ML031250295

Annual Environmental Operating Report 2002

ML031250295
Person / Time
Site:	Palo Verde
Issue date:	04/29/2003
From:	Bauer S Arizona Public Service Co
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
102-04933-SAB/TNW/CJJ
Download: ML031250295 (12)

Text

'ILAFS Scott A. Bauer Department Leader Regulatory Affairs Tel 623/393-5978 Mail Station 7636 Palo Verde Nuclear Fax 623/393-5442 P 0 Box 52034 Generating Station e-mail sbauer@apsc corn Phoenix, AZ 85072-2034 102-04933-SAB/TNW/CJJ April 29, 2003 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Mail Station: P1-37 Washington, DC 20555-0001

Subject:

Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS)

Units 1, 2, and 3 Docket Nos. STN 50-5281529/530 Annual Environmental Operating Report 2002 Enclosed please find a copy of the Annual Environmental Operating Report for 2002.

This report covers the operation of PVNGS Units 1, 2, and 3 during 2002, and is being submitted pursuant to Section 5.4.1 of Appendix B to the Operating License.

No commitments are being made to the NRC in this letter. If you have any questions, please contact Thomas N. Weber at (623) 393-5764.

Sincerely, 17 L~ UJOKO.-

SAB/TNW/CJJ/kg Enclosure cc: E. W. Merschoff (all w/o enclosure)

J. N. Donohew N. L. Salgado

,g)5

ENCLOSURE 2002 Annual Environmental Operating Report

2002 Annual Environmental Operating Report I. INTRODUCTION The Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS) is located in Maricopa County, Arizona, approximately 50 miles west of the Phoenix metropolitan area.

The PVNGS site comprises approximately 4080 acres. Site elevations range from 890 feet above mean sea level at the southern boundary to 1030 feet above mean sea level at the northern boundary. The station consists of three pressurized water reactor electrical generating units with a nominal generating capacity of 1270 MWE per Unit.

PVNGS was issued low power operating licenses NPF-34, NPF-46 and NPF-65 for Units 1, 2 and 3 by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) on December 31, 1984, December 9, 1985, and March 25, 1987, respectively. The Unit 1 full power operating license NPF-41 was issued June 1, 1985. The Unit 2 full power operating license NPF-51 was issued April 24, 1986. The Unit 3 full power operating license NPF-74 was issued November 25, 1987. Appendix B to these operating licenses is entitled the "Environmental Protection Plan (Non Radiological)". The Environmental Protection Plans (EPP) of each of the current operating licenses are identical.

The EPP is to provide for protection of environmental values during construction and operation of the nuclear facility. The principal objectives of the EPP are as follows:

(1) Verify that the station is operated in an environmentally acceptable manner, as established by the FES (Final Environmental Statement) and other NRC environmental impact assessments.

(2) Coordinate NRC requirements and maintain consistency with other Federal, State and Local requirements for environmental protection.

(3) Keep NRC informed of the environmental effects of facility construction and operation and actions taken to control those effects.

This Annual Environmental Operating Report is required by Section 5.4.1 of the EPP. This report describes the activities during the year 2001 related to the PVNGS EPP. For purposes of this report, references to the EPP are considered to be the EPP of NPF-41, NPF-51, and NPF-74.

Page 1 of 10

2002 Annual Environmental Operating Report

11. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING SUMMARIES AND ANALYSIS A. Cultural Resources Section 4.2.1 of the EPP requires that an archaeological survey be performed when final alignment of the PVNGS-to-Saguaro transmission line is completed.

As of the date of this report, plans for this transmission line have been indefinitely suspended. Therefore, there has been no activity with regard to this requirement of the EPP.

B. Terrestrial Ecology Monitoring As communicated in a letter from William F. Conway, APS, to NRC, dated December 30, 1991, the salt deposition monitoring program was discontinued at the end of 1991.

Ill. PLANT DESIGN AND OPERATION CHANGES Section 3.1 of the EPP allows changes in station design or operation or the performance of tests or experiments affecting the environment provided that such changes, tests, or experiments do not involve an unreviewed environmental question and do not involve a change to the EPP. Changes, tests, or experiments in which all measurable non-radiological effects are confined to the on-site areas previously disturbed during site preparation and plant construction or in which the environment is not affected are exempt from the evaluation and reporting requirements of Section 3.1.

Section 3.2 of the EPP also exempts changes, tests, or experiments, which are required to comply with other Federal, State, or local environmental regulations.

Ten (10) design and operation changes were evaluated in 2002 to determine if they involved either an unreviewed environmental question or constituted a change in the EPP. Table 111-1 summarizes the results of these evaluations. None of these changes involved an unreviewed environmental question or a change in the EPP.

