ML18017C023
| ML18017C023 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 09/08/1982 |
| From: | Mcduffie M CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8209150234 | |
| Download: ML18017C023 (55) | |
Text
REGULATOR INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION 'EN (RIDS)
.I AGCESSION NBR:8209150234 DOC ~ DATE: 82/09/08 NOTARIZED:
NO FACIL:50 400.,Shearon Harr is Nuclear Power Planti Unit 1i Carolina
',50 401 Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Pl anti Uni.t 2< Carolina AUTH,NAME AUTHOR AFF ILIATION MCDUFFIEiM,A, Carolina Power 8 Light Co, RECIP ~ NAPE RECIPIENT AFFILIATION DENTONiH ~ RE Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulationi Director
SUBJECT:
Forwards r esponse to five environ rept r eview questions r e blowdown discharge structureidesign curve for natural draf t cool irig tower s model 8 input data used to cal cul ate isotherms,Updated NPDES permit encl, DOCKET ¹ 05000400 05000401 DISTRIBUTION CODE:
C001S COPIES RECEIVED:LTR: J ENCL 2, SIZE:.j TITLE: Lic 'Submittal:
Environmental Rept Amdt 8 Related Correspondence NOTES:
RECIPIENT Ib CODE/NAt,E NRR LB3 BC 18 LICITRAiH~
04 COPIES O'TTR ENCL 1
1 1
RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME NRR LB3 LA 19 COPIES LTTR ENCL 1
1 INTERNAL: ELD/HDS1 NRR/DE/EEB 06 NRR/DE/SAB 07 NRR/DSI/RAB 09 RGN2 0
NRR/DE/AEAB 08 1
NRR/DE/HGEB 1
N SB 1
EG FILE 1
EXTERNAL0 ACRS NRC PDR NTIS 20 0?
3 3
1 1
LPDR NSIC 03 05
'TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED:
LTTR 19 ENCL 18
P ll
'1 w
Ci 1
t tl I
~l
'l tA 1,1
)
I 1
g I
1 l
CRQE Carolina Power & Light Company SEP 08 l982 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT UNIT NOS.
1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-400 AND 50-401 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT REVIEW QUESTION RESPONSES
Dear Mr. Denton:
Carolina Power
& Light Company's responses to five review questions on the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant (SHNPP) Environmental Report (ER) are attached.
These questions were transmitted to CP&L via telecopy on August 16, 1982.
Please contact us if you have any questions.
Yours very truly, LJW/lr (4106R5T3)
Attachments cc:
Mr. E. A. Licitra (NRC)
Mr. G. F. Maxwell (NRC-SHNPP)
Mr. J.
P. O'Reilly (NRC-RII)
M. A. McDuffie Senior Vice President Engineering
& Construction 8209i50234 8209'08 PDR ADOCK 05000400 Qc PDR 411 Fayetteville Street o P. O. Box 1551 o Raleigh, N. C. 27602
F lf l" flit I 1
~ 'l
~ IItl
' t
~ I
~
~
II
~
~
ER Question No.
1:
Provide a detailed description of the blowdown discharge structure including:
a)
Exit diameter b)
Orientation of structure with respect to the lake's i) depth ii) angle with respect to the lake bottom c)
Discharge velocity
~Res esse:
1.
a) exit diameter
= 48~
b) i)
depth
= 182'.0" 0 centerline of pipe with normal water level 6 220'.0~~
ii) there is no angle with respect to the bottom at the discharge structure; the pipe slope is 0.0 (flat) at this point c) discharge velocity for 1 unit is 1e9 FPS, for 2 units is 3.7 FPS
s ~
gg~,
ER Question No. 2:
Provide the design curve for the natural draft cooling towers, i.e.,
the cold water temperature as a function of wet bulb temperature for several values of relative humidity.
~Res ense:
The attached design curve for the cooling towers, Figure 2-1, provides the cold water temperature as a
function of wet bulb temperature for 30$, 50K, 75$ and 100$ relative humidity.
I 2
C
60IL RELATIVEHUMIDITY 100 DESIGN CONDITIONS WATERFLOW COOLING RANGE COLD WATER WET BULB RELATIVEHUMIDITY USGPM OF OF OF S8 40 44 48 62 66 60 64 68 72'6 80 84 88 WET BULB AIR TEMPERATURE (oF)
PERFORMANCE CURVES COLO WATER TEMPERATURE IN FUNCTION OF WET BULB AIR TEMPERATURE AND RELATIVEHUMIDITY WATERFLOW 633000.USGPM RANGE 2SOO oF SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Carolina Power & Light Company ENVIRONMENTAI.REPORT NATURALDRAFT COOLING TOWER PERFORMANCE CURVES Figure 2-1
ER Question No. 3:
Provide reference 5.1.2-j..
~Res ense: -1 is a copy of the testimony submitted by Dr. William T. Hogarth to the Atomic Safety 5
Licensing Board in September, 1977.
-1 UNITED STATES OF Ah%RICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY
& LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
CAROLINA POWER
& LIGHT COMPANY
)
(Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant
)
Units 1, 2, 3, and 4)
)
DOCKET NOS. 50-I400, 50-401, 50-402, and 50-403 TESTIMONY OF DR. WILLIAMT.
HOGARTH ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT Please state your name and business. address.
A.
My name is William T. Hogarth.
My business address is 336 4
q.
5 A.
8 Fayetteville Street, Raleigh, North Carolina.
By whom are you employed and in what capacity?
I am employed by Carolina Power
& Light Company as Principal Scientist Aquatic Biology Unit. I am responsible for super-vising 13 professionals and 4 technicians who are engaged in aquatic biology studies and the analysis of data.
My responsi-l bilities also include the administration of the Company',s 10 contracts with universities and outside consultants where these involve aquatic biology studies.
12 Q.
Hill.you briefly summarize your educational background and your 13 A.
professional experience as.a fisheries biologist?
I received a Bachelor of Science Degree in biology from the 15 17 18 University of Richmond in 1963 and a Master of Science Degree in fishery biolo'gy from the University of Richmond in 1965.
In 1976 I received my Ph.D. Degree in Zoology from North Carolina State University.
Since 1963 I have been directly
P,
~
involved with fishery studies.
Field studies have included the the sampling of the
- Chowan, Nottoway, and Black Water Rivers; 3
a dolphin Aquacultural-Sea Grant project in Hatteras, Bimiad.,
and Key West, Florida; oceanographic expeditions off Puerto Rico and Jamaica.
