ML17340A607

Forwards Assessment of Impacts of Steam Generator Repair Program at Turkey Point Plant on Threatened or Endangered Species

ML17340A607
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point
Issue date:	12/12/1980
From:	Varga S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Hankla D INTERIOR, DEPT. OF, FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE
Shared Package
ML17340A608	List: ML17340A607 ML17340A609
References
NUDOCS 8101140854
Download: ML17340A607 (44)

Text

DECEMBER 12 198o Docket Nos. 50- 50 an

" -251 Hr. Donald J. Hankla Are'a t)anager U. S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 15 North Laura Street Jacksonville, Florida 32202

Dear Nr-Hankla:

Reference Ho. 4-1-80-A-219 In a letter dated June 19, 1980 to Hr. K. Black, Director of the Atlanta Office, we notified the Fish and Hildlife Service that we vere preparing an Environmental Impact Statement as a part of our review of the Turkey Point Plant Stewf Generator Repair Program.

4Ie requested that the Fish and Wildlife Service provide fnforriation as to whether plants or animals listed or proposed to be listed as endagered species may be present in the vicinity of the Turkey Point site.

On July 14 and 25, 1980 we received responses to our request.

Me have completed our Assessment of the Impacts of the Steam Generator, Repair Program at the Turkey Point Plant on Threatened or Endangered Species and enclose a copy for your use.

Me have concluded that construction or operational aspects of the repair program will not have an adverse impact on threatened or endangered species known or suspected to inhabit or utilize the Turkey Point site, nor wi11 any impact occur to onsite designated critical habitat.

Based on our assessment we have also concluded that initiation of consultation in this action is not necessary.

4'e will, of

course, send a copy of our Draft Environmental Impact Statement for your COFpientso Sincerely,

.01'igi1181 Siglleg Qyf

,So A. Varga,

Enclosure:

As Stated q iovqufS g Steven A. Yarga, Chief Operating Reactors Branch 81 Divisi on of 'Licens ing OFFICE SURNAME OATE$.

Res..ot:xt. p NRC FORM 318 {9.76) NRCM 0240" AU.S.'GOVERNMENT PRINTING.OFFICE: 1979.289 369

4 4"

F 1

4

~

I I 4

Distribution Docket Files 50-250/251 NRC PDRs 2

Local PDR TERA NSIC ORB81 Reading T. Novak S. Varga R. Ballard H. Grotenhuis M. Masnik C. Parrish ISE (3)

Attor'ney, OELD J.

Roe J. Heltemes PL:ORB1 Srotenhufs:3

..../...IAO.....

OFFICE)

.SURNAME OATE P DL:0$B1 SAVarga.

../../.80.

NRC FORM 318 (9:76) NRCM 0240

~

4 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979 289 369

E.

V g,-

C V

V

P pp

~y'8 RKOO P0 Cy C

g

+0

+0

~>>*++

UNITEDSTATES t

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 December 12, 1980 Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251 Mr. Donald J. Hankla Area Manager U. S. Department of the Interior Fish and MildlifeService 15 North Laura Street Jack sonvi I Ie, Flori da 32202

Dear Mr. Hankla:

Reference No. 4-I-80-A-219 In a letter dated June 19, 1980 to Mr. K. Black, Director of the Atlanta Office, we notified the Fish and Wildlife Service that we were preparing an Environmental Impact Statement as a part of our review of the Turkey Point Plant Steam Generator Repair Program.

Me requested that the Fish and Wildlife Service provide information as to whether plants or animals listed or proposed to be listed as endagered species may be'resent in the vicinity of the Turkey Point site.

On July I4 and 25, 1980 we received responses to our request.

Me have completed our Assessment of the Impacts of the Steam Generator Repair Program at the Turkey Point Plant on Threatened or Endangered Species and enclose a copy for your use.

Me have concluded that construction or operational aspects of the repair program will not have an adverse impact on threatened or endangered species known or su pected to inhabit or utiIize the Turkey Point site, nor will any impact occur to onsite designated critical habitat.

Based on 'our assessment we have also concluded that initiation of consultation in this action is not necessary.

Me will, of

course, send a copy of our Draft Environmental Impact Statement for your comments.

S cerely,,

Ci

,~Steven A. Yarga,< hief

'perating Reacto ranch 81 Division of Licensing

Enclosure:

As Stated cc:

w/enclosure See next page

Mr. Oonald J. Hankla U. S.

Oepartment of the Interior December 12, 1980 CC:

Mr. Robert Lowenstein, Esquire Lowenstein,

Newman, Reis and Axelrad 1025'onnecticut

Avenue, N.W.

Suite 1214 Washington, D.

C.

20036 Environmental and Urban Affairs Library Florida International University Miami, Florida 33199 Mr. Norman A. Coll, Esquire

Steel, Hector and Davis 1400 Southeast First National Bank Building Miami, Florida 33131 Mr. Henry Yaeger, Plant Manager Turkey Point Plant Florida Power and Light Company P. 0.

Box 013100 Miami, Florida 33101 Mr. Jack Shreve Offi ce of the Publ i c Counsel Room 4, Holland Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Administrator

.Department of Environmental Regulation Power Plant Siting Section State of Florida 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Resident Inspector Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnission Post Office Box 971277 guai 1 Heights Sta ion Miami, Florida 33197 Dr. Robert E. Uhrig, Vice President Advanced Systems and Technology Post Office Box 529100 Florida Power and Light Company Miami, Florida 33152

Mr. Donald J. Hankla U. S. Department'of the interior December 12, 1980 cc:

Elizabeth S.

Bowers, Esquire, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.

20555 Or.

~ Emmeth A. Luebke Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.

20555 Mr. Mark P. Oncavage 12200 S-W-110th Avenue Miami, Florida 33176

,Neil Chonin, Esquire 1400 Ameri-First Building One Southeast Third Avenue Miami, Flori da 33131 Henry H. Harnage, Esquire Peninsula Federal Building, 10th Floor 200 S..E. First Street Miami, Florida 33131 Ms. Cheryl A. Flaxman 1023 Polk Street Hollywood, Florida 33019 Burt Saunders, Esquire

Steel, Hector and Davis Southeast First National Bank Building Miami, Flor ida 33130 Or. Oscar H. Paris Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.

20555

ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACTS OF THE STEAM GENERATOR REPAIR PROGRAM AT THE TURKEY POINT PLANT ON THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES November 1980 Docket Nos.

50-250 and 50-251 Michael T. Masnik UPS.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

TABLE OF CONTENTS

~Pa e

1.

PURPOSE

~

~

~

~

~

~

1 2

THE SITEs

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

1

2. 1 The Aquatic Environment....,

2.2 The Terrestrial Environment..

3.

THE PROPOSED ACTION..

3. 1 Potential Impacts Due to Construction Activity.........

4 3.2 Potential Impacts Due to Subsequent Station Operation..

6 4.

THE SAMPLING PROGRAMS 5.

THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES AT THE SITE

5. 1 West Indian Manatee - Trichechus manatus 5.2 American Peregrine Falcon - Falco ~ere rinus..........

5.4 Brown Pelican - Pelecanus occidental)s................

5.5 Atlantic Loggerhead Turtle - Caretta caretta caretta..

5.6 Atlantic Green Turtle - Chelonia ~mdas ~mdas..........

K K

Ki 5.10 Eastern Indigo Snake -

~Or marchen corais

~cou eri......

