ML021280344

2001 Annual Environmental Operating Report

ML021280344
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	04/22/2002
From:	Beasley J Southern Nuclear Operating Co
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
LCV-1618
Download: ML021280344 (5)

Text

J. Barnie Beasley, Jr., P.E. Southern Nuclear Vice President Operating Company, Inc.

Vogtle Project 40 Inverness Center Parkway P.O. Box 1295 Birmingham, Alabama 35201 Tel 205.992.7110 Fax 205.992.0403 SOUTHERN COMPANY April 22, 2002 Energy to Serve Your World LCV-1618 Docket Nos. 50-424 50-425 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555 VOGTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT 2001 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT Gentlemen:

In accordance with subsection 5.4.1 of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant Environmental Protection Plan, Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC) hereby submits the Annual Environmental Operating Report for 2001.

If you have any questions, please advise.

Sincerely, J. B.Beasey, Jr.

JBB/JLL

Enclosure:

2001 Annual Environmental Operating Report (Nonradiological)

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission LCV-1618 Page 2 Xc: Southern Nuclear Operating Company Mr. J. T. Gasser Mr. M. Sheibani SNC Document Management Georgia Power Company Mr. M. C. Nichols U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. L. A. Reyes, Regional Administrator Mr. F. Rinaldi, Project Manager, NRR Mr. J. Zeiler, Senior Resident Inspector, Vogtle State of Georgia Mr. J. L. Setser, DNR

VOGTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT - UNITS 1 AND 2 NRC DOCKET NOS. 50-424 AND 50-425 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. NPF-68 AND NPF-81 2001 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT (NONRADIOLOGICAL)

INTRODUCTION In accordance with Subsection 5.4.1 of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP)

Environmental Protection Plan (Nonradiological), Appendix B to Facility Operating License Nos.

NPF-68 and NPF-81, this report is submitted describing implementation of the Environmental Protection Plan for the calendar year 2001.

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS A. Summaries and Analyses of Results of Environmental Monitoring Activities for the Reporting Period in Accordance with Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) Subsection 4.2

1. Aquatic Monitoring - Liquid effluent monitoring was performed in accordance with the State of Georgia National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit GA00267 86; there was no additional requirement for aquatic monitoring during 2001.

2. Terrestrial Monitoring - Terrestrial monitoring is not required.

3. Maintenance of Transmission Line Corridors

a. An EPA-registered and state-approved herbicide was applied to wetland areas and upland areas along the entire VEGP-Thalman line.

b. Danger tree trimming was performed on the VEGP-Thalman line.

c. Trees were trimmed on the VEGP-Goshen line and an EPA-registered and state approved herbicide was applied as a cut stump treatment.

d. Re-clearing of vegetation was performed on the VEGP-Scherer line.

e. All routine maintenance activities within the designated cultural properties located along the transmission line corridor were conducted in accordance with the Final Cultural Resources Management Plan. This plan was developed in conjunction with the Georgia Historic Preservation Officer.

4. Noise Monitoring - There were no complaints received by Southern Nuclear Operating Company during 2001 regarding noise along the VEGP-related, high-voltage transmission lines.

Page 1 of 2

B. Comparison of the 2001 Monitoring Activities with Preoperational Studies, Operational Controls, and Previous Monitoring Reports These programs were not required because no nonradiological environmental monitoring programs were conducted during the reporting period beyond those performed in accordance with NPDES Permit No. GA0026786 referenced in Section A above.

C. Assessment of the Observed Impacts of Plant Operation on the Environment There were no significant adverse environmental impacts associated with plant operation during 2001.

D. EPP Noncompliance and Corrective Actions There were no EPP noncompliances during 2001.

E. Changes in Station Design or Operation, Tests, or Experiments Made in Accordance with EPP Subsection 3.1 Which Involved a Potentially Significant Unreviewed Environmental Question There were no changes in station design or operation, tests, or experiments in 2001 which involved a potentially significant, unreviewed environmental question.

F. Nonroutine Reports Submitted in Accordance with EPP Section 5.4.2 There were no nonroutine reports submitted in 2001.

Page 2 of 2