From 1966 to 1972 I was involved in graduate work at North Carolina State University.
I supervised research on striped bass in the Roanoke River and Albemarle Sound, North Carolina and was also research assistant at the Hatteras Marine 9
Lab.
The studies I have been involved with have resulted in lp several publications and technical reports.
ll In September 1972 I joined Carolina Power 6 Light Company as a Junior Scientist and.assumed the responsibilities of 13 Project Scientist Fisheries in February 1974.
I assumed my 14 present position as Principal Scientist - Aquatic Biology Unit in September 1975.
16 Professional associations of which I am a member include:
American Fisheries
- Society, American Society of Ichthyologists lg and Herpetologists, Limnology and Oceanography
- Society, 19 American Society of Zoologists and the Ecological Society of 21 22 23 Q.
24 A.
America.
I have previously testified as an expert witness in.
adjudicatory hearings before the Environmental Protection Agency 1
and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
What is the primary purpose of your testimony?
The purpose of my testimony is to provide necessary information 25 for evaluating the impact on aquatic organisms associated with
'C W )yt,>
3.
changes in the cooling tower blowdown volume and location noted 2
in CP&L's August 15, 1977 Amendment 66 to the SHNPP Environmental 3
Report.
4 Q.
Hhat were these changes?
5 A.
In order to eliminate the need for chemical treatment of the blowdown to prevent scaling of the condenser
- pipes, the blow-down volume was increased from 10 MGD to approximately 60 MGD, with a correspondi~g increase xn make-up water.
Vith the exception of chlorine, the chemical constituents of the blowdown have not been increased.
In fact, the chemical discharge will be more dilute.
The location of the discharge to the lake has also been changed 12 from a more upstream and shallower point in the lake to a point further downstream and in deeper water (Figure 1).
Each of these changes have been, described in greater detail in Mr. Sell's testimony.
The information which follows will demonstrate the impacts 16 associated with these relatively minor design changes.
17 Q. Hill you compare the aquatic habitat in the vicinity of,the old cooling 18 tower blowdown discharge to the new location and the impact a 19 discharge at each would have on aquatic resources in the lake'7 20 A.
The old blowdown discharge location involved an approximately.
21 22 100-130 acre mixing zone located in' reservoir area with depths of around 20-25 feet.
The shoreline in the old mixing
. 2.3 zone area had a fairly moderate gradient and thus more shallow 24 areas.
The new blowdown discharge location will involve a 25 larger mixing zone area of approximately 200 acres, but will be in an
~
~ l area having depths of 40-45 feet.
Although the area is larger, the shoreline area has a steeper gradient and consequently fewer shallow areas.
The predominate and most valuable species expected in the lake are largemouth bass and sunfish which are shallow-water, shoreline, nest spawners.
The, new discharge location with its steep shoreline and greater depths, will thus be a less attractive spawning area than the old area and should thereby further minimize the minimal impacts at~ributable to 10 blowdown.
En addition, with the increased depth there is a
!'rop in the dissolved oxygen level which further limits the area's potential 'for benthic as well as fish species quite 12 14 apart from any impacts associated with the blowdown.
Thus from a total aquatic standpoint the new discharge location is simply not as good an aquatic ecosystem as the old discharge location with its shallow'littoral zone which would be 16
. utilized much more extensively by aquatic organisms.
17 Because this new location is further downstream it also 18 leaves a larger contiguous portion of the lake free from any thermal impact associated with plant operation.
20 21 Will you compare the mixing zone areas involved at each location and the relative impact of each on the aquatic resources of the 22 lake?
23 A. The original discharge was located on the lake bottom in water 25 feet deep.
The discharge rate was pro)ected to be 25 10 MGD with a mixing zone of 100 130 acres.
The newly proposed discharge point is on the lake bottom in water'0 - 45 feet deep.
A discharge rate of 60 MOD results in a miximum mixing zone of only 200 acres in the winter and in the more critical summer months approximately 90 acres.
The mix-ing zone is the area within which state thermal water quality standards would be legally exceeded.
That is, under.state/federal law, this is the area of the lake temperature could legally rise 8
~ 10 above 90'F and/or 5'F above ambient Zake temperature.
Outside this area they would not exceed 90'F or 5'F above ambient.
A mixing zone of only 200 acres in the winter and down to 90 acres in the summer 12 is small compared to the size of the lake (approximately 4,000 acres).
The highest average winter and summer increase in water 13 temperatures above ambient reservoir temperatures at the end 14 diffuser is the same for both the old and new plans (only 9'F in July 15 and 32'F in December)
(Figures 2, 3, 4, and 5, show isotherms 16 for the old and new blowdown under adverse meterological conditions).
17 From this maximum the temperature gradually drops until at the 18 edge of the mixing zone the temperature is back to 90'F or no more
. 19 than 5'bove ambient lake temperatures.
20 Although the area affected by higher temperature is greater for the new blowdown procedures, it is still a small part of the 22 2.3 24 total lake surface area approximately 5% of the total reservoir in the winter and little more than 2% in the summer under normal pool.
While it would be totally unrealistic to do so, the worst case would be to assume that no'ne of this area is
~"
available to fish or other aquatic organisms.
Even if this were done, the impact is not great, and at worst is less than double the impact with the old discharge.
Under drawdown conditions which could occur once in 10 years, the lake surface acreage would be reduced to 3250 acres and the relative percent
'6 of the lake affected would be somewhat greater.
This worst case assumption is far too conservative,
- however, since we are talking about maximum average temperatures, which as I
~ 10 show below, are actually within the tolerance range for the species expected in the lake.
As noted, not only will the mixing zone be smaller in the 12 summer months than in the winter, but so too will the area 13 14 outside. the mixing zone in which temperatures are from.
0 5 F above ambient.
And even then the average summer temperature of 88'F to 92 F (See Environmental Report page
. 3.2-4a which 'gives average cooling tower blowdown temperatures 17 by month) within the hottest portion of the mixing zone will 18 not exceed published temperatures at which largemouth bass I
20 our experience at Lake Robinson in South Carolina where our 21 Robinson 'Plant is located and at Hyco Lake where our Roxboro 22 2.3 25 Plant is located have shown good fish populations at temperatures which greatly exceed the 90 F expected in the SHNPP reservoir.
