ML022280271

Application for Renewed Operating License, Appendix E - Environmental Report, 5.0 Assessment of New & Significant Information

ML022280271
Person / Time
Site:	Summer
Issue date:	08/06/2002
From:	Byrne S South Carolina Electric & Gas Co
To:	Rajender Auluck Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RC-02-0123
Download: ML022280271 (110)

Text

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

5.0 ASSESSMENT

OF NEW AND SIGNIFICANT INFORMATION 5.1 Discussion NRC "The environmental report must contain any new and significant information regarding the environmental impacts of license renewal of which the applicant is aware." 10 CFR $1.53(c)(3)(iv)

While U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations do not require that an applicant's environmental report contain analyses of the impacts of those environmental issues that have been generically resolved [10 CFR 51.53(c)(3)(i)], the regulations do require that an applicant identify any new and significant information of which the applicant is aware [10 CFR 51.53(c)(3)(i)]. The purpose of this requirement is to alert the NRC staff to such information, so the staff can determine whether to seek the Commission's approval to waive or suspend application of the rule with respect to the affected generic analysis. NRC has explicitly indicated, however, that an applicant is not required to perform a site-specific validation of Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (GEIS) conclusions (NRC 1996, pg. C9-13, Concern Number NEP.015).

South Carolina Electric and Gas Company (SCE&G) expects that new and significant information would include:

"* Information that identifies a significant environmental issue not covered in the GEIS and codified in the regulation, or

"* Information that was not covered in the GEIS analyses and that leads to an impact finding different from that codified in the regulation.

NRC does not specifically define the term "significant." For the purpose of its review, SCE&G used guidance available in Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) authorizes CEQ to establish implementing regulations for federal agency use. NRC requires license renewal applicants to provide NRC with input, in the form of an environmental report, that NRC will use to meet NEPA requirements as they apply to license renewal (10 CFR 51.10). CEQ guidance provides that federal agencies should prepare environmental impact statements for actions that would significantly affect the environment (40 CFR 1502.3), focus on significant environmental issues (40 CFR 1502.1), and eliminate from detailed study issues that are not significant [40 CFR 1501.7(a)(3)]. The CEQ guidance includes a lengthy definition of "significantly" that requires consideration of the context of the action and the intensity or severity of the impact(s) (40 CFR 1508.27). SCE&G expects that moderate or large impacts, as defined by NRC, would be significant. Chapter 4 presents the NRC definitions of "moderate" and "large" impacts.

Page 5-1

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT The new and significant assessment process that SCE&G used during preparation of this license renewal application included: (1) interviews with SCE&G subject experts on the validity of the conclusions in the GEIS as they relate to Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station (VCSNS), (2) an extensive review of documents related to environmental issues at VCSNS, (3) correspondence with state and federal agencies to determine if the agencies had concerns not addressed in the GELS, (4) a review of internal procedures for reporting to the NRC events that could have environmental impacts, and (5) credit for the oversight provided by inspections of plant facilities by state and federal regulatory agencies.

No new and significant information regarding the environmental impacts of VCSNS license renewal was identified.

Page 5-2

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 5.2 References NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1996. Public Comments on the Proposed 10 CFR 51 Rule for Renewal of Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses and Supporting Documents:

Review of Concerns and NRC Staff Response. Volume 1 and 2. NUREG-1529. Washington, D.C. May.

Page 5-3

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 6.0

SUMMARY

OF LICENSE RENEWAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATING ACTIONS 6.1 License Renewal Impacts The environmental impacts of renewing the Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station (VCSNS) operating license have been reviewed an determined to be small for all resource categories. As a consequence, no mitigation measures are recommended.

Chapter 4 incorporates by reference U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) findings for the 52 Category 1 issues that apply to VCSNS, all of which have impacts that are small (Table 4-2). The rest of Chapter 4 analyzes Category 2 issues, all of which are either not applicable or have impacts that would be small.

Table 6-1 identifies the impacts that VCSNS license renewal would have on resources associated with Category 2 issues.

Page 6-1

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 6.2 Mitigation NRC "The report must contain a consideration of alternatives for reducing adverse impacts...for all Category 2 license renewal Issues...." 10 CFR 51M3(c)(3)(ili)

"The environmental report shall Include an analysis that considers and balances...alternatives available for reducing or avoiding adverse environmental effects...." 10 CFR 5145(c) as adopted by 10 CFR 51.53(c)(2)

All impacts of license renewal at VCSNS are small and would not require mitigation. Current operations include mitigation and monitoring activities that would continue during the term of the license renewal. South Carolina Electric & Gas Company (SCE&G) performs routine mitigation and monitoring activities to ensure the safety of workers, the public, and the environment. These activities include the radiological environmental monitoring program, continuous emissions monitoring, effluent chemistry monitoring, effluent toxicity testing, and monitoring the water quality of Monticello Reservoir.

Page 6-2

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 6.3 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts NRC The environmental report shall discuss "[alny adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented;" 10 CFR 51A45(b)(2) as adopted by 10 CFR 51.53(c)(2)

This environmental report adopts by reference NRC findings for applicable Category 1 issues, including discussions of any unavoidable adverse impacts (Table 4-2). SCE&G examined 21 Category 2 issues and identified the following unavoidable adverse impacts of license renewal:

"* Some fish are impinged on the traveling screens at the intake structures.

"* Some larval fish and shellfish are entrained at the intake structures.

For purposes of analysis, SCE&G assumed that license renewal would require 60 additional workers, which would create an additional 177 indirect jobs. A total of 237 direct and indirect jobs (213 in the four counties in which the majority of workers reside) would be created. The demand for 213 housing units in the four counties in which the majority of the current VCSNS workers reside would result in small impacts to housing availability, transportation infrastructure, and public utilities that could be characterized as adverse, but would not be significant.

Although license renewal would result in some unavoidable adverse impacts, they would be small and would not noticeably alter any important attribute of the affected resources.

Page 6-3

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 6.4 Irreversible and Irretrievable Resource Commitments NRC The environmental report shall discuss "[alny irreversible and Irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved In the proposed action should it be Implemented." 10 CFR 51.45(b)(5) as adopted by 10 CFR 51.53(c)(2)

The continued operation of VCSNS for the license renewal term will result in irreversible and irretrievable resource commitments, including the following:

"* nuclear fuel, which is consumed in the reactor and converted to radioactive waste;

"* the land required to dispose of spent nuclear fuel, low-level radioactive wastes generated as a result of plant operations, and water treatment wastes (e.g., sludge) generated as a result of normal industrial operations;

"* elemental materials that will become radioactive; and

"* materials used for the normal industrial operations of the plant that cannot be recovered or recycled or that are consumed or reduced to unrecoverable forms.

Page 6-4

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 6.5 Shortterm Use versus Long-term Productivity of the Environment NRC The environmental report shall discuss "[t]he relationship between local short-term uses of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity...." 10 CFR 51.45(b)(4) as adopted by 10 CFR 51.53(c)(2)

The current balance between short-term use and long-term productivity at the VCSNS site was established when the station began operating in the early 1980s. Final Environmental Statements (USAEC 1973; NRC 1981) evaluated the impacts of constructing and operating VCSNS in rural Fairfield County, South Carolina. Some 8,000 acres were acquired from private landowners for the development of the VCSNS site, a cooling pond (Monticello Reservoir), a recreational lake (Monticello Subimpoundment), transmission line rights-of-way, and buffer areas. Most of this land was used in the creation of Monticello Reservoir (6,500 acres) and its subimpoundment (300 aQres). Approximately 370 acres became the developed (facilities) portion of the VCSNS site (see Section 2.4). Approximately 125 acres were committed to transmission line rights of way. An additional 890 acres south and east of Monticello Reservoir were left in their natural state, pine forest and mixed pine-hardwood forest.

Of the land that became Monticello Reservoir, 82 percent was forested and 17 percent was farmland/pastureland (SCE&G 1978, pg. 2.1-16). All the land that was cleared, graded, and used for the VCSNS facilities and powerblock area was forested prior to development of the site.

Most upland areas that were not inundated by Monticello Reservoir could be reforested or converted to agricultural use (dairy or cattle farming) after VCSNS is decommissioned.

However, decisions on the ultimate disposition of these lands have not yet been made. Continued operation for an additional 20 years would not alter this conclusion.

Page 6-5

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 6.6 References NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission).

1981.

Final Environmental Statement Related to the Operation of Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station Unit 1, South Carolina Electric and Gas Company, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Washington, D.C.

SCE&G (South Carolina Electric & Gas Company). 1978. Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station Operating License Environmental Report (Volume 1). October 1978.

USAEC (United States Atomic Energy Commission). 1973. Final Environmental Statement Related to Operation of Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station Unit 1, South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, Directorate of Licensing. Washington, D.C.

Page 6-6

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT TABLE 6-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS RELATED TO LICENSE RENEWAL AT VCSNS No.

Issue Environmental Impact Surface Water Quality, Hydrology, and Use (for all plants) 13 Water use conflicts (plants with Small. Evaporative losses from Monticello Reservoir would be less cooling ponds or cooling towers than 1 percent of the mean annual flow of the Broad River and would using make-up water from a small have little or no effect on the Broad River and its riparian ecological river with low flow) communities.

Aquatic Ecology (for plants with once-through and cooling pond heat dissipation systems) 25 Entrainment of fish and shellfish Small. SCE&G has a current NPDES permit which constitutes in early life stages compliance with CWA Section 316(b) requirements to provide best available technology to minimize entrainment.

26 Impingement of fish and shellfish Small. SCE&G has a current NPDES permit which constitutes in early life stages compliance with CWA Section 316(b) requirements to provide best available technology to minimize impingement.

27 Heat shock Small. SCE&G has a CWA Section 316(a) variance for facility specific thermal discharge limits.

Groundwater Use and Quality 33 Groundwater use conflicts None. This issue does not apply because VCSNS does not use (potable and service water, and groundwater for potable or service water; dewatering operations dewatering; plants that use > 100 remove much less than 100 gpm.

gpm) 34 Groundwater use conflicts (plants Small. The water in Parr Reservoir would distribute any loss due to using cooling towers or cooling evaporative cooling from Monticello Reservoir in such a way as to be ponds withdrawing make-up insignificant to the alluvial aquifer.

water from a small river) 35 Groundwater use conflicts None. This issue does not apply because VCSNS does not use Ranney (Ranney wells) wells.

39 Groundwater quality degradation Small. There is no indication that groundwater quality has been (cooling ponds at inland sites) degraded by the operation of VCSNS or its cooling pond.

Concentrations of common ions, minerals, and solids are higher in local groundwater than in Monticello Reservoir, suggesting little potential for the cooling pond to degrade groundwater.

Terrestrial Resources 40 Refurbishment impacts None. No impacts are expected because VCSNS will not undertake refurbishment.

Threatened or Endangered Species Threatened or endangered species Small. Numbers of bald eagles using the Parr Reservoir-Monticello Reservoir system have increased since VCSNS was originally licensed.

Construction and operation of the station have had no adverse effect on eagles, and may have had a beneficial effect by expanding foraging and nesting areas. Impacts over the license renewal term would be similar and largely positive. No other threatened or endangered species is known to occur at VCSNS or along its transmission corridors.

Page 6-7 49

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT TABLE 6-1 (Con, aued)

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS RELATED TO LICENSE RENEWAL AT VCSNS No.

Issue Environmental Impact Air Quality 50 Air quality during refurbishment None. No impacts are expected because VCSNS will not undertake (nonattainment and maintenance refurbishment.

areas)

Human Health 57 Microbiological organisms Small. The thermal characteristics of the VCSNS discharge and the (public health) (plants using lakes absence of a seed source or inoculant are such that plant operations or canals, or cooling towers or should not stimulate growth or reproduction of thermophilic cooling ponds that discharge to a organisms.

small river) 59 Electromagnetic fields, acute Small. The largest modeled induced current under the VCSNS effects (electric shock) transmission lines would be less than 5.0 milliamperes. Therefore, the VCSNS transmission lines conform to the National Electric Safety Code@ provisions for preventing electric shock from induced current.

Socioeconomics 63 Housing impacts Small. NRC concluded that housing impacts would be small in medium and high population areas having no growth control measures.

VCSNS is located in a medium population area that does not have growth control measures.

65 Public services: public utilities Small. Any increase in public water requirements from 237 new households would not impinge on the water supplies of the affected communities.

66 Public services: education None. No impacts are expected because VCSNS will not undertake (refurbishment) refurbishment.

68 Offsite land use (refurbishment)

None. No impacts are expected because VCSNS will not undertake refurbishment.

69 Offsite land use (license renewal Small. No plant-induced changes to offsite land use are expected from term) license renewal. Impacts from continued operation would be positive.

70 Public services: transportation Small. Any additional employees (up to 60) would be less than the typical refueling outage workforce of 600-800 people. Existing access roads are adequate to support this outage traffic. The impact of up to 60 additional workers would be small.

71 Historic and archaeological Small. Continued operation of VCSNS would not require construction resources at the site or new transmission lines. Therefore, license renewal would not adversely affect historic or archaeological resources.

Postulated Accidents 76 Severe accidents No SAMA candidates were found to be cost-beneficial.

Page 6-8

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 7.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION NRC The environmental report shall discuss "[A]iternatives to the proposed action....." 10 CFR 51.45(b)(3), as adopted by reference at 10 CFR 51.53(c)(2).

"..The report is not required to include discussion of need for power or the economic costs and economic benefits of.. alternatives to the proposed action except insofar as such costs and benefits are either essential for a determination regarding the Inclusion of an alternative in the range of alternatives considered or relevant to mitigation..." 10 CFR 51.53(c)(2).

"...While many methods are available for generating electricity, and a huge number of combinations or mixes can be assimilated to meet a defined generating requirement, such expansive consideration would be too unwieldy to perform given the purposes of this analysis. Therefore, NRC has determined that a reasonable set of alternatives should be limited to analysis of single, discrete electric generation sources and only electric generation sources that are technically feasible and commercially viable...."

(NRC 1996a, Section 8.1, pg. 8-1)

"...The consideration of alternative energy sources in Individual license renewal reviews will consider those alternatives that are reasonable for the region, including power purchases from outside the applicant's service area..." (NRC 1996b, Section H.H, page 66541, column 3)

Chapter 7 evaluates alternatives to Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station (VCSNS) Unit 1 license renewal. The chapter identifies actions that South Carolina Electric & Gas Company (SCE&G) might take, and associated environmental impacts, if the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) did not renew the plant operating license. The chapter also addresses some of the actions that SCE&G has considered, but would not take, and identifies the bases for determining that such actions would be unreasonable.

The alternatives discussion is divided into two categories, "no action" and "alternatives that meet system generating needs." In considering the level of detail and analysis that it should provide for each category, SCE&G relied on the NRC decision-making standard for license renewal:

"...the NRC staff, adjudicatory officers, and Commission shall determine whether or not the adverse environmental impacts of license renewal are so great that preserving the option of license renewal for energy planning decision makers would be unreasonable."

[10 CFR 51.95(c)( 4)].

The discussion that follows is intended to provide sufficient information to clearly indicate whether an alternative would have a smaller, comparable, or greater environmental impact than the proposed action. Providing additional detail or analysis serves no function if it only brings to light additional adverse impacts of alternatives to license renewal. This approach is consistent with regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality, which provide that the consideration of alternatives (including the proposed action) should enable reviewers to evaluate their comparative merits (40 CFR 1500-1508). Chapter 7 provides sufficient detail about alternatives to establish the basis for necessary comparisons to the Chapter 4 discussion of impacts from the proposed action and support NRC decision making.

Page 7-1

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT In characterizing environmental impacts of alternatives, SCE&G has used the same definitions of "small," "moderate," and "large" that are presented in the introduction to Chapter 4.

Page 7-2 I

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 7.1 No-Action Alternative SCE&G is using "no-action alternative" to refer to a scenario in which the NRC does not renew the VCSNS operating license. Components of this alternative include replacing the generating capacity of VCSNS and decommissioning the facility, as described below.

Presently, VCSNS generates two-thirds of its electricity for SCE&G. An additional one-third is generated for Santee Cooper. The SCE&G share is approximately 18 percent of the electricity that SCE&G provides to more than 500,000 residential and business customers (SCANA 2001a and 2001b). SCE&G believes that any alternative would be unreasonable if it did not include replacing the VCSNS capacity.

Replacement could be accomplished by (1) building new generating capacity, (2) purchasing power from outside the SCE&G service area, or (3) reducing power requirements through demand reduction. Section 7.2.1 describes each of these alternatives in detail, and Section 7.2.2 describes environmental impacts from feasible alternatives.

The Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) (NRC 1996a, pg. 7-1) defines decommissioning as the safe removal of a nuclear facility from service and the reduction of residual radioactivity to a level that permits release of the property for unrestricted use and termination of the license.

NRC-evaluated decommissioning options include immediate decontamination and dismantlement (DECON), and safe storage of the stabilized and defueled facility (SAFSTOR) for a period of time, followed by decontamination and dismantlement.

Regardless of the option chosen, decommissioning must be completed within a 60-year period.

Under the no-action alternative, SCE&G would continue operating VCSNS until the current license expires, then initiate decommissioning activities in accordance with NRC requirements.

The GEIS describes decommissioning activities based on an evaluation of a larger reactor (the "reference" pressurized-water reactor is the 1,175-megawatt electrical (MWe) Trojan Nuclear Plant).

This description bounds decommissioning activities that SCE&G would conduct at VCSNS.

As the GEIS notes, NRC has evaluated environmental impacts from decommissioning. NRC evaluated impacts include:

occupational and public radiation dose; impacts of waste management; impacts to air and water quality; and ecological, economic, and socioeconomic impacts.

NRC indicated in Section 4.4 of the generic environmental impact statement on decommissioning (NRC 1988) that the environmental effects of greatest concern (i.e., radiation dose and releases to the environment) are substantially less than the same effects resulting from reactor operations. SCE&G adopts by reference the NRC conclusions regarding environmental impacts of decommissioning.

SCE&G notes that decommissioning activities and their impacts are not discriminators between the proposed action and the no-action alternative. SCE&G will have to decommission VCSNS regardless of the NRC decision on license renewal; license renewal would only postpone decommissioning for another 20 years. The NRC has established in the GEIS that the timing of Page 7-3

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT decommissioning operations does not substantially influence the environmental impacts of decommissioning.

SCE&G adopts by reference the NRC findings (10 CFR 51 Appendix B, Table B-i, Decommissioning) to the effect that delaying decommissioning until after the renewal term would have small environmental impacts. The discriminators between the proposed action and the no-action alternative lie within the choice of generation replacement options to be part of the no-action alternative. Section 7.2.2 analyzes the impacts from these options.

Decommissioning impacts under the no-action alternative would not be substantially different from those occurring following license renewal, as identified in the GEIS (NRC 1996a) and in the generic environmental impact statement on decommissioning (NRC 1988, Section 4.4). These impacts would be temporary and would occur at the same time as the impacts from meeting system generating needs.

Page 7-4

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 7.2 Alternatives that Meet System Generating Needs Decisions regarding reasonable alternatives for meeting electrical demands in South Carolina are made primarily by two entities, utilities and the Public Service Commission of South Carolina (PSC). The current mix of power generation options in South Carolina is one indicator of what these entities believe to be feasible alternatives within the state.

In 2000, South Carolina's electric utility industry had a total generating capacity of 17.7 gigawatts-electric. A gigawatt is one million kilowatts.

This capacity includes units fueled by coal (34 percent); nuclear (37 percent); oil (5 percent); gas (4 percent); and hydroelectric (20 percent).

