ML17266A532

Forwards Comments on DES,NUREG-0842

ML17266A532
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	12/14/1981
From:	Robert E. Uhrig FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RTR-NUREG-0842, RTR-NUREG-842 L-81-523, NUDOCS 8112180379
Download: ML17266A532 (8)

Text

December 14, 1981 L-81-523 Office of Huclear Reactor Regulation Attention: Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing U.S. Huclear Regulatory Coranission Mashinqton, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Eisenhut:

oEczst Re: St. Lucie I'nit 2 Docket Ho. 50-389 4'il /y Draft Environmental Statement CLS' FPL Comments Attached for your review and corrrnent are Florida Power 5 Light (FPL) comments regarding the St. Lucie Plant Unit Ho. 2 Draft Environmental Statement, HUREG-0842, dated October, 1981.

FPL would be pleased to discuss any of the corenents at your conve-'ience.

Very truly yours,

~i g 'r~~~c

.obert E. Uhrig Vice President Advanced Systems and Technology REU/DME/mm Attachments cc: J .P. O'Reilly, Director, Region II (w/o attachments)

Victor Her ses (w/ attachments)

Harold F. Reis, Esquir (w/o attachments)

Q~OQ 8112180379 811214 PDR ADOC)i 05000389 A-5 D PDR

COPCEHTS OM ST. LVCIE 2 DES (HUREG-0842. Oct. 1981)

Section 3 - In the discussion of ACPS shou'ld be noted that hearings were also held in hearings it Hiami and Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.

Table of contents - Titles of Subsections 5.10.1 and 5.10.2 are mis'labeled; they shou'Id be "Reou--

lator Re uire.;,ants" and "Operational Overvievf'.

respectively.. See p. 5-I3, and p..v~-l4)

Section 1.2 - Same co)n))ent as I/umber (1)

Section 1.2 - The percentage completion indicated in the second paragraph should be updated as of the time of issuance of the FES.

The last paragraph should reao...the applicant has obtained State approval of the facility in the ~eorm of a site certification.."

Table 1.1 under status for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, it sould read - Permit obtained, 1/81.

Table 1.1 under status for U.S. Coast Guard, it should read - Permit obtained, 5/81.

Table 1.1 under status for State of Florida Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund, it should read - Permit Obtaineo, 1/81.

Table 1.1 under status for Federal Aviation Agency, it should read - Permit Obtained, 12/79.

K A~nal sis".

v Section 3.1 should read...that St. Lucie 2 at the soecified site, and of the specified design ".

Section 3.2 - A new rule which would provide that need-for-oower and alternative energy source issues should not be considered in coerat)ng license proceedings is currently scheduled for adoption late this year: Should such a rule be finalized before the comoletion of the FES, the FES shou':d so reflect.

Section 4.2. 1 should read...The Discharge pipeline for Unit 2 has a 4.9-m (16 ft) ins-ide diameter versus th'e 9.7-m (12 ft) diamet-er pipeline described

e P. 4-1 Section 4.2.2; Estimated averaoe plant water usage (14) supplied by the Fort Pierce Water Systeui has been revised to 10.1 1/s ('61 gpss), ratner than 9.6 1/s (152 gpm) .

Section 4.2.4, 1st paraqraoh, typo - bis - (n-tri-butyltin) oxide (TBTO).

Section 4.2.4, last paragraph, should read - When either St. Lucie i or 2 circulatioo eater ~sstem is out of service for extended neriods tl " Y-port diffuser is to be closed and all flow wi'i. e di- ."

verted through the eulti-port diffuser ~(exce t when this coincides with those infreouent occasions on which the multi- ort diffuser itself must be Section 4.2.6, 4th paragrap): St. Lucie 1 is in-correctly cited; it should be St. Lucie 2. Total heat rejection rate of 6.4x10 Btu/hr represents the combined heat from St. Lucie Unit 2 ICWS and Circulating Water System.

