-75-8) 11V. Chloroform (67-66-3)

X -- 0 -- --

12V.

Dichlorobromomethan X -- 0 -- --

e (75-27-4) 13V.

Dichlorodifluorometha X -- 0 -- --

ne (75-71-8) 14V. 1,1-Dichloroethane (75 X -- 0 -- --

3) 15V. 1,2-Dichloroethane (107- X -- 0 -- --

06-2) 16V. 1,1-Dichloroethylene (75- X -- 0 -- --

35-4) 17V. 1,2-Dichloropropane (78- X -- 0 -- --

87-5) 18V. 1,3-Dichloropropylene X -- 0 -- --

(542-75-6) 19V. Ethylbenzene (100-41-4)

X -- 0 -- --

20V. Methyl Bromide (74-83-9)

X -- 0 -- --

21V. Methyl Chloride (74-87-3)

X -- 0 -- --

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 68 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 69

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - VOLATILE COMPOUNDS 22V. Methylene Chloride (75-09-2)

X -- 0 -- --

23V. 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (79- X -- 0 -- --

34-5) 24V.

Tetrachloroethylene X -- 0 -- --

(127-18-4) 25V. Toluene (108 3)

X -- 0 -- --

26V. 1,2-Trans-Dichloroethylene (156- X -- 0 -- --

60-5) 27V. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (71-55 X -- 0 -- --

-6) 28V. 1,1,2-Trichloroethane (79-00 X -- 0 -- --

-5) 29V Trichloroethylene (79-01-6)

X -- 0 -- --

30V.

Trichlorofluoromethan X -- 0 -- --

e (75-69-4) 31V. Vinyl Chloride (75 4)

X -- 0 -- --

GC/MS FRACTION - ACID COMPOUNDS 1A. 2-Chlorophenol (95-57-8)

X -- 0 -- --

2A. 2,4-Dichlorophenol (120-83-2)

X -- 0 -- --

3A. 2,4-Dimethylphenol (105- X -- 0 -- --

67-9) 4A. 4,6-Dinitro-OCresol (534-52-1)

X -- 0 -- --

5A. 2,4-Dinitrophenol (51-28-5)

X -- 0 -- --

6A. 2-Nitrophenol (88-75-5)

X -- 0 -- --

7A. 4-Nitrophenol (100 7)

X -- 0 -- --

8A. P-Chloro-MCresol (59-50-7)

X -- 0 -- --

9A. Pentachlorophenol (87-86-5)

X -- 0 -- --

10A. Phenol (108 2)

X -- 0 -- --

EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 69 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - ACID COMPOUNDS 11A. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (88-05 X -- 0 -- --

-2)

GC/MS FRACTION - BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS 1B. Acenaphthene (83 9)

X -- 0 -- 0 2B. Acenaphtylene (208-96-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 3B. Anthracene (120-12-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 4B. Benzidine (92 5)

X -- 0 -- 0 5B. Benzo (a)

Anthracene (56-55-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 6B. Benzo (a) Pyrene (50-32-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 7B. 3,4-Benzofluoranthene X -- 0 -- 0 (205-99-2) 8B. Benzo (ghi)

Perylene (191-24-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 9B. Benzo (k)

Fluoranthene (207 X -- 0 -- 0 9) 10B. Bis (2-Chloroethoxy) X -- 0 -- 0 Methane (111-91-1) 11B. Bis (2-Chloroethyl) Ether X -- 0 -- 0 (111-44-4) 12B. Bis (2-Chloroisopropyl) Ether X -- 0 -- 0 (102-80-1) 13B. Bis (2-Ethylhexyl)

Phthalate (117-81-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 14B. 4-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether (101 X -- 0 -- 0 3) 15B. Butyl Benzyl Phthalate (85-68-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 16B. 2-Chloronaphthalene (91 X -- 0 -- 0 7) 17B. 4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether (7005-72 X -- 0 -- 0

-3) 18B. Chrysene (218-01-9)

X -- 0 -- 0 19B. Dibenzo (a,h)

Anthracene (53-70-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 70 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 71

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS 20B. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene (95- X -- 0 -- 0 50-1) 21B. 1,3-Di-chlorobenzene (541- X -- 0 -- 0 73-1) 22B. 1,4-Dichlorobenzene (106- X -- 0 -- 0 46-7) 23B. 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine (91- X -- 0 -- 0 94-1) 24B. Diethyl Phthalate (84-66-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 25B. Dimethyl Phthalate (131 3)

X -- 0 -- 0 26B. Di-N-Butyl Phthalate (84-74-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 27B. 2,4-Dinitrotoluene (121-14-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 28B. 2,6-Dinitrotoluene (606-20-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 29B. Di-N-Octyl Phthalate (117-84-0)

X -- 0 -- 0 30B. 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine (as Azobenzene) (122 X -- 0 -- 0 7) 31B. Fluoranthene (206-44-0)

X -- 0 -- 0 32B. Fluorene (86 7)

X -- 0 -- 0 33B.

Hexachlorobenzene X -- 0 -- 0 (118-74-1) 34B.

Hexachlorobutadiene X -- 0 -- 0 (87-68-3) 35B.

Hexachlorocyclopenta X -- 0 -- 0 diene (77-47-4) 36B Hexachloroethane (67-72-1)

X -- 0 -- 0 37B. Indeno (1,2,3-cd)

Pyrene (193-39-5)

X -- 0 -- 0 38B. Isophorone (78-59-1)

X -- 0 -- 0 39B. Naphthalene (91-20-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 40B. Nitrobenzene (98 3)

X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 71 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - BASE/NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS 41B. N-Nitrosodimethylamine X -- 0 -- 0 (62-75-9) 42B. N-Nitrosodi-N-Propylamine (621 X -- 0 -- 0 7) 43B. N-Nitrosodiphenylamine X -- 0 -- 0 (86-30-6) 44B. Phenanthrene (85-01-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 45B. Pyrene (129 0)

X -- 0 -- 0 46B. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene (120 X -- 0 -- 0 1)

GC/MS FRACTION - PESTICIDES 1P. Aldrin (309-00-2) X -- 0 -- 0 2P. a-BHC (319-84-6) X -- 0 -- 0 3P. -BHC (319-85-7) X -- 0 -- 0 4P. ?-BHC (58-89-9) X -- 0 -- 0 5P. d-BHC (319-86-8) X -- 0 -- 0 6P. Chlordane (57 9)

X -- 0 -- 0 7P. 4,4'-DDT (50-29-3) X -- 0 -- 0 8P. 4,4'-DDE (72-55-9) X -- 0 -- 0 9P. 4,4'-DDD (72-54-8) X -- 0 -- 0 10P. Dieldrin (60-57-1) X -- 0 -- 0 11P. a-Enosulfan (115 7)

X -- 0 -- 0 12P. -Endosulfan (115-29-7)

X -- 0 -- 0 13P. Endosulfan Sulfate (1031-07-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 14P. Endrin (72-20-8) X -- 0 -- 0 15P. Endrin Aldehyde (7421-93-4)

X -- 0 -- 0 16P. Heptachlor (76-44-8)

X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 72 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 73

2. MARK X 3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

1. POLLUTANT b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM AND a. b. c. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE CAS NO. BELIEVE (if available) TESTING D BELIEVE (1) (1) (1) (1)

REQUIR PRESEN D CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS CONCENTRATION (2) MASS d. NO. OF CONCENTRATION (2) MASS b. NO. OF ED T ABSENT (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES (mg/L) (lbs/day) ANALYSES GC/MS FRACTION - PESTICIDES 17P. Heptachlor Epoxide (1024-57-3)

X -- 0 -- 0 18P. PCB-1242 (53469-21-9)

X -- 0 -- 0 19P. PCB-1254 (11097-69-1)

X -- 0 -- 0 20P. PCB-1221 (11104-28-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 21P. PCB-1232 (11141-16-5)

X -- 0 -- 0 22P. PCB-1248 (12672-29-6)

X -- 0 -- 0 23P. PCB-1260 (11096-82-5)

X -- 0 -- 0 24P. PCB-1016 (12674-11-2)

X -- 0 -- 0 25P. Toxaphene (8001 2)

X -- 0 -- 0 Outfall Number: 03A PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

1. Asbestos X -- 0 -- 0

2. Acetaldehyde X -- 0 -- 0

3. Allyl Alcohol X -- 0 -- 0

4. Allyl Chloride X -- 0 -- 0

5. Amyl Acetate X -- 0 -- 0

6. Aniline X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 73 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

Outfall Number: 03A PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

7. Benzonitrile X -- 0 -- 0

8. Benzyl Chloride X -- 0 -- 0

9. Butyl Acetate X -- 0 -- 0

10. Butylamine X -- 0 -- 0

11. Captan X -- 0 -- 0

12. Carbaryl X -- 0 -- 0

13. Carbofuran X -- 0 -- 0

14. Carbon Disulfide X -- 0 -- 0

15. Chlorpyrifos X -- 0 -- 0

16. Coumaphos X -- 0 -- 0

17. Cresol X -- 0 -- 0

18. Crotonaldehyde X -- 0 -- 0

19. Cyclohexane X -- 0 -- 0

20. 2,4-D (2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic X -- 0 -- 0 acid)

21. Diazinon X -- 0 -- 0

22. Dicamba X -- 0 -- 0

23. Dichlobenil X -- 0 -- 0

24. Dichlone X -- 0 -- 0

25. 2,2-dichloropropionic acid X -- 0 -- 0

26. Dichlorvos X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 74 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 75

Outfall Number: 03A PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

27. Diethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

28. Dimethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

29. Dintrobenzene X -- 0 -- 0

30. Diquat X -- 0 -- 0

31. Disulfoton X -- 0 -- 0

32. Diuron X -- 0 -- 0

33. Epichlorohydrin X -- 0 -- 0

34. Ethion X -- 0 -- 0

35. Ethylene diamine X -- 0 -- 0

36. Ethylene dibromide X -- 0 -- 0

37. Formaldehyde X -- 0 -- 0

38. Furfural X -- 0 -- 0

39. Guthion X -- 0 -- 0

40. Isoprene X -- 0 -- 0

41. Isopropanolamine X -- 0 -- 0

42. Kelthane X -- 0 -- 0

43. Kepone X -- 0 -- 0

44. Malathion X -- 0 -- 0

45. Mercaptodimethur X -- 0 -- 0

46. Methoxychlor X -- 0 -- 0

47. Methyl mercaptan X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 75 of 77 CONTINUE ON REVERSE

Outfall Number: 03A PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

48. Methyl methacrylate X -- 0 -- 0

49. Methyl parathion X -- 0 -- 0

50. Mevinphos X -- 0 -- 0

51. Mexacarbate X -- 0 -- 0

52. Monoethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

53. Monomethyl amine X -- 0 -- 0

54. Naled X -- 0 -- 0

55. Naphthenic acid X -- 0 -- 0

56. Nitrotoluene X -- 0 -- 0

57. Parathion X -- 0 -- 0

58. Phenolsulfonate X -- 0 -- 0

59. Phosgene X -- 0 -- 0

60. Propargite X -- 0 -- 0

61. Propylene oxide X -- 0 -- 0

62. Pyrethrins X -- 0 -- 0

63. Ouinoline X -- 0 -- 0

64. Resorcinol X -- 0 -- 0

65. Strontium X -- 0 -- 0

66. Strychnine X -- 0 -- 0

67. Styrene X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 76 of 77 CONTINUE ON PAGE 77

Outfall Number: 03A PART D - Mark X in column 2-a for each pollutant you know or have reason to believe is present. Mark X in column 2-b for each pollutant you believe to be absent. If you mark column 2a for any pollutant which is limited either directly, or indirectly but expressly, in an effluent limitations guideline, you must provide the results of at least one analysis for that pollutant. For other pollutants for which you mark column 2a, you must provide quantitative data or an explanation of their presence in your discharge. Complete one table for each outfall. See the instructions for additional details and requirements.

Please select 'Believed Present' before you fill out the data for each pollutant.

Please indicate presence

3. EFFLUENT 4. INTAKE (optional)

b. MAXIMUM 30 DAY VALUE c. LONG TERM AVRG. VALUE a. LONG TERM

1. POLLUTANT a. b. a. MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE (if available) (if available) AVERAGE VALUE POLLUTANT NAME BELIEVE BELIEVE D D d. NO. OF Mass. (lbs/day) b. NO. OF PRESENT ABSENT Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) Conc. (mg/L) Mass. (lbs/day) ANALYSES Conc. (mg/L) ANALYSES

68. 2,4,5-T (2,4,5-trichIorophenoxyacetic X -- 0 -- 0 acid)

69. TDE (tetrachlorodiphenyl X -- 0 -- 0 ethane)

70. 2,4,5-TP [2-(2,4,5-trichIorophenoxy)propa X -- 0 -- 0 noic acid]

71. Trichlorofon X -- 0 -- 0

72. Triethanolamine X -- 0 -- 0

73. Triethylamine X -- 0 -- 0

74. Trimethylamine X -- 0 -- 0

75. Uranium X -- 0 -- 0

76. Vanadium X -- 0 -- 0

77. Vinyl acetate X -- 0 -- 0

78. Xylene X -- 0 -- 0

79. Xyenol X -- 0 -- 0

80. Zirconium X -- 0 -- 0

81. 2,3,7,8-TCDD X -- 0 -- 0 EPA Form 3510-2D (Rev.8-90) Page 77 of 77

1.t

/

Q V

()

I' *

- N Mercator Projection 0.5 1.0 1.5km

~~r WGS84 UTM Zone 17R 0,2 0.3 0,4 0 .5 0.6 0,7 0 .8 0.9ml Scale 1: 15420 1 inch = 1285 feet

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

3535 Colonnade Parkway Birmingham, Alabama 35243 (GZLQ,+DWFK1XFOHDU3ODQW8QLWV

13'(63HUPLW*$3HUPLW5HQHZDO$SSOLFDWLRQ+/-

$WWDFKPHQW 6RXUFH:DWHU3K\VLFDO'DWD

3OHDVHUHIHUWR6HFWLRQRIWKH$WWDFKPHQWQDPHG

E 6XSSRUWLQJ,QIRUPDWLRQ

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

3535 Colonnade Parkway Birmingham, Alabama 35243 (GZLQ,+DWFK1XFOHDU3ODQW8QLWV

13'(63HUPLW*$3HUPLW5HQHZDO$SSOLFDWLRQ+/-

$WWDFKPHQW &RROLQJ:DWHU,QWDNH6WUXFWXUH'DWD

3OHDVHUHIHUWR6HFWLRQRIWKH$WWDFKPHQWQDPHG

E 6XSSRUWLQJ,QIRUPDWLRQ

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

3535 Colonnade Parkway Birmingham, Alabama 35243 (GZLQ,+DWFK1XFOHDU3ODQW8QLWV

13'(63HUPLW*$3HUPLW5HQHZDO$SSOLFDWLRQ+/-

$WWDFKPHQW 6RXUFH:DWHU%DVHOLQH%LRORJLFDO

&KDUDFWHUL]DWLRQ'DWD

3OHDVHUHIHUWR6HFWLRQRIWKH$WWDFKPHQWQDPHG

E 6XSSRUWLQJ,QIRUPDWLRQ

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

3535 Colonnade Parkway Birmingham, Alabama 35243 (GZLQ,+DWFK1XFOHDU3ODQW8QLWV

13'(63HUPLW*$3HUPLW5HQHZDO$SSOLFDWLRQ+/-

$WWDFKPHQW &RROLQJ:DWHU6\VWHP'DWD

3OHDVHUHIHUWR6HFWLRQRIWKH$WWDFKPHQWQDPHG

E 6XSSRUWLQJ,QIRUPDWLRQ

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

3535 Colonnade Parkway Birmingham, Alabama 35243 (GZLQ,+DWFK1XFOHDU3ODQW8QLWV

13'(63HUPLW*$3HUPLW5HQHZDO$SSOLFDWLRQ+/-

$WWDFKPHQW &KRVHQ0HWKRG V RI&RPSOLDQFHZLWK

,PSLQJHPHQW0RUWDOLW\6WDQGDUG

3OHDVHUHIHUWR6HFWLRQRIWKH$WWDFKPHQWQDPHG

E 6XSSRUWLQJ,QIRUPDWLRQ

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

3535 Colonnade Parkway Birmingham, Alabama 35243 (GZLQ,+DWFK1XFOHDU3ODQW8QLWV

13'(63HUPLW*$3HUPLW5HQHZDO$SSOLFDWLRQ+/-

$WWDFKPHQW (QWUDLQPHQW3HUIRUPDQFH6WXGLHV

3OHDVHUHIHUWR6HFWLRQRIWKH$WWDFKPHQWQDPHG

E 6XSSRUWLQJ,QIRUPDWLRQ

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

3535 Colonnade Parkway Birmingham, Alabama 35243 (GZLQ,+DWFK1XFOHDU3ODQW8QLWV

13'(63HUPLW*$3HUPLW5HQHZDO$SSOLFDWLRQ+/-

$WWDFKPHQW 2SHUDWLRQDO6WDWXV

3OHDVHUHIHUWR6HFWLRQRIWKH$WWDFKPHQWQDPHG

E 6XSSRUWLQJ,QIRUPDWLRQ

December 18, 2015 FEDERAL EXPRESS Ms. Sarah E. Wise Regulatory Specialist, Permits Section U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Savannah District 100 W. Oglethorpe Avenue Savannah, GA 31401 Re: Individual Permit Application Submittal - Biological Assessment Addendum USACE #94003873 Southern Nuclear Operating Company Plant Hatch Intake Structure Maintenance Dredging Appling County, Georgia

Dear Ms. Wise:

Southern Nuclear Operating Company (Southern Nuclear) submitted a Joint Application for a Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers Permit, State of Georgia Marshland Protection Permit, Revocable License Agreement and Request for Water Quality Certification for the referenced project on August 12, 2015. As requested, we have updated the Biological Assessment (BA) for the shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) and have prepared a BA for the Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus) that is specific to the proposed maintenance dredging. Both species are addressed in the attached document.

With this submittal we request that your office initiate Section 7 consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service. We look forward to working with you through the permitting process.

Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Ken Darby at 205-992-7536 or me at 404-915-8823.

Sincerely, ECOLOGICAL SOLUTIONS, INC.

Mark Ballard, PWS Vice President

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS ON THE ENDANGERED ATLANTIC STURGEON (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus)

AND ENDANGERED SHORTNOSE STURGEON (Acipenser brevirostrum)

Plant Hatch Intake Structure Maintenance Dredging Appling County, Georgia USACE #940003873 December 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................. 1

ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................................................. 3

NO ACTION................................................................................................................................................. 3

ALTERNATIVE 1 - REDUCED SCOPE OF DREDGING ..................................................................................... 3

ALTERNATIVE 2 - CONTINUATION OF DREDGING AS CURRENTLY AUTHORIZED BY USACE (APPLICANTS PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE) ......................................................................................................................... 3

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ....................................................................................... 4

STREAM 01 ................................................................................................................................................. 4

STREAM 02 ................................................................................................................................................. 4

PRIOR COORDINATION .............................................................................................. 5

SPECIES CONSIDERED UNDER THIS ASSESSMENT ........................................... 7

POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FROM MAINTENANCE DREDGING ACTIVITIES .............................................................................................. 8

SPECIES ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................ 8

SPECIES ACCOUNTS .................................................................................................................................... 8

Altamaha Spinymussel .......................................................................................................................... 8

Atlantic Sturgeon .................................................................................................................................. 9

Shortnose Sturgeon ..............................................................................................................................11

IMPACT ASSESSMENT ON THE ATLANTIC AND SHORTNOSE STURGEON POPULATION ................................13

SUMMARY

EFFECT DETERMINATION ................................................................ 16

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 16

LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Summary of Jurisdictional Systems...5 Table 2. Federal Protected Species of Possible Occurrence ...7 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment A Figures and Impact Exhibits Attachment B Representative Photographs Attachment C Prior USACE Permits Attachment D Protected Species Documentation Attachment E Tier I Evaluation Report i

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 1 of 17 Project Description Southern Nuclear submitted an application to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for an Individual Permit, pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, reauthorizing periodic maintenance dredging of accumulated sediments within the Altamaha River at the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant (HNP) cooling water intake structure. The dredging is needed to maintain a reliable source of cooling water for generation operations at HNP.

The USACE has requested that Southern Nuclear submit an updated Biological Assessment (BA) for the shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) and a BA for the Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus) that is specific to the proposed maintenance dredging at HNP.

HNP is an electrical generation facility operated by Southern Nuclear. The facility has two boiling-water reactors with steam-electric turbines. Unit 1 began operation in 1975 and Unit 2 began operation in 1979. The excess heat produced by HNPs two nuclear units is absorbed by cooling water flowing through the condensers and the service water system. Main condenser cooling is provided by mechanical draft cooling towers. Each HNP circulating water system is a closed-loop cooling system that utilizes three cross-flow and one counter-flow mechanical-draft cooling towers for dissipating waste heat to the atmosphere. Makeup water required for operation of the cooling system is withdrawn from the Altamaha River via the existing cooling water intake structure.

Southern Nuclear has a withdrawal permit from the Georgia Department of Natural Resources (permit 001-0690-01) that allows the withdrawal of a monthly average of 85 million gallons per day from the river.

The purpose and need for the project is to enable Southern Nuclear to continue to withdraw water from the Altamaha River for required HNP plant operations. HNP operates under Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) permit numbers DPR-57 and NPF-5. Among the requirements of these permits is that Southern Nuclear activities at HNP can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public and such activities will be conducted in compliance with the rules and regulations of the Commission. Compliance with NRC permits requires periodic dredging at the existing Altamaha River intake structure so cooling water can be withdrawn in a predictable and dependable manner required for safe plant operations.

The intake structure is located in a relatively straight reach of the river. Due to natural sediment transport within the Altamaha River drainage system, sediments accumulate in the vicinity of the intake structure. The accumulated sediments, which consist primarily of sand, limit the ability to withdraw sufficient water for cooling operations and under certain conditions can lead to excessive intake pump wear. Southern Nuclear must periodically conduct maintenance dredging in the vicinity of the intake structure to insure proper operation of HNP and supporting equipment.

Maintenance dredging has been an on-going operation at the intake structure and has occurred at least since 1983 - 30+ years.

The proposed project includes the continuation of periodic maintenance dredging at the HNP intake structure. The proposed dredging location consists of an L shaped area adjacent to the existing intake structure. The area to be dredged is approximately 900 linear feet parallel to the river bank and approximately 388 linear feet channelward at its widest point (Exhibits 1 and 2, 1

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 2 of 17 Attachment A). The area will be dredged to approximately 5 feet below river bottom at the most channelward point and approximately 10 feet below river bottom near the river bank. The material will be removed utilizing a hydraulic dredge; however, as necessary other equipment including a clamshell, dragline, or similar could be used during dredging activities. Dredging other than using a hydraulic dredge has not been necessary up to this point and would occur only in those circumstances where the hydraulic dredge is not available.

The hydraulically dredged material will be transported to an upland dewatering area utilizing existing piping located within uplands. The upland dewatering area is located approximately 1,000 feet west of the intake structure and consists of an approximately 2.2 acre area surrounded by compacted earthen berms (Figure 8, Attachment A). The material entering the dewatering area consists of a mixture of dredged sediments and water. A 24-inch diameter stand pipe is located within the dewatering area (Figure 9, Attachment A). A series of risers/stop-logs are placed against the open side of the stand pipe to regulate the discharge of water from the area. Utilizing this method allows for dredged material to settle within the area and for water to be slowly discharged.

This method along with natural evaporation dewaters the dredged material. Water discharged through the stand pipe flows back to the Altamaha River.

Once dewatered, the majority of the dredge material is removed via truck from the dewatering area by the Appling County Road Department. Material not utilized by the road department is transported via truck to an existing, on-site, approximately 1.9 acre upland stockpile area. The stockpile area is located approximately 3,000 feet southwest of the upland dewatering area and is an existing, active borrow pit located in uplands. As clay is removed for various uses at HNP, the dredged material is used to backfill the borrow pit. In most years, the dredge material is either utilized by the road department or placed in the stockpile area; however, depending on need some dredged material may remain in the upland dewatering area. Representative photos of the project area are provided in Attachment B.

Using the dredging and disposal method discussed above, Southern Nuclear proposes to continue periodically conducting maintenance dredging at the HNP intake structure. The dredging would remove up to 45,000 cubic yards of material annually and would be conducted between August 15th and November 30th. The time required to conduct the dredging will vary based on river conditions, amount of dredged material, etc. It is estimated that a typical dredging activity will require 6 to 8 weeks to complete and that dredging will typically be conducted once per year; however, more frequent dredging could be required depending on actual site conditions.

Refer to Attachment A for figures depicting the project location, intake structure, and disposal areas.

2

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 3 of 17 Alternatives The intake structure dredging is a water dependent activity and no practical upland alternatives are available. Potential alternatives are significantly limited due to the requirement to safely operate HNP in compliance with NRC permits. Available alternatives include:

x No Action x Reduced Scope of Dredging x Continuation of Dredging as Currently Authorized by USACE (applicants preferred alternative)

Each of these alternatives is briefly discussed below.

No Action The No Action alternative is not practicable. Under this scenario where dredging would be ceased, sediment accumulation at the intake structure would eventually occlude the intake structure so that sufficient water needed for cooling purposes could not be withdrawn from the river. Without access to cooling water needed for safe plant operations, the potential for long-term, significant environmental impacts reaching far beyond the aquatic environment would be imminent.

Alternative 1 - Reduced Scope of Dredging Dredging has been occurring at the HNP intake structure since at least 1983. Prior to August 2005, dredging was conducted in an L shaped area in front of the existing intake structure. The configuration of the dredge area under this option required more extensive dredging (when compared to the preferred alternative) due to sediment accumulation rates. The USACE permit for dredging at HNP was modified in 2005 to create a larger L shaped dredging area. This larger area is the preferred alternative as discussed below. Reducing the scope of dredging to that originally authorized by the USACE is not a practicable alternative as it requires increased activity within the river due to the need to remove additional sediment, and increases operational costs.

Alternative 2 - Continuation of Dredging as Currently Authorized by USACE (applicants preferred alternative)

In 2005, the USACE modified the dredging permit to expand the footprint of the L shaped dredging area. The rationale for this modification is discussed below as excerpted from the 2004 Final BA for the shortnose sturgeon.

The increase in profile size produces a maximum increase of 6,553 m3 (8,571 yd3) in the amount of material removed during each dredging event to maintain the footprint. The increase in profile size is recommended as a mechanism to reduce the frequency of dredging by making the profile more amenable to natural flushing during high flow events. SNC states that removal of material on the upstream side of the current footprint will expose the area near the intake structure to the effects of high flows and naturally flushing of accumulated material. Less frequent dredging 3

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 4 of 17 provides an economic benefit to the plant and also benefits the environment by disturbing the river habitat less often. The increase in profile size does not have any relationship to the amount of water withdrawn by HNP. The proposed modification will support the required dredging on a less frequent basis.

Based on comparison data following the permit revision to allow a larger dredge area, dredge volume decreased by approximately 20 percent for the applicants preferred alternative when compared to Alternative 1.

The applicants preferred alternative (Alternative 2) is to continue dredge operations as authorized by the USACE in 2005. This alternative requires the removal of approximately 20 percent less dredge material, resulting in reduced disturbance in the river, and reduced costs associated with dredging. Exhibits associated with the preferred alternative are provided in Attachment A.

Affected Environment HNP is located east of U.S. Highway 1 adjacent to the Altamaha River in Appling County, Georgia (Figures 1 through 3, Attachment A). The facility is located approximately 11 miles north of Baxley. The existing cooling water intake structure is located at approximately 31.937890 latitude,

-82.344333 longitude on the Baxley Northeast, United States Geological Survey 7.5-minute topographic map (Figure 2, Attachment A). The proposed project is located in Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03070106 of the Altamaha River Watershed.

The project area consists of existing infrastructure including the intake structure, piping, the upland dewatering area, and the upland stockpile area. An existing dirt road provides access from the intake structure to the upland dewatering area and the upland stockpile area. The piping is located parallel to the existing road. Depending on required activities such as pipe or road maintenance, the piping can be dismantled and then reassembled on-site. The upland dewatering area and stockpile area are sparsely vegetated. Representative photographs of these features are provided in Attachment B.

Two jurisdictional waters of the U.S. are located in the vicinity of the proposed project. These include the Altamaha River (Stream 01) and an unnamed tributary of the river (Stream 02).

Approximately 1,065 linear feet of jurisdictional waters are located within the project area. The location of jurisdictional features are shown on Figures 8 and 9 in Attachment A.

Stream 01 Stream 01 is the Altamaha River, a Section 10 Water. The river drains approximately 13,600 square miles in the southeastern portion of the state and flows to the Altamaha Sound, which connects to the Atlantic Ocean. The reach of the river within the project area has clearly defined banks and width that ranges from approximately 540 to 570 feet. The existing intake structure abuts the river.

Stream 02 Stream 02 is a perennial, unnamed tributary of the Altamaha River. The stream joins the river approximately 220 feet upstream of the intake structure. Stream 02 is crossed by two existing 4

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 5 of 17 culverts that provide road access to the river. Stream 02 will not be impacted by the proposed project.

Refer to Table 1 below for a summary of jurisdictional systems within the project area and proposed impacts. Stream 02 flows underneath the dirt access road through an existing culvert.

The dredge transport pipe utilizes the existing culvert to cross this stream with no impacts.

Table 1 Summary of Jurisdictional Systems System Classification Linear Proposed Impact Footage Stream 01 R2UB 900 45,000 cubic yards (Altamaha River) annually Stream 02 R2UB 165 -

Total - 1,065 45,000 cubic yards annually Prior Coordination Below is a history of USACE permitting and protected species coordination associated with the maintenance dredging.

x July 29, 1994 - USACE Permit 940003870 was issued for intake structure maintenance dredging. The permit authorized the annual dredging of sediment at the HNP intake structure and expired on November 31, 2004. A copy of the permit is provided in Attachment C. The permit had several special conditions including:

o Maintenance dredging will be allowed from August 15th through November 31st of any calendar year for 10 consecutive years, o No dredging will be allowed from December 1st through June 30th of any calendar year, and o The permit also includes specific language regarding agency coordination and dissolved oxygen monitoring requirements should dredging be required from December 1st through August 14th.

x September 8, 2005 - An Individual Permit was issued for intake structure maintenance dredging. The permit authorized the annual dredging of up to 45,000 cubic yards of material, included an expansion of the authorized dredging area, and expired on August 31, 2015. Southern Nuclear had prepared a BA for the shortnose sturgeon in August 2000, in association with a 20 year renewal of the NRC operating license for HNP. During agency coordination associated with issuance of the Individual Permit, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries required that the shortnose sturgeon BA be revised to consider the potential impact of periodic maintenance dredging in the vicinity of the intake structure. An updated BA was submitted in June 2004. On August 10, 2005, NOAA concurred with the findings of the BA that periodic maintenance dredging at HNP 5

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 6 of 17 over the next 20 years (through 2025) in association with the NRC permit renewal is not likely to adversely affect the shortnose sturgeon. Please note that the USACE permit that was issued in 2005 extended the dredging exclusion period from December 1st to June 30th to December 1st to August 15th. This extension restricted dredging activities within the river by an additional 45 days. A copy of the permit is provided in Attachment C. Protected species coordination associated with the permit submittal is provided in Attachment D. As with the prior permit, several special conditions were included in the authorization and are summarized below. Please note that with the permit reissuance the dredging restriction period was extended from June 30th to August 15th.

o Maintenance dredging will be allowed from August 15th through November 30th of any calendar year for 10 consecutive years, beginning on August 25, 2005, o No dredging will be allowed from December 1st through August 14th of any calendar year, and o The permit also includes specific language regarding agency coordination and dissolved oxygen monitoring requirements should dredging be required from December 1st through August 14th.

General Condition 1 of the September 8, 2015, Individual Permit for the dredging required Southern Nuclear to submit a request for permit extension at least one month prior to August 31, 2015. Accordingly, Southern Nuclear began coordination with the USACE regarding a permit extension. Below is a summary of recent USACE coordination.

x April 14, 2015 - Southern Nuclear contacted the USACE (Ms. Amy Jensen and Ms. Sarah Wise) via phone to discuss a permit extension. It was determined that a new permit application would be required for maintenance dredging at the HNP intake structure. The permit application would include a Joint Public Notice (JPN) process and coordination with resource agencies including the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The JPN and permit issuance process would likely extend beyond the September 8, 2015, Individual Permit expiration date of August 31, 2015.

x May 1, 2015 - Southern Nuclear contacted the USACE (Ms. Amy Jensen and Ms. Sarah Wise) via phone to discuss an extension of the current permit so there would not be a lapse in required dredging. It was agreed that Southern Nuclear could pursue a 1 year permit extension provided that a Tier I evaluation be submitted for the intake dredge area and that a new permit application be submitted prior to the current August 31, 2015, permit expiration.

x May 12, 2015 - A 1 year permit extension request was submitted to the USACE. The proposed extension period is through November 30, 2016, to accommodate dredging in 2015 and 2016 while the new permit application is processed.

6

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 7 of 17 x May 29, 2015 - An on-site pre-application meeting was held with the USACE (Ms. Amy Jensen, Ms. Sarah Wise, and Ms. Kimberly Garvey).

x July 17, 2015 - Tier I Evaluation (Attachment E) submitted to the USACE.

x August 12, 2015 - Individual Permit application submitted to USACE to reauthorize period maintenance dredging.

x September 3, 2015 - USACE issued one year extension of existing permit (Attachment C).

Species Considered Under This Assessment Terrestrial protected species surveys and habitat assessments were conducted to determine the potential occurrence of federal protected species or their habitat within the project area. The list of potentially occurring species was developed by reviewing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) website (http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/).

Refer to Table 2 below for a list of federally protected species potentially occurring within the project area based on the IPaC analysis. The IPaC results are provided in Attachment D.

Table 2 Federal Protected Species of Possible Occurrence Species Federal Habitat Status Birds Rred-cockaded woodpecker E Nest in mature pine with low understory vegetation (<1.5m);

Picoides borealis forage in pine and pine hardwood stands >30 years of age, preferably >10 dbh.

Fishes Atlantic Sturgeon E Atlantic seaboard rivers and estuaries.

Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus shortnose sturgeon E Atlantic seaboard rivers and estuaries.

Acipenser brevirostrum Mussels Altamaha spinymussel E Fine to very coarse sand in sand bars with swift currents.

Elliptio spinosa Reptiles eastern indigo snake T During winter, den in xeric sandridge habitat preferred by Drymarchon couperi gopher tortoise; during warm months, forage in creek bottoms, upland forest, and agricultural fields.

gopher tortoise C Well-drained, sandy soils in forest and grassy areas; Gopherus polyphemus associated with pine overstory, open understory with grass and forb groundcover, and sunny areas for nesting.

E= Endangered; T=Threatened; C=Candidate 7

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 8 of 17 Potential Environmental Impacts from Maintenance Dredging Activities Periodic dredging of riverine habitat has the potential for adversely affecting aquatic species in a number of ways including entrainment of juveniles or adults during hydraulic dredging operations, physical damage to individuals during clamshell or dragline operations, and burial of juveniles.

Additionally, the potential exists to adversely affect aquatic species particularly if dredging is conducted on habitat this is critical to the species (i.e. feeding or spawning areas) or during periods when intra-riverine migrations are occurring. Also, dredging during the spawning migration may also be harmful by discouraging or preventing fish from reaching spawning grounds. Other potential environmental impacts from dredging include the release of contaminated sediments or siltation of instream habitat.

Proposed maintenance dredging operations at HNP have been on-going for 30+ years. The proposed methods and timeframe for dredging operations will be the same as most recently authorized by the USACE. The dredging operations have been addressed in a number of previous environmental documents, including the recent Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) issued by the NRC for a recent proposed operating license amendment, biological assessments, and biological opinions regarding threatened and endangered species. Supporting information regarding prior environmental documentation is provided above and in Attachments C and D.

Species Assessment Predominant habitats and land uses within the project area are the Altamaha River and continually disturbed, minimally vegetated uplands associated with the dewatering and stockpile area. No potential habitat for terrestrial, federal listed species is located within the proposed work area; therefore, the project would have no adverse effect on the gopher tortoise, eastern indigo snake, or red-cockaded woodpecker. No additional information regarding these species is included in this BA. Please note that an existing Safe Harbor Agreement for the red-cockaded woodpecker is in place for HNP. The Altamaha River does provide habitat for the Altamaha spinymussel, Atlantic sturgeon, and shortnose sturgeon. Each of these species is discussed below.

Species Accounts Altamaha Spinymussel The Altamaha spinymussel was listed as an endangered species by the USFWS on October 11, 2011. The listing included the designation of Critical Habitat in the Altamaha River upstream and downstream of HNP but not including the dredging location.

Please note that in association with a recent proposed operating license amendment, the NRC prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) including a BA for the Altamaha spinymussel for HNP. The EA addresses potential impacts to protected species including the Altamaha spinymussel. A FONSI was issued by the NRC on April 16, 2014. Relevant information from the Final EA regarding the Altamaha spinymussel is incorporated below.

8

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 9 of 17 In August 2013, the NRC sent a biological assessment for the Altamaha spinymussel to FWS and requested concurrence with its findings (ADAMS Accession No. ML13193A366). The biological assessment made the following conclusions. The Altamaha spinymussel has historically been found in the main stem of the Altamaha River and its larger tributaries. HNP lies close to the center of its present range. Although FWS has designated critical habitat above and below HNP, critical habitat does not include the Altamaha River near HNP. The NRC staff examined several sources of stress associated with the operation of HNP that the FWS listing announcement suggested might affect the species. The staff found that the potential effects of dredging and sediment contamination, entrainment and impingement of host fish species, trophic interactions, and habitat fragmentation are insignificant or discountable. The staff also found no adverse effects to critical habitat. The staff concluded that the present and future operation of HNP may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, Altamaha spinymussel and that the present and future operation of HNP would have no effect on Altamaha spinymussel critical habitat. On December 10, 2013, the FWS concurred with NRC's biological assessment and stated that the requirements of Section 7 of the ESA have been satisfied (ADAMS Accession No. ML14006A295).

Based on the information above, a BA, which included potential dredging impacts, has been prepared for the Altamaha spinymussel. The USFWS has reviewed and concurred with the may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, determination. No changes regarding the status of this species or the proposed impacts have changed; therefore, no additional analysis or regulatory coordination is required for this species. Refer to Attachment D for protected species documentation.

Atlantic Sturgeon Life History The South Atlantic and Carolina distinct population segments of the Atlantic sturgeon were listed for federal protection by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on February 6, 2012.

Given the relatively recent listing of this species, it has not been addressed during prior agency coordination for activities at HNP.

The Atlantic sturgeon is a member of the family Acipenseridae, which is a long-lived group of ancient anadromous and freshwater fishes. Historically, the Atlantic sturgeon was present in 38 rivers in the U.S., ranging from St. Croix Island, Maine to the Saint Johns River in Florida.

Historical spawning populations were confirmed in 35 of the rivers. Currently, Atlantic sturgeon populations are present in 35 rivers and spawning occurs in at least 20 rivers (ASSRT 2007),

including the Altamaha River.

Although the life history of the Atlantic sturgeon has been studied intensely since the 1970s, important aspects of the life history are still unknown. Generally, the Atlantic sturgeon is anadromous and spends the majority it its life in marine waters, but it reproduces in freshwater habitats. Spawning is believed to occur in flowing water between the salt wedge and the fall line of large rivers. Spawning adults generally migrate upriver during the spring in southern rivers. A fall-spawning migration also may occur in some southern rivers (ASSRT 2007). This appears to have first been reported by Smith (1985) who documented the occurrence of a fall run of fish that were in spawning condition in the south. Smith et al. (1984) note that the fall-run fish are typically 9

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 10 of 17 smaller than those caught in the spring. Collins et al. (2000) provided additional evidence of a fall spawning period in the Ashepoo, Combahee, and Edisto river basins in South Carolina. This finding was based on movements of two male fish that spent the summer in lower Edisto River and then moved upriver to river kilometer (RKM) 190 during October 1998. In addition, a female Atlantic sturgeon that had recently spawned was captured near RKM 56 of the Edisto River in the fall during this study; however, no spawning sites were confirmed. As discussed below in the status of the Atlantic sturgeon in the Altamaha River section, recent studies conducted at the University of Georgia (UGA) have documented spawning movements of the Atlantic sturgeon within the river.

Spawning habitat includes moderately flowing water in deep parts of large rivers. Eggs are highly adhesive and are deposited on bottom substrate, usually on hard surfaces such as cobble. Hatching occurs within approximately 94 to 140 hours0.00162 days 0.0389 hours 2.314815e-4 weeks 5.327e-5 months after egg deposition at temperatures of 20°C and 18°C, respectively. Embryos (age 1 to 8 days old) tend to seek cover and stay near the river bottom after hatching (Kynard and Horgan 2002). When the yolk-sac larval stage is complete (after 8 to 12 days), the larvae move downstream over a 6- to 12-day period to rearing grounds. Larvae are demersal and stay near the bottom of the water column (ASSRT 2007). During the first half of their migration, movement is limited to the night; during the day, they use the bottom (e.g., a gravel matrix) as refugia. As the larvae develop further, migration occurs during both the day and the night (Kynard and Horgan 2002). Juvenile sturgeon eventually arrive in estuarine waters, where they remain for months or years. Subadults and adults live in coastal waters and estuaries when not spawning, generally in shallow water (30 to 150 feet deep) near shore areas dominated by gravel and sand substrates. Atlantic sturgeons are benthic feeders and typically forage on benthic invertebrates such as crustaceans, worms, and mollusks.

Status of the Atlantic Sturgeon in the Altamaha River The Altamaha River is believed to support the largest population of this species in the southeast.

Potential spawning habitat for the Atlantic sturgeon is present within the Altamaha River in the project vicinity. Per the Federal Register (Vol. 77, No. 24, Page 5955), spawning has been confirmed in the Altamaha River.

Most recently, Dr. Douglas Peterson, fisheries professor with the Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources at UGA has conducted a three year detailed telemetry study of the Atlantic sturgeon within the Altamaha River. A paper discussing the study is currently in peer review. The following summary of that study is based on communication with Dr. Peterson (personal communication, November 10-11, 2015).

The study focused on the movement of adult shortnose sturgeon within the Altamaha River from 2011 to 2014. Telemetry data documented that Atlantic sturgeon are present within the Altamaha River. HNP is located at approximately RKM 180. Data provided by Dr. Peterson indicates that Atlantic sturgeon are within this reach of the river beginning in August and continuing into late December-early January. The sturgeon are not holding in the vicinity of HNP but are moving their way upstream to spawning grounds or back down river and that data indicates that all spawning fish have moved back down river by early January. The data gathered by Dr. Peterson documents 10

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 11 of 17 a summer spawning pattern for Atlantic sturgeon in the Altamaha River in comparison to spring patterns in northern rivers.

