ML19282C144

Updates 781207 Ltr Re Waste Disposal Permit Application. Forwards Draft Permit & Documents

ML19282C144
Person / Time
Site:	Black Fox
Issue date:	02/19/1979
From:	Murphy P ISHAM, LINCOLN & BEALE
To:	Johnson W, Salzman R, Sharfman J NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP)
References
NUDOCS 7903210064
Download: ML19282C144 (12)

Text

.

e.

,* 1>

ISHAM. LINCOLN & BEALE CCUNEELCRS AT LAW waswiNoTom or'icC*

cowano s. ieasu. ie,s.isoa e as s =T '. u nco6m. sn.e em e iC s o i7'= STm C ET. N. w.

mLuam a esats. iees.iosa wa s msNoToN, D. C. 3 0036 c ra g rin st N4Tro= AL *LAZ A aca.e33.aT3o FC R?T. S CO O N Q rLCC R 43 soClaT t s ewantzs a. mans cavios.mosso CHsC4GO. iLLrNC's 6C633 LAe to*Amo

• Mats *pou oce=aasums 3gg,s .g,a.astsesow t,% C s s. a C E LS o q

=uo- e . =c c o = e s .

• meumae w. cameow coma o=cca s o = = 6. c.v'C" u s a=o . 3 52,a wa ome r :. maa-t =

cuocur a ec=w sttig

.iLum= s.*saar .a a*wo = =va*=*

entotrica a canso= Lawarmes 2. 64 sav

• L,,e . s i g g,ws., sta== c. =cLa c=

n.c-am o s at mossom mostm' 4.*outa nicameo e oo'Lvic c. mic-a n o .o ==som

. awes s. swans ,s4= c s w. woaac n e aceca ,t.:mowin

,o = = c. : ...a o MQuas 324of e*A=

r nat o 2. **=oc a o. n i n e < c o 6s o =. =s servt= e.sc=arte si tzm s'aama acanT o. osTt=Lamo cL4=a cvans noww s encarnic r. sc=arvsm noec=T . coo Twku s .o= = w. sow c ca s c a u. cao v. sa. paws = sc=mososa neenano a cuoa=T* pawkr.=amaun aces =T L. Estre omvio m. specton nic=ano c. no.sa comaLo s. n Lunge Davia s. wiscata movo s. spasmosa A.oa% EEL Frbossam mo n gmT w. mLEs= mag was? 6. FtTCM mavio m. sta-L WMeup F PQ RC E Lg TERRT r. seemeT2 sasets a.FLETc6 '4 PMiLip R S TE pto g. 's samman L. msno moes=T q. wattLen an =s n. r=4 san naurLA e. sT=c eck JoM 4.umo JOSE *4 GaLLo* Mantua E. asses william m sumiamo essCMAEL L MsLLF R pgTNAgoo a gLovgm sT CVE N 4. Gi LF C R o PaTRIC a 4. s wg g es g7 mos*aLD A MeLACo4LA= RCS E AT M. LoE P FLER* MiC=4EL 4. GILL esCMaas s. ?=ig g ALERaMo EpesETER "*" *""""*""*'"

a' c = * - "' February 19, 1979 "^"'.'c's o T, A Richard S. Sal:: man, Esq. Dr. W. Reed Johnson Atemic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Jerome E. Sharfman, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing <  %

Appeal Board Panel  %

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory .o Commission sjM \g/ g c

Washington, D.C. 20555 ,

ga .,

=

w 2 -

1, ',-

hg$ /['

Re: Black Fox Nuclear Generating Station g Q Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. STN 50-556 and STN 50-557 b t.y 1 w Gentlemen:

By letter dated December 7, 1979, we informed this Board of the then current status of the applications fo- the NPDES Discharge Permit and Oklahoma Water Resources Bo'rd

("CWRB") Waste Disposal Permit for the Black Fox Nuclear Generating Station. The appeal now pending before you in the above cause raises certain issues regarding these permits.

Pursuant to the decision in Duke Power Co. (William B.

McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2) , ALAB-143, 6 AEC 623 (1973), we are providing this Board with an update to our earlier letter.

On February 13, 1979, the CWRB unanimously adepted by voice vote the proposed Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order and the Form of a Draft Waste Disposal Permi submitted by the CWRB staff. A copy of these documents is attached hereto. The actual permi will issue following -

payment by Applicants of the required fee.

