ML15364A437
Text
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 FIGURES
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project-August 2014 Figure 6.1-1. Historic ID Monitoring Wells and Transects.
6-17 Section 6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-18 Figure 6.3-1. Comparison of ID Monitoring Period to Average Monthly Historic Rainfall.
0 2
4 6
8 10 12 14 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Rainfall (inches)
Month S20F (Historical 1968-2013)
S20F (2013-2014)
TPM-1 (2013-2014)
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 3
co 2 00 c
~
z 1
- £ -
c:
0....
> 0 Q) w...
Q) 3: -1
-2
-3 L3 L5
- His orical Max June 2013 G21 Site Sept2013
- Dec2013 G28 March 2014 G35 Historical Min Figure 6.4-1. Historical Min and Max, and Quarterly L-3, L-5, G-21, G-28, and G-35 Groundwater Levels.
6-19 Section 6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-20 Figure 6.4-2. L-3 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Temperature (°C)
Jun-2013 Sep-2013 Dec-2013 Mar-2014 Historical Envelope
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-21 Figure 6.4-3. L-5 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Temperature (°C)
Mar-2013 Sep-2013 Dec-2013 Mar-2014 Historical Envelope
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-22 Figure 6.4-4. G-21 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
20.0 22.0 24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Temperature (°C)
Jun-2013 Sep-2013 Dec-2013 Mar-2014 Historical Envelope
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-23 Figure 6.4-5. G-28 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
20.0 22.0 24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Temperature (°C)
Jun-2013 Sep-2013 Dec-2013 Mar-2014 Historical Envelope
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-24 Figure 6.4-6. G-35 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
20.0 22.0 24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Temperature (°C)
Jun-2013 Sep-2013 Dec-2013 Mar-2014
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-25 Figure 6.4-7. L-3 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
-2 0
2 4
6 8
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Chloride Content (ppt)
Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Historical Envelope
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-26 Figure 6.4-8. L-5 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
0 2
4 6
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Chloride Content ppt)
Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Historical Envelope
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-27 Figure 6.4-9. G-21 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Chloride Content (ppt)
Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Historical Envelope
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-28 Figure 6.4-10. G-28 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
0 2
4 6
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Chloride Content (ppt)
Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Historical Envelope
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-29 Figure 6.4-11. G-35 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
0 2
4 6
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Chloride Content (ppt)
Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014
~ -1. 0 +-l"~----_,_,~-----,.~-------------------------
0
~
z Q)
~ -2. 0 -l-----L..-----------------------~--fm1iMH-~.---Ei=-~~
-3.0 +-----.-------.--------,---..-----.-------r-----,----..----,-----....,.-------r-----
6/1/13 7/1/13 8/1/13 9/1/13 10/1/13 11/1/13 12/1/13 1/1/14 2/1/14 3/1/14 4/1/14 5/1/1 4 Levee 31 Interceptor Ditch Canal 32 Figure 6.4-12. Transect A Water Levels June 2013 through May 2014.
6-30 Section 6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 i' -1.0 +-l"-..:------P~-----7'0...-------
0
~
z Q)
~ -2. 0 ---------------------------l---~.Jn.41r-r--=-~'""'"'....---~~~**
-3.0 +-----.------.--------,---..-----.------r-----,----..----,-----....,.-------r-----
6/1/13 7/1/13 8/1/13 9/1/13 10/1/13 11/1/13 12/1/13 1/1/14 2/1/14 3/1/14 4/1/14 5/1/1 4 Levee 31 Interceptor Ditch Canal 32 Figure 6.4-13. Transect B Water Levels June 2013 through May 2014.
6-31 Section 6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014
~
-1.0 Cl
~
z g -1.5
~
~
w...
Q)
~ -2. 0.,_------------------------'l..:=-------H~L..\\+--t--P.i\\
-3.0 +-----.------.--------,---..-----.------r-----,.---..------,-----....,.-------r-----
6/1/13 7/1/13 8/1/13 9/1/13 10/1/13 11/1/13 12/1/13 1/1/14 2/1/14 3/1/14 4/1/14 5/1/1 4 Levee 31 Interceptor Ditch Canal 32 Figure 6.4-14. Transect C Water Levels June 2013 through May 2014.
6-32 Section 6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014
~ -1. 0 +----------~-------------------------------
0
~
z Q)
~ -2.0
-3.0 +----.------.--------,----r-----.------r-----,----..------,-----....,.-------r-----
6/1/1 3 7/1/13 8/1/13 9/1/13 10/1/13 11/1/1 3 12/1/1 3 1/1/14 2/1/14 3/1/14 4/1/1 4 5/1/1 4 Levee 31 Interceptor Ditch Canal 32 Figure 6.4-15. Transect D Water Levels June 2013 through May 2014.
6-33 Section 6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014
~ -1. 0 +-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-
0
~
z
.2 -1.5
('O
~
w...
Q) -
~
-2. 0 --t---'lr--~~-r~---.~~--,.,_~~_....,,JllC-~~~~~-+---.:---:---~~~~~...-.~.r--.--~:ft--+--tt-
-2.5
-3.0 6/1/13 7/1/13 8/1/13 9/1/13 10/1/13 11 /1/13 12/1/13 1/1/14 2/1/14 3/1/14 4/1/14 5/1/14 Levee 31 Interceptor Ditch Canal 32 Figure 6.4-16. Transect E Water Levels June 2013 through May 2014.
6-34 Section 6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 1.00 00 00 c > <
0.50 z
c:
0 -
<
-L31-C32
-- L31-ID Section 6 Figure 6.4-17. Differences in Freshwater Head Equivalent/Density Corrected Water Levels Between L-31 and -C32, and L-31 and ID (based on actual water depths and bottom densities) -Transect A.
