ML19256A660

Forwards Responses to Environ Review Questions Encl in 780922 & 781130 Ltrs.Info Will Be Filed as App A.4,Suppl 5 to Environ Rept

ML19256A660
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	12/26/1978
From:	Jens W DETROIT EDISON CO.
To:	Ballard R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
EF2-43669, NUDOCS 7901090159
Download: ML19256A660 (141)

Text

Wayne H. Jens Ass:stant V.ce President Entneermg and Construct.on f 313n 2374860 Detro.ti Edison d -

December 26, 1978 EF2 - 43669 Mr. Ronald L. Ballard, Chief Environmental Projects Branch 1 Division of Site Safety and Environmental Analysis Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555

Dear Mr. Ballard:

Subj ect: Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, Docket No. 50-341 Responses to NRC Environmental Review Questions Enclosed are 20 copies of Detroit Edison's responses to the NRC's Environmental Review Questions enclosed in your letters of September 22, 1978 and November 30, 1978.

This information will be filed as Appendix A.4, Supplement 5 to the Environmental Report (Operating License) in January 1979.

With these responses, we anticipate that review of the Environ-mental Report and preparation of the Draf t Environmental Statement will continue as scheduled.

Sincerely, EFM/WifJ/dk Enclosures O

7 9 010 9 0 if0759 dO o 9

EF-2-ER(OO A.4 RESPONSES TO NRC ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW QUESTIONS

Reference:

1. NRC letter September 22,1978

2. NRC letter November 30,1978

/

A.4-1 Supplement 5 - Januan 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT

1. (Section 2.1) Provide a more legible reproduction of Figure 2.1-4.

(September 22, 1973)

RESPONSE

In accordance with NRC procedure RPOP 514, Revision 2, three (3) copies of Figure 2.1-4 " Aerial View of Fermi Site" are being submitted. This is a recent ph:tograph taken in April 1978.

A.4-2 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

HYDROLOGY AND WATER USE

1. (Section 2.5.1.1) Supply the records of runoff from Swan Creek (p. 2.5-3l. (September 22 1973)

1. (Section 2.5.1.1) Supply the available records of runoff from Swan Creek (p.2.5-3). (Noven ber 30, 1973)

RESPONSE

Refer to response to Question 1, Chemical Characteristics, (September 22, 1978).

A.4-3 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

HYDROLOGY AND WATER USE

2. (Section 5.1.1) If water is or will be withdrawn by the Fermi 2 intake, for use at the Fermi i site, what percentage of the total water withdrawn will be used at Fermi I? Volume per unit time? What is the use o1 the water withdrawn for the Fermi i site? (September 22, 1978)

RESPONSE

None of the water withdrawn by Fermi 1 will be used by Fermi 2 when the plant is in operatic n. Conversely, non: of the water withdrawn by Fermi 2 will be used by the Fermi i plant.

A.4-4 Sunnlement 5 - Jan'iag 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS

1. (Section 2.5.2.1.1) Supply chemical data for Swan Creek similar to those presented in Table 2.5.2. Describe the measurements and resulting data which support the statement that Swan Creek water ranges from hard to very hard. (p. 2.!-6) Supply evidence to support the statement on p. 2.5-7 of the ER-OL: " Free chlorine has not been identified (in stres.m water in the vicinity of the site) due to its unstable nature." Supply dissolved oxygen data for Swan Creek. (p.1.5-7). (September 22, 1978)

1. (Section 2.5.2.1.1) If available supply chemical data for Swan Creek similar to those presented in Table 2.5.2. Describe the measurements and the resulting data which support the statement that Swan Creek water ranges 1 rom hard to very hard. (p.2.5-6).

Supply evidence to support the statement on p. 2.5-7 of the ER-OL: " Free chlorine has not been identified (in stream water in the vicinity of the site) dua to its unstable nature."(November 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

Tables 1 and 2 represent the most recent chemical data available for Swan Creek.

The data on Swan Cree k water hardness are presented in Tables 3 and 4. Most data peints fall within the USGS degrees of hardness listed on p. 2.5-6 as hard (121-180 mg/l) to very hard (greater than 180 mg/1). These results are consistent with data presented in Table 2.5-2 for other Michigan streams tributary to Lake Erie.

A.4-5 Sucolement 5 - Januarv 1974

EF-2-ER(OL)

Free chlorine would not be found in stream water in the vicinity of the site. Due to its unstable nature, it would combine with other chemicals in the water.

A.4-6 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

~

f0 l/7

), 7 A o e a p N&y t

'*/V 2,00 2 A E E A

'#iyS e o g t i  ;

J V 0 J3 4

/

0an:yfh g = & t.

hy

' ,I/O ; 4 ,?}d ? $ _~ U 5 $ g $

l'.'O o o ~

(g,Jp?) , og' ; s4 C # ~~o-Olp, ty ,3h A

~

• Ek k$

8 o;,/ U(3',,~ 2~ ,,

'y = =

a o~ a3 ry'Of O 2 .=g 5 g " g g v_,

2  ;; ~~ a

% 8 o*/ ;p C Jn,'hy/o fe;,-?cg/

4 0 O t O "U U U S 5 '

Z'y'o 8

.E 7 E3 e  ; ), 04 *Cs,,# "-Q-n 2 w <

5, W ry'of.,.

Qm i < e: -i ,

os o u a n? f. ., bnJ.

E

$? b  ?*4 f fE a

=

8n :W ]%oOf7/,,No:*!%

y#

/g an%Jn "C w "

S

.2p, 3u 8

1. f 7/

• I;)I0 h E~g~M~=

0j #1 A7

~

E "Sy Clynlif ,p'.,7T-,ig C u 2e e 2u *

?,

"  :: 03 O) U_$a b_$

= * .e

.'d S &. '? yJV,7 I/o 4IC. d o

• 'O O E

• S UU7 I Of #4; 2N g;/ \g$$%$~EO

/

a ._ = o  :

F- o= =a = 3

g %Ex D n a 8 .=

w o-9 u 17 ~ ~ ~ C = ,m - c -

U<g c -3

\b m.?>, V 0 emo-Ewa f 3 2-2 s-S 3 U=$o3o E3u o 5 k.92 o E c- Q*g;,,

vt s

< o ,_

u o-U .0 fpoish 'b, y .

/

7 5,

.~-y= S$2S

-<->$R -

E o e o

a > o,n<:4,Ce m_- - a.

f7/r, :c, s b: e us

?>

b .b. 'Vt),On,~t , ~ St,y  ;,;

p n ~ ~ ~ 6 - 2, 5

5 h \'V y,9.,f,,t

-O:. OoV . >x7o 2

c x) ,

u ,: , _,

ti 0

rn1,y,s ,,,

x n-

=.

r- u 1 J s?

$f / .:y' of  ;; i , e J

1.,0 g%

i 4

4 UN '

.i

%&i ' '

• 5

,',3n, ,

,'%,,V Sog,**-% , s , e

.9 3

4 4'"c# ;. =- =

v

=

v {

O E R M $ i 5

- = = = =

r, -

e E ta Y E YB f ? E A.4-7 Sucolement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

/f)

//pf e ~ m m m

// m e ., , - c.

Oy a o e o sem o a .n a o o

- as n , , g o u y n c.

()Oy0 V )

• o e o .n e o o o mn

" e i ed a so a ci em a er

• e e ~ e e e e e ~

5y >],( &a o e m in o a

/?p,I ~. _o P= g ea _ W n P-W

.a W r= W W W Oy W _ es

,f/ - =-; ~ ooc= . ~o,

%,'Q F.'O E / ,x /f* >JJ*.N VE-e o a ,,n,,,

o~,-

e , o o~

oa

, ea,u a -s~ a n w o r~

n

1. en ~

o.

. c.:s y en.

& )' Cy // D - coa e >

N o r~ o2 .-.

-> V N, e n'* e<

s: ,e.,o y= c. ~

a .~ u (f,~

a (1 o m on a om a e, m'

o o o e~o "

C /O';)fy f :,_ s

1. n ;

m ~* Y.: *a-O w n im a o

~

- -~o-g- o-

's

'ei o *c .

u n-4 ,

C O ao 2-0 a 8

• 0/7O J ;f,/ R 'x &y*Q, , t_ i 9 e" .0, , - o C~ 2-2o // O " o cio -~" e "e on o

< a aee, e, c ;e o e4

/ ; fry f ;ffJy/fN\lL$e,'~~ s^

0 f o m - a

" O 5  ? N

• ~ ~' $ " ~

$ g 0;/j /g

w/)g %;5/ . Q U) ~ .? ~ ~

EybhE g

('#bk4;#*eh //p N wff /j

/

b N h'b55' w Ub'k WV

$ U, '

er Uj' y

g C

" ~ a - ><- < < * >

• 5 0"Q *

' sO dI < < g 3 H o

c o m

' O bCO E rO v 2 G a I ~d g g d

g d n "a N*R ) Nn //g ~ d f 7.3 U h NE U

),F& f ~

=

~

o B 2 1 2 K -

". - M G -

=

GGa

!

• 1 ?*! 8 I -

a G a I ~ !

ao

.2 O .7:: \ //4 2/ /

Oy f,/,  ? O ,

24 py* U N **

0 2.W u 6 5

/

4 [-U-E-5

- w

• W -

[-d C n'

o p 1 p

$-o C = 4,, t r= i c l ':

o a s .

" w 6 g

> W w 3 N O>

U gw n ),ph r . */ r(,} "

• u ** <

= =..

o o =

U 'IQ1 9 e $._<w u eu*

.2 o U: f);0;;/f Jo/ C < 3.a C . =, sC - = m " M. <c ".s e au-E ed a B,,. 7

~*=w~

.,aa -e c W- 1,Qj // uw a w .=8 -

=w gw ,w c

>= w SQ,v. AfO

%=~c-N- o H-n

" Q 5 U o n - a O &. E

• • U oyN J Op /7 sf#O o 8 " 8 .

$,8 = 1 $I wO1 i

• c.**

%g a 24 (7,, A7g,3/

v/ ,-

= - ,C M n n -

,O_ go = G g y

a F. g; - ., c m 'ov <a,, m.a - o *g ,c,- .,

e e,. ,,o.,,,

n -;,j /sO sO .

u . w c- c, ya

< a.

M$>Q f ff\ .3e. ou=, * - o _

c~.

m o o C = d

=

_=o w

Go e

ca o

% . ._o Mt IVd

• t., <,~/O I r O "< - $' * <, oS E"ao F-

<w 0 3s c' "sO 3

<w uw ~

<w "<w *:

• ' E8 o w < U

'e u o

~~a> y 0 0 u.

//.'/ c?a 2/(I/p,?j V

byP y

7 -,

k.a - u

<=ee "< ee <-

m o

r.

=

?'. "m u

-o

-< e.~

~ 2n

- < .n

-nn

~q o C A kp /f e

c.

- "o c u - M: ** ~ 5"7" "a- N :N 0

=

y 1; ff Olty NJ 0 p~3 $ ~, ..,e j  ?

e s9 .n .e., o -em,

< es o-e a .a e

~ ca ea e, o

e a, ,,,,., e.s r

=

y 0;*-).0% %g# ),/ "

A~ " ' "

"Q'--  :

$ " f.~ ~n o n /V,y r,: ,;

,,y Vf,so ,;O]4 c  ? ~ -

a e. .en **

-r 4 _

s  : - w. . ~ - ' .-. . . . , , .,

. ., .e t..

a :a ;- ' " 3 e

4 pf j fy,P/ o o em ,;*

C s.

4,I,s fII)<'o':1  ;;-- 3 5 17 11,. 1n e.

2 f

>C E/g .

g -

~

n

~

g , og g

~ g .-

r,A ,, y 3 .

N V (?! ~ o o o I a.=

'm' Or2/gD *// r. I , t -

3 g *

- e 8

~

IS,O p}4 . L' 10e) n f w  : **

". 'm  : ,

sf'Oy4p'4/ p i

j,&: ' n 3

~ 3 a"1 x a

n JgI/ *f. O v. e, N,

• 9 N N o er ~

g

r. e e n == ". -  %;

O o .rm Y

a se n' e n m o o

~

a, .n o a., o u.,

n ~  :

r- e- o,

, ~, - e =r o a o ~ v 3

.- - - o - - o o - - - 3

• c~; c,

~ n n a n - a -

w

- ~- ~ n ~ ~_ , c_ ~ ~ ~ ~_ . ", ~, s., ,c A.4-3 Supplement 5 - January 1979

048 Table 3. Chemical Analyses bf USGS Monitored Michigan Streams (a)

Chemical Analysis (mg/l) liardness Specific as CACO 3 conduc-Drain- Car- Non- tance car- Water age Dis- Bicar- bon. Sul- Chlo- (micro.

bon. temperature Station area Date charge bonate ate fate ride Ca (mhos at (sq mi) sampled Time (cts) (llc 03 ) (CO3) (SO4 ) (Cl) Mg ate 25"C) pil F C No. Station Name Location STREAMS TRIBUTARY TO LAKE ERIE 4 1695 Ituren River at SE % sec.10, T. 2 N., R. 8 E. 49.6 A pr. 6 1515 86.3 216 3 24 17 207 27 410 8.4 - -

Commerce. Aug.16 0850 13.7 225 3 29 25 224 36 560 8.3 - -

1700 t ' ron River at Milford. SE % sec.9,T.2 N., R. 7 E. 125 Apr. 6 1420 173 229 3 38 26 232 41 470 8.3 - -

Aug.17 1340 39.4 232 4 31 29 228 32 480 8.5 73 23.0 1705 uron River near New NE % sec.1 T.1 N., R. G E. 143 A pr. 6 1220 46.8 223 4 33 26 222 36 465 8.4 - -

Hudson Aug.17 1445 40.3 198 0 25 26 190 28 410 7.7 79 26.C rn 1715 Ore Creek near NW % sec.12. T.1 N., R. 5 E. 31.0 Mar. 31 1630 34.7 218 3 28 15 220 39 400 8.4 - -

',T1 Brighton. Aug.17 1710 4.38 249 0 17 20 222 18 450 7.7 - -

rp Sec. 24, T.1 N., R. 5 E. 299 Mar. 31 1555 382 214 3 52 27 240 62 500 8.4 - -

rT 1720 Ituron River at W

> llamburg.

t' 1725 Portage River near SW % sec. 34. T.1 H., R. 4 E. 79.0 Mar. 31 1115 120 201 4 88 14 274 106 530 8.4 46 8.0 8

• Pinckney. Aug.18 1010 2.13 185 0 72 15 228 76 48b R.2 - -

C SE % sec.13, T.1 S., R. 4 E. 506 Mar. 31 1235 854 202 0 62 24 242 76 488 S.2 41 5.0 1730 Ituron River near Dexter Aug.18 1300 81.8 210 0 45 26 220 48 465 8.2 - -

1735 Mill Creek near SE % sec.18, T. 2 S., R. 5 E. 134 Apr. 26 1000 11G 307 0 111 27 384 132 755 8.2 48 9.0 Dexter A ug. 22 1530 17.4 243 5 66 34 270 66 700 8.5 68 20.0 174'i lluron River at Ann NW% sec. 28. T. 2 S., R. 6 E. 711 A pr. 21 0025 668 230 3 75 22 276 85 520 8.3 52 11.0 vs Arbor Aug. 22 1700 81.4 220 0 51 28 236 56 520 8.2 72 22.0 4 1757 River Raisin near N E% sec. 21. T. 6 S., R. 4 E. 266 Apr.17 1530 404 253 0 64 12 274 67 500 8.2 61 16.0 E0 Tecumseh. Aug.14 1210 14.2 212 4 52 17 238 56 545 8.5 - -

1760 River Raisin near NW % sec. 5, T. 7 S., R. 4 E. 455 Apr.17 1245 597 245 4 80 16 294 91 545 8.4 60 15.5 Adrian. A ug.14 1200 47.9 273 0 73 28 302 78 64 0 8.0 - -

h 1765 River Raisin near On Ida Maybee Road 1034 1605 3110 178 4 86 28 280 127 561 8.4 a A p r. 4 * - -

Monroe, on Ida May- Aug.15 0930 66.9 168 0 130 38 268 130 690 7.6 - -

[ bee Road.

Y r

S

• Laboratory analysis.

ra q (a) A.W. Wood, Chemical Quality of Michigan Streams, USGS Circular 634,1970

?

w

948 Table 4. Chemical Analys., For Minor Streams Tributary to Lake Erie (a)

Color Bicar- Car- Hardness as CACO 3 Specific Temp. Platinum Turb-index bonate bonate Sulfate Chloride Nitrate Car- No ncar. Conductance erature Cobalt idity No.on Stream Map Date (cfs) (ctsm) (HCO 3 ) (CO3) (SO4) (Cl) (NO3) bonate bonate (micromhos) pH C Scale (ITU)

.002 154 .0 96 120 2.7 280 150 650 7.7 20.5 90 7 Ecorse River 8/31/71 232 .0 170 250 .5 440 250 1,600 7.5 9.0 30 4

+10 5/ 5/72 1.67 183 .0 88 330 1.8 220 74 1.300 8.1 19.5 60 4 Ecorse River 8/31n1 .33

+11 5/ 5/72 4.72 258 .0 200 300 1.2 490 280 1,800 7.6 10.0 50 15 South Branch 8/31/71 1.10 163 .0 70 130 2.6 230 92 750 7.7 21.0 10 1 270 10. 490 270 1,700 7.9 10.0 40 5 Ecorse River +12 5/ 502 5.13 261 .0 160 8/3191 .06 198 .0 210 210 2.5 380 210 1,200 7.1 20.0 60 35 Frank and Poet

+13 5/502 19.3 134 .0 100 120 .6 200 94 800 7.9 12.0 50 20 Drain 154 .0 90 110 3.5 240 110 700 8.0 21.0 30 4 Frank and Poet 8/3101 .51

+14 5/5#2 20.7 241 .0 210 430 1.6 460 260 1,500 8.0 13.5 70 15 Drain Blakely Drain 8/31/71 .07 198 .0 240 62 2.2 290 130 500 8.1 20.5 20 10

+15 5/ 502 6.78 196 .0 240 110 12. 370 210 700 8.2 155 40 5

.73 139 .0 100 120 5.2 240 130 750 7.7 20.0 50 2 Marsh Creek 8/31/71 224 190 300 11. 410 220 1,200 7.9 11.5 50 10 rn

+16 5/ SD2 17.1 .0 Brownstone Creek 8/3101 .08 156 .0 180 230 4.0 310 170 1,100 8.0 19.5 40 15 7

+17 5/ 5D2 4.42 224 .0 180 390 8.0 380 200 1,360 7.9 12.0 60 10 Y 540 7.6 18.0 0 0 Bradshaw Drain 9/ 1/71 1.02 188 .0 96 31 .1 260 360 100 700 7.5 6.5 70 8 Q

^

+18 5/2442 3.89 256 .0 120 61 2.0 150 o Swan Creek 9/ 1/71 0 0 -- , -- -- - -- - - - - --

h

+19 5/2392 4.38 254 .0 120 58 2.3 360 150 700 7.7 11.5 70 3 Disbrow Drain 9/ 101 .08 210 .0 110 87 2.3 300 130 750 8.0 18 3 60 7

+20 5/2392 1.97 178 .0 110 68 3.1 280 140 590 8.0 15.0 80 4 9/ 1/71 .08 176 .0 85 34 5.5 220 76 500 7.1 20 4 Swan Creek

+21 5/24/12 7.38 250 .0 130 63 8.5 370 170 725 7.7 18.5 40 4 m

C North Branch 9/ 101 0 - - - -- -- -- - -- -- - -

E Swan Creek +22 5/2442 3.18 250 .0 93 70 1.4 340 140 700 8.0 18 5 40 1 II North 8 ranch 9/ 101 0 -- -- -- -- - -- - -- - - -- -

3 Swan Creek +23 5/24/72 3.62 216 .0 130 79 28. 330 160 740 7.4 18.5 50 2

$ Little Swan 9/ 101 0 - - -- -- - -- - -- - -

" 220 48 52. 380 230 725 7.5 18.0 40 7

+24 5/2492 1.22 186 .0 8/31n1 - - --

[ Swan Creek

+25 5/23R2 0

18.5 248 .0 120 67

10. 380 180 760 7.8 24.5 70 5 a

y Little Swan Creek +26 5/23n2 .22 230 .0 250 51 42, 450 260 850 7.8 21.5 70 3 c Stony Creek +27 8/31/71 0 237 .0 56 64 2.2 260 70 600 8.0 20.0 to 3

} Sugar Creek

+2B 8/3101 5/2402 0

2.49 262

.0 130 66 24.

