Text

Transmittal of 2015 Annual Environmental Operating Report
	ML16126A221
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	04/27/2016
From:	Snyder M; Florida Power & Light Co
To:	; Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
	L-2016-095
	Download: ML16126A221 (51)
	v • d • e

APR 2 7 2016 L-2016-095 10 CFR 50.4 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission CERTIFIED MAIL Attn: Document Control Desk RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Washington, DC 20555 7011 3500 7495 7263 Re: St. Lucie Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-335 and 50-389 2015 Annual Environmental Operating Report In accordance with Section 5.4.1.2 of the St. Lucie Units 1 .and 2 Environmental Protection Plans (EPP), attached is the Annual Environmental Operating Report for calendar year 2015.

Sincerely, r~:fJ Licensing Manager St. Lucie Plant MJS/tlt

Attachment:

Florida Power & Light Company - St. Lucie Plant Annual Environmental Operating Report 2015 (50 pages) cc: FDEP Siting Office Florida Power & Light Company 6501 S. Ocean Drive, Jensen Beach, FL 34957

FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE PLANT ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT 2015 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY

. JUNO BEACH, FLORIDA INWATER RESEARCH GROUP, INC.

JENSEN BEACH, FLORIDA

Environmental Operating Report Table of Contents Acronyms ........................................................................................................................ 1 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 2 1.0 Background ........................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Area Description ................................................................................................. 4 1.2 Power Plant Description ..................................................................................... 4 1.3 Environmental Reporting ....... :* ........................................................................... 4 2.0 Sea Turtle Nest Monitoring .................................................................................... 6 2.1 Methodology ............................................................. ." ......................................... 6 2.1.1 Previous Methods and Projects ................................................................... 6 2.1.2 Current Methods., ............................................................................ ~ ............ 7 2.2 Results for 2015 ................................................................................................. 8 2.2.1 Loggerhead Nesting .................................................................................... 9 2.2.2 Green Nesting ...................*........................................................................ 10 2.2.3 Leatherback Nesting ................................ :........................ ~ ........................ 10 2.2.. 4 Predation ...........................................................................................:....... 11 3.0 Intake Canal Monitoring ....................................................................................... 12 3.1 Methodology ..................................................................................................... 12 3.1.1 Barrier Nets ............................................................................................... 12 3.1.2 Turtle Capture ............................................................................................ 13 3.1.3 Data Collection .......................................................................................... 14 3.2 Results for 2015 ............................................................................................... 14 3 .2 .1 Loggerhead Captures ........................................... ~ .................................... 15 3.2.2 Green Captures ....................... :................................................................. 15 3.2.3 Leatherback, Hawksbill, and Kemp's ridley Captures ................................ 16 3.2.4 Recaptures ................................................................................................ 16 3.2.5 Relative Condition ....................................... :............................................. 17 3.2.6 Mortalities and Injuries ............................................................................... 17 4.0 Sea Turtle Protective Activities ............................................................................ 19 4.1 NMFS Section 7 Consultations ........................................................................ 19 4.2 Sea Turtle Stranding and Salvage Network and Turtle Walks ......................... 20 4.2.1 Results for 2015 ........................................................................................ 20

4.3 Collaborative Efforts ......................................................................................... 21 4.4 Barrier Net Maintenance .................................................................................. 21 4.5 Intake Pipe Cleaning and Maintenance ............................................................ 22 5.0 References .......................................................................................................... 23 6.0 Figures and Tables .............................................................................................. 27 7.0 Annual Environmental Operating Report ................................. ~ ........................... 44 7.1 Introduction ............................... :...................................................................... 44 7.2 Sea Turtle Monitoring and Associated Activities .............................................. 44 7.3 Taprogge Condenser Tube Cleaning System Operation ................................. 44 7.4 Other Routine Reports ..................................................................................... 45 7.5 Figures and Tables*****************************************.**************************'********************** 47

Acronyms ABI Applied Biology, Inc.

BO Biological Opinion EAi Ecological Associates, Inc.

ESA Endangered Species Act EPP Environmental Protection Plan FWC Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FWRI Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute FPL Florida Power & Light IRG lnwater Research Group, Inc.

NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission PIT Passive Integrated Transponder SSCL Straight Standard Carapace Length STSSN Sea Turtle Stranding and Salvage Network USFW U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service UESI Underwater Engineering Services, Inc.

UIDS Underwater Intrusion Detection System 1

Executive Summary Florida Power & Light's (FPL) St. Lucie Plant, located on South Hutchinson Island, consists of two 1,000 MWe nuclear-fueled electric generating units that use nearshore ocean water for the plant's once-through condenser cooling system. Water for this system enters through three submerged intake structures located 365 m offshore.

Water passes through the structu~~s and into s~bmerged pipes (two 3.7 m and one 4.9 m in diameter) running under the beach. It then passes into a 1,500 m long intake canal, which transports water to the power plant. Turtles entering the ocean intake structures are entrained with cooling water and rapidly transported through the intake pipes into the enclosed canal system where they must be manually captured and returned to the ocean.

South Hutchinson Island is also an important rookery for loggerhead (Carella caretta),

green (Chelonia mydas), _and leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea) turtles. Under the Endangered Species.Act (ESA), the federal government has classified the loggerhead turtle as a threatened .species while *1eatherbacks and the Florida nesting population of green turtles are classified as endangered. One of FPL's primary environmental concerns is to ensure that the operation of the St. Lucie Plant does not adversely affect sea turtle nesting and to monitor nesting trends they have sponsored nesting surveys '<

on the island since 1971. Biologists use all-terrain vehicles to survey the island each morning during nesting season. New nests, non-nesting emergences (false crawls), and nests negatively affected by predators are recorded. Data collected from beach nesting surveys are reported to. the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) as part of a statewide survey program. In 2015, 7,878 loggerhead, 860 green, and 365 ,1

I leatherback nests were recorded on South Hutchinson Island. .i I

Since the plant became operational in 1976, turtles entrained in the intake canal have

been systematically captured, measured, weighed, tagged, and released. During 2015, ..

465 sea turtles were removed from the intake canal, including 274 loggerheads, 181 greens, seven Kelllp's ridleys, two leatherbacks,_ and one hawksbill. The majority of these turtles (94.4 %) were captured alive and released back to the ocean. Seventeen (3.7%) were taken to rehabilitation facilities for treatment of injuries or disease and nine turtles (1.9%) were found dead.

Injuries and*mortalities are categorized in twoways-causal to power plant operations or non-causal to power -plant operations. These decisions are made in consultation with FWC and/or a qualified veterinarian. Not all mortalities and injuries are causal to power plant operations, as some sea turtles enter the canal in either a moribund state or have pre-existing conditions related to fisheries, boat interactions, or disease. Injuries causal to power plant operations are recorded and are applied' against the take limit 2

established by the most recent Biological Opinion (BO) set forth by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The Incidental Take Statement in the most recent BO states that FPL will exceed their take limits for a calendar year if any of the following occur: 1) more than 1,000 sea turtles are captured, 2) more than 1% of the total number of loggerhead and green turtles (combined) are injured/killed due to plant operation, 3) more than two Kemp's ridley sea turtles are injured/killed due to plant operation, or 4) if any hawksbill or leatherback sea-turtles are injured/killed due to plant operation. In the case where 1% of t~e co~bined loggerhead and green turtle captures is not a whole number, it is rounded up (e.g. 520 combined captures = take limit of 6). Under Section 7 of the ESA, a new consultation with NMFS is required If FPL meets or exceeds the take limits spedfied in the Incidental Take Statement.

During 2015, there were four mortalities of green turtles that were causal to power plant operations. No leatherback, hawksbill or Kemp's ridley turtles were injured or killed due to power plant operation. Based on the current BO issued by NMFS, FPL did not exceed its take limit during 2015. However, FPL did exceed their sea turtle take limit at the St. Lucie power plant in 2006 and reinitiating a Section 7 consultation was required.

FPL has identified and responded to correct the contributing factors that led to exceeding the take limit in 2006.

The current BO also mandates that FPL participate in the Sea Turtle Stranding and Salvage Network (STSSN) as well as Public Service Turtle Walks. As participants in the STSSN, biologists routinely respond to sea turtle strandings in St. Lucie and Martin Counties. This activity involves the collection of information on turtles that are found dead, debilitated, or that have been impacted by human-related activities. During 2015, IRG biologists responded to 14 stranding events. Sea turtle nesting walks are conducted by FPL as public service programs during the summer sea turtle nesting.

season. These turtle walks educate the public about relevant sea turtle protection **

issues and, in most cases, allow the public to view a nesting loggerhead sea turtle:

During 2015, FPL conducted 15 turtle walks attended by 478 people.

The St. Lucie Plant sea turtle program continues to assist other sea turtle researchers, universities, nonprofit organizations, and state and federal agencies by providing data, specimens, and public outreach. Biologists collaborated with researchers on three projects in 2015. -

3

1.0 Background 1.1 Area Description Florida Power & Light's (FPL) St. Lucie Plant is located on a 457-hectare site on South Hutchinson Island on Florida's east coast (Figures 1 and 2). South Hutchinson Island is a barrier island that extends 36 km between inlets and attains its maximum width of 2 km at the plant site. The plant is approximately midway between Ft. Pierce and St.

Lucie Inlets and is bounded on the east by the Atlantic Ocean and on the west by the Indian River Lagoon. Elevations approach five *meters atop dunes bordering the beach and decrease to sea level in the mangrove swamps that are common on the western side. The Atlantic shoreline of South Hutchinson Island is composed of sand and shell hash with jntermittent rocky promontories protruding through the beach face along the southern end of the island. Submerged coquinoid rock formations parallel much of the island off the ocean beaches. The ocean bottom immediately offshore from the plant site consists primarily of s*and and- shell sediments. The Gulf Stream (Florida Current),

which flows parallel to the continental shelf margin, begins to diverge from the coastline at West Palm Beach. At South Hutchinson Island, the current is approximately 33 km offshore. Oceanic waters associated with the western boundary of the current periodically meander over the inner shelf, especially during summer months.