6-35
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 1.00 co co Cl
~ o.so z
~
c:
0 -"'
~
0.00 w
~
QI -"'
~
-0.50
-1.00 -.---~--~--~--~--~-~--~--~--~-~--~--~--~-~-
~v
~
-L31-C32
-- L31-I D Section 6 Figure 6.4-18. Differences in Freshwater Head Equivalent/Density Corrected Water Levels Between L-31 and C-32, and L-31 and ID (based on actual water depths and bottom densities) -Transect C.
6-36
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 1.00 co co 0 > <
z 0.50
~
c:
0 tv >
Q) w 0.00 Q) -
tv 3:
-0.50
-L31-C32 Section 6
-- L31-ID Figure 6.4-19. Differences in Freshwater Head Equivalent/Density Corrected Water Levels Between L-31 and C-32, and L-31 and ID (based on actual water depths and bottom densities) -Transect E.
6-37
O'I I w 00
~
<O c:
CiJ a>
- i:i.
I I\\)
~
- J -
CD
~
CD "S.
0.,
CJ 0 :::r
""C c:
3 "O
0 "O
CD
~
o*
- J I>>
- J a.
- o
!!?.
- J I
- u
- J -
I z
I z
N I
(/)
I
(/)
N I
I I
I I
I I
r-i=
r--L-F
=--
=
b-
=-
r-
- =-
I I
I w
Ln en Rainfall (in)
O'~
§:~
.... ~
Iii'~
~""(
~'b
.a:-.~.
~~
Qi :::J i:::J
~~
~ -
'9. d'
~ (j\\
..,.~
~~
c: Qi
~i iq. ~
~g C)....
..... 8'
.a:-..,
5*
IQ
~
6'
- J Q\\
~
~
~
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-39 Figure 6.4-21. Density vs. Elevation Wells L-3 and G-21 During September 2013 Sampling Event.
62.0 62.5 63.0 63.5 64.0 64.5 65.0 65.5 66.0
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10 0
10 Density (lbs/cu ft)
Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
L-3 Density lbs/cu ft G-21 Density lbs/cu ft
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-40 Figure 6.4-22. Pressure vs. Elevation Wells L-3 and G-21 During September 2013 Sampling Event.
0 5
10 15 20 25
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10 0
10 Pressure (psi)
Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
L-3 Pressure (psi)
G-21 Pressure (psi)
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-41 Figure 6.4-23. Pressure Gradient Difference between Well L-3 and Well G-21 during September 2013 Sampling Event.
-0.15
-0.10
-0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0
4 8
12 16 20 24 28
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10 0
10 Pressure (psi)
Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at Well G-21 Relative to Well L-3 (psi)
Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
L-3 Pressure (psi)
G-21 Pressure (psi)
Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at G-21 (psi)
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-42 Figure 6.4-24. Pressure Gradient Difference between Well L-3 and Well G-21 during March 2014 Sampling Event.
-0.15
-0.10
-0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0
4 8
12 16 20 24 28
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10 0
10 Pressure (psi)
Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at Well G-21 Relative to Well L-3 (psi)
Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
L-3 Pressure (psi)
G-21 Pressure (psi)
Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at G-21 (psi)
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-43 Figure 6.4-25. Pressure Gradient Difference between Well L-5 and Well G-28 during September 2013 Sampling Event.
-0.30
-0.20
-0.10 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.000 4.000 8.000 12.000 16.000 20.000 24.000 28.000
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10 0
10 Pressure (psi)
Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at Well G-28 Relative to Well L-5 (psi)
Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
L-5 Pressure (psi)
G-28 Pressure (psi)
Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at G-28 (psi)
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-44 Figure 6.4-26. Pressure Gradient Difference between Well L-5 and Well G-28 during March 2014 Sampling Event.
-0.60
-0.40
-0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0
4 8
12 16 20 24 28
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10 0
10 Pressure (psi)
Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at Well G-28 Relative to Well L-5 (psi)
Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
L-5 Pressure (psi)
G-28 Pressure (psi)
Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at G-28 (psi)
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 7 7-1 7.0
SUMMARY
, INTERPRETATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS In accordance with the Turkey Point Monitoring Plan (SFWMD 2009a) and the Fifth Supplemental Agreement (SFWMD 2009b), FPL is required to assess the groundwater, surface water, ecological, and meteorological conditions in and surrounding to the Turkey Point Plant Cooling Canal System (CCS). The purpose of the effort is to assess Pre-Uprate conditions prior to the uprating of the Turkey Point nuclear Units 3 and 4 and to assess effects following the Uprating (Post-Uprate).
Monitoring was initiated in June 2010 and has continued through May 2014. FPL notified the FDEP of commencement of the Uprate of nuclear Units 3 and 4 on September 24, 2010. Uprate modifications were performed on both Unit 3 and Unit 4 over a period of time. One unit was uprated at a time. The final modifications for Unit 3 took place during February 26, 2012 to September 5, 2012 and the unit reached full uprate power on October 31, 2012. The final modifications for Unit 4 took place during November 5, 2012 to April 17, 2013 and the unit reached full uprated power on May 8, 2013. Both units were operating together within their uprated capacities starting May 27, 2013. Data collected prior to February 26, 2012, are part of the Pre-Uprate period, while data collected between February 26, 2012 and May 27, 2013, are referred to as part of the Interim Operating Period. Data collected after May 27, 2013, are referred to as part of the Post-Uprate period.
This annual report incorporates findings from the Post-Uprate monitoring period from June 2013 to May 2014 and, where applicable, makes comparisons to the Pre-Uprate monitoring period.
This section provides a summary and interpretation of the results.
7.1 Groundwater Major Findings
In the Post-Uprate period, the salt constituents have remained relatively consistent for most wells; however, notable increases in chloride and sodium were observed in two deep wells (more than 100 feet below Bay bottom) in Biscayne Bay (TPGW-10D, and to a lesser extent in TPGW-11D) at the start of the Interim Operating period. The specific conductance also increased in response to the increase in saltwater constituents in these two wells. The effects were not observed in the shallow and intermediate depth wells.