5. 11 American Alligator - ~Alii ator mississi iensis.......

5. 12 American Crocodile - ~Crocod 1

s acutus 8

8 8

8 9

9 9

10 10 10 10 11 6.

THE ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACT..........................

12

6. 1 Construction.

6.2 Operation.

12 13 7.

CONCLUSION

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

14 8.

LITERATURE CITED.

~

~

~

~

~

15

1.

PURPOSE This assessment is submitted to the U.S.

Fish and Mildlife Service (FMS) by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to comply with Section 7 of the 1978 Amend-ments to the Endangered Species Act.

In a letter dated June 19, 1980 (Varga, 1980), the NRC requested information concerning those federally recognized threatened and endangered

species, both listed and proposed to be listed, and on designated critical habitat which might be affected by the steam generator replacement program and subsequent changes in the operating characteristics at the Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Plant located in Dade County, Florida.

The FMS responded to this request on July 14 and 25, 1980 (Hankla,

1980, Oberheu, 1980) informing the NRC that the station site is within the known range of the protected species listed in Table 1 and, under provisions of the Act, required the NRC to perform a biological assessment for the listed species.

This report provides the results of the NRC's biological assessment which attempts to determine the impact on the species listed in Table 1 from the con-struction and operational changes resulting from the amendment of the Turkey Point Plant Operating License.

During the course of this review, an additional Federally recognized endangered species not listed in the transmittals of July 14 and 25, 1980 was found to occasionally use the site.

This species, the American peregrine falcon (Falco

~ere r ious),

was included in this assessment for completeness.

2.

THE SITE Turkey Point Plant consists of two fossil fueled units (Units 1 and 2) each rated at 367 MMe and two nuclear units (Units 3 and 4) each rated at 760 MMe.

The plant is located on the western shore of Biscayne Bay in Dade County, about 40.2 km (25 mi) south of Miami and 12.8 km (8 mi) east of Florida City, Florida (Figure 1).

The low, swampy land surrounding the site is extremely flat, rising from sea level at the shoreline to an elevation of about 3

m (10 ft) at a distance of 12.8 km (8 mi) west of the site.

The site relief is about 0.3 to 0 '

m (1 to 2 ft).

The site owned by the licensee occupies approximately 3400 ha (8,400 acres).

The four-unit plant and related facilities occupy about 60 ha (150 acres) of compacted limestone fill at the north end of the site.

Approximately 2,800 ha (7,000 acres) extending south and west of the site are occupied by the plant canal cooling system which cools the plant's circulating water.

The remaining portions of the site have not been significantly altered by the activities of the licensee.

2.1 The A uatic Environment The most obvious feature of the Turkey Point Plant and site is the recirculat-ing canal heat dissipation system (Figure 2).

The flow rate through the station discharge canal and into Lake Marren due to pumping of condenser cool-ing water is approximately 114 m /sec (1. 8 x 10 gpm).

Lake Marren empties into the canal cooling system.

The system is composed of 38 channels each 61 m (200 ft)

wide and 1.2 m (4 ft) deep.

The spoils from the channels were piled on the 90-ft-wide banks between the channels.

The total water surface area of the canal system is approximately 1,563 ha (3,860 acres)

(USAEC, 1972).

Although open water communication with Card Sound was initially planned, and still pos-sible, operation of the canal system since February 1973 has been essentially closed without an open water communication between the two water bodies; how-ever, considerable groundwater exchange occurs.

Some pumping (~5.7 ms/sec (90,000 gpm)) of Card Sound water into the canal system occurred for several months in 1978 in an attempt to control condenser scaling.

This dilution pumping has been discontinued (FP&L, undated a).

The groundwater gradient is typically seaward or east.

The western edge of the canal system is bordered by an interceptor ditch (see Figure 2) which is used to prevent the flow of any saline canal water seepage westward into the fresh groundwater found to the west of the system.

The interceptor ditch is about 9

m (30 ft) wide, 6

m (20 ft) deep and 8.9 km (5.5 mi) long.

It's length is divided into a number of segments to provide a means for selective pumping.

If saline water moves westward from the shallow canals, it is intercepted and pumped back into the cooling canal system.

To determine if groundwater move-ment of the saline water is occurring, a series of test wells located.along the western site boundary is monitored on a weekly to monthly basis.

Pumping of the various segments of the intercepter ditch is determined by the salinity measurements in the test wells.

Monitoring of the abiotic characteristics of the canal system has been per-formed throughout the canal system's existence.

Between 1975 and 1979 the maximum intake temperature to the station was 35.6'C (96 F) and the maximum discharge temperature to the receiving pond was 44.4'C (1124F)

(FP8L, undated a, b, c,d,e).

The canal system temperature averages about 4. 14C (7.4'F) higher than Card Sound temperatures.

Between 1977-1979 the pH of the canal system ranged from 7.9 to 8.2, the dissolved oxygen between 2.5 and 6.6 ppm and the salinity between 32 and 45 ppt (FP8L, undated a, b, c, d, e).

A gradual increase in salinity over the years has occurred.

COD has ranged from 250 to 529 mg/1, copper less than 0.2 ppm, and zinc between

.02 and

. 13 ppm (FP8L, undated a, b, c, d, e).

Examination of the FES (USAEC, 1972) and the most recent monitoring data from surveys conducted in the canal system indicate no water quality related stresses.

The canal system appears to support an extensive and tolerant biotic community despite its lack of open water communication with Card Sound, elevated tempera-

tures, and high salinities.

The licensee, since 1974, has monitored zooplank-ton, phytoplankton, fish, shellfish,

benthos, vegetation and conducted surveys and special studies on higher vertebrates inhabiting the canal and surrounding area.

More than 150 species of aquatic organisms have been reported from the canal system (Uhrig, 1980a; FP8L, 1978).

Some 44 taxa of fish are known from the canal system (Uhr ig, 1980a).

These and organisms from the other biotic groups were-isolated from Biscayne Bay and adjacent offshore habitats when the system was closed in 1973.

Some species are represented by a variety of life stages indicating reproduction in the canal system and therefore are considered established.

A number of species, particularly some of the fishes, are known only from adult life stages, with other life stages not present, indicating

that these species are not established in the canal system probably due to special habitat requirements for reproduction, and therefore can be expected to be lost through natural attrition.

2.2 The Terrestrial Environment The four major natural plant associations found at the Turkey Point site pro-gressing from the shoreline (east) to the western boundary of the site are fringe forest, dwarf mangrove, black rush/salt grass/saw

grass, and saw grass (ABI, 1978a).

Throughout these vegetation zones are

hammocks, or tree islands, teardrop shaped and rich in accumulated organic material supporting heavy vege-tative growth.

Shoreline vegetation at Turkey Point is a fringe forest of red mangroves.

Landward of the fringe forest is a broad area known as the dwarf, or scrub, mangrove zone and is composed of black mangrove and the white mangrove.

Indi-vidual plants are typically short (less than 1.4 m (4.5 ft) tall).

Also found in this area are the black rush and scattered clumps of salt grass.

Further inland from the dwarf mangrove belt is a zone composed of black rush, salt

grass, and saw grass.

