ML19030A428

Part 03 Environmental Report (Rev. 2) - Part 03 - Environmental Report - Chapter 05 - Section 05.03 - Cooling System Impacts

ML19030A428
Person / Time
Site:	Clinch River
Issue date:	01/18/2019
From:	James Shea Tennessee Valley Authority
To:	Office of New Reactors
Fetter A
References
TVACLINCHRIVERESP, TVACLINCHRIVERESP.SUBMISSION.6, CRN.P.PART03, CRN.P.PART03.2
Download: ML19030A428 (55)

Text

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report 5.3 COOLING SYSTEM IMPACTS Section 5.3 describes the range of impacts on the environment and human health from the operation of the Clinch River (CR) Small Modular Reactor (SMR) Project cooling system. The cooling system includes the cooling water intake system (Subsection 5.3.1), the cooling water discharge system (Subsection 5.3.2), and the system for discharging heat to the atmosphere (Subsection 5.3.3). In addition to the evaluation of physical and ecological impacts from these three components, impacts to public health are evaluated (Subsection 5.3.4) based on potential effects from microorganisms and noise.

5.3.1 Intake System The design of the cooling water intake structure is described in Subsection 3.4.2.1. The hydrodynamic and physical impacts from operation of the intake structure are described in Subsection 5.3.1.1. The impacts on aquatic ecosystems from operation of the intake are described in Subsection 5.3.1.2.

5.3.1.1 Hydrodynamic Description and Physical Impacts The proposed location of the intake structure is on the shoreline of the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir at approximately Clinch River Mile (CRM) 17.9. As discussed in Subsection 3.4.2.1, the intake structure is proposed to be a common intake for all SMRs and contain pumps, trash racks, and appropriate water screen technology to minimize effects on aquatic biota. The front face of the structure is to be located at the existing river bank. The river bank is to be excavated to provide a short intake channel, approximately 50 feet (ft) wide, to ensure sufficient water depth to provide water under conditions of low flow (Figures 3.4-2 and 3.4-3).

Hydrological conditions in the reservoir adjacent to the Clinch River Nuclear (CRN) Site are discussed in Subsections 5.2.1.1.1 and 5.2.1.2.1. On the average, the design withdrawal rate for the facility is approximately 0.9 percent of the average flow rate in the portion of Watts Bar Reservoir adjacent to the CRN Site. In the most conservative scenario, assuming a maximum water withdrawal rate by the plant and a minimum release from Melton Hill Dam (400 cubic feet per second [cfs]), the facility withdrawal rate would be approximately 17 percent of the daily average reservoir flow past the plant. Considering all of Watts Bar Reservoir, these estimates are conservative because the water released from Melton Hill Dam is not the only source of water for the reservoir. The Tennessee River below Fort Loudoun Dam comprises the main body of Watts Bar Reservoir and supports a much larger conveyance than that of the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir. Based on a comparison of the volume of water to be withdrawn by the CRN facility and the overall volume of water available in Watts Bar Reservoir, CRN facility operations would not significantly affect water levels or flow rates within the reservoir.

As discussed in Subsection 3.4.2.1, the maximum intake inlet velocity, trash rack flow-through velocity, and water screens flow-through velocity are to be designed to be less than 0.5 ft per 5.3-1 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report second (s), in accordance with Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 316(b) regulations for protection of aquatic life. As discussed in detail in Subsection 5.3.1.2, this intake velocity is sufficiently low so that the majority of fish or other swimming organisms can avoid being trapped on the intake screens. Given the limited intake velocities and flow rates, the withdrawal zone created by the intake is expected to be weak and limited to the area immediately in front of the intake structure.

CWA Section 316(b) also requires that for cooling water intake structures located in a lake or reservoir, the total design intake flow must not disrupt the natural thermal stratification or turnover pattern (where present) (40 CFR 125.84) As discussed in Subsection 2.3.1.1.2.7, a daily thermal gradient was documented in summer due to surficial warming during the hottest time of the day. However, the warmer surface water was then either flushed out by daily dam releases from Melton Hill Dam or its heat dissipated with nighttime atmospheric cooling. As a result, there is no established thermal stratification or stable thermocline to be disrupted in this reach of this reservoir. In addition, as discussed in Subsection 3.4.2.5, releases from Melton Hill Dam are currently episodic, occurring for only one hour each day. Once the project is operational, a bypass will be added to Melton Hill Dam to provide a continuous release of 400 cubic feet per second (cfs). As a result, there will be continuous flushing of the reservoir and greater mixing during all seasons. Therefore, any short-term diurnal stratification that is currently present would not be present once the project is operational.

As discussed in Subsection 5.2.1.2.1, the design intake flow for the facility is approximately 0.9 percent of the average flow in this portion of the reservoir. Therefore, the withdrawal by the intake of such a small proportion of water in a localized area of this large reservoir would not be expected to noticeably alter thermal patterns. There is no stable thermocline or substantial turnover pattern to be disrupted in this relatively shallow and well-mixed reach of the reservoir.

In addition, as discussed in NUREG-1437, Revision 1 (2013), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has found that effects on thermal stratification in lakes at operating nuclear power plants are limited to the areas in the vicinity of the intake and discharge structures, and the NRC determined that these impacts have been SMALL.

For reasons discussed above, physical impacts from operation of the intake structure, including bottom scouring, induced turbidity, silt buildup, and alteration of thermal stratification patterns, are not expected to be significant. Therefore, hydrodynamic and physical impacts of water withdrawals during SMR operations would be SMALL.

5.3.1.2 Aquatic Ecosystems This subsection discusses the potential impacts on the aquatic community of the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir from the operation of the intake structure for the CR SMR Project. The ecological characteristics of the potentially affected reservoir community adjacent to the CRN Site are described in Section 2.4. The operation of the cooling system and its use of the reservoir as the source of makeup water are described in Subsections 5.2.1.2.1 and 5.3.1.1.

As noted in Subsection 5.3.1.1, operation of the CRN facility would not significantly affect water 5.3-2 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report levels or flow rates in the reservoir. Thus, aquatic ecosystems and associated riparian habitats of the floodplain would not be affected by hydrological changes from facility operation.

For aquatic resources, the primary concerns related to the water intake are impacts associated with the relative amount of water drawn from the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir and the potential for organisms to be impinged on the intake screens of the intake structure or entrained within the circulating water system (CWS). Impingement occurs when organisms are trapped against the intake screens by the force of the water passing through the intake structure. Impingement can result in starvation, exhaustion, asphyxiation (water velocity forces may prevent proper gill movement or organisms may be removed from the water for prolonged periods of time), descaling, and other physical injuries. Entrainment occurs when organisms are incorporated into the intake water flow and drawn through the intake structure into the CWS.

Organisms that become entrained normally are relatively small forms that float or swim freely in the water column, including plankton and early life stages of fish. As entrained organisms pass through the cooling system, they are subject to mechanical, thermal, and toxic stresses that often are lethal. (Reference 5.3-1)

As discussed in NUREG-1437, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, Rev. 1, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has determined that entrainment and impingement of fish and shellfish has not been a problem at operating nuclear facilities with cooling towers. This is due to the relatively low rates of water withdrawal required by facilities that utilize cooling towers in a closed-cycle cooling system. NRC did not identify any operating nuclear power plants with cooling towers operated in closed-cycle mode that reported reduced populations of aquatic organisms due to entrainment and impingement. Accordingly, NRC concluded that the effects of entrainment and impingement of aquatic organisms at nuclear facilities with a closed-cycle, cooling-tower-based heat dissipation system would be SMALL.

Closed-cycle, recirculating, cooling-water systems using fresh water can reduce water withdrawals by 96 percent to 98 percent of the amount that the facility would withdraw if it employed a once-through cooling system (Reference 5.3-1). This substantial reduction in water withdrawal capacity results in a corresponding reduction in entrainment and impingement of aquatic organisms.

The data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) impingement studies suggested that a through-screen velocity of 0.5 feet per second (ft/s) would protect 96 percent of the fish tested. (Reference 5.3-1) The intake structure for the CR SMR Project is to be designed in accordance with Section 316(b) to limit through-screen velocity to no more than 0.5 ft/s and minimize the impact of the intake system on aquatic organisms. Thus, the design and construction of the intake structure is expected to prevent the impingement of the majority of fish or other swimming organisms that may come into contact with the intake structure.

The hydrological and ecological characteristics of the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir are additional factors limiting the potential for cooling system impacts on aquatic 5.3-3 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report organisms from entrainment and impingement. As discussed in Subsection 5.2.1.2.1, based on the expected average water withdrawal through the intake structure, the design withdrawal rate for the facility is only approximately 0.9 percent of the annual average flow in the reservoir adjacent to the CRN Site. Under the most conservative scenario, based on the expected maximum withdrawal through the intake structure and a minimum daily average release from Melton Hill Dam, the facility withdrawal would be approximately 17 percent of the daily average flow in the reservoir adjacent to the CRN Site. Thus, the proportion of water withdrawn through the intake structure would be minimal under normal conditions and would be small even under the most conservative scenario. Also, the location of the intake structure on the shoreline of the reservoir is not near any known important spawning areas or other sensitive habitats. As discussed in Subsection 2.4.2, the reservoir adjacent to the CRN Site supports a community of relatively common species of aquatic organisms and is not known to provide habitat for listed species.

Subsection 2.4.2.1.1 includes a description of an investigation by Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) in 2011 of ichthyoplankton in Watts Bar Reservoir adjacent to the CRN Site. The temporal occurrence, composition, and abundance of fish eggs and larvae in that part of the reservoir were characterized by data collected at an upstream location, immediately upstream of the location of the intake structure, and a downstream location.

The total numbers of fish eggs and larvae collected at the upstream and downstream locations and the percentage composition of the samples represented by each taxon are summarized in Table 2.4.2-3. The taxa identified in the samples are organized in the table by family. The families represented in the egg and larvae samples and the principal species from each family are discussed in Subsection 2.4.2.1.1. More than 53 percent of the eggs collected were from the freshwater drum (family Sciaenidae), followed by shad (Clupeidae), and temperate basses (Moronidae). More than 67 percent of the larvae collected were Clupeid species, followed by suckers (Catostomidae), temperate basses, sunfishes (Centrarchidae), and others contributing less than 2 percent (Table 2.4.2-3). The species abundance data were used with sample volume data to calculate species-specific densities of fish eggs and larvae in the water column.

(Reference 5.3-2)

The data from the upstream location provide an indication of the ichthyoplankton densities at the proposed location of the intake structure. These density data are summarized in Table 5.3-1, which shows densities of fish eggs and larvae by family (in numbers/1000 cubic meter [m3])

based on the locations across the channel where they were collected along the transect. The results are totaled and averaged for day and night and for a 24-hour (hr) period. The average annual density for a 24-hr period was 337.5 eggs/1000 m3 and 91.0 larvae/1000 m3. Thus, the average annual total density of both fish eggs and larvae for a 24-hr period was 428.5 organisms/1000 m3.

This annual average total density was used with the average reservoir flow past the CRN Site and the average and maximum estimated water withdrawals through the intake structure to estimate the average and maximum rates of entrainment of fish eggs and larvae at the intake 5.3-4 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report structure during operation of the CR SMR Project. The results predict an average entrainment rate of 0.88 percent and a maximum entrainment rate of 1.5 percent of the total number of fish eggs and larvae in the reservoir at the intake structure. This evaluation conservatively assumes that biotic entrainment equals hydraulic entrainment (calculated in Subsection 5.2.1.2.1 as an average of 0.9 percent) and does not account for any potential reductions in entrainment that may result from factors such as intake screens or larval behavior.

These results are consistent with the conclusion by NRC that the effects of entrainment of aquatic organisms at nuclear facilities with a closed-cycle, cooling-tower-based heat dissipation system are SMALL. Impingement would be minimized by the design of the intake structure.

Entrainment of ichthyoplankton under normal conditions would be less than 1 percent, and it would not exceed 1.5 percent under the most conservative water withdrawal scenario. Based on the species present, the predominant fish eggs and larvae entrained would be common species.

The minimal reductions in numbers of fish eggs and larvae associated with the operation of the intake structure would not reduce the populations of important species (listed species or those considered commercially or recreationally valuable) or of mussels that may depend on fish as hosts for their larvae. Based on the use of closed-cycle cooling, the proportion of water that would be withdrawn, the expected design and location of the intake, and the composition of the aquatic community, the impacts from entrainment, impingement, or other effects on fish and other organisms due to the operation of the cooling water intake system for the CR SMR Project would be SMALL.

5.3.2 Discharge System This subsection describes the impacts of the discharge system during operation of the CR SMR Project. The hydrothermal discharge and its physical impacts are described in Subsection 5.3.2.1. The impacts on aquatic organisms from operation of the discharge are described in Subsection 5.3.2.2.

5.3.2.1 Thermal Discharges and Other Physical Impacts The design of the discharge structure, described in Subsection 3.4.2.3, consists of a bottom-mounted, cylindrical, multi-port diffuser situated approximately perpendicular to the flow at approximately CRM 15.5. Plans are for ports located in the downstream, upper quadrant of the diffuser pipe to disperse the heated water into the flow of the reservoir. Discharges from the CR SMR Project will be permitted under the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program, which regulates the discharge of pollutants into waters of the state. Under NPDES regulations, waste heat is regarded as thermal pollution and is regulated, as are chemical pollutants.

Computer modeling was performed to evaluate the thermal effects of the discharge from the CR SMR Project on both a local and regional scale. The computer codes are commercially available software products which have been vetted by developers and are successfully applied on projects similar to the SMR project. The computer modeling simulated the geometry of the water 5.3-5 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report body, the shapes of the SMR intake and discharge structures, the reservoir flow conditions, and the intake and discharge rates, to reproduce the transport and movement of mass, momentum, and thermal energy in the reservoir. The modeling included consideration of viscosity, buoyancy, flow advection, turbulent diffusion, and other physical parameters, and included site-specific calibration against actual field measurements.

The local-scale analysis focused on thermal effects in the immediate vicinity of the SMR discharge and included a computational model spanning the reach of reservoir from about CRM 13.5 to CRM 21.0. The regional-scale analysis focused on thermal effects in Watts Bar Reservoir at locations farther away from the SMR site. Of particular interest are potential impacts in the portion of the reservoir near the confluence of the Clinch River and Emory River (e.g., to assess potential impacts on the Kingston Fossil Plant), and the reach of the reservoir near the confluence of the Clinch River and the Tennessee River (e.g., to assess potential impacts on the main body of the reservoir). The regional-scale analysis included a computational model encompassing all of Watts Bar Reservoir.

Local-scale modeling was initially performed to evaluate alternatives for managing the SMR blowdown. The results of the analysis of those alternatives are presented in Subsection 9.4.2.2.2. The two preferred alternatives from the initial analysis each required installation of a new low-level outlet structure at Melton Hill Dam. The purpose of the bypass is to provide a continuous, minimum release from the dam during periods of idle operation of the existing hydroelectric generating units at the dam. With the bypass, sufficient flow is provided in the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir at all times to assimilate blowdown from the CR SMR Project. The hydrothermal impacts of the CR SMR Project discharge are the same for both preferred alternatives; the only difference being in the type of hydraulic equipment used to control the bypass release from the dam. The initial analysis was based on a preliminary estimate of 3944 gallons per minute (gpm) for the SMR blowdown flowrate and a bypass flow rate of 200 cfs. Following further development of the plant parameter envelope (PPE), provided in Tables 3.1-1 and 3.1-2, a supplemental analysis of the preferred alternatives was performed.

The supplemental analysis was based on a blowdown flow rate of 12,800 gpm and a bypass flow rate of 400 cfs.