1.2 Power Plant Description The St. Lucie Power Plant consists of two 1,000 MWe nuclear-fueled electric generating units that use nearshore ocean waters for the plant's once-through condenser cooling system. Unit 1 was placed on-line in March 1976 and Unit 2 in April 1983. Water for this system enters through three submerged intake structures located 365 m offshore.

(Figure 2). The intake structures are equipped with a velocity cap to minimize entrainment of marine life. Water passes through these structures and into submerged pipes (two 3.7 m and one 4.9 min diameter) running under the beach. It then passes into a 1,500 m long intake canal, which transports it to the plant. After passing through the plant, the heated water is discharged into a 670 m long canal that leads to two buri~Q__di~~IJ-~Jge_ pip~lines_. Tb_e~e__ R~ss*und_errieath the dunes and along the ocean floor to the submerged discharges, the first of which are 730 m north of the intake and extend approximately 365 m offshore. The second pipeline is located just t9 the south of the first and is nearly twice as long.

1.3 Environmental Reporting St. Lucie Units 1 and 2 use the Atlantic Ocean as a source of water for once through condenser cooling. Since 1971, the potential environmental effects resulting from the intake and discharge of this water have* been the subject of FPL sponsored biotic 4

studies at the site (Applied Biology, Inc. [ABI] 1978, 1980, 1986-1989, 1994).

Jurisdiction for sea turtle studies lies with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC),

which is considered to be the lead federal agency relative to consultation under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This document has been prepared to satisfy the requirements contained in Appendix B, Environmental Protection Plan (EPP); St. Lucie Units 1 and 2 Facility Operating Licenses No. DPR-67 and No. NPF-16. Previous results dealing with sea turtle studies are contained in 31 annual environmental operating reports covering the period from 1.983 through 2014 (ABI 1984-1994; Quantum Resources, Inc. 1995-2009; lnwater Research Group, Inc. [IRG] 2010-2015).

This report describes the 2015 environmental protection activities related to sea turtles as required by Subsection 4.2 of the St. Lucie Uni~s 1 and 2 EPP. Other routine annual reporting requirements are addressed in Section 7.

5

2.0 Sea Turtle Nest Monitoring Sea turtle nesting typically occurs along Florida's Atlantic coast from March through September. Furthermore, South Hutchinson Island is an imp-ortant rookery for loggerhead (Carella caretta), green (Chelonia mydas), and leatherback (Dermoche/ys coriacea) turtles (Meylan~ Schroeder, & Mosier, 1995). Under the ESA, the federal government has classified the loggerhead turtle as a threatened species while leatherbacks and the Florida nesting population of green turtles are classified as endangered. One of FPL's primary environmental concerns is to ensure the operation of the St. Lucie Plant does not adversely affect sea turtle nesting and they have sponsored monitoring of nesting activity on the island since 1971.

2.1 Methodology 2.1.1 Previous Methods and Projects Daytime nesting surveys and nighttime turtle tagging programs were conducted in odd numbered years from 1971 through 1979. During daytime nesting surveys, nine 1.25 km-long survey areas were monitored five days per week (Figure 3). The St. Lucie_ Plant -

began operation in 1976; therefore, the first three survey years (1971, 1973, and 1970) provided baseline data for nesting activity on South Hutchinson Island. Though the power plant was not operating during 1975, the St. Lucie Plant Unit 1 ocean intake and discharge structures were installed during that year. Installation of these structures included nighttime construction activities conducted offshore from and perpendicular to_

the beach. The plant was in full operation during the 1977 and 1979 surveys.

A modified daytime nesting survey was conducted in 1980 during the preliminary construction of the ocean discharge structure for St. Lucie Plant Unit 2. Four of the previously established 1_ .25 km-long survey areas were monitored. To mitigate any adverse effects associated with construction activities, turtle nests proximal to the construction area were relocated.

The St. Lucie Plant Unit 2 discharge structure was installed during the 1981 nesting season. Construction of the Unit 2 intake structure proceeded throughout the 1982 nesting season and_ was_ cor:Tipleted near the efld of the 1983 season. Mitigation activities associated with installation of both structures were similar to those conducted when the Unif 1 intake and discharg-e structures were installed. Analysis demonstrated that the construction of the plant's offshore intake and discharge structures significantly reduced nesting at the plant site during construction years - 1975, 1981, 1982, and 1983 (ABI, 1987). However, nesting at the plant consistently returned to levels similar to or greater than those at a control site in years following the construction.

6

During 1991 a major offshore construction project was undertaken to replace damaged velocity caps on the three intake structures. A large elevated platform, from which repair activities were conducted, was erected around the three structures. Construction occurred throughout the nesting season. Work was restricted almost entirely to daylight hours, nighttime lighting of the work area was minimal, and no equipment or materials were used on the beach. A sea turtle protection plan was implemented to mitigate any negative effects resulting from the required safety and navigational lighting on and near the platform. The plan included caging nests along a 1,500 m section of beach west of the platform and the release of hatchlings to unaffected areas to the north and south.

During this period, nests were more abundant at the construction site than at the control site.

Reconstruction of the primary dune in front of the power plant was completed by FPL prior to the beginning of the 2005 sea turtle nesting season. This project was required due to the widespread obliteration of the primary dune during the 2004 hurricane season. Despite the compact material and erosion problems associated with the reconstructed dune, nesting success was not noticeably different from nesting success in unaffected survey zones to the north and south of the project area.

In 2012, FPL implemented a construction project at the discharge canal headwall where a retaining wall was added landward of the beach-facing dune. Construction .activities took plac~ on a 100 m section on the crest of the primary dune line at the eastern end of the discharge canal. Daily sea turtle nesting surveys were performed as required by the construction permit. From the beginning of nesting season until May 21 5 \ nests were left in situ. Beginning on May 22nd, nests that could have been impacted by construction activities were relocated to a hatchery area approximately 1 km north of the construction site.

Another dune restoration project in front of the power plant was completed by FPL prior to the beginning of the 2013 sea turtle nesting season. This project was required due to erosion of the previous dune restoration area. Sea turtl~ nesting surveys were again performed in conjunction with the restoration activities. Sand placement began in January and was completed by mid-February (prior to the start of sea turtle nesting season). The planting of dune vegetation was subsequently completed in March. No.

nests or false crawls were recorded during the project timeframe.

2.1.2 Current Methods Nesting surveys to satisfy environmental reporting requirements were completed in 1986 (ABI, 1987) but continued voluntarily through 1998 with agreement from federal and state agencies. In 1998, the continuation of the nesting survey program was mandated as part of the BO and Incidental Take Statement issued by the National 7

Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). An amendment to the EPP was approved in 1999 to include these requirements.

From 1981 through 2015, 36 one-km-long segments comprising the island's coastline have been surveyed seven days a week during the nesting season (Figure 3). These "zones" are identified starting with Zone A at the northern end of the island and continue through Zone JJ at the southern end. Since the 1994 nesting season, the southern half of the island (Zone T to Zon_~ JJ) ~as be~n surveyed by Ecological Associates, Inc.

(EAi) and their data are included in this report. Biologists used all-terrain vehicles to survey the island each morning. New nests, non-nesting emergences (false crawls),

and nests affected by predators were recorded for each zone. Data collected from beach nesting surveys are reported to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) as part of the Index Nesting Beach Survey and the Statewide Nesting Beach Survey.

2.2 Results for 2015

-in 2015, Zones E-S were surveyed by lnwater Research Group, Inc. (IRG). EAi surveyed Zones A-D as part of a beach renourishment project south of the Fort Pierce inlet. Data from those zones, as well as the south end of South Hutchinson Island, were supplied by EAi and were used to provide whole-island nesting totals (Figures 4 - 6);

From March* 1st through March 31st, nesting surveys were conducted every other day along South Hutchinson Island in areas A-S. Three leatherback sea turtle nests were recorded in Zones A-S prior to the beginning of formal nesting surveys on April 1st. From April 1st through October 1st, nest surveys were conducted on a daily basis.

Not all ventures onto the beach by a female turtle end in successful nests. These "false crawls" (non-nesting emergences) may occur for many reasons and are commonly encountered at other rookeries. Davis and Whiting (1977) suggest that relatively high percentages of false crawls may reflect disturbances or unsatisfactory nesting beach characteristics.

Nest success was- lower- across all zones, due to an increase in number of false crawls. The increase was associated with below average rainfall during the peak of nesting season (June - August) that created difficult conditions (dry sand) for turtles to dig their nests. Historically, the distribution of loggerhead emergences on the island has been consistent with the distribution of nests, with no difference in nesting succe-ss among zones. We can only speculate the current causes for differences in nesting success between zones (Figure 7). Recent beach renourishment, coastal construction projects, formation of large escarpments that prevent turtles from crawling above the high tide line, and light pollution from inland sources may have all contributed to lower nesting success in the northern most zones. Nest success in the zone that 8

includes the power plant (Zone 0) was similar to the nesting success in the surrounding zones (Figure 7).

On June 11th lnwater biologists discovered that sea turtle nests were poached in Zone K. More than 20 nests were poached, including a marked loggerhead nests. FWC law enforcement officers were notified and investigated the incident.

2.2.1 Loggerhead Nesting Most loggerhead nesting occurs on warm temperate and subtropical beaches (Dodd, 1988). App~oximately 42,000 to 74,000 loggerhead turtle nests are deposited annually on Florida beaches (Turtle Expert Working Group [TEWG], 2000), ranking this loggerhead turtle rookery the second largest in the world (NMFS and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS], 1991 ). The beaches in southeast Florida are especially prolific nesting areas, with South Hutchinson Island being a critically important nesting beach (Meylan, Schroeder, & Mosier, 1995). Between 4,000 and 8,000 loggerhead nests have been deposited annually on South Hutchinson Island during the last thirty years.