Occasional isolated individuals of each mangrove species are also present.

Another characteristic of this zone is the occurrence of a well-developed blue-green algal mat covering the surface of the marl sub-strate.

The furthest landward and therefore the most upland vegetative zone on the site is dominated by saw grass and buttonwoods.

Large open areas exist in which the marl substrate is exposed.

Scattered over the site are three types'of hammocks which can be described based on their species composition as saltwater,,

brackish water, or upland.

The saltwater hammocks are largely composed of red mangroves, but occasionally both the black mangrove and white mangrove, and occasionally buttonwoods are present.

The brackish water hammocks are composed of palmetto and leather fern.

The freshwater hammocks are characterized as having a more diverse flora consisting of vines,

herbs, ferns, and trees.

The freshwater hammocks

'are increasingly dominated by trees such as Australian pine and Brazilian pepper and other exotic and native plants common in subtropical south Florida (ABI, 1978b).

Superimposed on the preexisting vegetative zones is the canal cooling system

which, due to the extensive dredging and the creation of spoil berms during the construction of the canal cooling system, has significantly altered the onsite vegetation.

The licensee has for a number of years extensively monitored the revegetation of the spoil berms separating the individual canals of the cooling system.

Soil type appears to be the most important factor in determining the vegetation density.

Australian pine and buttonwoods dominate the spoil berms composed of peat and muck soils of the old tidal creeks and hammock areas while salt grass and saw grass dominate the spoil berms in areas of the former clay/

marl barrens (FP8L, 1979).

The Australian pine have reduced species diversity and numbers in portions of the cooling canal system and a program to control this exotic species is underway.

3.

THE PROPOSED ACTION The Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 steam generators have experienced a corrosion-related phenomena known as tube denting that necessitates periodic inspection and plugging of steam generator tubes to ensure the plants'ontinued safe operation.

The steam generators are heat exchangers located inside the con-tainment which transfer heat from the primary coo'lant water, circulating within and cooling the reactors, to the secondary coolant water converting the secondary coolant to steam to turn the turbines.

It is conceivable that continued cor-rosion could lead to unacceptable inspection intervals and reductions in unit power levels (FP&L, 1980b).

The licensee is requesting that the operating license for the plant be amended to allow for the repair of the steam genera-tors via replacement of the lower portion of the units.

The removal and replacement of the lower assemblies will be through the containment equipment hatch.

The replacement units have, already been delivered to the site.

The units that will be removed from the containment building will be transported to a concrete vault located onsite for permanent storage should offsite disposal prove infeasible.

For the replacement steam generator lower units a number of changes from the original units have been made in the materials, the design and the operating procedure to assure that denting problems will not recur.

Only one of these changes will result in any difference in the interaction with the environment outside of the containment building.

The installation and operation of a full-flowcondensate polishing demineralizer system has been proposed and this will result in a waste discharge to the canal system and in land disposal of solid wastes.

3. 1 Potential Im acts Due To Construction Activit It is anticipated that the construction phases of the steam generator repair program will take approximately 6-9 months per unit.

Construction activities occurring during this period have been evaluated for their potential to impact threatened or endangered species occurring at the Turkey Point site.

The fol-lowing is a discussion of these activities.

An area approximately 0.8 ha (2 acres) in size located along the south side and inside the site compound (Figure 3) will serve as the steam generator storage compound (SGSC) where the existing station steam generators may be kept in per-manent storage after removal.

The SGSC will be at elevation 5.3 m (17.5 ft)

(present elevation +1.5 m (+5 ft)) with side slopes of 1:3.

Fill required to bring this area up to grade will be obtained from on-site spoils piles created during canal construction.

An existing at grade area within the site compound also at the southern boundary is presently being used as a laydown area for the new steam generators.

No additional site preparation is planned.

Both the SGSC and the new steam generator laydown area are surrounded on three sides by the canal system and on the fourth side by the station.

Standard con-struction practices including erosion control procedures, and revegetation where appropriate will be employed.

Site runoff during and after construction is towards Loch Rosetta, north of the site, and East Canal, east of the site.

These canals flow into the station intake.

No runoff from the disturbed sites will flow into Biscayne Bay.

Filling the SGSC to grade may result in some slight increase in turbidity in the East Canal and Loch Rosetta for a brief periods after rainfall during the construction

phase, however, this is expected to be minor and temporary in nature.

Once the site is brought to grade the cement-like properties of the limestone marl used as fill and the bank slope will reduce erosion due to runoff to an insignificant level.'he use of dredge spoils located on the banks of the cooling canal system for fill may result in increased turbidity in the canal system in the vicinity of the activity for a short period after rainfall.

However, this also is expected to be minor and temporary in nature.

During the constructional phase of the steam generator repair approximately 300 additional people will augment the existing site workforce.

This is typical of the number of additional people required for refueling and major maintenance activities associated with normal operation.

The repair activities will occur in areas that lack readily accessible sanitary facilities.

Portable sanitary units will be utilized and all sanitary wastes will be removed from the site (Uhrig, 1980d).

No significant increase in sanitary wastes discharged from the station or modification to the existing facility different from that evaluated in the EIS is expected.

The applicant has indicated (FP&L, 1980b) that during the repair procedures laundry releases will be approximately 83,000 1/day (22,000 gal/day) for about 300 days for each unit.

Although 83,000 1/day (22,000 gal/day) is the con-servative value used to estimate radioactive wastes, it is expected that on the average only 38,000 1/day (10,000 gal/day) will be discharged.

Laundry waste water is and will be discharged without processing.

The amount of laundry waste water discharged is typical of the daily discharge during refueling and major maintenance activities associated with normal station oper ation;

however, the duration (number of days) of the discharge will be significantly longer for the steam generator repair.

Estimated total radioactive liquid releases from all sources during the repair effort per unit is expected to be approximately 0.55 Ci or 1.8 times the observed total liquid waste released per unit (excluding tritium and dissolved gases) during 1978-79.

The tritium release during the replacement effort is estimated to be about 185 Ci per unit or 40 percent of the observed tritium release per unit during 1978-79 (FP&L, 1980b).

The licensee estimated (FP&L 1980b) order of magnitude sound pressure levels (SPL) typical of construction noise sources at the nearest site boundary (1.2 km (0.8 mi).

Estimated values of SPL at the nearest site boundary ranged from 40 to 58 dBA for a variety of construction equipment.

Dust may be created by movement of vehicular traffic in unpaved areas.

3. 2 Potential Im acts Due To Subse uent Station 0 eration Included in the steam generator repair program is the installation of the full-flow condensate polishing demineralizer.

This system will become operational once the repair has been completed and the units begin to operate.

This is the only modification to the plant's operation that will have any effect outside the con-tainment.

An analysis of the potential for impact has been performed.

The function of this system is to demineralize the entire volume of condensate water prior to its reentry into the steam generators.

It is anticipated that the removal of suspended solids and ionic species from the condensate water will reduce corrosion-related phenomenon.

The demineralizers will employ a mixed bed ion exchange resin (Powdex (Uhrig, 1980a)) in a series of vessels.

Con-densate water will be circulated into the vessels and through the exchange beds.

Periodic replacement of the resins will occur due to a buildup of suspended solids and exhaustion of the ion exchange resins.