Chloride, sodium, and specific conductance at TPGW-7D were higher during the Post-Uprate period compared to the Pre-Uprate. This well was previously fresh at depth. It is
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 7 7-2 not clear if the increase in specific conductance is the result of the long-term operation of the CCS, lag effects of the 2011 drought, or some other factor.
The extent of CCS water in the groundwater does not appear to have changed appreciably between Pre-and Post-Uprate beyond the deep Biscayne Bay well, TPGW-10D; however, further verification with tritium data is still needed. The Post-Uprate results still indicated hypersaline water immediately adjacent to the west in the groundwater.
Further west from the CCS, there is evidence of saline water present in decreasing ionic concentrations at depth out approximately 3 miles. The outermost wells to the west, TPGW-8 and TPGW-9, were fresh at all depths.
Nearly all of the observations made in the Pre-Uprate period regarding groundwater quality and levels, the influence of meteorological conditions, operation of the CCS, and operation of the ID (FPL 2012a) are the same during the Post-Uprate period. The higher water densities in the CCS will impact groundwater flow and gradients, but seasonal changes and rainfall have a greater impact on groundwater levels. There was no discernable evidence of CCS operations on water levels at nearby wells TPGW-1 and TPGW-10.
7.2 Surface Water Major Findings
Specific conductance in the CCS has been rising since the beginning of the dry season in 2014 and reached over 120,000 µS/cm (salinity of 95 PSU) in May 2014. The average Post-Uprate value for all stations was 92,594 µS/cm. The maximum value was over 25,000 µS/cm higher and the average value was over 15,000 µS/cm higher than that reported in the Pre-Uprate period. For comparison, Biscayne Bay surface water stations from June 2013 through May 2014 had specific conductance values that ranged from 23,315 to 63,186 µS/cm.
The temperature has also increased in the CCS during the Post-Uprate period and on average was 3°C to 5°C warmer than during the Pre-Uprate period. The increase in CCS surface water temperatures during the Post-Uprate period cannot be explained by the Uprate since the total heat rejection rate to the CCS from Turkey Point Units 1, 2, 3, and 4, operating at full capacity prior to the Uprate would have been higher than the Post-Uprate heat rejection rate to the CCS for Units 1, 3, and 4, operating at full capacity. Unit 2 has been dedicated to operate in a synchronous generator mode (i.e. not producing steam heat).
Nutrients (TKN) have increased in the CCS since June 2013 and may have contributed to algal blooms in the CCS. The algal species in the CCS is known to be a nitrogen-fixer, which may be contributing to the TKN observed. FPL is currently assessing the cause as it may be attributable to a number of factors unrelated to the Uprate.
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 7 7-3
In conjunction with specific conductance, data indicate there is no measurable contribution of nutrients to the Bay that can be attributed to the CCS.
There continue to be no discernable effects of the CCS on Biscayne Bay surface water quality.
Some of the potential seepage effects reported in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012) at TPSWC-4 and TPSWC-5 were not as evident in the Post-Uprate period based on temperature and specific conductance.
With the exception of the CCS, the majority of observations made in the Pre-Uprate reporting period (FPL 2012) regarding water quality and stage are still the same.
7.3 Water Budget Major Findings
The model simulates a net water loss of 3.26 MGD from the CCS during the Post-Uprate period and a net salt gain of 2,216 (lb x 1,000)/day within the CCS over the same period.
This has resulted in decreased water levels and increased salinity within the CCS.
A significant lack of precipitation and increase in evaporative losses have contributed to the decline in water levels in the CCS during the Post-Uprate period.
Reductions in CCS water levels and the amplified role of saline groundwater inflow during the Post-Uprate period have increased the salt content (and salinity) in the CCS.
7.4 Interceptor Ditch Major Findings
The use of freshwater head equivalents provides a more rigorous approach to the operation of the ID.
FPL is operating and maintaining a net seaward gradient in the upper zone of the aquifer.
7.5 Ecological Major Findings
Ecological monitoring in Biscayne Bay and the marsh and mangrove areas surrounding Turkey Point show no evidence of impacts from the CCS. Changes appear to be more seasonally and meteorologically driven.
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 7 7-4
Findings were similar to those previously summarized in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012).
7.6 Recommendations
Based on data consistency over the monitoring duration in the groundwater stations, FPL recommends reducing the automated recording of groundwater quality data and level measurements at non-tidal stations (TPGW-1, -2, -4, -5, -6, -7, -8, -9 well clusters) from hourly to daily.
Based on the lack of ecological changes from the Pre-Uprate to the Post-Uprate, FPL recommends eliminating all (Biscayne Bay, marsh and mangrove) ecological monitoring.
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 8 9-1
- 8. REFERENCES Biscayne National Park. 2007. Salinity sampling in Biscayne Bay (2005-2006). Annual Report to the United States Army Corps of Engineers for the Monitoring and Assessment Plan of the Comprehensive Everglades restoration Plan for RECOVER Assessment Team Southeast Estuary Subteam. 151 pp.
Chang, C. Y., P. V. McCormick, S. Newman, and E. Elliott. 2009. Isotopic indicators of environmental change in a subtropical wetland. Ecological Indicators 9:825-836.
Childers, D. L., D. Iwaniec, D. Rondeau, G. Rubio, E. Verdon, and C. J. Madden. 2006.
Responses of sawgrass and spikerush to variation in hydrologic drivers and salinity in Southern Everglades marshes. Hydrobiologia 569(1):273-292.
Coronado-Molina, C., J. W. Day, E. Reyes, and B. C. Perez. 2004. Standing crop and aboveground biomass partitioning of a dwarf mangrove forest in Taylor River Slough, Florida. Wetlands Ecology and Management 12:157-164.
Florida Power & Light Company (FPL). 2014a. Florida Power & Light Company Semi-Annual Report for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., Effective Date: 02/28/11. February 2014.