Section <.2 '. 2nd paragraph, 4th line, typo-Section 4.2 ', petition to read...and the 2nd paragraph, 3rd sentence should the State for t'aodifica-tion of Certification requested approval...

4 II Section 4.2.7 . 1st paragraph", 3rd line should read...

waste streams and has given additional detailed .

I Section 4.2.7, 1st paragraph - The last sentence:

"TRO must be'...below 0.02 mg/1......" does not clearly reflect the intent of the HPDES permit. It' suggested to replace this sentence with: "For con-tinous chit. !nation of the auxiliary cooling water systems, TRO shall not exceed an instantaneous maximum concentration of 0.03 mo/1, prior to entry into the Atlantic Ocean". (See App. C Draft NPDES Permit, Part I, P. I-3)

Section 4.2.7, 2nd paragraph: The stater!ent: "Dis-charges of water treatment plant wastes ~...directed to the evaporation/percolation ponds" is incorrect.

As described in Section 3.6.2 and Table 3.5-l of the St. Lucie Unit 2 ER-Ol, these wastes are norpally directed to the neutralization basin for treatment before release to the intake canal. (See also App.

C Draft NPDES Permit outfall 002, Part I, P. 1-5)

II The paragraph which ends at the too of the page refers to "the need for later tying into municipal treatmen.

acilities." There is, however, no basis for such a "need". Accordingly, the statement, should be elimina-ted in the FES.

A-7

P. 4-9 Section 4.2.7, 2nd paragraph - Oue to system change, (24} anmonium h droxide will be used for corrosion control.

Cyclohexylamine will not be used. (See ER-OL Section 3.6.6.2 of Amendment 3 dated 7/81).

4-10 The third paragraph on this nape states that "Great (25) concern also exists....because of evacuation due to hurricanes." 'This statement is unclear, contributes j, nothino to the environmental analysis and impact of St. Lucie Unit 2 and should be deleted.

P.. 4-14 Section 4.3.3, 2nd paragraph: 800 meters are equi-.

(26) . valent to 0.5 miles, not 0.5 m as stated..

P. 4-14 Section 4.3.3, 4th paragraph: Average current speed (27) was found to be 16.4 cm/s (0.54 fps) near the bottom, not 1.64, cm/s. The statements,"The prevailing sur-face current..;alongshore from the north...about, 49K of the time. Flow from the south occurs about 23~

of the time." should be corr~c ed to read: "The pre-vailing surface current..'...a'.o.-. :ci.e towards the =

north ...a.bout 493 of the tir...;tow towards the south 'occurs about 35". or ti . ae."

a P. 4-17 Section. 4.3.8.1, 1st paragr.'uh >>>uld read -:ndian u (28) River is a Coastal Lauoon lying to the west-" ,I

,l P; 4-17 Section 4.3.8.1, 1st paragraph, 3rd line should read (29} ...arm of the Indian River P. 4-17 Section 4.3.8.1, 1st paragraph, last line should read (30) ...-in the Indian River was dredged. ~ ~

P. 4-17 Section 4.3.8.1, 2nd paragraph, 1st line should read (3i). ...biological characteristics of the. Iniian River "

P. 4-17 Section 4.3.8.1, 3rd paragraph,'th'ine should read (32) ...300 species. identified. Ouring the Gilmore study" ~

P. 4-17 Section 4.3;8.1, 3rd paragraph, 10th line should read (33) ...The large fish populations encountered ~ ~

P. 4-17 , Section 4.3.8. 1, 4th paragraph, 3rd line should delete (34), the word- "crustaceans".

a P. 4-18 Section 4.3:8.2.1 should read...substrate for Hacrophyte

". (35) attachment and the hi h ener of the nearshore en'viron-ment. Benthic macrophytes are genera y ragments or s~aTl specimens..........at the remaining stations-further.

offshore where the shell and shell fragment bottom offered.

rere =.surface area for algal attachment.-- ~

, P. 18 . Section, 4:3.8.2.2, 1st line should read... and Chloro-(36) phyll a offshore of the... r L

e ~

I r

A-8 I r

p. 4-ie Section 4.3.8.2.2, 8th line should read...and Chloro-(37) phyll a at the control...