380 160 790 7.8 50 2

3

] Note: Chemical analysis in milligrams per hter (mg/l). ,

I*'W.W. Wood, Chemical Quality of Michigan Streams, USGS Circular 634,1970.

s EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMICAL CHAR ACTERISTICS

2. (Section 2.5.3.3) What " standard techniques" were used to perform the chemical analyses of the groundwater (Table 2.5-8 anc 2.5-9)?

(Septembc r 22, 1978)

2. (Section 2.5.3.3) What " standard techniques" were used to perform the chemical analyses of the gt oundwater (Tables 2.5-3 and 2.5- 9)?

(November 30, 1978)

RESPONSE

Groundwater analyses (Tablea 2.5.8 and 2.5.9) were performed according to the " Standard techniques" described in the APHA-AWWA-WPCF," Standard m thods for the Examination of Water and Waste Water," 12th Edition.

APHA - American P iblic Health Association AWWA - American k ater Works Association WPCF - Water Polletion Control Foundation A.4-11 Sucolen.ent 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMICAL CHAR ACTERISTICS

3. (Section 3.6.1) Provide the basis for the assumption of a chlorine demand of 2-3 ppm for Lake Erie water. (September 22, 1978)

3. (Section 3.6.1) Provide the basis for the assumption of a chlorine demand of 2-3 ppm for Lake Erie water. (November 30, 1973)

RESPONSE

This question was responded to in Supplement 1, June 1975, page 3.6-3.

The discussion was deleted in Supplement 4, February 1978 as no longer applicable to the effluent limitations placed en Fermi 2 under NPDES Permit No. MI 0037028 (Table S.4-2) issued November 23,1977. New effluent limitations have been established by the Michigan Water Resour:es Commission which will be outlined in a revision to the present permit.

The chlorine smand of Lake Erie water is estimated to be 2-3 ppm, based on an ave. age valur of 2.4 ppm chlorine demand measured by the Monroe Water D:partment for the 12 months ending June 30, 1974. The minimum and maximum values recorded for this period were 0.83 and 6.2 ppm, respectively. In addition, at the Davis-Besse site, Toledo Edison measured an average chlorine demand of 2.4 ppm on samples collected at least monthly over the period of November 1968 t: July 1971. The minimum value observed by Toledo Edison u as 0.3 ppm, while the maximum was 7.8 ppm.

A.4-12 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMIC AL CHARACTERISTICS

4. (Section 3.6.1) Provide a discussion of the variability of the chlorine demand of Lake Erie water in the site vicinity to support ti e proposed grab sample method of chlorinatien control as opposed to continucus monitoring (September 22, 1973).

RESPONSE

This question was responded to in Supplement 1, June 1975, page 3.6-3. The information was dele ted in Supplement 4, February 1973, in deference to NPDES P2rmit No. MI 0037023 (Table 5.4-2) which in Part I.A.1 specifies greb sample and amperometric titration. In addition,40 CFR 136 specifies an iodimetric titratien with either a starch-iodide or zmpercmetric end point.

A.4-13 Supplement 5 - Jan"ary 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMIC AL CHARACTERISTICS

5. (Section 3.6.1) Provide estimates for the total chlorine average concentrations anticipated in the blowdown. Explain the bases for the estimates (September 22,1973)

4. (Section 3.6.1) Provide estimates for the total chlorine average concentrations anticipated in the blowdown. Explain t! e bases for the estimates (November 30,1978)

R ESPONSE Refer to the response to Quertion 8, Chemical Characteristics, September 22,1978.

A.4-14 Supplement 3 - Jar.uary 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMIC AL CHARACTERISTICS

5. (Section 3.6.1) What chlorination procedure will be used in the circulatins water and general service water systems? In pr.rticular, in what form will the chlorinating agent be shipped to and stored at the plant site, e.g., as Cl2 or Na0Cl and in what quantities?

What dechlorination techniques will be used, if necessary, to achieve the applicable limitatic ns on chlorine in the effluent as described in Part 1, Section A.1 of NPDES (MI OC 37028, revised 10/27/78)? (November 30, 1978)

RESPONSE

Refer to response to Question 8, Chemical Characteristics, September 22,1978.

A.i+- 15 Supplemer.t 5 - Cariuacy 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMIC AL CHARACTERISTICS

6. (Section 5.4.1) Provide the basis for requiring such a long chlorination period for the circulating water system condensers (one hour for each condenser half) since the incoming water will be chlorinated continuously in the service water system (September 22, 1978)

RESPONSE

Refer to the response to Question 2, Chemical Characteristics, September 22,1978.

A.4-16 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMICAL CHAR ACTERISTICS

6. If a dechlorinating system will be used, what techniques rill be used to monitor and control the possible discharge of excess dechlorint. ting agent? (Novetr.ber 30, 1973).

R ESPONSE Refer to response to Question 8, Chemical Characteristics, September 22,1978.

I t

i

'. A.4-17 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMIC AL CHARACTERISTICS

7. (Section 6.2.2.1) The statement on chlor!ne concentration in the plant blowdown is not consistent with the statement in Section 3.6.1. Resolve the discrepancy in expected chlorine content in the blowdown (September 22,1978).

RESPONSE

This question was responded to in Supplement 1, Jur.e 1975, page 6.2-15. The information was deleted in Supplen. :nt 4, February 1973 in deference to the effleent limitations set forth in NPDES Permit MI 0037028 (Table 5.4-2).

A.4-18 Sunnlement 5 - 3=nuary 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMICAL CHAR ACTERISTICS

7. Would increasing the cycles of concentration during system chlorinat;on eliminate the need for manual dechlorination by allowing a greater amount of time for natural chlorine dissipt. tion? If so, why isn't this being done instead of manual dechlorination? (November 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

Refer to response to Question 8, Chemical Characteristics, September 22,1978.

A.4-19 Supplement 5 - January a/9

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMIC AL CHARACTERISTICS

3. (Section 3.6.1) Tentative free chlorine guidelines have been proposed by the applicant, and have hetn discussed with the state '\ ater Quality Division. The applicant shouM by n w 1. ave prepared a tentative chlorination procedure. Dis. . The details of this procedut e, (p. 3.6-2) (Septemt er 22, 1973).

RESPONSE

Total residual chlorine (TRC) effluent limitations have been recently established by the Michigan Water Resources Commission (MWRC). NPDES Permit No. MI 003702S (operating) is being modified to reflect these limitations, Copies of the revised permit will be made available to the NRC following final approval by EPA and the MWRC.

The essential requirements are Total Residual Calorine 0.2 mg/l daily average 0.3 mg/l daily maximum Sampling frequency 5 times weekly,3 grab samples equally spaced during each treatment Total discharge time 160 min / day Dechlorinating agents shall be limited to 1.5 times the stoichiometric quantity recuired for the cHerine applied.

A.4-20 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

Based on the TRC effluent limitations, a tentative chlorination scheme has been developed for Fermi 2.

General Service Water System Shock treated at 5 ppm for I hour each day

• Circulating Water System Shock treated at 5 ppm for I hour each day *

(30 minutes for each half of conde ser).

• Treatments will be concucrent The chlorine will be receiv:d and stored as C1 2 in 1-ton cylinders. A bank of _ylinders will be maiitained in the Fermi 1 pump house to feed the Fermi 2 GSWS; a bank of 12 cylinders will be maintained in the Fermi 2 circulating water pump h juse for the CWS. Approximating a useage rate of 1500 lb C12 per day,5 to 6 replacement cylinders will be required weekly (refer to response to Question 15, Chemical Characteristics, November

~

30, 1978).

Cnculations based on a chlorine demand of approximately 2 ppm for Lake Erie water indicate that the daily average maximum values of 0.2 mg/l and 0.3 mg/l TRC can be met. However, there are indications that TRC may perisit in the blawdown from the circulating water reservoir for longer than 160 minutes.

Data from the Fermi i potable water plant show that chloramine concentrations can be as high as 0.4 mg/l two (2) hours after chlorination. This is particularly true during the winter months when the water is cooler and there is less exposure. Thus it could be possible for TRC to persist in the Fermi 2 blowdown beyond the 160 min / day. This cannot be conf! . ed until operating A.4-21 Supplement 5 - Janurry 1979

EF-2-ER(OL) data from the plant is available. As a precaution, a standby dechlorination system using sodium sulfite will be installed at the decant pumps in the CWPH. The dechlorination system will be employed only if the TRC persists in the blowdown 120 minutes af ter application. (The 120 minutes is subject to change should actual operation require). This procedure will minimize the use of dechlorinating agent and will result in the addition of insignificant quantities of sulfate to the blowdown. Since there at: no Federal or State limitations on sulfate, the dechlorinating agent has been limited to 1.5 times the stiochiometric quantity of chlorine applied.

At this time, the parameters f:r the dechlorination system have not been defined and a system has not been designed.

Until such time as more definitive, representative operating data are collected, a temporary manual operation will be used consisting of a portable tank, manual mixing of the bulk sodium sulfite solution, and gravity feed either into the CWR or at the suction side of the decant pumps.

Interruption of the discharge flow from the CWR to take Erie was considered as an alteraative; however, discontinuous operation of the discharge flow is inconsistent with respect to statements made in response to Question 9 (September 22,1978) and Question 6 (November 3,1973), Ac.uatic Ecology, and the effect of thermal shock on fish.

A.4-22 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMIC AL CH AR ACTERISTICS

9. (Section 6.1) What is the rationale for the proposed sampling frequency in the monitoring program for heavy metals? Mercury levels appear to be elevated in the sediments around the plant.

Please assess the potential for the resusper.sion of mercury-laden sediment due to the operation of the plant (September 22, 1978).

S. (Section 6.1) What is the ratioaale for the proposed sampling frequency in the monitoring prcgram for heavy metals? Mercury levels appear to be elevated in the sediments around the plant.

Please assess the potential for the resuspension of ir.ercury-laden sediment due to the operation cf the plant (November 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

The response to a portion of the above question was provided in Supplement 1, June 1975, Appendix A.2, Item 350.13, pades A.2-23, 24 and 26.

The rationale for the sa;r pling frequency for heavy metals both in the water column (menthly) and in the sediments (quarterly) is based on the very minute quantities of these metals that would be in the Fermi 2 efficent as shown in Section 3.3, Table 3.31 which would result in nn anparent incraese as a result of the discharge.

A.4-23 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

As described Section 5.1.2, the thermal discharge is a surf ace plume. As such, it would not cause resuspension of sediments in the vicinity of the plant.

A.4-24 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMIC AL CH AR ACTERISTICS

10. (Section 3.6.2) With what materials does the circulating water system come into contact? Is there likely to be sufficient corrosion from these sources to measurably affect tl.e total dissolved solids in the effluent. (p. 3.6-27 and 3.6-13) (September 22, 1978).

9. (Section 3.6.2) With what materials does the circulatint; water system come into contact? Is there hely to be sufficient corrosion from these sources to measuratly affect the total dissolved solids in the effluent? (p. 3.6-2 and 3.6-3) (November 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

The circulating water comes in contact with the condenser, the circulating water pipes, and the cooling tower baffles. The composition of these systems is listed below:

CONDENSER Admiralty 96%

Copper / Nickel 4%

Admiralty Type Alloy 443 Copper 10-73 %

Tin 0.9 to 1.2%

Lead 0.07 %

Iron 0.06%

Arsenic 0.02 to 0.10%

Zinc Approximately 28 to 30%

A.4-25 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CIRCULATING WATER PIPES ASTM - 150 - Type 5 Cement (sulf ate resistant)

Tricalcium Silicate 40%

Dicalcium Silicate 40%

Tricalcium Aluminate 4%*

Tetracalcium Aluminoferrite 9%*

• The last two items are mixed to stated proportions to a maximum of 20% of the total composition COOLING TOWER BAFFLES Transite 15% asbestos 85% cement As shown in Section 3.3, Table 3.3-1 there is no measurable effect from these sources on the total dissolved solids in the effluent.

In addition, sulfuric acid is added to the system to control pH to essentially neutral, reducing corrosion to a minimum.

A.4-26 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMIC AL CHARACTERISTICS

11. (Sections 3.6.3and 3.6.5) What is the source of information in Tables 3.6-1 and 3.6.2? Provic'e a copy of missing page 3.6-13 with Table 3.6-3, laundry wastes (September 22, 1978)

10. (Sections 3.6-3 and 3.6 ,5) What is the source of information in Tables 3.6-1 and 3.6-2? Provide a copy of missing page 3.6-13 with Table 3.6-3, laundry wastis (November 30, 1978)

RESPONSE

Section 3.6, Table 3.6-1 is bast d on manufacturer's recommended regeneration cycle as described on pages 3.6-3, 3.6-4, and 3.6- 5 of Supplement 4, February I'378.

Section 3.6, Table 3.6-2, Auxiliary Boiler Blowdown was deleted in Supplement 4, February 1973 as ng longer appropriate as an effluent stream from Farmi 2 directly to the environment.

As shown in Figure 3.3-1, f ection 3.3, the boiler blowdown is routed through the Fermi 1 waste water basin and through the sewer to the Monroe Se tage Treatment Plant.

Section 3.6, Table 3.6-3, Laundry Wastes, was deleted in Supplement 4, February 1978, since it is part of the radwaste system effluent stream. The estimated discharge is 3840 gallons per day, or 0.03% of the 10,000 gpm blowdown. A biodegradable, nonphosphate detergent and non-chlorine containing germicidal agent will be used.

A.4-27 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMICAL CHAR ACTERISTICS

12. (Section 5.4.5) It is stated that dissolved oxygen does not decrease as the water passes through the turbine condenser in "similar situations." Supply actual examples of "similar situations," with data such as water flow rates, temperatures, and oxygen concentrations.

(p. 5.4-6) (September 22,197S).

11. (Section 5.4.5) It is stated that dissolved oxygen does rot decrease as the water passes through the turbine condenser in "similar situations." Supply actual examples of "similar siturations,"

with data such as water flow rates, temperatures, and oxygen concentrations. (p. 5.4-6) (November 30, 1973).

RESPONSE

The Applicant has no " actual examples of similar situations."

The phrase "similar situati:ns" is inappropriate as used in present context.

In a closed cycle system, such as Fermi 2, where natural draft cooling towers are an integral part of the system there would be no overall effect on the dissolved oxygen in the effluent.

Should a decrease in dissolved oxygen occur in the condenser, the oxygen content svould again reach saturation passing through the cooling towers ar.d circulating water reservoir from where it is discharged to Lake Erie.

A.4-28 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS

13. (Section ( A-2.3.4.4) What is the reason for the implied limitation of pH values to numbers from 0 to 14? (p. SA. 2-10)(Septe mber 22, 1978).

12. (Section 6A-2.3.4.4) What is the reason for the implied limitation of pH values to numbers from 0 to 14? (p. 6A.2-!0)(November 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

The Technical Specifications in Appendix 6A are no longer appropriate and will be resubmitted as required prior to receipt of the Operating License.

At present pH limitations for effluent discharges are established as 6.0 to 9.0 in NPDES Permit No. MI 0037028, Table 5.4-2, Supplement 4, February 1978.

A.4-29 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS

14. (Section 3.3.2.2) Supply the material composition of the condenser and other heat exchanger surfaces subject to corrosion. (p. 3.3-3).

An average corrosion rate of 0.107 mils /yr is identified (on p. 3.3-3) as representative of other Detroit Edison plants. Supply initial composition and pH of the water at those plants. Are the corrodable materials comparable to the Fermi 2 materials? Describe any water treatment programs to rcduce corrosion at existing Detroit Edison facilities.

What portion of the sewage transported by the Frenchtown Towr. ship sewer line is predicted to be fr:m Fermi 2? What percentage of the sewage treated at the Mcnroe sewage treatir.ent facility is predicted to be from Fermi 2? (p. 3.3-3)

Supply the non-radioactive che mical composition of the water from the liquid radwaste syste m. (p. 3.3-4) (September 22, 1978)

13. (Section 3.3.2.2) Supply the material composition of the condenser and other heat exchanger st rfaces subject to corrosion. (p. 3.3- 3).

An average corrosion rate of 0.107 mils /yr is identified (on

p. 3.3-3) as representative of other Detroit Edison plants. Supply initial composition and pH of the water at those plants. Are the corrodable material < comparable to the Fermi-2 materials?

Deccribe any water treatment programs to reduce corrosion at existing Detroit Edison facilities.

What portion of the sewage transported by the Frechtown Township sewer line is predicted to be from Fermi-2? What percentage of the sewage treated at the Monroe sewage treatment facility is predicted to be from Fermi-2? (p. 3.3-3).

A.4-30 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

Supply the non-radioactive chemical composition of the water from the liquid radwaste system (p.3.3-4) (November 30, 1973).

RESPCNSE Refer to response to Question 10, Chemical Characteristics, September 22,1978, for the material composition of the condenser.

The two main heat exchangers are Admiralty ASTM Bill.

The 0.107 mil / year was calculated for the water side of the Fermi 2 condenser based on measurements made in 1973 on Admiralty metal condenser tubes that hr d been in service at Edison's Trenton Channel Power Plant for 49 years.

The Trenton Channel Plant is situated on the west bank of the Trenton Channel of the Detroit River about 7 miles north of Lake Erie. .No water qualit) data are available for this portion of the river; however, there are effluents from industrial complexes upstream. PM A alkalinity readings taken at the plant during 1972 showed a typical A alkalinity of -3 to -9.

Edison has no water treatment program for the water side of the condenser.

Since the Frenchtow n Township sewage system is an integral part of the Monroe sewage system, it is not possible to predict that portion which is due to Fermi 2. The Monroe Sewage Treatment Plant presently treats between 12,000,000 and 15,000,000 gallons A.4-31 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL) of sewage per day. The 10,000 gallons of sewage per day anticipated from Fermi 2 under normal operating conditions represents less than 0.1% of the total treated.

The water from the liquid radwaste system is distillate frcm the evaporators.