__________. 2014b. Turkey Point Power Plan Groundwater, Surface Water, and Ecological Monitoring Project -Groundwater and Surface Water Audit Report. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., December 2013
__________. 2013a. Florida Power & Light Company Semi-Annual Report for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., Effective Date: 07/13/13. July 2013.
__________. 2013b. Florida Power & Light Company Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., Effective Date: July 2013.
__________. 2012. Florida Power & Light Company Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., October 31, 2013.
__________. 2011a. Florida Power & Light Company Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., Effective Date: 12/05/11. December 2011.
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 8 9-2
___________2009. FPL Turkey Point Power Plant Groundwater, Surface Water, and Ecological Monitoring Plan. October 14, 2009.
Fourqurean, J.W. and J.C. Zieman. 2002. Nutrient content of the seagrass Thalassia testudinum reveals regional patterns of relative availability of nitrogen and phosphorus in the Florida Keys USA. Biogeochemistry 61: 229-245.
Golder Associates Inc. 2011a. Saltwater Orientation in the Biscayne Aquifer in the Turkey Point Plant Vicinity Prior to Installation of the Cooling Canal System. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company. April 22, 2011.
__________. 2011b. 2011 Annual Report Groundwater Monitoring Program. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company. August 2011.
__________. 2010. 2010 Annual Report Groundwater Monitoring Program. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company. August 2010.
JLA Geoscience, Inc. 2010. Geology and Hydrogeology Report for FPL, Turkey Point Plant Groundwater, Surface Water, and Ecological Monitoring Plan, FPL, Turkey Point Plant, Homestead, Florida. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company. October 2010.
Kohn, M. J. 2010. Carbon isotope compositions of terrestrial C3 plants as indicators of (paleo) ecology and (paleo) climate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
107(46):207-226.
Lugo, A. E. and S. Snedaker. 1974. The Ecology of Mangroves. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 5:39-64.
McKee, K. L., I. C. Feller, M. Popp, and W. Wanek. 2002. Mangrove Isotopic (15N and 13C)
Fractionation Across a Nitrogen vs. Phosphorous Limitation Gradient. Ecology 83(4):1065-1075.
Olmsted, I. and T. V. Armentano. 1997. Vegetation of Shark Slough, Everglades National Park.
SFNRC Technical Report 97-001. 39 p.
Quiros, R. 2002. The nitrogen to phosphorus ratio for lakes: a cause of a consequence of aquatic biology? In: Cirelli, A.F., and Marquisa, G.C. (eds). El Agua en Iberoamerica: de la Limnologia a la Gestion en Sudamerica. CYTED XVII, Centro de Estudios Transdisciplinarios del Agua, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad de Buenos Aires.
Buenos Aires, Argentina. Pp. 11-26.
Robblee, M. B. and J. A. Browder. 2007. Year 2 Annual Report. USGS Work Order #19 NOAA Work Order #3 for MAP activities 3.2.3.5 and 3.2.4.5. South Florida Fish and Invertebrate Assessment Network. 84 pp.
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 8 9-3 Ross, M. S., J. F. Meeder, J. P. Sah, P. L. Ruiz, and G. J. Telesnicki. 2000. The Southeast Saline Everglades revisited: a half-century of coastal vegetation change. Journal of Vegetation Science 11:101-112.
Ross, M. S., P. L. Ruiz, G. J. Telesnicki, and J. F. Meeder. 2001. Estimating above-ground biomass and production in mangrove communities of Biscayne National Park, Florida (U.S.A). Wetlands Ecology and Management 9: 27-37.
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). 2013a. Letter from Terrie Bates, Director, Water Resource Division, dated June 3, 2013, regarding Units 3 and 4 Post-Uprate Monitoring (reduction of groundwater/surface water monitoring), to Barbara Linkiewicz, FPL & NextEra Energy Resources, Juno Beach, Florida.
__________. 2013b. Letter from Terrie Bates, Director, Water Resource Division, dated July 17, 2013, regarding Unit 3 and 4 Post-Uprate Monitoring (reduction of ecological monitoring), to Barbara Linkiewicz, FPL & NextEra Energy Resources, Juno Beach, Florida.
__________. 2013c. Email from Terrie Bates, Director, Water Resource Division, dated July 23, 2013, regarding Unit 3 and 4 Post-Uprate Monitoring (clarification of sampling frequency for ecological nutrients), to Stacy Foster, Manager, Environmental Licensing, FPL & NextEra Energy Resources, Juno Beach, Florida.
__________. 2009a. FPL Turkey Point Power Plant Groundwater, Surface Water, and Ecological Monitoring Plan (Exhibit B). Prepared by SFWMD, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resource Management. October 14, 2009.
__________. 2009b. Fifth Supplemental Agreement between the South Florida Water Management District and Florida Power & Light Company. October 2009.
__________. 2008. 2007 Cumulative Annual Report for the Coastal Water Quality Monitoring Network (Agreement 46000000352) for the period January - December 2007. Prepared for the South Florida Water Management District Water Quality Analysis Division by Southeast Environmental Research Center (SERC). May 23, 2008.
TestAmerica, 2014. Letter from Terry Hornsby, Quality Assurance Manager, dated August 22, 2014, regarding Bicarbonate Alkalinity Data Revision, to Stacy Foster, Florida Power &
Light Company, Juno Beach, Florida.
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 8 9-4 Weather Underground. 2014. Weather History for Homestead AFB, FL, July 1, 2013 through May 21, 2014.
http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KHST/2013/7/1/CustomHistory.html?day end=31&monthend=5&yearend=2014&req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=N A. Accessed July 2014.
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 FIGURES
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project-August 2014 Figure 6.1-1. Historic ID Monitoring Wells and Transects.
6-17 Section 6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-18 Figure 6.3-1. Comparison of ID Monitoring Period to Average Monthly Historic Rainfall.
