ML18291A605

Final Environmental Statement, Related to the Operation of Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Philadelphia Electric Company, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, April 1973, United State Atomic Energy Commission

ML18291A605
Person / Time
Site:	Peach Bottom
Issue date:	04/30/1973
From:	US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)
To:
References
Download: ML18291A605 (519)

Text

.'?J!. .**:*, . ~. ~--

-*-. ,Rf . *, ,c10 RESutAr* v*c£urRJrt1,ts**

• .* . R00Mij~:z:~.*..* .

. *-~~. ,* . -- '

'1 ': ,,*- ::'-_.,

• . :*:*'.~~*:~t~*ct .,lo;<.,,;P~l:-.:.1,J*~:****:.~f:

.-"  :, '>' _,* ** ' [. '< - L I  :>-:.'\**, ',.,

\. L ~ ._ ) * * '

PHlL'A"D;ELPHtA* ... E LE:£1:Rl.C .:. C'OMPA*N"{*.*.

_.~ ':: '. . . '

ti:

i l1 I')

't . .

1 1 ' ~ - -........... t ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * - - - - - - * - - - - - - - - - - -

i

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS This Final Environmental Statement was prepared by the U.S. Atomic Energy Connnission, Directorate of Licensing.

1. This action is administrative.

2. The proposed actions are* the- continuation of construction permits Nos. CPPR-37 and CPPR.,.38 and the issuance of an operating license to the Philadelphia Electric Company for the start-µp and operation of Peach *Bottom Station Units 2 and 3, nuclear power reactors located on the Susquehanna Riyer, in Peach Bottom Township, York Cotmty, Pennsylvania {Docket Nos.

50-277 and 50~278).

• Units 2 and 3 will employ identical boiling water reactors to produce a total of 6586 megawatts. thermal (MWt). Steam turbine-generators will use this heat to provide 2130 MW (net) of electrical power*capacity. A "stretch" pov1er level of 6880 MWt (222~ MWe) is anticipated at a future date and is considered in the assessments contained .in this St.atement. The exhaust steam will be cooled by once-through flow of w_ater obtained from and discharged to the Susquehanna River and also by forced draft towers when needed.

3. Summacy of environmental impact and adverse effects:

• At full power, the cond_enser cooling water will be dis charged to Conowingo Pond at the rate of 3350 cubic feet per second.

Discharge temperature will be about 21F 0 above inlet tempera-ture during most of the year. In the summer, with the helper cooling towers operating, discharge temperature will be 13F 0 above inlet temperature. 'lhe heated water will be mixed with pond water and the heat dissipated to the atmosphere. In a mixing zone of up to 500 acres, the water temperature increase may exceed 5F 0 , according to the applicant's a~alysis. The staff believes that thermal effects are understated by the applicant and that there is a significant potential for ex-

• tensi.ve.thermal damage to the biologi~al commtmity within ConOW"ingo Pond.

Th*e entrainment of planktonic organisms could be a serious threat to the aquatic commlillity because of the large volume

ii

)

of wate; which is* circulated and the relatively long residence ti-me in various parts of the cooling system, Entrained organ-isms , including larval and innnature fishes , will be exposed to mechanical, thermal, and chemical damage.

Impingement of fishes on the intake screens could cause losses to the fish population, particularly in late fall and winter.

Unexpected. s_hutdown of. the plant in winter could produce sig.,-

nificant mortalities in fishes, The planned chlorine concentration in the plant discharge would, at times, result in an adverse impact on aquatic biota.

The current eutrophication of Conowingo Pond may be somewhat aggravated by discharges from the plant.

Noise levels from the mechanical-draft cooiing towers -may be high enough to be objectionable to people in nearby boats, Natural fogging duration will be only slightly increased by operation of the helper cooling towers, Alternative closed cycle cooling would cause still further increase in fogging and some icing; both effects are expected to be -minor.

About 100 acres of the surface area of Conowingo Pond has been enclosed or filled in as a result of plant construction.

Visual impact of the plant has been minimized both by its siting and by the planned mass planting of trees and grasses.

The risk associated with accidental radiation exposure .is very low.

The estimated potential doses from radioactive iodine near the site boundary are significant, and thus, _the applicant will be required to .reduce this dose. Weekly milk sampling and analysis will. also be required to assure that the iodine levels are maintained as low as practicable.

The estimated total body dose to the population within 50 miles from operation of the station is about 83 -man-rems per year as compared to a natural background level of 1,100,000 man..-rems/year.

Land 'areas disturbed during construction of the station, but not to be used, are to be seeded to native grasses, trees, and shrubs, Farming will be permitted up to and between trans-mission line structures where rights-of-way cross agricultural land.

/

,.J..---.....,__,,----

iii

4. Principal alternatives considered:

Purchase of power.

Construction of an equivalent power plant at another site.

Use of fossil fuel instead of nuclear fuel.

Dissipation of the waste heat to the atmosphere via closed cycle cooling towers.

5. Comments on the Draft- Environmental Statement were received from the agencies and organizations listed below a-qd have been considered in the preparation of the_ Final Environmental Statement. Copies of those connnents are included as Appendix N and the comments are discussed_ in Section XIII.

Department of Agriculture Department of the Army, _Corps oj: Engineers Department of Commerce Department' of the Interior Department of Transportation Federal Power Commission Environmental Protection Agency Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Philadelphia Electrtc Company

6. This Final Environmental Statement is being made available to the public, to the Council on Environmental Quality, and to other agencies in April 1973_.

7. On the basi$ of the evaluation-and analysis set forth in this Stat.ement, after weighing the_ environmental, economic,_ tech-nical, and other* benefits of Peach Bottom Station Units 2 and 3 against the environmentc1.l and other costs, an~ consid_ering ayailable alternatives, it*is concluded that the.actions called for, under NEPA and Appendix D to-10 CFR Part 50, are the continuation of construction permits CPPR-37 and CPPR~38 and the issuance of an operating li.censefor the facility, subject t_o the f~l_lowing conditions _for the protect ion of the_

environment:

(a) The applicant will carry out the station's radiological monitoring program at a level considered by the AEC's Regulatory Staff.to be adequate to determine_ any radio-

- logical effects on the envir~11ment from operation of the station.

iv (b) A non-radiological environmental monitoring program will be incorporated in the Technical Specifications appended to the operating license. The applicant will be required to conduct a monitoring program to determine:

(1) Temperature in the discharge canal and in Conowingo Pond as affected by the cooling water discl].arge, meteorological conditions, and flow conditions in the pond.

(2) Free and total residual chlorine, iron, and heavy

.metals (copper, zinc, cadmium, cobalt, ~ickel, chromium, and manganese) concentrations in the

• condenser discharge.

(3) The effects of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station operation on the biological community of Conowingo Pond with particular emphasis on the losses* of biota due to impingement and entrainment and including the number and species of fish mortalities attributable to operation of the station.

(c) Operation of the Peach Bottoni Atomic Power Station with the once-through, tower assisted, cooling system will be permitted until November 1, 1975 and there?fter a closed cycle cooling*

system shall b'e required.

(d) Evaluation of the economic and environmental impacts of an alternative closed-cycle cooling system shall .be made by the applicant in order to determine a preferred system for installation. ]his evaluation shall be submitted to the Atomic Energy Commission for review by August 1, 1973.

(e) After approval by the Atomic Energy Commission, the required closed-cycle cooling system shall be designed, built and pla<::ed in .operation no later than November 1, 1975.

(f) During once-through operation, the total residual chlorine concentration in the condenser discharges, prior to entry into the discharge pond, shall not exceed 0.1 ppm, and the period of chlorine addition to a condenser stream shall not exceed one hour per day.

(g) The applicant will be required to reduce the dose from iodine releases and shall operate the facility so that the iodine dose through the pasture-cow-milk pathway, as com-puted by the staff, does not exceed "as low as practicable" levels.

V (h) If harmful effects or evidence of irreversible damage are detected by the monitoring programs, the applicant will provide to the staff an analysis of the problem and plan of action to be taken to eliminate or significantly reduce the detrimental effects or damage.

8. The applicant will assess and evaluate the environmental monitoring and study programs outlined in this Statement and in the. Technical Specifications accompanying the operating license. Whenever the applicant believes it has accumulated information which can clearly demonstrate* that the operation of the station with the once-through, tower assisted cooling system will not result in an unacceptable, long-term, irreparable damage to aquatic biota, the applicant may file an appropriate application for amendment of the operating license. The Commission will take appropriate action in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR Part 2.

---

******----------.,.-----~

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS *....*..........*.*. *. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i FOREWORD. * * * * * * * * * . * . * * * * * * . * * . * . * * . * * . * . . . * * . . * * . . * . * . . * . . . . xxii i I. INTRODUCTION .. *..*.......... ~ . . . . . . * . . . . . . . . . * . . * * * . *

• I-1 A. Site Selection *.**.*.*..*.............* .' ...... *. .'. I-1 B. Applications and Approvals ...*.**...*..... ;...... I-2

. References for Section I ....*..**...*.*........ *..... *. I-5 II. THE S~TE * .... ~ ; .................* .... * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-1 A. Location of Plant .***..*....*.*..*............... II-1 B. Regional Demography and Land Use ...............*. II-5

1. Population................................... II-5

2. Land Use ..... ~................................ II-5 C. Historical Significance........................... II-7 D. Environmental Features............................ II-10

1. Surface Water Hydrology .... ; * . . . . . . . . . . . . . * . . II-10

2. Groundwater Hydrology........................ II-17

3. Water Use *...*.*.* .*............ ,:.............. II-17

4. Geology.............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-19

5. Seismology . ................ -. ....... *: ........ . II-19

6. Meteorology ....*...........*.....*.*......... II-20 E. Ecology of the Site and Environs *........*....*.. II-24

1. Terrestrial *......*.*....**.*................. II-24

a. Vegetation: ..***....*. ;.~**************** II-24

b. Animals . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-26

2. Aquatic ...*..... **..* _.. *...... .". * * .. . * . . . * . . * .. . . . II-28

a. Decomposers *......*......... *.*........... II-30

b. Primary Producers ....*........ ~ . . . . . * . . . . II-30

c. Consumers ............ . ~. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-33 vii

viii

3. Special Environmental Features *.************** II-44.

References for Section II ....................*....... *. II-46 III. THE PLANT * ***. ********. ; ***. *' ..********.************ ~ *** III-1 A. External *Appe~rance . ..... , .. ** , . , ........ ** ........ ' .. III-1 B~ TransmissiOn Lines . ...................... _........ . III-6 C; Reactor, Steam Electric, and Normal Operation Cooling System . ..... ,.......... , ............ !t ******. III-9

1. Reactor and Steam Electric ~ystem ************* III-9

2. Cooling Systems for Normal Operation ********** III-9

a. Gener al ..... II ************************.***  !'

• III-9 b*. Cooling Water Intake Facility ************* III-10

c. Cooling Water Discharge from Units 2 and 3, .................... * ...... . III-10

d. Mechanical Draft Cooling Towers *********** III-12

e. Discharge Canal and Discharge Port to Conowing_o Po_nd .................... . III-13

f. Transient Times of Coolant Water ********** III-13, D~ The Plant Effluent Systems .********** , ************ III-13

1. Heat .......................................... . III-13

a. Thermal Discharges into Conowingo Pond **** III-13

2. Radioactive Waste Systems, ***** -**** , ********** III-33

a. Li<Juid Wastes * *********.******************. III-33

b. Gaseous Wastes ************************.*** III-38

c. Solid Radioactive Waste System ********** *.* III-43

3. Chemical and Sanitary Wastes ****************** IIL-44 a, Chemical Wastes .......*....*..........*... III-44

b. Sanitary. Wastes . ........................ ,fA * *

• III-48

c. Laundry Wastes .... *, ........... *.* ......... . III-48 References for Section III ****************.* , ********** III....;51

~---.-.-.* **--*-.---------*-------*----.,-*

ix

.IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF SITE PREPARATION AND P'r.,AN'T CONSTRUCTION * .**.****** ; ***.*.***..*****.****** IV-1 V. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF PLANT OPERATION............. V-1 A. Land Use......................................... V-1 B. Water Use, **.** , ****.***. , . , ** , * * * * * . * * * * * . * * * * * *

• V-2 C. Biolo_g::L~al Impact . .....*.....***.*.......*.. Iii * * *

• V-2

1. Sources of Probable Impacts.................. V-3

a. Thermal Dischar*ges . ..................... . V-3

b. Entrainment ..... *......................... . V-6

c. Dissolved Oxygen . .. G * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * *

• V-10

d. *chemica'i Dis.charges **.**.**************** V-10

e. Radioactive Discharges *********.*********

V-11

2. Extent of Impac,ts *.*****************.*.******** V-11 D. Radiological Impact of Routine Operation ********* v.;..17

1. General Considerations *.** ***** , ************** V-18

a. Dispersion of Gaseous Effluents ********** V-18

b. Dispersion of Liquid Effluents *********** V-18

2. Estimates of Radiation Dose to Man *********** V-20

a. Estimates of Radiation Dose from Exposure to Gaseous Effluents. * * * * * * * * * *

• V-21

b. Estimates of Radiation Dose from Exposure to Liquid Effluents. * * * * * * * * * * *

• V-25

c. Estimates of Dose from Direct Radiation.. V-26

3. Assessment of Dose to Man *************** : **** V-26

4. Radiation Doses to Species Other than Man **** V-28

a. Terrestrial Environment ****************** V-28

b. Aquatic . ..*....*.... , .......... o *********** V-33

.E.

• Transportation of Nuclear Fuel and Solid Radioactive Waste .........*...*... o **.****** , .***** V-36

1. Transport of New '.Fuel *********************** V-36

X

2. Transport of Irradiated Fuel,.,,.,.,.,, ****** V-37

3. Transport of Solid Radioactive Wastes, ******* V-37

4. Principles of Safe,ty in Tran.sport, * , ***** , , ** V-38

5. Exposures During Normal (No Accident)

Condit ions .............................. * .... . V-39 a, New Fuel., ..... , ................*.......*.

j V-39

b. Irradiated Fuel, ............. , .. *.....* ... . V-40 c.* Solid Radioactive Wastes ** ,.,.,.,,,., **** V-41 References for Section v **.*..*.****.*.******** ~ ***** V-42 VI. EFFLUENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING *.************** VI-1 A. Radiological Mani taring .********* , ***** , ********* VI-1 B, Biological Monitoring . ......*............* .. * ..... VI-3

J.. Studies ............ ~ ........................ . VI-3

2. .Conclusions . ........ , ............. ~ ......... . VI-5

.*c. Thermal Monitoring Program *********************** VI-6 D. Chemical Moni taring, .......... ~ . *................. . VI-8 References for* Section VI. , .*********************** ,

• VI-9 VII. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF POSTULATED ACCIDENTS ********* VII.-1.

A. Plant Ope*ration Accidents *******.** , ************* , VII-1 B. Transportation Accidents ************************* VII-5

1. New Fuel . ........ *........................... . VII-5

2. Irradiated Fuel . ................ ~ ... , .......

• VII-6 3, Solid Radioactive Wastes *********.*********** VII-:7

4. Severity of Postulated Transportation Ace id en ts . .......... ~ ....*.....**....*...** * .. VII-7 References for Section VII ************** , , *********** VII-9 VIII. ADVERSE EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED ********** ~*** VIII-1 A. Factors Responsible for Adverse Effects ********** VIII-1 B. Probable, Adverse Effects .*** , , ** , *****.*.*** ~ **** VIII-1

xi IX. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USE OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY **** ........ IX-1 A. Land Use *.****** ** ........ .. .................. .

~ ~ IX-1 B. Water.Use **.***. .......................... ... . ** IX-2

c. Air Use . .................. !I' * * . * * * * . * . * * * * * , ** * , * * *. * *

• IX-2 D. St.mllllary * ***************************************** IX-3 References* for Section IX ********************* ..... . .. IX-4 L IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF .RESOURCES * **** , *****.************ , **** *, **** , ******* X-1 XI. THE DEMAND FOR POWER ******* ....................... . XI-1 References for Section XI *. ....................... . XI-8 XII, ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION AND.

COST-BENEFITS ANALYSIS OF THEIR ENVI_RONMENTAL EFFECTS ****.*..* ~- .*.* ~ .****.*..**.***..****..******** XII-1 A. Summary of. Alternatives ************************** XII-1

1. Purch.ase of Powe~ . ..........................*. XII-1

2. Hydropower ..............*...* *. ~- ... * .......*... XII-1

3. Building Power Plant at Anothe! Site ********* XII-2

4. Alternative Fuel ............................ . XII-2

a. Coal . ..................................... . XII-3

b. Oil . ....* ............ ~ ........ ~ .......... . XII-4

c. Gas ****** * *****************.************** XII-5

5. Cooling System Alternatives, .................. . XII-5

a. Scheme I ...... * . * . * . .................... . XII-5

b. . Scheme II *** .. ** .......................... . XII-6

c. Schenie II-A. .. ....... ....... ........

• XII-6

d. Scheme III ** ... .... . ............ . ......... XII-6

e. Scheme IV *********** ..................... XII-6

xii

6. Alternatives to Normal Transportation Procedures ................................ ~ .. . XII-6 B. Cost-Benefit Analysis of Alternative Cooling Sys terns ................................. . XIII-7

1. Cost Analysis ............................... . XIII-7

2. Environmental Analysis ..******............*.. XII-10 C. Cost-Benefit Balance ...*....*.****..*..*...*.**.* XII-11

1. Lan:d Use .** : .*...**.*.*...******.*..*.*..**** XII-11

2. Water Use .*. ***.*.**.*.**.*.........*.*.*** **.... XII-13

3. Economic Effects ..*.*....*....*.*....*.*.. *..* XII-14

4. Sl.IIIlmary **.***.****..*.*********.************* XII-14 References for Sect ion XII *******..*.*.******...***** XII-17 XIII. DISCUSSION OF COl,Il,lENTS RECEIVED ON THE DRAFT ENVIRON-MENT~ STATE~NT . .**..*****.. ~ *....*.**...** : ***..**. XIII-1 Appendix A Population Data for the Area Around Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station............ A-1 Appendix B Susquehanna River Data *..*... *..*...*.*....* :. B-1 Appendix C Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale .*..*......* C-1 Appendix D Meteorological Data for Peach Bottom .*.**.*** D-1 Appendix E Wind Movement at the Peach Bottom Site . ..................... ~ .............. ~ . . . E-1 Appendix F Wind Movement Data Modified for Staff Computer Program. , **.: . . * . * * . . . . . . . . * * . . . F-1 Appendix G Terrestrial Biota of the Peach Bottom Area .******.*.....*.... ;............ . . G-1

• Appendix H Aquatic Biota of Conowingo Pond .******....*.* H-1 Appendix I Life Histories'of Important Conowingo Pond Species .*.....*.... ~.................... I-1 Append:i,x J The Chemistry of Chlorine in Fresh Water.................................. J-1 Appendix K Sources of Potential Biological Damage from Once-Through Cooling Systems *.......*.** K-1 Appendix L PJM and MAAC Details *...*.*...*..**..*******. L-1 Appendix M Water Quality Certification and Permits ****** M-1 Appendix N Comments on the Draft Environmental Statement N-1

_ _...,._."'"**,*"'.ct':- * - - - - - - - ' - - - - - - -

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Fig~re

)

II-1 Location of Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (100-mile radius) .*************************** II-2 II-2 Site of Peach Bottom* Atomic.Power Station ********* ~.~ II-3 II-3 Population distribution within 5 miles of Peach Bo.ttom Units 2 and 3, according to a 1971 survey .........*., .............................. *,. II-6

• '\

II-4 Zoning regulations for Pennsylvania counties and townships within 5 miles of Peach Bottom ********* II-8 II-5 Conowingo Dam, the southern limit of Conowingo PO*nd . .. ~ .......**.****..**.*.*.* ***...**..*. II-12 II-6 Holtwood Dam, the northern limit of Conowingo Pond, and the steam plant that operates on c*oal dredged from the Susquehanna River ************* ** II-13 II-7 Major inputs and outputs of the Susquehanna River ......... * ................... ~ ............... ~ .... . II-14.

II-8 Bottom contours of Conowingo Pond at the Peach Bottom site, with vertical contours shown for the points of intake and discharge ********* II-16 II-9 Wind data for the Peach Bottom site, 153 ft above sea level . ....... " ........ II * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **

• II-21 II-10 Wind data for the Peach Bottom site,

• 302 ft ab ave sea level . .......... * .................... . II-22 II-11 Simplified aquatic food web for Conowingo Pond ******* II-29 II-12 Seasonal fluctuations in the mean number of total zooplankton per liter in Muddy Run.

Recreation Lake, Muddy Run Pumped Storage Reservoi.r,

• and* Conowingo Pond ************************ II-35 11~13 Location of stations sampled during 1970, ************ II-36 xiii

xiv Figure III-1 Conceptual outline of Peach Bottom Station *** ********* III-2 III-2 *A view of Peach Bottom Unit 1, looking north across Rock *Run Creek ********* ******* .- ****.***** III-3

• rn-3 Status of Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station as of April S, 1972 ******* , **.* ~ ***. , *********

• III-4 III-4 Helper cooling_tower under construction on.

berm in Conowingo Pond . . , .... , ... , ..........* .... '* .... . III-5 III-5 Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station vis*itors' info*rmation center . ......... , . , .............. , ...... . III-7 III-6 Philadelphia Electric Company transmission system . * ~ .*.*.**.***..** , *.. , * , ***..* , , ** * ******* , * ,

• II_I-8 III-7 Closeup of Peach Bottom Complex*.*** , ******* ~ ********* III-11 III-8 Submerged discharge facility, with details of* movable gates . ....... , ............................ . III-14 III-9 Path of cooling water from Conowingo Pond through the Peach Bottom Station **************.****** III-16 III-10 Major weekly inflows and discharges of Conowingo Pond at a natural river flow of 2500 cfs ................ * ..... , ..... , ... , ........... ,. III-19 III-11 Maj or weekly inflows and discharges of 1

Conowingo Pond at a natural river flow of 5000 cfs ................. .* .......................... . III-20 III-12 Major weekly inflows and discharges of Conowingo Pond at a natural river flow of 15,000 cf s . .......*........... , .......... , ... , ....* .. , .. III-21 III-13 Isotherm patterns expected at the end of a Tuesday, based on physical model studies,*

under varying wet bulb temperature conditions: **.***** III-24

-~---------------------*--*----------------..,.-~,

xv III-14 Isotherm patterns expected at the end of a Saturday, based on physical model studies, under varying wet bulb temperature conditions ** ~..... III-25 III-15 Isotherm: patterns-expected at the end of a Tuesday, based on physical model studies .** ~. . * . * .

• III-26 III-16 Isotherm patterns expected at the end of a Saturday, based on physical model studies ***..*...* III-27 III-17 Liquid radioactive waste treatment system for Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3........... . . * * . . . . . * . . III-37 III-18 Gaseous radioactive waste treatment system for Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3....................... III-41 V-1

• Summary of data on toxicity of residual chlorine. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-12 V-2 Pathways for radiatio!). exposure of man............... V-19 VI-1 Thermal monitoring locations for Conowingo Pond ...*.. ~ **....*..* *....**. ~ . * . * * * . . . * . . * * . . VI- 7 XI-1 Tranmission system of the Pennsylvania - New Jersey - Mary land Pool .*.**....**.*** * . * . * * * . . * . . . . . . . XI,..2 Demand for power predicted for the Philadelphia Electric Company............. . * . * . . . . . *

• XI-8 XIII-1 Schematic of flow processes assumed for the staff's estimation of near-field temperature patterns .............. _...... *~* ...................... XII-16 XIII-2 Staff's estimati~n of, isotherms resulting from two-unit operation in summer.................................. XIII-17 XIII-3 Staff's estimation of isotherms resulting from two-unit operation in winter **.*****.**.....*.****.***.**..... XIII-18 J-1 Typical pattern of _chlorine reaction with natural wa:ter............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J-5 K-1 Population changes in algal groups with changes in temperature .*.*..**...** , ...... , * , * , . . . . . . K-4 K-2 Relative proportions of diatoms, green algae, and blue green algae in the standing crop at Indian Point, 19 70 .**. **.*.** , ......** , . . * * . . . . . * * . K-7

xvi K-3 Fish count per screen vs. intake* current velocity . ........................................... . K-17 K-4 Zooplankton variation with water temperature in the Green River, Ky., near the Paradise Steam* Plant ...... : .................... *.***.*.***.*.* K-21

LlSTOF TABLES Table Page 1-1 Applications, pennits, and actions involving

.Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3 *....*.*.**.** ~ ...*. , *** ** ,.,, **~, .* , ** ,,..... *.. * *

• 1-3 II-1 Milk cows in the vicinity of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, .. , ****...*****.******* **. 11-9 II-2 Correlation between water temperature and flow rate, measured above Safe Harbor Dam ********.*** II-15 II-3 Average weekly wet bulb temperatures for the low-flow summer weeks with concurrent river water temperatures ....... , ................ ~ ......... . Il-25 11-4

• Annual variation in percentage composition of algal classes in Conowingo Pond ***.***.**.****.*** II-32 11-5 Seasonal variation in percentage composition of algal classes in Conowingo Pond ***.***********.**. Il-32 II-6 Occurrence of zooplankton in Conowingo Pon4, 1970 .............. , ...... , .................... . II-37 Il-7 Occurrence of *zooplankton at sampling stations in Conowingo Pond during August, 1970 .*************** Il-38 II-8 Average zooplankton biomass in Conowingo Pond ******** Il-39 11-9 Mean number of benthic organisms from Conowingo. Pond . ............... *...................... . 11-41 11-10 Relative f{shing success at trap net stations 1, 2, 8, 9, _and 10 in Conowingo Pond *.*.*********.**. II-43 111-1 Circulating water transit time through plant cooliil.g sys!=,em, ....... ~ .....*....*.. ~- ........*... Ill-15 llI-2 Heat transfer in Conowingo Pond indicated by isothenn data from model study ***********.****.*** lll-31 xvii

xviii III-3 Co~ditions used in determining releases of radioactivity in effluents from Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3 ******************* III-34 III-4 Projected effluents from'Peach Bottom Unit 1 *******.* III-35 III-5 Annual release of radioactive material iri liquid effluents from Peach Bottom Units 2 and. 3 . ................ , ........ , , , *. , * , .. * , * , * , * * * * * *

• III-39 III-6 Calculated releases of radioactive materials irt gaseous effluents from Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3*.. ................... *, *. , , . * , * * * , , * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• III-42 III-7

• Principal chemical effluents of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 . ........................................ III-49 III-8 Summary of the. water quality of the Susquehanna River ........................ , ....................... . III-50 V-1 Exposure times at different levels of thermal shock expected to produce.no mortalities or

.Conowingo Pon~d. fish . ................................ . V-5 V-2 Cumulative mortality of Conowingo Pond zooplankton after exposure to a temperature rise of 15F 0 (8.3C 0 ) *for 5 min ****.*.**************** V-7 Key to Fig. V-1. Exposures of aquatic organisms to total residual chlorine ***************** . V-13 V-4 Summary of estimates of annual radiation dose to the.population from immersion in the gaseous effluents released by the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station ***..*.** , ~*. * . * . * * * * * . * * * * * * * . * * * * * * * * * . V-22 V-5 Summary of the estimated radiation doses to individuals per year of release at locations of maximum exposure to gaseous and liquid effluents*

from the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station *********** V-23 V-6 Summary of estimated totalbody doses to the population within 50 miles per year of release of gaseous and liqutd effluents from Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3 *.****** ~ ** V-27

.-----~,~

xix V-7 Bioaccumulation factors for various organisms ......*........*....*.*...... , ..............*.*. V-30 V-8 Internal radiation dose to bi6t~ .....*............*..* V-31 V-9 Radiation dose to biota by water immersion .. *; .*...... V-34 VI-1 Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 environmental radiation monitoring program ................*........ VI-2 VII-1 . Classification of postulated accidents and occurrences at Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station ............................................ *.. . VII-2 VII-2 Summary of radiological consequences of postulated accidents *..***.***..*... ***..... * .......*.... VII-4 XI-1 PJM power pool members as of July 19 72 **.******.** .- **

XI-2 Capacity and demand of the Philadeiphia Electric Company for 1961-1980*.*....*...**.................... XI-5 XI-3 PJM and applicant's reserve margin .................. . XI-6 XII-1 Cost/benefit balance .for Peach Bottom, Stat ion Uni ts 2. and 3 ...*.**.*...*.*.................* XII-8 XII-2 Applicant's cost summary as of t1ay 1972 ...*......*.. ~ XII-12 XIII-1 Rock Core Laboratory Test Results ... , .._*... , .......*.. XIII-6 XIII-2 Flow conditions considered in staff estimates ......*. XIII-14 A-1 Population distribution between 5 and 60 miles from Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 by radius and compass sector ....*..*.......... .- .*...*....... ~...... A-2 B-1 Susquehanna River* fl*ows and flow durations, SO-year re cord ... *.*................ ; .. *...**.....*.*...* B-2 B-2 Susquehanna River water temperatures (°F),

31-y~ar record ....*............... *........ .- .......** ; .* B-3 D-1 Distribution of hourly temperatures at Peach Bottom weather station No. 1, August 1967-July 1969 ...........*,.*.*.........**......*...***...*. D-2

xx D-2 Precipitation at Peach Bottom weather .station No. 1, August 1967-July 1969*, , ..**********.**** ** ****** D-3 D-3 Highest mean hourly wind speeds and estimated peak

.gusts at Peach Bottom weather st~tion No. 2, August 1967-July 1969 **.. ~ ****.* , *********** , * , *** , * *

• D-4 E-1 Wind-rose for turbulence class 1 ...*.* ,, .........*...* E-2 Wind-rose for turbulence class 2 . .*.**..*******.****. E-3 Wind-rose for turbulence class 3 . .................... E-4 4 Wind-rose for turbulence class 4 ..................... E-5 E-5 Wind-rose for turbulence class . 5' ...*...*.* ~ .......*. E-6 E-6 Wind-rose for all turbulence clas~es ******.****.***** E-7 F-1 Modified w;i.nd rose for stability condition B., ,* ****** F-2

, F-2 Frequency of wind speed under stability condition B as a function of *direction *************** F-3 F-3 Frequency of wind speed under stability condition. D as a function of direction ** *******. ~ ***** F-4 F-4 Frequency of wind speed under stability condition Fas a function of direction **.*.******.*** F-5 G-1 Trees and shrubs in the oak-chestnut region of the lower Susquehanna River Basin *** ~ *********.****** G-2 G-2 Amphibians expected and observed to occur in the vicinity of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station . ............... , ........ , ................... . G-4

.G-3 Reptiles expected and observed to occur in the vicinity of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station ....................... *....................... G-5 G-4 Mammals expected and observed to occur in the vicinity of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station.............................................. G-6

xxi G-5 Birds expected and observed* to occur in the

• vicinity-of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station ...................... ~........................ G-7 H-1 Fishes of Conowingo -Pond **....* , .***.******.*** , .** ,

• H-2 H-2 Aquatic macrophytes of Conowingo Po~d ******.********* H-3 H-3 Phytoplankton of Conowingo Pond; .*******.************ H-4 H-4 Zooplankton of Conowingo Pond *.**********************

• H-5 H-5 Benthic fauna of Conowingo Pond, ..** *.**************** H-6 I-1 Length frequency distribution of the channel catfish, *rctalurus punctatus, taken at all trap net stations and taken by 16-ft semi-balloon trawl in Zone 5, Conowingo Pond, 1970 ******** 1-6 I-2 Length frequency distribution of the white crappie, Pomoxis annularis, taken at all trap net stations and taken by 16-ft semi-balloon trawl in Zone 5, Conowingo Pond, 1970 *.*..*** I-11 J-1 Precision and accuracy data for residual chlorine methods based upon deterininatiori by severa~ laboratories..............................

. . . J-6 K-1 Upper_ temperature limits of aquatic species found in Conowingo Pond at Peach Bottom based on laboratory studies and field observations *.**.******* K-11

FOREWORD This final statement on environmental considerations associated with the proposed issuance of an operating license for the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3 was prepared by the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, Directorate of Licensing (staff) in accordance with the Commission's regulation, 10 *cFR Part 50, Appendix D, imple-menting the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). .

The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 states, among other things, that it is the continuing responsibility of the Federal Government to use all practicable means, consistent with other essential considerations of national policy, to improve and coordi-nate Federal plans, functions, programs, and resources to the end that the Nation may:

Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations.

,* Assure foJ:" all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings.

Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the.environ~

ment without degradation, risk to health or .safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences.

Preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of. our national heritage, and maintain, wherever possible, an environment which supports diversity and variety of individual choice.

Achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life's amenities.

Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of depletable resources.

Further, with respect to major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, Section 102 (2)(C) of the NEPA calls for preparation of a: detailed statement on:

(i) The environmental impact of the proposed action, (ii) any adverse environmental effects which cann<;>t be avoided should the proposal be implemented, (iii) alternatives to the proposed action, xxiii

xxiv (iv) the relationship between local short-term uses of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement~of long-term productivi°ty, and (v) any irreversible and.irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be impleinented.

Pursuant to Appendix D of 10 CFR Part 50, the AEC Directorate of Licensing prepares a detailed statement on the foregoing considera-tions with.respect to each application for a construction permit or full-power operating license for a nuclear power reactor.

When application is. made for a construction permit or a full power operating license, the applicant submits an environmental report to the AEC. The staff evaluates this report and may seek further information from the applicant, as well as other sources, in making an independent assessment of the considerations specified in Section 102 (2)(C) of NEPA and Appendix D of 10 CFR Part 50. This evalua-*

tion le.ads to the publication, of a draft environmental state.ment, prepared by the Dir~ctorate of Licensing, which is then circulated to Federal, State and local governmental agencies for comment.

Interested persons are also invited to comment on the draft statement.

After receipt and consideration of comments on the draft statement, the staff prepares a final environmental statement, which includes a discussio~ of questions and objections raised by the comments and the disposition thereof; a firial cost-benefit analysis which considers and balances the environmental effects of the facility and the alter_;

natives available for reducing or avoiding adverse environmental effects with the environmental economic, technical, and other benefits of the facility; and a conclusion as to whether., after weighing the environmental, economic, technical ~nd other benefits against environ-mental costs and considering available alter.natives the action called for is the issuance or denial of the proposed permit or license or its appropriate conditioning to protect environmental values.

In addition, in a proceeding such as this which is subject to Section c of Appendix D of 10 CFR Part 50, the final detailed statement includes a conclusion as to whether, after weighing the environmental economic, technical and other benefits against environmental costs and considering available alternatives, the action called for as regards the previously issued construction permit is the continuation, modification or termina-tion of the permit or its appropriate conditioning to protect environ-mental values.

Single copies of this statement may be obtained by writing the Deputy Director for .Reactor Projects, Directorate of Licensing, U. S. Atomic

XXV Energy Commission, Washington, D.C. 20545. Dr. J. H. Cusack is the AEC Environmental Project Manager for this statement. (301-9 73-7588)

'~.t;-----,,------------*---*------------*------------:-,-*-

I. INTRODUCTION The Philadelphia Electric Company (applicant) applied to the Atomic Energy Commission on Aµg. 31, 1970, for .an operating license. for two boiling water reactors (BWRis), Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3,

• each rat'ed. at 1065 negawatts net electrical (MWe). Th_e facility is located on the west bank of Conexvingo Pond, principally in

• Peach Bottom Township, York County, Pennsylvania. Conowingo Pond is formed by the backwater of Conowingo Dam on the sus*quehanna River~ Peach Bottom Unit 1, a high temperature gas-coo;J..ed reactor (HTGR) rated at 40 .* MWe. is presently operating.

at the faciiity site .

The appli~ant also represents Public Service Electric and Gas Com-pany, Delmarva Power and Light Company, and Atlantic City Electric Company. These four* companies (and their _combined sys tens) face an 'increasing demand for power.. They will joir:itly own and share the output of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3.

• Construction Permits _Nos. CPPR-.37 and CPPR...:.38 for Units 2 and 3 were issued to. the Philadelphia Electric Company in January 1968 under Dockets 50-277 and 50-278. Construction of the two combined units was about 85% complete as of December 19 72. Fuel* loading is scheduled for March 1973 for Unit 2 anq March 1974 for Unit 3.*

Full power operation is scheduled for September 19 73 for Unit 2 ah.d a year later for Unit 3.

The principal environmental issues to be considered are-the possible effects of water usage, land usage, and societal changes to the community. Several cities and texvns are wholly or partially supplied by water from Conexvingo Pond._ The.-introduction of an industrial complex to a quiet rural comrnuni ty will inevitably bring about various degrees of changes to the general area. (See Section II.B.2.)

A. SITE SELECTION The applicant's major considerations for choosing the Peach. Bottom site for Units 2 and 3 were: (1) the site suitability :for .nuclear power generation was e_stablished when the construction permit for Unit 1 was issued, and (2) the location is at the hub of the appli-cant's 500-kV transmission system. Th.is strategic location for additional electric power generation seemed to be unusually valuable for improving the reliability of both the applicant's group of power system and the Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland (PJM) power pool, of which the applicant's systems are members, by* completing a 500-kV loop around the Eastern Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New Jersey area.

1he area surrounding the site is characterized by broad ridgetops and steep hillsides. Topography of the area ranges from an eleva-tion of about 109 ft at the river to above 400 ft beyond the 1-1

I-2 property limits. Conowingo Pond, forned by Conowingo Dam, varies in width from about O. 6 miles to 1.5 miles and is slightly less than 1. 5 nd.les wide in the site area. Approxi:mately 100 acres of the 600...-acre site will be occupied by roads and structures.

The staff agrees that location of the power plant in this area will not cause major adverse impacts on land use plans or environmental characteristics.

Contributing to the siting decision were the following site char-acteristics: cooling water was available; the geological s:trata wer~ stable .and provided a good foundation; transmission lines and rights-of-way for transmitting the generated .power already existed; danger from flooding was minimal; there was good access to nearby road and railroad 'transportation; and the population density in the area was low (average density within 5 miles of the site is 79 people per square nd.le). Experience had been gained as a result of the operation of Unit _1 regarding the dis-charge of thermal, chemical, and rac;lioacti ve effluents and their effects on the environment, and studies had been made of the im-pact of additional amounts of these discharges

• 1 Although the facility does not blend perfectly with the surrounding area, it is so sited as to be visible only from the river side, and trees and vegetation are planned to minimize the visual impact from that direction.

A relatively small acreage of low productivity farm land was used.

The available cooling supply. seemed to be controllable within ther-mal and chemical. discharge limits that would not damage the biota and aquatic life appreciably or be objectionable to other Pond and

• downstream users.

B. APPLICATIONS AND APPROVALS Permits and approvals from various federal, state, and local agencies as related to environmental aspects *of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station are listed chronologically in Table I-1.

• The stgte certification of water quality and applicable state permits are presented in Appendix M. *

• 1 I!

I Table 1-1. Applications, permits, and actions involving Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3

,1" Date Date of l

Permit Permit No. Purpose of permit received application Issuing agency I Encroachment 16968 Allows construction of fill and riprap 5-8-67 .3-27-67 Pennsylvania Department of Forests and Waters l Susquehanna River offshore 16969 along west bank of Susquehanna River Allows construction of embankments along west shore of Susquehanna 5-8-67 3-29-67 Pennsylvania Department of Forests and Waters l Department of the Army permit NABOP-P (Phila. Elec.

Allows dredging, placing fill, construction of rock embankments, 5-12-67 Department of Army, Corps. of Engineers I'I Co.) 9 .cooling tower foundations, water I ponds, water intake and discharge I structures l Use and occupancy MAI05153 Permits use of various buildings - 9-5-67 Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry permit  !

Building permit Permit to construct an electric power generating station 10-18-67 10-5-67 Peach Bottom Township I

Water obstruction permit Construction permits 17333 CPPR-37 Change Rock Run Creek to allow for construction of railroad spur Authorize construction of nuclear 11-14-67 1-31-68 1-18-67 2-10-67 Pennsylvania Department of Forests and Waters USAEC H

I w

ll and plant in accordance with plans CPPR-38 submitted by the owner iI I

Industrial waste 578I01 l Permit for non-radioactive waste 1-21-69 10-11-68 Pennsylvania Department of Environmental lI permit

• Resources

• I Water obstruction 18093 Allow change of channel of Rock 5-13-69 3-31-69 Pennsylvania Department of Forests and Waters permit Run Creek Water obstruction permit 67-492 Allow construction of dam across Rock Run Creek 5-13-69 4-2-69 Pennsylvania Department of Forests and Waters Il Water obstruction 18092. Allows construction of intake 6-10-69 4-2-69 Pennsylvania Department of Forests and Waters permit screen structure I Department of Army permit NABOP-P (Phila. Elec.

Allows construction of diversion dike and dredging at mouth of Rock 6-18-69 4-14-69 Department of Army, Corps of Engineers I

Co.) 11 Run Creek and construction of dike along Susquehanna l Department of Army NABOP-P* Allows construction of discharge 10-20-69 4-14-69 Department of Army, Corps of Engineers permit (Phila. Elec. structure on west bank of Co.) 13 Susquehanna Sewerage permit 6769409 Approval of sewage treatment 10-28-69 Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources

Table 1-1 (continued)

Date Date of Permit Permit No. Purpose of p_ermit Issuing agency received application Permit to operate 67-302-017 Permit- for operation of auxiliary 1-20-70 12-17-69 Pennsylvania Air Pollution Commission an air contamination boiler

• sourc:e Permit for storage and 169812 Approval of storage tanks 11-20-70 6-25-70 Pennsylvania State Police-Fire Marshall handling of flammable or combustible liquids Radwaste permit 6769204 Permit-for radioactive wastes 7-6-70 12-16-69 Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources Conowingo Pond Project 405 Change of boundary in Peach Bottom 10-13-70 2-25-69 Federal Power Commission boundary area Byproduct material 37-06752-04 Required for materials used in 11:20-10 USAEC license calibration, standardization and

• checking of radiation detection instruments and systems H I

.i:,-

Gas stack 70-EA-446-0E FAA approval required 6-30~71 Federal Aviation Administration Certificate of water State certification of plant 11-3-71 10-21-71 Pennsylvania Department.of Environmental quality water quality Resources Special nuclear SNM-1274 Authorizes receipt, possession, 11-17-71 10-6-71 USAEC material license inspection, and storage of fuel Permit to discharge or Permit for construction discharges Not yet 2-4-72 work in navigable received waters and their tributar.ies Permit to discharge or Permit for normal operating Not yet work in navigable discharges. applied for waters and their.

tributaries Operating lic.ense Authorizes utility to load and Not yet 8-31-70. USAEC*

begin power operations of the received reactor

7 I-5 REFERENCES FOR SECTION I

1. Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3, Philadelphia Electric Company, June 1971;

. II. THE SITE This section gives the location of the Peach Bottom site and describes for this site and its environs those aspects which will feel effects from,construction and *operation of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station. The subject matter is intended, both in content and presen-tation, for a wide audience.* A limited amount of data and descrip-tion is presented for general information. Most of the information,

'however,. is basic to subsequent impact evaluation; to the extent possible, it is presented both qualitatively for the layman and quantitatively for the analyst.

A. LOCATION OF PLANT The Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station is located in Peach Bottom Township, York County, Pennsylvania. The* location in respect to significant and famili_ar features such* as principal cities, highways, and waterways is given in Fig. II-1.

The site is in the Piedmont Upland section of the Appalachian Highl~ds, on the Susquehanna River about 18 miles . above its entrance to Chesapeake Bay. Approximately equidistant from the site and about 14 miles ~part *are Holtwood Dam (above) and Cono-wingo Dam (below). These dams create a lake named Conowingo Pond which was constructed by the applicant .in 1928 to supply water for the eo*nowingo Hydroelectric Plant~

The Unit 2 and Unit 3 reactors are situated about 300 ft back from the shoreline of Conowingo Pond (Fig. II-2) as it existed prior to present construction. The terrain within 1 mile of the station on both sides of Conowingo Pond consists of steeply rising hills that reach elevation of about 300 ft above the station grade, whose elevation is about 116 ft above sea level_. Beyond the immediate hilly terrain which extends to a distance of 12 to 15 miles from the station, the land is rolling. The site are~ close to the plant is generally wooded *with scattered areas which have been cleared and cultivated *

. The applicant, Philadelphia Electric Compa_ny, owns. all 620 _acres within the boundaries represented by .the heavy line in Fig. II-2, excepting the land actually occupied by Units 2 and 3; This land is jointly owned by the Philadelphia Electric Company (who will operate the reactors), the Public Service Electric and Gas Company, the Delmarva Power and Light Company, and the Atlantic City Electric Company. 0 II-1

II-2 Fig. II-1. Location of Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (100-mile radius) ..

---

,,,,':~ --------------------------------

II-3 j

j PEACH BOTTOM UNITS 2 6 3 .

J.r'")>--=eC~ PEA\C~M

/UNIT 1 VISITORS CENTER CONOWINGO POND Fig. II-2. Site of Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station.

' *" ..... --~~~-- . ---,_,.. -* ...--.-.-~,----**'\~ -***--*--*----..~~~--.. -~ ***~< ... * ** ' * * ~--.. *, ... _,...,. * ..,._, __ .*. ..,, .. _.,. .. ,.,~,~*****P*-**~-..,_.,!.ft**,_,.,.,,.,_~_._,..,_ o<-'.,,,_.,...,.._.._,.,,J -**

• II-4 An adjoining area, under the ownership of the applicant's wholly-owned subsidiary, Philadelphia Electric Power Company, extends to the terminus of the discharge canal, The remaining land on both sides of Conowingo Pond from .Holtwood Dam to Conowingo Dam to a distance of 300 ft from the water line is the property of the applicant's wholly-owned subsidiaries, Philadelphia Electric Power and the Susquehanna Power Companies. About 500 ft down-stream from Units 2 and 3 is the existing high-temperature gas-cooled reactor, which is designated as Unit 1 and is own.ed and operated by; the applicant.

A relatively small area, scarcely larger than that occupied by the Units 2 and 3, is secured by a fence; entrance to this area is either through the gatehouse for Units 2 and 3 at the north end of the enclosure or via the lobby to Unit 1 which is at the south end (see Fig, II-2).

II-5 B. REGIONAL DEMOGRAPHY AND LAND USE

i. Population The principal population centers within 100 miles of Peach Bottom are shown in the schematic map (Fig~ II-1). The distribution o:f popula-tion to a distance of 5 miles is shown graphically.in Fig. II-3.

Within a !-mile distance, the.total population (permanent an~ seasonal) as given in Fig. II-3 has been recently confirmed (June* 1971) by the applicant.in a door-to-door survey.

The population distribution to a distance of 60*miles from the site is given in Appendix A, Table A-1. The numbers presented are from the U.S. Government Census for 1960 and 1970, together with

. official state projections for 1980 and for 1970 (before the census).

Conowingo Pond offers substantial recreational opportunities which can *attract as many as 8000 pTrsons on.weekends. The visitors' information center is responsible for an additional transient population. Since its opening on July 9, 1963, the center has*

re~ei ved mo.re than 500,000 visitors. *

2. Land Use Historically, the Peach Bottom area has been more or less isolated, being blocked to movements from the east until recent times by the Susquehanna River; new highways and bridges are expected to stimu-late new patterns of growth and development. Considerations of land use in the present context focus upon three aspects: (a) pfist use, (b) changing patterns of use; and (c) organized efforts to direct future use.

The situation in regard to these three aspects can be summarized as follows: In times past, the region. has been rural. In recent

.-*~*----*-,..a**~-~...,,,..,.._..,~.,...,._.~.,._.s.-,,,._ """'" ~-*-.,-., ' '"'" - ' " ... -.-~-...-- -,~ *~*--**-*-~~--,., __ ,_..,.. .. ~,,,,._...,..,.w,.-~,._...,..._.....__.__ .,._.* ,,...,.,-,,*,-*,.

11-6 N

E s

ESTIMATED TOTAL POPULATION PEAC\"l BOTTOM STATION 0-1 MILE 114 0- 2 MILES 596 0-3 MILES 1447 0-4 MILES 3333 o.:. 5 MILES 6145 Fig. 11-3 ... Population distribution within 5 miles of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3, according to a 1971 survey.

II:-7 years, urbanization has been taking place., and as a result, a great deal of undeveloped and underdeveloped lands are to be found within urban boundaries. Plans by* counties and townships are underway that aim primarily .to contain residential, commercial, and industrial growth.so that agricultural, rural, and underdeveloped are terms that will c~ntinue to characterize the majority of land uses in the

.region.

For example, York County 3 has a plan which visuali~es a hierarchy of. centers of uPban*, [!atelZite, T'UT'al village, and highway irrrpaat areas in which residential, commercial, and industrial land uses will occur. Superimposed upon York County plans are those of Lower Chanceford and Peach Bottom Townships.3 These townships have care-fully analyzed the land according to geology, topography, ground and surface water, drainage, and soil character in order to in-telligently partition the land according to future use categories:

(a) residential, (b) commercial, (c) industrial, (d) agri.cultural, and (e) open space. Similarly, Lancaster County, which lies east across the*Susquehanna from the Peach Bottom site, has plans for exercising con.trol over future use of the land within its borders.

Although the various classitications of land use differ somewhat in their fine details, a nearly common generalclassification*can be reached. Such a classification is given in Fig. II-4 for the area within a 5-mile radius of the reactor site.

For Peach Bottom Township, 99.95% of the land is undeveloped (i.e.,

crops, timber, vacant). About one half Of the crop value is in fruits and vegetables for huma:n consumption with the remainder in fiel9 and* forage crops for 1~ves tock and poultry. The distribution of milk cows within two mil~s of the reactor is shown in Table II-1. 4 The remainder, 0.05%, is developed and divided according to resi-dential (51%), roads and public rights-of-way (44%), and connnercial and industri~l (5%)~ Of about 40 commercial land users, many are located along Pennsylvania State Routes 74 and 851; they consist mostly of grocery stores, beauty and barber shops, service stations, and farm stores. Industrial land use has beep dominated in years past by the slate quarry business. Other industrial activities include grain and feed mills, fruit and vegetable packing plants, and one*sewing factory.

C. HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE Peach Bottom Township, from which the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station takes its name, is part of an area that h~s had a rather colorful past. From before the arrival of European settlers down to the present time, the general area at the upper end of Conowingo

II-8 LEGEND:

B D

RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL/ RlJRAL

[I]

COMMERCIAL CONSERVATION

• INDUSTRIAL D. RECREATION Fig. II-4. Zoning regulations for Pennsylvania counties and townships within 5 miles of Peach Bottom.

.*~

II-9 Table 11-1. Milk cows in the vicinity of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station4 Direction Approximate number o(milk cows

• 0- 1/i mile 1/i-l mile 1-11/i miles 1 1/i -2 miles 0-2 miles N 0 0 0 0 0 NNE 0 0 0 0 0 NE 0 0 0 0 ()

ENE 0 0 0 0 0 E 0 0 0 0 0 ESE 0 0 0 0 0 SE 0 0 0 0 0 SSE 0 0 0 0 0 s 0 0 0 86 86 SSW 0 0 52 38

• 90 SW 0 0 0 0 0 Wf,W 0 0 0 40 40 w 0 0 20 30 50 WNW 0 0 0 70 70 NW 0 15 0 0 15 NNW 0 0 0 0 *o Total 0 15 72 264 351

- ---... ~---*--- --*-~-~--- .H--.. . ~- -,......_.,._.~-~- ...... -----* --~~-

~~*--- ~# -

~

II-10 Pond has been one of some special significance. Holtwood Dam and Hydro Station occupy the site now. The Indians used the site for a river crossing, and later, the settlers knew it as McCall's Ferry. In 1817, the first of several unsuccessful attempts was made at this site to bridge the Susquehanna River. The Susquehanna and Tidewater Canal (1835-1894) enterpris.e existed primarily to furnish Baltimore with cheap access to Pennsylvania coal. Lock 12, an historical nonworking.

reconstruction at Holtwood Dam, connnemorates this era.

The area most closely related to the nuclear station was originally known as the York Barrens because of the large tracts of land that were devoid of timber, a result of the annual burning procedure that the Indians employed with the aim to improve their hunting grounds.

The Indian Steps Museum preserves artifacts of the pre-settler Susquehanna Indians. Notwithstanding its early Indian occupancy, no artifacts of historical or archaeological significance have been found within the site boundary, and none are listed in the National Register of Histo.ric Places 2 for any of the immediately surrounding townships.

D. ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES

.In*most respects, the Peach Bottom site is well suited for the location of a nu.clear power plant. s-:i. 3 Surface water and ground water drain toward the Susquehanna River; the underlying rock is not porous and contains few fractures. The elevation of the plant is such that there is no danger* from flooding even in the uniikely event of a failure of .Holtwood Dam. During the record flood of June 1972, the water level rose to within 20 ft of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3.

Operation of the station would not have been affected. Withdrawal from Conowingo Pond for domestic water supply is small compared to normal flow in the river.

The foundation for the plant is a very solid metamorphic rock that is ideal for .the heavy concrete structures. A rock cliff beh;ind the plant, created when the hill was cut down for the plant site, shi.elds the entire station, except for the gas stack, from view from the west. The plant is visible only from the river. The strµctures have been designed so that they can withstand the largest earthquake of record in the eastern United States and still be shut down in a safe manner.

1~ Surface Water Hydrology The Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station is located on the Susque-hanna River just north of the Pennsylvania-Maryland border. The

II-11' river at this point is a lake, called Conowingo Pond, formed by the Conowingo hydroelectric darn (Fig. II..;5) 8 miles downstrea111 and the Holtwood Dam 6 miles upstream (Fig. :I:I-6). . ..

The Susquehanna River ts about 422 miles long from its source, Lake Otsego in New York, to its mouth, on: ChesapeaJ<e Bay. It drains an area of about 27,500 square miles,'. The quai;lt:ity' of flowing'water, an average( of 36',080 cubic feet per second* (cfs),

is small in comparison to theJsize of.the river valley; probably the valley was shaped at a time,when*the river was.much larger than it is now. The course that the river has takeri *has been contro'lled by the erosion resistance of bedrock. As.a conse-quence, the river is characterized by mimerdus rock islands.

The 'river is regulated by nine existing flde>d-control dams on its major tributaries and by the York Haven, Safe Harbor, Holtwood, and Conowingo Dains on the main stream. The lowe.r portion of the Susquehanna River, with- the locations of these four major danis, is shown in Fig! *u-7. Water statistics at any particular site are likely to be comp_lex by. virtue 'of the regulatory nature .bf the dams. However, some open river .still exists be*tweeri York' Haven and Safe Harbor Dams, and it is in terms of these open stretches

.that natural river conditions can be defined, as for example the natural river :flow .rate. Ove?r a 50""'.year period thii;; fiow rate has varied from 1500 c:fs to 972-,000 cfs.* . A sumrµary of river flows and water temperatures i.s given in Appendix B; the highest water tempera-tures occur in July whe~eas the lowest flow rates occur in Septemb~r.

T!ible U . . 2, although it represents a statistically. poor sample, suggests* strongly .that odds are rather low for mq,ximµm water* tempera'-

tures te> 'c6incide with minirinJm flow rate's, the reason being that wat.er

.temperatures. depend upon a riumber hf factors of. which flow rate is only one,*

Conowingo Pc:inc:I; the segment of the Susquehanna which is of immediate concern, ha!:l inore of the aspect:s *of a lake than of--a river . . In this regard, some of Gonowingo's phy~ical features ~re: its width, which varies from 0~5 to 1.5 *miles; its surface area, which is about 14 square miles; and its volume:; whlch vari.es between' 240,000 acre.:..feet and 322 ;OOO a*cre-feet because of the Muddy R,tin Pumped Storage* Station.

In the high..,;f low, shallow uprive:r porti.ons of t:he pond, the depth varies from,l2to 20:ft; q.c,wnstr~am tlie.aepth'reaches 100 ft at Conowingo Dam. The fall of the ori,ginal river bed is abo1,1t 4 to 5 ft/mile *. * *The depth contour and b:ottom profile of Conow:j.ngo Pond at Peach Bptt.om site are showrt in Fig~ rt--8. During the record flood of June 1972, the water reached an elevation of 114.5 ft above sea level. Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 ar.e protected to 135 ft. The silt.ing rate has amounted to about 7 ft in 20 years.

11-12 Fig. 11-5. Conowingo Dam, the southern limit of Conowingo Pond.

H H

I I-'

w Fig. II-6. Holtwood Dam , the northern limit of Conowingo Pond, and the steam plant that operates on coal dredged from the Susquehanna River.

DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLIES

1. CITY OF CHESTER

2. CITY OF BALTIMORE

3. HAVRE DE GRACE

4. PERRY POINT VETERANS HOSPITAL

5. BAINBRIDGE NAVAL TRAINING STATION INCLUDING PORT DEPOSIT 6.CONOWINGO HYDRO PLANT DAM NORMAL MAXIMUM WATER ELEVATION (ft)

CONOWINGO 108.5 MUDDY RUN 520 (PUMPED STORAGE)

HOLTWOOD 170 SAFE HARBOR 227 YORK HAVEN 254 w

<!)

MUDDY RUN. (PUMPED STORAGE) z4

,0::

a::~

>- Ul co ow PEACH BOTTOM  ::, a.

ATOMIC POWER STATION  :. :.::,,

~

500!;;!...J 4000!;;!

~1------< 300 ~ ~

'---1----"1 200:,; 4

.....,_"'!"--'-4f-'-----1 100 ~ ~

z

-0'---~2'----'4 O w i~

s::o 0::

0

>- 250 f

N. ...J BALTIMORE =-+--,---+--t---t----1 200 !;;!

w

...J j ~---l----l-------1---+---+---l 150 ;;\

(/)

w 100 ~

a, 4

---

1----!----+--+-----l 50 ~

...J w

CHESAPEAKE BAY SEA LEVEL ' 55 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 5 10 15 RIVER DISTANCE (miles)

_/

Fig. II-7. Major inputs and outputs of the Susquehanna River.

II-15 Table 11-2. Correlation between water temperature and.

flow rate, measured above Safe Harbor Dam 31 Average Occurrence*

temperature (°F) Natural river flow (cfs)

(weeks) 88 15,000 I 86 15,000 2 86 10,000 86 5,000 86 2;500 I 85 15,000 3 85 10,000 85 7,500 2 85 5,000 85 2,500

• For the 30 year period prior to.1967.

11-16 REACTORS I 2 AND 3 INTAKE '

II I_~"~'"""' ~'""" '"""" ,

J t ffi O 800 I I I I t I I 11 If ITTf1: ;

1600 . 2400 3200 HORIZONTAL SCALE 0

4000 (feet) 4800 5600 6400 7200 PROFILE A-A -COLD WATER INTAKE STRUCTURE

I seu= ~'~\

• ::."" srnocro"'

ffiH 1111111111 Etl:n 0

o BOO I

1600 2400 3200 4000 4800 5600 6400 HORIZONTAL SCALE (feet)

PROFILE 8-B - DISCHARGE STRUCTURE Fig. II-8. Bottom contours of Conowingo Pond at the Peach Bottom site, with vertical contours shown for the points of intake and discharge.

---

~-

II-17 The volume and flow rate of the lake are complex because contributing to these are the inflows from the Holtwood hydroelectric plant, which can be up to 32,000 cfs, and from the Muddy Run Pumped Storage Plant, which can be up to 34,000 cfs. Outflows from Conowingo Pond are primarily the flow to the Muddy Run Pumped Storage Plant, which can be up to 27,000.cfs, and to the Conowingo hydroelectric plant, which can reach 85,000 cfs. (Sect. III.D.l gives more details in connection with thermal discharges from Peach Bottom Statfon.)

• Information on the composition and quality of the water in Conowingo Pond is limited. Data acquired at Holtwood anµ Conowingo Dams are given with the discussion on chemical effluents from Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station in Sect. III.D.3.

2. Groundwater Hydrology The depth of weathering of the bedrock which underlies the site varies from 15 to over 60 .ft, the greater depths being under the higher land~

This weathered material and fractures in the underlying sounder rock contain small amounts of groundwater. Most of the farms and private dwellings in this general area that are not in towns are supplied by

• wells, most of which are less than 100 ft deep. Of these wells, 25% yield less than 5 gallons per minute (gpm); 50% yield 5 to 20 gpm; and 25% yield between 20 and 100 gpm. Yields of over 100 gpm are virtually unknown; so groundwater could not supply an industrial plant or a municipal water supply. The low yields are the result of the low porosity and permeability of the weathered and fractured rock.

The water table slopes toward the nearest stream or river so that *in the plant area the groundwater is flowing towards Conowingo Pond.

There are three wells on the power plant site. Two are dry holes and one supplies water to the information center.

3. Water Use For the Peach Bottom site, the entire lower 35-mile stretGh of the Susquehanna River, because of its dams and electric generating stations, contributes to the environmental picture. Each of the

• dams in Fig. II-7 is the site of a hydroelectric station; however, these stations _are relevant only because of the complexities of the flow rate, which have been discussed.

Two uses of the water upstream from Conowingo Pond need consideration.

First, above Safe Harbor Dam, coal is dredged from the river bottom.

The dredging op*eration itself apparently has little noticE;!able effect on Conowingo Pond. Before the coal can be used, it must be cleaned; this is done at a site removed from the river. A retaining pond

- . --*-*----- ---*-****....-*~------ - - . ~ . . ---.. . .*--.. -~---**---.,..... ~,..,,.- ,.-..... ,.,,. ,-----... -, ..*-----~ ---~--~--~--**=~-_..,.., _____. __ -. '" *-

II-18 receives the effluent from the cleaning operatio~, apparently preventing the detrimental products ot fuel production from associating with the river. Second, the fossil fuel steam plant located at Holtwood Dam (Fig. ir-6) uses the coal dredged from the river aboye Safe Harbor Dam. The plant takes its cooling water from the river above Holtwood Dam and discharges the warmed water from its condensers into the river inunediately above Holtwood Dam. This station, with a rating of 108 MW(e), uses 220 cfs for cooling purposes .. As of Oct. 1, 1972, .the older of the two units of the station, which provides slightly less than half the electric output of the station but slightly more than half the thermal input to the river, will be retired. The Holtwood Steam Plant seems to be of minor importance to Conowingo .Pond except perhaps esthetically (Fig. II-6). There are several small industries near Port Deposit, below Peach Bottom; these use relatively* small amounts of water.

There.is a small fishing industry near the mouth of the river on Chesapeake Bay.

The Susquehanna River, including Con9wingo Pond, supports, considerable water-related recreation, including fishing and.waterfowl hunting.

'Public and private marinas exist below Peach.Bottom at Fishing Creek and Peters Creek in Pennsylvania and at Glen Cove, Rock. Run, Lapidum, Port Deposit, Perry Point, and Havre de Grace in Maryland. In addi-tion, there are numerous shoreline cottages with recreational facil-ities.

• There are six major consumers that take water from Conowingo Pond *

. or from the river just below the Conowingo Dam for domestic use (Fig .. II-7), These are:

Consumer Source Amount withdrawn Baltimore, Md. Conowingo Pond 230 cfs at present 460 cfs in future

• Chester, Pa. Conowingo Pond 50 cfs Conowingo Hydro Plant*. Conowingo Pond <2 cfs Havre ,ide Grace Below Conowingo Dam 2 cfs Perry Point Veterans Below Conow;i.ngo Dam <2 cfs Hospital Bainbridge Naval Below.Conowingo Dam <2 cfs Training Center (Porf Deposit)

---

~---------------

II-19

4. Geology The power plant site is located in the Piedmont Upland Province.

It is bounded. on the southeast by the Coastal Plain, from which it is separated by the Fall Line, and on the northwest by the Triassic Lowland Section of the Piedmont Province. The Piedmont Upland* is a dissected plateau surface*with a generally gently rolling topo~

graphy and a relief of 300 ft or so. It is underlain by the rocks of the Glenarm series, which are believed to be of late Precambrian or early Paleozoic age. The si,te itself is underlain by the Peters Creek Schist, probably .a member of the widespread Wissahickon Schist.

Just to the south is the long, narrow Peach Bottom syncline in which are exposed the somewhat younger Cardiff conglomerate and the Peach Bottom slate. This small syncline is one of the. few structures in the area which can be identified although one or more faults are believed to trend northeast-southwest parallel to the regional structure. The fault near.est to the site is 1 mile to the southeast.

However, these faults, as well as more recent but still ancient faults to the northwest in the Triassi.c Lowland section, have been inactive for at least 140 million years and are not probable sources for an earthquake.

The Peters Creek Schist is weathered to a depth of 15 to 60 ft, material that has been removed for *the foundations of the heavier structures. The underlying fresh rock is firm and strong and provides a good foundation for the station.

5. Seismology The Piedmont Upland is a region of infrequent earthquakes of small to moderate intensity. The nearest region of strong earthquakes is the St. Lawrence River Valley some.350 miles to the northeast. This distance is great enough so that even major shocks originating in the St. Lawrence Valley are *attenuated and barely felt at Peach Bottom. The same holds true for major quakes that may originate in Charleston, South Carolina, which is also 500 miles distant.

Nearer earthquakes have been of lesser intensity. The most important of these occu:i;red at Wilmington, Delaware, about 40 niiles from the site, in 1871. The intensity at Wilmington is estimated to have been VII on the modified Mercalli intensity scale (Appendix C) and the intensity at the site was IV or V, which means that it would have been felt but would have done no damage. A second earthquake of intensity VII occurred at Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, 100 miles from the site, in 1854. This was very much a local quake and probably could not have been felt at the site. There have been four other earthquakes with epicentral intensities of V or VI within 50 miles of the site; and, while these might have been felt at the site, they would have been too weak to have caused any damage.

II-20

6. Meteorology The climate of York County, within which Peach Bottom Station is loc;ated, is relatively mild and humid, largely as a result of the mountains that serve as protection against the more severe weather which prevails 50 to 100 miles to the north and west. To a lesser extent, the Atlantic Ocean exerts a moderating influe.nee from the east. The average temperature for the county is 52.8°F, with temperatures of 32°F or less occurring fewer than 100 days/year and with 90°F or more occurring about 25 days/year (see Table D-1, Appendix D). The precipitation for 1968,

• as given in Table D-2, totaled 30 inches.

While the m.~ather factors for York County generally are indicative of those specifically for the site, the station weather has. its own additional peculiarities. The station site is located in a well-defined river valley, and there exists evidence for_ the wind channeling that is expected for such a situation. As a comparison of the wind roses in Figs. II-9 and 11-10 shows, wind flow at higher elevations is less affected by valley contours than wind flow at lower elev~tions. At the steep western side of the valley, virtually all stable atmospheric condttions are accompanied by d-own slope motion, with air flowing out over the river and thence either up-or downstream.

Meteorological studies on site have been carried out since August 1967 by two weather Btations; data have been processed and analyzed by Smith-Singer Meteorological, Inc.

Hourly temperature distributions from one of the two stations are given in Append:'.x D, Table D-1. There are a few winter tempera-tures in the 5° to 10°F range and some sunnner temperatures of 90°F.

Monthly amounts of precipitation, including rain and melted snow, have been tabulated; the results for one of the observing stations as given in Appendix D, Table D-2. Severe ice storms are not regular occurrences but occur about every 3 years, usually be-tween December and February.

II-21 350 10 PERIOD: -AUGUST 1967-JULY 1969 HOURS OF MISSING DATA: 2400 MEAN WIND SPEED: 3 mph 80 90 100 190 180 170 Fig. II-9. Wind data for the Peach Bottom s:i.te, 153 ft above sea level.* Shaded areas show percentage of time that wind comes from each 10° sector.

.- -~-----------~----...-~--- . ' - * =.;., *.. __. .... -.-...-*** .---~*~*--*--*----,.-----------,-* *****,--*-~-..- -... ~**---******..,.,.**-'*' .. ~.--*--***-*,-...,._*~*--**" '"' *-w~,.-,,.._..,.._,~. """"""

II-22 PERIOD: AUGU.ST 1967-JULY 1969 350 10 HOURS OF MISSING DATA: 4804 MEAN WIND SPEED: 4 mph 280 90 270 260 190 180 170 Fig. II-10. Wind data for the Peach Bottom site, 302 ft above sea level. Shaded areas show percentage of time ,that wind comes from each 10° sector.

II-23 The monlhly max:i.mum wind speeds recorded at one of the weather stations are given in Appendix D, Table D-3, for the period August 1967 to July 1969. A study of tornado occurrence places the chance for a tornado at once in 2600 years.

Calculations of air transport under varying meteorological conditions are based on the existing wind-rose data taken at Peach Bottom in the period August 1967 to July 1968. The resul ts,1 6 are given in Appendix E, Tables E-1 to E-6. These data are, however, given by Turbulence Class rather than by Stability Condition which is employed by the staff in its calculati.ons of air transport for radiation dose calculations. A transformation from the former to the latter, in the format for computer utilization is achieved as follows:

(1) Calms were omitted.

(2) (a) Turbulence classes 1, 2, and 3 (Tables E-1, E-2, and E-3) were combined to form the Pasquill stability condition B (Table F-1, Appendix F).

(b) Turbulence class 4 (Table E-4) became Pasquill stability condition D. *

(c) Turbulence class 5 (Table E-5) became Pasquill stability condition F.

(3) Wind speed was. changed from mph tom/sec, and the range of speeds was replaced by its average.

(4) Wind direction was changed to indicate the direction toward which the wind blows.

Appendix F, Tables F-2 to F-4, gives the d*irectional frequency of wind occurrences according to. stability class in the form appropriate for the staff's computer program.*

• The wind rose of all inversion conditions has not been given; inversion conditions exist about 37% of the time.

11-24 The heat dissipation from a body of water depends upon a number of factors, one of which is the wet-bulb temperature. Table 11-3 gives data that characterize the critical high-temperature low-flow months.

The winter heat dissipation regime.depends upon entirely different fact.ors from the summer regime, since the river usually freezes over during winter.

E. ECOLOGY OF THE SITE AND ENVIRONS This section of the report provides the reader with a basic description of- the terrestrial and aquatic ecology of the Peach Bottom site and its surroundings. Its purpose is to emphasize the types and character-istics of plant and.animal communities which are affected by the con-struction and operation of the nuclear power station.

1. Terres trial

a. Vegetation The lower Susquehanna River Valley lies within the Piedmont section of the former oak-chestnut forest region. Timber-cutting and farming eliminated the primary forest, which has been succe.eded by a variety of secondary plant communities. Introduction of the chestnut blight in 1900 has resu:J..ted in the elimination of the chestnut from the secondary forest (except for occasional sprouts from old trunks).

The resulting forests in the site vicinity are now characterized as oak-hickory or oak-tuliptree assemblages with a large variety of sub communities depending on the terrain. l 7, l 8 The land surrounding the site consists of rolling hills covered by a mixture of farmland and woodlots. Some extensive forest tracts border river and creek~ where land is unsuitable for agriculture, but most of the land is under cultivation.

• In the immediate vicinity of the site,' oaks and hickories dominate the woodlands. Stands of pine are also found through the area.

The highest uplands are dominated by chestnut oak, mixed with black, scarlet, red, and white oak. The understory consists mainly of dogwood, mountain laurel, dwarf blueberry, pink azalea, wintergreen, and pipsissewa. The ground cover is sparse, reportedly due to xeric (relatively dry) coriditions.17,19

• Common successional species are staghorn sumac, large-toothed aspen, tuliptree, and cherry. Large fruit orchards ate* als.o found near the site. *

• II-25 Table 11-3. Average weekly wet bul_b temperatures for the low-flow*summer

• weeks with conc_urrent river water temperatures. 31 Month Parameter First week Second week Third week Fourth week June Flow (cfs) 12,500 12,500 7,500 5,000 Avg. river water temp. (° F) 72 78 72 75 Wet bulb temp. (° F) 62 66 61 65 July Flow (cfs) 5;000

• 5,000 5,000 2,500 Avg. river water temp. (0 f) 76 77 80 81 Wet bulb temp. (°F) 65 72 66 70 August Flow (cfs) 2,500 2,500 5,000 2,500 Avg. river water temp. (°F) 77 77 79 81 Wet bulb temp. (°F) 66 70 71 65 September Flow (cfs) 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 Avg. river water temp. (° F) 79 78 73 69 Wet bulb temp. (0 F) 60 62 63 56

• For the 30 year period prior to 1967.

___.... ----*---*--------~----~~------------ - -- .* - .. _..,.. __ , _, ___ *----- -~*-****-* *-<**-~-*-"'" - --* --.. ~ ----~-~*-*-*-~--'""'"'" --~*-**** --~*-~-.,;.. ....---........ __..._,.,.~- -""~~ ~ **

II-26 In the rolling Piedmont Upland of southeastern Pennsylvania, beech is reportedly more common than on ravine slopes further south.

Ravines and stream banks contain trees of the uplands, red oak and beech, but are better characterized by mixtures of hemlock, bass-wood, black cherry, black locust, and tuliptree. Pure stands of hemlock or tuliptree reportedly exist. The understory consists mainly of rhododendron, mountain laurel*, and maple-leaved viburnum on the upper slopes and witch hazel, spice bush, and pawpaw in the wetter areas. Ground cover is abundant, including spring blooming trilliums, bloodroot, trout lily, and bluets. Common ferns are Christmas fern, marginal wood fern, New York fern, hay-scented fern, common polypody, and sensitive fern. Only hay-scented ferns and sensitive ferns are found along roadsides and in open fields.1 7 ,19 Small, rocky islands in Conowingo Pond support lichens, mosses, and wildflowers mixed with scrub pine, post oak, and blueberries. The larger islands carry a wood cover similar to that of ravines and river shorelines. Holly is more connnon on several islands than elsewhere in the vicinity. Spring-fed basins on Lower Bear Island contain yellow waterlily and blue flag; alder is also associated with these pools.

Low islands with sandy soils are covered mainly with red or river birch. 19 The pond is bordered by exposed cliffs which* support little more than lichens and by steep hills covered with ravine flora to the water's edge. A distinct shore flora has not developed, apparently because of the steep and uneroded nature of the shoreline. 19 A list of the trees and shrubs common to the lower Susquehanna River Valley with reference to habitat 20 is presented in Appendix G.

b. Animals Lists of the animals in the area were compiled from a literature search and are given in Appendix G, In addition, species actually observed in the site area were incorporated. The species in the list are those that should reasonably occur in the area surrounding the site, but because of the method of preparation, the list probably includes some animals that do not occur in the site vicinity. How-ever, unless exhaustive studies were carried out over many years, no one could be positive that these species do not in fact actually occur there. *Animals that are less common than others, secretive in habits, o*r highly localized to specific habitat types would not be collected in most animal surveys. The ,lists in this report were compiled from sources that are the results of many years of obser-vation and therefore take these factors into account.

II-27 Lists of bird species do no~ include those reported to be of rare or accidental occurrence unless there is a possibility that they might breed in the site vicinity. For example, if the reports on a bird indicate that it is found in the area only after heavy storms or as a wanderer far off its normal migration path, it would not be included.

On the other hand, an unconnnon bird, typically of spotty distribution, which might nest in the site vicinity if a suitable patch of habitat occurs, would be included in the list.

The bird populations are reportedly diverse. 1 9 The Susquehanna River Basin is a major flyway for many species of waterfowl. The upper river is reportedly poor habitat for migratory birds, 19 unlike many areas *of Chesapeake Bay and the Conejohela mud flats. Muddy Run Pumped Storage Reservoir, which is closed to hunting (as will be the Peach Bottom site proper), is an important resting area for waterfowl.

Since the Muddy Run Plant has been in operation, the utilization of Conowingo Pond as a resting area has decreased, according to the applicant. The Canada goose, black duck, mallard, and scaup are reported to be the most commonly harvested waterfowl; but the green-winged teal, American widgeon, and canvasback may also be important. 19 ' 21 The most important upland game animals are the ring-necked pheasant and the eastern cottontail rabbit, associated .with open agricultural areas rather than forest. Other animals in this category are the red fox, mourning dove, bobwhite quail, and woodchuck.19, 2 1, 2 2 The largest animal in the local oak-hickory forest is the white-tailed deer, another important game species. In 1971, 1037 deer were harvested legally from Lancaster and York counties. Approxi-niately 600 deer were killed by motor vehicles in. the same period. l 9 Other characteristic inhabitants are the gray* squirrel, gray fox, and fox squirrel (in open woods, reintroduced from western Pennsylvania). Formerly, important rodents of the oak-chestnut forest were the Allegheny wood rat and the white-footed mouse.

Raccoons, opossums, and striped skunks prefer stream sides and forest edges for breeding but range throughout the forest in search of food. Few mammals have large populations in oak-hickory forests or pinelands., Game birds include.woodcock, ruffed grouse, snipe (in wet lands); and turkey, norte .of.which appear to be common in the area.

Most of the snake species feed primarily on amphibians, although rodents, birds, invertebrates, and reptiles may be important food sources for certain types. 15 ' 18 ' 22 ' 23 Reptiles and amphibians of the .area reportedly include the painted turtle, box turtle, copper-head, rat snake, water snake, and bullfrog. 19 Reptife populations are lower at the northern edges of the oak-hickory forest region (such as near the site) than further south. The slimy salamander is the only salamander found regularly in the oak-hickory forest. 1 8

II-28 The American peregrine falcon, southern bald eagle, and Delmarva Peninsula fox squirrel (a subspecies) are on the Endangered Species List of the Department of the Interior and were once found throughout the site area. 24 Isqlated occurrences may still be a possibility, although the Delmarva Peninsula fox sq~irrel is thought to be already extinct in Pennsylvania and the breeding sites of the peregrine falcon ,

in eastern Pennsylvania have apparently not b~en in use since 1959.22,25,26 .

2. Aquatic Conowingo Pond may be arbitrarily divided into three zones: upper reservoir (Holtwood Dam to Sicily Island), mid-reservoir (Sicily Island to Broad Creek), and lower reservoir (Broad Creek to Conowingo Dam)* 19 The upper reservoir. is studded with 25. to 30 islands. Water is very shallow in the northwest area; depth is dependent on river flow and dam operation. Only small pools exist in the summer,*but the-area is.

completely inundated in the ~pring. A substantial growth of aquatic plants is found throughout this area. The bottom material is mainly bedrock, with a few s~ndy beaches off some island shores~

In mid-reservoir~ substantial littoral areas ~xist between Williams Tunnel.and Burkins Run to Sicily Island; average water.,depth is 10 to 15 ft. The remaining area has a reduced littoral zone*, and depths are 20 to 40 ft just off shore. The bottom throughout is primarily fine gravel and silt, but large rocks and boulders are found along the shore.

The lower reservoir has a ateep-sided basin with a re4uced littoral zone. Water depths increase from 40 to 90 ft toward the dam over a distance of 5 to 6 'miles. A major tribut*ary stream enters on the east shore, forming a small cove. Three prominent coves occur on the west shore. The bottom is ~overed by numerous obstructions:

trees and foundations of buildings that were present befor~ im-poundmertt in 1928.

A simplified food web for Conow'ingo Pond is shown 1in Fig. II-11.

The aquatic biota of the area is diverse. A list of aquatic species found in the area by several investigators is included as Appendix H.

The principal aquatic primary producers in the vicinity of Peach Bottom are phytoplankton. The high turbidity and depth of the water do not provide a good habitat for the development of extensive communities of periphyton or rooted vascular aquatics in the immediate vicinity of the plant. However, such communities exist within the area that will

\

ll

)

.I SUNLIGHT

• /

DISSOLVED

• PRIMARY

• MICROZOOPLANKTON

• PLANKTIVOROUS .CARNIVOROUS NUTRIENTS PRODUCERS FISHES FISHES (PHYTOPLANKTON)

\ H H

N I

\0

{//;(/ DETRITUS

!l/f;:;;;':::'/1(.f}. SEDIMENTS lln=~

Fig. II-11. Simplified aquatic food web for Conowingo Porid.

II-30 be exposed to the thermal plume from the Peach Bottom Station, Icthyological Associates studied the phytoplankton in Conowingo Pond and f?und members of some 48 genera of planktonic algae. 19

a. Decomposers Bacterial communities in Conowingo Pond are important constituents of the biological community. These organisII1S are important in that they are responsible for the decomposition of organic matter which provides the raw materials for growth of *phytoplankton and prevents loss of important materials from biological systems. Bacteria play an additional role by assimilating dissolved organic matter in the water. The bacteria themselves are food for much of the microscopic zooplankton and thereby contribute directly to production at higher trophic levels. 2 7 For most bacteria charac*teristic of waters in the temperate region, the optimum temperature for growth is about 95°F. Lower temperatures inhibit growth. In laboratory cultures with optimum temperature and nutrient supply, bacterial populations are able to double themselves.within 18 to 35 min. 2 8 The generation times of bacteria in impoundments investigated in the U.S:S.R. ranged* from 9 to 120 hr; in comparison, the maximum net production of phyto~lankton in a nearby lake was about.150% of the standing crop per day. 2 This indicates that for short periods. the generation time of phytoplankton may roughly equal that of bacteria. The growth of bacteria in natural water does not normally outstrip the growth of phytoplankton so greatly that the bacteria continuously dominate the food supply of the zooplankton. On the contrary, only when the phytoplanktonic organisms die, releasing large quantities of nutrients for bacterial growth, do the bacteria temporarily increase their role as an energy source for the zooplankton. 27

b. Primary Producers Planktonic algae are responsible for using energy from the sun to 1

convert ~arbon dioxide, minerals, and water int 0 the organic material of which they are*composed. These organisms provide the basis for the aquatic food web and are the principal food of most of the zooplankton 2 8 and some fish species. 29 Algae may have a very short generation time. Under optimum conditions some species are capable of producing three generations per day *

. However, the normal population growth rate is regulated by temperature, light, grazing by herbivores, and availability of nutrients. 30

II-31 Many algae are capable of limited movement, although the movement is very small in comparison with the movement of the water in their habitat. Consequently, the turbulence and current of the river are primarily responsible for their distribution within. the water.

Because of turbid water conditions in Conowingo Pond, only algae I and other plants near the surface *are able to capture energy from the sun to grow and reproduce. Since their distribution is largely regulated by turbulent water currents, *the phytoplankt6nic organisms are not always in the upper photosynthetically active zone, which averages about 4 ft deep. 31 Consequently, even if all other factors were optimum, the generation time would still be much longer than pre-dicted by laboratory analysis.

(1) Phytoplankton Primary productivity data are not available yet for Conowingo Pond.

A genera list_is provided in Appendtx H; Pandorina, Pleodorina, Pediastrum, MeZosira, Anacystis., Gorrrphosphaeria., and Anahena are reported to .

be the most abundant .genera in the pond.19 In general, species of these genera are most common (with certain exceptions in the case of Melosira) in highly productive or eutrophic water bodies. 32 - 3s Three genera, the blue-greeris Anacystis and Anahaena and the diatom Melosira, reportedly make up as much as 100, 60, and 95%, respectively, of the phytoplankton population at certain seasons of the year. 36 Certain common species of Anacystis (Microcystis) and A~ahaena are known to be extremely toxic to man and his ] ivestock. 3 7 As shown in Table II-4, Conowingo Pond has a recent history of blue-green algal blooms. The predominance of blue-green algae was again noted in 1970. 19 In the period from 1967 to 1969, as shown in Table II-5, diatoms were most abundant in late spring and early summer, green algae in m~d-summer, and blue-green algae in late summer and early fall -

a commonly observed successional pattern. However, the utility of such an "average" successional pattern is questionable. The periodic dominance of the plankton by massive blue-green algal blooms indicates an unbalanced ecosystem, and any discussion of average conditions is futile *in the presence of such instability.

The apparent eutrophication of Conowingo Pond is the result of uncontrolled discharges o~ municipal wastes, water runoff from heavily fertilized agricultural lan4, and the construction of dams. Hopefully, in the future, upriver sources of pollution will decrease to levels whereby eutrophication may cease to be a problem. But in the near future, at least, the problem of

II-32 Table 11-4. Annual variation in percentage composition of algal classes in Conowingo Pond Algae 1967 1968 1969 Green algae

• 20.9 4.4 33.9 Yellow-brown algae 1.4 0.7 0.5 Dinoflagellates 1.4 2.4 6.6 Diatoms 72:3 13.3 43.3 Blue-green algae 4.6 78.9 15.6 Tab_le 11-S. Seasonal variation in percentage composition of algal classes.in Conowingo Pond Algae June

• July Aug. Sept. Oct. Average Green algae 16.3 21.3 40.5 31.4 5.0 27.4 Yellow-brown algae 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.0 0.6 Dinoflagella tes 0.7 1.2 1.5 1.6 15.0 5.1 Diatoms 75.0 63.8 31.4 31.6 46.0 49.0 Blue-green al_gae 4.0 9.5 17.8 30.0 32.0 19.7

II-33 eutrophication and the possible aggravation*of the current situation*

by discharges from power p*lants must be reckoned with.

(2) Macrophytes Extensive communities of aquatic vascular plants (macrophytes) do not oc'cur in the vicinity of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 or below its outfall in Conowingo .Pond. Substantial growths occur only in a few coves, generally removed from the direct influence of the thermal discharge.

The species that do occur are almost entirely of the emergent type, rushes, sedges, cattails~ pickerel weed, etc. Wild celery appears.

to be the only form of submerged aquatic vegetation present in Conowingo Pond *. The absence of important submerged 'plant groups such as *the pondweeds (Potamogeton) and the naiads.(Najas)*may be the.

• major factor limiting the use of Conowingo Pond by water:fowL 38 Macrophytes which have been identified from Conowingo Pond are listed in Appendix H.

c * . Consumers (1) Zooplankton

• The zooplankton is a diverse group of organisms that transform their generally less nutritious food '(phytoplankton, bacteria, and organic detritus) into a form more readily utilized by larger ,organisms.

These larger organisms* include larger zooplankters, larval fish, and adults of several fish species' such as the minnows' which utilize

.the zooplankfon for* food throughout their life cycle.

Many reproductive strategies a:re employed among zooplankton species.

Protozoans generally reproduce by division of parent cells into two daughter cells. Under optimum conditions for ~rowth, including food supply and temperature, protozoan populations 9 can double from one to three times per day.

Population growth of small crustaceans* such as copepbds and cladocerans.

is also very dependent on temperature, noticeably increasing as the temperature increas~s. Doubling times of 0.2 to 2.0 days have b.een observed for these organisms 40 , 41 at temperatures of .about 77°F. The population turnover. rate (100% replacement by a new crop) may be as little as 4 days at 77°F but up to 22 days or longer* when temperatures are low. One-quarter of an average 28% loss rate per day at summer temperatures has been attributed* to predation. 3 9

II-34 Zooplankton data collected during 196 7, 1968, and 1969 were analyzed .

by multiple analysis of variance by one investigator to determine .the annual seasonal and spatial differences in abundance in Conowingo Pond. 19

• Abundance differed significantly during the surmner periods studied, with average abundance highest in 1967 and lowest in 1968.

Significant viriation.in seasonal abundance also occurred: abundance was highest in late July and early September and lowest in early June. Seasonal fluctuations are shown in Fig. II-12.

The most abundant zooplankton gJ;oups, listed.in order of decreasing abundance, were: (1) copepod nauplii, (2) Diaphanosoma Zeuahten bergianum, (3) Daphnia spp., (4) cyclopoid copepodids, and (5) Bos-mina Zongirostris. A list of the zooplankton species c.ollected from Conowingo Pond is presented in Appendix H. Species have been separated into euplankton species (truly planktonic), found.in the table of zooplankton, and benthic species (accidentally planktonic)~

found under the headings Cladocera and Copepoda in the table of benthic fauna.

Zooplankton abundance increased from the upper portion of the Pond* to the lower portion. No significant interactions occurred between zooplankton groups and sampling stations; localizations of groups did not occur.

A more comprehensive sampling program 19 was unde.rta.ken. in 1970 (Fig. II-13), taking into account the isotherms predicted by the applicant's thermal model (Sect. III.D.l) and the resuits provided in the previous sampling program. The results of these studies are presented in Tables II-6 and II-7. The data indicate seasonal and spatial variations simila.r to those observed from 1967 to 1969, i.e., peak abundance from June to September and greatest abundance along the east side and lower half of Conowingo Pond. Other data collected from Holtwood and Conowingo Dams indicate that approxi-mately the s*ame kinds and concentrations of zooplankton enter and leave Conowingo Pond.

Total zooplankton biomass was also determined, along with values for samples collected from 1967 to 1969 (preserved materials). The.

results are presented as the average value for the entire pond in Table II-8. The standard deviation in Table 11-8 relates to the.

natural variation in biomass during 1970, not to sampling errors.

Rotifers were studied for the first time in 1970. 19 Asplanahna spp. ,

Braahionus aalyciflorus, Braahionus quadridentatus, Bracnhionus pliaatilis, Keratella aoahlearis and Polyar.thra spp. were the most

. abundant species. At certain times rotifers outnumbered cladocerans and cq~pods

~ ,.. ..

by as much as 100 to 1.

]

i r/*

2 103

,,l. ,.

n Cl: I w I I

,, I AN I- 5 ,1 I I

r\ I I I*~'f'\'i

_J I I\

Cl: I w ,' I a.. 2 \, I ~ V, ,,J.

-Z

f. / \ I I\~ I 0

I'I I \\ I I-z

<(

102 II ./" J'I \\ I

,,I '

• I \ V I

I

_J a.. 5 \ I I \ ,*, \ I \

0 0

I / I I \ I I ,/ \

N II I \ \ I I I/ \ H LL 2

I/

1, I

\

\

\ I -1I \ H I

0 . II ( \ w I *I \

u, Cl:

w*

en 101

~

1'1' I \

\

1/

~

I

\

, . ~ I z r I \ \

z 5 \ I

<( I \ \

w

~ - - - CONOWINGO POND I \ . \

2 ---:---~ RECREATION LAKE I \ I

-*~- PUMP STORAGE RES I \

J 10 0 [_[__j_...L_....J...___:_i______L____L____JL...-.L.._--'--'-----'------'---'----'---.JL--..____.____._---'---L---'----'-----'-L---'-----'--'-----'----'----'-__J J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N 1967 1968 1969 Fig. II-12. Seasonal fluctuations in the mean number of total zooplankton per liter in Muddy Run Recreation Lake; Muddy Run Pumped Storage Reservoir, and Conowingo Pond.

~ -* -----,-=----,_____,_____ __

• <<. - * - - - - '>' * - *- ........... <--<,-*-~*-*-.,--,-.*._~---~*****-----oc,*....,**~--..--.. -........:..-*.,.~ """*-*---<" _._,.__,_ _ _,._ *~.-..... ,--*-* * ~- ~----**---.-.,,..._,_,_**._,***-***,,-, _,.. ** ,,,...,..,,* .oe***-,. ** ,.,** , , . , , ,. . . .,

/

II;....36

'=\\\.'

• .:-.

ST:~!it:T. \;;i1it;,,:.,. N

~i 1~\,7, 1

G\ @W:1?J?>

\t?)?r=-=:{PJi~

PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION

@) ,01:~~ -,;;f..~ PEACH BOTTOM DOCK

.  :**::*:\J~y ~

• • • • 15 :\/ .

Fig. I1~13. Locations of stations sampled during 1970: 1. Muddy Run Recreation Lake; 2. Muddy Run Pumped Storage Reservoir; 3.

Holtwood Dam; 4. II-B; 5. III-A; 6. III-B; 7. III-C; 8. V-A;

9. V-B; 10. v:...c; *11. VI-AB; 12. A;...II; 13. B-cII; 14. D-II;

15. Conowingo Dam; 16. Peach Bottom Unit 1 intake well; and

17. Peach Bottom Unit 1 discharge well.

.IJ -

Il".""37 l!able 11-6. Occummce of zooplankton in Conowingo Pond, 1970 Average number of zooplankters per liter per month Mar.* Apr.* June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov.**

Nauplii 0.005 0.009 0.940 9'.04 15.1 39:6 13.3 0.683 Cyc/opoid copepodids O.Q35 0.153 2.91 2.35 16.1 10.3 6.32 0.470.

Cyclops verna/is 0.002 0.053 0:691 0.318. 6.20 3.74 LSI 0.030--

Cyclops bicuspidatus thomasi 0.001 0.004 0.003 Mesocyclops edax 0:036 0..354 1.87 2.09 1.19 Eucyclops spp. 0.010 0.006 0:001 0.001 0.001

.Tropocyclops prasinus 0.001 0.002 0.062 0.011 0.002 0.003 Macrocyc/ops a/bidus 0.001 Ca/anoids 0.001 0.008 0.260 0.099 0.143 0.102 0.049 0.002 Harpacticoids 0.002 0.002 0.001 Leptodora kindtii 0.021 0.080 0.020 0.063 0.029 Diaphanosoma /euchtenbergianum 3.95 8.42 23.0 14.9 2.66 0.002 Sida crystallina 0.001 Latona setifera 0.001 0.001 Daphnia spp. 0.003 0.004 7.18 9.28

• 9.76 . 27.2 4.79 0.033 Moina spp. 0.002 0.073 0.3.96 3.37 2.98 2.10 0.001 Ceriodaphnia spp. 0.060 0.416 1.28 0.240

• 0.067 0.001 Scapholebris spp. 0.002 0.001 Immature Daphnidae 0.064 0.001 0..173 0.178 0.050 Bosmina longirostris 0.011 0.066 4.11 1.70 6.65 16.0

• 8.75 0.219 Bosmina coregoni 0.001 0.006 0.009 0.033 Bosminopsis deitersi 0.049 0.006 llyocryptus spp. 0.001 0.022 0.038 0;035 0.005 0.005 0.009 Macrothrix /aticornis 0.001 0.001 0.004. 0.016 Immature Chydoridae 0.001 Pleuroxus spp. 0.001 0,035 *o.01s 0.002 0.001 .0.005 0.005 Alonaspp. 0.001 0.010 0.016 0.006 *0.001 0.010

• Leydigia quadrangularis 0.001 0.002 0.011 0.027 0.008 0.001 0.008 Chydorus sphaericus 0.006 . 0.005 0.003 0.003 0.001 0.004 0.005 Camptocercus rectirostris 0.001 Total copepods 0.054 Q.233 4.85 12.2 100 55.9

• 22.6" 1.19 Total cladocera 0.026 0.076 15.5 20.4 44.4 61.6 18.5 0.310 Total zooplankton o;oso 0.309 20.4. 32.6 144 118 41.1 2.50

• Samples taken from V-A, V-B, and*v-e only.

• • Some samples were not counted.

t I.

I 1

j l

Table 11-7. Occurrence of zooplankton at sampling stations in Conowingo Pond during August, 1970

.i l

Average number of zooplankters per liter at sampling stations l

11-B 111-A Ill-B 111-C V-A V-B V-C VI-AB A-II B-11 D-11 i I

I Nauplii 36.4 46.9 41.7 65.6 54.7 69.3 88.6 81.2 92.8 142 . 113 Cyclopoid copepodids 12.8 17.0 1_2.5 9.57 13.2 15.2 12.1 13.8 15.1

• 27.2 29.2 f j

Cyclops vernalis 8.41 8.74 6.33 4.56 6.98 5.71 5.64 5.01 5.60 6.55

• 4.70 l Mesocyc;lops edax 0.123 0.025 O.Q71 0.799 0.235 0.463 3.10 0.403 2.96 7.84. 4.59 It Tropocyclops prasinus 0.022 0.013 -0.014 0,007 0.015 0.013 0.010 0.022 Calanoids 0.006 0.011 0.032 0.028 0.034 0.020 0.072 0.049 0.066 0.686 0.574 i Harpacticoids 0.007 Leptodora kindtii 0.047 0;011 0.085 0.041 0.039 l Diaphanoso,r,a leuch ten bergianum 5.19 5.77 12.2 23.2 27.8 11.4 33.4 24.9 33.3 43.6 32.8 }

Latona setifera 0.013 l Daphnia spp. 0.915 0.040 0.379 10.7 1.90 1.34

• 16.8 4.95 10.3 35.4 24.6 H 1*

Moina spp.* 1.42 1.16 1:10 1.80 4.91 8.97 . 1.91 7.03 4.67 1.54 2.57 H I

I Ceriodaphnia spp. 1.02 0.206 0.350 2.29 1.31 1.72 1.41 1.43 1.54 1.47 1.34 vJ '1 00 Scapholebris spp. 0.007 Immature Daphnidae 0.0!)6 0.047 0.057 0.147 0.150 0.042 1.716. 0.389 0.351 Bosmina longirostris 2.39 0.258 1.49 7.80 2.48 3.78 17.8 2.82 5.86 18.8 9.65 Bosmina coregoni 0.018 0.048

• Boxminopsis deitersi 0.004 0.004 0,029. 0.024 Jlyocryptus spp. 0.178. 0.026 0.049 0.061 0.020 0.014 0.019 0.019 Pleuroxus spp. 0.005 0.007 0.004 0.005 Alona spp. 0.008 0.005 0.012 Leydigia quadrangularis 0.022 0.040 0.072 0.091 0.017 0.013 0.019

• 0.024 Chydorus sphaericus 0.005 Total copepods 57.8 72.7 60.7 80.6 75.1 90.8 109 101 117 184 152 Total cladocera 11.2 7.48 15.7 45.9 38.7 27.5 71.5 41.9 56.2 101 71.0 Total zooplankton 69.0 80.2 76.4 127 114 118 181 143 173 285 223

II-39 Table 11-8. Average zooplankton biomass in Conowingo Pond 1967 1968 1969 1970 1967-1970 Dry weight (mg/liter) 0.25 0.34 0.29 0.26 0.29 Standard deviation 0.32 0.44 0.18 0.24 0.32

/

II-40 A statistically significant positive correlation (probability of occurrence by chance= less than 1%) was observed 19 between the total number of cladocera and the concentration of phosphate ion:

numbers of cladocera increased with increasing phosphate concentra-tions. Turbidity of the water (a function of the phytoplankton density) and the conc~ntration of oxygen tended to decrease with increasing temperature. No significant relationship was noted between temperature arid zooplankton abundance. Thus, although higher water temperatures appeared to affect the abundance of phytoplankton and the oxygen concentration, there was no detectable co~trol of zoo-plankton abundance by water temperature. Data collected from 1967 to 1970* indicate that only a small fraction of the variations in zooplankton biomass may be accounted for by changes in temperature and river flow.

(2) Benthic Invertebrates This group of organisms includes bottom fauna, which live in or on the bottom deposits, and organisms that attach themselves to any hard surface. Larval states 9f these organisms form a small part of the zooplankton. Larval Chaoborus are temporary plankters at night while feeding. Most of the larger invertebrate organisms (macrobenthos) that live in these habitats reproduce during only one season of the year; their ability to recover from a .kill would be restricted compared with many microbenthic forms which repro-duce throughout 'the year.

Natural hard-wa.ter rivers of the eastern U.S. such as the Susquehanna have generally been found to contain on the order of 75 species of aquatic insects. 42 I~sect diversity in Conowingo Pond is strikingly lower than this figure, both in types and numbers. Other invertebrate groups are also notable by their absence or low numbers (i.e., cray~

fish, plana:rians, snails). This apparent low diversity.is probably due to seyeral factors: anthracite coal dust is present in the bottom sediments, certain bottom substrates were not part of the benthic sampling program, etc. Also, benthic organisms are highly localized according to water depth and bottom materials.

A comparison of the numbers of benthic invertebrates found on soft substrates (mud, silt, etc.) in the Pond, such as those found in the immediate area of the thermal discharge, is presented in Table II-9. A more nearly complete species list is presente*d in Appendix H. This community is dominated by tubificids and chironoinids; both in numbers and biomass. Tubificid worms reportedly increase in abundance during the summer while midge larvae (chironomids) decrease during the same period. 19 The standing crop of benthos may be approxi-mately one order of magnitude smaller than that of the zooplankton in the

II-41 Table 11-9. Mean number of benthic organisms

• ** from Conowingo Pi>nd

• Organisms Numbei:/m 2 Flatworms (Hydrolimax grisea) 4.01 Oligochae.te worms unident. spp. 0.19 Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri 545 Ilyodrilus templetoni 39.2 Snails 0.19 Fingernail clams unident. spp. 0*.19 Pisidium sp. 6.88 Amphipods (Gammarus fasciatus) . 1.34 Dragonfly nymphs 0.19 Mayfly nymphs 3.25 Caddisfly larvae 1.72 Midge larvae unident. larv~e and pupae 1.72 Procladius sp. 111 Coelotanypus concinnus 89.4 Chironomus attenuatus 7.26 Cryptochironomus nr fulvus 9.74 Harnischia amachaerus 0.19 Calopsectra sp. 5 0.19 Polypedilum halterale 0.19 Phantom midge larvae and pupae 8;98 Water mites 4.01 Source: Attachment to. letter from 0. Sisman;. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, to J. Cusack, USAEC, Jan. 9, 1973, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278.

• II-42 overlying water column. When the much shorter generation time of zooplankton is taken into account, the importance of the benthos in the overall bioenergetics of Conowingo Pond is still further reduced.

Despite the low relative abundance of benthos in the pond, many species of game fish depend on benthos for _food at certain stages in their life cycles or at certain seasons of the*year (see Appen-dix I) *. Others are dependent on benthos for most of their adult lives. Therefore, the benthic community may not be simply dismissed because its members are less numerous than those of the zooplankton community.

(3) Fishes

.\'

Fishes of Conowingo Pond consume zooplankton, benthic invertebrates, and other fish. A: few species, mainly minnows and some catfishes, consume benthic algae and aquatic plants regularly.. Larval and juvenile fishes consume mainly zooplankton, shifting to a diet of benthos or fishes as they grow older. Adult crappies, walleyes, basses, and muskellunge feed predomin~ntly on other fishes.

/

A list of fish species reported from Conowingo Pond is presented in Appendix H, and pertinent life history information ror the important species in Appendix I. .

The percentage composition of each species r~ported was a function of. the sampling gear employed. The white crappie and channel catfish dominated both the trap* and trawl catches, while the spotfin shiner*

dominated' the seine ca~ch. Species common in both the trap and trawl catch were the bluegill, pumpkinseed, and brown bullhead. The spottail shiner was common in the trawl catch but not in the traps. 19 Most common seine species wer~ the bluntno~e minnow, spottail shiner, bluegill, tesselated darter, and yellow walleye.

Variations in abundance from year to year are expected in any natural fish population. This variation is reflected in the catch per effort data (indication of relative fishing success) for fish caught in trap nets in Conowingo Pond (Table II-10).19 ,43 Regular outbreaks of a fish disease (possibly an Aeromonas infection) are reported in the months of May to July in Conowingo Pond. Some localization of fish mortalities has occurred in the vicinity of the Muddy Run intake, but the exact causes for fish mortalities are uncertain at present.19

,~--

Table 11-10: Relative fishing success at trap net stations I, 2, 8, 9, and IO in Conowingo Pond Catch per effort for each year (number of fish per hour)a Species 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970b Anguilla rostrata 0,03 c C C C Cyprinus carpio C C 0.01 0.02 0.02 Notemigom,s crysoleucas 0.03 0.02 O.Ql 0.04 0.04 Noiropis spilopterus C 0.01 C 0.01 C Catostomus commersonii C 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

/ctalurus catus 0.01 0.02 C 0.01 0.01

[ctalurus natalis 0.01 0.02 C 0.05 0.07

/ctalurus nebulosus 0.01 0.05 0.05 0;12 0.10.

/ctalurus punctatus 0.69 0.44 0.10 1.33 .0.52 Ambloplites rupestris 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.01 Lepomis auritus C C 0:01 0.05 0.02 Lepomis gibbosus 0.05 0.14 0.07

• 0.19 0.21 Lepomis macrochirus 0.16 0.05 0.13 0.27 0.22 Ponioxis annularis 4.25 2.28 1.50 3.83 4.66 Pomoxis nigromaculatus . 0.01 C C C C Perea jlavescens C C C 0.01 C asampling efforts for each year were: 1966 - 1800 hr, 1967 _:_ 4200 hr, 1968 - 3702 hr, 1969 - 2889 hr, and 1970 - 7145 hr.

blncludes data from-all trap net stations.

cLess than 0:01.