In 2015, 7,878 loggerhead nests were recorded on South Hutchison Island (Figure 4). In Zones A-S (the north end of the island) biologists observed 3,748 nests (Figure 8). The first recorded nest was on April 14th and the last loggerhead nest was recorded on September 1oth. There were 5,669 loggerhead false crawls observed in Zones A-S.

Eighty-nine of the 3,748 loggerhead nests were marked to assess nest productivity.

Forty-six nests were successfully inventoried, 25 were completely predated, 11 completely washed out, five had their marking stakes removed/vandalized preventing the clutch from being located, one was predated after the first emergence, and one was poached. The 46 inventoried nests contained a cumulative total of 4,751 eggs. Of these, 2,673 successfully hatched and emerged from the marked nests. This represents an emergence success rate of 56.3%. There were 28 live loggerhead hatchlings found during nest excavations. These hatchlings were not considered to have successfully emerged from the nest.

Loggerhead nesting activity on South Hutchinson Island fluctuates considerably from year to year (Figure 6). Annual variations in nest densities are also common at other rookeries, and probably result from non-annual reproductive behavior (Heppell, Snover,

& Crowder, 2003). No relationships between annual fluctuations in nesting activity and power plant operation or intake/discharge construction have been found. However, loggerhead nesting on South Hutchinson Island mirrors trends in nesting statewide.

9

2.2.2 Green Nesting The green turtle is the second most common sea turtle on Florida nesting beaches. '

Approximately 99% of the green turtle nesting in Florida occurs on the Atlantic coast from Brevard through Broward Counties (Witherington, Herren, Bresette, 2006). On South Hutchinson Island, green turtles have had alternating years of nesting: a high nesting year followed by a low nesting year, although this pattern has become less distinct in recent years. This biennial pattern is also seen at other locations throughout their nesting range (Witherington et al., 2006).

In 2015, 860 green turtle nests were recorded on Hutchison Island (Figure 5). Biologists observed a total of 381 green turtle nests in Zones A-S (Figure 8). The first recorded nest of the season was on May 2?1h and the last green turtle nest was noted on October 2nd. There were 817 green turtle false crawls observed in Zones A-S.

Forty-seven of the 381 green turtle nests were marked to assess nest productivity. Ten nests were completely predated, seven were completely washed out, two had their marking stakes removed/vandalized preventing the clutch from being located, and two were not inventoried because -another turtle had nested on top the marked and/or destroyed the marking stakes. Twenty-six nests were successfully inventoried and contained a cumulative total of 3,016 eggs. Of these, 2,027 successfully hatched and emerged from the marked nests. This represents an emergence success rate of 67.2%.

In addition, there were 50 live green turtles found during nest excavations. These hatchlings were not considered to have successfully emerged from the nest.

2.2.3 Leatherback Nesting Leatherback nesting occurs on subtropical and tropical beaches. Leatherbacks inhabit Florida waters primarily during the nesting season (March-June) when they are generally found in higher densities close to shore awaiting nesting forays onto the beach (Schroeder & Thompson, 1987). Outside of nesting season leatherbacks are often found in pelagic habitats as far north as the Canadian Maritimes where they feed primarily on jellyfish (Fossette et al. 2010).

In 2015, 365 leatherback turtle nests were recorded on Hutchison Island (Figure 6).

Biologists observed a total of 86 leatherback sea turtle nests in Zones A-S (Figure 8).

The first recorded nest was on March 6th and the last leatherback sea turtle nest was recorded on August 9th. There were 14 leatherback sea turtle false crawls observed in the surveyed areas A-S.

Twenty-seven of the 86 leatherback turtle nests were marked to assess nest productivity. Twenty-five nests were successfully inventoried, one egg chamber could 10

not be located, and one had its marking stakes removed/vandalized preventing the clutch from being located. The 27 nests contained a cumulative total of 1,811 eggs. Of these, 609 successfully hatched and emerged from the marked nests. This represents an emergence success rate of 33.6%. There were six live leatherback turtles found during nest excavations. These hatchlings were not considered to have successfully emerged from the nest.

The increase in leatherback nesting on South Hutchinson Island mirrors the nesting trend for the entire state Florida. The number of leatherback nests in Florida has increased more than 10% per year since 1979 (Stewart et al., 2011 ), but it is unknown whether the increase is from new recruits to the population or if it represents migrants from other Caribbean nesting beaches.

2.2.4 Predation Historically, raccoon (Procyon Jotor) predation has been the leading cause of turtle nest destruction on South Hutchinson Island (ABI, 1989). Though turtle nests on South Hutchinson Island have probably been depredated by ghost crabs (Ocypode quadrata) since nesting surveys began, quantification of ghost crab predation did not begin until 1983. Occasionally, sea turtle nests are depredated by other animals such as bobcats (Lynx rufus), fire ants (Solenopsis invicta), and various species of birds. However, this only accounts for a small portion of th_e total number of predation events on South Hutchinson Island.

IRG biologists recorded a total of 672 predation events for South Hutchinson Island in 2015 within beach Sections A-S. The predation rates for each zone are shown in Figure 9. Sea turtle nests on South Hutchinson Island were depredated by ghost crabs, raccoons, birds, and fire ants. The most abundant predators were *ghost crabs, which_

accounted for 231 individual predation events. Raccoons were the second most abundant predator accounting for 189 events. Another 214 predation events consisted of a combination of raccoon and ghost crab predation. Other predators (fire ants, domestic dogs or birds for example) accounted for 38 additional predation events.

Nest excavation provides an opportunity to more accurately account for predation activity. For example, fire ant and ghost crab predation are not always evident from a cursory inspection of the sea turtle nest's surface. Predators negatively affected 62.5 %

of nests (60 out of 96) where hatch success could be evaluated. Thirty-five marked nests were completely predated prior to inventory.

11

3.0 Intake Canal Monitoring Entrainment of sea turtles at the St. Lucie Plant has been attributed to the presumed physical attractiveness of the offshore structures housing the intake pipes rather than to plant operating characteristics (Ecological Associates, Inc., 2000). The velocity caps, which are supported above the openings to each intake pipe, eliminate vertical water entrainment and substantially reduce current velocities near the structures by spreading horizontal draw over a wider area. Even when both units are operating at full capacity, turtles must actively swim into the inouth of one of the structures before they encounter current velocities sufficient enough to entrain them. Turtles entering the ocean intake structures are entrained with cooling water and rapidly transported through the intake pipes into an enclosed canal system where they must be manually captured and returned to the ocean. Since the plant became operational in 1976, turtles entrained in the intake canal have been systematically captured, measured, weighed, tagged, and released.

3.1 Methodology 3.1.1 Barrier Nets In 1978, a barrier net at the A1A bridge (Figure 2) was constructed to confine turtles to the easternmost section of the intake canal where capture techniques have been most effective. This net is constructed of large diameter polypropylene rope and has a mesh size of 20.3 cm x 20.3 cm. A cable and series of large floats are used to keep the top of the net above the water's surface and the bottom of the net is anchored by a series of concrete blocks. The net is inclined at a slope of 1:1, with the bottom positioned upstream of the surface cable. This reduces bowing in th.e center and minimizes the risk of a weak or injured turtle being pinned underwater by strong currents.

In the past, the integrity of the barrier net was occasionally compromised, and turtles were able to move west of A 1A. These turtles were further constrained downstream by an underwater intrusion detection system (UIDS) consisting, in part, of a large barrier positioned perpendicular to the n()rth-_south arm of the canal (Figure 2). The UIDS x

security barrier has a mesh size of 22.9 cm 22.9 cm. Prior to completion of the UIDS in December 1986, turtles unconfined by the A 1A barrier net were usually removed from the canal at the intake wells ofUnits-1 and 2 (Figure 2). They were then retrieved by means of large mechanical rakes or specially designed nets. Following construction of the UIDS barrier, only the smallest individuals were able to reach the intake wells.

Improvements made to the A1A barrier net in 1990 have effectively confined all turtles larger than 32.5 cm carapace length (28. 7 cm carapace width) to the eastern end. of the canal.

12

In January 1996 (in response to the large numbers of small green turtles entrained in the intake canal in the early 90s) an improved barrier net design involving a smaller 12.7 x 12.7 cm mesh size was erected 150 m east of A1A (Figure 2). This additional "primary barrier net" was designed to confine all turtles with a carapace width greater than 18 cm to the extreme eastern portion of the intake canal. However, the integrity of this net was often compromised by incursions of seaweed, drift algae, jellyfish, and siltation. During these events, water velocities around the net increased dramatically creating an insufficient net slope that caused several sea turtle mortalities. To address this design problem and to further alleviate mortalities, FPL constructed a new net with a stronger mesh and added support structures. Dredging of the canal east of the A 1A net was also conducted to minimize water velocities around the new barrier net. Construction was completed in November 2002.

In October 2009 the primary barrier net and support structures failed due to an algae event, submerging the north half of the net 0.6-1.5 m underwater (IRG, 2010). UESI installed large floating buoys onto the primary net in order to create a temporary barrier.

However, this temporary barrier net was found to be susceptible to partial submergence or failure due to severe algae/jellyfish events or at extreme high tides. Construction on a new permanent primary barrier net began in 2014 and was completed in January 20,15.

3.1.2 Turtle Capture Historically, most turtles entrained in the St. Lucie Plant intake canal were removed using large-mesh tangle nets set near the intake canal headwalls at the extreme eastern end of the intake canal (Figure 2). Nets used were from 30 to 40 m in length, 3 to 4 m deep, and composed of 40 cm stretch mesh multifilament nylon. Large floats were attached to the surface and unweighted lines were used along the bottom. Turtles entangled in the nets generally remained at the water's surface until removed. Nets ..

were_ usually deployed on Monday morning and r~trieved on Friday afternoon. During periods of deployment, the nets were inspected for captures a.t least twice each day (mornings and afternoons).

St. Lucie- Plant personnel checked the nets periodically and biologists we.re notified immediately if a capture was observed. Sea turtle specialists were on call 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months a day to retrieve captured turtles from the plant intake canal system.