Approximately 1.0 gigawatt electric (5 percent of the state's generating capability) was from non-utility sources (EIA 2002, Table 17). Non-utility generators also use a variety of energy sources.

Based on 2000 utilization data, South Carolina utilities relied heavily on nuclear-powered and coal-powered generating plants for meeting electrical demand. Approximately 56 percent of the electricity used in South Carolina was generated by nuclear-powered plants, followed by coal (43 percent), hydroelectric (0.5 percent), oil (0.3 percent), and gas (0.2 percent) (EIA 2001a, Tables A8, A9, A10, Al1, A12, and A13).

The difference between capacity and utilization is the result of preferential usage. For example, nuclear power plants represented 37 percent of utilities' installed capability, but produced 56 percent of the electricity generated by utilities. This reflects South Carolina's preferential reliance on nuclear energy as a base-load generating source. Figures 7-1 and 7-2 below illustrate South Carolina's utility generating capabilities and utilization, respectively.

Hydroelectric -

1 Oiired Hydroelectric Gas 20%

5%

0.5%

02%

Gas-fired 4%

Oil 0,3%

Figure 7-1. South Carolina Utility Figure 7-2 South Carolina Utility Generating Capability, 2000 Generation Utilization, 2000 cor Page 7-5

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Figure 7-3 illustrates the 2000 SCE&G energy capacity mix. Fourteen (14) percent of SCE&G's capacity comes from nuclear, 59 percent from coal, 17 percent from hydroelectric, natural gas provides 8 percent, and other resources provide 2 percent (SCANA 2001 a).

-Other 2%

Hydroelectric Figure 7-3. SCE&G Energy Capacity Figure 7-4 illustrates the 2000 SCE&G utilization by fuel type.

Nuclear power generated 22 percent, coal generated 77 percent, gas and oil generated I percent, and hydroelectric generated 4 percent (SCANA 2001a).

Hydroelectric Gas and Oil 4%

1%

01 Figure 7-4 SCE&G Utilization by Fuel Type Page 7-6 0

0

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Like the State of South Carolina as a whole, SCE&G's utilization reflects a preference for nuclear energy as a base-load generating source, and the difference is offset by diminished reliance on hydroelectric units, which are dependent on weather (rainfall).

Nuclear energy represented 14 percent of SCE&G's installed capacity but produced 18 percent of the electricity generated by SCE&G.

Hydroelectric power represents 17 percent of SCE&G's installed capacity, but produces 4 percent of the energy generated by the utility (SCANA 2001a).

7.2.1 Alternatives Considered Technoloi-y Choices SCE&G routinely conducts evaluations of alternative generating technologies. Based on these internal reviews, SCE&G identified candidate technologies that would be capable of replacing the net base-load capacity (966 MWe) of the nuclear unit at VCSNS (see Section 3.1.1). For consideration of alternatives, the SCE&G evaluation focuses on the 966 MWe capacity.

Based on these evaluations, it was determined that feasible new plant systems to replace the capacity of the VCSNS nuclear unit are limited to pulverized-coal and gas-fired combined-cycle units for base-load operation.

This conclusion is borne out by the generation utilization information in the introduction of Section 7.2 that identifies coal as the most heavily utilized non-nuclear generating technology in South Carolina. The high cost of oil has prompted a steady decline in its use for electricity generation.

Manufacturers now have large standard sizes of combined-cycle gas turbines that are economically attractive and suitable for high-capacity base-load operation.

For the purposes of the VCSNS license renewal environmental report, SCE&G has therefore limited its analysis for new generating capacity alternatives to the technologies it considers feasible:

pulverized coal-and gas-fired units. SCE&G chose to evaluate combined-cycle turbines in lieu of simple-cycle turbines because the combined-cycle option is a more economical option.

The benefits of lower operating costs for the combine-cycle option outweigh its increased capital costs.

Mixture The NRC indicated in the GEIS that, while many methods are available for generating electricity and a huge number of combinations or mixes can be assimilated to meet system needs, such expansive consideration would be too unwieldy given the purposes of the alternatives analysis. Therefore, NRC determined that a reasonable set of alternatives should be limited to analysis of single discrete electrical generation sources and only those electric generation technologies that are technically reasonable and commercially viable (NRC 1996a, pg. 8-1). Consistent with the NRC determination, SCE&G has not evaluated mixes of generating sources.

Page 7-7

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Dereoulation Efforts to deregulate the electric utility industry began with passage of the National Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPACT). Provisions of this act required electric utilities to allow open access to their transmission lines and encouraged development of a competitive wholesale market for electricity. EPACT did not mandate competition in the retail market, leaving that decision to the states (NEI 2000).

In 1996, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued Orders 888 and 889, which opened transmission access to non-utilities and required utilities to share information about available transmission capacity. On December 20, 1999, FERC issued Order 2000 requiring utilities to participate in Regional Transmission Organizations (RTOs).

In response to Order 2000, SCE&G is pursuing an agreement with a transmission organization for operation of SCE&G transmission assets.

Over the past few years, deregulation of the electric utility industry has received considerable attention in South Carolina.

In 1997, the General Assembly began considering a number of bills that would deregulate the retail electricity market. The Senate Judiciary Committee named a 19-member task force to study the restructuring issue in 1998, and the House Utility Subcommittee has been studying the issue since 1997 (CP&L 2000). While South Carolina's General Assembly has not adopted any restructuring legislation, it continues to debate the issue.

If the electric power industry in South Carolina is deregulated, retail competition would likely replace the electric utilities' mandate to serve the public, and all electricity customers in the state would be able to choose among competing power suppliers, including those located out of state (Chilton et al. 1997). As such, electric generation would be based on the customers' needs and preferences, the lowest price, or the best combination of prices, services, and incentives.

This potential major source of competition for construction and operation of power plants would affect the selection of alternatives for VCSNS license renewal. With the prospect of hundreds of suppliers being licensed to sell electricity in South Carolina, SCE&G could not control demand and would not remain competitive if it offered extensive conservation and load modification incentives. The PSC would probably ensure that the operation of generating units of incumbent utilities would not inhibit the development of competition within the State. Therefore, it is not clear that the PSC would grant SCE&G the authority to construct new generating units to replace VCSNS, if its license was not renewed.

However, regardless of the entity that constructed and operated the replacement power sources, certain environmental parameters would be constant among replacement power sources. Therefore, it is appropriate and instructive for SCE&G to discuss the impacts of reasonable alternatives to VCSNS.

Page 7-8

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Alternatives The following sections present fossil-fuel-fired generation (Section 7.2.1.1) and purchased power (Section 7.2.1.2) as reasonable alternatives to license renewal.

Section 7.2.1.3 discusses reduced demand and presents the basis for concluding that it is not a reasonable alternative to license renewal.

7.2.1.1 Construct and Operate Fossil-Fuel-Fired Generation SCE&G analyzed locating hypothetical new coal-and gas-fired units at the existing VCSNS site. This approach could minimize environmental impacts by building on previously disturbed land and by making the most use possible of existing facilities, such as transmission lines, roads and parking areas, office buildings, and the cooling system. Locating hypothetical units at the existing VCSNS site has been applied to the gas-fired units. However, coal-fired units could be built at the Cope Station, the site of a new state-of-the art coal-fired unit. This site was designed to accommodate two additional units in the future if needed.

Co-locating at the Cope Station site would have environmental benefits similar to locating at the VCSNS and would improve the use of existing facilities designed specifically for coal-fired generation. Accordingly, the coal-fired alternative was defined as construction at the Cope Station near Bamberg, South Carolina.

For comparability, gas-and coal-fired units of equal electric power and capacity factors were selected. A scenario of, for example, two units with a net capacity of 483 MWe each could be assumed to replace the 966 MWe VCSNS net capacity.

However, SCE&G's experience indicates that, although customized unit sizes can be built, using standardized sizes is more economical. For example, the coal-fired Cope unit of 430 MWe gross capacity operates at a net output of 408 MWe (PSC 2000, pg. 51), and two units nearly identical to the existing unit could be built. Accordingly, SCE&G evaluated constructing two 408 MWe net coal-fired units. The number and the net power of the gas-fired units were set equal to those of the coal-fired units. Although this provides less capacity than the existing unit, it ensures against overestimating environmental impacts from the alternatives. The shortfall in capacity could be replaced by other methods (see Mixture in Section 7.2.1).

It must be emphasized, however, that these are hypothetical scenarios. There are no plans for such construction at VCSNS or at the Cope Station.

Page 7-9

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Coal-Fired Geheration NRC has evaluated coal-fired generation alternatives for the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant (NRC 1999a, Section 8.2.1) and for the Oconee Nuclear Station (NRC 1999b, Section 8.2.1). For Oconee, NRC analyzed 2,500-MWe of coal-fired generation capacity. SCE&G has reviewed the NRC analysis, believes it to be sound, and notes that it analyzed more generating capacity than the 816 MWe net (i.e., two 408 MWe units) discussed in this analysis. In defining the coal-fired alternative, SCE&G has used the Cope Station unit-and South Carolina-specific input and has scaled from the NRC analysis, where appropriate.

Table 7-1 presents the basic coal-fired alternative emission control characteristics.

SCE&G based its emission control technology and percent control assumptions on alternatives that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has identified as being available for minimizing emissions (EPA 1998). For the purposes of the analysis, it was assumed that coal and calcium hydroxide would be delivered by rail via the rail line that is used for the existing Cope Station unit.

Gas-Fired Generation SCE&G has chosen to evaluate gas-fired generation, using combined-cycle turbines, because it has determined that the technology is mature, economical, and feasible. This is evidenced by SCE&G's plans to consider simple-cycle and combined-cycle gas-fired turbines to meet projected energy needs and the construction of combined-cycle units as part of the Urquhart Repowering Project (SCE&G 2000).

Unit sizes in the planned range (408 MW) are available and economical. Therefore, SCE&G has analyzed 816 MW of net power, consisting of two 408-MW gas-fired units located on VCSNS property.

Table 7-2 presents the basic gas-fired alternative characteristics.

SCE&G would ensure gas availability through its parent company SCANA Corporation.

7.2.1.2 Purchased Power SCE&G has evaluated conventional and prospective power supply options that could be reasonably implemented before the current VCSNS license expires in 2022. Because South Carolina is a net exporter of power, SCE&G assumes that in-state power could be purchased.

However, in order to purchase replacement capacity for VCSNS (966 MWe net), new construction would probably be required.

Page 7-10

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT SCE&G assumes that the generating technology used to produce purchased power would be one of those that NRC analyzed in the GEIS. For this reason, SCE&G is adopting by reference the GEIS description of the alternative generating technologies as representative of the purchased power alternative.

Of these technologies, simple-cycle combustion turbines or combined-cycle facilities fueled by natural gas are the most cost effective. There has been a corresponding decreased incentive for using boilers fired by coal or residual oil.

Although purchased power could provide replacement power for VCSNS, new construction would be required.

SCE&G concluded that it would not be economically or environmentally preferable to purchase power.

Factors that lead to this conclusion include the following:

The existing power transmission infrastructure currently lacks capacity to import additional power to replace VCSNS capacity from outside the current SCE&G marketing area. The construction of an additional high capacity [e.g., 500 kilovolt (kV)] transmission line would be required.

To ensure its continued capability to meet customer demands of reliable and affordable power, SCE&G would limit the amount of power it imports.

Under customary import restrictions, it is unlikely that SCE&G could purchase the power generated by VCSNS from the generation market.

Utility generators providing power to SCE&G would need to increase their capacity with new power units.

As described above, the most cost effective alternative for providing base-load power capacity is large, standard design combined-cycle facilities fueled primarily by natural gas.

In light of SCE&G's current focus on becoming "the best provider of customer-driven energy products and services in the southeast" (SCANA 2000, pg. 2), SCE&G would clearly prefer to build its own gas-fired combustion turbines.

The purchase of power from a non-utility generator would be less economical than SCE&G building its own facility. Non-utility generators have comparable construction and finance costs. A non-utility generator would be expected to make a profit on the sale of electricity and capacity.

The additional costs to SCE&G would be passed on to SCE&G customers.

The State of South Carolina is considering legislation that would deregulate the retail electricity market. If enacted, this legislation would allow non-utility generators to compete directly with utility companies for Page 7-11

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT the retail power market.

This would decrease non-utility generators' incentive to provide wholesale power to utility companies, reducing the availability of power for SCE&G purchase.

7.2.1.3 Reduce Demand In the past, SCE&G has offered demand-side management (DSM) programs that either conserve energy or allow the Company to reduce customers' load requirements during periods of peak demand. SCE&G's DSM programs fall into three categories:

Conservation Programs Educational programs that encourage the wise use of energy.

Energy Efficiency Pro2rams

"* Discounted residential rates for Good Cents homes and homes that meet specific energy efficiency standards.

"* Home Energy Check Program to provide residential energy audits and encourage efficiency upgrades.

"* Incentive Programs that encourage customers to replace old, inefficient appliances or equipment with new high-efficiency appliances or equipment.

Load Management Proarams

"* Standby Generator Program - encourages customers to let SCE&G switch loads to the customer's standby generators during periods of peak demand.

"* Interruptible Service Program - encourages customers to allow blocks of their load to be interrupted during periods of peak demand.

"* Real Time Pricing - encourages customers to discontinue usage during specific times.

South Carolina electric and natural gas utilities submit annual reports to the South Carolina Public Service Commission describing their DSM programs and activities. Over the past few years, SCE&G and other electric utilities have been scaling back their DSM programs and this trend is expected to continue (South Carolina Energy Office 2002).

The market conditions that provided the initial support for utility-sponsored conservation and load Page 7-12

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT management efforts during the late 1970s and early 1980s, can be broadly characterized by:

1. increasing long-term marginal prices for capacity and energy production resources;

2. projecting increasing demand for electricity across the nation;

3. general agreement that conditions (1) and (2) would continue for the foreseeable future;

4. limited competition in the generation of electricity;

5. economies of scale in the generation of electricity, which supported the construction of large central power plants; and

6. the use of average embedded cost as the basis for setting electricity prices within a regulated context.

These market and regulatory conditions would undergo dramatic changes in a deregulated market.

Changes that have significantly impacted the cost effectiveness of utility-sponsored DSM, can be described as follows:

1. a decline in generation costs, due primarily to technological advances that have reduced the-cost of constructing new generating units (e.g., combustion turbines); and

2. national energy legislation which has encouraged wholesale competition through open access to the transmission grid, as well as state legislation designed to facilitate retail competition.

Consistent with (1) and (2) above, the utility planning environment features lower capacity and lower energy prices than during earlier periods, shorter planning horizons, lower reserve margins, and increased reliance on market prices to direct utility resource planning. These have greatly reduced the number of cost-effective DSM alternatives.

Other significant changes include:

The adoption of increasingly stringent national appliance standards for most major energy-using equipment and the adoption of energy efficiency requirements in state building codes. These mandates have further reduced the potential for cost-effective utility-sponsored measures.

Page 7-13

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT In states that are currently transitioning into deregulation, third parties are increasingly providing energy services and products in competitive markets at prices that reflect their value to the customer.

Market conditions can be expected to continue this shift among providers of cost effective load management.

DSM programs, which are primarily directed toward load management, are not an effective substitute for large base-load units operating at high capacity factors, including VCSNS.

7.2.2 Environmental Impacts of Alternatives This section evaluates the environmental impacts from reasonable alternatives to VCSNS license renewal:

coal-fired generation, gas-fired generation, and purchased power.

Purchased power may not be economically feasible for SCE&G but it is a reasonable alternative under NEPA.

7.2.2.1 Coal-Fired Generation The NRC evaluated environmental impacts from coal-fired generation alternatives in the GEIS (NRC 1996a, Section 8.3.9). The NRC concluded that construction impacts could be substantial, due in part to the large land area required (which can result in natural habitat loss) and the large workforce needed. NRC pointed out that siting a new coal-fired plant where an existing nuclear plant is located would reduce many construction impacts; similar reductions would occur through construction at the Cope Station.

NRC identified major adverse impacts from operations as human health concerns associated with air emissions, waste generation, and losses of aquatic biota due to cooling water withdrawals and discharges.

The coal-fired alternative that SCE&G has defined in Section 7.2.1.1 would be located at Cope Station.

As noted previously, the Cope Station site was designed to accommodate two additional units in the future, if needed.

Air Oualitv Air quality impacts of coal-fired generation are considerably different from those of nuclear power. A coal-fired plant would emit sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides (NOJ), particulate matter, and carbon monoxide, all of which are regulated pollutants. As Section 7.2.1.1 indicates, SCE&G has assumed a plant design equivalent to the existing Cope Station unit that would minimize air emissions through a combination of boiler technology and post-combustion Page 7-14

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT pollutant removal. SCE&G estimates the coal-fired alternative emissions to be as follows:

Sulfur oxides = 6,249 tons per year Nitrogen oxides = 642 tons per year Carbon monoxide = 642 tons per year Particulates:

Total suspended particulates = 113 tons per year PM 10 (particulates having a diameter of less than 10 microns) = 26 tons per year Table 7-3 shows how SCE&G calculated these emissions.

In 1999, emissions of sulfur dioxide and NO, from South Carolina's generators ranked 15th and 30th nationally, respectively (EIA 2001b). No South Carolina generators were cited in the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 to begin compliance in 1995 with stricter emission controls for sulfur dioxide (SO 2) and nitrogen oxides (NOj).

However, it is likely that South Carolina's Public Service Commission will need to design a State Implementation Plan for reducing ground-level ozone in response to a proposal released by the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency in October 1998.

NRC did not quantify coal-fired emissions, but implied that air impacts would be substantial. The NRC noted that adverse human health effects from coal combustion have led to important federal legislation in recent years and that public health risks, such as cancer and emphysema, have been associated with coal combustion. The NRC also mentioned global warming and acid rain as potential impacts. However, sulfur oxide emission allowances, NO, emission offsets, low NO, burners, overfire air, fabric filters or electrostatic precipitators, and scrubbers are regulatorily-imposed mitigation measures. As a consequence, the coal-fired alternative would have moderate impacts on air quality; the impacts would be clearly noticeable, but would not destabilize air quality in the area.

Waste Management SCE&G concurs with the GEIS assessment that the coal-fired alternative would generate substantial solid waste. The coal-fired plant would annually consume approximately 2,570,000 tons of coal having an ash content of Page 7-15

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 8.8 percent (Tables 7-1 and 7-3). After combustion, most (99.9 percent) of this ash, approximately 230,000 tons per year, would be collected and disposed of onsite. In addition, approximately 170,000 tons of scrubber sludge would be disposed of onsite each year (based on annual calcium hydroxide usage of nearly 95,000 tons). SCE&G estimates that ash and scrubber waste disposal over the 40-year plant life would require approximately 210 acres (a square area with sides of approximately 3,000 feet). The Cope site is 1,700 acres.

While only half this waste volume and land use would be attributable to the 20-year license renewal period alternative, the total numbers are pertinent as a cumulative impact.

It is believed that with proper siting coupled with current waste management and monitoring practices, waste disposal at the Cope site would not destabilize any resources. There would be space within the site footprint for this disposal.

After closure of the waste site and revegetation, the land would be available for other uses. For these reasons, waste disposal for the coal-fired alternative would have moderate impacts; the impacts of increased waste disposal would be clearly noticeable, but would not destabilize any important resource and further mitigation would be unwarranted.

Other Impacts Construction of the powerblock and coal storage area would impact some land area and associated terrestrial habitat. Because most of this construction would be in previously disturbed areas, impacts would be minimal. For the most part, visual impacts would be consistent with the industrial nature of the site. The (525 foot) exhaust stack would be visible from the Edisto River and for several miles in every direction, however.

