ML18100B066

1993 Annual Environ Operating Rept (Non-Radiological) Jan- Dec 1993,Salem Generating Station Units 1 & 2. W/940429 Ltr

ML18100B066
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	12/31/1993
From:	Miltenberger S Public Service Enterprise Group
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NLR-E94064, NUDOCS 9405170073
Download: ML18100B066 (8)

Text

. '.

• Public Service Electric and Gas Company Steven E. Miltenberger Public Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 609-339-4199 Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED ARTICLE NUMBER: Z 691 525 086 APR 2 9 1994 NLR-E94064 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Gentlemen:

1993 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT SALEM GENERATING STATION, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-70 AND DPR-75 DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 50-311 The attached annual environmental operating report is hereby submitted pursuant to Subsection 5.4.1 of the Environmental Protection Plan (Non-radiological) for Salem Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2. The Environmental Protection Plan is Appendix B to Facility Operation License DPR-70 and DPR-75 (Docket Nos~\.

50-272 and 50-311).

Sincerely, Attachment (1)

~0n0~g V'VU1 u**i. - *

( ----94051 70073 *931231 ---.~

PDR ADOCK 05000272

{!.td-4 z_ (p 9/~JS- of~. PDR ~

Document Control Desk 2 NLR-E94064 APR 2 9 1994 c Mr. J. c. stone Licensing Project Manager Mr. T. Johnson Senior Resident Inspector Mr. T. Martin Administrator - Region I

u. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Mr. Kent Tosch, Manager *rv New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy Division of Environmental Quality Bureau of Nuclear Engineering CN 415 Trenton, NJ 08625

1993 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT (NON-RADIOLOGICAL)

January 1 through December 31, 1993 SALEM GENERATION STATION UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 50-311 OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-70 AND DPR-75 PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY P.O. BOX 236 HANCOCKS BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY 08038 APRIL 1994

TABLE OF*CONTENTS Section Title

1.0 INTRODUCTION

..**************.********.* 1 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACTIVITIES .*.* 2 2.1 AQUATIC ISSUES *..*******************..* 2 2.2 TERRESTRIAL ISSUES *******************.. 3 3.0 EPP COMPLIANCE STATUS ****************.* 3 3.1 EPP NONCOMPLIANCES ********************* 3 3.2 REVIEW . ***....*..****.***************.* 4 4.0 CHANGES IN STATION DESIGN OR OPERATION. 4 5.0 NONROUTINE REPORTS *********.***.*.***.* ~

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This 1993 Annual Environmental Operating Report (AEOR) is submitted in accordance with Section 5.4.1 of the Salem Generating station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Environmental Protection Plan, Non-radiological (Appendix B to Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-70 and DPR-75, Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-311, respectively).

This is the fifth Annual Environmental Operating report submitted under the EPP and covers Salem Unit No. 1 and Salem Unit No. 2 for the period from January 1 through December 31, 1993. During 1993, Salem Unit No. 1 generated 5,865,894 megawatt-hours of net electrical energy. Salem Unit No. 2 generated 5,541,301 megawatt-hours of net electrical energy.

As required by Subsection 5.4.1 of the EPP, we have included summaries and analyses of the results of all required environmental protection activities. This information is described in Section 2.0. Section 3.0 addresses the issues of EPP compliance. Changes to station design or operation and the review for potentially significant unreviewed environmental questions are addressed in Section 4.0.

Unusual and/or important environmental events are discussed in Section 5.0.

1

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACTIVITIES 2.1 AQUATIC MONITORING ISSUES Subsection 4.2.1 of the EPP references the Clean Water Act as a mechanism for protecting aquatic biota through water quality monitoring. The USNRC relies on the State of New Jersey, acting under the authority of the Clean Water Act, to insure applicable requirements for aquatic monitoring are implemented. The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy (NJDEPE) is the State's regulatory agency.

The NJDEPE requires as part of the New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NJPDES) permit program that effluent monitoring be performed, with the results summarized and submitted monthly on Discharge Monitoring Report forms (DMRs). The monitoring is intended to determine compliance with the effluent limitations of the.

station's NJPDES permit (No. NJ0005622). We have reviewed, the DMRs corresponding to the 1992 AEOR reporting period and have determined that no significant deviations have occurred.

We have observed no evidence of trends towards damage tq the environment. Copies of monthly NJPDES DMRs for the 1993' report year are available upon request and have been ~

transmitted to the USNRC.