P. 4-18 Section 4.3.8.2.4, 7th line should read...increases (38) in molluscs and echinoderms.

P. 4-20 Section 4.3.9, 4th paragraph, 1st line should read...

(>>) Preservation of native Flora statute P. 4-20 Section 4.3.9, 4th paragraph, 2nd sentence states that (40) "A number of species listed...grow on the St. Lucie Plant Site". Based on the 1980 version of the Act, only" one species, Acrosticum danaeifolium, is known to occur on site.

P. 4-20 Section 4.3.9, 4th paragraph, 3rd sentence should read (41) ...Houever, the statute is ~riearil concerned uith...

P. 5-1 Section 5.3.1, 1st paragraph: The average and maximum (42) estimated water uses by St. Lucie 2 are 32.74x1031/s (1158 cfs) and 33.33x1031/s (1177 cfs), respectively, not 32.74x106 and 33.33x106 1/s as stated.

The average fresh water supplied by the Fort Pierce Hunicipal Mater System will be 10.1 1/s (161 gpm),

instead of 9.6. 1/s (152 gpm).

P. 5-4 Section 5.6 should read...Because of the high flow (43) and through the intake pipes...

P. 5-5 Section 5.6.1, 1st line, typo - ...stretch mesh) uiere (44) fished two consecutive...

P. 5-5 Section 5.6.1, 5th line from top of page, typo -...

(45) were grunt, drum, snapper...

P. 5-5 Section 5.6. 1, 6th line from top of page, typo -...

(46) in the intake canal is compared to the number 'taken ...

P. 5-5 Section 5.6. 1, 7th line from top of page, typo -...

(47) in the intake canal is low. " .

P. 5-5 Section 5.6.1, 1st full paragraph on the page, line (48) 8 - delete "gill or". Additionally, line 10 should read...a total of 542 loggerheads, almost. . Lire

~ ~

13 should read - The mortality rates related to net ca ture and unknown factors have been 9.2 '...

p. 5-6 Section 5.6.2, 2nd paragraph should read...in the (49) vicinity and an insinnificant ortion of the number of shrimo coomercially caught...

P. 5-6 Section 5.6.3, 1st paragraph should read...no measura-(50) ble effect on the communities of the adjacent oceanic waters...

p. 5-6 Section 5.6.3, 2nd paragraph should read...stations and one station in ~boy the in.ale and discharge canals (51)

A-9

P. 5-7 Section 5.6.", '.st paraqraph should read - As a result

'(52) of redesinn of the cooling lIater discharoe...idelei.e the word "additional" ).

P. 5-7 Section 5.6.4, 2nd paragraph should read...need not be (53) that originatino from St. Lucie 2...

P. 5-7 Section 5.6.e. 3rd paragrap[ shculd read ..d.ischarges (54) showed no interaction of the plumes from the two discharges ..only brief 1'f during intertidal periods

~

and in the absence of wind driven...

P. 5-7 Section 5.6.4, 4th paragrap should read...reduced to (55) 23.7 m /s (836 cfs), and wi h a plant temperature--

P. 5-7 Section 5.6.4, 4th paragrap): The 1.1 C (2 F) isotherm (56) encloses an area of 390xl04n2 (963 acres), not 390x103.--3 as stated.

P. 5-8 Section 5.6.4, 3rd paragraph should read, and surface (57) temperature rise of discharge water from the new diffuser

...The State requirem~ents or the vaniance will be spelled out in a modifi ~tion to the site certification issued under the Flo.>da Electrical Power Plant siting Act and will be....