Replacement* of spent resins in the full-flowcondensate polishing demineralizer vessels will result in the periodic discharge of a waste stream into the canal system.

Resin vessels will be backflushed to a backflush receiver tank and resins replaced periodically depending upon the buildup of suspended solids and ion-exchange capacity exhaustion.

Replacement of spent resins in an on-stream vessel will occu~ about every two to three weeks (Uhrig, 1980b).

A total of eight vessels will be employed for both units, four per unit, three operating at a given time, with one per unit in reserve.

Maximum resin loading is approx-imately 136 kg (300 lb) dry weight per resin vessel per cycle.

Backflushing will occur at an anticipated frequency of one per week per unit or two vessels per week for the plant.

Approximately 24,000 1 (6,350 gal) of high purity water from the condensate storage tank will be used to backflush each de-mineralizer resin vessel (Uhrig, 1980b).

The spent resins will be backflushed to a receiving vessel for resin-water separation.

The spent resin handling subsystem is designed to process the backwashed resin slurry discharged from the resin vessels using a filtration system.

This subsystem concentrates the resin in a 30-50 percent (by weight) slurry suitable for land burial (Uhrig, 1980b).

After resin-water separation, the supernatant liquid (approximately 22,700 1 [6,000 gal]) will be discharged to the canal system.

The quality of the waste water prior to discharge is predicted to have a pH between 8.5 and 8.7, a dissolved oxygen concentration of 0.08 ppm, and a conductivity about 1

pmho/cm (Uhrig, 1980b, 1980f).

The concentration of total suspended solids in the waste stream is expected to be significantly less than low volume waste source limits (Title 40 CFR 423.22 - 100 mg/1 instantaneous max.,

30 ppm monthly average).

During normal operation, the liquid contents of the backflush receiver tank should.contain no radioactivity.

The secondary systems are continuously moni-tored for evidence of primary to secondary leakage and the steam generators will be sampled and analyzed for radioactivity daily. If there is evidence of a primary to secondary leakage or radioactivity in a steam generator, then a

sample of the liquid in the backwash receiver tank will be analyzed for radio-activity. If the specific radioactivity of the liquid co'ntents of the receiver tank equals or exceeds 1 x 10-pCi/ml (gross beta-gamma) or 5 x 10-pCi/ml (isotopic), then the liquid waste would be transferred to the radwaste system

for release or further processing (Uhrig, 1980c).

If the specific radioactiv-ity is below these

values, then the waste liquid will be discharged in the normal manner.

The current design of the continuous steam generator blowdown system allows the blowdown effluent to be discharged untreated.

The design of the full-flowcondensate polishing demineralizer will actually reduce the amount of radioactivity released to the station effluent in the event of primary to secondary leakage (Uhrig, 1980c).

The waste water will be released at a rate of less than 0.0009 ms/sec (15 gpm) from the discharge structure to the discharge canal that leads into Lake Warren, a receiving pond and then into the canal cooling system (Uhrig, 1980a).

During normal operation, there should be no radioactivity in the spent resins obtained from the spent resin storage tank.

A representative sample of solids from the backwash receiver tank will be screened for radioactivity. If screen-ing indicates radioactivity above minimum detectable levels or if there is evidence of primary to secondary leakage or radioactivity in a steam generator, then a sample will be analyzed for specific isotopes.

If specific radio-activity exceeds values listed in Title 10 CFR 20 Appendix B unrestricted land disposal will not be allowed.

4.

THE SAMPLING PROGRAMS The Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS) which are a part 'of the Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Operating License issued by the NRC require the licensee to perform a minimum level of monitoring to assess the impact of the plant on the environment.

A number of these studies, particularly the field monitoring pro-

grams, could reasonably be expected to identify any threatened or endangered species inhabiting or occasionally using the Turkey Point site.

These

programs, listed in Table 2, are required by the ETS and have been in most cases volun-tarily expanded by the licensee.

All of the studies in some form have been conducted since 1972.

The results of these studies are presented in the annual or semiannual reports submitted to the NRC in compliance with the ETS.

In addition to the programs required by the ETS, the licensee has conducted other relevant studies including, but not limited to, bird censuses every two months for one year at 12 sites and along the shoreline south of the site, a

small mammal study consisting of live trapping at sampling grids every two months for six consecutive days over the course of a year and a crocodilian survey since 1977 over the entire site area.

5.

THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES AT THE SITE A short discussion of each of the federally recognized threatened or endangered species identified by the FWS (Hankler,

1980, Overheu, 1980) or known to occa-sionally use the site is presented.

Notes on their life history, distribution, and abundance onsite that are pertinent to this assessment are presented.

If no site record exists for a species, no additional information is presented.

5. 1 West Indian Manatee - Trichechus manatus The FWS has designated all waters of Card Sound and all adjoining and connected lakes, rivers, canals, and waterways of, Biscayne Bay from the southern tip of Key Biscayne northward to and including Maule Lake, Dade County, as part of the critical habitat (Title 50 CFR 17.95) for this species.

The -Turkey Point canal cooling system can be considered adjoining these water bodies,

however, no open water communication or connection exists.

Therefore, the canal system would not be considered critical habitat.

During the year long mammal study conducted by the licensee three West Indian manatees were noted in the water management district borrow canals located south of the Turkey Point.site (ABI, 1978b)

No manatees have been reported from the Turkey Point site and are not likely to be present in the future since no open water communication exists between the borrow canal or Biscayne Bay and the cool-ing canal system.

Sightings of the endangered species outside of the cooling canal system have been on an occasional basis throughout the year and usually involves a solitary animal or a mother/calf pair (FP8 L, 1980a).

5.2 American Peregrine Falcon - galen ~ere rinoe Critical habitat for the American peregrine falcon has been designated only in the State of California (Title 50 CFR 17.95(a)).

This endangered species is an uncommon winter resident of South Florida and individuals hav'e been observed on an occasional basis in the sawgrass and mangrove areas in the vicinity of the Turkey Point site (FP8L, 1980a;

ABI, 1978a; Uhrig 1980g).

E Critical habitat for the southern bald eagle has not yet been designated.

Members of this species are permanent residents of south Florida and occasional sightings of juveniles and adults in the Turkey Point site air space have been reported (Uhrig, 1980e; ABI, 1978a) as well as along the mangrove fringes north and south of the Turkey Point-site (Owre, undated).

The southern bald eagle is principally a fish-eating species that forage extensively in nearby bays and estuaries.

A nest containing one egg during two consecutive years has been reported from the rookeries of Arsenicker Key, an island in Biscayne Bay approxi-mately 6

km (3.7 mi) southeast of the Turkey Point Station (ABI, 1978a).

5.4 Brown Pelican - Pelecanus occidentalis Critical habitat for the brown pelican has not yet been designated.

The brown pelican is a permanent resident of the Turkey Point area and vicinity.

Colonies of 1 to 12 individuals roost and nest in the mangrove fringe forest bordering on Biscayne Bay and the Turkey Point Site (Uhrig, 1980e).

Nesting has not been documented near the Turkey Point site, but based on the occurrence of suitable habitat it is presumed to occur.

Individuals as

well as groups are seen flying over and feeding from the shallow-water estuarine areas adjacent to the Turkey Point site (Uhrig, 1980g).