The baseline temperature of water in the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir is summarized in Subsection 2.3.1.1.2.7. The flow conditions in the reservoir are summarized in Subsections 2.3.1.1.2.4 and 2.3.1.1.2.6. The local-scale analysis was conducted for both steady and unsteady flow conditions. As discussed in Subsection 2.3.1.1.2.4, flow rates and directions in the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir are a function of the relative release rates from Melton Hill, Fort Loudoun, and Watts Bar Dams. Although the Reservoir Operations Study (ROS) operating policy for Melton Hill Dam requires a minimum daily average release rate of 400 cfs, this may be achieved with a very short (less than 1 hr) period of operation of the hydro generating units at the dam, followed by up to 46 hr of no water release, before water is again released for another short period of operation. As discussed in Subsection 2.3.1.1.2.6, this manner of operation can lead to reversal of flow direction, or sloshing, of the reservoir. To address this behavior, the local-scale modeling analysis also examined the assimilation of the 5.3-6 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report blowdown from the SMR plant for unsteady conditions in the Clinch River arm of Watts Bar Reservoir created by infrequent operation of the existing hydro units at Melton Hill Dam.

In the supplemental analysis, for the steady, minimum flow situation, the thermal plume from the SMR diffuser was evaluated using CORMIX, a water quality model used to assess and perform environmental impact assessment of mixing zones resulting from wastewater discharges from point sources. Modeling was conducted to evaluate worst-case scenarios under both extreme winter conditions and extreme summer conditions while the CRSMR Project is operating at 100 percent power (800 megawatts electric [MWe]). The steady flow rate was assumed to be 400 cfs, corresponding to the minimum daily average release from Melton Hill Dam as specified by the TVA ROS operating policy. The results suggest that for steady flow in the reservoir at or above 400 cfs, the thermal effluent from the SMR plant under PPE conditions could be assimilated within regulatory limits at a minimum distance of 50 ft from the diffuser.

For regulatory limits enforced on an hourly basis, the mixing zone for the diffuser discharge needs to be large enough to capture unsteady events wherein the thermal plume from the SMR billows laterally and upstream during sloshing events. To evaluate the thermal plume for these conditions, the model for local-scale analyses is capable of simulating the three dimensional, unsteady behavior of the SMR thermal discharge in the reservoir. The computational domain for the local-scale model included the natural geometry of the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir between approximately CRM 13.5 and CRM 21.0 (7.5 miles [mi]). The model inputs include the bathymetry of the reservoir and the basic configurations of the CR SMR Project intake and diffuser, as well as time histories for the ambient flow and temperature in the reservoir and the flow and temperature of the SMR blowdown.

In the supplemental analysis, two of the unsteady scenarios analyzed using the local-scale model included the behavior of the thermal plume for operation of the CR SMR Project at full power under extreme winter conditions and under extreme summer conditions. In terms of reservoir flow, operating conditions of Watts Bar Reservoir leading to perhaps the most challenging conditions for assimilation of the SMR thermal discharge are an extreme winter event and an extreme summer event, respectively, as presented in Figures 5.3-1 and 5.3-2.

These diagrams show the flow rates from Melton Hill Dam (MHH), Watts Bar Dam (WBH), and Fort Loudoun Dam (FLH), and the flow rate in the reservoir at the CR SMR Project discharge location through a representative 48 hr period. Figures 5.3-1 and 5.3-2 show that Melton Hill Dam releases water for power generation through the hydroelectric plant at approximately 5000 cfs for 1 hr at the beginning of the first day, then releases a continuous flow of 400 cfs (through the bypass), and then releases flow through the hydroelectric plant at approximately 5000 cfs again for 1 hr at the end of the second day. In both scenarios, the flow in the reservoir increases immediately in reaction to the higher release volume during the first 2 hr. Once the release from the hydroelectric unit is completed, the flow rate at the discharge drops, and by hour 3 it reverses, flowing upstream in the reservoir. In the winter scenario (Figure 5.3-1), the sloshing in the reservoir continues for approximately 24 hr, decreasing in magnitude throughout that period until the reservoir reaches a steady flow rate of 400 cfs in the downstream direction. In the summer scenario (Figure 5.3-2), the sloshing continues for almost the entire 48-hr period.

5.3-7 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report The reversal of flow in the reservoir temporarily reduces downstream dispersion and transport of the discharge from the CR SMR Project. This causes the thermal plume to occupy a wider area of the reservoir as it is transported laterally and upstream from the discharge during the reverse flow event.

The behavior of the thermal plume must comply with the general water quality criteria for the State of Tennessee, which are provided by TDEC. For effluent entering the reservoir from the SMR discharge, the water quality criteria at the boundary of the mixing zone require that:

• The maximum change in river water temperature (TR) caused by the effluent shall not exceed 5.4 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) relative to an upstream control point.

• The maximum river water temperature (TR) caused by the effluent shall not exceed 86.9°F.

• The maximum water temperature-rate-of-change (TROC) in the river shall not exceed

+/-3.6°F/hr.

The hydrothermal modeling results for the CR SMR Project indicate that these regulatory limits would be approached only under worst-case conditions. Extreme winter conditions would challenge regulatory limits for the river temperature rise (TR) and the river TROC. Extreme summer conditions would challenge regulatory limits for the maximum river TR.

Spatially, the criteria for water temperature would be applied along the boundaries of an instream mixing zone surrounding the plant discharge. The water quality criteria do not outline any detailed procedures as to how the size and shape of mixing zones should be defined.

Under these circumstances, the exact dimensions of mixing zones typically are determined on a case-by-case basis using analyses and recommendations provided by the permittee. Beyond this, some guidelines for the size and shape of mixing zones can be found in regulatory literature and correspondence from EPA. EPA would review any NPDES permit for the CR SMR Project issued by TDEC.

Because of the oscillation of flow within the reservoir due to the unsteady flow conditions, the shape and extent of the thermal plume, and the magnitude of TR, TROC, and maximum TR all change throughout the 48-hr flow cycles depicted in Figure 5.3-1 and Figure 5.3-2. For winter conditions, the point in time with the most extreme temperature impact is hour 13. From results of the local-scale model, the configuration of the thermal plume at hour 13 is shown in Figure 5.3-3, along with configurations at other points in time, as identified in Figure 5.3-1. The figure shows the distribution of the change in temperature from ambient conditions within the plume (TR), as well as the average TR calculated around the perimeter of a 150 ft diameter mixing zone. For summer conditions, the point in time when TR, and subsequently TR, is perhaps the most extreme is hour 46. The configuration of the thermal plume at hour 46 is shown in Figure 5.3-4, along with the configuration at other points in time, as identified in Figure 5.3-1.

The analysis also evaluated the maximum upstream travel distance of the thermal plume in both extreme winter and summer conditions to verify that the plume likely would not reach the SMR 5.3-8 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report intake in any measureable amount. Figure 5.3-5 shows the approximate zone of influence of the thermal plume during extreme winter conditions. The most extreme condition occurs at hour 6 of the 48-hr cycle. Figure 5.3-5 shows that the maximum upstream extent of the plume would be to approximately CRM 16.3, more than 1.5 mi downstream of the SMR intake. Figure 5.3-6 shows the approximate zone of influence of the thermal plume during extreme summer conditions. The most extreme condition occurs at hour 38 of the 48-hr cycle. Figure 5.3-6 shows that the maximum upstream extent of the plume would be to approximately CRM 16.6, approximately 1.3 mi downstream of the SMR intake.

The result of the supplemental local-scale simulations suggest that the blowdown from the CR SMR Project operating at full power requires not only a bypass flow of about 400 cfs from Melton Hill Dam, but also a mixing zone commensurate to a circular area with a diameter of approximately 150 ft. The actual mixing zone would be established during the NPDES permitting process and is therefore deferred to the combined license application (COLA).

However, a significant portion (more than half) of the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir is expected to remain hydrothermally unobstructed, allowing for the passage of fish and other aquatic life even during the relatively infrequent periods of extreme operating conditions. Although regulatory requirements based on compliance at the boundary of a 150-ft diameter mixing zone are satisfied, local pockets of warm water can slosh into regions beyond the mixing zone. For extreme winter conditions, the temperature rise in these pockets can be high. For PPE bounding conditions in Table 3.1-2, these are considered to fall within the range of acceptability for thermal compliance because they are brief and provide a zone of passage for aquatic life. The results also indicate that the intake for the CR SMR Project is far enough upstream that there is essentially no threat of blowdown being recirculated into the intake.

To assess potential water quality and hydrothermal impacts of the CR SMR Project at a regional-scale, a CE-QUAL-W2 (W2) water quality model was developed for Watts Bar Reservoir. W2 is formulated to simulate the behavior of rivers and reservoirs with traits that vary primarily throughout the depth and in the direction of flow. The parameters of primary concern for the Watts Bar model include flow, stage, water temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO), and algae biomass. The model includes the main body of Watts Bar Reservoir, major tributary inflows, and industrial discharges that potentially have a significant impact on reservoir water quality, including the withdrawal and thermal discharge for the CR SMR Project.

The calibrated W2 models for 2004, 2008, and 2013 were used to conduct simulations of the effects of SMR operation on temperature, algae, and DO in the Clinch River and Tennessee River portions of Watts Bar Reservoir. These years were selected to represent a normal flow year (2004), a low flow year (2008), and a high flow year (2013). The year 2013 also represented a year in which data were available; preapplication studies of the reservoir were conducted in 2013 to support the SMR evaluation.

W2 modeling results were summarized at the 1.5 meters (m; 5 ft) depth, the normal monitoring depth required by TDEC. TDECs criteria for the Fish and Aquatic Life stream classification (Rule 1200-04-03-.03) are stated as follows:

5.3-9 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report

• DO: In lakes and reservoirs, the DO concentrations shall be measured at mid-depth in waters having a total depth of 10 ft or less, and at a depth of 5 ft in waters having a total depth of greater than 10 ft and shall not be less than 5.0 milligrams per liter (mg/L).

• Temperature: The maximum water temperature change shall not exceed 3 degrees Celsius

(°C; 3°F) relative to an upstream control point. The temperature of the water shall not exceed 30.5°C (86.9°F) and the maximum rate of change shall not exceed 2°C (35.6°F)/hr.

The temperature of recognized trout waters shall not exceed 20°C (68°F). There shall be no abnormal temperature changes that may affect aquatic life unless caused by natural conditions. The temperature in flowing streams shall be measured at mid-depth.

• The temperature of impoundments where stratification occurs will be measured at mid-depth in the epilimnion (see definition in Rule 0400-40-03-.04) for warm water fisheries and mid-depth in the hypolimnion (see definition in Rule 0400-40-03-.04) for cold water fisheries.

• A successful demonstration as determined by TDEC conducted for thermal discharge limitations under Section 316(a) of the CWA, (33 USC 1326) shall constitute compliance with this section.

TDECs criteria for the Domestic Water Supply stream classification is stated as follows:

• Temperature: The maximum water temperature change shall not exceed 3°C (5.4°F) relative to an upstream control point. The temperature of the water shall not exceed 30.5°C (86.9°F) and the maximum rate of change shall not exceed +/-2°C (+/-3.6°F)/hr. The temperature of impoundments where stratification occurs will be measured at a depth of 5 ft or mid-depth, whichever is less, and the temperature in flowing streams shall be measured at mid-depth.

The results of the regional-scale modeling suggest that SMR effects would have de minimis impact on temperature, algae, and DO at sites further downstream in Watts Bar Reservoir. The modeling analyses suggest that the water temperature in these areas would perhaps be attenuated very slightly by the 400 cfs bypass at Melton Hill Dam (i.e., compared to the present conditions wherein there is no release).

In summary, hydrothermal modeling simulations were performed to evaluate impacts in the reservoir under various operational alternatives, including conditions with minimum, steady flow in the reservoir and conditions with unsteady flows in the reservoir. The results indicate that with a minimum steady flow of 400 cfs through the planned Melton Hill Dam bypass, the thermal effluent from the CR SMR Project operating under PPE conditions ideally could be assimilated within regulatory limits at a distance of about 50 ft from the diffuser. To allow for unsteady flow and PPE conditions, a mixing zone commensurate to a circular area of diameter of approximately 150 ft is expected to be sufficient. Because the discharge would be managed in accordance with requirements of the TDEC NPDES permit, and the modeling indicates compliance with the thermal water quality criteria, thermal impacts from operation of the CR SMR Project discharge would be SMALL, and mitigation beyond operation of the Melton Hill Dam bypass is not warranted.

5.3-10 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report 5.3.2.2 Aquatic Ecosystems Operation of the CR SMR CWS produces liquid effluent that is discharged to the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir and has thermal and chemical effects as described in Subsections 5.3.2.1 and 5.2.2.2, respectively. The majority of the waste heat produced by the SMRs would be discharged to the atmosphere through evaporation in the cooling towers. In a closed-cycle system, evaporation causes the accumulation of minerals in the water of the system. To limit this buildup of dissolved solids (minerals and salts), some water would be regularly removed from the system (blowdown) and replaced with makeup water from the reservoir. The discharge of this heated blowdown water can have thermal and chemical effects on biota in the receiving water body, the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir. This subsection discusses the potential impacts from the cooling water discharge on aquatic organisms in the reservoir. The ecological characteristics of the potentially affected reservoir community adjacent to the CRN Site are described in Section 2.4.

As discussed in NUREG-1437, Rev. 1, NRC has determined that thermal discharges from operating closed-cycle nuclear facilities with cooling towers have not been a problem with respect to heated effluents directly killing aquatic organisms. NRC studies also have evaluated other effects on biota resulting from cooling system discharges from operating closed-cycle nuclear facilities with cooling towers. The issues NRC evaluated included the following:

• Cold shock

• Thermal plume barriers to migrating fish

• Effects on the regional geographic distribution of aquatic organisms

• Premature emergence of aquatic insects

• Establishment and proliferation of nuisance species

• Low dissolved oxygen and gas supersaturation

• Accumulation of nonradiological contaminants in sediments or biota

• Exposure of aquatic organisms to radionuclides For each of these issues, NRC determined that the effects of the cooling system discharge have been SMALL for operating closed-cycle nuclear facilities with cooling towers.

The results of the thermal discharge evaluation performed by TVA to evaluate the local and regional effects of the CR SMR Project discharge are consistent with the conditions assumed under NRCs evaluation. For example, as discussed in Subsection 5.3.2.1, modeling of the effects of the discharge from the CR SMR Project found that under worst-case conditions, the plant thermal effluent could be safely assimilated using a mixing zone commensurate to a circular area of diameter of approximately 150 ft. A 150-ft diameter mixing zone encompasses approximately 45 percent of the width of the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir in the area of the discharge, which leaves more than half of the width of the reservoir hydrothermally 5.3-11 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report unobstructed for passage of fish. In extreme winter conditions, local pockets of warm water can slosh into regions beyond the mixing zone; however, these are of brief duration, and a zone of passage for fish would remain. Additional modeling was performed at a regional scale to evaluate the discharge in the context of the full extent of Watts Bar Reservoir, and it showed that the CR SMR Project discharge would have a negligible impact on temperature (outside of the area local to the mixing zone), algae, and dissolved oxygen in the reservoir. Accordingly, NRCs conclusions are applicable for the CRN Site, and the effects of the cooling system discharge would be SMALL.