As noted above, the Atlantic sturgeon spawning grounds in the Altamaha River are located upstream of HNP. The UGA study focused on the movements of adult fish; however, during the course of the study juvenile sturgeon have been captured in the lower reaches of the Altamaha River. According to Dr. Peterson, available capture data indicates that juvenile Atlantic sturgeon have moved down river to the Altamaha sound by the end of July as the juveniles live below the head of tide during years 1 to 3 of their lifespan. This conclusion regarding juveniles having moved down river by July is based on available data as there have been no focused studies on the movements of juvenile Atlantic sturgeon within the Altamaha River.

Shortnose Sturgeon Life History The shortnose sturgeon was originally protected as an endangered species on March 11, 1967, under the Endangered Species Preservation Act and continued to be protected under the Endangered Species Conservation Act which was enacted in 1973. Jurisdiction over the shortnose sturgeon transferred from the USFWS to the NMFS in 1970 (SSRT 2010).

Like the Atlantic sturgeon, the shortnose sturgeon is also a member of the Acipenseridae family.

Historically, the shortnose sturgeon was found in larger freshwater rivers, estuaries, and the sea along the eastern coast of North America. Their occurrence is thought to have ranged from as far north as the St. Johns River, New Brunswick, Canada to as far south as the Indian River, Florida.

Current population data indicates that the southern range for the species now only extends to the St. Johns River, Florida.

While the shortnose sturgeon and Atlantic sturgeon overlap in much of their range, the Atlantic sturgeon spends a larger portions of its life in the ocean. In riverine environments, utilization of habitat, food resources, and spawning grounds appears to overlap between the two species; however, historic data as well as more recent studies conducted at UGA as discussed below under the status of the shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River section indicate that shortnose sturgeon generally spawn earlier than Atlantic sturgeon.

Previous studies documented 19 distinct populations of the shortnose sturgeon inhabiting Atlantic coast rivers; however, more recent studies and data analysis, including telemetry and genetic studies, have provided additional information supporting coastal migrations between adjacent rivers (SSRT 2010). Most shortnose sturgeon populations have their greatest abundance in the estuary portion of their respective river (Weber 1996).

The shortnose sturgeon migrates upstream to freshwater habitats upgradient of the salt wedge for spawning. Following spawning, they return to the estuaries and spend much of their lives near the freshwater/saltwater interface. Fresh tidewaters and oligohaline areas serve as nurseries for shortnose sturgeon (Flournoy et al. 1992).

11

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 12 of 17 Spawning patterns appear to differ by region with shortnose sturgeon in northern rivers beginning to move upstream in the spring and southern river populations beginning to move upstream late winter into early spring. Studies by Buckley and Kynard (1985), have identified three migration patterns within Massachusetts rivers. The patterns include short one-step, long one-step, and short two-step. As the names indicate, the short one-step individuals migrate for a few weeks in spring prior to spawning. The long one-step individuals migrate in late winter/early spring before spawning and the short two-step individuals have a long fall migration leaving fish near spawning areas for overwintering followed by a short migration and spawning. As discussed below under the status of the shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River section, recent studies by UGA have gathered telemetry data for shortnose sturgeon movements in the Altamaha River.

Shortnose sturgeon eggs are demersal and adhesive after fertilization, sinking quickly and adhering to sticks, stones, gravel, and rubble on the stream bottom. Studies indicate that the incubation period for fertilized eggs varies based on water temperature with the hatching period ranging from 8 days in water temperatures of 17°C (Buckley and Kynard 1981) to 13 days in water temperatures ranging from 8°C to 12°C (Meehan 1910). Within 8 to 12 days after hatching, larvae quickly develop morphological features such as fins that accommodate movement associated with juveniles and adult sturgeon and that allow the larvae to utilize external food sources. With the ability to utilize food sources other than the yolk-sac, behavior patterns changes such as the utilization of substrate for cover and foraging (SSRT 2010). As the juveniles mature, they migrate downstream toward the salt wedge and estuaries.

A number of studies have been conducted on the young-of-year (YOY) juveniles in an effort to determine habitat utilization and overall movement. In general, these studies indicate that YOY have specific salinity tolerances and tend to remain in freshwater environments upstream of the salt wedge. They utilize intermediate to deep water habitats within this freshwater systems and remain above the salt wedge for approximately one year. As their body size increases, there is a corresponding increase in salinity tolerance (SSRT 2010). Studies by Flournoy et al. (1992) and Collins et al. (2002) on southern rivers indicates that one year old shortnose sturgeon begin to make seasonal migrations like adults.

Status of the Shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River Shortnose sturgeon occurrence within the Altamaha River was first documented in the early 1970s.

Subsequent studies have generated population estimates within the Altamaha River ranging from 400 to 6,320 individuals. More recent abundance studies (Bednarski et al. 2013) documented that the Altamaha River population is the largest south of the Delaware River.

Historic studies within the Altamaha River have documented the presence of spawning adults, eggs, and juveniles within the river. Within the Altamaha River, capture data indicates that primary shortnose sturgeon habitat includes the lower 40 RKM of the river, which is tidally influenced (Flournoy et al. 1992; Rogers and Weber 1994). Deeper water within the main channel of the river near the salt wedge appears to be utilized by the shortnose sturgeon during the summer (Rogers and Weber 1995).

12

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 13 of 17 Various studies indicate that multiple substrates including boulders and coarse sand substrate are used for spawning with actual spawning locations varying based on yearly conditions within the river. Previously, studies indicated that a single-step migration pattern was followed by shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River; however, some suggested a pre-spawn fall migration may also occur within the river (SSRT 2010). Multiple studies over the prior 10 to 30 years, indicate that spawning likely occurs from January to March when water temperatures reach approximately 10°C (Heidt and Gilbert 1978, Rogers and Weber 1995, DeVries 2006).

Most recently, Dr. Douglas Peterson with the Warnell School of Forest at UGA has conducted a three year detailed telemetry study of the shortnose sturgeon within the Altamaha River. Data analysis for that study is on-going. The following summary of that study is based on communication with Dr. Peterson (personal communication, November 10-11, 2015).

The study focused on the movement of adult shortnose sturgeon within the Altamaha River from 2011 to 2014. Telemetry data documented that shortnose sturgeon are present within the Altamaha River. HNP is located at approximately RKM 180. Data indicates that shortnose sturgeon adults move upstream to spawn beginning in mid to late December and move back down river by April.

Spawning grounds are located upstream of HNP and generally includes the area near the confluence of the Ocmulgee and Oconee Rivers and the upper reaches of the Altamaha River.

Juveniles begin to move downstream in March and based on research for other rivers tend to have moved down river shortly following the end of spawning in April. As with the Atlantic sturgeon, there have been no focused studies on the movements of juvenile shortnose sturgeon within the Altamaha River.

Impact Assessment on the Atlantic and Shortnose Sturgeon Population Considering the overlapping spawning and foraging habitat and distribution within the Altamaha River for both the Atlantic sturgeon and the shortnose sturgeon, and similar potential impact to the species associated with proposed dredging activities, both species are being evaluated under one impact assessment.

According to the NMFS (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/fish/atlanticsturgeon.htm) and other documents (SSRT 2010, ASSRT 2007), potential stressors/threats to these species include:

x Dams and diversions, x Flow fluctuations, x "Bycatch" of sturgeon in fisheries targeting other species, x Dredging, blasting, and pile driving, x Habitat impediments including locks and dams, x Water quality and contaminants, x Ship strikes, and x Energy projects such as o tidal turbines 13

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 14 of 17 o liquefied natural gas o impingement and entrainment (cooling water intakes).

Periodic dredging of riverine habitat has the potential for adversely affecting Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon in a number of ways including entrainment of juveniles or adults in hydraulic dredging operations, physical damage to individuals during clambshell or dragline operations, and burial of juveniles. Additionally, the potential exists to adversely affect the species particularly if dredging is conducted on habitat critical to the species (i.e. feeding or spawning areas) or during periods when intra-riverine migrations are occurring. Dredging of seasonal aggregational sites may also be harmful to the species. Dredging during the spawning migration may also be harmful by discouraging or preventing fish from reach the spawning grounds.

The area in front of the HNP intake does not appear to be habitat critical to the existence of these species. The river bottom in this area consists primarily of accumulated sand deposits that shift constantly with changes in river flow and spawning grounds for both species are located upstream of HNP.

Although dredging in front of the intake structure is not expected to impact habitat critical to the existence of these species, the current permit that authorizes periodic maintenance dredging contains numerous special conditions to ensure protection of aquatic habitat. Several of the permit conditions, including the dredging timeframe restrictions, were established by the USACE in coordination with the NMFS during consultation associated with the previous shortnose sturgeon BA. These conditions are currently specified by the permit extension and Southern Nuclear proposes no changes to these conditions. The special conditions include:

x That maintenance dredging will be allowed from August 15th through November 30th of any calendar year for 10 consecutive days, x That no dredging will be allowed from December 1st through August 14th of any calendar year x That the permittee may request emergency authorization for dredging from December 1st through August 14th. However, the proposed request may require an informal consultation with the Georgia Department of Natural Resources - Wildlife Resources Division and NOAA Fisheries prior to granting authorization to proceed.

x If justification for dredging during the December 1st through August 14th period is adequate, the permittee will determine oxygen levels in the project area immediately before dredging. No dredging will be allowed if dissolved oxygen levels are 3.0 mg/L or less. If the dissolved oxygen is 4.0 mg/L, the permittee will monitor dissolved oxygen during dredging and cease dredging when the dissolved oxygen level drops to 3.0 mg/L or less.

The permittee will provide the USACE with all monitoring data.

14

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 15 of 17 x Each time the hydraulic dredge pipeline is cleared, the dredge cutterhead shall be removed from the river bottom, promptly lifted near the surface and kept close to the surface as practicable while water is pumped for pipeline cleaning.

Based on recent telemetry studies in the Altamaha River for these two species, shortnose sturgeon adults as well as juveniles are unlikely to be present within the reach of the river to be dredged as seasonal restrictions associated with the Section 404 permit do not allow dredging during the period in which this species is most likely to be in the vicinity of HNP.

The dredging period of August 15th to November 30th does overlap with the documented movements of adult Atlantic sturgeon in the reach of the river to be dredged. This creates the potential for entrainment during hydraulic dredging, physical damage by other dredge methods, and/or discouraging or preventing fish from reaching their spawning grounds upstream of HNP.

It is likely that adults would avoid the dredging area by swimming around the active disturbance.

Dredging at HNP occurred in 2011 through 2014 during the Atlantic sturgeon study conducted by UGA. Data show that Atlantic sturgeon were present in the vicinity of HNP as well as upstream of HNP during the authorized dredging period. These movements support the conclusion that dredging activities are unlikely to discourage or prevent sturgeon migration movements.

Based on available data, it is likely, though not documented through focused studies, that juvenile Atlantic sturgeon have moved down river by the end of July and are not present within the reach of the river to be dredged during the authorized period of August 15th to November 30th. Should juveniles be present during dredging activities, there is the potential for entrainment.

The USACE requested that a Tier I evaluation be conducted for the dredge area to ensure that no potential contaminants are released as a result of the dredging operations. A Tier I evaluation (Attachment E) has been conducted for dredge material at HNP. A copy of the Tier I evaluation was submitted to the USACE on July 17, 2015. The Tier I evaluation noted that the majority of the land along the Altamaha River is agricultural or forested, with little to no industry or major cities present. The evaluation also noted that because the river is not located near any major industrial sites or harbors, the river receives limited or few inputs of chemical constituents.

The evaluation included obtaining sediment samples in the proposed dredging area to determine dredge material composition. The sampling determined that sediment to be dredged from the HNP intake area is predominately brown poorly graded sand with a small proportion of fine gravel.

The total sand/gravel composition in each sample ranged from 98.9 to 100%.

The USACE Upland Testing Manual (UTM) identifies three criteria, any one of which indicates that further analysis is not necessary. One of the criteria is that the dredged material is composed predominantly of sand, gravel, and/or rock. The material to be dredged clearly satisfies this requirement. Though this requirement was met, the Tier I evaluation also included a conceptual site model (CSM) to evaluate constituents of concern in concentrations that would be expected to negatively impact human or ecological receptors. The CSM determined that dredging and placement of the sediment from the intake area at Plant Hatch do not present potential risk to these receptors within the Altamaha River discharge point, the upland dewatering basin, or the stockpile area.

15

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 16 of 17 The combination of the lack of habitat critical for these species in the vicinity of the intake structure, the permit conditions placed on Southern Nuclear by the USACE permit (prohibiting dredging from December 1st to August 14th, cutterhead restrictions, no in-river disposal of dredged materials, etc.) that are specific to sturgeon life history, and data supporting that sturgeon spawning in the Altamaha River is not interrupted by dredging activities, it can be concluded that potential impacts to the Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon resulting from HNP maintenance dredging operations are discountable and insignificant. Therefore, the continuation of maintenance dredging at HNP may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, the Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon.

Summary Effect Determination Based on available species data including life history and information specific to the Altamaha River and permit conditions developed specifically to protect these species through prior USACE and NMFS coordination, proposed continuation of maintenance dredging at HNP may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, the Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon.

References Atlantic Sturgeon Status Rivew Team. 2007. Status Review of Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus). Report to National Marine Fisheries, Northeast Regional Office.

February 23, 2007. 174 pp.

Bednaski, M.S., and D.L. Peterson. 2013. Abundance and size structure of shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum in the Altamaha River, Georgia. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society. 142:1444-1452.

Buckley, J., and B. Kynard. 1981. Spawning and rearing of shortnose sturgeon from the Connecticut River. Progressive Fish Culturist 43:74-76.

Buckley, J., and B. Kynard. 1985. Yearly movements of shortnose sturgeon in the Connecticut River. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 114:813-820.

Collins, M.R., T.I.J. Smith, W.C. Post, and O. Pashuk. 2000. Habitat utilization and biological characteristics of adult shortnose sturgeon in two South Carolina rivers. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 129:982-988.

Collins, M.R., W.C. Post, D.C. Russ, and T.I.J. Smith. 2002. Habitat use and movements of juvenile shortnose sturgeon in the Savannah River, Georgia-South Carolina. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 131:975-979.

DeVries, R.J. 2006. Population dynamics, movements, and spawning habitat of the shortnose sturgeon, Acipenser brevirostrum, in the Altamaha River system, Georgia. M.S. Thesis, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia. 103 pp.

16

Biological Assessment - Maintenance Dredging at HNP Atlantic Sturgeon and Shortnose Sturgeon December 2015 Page 17 of 17 Flournoy, P.H., S.G. Rogers, and P.S. Crawford. 1992. Restoration of shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River, Georgia. Final Report to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia.

Heidt, A.R., and R.J. Gilbert. 1978. The shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River drainage, Georgia. Pages 54-60 in R.R. Odum and L. Landers, editors. Proceedings of the rare and endangered wildlife symposium. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Game and Fish Division, Technical Bulletin WL 4, Athens, Georgia.

Kynard, B. and M. Horgan. 2002. Ontogenetic behavior and migration of Atlantic sturgeon, Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus, and shortnose sturgeon, A. brevirostrum, with notes on social behavior. Environmental Biology of Fishes 63:137-150.

Meehan, W.E. 1910. Experiments in sturgeon culture. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 39:85-91.

Rogers, S.G., and W. Weber. 1994. Occurrence of shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) in the Ogeechee-Canoochee River system, Georgia during the summer 0f 1993. Final Report to the Nature Conservancy of Georgia, U.S. Army, Atlanta, Georgia.

Rogers, S.G., and W. Weber. 1995. Movements of shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River system, Georgia. Contributions Series #57. Coastal Resources Division, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Brunswick, Georgia.

Shortnose Sturgeon Status Review Team. 2010. A Biological Assessment of shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum). Report to National Marine Fisheries Service, Northeast Regional Office. November 1, 2010. 417 pp.

Smith, T.I.J. 1985. The fishery, biology, and management of Atlantic sturgeon, Acipenser oxyrhynchus, in North America. Environmental Biology of Fishes 14(1):61-72.

Weber, W. 1996. Population size and habitat use of shortnose sturgeon, Acipenser brevirostrum, in the Ogeechee River system, Georgia. Masters Thesis, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia.

82 pp.

17

Biological Assessment Plant Hatch Intake Structure Maintenance Dredging Appling County, Georgia USACE #940003873

Attachment A Figures and Impact Exhibits

TOOMBS 352-(&7/2&$7,21 APPLING 20285-001_Permit_Supp_GIS_Loc Southern Nuclear AUGUST 2015 Plant Hatch Intake StructureDredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia 0 0.25 0.5 1 (Altamaha River) Miles 1 inch = 0.5 mile 352-(&7/2&$7,21

),*85(

TOOMBS 352-(&7/2&$7,21 APPLING 20285-001_Permit_Supp_GIS_Loc Southern Nuclear AUGUST 2015 Plant Hatch Intake Structure Dredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 (Altamaha River) Feet 1 inch = 2,000 feet

0LQ86*67RSRJUDSK\0DS

),*85(

(Baxley Northeast Quadrangle)

d ver 352-(&7/2&$7,21 R

nd R i

NE Ac res Belly Deans Lan ding Rd Sweetgum Ln Doy le R US Highway 1 d

Piney Bluff Rd Hill Top Rd 20285-001_Permit_Supp_GIS_Loc Southern Nuclear AUGUST 2015 Plant Hatch Intake Structure Dredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 (Altamaha River) Feet 1 inch = 2,000 feet

$(5,$/3+272*5$3+<

),*85(

National Agriculture Imagery Program, Appling County, GA

TOOMBS APPLING

/(*(1' PROJECT LOCATION HYDRIC SOIL NON HYDRIC SOIL 20285-001_Permit_Supp_GIS_Loc Southern Nuclear AUGUST 2013 Plant Hatch Intake Structure Dredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 (Altamaha River) Feet 1 inch = 2,000 feet 15&662,/67232*5$3+<

),*85(

USGS 7.5-Minute Topo Quadrangles Baxley Northeast, GA

TOOMBS ER A RIV H

MA TA AL ALTAMAH A RIVER ALT AM A HA RIV ER APPLING

/(*(1' PROJECT LOCATION BAY C HYDRIC SOIL REEK NON HYDRIC SOIL RIVERS & STREAMS 20285-001_Permit_Supp_GIS_Loc Southern Nuclear AUGUST 2015 Plant Hatch Intake Structure Dredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 (Altamaha River) Feet 1 inch = 2,000 feet 15&662,/6$(5,$/

),*85(

National Agriculture Imagery Program, Appling County

PFO1F PFO1A PEM1A PFO1F PFO4A PFO1F PFO1F PFO1/4A PFO1A PFO1F

/(*(1' PFO1A PEM1A PFO1C PFO1C PROJECT LOCATION PFO1F PFO1A PFO1C PFO1F PFO1C RIVERS & STREAMS ALTAMAH A RIVER NWI DATA Freshwater Emergent Wetland PFO1/4A Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland R2UBH Freshwater Pond PFO1C Lake PUBGx ALT Other AM AH PFO1F Riverine AR IVE R

PUBG PFO1A PFO1C PFO1A PFO1F PFO1A PFO1A PFO1C PFO1F EK C RE BAY PUBHh PFO1Ch PEM1Ch 20285-001_Permit_Supp_GIS_Loc Southern Nuclear AUGUST 2015 Plant Hatch Intake Structure Dredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia 0 500 1,000 2,000 (Altamaha River) Feet 1 inch = 1,000 feet 1$7,21$/:(7/$1'6,19(1725< 1:,

),*85(

2013 National Agriculture Imagery Program, Appling County, GA

outfall stand pipe

/(*(1' PROJECT LOCATION 20285-001_Permit_Supp_GIS_Loc Southern Nuclear AUGUST 2015 Plant Hatch Intake Structure Dredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia 0 500 1,000 2,000 (Altamaha River) Feet 1 inch = 1,000 feet

)(0$)/22'3/$,10$3$33/,1*&2817<

),*85(

FEMA Map #: 13001C0050C

3HUHQQLDO6WUHDP

$OWDPDKD5LYHU 3HUHQQLDO6WUHDP

8SODQG'HZDWHULQJ$UHD

,QWDNH6WUXFWXUH 6WRFNSLOH$UHD

/(*(1' PERENNIAL STREAM 20285-001_Permit_Supp_GIS_Loc Southern Nuclear AUGUST 2015 Plant Hatch Intake StructureDredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia 0 500 1,000 2,000 (Altamaha River) Feet

-85,6',&7,21$/'(/,1($7,21),1',1*6 1 inch = 1,000 feet 2013 National Agriculture Imagery Program, Appling County, GA ),*85(

3HUHQQLDO6WUHDP

$OWDPDKD5LYHU 3HUHQQLDO6WUHDP

,QWDNH6WUXFWXUH 8SODQG'HZDWHULQJ$UHD

/(*(1' PERENNIAL STREAM CULVERT 20285-001_Permit_Supp_GIS_Loc Southern Nuclear AUGUST 2015 Plant Hatch Intake Structure Dredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia 0 250 500 1,000 (Altamaha River) Feet 3URMHFW)HDWXUHV 1 inch = 500 feet

),*85(

2013 National Agriculture Imagery Program, Appling County, GA

,* Sp1JTt **~N NUCLEAR OPERATil'f'"' C*1 'PANY

. His .. G, 1-.JUCLEAR PLANT - GEKvG\_' POWER COMPANY TO LYONS. WW.IA

* ~T~ RIVER

-=::U----- ~ . . ---

u.s. 1 PLANT HATCH TO BAXLEY 288 .EXCAVATION AREA

~ SETT'UNG BASIN VICINITY MAP N.T.S.

TOP OF SHEET PILE WAU.. El-515.0' BOT /EXCAVATION EL 55' INTAKE STRUCTURE 01 design: J. 1 OF 2

~.....;....---s o---i/~-J ....~~ Nuc~ OPERATING b~ANY -~.* *- *-* --

HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT - GEORGIA POWER COMPANY EXISTING SETTUNO BASIN APPROX. ALTN.W-IA 420t)(420'X1 O') RIVER n 'I fl.OW' N6500.00 E4200.00 EL. 56,00 IL.II' EXCAVATION AREA CORP. DREDGING PLAN 8/15/01

2 of 2 HUWlllt design. J.HOWSER :

Biological Assessment Plant Hatch Intake Structure Maintenance Dredging Appling County, Georgia USACE #940003873

Attachment B Representative Photographs

Photograph 1 - Altamaha River Facing Upstream Photograph 2 - Altamaha River at Existing Intake Structure App_E_20285-001_Permit.fh11 Southern Nuclear July 2015 Plant Hatch Intake Stucture Dredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia (Altamaha River) 5HSUHVHQWDWLYH3KRWRJUDSKV $WWDFKPHQW&

Photograph 3 - Altamaha River at Existing Intake Structure Photograph 4 - Altamaha River Immediately Upstream of Existing Intake Structure App_E_20285-001_Permit.fh11 Southern Nuclear July 2015 Plant Hatch Intake Stucture Dredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia (Altamaha River) 5HSUHVHQWDWLYH3KRWRJUDSKV $WWDFKPHQW&

Photograph 5 - Altamaha River Immediately Upstream of Existing Intake Structure Photograph 6 - Stream 2 App_E_20285-001_Permit.fh11 Southern Nuclear July 2015 Plant Hatch Intake Stucture Dredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia (Altamaha River) 5HSUHVHQWDWLYH3KRWRJUDSKV $WWDFKPHQW&

Photograph 7 - Existing Upland Access Adjacent to Intake Structure Photograph 8 - Existing Piping for Transport of Dredge Material App_E_20285-001_Permit.fh11 Southern Nuclear July 2015 Plant Hatch Intake Stucture Dredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia (Altamaha River) 5HSUHVHQWDWLYH3KRWRJUDSKV $WWDFKPHQW&

Photograph 9 - Upland Dewatering Area Photograph 10 - Upland Dewatering Area with Outfall Stand Pipe App_E_20285-001_Permit.fh11 Southern Nuclear July 2015 Plant Hatch Intake Stucture Dredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia (Altamaha River) 5HSUHVHQWDWLYH3KRWRJUDSKV $WWDFKPHQW&

Photograph 11 - Upland Dewatering Area with Outfall Stand Pipe Photograph 12 - Upland Dewatering Area with Outfall Stand Pipe App_E_20285-001_Permit.fh11 Southern Nuclear July 2015 Plant Hatch Intake Stucture Dredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia (Altamaha River) 5HSUHVHQWDWLYH3KRWRJUDSKV $WWDFKPHQW&

Photograph 13 - Upland Dewatering Area Photograph 14 - Upland Dewatering Area with Existing Dredge Material App_E_20285-001_Permit.fh11 Southern Nuclear July 2015 Plant Hatch Intake Stucture Dredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia (Altamaha River) 5HSUHVHQWDWLYH3KRWRJUDSKV $WWDFKPHQW&

Photograph 15 - Upland Stockpile Area App_E_20285-001_Permit.fh11 Southern Nuclear July 2015 Plant Hatch Intake Stucture Dredging 20285-001 Appling County, Georgia (Altamaha River) 5HSUHVHQWDWLYH3KRWRJUDSKV $WWDFKPHQW&

Biological Assessment Plant Hatch Intake Structure Maintenance Dredging Appling County, Georgia USACE #940003873

Attachment C Prior USACE Permits

Intracompany Correspondence SOUTHERN COMPANY A

Energy to Ser11e Your World" File: E.02.50 Log: EV-06-0679 DATE: April 10, 2006 RE: Hatch Intake Structure Maintenance Dredging FROM: J. M. Godfrey TO: W. E. Duvall The Army Corps of Engineers (COE) has renewed the Hatch Intake Structure Maintenance Dredging Permit. The permit expires August 31 , 2015 . The renewal must be submitted at least one month prior to expiration . Environmental Affairs will track the permit and coordinate submission of the renewal application.

Maintenance dredging is allowed August 15th through November 30 th each year. The estimated average annual removal is 45,000 cubic yards. All spoils must be deposited in the designated upland disposal area . SNC must inspect all berms, embankments and weirs prior to disposal. Any unsatisfactory conditions must be corrected prior to disposal. The work shall be completed according to maps and drawings provided. At the end of each calendar year SNC must furnish the District Engineer a written report detailing any dredging activities . Environmental Affairs will prepare and submit the annual report with input provided by the site environmental specialist. The enclosed yellow Notice of Authorization card must be displayed at the work-site during every dredging event.

~~;;:f;B-92 -7693 If there are any questions concerning the dredging permit or related activities please Environmental Aff~'irs Manager JMG/JAJ:ahl Enclosure

frwl) This notictiof authorization must be

-~ conspicuously displayed at the site ~f work.

United States Army Corps of Engineers 20 05 conduct periodic maintenance dredging for .continued A permit to operation of the intake structures at the Plant 1-Iatch Facility latitude 31° 56' 2.0 11 north and longitude 82° 20' 39.01" west, near at Baxley, ill Appliag County, Georgia has been issued

to Southern Nuclear Operating Co.on SEP 08 20=05~-

Address of PermitteePO Box 1295, Birmingham , AL 35201-1295 Permit Number //

I I

/

,/ tf' L -4.

940003873 l Di c Commander for Mark S. Held Colonel, US Army District Engineer ENG FORM 4336 , Jul 81 (33 CFR 370-330) EDITION OF JUL 70 Ml,Y BE USEO (Proponent: CECW .O)

U.S. GPO: 1999- 742- n2

Page 2 EV-06-0679 W. E. Duvall bee: P. H. Wells (w/o)

D. R. Madison (w/o)

V. M. Coleman (w/o)

B. K. Feimster T. D. Blalock (w/o)

J . B. Wetherington (w/o)

SNC Document Services - Hatch (Return Receipt)

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT f~~~!~i PERMITTEE:

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

Attention: Mr. J. Mike Godfrey Environmental Affairs Manager P.O. Box 1295 Eo\J\ronmenta\ /\11a\rs Birmingham, Alabama 35201-1295 PERMIT NUMBER: 940003873 ISSUING OFFICE:

Savannah District US Army Corps of Engineers Post Office Box 889 Savannah, Georgia 31402-0889 NOTE: The term "you" and its derivatives used in this permit, means the permittee or any future transferee. The term "this office" refers to the appropriate District or Division office of the US Army Corps of Engineers having jurisdiction over the permitted activity or the appropriate official of that office acting under the authority of the commanding officer.

You are authorized to perform work in accordance with the terms and conditions specified below.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To conduct periodic maintenance dredging for a IO-year period by hydraulic dredge (primarily), clamshell, or dragline at the Plant Hatch intake structure to assure an adequate water supply for continued operation of the plant and to prevent excessive pump wear . The project will expand an originally authorized area to create an " L " shaped area 900' parallel to the bank X 388' channelward at its widest point (an additional 8,500 cubic yards) . A total of approximately 45 ,000 cubic yards of material will be dredged annually. The area will be dredged to approximately 5' below river bottom at the most channel ward point and approximately 10' below river bottom near the bank. The material removed by hydraulic dredge will be pumped to an existing upland settling basin, approximately 420' X 420' X 10' deep. The settling basin discharge will be routed to the Altamaha River near the existing intake structure.

After the material deposited in the settling basin has dried, the basin will be periodically excavated and the material spoiled in an upland area to the south of the Plant. This project could require the limited use of a clamshell or dragline. Any material removed by this method will be placed in trucks and placed in an upland area and will not result in any discharge to any waterway. Each dredging activity in the river will take approximately 6 to 8 weeks and will be performed on an as needed basis (approximately once per year).

o7 2005ohKn RECEIVED BV ONSEP

PROJECT LOCATION: The site is located in the Altamaha River at latitude 31 ° 56' 2.0" north and longitude 82° 20' 39.01 " west near Baxley, in Appling County, Georgia.

PERMIT CONDITIONS :

General Conditions.

1. The time limit for completing the work authorized by this lndividual Permit ends on August 31 , 2015. If you find that you need more time to complete the authorized activity, you must submit a request for your permit extension at least one month prior to the above date.

2. You must maintain the activity authorized by this permit in good condition and in conformance with the terms and conditions of this permit. You are not relieved of this requirement if you abandon the permitted activity, although you may make a good faith transfer to a third party in compliance with General Condition 4 below. Should you wish to cease to maintain the authorized activity or should you desire to abandon it without a good faith transfer, you must obtain a modification of this permit from this office, which may require restoration of the area.

3. If you discover any previously m1known historic or archeological remains while accomplishing the activity authorized by this permit, you must immediately notify this office of what you have found. We will initiate the federal and state coordination required to determine if the remains warrant a recovery effort or if the site is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places.

4. If you sell the property associated with this permit, .you must obtain the signature of the new owner in the space provided and forward a copy of the permit to this office to validate the transfer of this authorization.

5. If a conditioned Water Quality Certification has been issued for your project, you must comply with conditions specified in the certification as Special Conditions to this permit. For your convenience, a copy of the certification is attached if it contains such conditions.

6. You must allow representatives from this office to inspect the authorized activity at any time deemed necessary to ensure that it is being or has been accomplished in accordance with the tem1s and conditions of your permit.

Special Conditions.

1. Use of the permitted activity must not interfere with the public's right to free navigation on the Altamaha River, a navigable water of the United States.

2. The perrnittee understands and agrees that, if future operations by the United States require the removal, relocation, or other alteration, of the structure or work herein authorized, or if, in the opinion of the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative, said structure or 2

work shall cause unreasonable obstruction to the free navigation of the navigable waters, the permittee will be required, upon due notice from the US Anny Corps of Engineers, to remove, relocate, or alter the structural work or obstructions caused thereby, without expense to the United States. No claim shall be made against the United States on account of any such removal or alteration.

3. Dredging-related equipment and/or floating facilities shall not obstruct general public use of shoreline or adversely affect the natural terrain of vegetation. Anchoring to vegetation is prohibited.

4. That maintenance dredging will be allowed from August 15 th through November 30 th of any calendar year for 10 consecutive years, beginning August 25 th , 2005 .

5. That no dredging will be allowed from December 151 through August 14th of any calendar year.

6. That the permittee may request emergency authorization for dredging from December 1st through August 14th

However, the proposed request may require an informal consultation with the Georgia Department of Natural Resources-Wildlife Resources Division and NOAA Fisheries prior to granting authorization to proceed.

7. If justification for dredging during th.is December 1st through August 14 th period is adequate, the permittee will determine oxygen levels in the project area immediately before dredging. No dredging will be allowed if dissolved oxygen levels are 3.0 mg/Lor less. If the dissolved oxygen is less than 4.0 mg/L, the permittee will monitor dissolved oxygen during dredging and cease dredging when the dissolved oxygen level drops to 3.0 mg/I or less. The permittee will provide the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers with all monitoring data.

8. That the permittee will keep and maintain an accurate record of the times and duration of any dredging operations.

9. That the permittee will furnish the District Engineer a report in writing at the end of each year, which shall list therein the date of each dredging operation and give the total cubic yardage moved by dredging (including negative reports).

10. That prior to deposition of any material into the disposal area, the permittee shall inspect all berms, embankments and weirs to determine if they are in satisfactory condition.

11. That breeches in the dikes of the disposal area be repaired prior to discharge of any dredged material and maintained in good condition throughout the period of discharge and until the dredged material has settled and stabilized.

12. Each time the hydraulic dredge pipeline is cleared, the dredge cutterhead shall be removed from the river bottom, promptly lifted to near the surface and kept close to the surface as practicable while water is pumped for pipeline cleaning.

3

13. That the work will be accomplished in accordance with the plans and drawings attached hereto which are incorporated in and made a part of this permit.

a. Vicinity Map

b. Location Map / Proposed Dredging Depth

c. Dredging Area

d. Plant Layout with Settling Basin FURTHER INFORMATION:

l. Congressional Authorities: You have been authorized to undertake the activity described above pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403).

2. Limits of this Authorization.

a. This permit does not obviate the need to obtain other federal, state, or local authorizations required by law.

b. This permit does not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges.

c. This pennit does not authorize any injury to the property or rights of others.

d. This pennit does not authorize interference with any existing or proposed federal projects.

3. Limits of Federal Liability. In issuing this permit, the Federal Government does not assume any liability for the following:

a. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of other permitted or unpennitted activities or from natural causes.

b. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of current or future activities undertaken by or on behalf of the United States in the public interest.

c. Damages to persons, property, or to other permitted or unpermitted activities or structures caused by the activity authorized by this permit.

d. Design or construction deficiencies associated with the permitted work.

e. Damage claims associated with any future modification, suspension, or revocation of this permit.

4

4. Reliance on Applicant's Data. The determination of this office that issuance of this permit is not contrary to the public interest was made in reliance on the information you provided.

5. Reevaluation of Permit Decision. This office may reevaluate its decision on this permit at any time the circumstances warrant. Circumstances that could require reevaluation include, but are not limited to, the following:

a. You fail to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.

b. The information provided by you in support of your permit application proves to have been false, incomplete, or inaccurate (see 4 above).

c. Significant new information surfaces which this office did not consider in reaching the original public interest decision. Such a reevaluation may result in a determination that it is appropriate to use the suspension, modification, and revocation procedures contained in 33 CFR 325.7, or enforcement procedures such as those contained in 33 CFR 326.4 and 326.5. The referenced enforcement procedures provide for the issuance of an administrative order which requires you to comply with the terms and conditions of your permit and for the initiation of legal action where appropriate.

d. You will be required to pay for any corrective measures ordered by this office, and if you fail to comply with such directive, this office may in certain situations (such as those specified in 33 CFR 209.170) accomplish the corrective measures by contract or otherwise and bill you for the cost.

6. Extensions. General Condition 1 establishes a time limit for the completion of the activity authorized by this permit. Unless there are circumstances requiring either a prompt completion of the authorized activity or a reevaluation of the public interest decision, the US Army Corps of Engineers will normally give favorable consideration to a request for an extension of time limit.

5

Your signature below, as permittee, indicates that you accept and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.

Mr. J. Mi e Godfr~y / (DATE)

Environmental Affiirs Manager This permit becomes effective when the federal official, designated to act for the Secretary of the Army, has signed below.

Colonel, US Army District Engineer When the structures or work authorized by this permit are still in existence at the time the property is transferred, the terms and conditions of this permit will continue to be binding on the new owner(s) of the property. To validate the transfer of this permit and the associated liabilities with compliance with its terms and conditions, have the transferee sign and date below.

(TRANSFEREE) (DATE) 6

Regulatory Branch CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT PERMIT NUMBER: 940003873 PERMITTEE:

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

Attention: Mr. J. Mike Godfrey Environmental Affairs Manager P.O. Box 1295 Birmingham, Alabama 35201-1295 Within 30 days of completion of the activity authorized by this permit, sign this certification and return it to the following address:

Commander US Army Engineer District, Savannah Attention: Regulatory Branch P.O. Box 889 Savannah, Georgia 31402-0889 Please note that your permitted activity is subject to compliance inspection by an US Army Corps of Engineers' representative. If you fail to comply with the permit conditions it may be subject to suspension, modification, or revocation.

I hereby certify that the work authorized by the above referenced permit has been completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the said permit.

Signature of Permittee/Date

20D'-D'" 10O'-o" N

0 0

I r'lt"l'l"l""'I . , , . , . ,, ,.....,..., ' .. .. ,_ . . , - * .

,.,. . ,* . ' sp1JTl-( **~N NUCLEAR OPERATir,ir C-1 'PANY

'* 1-t . C, 1\JUCLEAR PLANT - GE~uG\. .'- POWER COMPANY TO LYONS, VIDAUA u.s. 1 PLANT HATCH

~ SPOIL AREA

~ .EXCAVATION ARE,\

~ SETTLING BASIN VICINITY MAP N.T.S.

TDP OF SHEET F'ILE WAli EL.58.0' INTAKE STRUCNRE G SE TON 8 15 O1 ,,.,..

design: J. HOWSER 1 OF 2

-:~~----so -r*,**..;. . _~~ NUCLFAR OPERATING ~oi (ANY -.:.**- - *-*- -

HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT - GEORGIA POWER COMPANY EXISTING SEnuNO B.EIN {APPROX.

420-X420'X 1O')

n n Ft.OW 0UTF1.0W TO INT.AK£ STRUCTURE N6500.00 E4200.00 EL. 56,00 11..11*

EXCAVATION AREA CORP_ DREDGING PLAN 8/15/01

NUWIEJt design. J.HOWSER : 2 of 2

Regulatory Branch CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT PERMIT NUMBER: 940003873 PERMITTEE:

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

Attention: Mr. J. Mike Godfrey Environmental Affairs Manager P .O. Box 1295 Birmingham, Alabama 35201-1295 Within 30 days of completion of the activity authorized by this pennit, sign this certification and return it to the following address:

Commander US Army Engineer District, Savannah Attention: Regulatory Branch P.O. Box 889 Savannah, Georgia 31402-0889 Please note that your permitted activity is subject to compliance inspection by an US Army Corps of Engineers' representative. If you fail to comply with the permit conditions it may be subject to suspension, modification, or revocation .

I hereby certify that the work authorized by the above referenced permit has been completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the said permit.

Signature of Permittee/Date

Georgia Department of Natural Resources 2 Martin Luther King , Jr. Drive, S.E. , Suite 1152 East Tower, Atlanta , Georgia 30334-9000 Noel Holcomb , Commissioner Carol A. Couch, Ph.D ., Director Environmental Protection Division 404/656-4713 August 24, 2005 Mr. W.C. Carr Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

Environmental Services P.O. Box 1295 Birmingham, Alabama 35201-1295 Environmental Affairs Re: Water Quality Certification Joint Public Notice 940003873 Maintenance Dredging Reauthorization Altamaha River Basin Appling County

Dear Mr. Carr:

Pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act, the State of Georgia issues this certification to Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., an applicant for a federal permit or license to conduct an activity in, on or adjacent to the waters of the State of Georg ia.

The State of Georgia certifies that there is no applicable provision of Section 301; no limitation under Section 302; no standard under Section 306; and no standard under Section 307, for the applicant's activity. The State of Georgia certifies that the applicant's activity will comply with all applicable provisions of Section 303.

This certification is contingent upon the following conditions:

1. All work performed during construction will be done in a manner so as not to violate applicable water quality standards.

2. No oils, grease, materials or other pollutants will be discharged from the construction activities which reach public waters .

Page 2 JPN 940003873 Appling County This certification does not relieve the applicant of any obligation or responsibility for complying with the provisions of any other laws or regulations of other federal, state or local authorities .

It is your responsibility to submit this certification to the appropriate federal agency.

Sincerely, r\

'\~.t:=,,#~$JJ;i-Carol A. Couch, Ph.D.

Director CAC:kp cc: Ms. Carol Bernstein Ms. Sandy Tucker Mr. Ron Mikulak

Biological Assessment Plant Hatch Intake Structure Maintenance Dredging Appling County, Georgia USACE #940003873

Attachment D Protected Species Documentation

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service My project IPaC Trust Resource Report Generated July 23, 2015 09:10 AM MDT

IPaC Trust Resource Report LAGSB-M7AVJ-D43PR-DEPA4-O5BVQU US Fish & Wildlife Service IPaC Trust Resource Report Project Description NAME My project PROJECT CODE LAGSB-M7AVJ-D43PR-DEPA4-O5BVQU LOCATION Appling and Toombs counties, Georgia DESCRIPTION No description provided U.S. Fish & Wildlife Contact Information Species in this report are managed by:

Georgia Ecological Services Field Office 105 Westpark Drive WESTPARK CENTER SUITE D Athens, GA 30606-3175 (706) 613-9493 07/23/2015 09:10 IPaC Information for Planning and Conservation Page 2 Version 2.1.0

IPaC Trust Resource Report LAGSB-M7AVJ-D43PR-DEPA4-O5BVQU Endangered Species Proposed, candidate, threatened, and endangered species that are managed by the Endangered Species Program and should be considered as part of an effect analysis for this project.

This unofficial species list is for informational purposes only and does not fulfill the requirements under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, which states that Federal agencies are required to "request of the Secretary of Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action." This requirement applies to projects which are conducted, permitted or licensed by any Federal agency.

A letter from the local office and a species list which fulfills this requirement can be obtained by returning to this project on the IPaC website and requesting an Official Species List from the regulatory documents section.

Birds Red-cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis Endangered CRITICAL HABITAT No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B04F Clams Altamaha Spinymussel Elliptio spinosa Endangered CRITICAL HABITAT There is final critical habitat designated for this species.

https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=F026 Fishes Atlantic Sturgeon Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus Endangered CRITICAL HABITAT No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=E0A7 Shortnose Sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum Endangered CRITICAL HABITAT No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=E00B 07/23/2015 09:10 IPaC Information for Planning and Conservation Page 3 Version 2.1.0

IPaC Trust Resource Report LAGSB-M7AVJ-D43PR-DEPA4-O5BVQU Reptiles Eastern Indigo Snake Drymarchon corais couperi Threatened CRITICAL HABITAT No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=C026 Gopher Tortoise Gopherus polyphemus Candidate CRITICAL HABITAT No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=C044 Critical Habitats Potential effects to critical habitat(s) within the project area must be analyzed along with the endangered species themselves.

