ML19123A200
| ML19123A200 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 04/30/2019 |
| From: | Southern Nuclear Operating Co |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19123A207 | List: |
| References | |
| NL-19-0486 | |
| Download: ML19123A200 (2) | |
Text
Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant - Units 1 &2 Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant - Units 1 &2 Vogtle Electric Generating Plant - Units 1 &2 Annual Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Reports, Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports, and Offsite Dose Calculation Manual for 2018 Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant - Units 1 &2 Annual Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report for 2018 Page 1 of 1 Annual Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Reports for 2018 JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT - UNITS 1 AND 2 I.
Introduction fu accordance with Subsection 5.4.1 of the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant Environmental Protection Plan, Appendix B to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-2 and NPF-8, this report is submitted summarizing implementation of the Environmental Protection Plan for calendar year 2018.
II.
Reporting Requirements A.
Summaries and Analyses of Results of Environmental Protection Activities Required by Subsection 4.2 of the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) for the Reporting Period
- 1. Aerial Remote Sensing - Aerial Remote Sensing is no longer required.
- 2. Herbicide Application - There is no reporting requirement associated with this condition.
- 3. Land Management - There is no reporting requirement associated with this condition.
B.
Comparison of the Year's Monitoring Activities with Preoperational Studies, Operational Controls, and Previous Non-Radiological Monitoring Reports These comparisons were not required because no nonradiological environmental monitoring programs were conducted during the reporting period beyond those performed in accordance with NPDES Permit No. AL0024619.
C.
Assessment of the Observed Impacts of Plant Operation on the Environment There were no significant adverse environmental impacts associated with plant operation during the year.
D.
EPP Noncompliance and Corrective Actions There were no EPP noncompliances during the year.
E.
Changes in Station Design or Operation, Tests, or Experiments Made in Acc6rdance with EPP Section 3.1 Which Involved a Potentially Significant Unreviewed Environmental Question There were no changes in station design or operation, tests, or experiments which involved a potentially significant, unreviewed environmental question.
- F.
Nonroutine Reports Submitted in Accordance with EPP Section 5.4.2 There were no nonroutine reports submitted during the year.