.II-44 Conowingo Pond has been underfished (relative to its_ size) , report-edly because of limited water access points. The applicant will increase the number and facilities of such s*ites, and sport fishing is expected to increase in the future. In the past, white crappies have dominated the sport fishing catch, followed by catfishes, sun-fishes, basses, walleyes, and yellow perch. Tagging studies have shown that the white crappie moves upstream in the spring and then gradually returns to the lower reservoir during summer and fall. 1 9

3. Special Environmental Features The circulation of Conowingo Pond is complex because of the multiple sources of flow alteration. The inflows and outflows are partially controlled by electric generating plants at Holtwood (hydro and fossil fuel) and Coriowingo (hydro). Additionally, inflows are supplemented by the discharges directly into the reservoir from several creeks. Outflows are slightly altered by municipal water intakes for Chester, Pa., and Baltimore, Md. Further alteration is a result of operations of Muddy Run Pumped Storage Station and the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station.

Another feature of Conowingo Pond is that it will be the focus of planned attempts to restore anadromous fishes, particularly the American shad (Alosa sapidissima), to ~he Susquehanna River.

Presently, an experimental program is underway (a joint venture of Philadelphia Electric Co. ,and the Pennsylvania Fish Commission) to determine the best means of accomplishing this. Currently, fish are trapped at *the base of Conowingo Dam and transported by lift over the dam to the pond. The trapped fish are not selected according to species, and this method will result in the introduction of several other species not now present in the pond. Of these species, striped bass (Marone saxatilis) and white perch (Marone americana) have the potential for establishing landlocked populations in fresh water.

The trophic patterns of Conowingo Pond are affected by the fact .that nutrients, plankton, and fishes enter over Holtwood Dam and are lost through Conowingo Dam. The situation at the intake to the Muddy Run Pumped Storage Reservoir is somewhat more complicated.

Owing to a greater concentration of plankton in the Pumped Storage Reservoir, a net gain is reportedly realized for Conowingo Pond during the generating phase of Muddy Run *. However, the additional plankton is not sufficient to produce a *detectable increase in the' zooplankton population in Conowingo Pond downstream from the Pumped Storage Plant.

Il-45 An estimated 500,000 larval and juvenile fish were reportec;Ily lost from Conowingo Pond to the Pumped Storage Reservoir during an average operational cycle in the periods from May to August, 1969 and June to July, 1970. Th~ fish lost were primarily very small fish

c10 to 30 min long), but some fish up to 62 mm long were captured.

The size selectivity of the meter nets used in the studies was not determined. An estimated 90,000 young fish per day (on the average) were reportedly so damaged by the transport process as to be unrecognizable. The total number actually killed during transport is presently unknown. The fish species most affected is the channel catfish which made up 62% and 45% of the meter net catch during the periods studied in 1969 and. 1970, respectively. 19 ,4 4 No significant net difference was observed petween the actual numbers of older fish transported during generating and pumping.

Based on the catch data reported, an estimated 3000 to 5000 older fish per cycle, mainly channel catfish, weFe transported from Muddy Run to Conowingo* Pond during generation in the periods de-scribed above. No estimate is available for the percentage killed or. mutilated in the process, but large numbers of dead channel catfish have been found at times near the Muddy Run intake in Conowingo Pond. The determination of the size selectivity of the meter nets is even more pertinent when older fish are considered; the numb_ers presented may thu*s be gross uriderestimates.19,.43,4 4 The net result of the complex circulation, of the operation of multiple electric-generating stations, and of the introduction of new species to Conowingo Pond is that any assessment of the impact of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station either on Cono-wingo Pond or on the anadromous fish restoration program will be extremely difficult.

• Ih-46 REFERENCES FOR SECTION II

1. 10 CFR 100. 3

2. 36, 37.Federal Register (1971, 1972)

. 3. York Counbj L(1}1,d Use Pl(1}1, (Private commtmication., J. R. Shaw, York County Planning Commission, to R.H. Bryan, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, April 2 7, 19 72); Lower Chanceford Township--

Peach Bottom Township-~Delta Borough, Corrrprehensive Plans, Pa:rt 1, The Study , . Lower Chanceford--Peach Bot tonr--Del ta Planning Commission, February 1971.

4. Environnental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement No, 2, Philadelphia Electric Company, .May .1972.

5. George M. Hall, Ground Water in Southeastey,n Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Topographic and Geologic Survey, Bulletin W 2 (1934).

6. u.s. Weather Bureau, CZimatography of the United States, Number 86-1.5' Maryland and Pennsylvania, i951 through 1960 (1964).

7. U.S. Weather Bureau, CZimatography of the United States, Number 86-32 Pennsylvania, 1951 through 1960 (1964).

8. s. W. Lohman, Ground Water Resources of Pennsylvania, Pennsyl-vania Topographic and Geologic Survey, Bulletin W 7 (1939),

9. U.S. Corps of Engineers, District Engineer, Baltimore District, West Branch of the Susqu.ehanna River, Pennsylv(1}1,ia (February 29, 1952); published as House Document 25, 84th Congress, 1st Session (1954).

10. U.S, Corps of Engineers, District Engineer, Baltimore District, North Br(1}1,ch of the Susquehanna River and Tributaries, New York and Pennsylv(1}1,ia (December 30, 1950); published as House Document 394, 84th Congress, 2d Session.

11. U.S. Corps of Engineers, District Engineer, Baltimore District, Juniata River and Tributaries, Pennsylvania (Jtme 30, 1961);

published as House Document 565, 87th Congress, 2d Session (1962).

II-47

12. U.S. Army Engineer Division, North Atlantic, Water, Resources Development by the U.S. Ay,my Cor,ps of Engineer,s in Pennsyl-vania (January 1, 1965).

13. U.S. Army Engineer Division, North Atlantic, Water, ResoUl'ces Development by *the U.S. Army Cor,ps of Engineer,s in Nei,; Yor,k (January 1, 1965).

14. Not used.

15. R*. Conant, A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1958~

16. Philadelphia Electric Company, Final Safety Analysis Report

• (submitted August 31, 1970), Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Uni ts 2 arid 3, Docket Nos. 50-2 77 and 50-2 78. *

17. E. L. Braun, Deciduous For,ests of Eastern Nor,th AmePica 3 Blak:i..s ton, Philadelphia, 19 50 .

18. V. E. Shelford, The Ecology of NoPth AmePica3 Univ. of Illinois Press, Urbana, 1963.

19. Environmental Report, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement No. 1, Philadelphia Electric Company, November 19 71 ~

20. C. Keever, A study of the mixed mesophytic, western mesophytic, and oak-chestnut regions of the eastern deciduous forest including a review of the vegetation and sites recommended as potential natural landmarks, unpublished manuscript, Millers-ville State College, Millersville, Pa., 1971.

21. Watepfowl TomoPPOW, U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wild-life, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 1964.

22. J. K. Doutt, Mammals of Pennsylvania 3 Pennsylvania Game Commission, Harrisburg, 1965.

23. H. H. Jackson, Mammals of Wisconsin 3 Univ. of Wisconsin Press, Madison, 1961.

24. EndangePed Species of the United States, U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, 1970.

. 25. J. J. Hickey (ed.), PePegPine Falcon Populations 3 TheiP Biology and Decline 3 Univ. of Wisconsin Press, Madison, 1969.

' -*~--.. ...... . .**,

II-48

26. E. L. Poole, Pennsylvania Birds, Livingston Publishing Company, Narbeth, Pa., 1964.

27, G. W. Saunders, Jr., Some aspects of feeding in zooplankton, pp. 556-573 in Eutrophication: Ca:uses, Consequences, Correctives, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, 1969.

28 .. R. Stanier, M*. Douderof f, and E; Adelberg, The Microbial World, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1961.:

29. P.A. Larkin and T. G. Northcote,. Fish as indices of eutrophi-cation, pp. 256-273 in Eutrophication: Causes, Consequenees, Correctives, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, 1969.

30. L. Provasoli, Algal nutrition and eutrophication, pp. 574-:-593 in Eutrophication: Causes, Consequences, Correctives, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, 1969.

31. Environmental Report, Operating.License State, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Philadelphia Electric Company,- June 1971.

32. G. E. Hutchinson, A Treatise on Lirrmology, Vol. 2, John Wiley and Sons,. Inc. , New York, 196 7.

33, H. Jarnefelt, Plankton als Indikator der Trophiegruppen der Seen, Suomal. Tiedeakat. Toin. (Annals Acad. Sci. Fenn.),

ser. A, IV Biol., 18, 29 pp., 1.952.

34. H. Jarnefelt, Zur Linmologie.einiger Gewasser Finnlands. XVI.

Mit besonderer Beriicksichtigung des.Planktons, Suomal. elain-ja kasirt Sevr. van. elain Julk. (Annals Zool. Soc. Vanoma), 17(7),

201 pp*. , 1956.

35. G. W. Prescott, Algae of the Weste:rin Great Lakes Area, Wm .. C.

Brown Company Publishers, Dubuque, Iowa, 1962.

36, H. A. Boyer, Limriological data for Conowingo Reservoir, Muddy Run Pumped Storage Reservoir, and Muddy Run Recreation Lake, 1968-1969, Conowingo Reservoir - Muddy Run Ecological Studies Data Report 3, 1970.

37. P.R. Gorham, To~ic Algae, in 1lgae and Man, Plenum Press, New York, 1964.

II-49

38. T. W. Robbins, Icthyological Associates, Inc., personal communication, Macrophytic aquatic plants observed in Cono-wingo Reservoir, to J. Trabalka, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, April 28, 1972.

39. R. R. Kudo, Protozoology (5th Ed.), Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, Ill., 1966.

40. D. J. Hall, An experimental approach to the dynamics of a natural population of Daphnia gal~ata mendotae 3 Ecology 45(1):

94-112 (1964).

41. W. T. Edmondson, G. W. C6mita, and.C. C. Anderson, Reproductive rate of copepods in nature and its relation to phytoplankton population, Ecology 43(4): 625-34 (1962).

42. R. Patrick, A study of the numbers and kinds of species found in rivers in eastern United States, Proa. Aaad. Nat. Sai.

Phi la. Jl3 (10) : 215 (1961) *

43. T. W. Robbins, Studies of the fishes of Conowingo Reservoir, 1966-1968, Conowingo Reservoir - Muddy Run Fish Studies Report 2, 1969.

44. D. E. Snyder, Studies of larval fishes in Muddy Run Pumped Storage Reservoir near Holtwood, Pennsylvania, M.S. Thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., 1971.

III. THE PLANT A. EXTERNAL APPEARANCE The external appearance of the.*Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station will be essentially as shown by the architectural rendering (Fig. III-1).

Peach Bottom Unit 1 pressure vessel is shown in Fig. III-2. The

_construction status as of April 5, .1972 is shown in Fig. III-3.

The lakeside appearance of.one of the nearly completed cooling towers is shown in Fig. III-4.

The structures of Units 2 and 3 housing. the. two reactor buildings, turbogenerator building, administration building, and the service facilities have a modern industrial appearance employing color-coordinated decorative exterior wall panels. This complex, together with the three low silhouette cooling towers; \110U:ld provide a

• pleasing effect if this were an industrial area *..

The round containment vessel of Unit 1 does not complement the generally rectangularly shaped structures of Units 2 and 3. However, because the higher structures of Units 2 and 3 dominate the lower con:-

tainment vessel of Unit 1, this otherwise objectionabl:e architectural contrast within the total facility is minimized.

There is a considerable visual impact of this total industrial. complex on the surrounding rural scene. Such :impacts a~e difficult, if not impossible, to avoid whenever an industrial plant*is sited in a rural area. A 500~ft stack will be used by Units 2 and 3. The. appearance in this case is considerably *better than for more conventional rurally located industrial installations, principally because of the modern design and the absence of visible smoke emissions from nuclear power plants.

In recognition of. the aesthetic effect on the surrounding area and the station's exposure to view from across the Susquehanna River, the applicant states that "mass planting of willow o_aks and white pines will be :done on the river front to direct attention from the Cooling Towers. Upper regions of the area cut during construction of the project will be hydroseeded with a mixture of Crown Vetch and treeseed in an effort to restore the.area to its origi.nalstate~

Grass areas shall be a prominent factor throughout the site *1:0 soften the impact of the station area~ Planting of trees arid shrubs at various locations within the site will enhance the overall ap-pearance, blend with the existing vegetation and reduce the scale of the structures." 1 III-1

ORNL-DWG 72 *-5916A H

H H

I N

Fig. 111-1. Conceptual outline of Peach Bottom Station.

\

/

H H

H I

w Fig. III-2. A view of Peach Bottom Unit 1, looking north across Rock Run Creek.

H H

H I

~

Fig. III- 3 . Status of Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station as of April 5, 1972.

I H

H H

I

~

Fig. 111-4. Helper cooling tower under construction on berm in Conowingo Pond.

III-6 A visitors' center, of modern design, with parking and toilet facilities is now provided at the site just south of Unit 1, as shown in Fig. III-5.

B. TRANSMISSION LINES Only one additional corridor and one 500-kV transmission line were required to integrate the Peach Bottom generation into the applicant's bulk power system, This line, from the Peach Bottom terminal to Keeney Substation in Delaware, was completed and placed in service in 1971 and will be part of a 500-kV transmission loop around the Eastern Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New Jersey area (Fig. III-6).

The loop completes a long range plan to improve the reliability of the power supply to eastern PJM power pool area custoners.

Approximately 1030 acres was required for the transmission line right-of-way. Of this total, approximately 840 acres was previously used as farm land and the remainder was woodland. Except for the area at the tower bases and some roads, the land uses are essentially the same as before construction.

The line was constructed in accordance with the applicant's published program for improving the appearance of overhead transmission lines. 2 A staff review of this program shows that the applicant followed criteria closely paralleling that of Environmental Criteria for Electric Transrrrission Systems as published by the U.S. Departments of the Interior and Agriculture. 3 It appears that the applicant was sensitive to the ertvironnental concerns specific to the areas affected and exercised considerable care in treating the visual impact and physical infringenent on the landscape.

All other existing transmission lines, including the 230-kV lines ,

will continue to function in their present service.

1he applicant's present practice is to perform right-of-way clearing for both new construction and maintenance without the use of herbi-cides except in the following cases: 4 (1) In cleared areas containing flush-cut stumps of trees and shrubs, stumps are treated with a 4% strength mixture of equal parts of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T (diluted in fuel oil),

(2) When necessary, an Amchem growth retardant (NAI-10637 + 1% NAA +

1% ethyl alpha-napthlene acetate) is applied to fresh cuts on trinnned trees,

H H

H I

~

Fig . III- 5 . Pe ach Bottom Atomic Power Station visitors ' information center .

TO PLYMOUTH TO H

H H

I 00 TO TO CONASTONE SALEM B.G. 8 E.

GRACETON B.G.8 E.

~ \ DELAWARE

- - -

• 5 0 0 kV

- - - - 2 3 0 kV Fig. 111-6. Philadelphia Electric Company transmission system.

---

*~ ---*

III-9 (3) When right-of-way access for maintenance is difficult (e.g., river crossings, island), growth is controlled by a mixture of Tordon No. 155 (Dow Chemical) and fuel oil. The environmental impact from the occassional use of such agents is expected to be minor *.

C. REACTOR, STEAM ELECTRIC, AND NORMAL OPERATION COOLING SYSTEM

1. Reactor and Steam Electric System Units 2 and 3 will each employ a boiling water reactor and turbo-generator supplied by the General.Electric Company. Each reactor -

turbine - generator unit will h,ave a nominal generating capacity of 1100 MW(e) and a design thermal rating of 3440 MW(t). Each unit has rated operating conditions of 1065 MW(e) net and 3293 MW(t). The totai electrical generating output from both Units 2 and 3 therefore will be 2130 MW(e), with a net thermal efficiency of 32.3%. Thus, approximately 4456 MW(t) or 1.52 x 10 1 0. Btu/hr nrust be dissipated to the environment at full operation of Units 2 and 3.

2. Cooling Systems for Normal Operation

a. General The condensers in Units 2 and 3 of the Peach Bottom Station will be cooled in winter by once-through flow of water from Conowingo Pond.

Under full operation of these unit's, a total of 3350 cfs of Conowingo Pond water will flow through the condensers. This flow is greater than the lowest monthly average river flow 5 of 2500 cfs~ Maximum water consumption (evaporation) will be about 50 cfs. Water will be circulated by three 250,000 gpm (557 cfs) pumps per unit Ia total of

. six pumps with a capacity of 1,500,000 gpm (3350 cfs)]. The cooling water is discharged to an intermediate pond (Fig. III-1) from which it is directed down a 4700-ft canal to a subsurface discharge port at 5 to 8 fps to Conowingo Pond. In sunnner, 57% of the* water-may be diverted through forced-*draft helper (open cycle). cooling towers for preliminary cooling before subsequent discharge to the canal and reservoir. The helper cooling towers are intended to be used during the summer months, when required, to comply with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's standards on water temperature.* A limit for the mix-ing zone has not been specified by either the state or the applicant.

The applicant considers the area in the Pond out to the 5F 0 isotherm

• as a mixing zone; the applicant estimates that this area could be as large as 500 acres. 11 The design water temperature rise at full power operation is 20.8F 0 without use of the cooling towers. With the cooling towers in operation at design conditions, the net rise in discharge water temperature above inlet temperature will be 13F 0 *

• Fora full discussion of the effect of applicable water quality criteria, see Section XIII.S.

III-10 Figures II-2, III-1, and III-7 show the site; Figure III-7 shows the circulating water system and the 4700-ft discharge canal.. Details of the various structures and their functions as they relate to the external environment are given below.

b. Cooling Water Intake Facility Cooling water is withdrawn directly from Conowingo Pond through an intake portal 487 ft in length and parallel to the pond.* This portal contains 32 intake openings that are protected by vertical, painted steel trash bars (slats) of 1/4-in. thickness and approximately. 3-iri.

width, facing the pond, spaced 3.5 in. apart and parall-e_l to the intake water flow. Thus, the width of the openings between slats, through which the water. flows, is 3-1/4 in. These outer trash bars prevent heavy debris, or ice floes in the spring or winter, from contacting the rotating screens.

Approximately 40 ft behind the tra~h bar intake portals are 24 ver-tically traveling screens of 3/8-in. mesh. These screens are con-tained in structures that extend 408 ft in length and that parallel the reservoir. The locations are shown in Figs. III-1.and. III-7.

The total intake area was designed to be large enough to allow a velocity through the screens of 0.75 fps or less at reservoir levels down to the 104.5-ft elevation, the lowest pond level normally attained. The rotating screens should prevent clogging of the system by small debris, and the 3/8-in. mesh will exclude large fish from entering the intakes. *

• The screens are washed continually during the rotations, and any trash or debris is thus removed to a trash collection area at the south end of the set of 24 screens. This collected trash is dis-posed of at locations on the site or is hauled away.

The cooling water enters two separate intake basins (one each for Units 2 and 3), each approximately 700 x 200. ft in dimension, and travels the 700-ft length to the pump intake facility shown in Fig. III-7. There are six pump intakes, three in the south basin for Unit 2 and three in the north basin for Unit 3. The pump in-takes are also protected by rotating screens on their suction side.

These screens are of the same mesh (3/8 in.) as those,in the exter-nal structure. The screens can also be washed with water; the wash water is returned to the intake basin and the screenings are depos-ited at a suitab+e location on the site, or hauled away.

c. Cooling Water Discharge from Units 2 and 3 The cooling water discharge outlets for Units 2 and 3 are shown in.

Fig. III-7. The water from*the condensers of Units 2 and 3 is

I

"(

---::z--

SOUTH 0 500KV SUBSTATION H

H H*

.....I OUTER SCREEN STRUCT.URE COOLING TOWER PUMP STRUCTURE PONO SCALE O __ __

500 __.. FEET 1000 Fig. III-7. Closeup of Peach Bottom Complex.

. --* ./ . . :

III-12 discharged into a basin of approximately the same area and dimensions as the combined two intake basins, that is, 400 x 700 ft. The cooling water temperature rise through the condenser is 20.8F 0 , and this warmer water passes from the output basin directly into the 4 700-ft discharge canal. Up to 57% of the flow, however, can be diverted to the three forced-draft helper cooling towers for partial cooling before the water is discharged to the canal.

d. Mechanical Draft Cooling Towers Three sets of helper (open-cycle) cooling towers of 12 .cells each are located on berms perpendicular to the discharge canal (Figs. III-4 and III-7). These cooling towers will be used in the summer months when needed. Each tower [500 ft iong x 71 ft wide (55 ft at base) x 53 ft high] is a forced-draft type designed to pass 292,000 gpm (650 cfs).

The total water circulation through the three towers is designed to be 876,000 gpm (1950 cfs) or about 57% of the total condenser fiow of 1.5 x 10 6 gpm (3350 cfs). The towers are t,o be used in parallel, and each tower is designed to lower the temperature of the once-through water by 13.8F 0

• With the use of all three towers in parallel (57%

of total condenser flow), the net rise in the temperature of the subsequently mixed water delivered--;;-the discharge canal (57% through towers, 43% direct) will be 13F 0 , as contrasted to 20.8F 0 wheri the towers are not used for partial cooling. With the use of the cooling towers, the temperature of the forced air draft from the towers is approximately 9F 0 higher than the temperature of the outlet water from the towers. In the process, 876,000 gpm pass through the three towers; 11,100 gpm (25 cfs) are lost by evaporation a~d less than i750 gpm by drift. Since the towers are used for once-through cooling only, dissolved solids buildup does not occur and makeup water is not *required for blowdown. During operation of the towers., chlorine will be added periodically to the tower water to inhibit algae and crustaceans as discussed in Sect. III.D.3.

The drift loss from the three cooling towers is guaranteed by the manufacturer not to exceed 1750 gpm; however, the a:pplicant 1 expects the actual drift loss to be between 450 and 850 gpm. The concentra-tion of dissolved solids in the drift will be the same as that of Conowingo Pond. The amount of dissolved solids that will be present in the drift at the guaranteed drift loss and the expected minimum drift loss for average and maximum dissolved solids content of Conowingo Pond is shown below:

Dissolved solids (ppm) 1750 gpm 450 gpm 300 6270 lb/day* 1610 lb/day 176 3680 lb/day 945 lb/day

~---------------*--*

III-13 The drift loss from the cooling towers will be present only during the summer months when the cooling towers are in use. The usual wind conditions at the plant site will carry most of the drift over the pond.

e. Discharge Canal and Discharge Port to Conowingo Pond Figures III-1 and III-7 show the 4700-ft discharge canal and the location of the discharge port to Conowingo Pond at the end of the canal, both in relation to-the power station and the cooling towers.

The canal will vary from 300 to 400 ft in width; Rock Run Creek, as shown in Fig. III-7, empties into the canal immediately adjacent to Unit 1.

• The discharge facility, shown ih Fig. III-8, is to be constructed of concrete and steel and will contain steel gates to allow the water to discharge to Conowingo Pond. One port, 15 x 20 ft, will always be open from the canal bottom to the pond. In addition, there will be a concrete spillway for use during high water flows.

By adjusting the .extent of opening of the gates, the discharge ve-locity is regulated to be maintained at 5 to 8 fps. This flow rate will produce a large jet of water downstream into the pond. The discharge canal and discharge structure design was developed after hydraulic and thermal model studies were performed at the Alden Research Laboratories, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, Mass.

f. Transit Times of Coolant Water The transit times of the c.oolant water within the plant, the

-plant condensers, the intake and discharge basins, the cooling towers, and the 4700-ft discharge canal are given in Table*III-1 and Fig. III-9, as supplied by the applicant. Numbers in the first column of Table III-1 refer to the marked locations on Fig. III-9.

D. THE PLANT EFFLUENT SYSTEMS

1. Heat a, Thermal Discharges into Conowingo Pond (1) Major Flow Conditions Since the receivirig water for the liquid thermal effluents is Conowingo Pond, a general. description of the signi-ficant natural

EL 129.0 ft REGULATING GATES NO. I, 13ft 6in. HIGH, 20ft WIDE N0.2, 13ft 6in. HIGH, 20ft WIDE NORMAL WATER N0.3, 12ft Qin. HIGH, 20ft WID_E EL 108.5 ft NON REGULATED. OPENING 15ft X 20ft (BELOW GATE N0.3)

LOW WATER EL 104.5 ft GATES REGULATE DISCHARGE VELOCITY BETWEEN 5 AND 8 fps EXTREME LOW WATER EL 98.5 ft 13 ft 6in. ~I

\ ....~

=l*-~-~ffl:"~*'*'****~.,.:,.;:;::_,, ... ,,.~:-.;-:*~-.,-,.~-;;,.~

BOTTOM OF DISCHARG~

CANAL EL 85.0 ft SECTION A-A DISCHARGE STRUCTURE

. EL f08.5 ft NORMAL pOOL _:: . -

.. _.'_ .. . ...*"=c-~.-.=,,.c* -

Fig. III-8. Submerged discharge facility, with details of movable gates.

III-15 Table III-I. Circulating water transit time through plant cooling system Flow directly Flow through Flow Description to discharge cooling tower distancea canal system 1-2 Retention in intake structure 24.3 min 24.3 min 2-3 Circulating water piping to condenser 0.7 min 0.7 min 3-4 Condenser 14 sec 14 sec I 4-5 Condenser to co.oling tower pond 1.3 min 1.3 min I I

5-6 First cooling tower pond 24.3 min

• I 6-7 Second cooling tower pond 16.3 min 7-8 Piping from pond to cooling tower 22 sec 8-9 Retention in cooling tower 64 sec 9-10 Cooling tower discharge to canal 87.5 sec 10-11 Transit in discharge canal . 38.9 min 38.9 min

.5-10 Bypassing of cooling towe.r; 22.6 min ti!l)e in discharge canal Total 88 min 109 min aPoints 1 through 10 are labeled on Fig. 111-9.

CONDENSER II COOLING TOWER NO I Fig. 111-9. Path of cooling water from Conowingo Pond through the Peach Bottom Station. Transit times are given in Table 111-1.

III-17 and artificial flows into and out of this lake, essential to understanding the water flow pattern at the site, is given here.

Conowingo Pond, a reservoir on the Susquehanna River, is 14 miles long and approximately L 5 miles wide at its midpoint, near which Peach Bottom Units 1-3 are located. A general map of the pond and the surrounding area is given in Figs. II-2 and II-4.

The natural daily average flow of the Susquehanna River in this vicinity (Table.B-1, Appendix B-II) has varied over a 50-year period from a record low flow of 1500 cfs (September, 1964) to a record high flow of 972,000 cfs (June 1972). Average minimum and average maximum flows are a.lso shown in Table B-1. The patterns and volumes of flow of water thr~ugh the pond at any given time are highly complex and dependent on several factors. These factors relate to the Conowingo and Holtwood Dams, which have hydroelectric stations; the Muddy Run Pumped Storage.Hydroelectric Station; and to a very small extent, the water intakes for both .the cities of Chester and Baltimore municipal water supplies. Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3, in addition to the existing Unit 1, will discharge heated water to the.pond and withdraw.essentially equivalent volumes of water for cooling purposes. When the helper cooling towers are used in the summer months, a relatively ins.ignificant volume of water (25 cfs) in relation to the total once-through cooling water (3350 cfs) will be evaporated to the atmosphere. All locations of major water inputs and discharges to Conowingo Pond are shown in F:Lg, II-8

.(Sect. II .D. l). In sunnnary ,' the max:j.mum and. minimum expected inputs and discharges to Conowingo Pond from th.ese various sources. are as follows:

Principal Inputs into Conowingo Pond:

(a) Holtwood Dam and Hydroelectric Plant. Plant throughput varies from zero to 32,000 cf_s, generating. P+csently 110 MW(e) with 272 MW(e).planned in the future,* During periods of high flow, 250,000. cfs passes over th~ spillway. * *

(b) Muddy Run Pumped Storage Station. During the generating phase [which produces 880 MW(e)], the flow input will be as high as 34,000 cfs on a diurnal basis.

(c) Peach Bottom Uriits 2 and 3. Thermal discharge may vary from zero when not operating to 1675 cfs for one unit or up to 3350 cfs for both units.,

. (d) Peach Bottom Unit 1 may vary from zero to 100 cfs, or approximately 3% of Units 2 and 3; Unit 1, however,-both wi.thdraws and discharges cooling water within the beginning length of ~he 4700-ft canal. This water therefore does not add to the 3350 cfs maximum withdrawal for Units 2 and 3.

III-18 Principal Discharges from Conowingo Pond:

(a) _Conowing0 Dam _and Hydroelectric Generating Plant. As much as "85,000 cfs may pass through the generating units' producing 513 MW(e); and during normal periods of high flow, 250,000 cfs over the spillway.

(b) Muddy Run Pumped Storage Station. During the pumping phase, up to 2°7",120 cfs is withdrawn from Conowingo Pond.

(c) The cities of Chester and Baltimore will withdraw municipal water supplies up to 50 cfs and 230 cfs (with future capability of 460 cfs), respectively.

(d) Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3~ The plant intak~ will with-draw. up to 3350 cfs . for cooling both Units 2 and 3.' .

(e) Peach Bottom Unit 1. Unit 1 withdraws and discharges cooling wa.t_er* *both within the beginning length of the 4700...;ft canal, and therefore its in~ut is not considered.

(2) Cyclic Operations Figu~e III-10 shows graphically a normal 7-day cycling operation of the Muddy Run Plant, the Holtwood Dam, and Conowingo Dam. This figure illustrates.the operations in late summer when river flow is relatively low (assumed to be 2500 cfs in the graph). *The.Muddy Run Plant pumps into the Muddy Run Reservoir during the early morning hours and generates electricity during the hours of peak demand. The Holtwood and Conowingo Hydroelectric Plants essentially counterbalance each other with respect to the net rate of water input and discharge from Conowingo Pond. The withdrawals for. the cities of Chester and Baltimore *water supplies will be approximately continuous in times of low river flow and* are relatively insignificant *(46 cfs and, ultimately, 460 cfs for Chester an_d Baltimore, respectively) with respect to the rates of flow shown in Fig. III-10. Figures III-11 and .III-12 show the cyclic behavior at representative river flow~ of 5000 and 15,000 cfs, respectively.- The operation of these three plants i~ altered markedly during the Saturday and Sunday periods when demands for electrical power are low. At a low river flow of 2500 cfs (Fig.

III-10) the Muddy Run Plant is the major determinant in dictating a flow pattern, whereas at high river flows (15,000 'cfs), the periodic withdrawal of water through the Conowingo plant becomes a major determinant of flow pattern. The Holtwood Plant under high flow conditions provides an almost continuous input to Conowingo Pond whereas the effect of the cyclic behavior of the Muddy Run Plant is diminished.

, . , - - - - ~ - , - - - - , . . --------------:-----:.....-------'-------*

III-19 MON TUES WED THURS FRI SAT SUN AM PM AM* PM AM PM AM PM AM PM "AM PM AM PM 40 30 i-- i--

20 10

- (/)

~, , "'*v\.

0 0

0 0

IN r-.,J}

V\

\

• ..J 1,i,,*,

', -~

. ~ i.,*,1

~,

__j i

I l..J r*-,/".

.I i

"*\.iI

~-l'.

0 ,__ II ~

~ OUT

.,I

*~---* *

, ___ I I

I I

\ I I

fJ

....J lJ.. ~-I.;--"' \,.1,,,,.,..,1 10 20 V i- L,.,, .,,. ~

30

-*-*- HOLTWOOD MUDDY RUN

- - - - - CONOWINGO

• 1 I I I I 40 Fig. III-10. Majqr weekly inflows and discharges of Conowingo Pond at a natural river flow of 2500 cfs.

11.1-20 MON TUES WED THURS FRI SAT SUN AM* PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM

• PM

• AM I PM AM :I PM I 'I

-. - - - - - - HOLTWOOD -

MUDDY RUN

- - - - - CONOWINGO 10,--..~~~~*:-t--t--t1-..:-ff-lt-----lnfi.-r..\-l---+-~->>-d----+~---fl!~**'4.----::+-~-l-~-l-~_J_~_j I \, '~".

• i ~ . *J\ '"*

i  ; "* :\

i; \ IJ',  : '.  ; /'. .,,.'

!/)

'+-

0  ! I. I ..,, I I  ; ",

0 0  !  ! I i  !  ;  ;

0 IN I I I f I i o-.:~ -- __i __ J __ _; ~-J

S: -- I - I JI -

~ OUT  ! I I '  : I I~

I I I I I I I I

I I

h

,'J

I 1 1

I I

I I

I I

/

I I

/i,, II II I

I I

I I 10------t-:-t--f-+-tt---¥.--t-i---tt--tt-t----.-~--l++-----.'1*~'-a-..+.i'~*~-~*--tl--+--l~---1l---~-li----l II I Ir ,,~

1 I I 1 I 11 I I I I 1 I ,, 1 I I I

,*1I \d I

,,1IU I

,a, I

~

~

,, ~

1, 20tt--t--i--~-tt--t--r-~-tt--t--~-tr--v~H-+-+-~+t--+-+-___:_-H---J-l-~--ll-~--'-~--l Fig. Ill-11. Major weekly inflows and discharges of Conowingo Pond at a natural river flow of 5000 cfs.

III-21 MON TUES WED THURS FRI SAT SUN AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM 30

...... ~

'I i,- - '*

~ r ..-*-

.....!'"* ~* .- -*

20r----------tt~---t----tt---t--tt---tt---t-+------f-t--~----l-v+--+---+---+---+--~

• \.*-- -- -* "\,*- ... - r ---""

I 1\"'i,';

r.

~ i' \\.i I I i I

j I

10 I

• I J I I

\ I I, I I \ I IN V I I I I I I II /

0 --- I *-, - I -- u .. '--J I

u\M OUT I I I I /

I

~ 10.----t-t---1~1-h+--+rH+-i'l'+---rH+---fl--t--~r+--,--¥--+-l~I--~-~-~~

I Jl ,H

't o

,1 '

f If I

~

II .

i I

I rr i I 11 i

I i, ~

i g 20 '"

, II 1' II ,' ,1 ,I II : I, I1 I 1

~, 'I/ I 1* I 'I 1 I i

~ ~ I

s: '1 I '- I ,,,, - I I II L,, I I 0

..J LL.

I I

• I I I 1, 1 I II I I 1

30t--<J'-t--T'---t--,1-t--t--t---1Lr---+ttilllrl----'-l+-t!---,l-~'l+--~I-+---+----+---+-~

I 1 .I I I 11 111 I j I I I I I I I I1:1 1 1 I I I I I I 111 1 / I I I

I I I I I

I I I I I I I Iii u 401--.-t-t----t---tt.-+---+--;+--m-"+---r-h-f----jf-----H,.-.--+---+----+---+-~

'1 1,'i' I I I fI lf1 I

I I

\1,.i I

501---<l'-t--tl~t----t!f-1,l1.--l!f---+---L/t',,-;:,-1,--1----.11-\ri'+1~1----+~f-'~+----+~-+-~+-----I

~  : I ii \'i l If 60 i----.1

,I:  ::

.-.,-+--+slc+l-i------'111rt-l 11 11 1

..---+-'---H:+--:-+--'---+ - - -

---

HOLTWOOD

• MU DD Y RUN -

11 1 1

jl 11 11 J ---- CONOWINGO

..____*....__u*___,_____,__~___._____.__u___._____.__'__.____._____.__I~.....___I..______I*I.____,

10 Fig. III-12. Major weekly inflows and discharges of Conowingo Pond at a natural river flow of 15,000 cfs.

III-22 Because of the cyclic operations of the various plants, which are superimposed on the natural water flow of the Susquehanna River, the calculation of time-dependent isotherms for tqe thermal discharge from the Peach Bottom Units 1-:3.becomes exceedingly difficult. The applicant has chosen therefore to have a physical model constructed in order to attempt. to obtain experimentally the isotherms* .under various river flows. He has presented graphically the results for two different times during the week (Tuesday and Saturday). Summa-rizing details of the report .of the applicant's contractor (Alden Research Laboratories, Worcester Polytechnic Ins.titute, Worcester, Mass.) are giv~n below. *

(3) Studies to Evaluate the Thermal*Plume from Peach Bottom Units 1-3 A model, constructefl by the Alden Laboratories* at Worc,ester, Mass.,

comprised the entire Conowingo Pond between the two dams. The scales of the model were 1:300 horizontal and 1:30 vertical; the scale distortion therefore was 1 :10. Wooden templates derived from

. contour maps of the river bottom from Conowingo to Holtwood were placed every 5 ft in the*model; these placements represented a spacing of approximately every 1500 ft in the prototype (Conowingo Pond). Areas in the immediate vicinity of the Peach B.ottom site were provided with extra templates for a more accurate description of the topography_ at the. inlet and discharge points. All t~mplates were backfilled with compacted sand and the final surface of the model.was plastered witq cement grout to the finished top edges of the templates. Flows were provided to correspond to the time-dependent i~puts to and discharges from Conowingo Pond .as described. above, with.*

the exception of the two outlets for the cities of Chester and Baltimore.

Water corresponding to that of the Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 intake was passed through a boil.er in order to obtain the same rises in temperature (13F 0 ) that would exist in the discharge canal under operation with part (57%) of the water passing through the cooling towers. Temperature measurements were made with 240 copper-constantin thermocouples located at different positions, and these temperatures were recorded automatically every 48 seconds for each thermocouple.

This 48-second period corresponded approximately to 44 minutes in the prototype. More frequent measurements were also made when these were thought to be necessary.

The evaluations by Alden Laboratories included the assumptions made in the interpretations of the experiments (for example, scaling corrections for inertia, viscosity, and gravity forces), and repre-sentative results were presented, plotted as isotherms at the ends of the second (Tuesday) .and sixth (Saturday) days of a week. The isotherms given in the applicant's Environmental Report6* show the thermal conditions which he is predicting at the surface of the pond and at 5- and 10-ft depths, when the naturai river flows are

III-23 2500 cfs and 15,000 cfs, under varying wet bulb temperatures. These studies apply to the prototype (Conowingo Pond) for the summer months.

A natural river flow of 2500 cfs is somewhat above the 50-year record low flow of 1500 cfs or the 50-year record 7-day minimum average flow of 1900 cfs, but it is below the record 4600-cfs average minimum flow over a 21.56-day period.

• A flow of 2500 cfs appears to be a relatively reasonable low flow to consider in obtaining the.isotherms; the rare low flow of 1500 cfs has not been considered. Higher river flows produce smaller areas for corresponding isotherms.

Figures III~l3 and III-14 show representative isotherms for the pond at the ends of the second and sixth days, respectively, as presented by the Alden Research Laboratories, and the reader is referred to their report, included in the applicant's environmental report, I to see additional isotherms. I The largest spread of the ther~al plume for a given condition of river flow and river temperature was observed from the studies at high wet bulb temperatures. Figures III-15 and III-16 show iso-therms for Conowingo Pond based. on studies where the wet bulb temperatures were kept at high values. These two figures show the expected positions of the isotherms, where the assumed river flow is 2500 cfs and the river temperature is 85°F, for the end of a Tuesday and a Saturday, respectively. Figures III-15 and II.I-16 might therefore be expected to represent approximately the largest extent of the thermal plume puring a week of operation in the sununer at low river flow. Isotherms are shown for the surface and for 5- and 10-ft depths. Under these conditions, the 4F 0 sur-face isotherm is shown to stretch entirely across Conowingo Pond.

The isotherms presented by the applicant represent severe conditions of river flow, temperature, time of year (summer months), and wet*

bulb temperatures for heat dissipation. From past records, these severe conditions have not occurred simultaneously. 2 Higher river flows or lower wet bulb temperatures will produce a smaller area of heated water for the same rise in temperature (;l.3F 0 with the operation of helper cooling*towers or 20.8F 0 without use of the cooling towers) and the same submerged discharge of 5 to 8 fps (at a flow of 3350 cfs through the combined Units 2 and 3). This plume will show almost hourly, cyclic time dependence, and at any given location within the maximum area of the plume, the difference in temperature above the natural lake

• temperature will fluctuate with maximums and minimums occurring from seve.ral hours to a half-day apart. It is difficult therefore to del~neate a mixing zone. The applicant purports to define the mixing zone as the area within the 5F 0 isotherm. From the appli-cant's plots, 6 the mixing zone appears to cover about 140 acres along the west bank of Conowingo Pond below the discharge structure.

The applicant has stated that the mixing zone may be as l~rge as 500 acres.I

I

\

i I

I I

l i

l DOWN STREAM -

0 0

SURFACE 0 3000 6000 9000 FEET NATURAL RIVER FLOW - 2500 c:fs NATURAL RIVER TEMP- 85°F TIME- 2nd DAY OPERATION WET BULB TEMP- SEE TABLE H

H H

\*~~ I l'v

~

MUDDY RUN

~~

t MILE 76 FOR 8 hr 82 FOR 3 hr 84 FOR 3 hr 83 FOR 4 hr 78 FOR 2 hr STATE LINE 73 FOR 4 hr 0

PEACH BOTTOM TEN FOOT DEPTH ATOMIC STATION HOLTWOOD

- - 3 MILES Fig. 111-13. Isotherm patterns expected at the end of a Tuesday, based on physical model studies, under* varying wet bulb temperat.ure conditions._*

j DOWN STREAM ~ \

0 SURFACE 0 3000 6000 9000 FEET NATURAL RIVER FLOW~2500 i:fs NATURAL RIVER TEMP- 85°F TIME-6th DAY OPERATION WET BULB TEMP- SEE TABLE .

0

/ H

/ . H

~

H PEACH BOTTOM FIVE FOOT DEPTH I

N FLOW 3350 cfs Ul TEMP. RISE 13°F WET BU.LB MUDDY VARIATIONS

~ RUN t MILE 76 FOR 8 hr 82 FOR 3 hr 84 FOR 3-hr 83 FOR 4 hr 78 FOR 2 hr STATE LINE 73 FOR 4 hr 0

PEACH BOTTOM TEN FOOT DEPTH ATOMIC STATION HOLTWOOb

- - - 3 MILES Fig. III--14. Isotherm patterns expected at the end of a Saturday, based on physical model studies, _under varying wet bulb temperature conditions.

DQWN STREAM - - - -

0 3000 6.000 FEET NATURAL RIVER FLOW- 2500 c Is NATURAL RIVER TEMP- B5°F TIME- 2nq DAY OPS:RATION WET Blll,.B TEIVIP- 75°F 8

I N

PEA(:H BOTTOM r1vE FOOT DEPTH Q'\

FLOW 3350 els MUDDY TEMP. RISE t3°F

- - RUN t MILE STATE LINE PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC STATION

-HOLTWOOD

_3 MILES Fig. III-15. Isotherm patterns expected. at the end of a Tuesday, based on physical model studies. Wet bulb temperature= 75°F.

J i i

DOWN STREAM - -

I

~

\  ; ) .4 3 2 0 1 I 0

~ ~

SURFACE . ./ ~ -

0 3000 6000 9000 LI.:...*-L---11_....___,_I-'--.....JI FEET NATURAL RIVER FLOW-2500 cfs NATURAL RIVER TEMP-B5°F I

TIME-6th DAY OPERATION WET BULB.TEMP- 75°F PEACH BOTTOM H

H i FIVE FOOT. DEPTH H FLOW 3350 els I MUDDY TEMP. RISE t3°F. N

-RUN t MILE

"-J I

STATE LINE PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC STATION

-HOLTWOOD 3 MILES Fig. III-16. Isotherm patterns expected.at the end of a Saturday, based on physical model studies. Wet bulb temperature= 75°F.

III-28 (4) Staff Assessment of the Applicant's Thermal Plume Analysis The applicant's analysis of the thermal plume in Conowingo Pond due to the heated water discharge from the plant is based completely on a physical model study. This study was performed by the applicant's consultant, Alden Research Laboratories. The modeling, either math-ematical or physical, of a thermal plume such as.will be caused by the Peach Bottom Station is not a simple task. It is impractical and, in some instances, impossible to correctly model all of the hydraulic and thermal parameters in a physical model because of conflicts in the similitude requirements for the various heat trans-fer mechanisms.

The Peach Bottom model is further complicated by the fact that other plants are adding water to and withdrawing water from Conowingo Pond ..

The model apparently simulated these additions and withdrawals. The applicant has not presented sufficient information to .show that he gave detailed consideration to choosing the proper similitude requirements for the heat transfer aspects of the model. The applicant attempted to exercise control over the heat transfer in the model as follows:

The model was operated in a room with high humidity to minimize evaporative surface heat transfer; and solar and terrestrial radiation effects and wind effects were eliminated by operating the model inside a closed building.

The translation of model data into meaningful prototype predictions can be especially difficult if all of the imnortant thermal and hydraulic mechanisms have not been modeled correctly. It is not uncommon to apply adjustment factors. to model data in order to predict prototype behavior. The applicant formulated such a factor for translating model isotherm areas to prototype predictions in an attempt to account for the fact that the surfiice heat" transfer co-efficient in the model was much smaller than the corresponding co-efficient in the prototype was expected to be. The reason for this difference is that the model supp~essed evaporative.heat transfer and also did not simulate the effects of wind and radiant heat transfer. The applicant's adjustment factor involves ratios of (1) plant heat output a.nd (2) surface heat transfer for both model and prototype. In calculating surface heat transfer, both in model and in prototype, the applicant used a surface heat exchange coeffi-cient, in conjunction with an excess temperature *above the wet bulb temperature. In his experimental determination of the model surface heat exchange coifficents, the applicant was consistent in using an excess temperature above the wet bulb temperature. However, the value, 6 Btu/hr-ft 2-F., of the surface heat exchange coefficient which the

III-29 applicant assumed for the prototype was developed for use with an excess temperature above the equilibr>ium or natural terrrperature.

Thus, the applicant's use of this prototype surface heat exchange coefficient in conjunction with an excess temperature above the wet bulb" temperature is not justified.

Further, the staff is not aware of any published experimental or theoretical evidence to support the use of a surface heat exchange coefficient in conjunction with an excess temperature above the wet bulb temperature in order to calculate surface heat exchange.

The rate of heat transfer to the atmosphere from a body of water can be calculated using the "heat budget" approach developed by Edinger and Geyer, 7 which expresses the rate of heat transfer as: .

H = K .(T - E) s where H = Net rate of heat transfer per unit area, Btu/ft 2 -hr K = Exchange coefficient, Btu/ft 2 -hr-'F 0 T = Water surface temperature, °F s

E = Equilibrium temperature, °F The equilibrium temperature is. somewhat difficult to calculate, and several investigators, e.g., Ryan and Stolzenbach, 8 have shown that reasonable results* can be obtained using ambient water surface tem-perature in place of equilibrium temperature to calculate the forced temperature rise caused by the addition of excess heat to a water body. With this approach, the equation can be written:

Q = KAllT where Q = Rate at which excess heat, i.e., from plant effluent~ is added to the water, Btu/hr K = Exchange coeffiGient, Btu/ft 2 -hr-F 0 A = Water surface area, ft 2 llT = Excess temperature above ambient water surface

• temperature, F 0

• III-30 The. staff measured the ar~a between surface isotherms in Fig. 19 of the Environmental Report 6 (Fig. III-13 of this statement) with a planinieter. Table III-2 gives the areas and the surface heat .

transferred for each area, assuming a surface heat exchange coeffi-cient of 6 Btu/hr-ft2-F 0 *

• The effluent heat rejection rate, with the helper cooling towers in operation, was calculated as:

• Q = (3350 ft 3 /~ec) x (62.4 lb/ft 3 ) x (13F 0 ) x (3600 sec/hr) x (1.Btu/lb-F 0 ) = 9783 x 10 6 ,Btu/hr.

I.

I .

Thus, the prototype isotherms appear to be capable of transferring only about 20% of the effluent heat. As a further check, the staff performed a simple calculation. to determine an average excess temperature (over the entire 14 sq. miles of Conowingo Pond) above river ambient:

/J.T = ..Jl = 4.2F 0 KA I

where Q = 9783 X 10 6 Btu/hr K = 6 Btu/hr-ft 2-F 0 A = 14 sq. miles X (5280 ft/mile) 2 The isotherm plots pres,ented in the Environmental Report 6 do not indicat~ an average excess temperature nearly this large for the pond as.a whole.

• (5) Staff Conclusions and Recommendations Concerning the Applicant's l'hermal Plume Analysis The staff -recognizes the fact that at the.time the applicant's con-suitant performed the analysis (1967), using a physical model, the study of surface heat exchange from large water bodies and the tech-nology necessary to design,*build, and operate a thermal/hydraulic physical model had not* advanced to the current level of understand-ing. Thus, for instance, the fact that the applicant's main thermal precaution in operating the model was suppression of surface evap-oration and solar and .wind effects.by operating the model in a closed building at high humidity is understandable.

_However, the staff cannot accept the applicant's use of the wet-bulb temperature in the calculation of surface h~at exchange. The usual V

-,ry*-----*--*----- ---~*-...,------ - *-*-****----~--...-~... ----~---***---~---~-----*------ ... -~--

III-31 Table 111-2.

• Heat transfer in Conowingo Pond indicated by isotherm data from model study Isotherm Arca H cat transferred AT (Fo) (n2 l (!Hu/hr) (F")

0 35.7 X I0 6 214.8 X 10 6 6

2 33.9 X 10 406.8 X 10 6 2 6

2 3 26.3 X I 0 4 73.4 X 10 6 3 3 4 11.5 X I 0 6 276.0 X 106 4 6

4 5 3.5 X 10 105.0 X 10 6 5 5 6 3.2 X 106 115.2 X 106 6 6

6 8.3 X 10 348.6 X 10 6 7 Total 1939.8 X 10 6

III-32 procedure is to use either natural temperature or equilibrium tem-perature *. The use of wet bulb temperature in the analysis causes a large overestimation of the amount of heat that can be transferred for any given e~cess temperature, since the wet bulb temperature is

. signifi~antly lower than either the natural temperature or the equi-librilllll temperature.

The applicant also used the wet bulb temperature in experimentally

• deducing the IlRlltiplicative factor that he subse*quently used to translate isotherm areas measured in the model to predicted iso-therms in the prototype. This use occurred both directly in the factor itself and indirectly through the experimental determination of the model surface heat exchange coefficient.

Therefore, based on the information currently availab).e to us, the staff cannot accept the applicant's analysis of the thermal plume behavior in Conowingo Pond arising from the discharge of heated water from the plant because we believe the river surface within the isotherms presented by the applicant cannot dissipate the rejected condenser heat. The staff recommends that the applicant and his consultants review their analysis and make appropriate corrections in order that a revised analysis will conform to experi-mentally verified principles of surface heat exchange and thermal plume behavior prediction. Such principles are available in the open literature. The staff further recommends that any revised analysis of physical model data be supported by separate analyti-cal calculations.*

(6) Forced-Draft Helper Cooling Towers The applicant has not asses_sed the sizes of the vapor plumes to be expected from the three banks of helper cooling towers. Quantita-tive assessment of a vapor plume is difficult because of the highly time-dependent behavior of the plume. Additional fogging because of the vapor plume will occur primarily over the ~ond and should not be more than a minor nuis.ance. The applicant has estimated that, during the months of anticipated cooling tower operation, the 227 hr of natural fog at the bridge on Pennsylvania State Highway 372, 4 miles north of the site, will be increased by 7 hr and that the 524 hr of natural fog on the east shore of Conowingo Pond, where the Penn Central Railroad operates, will be increased by 12 hr. Since the cooling towers will not be operated during the winter, there will be no increase in icing in the area as a. result of station operation.

• The applicant's response to these recommendations are included in his comments, p. N-65; staff discussion of this response and further staff calc~lations are provided in Section XIII.Q.

---

*~------ _______ _____________________________ _

. III-33

2. Radioactive Waste During the operation of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, radio-active material will be produced by fission and by neutron activation reactions in metals and other material in*- the reactor coolant system. Small amounts of gaseous c!-nd liquid radioactive wastes will enter the waste streams, which.will be monitored and processed within the station to minimize the radioactive nuclides that will ultimately be released to the atmosphere and into Conowingo Pond.

The radioactivity that may be released during operation of the station at full power will be in accordance with the C_ommission 's regulations, as set forth in 10 CFR Part 20 and 10 CFR Part 50.

Based oh the staff evaluation (see section V.D), it is concluded that the radioiodine released in the gaseous effluent to the environ-ment must be reduced to meet the "as low as practicable" guidelines of 10 CFR Part 50.

The waste handling and treatment systems currently installed at the station are discussed in detail in the Final Safety Analysis Report and in the applicant's Environmental Report. 6 In *these*references the applicant has prepared an analysis of the proposed treatment systems and has provided estimates of the annual effluents, The following analysis is based on our model, adjusted to apply to this plant and uses somewhat different operating conditions. Our calcu~

lated effluents are therefore.different from the applicant's; however, the model used* results from a review of available data from operating power plants. Table III-3 lists the principal assumptions and conditions used in our evaluation of the waste treatment systems.

Table III-4 lists the projected effluents from Unit 1.

a. Liquid Waste The liquid radioactive waste treatment system, common to both Units 2 and 3, will consist of 'the process equipment'and instrumentation necessary to collect, process, monitor and discharge potentially radi_oactive liquid wastes from the station. Treated liquid wastes will be handled on a batch basis as required to permit optimum control and release of radioactive liquid waste. Prior to release of any treated liquid wastes, samples will be analyzed to determine the type and amount of radioactivity in a batch. Based on the analysis these wastes will be either released under controlled conditions to the Conowingo Pond or retained for further processing. Radiation monitoring equipment will automatically terminate liquid waste discharge if radiation levels are above a predetermined level in the

• discharge line.

Liquid wastes are classified, collected and treated as. high purity, low purity, chemical, laundry and sludge or concentrated wastes.

III-34 Table 111-3. Conditions used in determining releases of radioactivity in effluents from Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3 Thermal power 3440 MW(t)

• Total steam flow 14,000,000 lb/hr Plant factor 0.8 W~ight of liquid in the system 1,830,000 lb Weight of steam in the system* 63,600 lb Cleanup demineralizer flow 133,000 lb/hr Failed fuel Equivalent to 100,000 µCi/sec with 30-min holdup Leaks Reactor building (liquid) 480 lb/.hr Turbine building (steam) 2400 lb/hr Condenser inleakage (air) 40 cfm Gland seal flow 14,000 lb/hr Partition coefficients (iodine)

Steam/liquid in reactor 0.012 Reactor building liquid leak 0.001 Turbine building steam leak 1.0 Gland seal Ci.I Air ejector 0.005 Recombiner system 0.1 Holdup times G\and seal gas O.D75 hr Air ejector gas 56 hr*

1 Equipment drain system (liquids) /rday fill and I-day hold Floor drain system (liquids) 1-day fill and 1-day hold Chemical wastes (liquids)

• 4-day fill and 1-day hold Decontamination factors Powdex demineralizer 10 (except Y, Mo, and H-3)

Equipment drain system demineralizer Cs and Rb 10 Y, Mo, and H-3 1 Others 100 All filtration liquids 1 Removal factors to account for plateout Mo and Tc-99m 100 y 10

\

~---- \ .. -----

III-35 Table 111-4. Projected effluents from Peach Bottom Unit I Nuclide Gaseous release Liquid release Liquid release (Ci/yr) Nuclide Nuclide

(µCi/yr) (µCi/yr)

Kr-85 190

• Na'.24 1,000 Y-91 1,000 Kr-87 I Fe-59 50 Nb-95 10 Kr-88 3 Zn-65 400 Sb 2 Xe-l31m 2 Cs-134 400 Te-125m 30 Xe-133 4 Cs-137 1,000 Te-l 29m 30 Xe-135 Sr-90 50 Te-129 4 Xe-138 C'o-60 10 Ba-137m l,000 Sr-89 20 Ce-144 3 Y-90 100 Pr-144 3 Iodines and 0.002 Eu-154 6 particulates Eu-155 5 H-3 100 Ci/yr

III-36 The waste treatment system is designed to handle these wastes separately or on a combined basis. Cross connections between the subsystems provide flexibility for processing by alternate methods.

The interrelation of these systems are shown schematically in Figure iII-17. Radioactive materials generated in the reactor coolant of each unit will be removed continuously by a Powdex demineralizer system.

High purity liquid wastes (low conductivity) will be collected in the*

waste collector tanks (100,000 gallons capacity) from the reactor cleanup systems, the residual heat removal systems, equipment drains in the reactor, radwaste and turbin~ buildings, decantates from resin*

phase separator tanks and centrifuge effluents. The liquids will be processed on a batch basis by filtration and demineralization. After processing .the wastes will be sampled and analyzed and transferred to the condensate storage tank for reuse in the reactor or returned to the cleanup system for additional treatment.

In our evaluation of this system we considered a daily input of about 30,000 gallons at 40% of primary coolant activity. We assumed that 90% of this water will be reused and that 10% will be discharged.

The annual release from this source was calculated to be less than 1 Ci/.yr from both units.

Low purity (high conductivity) liquid wastes will be collected in the floor drain tank (96,000 gallons capacity). Liquids will be processed through a precoat type filter and collected in the floor drain sample tank. After sampling and analysis the liquid waste will normaily be released to the circulating and service wa_ter discharge canal. If the radioactivity of the batch is above a predetermined level the waste may be routed from the floor drain filter through the waste demineralizer, or recycled through the high purity waste channel via the waste collector tank.

In our evaluation we considered a daily input into this system of 15,000 gallons at 35% of primary coolant activity and that all this water will be _released after sampling. Based on this mode of operation we have estimated a release of over 5 Ci/month from each reactor. Our evaluation has been discussed with the applicant who has stated that alternate methods of treating the floor drain waste were available and that these methods would be implemented to the extent necessary to keep the total liquid effluents to less than 5 Ci/year from each reactor. Alternate methods include the addition of Powdex resin to 'the precoat in the floor drain system and the

"'"""- . --s- . ___________________________ ..___________________________ _

III-37 STEAM TURBINE CONDENSATE FILTER CONDENSER DEMINERALIZER WASTE SAMPLE --,

TANK TO WASTE DRUMMING STATION (WDS)

MAKE UP WATER f - - - - - '

CLEAN WASTE (LOW CONDUCTIVITY l WASTE COLLECTOR WASTE COLLECTOR WASTE EQUIPMENT DRAINS AND RESIDUAL SURGE TANKS FILTER DEMINERALIZER HEAT REMOVAL SYSTEM RESIN TO WDS DIRTY WASTE (HIGH CONDUCTIVITY) FLOOR DRAIN FLOOR COLLECTOR AND t-----<~ FLOOR DRAIN DRAIN BUILDING FLOOR DRAINS SURGE TANKS SAMPLE TANK FILTER CHEMICAL* WASTE WASTE CHEMICAL SOLIDS TO

.:.DE __O_N...;T:..Ac:M:..IN_A_T_l..cO:..N-,L-A-B-,_A_N_D_C_A_S_K----.J

....C TANK WDS

• . WASH DRAINS, NEUTRALIZATION DETERGENT LAUNDRY LAUNDRY DRAIN LAUNDRY DRAINS, PERSONNEL DRAIN TANKS FILTER t-----------

AND DECONTAMINATION SERVICE WATER CIRCULATING WATER SYSTEM DISCHARGE CANAL POND ~ ~

DISCHARGE fNTAKE

---

~----

- . . * - . .- - - - --..:::==--=--~--

. . .. ~---:::::_

- - - - -- CONOWINGO - - - ~ -=--==--=-=-::::..::-:=-----

STRUCTURE STRUCTURE --

Fig. III-17. Liquid radioactive waste treatment system for Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3.

- -*,-~--*** ----~ .. -..~~-*--*- *--****-*---.,-*,~*.****-.... '-* -~- - -**~*~--~--.-*-*~**-~* ...****--- .. *- **" ... . , ..... _,. ...... ,........,., --** .. ........ ' --- ~ .....~ ..,,.,,,._ '

III-38 transfer of floor drain waste to the waste sampl.e tank through the demineralizer. Our analysis of this alternate method of operation and operating experience at a reactor ui;;ing a similar me.thod indicates.

that total liquid effluents can be reduced to less than 5 Ci/yr from each reactor.

• Chemical waste will be collected in. the chemical waste t.ank (5,000 gallons capacity) from laboratory drains and decontamination solutions from shop, reactor and turbine building.drains. These wastes, estimated at 1,000 gallons/day at 1% of primary coolant activity will

.be neutralized and processed by filtration. The filtered waste, after sampling, will normally be diluted and discharged. If the radioactivity level precludes disposal by dilution in the Conqwingo Pond, the chemical wastes will be solidified in inert material and packaged as solid waste.

• The.annual release from this source was

/

• calculated to be less than 1 Ci/yr from both units.

Detergent wastes, estimated at 1,000 gallons/day will be collected in two laundry drain tanks (4,000 gallons total capacity) from laundry, decontamination and wash-down wastes._ Laundry wastes will 4

normally be low in radioacttvity (less than 10 * µCi/ml) and will be filtered and released to the.discharge canal. In our evaluation we considered the effluents from the laundry system to be a small fr act.ion of the wastes from the other system and have not* analyzed them separately.

Our estimated annual releases from the primary sources for normal operation are shown in Table III-5. Based on evaluation of the liquid waste treatment system we have estimated releases to be a fraction of the values shown in Table III-5. However, to compensate for equipment.downtime and expected operationai occurrences the values have been normalized to 5 Ci/yr/reactor based on the alternate method of processing the floor drains. The calculated releases of tritium, 20 Ci/yr, are based on operating experience, The applicant has estimated annual releases in liquid effluents to be about 1.5 Ci/yr/

reactor.

b. Gaseous Wastes During power operation of the facilities, radioactive materials released to the atmosphere in gaseous effluents include low concen-trations of fission-product noble gases (krypton and xenon), halogens (mostly iodines), tritium contained in water vapor, and particulate material including both fission products and activated corrosion*

III-39 Tablelll-5. Annual release of radioactive material in liquid effluents from Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 Nuclide Liquid release Liquid release (Ci/year per unit) Nuclide (Ci/year per unit)

Rb-86 0.00040 1-133 0.74 Sr-89 0.26 1-135 0.10 Sr-90 0.015 Cs-134 0.20 Sr-91 0.17 Cs-136 0.076 Y-90 0.053 Cs-137 0.19 Y-91m 0.12 Ba-137m 0.18 Y-91 0.18 Ba-140 0.43 Y-93 0.22 La-140 0.23 Zr-95 0.0028 Ce-141 0.0093 Zr-97 0.0019 Ce-143 0.0075 Nb-95 0.0025 Ce-144 0.0017 Nb-97m 0.0019 Pr-143 0.0029 Nb-97 0.0019 Pr-144 0.0017 Mo-99 0.47 Nd-147 0.00095 Tc-99m . 0.44 Pm-147 0.00023 Ru-103 0.0017 Pm-149 O.OOQ93 Ru-106 0.00050 Sm-153 0.00042 Rh-103m 0.0017 Na-24 0.012 Rh-105 0.0018 P-32 0.000076 Rh-106 0.00050 Cr-51 0.017 Sn-125 0.000016 Mn-54 0.0031 Sb-125 .0.0000077 Fe-55 O.Q75 Sb-127 0.00013 Fe-59 0.024 Te-127m 0.00046 Co-58 0.17 Te-127 0.0013 Co-60 0.017 Te-129m 0.0045 Cu-64 0.019 Te-129 0.0029 Zn-65 0.00077 Te-131m 0.0059 Zn-69m 0.00016 Te-131 0.0010 W-187 0.019 Te-132 0.060 1-130 0.0021 Total 5 approx 1-131 0.36 H-3 20° 1-132 0.060 0

Based on consolidated operating experience from several BWR's.

• --* ...... -.... .-- -~-*-* .. --*--*'"****-~h-.. ~----*--* -*- .. -,*

III-40 products. A simplified schematic of the various systems is shown in Figure III-18.

The primary source of gaseous radwaste will be the non-condensible gas~s removed from the main condenser by the air ejector. These gases consist of air which has leaked into the condenser, hydrogen and oxygen produced by the radiolytic decomposition of water, and very small volumes of radioactive gases (primarily krypton and xenon). Other sources include the non-condensible radioactive gases removed from the turbine gland seal condenser and the reactor, turbine, recombiner, and radwa:ste building ventilation systems, Potentially radioactive gases include the off-gas removed from the main condenser during startup by the mechanical vacuum pump, and the off-gas from purging the drywell and suppression chamber during shutdowns.

In each unit the gases removed from the main condenser by the air ejectors will be processed in a gas delay system consisting of:

a catalytic recombirier, a condenser which condenses the water- vapor

• and returns the water to the primary coolant system, a compressor and holdup pipe which permits the short-lived radioactive gases to decay, and a HEPA filter. The gases will be released to the atmosphere through the 500' main off-gas stack. In our evaluation we considered a 40 CFM condenser air inleakage which results in 56 hours6.481481e-4 days <br />0.0156 hours <br />9.259259e-5 weeks <br />2.1308e-5 months <br /> holdup, Primary system steam will be used in the turbine gland seal system; hence, the gases released from the turbine gland seal condenser can be radioactive. These* gases will be held up approximately 4.5 minutes before being exhausted into the off-gas stack without further treatment.

During unit startup, air and any radioactive gases present will be removed from the main condenser by a mechanical vacuum pump. This exhaust will enter the same 4.5-minute holdup pipe into which the turbine gland seal condenser exhausts. These gases will be released through themain off-gas stack without further treatment. Our calculations indicate that the quantity of gaseous releases from this source will be less than 1% of those in Table III-6.

The ventilation air from .the reactor, turbine,.and radwaste buildings will be discharged to the reactor building vent without treatment.

The ventilation air from potentially contaminated areas of these buildings and from the recombiner building will pass through a HEPA filter before entering the reactor building vent.

• I i

III-41 CONDENSER FROM MAIN C_ONDENSER 2-STAGE AIR CATALYTIC EJECTOR RECOMBINER COMPRESSORS MECHANICAL VACUUM PUMP 4.5-min "PRIMARY HOLDUP STEAM~ C. -PIPE FROM"~-~

~~:~~NE CONDENSER WASTE GAS SYSTEM- EACH UNIT r--

1 COMMON  :

TO BOTH I UNITS  :

II r:

I REACTOR BUILDING REFUELING 1

• 1, FLOOR f--'--ll---------~-+----,

r-~ 500-ft I I OFF-GAS I I STACK I l

~

15 ft ABOVE REACTOR BUILDING

_J TURBINE BUILDING POTENTIAL CONTAMINATION RADIOACTIVE WASTE BUILDING TO UNIT 2 VENT z

0

UNIT 0 REACTOR BUILDING VENT u~

TO UNIT 3 VENT P PREFILTER A HIGH-EFFICIENCY PARTICULATE FILTER C CHARCOAL ADSORBER VENTILATION SYSTEMS

-- NORMAL OPERATION

---

ABNORMAL OPERATION Fig. III-18. Gaseous radioactive waste treatment system for Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3.

III-42 Table.lII-6. Calculated releases of radioactive materials in gaseous effluents from Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 Gas release (Ci/year per unit) (

Nuclide Turbine and Air Air reactor Gland seal Total ejectora ejectorb buildings Kr-83m 15 86 2200 2300 Kr-85m 25 140 22 4000 4200 Kr-85 0.1 0.8 750 25 780 Kr-87 75 420 10,000 10,000 Kr-88 80 460 12,000 12,000 Kr-89 310 680 75 1100 Xe-13lm 0.1 0.7 570 20 590 Xe-133m 1.5 9.2 4500 30 4500.

Xc-133 44 260 190,000 7700 200.000 Xe-135m 130 640 6000 6800 Xe-135 120 740 11,000 21,000 33.000 Xe-137. 530 1400 380 2400 Xc-138 420 2000 21,000 23,000 Total 300,000 1-131 0.84

• 0.05 2.0 0.4 3.3 1-133 4.3 0.25 2.1) 2.0 8.6 aconsider~ 56 hr holdup time.

bco*nsiders 10 days/year with only 30-min holdup to account for recombiner system downtime.

III-43 The drywell and suppression chambers will be valved off during reactor operation. However, during shutdowns and -startups these areas will be purged, with the gases exhausting through the Standby Gas Treatment System, or to the reactor building vent if the activity is low. All the exhaust lines to the reactor building vent will be monitored. If the activity level of the exhaust from the reactor building or the drywell and suppression chamber exceeds* a preset value, the flow is directed to the Standby Gas Treatment System consisting of a prefilter, a HEPA filter, an activated charcoal adsorber, and another HEPA filter before entering the off-gas stack. Our analysis indicates that these sources are less than 1% of those listed in Table III-6.

Each of Units 2 and 3 has 'separate waste gas treatment and ventilation systems as shown in Figure IIl-18. However, the Standby Gas Treatment Systems are interconnected so they can accept inputs from either or both units. The station has one off-gas stack. The radwaste and recombiner buildings are common to both units, with the radwaste building discharging to No. 2 plant vent, and the recombiner building to No. 3_plant vent.

Table III-6 lists the results of our calculations of annual gaseous effluents which show a per unit annual release of 300,000 curies of noble gases. The applicant estimates about 150,000 Ci/yr. The table shows a per unit annual release of 3.3 curies of 1 131

• The applicant estimated a per unit annual release of 31.4 curies of 1 131

• The applicant's value _did not include credit for the recombiner which would reduce the iodine release to about 3.1 curies per year.

c. Solid Radwaste System The Solid Radwaste System is an integral part of the Liquid Radwaste System. The system will pr.ocess wet and dry solid wastes but will not include spent fuel storage and shipment.

Because of physical differences and differences in radioactivity or contamination levels, various methods will be employed for processing and packaging the solid radwastes. Wet wastes will be dewatered and dry wastes compacted to reduce free volume. rhe wastes will then be packaged in 55 gallon steel drums, or other approved shipping containers, as 'applicable. Each type of waste will be kept segregated to reduce shielding requirements during storage and shipping.

• Shielded areas will be provided for drum processing and temporary storage. Wet pastes will be drummed semi-remotely to ~educe radiation exposure to personnel. Wash-down facilities with .floor drain return to the Liquid Radwaste System will be provided.

III-44 Wet solid radwastes result from the processing of spent demineralizer resins (both bead and powdered) and spent filter material from the Equipment Drain and Floor Drain' subsystems, and from the three (reactor, condensate, and fuel pool) water cleanup systems. The wastes will be collected in the four Backwash Receiving Tanks or in the waste sludge tanks. The slurry collected in the Backwash Receiving Tanks will be pumped on a bat ch basis to* one of the corresponding* Phase Separators, The slurry will be pumped from either the phase separators or the waste sludge. tank *to the centrifuges. The centrifuge supernatant .will flow by gravity to the Waste Collector Tank. The dewatered solid material will be discharged to a hopper below eachI centrifuge. When*

full, the drum will be moved to the capping station for remote lid placement . *

• Drums will be decontaminated, and moved by the conveyor system to the .

shielded temporary storage area.

Dry wastes, generated as a result of operation and maintenance activities, will be collected throughout the plant facility. Typical wastes of this type are air filters, cleaning rags, protective tape, paper and plastic coverings, discarded contaminated clothing, tools, and equipment parts, and solid laboratory wastes. Use will be made of decay time before packaging and/or removal to either temporary inplant storage or offsite disposal.

Most wastes will be of relatively low radioactivity, and collected in fiber drums, cartons, or boxes. Compressible wastes will be compacted in 55 gallon steel drums by a hydraulic press. All solid wastes will be packaged and shipped to a licensed burial ground in accordance with AEC and Department of Transportation regulations.

We anticipate annual shipments of 700 drums of resins and filter material, and 450 drums of dry and compacted waste per year for each unit.

3. Chemical and Sanitary Wastes

a. Chemical Wastes Operation of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 will produce chemical wastes that will be discharged into the environment. The two major chemical wastes will be sodium sulfate, which will be produced from regeneration

,........_---~--------*-~------~=--**-a-*--*-*-------

III-45

• of ion exchange resins in the makeup water demineralizer system, and chlorine compounds in the once-through cooling water. Additional residual chlorine will be present in the effluent from the sewage treatment plant.

• Small amounts of phosphate will be present in laundry wastes and from auxiliary boiler water disposal.

Sodium hydroxide and sulfuric acid will be used to regenerate the anion and cation exchange resins in the*makeup water demineralizer system. The waste liquid from this process will contain sodium sulfate. The ion exchange resins are to be recharged twice each day, and the resulting sodium sulfate solution discharged intci a settling basin. According to the applicant, 6 there will be a re-tention time of 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> in the settling basin at an overflow rate of 93.5 gal/min. This overflow from.the settling basin will go directly into the condenser circulating water discharge canal and then into Conowingo Pond; Because the ion exchange resins are regenerated twice a day, the concentration of sodium sulfate reaching the discharge canal will vary. The maximum concentration can be-computed from*data in the applicant's Environmental Report: 6 894 lb/ day Na.2S04 is produced, 7500 gal/day anion regeneration liquid-waste, 15,000 gal/day cation regeneration liquid waste, 13,000 gal/day raw water filter backwash, 35,700 gal/day total, 93.5 gal/min outflow from settling basin, 3350 cfs (18 x 10 9 lb/day) circulating water flow, (894) (93.5)/35,700 =* 2.34 lb Na2S04 per minute, will*leave the settling tank by means of the overflow.

the maximum concentration (2.34 lb/min)(l440

....:.....---,.,..:....-__:.__;_.____min/day)

_..c---___,,-'--____ = 0.2 ppm= of Na2S04 that will be in 18 x 109 lbs circulating water/d-;;_y the discharge canal.

The average concentration of Na2S04 in the discharge canal as calculated by the applicant will be 894 lb/day Na2S04 =

• 18 x 10~a lb circulating water ; *day 0.05 ppm.

III-46 The circulating (condenser cooling) water *and the service water will be treated with elemental chlorine. 1 ,6 , 9 .,...i 1 E*ach condenser will be divided into three sections and each section will be chlo-rinated for 20 min three times per day. The amount of chlorine to be added to the circulating water is to be determined by the con-centration of chlorine at the discharge side of the particular

• section of condenser being treated. The applicant has stated6 that the concentration of free residual chlorine in the effluent from the .discharge side is to be maintained at 0.5 ppm. The maxi-mum initial concentration of chlorine at the input side is expected to be 5 ppm. *The maximum rate of. chlorination of the circulating water and service water is expected to consume 3840 lb of* chlorine per day. At the maximum chlorination rate, about 210 lb of chlorine for each condenser section for each treatment per day will be used.

The expected normal consumption will require a 2-ppm! input concen-tration of chlorine, giving a daily consumption of approximately 1530 lb.

In describi~g the chlorination procedure, the applicant has dealt only with free residual chlorine which consists of hypochlorous acid (HOCl) and hypochlorite ion (OCl-). These chemical species along with chloride ions (Cl-) are products of the hydrolysis of elemental chlorine. The HOCl and OCl- in turn react with nitro-genous materials in water.to give compounds known as chloramines which are also toxic to aquatic organisms. Thus at the maximum rate of chlorination, 1920 lb/day of chloride ion and 1920 lb/day o~ chlorine as HOCl, OCl-, and chloramines are discharged into Conowingo Pond. A 0.5-ppm concentration of free residual chlorine in the discharge could well mean a total toxic chlorine concentra-tion of over 1 ppm. A brief surrnnary of the chemistry'of chlorine in fresh water is given in Appendix J.

• The staff believes that a significant reduction should be made in the proposed chlorination schedule. At Indian Point, 12 chlorination will be carried out with a 15% solution of NaOCl added at a rate of 7. 3 lb /min for 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> three times per week. This is equivale~t to 625 lb of chlorine per week; normalized to the condenser through-put at Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3, the quantity of chlorine is 826 lb per week. The staff r*ecommends that, under a revised chlorina-tion schedule, the total residual chlorine concentration in the con-denser discharge (prior to entry into the discharge pond) be limited to a maximum of 0.1 ppm and that the period of chlorine addition to a condenser stream be limited to one hour per day.

III-47 The applicant has considered the use of rubber balls (Amertap System) to clean condenser tubes as ,an alternative to chlorina-tion of* the condenser cc:iolirig water.1,6,9 The method waei tried in an installation in an existing plant; however, the applicant decided the economic benefits of the method. did not justify the cost. The staff recommends that the applicant reconsider mechanical cleaning alternatives in view of chlorination schedule revisions discussed above.

Trisodium phosphate and sodium sulfite will be used as scale pre-ventatives in the auxiliary boiler used for plant heat,ing. l ,6 The concen~rations of these chemicals will be kept at from 2 to iO ppin as P04::: and S03 =. The blowdown from* the boiler will be at a* rate of* 50 to 100 lb of water per hour and will flow into. the settling basin~ The maximum discharge into the settling basin will be

• 17 ppm/hr or about O ~002 lb/hr of N,a 3Po 4 and 16 ppm/hr or about 0.002 lb/hr NAzS0 3

• The concentration of these chemicals in the circulating water discharge canal from this source wiil be negli-gible (<10-5 ppm). The evaluation of chemical effiuents from Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 is made on the basis _that trisodium phos-phate and *sodium sulfite will be the only corrosion and scale inhibitors used.

Operation of the station's auxiliary boilers wiil consume a maximum

.of 5 ~5 gal/min of low-sulfur, residual fuel oil.* At this rate* of fuel consumption, 33 lb/hr of sul:fut oxides will be produced. 9 The applicant expects to consume 510,000 gal of fuel oil per year at' normal burning rates producing about 50,000 lb/yr of sulfur oxides.

Ten gallons per week of chemical waste from laboratory drains in the water treatment plant will be checked for pH, neutralized if necessary, and then discharged into Coriowingo Pond. The applicant states 10 that he is unable to define the composition of this waste other than to say it will contain a variety of chemicals_ used in the analysis of water.

Non-radioactive lubricating oil wastes from service equipment will be collected in tanks or drums for pickup and disposal by an outside contractor.

Sludges from the settling basin will be disposed of at a suitable lo.cation on site.

III-48 Table III-7 lists the principal chemical .eff.luents and Table III-8 gives a summary of the* water quality at Ho1.twood and C~nowingo Dams.

The concentrations of dissolved fons are well below toxic limits; therefore, the staff expects no unusual* chemic~l effects on biota from ions already in the pond.

b. Sanitary Wastes A new sewage treatment plant has been construct_ed at the site. It is designed to treat wastes that would produce 15,000 gal/day of /

effluent; h<Mever, during routine operation of the nuclear station,

. a volume of 1800 gal/day is expected. The treatment. facility is an extended aeration type with sludge settling and chlorination facilities. The. final liquid effluent from the plant will contain a maximum concentration of 1 ppm free residual chiorine. The liquid will be discharged to the circulating water discharge canal, from which it will flow into Conowingo Pond *

. c. Laundry Wastes This l_iquid effluent .will primarily be treated as a radioactive liquid waste. That is, the waste will be collected in one of two 1000-gal tanks, processed by transferral to the second lOOO~gal tank through a filter, checked for activity, and reprocessed again if necessary. The liquid waste will then be discharged into the circulating water canal. The expected volUII!e of tp.is waste is 900 gal/day under normal conditions and up to 1800 gal/day under maximum use.

III-49.

Table 111-7. Principal chemical efll_uents of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 Conc~ntration Source entering Frequency Quantity Conowingo Pond Circulating water system; .;;;0.5 ppm 20 min; three times 3840 lb/day ofCl2 (max) chlorine added as Cl2 . per day Unidentified chemical IO gal/wk waste from water treatment plant Auxiliary boilers Na3P04. <3 X 10-6 ppm 50 to 100 lb/hr of 0.002 lb/hr Na2S03 <3 X 10-6 ppm

• boiler water 0.002 lb/hr Auxiliary boilers S0 2 produced from 33 lb/hr (max) of low-sulfur fuel oil sulfur oxides from consµltlption of 510,000 gal/year Laundry P0 4 Makeup water demineralizer 0.2 ppm max Na2S04; Twice .each day (NaOH and H2S04) 0.05 !)pm (daily average)

Sewage treatment, NaOCI ,;;; I ppm of free residual chlorine 1800 gal/day

III-50*

Table 111-8. Summary of the water quality of the Susquehanna River0 Parametei Holtwood Dam Conowingo Dain Period 1960-1972 1960-1972

• Temp. (°C), max-min 29-0 30-0 pH, max-min 8-6 8-6.5 DO, max-min (ppmf BOD (5 day), max-min (ppm) 4.4-0 4.4-0 HC03- 69-49 P043- 1.1-0.06 1.1-0.09 Ca2+ 49-21 Mg2+ 18-7.2 Na+ 17-8.0 17-9 K+. 3.3-2.1 3.3-2.2 c1- '

22-10 22-10 S04 2+ 205-70 205-70 Fe2+ 0.6-0.2 Mn2+ 0.4-0.2 Cu2+ 0.07-0.02 0.03-0.01 Zn2+ 0.05-0.03 0.04-0.02 Cd2+ 0.02-0.01 0.02-0.01 Pb2+ 0.04-0.0.2 0.03-0.02 0

Data supplied by STORET Program, Region llI of EPA ...

bConcentrations (ppm) of the ion species are the maximum and mean values found during the given period.

cRanges from 9.2 to 3.8 in Conowingo.Pond 13

ur.:..51 REFERENCES FOR SECTION III 1.* Environmental Report, Operating License* Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station; Units 2 and 3, Suppieme])t No. 2, Philadelphia Electric Company, May 1972. . .

2. Environmental Report, Operating *.License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and, 3, Supplement No *. 1*, Parts 1 and 2, ,Philadelphia .Electric Company; November 8, 1971.

I

)

3. *Environmental Criteria for Electric Transmission Systems, Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C.

4. Environmental Report (Revised), Construction Permit Stage, Limerick Generating Station, Units .1 and 2, Philadelphia Electric Company, May 1972.

5 *. S. Moyer.and E. C. Raney, Thermal Discharges from a Large Nuclear: Plant, J. Sa:nita:r'y Eng. Div., SA 6: 1131 (1969),

6. Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peacl:t Bottom Atomic.Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Philadelphia Electric Company, July 1971.

7. J.E. Edinger and J, C. Geyer, Heat Exchange in the Environment, Department of Sanitary Engineering and Water Resources, The

• Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, June 1965 (available as.Edison Electric Institute Publication No.65-902).

8. P, J, Ryan an~- K, D, Stolzenbach, Chapter 1: "Environmental Heat Transfer," Engineering Aspeats of Heat Disposal from Power Generation, (D.R,F. Harleman, ed,), B. M. Parsons Laboratory for Water Resources and Hydrodyn~ics, Department of Civil Engineering, M.I.T., Cambridge, Massachusetts, June 1972.

9. Environmental Report, Operating Liqmse Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement No. 3, Philadelphia Electric Company, June 1972.

10. Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement No. 4, Philadelphia Electric Company, July 1972.

III-52

11. Environmental Report,- .Operating License Stage, .Pea<<!h Eottom Atomic Power Station, Units* 2.and 3,.Supplement No. 5, Philadelphia Electric Comp~ny, July 1972.

12. Draft Detailed Statement on *the Environmental Considerations Related to the Proposed Issuance of an Operating License to the Consolidated Edison Company of New York for the Indian Point Unit No. 2 Nuclear Generating Plant, Docket No. 50-247, USAEC; Division of Radiological*and Environmental Protection, April 13, 1972.

13. M. S. Topping, Limnological data for Conowingo .Reservoir, Muddy Run Pumped Storage Reservoir, and the Recreation Lake, 1970, Ie:thyologica.Z Associates Data BepoPt No. 7, 1971.

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL. IMP.ACT OF SITE PREPARATION AND.PLANT CONSTRUCTION Construction of _Peach Bottom Unit 2 is 80% complete and Unit 3 is 50% (overall 65% complete) as of May 1972. The applicant states that fuel will be available for loading which is now planned for about March 1973 for Unit 2 and March 1974 for Unit 3. Connnercial operation is scheduled for September 1973 for Unit 2 and September 1974 for Unit 3.

Of the total construction force of 3,500, the applicant estimates that some 2,800 workers with a family total of about.5,600 were introduced to the general area several years ago. Public facilities including housing, schools, churches, and merchants have been able to satisfy their needs and no serious difficulties are currently known to exist. Automobile traffic of construction workers is quite heavy in the gener_al area at various times.

Staggered shifts have minimized traffic congestion.

There will be an economic impact upon the general area during the closing phases of the constructio~ period when the plant operating force is reduced to, and stabilized at, about 150 operating.people (family total about 500). The economic change will be somewhat gradual since Unit 2 will be completed in 1973 and Unit '3 will be completed in 1974. The staff estimates that the net_change in the economic situation at the end of construction will be a slight increase in the regional income over the pr~construction status as a result of operational activities and recreational usage, but the situation will probably be close to that of the preconstruc-tion connnunity.

Inspection of the site shows that steps have been taken to control erosion, dust, trash, and construction waste. Solid waste is being trucked off-site for disposal. Sewage is treated by a contact sta-bilization process and discharged to Conowingo Pond. The construc-tion program has not_, therefore, done significant damage to the iand area, and all effects should disappear at the con~lusion of the construction program in 1974.

Noise levels from construction.are not noticeable from the land-ward side of the plant because of the screening effect of hills, and levels on the opposite side of the pond are barely noticeable.

Noise levels may be objectionable tc:.i some river traffic.

IV-1

V. . ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACTS OF PLANT OPERATION A. LAND USE The modem design of the Peach Bottom Statio.n contrasts strongly with the quiet rural surrotmdings and may be considered objection-*

able by some perso;ns. However, exce.pt for the tall stack, the station . can b~

• seen only from across th.e pond; . efforts have been made to minimize the impact (Sect~, III.A),

The noise levels from the mechanical draft cooling towers and the 500-kV transformers are typicaliy on the order of 65 to 75 db(A)*

at 100 ft from the base of a tower or transforner (equivalent to a noisy city street).* These noise levels may affect the enjoyment of fishing near' the. plant site. .

There are 34 residences, including summer cottages, within.3100 ft of the transformers; noise levels at all houses would pe within ,the

."NorII!B-llY Acceptable" Guideline for N*on'.'"Aircraft Noise set by the Department of Housing Urban and .Development. 1 There are no schools or .hospitais in the area.. *

• Approximately 100 acres* of the 620-acre site will be occupied by site structures,. roads, etc. Another 1030 acres will be used as.

transmission line corridors. A very small fraction of the ;trans-mission right-of-way (tower bases) will be. removed from its present use. The impact of the loss of. this amotm t of farml~d and wildlife habi.tat should be negligible .when compared to that available in the site vicinity. The applicant has a policy of leasing parcels of right-of-way fo*r recreational or commtmity uses, thus decreasing the impact on land use~ The site proper (620 acres).will be closed to htmting. A visitors' center on-site is open to the public**and is.* reported to be. heavily used.

Approximately 100 aGres o.f the. surface area of Conowingo Pond has been enclosed or filled in as .a result of construction. An estimated 40 acres has been totally fill~d. 'Ih.e fill material was obtained by olasting 111aterial from the rock cliff area immediately behind the reactor buildings, Water access to Rock Rtm Creek from Conciwingo Pond has been eliminated, and the creek channel has been.altered in several places, Although most of the water* area ('u60 acres) has been retained, a large fraction will be exposed directly to the plant

• Sotmd pressure level in decibels,

. V-1

V-2 effluents. Substantial alterations in the biological communities are to be expected. The enclosed and filled areas and Rock Run Creek EaY have be.en impurtant. spawning areas for many fishes. Thus, the loss of 100 acres of Gonowiugo Pond, al:though small in relation to the total surface area (9000 acres), may actually result in a bio-logical. .impact disproporti,onately greater than size alone might indicate. *

.B. WATER USE Evaporative loss from the pond and towers (<55 cfs) will be an ins:ignif:icant fraction (<0.2'%) of the average pond flow. Thermal dis*charge to Con:owingo Pond will be larg,e. If pr,esently planned

• onc,e-through cooling is used in the nuclear plant, it is unlikely that any additional thermal commitment. *(Le., industrial or power plant *operations) could be sustained by the pond. If the thermal di:s*charge increases the proportion of blue-green algae in Conowingo Pond, some impact on the use of pond water for drinking purposes

may be expect,ed. In addition to pr.oducing objectionable tastes and odors, some species of blue-green algae are extremely toxic to man and his livestock under certain conditions.2,3

'The planned discharges of ra-di.oactive, chemical, and sanitary wastes ar.e sufficiently small and dilute so that we :expect no significant.*

• effect upon present. or. projected water use, except for the potential bi,olo,gical impact of chlorine .discussed in Section V. C below.

Increased turbi.dity which* would result from scouring of the bottom of the pond by the discharge canal is expected to be temporary and

• should diminish with the redistribution of bottom silt.

No radioactive contamination of pond water is anticipated from either routine station operations or from 'non-routi_ne occurrences.

• C. BIOLOGICAL IMPACT

.Staff evaluation of the probable biological effects of the operation of the Peach Bottom facility is based on an analysis of the available inf.onnation from three sources: field studies at other steam elec-tric stations, laboratory and. field* invest:igations of the biological effects of p.lant effluents, and the information from the Peach Bottom

.ecologi.cal .studies.

V-3 The ana1ysis is divided irito two sections: Section V.C.l identifies

.and evaluates the factors that may result in biological. damage :from the operation of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3.Section V.C.2 appli*e.s the important fact:ors identified in Sect. V. C.l t:o th._e biological co:mmunit:y at P1=ach Bottom. App,endix K discusses tile pot,ential.

impact of , once-through cooling syst:,e1DS.

a. , Thermal Discharges

.As described in :Secti,on III.D.l, .large amounts *of heat w:ill ib,e dis-charged to Conowin;go Pon:d :during pl.ant op.era ti:cms * :S,ome pimhlisn:eid upper critical temperatur,es for spe,cies fotmd in :the pond are given in 'Table K-1:, Appendix K. During peri,ocls when ambient water temperatures are *ab:out '85"F, lllany ,of these ,organisms wiLll be l:htlm,g rrear their upper

• limits and :pr,oibably above their thermal ram,g,e ,of imetcrbolic :ins.ens iti. vi ty (Appen*dix K)

• A1llrliti*oas of ].ar;ge rquamti -

ties *of heat to Conowin;go Pond a1t these times *could .oonoei.v.ably result in profound changes 'in the b:iol't:iLc ,commw:ity. :Siaoo *ch:an,ges might not be :readily apparent, espe,eially i:lf :they :invo'lve plank-tonic microc*rustaceansor algae. However,, secondary effects Ji:rollll such changes could be extensive.

The Pennsylvania regulations, in part, .limit the warer te,IIJ>e-rat*ure to 87°F. The applicant sta:t,es that the temperaturse o.f £he h:eatei:'l effluent will not exceed 98"F at the poin,t of discharge. .At :i:n'takie temperatures between 77"F (lff = 21F") and 185°:F {l'i.T =, 13F"), ty;> to 18,400 cfs of pond water and the organisms thene+/-n will he exposed to temperatures in excess of. 87"F as a result of mixing with !:he thermal discharge (assuming no heat loss to the atmosph:ere). iSincce planktonic organisms may pass through the area *m:r.re than once'° .thei-r chance of exposure to temperatures in :excess of '87'"F .is in c([!~as.e-d, 1

but will vary with the river flow p.ast the plant.

The duration of such exposure is very important :in determining possible effects on organisms. Once the thermal pl-ume rieaC:hes the surface, the rate of mixing will rapidly decrease,. The dura:tioa of exposure to the increased temperature :can be roughly estimate*d from the configuration of the thermal plume and the flow ra!tes in Conowingo Pond. Preliminary calculations indicate that elevated temperatures could last several hours. In view of the low tole*ir.an:ce of many of the species to increases in temp-erature* and the high

V-4 probability of exposure to. elevated temperatures, some thermal effects are anticipated *

.Exposure times for thermal shocks of various magnitudes which are expected to produce~ mortalities among Conowingo Pond fishes are shown in Table V-1. These values were calculated from data supplied by Coutant. 4 *Briefly, safe exposure times of fish exposed to thermal shock may be described according to the following relationship:

log survival time = A + B (T, + LiT)

A,B = constants obtained from data in the literature by Coutant. 4 T = ambient temperature (acclimation temperature), (°C)

LiT = the temperature elev~tion (°C) + 2C 0 (safety factor)

The equations derived from research on thermal tolerance predict

• 50% mortality, and the established threshold temperatures re.fleet this degree of mortality; an- added safety factor is needed to assure no mortalities. Severalstudies have indicated that reduction of the upper temperature threshol.d by 2C 0 (3.5F 0 ) results in no.mor-talities within an equival,ent duration. of exposure. 1 5 Whenever the actual exposure time exceeds the value shown in Table V-1, mortalities will occur; when the value is exceeded by a considerab).e

• margin, an order of magnitude or more, mortalities will be severe, Most fish will _avoid the unfavorable areas of the thermal plume, but some fish may encounter these areas by accident, In addition, survivors o~ entrainment will receive an extended exposure to.higher temperatures, especially if they have been stunned by the initial shock. It i~_therefore important to have these data in order to estimate the impact of the therma~. plume.

Another aspect of exposure to the thermal discharge will occur in the winter. As water temperatures drop in the fall, fish will be attracted to the plume and the discharge canal, Since water veloc-ities at the exit to the discharge canal are fairly. high (5 to 8 fps), only relatively large fishes will be able to enter the canal proper. This category includes the desirable sizes (from a sport fisherman's standpoint) of the Conowingo Pond game fishes, except for the channel catfish.

If the.density of fishes in the plume and discharge canal does not exceed the carrying capacity of the area, a beneficial effect of

-~--**-----* ____  ; --*--,.-*~---...-----**---*-------------*

V-5 Table V-1. Exposure times at different levels of thermal shock expected to 11roduce no mortalities of Conowir_igo Pond fish s ~ 14 Ambient L1T Species0 temperature 21°F 13°.F 5°F oc . OF 01. 1°c) (7 .2°C) (2.8°C)

Esox masquinongy Uuvenile) 25 77 1.8 sec JOO min 16 day 30 86 0.4 sec 51 sec 2 hr Catostomus commersoni 15 59 29 hr Nb N 20 68 51 sec . 45 hr N 25 77 0.8 sec 5.5 min 56 hr Ictalurus nebulosus 15 59 44 day N N 25 77 2.5 min 13 hr N 30 86 I. 7 sec 10 min 73 hr Ictalurus punctatus Adults 15 59 18 day N N 20 68 62 min N N 25 77 0.02 sec 2 hr N Juveniles 25 77 5.2 min 24 day N 30 86 0.9 sec 35,miri N Lepomis macrochirus 25 77 5.8 sec 19 hr N 30 86 0.04 sec 1.4 min 57 hr Micropterus salmoides Adults 20 68 48 min N N 25 77 1.2 min 13 hr N 30 86 0.045 sec 10 min 10 day Juveniles 30 86 0.03 sec 3.5 min . 26 day Perea flavescens Adults 15 59 104 min 66 hr 113 day 20 68 6.6 min 13 hr N 25 77 1.8 sec 11 min 79 hr Juveniles 19 66 84 min 87 hr N

°For common names, see Appendix H.

bN = No detectable acute effects.

~---*----..,.,,,.._____ ...,._**-- *--.........

. . ~ "' ._ - -. .. ~--*-***'- ~~..-.--->.~-* - - ,,.,,.. ,*.~, .*. , . ..,___ .~.,......,...., **--*-* *~-*****-~*"""*"-*-,.><u..,-*-**.-*~,.._,,., **--* *.*. ,,_.,.., .. ,..,,..,._~ ......-, .... ~. **-* *.. "'-.*~* --- .

V-6 the .plant would be increased growth during the colder months. How-ever, since this area will be the most desirable from a thermal standpoint for all the fishes of Conowingo Pond during mid-winter, overcrowding is a possibility. Unless food production is markedly increased, loss of condition or starvation would result. The higher water temperatures in this area will stimulate both benthic and planktonic metabolic rates, but unless adequate light and nutrients are ctva:i.lable for* primary producers*, sufficient increased food production will not be realized. Any attempt to claim bene-ficial effects for the thermally altered area during the colder months is purely speculative. Confirmation or denial of such an effect must 'await measurements made after the pla:nt is in operation.

Available evidence is simply not adequate at the present time.

If plant operations are suddenly interrupted in mid-winter, fisres residing in the plume and discharge canal will be subjected to negative thermal shocks. When ambient temperatures are close to the freezing point of water, the effects are as severe.as those that result when fishes are placed at the upper limits of their thermal tolerance. Severe mortalities of -fish and invertebrates result (discussed in Appendix K). Since frequent shutdowns of power stations are expected during initial operation and less frequent but, nonetheless, possible interruptions occur thereafter, the potential for massive kills will always exist with the once-through cooling system.

b. Entrainment Large numbers of planktonic organisms will pass through the conden-sers during plant operation.

• These organisms will include bacteria~

phytoplankton, zooplankton, and immature fishes. During their passage through the plant, these organisms will be exposed to mechanical, thermal, and chemical damage. High mortality may result, especially for fragile species or during periods of chlori-nation. During periods of low flow, the withdrawal of water and associated organisms may be considerably greater. than the flow past the plant.

Determination.of the exposure times for entrained biota at a given level of-thermal shock is somewhat complicated. At ambient water temperatures up to 77°F (25°C), all entrained organisms will be exposed to a ~T of 21F 0 (ll.6C 0 ) for 63 minutes. At an intake temperature of 85°F (29.4°C), 43% of the cooling ;,.ater wi:J._l bypass

V-7 the cooling towers, receive an initial-AT of 21F 0 for approximately 11 minutes, .then* 111ix with* the. cooling tower effluents* to produce a residual l:,.T of 13F0 -(7.2C 0 ) over a period of 51 minutes. Meanwhile, 57% of the cooling water flow is diverted.through the cooling towers.

The water reaching the first, second, and* third cooling towers .. re-ceives exposures of *21F 0 for periods of 26 ,: 42 ,: and 59 111.inutes, respectively. During the 2.5-minute transit in the cooling towers, the llT falls from 21F 0 to 9F 0 (5C 0 ) . The cooling tower effluents then mix with the water in the discharge canal to produce the residual fiT _of 13F 0 over a period of 30 to 51-minutes, depending on ,the location of the cooling tower (see Fig. III-9 and Table III-1)~

An additional 96 cfs (3% of the flow) will be withdrawn from the discharge canal and will receive an additional 2.5-minute exposure to a llT of 21F 0 in the cooling system of Peach Bottom Un:L°t 1 (the effective* llT resulting from this

• exposure could be* 42F 0 ) . The cooling water from Unit 1 will then be returned to the discharge canal. Additional expdsures to the eievatedtemperatures in the thermal plume (after discharge) will enhance the adverse effects of entrainment. This occurs because the effects of thermal shock are cumulative, and entrained biota will be exposed in the plume for a considerable period of time, even though the llT will steadily decrease during-that period.

Calculations of the safe exposure times for fishes in response to a thermal shock were shown in Table V-1. The data clearly show that when ambient. temperatures exceed.25°C *(77°F),*mortality from the present cooling system will be essentially complete from thermal shock alone. Several species would suffer similar losses at temperatures above 20°C (68°F).* Fishes in the fraction of water diverted through the cooling towers would suffer complete mortality from mechanical damage, even if no thermal shock were admiriistered.

• Effects *on plankton organisms likewise are highly species-specific, albeit very difficult to determine. Among the zooplankton, certain species of Daphnia, particularly Daphnia Zongirerrris, a northern, cold-water form, would be expected to be most sens.itive to thermal shock. 15 *

• The effects of thermal shock on some of the Conowingo Pond zooplank-ton speciesl6 are shown in Table V-2. It should be noted that a considerable lag occurs between the time the shock is administered

V-8 Table V-2. Cumulative mortality of Conowingo Pond zooplankton after exposure to a temperature rise of 1SF0 (8.3C0 ) for S min Acclimation Time after Mortality (%)

Species temperature exposure (hr) Untreated Heat shocked Daphnia retrocurva 70°F (21 °C) 53 48 100 80°F (26.6°C) 51 34 92 Diaphanosoma leuchtenbergianum 70°F 54 40 97 80°F 51 33 96 Cyclopoid copepods0 70°F 126 17 28 80°F. 122 5 18 0 A mixture of Mesocyclops edax and Cyclops vernalis; the experimeQts were not carried beyond the times shown.

V-9 and the time the effect becomes measurable: sampling between the intake and discharge would not detect these differences (for a short entrainment time). The longer exposure times in the cooling system of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 would produce a much more rapid onset of mortality and a greater relative mortality in shocked zooplankton. Mechanical damage in cooling towers should result in severe mortality.

Large numbers of fish impinged on the intake screens at* Indian Point. 1 7 While there are substantial differences between the situation at Peach Bottom and that at Indian Point, comparisons indicate the possibility that significant impingement may occur at Peach Bottom. Although the approach velocity to the intake screens is lower at Peach Bottom than at Indian Point (0.75 fps vs.

0.9 fps), the cooling water flow is 25% greater at Peach Bottom (3350 cfs vs. 2675 cfs). Additionally, data obtained by the applicant's consultants 1a- 22 provide the following information:

(1) Swim speeds of fish vary markedly from one individual (same species and size) to the next (as ,does athletic ability among humans).

(2) Maximum speeds of fish are controlled by water temperature.

Swimming ability is reduced somewhat at very high temperatures but considerably reduced at very low temperatures.

(3) Swim speeds depend (as expected) *on the size of the fish.

(4) Young-of-the-year and yearling white crappie are not con-sistently able to swim against the intake velocities expected at Peach Bottom; particularly at the low water temperatures expected in wintertime (when largest impingement losses occurred at Indian Point).

• (5) The white crappie is probably a weaker swimmer 'than the white perch that figured so prominently in fish kills at Indian Point.

(6) Young-of-the-year and yearling channel catfish are not consistently able to maintain themselve*s against the Peach Bottom intake gradient during very low wintertime water temperatures.

V-10

c. Dissolved Oxygen The precise effect on dissolved oxygen level~ will have to be mea-sured. once the *plant* goes into operation. Based on previous experi-ence at other plants, the overall impact on. dissolved oxygen levels should be slight, except when the cooling towers are being used.

At times when the cooling towers are in operation (late summer and early autumn), an increase in dissolved oxygen levels should result, but perhaps only of limited extent and duration.

Dissolved oxygen levels in Conowingo Pond are usually well below saturation values during most .of the year. However, levels rarely fall below* 4 to 5 ppm (sunnner) . 23 ' 24 'Such concentrations are com..:.

patible with the. existenc*e of a diverse fish fauna, including valu-able* food and game species. Despite this,. the available data 25 on the effects of dissolved oxygen on fishes indicate that there is no absolutely safe "minimum" value *. Reduction of oxygen content to any level below saturation will produce some adverse effects on reproduction or growth of fishes. It is therefore desirable .to maintain dissolved oxygen levels as near to the saturation level as possible. Any significant additional re-aeration provided by

• the cooling towers could benefit the Conqwingo Pond biota, partic~

ularly _during periods of low natural water flow. Unfortunately, losses of entrained biota in cooling towers should far outweigh this benefit.

d. Chemical Discharges Many of the chemicais that will.be released during plant operations are toxic to aquatic organisms (Appendix K). The magnitude of the response.of the biota to toxic chemicals depends on the concen-trat.ion of the chemical, the duration of exposure, and variations in species sensitivity.

Only two compounds a*ppear to be of consequence in the chemical discl:iarge - sodium sulfate and res.idual chlorine. The concentration of sodium sulfate *at the point of discharge from the settling basin will be 2500 ppm. After dilution with cooling water. in the discharge canal, _this concentration will be reduced to 0.2 ppm .. The concen-tratiori at the point of discharge from the settling basin should be rapidly reduced to non-toxic levels by mixing with the cooling water flow. The concentration at the end of the discharge canal, 0.2 ppm, is several orders of magnitude lower than the natural con-centration in Pond water.

--*------~-- *------- - - -

V-11 The applicant's proposed chlorination schedule and the staff's reconnnended revision of this schedule were discussed in Section III.D.3,a, A stmnna-ry of chlorine toxicity data 26 "::4- 4 on aquatic life, mostly fresh water fish, is presented in Fig. V-1 and Table V-3.