7 9 0 3 210 0G4

The active parties to the adjudicatory hearings on the NPDES Permit issued by EPA Region 6, and referenced in our December 7, 1978 letter, have been negotiating to settle the issues pending in that hearing. The active parties are Fuhlic Servica Ccapany of Cklancma and EPA Region 6.

Citizens Action fer Safe Energy (C. A. S .E . ) and Citizens Against Radioactive E::posure (C.A.R.E.) had also filed a request for an adjudicatory hearing. These organizacions have had the opportunity but have not actively participated in settlement negotiations. It is anticipated that a set-tlement stipulation will be reached and will result in the issuance of an amended NPDES Permit for the Black Fox Station.

We will advise the Board of the results of the referenced negotiations when they have been completed. The administra-tive actions of the CWR3 and the EPA discussed in this letter are, of course, subject to appeal. -

,r3 Sincerely "} ,

l I -~ i !: l .

. . c . /..

^

ty,, <a.a. , -

Paul M. Murphy One of the Attorneys for Applicants PMM/ sag Enclosure cc w/ enc.: Black Fox Service List

_2_

~

/*

\

N MCPOS ED ER g SEFCKE THE CC.AHp WATOTESCW3h ARD

,W IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICA!!CN ICATICN NO. WD-73-C88 4

TOR WASTE DISPOSA:. PEDt!T FILED f k## ah ER NO. WQ-79-02-13-03 3Y P'.'ELIC SERVICE CCMPA.Tf CF CKl.AHCMAl s

cu s ~s F!?Cl?:C5 CF r m

1. On October 24, 1975, an application for a waste dis;csal persit was filed by Public Service Company, Sex 201 Tulsa, Oklahoma, 74102, for the discharge of waste water f rom a nuclear steam electric generating f acility, known as the Black Fox Station, located in the NE4 NES, Section 24 Township 19N, Range ,

16EIM, Rogers County, Oklahoma.

2. During November,1977, approximately thirty-seven letters were received from various citizens concerning the Black Fox Station, all requesting that a public hesring be held on the proposed facility.

3. On July 24, 1978, the ce=pany was advised by the Oklahoma Water Resources Soard to place a Notice by Publication in a newspaper of general circulation in that section of the county in which the wastes will be deposited, once each week for two consecutive weeks, giving notice of a hearing to be held August 30, 1978, at 9:00 a.m. Due notice as herein referred was given by applicant.

4. On August 30, 1978 Mr. R. Lee Schmidt of the State Attorney General's of fice conducted a public hearing on vaste disposal permit WD-75-083, in the auditorium of the Cklahoza Department of Wildlife Conservation building. ne proposed permit was pretested by Mrs. E. F. Ceary of Tulsa, and Citizen's Action for Safe Energy (C.A.S.E.) represented by Mr. Andrew T Dalton, Jr., Attorney. Other protests received during the thirty day coment period following the hearing were received from Mrs. A. Webster, Claremore; H. M. Ceary, Tulsa; Ms Nancy Perreault, 3rckan Arrow: Mr. Bill Bryant, Oklahoma City; Mrs. Joyce Nipper.

Tulsa; Mr. Robert H. Bryant, Catoosa; Mr. John Jacobs-Danner, Jr., Tulsa; and Ms Nancy Smart. Norman. The hearing was conducted in accordance with the Adminis-trative Procedures Act, O.S. 75, and was for the purpose of hearing relevant testi=ony concert.ing the proposed permit. During the hearing a nu:bar of issues were raised by the applicant and protestants, which are addressed below.

5. Issues raised by the applicent and the responses and conclusicas of the 3 card with regard thereto, are as follows:

a. The Applicant objec:ed to the permit on the grounds that there is no legal authority for imposing effluent limitations on point source dis:harges.

l Response: Under the provisiens of Title 92 0.S. Su:p. 1973. Il 926./et seq., with particular respect to 5 9:5.3 and ?:6.a thereof, a per-1: nay be required for the increase in volume or strength of any industrial wastes &

excess of the permissive discharges specified under any existing permit.

~'his i= plies that a permit may be used to specify the vclure or strength (concentratien) of wastes in the discharge, i.e., effluent limitations.