As with any large construction project, some erosion and sedimentation and fugitive dust emissions could be anticipated, but would be minimized by using best management practices.

Construction debris from clearing and grubbing could be disposed of onsite and municipal waste disposal capacity would be available.

Socioeconomic impacts from the construction workforce would be minimal, because worker relocation would not be expected due to the site's proximity to Columbia, South Carolina; Charleston, South Carolina; and Augusta, Georgia. Cultural resource impacts would be unlikely, due to the assumed previously disturbed nature of the site.

Impacts to aquatic resources and water quality would be minimal due to the plant's closed-loop cooling system that recycles condenser water and withdraws makeup from four onsite groundwater wells. Although the Cope Station was designed to use the Edisto River as the source of its makeup water, Page 7-16

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT it has in recent years relied on groundwater for makeup. The South Fork of the Edisto River is used as a backup supply only.

The additional stacks, boilers, and rail deliveries would increase the visual impact of the existing site.

Socioeconomic impacts would result from a decrease in the operational workforce from approximately 600 employees at VCSNS and an increase in the operational workforce at Cope Station (doubling, to approximately 140 employees). These impacts would be small to moderate, due to Cope Station's proximity to large metropolitan areas (Columbia, Charleston, and Augusta).

Other construction and operation impacts would be small. In most cases, the impacts would be detectable, but they would not destabilize any important attribute of the resource involved.

Due to the minor nature of these other impacts, mitigation would not be warranted beyond that mentioned.

7.2.2.2 Gas-Fired Generation NRC evaluated environmental impacts from gas-fired generation alternatives in the GEIS, focusing on combined-cycle plants.

Section 7.2.1.1 presents SCE&G's reasons for defining the gas-fired generation alternative as a combined-cycle plant on the VCSNS site. Land-use impacts from gas-fired units on VCSNS would be less than those of the coal-fired alternative at the Cope Station site due to construction on the existing site and a smaller facility footprint. There would, however, be land use impacts associated with the construction of a new natural gas pipeline (see Other Impacts).

A smaller workforce could have adverse socioeconomic impacts. Human health effects associated with air emissions would be of concern. Aquatic biota losses due to cooling water withdrawals would be offset by the concurrent shutdown of the nuclear facility.

The NRC has evaluated the environmental impacts of constructing and operating four 440-MW combined-cycle gas-fired units as an alternative to a nuclear power plant license renewal (NRC 1996a).

This analysis is for a generating capacity approximately two times the VCSNS gas-fired alternatives analysis, because SCE&G would install two 424 MW gross units. SCE&G has adopted the rest of the NRC analysis with necessary South Carolina-and SCE&G-specific modifications noted.

Air Ouality Natural gas is a relatively clean-burning fossil fuel; the gas-fired alternative would release similar types of emissions, but in lesser quantities, than the coal-Page 7-17

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT fired alternative.

Control technology for gas-fired turbines focuses on NO,,

emissions.

SCE&G estimates the gas-fired alternative emissions to be as follows:

"* Sulfur oxides = 88 tons per year

"* NO,, = 332 tons per year

"* Carbon monoxide = 435 tons per year

"* Filterable Particulates = 130 tons per year (all particulates are PM10)

Table 7-4 shows how SCE&G calculated these emissions.

The Section 7.2.2.1 discussion of regional air quality and Clean Air Act requirements is also applicable to the gas-fired generation alternative. NO,,

effects on ozone levels, sulfur dioxide allowances, and NO, emission offsets could all be issues of concern for gas-fired combustion.

While gas-fired turbine emissions are less than coal-fired boiler emissions, and regulatory requirements are less stringent, the emissions are still substantial. Emissions from the gas-fired alternative located at VCSNS would noticeably alter local air quality, but would not destabilize regional resources. Air quality impacts would therefore be moderate, but substantially smaller than those of coal-fired generation.

Waste Mana2ement Gas-fired generation would result in almost no waste generation, producing minor (if any) impacts. Therefore, gas-fired generation waste management impacts would be small.

Other Impacts As noted previously, building the gas-fired alternative on the existing VCSNS site would reduce some construction-related impacts. NRC estimated in the GEIS that 110 acres would be needed for a plant site; this much previously disturbed acreage is available at VCSNS, reducing loss of terrestrial habitat.

Aesthetic impacts, erosion and sedimentation, fugitive dust, and construction debris impacts would be similar to the coal-fired alternative, but smaller because of the reduced site size. The GEIS estimates a work force of 150 for operation of these units. The reduction in work force (relative to the existing VCSNS work force) would result in adverse socioeconomic impacts. These impacts would be small to moderate and would be mitigated by the site's Page 7-18

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT proximity to the large metropolitan areas of Columbia, Charleston, and Augusta.

It would, however, be necessary to upgrade existing South Carolina Pipeline Corporation (a wholly-owned subsidiary of SCANA Corporation) natural gas lines to provide the necessary firm quantities of gas for these combined-cycle base-load units. This would probably involve construction of a new 24-inch dedicated pipeline from South Carolina Pipeline Corporation facilities in Aiken, South Carolina to VCSNS, a distance of some 70 miles. Natural gas would be supplied by Southern Natural Gas (Sonat), which has a terminal in Aiken adjacent to the South Carolina Pipeline Corporation facilities. South Carolina Pipeline Corporation would likely route this new pipeline along existing utility rights-of-way. It would be necessary to widen the existing corridors to accommodate a new pipeline. The South Carolina Public Service Commission has no set-back standards for intra-state natural gas pipelines; companies involved in natural gas transmission and distribution determine right-of-way widths based on site-specific factors (e.g., soils, topography, populations of rare plants and animals, land use in surrounding areas, existing surface and sub-surface utilities) and safety considerations. Rights-of-way for large (24-inch diameter and larger) natural gas pipelines are generally 75 to 100 feet wide during construction, with a permanent width of approximately 50 feet (FERC 2000). Detailed engineering studies would be necessary to determine the increased width of the transmission corridors.

Construction of a new 24-inch pipeline would require widening the existing transmission corridors and could require re-routing through previously undisturbed areas. Impacts would include disturbance of wildlife from noise and movement of pipeline workers and heavy equipment during construction, as well as potential impacts to water quality from erosion and sedimentation.

These impacts would be temporary and limited to the construction phase of the project.

Best construction management practices and soil conservation measures would be employed to limit soil loss and potential impacts to down gradient surface water and wetlands. Some undetermined amount of wildlife habitat would be permanently lost with the widening of the transmission corridors. In addition, cultural resources could be disturbed in the course of building the pipeline (unlikely) and widening the right-of-way (more likely).

Impacts would be mitigated by pre-construction surveys and consultations with the SHPO.

Page 7-19

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 7.2.2.3 Purchased Power As discussed in Section 7.2.1.2, SCE&G assumes that the generating technology used under the purchased power alternative would be one of those that NRC analyzed in the GELS.

SCE&G is also adopting by reference the NRC analysis of the environmental impacts from those technologies. Under the purchased power alternative, therefore, environmental impacts would still occur, but would be located elsewhere within the state. There is no evidence to suggest that out-of-state imports would be required.

The purchased power alternative would include constructing up to 200 miles of high voltage (i.e., 500 kV) transmission lines to get power from the remote locations in South Carolina to the SCE&G network. Most of the transmission lines could probably be routed along existing rights-of-way.

The environmental impacts of constructing up to 200 miles of transmission lines would be moderate. As indicated in the introduction to Section 7.2.1.1, the environmental impacts of construction and operation of new coal-or gas-fired generating capacity for purchased power at a previously-undisturbed greenfield site would exceed those of the gas-fired alternative located on the VCSNS site or the coal-fired alternative located at Cope Station.

Page 7-20

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 7.3 References Chilton, J. B., R. P. Wilder, and D. P. Woodward. 1997. "Whither Electricity Deregulation," Business &

Economic Review, Volume 43, Issue 4. Division of Research, The Darla Moore School of Business, University of South Carolina.

Available at http://research.badn.sc.edu/research/bereview/

be43_4/electr.htm. Accessed July 20, 2000.

CP&L (Carolina Power & Light Company). 2000. "Deregulation Latest News, Update - April, 2000."

Available at http://cplc.com/about/policy/dereg/deregnews.html. Accessed July 20, 2000.

EIA (Energy Information Administration). 2000. Electric Power Annual 1999, Volume II. October 26.

Available at http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epav2/epav2.pdf.

Accessed May 15, 2002.

EIA (Energy Information Administration). 2001 a. "Electric Power Annual 2000, Volume I." DOE/EIA 0348(2000)/1. August 2001. Available at http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epavl/epavl.pdf.

Accessed May 15, 2002.

EIA (Energy Information Administration). 2001b. "State Electricity Profiles 1999 - South Carolina,"

November

29.

Available at http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/st-profiles/south

_carolina.pdf. Accessed May 23, 2002.

EIA (Energy Information Administration). 2002. "Inventory of Electric Utility Power Plants in the United States 2000."

DOE/EIA-0095(2000).

March 2002.

Available at http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/ipp/ipp-sum.html.

Accessed May 15, 2002.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1998. Air Pollutant Emission Factors. Vol. 1, Stationary Point Sources and Area Sources.

Section 1.1, "Bituminous and Subbituminous Coal Combustion." AP-42.

September 1998.

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42cl.html.

Accessed July 26, 2001.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2000. Air Pollutant Emission Factors. Vol. 1, Stationary Point Sources and Area Sources. Section 3.1, "Stationary Gas Turbines for Electricity Generation."

AP-42. April 2000. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42c3.html.

July 24, 2000.

FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission).

2000. "An Interstate Natural Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?" Office of External Affairs, Washington, DC.

NEI (Nuclear Energy Institute). 2000. "Restructuring the U.S. Electric Power Industry." Available at http://www.nei.org/doc.asp?catnum=3&catid=621. Accessed May 29, 2001.

NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1988. Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities. NUREG-0586. Washington, D.C., August 1988.

Page 7-21

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission).

1996a. Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants. NUREG 1437. Washington, DC. May.

NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission).

1996b.

"Supplementary Information to Final Rule."

Federal Register. Vol. 61, No. 244. December 18.

NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission).

1999a.

Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants:

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant.

NUREG-1437, Supplement 1, Final. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Washington, DC. October 1999.

NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission).

1999b. Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: Oconee Nuclear Station. NUREG-1437, Supplement 2, Final.

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Washington, DC. December 1999.

PSC (Public Service Commission of South Carolina). 2000. Annual Report 1997 - 1998.

SCANA. 2000.

"Energy for Success," SCANA Corporation 1999 Annual Report.

Available at http://www.scana.com/finance/REPORTS/annual/1999.pdf.

Accessed July 28, 2000.

SCANA.

2001 a.

SCANA Statistical Supplement to the 2000 Annual Report.

Available at http://www.scana.con/pdf/2000supplement.pdf. Accessed May 15, 2002.

SCANA.

200lb.

"Power for Living" SCANA Corporation 2000 Annual Report.

Available at http://www.scana.com/PDF/2000-annual-report.pdf. Accessed May 15, 2002.

SCE&G (South Carolina Electric & Gas Company). 2000. Integrated Resource Plan. South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, Columbia, S.C.

South Carolina Energy Office. 2002. The Status of Utility Demand-Side Management Activities in South Carolina for 2000. Prepared by South Carolina Energy Office for the South Carolina General Assembly. Available at http:llwww.state.sc.us/energy/. Accessed June 20, 2002.

Page 7-22

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT TABLE 7-1 COAL-FIRED ALTERNATIVE Characteristic Basis Unit size = 408 MW ISO rating neta Chosen as equal to existing Cope Station unit Unit size = 430 MW ISO rating grossn Chosen as equal to existing Cope Station unit Number of units = 2 Calculated to be < VCSNS Unit gross capacity of approximately 1,000 MW Boiler type = tangentially fired, dry-bottom Minimizes nitrogen oxides emissions (EPA 1998, Table 1.1-3 Page 1.1-17).

Fuel type = bituminous, pulverized coal Typical for coal used in South Carolina Fuel heating value = 12,783 Btu/lb 1998 value for coal used in South Carolina (EIA 2000, Table 28)

Fuel ash content by weight = 8.8 percent 1998 value for coal used in South Carolina (EIA 2000, Table 28)

Fuel sulfur content by weight = 1.28 percent 1998 value for coal used in South Carolina (EIA 2000, Table 28)

Uncontrolled NOQ emission = 9.7 lb/ton Typical for pulverized coal, tangentially fired, dry Uncontrolled CO emission = 0.5 lb/ton bottom, pre-NSPS with low-NO, burner (EPA 1998, Table 1.1 -3 Page 1.1-17)

Heat rate = 10,200 Btu/KWh Typical for coal-fired, single cycle steam turbines (EIA 2000, page 45)

Capacity factor = 0.85 Typical for large coal-fired units (SCE&G experience)

NO, control = low NO, burners, overfire air and Best available and widely demonstrated for minimizing selective catalytic reduction (95 percent reduction)

NO, emissions (EPA 1998, Table 1.1-2 Page 1.1-14).

Particulate control = fabric filters (baghouse-Best available for minimizing particulate emissions (EPA 99.9 percent removal efficiency) 1998, Page 1.1-6 and -7)

SO, control = Spray drying (dry scrubber-calcium Best available for minimizing SO, emissions (EPA 1998, hydroxide [90 percent removal efficiency])

Table 1.1-1 Page 1.1-13)

a.

The difference between "net" and "gross" is electricity consumed onsite.

Btu

= British thermal unit ISO rating = International Standards Organization rating at standard atmospheric conditions of 59*F, 60 percent relative humidity, and 14.696 pounds of atmospheric pressure per square inch KWh

= kilowatt hour NSPS

= New Source Performance Standard Lb

= pound MW

= megawatt NOx

= nitrogen oxides SOx

= sulfur oxides Page 7-23

VIRGIL C. SUMN AER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT TABLE 7-2 GAS-FIRED ALTERNATIVE Characteristic Unit size = 408 MW ISO rating net:'

Two 135 MW-combustion turbines and a 138 MW heat recovery boiler Unit size = 424 MW ISO rating gross:a Two 140.5 MW-combustion turbines 143 MW-heat recovery boiler Number of units = 2 Fuel type = natural gas Fuel heating value = 1,037 Btu/ft3 Fuel sulfur content = not available SO, emission = 0.0034 lb/MMiBtu NO, control = selective catalytic reduction (SCR)

Fuel NO, content = 0.0128 lb/MMBtu Fuel CO content = 0.0168 lb/MMBtu Basis Manufacturer's standard size gas-fired combined cycle plant Calculated based on 4 percent onsite power Calculated to be < VCSNS unit gross capacity of approximately 1,000 MW Assumed 1998 value for gas used in South Carolina (EIA 1999)

SO,, = 0.94S. When sulfur content is not available, use SO, = 0.0034 lb/MMBTU (EPA 2000, Table 3.1-2a, Page 3.1-11)

Best available for minimizing NOx emissions (EPA 2000, Table 3.1 Database)

Typical for large SCR-controlled gas fired units (EPA 2000, Table 3.1 Database)

Typical for large SCR-controlled gas fired units (EPA 2000, Table 3.1-2 Page 3.1-8)

Heat rate = 8,200 Btu/Kwh Typical for combined cycle gas-fired turbines (EIA 1997, page 106)

Capacity factor = 0.85 Typical for large gas-fired base load units

a.

The difference between "net" and "gross" is electricity consumed onsite.

Btu

= British thermal unit ft3

=

cubic foot ISO rating =

International Standards Organization rating at standard atmospheric conditions of 59°F, 60 percent relative humidity, and 14.696 pounds of atmospheric pressure per square inch Kwh

=

kilowatt hour MM

= million MW

=

megawatt SO,

=

sulfur oxides

NOQ,

=

nitrogen oxides Page 7-24

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT TABLE 7-3 AIR EMISSIONS FROM COAL-FIRED ALTERNATIVE Parameter Calculation Result Annual coal 10,200Btu 1,000kW lb ton 24hr 365 day 2,569,546 tons consumption 2x432 4Wx x

x x-x0.85x-x of coal per kW x hr MW 12,783 Btu 2,000 lb day yr year SO 2ax 38 x 1.28 lb ton 6,249 tons x

x (1 - 90100)x 2,569,546 tons 6,2 tons ton 2,000 lb yr SO2 per year NOC 9.7 lb ton 2,569,546 tons 642 tons NO, ton 2,000 lb yt per year COC 0.5 lb ton 2,569,546 tons 642 tons CO ton 2,000 lb yr per year Pd 10 x 8.8 lb ton

1.

2,569,546 tons 213 tons TSP x tx

( - 99.9/100)x 2 9

t ton 2,000 lb yr per year P o 2.3 x8.81lb ton 2,6,4 os26 tons PM1 0 x

x (1 - 99.9/100)x 25956tn ton 2,000 lb yr per year

a.

b.

C.

d.

CO NO, PM1 SO 2 TSP EPA 1998, Table 1.1-1.

EPA 1998, Table 1.1-2.

EPA 1998, Table 1.1-3.

EPA 1998, Table 1.1-4.

= carbon monoxide

= oxides of nitrogen 0 = particulates having diameter less than 10 microns

= sulfur oxides

= total suspended particulates Page 7-25

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT TABLE 7-4 AIR EMISSIONS FROM GAS-FIRED ALTERNATIVE Parameter Calculation Result Annual gas 4 24MMW 8,200 Btu 1,000kW 085 ft 3 24 hr 365 day 49,966,810,230 ft3 consumption 2 units x x

O.5-x-

per year unit kWxhr MW 1,037 Btu day yp Annual Btu 49,966,810,230 ft3 1,037 Btu MM Btu 51,815,582 MMBtu input yr ft3 106Btu per year SO2a 0.0034 lb ton 51,815,582 MMBtu 88 tons SO2 per x x year MMBtu 2,000 lb yr NO,'

0.0128 lb ton 51,815,582 MMBtu 332 tons NO,, per MMBtu 2,000 lb yr year Co 0.0168 lb ton 51,815,582 MMBtu 435 tons CO per MMBtu 2,000 lb yr year TSP" 0.005 lb ton 51,815,582 MMBtu 130 tons filterable xTSP per year MMBtu 2,000 lb yr PM1 0" 130 tons TSP 130 tons filterable yr PM10 per year

a. El

b. El Co NO, PM, 0 so2 TSP PA 2000, Table 3.1-1.

PA 2000, Table 3.1-2.

=

carbon monoxide

=

oxides of nitrogen

=

particulates having diameter less than 10 microns

=

sulfur oxides

=

total suspended particulates Page 7-26

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 8.0 COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF LICENSE RENEWAL WITH THE ALTERNATIVES NRC

"...To the extent practicable, the environmental impacts of the proposal and the alternatives should be presented in comparative form;" 10 CFR 51A5(b)(3) as adopted by 51-53(c)(2)

Chapter 4 analyzes environmental impacts of V. C. Summer Nuclear Station (VCSNS) license renewal and Chapter 7 analyzes impacts from renewal alternatives.

Table 8-1 summarizes environmental impacts of the proposed action (license renewal) and the alternatives, so the reader can compare them. The environmental impacts compared in Table 8-1 are those that are either Category 2 issues for the proposed action, license renewal, or are issues that the Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) (NRC 1996) identified as major considerations in an alternatives analysis. For example, although the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) concluded that air quality impacts from the proposed action would be small (Category 1), the GEIS identified major human health concerns associated with air emissions from alternatives (Section 7.2.2). Therefore, Table 8-1 compares air impacts among the proposed action and the alternatives. Table 8-2 is a more detailed comparison of the alternatives.

