DCL-04-053, Annual Nonradiological Environmental Operating Report

Annual Nonradiological Environmental Operating Report

ML041260492
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	04/28/2004
From:	Becker J Pacific Gas & Electric Co
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
DCL-04-053, OL-DPR-80, OL-DPR-82
Download: ML041260492 (6)

Text

PacificGasand Electrc Company m1an James R Becker Diablo Canyon Power Plant Vice President-Diablo Canyon PO. Box 56 Operations and Station Director Avila Beach. CA 93424 805.545.3462 April 28, 2004 Fax: 805.545A234 PG&E Letter DCL-04-053 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001 Docket No. 50-275, OL-DPR-80 Docket No. 50-323, OL-DPR-82 Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 2003 Annual Nonradiological Environmental Operating Report

Dear Commissioners and Staff:

Enclosed is the 2003 Annual Nonradiological Environmental Operating Report for Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, submitted in accordance with Subsection 5.4.1 of the Environmental Protection Plan, Appendix B, of the Facility Operating Licenses DPR-80 and DPR-82.

Sincere Ja m s R B ddm/R0246450 Enclosures cc/enc: Roger W. Briggs, Regional Water Quality Control Board Bruce S. Mallett, NRC Region IV David L. Prouix, NRC Senior Resident Girija S. Shukla, NRC Project Manager Diablo Distribution A member of the STARS (Strategic Teaming and Resource Sharing) Alliance Callaway

• Comanche Peak

• Diablo Canyon

• Palo Verde

• South Texas Project

• Wolf Creek

• Se 2,5

Enclosure PG&E Letter DCL 04-053 2003 ANNUAL NONRADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT DIABLO CANYON POWER PLANT Pacific Gas & Electric Company April 2004

Enclosure PG&E Letter DCL 04-053 Page 1 of 4

1. Introduction PG&E has prepared the 2003 Annual Nonradiological Environmental Operating Report (AEOR) in accordance with the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP),

Appendix B, of Facility Operating Licenses DPR-80 and DPR-82, for Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP), Units 1 and 2. The report describes implementation of the EPP per the Routine Reporting requirements of EPP Subsection 5.4.1. PG&E remains committed to minimizing the environmental impact of operating DCPP.

2. Environmental Monitoring 2.1. Aquatic Issues Aquatic issues are addressed by the effluent limitations and receiving water monitoring/reporting requirements contained in the DCPP National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The NPDES permit includes applicable requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board's Ocean Plan and Thermal Plan.

2.1.1. Routine Influent and Effluent Monitoring DCPP submitted quarterly NPDES reports containing routine influent and effluent monitoring data and permit compliance summaries to the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (CCRWQCB) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) during the month following the end of each quarter. DCPP also submitted an annual NPDES report (PG&E Letter DCL-2004-516, dated February 28, 2004) containing monitoring data summaries in tabular and graphical form, and a summary of permit compliance and corrective actions for 2003.

2.1.2. Receiving Water Monitoring Program The NPDES Receiving Water Monitoring Program includes the ecological monitoring, temperature measurements, and State Mussel Watch activities.

Environmental monitoring programs have recorded biological changes in the discharge area since plant start-up. These programs monitor intertidal and subtidal communities of invertebrates, algae, and fish in the discharge cove, and at stations north and south of DCPP. During 2003, environmental monitoring continued under the revised Receiving Water Monitoring Program (RWMP). The revised RWMP continued historical monitoring tasks, including temperature monitoring, State Mussel Watch activities, and intertidal and subtidal surveys (with additional stations and increased sampling frequencies).

I Enclosure PG&E Letter DCL 04-053 Page 2 of 4 The NPDES permit remains under administrative extension. In 2000, DCPP reached a tentative agreement with the CCRWQCB staff that addresses current and future impacts on the receiving waters. This agreement and the revised NPDES permit renewal application did not receive the expected approvals from the CCRWQCB in July 2003, and discussions are continuing with CCRWQCB staff and their consultants.

Effluent monitoring will continue under the revised NPDES Permit.

DCPP submitted the uReceiving Water Monitoring Program 2002 Annual Report" (PG&E Letter DCL-2003-532, dated April 30, 2003) to the CCRWQCB and the NRC.

2.1.3. Thermal Effects Study DCPP submitted the final thermal effects comprehensive assessment report entitled "The Diablo Canyon Thermal Effects Analysis Report Chapter 2 - Assessment of Thermal Effects," (PG&E Letter DCL-98-585, dated November 5, 1998) to the CCRWQCB and the NRC, concluding that beneficial uses are protected.

2.1.4. 316(b) Studies DCPP submitted the final 316(b) report, entitled "Diablo Canyon Power Plant 316(b) Demonstration Report" (PG&E Letter DCL-2000-514, dated March 1, 2000), to the CCRWQCB and the NRC, concluding that beneficial uses are protected.

2.2. Terrestrial Issues 2.2.1. Herbicide Application and Erosion Control PG&E continues to implement erosion control activities at the plant site and in the transmission line corridors as part of an overall land management program. These erosion control activities consist of routine maintenance and prevention efforts performed periodically on an as-needed basis, including seasonal storm damage repair and wildfire damage repair.

Herbicides are used as one component of an overall land management program that includes transmission line corridors and rights-of way.

The company continues to use only EPA and/or state approved herbicides, and applies them in accordance with all applicable regulations.

Enclosure PG&E Letter DCL 04-053 Page 3 of 4 2.2.2. Preservation of Archaeological Resources A. CA-SLO-2 Site Management All work performed within the boundaries of CA-SLO-2 is tracked and approved per procedure EVI.1D2, CA-SLO-2 Site Management.

In October 2003, the PG&E archaeologist reviewed the 23 CA-SLO-2 photo-monitoring stations. The photo monitoring was conducted in accordance with the Building and Land Service Department's (now Corporate Real Estate) "Cultural Resources Management Procedures for Archaeological Site CA-SLO-2," which implements policies of the Archeological Resources Management Plan. No new areas of erosion or impacts to CA-SLO-2 were noted.

The DCPP staff contacted PG&E's senior archaeologist about two projects during the course of the year. One project was in response to security orders and consisted of the placement of concrete vehicle barriers through the entire CA-SLO-2 area in an east-west direction. The barriers were placed on existing road (95 percent paved and 5 percent gravel) so as to not disturb archaeological deposits at CA-SLO-2. The other project consisted of the repair of the wood stairs that lead down to the Fields' cove area on the western end of CA-SLO-2. A no ground disturbance approach to this project was implemented to rebuild the stairs.

Crews were briefed on the goal of not disturbing the sites prior to the beginning of both projects. Monitoring was undertaken at the stair project twice. Both projects were successfully completed with no disturbance to CA-SLO-2.

B. Chumash Indian Correspondence There was no communication between PG&E and the Chumash Indians during 2003 concerning CA-SLO-2.

3. Unusual or Important Environmental Events No unusual or important events that would indicate, or could result in, a significant environmental impact causally related to station operations occurred in 2003.

Enclosure PG&E Letter DCL 04-053 Page 4 of 4

4. Plant Reporting Requirements 4.1. EPP Noncompliance There were no EPP noncompliances during 2003.

4.2. Changes In Station Design There were no changes in plant design or operation, tests, or experiments that involved an unreviewed environmental question or a change to the EPP.

4.3. Nonroutine Reports There were no nonroutine events during 2003 per the EPP, and therefore no nonroutine reports were submitted to the NRC.