There is no critical habitat within this project area 07/23/2015 09:10 IPaC Information for Planning and Conservation Page 4 Version 2.1.0

IPaC Trust Resource Report LAGSB-M7AVJ-D43PR-DEPA4-O5BVQU Migratory Birds Birds are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.

Any activity which results in the take of migratory birds or eagles is prohibited unless authorized by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1). There are no provisions for allowing the take of migratory birds that are unintentionally killed or injured.

You are responsible for complying with the appropriate regulations for the protection of birds as part of this project. This involves analyzing potential impacts and implementing appropriate conservation measures for all project activities.

American Kestrel Falco sparverius paulus Bird of conservation concern Year-round American Bittern Botaurus lentiginosus Bird of conservation concern Season: Wintering https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0F3 Bachman's Sparrow Aimophila aestivalis Bird of conservation concern Year-round https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B07F Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bird of conservation concern Year-round https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B008 Brown-headed Nuthatch Sitta pusilla Bird of conservation concern Year-round Chuck-will's-widow Caprimulgus carolinensis Bird of conservation concern Season: Breeding Common Ground-dove Columbina passerina exigua Bird of conservation concern Year-round Fox Sparrow Passerella iliaca Bird of conservation concern Season: Wintering Henslow's Sparrow Ammodramus henslowii Bird of conservation concern Season: Wintering https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B09D Kentucky Warbler Oporornis formosus Bird of conservation concern Season: Breeding Le Conte's Sparrow Ammodramus leconteii Bird of conservation concern Season: Wintering Least Bittern Ixobrychus exilis Bird of conservation concern Season: Breeding Loggerhead Shrike Lanius ludovicianus Bird of conservation concern Year-round https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0FY Mississippi Kite Ictinia mississippiensis Bird of conservation concern Season: Breeding 07/23/2015 09:10 IPaC Information for Planning and Conservation Page 5 Version 2.1.0

IPaC Trust Resource Report LAGSB-M7AVJ-D43PR-DEPA4-O5BVQU Painted Bunting Passerina ciris Bird of conservation concern Season: Breeding Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus Bird of conservation concern Season: Wintering https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0FU Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor Bird of conservation concern Season: Breeding Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea Bird of conservation concern Season: Breeding Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus Bird of conservation concern Year-round Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus Bird of conservation concern Season: Wintering Sedge Wren Cistothorus platensis Bird of conservation concern Season: Wintering Swainson's Warbler Limnothlypis swainsonii Bird of conservation concern Season: Breeding Swallow-tailed Kite Elanoides forficatus Bird of conservation concern Season: Breeding https://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B0GB Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina Bird of conservation concern Season: Breeding Worm Eating Warbler Helmitheros vermivorum Bird of conservation concern Season: Migrating 07/23/2015 09:10 IPaC Information for Planning and Conservation Page 6 Version 2.1.0

IPaC Trust Resource Report LAGSB-M7AVJ-D43PR-DEPA4-O5BVQU Refuges Any activity proposed on National Wildlife Refuge lands must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. If your project overlaps or otherwise impacts a Refuge, please contact that Refuge to discuss the authorization process.

There are no refuges within this project area 07/23/2015 09:10 IPaC Information for Planning and Conservation Page 7 Version 2.1.0

IPaC Trust Resource Report LAGSB-M7AVJ-D43PR-DEPA4-O5BVQU Wetlands Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats from your project may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal Statutes.

Project proponents should discuss the relationship of these requirements to their project with the Regulatory Program of the appropriate U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District.

DATA LIMITATIONS The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery.

Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classification established through image analysis.

The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.

Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work. There may be occasional differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site.

DATA EXCLUSIONS Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters.

Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory.

These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.

DATA PRECAUTIONS Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a different manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate federal, state, or local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may affect such activities.

Freshwater Forested/shrub Wetland PFO1C 71.3 acres Freshwater Pond PUBGx 1.55 acres Riverine R2UBH 10800.0 acres 07/23/2015 09:10 IPaC Information for Planning and Conservation Page 8 Version 2.1.0

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D .C. 20555-0001 August 7. 2013 Ms. Cindy Dohner Southeast Regional Director U.S, Fish and Wildlife Service 1875 Century Blvd ., Suite 400 Atlanta, Georgia 30345

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR COt°'CURRENCE ON THE EFFECTS OF THE EDWIN I.

HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 ON THE FEDERALL Y-USTEO ENDANGERED SPECIES AL TAMAHA SPINYMUSSEL

Dear Ms. Dohner:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuing an amendment far Renewed Facility Operating Licenses for the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant (HNP) Units 1 and 2.

HNP is located on the Altamaha River in Appl ing County, Georgia. The NRC staff prepared this biological assessment due to both the requested license amendment of July 5, 2012 and the U.S . Fish and Wildlife Services (FWS's) 2011 ltsting of the Altamaha sp1nymussel (Efliptio spinosa) as endangered and designation of critical habitat. With this letter, and in accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA) the NRC requests your concurrence with its determination that HNP may affect; but is not likely to jeopardize, the continued existence of Altamaha spinymussel and wm have no effect on its designated critical habitat.

Project Summary and Description of Federal Ac~J.QD HNP is a steam-electric generating facility operated by Southern Nuclear Operating Company

{SNC). HNP is located in Appling County, Georgia, at river kilometer 80 (river mile 112), slightly southeast of the U.S. Highway 1 crossing of the Altamaha River. The plant site is approximately 18 km (11 mi) north of Baxley, Georgia; 158 km (98 mi) southeast of Macon, Georgia; 117 km (73 mi) northwest of Brunswick, Georgia; and 108 km (67 mi} souttiwest of Savannah, Georgia .

Hl"-JP fs a two~unlt nuclear plant using a closed-loop cooling system for main conden:ser cooling that withdraws from and discharges to the Altamaha River through a :shoreline intake and offshore discharge structures.

On October 13, 1974, the NRC i ssued an operating license for Unit 1 with an expiration date of August 6, 2014. On June 13, 1978. the NRC issued an operating ltcense for Unit 2 with an expiration date of June 13, 2018. By letter dated February 29, 2000, SNC submitted an application to the NRC to renew the operating licenses for HNP, Units 1 and 2 , for an additional 20-yeaf period . On January 15, 2002, the NRC renewed the licenses for HNP, Units 1 and 2 for an additional 20 years. The current expiration dates for Unit 1 and 2 operating licenses are August 6, 2034. and June 13, 2038, respectively.

The property at the HNP site totals approximately 907 (ha) (2 ,240 ac) characterized by low.

rolling sandy hills that are predominantly forested . The property includes approximately 364 ha (900 ac) north of the Altamaha River, on 1he other slde of the river, in Toombs County and approximately 542 ha (1,340 ac) south of the river in Appling County . All industrial facilities

C. Dohner -2~

associated v.1th the HNP site are located in Appling County. The restricted area, whfch comprises the reactors , containment buildings, switchyard , cooling tower area and associated facilities, is approximately 121 ha (300 ac), Approximately 648 ha {1 ,600 ac) are managed for timber production and wildlife habftat.

The proposed Federal action would amend Appendix A of HNP's renewed facility operating licenses as ,equested by SNC. On July 5, 2012, SNC sent tt,e NRC a request for .a license amendment to revise the minimum water level at which the plant could withdraw water from the Altamaha River from 60.7 to 60.5 feet (ft) {18.5 to 18.4 m), a difference of 0.2 ft (6 cm), as measured in the plant service water pump well. Withdrawn watet is used for 1he plant service water system under normal operating conditions and the ultimate heat sink in case of emergencies. SNC's request sta tes that the proposed change would not result in or require any physical changes to HNP systems, structures, and components, including those Intended for the prevention of accidents. SNC proposes to implement the proposed operational changes within 60 days of the NRC issuing the requested amendment.

$NC calculateg the water VBlocity through the intake traveling screens to be 2 .81 feet per second (ft/s) (0.856 m/s) at the present minimum operating water level of 60.7 ft (18.50 m) mean sea level (MSL) . Under the proposed license amendment, the velocity would increase to 2.93 ftls (0.893 mis) at the minimum operating water level of 60 .5 ft {18.44 m) MSL; although the volume of surface water withdrawn would not increase.

Sect!on 7 Consultation History On August 31, 2000, in conjunction with the license renewal application for HNP, the NRC staff submitted a biolog tcal assessment to the National Marine Fisheries Service rNMFS") for the Federafty endangered shortno6e sturgeon . At a November 3, 2003, meeting with NRC staff, NMFS informed the NRC that the biological assessment required revisions . On July 9, 2004, the NRC submitted a revised biological assessment concluding that HNP may affect the shortnose sturgeon, and that the effects a.re discountable and extremely unlikely to occur, and, therefore, not likely to adversely affect the species. Subsequently, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) sent a letter dated May 19, 2005, requesting ESA section 7 consultation on the issuance of a permit 10 conduct maintenance dredging of lhe A!tamaha River at HNP and requested NMFS's concurrence with its determination that periodic maintenance dredging at HNP was not likely to adversely affect the shortnose sturgeon. Because NMFS believed that the periodic maintenance dredging is interrelated to the operation of the plant, it combined the se two activities into one consultation. In a letter dated August 10, 2005, NMFS found that chances of impinging juvenile a;1d adult shortnose sturgeon on the intake trash racks or entraining shortnose sturgeon eggs or larvae in the cooling water intakes are discountable and that the effects of discharging heated effluent and dredging operations on shortnose sturgeon are insignificant. NMFS concurred with the COE and NRC staff that continued operation of HNP with periodic maintenance dredging is not likely to adversely affect sho11nose sturgeon.

On October 11, 2011 . FWS listed the Altamaha spinymussel as endangered and designated critical habitat. The listing announcement identified several sources of stress associated with operating HNP that might adversely affect the Altamaha spinymusse! population. On July 5, 2012, SNC sent the NRC a request for a license amendment, and the NRC staff began this review.

C. Dohner Request for Concurrence with the NRC's Biolog!cal Asse2srne[lt and ESA Effect Determinations The NRC has examined the new information and the past consultation and found no reason to modify past conclusions . The attached biological assessment addresses whether the operation of HNP, including the proposed license amendment, has potential to affect the Altamaha spinymussel and its critical habitat. The NRC staff concludes that the continued operation of HNP may affect but is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the Attamaha spinymussel and that any possible adverse effects would accrue primarily through direct mortality caused by entrainment and tmp,ngement of larvae and juveniles of its unknown host fish species, although the effects are probably discountable. The staff also concludes that operation of HNP would have no effect on designated critical habitat of the Altamaha spinymusseL With this letter, we are requesting FWS's concurrence with the staff's effect determinations under section 7 of the ESA. In reaching our conclusions, the NRC staff relied on Information provided by the applicant. on analysis petiormed by NRC staff. and on information from FWS.

Conclusion If you have any questions regarding the staff's request, please contact Or. Dennis Logan, aquatic ecologist, at 301-415-0490. I have also forwarded a copy of this retterto Mr. Colwell, Supervisory Biologist of your Coastal Sub-office with whom my staff has been in contact Sincerely, Melanie C. Wong, Chief Environmental Review and Guidance Update Branch Division of license Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366

Enclosures:

As stated

ML13193A368 (PKG), ML13193A366 {LTR), ML13193A367 (Encl.)

.. concurred via email OFFICE LA:RPB1:DLR* AB:RERB :DLR PM:RERB:DLR BC:RERB:DLR MWong NAME YEdmonds Dlogan KFolk (WFord for)

DATE 7/15/13 7/15/13 7/16/13 8//13 Letter to C. Dohner from M. Wong dated August 7, 2013

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR CONCURRENCE ON THE EFFECTS OF THE EDWIN l.

HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 ON THE FEDERALLY-LISTED ENDANGERED SPECIES Al TAMAHA SPINYMUSSEL DISTRIBUTION:

HARD COPY:

Mr. Strant Colwell Supervisory Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Georgia Ecological Services 4980 Wildlife Drive, NE Townsend, Georgia 31331 strant colwell@fws.gov Mr. C, R. Pierce Regulatory Affairs Director Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

Post Office Box 1295, Bin - 038 Birmingham, AL 35201 -1295 E-MAIL:

PUBLIC EndangeredSpecies Resource RidsNrrDlr Resource RidsNrrDlrRerb Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb2 Resource RidsOgcMailCenter Resource RidsNrrPMCallaway Resource Dt.ogan KFolk MWong RMartin , DORL strant colwell@fws.gov

Biological Assessment for Altamaha Spinymussel (Elllptio spinosa)

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant> Units 1 and 2 Appling County, Georgia July 2013 Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50 ..366 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Rockville, Maryland Prepared by Dennis Logan, PhD Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Table of Contents 1.0 Jntroductlon and Purpose ........................................ ........................................................... 1 2.0 Section 7 Consultation Hf story ...........................................................,. ............................. 1 3.0 Proposed Action ................................................................................................................. 1 4.0 Description of Project Area ...............................................................................,................ 2 4.1 General Plant Information ................... .. ............. .. ... ....... ... .. .. .. .. ......... ........ ........... .. ... .. 2 4.2 Cooling Water System " ...... .... ........... .... .. ......... .... .... ................. ............ ..... ............ ..... 2 4 .3 Maintenance Dredging .. ... ... ................ .... ....... ........ ...... .. ... ....... .. ... .. ..... .... .. ... .... .... .. ., ... 5 5.0 Status Review of the Altamaha Spinymussel ................................................................... 5 5.1 Life History ... ..... ...... ..... ... ................................. ....... .. ... ........ .... ....... ... ......... ................ 5 5.2 Status in the Altamaha River ...... ... .. ... .. ...... .. ... ...... .. ...... .. ..... ............. ... ... ............ ...... . 6 5.3 Effects of HNP on Altamaha Spinymussel .......... .. .........,... ... .......................... ............. 6 5.3.1 Dredging and Sediment Contamination .. ,. .. ., ....... ... ............... .. .... .. ................... 7 5.3.2 Entrainment and Impingement of Host Fish Species ....... .. .... .. . .... .. .. .. ........... 8 5.3.3 Thermal Effects ...... .......... ., ............. ..... ,.... .. ..... .. ... ,. .......... ........ ..... ....... ,. ......... B 5.3.4 Critical Habitat. ........ .............. ,. ..... ............. .. .. ....... .. ............... .... .. .. ... .. ... ,.......... 9 5.3.5 Habitat Fragmentation ... ........... .... ......... ........ ... .. .......... .. .... ... ....... ..... ........ ... .... 9 5.3.6 Trophic lr1teractions .. ... .... .. ... ......... .. .. ......... .. ... ... ..................... ... .. ....... .. ... .... .. 10 5.3.7 Cumulative Impacts ............ .... .. ... ........ .. .. ................ ................... .... . .............. 10 6.0 Conclusion ................... ,...........,............,. ............................ ,, .. ~***kf,..,, ... , ................................... , ... l ............ ~,. ................... 11 7.0 L*te-n1ture Cited ...... .,,.., ... ............................................. ,.. ., ................................................ 11

Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Symbols oc degrees Celsius OF degrees Fahrenheit ac acre(s) cm centimeter(s)

COE U .S. Army Corps of Engineers CFR Code of Federal Regulatfons DO dissolved oxygen concentration ESA Endangered Species Ac,1 of 1973, as amended ft foot (feet) ft/s feet per second FWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service GADNR Georgia Department of Natural Resources ha hectare(s)

HNP Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 in. lnch(es) km kilometer(s) m meter(s) mis meters per second mgd million gal!ons per day mg/L milligrams per liter mi mile(s)

MSL mean sea level MW(t) megawatt-therm al NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elim fnation System NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulator/ Commission PCE primary constituent elements of designated critical habitat RKm river kilometer(s)

RM river mile(s)

SNC Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

ii

1.0 Introduction and Purpose The NRC is considering issuing an amendment for Renewed Facility Operating License Numbers DPR-57 and NPF-5. The NRG issued the licenses to Southern Nuclear Operating Company ("SNC" or ' the licensee"} for operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant ("HNP-~)

Units 1 and 2 in accordance with Title 10, Part 50.90 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 50.90) . HNP is located on the Altamaha River in Appling County, Georgia. The NRG staff prepared this biological assessment due to both the requested license amendment of July 5 2012 {SNC 2012a) and the FWS's (2011) listing of the Altamaha spinymussel (Elliptio spinosa) as endangered and designation of critical habitat. NRC's consideration of and granting of a license amendment is a Federal action necessitating review in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51.

Pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 ("ESA"}, as amended, on February 21, 2013. the NRC staff consulted the Georgia Department of Natural Resources

("GADNR"), Wildlife Resources Division's website regarding species of concern near HNP and requested a list of protected speoies through that website. In a letter to NRC dated February 28, 2013, the FWS (2013) provided information on Federally listed endangered or threatened species. as wet! as on proposed or candidate species, and on any designated criticaJ habitats that may occur in the vicinity of HNP. The FWS identified two endangered aquatic species, the shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) and the Alta ma ha spinymussel, for which FWS had also designated critical habitat; one threatened terrestrial species, the eastern Indigo snake (Drymarchon corais coupen) ; and one candidate species, the gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus).

2.0 Section 7 Consultation History On August 31, 2000, in conjunction Vt'ith the license renewal application for HNP, the NRG staff submitted a biological assessment to the National Marine Flsherles Service ("NMFS") for the Federally endangered shortnose sturgeon {NRC 2000) . At a November 3, 2003, meeting with NRC staff, NMFS informed the NRC that the biological assessment required revisions . On July 9, 2004, the NRC (2004) submitted a revised biological assessment concluding that HNP may affect the shortnose sturgeon, and ttiat the effects are discountable and extremely unlikely to occur, and, therefore, not likeiy to adversely affect the species . Subsequently, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers rcoE) sent a letter dated May 19, 2005, requesting ESA section 7 consultation on the issuance of a permit to conduct maintenance dredging of the Altamaha River at HNP and requested NMFS's concurrence with its determination that periodic mair'ltenance dredging at HNP was not likely to adversely affect the .shortnose sturgeon.

Becaus-e NMFS believed that the periodic maintenance dredging is interrelated to the operation of the plant, it combined these two activities into one consultation . In a letter dated August 10, 2005, NMFS (2005) found that chances of impinging juvenile and adult shortnos-e sturgeon on the intake trash racks or entraining shortnose sturgeon eggs or larvae in the cooling water intakes are discountable and that the effects of discharging heated effluent and dredging opefation on shortnose sturgeon are irlsignificant. NMFS concurred with the COE and NRG staff that continued operation of HNP with periodic maintenance dredging ls not likely to

_adversely affect shortnose sturgeon.

3.0 Proposed Action The proposed Federal action would amend Appendix A of HNP's renewed facility operating licenses as requested by SNC. On July 5, 2012 , SNC (.2012a) sent the NRC a request for a license amendment to revise the minimum water level at which the plant could withdraw water from the Altamaha River from 60.7 to 60.5 feet (ft) {18.5 to 18.4 m), a difference of 0.2 ft (6 cm},

1

as measured in the plant service water pump well, Withdrawn water is used for plant service water system under normal operating conditions and the ultimate heat sink in case of emergencies. SNC (2012a) states that the proposed change would not resvlt in or require any physical changes to HNP systems, structures. and components, including those intended for the prevention of accidents . SNC proposes to implement the proposed operatlonar changes within 60 days of the NRC issuing the requested amendment.

4.0 Description of Project Area 4.1 General Plant Information HNP is a steam-electric generating facility operated by SNC. HNP is located in Appling County, Georgia, at river kilometer (RKrn) 180 (river mile [RM] 112), stfghtly southeast of the U.S.

Highway 1 crossing of the Altamaha River. The plant site is approximately 18 km (11 mi) north of Baxley, Georgia; 158 km (98 mi) southeast of Macon, Georgia; 117 km (73 mi) northwest of Brunswick, Georgia; and 108 km (67 mi) southwest of Savannah, Georgia (Figures 1and 2).

HNP is a two-unit nuclear plant, and both units are licensed for 2,763 megawatt-thermal (MW{t}) . HNP uses a closed-loop cooling system for main condenser cooling th.at withdraws from and discharges to the Altamaha River through a shoreline intake and offshore discharge structures. The NRC's (2000) b10!09i-cal assessment for shortnose sturgeon for HNP describes the cooling water system in more detail.

On October 13, 1974, the NRC issued an operating license for Unit 1 with an exp[ratlon date of August 6, 2014. On June 13, 1978, the NRG issued an operating license for Unit 2 with an expiration date of June 13, 2018. By letter dated February 29, 2000, SNC submitted an application to the NRC to renew the operating licenses for HNP, Units 1 and 2, for an additional 20-year period (SNC 2000). NRG (2001) reviews the potential environmental impacts of continued operations of HNP Units 1 and 2 . On January 15, 2002, the NRC renewed the licenses for HNP Units 1 and 2 for an additional 20 years (NRC 2002}. The current expiration dates for the Unit 1 and 2 operating licenses are August 6, 2034, and June 13, 2038, respectively.

The property at the HNP site totals approximately-907 he-ctares (ha) (2,240 ac} and is characterized by low, rolling sandy hills that are predominantly forested. The property includes approximately 364 ha (900 ac) north of the Altamaha River, on the other sfde of the river, in Toombs County and approximately 542 ha (1 ,340 ac) south of the river in Appling County. All industrial facilities associated with the HNP site are located in Appling County . The restricted area, which comprises the reactors , containment buildings, swrtchyard , cooling tower area and associated facilities, is approximately 121 ha (300 ac). Approximately 648 ha (1,600 ac) are managed for timber production and wildlife habitat (NRC 2001 ).

4.2 Cooling Wat()r System The excess heat produced by HNP's two nucfear units is transferred to cooling water flowing through the condensers and the service water system. Main condenser cooling is provided by mechanical draft cooling towers . Each HNP circulating water system is a closed~loop cooling system that employs three cross-flow and one counter-flow mechanical-draft cooling towers to transfer waste heat to the atmosphere. Water withdrawn for the river to replace evaporation and to dilute the buildup of dissolved solids is called makeup water.

For bOth generating units, cooling tower makeup water is withdrawn from the Altarnaha River through a single intake structure. The intake structure is located along the southern shoreline of the Altamaha River and is positioned so that water is available to the plant at bo1h minimum flow 2