Beginning in April 1990, after consultation with NMFS, net deployment was scaled back to daylight hours only. Concurrently, surveillance of the intake canal was increased and biologists remained on site for the duration of each day's netting activities. This measure decreased response time for removal of entangled turtles and provided an opportunity to improve daily assessments of turtle abundance within the canal.

13

During each day's directed capture efforts, formal inspections of the intake canal were made to determine the number, location and species of turtles present. Surface observations were augmented with periodic underwater inspections, particularly in and around th_e barrier nets. These observations allowed for a rough estimate of how many sea turtles were in each section of the canal on a given day.

The canal capture program has been under continual review and refinement in an attempt to minimize both entanglement time and injuries/mortalities to sea turtles. Better utilization of currents and eddies, adjustments to tethering lines, multi-net deployments and increased efforts to hand capture and dip net turtles have contributed to reduced residency times in recent years.

3.1.3 Data Collection Regardless of capture method, all turtles removed from the canal are identified to species, measured, weighed, tagged, and examined for overall condition (wounds, abnormalities, parasites, etc.). Since 1994, captured turtles have been photographed dorsally and ventrally prior to release. Additionally, as of July 2001, Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tags were injected subcutaneously into the right front flipper of alL turtles as outlined in the BO issued by NMFS in May 2001. Healthy turtles were released into the ocean the same day of capture. When treatment was warranted, turtles were transported to an approved rehabilitation facility after consultation with *i*

FWC. Beginning in 1982, necropsies were conducted on dead turtles found in fresh condition. Currently, fresh dead turtles are held on ice and taken to a qualified veterinarian for necropsy. Methodologies associated with the canal capture program have remained essentially unchanged since 1994, making data comparable from that year through the current reporting period.

3.2 Results for 2015 Methods to remove sea turtles from the intake canal included the use of tangle nets, dip nets, and hand capture. Long handled dip nets employed from small boats, the canal banks, and headwall structures were moderately effective in capturing turtles with carapace lengths of 40 cm or less. Divers were employed to hand capture turtles whenever water visibility permitted. This techn-ique has proven highly effective in the capture of turtles of all sizes, particularly less active individuals that are often found partially buried in the sediment near the primary barrier net. Hand capture efforts have successfully reduced residency times for turtles in the intake canal.

During 2015, a total of 465 sea turtles were removed from the intake canal, including 274 loggerheads, 181 green turtles, seven Kemp's ridley turtles, two leatherbacks and one hawksbill (Figures 10 and 11; Table 1). The majority of these turtles (94.4%) were 14

captured alive and released back to the ocean. Seventeen (3.7%) were taken to rehabilitation facilities for treatment of injuries or disease and nine (1.9%) turtles were found dead. None of the turtles taken to rehab facilities had injuries causal to power plant operations. Four of the nine turtles found dead were causal to power plant operations. Mortalities and injuries are discussed in Section 3.2.6.

In 2015, one juvenile green turtle was captured west of the primary barrier net in the intake wells. The other 464 turtles entrained in the canal were captured east of the primary .barrier net - 315 by tangle nets, 23 off of the primary barrier net, 39 by dip net, and 87 by hand capture. Proactive captures* (hand capture and dip net) accounted for 40.6% of the turtles removed from the intake canal.

Decreased water flow during plant outages likely reduces the number of turtles entrained into the intake canal. In 2015, Unit 1 was in an outage from March 23rd to April 24th and Unit 2 was in an outage from September ]1h to October 26th_

3.2.1 Loggerhead Captures Historically, loggerheads have been the most abundant species entrained into the canal. The number of loggerheads captured each year ranged from 62 in 1981 to 623 in 2004. During 2015, monthly captures of loggerheads ranged from 7 in September to:-43 in June (Table 2), with a monthly mean of 22.8. Loggerhead capture rates have exhibited considerable year-to-year fluctuation, but have shown an overall increasing trend since the plant started operation (Figure 1O; Table 1). The size frequency of loggerheads captured at the intake canal of the power plant ranges from predominately juvenile to sub-adult animals, with mature adult animals captured mainly during the nesting season of April through September (Figure 12).

Of the 274 loggerheads captured where standard straight carapace length (SSCL) is -

available, 165 were juveniles (SSCL ~ 70 cm), 42 were adults (SSCL ~ 85 -cm), and 67 _

were transitional (SSCL 70~85 cm; Hirth, 1980, Figure 12). The latter group probably includes both mature and immature individuals. Of the 42 turtles classified as adults, 39 were females and 3 were males. Two additional loggerheads were recorded as males even though their SSCL was less than 85 cm because sex was apparent from the animal's tail length.

3.2.2 Green Captures The number of green turtles captured each year has ranged from three in 1979 to a record high of 673 in 1995 (Figure 1O; Table 1). A spike in green turtle captures, driven mainly by small juveniles (Bresette, Gorham, & Peery, -1998), during the mid-1990s has leveled off to a capture rate consistently greater than numbers recorded prior to 1994.

15

Size class frequencies of green turtles at the intake canal are dominated by juvenile animals with adults captured in relatively small numbers during the nesting season of May through October (Figure 13).

During 2015, monthly green turtle captures ranged from one in August to 35 in December (Table 2) with a monthly mean of 15.1. Of the 181 green turtles captured in 2015, there were 177 juveniles or sub-adults (SSCL < 83cm), three adult males, and one adult female (SSCL ~ 83 cm; Witherington and Ehrhart, 1989, Figure 13).

3.2.3 Leatherback, Hawksbill, and Kemp's ridley Captures Captures of leatherback, hawksbill, and Kemp's ridley turtles have been infrequent and scattered throughout the years (Figure 11 and Table 1). However, each species has shown rather pronounced seasonal occurrences (Table 3). Leatherbacks are typically

captured in March and April, hawksbills are captured between July and September, and Kemp's ridleys are caught between December and April.

In 2015, there were seven Kemp's ridley turtles, two leatherbacks, and one hawksbill captured in the intake canal of the St. Lucie Plant (Table 1). The Kemp's ridley sea turtles ranged in SSCL from 44.9 cm to 56.9 cm. The first leatherback was captured; March 5th and had a SSCL of 136.2 cm. The second leatherback was captured on May 15th and had and SSCL of 138.0 cm. A subadult hawksbill was captured on~November 29th and had a SSCL of 65.6 cm.

3.2~4 Recaptures Since plant operation began in 1976, a total of 16,463 sea turtles (including recaptures) have been captured, including 9,480 loggerhead, 6,815 green, 64 hawksbill, 63 Kemp's ridley, and 41 leatherback turtles (Table 1).

Most turtles removed from the intake canal have been tagged and released into the ocean at various locations along South Hutchinson Island. Consequently, individual turtles can be identified as_ long as they retain their tags. Over the history of the program at the St. Lucie Plant, 3,002 recapture events (701 loggerheads and 2,301 green turtles) have occurred. The recapture rate in 2015 was 3.3% for loggerheads and 33.7% for greens. Occasionally,_turtles are captured that have been tagged by other researchers.

There were five such captures in 2015. One loggerhead was originally tagged nesting on Wassaw Island, Georgia in 2004. An adult female loggerhead was originally found in the Mosquito Lagoon and tagged during the 2010 cold stun event in Brevard County, Florida. A green turtle was originally tag~ed during the same cold stun event in Brevard County. A leatherback was originally tagged while nesting in Brevard County in 2001 16

and was also encountered nesting in 2003 and 2012 in Juno Beach, Florida. Lastly a juvenile loggerhead was originally tagged in the Indian River Lagoon earlier in 2015.

3.2.5 Relative Condition Turtles captured alive in the intake canal of the St. Lucie Plant are assigned a relative condition based on weight, activity, parasite infestation, epibiont coverage, injuries, and any other abnormalities that might affect overall vitality. Relative condition ratings can be influenced by a number of factors, some related and others unrelated to entrainment into the intake canal. A rating of good indicates that turtles have not been negatively impacted by their entrapment in the canal, as evidenced by physical appearance.

Although ratings of fair or poor imply reduced vitality, the extent to which entrainment and entrapment are responsible is often indeterminable. In some instances, acute injuries responsible for lower overall condition ratings, such as boat collision, fisheries gear entanglement, or disease were obviously sustained prior to entrainment. However, in recent years, turtles have been found with fresh scrapes and cuts incurred during the entrainment process.. Some of these incidents have had a negative effect on a sea turtle's overall condition and have been categorized as directly causal to power plant operation. Causal determinations are made by consultation with personnel from FWC and/or a qualified veterinarian.

During 2015, of the 274 loggerheads captured, 90.9% (249) were alive and in good condition. Only 8.8% (24) of all loggerheads were individuals in fair or poor condition, ,.,

and 0.4% (one) was found dead. Of the 181 green turtles removed from the intake canal

91. 7% (166) were in good condition, 3.9% (seven) were in fair or poor condition and 4.4% (eight) were found dead.

Of the 465 turtles removed from the intake canal during the year, 390 (83.9%) were ...

observed with fresh cuts and scrapes that may have been incurred during transit ,..

through the intake pipes. The scrapes varied in degree of severity, although most (91.0%) of-the scrapes were classJfied as minor. However, some of the scrapes (9.0%)

were moderate. No turtles had a fresh scrape categorized as severe and warranted the turtle being sent to a rehabilitation facility.

3.2.6 Mortalities and Injuries Injuries and mortalities are categorized in two ways - causal to power plant operation or non-causal to power plant operation. These decisions are made in consultation with FWC and/or a qualified veterinarian. Not all mortalities and injuries are causal to power plant operation, as some sea turtles enter the canal in either a moribund state or have had pre-existing conditions related to fisheries, boat interactions or disease. Injuries 17

causal to power plant operation are recorded and are applied against the take limit established by the most recent BO set forth by NMFS.