This statutory mandate, together with the lengthy precedent that has already been established for the issuacce of per=its with effluent lisi .ciens shows this objection to be without merit.

l b. The applicant objected to the proposed permit on the grounds that there is I no authority for the numerical limitations in Special Conditions 1 and 2, irrespective of the point of applicaticn, and that the nu=erical limitations were set arbitrarily.

Respense: The authority for placing numerical li=itaciens has already been discussed in paragraph 54. *he basis for the specific numerics 1 limitations placed on the permit is, ultimately, the appropriate water quality standards for the receiving stream necessary to protect the beneficial uses assigned to that stream and is therefore not arbitrary. *he relatienships of various limi:ations to the individual beneficial uses to be prettcted are elabora:ed upon in the folicwing paragraphs.

c. The applicant objected to the proposed limitation for total suspended solids (50 mg/L eaximum allesable cencentration) stating that the TSS in the discharge will be frca natural sources and that because of barge trafi?c in the Verdigris River, it would be impossible to attribute all or any part of bottom deposition of solids to the discharge frem the static?.

Response: The applicant's arguaent that land runoff is a natural source certainly cannot be challenged, except that during the constructi:n phase of the f acility large plots of land will be stripped of vegetation with the result that large quantities of soil could be allowed to enter the river via stor= water if not controlled. This man-induced pollution therefore should not be considered natural and must be thought of as a causeative agent of certain types of pollution addressed by the Water Quality Standa,rds.

However, because this source is non-point in nature, it is reccc= ended that susp.cded solids due to construction related runof f be controlled by best management practices during the construction phase.

It is also argued by the applicant that since the TSS in the discharge during station operation will consist of solids present in the intake water, this also should be considered a natural source. But, again, because the solids will be increased as a result of a man-induced conditien, i.e.,

concentration through cooling tower recycle, Section 6.4 of Oklahema's Water Ouality Standards (Solids - Suspended and/or Settleable) must be censidered applicable, and possible violations should be prevented as far as possible through the imposition of permit limitations. Therefore, suspended solids should not be discharged in concentrations sufficient tp cause a build-up of sediment or excess turbidity above what occurs naturally.

Instream monitoring should be perfor:ed by the applicant to determine natural turbidity levels,

d. The applicant objected to the proposed limitation for 3CDs as being unrelated to any water quality standard, and that, therefore, the Board has exceeded its legal authority in imposing such itsitation.

Response: BCDs is, of course, a measure of the presence of decrygenating waste (such as sanitary sewage) in wastewater and is therefore related to the water quality standard for dissolved oxygen, such standard being 5.0 mg/L for the Verdigris River. 30Ds li=itatiens on permits are a co=menly accepted =ethod of insuring the maintenance of the dissolved oxygen standard, and the Board is therefore authorized to impose such li itations. Even though the f acility's discharge will contain only a s=all amount of sewage, and probably will not cause a sirnificant reduction in the instreas dissolved oxygen concentration, this parameter should be included in the per=it to ins tre the standards are not violated.

e. The applicant objected to the proposed li=itation for oil and-grease because th_ station will not contribute eil and greast of any type to the river,

and because the oil and grease limitaticn given in the state's Vater Ouali-"

Standards was concerned only with instream water quality ef fects and not with setting industrial effluent limitaticns.

Response: Since it was stated in the Black yox Station Enviren= ental Report that various plant drains could be conta=1nated with oil, it is

! determined tha6 this parameter shculd be permitted; it is further determined i that a licitatien of 20 =g/L daily maximum oil and grease for the ccnstruction period and limitation of 15 mg/L daily average and 20 mg/L daily =aximam oil and grease during plant operations should be suf ficient to ecmply with the state's Water Ouslity Standards for oil and grease. While it is true that the Water Quality Standarcs are concerned only with instream water quality effects, it should be understood that permit limits constitute a significant cathod of assuring compliance with the standards. The authcrity for CWR3 to issue permits with effluent limitati:ns has already been discussed in paragrapn 5a.

f. The applicant objected to the inclusion of the p;cposed limitatten f:r free available chlorine in the permit as exceeding the 3 card's legal authority.

i Respense: The toxic ef fects of chlorine and chloramines to aquatic life are well documented, hence it was determined that it should be limited since it will be used in the cooling water systes. Limitations of 0.2 g/L (daily a.erage concentration) and 0.5 mg/L (daily maximum concentration) daring the operati:nal period should insure the prote:ti:n cf aquatic life.

g. The a;plicant objected to the proposed radiological report requirements of the pr: posed permi because of the

• unnecessarily frequent menitorine, inc:nsistent menitoring locaticns. monitering for parareters which will not be produced in Jetectable amounts, and reporting deadlines which do not provide adequate preparaticn time."

