ML19257B851
| ML19257B851 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 12/13/1979 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19257B850 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8001210067 | |
| Download: ML19257B851 (8) | |
Text
'
sn*tcy
,,4 7o UNITED STATES g
-(
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y
" o' \\ #,, gw. /p/
E WASHINGTON D. C. 20555 g
ENVIR0f; MENTAL I"oACT 'PPRAISAL BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTCR REGULATION RELATED TO A."ENDMENT N0. 23 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. OPR-70 PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY, PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY, DELMARVA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, AND ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY SALEM f:UCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-272 By application dated December 21, 1977 supplemented on May 9,1979, the Public Service Electric and Gas Company (the licensee) requested changes to Facility Operating License No. OPR-70 Appendix B, Non-Radiological Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS) for the Salem Nuclear Generating Station Unit No.1.
The application supported requests that would:
1.
Make administrative changes to clarify and improve the Technical Specifications; 2.
Remove the condenser AT and suspended solid limit; 3.
Change certain sampling and' monitoring requirements; and 4.
Delete some special studies that will be evaluated as part of the 3165 demonstraticn.
During cur review of the licensee's proposals for this amendment, we fcund that cenain changes were necessary to meet our requirements.
The licensee's staff agreed to these changes and they have been incorporated in this amendnent.
Environmental Incacts of the Proposed Actions Section 1.1 Descriotion Changes to denitions are proposed to reflect the latest terninology regarding chicrire usage.
Evaluation
'M evaluatio. 's necessary for this adninistrative change.
It has no e- 'i rcrrental ' : act.
1773 094
">I21o dC7
2-Sections 3.1.la, 2.1.lb and 2.1.2 Descriotion Changes are propcsed for consistency with the NPDES pemit.
The requirerents to limit the aT to 16.5'F and the discharge temperature to 104 F would be del eted. Rather than change the numerical limits in the ETS as requested by the licensee, the staff recomends relying on the NPDES pemit to control discharges of heated water from Salem. Specifically, the ETS should incor-porate the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) limits and monitoring by reference and require that the NRC be notified when the NPDES limits are exceeded.
Evaluation The Salem Nuclear Generating Station has been designed so that each unit is equipped with six circulating water pumps to handle cooling water flow.
The current ETS require that the AT across the condenser be limited to 16.5*F and that maxinum pump discharge temperature be limited to 104 F during nomal operation. During pump outage (five or fewer circulating water pumps in operation), the allowable condenser aT is 27.5*F, with a maximum discharge temperature of 115*F. Operation during pump outage is further constrained by time requirements limiting: the amount of time
. allowed with a AT above 16.5*F to 24 consecutive hours; the time allowed for operation with discharge temperature above 104 F to 24 consecutive hours; and the amount of time with discharge temperature above 115*F to 8 consecutive hours within any 24-hour period.
The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency has set a limit of 27.5*F as the maximum AT and ll5*F as the maximum discharge temperature pemitted under the NPDES pemit. These are the same limits as those in the current ETS for less than six-punp operation. Although the licensea has conducted a 316a themal demonstration, EPA has not yet issued a final detemination on 315a compliance.
In the event that a favorable finding is not made, alternate recuirements in the MPDES pemit, which could only be satisfied by discharge of cold-side blowdown from a closed-cycle cooling system, will apply.
Thus, in effect, reliance on the NPDES limit to control AT and maximum discharge temperature would allow for limits which are numerically no less stringent than those in the ETS. What would be allowed would be greater operational flexibility because the time contraints to bring the plant back to nomal (six-pump) operation would be relaxed. The licensee has indicated that operating mode and repairs will be nade with all reasonable s;eed to restore n) mal (six-pump) operation.
Exami nation of past operatioral history indicates that punp outages in the past two years are normally ccrrected witFin 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
1773 095
. The licensee has furnished information which indicates that operatior for considerable lengths of time with a AT of 27.5'F and a discharge temperature of ll5'F wculd not cause significant impacts on receiving-water biota. The following factors combine to assure that impacts occurring due to operation during purp outages will not be significantly greater than those assessed in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) for the Salem Station dated April 1973.
1.
Comparative small (on the order of 1%) amounts of water are utilized during normal operation compared to tidal flow.
