DCL-12-042, 2011 Annual Nonradiological Environmental Operating Report
| ML12124A337 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 04/30/2012 |
| From: | Becker J Pacific Gas & Electric Co |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| DCL-12-042 | |
| Download: ML12124A337 (6) | |
Text
w1 Pacific Gas and Electric Company' James R. Becker Site Vice President Diablo Canyon Power Plant Mail Code 104/6 P. 0. Box 56 Avila Beach, CA 93424 805.545.3462 April 30, 2012 Internal: 691.3462 Fax: 805.545.6445 PG&E Letter DCL-12-042 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 Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 2011 Annual Nonradioloaical Environmental ODeratina ReDort
Dear Commissioners and Staff:
Enclosed is the 2011 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 Facility Operating Licenses DPR-80 and DPR-82.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company makes no new regulatory commitments in this letter (as defined by NEI 99-04).
If you have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact James L. Kelly at (805) 545-3194..
James R. Becker wrl/64054486 Enclosure cc/ enc: Roger W. Briggs, Executive Officer, CRWQCB Elmo E. Collins, Regional Administrator, NRC Region IV Michael S. Peck, NRC Senior Resident Joseph M. Sebrosky, NRR Project Manager Diablo Distribution A member of the STARS (Strategic Teaming and Resource Sharing) Alliance Callaway
- Comanche Peak o Diablo Canyon
- Palo Verde 9 San Onofre
- South Texas Project
- Wolf Creek
Enclosure PG&E Letter DCL-12-042
- 1. Introduction Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) has prepared the 2011 Annual Nonradiological Environmental Operating Report 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 California State Water Resources Control Board's Ocean Plan and Thermal Plan.
2.1.1. Routine Influent and Effluent Monitoring DCPP electronically submitted quarterly NPDES reports to the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (CCRWQCB) during 2011 in the month following the end of each quarter via the California Integrated Water Quality System (CIWQS), an internet database application. These reports contained routine influent and effluent monitoring data and permit compliance summaries. DCPP also submitted an annual NPDES report to the CCRWQCB in February 2012 via the CIWQS application. The annual report contained monitoring data summaries in tabular and graphical form, and a summary of permit compliance and corrective actions for 2011. Copies of the quarterly and annual reports were submitted concurrently to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
2.1.2. Receiving Water Monitoring Program The NPDES Receiving Water Monitoring Program, required by the CCRWQCB, included 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 2011, environmental monitoring continued under the revised Receiving Water Monitoring Program (RWMP).
1
Enclosure PG&E Letter DCL-12-042 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).
The NPDES permit remains under administrative extension. In 2000, DCPP reached a tentative agreement with CCRWQCB staff, which addresses current and future impacts on receiving waters from power plant effluent discharge. 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. Based on the tentative agreement, future receiving water monitoring requirements will be significantly reduced or eliminated upon approval of the revised NPDES permit. Effluent monitoring would continue under the revised NPDES Permit.
DCPP submitted the "Receiving Water Monitoring Program - 2010 Annual Report" (PG&E Letter No. DCL-2011-521) to the CCRWQCB and with a copy to the NRC on May 2, 2011. The 2011 Receiving Water Monitoring Program Annual Report will be submitted to the CCRWQCB at the end of April 2012.
2.1.3. Thermal Effects Study DCPP submitted the final thermal effects comprehensive assessment report to the CCRWQCB and the NRC in 1998.
2.1.4. 316(b) Studies DCPP submitted the final 316(b) report, entitled "316(b)
Demonstration Report" (PG&E Letter No. DCL-2000-514) to the CCRWQCB and the NRC on March 1, 2000. The report incorporated data and analysis from the onsite 316(b) study conducted October 1996 through June 1999 under the direction of the CCRWQCB Entrainment Technical Work Group.
2.2. Terrestrial Issues 2.2.1. Herbicide Application and Erosion Control Herbicides are used as one component of an overall land vegetation management program that includes transmission line corridors and rights-of-way. The company continues to use only Environmental Protection Agency and/or state-approved herbicides and applies them in accordance with all applicable regulations.
2
Enclosure PG&E Letter DCL-12-042 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 and wildfire damage repair.
2.2.2. Preservation of Archaeological Resources A. CA-SLO-2 Site Management Archaeological site CA-SLO-2 is managed in compliance with the Archaeological Resource Management Plan (ARMP) and operating procedure EVI.ID2. All projects undertaken within site CA-SLO-2, or immediately adjacent, are reviewed to determine whether archaeological deposits associated with the site are present and, if so, an impact assessment is completed. PG&E invokes the notification, monitoring, and mitigation procedures identified in the ARMP if a project-related impact is identified.
Archaeological examination and monitoring of site CA-SLO-2 was undertaken on two separate occasions during 2011.
In order to evaluate potential impacts associated with the DCPP North Gate Security Enhancement Project located adjacent to CA-SLO-2, it was necessary to conduct an enhanced surface and subsurface archaeological survey of the project site. The security project installed crash gates, modified culverts associated with Diablo Creek, and installed wireless remote sensing equipment.
The 2011 archeological fieldwork was a continuation of a project initiated in 2010, and initially described in the annual nonradiological environmental monitoring report for that year. PG&E's cultural resource consultant Applied Earthworks, excavated seventeen auger probes and five sondages (small test excavations to examine stratigraphy of a site) along the slopes above the cut for Diablo Creek Road. The work was undertaken to define the content, depth, lower boundary, and integrity of the archaeological deposit adjacent to the project footprint. Fred Collins of the Northern Chumash Tribal Council observed all test excavations.
Additionally, the annual photo-monitoring of CA-SLO-2 was conducted in December of 2011 by PG&E Senior Cultural Resource Specialist, Mike Taggart, RPA. The overall condition of site CA-SLO-2 is stable, with no significant changes observed since the last monitoring event completed in 2010.
3
Enclosure PG&E Letter DCL-12-042 The barriers in place along the established roadways have proven effective in keeping vehicular traffic off of sensitive portions of the archeological site, and restricting traffic to previously disturbed areas. Dense vegetation that covers much of the site has stabilized loose soil, limiting erosion and obscuring surface artifacts.
Localized erosion observed along Diablo Creek Road was subsequently addressed through revegetation conducted in the first quarter of 2012. The gradual loss of deposits along portions of the marine terrace subject to natural erosion is being monitored and opportunistic collection of materials eroding from this area will be undertaken ongoing to salvage datable material and diagnostic artifacts as necessary.
B. Chumash Indian Correspondence Over the course of 2011, PG&E cultural resource staff corresponded and met with representatives of the local Chumash community on multiple occasions to discuss cultural resources at DCPP. In general, contact was initiated by PG&E Cultural Resources Specialists to notify Native American contacts of operations and maintenance work proposed in proximity to archaeological site CA-SLO-2, and to solicit their views and concerns. Consultation was also conducted in the broader context of the in-progress DCPP Seismic Imaging Project. PG&E staff met directly with Chumash representatives on three occasions in 2011.
In addition, Native American monitoring of ground disturbance as part of the North Gate Security Enhancement Project investigation in proximity to CA-SLO-2 was conducted by a member of the Northern Chumash Tribal Council.
4
Enclosure PG&E Letter DCL-12-042
- 3. Unusual or Important Environmental Events There were no unusual or important environmental events during 2011.
- 4. Plant Reporting Requirements 4.1. EPP Noncompliance There were no EPP noncompliances during 2011.
4.2. Changes In Station Design There were no changes in plant design, 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 2011 per the EPP, and therefore no nonroutine reports were submitted to the NRC.
5