Page 8-1

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 8.1 References NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission).

1996.

Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (GEIS). Volumes 1 and 2. NUREG-1437. Washington, DC.

May.

Page 8-2

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT TABLE 8-1 IMPACTS COMPARISON

SUMMARY

No-Action Alternative Proposed Action With Coal-With Gas-With (License Base Fired Fired Purchased Impact Renewal)

(Decommissioning)

Generation Generation Power Land Use Water Quality Air Quality Ecological Resources Threatened or Endangered Species Human Health Socioeconomics Waste Management Aesthetics Cultural Resources SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL MODERATE SMALL MODERATE MODERATE SMALL SMALL to MODERATE MODERATE SMALL MODERATE SMALL MODERATE SMALL to MODERATE MODERATE SMALL SMALL SMALL to MODERATE SMALL to MODERATE SMALL SMALL SMALL SMALL to MODERATE SMALL to MODERATE SMALL to MODERATE SMALL SMALL to MODERATE SMALL SMALL to MODERATE SMALL SMALL SMALL - Environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource. MODERATE - Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, any important attribute of the resource. 10 CFR 51, Subpart A, Appendix B, Table B-i, Footnote 3.

Page 8-3

TABLE 8-2 IMPACTS COMPARISON DETAIL No Action Alternative Proposed Action (License Base With Coal-Fired With Gas-Fired With Purchased Renewal)

(Decommissioning)

Generation Generation Power VCSNS license renewal for 20 years, followed by decommissioning Decommissioning following expiration of current VCSNS license. Adopting by reference, as bounding VCSNS decommissioning, GElS description (NRC 1996, Section 7.1)

New construction at an existing site, Cope Station Use existing rail spur.

Use existing switchyard and transmission lines.

Two 408-MW tangentially-fired, dry bottom units; capacity factor 0.85 Existing closed-cycle Cope Station cooling water system with Edisto River water as back-up Pulverized bituminous coal, 12,783 Btu/pound; 10,200 Btu/kWh; 8.8%

ash; 1.28% sulfur; 9.7 lb/ton nitrogen oxides; 2,569,546 tons coal/yr New construction at the VCSNS site Construct 70 miles of gas pipeline along existing rights-of-way to the extent practicable. Widen rights of-way to accommodate new 24-inch pipeline.

Use existing switchyard and transmission lines Two 424-MW units; each consisting of two 140.5 MW combustion turbines and a 143-MW heat recovery boiler; capacity factor 0.85 Existing VCSNS intake/

discharge canal system Natural gas, 1,037 Btu/ft3; 8,200 Btu/kWh; 0.0034 lb sulfur/MMBtu; 0.0128 lb NO./MMBtu; 49,996,810,230 ft3 gas/yr Would involve construction of new generation capacity in the state.

Adopting by reference GElS description of alternate technologies (Section 7.2.1.2)

Assumed construction of up to 200 miles of transmission lines

'*0 eq

>a tT1 5TO~

IV Mr M >I 0

TABLE 8-2 (Continued)

IMPACTS COMPARISON DETAIL No Action Alternative Proposed Action (License Base With Coal-Fired With Gas-Fired With Purchased Renewal)

(Decommissioning)

Generation Generation Power Low NO, burners, overfire Low NO, burners, air (95% NO, reduction selective catalytic efficiency).

reduction with overfire air Dry scrubber - calcium hydroxide desulfurization system (90% SO, removal efficiency); 95,000 tons limestone/yr Fabric filters or electrostatic precipitators (99.9% particulate removal efficiency) 600 workers 70 additional workers 150 workers (Section 7.2.2.1)

(Section 7.2.2.2)

SMALL - Adopting by reference Category 1 issue findings (Table 4-2, Issues 52, 53)

SMALL - Not an impact evaluated by GEIS (NRC 1996, Section 7.3)

Land Use Impacts SMALL - Cope site was designed to accommodate two additional units and could use existing rail lines and transportation corridors. Twenty years of ash and scrubber waste disposal would require 105 acres of forested land (Section 7.2.2.1).

MODERATE - 110 acres for facility at VCSNS location; pipeline would be routed along existing rights-of-way when practicable. Would be necessary to widen existing rights-of-way (Section 7.2.2.2).

MODERATE -Most transmission facilities could be constructed along existing transmission corridors (Section 7.2.2.3).

Adopting by reference GElS description of land use impacts from alternate technologies (NRC 1996, Section 8.2)

(

(IQ CD 90 LA oil

(

TABLE 8-2 (Continued)

IMPACTS COMPARISON DETAIL No Action Alternative Proposed Action (License Base With Coal-Fired With Gas-Fired With Purchased Renewal)

(Decommissioning)

Generation Generation Power Water Quality Impacts SMALL - Adopting by SMALL - Adopting by SMALL - Construction SMALL - Reduced SMALL to MODERATE - Adopting by reference Category I issue reference Category I issue impacts minimized by use cooling water demands, reference GEIS description of water findings (Table 4-2, Issues 3, 5, finding (Table 4-2, Issue 89).

of best management inherent in combined-quality impacts from alternate 6, 7-12). Two Category 2 practices. Operational cycle design (Section technologies (NRC 1996, Section 8.2) groundwater issues not impacts minimized by use 7.2.2.2) applicable (Section 4.5, Issue of existing close-loop 33; and Section 4.7, Issue 35).

system that recycles Evaporative loss from cooling cooling water and Construction of pipeline pond would have minimal effect withdraws makeup water could cause temporary on biological communities from onsite wells erosion and sedimentation (Section 4.1, Issue 13) and (Section 7.2.2.1).

in streams crossed by right aquifer recharge (Section 4.6, of way (Section 7.2.2.2).

Issue 34) or groundwater degradation (Section 4.8, Issue 39).

Air Quality Impacts SMALL - Adopting by SMALL - Adopting by MODERATE -

MODERATE -

SMALL to MODERATE - Adontina bv reference Category I issue finding (Table 4-2, Issue 51).

Category 2 issue not applicable (Section 4.11, Issue 50).

reference Category 1 issue findings (Table 4-2, Issue 88) 6,249 tons SO./yr 642 tons NO./yr 642 tons CO/yr 113 tons TSP/yr 26 tons PMyl/yr (Section 7.2.2. 1) a 88 tons SO,/yr 332 tons NOjyr 435 tons CO/yr 0

130 tons PM 1 yra (Section 7.2.2.2).

reference GElS description of air quality impacts from alternate technologies (NRC 1996, Section 8.2) rn 4;Y1 t-,

'VQ 00

TABLE 8-2 (Continued)

IMPACTS COMPARISON DETAIL No Action Alternative Proposed Action (License Base With Coal-Fired With Gas-Fired With Purchased Renewal)

(Decommissioning)

Generation Generation Power Ecological Resource Impacts SMALL - Adopting by SMALL - Adopting by SMALL - 105 acres of MODERATE -

SMALL to MODERATE - Adopting by reference Category I issue reference Category I issue forested land could be Construction of new reference GEIS description of ecological findings (Table 4-2, finding (Table 4-2, Issue 90) required for ash/sludge pipeline would require resource impacts from alternate Issues 15-24, 28-30, 41-48).

disposal over 20-year widening of existing right-technologies (NRC 1996, Section 8.2)

One Category 2 issue not license renewal term of-way, with noise applicable (Section 4.9, (Section 7.2.2. 1).

disturbance during Issue 40). VCSNS holds a construction and current NPDES permit, which permanent loss of wildlife constitutes compliance with habitat (Section 7.2.2.2).

Clean Water Act Section 316(b)

(Section 4.2, Issue 25; Section 4.3, Issue 26) and 316(a)

(Section 4.4, Issue 27)

Threatened or Endangered Species Impacts SMALL - Only one threatened SMALL - Not an impact SMALL - Federal and SMALL - Federal and SMALL - Federal and state laws or endangered species (bald evaluated by GEIS (NRC state laws prohibit state laws prohibit prohibit destroying or adversely eagle) is known to occur in the 1996, Section 7.3) destroying or adversely destroying or adversely affecting protected species and their vicinity of the site or along affecting protected species affecting protected species habitats.

transmission corridors, and no and their habitats.

and their habitats.

impacts have been observed to date (Section 4.10, Issue 49).

Human Health Impacts SMALL - Category 1 issues (Table 4-2, Issues 56, 58, 61, 62). Risk from microbiological organisms minimal due to low discharge temperatures (Section 4.12, Issue 57). Risk due to transmission-line induced currents minimal due to conformance with code (Section 4.13, Issue 59)

SMALL - Adopting by reference Category I issue finding (Table 4-2, Issue 86)

MODERATE - Adopting by reference GElS conclusion that risks such as cancer and emphysema from emissions are likely (NRC 1996, Section 8.3.9)

SMALL - Adopting by reference GElS conclusion that some risk of cancer and emphysema exists from emissions (NRC 1996, Table 8.2)

SMALL to MODERATE - Adopting by reference GEIS description of human health impacts from alternate technologies (NRC 1996, Section 8.2)

-F

-4 mI

>T~,

z*1

>T r

TABLE 8-2 (Continued)

IMPACTS COMPARISON DETAIL No Action Alternative Proposed Action (License Base With Coal-Fired With Gas-Fired With Purchased Renewal)

(Decommissioning)

Generation Generation Power Socioeconomic Impacts SMALL - Adopting by SMALL - Adopting by SMALL to MODERATE SMALL to MODERATE SMALL to MODERATE - Adopting by reference Category 1 issue reference Category I issue

- Reduction in permanent

- Reduction in permanent reference GEIS description of findings (Table 4-2, Issues 64, finding (Table 4-2, Issue 91) work force at VCSNS work force at VCSNS socioeconomic impacts from alternate 67). Two Category 2 issues not could adversely affect could adversely affect technologies (NRC 1996, Section 8.2) applicable (Section 4.16, Issue surrounding counties surrounding counties 66 and Section 4.17. 1, Issue 68).

(Section 7.2.2.1).

(Section 7.2.2.2).

Location in medium population area with limited growth controls minimizes potential for housing impacts. (Section 4.14, Issue 63). Plant contribution to county tax base is significant, and continued plant operation would benefit county (Section 4.17.2, Issue 69). Capacity of public water supply and transportation infrastructure minimizes potential for related impacts (Section 4.15, Issue 65 and Section 4.18, Issue 70)

Waste Management Impacts SMALL - Adopting by reference Category 1 issue findings (Table 4-2, Issues 77-85)

SMALL - Adopting by reference Category I issue finding (Table 4-2, Issue 87)

MODERATE - 230,000 SI*

tons of coal ash and w

170,000 tons of scrubber (S

sludge would require 105 acres over 20-year license renewal term.

Industrial waste generated annually (Section 7.2.2.1).

AALL - Almost no iste generation eclion 7.2.2.2).

SMALL to MODERATE - Adopting by reference GEIS description of waste management impacts from alternate technologies (NRC 1996, Section 8.2)

Oq 0

90 00 0

oil P

TABLE 8-2 (Continued)

IMPACTS COMPARISON DETAIL No Action Alternative Proposed Action (License Base With Coal-Fired With Gas-Fired With Purchased Renewal)

(Decommissioning)

Generation Generation Power Aesthetic Impacts SMALL - Adopting by SMALL - Not an impact SMALL - The coal-fired SMALL - Steam turbines SMALL to MODERATE - Adopting by reference Category 1 issue evaluated by GElS (NRC power block and the (525 and stacks (approximately reference GElS description of aesthetic findings (Table 4-2, Issues 73, 1996, Section 7.3) foot) exhaust stack would 200 feet tall) would create impacts from alternate technologies

74) be visible from the Edisto visual impacts comparable (NRC 1996, Section 8.2)

River from a moderate to those from existing offsite distance VCSNS facilities (Section 7.2.2.1).

(Section 7.2.2.2).

Cultural Resource Impacts SMALL - SHPO consultation minimizes potential for impact (Section 4.19, Issue 7 1 )

SMALL - Not an impact evaluated by GElS (NRC 1996, Section 7.3)

SMALL - Impacts to cultural resources would be unlikely due to developed nature of the site (Section 7.2.2.1)

SMALL-Widening ROW to accommodate new pipeline could impact cultural resources, if present. But impacts would be mitigated by pre-construction surveys and consultation with SHPO. (Section 7.2.2.2).

SMALL - Adopting by reference GElS description of cultural resource impacts from alternate technologies (NRC 1996, Section 8.2)

SMALL - Environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource. MODERATE Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, any important attribute of the resource. 10 CFR 51, Subpart A, Appendix B, Table B-1, Footnote 3.

Btu

=

British thermal unit MW

=

megawatt ft3

=

cubic foot NOx

=

nitrogen oxide gal

=

gallon PMI0

=

particulates having diameter less than 10 microns GElS =

Generic Environmental Impact Statement (NRC 1996)

SHPO =

State Historic Preservation Officer kWh =

kilowatt hour SO.

=

sulfur dioxide lb

=

pound TSP

=

total suspended particulates MM

=

million yr

=

year

a.

All TSP for gas-fired alternative is PM10.

00 oV

'VEn 4J1

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 9.0 STATUS OF COMPLIANCE 9.1 Proposed Action NRC "The environmental report shall list all Federal permits, licenses, approvals and other entitlements which must be obtained in connection with the proposed action and shall describe the status of compliance with these requirements. The environmental report shall also include a discussion of the status of compliance with applicable environmental quality standards and requirements including, but not limited to, applicable zoning and land-use regulations, and thermal and other water pollution limitations or requirements which have been imposed by Federal, State, regional, and local agencies having responsibility for environmental protection...."

10 CFR 51.45(d) as adopted by 10 CFR 51.53(c)(2) 9.1.1 General Table 9-1 lists environmental authorizations that South Carolina Electric & Gas Company (SCE&G) has obtained for current Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station (VCSNS) operations.

In this context, SCE&G uses "authorizations" to include any permits, licenses, approvals, or other entitlements. SCE&G expects to continue renewing these authorizations during the current license period and through the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) license renewal period.

Based on the new and significant information identification process described in Chapter 5, VCSNS is in compliance with applicable environmental standards and requirements.

Table 9-2 lists additional environmental authorizations and consultations that would be conditions precedent to NRC renewal of the VCSNS license to operate. As indicated, SCE&G anticipates needing relatively few such authorizations and consultations.

Sections 9.1.2 through 9.1.5 discuss some of these items in more detail.

9.1.2 Threatened or Endangered Species Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (16 USC 1531 et seq.) requires federal agencies to ensure that agency action is not likely to jeopardize any species that is listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered. Depending on the action involved, the Act requires consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) regarding effects on non-marine species, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for marine species, or both. FWS and NMFS have issued joint procedural regulations at 50 CFR 402, Subpart B, that address consultation, and FWS maintains the joint list of threatened and endangered species at 50 CFR 17.

Although not required by federal law or NRC regulation, SCE&G has chosen to invite comment from federal and state agencies regarding potential effects that VCSNS license renewal might have. Appendix C includes copies of SCE&G correspondence with FWS Page 9-1

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT and the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR).

SCE&G did not consult with NMFS because species under the auspices of NMFS are not found in the vicinity of VCSNS.

9.1.3 Coastal Zone Management Program The federal Coastal Zone Management Act (16 USC 1451 et seq.) imposes requirements on applicants for a federal license to conduct an activity that could affect a state's coastal zone. VCSNS, located in Fairfield County, is not within the South Carolina coastal zone (Code Laws of South Carolina, Section 48-39-10) and, due to its distance (approximately 90 miles) from the coastal zone, is not expected to affect the South Carolina coastal zone.

Coastal zone management requirements are not applicable to VCSNS license renewal.

9.1.4 Historic Preservation Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 USC 470 et seq.) requires federal agencies having the authority to license any undertaking to, prior to issuing the license, take into account the effect of the undertaking on historic properties and to afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation an opportunity to comment on the undertaking. Council regulations provide for establishing an agreement with any State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) to substitute state review for Committee review (35 CFR 800.7). Although not required of an applicant by federal law or NRC regulation, SCE&G has chosen to invite comment by the South Carolina SHPO. Appendix E includes a copy of SCE&G correspondence with the SHPO regarding potential effects that VCSNS license renewal might have on historic or cultural resources. Based on the SCE&G submittal and other information, the SHPO concurred with SCE&G's conclusion that continued operation of VCSNS would have no effect on historic properties, noting that "these (continuing) operations are usually not associated with new construction or expansion of plant boundaries."

9.1.5 Water Quality (401) Certification Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 401 requires that applicants for a federal license to conduct an activity that might result in a discharge into navigable waters provide the licensing agency a certification from the state that the discharge will comply with applicable CWA requirements (33 USC 1341).

NRC has indicated in its Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal (NRC 1996) that issuance of a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit implies certification by the state.

SCE&G is applying to NRC for license renewal to continue VCSNS operations. Appendix B contains excerpts from the VCSNS NPDES permit.

Consistent with the GEIS, SCE&G is providing the VCSNS NPDES permit as evidence of state water quality (401) certification.

Page 9-2

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 9.2 Alternatives NRC

"...The discussion of alternatives in the report shall Include a discussion of whether the alternatives will comply with such applicable environmental quality standards and requirements."

10 CFR 54.45(d) as adopted by 10 CFR 51.53(c)(2)

The coal, gas, and purchased power alternatives discussed in Section 7.2.1 probably could be constructed and operated to comply with all applicable environmental quality standards and requirements. SCE&G notes that increasingly stringent air quality protection requirements could make the construction of a large fossil-fueled power plant infeasible in many locations. SCE&G also notes that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has revised requirements that could affect the design of cooling water intake structures for new facilities (EPA 2001) and has proposed requirements that could affect modifications at existing facilities (EPA 2002). These requirements could necessitate construction of cooling towers for the coal-and gas-fired alternatives if surface water were used for cooling.

Page 9-3

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 9.3 References Code of Laws of South Carolina.

Section 48-39-10. Chapter 39.

Coastal Tidelands and Wetlands. Available at http:llwww.lpitr/state/sc/us/code/t48cO39/htm. Accessed June 20, 2000.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency).

2001.

"National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System:

Regulations Addressing Cooling Water Intake Structures for New Facilities; Final Rule." Federal Register. Vol. 66, No. 243. December 18.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency).

2002.

"National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System: Proposed Regulations to Establish Requirements for Cooling Water Intake Structures at Phase II Existing Facilities; Proposed Rule." Federal Register. Vol. 67, No. 68.

April 19.

NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1996. Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (GEIS). Volumes 1 and 2. NUREG-1437. Washington, DC. May.

Page 9-4

TABLE 9-1 ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORIZATIONS FOR CURRENT VCSNS OPERATIONS Issue or Agency Authority Requirement Number Expiration Date Activity Covered Federal Requirements to License Renewal U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC)

- Bureau of Water SCDHEC-Bureau of Air Quality SCDHEC Division of Radioactive Waste Management, Bureau of Land and Waste Management Atomic Energy Act (42 USC 2011, et seq.), 10 CFR 50.10 Clean Water Act (33 USC Section 1251 et seq.); Pollution Control Act of South Carolina (S.C. Code Sections 48-1 -10, et seq.)

Pollution Control Act (Sections 48-1-50[5]

and 48-1-11 0[a];

Code of Laws of South Carolina (Regulation 61-62)

Atomic Energy and Radiation Control Act (S.C. Code of Laws, Sections 13-7 40, et seq.)