5.5 Atlantic Loggerhead Turtle - Caretta caretta caretta No critical habitat has been designated for this threatened species (Title 50 CFR 17.11).

Although sea turtles are common in Biscayne Bay only the Atlantic Loggerhead and the Atlantic green turtle have been reported from the Turkey Point cooling canal system.

There has been one observation in 1974 of four individuals (unidentified) that may have been loggerheads.

In August 1977, a 27-kg (60 lbs) loggerhead was caught in the cooling canal system and released to Biscayne Bay (FPKL, 1978).

In 1980, one loggerhead turtle was also reported (Uhrig, 1980e) captured from the canal system and again released to Biscayne Bay.

Because of the lack of an open water communication with Card Sound or Biscayne Bay and the lack:of suitable nesting habitat for these species, it is suspected that the loggerhead turtles found in the canal system are individuals that have existed in the canal system since its closure or isolated individuals that have found their way into the canal system.

In either case, probably only a few individuals, if any, presently inhabit the canal system.

5.6 Atlantic Green Turtle - Chelonia

~mdaa

~mdae No critical habitat has been designated for this threatened species.

Although sea turtles are common in Biscayne Bay, only the Atlantic green turtle and the Atlantic loggerhead turtle have been reported from the Turkey Point cool-ing canal system.

Several green turtles have been captured in the system since 1972 and have been released to Biscayne Bay (Uhrig, 1980e).

Because of the lack of an open water communication with Card Sound or Biscayne Bay, and the lack of suitable nesting habitat for these species, it is suspected that the Atlantic green turtles found in the canal system are individuals that have existed in the canal system since its closure or isolated individuals that have found their way into the canal system.

In either

case, probably only a few individuals, if any, presently inhabit the canal system.

L kT 1 -~h No critical habitat has been designated for this endangered species.

No leatherback turtles have been collected or reported from the Turkey Point cooling canal system despite continuous monitoring programs conducted since 1972 studying most biotic categories inhabiting the canal system.

10 No critical habitat has been designated for this endangered species.

No hawksbill turtles have been collected or reported from the Turkey Point cooling canal system despite continuous monitoring programs conducted since 1972 studying most biotic categories inhabiting the canal system.

No critical habitat has been designated for this endangered species.

No ridley turtles have been collected or reported from the Turkey Point cooling canal system despite continuous monitoring programs conducted since 1972 studying most biotic categories inhabiting the canal system.

5.10 Eastern Indigo Snake -

~gr aarchon corais

~coo eri No critical habitat has been designated for this threatened species.

The, eastern indigo snake occurs throughout peninsula Florida. It is typically an inland species in south Florida that does not normally utilize estuarine hab-itat (ABI, 1978b).

The site is considered marginal habitat for the species due to the predominance of saline habitat.

One or two sightings on the Turkey Point site of individuals of this species have been reported from tree islands located in the sawgrass or the furthest landward and therefore most upland vegetative zone.

This zone is found in the western most portion of the site (Uhrig, 1980e).

Critical habitat for this species has not been designated (Title 50 CFR 17. 11).

The American alligator is found commonly throughout Dade County (Uhrig, 1989d) and alligators of all sizes, but primarily subadults are frequently seen in non-saline environments west of the Turkey Point site.

Alligators prefer freshwater wetlands (Mazzotti and Kushlan, 1978) therefore much of the Turkey Point site is marginal habitat for this species (ABI, 1978a).

Mazzotti and Kushlan (1978) in their study of alligators and crocodiles in the Everglades National Park found that at alligator sightings (N=32) 56K of the salinities were below 5 ppt and only 2 alligators were observed in water above 15 ppt.

Despite the often hypersaline conditions existing in the canal system approximately 2-15 sight-ings of alligators per year occur on the western part of the licensee's property, including the Turkey Point site (Uhrig, 1980e).

The alligators are year around residents that make use of the gradation in salinities between the cooling canal

system, the interceptor ditch and the water management district canals.

11

5. 12 American Crocodile " ~Crocod lus scutum The Turkey Point site is within the boundaries of critical habitat designated for the American crocodile (Title 50 CFR 17.95).

The American crocodile has been known to exist in Turkey Point site since 1975 (Uhrig, 1980e).

It appears crocodiles that are presently inhabitating the canal cooling system and adjacent ditches are in areas that probably did not support a population of crocodiles prior to canal construction.

The canal cooling sys-tem and the deep interceptor ditch provide secluded, protected habitat near suitable nesting sites and close to a readily available food supply.

The population is centered in the more remote western portions of 'the canal system between 2-9 km (1.2-5.6 mi) from the Turkey Point plant.

The licensee is funding, along with the Fish and Wildlife Service, a field study conducted by staff biologists of the Connel, Metcalf and Eddy consulting firm to determine the population dynamics and ecology of'he crocodile.

This study is now into its third year.

Recording of sightings, food studies, age and growth mark-recapture and radiotelemetry tracking have been employed (FP5L, undated a).

The resident population is estimated at between 6-16 individuals representing all age groups (adults, subadults, and hatchlings (Uhrig, 1980d).

In 1979, the licensee reported six adults and approximately 7 subadult crocodiles residing in the canal system (FP8L, undated a).

They ranged in size from.6m (2 ft) to 3.8m (12.5 ft) long.

Apparently, recruitment into the population inhabiting the Turkey Point site is occurring.

Ouring 1980, a previously unknown male of 1.5 m (5 ft) in length and an unknown female of smaller size were captured,

marked, and released onsite.

Three documented nests on the berms of the cooling canals have been reported for 1978 and 1979 (Uhrig, 1980g).

From these

nests, 44 hatchlings ere

captured, marked, and released.

One 1978 and four 1979 hatchlings are known to have survived through June 1980.

One 1979 hatchling that was originally measured at 25 cm (10 in) and 52 g (1.8 oz) was recaptured in 1980 and had attained a length of 66 cm 25 in and 1100 g (2.4 lbs) (Uhrig 1980e).

Another 1979 hatchling, originally captured shortly after emerging from the nest had a

weight of 62g (2 oz) and a length of 28; 1 cm (ll in. ).

Fourteen months later the individual weighed 230g (5 lbs) and was 88.2 cm (35 in.) in length.

Two dead crocodiles have been reported from the Turkey Point site.

In Septem-ber 1976, a dead juvenile (~25 cm (10 in) long) was found in the southern leg of the western most cooling canal.

The cause of death was not determined (ABI, 1978a).

On October 26, 1979, one mortality (adult, female,

~45kg (100 lbs))

was reported.

The carcass was shipped to the University of Florida for a necropsy to provide information relative to the cause of death.

Oue to the extreme state of postmortem degeneration, no diagnosis as to the cause of death could be made (Jacobsen, 1979).

Based on the results of several years of field study, the crocodile population inhabitating the Turkey Point site use the area for feeding, loafing, and

s

>>Reel I

~ 4 I

sI.