• The applicant's proposed initial chlorine concentration of 2 to 5 ppm would be lethal to -most entrained organisms. The residual level contemplated would likewise be toxic to some organisms upon exposures of 10 minutes or longer, The-limitations on chlorination

• reconnnended by the staff (Section III.D.3,a} would greatly reduce the-biological impact of chlorine treatment. Replacement of.

chlorination by mechanical cleaning methods would, of course, eliminate this source of biological impact. *

e.

• Radioactive Discharges The impact of radioactive discharges on the aquatic ecosystem is considered in Secti~n V.D.4. *

2. Extent of Impacts The operation of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 should have only a slight impact on the terrestrial biota off the site. On site, permanent alteration of the habitat has occurred as a result of blasting, filling, and construction of the reactor buildings, Serious detrimental impacts are not expected, because the terres-trial biota of the area consists of forins. tolerant of human intrusion, The primary impact of the operation of the facility will be associ-ated with the aquatic environment~ Several significant problems have been perceived, and some plausible consequences of operation are described in this section. Background material for the conclu-sions stated in this section may be found in other sections of this statement.

Anqlysis indicates that significant changes could occur in the phytoplankton conununity as a result of plant operations. However, quantitative assessment of the magnitude of the possible changes or the probability of their occurrence is not possible with the available information. Information related to the operation of other power plants indicates that the assimilative capacity of

7 41 39 16 8 38 46 21 17 28

" 18

¥

" "* 23 4i2 43

"' 33

.5 10-t l - - - - - - " - ' - - , - , - - - - - - - , 1 - - ~ - - - - - - 1--'----- 29 - - -

34 30 25 o2 '- 14,22

~ °"

19

~ ' & 10 5 _24

.26

-~ ~'-7°-?

~ ~('

8 /;,j. '-ov.

UJ - \ " -?...,)'

~.*

2 ~~&"\,"O,i, a: IS'o ,

31 g ~" I G10- 2

~ '

,___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __,___ _ _ _........_.._ _ _ ____,__ _ _ _ _ _ _ 12 *3

<t 0

iii UJ a:

---

4 CHRONIC TOXICITY THRESHOLO ~

,o-3 .____~-'-----'--L--L...JL....J....l--'--_,____,,~L-.l.--1-...L..........___,_--L---~

. 1

• 2 :1

,11111 4 I I I IuJ1os 10 10 10 40 EXPOSURE TIME (min)

Fig. V-1. Summary of data on toxicity of residual chlorine.

Key is on Table V-3.

V-13 Table V-3. Key to Fig. v,1. Exposures of aquatic organisms to total residual chlorine.

All concentrations were measured. -

Species No. Effect endp~inta Reference*

Protozoa 1 Lethal 34 Cladoceran 2 Lethal (4 days) 30 Scud 3 Safe concentration 27 4 Safe con1,entration 26 Trout fry 5 Lethal (2 days) 31 6 Lethal (instantly) 31 Brook trout 7 Median mortality (90_ min) - 37 8 Mean survival time (8. 7 hr) 32 9 Mean survival time (14.1 hr) 32 10 Mean survivai time (20.9 hr) 32 II Mean sQrvival -time (24 hr) 32 12 67% lethability (4 days) - 32 13 Depressed activity. 32 14 7-day TL50a 27 44 Not found in streams 41 Brown trout 45 Not found-in streiuns 41 Fingerling rainbow trout 17 Lethal (4 to 5 hr) 39 Rainbow trout 15 Slight avoidance (IO min) 38 16 Lethal (2 hr) 39 18 96-hr TL50 29 19 7-day TL50 36 20 - Lethal (12 days) 38 Chinook salmon 21 Firstdeath (2.2 hr) _35 Coho salmon 22 7-day TL50 27 23 100% kill (1-2 days) 35 24 Maximum non-lethal 35 Pink salmon 25 100% kill (1-2 days) 35 26 Maximum non-lethal - 35 Fathead minnow 27 TL50 (I hr) 28 21i TL50 (12 hr) 28

~

( 29 96-hr TL50 42-44 30 7-day TL50 27 31 Safe concentration 26 White sucker 32 Lethal (30-60 min) 33 33 day TL50 27 Black bullhead 34 96-hr TL50 27 Largemouth bass 35 7-day TL50 27 37 TL50 (l hr) 28 38 TL50 (12 hr) 28 Smallmouth bass 36 - Not found in streams .41 39

• Median mortality (15 hr) 37 Yellow perch 40 TL50 (1 hr) 28 41 _ TL50 (12 hr) 28 42 7-day TL50 27 Walleye 43 7-day TL50 27 Miscellaneous 46 Initial kill (15 min) 40 47 Erratic swimming (6 min) 40 aTL50 = median tolerance limit.

V-14 entrained phytoplankton may be reduced or eliminated. Species so affected would be effectively removed from tl_le reproductive population but. for i:f ti1*e. could contribute to other trophic levels.

During periods of lpw flpw, the equilibrium cc;,ncentration of orga-nisms so. removed from the population can be a significant proportion of their total population at Peach Bottom (and downstream as well).

Two possible consequences of this source of damage to the producer populations would be a reduc_tion in production and* a change* in composition.

Reduced production would reduce.the food input to other trophic levels. The maximum possible *consequence, which would result from a complete "reproductive kill" of the entrained organisms, would be a yearly reduction of 9.3% of phytoplankton productivity at Peach

• Bottom, with nruch higher reductions during the low flow periods of the summer. The magnitude of these figures would be altered by changes in productivity in the thermal plume. When ambient river temperatures are below optimum for algal growth, productivity would be significantly increased in *the plume. This effect wo.uld b_e amplified because the increase in temperature would. be greater in the upper layer, which is the photosynthetically activ-e zone. Thus, a much greater increase in productivity would result from thermal discharges than would occur if either photosynthesis or elevated temperatures were randomly distributed in the volume of water. When ambient temperatures are at their highest levels, considerable in-hibition of production may occur in the plume, which again would be more significant than if photosynthesis' were evenly distributed in the water column. The net r~sult could be a greater variation in algal populations than now occurs;- greater production in winter and spring would be followed by a significant reduction in the summer and fall, which would reduce the input of food (algae) to the rest of the community during late summer as a result of both "reproductive death" and inhibition in* the _plume.

A different type of change in the algal populations resulting from the "reproductive death" and plume inhibition during late summer would be mpre likely. Strong selection would occur and would favor algae with higher thermal optima and tolerance. The net result could be significant increases .in the populations of* blue,...green algae and concurrent reductions in green algae and diatoms. These changes would be easily detected by _the prOper biological' sampling program.

L

....,...,----.~----------------

V-15

. The operation. ()f. t:he Peacll Bottom. complex .will have a si,gnificant detri,mental effect on the resident benthi.c organis:ms over a small portion of the pond as a re.sult of the. interactio11 of four :factors:

entrainment of larvae and pupae, thermal discharges.~ chlorine

. releases, and outfall scouring .. The velocity ()f the intake .aIJ.d

.outfall water is expected to cause scouring over an area of ,the

' bottom adjacent to these structures and may ,ei:iminate these areas

. as suitable habitat~ for benthic organisms, The thermal. discharges and chlorine releases are also expected to make the benthic habitat

• . less suitable in the discharge. po"Q.ds, discharge canals, and in the

. area near the outfall. Some benthic organ:i,smf? would b.e, contf:1:m-ously or intermittently exposed to large increases in temperatur,e, depending on their location, prevailing wat:er flows, and the ambient temperature, In addition, the periodic releases of chlorine could intensify the problem. Many of these organisms have mero-planktonic larvae or pupae that_ would be subjected. to et1trainment. Although sufficient data are not available to quantify the magnitude of this.

effect, some mortality Qf entraine4 larvae can be expected.

High mortality of entrained plankton could have two effects on the*

benthic biota. There would be an incremental reduction of larvae

. and pupae, which could affect recrui.tment rates, and, at the same time, there would b,e an increase in food availability as d1:tmaged or killed plankton set tie to the bottom~ Consequently, a high mor-tality rate of entrained organisms could d.irect more production through the benthic community ~nd thereby slightly increase the density of beilthic fauna. .Th~ combined effects of entrainment mortality of .larvae and pupae and increased productivity in the .

benthic community,, if of sufficient magIJ,itu,de' would have the capability of ca~sing changes in the species compoi;;ition of the attached benthos. Available data are not sufficient to assess the probability of such changes or the. extent to which they may take place. ** * * * **

• Based on available evidence, howeyer,

• we are of the opinion that.

ch~ges in' the species composition and d~nsity of the benthic c6ImI1unity mll not be of sufficient magnitude to be iillpo.ttant. to the pond as a whole.

• The combined influences of plant ~pe:tatiC?n are ~xpected to 4ave .

qonsiderabie effects on the zooplanktort ~ommuni,ty.. These effects will result f.fom additions of' chlorine, .. entr~irimen~' and exposure

V-16 to the thermal plume. Since high entrainment mortality is expected.,

particularly for cladocerans, there may be a strong* selection for heat,;..tolerant 111icrocrustaceans with short population turnover rates. The situatio.n will be complicated by the chlorine releases, which will be at concentrations greater than those known to reduce reproductive *capability in Daphnia. Thus, there- -could be a signif-icant reduction in the concentrations of microcrustac~ans -during late summer as a result of plant .operation.

Large benthic components (imiphipods, Chaoborus) of the zooplankton will be similarly affected. Some species (Chaobol'UB and Gamma.rus) undergo diurnal vertical migrations in which they leave their sub-strate, move up into the water column at night to feed, and return to their substrate during the day. Thus, their susceptibility to the intake will be greatly increased at night. The possible conse-quences to the populations of these species are related to the fractions of the populations beirlg affected (presenti).y unknown) and the length of the* generation time. These changes in the zoo-plankton populations should be detectable by the proper biological sampling program.

Fish life of Conowingo Pond will be subjected to stresses by plant operations. Recruitment rates and standin~ crops of several species may be appreciably lowered. The major causes of these effects will be losses due to entrainment, winter kills as a result of *interrup-tions in plant operation and impingement on the intake screens.

Indirect effects may result from alterations in primary and secondary productivity. At the present time, the overall effect on the fish populations of the pond cannot be stated. If the worst conditions are realized, a significant ,impact on the fishery will occur.

Although there. are clear differences between adults and juveniles and between species, and although data are lacking in many cases for juveniles, the calculations in Table V-1 still indicate that from June to September (water temperatures near or above 25°C) mortality of entrained fish in the present cooling system will be extremely-severe.

The majority of fishes impinged on the traveling screens will be relatively small fish. In a water body overpopulated with smaller fishes, such losses or selective thinning of smaller fish might be beneficial to the fish populat;i.on as a whole. Likewise losses of larvae or juveniles through entrainment might have a similar effect

V"717 but only if the mortality is highly selective for grazers or zoo-plankton* feeders. If predators are killed proportionate to their populations in the Pond, no benefit can be achieved- from such losses.

Data on .fish populations in-the Pond do not indicate that a serious problem of stunting or overpopulation by small fishes occurs, al-though the growth rate o:f channel catfish. is lQw~ Until. the species composition and frequency of impingement losses. are known, the .im-pact of impinge11'1lent must b,e considered to *be potentially severe.

Similarly; losses of Amarican shad and other anadrornous fishes a:t Peach Bottom and Muddy Run would tend to defeat efforts to restore aspects of this fishery *

. Certain contributions to the impact on the fishes of Conowin:go Po11:d will not be easily separable from natural variations, cllanges resulting from. the operation of Muddy Run, recurring :disease out-breaks,. and the presence of newly introduced an.adr,omous f.ish~ Since the effect on the fish populations from the operations of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station poses the most serious potential ,environ-mental impact of routine operation, added emphasis sb.oulcd be given to the present sampling program, .and remedial measures .discussed elsewhere should be eII\ployed to reduce the magnitude -o-f the :impa-ct.

D. *RADIOLOGICAL IMP ACT OF ROUTINE. OPERATION During normal station* operations, radioactivity will be release,d to the environment as liquid, gaseous, and particulate matter..

1h.e radiological impact of these effluet1ts from the thr,ee r.ea<ctor units at the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station is *assessed f.or individuals and the population within a SO-mile radius of the site.

Other sections of this report -describe the measures taken by the applicant to ensure that these releases are within the limits'45 set by 10 CFR 20 and by the Technical Specifications for the station.

The Commission's Regulations at 10 CFR Part 20 limit the ma.ximlum dose to individuals in unrestricted areas to 500 mill.irems -(mrems)

-- l .mrem equals 1/1,000 rem .,.- to the total body in any period ,of 1 calendar year. Further, 10 CFR Part 50 4 6 limits levels of .

radioactivity in* effluents to unrestricted areas to "as low as practicable".

V-18

1. General- Considerations Potential pathways for radiation exposure due to radionuclides outside *the body (external exposure) and radionuclides deposited within the body (internal exposure) that originate in radioactive effluents released by the plant are presented schematically in Fig. V-2. Those shown in the figure are not e::xhaustive, but they illustrate the principal pathways of exposure based on experience.

Immersion in air containing radionuclides results in external exposure, and inhalation of air containing the radionuclides

• results in internal exposure. -In addition,. radionuclides de-posited on vegetation and on the ground *can result in direct external exposure and in internal exposure through various food chains.

Swimming in rivers or lakes containing diluted liquid radioactive effluents can result in external exposure. Utilization of such wat~r for drinking, fishing, and irrigation can result in internal exposures.

a. Dispersion of Gaseous Effluents Average annual concentrations of radionuclides contained in the air and deposited on the grolllld at distances up td 50 miles from*

the plant have been estimated using an atmospheric transport model 47 incorporated in a computer program. 48 The deposition velocities*

used in the calculations were 10- 6 cm/sec for the noble gases (krypton and xenon}, and 1 cm/sec for molecular iodine* (I2) and particulate matter (rubidium and cesium). 49 - 52 In this 100del, the reduction of radionuclide concentrations in the air at grol.ll1d level by* :radioactive decay and deposition are taken into accollllt. The site meteorological data used in the nndel are discussed in Sect.

II.D. 6.

b. Dispersion of Liquid Effluents Liquid effluents from the plant will be released in Conowingo Ponci.

Estimates of dilution of the effluent after release to the pond are complicated by the combination of natural variations in stream flow and cyclical demands of area hydroelectric facilities on the reservoir. Under conditions of low stream flow and pumping opera-tions of the Muddy Rlll1 Pumped Storage Generating Plant (located about 4 miles upstream of Peach Bottom), normal stream.flow is reversed and some of the discharged effluent will probably re-enter the plant intake pond. At very low stream flow and heavy coolant flow demand of the power station, the same situation will

V--19 ATMOSPHERIC AQUATIC RELEASES RELEASES .

IMMERSION SUBMER~ION EXTERNAL INTERNAL Fig~ V-2. Pathways for radiation exposure of man.

i V-20 occur. Dilution estimates us~d in the calculation.of radiological

• effects are based on results of dye tests conducted with hydraulic models of Conowingo Pond. 53

2. Estimates of Radiation Dose to Man Radiation doses to individuals (in millir~ms) and to the population (in man-rems) were estimated per year o*f rel.ease of radioactive*

effluents from normal operations of the plant. Possible exposures to radionuclides released by the plant were converted to estimates of radiation dose to individuals using models and data presented in Publication 2 of the International Commission on Radiological Protection 54 and other recognized texts on radiation protection. 55 , 56 Computer programs incorporating these trodels 57 , 58 were used to cal-culate the radiation dose from external exposure to radionuclides in air, in water, or on the grotmd and the radiation dose from internal exposure to inhaled or ingested radionuclides. Radio~

activity taken into the body by inhalation or ingestion will continuously irradiate the body 1mtil removed by processes of metabolism and radioactive decay. 'Iherefore, the calculated dose from a given intake of radioactivity can be used to estimate the total dose the individual would accrue during his lifetime as a result of that intake.

Th.e radiation doses to the total body and to internal organs from exposure to penetrating radiation from external exposures are approximately equal; however, doses to the total body may vary considerably from doses* to internal organs from internal exposure because *some radionuclides tend to concentrate in cer.tain organs of the body. Where they are significant, the estimates of dose to organs other than the total body are discussed.

Radiation doses to the internal orgaI).s of children in the popula-'

tion will differ from those of an average adult because of differ-ences in metabolism, organ size, and diet. Differences between the organ doses of a chil,d and those of aI). average adult by11Pre than a factor of 3 would be musual for all pathways of internal eJq>osure except.the atmosphere-pasture-cow-milk pathway. For this .

pathway, the dose estimated to the thyroid of a child ( <2-year old) from radioactive iodine in milk is approximately 10 times that for an average adult. 59 , 60

'Total:-body doses from gamma exposures approximate those to gonads and therefore were used in the man_.rem estimates because.gonads have the most restrictive dose limits. 54 , 61 Since radiation doses to the total body are .relatively _independent of age, 62 the mart-rem estimates are based on total-body doses calculated for adults.

---

~

V-21

a. Estimates, o-f Radi'B.tion Dose from Exposure to Gaseous

'Efflueiit s The estimates of dose from exposure to gaseous effluents from the plant are based on the radionuclide releases given in Table III-5.

Studies at operating nuclear power plants 6 3 have shown that. the iodine released is in molecular and organic forms, with the relative amounts of each form highly variable from plant to plant, depending upon*many factors, including the .radwaste system used.

For dose calculations for this plant, the released iodine is considered to be all molecular. The man-rem dose estimates. resulting from gaseous releases are based on the population distribution for 1980 given in Appendix A (Table A-1).

• The population distribution within 5 miles was projected from the_ data in Table 2.2.25.1 of the applicant's Environmental Report, Part 2 of Supplement 1.

(1) Immersion and Grotm.d Contamination Pathways The maximum annual immersion dose (total body) from *gamma radiation estimated along the bmmdary o*f the exclusion area is 7. 8 mrems assuming full time, totally tm.shielded occupancy; this maximum dose point is 1100 m SSE from the power station.. The corresponding annual average exposure rate (beta plus gamma) due to noble gases is 16 mrem/year. Radionuclides making important contributions* to this dose are: Kr-87, Kr-88, Xe~l33, Xe-135, Xe-138, and Cs-138.

At the Peach Bottom Information Center (400 m SSE ,from the power station), the estimated immersion dose _rate is 1.4 x l0- 3mrem/hr.

The population dose to the current 64,000 visitors .per year is 0.18 man-rems, with the assumption that the average visit last 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />. At Delta, Pa., (the nearest commt.mity), the estimated annual dose is O .09 mrem, and the population dose is approximately 0.1 man-rem.

'!he population dose (based on 1980 population projections) for immersion is estimated to be 75 man-rems , The average dose to an individual within 50 miles of the plant is estimated to be 0.015-mrem. A summary of the population doses and the average individual doses as a ft.mction of radial distance from the plant is given in Table V;_4.

For direct external exposure from radionuclides deposited on the grot.md, the _radiation dose to an individual at the SSE botm.dary of the exclusion area is estimated to be about 0.4Q mrem, and the population dose is estimated to be 3.8 man'.""rems. Estimated doses to individuals from immersion in gaseous effluents and.from expo-sure to ground-deposited radioactive material are given in Table V-5 for other locations,

V-22

• Table V.-4. Summary of estimates of annual radiation.dose to the .

population from immersion in the gaseous effluents released by the Peach. Bottom Atomic Power Station 1980 projected Cumulative Average Radial distance population individual dose cumulative from plant (miles) dose ( man~re ms/year) (millirems/year) population 0-1 140 0.62 4.3 0-2 720 1.6 2.2 0-3 1.810 1.9 I. I 0-4 4,010 2.3 0.58 0-5 7.380 2.9 0.39 0-10 35.560 6.9 0.19 0-20 386.100 32 0.083 0-30 1.032,000 44. 0.043 0-40 3..330.000 63 0.019 0-50 5.063.000 75 0.015

V-23 Table v~s; Summary of the estimated radiatim1 doses to individuals per year of releas~ at locations of maximum exposure to gaseous and liquid effluents from the Peach Bottom Power Station Annual dose (millirems)

Pathway Location Total body Thyroid Gaseous effluen~

Direct radiation from* air and ground lnfo.qnation centef <0.01 <0.01

-1100 m SSE, boundary site 8.2 8.2

.Delta, Pa . 0.089 0.089

. Inhalation of contaminated air Information cente/2 <0.01 <0:01

-1100 m SSE, boundary site 0.02 2.3 Delta, Pa. <0.01 *0.01 Food chain (pasture-cow-mi!kl Nearest dairy herd (1200 m NW) 0.09 48 Liquid effluents Drinking water (average stream flow) Chester, Pa. <0.01 0.04 Aquatic food chains Conciwingci Pond 0.12 0.34 Swimining Conowingo Pond <0.01 <0.01 aVisitors to the information center are assumed to stay 2 hr.

bThis dose is for an adult drinking milk from cows pastured at given locations one-half of the year. For a I-year old child, tlie thyroid dose would be approximately 10 times this level.

V-24 (2) Inhalation Pathway The estimated annual dose of O.02 mrem to the whole body of an individual at the SSE boundary of the exclusion area of the* plant is based on an inhalation rate 54 for ~n average adult of 2 x 10 4 liters/day *. Corresponding estimates of annual dose to the gastrointestinal tract and thyroid are 1.1 mrem and 2.3 mrem, respectively. The radionuclides of primary importance in the inhalation pathway are Rb-88 and Cs-138 for the dose to the gas-trointestinal tract and I-131 and I-133 for the dose *to the thyroid.

The estimated population dose from the inhalation pathway is about 0.30 man-rem within a 50-mile radius.

(3) Food-Chain Pathways Ingestion of radioactive particles and iodine deposited on vege-table crops is one possible food-chain pathway, and ingestion of radionuclides fro~ milk and meat produced by animals pastured on areas exposed to gaseous effluents in the air is another. An additional pathway utilizing all of these mechanisms also exists for nuclides deposited on the soil and incorporated into food plants through their roots.

The most important contribution to radiation dose from exposure to gaseous effluents released from Peach Bottom Station by food-chain pathways is from I-131 and I-133 via the atmosphere-pasture-cow-milk *pathway. Concentrations in milk are based on a value of

0. 2 µCi of 1-131 per liter. from the presence of an equilibrium level pf 1 µCi of I-131 per square meter of pasture. 64 In addition to radioactive decay of the iodine; the contamination on the pasture is assumed to decrease by one-half every 14 days because of weather-ing-and grazirig. 64 Similar treatment was accorded 1-133. It was assumed that cows obtained all their food from these pastures one-haif of the year.

Annual doses to the thyroid and total bodt of an adult drinking milk from the dairy herd closest to the plant 6 (about 0.75 mile NW) were estimated to be 48 mrems* and O,09 mrem, respectively, At this location, x/Q values for stack release and for turbine and reactor building release were 1.2 x 10- 7 and 1.5 x 10- 6 sec/m 3 , respectively. About 70% of the dose results from turbine and reactor building release while about 30% results from stack release, 'Ihe majority of the dose (about 93%) results from I-131, the remainder from I-133. These esti-mates of dose are based on consumption of 1 liter (about 1 quart) of milk per day by an adult. 54 The dose to the thyroid of a one-year-old child drinking one liter of milk per day from this herd would be about ten times the adult level.

• V-25

b. Estimates of Radia~ion, Dose fr?m Exposur~ to Liquid Effluents The estimates of dose from exposure to liquid effluents were based on the radionuclide releases given in Table III-5. All radionuclides released in the liquid effluent were assumed to be soluble in water, for purposes of calculating doses from ingestion of food and water.

(1) Submersion Pathway If an individual is assumed to swim about 1 hr/day during the three summer months (about 1% of a year) at the exit of the discharge canal, the estimated annual total-body dose from direct external exposure to radionucldies contained in the water is less than 0.01 mrem. If 10% of the individuals within 50 miles of the plant are assumed to. swim in Conowingo Pond 1% of a year, the estimated population dose is less than 0.1 man-rem for average river flow conditions.

(2) Drinking Water Pathway Radiation dose to .the total body of an average adult drinking from the Chester, Pa., or BaltiI1Dre water supplies was estimated for conditions of low (2500 cfs) and average (36,000 cfs) river flow.

Estimated annual doses were 0.02 and 0.002 mrem, respectively. In*

these estimates, an individual was assurred to drink 1.2 liters (about 2.5 pints) of water per day 54 from the mtm.icipal water supplies.

Those radionuclides making the most important contributions to dose were H-3 (33%), .Cs-134 (33%), and Cs-137 (18%)'. For average stream flow conditions, the population dose for Chester was esti-mated to be about 0.11 man-rem. At present, Baltimore uses water from Conowingo Pond on an intermittent basis; if the total water supply of. Baltimore were taken from the pond, the Baltimore popu-lation dose would be 1.8 man-rems.

(3) Aquatic Food-Chain Pathways The radiation dose to the total body from consumption of fish was estimated to. be 0.13 mrem. Doses to individual organs, in mrem, were calculated to be 0 .* 33 (bone), 0. 31 (thyroid), and O. 24 (liver).

For these estimates, an: average adult was* assuned t.o consume

• 20 g/day (about 5 oz/week) of fish from the Conowingo Pond. 6.6 Concentrations of _radionuclides in the fish were calculated by.

multiplying the radioactivity levels in water by bioaccumulation factors for edible parts of fish. 67 - 70 The bioaccumul~tion factor is defined as the ratio at equilibrium of the radionuclide concen-tration in fish flesh to the radionuclide concentration in water .

.The radionuclides making important contributions to dose via this pathway of exposure are Cs-134, Cs-137, and, in the case of the

--1

~----*----*---~* ___ ___ _

' ... . ---~---- --- ~*--** - ~ _,. .... ~-------,*** - **-*-** --~- ---,-~ *-*-- -~--.....*~---*--- ~- -

V-26.

thyroid, I-133 and I-131. A population dose from fish consumption is difficult to estimate pecause of the lack of fish harvest data for Conowingo Pond. If 1% of the individuals living within SO miles of the plant obtain 10% of their diet of fish from the pond, the estimated population dose is 0.52 man-rems.

(4) Terrestrial Food-Chain Pathways Radiation doses from several of the pathways associated with land irrigation are disregarded in this statement because there are no agricultural uses of water fro~ Conowingo Pond.

c. Estimates of Dose from Direct Radiation Nitrogen-16, an activation radionuclide produced from oxygen-16, is flashed in the turbines of boiling water nuclear power stations.

Because of its short half-life (7.3 seconds), essentially no nitrogen-16 is released in the gaseous effluent *. However, direct radiation results from the decay emission of high energy garmna rays which penetrate through and *emerge from the turbine shell and surrom1ding building structure. Using measured data from another boiling water reactor, 78 scaled to the rated power of the Peach Bottom Station, it is estimated that less than 2.4 mrem of annual total b_ody dose from both m1its would be received by an individual continuously located at a distance of 1100 meters from the station.

Detailed considerations of 1) distance correlated with direction from turbines, 2) shielding afforded by terrain and building, and

3) occupancy periods, could substantially reduce the estimated dose.

3. Assessment of Dose to Man A summary of the estimated radiation doses to individuals at points of maximum exposure to the gaseous and liquid effluents where the exposure pathways are operative is given in,Table V-5, and a sunnnary of the estimated population doses from exposure to the effluents released by the plant is given in Table V-6. The assessment of the.potential radiological impact from the exposures summarized in the tables can- be given some perspective by comparison with (1) the 10 CFR Part 20 annual limits of.SOD mrems maximum total body dose per individual or 170 mrems total body dose to an average individual of the population, and (2) the doses from the natural radiation background. The radiation q.ose to the total body and to internal organs of an individual from 'the natural radiation back-grom1d56 at sea level averages about O.1 rem (100 mrens) per year.

The largest estimate of radiation dose to the total body of an individual from the gaseous effluent outside the exclusion area occurs at the SSE bom1dary of the station. These estimates of dose have not been reduced by the shielding provided by houses L_

V-27 I

I Table V-6. Summary of estimated total body doses to the

• *population, within 50 *miles per year of release of gaseous and liquid effluents from Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3 Pathway Population dose (man-rems)

Gaseous effluents Immersion 75 Ground deposit 3.8 Inhalation 0.3 Terrestrial food chains 0.9 Liquid effluents Drinking water ,l.9 Aquatic food chains 0.5 Swimming <0.1

• Total population dose 83

V-28 against radionuclides contained in the air or deposited on the grotm.d or for part-time occupancy. Without any consideration of these possible dose reduction factors, the sum of the dose estimates ./

• / to the total body of an individual at the S_SE botm.dary of the exclusion area is about 8% of the dose from natura+ backgrotm.d and less than 2% of the limits of 10 CFR Part 20.

Th.e estimated annual radiation dose to the thyroid is approximately 48 mrems for an a_dult and 480 mrems for a child if it is assuroad that all of their milk is obtained from cows pastured 0.75 miles NW of. the station. This estimate of dose to the thyroid of a child is about 5 times the dose from natural background, These doses have been discussed in Section V.2.a(a).

The estimated largest dose to individuals from liquid effluents will occur at Chester, Pa,, where the source _of drinking water is Conowingo Pond.

• For reasonable dilution factors as given in the reports of dye studies *with hydraulic models, the dose estimates for individuals drinking water in Chester are O. 04 mrem to the

• thyroid and 0.002.mrem to the total body per year of reactor operation. These estimates of dose are <0.1% of the dose from natural background and <0,01% of the limits of 10 CFR Part 20. If the stream flow bf .the river is reduced to the point that recir-culation of the discharge occurs, as discussed in Sect. V.D.l.b, the estimated dose to an individual for a 1-year period would still be less than O.1 mr:em.

• This est;i.mate is based on the normal release of liquid effluents during* a minimum river flow of 2500 cfs.

The sum of the estimated population doses (total body) within a 50-mile radius from exposure to both gaseous and liquid radio-active effluents released by the plant is* about 83 man-rems per year. This population dose is small compared with the 1,100,000 man-rems that the population within a 50-mile- radius receives each year from the natural radiation background. Although no discernible radiological impact on individuals and the population is expected from normal operations of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power*

Station, the staff feels that, with the present state of the art, equipment modifi~ations could lead .to a lowering of the estimated doses from the gaseous effluents near the site bound,ary.

4. Radiation Doses to Species Other than Man a .. Terrestrial Environment Because of the many potential modes and pathways of radiation

. .---~-----,..-----,----------

.V-29 exposure to terrestrial organisms near the Peach Botto~ Station, a single pathway was selected that would most likely result in the maximum radiation dose to. an organism in. the surroundin*g terrestrial ecosystem. The exposure pathway that would produce the 1I1axi111um dose would be for an animal such as a duck or muskrat to consume aquatic plants (e, g., algae) that ~re growing in the*

water near the point of discharge of liquid radioactive effluents.*

Although other pathways were considered, this one was selected for assessment based on the*following:.

(1) Estimated dose to man from (a) submersion in air (external dose), (b) grotmd contamination (external dose), and (c) inhalation (internal dose) resulted in a dose of only 8.2 mrems/

year based on the worst-case c_ondition (Sect. V.D.3). The dose to these terrestrial animals would be approximately the.same.

(2) If a second internal dose from ingestion of con-taminated terrestrial plants was added to this dose of 8.2.mrems/year, the dose would be raised only slightly because terrestrial plants do not concentrate nuclides from gaseous releases at nuclear power reactors.

• (3) Since algae concentrate lllQSt radionuclides by

• factors usually ranging from approximately 10 2 to 10 5 (Table V-7) relative to the concentrations in water, the internal radiation dose to a wild ani111al consuming aquatic plants would probably be 111uch greater than for terrestrial animals having other food chain pathways *.

To assess the potential effect from a combined aquatic-terrestrial pathway, the internal dose to the whole body was estimated for a 111ammal or bird ~ating algae or other aquatic plants* as its only source of food. The ratio of daily intake (grams of algae consumed) to total body weight: (grams of animal) was* set equal to O .1, and the animal was assumed to be *in equilibrium with the algae (i.e.,

the animal had attained an equilibrium body burden of radionuclides such that the rate of excretion equaled the rate of assimilation).

Concentrations of radionuclides in the algae were computed as the product of the bioaccumulation factor (Table V-7) and the radio-nuclide concentration in effluent water at the point of discharge frotn the Peach Bottom Station (Table V-8).

The internal dose, D. (mrads/year) for the ith radionuclide to an animal consuming aqultic plants was computed from the following equation:

V-30 Table V-7. Bioaccumulation factors _for various organisms 67 *68 *77 Bioaccumulation factors (µCi/mg:µCi/cc)

Radionuclide Aquatic plants Invertebrates Fish Muskrat RB-86 1

• OOE+03 2.00E+{)3. 2.00F.+03 1. 90E+03 SR-R9 3.00E+03 4. OOE+n3 t. 50E+O?. 6.52E+03 SR-90 3~00E+03* 4. OOE+03 l

• 50E+Ol' 7.39E+05 SR-91 3.()l)E+03 4. OOE+03 1

• 50E+O?. 5. 1 P.E+O 1 Y-90 1.00E+f)4 1'. OOF.+03 1. OOE+O?. 3

• R6E-l) l Y-91 lo00E+04 l.OOE+n3 1. OOE+02 R.35E+OO Y-93 1** on*E+04 1. OOE+03 l. OOE+02 6. l 9E-02 ZR-95 l

• 50E+03 1

• 50 E+ 0 2 . 1. l)l)F,+() l 1

• 20E+l)I)

ZR-97 1. 50E+03 l. 50E+02 1. 00E+O l l

• S()E-02 NB-95 t. OOE+C)3 1. OOE+Oa 1.00E+Ol 3o35E+OO

[wl.l-99 _ 1 ~ OOE+02 1. 00E+1)2 1. OOE+O?.  :?.

• 0 7E+O l

.RU-103 2. l)OE+03 2. OOE+03 1. OOE+02 5.36E+Ol RU-106 2.00E+03 2* OOE+03 1.00E+02 6e?2E+Ol Fl-l-105 2. OOE+0.3  ?.. OOE+03 1. OOE+02 i. 1 SE+O 1.

!:N-125 3.Jl)E+Ol 6.67E+02 l. ()()F.+0 3 R

• 30 F.+0 0 SB-125 1

• OOE+l) 3 s. OOE+O l 4.00E+Ol l

• 56E+02 SB-127 1.00E+03 5. OOE+O l Li. OOE+O 1* le52E+Ol TE-127M 1.00E+03 6. 1 OE+l)3

• Ls.OOF.:+02 6.6?.E+Ol TE-127 1. OOE+03 6. I ()E+03 Li. 00E+09. 1.12E+OO TE-129M I* OOE+03 6. l l)F.+()3 4.00E::+0?. 3.60E+02 TE-131M l.OOE+03 6. 10E+ll3 4.00E+02 4. 14E+() l TE-132 1. OOE+03 6. I OE+f)3 L1. 0 OE+O?. 9.36E+Ol I-130 2.00E+02 1. 00E+03 s.OOE+Ol 1. 44E+O 11 1.. 131 2.00E+02 1. OOE+03 5.00E+Ol 2.19E+02 I-133 2.00E+02 1. OOE+03 5.00E+OI 2o51E+Ol I-135 2.00E+02 1. OOE+OJ 5.00E+Ol 8.06E+OO CS-134 2.SOE+04 1. 1OE+04 1. OOE+03 2* 34E+05 CS"." 136 2.SOE+04 l

• 1OE+()4 l

• OOE+03 3.96E+04 CS-137 2.50E+04 1. 10 F,+1)4 1. OOE+03 2.52E+05 BA-140 5o00E+02 2.00E+02 1.00E+Ol 3.85E+Ol LA-140 1. OOE+04 l,OOE+03 1. OOE+02 2.42E-Ol CE-141 lo00E+()4 1. ()OE+03 l. 00E+02 4.J2E+OO CE-143 t .OOE+04 l

• OOE+03 1

• 00E+02 l

• 92E-O 1 CE~ 144 1 .-OOE+04 l o00E+03 1. om:+02 2.75E+Ol PR-143 1. OOE+04 1. OOE+03 l. OOE+02 1. 94E+OO ND-147 l

• OOE+04 1. OOE+03 l

• 00E+02* l

• 60E+OO R-1-147 1.00E+04 1. OOE+03 1. OOE+02 5.52E+OI NA-24 l

• 60E+02 2. 70E+O l 3.~0E+Ol l.JRE+Ol P-32 l. OOE+05 1. 00E+!15 l.OOE+05 l

• 36E+l)5 CR-51 l e00E+02 S.()OE+Ol 2.ooE+OP- le92E+OO

~-54 3. 50E+04 l

• 40E+05 2.SOF.:+Ol 2.fS2E+03 FE-55 5.()QE+03 J.20E+03 3.00E+02 3.3JE+04 FE-59 5. OOE+03 3. 20E+03 J.OOE+02 3. 0 7E+03 O..l-58 2.50E+03 l

• 50E+03 s. OOE+02 - 9.07E+02 00-60 2. 50E+03 l

• 50E+03 5.00E+02 1. 03E+03 CU-64 1. OOE+03 . l

• OOE+03  ?..OOE+02 2.lOE+Ol 21'1-65 4.00E+03 4. OOE+OL! J.OOE+OJ l .12E+03 1N-69M 4.00E+03 4. l)OE+04 1. OOE+03 3.34E+Ol W-187 J.OOE+Ol J. OOE+O l  ?..OOE+OO 2.16E-01 H-3 1. OOE+nn 1. OOE+<lO 1. OOE+OO 1.00E+OO

V-31 Table V-8. Internal radiation dose to biota07 *68 *77 Concentration Dose (millirads/year)

Radionuclide

(µCi/ml) Aquatic plants Invertebrates Fish Muskrats RB-86 I. 3E- I 3 I. 8E-03 3. SE-03 3.SE-03 J.IE-03 SR-89 8.7E-II 2.7E+OO 3.6E+OO I. 3E-0 1 s.RE+OO SR-90 s. OE-12 3.IE.:.01 4. IE-01 I* SE-02 7.6E+OI SR-91

• S. 7E- I l 6.7E+OO 8.9E+OO 3. 3E-01 R.JE-02 Y-90 1

• 8E-1 I 2.9E+OO 2.9E-OI 2. 9E-02 I

• I E-04 Y-91 6.0E-11 6.6E~OO 6. 6E-O I 6.6E-02 s.sE-03 Y-93 7.4E-II 2.3E+OI 2. 3E+OO 2.3E-01 I* 3E-04 ZR-95 7.7E-13 2.4E-02 2. 4E-03 1. 6E-04 9. 8E-06 ZR-97 6.3E-13 3.7E-02 3. 7E-03 2.SE-04 2.BE-07 NB-95 8.4E-13 8.0E-03 8.0E-04 8.0E-05: 1. 4E-05 M0-99 t. 6E-10 1.6E-Ol 1. 6E'.".'0 1 1.6F.:-01 2. 9E-02.

RU""'.103 S.7E-13 9. 3E-03 9. 3E-03 4. 7F.>-04 1 * .SE-04 RU-1<)6 1. 7E-" 13 8.7E-03 ij. 7E-03 4. 4E..;.04 2.7E-04 RH-, 105 6.0E-13 4.lE-03 4. I F.-0 3 2.0E-04 2.JE-05

$N;.,125 S.4E-15 3.IE-06 6. JE-05 9. 4E..;.05 7.8E-07 SB-125 3. 2E- I 5 2.2E-05 1

• I E-0 6 13. 7E-07 3.4E;..06 SB-127 4.3E-i4 8. 2E-04' *4.lE-05 3e3E-Os* 1.0E-05 TE-127M t. SE.,. 13 9 .* 2E-04 5. 6E-03 3.7E-04 6elE-05 TE-127 4. 4E-13 2. OE-,.03. I. 2E-02 7. RE-04. 2.P.E-06 TE-129M 1. SE-12 ' 3.lE-02 l.9E-OI I. 2E-02 8.4E-03 TE-13 lM

• 2.l)E-12 5. 9E..;.02 3.6E-01 2. 4E-02* 1. SE-03 TE-132 2.0E"'.'11 7

• I E-0 I 4. 4E+OO , 2. 9E-0 I 3.9E-02*

I-130 1.01::-13 3.4E-03 I. 7!;:-02 8.SE-04 I* IE-C~4 I -131 1. 2E- l 0 2. OE"."01 9.9E-Ol 4.9E-02 loSE-01 I-133 2.SE-10 7.8E-Ol 3. 9E+OO I* 9E-01 7. 4E-02 I-135 3.3E.;.II l.6E-01 .8

• I E-0 I 4. I E-02 J. 9E-03 CS-134 6. 7E-l I 3.4E+Oi I. SE+O 1 1

• 4E+OO I* 7F.+02 CS-136 2.SE-11 7. 7E+OC) 3.4E+OO 3, IE-01 6 *.6E+OO .*I cs- 137 6. 4E- I I I. fSE+O 1 7.7E+OO 7.0E-01 l*2E+02 BA-140 1.4E-1n 3. I E+OO I. 2E+OO 6.2E-02 1. SE-0 I LA-140 7

• 7E- I I 2.7E+OI 2.7E+OO 2.7E-OI 3o8E-04 CE-141 3. 1 E- 12 I. 2E-O I I. 2E-02 I. 2E-03 4.SE-05 CE-143 2.SE-12 4.6E-QI 4.6E-02 4.6E-03 7. 7E-06 CE~l44 S.7E-13 I. 4E-0'1 I. 4E-02 I .4E-03 3.RE-04 PR-143 9.7F.-13

• S. BE-02 s. RE-03 S. 8E"".04 I.IE-OS ND-147 3.2E-13 2. 4E-02 2.4E-03 2.4E-04 3. OE-06 PM-lL:7 7.7E-14 9.9E-04 9.9E-05 9. 9E-06 s.sE-06 NA-24 4e3E-12 3.SE.;.02 5~ 9E-03 7. OE-03 1. 7E-03 P-32 2. SE-14 3.3E-02 3. 3E-02 3.3F.-0~ 4.SE-0?

CR-51 5e7E-12 2.7E-04 I. 3E-04 5. 3E-04 . ~. 9E-06 Mill-54 1. OE- 12 3.SE-01 1. 4E+OO ~.SE-04 1.3E-02 FE-55 2.SE-11 I.* SE-02 9. 8E-03 9.~E-04 1 ~ OE-0 I FE-59 8. OE- i 2 6.lE-01 3. 9E-O 1 3.6E-02 l*9E-01 Cll-58 . S.7E-ll 1. 6E+OO 9o7E-Ol 3.2E-Ol 2*8E-01 C0-60 s. 7E.-12 LI.OE-01 2. 4E-O 1 8.0E-02 7e9E-02 CU-64 .6* 4E- 1 ~ 3. OE-02 3. OE-02 S. 9E-03 4. 7E-04 7.N-65 4* OE-13 9.6E-03 9.6E-02 2.l!E-03 l~3E-03 ZN-69M S.4E-14 2.6E-03

• 2. 6E-02 6.4E-04 I* 7E-05

.W-187 6. 4E- l 2 2.l!E-03 2. 4E-03 1. 6E-04 lelE-05 H-3 6.7E-09 1

• 3E-03 Io 3E-03 1. 3E-03 1. 3E-03 TOT DOSE 1. 4E+02 6. OE+O 1 4.BE+OO J.8E+02

V-32

.where 1.87 x 10 7 is a constant to convert µCi/g of animal to millirads/year, .X. eq is the body. burden. of the ith radionuclide

(µCi) at equilibrium in an animal consuming 100 g of algae per

. day,* E. is the* effective aosoroed energy (MeV) of the. i"th radio-nuclidt for a 10....cm diam cylindrical.shaped ani111al,. and m-is the mass of the ani111al (1000 g). The ..f>ody *ourden, X. eq (µCi), of the ith radionuclide at equiliorium in the total oodj of* the ani111al was computed from the following expressic:in:

X. eq -- 1.

. 4 T.W.C.g f. . ,

1 .

• 1 1 1 1 where T. is the effective half-life (days) of the* ith radionuclide in the ~ale body of _the animal, W. is the concentration (µCi/ml) of the ith radionuclide in the liqiiid effluent of the Peach Bottom Station (see Table V-8), C. is the concentration factor of the.ith radionuclide in algae or ofher aquatic vegetation (dimensionless)~

g is the mass (grams) of aigae consumed per day (100 g/day) by the animal, and f. is the fraction of the ingested quantity of radio-

_nuclide i thaE is initially assimilated by the tissues of the animal (dimensionless).

The estimated total internal dose to an animal (the muskrat) from the given pathway of exposure was 0.38 rads/year or approximately 1 mrad/day (Table V-8). Sr-90, Cs-134, and Cs-137 contributed over 96% of this dose.

The literature on the effects of chronic low-level .radiation on terrestrial animals is not extensive. 69 French found a suggested shortening of the life span of the pocket mouse induced by 0.9 rad/day of chronic gamma radiation. 72 There is no information available to indicate that a detectable radiation effect would be f~und at a dose rate of 0.38 rads/year for terrestrial animals, It must.be emphasized that doses to these animals represent ex-treme conditions, i.e., the organisms are assumed to" feed only*

on aquatic plants that are growing in a relatively small area of the discharge canal. If they consume foods other thari these.

aquatic plants or feed in area_s other than the i-mmediate discharge where the radionuclide concentrations in algae will be lower, the doses will decrease significantly. Also, that a bird would feed

V-33 only in.this one location for a period of time sufficient to attain equilibrium with radionuclides*in*aquatic plants* is highly unlikely~

Although. the selected pathway of exposure to terrestrial organisms is realistic (since waterfowl* are known to feed*'*in the inshore area of .th~ pond} s

• the estimated* dose *ts maximized* B.ecause of the assumptions used, which. tend to *maximize*. the estimated dose.** It is therefore unlikely that ail organism.would get a dose equal *to that estimated for the previously descri6ed

• mode and pathway of exposure.*

Despite this, the maximized dose estimate is far lower than any dose so far known to prod*uce detectable rad.iation effects.

b. Aquatic Although concentrations of radionuclides in liquid effluents will be diluted in Conowingo Pond, -the ability of an organism to con-centrate these materials presents a potential radiological hazard to species living in the contaminated water. To assess the poten-tial impact of liquid releases to pond biota~ radiation qoses to aquatic plants (algae, etc.), invertebrates, and fish were calcu-lated, based on the assumption that the organisms live continuously in effluent water containing radionuclides itl concentrat'ions equal to those at the point of discharge from the Peach nottom Station (i.e., before dilution with the pond water). This pathway of ex-posure was used to maximize estimated doses. Organisms living further offshore will receive a lower dose as radionuclide concen-trations become diluted with pond water.

Total doses were computed as the sum of the immersion (Table V-9) and internal (Table V-8) dose. Internal dose to aquatic*organisms results from intake of radionuclides through ingestion (food chain) ,

direct absorption from water, or both. Irmnersion dose results from immersion of the organis:rii in the coritaniinated water.

Internal dose, D. (millirads/year), for the ith radionuclide was computed from th~ following equation:

D. = 1.87 x 10 7 WiC.E. ,

1 .. 1 1 where 1.87 x 10 7 is a constant to convert. .µCi/g or organism to millirads/year, W. is the concentration (µCi/ml) of the ith,radio.:..

nuclide in the liijuid effluents of the Peach Bottom Station, c.

1

---

---*---- ~ -

V-34 Table V-9. Radiation dose to biota by water immersion Beta+

Concentration Gamma dose Radionuclide gamma dose

(µCi/ml) (millirads/year)

(millirads/year)

• RB-86 1

• 3!:'.-13 3. 2F:-()'/  ?,.4E-07 SR-R9 8. 7E-1 l 4.SE-04 0. OE+IYO SP-90 S. OE-12 . 5. lE-05 o. en~+ on S:P-Ql s.-7E- 1 1 l.9E-03 1. :?.E:-03 Y-90 1

• 8E- 11 1. SE.-04 U.OE+OO Y-91 6. OE-11 3e3f.-(i4 4. IF.:-06 Y-93 7. 4E-1'1 8. Of.-Olt l.4E-04 ZH-95 7.7E-13 2. 3E-05 2. l F.-() 5 ZR-97 6e3E-13 2. L1E-ns l. 7f:-05 NB-95 R.4E-13 l

• 2E-05_ 1. ~F.-0:5 Nll-99 l.6E-10 1. 41::-1°13, 7.SF..-04 RU-103 5. 7E-13 s. RE-06

• S. 4E-06 RU-106 1. 7F'.- l 3 3.~E-Of. 6. 8E-07 RH-105* 6.01'..~ 13 l. 4E-n6 3. 5E-07 SN-125 5. 4E-15 l*lE-07 6.JE-OA SR-125 3e2E-15 3, 4E-OS 3.lE.-Ofi SB-127 4. 3F.-14 6.8E-07 4.0f.-07 TE-127M 1 .. SE-13 S. 9E-07 2.7E-07 TE-127 4. LIE-13 Q. 9F.-0 7 3.lE-08 TE-129M 1

• SE:- 12 9.7E;-06 S.4F:-06 TE-13111 2.0E-12 9e9E-05 9. OE-0~

TE-132 2. OE-11 1.6E-1)3 9. 1 F.- oi, I-130 7.0E-13 3.2E-1)5 2.7F:-1)5 I-131 l

• 2E- 1<) 1

• 1 f::-1) 3 Q.()}:;-(l.l!

I-133 2.sE-1n 3. 9r:-03 2. 7E-ll 3 I-135 3.3r::-11 2. 1 E-03 2.nF:-03 CS-134 6.7E-l.l 2. lE-03 2. n ;-~- o :~

CS-136 - 2* SE-11 1

• 2E-n3 1

• l F:-03 CS-137 6. 4E- l 1 8.4F:-04 7.2E-04 BA-140 l e4E-10 fi. 3E-1)3 7. 2E.-03 LA-14() 7. 7E- 1 1 3. HE-()3 3.SF.-03 CE-141 3. l E-1 P. 9. l E-06 * 7E-06 CE-143 2.SE-12 4.6E-05 2*9E-05 CE-144 Se7E-13 7e3F.:-06 5.6E-117 PR-143 9. 7E- l 3 3.01::-06 0. OE+O'O ND--147 3. 2E- l 3 ~

• OE-0 6 lelE-06 PM-147 7~-7E-_14 s. 1 E-l)8 O.OE+OO NA-24 4. 3E- l 2 3.4E-1)4 3.4E;-04 P~32 2.SE-14 1

• 7F:-n 7 0. OE+OO CR-.51 5e7E-12 3. 2E-06 3. 2E-06 MN-54 1.oE-12 1

• 6E:-05

• t. 6E-OS FE-55 2. SE-11 4. 6F.-06 . .l!.6E-06 FE-59 s.oE-12* 1. 9E-04 I* 8E-04 Cll-58 5. 7E- 11 l

• 1E-03 1 *. 11:::-*03 C0-60 S.?E-12 2. 7E-OL& 2

• 7F:-0L1 CU-64 6e4E-l:? 7.9E-06 7.9E-07 ZN-~5 4. OE-13 4o0E-06 4_. OE-06 ZN-69M S. 4E-14 8. 4E-07 4.2E-07 W-18 7 6e4E-12 R

• 4E-05 6. 4E-05 H-3 6.7E-09 4.0E-04 o.nF.:+oo TOT DllSE 3.2E-02 2.SE-02

• • • ~~-

V-35 is the concentration factor of the ith radionuclide in the biota

_of interest, andE. is the effective absorbed-energy (_MeV) of the ith radionuclide. 1 (The largest effective absorbed energy listed in Report No. 2 of the International Connnission on Radiological Protection Sit was selected*. J Immersion doses in water were computed with the EXREM computer code.s 7 ; 5a This. calculati~n assumes continuous immersion of the organism in water containing radionuclides* in concentrations as listed in Table V-8.

Both the internal and immersion dose calculations assume steady state conditions (i.e., the radionuclide concentrations in water remain constant). The computed internal doses are maximized since the maximum-effective absorbed energies (E.) in man were used in 1

the calculation. For small organisms such as singie-celled phyto-plankton,, zooplankton, benthic invertebrates, etc., the internal dose will tend to be overestimated because these organisms will not absorb this amount of energy emitted from a radionuclide de-posited in the body or cells of the species.

limllersion doses to benthic organisms such as invertebrates and*

periphytic algae are probably underestimated since a source term from radionuclides sorbed onto inorganic and organic bottom sedi-ments was not included in the dose calculations. Doses from sedi-ments should be comparable to the doses already calculated for algae, since concentration factors in algae are similar to those reported for fine sediments for many isotopes. 7 3 Quantitative calculation of sediment doses will not be possible until more data become available. Due to the relatively short residence time of the water in Conowingo Pond, and the continual irregular movement of the

• sediments downstream, there is very little chance of an equilibrium being established between the radionuclides in the-water and in the sediments.

Concentration factors (C.) used in the calculation of*internal dose (Table V-7) were exierimentally determined values obtained from the literature since there were no data on concentration factors specifically for the pond ecosystem. Altho.ugh factors vary in different environments due to various physical, chemical and biological conditions, it is felt that the best possible values for aquatic ecosystems obtained from literature used in these calc~lations are conservative and witl not differ significantly

--**--- ~----* ***---*------*~~- --.----,~- - .*---*-~* .. - *--~*-*-----* .-..--~~------**~-*-*-- -.....-,. ____,_. _____.,. ------***--~------ .. -,,.-.,, .. -.,. ,,.. ,_, ____ *-- ... --*-* -* .. _... , __ ,.

V-36 from actual values at the Peach. Bottom- site. Therefore, the dose estimates obtained using the literature values are accurate within the present state of knowledge.*

The radionuclide concentrations* in effluent water are Based on several. assumptions- of plant operation which tend to* maximize radionuclide concentrations- in effluent. water cased on" compari-sons with.actual operating histories of other plants, 'For normal operation, radionuclide concentrations in effluent water will probably not reach the concentrations listed in Taole V--8.

The estimated total doses (internal plus immersion) for aquatic plants, invertebrates, and fishes living in the discharge canal are 140, 60, and 4.8 mrads/year, respectively. Most of this dose, in all organisms, is from internal exposure. The nuclides of strontium, yttrium, cesium, and. cobalt contribute most of the in-ternal dose in plants, invertebrates, and fish, These doses are below those at which demonstrable radiation effects to aquatic organisms have been found. The problem of detecting effects at low dose levels such as these which result from radio-nuclide. releases at nuclear power reactors was pointed out in two recent reviews. 69 , 73 Although the assumptions used to estimate doses to aquatic organ-isms near the Peach Bottom Station tend to maximize the dose, there should be no discernible effects to these organisms as a result of the low-level releases.

E, TRANSPORTATION OF NUCLEAR*FUEL AND SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE The nuclear fuel for the two reactors at the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station in southeastern Pennsylvania is slightly enriched

• uranium in the form of sintered uranium oxide pellets encapsulated in zircaloy fuel rods.

1, Trartsport*of New*Fuel The applicant has indicated that new fuel will be shipped.by* truck in AEC-DOT approved* containers whi.ch. hold two fuel* elements per container. About 12 truckloads will be required each year for replacement fuel and about 48 truckloads for the initial loading, The applicant indicated the new fuel would come from Wilmington, North Carolina, a shipping dista~ce of about 460 miles.

---.-.- -.------c---------~-----------------------------------------.-

V-37

2. Transport-of-Irradiated Fael Fuel elements removed from tlie reactor will. be uncfumged in appear-,,..

ance and will. contain some of the. original u..:.235 (wliich* is .recover-able). As a result of tfie irradiati.on and* fissioning of . the uranium, the fuel* element w:i'll contain large amounts- of. radioactive fiss-:i;on products and some plutonium. As *these lllaterials .decay, they produce. radiation and ndecay heat," The radioactivity of the fuel varies according to ..-the length of time. after it has been dis-charged from the reactor,. After discharge from a reacto.r, .fuel

• elements are placed underwaterin a storage pool for cooling prior to being loaded int.o a cask for transport.

The applicant has indicated the irradiated fuel could be trans-ported by highway, rail, or water. He estimates 8 rail shipments or 100 truck shipments pet unit would be required each year. Des-tination.for these shipments will be Allied-Gulf Nuclear Services in Barnwell, South Carolina. Rail routing will be via Maryland and Pennsylvania, Penn, Central, Western Maryland, Norfolk and Western, Winston-Salem. Southbound, and Seaboard Coastline Railroad, a distance of 660 miles. Truck routing will be via York County Road LR 66070, Pennsylvania State Highway 851, U.S. Highways 1-83, 1-695, 1-95, and 1-495, and *south Carolina State Highway 64, a total distance of about 640 miles.

Although the specific cask design has not been identified, the applicant states tha_t the irradiated fuel elements will be shipped in approved casks. The cask will weigh perhaps 30 tons. for truck shipment and 100 tons for rail shipment *. To transport the irra-diated fuel from both reactors, the applicant*estimates 200_truck-lc:iad or* 16 railcatload shipments per year. An equal number of shipments will be required to return the empty casks.

3. Transport of. Solid Radioactiv.e Wastes The applicant has *indicated that all of the solid wastes,_90% of which will be. low specific 9-ctivity. mat.e:dal, wi.11 be placed ;in..

.55-gallon drums *. '!'.he wastes. will be' transported as. follows: the low level material will.oe* carried in a fully closed, excl;usive-use van; the low spe~ific- activity material requiring sli:ielding will be sh:ipp~d. in low_ specific activity *shield~f S!asks,

• Quan ti--

ties of waste exceeding 0.3 m.Ci/g will be shipped* in Type B shielded casks.

---

. --- --~-

' . - - ..... ~ ...... ~- *-- -*--~- - _... ...~ -*-----*---- ~ *-***..-*---..~....-**~--------~ -* *- *--*~* --- --** --* ---*.....--~-,. ,-------~~-- *--.. ---.- --*-- ---*- ..... -.---* *- -**- ~

V-38 The applicant indicates*that all shipments will be by truck, The low level wastes will be shipped to West Valley, New York, The appiicant estimates that this will require ab.out two tr.ips of 80 drums each per year per unit. "The routing will be via Pennsylvania State Highway 74 and U.S. Higfurays T-83, .22. 322, and 219, The distance to West Valley is ahout 400. miles.

• The low specific activity-materials requiring-shielding- and the Type B quantities will be shipped to Morehead, Kentucky. The appli-cant estimates 40 shipments of low specific activity requiring shielding, with 14 drums in each shipment, per year* per unit. He also estimates 4 shipments with 7 Type B packages _in each shipment, per year per unit. The routing will be via Maryland State Highway 136, U.S. Highways 1, I-95, I-70N, and 340, West Virginia State Highway 7, and U.S. Highways I-81 and 60 to Morehead, Kentucky, This is a distance of about 600 miles.

4. Principles of Safety in rransport The transportation of radioactive material is regulated by the Department of Transportation and the Atomic*Energy Commission, The regulations provide protection of the public and transport workers from radiation. This protection is achieved by a combina-tion of standards and requirements applicable to packaging, limita-tions on the contents of packages and radiation levels from packages, and procedures to limit the exposure of persons under normal and accident conditions, Primary reliance for safety in transport of radioactive material is placed on the packaging. The packaging must meet regulatory standards 75 established according to the type and form of material.

The standards provide that the packaging shall prevent the loss or dispersal of the radioactive contents, retain shielding efficiency, assure nuclear criticality safety, and provide adequate heat dissi-pation under normal conditions of transport and under specified accident damage test conditions. The contents of packages not designed to withstand accidents are limited, thereby limiting the risk from releases which could occur in an accident. The contents of the package also m~ be limited so that the standards for external radiation levels, temperature, pressure, and containment are met.

Procedures applicable to the shipment of packages of radioactive material require that the package be labelled with a unique "radio-active materials" label. In transport the carrier is required to

V-39 exercise control over r~dioacti:veinaterial pack.ages including load-ing and storage in areas separated from persons and limiting aggre_:

gati_ons of- packages to reduce the. exposure of persons under normal conditi_ons. The prpcedures* that carriers must follow in case of acci_dent include segregation of damaged and leaking pack.ages from people and notlii_cat{on of the sliipper and the Department 0£. Trans..,.

portation. Radiological assistance teams are availaole through an inter-governmental program to provide equipment and trained per-sonnel, if necessary, in such emergencies.

Within the regulatory standards, radioactive materials are required to be safely transported in routine commerce using conventional transportation equipment with no special restrictions on speed of vehicle, routing, or ambient transport conditions. According to the Department of Transportation, the record of safety in the transportation of radioactive materials exceeds that for any other type of hazardous commodity. Approximately 800,000 packages of radioactive materials are currently being shipped in the United States each year. Thus far, based on the best available infor-mation, there have been no known deaths or serious injuries to the public or to transport workers due to radiation from a radio-active material shipment.

Safety in transportation is provided by the package design and by limitations on the contents and external radiation levels and does not depend on controls over routing. Although the regulations require all carriers of hazardous materials to avoid congested areas76 whenever practical to do so, in general, carriers choose the most direct and fastest route. Routing restrictions that*

require use of secondary highways or other than the most direct route may increase the overall environmental impact of transporta-tion as a result of increased accident frequency or severity.

Any attempt to specify routing would involve continued analysis of routes in view of the changing local conditions as well as changing of sources of material and delivery points.

5 *.

• Exposures During Normal (No Accident) Conditions

a. *New Fuel Because amounts of nuclear radiations and heat emitted by new fuel are small, there will be essentially no effect on the environment during transport under normal conditions~ Exposure of individual transport workers is estimated to be less than 1 mrem per shipment, For the 12 shipments, with two drivers for each vehicle, the total

V-40 dose would be about 0.02 man-rem per year. The radiation level associated with each truckload of cold fuel will be <0.1 mrem/hr at 6.ft from the truck. A member of the general public who spends 3 minutes at an average distance of 3 -ft from the truck might re-ceive a dose of about O.05 mrem per shipment, The doses to other persons along the shipping route would be extremely small.

b. Irradiated Fuel Based on actual radiation levels associated with shipments of ir-radiated fuel elements, the staff estimates that the radiation *(

level*at 3 ft from a rail car will be about 25 mrem/hr.

The average exposure to an individual truck driver during a 640-mile shipment of irradiated fuel is estimated to be about 15 mrem. With two drivers on each vehicl_e, the annual cumulative dose for 200 shipments would be about 6. man-rem.

Train brakemen might spend a few minutes in the vicinity of the cat for an average exposure of about 0.5 mrem per shipment. With ten different brakemen involved along the route, th.e annual cumulative dose for 12 shipments is estimated to be about 0.08 man-rem.

A member o~ the general public who spends 3 minutes at an average distance of 3 ft from the truck or rail car,. might receive a dose of as much as 1.3 mrems. If 10 persons were so exposed per ship-ment, the annual cumulat.ive dose* for the 16 shipments by rail would be about 0.2 man-rem. Approximately~200,000 persons who reside along the 640- to 660-mile route over which the irradiated fuel is transported might receive an annual cumulative dose of about

1. 4 man-rems if the* fuel is transported by truck and O. 2 if trans-ported by rail. The regulatory radiation level limit of 10 mrem/hr at a distance of 6 ft from the vehicle was used to calculate the integrated' dose to persons in an* area between 100 ft and 0.5 mile on both sides of the shipping route. It was assumed that\ the ship-ment would travel 200 miles/day and the population density would average 330 persons/sq. mile along the route.

• The applicant estimates the amount of heat released to the air from each cask will vary from about 12 kW (thermal) *for a truck cask to 120 kW(t) for .a rail cask. This might be: compared to about SO KW(t) of waste' heat which is released from a .100-horsepower_ truck engine. Although th*e temperature. of the air that contacts the loaded cask'may be increased a few degrees,

V-41 no appreciable thermal effects on the environment will result because the amount of heat is small and is being released over the entire transportation route.

c. Solid Radioa~tDt'e*Wiistes.

Under normal conditions, tlie average exposure to the individual truck driver during a 4QQ;.,.. to 600:..mile shipment of solid radio-active waste is estimated to oe about 15 mrems. .If the same driver were to drive 15 truckloads in a year, he could receive an estimated dose of about 225 mrems during the year. With two drivers on each vehicle, the annual cumulative dose for the 164 shipments would be about 5 man-rems.

A member of the general public who spends 3 minutes at an average distance of 3 ft from the truck might receive a dose of as much as 1.3 mrems. If 10 persons were so exposed per'shipment, the annual cumulative dose would be about 2 man-rems. Approximately 120,000 to 180,000 persons who reside along the 400- to 600-mile routes over which the solid radioactive waste is transported might re-ceive an annual cumulative dose of about 1.8 man-rems. These doses were calculated for persons in an area between 100 ft and 0.5 mile on either side of the shipping route, assuming 330 persons/sq. mile, 10 mrem/hr at 6 ft from the vehicle, and the shipment traveling 200 miles/day.

• V-42 REFERENCES FOR SECTION V 1.. Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, ~nits 2 and 3, Supplement 3, Phila-delphia Electric Company, June 1972.

2. D. F. Jackson (ed.), Algae and Man, Plenum Press; New York, .

1964.

3. C. M. Palmer, Algae in Water Supplies, Public Health Service Publication No. 657, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington 25, D.C., 1959.

4. C. c. Coutant, Temperature Requirements of Aquatic Organisms, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 1973, in press.

5. L. P. Parrish, Marine, ~stuarine, *and Anadromous Fishes, pp. 52-82 in TerrrperatUX'e and Aquatic Life, Laboratory In-vestigations Branch, FWPCA, 1967.

6. O. P. de Sylva., :Iheoretical Considerations on the Effects of.

Heated Effluents on Maririe Fish, pp. 229-293 in Biological

• Aspects of Thermal PoUution, P. A. Krenkel and F. L. Parker (eds.), Vanderbilt University Press, Nashville, Tennessee, 1969. .

7. J. A. Mihursky and V. S. Kennedy, Water Temperature Criteria to Protect Aquatic Life, Amer. Fish. Soc. Spec. Publ. No. 4, pp. 20-32, 1967.

8. F.E.J. Fry, J. R. Brett, and G. H*. Clawson, Lethal Limits of Temperature for young Goldfish, Rev. Can. Biol. 1: 50-56 (1942).

9. J. s. Hart, Lethal Temperature Relations of Certain Fish of the Toronto Region, Trans. Roy. Soc. Canada 51 (Ser. 3): 57-71 (1947).

10. D. P~ Scott, Thermal Resistance of Pike (Esox lucius L.),

• Muskellunge (E. masquinongy Mitchill) ~and Fl Hybrids, J.

Fish. Res. Bd. Canada 21(5): 1043-1049 (1964).

11. E. T. Garside and. C. M. Jordan, Upper Lethal Temperatures at Various Levels of Salinity in the Euryhaline Cyprinodontids Fundulus heteroclitus and F. diaphanus After Isomotic Accli-mation~ J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada 25(12): 2717-2720 (1968).

V-43

12. J. - S. Hart, Geographic Variations of .*same Physiological and Mo:tphoiogical Characters in Cer.tain F-reshwater Fish, -Publ, Onta:rio Fish~ .Res. Lab.. No. 72, - 1952,.

13, K, --0, *Allen and K. Strawn, Heat Tolerance of Channel* Catfish, PP* 399:.,.411 in Proc. 21st Annual Conf*. S.E. -Assoc. - Game and Fish comm. , 19q7.

14. T. H. Blahm and W, D, Parente, The'Effect of Increased Water Temperatures on the Survival of Adult Threespine Stickleback (Gasterostues aculeatus) and Juvenile Yellow Perch (pe:rca flavescens-) in the Columbia River~- mamis.cript, Biological Laboratory, Bureau of Comm, Fish., Seattle, 1970,

15. G. E. Hutchinson, A Treatise on LirrrnologyJ Vol, 2, John Wiley and Sons, Inc, , New Yo_rk, 1967.

16. H, A, Boyer, The effect of passage of zooplankton through Peach Bottom Atom Plant, Unit No. 1, M.S. Thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1971.

17. M. J, Oestmann, Indian Point No. 2 (Docket No .. 50-247) - Fish Kill on th~ Hudson River, DREP, AEC, Washington, D.C., March 6, 1972.

18. C.H. Hocutt, Swinnning speed of the channel catfi~h and other warm water fishes of Conowingo Reservoir as determined in the Beam_ish Respirometer, in Studies of the fishes of Conowingo Reservoir 1966-1968, Conowingo ReseY'VoiP - Muddy Run Fish Studies "Progress Report 2, T. W. Robbins and Associates, 1969.

I.9. E. Kothas, Studies of the swimming speed of some anadromous fishes found below Conowingo Dam, Susquehanna River, Maryland, Conowingo ReseY'Voir - Muddy Run Fish Studies Progress Report 6, 1970.

20. L. R. King, Swinnning speed of the channel catfish, white crappie, and other warm water fishes from Conowingo Reservoir, Susquehanna River, Pa, , Icthyo logica Z Associates Bull. No.* 4 ,

1969.

21. -C. H. Hocutt, The effects of temperature on the--swimming per-formance of the largemouth bass, -spotfin shiner~ and channel catfish, Conowingo Rese:rvoi:r - Muddy Run Fish Studies "Progress Report 5, 1970.

22. V. J. Schuler, Progress report of swim speed study conducted on fishes of Conowingo Reservoir, IcthyologicaZ As.sociatesJ Progress Report 1B, 1968,

V-44

23. H. A. Boyer, Limnological data for Conowingo Reservoir, Muddy Run Pmnped Storage Reservoir, and Muddy Run Recreation Lake, 1968-1969, ConOIJ)ingo Reservoir - MuddJJ Run Ecological Studies Data Report J, 1970.

24. M. S~ Topping, Limnological data for Conowingo Reservoir, Muddy Run Pumped Storage Reservoir, and the Rec-reation Lake, 1970, Icthyological Associates Data Report No. ?, 1971.

25. P. Doudoroff and D. L. Shumway, Dissolved oxygen requirements of freshwater fishes, PAO Pi heries Tech. Paper No. 86, Rome, 1970.

26. J. W. Arthur and J. G. Eaton, ~o~icity of Chloramines to the Amphipod, Gamrnarus pseudolirrmaeus Bousfield, and the Fathead Minnow, Pimephales promelas Rafinesque, J. Fisheries Res.

Board Ca:n.*, 1972.

27. J. W. Arthur, Progress reports, National Water Quality Laboratory, Duluth, Minnesota, 1971.

28. J. w. Arthur, Progress reports, National Water Quality Laboratory, Duluth,. Minnesota, 1972 *.

29. R. E. Basch, In-situ Investigations of the Toxicity of Chlori-nated Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluents to Rain-bow Trout (Salmo gairdneri) and Fathead Minnows. (Pimephales promelas). Bureau of Water Management, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Lansing, Michigan, 1971.

30. K. E. Biesinger, Personal communication, National Water Quality Laboratory; Duluth, Minnesota, 1971; described in letter, O. Sisman, ORNL to J. Cusack, USAEC, Jan. 15, 1973 (Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278).

31. F. L. Coventry, v. E. Shelford, and L. F. Miller, The Con-ditioning of a Chloramine Treated Water Supply for Biological Purposes, Ecology 16,: 60-66 (1935).

32. J .w. T.* Dandy, The Effects of Chemical Characteristics of the Environment on the Activity of an Aquatic Organism, Thesis, University of Toronto, Ont., 1967; Dissertation Abstracts 29, B. 3132 (1969); Water Pollution AhH . (Brit.) 42: 1708 (1969).

33. R. L *. Forbes, Chlorine Toxicity and Its Effect on Gill Tissue Respiration of the White Sucker, Catostomus commersoni (Lacepede). MS thesis, Department of Fisheri~s and.Wildlife, Michigan State University, East *Lansing, Michigan, 1971.

v-45

34. F. E. Hale, Control of Microscopic Organisms in Public Water Supplies with Particular Reference to New York City, New Engl. Water WoPks Assoc. 44: 361-85 (1930).

35. G. A. Holland, J.E. Lasater, E. D. Neumann, and W. E. Eldridge, Toxic Effects of Organic and Inorganic Pollutants on Young Salmon and Trout, State of Washington, Department of Fisheries, Research Bulletin No. 5, September 1960, pp. 198-~14. *

36. J. C. Merkens, Studies on the Toxicity of Chlorine and Chlora-mines*to the Rainbow Trout, Water and Waste Treat. J. 7: 150-51 (1958). .

37. E. A. Pyle, Neutralizing Chlorine in City Water for Use in Fish"-Pistribution Tanks, .

FPog. Fish-Cult. 22: 30-33 (1960). *

\ .

38. J.B. Sprague and D. E. Drury, Avoidance Reactions of *salmonid Fish. to Representative Pollutants, pp. 169~179 in Advances in Water Pollution Research, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference, 1969.

39. R. $~ Taylor and M~ C. James, Treatment for Removal of Chlorine from City Water for Use in Aquaria, U.S. Bur. Fish. Doc. #1045, Rept. U.S. Corron. Pim .. App. 7: 322-27 (1928) *.

40. J. G. Trucha"Q, Personal connnunication (through W*. _Brungs, EPA),

Michigan Water ~esources Commission, Lansing, Michigan, 1971; described in letters, O. Sisman, ORNL to J. Cusack, USAEC, Jan. 15, 1973 (Docket No. 50-277 and 50-278).

41. C. Tsai, Water Quality and Fish Life Below Sewage Outfalls, Progress Report, Natural Resources Institute, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, 1971.

42. J. A. Zillich, The Toxicity of the Wyoming Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent to the Fathead Minnow and.the White Sucker, July 28-August 1, 1969, Michigan Water Resources Commission, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, 1969 .*. *

43. J. A. Zillich, The Toxic Effects of the Grandville Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent to the Fathead Minnow, Pimephales promelas, November 17-21, 1969, Michigan Water Resources Conmdssion, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, 1969.

44. J. A. Zillich, The Toxicity of the Wyoming Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent to the Fathead Minnow, December 8-12, 1969, Michigan Water Resources Connnission, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, 1969.

v-46

45. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20.

46 . . Title 10, Code of Federal Regulatii:ms,Part 50.

47. D. K *. Slade. (ed.}, Meteorofogy- and Atomia Energy<t9BB,

'.!.'ID~24190 (.July 1968).

48. M. Reeves III~ P. G*. Fowler, and K.

• E.

• Cowser, A Computer Code

• for Routine Atmospheric Releases of .Short-Lived.Radioactive Nuclides, ORNL-TM~3613, Oak,Ridge National Laboratory, in press.

49. K. E. Cowser et al. 3 Evaluation of the Potential Radiological Impact of Gaseous Effluents on Local Environments, presented at International Symposium on Radioecology Applied to the Protection of Man and His Environment, Connnission of the European Communities, September 7-10, 1971, Rome, Italy, 50, D.H.F. Atkins, R. C. Chadwick, and A. C. Chamberlain, Depo-sition of Radioactive Methyl Iodide to Vegetation, Health Phys. 13: 91 (1967),

51. D. F, Bunch (ed.), Controlled Environmental Radioiodine Tests, Progress Report 2, ID0-12053 (August 1966).

52. F. A, Gifford and D. H. Pack, Surface Deposition of Airborne Material, Nual. Safety 3(4): 75 (June 1962).

53. Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Environmental Report, .June 1971.

54. International Commission on Radiological Protection, Reaommen-dations of-the International Corronission on Radiologiaal I>ro-teation, ICRP Puhl. 2; Pergamon Press, London, 1959.

55, G. J. Hine and G. L, Brownell (eds, ) , Radiation Dosimetry, Academic Pres&, New York, 1956.

56. K. Z, Morgan and J. E. Turner (eds.), I>rinaip les of Radiation Proteat{ori, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1967.*

57. W, Doyle Turner, S. V. Kay, and P. S. R~hwer, EXREM and INREM Computer Codes for Estimating Radiation Doses to Populations from Construation of a Seci-Level Canal uJith Nualear Ea:plosives, .

K-1759 (Sept, *16, 1968).

V-47

58. w. Dorle Turner, _The.EXR.EM.1I.. Computer Code for Estimating External Dos.es to -Populations: fr()m .Construction of a Sea;,..

Level Canal with- Nua leoj, Explosives~ *. ~TC.;...a * (July 2_1, 19 69 l.

59. J.

• K.

• Soldat;

• Environmental Evaluat~on of. an Acute* Release of I~131 to tlie Atmospliere., lf_e.al tli Pf1:yi * .11: 1009. (19651.

60. B. Shle.ien, An Evaluation of Internal Radiation Exposure Based on Dose Commitments from Radionuclides in Milk., ]i'ood, and Air, Health* Phys.* 18: 267 (197b}. . .

61. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Basic Radiation Protection Criteria, NCRP Report No. 39, NCRP Publications, Washington, D.c., 1971.

62. Federal Radiation Council, Estimates and Evaluation of Fallout in the United States friom Nuc Zeari Weapons Testing Conducted thrioughJ962, Report No~ *4, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.c., May 1963. *

63. J. Mishima, Methyl Iodide Behavior in Systems Containing Air-borne Radioiodine, Nucl. Safety 9(1): 35 (1968).

64. J. D. Burton, R. J. Garner, and R. S. Russell, Possible Rela-tionships between the Deposition of Fission Products and Levels of Dietary Contamination, p. 457 in Radioactivity and Human Diet, R. S. Scott (ed.), Pergamon Press, London, 1966.

65. Philadelphia Electric Company, Supplement No. 2 to the Environmental Report, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, May 1972.

66. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriicu.Zturial Sta,tistics 1959, U.S~ Government Printing Office, Washingt~n* D.c., 1969.

67. W. H. Chapman, H. L. _F~sher, and _M. w. Pratt, Concentz,ation Pactoris of .. Chem'ica l Elements iri --Edible Aquatie Origanisms, UCRL-50564, Univ. of California, Lawrence Rad~ Lao., 19'68.

68. G. C. Polikarpov, RadioeaoZogy of .IJ.quatic Organisms, Reinhold Puol. Corp., New York, 196i.

69. S. I. Auerbach, D. J. Nelson, s. V. Kaye, D. E *. Reichle, and C. C. Coutant, Ecological Considerations in Reactor Power Plant. Siting, pp. 805-820. in-Environmental Aspects of !!Juel.ear Power Stations, IAEA, Vienna, 1971.

• V.;..48

70. A. M. Freke, A Model for the Approximate Calculation of Safe Rates of Discharge of Radioacti:ve Wastes into Marine Environ--

ments, HEaZth Phys. 13: 743 (;[967}.

71. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50) Appendix I.

72, N. R, French, B, G.. }faza, and H. W-. Kaaz, Mortality Rates in Irradiated Rodent Populations*, pp. 46,,.-52 in Proaeed-z:ngs_ of the 2nd National 5ymposiwn on. RadioeaQ-Zogy, D. J.. Nelson and F. E. Evans (ed~J, USAEC Conf~* 67-503,* TID-4500, 1969,

73. Radioactivity in the MaPine Environment, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D. C, , 1971.

74. Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Uni-ts 2 and 3, Supplement 1, Philadelphia Electric Company, May 1972,

75. 10 CFR 71; 49* CFR 173 and 178.

76, 49 CFR 397,l(d).

77. D. E. Reichle, P. B. Dunaway, and D. J. Nelson, Turnover and Concentration of Radionuclides in Food Chains, Nwl, Safety, 11:43-56 (1970).

78. W. M. Louder, et al, Environmental Gamma Radiation From Nitrogen-16 Decay in the Turbines of a Large Boiling Water Reactor, HASL-TM-12-1, USAEC New York Operations Office, Health and Safety Laboratory (February 1972).

.::;;.,-----*----,--,-----,-----------c--~--

VI. EFFLUENT AND .ENVIRONMENTAL. 'MONITORING Biological and radiological monitoring programs were instituted for Peach Bottom Unit 1 and are continuing. Thermal monitoring has also been sta~ted and will con~inue. '!he chemical monitoring program has not been too extensive and will be expanded for Units 2 and 3. This section describes the past and continuing programs and discusses some recommendations by the .staff for enlarging some of the monitoring programs.

A. RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING The applicant is conducting a comprehensive preoperational environ-mental radiation monitoring program for Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 which is a modified version of the preoperational and operational monitoring programs 1 , 2 used for *Peach Bottom Unit 1. Modification of the program involved the addition of monitoring locations and types o_f monitoring directed toward gaseous and liquid discharges from BWR units * . Three consulting firms are employed by the appli-cant to C?nduct th~ environmental radiation ~onitoring program:

Combustion Engineering, Inc., International Chemical and Nuclear Corporation, and Radiation Management Corporation. Each consulting firm has re~ponsibility for specific areas of the program~

• The preoperational program includes sampling and analysis of air particulates, precipitation, milk, well water, terrestrial vege-tation, soil, animals (rabbits), river water, fish, shellfish (oysters), silt, and plankton. All samples are analyzed for gross beta activity at the same frequency as _the collection frequency.

Samples associated with the water environment are also .analyzed )

by gross alpha and gamma spectral techniques. Samples other than air particulates are analyzed .for a number of specific radio-nuclides as ~ollows: H-3 in water samples; I-131 in milk, rabbit thyroids and shellfish tissue; Sr-90 and Cs-137 in milk, precipi-tation, soil, vegetation~ well water, bottom sediments, fish,* and shell£ ish; and uranium in well water. The analysis frequency for specific radionuclides varies from monthly for H-3 in water samples to annually for Sr-90 and Cs-137 in soil. Table vr~l presents a summary of the applicant's environmental radiation monitoring program. A more detailed description of the program is given in Part 2 of the applicant's Environmental Report, Supplenent No. 1. 2 The operational monitoring program will be basically a continuation VI-1

---

*---~

Table Vl-1. Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 environmental radiation monitoring program

• Type of sample and collection frequencya Ambient Station Location Shell Air external Well River gamma Precipitation Milk water Vegetation Soil Rabbits water Fish fish Silt Plankton particulates

,adiation (oysters) 1 Peach Bottom Station w W,Qb M QC TA SA SA Md SA 2 Hill south of station w Q 3 Delta, Pa. w Q TA SA 4 Conowingo Dam W(2) Q M TA SA M Qe M 5 Wakefield, Pa. w Q TA SA 6 Holtwood Dam w Q TA SA M Qe SA 7 Derlington, Md. Q 8 Colora, Md. Q TA 9 Tolchester, Md. Q 10 Hacketts Pt., Md. Q 11 Swan Pt., Md. - Q 12 Philadelphia, Pa. w Q <l H

13 Chester Water Intake M I N

14 Peach Bottom, Lancaster County Q 15 Hill*near Silver Spring Road Q 16 Nottingham, Pa.

• Q 17 Hill near Riverview Road Q 18 Fawn Grove, Pa.

• Q 19 Red Lion, Pa. Q 20 Bel Air, Md. Q 21 Lancaster, Pa. Q 22 Hill near Eagle Road Q Regional farms A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H Q aCollection frequency: W = weekly, M= monthly, Q=quarterly, TA= three times per year, SA= semi-annually.

bcontinuous recording scintillation monitors read weekly - TLD read quarterly. *

• csampling and analysis for tritium monthly.

dSamples collected of both intake and discharge water.

eSaniples collected in Conowingo and Holtwood Ponds and tributaries.

/.

~-~--,------------------

\rr-3 of the preoperational prog;am, with certain changes and modifica-tions required by the staff. For example, charcoal cartridges will be operatea in conjunction with the air particulate samplers and analyzed weekly for I-131. Milk samples will be collected at appro-priate sites in the potentially affected area and analyzed weekly for I-131, and monthly composites analyzed for Sr-89, Sr-90 and gamma spectrum.

The applicant will be required to take a census every six months to determine the location of cows in the potentially affected areas. Milk will be sampled* from any cows introduced into this potentially affected area and analyzed as above.

The program will be defined in detail in the applicant's FSAR and in the Technical Specifications. It is felt that the environ-mental radiological program will be capable of measuring any radiological effects from *the operation of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station on the environment.

B, BIOLOGICAL MONITORING

1. Studies Ecological studies were made by the applicant's consultants in Conowingo Pond_ to enable identification of ecologic.al changes due to subsequent plant operation. Studies began in the summer of 1966 and have continued to the present time.. The results were reported in a series of documents published by Icthyological Asso-ciates and sunnnarized in Supplement No. 1 of the applicant's Envi-ronmental Report.2 '

Terrestrial ecological studies were not performed. Nature walks, personal observations, and intervi~ws of iocal authorities (Audubon Society, etc.) and game wardens were incorporated in a description of the local terrestrial ecology. A supplemental list of terres-trial v.ertebrates was supplied by .the applicant at the request of the staff*.

• Sampling stations were establi~hed throughout Conowingo Pond.

Certain aspects of tQe physical environment and major components of the biota were sampled at many stations on the pond. Physical parameters examined were temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen~ chloro-phyll a, transparency, total dissolved solids, conductivity, sodium,

VI-4 potassium, calcium, magnesium, carbonates, chloride, sulfate, iron, silicas, nitrates, nitrites, and phosphates. Biological connnunities studied were fish, benthic invertebrates, zooplankton, and phyto-plankton.

In general, water, phytoplankton, zooplankton, and benthos samples were taken at the same sampling station (see Sect. II.E.2.c.(1)).

Water samples were collected from the surface, 5 ft, 10 ft, and bottom depths using a VanDorn water sampler. Transparency was measured with a Secchi disk and water temperatures with a Model

• FT3 Hydrographic Thermometer (thermistor probe). Oxygen concen-trations were determined in the field by the unmodified Winkler method in sunnner, 1970, but, prior to that time and after, con-centrations were measured by a Weston-Stack Dissolved Oxygen Analyzer. Carbonates and pH were determined potentiometrically.

Sodium, potassium, calcium, magnesium, chloride, and nitrate were determined with specific-ion etectrodes, but in the future, metal concentrations will be obtained by atomic absorption spectro-photometry~ Phosphate, silica, and soluble iron were determined spectrophotometrically. Beginniµg in 1970, chlorophyll a concen-trations were also measured by spectrophotometry. 3 .

Plan~ton was collected by diagonal tow using a Clarke-Bumpus Plankton Sampler with a #20 mesh net.

Benthic invertebrates were sampled by a 12-in.-square Ekman grab sampler, and the samples were sieved through a #20 Tyler standard screen.

Sampling areas for Conowingo Pond fishes are described in Supple-ment .No. 1 to the applicant's Environmental Report. 2 Fishes were collected primarily with seines, trap nets, tr~wls, and meter nets.

Trannnel~ets, gill nets, and electroshocking were used minimally, since the other gears proved more effective.

The trap net had a 3 x 6-:-ft trap with 3 x 50-ft i.ead with 1/2-in.

mesh of #126 knotless nylon. Trap nets were set with the lead perpendicular to and attached at the shoreline.

Trawls were made with a 16-ft semi-balloon trawl pulled behind a houseboat. Trawl speed was 2 to 3 mph. Hauls were made.in an up-stream direction for 10 minutes.

Seines were either 10 x 4 ft or 15 x 4 ft with i/4-in. mesh. Most seinable sites were small beaches less than 100 ft in length; water depths were 3 to 4 ft approximately 15 to 30 ft offshore. Seine stations were sampled both during the day and at night, with an emphasis on daylight samples.

~;:>,.-.,----_...;...,....,_ _,,,""""""'."__________

. VI-5 Meter net samples were taken in the intake canal of the Muddy Run plant to determine the effects of pumping and generation. Tagging studies (13,000 fish) have been performed to determine the movements of white crappie and channel catfish in the pond.

A considerable effort has been e:xpended in the Conowingo Pond ecological studies, particularly with regard to the zooplankton and fish sampling programs. However, phytoplankton has not been sampled on a regular basis, and the species composition of this important connnunity is presently unknown. Benthic studies have tended to ign()re hard-bottom areas of Conowiri.go Pond, and the species composition of the periphyton commtmity is also tinknowri.

Certain aspects of the water chemistry studies were also inade-quate as conducted. In many cases, dissolved oxygen, water

• temperature, and pH "t:7ere not measured on the same sampling date in 1970. 'The concentrations of _some ions (potassium, nitrate, were too low to. permit the use of specific ion electrodes as a measurement technique *. The size and species selectivity of the fish sampling gear was not determined for the larger game fishes (basses, etc.).

Certain impor~ant properties of the populations of the major fish species in Conowingo Pond. which are necessary to the proper evaluation of potential biological impacts have not been.determined: standing crop, natural recruitment and nortality rates, location and importance of spawning areas, IIDrtality rates due to the operation of Muddy Run, definitive age and growth data, and the annual variations in such proper~ies. Far more rigorous information would be necessary to predict future*ecological changes than to determine effects after plant .operation cominences. Most aspects of the ecological sampling programs were designed for the latter purpose. *

2. Conclusions The applicant's ecological sampling program with necessary modifi-cations could provide the information to enable detection of major ecological changes in Conowingo Pond once station operation commences.

The phytoplankton and water chemistry programs should be augmented.

Studies should be initiated to determine the losses of biota due to impingement and entrainment. Growth, condition, and popul,.ation density monitoring of fishes in the discharge canal and near-field areas of *the thermal plume would be desirable. Fish mortalities associat~d with Peach Bottom and Muddy Rtm should be rigorously monitored. The physical characteristics of the thermal plwne should be carefully studied tmder a wide range of conditions.

Studies of the potential losses of anadromous fish due to Muddy Run would be highly desirable.

VI-6 C, THERMAL MONITORING PROGRAM Th~ applicant has established two basic thermal monitoring plans for Conowingo Pond. Both plans are presently in operation, One plan, which involves. only permanent monitoring stations, is used for winter conditions when ice might be expected to prevail over a portion of the pond. The other plan, involving both permanent stations and boat monitoring, is used during sunnner conditions.

'lhe winter plan was started in December 1971. In_ this program there are 8 permanently moored,stations that contain a total of 18 thermographs. 'lhese instruments are located at various depths at each station accor¢ling to the depth of the pond. 'lhe upper-most instrument is anchored sufficiently below the pond surface to avoid damage from, any thick ice cover. The locations of these stations are shown in Fig, VI-1. One station is downstream and within 1000 ft of the plant discharge port, another station is about 4000 ft downstream, and the remaining six stat ions are located between the Conowingo Dam and one mile above the plant, During the s:ummer, the 18 thermographs are relocated in 16 perma-nent stations as shown in Fig. VI-1, thus affording approximately one thermograph per station. The depths at which these thenoo-graphs are located was not given by the appli.can t. The eight additional stations are closer to the plant than the eight winter stations with some emphasis along the near shoreline d~nstream from the discharge port. However, two stations are located approximately one and two. miles upstream center from the plant,

• with one station placed at a limiting downstream position at Conowingo Dam. The density of stations is highest from the plant*

site to three miles downstream. 'lhe recorded thermal data are collected monthly from t~ese 16 stations.

During the sununer months, collections of recorded thermal data from the 16 permanent stations are augmented by use of a motorboat-mounted temperature recorder. With the boat and its nonitor, thermal data are being collected from44 locations. Tii.ese loca-tions are also shown on Fig, VI-1. Tii.e temperature recorder on the motorboat is used to record the temperature at intervals of 5-ft depths at each of the 44 stations. The thermal data from this mobile unit are used to help evaluate the monitoring data from the permanently moored stations.

Both sununer and winter plans are now in operation and will be continued after the plant is in operation. No termination date has been given by the applicant, 'lhe duration of the program

-a.... . , . . - - - - - - - - - - , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

VI-7 r-----~*~~ .: 8 . . 8 3

• 5*

\ PEACH BOTTOM - ~~4*

7

. r-:---'

ATOMIC POWER  : - . DOWN STREAM __,.

STATION . . -

WINTER INSTRUMENTATION (8)

I I 0 3000 6000 FEET

• 8 12*

.1

.5~~~

SUMMER INSTRUMENTATION ( 16) 36.

~ ~

• 4 21 38*

• 7 *12 *19 22: 41*39* *

,. 3 . e15 18* 23* , *31 . 35 40 8 .11 16 17 4 ' *30 *34 33

,.,---.a.::2_ _ _ l ! * ! , - ~ ~ - . .29 :32 -~

_.,' . f5 '~-28.4443 ' .- '

, 27

' 26 .

BOAT MEASUREMENT POINTS (44)

Figure VI-1. Thermal monitoring locations for Conowingo Pond.

VI-8 and the circumstances under which it could be curtailed will be defined in the Technical Specifications. The innnediate objectives of the thermal monitoring program, as stated by the applicant, are to (1) validate the thermal model studies of the Alden Research Laboratories (Section III.D.l.a), (2) to determine whether or not the thermal discharges of the plant exceed the thermal limits set by regulatory agencies (presumed by the staff to be the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania agencies), (3) to determine preoperational or base-line conditions in the pond, and (4) to determine minimum physical measurements needed to predict pond thermal conditions for operat-ing the plant.

D. CHEMICAL MONITORING The applicant will- monitor the discharge of each condenser section during*chlorination of the condens~r cooling water.1,2,4-7 This will be done in order to maintain the free residual chlorine 2oncen-

. tration at or below the control limit. The applicant will also monitor waste discharges for iron to confirm that Pennsylvania state standards are being met. He has no plans for monitoring the non-radioactive liquid waste for heavy metal ions (other than iron) such as copper, zinc, cadmium, cobalt, nickel, chromium, and manganese. 1 , 4 There will be additional chemical monitoring in the settling basin discha~ge line for conductivity~ p~, and turbidity. 1 ,4 The staff reconnnends that the applicant plan* and begin a program for determining the total residual chlorine in the condenser cool-ing water during chlorination. In addition, a program should be undertaken by the applicant to determine the minimum amount of chlorine necessary in the cooling water to prevent condenser fouling. When the piant becomes operational, the applicant should undertake a monitoring program for heavy metals such as copper, zinc, cadmium, cobalt, nickel, chromium, and manganese to determine if these metals are being discharged to the river.

For example, copper and zinc can be present in the circulating water because of corrosion of the admiralty metal heat exchangers.

VI-:-9 REFERENCES*. FOR SECfION. VI

1. Envirorunental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Pow~ Station, Uni.ts 2 and 3,' Supplement 2, ];'hiladelphia Electric Cqmpany,, MaY' 1972.

2.

• Environmental Report,. Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement 1, Philadelphia Electric Company, November* 1971. *

3. M. S. Topping, Limnological data for Conowingo Reservoir, Muddy Run Pumped Storage Reservoir, and the Recreation-Lake, 1970, Icthyological Associates Data Report No. ?; 1971,

4. .Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Philadelphia Electric Company, June 1971.

5. Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power *station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement 3, Philadelphia Electric Company, June 1972,

6. Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement 4, Philadelphia Electric Company, July 1972,

7. Environmental Report, Operating*License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement 5, Philadelphia Electric Company, July 1972.

VII. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF POSTULATED ACCIDENTS A. PLANT OPERATION ACCIDENTS Protection against the occurrence of postulated design basis acci-dents in the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3 is provided through the defense-in-depth concept of design, manufac-ture, operation, and testing and continued quality assurance program for the integrity of the reactor primary system. These aspects will be considered in.the staff's safety evaluation for 'the Peach Bottom facilities. Off-design conditions that may occur are limited by protection systems which place and hold the power plant in a safe condition. Notwithstanding this, the conservative postulate is made* that serious accidents might occur, even though unlikely; and engineering safety features are installed to mitigate the consequences of these postulated events.

The probability of occurrence of accidents and the spectrum of their consequences to be considered from an environnental effects standpoint have been analyzed using estimates of probabilities and realistic fission product release and transport assumptions.

For site evaluation in the staff's safety review, extremely con-servative assumptions are used for the purpose* of evaluating the adequacy of engineered safety features and for comparing calculated doses resulting from a hypothetical release of fission products from the fuel against the 10 CFR Part 100 siting guidelines. The computed doses that would be received by the population and environ-ment from actual accidents would be significantly less than those which will be presented in the safety evaluation.

The AEC issued guidance to applicants on September 1, 1971, requir-ing the consideration of a spectrum of accidents with assumptions as realistic as the state of knowledge permits. The applicant's response was contained in the "Peach Bottom Atomic Power Statio*n Units No. 2 and 3 Environmental Report, Supplement No. 1, Operat-ing License Stage," dated November 1971.

The applicant's report has been evaluated, using the standarq accident assumptions and g:uidance issued by the AEC as a proposed amendment 1 to Appendix D of 10 CFR Part 50 on December 1, 1971.

Nine classes of postulated accidents and occurrences ranging in severity from trivial to very serious have been identified by the AEC, In general, accidents in the high potential consequence end of the spectrum have a very low occurrence rate, arid those on the low potential consequence end have a higher occurrence rate, Tl)e VII-1

VII-2 Table VII-I. Cl~ssification of postulated accidents and occurrences at P!'ach Bottom Atomic *Power Station Class AEC description Applicant's examples 1 'Frivial incidents None 2 Miscellaneous small releases Reactor coolant leaks (below allowable Technical outside containment. Specifications limits) outside primary containment or reactor building 3 Radioactive waste system failures Any single equipment failure or any single operator error

4. Events that release radioactivity

• Fuel failures during transients outside the normal into .the primary system (BWR) range of plant variables but within expected*

range of protective equipment and other parameter operation 1 5 Events that release radioactivity Primary coolant loop leaks to auxiliary cooling into primary.and secondary system; secondary side of heat exchanger leak systems (PWR) 6 Refueling accidents inside Dropping of.spent fuel shipping cask in pool or containment. outside pool 7 Accidents to spent fuel outside Transportation incident involving spent and new containment fuel shipment onsite but outside primary containment or reactor building 8 Accident initiation events a. Reactivity transient considered in design-basis b. Loss of rea~tor coolant inside or outside*

evaluation in the Safety primary containment

• Analysis Report 9 Hypothetical sequences of None.

failures more severe than class 8

',:,_-----~----------------------** ----------

VII-3.

examples selected _by the appl:Lcant for these classes of accidents are shown in Table VII-1. The examples given are reasonably homo-*

genous in . terms* of probability within each. class.

Certain assumptions 'made by -the applicant, such as the iodine partition factor in the suppression pool during a loss..-of..,.coolant accident and the efficiency assigned to* the charcoal filters in the standby gas treatment system, in our view, are optimistic; but the use of alternative assumptions does*not significantly affect the overall environmental risk.

Staff estimates of the dose that might be received by an assumed individual standing at . the site boundary in the downwind direction, using the assumptions in-the proposed Annex to Appendix D, are presented in Table VII-2. Estimates of the integrated exposure in man-rem that might be delivered to the population within 50 miles of the site are also presented in Table VII-2. These man-rem esti-mates were based on the projected population around the site for the year 2015.

• To rigorously establish a realistic annual risk, the calculated doses in Table VII-2 would have to be multiplied by estimated probabilities, . The events in Classes 1 and .. 2 represent occurrences that are anticipated during plant operation, and their consequences, which are very small, are considered within the framework of routine effluents from the plant. Except for a limited amount of fuel failures, the events in Classes 3 through 5 are not anticipated during plant operation, but events of this type could occur some~

time during the 30-year plant lifetime. Accidents in Classes 6 and 7 and small accidents in Class 8 are of similar or lower prob-ability than accidents in Classes 3 through 5 but are still possi-ble. The probability of occurrence of large Class 8 accidents is very small. Theref9re, when the consequences indicated in Table VII-2 are weighted by probabilities, the environmental risk is very low.* The postulated occurrences in Class 9 involve sequences of successive failures* more severe than those require.cl to be considered for the design basis of protection systems and engineered safety features. Their consequences could be severe. However, the prob-ability of their occurrence is so small that their environmental risk is extremely low. Defense in depth (multiple physical bar-riers); quality assurance for design, Eanufacture, and operation; continued surveillance and testing; and conservative design ar~

all applied to provide and maintain the required high degree of assurance that potential accidents in this class are, and will remain, sufficiently small in probability that the environmental risk is extremely low.

VII-4 Table Vll-2. Summa,y of radiological consequences of postulated accidents Estimated dose Estimated fraction

• to population Class Event of 10CFR 20 in 50-mile limit at site boundarya radius {man-rems) 1.0 Trivial incidents b b 2.0 Small releases outside b b containment 3.0 Radioactive waste system failures 3.1 Equipment leakage or 0.072 26 malfunction 3.2 Release of waste gas 0.29 100 storage tank contents 3.3 Release of liquid waste <0.001 < 0.1 storage tank contents 4.0 Fission products to primary system (BWR) 4.1 Fuel cladding defects b b 4.2 Off-design transients that *0.003 2.6 induce fuel failures above .

those expected 5.0 Fission products to primary N.A.c N.A.

and secondary systems *cPWR) 6.0 Refueling accidents 6.1 Fuel bundle drop <0.001 0.33 6.2 Heavy object drop onto 0.001 2.7 fuel in core 7.0 Spent fuel handling accident 7 .1 fuel assembly drop in fuel <0.001 0.59 storage pool 7 .2 Heavy object drop onto fuel <0.001 1.1 rack 7.3 Fuel cask drop 0.11 38 8.0 Accident initiation events considered in design basis evaluation in the Safety Analysis Report 8.1 Loss-of-coolant accidents Small break <0.001 <0:1 Large break 0.002 48 8.l(a) Break in instrument line from <0.001 <0.1 p,:imary system that penetrates the containment 8.2(a) Rod ejection accident (PWR) N.A.

• N.A.

8.2(b) Rod drop accident (BWR) 0.004 3.1 8.3(a) Steam-line breaks {PWR'S-putside N.A. N.A.

containment)

'8.3(b) Steam-line breaks (BWR)

Small break 0.002 0.89 Large break 0.013 4.5 aRepresents the calculated fraction of a whole body dose of 500 millirems or the equivalent dose to an organ. * .

bThese releases will be comparable to the design objectives indicated in the proposed Appendix I to 10 CFR 50 for routine effluents (i.e., 5 millirems/year to an individual from either gaseous or liquid efflu~nts).

cNot applicable.

VII-5 1he information given in Table VII-2 indicates that the realis-tically estimated radiological consequences of the postulated

_accidents would result in exposures of an assumed individual at

• the site boundary to concentrations of radioactive materials within the Maximum Permissible Concentrations (MPC) of 10 CFR Part 20.

The tabulated information also shows that the estimated integrated exposure of the population within 50 miles of the plant from each postulated accident would be orders of magnitude* smaller than that from the naturally occurring radioactivity, The exposure from naturally occurring radioactivity corresponds to approximately 1600 man-r_ems per year within 5 miles and approximately 1,100,000 man-rems/year within 50 miles based on a natural backgrotmd level .

of O.125 rem/year. When co.nsidered with the probability of occurrence, the annual potential radiation exposure of the population from all the postulated accidents is an even smaller fraction of the exposure from natural backgrotmd radiation and, in f~ct, is well within naturally occurring variations in the natural backgrotmd. It is concluded from the results of the realistic analysis that the environ-mental risks due to postulated radiological accidents at the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station are exceedingly small and need not be considered further.

B. TRANSPORTATION ACCIDENTS Based on recent accident statistics,2 a shipment of fuel or waste from this plant may be expected to be involved in an accident about.

once in 6 or 7 years. The staff has estimated that only about 1 in 10 of those accidents that involve Type A packages or 1 in 100 of those that involve Type B packages might result in any leak-age of radioactive material. In case of an accident, procedures carriers are required 3 to follow will reduce the consequences of an _accident in many cases. The procedures include segregation of damaged and leaking packages from people and notification of the shipper and the Department of Transportation. Radiological assist-ance teams are avail~le through an inter-govenimental program to provide equipped and trained personnel. -These teams, dispatched in response to calls for emergency assistance, can mitigate the conseq~ences of an accident.

1. New Fuel Under accident conditions other than accidental criticality, the pelletized form of the *nuclear fuel, its encapsulation, and its low specific activity limit the radiological impact on* the environment to negligible levels,

VII-6 The packaging is designed to prevent criticality under normal and severe accident conditions. To release a number of fuel assemblies under conditions that could lead .to accidental criticality would require severe damage or destruction of more than one package, which is unlikely to happen in other.than an extremely severe accident.