. In fact, Cobbs Creek, which received the effluent from the once-I through cooling system at Roxboro, had a standing crop of 285
3.
pounds per acre.
However, this area also had a better habitat shallower, with a good littoral zone for reproduction.and food 3
production - than is available at the new discharge location at 4 'arris.
In the winter, the elevated 'temperatures will tend to attract fish.to the aiea and will probably prove to be one of the better fishing areas in the lake.
At the same time there is no chance of cold shock since ultimately we will have four units and therefore continuous blowdown.
In actuality, cold shock
'10 is more of a phenomenon which occurs in confined areas such as 12 a closed discharge canal where the fish cannot get out of the temperature change.
In an open body of'water such as the 13 Harris reservoir the fish will be free to swim out of the influence of cooling tower blowdown and reacclimate as the temperature gradually decays in the event of a full plant shutdown.
17 Q. What effect do you expect the chemical discharges associated 18 with the blowdown at the new location and volume to have on the 19 aquatic populatonsf 20 A. Most chemical discharges will be less concentrated with the 21 increased volume of-water used in the new blowdown procedure, 22 therefore having less impact on the aquatic populations.
The 2.3 only chemical not more dilute would be chlorine.
- However, the 24 level of chlorine released at the diffuser pipe will not exceed 0,2 mg/1 average residual chlorine.
Within a five surface acre
area this concentration would be diluted to.Ol mg/1 which is below recognized toxic levels and should have little effect'on the aquatic life of the area.'ith the chlorine demand of the Cape Fear waters ranging from approximately 3 - 5 ppm, we would actually expect lower residuals remaining after release to the lake.
Thus even w'ithin much of the mixing'zone the chlorine residual would (1) not be toxic and (2) would be avoided by the fish present.
Furthermore, che 5-acre area would be confined to 9
one of the deeper areas of the lake, avoiding chlorine impacts 10 on littoral areas of the lake, which are the areas most 11 utilized by fishes.
12
- g. In your professional opinion will the increased intake volume increase'he impingement rate?
14 16 A. The intake design specifications have not been changed.
These include a maximum intake velocity not to exceed 0.5 fps under average conditions; deep water withdrawal (approximately 40')
17 and the use of smooth surfaces at the structure (i.e., eliminate 20 rip-rap) to minimize its attractiveness to fish.
Although increasing'he make-up volume from 115 cfs to 185 cfs may increase impingement slightly, we believe the design criteria noted above and the fact that 185 cfs is still a relatively small volume of water for a power plant intake will serve to 2.3 keep impingement at a level which has no significant effect 24 on the reservoir's fishery.
25 The Cape Fear Steam Electric Generating Plant, about 6
3 miles upstream from. the reservoir make-up intake for the SHNPP 2
on the Cape Fear River, has higher intake velocities (0.6-2.9 fps) than SHNPP.
Although it is located in a more riverine area than the nuclear plant, the same species were present that should be 5
present in the new impoundment.
The impingement at the Cape Fear River Plant averaged 22.5 fish per 24 hr., exerting very little 0
adverse impact on the'productive fisheries community in this 8
area.
Presumably, the lower intake velocities at the new plant 9
should result in an eve smaller impingement rate than exists at 10 the Cape 'Fear Steam Plant..
The H. B.
Robinson Nuclear Plant in Hartsville, South 12 Carolina also has a deep ~ater intake structure on a large 13 impoundment.
It's impingement rate averaged 886.3 fish per 14 day with higher intake velocities and more "attractive" 15 structures.for fish than designed in the new SHNPP.
Most of I
16 these fish were small bluegills which are over abundant in 17 18 19 the lake.
The new plant should have even lower impingement rates than the Robinson Plant due to its lower intake I
I velocities and structure design.
20 Q. In your professional opinion what effect will the increased intake volume have on the entrainment rate?
A. The intake volume will be increased by about 60/ (from 115 cfs 2.3 24 to 185 cfs),
and the entrainment will increase somewhat.
- However, the design criteria stated earlier in r'egard to impinge-25 ment (deep intake, low velocity, low volume) will serve to
3.
minimize the entrainment simply because the area should be un-.
2 attractive for spawning and there will be few entrainable organisms 3
present.
As mentioned earlier the primary species expected
$n the 4
lake are largemouth bass and sunfish which utilize the shallow 5
littoral zone for feeding and spawning.
As a result the eggs 6
of the important lake species will not be entrained under either 7
blowdown scheme due to the intake design.
Me have not experienced high entrainment numbers at our Robinson Plant which also has 9
a deep intake.
10 Q. Are you familiar'ith EPA's Ap'ril, 1976 Development Document for I
Best Technolo Available for the Location Desi Construction 12 and Ca acit of Coolin l4ater Intake St'ructures for EHnimizin 13 Adverse Environmental Im act, and if so, how does the SHNPP 14 15 intake system at the new intake volume measure up to the factors set forth for assessing best available technology for intake 16 structures?
A. Yes, I have reviewed that document.
The SHNPP follows the 18 recommendations set forth for minimizing adverse environmental 19 impact as I will outline.
Reduction of intake capacity is the 20 surest way to reduce entrainment impact.
Thus, the EPA develop-22 23 ment document recognizes closed-cycle cooling as the best avail-able Technology and does not appear overly concerned with blowdown volumes.
In this perspective, even though the new volume (185 cfs) is greater than the old 115 cfs, it is still 25 minimal and the significant point is not that the new intake volume is 60% greater than the previously evaluated blowdown volume, but that both are less than 5/ of the original once-through volume of over 4000 cfs which at one point the NRC Staff had found acceptable in the Revised 5'
March 1974 on page 1-4.
Final Environmental Statement, Approach velocity is also a factor influencing best available technology and the Harris intake is designed to have velocities of 10 less than 0.5 cfs under all pumping conditions, which will minimize impingement.
In addition, location of the Harris intake agrees with the development document.
As I discussed earlier, the intake I
is in deeper, less productive water of approximately 40'nd is 12 13 constructed so as to minimize its attractiveness to fish.
All of these factors capacity, location, and velocity 14 follow EPA s recommendations for minimizing impact.
t 15 Q. In summary, do you see any basis for concluding that the impacts 16 on the.aquatic life in the lake will be more adverse with a 17 60 MGD blowdown at the new location than they were under the 18 original plan assessed in the revised FES?