Chemical impacts from the CR SMR Project cooling system discharge on water quality of the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir are discussed in Subsection 5.2.2.2. Because cooling towers concentrate minerals and salts as well as organic compounds that enter the system in makeup water, cooling tower water chemistry must be modified with the addition of anti-scaling compounds and corrosion inhibitors. Biocides are also added to the system to prevent the growth of bacteria and algae. It is anticipated that the facilitys blowdown discharge would contain the nonradioactive liquid waste constituents and concentrations listed in Table 3.6-1. Radionuclides anticipated to occur in the discharge from the facility are discussed in Section 3.5 and listed in Table 3.5-1. The effluent from the liquid radioactive waste treatment system would be combined with the flow from the holding pond before entering the reservoir through the discharge structure. Chemical constituent levels in the cooling system discharge will be regulated by TDEC through an NPDES permit. The concentrations of constituents in the facility discharge would be limited by the NPDES permit to comply with state water quality standards for the protection of aquatic organisms.

On the basis of the NRCs determination of insignificant biological impacts associated with thermal discharges from operating closed-cycle nuclear facilities with cooling towers, the results of the modeling of the thermal plume from the discharge at the CRN Site, the regulation of the temperature effects of the discharge in accordance with requirements of the NPDES permit and CWA Section 316(a), and the regulation of the chemical concentrations in the discharge in accordance with requirements of the NPDES permit, impacts on aquatic organisms from operation of the CR SMR cooling water discharge would be SMALL.

5.3.3 Heat Discharge System This subsection describes the impacts from operation of the heat-discharge system for the CR SMR Project. Subsection 5.3.3.1 discusses the physical effects from the transfer of heat to the atmosphere, and Subsection 5.3.3.2 discusses the potential for theses physical effects to impact terrestrial ecosystems.

5.3.3.1 Heat Dissipation to the Atmosphere The cooling system design for the CR SMR Project includes linear mechanical draft cooling towers (LMDCT) for the transfer and dissipation of heat from SMR cooling water to the atmosphere. The planned LMDCT use circulating makeup water from the Clinch River arm of 5.3-12 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report the Watts Bar Reservoir. Releases from cooling towers consist of a vapor plume that is visible when water vapor released from the towers condenses in cooler ambient air. Small water droplets associated with the towers circulating water also are emitted and escape with the exhaust air. These droplets are referred to as drift and contain dissolved solids. Potential impacts from these releases on the CRN Site and immediate surroundings include:

• Aesthetics related to an elevated visible plume

• Ground level fogging and icing

• Deposition of dissolved solids in drift that escapes from the circulating water

• Cloud formation and shading

• Additional precipitation from the vapor plume

• An increase in humidity

• Interaction with other vapor plumes from existing sources in the vicinity of the CRN Site Computer modeling of the CR SMR Projects LMDCT used the Electric Power Research Institutes (EPRI) Seasonal and Annual Cooling Tower Impact (SACTI) model for evaluating potential impacts to the CRN Site and its immediate surroundings. A description of the modeling and results of the study are presented below.

The SACTI model uses hourly meteorological data to calculate seasonal and annual impacts associated with the released vapor plume and drift deposition. Meteorological data used as input to the cooling tower model were from the CRN Sites meteorological monitoring program for the period from April 21, 2011 through July 9, 2013. Other SACTI model inputs include ceiling height and mixing height data, which were not collected as part of the onsite monitoring program. Ceiling height data used were from Lovell Field Airport in Chattanooga, as obtained from the National Climatic Data Center, which was determined to be the best source of available ceiling height data for the CRN Site. Mixing height data are not collected at all National Weather Service Stations. The Lovell Field Airport mixing height data are considered representative for the Appalachian Ridge and Valley Region of Tennessee. These data are provided by the EPA Support Center for Regulatory Atmospheric Modeling (SCRAM) database website for Tennessee. Ceiling height data used from Lovell Field were concurrent with the onsite meteorological data. The design of the facilitys cooling towers is not yet final; thus, certain details, such as tower-specific performance curves and some design values, were not available.

However, the current design for the CR SMR Project does use LMDCT. A representative set of cooling tower parameters was developed based on the required heat rejection for the CR SMR Project. Bounding cooling tower parameters were used where applicable. The representative data selected for the projects cooling tower evaluation were based on design parameters consistent with Case Study 1 of the SACTI Users Manual, as the heat rejection for Case Study 1 is similar to that of the CR SMR Project. SACTI Model Case Study 1 included two LMDCT with a total heat rejection of 1400 megawatts (MW). The CR SMR Project is designed for a total 5.3-13 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report heat rejection of approximately 1640 MW. Where appropriate, cooling tower data for the project were prorated from the SACTI Models Case Study 1 input data.

The cooling towers area on the site layout is located approximately 500 ft to the west of the power block area, at an elevation of approximately 810 ft above mean sea level (msl). The cooling towers are located 2950 ft (899 m) from the northern boundary of the CRN Site, 1400 ft (426 m) from the western boundary, 635 ft (193 m) from the southern boundary, and 2300 ft (701 m) from the eastern boundary. As shown in Table 3.1-2, Item 3.3.1, the design footprint of the cooling towers area occupies approximately 6 acres (ac).

Representative cooling tower parameters for the project are presented in Table 5.3-2. The modeled cooling tower configuration includes two towers consisting of nine cells each. Cooling tower cells are evenly spaced by 11.0 m. (Metric units are presented here to be consistent with the SACTI model input requirements.) Each tower modeled is 99.0 m long by 11.0 m wide. The release height of the cells above ground level is 19.8 m (65 ft, from Table 3.1-2, Item 3.3.8). The total cooling water flow rate would be up to 755,000 gpm (Table 3.1-2, Item 3.3.12). The circulating water system would operate at up to four cycles of concentration. Section 3.4 of this report provides additional information on the cooling system description, operating modes, and water intake and discharge characteristics.

Table 5.3-3 provides the drift droplet mass spectrum used for the SACTI modeling based on a Marley cooling tower, which is expected to have characteristics similar to the actual cooling towers that may be included in the eventual design. Excel drift eliminators are included to mitigate drift deposition and drift impacts. The two cooling tower housings were assumed to be 11.0 m apart, which is closer than the SACTI Model Case Study 1. Positioning the towers closer conservatively increases drift deposition by concentrating the releases from the towers. The cooling tower orientation was determined based on a sensitivity study of varying tower orientations and deposition rates. The sensitivity analysis demonstrated that an east-west lengthwise orientation generated the most conservative deposition rates.

Because the design of the cooling towers is not yet final, the density of total dissolved solids (TDS) in the CR SMR Projects cooling tower water is unknown. For the SACTI modeling, the TDS density was assumed equal to that of salt, 2.17 grams per cubic centimeter (gm/cm3). This is considered an acceptable assumption given that an order-of-magnitude approach [in the SACTI Model] is utilized when analyzing depositions, so small differences in density are negligible with respect to the conclusions derived in the calculation. Other dissolved solids potentially found in the cooling water, such as ferric nitrate, ferric chloride, potassium nitrate, and magnesium nitrate are relatively comparable in density to salt.

SACTI modeling was performed using a polar receptor grid with radials at the 16 compass directions. Receptors along each radial were spaced at 10-m, 100-m, or 200-m increments depending on the parameter modeled. Modeling was conducted to evaluate the following:

• Groundlevel fogging and icing 5.3-14 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report

• Additional precipitation and humidity

• Salt deposition

• Deposition of TDS

• Hours of plume shadowing

• Plume length frequencies Results of the SACTI modeling are discussed below.

5.3.3.1.1 Groundlevel Fogging and Icing Groundlevel fogging occurs when the visible vapor plume directly impacts groundlevel locations downwind of the tower. Icing is predicted under temperature conditions low enough for the freezing of plume water on groundlevel surfaces. The cooling tower analysis demonstrated that due to the relatively small size of these cooling towers in comparison to a cooling tower servicing a large power plant, and the temperature and climate of the area, there were no hours of fogging or icing calculated by the SACTI code at any distance from the towers. Therefore no fogging or icing impacts are expected on transportation areas around the CRN Site and impacts are categorized as SMALL.

5.3.3.1.2 Additional Precipitation and Humidity Table 5.3-4 provides annual average water deposition rates from the SACTI model for distances out to 1000 m. The modeling predicted the greatest annual water deposition would occur at 100 m from the cooling towers for all directions. The greatest level of deposition on an annual average basis is 97,000 kilograms per square kilometer per month (kg/km2-mo), which occurs to the west of the towers. This value, which is equivalent to approximately 0.004 inches (in.) of water per month, is insignificant for the Oak Ridge area because the Oak Ridge National Weather Service Station reports approximately 3 in. of precipitation per month or more (Table 2.7.1-2). Thus, additional water deposition from the cooling towers would be negligible. No calculations for humidity levels are provided by the SACTI model. Some increase in relative humidity may occur close to the towers and in the elevated plume. However, with low levels of water deposition and no prediction of fogging or icing, impacts on groundlevel humidity are expected to be minimal. Based on this analysis, the effects of cooling tower operation on precipitation and humidity are expected to be SMALL.

5.3.3.1.3 Salt Deposition The SMR project design includes efficient drift eliminators to mitigate the impacts of water droplets (drift) discharged from the top of the cooling towers. However, some water in the form of drift would still be discharged from the tower with the exhaust air. Once released, drift is carried downwind from the towers. Because drift consists of water originating from within the cooling towers, it has the same concentration of salts and other dissolved solids as the water 5.3-15 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report circulating in the towers. As shown in Table 3.1-2, Item 3.3.6, the design of the cooling towers would utilize up to four cycles of concentration. Salt drift is of primary concern, because salt particles deposited in the surroundings may have adverse effects on the environment. Based on sodium (Na) and chloride (Cl) concentrations in the cooling towers circulating water (as shown in Table 5.3-2), a salt (NaCl) concentration of 0.010086 grams of salt/gram of solution was modeled in the SACTI model.

NUREG-1555, Standard Review Plans for Environmental Reviews for Nuclear Power Plants:

Environmental Standard Review Plan, provides a basis for interpreting salt deposition rates based on levels at which vegetation may be affected. Deposition rates of 1 to 2 kilograms per hectare per month (kg/ha/mo or kg/ha-mo), which is equivalent to 100 to 200 kg/km2-mo, are generally not damaging to plants. Deposition rates of 10 to 20 kg/ha/mo (1000 to 2000 kg/km2-mo) cause leaf damage in many species. These effects levels and the potential for impacts on terrestrial vegetation at the CRN Site are discussed further in Subsection 5.3.3.2.1.

Table 5.3-5 provides annual average downwind salt deposition rates from the SACTI model for distances out to 1000 m. The SACTI model predicted that the maximum salt deposition rate would occur at 100 m for all directions. At this distance, the greatest annual average deposition predicted is 6276 kg/km2-mo to the west. The average salt deposition at 100 m based on all directions is predicted to be 2983 kg/km2-mo.

At 200 m, annual average salt deposition rates are predicted by the model to be below 1000 kg/km2-mo in all directions except for the west and west-northwest. At 300 m and beyond, annual average salt deposition rates are below 1000 kg/km2-mo in all directions, and the greatest annual average deposition predicted is 605 kg/km2-mo to the west of the towers. Salt deposition rates at 300 m also are below 1000 kg/km2-mo in all seasons. At 600 m and beyond, the greatest annual average deposition rate is below 100 kg/ km2-mo for all directions. A distance of 600 m from the cooling towers extends beyond the site boundary, to just over the other side of the river, in the south-southeast through northwest directions (clockwise).

Seasonal salt deposition values for distances out to 1000 m also are provided in Table 5.3-5.

For the individual seasons at 600 m, salt deposition rates are below 100 kg/ km2-mo except for the rate in the westerly direction from the tower during the summer season (111 kg/ km2-mo).

Based on this analysis, the effects of salt deposition from cooling tower operation are expected to be limited to the area of the cooling towers and would be SMALL.

5.3.3.1.4 TDS Deposition Deposition of TDS other than salt was modeled and annual average values out to a distance of 1000 m are presented in Table 5.3-6. Maximum TDS deposition for all directions occurs at 100

m. At 100 m from the cooling towers, the greatest predicted deposition is 93,928 kg/km2-mo to the west of the cooling towers, while the average deposition at 100 m is 44,972 kg/km2-mo. At 300 m from the cooling towers, TDS deposition drops considerably. The maximum TDS deposition at 300 m is 5079 kg/km2-mo, while the average at 300 m is 2545 kg/km2-mo.

5.3-16 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Seasonal TDS deposition values for distances out to 1000 m also are provided in Table 5.3-6.

Similar to the salt analysis, the greatest TDS deposition occurs adjacent to the cooling towers, and deposition drops off rapidly with distance. Thus, the effects of TDS deposition from cooling tower operation are expected to be limited to the area of the cooling towers and would be SMALL.

5.3.3.1.5 Plume Shadowing The frequency of annual plume shadowing, or shading, in hours per year (hr/yr) out to a distance of 1000 m is presented in Table 5.3-7. SACTI model results predict a maximum of 634 hr/yr of plume shadowing at 200 m to the northeast of the cooling towers. At 200 m to the northeast, the cooling tower plume would be over the SMR facilities. The maximum number of hours of plume shadowing at 400 m is 283 hr to the west-southwest and is equivalent to just over 3 percent of the year. The nearest residences are located at approximately 500 m to 600 m to the west-southwest and southwest of the cooling towers. At 600 m, the maximum number of hours of plume shadowing to the west-southwest is 237 hr/yr, or 2.7 percent of the year.

The plume modeling evaluates the hours of shadowing per year based on plume sectors, where each sector consists of a 22.5 degree arc. Thus, any specific point within these 22.5 degree sectors is likely to experience plume shadowing less than the percentages given here. In addition, plume shadowing varies seasonally. At 600 m, for example, maximum plume shadowing is predicted to occur 3.9, 3.7, 5.8, and 2.7 percent of the time during the winter, spring, summer, and fall seasons, respectively. Seasonal hours of plume shadowing for distances out to 1000 m are presented in Table 5.3-7. Because the predicted frequencies of plume shadowing beyond the CRN Site are low, impacts would be SMALL.

5.3.3.1.6 Plume Length Frequency Annual plume length frequencies calculated by the SACTI model are presented in Table 5.3-8 for plume lengths up to 1000 m. Predicted visible plumes extend no more than 3200 m from the towers. Plumes at this distance occur to the south, south-southwest, north-northwest, north, north-northeast, and south-southeast directions. However, the frequency of a visible plume at this distance is very low, with the greatest value being 0.09 percent of the time (annually) in the south-southeasterly direction. For other wind directions, the predicted plume does not extend beyond 2100 m. For these cases, a visible plume at 2100 m is also infrequent.

On an annual average basis, visible plumes occur up to 5.4 and 5.0 percent of the time out to a distance of approximately 200 m to the east and east-southeast directions of the towers, respectively. For other directions, a plume out to 200 m occurs less than 3.4 percent of the time annually. Table 5.3-8 also provides seasonal plume length frequencies for distances out to 3200

m. Visible plumes are more frequent in winter and fall than in spring and summer. In winter, predicted visible plumes occur 5 percent of the time out to approximately 800 m in the east direction and 300 m in the east-southeast direction from the cooling towers. During summer, the 5.3-17 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report 5 percent visible plume frequency level extends to only between 100 m and 200 m for any direction.

At 300 m, a visible plume is expected less than 3 percent of the time annually for the east and east-southeast directions and less than 2 percent of the time for any of the other directions.

Based on these distances and directions, locations with overhead visible plumes occurring more than 3 percent of the time annually are predicted to be restricted to the CRN Site on or adjacent to the CR SMR Project.