IV. EPP NON-COMPLIANCES There were no instances of non-compliance with the EPP identified during 2002.

V. NON-ROUTINE REPORTS There were no non-routine reports required by Section 5.4.2 of the EPP submitted during 2002.

Page 2 of 10

2002 Annual Environmental Operating Report TABLE III - 1

SUMMARY

OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATIONS PERFORMED DURING 2002 FOR PLANT DESIGN AND OPERATION CHANGES Log # Title Description Analysis Interpretation Evaluation 01-078 WRSS January 2002 Pipeline Maintenance activities The FES does not address There was no unreviewed

& Manhole Inspection and associated with the inspection portable emission sources. The environmental question Repair and repair require the use of equipment purchased / rented / because the equipment portable combustion equipment, contracted will be permitted In operation and maintenance earth moving operations, and accordance with county activities will be conducted abrasive blasting / coating regulations. in accordance with county operations. These activities can regulations. In addition, the increase airborne emissions. The earth moving activities area to be disturbed was Maintenance and repair will also associated with the construction of previously identified in the disturb offsite areas. the facility were discussed in the FES.

FES and no adverse environmental impacts were identified. The scope of the proposed work activities would be less than those already evaluated in the FES. Therefore, there are no adverse impacts as long as activities are conducted in accordance with county regulations.

The FES does not address abrasive blasting / coating operations. There are no adverse impacts as long as activities are conducted in accordance with county regulations.

The offsite area that is disturbed is within the right of way of areas disturbed during initial construction. The FES identifies that routine maintenance may occur in these areas.

Page 3 of 10

2002 Annual Environmental Operating Report TABLE III - 1

SUMMARY

OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATIONS PERFORMED DURING 2002 FOR PLANT DESIGN AND OPERATION CHANGES Log # Title Description Analysis Interpretation Evaluation 01-079 WO 2347392 Sludge Landfill Clearing Land clearing activities The earth moving activities There was no unreviewed associated with operation, associated with the construction of environmental question maintenance and use of the site the facility were discussed in the because the equipment Sludge Landfill involves earth- FES and no adverse operation and maintenance moving operations. These environmental impacts were activities will be conducted activities can increase airborne identified. The scope of the in accordance with county emissions. Land clearing is proposed work activities would be regulations. In addition, the performed to open a new area less than those already evaluated area to be disturbed was for sludge disposal. in the FES. Therefore, there are previously identified in the no adverse impacts as long as FES.

activities are conducted in accordance with county regulations.

With respect to land use, the potential to disturb archeological sites or harm endangered vegetation / animals were evaluated. The actual construction site was inspected and no archeological or endangered species of plants / animals were identified.02-001 T-MOD T-Mod cooling tower fan Changes to cooling tower The FES identifies that based on The design change is a like-2422863 replacement for performance operation or equipment could current cooling tower design there for-like replacement of testing affect offsite impacts evaluated are no adverse environmental existing equipment already in the FES and dnft-monitoring impacts identified. The proposed evaluated in the FES. The program. change does not change the fan change, therefore, will have design airflow rate or velocity and no adverse environmental therefore will not affect cooling impact as previously tower operations. The modification determined in the FES.

is considered a like for like replacement.

Page 4 of 10

2002 Annual Environmental Operating Report TABLE III - 1

SUMMARY

OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATIONS PERFORMED DURING 2002 FOR PLANT DESIGN AND OPERATION CHANGES Log # Title Description Analysis Interpretation Evaluation 02-008 PCWO WRSS April 2002 Manhole Maintenance activities The FES does not address There was no unreviewed 2441887 Inspection and Repair associated with the inspection portable emission sources. The environmental question and repair require the use of equipment purchased / rented / because the equipment portable combustion equipment, contracted will be permitted in operation and maintenance earth moving operations, and accordance with county activities will be conducted abrasive blasting / coating regulations. in accordance with county operations. These activities can regulations. In addition, the increase airborne emissions. The earth moving activities area to be disturbed was Maintenance and repair will also associated with the construction of previously identified in the disturb offsite areas. the facility were discussed in the FES.

FES and no adverse environmental impacts were identified. The scope of the proposed work activities would be less than those already evaluated in the FES. Therefore, there are no adverse impacts as long as activities are conducted in accordance with county regulations.

The FES does not address abrasive blasting / coating operations. There are no adverse impacts as long as activities are conducted in accordance with county regulations.

The offsite area that is disturbed is within the right of way of areas disturbed during initial construction. The FES identifies that routine maintenance may occur in these areas.

Page 5 of 10

2002 Annual Environmental Operating Report TABLE III - 1

SUMMARY

OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATIONS PERFORMED DURING 2002 FOR PLANT DESIGN AND OPERATION CHANGES Log # Title Description Analysis Interpretation Evaluation 02-009 DMWO Unit 2 Old Steam Generator The construction of the Unit 2 The FES does not address There was no unreviewed 221246 Storage Facility Old Steam Generator Storage portable emission sources. The environmental question Facility requires the use of equipment purchased / rented / because equipment portable combustion equipment contracted will be permitted in operation and construction and earth moving operations accordance with county activities will be conducted The use of portable combustion regulations. in accordance with county equipment could increase regulations.

airborne emissions due to the The earth moving activities combustion of fossil fuel. Earth associated with the construction of moving operations could the facility were discussed inthe increase airborne emissions FES and no adverse due to fugitive dust. environmental impacts were identified. The scope of the proposed work activities would be less than those already evaluated in the FES. Therefore, there are no adverse impacts as long as activities are conducted in accordance with county regulations.02-012 Purchase new air The use of portable combustion The FES does not address There was no unreviewed compressors for use on site equipment could increase portable emission sources. The environmental question airborne emissions due to the equipment purchased / rented / because equipment combustion of fossil fuel. contracted will be permitted in operation will be conducted accordance with county in accordance with county regulations. regulations.