A.4-32 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMIC AL CHARACTERISTICS

14. In section 3.1 of the ER it is noted that the reduction in the surface area of the circulating water reservoir from 50 to 5.5 acres is a resultof "the safety related decision not to use the circulating water reservoir as the ultimate heat sink." Please elaborate on the rationale for this decision (November 30, 1978)

R ESPONSE Refer to the response to Question 5, Heat Dissipation System, September 22,1973.

A.4-33 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS

15. Provide a list of the anticipated monthly chemical usage at the plant ann indicate any expected seasonal variations in such usage.

(November 30, 1973).

RESPONSE

As noted in Section 3.6 of the ER(OL), the following systems will require chemical treatme it:

o Chlorination of the Gent ral service (GS) and circulating water (CW) systems o Sodium sulfite as dechlcrinating agent as necessary o Sulfuric acid addition to circulating water to control pH to essentially neutral o Sulfuric acid and soJium hydroxide to regenerate the demineralizer Table I shows the anticir ated chemicut usage for the above systems.

A.4-34 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

TABLE 1 - CHEMICAL USAGE Daily Vothly Usage, Ib.(

Chemical System Max. Ib. Max. _ ummer Avg.

J Winter Avg.

C1 (as gas)(b) GSW,CW l132 33,960 33,900 33,960 2

N SO (c) Blowdown 2547 76,410 76,L10 76,410 2 3 H 2SO 4 CW 6480 194,426 177,144 147,620 H2SO 4 Deminer- 340 1,360 1,360 1,360 alizer (d)

NaOH Deminer- 278 1,112 1,112 1,112 alizer(d)

(a) Based on 30-day month and Table 3.4-1, Section 3.4 (b) CWS requires 93% of C1 2 use!; therefore, the seasonal variation for flow of GSW is negiglible. Variation in usage in CWS will not be known until facility is operational. Calculations Lased on Figure 3.'-1, J Section 3.3 (20,000 gpm blowdown).

(c) Assumes dechlorinating agent is added to the maximum allowable (NPDES Permit No. MI 0037023),1.5 times the stoichiometric amount of C1. 2 Until the plant becomes operational rnd the chlorination procedures are finalized, the exact quantity used will nat be known. It is anticipated it will be less than that shown.

(d) These numbers are base J on daily regeneration once per week,4 weeks per month.

A.4-35 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMIC AL CH AR ACTERISTICS

16. A clay-lined chemical holding pond divided into three sections was observed during the site visit. Please indicate it on Figure 3.1-2, Site Plot Plan, and describe its function (November 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

There is one holding pond on tre Fermi 2 site that is divided into three compartments having maximum volumes cf 330,000 gallons, 490,000 gallons, and if 4,000 gallons. The 164,000-gallon compartment is for emergency oil dump throughout the life of the plant. This compartment will be pumped out as necessary and the liquids hauled offsite by a licensed industrial waste disposal form.

The other two compartments will be used for chemical cleaning wastes during construction. At this time there is no anticipated use of these compartments during plant operation.

A.4-36 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMICAL CHAR ACTERISTICS

17. Provide a list of chemical solution streams which will be routed to any chemical holding or treatment ponds. Include the chtmical compositions of the respective solution streams, i.e., provide the pH and identify the major components and potentially texic minor components. In addition, include the anticipated quantities of such solutions and the anticipated holding times in the respective ponds. Describe the ultimate disposal of chemicals routed to holding or treatment ponds. (November 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

Refer to response to Question 19, November 30,1978.

A.4-37 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMIC AL CH AR ACTERISTICS

18. For the purpose of evaluating the potential for storage frcm the circulating water reservoir and any holding or treatment ponds, provide data about the pond lining material and the underlying soils. (November 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

Data on the circulating water reservoir and chemical holding pond are listed below:

CWR Chem. Pond Bottom Elevation 562' 0" 566'6" Bottom Clay Thickness 4' 8' 6" Side Clay Thichness* 14' 16 6" Test Boring No. 60 42

• Sides consist of clay cort faced with stone riprap.

Table i shows a typical analysis indicating the subsurface profile of

_the CWR and chemical hr iding pond. Logs of borings 42 and 60 are included for information purposes.

A.4-38 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

TABLE 1 - GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE PROFILE Chem. Pond CWR Test Boring 42 60 Sample Elevation, ft 563.3 566.0 Transverse Shear, psf - 274 One-half Unconfined Compression, psf - 97.5 Water by Dry Weight, % _

26.1 Dry Unit Weight, pcf - 97.5 Volumetric, % -

Solids - 58.5 Water - 40.8 Air - +0.7 Atterberg Limits - -

Shrinkage 14 15 Plastic 18 22 Liquid 29 36 Gradation, % - -

Clay 47 63 Silt 32 31 Limestone 13 03 Medium Sand 05 02 Coarse Sand 03 01 Gravel 00 00 A.4-39 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

S'J O SUcr* ;I ":: LE I DE N E

• C AhC] a f S ST ANC E 8 C CA E R E CO .' E Q v f LOG OF I

CL ASSi'iC AT'ONS av: 0 ;. r - _ .M . . )

.- I

,ouno s u rf a ce E'ev =

c: "+ '

-* D E NE ' 4 AT'ON CESIST A NCE

• i

s. l

., - u s c- so u. p ., a P

i -

a i c.y . ,,4-- 3.,

.w. T . a..,- .

, Q. .

, .p; JJ Sof t 3rn. SIL"Y C1, .' Ic te S3. Grav. D

• J -

. . s-.

• , . 2- . l l f.

Med , :.,Jrns a a r. :. - .

a., ,&). f

=-

ee

, I.y*! *.w/So .a S.nd ! Cr.r-1. 6 oc l ,

s i

%d =.r- & u,,r e a..s. k .

. - . .- .s u...--,, .-2_._

. ,.v., (o v nQT~ ,, --

~

u.,J .

dc,9 y)u/ /e ,_i.8/c ..,..,.

a . . >

m. .  ;

Onv 5.i , . : k .: . (C u- 4.- _ .- .. -.

j=u

. ~.

.::: ~ L'. :', %_&=0

' *I'),11 F.2:/S.~ v ~ n n~ voi L ~ .-

. "e

• LL r* l' * 'd'

,_2 % itt d J ra y DL.A..".!!!.

3...A D< . O r . Ee nd S. j

' ]

1 tL 32-1f 16". l : - P. -.

'l i.

. i-

.y Trace SdALE,47s < % <1/,/.,;.

r a c u re ,_ , .c.~,- s. , c. ,. :. 3

.,i

. ' i

.c

l_J., t,ey y,. 4

-. .c. ,. -.~ ..i- .i-- J-  :.

....s. .;1 . i l  ;

N . ':-

Evide n ce cf r.?-iril. i.^ 7, - th run s. 3,

"" ^ '

I  ! - ' __ _ ,r 1 t

{

9' 4-in e sin - c 2d. l t Hole rrouted; 2 M.:.= ce:ent.

l I. .

8 i

l l

{ t .

l i  ! l  ; i

' i CJ v!.'D

• AT7'3 I??C } j j C

Drill c.ter loss 2.

El: jj'i. 9 i i fellowed by =. rte si.. . flew at { l  :

.: rate cf 0.42 .::. t . [

l l

I Arteciln flcw cf C.42 g;: t: 574 5-i :sf ter ecc.71 etic n.  !  !

l-l'

'a'.L. after Sr0utine - 7.1 570.3 i i* ,

i a , s i

J l I -

i t

I I I

I

. E

' 20 46 60 F> E' LCCAT6CN:  : '5355: E- 025

. ;;? m*7. ;-mcbtarate o-

'OTAL CEPTH- 2-'4a x.

- r ..'q ,..'"'cw :v - r. r, v , 0 ., , m. i- 1 * - -

gi, v.s.:.~.~ra

c. n.r; c s ;;cE n : 1-2 ' . ".r W/M).

.s.+n. ur a.. n-OhA c.. ~.a..., y.<:'~"-'

. - - - ' n v ~ .- -:

~

BCR:NG COM PLE E C:1-2 9 A

.[I , Scit t.ND CCUND*UCNS ASSOC 2.'E 3 y g,:v ~

,9w 3 nosT w* E sT E ra. er  ;

.s cToR : 3.S. I:'ecr (SLFA) t0JT* ELD *'C"'G^"

-- .--. -- - M 'l- ~.-= ,

, CAiLL E R : .I. Fugh e m CG v t. s . c. L' . . d_:. ,S __ __J ci;37geV .- ,, c L,e a C ONTR ACTC9 :.riP.17 Crd con 0*cte Pilo Div. *** lno.* " '1 ^ ^ L .s. ' . . C r,o r. .:

T WATER LfvEL rio., c' ...c.c:'e d ve s a r U!ilT :.0. 2  !

. , . _ . , , , , , l, cf h>,r. av,e, cc,,r, ,c, 3 oc.,n; LA,.,n,.u. ,. ,i A ., :,,,u,,.,. ......s,.

9 v.. , er c e s ,... - c. .. -.----- - - - - - - - - - - -

A.4-40 Supplement 5 - Januarj 1979

. EF-2-ER(OL)

LCG OF S A 50 rt.CE ewcr:tg l c p s t a .1 .

.4 ____.a c g s . c g S: 1:r pr M F Ov

. I c.

i ct e.cs rica ec St<FA_(S ail) 4 i

l Water u::. E r. = 573 0 Ft. ( e c . c a a. c.,

. ges:s as;g - i o ,. ; <. .. p on o, I ----I WATF3. G . S .El_.a_71. 4 0 e .l I .

Ir.lI,

'l g gl r-4 Dark Gray PEAT,v/Some Fibers. '?t,

. ,,Ir** ._

' #1

.f)

Soft Brevn & Gray SILTY CLU ,

_. h_ , ,, ,

~

-~

~

ei c- .

- - ' l ',.

j??[}{ ! Stiff hown v/S::e SIL"'" CLAT,v/

Sand,Little Gravel. Silt LcndEs, I ' I i

'60 C 'v ** - - - * . * ' *3 '-

y'y i Hard Gray (w/So-.c Brown) @-!C  ;

/t, y. a-.qny . .

2.-..,~.v. .v [w 4...,e m m ..

u. g... . . . , i i- . TAN",Y SIL"Y CLAY, QL-C ., 26

h, .

Stif f Gray ' ~

^

w/Little Graval & Roc _k___Fran._. .

~

..s

!;iI ( u-C i

. _ _ _ . . _ _ __ 81_;

c'40~'M 7/ i V.Hard Cray F. SANDY SILTY 'LAT , i

(

w/Little Gravel & Rock Frsgs. '

I i -  !

.J T :  !

oh ... TO?/ ROCK EL.4h$.0

e..I " * ' '

Few I' M

p* Fe d .H Ydt! S d%Z: . G r.;'."'XLur? G ESTE , v/ Tr . SUtLE ,lio

&Cl:2.G ri t . -

r*=- HO.ra ur..A .,v, .s Vf q :wr Lear.S .

/.. 3 -i 4

i r j..

'.~ . !

t .,,

-rne ?.+.c~ 1.~.9 '.r 1 em n.,, _

, ' . E *-

.- 5 4 -

.h(P:.:= - -

1 ' * " - I '

i, i. 1

-- i w  !  !

- l

. I t i ,

t j 9' h-inch casing used. 1 2

C' l l n> Hole grouted; 1 bag cc=ent.

. I w . '

a l I

u, ,

s NOTE: -

No artesian flev observed for two-day i  : l

. period between drilling and grouting. '

I l l t

I l i I t l .

l i.

t I

i i

! 8 I .i Loc A ncn: N-Sh00; E-5600 0, ="

20 40 60 so. _ . _ o t.

oT .L D E FT H :

32' 0" .-;

% RCC 'F"f "fC ,' n .. ee

- c, ; q -- ' ,-,- .

- O; *4 G S ' A ~* E D :

92363

.r.)

a .* -raa

, "'t.<'s

• f.u g. v.egar-t 4 -

._ f - a .'- 'W ' '.' " " ~

m'*,, '*"-

._AN ,.S_.j v.

m":._m.

- ': 4" m

.sc..._...c..

-N' A? ~ " ~ "

e A'sc c o m E-' E D

• Q _ '.). ,c'm 4 8

, AiuuT t7.~r,e'. u? r ) a-af, - m

? .tL - . D p L , , *, ~ c. . % . m., c-

., . ..-r; c_ i J.O.rianceck(S&FA) g, L, grc,p; i 7%3 ,,c u,,g 37 t y s y g ,, ,, ,, ,  !

'.< E c' e s : B.S.I:ber (S'JA) ( pt,-,;U g) f e n.y , p g - y,cw, a__ w . ______, -

(

-o.ggq p. 3 u ,, ,;

m too cc TE'i' EC: M NC tC ~'-----i-C ONTR ACTc A : Ra.'~ond Cencrote

• i e D4 v. -

-rigtT ",o : :gr- <g .m.e v r-v .r . +- - n. y1.<. ii r-

__*ATEA LFVEL in Sc e cr m3ccred w ber

- UNI" 2 4 et hours c e ter c m .nen ce tori,q , , , ,, , , ""l> , , , , , , ,

to,e ee 3, ,- ,. . .,. ,a s ,. , . ,. a i " " "> ' - * " - ' '

A.'4-h l Sucolement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS

19. Section 3.6.4 of ER Supplement 1 (June 1975) describes a pre-operatior.sl cleaning and flushing program, This section has been deleted f.om Supplement 4 (February 1978) although such a pre-operational cleaning and flushing program was mentioned during the site visit. Provide a description of the planned pre-operational cleaning and flushing program, including the identity and quantity of each of the chemicals used, the time period of such use, and the ultimate disposal of the chemicals used (November 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

The pre-operational flushing rnd cleaning program was deleted from the Environmental Rep;rt (Operating License) in Supplement 4, February 28 because it is associated with the construction phase of the plant under construction permit No. CPPR 87. In addition, NPDES Permit No. MI 0039110 was issued April 4,1978 for discharges from the constrt citon site. The construction permit covers all discharges during construction and is in addition to operating NPDES Permit No. MI 0037028. Copies of this permit were transmitted to the NRC on April 26,1978, EF2-40175.

The systems to be chemically claimed are relatisely by small.

One system volume will be approximately 220,000 gallons.

The chemical cleanir.g operation as presently envisioned will consist of the folicwing stages:

1. High velocity flush using one system volume of demineralized water.

A.4-42 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

2. Degreasing solvent using 3 to I ratio of trisodium / disodium phosphate and 0.1% surfactant followed by demineralized water flush.

3. Mill scale removal using Dow Industria! Services Vertan 661 process (6% chelating agent - tetra ammoniated EDTA) with pH adjustment using citric acid followed by demineralized water flush.

4. Passivation solution consisting of hydrazine/ ammonia followed by demineralized water flush.

Other chemical formulations are being investigated in relation to the Fermi 2 piping system and may be substituted for the above.

The cleaning operation is a continuous high velocity procedure where each step consists of or.e system volume of cleaning solution followed by one or more system volumes of demineralized water flush (displacement). The first three steps require only 4.5 days to complete.

Since this is a continuous Operation, immediate disposal of the liquid waste is required. "ihe disposal scheme has not been firmly established; however, to meet the time constraints and the conditions of NPDES Permit No. f II 0039110 any combination of the following disposal methods is vialle:

Use of appropriate ccmpartments of the chemical holding pond in combination with any one or several of the following o Truck offsite by a licensed industrial liquid waste disposal contractor o Truck to Monroe Sewage Treatment Plant A.4-43 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL) o Pump to Monroe Sewage Treatment Plant via Ferrai i sewer system The introduction of the various chemical constituants has been discussed with the Monroe personnel and all disposal will Le carried out in close liason with the plant.

The time frame involved with passivation will be established at a future date in response to startup requirements for systems.

A.4-44 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL) Permit No. MI 0039110 MICHIGAN WATER RESOURCES COMMISSI0ti AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMIriATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, (33 U.S.C. 125) et seq; the "Act"), and the Michigan Water Resources Conrission Act, as arended, (Act 245, Public Acts of 1929, as amended, the " Michigan Act"),

THE DETROIT EDISON COMPANY (Sole operator cr.d principal v.;ner) is authorized to discharge from the Enrico Fermi Atcmic Pc.,cr Plant, Uriit 2, constructicn site located at 6400 Dixie Highway Newport, Michigan 48166

• o receiving ',;aters named S.,an Creek and Lake Erie in accordance with effluent i mitations, r.cnitcring requirenents, and other conditions set forth in Parts I and II hereof.

This permit shall becore effective on the date of ccmmencement of any discharge authrized herein.

This perr.'it and the authcrization to discharge shall expire five years from the effective date. In order to receive authorization to discharge beyond the date of expiration, the permittee shall submit such information and forms as are required by the iiichigan Uater Resources Commission no later than 180 days prior to the date of expiration of this pennit. -

This pemit is based on the company's application numbered MI 0039110 ,

dated July 7, 1977. as amended , and shall supersede any and all Orders of Octermination, Stipulation, or F'inal Orders of Determination previously adopted by the Michigan Water Resources Contaission.

day of bLoA l Q'? 8 , for the Michigan Water Issued this N b f' Resources Cohnission. 1

& \ Aw-.

Robert J. Courchaine Executive Secretary f

A.4-45 Supplement 5 - January 1979

' Page 2 of 8 Permit No. nt 0039110 EF-2-ER(OL)

PART I A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS

1. Effluent Limitations (Demineralizer Regeneration Wastes)

During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until the expiration date of this permit, the permittee is authorized to discharge demineralizer regeneration viastes, a low volume waste source, through outfall (see Footnote a.). Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee prior to discharge as specified below:

Discharce Limitations Monitorina Require ents ko/ day (lbs/ cad ~ Cor.centratio_ns Sample Daily Diily Daily Daily Measurement Effluent Frecuency Type Characteristic Average Maximum Averace Maximum Flow, M 3/ Day (MOD) Per Occurrence Total Suspended Solids 30 mg/l 100 mg/l Weekly per Grab Occurrence Oil and Grease 15 mg/l 20 mg/l Monthly per Grab Occurrence

a. The pemittee shall notify the Executive Secretary of the Michigan Water Resources Coraission of the exact location of the outfall, in writing, at least 30 days prior to the commencement of discharges therefrom.

6.0 nor greater than 9.0 . The

.b. The pH shall not be less than .

pH shall be monitored as follows: Week 1v oer occurrence: arab The

c. The discharge shall not cause exces}ive foam in the receiving waters.

discharge shall be essentially free of floating and settleable solids.

d. The discharge shall not contain oil or other substances in amounts sufficien-to create a visible film or sheen on the receiving waters.

e. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements above shall be taken prior to discharoe to the waters of the State.

A.4-46 Supplement 5 - January 1979

, Perni t ::o. _tiLLO39110 EF-2-ER(OL) Page 3 of 8

2. Final Limitations (Leak / Hydrostatic Testing, During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until the expiration date of this permit, the permittee is authorized to discharge waters frca leak testing; hydrostatic testing; ad preoperational testing as required for nuclear pc,,er plant systems and equipment through outfall (see Fcotnote a). Sxh discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below: Discha rr:e ' iri o e inr r, kg/ day (los/cgyl Cercentrations Monitorina Recuirerents Effluent Daily Daliy vally Daily Measurerent Sample Cha ra c teris t ic Average Maximum Averace Maximum Frequency Tvre 3

Flow, M / Day (MGD) Per occurrence

a. The permittee shall notify the Executive Secretary of the Michigan Water Resources Comission of the exact location of the outfall and the nature of the discharge, in writing, at least 30 days prior to the cccc.encement of discharge therefrom.

b. The discharge shall not cause excessive foam in the receiving waters. The discharge shall be essentially free of floating and settleable solids.

c. The discharge shall not contain oil or other substances in amounts sufficient to create a visible film or sheen on the receiving waters.

d. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements above shall be taken prior to distharae to the water of the State.