and probable flood conditions. The main river channel (thalweg) is located closer to the northern shoreline on the opposite side of the river from the plant and its intake structure. The intake ls approximately 46 m (150 ft) long, 18 m (60 ft) wide. and the roof of the intake structure is approximately 18 m (60 ft) above the water surface at normal river level. The water passage entrance is about 8.2 m (27 ft) wide and extends from 4 .9 m (16 ft) below to 10 m (33 ft) above normal water levels. Trash racks remove large debris, and vertical traveling screens with a 1-cm (3/4-in.) mesh remove smaller material.

~~~5l~..,..il".'!'!'.~.,~-~_~ooo~~liiiiiiiiiii.iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiil

~ ffOd<J= t,,J ~t,...,,...,.,, fist! Sl!f\!oes 050ROfA.\.

POwta A

Apl:10, ,...M Figure 1. Altamaha River Drainage below the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant 3

_I I ~-- .

t L-"

i .::,,'

i.-:1' i ~ . .. .

'8V i

.. \ ~

___ 2.~ ~---

Al.TN'1.IIMA l'IMft l'ROM CONflUENCf. TO H.'.TCH lf.JCLUR Pl.AHT WfTH SHOIU N05l 8Tl.lR~ SPAVVHlt'G m.A!J

-*tllm.-

1,1,,p imoooed b1 ["'l'~lloll l'lft! SMtres OliOltGIA..\

l>OWH A

f'\

,..-ni :xi. :i'Oool.

Figure 2. Alt.amaha River Drainage above t.he Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant SNC (2012b} calculates the water velocity through the intake traveling screens to be 2.81feet per second (ft/s) (0.856 mi's) at the present minimum operating water level of 60.7 ft

{18.50 m) MSL. Under the proposed license amendment, the velocity would increase to 2.93 ft/s (0.893 mis) at the minimum operating water level of 60.5 ft (18.44 mj MSL, although the volume of surface water withd rawn would not increase. SNC (2000) states that water velocity through the intake scree ns is 1,9 ft/s (0.6 mis) at normal river elevation. HNP's current Georgia surface water withdrawal perm it. number 001-0690-01 (reproduced in SNC 2012b), issued by the GADNR, allows SNC to withdraw a monthly average of up to 85 million gallons per day

{mgd) with a maximum 24-hour rate of 103.6 mgd and requires SNC to monitor withdrawals and to report annually. SNC (2012b) reports calendar-year average water withdrawal rates of 56.58 mgd in 2007, 57.69 mgd in 2008, 55.33 mgd in 2009, 56,70 mgd in 2010, and 56 .98 mgd in 2011 . NRC (2001 ) calculated that approximately 58 percent of the water withdrawn by HNP for all uses is consumptively consumed in HNP's cooling towers and by other processes.

Wafer returns to the Altamaha River through a submerged discharge structure consisting of t\vo 1.1 m (42-in.) lines that extend approximately 37 m (120 ft) out from the shore at an elevation of 16 m (54 ft) MSL. Ttie point of discharge is approximately 384 m (1,260 ft) down river from the 4

lntake structure and approximately 1.2 m (4 ft) below the surface when the river is at its lowest level. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System {NPDES) Permit for HNP, number GA0004120 (reproduced in SNC 2012b), issued by the Georgia Environmental Protection Division requires weekly monitoring of discharge temperatures but does not stipulate a maximum discharge temperature or maximum temperature rise across the condenser. The NPDES permit expired on June 30, 2012, but it has been administratively continued (SNC 2012b) .

To control biofouling of coo ling system components :such as condenser tubes and cooling towers, an oxidizing biocide {typically sodium hypochlorite or sodium bromide} is injected into the system as needed to maintain a concentration of free oxidant sufficient to kill most microbial organisms and algae. When the system is being treated, blow down to the river is secured to prevent the discharge of residual oxidant into the river. After biocide addition, water is recirculated within the system until residual oxidant levels are below discharge limits specified in the NPDES permit. .

4.3 Maintenance Dredging In order to ensure adequate depth of water at the HNP intake structure for continued plant operation, the river bottom near the intake structure ls maintained to remove accumulated sand, silt, and debris. Periodic maintenance is performed with a hydraulic dredge, clamshell, or dragline. The COE issued permit number 940003893 under Section 404 of the Water Pollution Control Act {Clean Water Act) of 1977 fo( maintenance dredging in front of the HNP intake structure to remove accumulated sand, silt, and debris and ensure adequate water supply for plant operation. Removed material is spoiled in an upland disposal area with no return of material to the river. The permit contains special conditions to ensure protection of aquatic habitat. Special Conditions 1, 2, and 3 limit dredging to a specific time of the year (August 15 through November 31) and spedfically prohibit dredging from December 1 through June 30 to ensure protection of anadromous fish. The permit also requires monitoring of dissolved oxygen {DO) during dredging and requires suspension of dredging operations if 00 levels fall below 3.0 mg/L. The permit also specifies recordkeeplng for each dredge event and reporting to tt,e COE.

5.0 Status Review of the Altamaha Spinymussel 5.1 life History The Altamaha spinymussel is a freshwater mussel belonging to the family Unionidae, which is a worldwide family of mussels, also called unionids, river mussels, or naiads, with almost 300 taxa in North America . Unionids like the Altamaha spinymussel have compJex life cycles The FWS's (2011) recently published species description contains the most current life histor; information on the Altamaha spinymusse!. Unless otherwise noted, information presented here is from the FWS's review. This species in endemic to the Altama.ha River drainage, and the historical distribution was restricted to the Coastal Plain portion of the Aftamaha River and the lower portions of its three main tributaries, which are the Ohoopee, Ocmulgee, and Oconee Rivers. Altamaha spinymussels are found in association v.ith stable, course to fine grained sandy sedlments of sandbars, sloughs , and mid-channel islands in areas of swiftly flowing water. Much of the life history of the Altamaha spinym ussel has not been studied and is inferred from life histories of other mussels of the same genus, Ef!iptio, which refers to the elliptical /

shape of the adult mussels.

Adults reach a maximum shell length of about 11 cm (4 .3 in.), and the shells have one to five spines that may reach lengths of 1.0 to 2.5 cm (0.39 to 0.98 in.) in a single row parallel to the 5

posterior ridge. They burrow about 5 to 10 cm (2 to 4 in.) into the substrate and pump wate(

through their gills to obtain oxygen and food and rid themselves of waste products. They filter phytoplankton, zooplankton, suspended bacteria, other microorganisms, particulates, and dissolved organic matter from the water and in doing so can clarify the water in the stream or river. Freshwater mussels can have long life spans, and Schneider and Strayer (2006) report that, in a population of the related, congeneric pearly mussel {Elliptio compfanata) in New York, ages ranged from 33 to 95 years old, with 94 percent of individuals more than 50 years old and individuals between 50 i3nd 60 years otd being the most abundant in t'ne population .

Reproduction and early life history is incompletely known and understood through studies of related species of the same genus. Reproduction is thought to occur in spring. Fertilization is internal, and females brood the larvae, which are called glochidia. Females release mature glochidia into the water column, perhaps in May or June. To survive, the glochicia must fin

and attach to specific host fish species, although the host species are currently unknown for the Altamaha spinymussel. After some period of attachment to host fish , the immature mussels release and move to the bottom to begin a benthic existence, provided they find suitable habitat.

The juvenile mussels on the bottom use the foot to extract and feed on bacteria, algae, and detritus in the sediment.

5.2 Status in the Al@maha River The Altamaha River is formed by the confluence of the Ocmulgee and Oconee Rive rs, and the ra nge of the Altamaha spinymussel formerty included the Altamaha River and the lower portions of both the Ocmulgee and Oconee Rivers as well as the lower reach of another tributary to the Altamaha River. the Ohoopee River. The species has apparently been extirpated from the lower Oconee, Ohoopee, and Altamaha Rivers and now survives only in the Ocmulgee and Upper Altamaha Rivers, where FWS has designated critical habitat under the ESA The Altarnaha spinymussel has been observed at only 22 sites since 2000, most of which are clustered geographically and separated by long reaches w ith no or undetectable numbers of the species.

The remaining populations of A ltamaha spinymussel are dwindling. In its deterrnination, the FWS (2011) finds that The remaining srnali spinymussel populations are threatened by a variety of factors that are expected to persist indefinitely and Impact, or have the potential to impaat, remaining spinymussel habitat. These factors include siltation, industrial pollution , municipal effluents , modification of stream channels, pesticides , heavy metals, invasive species, loss of host fish, water withdrawal, re.curri ng drought, and loss of genetic viability.

The FWS believes that the small, isolated populations of spinymussels that remain are not large enough to be resilient against any of the above factors acting on the specfes itself or on its habitat and that the threats to the species, particularly from habitat degradation, small population site 1 and drought are current and are proj ected to continue into the future.

The Altamaha spinymussel is 1n danger of extinction throughout its range, and FWS has listed it as an endangered species throughollt its range under the ESA and designated four reaches of the Altamaha, Ocmulgee, and Ohoopee Rivers as units of critical habitat.

5.3 Effects of HNP on Altamaha Spinymussel The FlNS {201 1) listing announcement identified several sources of stress associated with operating HNP that might adversely affect the Altamaha spinymussel population . The stressors include elevated levels of metals in sediments below the plant, impingement and entrainment of 6

host fish species. effects of the thermal effluent and dredging the river. In addition, entrainment may alter available food sources (trophic structure) for downriver populations .

5.3.1 Dredging and Sediment Contamination Elevated levels of metals in sediments and pore water may adver~ty affect the mussels, including Melevated zinc and chromium below Plant Hatch" {FVVS 2011 ). Sources of sediment contamination may include HNP operations and resuspension of buried legacy sediment contamination and its transport downstream due to dredging . NRG staff found no additional information on this subject.

lhe FWS (2011) found that annual dredging performed at the plant, which was the subject of the NRC's 2004 biological assessment for shortnose sturgeon, may also adversely affect the Altamaha spinymussel:

While the amount of material removed annually is generally far less than the amount permitted ... , annual dredging could negatively Impact the Altamaha spinymussel by decreasing channel stability (creating a potential head cut).

altering sediment transport dynamics, increasing sedimentation and turbidity downstream dur1ng dredging operations, and decreasing habitat quality for host fishes. It is unknown how far doW11stream these impacts extend.

SNC (2006} disputes this assessment and states that A permit renewal and modification was obtained on September 7, 2005, increasing the allowable dredged volume from 35,000 to 44.424 cubic yards.

This Increase is expected to reduce the frequency of dredging and make the area more amenable to natural flushing during high flow events (Law, 1998). The dredging footprint and adjacent areas are poor habitat for mussels with relatively steep banks, shifting sand bars, and higher currents . Additionally, the dredging permit contains specific requirements, including those Inserted by the US Fish &

Wildlife Service ... , to ensure protection of a-quatic species.

Dredging reports indicate that, in 2010, HNP dredged an estimated 13,409 yd 3 : in 20"11, about 406 yl\ and, in 2012, about 13,866 yd 3 These actual volumes are well below the permitted limit.

Law Engineering and Environmental Services, lnc {Law 1998) performed the study cited by SNC (2006) above for Georgia Power Company. Law (1998) collected mussel at 23 sampling sites in the Altamaha River near HNP on September 25 and 26. 1998. from a 'i2-mi reach (RM 109.9 to RM 122.0) (19-krn reach, RKm 176.8 to RKm 196.3) from sites in sand bars, sloughs, the mouth ot a cypress swamp (one -site), and river banks. Sampling efforts "targeted mussel habitats and areas where mussels have been collected (n the past# and included areas above, near, and below HNP, which is located at RM 116. Law (1998) concludes that a 2.5--mi (4-km}

reach of the river that includes the HNP site is less favorable mussel habitat than the reaches above and below and, further, that the lower mussel catch-per-unit effort in that reach is not due to operation of HNP. Law {1998} notes that Differences in collection rates between years likely ,eflect the direct effects of water levels on mussel distribution and collection efficiency. Consistel"lt spatial differences between years suggested that the distribution of habitat within the river reach surveyed, rather than operatlon of Plant Hatch, accounted for the lower dm*vnstream collection rates. The highest collection rates both upstream and do'M'lstream of Plant Hatch i,,vere associated with stable sand bars. The river channel downstream of the U.S. 1 Highway bridge is relative1y straight between 7

RM 117 and RM 114.5, a reach where collection rates were consistently lower in 1993 and 1998. The collection sites within this reach generally had steeper banks, less stable sand bars, and higher currents than collections sites a1 the river bends where collection rates were consistently higher .

In regard to these conclusions, the NRC staff notes that targeted sampling may help investigators understand trends at the selected sites but rnay not provide representative sampling needed to support broader comparisons and conclusions. This is not necessarily a criticism of the study design. Randomized sampling required for representative estimates can result iri some samples with no catches, which may not only cost time and effort, but which also may introduce problems into data analysis. Investigators must therefore balance these considerations.

The NRC relies on the COE permitting process to protect endangered species because the COE, not the NRC, regulates dredging. Because of 1he relatively small area dredged and the reports Indicating that actual dredg ing was about a third of the permit amount or less (in 2011 ),

the NRC believes that the effects of dredging on Altamaha spinymussels through downstream effects and sediment resuspension and redeposition would be insignificant or discountable.

5.3.2 Ent.rainment and Impingement of Host Fish Species The FWS (2011) also finds that en1rainment and impingement of host fisi1 species may adversely affect the early life stages of Altamaha spinymussel and notes that aPlant Hatch also monitors fish entrainment, so if the host fish of the spinymussel was known, management efforts could be made to reduce the potential of this impact."

The GADNR regltlates entrainment and impingement at the cooling water intake strncture as part ot its administration of the NPDES permitting program . SNC's Clean Water Act Section 316(b) demonstration incll1ded entrainment and impingement studies (Wiltz 1981) with collections in 1975, 1976, *t977, and 1980. SNC (2000) includes the following impingement estimates from the impingement studies: 1975, 12 fish per day and 438 per year; 1976, 0.4 fish per day and 146 per year: 1977, 1, 1 fish per day and 401 .5 per year: 1979, 1.3 fish per day and 474.5 per year; and 1980. 1.2 fish per day and 438 per year. SNC (2000) also reports that entrainment rates were generally low. Because GADNR regulates the cooling water intake structure, the NRC reties on the GADNR to monitor impingement and entrainment to protect aqua.tic resources . Although the host fish species of the Altamaha spinymussel are unknown, the low entrainment and Impingement rates reported for the HNP suggest that the effects to Altamaha spinymussel resulting from any entrainment or impingement of host species are likely insignificant or discountable.

5.3. 3 Thermal Effects The FWS (2011) a lso finds that the thermal effluent could adversely affect the host species.

While FWS notes that the HNP 0 has made substantial efforts to reduce thermal discharges through the construction of cooling towers that have significantly reduced the thermal plL1me."

the increased water temperatures can still have adverse effects. The HNP's thermal effluent could elicit these effects because higher water temperatures can increase the sensitivity of mussels to certain pollutants." Because FWS finds that ~(t}hese effecis would be exacerbated during years of !ow rainfall, when less water would be available to dissipate the heat of the Plant Hatch effluent,~ the potential adverse effect !s pertinent to the proposed license amendment.

HNP's NPDES permit allows for the discharge of combined process wastewaters, including cooling tower blowdowr., to the Altamaha River. The permit also sets effluent limits for several contaminant parameters (e.g., oil and grease, total suspended solids. metals). The permit does 8

not impose a maximum temperature limit on the combined river discharge but does require weekly temperature monrtoring at the point of mixing and quarterly reporting of discharge temperatures to the State of Georgia. The permit further stipulates compliance with NRC requirements relative to radiological constituents. The water quality of the Altamaha River, on which the HNP is located, is also subject to regulation in accordance with Georgia's Water Use Classifications and Water Quality Standards (Chapter 391-3-6-03 of the State's Rules and Regulations). For all waters in the State of Georgia, except where more stringent criteria apply ,

receiving water temperatures are not to exceed 90 "F and the temperature of receiving waters is not to be increased more th.an 5 °F above the intake temperature.

The NRC (1978) modeled both average expected thermal conditions and extreme thermal conditions under conservative assumptions in the HNP, Unit 2. Final Environmental Statement and concluded that the small size of the thermal plume, even under conservative assumptions, would not block movement of fish in the A \ta maha River. In support of its NPDES permit application. SNC performed a computer modeling study using CORMIX (version 5.0) and associated river bottom survey to evaluate 1.he potential environmental impacts of operating HNP at the proposed minimum water level of 60.5 ft (18.4 m) in the plant service water pump well (summarized in SNC 2012b) . This modeling incorporated ambient rivertemperature conditions for summer and winter and utilized historical river and HNP discharge flow rates.

The modeled base case assumed ambient river temperature of 97 °F {36 "C), a temperature difference of 5 "F between the plant discharge and ambient river temperatures, and a discharge flow of 27,444 gpm. With this base case, the calculated temperature difference between the discharge plume and ambient river temperature was 2.5 "F (1 _8 "C) or less at a di.stance of 140 ft (42 .7 rn) downstream from the point of discharge, with a plume surface area of 0.05 ac and a plume cross-sectional area 3 percent of the river cross-section. SNC (2012b) stated that the modeled plume "is generally fully m ixed along a vertical cross-section with some lifting from the bottom in the near field due to buoyancy" and that ~state and federal limitations regarding water quality criteria and thermal impacts to !he Altamaha River continue to be satisfledn under the proposed license amendment The State of Georgia, not the NRC, regulates the discharge. The NRC relies on the State of Georgia to monitor and permit the discharge to protect the balanced , indigenous populations of fish and shellfish _ Therefore, the NRC staff concludes that any thermal effects to the Altamaha spinymussel and its fish host populations would be discountable.

5.3.4 Critical Habitat The FWS designated critical habitat in the Upper Altamaha River both above HNP (from the confluence of the Ocmulgee and Oconee Rivers downstream to the U.S. Route 1 crossing) and below HNP (from the western edge of the Moody Forest downstream to the confluence of the Altamaha and Ohoopee Rivers). Critical habitat does not include manmade structures present on the date of the rule (October 11 . 2011) and the land on which such structures are located.

Due to the lack of designated critical habitat at HNP, the NRC finds no adverse effects to critical habitat.

5.3.5 Habitat Fragmentation Fr~gmentation of habitat in rivers can suwtantially reduce biodiversity and alter ecosystem function (Doi 2009). In small populations, habitat fragmentation can increase the vulnerability of species to disease, human-caused disturbance, habitat modification , and demographic accidents and can lead to population declines, abnormal population structure , and eventual extinction (Dodd 1990).

9

The FWS (2011) explained that the exclusion of critical habitat designation in the stretch of river that includes HNP is because that sb*etcll does not include some primary constituent elements (PCEs) of habitat necessary to support the species . The FWS (2011) identifies two reasons that the stretch does not include PCEs necessary for the Altamaha spinymussel:

(1) Dredging for intake pipes at Plant Hatch, which destabilizes the river channel and banks, sandbar, slough, and mid-channel-island habitats and disrupts the movement of coarse-to-fine sand substrates with low to moderate amounts of fine sediment; and (2} Thermal discharges from Plant Hatch that reduce water quality.

These effects could fragment the habitat of Altamaha spinymussels by diminishing the distribution of larvae attached to fish hosts. The NRC staff examined these effects and found them insignificant or discountable. Entrainment and impingement of hos1 fish species may occur, but entrainment and impingement rates at HNP are low. Because the host species have not yet been identified, effects cannot now be accurately determined, but due to the low en1rainment and impingement rates overall, the staff expects that any effects would be discountable, 6.3.6 Trophic Interactions SNC (2012a) states that the hydraulic entrainment would be about 11 percent of the river flow passing the plant under minimum flow conditions without the proposed license amendment and about 11,5 percent with the license amendment. Along with the water, potential food of Altamaha spinymussels would also be entrained and removed from the r1ver, and so staff investigated how tt1is trophic change might affect mussels living downstream of the plant.

Adult Altamaha spinymussels filter phytoplankton, zooplankton, suspended bacteria, other microorganisms, particulates, and d issolved organic matter from the water, although which of these they use for nutrition is not presently clear. Assuming the entrainment rate of these potential foods equals the hydraulic entrainment rate ; and, assuming worst case entrainment rate (minimum river flow and plant withdrawal with the license amendment}, about 11.5 percent of these potential food sources would be removed. Smaller phytoplankton and suspended bacteria populations would recover quickly. The FWS did not identify food as a limiting resource for the adult mussels, which are most likely to be limited by other adverse habitat modifications .

Therefore, the effect of entrainment on food of adult mussels is likely discountable.

The juvenile mussels on the bottom use the root to extract and feed on bacteria, algae. and detritus in the sediment. These benthic food sources would not be adversely affected by upstream entrainment, so the effect of entrainment of potential food on juvenile mussels is also discountable.

5.3.7 Cumulative Impacts FWS (2011} presents a detailed '1Summary of Factors Affecting the Species." In short, FWS finds ttiat the present threats to the Altamaha spinymussel populations that remain today include siltation, industrial pollution., municipal effluents, modification of stream channels, pesticides, heavy metal pollution, invasive species, loss of host fish, water withdrawal, recurring drought, and the loss of genetic variability. Although operation of HNP contributes to the cumulative impact, the direct and indirect effeci.s of plant operation are a small contribution to the cumulative impact on the species .

10

6.0 Conclusion The Altamaha spinymussel has historically been found in the main stem of the Altamaha River and its larger tributaries. HNP lies close to the center of its present range. Although FWS has designated critical habitat above and below HNP, critical habitat does not include the Altamaha River near HNP. The NRC staff examined several sources of stress associated with the operation of HNP that the FWS (2011) suggested might affect the species. The staff found that the potential effects of dredging and sediment contamination , entrainment and impingement of host fish species, trophic interactions, and habitat fragmentation are insignificant or discountable. The staff also finds no adverse effects to critical habitat. The staff concludes that the present and future operation of HNP may affect, but is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of, Altamaha spinymussel and that the present and future operation of HNP would have no effect on Altamaha spinymussel critical habitat.

7.0 Literature Cited References that appear with an Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS) accession number can be accessed through NRC's web-based ADAMS at the following URL: http://adams.nrc.gov/wbal.

10 CFR 50. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Energy, Part 50, "Domestic licensing of production and utilization facilities ."

10 CFR 51. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Energy, Part 51, "Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions."

Dodd, C. K., Jr. 1990. Effects of habitat fragmentation on a stream-dwelling species, the flattened muck turtle Sternotherus depressus. Biological Conservation 54(1):33-45 .

Doi, H. 2009. Spatial patterns of autochthonous and allochthonous resources in aquatic food webs, Population Ecology 50:57-64.

[FWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011 . Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Status for the Altamaha Spinymussel and Designation of Critical Habitat; Final Rule. Federaf Register 76(196):6292_8-62960 . October 11, 2011 .

[FWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013. Letter from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Georgia Ecological Services Field Office to the NRC. Subject List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project. February 28, 2013 . ADAMS No. ML13063A517 .

(Law] Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc. 1998. Freshwater Mussel Survey, Altamaha River, Appling and Toombs Counties, Georgia. Law Project No. 12000-0178.

December 2, 1998. Prepared for Georgia Power Company, Smyrna, Georgia. Prepared by Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc., Kennesaw, Georgia . ADAMS No.

ML13204A044.

[NMFS] National Marine Fisheries Service. 2005. Letter from R.E. Crabtree, Regional Administrator, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS to P.-T. Kuo, NRC and C.L. Bernstein, Department of the Army. August 10, 2005. ADAMS No. ML052640354.

[NRC] U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 1978. Final Environmental Statement for the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Unit 2; Georgia Power Company; Docket Nos. 50-366, NUREG-0417, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation , Washington, D.C.

11

[NRCl U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 2000. Biological Assessment of the Potential Impact on Shortnose Sturgeon Resulting from an Additional 20 Years of Operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2. August 31, 2000. ADAMS No. ML003746456.

[NRC] U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 2001 . Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants, Supplement 4, Regarding the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. NUREG-1437, Supplement 1, Washington, D.C .

[NRG] U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 2002. Letter from William F. Burton, U.S. NRC, to H. L. Sumner, Jr., Southern Nuclear Operating Company.

Subject:

Issuance of Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-57 and NPF-5 for Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. 15January 2002. ADAMS No. ML020150435.

[NRCJ U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 2004. Biological Assessment of the Potential Impact on Shortnose Sturgeon Resulting from Continued Operation of the Edwin l. Hat.ch Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2. July 9. 2004. ADAMS No. Ml041910254 Schneider, R.. and D.L. Strayer. 2006. The age structure and decline of the fr&shwater mussel Elliptio complanata in Webatuck Creek in Amenia, New York. Undergraduate Ecofogy Research Reports, Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Millbrook, New York. Available at http://v-tww.caryinstitute.org/sites/default/files/publicireprintS/Schneider 2006 REU .pdf.

Accessed 29 April, 2013.

[SNC] Southern Nuclear Operating Company. 1997. Letter from H. L. Sumner, Jr. 1 SNC, to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Subject:

Edwin I Hatch Nuclear Pfant Request for License Amendment - Extended Power Uprate Operation. AugtJst 8, 1997.

[SNC] Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. 2000. Application for License Renewal for the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. Appendix D. Applicant's Environmental Report-Operating License Renewal Stage, Edwin I. Hatch Plant. 3 March 2000. ADAMS No.

ML003688151.

[SNC] Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. 2006. No subject. Letter from J.K.

Godfrey, SNC 1 Birmingham. Alabama, to Jimmy Rickard, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Athens, Georgia. ADAMS No, ML13204A044.

[SNCl Southam Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. 2012a. Letter from M.J. Ajluni, Nuclear Licensing Director, SNC to NRC . Re: Edwin L Hatch Nuclear Plant, License Amendment Request to Revise the Minimum Water Level in the Plant Service Water Pump Well. NL-12-78.

July 5. 2012. ADAMS No. ML12188A721

[SNC] Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. 2012b. Letter from M.J. Ajlunl, Nuclear Licensing Director, SNC to NRC. Re: Edwin I. Nuclear Plant, Request to Revise the Plant Service Water Pump Well Minimum Water Leve!, Response to Request for Additional Information Regarding the Environmentaf Evaluation. NL~12-1916. October 10, 2012. ADAMS No. ML12284A299.

[SNC] Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. 2012c. Letter from M.J. Ajluni. Nuclear Licensing Director, SNC to NRC . Re~ Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant License Amendment Request to Revise the Minimum Water Level in the Plant Service Water Pump Well. April 20, 2012. ADAMS No. ML12115A173.

Wiltz, J.W. 1981. Plant Edwin I. Hatch 316(b) demonstration on the Altamaha River in Appling County, Georgia. Georgia Power Environmental Affairs Center. March 1981 . ADAMS No.

Ml 13204A044, 12

United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 105 West Park Drive, Suite D Athens, Geor::iia 30606 Phone: (706) 613-9493 Fax: (706) 6 I3-6059 West Georgia Sub-Office Coastal Suh-O(fice Post Office Box 52560 4980 Wildlife Drive Fort Benning, Georgia 31995-2560 Townsend, Georgia 31331 Phone: (706) 544-6428 Phone: (912) 832-8739 Fax: (706) 544-6419 Fax : (912) 832-8744 December 10, 2013 Melanie C. Wong, Chief U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Environmental Review and Guidance Update Branch Division of License Renewal Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Re: USFWS File Number 2013-0739

Dear Ms. Wong:

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed your request for conctll'rence on the effects of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units I and 2 and the proposed license amendment on the federally-listed endangered species Altamaha spinymussel (Elliptio spinosa) located on the Altamaha River, Appling County, Georgia. This report is submitted in accordance with provisions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended; (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has determined that the continued operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant (HNP), jncluding the proposed license amendment, may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, the continued existence of Altamaba spinymussel and will have no effect 011 its designated critical habitat.

HNP is a steam-electric generating facility operated by Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC). HNP is a two-unit nuclear plant using a closed-loop cooling system for main condenser cooling that withdraws from and discharges to the Altamal1a River through shoreline intake and offshore discharge structures. The proposed license amendment of Appendix A ofHNP's renewed facility operating license would revise the minimum water level at which the plant could withdraw water from the Altamaha River from 60.7 to 60.5 feet (18.5 to 18.4 m), a difference of 0.2 feet (6cm), as measured in the plant service water pump well.

The Service listing of the Altamaha spinymussel as endangered and the designation of critical habitat identified several sources of stress associated with operating HNP that might adversely affect the Altamaha spinymussel population. Stressors include dredging of the river, elevated levels of metals in sediments below the plant, impingement and entrainment of host fish species, effects of the thermal effluent, and the entrainment of available food sources (trophic structure) for dowmiver populations.

Dredging and Sediment Contamination: The re-suspension of buried legacy sediment contamination and its transport downstream due to dredging and HNP operations may be a source of sediment contamination. The current dredging permit contains specific requirements to ensure the protection of aquatic species and repo11s demonstrate that actual dredging is approximately a third or less of the permitted limit of 44,424 cubic yards. The dredging footp1int and adjacent areas are poor habitat for mussels and is not included in the designation of critical habitat. The NRC believes that due to the small area subject to dredging and the actual amount of dredging is much lower than permitted ; the effects of dredging on Altamaha spinymussel through downstream effects and sediment suspension and redisposition would be insignificant or discountable.

Entrainment and Impingement of Host Fish Species: The entrainment and impingement of host fish species may adversely affect the early life stages of Altamaha spinymussel. HNP monitors fish entrainment and if the host species of the spinymussel was known, management efforts to reduce the potential of this impact could be made. SNC monitoring reports show that entrainment and impingement rates are low. The NRC states that since the host fish species of the Altamaha spinymussel is not known and the impingement and entrainment rates reported for the HNP are low, effects to Altamaha spinymussel are Hkely insignificant or discountable.

The1mal Effects: The thermal effluent could adversely affect the host species and the higher water temperatures can increase the sensitivity of mussels to certain pollutants. The U, S. Environmental Protection Agency administers the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (Nl>DES) permit for the discharge of combined process wastewaters, including tower blowdown, to the Altamaha River. This permit sets effluent limits for contaminant parameters but does not impose a maximum temperature limit on combined river discharge. The weekly monitoring of water temperature at the point of mixing is a requirement of the permit, along with quarterly reporting of discharge temperatures submitted to the State of Georgia. The water quality impact on the Altamaha River is also regulated in accordance with Georgia's Water Use Classifications and Water Quality Standards which states that receiving water temperatures are not to exceed 90°F and temperature of receiving waters is not to be increased more than 5°F above the intake temperature. The NRC modeled expected thermal conditions and extreme thermal conditions and evaluated the potential enviromnental impacts of operating HNP at the proposed minimum water level of 60.5 feet in the plant service water pump well The modeling showed that the calculated temperature difference between the discharge plume and ambient river teiliperature was 2.5°F or less at a distance of 140 feet downstream from the point of discharge, with a plume surface area of 0.05 acre and a plume cross-sectional

area three percent of the river cross-section. SNC states that the results of this modeling indicates that *the state and Federal limitations -regarding water quality criteria and thermal imp~cts to the Altamaha River continue to be satisfied under the proposed license amendment. The NRC states that it relies on the State of Georgia to regulate discharge, to monitor and permit the discharge to protect aquatic species and that any thermal effects to the Altamaha spinymussel and its host fish populations would be discountable.

Trophic Interactions: SNC states that the hydraulic entrainment before the proposed license amendment is 11 percent of the river flow passing the plant under minimum flow conditions and 11.5 percent with the license amend,ment. Since adult Altam.aha spinymussel filter phytoplankton, zooplank.ton, suspended bacteria, other microorganisms, particulates and dissolved organic matter from the water and assuming that potential food of the Altamaha spinymussel would be entrained and removed from the water at presumably the same rate as water, about 11 .5 percent of food sources would be removed.

NRC states that since the Service did not identify food as a limiting resource for adult mussels, the effect of entrainment of food of adult mussels is likely discountable. NRC also states that the benthic food sources that juvenile mussels rely on are not adversely affected by upstream entrainment and thus the effect of entraimnent of potential food on juvenile mussels is also discountable.

Critical Habitat: The Service designated critical habitat for the Altamaha spinymussel and excluded a stretch of the Altamaha River from U.S. Route One downstream to the State-owned property of Moody Forest (2. 7 km. (1. 7 mile)), which includes HNP. Due to the lack of designated critical habitat at HNP, the NRC finds no adverse effects to critical habitat.

We concur with your determination for the Altamaha spinymussel on the continued operation of HNP, including the license amendment. We believe that the requirements of section 7 of the ESA have been satisfied. However, obligations under section 7 of the ESA must be reconsidered if: (I) new infonnation reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered; (2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner which was not previously considered in this assessment; or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat determined that may be affected by the identified action.

We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If you have any further questions, please contact our Coastal Georgia Sub Office staff biologist, Gail Martinez, at 912-832-8739 extension 7.

Sincerely, Strant Colwell Coastal Georgia Supervisor

July 9, 2004 Dr. Roy E. Crabtree NOAA Fisheries Southeast Regional Office (SERO) 9721 Executive Center Drive North St. Petersburg, FL 33702

SUBJECT:

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. MC1172 AND MC1173)

Dear Dr. Crabtree:

On November 3, 2003, members of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff and representatives from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) met with you and your staff to discuss the status of the informal Section 7 review for the Hatch Nuclear Plant (HNP). The HNP is a two unit steam-electric plant located on the Altamaha River near Baxley, Georgia.

The NRC staff had submitted a Biological Assessment (BA) prepared in conjunction with the license renewal application for the HNP by letter dated August 31, 2000. The letter of transmittal and the BA requested NOAA Fisheries concurrence in the staffs assessment. The species of concern is the Federally protected endangered shortnose sturgeon, Acipenser brevirostrum. At the November 3, 2003, meeting your staff informed the NRC that the August 31, 2000, BA required revisions. Specifically, you requested that the BA consider the potential impact on shortnose sturgeon of periodic maintenance dredging in the river in the vicinity of the intake structure. The NRC and the USACE agreed at the meeting to collaborate in developing a revision to the August 31, 2000, BA addressing the issues raised by NOAA Fisheries. The NRC and the USACE agreed to submit the revised assessment to NOAA Fisheries by separate transmittal letter, each requesting concurrence on the conclusions contained in the revised BA. Your staff agreed with this approach.

Enclosed is the revised BA, dated June 2004. The revised BA includes recent data on shortnose sturgeon life history and habitat preferences. The staff believes that the extensive physical and biological data from the river in the vicinity of the plant, the well understood plant operating characteristics, and our more general understanding of shortnose sturgeon life history are sufficient to evaluate the impacts of the HNP on this species.

The staff has evaluated the potential for impact to the shortnose sturgeon from continued operation of the HNP. The staff specifically evaluated the potential impacts from impingement, entrainment, thermal effects, and periodic river maintenance dredging associated with continued plant operation. After reviewing the operating characteristics of the plant, the Altamaha River environment, shortnose sturgeon life history and the shortnose sturgeon data from the Altamaha River, the staff has concluded that HNP may affect, but that the effects would be discountable effects, and therefore, not likely to adversely affect the shortnose sturgeon. Consistent with Section 3.5 of the March 1998 Consultation Handbook, we request NOAA Fisheries concurrence with our conclusion.

R. Crabtree 2 The technical point of contact for this BA is Dr. Michael T. Masnik, who can be contacted at MTM2@NRC.GOV or 301-415-1191.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Pao-Tsin Kuo, Program Director License Renewal and Environmental Impacts Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos.: 50-321 and 50-366

Enclosure:

As stated

R. Crabtree 2 The technical point of contact for this BA is Dr. Michael T. Masnik, who can be contacted at MTM2@NRC.GOV or 301-415-1191.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Pao-Tsin Kuo, Program Director License Renewal and Environmental Impacts Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos.: 50-321 and 50-366

Enclosure:

As stated DISTRIBUTION:

RLEP/RF M. Masnik P.T. Kuo Accession no.: ML041910254 Document name: C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML041910254.wpd OFFICE RLEP:DRIP:PM RLEP:DRIP:LA OGC (NLO) RLEP:DRIP:SC RLEP:DRIP:PD w/comments NAME M. Masnik M. Jenkins B. Poole J.Tappert P.T. Kuo (SWest for)

DATE 7/7/04* 6/30/04* 7/6/04 6/28/04* 7/9/04 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE POTENTIAL IMPACT ON SHORTNOSE STURGEON RESULTING FROM CONTINUED OPERATION OF THE EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 July 2004

I. INTRODUCTION In November 1999, Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC), the licensee, prepared and submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) a Biological Information Update to address the impacts of continued operation of Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant (HNP) on the Altamaha River population of the Federally endangered shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum. The biological information update was utilized by the NRC to prepare the Hatch Biological Assessment under the Endangered Species Act for the Shortnose Sturgeon. The biological assessment (BA) was submitted to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - Fisheries (NOAA Fisheries) on August 31, 2000, in support of informal consultation conducted under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1969.

The informal consultation was prompted by the licensees request (SNC 2000a) to renew the operating licenses for the HNP for an additional 20 years. The NRC staff prepared, and issued in May 2001, a site-specific supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) entitled Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, Supplement 4, Regarding the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. The NRC staff concluded in the SEIS, consistent with its conclusions in the August 2000 BA, that operation of the HNP may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, the shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River. In February 2002, the NRC renewed the operating licenses for the HNP, Units 1 and 2 for an additional 20 years. The operating license for Unit 1 now extends through August 6, 2034, and the operating license for Unit 2 extends through June 13, 2038.

Based on discussions between the NRC, NOAA Fisheries and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, (NRC 2003) the August 2000 BA, originally developed for the HNP relicensing process, has been revised. This revision, which supersedes the August 2000 BA in its entirety, provides additional information on the shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River, and considers recent developments in the knowledge of shortnose sturgeon early life history, distribution, and behavior. The BA provides an assessment of continued plant operation on shortnose sturgeon, including periodic dredging in the vicinity of the intake. Dredging is conducted under the Corps of Engineers Maintenance Dredging Permit issued under Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1977.

2. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREA 2.1 General Plant Information The HNP is a steam-electric generating facility operated by SNC. HNP is located in Appling County, Georgia, at river kilometer (rkm) 180 (river mile[rm] 112), slightly southeast of the U.S.

Highway 1 crossing of the Altamaha River. It is approximately 18 km (11 mi) north of Baxley, Georgia; 158 km (98 mi) southeast of Macon, Georgia; 117 km (73 mi) northwest of Brunswick, Georgia; and 108 km (67 mi) southwest of Savannah, Georgia (Figures 1and 2).

Figure 1: Altamaha River Drainage Below the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Figure 2: Altamaha River Drainage Above the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant HNP is a two-unit nuclear plant. Each unit is equipped with a General Electric Nuclear Steam Supply System that utilizes a boiling-water reactor with a Mark I containment design. Both units are licensed for 2,763 megawatt-thermal (MW(t)). HNP uses a closed-loop cooling system for main condenser cooling that withdraws from and discharges to, the Altamaha River via a shoreline intake and offshore discharge structures. Descriptions of HNP can be found in documentation submitted to the NRC for the original operating license and subsequent license amendments. Georgia Power Company (GPC) submitted environmental reports for the construction stage and operating license stage for HNP in 1971 and 1975, respectively (GPC 1971, 1975). In 1972, the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)(1) issued a Final Environmental Statement (FES) for Units 1 and 2 (AEC 1972), and in 1978, NRC issued a FES for Unit 2 (NRC 1978). On October 13, 1974, the NRC issued an operating license for Unit 1 with an expiration date of August 6, 2014. On June 13, 1978, the NRC issued an operating license for Unit 2 with an expiration date of June 13, 2018.

By letter dated February 29, 2000, SNC submitted an application to the NRC to renew the operating licenses for HNP, Units 1 and 2, for an additional 20-year period (SNC 2000a). On January 15, 2002, after the completion of a safety review, an environmental review, inspections 1

Predecessor agency to the NRC.

of the facility, and an independent assessment by the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards the NRC renewed the licenses for HNP, Units 1 and 2, for an additional twenty years (NRC 2002). The current expiration dates for the Unit 1 and 2 operating licenses are August 6, 2034, and June 13, 2038, respectively.

The property at the HNP site totals approximately 907 hectares (ha) (2,240 ac) and is characterized by low, rolling sandy hills that are predominantly forested. The property includes approximately 364 ha (900 ac) north of the Altamaha River, on the other side of the river, in Toombs County and approximately 542 ha (1,340 ac) south of the river in Appling County. All industrial facilities associated with the site are located in Appling County. The restricted area, which comprises the reactors, containment buildings, switchyard, cooling tower area and associated facilities, is approximately 121 ha (300 ac). Approximately 648 ha (1,600 ac) are managed for timber production and wildlife habitat (NRC 2001).

2.2 Heat Dissipation System The excess heat produced by HNPs two nuclear units is absorbed by cooling water flowing through the condensers and the service water system. Main condenser cooling is provided by mechanical draft cooling towers. Each HNP circulating water system is a closed-loop cooling system that utilizes three cross-flow and one counter-flow mechanical-draft cooling towers for dissipating waste heat to the atmosphere.

For both Units 1 and 2, cooling tower makeup water is withdrawn from the Altamaha River through a single intake structure. The intake structure is located along the southern shoreline of the Altamaha River and is positioned so that water is available to the plant at both minimum flow and probable flood conditions. The main river channel (thalweg) is located closer to the northern shoreline on the opposite side of the river from the plant and its intake structure. The intake is approximately 46 m (150 ft) long, 18 m (60 ft) wide, and the roof of the intake structure is approximately 18 m (60 ft) above the water surface at normal river level. The water passage entrance is about 8.2 m (27 ft) wide and extends from 4.9 m (16 ft) below to 10 m (33 ft) above normal water levels. Large debris is removed by trash racks, while small debris is removed by vertical traveling screens with a 1 cm (3/8 inch) mesh. Water velocity through the intake screens is 0.6 meter per second (m/s) (1.9 feet per second [fps]) at normal river elevations and decreases at higher river flows (SNC 2000b). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued permit Number 940003893 under Section 404 of the Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act) of 1977 to support maintenance dredging in front of the HNP intake structure to remove accumulated sand, silt, and debris and ensure adequate water supply for plant operation. The specifics of this permit and the maintenance dredging process are discussed in detail in Section 2.4.

Water is returned to the Altamaha River via a submerged discharge structure that consists of two 1.1 m (42-inch) lines extending approximately 37 m (120 ft) out from the shore at an elevation of 16 m (54 ft) mean sea level. The point of discharge is approximately 384 m (1,260 ft) down-river from the intake structure and approximately 1.2 m (4 ft) below the surface when the river is at its lowest level. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit for HNP, issued by the Environmental Protection Division (EPD) of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GA DNR) in 1997 requires weekly monitoring of discharge temperatures, but does not stipulate a maximum discharge temperature or maximum temperature rise across the condenser. Maximum discharge temperatures measured at the mixing box, which are reported to EPD on a quarterly basis, range from 17EC (62EF) in winter to 34EC (94EF) in summer.

2.3 Surface Water Use The Altamaha River is the major source of water for the plant. Water is withdrawn from the river to provide cooling for certain once-through service water loads and makeup water to the cooling towers. SNC is permitted to withdraw a monthly average of up to 321 million liters per day (85 million gallons per day) or 3.8 cubic meters per second (m3/sec) (132 cubic feet per second [cfs])

with a maximum 24-hour rate of up to 392 million liters (103.6 million gallons). As a condition of this permit, SNC is required to monitor and report withdrawals. Historically, HNP withdraws an annual average of 216 million liters per day (57.18 million gallons per day) or 2.5 m 3/sec (88 cfs).

The U. S. Geological Survey maintains a gauging station (Number 02225000) on the right bank of the river 121 m (400 ft) downstream from the U.S. Highway 1 bridge, approximately 160 m (530 ft) upstream from HNP (NRC 2001). An analysis of surface water monthly stream flow statistics are provided in Appendix A. The mean of monthly stream flows for the Altamaha River at the Baxley, GA gauging station for the period 1971 through 2002 with discontinuous data as far back as 1949 ranges from 4,683 cfs in September to 24,620 cfs in March.

The evaluation of surface water use by SNC determined that the consumptive losses through evaporation from the HNP cooling towers would be approximately 57 percent of the total water withdrawn from the river (SNC 1997).

The thermal discharge plume in the Altamaha River at the HNP cooling water discharge has been modeled using the Motz-Benedict model for horizontal jet discharges. The predictive thermal plume model was field verified during 1980 following commencement of Unit 2 operation (Nichols and Holder 1981). Twelve thermal plume monitoring surveys were conducted during 1980 and compared to model predictions. During each of the twelve surveys, temperatures were taken at depths of 0.3 m (1 ft), 0.9 m (3 ft), and 1.5 m (5 ft). All temperatures measurements were made from a boat moving along a pre-selected transects in the river using a temperature probe and continuous recorder. Monitoring equipment was calibrated in the laboratory before each survey and rechecked in the field before and after each survey. The model predicted that the fully mixed excess temperature, under historical average summer conditions (average river flow of 85 m3/s [3000 cfs], and a plant )T of 2.6EC [4.7EF]), would be 0.05 EC (0.09EF). During the 1980 field surveys, during the period of lowest river flow (91 m3/s

[3220 cfs]), greatest cooling tower heat rejection, and a )T of 2.5EC (4.5EF), a fully mixed excess temperature of 0.03EC (0.05EF) was measured confirming the models predictions. The NRC modeled average expected thermal conditions and extreme thermal conditions under conservative assumptions in the Unit 2 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FES) (NRC 1978). In that environmental statement, the NRC noted the small size of the thermal plume even under the conservative assumptions, and concluded thermal blockage in the Altamaha River from the plant discharge was not possible.

To control biofouling of cooling system components such as condenser tubes and cooling towers, an oxidizing biocide (typically sodium hypochlorite or sodium bromide) is injected into the system as needed to maintain a concentration of free oxidant sufficient to kill most microbial organisms and algae. When the system is being treated, blowdown to the river is secured to prevent the discharge of residual oxidant into the river. After biocide addition, water is recirculated within the system until residual oxidant levels are below discharge limits specified in the NPDES permit.

2.4 Maintenance Dredging of Intake In order to ensure adequate depth of water at the HNP intake structure to provide a dependable water supply for continued plant operation, the river bottom in the area of the intake structure must be maintained to remove accumulated sand, silt, and debris. Periodic maintenance is performed by dredging with a hydraulic dredge, clamshell, or dragline. Permit Number 94003873 has been issued by the Savannah District - U. S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. The permit authorizes periodic maintenance dredging by hydraulic dredge, clamshell, or dragline for a ten year period.

Removed material is spoiled in an upland disposal area with no return of material to the river.

The permit contains numerous special conditions to ensure protection of aquatic habitat.

Special Conditions 1, 2, and 3 limit dredging to a specific time of the year (August 15 - November 31) and specifically prohibit dredging from December 1 through June 30 to ensure protection of anadromous fish. The permit also requires monitoring of dissolved oxygen (DO) during dredging and requires suspension of dredging operations if DO levels fall below 3.0 mg/L. The permit also specifies recordkeeping for each dredge event and reporting to the Corps of Engineers. The licensee has dredged the area in front of the HNP intake structure 13 times since 1983. The last time the area was dredged was October 2001.

HNP routinely conducts surveys of the river bottom in front of the intake structure to evaluate the need for dredging. Recently, HNP applied for a permit modification to support a change in the size and shape of the dredge footprint. This modification was based on hydraulic engineering studies that indicated removal of the upstream sandbar area would enhance natural scouring properties of the river and ultimately reduce the amount of dredging required to maintain the intake structure. This permit modification is currently under consideration by the Savannah District Corps of Engineers. The requested modification proposes an increase in the current L-shaped profile to a larger L-shaped profile. The increase in profile size produces a maximum increase of 6,553 m3 (8,571 yd3) in the amount of material removed during each dredging event to maintain the footprint. The increase in profile size is recommended as a mechanism to reduce the frequency of dredging by making the profile more amenable to natural flushing during high flow events. SNC states that removal of material on the upstream side of the current footprint will expose the area near the intake structure to the effects of high flows and naturally flushing of accumulated material. Less frequent dredging provides an economic benefit to the plant and also benefits the environment by disturbing the river habitat less often. The increase in profile size does not have any relationship to the amount of water withdrawn by HNP. No changes in the withdrawal, discharge, or treatment of water are associated with the modification request. The primary purpose of maintenance dredging at HNP is to ensure adequate water depth for the river water intake pumps and to minimize the amount of silt entrained by pump operation. The proposed modification will support the required dredging on a less frequent basis. Conditions contained in the permit to protect the environment, as described above, would be required by the revised permit.

3. STATUS REVIEW OF SHORTNOSE STURGEON 3.1 Life History The shortnose sturgeon, Acipenser brevirostrum, is a member of the family Acipenseridae, a long-lived group of ancient anadromous and freshwater fishes. The species is currently known by at least 19 distinct populations inhabiting Atlantic coast rivers from New Brunswick, Canada to northern Florida (NMFS 1998). Most shortnose sturgeon populations have their greatest abundance in the estuary portion of their respective river (Weber 1996). The species is Federally protected throughout its range.

The distribution of shortnose sturgeon strongly overlaps that of the Atlantic sturgeon, Acipenser oxyrhinchus, but life histories differ greatly between the two species. The Atlantic sturgeon is truly anadromous with adults and older juveniles spending large portions of their lives at sea.

Shortnose sturgeon, however, are restricted to their natal streams. Evidence of inter-riverine movement of individuals by way of the Atlantic Ocean is highly speculative and populations seem to be isolated in each river system that supports a population. (Rogers and Weber 1995; Flournoy et al. 1992).

Seasonal migration patterns and some aspects of spawning may be partially dependent on latitude. In northern rivers, shortnose sturgeon move to the estuarine portion of rivers in the summer months. In southern rivers, movement to estuaries usually occurs in winter (NMFS 1998). Shortnose sturgeon spawn in freshwater like the Atlantic sturgeon, but then return to the estuaries and spend much of their lives near the fresh water/salt water interface. Fresh tidewaters and oligohaline areas serve as nurseries for shortnose sturgeon (Flournoy et al.

1992). There is some indication that populations of shortnose sturgeon in a river may be limited by the availability of spawning and rearing habitats (Weber 1996).

Shortnose sturgeon eggs are demersal and adhesive after fertilization, sinking quickly and adhering to sticks, stones, gravel, and rubble on the stream bottom. E. Parker,(2) based on unpublished laboratory behavioral studies on shortnose sturgeon larvae, found that the yoke-sack larvae spend about five days in gravel after hatching. After 5 days the larvae become positively phototrophic and enter the water column. They remain in the water column for approximately one week. They are actively feeding during this semi-planktonic phase. After about a week, they again become closely associated with the bottom. Based on the results of Parkers work, it is this one week period that the larvae would be in the water column, moving downstream as a result of the semi-planktonic behavior, and presumably would be subject to entrainment.

Parker E., et al. (unpublished ms.) conducted a laboratory study to determine substrate preference and water velocity preference of post-larval year-0 shortnose sturgeon. The species preferred fast water over a sand substrate and individuals were negatively phototrophic.

Shortnose sturgeon exhibit faster growth in southern rivers, but will reach larger adult size in northern rivers (NMFS 1998). Thus, shortnose sturgeon will reach sexual maturity (45-55 cm fork length, [Weber 1996]) at a younger age in southern rivers. Spawning by individual fish may 2

Personnal communication with Erika Parker, University of Massachusetts. August 13, 2003.

only occur at intervals with frequencies of a few to several years. Dadswell, et al. (1984) composed a detailed summary of the known biology of shortnose sturgeon.

Rivers of the deep south are thought to be on the edge of the natural range of the shortnose sturgeon and present somewhat unique problems for the species. A commonly held theory is that sturgeon, originally thought to be a freshwater northern species, gradually adapted to spending time in the marine environment and that the end of the last ice age trapped many populations of anadromous sturgeon in southern rivers with a gradually warming environment.

The theory proposes that, shortnose sturgeon are present in southern Atlantic coastal rivers as relic populations that are severely heat stressed in the summer and close to extinction. Activities by man, habitat destruction, overfishing and water quality degradation have further stressed the species. It has been suggested that the populations of southern shortnose sturgeon are restricted to deep spring-fed refugia, with many individuals crowded into a small cool area of the river. Within this thermal refugia, they eat everything available and then no longer feed when the food supply is depleted. The sturgeon are confined to this refugia by the high water temperatures found in the main stem of the river (Flournoy et al. 1992). Sulak et al.

(unpublished ms), devised a study to test these hypotheses for Gulf sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrhinchus desotoi). A summer aggregation of adult Gulf sturgeon were found in the Suwannee River. The researchers determined that the cold water refugia did not exist, and mixing of nearby spring flow was quick and complete. There was no significant depletion of benthos in the vicinity of the aggregation by the end of summer, the fish appear to move in and out of the areas of concentration, and they are not inactive. This study seems to refute the cold spring-fed refugia theory. The aggregation of Gulf sturgeon in the deep holes with low river water velocity may be as simple as sturgeon wanting to inhabit the deep water with reduced current where they do not have to expend much energy. This hypothesis may be applicable to the shortnose sturgeon as well. Therefore the old hypothesis of fish seeking out deep holes in the lower reaches of the rivers may be still true, but for a different reason, not to escape the elevated summer temperatures at the expense of feeding.

A life history that restricts the species to individual drainages, combined with seasonally restricted use of habitats, may be directly related to the species current endangered status.

Sturgeon have long been commercially important species, which may be a leading cause in their rapid decline worldwide. For more than a century, Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon populations were subjected to extensive fishing, likely contributing to the massive population declines along the east coast (NMFS 1998). Prior to 1900, sturgeon catches were averaging over 3.0 million kg per annum, but this harvest was sustained for less than a decade. Prior to the closure of most east coast fisheries during the 1980s, catches had decreased to less than 1% of historical levels (Rogers et al. 1994).

Although the shortnose sturgeon was severely overharvested in the past, the greatest threats to the survival of the species include barriers to its spawning grounds created by dams, loss of habitat, poor water quality, poaching, and incidental capture in gill net and trawl fisheries targeting other species (Rogers and Weber 1995; Rogers et al. 1994). Shortnose sturgeon was listed as endangered in 1967 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In 1974, the National Marine Fisheries Service reconfirmed this decision under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Rogers and Weber 1995; NMFS 1998).

3.2 Status of Shortnose Sturgeon in the Altamaha River The Altamaha River watershed is one of the three largest river basins on the Atlantic Seaboard.

The Altamaha River is located entirely within the state of Georgia. It flows over 800 km (497 mi) from its headwaters to the Atlantic Ocean. The main body of the Altamaha is formed by the confluence of the Oconee and Ocmulgee rivers in the central coastal plain at Altamaha rkm 212 (132 rm) (Rogers and Weber 1995).

The incidences of catch and overharvest of sturgeon from Georgia rivers paralleled the trends of other states. From 1888 through 1892, sturgeon catches in Georgia averaged 71,000 kg per annum (157,000 lbs/yr) (Smith 1985). As recently as 49 years ago, a dealer in Savannah, Georgia was shipping 4,500 kg (10,000 lbs) of carcasses per week (6,500 kg [14,500 lbs] in the round) during the peak three to five weeks of the spring run (Smith 1985). Similar harvests were recorded from the Altamaha River (Flournoy et al. 1992).

Catch rate data for sturgeon in Georgia show a major declines from historic levels. In 1880, an average seasonal catch was 100 fish per net. During a 20-year period from the late 1950s through the late 1970s, net fishermen in the lower Altamaha River caught just 1.1 to 3.2 fish per net per season (Essig 1984, as presented in Flournoy et al. 1992). These data indicate a 97-99% decline in the sturgeon fishery (Flournoy et al. 1992).

There is a continuing high demand for sturgeon roe and flesh. From 1962 to 1994 the source of the majority of sturgeon catches has shifted among the Savannah, Ogeechee, and Altamaha Rivers. The Altamaha River has been the focus of a much-throttled fishery from 1982 to present. Certain recent events have kept prices for sturgeon products high or rising, fueling commercial fisheries and some poaching (Rogers et al. 1994). Some of these events were an increasing U.S. domestic demand for all seafood products, decreased supplies of sturgeon products as fisheries closed in the U.S., and sturgeon stocks worldwide were becoming more depleted by overharvesting and habitat degradation, particularly in the republics of the former Soviet Union (Rogers et al. 1994).

The Altamaha River population of shortnose sturgeon has been the focus of much recent research to assess abundance and distribution, determine migration patterns, and describe habitat utilization. Some authors suggested the Altamaha River population of shortnose sturgeon was in better shape than the population in the Savannah River, Georgia-South Carolina (Rogers et al. 1994). Another study indicated shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River may be experiencing lower juvenile mortality rates than in the Ogeechee River, Georgia (Weber 1996).

The Shortnose Sturgeon Recovery Team indicated that the Altamaha River population was the largest and most viable population south of Cape Hatteras, North Carolina (NMFS 1998).

Relative abundance data from one sampling station during 1986-1991 appear to demonstrate a relatively stable population with little trend in the abundance of juveniles (Flournoy et al. 1992).

Telemetry studies have revealed much information about the seasonal migrations of shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River and the importance of certain habitats. During summer in the Altamaha River, most fish ages 1+ and older are concentrated at or just upstream of the fresh/salt water interface. Cooling water temperatures in the fall spur a movement of all sizes of fish to generally more saline waters. Some adult and most large juvenile fish move back to fresh tidewater near the end of autumn to overwinter with little movement or activity. In preparation for spawning in late winter-early spring, some adults will move upstream to locations near spawning sites. It is believed that spawning occurs during the February to March time frame (Rogers et al.

1994). The majority of adults and a few large juveniles remain in oligohaline waters, near the fresh/salt water interface, and may be very active (Rogers and Weber 1995).

Shortnose sturgeon are suspected to spawn in two reaches of the Altamaha River system. A suspected spawning area is defined as a section of river in which fish in spawning condition (both males and females present, female fish ripe with eggs) have been found, but actual spawning has not been visually observed nor has the presence of fertilized eggs been documented.(3) One area is a 70-km (43-mi) section of the Altamaha River centered about Doctortown, Georgia (Rogers and Weber 1995). Doctortown, Georgia is located at RK 72 (RM

45) some 108 km (67 mi) downstream of the HNP site.

A second spawning area has also been suspected in the lower Ocmulgee River, which is several kilometers upstream of the shoals marking the transition to the upper coastal plain. Heidt and Gilbert (1978) reported the collection of two male shortnose sturgeon and, in February, a female shortnose sturgeon ripe with eggs from the lower Ocmulgee River. This reach is about 40 rkm (25 river mi) upstream of HNP. They also reported collecting in February a ripe female at rkm 185.9 (rm 115.5) approximately 6 rkm (3.7 rm) upstream of HNP. Recent discussions with Dr.

Doug Peterson(4), a Professor at the University of Georgia currently conducting a study entitled Population Dynamics and Critical Habitats of Shortnose Sturgeon in the Altamaha River for the NOAA Fisheries, indicate that there is no data that conclusively demonstrates the location of active spawning sites used by shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha or Ocmulgee Rivers.

In addition, discussions with Mr. Jimmy Evans(5), Fisheries Biologist with the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, confirm that no data exist to support the viability of the Ocmulgee site.

However, it is likely that there was and still is suitable spawning habitat for sturgeon in the Altamaha River above HNP since a single larva of the genus Acipenser was collected by the licensee in the early 1970s during the preoperational larval drift study for the plant. Identification of the collected larva to species was not possible. A map indicating the suspected two spawning areas in relation to HNP is provided as Figures 1 and 2.

Based on historical data there appear to be at least two potential spawning areas in the Altamaha River system that are suitable for sturgeon: the lower spawning area near Doctortown, GA, and an upper spawning area, located some distance upstream of HNP. Suspected spawning areas in the Altamaha River system are thought to be adjacent to river bluffs with gravel, cobble, or hard rock substrate (Rogers et al. 1994).

Shortnose sturgeon, especially juveniles, appear severely restricted to certain habitats near the fresh/salt water interface of the lower Altamaha River. During summers when the water temperature exceeds 28EC (82EF), the fish are further restricted to a few deep holes near the interface. Recaptures of tagged fish indicate that the fish move little and lose weight during this time, which indicates the oversummering habitat is very important, and that food resources may 3

Personnal communication with Gordon Rogers, Satilla Management Associates, May 7, 2003.

4 Personnal communication with Douglas Peterson, University of Georgia, May 7, 2004.

5 Personnal communication with Jimmy Evans, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, December 9, 2003.

be quickly exhausted (Flournoy et al. 1992) or the fish may not be feeding. Flournoy, et al.

(1992) proposed that shortnose sturgeon were using a few deep holes in the lower Altamaha as physiological refuges, and that these holes may constitute critical habitat. They further hypothesized that the Altamaha River population of shortnose sturgeon existed only because the physiological refugia were available.

Previous research has shown that shortnose sturgeon, ages one year and older, aggregate in the Altamaha River at or just upstream of the fresh/saltwater interface during the summer.

These fish appear to move downstream into more saline water at the end of summer. During late fall and early winter, movement to less saline water occurs and some adults may move upstream toward spawning areas. Spawning is thought to occur during February through March.

Some spawning fish move downstream immediately, while others remain upstream (Rogers and Weber 1995).

The Shortnose Sturgeon Recovery Team has identified numerous factors that may affect the continued survival and potential recovery of the species. Some of these factors may be habitat degradation or loss from dams, bridge construction, channel dredging, and pollutant discharges, as well as mortality from cooling water intake systems, dredging, and incidental capture in other fisheries (NMFS 1998). Evidence of illegal directed takes of shortnose sturgeon in South Carolina indicate that poaching may also be a significant source of mortality (Weber 1996).

All of the above factors may contribute to mortality in shortnose sturgeon populations, and the significance of each may vary with latitude and individual circumstances. However, the prevailing evidence seems to indicate, at least for the Altamaha River, that the primary threats to the population are commercial harvesting, poaching, and possibly limited oversummering habitat. Dahlberg and Scott (1971) recognized that shortnose sturgeon were often caught in gill nets by shad fishermen in the Altamaha River. The threat of bycatch remains real, as many of the individual shortnose sturgeon used in recent studies were captured or recaptured with shad fishing gear. Rogers, et al. (1994) stated that at least one of their tagged fish released in the estuary was captured in commercial shad gear, and six of the 36 individuals telemetered were initially collected with shad gear. Even if the fish are recognized as protected shortnose sturgeon and returned to the river, the capture may result in abandonment of spawning activity (Weber 1996) or death.

The Altamaha River population of shortnose sturgeon may be healthier than the Savannah River population (Rogers and Weber 1995). Both rivers have discharges of similar magnitude and neither is dammed below the fall line. Both the Savannah and Altamaha are moderately industrialized, including paper mills and nuclear generating stations along their reaches from the fall line to the coast. Only the Savannah, however, is heavily altered and industrialized in its estuarine zone (Rogers et al. 1994).

3.3 Impact Assessment of HNP on the Shortnose Sturgeon Population Operation of the HNP has the potential to impact the shortnose sturgeon population in the Altamaha River. Impingement of young and adults, entrainment of larva, disruption of intra-river movement through dredging and the discharge of heated effluents all have the potential to impact the species.

3.3.1 Impingement The impingement of healthy juvenile and adult shortnose sturgeon on the intake trash racks or traveling screens of nuclear plants has not been a concern throughout the range of the species.

Although occasional impinged shortnose sturgeon are reported from other nuclear plants, those plants are of once-through cooling design and located in the reach of the river where large aggregations of shortnose sturgeon are known to exist. Often, specimens that are taken on the trash racks or traveling screens are injured or weakened individuals. Typically this bottom oriented species with a preference for deep water makes interaction with a shoreline intake structure unlikely. Also the preference of adults and juvenile shortnose sturgeon for high velocity water suggests that escape by healthy fish from the surface of the intake is likely. Under normal flow and pumping conditions the velocity of water through the HNP intake structure is 0.6 m/s (1.9 fps). The measured range of intake velocities was from 0.09 to 0.8 m/s (0.3 to 2.7 fps)

(SNC 2000b).

The intake structure was constructed flush with the shallow, southern shoreline of the Altamaha River. The deep river channel (thalweg) hugs the northern bank opposite of the intake structure.

Literature indicates that shortnose sturgeon migrate along the bottom of river channels, often seeking the deepest water available. This behavior and the cooling water intake location on the shoreline opposite the river channel should minimize the probability of juvenile and adult shortnose sturgeon encountering the intake structure. The plant and intake structure are also located in a reach of the Altamaha River where large aggregations of shortnose sturgeon are not known to occur. Shortnose sturgeon in the vicinity of the plant would likely be individuals migrating between up- and down-river.

During the preoperational surveys, conducted as part of the initial licensing of HNP, one adult shortnose sturgeon was collected by gill net on March 13, 1974, in the vicinity of HNP. Two additional juvenile specimens of Acipenser sp. were collected but could not be identified to species (NRC 1978).

Impingement data, taken from the HNP intake once the station began operation, are available for five years, including 1975, 1976, 1977, 1979, and 1980. Impingement samples include weekly samples in 1975, 1976, and 1977 and monthly samples for 1979 and 1980. Each sample represents impingement for at least a 24-hour period. A total of 165 fish representing 22 species were collected. The data indicate low impingement estimates per day and per year.

The 1975 estimates are 1.2 fish per day and 438 per year; 1976 estimates are 0.4 fish per day and 146 per year; 1977 estimates are 1.1 fish per day and 401.5 per year; 1979 estimates are 1.3 fish per day and 474.5 per year; and 1980 estimates are 1.2 fish per day and 438 per year.

The hogchoker, Trinectes maculatus, was the most abundant and the only species collected consistently each year. Most species were collected only once during the five years. No sturgeon were collected in impingement samples during five years of sampling. In addition, no adult sturgeon has been reported impinged by the intake structure since HNP began operation.

Impingement effects are also a function of withdrawal rates, which are reduced for facilities with closed cycle cooling systems in comparison to once through cooling systems. HNP is operated using mechanical draft cooling towers for cooling. Cooling towers have been suggested as mitigative measures to reduce known or predicted impingement losses (see, for example, Barnthouse and Van Winkle 1988). EPA has endorsed closed cycle cooling towers as the best available technology for minimizing impingement mortality (Barnthouse et al. 1988). The relatively small volumes of makeup and blowdown water needed for closed-cycle cooling systems result in concomitantly low impingement rates. In the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (GEIS) (NRC 1996), the staff noted that studies of intake and discharge effects of closed-cycle cooling systems have generally judged the impacts to be insignificant.

Both the design of the plant (location, shoreline intake, closed cycle cooling) and the behavioral characteristics of juvenile and adult shortnose sturgeon lead to the conclusion that impingement of healthy adult and juvenile fish unlikely. This conclusion is supported by the results of the above described impingement study as well as the lack of any reported impingement events involving shortnose sturgeon since both Units 1 and 2 began operation in the latter half of the 1970s.

3.3.2 Entrainment Available literature suggests there is little opportunity for shortnose sturgeon eggs or larvae to be entrained in the cooling water intakes at HNP. One of the suspected spawning areas for shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River is well downstream of HNP. Eggs and larvae from the downstream Doctortown, Georgia, spawning site are not available for entrainment by HNP.

Spawning upstream of the site has been suspected but no evidence of actual spawning by shortnose sturgeon has been found except for a single larval specimen of the genus Acipenser collected during drift sampling in the 1970s. Identification of the specimen to species was not possible so we are unable to conclude that upstream spawning of shortnose sturgeon currently occurs or does not occur. It is likely that the specimen was a Atlantic sturgeon, Acipenser oxyrhinchus, the more common species.

Should future studies determine in fact that spawning of shortnose sturgeon occurs in the lower Ocmulgee River, upstream of HNP, the staff does not believe that continued operation of the plant is significantly affecting the species. As was stated, fertilized shortnose sturgeon eggs sink quickly and adhere tightly to rough substrates, even under high flow conditions. Eggs therefore are not subject to entrainment by HNP. Shortnose sturgeon larvae initially seek bottom cover quickly upon hatching and seldom stray from cover for the first five days. After five days the larva become positively phototrophic and enter the water column and float downstream for about a week. It is this semi-planktonic phase of the sturgeon life cycle that is vulnerable to plant induced mortality. Any larvae that become entrained into the cooling water flow would experience 100 percent mortality.

Factors that effect entrainment of the semi-planktonic larvae are density and distribution of the organisms in the water column in the vicinity of the intake, the location and design of the intake structure, and the amount of water withdrawn by the plant.

Little is known about the distribution in the water column of shortnose sturgeon larvae during this planktonic phase. We know that the larvae seem to be positively phototropic so they are probably up off the bottom and actively feeding. It is unknown if they prefer the slack water areas or attempt to remain in the thalweg. If they prefer the swift deep channel then they would be preferentially excluded from entrainment into the intake because the swifter water is in the far side of the river from the intake structure. If they prefer areas of lower velocity typical of the river near the intake it is unlikely that many larvae would be present since the suspected upper spawning grounds are some 40 km (25 rm) upstream and there are many backwaters and areas of slack current for the larvae to inhabit between that area and the plant site during their semi-planktonic life stage. It would not be expected that a large number of larvae would preferentially seek out slack water in the vicinity of the site over other slack water areas between the suspected spawning grounds and the HNP.

If we assume that the larvae are evenly distributed throughout the water column the loss would also be inconsequential. Spawning of shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River is thought to occur during February through March. A comparison of Altamaha River flows for the months of February, March, and April from 1971 to 2002 to the annual daily average HNP water withdrawal rate is presented in table 1. Both the average flow in m3/sec (cfs) and the percent of that flow withdrawn by HNP, assuming a withdrawal rate of 2.5 m3/sec (88 cfs), is given for each month for historical average, maximum, and minimum flow rates.

Table 1. Percent Water Withdrawal from the Altamaha River by HNP Two unit Operation at 100 Percent Power for the Months of February, March, and April1 February March April Mean flow2 626 m3/sec 697 m3/sec 526 m3/sec (22,110 cfs) (24,620 cfs) (18,590 cfs)