Sea turtle mortalities have been closely monitored throughout the history of the capture program in an attempt to assign probable cause and take rer:nedial action to minimize future occurrences. Modifications to capture procedures, improvements to barrier nets, and virtual elimination of low flow conditions within the intake pipes have resulted in a substantial reduction in sea turtle mortalities over the life of the canal capture program.

Mortality rate declined from 7.8% during the period 1976-1984 to 1.3% for the period 1985 to present (T~ble 1). Over the entire monitoring program's history (1976-2015),

180 (1.9%; including hatch lings from 2006) loggerheads and 107 (1.6%) green turtles entrained in the canal were found dead. Only four Kemp's ridley mortalities have been documented at the St. Lucie PlanCduring 1987 and 1988. The only hawksbill mortality was recorded in 2014. There have been no leatherback mortalities in the history of the project.

In 2015, nine mortalities were recorded at the St. Lucie power plant intake canal; eight green turtles and one loggerhead. Four mortalities were considered causal to power plant operations (shown below).

On February 28th a juvenile green turtle was found submerged below the water on the primary barrier net. In the necropsy noted the turtle was heavily compromised by disease but the veterinarian determined forced submergence was the final cause of death during.

On October 14th a juvenile green turtle was found floating at the surface of the primary barrier net. The necropsY, found no evidence of life threatening disease or compromise and the veterinarian determined that forced submergence was the likely cause of dE:!ath.

On October 19th a juvenile green turtle was found floating at the surface of the primary barrier net. The veterinarian discovered an abnormality in the vascular system during necropsy and determined it may have resulted in mortality under the circumstances involved in entrainment.

On December 1ih a juvenile green turtle was found submerged below the water on the primary barrier net. The necropsy found no evidence of life threatening disease or compromise and the veterinarian determined that forced submergence was the likely cause of death.

18

4.0 Sea Turtle Protective Activities 4.1 NMFS Section 7 Consultations In accordance with Section 7 of the ESA, FPL must submit a Biological Assessment to NMFS for review if FPL exceeds the incidental take limit established by the most recent BO. The BO is an analytical document that looks at the effects of a federal action on endangered and threatened species.

Section 7(b)(4) of the ESA refers to the incidental take of listed species. It sets forth the requirements when a proposed agency action is found to be consistent with Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA and the proposed action. may incidentally take listed species. NMFS is responsible for issuing a statement that specifies the impact of any incidental take of endangered or threatened species. It also states that reasonable and prudent measures, and terms and conditions to implement the measures, be provided to minimize such impacts.

In 1999, FPL exceeded their anticipated incidental take limit established by the 1997 BO set forth by NMFS. This required reinitiating of consultation under Section 7 of the* E_SA.

As part of this consultation, FPL conducted a study on the factors influencing sea turtle entrainment (EAi, 2000). NMFS considered this new information when developing the new opinion. On May 4, 2001, NMFS issued its BO as part of the reinitiating of consultation subsequent to*the 1997 BO.

In the 2001 BO there were a number of changes, most importantly in the Incidental Take Statement. This states that FPL will exceed their take limits for a calendar year if any of the following occur: 1) more than 1000 sea turtles are captured, 2) m.ore than 1%

of the total number of loggerhead and green turtles (combined) are injured/killed du~ to plant operation, 3) more than two Kemp's ridley sea turtles are injured/killed due to plant .

operation, or 4) if any hawksbill or leatherback sea turtles are injured/killed due to plant operation. In the case where 1% of the combined loggerhead and green turtle captures is not a whole number, it is rounded u*p (e.g. 520 combined captures= take limit of 6).

Under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act a new consultation with NMFS is required If FPL meets or exceeds the take limits specified in the Incidental Take Statement.

During 2015, there were four sea turtle mortalities or injuries that were causal to power plant operations. No leatherback, hawksbill or Kemp's ridley turtles were injured or killed due plant operation. A total of 465 turtles were captured in the FPL intake canal for the year. Based on the latest BO issued by NMFS, FPL did not exceed its take limit during 2015. However, FPL did exceed their sea turtle take limit at the St. Lucie Power Plant in 2006 and reinitiating a Section 7 consultation was required. FPL has identified the 19

contributing factors that led to exceeding the take limit in 2006 and the company has responded by cleaning the intake pipes and developing a plan to install turtle excluder panels on the offshore intake structures. These grated panels would exclude almost all reproductively active sea turtles from being entrained into the power plant's intake canal.

4.2 Sea Turtle Stranding and Salvage Network and Turtle Walks An amendment to the EPP, Requirement 4.2.1 of the St. Lucie Unit 2 operating license Appendix B, was approved in 1999. This mandated that participation in the Sea Turtle Stranding and Salvage Network (STSSN) and Public Service Turtle Walks was to become part of the BO and Incidental Take Statement issued by NMFS.

As participants in the STSSN, IRG's sea turtle biologists routinely respond to sea turtle strandings in St. Lucie and Martin Counties. This activity involves the collection of information on turtles that are found dead, debilitated, or that have been impacted by human-related activities. All permit holders participating in this program are required to complete a STSSN stranding report for each dead or debilitated turtle encountered.

Completed stranding reports are then sent to FWC.

Sea turtle nesting walks are conducted by FPL as part of their public outreach programs during the summer sea turtle nesting season. These turtle walks educate the public about relevant sea turtle protection issues and, in most cases, allow the public to view a nesting loggerhead sea turtle.

4.2.1 Results for 2015 During 2015, IRG biologists responded to 14 (four loggerhead, nine green, and one.

unknown species) stranding events in Martin and St. Lucie Counties. Three live turtles were transported to rehabilitation facilities. The 11 dead turtles were found in various stages of decomposition. The probable cause of stranding included three boat strikes, three in an emaciated'bo.dy condition, and one fishing line entanglement. The remaining seven turtles were either too decomposed, had injuries of an unknown origin, or otherwise lacked any salient wounds or abnormalities to indicate a probable cause of death.

FPL conducted 15 turtle walks.between June 51hand July 241h, 2015. During these programs, a total of 478 people attended and on .14 of the 15 turtle walks participants were able to view a nesting female loggerhead turtle.

20

4.3 Collaborative Efforts IRG biologists continue to assist other sea turtle researchers, universities, nonprofit organizations, and state and federal agencies by providing data, specimens, and public outreach. IRG biologists at the St. Lucie power plant continued to collaborate with other researchers on three research projects in 2015.

IRG biologists collected blood samples from 40 juvenile green turtles for analysis of health parameters by the University of Georgia and the Georgia Sea Turtle Center.

Unhatched eggs from loggerhead nests were also collected for stable isotope analysis conducted by Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute (FWRI). Measurements of hatchlings orientation direction were also collected for a separate study by FWRI.

4.4 Barrier Net Maintenance Maintaining the integrity of the barrier nets is essential to reducing mortality rates and residency times of entrained sea turtles and is mandated by the most recent BO issued by NMFS. Daily inspections are performed from a small boat to remove floating debris and to repair holes at or near the water's surface. Quarterly inspections and cleaning debris from the net when warranted was conducted by Underwater Engineering Services, Inc. (UESI). In addition to scheduled inspections and cleaning of the nets, divers are deployed when the integrity of the nets are threatened by algae events.

These algae events can cause undue stress to the net structures and may cause the net to fail. Net failures increase both the risk of sea turtle mortalities and residency times. Turtles can become tangled in or pinned under a failed barrier net, leading to a causal drowning mortality. Furthermore, if turtles have access to larger portions of the intake canal, then it becomes more challenging to quickly entrap and release these animals back into their natural environment. The primary barrier net, with few exceptions, has effective!¥ confined sea turtles to the eastern 200 meters of the intake canal.

During 2015, there were two net failures. On April 1?1h, approximately 1 ft. sections on the north arid south ends of the primary net were below the water (0.5 - 1.0 ft.). The same sections were again below the water during high tide between September 23rd and October 151 . The net failures were caused by a combination of extreme high tides and higher water levels within the intake canal during an outage. IRG biologists monitored west of the 5" during the failures. No turtles were spotted west of the 5" net or subsequently captured in the intake wells. Routine inspections of the temporary primary barrier net and the A1A net were completed quarterly: During these inspections, debris was removed from both nets. No holes were found during the quarterly inspections in the primary barrier or A1A barrier nets. After a juvenile green turtle was captured in the intake wells an additional inspection of the primary barrier net was conducted on 21

December 1]1h. Divers determined the mesh at bottom of the net was overstretched and repaired the net on the same day.

4.5 Intake Pipe Cleaning and Maintenance Beginning in 2002 there was a steady increase in the number of sea turtles incurring scrapes during transit through the power plant intake pipes. These scrapes varied in degree of severity, with most being minor and similar to those found on sea turtles that inhabit nearshore reefs. However, some scrapes were moderate or severe, causing some turtles to be sent to rehabilitation facilities for treatment. This prompted FPL to inspect the intake pipes in 2006 and schedule cleaning of bio-fouling and marine debris that were thought to be causing the scrapes to entrained sea turtles.

Cleaning and removal of debris from the intake pipes and offshore intake structures began in October of 2007 and was completed in February 2011. Additionally, two openings that extended from the top of the two 12' intake pipes were also sealed off during this time.

22

5.0 References Applied Biology, Inc. (1978). Ecological Monitoring at the Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Plant, Annual Report 1977, Volumes I and II (AB-101).

Prepared by Applied Biology, Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Miami.

Applied Biology, Inc. (1980). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Plant Annual Non-radiological Environmental Monitoring Report 1979, Volumes II and Ill, Biotic Monitoring (AB-244). Prepared by Applied Biology, Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Miami.

Applied Biology, Inc. (1984). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 1983 (AB-533). Prepared by Applied Biology, Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach.

Applied Biology, Inc. (1985). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 1984. Prepared by Applied Biology, Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach.

Applied Biology, Inc. (1986). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 1985 (AB-563). Prepared by Applied Biology, Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach.

Applied Biology, Inc. (1987). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 1986 (AB-579). Prepared by Applied Biology, Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach.