Operation with fewer than six circulating water pumps would use even less water and numbers of organisms impinged and entrained would also be less.
Studies show a relati' ely high survival among potentially 2.
v entrainable important species found in the vicinity of the plant exposed for 10 minutes to a AT of 27.5 F.
During a pump outage, the number of organisms entrained would be less due to the reduction in flow.
3.
No tenperature blockages for the Delaware estuary are predicted by the thernal plume model for a AT of 27.5'F, even with an inlet temperature as high as 87.5*F.
4.
Because the therral plume is bouyant for most of the year, effects of the higher temperature discharge would ha.a little effect on benthic macroinvertebrates.
Based on the analysis above, the staff concludes that deletion of the current ETS requirements and reliance on the NPDES permit is acceptable.
Because the licensee would be required to submit copies of monitoring reports re:uired by the NPDES permit and te notify the NRC of any violations that may occur, the staff would continue to be made aware of the potential thermal irpacts of operation.
Section 2.1.3 Descri otior.
Changes are proposed for administrative purposes and to clarify intent with respect to rate of power change.
1773 096
. Evaluation Since no substantive changes to the specification or ronitoring requirements have been made, no technical evaluation is necessary. We conclude that this proposed change would appropriately clarify the intent. The bases would be changed by adding a paragraph explaining the rationale for monitoring as specified.
Section 2.2.1 Description Several changes are proposed to reflect new terminology, clarification of monitoring requirements to reflect sint taneous chlorination of three intakes, correction to chlorine monitor : curacy, and correction of erroneous ASTf1 references.
Evaluation No technical evaluation is necessary for these administrative changes. We conclude that they are acceptable.
Section 2.2.2 Description Changes are proposed to achieve consistency with the NPDES permit.
The existing ETS requirement that the average annual suspended solids concentration not exceed 25 mg/ liter would be deleted.
Evaluation Rather than change the numerical limits in the ETS to those duplicative of the NPDES permit, we would find it acceptable to rely entirely on the NPDES permit to control discharges of suspended solids from Salem. The ETS should incorporate the NPDES limits and monitoring by reference and require that the NRC be notified when the NPDES limits are exceeded.
The NPDES permit limits the average daily concentration to 30 mg/ liter and the maximum daily concentration to 100 mg/ liter over a seven-day period.
The licensee has agreed to this alternate change.
The preoperational suspended solids concentration in the t'elaware River in the vicinity of the plant was 3s high as 700 mg/ liter, with a ten-year average of 150 mg/ liter. The discharge limits set by the NPDES ernit assure adequate control cver this parameter as they are within the back-c,round range and the pro:osed chinge is acceptable.
1773 097
. Section 2.2.3 Description The change would reduce sampling frequency for pH from continuous sampling during discharge to twice weekly during discharge.
Evaluation Changing the monitoring requirenent fron continuous monitoring during discharge to twice weekly during discharge is acceptable.
The trade-off involved is the exchange of continuous monitoring of dubious quality for twice-weekly grab samples of high accuracy. Because the in-line probe used for continuous nonitoring is continuously immersed in the waste stream, proper maintenance and calibration are difficult to achieve.
The portable pH meter used for grab samples is likely to be more accurate because it is easily maintained and calibrated. With automatic neutralization of wastes prior tu discharge, the pH is automatically maintained within the specified range. Grab samples taken twice weekly will provide adequate assurance that automatic pH neutralizer system is functioning correctly and that any waste discharges outside the 6.0 to 9.0 pH range are of short duration. Should the system f ail to perform as it is supposed to, the fact that the discharge would be of short duration, amounts ' 3 far les'; than 1%
of the tidal flow in the river at this point, and is into a well-buffered system will prevent significant adverse environmental impacts.
Section 3.1.1.1 Description The requirement to monitor river chlorine concentrations at the intake, discharge and outside of the mixing zone weekly during the chlorination cycle would be deleted.
Evaluation In 1977 and 1978, the licensee measured total residual chlorine at the intake, discharge and outside the mixing zone during chlorination.
at no time did the total residual chlorine at any of the sampling stations exceed 0.1 mg/ liter.