A.4-47 Suppleme(t 5 - January 1979

Page 4 of _8_

Permit fio. tit n039_110_ EF-2-ER(OL)

3. Final Limitations (Flu';hing and Passivation)

Dur;ng the period beginning on the effective date of this pernit and lasting until the expiretion date of this permit, the permittee is authorized to discharge wasteaater frcm flushir:g and passivation c;.erations a, re<;uired fur nuclear rcaer plans systens and equipment through outfall (see Footnote a), Such discnarqes shall be limited e'.d r.onitored by the permittce as specified below; Discharce Limitations kq// day (lbs/ca n Other Linitations Monitorino Reauire y ts Cagy Measurement Sa.ple Effluent ~Da ily DHly Daily Averece Maximum Frequency Tyce Characteristic Averace Maxinum Flou, M3/ Day (l'3D) Per Occurrence Per Occurrence Grab

/;nmonia (as fi)

Per Occurrence Grab Hydrazine (:lHgiH2 )

15 mg/l 20 rog/l Monthly per Grab Oil and Grease Occurrence 30 mg/l 100 mg/l Per Occurrence Grab Total Suspended Solids 1 mg/l Per Occurrence Grab Total Iron 1 mg/l Per Occurrence Grab Total Copper Per Occurrence Grab Total Phospnorus (as P) 1 mg/l

a. The permittee shall notify the Executive Secretary of the Michigan IIater Resources Connission of the exact location of the outfall and the nature of the discharge, in writing, at least 30 days prior to the comencement of discharge therefrom, nor greater than o; . The

b. The pH shall not be less than 6.5 -

pH shall be monitored as follows: cer occurrence: ore The

c. The discharge shall not cause excessive foam in the receiving waters.

discharge shall be essentially free of floating and settleable solids.

d. The discharge shall not contain oil or other substances in amounts sufficient to creatt a visible film or sheen on the receiving waters.

e. Samples taken in compliance I withWater Coolina the monitoring Canal requirements with exception of above p h hich shall b taken prior to discharge to Fermi -

shall L_e monitorea at tne Overflow Cana1 nrior to discharge to the Swan Creek.

A.4-43 Supplement 5 - January 1979

Permit No. MI 0039110 EF-2-ER(OL) Page 5 of 8

4. Final Limi ta tions (Chemical Rinse Water)

During the period beginninq on the effective date of this permit and lasting until the expiration date of this permit, the permittee is authorized to discharge waste water from chemical rinsing operations as required for nuclear power plant systems and caui; rent through outfall (see Fcotnoto a). Such discharges shall be limited and monitored t;y the perr.:ittee as specified below:

Discharce Limitations ka/ day (lbs/da[ Concen tra tions Monitorina Recuirements Ef fluent Daily Daily DEy 0aily 7

Measurenent Sample Characteristic Avera ge Maximum Average Maxirum Frequency Tvee Flow, M 3/ Day (MGD) Per Occurrence Oil ar.d Grease 15 mg/l 20 mg/l Monthly per Grab Occurrence Total Suspended Solids 30 mg/l 100 mg/l Per Occurrence Grab Total Iron 1 ng/l Per Occurrence Grab Total Copper 1 mg/l Per Occurrence Grab

i. s

a. The permittee shall notify the Executive Secretary of the Michigan Water Resources Comission of the exact location of the outfall and the nature of the discharge, in writing, at least 30 days prior to the comencement of discharge therefrom.

b. The pH shall not be less than 6.5 nor greater than 9.5 . The pH shall be monitored as follows: per occurrence; grab .

c. The discharge shall not cause excessive foam in the receiving waters. The discharge shall be essentially free of floating and settleable solids.

d. The discharge shall not contain vil or other substances in amounts sufficient to create a visible film or sheen on the receiving waters.

e. samples taken in coroliance with the monitoring reouirements above shall be taken prior to discharge to Fermi I Coolina Water Canal WITh exception of pH which _

.shall he monitarr_tL AL_the._0Jer_Osw.QD11_y_jor to discharoe to the Swan Creek.

A.4-49 Supplement 5 - January 1979

Permi t tio. _lil 0039110 EF-2-ER(OL) Page J_ of 8

5. Final Limitations (Stormater)

During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until the expiration date of this permis, the p0rnittce is authorized to discharge point source storm water runoff through out'all 201C. Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified.

Discharce Liritations ~

kg/ day (Es/Jayl

~

(,onc enTra~ti o ns Monitorino Recuirewnts Effluent Daily DaBy Da il y Daily - *

.;easurerent Sa.,pTe Characteristic Averoce Maximum Averece Maxi-um Freg ency_ Type The discharge is limited to stor= tater runoff only.

6. Final Limitations (cor.struction site cc.vatering)

During the pericd beginning on the eff ective date of this permit and lasting until the expiration date of this permit, the permittee is authorized to discharge point source construction site dewatering through outfall (see Footnote a). Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:

Discharce Limitations ko/ day (lbs/ cay 1 _ConcentAtir,y n Monitorina Recuiremants Effluent Daily Daily Daily Dalty Measurer.ent Sample Characteristic _ Averace Maximum Average Maxicum Frecuency - Tyoe 15mg/l 20mg/l monthly Grab 011 and Grease

a. The permittee shall notify the Executive Secretary of the Michigan Water Resources Commission of the exact location of the outfall, in writing, at least 30 days prior to the commencement of discharge therefrom.

b. The discharge shall not cause excessive foam in the receiving waters. The discharge shall be essentially free of floating add setticable solids.

c. The discharge shall not contain oil or other substances in amounts sufficient to create a visible film or sheen on the receiving waters.

A.4-50 Supplement 5 - January 1979

Pemit No. M1 0039110 EF-2-ER(OL) Page 7 of 8 PART I B. MONITORING AND REPORTING

1. Representative Sampling Samples and measurements taken as rcquired herein shall be representative of the volume and nature of the monitored discharge.

2. Reporting The pemittee shall submit monitoring reports con: aining results obtained during the previous month and shall be postmarked no later than une 10th day of the month following each completed report period. The first report shall be submitted within 90 days of the date of issuance of this permit.

3. Definitions

a. The daily average discharge is defined as the total discharge by weight, or concentration if specified, during a calendar month divided by the number of days in the month that the production or commercial facility was operating. When less than daily sampling is required, the daily average discharge snall be deter-mined by the sumation of the measured daily discharges by weight divided by the nunber of days during the calendar month wher, the measurements were made.

b. The daily maximum discharge means the total discharge by weight, or concentration if specified, during any calendar day.

c. The Regional Administrator is defined as the Region V Administrator, U.S. EPA, located at 230 South

Dearborn,

13th Floor, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

d. The Michigan Water Resources Comission is located in the Stevens T.

Mason Building. The mailing address is Box 30028, Lansing, Michigan 48909.

4. Test Procedures Test procedures for the analysis of pollutants shall conform to regulations published pursuant to Section 304(g) of the Act, under which such procedures may be required.

5. Recording of Results For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements of this permit, the permittee shall record the following information:

a. The exact place, date, and time of sampling;

b. The dates the analyses were performed;

c. The person (s) who perfomed the analyses;

d. the analytical techniques or methods used; and

e. The results of all required analyses.

A.4-51 Supplement 5 - January 1979

09" b 0 b Pe r m i t No . ,,Ml_ _00391,10 EF-2-ER(OL)

6. Additional Monitoring by' Permittee If the permittee reonitors any pollutant at the location (s) designated herein more frequently than required by this permit, using approved analytical methods as specified above, the results of such monitoring shall be included in the. calculation and reporting of the values required in the Monthly Operating Report. Such increased frequency shall also be indicated.

7. Records Retention All records and information resulting from the monitoring activities required by this pernit including all records of analyses performed and calibration and raintenance of instrumentation and recordings from continuous monitoring instrumentation shall be retained for a minimum of three (3) years, or longer if requested by the Regional Administrator or the Micnigan Water Resources Co. mission.

C. SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE

1. The permittee shall achieve compliar.ce with the effluent limitations specified herein upon the effective date of this pemit.

2. The per=1 u:a shall comoly with the requirements of Section 10, Part II-A in accordance with the following:

a. Submit plans for approval to the Chief of the Water Quality Division necessary to comply with the primary power provision of Section 10 in Part 11 on or before N/A .

b. The permittee shall comply with the requirenents of items 10a or 10b contained in Part 11 on or before Ng_

Hot withstanding the preceding sentence the permittee shall at all times halt, reduce, or othentise control production in order to protect the waters of the State of Michigan upon the reduction or loss of the primary source of power.

3. No later than 14 calendar days following a date identified in the above schedule of compliance, the permittee shall submit either a report of progress or, in the case of specific actions being required by identified dates, aIn the latter case, written notice of compliance or noncompliance.

siiaTT Include the cause of noncompliance, any remedial actions taken, and the probability of meeting the next scheduled requirement.

o A.N2 Supplement 5 - January 1979

Pemi t tio. MI 0039110 EF-2-ER(OL) Page _1_ of . _4 PART II A. MAtiAGEMEtiT REQUIREMEtiTS

1. Change in Discharge All discharges authorized herein shall be consistent with the tems and conditions cf this semit. The discharge of any pollutant identified in this pemit more frequently than or at a level in excess of that authorized shall constitute a violation of the permit. Any anticipated facility expansions, production increases, or prccess modificaticns which will result in new, different, or increased discharges of pollutants must be reported by submission of a new fiPCES application or, if such changes will not violate the effluent limitations specified in this permit, by notice to the vera.it issuing authority of such changes.

Following such notice, the perr.it may be modified to specify and limit any pollutants not previously limited.

2. Containment Facilities The pemittee shall provide approved facilities for contair. ment cf any accidental losses of concentrated solutions, acids, alkalies, salts, oils, or other polluting materials in accordance with the req'airements of the tiichigan Water Resources Comission Rules , Part 5.

3. Operator Certification The pemitter shall have the waste treatment facilities under the direct supervision of an operator certified by the Michigan Water Resources Comission, ,

as required by Section 6a of the Michigan Act.

4. Noncompliance tiotification If, for any reason, the pemittee does not comply with or will be unable to comply with any daily maximum effluent limitation specified in this pemit, the  !

permittee shall provide the Regional Administrator and the State with the following information, in writing, within five (5) days of becoming aware of such condition:

a. A description of the discharge and cause of noncompliance; and

b. The period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times; or, if not corrected, the anticipated time the ncncompliance is expected to continue, and steps being taken to reduce, eliminate and prevent recurrcice of the noncomplying discharge.

5. Spill fiotification The pemittee shall imediately report any spill or loss of any product, [

by-product, intermediate product, oils , solvents, waste material, or any other i polluting substance which occurs to the surface or grcundwaters of the state by I calling the Department of tiatural Resources 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> Emergency Response telephone I number (517) 373-7660; and, the pemittee shall within ten (10) days of the spill or loss provide the State with a full written explanation as to the cause and .j discovery of the spill or loss, clean up and recovery measures taken, preventative (

measures to be taken, and schedule of implementation. I A.4-53 Supplement 5 - January 1979

, Permit Po. ,,_MI 0039110 Page 2 of 4 EF-2-ER(OL)

6. Facilities Operation The permittee shall at all times maintain in gccd working order and operate as ef ficiently as possible, all treatment or control facilities or systems installed or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit.

7. Adverse Impact The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize any adverse in pact to navigable waters resulting from nonccnpliance with any effluent limitations specified in this pemit, including such accelerated or additional monitoring as necessary to determine the nature and in pact of the noncomplying discharge.

8. By-passing Any diversion from or by-pass of facilities necessary to maintain compliance with the terms and conditicns of this pemit is prohibited, except (i) where unavoid-able to prevent loss of life or severe property damage, or (ii) where excessive storm drainage or runoff would damage any facilities necessary for ccmpliance with the effluent limitations and prohibitions of this pernit. The remittee shall orcmptly notify the Michigan Water Rescurces Com::issicn and the Regional Acministrator, in writing, of such diversion or by-pass.

9. Recoved Substances Solids, sludges, filter backwash, or other pollutants removed from or resulting from treatment or control of wastewaters shall be disposed of in a manner such as to prevent any pollutant from such materials from entering navigable waters, or the entry of toxic or hamful contaminants thereof onto the groundwaters in concentrations or amounts detrimental to the groundwater resource.

10. Power Failures In order to maintain compliance with the effluent limitations and prohibitions of this pemit, the pemittee shall either:

a. Provide an alternative power source sufficient to operate facilities utilized by permittee to maintain compliance with the effluent limitations and conditions of this pemit which provision shall be indicated in this permit by inclusion of a specific ccmpliance date in each appropriate " Schedule of Compliance for Effluent Limitations",

or

b. Upon the reduction, loss, or failure of cne or more of the primary sources of power to facilities utilized by the permittee tc maintain compliance with the effluent limitations and conditions of this permit, the pennittee shall halt, reduce or othentise control production and/or all discharge in order to maintain ccmpliance with the effluent limitations and conditions of this pemit.

A.4-54 Supplemen) 5 - January 1979

Pemit flo. MI 0039110 #90 U EF-2-ER(OL)

B. RESP 0.1SIBILITIES

1. Right of Entry The pemittee shall allow the Executive Secretary of the Michigan Water Resources Comission, the Regional Administrator an/or their authorized repre-sentatives, upon the presentaticn of the credentials and subject to applicable requirements of federal and state law:

a. To enter upon the permittee's premises where an effluent source is located or in which any records are required to be kept under the terms and conditions of this pemit; and

b. At reasonable times to have access to anc cooy any records required to be kept under the tems and conditions of this pemit; to inspect any n.onitoring equipment or nonitoring method required in this pemit; and to sample any discharge of pollutants.

2. Transfer of Cwnership or Control In the event of any change in control or ownership of facilities from which the authorized discharge emanate, the pemittee shall notify the succeeding owner or controller of the existence of this pemit by letter, a copy of which shall be forwarded to the Michigan Water Resources Concission and the Regional Administrator.

3. Availability of Reports Except for data detemined to be confidential under Section 208 of the Act and Rule 2128 of the Water Resources Co mission Rules, Part 21, all reports prepared in accordance with the tems of this pemit shall be available for public inspection at the offices of the State Water Pollution Control Agency and the Regional Administrator. As required by the Act, effluent data shall not be considered confidential. Knowingly caking any false statement on any such report may result in the imposition of criminal penalties as provided for in Section 309 of the Act and Sections 7 and 10 of the Michigan Act.

4. Permit Modification After notice and opportunity for a hearing, this pemit may be modified, suspended, or revoked in whole or in part during its term for cause including, but not limited to, the follcwing:

a. Violation of any tems or conditions of this permit;

b. Obtaining this pemit by misrepresentation or failure to disclose fully, all relevant facts; or

c. A change in any condition that requires either a temporary or permanent reduction or elimination of the authorized discharge. ,

A.4-55 Supplement 5 - January 1979

M1 0030110 EF-2-ER(OL) Page 4 of 4

, Permit No.

5. Toxic Pollutants Notwithstcnding Part II, B-4 above, if a toxic effluent standard or prohibition (including any schedule of ccmpliance ssecified in such effluent standard or prohibition) is established under Section 307(a) of the Act for a toxic pollutant which is present in the discharge and such standard or pro-hibition is more stringent than any limitation for such pollutant in this permit, this permit shall be revised or r:odified in accordince with the tc)ic effluent standard or prohibition and the pemittee so notified.

6. Civil and Criminal Liability Except as provided in pemit conditions on "Sy-passing" (Part II, A-8) and Power Failures" (Part 11, A-10), nothing in this pemit shall te construed te relieve the permittee frcm civil or crininal penalties for nor.cenpliance, whetner or not such nonccmpliance is due to factors beycnd his control, such as accidents, equipment breakdowns, or labor disputes.

7. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability Nothing in this pemit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee frcm any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which the pemittee may be subject under Section 311 of the Act.

8. State Laws S

Nothing in this pemit shall be ctrgrued to preclude the instutition of any legal action or relieve the pemittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established pursuant to any applicable State law or regulation under authority preserved by Section 510 of the Act.

9. Property Rights The issuance of this perait does not convey any property rights in either real or personal property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury to private property cr any invasion of personal rights, nor infringement of Federal, State or local laws or regulations, nor does it obviate the necessity of obtaining such pemits or approvals from other units of government as may be required by law.

10. Severability The provisions of this pemit are severable, and if any provision of this pemit, or the application of any provision of this permit to any circumstances, is held invalid, the application of such provision to other circumstances, and the remainder of this pemit, shall not be affected thereby.

A.4 Supplement 5 - January 1979 g

EF-2-ER(OL)

CHEMIC AL CHARACTERISTICS

20. Explain the background for the proposed substantial reduction in the size of the holding pond, and the consequent new preposal for a smaller pond plus the construction and operation of a chemical dechlorination system to remove residual chlorine values (November 30, 1973).

RESPONSE

Refer to responses to Question 5, Heat Dissipation System, and Question 8, Chemical Characteristics, September 22,1978.

A.4-57 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

AQUATIC ECOLOGY

1. (Section 2.7.1.1). Provide a discussion of the effects of the plant on important fish populations, based on the spawning and distribution information presented on the important species in Lake Erie.

Provide quantitative estimates of the effects on important species through entrainment and local increases in temperature (September 22, 197S).

1. (Section 2.7.1.1). Provide a discussion of the effects of the plant on important fish populations, tased on the spawining and distribution information presented on the important species in Lake Erie.

Provide quantitative estimates of the effects on important species or families through entrainm. nt and local increases in temperature (November 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

The effects of entrainment are addressed in response to Question 2.

The effects of local increases in temperature on selected fishes are herein addressed. Selected life history information are summarized in Table 1 to provide information for the analyses.

The temperature differential at the Enrico Fermi Unit 2 discharge may range from 25 to 42 F. Because of mixing, however, the 3 F isotherm occupies an extremely small area primarily at the surface. (See Section 5.1). The selected species, (See Question 2),

A.4-58 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL) the alewife, gizzard shad, carp, emerald shinner, white bass, yellow pe rch, and logperch, may potentially be slightly affected by the small area with the relatively high AT. The species that broadcast their eggs near the surface, e.g., the emerald shiner and white bass, may be affected for a slightly larger area from the surface plume. However, since the eggs of most of the species at the site are adhesive and/or demersal (Table 1), the surface plume should have little or no significant effect.

The habitats for spawning, nursery, and adults (Table 1) are common and plentiful in the Western Batin and thus the minor displacement from the immediate discharge area will not significantly affect the Western Basin fish populaticns.

Cold shock should not be a problem near the discharge. The plume is small and thus will not attract numerous fishes. In the event of plant shut down, there will be no sudden temperature reduction, since the discharge from the circulating water reservoir will allow a gradual reductior. in the plume AT.