Applied Biology, Inc. (1988). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 1987 (AB-595). Prepared by Applied Biology, Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach.

Applied Biology, Inc. (1989). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 1988 (AB-596). Prepared by Applied Biology, Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach. ,..

Applied Biology, Inc. (1990). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annu.al Environmental Operating Report 1989). Prepared by Applied Biology, Inc. foL Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach.

Applied Biology, Inc. (1991 ). Flor:ida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 1990 (AB-610). Prepared by Applied Biology, Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach.

Applied Biology, Inc. (1992). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 1991 (AB-617). Prepared by Applied Biology, Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach.

Applied Biolog*y, Inc. (1993). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 1992 (AB-623). Prepared by Applied Biology, Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach.

23

Applied Biology, Inc. (1994). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 1993 (AB-631). Prepared by Applied Biology, Inc., for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach.

Bresette, M., Gorham, J., & Peery, B. (1998). Site fidelity and size frequencies of juvenile green turtles (Chelonia mydas) utilizing nearshore reefs in St. Lucie County, Florida. Marine Turtle Newsletter, 82, 5-7.

Davis, G.E., & Whiting, M.C. (1977) Loggerhead sea turtle nesting in Everglades National Park, Florida, USA,.Herpetologica, 33, 18-28.

Dodd, C.K., Jr. (1988). Synopsis of the biological data on the loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta (Linnaeus1758). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88(14).

Ecological Associates, Inc. (2000). Physical and Ecological Factors Influencing Sea Turtle Entrainment Levels at the St. Lucie Power Plant 1976-1998. Submitted to FPL.

Fossette, S., Hobson, V.J., Girard, C., Calmettes, B., Gaspar, P., Georges, J., & Hays, G.C. (2010). Spatio-temporal foraging patterns of a giant zooplanktivore, the leatherback turtle. Journal of Marine Systems, 81, 225-234.

Heppel, S.S., Snover, M.L., & Crowder, L.B. (2003). Sea Turtle Population Ecology. In P. L. Lutz, J. A. Musick, & J. Wyneken (Eds.), Biology of Sea Turtles Volume, II (pp. 275-306).

I Hirth, H.F. (1980). Some-aspects of the nesting behavior and reproductive biology of *. 1 sea turtles, American Zoologist, 20, 507-523.

lnwater Research Group, Inc. (2010). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 2009. Prepared by lnwater Research Gro,up, Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

lnwater Research Group, Inc. (2011). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2

. Annual Environmental Operating Report 2010. Prepared by lnwater Research Group, Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

lnwater Research Group, Inc. (2012). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 2011. Prepared by lnwater Research Group, Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

lnwater Research Group, Inc. (2013). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report.2012. Prepared by lnwater Research Group, Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

lnwat_er Research Group, Inc. (2014). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 2013. Prepared by lnwater Research Group, Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

lnwater Research Group, Inc. (2015). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 2014. Prepared by lnwater Research Group, Inc. for Florida Power & Light C?mpany, Juno Beach, FL.

24

Meylan, AB., Schroeder, B. & Mosier, A. (1995), Sea turtle nesting activity in the state of Florida, 1979-1992. Florida Marine Research Publications, 52, 1-51.

National Marine Fisheries Service & U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1991). Recovery plan for U.S. population of the loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta). National Marine Fisheries Service, Washington D.C.

Quantum Resources Inc. (1995). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 1994. Prepared by Quantum Resources Inc. for Florid.a Powe~ & Light Company,* Juno Beach, FL.

Quantum Resources Inc. (1996). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 1995. Prepared by Quantum Resources Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

Quantum Resources Inc. (1997). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 1996. Prepared by Quantum Resources Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

Quantum Resources Inc. (1998). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmerital Operating Report 1997. Prepared by Quantum Resources Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

Quantum Resources Inc. (1999). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 1998. Prepared by Quantum Resources Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

Quantum Resources Inc. (2000). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie* Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 1999. Prepared by Quantum Resources Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

Quantum Resources Inc. (2001 ). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 2000. Prepared by Quantum Resources Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

Quantum Resources Inc. (2002). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 ,

Annual Environmental Operating Report 2001. Prepared by Quantum Resources Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

Quantum Resources Inc. (2003). Florida.Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 2002. Prepared by Quantum Resources*

Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

Quantum Resources Inc. (2004). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 2003. Prepared by Quantum Resources Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

Quantum R~sources Inc. (2005). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 2004. Prepared by Quantum Resources Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

25

Quantum Resources Inc. (2006). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 2005. Prepared by Quantum Resources Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

Quantum Resources Inc. (2007). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 2006. Prepared by Quantum Resources Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

Quantum Resources Inc. (2008). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 2007. Prepared by Quantum Resources Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

Quantum Resources Inc. (2009). Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Unit 2 Annual Environmental Operating Report 2008. Prepared by Quantum Resources Inc. for Florida Power & Light Company, Juno Beach, FL.

Schroeder, B.A. & Thompson, N.B. (1987). Distribution of the loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta) and leatherback turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) in the Cape Canaveral, Florida area; results from aerial surveys (NOAA Technical Report, NMFS-53).

Stewart, K., Sims, M., Meylan, A., Witherington, B., Brost, B., & Crowder, L (2011).

Leatherback nests increasing significantly in Florida, USA; trends assessed over 30 years using multilevel modeling. Ecological Applications, 21(1), 263-273.

Turtle Expert Working Group. (2000). Assessment update for the Kemp's ridley and:.*

loggerhead sea turtle populations in the western Atlantic (NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-444). U.S. Department of Commerce.

Witherington, B.E., & Ehrhart, L. M. (1989): Status and reproductive characteristics of green turtles (Chelonia mydas) nesting in Florida. In Ogren, L., F. Berry, K.

Bjorndal, H. Kumpf, R. Mast, G. Medina, H. Reichart and R. Witham (Eds.),

Proceeding of the Second Western Atlantic Turtle Symposium, Mayaguez, Puerto Rico, 12-16October1987 (pp-351-352). NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFC-226.

Witherington, B., Bresette, & Herren, R. (2006). Chelonia mydas - green turtle. In Meylan, P.A. (Eds.), Biology and Conservation of Florida Turtles (pp90-104).

Chelonian Research Monographs.

26

6.0 Figures and Tables 27

FLORIDA GULF OFM.EXICO

. I\'\

" .,p"'.

Figure 1. Location of St. Lucie Plant on South Hutchinson Island, Florida.

28

HUTCHINSON ISLAND INDIAN RIVEFI ATLANTIC OCEAN INDIAN RIVER Figure 2. St. Lucie Plant cooling water intake and discharge system.

