ML19207C384
| ML19207C384 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Satsop |
| Issue date: | 07/09/1979 |
| From: | Gossick L NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Jackson H SENATE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19207C385 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7909110560 | |
| Download: ML19207C384 (4) | |
Text
? d 2..
[SR Rfcq) o, UNITED STATES 2
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 S
/
JU!.
3 IS7s The Honorable Henry M. Jackson United States Senator 802 United States Courthouse Seattle, Washington 98104
Dear Senator Jackson:
We have prepared a respor.se to Mrs. Mary V. Willis's letter of May 12, 1979 regarding the effects of pollutants frcm Satsop Nuclear Plant (WPPSS 3 and 5, Docket Nos. 50-508 and 50-509) on lowland fanns near the Chehalis River.
As you requested, the letter and our response have been sent tc your office in Seattle. Two copies of the response are enclosed for your use.
Briefly, our response is that our evaluation of chemical discharges from the plant is containea in the Final Environmental Statement (NRC Report NUREG 75/053). We have concluded that chemical discharges to the Chehalis River will be below state and federal water quality standards. Further, for these chemicals to be deposited on farmlands, river flows in excess of that used in our evaluation would be required. Therefore, chemical concentrations in the flood waters would be even less due to dilution. For these small concentrations, we conclude there would be no measurable effect on farmlands, even if accumulated over the life of the plant.
Sincerely,
-(signed) T. A. Rehrii L** y' G a dCh p,g.cz
Enclosure:
As Stated
?
900)10560 t
a RESPONSE TO CONCERNS OF MRS. MARY V. WILLIS ON DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS FROM SATSOP NUCLEAR PLANT (WPPSS 3 AND 5, DOCKET NOS. 50-508 AND 50-509)
Mrs. Willis expressed concerns that the effects of pollutants from WPPSS 3 and 5 on famlands adjacent to Chehalis River in a letter to Senator Henry M. Jackson, dated May 12, 1979. Mrs. Willis' concerns are that pollutants from the plant would be deposited on famlands when they are flooded and these pollutants would accumulate, eventually destroying the land.
As part of our responsibilities the Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC) is is required tJ evaluate the environmental impact of a proposed nuclear facility. Our evaluation is presented in the Final Environmental Statement (NRC Report NUREG 75/053) for this plant. Table 3.6 from this report is attached. This table lists the principal chemicals that will be discharged from the plant during nomal operations and their expected concentrations in the Chehalis River.
These concentrations are based on average flow in the Chehalts River of 6640 cubic feet per second, which would not be over the banks of the river. Although not noted in the table, the expected concentrations are below state and Federal water quality standards.
In order for the river to spill over its banks and flood the farms in the lowlands, flows must be much higher than the average flow of 6640 cubic feet per second used in Table 3.6.
The 1972 flood, for example, had a maximum flow of 572,000 cubic feet per second. Due to the increase.i flow, dilution of chemical discharges will lower concentrations even more than is shown in Table 3.6.
Therefore, only very minute quantities would be deposited on famlands.
Even over the life of the plant, assuming several floods will occur, the quantities of discharged chemicals deposited on farm-lands will be negligible.
Metals such as copper, zinc, and chromium can, under certain conditions, reach toxic concentrations for plant growth in soils. This could happen when very high concentrations are produced by the addition of sewage sludges, long-term addition of fertilizers containing heavy metal impurities, long-tem use of pesticides on crops or direct contamination from industrial sources such as effluents from smelter stacks. There are currently no known incidents of heavy metal contamination of farmland resulting from deposition of ordinary stream sediments due to flooding. Most agronomists consider deposition of stream sediment on famland as a net benefit to soil fertility because of added plant nutrients, although flooding itself can have serious effects on crops.
b 94G 0t
. Practically all soils and sediments in nature contain a variety of heavy metals.
Some of these, such as copper and zinc, are essential nutrients for plant growth and crops cannot be grown successfully in their absence.
Whether these elements become toxic or not depends on their concentration in soil and their biological availability (f.e., the ability to get into a plant root even if present). While nomal uncontaminated sofis may range from a few parts per millicn to 100 parts per million of these metals, toxic symptoms have appeared in crops at levels of 700 to over 1000 ppm. Thus crop plants have a large natural range of heavy metal concentrations over which they can be successfully grown without adverse effect. Our review of the concentrations of copper and zinc in the discharge of the subject plant indicates that only a few parts per million are present. These levels are sufficiently low for us to be confident that concentrations of metals could not accumulate sufficiently to exceed the natural range of tolerance of crop plants. The addition of copper and zinc in sediments in the moderate amounts indicated could be beneficial to crop production when the sediments are deposited on farmland.
While chromium can be toxic to crop plants in large concentrations, there are no known sources of this metal in power plant operation which are of sufficient magnitude to cause toxicity.
Chlorine in power plant effluents occurs in chemical foms which do not accumulate to any appreciable degree in stream sediments because of their high solubility in water. Thus, we do not expect flood deposits to be a source of chlorine on crop lands. The usual form of chlorine in soils is the chloride ion derived from fertilizers and organic decay. This fom has no adverse effect on crops over a very wide range of concentrations and is quickly leached out of soils by rainfall. There is no itkelihood that chlorine discharges from the power plant could adversely effect crops through the indirect pathway of stream sediment deposition by flooding because, the sediments will not be a carrier of chlorine, it is non-toxic in soils except at unrealistically high concentrations, and residual amounts are rapidly leached out of soils.
H0 075
~
t
?
3-24
~
Table 3.6.
Concentrations of the Principal Chemicals g
in the Cooling Tower Blowdown Ccrnbined Intake Plant Chehalis River Water
- Water, Olscharge,b Before Mixing,d After Mixing.C Constituenta ppm ppm ppm ppm 1
50,
<1 182 3.1 3.4 g
't l
Na 4
45 4.5 4.5 4
.s Ca 8
49 6.0 6.1 I
l Mg 3
18.3 2.1 2.1 s
i I
K 0.7 42 0.6 0.6 a
i I
Cl-6 41 3.7 3.8 e
i NO3 0.25 1.8 0.8 0.8 SiO2 23 141 15.0 15.2
,?
HCO3 46.4 109 37.6 37.7 Cu9 0.022 0.23 ef 0.0004 1
1
?
Zn 0.03 0.19 e/
0.0003
(
I 4
FeG 0.11 0.79 e/
0.0015 4
4y Mn 0.04 0.24 ej 0.0004 t
?
I Total dissolved 92.6 592.5 54 55 j
solidsf s
i y
Suspended
{
solidsh
< 15 k
011 & greaseh i
None
< 10 t
3 ph 6.5-8.5 h
'Yalues for 50.. Na, Ca, Mg, K, Cl'. NO, SiO 3
2 and HCO3 from Table 3.6-1 of the ER.
A Based on six cycles of concentration and includes treated non-radioactive wastes generated during plant operation.
C g
Average yearly concentrations from Table 2.5.
g dBased on dilution with an average ficw of 6640 cfs.
'Below detection limits.
I Sum of dissolved solids. Values obtained by adding values for all individual constitu-I, ents, not by analysis.
d.,
9?ncludes applicant's estimate of condenser corrosion products.
rc
$P h
1 Application for Washington State Site Certification-WPPS Nuclear Project No. 3, d.k Table 125(10)-3, Section 125(10), page 7, Arnendrent No. 3.
~
N G
-g n
y i
5 N
/HU UIv w
i 3
W
=..
_.