Response: Radiological sonitoring and reporting is necessary to detect violations of water quality stancards f or radicactive =aterials. The schedule included as part of the attached permit, tcgether with the radiclogical monitoring schedule submitted by the State Health Department at the public bearing (see attached) should be sufficient to detect any violations that may occur.

6. Based on river flow data supplied by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Tulsa District, it is determined that a two-year, seven-day low flow value of 163 cfs shall be used to evaluate water quality impacts resulting f rom the proposed discharge.

7. A review of instream water quality data submitted by representatives of C.A.S.E.

and U.S.C.S. trend monitoring data indicate water quality standards for public and private water supplies have been exceeded for cadmium and lead a large percentage of the ti=e. Because of the pollutant cencentration that is expected -

to occur as a result of evaporative losses f rco plant cooling tewers, instream meni:oring for these constituents shall be perforced by the applicant.

8. A number of protestants objected to the proposed permit in that it appeared to espouse a stortge and release philosophy, particularly regarding control of sulf ate, and that the statutes specifically require treatment of vaste discharges.

Title 82 0.S. 925.1 states that it is the policy of the Cklahoma Water Resources 1 card. "to provide that no waste be discharged into any waters of the state without first being given the degree of treatment necessary to protect the legitimate beneficial uses of such waters." The beneficial uses of the Verdigris River as listed in the 1976 version of Oklabema's Vater cuality standards are public and private water supply, fish and wildlif e propagation, agriculture, hydecelectric power generation, municipal a,d industrial cooling water. primary and secondary body contact recreation, navigation and aestat;cs. The data used by the 0.W.R.3. in its evaluation indicates that the levels of sulfate orotosed to be released frem the facility will not impair any of these uses. However, unrelated to beneficial use is the issue of non-degradatica which is partly i=ple ented through the Water Quality Standards by imposing a sa ple standard and a yearly =ean standard for minerals (including sulf ate) en the Verdigris River. A review of the sulfate discharge infcrmation supplied by the applicant ani che historical flows =entioned in item o indicate & slight possibili:y that the sz=ple standard for rulfate may be exceeded when river flow rates approach the two-year, seven-day low flow. The sulfa:e control zathodology presented in the per:1t is designed to ?--~ent violatiens of the sample standard at any river flev rate utilizing a sL s 's balance approach and snould net be regarded as prescribing either treat =ent or storage and release techniques. Cocpliance with I the propesed permit and the Water Quality Standards s3all at all ti=es be the burden of the applicant, whose responsibility it is to show the !aard goed faith 8 in meeting every requirement of the law, regardless of whatever uncertainties I may exist re;arding the efficacy of present pollutten centrol methods.

9. In 0.W.R.3.'s evaluation of the thermal effects of the plant dischar;e. the model developed by M. A. Thirszi and L. R. Davis as presented in the Verkbeck of Thertsi Plume ??adiction , Vol. 2 - Surfste Dischart=. May 1974, was used. This analysts showec that at an acolent stream te:perature of 37.3* 7 (monthly zaximu:

cver a five year period) and an ef fluent ta=perature of 9;* 7. a surf ace plu e te:0*rsture :f 90* 7 vnuld be achieved at a distance approxicately 67 feet downstream f rem the point of discharge. This dis:ance is well within the ts: :ated

Lxing :ene length of 3f00 feet. Therefere it is recomrended that a daily average te:eerature 1Lmita: ion Of 92* ? be included as a per:t* conditice.

o

10. Issues that were raised relative to plant safety and airborne asbestos were determined to be outside the jurisdiction of the Water Resources Soard and irrelevant to the issuance of a waste disposal permit.

CCNCLUSIONS OF LAV The Cklahema Water Resources Board finds, as a matter of law, that:

1. The CklaPc:a Vater Resources Board possesses and exercises its jurisdicticn of the instant application pursuant to 82 0.S. Supp. 1978, il 926.1 et seq.. with particular respect to i 926.3 thereof. ,

2. Under the provisions of 82 0.S. Supp.1978, il 926.1 et seq., with particular respect to il 926.3 and 926.4 thereof, and, pursuant to the rules and regulatiens of the Board, with particular respect to 5 505.1, Chapter V, thereof, applicant is required to obtain frem this Board a waste disposal permit for the discharge of waste f rom applicants's proposed nuclear electric generating Facility kncwn as the Black Fox Station.