(0.4%) (0.4%) (0.5%)

Max flow3 1710 m3/sec 1845 m3/sec 1174 m3/sec (60,419 cfs) (65,210 cfs) (41,490 cfs)

(0.1%) (0.1%) (0.2%)

Min flow4 136 m3/sec 226 m3/sec 159 m3/sec (4,803 cfs) (7,977 cfs) (5,635 cfs)

(2%) (1%) (2%)

Stream flow data from USGS 2004

1) Assumes an average plant withdrawal rate of 2.5 m3/sec (88 cfs)

2) The mean of monthly mean stream flows in m3/sec (cfs) from available data from 1950 to 2002

3) The maximum monthly mean stream flow in m3/sec (cfs) from available data from 1950 to 2002

4) The minimum monthly mean stream flow in m3/sec (cfs) from available data from 1950 to 2002 Based on the stream flow analysis, HNP withdraws about 2% of the river flow under extreme low flow conditions during the period of time that shortnose sturgeon larvae may be drifting by the plant and vulnerable to impingement. Typically it is 0.5 percent or less of the flow. Assuming a uniform distribution within the water column, few, if any, larvae would be impinged in any given cohort.

The paucity of shortnose sturgeon larvae, and for that matter any entrainable fish larvae, in the vicinity of HNP was confirmed by both preoperational studies and postoperational entrainment sampling. Preoperational drift surveys where conducted weekly from February through May in 1973, and every 6 weeks June through December 1973. Samples were collected at four quadrants from transects above and below the plant intake and two locations close to the plant intake. Typical sample sets consisted of 14 individual samples from 15-minute collections.

Drifting organisms were collected with a one-meter diameter 000-mesh nylon plankton net, set 6-12 inches above the river bottom. Samples were washed into a quart container and preserved with formalin.

Cataostomids, cyprindis, and centrarchids were the dominant ichthyoplankton families collected.

Commercially important fish in these collections included American shad, Alosa sapidissima, eggs, with mean densities approaching 0.3 per 1000 m3 in March. American shad larvae were present in drift samples from May through June, with the density never exceeding 0.03 individuals per 1000 m3. A sturgeon larva was collected during this sampling and sent to Dr. Donald Scott for identification of species, but could not be identified beyond the genus Acipenser. This is the only record of larval sturgeon found in the vicinity of HNP.

Entrainment samples at HNP were collected for the years 1975, 1976, and 1980 following unit startup. Samples were collected weekly during 1975 and 1976, and monthly in 1980 (Bain and Nack 1995). Additional ichthyological drift data are available for 1974 (weekly collection) and 1979 (monthly collection), but were not used in summarizing entrainment rates. Monthly entrainment data for each taxa for 1975, 1976 represent entrainment estimates for Unit 1 operation. The 1980 data include entrainment estimates for Unit 1 and Unit 2 operation. There was no increase in fish eggs and larvae entrainment at HNP with both units operating. The differences in numbers of fish eggs and larvae reported in the studies are due to differences in species abundance from year to year, spawning activity upstream from the plant, river discharge, and time of year. No sturgeon larvae were found in any entrainment samples collected during operational monitoring.

Entrainment effects are a function of withdrawal rates, which are reduced for facilities with closed cycle cooling systems in comparison to once through cooling systems. HNP is operated using mechanical draft cooling towers for cooling. Cooling towers have been suggested as mitigative measures to reduce known or predicted entrainment losses (see, for example, Barnthouse and Van Winkle 1988). EPA has endorsed closed cycle cooling towers as the best available technology for minimizing entrainment mortality (Barnthouse et al. 1988). The relatively small volumes of makeup and blowdown water needed for closed-cycle cooling systems result in concomitantly low entrainment rates. In the GEIS for license renewal (NRC 1996), the staff noted that studies of intake and discharge effects of closed-cycle cooling systems have generally judged the impacts to be insignificant.

The design and location of the plant (shoreline intake on the opposite side of the thalweg, closed cycle cooling, and the plant not located in any known spawning areas) and the lack of a confirmed upstream spawning grounds leads the staff to conclude that the site has a very low potential for entrainment of shortnose sturgeon larvae. Even if upstream spawning areas for shortnose sturgeon are identified, the staff believes that the impact would still be inconsequential because of the location of the intake structure and the very low withdrawal rates of HNP during and immediately after the suspected spawning period in the Altamaha River. This conclusion is supported by the results of the entrainment sampling study.

3.3.3 Thermal Related Impacts Operation of steam electric power facilities results in the release of waste heat. Typically that heat is dumped into a nearby watercourse (once-through cooling) or into the atmosphere by evaporative cooling (closed-cycle cooling). HNP utilizes closed-cycle cooling and disposes most of its waste heat into the atmosphere. However, to maintain water quality in the circulating water system a portion of the heated water that is circulated between the plant and the cooling tower is discharged to the Altamaha River. This discharge is commonly referred to as blowdown. The waste heat discharged to the river is of concern because, depending on the volume relative to the river, and the rise in temperature of the discharged water over the ambient river water, the discharge could have adverse effects on aquatic life. Approximately one half of the water withdrawn from the Altamaha River by the HNP is evaporated and not returned to the river as blowdown. With respect to the shortnose sturgeon the concern is that the heated blowdown could cause a thermal blockage across the river limiting or eliminating upstream and downstream migrations. As stated in Section 2.3 above, thermal modeling of the discharge demonstrated that thermal blockage of the river will not occur. The area of temperature rise in the river of a few degrees is limited to a small area just below the outfall even during low flow conditions. Therefore, the staff concludes that thermal discharges from the plant will not adversely affect the migration of shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River.

3.3.4 Dredging Related Impacts Periodic dredging of riverine habitat has the potential for adversely affecting shortnose sturgeon in a number of different ways, such as entrainment of juveniles or adults in hydraulic dredging operations, physical damage to individuals during clamshell or dragline operations, and burial of juveniles. Additionally the potential exists to adversely affect the species particularly if dredging is conducted on habitat that is critical to the species (i.e. feeding or spawning areas) or during periods when intra-riverine migrations are occurring. Dredging of seasonal aggregational sites may also be harmful to the species. Also, dredging during the spawning migration may also be harmful by discouraging or preventing fish from reaching the spawning grounds.

Based on the known life history of the species and telemetry data from the Altamaha River population, the older fish congregate at or just upstream of the fresh/saltwater interface significantly downstream of HNP during the summer months. Cooling temperatures in the fall result in fish moving towards the ocean. The Doctorville, Georgia suspected spawning site is some 108 river kilometers (67 rivermiles) downstream of HNP and would not be affected by dredging. A second spawning site is suspected, but is upstream of HNP, and would be unaffected by dredging. There is the possibility that if an upstream spawning site is utilized by shortnose sturgeon that dredging operations at HNP could discourage upstream migration of adults to the spawning grounds during the early spring spawning migration.

The area in front of the HNP intake does not appear to be habitat critical to the existence of the species. Extensive sampling in the vicinity of the station has not indicated that significant numbers of adults or juveniles use this stretch of the river. The bottom consists primarily of accumulated sand deposits that shift constantly with changes in river flow.

Although dredging in front of the intake structure is not expected to impact habitat critical to the existence of the species, the permit that authorizes periodic maintenance dredging contains numerous special conditions to ensure protection of aquatic habitat. These conditions are currently specified by the existing permit and will continue to be required whether or not the requested revision to the permit for the expanded dredging footprint is approved by the U.S.

Corps of Engineers. Special Conditions 1, 2, and 3 of the Corps of Engineers Dredging Permit Number 94003873 limit dredging to a specific time of the year (August 15 -November 31) and specifically prohibit dredging from December 1 through June 30 to ensure protection of anadromous fish, including shortnose sturgeon. This prohibition would eliminate the potential for dredging operations to affect the upstream spawning migration of adults and the downstream movement of larva. Additionally, the permit has the following restriction: Each time the hydraulic dredge pipeline is cleared, the dredge cutterhead shall be removed from the river bottom, promptly lifted to near the surface and kept as close to the surface as practicable while water is pumped for pipeline cleaning. By raising the cutterhead to the surface prior to cleaning, the potential impact to juvenile shortnose sturgeon and other bottom dwelling fish is minimized.

The permit also requires monitoring of dissolved oxygen (DO) during dredging and requires suspension of dredging operations if dissolved oxygen levels fall below 3.0 mg/L. The permit specifies recordkeeping for each dredge event and reporting to the Corps of Engineers. In the past, dredging at HNP has been conducted during the time of the year that shortnose sturgeon are not spawning and are thought to inhabit the in the lower reaches of the Altamaha River near the fresh/saltwater interface. Limiting the time of year that dredging can occur to protect the shortnose sturgeon is consistent with other consultations with NOAA Fisheries. For example, the 1992 Biological Opinion (BO) (NMFS 1992), issued to the Army Corps of Engineers, for maintenance dredging the channel in the Connecticut River from the mouth in Long Island Sound to river kilometer 85 (river mile 53) restricted dredging to about 7.5 months a year. Other restrictions in the BO placed prohibitions on the location for the disposal of spoils and the type of dredging equipment that could be employed by the Corps. The Connecticut River has one of the largest shortnose sturgeon populations of any U.S. river.

The combination of the lack of habitat critical to the shortnose sturgeon in the vicinity of the intake and the limitations placed on the licensee by the Corps of Engineers permit (prohibiting dredging from December 31 to June 30, cutterhead restrictions, no in-river disposal of dredged materials, recordkeeping and periodic monitoring of DO during dredging) assure that the species will not be adversely affected by HNP dredging.

3.4 Comparison with other power generation facilities The staff has performed an assessment (Masnik and Wilson 1980) of the potential impact of the operation of the Delaware River nuclear power plants, Salem 1 and 2 (once-through) and Hope Creek 1 (closed cycle) on shortnose sturgeon, and concluded that plant operation was unlikely to adversely affect shortnose sturgeon. This conclusion was based on a combination of life history information, plant siting considerations, and engineering design to mitigate potential adverse impacts (Masnik and Wilson 1980).

The Hudson River, New York, supports a large sturgeon population including both the shortnose and Atlantic. There are six fossil-fueled and one nuclear electricity generating stations located along the Hudson River, and much research has been conducted to address impingement and entrainment concerns. Results for entrainment and impingement at the power generation facilities Bowline, Indian Point, and Roseton have been recently summarized for the period from 1972 through 1998 (CHGE 1999). These three facilities withdraw 62% of the maximum permitted water withdrawal from this reach of the Hudson River. Bowline Units 1 and 2 are two fossil fuel steam electric plants with combined capacity of 1200 MW(e) and utilize an intake structure located on an embayment off of the Hudson River. The maximum pumping rate is 384,000 gpm. Indian Point Units 2 and 3 are separate pressurized water reactors with combined capacity of 2042 megawatts electric (MW(e)) utilizing two separate shoreline intake structures.

Predicted condenser cooling water flow rates are 840,000 gpm and 870,000 gpm for Indian Point Units 2 and 3, respectively. Roseton is a two-unit fossil-fueled steam electric plant with combined capacity of 1248 MW(e) and utilizes a shoreline intake structure. Maximum pumping rate is 641,000 gpm. Unlike HNP, all three of these facilities use once-through cooling. For comparison, the maximum pumping rate for HNP is 72,000 gpm. The GEIS for license renewal (NRC 1996) notes that Water withdrawal from adjacent bodies of water for plants with closed-cycle cooling systems is 5 to 10 percent of that for plants with once-through cooling systems, with much of this water being used for makeup of water by evaporation. The operation of the HNP cooling system is consistent with this description.

One of the environmental impacts identified for the three facilities on the Hudson River is entrainment and impingement of aquatic organisms, including striped bass, Morone saxatilis, white perch, Morone americana, Atlantic tomcod, Microgadus tomcod, American shad, bay anchovy, Anchoa mitchilli, alewife, Alosa pseudoharengus, blueback herring, Alosa aestivalis, and spottail shiner, Notropis hudsonius. Other species were considered, including Atlantic sturgeon and shortnose sturgeon. No shortnose sturgeon eggs or larvae were collected in entrainment samples for these facilities over periods ranging from 5 to 14 years. As a result, entrainment effects on shortnose sturgeon are believed to be negligible.

Adult shortnose sturgeon, however, were collected in impingement samples at these facilities.

Indian Point Unit 2 reported shortnose sturgeon in impingement samples for 10 of 19 years reported (ranging from 1 to 6 individuals per year). Indian Point Unit 3 reported shortnose sturgeon in impingement samples for 7 of 15 years reported (ranging from 1 to 3 individuals per year). The size of impinged shortnose sturgeon ranged from 12 to 18 inches. The low rate of impingement and the return of impinged fish to the Hudson River alive lead to the conclusion that impingement effects were negligible (CHGE 1999). Even though sampling has documented large numbers of affected fish at intakes along the Hudson River, and a large resident population of sturgeon exists, shortnose sturgeon are a very small component of the impingement and entrainment numbers (CHGE 1999).

The use of closed cycle cooling minimizes water withdrawals from the Altamaha River. As a result, the probability is much lower of impinging shortnose sturgeon, particularly when compared to similarly situated facilities using once-through cooling systems. In addition, the existing monitoring data support the conclusion that no impacts are known to occur to shortnose sturgeon from entrainment and impingement at HNP.

4. CONCLUSION The staff evaluated the potential for impact to the shortnose sturgeon, Acipenser brevirostrum, from continued operation of the HNP; specifically evaluating impacts related to impingement, entrainment, thermal effects, and periodic river dredging in the vicinity of the intake structure.

After reviewing the operating characteristics of the HNP, the Altamaha River environment, the shortnose sturgeon life history, and data from the Altamaha River, the staff has concluded that HNP may affect the shortnose sturgeon. However, the staff has determined that the effects are discountable and extremely unlikely to occur, and therefore, not likely to adversely affect the species.

5. REFERENCES Bain, M., and S. Nack. 1995. Population status of shortnose sturgeon in the Hudson River, in Sturgeon Notes Issue # 3. Cornell University, New York. Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit. Sponsored by the Hudson River Foundation.

Barnthouse, L. W., J. Boreman, T. L. Englert, W. L. Kirk, and E. G. Horn. 1988. Hudson River Settlement Agreement: Technical Rationale and Cost Considerations, American Fisheries Society Monograph, 4, 267-273, 1988.

Barnthouse, L. W., and W. Van Winkle. 1988. Analysis of Impingement Impacts on Hudson River Fish Populations, American Fisheries Society Monograph, 4, 182-190.

. Central Hudson Gas and Electric (CHEG). 1999. Draft Final Environmental Impact Statement for State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permits for Bowline Point, Indian Point Units 2 and 3, and Roseton Steam Electric Generating Stations. Submitted to New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, December 14, 1999.

Dahlberg, M. D., and D. C. Scott. 1971. The freshwater fishes of Georgia. Bulletin of the Georgia Academy of Sciences 29:1-64.

Dadswell, M. J., B. D. Taubert, T. S. Squiers, D. Marchette, and J. Buckley. 1984.

Synopsis of biological data on shortnose sturgeon, Acipenser brevirostrum LeSueur 1818. NOAA Technical Report. National Marine Fisheries Service 14:1-45.

Essig, R. J. 1984. Summary of biological and fishery information important for the management of sturgeon in Georgia. Internal Report, Coastal Resources Division, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Brunswick, GA.

Flournoy, P. H., S. G. Rogers and P. S. Crawford. 1992. Restoration of shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River, Georgia. Final Report to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Project AFS-2, Coastal Resources Division, Georgia Department of Natural Resources. 51 pp.

Georgia Power Company (GPC). 1971. Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Environmental Report: Construction Permit Stage, February, 1971.

Georgia Power Company (GPC). 1975. Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Unit No. 2 Environmental Report Operating License Stage, July 1975.

Heidt, A. R. and R. J. Gilbert. 1978. The shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River drainage, Georgia. P. 54-60. In R. R. Odum and L. Landers [ed.] Proceedings of the rare and endangered wildlife symposium, August 3-4, 1978, Athens, Georgia. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Game and Fish Division Technical Report WL4.

Masnik, M. T. and Wilson, J. H. 1980. Assessment of the Impacts of the Salem and Hope Creek Stations on the Shortnose Sturgeon, Acipenser brevirostrum LeSueur, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-0671, Washington, D.C.

Nichols, M. C., and S. D. Holder. 1981. Plant Edwin I Hatch Units 1 and 2 Thermal Plume Model Verification, Georgia Power Company, Environmental Affairs Center, March, 1981.

Parker, E. H., B. Kynard, and M. Horgan. Unpublished ms. Seasonal Substrate and Water Velocity Preference of Year-0 Pallid and Shortnose Sturgeons. Paper presented at the 133rd Annual Meeting of the American Fisheries Society. Quebec City, Canada.

August 2003.

Pottle, R. and M. J. Dadswell. 1979. Studies on larval and juvenile shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum). Edited by Washburn and Gillis Associates, Ltd. Report to the Northeast Utilities Service Company. 87pp.

Rogers, S. G., P. H. Flournoy, and W. Weber. 1994. Status and restoration of Atlantic sturgeon in Georgia. Final Report to the National Marine Fisheries Service for Anadromous Grant Number NA16FA0098-01, -02, and -03 to the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Brunswick, GA. 121 pp.

Rogers, S. G., and W. Weber. 1995. Movements of shortnose sturgeon in the Altamaha River system, Georgia. Contribution Series No. 57. Coastal Resources Division, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Brunswick, Georgia. 78 pp.

Smith, T. I. J. 1985. The fishery, biology, and management of Atlantic sturgeon, Acipenser oxyrhynchus, in North America. 61-72 in F.P. Binkowski and S.I. Doroshov (eds.) North American Sturgeons: Biology and Aquiculture Potential. 163 pp. J. W.

Junk, Dordrecht, Germany.

Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC). 1997. Letter from H. L. Sumner, Jr.,

SNC, to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Subject:

Edwin I Hatch Nuclear Plant Request for License Amendment - Extended Power Uprate Operation. August 8, 1997.

Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC). 2000a. Letter from H. L. Sumner, Jr.,

SNC, to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Subject:

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Application for Renewed Operating Licenses. February 29, 2000.

Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC). 2000b. Application for License Renewal for the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. Appendix D, Applicants Environmental Report - Operating License Renewal Stage, Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant.

Sulak, K. J., R. Brooks, M. Randall. Unpublished ms. Seasonal Freshwater Refugia and Tropic Dormancy Among Anadromous Sturgeon. Paper presented at the 133rd Annual Meeting of the American Fisheries Society. Quebec City, Canada. August 2003.

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). 1972. Final Environmental Statement for the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Unit 1 and Unit 2; Washington, D.C.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2002. Water Resources Data - Georgia 2002 United States Geological Survey Publication Water Data Report GA-02-1, 2.

U. S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2004. Monthly Streamflow Statistics for Georgia.

Accessed on the Internet [May 4, 2004] at http://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov/ga/nwis/monthly/?site_no=02225000.

U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1992. Biological Opinion for Maintenance Dredging of the Connecticut River Navigation Channel. Issued to the U. S.

Army Corps of Engineers. Silver Springs, MD. June 26, 1992.

U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1998. Recovery plan for the shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum). Prepared by the Shortnose Sturgeon Recovery Team for the National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, Maryland. 104 pp.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 1978. Final Environmental Statement for the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Unit 2; Georgia Power Company; Docket Nos. 50-366, NUREG-0417, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 1996. Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants. NUREG-1437, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 2001. Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants, Supplement 4, Regarding the Edwin I.

Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. NUREG-1437, Supplement 1, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 2002. Letter from William F. Burton, U.S.

NRC, to H. L. Sumner, Jr., Southern Nuclear Operating Company.

Subject:

Issuance of Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-57 and NPF-5 for Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2.

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 2003. Meeting Summary from Dr.

Michael T. Masnik, NRC. November 19, 2003. ADAMS Accession No. ML033300329.

Washburn and Gillis Associates, Ltd. 1980. Studies of the early life history of the shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum). Final report to the Northeast Utilities Service Company. 120pp.

Weber, W. 1996. Population size and habitat use of shortnose sturgeon, Acipenser brevirostrum, in the Ogeechee River system, Georgia. Masters Thesis, University of Georgia. Athens, Georgia. 82 pp.

Appendix A Monthly Streamflow Statistics Monthly mean streamflow, in ft3/s YEAR Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1949 13,860 6,434 5,945 6,499 1950 6,487 7,121 14,750 9,769 5,739 6,116 4,993 4,204 5,028 5,179 4,560 6,533 1951 10,130 9,138 10,530 14,760 6,545 3,719 1970 2,625 5,421 5,933 1971 16,320 20,430 42,630 23,880 16,640 6,393 6,879 12,870 7,735 5,050 5,252 16,280 1972 30,520 34,170 16,250 11,670 7,252 6,749 6,418 4,436 3,268 2,597 3,663 10,210 1973 23,210 41,600 24,310 41,490 16,960 19,380 8,219 7,668 4,179 4,209 3,496 5,694 1974 13,819 31,950 16,490 21,160 6,596 6,070 4,314 7,554 6,599 2,912 3,474 6,871 1975 18,250 26,540 47,260 41,730 20,630 14,660 11,440 12,160 7,419 11,210 8,366 8,516 1976 14,590 16,180 20,970 13,070 16,720 14,490 8,429 4,157 3,968 7,206 6,808 22,430 1977 24,320 11,640 28,980 22,270 5,586 4,273 3,284 5,205 4,297 4,623 11,020 8,182 1978 18,180 34,260 17,820 10,250 16,660 5,820 3,774 5,779 2,877 2,224 2,336 4,486 1979 8,723 18,790 34,890 22,330 14,640 5,177 5,102 3,666 4,582 6,106 6,810 7,056 1980 10,800 15,900 38,300 39,450 11,150 10,240 6,049 3,053 2,468 3,018 3,094 4,089 1981 3,395 14,670 10,310 14,490 3,665 3,666 2,211 2,874 2,484 1,864 2,115 3,202 1982 22,220 27,080 15,270 13,610 12,280 8,321 6,153 6,112 3,464 3,992 3,932 11,690 1983 18,790 29,049 34,410 38,390 10,280 5,602 4,395 2,933 3,309 2,731 4,571 25,140 1984 22,790 22,970 29,809 24,710 18,970 8,064 6,274 16,580 3,597 2,665 4,048 4,821 1985 5,721 20,230 9,112 5,711 5,225 2,932 3,301 5,440 3,928 4,186 8,722 14,700 1986 8,503 14,800 10,770 5,635 2,576 2,406 1,810 2,093 3,129 2,133 4,530 15,650 1987 30,540 28,210 31,830 18,770 6,421 5,634 5,677 2,692 2,597 1,903 2,193 2,763 1988 7,281 11,870 11,290 9,252 6,040 2,302 1,796 1,902 4,272 3,286 3,191 3,495 1989 5,068 4,803 11,080 15,970 7,685 7,304 12,900 6,613 4,193 16,030 6,086 12,600 1990 24,000 24,890 31,550 14,900 6,298 3,830 2,666 2,765 2,975 4,952 5,538 4,915 1991 14,580 28,930 32,690 20,410 17,980 8,625 12,030 13,150 6,415 2,750 3,021 4,123 1992 12,889 20,900 23,680 13,500 4,406 7,088 5,355 8,880 11,050 11,350 12,120 29,870 Monthly mean streamflow, in ft3/s YEAR Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1993 36,550 23,380 38,020 34,840 8,955 5,634 3,484 2,821 2,759 2,373 5,158 7,806 1994 10,380 18,370 21,950 16,530 5,651 5,401 32,470 19,600 10,570 24,560 12,440 21,550 1995 20,470 37,360 31,550 9,998 5,479 11,550 4,364 4,211 5,748 9,150 14,480 9,693 1996 11,940 29,970 30,190 18,540 9,603 6,536 3,430 4,028 3,297 4,415 3,767 7,034 1997 14,290 24,790 25,970 6,286 10,560 6,672 4,942 4,377 2,228 6,541 19,540 31,920 1998 46,750 60,419 65,210 35,290 20,520 6,713 3,547 4,968 7,308 6,099 4,481 3,784 1999 7,933 17,160 8,597 5,817 3,950 2,753 4,741 2,106 1,643 3,140 2,522 4,312 2000 6,949 11,120 10,470 9,326 2,813 1,877 1,666 1,683 3,133 2,542 2,471 4,488 2001 6,860 5,805 32,020 19,850 3,956 10,600 5,981 4,074 2,685 2,064 1,870 2,424 2002 3,504 7,193 7,977 8,436 4,035 2,285 1,880 1,627 2,170 Mean of monthly 15,790 22,110 24,620 18,590 9,484 6,732 6,060 5,827 4,683 5,356 5,795 9,964 stream flows

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant cc:

Mr. Ernest L. Blake, Jr. Charles A. Patrizia, Esquire Shaw, Pittman, Potts Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker and Trowbridge 10th Floor 2300 N Street, NW. 1299 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20037 Washington, DC 20004-9500 Mr. D. M. Crowe Chairman Manager, Licensing Appling County Commissioners Southern Nuclear Operating County Courthouse Company, Inc. Baxley, Georgia 31513 P. O. Box 1295 Birmingham, Alabama 35201-1295 Mr. J. D. Woodard Executive Vice President Resident Inspector Southern Nuclear Operating Plant Hatch Company, Inc.

11030 Hatch Parkway N. P. O. Box 1295 Baxley, Georgia 31531 Birmingham, Alabama 35201-1295 Mr. Charles H. Badger Mr. P. W. Wells Office of Planning and Budget General Manager, Edwin I. Hatch Room 610 Nuclear Plant 270 Washington Street, SW. Southern Nuclear Operating Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Company, Inc.

U.S. Highway 1 North Harold Reheis, Director P. O. Box 2010 Department of Natural Resources Baxley, Georgia 31515 205 Butler Street, SE., Suite 1252 Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Mr. L. M. Bergen Resident Manager Steven M. Jackson Oglethorpe Power Corporation Senior Engineer - Power Supply Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Municipal Electric Authority P. O. Box 2010 of Georgia Baxley, Georgia 31515 1470 Riveredge Parkway, NW Atlanta, Georgia 30328-4684

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant cc:

Laurence Bergen Arthur H. Domby, Esq.

Oglethorpe Power Corporation Troutman Sanders 2100 East Exchange Place Nations Bank Plaza P.O. Box 1349 600 Peachtree Street, NE, Suite 5200 Tucker, Georgia 30085-1349 Atlanta, Georgia 30308-2216 Mr. R.D. Baker Chairman Manager - Licensing Appling County Commissioners Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. County Courthouse P.O. Box 1295 Baxley, Georgia 31513 Birmingham, Alabama 35201-1295 Mr. J. B. Beasley, Jr.

Resident Inspector Executive Vice President Plant Hatch Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

11030 Hatch Parkway N. P.O. Box 1295 Baxley, Georgia 31531 Birmingham, Alabama 35201-1295 Harold Reheis, Director Mr. G. R. Frederick Department of Natural Resources General Manager, Edwin I. Hatch 205 Butler Street, SE., Suite 1252 Nuclear Plant Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

U.S. Highway 1 North Steven M. Jackson P.O. Box 2010 Senior Engineer - Power Supply Baxley, Georgia 31515 Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia 1470 Riveredge Parkway, NW Mr. K. Rosanski Atlanta, Georgia 30328-4684 Resident Manager Oglethorpe Power Corporation Mr. Reece McAlister Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Executive Secretary P.O. Box 2010 Georgia Public Service Commission Baxley, Georgia 31515 244 Washington St., SW Atlanta, Georgia 30334

Biological Assessment Plant Hatch Intake Structure Maintenance Dredging Appling County, Georgia USACE #940003873

Attachment E Tier I Evaluation Report

),1$/

7(&+1,&$/0(025$1'80

7,(5,(9$/8$7,21$1'3$7+:$<$1$/<6,62)'5('*('0$7(5,$/

3/$&(',17+(83/$1''(:$7(5,1*%$6,1$76287+(5118&/($5¶6

3/$17+$7&+$33/,1*&2817<*(25*,$

3UHSDUHGE\

($(QJLQHHULQJ6FLHQFHDQG7HFKQRORJ\,QF3%&

6FKLOOLQJ&LUFOH6XLWH

+XQW9DOOH\0'

3UHSDUHGIRU

6RXWKHUQ1XFOHDU

32%R[

%LUPLQJKDP$/

-8/<

This page intentionally left blank.

7$%/(2)&217(176

/,672)),*85(6L

/,672)7$%/(6LL

/,672)$&521<06LL

,1752'8&7,21

385326($1'6&23(

6,7(&21',7,216

,17$.('5('*,1*$5($

83/$1''(:$7(5,1*%$6,1$1'672&.3,/($5($

'(7(50,1$7,212)7+(1((')25&217$0,1$17(9$/8$7,21

7,(5,3$7+:$<$1$/<6,6&21&(378$/6,7(02'(/

(9$/8$7,212)3/$17+$7&+'5('*('0$7(5,$/$6$327(17,$/6285&(

2)&+(0,&$/6

)$7($1'75$163257

+80$1+($/7+(;32685(3$7+:$<6

(&2/2*,&$/(;32685(3$7+:$<6

6800$5<$1'5(&200(1'$7,216

5()(5(1&(6

/,672)),*85(6

)LJXUH /RFDWLRQRI6RXWKHUQ1XFOHDU3ODQW+DWFK:DWHU,QWDNH$UHD8SODQG'HZDWHULQJ

%DVLQDQG6WRFNSLOH$UHD%D[OH\$SSOLQJ&RXQW\*HRUJLD

)LJXUH6HGLPHQW6DPSOH/RFDWLRQV6RXWKHUQ1XFOHDU3ODQW+DWFK,QWDNH

)LJXUH&RQFHSWXDO6LWH0RGHOIRU6RXWKHUQ1XFOHDU3ODQW+DWFK'UHGJHG0DWHULDO

8SODQG'HZDWHULQJ%DVLQDQG6WRFNSLOH$UHD%D[OH\$SSOLQJ&RXQW\*HRUJLD

L

/,672)7$%/(6

7DEOH *UDLQ6L]H'DWDIURP3ODQW+DWFK,QWDNH$UHD

7DEOH ([SRVXUH3DWKZD\VIRU+XPDQDQG(FRORJLFDO5HFHSWRUV:LWKLQDQG2XWVLGHWKH

6RXWKHUQ1XFOHDU3ODQW+DWFK8SODQG'HZDWHULQJ%DVLQDQG6WRFNSLOH$UHD

%D[OH\*HRUJLD

/,672)$&521<06

&2&&RQWDPLQDQWRI&RQFHUQ

&60&RQFHSWXDO6LWH0RGHO

F\FXELF\DUGV

'2''HSDUWPHQWRI'HIHQVH

'2'LVVROYHG2[\JHQ

3$+V3RO\F\FOLF$URPDWLF+\GURFDUERQV

3&%V3RO\FKORULQDWHG%LSKHQ\OV

86$&(8QLWHG6WDWHV$UP\&RUSVRI(QJLQHHUV

86(3$8QLWHG6WDWHV(QYLURQPHQWDO3URWHFWLRQ$JHQF\

8708SODQG7HVWLQJ0DQXDO

LL

,1752'8&7,21 7KHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQDW6RXWKHUQ1XFOHDU¶V3ODQW+DWFKLQ$SSOLQJ&RXQW\*HRUJLDKDV

EHHQXVHGIRUSODFHPHQWRIVHGLPHQWGUHGJHGIURPWKH$OWDPDKD5LYHULQWKHGLUHFWYLFLQLW\RIWKH

ULYHUZDWHULQWDNHV\VWHPIRU theSDVWVHYHUDOGHFDGHV7KHPDMRULW\RIWKHGUHGJHGVHGLPHQWLQWKH

GHZDWHULQJEDVLQLVWUDQVIHUUHGE\WUXFNV DIWHUGHZDWHULQJLVFRPSOHWH WREHXVHGDVILOOIRUORFDO

URDGV7KHSRUWLRQRIUHPDLQLQJPDWHULDOWKDWLVQRWLPPHGLDWHO\XVHGIRUILOOLVWUDQVIHUUHGIURPWKH

GHZDWHULQJEDVLQWRDVWRFNSLOHDUHDRQWKH3ODQW+DWFKSURSHUW\7KHGHZDWHULQJEDVLQDQGWKH

VWRFNSLOHDUHDRFFXS\DSSUR[LPDWHO\DQGDFUHVZLWKLQWKH$OWDPDKDZDWHUVKHG

UHVSHFWLYHO\7KLVWHFKQLFDOPHPRUDQGXPSURYLGHVDVXPPDU\RIH[LVWLQJLQIRUPDWLRQUHODWHGWR

WKHSRWHQWLDOFRQVWLWXHQWVLQHQYLURQPHQWDOPHGLDDVVRFLDWHGZLWKGUHGJLQJDQGGUHGJHGPDWHULDO

SODFHPHQWDQGHYDOXDWHVH[SRVXUHSDWKZD\VE\ZKLFKFRQVWLWXHQWVFRXOGSRWHQWLDOO\OHDYHWKH

XSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQDQGWKHVWRFNSLOHDUHD

385326($1'6&23(

7KLV7LHU,(YDOXDWLRQDQG3DWKZD\V$QDO\VLVZDVUHTXHVWHGE\WKH86$UP\&RUSVRI

(QJLQHHUV 86$&( 6DYDQQDK'LVWULFWWRVXSSOHPHQW6RXWKHUQ1XFOHDU¶VDSSOLFDWLRQIRUDQ

H[WHQVLRQRIWKHLUH[LVWLQJ6HFWLRQPDLQWHQDQFHGUHGJLQJSHUPLWDQGVXEVHTXHQWLVVXDQFH

RIDQHZSHUPLW7KHDQDO\VLVSURFHVVIROORZVWKHSULQFLSOHVVHWIRUWKLQWKHUpland Testing Manual 870 IRUHYDOXDWLRQRIVHGLPHQWVIRUXSODQGSODFHPHQW 86$&( 7KH870XVHV

DIRXUWLHUHGDSSURDFK

7LHU,(YDOXDWHUHDGLO\DYDLODEOHH[LVWLQJLQIRUPDWLRQ

7LHU,,8VHFRQVHUYDWLYHWHFKQLTXHVWRFROOHFWGDWDUHJDUGLQJWKHFKHPLFDOSK\VLFDODQG ELRORJLFDOFKDUDFWHULVWLFVRIWKHGUHGJHGPDWHULDODQGWKHFRQWDLQPHQWIDFLOLW\

7LHU,,,3HUIRUPPRUHGHWDLOHGPRGHOLQJDQGWHVWLQJWRIXUWKHUFKDUDFWHUL]HIDWHDQG HIIHFWV

7LHU,93HUIRUPDTXDQWLWDWLYHULVNDVVHVVPHQW

7KLVWHFKQLFDOPHPRUDQGXPSUHVHQWVWKH7LHU,HYDOXDWLRQIRU6RXWKHUQ1XFOHDU¶V3ODQW+DWFK

XSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQDQGVWRFNSLOHDUHD7KHJRDORIWKLVHYDOXDWLRQLVWRGHWHUPLQHZKHWKHU

VXIILFLHQWGDWDDUHDYDLODEOHWRPDNHGHWHUPLQDWLRQVUHJDUGLQJWKHPDQDJHPHQWRIGUHGJHGPDWHULDO

RUZKHWKHUDGGLWLRQDOGDWDDUHQHHGHG7KLVWHFKQLFDOPHPRUDQGXPHYDOXDWHVGDWDIURPH[LVWLQJ

HQYLURQPHQWDOVDPSOHVDQGVWXGLHVWRGUDZFRQFOXVLRQVDVWRZKHWKHUWKHUHDUHFRPSOHWHDQG

VLJQLILFDQWWUDQVSRUWDQGH[SRVXUHSDWKZD\VWRSURYLGHUHFRPPHQGDWLRQVUHJDUGLQJGUHGJHG

PDWHULDOPDQDJHPHQWDQGWRDVVHVVWKHQHHGIRUIXUWKHUHYDOXDWLRQ7KHGDWDHYDOXDWHGLQFOXGH

*HQHUDOHQYLURQPHQWDOGDWDDQGVLWHFKDUDFWHULVWLFVIRUWKH$OWDPDKD5LYHUWKHLQWDNHDUHD

DQGWKHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQDQGVWRFNSLOHDUHD

1

8QLILHG6RLO&ODVVLILFDWLRQ6\VWHP 86&6 DQGJUDLQVL]HGDWDIRUVHGLPHQWVDPSOHV

FROOHFWHGIURPWKHLQWDNHDUHDLQ-XQH GLVFXVVHGLQ6HFWLRQ

7KHIROORZLQJVHFWLRQVVXPPDUL]HFRQGLWLRQVDWWKHVLWHSUHVHQWDQGHYDOXDWHDYDLODEOHZDWHUVKHG

DQGVHGLPHQWGDWDDQGSUHVHQWFRQFOXVLRQVDQGUHFRPPHQGDWLRQV

6,7(&21',7,216

7KHIROORZLQJVHFWLRQVGLVFXVVWKHSURSRVHGDUHDRIGUHGJLQJZLWKUHVSHFWWRFRQGLWLRQVWKDW

SRWHQWLDOO\DIIHFWWKHFRQVWLWXHQWVWKDWPD\EHSUHVHQWLQWKHGUHGJHGPDWHULDODQGWKHXSODQG

GHZDWHULQJEDVLQDQGVWRFNSLOHDUHDZLWKUHVSHFWWRFRQGLWLRQVWKDWDIIHFWWUDQVSRUWIDWHDQG

H[SRVXUHRIFRQVWLWXHQWVRISRWHQWLDOFRQFHUQ

,17$.('5('*,1*$5($

7KHSURSRVHGGUHGJLQJORFDWLRQLVLQDQ/VKDSHGDUHD DSSUR[LPDWHO\DFUHVLQVL]H GLUHFWO\LQ

IURQWRIWKHLQWDNHVWUXFWXUHZLWKLQWKH$OWDPDKD5LYHU )LJXUH 7KHDUHDLQIURQWRIWKH

LQWDNHVWUXFWXUHLVK\GUDXOLFDOO\GUHGJHGRQD\HDUO\EDVLVEHWZHHQ$XJXVWDQG1RYHPEHUWRDOORZ

LQWDNHRIFRROLQJZDWHULQVXSSRUWRI3ODQW+DWFKIDFLOLWLHV%RWKGUHGJHFXWGHSWKDQGJHRPHWU\

KDYHEHHQUHODWLYHO\FRQVLVWHQWHDFK\HDU'UHGJLQJLVW\SLFDOO\FRPSOHWHGWRDQHOHYDWLRQRI

IHHWLQWKHFKDQQHODQGIHHWQHDUWKHVKRUH7KHGUHGJHGHSWKYDULHVHDFK\HDUEDVHGRQVDQG

EXLOGXSEXWW\SLFDOO\UDQJHVDQGIWEHORZVHGLPHQWVXUIDFH

2YHUWKHSDVWWHQ\HDUVDQDYHUDJHRIDSSUR[LPDWHO\F\RIPDWHULDOKDVEHHQUHPRYHG

DQQXDOO\GXULQJHDFKGUHGJLQJHYHQWYLDK\GUDXOLFGUHGJHDQGSXPSHGGLUHFWO\WRWKHXSODQG

GHZDWHULQJEDVLQ7KHGUHGJHGPDWHULDOUHPRYHGFRQVLVWVRIVDQG\VHGLPHQWVWKDWKDYH

DFFXPXODWHGRYHUWKHFRXUVHRIWKH\HDUGXHWRGHSRVLWLRQIURP$OWDPDKD5LYHUZDWHUVDQGVORXJK

IURPVLGHEDQNVDQGWKHULYHUERWWRP7KHPDMRULW\RIWKHPDWHULDOLVWKHQWUDQVSRUWHGGLUHFWO\IURP

WKHGHZDWHULQJEDVLQIRUXVHE\ORFDOHQWLWLHV5HPDLQLQJPDWHULDOLVPRYHGIURPWKHGHZDWHULQJ

EDVLQWRWKHVWRFNSLOHDUHD

7KH$OWDPDKD5LYHULVORFDWHGLQWKH$OWDPDKDZDWHUVKHGZKLFKFRYHUVVTXDUHPLOHVLQWKH

VRXWKHDVWHUQSRUWLRQRIWKHVWDWH7KHDYHUDJHGDLO\IORZUDWHIRUWKH$OWDPDKD5LYHULVFXELF

IHHWSHUVHFRQG7KHULYHUIORZVIURPWKHFRQIOXHQFHRIWKH2FPXOJHHDQG2FRQHH5LYHUVLQWR

$OWDPDKD6RXQGZKLFKFRQQHFWVWRWKH$WODQWLF2FHDQ /RHIIOHUDQG0\HU 7KHPDMRULW\RI

WKHODQGDORQJWKH$OWDPDKD5LYHULVDJULFXOWXUDORUIRUHVWHGZLWKOLWWOHWRQRLQGXVWU\RUPDMRU

FLWLHVSUHVHQW

3ODQW+DWFKLVORFDWHGDSSUR[LPDWHO\PLOHVXSVWUHDPRIIURPWKH$WODQWLF2FHDQ%HFDXVHLW

GRHVQRWIORZQHDUDQ\PDMRUKDUERURULQGXVWULDODUHDVWKH$OWDPDKD5LYHUUHFHLYHVOLPLWHGRUIHZ

LQSXWVRIFKHPLFDOFRQVWLWXHQWVIURPDQ\SRLQWVRXUFHV2QO\RIVDPSOHGVXUIDFHZDWHUVLQWKH

$OWDPDKD5LYHUKDYHEHHQUHSRUWHGDVLPSDFWHGE\WKHVWDWH /RHIIOHUDQG0\HU +RZHYHU

WKH6WDWHRI*HRUJLDKDVSXWILVKFRQVXPSWLRQDGYLVRULHVLQSODFHIRUWKH$OWDPDKD5LYHUIRU

PHUFXU\FRQFHQWUDWLRQVLQILVKWLVVXH *HRUJLD'HSDUWPHQWRI1DWXUDO5HVRXUFHV

2

83/$1''(:$7(5,1*%$6,1$1'672&.3,/($5($

7KHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQLVORFDWHGDSSUR[LPDWHO\IHHWZHVWRIWKHLQWDNHVWUXFWXUH

)LJXUH DQGLVDSSUR[LPDWHO\DFUHVLQVL]H7KHEDVLQLVFRPSULVHGRIDVDQGFOD\PL[RI

PDWHULDOVXUURXQGHGE\FRPSDFWHGGLUWEHUPV7KHEDVLQGRHVQRWKDYHDQ\OLQLQJRURWKHUFRQWURO

IHDWXUHV$VGLVFXVVHGDERYHWKH/VKDSHGDUHDLQIURQWRIWKH3ODQW+DWFKZDWHULQWDNHLVGUHGJHG

K\GUDXOLFDOO\HYHU\\HDUDQGPDWHULDOSXPSHGGLUHFWO\LQWRWKHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQ7KH

HIIOXHQWLVGLVFKDUJHGJUDGXDOO\WKURXJKDLQFKRXWIORZSLSHVWRSORJVDUHSODFHGRQWKHRSHQ

VLGHRIWKHSRUWLRQRIWKHSLSHORFDWHGLQWKHEDVLQWRDOORZZDWHUWRVHHSWKURXJKLQDFRQWUROOHG

PDQQHUDOORZLQJVHGLPHQWWRVHWWOHRXWSULRUWRWKHZDWHUGLVFKDUJLQJ(IIOXHQWIURPGHZDWHULQJLV

GLVFKDUJHGWKURXJKWKHSLSHLQWRDGUDLQDJHGLWFKDSSUR[LPDWHO\IHHWDZD\IURPWKHQRUWKHUQ

HGJHRIWKHGHZDWHULQJEDVLQ7KHHIIOXHQWWKHQIORZVLQWRWKH$OWDPDKD5LYHUDWDORFDWLRQ

DSSUR[LPDWHO\IWZHVWRIWKHLQWDNHVWUXFWXUH )LJXUH 7KHPDWHULDOLQWKHGHZDWHULQJ

EDVLQLVQRWSK\VLFDOO\PDQDJHGRUPDQLSXODWHGWRIDFLOLWDWHGHZDWHULQJ

7KHDUHDLQVLGHWKHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQLVVSDUVHO\YHJHWDWHGZLWKYDULRXVZHHGVDQGJUDVVHV

,WLVVXUURXQGHGE\GHFLGXRXVKDUGZRRGDQGFRQLIHURXVWUHHVZLWKVRPHVPDOORSHQJUDVVDUHDV

$OWKRXJKWKHDUHDLVVSDUVHO\YHJHWDWHGDQGODFNVVWDQGLQJZDWHU DVLGHIURPWKHWRZHHNVHDFK

\HDUGXULQJZKLFKGHZDWHULQJRFFXUV LWLVSRVVLEOHWKDWVRPHZLOGOLIHPD\XVHWKHVLWHWRIRUDJH

IRUWHUUHVWULDOSUH\LWHPVRUWRFRQVXPHZDWHU7KHRSSRUWXQLWLHVIRUIRUDJLQJDUHOLNHO\WREH

OLPLWHGE\WKHIDFWWKDWGUHGJHGPDWHULDOLQWKHGHZDWHULQJEDVLQLVFRPSULVHGSULPDULO\RIVDQGDQG

XQOLNHO\WRVXSSRUWVRLOLQYHUWHEUDWHVVXFKDVHDUWKZRUPV*LYHQWKHUHPRWHORFDWLRQRIWKHXSODQG

GHZDWHULQJEDVLQLWLVXQOLNHO\WKDWDQ\RQHRWKHUWKDQ3ODQW+DWFKSHUVRQQHOZRXOGEHSUHVHQWDW

WKHVLWH

7KHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQGLVFKDUJHVLQWRWKH$OWDPDKD5LYHU7KHGLVWDQFHEHWZHHQWKHXSODQG

GHZDWHULQJEDVLQDQGWKH$OWDPDKD5LYHULVDSSUR[LPDWHO\IHHW)LVKFUXVWDFHDQVDQGRWKHU

DTXDWLFDQGEHQWKLFRUJDQLVPVDUHOLNHO\WRXVHWKHULYHUDUHDDVKDELWDW:LOGOLIHVXFKDVZDGLQJ

ELUGVZDWHUIRZODQGPDPPDOV LHUDFFRRQVDQGIR[ PD\SRWHQWLDOO\IRUDJHLQWKHDUHDIRU

DTXDWLFSUH\5HFUHDWLRQDOERDWHUVRUILVKHUPDQFRXOGEHSUHVHQWRQWKH$OWDPDKD5LYHU

7KHUHDUHWZRNQRZQOLVWHGWKUHDWHQHGVSHFLHVWKDWDUHRFFDVLRQDOO\REVHUYHGRQ3ODQW+DWFK

SURSHUW\WKHJRSKHUWRUWRLVH Gopherus polyphemus ZKLFKLVVWDWHOLVWHGWKUHDWHQHGDQGD

FDQGLGDWHIRUIHGHUDOOLVWLQJDQGWKH(DVWHUQLQGLJRVQDNH Drymarchon couperi ZKLFKLVERWK

VWDWHOLVWHGDQGIHGHUDOOLVWHGDVWKUHDWHQHG7KH)HGHUDODQGVWDWHOLVWHGHQGDQJHUHGVKRUWQRVH

VWXUJHRQ Acipenser brevirostrum DQG$WODQWLFVWXUJHRQ Acipenser oxyrhynchus DUHSUHVHQWLQ

WKH$OWDPDKD5LYHU3ODQW+DWFKLVPDQDJHGIRUZLOGOLIHKDELWDWDQGLVERUGHUHGRQWKHHDVWE\D

QDWXUHSUHVHUYH

7KHVWRFNSLOHDUHDLVDGHSUHVVHGQRQEHUPHGDUHDDSSUR[LPDWHO\IHHW PLOHV VRXWKZHVW

RIWKHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQ7KHVWRFNSLOHDUHDFRYHUVDSSUR[LPDWHO\DFUHVDQGLVQRW

YHJHWDWHGEXWLVVXUURXQGHGE\ERWKGHFLGXRXVDQGFRQLIHURXVWUHHV2QFHWKHPDWHULDOLV

3

FRPSOHWHO\GHZDWHUHGLQWKHGHZDWHULQJEDVLQWKHGULHGPDWHULDOLVWUDQVIHUUHGRIIVLWHYLDWUXFNV

IRUXVHDVURDGILOO7KHUHPDLQLQJPDWHULDOLQWKHGHZDWHULQJEDVLQLVWUDQVIHUUHGE\WUXFNWRWKH

VWRFNSLOHDUHDE\ZD\RIDFFHVVURDGV$SRUWLRQRIWKHGHZDWHUHGPDWHULDOGRHVUHPDLQLQWKH

VWRFNSLOHDUHD\HDUURXQG7KHVWRFNSLOHDUHDKDVDKDUGFOD\ERWWRPDQGUHWDLQVVRPHUDLQZDWHU

WKURXJKRXWWKH\HDUQRZDWHUGLVFKDUJHVIURPWKLVDUHD

'(7(50,1$7,212)7+(1((')25&217$0,1$17(9$/8$7,21

$VGHILQHGLQWKH870 86$&( LIWKHUHLVDSRWHQWLDOIRUSUHVHQFHRIFRQWDPLQDQWVRI

FRQFHUQLQWKHGUHGJHGPDWHULDODSDWKZD\DVVHVVPHQWVKRXOGEHFRQGXFWHG7KH870LGHQWLILHV

WKUHHFULWHULDDQ\RQHRIZKLFKLQGLFDWHVWKDWIXUWKHUDQDO\VLVLVQRWQHFHVVDU\7KHWKUHHFULWHULD

DUH

7KHGUHGJHGPDWHULDOLVH[FDYDWHGIURPDVLWHIDUUHPRYHGIURPH[LVWLQJDQGKLVWRULFDO VRXUFHVRIFRQWDPLQDQWVSURYLGLQJUHDVRQDEOHDVVXUDQFHWKDWWKHGUHGJHGPDWHULDOGRHVQRW FRQWDLQWKHP

7KHGUHGJHGPDWHULDOLVFRPSRVHGSUHGRPLQDQWO\RIVDQGJUDYHODQGRUURFN

7KHGUHGJHGPDWHULDOLVFRPSRVHGRISUHYLRXVO\XQGLVWXUEHGJHRORJLFDOPDWHULDOVZKLFK KDYHQRWEHHQH[SRVHGWRPRGHUQVRXUFHVRISROOXWLRQ

$VGLVFXVVHGLQ6HFWLRQWKH$OWDPDKD5LYHUGRHVQRWIORZQHDUDQ\PDMRUKDUERURULQGXVWULDO

DUHDVDQGWKXVUHFHLYHVOLPLWHGLQSXWVRIFKHPLFDOFRQVWLWXHQWVIURPDQ\SRLQWVRXUFHV7KHGUHGJHG

PDWHULDOH[FDYDWHGIURP3ODQW+DWFKLVORFDWHGLQDQDUHDUHPRYHGIURPFRQWDPLQDQWVRXUFHVWKXV

PHHWLQJWKHILUVWRIWKHDERYHFULWHULD

$GGLWLRQDOO\ DVGHVFULEHGLQ6HFWLRQVDQGDERYH WKHPDWHULDOGUHGJHGIURPWKHLQWDNH

DUHDRI3ODQW+DWFKLVH[SHFWHGWREHSUHGRPLQDWHO\VDQG7RFRQILUPWKHSK\VLFDOFKDUDFWHULVWLFVRI

WKHVHGLPHQWWREHGUHGJHGVHGLPHQWVDPSOHVUHSUHVHQWDWLYHRIWKHPDWHULDOWREHGUHGJHGZHUH

FROOHFWHGIURPWHQORFDWLRQVLQWKH$OWDPDKD5LYHURXWVLGHWKHLQWDNHVWUXFWXUHLQ-XQH )LJXUH

7KHVDPSOHVZHUHFROOHFWHGXVLQJDSRQDUJUDEVDPSOHUZKLFKFROOHFWHGDVXUIDFH XSSHU

LQFKHV VDPSOHIURPHDFKORFDWLRQ$KDQGKHOG*36XQLWZDVXVHGWRGRFXPHQWWKHFRRUGLQDWHV LQ

FRRUGLQDWHV\VWHP:RUOG*HRGHWLF6\VWHP IRUHDFKVDPSOLQJORFDWLRQ:DWHUGHSWKDWHDFK

ORFDWLRQUDQJHGIURPWRIHHW

UDLQVL]HDQDO\VHVLQGLFDWHWKDWWKHVHGLPHQWWREHGUHGJHGIURPWKH3ODQW+DWFKLQWDNHDUHDLV

SUHGRPLQDWHO\EURZQSRRUO\JUDGHGVDQGZLWKDVPDOOSURSRUWLRQRIILQHJUDYHO7KHWRWDO

VDQGJUDYHOFRPSRVLWLRQLQHDFKVDPSOHUDQJHGIURPWR 7DEOH 7KHVHUHVXOWV

PHHWthe secondRIWKHDERYHOLVWHGFULWHULDDQGVXJJHVWWKDWIXUWKHUDQDO\VLVLVQRWQHHGHGIRUWKH

VLWH+RZHYHUDOWKRXJKWKHVHGLPHQWLVFRPSRVHGODUJHO\RIVDQGZKLFKGRHVQRWW\SLFDOO\

VXSSRUWFRQVWLWXHQWVRIFRQFHUQ &2&V LQFRQFHQWUDWLRQVWKDWZRXOGEHH[SHFWHGWRQHJDWLYHO\

LPSDFWKXPDQRUHFRORJLFDOUHFHSWRUVWKLV7LHUHYDOXDWLRQLQFOXGHVDFRQFHSWXDOVLWHPRGHO

&60 IRU3ODQW+DWFK7KH&60SURYLGHVDFRPSOHWHXQGHUVWDQGLQJRIWKHVLWHWKURXJK

LGHQWLILFDWLRQRIWKH

4

SRWHQWLDOWUDQVSRUWDQGH[SRVXUHSDWKZD\VE\ZKLFKUHFHSWRUVRQVLWHFRXOGEHH[SRVHGWRWKH

GUHGJHGPDWHULDO

7,(5,3$7+:$<$1$/<6,6&21&(378$/6,7(02'(/

$&60ZDVGHYHORSHGIRUWKH3ODQW+DWFKXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQDQGVWRFNSLOHDUHD )LJXUH

$FFRUGLQJWRWKHSULQFLSOHVVHWIRUWKLQWKH870 86$&( WKHSULPDU\FRQFHUQZKHQ

HYDOXDWLQJGUHGJHGPDWHULDODWXSODQGSODFHPHQWVLWHVLVWKHSRWHQWLDOIRULWWRFRQWDLQFKHPLFDO

FRQVWLWXHQWVWKDWFRXOGSURGXFHHIIHFWVLIWKH\DUHWUDQVSRUWHGRIIWKHVLWHWRORFDWLRQVZKHUHSHRSOH

RUZLOGOLIHFRXOGFRPHLQFRQWDFWZLWKWKHP7KHFRQFHSWXDOVLWHPRGHOLGHQWLILHVZD\VLQZKLFK

SHRSOHZLOGOLIHDQGRWKHURUJDQLVPVPD\FRPHLQWRFRQWDFWZLWKFRQVWLWXHQWV LISUHVHQW IURP

GUHGJHGPDWHULDOWKDWKDVEHHQSODFHGLQWKHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQDQGVXEVHTXHQWO\WUDQVSRUWHG

WRWKHVWRFNSLOHDUHD7KHIROORZLQJVHFWLRQVVXPPDUL]HWKHNH\IDFWRUVDIIHFWLQJIDWHWUDQVSRUW