19 A. No.
When one considers that additional treatment of the more 20 concentrated cooling water will be required to prevent scale 21
- buildup, and that this more concentrated blowdown would have 22 been discharged into a more suitable spawning area, the increased 23 intake volume and new discharge location will, if anything 24 result in less impact.
25 The intake structure of the plant has been designed to 0
I~
~ ~
jjg")
3.
keep the entrainment and impingement rates as low as possible by (1) keeping velocities less than 0.5 fps, (2) by placing the 3
structure in deep water, and (3) by minimizing the structure's 4
'attractiveness" to fish.
The increase of the intake volume (115 cfs 5
to 185 cfs) will somewhat increase the entrainment impact on the aquatic organisms.
- However, due to the location of the intake and its design, we do not expect any entrainment problems.
~ 10 12 14, 15 17 18 20 22 2,3
N-
~
4
~
TENTATIVE RN INC TCNYERC ITYWCALI AIIXILIARY RCEERYOIR ETILLWAY TENTATIVE COOL INC ~ORE R ELOWOORN LINE
~LANTCITE~
Q(
I I
l I
I I
I I
I TCN'TATIY2 44RWCC RATER CNAJQICL I
I I
~
I I
OLD DISCHARGE A
EA I
$0IOIAL IL'ATE R IEL.220'%
'L+g)1
'.ES I
)
I I
I I
~
I I
MEW DISC HAFI 6 E NC 42 EA sN5E7 WLLTIAY CAROLIkAPOWER 6 LIGHTCOMPAkv SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT UNITS 1, 2, 3 8 4 Environmental Report EMCKNORN OAI4 4
4 2
2 4
0 YIIOLIIANOEOT<CCT MAIN RESERVOIR MIXINGAREA Figure 1
AUXILIARY R E 5 C R YOI R 5fiLLWAY ROR.'fAL
~ ATCR r.L.
220'MBIENT I AKE TEMP.M41 F
SUBMERGED
)
DISCHARGEV NC 51 50 OLII MAINOAM 5tlLLWAY CAROLINA POWER 8
LIGHT COMP AN Y SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT UNITS I, 2. 3 6 4
Cg IVCR
~UCXIIOANOAM
~
I
'1 5
~
5 YNOV5ANO5Of f55T NEW DISCHARGE MAINRESERVOIR ISOTffERSE ADVERSE WINTER METEOROLOGICAI.CONDITIONS Figure 2
~
AUXILIARY RE5CRVOIR SflLLWAY FOR'.IIIL L'RYE R fl.
220'MBIENT LAKE TEMP. ~ 84 F
'UBMERGED DISCHARGE RC l2 90 86
<<O<<'O, CA
$tILLWAV IlAIllOAll waY" 5
CAROLINA POW E 11 8
LIGHT COMP ANY SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT UNITS
- 1. 2. 3 6 4
~VCXHORIIOAll
~
I 2
2 l
5 TIlOUSAIlOS OS ~ 2 XT NEW DISCHARGF IVIAINRESERVOIR ISOTHERMS ADVERSE SUMMER METEOROLOGICALCONDiTIONS Figure 3
AUXlllARY RCSERYOIR
'VILLWAY 46 42 20 4&o
.,&6 AMBIENTI AKE TEMP.~41 F
LAKE E LEV. w 216'C+
IfAIII OAlf ffll.LW*y
%0 CAROLINA POWE R LIGHT COMP AH Y SHEARON MARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT UNITS I,2.3 6 4
fVCIOIOPIIIOAI~
f I
'f 0
S YIIOIOAWOSOf fsty OLD DISCMARGE MAINRESERVOIR ISOT8ERMS ADVERSE WINTER METEOROLOGICALCONDITIONS Figure 4
~ ~
~
AUXILIARY RCSCRVOIR HANTtITt tHLLWAY 87 85 AMBIENTQKE TEMP.
84 F
LAKEELEV. ~ 21T WAIN OAN tHLLWAY CAROLINA POWER 8
LIGHT COMP AN Y SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT UNITS
- 1. 2. 3 6 4 Aee eq eVCKNOfINOAII e
I 2
2
~
S TNOV5ANO50ffttT OLD DISCHARGE MAINRESERVOIR ISOTHERMS ADVERSE SUMMER METEOROLOGICALCONDITIONS
~
Figure 5
ER Question No. 4:
I Provide a more detailed description of the model and input data used to calculate the isotherms shown on Figures 5. 1.2-2 and 5. 1.2-3.
~Rea once:
The methodology used to generate the isotherms shown on Figures 5. 1.2-2 and 5. 1.2-3 is described in Section 5.1.2 of the Environmental Report. It is conservatively assumed that four units are operating, that there is an absence of significant currents in the reservoir, and no credit is taken for dilution or diffusion.
This simplified methodology results in the uniform circular nature of the plume isotherms.
Thus, with the given heat load, the area within the isotherms is dependent on the heat of evaporation and the heat of conduction from the water surface.
The heat of evaporation and the heat of conduction for cooling pond surfaces were calculated by the method outlined in the publication,
>>The Capacity of Cooling Ponds to Dissipate Heat,"
by W. D. Patterson, J. L. Leoporati, and M. J. Scarpa, for presentation at the 33rd Annual Meeting of the American Power Conference, held in Chicago, Illinois during April 1971.
The following are excerpted from this publication:
1 1.
Heat of Conduction Hc =.26(73 + 7.3W) (Ts - Ta) (P/760) BTU/ft2/day where:
Hc
= heat of conduction in BTU/ft /day W = wind speed in MPH Ts
= pond surface temperature in degrees F
Ta
= dry bulk air temperature in degrees F
P
= station atmosphere pressure in mm Hg.
This equation relates heat lost by conduction to heat lost by evaporation and was first explored by I. S.
Bowen in "The Ratio of Heat Losses by Conduction and Evaporation from any Water Surface, e~ph sical Review 27", No. 2, June 1926.
~Res onse:
(oonrt) 2.
Heat of Evaporation He
= (73 + 7.3W) (es ea BTU/ft /day where:
He
= heat of evaporation in BTU/ft2/day W = wind speed in MPH r
es
= saturation vapor pressure determined from the water surfaces temperature in mm Hg ea
= air-vapor pressure in mm Hg This equation known as the Meyer evaporation equation expresses the relationship that evaporation is directly proportional to the product of the vapor pressure gradient 'between the air and water surface and the wind speed.