CRO E1 IT IS HERE3Y ORDERED by the Cklaho=a Water Resources Board, based upon consideratien of all premises, that the attached Vasta Disposal Permit. WD-75-C88, for Public Service Company of Oklahoma, Black Fox Station, applicant herein, be granted and issued pursuant to the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of the Scard herein entered and that the Executive Director of the 3 card proceed to issue same as herein provided.

Dene this 13th day of February,1979.

OKLAHCM.A VATER RESCURCES 30ARD Gerald E. Screlli, Chairman ATTES!!

e L. .. Males. Secretary i

I i

l (SFx.)

TJ R A 9 7 B. Radis10gica! Pollutants The permittee shall collect and analy:e sa.?ples as shen in Table 1. The concentration of radioisotepes in the eff.uent shall not exceed the limits for release of radioactive zaterials specified in the Cklahoma Radiation Prctection Regulaticns, Section 13.2.A. The concentration of radioisotepes which may be attributable to the cperations of the penittee in other sa;nples shall not exceed the limits specified in the Rules and Regulations Coverning Operation of Public water Supply -

Systems, Section 3.D.

Analysis of samples shall be by a laboratory approved for radiochemical analyses by the Cklahoma State Department of Health.

The permittee shall submit a report to the Cklahora State Department of Health not later than the sixty (60) days following January 1 and July 1 of each year. Thi report shall contain the results of the analysis of each sample taken since the previous report was submitted.

If the result of any analysis shows that the concentration (s) of radioisotope (s) in a sample exceels the appropriate limit, the permittee shall ir. mediately notify the Cklahoma State Depart-ment of Health of the occurrence and the action taken to

' reduce the consequences of the ex.-. sive concentration.

Within ten (10) days of the occurrence of an excessive concentration the permittee shall submit a written re ortr to the Oklahoma State Depart =ent of Health which describes the reason for the excessive conecatration, the expected consequences, f and the action taken to prevent a recce irrence of excessive Concentrations.

RECEIVED AUG 2 91978 i

i l

CF1A.MIER RE;;'J R;;S s;APJ

i

?

3) R A PT in the esent of a spill or accidental discharge of material

.hich causes or tends to cause the concentration of radicactive matetaal to exceed the appropriate limit, the permittee shall immediately notify the Oklahoma State Department of Health by telephone. Within ten '40) days the permittee shall submit to the Oklahoma State Department of Health a written report describing the circumstances causing the spill or accidental discharge, the consequences, and action taken to prevent a similar spill or .cidental discharge.

O RECElVED AUG 2 91978 cKt.uAti.?.RES;"F.;15 3M3 i

es-k

. TABLE I O Im Padiological Sampling Schedule [gj p y

-. $ e a$

Sampling Point Sampling and Collection Type and Frequency of Analysis Ltj ei y Frequency Q L3 111 & W #

semi-monthly [E

• Liiluent at point Continuous ser..ple. Sampling Radiolodine j of dischage to volume proportional to total Cross Beta monthly a Verdigris River flow of ef fluent. Camma Isotopic monthly Tritium quarterly strontium-89 quarterly s t rontitus-90 quarterly

( Verdigris Piver approximately 3/4 Weekly grab sample.

Composited for analysis.

Radiolodine Cross Beta semi-monthly monthly Q mile upstream from Camma Isotopic monthly point of discharge Tritium quarterly g of ef fluent Strontium-89 qua rt e rly k Strontium-90 quarterly b Verdigris River Weekly grab sample. P.adiolodine semi-monthly at point of removal Composited for analysis. Cross Beta monthly of water for Brol.en Gamma Isotopic monthly Arrow water treat- Tritium quarterly ment plant Strontium 89 quarterly Strontium-90 quarterly

• This sanpling requirement shall not become ef factive until the initial fuel load is received on site.

i

\

9.

n TABLE I (-continued)

O m eg"'g ,

Radiological Sampling Schedule Id

>_ m S 1/il.