The probability that an accident could occur under conditions that could result in acc'idental criticality is extremely remote. If criticality were to occur in transport, pe~sons within a radius of about 100 ft from the accident might receive a serious exposure, but beyond that distance, no detectable radiation effects would be likely. Persons within a few feet of the accident could receive

• fatal or near-fatal exposures unless shielded by intervening material.

Although there would pe no nuclear explosion, heat generated in the reaction would probably separate the fuel elements so that the reac-tion would stop. The reaction would not be expected to continue for more than a few seconds and normally would not recur. Residual radiation levels due to induced radioactivity in the fuel elements might reach a few roentgens per hour at 3 feet. There would be very little dispersion of radioactive material.

2. Irradiated Fuel Effects on the environment from accidental releases of radioactive materials during shipment of irradiated fuel .have been estimated for the situation where contaminated coolant is released and the situa-tion where gases and coolant are released.

Leakage of contaminated coolant resulting from improper closing of the cask is possible as a result of human error, even though the shipper is required to follow specific procedures which include tests and examination* of the closed container prior to each shipment. Such an accident is highly unlikely during the 30-year life of the plant.

Leakage of liquid at a rate of 0.001 cc/sec or about 80 drops/hr is about the smallest amount of leakage that can be detected by visual observation of a large container. If undetected leakage of contami-nated liquid coolant were to occur, the amount would be so small th~t the individual exposure would not exceed a few millirems and only a very few people would receive such exposures.

Release of gases and coolant is an extremely remote possibility.

In the improbable event that a cask is involved in such an extremely

---

- - - - - - - - - - - ~ - -.. . . . . ----------*------..--- ----*- -*- --**----~----*----->... ____________________ _

VII-7 severe accident that the cask containment is breached and the cladding of the fuel assemblies penetrated, some of the coolant and some of the noble gases might be released from the cask.

In such an accident, the amount of radioactive material released would be limited to the available fraction of the noble gases in the void spaces in the fuel pins and some fraction of the low level contamination in the. coolant. P.ersons would not be expected to remain near the accident because the severe conditions that would be involved, including a major fire. If releases occurred, they would be expected to take place in a short period of time. Only a limited area would be affected. Persons in the downwind region and within 100 ft or so of the accident might receive doses as high as a few hundred millirem. Under average weather conditions, a few hundred square feet might be contaminated to the extent that it would require decontamination (that is, Range I contamination levels) according to the standards 4 of the Environmental Protection Agency.

3. Solid Radioactive Wastes It is highly unlikely that a shipment of solid radioactive waste will be involved in a severe accident during the 30-year life of the plant.* If a shipment of low".'"level waste (in drums) becomes involved in a severe accident, some release of waste might occur, but the- specific-activity of the waste will be so low that the exposure of personnel would not be expected to be significant.

Other solid radioactive wastes will be. shipped in Type B packages.

The probability of release from a Type B package, in even a very severe accident, is sufficiently small that, considering the solid form of the waste, the likelihood of significant exposure would be extremely small.

In either case, spread of the contamination beyond the immediate area is unlikely, and although local clean-up might be required, no significant exposure to _the general public would be expected to result.

• 4. Severity of. Postulated Transportation Accidents The event postulated in this analysis are unlikely but possible.

More severe accidents than those analyzed can be postulated,. and their consequences could be severe. Quality assurance for design, manufacture, and use of the packages; continued surveilla~ce and

VII-8 testing of packages and transport conditions; and conservative design of packages ensure that the probability of accidents of this la.tter potential is sufficiently small that the environmental risk is extremely low. 'For these reasons, such severe accidents have not been included in the analysis.

VII-9.

REFERENCES FOR SECTION VII

1. Federal Register, 36(231): 22801-94 (Dec. 1, 1971).

2. Federal Highway Administration, 1969 Acaidents of Large Motor Carriers of Property, December 1970; Federal Railroad Adminis-tration Accident Bulletin No. 138, Surrrmary and Analysis of Accidents on Railroads in the U.S., 1969; U.S. Coast Guard, Statistical Swronary of Casualties to Commercial Vessels, December 1970.

3. 49 CFR 171.15, 174,566, and 177.861.

4. Federal Radiation Council Report No. 7, Backgrounq Material for the Development of Radiation Protection Standards; Protec- .

tive Action Guides for Strontium 89, Strontium 90J and Cesium 13?,

May 1965.

---

*- --------~---*w-~*---,--,--.--,----~~---*-----*---.-.,..--,

VIiI. ADVERSE EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED A. FACTORS RESPONSIBLE F.OR ADVERSE EFFEC'rS Several factors associated with the operation of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 are capable of producing adverse effects. The more important of these factors include:

1. Entrainment of planktonic organisms in the once-through portion of the cooling system.

2. Impingement of various fish species on the intake screens.

3. Winter kills of fishes due to unexpected plant shutdowns.

4. Discharges of heated water to the Susquehanna River.

5. Discharge of chlorine to the Susquehanna River.

6. Encroachment of the Susquehanna River.

7. Noise from the mechanical draft cpoling towers.

8. Releases of radionuclides to the environment.

Other adverse effects would include consumptive use of non-replenishable natural resources and the long-term collllllitment of other resourcel? *. These aspects of the plant are discussed in Sects. IX and X and are not included in this section.

B. PROBABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS Plant operation has the potential for changes in*. the biological and physical aspects of the environment and for imposing some 1

limitations on future industrial uses of the Susquehanna River.

The principal adverse effect that could limit future industrial uses of the Susquehanna is related to the heat discharged to Conowingo Pond. The planned once-through condenser cooling system, even when operated wi.th the helper cooling towers, may preclude the construction and operation of additional industrial facilities nearby that would add to the thermal load of the Susquehanna near Peach Bottom.

VIII-1

VIII-2 The radiation doses to aquatic organisms, although calc1,1lated by conservative procedures that tend to overestimate the dose, were comparable to or lower than natural backgrotm.d levels; i.e., doses are well below levels required to produce detectable radiation

• effects. Although the additional. doses from radionuclides in sed-iments (not obtainable with present information) are* not expected to alter this conclusion, studies should be performed t.o confirm

_this prediction once the plant becomes operational.

The entrainment of.planktonic organisms appears to be a serious threat to the aquatic commtm.ity. Entrained organisms will be ex-posed to mechanical, thermal, and chemical (chlorine) damage.

Most species of aq'uatic organisms in the area will be subject to entrainment at some life stage. *These include phytoplankton, planktonic

• microcrustacea, immature benthic invertebrates, mero-planktonic benthic invertebrates, and larval and immature fishes.

Impingement of larger fishes on the intake screens may cause serious losses to the fish population, particularly in' late fall and winter (see section V. C.1. b).

• Unexpected shutdowns of the plant in the.

same period could produce massive mortalities of* fishes, including desirable food and game species.

The combined losses of anadromous fishes at Peach Bottom and at Muddy Rtm. may effectively foreclose the option to restore aspects of this fishery to the Susquehanna River.

1he staff feels that the operation of this plant with the present once-through cooling system has a significant potential for caus-ing extensive damage to the biological community within Conowingo Pond. Of real concern are the populations of indigenous and anadromous fishes and the food web that supports them. Changes in species composition and seasonal density may occur in the plankton commtm.ity, which is the principal source of food for the fish population.

Essentially all of these adverse effects would be eliminated by.

changing to alternate cooling scheme II or Ila as discussed in Section XII and summarized in Table XII-1.

The predicted release of radioiodine and the resultant potential annual dose of up to 480 mrem to a child's thyroid through the pasture-cow-milk chain does not meet the "as low as practicable" guidelines and would create a serious adverse effect. The applicant will be required to reduce this iodine dose.

• VIII-3 Cooling tower operation, either as a "helper" operation as ;initially proposed by the applicant or under full time use in a closed cycle alternative, will cause a slight increase in natural fogging duration. Additionally, closed cycle operation may** result in minor icing on rare occasions. .Neither condition is ep{pected to have a significantly adverse effect upon the environment or the public's use and enjoyment thereof.

'Ihe aesthetic impact of the plant has been minimized by its siting; it is visible to the public only from across Conowingo Pond or from*

the Pond itself. The tmavoidable incongruity of an industrial complex in a rural setting will be softened somewhat by mass plantings of trees and grasses and will not constitute a severe *adverse effect.

IX. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USE OF THE ENVIRONMENT .AND.THE.MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT.OF LONC-:.TERM PRODUCTIVITY This section "assesses the action (local short term utilization of the land, water and air)" by the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station in regard to "cumulative and long term effects" as these in turn diminish, maintain, or enhance environmental amenities and produc-tivity for future generations.I The lifetime of a nuclear station is assumed to be about 3_0 years.

To be considered here are those consequences of use by the Peach Bottom Station of the surrounding land, water, and air which would persist beyond the station's lifetime, assuming that the plant en-hances productivity as long as it runs. Some consequences of con-struction are compensated during operation; such consequences are irrelevant so far as cumulative and long-term effects are concerned.

The assessment which follows views the utilization of the surrounding land, water, and air for the lifetime of the station in terms of persisting effects from an aesthetic viewpoint, from the productive viewpoint for people near the site and far beyond, and from the eco-logical viewpoint.

A. LAND USE About 80 acres of the 620-acre company-owned tract was developed for station structures and other necessary facilities. Nearly 130 acres of Conowingo Pond has been filled or enclosed by site facil-ities. Approximately 1030 acres was required for the transmission line right-of~way, including 190 acres of wqodland. Less than 50 acres of this tota_l was modified for tower bases and access and mainte.nance roads. Most of the land in the transmission corridors was not removed from its present use. Thus, direct land use re-moves ~ram other potentially productive contemporary uses a rela~

tively small area. The range of productive uses of surrounding land areas will not be reduced by plant operations, except in the highly unlikely event of a severe accident (see Sect. XII).

Although use of this site seems reasonabl*e for a power plant for the next 30 years, the land may or may not be usable for other purposes after operation of the station finally ends. If not,

• long-term productivity would be curtailed. The AEC.will require that upon deconnnissioning all quantities of source, special nuclear,_

IX-1

IX-2 and by-product materials not exempt from licensing under 10 CFR Part 30, 10 CFR Part 40, and 10 CFR Part 70, either be removed from the site or secured and kept under surveillance.

However, there seems to be no reason at present to assume that this site would not be satisfactory for future power plants after this plant has been decommissioned. This site could also be used for some other industrial or recreational activity.

B. WATER USE The station occupies a small enough fraction of Conowingo Pond that the aesthetic consequences of the plant structures are not

• large.

Recreational activities are developing in this area. The appli-cant has built a boat-launching facility and parking area below Conowingo Dam,* and he is planning to build a boat-launching fa-cility about one-half mile above the Peach Bottom site. He has dammed off part of the Muddy Run Pumped Storage Reservoir for boating and :fishing (Fig. II-13) and has installed a trailer park and camping area. Future uses of Conowingo Pond will include increased recreational activity provided that the water remains a good habitat for fish and an acceptable outdoor nedium for people.

Surface water uses could be seriously impaired if the proposed once-through cooling sy$tem is not adequate. Industrial and municipal uses of Conowingo Pond water might then be curtailed. Recreational water uses might be seriously reduced due to both direct and in-direct .effects of plant operation on the fish populations (see Sect. V) of Conowingo Porid. The extent and the consequences of these effects on the long-term productivity of the.Conowingo Pond ecosystem will only be known with certainty as .a result of operating exp~rience. Alternative cooling schemes are available which would effectively reduce the potential impacts on water uses to a very low level.

• The warming of the lake water and the vapor from the cooling towers will produce some increased fogging, but the persistent aesthetic consequences and the long term effects seem negligible.

IX-3 C. AIR USE The transmission lines from Peach Bottom constitute an environmental impact which, .aesthetically, is not confined just to the supporting are.a. The wires and towers, however, would no doubt exist only so long as the generating plant is functional and is considered a short-term effect.

The cooling towers pose somewhat of a noise problem, but this c*on-sequence of Peach Bottom is also a short te*rm effect.

The air in the vicinity will receive gaseous effluents, vapor and drift from the cooling towers' and radioactive gases and partic-ulates. For its use in this capacity, there is no evidence that the air will sustain any effects of long or short term consequences.

D.

SUMMARY

The long term consequences of the. Peach Bottom Station appear to at least support the maintenance if not the enhancement of produc-tivity. Correspondingly, no great change is brought about to the environment insofar as aesthetic considerations and people's quality of life are concerned. Ecologically, changes will occur which have long term consequences.

.,.*. ,. .,. ...*-,. *.,, *.,..,._,,.....,._~----**S.-"~".,._'" ---- --*--*--<*,*~ .. ~.-., ........ ,. --...*-**--~ ..*-**** ,..,.......... ..,..,..* ~-- ...... -. -.,. *-*- *-- .. - ~,.,... - -- ***---*- -.. - . -"' ". - . - **----*--*-'**-* *--'~--*-* *---- ~-- *-*- *******-- ... -- ----- ,. -- . -*-* --~=**

IX-4 REFERENCES FOR SECTION IX

1. Fe<iEraZ Register, 36(79): 7725 (April 23, 1971).

.... ,-*---------*------. -------------- ----------------------~----

X. IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES In this section we discuss the commitments of resources involved in the construction and operation of the plant. Irreversible com-mitments generally concern changes set in motion by the proposed action which, at some later time, could not be altered so as to re-store the present order of environmental resources, Irretrievable commitments are generally the use or constnnption of resources that are neither renewable nor recoverable for subsequent utilization.

A large quantity of concrete, various metals, and other construc-tion material was used to build the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station. When the station is deconnnissioned, much of- this material might be recovered; however, the reactor vessels and adjacent shielding would be irretrievable for several decades because they will contain long-lived radioisotopes produced during operation.

The life of the station is estimated to be 30 years. During this period, the applicant estimates that 60,000 kg of 235u will be consumed. Other materials consumed are metals used for reactor core components and chemicals used in plant operations. These are irretrievable commitments of resm,irces. _

Commitments of air and water resources are temporary, and with the possible exception of the land actually occupied by physical struc-tures, the land is only temporarily connnitted, No specific plan for the decommissioning of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station has been deyeloped. This is consistent with the Commission's current regulations which contemplate detailed con-sideration of decommissioning near the end of a reactor's useful life. The licensee initiates such consideration by preparing a proposed decommissioning plan which is submitted to the AEC for review *. The iicensee will be required to comply*with Commission regulations then in effect and decommissioning of the facility may not commence without authorization from the AEC.

To date, experience with decommissioning of civilian nuclear power reactors is limited- to six facilities which have been shut down or

-dismantled: Hallam Nuclear Power Facility, Carolina Virginia Tube Reactor (CVTR), Boiling Nuclear Superheater (BONUS) Power Station, Pathfinder Reactor, Piqua Reactor, and the Elk River Reactor.

There are several alternatives which can be and have been used in the decommissioning of reactors: (1) -Remove the fuel (possibly followed by decontamination procedures); seal and cap the pipes; X-1

X-2 and establish an exclusion area around the facility. The Piqua deconnnissioning operation was typical of this approach. (2) In additic:m to the steps outlined in (1) , remove the superstructure and encase in concrete all radioactive portions which remain above ground. The Hallam deconnnissioning operation was of this type.

(3) Remove the fuel, all superstructure, the reactor vessel and all contaminated equipment and facilities, and finally fill all cavities with clean rubble topped with earth to grade level. This last procedure is being applied in deconnnissioning the Elk River Reactor.

Alternative decommissioning procedures (1) and (2) wou.ld require long-term surveillance of the rea_ctor site. After a final check to

• assure that all reactor-produced radioactivity has been removed, alternative (3) would not require any subsequent surveillance.

Possible effects of erosion or flooding will be included in these considerations.

The cost of alternative (3) has been estimated by the applicant at more than* $100,000,000, however, and it is likely that the site would be reserved for future power plants or other industrial uses.

Losses or aquatic biota are.expected as a result of the operation of the plant.

• The amount cannot be quantified* at this time. Tt is unlikely that this will constitute an irreversible or irretriev-able connnitment of resources.

A maximum of 55 cfs of water will be evaporated during full power operation of the station. This .is less than 0.2% of the average flow through Conowingo Pond and constitutes an insignificant local loss to the Pond.

XI. THE DEMAND FOR POWER A high population density with concomitant demand for electric power is a situation that has existed in the Northeastern region of the United States for quite some time. This growth reflects both increasing population and increasing per capita consumption of electricity.

The. applicant's group of systems is comprised of systems facilities of four utilities: Philadelphia Electric Company, Public Service Electric and Gas Company, Atlantic City Electric Company, and Debnarva Power ap.d Light Company. A_ line diagram of these facil-ities is shown in Fig. XI-1.

• The group's generating capacity is 48% of the total capacity of the Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland

. (PJM) power ~ool, of which each utility of the applicant's group is a member. *A comparison of the power generation of the group to that of the power pool is shown in Table XI-1. 1 The applicant's group of systems peak load has been increasing about 6% per year. In.the decade 1960-1970, the group's increase in residential customers was about 17% (from 2,462,000 to 2,882,587). An increase in customers of at least 15% is expected over the next decade. 2 Should average annual kilowatt-hour (kW-hr) consumption per residential customer remain the same as in 1970 (5,556 kW-hr), residential customer usage would increase by 2.4 billion kW-hrs. Several factors, including rises in per capita income and substitution of electricity for other fuels, are ex-pected to increase the annual kW-hr usage per .customer. The appli-cant states that commercial and industrial use of electricity in the applicant group's area rose 95% in the 1960-1970 decade and he expects growth to be about the same percentage in the next decade. 2 The load is characterized by a high peak demand in the daytime and is greatest in sunnner.

• The pool operates under a written agreement which provides for

• distributing the bulk power supply of each company as an integral part of the total PJM system and for operation as a single control area.with minute-to-minute economic use of generation capacity to provide free flow of power among pool participants *.

XI-1

TO PLEASANT VALLEY

• P.S. OF N.J.

TO HOSENSACK TO BRANCHBURG ~

P.P.6L. CO. P.S. OF N.J. N.J t:----, . PE NNA.

. DELAWARE RIVER

--~~~.;:_:~~s.==----\~f~c:-::::;~

. TABOR /

NORTH WALES . HEATON - - - - - JENKINTOWN - - _,, _1"l *,, BURHOLME, CRESCENTVILLE Q

- . - - - , -=t~ARSH ., '

- , - - - - - - - ---0--~-QCEDAl;IBROOK

. . . ------===-=-6---------=-~I

---

BARBAOOES ( \PLYMOUTH

,, MEETING ROXBOROUGH .

'\

WESTMORELAND CONEMAUGH CROMBY . UPPER MERION/

1I 9 \~:~====:~=========-=;,--P:{:::-:----------

\ PENCOYO .........,,,,' ...... _ ... - -

/_J . ~ - - - - - - - - - ,' --~ NORTH PHILA. TO CAMDEN

-- - -.:RF~;~~'<.

PLANEBR00~""-1 ,-' PENN" - * .... - - - - - - .... P,S, OF N.J.

MUDDY RUN , , IBALA PARRISH ,,0-----------::: __

~

~ 1

'I J\

1 \.}

NEWLINVIL~-

r-r-"

/r---./

RADFORD BRYNMAWR

'""'-() \

...,-.N,

-~.sci-i'uYLKILL

0-LOMBARD

--- - - - - - .A:

I t :x:

\. / / \ ELMWOOD- ,,,' ,~,-- -  :,.

II \ p- 0-AN~~RA \ ,,..____ _ ... ~~ ~ H I

I \ \\ ',,: '" PASSYUNK .,.,., ...

.,. .,. -,.:, '";.,.. SOUTHWARK

_.... ,..,. N II \ I \\ PASCHALL().

. . . . , Q,. _ ~ ------

., ~'.,. ,()'

ACKER PEACH BOTTOM//

II \ \ _.,

O':PPER DARBY

--~'()'.!§_~ANO RD.

---

S~O;;:U:.;T,;.:.H I ,-- -

r--- - r - NOTTINGHAM \

\..

\ ----

\::.A~C_!i_ _ - - - - - --,.

EDDYSTONE PEACH BOTTOM,.1_ / / '- \ '* ____ ,.

I' ATO~~~~TA. u , , ------- ---------=:0c;~;E:--

,,------,.",\.

CHICHESTER *-

I If -------- ,

-~ -------," ---T,-- ,</1 TO ,~~:~tMAR~H_::_

TO GRACETON BAlTIMORE GAS 6 ELECTRIC co.

TO COIJASTONE

!/ .. \

L

-0 COLORA TO KEENEY DELMARVA I SILVERSIOE;'

DELMARVA I\IAAMANS TO I

J \

I I

TO CLAYMONT BALTIMORE GAS SUSQUEHANNA 1 DELMARVA t DELMARVA 6 ELECTRIC CO. DARLEYTO UG AERIAL _DELMARVA 66 kV LJNE

- - !32 kV LINE

...,....,,. - * - 2 2 0 kV LINE

..._... - 500 kV LINE Fig. XI-1. Interconnections of the Philadelphia Electric Company with other systems

XI-3 Table Xl-1. PJM power pool members as of July 1972 Net generating capacity Utility Company (MW), summer 1972 Public Service Electric and Gas Company0 8023 Philadelphia Electric Company 0 6137 Atlantic City Electric Company0 1131 Delmarva Power and Light Companyll 1394 16,685 Pennsylvania Power and Light Company Group 4242 Baltimore Gas and Electric Company 3876 General Public Utilities System 5546 Po~omac Electric Company 4240 34,589 0

Applicant company.

XI-4

'!he staff has made an analysis and confirms that the 19*70-19 75 compounded rate .of growth for the PJM power pool, as est.imated by the Federal Power Coilllllission (FPC) will be 7% per year, 3 Although

• the desirabili.ty and means of limiting the consumption of elec-tricity are being debated today, there is no reason to expect the power demand during the next several years to deviate significantly from.FPC predictions. In .addition to being a member of the PJM power pool, the applicant's group belongs to the Mid-Atlantic Area Coordination Group (MAAC), Some details of PJM and MAAC are dis-cussed in App~ndix* L.

The capacity of all generation sources, firm purchases, total system capacity (both installed and available), peak demand, and predicted demand as compiled by the Philadelphia Electric Company (the largest utility in the applicant's !roup of sys terrs) for the years 1961-1980 are shown in Table XI-2. Some voltage reduction and voltmtary customer load curtailment in its system were in effect during the years 1967, 1968, 1969,- and 1971, as noted in T~ble XI-2.

The applicant's group of systems, as identified above, projects that they will require 19,140 MW of generating capacity in 19 73 and 20,856 MW in 1974 to meet summer peak demands and maintain system reliability. Presently, 14,144 MW of generating capacity is available, and 4,914 MW are planned or authorized for construction in 1974. About 640 MW are planned for retirement including Peach Bottom Unit 1 (40 MW) in about two years. The net increase in generating capacity of 4,274 MW results in a total of 18,418 MW of existing and scheduled generating capacity, The applicant estimates that this capacity is short of the reliability objectives for 1974 by 2,438 MW and that Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 would provide 2,130 MW of this requirement, The nation-wide standard among utilities for acceptable system reliability is approximately 20% reserve ma-r_gin in installed gener-ation capability over power demand *.5 Reserve generating capacity helps to provide assurance of system reliability against scheduled outages. for maintenance, forced outages because of equipment failures, and imperfect load forecasting. The applicant's evaluation of the reserve margin of both the applicant's four companies and the PJM power pool is shown in Table XI-3. 1 The Philadelphia Electric Company estimates 1 that the four companies reserve margin with

--"*~~---~---µ ,__ --- -- - -----------*-----

XI-5 TableXl-2. Capacity and demand of the Philadelphia Electric Company fo~ 1961-1980 In megawatts Gas Total system capacity Peak Applicant Hydroelectric Fossil Other Nuclear Firm Year turbine load predicted capacity capacity capacity capacity purchases Installed Availablea capacity demand demandb 1961 252 2942 21 6 0 0 3,221 2702 1962 252 3013 41 6 0 0 3,312 2721 1963 252 3013 41 6 0 0 3,312 2926 1964 512 3013 41 6 0 0 3,572 3134 1965 512 3013 41 6 0 ci 3,572 3366 1966 512 3013 41 6 0 0 3,572 3425 3673 1967 952 3013 81 25 40 0 .4,111 4009 3727c 1968 1392 3202 141 25 40 0 4,800 4164 4375d 1969 1392 3306 301 27 40 0 5,066 4594 4592c 1970 1392 3419 476 30 40 0 5,357 4475 4712 1971 1392 3589 877 30 40 0 5,928 4780 4922d 1972 1392 3535 1134 36 40 0 6,137 5,740 1973 1392 3453 1134 31 492 +200

• 6,702e 6,300 1974 1392 3591 1134 31 905 +200 7,253/ 6,850 1975 1392 3991 1134 31 1843 0 8,391g 7,480 1976 1392 3991 1134 31 2898 0 9,446h 8,110 1977 1392 3991 1134 31 3953 0 *10,501; 8,630 1978. 1392 3831 1134 31 3953 0 10,341 9,240 1979 1392 3831 1134 31 5113 0 11,501 9,770 1980 1392 3831 1134 31 5113 0 11,501 10,300 acapacity at time of peak demand hour for 1961 to 1965 not available.

bBased on probability of temperature occurrence once in ten years.

cvoltage reduction and voluntary customer load curtailment in effect.

dVoltage reduction in effect.

ePeach Bottom Unit 2 (Philadelphia.Electric Company portion).

/Peach Bottom Unit 3 (Philadelphia Electric Company portion), Eddystone Unit 3.

Ksalem Units 1 and 2 (Philadelphia Electric Company portion), Eddystone Unit 4.

hLimerick Unit I.

Limerick Unit 2.

/

XI-6 Table XI-3. PJM and* applicant's reserve margin Reserve margin(%)

Year Condition PJMa Applicant's systema 1973 Without Peach Bottom 2 19 10

• with Peach Bottom 2 22 17 1974 Without Peach Bottom 2 and 3 15 5, Without Peach Bottom 3, but 17 11

• with Peach Bottom 2 With Peach Bottom 2 and 3 25 17 aData supplied by applicant. See Table Xl-1 for four companies.

.,.-*- *~---------~---------*---*-------------*---

XI-7 Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 in 1973 and 1974 will be 17.0% in both years and that reserve margins without Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 in 1973 and 1974, will be 10% .and 5% respectively. The Philadelphia Electric* Company's predicted demand as compared to that of the staff is shown in Fig. XI-2. The staff's extrapolation: curve of Phil-adelphia Electric Company's peak load demands of 1961 through 1971 indicates somewhat less peak load demands in future years than that expected by the Philadelphia Electric Company. The peak load demand for 1972 of 5313 MW, reported by Philadelphia Electric Company3 falls closely on the staff's extrapolated demand curve. On the basis of the staff's demand curve, the Philadelphia Electric Com-pany's reserve margins with its portions of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 capacity in 1973 and 1974 should be about 15% and 17% re-*

spectively, and the reserve margins without its portions of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 capacity in 1973 and 1974 should be about.5%

and a deficit of about 2-5% respectively. It is noted that firm purchase of 200 MW are scheduled for Philadelphia Electric Company in those two years.

A delay of more than one year would place the company in a highly.

vulnerable condition. Furthermore, the more intensive operation of older fossil steam plants to partially.supplement this deficiency would impose upon the applicant, and ultimately upon its customers and the economy of the area served, some additional cost burdens as well as environmental effects.

The purchase of 'power from other sources does not seem to he a practical means of satisfying the capacity needs of the applicant.

The PJM pool as a whole is short on capacity as is the Mid-Atlantic Area Coordination Group (see Appendix L) with which the pool is associated. Whi.le capacity expansion is being .planned in other*

areas associated with the PJM pool and MAAC, the uncertainties of other plans and the steady extension of demand in these areas make dependence on these external power sources questionable *. The over-all growth pattern of electrical energy use for the mid-Atlantic region of the United States is such that this additional capacity will certainly be necessary within a period of time very close to that indicated by the applicant even if all other regional capacity expansion which could be considered by the appl~cant as a source of purchased power were to proceed as planned. The history of such planning indicates that capacity extensions of other groups are fre-quently not completed within anticipated schedules. The extension of the applicant's own plant capacity, therefore, appears to be prudent acti~n to satisfy the growth requirements of his service area.

XI-8 1 2 ,----,--r----,--r----,--r-----,--r-----,--r----,--~---,--...----,-__;O_;R:.....N-=.L-~D:.....W:.....G:...7:.....2:.....-,..:.8__

9.:.._:;78

,1 10 TOTAL SYSTEM CAPACITY I

.I I

I I

9 8

0 "O

g 0

6 STAFF PREDICTED DEMAND

.r:.

I-'.!::,

0::

w

~ 5 0

0..

4 3

2 0 '-----+--t------+--t----+--t----+--t----+------+--t------+--t----+----le---+--t----+----'

1961 1963 1965 1967 1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 *1979 YEAR Fig. XI-2. Demand for power predicted for the Philadelphia Electric Company.

XI-9 REFERENCES FOR SECTION XI-

1. Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach .Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement 4., Philadelphia Electric Company, July 1972.

2. Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3, Philadelphia Electric .

Company, June 1971.

3, Federal Power CoI!llllission, The 1970 National Power Survey, Part II, Northeast Regional Advisory CoIIllllittee, 4, Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement No. 2, Phila-delphia Electric Company, May 1972, 5, Federal Power CoI!llllission, National Power Survey, 1964.

)

...-----------~**~--* --------------* ------

XII. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION AND COST-BENEFITS ANALYSIS OF THEIR ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 1he applicant has provided a discussion of alternatives and a cost~

benefit analysis in his Environmental Report and supplements. l-S 1he staff has reviewed these reports and has constructed its own analysis, the results of which follows:

A.

SUMMARY

OF ALTERNATIVES

1. Purchase of power

2. Hydropower

3. Building power plant at another site

4. Using fossil fuel rather than nuclear

5. Alternative cooling systems

6. Alternatives to normal transportation procedures

1. Purchase of Power As discussed in Section XI, all other PJM companies are virtually in the same position as the applicant with respect to IIEeting in-creasing power demands on their own systems. Furthermore, the transmission lines of the applicant's syst~m and that of the neighboring companies do not have surplus. capability to reliably deliver the base load power in the amollllt of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 generation. Purchase of power from other utilities, therefore is not a viable alterrtati ve.

2. Hydropower In the applicant's territory the only area capable of hydrodevel-opment is the Susquehanna River. This has been almost, completely developed by the applicant and other companies. Only additional marginal hydroelectric expansion is possible. 1he applicant has used hydroelectric generation to satisfy its requirements to the fullest extent possible, including its Conowingo Dam project and its Muddy Rt.m Pumped Storage project. Hydroelectric generation, therefore, is not appropriate for the applicant's future base load generation requirements. Peaking capacity in 1973 from gas tur-bines, hydropower, and pumped storage will amollllt to about 27% of the generating capacity, and the staff agrees with the applicant that additional peaking capacity cannot be economically justified.

Peaking plants of any kind, alone, are not an economical alternative

• to base load plants since both are required for peak load reliability which is the basis of need for power.

XII-1

XII-2

3. Building Power Plant at Another Site Environmental considerations were .a substantial factor in the orig-inal selection of the*. site, and its locatfon is quite favorable in most respects, e.g., low population density, minimum visual impact upon the comitryside, minimal land removed from other potential production, and no .damage to, or encroachment upon areas of his-torical significBI\ce.

'Ihe applicant IS Consideration Of Other Sites rev.eals that they have similar characteristics considering such factors as cooling water, access to roads and railroads' and an optimum power generation location relative to the bulk power transmission system. Other important considerations were availability of open land, geology and hydrology of the site and environs, and places of historical significance which should be preserved.

Because Peach Bottom Unit 1 is already in operation and because .

construction of Units 2 and 3, collectively, is about 65% complete, environmental impacts associated with the construction have already occurred. Roads had been built for the existing Unit 1, a railroad spur has been buiit to the construction site, and transmission lines. for Units 2 and 3 have been completed. If Units 2 and 3 are not used, similar impacts would be incurred at another location.

'Ihe operations required by abandonment including dismantling, blasting, and restoring the land would, in. itself, be an additional environmental impact. Furthermore, nnst of the $380 million 3 committed at Peach Bottom to date would be lost, the annual electric sales from Peach Bottom beginning about 1974 would be lost for 5 to 7 years (until another plant was designed and constructed),

and power reserve margins within the applicant's system would rapidly diminish during this period.

After considering all the above factors, the ~taff has concluded that a change of site would .involve an economic sacrifice that could only be justified by the need to. avoid irreparable and significant environmental damage, which is not expected at Peach

• Bottom Site. *

4. Alternative Fuel Peach Bottom is designed and constructed for the use o*f nuclear fuel, and a change to fossil* fuel could not now be made without major changes in equipment which would involve substantial new

XII-3 construction. The economic penalties would involve not only capital costs approaching those of a completely new fossil plant but also the loss of .the existing $380 million investment in the nuclear station. In addition, should the plant be reconstructed for coal, oil, or gas-fired m1its, the cost of replacemep.t power from older and higher...-operating-cost plants during the interim construction period would be about $450 million annually, all of which would eventually be passed* to* the consumers . 2

a. Coal Although present coal-fired plants convert thermal energy into electricity more e_fficiently than available water-cooled nticlear-fueled plants, there are other, more compelling reasons for the applicant's choice of a.nuclear station. Those reasons were:*

1. Although low-sulfur coal could be made avaiiable from di.stant

• coal fields, the applicant states that none is available from local fields with a sulfur content of less than 3 to 5%.

2. There is no economically appropriate sulfur dioxide removal process_ for high sulfur coal. Several of the applicant's coal-fired plants have been converted to oil-fired .units i,n recent years to enable them to meet state regulatiop.s on sulfur dioxide emissions.~

3. The difference in fuel-transportation load and expense is significant. The Peach Bot tom Atomic Power Station will operate on 80 metric .tons of fuel per year. On the* other hand, a coal-fired plant of the same size would require about 5 .1 million tons per year based on Peach Bottom generation of 1.5 x* 109 KWhr per year,2 9,200 Btu per kwhr. heat rate 2 and 13,500 Btu per p.ound 6 and would emit about 100,000 tons of so 2 annually.7 There are no locks in either Holtwood Dam or Conowingo Dam to permit barging.

4. The aesthetic impact of a coal-fired plant with its smoke stacks and the land areas required for both coal and ash storage would be considerable.

5. Although the capital costs of a coal-fired plant are *currently about 20% less than those of a comparably sized nuclear plant, in the 'long term the overall costs of energy from a nuclear' plant are much lower than those from a coal;,_fired plant because of much lower fuel and operating costs.

The staff agrees that the applicant's reasons for not building a coal-fired station are sound and :reasonable.

XII-4

b. Oil A comparison with oil as an alternative fuel shows the*thermal advantage over nuclear to be about the same as that for. coal. The supply of oil has been growing progressively acute in the heavily populated northeastern region of the United States, effecting an upward trend in costs~

Future oil availability depends on a number of yet uncertain factors: the unstable political situations in countries producing the fuel, future ocean tanker capabilities; and probable increases in water transportation costs due to more elaborate pollution con-trol measures likely to be imposed on tankers.

The transportation problem would be about the same as that for coal since the site is not accessible by water (there are no locks on

• either Holtwood or*conowingo Dam). Oil has the same general dis-advantages as coal with respect to air contamination. For instance, assuming 1% sulfur oil can be made available in sufficient. quantities so that the plant could conform to existing air quality regulation2, such a unit would require about 23 million barrels of oil per year and would emit approximately 90,000 tons of S02 annually. 2 However, the particulates released and ash generated are considerably lower than for coal.

Oil-fired plants also have the disadvantage of requiring smoke stack and storage and waste areas. Whether above or below ground, the storage tanks would require upward of 20 acres of land. The appl~-

cant has estimated the direct cost of electricity from an oil-fired replacement* alternative would be about. 2. 5 times the cost of elec-tricity generated from the nearly constructed Units 2 and 3 (4.18 mills for Peach Bottom compared to 11.45 mills). The figure 4.18 mills per kilowatt hour is based on capital costs remaining to be expended. Costs already incurred are excluded.since only those costs which are yet to be incurred to complete the units are relevant in comparing costs and benefits of the alternatives. The cost of an oil-fired alternative would include the construction of new units with loss of most of the capital costs spent to date. On an annual basis, .the total operating costs of an oil-fired station would be about $182 million compared to $62 million for nuclear Units 2 and 3. 2 In addition, the cost of replacement power during an .

interim reconstruction period would be considerable. The applicant has estimated that equipment costs for attaining aaceptable emis-sion levels of S0 2 and particulates from older units which would have to be continued in: service because of the delay in st~rtup of Peach Bottom would be about $6 million and $33 million respectively.

~-- . ---*------*-------------

XII-5 c *.. -Gas While gas would satisfy existing air qualit*y regulations, the applicant's plant is needed for base-load capacity. Gas turbines are designed solely .to provide peaking capacity, and the applicant has statea that peaking requirements are currently available in other facilities of its sys tern. 1 .

The staff agrees that a conversion to any alternative fuel would add signi.ficantly .to the cost .of the plant and would, on balance be enviro.nmentally detrimental.

5. Cooling System Alternatives The applicant found .that an unaided once-through condenser cooling

• system would not meet state regulations. regarding thermal dis charges to Conowingo Pond; a cooling pond would require the flooding of 2500 to 3000 acres (or several times the acreage of the present plant site) ; and dry cooling towers are impractical .at present, primarily because of their undeveloped technology. 2 In a dry cooling sys.tem heat* is rejected directly to the atnosphere wi_thout using water as an intermediate' heat receiver. One of the obvious advantages of this system is the elimination of the need for a water makeup supply and the elimination of water and salt drift from the tower. Disadvantages which counterbalance these advantages include losses in plant efficiency due to increased turbine back pressures,. condenser replacement costs, large land and capital requirements, increased plant power requirements for cooling tower fans, and increased nois*e. Because of these disad-vantages,* and also because dry cooling tower reliability.and

. performance has not been demonstrated for heat loads as large as the combined heat rejection of Units 2 and 3, the staff considers the dry cooling tower to be an unacceptable alternative to the proposed design.

• The cooling systems considered by the applicant and described in detail in a supp_J,ement* *to his* .~'li.!"_onmental report 2 are summarized below._ . A mbd:i.ficatiori suggested by tne staf:f;pidentified as Scheme

. II--A, is also included.

a. Scheme I. The condensers of Units 2 and 3 are to be

_cooled in winter by once-through flow. of water from Conowingo Pond.

In summer, 57% of the water may_be diverted through three forced-draft helper (open cycle) cooling towers on the shore of Conowingo Pond before su~sequent mixing with the other 43% of the once-through cooling water in the discharge canal and final discharge to Conawingo Pond.

XII-6

b. Scheme II. The entire condenser water flow from Units 2 and 3 would pass through five closed-cycle mechanical-draft cool-ing towers on the shore of Conowingo Pond. The tower blowdown would pass to the discharge canal which is* open to Conowingo Pond.

c. Scheme II-A. 'Ille entire condenser water flow from Units 2 and 3. would pass through five closed-cycle nechanical-draft cooling towers on the shore of Conowingo Pond. The tower blowdown would be discharged to Conowi,ngo Pond via a diffuser pipe extending several htm.dred feet into Conowingo Pond rather than to the dis-charge canal.

d. Scheme III. The entire condenser water flow from Units 2 and 3 would pass through two closed-cycle natural-draft cooling towers located on the hill above Peach Bottom Station, and the blowdown would be discharged to the pond.

e. Scheme IV. The *entire condenser water flow from Units 2 and 3 would pass through eight closed-cycle nechanical-draft cooling towers located on the hill above Peach Bottom Station, and the blowdown would be discharged to the pond.

The heat dissipation system chosen by the applicant is that of Scheme I. The adequacy of this system is based on model studies performed by the Alden Research Laboratories for the Philadelphia Electric Company. 2 'Ille Alden Research Laboratories state that

". ,, the water discharged from the plant will mix with the Pond water in such a manner that even tm.der severe ambient conditions' temperatures greater than 2°F above.the inlet temperature will exist only in limited surface area along the western shore. 111 The appli-cant has further stated that " .** should the cooling tower installa-tion prove inadequate to reproduce the'nndel studies, or to reduce effluent temperature to a degree that the resulting stream tempera-ture is suitable for maintenance of a balanced population of aquatic organisms, additional cooling capacity -will be provided. 111 The applicant has provided* for this possibility by arranging space for two more banks of cooling towers alongside the present three.

6. Alternatives to Normal Transportation Procedures Alternatives (such as special routing of shipments, providing es-corts in separate vehicles, adding shielding to the containers, and constructing a fuel recovery and fabrication plant on the site rather than shipping fue*l to and from the station) have been ex-amined by the staff. The environmental impact of transportation under normal or postulated accident conditions is not considered to be sufficient to justify the additional effort required to im-plement any of the alternatives.

• XII-7 B, - COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE CXJOLING SYSTEMS

.The staff has made an analysis of both the differential capital costs and environmental impacts of the various cooling system alternatives (Table XII-1).

1. Cost Analysis Monetized costs occurring over a 30-year aroortization period of the plant are given on an incremental "presertt worth" basis at a discount rate of 8. 75% per year. The analysis takes into account the different times that capital costs are incurred and the different cash flow patterns of annual costs for each alternative as estimated by the applicant. 2 The "present worth" and annualized costs following AEC Cost-Benefit Guidelines of May 1972 are shown in Table XII-1. In-cluded are incremental costs, interest costs during delay, repl.acement power costs, incremental fuel and operating costs, and total capitalized costs. The alternatives tabulated are:

Scheme I - three mechanical-draft helper towers on Pond, completed as presently scheduled.

Scheme II - closed cycle, five mechanical-draft towers on pond, 27 additional months for construction, and three IIDnths for altering the plant cooling fiow pattern.

Scheme II-A (Staff's scheme) - closed cycle, five mechanical-draft towers on pond with discharge pipe for blowdown to pond, 2 7 addi-tional months for construction, and three nnnths for altering the plant cooling flow pat tern.

Scheme III - closed cycle, two natural-draft towers on hill, 51 additional months for construction, and 12 mmths for the cooling water flow pattern.

• Scheme IV - closed-cycle, eight mechanical-draft towers on hill, 48 additional months for construction, and 12 months for the cooling water flow pattern.

Inasmuch as the plant is nearing completion, no additional cost is entered under capital costs shown for fhe *reference case. Decreased thermal efficiency and power expended )on additional pumping equip-ment and tower fans increase the fuel cycle 'and operating expenses of the alternate schemes. Fuel and operating expenses are calcu-lated as remaining constant in current dollars over the 30-year period and the plant operating uniformly on a plant factor at 80%.

An economic analysis of applicant's data2 shows tp.at the comparative.

costs, on a present worth basis and allowing for the lag in startup time, for an oil-fired steam electric replacement plant for Peach Bot tom woulq be:

Table XII-I. Cost/benefit balance for Peach Bottom Station Units 2 and 3 J?ifferential cost or impact for alternative heat dissipation systems" Scheme II-A

__ Cost or impact for closed-cycle, S Scheme II, Scheme III, Scheme IV, refetence case, Scheme I, mechanical-draft closed-cycle, S _closed-cycle, 2 closed-cycle, 8 once-through, 3 mechanical- towers on pond mechanical-draft natural-draft mechanical-draft draft towers on pond with diffuser towers on pond towers on hill towers on hill (Applicant's scheme) pipe to pond (Staff's scheme)

Monetary costs ($10 6 )

Incremental Present worth 1153.9b 75.l 75.2 202.6 197.1 genera ting cost Annualized 112.3 7.1 7.2 19.3 18.8 p

Lost capacity (MW) 0 76.1 76.1 92.3 69.7 H I

00 Environmental impacts Land use Agriculture Minor changes None None None None Recreation Increased visitors and None None None None fishing facilities Historic and No apparent effect None None None None scientific

I I

Table XII-I. (continued)

Differential cost or impact for alternative heat dissipation systems" Scheme II-A Cost or impact for closed-cycle, 5 Scheme II, Scheme III, Scheme IV, reference case, Scheme I, mechanical-draft closed-cycle, 5 closed-cycle, 2 closed-cycle, il once-through, 3 mechanical- towers on pond mechanical-draft natural-draft mechanical-draft draft towers on pond with diffuser towers en pond towers on hill towers on hill (Applicant's scheme) pipe to pond (Staff's scheme)

Natural;area 100 acres permanently Additional 25 Additional 25 Additional 50 Additional 100 altered; 100 acres of lake acres of lake acres of lake acres of site acres of site modified modified Land required 620 acres, 100 acres for None None 50 acres of land 100 acres of land

. station Shoreline 7000 ft None None None None Aquatic life Possible serious impact Reduced impacts Eliminate impact Reduced impact Minimal impact >::

H due to due to attraction due to entrain- to aquatic life H I

entrainment to discharge canal ment and I.O thermal discharge Recreation Possible damage to Reduced damage

• Minimal environ- Minimal environ.- Minimal environ-fishing to fishing mental impact mental impact mental impact on Conowingo on Conowingo on Conowingo Pond Pond Pond Aesthetics Moderate intrusion Increased noise Increased noise Seen from sur- Moderate instrusion rounding countryside Transportation Slight fogging Slight fogging Slight fogging None Greater fogging

~Costs are in addition to Scheme I and are annualized in accordance* with AEC Cost-Benefit Guidelines of May 1972.

bReported costs to AEC 12/31/71. All other costs derived from costs in applicant's report.

XII-10

$106 Capital 489, 7.

Replacement Power . 381.5 Operating, Maintenance, and Fuel 764. 7 TOTAL 1,635.9 This total should be compared with the $1,153.9 x 10 6 shown in Table XII-1 for the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, The economic advantage for the nuclear plant over the oil:...fired plant is,

• there-fore, more than $480 x 10 6 *

2. Environmental Analysis

a. Scheme I (reference case) . There will be minor changes to agriculture; both fishing facilities and visitors will increase; 100 acres of land and 100 acres of the pond will be permanently altered; 7000 ft of shoreline will be used; the impact to aquatic life may be serious; possible damage to fishing may occur; a mod-erate enlargement to the basic plant facilities will occur; and only slight fogging and no icing will occur since the cooling towers will operate only in summer.

b. Scheme II (differential to Scheme I). Twerity "five additional acres of*lake will be permanently altered; the impact to aqtiatic life will be reduced because of reduced entrainnent, impingement, and temperatures; and noise will increase, because of, the fans of two additional cooling towers, by about 3 db over the 75 db at 100 ft for Scheme I to a total of 78 db or about 35 db at

1. 5 miles (across the pond) ~ 'lllis noise level would cause ~ minor degradation in the enjoyment of recreational aspects of Conowingo Pond.

c. Scheme II-A (differential to Scheme I). Twenty five additional acres of lake will be permanently altered;* the impact to aquatic life will be reduced (even below Scheme II) because the blowdown from the cooling towers will be diffused several hundred feet out into Conowingo Pond rather than directly to the *discharge canal (differential to Scheme II); noise level will be similar to that of Scheme II.

d. Scheme III (differential to Scheme I), Fifty additional acres of site land wHl be modified; occupied shorelines will be reduced; some bird kills may occur. in bad weather; impact to aquatic

XII-11 life will be significantly reduced for the same reasons as Scheme II; .and the visual impact to the countryside will be significan~.

e. Scheme IV (differential to Scheme I). One hundred acres of site and land will be 'modified; impact to aquatic life will be insignificant; the effect upon fishing will be insignifi-ca,nt; . and a moderate intrusion upon the landscape *appearance will result from the cooling tower structure.

• Annual water los*ses to Conowingo Pond are estimated by the applicant to be 7.1 x 10 9 *gal for Scheme I (reference scheme) and 12.6 x 10 9 gal for all other schemes. 2 These amounts are small compared to the total 10.4 x 1010 gal of Conowingo Pond where the average daily flow rate is about 2 X 10 5 gal/sec. .

The use of closed cycle cooling towers of any type will increase the probability of fog by a few hours per year (see III D.1. a(6))

and may cause some icing in the winter. The blowdown from the cooling towers w_ill contain some additional chemicals. The normal chemical content of the river water will be concentrateq by a factor of three to five before being put back into the river. Sulfuric acid may be added to the cooling tower water to regulate the pH; the concentration of calcium sulfate in the blowdowri might approach 200 ppm but would probably be much lower. Chlorine is used to con-trol algae growth in most cooling towers; based on the quantities projected for the applicant's Limerick Station, as much as 1500 pounds per day for two natural draft cooling. towers might be used.

The residuai chlorine discharge would have to be. maintained within acceptable limits.

C. COST-BENEFIT BALANCE The*total capital costs, the amount spent, the additional amount committed, as of May 1972, are.shown in Table XII-2. Unrecoverable costs associated with any alternative are real and must be recovered in some manner, probably by passing them along to the co~sumers as incremental electrical service costs.

1. Land Use The development of the complete s_tation has caused a reassignment of 620 acres of scattered wooded .and farm land, although only about 50 .acres have been modified for the station. All *620 acres were basically reassigned when Unit 1 was constructed, and the plant

XII-12 Table XII-2. Applicant's cost summary as of May 1972 Costs ($10 6 )

Category Unit 2 Unit 3 Total and common Total capital costs 298 266 564 Amount spent to-date 250 140 390 Additional amount committeda 9 14 23 aThese costs are* r~coverabie.

Source: Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement 2, Philadelphia Electric Company, May 1972.

-~.,_..,......-------~-------------------------

XII-13 area was no*t expanded for Units 2 and 3. The applicant has planned additional recreational development on the shoreline_ of Conowingo Pond. A visitor information center was built when Unit 1 was con-structed and will continue to operate.

The applicant acquired 1030 acres for the transmission line right-of-way which was designed to minimize the visual impact of the transmission lines. Except for the area at the tower bases and some roads; the farmland and woodland uses are essentially the same as before construction. The applicant will lease parcels of this right-of-way for recreationai or other conununity uses whenever practical.

The 620: acres of site land were withdrawn from productive use when Peach Bottom Unit 1 was built in 1967, and there is no information to indicate that this land use is presently considered by the com-munity to be objectionable or that it will appreciably change the surrounding land values.

2. Water Use The circulating water system of the Peach Bottom:Station will with- -

draw approximately 3350 cfs from Conowingo Pond for cooling needs of the station, and the water will be released to the collecting.

basin (discharge pond) after undergoing a temperature rise of 21F 0 while passing .through the condensers. In warm weather, the average discharge temperature will be reduced to 13F 0 by flowing about-43%

directly to the discharge canal_and the remainder through the cool-ing towers before entering the discharge *canal. The water then flows back to Conowingo Pond at 97°F under maximum temperature cpnditions. The applicant states that for his selected al_ternative (Scheme I), only a limited area near the discharge outlet on the western shore will have surface water temperature greater than 2F 0 above the plant inlet temperature. 2 The validity of the tempera-ture estimate based on the model studies performed by the*Alden Research Laboratori~s is subject to question and further substanti-ation by the applicant_ is necessary if this alternative is to be actively considered.

The loss of water to evaporation in the cooling towers is relatively small with respect to the water volume of Conowingo Pond. However, the heat directly dissipated to the pond in periods of low flow and

'high ambient temperatures will cause'a significant water temperature rise that will exceed approved state temperature limitations.

- . ,. _,. - ** *-~~.

• _,,_, -....-.-. --**--h_...__w_~....,_,., .,_,. ....--.. _., . _. ~.-. -.._.,. ,_,_, ., . ,-,,-.. ._ *-* ~~--~----~---.,.-.*-=**-'

~ ~ -*-*r"*-*--*-----*~c,.-* ._..,, *- ___ ,_,__..._,.,,.,. .*--,--****,**- *+*. ,.,*.,._,,..,,_ ....__**,_,_,....,,._ ___ ,,, ** **** *s**<< _, * *,.

XI.I-14 Except for chlorine, the discharge of chemicals is not expected to have any appreci~ble effect on water quality or the aquatic system.

While chlorine concentrations will be high enough to destroy certain species of biota in local areas (see Section V), with proper con-trol the overall effect on these species would be minimized.

3. Economic Effects The applicant states that the taxable property at Peach Bottom Station includes only the administration office building* and the land; machinery and buildings housing machinery, which comprise all other property at the station, have not been taxed by state or local authorities. The administration office building has been taxed at 20% of assessed value and the land* at some reduced percentage not.

yet *determined. The applicant further states that the disbursement of the tota~. collected taxes will be: York County 10%, Peach Bottom Township 6%, School District 63%, and undefined miscellaneous func-tions 21%. Land value for the site is about $5,000/acre, but this will be taxed at a percentage somewhat less than the 20% of assessed value noted above~

The current construction force of 3500 persons, which is comprised mostly of transitory workers who normally migrate between major construction activities, will be replaced by a stable operating force numbering some 150 people *. The economic effect of this force reduction (see Section IV) will be cushioned since Unit 2 will be completed in 1973 and Unit 3 will be completed in 1974.

4. Sunnnary The ultimate costs resulting from the licensing of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 are found to be mainly:

a. some changes to the individual and community living patterns in the surrounding conimunity (Section IV),

b. a higher intensity of land use originally commit te_d to Peach Bottom Unit* I, when sone land. was with-drawn from agricultural production,

c. con~umption of nuclear fuels,

d. addition of a significant thermal load to Conowingo Pond if the applicant's proposed cooling system is use_d, I

"---~--------

XII-15 e, a very low probability accide-q.t risk by the residents at the station site boundary, and.

f, the discharge of some chemical waste into Conowingo Pond.

The benefits are expected to be mainly:

a. The addition of electric capacity to _support the expected economic growth of the area served by the applicant's group of power systems,

b. stimulation of the local economy from additional funds derived from taxes levied on Peach Bottom Station property,

. c. increased income to the* community from the Peach Bottom Station operating force,

d. minor additions .to the economy' brought about by the increase of visitors to the nuclear power station and Conowingo Pond, e, improved recreational facilities around Conowingo Pond, and,*

f. to some residents, the addition of a prestigious industrial enterprise.

The staff has strong reservations as to the adequacy of the appli-cant's heat dissipation analysis and recommends restudying the proposed heat dissipation system by use of both hydraulic and math"."

ematical models. This study should provide a mapping of the tem-perature distribution expected in Conowingo Pond and convincingly show that the State thennal criteria will indeed be met.

If the once-through heat dissipation system (Scheme I) should prove inadequate, the applicant has several alternatives -which can dis-sipate the heat with minimal impact on the environment. The staff believes that Scheme II-A would be his. best choice*.

XII-16 On the basis of the use of an appropriate heat dissipation system, it is the judgment of the staff that the benefits of Peach Bottom,Units 2 and 3 will be substantially greater than the environmental costs, which for the most part have already occurred, and that a reasonable balance between the benefits to the areas and the environmental costs has been established.

In: commenting on the Draft Environmental S:tatement, the applicant has presented a view of cost-benefit.balancing procedures contrary to that of the staff. The staff has addressed this view in Section XIII-S.

• -- *-.------,-..---~- -------------------------------*

XII-17 REFERENCES FOR SECTION XII

1. Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Philadelphia Electric Company, June 1971.

2. Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement 1, Phila-delphia Electric Company, ijovember 1971.

3. Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement 2, Phila-delphia Electric Company, May 1972.

4. Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement 3, Phila-delphia Electric Company, June 1972. *

5. Environmental Report, Operating License .Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power.Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement 4, Phila-delphia Electric Company, July 1972~

6. The 1970 Federal Power Survey, Part 2, Federal Power Commission.

7. Draft Environmental Statement, Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Units 1 and 2; USAEC, Directorate of Licensing, January 20, 1972.

• • • -~*;._.-.,,---------------

XIII. DISCUSSION OF CDMMENTS RECEIVED ON .

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Pursuant to paragraph A.6 of Appendix D to 10 CFR Part 50, the Draft Environmental Statement of October, 1972 was transmitted, with a .

request for conunerit, to:

Advisory~ Cotmcil on Historic Preservation Department of Agriculture Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers Department of Corilmerce .

Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Department of Housing and Urban Development Department of the Interior Department of Transportation Environmental Protection Agency Federal Power Commission Commonwealth of Pennsylvania State of Marylapd Board of Supervisors, York Cotmty (Pennsylvania)

• In addition, the AEC requested comments on the Draft Environmental Statement from interested. persons by a notice published in the Federal Register on October 11, 19 72 (37 FR 21453).

• Conunents it{ response to the. requests referred to above were received from:

Department of Agriculture Department of Arrey, Corps of Engineers .I Department of Conunerce Department of the Interior Department of Transportation

. Federal Power Conunission Environmental Protection Agency Commonweal th of Pennsylvania Philadelphia Elec~ric Company Our consideration of conunents received and the disposition of the issues involved are reflect~d in part by .revised text in other sections of this Final Environmental Statement and in part by the following discussion. The comments are included in this statement as Appendix N.

XIII-1

XIII-2 A. PREDIGTED POWER DEMAND (Applicant, p. N-130)

As suggested by the applicant, the* staff has recalculated its pre-diction of power demand to take into account past weather conditions and load curtailment due to voltage reductions. The resultant cor-rection is minor, increasing the predicted power demand in the mid and late 1970 's slightly above the original staff curve shown in Figure XI-2, The original staff conclusions, which* supported a need for power, remain unchanged, Staff and applicant* conclusions are supported by the Federal Power Connnission conunents (p. N-45).

B, DETERGENT AND LAUNDRY WASTES (EPA, pp. N-35, N-43)

The applicant states 1 that he plans to use the in-plant laundry.

system for* clothing having low level activity. Clothing having a higher level of activity will be laundered off-site at a colllilercial facility, if an acceptable one is available, or will be disposed of as solid waste.

C. SANITARY WASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM SLUDGE DISPOSAL (EPA, p. N-43)

The applicant states 1 that all digested, sewage sludge requiring disposal will be removed off-site by an outside contractor and placed in a landfill nee ting state standards.

D. OIL AND CHEMICAL STORAGE- AND SPII.LS (EPA; pp. N..:.42, 43)

A report 2 entitled '.'Pollution Incident Prevention Report, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station,." was prepared by the Philadelphia Electric Company and submitted to the Conunonwealth of Pennsylvania in June, 1972, This docunent, .which is filed in the Public Document Rooms, discusses incidents concerned with the transportation, storage and use of fuel oil, lube oil, radioactive liquids and waste and water treatment chemicals. Preventative measures provided to pre-clude spillage or leakage incidents are described as are the cor-rective actions which would be taken to mi.tigate the effects of such incidents should they occur. The staff finds this analysis to be satisfactory.

E. GEOLOGY (Interior, p. N-20)

The detailed geology, seismology and seismic design criteria pertinent to the Peach Bottom Station are extensively discussed and evaluated in the staff's Safety Evaluation Report. 3

)

---*--~-.--~-

XIII-3 F. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF COOLING TOWER OPERATION IN WINTER (EPA, p. N-41)

The applicant has considered this problem in his environmental report: 4 "Operation of the greater number of cooling towers .continuously would of. course increase the ti.me during which moisture would be added to the air in the river valley and thus possibly increase the frequency of fogging. Preliminary results of the study being made indicate that at the Rt. 372 bridge, the 657 annual hours

• of fogging would be increased by 26, and on the east shore, the 1615 annual hours would be increased by 64. Practically all of*

these increases would be during darkness. During low ambient temperatures, the plumes could cause icing on physical structures in their path. Since all such structures are on the plant property, such effects are of concern only to the Applicant. II 1he staff generally concurs in this analysis.

G. GENERATION OF OZONE AROUND TRANSMISSION LINES (EPA, p. N-42)

The generation of ozone as a result of corona generated by trans*-

mi.ssion lines has recently been experimentally investigated in the laboratory and field. 5 ' 6 'l'hes e investigations indicate that, for transmission lines up *to 765 kV, the maximum ground~level ozone concentration will .be well below Federal Standards. 7 The National Primary Air Quality Standard for photochemical oxidants, as issued by the Environmental Protection Agency, is O.08 ppm by volume for a one-hour concentration, not to be exceeded once per year. Lab-oratory. studies have indicated that 0.0193 ppm by volume of total oxidants might be expected* at ground level. Field studies with equipment sensitive to 0.002 ppm by volume indicated no measurable oxidants at *either ground or transmission line wire level.

H. PLANT OPERATION ACCIDENTS (Interior, p. N-23; Agriculture, p. N-13)

It was suggested that releases to water should be considered. 'Ille doses calculated as consequences of the postulated accidents are bas.ed on airborne transport of radioactive materials resul t;i.ng in both a direct and an inhalation dose. The staff evaluation of the accident doses assumes that the applicant's environmental monitoring program and appropriate additional nPnitoring (which could be initi-ated subsequent to an incident detected by in-_plar:it monitoring) would detect the presence of radioactivity in the environment in a timely manner such that remedial action could be taken if necessary to limit exposure from other*potential pathways to man.

A comment was made on the meteorological assumptions used for the accident analysis. The meteorological conditions indicated in the Annex to Appendix D of 10 CFR Part 50 approximate the dispersion conditions which would prevail at least 50% of the time.

' . XIII-4 I. SITE ARCHEOLOGY AND HISTORY (Interior, p. N-19)

While no detailed archeological survey was c*onducted at the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station* ,prior to the start of construction, Mr. Ira F: Smith, III, a Field Archeologist with the William Penn Museum of the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission was requested by the applicant to make a survey in June, 1972. In letters describing the results of his survey, 1 Mr. Smith said, in 1 part, " .** investigations *** were somewhat academic since the actual

. construction of the reactors wo¥1d already have destroyed any Indian sites that might have been present at those locations. However, it is unlikely that there were ever any sites there.in the first place. * ** it is the flood plain and t*errace that ate the most likely areas to find Indian settlements .and these are obviously no longer susceptible to investigation at Peach Bottom because they have either.been built upon in the past or flooded by the backwaters of Conowingo Pond."

J. FUEL CYCLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Agriculture, p. N::.4)

Environmental effects of :the mining, milling, and enrichment of uranium; the reprocessing of spent fuel; and the long-term manage-ment and storage of nuclear wastes are generic in nature, applying to all nuclear power plants, including the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station. The Commission has issued for comment an environmental surveys of the effects associated with producing the annual require-ments of uranium nuclear fuel for a "model" light water cooled power reactor capable of producing 1000 megawatts of electricity. The survey describes the effects of each stage of the cycle. Further, the Commission has published 9 a Notice of Proposed Rule Making to consider possible amendments to its regulations in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix D that would specifically deal with the question cif the consideration of environmental effects associated with the uranium fuel cycle in the individual cost-benefit analyses for light water cooled nuclear power reactors.

K. TESTING OF SirE FORMATIONS; SITE PREPARATION (Penna, pp. N-61, N-62)

The applicant has stated:10 "Representative rock cores were. extracted from selected borings and were subjected to a laboratory testing.program to evaluate the physical properties of the rock encountered at the site. Specific laboratory tests included:

XIII-5

a. unconfined compression tests;

b. density tests;

c. shock scope tests; and

d. torsional shear tests.

Results of these tests are shown in Table XIII-L "The significance of a major cut slope adjacent to the reactor buildings in Peters Creek Schist was realized by the consulting geologists. Consequently much attention was directed to this item from the beginning of the project.

"An extensive testing program was developed to determine the physi-cal properties of the rock, many core borings were made, cores were tested in the laboratory and a* detailed slope analysis was made.,

A finite element analysis was utilized to determine the overall slope stability and the potential modes by which failure could*

occur. The highest value of the maximum principal stress was found at the toe of the slope. At the same point, the maximum shearing stress was 11_, 700 pounds per square foot (81 psi). The shear strengt_h of the rock at this critical point is estimated from test data to be at least 980,000 pounds per square foot (6,800 psi).

"Evaluation of the results of the analysis leads to the *conclusion that, even under severe earthquake conditions, there is a large margin of safety against failure of the rock material. Deep seated failure is improba:t,le,. but localized surf ace ravelling could occur.

"In order. to monitor the rock ~~t slope for possible future move"".'

ment twenty-four bore hole extensometers, 35 to 80 feet long, were installed in June 1968. Observations since that time have indicated some small surface movements but no deep-seated movement of the rock mass *

."The characteristics of the severely weathered rock and overburden existing at the top of the cut slope adjacent to the reactor build-ings were determined by testing. An analysis showed that the mate-rial would be stable when cut with slopes of 1-1/2 horizontal to 1 vertical. This was done and the following additional measures we~e taken to prevent water from penetrating the slope.

a. Benches were provided at selected elevations to minimize erosion.

XIII-6 TABLE XIII-1 ROCK CORE LABORATORY TEST RESULTS PEACH BOTTOM UNITS 2 AND 3 BORING NUMBER AND UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE U. S *G. S :- El.EVATI ON STRESS DENSITY (feet) (lbs./sq. in.) (lbs. /cu. ft.)

2 @ 139 17,490 151

_2 @ 91 1/2 15,000 149 2@ 88 17,850 144 9@ 148

• 6,370 140

• 9@ 106 1/2 14,520 153 20 @ 175 . 19,630 159 22@ 190 1/2 20,110 162 22@ 179 14,570 155 25A@ 204 1/2 16,560 155 25A@ 2011/2 13,670 150 120@ 124 19,290 15-3 120@ 122 1/2 22,140 161 120@ 118 24,540 162 120@ 76 10,950 144 121@ 97 12,100 145 122@ 109 1/2 8,340 150 SHOCK.SCOPE TEST RESULTS 1

BORING NO. DEPTH VELOCITY OF COMPRESS-IONAL WAVE PROPAGATION (ft.) (feet per second) 120 31.9 12,200 120 32. 7" .16,100 120 37.9 13,900 120 7~.5 12,300 121 27.8 10,400 121* 31.6 1i,ooo 121 22.8 10,400 TORSIONAL SHEAR TEST RESULTS BORING NUMBER AND SHEAR STRAIN MODULUS--OF U.S.G.S. ELEVATION AMPLITUDE RIGIDITY (feet) (percent) (lbs'/ sq. ft.).

2 @ 92 +/2 .00018 409,200 22@ 191 .00016 633,800 i

L

XIII-7

b. The upper most" bench was covered wi-th a slush concrete to.

prevent erosion and infil tr at ion. Proper shaping was done to carry water off in an appropriate manner.

c. Slope drains were installed to remove water before a buildup could occur. These drains provide a means of monitoring the slope for water infiltration. Observations since 1968 when the drains were installed have indicated that ten of the twenty drains make no water while the others show drainage of just an occasional drip to about 2 gpm. Following snow melt and heavy rains, the discharge increases.

d. The overburden has been planted to further reduce the amount of water seepage into the slope."

Site suitability and preparation are discussed further in the staff's Safety Evaluation Report.

L. RAIMASTE TREATMENT

1. Potential Leakage from the Recombiner-Compressed Gas Storage System (EPA, p. N-34)

While the system is designed to minimize leakage, the leakage that may occur. from the waste gas system will be colle.cted in the equip-me~t compar~ment.

• The compartment ventilation is exhausted through a charcoal adsorber for iodine reduGtion prior to release through the reactor building vent, The reactor building vent will be monitored.

2. Basis for Assumed Outage of the Hydrogen-Oxygen Recombiner

.on the Air Ejector System (EPA, p. N-34)

Since a spare unit is not installed, _the 10-day outage per year per unit was based on an assumed failure of the equipment once every two years with twenty days required to decontaminate and repair the equipment.

3_. iodine Release. (EPA, p. N-33; Commerce, p, N-16)

. The applicant has been informed that, before the operating license*

for this plant is issued, the radwaste system will have to be 11Ddified to neet the' "as low as practicable" releases of radioactivity, M. RADIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

1. Monitoring (Applicant, pp. N-67, N-129, N~l33)

Weekly sampling*and analysis of milk for its radioiodine content is the only way that definitive values of radioiodine that humans could

XIII-8 ingest can be obtained, witliout any assumptions or theoretical cal-culations. The monitoring of the stack effluents as described by the applicant is only. ~n approximation at best.* A milk monitoring requirement will be included in the Technical Specifications.

Technical Specifications will require the weekly sampling and analy-sis of charcoal cartridges for' -I-131. They will be located with the air-particulates samplers; these samplers should be located, among other places, at t~e farms where milk is sampled.

I Milk samples will be taken and analyzed weekly for I-131 and monthly for complete y-spectrum and Sr-89, 90 during pasture season, and monthly the other 6 months of the year, as called for in the .Tech-nical Specifications.

\

The co~ census is a necessary responsibility of the applicant to determine the future location of cows at areas potentially effected by Iodine releases from the plant, and will be required in the Tech-nical Specifications. The potential dose from milk is not insig-nifi~ant according to staff calculations.

2. Dose Assessment (Applicant, pp. N-132, N-133)

Doses for the case. of real cows must be calculated for the child thyroid, with no allowance for pooling of the milk or delay time between. the cow and ingestion -by the child - i.e.,, on the assump-tion .that the milk is consumed on the farm or in the immediate locale. Allowance is made for the fraction of the.year the cow is actually on pasture; before allowance can be made for the amount of supplementary feed the cow consumes, the nature of the feed supple-ment and its effect on the amount of grass*consumed by the cow must be considered.

The applicant refers to "equivalent whole body dose." The staff is unsure what is meant by this. -'~he dose of concern here is the dose to the thyroid gland.. It is felt that the most sensitive and accurate way to determine this dose is to measure the radioiodin_e in the* .milk to be consumed.

N. METEOROLOGY (Commerce, N-13; . ~PA, N-40)

The staff modified the Peach Bottom site meteorology data, shown in Appendix E, using techniques discussed. on page II-23 of the statement.

The modified data are shown in Appendix F.

XIII-9 The applicant's Class I data correspond to Pasquill Stability Cate-gory A., the Class II data correspong. to Pasquill Categories B and C.

The Class III data correspond to Pasquill Category A. Some 11,000 entries out of 20,000 were turbulence Class II (Pasquill Band C) with another 700 entries in .turbulence Classes 1 and 3 (Pasquill A).

The staff feels that it is likely that unstable conditions will

• exist at the site for the fraction of the year shown. Turbulence Classes IV and V correspond to Pasquill Categories D and Fas used~

Within the general uncertainties of dispersion calculations, the choice of Pasquill Stability Category B for a11* of the unstable data was felt to be reasonable since the conservative assumption was made that all radionuclide releases from the turbine and reactor buildings occur at ground level.

Radionuclides*released.from the. gland seals and air ejectors are discharged from a 50'0-ft stack and this release height was used for their dispersion calculations.

The staff considers it appropriate to use a single set of wind ~d stability data for these two release conditions since, at lower elevations (153 feet) during stable. conditions, the air flow is up-stream or downstream over the reservoir, as shown .on p*~ge II-2+ of the statement. Since no potential for full-time exposure appears to exist on the water, the more realistic potenti.al for land exposure is chosen.

Since two release conditions *are assessed and summed for,, dose calcula- **

tions, 320 .values of x/Q are. calculat:ed and used with pertinent information to determine only the total body dose. The values of x/Q were determined using the approach stated above~ Section F of the statement, and references 47 and 48 from Section V of the state-ment *. For the worst sector, SSE at 1100.meters on the site boundary, the X for gland seal and air ejector releases is 1.6 x 10- 7 sec/m 3 , *

• whil~ the '3' for the turbine and reactor building releases at the

• same location is 2.5 x 10-6 sec/m3.

O. CHLORINE CONCENTRATION (Applicant, pp~ N-70, N-144; EPA, pp. N-32, N-40)

In his comments, the applicant states " *** a free chlorine residual is necessary to keep the Peach Bottom heat exchangers (condensers) free of organic buildup and in efficient operating condition" and

.that, under the restrictions recommended by the staff, c;ondenser sterilization would not occur. Further, he states f;hat increased chlorine concentrations are nec~ssary in his helper cooling towers.

XIII-10 EPA generally recommends that concentrations of residual chlorine in receiving waters of 0.1 mg/liter and 0.05 mg/liter should not per-*

sist for longer than 30 minutes and. 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />, respectively (p. N-40).

In the opinion of the staff, the imposed restrictions on effluent chlorine concentrations are necessary to avoid unacceptable damage to the biota* in both the discharge canal and the pond. If the allowable.chlorine concentrations are considered by the applicant to be ineffective, mechanical condenser cleaning techniques are available.

Viable mechanical cleaning techniques for cooling towers may not be available. If, during the.allowable open cycle operations prior to July 1, 1975, operating experience indicates that the allowable chlorine concentrations are in.effective in the towers, a gradual and carefully monitored increase will be allowed on an ad hoc basis.

After July 1, 1975, the closed cycle operation will allow for an increased internal *chlorine use conditioned only by the effects of blowdown upon pond biota.

P. BIOLOGICAL IMPACT (Applicant, pp. N-~3 through N-127)

The applicant has commented ext~nsively on biological discussions in the draft statement. The staff believes*that there are several major areas of disagreement with the applicant as to the ecological effects of operation of *the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station and has directed its respons~ to those general areas rather than attempttng a detailed point-by-point response. Revisions made in the statement text as the result of applicant comments are noted in Section XIII.T.

First, the applicant believes that the potential for severe impinge-men_t losses (of fish on .intake screens) is negligible. He feels that the white crappie will not be present in the p+ant vidinity during cold weather periods since it normally migrates downstream during such periods. He states that the design approach velocity of water to the intake screens was dictated by r~sults of pre-operational swim speed studies conducted on the important.fishes of Conowingo Pond. He also believes that the operating and test experi-ence at Indian Point Units 1 and 2 cannot be applied ~o the Peach Bottom situation.

The staff does not believe that white*crappie (or other fishes, for that matter) will be able to follow normal migration patterns while the plant is in operation *. The applicant agrees *with the staff that attraction to the thermal discharges will occur during cold weather.

The staff does not agree .that the attraction can be claimed entirely as a benefit (increased winter sport fishery) on the one hand while negative aspects (impingement, etc.) are rejected on the othe.r.

XIII-11 Further, the results of preoperational swim-speed studies, provided by the applicant to the staff, contradict the conclusion that th_e intake velocity chosen, 0.75 fps, would prevent extensive impinge-ment of the white crappie~ The staff believes that it. is imprudent to reject the.experience at Indian Point Units 1 and 2 until the reasons for the impingement losses are known with greater certainty.

Second, the applicant believes that cold kills of fishes will not occur because the time interval required for water temperatures to drop_ to ambient levels will be approximately 7 days. He further

• believes that since simultaneous shutdown of both units would be highly_ improbable, the overall probability of damage is reduced to negligible proportions.

Calculations by the staff indicate that the total interval required for-temperatures to fall to_ambient levels may indeed be on the order of one week. However, the initial temperature drop in the region of maximum temperature will be much more rapid. A recent studyloa.has shown that the rate of temperature change is much more critical (by a-factor of 20) during cold shock than for heat shock. The cumula-tive effects of a rapid.initial temperature drop, followed by a slower fall to ambient levels, may therefore be severe enough to produce mortality. Until cold shock experiments on Conowingo Pond fishes are completed~ the staff must adopt a conservative position on the impact of *cold shock. Further, should a significant natural temperature fall coincide with a plant shutdown (such as that which apparently occurred in conjunction with the Oyster Creek mortality),

the previous discussion should prove to be academic. Both the rate and magnitude of the temperature change should be more than suffi-cient to produce severe mortalities under such synergistic conditions.

Additionally, since one unit of the station will be shut down for refueling for a period* of 4~8.weeks each year, the possibility of a one unit shutdown will be present during a significant portion of the critical cold weather period. Thus, the staff 'believes that the possibility of cold shock mortalities may not be easily dismissed.

Third, the applicant, although ,agreeing with the staff as to the relative mortality of entrained organisms and magnitude of tempera-ture increments expected in the thermal plume, believes that the.

overall effect on the Conowingo Pond food web will be acceptable,

• if not beneficial. The applicant, citing a study performed at the

~ine Mile Point Station on Lake Ontario, believes that increased production of zooplankton in the thermal plume (exc~pt d~ring the warmest period of the summer) will more than compensate for entrain-ment losses~ *

• XIII-12 The Lake Ontario study, referred to above, does not provide the statistically defensible results which the staff believes are required to draw meaningful conclusions. Since the water depth in the vicinity of the intake generally ranges from 10-12 feet, the entrainment losse*s during an expected maximal turnover period for microcrustacean zooplankton in nature (4 days) would amount to the populations and production found under approximately 4 square miles

("130% of the surface area) of the Pond.. Thus, even under ideal conditions, production of zooplankton must be significantly increased in order to replenish these los~es. During much of the year, when increased temperatures might pe expected to produce the most benefi-cial _effects (late fall throµgh spring), rapid transport through the reservoir (by increased river fiows), coupled with increased turnover periods, should prevent the realization of significant benefit from the presence of heated water. Further, during warmest periods of the sunnner, significant depressions of zooplankton production could occur. This would c_oincide with the presence of large zooplankton-dependent populations of fishes (young of the year resul~ing from spring and summer spawning). Thus, these fishes would be faced _with a significant reduction in their. major food source at a .time when they are least able to* afford it; metabolic requirements would be at maximal levels due to the increased water temperatures.

Fourth, the applicant believes that the combined effects of the Peach Bottom Station and _the Muddy Run Pumped Storage Reservoir on i~troduced American shad populations will be negligible. He apparently believes that the experience gained from the Connecticut River Ecological Studies are sufficient at this point to conclude that no significant effects _should result.

The fractional withdrawal (based on average river flows) from Conowingo Pond (with Muc;ldy Run pumping) is 77% and. from the Connecticut River (by the Connecticut Yankee Station) is 5%. Thus, significant differences in impact are certainly possible. F~rther, the staff believes that the status of the Connecticut River Studies is best summarized in the statement by Dr. ijerriman, director of that investi-gation, on p. ii of the latest (13th, 1971) semi~annual progress report:

W. C. Leggett concludes (p. 53) that, "To date, no alterations of population size, migration rate$ or age and. spawning history attributable to the discharge of heated° water into the Con-necticut River from the.Connecticut Yankee facility have been observed." Here the key works are, "To date." The majority of.the males of this anadromous fish return to spawn after four years at sea, the females after five years of ocean life.

Sirice the plant only reached full operation in 1968, if it

'\;,

XIII-13 had any serious deleterious effect on. the downst.ream passage of juvenile emigrants it should show markedly for the first time with t.he returning male population in 1972 and with the females in 1973. In short, there is clear evidence that the upstream migration of adult shad is in no way affected by the condenser cooling effluent from Connecticut Yankee; that is, under present circumstances the shad get batk to their spawning grounds successfully. And there is no*evidence to date that the three- to five-month old juveniles suffer serious mortality from the plant's operation on their seaward journey in August-October each year, but co~roborative evidence from the strength of at least the returning year-class of 1968 in 1972 and 1973 is a definite desideratum, as is; indeed, the annual monitoring of the shad population with respect to numbers, sex ratio and age composition."

The applicant, in his COillJ!lents, pointed out a number of errors in.

the draft statement. The staff acknowledges that there -t.7ere*a limited number of minor errors~ as in any draft manuscript, and has attempted to correct them during the preparation of the final statement. How-ever, these changes have not altered the staff's analysis of probable biological impact or the conclusions derived therefrom:

Q. THERMAL DISCHARGES (Applicant, pp. N-66 and N-73; EPA, p~ N-38; Interior, p. N-22)

1. Isotherm Prediction In his Environmental Report,i 1 the applicant presented predicted isothermal distributions based upon a correction of model to proto-type isotherms using the wet-bulb temperature method. These pre-dictions are summarized in Section III.D.1. (3) of this Statement, together with .the reasoning behind the staff's disagreement with the applicant Is prediction method. A simplified analysis by the staff (Section III.D.1.(4)) indicated that the applicant's predicted isotherms would be capable of rejecting only about 20% of the ef-fluent heat load.

In his comments on the Draft Environm~ntal Statement (p. N~73), the applicant presents recalculated isotherm plo~s for selected operating conditions using the equilibrium temperature method suggested by the staff. Those new predictions indicate significantly larger excess temperature isotherms, e.g., the 6° surface isotherm was found to cover over half the area of Conowirigo Pond (p. N-77). Addition:a.lly,

XIII-14 large areas, amounting to hundreds of acres, were found to be con-fined within the 8° and 9° isotherms (pp. N-75, N-77). These new applicant predictions are for sunnner low flow conditions with the helper cooling towers operating.

• The applicant states in his comments that " *** this (new) method has little verification from prototype operation; particularly under such complex hydraulic conditions as those of Conowingo Pond." The staff concurs; however, as discussed below, t~ese new applicant estimates are in good agreement with staff estimates using mathe-matical modeling techniques.

The staff has estimated the temperature rise to be expected in Conowingo Pond for the four typical cases listed below:

TABLE XIII-2 Flow Conditions Considered in Staff Estimates Case No. 1 2 3 4 Season Sunnner Sunnner Winter Winter River Flow Rate, cfs 2500 10,400 2500. 31,700 Discharge Temperature Rise, OF *13 13 20.8 20.8 Surface Heat Loss Coefficient, Btu

-1 -2 -1

°F Ft Day 139

• 139 110 lIO Average Temperature Rise on Conowingo Pond, OF 3.8 2.3 6.8 1.8 The first two cases above are similar to cases I and III presented in the applicant's comments. Cases 3 and 4, above, assume once-through cooling with the helper cooling towers not operating, the applicant's suggested method of winter operation. In all*cases, the pond temperature rise is a rough estimate based on.the simplifying assumption that the entire 14 squ~re miles of .the pond between the two dams is at a u~iform. temperature..

• Some addition~l details of* the nature of the temperature rise struc-ture near the outlet ports were obtained by the application of a

XIII-15

• recently developed calculational model.1 2 The phenomena taken into account are depicted in Figure XIII-1. A time-steady pond velocity was assumed, typical of a time when Muddy Run is in a discharge phase of operation. These free.-stream velociti,es range from 0.12 to 0.38 ft/sec, depending on the river flow rate.* The jet discharges at 8 ft/sec, creating a traction between the jet and free stream, which induces fluid from the free stream to join the jet flow. Thi,s process continues until the effects* of entrainment and bottom fric-tion slow the jet down to the free.stream velocity. The confining effects of the shorelines are taken into account:and, as a first step, the two-dimensional velocity patterns in the vicinity of the discharge are computed. Uniformity in the vertical direction is presumed.

Near-field jsotherms were obtained by superimposing a heat balance upon the calculated velocity patterns. Initially, the jet.,tempera-ture profile is flat with a rapid erosion at** the periphery caused by entrainment of 'cooler fluid from the jet stream. The temperature of the entrained fluid-in each.case is taken to be the average pond temperature* rise 1.isted in Table XIII-2. !Ii so doing, an approximate matching of near and far field models is attained.

The results thus obtained are depicted in Figure XIII-2 (Cases 1 and

2) and Figure XIII-3 (Cases 3. and 4). Case 1 conditions are similar to those illustrated *b.y the applicant ~s Figure I-A of his comments (p. N~75). Considering that the applicant's predictions are based

. on the continuously varying flow condit_i*ons within his physical model while the staff's predictions are based on a steady-state flow assumption employing a mathematical model, the two are in remarkably.

good agreement. *similarly, there is.good agreement between staff's Case 2 and applicant's Figure III-B (p. N-80). It should be recog-nized that imposition of the periodic flow reductions actually occur-ring in Conowingo Pond between inflow and outflow phases of Muddy Run operation would result in even larger near~field isotherms than produced by the staff's model.

Winter operation, without tower assistance, would impose an even more severe thermal impact upon the pond as illustrated in Figure III-3.

Under. *case 3 conditions, a temperature rise of at least 7°F will be felt at the far shore even under the steady-state flow conditions of the staff model. Again,: if more realistic flow conditions were to be imposed upon the model,,even higher temperature isotherms could be expected to reach the far shore.

I .

FREE STREAM

. SURFACE HEAT LOSS I

I* UJ w >-o

~U>

I fl: t:z ENTRAINMENT OF FLUID I

I

u. u UJ U) g ...

UJ UJ z

> >UJ I

I w

i:~z u <( -

<( UJ c:(

~

. H H

H i:: .....I I

I

..... fl:

UJ ~ z

-, UJ . °'"

JET . I .

I I- JET SLOWS DOWN DUE TO FRICTION - CONSTANT VELOCITY -

XIII-1 Schema.tic of flow processes assumed for the staff's estimation of near-field temperature patterns.

• I r~--1--=::::::f-----1--.;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;f::::=24~;,~-.===j FAR SHORE 6000 CASE 1

-Cl) 4000

• 2000 NEAR SHORE FAR SHORE -~

H CASE 2 - t - ~ - - - - - t - - - - - + - - - - - - , 1 ' - - - - - - - + - - - - _ _ . ; . . + - ' - - - - - - - - 1 H 6000 H

-Cl) 4000

. 40 I

I""'

-..J I Cl) 2000 60 II ao NEAR SHORE 0 4 8 12 16 20 24

. DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM FROM SITE {ft)

XIII-2 Staff's estimate of isotherms resulting from two-unit operation for Summer low-flow (Case 1) and Sunnner average-flow (Case 2) conditions. Muddy Run assumed to be in discharge phase~

FAR SHORE 6000 CASE 3 - - - - + - - - - - ~ - - - - - + - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - + -

-Q) 4000

-Q) 12° NEAR SHORE

~

FAR SHORE I H H

6000 _;__CASE 4 - H I

r-'

• • • • • 00

-Q) 4000 40 Q) 2000

~ ----

- 50

- ..~ 10° NEAR SHORE 12°

• O 4 8 12 16 20 24 DISTANCE DOWNSTREAM FROM SITE (ft)

XIII-3 Staff's estimate of isotherms resulting from two~unit operation for Winter low-flow (Case 3) and Winter average-fiow conditions.

M:µddy Run assumed to be* in discharge phase.

XIII'-19 In summary, the staff predicts that under winter low flow conditions, isotherms*'in excess of 7°F will reach the far shore in tlie Muddy Run discharge phase, while under summer low flow conditions the maximum far shore temperature rise will be approximately 4°F in the Muddy Run dis*charge phase. Higher near-field temperatures are likely. during the periods when Muddy Run is neither charging nor discharging.

A further statement appropriate to this topic was. con*tained in the Environmental Protection Agency comments (p. N-38): " *** we agree with the AEC in that water temperatures in the mixing zone may, at times, exceed a 5°F ris~ above ambient. Such a rise would constitute a violation of the :federally approved state water* quality standards applicable to this section of the Susquehanna River."

2. Cool-down.Rates Following Power Cutoff Under winter low ftow condition, it is estimated that the average temperature of Conowingo Pond will be elevated approximately 6.8°F.

Following power cutoff, the pond will cool due to heat losses to the atmosphere and convective loss tqrough the downstream dam. If it, is a.ssumed that the excess temperature zone is ~onfined to the upper 10 ft stratum of the pond, and convective losses are incurred solely from this warm stratum, the average cool-down rate of the pond may be approximated from the relation (where tis in hours),

T(t)

To

= exp [-0.0lt]

applicable to winter low flow conditions. The above predicts a diminution of pond-average temperature to 50% of its initial value in 2.-9 days-for winter low flow~

Zones within the pond which were, prior to power cutoff, at higher than pond-average temperatures will cool down at a more rapid rate th.an predicted by the aboye. The estimation of cooling rates for these warmer zones is quite uncertain under the complex flow condi~

tions which exist in the pond. However, in cases where these warm zones are essentially detached from the shores and surrounded by cooler zones.,* temperature decay may be significantly more rapid than predicted by the pond-average cool-down rates due to mixing with lower temperature water~

XIII-20 R. AIRPORTS AND AIRWAYS (DOT, p. N-27)

The applicant has stated: 11 "Within 10 statute miles of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Stations (PBAPS) site are three aerodromes with only emergency facilities or no facilities according to the Washington Sectional Aeronautical Chart, 9th Edition,.effective April 1, 1971, which is published in accordance with Inter-agency Air Cartographic Committee specifica-tions and agreements and approved*by the Department of Defense, Federal Aviation Administration, and the Department of Commerce.

Of these three, which are listed in Table Q2.13.1, only one aerodrome is for public use; they have no traffic areas. There are no civil or military aerodromes within 10 miles of the site.

Table Q2.13.l Airports within 10 Miles of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Stations Airport TB;nglewood Huber Delta

• Distance (statute miles) 6-1/2 7-1/2 4 Direction (true north) 36° 75° 226° Elevation (feet) 680 505 540 Public Use Private, Private, Restricted Restricted The center line of Victor 3 Airway is one mile from the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Stations. Airways extend four miles on either side of their center lines. Victor Airways carry commercial and general flights between four and twenty-four thousand feet. The segment of Victor 3 passing over PBAPS is between West Minister and Modena which are radio navigation facilities. Approximately at the closest point on Victor 3 to PBAPS is Norris intersection which is established by

\

XIII-21 another radio navigati,on facility called Lancaster- VOR. The inter-section is the point at which the airway changes between a "From" bearing a:nd a "To" bearing with respect to the above mentioned terminal radio facilities. The air traffic on-Victor 3 passes PBAPS high overhead in the east northeast and west southwest magnetic directions."

As stated abov~, air traffic on Victor 3 Airway passes between 4,000 and 24,000 feet. Using the extreme fogging meteorological conditions in the Peach Bottom area*(Appendix -D) and Briggs' plume rise formula, 13 the maximum plume rise is less than 2,000 feet. There should be

• negligible adverse effect from the Peach Bottom cooling tower plumes on air traffic in the Victor 3 Airway.

F *. w. Decker14 states that the probabi,lity of mechanical draft cool-ing tower plumes obstructing visib'ility may .be substantial, but highly variable, depending upon wind and orientation or grouping of the units. The staff considered the effect of the cooling tower plumes on visibility near the nearest airport in the Peach Bottom area, Delta Airport, located 4 miles SW of the site. Using Hanna's method to account for moisture in the plume, one can determine that under normal conditions the plume will disappear within 500 feet of the cooling tower *. However," there may be periods of time where the cooling tower pltnnes may be visible as far as 10 miles downwind of the cooling towers (i.e., under stable atmospheric conditions and /

high relative htiinidity). Using the :Peach Bottom meteorological conditions (Appendix D) and the Gaussian diffusion equation, 1 6 the increase in moisture content of the. air at ground level at Delti Airport is less than 0.0021-gm/m 3 , which correspond to a visibility of greater than one mile 17 , assuming that the excess moisture remains in the liquid state and in a droplet size range typical of a fog.

The estimated frequency of combined meteorological conditions which would bring visible plumes over the Delta Airport is 0.034% or about 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> per year.

S. COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1972 (E~P .A., p. N-38)

On January 29, 1973, the Commission published an Interim Policy Statement, effective on that date, implementing the FWPCA, particularly section 511 thereof (38 F.R. 2679). On the same date, a Memorandum of Understanding between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Commission for the purpose of implementing NEPA and the FWPCA in a manner consistent with both acts was published in the Federal Register (38 F.R. 2713). .

In general, the Interim Policy Statement provides that the Commission will continue to exercise its NEPA authority and responsibility in

XIII-22 licensing proceedings subject to Appendix D of 10 CFR Part 50 so as to avoid, to the maximum extent possible, needless duplication of regulatory effort or, conversely, any hiatus in Federal responsibility and authority, respecting environmental matters embraced by both NEPA and FWPCA, in the interim period before various actions are taken under the FWPCA.

Section 3 of the Interim Policy Statement indicates one major impact of.the FWPCA on the Commission's NEPA authority. It provides that if and to the extent that there are applicable limitations or other re-

_quirements imposed pursuant to the FWPCA, the Commission will not (with certain exceptions) impose different limitations or requirements pur-suant to NEPA as a condition to any license or p~rmit.

Section 4 sets out the limitations on AEC consideration of alternatives relevant to water quality in particular situations. Generally, it indicates that ~he Commission will not consider various alternatives where such action would constitute a review of similar consideration of alternatives under the FWPCA and upset a limitation or requirement imposed as a result thereof or where a particular alternative has been required to be adopted pursuant to the FWPC~.

Section 5 concerns the effect of the FWPCA on cost-benefit analyses.

It states, in summary, that the Commission will continue to evaluate and give full consideration to erivironmental impact provided that, with

.certain exceptions, such evaluation will be conducted on the basis of

• activities at.th~ level of limitations or requirements promulgated or imposed pursuant to the FWPCA. In addition, section 5 provides that the Commission will also determine, except in certain situations specified in section S(c), whether the facility will comply with-applicable requirements.

The impact of. the Commission's Interim Policy Statement depends on whether and to what extent there are "limitations or other requirements promulgated or imposed pursuant to the FWPCA," as defined in section 2(a) of the Statement. In this case, the applicable thermal limitation of the_ Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for the area of the Susquehanna River where the Peach Bottom facilities are located has been continued in effect, pursuant to section 303 of the FWPCA. This limitation set forth in the Pennsylvania Water Quality Criteria contained in the Rules and Regulations of the Department of Environmental Resources is as follows: *the temperature is "not to exceed 5°F rise above ambient temperature or a maximum of 87°F, whichever is less; not to

• be changed by more than 2°F during any one-hour period. nl8 Under

XIII-23 section 303(a) (1) of the* FWPCA, this preyiously approved limitation remains in effect since the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) did not notify the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania of a desired change by January 18, 1973.19 Under the Interim Policy Statement, it is nec*essary to determine whether the Peach Bottom facilities will be in compliance with the approved thermal standard. This determination, however, is complicated by the need to establish the precise area for temperature measurement. In many cases, the point or area of such measurement is the botmdary of a thermal umixing zone. 11 The Pennsylvania standard notve does not contain a reference to a point of measurement, or to a Illl.XJ..ng zone. Accordingly, it is *necessary to determine whether the lack of such reference in the approved standard implies that the thermal limita-tion is applicable at the botmdary of a mixing zone to be reasonably determined, or instead: implies that the measurement is determined without any mixing in the river -- essentially a point of discharge standard. We have obtained from EPA clarification of its approval of the Pennsylvania standards with respect to this matter.zo EPA states that no mixing zone standard was approved as part of its approval of Pennsylvania water quality criteria. EPA also states that the presently approved water quality thermal standard does not impose a point of discharge limitation; rather, the thermal limitation is applicable after some limited mixing in the river.

EPA indicates that its policy with respect to such mixing restricts the mixing zone to no more than one-fourth of the cross-sectional area and/or volume of the fiow of the stream. In any event, it *appears that the presently approved Pennsylvania standards with respect to thermal discharges in the river are applicable at the botmdaries of a mixing zone which is not fixed by such approved standards. Therefore, in accordance with the Commission's Interim Policy Statement, the Commission continues tmder its NEPA authority to impose such limitations on* the area exposed to the thermal plume as may be required to protect environmental values~*

The Final Environmental Statement assesses the environmental impact associated with the_ thermal discharge from the open cycle facility as proposed by the applicant and demonstrates that thermal mixing results in excessive temperatures in large portions of Conowingo Pond covering, in some situations, well over half of the Pond (see section XilI.,Q),

and results in significant long term* potential damage to the aquatic biota (see sections V.C.l.a and XIII.P). The staff: concludes that the potential damage is_ excessive and nnwarranted and that a closed cycle

XHI-24 cooling system is necessary to limit the size of the mixing zone, to restrict the amount of long term damage to the aquatic biota, and to protect the environment.

Under*a closed cycle system of operation, the blowdown to Conowingo Pond would be a minor impact as compared to the full flow effluent under the tower-assisted open-cycle system.

The design of the closed-cycle system should, nevertheless, be such as to generate a mixing zone resulting from the blowdown which does not exceed 25% of the cross-sectional area of the stream. This would be consistent with EPA's recommendation with respect to such mixing zone and zones of passage.

The installation of a closed-cycle cooling system, however, will require a period of time which is likely to be approximately two years. The staff has assessed the impact on the aquatic biota that would result if.operation of the facilities as presently proposed by the applicant is authorized solely during this pe~iod. in view of the fact that the damage.incurred during this period is reversible, if its source is eliminated*, and in view of the fact of the applicant's established power needs (section XI), the staff concludes that the balance factors.indicate that a delay in the operation of the facil-ities during this period,is not warranted.

With respect to other matters covered by applicable Pennsylvania water quality criteria (pH, dissolved oxygen, iron, dissolved solids, bacteria, chlorides, and total manganese concentration), it is the considered judgment of the staff that the facilities will be in com-pliance with the relevant State standards (see sections III.D.3, V.C.l.d.,

and VI.D.).

With respect to chlorine, there is no applicable standard; the staff*

has considered the impact of chlorine discharges on the biota of Conowingo Pond and, as noted in section XIII-0, it is the position of the staff* .that chlorine concentrations in the effluent should be substantially limited.

Assessment of impact on the aquatic environment of chemical and other waste discharges at levels equivalent*to those of the approved standards

• does not affect our analysis.

T. COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS (Applicant, *p. N-70)

In his comments, the applicant presents a calculation of the dollar cost of an assumed fish kill, assigning values to areas affected,

XIII-25 biomass present and the mortality thereof, and the per pound. value.

of the fish. Using values he believes to be conservative, the applicant calculates the cost of a kill at $250,000. The applicant compares this cost to his annualiz*ed cost of closed cycle cooling.

(a,pplicant's estimate - $7,000,000) and states that*"the AEC Regula-tory staff has totally failed to justify on a cost-benefit basis the alternative cooling system that is .recommended" and that "the (appli-cant's) analysis of the cost-benefit considerations of the staff's position demonstrates that the annualized expenditure of over $7 million per year for the closed loop system .is not justifiab,le."

The staff recognizes that such calculations may indeed lead to presumed dollar costs of fish kills substantially below the expendi-ture necessary to avoid these kills. If the only basis for cost benefit measurement of environmental effect were dollar cost of primary damage, the applicant's conclusion might well be valid. It seems clear to the staff, .however, that considerations related to the quality of the environment must be brought to bear in*acost-benefit balance, not to the e::x;clusion of, but in addition to, the dollar measure.

Further, using the applicant's cost-benefit rationale, it is unlikely that the applicant's helper cooling towers could be "justified." If the applicant's justification for installation of the helper cooling towers was related to state water quality requirements, rather than cost-benefit matters, he has failed.to explain why the recent re~

calculation showing greatly increased isotherm areas (see Section XIII-Q) has not led /to a redesign to increase his tower cooling capability..

• It was, and remains, the conclusion of the staff that the costs of a closed cycle cooling alternative are reasonable to attain the benefit of maintaining the existing environment of Conowingo Pond.

J U. LOCATION OF PRINCIPAL REVISIONS OF TEXT IN RESPONSE TO COMMENTS Section Where Topics Topics Commented Upon are Addressed Recreational Water Use (Interior, p. N-20) II.D.4 Sampling Station Nomenclature (EPA, p. N-43) Table II-7 Water Consumption (Interior, p. N-21) III.C.2.a.

XIII-26 Section Where Topics Topics Commented Upon are Addressed Parameter Choice for Thermal Plume*

Evaluation (Interior, p. N-21) III.D.l.al. (3)

Location of Boat Launching Facility Interior, p. N-24)

• IX-B Additional Information on Alternative Fuels (Interior, p. N-24) XII.A,!4 Cost-Benefit Balance (Interior, p. N-75) XII.C.4 Applicant's Iodine Release Estimate (Conunerce, p. N-16) III.D.2.b

\

Minor Corrections in Biological Discussions II.E, II (Ref), V.A, (Applic~nt, p. N-83 through N-127) V. C, VI.B.

Rad:i:ological Assessment (Conunerce, p. N-16; EPA, p. N-42) III.D.2, V.D.

XIII-27 REFERENCES FOR SECTION XIII

1. Letter; E. J. Bradley; Philadeiphia Electric Company to G. *K.

Dicker, USAEC, December 15, 1972 (Docket N:>s. 50-277 and 50-278).

2. Pollution Incident Prevention Report, Philadelphia Electric

• company, June, 1972; Enclosure to Letter; E. J. Purdy, Philadelphia Electric Company to J. H. Cusack, USAEC, December 14, 1972 (Docket fus. 50-277 and 50-278). *

3. Safety .Evaluation of the. Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3, USAEC, Directorate of Licensing, August 11, 1972.

4. Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement No. 1, Part. 1, fuvember,

• 1971. . .

5. Scherer, H. N., Jr., *B. J. Ware, C. H. Shih (1972). Gaseous Effluents Due tc;, ERV Transmission Line Cor.ona. Preprint of Paper presented at the IEEE PES Summer Meeting, San Francisco, California, July 9-14, 1972.

6. Frydman, M., A. Levy, S. E. Miller (1972). Oxidant Measurements in the Vicinity of Energized 765-KV Lines. Preprint of paper presented at the IEEE. PES Summer Meeting, San Francisco, California, July 9-14, 1972.

7. Eisenbud, M., "Review of USA Power Reactor Operating Experience,"

Presented as SN-146/15 at the IAEA Symposium on Environmental Aspects of Nuclear Power Stations, New York, August 10-14, 1970.

8. Environmental Survey of the* Nuclear Fuel Cycle, USAEC,

. Directorate of Licensing, fuvember, 1972.

9. 37 Federal .Register 24191 (1972).

10. Letter; E. J. Bradley, Philadelphia Electric Company to G. K.

Dicker, USAEC; December 28, 1972 (Docket fus. 50-277 and ~0-278).

.lOa. Speakman, J. N. and P.A. Krenkel, Quantification of the Effect of Rate of Temperature Change on Aquatic Biota, Report No, 6, National Center for Research and Training in the Hydrologic and Hydraulic Aspects of Water Pollution. Control, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tenn., May 1971.

• 11, Environmental Report, Oper1;1ting License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic

_Power Station, Units 2 and 3, June, 1971.

XIII-28

12. B.S.11, Temperature Patterns in Conowingo Pond Near the Cooling Water Discharge from the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, TM-4085, Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

13. Briggs, G. A., Plume Rise, AEC Critical Review Series, TID-25075, from Clearinghouse for Fed. Scient. and Tech. Inform., U. S.

Dept. of Comm., Springfield, Va., 1969.

14. Decker, F. *W., "Probabilities of Cooling System Fogging," Oregon State University, Corvallis; Oreg.

15. Hanna, S. R., "Cooling Tower Plume Rise and Condensation,i*

Proceedings Air Pollution, Turbulence and Diffusion Symposium, Las Cruces, New Mexico, Dec. 7-10, 1971. *

16. Pasquill, F., ."The Estimation of the Dispersion of Wingborne Materials," Meteorol. Mag., 90, 1963, 33-49, 1961.

17. Eldridge, R. G., "The Relationship Between Visibility and Liquid Water Content in Fog," Journal of the Atm. Sciences,. Vol. 28, pp. 1183-1186, Oct~ 1971.

18. 40 CFR § 120.10 as amended, 37 FR 20243.

19. Letter, E~ W. Furia, E.P.A., to Gov. M. J. Shapp, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Jan. 18, 1973; Attachment to Memorandum, J. H. Cusack, USAEC to G. K. Dicker, USAEC, April 3, 1973 (Docket Nos. 50~277 and 50-278).

20. Letter, s. R. Wassersug, E.P.A., to Engelhardt, USAEC, April 3, 1973 (Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278).

Appendix A POPULATION DATA FOR THE AREA AROUND PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION .

A-1

A-2 Table A-1. Population distribution between Sand 60 miles from*Peach Bottom.Units 2 and 3 by iadius and compass sector. The figures for 1960 and 1970 are government census; the figures for 70-P and 1980 are projections made prior to 1970.

5-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 Total miles miles* miles miles miles miles N 1960 923 83,565 48,355 15,383 29,052 12,134 189,412 1970 997 83,097 63,099 18,409. 33,551 i2,776 211,929 70-P 1,045 94,629 54,758 17,028 31,129 11,864

• 210,453 1980 1,278 115,720 66,962 19,513 33,129 11,408 248,010 NNE 1960 877 12,500 19,535 26,423 182,658 34,633 276,626 1970 1,024 14,978 24,388 31,247. 188,626 40,331 300,594 70-P 993 14,156 22,121 28,716 191,917 36,325 294,228 .