Meyer's work is summarized in J. Edinger and J. Geyer's,
>>Heat Exchange in the Environment,>>
EEI Publication No.65-902, June 1965.
Although many equations have been proposed to calculate the evaporation from a water surface, the Meyer equation has been chosen because it is very compatible with the meteorological data available at most sites.
Table 4-1, attached, is a tabulation of the meteorological data used in this study.
These average monthly meteorological parameters were complied from observations made at the weather station at Raleigh, North Carolina.
Table 4-1 METEOROLOGICAL DATA Month January February March April Ho 1140 1510 2210 2580 2915 49 56 60 64 67 Ta 41.6 43.0 49.5
- 59. 3 67.6 8.5 760 9.1 760 9.6 760 9.4 760 7.8 760 32 31 35 45 56 June 2950 75.1 7.0 760 64 July August September October November December 2950
, 2765 2385 1845 1440 1105 62 62 66 61 51 71.2 7.0 760 60.5 50.5 41.9 7.2 760 7.9 760 8.0 760 77.9 6.7 760 76.9 6.6 760 68 67 61 50 38 30 Definitions:
Ho Solar radiation constant determined by latitude of site and month of the year in BTU/ft /DAY 2
S Percentage of sunshine Ta Average dry bulk air temperature in degrees F
W Wind speed in miles per hour P
Station pressure in mm Hg Dp - Dew Point in degrees F
ER Question No. 5:
~Res ense:
Submit updated copy of NPDES Permit. -1 is a copy of the final NPDES permit issued June 12, 1982.
~ )
~
~ -1 North Carolina Department of Natural Resources 8 Community Development James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Joseph W. Grimsley, Secretary DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Mr. P.
M.
Howe CPKL - Shearon Harris 411 Fayetteville Street Mall Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 July 12, 1982
Subject:
Permit No.
NC0039586
%PIXEL Shearon Harris Make County
Dear Mr. Howe:
In accordance with your application for discharge Permit received August 1, 1977, we are forwarding herewith the subject State -
NPDES Permit.
This permit is issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statutes 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency dated October 19, 1975.-
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this Permit are unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing before a
hearing officer upon written demand to the Director within 30 days following receipt of this Permit, identifying the specific issues to be contended.
Unless such demand is made, this Permit shall be final and binding.
Please take notice that this Permit is not transferable.
Part II, B.2.
addresses the requirements to be followed in case of change in ownership or control of this discharge.
)
This Permit does not affect the legal requirement to obtain other 'Permits which may be required by the Division of Environmental Management.
If you have any questions concerning this Permit, please contact Mr. Bill'Mills, telephone (919)733-5181.
Sincerely yours, Robert F.
Helm Director cc:
Mr. Jim,Patrick, EPA Raleigh Regional Office Raleigh Regional Office Manager P. O. Box 27687 Raleigh, N. C. 27611.7687 An Equal Opportunity Aff/rmoriveAaion Employer
li
Permi-No.
NC pp39586 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 6
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT P E R
M I T To Discharge wastewater Under the NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SySTEM In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards and regulations promulgated anc adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Hanagement Commission, and the Federal Mater Pollution, Control Act, as
- amended, Carolina Power and Light Company is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant Hake County to receiving waters of Harris Reservoir on Buckhorn Creek in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I,'I, and III hereof.
Tnis permit shall become effective July 12i 1982-This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on June 30, 1987.
Signed t'nis day of JulY 12 '982-Robert F.
Helms irector Division of Env ronmental Management By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
~ ~
Page of Permi t Ho.
HC SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
. Carolina Power and Light Company is hereby authorized to:
(include only appropriate items) l.
Enter into a contract for construct>on of waste'vster treatment facilities 2.
Make an outlet into Harris Reservoir on Buckhorn Creek C
3.
Construct and operate a facilities to control pollutants from cooling tov:er blowdovm, sanitary sev:age treatment plant, metal cleaning. and low located a
'volume wastes in 'accordance with apalicable effluent 1 t
iBQ. s ed at Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant subject to Par. III, condition No. c-of this Permit and I
4.
Discharge from said treatment works into the Harris Reservo'ir Buckhorn Cr which is c'.assified Class "C".
M28 I 2
I
h.
( ).
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS v
~
During the period beginning at first discharge and lasting untilexpiration permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial number(s).
001-cooling tower blowdown to Harri.
Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below: Reservoir Effluent Characteristics Dischar e Limitations Monitorin Re uirements Kg/day (lbs/day)
Daily Avg.
Daily Max.
Other Units (Specify)
Daily Avg.
Daily Max.
Measurement Frequency Sample
~Ty e Sample LocaLioa Flow Temperature Zinc**
Total Chromium*"
Phosphours**
Free available Chlorine 2/
Total Residual Chlorine 2/
1/
1.0 mg/1 0.2 mg/1 5 mg/1 Average 0.2 mg/1 30 mgd 1.0 mg/1 0.2 mg/1 5 mg/1 Instantaneous Maximum 0.5 mg/1 Contihuous or Pump Log 1/
1/Week 1/Week 1/Week Recorder 1/
Grab Grab Grab 1/
E*
'E*
.E*
1/Week 1/Week.
Multiple Grab At each tower liultiple Grab At each tower 1/
Discharge of blowdown from the cooling system shall be limited to the minimum discharge of recirculating water nec-essary for the purpose of discharging materials contained in the process, the further build-up of which would cause concentrations or amounts exceeding limits of established engineering practice.
The discharge shall not result in t)l violation of Class "C" water quality standards outside of a mixing zone of 200 acres around the point of discharge This mixing zone is for temperature and chlorine.
The temperature within the mixing zone shall not :(1) prevent passage of fish around or. cause fish mortality within the mixing zone;(2) result in offensive cqnditions;(3) produce undesirable aquatic life or result in a dominance of nuisance species outside of the zone(4)endanger the public healt or welfare.
Monitoring adequate to demonstrate compliance with the blowdown minimization, water quality standards fo temperature outside of the mixing zone, and prohibitions within the mixing zone shall be proposed by the permittee si months prior to start-up
- and, upon approval of the proposal, the results submitted with the monthly monitoring report The permittee may discharge cooling water to the auxiliary reservoir in compliance with Part III-E of this Permit.