~ ~

j,P' e

ej 0

ee I>>cert If'~~>>r Cu'L Is 5

oel,'

esesMl S~

it>>ref tert r Csssse>>

R>>r CCSS HKRI ""'

~ I

/ ~.,i krl s

r>>f Soe>>ree He Ieee

)

'ts PKs rstaol lelst re Dte

~

es'e

~ '

~ess r

~

r rf ctrl h(k r o esse I) w teot;

>>s O>>rR'esk

~. Sot>>too firj 5 ss 5

-:I R

s rs tts H ree Stst oo>>l re Perse>>ters oo~F n

I 5

e

~>>l r

r

~SSII

~el ere

~,

w

~eee s

~

o j>>;

~

~

Sre>>

g~ Sere 4ts

~sK City '

tAI

~ o Cooo Peers C

~ees lr>>s Seeds ler Ce

~

~

lee Rreoo h

~ w 55 s

>>else>>skRe

~K esK

~>>

I f.l

',II Stet>>to Hsks 0

5 I

I

'tT'jy'key o

Itt

. ~ ~'s kk>>R eloo

'I I>>sg,r>>sslsKsrore resort IIS+Iseel,v f Point Plant evo>>

w betsy Pw r

im

/

Reecho>>r sti reset S>>sv Poert Sere>>e Ios>>e Ref~

P

~r

~ Reef Retest Oteess Reef

.XV 0s wi+ w 4

sss

~ I 5 tress

~ js

~

w tj>>o 4>>

reset

~II troll

~e R et I ~ ~

tress 5 SI S ss g

~

~I w

0' w

Q00

,i vsr" I';r r.>>

I'f

/

s

~sl n

Figure 1. Turkey Point Plant Location Map" "After Figure ll-1, USAEC, 1972

~I AOOCOO f

III ITT A

I)

JJ

)) CAN AICVVJ'N TAAPTSIP 0

0 o

)

Turkey Point Plant Units 1Q TURKEY POINT AHA I

6 I/

/

/

/

/

)2eruRk IIT AT

/

//

/

//

II SSDOOO

/

/

/

/

//

/

/

)

//

//

/

COOLING CANALS 6)m (2NT) WIDE

).2m (4') DEEP 88m (290') OM CENTER NIIICTRDTE IIOOI1 II3)5000

//

I I

I

//

//

C

~CAIIA+ C IQIVP~

// PT~I

//

I

/

I I

T A PI A OK K)P 10 LL C

V CLOD VA K(S O

0 OO l 122 183

~ 0

.SCALEm CAAD SOVIID CAITAl Figure 2. Turkey Point Cooling Canal System" "After Figure l-3, FP&L, 1973

l2 nesting.

They appear to be a healthy group of organisms that are experiencing a fair degree of recruitment to the population.

6.

THE ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACT

6. 1 Construction Constructional activities identified in Section

3. 1 have been evaluated for their potential for impact to threatened or endangered species inhabiting the Turkey Point site.

The bringing of the SGSC up to grade will result in (1) some slight increase in turbidity in the cooling system after rainfall in the vicin-ity of the plant and the source of the fill material, (2) increased constructional

noise, (3) increased dust due to vehicular traffic.

Each of these potential impacts are expected to be minor, temporary and to a great extent controllable by the use of standard erosion abatement

methods, inspections, and the use of sprinkler trucks to minimize, dust.

Due to the limited use by the three species of protected birds of the site for foraging rather than for nesting, the rather small area in relation to the entire Turkey Point site that will be affected by construction activities, and the presence of an abundance of nearby suitable habitat for foraging, no detrimental effect on any of the species is expected.

Since the crocodiles, alligators and the eastern indigo snake inhabit the western and southwestern portion of the Turkey Point site much removed from any SGSC construction related activities, again no impact is expected.

No impact on manatees or sea turtles is expected due either to their absence or infre" quent occurrence on the site.

Noise associated with the repair program for the steam generators may deter avian fauna from utilizing the immediate vicinity of the station, however, the large size of the site, the ability of organisms to acclimate to higher than normal SPL (Busnel, 1978),

and the temporary nature of the repair program leads one to conclude that no long-term adverse impact to threatened or endangered avian fauna is expected.

No significant increase in treated sanitary wastes discharged from the plant or modification to the existing sanitary facility will occur, therefore, no incre-mental impact from sanitary facilities to threatened or endangered species is expected.

The discharge volume of laundry wastes, though not significantly different from that during normal refueling outages but discharged over a significantly longer period of time (6-9 months/unit),

even under the most conservative value of 83,277 1/day (22,000 gal/day) represents only 0.0008K of the total daily plant flow for four units.

Even with multiple plant outage the laundry waste stream would still represent considerably less than 0.02K of the total discharge flow.

Due to turbulent mixing in the discharge

channel, the small volume of the waste in relation to station flow, the large volume of water in the canal

system, the short duration (~6-9 months per unit) of the increased laundry waste flow, the location of the preferred habitat of the alligator and crocodile, and the use of phosphate-free biodegradable laundry detergents, no detrimental impact on either of these two species is anticipated, nor is any detrimental impact expected on an occasional sea turtle that may have been entrapped in the canal system since its closure.

13 The estimated total radioactive liquid and airborne releases from all sources during the construction phase will be in accordance with NRC Technical Specifi-cations.

No adverse impact to organisms inhabiting or utilizing the Turkey Point Site and canal system due to radioactive releases is expected.

It is concluded that construction activities associated with the steam gen-erator repair program will not have an adverse or detectable impact on the threatened or endangered species known to inhabit or utilize the Turkey Point site.

6. 2

~0eration Operational characteristics of the plant that will be materially different from those identified in the FES (USAEC, 1972) after replacement of the steam genera-tors are the creation of a new waste discharge to the canal system and the onsite disposal of a solid waste both associated with the periodic replacement of spent ion exchange resins in the full flow condensate polishing deminerali-zer.

Descriptions of these waste streams are presented in Section 3.2.

Under normal operating conditions full cooling water flow for all four units is approximate 114 m /sec (1.8

>< 10 gpm).

The waste stream from the demineralizer will discharge for about 7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> per week for each unit.

The waste stream from one unit will represent about 0.0008X of the total discharge flow into Lake Warren at full four plant operation.

Even with multiple unit outage and simul-taneous discharge of waste streams from both units, the waste would still represent less than 0.01X of the discharge flow.

Turbulent mixing in the dis-charge channel leading to the receiving pond is expected.

Mixing is further enhanced by the geometry of the receiving pond.

Due to the high purity of the backflush waste water stream and the anticipated water quality described in Section 3.2, no measurable effects on aquatic organisms are anticipated (McKee and Wolf, 1963; USEPA, 1976).

The total demineralizer backf lush discharge volume for both units over the life of the plant would represent less than 0.5X of the total present volume of water in the canal system.

No long-term degra-dation of water quality in the canal system due to concentration of pollutants in the waste stream system over the life of the plant is expected.

The small amount of resins that may fail to be removed from the waste water prior to discharge poses no environmental threat:

the resins are highly insoluble, resistant to biological degradation, have no effect on BOD or TOC, and are non-toxic at concentrations expected (Kunin, 1979).

Due to (1) the extremely small volume of water, in relation to the discharge flow and the volume of the canal

system, (2) the high purity of the waste

stream, (3) anticipated good mixing of the waste stream and the discharge

flow, (4) the nontoxic character, of the ion exchange

resin, and (5) the anticipated reduction in the amount of radioactivity released to the station discharge due to the installation and operation of the demineralizer, no impact to threatened or endangered organisms inhabiting or utilizing the canal system or surrounding water bodies is anticipated due to the discharge of the backflush waste water.