1980 1,215 17,310 27,051 32,357 200,546 37,886 316,365 NE 1960 978 3,725 16,398 12,806 '* 74,971 48,748 157,626 1970 1,178 4,234 20,431 17,794 85,808 59,881 189,326 70-P* 1,108 4,220 21,116 16,854 94,229 58,898 196,425 1980* 1,354 5,i58 28,235 22,689 118,788 70,730 246,954 ENE 1960 739 5,542 25,086 60,713 104,801 1,104,391 1,302,272 1970 834 6,857 25,451 88,211* 129,499 1,184,691 1,445,543 70-P 837 7,225 33,781 8J,510 130,828

• 1,215,556 1,469,737 1980 1,023 9,734 46,400 111,685 168,224 1,359,734 1,696,800 E 1960 782'* 7,634 22,789 219,952 204,904 221,382 677,443 1970 882 8,478 28,588 292,467 239,658 248,538 818,611 70-P 886 10,242 20,224 293,148 243,925 256,441 834,866 1980 1,083 14,012 41,719 416)37 303,802 301,208 1,078561 ESE 1960 1,296 6,524 23,534 . 6,4;2.8 26,335 36,973 101,090

. 1970 1,444 7,809 27,264 8,566 27,223 37,781 110,087 70-P 1,575 8,047 29,832 8,566 31,578 45,945 125,543 1980 1,913 9,762 38,444 12,182 38,620 55,187 156,108 SE 1960 1,046 17,086 1,691 9,482 8,407 35,625 73,337 1970 1,149 17,905 2,321 11,226 11,648 .49,814 94,063 70-P 1,291 21,076 2,086 -11,998 11,648 49,814 97,913 1980 1,565 25,567 2,530 15,446 16,~79 72,497 134,484 SSE . 1960 1,484 *30,390 328* 7,352 7,506 9,062 56,122 1970 1,797 37,533 327 7,678 8,274 9,341 64,950 70-P 2,138 43,779 380 8,525 8,304 9,708 72,834 1980 2,910 59,594 399 8,942 8,848 9,926 90,619 s 1960 1,482 6,570 15,852 1,320 3,905 6,494 35,623.

1970 1,795 11,506 29,845 1,352 4,082 7,734 56,314 70-P 2,135 9,464 22,650 1,531 4,528* 7,171 47,479 1980 2,906 12,883 30,613 1,606 4,750 7,647 60,405 SSW 1960 1,482 12,701 44,363 1,033,945 152,176 87,913 1,332,580 1970 1,795 21,843 62,297 1,031,786 216,766 147,488 1,481,975 70-P 2,135 18,298 58,122 1,104,870 227,336 136,153 1,546,914 1980 2,906 24,906 72,288 1,175,418 300,564 177,827 1,753,909 SW 1960 1,482 3,192 28,614 .221,179 698,875 63,347 387,689 1970 1,795 4,610 63,667 409,707 95,288 148,306 723,373 70-P 2,135 4,599 37,489 255,497 97,271 104,192 501,183 1980 2,906 6,260 , 46,624 290,490 130,712 143,861 620,853 WSW 1960 1,550 1,789 8,345 23,516 16,366 21;516 73,082 1970 1,929 2,532 9,910 4'5,716 20,649 27,580 108,316 70-P 2,108 2,526 10,933 30,011 20,623 27,423 93,624 1980 2,767 3,398 13,598 35,062 23,324 33;081 111,236 w 1960 822 3,615 9,022 38,388 20,096 21,980 93,923 1970 877 4,086 10,459 41,836 23,561 23,469 104,288 70-P 929 4,088 10,205 43,801 23,428 25,140 107,591 1980 1,057 4,649 11,600 49,554 . 26,179 28,531 121,570

A-3 Table A-1 (continued) 5-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 Total miles miles miles miles miles miles WNW 1960 619 6,856 100,004 29,637 14,175 38,631 189,922 1970 683 8,578 102,909 38,230 17,028 45,782 213,210.

70-P 700 7,155 113,104 33,516 16,013 47,714 218,802 1980 785 8,814 128,573 38,071 18,024 58,159 252,436 NW 1960 475 8,308 22,997 34,158 203,178 43,599 312,715 1970 528 9,928 30,150 36,150 214,004 57,115 348,535 70-P 537 9,396 26,013 37,577 224,183 51,819 349,525 1980 611 10,681 29,804 42,159 249,170 61,394 393.819 NNW 1960 1,368 15,919 44,404 20,304 79,186 10,003 171,184 1970 1,332 21,568 52,781 25,464 88,559 9,746 199,450 70-P 1,549 18,027 50,284 22,490 85,361 10,163 187,874 1980 1,894 22,045 61,489 25,921 9C126 I 0,310 213,385 Ring 1960 17,405 225,916 431,317 1,760,986 1,197,591 I;797 ,431 5,430,646 totals 1970 20,039 265,542 553,887 2,105,839 1,414,224 2,111,033 6,470,564

• 70-P 22,101 277,527 523,098 1,995,638 1,442,301 . 2,094,326 6,354,991 1980 28,183 350,493 646,329 2,297,832 1,733,285 2,439,392 7,495,514

• Append.ix B SUSQUEHANNA RIVER DATA B-1

B-2 Table B-1. Susquehanna Rivet flows and flow durations, SO-year record Flows are given in thousands of cfs Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.

I Min flow 2.9 3.9 6.1 14.4 8:6 4.9 2.6 2.0 I.Sa 2.0 1.9 2.0 Min 7-0ay flow av 4.6 5.1 7.8 15.4 9.1 5.1 2.9 2.7 1.9 2.3 2.4 2.9 Av *min flow 14.7 16.8 32.1 34.9 23.5 H.7 7.0 5.3 4.6 5.4 10.5 11.0 Days at or above 22.24 20.08 25.32 23.18 23.92 23.74 22.44 21.62 21.56 21.12 20.88 24.35 Av flow 40.9 39.1 40.0 76.9 49.9 23.9 13.2 10.4 10.1 13.6 24.7 31.7 Days* at or above 6.48 6.92 9.94 10.06 11.~4 11.24 11.74 i 1.82 8.20 9.39 11.82 9.37 Av max flow 108.5 105.4 202.9 189.5 118.9 53.4 28.0 22.2 26.2 37.6 72.3 93.4 Days at or above 1.26 1.06 0.62 1.40 1.64 1.72 3.24 2.66 1.84 2.49 2.67 1.51 Max flow 443.4 390.0 756.0 450.4 493.0 972.0b 191.6 297.0 . 135.1 275.0 450.0 350.0' aMinimum.

bMaximum.

B-3 Table B-2. Susquehanna River water temperatures (°F), 31-year record Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.

Min 32.cf 32.0 32.0 37.0 50.0 58.0 70.0 68.0 56.0 48.0 33.0 '32.0 Av 35.2 35.8 39.8 49.9 64.2 74.7 80.2. 79.4 72.9 60.5 47.4 36.0 Max 37.5 38.0 59.0 70.0 81.0 88.0 88:ob 87.0 84.0 76.0 64.0 48.0.

aMinimum for period.

bMaximum foi period

Appendix C

• MOD:;t:FIED MERCALLI. INTENSITY _SCALE I. Not. felt except by a very few unde*r specially favorable circumstances *.

II. Felt* only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper floors of buildings. Delic_ately *suspended objects ~ay swing.

III. Felt quite noticeably indoors, especially on upper floors of buildings, but many .people do not. recognize it as. an earthquake. Standing automobiles may rock slightly.

Vibration like passing of. truck. ** **

• IV. During the day, felt indoors by many, outdoors by few. At night, some awakened. Dishes, windows, doors disturbed;

-walls make creaking sound. Sensation like heavy truck striking building. Standing automobiles rocked noticeably.

V. Felt by nearly everyone, many awakened. Some* dishes, windows, etc., broken; a few instances of cracked plaster; unstable objects overturned. Disturbances of trees, poles, and other tall objects sometim~s noticed. Pendulum clocks may stop.

VI. Felt by all, many frightened. Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys.

Damage slight.

. VII. Everybody* runs outdoors. Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction, slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures, considerable in poorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys broken~

Noticed by persons driving automobiles.

VIII. Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable in ordinary, substantial buildings, with partial collapse; great in poorly built structures. Panel walls thrown out of frame structures. Chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, and walls fall. Heavy furniture overturned.

Small amounts of sand and mud ejected. Changes in well water. Persons driving automobiles disturbed.

C-1

C-2 IX. Damage considerable in specially designed structures; great in substantial buiidings, with partial collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations; well-designed frame structures thrown out of plumb. Ground cracked conspicuously.* Under~

ground pipes broken.

X. Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame structures destroyed with their foundations.

Gro.und badly cracked. Rails bent. Landslides. considerable from river banks and steep slopes. Sand and mud areas shifted. Water splashed (slopped) over banks.

XI. Few, if any, masonry structures* remain standing. Bridges destroyed. Broad fissur.es in ground. Underground pipe-lines completely out of service. Earth slumps and land slips in soft ground. Rails bent greatly.

XII. Damage total. Waves seen on ground surfaces. Line of sight and level distorted. Objects thrown upward into air.

Appendix D*

• METEOROLOGICAL DATA FOR* PEACH BOTTOM D-1

D-2 Table D--1. Distributionofhourly temperatw:es.atPeach Bottom weather station No. 1,. August 1967-Jul;y, 196,9 Temperature class distribution(%}

0 10 20 30 40 50 60i 70 80 90 Month <0°F to* to* to to to to to to to to >I00°F 10°F 20°F 30°F 40°F SO!'F 60°F 70~F' 80°F 90°1: 100°F Jan. 0 2 22 Jg: 29 8: 0 0 0 0 0 Feb. 0 5 16 64 13' 0 0 0 0 0 Mar~ 0 0 I, 20 42 22 8 4 2 0 0 Apr. 0 0 0 <I 8 27 39 20 5 0 0 May 0 0 0 0 1 11 42 30 12 3 I 0 June 0 0 ' 0 0 0 <I lO 37 39 13 0 July 0 0 0 O* O* 0 2 14 64 18 2 0 Aug .. 0 (} 0 0 0 0 7 27 42 22 2 0 Sept. 0 0 O* 0 o, .2 20 39 34 5 0 0 O~t. 0 0 0 0 9 IS 34 36 4 2 <I 0 Nov. o* 0 <I 3 28 43 22 3 I 0 0 0 Dec. 0 1 5 22 46 22 4' 0 0 0 0 0 Annual 0 <l 3 8 20 13: 16 18 17 5 LOO Aug. 6.91 3.46 0.91 i:o 1.00 Sept. 0.67 4.15 0.81 to 0.90 Oct. 1.41 3.14 0.41 too.so Nov. 2.32 1.37 0.21 to 0.30 Dec. 4.43 2.26 0.31 to 0.40 1968 Total 28.93 Source: Environmental* Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Philadelphia Electric Company, June 1971.

L D-4 Table D-3. Highest mean hourly '}'ind speeds and estimated peak gusts at Peach Bottom weather station No. 2, August 1967-July 1969

• Maximum hourly Estimated Wind Year Month mean speed (mph) peak (mph) direction ( deg) 1967 Aug. 22 36 200 Sept. 35 55 170 Oct. 31 49 240 Nov. 33 53 305 Dec. 34 54 335 1968 Jan. 37 56 300 Feb. 37 57 295 Mar. 40 60 325 Apr. 30 48 305 May 29 44 090 June 26 44 260

.July 22 33 345 Aug. 26 43 240 Sept. 24 39 125 OcL 28 44 235 Nov. 28 42 200 Dec. 41 64 295 1969 Jan. 28 44 295 Feb. 35 53 345 Mar. . 26 39 325 Apr. 27 40 180 May* 26

• 39. . 280 June 27 42 175 July 21 32 065 Source: Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Philadelphia Electric Company, June 1971.

---*---------- ---------*-*----*-*--~------...,-*----~--*-*------------*----

---~- * -*'"""0' Appendix E WIND MOVEMENT AT THE PEACH BOTTOM SITE E-1

E-2 Table E-1. Wind-rose for turbulence class l Station 12, August 1967-July 1970 Mean wind speed, 2 mph No. of calm hours, 117 (0,5%)a Cumulative durationa of wind of specified speed Direction (deg) 2-3 mph 4-7 mph 8-12 mph 13-18 q1ph  ;;;>19 mph All speeds hr  % hr  % hr  % hr  % hr  % hr  %

10 2 1 3 20 2 2 30 5 1 6 40 7 2 9 50 6 6 60 12 0.1 12 1 70 5 1 6 80 2 2 90 6 1 7 100 8 3 11 110 5 1 6 120 17 0.1 1 19 1 130 2 2 4 140 1 1 2 150 6 1 7 160 170 1 1 180 190 2 2 200 1 1 210 1 1 2 220 3 3 230 1 1 2 240 2 1 3 250 2 2 260 1 1 270 1 3 1 5 280 1 1 3 490 3 4 300 2 2 310 1 3 4 320 2 2 4 330 3 1 1 5 340 2 2 1 5 350 360 7 2 9 119 0.5 35 0.2 5 0.0 1 0.0 0 0.0 160 0.7 aThe percentages are fractions of the total number of hours (23,211) for which data were obtained during the 26,304-hr p,,riod.

• ~-.--* **--------"-

E-3 Table E-2. Wind-rose for turbulence class 2 Station 12, August 1967-July 1970 Mean wind speed, 7 mph No. of citlm hoots; 721 (3.1 %f Cumulative duration°. of wind of,specified speed Direction 2-3-mph 4-imph 8_:12 mph 13-18 mph  ;;.19 mph All speeds (deg) hr  % hr  % hr  % 'hr  % hr  % hr  %

10 53 0.2 122 0.5 115 0.5 15 0.1 304 1.3 20 49 0.2 146 0.6 92 0.4 21 0.1 308 1.3 30 51 0.2 209 0.9 90 0.4 12. 0.1 362 1.6 40 64 0.3 124 0.5 37 0:2 3 228 1.0 50 42 0.2 38 0.2 17 0.1 1 98 0.4 60 67 0.3 66 0.3 13 0.1 5 15.1 0.7 70 93 0.4 72 0.3 9 0 q4 0.7 80 54 0.2 34 0.1 2 1 91 0.4 90 89 0.4. 50 0.2 5 1 145 0.6 100 108

• 0.5 63 0.3 6 5 180 0.8 110 90 0.4 85 0.4 19 0.1 1 195 0.8 120 97 0.4 183 0.8 67 0.3 5 1 356 1.5 130 72 0.3 209 0.9 114 0.5 17 0.1 412 1.8 140 47 0.2 144 0.6 99 0.4 9 299 1.3 150 51 0.2 222 1.0 109 0.5 16 0.1 1 399 1.7 160 40 0.2 186 0.8 74 0.3 9 1 310 1.3 170 42 0.2 116 0.5 75 0.3 30 0.1 2 265 1.1 180 47 0.2 162 0.7 178 0.8 75 0.3 9 471 2.0 190 52 0.2 157 0.7 174 0.7 65 0.3 2 453 2.0 200 25 o.i 100 0.4 102 0.4 39 0.2 266 1.1 210 13 0.1 109 0.5 73 0.3 22 . 0.1 2 220 0.9 220 15 0.1 71 0.3 48 0.2 14 0.1 1 149. 0.6 230 12 0.1 40 0.2 39 0.2 6 97 0.4 240 15 0.1 61 0.3 94 0.4 16 0.1 2 188 0.8 250 27 0.1 62 0.3 84 0.4 36 0.2 7 216 0.9 260 12 0.1 . 31 0.1 57 0.2 28 0.1 128 0.6 270 . 31 0.1 81 0.3 120 0.5 83 0.4 11 326 1.4

. 280 23 0.1 83 0.4 170 0.7 146 0.6 13 0.1 435 1.9 290 22 0.1 73 0.3 136 0.6 114 0.5 18 o.i 363 1.6 300 37 0.2 107 0.5 248 1.1 263 0.7 33 0.1 588 2.5 310 23 0.1 116 0.5 188 0.8 139 0.6 17 0.1 483.. 2.1 320

• 23 0.1 84 0.4 135 0.6 54 0.2 13 0.1 309 1.3 330 40 0.2 162 0.7 209 0.9 145 0.6 15 0.1 S7i 2.5 340 36 0.2 224 1.0 355 .1.5 176 0.8 8 799 3.4 360 33 0.1 142 0.6 132 06 27 0,1 1 335 1.4 1614 7.0 4047 17.4 3668 15.8 1561 6.7 161 0.7 11,051 47.6 0 The percentages are fractions of the total number of hours (23,21 I) for which data were obtained during the 26,304-hr period.

E-4 Table E-3 .. Wind-mse for turbuience class 3 Station 12, August 1967-July 1970 Mean wind speed, 3 mph No. of calm hours, 136 (0.6%)° Cumulative duration° of wind of specified speed Direction 2-3 mph 4-7-mph 8-12 mph 13-18 mph  ;;;,}9 mph All speeds (deg) hr  % hr  % hr  % hr  % hr  % 'hr  %

T 10 6 13 0.1 2 21 0.1 20 8 11 I 20 0.1 30 11 9 3 23 0.1 40 18 0.1 4 22 0.1 50 6 3 9 60 9 3 12 0,1 70 6 3 9 80 9* 9 90 13 0.1 13 0.1 100 27 0.1 2 29 0.1 110 12 0.1 6 18 O.l 120 18 0,1 14 0.1 32 0.1 130 7 11 18 0.1 140 6 3 9 150 5 7 4 18 0.1 160 6 7 I 14 0.1 170 1 6 I ' 8 180 4 9 3 16 0.1 190 4 4 I 9 200 1 2 1 4 210 4 3 I 8 220 I 6 7

.230 I 6 7 240 2 9 2 13 0.1 250 I 6 3 10 260 I 6 1 8 270 I 6 3 10 280 2 4 3 9 290 6 6 300 3 10 6 3 22 0.1 310 7 ~ I 2 16 0.1 320 2 4 2 8 330 4 12 0.1

• 2 I 19 0.1 340 7 17 0.1 15 0.1 I 40 0.2 350 4 8 4 16 0.1 360 10 17 0.1 4 31 0.1 227 1.0 243 1.0 63 . 0.3 8, 0.0 *O 0.0 541 2.3 0

The percentages are fractions of the total number of hours (23,211) for whic4. data were obtained during the 26,304-hr period.

E-5 Table E-4. Wind-rose for turbulence class 4 Station 12, August 1967-July 1970 Mean wind speed, 11 mph No. of calm hours, 29 (0.1%)"

Cumulative duration" of wind of specified speed Direction

. (deg) 2-3 mph 4-7 mph . 8-12 mph 13-18 mph  ;;,19 mph . , All speeds hr  % hr  % hr  % hr  % hr  % hr  %

10 1 8 16 0.1 22 0.1 47 0.2

20. 3 5 7 14 0.1 1 30 0.1 30 2 8 11 12 0.1 5 38 0.2 40 12 0.1 13 0.1 25 0.1 50 9 1 1 11 60 1 4 7 12 0.1 24 0.1 70 4 12 0.1 5 21 0.1 80 1 10 1 12 0.1 90 1 18 0.1 11 30 0.1 100 3 9 '12 0.1 110 4 8 12 0.1.

120 1 12 0.1 17 0.1 1 31 o.i 130 2 15 0.1 23 0.1 7 47 0.2 140 3 19 0.1 16 0.1 2 40 ci.2 150 5 2,0 0.1 23 0.1 8 56 0.2 160 4 16 0.1 11 8 2 41 0.2 170 1 10 21 0.1 7 1 40 0.2 180 6 16 0.1 47 0.2 26 0.1 9 104 0.4 190 3 11 40 0.2 38. 0.2 14 0.1 106. 0.5 200 1 7 23 0.1 18 0.1 1 50 0.2 210 2 14 0.1 15 0.1 3 4* 43 0.2

• 220 4 5 7 2 1 19 0.1 230 4 6 2 12 0.1 240 1 9 ~ 2 17 0.1 250 2 10 16 0.1 8 . 2 38 0.2 260 2 21 0.1 6 1 30 0.1 270 2 16 0.1 29 0.1 14 0.1 1 62 0.3 280 20 0.1 60 0.3 42 0.2 17 O.i 139 0.5 290 13 0.1 72 0.3 JS* .. 0.2 4 124 0.5 300 2 28 0.1 138 0.6 1!5 0.4 15 0.1 268 L2 310 1 18 0.1 132 0.6

• 93 0.4

• 38 0.2 282 1.2 320 1 16 0.1 57 0.2 34 0.1 13 0.1 121 0.5 330 1 26 0.1 95 0.4 86 0.4 45 0.2 253 1.1 340 1 15 0.1 97 0.4 104 0.4 34 0.1 251 1.1 350 5 27 0.1 47 0.2 9 89 0.4 360 1 4 27 0.1 21 1 6 59 0.3 59 0.3 423 1.8 1109 4.8 768 3.3 225 LO 2584 11.1 "The percentages are fractions of the total number of hours (23,211) for which data were obtained during the 26,304-hr period.

E-6 Table E-5. Wind-rose for turbulence class 5 Station 12, August 1967-July 1970 Mean wind speed, 3 mph No. of calm hours, 2108 (9.1%)a Cumulative dw:ationa of wind of specified speed Direction 2-3 mph 4-7 mph 8-12 mph 13-18 mph >19 mph All speeds (deg) hr  % hr  % hr  % hr  % hr  % hr  %

10 33 0.1 34 0.1 7 74 0.3 20 42 0.2 29 0.1 6 77 0.3 30 33 0.1 34 0.1 5 73 0.3 40 26 0.1 12 0.1 38 0.2 50 17 0.1 7 1 25 0.1 60 39 0.2 6 45 0.2 70 39 0.2 12 0.1 4 55 0.2 80 15 0.1 14 0.1 1 30 0.1

• 90 20 0.1 11 1 32

• 0.1 100 41 0.2 28 0.1 4 73 0.3 110 60 0.3 40 0.2 4 104 0.4 120 71 0.3 91 0.4 6 168 0.7 130 78 0.3 106 0.5 18 0.1 2 204 0.9 140 57 0.2 78 0.3 10 145 0.6 150 . 8.6 0.4 92. 0.4 13 0.1 191 0.8 160 78 0.3 108 0.5 13 0.1 1 200 0.9 170. 51 0.2 68 0.3 8. 127 0.5 180 60 0.3 69 0.3 21 0.1 3 153 0.7 190 70 0.3 107 0.5 38 0.2 10 2 227 1.0 200 32 0.1 85 0.4 35 0.2 152 0.7 210 37 0.2 72 0.3 17 . 0.1 126 0.5 220 42 0.2 54 0.2 10 107 0.5 230 30 0.1 40 0.2 13 0:1 83 0.4 240 41 0.2 64 0.3 35 0.2 140 0.6 250 31 0.1 78 0.3 70 0.3 4 183 0.8 260 39 0.2 97 0.4 91

• 0.4 8 235 1.0 270 43 0.2 125 . 0.5. 105 0.5 15 0.1 . 287 1.2 280 61 0.3 171 0.7. 149 0.6 10 391 1.7 290 65 0.3 . 165 0.7 .98 0.4 2 330 1.4 300 93 0.4 188 0.8 103 0.4 4 388 1.7 310 82 0.4 165 0.7 71 0.3 318 1.4 320 71 0.3 121 0.5 25 0.1 1 218 0.9 330 97 0.4 139 0.6 54 0.2 4 294 1.3 340 84 0.4 132 0.6 41 0.2 6 263 1.1 350 53 0.2 58 0.2 12 0.1 123 0.5 360 40 0.2 32 0.1 13 0.1 85 0.4 1857 8.0 2732 11.8 1102 4.7 69 0.3 4 0.0 5764 24.8 aThe percentages are fractions of the total nu~ber of hours (23,211) for which data were obtained during the 26,304-hr period.

• ------------*------ __ ..._....______*-*~-

E-7 Table E-6. Wind.-rose for all turbulence classes Station 12, August 1967-July 1970 Mean wind speed, 6 mph No. of calm hours. 3111 ( 13.4%)a Cumulative durationa of wirid of specified speed Direction (deg) 2-3 mph 4-7 mph 8-12 mph 13-18 mph >19 mph . All speeds hr  % hr  % hr  % hr  % hr  % hr  %

10 95 0.4 178 0.8 139 0.6 37 0.2 449 1.9 20 104 0.4 191 0.8 106 0.5 35 . 0.2 1 437 1.9 30 102 0.4 261 1.1 109 0.5 24 0.1 6 502 2.2 40 115 0.5 154 0.7 50 0.2 3 322 1.4 .

50 71 0.3 57 0.2 19 0.1 2 149 0.6 60 128 0.6 79 0.3 20 0.1 17 0.1 244 1.1 70 147 0.6 100 0.4 18 0.1 265 1.1 80 81 0.3 58 0.2 4 1 144 0.6 90 129 0.6 80 0.3 17 0.1 1 227 1.0 100 187 0.8 105 0.5 10 3 305 1.3 110 167 0.7 136 0.6 31 0.1 1 335 1.4 120 204 0.9 301 1.3 91 0.4 9 1 606 2.6 130 161 0.7 343 1.5 155 0.7 26 0.1 685 3.0 140 114 0.5 245 1.1 125 0.5 11 495 2.1 150 153 0.7 342 1.5 149 0.6 24 0.1 1 669 2.9 160 128 0.6 317 1.4 99 0.4 17 0.1 4 565 2.4 170 96 0.4 200 0.9 104 0.4 38 0.2 3 441 1.9 180 117 0.5 256 1.1 249 1.1 104 0.4 18 0.1 744 3.2 190 131 0.6 279 1.2 253 1.1 116 0.5 18 0.1 797 3.4 200 60 0.3 194 0.8 161 0.7 57 0.2 .1 473 2.0 210 57 0.2 199 0.9 106 0.5 30 0.1 7 399 1.7 220 65 0.3 136 0.6 65 0.3 17 0.1 2 285 1.2 230 44 0.2 91 0.4 58 0.2 8 201 0.9 240 60 0.3 136 0.6 140 0.6 21 0.-1 4 361 1.6 250 61 0.3 158 0.7 173 0.7 48 0.2 9 449 1.9 260 52 0.2 136 0.6 171 0.7 42 0.2 1 402 1.7 270 78 0.3 231 1.0 258 1.1 111 0.5 12 0.1 690 3.0 280 87 0.4 279 1.2 383 1.7 198 0.9 30 0.1 977 4.2 290 90 0.4 258 1.1 306 1.3 151 0.7 22 0.1 827 3.6 300 137 0.6 333 1.4 495 2.1 255 1.1 48 0.2 1,268 5.5 310 114 0.5 308 1.3 392 1.7 234 1.0 55 0.2 1,103 4.8 320 99 0.4 227 1.0 219 0.9 89 0.4 26 0.1 660 2.8 330 145 0.6 340 1.5 360 1.6 237 1.0 60 0.3 1,142 4.9 340 130 0.6 390 1.7 509 2.2 287 1.2 42 0.2 1,358 5.9 .

350 76 0.3 183 0.8 227 1.0 105 0.5 12 0.1 605 2.6 360 91 0.4 197 0.8 176 0.8 48 0.2 7 519 2.2 3876 16.7 7487 32.2 5947 25.6 2407 10.4 390 1.7 20,100 86.6 aThe percentages are fractions of the total number of hours (23,211) for which data were obtained du;ing the 26, 3()4-hr period.

---

*------------~------,----...~-~*. ------*----- - .

Appendix F WIND MOVEMENT DATA MODIFIED FOR STAFF COMPUTER PROGRAM F-1

F-2 Table F-1. Modified wind dose for stability condition B Direction Cumulative duration (hr) of wind of specified speed (deg) 2'-3 mph 4.:...7 mph 8-12 mph 13-18 mph  ;;,19 mph All speeds 10 61 136 116 15 0 328 20 59 157 93 21 0 330 30 67 219 93 12 0 391 40 89 130 37 3 0 259 so 54 41 17 1 0 113 60 88 69 13 s 0 175 70 104 76 9 0 0 189 80 65 34 2 1 0 102 90 108 51 s 1 0 165 100 143 68 6 3 0 220 110 107 92 19 1 0 219 120 132 198 68 8 1 407 130 81 222 114 17 0 434 140 54 148 99 9 0 310 150 62 230 113 16 1 422 i6o 46 193 75 9 1 324 170 44 122 75 31 2 274 180 51 171 181 75 9 487 190 58 161 175 68 2 46.4 200 27 102 103 39 0 271

• 210 18. 113 74 22 3 230 220 19 77 48 14 1 159 230 14 .47 39,, 6 0 106 240 19 71 96 16 2 204 250 28 70 87 36 7 228 260 13 37 59 28 0 137 270 33 90 124 83 11. 341 280 26 88 174 146 13 447 290 25 80

• 136 114 18

• 373 300 42 117 254 116 33 612 310 31 90 189 141 17 503 320 27 175 137 54 13 321 330 47 175 211 147 15 595 340 45 243 371 177 8 844 350 23 121 188 58 3 393 360 so 161 136 27 1 375

F-3 Table F-2. Frequency0 of wind speed under stability condition Bas a function of direction Wind 1.12 m/sec 2.46 m/sec 4.47 m/sec 6.93 m/sec 8.49 m/sec Total toward (2.5 mph) (5.5 mph) (10mph) 15.5 mph) (19 mph)

E 0.0029 0.0084 0.0134 0.0095 0.0010 0.0352 SE 0.0036 0.0107 0.0211 0.0156 0.0026 0.0536 SE 0.0034 0.0125 0.0191 0.0116 0.0018 0.0434 SE 0.0047 0.0220 0.0312 0.0162 0.0011 0.0752 s 0.0051 . 0.0160 0.0162

• 0.0036 0.0001 0.0410 SW 0.0070 0.0199 0.0108 0.0018 0.0395 SW 0.0081 0.0103 0.0033 0.0003 0.0220 WSW 0.0102 0.0074 0.0011 0.0002 0.0189 w 0.0118 0.0057 0.0005 0.0002 0.0182 WNW 0.0137 .0.0146 0.0040 0.0005 0.0328 NW 0.0079 0.0211 0.0117 0.0014 0.0421 NNW 0.0058 0.0219 0.0100 0.0017 0.0001 0.0395 N 0.0057 0.0773 0.0168 0.0068 0.0006 0.0472 NNE 0.0032 0.0130 0.0116 0.0042 0.0002 0.0322 NE 0.0019 0.0073 0.0054 0.0012 0.0001 0.0159 ENE 0.0025 0.0073 0.0096 0.0030 0.0004 0.0228 Total 0.0975 0.2154 0.1858 0.0778 0.0080 . 0.5845 4

The tabulated frequencies are decimal fractions of the combined total for stability conditions B, D, and F (Tables E-2, E-3, and E-4).

F-4 Table F-3 .. *F~equencl of wind speed under stability condition D as a function of di~ection Wind 1.12 m/sec 2.46 m/sec 4.47 m/sec 6.93 m/sec 8.49 m/sec Total toward (2.5 mph) (5.5 mph) (10 mph) (15.5 mph) (19 mph)

E 0.0001 0.0015 0.0040 0.0022 0.0006 0.0084 ESE 0.0001 0.0022 0.0107 0.0062 0.0012 0.0204 SE 0.0001 0.0020 0.0109 0.0074 0.0029 0.0233 SSE 0.0001 0.0020 0.0095 0.0098 0.0038 0.0252 s 0.0001 0.0006 0.0027 0.0032 0.0006 0.0072 SSW 0.0003 0.0007 0.0011 0.0016 . 0.0003 0.0040 SW 0.0011 0.0008 0.0002 0.002l WSW 0.0003 0.0010 0.0006 0.0005 0.0024 w 0.0002 0.0015 0.0006 0.0023 WNW 0.0001 0.0009 0.0011 0.0021 NW 0.0003 0.0019 0.0022 0.0005 0.0049 NNW c:i.0004 0.0019 0.0019 0.0009 0.0001 0.0052 N 0.0004 0.0014 0.0042 '0.0027 0.0009 0.0096 NNE 0.0002 0.0012 0.0025 0.0020 0.0005 0.0064 NE 0.0002 0.0005 0,0008 0.0003 0,0001 0.0019 ENE 0.0001 0.0006 0.0016 0.0007 0.0002 0.0032 Total 0.0030 0.0210 0.0551 0.0382 0.0112 0.1286 aThe tabulated frequencies are decimal fractions of the combined total for stability conditions B, D, ;nd F (Tables E-2, E-3, and E-4).

• ~~--------~-----~-------

F-5 Table F-4. Frequencya of wind speed under stability condition F as a function of direction Wind 1.12 m/sec 2.46 m/sec 4.47m/sec 6.93 m/sec 8.49 m/sec Total toward (2.5 mph) . (5.5 mph) (10 mph) . (15.5 mph) (19 mph)

E 0.0052

• 0.0146 0.0127 0.0014. 0.0338 ESE 0.0084 0.0196 0.0122 0.0005 0.0406 SE 0.0088 0.0163 0.0058 0.0001 0.0310 SSE 0.0094 0.0137 0.0046 0.0005 0.0282 s 0.0047 0.0045

• 0.0012 0.0104 SSW 0.0041 0.0036 0.0006 0.0083 SW 0.0026 0.0012 0.0001 0.0039 WSW 0.0039 0.0011 0.0002 0.0052 w 0.0027 0.0019 0.0002 0.0048 WNW 0.0068 0.0065 0.0005

• 0.0138 NW 0.0077 0.0103 0.0015 0.0001 0.0196 NNW 0.0086 0.0106 0.0014 0.0206 N 0.0067 0.0089 0.0025 0.0005 0.0001 0.0187 NNE 0.0045 0.0094 0.0032 0.0002 0.0173 NE 0.0041 0.0055 0.0015 0.0111 ENE 0.0041 0.0085 0.0067 0.0003 0.0196 Total 0.0923 0.1362 0.0548 0.0035 0.0001 0.2869 aThe tabulated frequencies are decimal fractions *of the co.mbined total for stability conditions B, D, and r (Tables E-2, E-3, and E-4).

Appendix G TERRESTRIAL BIOTA OF THE PEACH BOTTOM AREA G-1

G-2 Table G-1. Trees and shrubs in the oak-chestnut region of the lower Susquehanna River Basin Species Common name L Common in ravines, valleys, and other mesic habitats*

Tilia ainericana Linden or basswood Aesculus octandra Buckeye Halesia monticola (Rehd. Sarg.) Silver bell Betula lutea Yellow birch Tsugu canadensis Hemlock Fagus grandifolia Beech Fraxinus americana White ash Magnolia acuminata Cucumber magnolia Magnolia fraseri . Ear-leaved magnolia Magnolia macrophylla Great-leaved magnolia Magnolia tripetala Umbrella magnolia Cladrastris lutea Yellowwood Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip tree or yellow poplar Carya cordiformis Bitternut hickory flex opaca Holly Lindera b.enzoin Spicebush Asima triloba Papaw Hydrangea arborescens Hydrangea II. Shade-tolerant trees of ridges and slopes Quercus prinus Chestnut oak Quercus rubra Northern red oak Quercus coccinea Scarlet oak Quercus alba White oak Quercus velutina Black oak Castanea dentata Chestnut sprouts Carya ova/is Red or sweet pignut hickory Carya tomentosa Mockernut hickory

. Carya glabra Pignut hickory III. Shade intolerant and successional.

Prunus serotina Black cherry Prunus avium Sweet cherry Prunus pennsylvanica Fire cherry Prunus virginiana Choke cherry Robinia pseudoacacia Black locust Fraxinus americana White ash Platanus occidentalis Sycamore Ulmusrubra Slippery elm Ailanthus altissima Ailanthus Quercus illicifolia Bear or scrub oak Sassafras albidum Sassafras Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip tree or yellow poplar Pinus strobus White pine Pinus virginiana Virginia pine Populus grandidentata Large-toothed aspen Betula /enta Black or sweet birch Comptonia peregrina Sweet fern

G-3 Table G-l (continued)

Species Common name IV. Shade-tolerant and small trees Acerrubrum Red maple

( occasionally a large tree, especially in northern parts)

Cornus florida Dogwood Hamamelis virginiaria Witch hazel Vibrnum acerifolium Maple-leaved viburnum Rhododendron calendulaceum Flame azalea Rhododendron maximum Great rhododendron

• Gaylussacia ursina Huckleberry Vaccinium spp. Blueberry Kalmia latifolia Mountain laurel V. Trees of flood plains, stream banks, or swamps Acer negundo Box elder Ac.er saccharinum Silver maple Betula nigra *Red or river birch Ulmus rubra Slippery elm Platanus occidentalis Sycamore VI. Infrequent or in special habitats Juniperus virginiana. Red cedar (in open and rocky areas)

Quercus stellata Pos*t oak (in dry habitats)

Quercus marilandica Blackjack oak (in dry habitats)

Ostrya virginiana Hop hornbeam Amelanchier spp. Service berry Oxydendrum arboreu'm Sourwood Carpinus carolinina Ironwood Source: C. Keever, "A Study of the Mixed Mesophytic, Western Mesophytic, and Oak-Chestnut Regions of the Eastern Deciduous* Forest Including a Review of the Vegetation and Sites Recommended as Potential Natural Landmarks," manuscript, _Millersville State College, Millersville, Pa., 1971.

G-4

\ Table G-2. Amphibians expected and observed to occur in the vicinity of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Species Observed

• Common name Bufo americanus X American toad Bufo woodhousei fowleri Fowler's. toad A eris gryllus Cricket frog Pseudacris nigrita Chorus frog Hy/a crucifer X Spring peeper Hy/a versicolor Common tree frog Rana catesbeiana X Bullfrog Rana clamitans Green frog Rana palustris Pickerel frog Rana pipiens X Leopard frog

.Rana sylvatica Wood frog Necturus maculosus Mud puppy Cryptobranchus alleganiensis X Hellbender Diemictylus viridescens X Common newt Amblystoma jeffersonianum Jefferson's salamander Amblystoma maculatum Spotted salamander Amblystoma opacum Marbled salamander Amblystoma tigrinum Tiger *salamander Desmognathus fuscus X Dusky salamander Plethodon cinereus Red-backed salamander Plethodon glutinosus Slimy salamander Hemidactylium scutatum Eastern four-toed salamander Pseudotriton ruber Red salamander

. Eurycea bislineata X Two-lined salamander

• Eurycea longicauda Long-tailed salamander Source:

a. A.H. Wright and A. A. Wright, Handbook of Frogs and Toads, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1949.

b. S. C. Bishop, Handbook of Salamanders, Hafner Publishing Company, New York, 1962.

c. R. Conant, A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1958*.

d. Attachment to letter from 0. Sisman, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, to J. Cusack, Jan. 9, 1973, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278.

G-5 Table G-3. Reptiles expected and observed to occur in the vicinity of the /

Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Species Observed *Common name Chelydra serpentiiza X Snapping turtle Sternotherus odoratus Stinkpot Clemmys i;uttata Spotted turtle Clemmys insculpta Wood turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii Mulilenberg's turtle Terrapene Carolina X Box turtle*

Graptemys geographica X *Map turtle Chrysemys picta X Painted turtle Sceloporus undulatus Eastern fence lizard Eumeces fasciatus Five-lined skink Eumeces laticeps Broad-headed skink Storeria occipitomaculata Red-bellied snake Storer/a _dekayi Brown snake Natrix sipedon X Common water snake Natrix septemvittata Queen snake Thamnophis sauritus Ribbon snake Thamrlophis sirtalis X Garter snake Halderia valeriae Smooth earth snake Heterodon platyrhinos Hognose snake

• Carphophis amoenus Worm snake Diadophis punctatus Ringneck snake Coluber constrictor* Black racer E/aphe obso/eta X Rat snake Lampropeltis doliata X Milk snake Lampropeltis getulus King snake Ancistrodon contortrix Copperhead Crotalus horridus X Timber rattlesnake Source:

a. A. Carr.Handbook of Turtles, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1952.

b. R. Conant, A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1958.

c. Attachment to letter from 0. Sisman, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, to J. Cusack, USAEC, Jan. 9, 1973, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278.

G-6 Table G-4. Mammals expected and observed to occur in the vicinity of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Species Observed Common name Didelphis marsupialis X Opossum Sorex cinereus Masked shrew Blarina brevicauda Short-tailed shrew Cryptotis parva Least shrew Sea/opus aqua_ticus Eastern mole Condylura cristata Star-nosed mole Myotis lucifu'gus Little brown bat Myotis keenii Eastern long-eared bat Myotis leibii Least brown bat Lasionycteris noctivagans Silver-haired bat Pipistrellus subjlavus Eastern pipistrelle Eptesicus fuscus ,* Big brown bat Lasiurus borealis Red bat Lasiurus cinereus Hoary bat Sylvilagus jloridanus X Eastern cottontail

• Marmota monax X Woodchuck Tamias striatus X Eastern chipmunk Tamiasciurus hudsonicus X Red squirrel Sciurus carolinensis X Eastern gray squirrel Sciurus niger Fox squirrel Glaucomys volans Southern flying squirrel Peromyscus leucopus White-footed mouse Neotoma jloridana Wood rat Synaptomys cooperi Southern bog lemming Microtus pennsylvanicus X Meadow vole.

Pitymys pinetorum Pine vole Ondatra zibethicus X Muskrat Rattus norvegicus X Norway rat Mus musculus X House mouse Zapus hudsonius Eastern.jumping mouse Vulpes fulva X ~ed fox

.Urocyon cinereoargenteus Gray fox Procyon lotor X Raccoon Musteliz frenata Long-tailed weasel Mustela vison Mink Mephitis mephitis X Striped skunk Odocoileus virginianus X White-tailed deer Source:

a. E. R. Hall and K. R. Kelson, The Mammals of North America, The Ronald Press Company, New York,

1959. .

b. W. J. Hamilton, The Mammals of Eastern United States, Comstock Publishing Company, ithaca, 1943.

c. R. W. Barbour and W. H. Davis; Bats ofAmerica, University Press of Kentucky, 1969. *

d. J. K. Doutt. Mammals of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Game Commission, Harrisburg, 1965.

e. G. S. Miller and R. Kellogg, List of North American Recent Mammals, U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 205:

1-954 °(1955).

f. Attachment.to letter from 0. Sisnian, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, to J. Cusack, USAEC; Jan. 9, 1973, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278.

G-1 Table G-5. Birds expected and observed to occur in the vicinity of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Occurrence key:

T Transient S Summer visitor W Winter resident N Nesting and summer resident R Permanent resident Species Observed Common name Occurrence Gavia immer X Common loon T Podiceps grisegena Red-necked grebe T Podilymbus pQdiceps X Pied-billed grebe T,N Phalacrocorax auritus Double-crested cormorant T Ardea herodias Ji. Great blue heron T,R Butorides virescens x. Green heron T,N Florida caerulea Little blue heron s Bubulcus ibis X Cattle egi:et s Casmerodius a/bus

• Common egret s

• Nycticorax nycticorax Black-crowned night heron T,R Nyctanassa violacea Yellow-crowned night heron T,N lxobrychus exilis Least bittern T,N Botaurus lentiginosus . X American bittern T,N Cygnus olor Mute swan T,R 0/or columbianus X Whistling swan T,R Branta canadensis Canada goose T,R Chen caerulescens Blue goose T Chen hyperborea X Snow goose T Anas platyrhynchos X Mallard T,R Anas rubripes X Black duck T,R Anasacuta X Pintail T,R Anas carolinensis Green-winged teal T,W Anas discors X Blue-winged teal T Mareca americana American widgeon T,W Spatula clypeata Shoveler T,W Aix sponsa X Wood duck T,N Aythya americana X Redhead T Aythya i:ollaris X Ring-necked duck T,W Aythya valisneria

• Canvasback T,S, W Aythya marila X Greater scaup T,W Aythya affinis Lesser scau p T,S, W Bucephala clangula X Common goldeneye T,W Bucephala albeola X Bufflehead T,W Clangula hyemalis X Old-squaw T,W Oxyura jamaicensis X Ruddy duck T Lophodytes cucullatus X Hooded merganser T,W Mergus merganser X Common merganser T,R Mergus serrator X Red-breasted merganser T Cathartes aura X Turkey vulture T,R Accipiter striatus X Sharp-shinned hawk T,R Accipiter cooperii Cooper's hawk T,R Buteo jamaicensis X Red-tailed hawk T,R Buteo lineatus X Red-shou.Jdered hawk T,R Buteo platypterus X Broad-winged hawk T,N Circus cyaneus X Marsh hawk T,R

G-8 Table G-5 (continued)

Species Observed Common name Occurrence Aquila chrysaetos Golden eagle T,W Haliaeetus leucocephalus X Bald eagle T Pandion haliaetus X Osprey T Falco peregrinus Peregrine falcon T,W Falco columbarius Pigeon hawk T Falco sparverius X Sparrow hawk T,R Bonasa umbel/us X Ruffed grouse R Colinus vi;ginianus X Bobwhite R Phasianus colchicus X Ring-necked pheasant R Meleagris gallopavo X Turkey R Ral/us limicola Virginia rail T,S Porzana carolina Sora rail T,S Fulica americana X ' American coot T,R Charadrius vociferus X Killdeer T,R Chilradrius semipalmatus X Semipalmated plover T,S Philohela minor X American woodcock T,N Capella gallinago Common snipe T,W Bartramia longicauda Upland plover T,S Actitis macularia X Spotted sandpiper T,N Tringa solitaria Solitary sandpiper T Totanus melanoleucus X Greater yellowlegs T Totanus f/dvipes Lesser yellowlegs T Erolia melanotos Pectoral sandpiper T Erolia minutilla Least sandpiper T Erolia alpina Dunlin T Micropalama himantopus Stilt sandpiper T Ereunetes pusil/us Semipalmated sandpiper T Larus argentatus X Herring gull T,W Larus. a tricilla Laughing gull T Larus delawarensis X Ring-billed gull T,W Larus marinus X Great black-backed gull w Larus philadelphia Bonaparte's gull T Sterna hinmdo X Common tern T Hydroprogne caspia. X Caspian tern T Chlidonias niger Black tern T Columba Livia X Rock dove R Zenaidura macroura X Mourning dove T,R Coccj,zus americanus X Yellow-billed cuckoo T,N Coccyzus erythropthalmus X B.lack-billed cuckoo T Tyto alba .Barn owl R Otus asio Screech owl R Bubo virginianus X G.reat horned owl R Strix varia Barred owl R Asia otus Long-eared owl T,R Caprimulgus vociferus X Whippoorwill T,N Chordeiles minor X Common nighthawk T,N Chaeiura pe/agica X Chimney swift T,N Archilocus colubris X Ruby-throated hummingbird T,N Megaceryle a/cyan X Belted kingfisher T,R Colaptes auratus x. Yellow-shafted flicker T,R Dryocopus pileatus X Pileated woodpecker R Centurus cardinus X Red-bellied woodpecker R Melanerpes erythrocephalus X Red-headed .woodpecker T,R Sphyrapicus varius Yellow-bellied sapsucker T,W Dendrocopus vil/osus X Hairy woodpecker R Dendrocopus pubescens X Downy woodpecker R

~------...:.........--------~-----------*

G-9 Ta~le G-5 {continued)

Species Observed Common name Occurrence r

Tyrannus tyrannus X Eastern kingbird T,N Myiarchus crinitus Great crested flycatcher T,N Sayornis phoebe X Eastern phoebe T,N Empidonax jlaviventris X Yellow-bellied flycatcher T Empidonax virescens Acadian flycatcher T,N Empidonax trail/ii Traill's flycatcher T,N Empidonax minimus X Least flycatcher T,N Contopus virens X Eastern wood pewee T,N Eremophila alpestris X Horned lark T,R Hirundo rustica X Barn swallow T,N Riparia riparia X Bank swallow T,N Stelgidopteryx ruftcollis X Rough-winged swallow T,N Petrochelidon pyrrhonota Cliff swallow T,N Progne subis X Purple martin T,N Iridoprocne bicolor X Tree swallow T,N Cyanocitta cristata X Blue jay R Corvus brachyrhynchos X Common crow R Corvus ossifragus X Fish crow R Parus* atricapillus X Black-capped chickadee w Parus carolinensis Carolina chickadee R Parus bicolor X Tufted titmouse R Sitta caro/inensis X. White-breasted nuthatch .R Sitta canadensis Red-breasted nuthatch T,W Certhia familiaris X Brown creeper T,W Troglodytes aedon X House wren T,N Troglodytes troglodytes Winter wren T,W Thryothorus ludovicianus X Carolina wren R Telmatodytes palustris Long-billed marsh wren T,N Cistothorus platensis Short-billed marsh WJ<'n T,N Mimus polyg/ottus X Mockingbird R Dumetella carolinensis x.. Catbird T,R Toxostoma rufum X Brown thrasher T,N Turdus migratorius X Robin T,R Hylocichla mustelina X Wood thrush T,N Hyfocichla guttata X Hermit thrush T,W Hylocichla ustulata Swainson's thrush T Hylocichla minima Gray-cheeked thrush T Hylocichla fuscesc~ns X Veery T,N Sialia sialis X Eastern bluebird T,R Polioptila caerulea X Blue-gray gnatcatcher T,N Regulus satrapa X Golden-crowned kinglet T,W Regulus calendula X Ruby-crowned kinglet T,W Anthus spinoletta Water pipit T,W Bombycilla cedrorun X Cedar waxwing T,R Larzius excubitor X Northern shrike T,W Lanius ludovicianus Loggerhead shrike T,W Sturnus vulgaris .X Starling T,R Vireo griseus White-eyed vireo T,N Vireo flavifrons Yellow-throated vireo T,N Vireo solitarius Solitary vireo T Vireo olivaceous X Red-eyed vireo T,N Vireo gilvus X Warbling vireo T,N

I G-10 Table G-5 (continued)

Species Obseived Common name Occurrence Mniotilta varia X Black-and-wl)ite warbler T,N Protonotaria citrea X Prothonotary warbler T,'N Helmitheros vermivorus Worm-eating warbler T,N Vermivora chrysoptera Golden-winged warbler T Vermivora pinus Blue-winged warbler T,N Vermivora peregrina Tennessee warbler T Vermivora ruficapilla X Nashville warbler T Parula americana Parula warbler T,N Dendroica petechia X Yellow warbler T,N Dendroica magnolia X Magnolia warbler 1' Dendroica tigrina X Cape May warbler T Dendroica caerulescens X Black-throated blue warbler T Dendroica corontita X Myrtle warbler T,W Dendroica virens X Black-throated green warbler T Dendroica cerulea Cerulean warbler T,N Dendroica fusca X Blackburnian warbler T Dendroica pennsylvanica X Chestnut-sided warbler T,N Dendroica castanea Bay-breasted warbler T Dendroica striata X Black-poll warbler T Dendroica discolor Prairie warbler T,N Dendroica palmarum Palm warbler T,W Seiurus aurocapillus X Ovenbird T,N Seiurus nov*eboracensis X Northern water thrush T Seiurus motacilla* Louisiana water thrush j T,N Oporornis f ormosus Kentucky warbler T,N Oporornis agilis Connecticut warbler T Geothlypis trichas X Yellowthroat T,N Icteria virens Yellow-breasted chat T,N Wilsonia pusilla . Wilson's warbler T,W Wilsonia canadensis Canada warbler T Setophaga.rutkilla American redstart T,N Passer domesticus

• X House sparrow R

_Dolichonyz oryzivorus X Bobolink T,N Sturnellil magna X Eastern meadowlark T,R Agelaius phoeniceus X Red-winged blackbird T,R lcterus spurius Orchard oriole T,N Icterus galbula X Baltimore oriole T,N Euphagus _carolinus X Rusty blackbird T,W Molothrus ater X Brown-headed cowbird T,R Quiscalus quiscula X Common grackle T,R Piranga olivacea X S cadet tanager T,N*

Richmondena cardinalis X Cardinal R Pheucticus ludovicianus Rose-breasted grosbeak T Guiraca caerulea Blue grosbeak T,N Passerino cyanea X Indigo bunting T,N Hesperiphona vespertina X Evening grosbeak w Carpodacus purpureus Purple finch T,W Carpodacus mexicanus House finch w Acanthus flammea X Common redpoll w Spinus pinus Pine siskin T,W Spinus tristis X American goldfinch T,R Pipilo erythrophthalmus X Rufous-sided towhee T,R Passerculus sandwichensis Savannah sparrow T,N Ammodramus savannarum X Grasshopper sparrow T,N Passerherbulus henslowii Henslow's sparrow T,N Pooecetes gramineus X Vesper *sparrow T,N

G-11 Table G-5 (continued)

Species Observed Common name Occurrence Junco hyemalis X Slate-colored junco T,W Spizella arborea X Tree sparrow T,W Spizella passerina X Chipping sparrow T,N Spizella pusilla X Field sparrow T,R Zonotrichia leucophrys X White-crowned sparrow T,W Zonotrichia albicollis X White-throated sparrow T,S,W Passerella iliaca X Fox sparrow T Melospiza georgiana *Swamp sparrow T,R Melospiza melodia X Song*sparrow T,R Source:

a. R. S. Palmer, Handbook of North American Birds, Vol. 1, Loons through Flamingos, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1962.

b. C .. S. Robbins, B. Bruun, and H. S. Zim, A Guide to Field Identification, Birds of North America, Golden Press, New York, 1966.

c. E. L. Poole, Pennsylvania Birds, Livingston Publishing Company, Narberth, Pa., 1964.

d. Attachment to letter from 0. Sisman, Oak Ridge National LaboratorY, to J. Cusack, USAEC, Jan. 9, 1973, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278.

• Appendix H AQUATIC.BIOTA OF CONOWINGO POND

H-2 Table H-1. Fishes*of Conowingo Pond Species Common name.

Anguilla rostrata American eel Salmo trutta Brown trout Salvelinus fontinalis Brook trout Esox niger Chain pickerel Esox masquinongy Muskellunge Campostoma anomalum Stone roller Carassius auratus Goldfish Clinostomus funduloides Rosyside dace Cyprinus carpio Carp Ericymba buccata Silverjawed minnow Exoglossum maxilingua Cutlips minnow Nocomis micropogon River chub Notemigonus crysoleucas Golden shiner Notropis amoenus

• Comely shiner Notropis cornutus Common shiner Notropis hudsonius S pottail shiner Notropis procne Swallowtail shiner Notropis rubellus Rosyface shiner Notropis spilopterus Spotfin shiner Pimephales notatus Bluntnose minnow Pimephales promelas Fathead minnow Rhinichthys atratulus Blacknose dace Rhinichthys cataractae Longnose dace Seinotilus atromaculatus Creek chub Semotilus corpora/is Fallfish Carpiodes cyprinus Quillback Catostomus commersonii White sucker Hypentelium nigricans Northern hog sucker Moxostoma macrolepidotum Shorthead redhorse lctalurus catus White catfish lctalurus natalis Yellow bullhead lctalurus nebulosus Brown bullhead lctalurus punctatus Channel catfish Noturus insignis Margined madtom Fundulus diaphanus Banded killifish Fundulus heteroclitus Mummichog Ambloplites rupestris Rock bass Lepomis auritus Redbreast sunfish Lepomis cyanellus Green sunfish Lepomis gibbosus Pumpkinseed Lepomis macrochirus Bluegill Micropterus dolomieu Smallmouth bass Micropterus salmoides Largemouth bass Pomoxis annularis White crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Black crappie Etheostoma olmstedi Tessellated darter Perea flavescens Yellow perch Percina caprodes Log perch Percina peltata Shield darter Stizostedium vitreum vitreum Yellow walleye Source: Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Philadelphia Electric Company, June 1971.

H-3 Table H-2. Aquatic macrophytes of Conowingo Pond Species Common name Asclepias incarnata Swamp milkweed Cyperus strigosus Sedge Dulichium arundinaceum . Three-way sedge Eleocharis acicularis Needlerush Eleocharis spp.

• Spike rushes Hibiscus palustris Rose mallow Juncus acuminatus Sharp-fruited rush Justicia americana Water willow Lobelia cardinalis Cardinal flower Ludwigia al ternifolia Seedbox Lysimachia terrestris Swamp candle loosestrife Lythrum salicaria Spiked loosestrife Mimulus ringens Monkey flower Nuphar advena Yellow water lily Physostegia virginiana False dragonhead Polygonum densijlorum Water smartweed Pontederia cordata Pickerel weed .

Scirpus americanus Three-square Scirpus validus

• Great bulrush Spartina pectinata Cordgrass Typha latifolia Cattail Vallisneria americana Wild celery Source: Attachment to letter from 0. Sisman, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, to J. Cusack, USAEC, Jan. 9, 1973, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278.

• H-4 Table H-3. Phytoplankton* of Conowingo Pond Euglenophyceae ( euglenoids)

Euglena Trachelomonas Chlotophyceae (green algae)

Clilamydomonas*

Eudorina Pandorina*

Pleodorima*

Volvox Haematococcus*

Sphaerocystis Golenkimia Micractinium

• E"erella Dictyospliaerium Coelastr.um Hydrodictyon Pediastrur_n.

• Oocystis Ankistrodesmus Closteriopsis Kirchneriella Selenastrum Actinastrum Scenedesmus Closterium Cosmarium Staurastrum-Spirogyra Xanthophyceae (yellow-green algae)

Gloeobotrys Chrysophyceae (yellow-brown algae)

Mallomonas Synura

_Dinobryon Bacillariophyceae ( diatoms)

Melosira*

Stephanodiscus Asterionella Fragilaria Gyrosigma Navicula Nitzschia Dinophyceae (dinoflagellates)

• Ceratium Peridinium Myxophyceae (blue-green alga~ **

Anacystis*

Coccochloris Gomphosphaeria

• Anabaena*

Aphanizomenon Nostoc Rivult1ria Oscillatoria Spiru(ina .

• Most abundant genera.

Source: Environmental. Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement No. I, Philadelphia Electric Company, November 1971.

Table H-4. Zooplankton of Conowingo Pond Rotifera Brachionus angularis Brachionus calyciflorus*

Brachionus ,iavanaensis Brachionus plicatilis*

Brachionus quadridentatus*

Kellicottia longispina Keratel/a cochlearis*

Keratel/a valga Platyias patulus Asplanchna sp.

Polyarthra sp.

• Filinia '/ongiseta Cladocera ( water fleas)

Leptodora kintii*

Diaphanosoma leuch tenbergianum

• Sida crystallina Latona setifera Daphnia ambigua Daphnia carawba Daphnia galeata mendotae Daphnia longiremis Daphnia parvula Daphnia pulex Daphnia retrocurva Simocephalus vetulus Scapholebris kingi Ceriodaphnia lacustris Ceriodaphnia qutidrangula Ceriodaphnia reticulata Moina a/finis Moina macrocopa Moina rectirostris Bosminopsis deitersi Bosmina coregoni Bosmina longirostris*

Chydorussphaericus*

Copepoda Diaptomus pal/idus*

Cyclops bicuspidatuil thomasi Cyclops vernalis*

Mesocyc/ops edax*

• Most abundant taxa.

Source: Environmental Report. Operating License Stage. Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement No. 1, Philadelphia Electric Company, November 1971.

. H-6 Table H-5._ Benthic fauna of Conowingo Pond Platyhelminthes (flatworms) Copepoda Alloiocoela Diaptomus pallidus Hydrolimax grisea Paracyclops fimbriatus poppei Eucyclops agilis Nematoda (unidentified) Eucyclops speratus Cyclops vernalis Rotifera (rotifers) Macrocyclops albidus Brachionus quadridentatus Harpacticoids Amphipoda Annelida Gammarus fasciatus Oligochaeta (aquatic earthworms)

LimnoJirilus hoffmeisteri Insecta Jlyodrilus templetoni Odonata ( dragonflies) (unidentified)

Branchiura sowerbyi EphemP,Ioptera (mayflies)

Hexagenia sp..

• Mollusca Baetis sp.

Gastropoda (snails) (unidentified) Trichoptera ( caddis flies) ( unidentified)

Pelecypoda (bivalves) Coleoptera (beetles)

Sphaeriidae (fingernail clams) (unidentified)

Elmidae (unidentified~

Pisidium sp.

Diptera \

Arthropoda Chironomidae (midges)

Crustacea Anatopynia sp.

Cladocera Calopsectra sp.

Chironomus attenuatus llyocryptusacutifrons Chironomus decorus llyocryptus sordidus

• Coelotanypus concim1us

/lyocryptus spinifer Oyptochironoml,ls fuluus Macrothrix laticornis Harnischia ruzis *

• Camptocercus rectirostris Limnochironomus sp.

Leydigia quadrangularis Pentaneura sp.

Alona a/finis Polypedilum halterale Alona costata Procladius sp.

• Alona guttata* Tanytarsus sp.

Alona quadrangularis Chaoboridae *  :. .

• Alona rectangula ChaobofttS,JJunctipennis (phantom mi?ge)

Pleuroxus denticulatus Pleuroxus hamulatus Ceratopogonidae Chydorus globosus Arachnida Chydorus sphaericus Acarina (mites) (unidentified)

Sources: Attachment to letter from 0. Sisman, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, to J. Cusack, USAEC;_Jan. 9, 1973, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278; Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, ~each Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement No. 1, Philadelphia Electric Company, November *1971.

APPENDIX I LIFE HISTORIES OF IMPORTANT CONOWINGO POND SPECIES

. I-1

I-2 Muskellurtge .(Eso.x masquinongy)

The range of .the muskellunge extends from southwestern Ontario to western New Brunswick and south to northern Alabama. It has been widely introduced~ often without success, outside its range. 1 , 2 The muskellunge inhabits lakes, .rivers, and streams of low or moder-ate gradients and prefers clear water, sandy bottoms, and ~onsid-erable areas of aquatic vegetation. It requires extensive flooded areas for reproduction. 1 . The preferred temperature of juveniles from laboratory experiments3 is 24°C.

Adult muskellunge 1 are usually 19 to 37 'in. long and weigh 2 to 12 lbs. Sexual maturity is reached betw.een ages 3 and 5. Spawn-ing occurs from mid-April to late May at temperatures of 9.5 to 15.5°C (13°C optimum). Eggs are deposited indiscriminately over several hundred yards of *shoreline in water 6 in. to 2.5 ft deep.

Hatching occurs in 8 to 21 days at 21 to 12°C. In one study, only 34% of the eggs found in lakes were fertile. Females from Wisconsin ranging in size from 35 to 46 in. produced 22,000 to 164,000 eggs per female. 2 Spottail Shiner (Notropis hudsonius)

This shiner is found from Alberta to Quebec and south along the Atlantic coast to Georgia and in the Mississippi Valley to Missouri and Kansas

• 1 , 2 The spottail shiner prefers clear waters with a bottom of sand or gravel. Its decrease in certain Ohio waters is attributed to in-creased silting and turbidity. 1 Spottail shinersl,2 mature at ages 1 to 2 at lengths of 3 to 5 in.

They reportedly spawn in closely packed groups, with no evidence of nesting. 2 Young spottails up to 10 mm eat mainly rotifers and algae; up to 70 mm, microcrustacea (zooplankton); larger shiners eat insect larvae, zooplankton, fingernail clams, fish eggs, and small .

shiners. 2

I-3 Spotfin Shiner (Notropis spiZoptePUs)

The range of the spotfin shiner extends from eastern North Dakota to Lake Champlain and south to Missouri and the Potomac River. 1 , 2 It is tolerant of a wide variety of habitats, occurring in greatest abundance in streams of iow or moderate gradients. It may be the inost numero1:1s shiner in turbid or polluted wa-ters or where consid-erable siltation occurs. It may be present 'in large numbe.rs among aquatic vegetation. 1 Sexual maturity is usually reached at age 1 and lengths of 2 to 4 in.

Spawning occurs in June in Maryland and June to late August in New York. Eggs are attached to the undersides of solid objects, usually in clusters. 1 , 2 The food of adults consists mainly of aquatic insects, but terres-trial insects and seeds were also important in Kentucky and Iowa. 2 Bluntnose Minnow (PimephaZes notatus)

This important minnow occurs over most of the eastern half of the United States and southern Canada from Manitoba to Quebec and south to Virginia and the Gulf states. 1 ,4,S It has been widely introduced outside its original range, l

• Trautmari 1 refers to* the bluntnose as a !lmost plastic species" because it occurs in all types of waters, except the deeper areas of large lakes or rivers. Its outstanding success appears to be the result of a number of factors: (1) its ability to survive in the face of severe competition; (2) its ability to inhabit waters whose gradients ranged from Oto 100 ft/mile; (3) its high tolerance to turbidity and pollutants; (4) its ability to inhabit and to spawn in nearly all water types; (5) its success in spawning and surviving in the smallest temporary brooks before these waters cease. flowing; (6) its method of spawning and (7) its long spawning season. The largest populations occur in streams and lakes of moderate size and high primary productivity, l

• Adults a:re generally L6 to 3.5.in. long. *sexual *maturity may be reached at age 1. In Ohio, the spawning season lasts from early April to early September. 1 Males prepare nests underneath rocks, bricks, logs, or a variety of other solid objects. Eggs are laid in patches, occasionally in two layers. The.male guards the nest after spawning. A single female lays from 200 to 500 eggs per spawning period (several days). Eggs hatch in 7 to 14 days. Young are approximately 5 mm long at the time of hatching. 5

.~,-- ........ "* **~-*-*"" ,-*.,_. .--

I-4 Bluntnose minnows feed on small organisms and debris taken about

• equally from plankton and the benthos. The major foods are diatoms and algae, microcrustacea~ and insect larvae . 5 Bluntnose minnows were found 'to be an important consumer of fish eggs in Walnut Lake, Michigan. 2 Channel Catfish (Ictalu:l'US punctatus)

The original range of the channel catfish extended from the southern prairie provinces of Canada south through the Great Lakes and Missis-sippi Valley, including the Gulf States and Mexico. It was not. found on the Atlantic coastal plain. Since it is a favorite warm water game fish for many, it has been widely introduced into other areas. 1 Ch~nnei catfish are found primarily in fairly large rivers and streams with low to moderate gradients. They are abundant in some.

sluggish streams, lakes, and large reservoirs. Bottoms of sand, gravel, or boulders are preferred; silt bottoms may be tolerated if the rate of silt deposition is low. They are seldom found in dense aquatic vegetation. Channel catfish do not grow well at temperatures 1 ,6 .less than 70°F (21.1 °C). The preferred tempera-ture from laboratory experiments 7 is 30 to 31°C.

Immature channel catfish appear to tolerate faster currents than adults and often feed at night in riffle areas. They inhabit shallow riffles and turbulent areas near sand bars *.. Yearlings and subadults often overwinter under boulders in swiftly flowing water. Adults spend the day in deeper areas and feed in shallow water at night.l,B Channel catfish are typically omnivorous, usually feedin~ near the bottom. They may feed both at night and during the day. Small fisli consume mainly insect larvae. 8 , 9 Larger fish take an increas-ing proportion of fish, larger insects, and crayfish with increas-ing size.2,a Other items reported to be important foods at different local{E:i.es were elm seeds, terrestrial insects, algae, and pond-weeds.2,8-10 .

Zooplankton was the primary food of very young Conowingo Pond fish in August and September. Zooplankton, detritus, algae, amphipods, and fish were the major items in the diet of subadults (122 to 263 mm fork length) from July to November.11

• I-5 Adult channel catfish 1 may exceed 3 ft in length and weigh over 40 lbs. Definitive age and growth studies were not. performed in Conowingo Pond. The available data indicate that the life span

. exceeds 13. years and that the* growth rate is rather slow, for .

the species (a not uncommon phenomenon in l~rge, turbid reservoirs).6, 11 ,1 2 Length-frequency relationships for Conowingo Pond fish are shown in Table I-1. Although channel catfish may contribute little to the total catch in certain waters, they may provide an interesting trophy fishery. 6 The majority of channel catfish 2 mature when 13 to 16 in. long, ages 4 to 6 years. The male selects and cleans a nest site, usually in a secluded semi-darkened area under rocks, below logjams, in

• holes, or in other protected spots. Spawning occurs at temperatures

. between 70 ° and 85 °F (21.1 ° and 29 .*4 ° C). Males guard the nest and aerate and clean the eggs by fanning them with their pelvi~ fins. 6 Females of 1 to 4 lb.produce approximately 4000 eggs per pound of

.their own weight. 13 Eggs hatch in 5 to 10 days at temperatures I 3, 14

• between 80 and .60°F (26.,7 and 15.6°C).

Brown Bullhead (IataZurus nebuZosus)

This bullhead,originally ranged from Saskatchewan to Nova Scotia and south to Mississippi and Florida. 1 It has been widely intro-duced elsewhere.6 Brown bullheads are primarily inhabitants of warmwater ponds, im-poundments, lakes, and sluggish streams. Deep, clear, weedy water*

is preferred, over a variety of bottom types (sand, gravel, or muck) *. 'Adults inhabit* the deeper areas of the littoral zone in lakes but enter shallow areas to feed and spawn. *Young are found closer to shore.1,6

• Adultsl are typically 4.5 to 12 in. in.length ~d weigh 1 to 15 oz.

Sexual maturity is normally reached at age 3. Water temperatures near 70 °F (21.1 ° C) are preferred for spawning. Nests are con-structed in shady areas, usually near a submerged log, stump*, etc.,

by both parents. The depth of the nesting site and the bottom type on which it is constructed may vary considerably. Post-spawning care may be .by both parents or one parent alone. Eggs reportedly hatch in 5 to 9 days at temperatures froni 77° to 69°F (25.0° to 20.6°C). Females from 8 to 13 in. in length lay from 2000 to 13,000 eggs. 6

I-6 Table 1-1. Length 'rrequericy distribution of the channel catfish, Ictalurus punctatus, ta)cen at all trap net stations and taken by 16-ft semi-balloon trawl in Zone 5, Conowingo Pond, 1970 Fork length Total of Total from (mm) 89 trawls traps 11-20 3 0 21-30 22 0 31-40 148 0 41-50 235 0 51-60 379 6 61-70 451 14 71-80 541 37 81-90 636 30 91-100 688 34 101-110 605 49 111-120 654, 90 121-130 691 148 131-140 567 148 141-150 385 125 151-160 229 93 161-170 158 107 171-;180 136 91 181-190 80 82 191-200 50 82 201-210 24 96 211-220

• 33 163 221-230 27 271 231-240 18 362 241-250 17 412 251-260 7 345 261-270 5 259 271-280 2 159 281-290 0 119 291-300 0 86 301-310 1 72 311-320 0 64 321-330 0 40 331-340 0 34 341-350 0 18 351-360 0 20 361-370 0 18 371-380 0 12 381-390 1 6 Source: Environmental Report, 'operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, *.

Supplement l, Philadelphia Electric Company, N~vember 1971.

1-7 The yolk sac is absorbed on th.e* seventh. day after hatching and feeding begins.* The fry consume zooplankton and chiroriomid larvae.* Older fish* add other* in,sect larvae, tubificid worms and larger crustacea to the diet. Adults are omnivorous, feeding on a wide variety of foods, including fish eggs. 6 Yellow Bullhead (IctaluPUs natalis)

I The yellow bullhead was found originally from N_orth Dakota through the Great Lakes--St. Lawrence River drainages and southward to eastern Oklahoma and Texas.1,4 Largest populations occur in the shallow areas of large bays, lakes, ponds, and low gradient streams where the water is clear and aquatic vegetation is dense. 1

• Adults are usually 5.5 to 15 in. long. 1 Sexual maturity is reached at age 3. Yellow bullheads spawn from May to June in Illinois; habits resemble those of the. brown bullhead. Nests are constructed in water 1. 5 to 4 ft deep. Eggs hatch in 5 to 10 days, and the male stands guard until the young are 2 in. long. 6 Largemouth Bass (MicroptePUs salmoides)

The range. of the largemouth bass extends from South Dakota to southern Ontario and south to Florida, the Gulf States, and north-eastern M~xico. It has been widely introduced elsewhere*

• 1 It* predominates in clear, weedy, non-flowing waters. The preferred temperature of juveniles in laboratory experiments 3 was reported to

. be 30 to 32°C.

Adults are generally 10 to 20 in. long. 1 Sexual matu;ity occurs normally at age 2 *. Nesting begins when water temperatures reach about 60°F. Nests are constructed in.sand, gravel, roots, or veget~tion at a me4ian depth of 30 in. Eggs hatch in 2 to 5 days at temperatures between 72° and 66°F (21.7° and 18.9°C). Fry re-main in or nea_r the nest for* 8 to 13 days. 'Males guard the eggs and fry. Egg production reportedly varies from 2000 to 94,000 eggs per female, depending on age, weight, and length. 6 Fry consume zooplankton, mainly Cyclops _and Daphnia spp. As they grow larger, insect larvae enter the diet. Adults eat mostly fish;

I-8 other food items are worms; mussels, frogs, crayfish, snails' and large i.nsects.

• Typical fishes in the diet* are bluegills, *yellow perch, and other*sunfishes; threadfin shad, golden shiners, and other minnows; bullheads; darters; and small basses. 6 Smallmouth Bass (Mioropterus dolomieu)

The smallmouth bass was originally found from Minnesota through the Great Lakes to Quebec and south to northerri Alabama and eastern Oklahoma. It has been often successfully introduced outside this range. 1 , 4 The largest populations are found in large, clear lakes and cool streams of moderate-to-high gradient which have bottoms of gravel, boulder, or bedrock. 1 , 6 The preferred temperature of juveniles in laboratory experiments3 was reported to be 28°C.

Adults are generally 10 to 18 in. in length

• 1 Sexual maturity occurs at ages 3 to 4. Nesting begins wqen water temperatures reach 40 to 60°F (4.4 to 15.6°C). The male constructs a dish-shaped nest (as oth~r sunfishes do) on sand, gravel, or rocks in water 10 in. to 12 ft deep. Spawning takes place at temperatures from 58° to 70°F (14~4° to 21.1°C). Hatchlings remain in the nest for 3 to~ days. The male guards the young until the fry are about 1 in. long. A 15- to 17-in. long female may contain 7000 to 21,000 eggs. 6 Smallmouth fry consume mainly zooplankton. Young fish 1 to 2 in.

long eat mainly insects and small fish. Adults prefer crayfish, fish, and insects. Fishes consumed include young pickerel, yellow perch, sunfish, chubs, shiners, suckers, and their own young. 6

• Bluegill (Lepomis maoroohirus)

Bluegill were originally found from Minnesota to New York, south.

through the Great Lakes and Mississippi drainages to the Gulf of Mexico, .northeastern Mexico, and Florida and up the coastal area to North Carolina. Widespread introductions have been made in North .America, Europe, and Africa.

The largest populations occur in clear, *non-flowing waters over a variety of bottom types. In heavily vegetated areas, this species,

__________________________ ------).... _______

I-9 like the pmnpkinseed and yellow perch, may become too numerous, resulting in a stunted populatio"n.1, 6 Little feeding and essen-tially no growth occurs below 10 to 13°C. The preferred tempera-ture of juveniles in laboratory experiments 2 , 3 is reported to be 32.3°C.

Adults are usually 3. 5 to 10 in. long. 1 Sexual maturity is_ reached at ages 1 to 2. Spawning occurs throughout most of the growing season (May to September in Illinois), when water temperatures are normally between 22 and 27°C. Males build nests over a variety*of bottom types, mainly fine gravel, and water depths. The nest is guarded by the male after spawning. Incubation time ranges from 32 to 71 hours8.217593e-4 days <br />0.0197 hours <br />1.173942e-4 weeks <br />2.70155e-5 months <br /> at water temperatures from 27.3°C-to 22.6°C. Fry are approximately 4 mm long at hatching and do not leave the _nest until 4 days later; A 6-in. female carries about 14,000 eggs, but since spawning may occur more than once, the actual number produced is generally much higher. 2 At a length of 10 to 12 mm, the young bluegill!:> take up a planktonic existence in the upper 3 m of the water body, remaining for 6 to 7 weeks while feeding on zooplankton. Copepods and Bosmina spp.

were preferred over Drxphnia spp.. As the bluegills grow in size, larger items, such as insect larvae and amphipods, are added to the diet. Adult _bluegills feed mainly on aquatic insects, small crayfish, and small _fish. 2 Pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus)

This member of the sunfish family was originally found in southern Canada, the upper Miss issipp.i River sys tern, the Great Lakes region, and along the Atlantic Co~st to Georgia. It has also been widely introduced elsewhere.1, 2 Habitat preferences are similar to the bluegill's, except that dense growths of aquatic vegetation are preferred. It reportedly does not overpopulate a lake as easily as the bluegill, because of a dietary preference for a greater fraction of small fish, including its own young. 1 The preferred temperatures of .juveniles in laboratory experinients 3 was 31. 5°:C.

Adults are usually 2.5 to 10 in; long. 1 Sexual maturity is reached at ages 1 to 2. Spawning takes place from May to August. 2 Nest building starts when water temperatures reach 15°C. Details of

I-10 reproduction are similar to the bluegill. Incubation time is about 3 days at 28°C. Fry at hatching are 3 imn long. A 5-in.

long female produces an

• average of 22,000 eggs. 2

• Pumpkinseeds feed mostly on insects, crustaceans, and snails.

Larger pumpkinseeds take a greater proportion of small fish. 2 White Crappie (Pomoxis annula'l'is)

Wh~te crappie were originally.found in ponds, lakes, bayous, and low-gradient flowing waters east of the Rockies

• 1 They ranged from the southern Great Lakes south to Texas and Alabama *. 4 They have been widely introduced into suitable areas (such as .the Sus-.

quehanna River) throughout North America. 15-White crappie tolerate a wide variety of habitats. In turbid or silty environments, the white crappie generally predominates over the black crappie.1,6 White crappie were.more abundant than black crappie in Texas waters 16 when the pH was greater than 7,0, Normally white crappie reach sexual maturity at ages 2 to 3, with total lengths .of 7 to 8 inches. They spawn from March to July (depending on geographic location) when water temperatures reach 64° to 68°F (17.8° to 20°C). Larger fish may spawn at an earlier date. The male selects a nest site, often near brush, stumps, or rock outcroppings, usually in water 3 to 8 ft deep. The male guards the nest after spawning. 6 At 7. 5-in. long female may con-tain nearly 1s,ooo* eggs.17 Adult crappie, the largest of the "panfish," usually range from 5 to 14 in. total length. 1 Definitive age and growth studies were not performed in Conowingo Pond.. The available data indi-cate that the life span is 3 to 4 years and growth rate is good,*

for the species. 6, l l Length-:frequency relationships for Cono-wingo Pond fish are shown in Table I-2.

Young crappie consume largely zooplankton. Then, as the fish grow older, insects and other invertebra~es become very important. Fish becomes the dominant food of adults. 6 Data from Conowingo Pond indicate. no substantial alterations of these feeding patterns.

1-11 Table 1-2. Length frequency distribution of the white crappie, Pomoxis annularis, taken at all trap net stations and taken by 16-ft semi-balloon trawl in Zorie 5, Conowingo Pond, 1970 Fork length Total of Total from (mm) 89 trawls traps 11-20 0 0 21-30 0 0 31~40 0 0 41--50 0 0

.51-60 2 0 61-70 1 0 71-80 4 1 81-90 8 8 91-100 31 121 101-110 261 1223 111-120 603 3358

'121-130 532 4688 131-140 324 4796 141-150 224 4446 151-160 166 3943 161-170 83 3512 181-190 21 1927 191-200 14 1145 201-210 11 577 211-220 4 250 221-230 4 155 231-240 2 140 241-250 2 109 251-260 0 104 261-270 0 58 271-280 0 22-281-:-290 0 13 Source: Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Supplement 1, Philadelphia Electric Company, November 1971.

I-12 Stomach contents of young white crappie from Conowingo Pond con-tained:mainly Dcxphnia spp. (51 to: 97% byvolmne} from June to October and CycZops spp. (up to 98%) from -September to April.

Diet was most varied in late £all, wi.nter, and spring when chiron-omid larvae, amphipodsi and other insect larvae entered the diet in greater quantities. 1

• Adult white crappie consmned mainly fish during most of t_he year.

Amphipods, insects, and zooplankton were also consmned. The blue-gill and tesselated darter w~re the most important fishes in the diet, but spottail shiner, spotfin shiner, golden shiner, channel catfish, pumpkinseed, young whit;e crappie,. and log perch were also included. 11 . .

Adult crappie are considered predators that compete more with the larger game fishes (e.g., black basses) than with other panfish.6 Yellow Perch (PePca 'flavescens)

The yellow perch had a native range from central Manitoba to the Maritime Provinces, south to South Carolina along the Atlantic Coast, and west to Kansas and Missouri.I It occurs most abundantly in clear, weedy .lakes and sluggish streams. Its numbers are drastically reduced by increased tur-bidity and siltation. I The preferred temperature from laboratory experiments 3 is reported to be 24.2°C for juveniles and 21°C for adults.

Adults are typically 4.5 to 12 in. long.I Sexual maturity is reached at age 2. Spawning takes place near shore at water temperatures be-tween 45° to 55°F (7.2° to 12.a 0 *c), typically in early spring. Eggs are laid in gelatinous strings, woven in and around aquatic plants or brush. Eggs hatch in 3 or 4 weeks, and the young reportedly school throughout life.6 Small crustaceans, snails, insect larvae, and fish are major food items. Fish enter the diet in about the s_econd year of life.

Small chubs, dace, suckers, young perch, and green sunfish have been found in stomachs of perch. .

• I-13 Yellow** Walleye (Stizos tediwn vi tPewn vi tPewn)

The range of the yellow walleye extends from the Great Slave Lake east to Labrador and south* to North Carolina and northern Arkansas. 1 , 4 It is found mainly in larger lakes and streams, preferring clear, shallow waters over gravel*, l>edrock, or other firm bottom types in lakes and clear, deeper stretches in streains.l

~

The walley~, 4 the largest member of the perch family, may reach 3 ft in length and weigh 25 lbs. Adults generaily range from 11 to 30 in. long and 1 to 10 lbs in weight.I Sexual maturity is reached at ages 4 to 5 in Lake Erie. Spawning occurs from March .to June when water temperatures are 38° to 50°F

• (3.3° to 10°C). Eggs are broadcast over gravel riffles or gravel-rock shoals in water* 12 to 30 in. deep. Spawning over sand or .

silt. bottoms results in very low egg survival. A 16- to 17-in.

long female produces an average of 44,000 eggs.6 Walleye are almost exclusively predacious on other. fish. Fish were found to make up 88, 99, and 89% of food (by volume) of young-of-the-year, yearling, and adult walleye, resp~ctively, in Lake Gogebic, Michigan. Aquatic insects, particularly mayfly and midge larvae, were also important.6 * *

• Tessellated Darter (Etheostoma oZmstedi)

The tessellat.ed darter was formerly considered a subspecies of the johnny _darter. Its range extends f;om the Ottawa River and e~stern Lake Ontario to the Canadian Maritime Provinces and south to North Ca;rolina. 1 , 4 It is reported to prefer quiet waters and the riffles of streams. 4 Adults are generally 1.5 to 2.8 in. long. Sexual m~turityl is reached at age 1. Nests are excavated under stones or other sub-merged_objects. The eggs are attached to the underside of the roof of the nest and are subsequently guarded by both parents~l8 Principal foods are reported to be midge larvae, amphipods, and microcrus tacea,

• with a coniiderab le pe_rcentage of algae

• 19 .

I-14 American Shad (A 7,osa sapidiasima)

The American shad is an anadromous fish of the herring family, Clupeidae*,. Its* range includes. offshore,. coasti;tl, and river waters from Newfoundland to the Saint Johns River, Florida, Shad are most abundant from Connecticut south to North Carolina. They spend their adult lives in the ocean, except in spring, when they ascend rivers along the coast to spawn.* Fish that spawn in rivers north of the Chesapeake Bay are said to return to the sea and migrate north to Gulf of Maine wat"ers. 20 ' In winter they are presumed to remain in the deeper offshore waters of the Middle Atlantic coast, moving inshore again as the spawning season approaches. 21 Shad begin their spawning run into the Susquehanna in April, and the run continues until June. 22 The average number of eggs pro-duced by a single fish varies between 25,000 and 30,000, with larger fish producing more eggs than small ones. 2 3 The*eggs are deposited free in the water and sink, to be carried along near.

the bottom by the current. They were reported 23 to hatch in 52 hr at an average temperature of 57.2°F (14°C) and in less than 36 hr at an average of 74°F (23.3°C), However, a longer incubation period has been reported. 23 Eggs held under artificial conditions hatched in 12 to 15 days at 53.6°F (12°C) and in 6 to 8 days at 62.6°F (17°C), The yolk 2 3 i~ absorbed in 4 to 5 days at 62.5°F.

(17°C),

Newly hatched larval shad average O,40 in. ;Ln length and are ti::ans-ported by water currents. 23 The young, as they grow, tend to dis-perse from the upstream spawning grounds *down into the lower parts of the river. The larvae appear to feed on plankton; the principal diet of juveniles consists of small crustaceans and insect larvae~ 24 Those found in the lower estuarine parts of a river are reported to grow faster than those further upstream. 25 In the autumn, the young migrate to the sea to stay until they mature and join the annual spring migrations into the river for spawning, Working with young specimens from the Shubenacadie River, a tribu-tary to the Bay of Fundy, and its estuary, Leim found that the

. first food taken by larvae 11 nnn long consisted of midge larvae (Chironomidae), while the somewhat larger larvae had fed principally on* mature and immature copepods. 26 In fact, these organisms consti-tuted the chief food of the young up to the time of transformation, with the relative abundance of these forms in a particular locality determining which food predominated, These data show also.that

I-15 young adults taken in the same vicinity continued to. subsist princi-pally on these same organisms .. Other foods ingested consisted of ostracods,insects, and fish. 23 **

Little or no food has been found in the stomachs of shad caught while in fresh water en route to their*spawning grounds, indicating that these fish, iike salmon, do not ordinarily feed then. However, there are some records showing that adults occasionally do take food

.while in fresh water, at least late during the spawning season.

They will often take a live minnow or an artificial fly when working upstream on their spawning run. 23 From an examination of about 350 stomachs of both mature and iminature fish caught in.the salt water of Scotsman Bay (Bay of Fundy), Leim26 found that, while copepods constituted the chief food of the smaller ones, as in fresh water, thes_e crustaceans were unimportant in fish 400 mm and more in length. Mysids, which were sparingly eaten by small fish,.were the chief food of adult fish. In general, about 90% of the specimens of all sizes from that area had eaten copepods and mysids, with ostracods, amphipods, isopods, decapod larvae, insects, molluscs, algae, fish eggs, and fish making up the re-mainder of the diet. After examin*ing many stomachs of specimens taken in the Bay of Fundy, Willey 23 also concluded that the chief foods consisted of copepods and mysids, with a few shrimp and larval stages of barnacles. Stomach samples from Conowingo Pond

~ish contained large numbers of zooplankton. 27 .

Studies performed in the Susquehanna indicate that most of the river above Columbia, Pa. (approximately 20 miles upstream from the Peach Bottom* Station) is suitable for the spawning, egg de-velopment, and larval development of shad. However, many hazards to emigration of young shad exist: pollution, injuries at electric generating stations, predation, etc. In addition, adult shad showed little inclination to move upstream once they had been trapped and

• lifted over the dams on the Susquehanna. Many obstacles still re-main to be overcome before successful runs of shad return to the upper Susquehanna.27 Although there is no sport fishing for shad in Conowingo Pond yet, more than 100,000 sport fishermen fished for shad in other Atlantic coastal rivers, estuaries, and bays in 1965*and took an estimated 4,700,000 lb of them. From Maine to North Carolina, commercial fishermen 2 B took 6,372,000 lb of shad in 1965.*

I-16 White Perch (MoPone americana)

This species.is found in fresh, brackish and coastal salt water between* South Carolina and Nova Scbtia:. 29 Spawning of demersal and adhesive eggs (7". 5 nun in diamet;er) occurs in fresh and brackish water from April to ~une, depending on geograph;i.c location, and at

• water temperatures30 between 45° arid 60°F (7.2° and 15.6°C). The eggs hatch in about_3 days at 58°F (14.4°C). Young and adults re-main in fresh or brackish waters. They frequent shoal areas, except in winter, when they congregate in the deeper parts of bays. and rivers, where they remain sluggish until spring. During spring, summer, and autumn, localized wandering occurs. 29 This species feeds on. small crustaceans and. small fish. 2 4 ,29 Large numbers of white perch larvae 31 were observed to move out of the Susquehanna River and into upper Chesapeake Bay during 1966 and 1967.

This species grows to about 15 in. and weighs from z* to 3 lb. It is of limited commercial importance but is commonly fished for along the shore at many localities. 32 Striped Bass (MoPone saxatiZis)

The striped bass in an anadromous species of the family Serranidae.

This family includes freshwater, estuarine, and marine forms.

Although the species was originally an Atlantic form, it has been successfully introduced on the Pacific *coast and is a common food and game fish in that area. On the Atlantic coast, these fish are found from Florida to Nova Scotia but are most abundant in protected waters between North Carolina.and Massachusetts. Large fish often reach 35 lb or more and are ~enerally found along the open coast but within 5 miles of shore. 3 Most stripers are found associated with bays, sounds, and tidal rivers. However, according to Clark, 34 they are aiso abundant along the Atlantic seaboard from the Delaware Bay to Cape Cod.

Clark34 described the movements of striped bass in the area from the Chesapeake Bay to New England. Evidence from his studies, as well as previous studies, indicates that the species is not homog-eneous but is instead composed of a number of separate groups that are more or less isolated from other groups. In southern waters, the fish remain in protected water throughout their life span, and

I-17 as a consequence the various popul,ations have little interchange and. are most intensely isolated from each other~ In contrast, striped* *bass* from the Ch.esapeake Bay north. to* New* ~ngland commonly leaire. their n'ursery areas after* 3 or more yea.rs and migrate in groups along the open coast.* Summermovements*a'I'.e generally north,

. while winter* movements are generally south.. In the nor'thern part of their range, the striped bass become dormant in the winter.

The greatest area of spawning is a few miles upstream fro:m the salt water front, which varies in location from year to year. Striped bass in spawning condition were observed in the Elk River (near the mouth of the Susquehanna) in March and April, 1960. 22 The non-adhesive demersal eggs are semi-buoyant and require sufficient vertical water flow in order to remain suspended. Eggs are en-countered most often in fresh or only slightly brackish water (salinity below 1 part per thousand). They35 average 0.134 in.

in diameter and hatch in 2 or 3 days at 60° to 64°F (15.6 to

17. 8°C). After hatching, the larvae, which are about O .13 in.

long, continue to drift downstream. At this stage in development, the larvae-are still unable to move effectively against the currents and will settle to the bottom in quiet water despite swimming efforts to approach the.surface. Once the larvae reach a length of 0.5 in.,

they appear capable of sustained swimming. The larvae make extensive vertical diurnal migrations, being found in surface water at night and nearer the bottom during the day.30,36 This species, like white perch, shows a definite preference for the bottom waters in shoal areas.

After spawning, the adults generally return to sea. Larvae and young-of-the-year remain in freshwaters and estuaries. Striped bass may remain in an estuary for 2 or 3 years before migrating to the sea. During winter, adults and young are found in the lower regions.

As larvae and young'.""of-the-year, striped bass fe*ed primarily on microcrustaceans. As they grow, their diet changes from smaller to larger forms. Gamma:rius apparently makes up a major proportion of their diet, but most other microcrustaceans are also taken, and there is evidence that a variety of food is needed for normal growth. 37 Small fish also become an important food item as the fish grow larger.*

Typical fishes in the diets of adults are minnows,.herring, gizzard.

shad, and alewives.38

• A total of 7969 striped bass were. tagged and planted in Conowingo Pond in 1957, 1958, and 1959 during the months of 'September, October, and November. Most of the females were too small to spawn in the

I-18 spring followii1.g the planting, but would have been large enough had they remained above the dam for another year. Intensive sampling produced no evidence that successful spawning had actually occurred. 22 The Susquehanna River is no longer the* major striped bass spawning area in the Chesapeake. It has not made a substantial contribut.ion to either reproduction or commercial'harvest in recent years. Dams on the Susquehanna, which have altered the flow patterns of the river~ are thought to be responsible for the decline. Flow in the Susquehanna is intermittent now near the mouth of the river. 39 The main source of striped bass for the American Atlantic Coast is the Chesapeake Bay stock.40-44 j

REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX I

1. M. B. Traut;m~, The Fishes *of O"Ej,'io, Ohio State University Press, Columbus, l957,

2. K. D. Carlander, Handbook of FPeshwater Fishery Biology, Vol. *1, *Iowa st'ate Univ. Press,*Ames,'.1969. *

3. R. G*. Ferguson, The Preferred Temperature of Fish and Their Mid-Summ~r Distribution in Temperat*e Lakes and Streams, J.

Fish Res. Bd. Canada 15(4): 607-624 (1958) ~*

4. c. L. Hubbs and K~ F. Lagler, Fishes of the. Great Lakes Region. Univ. of Mich. Press, Ann Arbor, 1964.

5. *C. L. Hubbs and G. P. Cooper, Minnows of Michigan, Bulletin No. 8, *cranbrook ~nstitute of Science, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, ,1938.

6. A. Calhoun, Inland Fishei>ies Management, Department of Fish and Grune, California, 1966 *.

7. K. Strawn; paper presented at.the 97th Annual Meeting, American *Fisheries Society, Toronto,, 19 6 7.

8. R. M. Bailey and H. M*. Harrison, .Food Habits of the Southern Channel Catfish (Ictalurus Za<Just'ris puncta;t;U:S) in the Des Moines River, Iowa, TPans. Ame:r*. Fish. Soc. 75: 110-138 (1948).

9. W*.A~ :Dill, The Fishery of the Lower Colorado River, Calif.

Fish and Gam? 30(3): 109-211 (1944) *.

10. J. B. Kimsey, R. H. Hagy, and G. W. McCanunon, Progress Report on the Mississippi Threadfin Shad, Doraosomapetenenis

• ~. atchafaylae, in the Colorado River for 1956, Calif. Dept. Fish

. and Gaine, Inland Fish. Aclmin *. Rept. No. 5?-23, 1957.

11. *Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units .2 and 3, Supplement 1, Philadelphia*

Electric Company, November 1971.

12. K. F. Schwalm, Age and growth of the channel.catfish, Ictalu:l'US punctatus (Rafinesque), in Conowingo and,Muddy Run Reservoir, in T. W. Robbins and Associates, Studies of the Fishes of Conowingo Reservoir, 1966-1968, ConOuJingo ResePvoi:l' - Muddy Run Fish Studies ProgPess ~epoPt 2, 1969.

• I-19

I-20

13. H. P. Clems and K. F. Sneed~ Th.e Spawning Behavior of the Channel Catfish, Iatalurrus punatatus, v.s. Fish and WildZife Serv., Spea. *sc:i. Rept. Fi.sh;* No. 219, 1957.

14. L. Brown~ Propagation of the Spotted Ch,arinel* Catfish (IatalUPUS Zaaustris punatatus), Trans. Kansas Aaad. *sc:i.

45: 311-314 (1942).

15. K. F. Lagler, Freshwater FishepY Biology, Wm. C. Brown Company Publishers, Dubuque, Iowa, 1956.

16. M. Toole, Utilizing Stock Tanks and Farm Ponds for Fish, Texas Game and Fish. Comm. Bull. 24~ 1950.

17. T. H. Langlois, Ohio's Fish Program, Ohio Div. Cons. and Nat.

Resources, 1945.

18. K. F. Lagler, J. E. Bardach and R. R. Miller, IathyoZogy, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1962.

19. S. Eddy and T. Surber, Northern Fishes, Univ. of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 194 7.

20. A. J. Mansueti and J. D. Hardy, Jr. , Development of Fishes of the Chesapeake Bay Region, An Atlas of Egg, Larval, and Juvenile Stages, Part 1, Nat. Res *. Inst., Univ.* Md., 1967.

21. H. B. Bigelaw and. W, C. Schroeder, Fishes of the Gulf of Maine, U.S. Department of the Interior, F'ish and Wildlife

. Servic*e, F1-sh. BuU. 53: 577 (1953).

22.

• R. R. Whitney, The .Susquehanna Fishery Study, 1957-1960, Md. Dept'. Res. Ed. Contrib. 169; 1961. *

23. S. F. Hildebrand, Genus Alosa, p. 293 in Fishes of the Western North Atlantia, Sears Foundation for Marine Research, Yale, 1954.

24. H. I. Hirschfield, J. W. Rachlin. and E. Leff, A Survey of the Invertebrates*from Selected Sites of the Lower Hudson River,

p. 220, Hudson RiveI'*EaoZogy, Hudson River Valley Commission of New York, 1966.

25.

• C. H. Walberg and P. R. Nichols, Biology and Management of t.he

• .American Shad, and States of. the Fisheries, Atlantic Coast of the United States, 1960, Fish Wildlife Service, Spec. Sci.

Rep., Fish, No. 550, 1967.

I-21

26. Leim, Cont:l'. Canad. Bi:ol * ., Iv.S. 2(1}, 1924.

27. F. T. Carlson, Report on the biological findings.~ in Suitabili-ty of the Susquf3hanna Rive:l' for-RestoPation of S'had., 'U.S. Govern-ment Post Office,* Washington, D. c;, 1968.

28. G. B. Talbot, Factors Associated with Fluctuations in Abundance of Hudson. River Shad, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,* Fish. Bull. 56: 373-413 (1954).

29. C. M. Breder, Jr., Field Book of Marine Fishes of the At-Z.antia Coast, G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York, 1948.

30. Hudson River Fisheries Investigations 1965-1968, Hudson River Policy Committee.

31. R. J. Mans4eti, Eggs, Larvae and Young of the White Perch, Roaaus ameriqanus, with Comments on its Ecology in the Estuary, (;hesa:peake Sci. 5(1-2): 3-45 (1964).

32. W. T. Edmondson, G. W. Comita, and G. C. Anderson, Repro-ductive Rate of Copepods in Nature and Its Relation to Phytoplankton Population, EaoZ.o{JY 43(4): 625-639 (1962).

33. J. R. Clark and S. E. Smith, Migratory Fish of the Hudson.

Estuary, p. 293 in Hudson River Eaolo{JY, G. P. Howells and G. J. Lauer (eds.), New York State Department of Environ-mental Conservation, 1969.

34. J. R. Clark, Seasonal Movements of Striped Bass Cont~ngents of Long Island Sound and the New York Bight, Trans. Amer.

Fish. Soc. 97(4): 320-343.(1968).

35. G. B. Talbot, Estuarine Environmental Requirements and Limiting Factors for Striped Bass, pp. 37-49 in Am. Fish.

-Boa. Spec. Puhl. No. :3, 1966.

36. Raytheon Company, Indian Point Ec'ological Suryey, Final Report, 19 71.

37, United States Dept. o*f Interior, Fish* and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, 1969 and 1970 reports on the development of essential requirements for production of striped bass, 46 and 37 pp., resp.

I-22 38.* L. Trent and W. w. Hassler~ feeding Behavior of Adult Striped* Bass, fl19aaw; saxati,Zis, ;in: Relation to Stages of Sexual Maturity, c;liesapeake Sen.. 7(4}.: :1.89-192 (i<:i66).

39*. w. L. Dovel* and J. R. Edmunds, Recent Changes* in Striped Bass (MoPone saxatiUs) Spawning Sites and Commercial Fishing Areas in Upper Chesapeake Bay; Possible Influencing Factors, Chesapeake *sai. 12(1): 33-39 (1971).

40. E. C. Raney, The Life History of the.Striped Bass, Eoaaus saxatiUs (Walbaum), BuU. Binghom *oaeanogP. CoUeation 14(1): 5-97 (1952). .

41. T. S. Koo, The Striped Bass Fishery in the Atlantic States, Chesapeake Sai.' 11(2):

• 73""'.'93 (1970).

42. D. Merriman, Studies* on the Striped Bass (Roaaus saxatiZis) of the Atlantic Coast, Rish Buzz.* 35: 1-77 (1941).

43. P.R. Nichols and R. V. Miller, Seasonal Movement of Striped Bass, Roaaus saxatitis (Walbaum), Tagged and Released in the Potomac River, Maryland, 1959-1961, Chesapeake Sci. 8(2):

102-124 (1967).

44. V.

• D. Vladykov and D. H. Wallace, Studies of Striped Bass, Roaaus saxatiUs (Walbaum), with Special Reference to. the Chesapeake Bay Region During 1936-1938, BuZZ. Bingham Oaeanog *

. CoU. 14(1): 132-177 (1952).

Appendix J

• THE. CHEMISTRY OF CHLORINE. LN FRESH..WATER Chl.orine i~ a very effective biocide,

• and for -this reason, it is used' extensively in the treabnent. of cooling and proc~ss water to prevent. the fouling by aquatic growth of heat exchanger surface and other piping .in both fossil- and nuclear-fueled power plants. How-

. ever, this* high level* of toxicity to aquatic organisms makes chlo'r-ine a hazard to biota in the bodies* o'f water which receive plant effluents.

There is some confusion . about the use of the word chlorine in water treatment, and because of the possible adverse impact of chlorine and compounds containing chlorine on aquatic environments, the staff has prepared* this brief outline of the chemistry of chldrine in fresh water.

The extensive use of chlorine for treatment of water supplies began in the 1940's, and Griffin 1 .has co~piled ;,{ bibliography of the work published between 1939 and i952. .

Fair et al. 2 have summarized the work.done on the chemistry of chlorine in fresh water prior to 1948. Draley 3 has again reviewed the problem recently.

In the literature on water treatment, the terms used to describe the reaction products of chlorine and water are often not well d'efined.

To avoid any confusion, the definitions of these terms are listed:

(a) Free Chlorine (Free Availa~le Chlorine, Free Residual Chlorine)

Chlorine that remains in the water as molecular chlorine, hypochlo-rous acid, or hypochlorite ion after water has been treated with chlorine.

(b) Combined Chlorine (Combined Available Chlorine)

The chlorine that reacts with ammonia or other nitrogen compounds in water.

(c) Active Chlorine (Total Residual Chlorine or Total Available Chlorine)

The sum* of the free chlorine (free available chlorine) and the com-bined chlorine (combined available chlorine). The words "active" J-1

I I

I J-2 and "available" refer to biological activity and availability. The amount of this "active chlorine" is determined by the amount of iodine released* from potassium iodide.in acid solution.

(d) *Chlorine* Demand The amount of chlorine consumed in reaction with the oxidizable com-pounds in water~ The terin is used when referring to the difference between the amount of chlorine added to the water and the.free avail-ab le chlorine remaining , after .a particular period of contact.

When elemental chlorine dissolves in water, the chlorine undergoes rapid hydrolysis to produce* hypochlorous and hydrochloric acids.,

Cl + H O ::: HOCl + H+ + Cl (1) 2 2 The hydroly~is is virtually complete in most natural waters. If, however, the pH is below 3 or the .chlorine concentration is of the order of 1,000 ppm, there will be a measurable concentration of molecular chlorine at equilibrium. The full oxidizing capacity of c1 2 is retained in the hydrolysis product HOC!. For the reaction as written, one chlorine atom. is reduced to a chloride ion while the chlorine atom in HOCl is oxidized to +1.

HOCl partially ionizes in water to give (2) and

[OCl~]

[HOCl]

where the brackets represent molecular concentrations. At a given temperature, the ratio of hypochlorite ion to hypochlorous aci_d is a function of the hydrogen ion concentration or pH. At pH= 7, and a temperature of 20°C, the equilibrium ratio is 75% HOC! and 25%

oc1-. At pH= 8, the ratio becomes 25% HOC! and 75% oc1-.

J-3 When a hypochlorite

. salt such

. as sodium hypochlorite{NaOCl) is dis:-*

solved in water, thehypochlorite ion is rapidly hydrolyzed to give a basic solution.

OCl- + HzO; HOCl + .OH- (3)

,Wh~n ammonia or ammonium ions are present in water, hypochlorous acid will react with tliem to give a series of substitution products known as chloramines:

(4)

NH Cl 2

+ HOCl ::: NHC1 2

+ H 0 (5) 2 Sodium hypochlorite will also react with ammonia to give monochlor-*

amine:

(6)

At a fixed temperature, the ratio of monochloramine to dichloramine depends on the concentration of ammonia present and on the pH.