License to operate Individual Discharge Permit Conditional Major Permit Radioactive Material License NPF-12 SC0030856 CM-1000-0012 Issued on 8/6/82 Expires on 8/6/22 Issued on 10/1/97 Expires on 9/30/02 Issued on 8/10/99 Expires on 7/31/04 No. 517, Amendment Issued on 9/30/99 02 Expires on 9/30/04 Operation of Unit I Contains effluent limits for VCSNS discharges to Monticello Reservoir and the Broad River Establishes emissions limits Authorizes storage of radioactive material in three steam generators removed from service in 1994.

1P t.,

Oil co 0

C',

0

TABLE 9-1 (CONTINUED)

ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORIZATIONS FOR CURRENT VCSNS OPERATIONS Issue or Agency Authority Requirement Number Expiration Date Activity Covered SCDHEC Division of Waste Management Tennessee Dept. of Environment and Conservation Division of Radiological Health South Carolina Radioactive Waste Transportation and Disposal Act (S.C.

Code of Laws 13-7 110 et seq.).

Tennessee Code Annotated 68-202 206 Federal Requirements to License Renewal Radioactive Waste 0163-39-02 Transport Permit License to Ship Radioactive Material T-SCOO 1 -L02 I

I Issued 12/18/01 Expires 12/31/02 ssued 1/1/02 Expires 12/31/02 Authorizes shipment of radioactive waste to licensed collecting/processing facilities within state of South Carolina.

Authorizes shipment of radioactive waste to licensed disposal/processing facilities within state of Tennessee.

CFR

= Code of Federal Regulations SCDHEC = Department of Health and Environmental Control EPA

=

U.S Environmental Protection Agency n

"V0 tv.

°!

0

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT TABLE 9-2 ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORIZATIONS FOR VCSNS LICENSE RENEWAL Agency Authority Requirement Remarks U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Atomic Energy Act License renewal Environmental Report submitted Commission (42 USC 2011 et seq.)

in support of license renewal application U.S. Fish and Wildlife Endangered Species Act Consultation Requires federal agency issuing Service (FWS)

Section 7 a license to consult with FWS (16 USC 1536)

South Carolina Department National Historic Consultation Requires federal agency issuing of Archives and History Preservation Act Section a license to consider cultural 106 impacts and consult with State (16 USC 470f)

Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). SHPO has concurred that license renewal will not affect any sites listed or eligible for listing SCDHEC - Bureau of Clean Water Act Section Certification of Discharges during license Water 401 (33 USC 1341) compliance with renewal term state water quality standards Page 9-7

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT APPENDIX A NRC NEPA ISSUES FOR LICENSE RENEWAL OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS South Carolina Electric & Gas Company (SCE&G) has prepared this Environmental Report in accordance with the requirements of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulation 10 CFR 51.53. NRC included in the regulation a list of National Environmental Policy Act issues for license renewal of nuclear power plants. Table A-1 lists these 92 issues and identifies the section in which SCE&G addressed each issue in the Environmental Report. For expediency, SCE&G has assigned a number to each issue and uses the issue numbers throughout the Environmental Report.

Page A-1

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT TABLE A-1 VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DISCUSSION OF LICENSE RENEWAL NEPA ISSUES2 Issue

1.

Impacts of refurbishment on surface water quality

2.

Impacts of refurbishment on surface water use

3.

Altered current patterns at intake and discharge structures

4.

Altered salinity gradients

5.

Altered thermal stratification of lakes

6.

Temperature effects on sediment transport capacity

7.

Scouring caused by discharged cooling water

8.

Eutrophication

9.

Discharge of chlorine or other biocides

10.

Discharge of sanitary wastes and minor chemical spills I I.

Discharge of other metals in waste water

12.

Water use conflicts (plants with once-through cooling systems)

13.

Water use conflicts (plants with cooling ponds or cooling towers using make-up water from a small river with low flow)

14.

Refurbishment impacts to aquatic resources

15.

Accumulation of contaminants in sediments or biota

16.

Entrainment of phytoplankton and zooplankton

17.

Cold shock

18.

Thermal plume barrier to migrating fish

19.

Distribution of aquatic organisms

20.

Premature emergence of aquatic insects

21.

Gas supersaturation (gas bubble disease)

22.

Low dissolved oxygen in the discharge

23.

Losses from predation, parasitism, and disease among organisms exposed to sublethal stresses

24.

Stimulation of nuisance organisms (e.g., shipworms)

25.

Entrainment of fish and shellfish in early life stages for plants with once-through and cooling pond heat dissipation systems

26.

Impingement of fish and shellfish for plants with once-through and cooling pond heat dissipation systems

27.

Heat shock for plants with once-through and cooling pond heat dissipation systems

28.

Entrainment of fish and shellfish in early life stages for plants with cooling-tower-based heat dissipation systems

29.

Impingement of fish and shellfish for plants with cooling-tower based heat dissipation systems

30.

Heat shock for plants with cooling-tower-based heat dissipation systems

31.

Impacts of refurbishment on groundwater use and quality

32.

Groundwater use conflicts (potable and service water; plants that use < 100 gpm)

33.

Groundwater use conflicts (potable, service water, and dewatering; plants that use> 100 gpm) 1 Category 1

1 1

2 1

1 2

1 1

1 1

1 1

2 1

1 1

2 2

2 1

4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.5 1

1 2

Page A-2 Section of this Environmental Report 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.0 I

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT TABLE A-1 (CONT'D)

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DISCUSSION OF LICENSE RENEWAL NEPA ISSUES2 Section of this Issue Category Environmental Report 2

4.6 2

1 1

1 2

2 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

2 2

1 1

1 1

1 2

34.

Groundwater use conflicts (plants using cooling towers withdrawing make-up water from a small river)

35.

Groundwater use conflicts (Ranney wells)

36.

Groundwater quality degradation (Ranney wells)

37.

Groundwater quality degradation (saltwater intrusion)

38.

Groundwater quality degradation (cooling ponds in salt marshes)

39.

Groundwater quality degradation (cooling ponds at inland sites)

40.

Refurbishment impacts to terrestrial resources

41.

Cooling tower impacts on crops and ornamental vegetation

42.

Cooling tower impacts on native plants

43.

Bird collisions with cooling towers

44.

Cooling pond impacts on terrestrial resources

45.

Power line right-of-way management (cutting and herbicide application)

46.

Bird collisions with power lines

47.

Impacts of electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna (plants, agricultural crops, honeybees, wildlife, livestock)

48.

Floodplains and wetlands on power line right-of-way

49.

Threatened or endangered species

50.

Air quality during refurbishment (non-attainment and maintenance areas)

51.

Air quality effects of transmission lines

52.

Onsite land use

53.

Power line right-of-way land use impacts

54.

Radiation exposures to the public during refurbishment

55.

Occupational radiation exposures during refurbishment

56.

Microbiological organisms (occupational health)

57.

Microbiological organisms (public health) (plants using lakes or canals, or cooling towers or cooling ponds that discharge to a small river)

58.

Noise

59.

Electromagnetic fields, acute effects (electric shock)

60.

Electromagnetic fields, chronic effects

61.

Radiation exposures to public (license renewal term)

62.

Occupational radiation exposures (license renewal term)

63.

Housing impacts

64.

Public services: public safety, social services, and tourism and recreation

65.

Public services: public utilities

66.

Public services: education (refurbishment)

67.

Public services: education (license renewal term)

68.

Offsite land use (refurbishment)

69.

Offsite land use (license renewal term) 2 2

1 2

2 4.7 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.8 4.9 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.10 4.11 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.12 4.0 4.13 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.14 4.0 4.15 4.16 4.0 4.17.1 4.17.2 Page A-3 1

2 NAb 2 1

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

"",BLE A-1 (CONT'D)

VIRGIL IC "MMER NUCLEAR STATION ENVIRON.'.,

rAL REPORT DISCUSSION OF LICENsE RENEWAL NEPA ISSUESa Issue

70.

71.

72.

73.

74.

75.

76.

77.

78.

79.

80.

81.

82.

83.

84.

85.

86.

87.

88.

89.

90.

91.

92.

Public services: transportation Historic and archaeological resources Aesthetic impacts (refurbishment)

Aesthetic impacts (license renewal term)

Aesthetic impacts of transmission lines (license renewal term)

Design basis accidents Severe accidents Offsite radiological impacts (individual effects from other than the disposal of spent fuel and high-level waste)

Offsite radiological impacts (collective effects)

Offsite radiological impacts (spent fuel and high-level waste disposal)

Nonradiological impacts of the uranium fuel cycle Low-level waste storage and disposal Mixed waste storage and disposal Onsite spent fuel Nonradiological waste Transportation Radiation doses (decommissioning)

"Waste management (decommissioning)

Air quality (decommissioning)

Water quality (decommissioning)

Ecological resources (decommissioning)

Socioeconomic impacts (decommissioning)

Environmental justice Category 2

2 1

1 1

1 2

1 1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1

a.

Source: 10 CFR 51, Subpart A, Appendix A, Table B-1. (Issue numbers added to facilitate discussion.)

b.

Not applicable. Regulation does not categorize this issue.

NEPA = National Environmental Policy Act.

Section of this Environmental Report 4.18 4.19 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.20 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.11 Page A-4

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT APPENDIX B NPDES PERMIT The NPDES permit for Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station is approximately 75 pages long. Only the cover page, providing the authority to discharge to Monticello Reservoir and the Broad River, and pages related to the Section 316(a) variance and Section 316(b) determination are provided.

Page B-1

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT D

H E

C PROMOTE PROTECT PROSPER South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit for Discharge to Surface Waters This Permit Certifies That SCE&G Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station has been granted permission to discharge from a facility located at Jenkinsviile, Fairfield County, South Carolina to receiving waters named Monticello Reservoir and Broad River accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements and other conditions set forth in Parts I, 1I, and Mn hereof. This permit is issued in accordance with the provisions of the Pollution Control Act of South Carolina (S.C. Code Sections 48-1-10 et seq., 1976), Regulation 61-9 and with the provisions of the Federal Clean Water Act (PL 92-500), as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., the "Act."

Marion F. Sadler, Jr., Dir-ctr Industrial, Agricultural, and Storm Water Permitting Division Bureau of Water Issued:September 29, 1997 Expires:September 30, 2002 Effective: October 1, 1997 Permit No.: SC0030856 Page B-2

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Page 7 2.0 mg/l (max)

5.

Human Health: 0.05 mg/l

6.

Detection Limit:

0.01 mg/l

7.

-Conclusion:

Based upon sampling data and reasonable potential procedures, no limit for manganese will be proposed.

Flouride

1.

Form 2C Value: 0.123 mg/l

2.

Previous Permit: none

3.

Effluent Guidelines:

Not applicable

4.

Water Quality Criteria:

none

5.

Drinking Water'MCL:

4.0 mg/l

6.

Detection Limit:

0.01 mg/l

7.

==

Conclusion:==

Based upon sampling data and reasonable potential procedures. no limit for flouride will be proposed.

Sulfate

1. Form 2C Value: 6.14 mg/i

2.

Previous Permit: none

3.

Effluent Guidelines:

Not applicable

4.

Water Quality Criteria: none

5.

Drinking Water MCL: 250 mg/l

6.

Detection Limit:

0.005 mg/l

7.

==

Conclusion:==

Based upon sampling data and reasonable potential procedures. no limit for sulfate will be proposed.

Nitrate-nitrite

1. Form 2C Value: 0.36 mg/l

2.

Previous Permit: none

3.

Effluent Guidelines:

Not applicable

4.

Water Quality Criteria: none

5.

Drinking Water MCL: 10 mg/i

6.

Detection Limit:

0.02 mg/l

7.

==

Conclusion:==

Based upon sampling data and reasonable potential

.procedures. no limit for nitrate-nitrite will be proposed.

1. 316(a)

The thermal component of the discharge from this facility is subject to comliance with South Carolina Water Classificatons and Standards (Reg.

61-68). Section D. (8)(a) of the standards stipulates that the water temp erature of all Class A-waters "shall not be increased more than 5°F(2.BT) above natural temperature conditions or exceed a maximum of 900F(32.20C) as a result of the discharge of heated liquids," unless a different temp erature standard has been established, a mixing zone has been established.

or a Section 316(a) determination under the Federal Clean Water Act (the Act) has been completed.

Section 316(a) of the Act allows the permitting authority to impose alternative and less stringent thermal limitations after demonstration that the water quality standards limitations are more Page B-3

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Rationale Page 8 stringent than necessary to assure the protection and propagation of a balanced, indigenous population of shellfish, fish. and wildlife in and on the receiving water.

On April 7. 1975. as a part of permitting activities of the original NPDES permit. SCE&G provided information to support its request that alternative thermal effluent limitations be allowed under Section 316(a) of the Act.

In April 30, 1976. a determination was made that the permittee had submitted adequate information to demonstrate that the alternative limitations for the thermal component of the discharge would assure the protection and propagation of a balanced.

indigenous population of shellfish, fish and wildlife In and on the Monticello Reservoir.

The alternate maximum discharge temperature for Outfall 001 is 45:C(1130F). A maximum thermal plume temperature of 32.20C(90:F) and temperature rise of 1.660C(3.0°F) is also imposed.

On July 1.

1984 a continuation of the 316(a) variance was allowed by the reissuance of the NPDES permit.

On January 3. 1989. a request to continue the variance was included as part of the application for reissuance of the NPDES Permit.

To support the request, the permittee has indicated there has been no change in facility operation and no change in the biological community. A tentative determination was made that continuation of the 316(a) variance was appropiate in the reissuance of this permit.

On April 3. 1997, the permittee submitted an application for reissuance of the permit. A request to continue the 316(a) variance was included as part of the application.

On June 19. 1997, the Department determined that continuance was appropriate.

2. Section 316(b)

Section 316(b) of the Act requires that the location, design.

construction, and capacity of a cooling water intake structure reflect the best technology available for minimizing environmental impact.

On April 19, 1985. a determination was made, in a accordance with Section 316(b) of the Act. that the location, design, construction.

and capacity of the cooling water intake structure(s) reflects the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact.

This determination was based on information submitted by SCE&G in a 316(b) Demonstration (March 1977).

Outfall 002 Outfall 002 consists of house service water for cooling of emergency generators, cooling heat exchangers and reactor building cooling units and is discharged at Page B-4

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT APPENDIX C SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES CORRESPONDENCE Letter Byrne, SCE&G, to Holling, SCDNR Holling, SCDNR, to Byrne, SCE&G Byrne, SCE&G, to Banks, USF&WS Duncan, USF&WS, to Summer, SCE&G Page C-1 Page C-2 C-9 C-14 C-21

", VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT January 19, 2001 RC-01-0003 A SCANA COMPANY Ms. Julie Holing Data Manager Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries Division South Carolina Heritage Trust Program South Carolina Dept. of Natural Resources P.O. Box 167 Columbia, SC 29202 Stephen A. Byrne Vice President Nuclear Operations B03 345 4622 South Cololmo Electr( & Gas Co Vfgil C. Summer 'ucIleo Station P 0 Box 88 Jenknsvwlle, South Carolino 29065 803,345 4344 803.345 5209

.*,vw scara corn

Subject:

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION LICENSE RENEWAL REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON LISTED SPECIES AND IMPORTANT HABITATS South Carolina Electnc and Gas Company (SCE&G) is preparing an application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to renew the operating license for Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, which expires in August 2022. SCE&G intends to submit this application for license renewal in August 2002. As part of the license renewal process, the NRC requires license applicants to "assess the impact of the proposed action on threatened or endangered species in accordance with the Endangered Species Act" (10 CFR 51.53). The NRC will consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and may also seek your assistance in the identification of important species and habitats in the project area. By contacting you in advance, we hope to identify any issues that need to be addressed or information required to expedite the NRC's consultation.

SCE&G has operated Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station (Summer Station) and associated transmission lines since 1982. Summer Station is in Fairfield County, South Carolina, approximately 15 miles southwest of the town of Winnsboro and approximately 26 miles northwest of Columbia (latitude 34.295833; longitude 81 320278) (see Figure 2-1)

The plant lies on the south shore of Monticello Reservoir (see Figure 2-2), which serves as its cooling water source and heat sink The Summer Station property (Figure 2-3) is defined as the area within approximately one mile of the reactor building and includes the southern portion of Monticello Reservoir. It totals approximately 2,200 acres.

SCE&G, which owns two-thirds of the plant, built eight transmission lines for the specific purpose of connecting Summer Station to the regional transmission system (see Figure 3-3). South Carolina Public Service Authority (commonly referred to as "Santee Cooper"), owner of the remaining one-third of the plant, built two additional lines to connect to the regional grid. Beginning at Summer Station, the SCE&G lines NUCLEAR EXCELLENCE - A SUMMER TRADITION!

Page C-2

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Ms. Julie Holing, SCDNR Page 2 of 2 generally run in a southerly direction, with five terminations very near Summer Station; one near Aiken, South Carolina; and two near Columbia (see Figure 3-2). The Santee Cooper lines run roughly east and west to substations near Blythewood and Newberry, South Carolina, respectively.

SCE&G is committed to the conservation of significant natural habitats and protected species, and believes that operation of Summer Station and its transmission lines since 1982 has had no

-adverse impact on any threatened or endangered species. Only one listed species, the bald eagle, is known to occur in the vicinity of Summer Station. Bald eagles are commonly observed foraging around Monticello Reservoir, Parr Reservoir, and on the Broad River downstream of Parr Shoals dam. There were two active bald eagle nests on Parr Reservoir in 1999-2000, one on the Cannons Creek arm of the reservoir (approximately 2 miles east of the station) and one on the Hellers Creek arm of the reservoir (approximately 4 miles northeast of the station).

SCE&G has no plans to alter current operations over the license renewal period. Any maintenance activities necessary to support license renewal would be limited to previously disturbed areas. No major expansion of existing facilities is planned, and no additional land disturbance is anticipated in support of license renewal. As a consequence, we believe that operation of the plant, including maintenance of the transmission lines, over the license renewal period (an additional 20 years) would not adversely affect any threatened or endangered species. Although SCE&G has not identified any rare plants in the transmission corridors, control of woody vegetation in these corridors could provide habitat for rare plants and animals that depend on open conditions (grassland and bog-type habitats) that are maintained by regular mowing and selective application of approved herbicides.

We would appreciate your providing us with any information you may have about any State or Federally listed species or ecologically significant habitats that may occur on the 2,200-acre Summer Station site or along associated transmission corridors by March 1, 2001. This will enable us to meet our application preparation schedule. We will include a copy of this letter and your response in the license renewal application that we submit to the NRC. Please inform Mr. Stephen E. Summer at (803) 345-4252 if you have any questions or require any additional information to review this action.