Visible plume frequency calculations evaluated all hours of the year including night-time hours and periods of poor visibility (e.g., periods of precipitation and fog). During night-time hours and weather conditions producing poor visibility, visible plumes from the cooling tower would be obscured or hidden. Cooler temperature conditions, such as during the night-time hours, create greater occurrences of condensation and the likelihood of a visible plume. In addition, modeling indicates long visible plumes can be generated during periods when atmospheric conditions are close to or at saturation, conditions often associated with precipitation that can obscure a predicted visible plume. As a result, the SACTI model produces conservative results, and the occurrence of visible plumes from the projects cooling towers is expected to be less frequent than predicted by the model. Impacts on terrestrial ecosystems from the occurrence of visible plumes would be SMALL.

5.3.3.1.7 Plume Interaction with Existing Sources The nearest large facility to the CRN Site is Hittman Transportation, located approximately 2 kilometers (km) north of the cooling towers. At this distance, the SACTI model results indicate that water and salt deposition decline significantly (Tables 5.3-4 and 5.3-5). This reduction in deposition rates is reflective of reduced concentrations of plume contaminants. Further, the frequency of a visible plume at 2 km in this direction is only about 15 hr/yr (Table 5.3-8). The impacts of the cooling towers on other facilities, as well their interaction with other nearby air pollution sources, will be addressed during consultation with TDEC regarding air quality permitting. Given the limited concentrations of salt and TDS in drift and the distance to other potential sources of vapor plumes, the potential for interaction of the SMR plume with other plumes would be negligible, and the impact would be SMALL.

5.3.3.1.8 Holding Pond The planned CR SMR Project includes a holding pond to mix discharge streams from the cooling towers and miscellaneous demineralized water users for the facility. This provides that any discharge from the holding pond into the reservoir would be homogeneous in temperature and composition. The intent of the holding pond is not for heat removal from the facility discharge or for management of discharge flow rates, and cooling effects of the pond are not given credit in the hydrothermal analysis. The purpose of the pond is for discharge flow mixing only. Nevertheless, this mixing would act to further reduce temperatures and moderate flow rates, making this is a conservative modelling assumption for purposes of the hydrothermal 5.3-18 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report analysis. Assuming the holding pond was to function under a worst case scenario as a cooling pond, NUREG-1555 states:

• The plume will exist as ground level fog, but will evaporate within 300 m or lift to become stratus for wind speeds greater than 2.2 meters per second (m/s).

• The plume will exist as fog over the pond, lifting to become stratus for winds less than or equal to 2.2 m/s.

An analysis of nearby areas of importance shows that the closest such area is Interstate 40, which is located 900 m from the CRN Sites nearest boundary. Because this area is greater than 300 m from the location of the holding pond, potential worst case scenario impacts from the holding pond would be SMALL.

5.3.3.2 Terrestrial Ecosystems The terrestrial ecosystems at the CRN Site that could be affected by operation of the SMR system for discharging heat to the atmosphere are described in Subsection 2.4.1. Heat dissipation systems at nuclear power facilities potentially can impact terrestrial ecological communities through effects such as those evaluated and discussed in Subsection 5.3.3.1 (salt deposition; increased precipitation, humidity, fogging, and icing; and plume shading), as well as noise, and bird collisions with cooling towers.

5.3.3.2.1 Salt Deposition As discussed in NUREG-1437, Rev. 0, salts from cooling tower operation are deposited on plants by droplet and particulate fallout, rainfall, and wind. In most humid environments, rain would wash salts off of vegetation, but exposure can become substantial during periods between rainfall events. Plants damaged by salt drift and deposition may show acute symptoms, such as discolored or necrotic tissue, stunted growth, or deformities. Chronic symptoms are less apparent but may include reduced growth, chlorosis, or increased susceptibility to insects or disease. Foliar uptake of salt is affected by the characteristics of the leaves, salt concentration, temperature, humidity, and the length of time the leaf is wet. Salt on foliage is absorbed in solution, so rainfall, dew, and humidity can enhance salt uptake. Because moisture and other plant and environmental factors affect salt deposition, uptake, and injury to plants, exposures likely to cause effects are difficult to predict.

Salt deposition also can damage vegetation through salinization of soil. However, in areas where rainfall is sufficient to leach salts from the soil, salinization usually does not occur.

Consequently, NRC generally considers the risk to vegetation from soil salinization to be low.

As noted by NRC in NUREG-1437, Rev. 0 and NUREG-1555, the tolerances of native plants, crops, and ornamentals to salt deposition from drift are not precisely known. Accordingly, NRC recommends an order-of-magnitude approach to evaluating such effects, and NUREG-1555 5.3-19 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report identifies the following salt (NaCl) deposition thresholds for evaluating the potential for effects on vegetation:

• 1 to 2 kg/ha/mo (100 to 200 kg/km2-mo): salt deposition generally not damaging to plants

• 10 to 20 kg/ha/mo (1000 to 2000 kg/km2-mo): threshold range for visible leaf damage from salt deposition on leaves in any month during the growing season

• Hundreds or thousands of kg/ha/year: could cause damage sufficient to suggest the need for changes of tower-basin salinities or a re-evaluation of tower design, depending on the extent of the area impacted and the uniqueness of the terrestrial ecosystems expected to be exposed to drift deposition The distance at which the SACTI model predicts the greatest salt deposition rate from the cooling towers is 100 m; the greatest annual average deposition is 6276 kg/km2-mo to the west (Table 5.3-5). The average salt deposition for all directions at 100 m is 2983 kg/km2-mo. A radius of 100 m from the cooling towers is within the developed area of the facility immediately surrounding the cooling towers. Thus, salt deposition is predicted to exceed the 1000 to 2000 kg/ km2-mo threshold range for effects within that radius. As a result, there is the possibility that vegetation on slopes established immediately adjacent to the cooling towers to the west and south may be adversely affected by salt deposition.

At 200 m from the cooling towers, annual average salt deposition rates are predicted by the model to be below 1000 kg/ km2-mo in all directions except for the west and west-northwest (Table 5.3-5). Thus, within this developed area of the facility, salt deposition is predicted to be within the threshold for adverse effects in almost all directions. However, the potential for impacts to vegetation on the slopes adjacent to the cooling towers may extend to the toe of the slope in the westerly direction.

At 300 m from the cooling towers and beyond, the model predicts that the maximum salt deposition drops below 1000 kg/km2-mo (Table 5.3-5). The greatest annual average deposition predicted at 300 m is 605 kg/km2-mo to the west of the towers. Seasonal salt deposition rates at 300 m are below 1000 kg/km2-mo in all seasons. Thus, beyond 200 m from the cooling towers and throughout the remainder of the CRN Site, salt deposition is predicted to remain below the 1000 to 2000 kg/km2-mo threshold range for adverse effects.

At 600 m and beyond, maximum annual average salt deposition for all directions is below 100 kg/km2-mo, a level at which vegetation damage does not occur. For the individual seasons, salt deposition values also are below 100 kg/km2-mo at 600 m except for the westerly direction from the towers during the summer season. In summer at 600 m to the west, the predicted salt deposition is 111 kg/ km2-mo, which is within the 100 to 200 kg/ km2-mo range where damage to vegetation generally does not occur.

Based on studies of operating nuclear power facilities with cooling towers, discussed in NUREG-1437, Rev. 1, most deposition of drift and salt from cooling towers occurs in relatively 5.3-20 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report close proximity to the towers. Deposition rates generally have been below those known to cause measurable adverse effects on plants, and no deposition effects on plant communities or crops have been observed from the operation of cooling towers at most nuclear power facilities. The SACTI modeling for the operation of the cooling towers at the CRN Site similarly predicts only a minor potential for vegetation to be impacted, and the area potentially affected would be limited to the area between the cooling towers and the reservoir on the west side of the CRN Site.

Whether localized impacts to vegetation occur in this area would be determined by the sensitivity to salt deposition of the vegetation established in the area and local climatic conditions, such as the frequency with which rainfall washes salt deposits from foliage. Given that the potentially affected vegetation would be vegetation established on slopes during facility development in a limited area adjacent to the cooling towers, and the minimal occurrence of deposition effects at other facilities operating cooling towers, the impacts of salt deposition at the CRN Site would be SMALL. Mitigation may be warranted if vegetation established on slopes to prevent soil erosion is adversely affected by salt deposition.

5.3.3.2.2 Increased precipitation, humidity, fogging, and icing As discussed in Subsections 5.3.3.1.1 and 5.3.3.1.2, the SACTI model indicated that operation of the cooling towers would not produce additional fogging or icing at any distance from the towers, and additional water deposition from the cooling towers would be negligible. Some increase in relative humidity may occur close to the towers, but effects on groundlevel humidity are expected to be minimal. As discussed in NUREG-1437, Rev. 1, impacts from increased humidity at nuclear power facilities have not been observed. Thus, the effects of cooling tower operation on terrestrial vegetation or other biota at the CRN Site from precipitation, humidity, fogging, or icing are expected to be SMALL.

5.3.3.2.3 Noise The principal source of noise associated with the heat discharge system is the operation of the mechanical draft cooling towers. Wildlife on the CRN Site and the adjacent Grassy Creek Habitat Protection Area would be exposed to elevated noise levels, which would have the potential to alter behavioral patterns. As discussed in Section 2.8, the ambient noise assessment performed prior to construction and preconstruction activities on the CRN Site concluded that sound levels onsite ranged between daytime levels of 46 to 48 A-weighted decibels (dBA) and nighttime levels of 41 to 49 dBA. As presented in Table 3.1-2, Item 3.3.10, the cooling towers at the CR SMR Project are expected to operate at less than 70 dBA at a distance of 1000 ft.

Subsection 4.3.1.4 discusses the potential effects of noise on wildlife in the context of noise generated by construction activities. As discussed in that section, construction-related noise is attenuated by natural factors such as vegetation, topography, and temperature, and it quickly decreases over relatively short distances. Prediction of the effects of noise on wildlife is limited by the paucity of information linking sound levels to effects on species. A study by the Federal Highway Administration that summarized information from the available literature on the effects 5.3-21 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report of noise on wildlife populations indicated that birds have been studied the most. The review found that some studies indicated that bird numbers and breeding were adversely affected by proximity to roads and their associated noise, while other studies found the opposite effect, with reports of many bird species using roadside habitats despite the noise. The sensitivity of birds seems to vary by species, with some affected, some not affected, and others more common even near noisy interstate highways. For mammals, the review found that studies indicate large mammals may avoid noise, but the effect seems to be small to moderate, and small mammals occur in significant numbers in highway rights-of-way and do not seem to be adversely affected by road noise. (Reference 5.3-3) The threshold noise level at which birds and small mammals are frightened or startled is 80 to 85 dBA (893 NRC 2011). This noise level is expected to occur at less than 1000 ft from the cooling towers, and undeveloped areas of habitat potentially affected occur only in a small area immediately south and west of the cooling towers between the facility and the reservoir.

More sensitive species may be permanently displaced to more distant habitats as a result of elevated noise levels from cooling tower operation, while more tolerant species likely would remain nearby if available habitats are otherwise suitable. Wildlife displaced by noise can find refuge in available undisturbed habitats in the vicinity of the CRN Site. Based on the similarity of cooling tower operational noise and highway noise levels, the rapid attenuation of noise expected to occur beyond the cooling tower area, the ability of mobile wildlife to move away from the noise, and the habituation and limited sensitivity of many wildlife species to the noise levels likely to occur in habitat areas, the impacts of noise on wildlife from cooling tower operation are expected to be SMALL.

5.3.3.2.4 Bird Collisions with Cooling Towers As shown in Table 3.1-2, Item 3.3.8, the height of the mechanical draft cooling towers is expected to be 65 ft above finished grade. As discussed in NUREG-1437, Rev. 1, NRC has determined that natural draft cooling towers, which are much taller (usually taller than 330 ft),

cause some bird mortality from collisions. However, mechanical draft cooling towers are much smaller (usually less than 100 ft) and cause negligible mortality to birds. Therefore, adverse effects on bird populations from collisions with the mechanical draft cooling towers at the CR SMR Project would be SMALL.

5.3.4 Impacts to Members of the Public This subsection describes two issues associated with operation of the cooling system for the CR SMR Project that potentially could impact human health: propagation of etiologic agents (pathogenic microorganisms) and noise.

5.3.4.1 Etiologic Agent (Microorganism) Impacts As discussed in NUREG-1555, etiologic agents, including organisms formerly referred to as thermophilic microorganisms, can increase in occurrence and numbers due to the presence of 5.3-22 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report heat in aquatic systems or can resist moderately high temperatures long enough to be released into a cooler water body where they can grow. When such microorganisms are etiologic agents capable of causing human disease (pathogens), they can pose a risk to public health if cooling towers and thermal discharges can harbor them or accelerate their growth once they are released into the environment.

Etiologic agents of concern in the context of cooling systems include bacteria such as Vibrio species (spp.), Salmonella spp., Legionella spp., Shigella spp., Plesiomonas shigelloides, and Pseudomonas spp.; thermophilic fungi; noroviruses; free-living amoebae of the genera Naegleria and Acanthamoeba; the protozoan Cryptosporidium; and toxin-producing algae such as Karenia brevis. Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show that there were three outbreaks of waterborne illness from treated recreational waters and one from untreated recreational water in Tennessee between 2009 and 2010. The organisms responsible were Cryptosporidium spp., Shigella spp., Escherichia coli, and an unidentified species.

(Reference 5.3-4) In the years 2011 to 2012, there were no reported waterborne illnesses in Tennessee (Reference 5.3-5). Data regarding waterborne pathogens and toxic algae were not available specifically for the Watts Bar Reservoir.

Characteristics of these etiologic agents associated with aquatic environments and cooling systems are described below:

Vibrio spp., V. cholerae and V. parahaemolyticus, are human pathogens that cause severe diarrhea, but through different mechanisms. Cholera is transmitted to humans through water or food. V. vulnificus is an emerging pathogen of humans that causes wound infections, gastroenteritis, or primary septicemia. (Reference 5.3-6) V. cholerae has an optimal growth temperature range of 18°C (64.4°F to 37°C (98.6°F) (Reference 5.3-7).

Salmonella spp. live in the intestinal tracts of humans and animals. Salmonella spp. are the cause of two types of salmonellosis: enteric fever (typhoid), resulting from bacterial invasion of the bloodstream, and acute gastroenteritis, resulting from a foodborne infection/intoxication. (Reference 5.3-8) Salmonella spp. enter the natural environment (water, soil, plants) through human or animal excretion. Salmonella spp. do not appear to multiply significantly in the natural environment, but they can survive several weeks in water and several years in soil if conditions are favorable. (Reference 5.3-9)

Shigella spp. can cause a gastrointestinal disease called shigellosis, with symptoms that include diarrhea, fever, and stomach cramps. Shigella spp. can occur in water or food.

Infection can occur from eating contaminated food, swimming in or drinking contaminated water, or contact with flies that carry the bacterium. Water may become contaminated from sewage or an infected person swimming or bathing.(Reference 5.3-10) 5.3-23 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Plesiomonas shigelloides has been found in many aquatic ecosystems, including freshwater (ponds, streams, rivers), estuarine, and marine. The pathogen has been isolated from warm-blooded and cold-blooded animals, including freshwater fish and shellfish, and from many types of animals, including cattle, goats, swine, cats, dogs, monkeys, vultures, snakes, and toads. Symptoms from an infection are usually mild, although a more severe, dysenteric form of gastroenteritis may occur. Under laboratory conditions, P. shigelloides is able to grow at temperatures between 8°C (46.4°F) and 45°C (113°F), with an optimal range from 25°C (77°F) to 35°C (95°F). (Reference 5.3-11)

All of the Pseudomonas spp. are free-living bacteria found in soil and water. They are also found on the surfaces of plants and animals. P. aeruginosa exploits an existing break in the host defenses in order to infect the compromised tissues. It can infect almost all tissues, causing urinary tract infections, respiratory system infections, dermatitis, soft tissue infections, bacteremia, bone and joint infections, gastrointestinal infections, and a variety of systemic infections. (Reference 5.3-12) Its optimum temperature for growth is 37°C (98.6°F), and it is able to grow at temperatures as high as 42°C (107.6°F).