Page 6 of 10

2002 Annual Environmental Operating Report TABLE III - 1

SUMMARY

OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATIONS PERFORMED DURING 2002 FOR PLANT DESIGN AND OPERATION CHANGES Log # I Title I Description I Analysis I Interpretation I Evaluation The evaluation performed per 00- There was no unreviewed 02-026 l WDP-TB-559 Redhawk Makeup Line The work package involved the System construction and installation of 057 was still in effect and environmental question an underground pipeline applicable to this package because all construction between PVNGS and the modification. activities will be performed in Redhawk Power Plant to supply accordance with existing treated effluent water. The The FES does not address federal, state, and county evaluation was previously portable emission sources. The requirements. All necessary reviewed per Environmental equipment purchased / rented I permits and plans will be Evaluation 00-057 and was for contracted will be permitted in submitted to the appropriate the construction of the pipeline. accordance with county regulatory agency prior to The installation of the pipeline regulations. The earth moving conducting work in an has the potential for air, water, activities associated with the affected area.

and land use impacts. construction of the facility were discussed in the FES and no adverse environmental impacts were identified. The scope of the proposed work activities would be less than that already evaluated in the FES. Therefore, there are no adverse impacts as long as activities are conducted in accordance with county regulations.

With respect to land use, the potential to disturb archeological sites or harm endangered vegetation / animals were evaluated. The actual construction site was inspected and no archeological or endangered species of plants / animals were identified.

The construction would transgress an existing ephemeral wash that is classified as a waterway of the US. As a result, any construction activities in these areas will be conducted in accordance with existing state and federal requirements.

Page 7 of 10

2002 Annual Environmental Operating Report TABLE III - 1

SUMMARY

OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATIONS PERFORMED DURING 2002 FOR PLANT DESIGN AND OPERATION CHANGES Log # Title Description Analysis Interpretation Evaluation 02-033 EDC 2002- Remove inserts from the CW The removal of inserts from the The FES and salt drift monitoring There was no unreviewed 00382 Cooling Tower Distribution cooling tower nozzles has the program identified impacts environmental question Deck Spiral Target Nozzles potential to affect emissions associated with cooling tower drift. because the scope of work from the cooling towers. Cooling tower operation was performed would not cause previously reviewed. The scope any significant increase in of work caused no real change to emissions. The towers will cooling tower operation. The continue to be operated in scope of work performed and the accordance with county number of inserts removed would regulations.

not cause a significant increase in emissions and the original impact assessments remained valid.

Page 8 of 10

2002 Annual Environmental Operating Report TABLE III - 1

SUMMARY

OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATIONS PERFORMED DURING 2002 FOR PLANT DESIGN AND OPERATION CHANGES Log # Title Description Analysis Interpretation Evaluation 02-040 PCWO WRSS May 2001 Pipeline Maintenance activities The FES does not address There was no unreviewed 2448498 and Refurbishment associated with the inspection portable emission sources. The environmental question 2444414 and repair require the use of equipment purchased / rented because the equipment portable combustion equipment, contracted will be permitted in operation and maintenance earth moving operations, and accordance with county activities will be conducted abrasive blasting / coating regulations. in accordance with county operations. These activities can regulations. In addition, the increase airborne emissions. The earth moving activities area to be disturbed was Maintenance and repair will also associated with the construction of previously identified in the disturb offsite areas. the facility were discussed in the FES.

FES and no adverse environmental impacts were identified. The scope of the proposed work activities would be less than those already evaluated in the FES. Therefore, there are no adverse impacts as long as activities are conducted in accordance with county regulations.

The FES does not address abrasive blasting / coating operations. There are no adverse impacts as long as activities are conducted in accordance with county regulations.

The offsite area that is disturbed is within the right of way of areas disturbed during initial construction. The FES identifies that routine maintenance may occur in these areas.

Page 9 of 10

2002 Annual Environmental Operating Report TABLE III - 1

SUMMARY

OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATIONS PERFORMED DURING 2002 FOR PLANT DESIGN AND OPERATION CHANGES Log # Title Description Analysis Interpretation Evaluation 02-047 DMWO Construction of Rudd The scope of work involved the The environmental impacts There was no unreviewed 2493193 Transmission Line on PV addition of transmission lines on associated with transmission lines environmental question Property site property. and transmission line corridors because the transmission were previously evaluated in the lines would be in an existing FES. The proposed modification transmission line corridor would run an additional that has already been transmission line in an already evaluated in the FES.

evaluated corridor. Therefore there would be no new or unreviewed environmental impacts.

• FES - Final Environmental Statement, ER-OL - Environmental Report, Operating License Stage Page 10 of 10