Anticipated yearly resin usage for both units is approximately 26,000 kg (57,000 lbs) (Uhrig, 1980c).

Due to the nontoxic nature of the resin material,

the small amount generated/year, the monitoring for radioactivity which would preclude unrestricted land burial if radioactivity exceeded permissible levels, no impact on threatened or endangered organisms inhabiting or utilizing the Tur" key Point site is expected should land burial of the spent resins on site be chosen as the method of disposal.

It is concluded that changes in the operational characteristics of the plant due to the steam generator repair will not have an adverse or detectable impact on the threaten or endangered species identified by the FWS and known to inha-bit or utilize the Turkey Point site.

7., CONCLUSION It is concluded that constructional and operational aspects of the Turkey Point Plant steam generator repair program will not have an adverse impact on threatened or endangered species known or suspected to inhabit or utilize the

site, nor will any impact occur to onsite designated critical habitat.

The NRC staff does not recommend any studies in addition to those already being performed.

This is based on our conclusions that the existing environmental monitoring programs are of sufficient adequacy to detect impacts, the duration of the construction activity is relatively short, and the results of this assess-ment indicate that no impacts are predicted.

Based on the foregoing biological impact assessment, it is the opinion of the NRC staff that initiation of consultation in this action is not necessary.

15 8.

LITERATURE CITEO Applied Biology, Inc. 1978a.

Baseline ecological study of a subtropical terrestrial biome in southern Dade County, FL.

ABI, Atlanta, GA, prepared under contract with FP&L Co., Miami, FL.

Applied Biology, Inc.

1976b.

Evaluation of ecological studies conducted at Turkey Point and the South Dade study area.

ABI, Atlanta, GA., prepared under contract with FP&L Co., Miami, FL.

Busnel, Rene-Guy, 1978.

Introduction,

p. 7-22.

In J.

L. Fletcher and R.

G.

Busnel

[ed. ] Effects of nois on wildlife.

Academic Press, New York.

Florida Power and Light Company.

1973.

A summary report of the Turkey Point Cool-ing Canal System.

Ray L. Lyerly and Associates,

Dunedin, FL.

Florida Power and Light Company.

1978.

Ecological monitoring of selected param-eters at the Turkey Point Plant, annual report January - December

1977, Docket Nos.

50-250 and 50-251, FP&L Co., Miami, FL, dated January 1978.

Florida Power and Light Company.

1980a.

Account of program to find endangered species and rare and endangered species found on Turkey Point site and vicinity.

Draft, dated October 17, 1980.

Florida Power and Light Company.

1980b.

Steam generator repair report, with revi-sions 1-7.

FP&L Co., Miami, FL, dated March 1980.

Florida Power and Light Company.

Undated a.

Environmental monitoring report no.

13, Turkey Point Plant Units 3 and 4.

Docket Nos.

50-250 and 50-251, January 1 through December 31, 1979.

FP&L Co., Miami, FL.

Florida Power and Light Company.

Undated b.

Environmental monitoring report no.

12, Turkey Point Plant units 3 and 4.

Docket Nos.

50-250 and 50-251, July 1 through December 21, 1978.

FP&L Co., Miami, FL.

Florida Power and Light Company.

" Undated c.

Environmental monitoring report no.

11, Turkey Point Plant Units 3 and 4.

Docket Nos.

50-250 and 50-251, January 1

through June 30, 1978.

FP&L Co., Miami, FL.

Florida Power and Light Company.

Undated d.

Environmental monitoring report no.

10, Turkey Point Plant Units 3 and 4.

Docket Nos.

50250 and 50-251, July 1 through December 31, 1977.

FP&L Co., Miami, FL.

Florida Power and Light Company.

Undated e.

Semiannual environmental report no.

9, Turkey Point Plant Units 3 and 4.

Docket Nos.

50-250 and 50-251, January 1 through June 30, 1977.

FP&L Co., Miami, FL.

Hankla, Donald J.

1980.

Letter to Steven A. Varga, U..S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, from Donald J.

Hankla, U.S. Fish and Mildlife Service, Jacksonville, FL, dated July 14, 1980.

16

Jacobson, Elliott R.

1979.

Letter to Ronald Gaby of Connell, Metcalf, and Eddy, Coral Gables, FL, from Elliott R. Jacobson, University of Florida, Gainsville, FL, dated November 14, 1979.

Kunin, R.

1979.

The disposal of spent POWDEX ion exchange materials.

In:

(R)

Letter to A. Schwencer, USNRC, from R.

E. Uhrig, FPEL FP8L Co., Miami, FL, dated March 18, 1980.

Mazzotti, Frank J.

and James A. Kushlan.

1978.

Distribution of the American crocodile in Everglades National Park, May 1977 - October 1978.

Everglades National Park, Homestead, FL.

McKee, J.E.

and H.W. Wolf.

1963.

Water quality criteria, 2nd Ed. Publication No. 3-A.

The Resources Agency of California, State Water Resources Control Board.

Oberheu, John C.

1980.

Letter to Steven A. Varga, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commis-sion, Washington, DC, from John C.

Oberheu, U.S.

Fish and Wildflife Service, Jacksonville, FL, dated July 25, 1980.

Owre, O.

T. Undated Ms. Site specific report:

birds.

Received September 8, 1980.

pgs.

30-42.

Uhrig, Robert E.

1980a.

Letter to Albert Schwencer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

from Robert E. Uhrig, Florida Power and Light Co., Miami, FL, dated March 18, 1980.

Uhrig, Robert E.

1980b.

Letter to Steven A. Varga, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D. C., from Rober t E. Uhrig, Florida Power and Light Co., Miami, FL, dated July 22, 1980.

Uhrig, Robert E.

1980d.

Letter to Steven A. Varga, U.S. Nuclear Regultory Commission, Washington, D.C. from Robert E. Uhrig, Florida Power and Light Co., Miami, FL, dated September 24, 1980.

Uhrig, Robert E.

1980e.

Letter to Steven A. Varga, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, from Robert E. Uhrig, Florida Power and Light Co., Miami, FL, dated October 31, 1980.

Uhrig, Robert E. 1980f.

Letter to Thomas M. Novak, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC from Robert E. Uhrig, Florida Power and Light Co., Miami, FL, dated August 29, 1980.

Uhrig, Robert E.

1980g.

Letter to Thomas M. Novak, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC from Robert E. Uhrig, Florida Power and Light Co., Miami, FL, dated November 24, 1980.

United States Atomic Energy Commission.

1971.

Final environmental statement related to operation of Turkey Point Plant.

Docket Nos.

50-250 and 50251.

Directorate of Licensing.

United States Environmental Protection Agency.

1976.

Quality criteria for water.

EPA-440/9-76-073.

U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.

Varga, Steven A. 1980.

Letter to Kenneth E. Black, U.S.

Fish and Wildlife service,

Atlanta, GA, from Steven A. Varga',

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, OC, dated June 19, 1980.