(7)

Fair et al. 2 have determined the equilibrium constant for reaction (7). They have also calculated the relative amounts

• of the two chlor-amines as a function of pH with a fixed mole ratio' of Cl/N = 2 **

.E.1i  % dichloramine 5 84 7 35 9 6

J-4 If excess chlorine is added, the chloramines decompose with the over-all reaction With a chlorine-to-ammonia-nitrogen mole ratio of 3, the reaction should be complete with no remaining residual chlorine.* This is commonly. kn_own *as the *breakpoint. That is , for Cl/N < 3, the reac-tion products will contain a mixture of mono- and dichloramines. For Cl/N > 3, the excess chlorine should remain as hypochlorous acid.

In actual practice, a clear breakpoint is not--,found. Pulham4 *has shown that ~hen water contains organic amines in addition to ammonia, chloramines can co-exist in solution with free chlorine. This situ-ation is explained in Fig*. J-1.

Draley, 3 using previously reported equilibrium constants, calculated equilibrium concentrations of the reaction products of equations (1),

(2), (4), , (5), and (7). The calculations do not take into account possible decomposition

( .

of chlorine compounds or* the effects of or-.

ganic amines or other reactive compounds that may be present in natural water.

Because of the toxicity of low chlorine levels to aquatic life, ana-lytical methods must be devised that give reliable results. Unfor-tunately this is not the case. *. Lishka et al. 5 have analyzed the results from 32 laboratories that used eight analytical methods. The results are shown in Table J-1.

Two obvious conclusions can be drawn from Table J-1. The first is that the sensitivity and accuracy of the present analytical methods are unsatisfactory for determination of low residual chlorine levels.

Second, there is a need for reliable analytical methods and ins'tru-ments so that residual chlorine can be monitored on a routine continuous basis down to concentrations of O.01 ppm.

~ FREE CHLORINE

~~ COMBINED CHLORINE AS CHLORAMINES LO e o.8 C.

C.

w z

a:: 0.6 0

_J I c.-i

. I

0. Ul

_J 0.4

• c;::{

0 en w

a:: 0. 2 0 K . . : . . ~ ~ - . . . J l , , . . ~ ~ ~ ~ . . . . . . . l l o . . , ; l..........~...........................................llo..,;l......................................................_.,_..,..........----.w 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 LO 1.2 4.4 CHLORINE DOSE (ppm)

Fig. J-1. Typical pattern of chlorine reaction with natural*

water.

J-6 TableJ-L Precision and accuracy data for residual chlorine methods based upon determination by several laboratories

• Residual chlorine Relative concentration Relative Number of . standard error Free Total laboratories deviation Method (%)

(µg/liter) (µg/liter) (%)

lodometric 840 32 27.0 23.6 640 30 32.4 18.5 1830 32 23.6 16.7 Amperometric 800 23 42.3 25.0 640 24 24.8 8.5 1830 24 12.5 8.8 Orthotolidine 800 15 64.6 42.5 640 17 37.3 20.2 1830 18 31.9 41.4 Orthotolidine- 800 20 52.4 42.3 arsenite 640 21 28.0 14.2 1830 23 35.0 49.6 Stabilized 800 15 34.7 12.8 neutral 640 .16 8.0 2.0, orthotolidine 1830 17 26.1 12.4 Ferrous DPD 800 19 39.8 19.8 640 19 19.2 8.1 1830 19 9.4 4.3 Leuco crystal 800 17 32.7 7.1 violet 640 . 17 34.4 0.9 1830 18 32.4 18.6 Methyl orange 800 26 43.0 22.0 640 26 30.1 14.2 1830 26 19.9 7.2

J-7 REFERENCES FOR .APPENDIX.J

1. A. E. Griffin, J. New England Water Works Assn . ., 68: 97-112 (1954).

2. G. M. Fair, J. C. Morris, s. L. Chang, I. Weil, and R. P. Burden, J. Am. Water Works Assn . ., 40: 1051-61 (1948).

3. Joseph E. Draley, The Treatment of Cooling Waters with Chlorine, ANL/ES-12, Argonne National Laboratory, 1972.

4. C. J. Pulham, Ingenieu:ri., 64(13): 11-16 (1952).

5. R. J. Lishka, E. F. McFarren, and J, H. Parker, Water Chlorine

{Residual) No. 1., Study Nwriber 35, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service., 1969.

Appendix K,. .

SOURCES

• 0]' POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL *.DAMAGE

• FROM ONCE..;,THRQUGR. COOLING. SYSTEMS*

This section presents pertinent environmental information related to predicti.ng the effects of plant operation. There are seven prin.;..

cipal sources of potential direct biological damage from operation of a once.:..*through cooling system (and an eighth, their combined effects): * *

(1) Temperature increases from the warm .cooling water, causing both direct e*ffects and indirect effects (metabolism, growth, dis-

. ease, predation, etc.).

(2) Mechanical and pressure changes that damage small organisms passing through pumps and condenser tubing.

(3) Impingement on intake screens of large organisms, principally fish, drawn into the cooling-water intake.

Entrainment refers to .the combined effects of impingement, tempera-ture increases, and mechanical (and pressure) changes on small or-ganisms (plankton, small fish) which pass through the intake screens *

. The magnitude of the entrainment problem is determined principally by the abundance of suspended small organisms and the percentage of the water b.ody (or flow) that is pumped through the plant.

(4) Chemicals .used as biocides (usually chlorine) to remove slimes from the condenser tubing and perhaps other .chemicals released to the cooling water from a variety of plant operations, all of which maybe toxic to aquatic life.

(5) Reduction of dissolved oxygen in water passed through the power plant .or, more likely, in the water body as a result of increased biochemical oxygen demand at warmer water temperatures.

(6) Induced circulation of a water body, both in the local area of the discharge (which may influence migrations) and in the wider range of the water body (changing normal seasonal patterns).

(7) Radiation, derived largely from radioactive nuclides taken up by* terrestrial and *aquatic organisms, which could potentially induce radiation damage if concentrations of the nuclides were sufficiently high.

K-1

K-2 (8) Combinations of the above, which may cause effects greater than the sum of individual effects (synergism).

Construction activities add additional sources* _of biological damage.

Destruction of wildlife habitat and silting of nearby water bodies.

during construction may result from such activities.

a. Thermal Effects*

Temperature is a particularly important -factor governing the occur-

. rence and behavior of organisms.. It not* only .affects *the distribu-tion of a single species but may also modify the species composition of a community or an ecosystem.

• Generally, tropical and subtropical species are more stenothermal (tolerate only a rtarrow range of tem-peratures) than those of higher latitudes, and marine forms are more stenothermal than freshwater or estuarine ones.I_ In this con-nection, Naylor 2 noted that estuarine species were more tolerant of heated effluents than marine *forms *and concluded .that some cold,-

water stenothermal species may be eliminated by heated discharges while eurythermal (tolerate a wide range of temperatures) species may be increased. *

• Pelagic forms are most susceptible to temperature fluctu~tions re-sulting from power plant operations since they are dependent upon water currents for much of their movement. Larger, motile organisms are usually able to find and remain in areas near their preferred temperature unless trapped in shallow or- enclosed areas or forced to migrate through thermally altered zones * .Many organisms have restricted ranges of temperature within which they can reproduce successfully.I Larval development also requires narrow ranges of temperature. 3

• For these .reasons, many spe*cies may exist in exces-sively heated areas only by continued recruitment from the outside.

Fish may be absent from such areas during:warm summer months and present in cold wint*er months *. In some locations, populations of widely heat-tolerant species may replace stenothermal species.

(1) Decomposers The temperature of most natural waters, even during the summer, is below the optimum for most bacteria. Increasing the water tempera-ture increases the bacterial multiplication rate when the environ-

-ment is favorable and the food supply is abundant.

• Increasing the water temperature within the growth range of the bacteria causes a more rapid die~off when the food supply is limited. 4 Consequently the few degrees increase in temperature due to the discharge of

K-3 heat by the power plant would be expected' to* favor i.ncreased bac-terial growth.during most of the'year only if the standing crop of bacteria is less than the' carrying ~apacity of their food supply.

Because of metabolic considerations, i.ncreases in. temperature that favor population growth inay be counteracted ,by a reduction in the carrying' capacity of the* area. However, if, in addition to. the increased temperature, ,there is an associated increase in available organic material (e.g., fish or otlier organisms killed. by plant op-eration), increased standing crops of bacteria might be experienced.'

• Bacterial counts in the influen~ and effluent water of a power plant on the PatuxentRiver estuary when there was a rapid heat change (but no chlorination) were found to remain constant~ 5

'(2) Producers Inherent in ~pe question of availability of different algal groups as food for invertebrates is the succession of these algae with increasing temperature. As Patrick 6 n~ted in her review of the effects of temperature on freshwater algae,*each species in nature has its own range of temperature tol~rance, .and its range of optimum growth, photosynthes*is, and reproductic,n. In general, the diatoms are represented by the largest number of species, with relatively low tolerances to temperatures less than 86°F. The tolerances of the green algae cover a wide temperaturg span. The blue;.green algae have more species that are tolerant of very high temperatures *

. There are some species in .all groups, however, that tolerate an.

unusual extreme for their group. Under normal seasonal conditions, there is a succession of species on the same substrate. This suc-cession is largeiy the result*of changes.in water-temperature and light intensity through the optima £or the various species. As the temperature increases or decreases, one species replaces another as the dominant organism. In nature, there are also many*. other

• pressures upon a species, including interspecies competition and

,predation; so that the temperature .of maximum development in a stream niay not be exactly the same as the optimum range for growth in the*laboratory. Figure K-1 indicates.the most commonly observed type of population *shift. This figure has been used repeatedly since it was introduced by Cairns 7 and is generally accepted, al-though, as Coutant8 points out, it is a generalized pattern, which is not always followed by algal populations in the field.

Reports of field studies of the biota associated with discharge canals of power plants, where the water temperature is still essen-tially as high as it was when the water left the condensers, have

---

d*-- -----~--*----**---~- -.. _.__ '" --- . ._.. ----~ ,._... - - - ---- --*---*- ....... -------.,<a--*~-----~-_,..,---*.----**-*-.,._ - ------- ~-*~,-- _, ~ --

K-4 Ill E

Ill C

C Cl 0

0 Q)

.Cl E

~

C Q) BLUE C

Q)

DIATOMS GREENS GREENS z

O' ct

...J (l.

0 (l.

...J ct C)

...J ct 65 75 85 95 105 TEMPERATURE (°F)

Fig. K-L Population changes in algal groups with changes in temperature.

K-5 noted" dominance. of th.e periphyton ~ommunity by. heat-tolerant blue-green alfa: w.~en water_" tempeJ:"at~res: exG~ed about 86°F. ~epor~s by Trembley indicate that the periphyton grown. on glass slides .were dominated" even more by b+ue-green algal species when the tEmtperature exceeded" 94 .1 °F in the discharge canal of the Martin's Creelcc. Power Plant on th.e Delaware River*.

• The'fe were fewer species on the slides than when the water/was cooler, but those remaining were represented by a larg~r nl..llllber of .individuals. This condition is generally rec-ognized as an indication of an abnormal community structure. Obser-vations indicated that blue-green algae were utilized as food by fewer organisms.than other algal classes. It is difficult to deter-mine, however, how much of the alteration of comm.unity structure Wc:!-S due to chlorination of the cooling water. 8 Fo~rster 1 0 discuss.ed the apparent early arrival. of spring seasonal successions in periphyton of the discharge canal of the Yankee Atomic Power Plant on the Connecticut River. Buck 11 reported a.

no"ticeable shift 1:rom diatoms to blue-green algae in plankton in the area of thermal effluent. These planktonic forms were presum-ably der:tved from the periphyton population~ of the mile-long canal, although a d_etailed report of this. i;;tudy has not yet ,been published.

Similar changes in the species composition of plankton in cooling water were, reported by Beer and Pipes, 12 who* described a shift from diatom dominance in the inlet to dominance by unicellular green algae in the effluent.canal of the Dresden Station on the Iilinois River *.

In a September survey, OsaiUatoria (a blue-gre~n filamentous alga) covered all bottom materials in shallow water: of the discharge canal and the river bed close to the confluence of the discharge from the John Sevier Steam Plant (Tennessee Valley Au:thprity) with the Holston River, Tennessee. 8 No large-scale replacement of cold-water marine algae by warm::..wat~r-tolerant forms was found by North 1 .3 at the Morro Bay discharge canal, however. The entire algal flora was simply*

depleted at the warmer temperature.

The lethal :temperature for the algae varies with the species. 6 Most of the algcil species studied to date have a lethal .temperature in the range from 91.5°:F to 113°F, with the majority being near .

111 °F. Diatoms that require cooler temperature (stenotherms) are generally most sensitive t.o temperature change and can withstand an 18F 0 temperature change. Diatoms suite.d to warmer* temperatures can tolerate temperature changes 6 from 27F 0 to 3.6F 0

• K-6 At the Indian Point plant on the Hudson- River*, the diatom Melosira is dominant throughout most*of the*year, although its dominance declines* during *the summer* period -of high temperatures and salinity.

Many other* species* are also* consistently present *14 . H.ow.ever, there is a seasonal change in composition characterized"by" diatom domi-nance much of the year' with. green and. blue-green algae. becoming more abundant in lat_e summer and early fall. 1 5 The pattern of dominant algal. forms (Fig. K-2) -con.forms to* the typical pattern previously described (Fig. K-1), although the* shifts in abundance of the green and blue-green algae seem to be* occurring at lower temperatures than would be predicted.

(3) Consumers The physiology of aquatic fauna is directly affected by temperature.

Changes in temperature may cause increases in metabolism, changes in food conversion abilities, changes in reproductive cafacity, .

changes in behavior, or even thermal death. Fry et al. 1 described the thermal responses of fish and divided the total range of temper~

ature experience of an organism into several zones. They discerned an upper and a lower zone of thermal resistance and a central zone of thermal tolerance, bounded abov~ and*below by an upper and'a lower lethal temperature. The lethal temperature is defined as that temperature which, when a fish is brought rapi~ly to it from a dif-ferent temperature, will kill a stated fraction of the population (generally 50%) within an indefinitely prolonged exposure.. In the zones of thermal resistance, an organism can survive for a definite period of time that becomes longer.as the acclimation temperature approaches the lethal temperature.

Previous thermal history, referred t*o as acclimation temperature, profoundly affects the lethal temperature. In general, a history of cold temperatures results in a low lethal temperature,. while.a history of warm temperatures produces an elevated lethal temperature.

Evidence is accumulating that many cold-blooded (poikilothermic) species are capable of considerable adjustment of their metabolic activities to a wide range of temperatures. This adjustment to warmer t:emperatures is evidenced by increased upper and lower _lethal temperatures. The range of adjustment ~ay be considerable, e~g.,

the goldfish has an upper lethal temperature that varies from ap-proximately 78.8°F to 104°F. This hardy species may be one of the extreme cases in this respect. 8

l K-T 100 90 80 70

-*. 60

~

z 0

I- 50 en 0

a..

~

0 40 u

30 20 10 0

A M J J A S 0 N D J MONTH.

Fig. K-2. Relative proportions of diatoms, green algae, and blue green algae in the standing crop at Iridian Point,

.1970 *.

K-8 Elevation of lethal temperature is not directly proportional to ele-vation of acclimation temperature, but is rather* some*f:raction 0£ it. The result is that the acclimation temperature and the upper lethal temperature tena t6 converge upon the ulti:mate upper lethal temperature,* at which both. the accli:mation and the lethal tempera-ture are the sa1ne.

• Coutant elaborates on this in his recent publi-cation. a The time necessary for thermal accli1nation varies* among species, as has been shown by several woi:kers*.a

• Adjustment to higher tempera-tures is generally fairly rapid. Data of Alabaster and Downing17 indicate an elevation of about 1.8F 0 per day for the roach; Sprague 1 a found that acclimation temperatQres could be raised 4 .5F 0 to 9F 0 per day for several crustaceans. Once acquired, tolerance to high temperatures may persist for considerable periods after return of a fish to a lower temperature. a Heat exposure during acclimation need not be continuous. An intermittent ~xposure *to a different temperature for sufficient hours per day can produce the same accli-mation temperature as a continuous exposure.a According to several authors,a acclimation to low temperature usually tends to shift the

_lower thermal limits downward, and acclimation to high temperatures tends to shift.the lower limits upward. Since intermittent brief exposure to high temperatures can result in markedly increased re-sistance to' heat, which is not readily lost during subsequent expo-sure to low temperatures, possible increased susceptibility to reduced temperatures may result in areas where organisms regularly encounter thermal plumes.

• By testing species in the laboratory, Brett 19 noted that a slow rate of decrease in environmental temperature is of greater importance for maintaining life than a slow rate of increase. Thus, lethal cold can be more important than lethal heat as a factor affecting survival of some species exposed to thermal plumes. Deaths result-ing from the inability of fish to rapidly acclimate to !owe.ring temperatures have been reported by several authors. 20 , 2 1 When fish are exposed to altered temperatures, the duration of the exposure, _the size of the fish, and their thermal history are ex-tremely important in determining their survival.' Eggs and larvae are extremely exacting in their temperature requirements, while sub-juveniles and juveniles appear to be more eurytherma,1, and adults tend to be broadly stenoth~rmal. 3

K-9 Based upon the few* data on upper lethal temp.eratures reported in the literature,* l.arvae of temperate :marine fishes. have lower upper lethal Hmit~* th,;1n the *adults do.1~*3 . The experimentally derived*

median upper* temperature £.or temperate species* is 78. 8°F for larvae and 86 °F for the* adults. 3 Although the upper limits for larvae .

and adults differ~ the* absolut'e ranges* of temperab1res* tolerated are approximately *identical. 3 *

• The eggs of some species may be especially sensitiv~ to fluctuations of temperature. For instance, bne of the most important effects noted-in a study on eggs of the American smelt (Osmerus mord.a.x) in

,Maine was the large increases in niortality during fluctuations.in daily water temperature of as much as i2 .6F 0 as observed by Rothschild. 22 In cont:rast, striped bass eggs (Marone saxatiZis) were foun,d to survive in water whose temperature ~aried about 20F 0 daily. 2 3

• The thermal tolerances of invertebrate herbivores that are generally most active in grazing algal populations ar~ poorly known. Co~tant 24 observed a reduction in the normal complement of Delaware River invertebrates -when the daily maximum temperature was near 89.6°F.

Chironomids larvae, which are generally important as periphyton harvesters, persisted in the zone where algae were accumulating.

Other studies have noted depletions of*invertebrates in warmed water. 8 The effects of thermal discharges on b_enthic colIIIllunities have been reviewed by Stewart. 25 In general, the number and distribution of bottom organisms decrease as water temperatures increase; with a tolerance limit close to 90°F for a "balanced" population structure.

Studies of particular species of macroinvertebrates have showri that lethal temperatures vary considerably with the type. of organism. In some cases a particular species may be stenothermal at one develop-ment al stage and eurythermal at another. Thus, a large number of species are able to live at higher temperatures than tho.se at which they can repr'oduce. In a study on the York River in Virginia, Warinner and Brehnier2 6 found that the community composition and abundance of marine benthic invertebrates in the river were affected by thermal discharge over a distance of 1000 to 1300 ft from the discharge outfall, and they concluded that during the months of high normal river *temperatures there was clear evidence.of biological stress.

At power plants where benthic communities are destroyed in sullimer~*

the reverse is often the case in wiriter. 25 Massengill 27 reported

K-10 not only colonization, but also a 10% to 40% increase in standing crop in the discharge canal at the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Plant, as compared to sta.ti,ons in the Connecticut River.

Results of thermal tolerance studies conducted on species of aquatic organisms that occur in Conowingci Pond are reported in Table K-1.

The actual predictive utility of these figure*s is limited, because acclimation temperatures have not often been reported.. In most cases, however, these data should be regarded as optimistic esti-mates of upper lethal limits of the populations as a whole, because, as McCauley28 h_as stressed, lethal temperatures quoted in the liter-ature usually have been determined for individuals of the more hardy stages of postembryonic*development.

In predicting responses to increase,d temp*erature, it is important to note that a temperature need not-kill the organisms to produce profound effects on a population. For instance, brook trout were found to be comparatively slow in catching minnows at 63°F and vit-

• tually incapable of catching them at 69.8°F. This resulted in the trout virtually starving to death. 8 Many other types of sublethal effects on populations are known ~o occur.

Rates of metabolism and a.ctivities of organisms increase with in-creasing temperatures over most of the tolerated temperature range and then often drop suddenly near the upper lethal temperature, Such rates vary with different species, processes, and levels or ranges of, temperature and may also be modified by salinity and oxygen factors. The effect of elevated temperatures on a biological system is often considered to be an increase in the rate of biochemical reactions within the system by 100% to 600% for each 18F 0 increa~e, 29 although this rate does not necessarily hold for extreme tempera-

• tures. Application of this concept shows that even a slight temper-ature increase may have far-reaching effects, because a number of metabolic functions will be accelerated with a temperature increase even though the organism may not be killed outright. Fortunately, Cou.tant 8 pointed out, the actual metabolic increases upon exposure to elevated temperatures are often less than would be anticipated from strictly thermodynamic considerations where metabolic rate would typically vary directly with temperature. If the oxidative processes of an organism are independent of temperature (thermally insensitive), then the rate of oxygen utilization would be rela-tively constant over a wide temperature range, Studies involving many species of invertebrates indicate that over certain parts of a temperature range in which they can be held for prolonged periods,

K-11 Table K-1. Upper temperature limits of aquatic species found in Conowingo<Pond at Peach Bottom. based on laboratory studies and field observations Acclimation Upper critical Species" temperature temperature Criterionb oc OF oc OF Carassius auratus (juveniles) 38.0 100.4 41.0 105.8 14 hr LDso Catostomus eommersoni 25 77 31.0 87.8 T Esox masquinongy (juvenile) 30 86 34.5 94.1 T Fundulus diaphanus 15 59 33.5 92.3 Lethal threshold (salinity 14 ppt)

Fundulus heteroelitus 7.2 45 37 99 8 hr LD 5 o Fundulus heteroelitus* 40 1U4 T Fundulus heteroelitus 28 82 37 99 T Ictalurus nebulosus 34 93 37 99 T letalurus punetatus (adults) 25 77 34.5 94.1 T

/ctalurus punctatus (juveniles) 34 93 40 104 T Lepomis maeroehirus 30 86 37 99 T Mieropterus salmoides (adults) 30 86 36.5 97.7 T Mieropterus salmoides (adults) 30 86 38 100 I.

Micropterus salmoides (under-yearlings). 35 95 39 102 T Morone americanus* 4.4 40 27.8 82.0 8 hr LDso*

Morone saxatilis (adults) 32 90 T Morone saxatilis 25-27 77-:-81 Field o.bservation Morone saxatilis 4.4 40 23.9 75.0 8 hr LD 5 o Morone saxatilis (juveniles) 35 95 T Notemigonus crysoleucas 30 86 36.5 97.7 T Notropis eornutus 30 86 35.5 95.9 T Notropis cornutus 25 77 33 91 . T Notropis eornutus 30 86 36.5 97.7 T Perea flaveseens (adults)' 25 77 31.5 88.7 T Perea flaveseens (juveniles) 19 66 35 95 T Pimephales notatus 25 77 34.5 94.1 T Pimephales promelas 30 86 35 95 T Rhiniehthys atratulus 28 82 34 93 T Rhiniehthys atratulus 25 77 34.5 94.1 T Rhiniehthys atratulus 25 77 32 90 T Semotilus atromaeulatus 25 77 33. 91 T Semotilus atromaeulatus 30 86 . 35 95 T Gammarus fasciatus (amphipod) 15 59. 31.5 88.7 24 hr.LDso 0

common* names are given in Appendix H*

bT = maximum tolerated temperature.

K-12 animals tend to be metabolically independent. This kind of response is intermediate between the two extremes. In general, this thermal range of metabolic ins*ensitivity coincides with the temperature regime of the animal's habitat. For such species, slight changes in their thermal environment would have little effect as long as such changes remained within the zone of metabolic insensitivity.

However, greater changes could.ha,ve a pronounced effect.

The temperature requirements for reproduction in many species are confined to narrower ranges than for other physiological func-tions.3,29 Most aquatic animals breed in a very restricted temper-ature range. Photo-period. effects and rising temperatures in the spring induce development of the gonads, and actual spawning takes place when a certain temperature level is reached, This value varies for different species, and in some species. the whole process may be reversed.! I A temperature stimulus of some kind is often required for inducing sexual activity in aquatic animals. This threshold is often quite critical and may occur with a temperature rise 19 of only 1 or 2C 0

• Brandhorst30 believed that spawning activity in herring was induced by the suddenness of the temperature change rather than by the mag-nitude of the change per -se. Generally, low temperatures during pre-spawning periods delay spawning, and higher temperatures hasten it.3,19 Most fish have.been shown to have a preferred temperature range. 31 This range is generally higher than ambient wat~r temperatures during the cooler months in the temperate zone, with t~e result that fish are attracted to thermal discharges at these times. As ambient temperatures drop in autumn, warm-water fish are believed to follow their preferred temperatures toward the discharge rather toward their usual wintering areas. In Long Island Sound, blue fish schooled in the thermal plume of.the Northport plant rather than follow their usual migration to deeper oceanic,w~ters offshore. 32 As ambient temperatures drop further, or storms dissipate the thermal plume more rapidly, or the power plant ceases operation temporarily, the thermal drop to ambient levels may not be toler~

able, and large numbers of fish may be killed. 33, 34 Mass mortal-ities of animals caused by a rapid drop. in winter temperature or-during severe winters are well documented. 2 1,35-41 Fish attracted _to discharge canals and in residence there for sev-eral months may be induced by higher temperatures to spawn earlier

K-13 than might otherwise be expected. 8 Premature spawning*can have many repercussions in the receiving water, ranging from loss of progeny due to lack of proper food t*o species changes brought about by the overly dominant large warm-water fry.

• The problem is not unique to discharge canals but occ~rs iri cooling ponds and mixed water bodies wherever the water temperature is elevated.a . .

Few of the theoretically predicted changes in reproductive schedules have been studied at power plants, and observations are generally limited to evidence that premature spawning can and does occur. For instance, white suckers (Catostorrrus aommersoni) spawned prematurely in the discharge canal of the Martin's Creek Power Plant on the Delaware River. 42 Spawning activities were observed earlier there than elsewhere (although specific times were not given), Young of the year were active in the spring ip the canal and apparently left the warmer water.as the temperature rose in summer. Very small fry of several other species (rearing determined.them to be principa:liy minnow species) were found in the canal prior to normal spawning times. They probably were spawned in the*canal, instead of.having passed through the condensers, although this was not certain.a

• The attraction of fish to warm areas associated with thermal dis-charges may cause additional problems. For instance, fish attracted to warm disch~rge canals of power pl_ailts, and forced by their. own temperature selection behavior*to remain there, subject themselves to speeded metabolic rates compared to their seasonal.norm in other parts of their environment.

At the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Cq~pany's plant on the Con-*

necticut River, Merriman et ai. 4 3 have identified ".skinny fish" in the winter accumulations of brown bullheads (Iatal:ux>us nebuZosus) and white catfish (IataZurus aatus) in the discharge canal. The

• weight-length ratio, or '.'condition factor, 11 exhibited significant

.declines thr~ughout the winter months, Fish tagged early in the.

winter of 1968-1969 and recaptured four months later had lost an average of 20% of their weight, some having lost 60%. Comparisons of tagged and untagged fish in weekly collections indicated that this marked weight loss was not the result of the tagging but was indicative of the resident canal population as a whole. Populations in the cooler river water outside the canal also showed some condi-tion loss, l>ut* at a ~uch slower rate. *The poorer condition was also identifiable in these two species of fish caught in the canal in the summer. Channel catfish (IataZurus punatatus), on the other hand, showed no such decline in condition at any season.

K-14 Significance of the weight losses for ultimate survival of the popu-lations in the Connecticut River has yet to be established, but the persistence of the effect beyond the winter was demonstrated through tagging and recovery studies. 8 Early fall returns from fish tagged in the canal the previous winter revealed that these fish had not made Up their past Winter's weight loss over the SUilDller.

As a corollary to feeding rate and quantity of food consumed, the effect of temperature upon the growth of fish is an important factor in considering the effects of heated effluents but is one that has been studied essentially using freshwater fishes in the laboratory *

. The general relation between.growth rate of fish and temperature has been discussed by several authors. 19,4 4 In general, reduction in.

growth rate can be expected with increasing temperature above optimum for the species, especially if the availabLlity of food does not increase, This situation is the result of reduced food conversion efficiency, which in some cases may be intensified by behaviorial changes such as reduced effectiveness as a predator or reduced appetite.

b. Mechanical and Pressure Changes Organisms often sustain mechanical breakage that generally results in death when they are drawn with cooling water through the sequence of screening, pumping, pressure changes, and outfall turbulence.

Mechanical effects have only recently been studied separately from other effects at operating power stations, and most results are available only in the form of quite tentative progress.reports.

Ayers et al. 45 observed a small decreas~, about 15%, in numbers of phytoplankton organisms during their passage through the cooling system of the Waukegan power plant on Lake Michigan, Since thermal damage would not destroy the carcasses, some type of mechanical destruction must have been responsible for loss of _cells.* Scanty evidence suggests that from 15% to 100% of the zooplankton organisms

~ay be killed, depending largely upon organism size. Losses of about 30% during passage through the condenser may be representative.

c, Impingement A major problem encountered during the operation of several power plants has been that of fish mortality caused by impingement on the fine mesh s~reens used to filter _out d*ebris that couid c~use damage

• ---------------------~---------**-**-------*---- ---**-

K-15 /

to the. circulating water systetl)., This problem has been documented best at the Indian Point Unit No, 1 Station on the Hudson River.

The available information concerning these fish kills has been compi,led by Consolidated Edison Company,46 and an analysis of the information has be.en reported and summarized by the Division of Compliance, Di rec t~r of Regulation, of the AEC. 4 7 The following discussion is based on the information contained in these documents, In March, 1963, fish entering the open intake forebays were subse-quently killed and collected on the traveling screens, Striped bass, tomcod, and white perch comprised most of the fish that were killed. Apparently these kills included both juvenile and.adult fish, including large striped bass. Efforts to reduce kills using air bubble screens, pneumatic sound sources, and smaller mesh mechanical bar=iers in front of the forebays were not effective in solving the

• problem. Subsequent efforts, including alterations of the physical structures surrounding the intakes and alterations of the. intensity of the light, were not effective either.

In June, 1965, a correlati_on between additions of sodium hypochlo.,..

rite and kills of large fish was noted, .The point of addition of the sodium hypochlorite was moved behind the traveling screens, Following this change, large fish were no longer collected on the*

screens, Apparently, the sodium hypochlorite was either killing the larger fish directly or, more likely, was reduci~g the fish's ability to avoid the intake, The actual effectiveness of the fish protection efforts during the period from 1963 to 1966_as described above cannot be ascertained because adequ.s.te data were not collected during this pe.riod. The_

only effort that produced desirable results was the change in pro-cedure associated with adding sodium hypochlorite to the circulating water.

During the spring and summer of 1967, fine mesh (0.375-in. square wire mesh) screens were designed to eliminate the possibility of fish entering the forebays. This modification was the result of testing during January and March 1967 which showed a significant reduction in fish counted on *the traveling screen of one foLebay fitted with a fixed screen at its mo*sth. According to Consolidated Edison, this modification we.s effective unti_l the winter of 1969, although fish count data to support this co:'ltention were not included.

K-16 Substantial fish kills were observed during January of 1970 and were thought to be the result of openings \t::>der the fixed screens.

This conclusion is supported by the fact that a significant re-duction of the number of fish counted on the traveling screens occurred after the openings were eliminated. This point was graph-ically illustrated in Fig. 6 of Consolidated Edison's report con-cerning the fish kills at Indian Point.46 These data indicate that the ma,gnitude of the fish kill was reduced from highs in excess of 16,000 to 18,000 fish per screen washing on February 1-3 to sus-tained counts .of less than 50 fish per washing after February 6.

However, collections of fish on the traveling screens when the fixed scr*eens are in place do not adequately represent the extent of the fish kill, especially during periods when dead fish were netted from in front of the fixed screens and consequently could not have had a chance to be included in the counts of fish on the

• traveling screens. For instance, when the traveling screen count was reported to total 388 *for March 6 and 7, there were approxi-mately 120,000 fish netted in front of the fixed screens (Table 3, Ref. 46). In essence, the impingement problem was simply shifted from the traveling screens to the fixed fine mesh screens.

The precise cause of the impingement problem is not completely understood~ All the fish kills *at Indian Point Unit 1 appear to have been associated with the plant's .condenser cooling water system. Fish apparently are caught against the screens by the force of the river water drawn into the plant; once caught, they are un-able to escape and eventually succumb to exhaustion, although the precise c*ause of death is unknown. A number of possible factors contributing to the problem have been examined. The wharf and re-lated structures located over the intakes may contribute by appear-ing to provide refuge for fish.* Another factor may be the existence in wintertime of warmer river water in the vicinity of the plant~

caused by discharge of heated river water from the plant.

The.most important contributing factor is. the capturing capacity of the large volume o.f water withdrawn from the river at high ve-locities. The only action that really seems to reduce the level of mortality is a reduction in the intake :velocity, Present evi-dence indicates that a reduction in the water velocity to 0.5 fps may greatly reduce the fish kill problem (Fig. K-3).

There is a definite seasonal variation in the magnitude of the kill, the highest mortalities occurring in the winter months and.the lowest mortalities in the summer. Apparently, this is due to re-duced swimming ability of many fishes at the very low (34°F) winter temperatures.

i lI 80 70 I ,---

CURVE RESULTING FROM DATA OBtAINED DUR1NG 60 FALL OF 1965~

RESULTS OF DATA * *

• 40 OBTAINED IN SPRING OF 1966

~ }

I/

• 30 . * *

• 20

/

• 10

... ..../ *V

~o 0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 INTAKE CURRENT VE:LOCI TY (ft/sec)

Fig. K-3. Fish count per screen vs. intake current.velocity.

K-18 These kills have included some 23 species, white perch being by far the predominant species and accounting for over 60% of winter fish kills. However, because of the large number of fish involved, sub~

stantial numbers of other species are also killed. For instance, from data obtained by the Raytheon Corporation, a consultant for Consolidated Edi,son, the total of fish killed from November 6, 19'69, to January 11, 1970, was ~,310,345 fish; 137,649 of these were striped bass. 4 7 The fish that have been collected on the intake screens, identified, and measured'+ 6 are generally longer than 45 to . 50 mm *. Smaller fish are known to exist in the area; therefore, the minimum screenable

. size (at least for striped bass) must be *in the neighborhood of 40 to 45 mm. Smaller fish would be expected to go through the plant.

d. Entrainment*

The importance of entrainment is related to the relative quantity of organisms withdrawn from the water body, the level of mortality incurred, the ecological role of the entrained organisms, and the reproductive strategy of the species involved. The importance of these factors will be species dependent. Consequently, detailed considerations of the effects of entrainment must be done sepa-rately for each species.

Mortality of entrained organisms is caused by mechanical damage, (including impingement), thermal shock, and (at times) chemicals discharged into the cooling water. Mortality caused by other

• factors associated with plant operations would, of course, be additive.

(1) Decomposers As previously indicated, bacteria are generally tolerant of exposure to changes in temperature that exceed the temperature rise-of most power plant cooling water and are also unlikely to be physically damaged as a result *of entrainment.. The only extensive bacterial mortality that might be encountered would be when chlorine is added to the circulating water to control fouling in the condensers. *

(2) Producers Entrainment effects on algal populations have been determined by examining the ability of the algae to produce organic matter. Using

K-19 this method in studies on the York River, Virginia, Warinner and Brehmer 26 showed that the responses of phytoplankton to entrainment depended on the ambient stream temperature as well as on the change of temperature imposed by the condensers. At low winter tempera-tures (32° to 50°F)*, temperature rises increased production, During the summer (temperatures 59° to 70°F), slight additional tempera-ture increases increased production, but larger increases (greater than 10F 0 ) depressed it, The greater tHe temperature rise in summer, the greater was the depression of the affected plankton's ability to photosynthesize, Similar results were shown by Morgan and Stross 48 for the Chalk Point Plant on the Patuxent estuary_off Chesapeake Bay.- In this study, temperature rises of about 14,5F 0 stimulated photosynthesis when natural water temperatures were 60.°F or cooler and inhibited photosynthesis when temperatures were 68°F or warmer. Passage through the condensers at times, however, contributed additional damage (perhaps mechanical or chemical) that nullified stimulation by temperature rise at cool temperatures and increased inhibition at warmer ambient levels. Return of phytoplankton to the cool temperatures of the mixed estuary at the end of the discharge canal did not allow recovery of photosynthetic ability. In relating the observed changes in productivity to the entire estuary, the authors noted that reductions in productivity might occur only if the rate of photosynthesis is not nutrient limited, They concluded that, since Stottlemyer 49 found that nutrient limitation was only a sporadic occurrence, reduction in photosynthesis by another factor (the power plant) must, therefore, be responsible for any reduction in the amount of material available for passage through the food chain.

In contrast, another study showed that rates of photosynthesis were similar for power plant intake and effluent water when incubated at the prevailing temperature for each source, although some dif-ferences were .significant. 5 Algae in heated water had a higher rate of photosynthesis than algae incubated at ambient temperatures.

The highest rates of photosynthesis occurred at temperatures be-tween*80.60 and 91.4°F. The highest rate observed was for effluent water incubated at 86.9°F. No consistent reduction of photosyn-thesis was observed in the vicinity of the discharge canal during field studies.

K-20 (3) Consumers Entrainment analysis of the coolant system should include an esti-mate of zooplankt_on mortality and the potential for a rapid recovery downstream of the power plant. Such an analysis was carried out in May 1964 at the Paradise Generating Station at Green River, Kentucky.SO Biologists of the Tennessee Valley Authority found that the volume of zooplankton was drastically reduced during passage through the single-pass cooling system of the plant, How.-

ever, organisms that bypassed the plant were found to reproduce at an accelerated pace in water that was warmed by mixing with a thermal discharge, 16F 0 above an ambient of 82°F (F.ig. K-4).

Coutant 8 observed that decreases in zooplankton volume could not be attrib_utable to thermal shock effects alone, Other factors

. might include mechanical destruction in the condenser or piping system and predation upon carcasses and weakened individuals at or near the*plan-t discharge, The Green River reports shed no light on these processes. 8 Heinle 51 conducted an extensive series of laboratory and field experiments to determine the effect of condenser passage on zoo-*

plankton in the brackish Patuxent estuary in the vicinity of the Chalk Point power station of Potomac Electric Power Company. In-stead of examining survival alone, he observed the reproduc,tive success in-subsequent laboratory culture of populations that had experienced the thermal, mechanical, and chemical shocks of con-denser passage. Entrained populations of some copepods were gen-erally not as fit for reproduction as control groups, even when the exposure temperatures were below the laboratory-determined lethal temperatures. He attributed part of this effect to *chlorination - .

of cooling water as a normal operating routine at the plant, While effects of _condenser passage were identified by this research, the methodology and the lack of control over such variables as chlori-nation yielded results of uncertain predictive utility, Within the estuary, population densities of the zooplankton organisms remained high despite high rates of natural predation and the addi-tional losses at.tributable to the power plant, Certainly, the reproductive potential of the entire population exceeded the effects of condenser passage.

• Normandeau 52 identified clear effects of condenser passage on summer zooplankton and phytoplankton at the Merrimack Generating Station, Samples taken above the inlet and in the discharge canal

I II 0.8 100 I'()

E 0.7 ZOOPLANKTON

- 0 z 0.6 95 0 -

I-

~

z 0.5

<(

_J IJ..

0 w.

a::

a.. 0.4  ::>

0 0:: 90 I-

<( I 0

I w 0:::

• 1 N I- w ~

I  !

<(

LL 0.3 ~

a.. ....N 0 ~

Cl TEMPERATURE w w w I-

~ 0.2 I- 85

> <(

_J 1 w 0

> 0.1 I

\~. I RIVER FLOW .

0 80 106 102 98 94 90 88 GREEN RIVER (mile po.int )

Fig. K~4. Zooplankton variation with water temperature in the Green River,. Ky., near the Paradise Steam Plant.

--~- '""------. *- *- *- **--'"""" <,-*~-** ,, - * ~ * - ~ w-----.** --~ -----*--~,~-*-.... s< * ~***--.., .. * ..,,._,..,... * - - - ,,__..,. ~ - - -.. ~--.,... ~u* "°"' - * * - - ~-~*"'- ,..--- --- _,.,...,. ~-- - .,._ * ..,- ******* .,._ ""\'*~**** .. - **'"'- **--,-.

• K-22 indicated a reduction in population density of nearly all zoo-plankton and diatoms after passing-through the power plant. These effects were definitely related to absolute temperature, being discernible principally when the condenser cooling water was ele-vated in July to temperatures above 100°F. The increase in temper-ature by itself was not the apparent causative factor; rather, mortality was evidenced when the temperature attained exceeded the tolerance limits of the species.

• The zooplankton population de-pressions were also evident in the mixing zone in the Merr-imack River downstream of the plant, although cooling water was a small percentage of the total river flow at this point. 52 On the other hand, other studies indicate little or no damage fol-lowing entrainment. Adams 53 reported that the discharge canal of the Humboldt Bay Nuclear Plant on the California coast was a fav-orable site for natural sett!ng of native oysters (Os-tr.ea lu:r'ida),

cockles (Cardium adP.bis), little-neck clams (Protothaaa staminae),

butter clams (Sax_idomus giganteus), *gaper clams (Tresus nuttalli),

and about half a.dozen other bivalves. The net flow in the canal was always outward because of domination by the cooling water flow, and complete evacuation of the canal, as revealed by dye studies, took place in less than 3 hr. Therefore, some of the free~swimming stages of these bivalves had to pass alive through the condenser system of the power plant in order to colonize the canal. Similar successful passage must have occurred at the Chalk Point Power Station on the Pat:uxent estuary to account for.high densities of invertebrates found in the discharge canal. 54, 55

• Profitt found that after the passage of minnows through condensers of a power plant, several hundred were seen dead and dying along the banks of the effluent canal. 5 6 In another study, preliminary observations obtained at the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Plant on the Connecticut River indicated that larval river herring (Alosa spp.) were abie to successfully pass through condensers in July in which the temperature was raised to 93°F. All larvae were judged to be in good condition following the rapid thermal shock and col-lection by plankton net in the plant's discharge canal. 57 However, more detailed studies 58 at this site found that no larval or juve-nile fish of the nine species which were entrained in the condenser cooling-water system of the plant survived when the temperature' of the canal water exceeded 86°F.

In contrast to these findings, Kerr 59 found that juveriile striped bass and Chinook salmon that passed thrqugh the condenser system

K-23 of a power plant had generally h:j.gh survival. Unfortunately the ambient water_ temperature was not reported. Kerr acknowledged the**

fact that the small striped bass would "readily go into a state of shock" during the experiments, and as Coutant 8 pointed out, the data from Kerr's study have little predictive value for application to other power plants.

In connection with Kerr's observation that .the juvenile striped bass would go into a state of shock, it is important to recognize that the considerable mortality that may result from such shock would not be observed in laboratory studies because death is not from physiological causes. Thermal death, with a *end point such as {for fish) cessation of beating of the opercula as is often used in laboratory studies, may not be the most pertinent ecolog-ical effect of acute thermal shock to organisms exposed to elevated temperatures. Heat death of cold-blooded organisms has been ob-served to follow a common pattern which includes, in sequence, loss of equilibrium, coma, and physiological death, These observations have been made with several species of fish and with amphibians and reptiles; they probably hold, in.essence, for lower forms as well. Th_e early stages of heat death, while not "death" in them-selves, may lead t.o death through immobilization in the are_a of adverse temperature (which may prolong exposure until death results) or through stimulation of predatory activity upon the.heat-injured organisms. Both results have been observed in the field and in laboratory experiments.a A concept of a critical exposure to heat, which causes equilibrium loss, similar-to that proposed by Cowels and Bogert, 60 would seem to be of ,paramount significance in understanding the relations of aquatic populations to thermal shock in condenser cooling water

_of a power station, as was noted by_Mihursky and Kennedy. 61 In-reacreasingly, the demise of animal populations is recogni~ed to be not absolutely dependent upon the physiological death limits of_

individuals; it involves broad ecological considerations such as breeding densities and predator-prey relationships, Equilibrium loss in the natural environment is a critical occurrence for the survival of an organism because it greatly increases the organism's susceptibility to predation.

. ---"*"-"'""'--*~~ -----*...,_,-.-*-*-*,---- ..,......_....,.,,,~-.~.... P*.,..,..._,,...,,_,_~-.,,.- "~*--*~..--.-,__.-,.... --~,-....~*"'--""""""'_.,....,,...~...... ---~.;-*--~..,....,._._..........,. *-~ *. .._ ......,.. _,.,..._.,~.. ~-'"'.. """""' ___ . .....,~.______.... ..*.,~.~*....,.-._.,,...~~""*"~ ....,,,,,._.,.,..,~-*..-,-*. ,.,.,s.. "

K-24 The effect of equilibrium loss in providing stimulatory cues to predators may be a particularly.important feature in fish and other animals shocked by condenser cooling water. Mossman 62 c.ites sev-eral points of evidence that suggest release of predator attack by any behavior associated with weakness. Coutant 8 has specificaily studied the effects of acute thermal shock and found that the vul-nerability of thermally shocked juvenile salmonids to predation by larger fish increased. When both shocked and control fish were offered simultaneously under laboratory conditions, the shocked fish were found to be selectively preyed upon by larger fish. Rel-ative vulnerability of shocked fish to predation increased with duration of sublethal exposure to lethal temperatures. Effects were also shown well below doses causing equilibrium losses.

Confirmation of.the potential importance of predation on shocked organisms in the field situations .of thermal discharges can be found in the many references to predators being attracted to points of thermal discharge. 8 . Although preference for a particular tem-*

perature range may be the predominant attractant for some orga-nisms, it hardly would apply to concentrations of fish-eating gulls. 6 3 Neill 64 reported int.ensive feeding by fish on entrained zooplankton in the outfall area of a power plant on Lake Monona.

Young-of-the-year bluegills congregated at the periphery of the*

discharge plume and fed on zooplankton. Several large long-nose gar, their stomachs di~tended by an abundance of zooplankton, were taken in and near the discharge *. Bigmouth buffalo, yellow bass, bluegills, black crappies, and brook silversides caught near the outfalls .

were I suspected .

of feeding heavily on zooplankton, al-though confirming data were not collected. Abundant zooplankton was entrained by this plant in cooling water taken from 100 m off-shore and 5.2 m below the water surface. The temperature rise of 18f 0 may have killed or debilitated the zooplankton sufficiently that predation upon them was easier in the discharge area than in the unheated water of the lake ..

Obviously, absolute statements concerning the mortality of orga-nisms drawn through any given plant cannot be made, but the possi-bility is *high that some fraction of the organisms entrained will be killed or damaged by entrainment.

e. Chemicals

• (1) *Chlorine Chlorine is used in many generating facilities to rid the cooling

K-25 water piping of bacteria, fungi, and algae. These treatments are generally periodic "slugs" of high concentration (perhaps once a day, depending upon the power -station), The treatments affect natural populations as well as the coatings of biological materials on the condenser tubes.

Merkens6 5 found that at a pH of 7.0, 0.08 ppm of *residual chlorine killed half of his test fish in 7 days,

• Z1.llich 66 found chlorh nated sewage effluent to be toxic to fathead minnows at residual chlorine concentrations of 0.04 to 0,05 ppm, Basch 67 found that 50% of a population of rainbow trout could tolerate 0.23 ppm for only 96 hr, Arthur and Eaton6 8 found that half of a population of the invertebrat.e GammaPus pseudolirrmaeus survived 96 hr at a con-centration of 0.22 ppm and that reproduction was reduced when chronic concentrations (for 15 weeks) were maintained at 0.0034 ppm. They also found t,hat the highest concentr*ation that produced no effect on the life cycle of the fathead minnow was 0,016 ppm, Sprague and Dr*ury 69 showed an avoidance response by rainbow trout to free chlorine levels of 0.001 ppm.

Mortalities of phytoplankton organisms in.passing through power plant cooling systems (or loss of the ability to .photosynthesize) have recently been attributed to toxic chemicals rather than to heat or mechanical damage.

_(2) Sodium Sulfate The concentrations of sodium sulfate required to kill-50% of the amphipods tested were 2380, 1110, and 880 ppm for exposure times of 1, 2, and 4 days, respectively, Concentrations that produced

. similar effects in zooplankton and fishes were in exc~ss of 500 ppm

• (1-day exposure time) , 7D The values quoted represent the lowest concentrations at whiGh sodium sulfate toxicity* has b_een 4emon-strated in hard waters (similar to Conowingo Pond).

(3) Sodium -Phosphate The toxicity of phosphates has been discussed by McKee and Wolf, 7 1 Daphnia magna was the .most sensitive organism discussed, being

• affected by levels above 50 ppm. Most other organisms were much less sensitive. If pho~phates are the limiting nutrient in a water body, discharge of excessive cqncentrations of phosphates will result in algae blooms, In eutrophic waters, these blooms may consist in large part of toxic blue-green algae.

. . -------~----~...-.---"~-....,-**-*~""'...-**-~---**** *--~ ...-~.. -~-----~-.,-.. *---~- __ _... ___ ~--**~*'--* ___.._......... -***- *- _. ..,...... _____ ,._,...._,._,........,.~,,--....

~ ~ . ...,.,... _"_,,. _____~. ----~*-*~- ...~'"--'"--,.----- ........... -~~ ~ -.............. -... *---**--~ -- -~-- ..

, ..__ *-"*-~---,, -- ~.--. .. ~,-

K-26 (4) Copper Oyster meats produced near the outfall of Chalk Point Plant in the Patuxent River accumulated enough copper to make them unfit for human consumption and to disqualify the area for the production

.of marketable oysters. 72 Generally, copper emissions from power plants are on the order of several ppb. . These levels are lower than the natural concentrations in most healthy freshwater lakes and rivers. Thus, toxicity per se is not expected to be a problem.

f. *Dissolved* Oxygen The following analysis is derived from a recent review by Coutant. 8 Since warm water holds less oxygen in solution than cool water, increasing coolant water temperatures by 21F 0 , as predicted.for the Peach Bottom facility during condenser passage, will theoreti-cally result in some loss of oxygen, which may subsequently in-fluence aquatic organisms. For example, the concentration of oxygen in water in equilibrium with air at 82,4°F is 7.9 ppm, whereas at lll.2°F the saturation concentration is 6,1 ppm, Another factor theoretically tending to lower dissolved oxygen concentrations in the water passing through a condenser is the partial vacuum existing at the discharge end of. the condenser, This partial vacuum results

• from the fact that the discharge end of the condenser lies above the hydraulic gradient, This situation is common to all steam plants. *Vacuum pumps are often installed in the cooling circuit to remove any accumulated air, These theoretical considerations have been_examined in a number of studies .at operating power etations throughout the world,. Alabaster and Downing, 17 after examining the literature and conducting their own studies in Britain, acknowledged that the oxygen content of water. used for direct cooling may change slightly in its passag_e through electrical generating stations, This appeared to be partly due to the turbulent flow in the effluent outfall causing water unsaturated with oxygen to pick up this gas, while supersaturated water lost it ..

Dissolved oxygen analyses of samples taken by Alabaster and Downing 17 showed that most unheated water was not saturated, that there was either a slight rise or little change in concentration in the heated water discharged from the condensers, and that, as a result, the*

effluent was supersaturated with respect to oxygen (and other gases).

These authors made the further (very pertinent) observation that

K-27 the changes were generally small compared with those occurring in most natural waters through plant photosynthesis and respiiation and through the oxidation of organic effluents.

Adams has reported similar analyses /lt California power stations. 5 3

.. Measurements of dissolved oxygen at intake and outfall points showed that dissolved-oxygen concentrations were not decreased in passing through the cooling water system. Rather, the water merely became supersaturated with oxygen. As the temperature of the ef-fluent dropped in the mixing zone, saturation values dropped corre-spondingly, with little .loss of dissolved oxygen.

Dissolved oxygen surveys performed in _late summer at the Northport Plant on Long Island Sound showed a mean decrease of 12.6% in dis-solved oxygen levels from intake to discharge.3 2 Studies have bee:µ performed which indicate that once-through cooling towers may significantly increase the concentration of dissolved oxygen* in the effluent when intake water is unsaturated. *Thus, in water bodies where oxygen concentrations fall considerably below saturation levels in late summer and early autumn, cooling towers ma; provide some benefit as a result of the increased aeration. 3 .

Once the cooling.water has entered the main body of water, rates of oxygen demand by organic materials (both living and decomposing) will be increased because of the higher temperature. In waters that are heavily loaded with decomposing organic matter, this ad-ditional demand can exceed the rate of reoxygenation through the water surface (from the air), and d~ssolved oxygen levels could fall below those normally expected.7 4

g. Induced Circulation A little-recognized source of ecological change is the induction of new current patterns by water flows of .a once-through cooling system, Many patterns of distribution of organisms are intimately related to density (thermal) stratification, currents, concentra--

tiori gradients, and the like, as any textbook of freshwater or marine ecology describes. The withdrawal and subsequent release (often elsewhere) of *quantities of water approximating 1/2 to 1 million gpm by power stations will unquestionably alter some of the existing patterns. These alterations can be detrimental or

K-28 beneficial depending partly upon the degree of thought that goes into their planning. Circulation patterns at the intakes may ac-tually attract organisms into an area where they become susceptible to impingement or entrainment. At discharges, induced circulation patterns may simulate tributary streams and stimulate migration, spawning, or other functions associated with tributaries. Most of

• the speculated influences have. not been documented, largely due to lack of adequate study.

h. Radiatio~ Effects I

Although there is a voluminous amount of literature relating to the effects of radiation on organisms, very few studies have been con-ducted on the effects of chronic low-level radiation on riatural aquatic populations. The more recent and pertinent studies have been reviewed by Auerbach *.et al. 7 5 and Templeton, Nakatani, and Held. 76 In general, the results of the studies summarized in these two reviews support the prediction that radiation effects would be difficult to* detect at the dose levels normally encountered around power reactors:

"in assessing the effect of low doses of ionizing radiation, sophisticated means of detection must be used and sensitive biological endpoints are necessary as criteria for ascertaining radiation damage. In experimental practice when dose rates are lowered to 1 rad per day or less, the number of factors affecting the organism are sufficient to mask any *effects that might be present. Such commonly used endpoints as survivorship, fecundity, growth, development, and suscepti-bility to infection have not as yet *been shown to be unequivo-cally affected by such low dose rates. Evaluating the impact of doses of less than 1 rad per day on organisms and popula-tions under field conditions is a challenge of considerable magnitude." 75

• Aquatic organisms are exposed to both internal and external radia-tion. The dose from external radiation, termed submersion dose,

• is due to the radiation from radionuclides in the organisms' sur-roundings. For planktonic or pelagic organisms, this part of the total dose results from radionuclides dissolved in the wa.ter. For benthic and epibenthic organisms; part of the external dose comes from the radionuclides dissolved in the water and another part comes

K-29 from radionuclides adsorbed onto or concentrated in their substrate.

The radiation dose resulting from dissolved radiori.uclides can be calculated if the concentrations of the various radionuclides in the water are known~.

However, the external dose resulting from radionuclides that are in the substrate of the organism is much more difficult to deter-mine. This difficulty arises from the various 1behavioral charac-teristics of the organisms involved which modify the magnitude of.

the dose from radiation originating in the substrate. In addition, the level of contamination of the substrate by a radionuclide may vary with physical parameters within the environment. For example, mariganese-54 adsorbs onto the substrate during periods when fresh water is predominant.a~ _Indian _Point on the Hudson River but is released during periods*when salt water moves into the area. 77 *As 1 a result of these complications, the external dose from radionu-clides concentrated in the substrate is difficult to estimate from the projected releases.

In addition to radiation from external sources, aquatic organisms are exposed to radiation from radionuclides within their tissues, Doses resulting from this source of exposure are generally much great~r than doses from external sources~ except perhaps for ben-thic or epibenthic organisms living in association with substrates in which radionuclides have been concentrated. Organisms accu~u-late radionuclides eith~r directly from the-water thro~gh epithelial tissue or indirectly by assimilation of their food. Transient re-leases of radionuclides into the environment are followed by tran-sient peaks of radioactivity along the food-chain pathways. 75 Knowledge of these pathways arid of the rates of assimilation and turnover of radionuclides is essential for prediction of time-dependent concentrations in the biota. However, chronic releases will result in steady-state concentrations in the biota, and in these instances, concentration factors can be used to approximate the eventual equilibrium levels of* radioactivity. 3 Consequently, concentration factors *such as those* given in Sect. V.D.4 can be used to estimate the internal doses the various org~nisms will

• receive if continually exposed to ra~ionuclides released by power plant operations.

K-30

i. Combination*Effects

{1) Direct.Effects An important aspect of the response of a population to abnormal mortality is associated with the manner in which the density of the population is controlled, The degree of crowding (density) and the patt~rn of dispersion o{ individuals (whether random, uni-form, or clumped together in a limited area) are especially impor-tant in determining the degree of interaction between individuals of the same and of other species. Some population~ tend to be self-limited in that the rate of growth decreases as the density increases. Such populations tend to level off in density before saturation, thus assuring that adequate resources are maintained.

Other populations are not self-limited but tend to grow in geo~

• metric sequence unless checked by forces out'side the population:.

Such populations are generally limited by habitat resources or predation.

The ~eneration time is another important factor in determining the response of populations to mortality, Species with very short generation times (hours or days), whose*populations are regulated by density-dependent factors such as resource limitations, wquld be able to maintain population levels in spite of increased mor-tality. Population maintenance in species with longer generation times (months or years) would require increased reproductive capa-bility in the survivors in order* to maintain the population level.

On the other hand, a species whose population is regulated by factors other than its own density, e_,g~, predation or competition with other species, could not compensate for changes in survivorship of the other individuals in the population, Consequently* a sus-tained removal of a significant portion of such species would ulti-mately eliminate the population in the area, provided of course that there was no additional source of reproductive stock moving into the area from elsewhere.

The possible effects of increasing mortality to a population were examined by Jensen 78 in conjunction with a detailed study of a population of brook trout, He used a mathematical model for yield which was fitted to the extensive data bn a trout population, His results showed that a 5% increase in mortality of young-of-the-year decreased the yield of the trout fishery, In addition, an increase

K-31 of mortality to 50% o.f young-of-the-year caused the population to become extinct, although the effect did not become apparent for several years because of normal variations in reproduction and y;i.eld.

(2) Indirect Effects Less obvious effects niight accompany chronic exposure to increases in temperature (or radiation and chemical stresses from plant re-leases).* These effects could al~er food conversion, growth rate, or reproductive potential and might alter the interspecific rela-tionships. For example, changes within the plankton populations have a potential for causing changes-in populations of.other trophic levels. The extent and importance of such changes would be corre-lated with the ecological function of the organisms involved and

-the relative densities of their populations.

• The importance of this type Qf consideration can be seen in the following hypothetical example. Phytoplankton species A is the principal food of zooplankton species B, which is. the 'principal food for early lar_val stages of a dominant fish species. A power plant in the area begins to operate and increases the surface temperature several degrees over ambient, Because of poor light penetration in the slightly turbid water, the principal zone of phytoplankton growth is in the upper, thermally altered layer.

Phytoplankton.,species X .is better fitted to grow and reproduce in the warmer water and replaces species A. However, Xis a poor-quality food for zooplankton B. As a consequence, the population of B zooplankton decreases, and the food supply for.the larval fish is diminished, .causing significant reduction in their yearly production. As the numbers of these fish decline through several seasons, .the reproductive capacity of the population declines, and they exert less and less of an influence in the area. If this species were a top carnivore, changes in its population could re-

• sult in changes in the populations of other fish species as well.

Changes in these populations would also have their effects.

The above hypothetical example demonstrates one manner in which indirect effects of pollutants* may result in extensive changes in the biological composition of a body of water. The extent of these effects depends on several factors, which must be known to make accurate predictions of the consequences of operation of any power plant.

K-32 (a) The species composition of the affected area. must be known and the relationships between various species. understood.

7 (b) The spatial and temporal distribution of the species in the area must be known.

(c) The relationships between each species and. its physical environment must be understood.

(d) The sensitivity of the various species to alterations in their chemical and physical habitat must be known.

All this information would be needed to*produce reliable predictions of the consequences of plant operations on the biota. Many reasons,"

including lack of time, resources, and adequate sampling techniques, preclude the acquisition of the necessary information. At Peach Bottom, the complex interactions, of the biota with each other, the .

unusual circulation, the natural cycles of nutrients and temperature, and* the presence of several power generating facilities produce a staggering comb*ination of possibilities. Unfortunately, even if all of the .relationships were known, reliable biological predictions of the indirect effects. of the operation of .the facility could not be developed. with the present state of the* art. As a result; assess~

ment of these aspects of environmental effects of plant operation will be necessarily qualitative. However, over an*extended period of time, these effects may have far greater consequences than the direct effects on the biota.

K-33 REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX K

.1. L. P. Parrish, Marine, Estuarine, and Anadromous Fishes, pp. 52-82 in TeniperatUl'e and Aquatic Life., Laboratory Invest-igation No. 6, Technical Advisory and Investigations Branch, FWPCA, 1967.

2. E. Naylor, Effects of Heated Effluents on Marine and Estuarine Organisms, pp.63-103 in Advances in Marine Biology, Vol, 3, F. S. Russell (ed.), Academic Press, New York,. 1965,

3. O. P. De Sylva, Theoretical Considerations on the Effects of Heated Effluents on Marine Fish, pp, 229-293 in Biological Aspects of Thermal Pollution, P, A. Krenke! and. F. L. Parker (eds.), Vanderbilt University Press, Nashville, Tennessee, 1969.

4. L.A. Resi, Bacteria, pp. 19-29 in TemperatUl'e and Aquatic Life., Laboratory Investigation No. 6, Technical Advisory and Investigations Branch, FWPCA, 1967,

5. D. H. Hamilton, D. A. Flemer, C. W. Keefe, and J, A. Mihursky, Power Plants: Effects of Chlorination on Estuarine Primary Production, Science 169: 197-198* (1970).

6. R. Patrick, Some Effects of Temperature on Fresh-Water Algae, pp. 161-185 in Biological Aspects of Thermal Pollution.,

P. A, Krenkel and F. L, Parker (eds.), Vanderbilt University Press, Nashvilie, 1969,

7. J, Cairns, Jr., Effects of Increased Temperatures on Aquatic Organisms, Ind. Wastes 1: . 150-152 (1956).

8. C. C, Coutant, Biological Aspects of Thermal Pollution, I.

Entrainment and Discharge Canal Effects, CRC Critical Reviews in Environmental Control 1(3): 341-381 (1970).

9. F. J, Trembley, Effect of Cooling Water from Steam-Electric Power Plants on Stream Biota, pp. 334-345 in Biological FPob-lems in Water Pollution, C. A. Tarzewell (ed.), U.S. Public Health Service, Cincinnati, Ohio, Puhl. No. 999-WP-25, 1965.,

10. J. W. Foerster, Discussion, Heat and Freshwater Algae, p, 191 in Biological Aspects of Thermal Pollution., P.A. Krenkel and F, L. Parker (eds.), Vanderbilt University Press_, Nashville, Tennessee, 1969.

K-34

11. J. D. Buck, Summary of Connecticut River Microbiology Study,*

pp. 36-39 in The Conneatieut RiveP Investigation, D. E.

Merriman (ed.), 10th Semiannual Progress Report to Conn. Water Res. Comm~, April 1970.

12. L. O. Beer and W. O. Pipes, The Effects of Discharge of Con-denser Water into the Illinois River, Industrial .Bio-Test Labs., Inc., Northbrook, Illinois, 1969.

13. W. J. North, Biological Effects of a Heated Water Discharge at Morro Bay, California, Proa. Int. Se(IJ;)eed Symp.* 6: . 275-286 (1969).

14. G, P, Howells and S, Weaver, Studies on Phytoplankton at Indian Point, pp, 231-261 in Hudson RiveP *EaoZogy, G. P.

Howells and G, J. Lauer (eds.) , New York State Department of Environmental Conserva-tion, 1969,

15. R. L. Heffner, G. P. Howells, G. J, Lauer, and H. J, Hirsh-field, Effects of Power Plant Operation on Hudson River Es-*

tuary Micro Biota, PI>oaeedings of ThiPd NationciZ Radioeaology Symposium, Oak Ridge, 1971, in press,

16. F. E. J. Fry, J. S. Hart, and K. F. Walker, Lethal Temperature Relations for a Sample of Young Speckled Trout (SaZveZinus fontinaUs), Univ. ToPnoto Stud *. BioZ. SeP, 54 (1946); also in Pub. Ont. Fish,

• Res. Lqb. '66: 5 (1946).

17, J. S, Alabaster and A,' L, Downing, A Field and Laboratory Investigation of the Effect of Heated Effluents on Fish, FishePy Investigations SeP. 1, Ministry of Agriculture, Fish-eries and Food, U.K~, 6: 1-42 (1966). *

18. J, B. Sprague, Resistance of Four Freshwater Crustaceans to Lethal High Temperature and Low Oxygen, J, Fish. Res. Bel, Canad *. 20: 387-415 (1963).

19. J, R. Brett, Some Principles in the Thermal Requirements of Fishes, Quaz,tePZy Rev. of Bio. 31: 75-87 (1956).

20. J, C. Galloway, Lethal Effects of the Cold Winter of 1939/40 on Marine Fishes at Key West, Florida, Copeia 2: 119 (1951).

K-35

21. G. Gunter and H. H. Hildebrand, . Destruction of Fishes and Other Organisms on the South Texas Coast by the Gold Wave-of January 28-February 3, 1951, Eaol. 32 (4) :: 731-735 (1951).

22. B. J. Rothschild, Production and Survival of Eggs of the American Smelt, Osmer-us mordax (Mitchill) in Maine, Trans.

Am. Fish. Boa. 90(1): 43-48 (1961).

23. A. B. Albrecht, Some Observations on Factors Associated with Survival of Striped Bass Eggs and Larvae, California Fish &

Game Jou.r. 50(2): 100-113 (1964).

24. C. C. Coutant, The Effect of Heated Water Effluent Upon the Macro-Invertebrate Riffle Fauna of the Delaware River, I'Poa.

Penn. Aaad. Sa?. 36: 58-71 (1962).

25. R. K. Stewart, Aquatic Plants and Benthos, pp.* 83-96 in Tem-pera-tu.re and Aquatia Lifel Laboratory Investigation No. 6,

.Technical Advisory and Investigations Branch, FWPCA, 1967.

26. J. W. Warinner and M. L. Brehmer, The Effects of Thermal Ef-fluents on Marine Organisms; International Jour. Air and Water Poll. 10(4): 277-289 (1966).

27. *R. R. Massengill, Changes in Species of Bottom Organisms Com-position Relative to Connecticut Yankee Plant Operation, pp.

6~12 in The Conneatiaut River Investigation, D. E. Merriman (ed.), 9th Semiannual Progress Report to Conn. Water Res.

Comm., October 1969.

28. R. W. McCauley, Thermal Relations of Geographic Races of Salv~linus, Canad. J. Zool. 36:* 655 (1958).

29. G. _Gunter, Temperature, Chap. 8 in Treatise on Marine EaoZogy and Palaeoeaology, I., J. *w. Hedgepeth (ed.), Geol. Saa. Amer.

Mem. 67: 159-184 (1957).

30. W. Brandhorst, Spawning Activity of Herrings and the Growth of Their Larvae in Relation to Temperature and Salinity Con~

ditions, p. 218 in Int. Oceanogr. Congr., M. Sears (ed,), Am.

Ass. Adv. Sci., Washington, D.C. (1959).

K-36

31. R. G. Ferguson, The Preferred Temperature of Fish and Their Mid-Summer Distribution in Temperate Lakes and Streams, J, Fish. Res. Bd. Co:nada is (4): 607-624 (1958).

32. Studies on the Effects of a Steam-EZeatric Generating Plant on the Marine Environment at Northport, New York, Marine Sciences Research Center, Technical Report 9, Stony Brook, 1971.

33, Thermal Fish Kill, SFI Bull. No. 232: 7 (1972).

34. Thermal Pollution Fish Kill, SFI Bull. No, 223:. 3-4 {1971).

35. M. Brogersma-Sanders, .Ma~s Mortality in the Sea, Geo Z, Soc.

America Memoir 67(1):

• 941-1010 (1957).

36. P, M, Woodhead, The Death of Fish and Sub-Littoral Fauna in the North Sea and the English Channel During the Winter of 1962-63, J, Anim. Ecol, 33: . 169-173. (1964).

37. M. D. Dahlberg and .F. G. Smith, Mortality of Estuarine An:p:nals Due to Cold on the Georgia Coast, Ecology 51(5): 931-933 (1970).

38. M. Stor,ey, The Relation Between Normal.Range and Mortality of Fishes Due to Cold at Sanibel Island, Florida, Ecology 18(1):

10-26 (1937).

39. W~ Templeman, Mass Mortalities of Marine Fishes in the New-foundland Area Presumably Due t9 Low Temperature, Int. Comm.

• N.W, Atl. Fish., Spec. Iubl. 6: 137-148 (1956),

40. W. C, Allee, Studies in Marine Ecology: IV, The Effect of Temperature in Limiting the Geographical Range of Inverte-brates of the Woods Hole Littoral, Ecology 4(4): 341-354 (1923).

41. D, J, Crisp, The Effects of the Winter of 1962/63 on the British Marine Fauna, Helgolander wiss. Meererunters. 10:

313-327 (1964),

42, F. J, Trembley, Research Project on Effects of Condenser Dis-charge Water on Aquatic Life, Progr. Rept, 1956-59, Institute of Research, Lehigh Univ., Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, 1960,

K-37

43. D'. Merriman et al., The -Connecticut River Investigation, Semi-

• annual Progress-Reports to ConneGticut Yankee Atomic Power Co., Haddam, Ct., 1965 and continuing.

44. F. E. J. Fry, The Aquatic Respiration of Fish, pp. 1-63 in The Physiology of Fi.shes,* 1, Margaret E. Brown (ed,), Academic Press, New York, 1957, 45, J, C, Ayers, R*.F, Anderson, N. W. O'Hara, and C. C. Kidd*

Benton Harbor Power Plant L:imnological Studies.' Part *rv.

Cook Plant Preoperational.Studies 1969, Special Report No. 44, Great Lakes Research Division, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1970 *

. .46. Fish Protection at Indian Point, Environmental Report Supple-ment for Indian ~qint Unit No. 2, Appendix S, 1970,

47. Report of Inquiry into Allegations Concerning Operation of Indian Point 1 Plant of Consolidate4 Edison Company (for Period of August 196.2 to June 1970), Vol. I and II, Report Details, Division of Compliance, Director of Regulation, U,S.

Atomic Energy Commission, July 1971,.

48. R. P. Morgan and R, G. Stress, Destruction of Phytoplankton in the Cooling Water Supply of a Steam Electric Plant, Chesa-peake Bai. 10(3/4): 165-171 (1969).

49. J, R. Stottlemyer, Plant.Nutrients and Primary rroduction in*

the Patuxent River Estuary, Thesis, Univ, of Maryland, 1964.

50. M. A. Churchill and T. A. Wojtalik, Effects of Heated Dis-charges: .The TVA Experience, Nuclea.r News, *12(9): 80-86 (1969). .

51. D*. R. Heinle, Temperature and Zooplankton, Chesapeake Sei.

10 (3/ 4) : . 186-20~ (1969) *

52. D. A. Normandeau, The Effects of Thermal Releases on the Ecology.of the Merrimack River, R~port to Public Service Co.

of New Hampshi~~' undated.

53. J. R. Adams, Thermal Power, Aquatic Life and Kilowatts on the Pacific Coast, Nuclectr' Ne~s, 12(9): 75-79 (1969).

K-38

54. R, L. Cory and J *. W, Nauman, Epifauna and Thermal Additions in the.Upper Patuxent River Estuary, Chesapeake *sci.* 10(3/4):

210-217 (1969),

55, J. W, Nauman and R. L. *Cory, Thermal Additions and Epifaunal Organisms at Chalk Point, Maryland, Chesapeake *sci, 10(3/4):

218-226 (1969). .

56. M.A. Profitt, Effects of Heated Discharge upon Aquatic Re-sources of White River at Petersburg, Indiana, Indiana Uni-versity Water Res. Center, Report No. 3, 1969,

57. B. C~ Marcy, Jr,, Resident Fish Population Dynamics and Early Life History Studies of the American-Shad in the Lower *con-nec~icut River, pp. 13-32 in The Connecticu.t River Investiga-tion, D. E. Merriman (ed.), 9th Semiannual Progress Report to Conn. Water Res. Comm,*, October 21; 1969,

58. B. C, Marcy, Jr., Survival of Young Fish in the Discharge

. Canal of a Nuclear Power Plant, J, Fish. Res, Bd. Canada 28:

1057-1060 (1971).

59. J, E, Kerr, Studies on Fish Preservation at the Contra Costa Steam Plant* of The Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Fish, Bull. No, 92, Calif, Dept, of Fish and Game, 1953,

60. R, B, Cowles and C. M. Bogart, A Preliminary Study of the Thermal Requirements of Desert Reptiles, BuZZ. Amer. Museum Nat. Hist. 83: 265-296 (1944),

61. J, A. Mihursky and V, S. Kennedy, Water Temperature Criteria to Protect Aqua tic Life, Amer. Fish, Soc, Spec, Pub 1. No, 4, .

pp, 20-32, 1967,

62. A. S. Mossman, Experimental Studies of Fitness as Measured by Vulnerability to Predation, Ph.D. Dissertation, Univ, of Wisconsin, Madison, 1955.

63, E.G. Prentice, Gull Predation in a Reactor Discharge Plume, BNWL-1050, Battelle Northwest, Richland, Washington, 1969.

64. W, H, Neill, Ecological Responses of Lake Monona (Dade County, Wisconsin) Fishes to Heated Influent Water, Annual *progress Report, Wisconsin Utilities Association, September 1969,

K-39

65. J.C. Merkens, Studies on the Toxicity of Chlorine and Ch1or-amines to -the Rainbow* Trout,* J., Water Waste Treat. 7: 150-151 (1958). .

66. J. A. Zillich, Toxicity of Combined Chlorine Residuals to*

Freshwater Fish, J, Water PoUut, Control, Fed . ., 44(2): 212-220 (1972). .

67, R. E, Basch, In-situ Investigations of Toxicity of Chlorinated Municipal Waste Water Treatment Plant Effluents to Rainbow Trout (Salmo gairdnel'i) and Fathead Minnows (Pimephales promelas), Complet. Rept, Grant 38050G22 EPA Water Quality.

Office, 19 71.

68. J, W, Arthur and J, G. Eaton, Chloramine Toxicity to the Amphipod~ Gammarus pseudolimnaeus, and the Fathead Minnow, Pimephales promelas, Environmental Protection Agency, National Water Quality Laboratory, Duluth, Minn,, 1971.

69'. J, B. Sprague and D. E.' Drury, Avoidance Reactions of Salmonid Fish to Representative Pollutants, pp. 169-179 in Advo:naes in Water Pollution Researah, Proa. 4th Int, Conf,., Prague, 1969, S. H, Jenkins (ed.), *Pergamon Press, New York 1969, 70 *. Water Quality Criteria Data Book, Vol, 3, Effects of Chemicals

.J on Aquatic Life, Environmental Protection Agency, 18050 GWV05/71, Washington, D.c., 1971. *

71. J.E. McKee and H, W. Wolf, Water Quality Criteria, State*

Water Quality Control Board (California) Puhl. No. 3-A, 1963.

72. W, H~ Roosenburg, Greening and Copper Accumulation in the American Oyster, Crassostrea virginiaa, in the Vicinity of a Steam Electric Generating Station, Chesapeake Bai. 10(3/4):

241-252, 1969.

73. C, C, Burwell, Water Pollution and Electricity Production:

The Open Cycle Cooling Tower for Stream Aeration - A _Prelim-inary Evaluation, ORNL internal document, July 13, 1971.

74. F. L. Parker and P. A, Krenke!, Thermal Pollution: Status--of the Art , Report No, 3, Dept, of Envir. and Water Res

• Eng, ,

Vanderbilt University, Nashville, 1969.

K-40

75. S. I. Auerbach, D.* J. Nelson, S. V. Kaye,.D. E. Reichle, and C. C. Coutant, Ecological Considerations in Reactor Power Plant Si.ting, pp. 805-820 iri Environmental Aspects of Nuclear Power Stations, (STI/PUB/261), International Atomic Energy

)

Agency, Vienna, 1970.

76. W. L. Templeton, R. E. Nakatani, a~d E. Held, Radiation Ef-fects, pp. 223-239 in Radioactivity in the Marine Environment, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1971.

77. J, W. Lentsch, T. J, Kreip, M, E. Wrenn, G. P. Howells, and M. Eisenbud, Stable Manganese and Mn-54 Distributions in the Physical and Biological Components of the Hudson River Estuary,.

"Proc. of Third National Radioecology Symposium, Oak Ridge, 1971, in press.

78. A. L. Jensen, The Effect of Increased Mortality on the Young in a Population of Brook Trout, A Theoretical Analysis, Trans.

Amer. Fish.* Soc. 100(3): 456-459 (July 1971).

Appendix L PJM*AN:p*MAAc*DETAILS The Pennsylvania--New Jersey--Maryland Interconnection (PJM) is a formal power pool made up of twelve operating companies.

• Each company's bulk power system is planned, developed, and operated as an integral part of PJM. PJM operates as a ~ree-flowing inter-change with continuous computer-aided (IBM System/360 Model 50) dispatch of power, with power not being pre-scheduled but rather, flowing to meet the demand and originating at the most economical source. The use of the computer improves the reliability and operating economy of PJM.

The twelve operating companies of PJM are combined into six member groups:

1. Public Service Electric and Gas Company 2, Philadelphia Electric Company Group Philadelphia Electric Company Atlantic City Electric Company Delmarva Power & Light Company

3. Pennsylvania Power & Light.Company Group Pennsylvania Power & Light Company UGI Corporation 4, Baltimore Gas and Electric Company 5, General Public Utilities System Jersey Central Power & Light Company Metropolitan Edison Company New Jersey Power & Light Company Pennsylvania Electric Company 6.- Potomac Electric Power Company PJM services an area of 48,000 square miles with a population of about 20 million. The service area encompasses three-quarters of Pennsylvania, most of New Jersey, about half of Maryland, a small part of Virginia, and all of Delaware and the District of Columbia, The capacity of PJM was approximately 28,000 MW in 1970, and the applicant made up about 45% of this capacity.

L-1

L-2 The Mid-Atlantic Area Coordination Group ~C) is made up of the same twelve operating companies as PJM. However, the*two organi-zations have different purposes. PJM develops and coordinates plans to meet specific µeeds in the service area with maximum reliability and economy. MAAC studies the effect on the bulk power system of additions, modifications, and removals of generat-ing and bulk transmission facilities planned by the individual PJM companies in their long~range plans and policies. For a more com-prehensive discussion of these two organizations, the reader is referred to the Federal Power Commission Northeast Regional Advisory Committee Report.

APPENDIX M WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION AND PERMITS M-1

--~-----*-. -----*--~--~---*--'-----*-------~-------**

November 3, 1971 Mr. J. L. Allen Assistant Chief Mechanical Engineer Phil adel phi a EI ectri c Company 1000. Chestnut Street Philadelphia, Perinsylvania 19105

Dear Mr. Al Jen:

This fs in response to your letter of October 20. requesting certification of reasonable.assurance that Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3 ~,ill not violate applicable water quality standards.

ihe fo*llowing information is provided in accordance with the format included in proposed rule making, 18 CFR, Part 615.2, as published in the February 5, 1971 Federal ~egister.

(a) The applicant is Philadelphia Electric Company, 1000 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, Penhsylvania 19105 *.

(b) The facility is a nuclear powered electric generat-t~g station which will result in the prod~cti6n, *

.treatment and discharge of heated waters, water treat-ment wastes and radioactive .,.,astes. Details on the operation of the facility, including the characteristics of raw and treated wastes .and the locations of the dis-charges, are contained on Ap;,1 ication Nos. 568[011 arid 6769204 submitted by the Philadelphia Electric Company.

(c) Descriptions of the function and operation of the facili-ties for treatment of the wastes and the ~nticipated effluent quality are contained in the application documents mentioned in b above.

(d) (The Philadelphia Electric Ccrnpany must furnish the information under this heading.)

M-4 Hr. J. L. Al Jen November 3, 1971 (e) Water quality effects are described in the application. The res~lting water quality.after r~ceivirig the discharge should comply with state \*Jate.r qua 1 i ty standards for the Susquehanna River approved by the Secretary cf the !nterior.

(f). The Water Quality standards applicable to the Susquehanna River in Pennsylvania are those established by the Commom~ealth on June 28, 1967, and are included in Article 301 of the Penn-sylvania Sanitary Water Board Rules.and Regulations~ a copy of which is attached. * *

{g) (This information will have,to: be obtained from the State of Maryland.)

{h) There is reasonable assurance th~t the proposed activity will.

be conducted in a manner that will not violate applicable water qua 1 i ty standards. The issuance of Permits Nos.*

S68l01l and 6769204 by the Commonwealth indicat~s that we feel that the proposed activity wi 11 not violate water

• quality standards. Previous performance.of the applicant at the adjacent Peach Bottom Unit Nci. 1 has been in full comp 1 i ance with the *permit issued for that. pl ant.

(i) (It appears that tha Philada1phia Electri~*co~pany should transmit copies of the two permits to fulfill this require-

- ment.)

. Very telJ;uly*ours,* . * .. *

. A-

, ;I£",:

r.

• C: {!j----.1

.i'

/ *. ., -*

. I i -Ci-

. . ""/ /_. ;

i.!il td ,(._(;:.:-t. (_

~ Ernest*F. Giovannitti Acting.Director .

Divfsion of Industrial Wastes Attachments

HSB-6110-M-5 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SANITARY WATER BOARD HARRISBURG INDUSTRIAL WASTES PERMIT No. 568I011 The Sanitary Water Boa.rd, which b1 virtue of the Act of April 9, 1929, P. L. 177, known as The Administrative Code of 1929, and the amendments thereto, and of the Act of June 22, 1937, P. L. 1987, as 81\1ended by the Act of May 8, 194*5, P. L. 435, is empowered to exercise certain powers and perform certain duties "To preserve and improve the purity of the waters of the Commonwealth for the protection of public health, animal and a.qua.tic life, and for ind:us.tria.l consumption, and recrea..;..*

tion; .... ,. , hereby issues this permit to the Phil.adelphia Electric Cmpany., 1000 Chestnut Street., Philadelphia., Pennsylvania 19105 toi, the construction and operation of waste treatment facilities for its Atomic reactor units 2 and .3 located in Peach Bottan Township., York County and discharge therefran to Conowingo Pond, in the Susquehanna River., as shown on plans and described in reports accampanying appli-cation No. 568I011.

These plans are hereby approved ~ubject., nevertheless., to the condition that the waste treatment pl.an~ constructed* under said plans will produce an effluent satisfactory to the Sanitary Water Board. By this approT&l..,

neither the Board nor the Camnonvealth of Pennsylvania assumes any respon-sibility for the feasibility of the plans or the efficiency of the opera-tion of the plant to .b\9 constructed thereunder.

M-6 Page 2 Industrial Wastea Pe:noit No. -568!011 This permit is issued subject to all Sanitary Water Board Rules and Regulations now in force, and subject to the following Special Conditions:

A. The effluent discharges to the waters of the Commonwealth shall not be acid, shall have a pH of not less than 6.0 nor greater than 9.0, and shall not contain more than 7.0 mg/1 of dissolved iron.

B. In order to avoid obsolescence of the plans of waste treatment works, the approval of the plans herein granted, if not specifically extended, shall cease and be null.

and void two years fran the date of this . permit unless the works covered by said plans shall have been canpleted and placed in operation on or before that date.

C. Within six months art.er the herein approved waste treatment works are constructed and placed in operation, the permittee shall submit to the Secretary of the Sani-tary Water Board, Pennsylvania Department of Health, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, evidence of the efficiency and adequacy of such works in treating the waste dis-charges from this establishment. If the proposed waste treatment works fail to meet the requirements of the Sanitary Water Board for secondary treatment, then the pe:nnittee shall immediately proceed with the installation of such provisions as may be necessary to obtain a degree of treatment satisfactory to the Sanitary Water Boa.rd, subject to approvr;i.l by.the Board of plans for any major additions to or modifications o.f' the new proposed waste treatment works.

Secondary treatment is *that* treatment*. that will reduce the organic waste load as measured by the biochemical mcy-gen demand test by at least 85% during the period May 1 to October .31 and by at least 75% during the remainder of the year based on a five consecutive day average of values; wil.l remove practically all suspended solids; will provide effective disinfection to control disease producing organisms; will pro_vide satisfactory cU.sposal of sludge; and will reduce the quantities of oil.,

greases, acids, alkalis, toxic, taste and odor producing substances; color, and other substances inimical to the public interest to levels that will not pollute the receiving stream.

An equivalent ot secondary treatment is required for nonbiodegradable wastes.

D. Approval of plans refers to waste treatment and* not structural stability., which is assumed to be sound and in accordance with good struct.ural design. Failure, because of faulty structural design or poor construction, of the works herein approved-will render the pe:nnit void.

E*. It is stipulated that the approval herein granted is predicated upon the claims, made by the permittee's design engineers and biological consultant in their reports dated September 16, 1968 and July 15, 1968, respectively, as to the volume and character of the waste waters which will be con~yed to the waters of the Cammonwealth.

F. The .facilities shall be operated subject to the Sani't.µ-y Water Board Regulations which pertain .to heated wastes, namely, Article 600, . Section 16.

G. Be.fore placing Unit No * .3 in operation, the permittee shall submit to the Pennsyl-vania Department of Health a report on the operation of Unit No. 2 with one and two cooling towers.

M-7 This permit is also subject to tbe following STANDARD CONDITIONS RELATING TO INDUSTRIAL WASTF.S effective January 1, 1941, attached hereto:

• 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, s, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17~

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

. \ .. ' \ ' * *\*.; \'

,: .,'I... r)...

Jc....

i i ' . f . /:/

• • -1'*. /,{ .; / i* ' ' (., . '

,. <op **,:\..;_)._ '\.A.,'l, 1 Donald A. Iazarchilc, Director Division of Industrial Wastes Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

M-8 HSE - 6114 - P PENNSYLVANIA DEPAR'IMENT OF HEALTH .

SANITARY WATER BOARD

\

STANDARD

. CONDITIONS RELATING TO INDUSTRIAL. WASTES Effective J~uary 1, 1941 ONE: All. relevant and non-superseded conditions of prior industrial waste permits, decrees, or orders issued to the herein named permittee or his predecessor shall be continued in full force and effect~

TW'.:l: During construction no radical changes shall be made from the plans, designs, and other data herein approved unless the permittee shall first submit each such revision to the Sanitary Water Board,and receive written approval thereof.

THREE: The, works shall be constructed under expert* engineering super-vision and competent inspection, and in accordance with the plans, de-signs, and other data as herein approved or amended, and the conditions of this permit.

• FOUR: No storm water from pavements, areaways, roofs, or other sources shall be admitted to the works herein approved, which shall be used ex-clusively for the-treatment of industrial wastes.

FIVE:

• The outfall sewer or drain shall be extended to low water mark of the receiving body of water in such a manner as to insure the satis-factory dispersion of its effluent the;reinto; insofar as practic~le it shall have its outlet submerged; and shall be constructed of cast iron, concrete, or other material approved by the Division of Sanitary Engi-neering; and shall be so protected against the effects of flood water, ice, or other hazards as to reasonably insure its structural stability and freedom from stoppage.

SIX: When the herein approved industrial waste treatment works is constructed and before it is placed in operation, the permittee shall notify the State Department o;f Health so that an inspection of the works may be made by a representative of the Department.

SEVEN: The various structures and apparatus of the industrial waste treatment works herein approved shall be maintained in proper condition so that they will individually and collectively perform the functions for which they were designed.

EIGHT: Tl;ie screenings and sludge shall be so handled that a nuisance is not created and shall be dispq.sed of in a sanitary manner to the* satis-faction of the Division of Sanitary Engineering of the Department of Health.

HSE - 6114 - P M-9 NINE: The settled solids shall at no time be permitted to accumulate in the sedimentation basin(s) to a depth greater than one third that of the basin(s) as constructed and the settled material removed shall be handled and disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the Division of Sani-tary Engineering of the Department of Health and so that a nuisance is not created.

TEN: The permittee shall keep records of operation and efficiency of the waste treatment works and shall submit to the State Department of Health, promptly at the end of each month; such report thereon as may be directed by the Division of Sanitary Engineering of the said Department.

ELEVEN: Since the herein approved works employ principles not hereto- .

fore considered conventional in the treatment of similar industrial wastes, they must be regarded as experimental and the final opinion of the Sani-.

tary Water Board will depend on actual performance in eliminating the ob-jectionable characteristics of the waste waters as discharged from the works in question.*

• TWELVE: In view of the possibility of the production of industrial waste waters *contain:ing objectionable characteristics which the treatment works herein considered may not be capable of correction or eliminating,*

the said.waste* treatment works must be regarded as experimental and the final opinion of.the Sanitary Water Board will depend on the consistent_

production of a satisfactory effluent.

THIRIBEN: The right to dis9harge

• the effluent from the herein approved industrial was*te treatment works into the waters of the Commonweal th is specifically made contingent upon sucq operation of the~e works as will produce an effluent of a quality satisfactory for dis9harge into the re-ceiving body of water. If, in the opinion of the Sanitary Water Board, these works are not so operated or if by reason of change in the charac-ter of wastes or increased load upon the works, changed use or condition of-the receiving body of water, or otherwise, the said effluent ceases to be satisfactory for such discharge, then upon notice by the Board the right herein granted to discharge such effluent shall cease and become null and void and, within the time specified by the Board, the permittee shall adopt such remedial measures as will produce an effluent which, in the opinion of the Board, will be satisfactory for discharge into the said receiving body of water.

FOURTEEN: If at any time the industrial waste treatment works of the

'permittee, or any part thereof, or the discharge of the effluent there-from, sqall have created a public nuisance, or such discharge is or may become inimical and injurious to the public health or to animal or aqua-tic life or to the use of the receiving body of water for domestic or industrial consumption,* or for recreation, the permittee shall forthwith adopt such remedial measures as the Sanitary Water Board may advise or approve.

,**~--. --.--',-~--. _______ ___ _

HSE - 6114 - P M-10 FIFTEEN: The improvements being effected in the waters of the Common-wealth through the progressive, sanitary clean-up of streams by the Sani-tary Water Board render the effects of industrial.wastes upon these waters increasingly harmful or inimical to the public.interest,. in con..:

sequence of which the time should be anticipated when 51uch :industrial wastes must be suitably modified prior to their discharge thereto.

Therefore, the permittee is hereby notified that when the Sanitary Water Board shall have determined that the public interests require the treatment or further treatment of the industrial wastes of the permittee, then the pe:nnittee shall, upon notice by the Board, within the time specified, submit to the Board for its approval, plans and a report providing for the degree of treatment of the permittee 1 s indus-trial wastes specified by the Board and after approval thereof shall construct such works in accordance with the directions of the Board.

SIXTEEN: The permittee shall secure any necessary permission from the proper federal authority for any outfall or industrial waste treatment structure which discharges into or enters navigable waters and shall obtain from the State Water and Power*Resources Board approval of any stream crossing, encroachment, or* change of.natural stream conditions coming within the jurisdiction of the said Board, SEVENTEEN: Nothing herein contained shall be construed to be an intent on the part of .the Sanitary Water Board to approve any act made or to be made by the permittee inconsistent with the permittee's lawful powers or

• with existing laws of the Connno:nwealth regulating industrial wastes and the practice of professional engineering, or shall be construed as appro-val of the structural adequacy of the approved structures; nor shall thi_s p.~rmi t be construed to permit any act otherwise forbidden by. any of the law~ of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania or of the United States. -

M-11 H710,120 REV. 11/69 COMMONWEAL TH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF HEAL TH SANITARY ENGINEERING SANITARY WATER BOARD PERMIT N0,--.:6'--'7-=6""-9=20=4cc.----

1-1. PERMITT.EE: (Name and Address) B. PROJECT LOCATION Philadelphia Electric Company Municipality Peach Bottom Township 1000 Chestnut Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19105 County York C. TYPE OF FACILITY D. NAME OF MINE OR AREA SERVED Radioactive wastes Nuclear Electric Generating Plant Peach Bottom Units 2 & 3 E. THIS PERMIT APPROVES:

I. Plans For Construction Of: 2. The Discharge Of: 3. The Operation Of:

Pump Stations; sewers

a. D and Appurtenances a.[i] Treated a. 0 A Coal Mine 0 Untreated Maximum surface area fo be affected

b. D Sewage Treatment Fae i lities shall not exceed acres.

b.rn Industrial Wastes (Surface Mines) c.

rx:xJ Industrial Wastes

• D Treatment Facilities TO:

n Sewage Maximum area to be deep mined

_ _ _ _ _ acres.

Susquehanna River (Receivin.l! Waters)

F. YOU ARE HERlc;BY AUTHORIZED TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE OR DISCHARGE, AS INDICATED ABOVE, PROVIDED THAT YOU COMPLY.WITH THE FOLLOWING:

1. ALL REPRESENTATIONS REGARDING OPERATION, CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND CLOSI.NG PROCEDURES AS WELL AS ALL OTHER MATTERS SET. FORTH IN YOUR APPLlc'ATION AND ITS SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS (APPLICATION NO. 6769204 DATED 1 2-16-69 . , AND AMENDMENTS DATED 5-29-70 .) . SUCH APPLICATION, ITS SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AND AMENDMENTS ARE HEREBY MADE A PART OF THIS PERMIT.

2. CONDITIONSNUMBERED 1. 2. 3, 4. 5, 6, 7, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 OF THE Ind, wasteSSTANDARD CONDI Tl ONS DATED 1-1-41 . WHICH CONDITIONS ARE ATTACHED HERETO.

AND ARE MADE A PART OF THIS PERMIT.

B..,,__,c...,,i,..-D-,__...E..,,__.F_______________ wHICH

3. SPECIAL CONDITION(S) NUMBERED_...,A"',,,_*........ ARE ATTACHED HERETO AND ARE MADE A PART OF THIS PERMIT, G. THE AUTHORITY GRANTED BY THIS PERMIT IS SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING FURTHER QUALIFICATIONS:

1. IF THERE IS A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE APPLICATION OR ITS SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AND AMENDMENTS AND THE STANDARD OR SPECIAL CON'DITIONS, THE STANDARD OR SPECI.AL CONDITIONS SHALL APPLY.

2, FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE SANITARY WATER BOARD OR THE TERMS OR CONDITIONS OF THIS PERMIT SHALL VOID THE AUTHORITY GIVEN TO THE PERMITTEE .BY THE ISSUANCE OF THE PERMIT.

3, THIS PERMIT IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO THE CLEAN STREAMS LAW, THE ACT OF JUNE 22, 1937, P,L, 1987, AS AMENDED, ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT RELIEVE THE PERMITTEE OF ANY RESPONSIBILITY UNDER ANY OTHER LAW.

PERMIT ISSUED . DEPTTMXNT OF HEALTH .

JUL 6 1970 BY

• r')(\,\ cJ r 'f\ . l_<\ <'._/;, 1. 1,_t l_,~(

1lonald A. Lazarchik,/ Director TITLE Division of Industrial Wastes

M-12 Page 2 Industrial Wastes

• Permit No. 6769204 These plans are hereby approved subject, nevertheless, to the condition that the waste treatment plant constructed under said plans will produce an effluent satisfactory t9 the Sanitary Water Board. By this approval, neither the Board nor the Cormnonwealth of Pennsylvania assumes any responsibility for the feasibility of the plans or the efficiency of the operation of the plant to be constructed thereunder~

This permit is issued-subject to all Sanitary Water Board Rules and Regulations now in force, and the following Special. Conditions:

A. The effluent discharged to the waters of the Commonwealth shall not be acid, shall have a pH of not less than.6.0 nor greater than 9.0~ and shall not contain more than 7.0 mg/1 of dissolved iron.

In order to avoid obsolescence of the plans of waste treatment works, the approval of the plans herein granted, if not specifically extended, shall cease and be null and Void two years from*the date of this* permit unless the works covered by said plans shall have been completed and

.placed in operation on or before that- date.

c. The attention of the permittee is directed to the necessity of technical control and experimentation in the operation of the proposed waste treatment works to insure the most effective chemical dosages and proper operation cycles

• necessary for satisfactory performance at all 'times.

D. Approval of plans refers to waste treatment and not struc-tural stability, which is assumed to be sound and in.accord-ance~. with good

. structural design.. Failure, because of faulty structural design or poor construction,. of the wo_rks

M-13 Page 3 Industrial Wastes Permit No. 6769204 herein approved will render the permit void.

E. No matter.how well designed and carefully constructed a waste treatment works may be, full effectiveness cannot be developed unless it is efficiently operated. In order to secure such efficiency, protect the waters of the Commonwealth, and insure the most effective and economical dosage when chemicals are used, the permittee is required to place the works under the regular charge of a responsible plant official, and its operation under the control of a responsible plant official, and its operation under the control of the designer of the works (or other qualified person approved by the Bureau of Sanitary Engineering) for at least one year after completion.

Moreover, upon written notice from the Bureau of Sanitary Engineering, the permittee shall maintain one or m~re skilled operators regularly on duty for such daily periods as the Bureau may direct.

F. The discharge of untreated of improperly treated industrial wastes to the waters of the Commonwealth is contrary to the requirements of the Sanitary.Water Boa.rd. If, because of accidental breakdown of the treatment works or plant equip-ment or for other reason, any such discharge should occur, then the operation of the mill or process producing such discharge .shall be discontinued until repairs to the treat-

M-14 Page 4 Industrial Wastes Permit No. 6769204 ment works or other satisfactory measures to prevent stream pollution shall have been completed.

,----------------,-------~*-~,,__.,.______

M-15 HSE - 6114 - P PENNSYLVANIA DEPAR'IMENT OF HEALTH

, SANITARY WATER BOARD STANDARD CONDITIONS RELATING TO INDUSTRIAL WASTES Effective _January 1, 1941 ONE: All relevant and hon-superseded conditions of prior industrial*

. waste permits, de*crees, or orders issued to* the herein named permittee

• or his pred~cessor shall be continued in full force and effect *

.TI-D: During construction ho radical changes shall be made from the plans, designs, and other data herein .approved unless the permi ttee .* *.

shall. first submit each such revision to the Sanitary Water Board.and receive written approval thereof.

• THREE: The works shall be constructed _under expert engineering super-vision and competent inspection, and in accordance with the plans, de-signs,. cj.I].d other _data as herein approved or alnE!nded,_ and the conditions of this permit. *

• FOUR: No storm water from pavements, a'reaways, roofs, or other sources shall be admitted to the works herein approved, which shall be used ex-clusively for the treatment of industrial wastes.

FIVE: The outfall sewer or drain shall be extended to low water mark of the receiving body of water in. such a manner as to insure the. satis-

.factory dispersion of its effluent thereinto; insofar as practicable it shall have its outlet submerged; and shall be ci:>nstructe~ of cast iron, concret.e, or other material approved by the Division of Sanitary Engi-neerii.ig; and shall be so protected against the effects of flood water, ice., or other hazards as to reasonably ins.llI'e its structural stability and freedom from stoppage. *

• pIX: Wb,en the herein approved industrial waste treatment works is constructed and before it i.s placed in operation, the permi ttee shall notify the State Department of Health so that an inspection of the works may be made by a representative of the Department.

SEVEN: The various structures and apparatus of the industrial waste treatment works herein approved shall be maintained in proper condition so that they will individually and collectively p1arform the functions for which they were designed.

EIGHT: The screenings and sludge _shall be so handled that a nuisance is not created and shall be disposed of in a sanitary- maririer to the satis-faction of the Division of Sanitary Engineering of the Department of Health.

M-16 HSE - 6114 - P NINE: The settled solids shall at no time be permitted to accumulate in the sedimentation basin(s) to a .depth greater than one third that of the basin(s) as constructed and the settled material removed shall be handled and.disposed of in a manner satisfactory to the Division of Sani-tary Engineering of the Department of He.alth and so that a nuisance is not created.

TEN: The permittee shall keep records of operation* and efficiency of the waste treatment works and shall subm:i.t to the State Department of Health, promptly at the end of . each month, such report thereon as may be directed by the Divi~ion of Sanitary Engineering .of the said Department.

ELEVEN: Since the here.in approved works employ principles -not hereto-fore c9nsidered conventional in the treatment qf similar industrial wastes, they must be regarded as experimental and the final opinion of the Sani-tary Water Board will depend *on actual performance in eliminating the* ob-jectionable characteristics of the waste wate~s as discharged from the works in question.

TWELVE: In view of the possibility of the production of industrial waste waters containing objectionable characteristics which the treatment works herein considered may not be capable of correction or eliminating, the said waste treatment works must be regarded as experimental.and the final opinion of the Sanitary Water Board will depend on the consistent production of a satisfactory effluent.

THIR'.IEEN: The right to discharge the effluent from the herein approved industrial waste treatment works into the.waters of the Commonwealth is specifically made contingent upon such operation of the-se works as will produce an effluent of*a quality satisfactory f<;>r discharge into the re-ceiving body of water. If, in the. opinion of the.Sanitary Water Board, these .works are not so operated or if by reason of change in the charac-ter of wastes cir increased load upon the works, changed use or condition of the :receiving body of water, or otherwise, the said effluent ceases to be satisfactory for such discharge, then upon notice by the Board the right herein granted to discharge such effluent shall cease and become null and void and, within the time specified by the Board, the perini.ttee shall adopt such remedial *measures as will produce an effluent whicl1, in the opinion of the Board, will be satisfactory for discharge into the said receiving body of water.

• FOURTEEN: If; at any time the industrial waste treatment works of the permittee, or any part the:reof, or the discharge of the effluent there-from, sqall have created a public .nuisance, or .such discharge is or may become :i:himical and injurious to the public health or to animal or aqua-tic life or to the use of the receiving body of water for domestic or

. industrial consumption, or for recreation, the perini.ttee shall forthwith

'adopt such remedial measures as the Sanitary Water Board may advise or approve. *

..i 2 -

M-17 HSE - 6114 - P FIFTEEN: The improvements being effected in the waters of the Common-

.* wealth through the progressive, sanitary clean-up of streams by the Sani-tary Water Board render the effects of industrial wastes upon these waters increasingly harmful or inimical to the public interest, in con-sequence of which the time should be anticipated when such industrial wastes must be suitably modified prior to their discharge thereto.

Therefore, the perrrd.ttee is hereby notified that when the Sanitary water Board shall have determined that the public interests require the treatment or-further treatment of the industrial wastes of the permittee, then the pe:rmittee shall, upon notice by the Board, within the time specified, submit to the Board for its approval, plans and a report providing for the degree of treatment of the. permittee 1 s indus-trial wastes specified by the Board and after approval thereof shall construct such works in accordance with_ the directions of the Board.