On June 1, 1990,.the Salem Generating Btation filed an application for the renewal of their NJPDES permit. The application was filed 180 days prior to the expiration of the permit, November 30, 1990, pur~uant to the New Jersey Administrative Code. .Additional supplements to the permit application were filed with the NJDEPE on August 31, 199Q, January 10, 1991, and April 23, 1991. Copies of the *:

application and supplemental data were also provided to the USNRC.

The NJDEPE issued a draft NJPDES permit to the Salem Station on October 3, 1990. The draft permit contains several new treatment requirements and monitoring conditions which PSE&G believes are excessive and restrictive. PSE&G submitted written comments on the draft NJPDES permit to the NJDEPE on January 13, 1991. over the last two years, PSE&G and the NJDEPE have been working together to resolve all outstanding issues, and issue the permit renewal. The work has culminated in the issuance of a revised draft NJPDES permit on June 24, 1993 which resolved many of th~ treatment and monitoring issues. PSE&G is awaiting issuance of the final NJPDES permit. The conditions of the expired NJPDES permit remain in force until issuance of' the final permit.

2

While the USNRC relies on the State of New Jersey and the NJDEPE for protection of the water quality, the National Marine Fisheries Service maintains regulatory authority with respect to certain migratory threatened and endangered aquatic species. As required by Amendments 129 and 108 to the Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-70 and DPR-75 and the Section 7 Consultation, Biological Opinion, Salem Generating Station conducted inspections of the circulating water intake trash bars at least every two hours during the 1993 sea turtle season. One sea turtle, a Kemp's ridley, was recovered alive and returned to the Delaware Bay in 1993.

On May 15, 1993 NMFS issued a revised Section 7 Consultation, Biological opinion. The revision was incorporated into Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-70 and DPR-75 as Amendments 146 and 124 respectively. For the Salem Generating Station, the revision includes extending the monitoring period by fifteen (15) days and, in the event ,of endangered species mortality resulting from station operations, decreasing the duration between inspections of the intake structure. It also increases by one the number of lethal takes of endangered sea turtles permitted and clarifies the number of live and mortal takes permitted for the three species of sea turtles. The Conservation Recommendations have been revised to include obtaining samples from dead sea turtles recovered from the intake for analysis of pesticide and heavy metal concentrations. Salem Generating Station will continue to implement the Conservation Recommendations referenced in the revised Section 7, Consultation.

2.2 TERRESTRIAL ISSUES Section 4.2.2 of the EPP no longer requires terrestrial monitoring. Monitoring of Diamondback Terrapin nesting and the Osprey and Bald Eagle survey were completed in 1989.

However, PSE&G has voluntarily continued to monitor the osprey population in a join~ effort with the NJDEPE.

3.0 EPP COMPLIANCE STATUS 3.1 EPP NONCOMPLIANCES Subsection 5.4.1 of the EPP requires a list of EPP noncompliances and the corrective actions taken to remedy them. No significant environmental impacts attributable to the operation of Salem Generating Station Unit Nos. 1 and 2 were observed during 1993. PSE&G continued to operate Salem Unit Nos. 1 and 2 in compliance with the EPP during 1993 and had no instances of noncompliance that required corrective actions.

3

3.2 REVIEW Subsection 5.1 of the Environmental Protection Plan for Salem Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, requires that an independent review of compliance with the EPP be maintained and made available for inspection. PSE&G's Corporate Environmental Compliance Group in the Environmental Affairs Department recently conducted an environmental compliance review of the Salem Generating station in July 1993 which conforms to the objectives stated in the EPP.

4.0 CHANGES IN STATION DESIGN OR OPERATION Pursuant to the requirements of Section 3.1 of the Environmental Protection Plan for Salem Unit Nos. 1 and 2, station design changes and operation performance of tests or experiments, for the AEOR covered time period, were reviewed for potential environmental impact. None of the recommended changes posed a potential to significantly affect the environment, therefore, none involved an unreviewed environmental question or a change in the EPP.

5.0 NONROUTINE REPORTS Subsection 5.4.1 of the EPP requires that a list of all nonroutine reports (submitted in accordance with Subsection 5.4.2) be included as part of the Annual Environmental Operating Report.

Only one environmentally related nonroutine report was submitted to the USNRC in 1993. This report involved the incidental take of a Kemp's ridley sea turtle on the circulating water intake trash bars. The turtle was recovered alive and undamaged. The turtle was flipper tagged and released three and one half miles southeast of the Salem Generating Station and one half mile offshore in twenty feet of water~

• Salem Generating Station experienced no unusual or important events that indicated or could have resulted in "significant environmental impact" during the 1993 reporting period.

4