TABLE 1 Latin Name Common Name Federal Status MAMMALS Trichechus manatus West Iridian Manatee

- BIRDS Falco ~ere rinus Pelecanus occidentalis American Peregrine Falcon E

Bald Eagle Brown Pelican REPTILES Caretta caretta caretta Chelonia

~m das

~m das

~h

~Lid h

Atlantic Loggerhead Turtle T

Atlantic Green Turtle Leatherback Turtle Hawksbill Turtle Kemp's Atlantic Ridley Turtle

~0r marchon corais

~cou eri

~A Eastern Indigo Snake American Alligator

~Crocod lus acutus American Crocodile E - Endangered, T - Threatened

19 Current Floral and Faunal Monitoring Programs at the Turkey Point Site 8 Vicinity*

Biotic Grou Zooplankton Phytoplankton Fish 5 Shellfish Fre uenc of Sam lin quarterly quarterly Monthly Number of Sam lin Stations 15 13 10 Sampling Gear or Techni ues Plankton Net Whole Water Sampler Gill-Net Fish Trap Benthos Sea grasses 4

Macrophyte distribu-tion Semianually Observed during routine Entire Canal monitoring - semiannually Area Benthic Grab Visual Survey Sea Grass Recovery Semiannually Grand Canal Area Visual Survey quadrat Transect Terrestrial Faunal Survey Diurnal observations during routine monitoring Canal Berm Vegetation Semiannually Entire Site quadrat Visual Survey Terrestrial Floral Sur vey Annually 9

Transect and visual survey "From Uhrig, 1980g

$%~,~

hams Pgp

4 Docket No.

50-250/251 t ",

L

" UNITED STATES,

' 'P9ff NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION~~ 0 WASHINGTON D.C. 20555 November 22, 1980 DISTRIBUTION r

Docket F)1e 50-25 251 CSParrfsh ORB1 Readlng SEE ATTACHED LIST subject:

FMRIDA POUER AND LINT COMPANY (Turkey PO'Int 3 5 4}

The following documents concerning our review of the subject facility are transmitted for your information:

Notice of Receipt of Application.

Draft/Final Environmental Statement, dated Safety Evaluation, or Supplement No.,dated Notice of Hearing on Application for Construction Permit.

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Facility Operating License.

I Application and Safety Analysis Report, Vol.

Amendment No.

to Application/SAR, dated Construction Permit No. CPPR-

,date Facility Operating Licence No. DPR-, NPF-

, date r

Amendment No.

<o CPPR-or DRR-,dated I4I orget.

Rcc 9 001'l 07031 9 Effluent and lfaste 01s sa1 Sea annual Re Rapt or I

Acc. 8 8011180599 Nonth1 0 eratfn Re rt fo ber 1900 Dfvfsfon of Ucensfng Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

As stated cc:

DL:ORB OFFICE a JButt SullNAME n DATE ~

leRC 2l (676)

r' st I

/

I It g pl I

'll I

It I

Il

8 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON D.C. 20555 Docl:et No.

50-250/251 November 22, 1980 SEE ATTACHED LIST

,FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY.(Turkey Point 3 5 4)

The follpvving documents concerning our review of the subject facility are transmitted for your information:

Notice of Receipt of Application.

Draft/Final Environmental Statement, dated Safety Evaluation, or Supplement No.,dated Notice of Hearing on Application for Construction Permit.

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Facility Operating License.

Application and Safety Analysis Report, Vol.

Amendment No.

to Application/SAR, dated

,. Construction Permit No. CPPR-

,dated Facility Operating License No. DPR-

, NPF-

, dated Amendment No.

to CPPR-or DRR=,dated g

Acc.

P. 8011070319 Effluent and Waste Disposal Semiannual Report O~T97 Acc.

8 8011180599 Monthly Operating Report for October 1980 Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

As stated Nkc 't ib'">

Turkey Point 3

K 4 cc:

Chief Division of Ecological Services Bureau of Sport Fisheries 5 Wildlife U. S.

Department of the Interior Washington, D,

C.

20240 Dir ector National Oceanographic Data Center Environmental Data Service National Oceanic 5 Atmospheric Administration U. S.

Department of Commerce Washington, D.

C.

20235 Dr.

James T. Tanner National Bureau of Standards Reactor Building 235 Washington, D. C.

20234 9irector, Criteria and Standards Division Office of Radiation Programs (AHR-460)

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D.

C.

20460 U. S.

Environmental Protection Agency Region IV Office ATTN:

EIS COORDINATOR 345 Courtland Street, N.E.

Atlanta, Georgia 30308

Ce Doct et No.

5O-25O 50-251

~1~~~ h ~

~ ~

!~

~ Ii

~

~

~

~

~

~

1

~1 I~ ~~

~~~

~

~~ I~

~

UNITED ST"A HS NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 Nay 'l5, 1980 DISTRI BUTION annrr-rr and

-251

'SParrish ORb1 Reading g QdiO SEE ATTACHED LIST HERIOUS EHVIRONhIENTAL REPORTS The following documents concerning our review of the subject facility are transmitted for your information:

Notice of Receipt of Application.

Draft/Final Environmental Statement, dated Safety Evaluation, or Supplement No., dated Notice of Hearing on "Application for Construction Permit.

Notice oi'onsideration of Issuance of Facility Operating License.

Application and Safety Analysis Report, VOL Amendment No.

to Application/SAR, dated Construction Permit No. CPPR-

, dated Facility Operating License No. DPR-

, dated Amendment No.

to CPPR-or DRR-

. dated El otherSee attached list of accession numbers Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

As stated CC:

SURNAMEi DA15 IIBc-21 I6-76)

LeOR 1

ut 5f15 0

C II q/

, g l I

'V fl 4

1 t

E Ih I

P t",

t

Docket No.

50-250 50-251 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, O.C. 20555 1

May 15, 1980 SEE ATTACHED LIST

Subject:

VARIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS

~

~ ~

The following documents concerning our review oi'he subject facility are transmitted for your information:

Notice of Receipt of Application.

Draft/Final Environmental Statement, dated Safety Evaluation, or Supplement No., dated I

Q Notice of Hearing on Application for Construction Permit.

Q Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Facility Operating License.

Application and Safety Analysis Report, Uol Amendment No.

to Application/SAR, dated C3 Construction Permit No. CPPR-dated r

Facility Operating License No. DPR-iNPF-, dated II Amendment No.

to CPPR-or DRR-, dated g]

Oth<<.See attached 1ist of accession numbers Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

As stated W

~

CC:

NRC-2I (6-76 I

Turkey Point 3

& 4 cc:

Chief Division of Ecological Services Bureau of Sport Fisheries 5 Wildlife U. S.

Department of the Interior Washington, D.

C.

20240 Director National Oceanographic Data Center Environmental Data Service National Oceanic 5 Atmospheric Administration U. S.

Department of Commerce Washington, D. C.

20235 Dr.

James T. Tanner National Bureau of Standards Reactor Building 235 Washington, D. C.

20234 Director Technical Assessment Division Office of Radiation Programs (AW-459)

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Crystal Mall 82 Arlington, Virginia 20460 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IV Office ATTN:

EIS COORDINATOR 345 Courtland Street, N.E.

Atlanta, Georgia 30308

Turkey Point Unit Nos.

3 and 4

50-250 and 50-251 Accession Numbers 8003240346 8003180344 8004180373 8004240448 8004240368 8004180524 8004180529 8004240455 8004240359 8004240470 8004240436 8004240350 8004240463 8004230321 8004240443 8004230330 8004230484 8004240418 8005120395 8005120392 8005120392

N F