SIXTEEN: The perrrd.ttee shall secure any necessary.perrrd.ssion from the proper federal authority for any outfall or industrial waste treatment structure which discharges into or enters navigable waters and shall obtain from the State Water and Power Resources Board approval of any stre.am crossing, encroachment, or cha.nge of natural stream conditions coming within the jurisdiction of the said Board, SEVEN'lEEN: Nothing herein contained shall be construed to be an intent on the part of the Sanitary Water Board to approve any act made or to be

.made by the pennittee inconsistent with the permittee 1 s lawful powers or with existing laws of the Commonwealth regulating industrial wastes and the practice of professional engineering, or shall be construed as appro-val of the structural adequacy of the approved structures; nor shall this pernd. t be construed to perrni t. any act otherwise forbidden by any of the*

law$ of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania or of the United States.

. ---~-----------

APPENDIX N COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT FOR THE PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3 N-1

N-3

.WASHINGTON, D. C.20250 DEC t*,. 1972 50-277 50.. 278 *.

Mr. Daniel R. Muller Director of Licensing.*

Atomic Energy Commission Washi_ngton, D. C. 20545

Dear Mr. Muller:

We have had the draft.environmental impact* statement for

-the Peach Bottom* Atomic Power Sta ti on Uni ts 2 and .3,.

Philadelphia Electric Company, reviewed in the* relevant agencies of the Department of Agriculture. Comments from the Economic Research Service; the Forest Service, and the.

Soil Conservation Service, all agencies of the Department,*

~re enclosed.

• 1;:;1-1.~.

FRED H. TSCHIRLEY * ~

Assistant Coordinator Environmental Quality Activities

N-4 UNITED*~TATES DEfARTMENT.OF AGRICULTURE FOREST SERVICE WO Re: Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units

• 2 and 3 Phila,delphia Electric Company

.Raw material for the above nuclear plant is uranium (235) oxide *

. Production of electricity *for enrichment of uranium 235 usually*

involves the burning of coal. Indirect effects, such as air pollution from combusticn of coal and strip mining, should be evaluated. These are part of the environmental impact ~ven if the raw material is imported.

Rapid introduction of chlorine into.the condenser water ~auses a rise in chlorine concentration in the discharge pond which may exceed one part per million, with an unknown effect on terrestrial and aquatic vegetation. Perhaps a more frequent application of smaller amounts of chlorine would reduce maximum concentration of chlorine* at the discharge point.

Cumulative effect of all industry on river temperatures and also shallow portions of Chesapeake Bay should b~ the subject of continuous monitoring, so that measures can be taken to prevent rise to harmful levels.

Total concentration of chlorine or other chemicals from al.l sources should be monitored.for the same reason.

For atomic power stations as large as Units 1 & 2, settling of uranium oxide_pellets in their.rods results in bending and collapsing of rods around the voids with possible leaking of radioactive gases. Before the plant reaches.full capacity, preventive measures against this type of accident should be taken.

• Production of noise that affects passing boats would be prevented by. installation of natural draft coolitlg towers.

With the exception of the above, the Forest Service anticipates few adverse environmental effects from operation of Po~r Station Units l &*2. '

N-5 ERS. Comments on Draft Environmentifl. Statement, Peach Bottom Atomic Pqwer Station Units 2 and 3, Philadelphia El.ectric Company

1. Warm water temperatures may attract sizeable numbers of large game fish to the 4,700 foot discharge canal and pond, as well as to the thermal plume area in winter months. At the same time, frequent plant shutdowns are expected in initial stages of operation and additional, although less frequent shutdowns' will occur there-after (p *. V,;,5-6). If such were to take place during the winter, massive fish kills would result from the abrupt drop in water temperature. Although Conowingo Pond provides considerable recrea-tional opportunities (p. II-5), the Applicant does not indicate the importance of sport fishing~ We feel that the Environmental State-ment should discuss the present and projected levels of demand for this activity. If Significant, the A.pplicant should discuss alte.rnate means of preventing desirable game fish from entering the canal and pond.*

2. The Applicant basically justifies the Station on existing and pro-jected growth rates of electricity consumption. Although the present debate over the desirability and means. of limiting energy consumption is. briefly acknowledged (p. XI-4), the Applicant does not expect power demand* over the next several decades to deviate significantly from FPC predictions*. Inasmuch as the production of electricity consumes natural re~ources and results in environmental change, we feel that the Statement should include a*discussion of measures that the Applicant and the regional power network of which it is. a member, have under consideration to encourage more efficient utilization of electricity. Such measures which could have a significant impact on demand projections might include the reduction.of demands for costly peak power through special metering, implementation of rate structures designed to promote more efficient consumption, and the revision of present utility promotional effortso .

Such a discussion would be compatible with NEPA Guidelines fof environ-mentai impa~t statements which require evaluation of alternatives to th~ proposed action~ Recent interpretation of section 102(2)(c) of NEPA held~ in essence, that the range of alternatives required to be considered were those* "reasonably available." None were to be ruled out, "merely because they do not offer a complete solution to the problem." NRDC v. Morton (D.C_. Cir. 1972) ~

In light of the above, we also feel that the Applicant's discussion of "The.Demand for Power" (chapter.XI) would be inore compatiblew;th the intent of the NEPA* Guidelines if ~twas placed in Chapter XII,

'*'Alternatives to the Proposed Action *** II

N-6 SGS, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE CO~ENTS ON DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT PREPARED BY THE ATOMIC. ENERGY COMMISSION FOR PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION UNITS 2 and 3, PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY November 24, *1972

1. Removal of Agricultural Land from Production - The actual construction of units 2 and 3 used up*about 23 acres of Manor channery loam on D and F

.slopes. When the plant is operating under.normal conditions, as outlined in the *statement, no agricultural land is expected to be removed from production. When the plant is operating under abnormal conditions, an un-known amount of land may need to be temporarily or permanently removed from agricultural production. In the event of a severe accident of Class 8 or 9 1 as outlined on Page VII-2 1 a large amount of agricultural land could need permanent removal from agricultural production. As the extent of the Class 9 accident is not _stated nor its probability of occurrence given, it is impossible for us to determine agricultural land damage. The plan, indicating an approach to land restoration in case of a Class 9*accident, is not spelled out on Page VII, D-11 1 paragraph C.

2. Effects on Farm Enterprises* - The effects of normal plant operation in farm

.enterprises appears to be minor as stated in the statement. The fifth para-graph. on page ii 11 although *** as l~w as practicable.", and paragraph (g) on_page iv, 11 If **** iodine effluent", along with the incomplete answer to question 11, supplement No. 2 1 makes it impossible to determine the. effect on local dairy and o.ther farm enterprises from abnormal or accident conditions.

A list*of names, addresses, and phone numbers of dairies should be on hand so dairy farmers can be notified of abnormai releases of radiation so they can take protective action in line with paragraph C VII, D-11 1 _Supplement 1.

3. Anticipated Rural Development Effects - Beneficial and/or Adverse - Provided the plant*functioris as planned, we can see no significant effect, beneficial or adverse, on rural development *.

4_. Erosion and. Sediment Control Measures and *Effects - It_ appears that adequate attention was paid to erosion control during construction. The small acreage (23 acres) involved in actual, construction does not pose a significant sedi-ment source. There was no mention of a total conservation plan on the 620 acre site.

5. Effect on Land Use - As indicated on page IX-1, it is not anticipated that the area surrounding the plant will be noticeab;li..r'...t'fected by the* normal

• operation of the p~ant. However, . as also indic~ted on page* IX-1, in the highly unlikely event of a severe accident (up to or more than 50'/, of the fission inventory released to the environment), as postulated by environmen-talists, then permanent and severe land use chang.es would occur to large areas of land in nearby counties~

N-7

6. Water Supuly - The answer to question 10 in Supplement 2 indicate that no known* uses of water from Conowingo pond are being used for agricultural irrigation. The calculated amount of gaseous radwaste from units 2 and*

3 of 600,000 Ci/year as compared to approximately 10 Ci/year liquid effluents indicates the greater potential for surface water pollution from radwaste is from gaseous emissions. Some provision for warning owners of ponds of possible surface watE:r con~amination by gaseous radwaste should be incurporated into the monitoring and alarm system, as outlined on page 7 of the applicants report.

7. Drainage Patterns - The plant poses no detriment to drainage patterns either in the Susquehanna River or local streams.

8. Drainage Measures - No comment.

9.

• Potential Agricultural Pollutants - See comments on 1 1 2, 5, and 6.

N.;.9 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY BALTIMORE ,DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 50-277 P.,o. aox 171s 50-278 BALTIMORE, MARYi.A.ND 21203 NABPL-E 16 November 1972 Mr. Daniel R. Muller Assistant Director for Environmental .Projects*

Directorate of Licensing Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C. 20545

Dear Mr *.Muller:

In response to your letter of 10 Octo.ber 1972, the Baltimore District,

• Corps of Engineers has reviewed the Draft Environmental Statement *

"Related to the Proposed Operation of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, by the Philadelphia Electric Company, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278." Our comments are submitted in accordance with prov::i.sions of the"NationalEnvironmental Policy Act cif 1969

{Pubhc Law 91-190).

The 600 acre site is located on the west bank.of Conowingo Pond princi-pally in Peach Bottom Township, York County, Pennsylvania. Conowingo Pond is formed by the backwater o{ Conowingo Dam on the Susquehanna River. Units 2* and 3 will employ identical boiling water reactors to produce a total of 6,586 megawatts thermal (mwt). A steam turbine-generator will use this heat to provide *2 ,130 megawatts (net) of electrical power capacity. The exhaust steam will be cooled by once-through flow of water obtained from and discharged to Conowingo Pond and also.by forced draft towers when needed. At full power, the con-derisor cooling water will be discharged to Ccinowingo Pond at the rate of 3,350 cubic feet per second. Discharge tempe~ature will be about 21° F above inlet temperature during most of the year. In the summer, with the helper cooling towers operating, discharge temperature will be 13° F above inlet temperature. Peach Bottom Unit 1, a high temper-ature gas-cooled reactor rated at 40 megawatts electrical, is presently operating* at* ~he facility site. Unit 2 is scheduled for full power operation in September 1973 and Unit 3 in Se.ptem1)er 1974.

The Draft Environmental Statement is we11 written and addresses the environmental impacts well. Our specific comments are as follows.

• N-10, NABPL-E 16 November 1972 Mr, Daniel R, Muller

a. The statement indicates that Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 are protected to 135 feet m. s .1. It is assumed that the units will be*

protected to an elevation th.at will pass about 1,700,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) at this location (the flow to be expected during the probable maximum flood). The flood of June 1972 had an .estimated peak flow of about l,OCi0,000 cfs at this site.*

b. It is expected that the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station will have no effect on flood flows in the Susquehanna River.

c. It is noted that Peach Bottom Unit 1, presently in operation, withdraws cooling water within the beginning*length of the 4,700 foot discharge canal for Units 2 and 3. .The statement does not indicate if the increased water temperature within the canal (13° For 21° F over the presently existing conditions, depending on operation of the helper cooling t_owers) will have any impact on the operation of Unit 1.

d. The apparent eutrophication of Conowingo Pond and the causes therefore are noted in the. section of the statement on the existing aquatic environment. The comment is made that "hopefully *** upriver sources of pollution will decre~se to levels whereby eutrophication may cease *to be a problem. But in the near future .at least, the pro-blem of eutrophication and the possible aggravation of the current situation by discharge from* power plants *must be reckoned with.".

Later, the statement discusses the environmental impact to the biota of Conowingo Pond which may result from operation of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3. In a number of situations considered, it was noted that high mortalities or massive kills may.result during operation of the units *. The contribution of organic matter to the pond and con-currently the oxyge~ demand from the decaying organisms, however, is mentioned only in Appendix K. The oxygen demand and nutrients contri-buted. to the pond as a result of the operation of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 may significantly contribute to the eutrophic conditions in Cono-wingo Pond and could be discussed as. a potential significant impact in the body of the. statement.

e. _There is an apparent typographical error on page VII-7, where the plant life is *stated to be 40 years. At other points, including page VII-3, plant life is stated to be 30 years.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on your Draft Environmental Statement for this project. These comments are.offered to aid 2

N-11 NABPL-E 16 November 1972 Mr. Daniel R. Muller preparation of the final environmental statement. We have furnished copies of this correspondence to the Council on Environmental Quality, as requested.

Sincerely yours,

/ ' / .. ***."/ .* ~.,,-

///~ ,;//

cl,- t.lt:t1:-,._.-'&.' -*vc.

-lo '

• WILLIAM E. TRIESCHMAN, Jr.

/ i

.c.: (,y--/e--c..- 1.,..

Chief, Planning Division Copy furnished:

NAD, ATTN:/ NADPL-R (4 cys)

Mr. Timothy Atkeson General Counsel Council on Environmental Quality Executive Office of the President 722 Jackson Place, N.W.

Washington, D, C, 20506 (10 cys).

,(

I 3

'N-13 THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF COMMERCE Washington, D.C. 20230 50-277 50-278 November 29, 1972 Mr. Daniel R. Muller Assistant Director for Environmental Projects Directorate of Licensing United States Atomic Energy Conunission Washington, D. C. 20545 *

Dear Mr. Muller:

The draft environmental impact statement for "Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3 11 which accompanied your lett.er of October 10*, 1972, has been received by the Department of Conunerce for review and conunent.

• The Department of Commerce has reviewed the draft environ-mental statement and has the following connnents to offer for your consideration.

We are unable to evaluate the AEC staff's radiological dose values for routine and accidental emissions since.the appropriate relative concentrations in units of curies/m3 per curies/sec released and the meteorological assumptions used to determine them are not identified. The only infor-mation we can find is the statement.on page V-18; namely, "Avera:ge annual concentrations of radionuclides contained in the air and deposited on the ground at distances up to 50 miles from the plant have been estimated using an atmospheric transport model (ref 47 - Meteorology and

• Atomic Energy - 1968) incorporated into a computer program (ref 48, ORNL-TM-3613-in press). 11 No listing of such estimates were found in the -subject report.

With respect to radioactive effluents to be expected from this plant due to normal operations and the resulting anticipated radiological impact of the effluents the draft environmental.impact statement is not satisfactory, and corrective action concerning the reactor effluents should be undertaken innnediately. The* justification for this reconnnendation is outlined below.

N-14 The l'Sunnnary and Conclusions" section of this draft statement contains the paragraphs quoted below:

"Although no discernible radiological impact on indiyi-duals and*the population is expected from normal operations of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, the estimated potential doses from radioactive iodine near the site boundary are significant, and thus, weekly milk sampling and analysis will be required to assure

• that the iodine levels are maintained as low as practi-cable ****

'.'On the basis of the analysis and evaluation set forth in this statement, after weighing the environmental, economic, technical, and other*benefits of Peach Bottom Station Units 2 and 3 against environmental costs and considering available alternatives, it is concluded that the actions called for are the continua-tion of construction permits CPPR-37 and CPPR-38 and the issuance of an operating license for the facility subject to the following conditions for protection of the environment:

"(a) The applicant will carry out the station's radio-logical monitoring program at a level considered by the AEC's Regulatory Staff to be adequate to determine any radiological effects on the environment from operation of the station ****

"(g) If the .results of the radiological monitoring program.indicate a routinely detectable radioactive iodine level in milk samples, the applicant will take appropriate action to reduce-the radioactive ioqirie effluent."

The question which a reviewer of this draft statement must consider is whether the AEC Staff conclusions are reasonable.

Page III-43 of. the draft statement discusses the I-131 effluent from these plants as follows:

"Table III-6 lists the results .of our calculations of aµnual gaseous effluents which indicate a per unit annuai release of 300,000 curie's of noble .

gases. The applicant estimates about 150,000 Ci/yr *.

r N-15 The table shows a per unit annual release of 3.3 curies of 1131. The applicant estimates approX:i-*

mately 1 microcurie per second of iodine 131 release."

• In assessing the dose to man from the effluents of this plant, the draft statement further states on pages V-27, ff; the following:

"The largest estimate of radiation dose to the total body of an individual from 1 the gaseous effluent outside the exclusion area occurs at the SSEboundary of the station. These*estimates of dose have not been re-*

duced by the shielding provided by houses against radionuclides contained in the *air or deposited on

• the ground or for part-time occupancy. Without any consideration of these possible dose reduction factors, the sum of the dose estimates to the total body* of an individual at the SSE boundary of the exclusion area is about 2 7% of the dose from natura.l background and less than 4% of the limits of 10 CFR 20.

"The sum of all cif the estimated rad.iation doses to the thyroid at the SSE exclusion area boundary is approximate*ly 70 mrems for an adult and 500 mrems for a child if it is assumed that all of the milk is obtained from cows pastured 0.75 miles NW of the.

stati.cno This estimate of dose to the. thyroid of a:

child is about 5 times the dose from natural background.

This dose-is 100 times the guide of the proposed Appendix I of 10 CFR 50. The doses to an adult and to a child from drinking milk from* the nearest dairy farm have been discussed in Section v.* 2.a(3) ***.

"These dose estimates indicate that the release of 1 radioactive effluents from normal. operation of the plant can be conducted within the limits of 10 CFR 20 but not within the numerical guidelines of the proposed*Appendix I of 10 CFR 50 for gaseous effluents."

\

,., .* _,,,_.,, ________ *s**-*-~,...~--,~~*-**,..._._.,._..,~"*w*---.,**~-""*""*--o><,-'s-"~***s.---,.,...,,.***-** ...__ . .,,.-,,~~..,,,_..,..._..,.,.....,,_.,_,~**-**'- ,-,--~.,*- y...,~--~~,.,....._.,...., '-'**~ *~-~-. ,_._,. _.,_,,._,._'-,......,.,...,,._,..... .,...___.,.,_,____...,, ..,....,_.,.,,..,~..--,,,.._.,.*. ~-***<*-.s"'**"** *"'--<"*-*~~"* ~ *~,~*,-.*,~-

N-16 ,;,. 4 -

Several comments are in ordero (1) The above quotation from_page III-43 of the draft statement indicates approximately 1 microcurie per second of I-131 gaseous releases. This corresponds to 31.-5 Ci/yr or about 4.8 times

• the AEC estimate of 6.6 Ci/yr, if we assume that the 1 micro-curie per second refers to both units. (This would have been readily apparent to all readers :i,.f the draft statement had made the comparison in,the same measurement units as they should.)

(2) The already high thyroid dose estimated in the draft statement.would be 4.8 times higher if the applic~nt's estimates are correct, yet the draft statement contains no discussion of t~is point. ',

(~) The estimated dose.to man at the site boundary and in the thyroid dose are substantially above the proposed Appendix I of*10 CFR SO. In the case of the thyroid dose of a child it is 100* times the guide of proposed Appendix 1 of 10 CFR SO, providing we ignore the 4 .. 8 factor discussed above. It would be even higher if the applicant's estimates of I-131 release are correct.

(4) The I-131 release estimates for these units are sub-stantially above those estimates made for other nuclear plants.

This would seem to imply that it is quite feasible and_

practical to remove more I-i31 before release to the atmosphere.

(5) The "Guide to the Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Plants," issued for corinnent August 1972

• by the AEC, specifically calls for additional considerations.

regarding the guides of Appendix I of 10 CFR 50 as follows:

"For proposed light-water cooled reactor installations in which the quantities of radioactive material in effluents will be limited to levels.that are within the numerical guides for design objectives and limit-ing conditions of operation set forth in the Commission's proposed amendments (dated June 9, 1971) to 10CFR Part* 50 and embodied in a new Appendix I (reproduced in Appendix 4 of this Guide), no further consideration need be given to the reduction of radiological impacts in formulating alternative plant designs.* .If the

\ I .

• ---..----------------*-----~

N-17 reactor is not a light-water cooled reactor, the possibility must be explored of an alternative.rad-waste system which reduces the level of radio-activity in the effluents and direct radiation to the levels proposed in Appendix L, In any case, for reactors to whic.h the proposed Appendix I does not apply, the applicant should demonstrate sufficient consideration of alternative radwaste systems and of their radiological output to assure that releases from the proposed facility will be as low as practicableo" It would seem most reasonable.to assume that if a re~ctor operator is going to be allowed to potentially exceed the*

guidelines of Appendix I of 10 CFR 50 we should assume that these guides do not apply. Therefore, we feel that considera-tion of alternative radwaste systems should be a part of this draft document. There is* no such discussiono (6) . While :Lt is true that the procedures described in the *

"Surmnary and Conclusions" section of the draft document will require correction of I-131 effluents if they are too high, it is also true that there is an implied long delay time between an AEC order to correct a situation and the actual event of correction. Otherwise the.applicant would include this in his original plant system. Thus the question really is one of how long it is reasonable to accept a previously anticipated problem after plant operation begins, even when the anticipated problem is a factor of 100 over acceptable guidelines~

It is our belief that the AEC Staff conclusions in this draft document are not reasonable and that corrective action to reduce anticipated I-131 gaseous effluent levels be required before granting of an operating licenseo That such corrective action is reasonably feasible would seem to have been amply demonstrated by the large number of other*power reactor installations of similar type which have substantially lower I-131 estimated effluentso We hope these conunents ~ill be of assistance to you in the preparation of the final statemento Sincerely, *

%,! .A;;?.~.

~all~r Deputy Assistant Secretary rnr F.nvironmental Affaira

N-19 United States pepartment bf the Interior OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240

~

ER-72/1187 11972 R£C[1V£D 50-277

• 50-278

Dear Mr. Muller:

This is* i.n response to your letter of October. 10, 1972, /

requesting our*comm~nts on the Atomic Energy Commission's draft statement, dated October 1972, on environmental considerations for Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station,*

Units 2 and 3, York County, Pennsylvania.

Historical Significance The draft statement should reflect consultation with the Pennsylvania and Maryland State Liaison Officers for Historic Preservation concerning properties in the. area which may be under consideration for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. They are the Executive.Director, Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, William Pehn Memorial Museum and Archives Building, Box 1206, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108; and

_the Director, Maryland Historical.Trust, Box 1704, Annapolis, Maryland 21401.

It is indicated on page II-10, secorid paragraphl that no artifacts other than those of the pre-settler Susquehanrta Indians, which are preserved in the Indian Steps Museum, have been.found within the site boundary; however, there is no evidence that a professionally conducted archeological survey w&smade. Prior to the initiation of construction, the site should ~ave been surveyed by a professional archeologist to determine the presence or absence of archeological resources. If archeological resources were found, their significance should have been evaluated and steps identified to mitigate the impact of the project.

The absence of such a survey makes it impossible to accu-rately assess the impact of the power station on archeological

. resources at this time.

N-20

• Water Use We suggest that the second paragraph bn page II-18 be revised to indicate that the Conowingo Pond and the Susquehanna River, above and below the Conowingo Pond, support considerable fishermen and waterfowl hunter activity.

Geology The brief description *of the geology and seismology of the site presented in the draft statement is inadequate for an independent assessment of the geologic environ-ment relevant to the Peach Bottom Station. The data presented are inadequate concerning the physical prop-erties of the geologic materials on which.the plant and its.appurtenant structures are founded and there is only a slight indication of how~ knowledge of th~ phys{cal properties has been used in the design of the facility.

The Beismic design criteria.and the methods of their derivation are not discussed. Comprehensive discussions of these factors are required for an adequate assessment.

The sections on geology and seismology should reference*

the applicant's Safety Analysis Report to the AEC which treats the details of the geologic and seismologic in-vestigations and analyses that were performed for the project. We suggest*that, as a minimum, a summary of the geologic and seismologic analysis sections of the Safety Analysis Report be included in the final environmental statement with adequate cross-references to appropriate parts of the environmental statement to indicate how the data and analyses have been utilized for purposes of design and construction of the facility.

As a result of established procedures between the Geologic~l Survey and the AEC, the geologic aspects of the site that are included in the Safety Analysis Report have been pre-viously reviewed. The Geological Survey's co!Jlments on this report were transmitted to the AEC Director of _Regulation on September 21, 1967, and became part of the public record in connection with AEC licensing procedures *

.2

N-21 Animals It is recognized on pages II-27 and II-28 that many species of waterfowl use the Conowingo area for resting. This section should also recognize the importance of the area as breeding and nesting habitat for green-winged teal, mallard, and wood duck. The last paragraph 6n page II-27 should be modified to indicate that turkeys are hunted during the hunting season throughout the State of Pennsylvania.

We suggest that the first paragraph on page II-28 also mention the following additional species included in the "Rare and Endangered Species" list. The bog turtle should be listed as rare and endangered; the bald eagle*should be listed as endangered; and the American osp~ey and Eastern

£ox squirrel should be listed as undetermined.

Cooling System for Normal Operation The estimate for the maximum consumptive water use of 30 cfs given on page III-9 appears to be low. We estimate that the cooling tow.er consumption and the increased evaporation from the Conowingo Pond during full load would be nearly twice this .amount. We would estimate that 30 cfs would be a reasonable estimate for average consumptive use for a plant factor of 80 percent~

Studies to Evaluate the Thermal Plume from Peach Bottom Um.ts 1-3 The last paragraph on page III-22 presents the reasoning behind conducting studies of thermal plumes using an average low flow .of 2,500 cfs. Although it appears that the explanation is reasonably sound from a physical point of view, it is not equally sound from a biological point of view since the existance of aquatic life is limited by environmental extremes. Therefore, these studies should include consideration for lower flows of record also.

The last paragraph on page III-23 appears to be in ~rror in stating _that the isotherms presented by the applicant* in Figures III-13 through III-16 represent the worst physical conditions of the river. Table II-2 and Table B-2 indicate 3

N-22 maximum temperatures of 88°. Table B-1 and the first paragraph on page III-23 indicate that the minimum flow was below 2,500 cfs several times\during the 50-year record. Although daily temperature and discharge data are not presented, it appears that there is a significant possibility for discharges below 2,500 cfs and temperatures above 85° to also occur simultaneously. For example, temperatures above 85°- have occurred in June, July, and August and the minimum discli*arge in August* for the 50-year period of record was about 2,000 cfs.

Staff Assessment of the App"licant' s Ther*mal Plume Analysis We concur in the AEC's conclusion that the applicant's predictions of the thermal effects in Conowingo Pond are

• inadequate. Specifically, we agree with the AEC's computa.-..;

tions on page III-28. which show that the waste heat dis-*

charged by the plant cannot.be dis~ipated within the reach of the pond indicated by.the applicant.

The applicant's analysis is based on a distorted physical model which inherently cannot scale the processes of hydraulic dispersion and heat transfer as they occur in the prototype. These are the two primary processes which determine the thermal effects on Conowingo Pond resulting from the discharge of heated wat~r. The applicant's pre~

dieted temperature distributions (shown in Figs. III 13-

16) show practically none of the added heat being advected out of the pond through water discharge; and thus, all the added heat would have to be transferred to the atmosphere within the area of increased temperature. However, as shown by ,the AEC' s computations, using a reasonable estimate of the heat transfer co~fficient, only one-fifth of the 0ischarged heat would be transferred to the atmosphere within the area of raised temperature predicted by the applicant.* Hence, the area of increased temperatures would be very much larger than shown. The quantitative prediction of therma.:).. effects in Conowingo Pond would be extremely difficult because of its complex flow regime. A physical model is a reasonable approach for determining the current patterns likely .to result from the various hydraulic operations affecting the pond. These patterns would then reveal the areas most affected by the heated water. However, this physical model should not be expected to reproduce the raised temperatures quantitatively .

.4

N-23 Chemical Wastes The first paragraph ~n page III-47 mentions the applicant's consideration of a mechanical condense~ tube cleaning sys-tem and the conclusion that _the economic benefits of the method would not justify the cost. This conclusion should be supported by a balancing of benefits and costs. We endorse t_he AEC recorrimendation that mechanical cleaning alternatives should be reconsidered and evaluated in relationship to environmental costs.

Environmental Impact of Site* Preparation: a:n:a Plant. Construction This section shourd be expanded to include a discussion of the effects that construction activities had on fish and wildlife. The discussion should evaluate the disruption of wildlife habitat, and the effects of increased sedi~

mentation on fish and fish habitat.

Land Use The draft environmental statement includes nois~ level information for a distance of 100 feet from the base of transformers or cooling towers*and for houses and cottages in the area. We suggest that the level of noise at various distances from the plant and its estimated effect on the quality of outdoor recreation on Conowingo Pond and the surrounding land area be discussed'.in the final statement.

Plant Op~ration Acdidents This section contains an adequate evaluation of impacts.

resulting from plant accidents through Class 8 for airborne emissions. However, the environmental effects of releases to water is lackipg. Many of these postulated accidents listed in Table VII-2 could result in releases to Conowirigo Pond and the Susquehanna River. We think the probable environmental effects should be evaluated in detail.

We also think that Class 9 accidents resulting in both air and water releases should b~ described and the impacts on l'luman life and *the remaining environment discussed as long 5

)

N-24 as there is any possibility of occurrence. The consequences of an accident of ~his severity could have far-reaching effects on land and in the Susquehanna River which could persist for centuries affecting millions of people.

Water Use The applicant's recreational plans are. discussed on page IX-2; however, the location of the boat launching facility*

upstream from the Peach Bottom Plant is not glven. The final statement should include a locational sketch of this facility and other recreational facilities similar to that*

_*given.on page II-36 for the Muddy Run Recreational Lake.

Altern~tive Fuel Pages XI1-3 and XII-4 do not contain enough information tp confirm the quantity of coal or oil burned or the amount of so 2 that would be emitted to the atmosphere with a com-parable size fossil fueled-unit. The reference cited in the third paragraph, page XII-4, does not contain informa-tion on this subject: We ~uggest that the final statement include data that will allow the information supplied to be verified.

Cooling System Alternatives The stipulations to the operating license require the applicant to install and operate a closed-cycle cooling system by July 1, 1975; however, the applicant has the opportunity to ask for an amendment to the license in accordance with the provisions of 10CFR, Part 2. The amendment would be granted if the applicant can clearly demonstrate that the operation of the station with the once-through, tower-assisted cooling system will not result in an unacceptable, long-term, irreparable damage to aquatic biota.

We concur with AEC that the closed-cycle cooling tower system would-be the most effective alternative to reduce thermal impacts on the aquatic life of Conowingo Pond and the Susquehanna River.

6

N-25 Cost-Benefit Balance We suggest that the Summary of costs and benefits given on pages XII-14 and XII-15 include the losses of at least part of the aquatic biota in the pond, possible exclusion of anadromous fish runs fr.om the Susquehanna basin upstream and downstream from the project, and reduction of area which can sustain recreation in Conowingo Pond.

We hope these comments will be helpful to you in the preparation of the final environmental statement.

Deputy !tssistan..;. Secretary of the Mr. Daniel R. Muller Assistant Director for Environmental Projects Directorate of Licensing

u. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C~ 20545 7

N-27 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES COAST GUARD ~.:'.~~~s~oi~:!~' (GWS/83) 400 SEVENTH STREET SW.

-:::i~~~'W§:fi;. '2*25 20590 50-277 Mr. Daniel R. Muller 50-278 "Assistant Director for Environmental Projects Directorate of Licensing

u. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C. 20545

Dear Mr. Muller:

This is in response to your letter of 10 October 1972 addressed to Mr. John E. Hirten, Assistant Secretary for Environment and Urban Systems concerning the draft environmental impact statement, environ-m*antal report and other pertinent papers on the Peach Bottom Atomic Power*Station, Units 2 and 3, located on the Susquehanna River at Peach Bottom Township, York County, Pennsylvania.

The material submitted was reviewed by the concerned staffs and operating administrations. The following comments of the Eastern Region*of the Federal Aviation Administration are noted:

'*'We have reviewed the subject environmental impact statement and _;>rovide the following comments:

• n1. We note that the planned site appears to be located beneath Federal A.irway

• Victor 3 *. The effect of the *plant ad-.

d:i.tion on t.he airway should be noted in the final statement.

"2. There are no public use airports near the plant site; hoNever, two private airports are in the vicinity -

Delta Airport, approximately 4 statute miles so~thwest, and Huber Airport, approximately 7 statute miles northeast. In this connection, the use of the plant co*::>ling towers and the evaportion and drift comment does not refer-to vapor visibility in the expected height of the plumes. The final statement should c.ontain some indication of the effect of these plumes on air nayigation with respect to reduction in visibility, if any.

We find no other negative environmental effects on aeronautical facilities."

---*.---------------. -- -----*-----~----*---- - _,.. .... -**-*-~~ --~.. ---*----------** - --*--**----~. . ~---~-*... ---** ---*.:.------*-*-~*-----~*-**-*--*~~---~....- . . ,. ________ *-*-~* -~-~--- --..---~----- - <<----~-****- . .-.-~--., -. -..

N-28 The Department of Transportations has no further comments to

• offer on the draft statement nor do we have any objecti~n to the proj~ct. The final statement, however, should address the problem of the va?or visibility in the expected.heights of the plumes fro~

the cooling towers and should indicate the effect of the plumes on*

air navigation with respect to reduction in visibility, if any.

In this regard the applicant may wish to coordinate this aspect of .the project directly with the Federal Aviation Administration and it is *r-ecommended that this coordination be conducted with

~he, Administrator, Eastern Region at the following address:

Administrator, Eastern Region Federal A~iation Administration Federal Building John F. Kennedy International Airport Jamaica, New York 11430 The opportunity for the Department of.Transportation to review and comment on the draft statement for the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, _is ap?reciated.

Sincerely,

~~-~~

\._) ..*~., :-,

f-..-.p*~*:--~:* ~ .. - ....... -.... **-**

• .r* ......... **'J \...,, ,.,, **..:.*- * \. ... *.,.,,

t1c~*:rJJ Cb;::7 c:*~~~.::J c.,; (: :i~:*::~

2

N-29 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 OFFICE OF THE

.ADMINISTRATOR DEC-1 W Mr. L. Manning Muntzing Director of Regulation U.S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D.C. 20545

Dear Mr. Muntzing:

The Environmental Protection Agency has reviewed the draft environmental state~ent for the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3, and our detailed comments are enclosed.

131

~r principal radiological finding is that the release of 1 from the turbine building vent will not be reduced to a level that is "as *1ow as practicable." The final statement should evaluate additional means of reducing that release. We note that a major portion of the off-site whole body dose is delivered during periods when the recombiner is shut down for maintenance. The practicability of reduci.ng, if not entirely eliminating, this dose contribution should be investigated and the results presented in the final statement.

Our principal water quality conclusion is that the once-through cooling systems will very probably have a detrimental impact on the aquatic environment. We agree with the AEC that closed cycle cooling should be installed, unless it can be demonstrated that use of the present system will not result in long-term, irreparable damage to the aquatic environment.

We will be pleased to discuss our comments with you or members of your staff.

Sincerely,

/(-./t~W- ~

~ Sheldon Meyers Director Office of Federal Activities Enclosure

N-30 D-AEC~EPA-00072-07

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGNECY Washington, D.C. 20460 November 1972 ENVIRO~iIENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT COMMENTS Peach Bottom Atomic Power St.ation Units 2 and 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION AND 'CONCLUSIONS 1

. RADIOLOGICAL ASPECTS 3 Radioactive Waste *Treatment 3 Transportation and Reactor Acciderits 6 NON-RADIOLOGICAL ASPECTS 8 Thermal and Biological Enects s*

Chemical Impact -9 Air Quality 10 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 12

N-31 INTRODUCTION AND CONCLUSIO!~S The :Cnvirornncntal Protection Agency (EPA) h.:1s revie~~ed tl1:i druft environmental impact statement con~erning t~e Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3, prepared by the U.S. Atc~ic Ecergy Co.::::ission (AEC) and issued on October 10, 1972. Following are our major conclusio:is:

131

1. Our principal radiological finding is that the release of 1 from the turbine building vent will not be reduced. to a le~el that is "as low as practicable." The final statement sllould'evaluate additionai means of reducing that release.

2. We note that a major portion of the off-site whole body dcse is delivered during periods when the iecombiner is shut down for

• maintenance. The practicability of reducing, if n~t entirely

. eliminating, this dose contribution should be investigated and the results presented in the final statement.

3. There.appears to be a strong possibility that the present, once-through cooling system will have a detrimental impact on the aquatic environment. We agree with the AEC recommendation that closed-cycle cooling should be installed by July 1, 1975, unless interim monitoring

/

and study programs clearly demonstrate that open-cycle cooling does not result in long term, irreparable damage to the aquatic biota.

We wish to suggest, howev~r, that evaluations of the plant cooling system be made considering the recently enacted.Public Law 92-500 (Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972).

N-32 2

4. We agree with the AEC recoM~~ndation that the applicant limit total residual chlorine in the condenser cooling wat.er discharge to 0.1 mg/liter for three 20 _minute periods daily; However, shoul~

chemical monitoring reveal levels in excess of those generally recommended by EPA (concentrations of residual chlorine in receiving waters of 0.1 mg/liter and 0.05 mg/liter persisting no longer than 30 minutes per day and 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> fer day respectively) we suggest that the applicp.nt consider adopting an alternative defouling method. The final statement should discuss alternative defouling systems in detail.*

---

*---------------~----,..---

N-33 3

RADIOLOGICAL ASPECTS Radioactive. Waste !far~agec.cnt 131 .

With the possible exception of the release of I from the turbine building vents and the plant stack, Peach Bottom Atomic Power

• Station Units 2 and 3 are capable of maintaining the release of. radio-active materials to "as low as practicable" levels. Optimum use of .

existing capability will depend on the operating procedures that are employed.

Steam leakage into the turbine building will contain radioiodine which will be released .through the turbine building vents. .The .draft statement indicates that the resulting thyroid dose to a child could exceed the proposed 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix I organ dose guidelines by a factor. of 100. The draft statement also indicates* that plant syste~

modifications*are possible which could lower this dose. Further; the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) indicates *that* i.f radioiodine con-centrations approach 10 CFR 20 limits, consideration will be given to some method of decreasing releases such as attempting to collect the valve leakoffs from equipment in the turbine* building. It w.ould appear from the foregoing evidence that the risk reduction to be achieved by reducing the radioiodine levels is significant and that the means for effecting the reduction are practicable.

Similarly, it may be necessary to further reduce the release of rad~o-

. io.dine from the stack. Main condenser air ejector exhausts will contain 131 1 which will be released through the plant stack. The draft statement indicates the compressed gas holdup system will provide approximately 131 56 hours6.481481e-4 days <br />0.0156 hours <br />9.259259e-5 weeks <br />2.1308e-5 months <br /> holdu? for I.

• We estimate that the subsequent stack rel22.se

N-34.

4 131 of the r could re*sult in a thyroid dose t9 a child which exceeds 10 .CFR Part 50 Appendix I organ dose guidelines by at l~ast a factor of 10. T~e final statement should discuss measures that may be required to reduce the discharge of radioiodine _from the stack.

The- draft statement indicates that appropriate action will be taken to reduce radioiodine effluent if milk sampling and analysis show a routinely detectable iodine level. We favor environmental ~onitoring as a check on the performance of engineered controls but not as a substitute. As noted earlier, the application o{ additional engineered controls of radioiodine is indicated at the facility.

We note that the major contribution to the off-site whole body dose is associated with the operation of the recombiher - gas compressor train. When the recombiner is being serviced,* short-live*d ra:dionuclides are released. The draft statement assumes that the recombiner will not be operable for a* total of ten (10) days each year. We do not have the information to ~ndependentiy evaluate the extent of downtime

• associated _with the operation of the rec*ombiner; therefore, we JllUSt presently accept the information provided. The rationale and basis for this critical assumption should be*provided in the final statement.*

It would seem desirable for the final statement to considei the benefit

.and practicability. of providing measure~ to reduce the dose cluring recombiner downtime.

The recombiner-compressed *gas storage system has a greater potential for leakage of off-gas than other currently proposed systems which operate at ambient pressures. While the draft statement aadresses radiogas disch_arges resulting from steam leakage, it neglect~ consideration of leakage from .

• ~---. -,--------*

.N:-35 5

\

the pressurized holdup pi~e system. Since any ,releases from this system will result in ground level discharges, rather than elevated releases through the plant stack, the dose corisequences 0£ this potential leakage may be significant, relative to Appendix I dose limits, and should be a~dressed in the final statement.

The draft statement indicated that essentially all liquid radwastes,

. except those with detergents, may be treated by Powdex filters and mixed-bed demineraliz*ers, and that most of the liquids will be recycled. Provisions have been made for solidification of liquid wastes, if ~he.waste carinot be recycled or discharged to the environment. The draft statement indicates that detergent wastes will be treated by particulate filtration only, and that those wastes cannot be reused. While laundry wastes are expected to contain very lo~ concentrations ~f radi~activity, p~ovisions should be made for an alterna_tive mode of treatment for these wastes, should activities be significantly higher than expected. If the proposed liquid radwaste' equipment is operated as described, in combination with maximum.possible recycle, and additional treatment of detergent *wastes is provided and used when necessary, the liquid waste effluents .can b*e -considered "as low as

• pr~cticable, 11 and should be within the guidelines of the proposed Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50. The final statement should detail the applicant's criteria for reprocessing and reusing liquid radwastes, and/or initiating discharge to the environment.

_J

N-36 6

Transportation ar.d Reactor Accidents In its review of nuclear power plants, EPA has idencifieci a need for.::idditional infort:1ation on two types of accidents which coultf result in radiation exposure to. *the public: (1) those involving

. transportation of spent fuel and radioactive wastes and (2) in~plant

• i.

accidents. Since these accidents are common to all nuclear power plants, the *environmental risk for,each type of accident is amenable to a general :malysis. Although the AEC has done considerable wprk for a number of years on the safety aspects of such accidents, we believe that a thorough analysis of the probabilities of occurrence and the expected consequences of such accidents would result in a better under~tanding of the environmental risks than a less-detailed examination of the guestions on a case-by..:case basis.* For this *reason we have reached an understanding with the AEC that they wilI conduct such analyses with EPA participation concurrent with review of impact statements. .for individual facilities and will.make the results available in the near future. We are taking this approach primarily because we believe that any changes in equipment or operating pro-

• cedures for individual plants .requ"ired *as a result of the investi-gations co~ld be incl~ded without appreciable change in the overall plant design. If. major redesign of the plants to include engineering changes were expected or if an immediate publif or environmental risk were being taken while these two-issues were being resolved, we would, of course, make our concerns known.

N-37 7 The statement concludes " *** that the env;tronmental risk~ ,foe to*

postulated radiologic:-al accidents at the Peach Bottom Atomic Pqwer Station 11 are exceedingly small and need not be considered further. Th'fs conclusion is based on the standard accident assumptions and guidance issued by the AEC for light-water-cooled reactors as a.proposed amendment to Appendix D of 10 CFR Part 50 on December 1, 1971. EPA commented on this proposed amendment in a letter to the Comrniss,ipn on January 13, 1972. These comments essentially *raised t~e necessity for a detailed discussion of the technical bases of the assumptions involved in determining the various. classes of accidents and_ expected consequences. We believe. that the general analysis mentioned ,above will be adequate to resolve these points and that the AEC will apply the results*to all licensed facilities.

N-38 8

NON-P~~IOLOGICAL ASPECTS Thermal. and Biological Effects Condenser cooling at the Peach Bottom Station Units 2 and 3 will be

• accomplished by means of a once-through system with an intake and discharge on a se.ction of the Susquehanna River known as the Conowingo Pond.

During.warm weather, however, 57'percent of the plant's cooling water may*

_/

b_e diverted through forced-draft, helper *c*ooling towers (on~e-through) prior to discharge into the pond *.

We concur with the conclusion of the AEC staff that the applicant's calculations of thermal effects are not conservative and thus, may well prove overly optimistic. Therefore, in our *opinion, if the plant employs

.the proposed once-through cooling system only, there is a substantial potential for the degradation of the aquatfc environment in Conowingo Pond. .In addition, we agree with the AEC in that water temperatures in the mixing zone may, at times, exceed a 5°F rise above ambient. Such a rise would constitute a violat~on of the *federally approved state water quality standards applicable to this section of *the Susquehanna River. To _rectify this, the AEC will require a closed-cycle system af~er July 1, 1975, unless the applicant's interim environmental monitoring and study programs, as outlined in the draft statement and the tec~nical specifications accompanying the operating license,"*** can clearly demonstrate that the operation.

of the station with the once-through, tower assisted cooling system will not result in an unacceptable~ long-term, irreparable damage to aquatic biota **** " We wish to suggest, however, that evaluations of the plant cooling system be made considering the recently enacte*d Public Law 92-500

N-39 9 (F.aderal t*~atzr Pol!ction Cor:.t!"ol Act Amendments of 1972). 'T.'his lP.W

. requires that ...... not later than July 1, 1977, "ef_fluent limi;:.s.~ions for fr,)

point sources other th~n publicly o~rned trea~r.-.-?nt ...:10:.-k!:, * * * \, ...j .11) require the application of the best practicable control technology currently available as defined by the Ad::iinistn:tcr *** " and " *.. not later than July 1, 1983, effluent limitations for categories and classes of poi~t sources, other than publicly o,mcd treatment works. (will)

. .. I .

J:equire the application of the best available technology econom:f:cally

'achievable * * *

• II Although .the requirements for "best practicable" and "best economically achievable have not yet been determined, should these requirements warrant a change in-the*Peach Bottom facility-cooling, syste~,

we believe a supplementary or a new dra:(t enviro~mental impact.statement

• would be appropriate.

Chemical Impact The projected chemical effluent con*centrations of Peach Bottom Station. Units 2. and 3 are well under those allowed by the applic'7iJle,

/

federally approved, chemical water quality standards. We believe, there-fore, that the standards will be met.

We concur.with the AEC recommendation that the applicant revise the procedure for application of chlorine to the condenser cooling water in order that total residual chlorine" *** (pr-ior to entry into the discharge pond) be limited to a maximum of 0.1 ppm and-that the period of chlorination

.addition to a condenser stream be limited to one hour per day." Clarification should be made in the final. statement, however, :as t~ wh.ether chlorine concentrations refer to chlorine residuals.in the individual condenser section discharges or in the combined disc:harge *.

. .,. -*~ -~ w*--*-~ --~-~- "'""* * --~,-* ~.,. ,-.** ~---~-.

N-40 f In the past, EPA has recommended that concentrations of residual chlorine in receiving water of 0.1 mg/liter and 0.05 mg/liter should.

not persist longer than 30 ::iinutes .'.:!nd *2 hours respectively. In the case of the Peach Bottom plant, the initial discharge pond and the 4700 foot discharge canal will probably provide sufficient time fo.7: dissipation.

of any*excessive, residual chlorine. However, should chemical monitoring reveal levels in excess of these limits in the vicinity of the discharge canal outlet, or biological monitoring indicate that a ~ign.ificant impact on aquatic biota will occur, we recommend that the applicant consider adopting an alternate defouling method, for example, the Ainertap.system or other mechanical cleaning device. The final statement should discuss such alternatives.*

Air Quality The AEC modified the applicant's meteorological data and presented this modified data in section F of the draft statement. Independently we reviewed the applica~t's data as well as the AEC 1 s modified data, and I it appears that the modified data may not be ~s representative of the .meteoro-I logical conditions at the site as the original data. For example, it seems unlikely that unstable conditions would prevail at the site for almost 59% of the.year, though this is suggested.by the modified data in section F.

In ord.er to substantiate the modifications offered in section F, the final statement should present a detailed discussion and justification of the method the AEC used to transform the applicant's data to the modified data presented in the draft statement.

In the draft statet:!ent, it 2ppears the AEC assumes that any one set of wind and stability data can be applied when calculating the disp.::rsic.::i oi

N-41 emissions frcm the 500 foot stack, the* 300 foot vent sta_cks, a*,1d als.:, frc::-.

the 150 foot cooling towers. If this is the assumption upon which their calculations are based, the calculations wouJ:d be unacceptc1ble. The fi:12.l statement should clarify the AEC's methods of applying the data to the emissions Jrom the different height stacks.

The draft statement evaluated the envi_ror.mental impact of the cool:i.ng

• tower evapqration and drift losses only during plant operation in the sun:zier months. This approach is valid if the cooling system is op~rated as once-through. tower-assisted cooling. However, the draft* statement indicated .

th.at a closed-cycle cooling system would be required after July. 1, 19 75.

The final statement should discuss the environmental impact, especially during the winter months, of the operation of a closed-cycle cooling syste::1.

I This discussion should evaluate the increased fqgging and icing on nearby transportation routes caused during operation of the towers in the* wint$r*

N-42 1~

ADDIT!ONi\.L COM'*lENTS During the rev:i:ew we noted in certain instances that the d-raft statement does _not present sufficient inform<<tion to .substantiate the conclusions presented. We recognize that much of this information-is not of major importance in evaluating the environmental impact of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3. The cumulative effects, however, could be significant. It would, therefore, be helpful in determinirig the impact of the plant if the following infor.r.ation were included in the final statement-:

1. Criteria for using the standby gas treatment system to control radioiodine discharges during purging of the reactor building.

2. Assurances that the applicant utilize provisions of Safe.ty Guide 21 and Safety Guide 23 to enable dose estimates to be calculated.

during operation of the. plant.

3. The location *of the au:dliary boiler gaseous rE:lease vent.

4. A discussion of the potential environmental impact of non-radio-active fuel stor5ge areas and non-radioactive fuel transporcation.

5. A discussion of ~he ozone ge~eratea by the high v9ltage trans~ission lines leading from the plant and its potential environmental impact.

The final statement should provide ambient air ozone data that may have been developed by the electric power.industry and others as a result of previous ambient air sampiing for ozone around high.voltage transmission lines *. Assurance should be given that the national

• ambient air quality standard for photochemical'oxidants (ozone)

• will not be exceeded.

N-43 13

6. A discussion of ciie prci~ticabllity bf treating filtered dete*rgent and iaundrJ wastes along with the sanitary wastes.

7. T"--. clarifj:caticn of the prccc<lure to DL= e!::ployed for the disposal of sludge from the sanita*ry waste treatment system.

8. A discussion of whether sched_uled reactor shutdowns will be conducted during warm weather in order to have as little stress as possible on the aquatic biota.

9. A d_:,,,,cussion of the probabilities and consequences of oil and toxic chemical spills. The adequacy of measures for the prevention and containment of such spills should be evaluated.

10. A discussion of the effect of water use by the Peach Bottom facility upon the total water depletion of the Susquehanna River.

The three nucle;?.r stations built or plam:".::d for the Susquehanna River (Three Hile Island, Susquehanna, and Peach Bottom) will have a tota.l consumptive water use of about 16 7 cfs. This irnter cons ump tic::.

combined with other water diversions.of approximately 500 cfs (domestic use by Baltimore and Chester, Pa. with discharges to drainage basins other than the Susquehanna River) may de-crease the Susquehanna River's discharge by about 1/3 d~ring times of extreme low flow.

11. Clarification of Table II-7. Table II-7 is confusing in that two different columns are both labeled 11-B.

12. A discussion of the operational effects of Unit 1 on Conowingo Pond.

N-45 FEDERAL POWER COMMIS.SION WASHINGTON, 0.C. 20426 December 1, 1972° IN REPLY REFER TO:

50-277 Mr. Daniel R. Muller 50-278 Assistant Director for Environmental Projects Directorate of Licensing U.* S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C. 20545

Dear Mr. Muller:

This is in *.response to your letter dated October 10, 1972, requesting comments on the AEC Draft Environmental Statement* Related to the Proposed

• Operation of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3* (Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278) by the Philadelphia Electric Company (PECO).

The Peach Bottom.plant is on the shore of the reservoir of the Conowingo hydroelectric project, FPC Projec*t No. 405, which is operated under license issued by the Federal Power Commission to the Susquehanna Power Company and Philadelphia Electric Power Company. These joint licensees are* subsidiaries of the Philadelphia Electric Company, applicant for Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3. By order issued October 13, 1970, the Federal Power Commission authorized the Licensees to grant an easement for the use of project lands and .the reservoir, needed for the construction and operation of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3. The authorization was granted subject*to a number of conditions for environmental protection of the Conowingo Reservoir. A copy of the Conunission 1 s order of October 13, 1970, is enclosed.

The following comments review the need for the facilities as concerns the adequacy and reliability of the affected power systems, and matters related thereto, in compliance with the National.Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and the April 23, 1971, Guidelines of t.he Council on Environ-mental Quaiity.

In preparation of these comments, the Federal Power Commission's Bureau of Power staff has considered the AEC Draft Environmental Statement; the Applicant's Environmental Report and Supplements thereto; related reports. made in response to the Commission I s Statement of Policy on Adequacy and Reliability of Electric Service (Order 383-2); a~d the FPC staff's analysis of these documents together with related information from other FPC reports. The staff generally bases .its evaluation of the need

N-46 Mr. Daniel R. Muller for a specific bulk power facility upon the load-supply situation for the critical load period immediately following the availability of the facility as well as long-term considerations. It should be noted that* the. useful life of the Peach Bottom facilities is expected to be 30 years or more *.

During that period the plant will make a significant contribution to the adequacy and reliability of power supply in the Applicant's service area.

Need for the Facility The Applicant !/is a member*of the Mid-Atlantic Area Council (MAAC),

serves approximately half of the Council's load and owns slightly less than half of the Council's generating capability. Applicant serves Southeastern Pennsylvania, Eastern Maryland, the State of Delaware, half of New Jersey and a small part of Virginia.. Both the Applicant and MAAC.

have an annual peak load that is expected to double in the next ten years.

To meet this increasing demand, the Applicant companies have qeen expanding their baseload generating capacity with fossil-fueled and nuclear-fueled units, with the nuclear units becoming a significant part of the total*

source of power. By the summer of 1975 nuclear units will ac~ount for

• 18.2% of total generating capacity. The following tabulation shows the Applicant's scheduled expansion (including retirements) program through t'!ie 1975 summer peak load period.

!/ The Applicant is made up. of the following four companies:-

Philadelphia Electric Company (PECO)

Delmarva Power & Light Company (DPLC)

Atlantic City Electric Company (ACEC)

Public Serv.ice Electric & Gas Company (PSEG)

I

N-47 Mr. Daniel R. Muller APPLICANT'S CAPACITY EXPANSION PROGRAM Additions Capacity Projected Service Plant Unit No. MW Date ~Quarter/Year2 Company Kearny 1il2 196 2/73 PSEG Linden 1fo9 196 2/73 PSEG Burlington cc 1i12 40 3/73 PSEG Essex 1fol ]j 114 4/73 PSEG Yards Creek 50 4/73 PSEG Carll' s Corner JT 1fol, 2 79 2/7.3 ACEC Edge Moor 1fo5 400 2/73 DPLC Unassigned 4 40 2/73 DPLC Peach Bottom 1fo2 JI 1065 2/73 . Applicant Eddystone 1fo3 400 2/74 PECO B. L. England 1fo3 160 4/74 ACEC McKee Run 144 1/74 DPLC Peach Bottom. 1fo3 2/ 1065 4/74 Applicant Salem 1il 2./ 1090 4/74 Applicant Salem Eddystone 1fo2 2:/ 1115 2/75 Applicant-1fo4 400 2/75 PECO ll Essex No. 1 was placed on temporary retirement January 1972.

'};./ The Peach Bottom nuclear units, and the Salem nuclear units are all jointly owned in the following proportions:

PSEG - 42.5% PECO - 42.5%

ACEC - 7. 5% DPLC -

• 7. 5%

• • • • • - * ,n_..,. , -.- "**""""~ - _,.., *""" ** N. ,-* - - - ..-. * " " - - ~ ~ - --.-* - * ~ - - ~ - ~ * * * - ~ * * - " .-._,..-.* - - ****-"" - ** ~ , , , . , , . , , ... .,, _,_,,_,. * .,..,.. --****s,*-~"-***-* ,.. .,,., '"'"

N-48 Mr. Daniel R. Muller APPLICANT'S CAPACITY EXPANSION PROGRAM Retirements Capacity Scheduled Retirement Plant Unit No. MW Date rnuarter /Year 2 ComEan:i:

Barb ado es 1Fl 21 4/72 PECO Chester ifl, 2 58 4/72 PECO Vienna 1fl-4 31 4/72 DPLC Chester 1t3, 4 61 4/73 PECO Delaware 1t2, 4, 5 78 4/73 PECO Richmond 1FlO, 11 73 4/73 PECO Schuylkill 1fo5, 8 43 4/73 PECO

• Peach Bottom 1fl 40 4/73 PECO Missouri Ave. 31 1/75 ACEC The following tabulation shows the projected loads to be served by the Applicant and the Mid-Atlantic Area Council (MAAC), and the relation-ship of the electrical output of the Peach Bottom units to the available reserve on the sununer-p~aking Applicant's and summer-peaking MAAC's systems at the time of the 1974 and 1975 sununer peak load periods.!/*

. These units are expected to constitute a significant part of the Applicant's total generating capacity for some 30 years. Therefore, they will be depended upon to supply power to meet futur.e demands over a period of many y~ars beyond the service period discussed in this report.

1J These summer peaks were chosen for analysis because they occur directly after the presently scheduled commercial operation dates for Peach Bottom 2 and 3 which are, September 1974 and September 1975, respectively.

N-49 Mr. Daniel R. Muller SUPPLY SITUA.TION FOR THE SUMMERS .OF 1974 AND 1975 Summer of 1974 Applicant MAAC With Peach Bottom #2 (1,065 Megawatts)

Net Capab~lity - Megawatts 18,997 42,178 Net Peak Load - Megawatts 17,057 1/ 34,110 Reserve Margin - Megawatts 1,940 - 8,068 Reserve Margin - Percent of Peak Load 11.1 23.7 Minimum Reserve Margin Based on 20 Percent of Peak Load - Megawatts 3,411 Deficiency - Megawatts 1,471 Without Peach Bottom #2 Net Capability - Megawatts 17,932 41,113 Net Peak Load_- Megawatts 17,057 34,110 Reserve Margin - Megawatts 875 7,003 Reserve Margin - Percent of Peak Load 5 .1. 20.5 Minimum Reserve Margin Based on 20 Percent of Peak.Load - Megawatts 3,411 Deficiency - Megawatts 2,536 ll Peak Load is coincident peak load.

N-50 Mr. Daniel R, Muller SUPPLY SITUATION FOR THE SUMMERS OF 1974 AND 1975 (continued)

Summer of 1975 Applicant MAAC With Peach Bottom 4fa3 (1,065 Megawatts')

Net Capability - Megawatts 22, 796 47,441 Net Peak Load*- Megawatts 18,483 37,058 Reserve Margin - Megawatts 4,313 10,3.83 Reserve Margin - Perc.ent of Peak Load 23.3 28.0 Without Peach Bottom #3 Net Capability - Megawatts 21,731 46~376 Net Peak Load - Megawatts 18,483 37,085 Reserve Margin - Megawatts. 3,248 9',291 Reserve Margin - Percent of Peak Load 17.6 25.1 Minimum Reserve Margin Based on 20 Percent of Peak Load* - Megawatts 3,697 Deficiency~ Megawatts 449 NOTE: Applicant's Net. Capability was derived from information in MAAC' s April 1972 response to Order 383-2. The Net Peak Load is the sum of estimated loads for the four individual companies (Schedule 19,.

1971 Form 12); MAAC's data*comes directly from the response to Order 383-2.

The Applicant states that its minimum reserve margin criterion for

• acceptable system reliability is to provide approximately twenty percent reserve generating capacity with respect to the system load requirements for each year. Reserve generating. capacity allows for operating contingencies such as error in load forecasts, forced outages of equipment, scheduled

• maintenance of equipment and extreme weather conditions.

N-51 Mr. Daniel R. Muller The availability of the Peach Bottom Unit No. 2 for the 1914 summer peak period would provide the Applicant with an expected reserve margin of 1,940 megawatts, or 11.1 percent of peak load. If the unit is delayed*

beyond this period, the sys.tern reserves would be reduced to 875 megawatts, or 5.1 percent of the 1974 summer peak load, The Applicant's reserve margin falls short of its minimum criterion of 20 percent of peak load or 3,411 megawatts, whether the Peach Bottom Unit No. 2 is in service or not, with deficiencies of 1,471 megawatts and 2,536 megawatts respectively.

For the 1975 summer peak load forecast for.the Applicant's system, the minimum reserve margin required is 3,697 megawatts. With all units in service, the Applicant has a reserve margin of.4,313 megawatts, or 23.3 percent of the peak load. With only the Peach Bottom Unit No. 2 in service, the reserve margin is reduced to 3,248 megawatts, or 17.6 percent of the 1975 summer peak load and a deficiency of 449 megawatts occurs. If the Peach Bottom units were both unavailable, the Applicant would lack 1,514 megawatts of meeting its minimum* reserve margin crit~rion.

The adequacy* and reliability of the Applicant's system is not* only dependent on the two Peach Bottom units but on all new capacity scheduled for commercial service. Between the 1974 and 1975 summer periods, 3,270 megawatts of new nuclear capacity and 560 of new fossil-fueled capacity is scheduled for commercial service. In recent years, the utility industry has experienced delays in placing maz:iy new large units into commercial operation. These delays are created by licensing, construction*and start-up problems. Some delays have been for as much as several years. Even

• though the planned reserve margin of 4,313 meg.awatts for the summer of

• 1975 seems adequate, it must be pointed out that if the scheduled two Peach Bottom and two Salem nuclear units were to be delayed beyond the summer peak of 1975, the reserve margin would drop to a negative 22 megawatts which is 3,714 megawatts below the Applicant's minimum reserve criteria for planned system reliability.

The MAAC region projects a reserve margin of 8,068 megawatts or 23.7 percent of the 1974 summer peak load if all scheduled units are pla~ed in commercial operation on time. If Peach Bottom No. 2 were to be delayed, the reserve margin would drop to 7;003 megawatts or 20.5 percent of the peak load. For the summer of 1975 with all units installed as scheduled, the reserve margin would be 10,383 megawatts or 28.0 percent of peak load.

If one Peach Bottom unit was delayed, t\}e reserve margin w_ould be reduced.

to 9,291 megawatts, or 25.1 percent of peak load, and if both units were.

delayed the reserve margin would be.*8,226 megawatts or 22.*1 percent of

'peak load. As previously stated this reserve margin for MAAC system's reliability is dependent not only upon the Peach Bottom units but* on a number of other nuclear and fossil-fired generating units under con-struction on MAAC systems as well as the Applicant's system. Presently

-~---------------~-*-*** ... - * - * ----<-* --* *---- **-- - -------*-- -*-- -,-.,...,.~ ,-*-* -- ----**- --**- - _,, *. -- -- .*. - ***-..- __ ..... ,, ________ - --****----~-"' , -*- - *~***---........ ----*-'-- ---~-,,--**- --**---* *...*.. ,... - *-----~~ -- *.. -----~-- - _,..,

N-52 Mr. Daniel R. Muller the MAAC system reserve criterion is .that the system have enough genera-ting capability that the probability of the occurrence of load exceeding available generating capacity shall not be greater on the average, than one day in ten years.

MAAC's prime functions are the furthering of reliability of the members' bulk power supply systems through cqordination of the members' expansion plans and operation of their generation and transmission facilities, and coordination of these facilities to provide short term emergency relief in the event of contingencies normally experienced on interconnected power systems, rather than to provide a substitute for adequate instan~a reserves. for _the region.

Transmission Facilities Integration of the Peach Bottom generation into the existing trans-mission facilities required the addition of one 500-kilovolt overhead transmission line. This line was finished in 1971 and completes a 500-kilovolt transmission loop around the Eastern Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New Jersey area improving the reliability of power supply to area customers. The line.passes through farmland and woodland areas (about 1,030 acres was required for the right-of-way of which approximately 82%

was farmland). Land use is essentially the same after construction of the line as before. The Applicant states that construction of the line

• was in accordance with the Philadelphia Electric Company's 1968

• published program, and closely follows the criteria stated in the joint publication of the U. S. Departments of Interior ana Agriculture, entitled, Environ-mental Criteria For Electric Transmission Systems.

-Alternatives and Costs The Applicant in determining the need for additional generation to meet its projected system demands, considered in addition to the purchase of firm power, a number of other alternatives, such as alternate locations, plant types; fuels, environmental effects and economics. Presently only marg~nal hydroelectric expansion is available leaving other thennal generation as the only pra.ctical alternative to the Peach Bottom Nuclear Units. Local coal resources do not offer a viable alternative because of air quality regulations and suitable sources are-at such a distance as to impose transport.difficulties between mine and power plant. Natural gas also is not a viable alternative because it cannot be guaranteed in adequate quantity for the 30-year plant life. Only residual fuel oil is considered an available alternative fuel. Combustion turbines burning oil are not the economic solution for baseload capacity requirements because of high operating costs and the fact that combustion turbines are designed primarily for peaking service. The only reliable alternative would be

N-53 Mr. Daniel R. Muller oil-fired steam units; however such alternative units could not be in service before 1978.

The Applicant's economic studies which resulted in the selection of the nu.clear-fueled plant indicated a capital cost of $558,000,000 for the nuclear plant compared to $452,000,000 for the oil-fueled plant (equivalent cap*acity for both plants was the total of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 or 2,130 megawatts); these investments yield a cost of $262 and

$231 per kilowatt of capacity respectively. On the basis of oil costs of 72 cents per million Btu; fuel costs resolve to 6.55 mills per kilowatt-hour while nuclear fuel costs are stated to be L94 mills per kilowatt-hour.

Total power costs for an oil-fired'plant were estimated to be 11.45 mills per kilowatt-hour as compared to 4.18 mills per kilowatt hour for the nuclear plant. The staff of *the Bureau of Power finds these costs to be within the range of similar costs reported by the.industry.

Conclusions The staff of the Bureau of Power concludes that the electric power output represented by the Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 is needed to assist the Applicant.and the MAAC systems to meet their projected system loads and to provide some measure of reliability to their electric bulk power supply during the 1974 and 1975 summer peak load periods.

Very truly yours, Enclosure

N-54 Before Cc:,:.1d.s;;ionCrs: "( .. l-,-1. 1,,

, ........ ,,, 1-.T.-  : .. , ... s ,

,, .. : ..: ...*L 1-~

C' , *** c1,r

• a n,.

,,,:.:l 1.* 1.n1 J"' ***(*"'"'".,.

• ' .* J. * ' ' '- '* o...J

• o*rc""*c,**

'-' JI&!  ; ... )

• rr 1,,J * ) C"1*l

'*U . E*. BD;;r.;c,

..J\:.:;n /;.. c:--*i'"VCl.-, Jr.' c~ncl l)lbej~t B~ I3:rookc, Jr.

Ths S,1sc;1.1:-:h:m:*..1. Po-;,*er Co:n;~-:::n:,r m1d ) Proj cct No. 1+05

)?*bil::iCc). r~>1ia i~i..::c~rl.c i.\..i\.~~;*"~ Cl~:;.q;,.r1)' )

OJJIY~;l A:'?;;,"'r:*:::G RT::\7I~?D EXHIBIT K

,ANT) Tl-:::; USE OF. PROJECT.

J. . A::r::s l.i--~11 1~r:~::1~1:~\1 C)IIt (Iss~ed October 13, 1970)

On February 25, 1969, the. Susquehanna Po~ver Company and Philadelpbia Electric Pcmer Cornp-:.my, * (Licensees) joint licensees for the Cor.m}iri'.'*o ProJ* E.'Ct No. /{05 rmcl subsidiaries of Philadel**

. . \..J phi.a Electr:i.c*company (PECo.), f::i.led an application for approval of a revised E::::hibit K m.?.p and *for* approval of j oh1t use of

• the .Conowi11go J~ese:r.voi1: in connection with the co;1l:ti..*uction and operation of P(~a,~h Bottom Nuclear Units Ho. 2 and 3 by PECo.

The nuclec.:r units will h~ own0c1 j o:Lutl)r by PECo., Pu.bl:tc Serv:i.ce El,:?ctr:i..c and Gas Company; D0ln~a:cvn P.ov;,er & Light Conµ.:i..ny and Atlantic City J~lcctric Compa.'ny a.n:cl lvill be locfitecl 500 feet

-i.1ps~1~eam from the exit;t:i.ng Unit No. l 01~1 the westerly shore of Conowirigo reservoir gbout 9 1~1ilcs upstream from the. Conowingo Darn.

• Public, notice of the fil:lnr:; of t:b2. appH.cat:i.on was given, wii:h ,hme 2G, J.969 ns the la.s*i: d::~te. :for Gl:i.ng protcisl~s 01~

pet:i. t:i.c:,ns to :i.11 tervcne.

• l~o p,:ot:cs_ts > notices of in terventio1.1 >

or petitions to intcrv~ne were received.

DC--23

N-55 Project No. li-05 The revised Exhibit K relocates the 110 foot contour an average of 750 feet offshore for nn approxtmrite 5,000-

. foot reach, and an averpgc of 300 ft~r~t offshore for an q,proximntc l, 800*-foot reach along th~ t.1.pstrec1m .face of. the proposed intake structures and em'oankn~ents. The subject application has been filed for author:Lzntion to remove from.

the project the portion of land between the present'llO foot contour (located by a metes and botmds st1rvey) and the proposed 11"0 foot contour as shown in the revised Exhibit K map. Lice1:1sees also seek uuthorizati.on to remove a 26 acre

• parcel of land fron1 the project. Relocation of the project boundary and transfer of the 26 acre parcel would place all three nuclear units outside the project boundary.*

. The nuclear pla~tts water supply fqr Units No *. 2 and 3

~-JOuld be withdrawn. from the Y.eser.voir including approx:i.mately 110 cubic feet pe_r second of service water and 3,350 cub:lc feet*

per. second of conden~er cooling water. All water withdra~,m from the rese::r:voir wottld be returned except for a varying depletion which will not excee? 38 cubic feet per second.

• The forms of pollution attendant to the proposed use are chemical~ radiological and thermal.. Chen~ical .t..rastes of ten gallons per week, considered negligible, will be collected in

• holding tanks where the waste will be analyzed for pH and n<:mt'.ralized before being disd1arged to the reservoir.

Lubricating oil wastes will be collected -in ch:ains and disposed of without being discharged to the* reservoir.. The waste £rum the raw *water antlm{ikeup water treatm<2~t systems will be treated by using a neutralizer tank and a settling basin.

This proposal for disposal of waste from the plant han been approved by tJ-w Sanitary Water Bo:;ird, Department of Health, l?epnsylvania, subject to the condition that the wn:=;tc treatment plant will produce an effluent satisfactory to the Sanitary Water Board.

Rad.i.o,<:'.ctive uas te <l*i.scl:-:?*L"gcs nJ:c not to c~*:ccecl the r:inximum J.imits pr~nuissible. in drinking w~t:~r i:or rnnn p1~cscj:ib0d by

'J.'itle 10, Part 20, CFR. This i:;hottld ~)e monitored to assure 1*

comp.1.nnce

• t i F*c(l'.!J:a w:i..:i1 1 1 ancl ..:,"' ... ti,:.c

• 1

~,J.--i.:cc

• e',, .,L.,.!t,c..,t

, " *1 L._,

ci*,....... c* +* ~ - 1* ,....,, 1..,.,.

'\

N-56 Project No. l+OS *- 3. -

In regard to thermal pollution,. the power plant discharge with all three reactor units in operation would amount to an estimated 8,000 acre-feet per day or approxfmately 3. 33 pr~rcent "of the total ;:U'.(!J."Voir volume. The heat ln such di.sch.arge m<ly not only be dct:t::i..mc-mtal to fish life directly but r,*13y ctlso affect these resources indirectly through subtle b:LologicaJ. changes affecting the ecology of other aquatic organisms. ~he DeparDnent of the Interior in its report t:o the Coa1.missi.on dated Atigus t 13, 1969, recommended that approval of the application be con di t:i:oneq upon ( 1) maintenance of water quality s tandan1s in accordc,nce. with Federal and State s tandm:ds, ( 2) conducting pre** and post-operational studies to detennine the effects* of

\,;,ater di$charses on the reservoir ern~ironment, and (3) modification of facilities or their operation, if necessa"ry, to meet environmental standards.

The Commission finds:

It is appropriate and in the public interest to approve the revised Exh:i.bit K and to authorize Licensees to. grant an*

easement for the proposed use of project lrn:i.ds and reservoi!:,

_subject to the conditions set out in- this order.

Th~ Commission orders:

(A)

• Approval of nN:Lsed* Shc-!et 6 of 2~ of J~:d1.:Lbf t K (FPC No. l105-81) and the _ioirit use of* Conowingo reservoir is granted, subject ~o the following conditions:

(1) The quality of water discharged :i.nto the Susquehanna

. River at the p:coj ect_ shall. conform to fede).:-ally approved

• water quality standards ::md shall 11ot adversely a.:ffect fish and wildlife resources of, the pr.oj ect m:;t:!a or the:LJ: hahitats.

(-2) Licc:nsees shall insure that* )?ECo. condu,~u:; pi:*c-operntl.onal and poBt**ope:i:-ationa). studies in con*sultnd.or1 ,d.i:h approp;:iate State and. Federal agencies to (h~term:lne the effects of tbe ope.rations 0£ its nuclear plant on t:hc aqt,at:Lc, environment of Conowin 0 o Re.servo:ix Duc1 the Susquehttnm: River belo~,; Conowin~o Dam. P):e-operati.rrnal stmly 1~eports sball be complefed and. submitted to the Commi.ss:Lcn within sh: months

---

~*

Proj cc.t No. l105  :.:.ft.er oper.:1 tj_oy,i; begin. rost-opcr.~1:ion:-il 8 tuc1y reports shall be.~ ::*ub:*:,:i.ttc,d c.i.gh'te...:n months aftC!r ()pCJ:ations begin and

• annually thercnftcr or cis the Conun:tr,sion may require. These stmlj_es shall ir1cludc, a;:1D1:i2 othcir thin~s, chemical ch.9.nges, radiological. cl-inngcs, c:i.nc.1 therm,:11

• changes in the reservoir and tbe d.,*0.:c, j_f .:.ny, and the effects of any such changes upon the cc(.,logy of Conowingo Fool and of *the Susquehanna River below Conowingo da;n.

(3). Licensees shall assure that in the eve11t it becomes apparent modification of facilities or op~rations is.necess~ry on the:! part of. PECo. in order. to preserve qr promote optimum ecological conditions in Conowineo Reservoir or_the Susquehanna

• Riycrs such modifications will be made in due diligence by and -at the expense of PECo.

( £'.i.) Licensees shall present tw.o copies of PECo. 1 s cert:i.ficate of reasonable compli;:ince obtained in accordance with Pub. L. No.91-224, § 2l(b); (April 3, 1970) t6 the Commission prior to the beginning of plant operations for Units 2*and 3.

(5) Lie en sees shall. include in all documents transferrir:g land) a covc-!nant running with the land adequate to insure th.e use of the easements conveyed will not end.D. nger health, create a nuisance, or otherwise be incompatt:ple with over-all project recreational use: *

(B) The Sheet 6 of 23 of Exhibit K * (J.i'PC No. /+05-52) ~ super-seded 5y the afm:esa:lcl revised She~t 6 of 23 of Exhibit K (FP.C No. l}05--81), is 'eliminated from the license for Pro;ec t No. li.05.

By the Commission.

( S E AL )

Gordon M. G>:ant, Sec:.:et3.~Y.

N-59 GCVERNCJR;S OFFICE DF"P'ICE Dr STATE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT CDMMD_NWEALTH DF' PENNSYLVANIA

• . HARR1SSURl3, PA. 1712D 50-277/278 December 7, 1972

• Mr. Daniel R. Muller Assistant Director for Environmental Projects Directorate of Licensing Atomic Energy Commission Washington, IL C. 20545

Dear Mr. Muller:

The Pennsylvania Office of State Planning and Development,

• as the State Clearinghouse for_ the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, has received and reviewed the Draft Environmental Report for Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units II and III (Docket Numbers 50-277 and 50-278). Copies of the material were also sent to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resour.ces, Fish and Game Commissions.

Attached to this letter are the comments we received from the Department of Environm.en.tal Resources and the Fish Commission.

Please consider these comments in the further review of the abov~ re-port, responding to their statements where appropriate. _

Please consider this letter and its attachments the formal .

• -response of the State Clearinghouse for the above-referenced report.

Sin0:~f/.~

Viet or R. ~ r n e l l

• Deputy Director Att.

N-60 DIPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES P.O. IIOX . . ..,

NARlt1aeu1111, PSNNaYLVANIA ......

In Reply Refer to:

P.S~C.H. No.: 72-10-3-001 December 5, 1972

SUBJECT:

.

• Department of Enviroµment;al Resources Review and Evaluation of SCH No.: 72-10-3-001

Title:

Draft EIS - Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station

• Units .II and III '

TO: Mr. R. A. Heiss, Coordinator

_State Clearing House FROM: MAURICE K. GODDAIID Secretary of_ Environmental Resources The aforementioned appropriate personnel in the

• House.

The Department of Environmental Resources approves this project on condition that:

The. technical comments either appear in the Final E.I.S. or.responded to in ,a direct communication to the Secretary.

This evaluation is based strictly on the data submitted and actions as proposed. Approval does no*t extend automatically to any changes considered minor or to the time framework as proposed.

A re-evaluation of any such. changes will be necessary as soon as data can be submitted by the applicant. This information should be*

submitted by the applicant directly to the State Clearing House.

Throughout the duration of the review and evaluation, our DER Clearing House is ready to provide any assistance to facilitate progress of this undertaking.

---

~*-----~*------* *-----------------

-N-61 December 5, 1972 P.S.C.H. No. 72-10-3-001

Title:

Draft E.I.S. - Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units II and III Location: York County - Durmore Twp *. and Fulton Twp. Lancaster County The USAEC Draft Environmental Statement for Peach Bottom ~tomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3 have been reviewed by D.E.R.

The draft Environmental Statement *prepared by the AEC Directorat.e of Licensing not only evaluates the impact of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station on the water quality of the Susquehanna River (Conowingo Pond) but makes some very significant recommendations concerning thermal effects on the R:j.ver. Department permits have been issued for the water quality aspects of the project.

. Implementation of the AEC recommendations should reduce the degradation of the stream by-reducing the amount of heat and chlorine to be discharged. The recommendations a.re based on many theoretical considerations. From a water quality point of view we do not object to the recommendations in the impact statement but the Department .does not at. this td.me: have the technical evidence to implement the recommendations in the form of state*orders.

Implementation of the portions of the new Federal Water Pollution Act dealing with thermal discharges (primarily Section 301) which require.

'that.best practicable control technology be applied to all industrial waste discharges no lat.er than July 1, 197 7 could affect the effluent requirements.

Until there are guidelines developed to implement the sections of the act dealing with thermal discharges, however, a final determination can not be made for this site.

The Department's permit for control of the heated discharge requires a report on the effects of the heated discharge and cooling towers from*Unit 2 prior to placing Unit 3 in operation. The Department does have an excellent set of base-line neasurements of the aquatic eco-system ~n the Conowingo pool. If evidence is found that the pollution is occuring from the operating.plant and the initial evaluation of the proposal was incorrect, necessary steps will be taken to have revised water quality control measures implemented.

The land surrcunding the Peach Bottom. Station should be used for screening planting to help conceal, inhibit noise, -and soften the effect of the towers from observers looking from Conowingo Pond. This screening should be designed to be in character with the surrounding land*

scape while using a-greater percentage of evergreens which are more effective for this purpose. Therefore, naturalism should be stressed in the planting plan as well as using the same type trees found in the surrounding area.

The steps leading up to the visitors information center should be better blended with the landscape. Shrubbery should be placed judiciously for this effect.

With particular reference to the geologic statements on pages 21-22 and A-3 to A-11, on page A-3 it is stated that appropriate lab tests ~.ere

N-62 P.S.C.H. No. 72-10-3-001 Peach Bottom Atomic Fewer Station December 5, 1972 made on.rock cores and that adequate formation support for major structures is available; however, no mention is made in this document of the specific rock tests performed or of the actual results determined.

On page A-8 n:.ention is made of a major cut into the rock formation

• dur.ing construction of the site. In the Design Engineer's report following page 8, the toe of the slope on.this rock cut (approximately 100 feet.

vertical height) is almost directly adjacent to the two reactor buildings.

Since this rock cut and resulting near' *vertical slope exist very near the reactors, and since our observation of the rock formation (Peter Creek Schist) shows~ low cut-slope stability, evaluation of its stability at the site must be made and justified with appropriate test data.

There is no indication if the entire top of *the slope above the reactor will be properly graded and surfaced so as to protect the slope face from excess water intake and possible failure of the slope face.

In USAEC Draft Environmental Statement on Peach Bottom Units 2

_& 3, on Page II-19, under Seismology, it is correctly noted there have been five earthquake~ with *epicentral intensities of .V or VI within a 50 mile radius of the Peach Bottom site. The AEC report.then goes on to say

" *** at the site, they*would have been too weak to have caused any damage~"

This statement appears to be only an opinion, as there are no calculations or design specifications cited to show what degree of earthquake shock the reactor installation is built to take.

Since a monitoring program on wildlife was initiated prior to 19.66, we see no reason to change this program for* the additional Units No.

2 and 3. Therefore, the Pennsylvania Game Connnission has no objections or further comments on this project.

0 A-50 I 12-e7 *coMMONWEALTH OF PE*.. :.;j'f'LVANIA N-63 November 28, 1972

SUBJECT:

PSCH Project No. 72-10-3-001 Draft Environmental Statement Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station - Units 2 and 3 Notification of Intent to Apply for a Federal Grant-In-Aid TO:

Richard A. Heiss State Coordinator, PNRS J

• State Planning Board ~Wn '

' FROM: Jack G. Miller, Chief: * ~

Fisheries Envi ronmeiiµ1 , e;:{;~s' Pennsylvania Fish ColllTlission The Pennsylvania Fish Conmission is very concerned about this project and the effects it could have on the aquatic environment of the Conowingo Pool.

Our primary concern is the problem of thermal pollution. This can have a very deleterious effect on.the entire food chain within the area subjected to the increa.sed temperatures. The problem of impingement of fishes on the* intake screen is also a matter of conce.rn.

There appear to be many facets of this operation, the results of which are unknown or at best questionable. These are attested to by the many 11 may be, could be, .perhaps, might be, there is a possibility of, etc. 11 If any of the extremes which might occur do occur, there is the poten-tial for massive kills. *1f such a kill should bccur what will be done as far as plant operation is concerned to prevent continuing or reoccurrence of the conditions responsible for the kill? There seems to be too much potential for destruction of the aquatic community with very little being said about what should or could be done to eliininate or minimize the possibility of such an occurrence.

The operating license gives the Philadelphia Electric Company pennission to operate on a once-through basis until July 1, 1975. How mu.ch damage-must the fishezysuffer prior to July l, 1975, to cause revocation of that license?

We appreciate this opportunity to comment on the Draft Environmental Statement. 1 JGM:dms cc: Mr. Hobbs

N-65 PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY 2301 MARKET STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA. 19101 (215) 841-4500 V. S. BOYER VICE-PRESIDENT November 24, 1972 Mr. Angelo Giambusso Deputy Director for Reactor 'Projects Directorate of Licensing U. S. At~mic Energy. Commission Washington, D. C. 20545 Re: Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3 Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278

Dear Mr. Giambusso:

Philadelphia Electric Company respectfully submits its comments on the Draft Environment,al Statement (DES) on the environmental considerations related to the issuance of operatitig -licenses for the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3.

This letter summarizes comments on the major aspects of the DES, Detailed corr.ments are contained in f:i.ve appendices:

Appendi.x A :i.s a review of thermal dissipation to Conowi.ngo Pond, Append.ix B consists of suggested detailed comments and corrections to the DES prepared for Philadelphia Electric Company by Ichthyologital Associates.

Appendix C includes other suggested detailed comments by Philadelph:i,a Electric Company with regard to the DES.

Appendix D assesses the potential doses to humans through the grass-cow-milk chain.

Appendix E estimates the costs for fish mortalities in Conowingo Reservoir.

Comments on the Staff's summary of the environmen.tal impact and adverse effects ( page i and i i of the DES) are ~iven below in. items 1 throufh 5 and are followed by comreents (items 6 through 11) on the Staff 1 s proposed conditions for the protection of the environment (pages iii and iv

• of the DES)

• N-66 Mr. Giambusso

• November 24f 1972 As discussed in item 9 _below and in Appendix E, the Philadelphia Electric Company is most concerned that the AEC Regulatory Staff has totally failed to justify on a cost-be*nefit basis the *alternative cooling system that is recommended. Such a system would ha1re a capital cost of over $25,000,000, a total present worth cost of over $100,000,000, which can be represented.by an annualized inc~emental cost of generation of more than $7,000,000. We have postulated that the as.sociated "benefit 11 would be at the most the elimination of a one time adverse environmental impact for which, by our calculations, the consequences represent .not more than

$250,000 based on extremely conservative assumptions.

1. Therm~l Effects The Philadelphia Electric Company disagrees with the Staff's opim.on that 11 There is a significant potential for extensive thermal damage to the biological community within Conowingo Pond". Appendix A includes isotherm plots produced with the equilibrium correction method. (rather than-the wet bulb correction method) covering one and two*unit operation under various flow and meteorological conditions. Our fisheries biologist consultant, Ichthyological Associates, has been intensively studying the acrnatic ecology of the Conawingo Pond since 1966 and will continue such studies after the units begin operation. To illustrate the depth of the study in progress, over 12) man-years of professional effort have been expanded to-date. Ichthyological- Associates has considered the effect of these revised isotherms on the ecology of the Pond and is of the opinion that no significant damage, i.e., no short term, no long term, and no irreparable da.maQ,"e, to the ecos*ystem will result from thermal discharges from the station, as is further discussed in Appendix B. *

2. Entraimr.ent

/

The once-through cooling system has the advantages of producing a heated plume which will. i'ncrea.se the production of zooplankters upon whfoh many fishes feed in Conowingo Pond. Such an increase has been demonstrated and is described in Appendix B, pages 2 and 3. We believe as. a* result of intensive studies that the entrainment of the planktonic organisms in the.

circulating water system w:i,.11 not adversely affect the aquatic community.

The increased production of phytoplankton and zooplankton in the heated plume wili more than offset any losses that might occur in passage through the condenser system. Therefore, such losses will not be a threat to the aquatic corr~unity. Studies to confirm our conclusions will be performed after the plant goes into operation.

We believe as discussed on pages .26 and 27 of Appendix B that an active winter fishery will be created in Conowingo Pond. No credit for this improvement was given in the Staff's* analysis.

N-67 Mr. Giarnbusso November ?4, 1972

3. Imoin~ement on Int::lke Screens The Philadelphia Electric Company expec *.-i that the fish losses due to impingement on the intake screens will be insi~nificant and will certainly not affect the total fish population of the ?ond. Additional colllr.lents _on this topic are discussed in Appendix B, pages 3 and 4.

4. Winter Shutdo,m The Staff has expressed a concern that an unexpected shutdown of the plant in winter could produce significant mortalities in fishes. To attain such rapid temper~ture cha,'1ges, both units would have to be forced out of service for a period of several days; this is an extremely unlikely condition. ?*:ore over, if a trip did involve both units, at least one of the uni ts would, in all likelihood, be returned to service within a few hours. While such winter kills under the conditions postulated are a con-cern, Philadelphia Electric Compa,ny believes that the operation of the plant and the temperature changes associated with shutdo,m can be controlled to eliminate sir,nificant effects to the fish population, noreover, experi-ments and analysis by Ichthyological Associates indicate that sudden drops in temperature of the degree which will cause la:t'[e mortalities are hichly unlikely. Additional cor.m1.ents are contained in *Appendix B, :;:iages 4, 5, 24 and 2~. '

S. Hilk !<Toni torinf". Pror!r.;m The Staff has stated that the est'imated potential doses fro.TJ1 radioactive iodine near the site boundary are sienificant arid thus, weekly milk sampling and analyses will be required to assure that the iodine levels are maintained as low as practi.cable.

We disagree with the Staff's position and have presented a rationale for this disaireement in Appendix D. In surnmar;y, we have calculated that the thyroid equivalent whole body dose to humans from radioicdine deposited at nearby farms is an insignifica,'1t 0.45 mrem/~*ear, Weekly sampling and analy-ses of milk would not create addi ti ~nal assurance that iodine levels will be maintained as low as practicable. Radioiodine concentrations in pl~~t effluents will be determined by analyzing weekly a. charcoal filter through which a side stream of effluent is continuously passed. This i~ a far more accurate method than the one which the Staff proposed.

6. Radiolor-ical I*!oni torinrr We believe that parafraph (a) on page iii of the DES can be more clearly.

stated if modified to read:

N-68 Mr. Gia'llbusso November 24, 1972 The applicant will carry out the station's radiological monitoring prop.ram at a leve1 considered by the AEG' s Regulatory Staff to be adequate to measure long-term trends in radiation levels in the environment from operation of the station.

7. }ron-Radiolor:ical Environmental Moni taring

• With regard to the non-radi olor-i cal environmental monitoring program to be incorporated in the Technical Specifications appended to the operating license (pages i i i and iv of DES), the followinf- comments are provided:

(7a) In Supplement °'.'Jo. 2 to the Applic.ant' s Environmental Report, the answer to question 21..t provides the details of the hydro1:,raphic study of the Conowinp.:o Reservoir, now in prorress, to obtain thermal and flow data which will enable the thermal discharres from the operation o:!: ?each Bottom Units to be determined a:1d evaluated, This prov.ram will continue after operation as described in Appendix A, A meteorolorical monitoring prorram at the Peach Bottom site has been conducted since 1959.

(7b) In reference to the suggested monitoring program for iron and heavy metals pickup in the condenser circulating water system, PhiJ.adelphia e1ectr:i.c Company reco:-mnends that a total condenser flow sample be anal:tzed rather thari the individual condenser sections as suggested by the Staff (in page iv). The metal constituents in. the circulating water from each condenser section should be the same since identical materials of construction are used in each section.

There is no apparent advantave in knowinr the metal pickup in the various sections if the total S)~tem pickup is monitored. Discussicn of chlorine monitorinr: is presented spearately in item 10 below.

(7c) The Staff has recommended that the Applicant be required to conduct a monitoring program to determine "The effects of the Peach Bottom *Atomic Power Station operation on the biological coni.'rl!Ul1i ty

• of Conowinf!O Pond with' particular emphasis on* the losses of biota due to impingement and entrainment and including the numoer of species of fish mortalities attributable to the operation of the station".

The pre-operational phase of this prOf:ram wa.s initiated in 1966 by the Applic:.i.nt and the e:'fects of impingement and entrainrr,ent have been previously discussed in this letter, The .Philadelphia Electric Company believes the Staff has over-emphasized t~e losses incurred in one part of the s;vstem and neglected a.'1 overall evaluation of the performance of the entire system, Any evaluation should consider the magnitude of the losses in proportion to the total biota population of*

the Pond as well as the increased production of biota due to the thermal discharges, The operational pror.ran to be conducted by the Applicant will seek to confirm the prior extensive studie,s,

N-69 Vll'. Giambusso November 24,. 1972

8. Alternative Cooling System The Philadelphia Electric Company disagrees with the Staff I s position that:

1) the evaluation of the ecmomic and environmental impacts of a preferred alternative closed-cycle cooling system shall be submitted for review by Harch 1, 1973, and

2) a closed cycle coolinr system shall be designed, built and placed in operation no later tha.'1 July 1, 1975.

Such actions would preclude the accumulation of sufficient information which could clearly ,demonstrate that the operation of the station with the*

once--through tower assisted cooling system is satisfactory. Our studies concJ.ude that such.operations will not result in unacceptable, long term, irreparable damage to aquatic biota. "Sy July 1,. 1975, onl~r one month of summer data covering the operation of both uni ts could possibly be available.

To demonstrate that t!le open system is satisfactory, a minimum period of three years of summer operatio:ra is required in order that the effects on life cycle of the white crappie, the most irr;portant species, are demonstrated.

Based upon the studies of Ichthyological Associates, the Philadelphia Electric CorI;>any believes:

, 1) that there is no significant potential for extensive thermal d.:1.mage to the biological community within Conowingo Pond,

2) that the losses associated with the entrainment of planktonic organisms in the circulating water system are not a serious threat to the aquatic community,

3) that impingement of fishes on the intake. screens will not cause significant losses to the fish population,.

h)

• that unexpected shutdown of the plant in winter will not produce significant mortalities in fishes,. and S) that unacceptable long term irreparable damage to aquatic biota will not result from the operation Of the station with the presently installed once-through tower assisted coolinp, system throughout the*

life of the station, let*alone the proposed three year period~

For the* foregoine reasons, the Philadelphia Electric Company requests that the date for the decision with regards to implementing an alternative closed loop system be deferred until three years o:f experience has been obtained* with two units of operation.

N-70 Mr. Giambusso November 24, 1972 Cost Benefit Analysis The Philadelphia Electric Company* is most concErned that the AEC Regulatory Staff has totally failed to justify on a cost-benefit basis the alternative cooling system that is recor.unended. Such a system would have a capital cost of over $25:,000,000, a total present worth cost of over $100 .,000.,000 which is represented bY an annualized incremental cost of generation of more than ~;7 ,000,000. Hence, the environmental benefits from the system's implementation must be significant, readily identifiable and quantifiable to justify such an expenditure.

The Staff has made no effort to put into perspective the economic costs to :implement the closed loop system and the valu_e of the environmental benefits to accrue from the system's implementation. The Staff has relied on such vague statements as: 11 the impact to aquatic life nii? be .

serious" (XII-10), "possible damage to fishing may occur 11 XII-10), "There is a significant potential .for extensive thermal damage to the biological community within Conowingo Pond" (i), "The entrainment of planktonic organisms could be a serious threat to the aquatic' community" (ii),

"Unexpected s_hutdown of the plant in winter could produce significant mortalities in fishes 11 (ii) et~.

Philadelphia Electric Company believes that based upon the studies of Ichthyologicat Associates, no fish kill will occur during the life of the facility. However, for the purposes of the cost-benefit study, we have made the assuniptfon of a one-time fish kill. Ichthyological Associates studies (1967-1971) as indicated in Appendix E estimate the quantity of biomass in Conowingo Reservoir to be about 332 pounds per acre. Assuming most conservatively that: 1) the thermal discharges could affect 500 acres with 100% mortality, 2} the biomass could be assigned a value as high as $1.00 per pound, and 3) a concentrated quantity of the, biomass o:t 500 pounds per acre is present, then the environmental cost of such damages on this most conservative basis would be $250,000.

The Philadelphia Electric Company's analysis of the cost-benefit

• considerations of the Staff's position demoI1$trates that the annualized expenditure of over $7 millJon per year for the closed loop syst:em is not justifiable. The environmental benefits of the AEC *s proposed action at most represent the elimination of a possible occurrence during the station's life of a conservatively calculated one-time enviro_nmental impact for which the consequences represent not more than $250,000, based on ~sswnptions maximizing the dollar value. In any event, even- this mortality is not significant in relation to the total fish population and aquatic community.

10. Chlorination

• We believe that a free chlorine residual is necessary to keep the Peach Bottom heat. exchangers (condensers) free of organic buildup and in efficient operating condition. Chloramines or combined chlorine react too slowly to provide satisfactory sterilization auring the short

• ~sidence time of the cooling water in the condenser at the Peach Bottom plant *.

N-71.

Mr. Giambusso November 24, 1972 our experience has shown that the* chlorine dema.m o:f* the river water, ~t this site., would I'bsult in a.combined chlorine residual of approtilr.ately o.*5 ppJii. To maintain a total chlorine residµal conc~ntration of 0.1 ppm in.the *condenser discharge *prior to entry into the discharge pond, a.s set forth .in the Draft Environmental Statement,; the total chlorinl:3 residual would be restricted to 0.3 ppm at the outlet of the condenser section being chlorinated. Consequently, no free chlorine residual vould be available for sterilization, and proper st~rilization of the condenser sect ion would not have occurred.

It is suggested that the controlling monitoring point should be located at the end of the discharge canal, so that the dilution effect of the total plant flew is utilized to dissipate the chlorine as the water

. flows through the cooling towers and/or discharge canal prior to discharging into the receiving strea~. Besides monitoring total chlorin~ residual for control at the end of the discharge canal, it is our intent to also monitor free and.total chlorine residual at the discharge of each condenser section.

When* the plant goes into operation., it is our goal to determine an optimum chlorination program which will minimize chlorine usage and dosage while keeping the heat excha11g~ equipment in a serviceable condition.

11. Iodine Nonitoring ) .

The DES states on page =i:v in item ?g that 11 If the results of the radiological monit.oring program indicate a routinely *detectable radio-active iodine level in milk samples, the applicant will take appropriate action to reduce the radioactive iodine effluent".

Such a requirement does not relate to plant effects nor does it

• relate to aey real limits nor doe_s it even relate to 11 as low as practicable". Such a requirement is, therefore., in;a.ppropriate and should be eliminated, as described in Appendix. D.

We will-be pleased to discuss our comments with*the Staff in further detail at their convenience.

Sincerely,

• N'.'""72 APPENDIX A REVIEW OF THERMAL DISSIPATION PHILADELPHIA ELEX::TRIC COMPANY PEACH. BOTTOM ATOMIC ,POJJER STATION UNITS 2 AND 3 DOCKEI' NOS. 50-277 AND "50-278

N-73 APPENDIX A REVIEW OF THERMAL DISSIPATION The "Summary and Conclusi*ons 11 in the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission Draft Environmental Statement has prompted the Philadelphia Electric*

Company to re-analyze the predicted distribution of the plant's pro-posed thermal discharge.

• The predicted isothermal distributions submitted with the Philadelphia Electric Company environmental report of November 1971 were based upon a correction of model to prototype isotherms using the wet-bulb temperature method. This method was used.because at the time of the hydraulic model study (1968) the state of the art included very limited experience with temperature correction of hydraulic models, however there had been some field verification of a study which had used the wet bulb method. More recently, additional effort has been expended towards improving the technique for computing surface heat transfer of water bodies, and it is now generally agreed that use of the equilibrium temperature method for computing the surface heat transfer results in a more accurate prediction of prototype conditions. However, even this method has little verification from prototype operation, particularly under such complex hydraulic conditions as those of the Conowingo Pond.

• The Philadelphia Electric Company is currently re-analyzing the hydraulic model study of this plant using the equilibrium temP9rature method. When'this, review is completed the revised isotherm plots will be submitted to the Com-mission. Some preliminary isotherm plots which have beeri analyzed in this manner are attached. These plots show the estimated prototype isotherms for the following conditions:

1. Two unit operation under extreme flow and meteorological conditions, i.e.; river flow 2500 cfs., ambient river water temperature 850F, wet bulb temperature* 78°F. (Figures IA & IB) ~

2. Two unit operation under extreme river flow conditions and average meteorological conditions: river flow 2500 cfs., ambient river water temperature 80oF, wet bulb temperature 71°F. (Figures IIA

& IIB).

3. Two unit operation urider less extreme conditions: river flow 10,000 cfs., a~bient river water temperature 800F, wet bulb temperature 71°F. (Figures III.A & IIIB).

4. One unit operation under extreme flow conditions and average meteorological conditions: river flow 2500 cfs., ambient river water temperature 80°F, wet bulb temperature 710F. (Figures IVA & IVB).

Only monitoring the prototype can show the actual thermal distribution which will result from plant operation. Philadelphia Electric.Company is con-ducting pre-operational monitoring programs of the meteorological, flow and_

pond thermal-conditions and will conduct post-operational monitoring of these.

parameters which will reveal the magnitude of the changes in the conditions.

N-74 Initial post-operational monitoring programs will apply only to one unit operation, a condition whose isothermal pattern is predicted in ~lot #4, listed above. The .isotherms developed from the operation of *one unit are sufficient to verify predicted prototype isotherms.

Ichthyological Associates' biologists have considered the effect of the revised isotherms on the ecology of the pond and are of the opinion that no significant damage to the ecosystem will result fro~ the thermal discharges from the station. Amplification of this opinion and additional comments of the biologists on the.draft statement are contained in Appendb B.

The Applicant is also confident that two-unit operation will not result in significant ecological damage. Moreover, in the event that the monitoring program should reveal unexpected eff'ects, Philadelphia Electric.Company can institute a.number of alternatives to mitigate the situation.

Based on the facts stated above and those in Appendix B, the Philadelphia

~ectric Company requests that it be permitted to operate Peach Bottom Units*

2 & 3 to verify its predictions concerning the effec.ts of this facility on the aquatic life in the Conowingo Fond. The time required for such verification

• involves a minimum of three years, since the year classes of.the most important fish, the white ~rappie, fluctuate widely. It is believed that in this period of time a valid comparison can be made with.the range of fluctuations observed

.during the pre-operational studies. '

If after the firs~ three years of operation the biological monitoring program verifies the adequacy of the present circulating water system, the thermal monitoring program will be continued until such time that sufficient field data has been accumulated to assure that all probable adverse combinations of meteorological, river.flow and ambien~.temperature conditions have been exper.ienced. On the other hand, should the results *Of the biological monitoring program indicate that the existing circulating water facility is inadequate mitigating solutions would be used until further corrective measures could be implemented.

MUDDY RUN HOLTWOOD

~ ONE FT. DEPTH DISCHARG.E TO POND:3350CFS

~;_..L.r.

.I DISCHARGE TEMP. RISE: /,3. OF NO.COOLING TOWERS: 3 AVE. OUTGOING TEMP. AT CONOWI NGO 8S' OF AVE. INCOMING TEMP. AT HOLWJOOD. 85 °F Wet bulb temperature 78oF FIVE FT. DEPTH HOW TEN FT. DEPTH PEACH BOTIOM MODEL STUDY

i. :i' Philadelphia Electric Co.

i~~:

f *1 . PREOICTED CONOWINGO POND TEMPERATURE RISE I ** ~ . , , ,_.. **.,..,..~ * .l, .*.. aa, **:,.1, Jw*~., -.... ABOVE AMBIENT INC0',11'1G WATER TEMPERATURE I.SO*

• ,~::r . .P. r' A A I r:  :

TflERMS FOR UIIIT.S 2 t, 3 OPERATING WITH AVER*

• • • .. *-~

PROTOTYPE SCALE-FE(T AGE RIVER FLOW OF 2SOO CFS

£>< TP.l:MS 'J"LILY A TMO~PHE RIC ii*

. U""' Li =- LJ AVERAGE SURFACE HEAT TRANSr-ER COEFFICIENT IS 13 &. BTU Of*I FT-2 OAY*I, CONDITIONS FOR

. I FIGURE NO.

0700 HRS. Tf/ESl/4Y Ol'ERATIO~Al SCIIEDlll.ll §::.'":.

IA

MUDDY RUN 1 MILE HO\.TWOOD 3 MILES CONOWINGO DAM ONE FT. DEPTH DISCHARGE TO ?OND:3J50CFS DISCHA::GE TEMP. RISE: /.!/ Of NO.COOLING TOWERS: 3 AVE. OUTGOiN_G TEMP. AT CONOWINGO 85 °f AVE. INCOMING TEMP. AT HOLTWOOO 85 Of Wet bulb temperature 78°F

. 5 FIVE FT. DEPTH

~(-

~ -

TEN FT. DEPTH PEACH BOTTOM MODEL STUDY Philadelphia Electric Ca.

PREOICTEO CONOWINGO PONO TEMPERATURE RISE

~ ABOVE AMBIENT mco,.11tJG WATER T[l.<?ERATURE ISO*

THERMS FOR UNITS 2 ~ 3 OPERATING WITH AVEII*

PROTOTYPE SCALE-FEET "AGE.RIVER FLOW OF isoo ci=s

£XT/.'i:H/; "J'"V~Y ATMOSPHERIC AVERAGE SURFACE HEAT TRANSFER COEFFICIENT IS CONOITIONS FOR 0,9tJ() HRS. S/ITt!l?<P;J,Y.

/32. BTU °F* 1 FT-2 OAY*I. .j FIGURE NO.

JB

~ MUDDY RUN 1 MILE HOL TWODD 3 MILES CONOWINGO DAM ONE FT. DEPTH DISCHARGE TO"POND:3J5tJ CFS DISCHARGE TEMP. RISE: 13 OF NO.COOLING TOWERS: 3 AVE. OUTGOING TEMP. AT CONOWINGO /JO °F AVE*. INCOMING TEMP. AT HOLnvooD 80 °F Wet bulb temryerature 710F FIVE FT. DEPTH TEN FT. DEPTH PEACH BOTTOM MODEL STUDY Philadelphia Electric Co.