DQGH[SRVXUHSDWKZD\VIRUWKHVLWH

(9$/8$7,212)3/$17+$7&+'5('*('0$7(5,$/$6$327(17,$/6285&(2)

&+(0,&$/6

3ODQW+DWFKGUHGJHGPDWHULDOFRQVLVWVRIVDQG\DQGFRDUVHJUDLQHGVHGLPHQWVWKDWKDYH

DFFXPXODWHGLQIURQWRIWKHLQWDNHVWUXFWXUHYLDGHSRVLWLRQIURPWKHZDWHUFROXPQ7KH$OWDPDKD

5LYHUIORZVVRXWKHDVWDQGWKHFKHPLFDOPDNHXSRIWKHVHVHGLPHQWVLVOLNHO\WRUHIOHFWWKDWRI

VHGLPHQWVXSVWUHDPRI3ODQW+DWFK7KHUHDUHOLPLWHGSRVVLEOHFKHPLFDOVRXUFHVWRWKH$OWDPDKD

5LYHUDVPRVWRIWKHXSVWUHDPODQGXVHLVDJULFXOWXUDORULVIRUHVWHGDUHDZLWKOLWWOHWRQRLQGXVWU\

$VDSRWHQWLDOVRXUFHRIFKHPLFDOVVDQGVDQGJUDYHOVDUHW\SLFDOO\PRVWO\QDWLYHPLQHUDOVDQGQRW

VLJQLILFDQWVRXUFHVRIELRDYDLODEOHPHWDOVRUJDQLFFRPSRXQGVRUQXWULHQWV6DQGVGRQRWWHQGWR

VRUERUJDQLFFRPSRXQGV LHSHVWLFLGHVK\GURFDUERQVHWF RUPHWDOVIURPWKHZDWHUFROXPQGXH

WRWKHLUORZSDUWLFOHVXUIDFHDUHDFRPSDUHGWRFOD\VDQGVLOWV$VVXFKVDQGVDUHXQOLNHO\WRVHUYH

DVDVLJQLILFDQWVRXUFHRIFKHPLFDOFRQVWLWXHQWVLQGUHGJHGPDWHULDO

KLOHVDQGVDUHQRWH[SHFWHGWRSURYLGHDVLJQLILFDQWVRXUFHWKHIROORZLQJVHFWLRQVSUHVHQW

SRWHQWLDOWUDQVSRUWSDWKZD\VIRUFRQVWLWXHQWVLQGUHGJHGPDWHULDOIRUFRPSOHWHQHVVRIWKH&60

)$7($1'75$163257

&RQVWLWXHQWVRIGUHGJHGPDWHULDOPD\EHDIIHFWHGE\DQXPEHURIWUDQVSRUWPHFKDQLVPVDIWHULWLV

UHPRYHGIURPWKHULYHUERWWRP$VVHGLPHQWLVK\GUDXOLFDOO\GUHGJHGLWEHFRPHVPL[HGZLWK

ODUJHYROXPHVRIZDWHU:KHQGUHGJHGPDWHULDOLVPL[HGZLWKZDWHUQXWULHQWVDQGPHWDOVPD\

GLVVROYHLQWRWKHZDWHU2WKHUPHWDOFRPSRXQGVDQGRUJDQLFFRPSRXQGVPD\UHPDLQERXQGWR

SDUWLFOHVRIILQHJUDLQHGVHGLPHQWEXWWHQGQRWWRELQGWRFRDUVHJUDLQHGVHGLPHQWVXFKDVVDQG

KHQGUHGJHGPDWHULDOLVK\GUDXOLFDOO\SODFHGLQWKHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQLWVSUHDGVRXWIURP

WKHSRLQWZKHUHLWLVSXPSHGLQDQGLWVHWWOHV7KHVHGLPHQWSDUWLFOHVVHWWOHWRWKHERWWRPZKLOH

ZDWHUFROOHFWVRQWRS7KLVRYHUO\LQJZDWHUPL[HVZLWKUDLQZDWHUDQGHLWKHUHYDSRUDWHVRULV

5

GLVFKDUJHGDVHIIOXHQW5DLQIDOOLQJRQWRGULHGPDWHULDOIRUPVUXQRIIWKDWFRPELQHVZLWKRYHUO\LQJ

ZDWHUDQGLVDOVRGLVFKDUJHGDVHIIOXHQW,QVRPHFDVHVZDWHUPD\DOVRVHHSWKURXJKWKHERWWRPRI

WKHEDVLQRUWKURXJKWKHEHUPVDVOHDFKDWHKRZHYHUWKLVLVOLNHO\OLPLWHGLQWKHGHZDWHULQJEDVLQ

DVWKHERWWRPRIWKHEDVLQLVFRPSULVHGRIILQHJUDLQHGVHGLPHQWVWKDWIRUPDORZSHUPHDELOLW\

OD\HU%HFDXVHWKHPDWHULDOEHLQJSODFHGLQWRWKHGHZDWHULQJEDVLQSULPDULO\FRPSRVHGRIVDQG

WKHUHLVOLPLWHGSRWHQWLDOIRUWKLVPDWHULDOWRDFWDVDVRXUFHRIGXVWRQFHGULHG

6HGLPHQWWKDWLVGHZDWHUHGLQWKHGHZDWHULQJEDVLQLVWUDQVSRUWHGE\WUXFNVRIIVLWHIRUXVHDVILOORU

WRWKHVWRFNSLOHDUHD6LQFHWKLVPDWHULDOLVIXOO\GHZDWHUHGQRZDWHUFROOHFWVRQWRSGXULQJ

SODFHPHQWDWWKHVWRFNSLOHDUHD5DLQZDWHUPD\DFFXPXODWHLQWKHVWRFNSLOHDUHDDVVWDQGLQJZDWHU

WKURXJKRXWWKH\HDU,WLVSRVVLEOHIRUUDLQZDWHUIDOOLQJRQWRWKHGULHGPDWHULDOWRIRUPUXQRII

KRZHYHUPRVWRIWKHPDWHULDOLVXWLOL]HGE\URDGFUHZVDIWHULWLVGHZDWHUHGLQWKHGHZDWHULQJEDVLQ

DQGVWRFNSLOHG

,QDGGLWLRQWRWUDQVSRUWWKHUHDUHDQXPEHURIFKHPLFDOIDWHSURFHVVHVWKDWPD\DIIHFWFKHPLFDO

FRQVWLWXHQWVDIWHUGUHGJLQJ%HFDXVHWKHGUHGJHGPDWHULDOLVFRDUVHJUDLQHGVHGLPHQWFRPSULVHGRI

VDQGDQGJUDYHOWKHVHGLPHQWGRHVQRWUHDGLO\VRUERUJDQLFVDQGLVKLJKO\XQOLNHO\WRFRQWDLQRU

VRUEPHWDOFRPSRXQGV$GGLWLRQDOO\PL[LQJRIVDQG\DQGJUDYHOO\PDWHULDOHQKDQFHVWKH

EUHDNGRZQRIVRPHRUJDQLFFRPSRXQGV:KLOHWKHUHDUHSRWHQWLDOSDWKZD\VE\ZKLFKFKHPLFDOV

PD\EHWUDQVIHUUHGEHWZHHQPHGLDDWWKHVLWH LHELRDFFXPXODWLRQDQGELRPDJQLILFDWLRQ VDQG

SURYLGHVDQLQVXIILFLHQWVRXUFHRIFKHPLFDOVIRUWKHVHWREHVLJQLILFDQW

%DVHGRQWKHVHSURFHVVHVWKHSULPDU\IDWHDQGWUDQVSRUWSDWKZD\VE\ZKLFKFRQVWLWXHQWVPD\OHDYH

WKH3ODQW+DWFKXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQDUH

7UDQVSRUWRIFRQVWLWXHQWVLQGLVVROYHGIRUPLQHIIOXHQWWKDWLVGLVFKDUJHGIURPWKH

GHZDWHULQJEDVLQ

7UDQVSRUWRIFRQVWLWXHQWVDGVRUEHGWRVHGLPHQWSDUWLFOHVVXVSHQGHGLQHIIOXHQWWKDWLV

GLVFKDUJHGIURPWKHGHZDWHULQJEDVLQ

%LRDFFXPXODWLRQRIFRQVWLWXHQWVWKURXJKWKHIRRGFKDLQ

7UDQVSRUWRIFRQVWLWXHQWVYLDSK\VLFDOWUDQVIHUWRWKHVWRFNSLOHDUHD

$GGLWLRQDOIDWHDQGWUDQVSRUWSURFHVVHVDUHSRWHQWLDOO\FRPSOHWHEXWOLNHO\WRSOD\DOLPLWHGUROHLQ

WKHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJLIDQ\LQH[SRVXUHWRUHFHSWRUV7KHVHDUH

7UDQVSRUWRIFRQVWLWXHQWVGLVVROYHGRUVXVSHQGHGLQWKHZDWHUFROXPQDWWKHSRLQWRI

GUHGJLQJ

7UDQVSRUWRIFRQVWLWXHQWVLQGLVVROYHGIRUPLQOHDFKDWH

6

7KHSULPDU\IDWHDQGWUDQVSRUWSDWKZD\VE\ZKLFKFKHPLFDOFRQVWLWXHQWVPD\OHDYHWKH3ODQW+DWFK

VWRFNSLOHDUHDDUH

7UDQVSRUWRIFRQVWLWXHQWVYLDSK\VLFDOWUDQVIHURXWRIWKHGHZDWHULQJEDVLQDQGVWRFNSLOH

DUHDE\ORFDOURDGFUHZV

%LRDFFXPXODWLRQRIFRQVWLWXHQWVWKURXJKWKHIRRGFKDLQ

$GGLWLRQDOIDWHDQGWUDQVSRUWSURFHVVHVDUHSRWHQWLDOO\FRPSOHWHEXWOLNHO\WRSOD\DOLPLWHGUROHLQ

WKHVWRFNSLOHDUHDLIDQ\LQH[SRVXUHWRUHFHSWRUV7KHVHDUH

x 7UDQVSRUWRIFRQVWLWXHQWVLQGLVVROYHGIRUPLQOHDFKDWH

7UDQVSRUWRIFKHPLFDOVIURPGUHGJHGPDWHULDOLQWRWKHDLULVFRQVLGHUHGWREHDQLQFRPSOHWHDQGRU

LQVLJQLILFDQWWUDQVSRUWSDWKZD\GXHWRWKHVDQGFRPSRVLWLRQRIWKHPDWHULDODQGWKHOLPLWHG

YRODWLOLW\RIWKHSRWHQWLDOFRQVWLWXHQWV7UDQVSRUWSDWKZD\VDUHSUHVHQWHGLQ)LJXUH

+80$1+($/7+(;32685(3$7+:$<6

$IWHUSODFHPHQWWKHFRQVWLWXHQWVDVVRFLDWHGZLWKGUHGJHGPDWHULDOZLOOJHQHUDOO\UHPDLQVRUEHGWR

VHGLPHQWVLQWKHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQDQGWKHVWRFNSLOHDUHD+RZHYHUZLWKVDQG\VHGLPHQWV

RUJDQLFFRPSRXQGVPHWDOVDQGRWKHUFRPSRXQGVGRQRWW\SLFDOO\ELQGWRVHGLPHQWSDUWLFOHV

([SRVXUHVRIKXPDQVWRPDWHULDOLQWKHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQDQGWKHVWRFNSLOHDUHDZRXOGEH

OLPLWHGWR3ODQW+DWFKZRUNHUVZKRFRXOGFRPHLQWRFRQWDFWZLWKGUHGJHGPDWHULDOGXULQJWUDQVSRUW

RUSHUIRUPLQJDQ\PDLQWHQDQFHDWHLWKHUDUHD:RUNHUVZKRFRPHLQFRQWDFWZLWKGUHGJHGPDWHULDO

FRXOGSRWHQWLDOO\EHH[SRVHGYLDGHUPDOFRQWDFWDQGLQFLGHQWDOLQJHVWLRQ7KH\FRXOGDOVR

WKHRUHWLFDOO\FRPHLQFRQWDFWZLWKHIIOXHQWDOWKRXJKWKLVSDWKZD\LVOHVVOLNHO\([SRVXUHVYLD

LQKDODWLRQDUHH[SHFWHGWREHLQVLJQLILFDQW*LYHQWKHUHPRWHORFDWLRQRIGHZDWHULQJEDVLQDQGWKH

VWRFNSLOHDUHDLWLVXQOLNHO\WKDWRWKHUSHUVRQQHO LHWUHVSDVVHUVUHFUHDWLRQDOXVHUV ZRXOGFRPH

LQWRFRQWDFWZLWKPDWHULDOZLWKLQHLWKHUDUHD

$VGLVFXVVHGDERYHFRQVWLWXHQWVPD\EHWUDQVSRUWHGEH\RQGWKHERXQGDU\RIWKHXSODQG

GHZDWHULQJEDVLQYLDHIIOXHQW7KHTXDQWLW\WUDQVSRUWHGLVOLNHO\WREHORZEHFDXVHPRVW

FRQVWLWXHQWVZLOOUHPDLQERXQG WRWKHYHU\VPDOOSHUFHQWDJHRIILQHUJUDLQHGVHGLPHQWLQWKH

GUHGJHGPDWHULDO WRVHGLPHQWLQWKHGHZDWHULQJEDVLQLWVHOI&KHPLFDOVGLVVROYHGLQHIIOXHQWRU

FDUULHGLQHIIOXHQWZKLOHVRUEHGWRVXVSHQGHGVHGLPHQWPD\UHPDLQLQWKHZDWHUFROXPQRUEH

GHSRVLWHGLQVHGLPHQW5HJDUGOHVVWKLVSDWKZD\LVFRQVLGHUHGSRWHQWLDOO\FRPSOHWHDOWKRXJK

OLPLWHGDQGLQVLJQLILFDQWGXHWRWKHVDQG\QDWXUHRIWKHVHGLPHQW*UHDWHVWH[SRVXUHVZRXOGEH

H[SHFWHGIRUVLWHZRUNHUVSHUIRUPLQJPDLQWHQDQFHDWWKHVLWHRUWUDQVIHUULQJPDWHULDOIURPWKH

GHZDWHULQJEDVLQWRWKHVWRFNSLOHDQGIURPWKHGHZDWHULQJEDVLQDQGVWRFNSLOHWRWUXFNVWRUHPRYH

WKHPDWHULDOIURPWKHSODQW:RUNHUVZKRFRPHLQFRQWDFWZLWKVHGLPHQWDQGZDWHUFRXOG

SRWHQWLDOO\EHH[SRVHGYLDGHUPDOFRQWDFWDQGLQFLGHQWDOLQJHVWLRQ5HFUHDWLRQDOXVHUVRIWKH

$OWDPDKD5LYHUPLJKWEHH[SRVHGWRGLOXWHGGRZQVWUHDPFRQFHQWUDWLRQVRIFRQVWLWXHQWVLQHIIOXHQW

DQGVHGLPHQWEXWWKHLUH[SRVXUHZRXOGOLNHO\EHOHVVWKDQWKDWRIVLWHZRUNHUV5HFUHDWLRQDOXVHUV

7

PD\DOVREHH[SRVHGWRFKHPLFDOVLQWKHWLVVXHRIILVKWKDWKDYHELRDFFXPXODWHGFKHPLFDOVIURP

HIIOXHQWDQGVHGLPHQWQHDUWKHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQGLVFKDUJHSRLQW7KHUHIRUHUHFUHDWLRQDO

H[SRVXUHYLDJDPHILVKLVFRQVLGHUHGDVDFRPSOHWHSDWKZD\+RZHYHUWKLVSDWKZD\LVOLPLWHGDQG

LQVLJQLILFDQWGXHWRWKHVDQG\QDWXUHRIWKHGUHGJHGPDWHULDO+XPDQKHDOWKH[SRVXUHSDWKZD\VDUH

VXPPDUL]HGLQ)LJXUHDQG7DEOH

(&2/2*,&$/(;32685(3$7+:$<6

$IWHUSODFHPHQWWKHFKHPLFDOFRQVWLWXHQWVDVVRFLDWHGZLWKGUHGJHGPDWHULDOZLOOJHQHUDOO\UHPDLQ

VRUEHGWRVHGLPHQWVLQWKHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQDQGLQWKHVWRFNSLOHDUHD+RZHYHUZLWKVDQG\

VHGLPHQWVRUJDQLFVPHWDOVDQGRWKHUFRPSRXQGVWRQRWW\SLFDOO\ELQGWRVHGLPHQWSDUWLFOHV

$OWKRXJKVWDQGLQJZDWHULVSUHVHQWGXULQJWKHWRZHHNGHZDWHULQJSHULRGHDFK\HDUFRQGLWLRQV

LQWKHEDVLQDUHQRWFRQGXFLYHWRVXSSRUWDTXDWLFRUJDQLVPVDQGZRXOGQRWOLNHO\VXSSRUWZDGLQJ

ELUGV$OWKRXJKWKHVWRFNSLOHDUHDFRQWDLQVVWDQGLQJZDWHUWKURXJKRXWWKH\HDUDVDUHVXOWRIUDLQ

DFFXPXODWLRQLWLVXQOLNHO\WKDWFRQGLWLRQVLQWKHDUHDZRXOGVXSSRUWDTXDWLFRUJDQLVPV%LUGVDQG

RWKHUZLOGOLIHPD\FRQVXPHWKHZDWHUKRZHYHUH[SRVXUHVDUHOLNHO\WREHOLPLWHG([SRVXUHVWR

PDWHULDOLQWKHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQDQGLQWKHVWRFNSLOHDUHDZRXOGWKHUHIRUHEHOLPLWHGWR

RFFDVLRQDOIRUDJLQJIRUSODQWV DOWKRXJKYHU\OLPLWHGYHJHWDWLRQLVSUHVHQWDWERWKORFDWLRQV DQG

LQVHFWVE\WHUUHVWULDOZLOGOLIHVXFKDVVRQJELUGVDQGVPDOOPDPPDOVWKDWFRQVXPHSODQWVDQGWKHLU

SUHGDWRUV7KHVHH[SRVXUHVZRXOGEHUHODWLYHO\OLPLWHGDQGZRXOGFRQVLVWSULPDULO\RIH[SRVXUH

YLDLQJHVWLRQRIVRLODQGSUH\([SRVXUHVYLDGHUPDODQGLQKDODWLRQSDWKZD\VDUHJHQHUDOO\

FRQVLGHUHGLQVLJQLILFDQWIRUZLOGOLIHEDVHGRQVWXGLHVSHUIRUPHGE\86(3$DQGWKH$UP\ 86

$UP\&HQWHUIRU+HDOWK3URPRWLRQDQG3UHYHQWLYH0HGLFLQH86(3$

&KHPLFDOFRQVWLWXHQWVPD\EHWUDQVSRUWHGEH\RQGWKHERXQGDU\RIWKHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQYLD

HIIOXHQWLQWRWKH$OWDPDKD5LYHUZKHUHWKH\PD\HQWHUVXUIDFHZDWHUDQGVHGLPHQW7KHUHIRUHWKH

ULYHUVXSSRUWVFRPSOHWHH[SRVXUHSDWKZD\VIRUDTXDWLFRUJDQLVPVVXFKDVILVKDQGFUXVWDFHDQVWKDW

PD\EHH[SRVHGWRVXUIDFHZDWHUDQGVHGLPHQWYLDGLUHFWFRQWDFW:LOGOLIHFRQVXPLQJWKHVH

DTXDWLFRUJDQLVPVPD\LQWXUQEHH[SRVHGWRFKHPLFDOFRQVWLWXHQWVWKURXJKLQJHVWLRQRIDTXDWLF

SUH\VHGLPHQWDQGZDWHU:KLOHWKHVHSDWKZD\VDUHFRQVLGHUHGFRPSOHWHWKH\DUHOLPLWHGGXHWR

WKHVDQG\QDWXUHRIWKHGUHGJHGPDWHULDO:LOGOLIHH[SRVXUHVYLDGHUPDODQGLQKDODWLRQSDWKZD\V

DUHJHQHUDOO\FRQVLGHUHGLQVLJQLILFDQW(FRORJLFDOH[SRVXUHSDWKZD\VDUHVXPPDUL]HGLQ)LJXUH

DQG7DEOH

6800$5<$1'5(&200(1'$7,216

$7LHU,3DWKZD\V$QDO\VLVZDVSHUIRUPHGIRUGUHGJLQJDQGPDWHULDOSODFHPHQWDWWKH6RXWKHUQ

1XFOHDU3ODQW+DWFKIDFLOLW\0DWHULDOLVUHPRYHGIURPWKHIDFLOLW\¶VLQWDNHDUHDLQWKH$OWDPDKD

5LYHUDQGSODFHGLQDQXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQRQ6RXWKHUQ1XFOHDUSURSHUW\2QFHGHZDWHUHG

WKHPDWHULDOLVWKHQWUDQVIHUUHGRIIVLWHIRUXVHDVURDGILOODQGWKHUHPDLQLQJPDWHULDOLVWUDQVIHUUHG

WRDQHDUE\VWRFNSLOHDUHD7KHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQGLVFKDUJHVHIIOXHQWLQWRDGUDLQDJHGLWFK

IWDZD\7KHHIIOXHQWWKHQIORZVWRWKH$OWDPDKD5LYHU2QO\DSDUWLDO7LHU,DQDO\VLVZDVUHTXLUHG

DVUHFHQWSK\VLFDOWHVWLQJRIWKHVHGLPHQWKDVFRQILUPHGWKDWWKHPDWHULDOLVSUHGRPLQDWHO\

8

FRPSULVHGRIVDQGDQGJUDYHO7KHUHIRUHFRQVWLWXHQWVRIFRQFHUQDUHH[SHFWHGWREHPLQLPDODQG

LISUHVHQWDUHXQOLNHO\WREHELRDYDLODEOHWRHFRORJLFDOUHFHSWRUVRUERXQGWRVHGLPHQWSDUWLFOHVLQ

FRQFHQWUDWLRQVWKDWZRXOGEHH[SHFWHGWRSRVHDULVNWRKXPDQDQGHFRORJLFDOUHFHSWRUV

$FRQFHSWXDOVLWHPRGHOZDVGHYHORSHGIRUGUHGJHGPDWHULDOH[SRVXUHV7KH$OWDPDKD5LYHU

FRQWDLQVVRXUFHVRIFKHPLFDOVIURPSULPDULO\DJULFXOWXUDODQGUHVLGHQWLDOODQGXVHQRODUJHFLWLHV

DQGIHZODUJHLQGXVWULHVDUHSUHVHQWDORQJWKHULYHU7KHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQDQGVWRFNSLOH

DUHDDUHVSDUVHO\YHJHWDWHGDQGH[SRVXUHVWRGUHGJHGPDWHULDODVVRLOZRXOGEHOLPLWHGWRVRPH

ZLOGOLIHDQGVLWHZRUNHUV(IIOXHQWDQGDVPDOOSRUWLRQRIVHGLPHQWPD\HQWHUWKHULYHUDGMDFHQWWR

WKHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQYLDGLVFKDUJH([SRVXUHVLQWKHULYHUWRUHFHLYLQJZDWHUDQGVHGLPHQW

FRXOGRFFXUIRUVLWHZRUNHUVZLOGOLIHDQGDTXDWLFDQGEHQWKLFRUJDQLVPV5HFUHDWLRQDOXVHUV

PLJKWDOVRXVHWKHGLVFKDUJHDUHDWKH\ZRXOGKDYHOHVVFRQWDFWZLWKVHGLPHQWWKDQVLWHZRUNHUVEXW

PD\FRQVXPHILVK7UDQVSRUWDQGH[SRVXUHSDWKZD\VPD\EHFRPSOHWHEXWDUHH[SHFWHGWREH

LQVLJQLILFDQWIRUFKHPLFDOFRQVWLWXHQWUHOHDVHVDWWKHSRLQWRIGUHGJLQJDQGUHOHDVHVWRDLU$SRUWLRQ

RIVHGLPHQWWKDWLVGHZDWHUHGLQWKHGHZDWHULQJEDVLQZLOOEHWUDQVSRUWHGE\WUXFNVWRWKHVWRFNSLOH

DUHD([SRVXUHVWRVLWHZRUNHUVPD\RFFXUGXULQJWUDQVSRUWRIWKHPDWHULDO%HFDXVHWKHPDWHULDOLV

IXOO\GHZDWHUHGSULRUWRSODFHPHQWLQWKHVWRFNSLOHDQGEHFDXVHWKHVWRFNSLOHDUHDGRHVQRWFRQWDLQ

YHJHWDWLRQRUFRQGLWLRQVWRVXSSRUWZLOGOLIHH[SRVXUHVSDWKZD\VWRHFRORJLFDOUHFHSWRUVDUH

FRPSOHWHEXWH[SHFWHGWREHLQVLJQLILFDQW

$OWKRXJKH[SRVXUHSDWKZD\VIRUKXPDQDQGHFRORJLFDOUHFHSWRUVDUHFRPSOHWHIRUWKHVLWH

GUHGJLQJDQGSODFHPHQWRIWKHVHGLPHQWIURPWKHLQWDNHDUHDDW3ODQW+DWFKGRQRWSUHVHQWSRWHQWLDO

ULVNWRWKHVHUHFHSWRUVZLWKLQWKH$OWDPDKD5LYHUGLVFKDUJHSRLQWWKHXSODQGGHZDWHULQJEDVLQRU

WKHVWRFNSLOHDUHD

5()(5(1&(6

HRUJLD'HSDUWPHQWRI1DWXUDO5HVRXUFHVGuidelines for Eating Fish From Georgia WatersXSGDWH*HRUJLD'HSDUWPHQWRI1DWXUDO5HVRXUFHV$WODQWD$FFHVVHGDW

KWWSVHSGJHRUJLDJRYVLWHVHSGJHRUJLDJRYILOHVUHODWHGBILOHVVLWHBSDJH*$'15B)LVK&RQVX PSWLRQ*XLGHOLQHVB<SGI

/RHIIOHU*UHWFKHQ0H\HU-XG\/8QLYHUVLW\RI*HRUJLD5LYHU%DVLQ&HQWHU$OWDPDKD5LYHU

%DVLQKWWSZZZULYHUFHQWHUXJDHGXHGXFDWLRQNUHVRXUFHVEDVLQVRIJDKWP$WKHQV*HRUJLD

86$UP\&HQWHUIRU+HDOWK3URPRWLRQDQG3UHYHQWLYH0HGLFLQHDevelopment of

Terrestrial Exposure and Bioaccumulation Information for the Army Risk Assessment Modeling System (ARAMS)86$UP\&HQWHUIRU+HDOWK3URPRWLRQDQG3UHYHQWLYH0HGLFLQH

&RQWUDFW1XPEHU'$$'3$EHUGHHQ3URYLQJ*URXQG0DU\ODQG

86$UP\&RUSVRI(QJLQHHUV 86$&( (QJLQHHU5HVHDUFKDQG'HYHORSPHQW&HQWHU (5'&

Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Disposal at Island, Nearshore, or Upland Confined Disposal Facilities - Upland Testing Manual(5'&(/75

-DQXDU\

9

This page intentionally left blank.

10

Outflow pipe (approximate location) Altamaha River Upland GP-1 Settling Intake Structure Basin Approximate dredging area limits

GP PLANT MCMANUS

WATER INTAKE CANAL

0 250 500 Feet

FIGURE 2-1

Location of Southern Nuclear OUTFALL Plant Hatch Intake Area, Upland Settling Basin and Stockpile Area, Stockpile Baxley, Appling County, Georgia

Area

(

+DWFKVHG

( !

(

+DWFKVHG +DWFKVHG

( !

( (

+DWFKVHG +DWFKVHG +DWFKVHG +DWFKVHG +DWFKVHG +DWFKVHG

Document Path: G:\Plant Hatch\MXD\Sample Points.mxd 3ODQW+DWFK

)LJXUH6HGLPHQW6DPSOH/RFDWLRQV

/HJHQG Prepared By-Date:

CLS - 06/08/2015

( Sample Location 0 100 200 Checked By-Date:

HEF - 06/08/2015 Feet Estimated Dredging Limits Project Number:

6122150144

),*85(

&21&(378$/6,7(02'(/)256287+(5118&/($53/$17+$7&+'5('*('0$7(5,$/

83/$1'6(77/,1*%$6,1$1'672&.3,/($5($%$;/(<$33/,1*&2817<*(25*,$

Wildlife exposure to standing water

Human exposure to effluent

Wildlife exposure to sediment and prey items

Site worker exposure to sediment

OVERLYING WATER DISCHARGE PIPE RECEIVING WATER BODY DREDGED MATERIAL DRAINAGE DITCH Aquatic organism exposure to effluent

GROUNDWATER Benthic organism exposure to sediment

12

TABLE 2-1 GRAIN SIZE DATA TIER I EVALUATION AND PATHWAY ANALYSIS OF DREDGED MATERIAL SOUTHERN NUCLEAR'S PLANT HATCH INTAKE AREA Sample Location: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Sample Depth (in): 0-6 0-6 0-6 0-6 0-6 0-6 0-6 0-6 0-6 0-6 Date Sampled: 6/18/15 6/18/15 6/18/15 6/18/15 6/18/15 6/18/15 6/18/15 6/18/15 6/18/15 6/18/15 Analyte Unit Gravel % 12.9 10.2 13.9 5.1 9.1 4.3 1.3 0 0.1 0.3 Coarse Gravel % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fine Gravel % 12.9 10.2 13.9 5.1 9.1 4.3 1.3 0 0.1 0.3 Sand % 86.4 88.7 85.6 94.4 90.4 95.7 97.7 98.8 99.2 99.3 Coarse Sand % 14.4 20.8 25.6 11.1 11.9 16.6 12.3 0.3 2.2 5.2 Medium Sand % 62.5 59.9 53.8 77.3 71.6 78.8 81.8 67.4 63.3 80.7 Fine Sand % 9.5 8 6.2 6 6.9 0.4 3.6 31.1 33.7 13.4 Silt + Clay % 0.7 1.1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 1 1.2 0.7 0.4 Sieve Size 0.75 inch - Percent Finer % passed -- -- -- -- -- 100 -- -- -- --

Sieve Size 0.5 inch - Percent Finer % passed 100 -- 100 -- 100 97.8 -- -- -- --

Sieve Size 0.375 inch - Percent Finer % passed 98.5 100 98.4 100 99.5 97.8 100 -- 100 100 Sieve Size #4 - Percent Finer % passed 87.1 89.8 86.1 94.9 90.9 95.7 98.7 100 99.9 99.7 Sieve Size #10 - Percent Finer % passed 72.7 69 60.5 83.8 79 79.1 86.4 99.7 97.7 94.5 Sieve Size #20 - Percent Finer % passed 35.8 31.4 29 44.4 43.9 18.3 44.8 92.6 82.2 64.2 Sieve Size #40 - Percent Finer % passed 10.2 9.1 6.7 6.5 7.4 0.4 4.6 32.3 34.4 13.8 Sieve Size #60 - Percent Finer % passed 3.9 3.3 2.2 1.6 1.8 0.1 1.3 3 3.8 1.7 Sieve Size #100 - Percent Finer % passed 1.3 1.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.1 1.1 1.3 0.9 0.5 Sieve Size #140 - Percent Finer % passed 0.9 1.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.1 1 1.2 0.8 0.4 Sieve Size #200 - Percent Finer % passed 0.7 1.1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0 1 1.2 0.7 0.4

-- Sieve size not applicable.

7$%/(

(;32685(3$7+:$<6)25+80$1$1'(&2/2*,&$/5(&(37256:,7+,1

$1'2876,'(7+(6287+(5118&/($53/$17+$7&+83/$1'

'(:$7(5,1*%$6,1$1'672&.3,/($5($%$;/(<*(25*,$

([SRVXUH )LQGLQJV

/RFDWLRQ 5HFHSWRU 0HGLD

3DWKZD\V &RPSOHWH 6LJQLILFDQW

Human Health Exposure Pathways 1RW

'HUPDO &RPSOHWH

VLJQLILFDQW

8SODQGGHZDWHULQJ ,QFLGHQWDO 1RW

6LWH:RUNHU 'UHGJHG0DWHULDO &RPSOHWH

EDVLQ ,QJHVWLRQ VLJQLILFDQW

1RW

,QKDODWLRQ &RPSOHWH

VLJQLILFDQW

1RW

'HUPDO &RPSOHWH

VLJQLILFDQW

8SODQGGHZDWHULQJ 5RDG&UHZ ,QFLGHQWDO 1RW

'UHGJHG0DWHULDO &RPSOHWH

EDVLQ :RUNHU ,QJHVWLRQ VLJQLILFDQW

1RW

,QKDODWLRQ &RPSOHWH

VLJQLILFDQW

1RW

'HUPDO &RPSOHWH

VLJQLILFDQW

'UHGJHG0DWHULDO ,QFLGHQWDO 1RW

6WRFNSLOHDUHD 6LWH:RUNHU &RPSOHWH

GHZDWHUHG ,QJHVWLRQ VLJQLILFDQW

1RW

,QKDODWLRQ &RPSOHWH

VLJQLILFDQW

1RW

'HUPDO &RPSOHWH

VLJQLILFDQW

5RDG&UHZ 'UHGJHG0DWHULDO ,QFLGHQWDO 1RW

6WRFNSLOHDUHD &RPSOHWH

RUNHU GHZDWHUHG ,QJHVWLRQ VLJQLILFDQW

1RW

,QKDODWLRQ &RPSOHWH

VLJQLILFDQW

'HUPDO ,QFRPSOHWH

,QFLGHQWDO

7UHVSDVVHU 'UHGJHG0DWHULDO ,QFRPSOHWH

,QJHVWLRQ

8SODQGGHZDWHULQJ ,QKDODWLRQ ,QFRPSOHWH

EDVLQ 'HUPDO ,QFRPSOHWH

,QFLGHQWDO

5HFUHDWLRQDO8VHU 'UHGJHG0DWHULDO ,QFRPSOHWH

,QJHVWLRQ

,QKDODWLRQ ,QFRPSOHWH

'HUPDO ,QFRPSOHWH

,QFLGHQWDO

7UHVSDVVHU 'UHGJHG0DWHULDO ,QFRPSOHWH

,QJHVWLRQ

,QKDODWLRQ ,QFRPSOHWH

,QFLGHQWDO

6WRFNSLOHDUHD ,QFRPSOHWH

,QJHVWLRQ

'HUPDO ,QFRPSOHWH

5HFUHDWLRQDO8VHU 'UHGJHG0DWHULDO

,QFLGHQWDO

,QFRPSOHWH

,QJHVWLRQ

1

([SRVXUH )LQGLQJV

/RFDWLRQ 5HFHSWRU 0HGLD

3DWKZD\V &RPSOHWH 6LJQLILFDQW

'HUPDO ,QFRPSOHWH

6XUIDFH

DWHU6HGLPHQW ,QKDODWLRQ ,QFRPSOHWH

5HFHLYLQJ:DWHUV

5HFUHDWLRQDO8VHU 'UHGJHG0DWHULDO ,QFLGHQWDO

$OWDPDKD5LYHU ,QFRPSOHWH

,QJHVWLRQ

)LVK7LVVXH ,QFLGHQWDO

,QFRPSOHWH

,QJHVWLRQ

Ecological Exposure Pathways 1RW

3UH\ ,QJHVWLRQ &RPSOHWH

VLJQLILFDQW

1RW

,QJHVWLRQ &RPSOHWH

VLJQLILFDQW

LOGOLIH

1RW

8SODQGGHZDWHULQJ 'UHGJHG0DWHULDO 'HUPDO &RPSOHWH

VLJQLILFDQW

EDVLQ

1RW

,QKDODWLRQ &RPSOHWH

VLJQLILFDQW

7HUUHVWULDO 'LUHFW

'UHGJHG0DWHULDO ,QFRPSOHWH

,QYHUWHEUDWHV &RQWDFW

$TXDWLF 'LUHFW

'UHGJHG0DWHULDO ,QFRPSOHWH

2UJDQLVPV &RQWDFW

3UH\ ,QJHVWLRQ &RPSOHWH 1RW

VLJQLILFDQW

,QJHVWLRQ &RPSOHWH 1RW

VLJQLILFDQW

'UHGJHG0DWHULDO 'HUPDO &RPSOHWH 1RW

GHZDWHUHG VLJQLILFDQW

LOGOLIH

,QKDODWLRQ &RPSOHWH 1RW

6WRFNSLOHDUHD

VLJQLILFDQW

,QJHVWLRQ &RPSOHWH 1RW

6WDQGLQJZDWHU VLJQLILFDQW

'LUHFW &RPSOHWH 1RW

&RQWDFW VLJQLILFDQW

$TXDWLF 'UHGJHG0DWHULDO 'LUHFW ,QFRPSOHWH

2UJDQLVPV GHZDWHUHG &RQWDFW

1RW

3UH\ ,QJHVWLRQ &RPSOHWH

VLJQLILFDQW

1RW

,QJHVWLRQ &RPSOHWH

VLJQLILFDQW

5HFHLYLQJ:DWHUV :LOGOLIH

6XUIDFH 1RW

$OWDPDKD5LYHU 'HUPDO &RPSOHWH

DWHU6HGLPHQW VLJQLILFDQW

1RW

,QKDODWLRQ &RPSOHWH

VLJQLILFDQW

$TXDWLF 6XUIDFH 'LUHFW 1RW

&RPSOHWH

2UJDQLVPV :DWHU6HGLPHQW &RQWDFW VLJQLILFDQW

July 21, 1995 Mr. J. T. Beckham, Jr.

Vice President - Plant Hatch Georgia Power Company P. 0. Box 1295 Birmingham, Alabama 35201

SUBJECT:

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. M91077 AND M91078)

Dear Mr. Beckham:

Enclosed is a copy of the Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact related to your application for amendments dated January 13, 1995, as supplemented by letters dated April 5 and June 20, 1995.

The proposed amendments would increase the licensed core thermal power from 2436 MWt to 2558 MWt for Hatch, Units 1 and 2. This represents an increase of 5 percent over the current licensed power level.

This assessment is being forwarded to the Office of the Federal Register for publication.

Sincerely, Original signed by:

Kahtan N. Jabbour, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 11-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366 DISTRIBUTION ACRS (4)

PUBLIC E.Merschoff,RII

Enclosure:

Environmental Assessment R.Crlenjak,RII PDII-2 Reading S.Varga E.Jordan,AEOD cc w/encl: See next page J.Zwolinski OGC S* mmm*m*llltl mmm* la Pllll DOCUMENT NAME: Ii:

\HIC HIRIII HAIN.UV~____

NAME L.BERRZIY K.JABBOUR LI S.EB 1 Htii?&i DATE 7/1 /95 7/ I) /95 J 7/ / I,'957/ -1/95 7/ /95 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY i'0 9507310168 950721 PDR ADOCK 05000321 P PDR

0P UNITED STATES 0oNUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-1

%July21, 1995 Mr. J. T. Beckham, Jr.

Vice President - Plant Hatch Georgia Power Company P. 0. Box 1295 Birmingham, Alabama 35201

SUBJECT:

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. M91077 AND M91078)

Dear Mr. Beckham:

Enclosed is a copy of the Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact related to your application for amendments dated January 13, 1995, as supplemented by letters dated April 5 and June 20, 1995.

The proposed amendments would increase the licensed core thermal power from 2436 MWt to 2558 MWt for Hatch, Units 1 and 2. This represents an increase of 5 percent over the current licensed power level.

This assessment is being forwarded to the Office of the Federal Register for publication.

Sincerely, Kahtan N. Jabbour, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 11-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366

Enclosure:

Environmental Assessment cc w/encl: See ndxt page

Mr. J. T. Beckham, Jr.

Georgia Power Company Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant cc: Mr. Ernie Toupin Mr. Ernest L. Blake, Jr. Manager of Nuclear Operations Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge Oglethorpe Power Corporation 2300 N Street, NW. 2100 East Exchange Place Washington, DC 20037 Tucker, Georgia 30085-1349 Mr. D. M. Crowe Charles A. Patrizia, Esquire Manager Licensing - Hatch Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker Georgia Power Company 12th Floor P. 0. Box 1295 1050 Connecticut Avenue, NW.

Birmingham, Alabama 35201 Washington, DC 20036 Mr. L. Sumner Mr. Jack D. Woodard General Manager, Nuclear Plant Senior Vice President Georgia Power Company Nuclear Operations Route 1, Box 439 Georgia Power Company Baxley, Georgia 31513 P. 0. Box 1295 Birmingham, Alabama 35201 Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Route 1, Box 725 Appling County Commissioners Baxley, Georgia 31513 County Courthouse Baxley, Georgia 31513 Regional Administrator, Region II U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Heinz Mueller 101 Marietta Street, NW. Suite 2900 Environmental Review Coordinator Atlanta, Georgia 30323 345 Courtland Street, NE Atlanta, Georgia 30365 Mr. Charles H. Badger Office of Planning and Budget Room 610 270 Washington Street, SW.

Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Harold Reheis, Director Department of Natufral Resources 205 Butler Street, SE., Suite 1252 Atlanta, Georgia 30334

7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION GEORGIA POWER COMPANY OGLETHORPE POWER CORPORATION DOCKET NOS. 50-321 AND 50-366 EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT. UNITS I AND 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-57 and NPF-5 issued to Georgia Power Company, et al. (GPC or the licensee), for operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units I and 2, located in Appling County, Georgia.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Proposed Action:

This Environmental Assessment, provided by the licensee, addresses potential environmental issues related to GPC's application to amend Plant Hatch, Units I and 2, Operating Licenses. The proposed amendments would increase the licensed core thermal power from 2436 MWt to 2558 MWt, which represents an increase of 5 percent over the current licensed power level.

This request Is in'accordance with the generic boiling water reactor (BWR) power uprate program established by the General Electric Company (GE) and approved by the NRC staff in a letter from W. T. Russell, NRC, to P. W.

Marriott, GE, dated September 30, 1991. Implementation of the proposed power uprate at Plant Hatch will result in an increase of steam flow to approximately 106 percent of the current value, but will not require changes 9507310173 950721 PDR ADOCK 05000321 P PDR

to the basic fuel design. Core reload design and fuel parameters will be modified as power uprate is implemented to support the current 18-month reload cycle. The higher power level will be achieved by expanding the power/flow map and slightly increasing reactor vessel dome pressure. The maximum core flow limit will not be increased over the pre-uprate value. Implementation of this proposed power uprate will require minor modifications, such as resetting of the safety relief setpoints, as well as calibrating plant instrumentation to reflect the uprated power. Plant operating, emergency, and other procedure changes will be made where necessary to support uprated operation.

The proposed action involves NRC issuance of license amendments to uprate the authorized power level by changing the Operating Licenses, including Appendix A (Technical Specifications). Appendix B of the Operating License (Environmental Technical Specifications) does not require revision as a result of power uprate.

The Need for the Proposed Action:

The proposed action would authorize GPC to increase the potential electrical output of Plant Hatch by approximately 40 megawatts per unit and thus would provide additional electrical power to service GPC's grid.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:

The "Final Environmental Statement" (FES) related to operation of Plant Hatch Units 1 and 2 (Reference 6) evaluates the nonradiological impact of operation at a maximum design reactor power level of 2537 MWt per unit. By letter dated January 13, 1995 (Reference 1), GPC submitted the proposed amendment to implement power uprate for Hatch Units I and 2 which is the subject of this environmental assessment. Enclosure 2 of that submittal provided information on the nonradiological environmental aspects of the

- 3 amendment request. Enclosure 4 was the Plant Hatch power uprate licensing report (GE report NEDC-32405P) which provided information on the radiological environmental impact of power uprate.

The proposed amendments allowing power uprate operation will not have a significant impact on the environment and the change does not constitute an unreviewed environmental question. The nonradiological and radiological effects of the proposed action on the environment are described below.

Nonradiolocical Environmental Assessment:

Power uprate will not change the method of generating electricity nor the method of handling any influents from the environment or effluents to the environment. Therefore, no new or different types of environmental impacts are expected.

The detailed evaluation presented below and in Reference 1 concludes that nonradiological parameters affected by power uprate will remain within the bounding conditions cited in the FES, which concludes that no significant environmental impact will result from operation of Plant Hatch. This conclusion remains valid for power uprate.

The FES evaluated the nonradiological impact at a maximum design reactor power level of 2537 MWt per unit (approximately 104 percent of the current licensed power level). The parameters evaluated in the Environmental Report and the subsequent FES (References 4 through 6) were re-evaluated at 2558 MWt to determine whether the proposed change is significant relative to adverse environmental impact. Table E2-1 of Reference 1 provided a comparison of environmental-related operation parameters at rated and uprated power. Both units at Plant Hatch utilize a closed-loop circulating water system and forced air coolingtowers for dissipating heat from the main turbine condenser.

Other equipment is cooled by the plant service water (PSW) and residual heat removal (RHR) service water systems. The cooling towers and service water systems are operated in accordance with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. GA 0004120, which expires October 31, 1997. No notification changes or other action relative to the NPDES Permit are required.

The withdrawal of cooling water from the Altamaha River is expected to increase slightly, primarily due to the increase in the evaporation rate from the cooling towers. Emergency system flows are expected to remain generally unchanged. Although increased heat loads are expected for nonsafety-related loads, such as the main generator stator coolers, hydrogen coolers, and exciter coolers, heat loads will remain within the existing design heat loads of the service water systems.

The circulating water system design flow rate is the primary basis for determining makeup water for the Plant Hatch cooling towers. Other factors affecting tower makeup are tower performance and meteorological conditions.

Based on the review of cooling tower performance parameters associated with power uprate, the design flow rate of the cooling towers will not change.

Makeup requirements may increase slightly due to increased heat load on the towers and the associated increase in evaporation. As discussed in of Reference 1, the increase in makeup (withdrawal) rate is expected to be approximately 5 percent or 500 gpm. This projected increase associated with the uprate is not significant and is enveloped by the river water withdrawal rates discussed in the FES and the rates approved under the current Georgia Surface Water Withdrawal Permit for Plant Hatch. Intake canal

- 5 velocity will not be significantly affected. No measurable effects on fish impingement or plankton entrainment are expected.

Changes in cooling tower blowdown rate and cooling tower chemistry as a result of the uprate are not significant. Any changes in blowdown rate and cooling tower cycles of concentration resulting from uprated power operation are enveloped by the existing design criteria discussed in FES.

Cooling tower drift does not increase as a result of the uprate since the circulating water flow rate does not change. Cooling tower blowdown temperature associated with power uprate operation will increase slightly

(<10 F), thereby producing a slight increase in river discharge temperature. A review of the increase in the river discharge temperature relative to the conclusions of the FES and thermal studies required to support licensing of the plant indicates the slight temperature increase is not significant.

The thermal plume characteristics are not expected to change significantly as a result of power uprate. Circulating water and service water flow rates remain unchanged. The discharge temperature to the cooling towers should increase by no more than 1°F due to operation at power uprate conditions. The corresponding change in discharge temperature at the river will not significantly impact the size or characteristics of the thermal plume. Thermal plume studies conducted during original licensing and the FES conclusions relatiVe to thermal impacts remain valid for the uprated condition.

No significant change in discharge flow rate, velocity, or chemical composition will occur due to the proposed power uprate. Power uprate does not impact the discharge characteristics upon which the NPDES Permit is based.

- 6 No notification, changes, or other actions relative to the NPDES Permit are required.

No change in the groundwater withdrawal required to supply the Hatch treatment plant or fire protection system will result from the proposed uprate.

The evaluation also considered the flow rate required by the liquid radwaste system (e.g., floor and equipment drains) due to the proposed uprate.

No significant change in liquid radwaste quantities or activity levels which would increase the required radwaste dilution flow are expected. Therefore, the impact on the environment from these systems as a result of operation at the uprate power levels is not significant.

Plant operation at uprated power conditions will not affect current noise levels. Major plant equipment is housed within structures located on the plant site and is not a major contributor to surrounding noise levels.

Equipment, such as the main turbines/generators and the cooling towers, will continue to operate at the current speed and noise level. The generator step up transformers will operate at an increased KVA level; however, the overall noise level will not increase significantly.

Thus, the proposed uprate will not result in any significant environmental impact and is not an unreviewed environmental question. In addition, no actions relative to the Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS), NPDES permit or other environmental documents are required.

Radiological Environmental Assessment:

Georgia Power Company evaluated the impact of the proposed power uprate amendment and concluded that the applicable regulatory acceptance criteria relative to radiological environmental impacts will continue to be satisfied

- 7 for the uprated power conditions. Existing Technical Specifications limits on radiological effluents will be maintained. In conducting this evaluation, GPC considered the effect of the higher power level on liquid radioactive wastes, gaseous radioactive wastes, and radiation levels both in the plant and offsite during both normal operation and post-accident.

Enclosure 4 of Reference 1 provides the power uprate safety analyses report for Plant Hatch, as well as an assessment of the radiological effects of power uprate operation during both normal and postulated accident conditions. Sections 8.1 and 8.2 discuss the potential effect of power uprate on the liquid and gaseous radwaste systems. Sections 8.3, 8.4, and 8.5 discuss the potential effect of power uprate on radiation sources within the' plant and radiation levels during normal and post-accident conditions.

Section 4.4 discusses the standby gas treatment system (SGTS). Section 9.2 presents the results of the calculated whole body and thyroid doses at the exclusion area boundary and the low population zone that might result from the postulated design basis radiological accidents. All offsite doses remain below established regulatory limits for power uprate operation.

The floor drain collector subsystem and the waste collector subsystem both receive inputs from a variety of sources (e.g., leakage from component cooling water system, reactor coolant system, condensate and feedwater system, turbine, and plant cooling water system). However, leakages from these systems are not expected to increase significantly since the operating pressures of these systems are either being maintained constant or are being increased only slightly due to the proposed power uprate.

- 8 The largest single source of liquid radioactive waste is from the backwash of the condensate demineralizers. These demineralizers remove activated corrosion products which are expected to increase proportionally to the proposed power uprate. However, the total volume of processed waste is not expected to increase significantly, since the only appreciable increase in processed waste will be due to the slightly more frequent cleaning of these demineralizers. Based on a review of plant effluent reports and the slight increase expected due to the proposed power uprate, GPC has concluded that the slight increase in the processing of liquid radioactive wastes will not have a significant increase in environment impact and that requirements of 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 50, Appendix I, will continue to be met.

Gaseous radioactive effluents are produced during both normal operation and abnormal operation occurrences. These effluents are collected, controlled, processed, stored, and disposed of by the gaseous radioactive waste management systems which include the various building ventilation systems, the offgas system, and the SGTS. The concentration of radioactive gaseous effluents released through the building ventilation systems during normal operation is not expected to increase significantly due to the proposed power uprate since the amount of fission products released into the reactor coolant (and subsequently into the building atmosphere) depends on the number and nature of fuel-rod defects and is not dependent on reactor power level.

The concentration of activation products contained in the reactor coolant is expected to remain unchanged, since the linear increase in the production of these activation products will be offset by the linear increase in steaming rate. Therefore, based on its review of the various building ventilation

- 9 systems, GPC has concluded that there will not be a significant adverse effect on airborne radioactive effluents as a result of the proposed power uprate.

Radiolysis of the reactor coolant causes the formation of hydrogen and oxygen, the quantities of which increase linearly with core power. These additional quantities of hydrogen and oxygen would increase the flow to the recombiners by 5 percent during uprated power conditions. However, the operational increases in hydrogen and oxygen remain within the design capacity of the system.

The SGTS is designed to minimize offsite and control room radiation dose rates during venting and purging of both the primary and secondary containment atmospheres under accident or abnormal conditions. This is accomplished by maintaining the secondary containment at a slightly negative pressure with respect to the outside atmosphere and discharging the secondary containment atmosphere through high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters and charcoal adsorbers. The SGTS charcoal absorbers are designed for a charcoal loading capacity of 2.5 mgl/gC for the 30-day loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) scenario. The proposed power uprate will increase the post-LOCA iodine loading by 5 percent; however, the charcoal loading will remain within the 2.5 mgl/gC design limit. Therefore, there will be no significant increase in environmental impact.

Georgia Powei Company evaluated the effects of the power uprate on in plant radiation levels for Plant Hatch during both normal operation and post accident. GPC's conclusions are that radiation levels during both normal operation and post-accident may increase slightly (approximately proportional to the increase in power level). The slight increases in in-plant radiation levels expected due to the proposed power uprate should not affect radiation

Hatch Nuclear Plant - Line Drawing/Water Balance Permit No. GA0004120 01 02 03 03A ALTAMAHA RIVER

018 :

Screen Strainer Storm water 72 MGD Backwash Backwash comingled with per Unit

(.72 MGD) (. 72 MGD) Draining of water from the chiller Unit 1 Unit 2 Discharge Intake system to storm drains and allowable r-- Structure Structure I

non-stormwater j discharges Unit 1 Combined Unit 2 Combined (7 .19 MGD) Waste Streams Waste Streams Sewage 01F Treatment

.07 MGD Plant 04 Slowdown &

f Draining or water from 01 H Pressure Filler Backwash the chiller system to Diesel Generator storm drains

, (.72 MGD)

Non-contact Cooling Water Continuous - 2.02 MGD Water Treatment 1.s1 MGD Intermittent- 3.02 MGD Facility Main Power Block 01G Neutralizatior, Tank

.94 MGD 01E Liquid Radwaste System Unit 2 Unit 1 (.14MGD)

~

- 01A Unit 1 Cooling T=r -- 018 Unit 1 Cooling Tower Slowdown (48.96 MGD) Flume Overflow (48.96 MGD)

Unit 1 02E Liquid I

Radwaste System

(.14MGD)

T l Cooling Towers

~

OZA Unit 2 Cooling Tower 02C Uni! 2 Cooling Tower Slowdown (48.96 MGD) Flume Overflow (48.96 MGD)

Unit 2 Note : All Flows Are Maximum Cooling Towers

~ Southern Nuclear (Million Gallons Per Day)

6RXWKHUQ1XFOHDU2SHUDWLQJ&RPSDQ\

&RORQQDGH3DUNZD\

%LUPLQJKDP$/

&OHDQ:DWHU$FW E 6XSSRUWLQJ,QIRUPDWLRQ

SOURCE WATER PHYSICAL DATA, COOLING WATER INTAKE STRUCTURE DATA, COOLING WATER SYSTEM DATA, COMPLIANCE WITH IMPINGEMENT MORTALITY STANDARD, ENTRAINMENT PERFORMANCE STUDIES, AND OPERATIONAL STATUS r Reports: (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), and (8)

(GZLQ,+DWFK1XFOHDU3ODQW

13'(612*$

November 2021

7$%/(2)&217(176

GLOSSARY AND ACRONYMS ........................................................................................................ii 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1-1 2 40 CFR 122.21(r)(2) - SOURCE WATER PHYSICAL DATA ................................................. 2-1 2.1 Source Water Body ......................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.1 Water Depth ............................................................................................................ 2-1 2.1.2 Aerial Dimensions .................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.3 Salinty ...................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.4 Temperature Regimes ............................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Hydrological and Geomorphological Features................................................................. 2-2 2.2.1 Flood History............................................................................................................ 2-3 2.2.2 Low Flow Conditions ................................................................................................ 2-4 2.2.3 Source Waterbody Physical Configuration Cooling Water Intake Hydraulic Zone of Influence ................................................................................................................................ 2-4 2.3 Locational Maps.............................................................................................................. 2-4 3 40 CFR 122.21(r)(3) - Cooling Water Intake Structure Data .................................................. 3-1 3.1 Intake Structures for Units 1-2 ........................................................................................ 3-1 3.2 Latitude and Longitude ................................................................................................... 3-1 3.3 Operation of the CWIS .................................................................................................... 3-1 3.4 Water Balance ................................................................................................................ 3-2 3.5 Drawings ......................................................................................................................... 3-2 4 40 CFR 122.21(r)(4) - Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data.................... 4-1 4.1 Field Studies ................................................................................................................... 4-2 4.2 Threatened, Endangered and Protected Species ............................................................ 4-2 4.3 Public Participation ......................................................................................................... 4-2 4.4 Protectiveness Measures ................................................................................................ 4-2 4.5 Fragile Species ............................................................................................................... 4-2 4.6 Incidental Take Exemption or Authorization .................................................................... 4-2 5 40 CFR 122.21(r)(5) - Cooling Water System Data ............................................................... 5-1 5.1 Operation ........................................................................................................................ 5-1 5.2 The Proportion of the Design Intake Flow that is Used in the System ............................. 5-2 5.3 Proportion of Source Waterbody Withdrawn ................................................................... 5-2 5.4 Design and Engineering Calculations.............................................................................. 5-2 5.5 Description of Existing Impingement and Entrainment Technologies .............................. 5-2 6 40 CFR 122.21(r)(6) - Chosen Method(s) of Compliance with Impingement Mortality Standard .