P. 5-8 Table 5.1: Ninor errors should be corrected as follows:

(58) Plume Volume Travel Time Mithin Isotherm Thr ough Plume To isotherm 2.8 C (5 F) 2.8'C (5'F) 3 3 10 m (A-ft) I Sec 0.62 (0.5) I 8 0.74 (0.6) 9 1.23 ~1.0 P. 5-9 Section 5.6.4, 'ind paragraph should read...Planktonic (59) species in the vicinity of the diffuser will be en-trained...

P. 5-9 Section 5.6.4, 5th paragraph should read...of water (60) temperature on hatchling ~lo oerhead tur:les.

P. 5-10 Section 5.6.5, 3rd paragraph: lt's surgested ta add (61) a word "risers" to the first sentence to read "The or-ganic tin compound.....new diffuser risers...." This would clarify the fact that only 58 risers, rather than the entire diffuser pipe, are lined with TBTO.

p. 5-10 Section 5.6.5, 3rd paragraph should read...

(62) However, the applicant will use the diffuser rather than the Y-port discharge dvring extended single unit outages, except while the Unit 2 discharoe line '.s being cleaned. One unit opera ti on woul d then requi re the use of the Y-port dischar e for that limited time eriod.

During these periods as well as extended periods with no flow...

In addition, the last sentence ".....with no flow through the Plant...." implies shutdown of both units. It should be mentioned that-the operating philosophy of the St. Lucie Plant would make two-unit ovtage at the same time extremely unlikely.

p. 5-10 Section 5.6 6, 2nd line - delete -the words

~

(63) "of surface waters".

p. 5-11 Section 5.7, 2nd paragraph, 5th line.- typo-(64) habi tats. 6th line - typo -

responses'ection

p. 5-12 5.9, 3rd paragraph, last line should (65) read... can be forecast throvgh 1988.

p. 5-13 Section 5.10.1, 4th paragraph: Table 5.3 (66) being referred to appears in Section 5.10.3.

1.2, not Section 5.10.1.1.2. There is no, such section in this DES.

p. 5-18 (67)

Section 5. 10 '. 1. 1, 1st paragraph:

to change "high doses" in the last sentence Sugges ted

p. 5-18 Section 5.10.3.1.1, 3rd paragraph: While a (68) risk assessment of the St. Lucie Unit 2 workers, as compared to other nuclear power plant workers is proper (the section title suggest exactly that), a risk comparison of the nuclear oower plant workers to other industrial workers seems to be out of plac'e. Besides, one cannot help qvestioning how reliable these risk numbers are.

p. 5-34 Section 5.10.4.1.3.1, 4th line from top of page:

. (69) It is not clear as to what reference tne "section 5.7" is a part of.

p. 5-34 Section 5.10.4.1.3.1, 4th paragraph: St. Lucie (70) Unit 2 does not have an off-gas treatment system for filtering releases from the main condenser.

p. 5-56 Section 5.10.4.1.4.5, paragraph 1, 7th line - typo-(71) ... pathways as would the Sr-90...

a I <<I

p. 5-57 Section 5.!9.4. 1.4.6, 5th paragraph should read (72) ...into the atmosphere ~ehich ma amono other things...

p. 5-64 Section 5.11:

I The first paragraph refers to tne (73) development of a narrative to address the contents of Table S-3. That narrative is now scheduled f'r aaoption later this year. Should it b adopted before '.he environmental impact statement is finalized, the FES should so reflect.

p. C-36 10th line, typo- should read...cooling water (74) i. some 5000 ft to th e nuclear plant intake...

t

p. C-37 2nd pararaph snould read - The Florida Department (75)

Laboratory...

p. C-38 3rd paragraph,. 3rd sentence should read - The (76) leatherback, ridley, hawksbill, and green turtles are classified as endangered...

p. C-39 1st paragraph should read...period amounted to (77) 571 loggerheads...has ranged from 0 to 172.

a