PREDICTED CONOWINGO POND TEMPERATURE RISE 0 10.000 ABOVE AMBIENT INCOMll,G WATER- TEMPERATURE ISO*

~ e;...-j .THERMS FOR UNITS C. if :J OPERATING WITH AVER-PROTOTYPE SCALE-FEET AGE RIVER FLOW OF 2SOO CFS AJl.c/?/Jlf-E ':T"(lt..Y ATMOsPHER.IC AVERAGE SURFACE HEAT TRAN~FER *coEFFICIENT IS CONDITIONS FOR (J 7 a0 HAS. 1t1t:5tJ"1Y o- /_Z 7 aTu °F*1. n-2 oAv*I. FIGUR.E NO.

=--

=:--

1 MILE

• ONE FT. DEPTH DISCHARGE TO PONO: 3551' CFS DISCHARGE TEMP. RISE: /7 OF NO.COOLING TOWERS: 3 AVE. OUTGOING TEMP. AT CONOWINGO 8 () °F AVE. INCOMINGTEMP.'AT HOLTWOOO 8'0 Of Wet bulb temperature 71°F

• FIVE FT. DEPTH FLOW TEN FT. DEPTH PEACH BOTTOM MODEL STUDY I :1 -~'

,_' ..' Philadelphia Electric Co.

pp:

PREDICTED co,iOWINGO PONO TEMPERATURE RISE.

f :J ... I _'*"'1"'".'"','*-*-,,-".,

-.,-Nff.~ ' I I - I . i

• ABOVE AMOIENT INCOMING WATER HMPERATURE 1S0-THERt,IS FOR UNITS 2 Jt 3

,II...... ._* ... *_ *. 6"l n - .. PROTOTYPE SCALE-FEET AGE RIVE_R FLOW OF 2500 CFS OPERATING WITH AVER*

,,,Pt/El?;J~t; . -:rvt Y f;..~O~TI=rif ATMOSPllERIC AVERAGE SURFACE HEAT TRAN~FEII COEFFICIENT IS CONDITIO~* FOR. 0 8tJtJ HRS. SIJ"1(1,f,O,?}/ *

=- IZ 7 BTU °F*I FT-:z OAY*I. FIGURE NO.

OPERATIONAL SCHEDULE §:..'":.

JI. 13

-:--------"""""--...;._--------------.::.ll:...!/:.!'f:.~7...?-_ _

CONOWINGO DAM ONE FT. DEPTH PEACH BOTTOM NUCLEAR PLANT DISCHARGE TO PON0:3.3SOCFS AVE. OUTGOING TEMP. AT CONOWINGO $~//°F DISCHARGE TEMP. RISE: 13 OF NO. COOLING TOWERS: 3

• ' AVE, INCOMING TEMP. AT HOLTWOOO 90 OF Wet bulb temryer~ture 71°F FIVE FT. DEPTH

. FLOW + TEN FT. DEPTH I:~,' .

PEACH BOTTOM MODEL STUDY

• j Philadelphia Electric Co.

l>.Q,1naitr..

I..

, ... t

.f *'=~. .,. . ,-.. . . . . , .* . .:*- . .

OPERATIONAL SCHEDULE

~ .1,j **:.;., 1*...-...... ; ....;. ...

0

~

10,000 PREDICTED ABOVE CONOWlllG.0 AMOIWT ISOTHERMS FOR UNITS POND TEMP(RATURE RISE INC01.111.G WATER TEMrERATURE 2 i'.3 OPERATING WITH

. ;r:~  ?. .'.:~. ~- . *n~J L . - .f/,: ,;A: l"ROTOTYPE SCALE -FEET AVERAGE RIVER At/E!r/ltfE' FLOW OF

';J"(,/l.Y 10.~oo CFS ATMOSPHERIC 12* :, .*

i w

~ C"J,-

. *.;* ,

• AVERAGE SURFACE HEAT TRANSFER COEFFICIENT IS CONDITIONS FOR 07 () O HRS. TV£Sf),9 y'

• IZ6

-i77A c::::,-*- FIG.URE NO,

=-- BTU Of*I. FJ-:ZOAV*I.

t l/?/7Z.

~ .MUDDY RUN 1 MILE HOLTWOOD 3 MILES CONOWINGO DAM ONE FT. DEPTH PEACH BOTTOM NUCLEAR PLANT DISCHARGE TO PON0:33'S'0CFS AVE. OUTGOING TEMP. AT CONOWINGO ~.'/°F OISCHARG.E TEMP. RISE: /3 OF NO. COOLING TOWERS: 3 AV_E. INCOMING T.EMP. AT HOLnvooo 8tJ OF Wet bulb temperature 71°F FIVE FT. DEPTH flOW zI Co 0

TEN, FT.. DEPTH

~+

PEACli sonorJI MOOEL STUDY Philadelphia Electric Co.

RISE PREDICTED CONOV/INGO POND TEMPERAi'Ul\t

~000 ISOTHERMS FOR UNITS 2 AVERAGE RIVER

• 3 ABOVE AMBIENT INCOMING WATER TEMPERATURE :

FLOW OF OPERATING WITH 10.000 CFS j I

PROTOTYPE SC/IL.E- FEET 1

/} Vt;/?l/vc -:;"r) (,. ' / ATIA09'HERIC CONDITIONS FOR 0800 HRS. slirt1r.o.1y.!

AVERAGE SURFACE HEAT TR/INSFER COEFFICIENT IS

/26 BTU Of*I FT-zOAV*I.

I FIGURE NO.

!!]B II}.*/7:-

MUDDY RUN HOLTWOOO CONOWINGO DAM

-PLOW ONE FT. DEPTH PEACH BOTTOM NUCLEAR PLANT DISCHARGE TO PONo:/o75"cFS DISCHARGE TEMP. RISE: /().5 OF NO.COOLING TOWERS: 2 AVE. O\)TGOING TEMP. AT CONOWINGO 80 OF AVE. INCOMING TEMP. ATHOL TWOOD 80 °F Wet.bu.lb tempereture 110F PLOW FIVE FT. DEPTH zI 00 TEN FT. DEPTH PEACH BOTIOM MODEL STUDY I:1 Philadelphia Electric Co.

• 1:.....

i ::

l>*MH*-

I. I I

• r-*,*:**":." ***~

I . . l

• • - lw*-*1-*,

0

~

10000 PREDICTED CONOWINGO POND TEMPERATURE RISE ABOVE AM!llENT 114COMING WATER TEMPERATURE ISO-

. THERMS FOR UNIT 2. OPERATING WITH AVEII-fb'" . .. . *. ~ *

.:*~1Ttf PROTOTYPE SCALE-FEET AGE RIVER FLOW OF 2500 CFS

/lllE/flltfE -::rv~ y ATMosPHER1c 1~-* CONDITIONS FOR 07()0 HRS. 1(/t!Sl}/JY .

OfERAnONAL SCHEDULE

=-

l5:"-"": .

AVERAGE SURFACE HEAT TRANSFER COEFFICIENT IS It!/ BTU °F*I FT-2 OAY"I I FIGURE NO.

11//,/7 Z

MUDDY RUN

.HOLTWOOO ONE FT. DEPTH PEACH BOTTOM NUCLEAR PLANT DISCHARGE TO PON0:/075 CFS DISCHARGE TEMP. RISE: /~.'5 Of NO.COOLING TOWERS: 2,. AVE. OUTGOING TEMP. AT CONOWINGO 8/J Of AVE. INCOMING TEMP. AT HOLTWOOD ea Of Wet bulb temperature 71DF

-fLDW FIVE FT. DEPTH zI 00 N

fLOW T.EN FT. DEPTH PE!I.CH BOTTOM MODEL STUDY Philadelphia Electric Co.

PREDICTED CONOWINGO POND TEMPERATURE RISE

~ . ABOVE AMBIENT INCOMING WATER TEMPERATURE ISO*

THERMS FOR UNIT 2 OPERATING WITH AVER*

PROTOTYPE SCALE-FEET AGE RIVER FLOW OF 2500 CFS

/Jt/6/?Atf-E Tvt.Y ATMOSPHEIIIC

,e.,.

AVERAGE SURFACE HEAT TRAN~FER COEFFICIENT IS BTU *F*1 FT*'Z. oiw*1, I

CONDITIONS FOR o !}do HRs. S11TV1i'1J/JY.

FIGURE NO.

LV 8

///.t:/';I?

N-83 APPE:-JDIX B Crn.1MENTS ON THE DRAFT E:-JVIRONME:JTAL STATE!{SNT BY THE U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSIO'.-J DIRECTOR OF LIC~SING RELATED TO THE PROPOSED OPERATIO] OF THE fi:ACH BOTTOM AT01'!IC POWER STATIO!~ mHTS 2 AWD 3 DOCKET NU1*2ERS so-277 A:rn So-276 Prepared For Philadelphia Electric Company By ICHTHYOLOGICAL ASSOCIATES Edward C. Ra~ey, Ph.D., DIRECTOR

-l-N-84 Because Section VIII of the Staff I s Draft Statement is the most significant in terms of biota, our .comments on this section are present_ed first in this text. Comments on the remaining portion of the Draft Statement appear subsequent to Section VIII in chronological order.

A bibliography of the REFEP.~NCES cited is provided at the end

. of this Appendix.

N-85 Page VIII-1 "SECTION VIII - ADVERSE EFFECTS WHICH C/i.NNOT BE AVOIDED."'

11 A. FACTORS RESPCTISIBLE FOR ADVFBSE EFFECTS. 11 Several factors associated wi.th the opera,tion of' Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 are capable of producing adverse effects. 'The more important of these factors include:

• 11 1* Entrainment of planktonic organisms in the once-through portion of the cooling system. 11

1) Ichthyological Associates has conservatively assumed l00% :mortality for planktonic organisms *which pass through the.* condenser system, the cooling towers and the long discharge canal. However, at some seasons and under some conditions of operation this may not be true. The situ-ation will be carefully monitored under various operating conditions to detennine the true mortality. Studie_s of the Conowingo Pond will continue for the purpose of assessing the effect of this mortality on the fish populations.

• Many of the phytoplankters, ~nich do not pass through the cooling towers, may not be significantly damaged. Relatively few eggs and *larvae of fishes will pass through the system duririg the spawning season which extends mostly from May through July. Few eggs will pass through the system because .the important fishes which occur in the. pond build nests. This encompasses all the sunfishes, which includes the white crappie, the most common fish in the Conowingo Pond, and the catfishes.

The channel catfish is .second most common. These lay de.'1lersal eggs in nests. The early stages of young (larvae) lie :in the nests :which are guarded by the male. Certa:in larvae ( such as carp and carpsucker) which occur in the water column will be entrained to a greater extent.

This has been determined in studies of the Muddy Run Pumped Storage

• Plant which may pump approximately seven to eight times .as much water as is withdrawn by Peach Bottom. The demise of many of these young carp and carpsucker which are trash fish may be beneficial to Conow:ingo Pond.

N-86 The important species (the.white crappie and channel catfish) are bottom fishes and are less likely to be entrained. Another important point is that the eggs, larvae and larger young of piany of the fishes occur in the huge expanse of Conowingo Pond which will not be affected in the least by the intake water. The upstream waters, that is those.

above Holtwood, are a constant source of recruitment of eggs and larvae into Conowingo Pond.

The once-through cooling system has the considerable*potential ad-vantage of producing a heated plume which will increase the production of zooplankters upon which many fishes feed in Conowlngo Pond. Such an increase was demonstrated by the.recent studies of Fenlon, McNaught and

.Schroeder, (1971, Proc. 14th Conf. Great Lakes Res.).* They reported that "Additions of heat to the Lake Ontario ecosystem at Nine Mile Feint have increased the standing crop of Bosmina 25.0 times and Daphnia retro~

curva 1.2 times in the overall study area. Adjacent to the outfall these same populations increased 123.8 and 2.4 times respectively. At the. same time primary production was n<=:>t significantly affected. It is suggested 11 ***** that turning over these large populations of herbivores by fishing their predators may reduce the likelihood of algal blooms."

Both Bosmina and Daphnia are found in Conowingo Pond. However, the water temperatures will be warmer, in general, in, Coriow:ingo Pond than in Lake Ontario. Nevertheless, the more heat toierant zooplankters should reproduce at a faster rate in the fall and spring and to some extent during the summer. This could easily more than make up for t:he total loss in biomass which we assume in passage through the condenser*system.

The Staff report mentioned (without emphasis) this point of possible increase in plankton. *

• It remains to be determined by future, studies after the plant begins operations whether there will be an increase in phytopia:nkton and zoo-plankton in the heated plume.

11

2. Impingement of various species on the intake screens.".

1) The screen system as designed for Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 is the best available with the present state *of.knowledge and available equipment. Befora it was designed the Philadelphia Electric Company looke.d into all, types and arrangements of screen systems then in opera-

~ion in the United States. Biological studies were made to determine the swim speed of the important fishes at a size when their impinge~

lllent may be meaningful to the maintenance of fish populations in the Conowi.ngo Pond. The design criteria were then determined which*were used in the present design,

N-87 Major features are:

(1) Small mesh (3/8 inch) *

. (2) A low velocity before the screens of 0~75 f.p.s. at the expected low operating level of Conowingo Pond\ (104.5 ft~). The velocities before the screen wiJ.l *generGlly be lower expecially during the summer when the pond is normally maintained above 106.5 ft. For weekends between }'.emorial Day and Labor Day the-Philadelphia Electric Company maintains the level of Conowingo Pond-higher than 106.5 £t. to enhance recreational opportunity.

(3) The screens have been placed far out from shore and are preceded only by the trash bars. This feature avoids forming. a 11 trc.p 11 and permits currents to -move :Past the screens. This also creates a lat,:?ral escape route which the fishes will utilize.

(h) Vertical traveling screens were used. These were the only screens available at the .time it was necessary to place an order for Peach Bottom 2 and 3 and indeed are the only practical screEns which are available to date. It should* be noted that Philadelphia Electric. Company helped finance studies of other screeriing systems such as the 11 horizontal traveling screen 11

• This system is still under research and development.

The st.aff report referre'd to the situation at Indian Point_ on the Hudson R:i,ver where a different system was designed long ago. Unfortunately a trap resulted which captured a part of the large over-wintering population of white perch. This species is not present in Conowingo Pond -and is not expected to occur in the future. The Staff report made umiHrranted com-

• parisons with regard to the behavior of white crappie (which occur in Conowingo Pond) as compared with White perch.

Further, it appears that the Staff did. 'not properly consider in predicting impirn;ement on screens in winter, that in fact, fishes leave the vicinity of the screens when the water temperature reaches SS°F or lower. The white crappie moves to the lower southern section of Conowingo Pond and is present in the mouths of the creeks and in deep water. The catfish and other fishes beco;,ie lethargic and occupy deeper pools where some may lie in the bottom or go into the silt, However, during winter

• operation they may be attracted by the recirculated warm water, A final determination of the amount of impingement must await the operations of Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3. The ultimate effect of any impingement will need careful analysis of the dynamics of the fish populations* rather than extrapolations from a much different situation such as Indian Point which is located in a different river and which has a much different fish popul-ation, and is therefore inapplicable.

11 3. Winter kills of fishes due to unexpected ph.nt shutdowns".

Some minor winter kills may be postulated to occur under such conditions.

However, our experiments and analyses indicate that sudden drops in temperature of the degree which will cause l"arr;e mortalities, is 11ot expected. The staff has apparently extrapolated (data not given) inf-ormation re~arding winter kills which -involve rivers where sudden ch;mges f_rom approxim:itcly 75°F to 34<:rhave occurred. Experiments are now underway with

N-88 regtird to the effect upon Conowingo fishes when water temperatures of S0°F to ssq;,are decreased in a matter of several hours to Lo°F. So far no mor-talities under these experimental conditions.have been found.

Because heat is lost slowly to the atmosphere is the w:inter it is e:>..-pected that a fairly long period of at least a week or more will pass before the water could cool do,m to the ambient temperature (of the water which enters from Holtwood). The operations of }JJ.ddy Run Pmnr-ed Storage Plant and of Conow:ingo Hydro. Station in a mapner so as to conserve warm water dur:ing periods following a shutdo,m of Peach Bottom _Station is be:ing considered by PhHadelphia Electric Company. Thus the massive k:l.lls, which the Staff predicts, are not.anticipated to occur. Plant shutdowns are expected to be of short duration and when the plant comes back on-line some fishes which were available jn the area of 4o°F water, which is expected at the bottom of Conowingo Pond, are expected to slowly. move toward the preferred temperature which for all species is higher than 40°F.

A very important point is the fact that when two units are operating at Peach Bottom it is highly unlikely that both would cease operations at the same time. Either unit would give off enough heat to prevent mortalities without* stress.

11 L*. Discharges of* heated water to the Susquehanna River. 11 Heated water di~charged to the Susquehanna River will not cause signi-

• ftcant mortalities of fishes because being motile, they have a capacity to avoi.d heated water. This generalization was noted in the Staff report. Large numbers will be attracted to the plume in the winter and will serve as a source o.f an important winter fishery.

The heated water at the point.of jet effluent may destroy most of the common benthic organisms in several areas; however, the heated water is expectect to have relatively little effect in depressing the. reproductive rate of phytoplankton. These organisms are adapted to the seasonal changes to which they are sub,iectecl and it is predicted that they will continue to be present within the limited area of the heated plume. Some species will do better than others.

With zooplankt.on the prediction is that an increase :in productivity wnl

.occur except during the warmest two or three weeks of sU1J1.iner. This :increase could more than make up for the loss of zooplankton and other organisrr~ due to entrainment in the condensers, cooling towers and the heated canal.

The water discharged into ConowinGo Pond is expected to be at or near oxygen satur-:1tion level. This is particularly true when tho cooling tol-:ers are operriting. 1'herefore, no critical oxygen conditions are predicted to occur in the heP.ted plume.

N-89 The heated plume will not

• ca.use the blockage of migratory fishes *.

This has been* shown through experiments with fishes. They readily move under or around. heated plumes. Field sturies in the.Connecticut River have confirmed experimental studies. See Leggett,* W.C., In Merriman*

(1965-1972). . .

No fishes are eypected to enter the heated canal during periods of operation because of the combined effect of the increased temperature an0 the jet characteristic (5 to 8 feet per seC'*..,ncl) of the heated discharge.

During periods of shut-down some may* enter but these will be driven out as the uni ts come back o.n the line, and heated water moves down the cane.I.

The behavior expected here is predicted to be unlike that of a canal such as that at the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power.Plant where the discharge is at tho surface rather than a jet.

Fi.shes whicli COJ:?.cent:rate in the heated plrnne in the winter may have a condition factor which is slightly iess than that. of hibernating or semi-hibernating fishes. However it is predicted they will take an angler's bait more readily at that time.

11

5. Discharge of chlorine to the Susquehanna River~"

• The discharge of chlorine to.the Susquehanna River at the point of

• the jet effluent will be 0.1 ppm or less, and will be immediately reduced to a point in the plume where the amount.of chlorine could not be measured, The few *chloramines formed may have some effects on micro-organisms. However, no significant effect on production of fishes is antic:i.pe.ted. The effects of chloramines are now being investigated at the Deluth Water Quality Laboratory.

• __ ,__ ,,.., ... _._ ..... .,. ..._....... , . ., ___ - . .,. *-**** - *- .,._,_,_, ..~- ____ _, __ . -*

Page VIII-2 Fourth paragraph, Statement. 11 The combined losses of anadromous fishes at Peach Bottom and at l'iuddy Run may effectively foreclose on the option to restore* aspects of this fishery to the Susquehanna River".

Comment. We disagree.. We sugf.est that the Staff may not have considered the situation in spring and fall at which time adults and young of anadromous fish move, A consideration of the findings over the past several years at .Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Plant on the* Connecticut River should .reassure them in this regard.

Fifth paracranh, Statement. "The staff feels that the operation of this plant *with the present once-:throur,h coolinr, system has a significant potential for causing extensive damage to the biological comnrunity w,i thin Conowingo Pond".

Comment. We think that the Staff erred in reaching this con-clusion. We are confident from our ext~nsive studies of tpe effects of heat on fishes and other organisms that there. will be no extensive damage w:i thin Conow:ingo Pond. .

St.atenient, 11 0f re~ concern are the populations of indigenous and .

anadromous fishes and the food web that supports :them,"

Comment. There are no anadromous f:i.shes in .Conow:ingo Fond and there is little expectation that they will ever be present in large numbers.

Statement. "Changes in species composition and sea.sonal density may occur in the plankton community, which is the principal source of food

for the fi~h population".

• Cormnent. We agree that there may be seasonal changes in species composition. These changes would not necessarily be of any sifnificance with regard to the supply of fish food. There is no evidence that fishes in Conowingo Pond prefer one zoopJ.ankter of the same size over another.

We predict that through most of the year, but particularly in the spring

• and fall and perhaps to a lesser extend through the surm;ier, there. will be an increase in density of zooplankters which will more than replace the organisms destroyed by passage through the condensers, cooling* towers, and the heated canal.

• N-91 Page-VIII-2 Sixth paraf.!raph, Statement. "Essentially all of. these adv~rse effects would be eliminated by changing to alternate cooling scheme rr* or IIa as discu.ssed in section XII and summarized in Table XII-1".

Conunent. We disagree with regard to the adverse effects of once-through cooling and we cannot afree that the staff's alternate cooling.

scheme is desirable. We surrest that a rational approach would be to operate Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 for a period of at least three or four years with intensive studies to determine .the actual effects, if any, Should any damage be revealed from our intensive studies, it would not be irreparable. Obviously, if an alt.erna ti ve (closed) cooling scheme is used it will eliminate the excellent winter sport fishery which is predicted anq may also have certain detrimental ecological effects.

N-92 Page I -2 Fourth Parar>raph, Statement. "The available cooling supply seemed to be controllable within thermal and chemical discharge lirni ts that wouid not darnave the biota and aquatic life appreciably or be objectionable to other Pond and downstream user~. 11 Comment. We agree.

Page II-26 First PararraPh, Statement. "However, unless exhaustive studies were carried out over many ?ears, no one could be positive that these species do not in fact actually occur there."

Comment. In fact no study, however exhaustive, could possible prove that a species does not in fact occur in an area.

N-93

• Page II-27 Second paragraph, Statement. "The. up9er river is reportedly poor habitat for migrator~r birds 11 **

Comment. This is attribute_d to the *Environmental Report. We believe.

the report has been misinterpreted, The Environmental Report indicated that t_he river in the vicinity of the plant is not as good a habitat for migratory waterfowl as is the Chesapeake Bay. We are puzzled by the term 11 Conejohela mud flats".

• We do not. know the location of these flats nor were they mentioned in the Environmental Report.

Fourth Para~raoh, Statement. "Other characteristic inhabitants are the gray squirrel, gray fox, and fox squirrel (in open woods, reintroduced from wester*n Penr1sylvania) ** 11 Comment. The gray fox is scarce. One has been seen by Ichthyological*

Associates personnel since 1966. There is no r_ecord of the fnx: squirrel occurring in the area in recent years. Obviously these two rr.ammals are not characteristic inhabitants of the area.

• Statem~nt. 11 'furkeys are protected, having been recently reestablished in small bands throughout the vicinity."

Comment. This statement is misleading, Turkeys are not protected during the hunting season (see Digest of Pennsylvania Hunting, Trapping Regulations, September 1, 1972, published by Pennsylvania Game.Com-mission).

Statement: 11 Most of the snake species feed primarily on rodents, al-though rabbi ts, birds, amphibiaIJ.S and reptiles may be important food s,ources for. certain types_. 11 Comment. This statement is* erroneous. Hore than half of the snakes in this area feed on other than rodenis. See Wright and Wright (1957).

Statement, "The slimy salamander is the only salamander found regularly in the oak-hickory-l'oresi:. region (sucu <1"'. ~ <1r the site) than further 0

south. 11 Comment. The reference Doutt, .Mammals of Pennsylvania 1935 is cited. This statement is of que,stionable validity. Ichthyological Associates has not found this snecies to date. The redback salamander has been fow1d regularly in th.is ar~a. See Bishop (1947).

--- -,-. ---* -,,._. *. . ... ,...,,,~, ..... -. "**~**--**

-ll-N...:.94 Page II-28 First Paragraph, Comment. The American peregrine falcon may on occasion fly over the area as it does over every county in eastern Pennsylvania.

There are definitely no nesting falcon in the area cf the plant site.

Reference is made to the Delmarva Peninsl,ll.a fox squirrel (a sub-species) which appears on the endangered species list of the Department of the Interior. It once may have been found "throughout the site area" as indicated in the Dra!t Stat_ement. However, it is not now present in the area and apparently has not been for many years.

• Last -Paragraph, Statement. 11The high turbidity and.depth of the water da not provide a good habitat for the development.of extensive communities of periphyton or rooted vascular aquatics in the :iJnmediate. vicinity of the plant."

. Comment. We agree with this statement. This matter is again emphasized on page II-33 second paragraph rmich. says 11 Ex.tensive communities of aquatic vascular plants (macrophytes) do not occur in the vicinity of *Peach Bottom Units 2 .and 3 or below its outfall in Conowingo Pond.

Substantial growths occur only in a few coves, generally removed from the direct influence .of the thermal discharge".

This contradicts the statement on page II-28 last line which says "However, such communities exist within the area that will be exposed to the thermal discharge at Peach Bottom". This last statement is erroneous.

Because.of the experience of Ichthyological Associates personnel, based particularly upon the observations in the Connecticut River* in the vicinity of the Connecticut Xankee Atomic Plant, we would expect no increase of.aquatic plants or periphyton in the area of the heated plume.

N-95 Page II-30 Second Paragraph, Statement. "The bacteria themselves are food for much of the microscopic zooplankton and thereby contribute directly to production at higher trophic levels. 11 Comment.* The last part of the sentence beginning "and thereby" may be misleading. Other food sources are available.

Fourth Parar.:ra@, Statement. "These organisms provide the hasis for the aquatic .food web and are the principal food of most of the zooplankton and some fish species. 11 Comment. As a generality, this statement is. valid. It is important to note that none of the fifty odd species of fishes which occur in Conowingo Pond feed exclusively on planktonic algae.

.... _.. ..,._ ______ ,._,. __, _____ *-----*-*--**---~-~*~-. ------ ._, . .,. _________ **-*- --~------~--** ..

., , *- ----~ **-* . -** ---*--~----* -**---*~--~-.-----~- ..-- __ .

N-96 Page II-31 Second p:iragraph, *comment. We differ with several points made in this .

paragra.ph with regard to Conowingo Pond. There is considerable spRtial and temporal variation in the photosynthetic zone in Conowingo Pond as ind;_cated by the data collected between 1966 and 1972. There are no turbulent water currents in the vicinity of the Peach Bottom Plcnt. The statement with reg:ird to the photosynthetically active zone ("which averafeS about L feet 11 ) is ::ittributed to the Environmental Report of June 1971.

Apparently the StR.ff interpreted Secchi di.sc readings given in this report

• as the limits of the photosynthetically active zone. This is not true for Conowingo Pond or any other reservoir. Secchi disk readings*are a relative index of visible light penetration.

• Fourth paragraph, Comment~ Ichthyologtcal Associ~tes persorinel have ob.,

served occ:isione.l blooms of blue-green alf_!ae over the past five years.

There is no. evidence to indicate that these blooms did not also occur before field studies begri.n in 1966. Therefore *the use of the term 11 recent 11 by the StaSf may be misleading.

Statement *. 11 Three genera, the blue-greens, Anacystis and Anabaena and the diatom Melosira, make up as much. as 100, 60, and 95%,- respectively, of the phytoplankton populHtions at certain seasons of the year 11

• Conunent. *rt is certain that a monoculture (100% Anacystis) does not exist in Conowingo Pond at any time.

In the sentence from the Staff report cited above with regard to the three genera of algae (taken from the Bnyer report, Table 57A, Data Report No. 3 for 1970) consideration was not given to an evaluation of the manner in which the data were collected.

Paga II-33 Third parar-raph, Statement. "Absence of important submerged pla.nt groups as the pond-weeds (,Pota:mogeton)and the naiads (Najas) may be the major factor limiti_ng the* use of Conowingo Pond by waterfowl."

Comment. We point out tha.t the use of Conowingo or other ponds by waterfowl for resting is important. With many species it may be as im-portant as feeding on aquatic plants.

Page II-38 Table II-7, Comment. The headings of the last three columns are in error.

They should be A-II, B-I~, D-II. Note: Ichthyological Associates has other stations which are numhered II-A, II-B,.II-D.

N-97 Page II-31 Fifth Paragraph, Comment. The tenns such as 11 average 11 , massive blue- .

green algal blooms" and "unbalanced ecosystem" given herein have little meaning in reference to the Environmental Report. The :implication that the Conowingo Pond m,ay have an unbalanced ecosystem lacks sub-stantial basis in fact.

Last Paragraph, Comment *. There is* no evidence .from extensiv:e observa~

tions betwe-en 1966 and 1972 that so called 11 eutrophication of Coriowingo Pond" is a problem. Heat, per se, is not a cause of eutrophication.

If nutrients are not available, eutrophication will not occur.* The findings of Ichthyological Associates are that phosphate values a:i:-e relatively l_ow. These phosphate values are comparable to those taken

• by EPA at Conowingo Dam. *

-l,-

N-98 Page II-40 First paragraph, Statement. 11 Turbidity of the water ( a !'.unction of the phytoplankton density) *** *"

Comment. This statement is incorrect in part. Most of the turbidity found in Conowingo is due to silt.

Statement. 11 Data collected from 1967 to 1970 indicate that only a small fraction of. the variations of z.ooplankton biomass may be accounted for by changes in temperat,ure and river flow

• 11 Comment. This sentence is correct. Temperature and flow acco.unted

. for from 7 to 14% of the _variation in biomass in zoopla.nkton measured in Conowingo Reservoir from 1967 to 1970 (see Supplement No. 1 of Enviromnental Report, Appendix III). The other implications in the paragraph are not based upon data in the Environmental Report as noted and no other source is given. The implications and the conclusions in the remainder of the paragraph do not appear to be valid.

• se*cond. paragraph, Comment. 11 Adul~ Chaoborus 11 should read larval Chaoborus.

Tne implication may not be valid that the life histories of benthic in-vertebrates, particularly the aspect.of reproduction, is a function of the size of the organism.

Third paragraph,. Comment. The first two sentences .compare two different things. The number of species (75) of aquatic insects given for hardwater rivers of the eastern United States includes those species found through-out a river. The Staff says in regard tothe diversity of Conowingo Pond that the. insect fauna is "strikingly lower". The Staff is not justified in comparing data from a limited geographic area and from a pond habitat

( Cono..,,ingo Pond) ..,,ith those taken in a river ..

Statement. 11 0ther invertebrate e,roups are also notable by their absence or low numbers (i.e., crayfish, planarians' snails)

• 11 .

Comment. The available data are notadequate to justify this con-clusion.

1,-ist paragraph, Statement. i*The standing crop of benthos is approximately one order of magnitude smaller than that .of _the zooplankton in the over-lying water column."

Comment. We are unable to find a source for such data for Conowingo Pond. Nono was included in the Environmental Report*. * '

..16-N-99 Page II-42 First Paragraph, Statement. When the much shorter generation t:illle of zooplankton is taken into account, the :importance of the benthos in the*

overall bioenergetics of Conowingo Pond is still further reduced. 11 Comment. Without having data on biomass we are unable to ascertain how such a conclusion could be reached*.

Second ParagraEh, Statement. "Others {meaning game fishes) are dependent on benthos for most of their adult lives."

Connnent. This statement is not true for the fishes found in Conowingo Reservoir. They feed largely on zooplankton. In the winter

{December, January, February) the relatively few fishes which are active feed largely on benthos.

Third Paragraph, Statement *. "A few species, (fishes) mainly minnows

• and some catfishes, consume benthic algae and aquatic plruits regularly."

Comment. This statement is erroneous with regard to Gonowingo Pond and has.limitations as a generalization for North American fishes of the two families mentioned, Statement. "Larval and juvenile fishes consume mainly zooplankton, shifting to a diet of benthos or fishes as they grow older."

Connnent. For Conowingo Pond this is erroneous. Larval, juvenile and adu.lts of the white crappie, (the most common fish in Conowingo Pond) feed mainly on zooplankton throughout their life. A few fishes are eaten and some benthos is engulfed particularly during spring and win.ter. This type of generalization, made in many cases with regard to fishes in the Draft Environmental Statement is not applica*o1e to Conowingo Pond where det~iled studies of the food of fishes have been made. See studies by Mathur & Robbins, 1971; Mathur, 1970 and 1972.

Statement. "Adult crappies, walleyes, basses, and muskellunge feed almost exclusively on other fishes.

\

Comment. This is an erroneous statement as far as the white crappie is concerned. Some exception could be takeIJ. to the generalization with the food of the walleye, basses and muskellunge. However, the walleye and muskellunge are uncommon to rare in Gonow:ingo Pond and are relatively unimportant.

Fourth Paragraph, Comment, Paragraph four refers to "Appendix I-Life Histories of Important Gonowingo Pond Species". The treatment of life histories is only based upon general sources without considering the

\ literature.available on the.specific species listed. However, our major

~. co~cern is the inclusion of rare or nonexistent species in Conowingo Pond in Appendix I. For example, the muskellunge is listed. Fewer than r

• • 1

• • --*----~-~*----------*,..-~,*--------~-*-***<<-*--**"'------*-*-~~,.u*-*-*--------***---------*-*- -------------~-.

N-100 Page, II-42 twenty specimens of the muskellunge have been taken in Gonowingo -Pond.

out of more than. a million fish which have been .seen :in the period 1966-

.1972. These muskies are waifs which have. been washed ci.o:i-mstream.

Indeed, the Susquehanna River is not a part of the original range of the muskellunge nor is it good. muskellunge habitat. Over the years the Pennsylvania Fish commission ha,s attempted to establish populations in the Susquehanna River. This has resulted in a l:ilni ted sport f:i.shery at several places such as Falmouth which is located approximately 35 miles upstream from Conowingo Dam.

The yellow perch is also included. This species is uncommon in Conowingo Pond and. is certainly not :important in an ecological or recreational sense.

• We ar.e* .puzzled by the inclusion of fish species that definitely do not occur in Conowingo Pond. These are: the American shad, *white .

perch_, and. striped bass.

The yellow walleye is present in Conowingo Pond, but is not a.

common. species. It is, however, fished. seasonally by a relatively few anglers in the Holtwood tailrace.

Statement. 11Common seine species. were the bluntnose minnow, 11 spottail shiner, bluegill, tessellated darter and yellow walleye.

Comment. This statement applies to. species seined in 1970 when only 141 specimens out of more than 14,000 were yellow walleye.

Fewer than 0.1% of the many thousands of fishes taken in trap net sets have been the walleye. Table II-10 reports relative success at trap net stations in Conowingo Pond.

• The common fishes. in Conowingo Pond.were reported as -white crappie, cha1111el catfish, and bluegill.

Seventh Paragraph, Comment, Reference is made to outbreaks of fish disease in Conowingo *Pond. The species which has been mainly affected has been the, channel catfish. Fish diseases are not in a:rry way unique to populations found. in Conowingo* Pond. and this is particularly true of the* 11 Aeromonas infection".

• • • -~ **--**-""--*-*"---~--*~** ..~, ,-,"~**-._~,--"_._...__._....._.... _,_.........--.,... ,,..... " .............

___,,..,. .....~~. ,_.,._, ...,.-.,... **-** ....... ~---*-**~*~*** "*--~-~*-*""*---,~*----**"'-""' *- ..,.-~--------* -~ -.-***-*-***-~*"'*-*-**- *, -~-- -- - .

N-101 Page II-44 First Paragraph, Statement. "In the past, white crappies have dominated the sport fishing catch, followed by catfishes., sunfishes.,. basses, wall--

eyes., and yellow perch."

Comment. There are few yellow perch in or taken from Conowingo Pond. The walleye fishing is seasonal and mostly limited to the Hol twood tailrace.

Data on the sport fishery from 1958-60 (see Supplement No. 1 of Environmental Report, Appendix II) indicate that the walleye constitutes less than 1% of the catch. The same survey indicated that the small-mouth bass and the yellow perch niade up less than ~ of the catch.

Statement. "Tagging studies have sham that the white crappie moves upstream in the spring and then gradually returns to the lower reservoir during summer and fall. 11 Comment. This statement is true. J;t also should be noted that the white crappie is concentrated in the lower reservoir and in the mouths of creeks such as Broad Creek and Conowingo Creek in the wb1ter.

Second Paragraph, Statement. 11Further alte:ration (of circulation) is a result of operations of Muddy Run Pumped Storage Station and the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station."

Comment. The latter refers to Peach Bottom Unit 1 which has-very little effect on the alterations of flow in Coriow1ngo Pond.

Statem..:?nt. "The trapped fish are not selected according to species, and this method will result in the introduction of several other species not now present in the pond, 11 Comment. The objective.of the program is to get Ameri'can shad into Conowingo Pond. They are handled as little as possible and at times other fishes have been introduced.

Statement. 11 0f these species., striped bass (Marone sax:atilis) and wite perch (Marone americana) have the potential for establishing ]:and locked populations in_ fresh water. 11 Comment. True. Both species were in the 14 mile area now occupied by Conowingo Pond at the time the dam was closed in_ 1929. Neither the striped bass nor the white perch established landlocked populations.

Introductions made since 1958 have also failed.

N-102 Page II-44 Fourth Paragraph, Statement. "Trophic patterns of Conowingo Pond are altered by the fact that nutrients, plankton, and fishes enter over Hol twood Dam and are lost through Conowingo Dam. "

Comment. A more accurate statement would be over the dam and through 'the turbines at Holtwood Dam. However, we- fail to see how the basic trophic patterns of Conowin~o Pond have been altered as 1:1tated.

The basic change obviously occurred sho*rtly after the* time of . impound-ment. Both Lake Aldred, which is formed behind Hol twood Pam, and the Cob.owingo Pond are_,a much greater source of aquatic biomass than the natural river which was an area of swift current with.* a bottom largely of bedrock. Overall, the alterations of. the environment in this area over a period of fifty years has increased recreational opportunity

,iU>.d has been* of great economic benefit.

N-103.

Page II-45

• First parar,raph, ComMent. The .loss of larval* and juvenile fish .from Conowingo to the Muddy Run Pumped Storage*Reservoir was noted during the spawning seasons of 1969 and 1970 *.

This loss from Conowingo is estimated by Ichthyological Associates to be insignificant in tenns of reductior,i .* of fish populations which might result 'in Conowin~o Pond. In other words, there is adequate reproduction of warm "!ater fishes except in cases of extreme flood. Warm water fisheries normally have a problem of excess production which often results in stunting.

This is true of the channel catfish in Conowingo Pond.

In the two years 1969 and 1970 referred to, it is important to note that most of the larvae which ~ere transported to.the upper reservoir and some of which were injured and killed were channel catfish, carp, and carp suckers. The whit.e crappie which is the niost common fish in Conowingo Pondwas seldom pumped to the upper reservoir. In the two.years noted above, fewer than thirty young of the white crappie were taken .during

. the pumping operation. *

. The loss of larvae from Conowingo was a gain* to the Muddy Run Pumped Storage Reservoir (1,000 acres) which sir:ice 1967 produced .a large population of fishes. The upper part of this reservoir has.been open to anglers and is

• a productive fishery. 'fherefore, what has been emphasized in the Draft Env-ironmental Statement as a loss has actually. resulted in a very large re.cre-ational gain.

Statement.. "An estimated 100,000 young fish per day (on the average) were so damap,ed by the transport process

. as t*o .be unrecognizable 11 .*

Comment. We have been unable to find 'the source of this information.

Statement. 11 No estimate is available for the percentage killed or mutilated in the process, }?ut large number.s of dead channel catfish have been found near the Muddy Run intake in Conowingo Pond. 11 Comment. The implication is that this was a regular occurrence during the period of report (1.967-1968), Actually, dead ca~fish were present on only a .few occasions.

Statement. "The determination of the size selectivity of the meter nets is even more pertinent when older fish are considered; the numbers presented may thus be gross *underestimates1i.

Comment. Ichthyological Associates has considered in their findings the fact thnt meter nets* are selective against older fish (a~e ~roups *other than 0). * *Therefore, estimates of the effect on older fish as a result of

• meter net samplin~ during the operation of the Muddy Run Pumped Stora~e Plant are unwarranted~ . . .

I I

N-104

• Page II-45

• Third. paragraph, Statement. "The net result of the complex circulation, of the operation of multiple electric-generating stations, and of the.

introduction bf new species to Conowingo Pond is. that any assessment of the impact of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station either on the Conowingo Pond or on the anadromous fish restoration program will be extremely difficult".

Comment. We have recognized the difficulties and did so in 1966 when the studies began. The studies, on fishes have been done in such depth we are confident*thqt with our knowled!".e of the year-class fluctuations of the important fishes in Conowingo Pond we will be able to assess the si~nificance of the impact of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station on ConowinEo Pond if indeed there is any.

We have studild anadromous fishes and have been involved in the restora.tion program since 1963. We are confident, particularly from studies (Leggett, W. C. in J:.1err:i.n:cm, et al (1965 - 1972 and Marcy, B.*C., et al 1972, Observation of the Reactions of Young American Shad to a Heated Effluent), on the Connecticut River in connection with .the Connecticut Yankee A.tomic Power Plant at Haddam, that. there will be no blockage of anadromous fishes either in their upstream or downstream migrations. We predict that there will be no significant influence on the size or quality of the anadromous fish popula~ions.

page II-46 to 49 Comment. This includes bibliographic references for Section :rr. l*!e are concerned over the. relatively small number of references used (44).

Of these, _the only primary literature cited in the Staff I s references for Page II are numbers 33, 34, 40, 41 and 42.

Page III-46 Second paraRraph, ComMent~ The section states "compounds known as chloramines which are also toxic to aquatic orranisms 11

• Almost any chemical is toxic. The important thing is the dose and time of exposure.

(Zillich, 1972).

N-105 Page V-2 F'irst parar.:raph, Statement. "The enclosed and filled areas and Rock Run Creek may have been important spawning* areas for many fishes".

Comment. The enclosed and filled areas are spaces which are denied to fishes in any practical sense. Any production dependent upon this area of less than approximately 100 acres is lost.

Rock Run Creek was not an important spawning area for many.fishes.

It was utilized (as are all the tributaries. of the Conowingo Pond) for spawning by the white sucker, several species of small minnows and the tessellated darter. The implication that this loss from Rock Run may be important in the overall biolor:;icai impact particularly on fishes in Conowinga Pond is exap,gerated.

In the same para~raph the Staff gives the acreage of Conowingo Pond as being 8,000 acres. This should be 8,960 acres.

Page V-3 Second parar:raph, Statement. "As described in Page III. D.l, large amounts of heat will be discharged to Conowingo Pond during plant operations. Sor:ie published upper critical temperatures for species found in the pond are given in Table K-1, Appendix K. 11 Comment. The defirii tion of the "upper critical temperature*" is not given. Among those organisms listed in Table _K,-1 the rriuskelltinge is rare in Conowingo Pond and.the white perch and striped bass do not occur. The yellow perch is not a common species. The fathead minnow is rare. The blacknose dace, creek chub goldf:i:sl1 and the banded killifish are uncommon.

The mum:'lichog is introdu_ced occasionally, by bait fishermen in Broad Creek. Withi.n Con_o;nngo Pond there are always areas that even at critical times in sumu.ie-r are below the lethal temperatures for the fishes in the Pond. See Discussion by Moyer and Raney, ( 1969).

Page V-3 Second parar:raph, Statement. "During periods whem ambient water temperatures are about 850:<' many of these organisms will be livin!!, near their upper limits and probably above their thermal range of metabolic *insensitivity (Appendix K) 11

• N-106 Page V-3 Comment. This statement is a generalization which assumes that if the water .is 85°F or above in certain parts of Conowingo Pond that areas in the pond will nqt* be .available where the temperature is less.

We are dealing with motile organisms which have the ability to sense small differences in temperature which are of the order of much less than lOF, vlhen motile organisms approach water of 85 For of higher temperature and if it is not in the.direction of their preferred temp-erature, they turn and follow the gradient which must.lead from this temperature to cooler waters. This is precisely what fishes will do in Conowingo Pond. The second part of the Staff 1 s statement with regard to metabolic insensitivity is not explained.

Statement. 11 Additions of large* quantities of heat to Conowingo Pond at these-times could conceivably result in profound changes in the biotic community 11

• Comment. The introduction of heat will at times make an area in the vicinity_ of the heated plume unavailable to certain aquatic organisms.

T*he benthic organisms ( which might be affected) could be eliminated from a small acreage. Fishes coming in contact with the hotter parts of the plume* will move out of these areas. This has been shown by dozens of studies done over the_ past 30 years. Many of these a.re listed by Raney and. Nenzel, 1969 in 11 A Bibliography on Heated Effluents and Effects on Aquatic Life with Emphasis on Fishes 11

• Ichthyological Associates Bulletin 2.

A change in water temperature of S or 6 F when encountered by a fish usually causes an avoidance reaction. See Meldrin and Gift (1971 ). This is in accord with Alabaster* s (1964) findings, based on long field and laboratory studies. He noted that fish kills are rare in Great Britain even with pro-nounced changes in temperatures of effluent water. His conclusions were that sudden increases in river temperature (11 to 16 F) were sufficient to drive fishes away from lethal conditions and that the vast majority of fishes avoid lethal temperatures.

• Under the conditions of operation with the introduction of the heat by jet no such profound changes will occur. This is based upon studies of many situations where heated effluents have b_een discharged, including recent studies in the Connecticut River in connection with the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Plant.*

N-107 Page V-3 Third paragraph, Statement. 11 Up to 18,uOO cfs of pond water and the organisms therein-will he exposed to temperatures in excess of 87°F as a result of mixing with the the.rmal dischprge (assuming no heat loss to the atmnsphere)

• 11 Corn.rnent. Fishes* will not. be present in this area unless this i.s within their preferred temperature. For example catfishes will be found in this mixing zone at a temperature up to 93°F.

The planl<:tohic organisms which may pass through the area or are retained in the a.rea may increase or decrease in numbers depending upon their biology.

Fourth pa.ragr;iph, Corunent. In the hec>te~ ,Jater close to the effluent jet some thermel effects are anticipated as stated. Some of these.are predicted to result in incre;ises of organisms wb ich in view of the food habits of fishes present in Cnnowingo Pond will be desirable.

Page V-4 Sepond paraf',raph, Comment. Exposure times for thermal shocks of various magnitudes are given in Table V-1, PageV-5. The Staff then proceeds to discuss the effects of resulting mortalities. This apprrmch is almost useless except in cases where fishes may be trapped. No such trap will occur oh Conowingo Pond in connection 1-!ith the operation of Peach Bottom.

Third paragraph, Comment. Certainly mortalities will not be severe with regard to fishes. More specific cases are pointed out later.

Statement. 11 In adrlition, survivors of entrain.'ilent will receive an extended exposure .to higher temperatures, especiaily if they have been stunned by the .initial shock. 11 Comment. Those entrained in the plume will have a relatively ohort distance to travel a.nd little mortality is expected. There may be some stress to ~ome small fishes.

Statement. "It is therefore important to have these data in order to estimate the impact of the thermal plur.ie. 11 Comment. The data in Table V-1 are of little. value in connection with Conowingo Pond becanse fishes will not be trapped .. The muskellunge is rare and the yellow perch is uncommon. For these and the other fishes the

.avoidance temper.qtures ;ire such that mortalities will be rare.

Fifth p;irar.raph., Statement. "Anothe*r aspect of exposure to the thermal discharge 1-rill occur in the winter. As water temperatures drop in the fall., fish will be attracted to the plume and the discharge canal."

'"----.---*----------~--------*-------~~----*---**~---.- '"'*--~~-**-"'"""---'-,..,------------M,_________________________

N-108 Page V-4 Comment. We agree that fishes will be_ attracted to the plume because they will be going in the direction of their preferred. temperature. How-ever, it is extremely unlikely that fishes will enter the discharge canal because of the high velocities of 5 to 8 fps combined with the relatively high tempera,ture in the jet discharge compared with temperatures available close by ir. 'the mixing zone. A fish would need both to swim against what we know to be his avoidance temperature and against the high velocity.

Mo~t of the fishes except very l-" rge s pccir.1ens are unable to swim at these speeds. Those which might enter the canal during periods of shutdown will quickly leave the canal when war~ water enters at the time the plant comes back on line. Sudden decreases in water temperature of as much as 2c:?F can be fatal to most fishes. 1fost cases where 11 winter kills" have been observed nre on rivers where it is possible to get a sudden drop in tem-perature of considerable magnitude. A hazardous situation may develop when intake water is drawn from a canal at a low temperature of approximately 35°F and the hea.ted effluent is discharged into a separate canal \\here tem-peratures m:w reach 60 to 65°F. A sudden drop in water temperature from 60 to 35op ,rCiuld cause ,nortalities in fishes. Because mortalities of this*

nature have occurred at scattered localities it appears the Staff has made

• the :.'tSSumption that the conditions in Conowingo Pond are such that 11 massive 11 kills may occur. In winter during opera.tion of Peach Bottom 2 _and 3 the l-rater_ near the bottom of Conowingo Pond will be *approxil'lately uOOf when the temperature of the ambient *water ( entering from Hol twood) is 39°F or lower. In the plume (near the effluent but outside a small mixing zone) the water tem?er1'ture ma.y be as much as 50 to 55°F. If all units at Peach Bottom should suddenly cease operntions it would be a week or more before the Pond ,.,ater temperc1ture would fall to the ambient water tem~rature.

'l'he reservoir of water in Muddy Run Pumped Storage Pond could be used to augment the supply of wa.rm water. In some cases pur.iping could reduce some-what the amount of cold water entering the northern end of Conowingo Pond.

It should be emphasized again that it is unlikely that two units will be tripped simultaneously.

Studies are being done on fishes found in Conowingo Pond by Ichthyo-logical Associ:>tes to assess the effect of a decrease in temperature (shock) of as much as 10 and 15°F from the assumed winter plume temperature of 50 to 55°F.

These studies and other.observations on behavior.of fishes relating to decrePses in temperature enables us to predict with confidence that there will be no massive fish kills. This prediction is made with the knowledf!e that it would take longer than one ,1eek for Conowingo Pond to cool off from a winter temperature of approximately 5o°F to a temperature of approximately 35°F.

• If two unit.s are o;-,erating it is extremely unlikely that a trip wouid involve both units and furthermore even if both uriits were to trip at least one of the units could be returned to service within a few hours. If the heated effluent is available from one unit no mortalities will ensue._

Page V-l.i Sixth* para~rnph, Statement. "If the density of fishes in the plume and

.discharge canal does not exceed the carrying capacity bf the area, a bene-ficial effect of the plant would be increased growth during tl)e colder months."

Comment. Pe predict that Conowingo Ptind will become an outstanding fishery in colder months. ,Overcrowding is not likely. We are not dealing with an open canal such*as that found at the Connecttcut Yankee Atomic Power Plan~.

Because o.f the behavior of catfish in mter temperatures less than 55°F we expect few will be a.vailable in the heated plume. However, if they are ~resent they will augment the winter.fishery for the white crappie and other species.

• Page V-5 Table V-1, Comment *. We are unable to accept the applicability of the data in Table V-1 to predict fish mortalities in Conowingo, Pond. Use\ of the data in Table V-1, to predict fish mortalities in Conowingo Pond should include consideratiorsregarding the known responses of fish in avoiding thermal increases or decreases.

Page V-6.

First pRragraph, Statement. "Unless food production is markedly increased,

{in the thermal plume) loss of condition or starvation would result."

Comment. It is predicted fishes* w::, uld shift to feeding on benthos at .

this time. Because fishes will be active and hungry, the fishery should be good.

Statement. 11 Any attempt to claim beneficial effects for the thermally altered area during the colder months is purely .speculative. 11 Comm~nt.

• This statement is not in accord with the facts. It is common knowledge that the wi.nter fishing in the vicinity of v!arni water from steam pla_nts is among the best fishing available. For example, in .

the Tennesseo Valley studies of fish and fis.hing at five steam generating plants (John Sevier, Kingston, Bullrun, Colbert and Johnsonville) have confirmed the presence of large concentrations of fishes and good winter fishing. Channel catfish and. white crappie are among thos taken in the fall, winter and spring in lnrge numbers (see Tennessee Valley Authority, (1969).

N-110

• Page V-6 Moore, Charles J. and Charles M. Frisbie in 1972 Chesapeake* Science 13( 2): 110-115 report in a paper en tit led 11 A winter sport fishing survey in a warm water discharge of steam electric, station on the Patuxent River, Maryland" as .follows: A sport fishing survey was conducted from January through April 1970 along a one mile discharge canal of a Potomac Electric Pm-er Comp!lny steam electric station located at Chalk Point, 'Maryland.

In 20,000 fishing trips 58,000 fishes representing nine species were cap-tured. The average was o. T fish per man hour *. White perch and strip~d bass were the predominant species ta.ken in this estuarine situation.

• This eY.cellent catch was made in the cc1nal'ci.t a time when sport fishing on the Patuxent River is negligible. ThA fact. that _more fishing pressure was found on the canal during the.winter t~an during summer and fall indicated the value. of this* unseasonable s;:,ort fishery produced by the warm water discharge. For additional information s.ee Elser (1963 and 1965), Shearer Ritchie and Frisbie (1962) and Walker (1954).

• B. C. Marcy, Jr. reported on winter-spring sport fishing in the .

heated effluent of a nuclear* power plant at Haddam, *connecticut (Essex Marine Laboratory 15th Semi-annual Report on the Connecticut River Ecological Studies of Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Station, 1972). A total of 18 species*of fishes which were caught included white*perch, white catfish, and brown bullhead. The latter three made up 75~ of the total catch. The summary stated that a substantial winter sport fishery has developed.in the heated canal at the Connecticut Yankee Power Com?any. The fishermen utilizing this area were able to catch twice the number of fish with equal effort as those fishing in the Connecticut River in the vicinity of the plant from April through November.

• Statement. 11 Confirmation or denial of such an effect must await measurements made after the plant is in operation. Available evidence is simply not adequate at the present time."

Comment. Obviously each plant and its effects are unique. Confirma-tion must be made for each plant after it goes {nto operation. The n~ed ror adequate time to do these post-operational studies is obvious. An extension of time is warranted to confirm our studies to date_ which predict

.that operation of the fRcility as designed will not create any*adverse biological effects to the Conowingo.Pond. *

-28::.

Page V-6 N-111 Second paragraph, Statement. 11 If piant operations were, suddenly interrupted in mid-winter, fishes residing in the plume* and dis-charge canal will.be subjected to negative thermal shocks."

Comment. Due to the projected discharges of 5 to 8 fps with delta T of 21°F at the point of discharge, few fishes are expected in the discharge ca.rial particularly in winter. This situation is much different than the often quoted situation at Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Plant where the effluent canal is*open at the end and the discharge is at the surface. It is true that fishes will be subjected to a decreased temperature. The effect depends upon the amount and the rate . of temperature change. '

Third paragraph, Statement. "During per;i.ods of low flow, the with-drawal of water and associated organisms may be considerably greater than the flow past the plant."

• Comment *. This is a misleading statement. The withdrawal of water is from a reservoir not from a river. *There is of course some movement past the intake screens by reason of the operation of other facilities. We cannot agree that there.will be necessarily greater numbers of organisms withdrawn during periods of low flow.

The distribution of organisms needs to be considered in an evaluation of the effect mentioned in the Staff statement.

Page V-7 Third paragraph, Comment. In discussing pass~ge of fishes through the condenser system we*are dealing with larvae and small young. The data given for species in Table V-1 are in most if not all cases derived from experiments with larger fishes than those which may pass through .3/8-inch screen.

In the Environmental Report we have estimated that 100% of the organisms will be lost as they pass through the cooling system. What the actual loss is, compared with the ambient populatioµs, will depend upon studies made after the plant goes into operation.

Fourth paragraph, Statement. "Among the zoopla.nkton, certain species of Daphnia, particularly Da.phnia longiremis, a northern, cold-water form, would be expected to be more sensitive to thermal shock."

• Comment. Guesses as to the effect of thermal shock are of little value in an estimate of damage in the case of Peach Bottom where we have assumed that the mortality would be 100%. Daphnia longiremis has not been identified from Conowingo Pond.

..;29-N-112 Page V-9 First paragraph, Statement. "Mechanical damage in cooling towers should result in severe mortality. 11

• True. The emphasis that the Staff has placed on mortalities is noted; However, they avoid the subject of increased production in the heat~d plume which could be greater than mortality of organisms caused by passage through the condenser cooling tower system.

Second paragraph, Statement. "Large numbers of fish (are) impinged on the intake screens at Indian Point. 11 Comment. This is correct. The screens presently in use at Indian Point were designed long ago and were placed at the end of canals where fishes are trapped before *the screen and are unable to escape laterally. Although the Staff points out that there are differences in the situation at Peach Bottom and at Indian Point they come to an unwarranted conclusion that there will be significant impingement at Peach Bottom. They apparently fail to realize that the design of the Peach Bottom screen was based on the knowledge*

of the difficulties which had occurred at Indian Point. The experience gained at Indian Point was one of the factors used in postulating the criteria for the design of the intake structure at Peach Bottom. They were as.follows: (1) use the* smallest available mesh in the vertical traveling screens (3/8 inch), (2) reduce the. velocity of the water before the traveling screens to*0.75 fps at a low water stage (104.5 feet elevation), (3) provide upstream and downstream escape for fishes and (4) placement in the river so that fishes could take advantage of any currents which might be available either in an upstream or down-stream direction.

Extensive studies were done of swim speed of fishes found in Conowingo Pond so as to determine the criteria of 0.75 fps before the screens. On page V-9 the Staff report 1 connnents on some of these studies which were made available to them.

Fourth paragraph; Statement.

• 11 Swim speeds of fi~h are controlled by water temperature."

Comment. Th.is statement is erroneous. The swim speed may vary over a range of temperatures and for many fish increases with increased temperature within the preferred range of temperatures.

Statement. "Swimming ability is.reduced somewhat at very high temperatures but considerably reduced at very low temperatures."

Comment. The first part of the statement is true f.or most fishes found in Conowingo Pond. At low temperatures and in fact at temperat~es of from approximately 55°F or lower fishes are much less common .in th,e vicinity of the screens. The white crappie moves southward to the deeper end.of the reservoir. The catfish normally begins its movement toward and/or into the bottom where it usually spends the winter.

N-113 Page V-9 Sixth paragraph, Statement. 11 (4) Young-of-the-year*and yearling white crappies are not consistently able to swim against the intake velocities expected at Peach Bottom."

Comment. Ihis statement is inaccurcite for the larger young-of-the-year and for yearling white crappie; they are able to swim against intake velocities of less than 0.7 fps. The statement made by the Staff failed to take into consideration that the swim speeds obtained by the experi-ments are minimal estimates with regard to swim speeds of fishes found in nature.

Statement. " *** particularly at the low water temperatures expected in wintertime (when large impingement losses occurred at Indian Point)."

Comment. The Staff apparently has confused species and behavior.

The losses at Indian Point are approximately 90% white perch at less.

than 2.5 to 3 inches; It is true that ;the white perch becomes lethargic in winter. There is no evidence from our studies that the white crappie is particularly lethargic in winter.

Seventh paragraph, Statement. 11 (5) The white crappie is probably a weaker swimmer than the*white perch that figured so prominently in fish kills at Indian Point."

Comment. The Indian Point situation is not directly applicable to Peach Bottom. The white crappie is able to swim at a speed which would enable it to stay clear of the screens at Peach Bottom.

Eighth paragraph, Statement. 11 (6) Young-of-t~e-year and yearling channel catfish are not consistently able to maintain themselves against the Peach Bottom intake gradient during very low wintertime water temperatures."

Comment. During very low wintertime water temperature~ y~ung and yearling catfishes are not present in the area near*the screen. They move and inhabit the area near or in the bottom when the water temperature drops much below 550F.

Page V-10 Second paragraoh, sta*tement. "Reduction of oxygen content to any level below saturation will produce some adverse affects on reproduction c°r growth of fishes."

Comment. This statement is definitely not true with.regard to the fishes which inhabit the Conowingo Pond. Not only is it not grounded in fact but i t is in.consistent with "Dissolved oxygen levels in Conowingo

• Pond are usually well below saturation values during most of the-yeaJ,".

However, levels rarely fall below 4 to 5 ppm (summer). Such concentrations are compatible with the existence of a diverse fish fauna,. including valu-able food and game species."

Page V-10 N-114 Statement. "Unfortunately, losses of entrained bitota in cooling towers should far outweight this benefit. 11 Comment.* This refers to the so-called slight increase in oxygen due to the result of the operation of the cooling towers. There is..

no relationship between loss of entrained biota and an increase in oxygen. If 'oxygen*is a .limiting factor in the heated plume its addition from the cooling towers along with the increased heat could s.timulate increased seasonal production of zooplankters which we estimate would exceed the entrained biota killed in the cooling towers, Certainly in the winter when fishes may be concentrated near the heated plume dissolved oxygen will be plentiful, Page V-11 *.

Statement. "Replacement of chlorination by mechanical cleaning

• methods would, of course, eliminate this source of biological* impact, 11 Comment, It would, if the use of chlorine were not necessary in the cooling towers. However, if an alternative system was used to clean the condenser tubes it should be recognized that there may be an addition of heavy metals (such as copper) to the aquatic environment, Sixth paragraoh, Statement. 11 .Apalysis indicates that significant changes

• could occur in the phytoplankton community as a result of plant operation."

Comment. If by analysis they mean what follows on page V-14, we do not conclll',

i Page V-13

• Table V-3, "Exposure of aquatic organisms to total residual chlorine."

Comm~nt. The table is not applicable, in the case of most categories given, to organisms found in Conowingo Pond, We note with surprise.the

• inclusion of the categories.protozoa and cladoceran. *Stich large groups have little biologic meaning with reference to chlorine. The items in the table which do not pertain to the Conowingo Pond are trout fry, brook trout, brown trout, fingerling rainbow trout, rainbow trout, chinook salmon, coho salmon, pink salmon; and black :hulll;l.ead, The fathead minnow is rare in Conowingo Reservoir.

Page V-14 Second paragr~, Comments. The sou,rce fo~ the statement in the Draft Environmental Statement that "yearly reduction of 9,3% of phytoplankton productivity at Peach Bottom" is not shown.

Page V-15 N-115 Second paragraph, Statement. "Available data are not, su.ff'icient to assess the probability of such changes or the extent to which they may take place."

Comment. We agree that much of.the conjecture ~ncluded in this sentence (and in the two paragraphs ori the page) need studies which can only*be'done when the plant is in oreration.

Third .paragraph, Statement. "Based on the available evidence, however, we are of the opinion changes in the species composition and density of the benthic connnunity will not be of sufficient magnitude to bEl important for the pond as a whole."

Comment. We agree.

. Page V-16 First paragraph, Statement. "Thus, there could be a significant reduction in the concentrations of microcrustaceans during late summer as a result of plant operation."

Comment. No evidence is given. We cite the study by Fenlon, McNaught,.

and Schroeder (1971) which indicates significant increases in crustaceans in the plume at Nine Mile Point, Lake Ontario, during summer.

-Second paragraph, Statement. 11 The possible consequences to the populations of these species are related to the fractions of the populations being affected (presently unknown) and the length of the generation time. 11

• Comment. With reference to Gamrnarus which is referred to in the same paragraph, fohthyolog~calAssociates investigations indicate that it is absent in much of the area near the intake.

Third paragraph, Comment. This section speculates with regard to the effect of Peach Bottom Plant on Conowingo Pond. The arguments are generally negative and generally unsubstantiated *. The-indirect effects which may result from alterations in primary and secondary productivity are question-able. For the reasons stated in our previous comments, we do not believe thatthe Draft's conclusions in this paragraph have any factual basis.

---

*-------*-**-*--- . ---------~---- --------------. _,,,_~--------------

I

. N-116 Section V-17 First par.ar.ranh, Statement. "Until the species composition and frequency of impingement losses are kno,m, the impact of impinr.ernent must be consid-ered to be potentially severe,"

Cominent. *we estimate* the impinrcement losses will be low because of the excellent screening system which was developed after much investigation, On theoretical. grounds we disagree. that the impingement problem must be considered t'o be potentially severe,.

• Second paragraph, Statement. "Similarly, losses of American shad and .

other anaororr.ous fishes at Peach Bottom and Muddy Run will tend to defeat efforts to restore aspects of this fishery. 11 Connnent, At this time the statement is somewhat speculative. It is.

questionable i1' American shad and other anadromous fishes ~ill pass the Peach Bottom screen in numbers and if they do the significance of losses which speculatively might occur would need to be evaluated in terms of the effects on the population.

Third paragraph, Comment. Added emphasis will be given to certain aspects of the present sampling program when the heated effluent is present.

Thiladeiphia Electric Company will continually evaluate the results of sampling programs and will tak!3 reJT1edial measures as .necessary.

Section VI-3 Sixth paragr.anh, Comment. Determination of nitrites and bicarbonates are also made by Ichthyological Associates.

Section VI-1.i Fourth parap:ranh, Qomment, Note that benthic invertebrates were sampled by a nine inch square Ekm.an .grab* samnler rather than by a twelve inch

.square samnle,r as stated in the report. Also since 1971 we have been using a mur.ber 50 Tyler standard screen.

Section VI-5 Second paragraph, Statement. "Benthic studies have tended to ignore hard-bottom areas of Conowingo Pond, and t~e species composition of the periphyt.on community is* also unknown."

Comment.

• Most *Of the so-called hard-bottom areas in Conowingo Pond are located in the area which. is scoured by flood between the islands in upper Conowingo Pond. This area is located off and north of the Muddy Run Plant. Some hard-bottom area is present along each shore. This consists mostly of rock fill. The littoral zone in the Pond is small.

Statement*. 11C,ertain aspects* of the water chemistry studies were also inadequate as conducted."

Comment. We agree that studies of water chemistry for biological purposes were inadequate as conducted through 1970 with regard to certain aspects of the sampling program. In 1971, a sampling program of proven analytical techniques was established.

Section VI-5 N-117 Statement. 11 The conce.ntrati-ons of most ions (Sodium, potassium.,

nitrate' etc.) were t*oo low to permit the* use of specif'ic ion *electrod:es as ,a *measurement *technique .* "

• Comment. This statement is erroneous. Presently ,sodium, potassium, nitrate and ,chloride specific ion electrodes are used. Calcium and mag-

• nesium concentrations are determined by fluorometry and EDTA *titration-subtraction, respectively. A more refin~d measurement. ,ol the magnesium ion cari be . oota ined by the use of the two procedures mend.oned a:boV'e.

The concentration ranr,e of *each ion electrode. used, or now in use is snecified in 1;,he pr*oc;edures manual that acco'.!lnanies each *electrode.

In reference to the ions mentioned ahov~, only the potassium spec;ific ion electrode annroaches the lower detection limit. The ionic concen-tration of sodium, nitrate, chloride, calcium, and *magnesium *are{well within the concentration range as outlined for their l;"*e*spective *electrodes.

Physiochemical data collected by Ichthyological Associates on

.~amples taken at Holtwood and Conowingo Dams from January to September, 1972 is presented in Table 1 (the format of Table 1 f.ollows that *of

• Table III-8, page III~49, of the AEC Draft Environmental Statement).*

The data of Ichthyological Associates are comparable to data *on s.imilar analyses performed by the Environmental Protection Agency.

It should be noted that an error occurs in Table III-8, page III...,119:

Magnesium (Mg2+) values for Holtwood Dam should be 18..., 7.2 (ppm),

instead of 11 18 - 72 11 (ppm).

---

----~--------------

N-118 Table l. Water quality of the Susquehanna River. Dai:a supplied by Ichthyological Associates) Drumore, Pc11nsylvania.

Uoltwood .cono~dngo Per~od Jan. -Sept. 1972 Jan * ..:sept. 1972 No. of Samples 36 37 Temp. (°C) max-min 24.:.0 24-0 pH max-min 8.2-6.7 8.2-6.5 D.O. max-minb HC03 76-45 69-42

':eo43- 1.0-0.2 o.5..,0.1 ca2+ 42-26 40-24 Mg2+ . 23-8. 9 20-8.l

• Na+ 11-6 11-6 K+. 5.7-3 .5.8-2.9 c1- 17-10 16-9.5 so4~+ 137-56 122-50 Fe 2+ 0.24-0.07 0.11-0 *. 06

• a Concentrations (ppm) of the ion species are .the *maximum and mean values found during the given period.

b Ranges from 1.5. 3 ..to 5. 3 (ppm) in Conowingo_ Pond during the given period.

-3(:>-

Section VI-5 N-119 Statement. 11 In many.cases, dissolved oxygen, water temperature, and pH were not measured on the same sampling date in 1970."

Comment. Beginning in 1971 data on dissolved oxygen, water temper-ature, and_pH are available on the same sampling date.

Statement. "The size and species selectivity of the fish sampling

• gear was not determined for the larr;er game fishes (basses, etc.). 11 Comment.' The selectivity of the various samplin~ gears for the various size fishes is fully realized_ and determined by Ichthyological Associates personnel on the project. All.nets are selective to some extent. This is the reason trawls, trap nets, seines, *trammel nets, gill nets, plankton nets, block nets, ~lectro-fishing, and anp,ling are used. By usin~ a ccmplete. range of available gear the coverage on fishes is excellent.

• Third paraP.raph, Comment. This paragraph contains statements. which are amhiv.uous -:or,,,no:t::.;pertinen.t.:."to Conowingo Pond.

Statement. "Certain important properties of the fish populations in Conowingo which are necessary to the proper evaluation of potential biological impacts have not been determined: standing crop.~**"

Comment. It is our understanding that standing crop refers to some measure such as pounds per acre. It may be defined as total biomass present in the water column at. a given time. Odum (1971, Fund. of Ecol.,

Third Ed., p. 44) cautions: "Standing biomass or standing crop present at any given time should not be confused with productivity".

Data_ are available to make estimates of standing crop for fishes in Conowingo .Pond. These data are from our collection_s of fishes and from tagging studies on fishes. The ac,tual determination of standing crop is an exercise which may be done if this information .is shown to be needed.

Statement. 11 Certain important properties of the fish population in Conowingo Pond which are necessary to the proper evaluation of potential biological impacts have not been determined: *** natural recruitment.* **

rates."

Comment. The phrase "na.tural recruitment rate" is ambiguous with

• reference to 11 the fish population in Conowingo Pond 11 as stated in the Staff report. The fish ponulation in Conowin~o Pond is made up of some 50 species. Each of these has a di1Terent natural recruitment rate .

which varies from year to year. F.stimates may be 'obtained if needed for a wor'thwhile riurnose by an examination of our extensive data on fishes.

Measurements of 1'ish populations are believed adequate to determine fluctuations in year class strength for the white crappie and other important fishes.

Statement. ."Certain important properties of the fish population in

. ,Conowingo Pond which are necessary to the proper evaluation of potential biological impacts have not been determined: *** location and importance

--:o:r.- spawni:ng areas *****11 *.

N-120 Section VI-5

.comment. This statement is not correct since the location of the spawning-areas and the importance of various other areas *to fishes; ar.e well *known to the investigators.

Statement. 11 Certain important properties of the fish population in Conowingo Pond which are necessary to the proper evaluation of potential biol,>gical. impacts have not been determined: *** mortality rates **** 11 Comment. To determine mortality rates one needs age and growth studies, catch per unit effort and tag *returns. We have completed such studies on all the important species in Conowingo Pond and have the data including specimens from which the mortality rates could be calculated for all species which occur in Conowingo Pond.

Statement. "Certain imnortant pronerties of the fish 'population in ConowinRo Pond wr.ich are necessary to the proper evaluation of potential

. biological imnacts have not been determined: ** , mortality rates d 1.1e

• to

• the opera ti.on of Muddy Run* **** 11

• Comment. This statement is erroneous. Data are available with regard to eggs and larva.e and studies have be.en and are underway with regard to larger fishes.

Statement.* "Certain important properties of the fish popularion in Conowingo Pond which are necessary to the proper evaluation of potential biological impacts have not been determined: , ** definitive age and.

growth data *** ,"

Comment. This statement is erroneous. Definitive age and growth data are available for the important fishes.* Data and specimens are available so that it could be-- determined for other fishes which are available in Conowingo Pond should such information be needed~

• Statement. "Certain important properties of the fish population in Conowingo PQnd which are necessary to the.proper evaluation of potential biological impacts have not been determined: *** annual variations in

• such pro~erties. 11

• comment. This statement is erroneous. Annual variations have been determined* for various years for the impor.tant species~* Data are avail-able and specimens are saved, so that if it is important for other species these parameters could be determined. It was pointed out in the Environ-mental B.eport that many of. the fishes and particularly the most imoortant one (white crappie) *are subject to .variations in year-c)aass s~rength.

Statement. "Far more rigorous infor:nation is required to pre<li~t future ecological changes than to determine effects after plant ,op~ration commences. 11

. N-121 Section VI-.5 Comment. We disagree with the statement and believe that data on fishes as secured between 1966 and 1972,are adequate to make predictions with regard to the probable future strength of year-classes which might.

be affected by the heated effluent. These studies are described in detail in the Environmental Report. However, not all of the information was included in the Environment'11 Report but it is available. The specimens are also available for study.

Obviously some aspects of.the ecol6r,y of Conowingo Pond could have been studied in greater detail.. There probably is no study which could not be done if unlimited time and funds were available. The utility of other studies (such. as detailed studies on bacteria) in coming to a decision with re~ard to the harmf~l effects of the heated effluent and other effects of the operation of Peach Bottom 2 and 3 is questionable.

Third parar,raoh, Statement. "Most ecological sampling programs were.

desi*p.ned for the latter purpose (to determine effects after plant operation commences)."

Comment. The program was desip.:ned to get information to predict future ecolor.ical changes mi these do include those caused by the effect of plant operation. Noteworthy studi~s of pred:i.ctive value include studies .of temperature preference, avoidance, repellance, and shock.

To deterrr.ine the behavior of fishes extensive studies of swim speed*

were done. We are confident that they have helped provide criteria for the best possible screening system ~~ich could have been developed to minimize losses due to impingement of fishes.

Fourth parap.:rap~, Statement. 11 2. Conclusions. The applicant's ecological sampling program with necessary modifications could provide the information to enable detection of major ecological changes in Conowingo Pond once station operation commences."

Comment. We are convinced that the studies of fishes have been done in the depth required to detect significant ecological changes in Conowingo Pond after Peach Bottom begins operation.

Statement. 11 The phytoplankton and water chemistry programs *should.

be augmented."

Comment. The water chemistry program was augmented in 1971 and *it is expected tha*t studies of heavy metals will be made usini; an atomic absorption spectrophotometer. Ichthyological Associates plans to augment the studies of phytoplankton. However, we are not convinced that such studies will be helpful in detecting major ecological chanr,es, particularly as these may have reference to fish populations in Conowi.m~o Pond. Ohser-

. vations have been mad~ on plankton hloo~s and attempts have been made to study these. We found that most blooms have heen of *short duration and after study be~an the blooms soon disanneRred. If blooms are more co~mon after*the operation of the plant, a determination will be.made to see if these hlooms have harmful effects on other organisms

,I N-122 Section VI-5 Statement. 11 Studies should be initiated to determine the losses of biota due. to impingement and entrairnnent

• 11 Comment. Extensive studies o.f swim speed were done to provide criteria for th_e screen system whi.ch was developed. Studies of entrain-ment will be done during the _operation of the plant.

Statement. "Growth, conditi.on, and µonulation density monitoring of fishes in the discharge canal and near field areas of the thermal plume should be considered."

Com.~ent. These matters have been under study for six years and extensive data are available. Studies will continue after the plant be~ins operation.

Statement, 11 :nsh mortalities associated with Peach Bottom and Muddy Run ~hould be rigorously monitored, 11 Comment, We*agree that these should be monitored after Peach Bottom begins operating and we are confident that such studies will show no extensive mortalities of fishes, Huddy Run has been studied and it has been demonstrated that 'it is the source of a sport fishery which has added much to the resources of the rer,ion. Mortalities during purnning and.generating have been recognized and included in reports, These mortalities are miniscule in comparison with the added production from the 1 1 000 additional acres which constitutes Muddy Run Pumped Storage Pond, We also emphasize that the 100-acre recreation pond which is connected to the Muddy Run Pumped Storage Pond is another substantial body of productive water ~hich also. contributes to the regional sport fishery,

• Statement. IIThe physical characteristics of the thermal plume should be.carefully studied under a*wide range of conditions."

Comment, The area of the thermal nlume will be studied. The pre-operational conditions are currently being surveyed to obtain baseline conditions.

Statement. "Studies of the potential losses of anadroIT1ous fish due to Muddy Run would be highly desirable."

Colllr.'lent. Analyses of the probable effect of Muddy Run on adult and young anadromous fishes which at some future date might be present in Conowingo Reservoir and which might reach Muddy Run, has been done, The practical study awaits the arrival of young.shad moving downstream which

. might be pumped into Muddy Run, Sampling of fishes with "block nets" of Muddy Run is being done. We are confident that the appearance of

• anadromous fishes will be observed in these catches.

-l!D-N-123 Section IX-2 Fourth Paragraph, Statement. 11 future uses of Conowingo Pond will include increased recreational activity provided that the water remains a good habitat for fish and an acceptable outdoor medium for people. 11 Comment. We a{lree that it will provide an outlet for a rreat amarnt of recreational activity. It is particularly true for angling in the winter when other* recreational activity, of an outdoor type is lirni ted in the area. We are confident that the Pond will be a good habitat for recreation and that fishes will be available for a winter fishery. Other recreational activities will be enhanced. These will include an extended boating season with concomitant activities.

'fifth Parar::raph, Statement. 11 The extent and the. consequences of these effects on the long-term productivity of the Ccno;;ingo Pond ecosystem will only be kno.-m with certainty as a result of operating experience 11

• Comrnent. We aeree. Our predictions, based_*on our extensive studies, differ from those in the Staff Draft Environmental Statement, We me!'ely ask for an opportunity to confirm our predict,ions during the operation

• of plant as designed.

• --*-*---- -~~-------------*---~

N-124 Section IX-3 Fourth Paragraoh, Statement. 11 D, Sununary, The long term consequences of the Peach Bottom Station appear to at least s.upport the maintenance if not the enhancement of productivity

• 11

• Comment. We agree. This is the position that we have taken as we have studied each of the contentions raised in the Staff report. We believe. the Staff reached a conclusion that ar,rees with ours which is based upon solid investigations over a period* of more than six years.

Statement.

• 11 EcoJ.ogically, changes will occur which have lonr, term consequences, but the nature of these consequences can be krio,m with certainty only from exper:ince. 11 Comments. Ecoloe;ical changes occur from year to year and ov~r a long term in all habitats. We are convinced that there will be no major changes which will affect the quality or the productivity of the fish populations and otner biota in Ccnowinr:;o Pond as a result of the operatims of Peach 3ottom 2 and 3, We welcome.the opportunity to continue our studies so as to demonstrate the effects, if any, on *the ecology.

• Section X-2 Third *Pararraph, Statement, "Losses of aquatic biota are expected as a result of the operation of'. the plant. 11 Comment. We anticipate that the gains will outweigh the losses.

Statement. HThe amount (of aquatic losses*) cannot be qua.."ltified at this time 11

• Comment. We agree that the losses cannot be quantified at this time, but nevertheless, we are certain of the creation of an important winter fishery.

Statement. 11 It is unlikely that this will constitute an irreversible or irretrievable com.mi tment of resources. 11 Comment. We agree that there will be no irreversiable commitment of resources with regard to the biota in Con0wingo Pond.

N-125 Appendix H-L Table H-3, The source attribvted to the ~vironmental Report for June, 1971 is erroneous, it should be November, 1971 *.

Appendix I-10 Last Two Parar;.raphs, Statement. "Data from Cono.winr,o ?ond indicate no substantial alterations 9f these feeding patterns (in the white crappie). 11

• comment. This statement is untrue.

' Appendix K It is a general review. Many of the points are not applicable to Conowingo Pond as . it may be affected by Peach Bot tom Uni ts 2 and 3. -*

A limited number of references were used compared to those available.

A recent upd.ate has a.dded 2200 references to Raney and Henzel (1969 biblioi;:raphJ which contains 1800 reference_s to the effects of heated effluents on fishes *.

• • • • ---*------*------------- ---~----

REFERF. NCES N-126 I

Alabaster, J. S. 1964. The effects of heated effluents bn*fish~ Adv. Water Poll. Res. 1:261-292.

Bishop, S. C. 19h7. Handbook of salamanders. Comstock, Ithaca, N. Y.

Boyer, H, A. J.970, Limnolor,ical data for Conowingo Reservoir, Muddy Run Pumped Storage ~eservoir, and Muddy Run Recreation Lake, 1968-1969. Ichthyol-ogica.l Ass.* Data Rep. 3 157 p.

Doutt, J. D. 1953. Mammals of Pennsylvania. Pa. Game Cormn.

Elser, H, J. 1963, Patuxent River Creel Census. Nat. Res. Inst., Univ. of Md. Ref. No. 63-53.

Elser, H.

• J. 1965. Effect of warmed-water'* discharge on angling in the Potomac River, Maryland 1961-62. Prog. !"ish-Cult. April 79-86.

Environmental Report, Operating License stage, Pe.ach Bbttom Atomic Po~;er Station, Units 2 and 3, Suppl. 1, Philadelphia Electric Company, Nov. ,

• 1971.

Fenlon, M. W., D. C. Mc Naught and G. D. Schroeder 1971. Influences of thermal effluents upon aquatic production in Lake Ontario. Proc.

Great Lakes !Ti-sh. Res. 1971: 21-26.

I Ma~cy, B. c. Jr., 1972 - Canal Winter Creel Census Pages 26-28 in Conn.

River Ecol. study. 15th Semi-ann. Rep.

Marcy, E. C. Jr., 1972b. Ecological studies of Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Station. Essex Marine Laboratory 15th Se~i-ann. Rep. on the Connecticut River.* Ecol. Studies.

• Marcy, B. c. Jr., T * .M. Jacobson, and R. L. Nankee. 1972. Observation on the reactions of young American shad to a heated effluen~. Trans. Amer.

F:i_sh Soc. 101: 7h0-7u3.

Mathur, D. 1970. Food habits and feeding chronology.of channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus Rafinesque, in ConowinF;o Reservoir. Proc. 2hth Ann. Conf. Southeastern Ass. 3ame* and ?ish Comm. 24(1970):377-386.

V.athur, D. 1972. Seasonal food habits of adult white crappie, Promoxis annularis Rafinesque, in Conowingo Reservoir. Amer. Hidl. 'fat. 87:2362lil.

Mathur,D. and T. W. Robbins. 1971. Food habits and feeding chronology of young white crappie, Promoxis annularis Rafinesque, in Conowingo Reservoir. Trans. Amer. ?ish Sqc.' 100:307-311.

Meldrin, J. W. and J. J. Gift. 1971. Temperature preference, avoidance and shock experiments with estuarine fishes. Ichthyological Ass. Bull 7,. 75 p.

N-127 44

~:erriman, Editor; Composite Authorship. 196S.:.1972. The Connecticut River Ecological Study. Semi-annual Pro~. Rep. !Is 1-lli to the Connecticut Water Resources Commission (incoroorated into the new Department of Environmental Protection 1 Octobe~ 1971). !fri.meo., ca. 675 pp.

Moore, C. J. and C. M. Frisbie. 1972. . A winter sport fishing survey in a warm ,~ater discharte of steam electric station on the Patuxent River, }laryland. Chesapeake Sci. 13(2) :110-115.

Moyer, S. and E. C. Raney. 1969. Therrr:al dis char[, es from large nuclear plant. J. of the Sanit Eng. Div., .ASCE 95(SA6) :1131-1163.

Odum, E. P. 1971. Fundamentals of 1cology. ' 3rd edit. W. B. Saunders Co. Philadelphia. 574 p.

Pennsylvc:.nia Game Cor.unission. 1972. A digest of Pennsylvania hunting trapping. regulations. Pa. Game Conun. 50 p.

Raney, E. C. nnd B. W. Menzel. 1969. Heated effluents and effects on aquatic life with emphasis on fishes.--A Biblio£raphy. Ichthyological '

Ass. Bull. 2,470 p.

Shearer, L. W., D. E. Ritchie and c. H. Frisbie. 1962. Sport fishing survey in 1960 of the lower Patuxent Estuary and 1958 year class o:f striped bass. Chesapeake Sci. 3(1) :1-17.

Tennessee Valley Authority. 1969. Fish and fishinf around TVA steam

.plants. Div. of Forestry Develop. U.P.

Walker, E. '1'. 1954. An inte:.nsive survey of the Patuxent River sport fishery. Part 2. Pages 1--6 in R. D. Buzzell and E.T. Walker. A study of the Maryland 'l'idG1-rater sport fishery. Md. Dept. Res.

Educ., Res. Study Rep. 10 4(1): 1;..14 *.

Wrieht, A. H. and A. A. Wright. 1957. Handbook of snakes of the United States and Canada. Comstock Pub.

Zillich, J. A. 1972. Toxicity of combined chlorine residuals to freshwater

. fish. J. hPCF 44: 212-220. Connecticut Yankee Atomic Plant.

N-128 APPENDIX C ADDITIONAL DErAILED COM*iENTS BY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY PEACH BOT'}'.OH ATOMIC POWER STATION UNITS 2 AND 3 DOCKET NOS. 50-277 AND 50-278

N-129 Appendix C Additional detailed comments by Philadelphia Electric Company.

Page VI-3 First Para:,raoh, Statement. 11 For example, charcoal cartridges will be operated in conjunction wi*th the air particulate samplers and analyzed weekly for I-313 11 ;

Comment *. The statement is in error. Philadelphia. Electric Company is not and does not plan to analyze for I-131 with charcoal cartridges as part of the environmental monitoring pror;ram.* See Appendix D~

Firs.t Para.,-raph, Statement. "l"ilk samples will be collected at appropriate sites ***** and analyzed weekly for I-131 ~,d monthly composites analyzed *for Sr-29, Sr-90 and gamma spectrum".

Comment. Philadelphia EJ..ectric Company is now and wil:). in the* future.

analyze milk sam;:Jles on a quarterly basis for I-131 and Sr-90, see cover letter.*

Second Paragraph, Statement. "The applicant will be required to take a census everJ" six months to determine the location of cows *** 11 Corrm1ent. The Philadelphia Electric Company disai::rees with the Staff on the need for any future cow censes, because the location of distant cows is not relavant to significant da:ns to the public, since the potential dose from milk is insignificant. It is recommended that reference to a cow census be eliminated for the reasons provided in Appendix D.

Page XI-2 Statement. Title of Fig. XI-1 "Tr.ansmission system of the

. Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Karyland Pool. n Comment. Figure XI-1 is not a complete diagram of the PJM Pool.

It is a diar,ram of the Philadelphia Electric Company interconnections .

to other companies.

N-130 PaRe XI-7 First Pararrraµh, Statement. 11 The Staff's extrapolation curve of Philadelphia Electric Company's peak load demands of 1961 through 1971 indicates somewhat' less peak load demands in future years than that expected by the Philadelphia Electric Company

• 11 Comment'. . The Staff.' s load forecasting by extrapolation of historical loads does not take into account corrections for past weather conditions or load curtailments due to voltage reduction or *voluntary curtailments. Future loads must also be augmented by knowledge of

• discrete load increas~s and local busin.ess conditions. Thus it would be expected that a mathematical extrapolation of observed loads would not agree with the Philadelphia Electric Corr.pany Forecast.

N-132 APPENDIX D COMMENTS ON DRAIT PNIRO'.f:1:'SlITAL S'1'ATE!1Fl!T CONCYo:RNIHG RADIOLO-'."HCAL SAMPLING PRO'}qf1M The draft states on pag;e ii, 11 * *

• the estimated potential doses

~rom raoioactive iodine ne~r the site boundary are significant, and thus weekly milk sampling and analysis will be required to assur~ that the iodine levels are maintained as low as practicable 11

• There are no cows on the site boundary. In order to realistically assess the potential doses to hurr.ans through the grass-cow-milk chain, a cow survey was made within 2 miles and lat.er extended to 5 miles of the station. The nearest co~, is at least .0.8 miles from Units 2 and 3.

Based on this su.rvey, potential doses to humans have been calculated on both the neanist farm and the farm producinf, the highest dose in each of*

16 directions. The results of these calculations, based on the expanded cow survey are listed in Table 1. These doses were calculated by the same methods as employed in the answer to question 10.l dated September, 1972, of the Peach Bottom FS~R, except that a greater portion of the values for the fraction of the year in which the 'cows are in pasture and the fraction of the food intake that comes from grass during the period in pasture are actual values obtained from the survey of actual farms and a factor of 2 has been applied to account for decay. The assumptions used are listed in Table 2.

Sun*ey data of actual farms indicate that the hypothetical doses are substantially reduced by four important factors, one - that the cows only graze a fraction of the year in.pasture, two - that when they graze, the food intake from gra.ss is only a fraction of their. to.tal food intake, three - that the milk produced from these cows.is diluted with a relatively large quantity of milk from other sources prior to distribution to the public, and four - that there is an avera~e of about one I-131 half-life delay between the time of potential release from the primary system and the time of potential consumption.

• These calcul~tions are stilt extremely conservative because the real averaF,e dilution of the milk from these farms with milk from distant farms is probably soMewhere between a factor of 100 and several thousand even though only a factor of 10 has been used in the present calculation *.

The highest thyroid equ:i.valent whole body dose to humans from radio-iodine from any of the nearby farms is 0.45 mrem/year.

N-133 It must be emphasized that tho Enviromr.ental lfonitod.ng Progr2.m *is not used to directly control plant operation. Plant operations are controJ.led based on monitoring of pl.:mt effluents. In this re8ard, plant operations are primarily ROVerned by weekly measurements of radio-iodine concentrations in plant gaseous -radwaste eff.luents as deterrr.ined by t5.mely laboratory ar1alysis of the iodine filters through which the side stream of the waste effluent is continuously passed. This weekly

. analysis of iodine in. the effluent. stream is technically the only practical W?..Y of moni tor.i.ng and controllins plant operations since it is only in effluent streams that the radioiodine levels are sufficiently concentrated to monitor effectively.

• Once dissipated in the environment, the leve_ls are in general so low as to make measurement not technically feasible.

For example, the radwaste gaseous effluent monitor for iodine can detect about 2 x 10-12 uci/cc of I-131 in.the gaseous stream which is equ:ivalent to an equivalent whole body dose of 0.3 mrem/year at the nearest milk farm using the average atmospheric dilution factor for all direct.ions. Jn contrast, I-131 in a mill< sample can only be detected. to L pCi/1 at the ti!Tle of sampling ( 2 pCi/1 at the tirr.e of analysis) which corresponds to an equi ,ralent whole body dose of 20 mrem/year. , The equi-valent whole body dose that can be detected by gaseous effluent monitoring ave1*ar,ed at le2.st 60 times lower that that ,:hich can be detected by milk monitor:i.ng. Therefore, milk sam!')les are c*learly not the correct place to attempt to monitor I-131 for plant operations control.

The measurement of the concentration of radioiodine in milk samples in the Peach Bot.tom Snvironr:1ental Monitorirn~ Pro£:r<'.m by *the grab sample

• technique is only provided as an after-the-fact per:iodic spot check to monitor this parameter .and to confirm that radioiodirie concentrations from Peach Bottom sources in fact are no greater than those predicted from the continum:s measurements made on the gaseous radwaste effluent. The

. purpose of the environment.al samples is to confirm calculations and provide a factual numeric~l record to increase certitude in the calculated effects on the environment. Quarterly milk samples are sufficient to carry out this function. Further, from a cost-benefit viewpoint*, weekly samples .

provide no app:r:eciable benefit over quarterly samples, yet the increase in cost of weekly over quarterly analrsis for I-131 at eight farms is over $30,000 a year. Such an expenditure is not justified.

The draft report further states on page iv. in item 7g that "If the results of the radiolobical monitoring progr31ll indicate a routinely detectable radio:-frti ve iodine level in milk samples, the applicant will take appropriate action to reduce. the radioactive iodine effluent

• 11 Such a requirement does not relate to plant effects nor does it relate to any real limits nor does it relate to 11 as low as practicable".

Such a requirement is, therefore, inappropriate and, should be eliminated.

To demonstrate these points, first, the Peach Bottom Environment~l Monitoring Pro[_;ram has in the pnst (especially. in 1961 ;md 1962) detected radioactivitv in milk snmoles th;.,t resulted from weaDQns testing and not from any nuc"lear pbnt. l,ove ls as hii:;h as 133 pCi/ 1 were found at one farm in OctobPr, 1962. None has been found since 196L. It is, therefore, quite clear that 11 detectability 11 in a milk sample is in no way a technically justified limit for a nuclear power station. ~condly, the equivalent whole

N-134 body dose which.corresponds to the detectable radioactive concentrations in milk (h pCi/liter at time of sampling) is 20 nirem/year.

It is therefore recommended that the concept of detectability even from plant sources be eliminated from* any criteria.

TABLE 1 N-135 Summary of' 113 1 Doses ut Actual Milk Fs.rms from Peach Bottom 2 & 3 Vent Stacks due to Steam Ir-aks Fraction Distance of Year Fraction of to Fo.rm*H* x/Q Cows in Food that Dose-K-l<--X*

Direct:i.on-l<* . (m'eters l ( 10-8Hec/m3)  :::nsture Is Grass (mrem/year) n 4950 23 0.50 0.70 0.14.

NNE 3400 35 0.50 0.10 0.03 NE 3850 19 0.50 0.10 0.02 NE 3400 24 0.50 0.05 0.01 ENE 4700 26 . 0.58 0.35 0.10 E 7700 17 0.50 0.50 0.08 E 5000 38 0,50, 0.20 . 9.07 ESE 7550 22 0.50 0.35 0.07 ESE 5750 39 0.50 0.10 o.ol~

SE 7650 17 0.50 0.10 0.02 SSE  ;:,> 8050 .:::::15 ( 0

• 5 )*X-*X* (1.0) <0.13 s 4800 16 0.50 0.50 o.o8 s 1650 40 0.50 0.05 0.02 SSW 3700 19 0.50 o.4o 0.07 SSW 1h50 44 0.50 0.05 0.02 SW 6950 31 0.50 - 6.40 0.01 WSW 2850 18 . 0.50-

• 0.30 0.06 w 1700 64 0.50 0.50 0.30 WNW 2650 h6 0.50 0.50 0.23 NW 1300 163 0.50 0.20 o.45_

NNW >8050 <11 (o. 5) (LO) <.0.10

• N,E,S and Ware 30° sectors. All other directions are 20° sectors.

I *

• !:*Distances less than 2 miles (3218 meters) are to nearest pasture land.

Distances greater than 2 miles are to dairy barn. Both nearest farm and farm producing the hiehest dose arc reported for each sector. Only one farm is listed \/here the neurest fo.rm also produces the highest do~e.

• "!H:*This is based on realistic. asi::;umptions of an avcrar,e steam leak rate of l gpm/unit, a* conservative diluUon factor of 1/10 for the milk be1ng mixed with milk from dir,tant regions and clistrjbutccl over a wide area, and o. factor of 1/2 resultinG from the time between re.lease and con-sumption of o.ffccted milk being cquo.l to o.bout one hall'-lif'e of rl.31.

-K-IC**X*'J'he vnlues in ( ) nre assumed ::; ince no o.ctuo.l milk farn1s were found vithin 5 miles of the Units in this direction. All others ure clato. from actual farms.

T.l\DLE 2 N-136 Assumptions Used in Calculations of D:ises in Table 1 (a) Reactor water I-131 concentration of 0.007 uCi/cc.

(b) A carryover fraction of 1.25% based on recent mm operating experience.

(c) Jm annual average steam leak rate of 1 gpm/unit .

. (d) The location of the actual r.iilk produd11g farms as sho1m on Table QlO .1.2, Supple:rr.ent No. 1, Peach Pott om FSAR.

(e). Plant capacity factor - 80%.

(f) Fraction of year cows graze - Average values based on survey of actual farms. These varied from 0.0 to 1.0. The fraction of feed coming from pasture* grass during months in pasture varies from 0% to 707;. These two fractions are applied as multipliers in dose calcuJ.ations.

(g) . A cow-rniJJ< concentration factor of 700.

(h) Since most of the milk produced is pasteurized and. distributed over a wide area a.."1 additional conservative factor of 10 can be used to account for dilution.

(i) Y/Q values used are shmm in Figures Ql0.1.3, 0).0.1.h, arid Ql0.1.5, SUpplement No. l, Peach Bottom FSAR. These are based on:

(1) Release height of 200 ft. above ground elevation of 116 1 -0." which then dmm1-mshes to a ground level source using a correction of L.15.x 103 m2 x 1/2 =

2

• 09 X 103 m2 *

(2) Diffusion parameters for a height of less than 30 meters from bivane do.ta at Peach Bottom.

(3) .Angular sectors of 30° for the four cardinal compass points ru1d 20° for the remainil1e sectors.

{4) Turbulence distributions from.the normal 75 ft. level (El. 433 MSL) at Peach Bottom Weather station No. 2.

(5) Wind speeds were reduced to a 10 meter height result:ing in 1.0, 1.0, 2.h, 3,8, 1.2 meters/sec for Classes I through V, respectively.

N-137 APPENDIX E ESTH1ATES OF COST FOR FISH MORTALITIES IN CONOWINGO RESERVOIR.

Prepared For Philadelphia Electric Company by ICHTHYOLOGICAL ASSOCIATES Edward C, Raney, Ph.D., DIRECTOR

• ---------------*------*----------- ---~-------*----------~-.

N-138 APPENDIX E ESTIMATES .OF COST FOR FISH MORTALITIES IN CONOWINGO RESERVOIR The fish population in Conowingo Reservoir has been estimated to be 18.2 million (all species included)~ This number was estimated using the mark recapture method. The white crappie population was est:ini.ated

.to average 11,5 million from 1967 to 1971, and the channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) population to be ~-1 million over the same period.

It must be noted here that these estimates are subject to *very broad con-

. fidence limits because of the difficulty in fulfilling the assumptions for ~sti.mating fish populations in large bodies of water. From this total 10% was taken as an estimate of the other species in the reser-voir. The average weight selected was 75 grams (0,165 pounds) per fish. The population estimate was divided by the total acreage (8,960) in the reservoir to give the number of fish per acre (2,008 fish/acre)

This number was multiplied by the'average weight to give the poundage of fish per acre as 331,7 pounds/acre, This equals 2,972,032 total

.poundage of fish in Conowingo Reservoir. This estimates coincides closely with estimates obtained by Swingle and Swingle (1967) for fish in several southern reservoirs.

• In calculating the monetary cost of fish a range of values from 200 to 500 pounds per acre was used, This range was selected because it is felt the actual poundage/acre will be som!;!where between these limits. Table 1 indicates the estimated total poundage, population,

numbe~ and cost at 25. cents and one dollar per pound. These values were selected because it was felt that theyw,ould be the highest and lowest value that could be put on the organisms in the Conowingo Reservoir. Table 2 shows the cost and the total poundage of 9rganisms affected b:,* the heated effluent in the mixing zone. These tables assume a 100% mortality of fish* in this area.

References Swingle, H, S, and W. E, Swingle. 1967. Problems in Dynamics of Fish Populations in Reservoirs. Reservoir Fishery Resources Synzposium.

p, 229-243*

N-139 Table 1 EstiIT.ates of population, poundage and cost of biomass in Conowingo Reservoir, Pennsylvania.

Pounds per Population Total(cst.) Cost per 2ound acre Estiw.ate

\

pounds in $0.25 $1.00 Reservoir 200 $ so.ob. $ 200.00 10,860,605.9 1,792,000 448,000.00 1,792,000.00 220 55.0ci 220.00 11,9:46,666.4 l',971,200 4.92,800.00 1,971,200.00 21.0 60.00 240.00 13 , 03 2 , 72 6 , 8 2,150,400 537,600,00 2,150,400.00 260 65.00 260.00 1,.,118, 787 .2 2,329,600 582,400.00 2,329,600.00 280 70.00 *280. 00*

15 , 2'0!+, 8lf 7

• 6

• 2,508,800 627, ioo. oo 2,508,800.0b 300 75,00 300.00 16,299,908.9 2,688,000 672,000,00 2,688,000.00 320 80.00 320,00 17,376,969.3 2,867,200 716,800.00 . 2,867,200. 00 340 85.00 3lf0, 00 18,463,029~8 3,0!+6,400 761,600. oo* 3, 046,liOO*: 00:

360 90.00 360. 00 19,549,090.2 3,225,600 806,400.00 3,225,600.00 380 95.00 380.00 20, 635,151.5 3,404,800 851,200.0ci 3 ,l+Ol*, 800. 00 400 100,00 400.00 21,721,211.9 3.~584, 000 896,000.00 3,584,000. oo.

420 105.00 lf20. 00 22,807,:,272.3 3,763,200 '940,800.00 3,763,200.00 440 110.00 440.00 2~,893,332.7 3,%2,400 985,600.00 3,942,400.00 460 115.00 lf60.00 24,979,393.2 4,121~.600 1,030,400.00 4,121,600.00 480 120,00 ,.ao. oo 26,065,454.5 4,300,800 1,075,200.00 4,300,800.00 500 125.00 *500.00 27,151,514.9 4,480,000 1,120,.000.00 4,480,000.00

... , ... ---**** ~ - .  :*, - ** ' * ..1~

• • • • • -*~* ..... ,,., * .... .,,:

... , .... -~-,-- .... --

. . --*-* - .., ~

Pounds per .. ~~-.,_ .... , -: ., ..... , . Ac.rcs .. a££cictcid b,(.. liea.ted ~+/-':fluent acre 100 iso 200 250 300 350 400 [~50 500 206 '°l'tzo, aoo. . *30 --000 ,*ct,;cj; 000 1*50 ,*600- . ,'c6o 060 '>ir1o, ooo 7.:80, 000 ,*,90, 000 1,100,JOO 220. 22,000

. *.. j . .

33;000 44-0G() 55,000 '

66,000 77,000 88,000 99,000 110;000 240 Ztf; o~g 36; 000 48;000 6q,ooo 72;000 84;000 96,000 108,000 120,000 260 26-GOO

. ' 39 . . '

-006 52-000 ' 65,000 78;000 91,000 104,000 117,000 130,000 280 28j000 42,00(1 s6; 000 70,000 8L~, 000 93,000 il2;000 126";000 llrO; 000 300 30,000 45 ;-Odd 60;000 75 000.-,*,

90;060 165,000 iio,ooo 135

. ' 000.

150,000 320 32,000 48-000 64,000 80;000 96;000 112,000 128,000 144;000 160 ;ooo 340 34,000.51-000 68- ' oob 85,600 102;000 li9,000 136 ;()00 153-000' . .

170,00b 360 36 000 54-000 12,000 90,000 1D8i000 126;000 14-4, 000 162 000 180,000 3a;ooo '. isz,ooo ..

380 57,0bb 76,000 95,000 li4;000 133,000 171;000 190,000.

400 40,000 60' ,. 0*60* 80;000 100,000 120,000 ll,0,000 160,000 180,000 200,000 ~

I-'

420 -42, 000 63 000 84;000 105,000 126,000 ll~7, 000 163,000 189,000 210,000 ~

440 44;000 66,oOd ' 88;000 110 '*-000 132,000 154,000 176;000 198,000 220,600 0

460 46,000 69 ' bbd 92,000 115,000 138;000 161,000 184 '.000 207,000 *230, 000 lr80 li-8; 000 72,000 96,000 120;000 ll;-4; 000 168,000 192,000 216,000 2lf0, 000 500 50,.00C 75;000 100;000 125-;000 150,000 175,000 200;000 22s,ooo: 250,000 Total pounds affected by heated effluent and the cost at $1.00 per potmd.

• ~'rit . Assuming 100% mortality_of ail fish iri these areas~