Very truly yours, Stephen A. Byrne SES/SAB attachments c:

R. B. Clary (800)

W. R. Higgins (830)

P. R. Moore (Tetra Tech NUS)

File (821.01)

DMS (RC-01-0003)

Page C-3

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DRAFT LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION V.C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION 10 0

10 20 Kilomelers 10 0

10 20 MWes LEGEND V C. Summer Nuclear Station 50 mile radius of V C Summer Interstates Major roads County Boundaries D

State Boundary Lakes and Rivers M*,nr L Jrhn Arp*q FIGURE 2-1 V.C. Summer Nuclear Station, 50-Mile Locational Vicinity Map LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION Page C-4

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DRAFT LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION V.C. SUMMINER NUCLEAR STATION N

1 0

1 2

3 KkIometers 0

1 2

3 Mils LEGEND M

Six mile radius of V.C. Summer Interstates Major roads Minor roads SCounty Boundaries Lakes and Rivers FIGURE 2-2 V.C. Summer Nuclear Station, 6-Mile Vicinity Map LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION Page C-5

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT FOR LICENSE RENEWAL

, VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION a)

° Z

co coo 01 0

ME 2

2._u 0

0 CIS

,,lT,--lqi Cf, f0 Page C-6

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DRAFT LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION V.C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION 10 0

10 20 I0omneters 10 0

10 20 Wiles LEGEND V C Summer Nuclear Station A

Substations

ransmisSon tLines 50 mde radius of V C Summer Intestates Major roads County Boundaries S state Boundary Lakes and Rivers National Forests FIGURE 3-2 V.C. Summer Nuclear Station, 50-Mile Transmission Line Map LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION Page C-7

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DRAFT LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION V.C. SUMM~ER NUCLEAR STATION

-Z Sub-impoundment 1

0 1 2 3

Kometes I

0 1

2 3K Mometems 1

0 I

2 3MWas LEGEND A

Substations

/

• • /

Transmission Lines SiSx mile radius of V C Summer Interstates

/\\

Major roads Minor roads SCounty Boundaries 1 Lakes and Rivers FIGURE 3-3 V.C. Summer Nuclear Station, 6-Mile Transmission Line Map LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION Page C-8

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 2-20-0o,'2 s8PM.

.345 4355 2/

6 South Carolina Department of Natural Resources Paul A. Sandifer, Ph.D.

Director February 15, 2001 William S. McTeer Deputy Director for Stephen A. Byrne, Vice President, Nuclear Operations Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheres SCE&G, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station P.O. Box 88 JenkinsvXle, SC 29065 RE:

Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station License Renewal Request for Information on iUsted Species and Important Habitats

Dear Mr. Byrne,

I have checked our database, and there are no occurrences of any federally or state threatened or endangered species within one mile of the project area. There arc a number of known Bald Eagle nesting sites within a five mile radius. I've included a map indicating those locations for your information. Please understand that our database does not represent a comprehensive biological inventory of the state. Field work remains the responsibility of the investigator.

As an indication of other potential occurrences in the area, I have enclosed the lists of rare and endangered species for Fairfield, Newberry, and Richland counties. The highhighted ones are of legal significance. The remaining species on the list are of concern in the state.

If you need additional assistance, please contact me by phone at 803/734-3917 or by e mail at JulieH@scdnr.state.sc.us.

Sinc-erely, SC Department of Natural Resources Heritage Trust Program Page C-9,

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 2-20-01-.12=58PM,

.345 435a Legend N

Eagle Ned sttes W+

E I

0 1

Page C-10 3/

8 2 Miles

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 2-20-0.12

MSPM, RARE.

TIIREATENED, AND) ENDk\\GERErJ SPECIES or FAIRFIELD EOLNTY STATUS..

GRANM.

ANIMALS*

Sc FT/SE SC SC SC G3 G4 G5 G5 G4 PLANTS.

SC SC SC RC SC SC SC SC SC NC G2G3 G4 G4 G5 G3 G4 G5 G5 G4 G3

. SRANK... SCIENTIFIC NAME S9 S2 S?

S4 S?

S?

S?

S?

SI S2 S?

S?

S?

S2 ETHEOSTOUA COLLIS HALIAEETUS LEUCOCEPIALUS PYGANODON CATARACTA SCIURUS NIGER VILLOSA DELUMBIS ASTER GEORGIANUS CAREX OLIGOCARPA DIRCA PALUSTRIS FRASERA CAROLINIENSIS ISOETES PIEDMONTANA MINUARTIA UNIFLORA OSMORHIZA CLAYTONI I PIllLADELPhUS I(IRSUTUS SCIJTELLARIA PARVULA SEDUM PUSILLUM COMMON NAME............

CAROLINA DARTER BALD EAGLE EASTERN FLOATER EASTERN FOX SQUIRREL EASTERN CREEKSHELL GEORGIA ASTER EASTERN FEW-FRUIT SEDGE EASTERN LEATHERWOOD COLUMBO PIEDMONT QUILLWORT ONE-FLOWER STITC19ORT HAIRY SWEET-CICELY STREAMBANK MOCK-ORANGE SMALL SKULLCAP GRANITE ROCK STONECROP Page C-1I

345 4356 w

4/

6

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 2-20-01.12 58PM.

.345 4358 5/

6 RARFs. ThRFATENED. AND MrDANrFRFD WPPCIR OF I.FXINTGTO COU7NTY STATU... GRANK.

... SRANIL.

. SCIENTIFIC NAMdE...................... COMON MAM................

ANIMALS' FT/SB G4 S2 IIALIAEEflS LEUCOEPHALUS BALD EAGLE SC G2 S?

HETEROIDON SINES SOUTHERN~

HOGNOSE SNAKE SC GS 52 VIICKCUS FULVIUS EASTERN CORAL SNAKE FE/SE G3 S2 PICOIDES BOREALIS RED-COCKADED WOODPECKER SC G5 Sl SCIURUS NIGER EASTERN FOX SQUIRREL SC GS S?

SEIINATRIX PYGAEA BLACK SIAMP SNAKE PLANTS Sc GST3T4 SI ANDROPOGCN PERANCUSTATUS NARROW LEAVED BLUESTEM SC G4?

S?

ARISTIDA COND ENS ATA PIEDMONT ThfREE-AVNED GRASS SC G4 SI ASPLENIUM PINNATIFIDUII LODBED SPLEENWORT SC G4G5 S?

BfLRMANNIA BIFLORA NORTHERN4 BVRMADB4IA SC G4 SI CAREX COLLINSII COLLINS' SEDGE SC G4GS SlS2 CORYSOKA PAUCIFLOSCULOSA, WOODY GOLDENROD SC G3G5 5?

COREOPSIS GLAIIIATA SOUT'HEASTERN TICKSEED SC GS Si EUONYIIJS ATROPURPUREUS WAHOO SC G4 5?

CAYLUSSACIA I4OSIERI WOOLLY-BERRY NC G2Q S2 HYMEN0CALLIS CORONARIA SHOALS SPIDE:R-LILY SC G4 S?

HYPERICUM NITID4JM CAROLINA ST. JCW~ S-WORT SC G4 S3 ILEX AMELANCHIER SARVIS HOLLY SC G304 S?

LIATRIS IJICROCEPHALA SMALL-HEAD GAYFEATHER SC G?

S?

LOBELIA SP 1 LOBELIA SC G3 5?

LYCOPIIS (TIKERI CAROLINA BUGLEW EED SC GS S?

MENISPERMUM CANADENSE CANAA MOONSEED RC G3 S2 M19IDPHYI+/-IJIA LAXLUl PIEDMONT WATER-MILFOIL SC CG3G S?

NOLINA GEODRGIANA GEORGIA BEARGRASS SC G3 Sl OXYPOLIS TERNATA PIEDMONT COWBAKE SC G4 S?

PITYC4PSIS PINIFOLIA PINE-L.EAVED GOLDEN ASTER SC GS SIS2 POLYGALA NANA DWARF MILKWORT SC GS SI FJIYNCIIOSPORA ALBA WHITE BEAXRUSII SC G3G4 5?

RHYNCHOSPORA, INUNDATA DROWNED FIORNEDRUSH G3 SR RHYIKTIOSPORA LEPTOCARPA SC G4 S?

RHYNLTIOSPORA STENOI'HYLLA CHAPWA BEAKRUSII SC GS S?

RGRIPPA SESSILIFLORA STALKLESS YELLOWCRESS SC G3G4 52 SAGITTARIA ISOETIFORMIS SLENDER ARROW-HEAD SC G3 SI SARRACENIA RUBRA SWEET PITCHER-PLANT SC G4G5 S?

SCIRFUS SUBTERIRINALIS WATER BULRUSH NC GIG2 Si SI'OROBOLIIS TERETIFOLIIIS WIRE-LEAVED DROPSEED SC G4T2T3 SI.

STYLISKA PICEERINGNI VAR PICKERINGII PICKERINGS MORNING-GLORY SC G3?

5?

TRIDENS CAROLINIANUS CAROLINA FLUFF GRASS NC G4GSTl 51 YACCINIUM CRASSIFOLIUII SS? SEMdPERVIRENiS RAYNER S BLUEBERRY SC G3 S?

XYRIS CRAI'MANI I

CIIYAPUN S YELLOW-EVER)

GRASS Page C-12

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 2-20-01; 12: 58PM.

RARF THRFAFENEb.

AND INDANGERED SPFCIES OF,KEWBERRY CflflTd STATUS..

GRANK.. SRANK... SCIENTIFIC NAME COMON NAME..................

ANIMALS:

DISTOCAMBARUS YOUNGINERI ELLIPTIO LANCEOLATA HALIAEETUS LEUCOCEPEALUS URSUS AMERICANUS DIRCA PALUSTRIS EUPATORIUM FISTULOSUM FRASERA CAROLINIENS IS HETERANTHEIRA RENIFORMIS LIPARIS LILIIFOLIA MAGNOLIA PYRAMIDATA KONOTROPSIS ODORATA VIOLA PUBESCENS VAR LEIOCARPON A CRAYFISH YELLOW LANCE BALD EAGLE BLACK BEAR EASTERN LEATHERWOOD HOLLOW JOE-PYE WEED COLUMBO KIDN'FYLEAF MUD-PLANTAIN LARGE TWAYBLADE PYRAMID MAGNOLIA SWEET PINESAP YELLOW VIOLET Page C-13

.345 4355 0

a/, 6 Sc SC FU/SE SC Cl Si G2G3 S?

04 S2 G5 S3?

PLANTS:

SC Sc RC SC SC RC RC Sc G4 GS?

G5 G5 G5 G4 (53 GST5 S?

S?

st S?

S?

S?

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT January 19, 2001 RC-01-0004 A SCANA COMPANY Mr. Roger Banks Field Supervisor U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service P 0. Box 12559 217 Fort Jackson Road Charleston, SC 29202

Dear Mr Banks:

Stephen A. Byrne Vice President Nuclear Operations 8033454622 Sou'h rmohno Elecric & Gcs Co Virgil C SLrrncr 'u([eat Stohior P 0 Bo* 83

'ernkiqsde, Souih Carolinc 29065 8C3 345 4344 803345 5209

-"III :cQ[1O Grnl

Subject:

VIRGIL C SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION LICENSE RENEWAL REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON LISTED SPECIES AND IMPORTANT HABITATS South Carolina Electric and Gas Company (SCE&G) is preparing an application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to renew the operating license for Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, which expires in August 2022. SCE&G intends to submit this application for license renewal in August 2002. As part of the license renewal process, the NRC requires license applicants to "assess the impact of the proposed action on threatened or endangered species in accordance with the Endangered Species Act" (10 CFR 51.53). The NRC will consult with your office under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act to determine if any listed species or critical habitat occurs in the project area By contacting you in advance, we hope to identify any issues that need to be addressed or information required to expedite the NRC's consultation.

SCE&G has operated Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station (Summer Station) and associated transmission lines since 1982. Summer Station is in Fairfield County, South Carolina, approximately 15 miles southwest of the town of Winnsboro and approximately 26 miles northwest of Columbia (latitude 34 295833; longitude 81.320278) (see Figure 2-1). The plant lies on the south shore of Monticello Reservoir (see Figure 2-2), which serves as its cooling water source and heat sink The Summer Station property (Figure 2-3) is defined as the area within approximately one-mile of the reactor building and includes the southern portion of Monticello Reservoir. It totals approximately 2,200 acres SCE&G, which owns two-thirds of the plant, built eight transmission lines for the specific purpose of connecting Summer Station to the regional transmission system (see Figure 3-3). South Carolina Public Service Authority (commonly referred to as "Santee Cooper"), owner of the remaining one-third of the plant, built two additional lines to connect to the regional gnd Beginning at Summer Station, the SCE&G lines generally run in a southerly direction, with five terminations very near Summer Station; one near Aiken, South Carolina, and two near Columbia (see Figure 3-2)

NUCLEAR EXCELLENCE - A SUMMER TRADITION!

Page C-14

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Mr. Roger Banks, USFWS Page 2 of 2 The Santee Cooper lines run roughly east and west to substations near Blythewood and Newberry, South Carolina, respectively.

SCE&G is committed to the conservation of significant natural habitats and protected species, and believes that operation of the station and its trarnsmission lines since 1982 has had no adverse impact on any threatened or endangered species. Only one Federally-listed species, the bald eagle, is known to occur in the vicinity of Summer Station. Bald eagles are commonly observed foraging around Monticello Reservoir, Parr Reservoir, and on the Broad River downstream of Parr Shoals dam. There were two active bald eagle nests on Parr Reservoir in 1999-2000, one on the Cannons Creek arm of the reservoir (approximately 2 miles east of the station) and one on the Hellers Creek arm of the reservoir (approximately 4 miles northeast of the station)

SCE&G has no plans to alter current operations over the license renewal period Any maintenance activities necessary to support license renewal would be limited to previously disturbed areas. No major expansion of existing facilities is planned, and no additional land disturbance is anticipated in support of license renewal. As a consequence, we believ6 that operation of Summer Station, including maintenance of the transmission lines, over the license renewal period (an additional 20 years) would not adversely affect any threatened or endangered species.

We would appreciate your providing us with any information you may have about any threatened or endangered species or ecologically significant habitats that may occur on the 2,200-acre Summer Station site or along associated transmission corridors by March 1, 2001.

This will enable us to meet our application preparation schedule We will include a copy of this letter and your response in the license renewal application that we submit to the NRC. Please call Mr. Stephen E. Summer at (803) 345-4252 if you have any questions or require any additional information to review the proposed action.

- Very truly yours, Stephen A. Byrne SES/SAB attachments

c.

R. B. Clary (800)

W. R. Higgins (830)

P. R Moore (Tetra Tech NUS)

File (821.01)

DMS (RC-01-0004)

Page C-15

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DRAFT LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION V.C. SULMMER NUCLEAR STATION 10 0

10 20 Kilometem 10 0

10 20 Mies LEGEND

• V C Summer Nuclear Station 50 mile radius of V C Summer Interstates Major roads County Boundaries S state Boundary Lakes and Rivers Mainr I Irhan Aroaq FIGURE 2-1 V.C. Summer Nuclear Station, 50-Mile Locational Vicinity Map LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION Page C-16

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DRAFT LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION V.C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION 1

0 1

2 3

oM~

1 0

1 2

3 Mi.s LEGEND M Six mile radius of V.C. Summer Interstates Major roads Minor roads SCounty Boundaries

- Lakes and Rivers FIGURE 2-2 V.C. Summer Nuclear Station, 6-Mile Vicinity Map LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION Page C-17

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT FOR LICENSE RENEWAL VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION o

o 0

cz oo du 04 0

c0 0)9 00 0 u 5~3

~

-H Page C-18

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DRAFT LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION V.C. SUMNMER NUCLEAR STATION 10 0

10 20 Kilometers 10 0

10 20 Miles LEGEND VC Summer Nuclear Station A Substations Transmnission Lines 50 role radius of V C Summer Interstates Major roads County Boundares D

State Boundary Lakes and Rivers National Forests FIGURE 3-2 V.C. Summer Nuclear Station, 50-Mile Transmission Line Map LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION Page C-19

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DRAFT LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION V.C. SUNMER NUCLEAR STATION 1

0 1

2 3 Kjlomters 0

1 2

3 Mies LEGEND A

Substations

/ \\/

Transmission Lines

'*Six mile radius of V C. Summer Interstates Major roads Minor roads SCount Boundanes

_ Lakes and Rivers FIGURE 3-3 V.C. Summer Nuclear Station, 6-Mile Transmission Line Map LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION Page C-20

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E -ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Original Message6-...

From: LoriDuncan@fws.gov [1]

Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 12:45 PM To: ssummer@scana.com Cc: SteveGilbert@fws.gov; JasonAyers@fws.gov

Subject:

Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station License Renewal Please find attached a Word Perfect document with the Federally listed and candidate species and species of concern for South Carolina. Please use this list to aid you in analyzing potential impacts your project may have on these species. Thank you.

(See attached file: listetcsc.wpd)

Lori A.W. Duncan U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 176 Croghan Spur Road, Suite 200 Charleston, South Carolina 29407 (843) 727-4707 ext. 21 (843) 727-4218 fax Ioriduncan@fws.gov Page C-21

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT South Carolina Distribution Records of Endangered, Threatened, Candidate and Species of Concern March 8, 2001 E

Federally endangered T

Federally threatened P

Proposed in the Federal Register CH Critical Habitat C

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service has on file sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threat(s) to support proposals to list these species S/A Federally protected due to similarity of appearance to a listed species SC Federal Species of concern. These species are rare or limited in distribution but are not currently legally protected under the Endangered Species Act.

Contact the National Marine Fisheries Service for more information on this species These lists should be used only as a guideline, not as the final authority The lists include known occurrences and areas where the species has a high possibility of occurring. Records are updated continually and may be different from the following County Common Name Scientific Name Status Occurrence Bald eagle Georgia aster Bald eagle Wood stork Red-cockaded woodpecker Shortnose sturgeon Relict trillium Piedmont bishop-weed Smooth coneflower Dwarf burhead Bog spicebush Carolina bogmint Gopher frog Pickering's morning-glory Rafinesque's big-eared bat Shoals spider-lily Bald eagle Wood stork Red-cockaded woodpecker Shortnose sturgeon Smooth coneflower Canby's dropwort Awned meadowbeauty Boykin's lobelia False coco Yellow lampmussel Savannah lilliput Haliaeetus leucocephalus Aster georgianus Haliaeetus leucocephalus Myctena americana Picoides borealis Acipenser brevirostrum Trillium reliquum Ptilimoium nodosum Echmnacea laevigata Echinodorus parvulus Lindera subcoriacea Macbridea carohniana Rana capito Stylisma pickenngii var.

pickeringii Corynorhinus rafinesquii Hymenocalhs coronana Haliaeetus leucocephalus Mycteria americana Picoides borealis Actpenser brevirostrum Echinacea laevigata Oxypolis canbyt Rhexia anstosa Lobelia boykinfi Pteroglossaspis ecristata Lampsilis canosa Toxolasma pullus Page C-22 Abbeville Aiken Allendale T

C T

E E

E E

E E

SC SC SC SC SC SC SC T

E E

E E

E SC SC SC SC SC Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Possible Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT County Common Name Anderson Bamberg Barnwell Bald eagle Smooth coneflower Carolina darter Wood stork Red-cockaded woodpecker Canby's dropwort Dwarf burhead Awned meadowbeauty Boykin's lobelia Chapman's sedge Bald eagle Wood stork Red-cockaded woodpecker Shortnose sturgeon Smooth coneflower Pondberry Canby's dropwort Piedmont bishop-weed American chaffseed Dwarf burhead Awned meadowbeauty Bog spicebush Boykin's lobelia Carolina bogmint Creeping St John's wort Gopher frog Sandhills milk-vetch Yellow lampmussel Scientific Name Halaeetus leucocephalus Echinacea laevigata Etheostoma coltis Mycteria amencana Picoides borealis Oxypohs canbyi Echinodorus parvulus Rhexia artstosa Lobeha boykinhi Carex chapmann Hahaeetus leucocephalus Mycteria americana Picoides borealhs Acipenser brevirostrum*

Echinacea laevigata Undera melissifolta Oxypolis canbyi Ptihmnium nodosum Schwalbea amencana Echinodorus parvulus Rhexia anstosa Lindera subconacea Lobeha boykinh Macbridea caroliniana Hypencum adpressum Rana capito Astragalus michauxii Lampsilis cariosa West Indian manatee Trichechus manatus Finback whale Balaenoptera physalus*

Humpback whale Megaptera novaeanqliae*

Northern right whale Eubaleana glacialis*

-Sei whale Balaenoptera borealis*

Sperm whale Physeter catodon*

Bald eagle Hahaeetus leucocephatus Wood stork Mycteria amencana Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis Piping plover Charadnus melodus Kemp's ridley sea turtle Lepidochelys kempli*

Leatherback sea turtle Dermochelys coriacea*

Loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta Green sea turtle Chelonia mydas*

Flatwoods salamander Ambystoma cingulaturn Shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum*

E Known E

Known E

Known E

Known E

Known E

Known T

Known E

Known E

Known T/PCH Known E

Known E

Known T

Known T

Known T

Known E

Known Page C-23 Status Occurrences T

Known E

Known SC Known E

Possible E

Possible E

Known SC Known SC Known SC Known

'SC Known T

Known E

Possible E

Known E

Known E

Known E

Possible E

Known E

Known E

Possible Sc Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known Beaufort

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT County Common Name Pondberry Canby's dropwort Chaff-seed Dusky shark Sand tiger shark Night shark Speckled hind Jewfish Warsaw grouper Nassau grouper Cupgrass Pondspice Southeastern myots Scientific Name Lindera mehrssifoho Oxypolis canbyi Schwalbea americana Carcharhtnus obscurus*

Odontaspis taurus" Carchannus signatus*

Epinephelus drumrnondhayi*

E. it,]ara*

E. nigntus*

E. stnatus*

Enochloa michauxil Litsea aestivalis Myotis austronpanus Berkeley West Indian manatee Trichechus manatus Bald eagle Hahaeetus leucocephatus Wood stork Mycteria americana Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis Loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta Flatwoods salamander Ambystoma crngulatum Shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum*

Pondberry Lindera melissifolha Canby's dropwort Oxypolis canbyi Chaff-seed Schwalbea americana Awned meadowbeauty Rhexia aristosa Boykin's lobelia Lobelia boykindi Chapman's sedge Carex chapmanii False coco Pteroglossaspis ecristata Gopher frog Rana capito Incised groovebur Agrimonia incisa Least trillium Trillium pusillum var. pusillum Pineland plantain Plantago sparsitlora Pondspice Litsea aestivalis Rafinesque's big-eared bat Corynorhinus rafinesqud Sun-facing coneflower Rudbeckia heliopsidis County Common Name Scientific Name Beaufort (cont.)