0 2
4 6
8 10 12 14 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Rainfall (inches)
Month S20F (Historical 1968-2013)
S20F (2013-2014)
TPM-1 (2013-2014)
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 3
co 2 00 c
~
z 1
- £ -
c:
0....
> 0 Q) w...
Q) 3: -1
-2
-3 L3 L5
- His orical Max June 2013 G21 Site Sept2013
- Dec2013 G28 March 2014 G35 Historical Min Figure 6.4-1. Historical Min and Max, and Quarterly L-3, L-5, G-21, G-28, and G-35 Groundwater Levels.
6-19 Section 6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-20 Figure 6.4-2. L-3 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Temperature (°C)
Jun-2013 Sep-2013 Dec-2013 Mar-2014 Historical Envelope
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-21 Figure 6.4-3. L-5 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Temperature (°C)
Mar-2013 Sep-2013 Dec-2013 Mar-2014 Historical Envelope
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-22 Figure 6.4-4. G-21 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
20.0 22.0 24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Temperature (°C)
Jun-2013 Sep-2013 Dec-2013 Mar-2014 Historical Envelope
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-23 Figure 6.4-5. G-28 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
20.0 22.0 24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Temperature (°C)
Jun-2013 Sep-2013 Dec-2013 Mar-2014 Historical Envelope
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-24 Figure 6.4-6. G-35 Vertical Temperature Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
20.0 22.0 24.0 26.0 28.0 30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Temperature (°C)
Jun-2013 Sep-2013 Dec-2013 Mar-2014
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-25 Figure 6.4-7. L-3 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
-2 0
2 4
6 8
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Chloride Content (ppt)
Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Historical Envelope
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-26 Figure 6.4-8. L-5 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
0 2
4 6
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Chloride Content ppt)
Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Historical Envelope
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-27 Figure 6.4-9. G-21 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Chloride Content (ppt)
Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Historical Envelope
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-28 Figure 6.4-10. G-28 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
0 2
4 6
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Chloride Content (ppt)
Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14 Historical Envelope
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-29 Figure 6.4-11. G-35 Vertical Chloride Profile June 2013 through March 2014.
-60
-55
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5 0
0 2
4 6
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
Chloride Content (ppt)
Jun-13 Sep-13 Dec-13 Mar-14
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014
~ -1. 0 +-l"~----_,_,~-----,.~-------------------------
0
~
z Q)
~ -2. 0 -l-----L..-----------------------~--fm1iMH-~.---Ei=-~~
-3.0 +-----.-------.--------,---..-----.-------r-----,----..----,-----....,.-------r-----
6/1/13 7/1/13 8/1/13 9/1/13 10/1/13 11/1/13 12/1/13 1/1/14 2/1/14 3/1/14 4/1/14 5/1/1 4 Levee 31 Interceptor Ditch Canal 32 Figure 6.4-12. Transect A Water Levels June 2013 through May 2014.
6-30 Section 6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 i' -1.0 +-l"-..:------P~-----7'0...-------
0
~
z Q)
~ -2. 0 ---------------------------l---~.Jn.41r-r--=-~'""'"'....---~~~**
-3.0 +-----.------.--------,---..-----.------r-----,----..----,-----....,.-------r-----
6/1/13 7/1/13 8/1/13 9/1/13 10/1/13 11/1/13 12/1/13 1/1/14 2/1/14 3/1/14 4/1/14 5/1/1 4 Levee 31 Interceptor Ditch Canal 32 Figure 6.4-13. Transect B Water Levels June 2013 through May 2014.
6-31 Section 6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014
~
-1.0 Cl
~
z g -1.5
~
~
w...
Q)
~ -2. 0.,_------------------------'l..:=-------H~L..\\+--t--P.i\\
-3.0 +-----.------.--------,---..-----.------r-----,.---..------,-----....,.-------r-----
6/1/13 7/1/13 8/1/13 9/1/13 10/1/13 11/1/13 12/1/13 1/1/14 2/1/14 3/1/14 4/1/14 5/1/1 4 Levee 31 Interceptor Ditch Canal 32 Figure 6.4-14. Transect C Water Levels June 2013 through May 2014.
6-32 Section 6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014
~ -1. 0 +----------~-------------------------------
0
~
z Q)
~ -2.0
-3.0 +----.------.--------,----r-----.------r-----,----..------,-----....,.-------r-----
6/1/1 3 7/1/13 8/1/13 9/1/13 10/1/13 11/1/1 3 12/1/1 3 1/1/14 2/1/14 3/1/14 4/1/1 4 5/1/1 4 Levee 31 Interceptor Ditch Canal 32 Figure 6.4-15. Transect D Water Levels June 2013 through May 2014.
6-33 Section 6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014
~ -1. 0 +-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-
0
~
z
.2 -1.5
('O
~
w...
Q) -
~
-2. 0 --t---'lr--~~-r~---.~~--,.,_~~_....,,JllC-~~~~~-+---.:---:---~~~~~...-.~.r--.--~:ft--+--tt-
-2.5
-3.0 6/1/13 7/1/13 8/1/13 9/1/13 10/1/13 11 /1/13 12/1/13 1/1/14 2/1/14 3/1/14 4/1/14 5/1/14 Levee 31 Interceptor Ditch Canal 32 Figure 6.4-16. Transect E Water Levels June 2013 through May 2014.
6-34 Section 6
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 1.00 00 00 c > <
0.50 z
c:
0 -
<
-L31-C32
-- L31-ID Section 6 Figure 6.4-17. Differences in Freshwater Head Equivalent/Density Corrected Water Levels Between L-31 and -C32, and L-31 and ID (based on actual water depths and bottom densities) -Transect A.