Lethal, preferred, and upper avoidance temperatures are summarized for fishes of Lake Erie found near Fermi 2 in Tables 5.1-6 and 5.1-6a of the Enrico Fermi 2. Environmental Report (Operating License). Similar to the effects during spawning, the effects during nonspawning perieds will also be minimal. Fish will avoid the immediate discharge vicinity during summer months, an area that will amount to only a very few acres. The fishes will generally occupy areas of their preferred temperatures and avoid other temperatures, so heat shock should not be a problem.

The minimal reduction of less than 18 acres (3 F isotherm) from the 811,000-acre area of the Western Basin will not affect the fish populations with regard to nursery or adult habitats.

A.4-59 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

REFERENCES Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.1977. Final report Marcus Hook Creek Studies for BP Oil, Inc. No. 77-26. Philadelpi.ia.

Bigelow, H.B., W.C. Schroeder.1953. Fishes of the Gulf of Maine.

Bull. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv., Fish. Bull. 74, Vol. 53. 377 pp.

Bodola, A.1966. Life history of the gizzard shad, Dorosoma cepedianum (Le Sueur) in west ern Lake Eris. U.S. Fish. Wild. Serv. 66(2):

391-425.

Breder, C.M. and D.E. Rosen.1966. Modes of reproduction in fishes.

Nat. Hist. Press, Garden City, NY. 941 pp.

Brom., H.W.1976. Handbook of the effects of temperature on some North American fishes. Witt Supplements. American Electric Power Service Corp. Canton, Ohio.

Carlander, K.D.1969. Har dbook of freshwater fishery biology. Vol.1, Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames, Iowa. 752 pp.

Chadwick, H.K., C.E. Von Gelderman, Jr. and M.L. Johnson. 1966.

White bass. pp. 412-421. In: A. Calhoun (Ed). Ialand fisheries management. Calif. Cept. of Fish and Game.

Committee on Water Quality Criteria. 1973. Water Quality criteria 1972. EPA. R3.73.003.

Cocper, J.E.1978. Eggs and larvae of the logperch, Percina carpodes (Rafinesque). The Am. Midi. Nat. 99(2): 257-269.

Eddy, S., J.C. Underhill. 1943(1974). Northern fishes. Univ. of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minn.,276 pp.

A.4-60 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

Fish, M.P.1932. Contributions to the early life histories of sixty-two species of fishes from Lake Erie and its tributary waters.

U.S. Bur. Fish. Bull. 10(47): 298-398.

Gray,3.W. 1942. Studies of Notropis atherinoides Rafinesque, in the Bass Islands region of Lake Erie. M.S. Thesis, Ohio State Univ. 29 pp.

Jester, D.B., B.L. Jensen.1972. Life history and ecology of the gizzard shad, Dorosoma cepedianum (Le Sueur) with reference to Elephant Butte Lake. New f.lexico State Univ. Agric. Exp.

Sta. Res. Report 218. 56 pp.

Jester, D.B. 1974. Life history, ecology and management of the carp, Cyprinus carpio Linnaeus, in Elephant Butte Lake.

New Mexico State Univ. Agric. Exp. Sta. Res. Rpt. 273.

80 pp.

Langlois, T.H. 1954. The western end of Lake Erie and its ecology.

3.W. Edwards, Ann Arbor, :/ich. 479 pp.

Mansueti, R.3.1956. Alewife herring eggs and larvae reared successfully in lab. Md. Tidewater News 13 (1): 2-3.

Miller, R.R.1960. Systematics and biology of the gizzard shad (Doroscm_a cepedianium) and related fishes. U.S. Fish Wildlife Serv. Fish. Bull. 173, Vol. 60: 371-392.

Muncy, R.J.1962. Life history of the yellow perch, Perca flavescens, in estuarine waters of Severn River, a tributary of Chesapeake Bay, Maryland. Ches. Sci. 3(3): 143-149.

A.4-61 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

Parkhurst, B.R.1971. Part V. The distribution and growth of the fish populations along the western shore of Lake Erie at Monroe, Michigan during 1970. Tech. Rep. No.17. Mich. State Univ. Inst. of Wat. Res., East Lansing.

Pflieger, W.L.1975. The fishes of Missouri. Missouri De pt.

of Cons. 343 pp.

Raney, E.C.1965. Some pan fishes of New York - yellow perch, white perch, white bass, freshwater drum. NYS Cons. Dept.

information Leaflet. pp. 1-9.

Scott, W.C. and DE.J. Crossmsn. 1973. Freshwater fishes of Canada. Fish. Res. Bd. Canadr Bull. 184. 996 pp.

Trautman, M.B.1957. The fishes of Ohio, with illustrated keys.

The Ohio State Univ. Press. :olumbus, Ohio. 68.5 pp.

Walburg, C.H., P.R. Nichols.1967. Biology and management of the American shad and status of fisheries Atlantic Coast of the United States,1960. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv. Spec. Sci.

Rpt. Fish. No. 550.

Webb,3.F., D.D. Moss. Spawning behavior and age and growth of white bass in Center 11111 Reservoir, Tennessee. Proc. 21 Ann. Conf. SE Assoc. Of Game and Fish Commissioners. pp.

343-357.

Winn. H.E.1958. Ccmparative reproductive behavior and ecology of fourteen species cf darters (Pisces-Percidae). Ecol. Mono.

28 (2): 155-191.

A.4-62 Supplement 5 - January 1979

948 Table 1. Life History Information for Selected Species Spawning Spawning Spawning Habitat Species Period Temperature (Fl Behavior Spawning Nursery Adult Eggs mid March-Augustl 55 602,3 Upstream migration Po nds, sluggish Spawning grounds 6 Dpan waters 6 Demersal6 Alewife Anadromous4,7 stretches of streams 3 Protected areas 6 Non-adhesive 5 Eggs broadcast at Shallow beaches 6 Deep water 6 random 5 lashore migration 6 mid March-August 8 Eggs broadcast 8 Sloughs, ponds, Littoral and Same as nursery 11 Adhesive 8,12 Ginard shad 63-739 lakes,large river 58 timautic areas 11 0eepwater in Semi bouyant8 June July 9 50-708 64-7511 sand, gravel Shallow water 11 winter 11 Demersall2 627 boulder barb 6710 Shallow shores 10 April-Augustl 62.6-82.46 Eggs scattered over Shallow water 2,6 Low gradient warm, Warm waters, Adhesive 6 Carp June-July 12 65-7213 submerged plants and Dver plants 15 streams 15 mudbottomed Demersal6 March May6 667 debris 2,4,12,14 Shallow tones 17 large streams 16 Eggs released near Near shore 6 Inshore waters 6 Open waters 6 Demersal6,17 Emerald shiner Until mid August 10 68.080.61 July-August1 s in open Dfishore6 June-August 12 surface wateil $ over a bottom of sand or m firm mud 17 y White bass May12 6012 Migrate to shallows Near surf ace or Shore areas 22 Difshore21 Demersal6,24 y b March May21 58-7520,24 and tributaries 6,24 midwater6,17 Deeper waters 24 Adhesive 6,24 m 7 April-June 24 53 5521 Eggs scattered at I to 3 ft21 surface 24 3 or near surf ace 7,24 O

$ 537 Shoreline 21 Sand and rock C shores 7 Yellow perch February-March 23 35.6-5123 Eggs laid in Near shore 24 Weedy areas 24 Same as nursery Semibouyant6 February-July 1 44 5424 accordian like Dn sand, gravel, Shallow to medium Ribbons adhesive 6 April May24 gelatinous ribbons 24 or rubble bottom 6,24 depths 24 Non-adhesive 5 (A No parentalcane6,24 on vegetations24 Shore areas 22 Migration to shore 5-10 f t24 o shallows or tribu-rn tanes6 Logperch June + 6 >6426 Migration to sandy Sandy inshore Sand, gravel or Deepwater, off- Adhesive 26 April-July 25 inshore shallows 6 shallows 6 rocky beaches shore 6,25 Demersal26 a

" Eggs buried in sand 25 Lake shores 25 same as nursery 25

• Stream riffles 25 s

La

$ 1 Brown,1976 10Langlois,1954 19Gray,1942

@ 2Cartander,1969 11Jester and Jensen,1973 20Chadwick et al.,1966 Q 3Bigelow and Schroeder,1953 12Breder and Rosen,1966 21Webb and Moss,1968 g 4 Academy of NaturalSciencesof Philadelphia,1977 13Jester,1974 22Parkhurst,1971

% SMansueti,1956-Mansucti 14Walburg and Nichols,1967 23Muncy,1962

• 24Raney,1965 6Scott and Crossman,1973 15Trautman,1957 7Committee on Water Duality Criteria,1973 16 Eddy and Underhill,1943 25Winn,1958 8 Miller,1960 17Pflieger,1975 26 Cooper,1978 9 Bodola,1966 18 Fish,1932

EF-2-ER(OL)

AQUATIC ECOLOGY

2. (Section 2.7.1.1 and Appendix A.2). The effect of the plant on the important fish populations through entrainment is inacequately discussed. Item 350.4 specifically requests quantitative estimates on a species basis for entrainment and local temperature increases.

The discussion of the effect of local temperature increases, although non-quantitative, is marginally adequate. However, the discussion regarding entrainment impact is not acceptable.

Numeric estimates must be made on a species basis. These estimates were not provided in Subsection 5.1.3, or in Section 5.2, 5.4, or 5.5. (September 22, 1978).

1. The .:ffect of the plant on the important fish populations through entrainment is inadequately discussed. Item 350.4 specifically requests quantitative estimates on a species basis for entrainment and local temperature increa<es. The discussion of the effect of local temperature increases, although non-quantitative, is marginally adequate. However, the discussion regarding entrainment impact is not acceptable. Numeric estimates must be made on a species or family basis. These estimates were not provided in Subsection 5.1.3, or in Sections 5.2,5.4, or 5.5 (November 30, 1978).

R ESPONSE Quantitative estimates of the effects of entrainment at the Fermi 2 intake were made using the May 1976 through April 1977 oblique tow ichthyoplankton data from inshore station (5)

A.4-64 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL) of transect C (across the mouth of the intake channel (Table 10-25, Appendix 2C, Supplement 4). The equations used were adapted from Potter et. al. (1973). '" make the estimates, it was assumed that the densities and composition of ichthyoplankton collected would be representative of the densities and composition throughout the month. The average monthly flow rate at the intake was used to project the volume of water used as influent per 24-hour period during each month (Table 1).

The following equation was used to make each 24-hour estimate of entrainment for each taxon (T24)

T = Va(T/100) 24 where V = the average influent volume (m ) per 24-hour day for each month a = the months T = The number of specimens of each taxon per 100 m3 on each sample date for that month The estimates of the number of each tax 'n entrained per month (T ) were calculated as follows:

mo T = de(T24) mo e=1 where e = the number of 24-hour estimates per month d = the number of days in month represented by a 24-hour estimate T = the estimated number of each taxon entrained 24 per 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.

A.4-65 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

Monthly totals were made by summing the T mo f r each month; the total yearly estimate was made by summing the monthly totals by month and taxon.

SELECTED SPECIES The USEPA (1977) de'ined representative specics as: 1) species with high yield to commercial or sport fisheries,2) species that are important links in food chains, 3) species having large biomass in tne existing ecosystem (desireable species), and 4) rare and endangered species. These criteria were used herein to select representative fishes for the Farmi 2 entrainment evaluation.

No rare or endangered species were collected during the study program (Department of the Interior 1977). Sport and commercially important species include the carp, goldfish, channel catfish, white bass, gizzard shad, freshwater drum, yelloiv perch, and logperch. The gizzard shad, alewife, and emerald shiner are important links in the food crain. Sueral of the above species represent large proportions of fish biomass in Lake Erie. For the following discussion the carp, white bass, and yellow perch were selected, representing sport and commercial fishing importance and/or significant biomass. The alewife, gizzard shad, ar.d emerald chiner were selected as representing forage fish. The logperch is included as another important species based on its percentage in the following entrainment estimate.

ENTRAINMENT oER YEAR An estimated 19,360,485 ichthyoplankton could be entrained by the Fermi 2 intake per year (Table 2). Some 83.8% of the fish larvae were clupeids (76% were gizzard shad,1.8% were alewife, and 5.9% were either gizzard shad or alewife (Table 2) .

A.4-66 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

Approximately 16.2% or 3,135,835 !arvae of all other species were fourid. Larvae of the emerald shiner (7.1%) white bass (1.7%), yellow perch (1.0%), and logperch (2.1%) were the only other taxa representing more than 1%( 200,000 larvae) of the annual estimate. Eggs accounted for less than 0.5% of the entrainment estimate. This is a conservative estimate since it is based on a 100% plant capacity factor. The actual capacity factor is estimated to be 75%.

If each species is to maintain the same relative abundance in the system then the same relative numbers must survive from generation to generation (Everhart, Eipper, Youngs,1975). Some variability between years shoult be expected when fish life spans, year class strength variability, and environmental effects on populations survival are considered.

The numbers of fish larvae potentially entrained at Fermi 2 may be translated into the potential number of adults that they represent (equivalent adults)if survival rates from larvae to adult developmental stages can be determined. Since survival data from larva to adult are not available for tt e species considered here, and vary greatly among years and locations, gross estimates were calculated using the equivalent adults method of Horst (1977). This method is an indirect approach whereby larva to adult survival is calculated from fecundity, egg to larva survival, and egg to adult survival.

For these purposes, a wcrst case (100%) mortality of entrained organisms is assumed. The following description of the model is from Horst (1977).

This model is derived from the simple difference equation of population dynamics N t-1 = F. N t

A.4-67 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL) where Nt = the number of fish in population at time t R = the rate of population growth, which describes the change in the number in individuals in the population between successive time intervals t = time measured in years or generations If the population is at equilibrium, in one generation the eggs produced by a breeding pair will be reduced to two breeding adults:

2 = S F EA .

where S survival from egg to adult EA =

F = the fecundity of a female during her life This equation may also be expressed as:

S EA

= 2/F The survivorship from egg to adult is equal to the product of the survivorship from egg to larvae (SEL) and the survivorship from larvae to adult (Sgg):

S b S EA

• EL LA Combining the above equations allows calculation for Sgg S 2 LA * -

EL' A.4-68 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

The number of adults which would have survived from larvae to adult equals the number of larvae entrained multiplied by the survivorship SLA, assuming no density-dependent compensatory alteration in survivorship.

Several assumptions are made. These include (1) the population is in equilibrium with regard to numbers and age distribution, (2) the life time of a fish in the population is representative of the population (mean generation time), (3) there are equal numbers of each sex, and (4)lesses of larvae are instantaneous.

The fecundity of female during her life (F)is calculated from:

G F =  ;{g f; where G = the mean generation time f; = the average fecundity of a female during each year of her life The above equation (E) dces not come from Horst (1977). G is determined subjectively to be midwat between the age of sexual maturity and loss of reproductive capability (Potter 1978).

Survival rates from eggs to larvae (SEL) m y v ry gre tly within a species among populations and years. It is assumed that SEL from other locations are representative of Lake Erie. Where specific SEL are lacking it is assumed that SEL = 0.25 in species characterized by parental care and SEL = 0.005 in species lacking parental care. Selection of the first value was influenced by Clady's (1970) observation of greater than 25% survival from A.4-69 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL) egg to larval stage of the smallmouth bass and the latter value by Rothct.ild's (1961) observation of 0.5% survival of rainbow smelt eggs.

Alewife An estimated 358,651 larval alewife could be entrained annually (Table 3). This represents an estimated loss to the system of 79 adult alewife (Table 3). Since alewife are abundant in the region, and are commerically harvested, the annual loss of 79 adults would not have a significant effect on the Western Basin population.

Gizzard Shad An estimated 14,717,498 gizzard shad larvae could be entrained annually, resulting in a reduction of 5,887 adults annually from the breeding population (Table 3). As noted for the alewife, the gizzard shad is very abundant in most areas of the Western Basin, and is commercially harvested (695,402 fish in 1977), thus reductions should not affect the Western Basin population.

Carp Some 177,289 carp larvar could be entrained annually resulting in a loss of 3 adult carp (Table 3). Carp are harvested in large numbers from Lake Erie (550,400 fish in 1977) and the annual loss of 3 additional adults would not be noticed.

Emerald Shiner An estimated 1,379,135 cmerald shiner larvae could be entrained annually (Table 3). The loss of potential adult emerald shiner A.4-7 0 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL) equals 16,551. The emerald shiner is very abundant in the vicinity of the Fermi 2 plant, and in the Western Basin in general (Baker and Scholl 1972). Scott and Crossman (1973) reported that in all probability emerald shiner populations fluctuated widely in abundance from year to year, and that these fluctuations have been characteristic of the populations for over 50 years. Since the emerald shiner is cropped significantly by predators (including man) the loss.of 16,500 additional adults from the Western Basin population will probably not be significant.

White Bass An estimated 323,068 larval wi.ite bass could be entrained annually resulting in the potential loss cf 356 white bass adults (Table 3).

Commercial landings 1f the white bass in Lake Erie during 1977 were 1,326,558 fish. The additional reduction of 356 adults as a result of entrainemnt should be an insignificant impact on the Western Basin white bass population.

Yellow Perch The potential loss of 178 ar. ult yellow perch was calculated from the estimated 204,003 !arvae that might be entrained by the Fermi 2 intake annually. Since this is obviously a low number in relation to the reported abundance (3,428,176 fish in 1977 commercial landings). The impact on the Lake Erie population will be minimal.

Loeperch The potential loss af 53,674 adult logperch would result from the entrainment of 412,874 larvae. Logperch are commonly preyed upon by Itke trout, walleye, and northern pike (Scott and Crossman 1973) but are probably of lesser importance as A.4-71 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL) a forage fish than the emerald shiner, alewife, and gizzard shad.

Reductions of the logperch population as a result of entrainment may reduce the local population near the power plant intake somewhat, but will not affect the populations of predator fishes nearby nor the logperch population of the Western Basin.

Summary Forage fishes, in particular, the logperch and emerald shiner, made up most of the potential adult fish loss as a result of entrainement of larvae. These losses, however, should not significz ntly alter the fish community structure near the power plant er in the Western Basin.

A.4-72 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

REFERENCES Baker, C.T., Jr., and R.L. Scholl.1972. Survey of Offshore Fish Species in Ohio Portion of Lake Erie. Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife, Dingell-Johson Project F-35-R-10, Mimeographed Reports, Study III, 22 PP.

Carlander, K.D. 1969. Handbook of Freshwater Fishery Biology.

Vol. I. Life History Data on Freshwater Fishes of the United States and Canada, exclusive of the Perci formes.100 a State University Press, Ames, Iowa,752 pp.

Clady, M.D.1970. Regulation of Fish Populations in Three Lightly Exploited Lakes in Northern Blichigan, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Michigan.

Clady, M.D.1975. Populatiori Dynamics of Walleye and Yellow Perch in Onedia Lake, April 1,1970 to March 31,1975.

Federal Aid Project F-17-R, Job I-e, New York State Conservation Department. 32 pp.

Clady, M.D.1976. Influence of Temperature and Wind on the Survival of Early Stage of Yellow Perch, Perca Flavescens, Journal Fisheries Rescatch Board Canada. 33(9), pp.1887-1893.

Department cf the Interior.1977. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Federal Register 101:1509.