Bald eagle Haliaeefus leucocephalus Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis Shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum' Least trillium Trillium pusdlium var. pusillum T

Known E

Possible E

Known SC Known Page C-24 Status Occurrences E

Known E

Possible E

Known C

Possible C

Possible C

Possible C

Possible C

Possible C

Possible C

Possible SC Known SC Known SC Known E

Possible T

Known E

Known E

Known T

Known T

Known E

Known E

Known E

Known E

Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known Status Occurrences Calhoun

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT County Common Name West Indian manatee Finback whale Humpback whale Northern right whale Sei whale Sperm whale Bald eagle Bachman's warbler Wood stork Red-cockaded woodpecker Piping plover Kemp's ridley sea turtle Leatherback sea turtle Loggerhead sea turtle Green sea turtle Flatwoods salamander Shortnose sturgeon Sea-beach amaranth Canby's dropwort Pondberry Chaff-seed Dusky shark Sand tiger shark Night shark Speckled hind Jewfish Warsaw grouper Nassau grouper Bachman's sparrow Boykin's lobelia Gopher frog Island glass lizard Incised groovebur Pondspice Rafinesque's big-eared bat Southeastern myotis Sweet pinesap Venus' fly-trap Dwarf-flowered heartleaf Georgia aster Southeastern myotis Scientific Name Trichechus manatus Balaenoptera physalus*

Megaptera novaeanqltae*

Eubaleana glaciahs*

Balaenoptera borealis*

Physeter catodon*

Hahacotus leucocephalus Vermivora bachmanYi Mycteria americana Picoides borealis Charadnus melodus Lepidochelys kemph*

Dermochelys coriacea*

Caretta caretta Chelon/a mydas*

Ambystoma cingulatum A cipenser brevirostrum*

Amaranthus pumilus Oxypolis canbyi Lindera melissifolia Schwalbea amencana Carcharhinus obscurus*

Odontaspis taurus*

Carchannus signatus Epinephelus drummondhayl*

E itqara*

E. nigritus*

E striatus*

Aimophila aestivahs Lobeha boykinii Rana capito Ophisaurus compressus Agnmorna incisa Litsea aestivalis Corynorhinus rafinesquii Myotis austroripanus Monotropsis odorata Dionaea muscipula Hexastylts naniflora Aster georgianus Myotis austroripanus Status Occurrences E

Known E

Known E

Known E

Known E

Known E-Known T

Known E

Known E

Known E

Known T/CH Known E

Known E

Known T

Known T

Known T

Known E

Known T

Known E

Possible E

Possible E

Known C

Possible C

Possible C

Possible C

Possible C

Possible C

Possible C

Possible SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known T

Known C

Known SC Known Bald eagle Hahaeetus leucocephalus Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis Georgia aster Aster georgianus Shoals spider-lily Hymenocallis coronaria Page C-25 Charleston Cherokee Chester T

E C

SC Known Possible Known Known

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT County Common Name Scientific Name Status Occurrences Bald eagle Red-cockaded woodpecker Shortnose sturgeon Carolina heelsplitter Carolina dropseed Pine or Gopher snake Spring-flowering goldenrod Well's pixie-moss Wire-leaved dropseed Bald eagle Red-cockaded woodpecker Shortnose sturgeon Canby's dropwort Chaff-seed Awned meadowbeauty Boykin's lobelia Creeping St. John's wort Dwarf burhead False coco Bald eagle Wood stork Red-cockaded woodpecker Piping plover Kemp's ndley sea turtle Leatherback sea turtle Loggerhead sea turtle Green sea turtle Shortnose sturgeon Pondberry Canby's dropwort Dusky shark Sand tiger shark Night shark Speckled hind Jewfish Warsaw grouper Nassau grouper Carolina bird-in-a-nest Crested fringed orchid Island glass lizard Pondspice Hahaeetus leucocephalus Picoides borealis Acipenser brevrostrum*

Lasmigona decorata Sporobolus spi Pituophts melanoleucus Sohdago verna Pyxidanthera brevifolia Sporobolus teretifolhus Haliaeetus leucocephalus Picoides borealis Acipenser brevirostruwm*

Oxypolis canbyi Schwalbea amencana Rhexia aristosa Lobeha boykinit Hypencum adpressum Echinodorus parvulus Pteroglossaspis ecristata Haliaeetus leucocephalus Mycteria americana Picoides borealis Charadrius melodus Lepidochelys kempti*

Dermochelys conacea Caretta caretta Chelonia mydas*

A cipenser brevirostrumi*

Lindera melissifolia Oxypohs canbyi Carcharhinus obscurus*

Odontaspis taurus*

Carcharinus stgnatus*

Epinephelus drummondhayi E. itiara*

E. nigritus*

E. stnatus*

Macbridea carohniana Pteroglossaspis ecnstata Ophisaurus compressus Litsea aestivalis Page C-26 Chesterfield Clarendon Colleton T

E E

E SC SC SC SC SC T

E E

E E

SC SC Sc SC SC T

E E

T/PCH E

E T

T E

E E

C C

C C

C C

C SC SC SC SC Known Known Possible Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Possible Known Possible Possible Possible Possible Possible Possible Possible Known Known Known Known

"VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT County Common Name Scientific Name Status Occurrences Red-cockaded woodpecker Shortnose sturgeon Rough-leaved loosestrife Awned meadowbeauty Carolina bogmint Georgia lead-plant Rafinesque's big-eared bat Sandhills milkvetch Spring-flowering goldenrod Well's pixie-moss White false-asphodel Bald eagle Red-cockaded woodpecker Shortnose sturgeon Carolina bogmint Falso coco Pine barrens bonneset Bald eagle Wood stork Red-cockaded woodpecker Shortnose sturgeon Pondberry Canby's dropwort Bog asphodel False coco Gopher frog Least trillium Pineland plantain Rafinesque's big-eared bat Southeastern myotis Bald eagle Red-cockaded woodpecker Carolina heelsplitter Miccosukee gooseberry Relict trillium Georgia aster Brook floater Shoals spider-lily Yellow lampmussel Fairfield Bald eagle Georgia aster Carolina darter Picoides borealis A cipenser brevirostrum Lysimachia asperulaefolia Rhexia aristosa Macbrdea caroliniana Amorpha georgiana var.

georgiana Corynorhinus raflnesquii Astragalus michauxii Solidago vema Pyxidanthera brevifolia Tofieldia glabra Halaeetus leucocephalus Picoides borealis Acipenser brevirostrum*

Macbridea carohinana Pteroglossaspis ecristata Eupatonum restnosum Haliaeetus leucocephalus Myctena amencana Picoides borealis Acipenser brevirostrum*

Lindera melissifolia Oxypohs canbyi Narthecium americanum Pteroglossaspis ecristata Rana capito Tnllum pusillum var. pusillum Plantago sparsiflora Corynorhinus rafinesquil Myotis austronparius Haliaeetus leucocephalus Picoides borealis Lasmigona decorata Ribes echinellum Trillium reliquum Aster georgianus A/asmidonta vancosa Hymenocallis coronaria Lam psdis cariosa Haliaeetus leucocephalus Aster georgianus Etheostoma collis E

E E

SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC T

E E

SC SC SC T

E E

E E

E C

SC SC SC SC SC SC T

E E

T E

C SC SC SC Known Possible Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Possible Known Known Known Known Possible Known Possible Known Possible Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Possible Known Known Known Known Known Darlington (cont.)

Dillon Dorchester Edgefield T

Known C

Known SC Known Page C-27

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT County Common Name Florence Bald eagle Red-cockaded woodpecker Shortnose sturgeon Chaffseed Carolina bogmint Georgia lead-plant Ovate catchfly Georgetown West Indian manatee Finback whale Humpback whale Northern right whale Sei whale Sperm whale Bald eagle Red-cockaded woodpecker Wood stork Piping plover Kemp's ridley sea turtle Leatherback sea turtle Loggerhead sea turtle Green sea turtle Shortnose sturgeon Sea-beach amaranth Pondberry Canby's dropwort Chaffseed Dusky shark Sand tiger shark Night shark Speckled hind Jewfish Warsaw grouper Nassau grouper Awned meadowbeauty Bachman's sparrow Carolina pygmy sunfish Carolina grass-of-parnassus Dune bluecurls One-flower balduina Pineland plantain Pondspice Reclined meadow-rue Wire-leaved dropseed Venus' fly-trap Scientific Name Halaeetus leucocephalus Picoides borealis Acipenser brevirostrum*

Schwalbea americana Macbndea carohniana Amorpha georgiana var.

georgiana Silene ovata Trichechus manutus Balaenoptera physalus*

Megaptera novaeanqltae*

Eubaleana glaciahis*

Balaenoptera borealis*

Physeter catodon*

Halaeetus leucocephalus Picoides borealis Mycteria amencana Charadrius melodus Lepidochelys kempfi*

Dermochelys coriacea*

Caretta caretta Chelonia mydas*

Acipenser brevirostrum*

Amaranthus pumilus Lindera melissifolia Oxypolis canbyl Schwalbea americana Carcharhinus obscurus*

Odontaspis taurus*

Carchannus signatus*

Epinephelus drummondhayi*

E. itqara*

E. nigntus*

E. stnatus*

Rhexia aristosa Aimophia aestivalis Elassoma boehlkei Pamassia caroliniana Thchostema sp 1 Balduina uniflora Plantago sparsiflora Litsea aestivalis Thalictrum subrotundum Sporobolus teretifolius Dionaea muscipula Status Occurrences T

E E

E SC SC Known Known Known Known Known Known SC Known E

E E

E E

E T

E E

T/PCH E

E T

T E

T E

E E

C C

C C

C C

C SC Sc SC Sc SC SC SC SC SC SC SC Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Possible Possible Possible Possible Possible Possible Possible Possible Possible Possible Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Page C-28

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT County Common Name Scientific Name Status Occurrences Bog turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii Swamp-pink Helonias bullata,

Dwarf-flowered heartleaf Hexastylis naniflora Small whorled pogonia Isotna medeoloides Bunched arrowhead Sagittana fasciculata Mountain sweet pitcher-plant Sarracenia rubra ssp. jonesu White irisette Sisynnchium dichotomum Rock gnome lichen Gymnoderma lineare White fringeless orchid Platanthera integnilabia Green salamander Aneides aeneus Oconee-bells Shortia galacifolia Piedmont ragwort Senecio millefohum Rafinesque's big-eared bat Corynorhinus rafinesquii Southeastern myotis Myotis austroripanus Southern Appalachian woodrat Neotoma floridana haematoreia Sweet pinesap Carolina heelsplitter Monotropsis odorata Lasmigona decorata Bald eagle Hahaeetus leucocephalus Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis Wood stork Eastern indigo snake Shortnose sturgeon Canby's dropwort Boykin's lobella Myctena amencana Dtymarchon corais coupeon Apcpenser brevirostrum*

Oxypohis canbyi Lobeha boykmnii Carolina bogmint Macbndea carohniana Chapman's sedge Carex chapmanhi False coco Pteroglossaspis ecnstata Gopher frog Rana capito Pine or Gopher snake Pituophis melanoleucus Rafinesque's big-eared bat Cozynorhinus rafinesquii West Indian manatee Trichechus manutus Finback whale Balaenoptera physalus*

Humpback whale Megaptera novaeanqhae*

Northern right whale Eubaleana glacialis*

Sei whale Balaenoptera borealis*

Sperm whale Physeter catodon*

Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis Bald eagle Hahaeetus leucocephalus Wood stork Myctenia americana Piping plover Charadrius melodus T S/A Known T

Known T

Known T

Known E

Known E

Known E

Known E

Known C

Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known E

Known T

Known E

Known E

Known T

Possible E

Known E

Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known SC Known E

Known E

Known E

Known E

Known E

Known E

Known E

Known T

Known E

Known T/PCH Known Page C-29 Greenville Greenwood Hampton Horry

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT County Common Name Scientific Name Status Occurrences Kemp's ridley sea turtle Leatherback sea turtle Loggerhead sea turtle Green sea turtle Shortnose sturgeon Sea-beach amaranth Pondberry Canby's dropwort Chaff-seed Dusky shark Sand tiger shark Night shark Speckled hind Jewfish Warsaw grouper Nassau grouper Dwarf burhead Carolina grass-of parnassus Crested fringed orchid Dwarf burhead Harper's fimbnstylis One-flower balduina Pickering's morning-glory Piedmont cowbane Pine or Gopher snake Pineland plantain Pondspice Venus' fly-trap Well's Pyxie Moss White false-asphodel Wire-leaved dropseed West Indian manatee Finback whale Humpback whale Right whale Sei whale Sperm whale Bald eagle Red-cockaded woodpecker Wood stork Piping plover Eastern indigo snake Kemp's ridley sea turtle Leatherback sea turtle Loggerhead sea turtle Green sea turtle Lepidochelys kempnp*

Dermochelys coriecea*

Caretta caretta Chelonia mydas*

Acipenser brevirostrum*

Amaranthus pumilus Undera melissifolia Oxypolis canbyt Schwalbea americana Carcharhinus obscurus*

Odontaspis taurus*

Carchannus signatus*

Epmnephelus drummondhayi*

E ittiara*

E. nigritus*

E. stnatus*

Echinodorus parvalus Pamassia carohniana Pteroglossaspis ecristata Echinodorus parvulus E

E T

T E

T E

E E

C C

C C

C C

C SC SC SC SC Fimbnstylis perpusilla SC Balduina uniflora SC Stylisma pickemgii var pickenngihSC Oxypolis ternata SC Pituophis melanoleucus SC Plantago sparsiflora SC Litsee astivalis SC Dionaea muscipula SC Pyxidanthera barbulata var. SC barbulata Tofieldia glabra SC Sporobolus teretifolius SC Trichechus manutus Balaenoptera physalus Megaptera novaeanqliae Eubaleana glacialis Balaenoptera borealis Physeter catodon Hahaeetus leucocephalus Picoides borealis Mycteria amencana Charadrius melodus Drymarchon corais couperi Lepidochelys kempd*

Dermochelys coriacea*

Caretta caretta Chelonia mydas*

E E

E E

E E

T E

E T

T E

E T

T Page C-30 Horry (cont.)

Jasper Known Known Known Possible Known Known Possible Possible Known Possible Possible Possible Possible Possible Possible Possible Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Possible Possible Known Known Known Possible

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

-County Common Name Scientific Name Status Occurrences Jasper (cont.)