29

-N-

~

I FPL

~~~;.__-* ST.LUCIE PLANT

p ..

o) ~LIMITOF R .

CURRENT s SURVEY DRAWING NOT TO. SCALE Figure 3. Designation and location of nine 1.25 km segments (in brackets) and 36 one km segments surveyed for sea turtle nesting on South Hutchinson Island (1971-2015).

30

9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000

~

t; cu z

5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000

'l""'I \D 'l""'I 0 0 'l""'I 0 .0 0 N N N Year Figure 4. Number of loggerhead turtle nests on South Hutchinson Island from 1971 through 2015. Values for 1971 through 1979 are estimates (Section 2.1.1 ); values for 1981 through 2015 are from whole island surveys.

31

1,000 900 800 700 600 Ill Ill G,J 500 z

400 300 200 100 0

""'O'I

- U)

O'I ""'co O'I U) co O'I

""'O'IO'I U)

O'I O'I ""'00 U) o, 0

""'""'0

""' ""' ""' ""' ""' ""' N N N Year Figure 5. Number of green turtle nests qn South Hutchinson Island from 1971 through 2015. Values for 1971 through 1979 are estimates (Section 2.1.1 ); values for 1981 through 2015 are from whole island surveys.

32

600 500 400 200 100 U)

'0Cl"" Cl Cl Cl""""

N N N Year Figure 6. Number of leatherback turtle nests on South Hutchinson Island from 1971 through 2015. Values for 1971 through 1979 are estimates (Section 2.1.1 ); values for 1981 through 2015 are from whole island surveys.

33

100%

Loggerhead [ll Green I 75%

m QI u

u

~ 50%

t; QI z

25%

0%

A B c D E F G H J K L M N 0 p Q R s Zone t

Power Plant Figure 7. Loggerhead and green turtle nesting success (percentage of emergences resulting in nests) for each of the 1 km Zones A through S (North to South) on South Hutchinson lsla,nd for the 2015 nesting season.

34

600

loggerhead D Leatherback D Green 500 400 Ill

~ 300 z

200 100 0

A B c D E F G H J K L M N 0 p Q R s Zone t

Power Plant Figure 8. Number of turtle nests by species for each of the 1 km Zones A through S (North to South) on South Hutchinson Island for the 2015 nesting season (N=3,748 nests).

35

_ _*:..._=-*_-~_ **..

40%

% Raccoons Only 35% f-----~ D % Crabs Only o % Raccoons and Crabs

~%Other 30%

c 25%

.2

~

"'C

~ 20%

ll.

"'Cl.I z 15%

10%

5%

0%

A B c D E F G H J K L M N 0 p Q R s Zones t

Power Plant Figure 9. Percentage of sea turtle nests depreciated by 1 km Zones Athrough S (North to South) on South Hutchinson Island for the 2015 nesting season.

36

1000 -

- Ql Green *Loggerhead 900 800 -

700 f-----f-----l*~~i~t--tl:: r

- ,. _ I*,.: 11 ii. 1 In 600 -+_----------------------1:"~~., ,.. ':; i>1

~ Ii~

=

'S, 500 =

_---------------------l0~1~~-~T~-c--=-~~~~14~4J_.~l-l~f~ !c.*

..I. ii

'~ r~1~r~c,~~ t--tnm1-~~~~-

1 1 ra ' , >:

U 400 -+----------------------~~r~~f---Ll}r-+:1<1--+*t--tY:l-ft,_..___.....~-----l__,1~lli1t--t~:-i,_____~t--tet--tE*~

.~ ,.. w :,~ M~

300 ~* i,___._.~,t--1**~

200 100 0 .I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

\0 a.

00 a.

Q 00 m

\0 00 a.

00 a.

a.

8 Q

s Q

g Q

00 0

Q s

Q N N N N N

'""' '""' '""' '""' Year Figure 10. Number of loggerhead and green turtles captured and removed each year from the intake canal at the St. Lucie Power Plant, 1976 through 2015.

37

15 lil Kemp's ridley D Hawksbill

Leatherback 10 Ill C1.I

s c.

I~ '

~

I~

,I

j!

u rel ":

~~

I 5

I I

- >---~,....-t1M--~Wl-~-@.___~~~------ri-

~

~-"~ i

~

a K

~

iI

- I ~

~

~ ll! I '.4

~~

Ii,, ~ - v

"'~

~ I ,,

0 I I I I I I I I I I I nI I I I i I I I I I I I T T T T T II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U) 00 0 N ~ U) 00 0 N ~ U) co 0 N ~ U) co 0 N ~

00 co 00 00 co m m m m m Q 0 0 0 0 m m en en en en en en en en en m 0 N

0 N

Q N

0 N

""' ""'0 ""'

Q N N Q

N

""' ""' ""' ""' ""' ""' ""' ""' ""' ""' Year""' ""'

Figure 11. Number of Kemp's ridley, hawksbill, and leatherback turtles captured and removed each year from the intake canal at the St. Lucie Power Plant, 1976 through 2015.

38

~ 40 -+------------

i..

s a

a 30 --+------------

10 0

Straight Standard Carapace Length (cm)

Figure 12. Size distribution (Straight Standard Carapace Length; SSCL) of loggerhead turtles (N=274) captured and removed from the intake canal at the St. Lucie Power Plant during 2015.

~,_.' ...

39

/

~

GI E

c.

30 a

20 10 0

Straight Standard Carapace Length (cm)

Figure 13. Size distribution (Straight Standard Carapace Length; SSCL) of green turtles (N=181) captured and removed from the intake canal at the St. Lucie Power Plant during 2015.

40

Year Loggerhead Green Hawks bill Kemp's ridley Total 1976-1984 962 156 2 3

--+------....t 1130 1985 157 14 1 172 1986 195 22 1 1 1 220 1987 175 35 2 6 218 1988 134 42 5 181 1989 111 17 1 2 2 133 1990 112 20 132 1991 107 12 1 1 121 1992 123 61 1 2 187 1993 147 179 5 2 4 337 1994 164 193 2 2 361 1995 254 673 1 5 933 1996 349 549 5 3 906 1997 188 191 2 1 382 1998 393 268 1 2 2 666 1999 302 190 1 1 1 495 2000 344 345 2 691 2001 270 321 2 6 1 600 2002 341 292 3 636 2003 538 394 4 6 2 944 2004 623 286 2 2 1 914 2005 484 428 2 3 917 2006 419 267 1 2 3 692 2007 227 101 1 1 330 2008 420 299 4 2 725 2009 260 161 1 2 424 2010 295 444 2 3 7 751 2011 302 217 2 521 2012 232 127 2 1 362 20~3 302 197 2 2 503 2014 275 134 3 2 414 2015 274 181 2 1 7 465 Total 9479 6816 41 64 63 16463 Mean* 248.8 179.4 1.1 1.7 1.7 432.6 Table 1. Total number of captured turtles removed from the intake canal at the St. Lucie Power Plant from 1976 through 2015. Number of mortalities is highlighted in gray. Mean excludes partial year of 1976 when 26 loggerheads were captured.

41

Loggerhead Green Percent Percent 2015 Total of 2015 Total of MQnths Captures Captures Captures Mean Captures Captures Captures Mean January 28 876 9.3% 23.1 14 837 12.3% 22.0 February 27 835 8.8% 22.0 27 711 10.4% 18.7 March 42 1004 10.6% 26.4 30 802 11.8% 21.1 April 8 920 9.7% 24.2 6 484 7.1% 12.7 May 19 865 9.1% 22.8 6 469 6.9% 12.3 June 43 1018 10.8% 26.8 4 410 6.0% 10.8 July 35 1229 13.0% 32.3 12 400 5.9% 10.5 August 16 819 8.7% 21.6 1 393 5.8% 10.3 September 7 562 5.9% 14.8 2 512 7.5% 13.5 October 15 481 5.1% 12.7 28 646 9.5% 17.0 November 13 367 3.9% 9.7 16 564 8.3% 14.8 December 21 477 5.0% 12.6 35 588 8.6% 15.5 Total 274 9453 248.8 181 6816 179.4 Table 2. Total number of loggerhead and green turtles removed each month from the intake canal at the St. Lucie Power Plant from 1977 through 2015. Monthly totals exclude the partial year 1976 when 26 loggerheads were captured.

42

Leatherback Hawksbill Kemp's ridley Percent Percent Per~ent 2015 Total of 2015 Total of 2015 Total of Months Captures Captures Captures Mean Captures Captures Captures Mean Captures Captures Captures Mean January 0 5 12.2% 0.1 1 1 1.6% 0.0 1 11 17.5% 0.3 February 0 4 9.8% 0.1 0 1 1.6% 0.0 2 15 23.8% .0.4 March 0 13 31.7% 0.3 1 8 12.5% 0.2 3 15 .23.8% . DA April 0 7 17.1% 0.2 0 3 4.7% 0.1 0 11 17.5%. 0;3 May 0 5 12.2% 0.1 0 3 4.7% 0.1 0 2 3.2% .0.1 June 0 2 4.9% 0.1 0 2 3.1% 0.1 0 2 3.2% O;l July 0 0 0.0% 0.0 0 13 20.3% 0.3 1 2 3.2% 0;1 August 0 1 2.4% 0.0 0 9 14.1% 0.2 0 0 0,0% Q.O September 0 2 4.9% 0.1 1 12 18.8% 0.3 0 0 Q,;0% o:o October 0 0 0.0% 0.0 0 5 7.8% 0.1 0 1 ~.6'?6 OJ)

November 1 1 2.4% 0.0 0 6 9.4% 0.2 0 1 i.6%* o~o December 0 1 2.4% 0.0 0 1 1.6% 0.0 0 3 4,8% 0:1 Total 1 41 1.1 3 64 1.7 7 63 1.7 Table 3. Total number of leatherback, hawksbill, and Kemp's ridley turtles removed each month from the intake canal at the St. Lucie Power Plant from 1977 through 2015. Monthly totals exclude the partial year 1976 when 26 loggerheads were captured.

43

7.0 Annual Environmental Operating Report 7.1 Introduction The St. Lucie Unit~ 1 & 2 Environmental Protection Plans (EPP) require the submittal of an annual report for various activities at the plant site including the reporting on sea turtle monitoring programs, and other matters related to Federal and State environmental permits and certifications.

7 .2 Sea Turtle Monitoring and Associated Activities Surveillance and maintenance of the light screen to minimize sea turtle disorientation as required by Section 4.2.3 of the EPP is ongoing. The vegetation light screen located on the beach dune between the power plant and the ocean is routinely surveyed to determine its overall vitality. Evidence of sea turtle disorientation that occurs would also indicate any significant problems. Trees, vegetation or shade cloth are replaced as.,*

necessary to maintain the overall integrity of the light screen. Plant parking lot lighting is also designed and maintained to minimize light levels on the beach.

7 .3 Taprogge Condenser Tube Cleaning System Operation A Taprogge condenser tube cleaning system (CTCS) became operational on St. Lucie Unit 2 in January 1996 and on Unit 1 in July 1996. This system utilizes sponge balls, approximately 23 mm in diameter; to clean the condenser tubes through which seawater flows to cool steam after its pass through the plant's turbines. This system improves plant performance while reducfrig the need for chemical treatments such and biocides or chlorine to control biofouling.

Normally, the St. Lucie CTCS utilizes about 1,800 sponge balls, which are continually re-circulated through each of four "water boxes" on each unit. These sponge balls are retained in the system by a ball strainer located on the outlet of each water box. The ball strainers (mesh size 5 mm) are opened routinely to discharge debris, which can decrease flow and obstruct sponge ball movement through the system. The sponge balls are collected prior to opening, or back flushing, the ball strainers. At that time, the sponge balls are examined and replaced if they are worn to the point that they can no longer effectively clean the condenser tubes.

44

Sponge ball inventories and estimates of sponge ball loss to the environment have been performed since system start-up on both units. Number of ball strainer back flushes has also been tracked. In addition, daily beach surveys have been performed on plant property (approximately 2.5 miles) to note any sponge balls that may occur as a result of loss from the plant. This survey area has been extended during the turtle nesting season to almost 12 miles.

Ball loss reporting is required in accordance with the St. Lucie site environmental permit, a component of the site license. Best management practices are used to minimize the discharge of CTCS balls to the Atlantic Ocean.

The sponge cleaning balls are made of natural latex which will biodegrade and break down after about two_ months in a high nutrient seawater environment. Biodegradation

_can occur while balls are in service and weaken the latex sponge, leading to premature ball fatigue failure from cycle fatigue induced by the CTCS ball circulation impeller.

Although blue stripe balls are more resistant to biodegradation compared to orange balls, they are not as effective for tube cleaning during the last two weeks of service.

The five week maximum service interval is adequate to prevent most ball failure events.

Best management practices continue to be applied to minimize CTCS ball loss. The results of the program for 2015 are presented in Table 1.

7.4 Other Routine Reports The following items for which reporting are required are listed by section number from the plant's Environmental Protection Plan:

5.4.1.2(a) EPP Noncompliance Incidents and Corrective Actions Taken No incidents of noncompliance under EPP Section 5.4.1 (a) were determined to have occurred during 2015.

5.4.2(b) Changes in Station Design or Operation, Tests, and Experiments in Accordance with EPP Subsection 3.1 No changes in station design, and operation were determined to have occurred during 2015. Tests and experiments pertaining to the Heated Water Plan of Study, The Biological Plan of Study, and The Total Residual Oxidants Study were submitted in 2015. The letters identifying the notifications are included iri Section 5.4.1.2( c).

45

5.4.1.2(c) Non-routine reports were submitted to the NRC for the year 2015 in accordance with EPP Subsection 5.4.2.