S t
<I 2/
Neither free available chlorine nor total. residual may be discharged from any unit for more than two hours in any one day and not more than one unit in any plant discharge free available or total l'esidual chlorine at any one time unless the permittee can demonstrate to the Director Division of Environmental Management that the unit in question cannot operate at or below this level of chlorination.
The permittee shall record and report the times of release as a part of the monthly monitoring rcport.
3/
No later than three years after promulgation or July 1, 1987, whvichever is earlier, Total Residual Chlorine shall not exceed a maximum concentration of 0.14 mg/1 in the combined cooling tower blowdown discharge.
Note:
In the event t,)
(Continued on next page)
A.
(
)
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND'ONITORING REQUIREMENTS 3/ (continued)
BAT regulations for control are promulgated in a manner inconsistent with the October 14, proposed guidelines, requirements of this paragraph shall be modified consistent with the regulations (40 CFR 423).
There shall be no discharge of detectable amounts of materials
'corrosion inhibitition or any chemical added which contain the 129, priority pollutants.
- Effluent prior to mixing with any other waste stream.
- 198Q, promulgated added for
- Effective after July, 1983.
These limitations and monitoring requirements apply only if these materials are added by"thc permittee.
I The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall monitored weekly on a grab sample of the effluent.
~
~
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
A.
( ).
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND HONITORING REQUIREHENTS During the period beginning on initiation of discharge and lasting uptil expiration permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial number(s).
002 Sanitary waste treatment Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below: plant discharge to Harris reservoir on Buch urn Effluent Characteristics Dischar e Limitations Honi torin Re ui rements Creel
'ow EQD Kg/day (lbs/day)
Daily Avg.
Daily Hax.
0.05 MGD 30 mg/1 0.075 MGD 45 mg/1 Other Units (Specify)
Daily Avg.
Daily Hax.
Heasurement Frequency
)on$inuoyg, Monthly Sample Type Recorder
=Composite.
Sample a
IorE 30 mg/1 45 mg/1 Quarterly Composite Z
l I-Influent, L'-L'ffluent oau AS C:~.S ~
O
~
O The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored monthly on a grab sample of the effluent.
, ~
~ <
V)
There shall be no discharge of floatin solids fEAlfl 'f4& TlAEll+ nf rlE< nhne<~n g
Or ViSible fOam in Other than traCe amOuntS outside of an uE~A
'E El
A.
( ).
EFFLUEHT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING RE(UIREMEHTS Effluent Characteristics During 'the period beginning upon initiation of discharge and lasting until expiration permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial number{s). 003 metal cleaning wastes SuCh diSChargeS Shall be limited and mOnitOred by the permittee aS SpeCified belOW:
discharged to Harris Reservoir on Buckhorn Cree
'ischar e Limitations Monitorin Re uirements Flow Kg/day (lbs/day)
Daily Avg.
Daily Max.
Other Units {Speci fy)
Daily Avg.
Daily Max.
0.8 Measurement Sample Frequency Type During discharge Sampl e L
- tior, Oil
~~ Grease Copper, Total Iron, Total
'( quantities of pollutants discharged shall not exceed the quantity obtained by multiplying the flow of metal cleaning 'wastes generated times the con-centrations listed to the right.)
30 mg/1 15 mg/1 1.0 mg/1 1.0 mg/1 100 mp/1 20 mg/1 1.0 mg/1 1.0 mg/1 Daily during discharge Grab Daily during discharge Daily during discharge Grab Grab Daily during discharge Grab L
1 xHffluent prior to mixing with any other waste'stream 1/
Connnensurate with treatment system installed The pH shall not be less than 6:0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 'tandard units and shall be monitored daily during discharge on a grab sample of the effluent.
- There shall b e no discharae nf flnatkna znl{cl~ nr vkc<hlc O
~
~ o I
A.
( ).
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
=ffluent Characteristics During thk-'period beginning upon initiation of discharge and lasting until expiration permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial number(s).
004 low volume wastes discharged Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below: to uarris Reservoir on Buckhorn Creek Dischar e Limitations Monitorin Re uirements Kg/day (lbs/day)
Daily Avg.
Daily Max.
Other Units (Specify)
Measurement Daily Avg.
Daily Max.
Frequency-Sample Type Sample
~Loc n
Flow TSS 170(375) 568(1251)
Oil a Grease 85(187) 113(250) 1/ Commensurate with treatment system installed 1.5 HGD Weekly Weekly Grab Grab Effluent*
- Effluent prior to mixing with any other waste stream Low volume wastes shall mean but not all inclusive, taken collectively as if from one source, wastewater from wet scrubber air pollution control system, ion exchange, water treater systems, water treatment evaporator blowdown, laboratory and sampling streams, floor drainage, cooling tower basin cleaning wastes, blowdown from recirculating house service water systems, and steam generator blowdown.
Prior to Start-up of Unit 82, quantity. limitations shall be one-half of the limitations shown.
R 0 o
O fP 0 g 5
0 ~,
C+
M 4P Vl~
~o Ql The pH shall not be less than 6.0 'tandard units nor greater than 9.o standard units and shall be monitored weekly on a grab sample of the effluent.
There shall be no discharge of f]oatina ~nlrb~
n i.<<~~
c...
~
A.
( ).
EFFLUEHT LIHITATIOHS'NDHONITORI'fl6 RE(UIREhlEt]TS During tiiea period beginning upon initiation of discharg and lasting until expiration permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial number{s). 005 Point Source run-off Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below'>:
from construction Di ~hLi ~ t ti t<oni torin~Requi remen ts Effluent Characteristics Sample L
tioi Kg/day (lbs/day)
Daily Avg.
Daily Hax.
Other Units'Speuify) hleasurement Sample Dally pug.
Dally i(ax.
Frequency Type burnt source run-off from construction is permitted iri compliance with a sedimentation and erosion control plan approved by
.e Land Quality Section of the Division of Land Resources.
I
~
Q a f9 f'J j t!J tD sl '
~ Ys 0
~
0 h
Permit No. NC:-
B.
SCHEDULE OF COMPLIAI'ICE l.
The permittee shall achieve compliance with the effluent limitations specified for discharges in accordance with the following schedule:
Not Applicable.
2.
No later than 14 calendar days following a date identif;ed in the above schedule of compliance, the permittee shall submit either a report of progress or, in the case of specific actions being required by identified
- dates, a written notice of compliance or noncompliance.