Edsall, T.A.1970. The Effect of Temperature on the Rate of Development and Survival of Alewife Eggs and Larvae.

Transactions American Fisheries Society. 99(2), pp. 376-330.

A.4-73 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

Everhart, W.H., A.W. Eipper, W.D. Youngs. 1975. Principles of Fishery Science. Cornell University Press. Ithaca, NY.

Horst, T.J.1977. Mathematical Modeling of Power Station Impacts on Fisheries Resources in the United States, IFIP Working Conference on Modeling and Simulation of Land, Air and Water Resources Systems, Ghent, Belgium (Pre-print).

Nikolskii, G.V. 1969. Theory of Fish Population Dynamics.

Oliver and Boyd, Edinburg. 323 pp.

Polgar, T.T.1977. Striped Ba;s Ichthyoplankton Abundance Mortality and Production Estimation for the Potomac River Population. In W. Van Winkle (Ed), Proceedings of Conference on Assessing the Effects of Power-Plant-Inducted Mortailty on Fish Populations, Pergamon Press, NY, pp. 109-125.

Potter, W.A., K.L. Dickson, 3. Cairns, Jr. 1973. The effects of impingment and entrainment at Appalachian Power Company's Glen Lyn Plant on the fish ccmmunity of the New River. Center for Environmental Studies. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Blacksburg, VA.

Reed, R.J.1958. The Early Life History of Two Cyprinids Notropis rubellus and Campostoms anomalum pullum. Copeia 4, pp. 325-327.

Rothschild, B.J.1961. Production and Survival of Eggs of the American smelt, Osmerus mordax (Mitchill) in Maine. Trarsactions American Fisheries Society. 90(1), pp. 42-48.

Scott, W.B. and E.3. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater fishes of Canada.

- Fisheries Research Board Canada Bulletin 184. 966 pp.

A.4-74 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

Sheri, A.M.1968. Growth Dynamics of White Perch, Roccus americanus, During Colonization of Bay of Quinte, Lake Ontario.

Ph.D. Thesis, University of Waterloo,366 pp.

United Stttes Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).1977.

Draf t guidance for evaluating the adverse impacts of cooling water intake structures on the aquatic environment: Section 316 (b)

P.L.92-500. USEPA. Office of Water Envorcement. Permits Division, Industrial Permits Branch. Washington, D.C.

Van Vooren, A.R., D.H. Davies. 1974. Lake Erie Fisheries Investigations.

D.J. Projects F-35-R-12 Study II. Chio Department cf Natural Resources.

Winn, H.E.1958. Comparative Reproductive Behavior and Ecology of Fourteen Species of Darters (Pisces-Percidae). Ecological Monographs, 23(2), pp.155-191.

A.4-75 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

TABLE 1 AVERAGE MON" ILY FLOW RATE AT THE FERMI 2 INTAKE Month gpm m / min m / day April 21700 82.13 118267.2 May 22500 85.16 122630.4 June 24100 91.22 131356.8 July 27000 102.20 147168.0 August 27000 102.20 147168.0 September 25000 94.62 136252.8 I

calculated rate A.4-76 Supplement 5 - January 1979

948 Table 2 Estimates of Monthly and Annual Entrainment of Ichthyoplankton at the Fermi 2 Intake M AY,1976 JU N E,1976 JULY,1976 AU G UST,1976 SEPT.1976 APRIL,1977 TOTAL  %

DARTERS - 4,729 2,649 - - -

7,378 0.04 SUCKERS 6,622 - - - -

4.612 11,234 0.06 CRAPPIE - 7,619 4,268 6,402 - -

18,289 0.09 SUNFISit - - 17,219 - - - 17,719 0.09 BROOK SILVERSIDE - - -

20,530 - 20,530 0.11 WillTE PERCH - 15,500 8,683 - - - 24,183 0.12 SPOTTAIL SillNER 46,170 14,187 12,141 - - - 72,498 0.37 FRESilWATER DRUM - 60,293 76,572 - - 136,865 0.71 CARP 32,558 62,920 54,438 27,373 - -

177,289 0.92 rn R AINBOW SMELT 65,117 113,099 8,609 - - - 1E 6,825 0.96 73 YE LLOW PERCll 77,071 8,830 - - - 120,100 TJ4,003 1.05 Y

. WillTE BASS 17,475 245,769 59,824 - - - 323,068 1.67 ft f LOGPERCil 72,107 169,581 117,985 53,201 - - 412,874 2.13 3 y EMERALD SillNER - 111,259 78,956 1,188,970 - -

1,379,185 61,806 7.12 0.32 O

C E G GS, U NID ENTIFI ABLE 61,806 - - - - -

UNIDENTIFIABLE - 76,187 - 6,402 - -

82,589 0.43 SUBTOTAL 378/J28 887,973 441,344 1,302,878 124,712 3,135,835 16.2 y ALEWIFE EGGS ALEWIFE 132,145 4,709 19,426 185,211 21,869

- 4,709 358,651 0.02 1.85 o - -

E CLUPRIDHE -

197,429 43,046 903,317 - - 1,143,7S2 5.91 y GlZZARD Sil AD 100,618 9,569,607 4,757,205 290,068 - -

14,717,498 76.02 100,618 9,899,181 4,824,386 1,378,596 21,869 16,224,650 83.8 k SUBTOTAL Y TOTAL 479,546 10,787,154 5,253,589 2,693,615 21,869 19,360,485 100.0 E

a u

G 3

948 Table 3 Calculation of Potential Adult Fish Loss Due to Entrainment of Fish Larvae at the Enrico Fermi Unit 2 Intake 1977 Angler Estimated and commercial  %

No. Larvae No. Adults Harvest, No., llarvest ph C d Entrained Lost Western Basin Lost Species Ga SEA SEL SLA' Alewife 51 3D,000 1 6.f 6 x 10-5 0.300I 2.2 x 104 358,651 79 -

Ginard shad 41 1,000,000 1 2.0 x 10-6 0.0059 4.0 x 104 14,717,498 5,887 695 402 0.85 Carp Gl 400,000 3 5.0 x 10-6 0.34h 1.5 x 10-5 177,289 3 550,400 0.0005 Emerald shiner 2 I,m 1,700 I 1.2 10-3 0.100i 1.2 x 10 2 1,379,185 16,551 -

White bass 4n 600,000n 3.3 e 10-6 0.003i 1.1 x 10'3 323,068 356 1,326,558 0.03 Y Yellow perch 44 30,0008 6.7 e 10-5 0.077k 8.7 x 104 204,003 178 3,428,176 0.005 $

Logperch 2P 3,000".P 6.7 x 104 0.0059 1.3 x 10-I 412,874 53,674 -

O w C aMean generation time IAssumed using Reed (1958) b Mean life time fecundity IAssumed usmg Poigar (1977)

C Survival k Clady (1975,1976) from egg to adult d Survival from egg to larva I Assumed from Carlander (1969)

' Survival from larva to adult '" Assumed from Pflieger (1975) f E IEdsall (1970) " Scott and Crossman (1973) h 9 Assumed value 8Sheri (1968) g hNikoiskii(1969) PWinn (1958) 9VanVooren and Davies (1974)

[

E

~

k G

3

EF-2-ER(OL)

AOUATIC ECOLOGY

2. (Section 2.7.1) Discuss the importance of the portion of Lake Erie potentially af fected by the operation of the plant (i.e., the shore zone 3 miles either side of the plant) as a fish breeding ground and nursery area (November 30,1978)

RESPONSE

Ichthyoplankton in the vicinity of the Fermi 2 site are discussed in Appendix 2C, pp. 2C-24 through 2C-38, Supplement 4, February 1978.

Additionally, refer to Sections 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 for a description of the operation of the intake and discharge systems. Since the plume from the closed cycle cooling system at Fermi 2 is less than 18 acres (3 F isotherm),it is not expected that 3 miles of Lake Erie shoreline will be af fected by plant operation.

A.4-79 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

AQUATIC ECOLOGY

3. (Section 2.7.1) Provide evidence that indicates there are no important fish breeding grounds west of the barrier beaches in the western basin of Lake Erie. What fishes are known to breed in the vicinity of the intake? (September 22,1978).

RESPONSE

Presently, there are no barrier beaches in the vicinity of the Fermi Site. The area west of the " barrier beach"is now land.

Evidence of fish breeding in the vicinity of the intake was as-sumed by presence of fish eggs and/or larvae in ichthyo collec-tions near the intake. Evidence of breeding was grouped into common or uncommon breeding baaed on number of times eggs and/or larvae were collected and their relative densities (no/100 m ). Species that apparently breed commonly near the intake include the alewife, gizzard shad, carp, longperch, and freshwater drum. Other species, that apparently breed uncommonly near the intake but to a far lesser degree include the rainbow smelt, emerald shiner, spottail shiner, brook silversides, white bass, sunfish, darters, and yellow perch.

A.4-80 Supplement 5 - January 19d

EF-2-ER(OL)

AOUATIC ECOLOGY

4. (Section 2.7.1) Provide a summary of the fish impingement records for the Monroe power plant and Fermi Unit No.1.

(September 22, 1978).

3. (Section 2.7.1) Provide a summary of the fish impingment records for the Monroe power plant and Fermi Unit No.1.

(November 30, 1978).

7. Please supply complete impingement summa y records for Trenton Channel Power Station (November 30,1978).

RESPONSE

In accordance with NRC procedure RPOP 514, Revision 2, three (3) copies each of the following documents are submit-ted:

Monroe Power Plant: Study Report on Cooling Water Intake Enrico Fermi Power Plant, Unit 1: Sted Report on Cooling Water Intake Trenton Channel Power Plant: Study Report on Cooling Water Intake A.4-81 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

AQUATIC ECOLOGY

5. (Section 2.7.1.2) The discussion of the increasingly rapid eutrophication of Lake Erie is incomplete in that no conclusion is drawn as to the contribution that the plant will make to this phenomenon. Discuss the plant's role re!ative to the eutrophicatior. of the western basin of Lal'e Erie (September 22, 1978).

RESPONSE

Operation of the Fermi 2 plant is not expected to have an ef fect on eutrophication of Lake Erie. Discharges from the plant will not provide additional nutrients to the lake water since there are no phosphorous or nitrogen compounds used or produced by the plant. The phosphate and nitrate concen-tration in the discharge will increase by the same magnitude as other dissolved solids as a result of evaporation. The dis-charged water will be rapidly diluted andd'istributed in the lake. The area containing dissolved solids concentrations 20 percent over that of the ambient will be less than 2.4 acres (Section 5.1.2.2.5).

A recent study (PLUARG,1978) of the International Joint Commission indicates that the major single constituent in the problems of eutrophication is phosphorus. The PLUARG study also points out that the major phosphorus loads to Lake Erie are from direct municipal sewage treatment plants and tributaries entering the lake. Industrial loading contributed less than 3% of the total.

A.4-82 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

During operation of the plant,100 percent of the aquatic organisms entrained in the cooling system will be lost. The impact of this loss on the ecosystem is discussed in Section 5.1.3. The contribution of these dead organisms to the BOD concentrat on of the discharge water may cause slight changes in the immediate vicinity of the discharge area, however, the overall irnpact on the eutrophication of Lake Erie should be undetectable.

There will be less dissolved oxygen in the cooling water dis-charge will take place since oxygen is less soluble at higher temperatures. Operation during the month of April represents the worst case when the lake water temperatures have not incre . sed as rapidly as the air temperature. The minimum dissolved oxygen concentration during this period will be about 6.5 ppm while the ambient lake concentration will be around 9.0 ppm. The lower dissolved oxygen concentration in the discharge will have no impact on biotic productivity since the discharge will mix rapidly with water in the receiving body thereby decreasing temperature and picking up oxygen from the diluting water and atmosphere.

No thermally induced shift in the phytoplankton species com-position or population is anticipated to occur in the immediate vicinity of the discharge or in the lake as a whole. Nor is a shift in dominance from green algae and diatoms to less desirable blue green algae expected to occur due to plant operation. The expected slight increase in local ambient water temperature is not suf ficient to produce a significant shift in species composition.

A.4-83 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

REFERENCE Internation! Joint Commission,1978, PLUARG. Environ-mental Management Strategy for the Great Lakes System.

Windsor, Ontario.

A.4-34 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

AQUATIC ECOLOGY

6. (Section 2.7.1.2 and Appendix A.2-Item 3J0.5) In the discussion on Eutrophic Impact in Subsection 5.1.2.2.6 it is stated that "the discharge water will be rapidly diluted and distributed in the lake." What is the basis for this statement? Since the bottom does not slope much and the water is shallow in the vicinity of the plant it would seem that the rates of water exchange between the water body adjacent to the plant and Lake Erie as a whole would be relatively slow. Can calculations be made which com-pare this exchange rate to the volume rate of discharge to the lake? Provide proper revised text for Item 250.5 (September 22, 1978).

RESPONSE

For circular submerged jets the work by 3.0. Hinge and B.C.

Vander Hegge Zigen(1) showed that the distribution of tempera-ture and material (salinity dissolved solids, etc) in a turbulent jet were approximately the same although somewhat different than the momentum distribution. Abraham (2) developed the equation S - S, - 1 Qo - 1 L (1)

S -S 2C x 2C 2 x 2

o w 3 ,

e 4 ,

to express the distribution of salinity. The temperature and dissolved solids distribution can be expressed in a similar manner.

A.4-85 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

T-T w =D-D w = -1 Q o -1 }

2 T9-Tw D0 -D, 2C x 2C x 3 4

_e _

where S,T,D, = Salinity, Temperature, or dissolved solids at any point in the discharge plume.

5,T,D = Salinity, Temperature, or dissolved solids of 9 9 the jet at the discharge point.

5 ,, Tw, D w = dalinity, Temperature, or dissolved solids of the receiving water Dg = diameter of jet (4R H x = horizontal coordinate along the jet axis r or y = horizontal coordinate normal to the jet axis F = Densimetric Froude number R = hydraulic radius of discharge (D /4)

H Jen et al experimentally showed that surface jets follow similar 2

dilution equations with C3 = 0.071 and V2cq being replaced by KF g . The best fit to available data is obtained when k = 2.13..

A.4-36 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

Along the centerline of a discharge, i,e, (r-o) EQ.2 becomes T-T =D-D = 1 D_

(3)

T -T , D -D 2C 3

x For the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant Environmental Report the parameter 4RH * * *" * "*" and a conservative o

value of 35 for Sc was selected (a large value for V2c3 is con-3 servative in that the plume will be longer and the dilution less rapid than for small valves of Sc3). The value of 35 was selected based on prototype temperature data from the Ginna, Point Beach, and Waukegan power plants. Thus, the relationship for tempera-ture and dissolved solids distribution along the centerline becomes N

Mm"E m = 0 AD AT o o where Aindicates the difference between ambient and the plume (i.e. D - D = AD ) and m subscript refers to plume centerline values. EQ.4 is plotted in Figure 5.1-12 of the Environment Report.

For the final design of the decant line and using Case 3 of the Environmental Report as an example (Discharge = 20,000 gpm, T , = SS F, T, = 89.9 F and D = 190 ppm).

The value of R is 048 and Eq. 4 becomes H

D (Sa, $b) x = 95.2 o or x = 95.2 o AT AD m m The values in Table I were calculated using Eqs. Sa and 5b.

A.4-87 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

TABLEI Temperature and dissolved solids concentrates as a function of distance along the centerline of the plume.

Dis tance, (f t) ATg ( F) ATm(PP,) ADg(pp) AD (ppm) 0 31.9 31.9 190 190 250 31.9 12.1 190 72 500 31.9 6.1 190 36 750 31.9 4.0 190 29 1000 31.9 3.0 190 18 From Table 1 it can be seen that the discharge concentration of either temperature or dissolved solids will be reduced to 50 percent within 200 feet of the discharge point and to 10 percent within 1000 feet of the discharge point. This rapid decrease in concentration of either temperature or dissolved solids justifies the statement. "The discharge water will be rapidly diluted and distributed in the lake."

The lake bottom at the discharge location slopes away from the shoreline at an approximate slope of 1:180. The water depth 1,000 feet of fshore of the discharge point would be 7 feet.

Refering to the sketch below which depicts Case 3, an extreme case; (i.e. large discharge and AT, lower than existing MWL of 572, and dilution from one side of the plume) the latteral velocity required to provide the required plume dilution water would be approximately 0.1 foot per second.

A.4-SS Supplement 5 - Januarf 1979

EF-2-ER(OL) s

. AT = 3 F CONTUR % * '

4-4--

4--

d 1000 FT. ==-DILUTION WATER AT 58 F 4-4---

4-

"d

• Sif 0 RELINE DISCHARGE OF 20,000 GPM AT 89.9"F For a lake level of 575 feet, a discharge of 10,000 gpm, a AT of 31.9 F, and entrainrnent of dilution water from both sides of the plume (Case 5 in the Environmental Report) the required lateral velocity would be less than 0.02 fps to dilute the plume to a T of 3 F. Typical values for the lateral velocity at the Fermi power plant site range between 0.4 and 1.0 fps.

Thus, the vo!ume rate of " fresh dilution" water available to decrease the temperature and dilute the dissolved solids in the plume is approximately ten times greater than that required.

A.4-89 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

REFERENCES

1. Hinze,3.O., and van der Hegge Zinjnen, B.C., " Heat and Mass Transfer in Turbulent Mixing Zone of an Axially Symmetrical Jet," Proceedings,7th Internatl. Congrss for Applied Mechanics, London, England, Part 1, Vol. 2,1948, pp. '286-299.

2. Abraham, G.," Jet Diffusion in Liquid of Greater Density," Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol. 86, No. HY6, Proc. Paper 2506, June,1960, pp.1-13.

3. Jen, Y. Wiegel, R.L. and Mobarek, I., " Surface Discharges of Horizontal Warm-Water Jet", Journal Power Division, Proceedings, ASCE, Volume 92, No. Po2, pp 1-29, April,1966.

A.4-90 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

AOUATIC ECOLOGY

7. (Appendix 2C) Define the term " temporary hardness" as it is used on page 2C-3 (September 22,1978).

4. (Appendix 2C) Define the term " temporary hardness" as it is used on page 2C-3 (November 30,1978).

RESPONSE

Temporary hardness refers to the hardness constitutents which can be simply removed from waters (e.g., carbonates). For example, by boiling water which contains bicarbonates of calcium and magnesium causes these to precipitate as non-soluable salts. Permanent hardness refers to hardness resulting from sulfates, chlorides, or nitrates of calcium and magnesium which can be removed only by more rigorous sof tening techniques.

A.4-91 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

AOUATIC ECOLOGY

8. (Appendix 2C) Provide a written description for interpretation of the percent composition graph in Figure 2 given on Page 2C-

77. The relationship between the plotted lines and the various shaded areas is quite confusing (September 22,1978).

5. (Appendix 2C) Provide a written description for interpretation of the percent composition graph in Figure 2 given on Page 2C-

77. The relationship between the plotted lines and the various shaded areas is quite confusing (November 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

The percent composition graph on page 2C-77 provides two components of the composition of phytoplankton in Lake Erie. On a data by date basis, the graph read vertically provides the percent composition of each taxon or any combination of taxa. For instance, May indicates that approximately 16% of the phytoplankton were Microflagellates,2% were Others,64% were Chrysophyta, 17% were Chlorophyta, and 1% was Cyanaphyta. Cumulatively these total 100% of the composition. Comparisons based on percent composition between months are also possible. For example,64% of the phytoplankton were Chrysophyta in May, while they were only 8% in July.