Karenia brevis is a dinoflagellate responsible for red tides in the Gulf of Mexico. It is a marine species and would not be found in the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir. (Reference 5.3-13)

Legionella spp. can cause Legionnaires disease, which is contracted from inhaling infected water droplets. The bacteria can be found in hot tubs, hot water tanks, large plumbing systems, decorative fountains, and cooling towers. (Reference 5.3-14)

Symptoms of Legionnaires disease are similar to pneumonia, including cough, shortness of breath, high fever, muscle aches and headaches (Reference 5.3-15).

L. pneumophila can withstand temperatures of 50°C (122°F) for several hours, but it remains dormant below 20°C (68°F) (Reference 5.3-16).

Naegleria fowleri is an amoeba found in warm freshwater and soil. Specifically, it is usually found in bodies of warm freshwater, such as lakes and rivers, geothermal water such as hot springs, warm water discharge from industrial plants, swimming pools that are poorly maintained with minimal or no chlorination, and water heaters. An infection can occur if the amoeba is inhaled through the nose; it cannot be contracted by drinking contaminated water. N. fowleri causes primary amoebic meningoencephalitis, a brain infection that leads to the destruction of brain tissue. Initial symptoms include headache, fever, nausea, or vomiting. Later symptoms include stiff neck, confusion, lack of attention to people and surroundings, loss of balance, seizures, and hallucinations. The disease usually causes death within about 5 days (range 1 to 12 days). N. fowleri infections are rare. In the 10 years from 2005 to 2014, 35 infections were reported in the United States.

Of those cases, 31 people were infected by contaminated recreational water, three people were infected after performing nasal irrigation using contaminated tap water, and 5.3-24 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report one person was infected by contaminated tap water. N. fowleri grows best at higher temperatures of up to 115°F (46°C) and can survive for short periods at higher temperatures. (Reference 5.3-17)

Acanthamoeba can cause Acanthamoeba kerititis, an eye infection that can result in permanent vision impairment or blindness. Other symptoms include eye pain, eye redness, blurred vision, sensitivity to light, sensation of something in the eye and excessive tearing. Acanthamoeba can be found in freshwater bodies, soil, and air.

People who wear contact lenses are the most susceptible to this infection. (Reference 5.3-18)

Cryptosporidium parvum is an obligate intracellular parasite. It can cause cryptosporidiosis, with symptoms that include mild to severe diarrhea, with severity increasing in young, old, and immuno-compromised individuals. Human exposure usually occurs by the ingestion of water contaminated with fecal material from an infected animal or food that was irrigated or washed with contaminated water. Swimming pools and other recreational waters are another vehicle for transmission of Cryptosporidium oocysts. The oocysts are difficult to eliminate with disinfectants like chlorine and can remain infectious for up to a year in both freshwater and seawater.

Treated human wastewater can contain oocysts and could contaminate recreational waters downstream of a sewage treatment plant. (Reference 5.3-11)

Freshwater algal blooms can be harmful either by creating toxins or by generally impacting water quality such that they degrade aesthetic, ecological, or recreational value. Harmful algal blooms (HABs) are most often caused by cyanobacteria, but other types of algae can also cause toxicity. In addition to the production of neurotoxic, hepatotoxic, dermatotoxic, or other bioactive compounds, HABs can cause fish kills by depleting the oxygen in the water column. HABs can be naturally occurring or result of human activity. HABS usually are associated with significant increases in nutrient levels.

(Reference 5.3-19)

Subsection 5.3.2.1 describes the potential effects of the hydrothermal discharge from the cooling system on water temperatures in the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir. The discharge will be managed in accordance with requirements of the TDEC NPDES permit, and the modeling indicates compliance with the thermal water quality criteria; therefore, thermal impacts from operation of the CR SMR Project discharge would be SMALL.

The maximum temperature measured in the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir during monitoring activities was 31.3°C (88.3°F) (at the monitoring location near CRM 16, approximately 0.5 mi upstream from the discharge location). Due to the complexity of the human-manipulated hydrology of this portion of the reservoir, temperatures can at times exceed TDECs regulations without the additional discharge associated with the CR SMR Project. As discussed in Subsection 5.3.2.1, modeling of the effects of the discharge (incorporating a 5.3-25 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report continuous 400 cfs bypass of the Melton Hill Dam) indicated that the thermal component of the discharge would be assimilated within 50 ft of the discharge structure.

No data are available concerning the occurrence of etiologic agents and thermophilic microorganisms in the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir near the CR SMR Site. As stated in NUREG-1437, Supplement 34, thermophilic microorganisms generally occur in water with temperatures between 77°F (25°C) and 176°F (80°C). Optimal growth has been reported at between 122°F (50°C) and 150°F (65.5°C). TDEC requires a water temperature of lower than 86.9°F (30.5°C); it is unlikely that populations of thermophilic or other etiologic agents would increase in the reservoir due to discharges from the CR SMR Project. Because the temperatures in the reservoir have at times exceeded TDECs criteria in the absence of a discharge from the CR SMR Project, etiologic agents would not experience conditions that are substantially different from those that have previously occurred without causing their proliferation. The mixing zone where elevated temperatures from the discharge would occur would be a small area within the reservoir, and its temperatures would be at the low end of the range preferred by thermophilic etiologic agents. In addition, the few incidences of disease from etiologic agents reported in Tennessee would suggest that hydrothermal discharges on multiple reservoirs has had little or no effect on the proliferation of these agents. Based on these lines of evidence, the potential for etiologic agents associated with cooling system operation to impact public health is SMALL.

5.3.4.2 Noise This subsection is focused on the potential human health effects associated with operation of the cooling system for the CR SMR Project. NUREG-1555 notes that the principal sources of noise from nuclear power facility operations include natural draft and mechanical draft cooling towers. Other sources may include auxiliary equipment such as pumps to supply cooling water.

The main source of noise associated with the cooling system at the CR SMR Project is operation of the mechanical draft cooling towers.

The distance from the perimeter of the cooling tower block to the nearest property boundary is approximately 690 ft. The nearest offsite residence is located approximately 1900 ft southwest from the edge of the cooling tower block, across the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir from the CRN Site. The cooling towers are expected to produce noise levels of less than 70 dBA at a distance of 1000 ft during operation, as presented in Table 3.1-2, Item 3.3.10.

For industrial and commercial areas, TVA uses a 60 dBA equivalent noise level as a design goal at the property line. NUREG-1437, Rev 1 indicates that noise levels below 65 dBA are considered acceptable outside a residence. It also notes that cooling towers emit noise of a broadband nature, which is largely indistinguishable from and is less obtrusive than noise of a specific tonal nature (such as transformer or loudspeaker noise). Noise produced by the cooling towers would be attenuated with distance and intervening vegetation. Considering that noise levels from the cooling towers are expected to be less than 70 dBA at 1000 ft from the towers and the nearest residence is almost twice that distance, noise levels at the nearest residence 5.3-26 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report are expected to be attenuated to 65 dBA or less. Therefore, impacts to members of the public from noise associated with operation of the cooling system would be SMALL.

5.3.5 References Reference 5.3-1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "NPDES: Regulations Addressing Cooling Water Intake Structures for New Facilities," Vol. 66, No. 243, December 18, 2001.

Reference 5.3-2. Tennessee Valley Authority, "Temporal Occurrence, Composition, Abundance and Estimated Entrainment of Fish Eggs and Larvae at the Proposed Clinch River Small Modular Reactor Site," Tennessee Valley Authority Biological and Water Resources, Knoxville, TN, 2012.

Reference 5.3-3. Federal Highway Administration, "Synthesis of Noise Effects on Wildlife Populations," FHWA-HEP-06-016, September, 2004.

Reference 5.3-4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2009-2010 Recreational Water-associated Outbreak Surveillance Report Supplemental Tables, Website:

http://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/surveillance/recreational/2009-2010-tables.html, 2011.

Reference 5.3-5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2011-2012 Recreational Water-associated Outbreak Surveillance Report Supplemental Tables, Website:

http://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/surveillance/recreational/2011-2012-tables.html, 2013.

Reference 5.3-6. Todar, PhD K., Todar's Online Textbook of Bacteriology - Vibrio cholerae and Asiatic Cholera, Website: http://textbookofbacteriology.net/cholera.html, 2015.

Reference 5.3-7. Todar, PhD K., Todar's Online Textbook of Bacteriology - Nutrition and Growth of Bacteria, Website: http://textbookofbacteriology.net/salmonella.html, 2015.

Reference 5.3-8. Todar, PhD K., Todar's Online Textbook of Bacteriology - Salmonella and Salmonellosis, Website: http://textbookofbacteriology.net/salmonella.html, 2015.

Reference 5.3-9. Todar, PhD K., Todar's Online Textbook of Bacteriology - Salmonella and Salmonellosis (Antigenic Structure and Habitats), Website:

http://textbookofbacteriology.net/salmonella.html, 2015.

Reference 5.3-10. Todar, PhD K., Todar's Textbook of Bacteriology - Shigella and Shigellosis, Website: http://textbookofbacteriology.net/Shigella.html, 2015.

Reference 5.3-11. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Bad Bug Book, Website:

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/FoodborneIllnessContaminants/UCM297627.pdf, 2015.

Reference 5.3-12. Todar, PhD K., Todar's Online Textbook of Bacteriology - Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Website: http://textbookofbacteriology.net/pseudomonas.html, 2015.

5.3-27 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Reference 5.3-13. Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce, Karenia brevis, Website:

http://www.sms.si.edu/irlspec/Kareni_brevis.htm, 2011.

Reference 5.3-14. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Legionella, Website:

http://www.cdc.gov/legionella/about/causes-transmission.html, 2015.

Reference 5.3-15. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Legionella, Website:

http://www.cdc.gov/legionella/about/signs-symptoms.html, 2015.

Reference 5.3-16. Bioweb, Legionella pneumophila, Website:

http://bioweb.uwlax.edu/bio203/s2008/labudda_aman/Water%20Worlds2.htm, 2015.

Reference 5.3-17. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Naegleria Fowleri, Website:

http://www.cdc.gov/parasites/naegleria/general.html, 2015.

Reference 5.3-18. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Acanthamoeba Keratitis, Website: http://www.cdc.gov/parasites/acanthamoeba/gen_info/acanthamoeba_keratitis.html, 2015.

Reference 5.3-19. Lopez, C. B., Jewett, E. B., Dortch, Q, Walton, B. T., and Hundell, H. K.,

Scientific Assessment of freshwater Harmful Algal Blooms, Website:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/frshh2o0708.pdf, 2008.

5.3-28 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-1 Average annual densities of fish eggs and larvae (number/1000 m3) collected at the upstream sample location (CRM 18.0) near the proposed intake for the CR SMR Project from February 2011 through January 2012 Fish Eggs Day Night Midchannel Midchannel Family RDB Midchannel LDB RDB Midchannel LDB (bottom tow) (bottom tow)

Sciaenidae 3.5 14.9 23.4 26.0 12.5 13.0 1671.1 6.3 Clupeidae 13.4 31.0 49.4 309.6 5.3 11.7 22.2 36.6 Moronidae 4.3 24.2 26.5 154.4 3.6 13.9 21.8 56.0 Unidentifiable 4.3 11.9 11.0 65.2 5.8 8.1 10.6 27.6 Total 25.6 82.0 110.3 555.7 27.1 46.7 1725.7 126.5 Avg 193.4 481.5 24-hr Avg 337.5 Fish Larvae Clupeidae 44.2 51.8 45.9 81.9 64.1 64.7 65.3 137.4 Catostomidae 0.9 0.4 0.0 0.9 0.9 1.3 0.0 1.8 Moronidae 8.7 11.0 11.5 21.7 6.2 9.4 8.3 13.6 Centrarchidae 5.6 5.1 0.9 2.6 4.5 2.7 2.8 22.1 Atherinopsidae 3.0 1.3 0.9 0.4 1.8 - - 1.4 Cyprinidae - - - - 3.1 4.0 1.4 0.9 Sciaenidae 1.7 0.8 1.8 0.9 0.4 0.9 0.5 0.5 Percidae - - - 0.9 - 0.4 - 0.9 Unidentifiable - 0.4 0.4 - 0.9 - - -

Polyodontidae - - - 0.4 - - - -

Total 64.2 70.9 61.3 109.6 81.9 83.5 78.2 178.5 Avg 76.5 105.5 24-hr Avg 91.0 Notes:

Average Annual Density of Eggs and Larvae: 337.5 + 91.0 = 428.5/1000 m3 = 0.4285/m3 RDB = right descending bank LDB = left descending bank

- = no fish eggs or larvae collected Source: (470 Tennessee Valley Authority 2012) 5.3-29 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-2 Cooling Tower Design Inputs for SACTI Model Parameter Design Value Total Heat Rejection for All Units (MBtu/hr) 5593 Total Heat Rejection for All Units (MWt) 1640 Height of Cells Above Ground Level (m) 19.8 Cell Exit Diameter (m) 9.14 Cell Spacing (m) 11.0 Each Tower Length (m) 99.0 Each tower Width (m) 11.0 Maximum Number of Cells All Units 18 Sodium Concentration (ppm) 990 Chloride Concentration (ppm) 1527 1

Salt Concentration (g salt/g solution) 0.010086 1

Total Dissolved Solids Concentration (g TDS/g solution) 0.068 3

Salt Density (g/cm ) 2.17 Cycles of Concentration 4 Air Flow Rate All Cells (kg/s) 16,186.8 Drift Rate All Cells (g/s) 200.7 1 Based on four cycles of concentration Notes:

cm3 = cubic centimeter g = grams kg = kilograms m = meters MBtu/hr = million British thermal units per hour MWt = megawatts thermal ppm = parts per million s = second SACTI = Seasonal and Annual Cooling Tower Impact TDS = total dissolved solids 5.3-30 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-3 Cooling Tower Droplet Mass Spectrum1 Mass in Range Droplet Size Provided by Marley Droplet Size Used in SACTI Modeled (microns) (microns) 0.12 <10 5 - 10 0.08 10 - 15 10 - 15 0.20 15 - 35 15 - 35 0.20 35 - 65 35 - 65 0.20 65 - 115 65 - 115 0.10 115 - 170 115 - 170 0.05 170 - 230 170 - 230 0.04 230 - 375 230 - 375 0.008 375 - 525 375 - 525 0.002 >525 525 - 1000 1 The size distribution provided by Marley (SPX Cooling Technologies) did not include bounding values at the upper and lower ends of the spectrum. Limits were added as needed for the SACTI modeling. Limits were set to half the lowest value and approximately twice the upper value as provided by Marley.