In 'the latter
- case, the notice shall include the cause of noncompliance, any remedial actions taken, and the probability of meeting the next scheduled requirement.
Permit No.
NC Act used herein means the Federal Mater Pollution Control Act, As 'amended.
DEN used herein means the Division of Environmental Management of the Department of Natural Resources an4 <ommunit:y Developmen<
"EMC" used herein means the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission.
C.
MONITORING AND REPORTING Representative Sampling Samples and measurements taken as required herein shall be representative of the volume and nature of the monitored discharge.
2.
3.
Reporting Monitoring results obtained during the previous month(s) shall be" summarized for each month and reported on a Monthly Monitoring Report Form (DEM No.
MR 1.0, 1.1, an~ 1.4) postmarked no.later than the 45th day following the completed reporting period.
The first report is due on The DEM may require reporting of additional monitoring results by written notification.
Signed copies of these, and all other reports required herein, shall be submitted to the following address:
Division of Environmental Management, "
Mater guality Section Post Office Box 27687
- Raleigh, North Carolina=
27611
~
J Definitions a.
The "daily average" discharge means the total discharge by weight
'uring a calendar month divided by the number of days in the month
'hat the production or comer'cial facility was operating.
Where less than daily sampling is required by this permit, the daily average discharge shall be determined by the summation of all the measured.
daily discharges by weight divided by the number of days sampled during the calendar month when the measurements were made.
b.
The "daily maximum" discharge means the total discharge by weight during any calendar day.
Test Procedures 5.
For each measurem nt or sample taken pursuant to the requirements of this permit, the permittee shall record the following information:
Test procedures for the analysis of pollutants shall conform to The EMC regulations published pursuant to N. C.
G. S. 143-215.63 et seq..
The Mater and Air equality Reporting Act, Section 304(g}, 13 USC 1314, of the.
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, As Amended, and Regulation 40 CFR 136.
Recording Results I 5
0 pART I Permit No.
HC a.
,The exact place,
- date, and time of sampling; b.
The dates the analyses were performed; c.
The person(s) who performed the analyses; d.
The analytical techniques or methods used; and e.
The results of all'equired analyses.
6.
Additional Monitoring by Permittee If the permittee monitors any pollutant at the location(s) designated herein more frequently than required by this permit, using approved analytical methods as specified
- above, the results of such monitoring sha'il be included in the calculation and reporting of the values required in the Monthly Monitoring Report Form (DEM MR 1.0, 1.1, 1.4)
Such increased monitoring frequency shall also be indicated.
The DEM may require more frequent monitoring or the monitoring of other pollu-tants not required in this permit by written notification.
7.
Records Retention All records and information resulting from the monitoring activities required by this permit including all records of analyses performed and calibration and maintenance of instrumentation and recordings from continuous monitoring instrumentation shall be retained by the permittee for a minimum of three (3) years',
or longer if requested by the State Division of Environmental Management or the Regional Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
, ~ 1
, ~
PART Permit Ho.
NC.
A.
MANAGEMENT REQVIREMENTS Change in Discharge 2.
All discharges authorized herein shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this permit.
The discharge of any pollutant identified in this permit more frequently than or at a level in excess of that authorized shall constitute a violation of the permit.
Any anticipated facility expansions, production increases, or process modifications which will result in new, different, or increased discharges of pollutants must be reported by submission of a new HPDES application or, if such changes will not violate the effluent limitations specified in this permit, by notice to the DEM of such changes.
Following such notice, the permit may be modified to specify and limit any pollutants rot previously limited.
Non compliance Notification
/
If, for any reason, the permittee does not comply with or will be unable
'o comply with any effluent limitation specified in this permit, the per-mittee shall. provide the Division of Environmental Management with the following information, in writing, within five (5) days of becoming aware of. such condition:
3.
5.
a.
A description of the discharge and cause of noncompliance; and b.
The period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times; or.
if not corrected; the anticipated time the noncompliance is expected to continue, and steps being taken to reduce, eliminate and prevent recurrence of the noncomplying discharge.
Facilities Operation The permittee shall at all times maintain in good working order and operate as efficiently as possible all treatment or control facilities or systems installed or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit.
Adverse Impact The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize any adverse impact to navigable waters resulting from noncompliance with any effluent
. limitations specified in this permit, including such accelerated or additional monitoring as necessary to determine the nature and impact of the noncomplying discharge.
Bypassing Any diversion from or bypass of facilities necessary to maintain compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit is prohibited, except (i) where
PART II Permit No.
NC unavoidable to prevent loss of life or severe property
- damage, or'ii) where excessive storm drainage or runoff would damage any facilities necessary for compliance with the effluent limitations and prohibitions of this permit.
The permittee shall promptly notify the Water guality Section of DEM in writing of each such diversion or bypass.
6.
Removed Substances 7.
Solids, sludges, filter backwash, or other pollutants removed in the course of treatment-or control of wastewaters shall be disposed of in a manner such as to prevent any pollutant from such materials from entering waters of the State or navigable waters.of the United States.
Power Failures In order to maintain compliance with the effluent limitations'nd prohibitions of this permit, the permittee shall either:
a.
In accordance with the Schedule of Compliance contained in Part I, provide an alternative power source sufficient to operate the waste-water control facilities; or, if such alternative power source is not in existence, and no date for its implementation appears in Part I, b.
Halt, reduce or otherwise control production and/or all discharges from wastewater control facilities upon the r eduction, loss, or failure of the primary source of power to said wastewater control facilities.
8.
Onshore or Offshore Construction This permit does not authorize or approve the construction of any onshore or offshore physical structures or facilities or the undertaking of any work in any navigable waters.
PART 11
.P.ermit No.
NC B.
RESPONSIBILITIES I
l.
Right of Entry The permittee shall allow th.
Director of the Division of Environmental Manag ment, the Regior.al Administrator, and/or'heir authorized represen-
- tatives, upon the presentations of credentials:
a.
The enter upon the permittee's premises where an effluent source is located or in which any records are required to be kept under the terms and conditions of this permit; and b.
At reasonable times to have access to and copy any records required to be kept under the terms and conditions of this permit; to inspect any monitoring equipment or monitoring method required in this permit; and to sample any discharge of pollutants.
2.
Transfer of Ownership or Control This permit is not trar:sferable..