Flatwoods salamander Shortnose sturgeon Pondberry Canby's dropwort Chaff-seed Dusky shark Sand tiger shark Night shark Speckled hind Jewfish Warsaw grouper Nassau grouper Bachman's sparrow Creeping St Johns-wort Crested fringed orchid Florida pine snake Mimic glass lizard Pine or Gopher snake Pineland plantain Pondspice Yellow lampmussel Bald eagle Red-cockaded woodpecker Carolina heelsplitter Michaux's sumac Georgia aster Carolina pygmy sunfish One-flower stitchwort Pondspice Southeastern myotis White-false-asphodel White-wicky Wire-leaved dropseed Carolina heelsphitter Little amphianthus Smooth coneflower Schweinitz's sunflower Black-spored quillwort Brook floater Shoals spider-lily Red-cockaded woodpecker Georgia aster Page C-31 Ambystoma cingulatum Acipenser brevirostrum*

Lindera mellssifolha Oxypolis canbyi Schwa/bea americana Carcharhinus obscurus*

Odontaspis taurus*

Carcharinus signatus*

Epinephelus drummondhayt*

E. itiara*

E. nigntus*

E. striatus*

Aimophila aestivahs Hypericum adpressum Pteroglossaspis ecristata Pituophis melanoleucus Ophisaurus mimicus Pituophs melanoleucus Plantago sparsiflora Litsea aestivahs Lampsilis cariosa Haliaeetus leucocephalus Picoides borealis Lasmigona decorata Rhus michauxii Aster georgianus Elassoma boehlkei inuartia uniflora Litsea aestivalis Myotis austronparius Tofieldia glabra Kalmia cuneata Sporobolus teretifolius Lasmigona decorata Amphianthus pusillus Echinacea laewgata Hehanthus schweinitzii Isoetes melanospora Alasmidonta varicosa Hymenocalhs coronana Picoides borealis Aster georganus Kershaw Lancaster Laurens T

E E

E E

C C

C C

C C

SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC T

E E

E C

SC SC SC

- SC SC SC SC E

T E

E E

SC SC E

C Known Known Possible Possible Known Possible Possible Possible Possible Possible Possible Possible Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT County Common Name Scientific Name Lee Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis Canby's dropwort Oxypolis canbyi Chaffseed Schwalbea amn, Rhexia aristosa Awned meadowbeauty Status Occurrences E

Known E

Known E

Known SC Known Bald eagle Hahaeetus leucocephalus T

Known Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis E

Known Shortnose sturgeon Acppenser brevirostrum*

E Possible Smooth coneflower Echinacea laevigata E

Possible Schweinitz's sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii E

Known Pickering's morning-glory Stylisma ptckenngi, var. pickerngihSC Known Piedmont cowbane Oxypolhs temata SC Known Rayner's blueberry Vaccinium crassifolum sspSC Known sempervirens Shoal's spider-lily Hymenocallis coronana Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis Wood stork Myctena americana Shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum Canby's dropwort Oxypolis canbyii Yellow lampmussel Lampsths cariosa SC Known T

Known E

Known E

Possible E

Known E

Known SC Known Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis E

Known Shortnose sturgeon Actpenser brevirostrum*

E Possible Canby's dropwort Oxypolis canbyi E

Possible Awned meadowbeauty Rhexia anstosa SC Known Pickering's morning-glory Stylisma pickeringii var. pickeringiiSC Known Spring-flowering goldenrod Sohdago vema Sc Known Yellow lampmussel Lampsiis cariosa Sc Known Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis Carolina heelsplhtter Lasmigona decorata Miccosukee gooseberry Ribes echinellum Georgia aster Aster georgianus Brook floater Alasmidonta vancosa Shoals spider-lily Hymenocalfis coronana Yellow lampmussel Lampsihs caniosa T

Known E

Known E

Known T

Known C

Known SC Known SC Known SC Known Page C-32

<21 Lexington Marion Marlboro McCormick 111ý

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT County Common Name Newberry Bald eagle Saluda crayfish Sweet pinesap Oconee Orangeburg Pickens Bald eagle Smooth coneflower Small whorled pogonia Persistent trillium Georgia aster Brook floater Fort mountain sedge Fraser loosestrife Green salamander Hellbender Manhart's sedge Oconee-bells Rafinesque's big-eared bat Southern appalachian woodrat Sun-facing coneflower Sweet pinesap Bald eagle Red-cockaded woodpecker Flatwoods salamander Shortnose sturgeon Canby's dropwort Awned meadowbeauty Boykin's lobelia Florida pine snake Gopher frog Incised groovebur Pondspice Southeastern myotis Bald eagle Bog turtle Smooth coneflower Dwarf-flowered heartleaf Black-spored quillwort Mountain sweet pitcher-plant Georgia aster Alexander's rock aster Fort Mountain sedge Green salamander Oconee-bells Scientific Name Hahaeetus leucocepha/us Distocambarus younginen Monotropsis odorata Hafiaeetus leucocephalus Echmnacea laevigata Isotria medeoloides Trillium persistens Aster georgianus Alasmidonta varicosa Carex amphsquama Lysimachia fraseri Aneides aeneus Cryptobranchus alleganhensis Carex manhartil Shortia galacifolia Corynorhinus rafinesquli Neotoma flondana haematoreia Rudbeckia hehopsidis Monotropsts odorata Hahaeetus leucocephalus Picoides borealis Ambystoma cingulatum Acppenser bre virostrum*

Oxypolis canbyt Rhexia anstosa Lobeha boykinii Pituophis melanoleucus mugitus Rana capito Agrimonia incisa Litsea aestivalis Myotis austronparius Haliaeetus leucocephalus Clemmys muhlenbergh Echmnacea laevgata Hexastylis naniflora Isoetes melanospora Sarracenia rubra ssp. jonesli Aster georgianus Aster avitus Carex amphsquana Aneides aeneus Shortia galacifolia Status Occurrences T

Known SC Known SC Known T

E T

E C

SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC T

E T

E E

SC SC SC SC ZSC SC SC T

T SIA E

T "E

E C

SC

'Sc SC SC Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Possible Known Known Possible Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Page C-33

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT County Common Name Scientific Name Status Occurrences Biltmore greenbner Smilax biltmoreana SC Manhart sedge Carex manhartii SC Rafinesque's big-eared bat Corynorhinus rafinesquii SC Southern appalachian woodrat Neotoma flondana haematoreta SC Sweet pinesap Monotropsis odorata SC Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis Shortnose sturgeon Acppenser brevirostrum*

Smooth coneflower Echinacea laevigata Rough-leaved loosestrife Lysimachia asperulaefoha Canby's dropwort Oxypolis canbyt Georgia aster Astergeorgianus Awned meadowbeauty Rhexia anstosa Bog spicebush Carolina bogmint Carolina darter Creeping St. John's wort False coco Lindera subcoriacea Macbridea caroliniana Etheostoma collhs Hypericum adpressum Pteroglossaspis ecristata Purple balduina Balduina atropurpurea Rafinesque's big-eared bat Corynorhinus rafinesquli Rayner's blueberry Vaccintum crassifolium empervirens Sandhills milk-vetch Astragalus michauxu Shoals spider-lily Hymenocaills coronana Southern hognose snake Heterodon simus White false-asphodel Tofierdia glabra Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis Little amphianthus Amphianthus pusillus Piedmont bishop-weed Ptdlmnium nodosum Creeping St John's wort Hypericum adpressurr Dwarf burhead Echmnodorus narvulus5 Savannah lilliput Spartanburg Dwarf-flowered heartleaf Sweet pinesap Toxolasma pullus Hexastylis naniflora Monotropsis odorata Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis Shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum*

Canby's dropwort Oxypohs canbyi Chaff-seed Schwalbea americana Dwarf burhead Awned meadowbeauty Boykin's lobelia Echinodorus parvulus Rhexta aristosa Lobelia boykinfi T

E E

E E

E C

SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC ssp. SC SC SC SC SC E

T E

SC SC SC T

SC T

E E

E E

SC SC SC Page C-34 Pickens (cont)

Richland Saluda Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Sumter

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT County Common Name Scientific Name Status Occurrences Georgia aster Shoals spider-lily Sweet pinesap Red-cockaded woodpecker Shortnose sturgeon Canby's dropwort Chaff-seed Bald eagle Little amphianthus Schweinitz sunflower Dwarf-flowered heartleaf Georgia aster Carolina darter Shoals spider-lily Sun-facing coneflower Aster georgianus Hymenocallis coronaria Monotropsis odorata Hahaeetus leucocephalus Myctena americana Picoides boreahs Acipenser brevirostrumr Oxypolis canbyi Schwalbea americana Haliaeetus leucocephalus Amphianthus pusillus Helianthus schweinitzii Hexastylis naniflora Aster georgianus Etheostoma colhs Hymenocalhis coronaria Rudbeckia hehopsidis Page C-35 Union Williamsburg Bald eagle Wood stork York C

SC SC T

E E

E E

E T

T E

T C

SC SC SC Known Known Known Known Possible Known Known Known Known Known Known Known Possible Known Known Known Known

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIXK E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT APPENDIX D MICROBIOLOGICAL ORGANISMS CORRESPONDENCE Page D-2 D-4 Letter Byrne, SCE&G, to Brown, SCDHEC Brown, SCDHEC, to Byrne, SCE&G Page D-1

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT January 19, 2001 RC-01-0005 A SCANA COMPANY Dr. John F. Brown State Toxicologist S.C. Dept. of Health and Environmental Control Division of Health Hazard Evaluation 2600 Bull Street Columbia, SC 29212

Dear Dr. Brown:

Stephen A. Byrne Vice President Nuclear Operatbos 803.345.4622 South Carolinoa Eleriw & Gos Cs Virgil C. Sunoie Nudeor Station P, 0. Box 88

.lerinswille. South Carolina 29065 803.345.4344 803345.5209 www.scovorslO

Subject:

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION LICENSE RENEWAL REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON THERMOPHILIC MICROORGANISMS South Carolina Electric and Gas Company (SCE&G) is preparing an application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to renew the operating license for Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station. This application would provide for an additional 20 years of operation beyond the current license term, which ends in the year 2022.

As part of the license renewal process, the NRC requires license applicants to provide "...an assessment of the impact of the proposed action (license renewal) on public health from thermophilic organisms in the affected water" (10 CFR 51.53).

The NRC regulations state that "these organisms are not expected to be a problem at most operating plants" but state further that "without site-specific data, it is not possible to predict the effects generically."

SCE&G has operated Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station (Summer Station) since 1982. The plant lies on the south shore of Monticello Reservoir, in Fairfield County, approximately 26 miles northwest of Columbia. Summer Station's cooling system is a once-through system (no recirculation of cooling water) that withdraws from and discharges to a cooling reservoir (Monticello Reservoir). Discharge limits and monitoring requirements for Summer Station are set forth in NPDES Permit No.

SC0030856, issued by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) in September 1997, and subsequent permit modifications dated April 1, 1998 and April. 1, 2000.

SCE&G requests any information that SCDHEC may have compiled on the occurrence of thermophilic microorganisms in Monticello Reservoir in the vicinity of Summer Station, including results of any monitoring or special studies that might have been conducted by SCDHEC or its subcontractors. We are particularly interested in determining if there is a concern about the possible presence of Naegleria towlen in the Reservoir. We would appreciate your sending us a letter by March 1, 2001 detailing any concerns you may have about thermophilic NUCLEAR EXCELLENCE - A SUMMER TRADITION!

Page D-2

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Dr. John Brown, SCDHEC Page 2 of 2 microorganisms and potential public health effects over the license renewal term in order that we might meet our application preparation schedule. Please call Mr. Stephen E. Summer at (803) 345-4252 if you have any questions or require any additional information to review the proposed action.

Very truly yours, Stephen A. Byrne SES/SAB c:

R. B. Clary (800)

W. R. Higgins (830)

P. R. Moore (Tetra Tech NUS)

File (821.01)

DMS (RC-01-0005)

Page D-3

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT PROMOTE PROTECT PROSPER MillsJarrett Complcx Box 101106 Columbia, SC 29211-0106 February 13, 2001 COMMISSIONER:

Douglas E. Bryant BOARD Bradford W. Wyche Chairman Wdham Mn Hull. Jr. MD

%- Chairman kIi Kent

,St.I.

Howard L Brilliant. MD Brian K Snniih Rodney L Grandy Larry R Chewning, Jr., DMD Mr. Stephen A. Byrnc Vice President Nuclear Operations SCE&G Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station PO Box 88 (M.C. 830)

Jenkinsville, SC 29065-0088

SUBJECT:

RESPONSE RE VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION LICENSE RENEWAL REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON THERMOPHILIC MICROORGANISMS Thank you for your attached letter of January 19, 2001 requesting results of any monitoring or special studies that might have been conducted on thermophilic microorganisms in the Monticello Reservior in Fairfield County, South Carolina. Also, you request any concerns that DHEC may have regarding thermophilic microorganisms and potential public health effects.

In regard to the first request, I am not aware of any monitoring or special studies performed by DHEC on stated reservoir. I would refer you to Mr. Jeffrey P. DeBessonet, PE, Director of Water Facilities Permitting, Division of Industrial, Agricultural, & Stormwater, Bureau of Water, DHEC/EQC, 2600 Bull Street, Columbia, S.C. 29201 whose telephone number is (803) 898-4157. He should be aware of any studies that may have been done on stated reservoir.

While some microorganisms associated with thermal water discharges, especially related to air conditioning cooling towers, have been demonstrated to have deleterious human health effects, these events have occurred rarely and none have been identified with heated water sources associated with nuclear power plants, to my knowledge.

Pathogenic species of Legionella bacteria and Naegleria amoeba have been identified in heated cooling waters associated with nuclear plants. In most cases, the heated waters showed a very small increase SOUTII CA ROLINA DI PAI!I'M ENT OF ItEALTl AN D ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL Page D-4 ECE EE

[FV F E B 1 9 2001

-NL & OE

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Mr. Stephen A. Byrne Page 2 February 9, 2001 (approximately 10-fold) over unheated source waters, but were substantially higher in source waters in a few cases.

The most likely exposure to Legionella aerosol would be to workers within the plant.

This would not impact the general public beyond the plant boundaries. A similar exposure possibility exists for Naegleria amoeba, with slightly greater exposure potential for swimmers.

The potential public health hazard from pathogenic microorganisms whose abundance might be promoted by artificial warming of recreational waters is largely theoretical and not substantiated by available data. There is some justification for providing appropriate respiratory and dermal protection for workers regularly exposed to known contaminated water, but there seems no significant health threat to off-site persons near such heated recreational waters. Routine monitoring for pathogenic microorganisms could be established if suspicious illnesses arose or if there were significant community concerns. Please contact me at (803) 896-9723 if you desire additional discussion of this matter.

Sincerely,

.rown, DVM, PhD State Toxicologist Page D-5

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT APPENDIX E CULTURAL RESOURCES CORRESPONDENCE Letter Page Byrne, SCE&G, to Morton, S.C. Archives and History E-2 Brock, S.C. Archives and History, to Byrne, SCE&G E-9 Page E-1

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT January 19, 2001 RC-01-0006 A SCANA COMPANY Ms. Elizabeth Morton State Historic Preservation Office Representative Central Midlands Region South Carolina Department of Archives and History The South Carolina Archives & History Center 8301 Parklane Road Columbia, SC 29223 Stephen A. Byrne Vice President Nuclear Operatons 803 345 4622 South Carol]a Electric

& Gas Co Virgil C Summer tRcleor Stotion P 0 Box 88 Jeikinsvitlle, Scuth Carolina 29065 e83 345 5209 M3 635 1461

Subject:

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION LICENSE RENEWAL REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON HISTORIC / ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES South Carolina Electric and Gas Company (SCE&G) is preparing an application to the U S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to renew the operating license for Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, which expires in August 2022. SCE&G intends to submit this application for license renewal in August 2002. As part of the license renewal process, the NRC requires license applicants to "assess whether any historic or archaeological properties will be affected by the proposed project." The NRC may also request an informal consultation with your office at a later date under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 USC 470) and Federal Advisory Council on Historic Preservation regulations (36 CFR 800). By contacting you early in the application process, we hope to identify any issues that need to be addressed or any information your office may need to expedite the NRC consultation.

SCE&G has operated Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station (Summer Station) and associated transmission lines since 1982. Summer Station is in Fairfield County, South Carolina, approximately 15 miles southwest of the town of Winnsboro and approximately 26 miles northwest of Columbia (latitude 34 295833; longitude 81 320278) (see Figure 2-1)

The plant lies on the south shore of Monticello Reservoir (see Figure 2-2), which serves as its cooling water source and heat sink.

The Summer Station property (Figure 2-3) is defined as the area within approximately one mile of the reactor building and includes the southern portion of Monticello Reservoir. It totals approximately 2,200 acres.

SCE&G, which owns two-thirds of the plant, built eight transmission lines for the specific purpose of connecting Summer Station to the regional transmission system (see Figure 3-3). South Carolina Public Service Authority (commonly referred to as "Santee Cooper"), owner of the remaining one-third of the plant, built two additional lines to connect to the regional grid Beginning at Summer Station, the SCE&G lines NUCLEAR EXCELLENCE - A SUMMER TRADITION!

K>

Page E-2

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Ms. Elizabeth Morton, SHPO Page 2 of 2 generally run in a southerly direction, with five terminations very near Summer Station; one near Aiken, South Carolina; and two near Columbia (see Figure 3-2). The Santee Cooper lines run roughly east and west to substations near Blythewood and Newberry, South Carolina, respectively.

Using the National Register Information System (NRIS) on-line database, we have compiled a list of sites on the National Register of Historic Places within a 6-mile radius of the Summer Station property. In addition, a contractor spent several days at the S.C. Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology discussing the project with Institute staff and reviewing files on archeological sites in the project area. One site, designated FA 47 by the Institute of Archeology and Anthropology, lies between the access road (SC 311) to Summer Station and Monticello Reservoir. Based on the appearance of the area (mowed grass, for the most part), it is presumed to have been disturbed during construction of the station in the 1970s. We will provide all of this information to the NRC to aid in their evaluation of the license application.

SCE&G does not expect the operation of Summer Station through the license renewal term (an additional 20 years) to adversely affect cultural or historical resources in the area and region.

SCE&G has no plans to alter current operations over the license renewal period. No major expansion of existing facilities is planned, and no major structural modifications have been identified for the purposes of supporting license renewal. No additional land disturbance is anticipated in support of license renewal.

We would appreciate your sending us a letter by March 1, 2001 detailing any concerns you may have about historic/archaeological properties in the area or confirming SCE&G's conclusion that operation of Summer Station over the license renewal term would have no effect on any historic or archaeological properties in South Carolina This will enable us to meet our application preparation schedule. SCE&G Will include a copy of this letter and your response in the license renewal application that we submit to the NRC. Please call Mr. Stephen E. Summer at (803) 345-4252 if you have any questions or require any additional information to review the proposed action.

Very truly yours, Stephen A. Byrne SES/SAB attachments c

R. B. Clary (800)

W. R. Higgins (830)

P. R. Moore (Tetra Tech NUS)

File (821.01)

DMS (RC-01-0006)

Page E-3

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DRAFT LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION V.C. SUYMMER NUCLEAR STATION 10 0

10 20 Kilonewerm 10 0

10 20 Wr'es LEGEND V C Summer Nuclear Station C

50 mile radius of V C. Summer Interstates Major roads County Boundaries r-1 State Boundary Lakes and Rivers Mainr i krhan Arpaq FIGURE 2-1 V.C. Summer Nuclear Station, 50-Mile Locational Vicinity Map LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION Page E-4 K)

R

---

-----L-

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DRAFr LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION V.C. SULMMER NUCLEAR STATION N

I 0

1 2

3 Kloeter 0

1 2

3 MIes LEGEND i

Six mile radius of V.C. Summer Interstates

/

Major roads Minor roads County Boundaries Lakes and Rivers FIGURE 2-2 V.C. Summer Nuclear Station, 6-Mile Vicinity Map LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION Page E-5

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT FOR LICENSE RENEWAL VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION

°l o

o

°

!;2 u0 in 1 V3 03 z

to)

=

0.)

0

-Eom.

5~2 W(0.

N0, A 15"W-0 IN, zldlfM~0 7%U Page E-6

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DRAFT LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION V.C. SUMWMER NUCLEAR STATION 10 0

10 20 KIlometles 10 0

10 20 Mites LEGEND VC Surnmer Nuclear Staton AL Substations ransmission Lines 50 mle radius of V C Summer Interstates Major roads County Boundanes State Boundary Lakes and Rivers Nabonat Forests FIGURE 3-2 V.C. Summer Nuclear Station, 50-Mile Transmission Line Map LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION Page E-7

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT LICENSE RENEWVAL APPLICATION V.C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION 1

0 1

2 3 Klomelerws 0

1 2

3 Mdres LEGEND A

Substations

, \\ /Transmission Lines Six mile radius of V C. Summer Interstates Major roads Minor roads mCounty Boundaries I Lakes and Rivers FIGURE 3-3 V.C. Summer Nuclear Station, 6-Mile Transmission Line Map LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION K>

Page E-8

VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION APPLICATION FOR RENEWED OPERATING LICENSE APPENDIX E - ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT ll...January 29, 2001 Mr. Stephen A. Byrne Vice President, Nuclear Operations SC Electric & Gas Company Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station PO Box 88 Jenkinsville, SC 29065 Re: Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station License Renew

Dear Mr. Byrne:

Thank you for your letter of January 19, which we received on January 24, regarding the proposed license renewal for the Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station in Fairfield County.

It has been our experience that the license renewal for the continuing operation of plants such as this one has no effect on historic properties. These operations are usually not associated with new construction or expansion of plant boundaries.

Your letter states that you have used the NRIS to compile a list of National Register properties within a six-mile radius of the Summer Station. We encourage a search of our GIS database as a source of more accurate, up-to-date information. I've enclosed a copy of the Consultant's Guide to Survey & National Register Files, State Historic Preservation Office.

Please call me at 896-6169 if you have questions or if I can be of further assistance.

Sincerely, Nancy Brock, Coordinator FEB - 2 W01 Review and Compliance Programs

[

State Historic Preservation Office NL & OE S C Department of Archives-& History 8301 Parklane Road

• Columbia

• South Carolina

• 29223-4905 * (803) 896 6100

• www state sc us/scdah Page E-9