On January 23, 2015, St. Lucie submitted to the NRC a copy of a request to end the offshore monitoring activities required under an Administrative Order A0-022-TL, Heated Water Plan of Study (Condition 17) and Biological Plan of Study (Condition 20).

Notification to the NRC occurred via FPL letter L-2015-027.

On February 6, 2015, St. Lucie submitted to the NRC a copy of the final Evaluation of Total Residual Oxidant Attenuation Report. Notification to the NRC occurred via FPL letter L-2015-036.

On February 28, 2016, a green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas) was recovered in the plant's intake canal. Notification of the mortality to the NRC occurred via FPL letter L-2015-073.

On March 31, 2015, St. Lucie submitted to the NRC a copy of 316(b) related documentation pertaining to the Heated Water Plan of Study Report. Notification to the NRC occurred via FPL letter L-2015-108.

On April 28, 2015, St. Lucie submitted to the NRC a copy of the Annual Environmental Operating Report for 2014. Notification to the NRC occurred via FPL letter L-2015-142.

On May 8, 2015, St. Lucie submitted to the NRC the Biological Plan of Study Final Report. Notification to the NRC occurred via FPL letter L-2015-146.

On September 16, 2015, St. Lucie submitted to the NRC a copy of a Request for Additional Information by the State of Florida regarding the final evaluation of the Total Residual Oxidant Study. Notification to the NRC occurred via FPL letter L-2015-233.

On October 14 and October 18, 2015, two juvenile green sea turtles (Chelonia mydas) were recovered from the St. Lucie Intake Canal. Notification of the mortalities to the NRC occurred via FPL Letter L-2015-277.

On December 12, 2015, a juvenile green turtle was removed from the St. Lucie Plant's Intake Cooling Canal. The mortality occurred late in the year and as such the notification to the NRC occurred in January, 2016, and will be included in next year's Annual Environmental Operating Report.

46

7.5 Figures and Table Table 1 PSL CTCS Ball Loss 2015 Summary 1A1 1A2 1B1 1B2 PSL 1 ALL

B/W LOST #B/W LOST #B/W LOST #B/W LOST #B/W LOST COMMENTS Jan-15 3 17 1 134 2 . 1123 3 601 9 1875 Feb-15 3 592 3 43 1 11 3 26 10 672 Mar-15 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 6 0 Apr-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 May-15 2 0 2 0 2 0 3 0 9 0 Jun-15 2 50 3 20 3 0 2 0 10 70 Jul-15 3 25 3 56 1 0 0 0 7 81 Aug-15 3 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 12 0 Sep-15 4 46 4 101 5 262 5 78 18 487 Oct-15 3 4 4 71 4 28 5 58 16 161 Nov-15 3 0 4 0 1 493 3 363 11 856 .. ,

Dec-15 3 0 3 63 2 1844 1 . 724 9 2631 Summary 31 734 32 488 25 3761 29 1850 117 6833 2A1 2A2 2B1 2B2 PSL 2 ALL

B/W LOST #B/W LOST #B/W LOST #B/W LOST #B/W LOST COMMENTS Jan-15 3 39 3 93 3 80 3 0 12 212, Feb-15 2 0 3 32 3 0 3 0 11 32 Mar-15 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 4 0 ,_,...,'"

Apr-15 0 0 1 0 3 49 1 159 5 208 May-15 3 0 2 0 3 1777 2 0 10 1777 Jun-15 3 385 5 65 3 85 2 273 13 808 Jul-15 3 27 1. 21 0 0 1 0 5 48 Aug-15 3 3 3, 0 1 0 2 0 9 3 Sep-15 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 4 0 Oct-15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Nov-15 2 0 1 0 1 21 1 0 5- 21 Dec-15

2 4 2 74 4 0 4 0 12 78 Summary 23 458 23 285 23 2012 21 432 90 3187 47

APR 2 7 2016 L-2016-095 10 CFR 50.4 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission CERTIFIED MAIL Attn: Document Control Desk RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Washington, DC 20555 7011 3500 7495 7263 Re: St. Lucie Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-335 and 50-389 2015 Annual Environmental Operating Report In accordance with Section 5.4.1.2 of the St. Lucie Units 1 .and 2 Environmental Protection Plans (EPP), attached is the Annual Environmental Operating Report for calendar year 2015.

Sincerely, r~:fJ Licensing Manager St. Lucie Plant MJS/tlt

Attachment:

Florida Power & Light Company - St. Lucie Plant Annual Environmental Operating Report 2015 (50 pages) cc: FDEP Siting Office Florida Power & Light Company 6501 S. Ocean Drive, Jensen Beach, FL 34957

FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE PLANT ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT 2015 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY

. JUNO BEACH, FLORIDA INWATER RESEARCH GROUP, INC.

JENSEN BEACH, FLORIDA

Environmental Operating Report Table of Contents Acronyms ........................................................................................................................ 1 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 2 1.0 Background ........................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Area Description ................................................................................................. 4 1.2 Power Plant Description ..................................................................................... 4 1.3 Environmental Reporting ....... :* ........................................................................... 4 2.0 Sea Turtle Nest Monitoring .................................................................................... 6 2.1 Methodology ............................................................. ." ......................................... 6 2.1.1 Previous Methods and Projects ................................................................... 6 2.1.2 Current Methods., ............................................................................ ~ ............ 7 2.2 Results for 2015 ................................................................................................. 8 2.2.1 Loggerhead Nesting .................................................................................... 9 2.2.2 Green Nesting ...................*........................................................................ 10 2.2.3 Leatherback Nesting ................................ :........................ ~ ........................ 10 2.2.. 4 Predation ...........................................................................................:....... 11 3.0 Intake Canal Monitoring ....................................................................................... 12 3.1 Methodology ..................................................................................................... 12 3.1.1 Barrier Nets ............................................................................................... 12 3.1.2 Turtle Capture ............................................................................................ 13 3.1.3 Data Collection .......................................................................................... 14 3.2 Results for 2015 ............................................................................................... 14 3 .2 .1 Loggerhead Captures ........................................... ~ .................................... 15 3.2.2 Green Captures ....................... :................................................................. 15 3.2.3 Leatherback, Hawksbill, and Kemp's ridley Captures ................................ 16 3.2.4 Recaptures ................................................................................................ 16 3.2.5 Relative Condition ....................................... :............................................. 17 3.2.6 Mortalities and Injuries ............................................................................... 17 4.0 Sea Turtle Protective Activities ............................................................................ 19 4.1 NMFS Section 7 Consultations ........................................................................ 19 4.2 Sea Turtle Stranding and Salvage Network and Turtle Walks ......................... 20 4.2.1 Results for 2015 ........................................................................................ 20

4.3 Collaborative Efforts ......................................................................................... 21 4.4 Barrier Net Maintenance .................................................................................. 21 4.5 Intake Pipe Cleaning and Maintenance ............................................................ 22 5.0 References .......................................................................................................... 23 6.0 Figures and Tables .............................................................................................. 27 7.0 Annual Environmental Operating Report ................................. ~ ........................... 44 7.1 Introduction ............................... :...................................................................... 44 7.2 Sea Turtle Monitoring and Associated Activities .............................................. 44 7.3 Taprogge Condenser Tube Cleaning System Operation ................................. 44 7.4 Other Routine Reports ..................................................................................... 45 7.5 Figures and Tables*****************************************.**************************'********************** 47

Acronyms ABI Applied Biology, Inc.

BO Biological Opinion EAi Ecological Associates, Inc.

ESA Endangered Species Act EPP Environmental Protection Plan FWC Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FWRI Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute FPL Florida Power & Light IRG lnwater Research Group, Inc.

NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission PIT Passive Integrated Transponder SSCL Straight Standard Carapace Length STSSN Sea Turtle Stranding and Salvage Network USFW U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service UESI Underwater Engineering Services, Inc.

UIDS Underwater Intrusion Detection System 1

Executive Summary Florida Power & Light's (FPL) St. Lucie Plant, located on South Hutchinson Island, consists of two 1,000 MWe nuclear-fueled electric generating units that use nearshore ocean water for the plant's once-through condenser cooling system. Water for this system enters through three submerged intake structures located 365 m offshore.

Water passes through the structu~~s and into s~bmerged pipes (two 3.7 m and one 4.9 m in diameter) running under the beach. It then passes into a 1,500 m long intake canal, which transports water to the power plant. Turtles entering the ocean intake structures are entrained with cooling water and rapidly transported through the intake pipes into the enclosed canal system where they must be manually captured and returned to the ocean.

South Hutchinson Island is also an important rookery for loggerhead (Carella caretta),

green (Chelonia mydas), _and leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea) turtles. Under the Endangered Species.Act (ESA), the federal government has classified the loggerhead turtle as a threatened .species while *1eatherbacks and the Florida nesting population of green turtles are classified as endangered. One of FPL's primary environmental concerns is to ensure that the operation of the St. Lucie Plant does not adversely affect sea turtle nesting and to monitor nesting trends they have sponsored nesting surveys '<

on the island since 1971. Biologists use all-terrain vehicles to survey the island each morning during nesting season. New nests, non-nesting emergences (false crawls), and nests negatively affected by predators are recorded. Data collected from beach nesting surveys are reported to. the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) as part of a statewide survey program. In 2015, 7,878 loggerhead, 860 green, and 365 ,1

I leatherback nests were recorded on South Hutchinson Island. .i I

Since the plant became operational in 1976, turtles entrained in the intake canal have

been systematically captured, measured, weighed, tagged, and released. During 2015, ..