6-35
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 1.00 co co Cl
~ o.so z
~
c:
0 -"'
~
0.00 w
~
QI -"'
~
-0.50
-1.00 -.---~--~--~--~--~-~--~--~--~-~--~--~--~-~-
~v
~
-L31-C32
-- L31-I D Section 6 Figure 6.4-18. Differences in Freshwater Head Equivalent/Density Corrected Water Levels Between L-31 and C-32, and L-31 and ID (based on actual water depths and bottom densities) -Transect C.
6-36
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 1.00 co co 0 > <
z 0.50
~
c:
0 tv >
Q) w 0.00 Q) -
tv 3:
-0.50
-L31-C32 Section 6
-- L31-ID Figure 6.4-19. Differences in Freshwater Head Equivalent/Density Corrected Water Levels Between L-31 and C-32, and L-31 and ID (based on actual water depths and bottom densities) -Transect E.
6-37
O'I I w 00
~
<O c:
CiJ a>
- i:i.
I I\\)
~
- J -
CD
~
CD "S.
0.,
CJ 0 :::r
""C c:
3 "O
0 "O
CD
~
o*
- J I>>
- J a.
- o
!!?.
- J I
- u
- J -
I z
I z
N I
(/)
I
(/)
N I
I I
I I
I I
r-i=
r--L-F
=--
=
b-
=-
r-
- =-
I I
I w
Ln en Rainfall (in)
O'~
§:~
.... ~
Iii'~
~""(
~'b
.a:-.~.
~~
Qi :::J i:::J
~~
~ -
'9. d'
~ (j\\
..,.~
~~
c: Qi
~i iq. ~
~g C)....
..... 8'
.a:-..,
5*
IQ
~
6'
- J Q\\
~
~
~
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-39 Figure 6.4-21. Density vs. Elevation Wells L-3 and G-21 During September 2013 Sampling Event.
62.0 62.5 63.0 63.5 64.0 64.5 65.0 65.5 66.0
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10 0
10 Density (lbs/cu ft)
Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
L-3 Density lbs/cu ft G-21 Density lbs/cu ft
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-40 Figure 6.4-22. Pressure vs. Elevation Wells L-3 and G-21 During September 2013 Sampling Event.
0 5
10 15 20 25
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10 0
10 Pressure (psi)
Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
L-3 Pressure (psi)
G-21 Pressure (psi)
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-41 Figure 6.4-23. Pressure Gradient Difference between Well L-3 and Well G-21 during September 2013 Sampling Event.
-0.15
-0.10
-0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0
4 8
12 16 20 24 28
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10 0
10 Pressure (psi)
Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at Well G-21 Relative to Well L-3 (psi)
Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
L-3 Pressure (psi)
G-21 Pressure (psi)
Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at G-21 (psi)
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-42 Figure 6.4-24. Pressure Gradient Difference between Well L-3 and Well G-21 during March 2014 Sampling Event.
-0.15
-0.10
-0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0
4 8
12 16 20 24 28
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10 0
10 Pressure (psi)
Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at Well G-21 Relative to Well L-3 (psi)
Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
L-3 Pressure (psi)
G-21 Pressure (psi)
Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at G-21 (psi)
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-43 Figure 6.4-25. Pressure Gradient Difference between Well L-5 and Well G-28 during September 2013 Sampling Event.
-0.30
-0.20
-0.10 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.000 4.000 8.000 12.000 16.000 20.000 24.000 28.000
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10 0
10 Pressure (psi)
Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at Well G-28 Relative to Well L-5 (psi)
Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
L-5 Pressure (psi)
G-28 Pressure (psi)
Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at G-28 (psi)
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 6 6-44 Figure 6.4-26. Pressure Gradient Difference between Well L-5 and Well G-28 during March 2014 Sampling Event.
-0.60
-0.40
-0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0
4 8
12 16 20 24 28
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10 0
10 Pressure (psi)
Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at Well G-28 Relative to Well L-5 (psi)
Water Elevation (ft, NAVD 88)
L-5 Pressure (psi)
G-28 Pressure (psi)
Pressure Excess (+) / Pressure Deficit (-) at G-28 (psi)
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 7 7-1 7.0
SUMMARY
, INTERPRETATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS In accordance with the Turkey Point Monitoring Plan (SFWMD 2009a) and the Fifth Supplemental Agreement (SFWMD 2009b), FPL is required to assess the groundwater, surface water, ecological, and meteorological conditions in and surrounding to the Turkey Point Plant Cooling Canal System (CCS). The purpose of the effort is to assess Pre-Uprate conditions prior to the uprating of the Turkey Point nuclear Units 3 and 4 and to assess effects following the Uprating (Post-Uprate).
Monitoring was initiated in June 2010 and has continued through May 2014. FPL notified the FDEP of commencement of the Uprate of nuclear Units 3 and 4 on September 24, 2010. Uprate modifications were performed on both Unit 3 and Unit 4 over a period of time. One unit was uprated at a time. The final modifications for Unit 3 took place during February 26, 2012 to September 5, 2012 and the unit reached full uprate power on October 31, 2012. The final modifications for Unit 4 took place during November 5, 2012 to April 17, 2013 and the unit reached full uprated power on May 8, 2013. Both units were operating together within their uprated capacities starting May 27, 2013. Data collected prior to February 26, 2012, are part of the Pre-Uprate period, while data collected between February 26, 2012 and May 27, 2013, are referred to as part of the Interim Operating Period. Data collected after May 27, 2013, are referred to as part of the Post-Uprate period.
This annual report incorporates findings from the Post-Uprate monitoring period from June 2013 to May 2014 and, where applicable, makes comparisons to the Pre-Uprate monitoring period.
This section provides a summary and interpretation of the results.
7.1 Groundwater Major Findings
In the Post-Uprate period, the salt constituents have remained relatively consistent for most wells; however, notable increases in chloride and sodium were observed in two deep wells (more than 100 feet below Bay bottom) in Biscayne Bay (TPGW-10D, and to a lesser extent in TPGW-11D) at the start of the Interim Operating period. The specific conductance also increased in response to the increase in saltwater constituents in these two wells. The effects were not observed in the shallow and intermediate depth wells.