5.3-31 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-4 (Sheet 1 of 3)

Water Deposition in kg/km2-mo Dist S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE AVG (m)

Annual Average 100 40000 28000 33000 49000 97000 75000 53000 35000 37000 22000 21000 32000 62000 53000 48000 31000 45000 200 5300 3800 4500 7400 14000 10000 7300 4500 5600 2800 2800 6600 12000 12000 8300 4600 7000 300 3400 2600 3200 4700 8100 5900 4000 3000 3800 1700 1700 4600 8800 8200 6200 3500 4600 400 2000 1500 2400 3000 4500 3300 3000 1800 2100 1000 1200 2900 5200 5000 4800 2000 2900 500 870 610 940 1200 2000 1400 1200 770 760 430 460 960 1800 1700 1600 800 1100 600 230 180 280 450 820 580 350 190 230 110 150 400 830 780 530 230 400 700 230 180 270 430 800 570 330 190 230 110 140 390 810 770 510 230 390 800 230 180 250 320 480 340 300 190 230 110 120 330 600 570 480 230 310 900 230 180 250 310 440 300 300 190 230 110 110 320 570 540 480 230 300 1000 220 180 240 230 320 230 280 180 220 110 110 220 390 370 430 230 250 Winter 100 12000 10000 16000 19000 40000 47000 44000 37000 35000 27000 22000 28000 45000 28000 24000 14000 28000 200 2600 2700 4300 7800 9900 10000 9200 6300 6800 3900 3900 9900 18000 13000 8300 3700 7600 300 2500 2700 3400 6100 7200 7600 6100 4900 5400 2500 2400 8600 16000 11000 7600 3400 6100 400 1300 1400 2900 3400 3600 4100 4900 2800 3000 1500 1600 5400 9000 6900 6100 1800 3700 500 300 310 910 970 1100 1300 1600 1100 870 590 610 1500 2600 2100 1900 540 1100 600 170 170 310 580 730 720 520 320 340 170 220 720 1400 1100 680 230 530 700 170 170 290 560 720 700 500 320 340 170 200 710 1400 1100 660 230 520 800 170 170 270 380 440 390 470 320 340 170 160 580 1000 860 630 230 410 900 160 170 270 360 410 340 470 320 330 170 160 560 980 830 630 230 400 1000 160 170 240 250 260 250 400 310 320 160 160 400 670 560 580 230 320 5.3-32 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-4 (Sheet 2 of 3)

Water Deposition in kg/km2-mo Dist S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE AVG (m)

Spring 100 24000 22000 26000 46000 91000 79000 56000 38000 25000 21000 19000 31000 56000 42000 34000 30000 40000 200 4600 3800 3800 7100 16000 12000 6800 4300 5200 2400 2300 6500 12000 11000 7500 4300 6800 300 3000 2500 3100 4900 10000 7000 3600 2500 4000 1500 1400 4100 8200 8000 6000 3500 4600 400 1600 1400 1800 3100 5200 3500 2600 1500 1900 940 1100 2100 4700 4400 4300 1800 2600 500 530 540 710 1300 2100 1600 1100 700 540 380 430 810 1600 1500 1400 720 990 600 190 190 280 460 1000 740 300 150 200 100 120 410 770 770 490 220 400 700 190 190 270 450 970 720 290 150 200 100 110 400 750 760 480 220 390 800 190 190 250 350 530 390 270 150 200 100 91 310 610 590 450 220 310 900 190 190 240 340 460 330 270 150 200 99 89 300 580 570 450 220 290 1000 190 180 230 250 340 240 230 150 190 94 82 180 370 340 420 220 230 Summer 16000 100 74000 48000 51000 79000 0 94000 57000 30000 47000 20000 19000 31000 79000 85000 75000 48000 62000 200 6600 4500 4900 7600 16000 9400 5500 2900 4300 2200 2300 4300 8200 11000 7800 4900 6400 300 3300 2200 2700 3600 7400 3800 2000 1700 2600 1200 1400 2500 3800 5900 4000 2700 3200 400 2200 1400 2200 2600 4900 2600 1700 1100 1700 800 940 1600 2600 3500 3100 1700 2200 500 1300 840 1000 1400 2700 1500 940 610 850 360 370 630 1300 1600 1400 950 1100 600 230 160 220 290 760 390 190 100 160 72 100 180 380 490 340 180 260 700 230 160 210 280 750 380 180 100 160 72 100 170 370 480 330 180 260 800 230 160 200 240 480 270 160 100 160 72 95 150 240 290 300 180 210 900 220 160 200 230 440 250 160 100 160 72 94 150 220 260 290 180 200 1000 220 150 200 200 360 210 160 97 150 71 94 120 190 230 260 180 180 5.3-33 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-4 (Sheet 3 of 3)

Water Deposition in kg/km2-mo Dist S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE AVG (m)

Fall 100 45000 28000 39000 45000 89000 74000 55000 34000 42000 22000 24000 36000 68000 55000 57000 31000 47000 200 7100 4400 5100 7000 12000 9500 8300 5000 6300 2700 3100 6200 13000 11000 10000 5500 7300 300 4700 3400 3700 4500 7000 5100 4700 3300 3400 1500 1600 4000 8700 8500 7500 4800 4800 400 2800 1900 2700 2800 4200 3100 3100 1900 2000 990 1200 2800 5200 5500 6200 2700 3100 500 1300 730 1100 1200 1700 1300 1200 730 810 430 450 1000 1700 1800 2100 970 1200 600 340 220 360 480 740 490 420 200 240 120 160 350 840 830 650 320 420 700 340 220 340 480 710 480 400 200 240 120 150 350 810 820 630 320 410 800 340 220 310 340 450 310 360 200 240 120 120 300 590 590 590 320 340 900 340 210 300 320 420 290 360 200 240 110 120 300 560 560 590 320 330 1000 330 210 290 220 300 230 350 190 240 110 110 220 400 410 500 320 280 5.3-34 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-5 (Sheet 1 of 3)

Salt Deposition kg/km2-mo Dist S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE AVG (m)

Annual Average 100 2977 2067 2249 3259 6276 4781 3538 2593 2652 1634 1235 1950 3671 3334 3155 2364 2983 200 684 478 504 744 1425 1084 809 595 626 375 284 468 884 802 730 547 690 300 272.31 194.4 216.61 317.85 604.91 457.07 326.94 238.82 260.56 148.66 123.64 220.73 421.72 376.25 330.37 230.02 296.3 400 252.03 178.13 196.47 275.72 511.77 386.52 299.66 220.44 234.99 138.59 106.68 183.07 340.42 313.36 300.06 207.68 259.1 500 180.17 125.95 137.87 197.34 374.29 282.96 213.85 156.8 161.83 97.93 75.62 123.34 233.75 213.47 201.16 146.06 182.65 600 29.81 21.9 30.64 45.17 90.81 67.86 44.81 25.69 29.69 16.51 20.35 33.34 70.46 59.27 49.37 25.94 41.35 700 29.81 21.9 27.77 41.84 85.11 63.74 40.37 25.69 29.69 16.51 17.38 30.64 65.23 56.57 44.99 25.94 38.95 800 29.81 21.9 22.69 31.16 55.74 41.34 33.47 25.69 29.69 16.51 12.3 23.56 44.69 40.87 37.28 25.94 30.79 900 29.48 21.67 22.67 30.52 53.62 39.81 33.45 25.31 29.12 16.12 12.29 23.15 43.33 39.65 37.26 25.63 30.19 1000 28.79 21.2 22.19 28.11 50.26 37.74 32.38 24.52 27.97 15.34 12.1 20.32 38.19 34.69 35.32 25 28.38 Winter 100 733 709 721 626 1862 2474 2743 2569 2140 1797 1144 1477 2109 1342 1086 899 1527 200 189.89 182.55 201.11 222.67 494.75 619.48 686.32 626.19 552.19 432.56 288.36 408.33 634.79 411.73 313.73 239.86 406.53 300 99.09 97.37 115.26 156.99 276.78 321.27 308.33 273.99 262.64 181.7 138.18 247 406.09 269.04 207.14 125.61 217.9 400 82.75 78.56 99.36 100.24 189.21 239.44 279.11 246.07 226.49 166.59 110.3 191.79 296.2 204.35 176.33 101.4 174.26 500 49.29 47.71 59.66 59.42 129.47 164.97 187.09 166.2 142.06 112.75 77.84 111.33 175.22 118.48 99.41 63.51 110.28 600 14.26 12.97 25.19 39.13 61.38 62.82 50.76 35.06 37.65 23.76 28.6 43.13 83.07 55.67 45.41 17.45 39.77 700 14.26 12.97 21.8 34.14 57.09 57.11 45.39 35.06 37.65 23.76 23.52 40.27 77.37 54.95 40.63 17.45 37.09 800 14.26 12.97 16.31 20.27 30.34 32.06 38.07 35.06 37.65 23.76 15.28 30.32 52.75 39.98 32.39 17.45 28.06 900 13.68 12.62 16.27 19.25 28.74 30.18 38.02 34.48 36.15 22.95 15.28 29.62 50.74 38.67 32.39 17.1 27.26 1000 12.51 11.91 15.2 16.17 24.46 27.52 35.1 33.29 33.12 21.3 15.02 24.89 41.63 30.74 30.28 16.4 24.35 5.3-35 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-5 (Sheet 2 of 3)

Salt Deposition kg/km2-mo Dist S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE AVG (m)

Spring 100 1651 1505 1659 3075 5636 4930 3797 2982 1654 1529 1125 1718 3352 2459 2116 2261 2590 200 417 373 373 705 1320 1132 845 665 422 347 252 424 806 627 510 522 609 300 177.73 156.19 172.66 304.72 591.65 481.04 335.64 256.63 196.87 138.78 110.41 201.12 383.46 307.78 252.31 220.67 267.98 400 156.23 141.03 146.97 265.74 481.7 403.27 310.66 238.66 163.94 129.72 96.49 156.12 312.6 246.45 221.2 197.02 229.24 500 104.44 96.28 102.55 189.03 348.5 295.42 222.76 174.45 104.89 90.96 67.87 110.53 213.31 164.63 141.22 138.73 160.35 600 22.32 21.02 26.69 43.48 94.39 72.77 41.88 24.63 23.4 15.7 18.32 36.1 60.46 52.03 39.47 24.11 38.55 700 22.32 21.02 23.97 39.52 85.91 67.68 38.32 24.63 23.4 15.7 15.49 31.01 55.37 48.06 36.14 24.11 35.79 800 22.32 21.02 18.85 31.24 55.48 44.54 32.47 24.63 23.4 15.7 10.37 22.85 42.56 37.1 30.29 24.11 28.56 900 22.14 20.74 18.83 30.71 52.71 42.12 32.46 24.35 22.85 15.05 10.34 22.19 41.45 36.05 30.27 23.92 27.89 1000 21.75 20.18 18.41 27.91 49.15 39.53 31.2 23.8 21.73 13.76 10.12 18.75 35.14 29.41 29.01 23.55 25.84 Summer 100 5931 3772 3827 5969 11270 6677 3962 2386 3746 1574 1237 2151 5384 6092 5426 3780 4574 200 1282 826 826 1289 2457 1455 869 521 811 350 272 482 1178 1351 1180 834 999 300 473.49 303.53 315.64 484.57 940.68 554.23 322.39 196.88 305.3 133.12 111.03 198.38 460.88 535.58 455.98 313.66 381.58 400 454.62 292.13 303.95 459.37 863.82 506.41 306.04 187.58 292.58 124.4 102.23 176.34 415.61 484.08 429.71 299.45 356.14 500 342.72 218.84 220.36 338.39 643.26 379.37 227.6 139.3 216.65 91.4 71.72 124.9 308.34 352.57 311.47 222.11 263.06 600 42.78 28.53 32.01 48.74 111.44 66.28 37.52 17.81 27.39 11.96 12.82 22.94 58.77 62.63 52.81 30.28 41.54 700 42.78 28.53 30.65 46.42 107.97 63.39 34.18 17.81 27.39 11.96 11.95 21.78 54.72 59.17 48.82 30.28 39.86 800 42.78 28.53 28.44 41.43 81.09 47.53 29.02 17.81 27.39 11.96 10.47 17.76 39.9 45.57 41.45 30.28 33.84 900 42.49 28.53 28.43 41.12 79.03 46.79 29 17.62 27.2 11.96 10.46 17.68 38.82 44.43 41.42 30.28 33.45 1000 41.91 28.51 28.42 40.12 76.68 45.62 28.99 17.23 26.82 11.95 10.46 16.57 37.8 43.28 40.13 30.28 32.8 5.3-36 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-5 (Sheet 3 of 3)

Salt Deposition kg/km2-mo Dist S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE AVG (m)

Fall 100 3239 2032 2564 2799 5371 4574 3491 2394 3055 1675 1455 2452 3528 3034 3718 2222 2975 200 773 478 574 647 1224 1036 810 567 727 383 333 565 868 736 867 532 695 300 315.64 204.73 250.53 291.03 537.77 443.28 340.02 233.33 282.41 147.03 141 245.78 436.76 373.14 395.32 243.2 305.06 400 291.19 183.79 222.74 238.83 440.42 365.52 298.68 212.9 260.74 139.01 121 215.48 327.33 296.49 361.72 214.52 261.9 500 205.31 126.99 158.34 172.85 321.64 267.04 212.64 147.21 184.75 99.75 87.7 148.71 226.36 198.72 241.24 144.41 183.98 600 38.67 23.77 39.25 48.92 90.26 68.54 51.36 27.39 32.35 15.86 23.94 32.84 84.49 67.56 61.28 31.32 46.11 700 38.67 23.77 34.85 46.79 83.89 65.7 45.46 27.39 32.35 15.86 20.3 31.43 78.12 65.42 55.52 31.32 43.55 800 38.67 23.77 26.77 29.37 50.39 39.01 35.58 27.39 32.35 15.86 14.01 24.79 45.2 40.69 45.65 31.32 32.55 900 38.32 23.42 26.74 28.57 48.51 37.97 35.54 26.81 32.23 15.74 13.98 24.59 43.8 39.21 45.62 30.51 31.97 1000 37.61 22.72 26.21 25.61 45.04 36.05 35.26 25.66 31.99 15.51 13.7 22.26 39.04 34.66 42.2 28.89 30.15 5.3-37 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-6 (Sheet 1 of 3)

TDS Deposition kg/km2-mo Dist S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE AVG (m)

Annual Average 100 45567 31660 33854 49028 93928 71518 53352 39631 40548 24927 18407 29266 54604 49715 47381 36160 44972 200 7091 4965 5447 7939 15752 12025 8816 6189 6632 3967 3317 5176 9939 8542 7927 5669 7462 300 2445 1753 1739 2613 5079 3854 2767 2138 2448 1376 1059 1886 3627 3176 2721 2037 2545 400 2030 1441 1658 2383 4549 3434 2593 1781 1926 1113 968 1645 3166 2857 2567 1700 2238 500 1141 823 977 1389 2623 1967 1450 1003 1118 624 568 1004 1970 1743 1565 986 1309 600 389.08 302 422.04 493.52 921.96 688.79 577.52 349.87 458.92 218.35 290 443.66 920.53 786.06 760.77 386.18 525.58 700 327.31 258.57 269.83 393.86 679.22 500.26 360.64 287.89 385.54 175.99 158.96 367.81 726.6 649.62 504.45 319.67 397.89 800 291.22 227.25 247.28 339.65 537.23 388.18 313.67 250.66 330.13 153.97 135.36 330.42 623.8 582.33 461.71 276.27 343.07 900 257.96 199.34 232.78 296.1 458.88 336.07 304 222.96 286.61 138 131.76 290.28 535.19 489.04 434.97 243.86 303.61 1000 176.15 136.59 194.81 217.28 353.65 267.48 266.46 155.71 192.26 95.25 112.01 208.35 377.5 335.12 360.95 177.82 226.71 Winter 100 11058 10748 10587 8584 26948 36256 41488 39366 32548 27406 16995 21648 30445 19237 15761 13711 22674 200 2176 1979 2515 2776 6151 7270 7656 6731 6357 4798 3700 4240 6644 4080 3826 2612 4594 300 1034 935 1054 1527 2551 2830 2715 2699 2807 1867 1256 2098 3578 2322 1839 1262 2023 400 748 708 983 1235 2079 2382 2587 2061 1954 1366 1140 1813 3069 2069 1716 918 1677 500 490 466 646 867 1415 1525 1495 1233 1254 807 684 1221 2129 1478 1220 597 1095 600 311 289 478 604 857 793 786 595 751 374 450 743 1353 991 939 373 668 700 246 241 320 493 616 604 532 476 571 281 238 646 1158 861 658 307 516 800 204 203 294 434 481 495 494 425 475 249 206 604 1074 810 613 257 457 900 174.89 165.25 270.94 356.34 397.63 404.61 472.53 382.32 411.05 229.48 200.31 505.61 872.43 667.02 555.96 223.83 393.14 1000 128.34 123.23 223.74 240.01 277 286.47 413.49 251.15 282.72 147.48 170.94 340.32 557.58 418.35 455 166.21 280.13 5.3-38 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-6 (Sheet 2 of 3)