Sampling Point Sampling and Collection Type and Frequency of Analysis N o

Frequency [

m -:

y

• • Ground Water Weekly grab sample. Radiolodine semi-monthly Coa. posited for analysis. Gross Beta sic >n t h l y Gamma Isotopic samt h ly Tritium quarterly Strontium-89 quarterly Strontium.90 quarterly

' At least three wells shall be drilled for the purpose of monitoring contamination of ground

% water. These wells shall be situated such that one is down dip, one is up dip, and one is cross dip from any possible source of contamination.

(k A

OKLAhC."A LTER RESOURCES E0ARD x WASTE DISPOSAL PERHIT #' Ge

• PUELIC SERVICE COPPANY OF OKLAHOPA 6 EESL s3 3 ELACX FOX STATION g b g/

.s P.O. BOX 201 y p ff w

TutsA, 0xtAscMA 74102 PERMIT N0. 'n'D-75-088 I,D. N0, 66000C00 .

EFFECTIVE DATE:

EXPIRATION DATE:

TYPE CF WASTE: Waste consists initially of sanitary sewage and site runoff associated with the construction phase of a nuclear steam electric generating facility.

Af ter startuo, a single waste stream will consist of waste from the icw volume drains (water pretreatment sludge holding basin discharge, demineralizing waste, nenradioactive station drains, roof and yard ,

drains, and selected releases from the liquid radwaste system), sanitary sewage waste and ccoling tower blcwdown.

DISCHARGE POINT: Watte water (Discharge Point 001) is discharged from a holding peno into the Verdigris River at a point located in the SEh NWh Section 25 Township 19N, Range 16EIM, Rogers County.

SPECIAL CON 0!TIONS: (1) For the period beginning with the effective date of this permit and lasting througn c;erational s*artuo, the permittee is authcri:ed to discharge waste aater from Outfall 001 prcvided the felicwing limits are not exceeced and the monitoring recairetents are met.

DAILY A*! ERASE MAX;"';M CAILY MEASUCEMENT SAMPLE Pa W ETER CCNCENT:ATION CONCENTRATION F?E ZE'.CY TY:E Flow -- -- Caily Estir. ate 011 & Grease N/A E0.0 mg/l 1/=eer 3rab Total Suspenoed Solids (See Paragracn 5) 1/ week Grab BCOs N/A 45.0 mg/l 1/ week Grab i.

(2) Beginning with operatien startuo and lasting througn the exoiration cate, the folicwing : ncitions must be met.

DAILY a'!E: AGE '4AX MUM OAILY MEASCEEME~ fiPOLE Da:AMETER CC NC ET7 aT!CN CC';CE';T *. TION  ::E:U E'.Cv TY E

'l o w wA N/A C:ntinu:us Rac:r Temcerature 9E' N/A Ccntinue;s Re::rt h

PAGE 2 DA!LY A'.' ERA;E MAXIMUMAILY MEASUREMENT SAMP!.E CONCINTRATION CONCE NT RI.T! O*4 FEEOUENCY TYPE P'JAMETER 011 1 Grease 15.0 mg/l 20.0 mg/l 1/=eek Gran 30.0 mg/l 35.0 mg/l 1/ week Gran SCOs Total Sus;:en::ec Sclics (See Para;ri:n 6) 1/ week Gr3b Free A<ailable Chlorine 0.2 mg/l 0.5 mg/l 3/ week Gra Sulfate (See Paragra;n 4) Caily Grab (3) The pH shall not be less than 6.0 nor greater than 9.0 standar'd units and shall be measured and recorded on a continuous basis.

(4) The maximum daily sulfate concentration, s, from Outf all C01 shall not exceed the following limitation:

, , 3(57-s + 57(A) ,gjj khere: s = sulfate concentratien in discharge, mg/l st = sulfate concentration . .tream above discharge A = total daily discharge ficw rate, MGD B = stream flow belcw intake anc accve discharge, MGD (5) There shall be no discharge of ficating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

(6) Suspended solids shall not be discharged in concentrations sufficient to cause a build-up of sediment in excess of the naturally occurring sediment load. Stream turbidity resulting from the discnarge shall not exceec naturally occurring turbidity levels.

(7) Any sludge waste removed from the holding ;cno Or treatment system lagoens fer the pur:cse of disposal, and other c:n'. rolled industrial P

waste shall be hauled by a State ap;reved waste hauler to a Stata approved industrial waste dis 00 sal site.