Chloride, sodium, and specific conductance at TPGW-7D were higher during the Post-Uprate period compared to the Pre-Uprate. This well was previously fresh at depth. It is
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 7 7-2 not clear if the increase in specific conductance is the result of the long-term operation of the CCS, lag effects of the 2011 drought, or some other factor.
The extent of CCS water in the groundwater does not appear to have changed appreciably between Pre-and Post-Uprate beyond the deep Biscayne Bay well, TPGW-10D; however, further verification with tritium data is still needed. The Post-Uprate results still indicated hypersaline water immediately adjacent to the west in the groundwater.
Further west from the CCS, there is evidence of saline water present in decreasing ionic concentrations at depth out approximately 3 miles. The outermost wells to the west, TPGW-8 and TPGW-9, were fresh at all depths.
Nearly all of the observations made in the Pre-Uprate period regarding groundwater quality and levels, the influence of meteorological conditions, operation of the CCS, and operation of the ID (FPL 2012a) are the same during the Post-Uprate period. The higher water densities in the CCS will impact groundwater flow and gradients, but seasonal changes and rainfall have a greater impact on groundwater levels. There was no discernable evidence of CCS operations on water levels at nearby wells TPGW-1 and TPGW-10.
7.2 Surface Water Major Findings
Specific conductance in the CCS has been rising since the beginning of the dry season in 2014 and reached over 120,000 µS/cm (salinity of 95 PSU) in May 2014. The average Post-Uprate value for all stations was 92,594 µS/cm. The maximum value was over 25,000 µS/cm higher and the average value was over 15,000 µS/cm higher than that reported in the Pre-Uprate period. For comparison, Biscayne Bay surface water stations from June 2013 through May 2014 had specific conductance values that ranged from 23,315 to 63,186 µS/cm.
The temperature has also increased in the CCS during the Post-Uprate period and on average was 3°C to 5°C warmer than during the Pre-Uprate period. The increase in CCS surface water temperatures during the Post-Uprate period cannot be explained by the Uprate since the total heat rejection rate to the CCS from Turkey Point Units 1, 2, 3, and 4, operating at full capacity prior to the Uprate would have been higher than the Post-Uprate heat rejection rate to the CCS for Units 1, 3, and 4, operating at full capacity. Unit 2 has been dedicated to operate in a synchronous generator mode (i.e. not producing steam heat).
Nutrients (TKN) have increased in the CCS since June 2013 and may have contributed to algal blooms in the CCS. The algal species in the CCS is known to be a nitrogen-fixer, which may be contributing to the TKN observed. FPL is currently assessing the cause as it may be attributable to a number of factors unrelated to the Uprate.
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 7 7-3
In conjunction with specific conductance, data indicate there is no measurable contribution of nutrients to the Bay that can be attributed to the CCS.
There continue to be no discernable effects of the CCS on Biscayne Bay surface water quality.
Some of the potential seepage effects reported in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012) at TPSWC-4 and TPSWC-5 were not as evident in the Post-Uprate period based on temperature and specific conductance.
With the exception of the CCS, the majority of observations made in the Pre-Uprate reporting period (FPL 2012) regarding water quality and stage are still the same.
7.3 Water Budget Major Findings
The model simulates a net water loss of 3.26 MGD from the CCS during the Post-Uprate period and a net salt gain of 2,216 (lb x 1,000)/day within the CCS over the same period.
This has resulted in decreased water levels and increased salinity within the CCS.
A significant lack of precipitation and increase in evaporative losses have contributed to the decline in water levels in the CCS during the Post-Uprate period.
Reductions in CCS water levels and the amplified role of saline groundwater inflow during the Post-Uprate period have increased the salt content (and salinity) in the CCS.
7.4 Interceptor Ditch Major Findings
The use of freshwater head equivalents provides a more rigorous approach to the operation of the ID.
FPL is operating and maintaining a net seaward gradient in the upper zone of the aquifer.
7.5 Ecological Major Findings
Ecological monitoring in Biscayne Bay and the marsh and mangrove areas surrounding Turkey Point show no evidence of impacts from the CCS. Changes appear to be more seasonally and meteorologically driven.
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 7 7-4
Findings were similar to those previously summarized in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012).
7.6 Recommendations
Based on data consistency over the monitoring duration in the groundwater stations, FPL recommends reducing the automated recording of groundwater quality data and level measurements at non-tidal stations (TPGW-1, -2, -4, -5, -6, -7, -8, -9 well clusters) from hourly to daily.
Based on the lack of ecological changes from the Pre-Uprate to the Post-Uprate, FPL recommends eliminating all (Biscayne Bay, marsh and mangrove) ecological monitoring.
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 8 9-1
- 8. REFERENCES Biscayne National Park. 2007. Salinity sampling in Biscayne Bay (2005-2006). Annual Report to the United States Army Corps of Engineers for the Monitoring and Assessment Plan of the Comprehensive Everglades restoration Plan for RECOVER Assessment Team Southeast Estuary Subteam. 151 pp.
Chang, C. Y., P. V. McCormick, S. Newman, and E. Elliott. 2009. Isotopic indicators of environmental change in a subtropical wetland. Ecological Indicators 9:825-836.
Childers, D. L., D. Iwaniec, D. Rondeau, G. Rubio, E. Verdon, and C. J. Madden. 2006.
Responses of sawgrass and spikerush to variation in hydrologic drivers and salinity in Southern Everglades marshes. Hydrobiologia 569(1):273-292.
Coronado-Molina, C., J. W. Day, E. Reyes, and B. C. Perez. 2004. Standing crop and aboveground biomass partitioning of a dwarf mangrove forest in Taylor River Slough, Florida. Wetlands Ecology and Management 12:157-164.