A.4-92 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

AOUATIC ECOLOGY

8. Given that the requirements of the NPDES Permit are now known, please detail the chlorination scheme proposed for the plant circulating water system. How of ten do you anticipate using the manual dechlorination system. What quantities of soluble sulfates will be discharged into Lake Erie as a result of system use? Will they exceed federal EPA standards? (November 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

Refer to response to Question 8, Chemical Characteristics, September 22,1978.

A.4-93 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

AQUATIC ECOLOGY

9. (Section 5.1) The ER-OL does not clearly address the AT from the reservoir into Lake Erie. What is the expected & during worst case conditions into Lake Erie? Will this temperature cause a possible co!d shock ef fect to fish during the winter?

If so, what is the proposed mitigative action? (September 22, 1978).

6. (Section 5.1) The ER-OL does not clearly address the AT from the reservoir into Lake Erie. What is the expected AT during worst case conditions into Lake Erie? Will this temperature cause a possible cold shock ef fect to fish during the winter? If so, what is the proposed mitigative action? (November 30, 1973).

RESPONSE

Tables 5.1-4 (Section 5.1) and 10.3-1 (Section 10.3) show the worst case conditions for the & of the blowdown from the res-ervoir to Lake Erie. Cases 2 and 4 in Table 5.4-1 were used for the plume analysis presented in Section 5.1.

Subsection 5.1.3.4, page 5.1-15, Supplement 4, February 1973 discusses the ef fect of cold shock to fish during the winter and spring.

A.4-94 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

AQUATIC ECOLOGY

10. (Section 6.1) Is the pre-operational program presented in Sec-tion 6.1 of the ER-OL Supplement 4, February 1978, the pro-gram that will be implemented beginning January 1979 as a one year study beginning one year before fuel loading (Septem-ber 22,1978).

RESPONSE

The pre-operational aquatic monitoring program is outlined below.

INTRODUCTION A p. a-operational aquatic monitoring program will be initiated approximately 1 year prior to fuel load. The program is spe-cifically designed for the closed cycle cooling system at the Fermi 2 site located on the Western Basin of Lake Erie. It will provide results that can be compared with the 1976-1977 baseline study, as well as with a program that will be conducted during the initial years of operation.

SAMPLING LOCATION Figure 1 presents the configt.ation of the sampling locations.

Transects A, B, and C are perpendicular to the Lake Erie shoreline, extending 3500 to 4000 feet into Lake Erie. Stations 1 through 6 are located on the three transects, two per tran-sect: the odd numbers (1., 3, 5) are inshore, the even numbers (2,4,6s are offshore. Station 7 is in the intake canal immedi-ately in front of the Fermi 2 intake. Station 7A is located downstream of the trash racks where the intake water enters the general service water pumphouse.

A.4-95 Supplement 5 'anuary 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

SAMPLING SCHEDULE The pre-operational sampling at Stations I through 7 will con-sist of a 1-year program of weekly, biweekly, and monthly intervals from January through December, weather, lake conditions, and ice cover permitting. The parameters mea-sured during this period and sampling schedule are shown in Table 1.

PAR AM ETERS WATER QUALITY Discrete water samples will be collected at each sampling station coincident with ichthyoplankton sampling and analyzed for the following:

pH Suspended Solids Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved Solids Temperature Conductivity Transparency Total Hardriess Total Alkalinity FISHERIES POPULATION STUDIES Every 30 days, weather and lake conditions permitting, fish population will be sampled. Fish will be collected with gill nets, otter trawls, and beach seines, where possible. Six-panel experimental gill nets (mesh sizes 13 to 89 mm) will be used at Stations 2,4,6, and 7.

Nets will be set on the bottom, perpendicular to the shoreline with the largest mesh located offshore, for 24 iiours. A h.? m otter trawl (1/4 inch mesh) will be towed parallel to shore for 5 minutes. Seining will be accomplished at Stations 1, 3,5, and 7 with a 12.1 m bag seine (3/16 inch mesh).

A.4-96 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

Captured fish will be identified and measured in milli-meters. All viable fish will be released with the excep-tion of those which could not be readily identified in the field or those retained for voucher collection. Fish not positively identified in the field will be sent to the laboratory for identification.

ICHTHYOPLANKTON Ichthyoplankton samples will be taken once a week at Stations I through 7 during the anticipated spawning season, April through September. During the remaining months the schedule shown in Table I will be followed.

Duplicate samples, surface and bottom, will be collected at Stations 1 through 7. Net samples will be collected using 0.5 m diameter conical plankton nets of 505 micron mesh. Two 3-minute tows will be made at each station, where possible.

Demersal and adhesive eggs will be collected at Stations I through 7 using a 1.46 m3/ minute (385 gpm) pump attached 2

to a 0.073 m stationary bottom sampler.

At Station 7A between the trash rack and the pumphouse, ichthyoplankton will be collected once a week during the anticipated spawning season and on the schedule shown in Table 1. Duplicate diurnal samples will be taken, three per day and three per night, using a conical plankton net and/or a submersible pump, whichever can best be handled at the pumphouse.

A.4-97 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

The ichthyoplankton samples will be sorted and the eggs and larvae will be identified to the lowest possible taxon.

Eggs will be evaluated as to condition; larvae will be separated into various developmental stages.

FISH IM PINGEMENT An impingement study will be conducted to investigate the number and species of fish that are impinged on the traveling screens. The traveling screens will be periodically rotated and backwashed to remove any material that will be collected. Impinged fish will be collected over a 24-hour period once a week (Table 1) and the species composition and total weight will be determined. One sample per month will be taken and the length and weight of each fish determined. For unusually large collections, sub-sampling will be em-ployed.

All viable fish will be returned to the lake.

A.4-93 Supplement 5 - January 1979

TABLE 1 FERMI 2 SCHEDULE OF PRE-OPERATIONAL ECOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM (a) ,

Parameter Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.

ITI -

Water Chemistry X X X X X X X X X X X X 71

. Fish (adult) X X X X X X X X X X X X N1 p

h Ichthyoplankton(b) X X XX(c) XXXX(d) XXXX(d) XXXX(d) XXXX(d) XXXX(d) XXXX(d) X X X Fish Impingement (b) (once/ week)

(a) Sampling will be done at the specified intervals weather, lake y conditions, and ice cover permitting, m

" During pre-operational testing of the plant, these parameters (b) g will be sampled in conjunction with the operation of the general g service water pumps and traveling screens whenever feasible.

(c) biweekly y (d) weekly 5

w G

G e f ,

Fish Seining

__ Trawling and Gill tietting O water chemistry Transect O Ichthyoplankton g f ,Q~o

~-l 6 l- - O o l Scale: 1.5 in. = 2000 ft.

41-- O_p_

A C m T

B Y m

> Lake Erie D b' O o

C d 5, Oo, 00 7 y 3!

m D \ zy ni swan I 1.a qoon Discharge g I h Creek l 7 a L V

a Pumo Fermi 2 Ilouse

[ .

u C

9 Q

- PIGURE 1 d

• PREOPERATIONAL MONITORING ENRICO FERMI (UNIT 2) SAMPLING STATIOtJS AND TRANSECTS

EF-2-ER(OL)

AQUATIC ECOLOGY l1. (Section 6.2) Please provide 8 copies of pp. 6.2-18 and 6.2-

19. These are missing from some copies of the ER (September 22, 1978).

RESPONSE

Pages 6.2-18 and 6.2-19 were deleted in Supplement 4, February 1978. The information previously on these pages is on pages 6.2-16 and 6.2-17 of Supplement 4.

A.4-101 Supplement 5 - Januar.- !979

EF-2-ER(OL)

HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM

1. (Section 3.4) There is missing information between pages 3.4-4 and 3.4-5 in some copies of the ER. Please provide 8 extra copies of the latest supplement pages (September 22, 1973).

RESPONSE

in accordance with NRC procedure RPOP 514, Revision 2, three (3) copies of page 3.4-4a, Supplement 1, June 1975, are being submitted. In addition, eight (8) copies were submitted under separate cover to the Environmental Project Manager.

A.4-102 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM

2. (Section 3.4) Explain the increase in need for makeup water compared to that discused in the Environmental Report, Constnaction Phase (September 22, 1978).

RESPONSE

The quantity of makeup water,31,500 gpm, as discussed in the Environmental Report, Constnaction Phase, was based on a system that incomorated a 50-acre pond that was designed as a residual heat removal complex with a decant capability of 6,000 or 12,000 gpm. The present system incorporates a 5.5 acre circulating water reservoir with a decant capability of 10,000 or 20,000 gpm.

Section 3.3, Figure 3.3-1, Schematic of Proposed Water Flow-Daily Average Values, is the most recent basis for makeup water requirements. The figure is based on the maximum blowdown rate of 20,000 gpm.

A.4-103 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

HE AT DISS!PATION SYSTEM

3. (Section 3.4) What were the major factors considered in the design change of the discharge structure? Please summarize information related to costs, engineering feasibility and environ-mental impact (September 22, 1973).

RESPONSE

The original design change from an of fshore to an onshore dis-charge was suggested by the Regional Engineer, Bureau of Water Management, Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) in January 197'e. In January 1975, the onshore discharge concept was approved by the MDNR as indicated in Appendix A.2 page A.2-25.

Detailed information on the onshore discharge is presented in Section 10.3, Supplement 4, February 1978.

A.4-104 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM

4. (Section 3.4) Will the two mechanical draf t cooling towers of the RHR complex be used continuously? If not, when will they be used and what will be the typical duty-cycle? Provide any available estimates of fogging and icing effects from these units. If the units will not be used continuously, will they be tested periodically during long periods of non-use? That is the cesign heat rejection of these units? (September 22, 1978).

R ESPONSE The mechanical draft cooling towers associated with the RHR Complex will not be used continuously. Surveillance testing of the fans and valves will bz performed every 92 days or less.

The towers will be operated whenever it is necessary to cool the ultimate heat sink, such as during extended reactor shutdown cooling. The estimated usage is expected to be about 15 hours1.736111e-4 days <br />0.00417 hours <br />2.480159e-5 weeks <br />5.7075e-6 months <br /> every 3 months, or 60 hours6.944444e-4 days <br />0.0167 hours <br />9.920635e-5 weeks <br />2.283e-5 months <br /> per year. Because of the low estimated usage, no estimates of fogging or icing effects have been made.

The design heat rejecticn rate per tower is 160 million BTU per hour at 76 F wet bulb.

A.4-105 Supplement 5 - Januarf 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM

5. (Section 3.4) Since FES-CP several parameters of the circulating water reservoir appear to have changed: Area,50 acres to 6 6 5.5 acres; volume,230 x 10 gal. to 27.5 x 10 gal.; and holdup time of circulating water,4.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> to 1.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br />. What are the major objectives of the design alternations? Will the alternations result in increased discharge levels of chlorine to Lake Erie?

Explain (September 22, 1978).

RESPONSE

The initial concept of Fermi 2 included a 50-acre open-cut pond with sloping sides armored with rip-rap, to serve as a basin for the two natural draft cooling towers, and also to act as a ISO-day reservoir for the RHR Service Water (RHRSW) system. Special provisions were to be incorporated in the construction of the reservoir embankments to assure stability during seismic events, and a separate, seismically qualified pump house was provided for the RHRSW pumps. The design water levels and pump elevations were chosen to assure that the water supply would not be lost and to prevent flooding of the pumps. A barrier was provided on the Lake Erie shoreline to protect the pond and the pumphouse from storms on the lake.

The reliability of the RHR pond during violent storm and flood conditions was questioned in the USAEC/ DOL review of the Fermi 2 PSAR. A general discussion of deficiencies in the design was conducted in a meeting with the USAEC/ DOL on A.4-106 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

June 24,1971. On February 2,1972, Edison was advised that certain questions raised concerning the RHR " pond" in the June 24,1971 meeting were as yet unresolved, and this subject would therefore become an "open item" in the staff safety evaluation. Close proximity to Lake Erie and the consequent possibility of flood damage was the major concern.

As a result of discussions with consultants, Edison concluded that the open-cut pond might possibly become filled with silt by wave action from Lake Erie during postulated extreme storm conditions. No amount r f shore protection could be provided at a reasonable cost to guarantee that sitting would not occur. Consequently Edis >n decided to abandon the pond concept in favor of a protected, seismically qualified structure, away from Lake Erie, that would be capable of withstanding all foreseen and/or postulated meteorological and accidental events, and meet the requirements of the AEC General Design Criteria,10CFR50 Appendix A; and additionally AEC Regulatory Guide 1.27.

The 50-acre reservoir was t! en reduced to 5.5 acrea since the large volume of water was no longer required as the ultimate heat sink.

At the time the 50-acre reservoir was part of the Fermi 2 system design, the chlorine dosage for the system was established by maintaining free residual chlorine levels of 0.5 to 0.75 ppm at the outlet of the condenser water box and the general service water system. It was anticipated that af ter traveling through the cooling towers and retention in the reservoir, the blowdown to Lake Erie would be at a level of approximately 0.1 ppm free residual chlorine (Supplement II to Applicants Environmental Report, Construction Phase, Question 25, December 1971).

A.4-107 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

Since that time, total residual chlorine effluent limitations have been established by the Michigan Water Resources Comtnission as part of the NPDES permit program. These limitations have resulted in a reevaluation of the chlorination scheme for Fermi 2 as described in the response to Question 8, Chemical Characteristics (September 22, 1978). Establishment of the new limitations would have resulted in such a reevaluation had the 50-acre reservoir been retained.

A.4-IOS Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM

6. (Section 5.1) Cooling tower drift estimates appear to be much larger than state-of-the-art. What is the vendor's warranty?

R ESPONSE The vendor's warranty on the drift rate for the natural draft cooling towers is 0.1%

A.4-109 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

HEAT DISSIPATION SYS'"EM

7. (Section 6.1) Refer to the statement on page 6.1-26 of the ER-OL, Good agreement between model(LVPM-3) predictions and field observations..." Provide model validation evidence in support ,

of this statement. This 1973 study consisted of only 15 observations.

If more recent data are available, please provide a summary of the data and conclusions (September 22, 1978).

RESPONSE

NUS Corporation submitted an IBM-360 object module of the NUS LVPM computer code to Dr. H.J. Policastro at Argor ne National Laboratory (ANL) for use in their model validation work.(" A recent conversation with Dr. Policastro indicated that comparison of the LVPM model plume rise with field data ~

showed very good agreement.

During the latter part of 1974, the LVPM program was used to calculate vertical profiles of plume temperature and mixing ratio based on preliminary field data collected at Florida Power

& Light's Turkey Point Plant. These field data were collected under the direction of EPA, NERC, Corvallis, Oregon. The model-calculated plume profiles were sent to Mr. Larry Winiarski of EPA (c). They showed reasonable agreement with the observed plume profiles. With permission from Mr. Winiarski, these model predictions were sent to 3.E. Carson of ANL on October 15,1974(d) ,

A.4-110 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

The LVPM predictions were verified against field data for natural draf t cooling tower s, including the TVA studies at the Paradise Plant and the llT Studies at the Keystone Plant. These verifications are described in Section III of NUS-TM-S-184 (July,1974), three (3) copies of which are being submitted in accordance with NRC procedure RPOP 514, Revision 2.

(a) Letter, G. Fisher, NUS Corporatior, to A.J. Policastro, ANL, ESD-77-316(AQ), August 22,1977.

(b) Policastro, A.J., ANL, personal communication, Fisher, G., NUS Corporation, September 27,1978.

(c) Letter, Taylor, 3.H, NUS Corporation to Winiarski, L.,

USEPA, ESD-74-1035(AQ), Octobe r 4,1974.

(d) Letter, Taylor, J.H., NUS Corporation to Carson, J.E.,

ANL, ESD-74-1090(AQ), October 15, 1974.

A.4-111 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

OTHER GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL MATT .RS FOR DISCUSSION A. Review of Pre-operational Monitoring Program (September 22, 1978).

RESPONSE

The pre-operational program for aquatic monitoring is discussed in the response to Question 3, Aquatic Ecology (September 22,1978).

The pre-operational radiological m:nitoring program and the infrared vegetation surveillance prcgram are described in Sections 6.1.5 and 6.1.4 of the Applicants Environmental Report (Operating License Stage).

A.4-il2 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

OTHER GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL MATTF.RS FOR DISCUSSION B. Discussion of Plant Design Alernatives (Chapter 10 of the ER-OL) (September 22, 1978.).

RESPONSE

Since the issuance of the Final Enviror. mental Statement in July 1972, there has been no change in identifiable plant systems or components having a significant bearing on the environmental impact evaluation, other than a revision to the design of the discharge facility for the circulating water reservoir blowdown.

Considerations leading to the choice of the onshore discharge configuration are discussed in Secticn 10.3. No discussions have been included for other sections of Chapter 10, since they remain unchanged from those presented in the Final Environmental Statement in July 1972.

A.4-ll3 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

OTHER GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS FOR [.(SCUSSION C. Environmental Technical Specifications (September 22, 1978).

RESPONSE

The Environmental Technical Specificaticns will be written and filed within a time frame that is appropriate for a fuel load date of June 1980.

A.4-Il4 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

SOCIAL IMPACT

1. (Section 8.1) Provide the following information by year from 1978 to 1990 and by job classification (i.e., welders, masons, office personnel, etc)(Septebmer 22, 1978).

a. Number of construction workers

b. Number of operational employees.

1. (Section 8.1) Provide the following information by year frem 1978 to 1990 and by job classification (i.e., welders, masons, office personnel, etc)(November 30, 1978).

a. Number of construction workers

b. Number of operational employees

RESPONSE

a. Table 1, Construction Workers, shows the projected number of workers through 1981.

b. Table 2, Operational Employees, shows the projected number of employees through 1990.

A.4-115 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

TABLE 1 - CONSTRUCTION WORKERS CRAFT 1973 1979 1980 *1981 Laborers 265 270 121 26 Ironworkers 62 55 5 0 Bricklayers 0 6 0 0 Carpenters 234 135 72 14 Cement Finishers 16 22 14 2 Painters 11 81 43 12 Millwrights 40 22 12 4 Boilermakers 104 35 17 11 Pipefitters 663 572 162 63 Pipe Welders 16 22 7 6 Insulators 2 41 16 17 Sheet Metal 46 6 2 2 Electrician 394 404 141 63 Linemen 16 2 1 0 Equipment Operators 60 42 21 6 Field Engineers 2 2 2 -

1 Teamsters (Daniel) 29 31 22 14 Teamsters 35 36 28 8 Elevator Operators 1 1 1 1 Tile Setters 3 2 0 0 Trasel Grinders 1 1 0 0 2000 1788 687 250 Non-Manual 950 374 462 332

• Craft support for power ascension stage A.4-116 Supplement 5 - January 1979

TABLE 2 OPERATIONAL EMPLOYEES 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Supervisory Staf f 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 11 11 11 11 11 11 Office Personnel 8 9 11 11 11 11 11 Engineers 30 30 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Technicians 20 20 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 Supervisors (includes Shif t Supervisors) 10 15 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Supervising Operators 18 15 12 Operators 12 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Instrument llepairmen 6 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 General Mechanics --

10 36 36 36 3 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 m Apprentices -- --

6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Pipe Coverers -- -- 71 N

Painters -- -- 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Ilandymen 5 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 g

? --

10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 g y Janitors 1 5 10

-- Security Personnel 12 24 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 g N 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Stores Personnel 4 4 SUB TOTAL 129 183 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 y Contractors 67 50 25 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

U ar TOTAL 196 233 282 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 257 j

a u -

I a

w

'2 e

EF-2-ER(OL)

SOCIAL IMPACT

2. (Section 8.1) Provide an estimate of the following information for currently employed construction workers (September 22,1975).

a. Place of residence

b. Number of children

c. The number of workers who moved to the general area because of the job

2. (Section 3.1) Provide an estimate of the following information for currently employed construction v orkers (November 30, 1978).

a. Place of residence

b. Number of children

c. The number or workers who mcved to the general area because of the job.