Specification 2.2.1 requires that chlorine be nonitored and limited to 0.1 nc/ liter prior to discharge. We conclude that it is not necessary to continue the river chlorine monitoring program to deternine compliance with the limit er to assess the inpacts resulting from discharge of chlorine at tot concentration.
1773 098
. Section 1.1.1.2, oo. 3.1-2, 3.1-2a Description The requirement for using the Winkler titratic, nethod for measuring dissolved oxygen (0.0.) would be deleted and replaced by reference to EPA-approved methodology. Also, the sampling depth for 0.0. downstream of the mixing zone would be changed from 18 ft. to 5 ft.
Evaluation The methodology for measuring D.O. would still be acceptable with the proposed change as the accuracy and sensitivity is specified in the specification; the sampling depth of 5 ft., rather than 18 ft., would assure that the sample is taken from the mixed surface .yer where D.0. would potentially be most affected by plant operation. On these bases we find these changes acceptable.
Section 3.1.1.3 Descriotion A change of wording is proposed to clarify the meaning of the sentence describing the depths at which samples for river monitoring of suspended solids are to be taken. Also, the sampling depth outside ano downstream of the mixing zone would be changed from 18 ft. to 5 ft.
Evaluation These twelve parameters were identified in -he 1977 Salen Annual Environnental Operating Report (Non-radiological) as not be significantly affected by station operation. Additional ca a collected in 1978 also failed to indicate any impact from the statior on the same parameters.
Because there is no direct causal link with the plant, we conclude that the following twelve parameters can be deleted frca Table 3.1-1 and no longer be required in monthly river monitoring:
chromium phenolphythalein alkalinity sulfides free carbon dioxide phenols total organic carbon manganese reducing substances total volatile solids methyl orange alkalinity silica zinc I773099
. No evaluation is necessary for the change in wording to clarify the depth of samples taken at the intake and discharge, as none of the basic require-ments have changed. The sampling depth of 5 ft. rather than 18 ft. assures that the sample is taken from the mixed surface layer where the discharge from the plant is more likely to be found. These changes are acceptable.
Section 3.1.2.1.2 Description The requirement to conduct a monthly bird survey in the area of Artifical Island would be deleted. Also, clarification of the sampling schedule for the diamondback terrapin has been proposed.
-Evaluation Bird surveys have been conducted in the vicinity of Artifical Island on the Delaware River since 1975. Distribution of birds, other than gulls, has remained unchanged since Salem began operation.
More gulls have been observed in the area of the discharge and sluice outlets when the station is operating than during the pre-operational period. However, no apparant change in abundance of gulls over the total area surveyed has been observed since operation began. The mallard was the only bird species showing a change in abundance when compared to pre-operational data, and this change was unrelated to station operation.
The winters of 1976-1977 and 1977-1978 were much colder than previous winters, freezing most of the 3rsh and freshwater areas in the region and forcing waterfowl to use the open water of the river, thus increasing their numbers near the plant.
The schedule for monitoring of nesting of diamondback terrapin would be modified so that surveys are conducted only during months when nesting is likely to occur.
This change, for purposes of clarification, is acceptable and needs no technical evaluation.
Section 4.2 Descriotion Sections 4.2.1, 4.2.2, 4.2.3 and 4.2.4, requiring special studies of thermal and chemical responses of estuarine organisms, would be deleted.
1773 100
,.. Evaluation These studies were to be conducted for a period of one year after Unit 1 became operational.
The studies ha"e been concleted and the results reported in Volume 3 of the 1977 Annual Environmental Monitoring Report (Non-radiological). These studies will be reviewed and evaluated as part of the licensee's 316b demonstration.
Because the studies have been conducted and reported as raquired by the ETS, deletion of these sections is acceptable.
Section 5.6.1 Description The submittal period of the annual report would be changed to 165 days after January 1 to coincide with 316b study reporting periods.
Evaluation This will not cause additional environmental impact nor will it affect the staff's regultory capability and, therefore, is acceptable.
Conclusion On the basis of the foregoing analysis, it is concluded that there will be no significant environmental impact attributable to the proposed action.
Having made this conclusion, the Commission has further concluded that no environmental impact statement for the proposed action need be prepared and that a negative declaration to this effect is appropriate.
We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and does not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the anendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date: December 13, 1979 1773 101
.