Florida Power & Light Company (FPL). 2014a. Florida Power & Light Company Semi-Annual Report for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., Effective Date: 02/28/11. February 2014.
__________. 2014b. Turkey Point Power Plan Groundwater, Surface Water, and Ecological Monitoring Project -Groundwater and Surface Water Audit Report. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., December 2013
__________. 2013a. Florida Power & Light Company Semi-Annual Report for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., Effective Date: 07/13/13. July 2013.
__________. 2013b. Florida Power & Light Company Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., Effective Date: July 2013.
__________. 2012. Florida Power & Light Company Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., October 31, 2013.
__________. 2011a. Florida Power & Light Company Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for the Turkey Point Monitoring Project. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company by Ecology and Environment, Inc., Effective Date: 12/05/11. December 2011.
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 8 9-2
___________2009. FPL Turkey Point Power Plant Groundwater, Surface Water, and Ecological Monitoring Plan. October 14, 2009.
Fourqurean, J.W. and J.C. Zieman. 2002. Nutrient content of the seagrass Thalassia testudinum reveals regional patterns of relative availability of nitrogen and phosphorus in the Florida Keys USA. Biogeochemistry 61: 229-245.
Golder Associates Inc. 2011a. Saltwater Orientation in the Biscayne Aquifer in the Turkey Point Plant Vicinity Prior to Installation of the Cooling Canal System. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company. April 22, 2011.
__________. 2011b. 2011 Annual Report Groundwater Monitoring Program. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company. August 2011.
__________. 2010. 2010 Annual Report Groundwater Monitoring Program. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company. August 2010.
JLA Geoscience, Inc. 2010. Geology and Hydrogeology Report for FPL, Turkey Point Plant Groundwater, Surface Water, and Ecological Monitoring Plan, FPL, Turkey Point Plant, Homestead, Florida. Prepared for Florida Power & Light Company. October 2010.
Kohn, M. J. 2010. Carbon isotope compositions of terrestrial C3 plants as indicators of (paleo) ecology and (paleo) climate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
107(46):207-226.
Lugo, A. E. and S. Snedaker. 1974. The Ecology of Mangroves. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 5:39-64.
McKee, K. L., I. C. Feller, M. Popp, and W. Wanek. 2002. Mangrove Isotopic (15N and 13C)
Fractionation Across a Nitrogen vs. Phosphorous Limitation Gradient. Ecology 83(4):1065-1075.
Olmsted, I. and T. V. Armentano. 1997. Vegetation of Shark Slough, Everglades National Park.
SFNRC Technical Report 97-001. 39 p.
Quiros, R. 2002. The nitrogen to phosphorus ratio for lakes: a cause of a consequence of aquatic biology? In: Cirelli, A.F., and Marquisa, G.C. (eds). El Agua en Iberoamerica: de la Limnologia a la Gestion en Sudamerica. CYTED XVII, Centro de Estudios Transdisciplinarios del Agua, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad de Buenos Aires.
Buenos Aires, Argentina. Pp. 11-26.
Robblee, M. B. and J. A. Browder. 2007. Year 2 Annual Report. USGS Work Order #19 NOAA Work Order #3 for MAP activities 3.2.3.5 and 3.2.4.5. South Florida Fish and Invertebrate Assessment Network. 84 pp.
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 8 9-3 Ross, M. S., J. F. Meeder, J. P. Sah, P. L. Ruiz, and G. J. Telesnicki. 2000. The Southeast Saline Everglades revisited: a half-century of coastal vegetation change. Journal of Vegetation Science 11:101-112.
Ross, M. S., P. L. Ruiz, G. J. Telesnicki, and J. F. Meeder. 2001. Estimating above-ground biomass and production in mangrove communities of Biscayne National Park, Florida (U.S.A). Wetlands Ecology and Management 9: 27-37.
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). 2013a. Letter from Terrie Bates, Director, Water Resource Division, dated June 3, 2013, regarding Units 3 and 4 Post-Uprate Monitoring (reduction of groundwater/surface water monitoring), to Barbara Linkiewicz, FPL & NextEra Energy Resources, Juno Beach, Florida.
__________. 2013b. Letter from Terrie Bates, Director, Water Resource Division, dated July 17, 2013, regarding Unit 3 and 4 Post-Uprate Monitoring (reduction of ecological monitoring), to Barbara Linkiewicz, FPL & NextEra Energy Resources, Juno Beach, Florida.
__________. 2013c. Email from Terrie Bates, Director, Water Resource Division, dated July 23, 2013, regarding Unit 3 and 4 Post-Uprate Monitoring (clarification of sampling frequency for ecological nutrients), to Stacy Foster, Manager, Environmental Licensing, FPL & NextEra Energy Resources, Juno Beach, Florida.
__________. 2009a. FPL Turkey Point Power Plant Groundwater, Surface Water, and Ecological Monitoring Plan (Exhibit B). Prepared by SFWMD, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resource Management. October 14, 2009.
__________. 2009b. Fifth Supplemental Agreement between the South Florida Water Management District and Florida Power & Light Company. October 2009.
__________. 2008. 2007 Cumulative Annual Report for the Coastal Water Quality Monitoring Network (Agreement 46000000352) for the period January - December 2007. Prepared for the South Florida Water Management District Water Quality Analysis Division by Southeast Environmental Research Center (SERC). May 23, 2008.
TestAmerica, 2014. Letter from Terry Hornsby, Quality Assurance Manager, dated August 22, 2014, regarding Bicarbonate Alkalinity Data Revision, to Stacy Foster, Florida Power &
Light Company, Juno Beach, Florida.
FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August 2014 Section 8 9-4 Weather Underground. 2014. Weather History for Homestead AFB, FL, July 1, 2013 through May 21, 2014.
http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KHST/2013/7/1/CustomHistory.html?day end=31&monthend=5&yearend=2014&req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=N A. Accessed July 2014.