.............................................................................................................................................. 6-1 7 40 CFR 122.21(r)(7) - Entrainment Performance Studies ...................................................... 7-1 8 40 CFR 122.21(r)(8) - Operational Status.............................................................................. 8-1 8.1 Capacity Utilization Rates ............................................................................................... 8-1 8.2 Major Upgrades During the Last 15 Years ...................................................................... 8-2 8.3 Processing Units ............................................................................................................. 8-2 8.4 New Units Planned within the Next 5 years ..................................................................... 8-2 9 References ............................................................................................................................ 9-1 APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C i

/266$5<$1'$&521<06

$,) Actual Intake Flow

%7$ Best Technology Available FIV cubic feet per second

&:,6Cooling water intake structure

',) Design Intake Flow HO elevation

(3$: Environmental Protection Agency ISV feet per second

)6$5 Final Safety Analysis Report

(,6 Generic Environmental Impact Statement

3& Georgia Power Company

JSPgallons per minute

+13 Hatch Nuclear Plant

+=,Hydraulic Zone of Influence 0*'Million gallons per day PVOMean sea level 0:HMegawatts-electric 15& Nuclear Regulatory Commission 166Nuclear Steam Supply System

61&Southern Nuclear Operating Company ii

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

,1752'8&7,21

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has promulgated and revised regulations per Congressional mandate in section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. Existing facilities, as defined in 40 CFR 125.92(k), are required to submit information regarding the source water body, cooling water intake structure, and system operations in accordance with 40 CFR 122.21(r). Hatch Nuclear Plant (HNP) is an existing facility per this definition (construction was commenced prior to January 17, 2002).

The 2,240-acre HNP site is approximately 11 miles north of Baxley, Georgia, 20 miles south of Vidalia, Georgia, 98 miles southeast of Macon, Georgia, 73 miles northwest of Brunswick, Georgia, and 67 miles southwest of Savannah, Georgia. Appendix A-1 (Figure VI-1) shows the location of HNP in relationship to Georgia, South Carolina, and the Atlantic Ocean and Appendix A-2 (Figure VI-2) shows the details of the 10-mile region surrounding HNP. The site is in a sparsely populated, largely rural area, with forests and small farms as the dominant land use.

HNP is a two-unit electrical generating plant, each unit utilizing a Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS) that utilizes a boiling water reactor (BWR). HNP Units 1 and 2 began commercial operations in December 1975 and September 1979, respectively. The respective net power output for Unit 1 is 876 and 883 MWe for Unit 2.

Georgia Power Company (GPC), the Ogelthorpe Power Corporation (OPC), the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, and the city of Dalton, Georgia jointly own the HNP site and its existing facilities. Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC) is the plant licensee and is the licensed operator for Hatch as well as all existing Southern Company nuclear generating facilities. GPC and SNC are both subsidiaries of Southern Company.

Per 40 CFR 122.21(r)(1)(ii)(B), existing facilities that withdraw greater than 125 million gallons per day (MGD) Actual Intake Flow (AIF), must also submit applicable sections of (r)(9), (10), (11), (12),

and (13). The most recently calculated AIF for Hatch is approximately 63.13 MGD, based on the previous three years of runtime data (see section 5.4 calculations). Because the AIF is less than the 125 MGD, these sections have been omitted.

1-1

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant The following sections are intended to comply with the requirements for all existing facilities specific to 316(b), under 40 CFR 122.21(r)(1)(ii)(A) ³7KHRZQHURURSHUDWRURIDQH[LVWLQJIDFLOLW\

GHILQHGDW&)5 N PXVWVXEPLWWRWKH'LUHFWRUIRUUHYLHZWKHLQIRUPDWLRQUHTXLUHG

XQGHUSDUDJUDSKV U DQG RIWKLVVHFWLRQDQGDSSOLFDEOHSURYLVLRQVRISDUDJUDSKV U

DQG RIWKLVVHFWLRQ' Each of the required parts are included as major sections following the introduction. Within each section when relevant portions of the rules requirements are quoted they are presented in bold text. The requirements within the subparts are included as subsections within each of the sections.

The majority of the information within this document has been summarized, and in some cases incorporated verbatim, from the following HNP Nuclear Regulatory Licensing documents. Citations from these documents are clearly outlined at the point of reference. This list of documents includes:

x Appendix D, Applicants Environmental Report - Operating License Renewal Stage, Edwin I.

Hatch Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2, License Renewal Application, (Environmental Report) x Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, Supplement 4, Regarding Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Final Report, NUREG 1437, May 2001 (NRC 2001) x Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, 316(b) Demonstration, Georgia Power Company, 1981 (GPC 1981) x Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 & Unit 2, Final Safety Analysis Report Update, REV 39, May 2021 (FSAR)

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) evaluated the cumulative impacts resulting from the continued operation of the plant cooling system as part of the HNP operating license renewal. The NRC staff has determined the cumulative impact of continued operation of Hatch would be SMALL and that no additional mitigation is warranted (NRC, 2001).

1-2

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

&)5 U +/-6285&(:$7(53+<6,&$/'$7$

&)5 U 6RXUFHZDWHUSK\VLFDOGDWD7KHVHLQFOXGH L $QDUUDWLYHGHVFULSWLRQ

DQGVFDOHGGUDZLQJVVKRZLQJWKHSK\VLFDOFRQILJXUDWLRQRIDOOVRXUFHZDWHUERGLHVXVHGE\

\RXUIDFLOLW\LQFOXGLQJDHULDOGLPHQVLRQVGHSWKVVDOLQLW\DQGWHPSHUDWXUHUHJLPHVDQG

RWKHUGRFXPHQWDWLRQWKDWVXSSRUWV\RXUGHWHUPLQDWLRQRIWKHZDWHUERG\W\SHZKHUHHDFK

FRROLQJZDWHULQWDNHVWUXFWXUHLVORFDWHG LL ,GHQWLILFDWLRQDQGFKDUDFWHUL]DWLRQRIWKHVRXUFH

ZDWHUERG\¶VK\GURORJLFDODQGJHRPRUSKRORJLFDOIHDWXUHVDVZHOODVWKHPHWKRGV\RXXVHG

WRFRQGXFWDQ\SK\VLFDOVWXGLHVWRGHWHUPLQH\RXULQWDNH¶VDUHDRILQIOXHQFHZLWKLQWKH

ZDWHUERG\DQGWKHUHVXOWVRIVXFKVWXGLHVDQG LLL /RFDWLRQDOPDSV

6RXUFH:DWHU%RG\

The Altamaha River is the major source of water for the plant. Each HNP circulating water system is a closed-loop cooling system that utilizes three cross-flow and one counter-flow mechanical-draft cooling towers for dissipating waste heat to the atmosphere. Cooling tower makeup water for Units 1 and 2 is withdrawn from the Altamaha River through a single intake structure. The site Cooling Water Intake Structure (CWIS) is located along the shoreline of the Altamaha River (Appendix A-3, Figure VI-3) and is positioned so that water is available to the plant at both minimum flow and probable flood conditions.

:DWHU'HSWK

In the vicinity of the HNP, the Altamaha River is approximately 500 feet wide, with an average depth 30 feet and average velocity of 0.31 ft/s for water approaching the intake screen (GEIS, Section 2.2.2).

$HULDO'LPHQVLRQV

The intake is approximately 150 feet long, 60 feet wide, and the roof is approximately 60 feet above normal river level. A small portion of the circulating water flow is returned to the Altamaha River (SNC 2000).

6DOLQLW\

Salinity is a measure of the amount of salts in the water. Because dissolved ions increase salinity as well as conductivity, the two measures are related. HNP is not located near an estuary or tidally-influenced river, salt water intrusion is not a concern. Therefore, it was determined that salinity gradients are not applicable to HNP as outlined in Appendix F of the GEIS (NRC, 2001). As such, salinity data has not been included.

7HPSHUDWXUH5HJLPHV

The following Figure 2-1 represents weekly river water intake temperatures measured from 2015 to 2021 at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) gauging station (Number 02225000).

2-1

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

)LJXUH+/-+13,QWDNH7HPSHUDWXUH0HDVXUHPHQWV

+\GURORJLFDODQG*HRPRUSKRORJLFDO)HDWXUHV

HNP lies on the southern shore of the Altamaha River, which runs eastward past the plant. The Altamaha is the largest river of the Georgia coast and the second largest basin in the eastern United States. Located in southeastern Georgia, the river drains an area of approximately 11,600 mi2. It is formed by the confluence of the Ocmulgee and Oconee rivers about 20 miles upstream from HNP and ultimately discharges into the Atlantic Ocean just south of Darien, Georgia, approximately 117 river miles downstream of HNP (GEIS Section 2.1).

The U.S. Geological Survey maintains a gauging station (Number 02225000) on the right bank of the river 400 feet downstream from the U.S. Highway 1 bridge, approximately 530 feet upstream from HNP. Based on 49 years of record, the average annual flow rate at this station is 11,580 ft3/s. Highest monthly flows normally occur in March and lowest monthly flows normally occur in September. The historical single day low flow is 1620 ft3/s. The river remains relatively undisturbed and has no major channelization, dredging, or major reservoirs. Presently there are no other competing industrial consumptive users of water from the Altamaha River in the vicinity of HNP, nor are there plans for any new major consumptive users in the foreseeable future. There are no water-quality issues with the river in the vicinity of HNP and no restrictions have been imposed on HNP during low-flow periods.

The HNP site lies within the Coastal Plain physiographic province and is underlain by approximately 4000 feet of relatively unconsolidated Mesozoic and Cenozoic sand, gravel, clay, marl, claystone, sandstone, and limestone. These strata overlie basaltic basement rock of pre-Cretaceous age, and dip and thicken seaward. There was no evidence of faulting during the exploratory drilling and construction of the facility. The formations at the site, of interest due to their water-bearing characteristics, consist of the alluvium beneath the Altamaha River floodplain, the Brandywine Formation (the perched aquifer), the Hawthorn Formation, the Tampa Formation, the Suwanee 2-2

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant Formation, the Ocala Formation, and the Lisbon Formation. The Brandywine Formation caps the upland areas adjacent to the stream drainage areas (GEIS Section 2.2.2) 7DEOH+/-0RQWKO\'LVFKDUJH9DOXHVIURP$OWDPDKD5LYHU 86*6 1HDU%D[OH\*$

Mean of daily mean values for each day of record in, ft3/s (Calculation Period 1948-10-01 -> 2021-09-30)

-DQ )HE 0DU $SU 0D\ -XQ -XO $XJ 6HS 2FW 1RY 'HF

14,000 17,500 22,700 20,600 12,400 7,170 5,520 5,490 5,670 5,170 4,520 6,850

14,500 17,800 22,200 20,700 12,100 7,210 5,610 5,480 5,470 5,270 4,500 7,070

14,900 18,000 21,900 21,100 11,900 7,280 5,700 5,580 5,170 5,370 4,600 7,490

15,100 18,600 22,000 21,400 11,700 7,220 5,760 5,670 4,850 5,520 4,730 7,940

15,300 19,100 22,400 21,500 11,700 7,140 5,760 5,700 4,650 5,690 4,880 8,370

15,500 19,400 22,900 21,600 11,500 7,200 5,790 5,670 4,650 5,730 4,940 8,660

15,600 19,700 23,300 21,700 11,300 7,340 5,820 5,640 4,870 5,630 4,890 8,870

15,600 19,800 23,400 21,800 11,100 7,430 5,860 5,630 5,070 5,540 4,850 8,970

15,400 20,100 23,800 21,800 10,800 7,470 5,900 5,550 4,990 5,560 4,850 9,000

15,500 20,600 24,500 21,700 10,400 7,410 5,900 5,550 4,870 5,540 4,880 8,990

15,500 21,000 25,000 21,500 9,980 7,380 5,980 5,620 4,730 5,470 4,940 9,010

15,600 21,400 25,200 20,900 9,610 7,410 6,150 5,740 4,680 5,420 4,990 9,100

15,800 22,100 25,300 20,200 9,360 7,360 6,460 5,820 4,640 5,350 5,100 9,320

16,100 22,400 25,400 19,500 9,180 7,190 7,070 5,790 4,520 5,420 5,250 9,590

16,200 22,500 25,200 19,000 9,020 7,030 7,390 5,680 4,390 5,390 5,470 10,000

16,100 22,400 24,600 18,600 8,980 6,900 7,500 5,640 4,360 5,320 5,720 10,400

15,800 22,100 23,800 18,100 8,940 6,700 7,470 5,630 4,320 5,170 6,020 10,700

15,700 21,800 23,100 17,600 8,820 6,540 7,300 5,600 4,190 5,050 6,280 10,800

15,600 21,700 22,400 17,000 8,630 6,480 7,020 5,680 4,110 5,060 6,590 10,900

15,700 21,500 21,900 16,500 8,420 6,440 6,800 5,720 4,120 5,050 6,810 11,100

15,800 21,100 21,600 16,000 8,190 6,440 6,610 5,750 4,150 5,010 6,880 11,200

16,100 20,800 21,400 15,400 7,980 6,510 6,470 5,790 4,210 5,050 7,020 11,300

16,600 20,900 21,100 15,000 7,870 6,510 6,380 5,820 4,260 5,100 7,210 11,200

17,000 21,400 21,100 14,700 7,860 6,440 6,310 5,750 4,340 5,110 7,380 11,100

17,200 22,000 21,300 14,400 7,980 6,190 6,250 5,700 4,380 5,090 7,390 11,300

17,200 22,600 21,200 14,100 8,010 5,930 6,080 5,710 4,370 4,980 7,240 11,600

17,200 23,100 21,100 13,800 7,820 5,760 5,910 5,730 4,440 4,720 6,980 11,900

17,300 23,200 21,000 13,500 7,550 5,660 5,760 5,750 4,590 4,620 6,740 12,000

17,400 22,800 20,900 13,100 7,340 5,600 5,630 5,810 4,790 4,650 6,660 12,200

17,500 20,800 12,700 7,230 5,500 5,600 5,870 5,000 4,660 6,690 12,800

17,500 20,700 7,170 5,580 5,820 4,590 13,400

)ORRG+LVWRU\

The maximum historical flood was estimated to be 200,000 ft3/s near HNP during the flood of January 1925. This flow corresponds to an estimated maximum stage at the site of about el 91.3 ft msl (200,000 ft3/s) (FSAR, Section 2.4.2.1).

2-3

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

/RZ)ORZ&RQGLWLRQV

Minimum stream flows and related stages may influence water supply to the intake pumps and the plan of operation of the plant. For these reasons, a very low-flow river stage-discharge relationship (discharge rating curve) was developed for the Hatch intake structure location as outlined below.

The Hatch intake structure is located on the Altamaha River at approximately river mile 116.4. The nearest USGS gage is: 02225000, Altamaha River Near Baxley, Georgia. The Baxley gage is located on the south bank of the river (same side as the intake structure) ~ 400 feet downstream from the bridge on U.S. Highway No. 1, and 530 feet upstream from the Hatch intake structure. The discharge rating curve at the intake structure was developed by making appropriate adjustments to the low-flow discharge rating curve at the Baxley gage. The USGS performs bathmetric surveys of the river cross-section at the Baxley gage and measures a river-stage relationship on the average every 6 weeks. From time to time, as needed, the USGS revises the rating table at the Baxley gage when adequate additional data are collected, and the new data show the river bottom has stabilized. Rating Table No. 11 was developed in October 1994. The discharge rating curve was developed using the USGS measurement data taken since Rating Table No. 11 was published. The drop in water surface level from the Baxley gage to the Hatch intake depends on the quantity of discharge in the river. A higher discharge would result in a steeper hydraulic gradient and, therefore, in a greater drop between the two sites, and vice versa. A drop of 0.1 feet was determined by level survey, from the Baxley gage to the Hatch intake, when the river elevation at the Baxley gage was 62.0 ft msl. The discharge rating curve at the Hatch intake structure was developed by adjusting to the Baxley discharge rating curve. At the Hatch intake structure, the river level would be 61.4 ft msl for 1200 ft3/s, which is the low flow of record at Charlotteville USGS gage 02224940 and 60.9 ft msl for the hypothetical minimum flow of 950 ft3/s at the intake structure.

In accordance with plant procedure, the river stage-discharge rating curve at the Hatch intake structure is determined at least twice per 12 months, including a low-flow extension to el 60.0 ft msl.

The rating curve is verified to ensure that adequate water supply to the intake pumps is available for at least 30 days (required for a safe plant shutdown operation) when the river level falls to el 60.8 ft msl, which corresponds to 60.7 ft msl in the pump well of the intake structure.

In accordance with plant procedures, the USGS discharge-stage measurements taken since the last verification are analyzed, and the Hatch rating curve is adjusted every 6 months (at the middle and end of the year). The rating curve is evaluated to determine whether there is any adverse effect on water supply to the intake pumps. The rating curve is then used to estimate the number of days for which water supply would be available between river el 60.8 and 60.0 ft msl. Therefore, for up-to-date information on the Plant Hatch rating curve for low flows, refer to the most recent calculation, "Plant Hatch River Stage- Discharge Curve Verification (FSAR, Section 2.4.11.1)

6RXUFH:DWHUERG\3K\VLFDO&RQILJXUDWLRQ&RROLQJ:DWHU,QWDNH+\GUDXOLF=RQHRI

,QIOXHQFH

The hydraulic zone of influence for a CWIS has been defined as the area within which an induced velocity of 0.5 foot per second (fps or ft/s) is detectible. Use of the 0.5 ft/s threshold was adopted by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) because the majority of fish can escape at that fluid velocity. Using the average water withdrawal rate, the velocity of the water approaching the intake screen is approximately 0.31 ft/s (NRC 2001).

/RFDWLRQDO0DSV

The locational maps are included in Appendix A.

2-4

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

&)5 U +/-&RROLQJ:DWHU,QWDNH6WUXFWXUH'DWD

&)5 U &RROLQJZDWHULQWDNHVWUXFWXUHGDWD7KHVHLQFOXGH L $QDUUDWLYH

GHVFULSWLRQRIWKHFRQILJXUDWLRQRIHDFKRI\RXUFRROLQJZDWHULQWDNHVWUXFWXUHVDQGZKHUHLW

LVORFDWHGLQWKHZDWHUERG\DQGLQWKHZDWHUFROXPQ LL /DWLWXGHDQGORQJLWXGHLQGHJUHHV

PLQXWHVDQGVHFRQGVIRUHDFKRI\RXUFRROLQJZDWHULQWDNHVWUXFWXUHV LLL $QDUUDWLYH

GHVFULSWLRQRIWKHRSHUDWLRQRIHDFKRI\RXUFRROLQJZDWHULQWDNHVWUXFWXUHVLQFOXGLQJ

GHVLJQLQWDNHIORZVGDLO\KRXUVRIRSHUDWLRQQXPEHURIGD\VRIWKH\HDULQRSHUDWLRQDQG

VHDVRQDOFKDQJHVLIDSSOLFDEOH LY $IORZGLVWULEXWLRQDQGZDWHUEDODQFHGLDJUDPWKDW

LQFOXGHVDOOVRXUFHVRIZDWHUWRWKHIDFLOLW\UHFLUFXODWLQJIORZVDQGGLVFKDUJHVDQG Y

(QJLQHHULQJGUDZLQJVRIWKHFRROLQJZDWHULQWDNHVWUXFWXUH

+13,QWDNH6WUXFWXUH1DUUDWLYH'HVFULSWLRQ

All withdrawals from the Altamaha River will be from a single intake structure common to both units.

Screened water will be withdrawn through the intake structure, which is about 150 feet long, 60 feet wide, and located about 60 feet above normal water level. This structure is situated so that water is available to the plant at both minimum flow and design basis flood conditions on the river. The water entrances are covered with trash racks and traveling screens which can be backwashed to remove debris and impinged fish. The maximum intake velocity at the design low flow in the river will be 1.9 ft/s and proportionately less at higher river flows. Four pumps per unit will supply an average of 22,550 gallons per minute (gpm) from the Altamaha River (NRC 1978).

/DWLWXGHDQG/RQJLWXGH

The HNP Units 1&2 CWIS is located at N31°5615.6 and W82°2039.6.

2SHUDWLRQRIWKH&:,6

The HNP cooling system is a closed-loop cooling system that utilizes three cross-flow and one counter-flow mechanical-draft cooling towers for dissipating waste heat to the atmosphere. Cooling tower makeup water for Units 1 and 2 is withdrawn from the Altamaha River through a single intake structure. The site Cooling Water Intake Structure (CWIS) is located along the shoreline of the Altamaha River (Appendix A-3, Figure VI-3) (SNC 2000).

Water enters the pump bay of the intake structure through two inlet bays each 9 feet 2 inches wide.

Each inlet bay is protected by a steel trash rack including a catenary trash rake and a traveling water screen (FSAR, Section 12.2.7). Using the average water withdrawal rate, the velocity of the water approaching the intake screen is approximately 0.31 ft/s. A single intake structure housing four service water pumps per unit are required and withdraw approximately 22,550 gpm of water under normal operation. The intake structure also houses four residual heat removal (RHR) service water pumps per unit. The pumps have a combined capacity of 17,600 gpm and operate at a 16,000 gpm under normal circumstances during reactor shutdown. Normally, two RHR pumps are used when the system is operating withdrawing 8000 gpm from the river (SNC 2000).

The water discharged from both units service water and circulating water systems is combined and carried through a two 42-inch pipes extending about 120 feet into the river perpendicular to the shore and approximately 1,300 feet downstream of the intake. Discharge velocity under normal conditions will be 3.0 ft/s (NRC 1978).

3-1

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

:DWHU%DODQFH

This information was previously provided under separate cover in the NPDES Permit Application and has been included as Appendix B.

'UDZLQJV

Engineering drawings of the CWIS are not provided due to being NRC Safety Related Information (SRI).

3-2

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

&)5 U +/-6RXUFH:DWHU%DVHOLQH%LRORJLFDO&KDUDFWHUL]DWLRQ'DWD

6RXUFHZDWHUEDVHOLQHELRORJLFDOFKDUDFWHUL]DWLRQGDWD7KLVLQIRUPDWLRQLVUHTXLUHGWR

FKDUDFWHUL]HWKHELRORJLFDOFRPPXQLW\LQWKHYLFLQLW\RIWKHFRROLQJZDWHULQWDNHVWUXFWXUH

DQGWRFKDUDFWHUL]HWKHRSHUDWLRQRIWKHFRROLQJZDWHULQWDNHVWUXFWXUHV7KH'LUHFWRUPD\

DOVRXVHWKLVLQIRUPDWLRQLQVXEVHTXHQWSHUPLWUHQHZDOSURFHHGLQJVWRGHWHUPLQHLI\RXU

'HVLJQDQG&RQVWUXFWLRQ7HFKQRORJ\3ODQDVUHTXLUHGLQ E RU E RI

WKLVFKDSWHUVKRXOGEHUHYLVHG7KLVVXSSRUWLQJLQIRUPDWLRQPXVWLQFOXGHH[LVWLQJGDWD LI

WKH\DUHDYDLODEOH +RZHYHU\RXPD\VXSSOHPHQWWKHGDWDXVLQJQHZO\FRQGXFWHGILHOG

VWXGLHVLI\RXFKRRVHWRGRVR7KHLQIRUPDWLRQ\RXVXEPLWPXVWLQFOXGH L $OLVWRIWKH

GDWDLQSDUDJUDSKV U LL WKURXJK YL RIWKLVVHFWLRQWKDWDUHQRWDYDLODEOHDQGHIIRUWVPDGH

WRLGHQWLI\VRXUFHVRIWKHGDWD LL $OLVWRIVSHFLHV RUUHOHYDQWWD[D IRUDOOOLIHVWDJHVDQG

WKHLUUHODWLYHDEXQGDQFHLQWKHYLFLQLW\RIWKHFRROLQJZDWHULQWDNHVWUXFWXUH LLL

,GHQWLILFDWLRQRIWKHVSHFLHVDQGOLIHVWDJHVWKDWZRXOGEHPRVWVXVFHSWLEOHWRLPSLQJHPHQW

DQGHQWUDLQPHQW6SHFLHVHYDOXDWHGVKRXOGLQFOXGHWKHIRUDJHEDVHDVZHOODVWKRVHPRVW

LPSRUWDQWLQWHUPVRIVLJQLILFDQFHWRFRPPHUFLDODQGUHFUHDWLRQDOILVKHULHV LY

,GHQWLILFDWLRQDQGHYDOXDWLRQRIWKHSULPDU\SHULRGRIUHSURGXFWLRQODUYDOUHFUXLWPHQWDQG

SHULRGRISHDNDEXQGDQFHIRUUHOHYDQWWD[D Y 'DWDUHSUHVHQWDWLYHRIWKHVHDVRQDODQG

GDLO\DFWLYLWLHV HJIHHGLQJDQGZDWHUFROXPQPLJUDWLRQ RIELRORJLFDORUJDQLVPVLQWKH

YLFLQLW\RIWKHFRROLQJZDWHULQWDNHVWUXFWXUH YL ,GHQWLILFDWLRQRIDOOWKUHDWHQHG

HQGDQJHUHGDQGRWKHUSURWHFWHGVSHFLHVWKDWPLJKWEHVXVFHSWLEOHWRLPSLQJHPHQWDQG

HQWUDLQPHQWDW\RXUFRROLQJZDWHULQWDNHVWUXFWXUHV YLL 'RFXPHQWDWLRQRIDQ\SXEOLF

SDUWLFLSDWLRQRUFRQVXOWDWLRQZLWK)HGHUDORU6WDWHDJHQFLHVXQGHUWDNHQLQGHYHORSPHQWRI

WKHSODQDQG YLLL ,I\RXVXSSOHPHQWWKHLQIRUPDWLRQUHTXHVWHGLQSDUDJUDSK U L RIWKLV

VHFWLRQZLWKGDWDFROOHFWHGXVLQJILHOGVWXGLHVVXSSRUWLQJGRFXPHQWDWLRQIRUWKH6RXUFH

DWHU%DVHOLQH%LRORJLFDO&KDUDFWHUL]DWLRQPXVWLQFOXGHDGHVFULSWLRQRIDOOPHWKRGVDQG

TXDOLW\DVVXUDQFHSURFHGXUHVIRUVDPSOLQJDQGGDWDDQDO\VLVLQFOXGLQJDGHVFULSWLRQRIWKH

VWXG\DUHDWD[RQRPLFLGHQWLILFDWLRQRIVDPSOHGDQGHYDOXDWHGELRORJLFDODVVHPEODJHV

LQFOXGLQJDOOOLIHVWDJHVRIILVKDQGVKHOOILVK DQGVDPSOLQJDQGGDWDDQDO\VLVPHWKRGV7KH

VDPSOLQJDQGRUGDWDDQDO\VLVPHWKRGV\RXXVHPXVWEHDSSURSULDWHIRUDTXDQWLWDWLYH

VXUYH\DQGEDVHGRQFRQVLGHUDWLRQRIPHWKRGVXVHGLQRWKHUELRORJLFDOVWXGLHVSHUIRUPHG

ZLWKLQWKHVDPHVRXUFHZDWHUERG\7KHVWXG\DUHDVKRXOGLQFOXGHDWDPLQLPXPWKHDUHDRI

LQIOXHQFHRIWKHFRROLQJZDWHULQWDNHVWUXFWXUH L[ ,QWKHFDVHRIWKHRZQHURURSHUDWRURIDQ

H[LVWLQJIDFLOLW\RUQHZXQLWDWDQH[LVWLQJIDFLOLW\WKH6RXUFH:DWHU%DVHOLQH%LRORJLFDO

&KDUDFWHUL]DWLRQ'DWDLVWKHLQIRUPDWLRQLQSDUDJUDSKV U L WKURXJK [LL RIWKLVVHFWLRQ

[ )RUWKHRZQHURURSHUDWRURIDQH[LVWLQJIDFLOLW\LGHQWLILFDWLRQRISURWHFWLYHPHDVXUHVDQG

VWDELOL]DWLRQDFWLYLWLHVWKDWKDYHEHHQLPSOHPHQWHGDQGDGHVFULSWLRQRIKRZWKHVH

PHDVXUHVDQGDFWLYLWLHVDIIHFWHGWKHEDVHOLQHZDWHUFRQGLWLRQLQWKHYLFLQLW\RIWKHLQWDNH

[L )RUWKHRZQHURURSHUDWRURIDQH[LVWLQJIDFLOLW\DOLVWRIIUDJLOHVSHFLHVDVGHILQHGDW

&)5 P DWWKHIDFLOLW\7KHDSSOLFDQWQHHGRQO\LGHQWLI\WKRVHVSHFLHVQRWDOUHDG\

LGHQWLILHGDVIUDJLOHDW&)5 P 1HZXQLWVDWDQH[LVWLQJIDFLOLW\DUHQRWUHTXLUHGWR

UHVXEPLWWKLVLQIRUPDWLRQLIWKHFRROLQJZDWHUZLWKGUDZDOVIRUWKHRSHUDWLRQRIWKHQHZXQLW

DUHIURPDQH[LVWLQJLQWDNH [LL )RUWKHRZQHURURSHUDWRURIDQH[LVWLQJIDFLOLW\WKDWKDV

REWDLQHGLQFLGHQWDOWDNHH[HPSWLRQRUDXWKRUL]DWLRQIRULWVFRROLQJZDWHULQWDNHVWUXFWXUH V

IURPWKH86)LVKDQG:LOGOLIH6HUYLFHRUWKH1DWLRQDO0DULQH)LVKHULHV6HUYLFHDQ\

LQIRUPDWLRQVXEPLWWHGLQRUGHUWRREWDLQWKDWH[HPSWLRQRUDXWKRUL]DWLRQPD\EHXVHGWR

VDWLVI\WKHSHUPLWDSSOLFDWLRQLQIRUPDWLRQUHTXLUHPHQWRISDUDJUDSK&)5 I LI

LQFOXGHGLQWKHDSSOLFDWLRQ

4-1

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant Sections 4.1 to 4.3 address the requirements of 40 CFR 122.21(r)(4)((i) to (ix). Sections 4.4 to 4.6 address the requirements of 40 CFR 112.21(r)(4)(x) to (xii).

)LHOG6WXGLHV

Field studies were previously performed by GPC to support 40 CFR 122.21(r)(4)(i) to (v) application information. The result of these studies was previously submitted to EPD under separate cover and is being included in Appendix C.

7KUHDWHQHG(QGDQJHUHGDQG3URWHFWHG6SHFLHV

Section 2.2.5 of the GEIS identified the aquatic species in the vicinity of the HNP CWIS. There are are two Federal-listed aquatic species, the adronomous shortnose sturgeon and the Atlantic sturgeon. The anadromous shortnose and the Atlantic sturgeons habitat distribution is within the Altamaha Rivers vicinity of HNP.

3XEOLF3DUWLFLSDWLRQ

Documentation of the public participation and or consultation with Federal or State agencies related to the operation of the HNP CWIS was presented in the GEIS (NRC, 2001) Additionally, SNC consultation with Federal and State agencies was performed in support of the renewal application for the maintenance dredging permit (SAS-1994-03873) in December 2015.

3URWHFWLYHQHVV0HDVXUHV

Protective measures implemented by HNP Units 1 & 2 are inherently being implemented with the operation of the existing river intake in conjunction with the closed cycle cooling system. This system, along with the approximate 0.31 ft/s velocitiy of the water approaching the intake screen, meets the protective requirements listed in 40 CFR 125.94(c). Thus, effects to the baseline water conditions have been minimal since the initial startup of HNP and no negative effects have been observed. Additionally, the NRC determined that mitigation measures were not likely to warrant sufficient benefits.

)UDJLOH6SHFLHV

No species have been identified at HNP in addition to those listed in 40 CFR 125.92(m).

,QFLGHQWDO7DNH([HPSWLRQRU$XWKRUL]DWLRQ

No incidental take exemption or authorization has been requested or obtained for HNP; therefore, section 40 CFR 112.21(r)(4)(xii) does not apply.

4-2

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

&)5 U +/-&RROLQJ:DWHU6\VWHP'DWD

&)5 U &RROLQJZDWHUV\VWHPGDWD7KHRZQHURURSHUDWRURIDQH[LVWLQJIDFLOLW\

PXVWVXEPLWWKHIROORZLQJLQIRUPDWLRQIRUHDFKFRROLQJZDWHULQWDNHVWUXFWXUHXVHGRU

LQWHQGHGWREHXVHG L $QDUUDWLYHGHVFULSWLRQRIWKHRSHUDWLRQRIWKHFRROLQJZDWHUV\VWHP

LWVUHODWLRQVKLSWRFRROLQJZDWHULQWDNHVWUXFWXUHVWKHSURSRUWLRQRIWKHGHVLJQLQWDNHIORZ

WKDWLVXVHGLQWKHV\VWHPWKHQXPEHURIGD\VRIWKH\HDUWKHFRROLQJZDWHUV\VWHPLVLQ

RSHUDWLRQDQGVHDVRQDOFKDQJHVLQWKHRSHUDWLRQRIWKHV\VWHPLIDSSOLFDEOHWKHSURSRUWLRQ

RIGHVLJQLQWDNHIORZIRUFRQWDFWFRROLQJQRQ--FRQWDFWFRROLQJDQGSURFHVVXVHVD

GLVWULEXWLRQRIZDWHUUHXVHWRLQFOXGHFRROLQJZDWHUUHXVHGDVSURFHVVZDWHUSURFHVVZDWHU

UHXVHGIRUFRROLQJDQGWKHXVHRIJUD\ZDWHUIRUFRROLQJDGHVFULSWLRQRIUHGXFWLRQVLQWRWDO

ZDWHUZLWKGUDZDOVLQFOXGLQJFRROLQJZDWHULQWDNHIORZUHGXFWLRQVDOUHDG\DFKLHYHGWKURXJK

PLQLPL]HGSURFHVVZDWHUZLWKGUDZDOVDGHVFULSWLRQRIDQ\FRROLQJZDWHUWKDWLVXVHGLQD

PDQXIDFWXULQJSURFHVVHLWKHUEHIRUHRUDIWHULWLVXVHGIRUFRRLQJLQFOXGLQJRWKHUUHF\FOHG

SURFHVVZDWHUIORZVWKHSURSRUWLRQRIWKHVRXUFHZDWHUERG\ZLWKGUDZQ RQDPRQWKO\

EDVLV LL 'HVLJQDQGHQJLQHHULQJFDOFXODWLRQVSUHSDUHGE\DTXDOLILHGSURIHVVLRQDODQG

VXSSRUWLQJGDWDWRVXSSRUWWKHGHVFULSWLRQUHTXLUHGE\SDUDJUDSK U L RIWKLVVHFWLRQDQG

LLL 'HVFULSWLRQRIH[LVWLQJLPSLQJHPHQWDQGHQWUDLQPHQWWHFKQRORJLHVRURSHUDWLRQDO

PHDVXUHVDQGDVXPPDU\RIWKHLUSHUIRUPDQFHLQFOXGLQJEXWQRWOLPLWHGWRUHGXFWLRQVLQ

LPSLQJHPHQWPRUWDOLW\DQGHQWUDLQPHQWGXHWRLQWDNHORFDWLRQDQGUHGXFWLRQVLQWRWDOZDWHU

ZLWKGUDZDOVDQGXVDJH

2SHUDWLRQ

The HNP intake is continuously operated (365 days per year) to provide cooling water makeup to the condensers and the closed loop circulating water system for each of the two units as well as provide general service water for plant operations. Water is diverted to HNP from the Altamaha River and is used as service and makeup water for the facility. Three mechanical draft cooling towers per unit and one (shared) counter-flow mechanical-draft cooling tower for dissipating waste heat to the atmosphere are used to dissipate heat from each closed-loop circulating water system.

Approximately 93% of the intake water is used for plant service water system makeup, while about 7% of the intake water is used for residual heat removal. Each of these systems perform the primary function of cooling various plant systems, and therefore, approximately 100% of the water withdrawn from the river is used for cooling. The circulating water system is comprised of three mechanical draft towers per unit and one (shared) counter-flow mechanical-draft cooling tower for dissipating waste heat to the atmosphere. The values used for the descriptions found in (r)(5)(i) were obtained using previously documented studies and reports compiled by qualified professionals for regulatory licensing efforts and are therefore valid for these purposes.

5-1

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

7KH3URSRUWLRQRIWKH'HVLJQ,QWDNH)ORZWKDWLV8VHGLQWKH6\VWHP

The Design Intake Flow (DIF) is 148.61 MGD while the Actual Intake Flow (AIF) is approximately 63.13 MGD. Given assumed design intake flow and the calculated actual cooling system make-up flow, the proportion of the design intake flow that is used in the system is:

63.13 MGD 148.61 MGD = 0.42 (42%)

3URSRUWLRQRI6RXUFH:DWHUERG\:LWKGUDZQ

Using an average streamflow for the Altamaha River of 10,940cfs from Table 2-1, plant intake flow is approximately 1.07% of the streamflow (assuming 63.13 MGD intake flow, or 117.3 cfs), as calculated below:

117.3 cfs

= 0.0107 (1.07%)

10,940 cfs

'HVLJQDQG(QJLQHHULQJ&DOFXODWLRQV

Calculations for the intake flows are based upon river intake pump runtimes and the associated design pump curve. The design flow rate for each pump is 12,900 gpm.The total runtimes are obtained by reviewing the pump breaker indicator data from the plant computer (i.e. a closed breaker indicates that the pump was operating); these runtimes are summed, and the total intake flow is calculated as in the example below:

12,900gpm x 60 min/hr x # hours runtime

= total intake flow (MGD) 1,000,000 x Time period (365 days)

Note that there are sixteen pumps in the HNP CWIS; the runtimes of each pump are consolidated into a total runtime which is used in the calculation above to obtain the average intake flow rate.

Table 5-1 shows the last three years of intake flow calculations.

7DEOH+/-,QWDNH)ORZ&DOFXODWLRQVIRU

Year Total Annual Runtime Hours Flow (MGD) 2018 29,379 62.30 2019 30,907 65.54 2020 29,020 61.54 The AIF of 63.13 MGD was determined using the average of the values above.

'HVFULSWLRQRI([LVWLQJ,PSLQJHPHQWDQG(QWUDLQPHQW7HFKQRORJLHV

The cooling water systems at HNP are closed-cycle recirculating systems as defined at

§125.92(c)(1). This technology is listed as one of the seven Best Technology Available (BTA)

Standards for Impingement Mortality [§125.94(c)] and is a sound basis for entrainment BTA as well.

5-2

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

&)5 U +/-&KRVHQ0HWKRG V RI&RPSOLDQFHZLWK,PSLQJHPHQW

0RUWDOLW\6WDQGDUG

&)5 U &KRVHQ0HWKRG V RI&RPSOLDQFHZLWK,PSLQJHPHQW0RUWDOLW\6WDQGDUG

7KHRZQHURURSHUDWRURIWKHIDFLOLW\PXVWLGHQWLI\WKHFKRVHQFRPSOLDQFHPHWKRGIRUWKH

HQWLUHIDFLOLW\DOWHUQDWLYHO\WKHDSSOLFDQWPXVWLGHQWLI\WKHFKRVHQFRPSOLDQFHPHWKRGIRU

HDFKFRROLQJZDWHULQWDNHVWUXFWXUHDWLWVIDFLOLW\7KHDSSOLFDQWPXVWLGHQWLI\DQ\LQWDNH

VWUXFWXUHIRUZKLFKD%7$GHWHUPLQDWLRQIRU,PSLQJHPHQW0RUWDOLW\XQGHU&)5

F RU LVUHTXHVWHG

The chosen method of compliance with the impingement mortality standard for HNP is the operation of a closed-cycle recirculating system as defined at 40 CFR 125.92(c)(1). This technology is listed as one of the seven Best Technology Available (BTA) Standards for Impingement Mortality

[§125.94(c)].

6-1

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

&)5 U +/-(QWUDLQPHQW3HUIRUPDQFH6WXGLHV

&)5 U (QWUDLQPHQW3HUIRUPDQFH6WXGLHV7KHRZQHURURSHUDWRURIDQH[LVWLQJ

IDFLOLW\PXVWVXEPLWDQ\SUHYLRXVO\FRQGXFWHGVWXGLHVRUVWXGLHVREWDLQHGIURPRWKHU

IDFLOLWLHVDGGUHVVLQJWHFKQRORJ\HIILFDF\WKURXJK--IDFLOLW\HQWUDLQPHQWVXUYLYDODQGRWKHU

HQWUDLQPHQWVWXGLHV$Q\VXFKVXEPLWWDOVPXVWLQFOXGHDGHVFULSWLRQRIHDFKVWXG\WRJHWKHU

ZLWKXQGHUO\LQJGDWDDQGDVXPPDU\RIDQ\FRQFOXVLRQVRUUHVXOWV$Q\VWXGLHVFRQGXFWHG

DWRWKHUORFDWLRQVPXVWLQFOXGHDQH[SODQDWLRQDVWRZK\WKHGDWDIURPRWKHUORFDWLRQVDUH

UHOHYDQWDQGUHSUHVHQWDWLYHRIFRQGLWLRQVDW\RXUIDFLOLW\

Impingement and Entrainment studies were performed in 1981 and the report is included at Attachment D.

7-1

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

&)5 U +/-2SHUDWLRQDO6WDWXV

&)5 U 2SHUDWLRQDOVWDWXV7KHRZQHURURSHUDWRURIDQH[LVWLQJIDFLOLW\PXVW

VXEPLWDGHVFULSWLRQRIWKHRSHUDWLRQDOVWDWXVRIHDFKJHQHUDWLQJSURGXFWLRQRUSURFHVV

XQLWWKDWXVHVFRROLQJZDWHULQFOXGLQJEXWQRWOLPLWHGWR L )RUSRZHUSURGXFWLRQRUVWHDP

JHQHUDWLRQGHVFULSWLRQVRILQGLYLGXDOXQLWRSHUDWLRQVLQFOXGLQJDJHRIHDFKXQLWFDSDFLW\

XWLOL]DWLRQUDWH RUHTXLYDOHQW IRUWKHSUHYLRXV\HDUVLQFOXGLQJDQ\H[WHQGHGRUXQXVXDO

RXWDJHVWKDWVLJQLILFDQWO\DIIHFWFXUUHQWGDWDIRUIORZLPSLQJHPHQWHQWUDLQPHQWRURWKHU

IDFWRUVLQFOXGLQJLGHQWLILFDWLRQRIDQ\RSHUDWLQJXQLWZLWKDFDSDFLW\XWLOL]DWLRQUDWHRIOHVV

WKDQSHUFHQWDYHUDJHGRYHUD--PRQWKEORFNFRQWLJXRXVSHULRGDQGDQ\PDMRUXSJUDGHV

FRPSOHWHGZLWKLQWKHODVW\HDUVLQFOXGLQJEXWQRWOLPLWHGWRERLOHUUHSODFHPHQW

FRQGHQVHUUHSODFHPHQWWXUELQHUHSODFHPHQWRUFKDQJHVWRIXHOW\SH LL 'HVFULSWLRQVRI

FRPSOHWHGDSSURYHGRUVFKHGXOHGXSUDWHVDQG1XFOHDU5HJXODWRU\&RPPLVVLRQUHOLFHQVLQJ

VWDWXVRIHDFKXQLWDWQXFOHDUIDFLOLWLHV (LLL )RUSURFHVVXQLWVDW\RXUIDFLOLW\WKDWXVHFRROLQJ

ZDWHURWKHUWKDQIRUSRZHUSURGXFWLRQRUVWHDPJHQHUDWLRQLI\RXLQWHQGWRXVHUHGXFWLRQV

LQIORZRUFKDQJHVLQRSHUDWLRQVWRPHHWWKHUHTXLUHPHQWVRI&)5 F GHVFULSWLRQV

RILQGLYLGXDOSURGXFWLRQSURFHVVHVDQGSURGXFWOLQHVRSHUDWLQJVWDWXVLQFOXGLQJDJHRIHDFK

OLQHVHDVRQDORSHUDWLRQLQFOXGLQJDQ\H[WHQGHGRUXQXVXDORXWDJHVWKDWVLJQLILFDQWO\DIIHFW

FXUUHQWGDWDIRUIORZLPSLQJHPHQWHQWUDLQPHQWRURWKHUIDFWRUVDQ\PDMRUXSJUDGHV

FRPSOHWHGZLWKLQWKHODVW\HDUVDQGSODQVRUVFKHGXOHVIRUGHFRPPLVVLRQLQJRU

UHSODFHPHQWRISURFHVVXQLWVRUSURGXFWLRQSURFHVVHVDQGSURGXFWOLQHV LY IRUDOO

PDQXIDFWXULQJIDFLOLWLHVGHVFULSWLRQVRIFXUUHQWDQGIXWXUHSURGXFWLRQVFKHGXOHVDQG Y

GHVFULSWLRQVRISODQVRUVFKHGXOHVIRUDQ\QHZXQLWVSODQQHGZLWKLQWKHQH[W\HDUV

&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ5DWHV

HNP Units 1 & 2 are fully operational, nuclear-fueled, base-load power production units, which means they are running at 100% reactor power unless in an outage or emergent scenario. The units were brought into operation December of 1975 for Unit 1 and September of 1979 for Unit 2 with an approximate net electrical output of 876MWe for Unit 1 and 883 MWe for Unit 2. SNC,

2021

The capacity utilization rates for U1 and U2 were calculated using the Technical Development Document for 316(b) and are shown in Table 8-1.

8-1

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant 7DEOH+/-&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ5DWHVIRU+13

Unit Load Factor (Source: Southern Nuclear Operating Records)

Highest daily MW avg. divided by Nameplate Rating for Each Unit (Percentage)

0RQWK U1 U2 U1 U2 U1 U2 U1 U2 U1 U2 U1 U2

91 94 92 100 86 93 95 100 100 95 90 100

100 24 19 100 100 18 7 95 100 8 100

96 51 85 100 99 100 88 100 100 12 36 100

97 100 88 100 54 100 100 87 100 100 99 66

100 100 100 80 100 93 100 62 79 100 100 100

100 100 99 95 100 100 100 100 99 98 74 100

99 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 99 100 99

100 96 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 99 100 100

96 100 97 100 100 100 99 100 100 71 98 100

100 100 100 100 100 99 93 100 100 92 99 100

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 97 100

99 100 100 99 100 100 100 97 97 100 100 99

0DMRU8SJUDGHV'XULQJWKH/DVW<HDUV

No major changes or upgrades have occurred at the HNP facility in the past 15 years.

3URFHVVLQJ8QLWV

There are no processing units that use cooling water other than for power production or steam generation and HNP is not a manufacturing facility.

1HZ8QLWV3ODQQHGZLWKLQWKH1H[W\HDUV

HNP Units 1 & 2 were relicensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in 2000 and have been approved for operation until August 2034 (for Unit 1) and June 2038 (for Unit 2). No new units are planned.

8-2

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

5HIHUHQFHV

AEC (U.S. Atomic Energy Commission). 1972. Final Environmental Statement for the Edwin I.

Hatch Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2. Georgia Power Company.

Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366. October.

GPC (Georgia Power Company). 1981. Plant Edwin I. Hatch 316 (b) Demonstration NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1978. Final Environmental Statement Related to the Operation of Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Unit 2. Docket Nos. 50-366. March.

NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1995. Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact: Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plants Units 1 and 2. Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366.

NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 2001. Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, Supplement 4, Regarding Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Final Report, NUREG 1437, May.

Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC). 2000. Appendix D, Applicants Environmental Report

- Operating License Renewal Stage, Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2, License Renewal Application. February.

Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC). 2021. Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 & Unit 2, Final Safety Analysis Report. Update Rev 38, February.

USGS (U.S. Geological Survey), 2021, National Water Information Site Information for USA: Site Inventory, accessed October 14, 2021, at URL https://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/inventory/?site_no=02225000&agency_cd=USGS 9-1

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

$33(1',;$

5HIHUHQFHG)LJXUHV

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

$SSHQGL[$

)LJXUH9,IURP(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUW 61&

Applicants Environmental Report Appendix D - Attachment C Figure VI-1. HNP Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, 50 mile region Letter C-12. Attachment (page 20 of 73)

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant February 2000 Application for License Renewal C-65

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

$SSHQGL[$

)LJXUH9,IURP(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUW 61&

Applicants Environmental Report Appendix D - Attachment C Figure VI-2. HNP Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, 10 mile region Letter C-12. Attachment (page 21 of 73)

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant February 2000 Application for License Renewal C-66

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

$SSHQGL[$

)LJXUH9,IURP(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUW 61&

Applicants Environmental Report Appendix D - Attachment C Figure VI-3. HNP Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant property plan Letter C-12. Attachment (page 22 of 73)

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant February 2000 Application for License Renewal C-67

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

$33(1',;%

3ODQW:DWHU%DODQFH

Hatch Nuclear Plant - Line Drawing/Water Balance Permit No. GA0004120 01 02 03 03A ALTAMAHA RIVER

018 :

Screen Strainer Storm water 72 MGD Backwash Backwash comingled with per Unit

(.72 MGD) (. 72 MGD) Draining of water from the chiller Unit 1 Unit 2 Discharge Intake system to storm drains and allowable r-- Structure Structure I

non-stormwater j discharges Unit 1 Combined Unit 2 Combined (7 .19 MGD) Waste Streams Waste Streams Sewage 01F Treatment

.07 MGD Plant 04 Slowdown &

f Draining or water from 01 H Pressure Filler Backwash the chiller system to Diesel Generator storm drains

, (.72 MGD)

Non-contact Cooling Water Continuous - 2.02 MGD Water Treatment 1.s1 MGD Intermittent- 3.02 MGD Facility Main Power Block 01G Neutralizatior, Tank

.94 MGD 01E Liquid Radwaste System Unit 2 Unit 1 (.14MGD)

~

- 01A Unit 1 Cooling T=r -- 018 Unit 1 Cooling Tower Slowdown (48.96 MGD) Flume Overflow (48.96 MGD)

Unit 1 02E Liquid I

Radwaste System

(.14MGD)

T l Cooling Towers

~

OZA Unit 2 Cooling Tower 02C Uni! 2 Cooling Tower Slowdown (48.96 MGD) Flume Overflow (48.96 MGD)

Unit 2 Note : All Flows Are Maximum Cooling Towers

~ Southern Nuclear (Million Gallons Per Day)

CWA Section 316(b) Supporting Information Hatch Nuclear Power Plant

$33(1',;&

&RROLQJ:DWHU,QWDNH6WXG\+/- E 'HPRQVWUDWLRQ 7ZR8QLW2SHUDWLRQ

Enclosure to NL-13-1528 SNC Letter to U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Dated November 10, 2006 PLANT EDWIN I. HATCH 316(b)'DEMONSTRATION ON THE ALTAMAHA RIVER IN APPLING COUNTY, GEORGIA GEORGIA POWER COMPANY ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS CENTER JOHN W. WILTZ, PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR March, 1981

6RXWKHUQ1XFOHDU2SHUDWLQJ&RPSDQ\(,+DWFK1XFOHDU3ODQW

,QGXVWULDO6WRUPZDWHU%HQFKPDUN5HVXOWV

Table 1+/-%HQFKPDUN0RQLWRULQJ5HVXOWV PJ/

Year Outfall Oil & Grease Copper Nickel Zinc TSS 018 ND ND ND 0.1 N/A 2012 LF Sed Pond ND ND ND 0.013 19 010 ND ND 0.012 0.079 N/A 2013 LF Sed Pond NA NA NA NA NA 018 ND ND ND 0.049 N/A 2014 LF Sed Pond ND ND ND 0.019 13 010 ND ND ND 0.043 N/A 2015 LF Sed Pond ND ND ND 0.022 84 012 ND ND ND 0.03 N/A 2016 LF Sed Pond ND ND ND 0.03 13 018 ND ND ND 0.043 N/A 2017 LF Sed Pond ND ND 0.016 0.021 10 2018 014 ND 0.034 ND 0.21 N/A 1Q2019 014 ND ND ND 0.011 N/A 2019 015 ND 0.00321 ND 0.031 N/A 2020 017 ND 0.0023 ND 0.023 N/A

A000412, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Renewal Application

Contents

Text

Enclosure:

Title:

Title:

Title:

Title:

Dear Ms. Wise:

SUMMARY

Dear Mr. Carr:

SUBJECT:

Dear Ms. Dohner:

Enclosures:

SUBJECT:

Subject:

Subject:

Dear Ms. Wong:

SUBJECT:

Dear Dr. Crabtree:

Enclosure:

Enclosure:

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

SUBJECT:

Dear Mr. Beckham:

Enclosure:

SUBJECT:

Dear Mr. Beckham:

Enclosure:

Navigation menu

A000412, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Renewal Application

Text

Enclosure:

Title:

Title:

Title:

Title:

Dear Ms. Wise:

SUMMARY

Dear Mr. Carr:

SUBJECT:

Dear Ms. Dohner:

Enclosures:

SUBJECT:

Subject:

Subject:

Dear Ms. Wong:

SUBJECT:

Dear Dr. Crabtree:

Enclosure:

Enclosure:

Subject:

Subject:

Subject:

SUBJECT:

Dear Mr. Beckham:

Enclosure:

SUBJECT:

Dear Mr. Beckham:

Enclosure:

Navigation menu

Search