RESPONSE

a. Place of residence Count taken as of October 1978 showed Monroe County 607 Michigan - out of county 525 Out of State 1023 TOTAL 2155 A.4-il8 Supplen ent 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

b. Number of children Over the past 9 months, approximately 220 children were moved into Monroe County.

c. The number of workers who moved to the general area because of the job.

Over the past 9 months,673 construction workers moved into Monroe County.

A.4-119 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

SOCIAL IMPACT

3. (Section 3.1) Estimate the number of operational workers who will be hired from the local area and where those who will be hired from areas will reside (September 22, 1978).

3, (Section 8.1) Estimate the number of operational workers who will be hired from the local area and where those who will be hired from other areas will reside. Provide the following information about operational workers:

a. Number and/or percentage of current employees who will transfer jobs to work at Fermi 2.

b. Of the remaining operational employees, how many will be hired from the local area as compared to those who will have to move to the area?

c. How many of these "new" employe es have been hired?

(November 30, 1978)

R ESPONSE For the purpose of this answer, the " local area" is considered to be the County of Monroe.

Based on present trends, about 40 new employes will be hired from the local area and 20 present Detroit Edison employees living locally will hire into the plant.

Of the remaining 75 employees to be hired, it is estimated that 10 will be from out of state and 3 of these will move into Monroe A.4-120 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

County. The remaining 65 will be present Detroit Edison employees, mostly from areas surrounding Monroe County. About 15 of the 65 will move to be closer to the plant, but only 5 of the 15 will actually move to Monroe County.

Summarizing -- of the estimated final" operating complement" of 257, the follcwing will probably reside in Monroe County:

Present employes at the plant . . . . . . . . . . . 17 New hires from Monroe residents . . . . . . . . 40 Transfers from Monroe residents ........20 New out of State hires . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Transfers from other DECO facilities . . . . . 5 Estimated Monroe County Residents 85 With reference to where those who will be hired from other areas will reside, it is our experience that the majority choose to stay in or move to the Wayne Coi nty towns of Southgate, Trenton, Woodhaven, Grosse lle, Reckwook, Flatrock, etc.,

and even further afield such as Plymouth and Canton Township./

A.4-121 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

LAND USE

1. (Section 2.2) Please provide a loan copy of Reference 7, Section 2.2 of the ER-OL (Complan: 2000, Comprehensive Development Plan for Monroe County (September 22,1978).

1. (Section 2.2) Please provide a loan copy of Reference 7, Section 2.2 of the ER-OL (Complan: 2000, Comprehensive Development Plan Monroe County (November 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

At the Fermi 2 site visit on October 31,1978, the follovcing documents were loaned to the Argor ne National Laboratory review team:

1. COMPLAN: 2000

2. Monroe County: Year 2000 Comprehensive General Development Plan Please be advised that COMPLAN: 2000 has been superceded by the three volume plan as Monroe County's future land use plan.

A.4-122 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

LAND USE

2. (Section 4.1) Update the figures in column 2 and Table IV- 1 of the CP-FES incorporating the additional 30 acres and any other changes in plans since the publication of the document (September 22, 1978).

2. (Section 4.1) Update the figures in column 2 and Table IV-1 of the CP-FES incorporating the additional 30 acres and any other changes in pians since the publication of the document (November 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

There has been essentially no further disturbance to the Fermi Site due to construction activities since the Final Environmental Statement (FES), July 1972. Most of the changes that have occurred and continue to occur are a result of fluctuations in the level of Lake Erie. This can effect the lagoon areas, the type of cover growth, and the beaches.

As a result of the above, the general site features as they will be af ter construction are listed in Table 1 is mmewhat different format than shown in 'ES Table IV-1. The Fermi Sia is essentially divided into two areas- .

o NORTH AREA - North of Enrico Fermi Drive is occupied by the Fermi 2 plant, its cooling towers, circulating water reservoir, onsite transmission lines, parking lots, roads, etc. The remaining marshes, lagoons, cover types, and fill areas will remain in their present natural state.

A.4-123 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL) o SOUTH AREA - South of Enrico Fermi Drive which consists of marsh, lagoon, various cover types, the quarry lake, and the dredged material storage basin. This 400-acre area may be made available for controlled public access.

Lake Erie and Swan Creek are treated separately and comprise about 130 acres within the site boundary, exclusive of the north and south area.

A.4-124 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

TABLE 1 TYPICAL FERMI 2 SITE FEATURES 1120 ACRES; 1.75 SQUARE MILES Percentage Description South Area North Area Total Site

1. South Area 35.7 o Dredged Materials 8.5 -

0.9 Basin o Peakers, met tower, Fermi 1 associated buildings 5.5 -

2.0 o Quarry Lake 5.0 -

1.8 o Misc. Construction Disturbance 8.0 -

2.9 o Marsh, Lagoon, Thickets, Woodlots, etc. 79.0 -

28.2

2. L' orth Area 52.7 o Fermi 2 plant -

22.0 11.6 o Fermi i plant -

2.5 1.3 o Misc. Construction Disturbance, Lay-down, parking, revegetated fill -

16.9 8.9 o Marsh, Lagoon, Thickets, Woodlots, etc. -

58.5 30.8

3. Water Lake Erie and Swan Creek 11.6 11.6 100.06 100.0 A.4-125 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS

1. (Section 1.1) Please provide a recent bond prospectus that describes Fermi Unit No. 2 (September 22, 1978).

1. (Sectioni.1) Please provide a recent Lond prospectus that describes Fermi Unit No. 2 (Novmeber 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

in accordance with NRC procedure RPOP 514, Revision 2, three (3) copies each of the following information is being submitted:

Prospectus General and refunding mortgage bonds Series PP.

Preliminary Prospectus, General and refunding mortgage bonds Series RR.

A.4-126 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

FORECASTING

1. (Section 1.1.2.i) The applicant should also provide the methodology and results of forecasts from its Planning Department as it incorporates analyses from its other departments (ER,1.1-9). The applicant should provide tl e following reports of critiques of the DE forecast procedures (ER,1.1-12 and 13) (September 22, 1978).

1. Section 1.1.2.1) The applicant should also provide the methocology and results of forecasts from its Planning Department as it incorporates analyses from its other departments (ER,1.1-9). The applicant should provide the following reports of critiques of the DE forecast procedures (ER,1.1-12 and 13):

a. The review of the Michigan Public Service Commission Staff (Touche Ross team).

b. Review of the NERA organization

c. The review of Theodore Barry znd Associates.

d. Latest available studies perforraed by DE on its own initiative or requested by the Michigan Fublic Service Commission on energy use of the auto industry or other major industiral users in the DE service area (November 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

The basic methodology and result of Edison's latest official load forecast is described in the report " Forecast Electric Energy Use and Demend, 1979-1593," Septemher 1978. Three (3) copies of this report are being submitted in accordance with NRC procedure RPOP 514, Revision 2.

A.4-127 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

a. The review of the Michigan Public Service Commission Staff (Touche Ross team).

In accordance with NRC procedure RPOP 514, Revision 2, three (3) copies of the MPSC - Touche Ross evaluaticn are being submitted.

b. Review of the NERA organization.

In accordance with NP,C procedure RPOP 514, Revision 2, three (3) copies of the NERA review are being submitted.

c. The review of Theodore Barry and Associates.

In accordance with NRC procedure RPOP 514, Revision 2, three (3) ccpies of ae section of the Theodore Barry report pertaining to load forecasting are being submitted.

d. Lastest available studies performed by DE on its own initiative or requested by the Michigan Public Service Commission on energy use of the auto industry or other mtjor industrial users in the DE Service area.

The studies performed by Edison on energy use in the auto industry and other major industries are described in Section IIIV of " Forecast Electric Energy Use and Dernand 1979- 19'>3," September 1978.

A.4-128 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

ENERGY CONSERVATION

1. (Section 9.G) The applicant should provide any Alichigan Public Service Commission ordered studies and results of experiments, rate design changes, or demonstration projects that bear on energy conservation that have been performed or are underway since 1974 (September 22, 1978).

RESPONSE

In accordance with procedure RPOP 514, Revision 2, three (3) copies each of the following documents are being provided.

1. Project to Demonstrate Potential Energy Savings from Industrial Customers - Federal Energy Administration, The Detroit Edison Comp.iny and Alichigan Public Service Commission.

2. Residential Electricity Elasticities in the Lower Peninsular of Alichigan. Volume 1, Equitable Environmental Health, Inc.

3. Experimental Domestic Time-of-Day Report - Rate Department.

4. Interruptible Air-Conditioning Rate Filing - A1PSC:

Testimony, Exhibits, Working Papers and Appendices.

5. Generic Hearings to Cetermine the Effectiveness of Interrupting Specifiea Electric Services with Respect A.4-129 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL) to Load Management by Major Michigan Electric Utilities. MPSC Filing - Testimony and Exhibits Parts 1 and 2.

6. Testimony and Final MPSC Order - U-5174: Impir mentation of a Home Insulation Plan.

7. Application of The Detroit Edison Company for Authority to implement a Customer Information Program - U-5914.

8. MPSC pronouncements in The Matter of the Establishment on the Commission's own Motion of Residential Conservation Program Standards - U-5900.

A.4-130 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-? ER(OL)

SYSTE'.1 RELIABILITY

1. (Section 1.13) Fivvide a copy of the Michigan Electric Coordination System agreement and any non-legal document that may clarify the agreemeat (if necessary)(September 22, 1978).

R ESPONSE in accordance with RPOP 514, Revison 2, three (3) copies of the referencd document are beir.g provided.

A.4-131 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

SYSTEM RELIABILITY

2. (Section 1.1.3) Provide loss of load probability calculations, results of studies from ECAR, or other documentation of its choice of a 22 percent reserve margin (September 22, 1978).

1. (Section 1.1.3) Provide loss of load probability calculations, results of studies from ECAR, or other documentation of its choice of a 22 percent reserve margin (November 30, 1973).

RESPONSE

The reserve requirement of 20-221 was determined using a negative-day criterion of 25 negative days per year and the forecasted generating unit random outage rates. Parameters related to reserve requirements are developed through the use of the attached set of curves which represent the computer output of multiple runs of the " Distribution of Capacity Margins" program (See Table 1 and Figare 1).

The 25 negative-day criterion assumes that capacity in the range of 25 to 30% of our peak load is available from our interconnections on a perfectly reliable basis. This results in meeting a loss of load probability index of once in 10 years.

A.4-132 Supplement 5 - January 1979

948 Reserve Analysis - Detroit Edison Company 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 Summer Cap, MW B584 8584 8584 8584 8584 8584 8584 8584 8584 8584 8584 Greenwood 1, MW 780 780 780 780 780 780 780 780 780 780 780 Enrico Ferrai 2, MW 874 874 874 874 874 874 874 874 874 Belle River 1, MW 676 676 676 676 676 676 Belle River 2, MW 676 676 676 676 676 Ludington 5 & 6,MW 153 153 153 153 153 306 G reenwood 2, MW 1208 EF 2 Buy-back, MW 198 178 158 138 119 99 79 59 40 Total Net Capabihty, MW 9364 9364 10436 10416 10396 11205 11862 11842 11822 11802 13144 Peak Load, MW 7313 7612 7852 7855 8154 8492 8830 9163 9476 9834 10159 7 p Reserve, MW 2051 1752 25E4 2561 2242 2713 3032 2679 2346 1968 2985 Q

29.2 24.8 20.0 29.4 y Reserve, % 28.0 23.0 32.9 32.6 27.5 31.9 34.3 3

• Equivalent C Availability, % 77 78 76 78 79 78 78 79 78 78 77 Scheduled Outage Factor, % 7 6 8 7 7 8 7 6 8 8 8 Random 0utage Rate, % 17 17 17 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 17 g

j Negative Days 15 22 7 16 11 7 5 9 16 25 11 t,_ Negative Day Goal 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 cn 5 Reserve Required, MW 1594 1659 1711 1555 1614 1681 1748 1814 1876 1947 2214

@ Reserve Require.i,% 21.8 21.8 21.8 19.8 19.8 19.8 19.8 19.8 19.8 19.8 21.8 Purchase Required,% (6.2) (1.2) (11.1) (12.8) (7.7) (12.1) (14.5) (9.4) (5.0) (0.2) (7.6)

' Purchase Required,MW (456) (93) (872) (1005) (627) (1027) (1280) (861) (474) (20) (772) p 5 'It includes the ef fects of partial outages and deratings.

u G

3

EF-2-ER(OL)

, s i ,  ;

/

/

35 -

/ -

/

/

/

/

/

30 -

/

/

/

/

/

25 -

/ -

! 100 25 5 10 20 30 40 60 80

/

/

" 20 -

/ -

E /

E / 120 0 /

h /

u /

y 15 -

j -

/

/

/

/ U 140

• ~

/

10 -

7 [ -

/

/

8'

/ 160

/

/ -

5 f

/

/ 180

,/

5 10 15 20 25 RANDOM 0UTAGE RATE -PERCENT A.4-134 Suppleraent 5 - January 1979 948

EF-2-ER(OL)

BENEFITS AND COSTS

2. (Section 8.2) Provide analyses to support the position that economic savings dictate the issuance of a license (see ER Section 1.3).

The applicant should rely on the Wein Automatic System Planing Package to show system production cests in the 1981-1985 period with and without Fermi 2 in service. The analysis should be performed for varying growth rates in energy requirements (i.e.,

the applicant's official forecast and one 50% lower to sho t the sensitivity of these cost estimates to load growth). Data for each operating unit or grouping sitr.ilar 0 & M costs (variable and fixed), forced outage rates, scheduled maintenance, and other relevant operating characteristics (September 22, 1978).

1. (Section 8.2) Provide analyses to support the position that economic savings dictate the issuance of a license (see ER section 1.3).

The applicant should rely on the Wein Automatic System Planning Package to show system production costs in the 1981-85 period with and without Fermi 2 in service. The analysis should be performed for varying growth rates in energy requirements (i.e.,

the applicant's official forecast and one 50% lower to show the sensitivity of these cost estiinates to 1:ad growth). Data for each operating unit or grouping similar O & M costs (variable and fixed), forced outage rates, scheduled maintenance, and other relevant operating cnaracteristics (November 30, 1978).

RESPONSE

The requested analysis was performed on a computer program called PROMOD. PROMOD v;as developed by Energy Management A.I+-137 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

Associated which uses probabilistic theory in simulating economic dispatch of plants and peakers in order to determine fuel consumption and production costs. PROMOD is used to determine the Detroit Edison Company official production cost projections used in e

rate case testimony.

The Wein Automatic System Planning Package is used to determine future generation expansion and mix patterns. It is not used for detailed production cost analysis.

Three (3) copies of the resultant computer runs from PROMOD are being submitted in accordance with NRC procedure RPOP 514, Revision 2. The output contains all the information requested except the fixed operation and maintenance which is not included in these preduction runs.

A summary containing the Michigan Pool fuel savings with Fermi 2 in service versus Fermi 2 out of service is tabulated below:

Fermi 2 out of service versus Fermi 2 inservice Annual Fuel Annual Fuel Savingg) Savingg)

($ x 10

($ x 10 Projected 50% of Load Projected Year Growth Load Growth 1981 113.2 101.0 1982 93.0 30.8 1983 118.6 100.1 1984 150.7 110.2 1985 105.2 85.5 A.4-13S Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

SYSTEM RELIABILITY

3. (Section 1.1.3) Provide a copy of the Interconnection Agreement with MCP members (July 6,1976) (September 22, 1978)

RESPONSE

In accordance with NRC procedure RPOP 514, Revision 2, three (3) copies of the referenced document are being provided.

A.4-135 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

BENEFITS AND COSTS

1. (Section 8.1) Provide more detailed data on the annual and total primary benefits from Fermi 2. Table 8..-1 " Benefits from the Proposed Facility" is not consistent with estimated generated electricity of Fermi 2, shown on pages 3.1-2 and 8.1-3 (September 22, 1978)

RESPONSE

The value shown on page 3.1-2 for annual electricity generated is incorrect, due to a typographical error. The correct value is shown in Table 8.1-1 on page 8.1-1 and is obtained in the following way:

Electricity generated = 874 MW x .70 capacity factor x 3760 hr. per ye'ar

= 5.36 x 106 MWh per year or 5.36 x 109kWh per year The annual primary benefit in 1981 is computed by determining 9 9 sales (output minus losses) 5.36 x 10 kWh = 4.98 x 10 kWh times price 3.98c/kWH = $198,204,000 in 1981 (Edison only).

The tota? primary ber.efit in 1981 is computed by escalating the Edison 198 million in 1981 by 4% for 40 years and present worthing each annual revenue at 10.6% to 1981. The Cooperatives' revenues were held constant at 42 million per year (no escalation) and each annual revenue present worthed back to 1981 at 9%.

The total present worth values for Edison and the Cooperatives were summed to yield 3.28 billion in 1981.

A.4-136 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

BENEFITS AND COSTS

3. (Section 8.2.1) Provide a more detained breakdown of the primary internal cost for Fermi 2. Data should be presented showing capital cost of plant, fuel cost, operating and maintenance cost, NRC fees, decommissioning cost, research and development cost and other relevant costs. Annual costs are defined in mills /kwh or millions of dollars per year and present worth values are defined in millions of dollars (i.e., fuel cest, data should show the most recent projected fuel cost, including a resources depletion factor)

(September 22, 1978).

2. (Section 3.2.1) Provide a more detained breakdown of the primary internal cost for Fermi 2. Data should be presented showing capital cost of plant, fuel cost, cperating and maintenance cost, NRC fees, decommissioning cost, research and developement cost and other relevant costs. Annual costs are defined in mills /kwh or millions of follars per year and persent wortn values are defined in millions of dollars (i.e., fuel cost, data should show the most recent projected fuel cost, including a resources depletion factor)

(November 30, 1973).

RESPONSE

The data shown in the tabulation on page 3.2-3 is in the process of being updated and is not ready for filing at this time.

A.4-139 Supplement 5 - January 1979

EF-2-ER(OL)

ARCHEOLOGIC AL SURVEY

1. Has an archeological survey been conducted at the site inland and along the shore? If available provide the survey results including a description of the survey method (November 30, 1973).

RESPONSE

No changes or additional infornr.ation has been made available since that stated on pages 11-7 and 11-8 of the AEC Final Environmental Statement, Construction Permit Stage, July 1972.

A.4-140 Supplement 5 - January 1979