TDS Deposition kg/km2-mo Dist S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE AVG (m)

Spring 100 25464 23146 24803 46300 83983 73295 57233 45535 25309 23167 16717 25471 49839 36383 31583 34623 38928 200 4462 4016 4108 7457 14538 12585 9028 6780 4587 3748 2970 5053 8870 6619 5554 5358 6608 300 1791 1595 1374 2492 5047 4170 2756 2153 1965 1302 923 1833 3288 2710 2119 1898 2339 400 1303 1178 1278 2292 4438 3714 2598 1884 1403 1057 847 1560 2912 2437 1951 1608 2029 500 781 700 796 1348 2592 2076 1436 1023 866 600 505 965 1800 1507 1235 936 1198 600 374.87 326.61 389.08 478.44 956.6 679.25 486.05 264.47 461.56 222.47 257.18 420.29 787.39 716.35 691.07 363.23 492.18 700 330.68 272.61 228.56 397.2 754.05 524.15 292.89 231.02 388.61 161.2 134.44 337.63 652.93 612.78 476.03 309.13 381.49 800 302.22 254.26 208.16 356.78 639.6 436.62 253.09 202.23 332.06 132.9 112.68 297.17 592.25 572.29 439.96 264.37 337.29 900 259.25 229.89 196.56 313.89 525.84 375.32 250.06 177.9 285.4 120.95 108.5 267.72 527.61 490.05 413.01 230.11 298.25 1000 150.02 137.25 168.02 225.34 391.87 297.67 226.94 131.94 189.43 90.94 94.05 196.18 370.03 324.41 332.75 168.6 218.46 Summer 100 90590 57771 58105 90664 170044 100891 59892 36386 57193 24086 18514 32821 81225 92137 82039 57931 69393 200 12894 8319 8388 13202 26019 15436 9302 5271 8152 3522 2848 5358 13151 14158 12401 8429 10428 300 3766 2492 2429 3784 7581 4456 2672 1584 2421 1096 906 1647 3802 4339 3616 2597 3074 400 3500 2250 2380 3617 7114 4153 2518 1473 2265 968 839 1441 3456 4009 3434 2325 2859 500 1833 1180 1266 1901 3795 2237 1321 788 1202 513 465 812 1886 2152 1904 1240 1531 600 313.35 217.92 297.67 331.25 859.55 520.47 361.36 176.47 245.96 114.52 161 250.35 482.77 521.41 542.28 270.55 354.18 700 272.6 207.98 220.85 283.26 637.06 366.82 223.74 147.93 220.82 113.39 110.6 200.72 350.91 430.55 319.44 248.61 272.2 800 241.45 188.62 211.15 256.07 501.45 271.91 179.21 119.03 187.62 97.29 99.04 173.6 269.51 376.26 272.87 226.56 229.48 900 227.2 177.32 202.92 232.62 453.58 255.6 178.56 107.27 162.23 82.41 97.47 155.71 246.26 312.52 268.98 210.03 210.67 1000 182.52 122.27 170.63 199.57 388.78 230.33 159.73 88.27 128.37 64.62 80 122.83 217.84 252.17 237.88 142.72 174.28 5.3-39 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-6 (Sheet 3 of 3)

TDS Deposition kg/km2-mo Dist S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE AVG (m)

Fall 100 49710 31099 38497 41865 80049 68501 52347 36592 46948 25655 21726 37041 52056 44795 55892 33807 44786 200 8134 5010 6419 7255 14272 11881 9110 6051 7569 3954 3936 6012 10613 8502 9453 5724 7744 300 3038 1855 2027 2416 4577 3738 2946 2243 2722 1323 1218 2029 3878 3183 3246 2295 2671 400 2409 1506 1915 2134 4012 3252 2686 1752 2128 1106 1104 1828 3226 2756 3112 1829 2297 500 1390 891 1175 1337 2431 1937 1578 1015 1190 607 656 1071 2122 1801 1898 1124 1389 600 576 386 559 601 1017 800 746 425 427 185 330 413 1187 990 936 568 634 700 470.25 319.48 331.4 426.92 699.03 528.8 441.3 342.63 398.9 166.25 170.43 333.92 846.59 752.23 612.53 431.85 454.53 800 424.55 264.95 293.37 327.73 508.87 363.46 373.25 298.11 358.08 155.11 138.76 292.56 648.12 620.01 568.97 369.82 375.36 900 376.13 221.94 276.44 292.33 442.95 317.05 356.28 262.24 316.64 136.19 135.09 269.49 561.92 526.12 544.46 321.55 334.8 1000 248.37 166.39 229.06 206.83 339.51 256.16 299.57 173.01 184.13 86.11 115.41 197.11 402.5 366.68 452.65 243.26 247.92 5.3-40 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-7 Hours of Plume Shadowing Dist(m) S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE AVG Annual Average 200 40 65 125.4 421.4 618.5 505.1 419.9 361.4 393.3 469.7 633.7 541.6 535 218.1 71 37.7 341 400 16 22 59.1 282.6 241.8 205.9 134.1 104 114 141.3 216.9 200.6 163.6 187.5 30 18 133.6 600 12 16 41.1 237.1 134.1 139.6 56.8 50 58 72 131.9 133.2 103.9 57.7 22 16 80.1 800 7 12.1 33.1 169 101.5 96.6 39 36 49 52 104.9 111.2 74.6 48.9 19 12 60.4 1000 5 8 29.1 131.5 81.8 73.5 24 30 44 50 85.8 91.7 65.9 37.8 13 6 48.6 Winter 200 4 3 10.1 30.7 42.4 134.7 191 180.5 211.3 263.8 343.5 139.5 38.9 34.2 14.8 5.7 103 400 2 1 2 7.6 28.4 98.6 72.6 62 67 88.3 140 92.4 29.6 9 6 3 44.4 600 2 1 0 4.5 21.4 84.3 32.8 36 34 45 86 69.2 26.4 7 6 2 28.6 800 1 1 0 4.5 17.4 61.9 20 27 29 31 68 59.2 25.4 7 4 1 22.3 1000 0 0 0 4.5 17.4 48.8 11 24 29 31 56.8 54.2 23.2 7 2 0 19.3 Spring 200 20 31 60.6 142.7 246.7 152.8 72 70 67 75 86 179.5 265.3 83.7 37.1 16 100.3 400 7 10 27 104.2 106.9 32.7 18 12 19 23 24 39 81.3 58.4 15 9 36.7 600 6 8 18 80.1 50.2 12.7 7 4 11 10 12 24 50.4 30.3 9 8 21.3 800 2 5 15 57.2 36.2 9.7 8 4 9 10 9 20 33.2 27.2 9 6 16.3 1000 1 3 13 50.6 25.5 6.7 5 2 9 10 8 16 27.7 21.1 6 3 13 Summer 200 9 12.8 27.1 192.8 210.2 47.6 32.5 30 26 25 27 43.4 158.1 78.5 8 6 58.4 400 4 7 11.9 139.4 22.5 11.5 6.5 7 7 5 7 8 13 113.1 4 3 23.1 600 1 4 9.1 126 4 4.5 1 4 5 2 6 6 6 13.4 2 3 12.3 800 1 4.1 6.1 84.8 3 3.5 1 3 5 1 6 6 3 8.7 2 3 8.8 1000 1 3 6.1 57 1 2 1 3 3 1 5 5 2 4.7 2 2 6.2 Fall 200 7 18.2 27.5 55.1 119.3 170.1 124.4 81 89 105.9 177.2 179.3 72.7 21.8 11.1 10 79.3 400 3 4 18.2 31.5 83.9 63.1 37 23 21 25 45.9 61.2 39.7 7 5 3 29.5 600 3 3 14 26.5 58.4 38.1 16 6 8 15 27.9 34 21.2 7 5 3 17.9 800 3 2 12 22.5 44.9 21.5 10 2 6 10 21.9 26 13 6 4 2 12.9 1000 3 2 10 19.4 38 16 7 1 3 8 16 16.4 13 5 3 1 10.1 5.3-41 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-8 (Sheet 1 of 6)

Annual Plume Length Frequency Dist S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE AVG (m)

Annual Average 100 4.49 3.88 5.34 5.77 7.94 6.21 5.28 3.73 5.94 3.43 4.94 9.14 12.24 9.44 8.23 4 100 200 1.53 1.35 1.71 2.57 2.95 1.94 1.29 1.23 1.73 0.82 0.85 3.1 5.44 4.99 3.3 1.71 36.51 300 0.74 0.7 0.61 1.33 1.44 0.9 0.22 0.47 0.65 0.39 0.34 1.72 2.97 2.6 1.31 0.99 17.38 400 0.61 0.54 0.61 0.78 0.66 0.32 0.22 0.39 0.55 0.31 0.34 1.21 1.88 1.71 1.31 0.86 12.29 500 0.37 0.31 0.61 0.78 0.66 0.32 0.22 0.2 0.29 0.23 0.34 1.21 1.88 1.71 1.31 0.49 10.93 600 0.37 0.31 0.61 0.78 0.66 0.32 0.22 0.2 0.29 0.23 0.34 1.21 1.88 1.71 1.31 0.49 10.93 700 0.32 0.24 0.61 0.78 0.66 0.32 0.22 0.13 0.19 0.16 0.34 1.21 1.88 1.71 1.31 0.39 10.46 800 0.32 0.24 0.61 0.78 0.66 0.32 0.22 0.13 0.19 0.16 0.34 1.21 1.88 1.71 1.31 0.39 10.46 900 0.32 0.24 0.56 0.69 0.42 0.16 0.13 0.13 0.19 0.16 0.32 1.16 1.73 1.52 1.14 0.39 9.26 1000 0.27 0.21 0.56 0.69 0.42 0.16 0.13 0.07 0.17 0.15 0.32 1.16 1.73 1.52 1.14 0.33 9.04 1200 0.27 0.21 0.56 0.69 0.42 0.16 0.13 0.07 0.17 0.15 0.32 1.16 1.73 1.52 1.14 0.33 9.04 1300 0.27 0.21 0.56 0.69 0.42 0.16 0.13 0.07 0.17 0.15 0.32 1.16 1.73 1.52 1.14 0.33 9.04 1400 0.27 0.21 0.56 0.69 0.42 0.16 0.13 0.07 0.17 0.15 0.32 1.16 1.73 1.52 1.14 0.33 9.04 1500 0.27 0.21 0.56 0.69 0.42 0.16 0.13 0.07 0.17 0.15 0.32 1.16 1.73 1.52 1.14 0.33 9.04 1600 0.27 0.21 0.56 0.69 0.42 0.16 0.13 0.07 0.17 0.15 0.32 1.16 1.73 1.52 1.14 0.33 9.04 1700 0.27 0.21 0.56 0.69 0.42 0.16 0.13 0.07 0.17 0.15 0.32 1.16 1.73 1.52 1.14 0.33 9.04 1800 0.27 0.21 0.36 0.48 0.29 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.17 0.15 0.24 0.95 1.22 1.03 0.66 0.33 6.59 1900 0.27 0.21 0.36 0.48 0.29 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.17 0.15 0.24 0.95 1.22 1.03 0.66 0.33 6.59 2000 0.27 0.21 0.36 0.48 0.29 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.17 0.15 0.24 0.95 1.22 1.03 0.66 0.33 6.59 2100 0.27 0.21 0.14 0.19 0.08 0.05 0.03 0.07 0.17 0.15 0.12 0.4 0.59 0.48 0.41 0.33 3.7 2200 0.27 0.21 0 0 0 0 0 0.07 0.17 0.15 0 0 0 0 0 0.33 1.2 2300 0.17 0.14 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 0.12 0.09 0 0 0 0 0 0.19 0.73 2400 0.17 0.14 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 0.12 0.09 0 0 0 0 0 0.19 0.73 2500 0.17 0.14 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 0.12 0.09 0 0 0 0 0 0.19 0.73 2600 0.06 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0.08 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0.09 0.33 2700 0.06 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0.08 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0.09 0.33 2800 0.06 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0.08 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0.09 0.33 2900 0.06 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0.08 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0.09 0.33 5.3-42 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-8 (Sheet 2 of 6)

Annual Plume Length Frequency Dist S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE AVG (m) 3000 0.06 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0.08 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0.09 0.33 3100 0.06 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0.08 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0.09 0.33 3200 0.06 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0.08 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0.09 0.33 Winter 100 2.82 2.47 4.7 6.07 6.35 5.5 5.98 4.23 5.43 2.92 3.79 10.44 14.9 11.57 9.54 3.29 100 200 1.69 1.62 2.42 4.35 3.69 3.17 2.63 2.4 2.73 1.25 1.53 7.14 11.44 9 6.51 2.16 63.74 300 0.99 0.99 0.92 2.47 2.02 1.36 0.56 1.11 1.46 0.61 0.61 4.32 6.98 5.33 3.22 1.53 34.48 400 0.85 0.75 0.92 1.81 1.13 0.59 0.56 0.92 1.25 0.52 0.61 3.31 5.07 3.92 3.22 1.41 26.82 500 0.49 0.45 0.92 1.81 1.13 0.59 0.56 0.49 0.75 0.35 0.61 3.31 5.07 3.92 3.22 0.94 24.61 600 0.49 0.45 0.92 1.81 1.13 0.59 0.56 0.49 0.75 0.35 0.61 3.31 5.07 3.92 3.22 0.94 24.61 700 0.42 0.31 0.92 1.81 1.13 0.59 0.56 0.35 0.56 0.28 0.61 3.31 5.07 3.92 3.22 0.78 23.83 800 0.42 0.31 0.92 1.81 1.13 0.59 0.56 0.35 0.56 0.28 0.61 3.31 5.07 3.92 3.22 0.78 23.83 900 0.42 0.31 0.82 1.62 0.89 0.28 0.31 0.35 0.56 0.28 0.59 3.17 4.58 3.64 3.03 0.78 21.63 1000 0.42 0.31 0.82 1.62 0.89 0.28 0.31 0.21 0.49 0.23 0.59 3.17 4.58 3.64 3.03 0.7 21.3 1100 0.42 0.31 0.82 1.62 0.89 0.28 0.31 0.21 0.49 0.23 0.59 3.17 4.58 3.64 3.03 0.7 21.3 1200 0.42 0.31 0.82 1.62 0.89 0.28 0.31 0.21 0.49 0.23 0.59 3.17 4.58 3.64 3.03 0.7 21.3 1300 0.42 0.31 0.82 1.62 0.89 0.28 0.31 0.21 0.49 0.23 0.59 3.17 4.58 3.64 3.03 0.7 21.3 1400 0.42 0.31 0.82 1.62 0.89 0.28 0.31 0.21 0.49 0.23 0.59 3.17 4.58 3.64 3.03 0.7 21.3 1500 0.42 0.31 0.82 1.62 0.89 0.28 0.31 0.21 0.49 0.23 0.59 3.17 4.58 3.64 3.03 0.7 21.3 1600 0.42 0.31 0.82 1.62 0.89 0.28 0.31 0.21 0.49 0.23 0.59 3.17 4.58 3.64 3.03 0.7 21.3 1700 0.42 0.31 0.82 1.62 0.89 0.28 0.31 0.21 0.49 0.23 0.59 3.17 4.58 3.64 3.03 0.7 21.3 1800 0.42 0.31 0.56 1.24 0.59 0.16 0.14 0.21 0.49 0.23 0.42 2.51 3 2.56 1.97 0.7 15.54 1900 0.42 0.31 0.56 1.24 0.59 0.16 0.14 0.21 0.49 0.23 0.42 2.51 3 2.56 1.97 0.7 15.54 2000 0.42 0.31 0.56 1.24 0.59 0.16 0.14 0.21 0.49 0.23 0.42 2.51 3 2.56 1.97 0.7 15.54 2100 0.42 0.31 0.21 0.49 0.16 0.07 0.09 0.21 0.49 0.23 0.26 1.08 1.48 1.32 1.36 0.7 8.91 2200 0.42 0.31 0 0 0 0 0 0.21 0.49 0.23 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 2.37 2300 0.21 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0.07 0.38 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 1.29 2400 0.21 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0.07 0.38 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 1.29 2500 0.21 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0.07 0.38 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0.4 1.29 2600 0.07 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 0.26 0.07 0 0 0 0 0 0.24 0.73 5.3-43 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-8 (Sheet 3 of 6)