(3) The neutralization basin and :ludge holding basin snail be lirec i so as to prevent seepage of lagocn centents.

1 (3) The concentration of radioisot0;es in the effluent shall net exceed the limits for release of radicactive materials specified in tre Calancma Radiation Arotection Pegulati:ns, Settien 13.2.A. The :encentra-tion of radioiset::es wnich may be attributable to :ne c erations of the

emittee in other sam les shall not ex:eed the limits see:ifie: in tre Rules anc Regulatices Governing 0:eratien of Puolic Water Sa:piy Syste s, Section 3.0.

GO) Samole analyses must be perfer ec ty a Laterat:ry certifie: ty the

, CLiancma Water resources Scard.

e 9

• . P"GE 3 REPCRT RE;UIREMENTS. (1) The permittee shall moniter the discharge in accordance with the schedule, and repcrt to the Oklancma Water Resources Scard On =r before the 2Sth day of January, April, July and October of each year fer the

revious q1.arter.

(2) In additicn to the recuired mcnitoring, the permittee is receirec to collect samples at locations (a) and (b) f0r sulfate, t:tal dissolved solics, temperatare, taroidity, strentium 90, gross beta, cacmium Jtstal),

and lead (total) once every three months for the period beginning January 1,1982, through operational startup, and once per week thereaf ter, except strontium 90 samples which shall be collected twice per month. Results of these analyses shall be repcrted ;uarterly with the other effluent monitoring results.

(a) Verdigris River at a point located in the SEh, Section 23 Township 19N, Range 16EIM, Rogers County, approximately 3/4 mile upstretm from the point of discharge (further identified as Aquatic Station #2, in the Black Fox Station Environmental Report).

(b) Verdigris River at a point located in the NEl s, Section 36, Township 19N, Range 16EIM, Rogers County, approximately 3/4 mile downstream from the point of discharge, just ucstream of the Verdigris River cutoff.

(3) The permittee shall monitor and rescrt on a quarterly basis, daily river ficw data cbtained at a point below the intake and above the discharge 4

(4) The permittee snall submit c: pies Of tne semi-annual Radioicgical Effluent Monitoring Report and the annual Raciclegical Envircr. mental 0:erating Report to the Cklahcm3 Water Rescurces Board witnin 60 Oays afte-January 1st and July 1st for the semi-annual report and May 1st f:r tne l annual report of each year. The semi-anntial rescrts shall incluce a f, summary of the discharge monitoring, while the annual re ort shall centain a sumary of all Radiological Environmental Mcnitoring, this inc!udes upstream and downstream monitoring as well as ground water monit: ring. The exact location of ali grounc aate- mcnitcring wells anc parameters to be -onitcred, shall be su mitted f:r a;:roval by the Oklahoma Water Resources 3 arc on er before January 1,1932.

(S) If, for any reasen, the ;emittee cces not c: :ly .ith Or .ill :e unac'a to ccmciy with an efflaent limitat:cn s:ec;#ies in this ; emit, the pemittee snali previce the Oklancma Water Rescurces Scarc with

% e PAGE 4 the following inf:rmation, in writing, within (5) .crAing days of becoming aware of sucn conoition:

(a) A description of the discharge and cause of renco-cliance.

(b) The period of ncne:mpliance, including exact dates and ti?es; or if not corrected, t.te anticipated time t e nonc r;iiance is ex;ected to c ntinue, ano steps being taken to redu:e, eliminate and prevent recurrence of the nonc:molying discharge.

(6) The permittee shall keep accurate records and report on or before the 28th day of January, April, July and Octcber of each year to the Oklahoma Water Resourcesboard the following informaticn for the previous quarte *:

(a) The type snd amount of industrial waste hauled.

(b) Name and address of company hauling waste.

(c) The final disposal site of waste hauled.

(7) Whenever a spill or accidental discharge occurs, which may or may tend to cause pollution, the Cklahcma Water Resources Scard shall be notified immediately, such notification to be followed by a letter of explanation.

CERTIFICATICN: This is to certify that the proposed waste discharge described in this permit meets the requirements of Oklahcma's Water Quality Standards.

APPRCVAL: Approved by the Oklahoma Water Resources Board on the day of , 19 _

CrLAHOMA WATER RESCURCES 3 CARD i

I l

James R. 5arnett, Acting Executive ;irec :r i

e e