In the event of. any change in control or ownership of acilities from which the authorized discharge emanates or is contemp1eted, the permittee shall notify the prospective owner or controller by letter of the xistence of this permit and of'he need to obtain a p rmit:in the name of the prospective owner.
A copy of the letter shal"1 he,forwarded to the Division of Environmental Management.
3.
Availabili.y o> Reports Except for data determined to be confidential under N. C.
G. S. 143-215.
3(a)(2) or Section 308 of the Federal Act, 33 USC 1318, all reports prepared in accordance with the terms shall be available for public inspection at the offices of the Division of Environmental Management.
As required by the Act, effluent data shall not b considered confidential.
Knowingly making any false statement on any such repot t may result in the imposition of criminal penalties as provided for in N. C.
G. S. 143-215.6(b)(2) or in Section 309 of the Federal Act.
4.
Permit Modification After notice and opportunity for a hearing pursuant to N. C.
G.
S '43-215.1(b)(2) ard G. S. 143-215.1(e) respectively, this. permit may be modi ied, susp nded, or revoked in whole or in part during its term for cause including, but not limited to, the following:
a.
Violation of any terms nr conditions of this permit; b.
Obtaining th;.s p rmit by misrepresentation or failure to disclose fully...~ relevant facts; or c.
A chang in any condi inn that requires either a temporary or permanent reduction nr elimination of the authorized discharge.
81081 I 9
~
~
e.
PART II Permit No.
NC 5.
Toxic Pollutants Notwithstanding part II, B-4 above, if a toxic effluent standard or prohibition (including any schedule of compliance specified in such effluent standard or prohibition) is established under Section 307(a) of the Act for a toxic pollutant which is present in the discharge and such standard or prohibition is more stringent than any limitation for such pollutant in this permit, this permit shall be revised or modified in accordance with the toxic effluent standard or prohibition and the permittee so notified.
6.
Civil and Criminal Liability Except as provided in permit conditions on Bypassing" (Part II, A-5) and "Power Failures" (Part II, A-7), nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee from civil or criminal penalties for noncompliance pursuant to N. C.
G. S. 143-2'j5.6 or Section 309 of the Federal Act, 33 USC 1319.
7.
Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability Nothing in this p rmit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, ot penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject
~nder N.
C.
G. S. 143-215.75 et seq.
or Section 311 of the Federal Act, 33 USC 1321.
~
8.
Property Rights The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in either real or personal
- property, nr any exclusive privileges, nor does it autl orize any injury to priva4e property or any invasion of personal rights, nor any infrir',qement of Federal, State or local laws or regulations.
9.
Severability
. The provisions of his permit are severable, and if any provision of this permit, or the application of any provision of this permit to any circum-
- stance, is held irvalid, the application of such provision to other cir-cumstances, and the rem:inder nf this permit shall not be affected thereby.
M11 5 I 10
Permit No. NC0039586 10.
Expiration of Permit Permittee is not authorized to discharge after the 'expiration-date.
In order to receive authorization to discharge beyond the expiration
- date, tne permittee shall submit such 'information, forms, and fees as are required by the agency authorized to issue permits no later than 180 days prior to the expiration date.
Except as provided in N.C.G.S.
- 150A, any discharge without a permit after the expiration will subject the permittee to enforcement procedures as provided in N.C.G.S.
143-215.6 and 33 USC 1251 et seq..
PART III Page of Permit No.
NC B.
Previous Permits All previous State water quality permits issued to this facility, whether for construction or operation or discharge, are hereby revoked by issuance of this permit.
The conditions, requirements,
- terms, and provisions of this permit authorizing discharge under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System governs discharges from this faci1 ity.
C.
Cons truetion No construction of wastewater treatment facilities or additions thereto shall be begun until Final Plans and Specifications have been submitted to the Division of Environmental Management and written approval and Authorization to Construct has been issued.
If no objections to Final Plans and Specifications has been made by the DEM after 30 days following recei pt of the pl ans or issuance of thi s permi t, whi chever i s 1 atter, the plans may be considered,.approved and construction authorized.
t D.
Certified Oper ator Pursuant to Chapter 90A of North Carolina General
- Statutes, the permittee shall employ a certified wastewater treatment plant operator in responsible charge of the wastewater treatment facilities.
Such operator must hold a certification of the grade equivalent to the classification assigned to the wastewater treatment facilities.
M 15 6 I 12
Permit No.
NC0039586 Heated Water Discharge to Auxiliary Reservoir In order to insure that the auxiliary reservoir is available for its'esigned use at all times, the permittee may circulate heated water through the auxiliary reservoir to prevent ice formation at any time that the surface water temperature is below 35 F provided that the surface water temperature in the auxiliary reservoir is not raised more 5 F above ambient temperature and in no case is 0
raised to more than 40 F.
There shall be no discharge of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCS's) from this facility to the extent that this compound is not present in the facility's intake waters.'ithdrawal from the Cape Fear River Withdrawals from the Cape Fear River, shall be limited to 25/ of the flow in the river except that no withdrawals shall be made from the river when the flow is 600 cfs or less nor which will reduce the fl'ow in the river to less than 600 cfs as measured at the USGS Lillington Gauge.
The withdrawals shall be monitored and reported monthly on the monthly monito'ring report.
Nothing contained in this Permit shall be construed as a waiver by the Permittee of any right to a nearing it may have pursuant to State or Federal law or regulations.
Mater discharged as backwash from intake screens is permitted without limitations or monitoring requirements.
The Permittee shall submit information relative to the design, location, construction and capacity of the cooling water intake structures to demonstrate application of best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact in accordance with the adopt guidelines for cooling water intake structures.
This information must be submitted on or before December 31, 1982.
If any applicable standard or limitation is promulgated under sections 301(b}
(2)(C) and (D), 304(b)(2),
and 307(a)(2) and that effluent standard is more stringent than any effluent limitation in this permit or controls a pollutant not limited in this permit, this permit shall be promptly modified, or revoked and reissued, to conform to that effluent standard or limitation.
Widhin one year after start-up of the first unit,-the permittee shall analyze the discharges serial no.s 001,003, and 004 for the priority pollutants as required by 40 CFR 122.53(d) (7) to theextent that data is still required by regulation in effect at that ti.mes.
Should the guidelines and/or.water quality standards upon which the limitations of this permit are based be revised to be less strringent, the permittee may request relaxation of the permit limits in keeping with the revised guidelines and/or standards.
F <<)
(
a~a J
~
~
~