Annual Plume Length Frequency Dist S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE AVG (m) 2700 0.07 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 0.26 0.07 0 0 0 0 0 0.24 0.73 2800 0.07 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 0.26 0.07 0 0 0 0 0 0.24 0.73 2900 0.07 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 0.26 0.07 0 0 0 0 0 0.24 0.73 3000 0.07 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 0.26 0.07 0 0 0 0 0 0.24 0.73 3100 0.07 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 0.26 0.07 0 0 0 0 0 0.24 0.73 3200 0.07 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0.05 0.26 0.07 0 0 0 0 0 0.24 0.73 Spring 100 3.65 3.28 4.92 5.84 8.44 6.96 5.15 3.82 6.75 3.93 5.42 9.18 12 8.88 8.1 3.69 100 200 1.37 1.33 1.55 2.73 3.4 1.89 0.9 0.95 1.68 0.75 0.73 2.09 4.97 4.72 2.99 1.66 33.7 300 0.51 0.62 0.58 1.48 1.81 1.03 0.22 0.28 0.43 0.39 0.3 0.97 2.45 2.22 1.04 0.82 15.15 400 0.37 0.47 0.58 0.78 0.91 0.43 0.22 0.17 0.34 0.34 0.3 0.56 1.49 1.45 1.04 0.75 10.19 500 0.21 0.3 0.58 0.78 0.91 0.43 0.22 0.09 0.11 0.22 0.3 0.56 1.49 1.45 1.04 0.32 9.02 600 0.21 0.3 0.58 0.78 0.91 0.43 0.22 0.09 0.11 0.22 0.3 0.56 1.49 1.45 1.04 0.32 9.02 700 0.15 0.21 0.58 0.78 0.91 0.43 0.22 0.04 0.07 0.19 0.3 0.56 1.49 1.45 1.04 0.2 8.63 800 0.15 0.21 0.58 0.78 0.91 0.43 0.22 0.04 0.07 0.19 0.3 0.56 1.49 1.45 1.04 0.2 8.63 900 0.15 0.21 0.54 0.71 0.47 0.17 0.11 0.04 0.07 0.19 0.28 0.52 1.42 1.31 0.93 0.2 7.31 1000 0.13 0.17 0.54 0.71 0.47 0.17 0.11 0.04 0.06 0.19 0.28 0.52 1.42 1.31 0.93 0.17 7.19 1100 0.13 0.17 0.54 0.71 0.47 0.17 0.11 0.04 0.06 0.19 0.28 0.52 1.42 1.31 0.93 0.17 7.19 1200 0.13 0.17 0.54 0.71 0.47 0.17 0.11 0.04 0.06 0.19 0.28 0.52 1.42 1.31 0.93 0.17 7.19 1300 0.13 0.17 0.54 0.71 0.47 0.17 0.11 0.04 0.06 0.19 0.28 0.52 1.42 1.31 0.93 0.17 7.19 1400 0.13 0.17 0.54 0.71 0.47 0.17 0.11 0.04 0.06 0.19 0.28 0.52 1.42 1.31 0.93 0.17 7.19 1500 0.13 0.17 0.54 0.71 0.47 0.17 0.11 0.04 0.06 0.19 0.28 0.52 1.42 1.31 0.93 0.17 7.19 1600 0.13 0.17 0.54 0.71 0.47 0.17 0.11 0.04 0.06 0.19 0.28 0.52 1.42 1.31 0.93 0.17 7.19 1700 0.13 0.17 0.54 0.71 0.47 0.17 0.11 0.04 0.06 0.19 0.28 0.52 1.42 1.31 0.93 0.17 7.19 1800 0.13 0.17 0.35 0.49 0.37 0.11 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.19 0.26 0.5 1.06 0.88 0.48 0.17 5.32 1900 0.13 0.17 0.35 0.49 0.37 0.11 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.19 0.26 0.5 1.06 0.88 0.48 0.17 5.32 2000 0.13 0.17 0.35 0.49 0.37 0.11 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.19 0.26 0.5 1.06 0.88 0.48 0.17 5.32 2100 0.13 0.17 0.06 0.15 0.13 0.09 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.19 0.11 0.17 0.5 0.26 0.24 0.17 2.49 2200 0.13 0.17 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.06 0.19 0 0 0 0 0 0.17 0.75 2300 0.09 0.11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.15 0 0 0 0 0 0.09 0.49 5.3-44 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-8 (Sheet 4 of 6)

Annual Plume Length Frequency Dist S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE AVG (m) 2400 0.09 0.11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.15 0 0 0 0 0 0.09 0.49 2500 0.09 0.11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.15 0 0 0 0 0 0.09 0.49 2600 0.04 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.06 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.17 2700 0.04 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.06 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.17 2800 0.04 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.06 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.17 2900 0.04 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.06 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.17 3000 0.04 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.06 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.17 3100 0.04 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.06 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.17 3200 0.04 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.06 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.17 Summer 100 6.43 5.72 6.12 5.94 8.98 5.69 4.02 3.15 5.62 3.58 5.53 8.86 10.6 8.09 7.31 4.34 100 200 0.91 0.87 0.84 0.98 1.7 0.9 0.46 0.6 0.91 0.48 0.38 1.07 1.13 1.55 0.8 0.89 14.47 300 0.29 0.2 0.21 0.19 0.65 0.42 0.08 0.15 0.27 0.17 0.1 0.39 0.36 0.52 0.17 0.21 4.38 400 0.17 0.12 0.21 0.04 0.21 0.1 0.08 0.15 0.21 0.1 0.1 0.19 0.1 0.27 0.17 0.17 2.38 500 0.08 0.04 0.21 0.04 0.21 0.1 0.08 0.1 0.06 0.1 0.1 0.19 0.1 0.27 0.17 0.1 1.92 600 0.08 0.04 0.21 0.04 0.21 0.1 0.08 0.1 0.06 0.1 0.1 0.19 0.1 0.27 0.17 0.1 1.92 700 0.06 0.04 0.21 0.04 0.21 0.1 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.1 0.19 0.1 0.27 0.17 0.1 1.81 800 0.06 0.04 0.21 0.04 0.21 0.1 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.1 0.19 0.1 0.27 0.17 0.1 1.81 900 0.06 0.04 0.21 0.02 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.1 0.19 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.1 1.29 1000 0.04 0.04 0.21 0.02 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.1 0.19 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.06 1.2 1100 0.04 0.04 0.21 0.02 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.1 0.19 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.06 1.2 1200 0.04 0.04 0.21 0.02 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.1 0.19 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.06 1.2 1300 0.04 0.04 0.21 0.02 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.1 0.19 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.06 1.2 1400 0.04 0.04 0.21 0.02 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.1 0.19 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.06 1.2 1500 0.04 0.04 0.21 0.02 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.1 0.19 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.06 1.2 1600 0.04 0.04 0.21 0.02 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.1 0.19 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.06 1.2 1700 0.04 0.04 0.21 0.02 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.1 0.19 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.06 1.2 1800 0.04 0.04 0.15 0.02 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.16 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.95 1900 0.04 0.04 0.15 0.02 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.16 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.95 5.3-45 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-8 (Sheet 5 of 6)

Annual Plume Length Frequency Dist S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE AVG (m) 2000 0.04 0.04 0.15 0.02 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.16 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.95 2100 0.04 0.04 0.11 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.04 0.04 0 0.02 0.02 0 0 0.06 0.4 2200 0.04 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.04 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0.06 0.25 2300 0.04 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.02 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.18 2400 0.04 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.02 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.18 2500 0.04 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.02 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0.04 0.18 2600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 2700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 2800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 2900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 3000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 3100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 3200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 Fall 100 4.82 3.78 5.56 5.19 7.63 6.59 6.27 3.8 5.81 3.13 4.73 8.16 11.9 9.69 8.24 4.68 100 200 2.34 1.69 2.27 2.55 3.17 2.06 1.48 1.18 1.8 0.9 0.9 2.85 5.34 5.53 3.54 2.34 39.92 300 1.32 1.13 0.82 1.39 1.34 0.88 0.07 0.46 0.6 0.42 0.42 1.72 2.83 2.92 1.14 1.62 19.08 400 1.18 0.93 0.82 0.65 0.44 0.19 0.07 0.44 0.53 0.35 0.42 1.16 1.4 1.61 1.14 1.27 12.6 500 0.81 0.53 0.82 0.65 0.44 0.19 0.07 0.16 0.35 0.28 0.42 1.16 1.4 1.61 1.14 0.72 10.75 600 0.81 0.53 0.82 0.65 0.44 0.19 0.07 0.16 0.35 0.28 0.42 1.16 1.4 1.61 1.14 0.72 10.75 700 0.75 0.47 0.82 0.65 0.44 0.19 0.07 0.07 0.14 0.16 0.42 1.16 1.4 1.61 1.14 0.61 10.09 800 0.75 0.47 0.82 0.65 0.44 0.19 0.07 0.07 0.14 0.16 0.42 1.16 1.4 1.61 1.14 0.61 10.09 900 0.75 0.47 0.77 0.56 0.33 0.14 0.05 0.07 0.14 0.16 0.4 1.14 1.3 1.47 0.84 0.61 9.18 1000 0.56 0.4 0.77 0.56 0.33 0.14 0.05 0.02 0.14 0.16 0.4 1.14 1.3 1.47 0.84 0.49 8.76 1100 0.56 0.4 0.77 0.56 0.33 0.14 0.05 0.02 0.14 0.16 0.4 1.14 1.3 1.47 0.84 0.49 8.76 1200 0.56 0.4 0.77 0.56 0.33 0.14 0.05 0.02 0.14 0.16 0.4 1.14 1.3 1.47 0.84 0.49 8.76 1300 0.56 0.4 0.77 0.56 0.33 0.14 0.05 0.02 0.14 0.16 0.4 1.14 1.3 1.47 0.84 0.49 8.76 5.3-46 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Table 5.3-8 (Sheet 6 of 6)

Annual Plume Length Frequency Dist S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE AVG (m) 1400 0.56 0.4 0.77 0.56 0.33 0.14 0.05 0.02 0.14 0.16 0.4 1.14 1.3 1.47 0.84 0.49 8.76 1500 0.56 0.4 0.77 0.56 0.33 0.14 0.05 0.02 0.14 0.16 0.4 1.14 1.3 1.47 0.84 0.49 8.76 1600 0.56 0.4 0.77 0.56 0.33 0.14 0.05 0.02 0.14 0.16 0.4 1.14 1.3 1.47 0.84 0.49 8.76 1700 0.56 0.4 0.77 0.56 0.33 0.14 0.05 0.02 0.14 0.16 0.4 1.14 1.3 1.47 0.84 0.49 8.76 1800 0.56 0.4 0.42 0.28 0.19 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.14 0.16 0.26 0.93 1.04 0.9 0.35 0.49 6.2 1900 0.56 0.4 0.42 0.28 0.19 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.14 0.16 0.26 0.93 1.04 0.9 0.35 0.49 6.2 2000 0.56 0.4 0.42 0.28 0.19 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.14 0.16 0.26 0.93 1.04 0.9 0.35 0.49 6.2 2100 0.56 0.4 0.21 0.18 0.05 0.02 0 0.02 0.14 0.16 0.14 0.46 0.53 0.51 0.18 0.49 4.06 2200 0.56 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.14 0.16 0 0 0 0 0 0.49 1.77 2300 0.37 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.09 0.09 0 0 0 0 0 0.28 1.16 2400 0.37 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.09 0.09 0 0 0 0 0 0.28 1.16 2500 0.37 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.09 0.09 0 0 0 0 0 0.28 1.16 2600 0.16 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.07 0.07 0 0 0 0 0 0.12 0.53 2700 0.16 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.07 0.07 0 0 0 0 0 0.12 0.53 2800 0.16 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.07 0.07 0 0 0 0 0 0.12 0.53 2900 0.16 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.07 0.07 0 0 0 0 0 0.12 0.53 3000 0.16 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.07 0.07 0 0 0 0 0 0.12 0.53 3100 0.16 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.07 0.07 0 0 0 0 0 0.12 0.53 3200 0.16 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.07 0.07 0 0 0 0 0 0.12 0.53 5.3-47 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Notes:

Snapshots are provided in Figure 5.3-3 MHH = Melton Hill Hydro plant FLH = Fort Loudoun Hydro plant WBH = Watts Bar Hydro plant CR SMR = Clinch River Small Modular Reactor Figure 5.3-1. River Flows for PPE Extreme Winter Conditions, Full Power 5.3-48 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Note:

Snapshots are provided in Figure 5.3-4 Figure 5.3-2. River Flows for PPE Extreme Summer Conditions, Full Power 5.3-49 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Hour 0 Hour 4 Hour 8 Hour 13 Figure 5.3-3. (Sheet 1 of 2) Temperatures at 5-Foot Depth for PPE Extreme Winter Conditions, Full Power 5.3-50 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Hour 24 Hour 35 Hour 46 Hour 48 Figure 5.3-3. (Sheet 2 of 2) Temperatures at 5-Foot Depth for PPE Extreme Winter Conditions, Full Power 5.3-51 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Hour 0 Hour 4 Hour 8 Hour 12 Figure 5.3-4. (Sheet 1 of 2) Temperatures at 5-Foot Depth for PPE Extreme Summer Conditions, Full Power 5.3-52 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Hour 24 Hour 35 Hour 46 Hour 48 Figure 5.3-4. (Sheet 2 of 2) Temperatures at 5-Foot Depth for PPE Extreme Summer Conditions, Full Power 5.3-53 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Hour 6 Figure 5.3-5. Approximate Zone of Influence of SMR Thermal Effluent at Water Surface for PPE Extreme Winter Conditions, Full Power 5.3-54 Revision 1

Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 3, Environmental Report Figure 5.3-6. Approximate Zone of Influence of SMR Thermal Effluent at Water Surface for PPE Extreme Summer Conditions, Full Power 5.3-55 Revision 1