ML19309A777
| ML19309A777 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 03/28/1980 |
| From: | GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19309A775 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8004010326 | |
| Download: ML19309A777 (300) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:rx i )
%/
GEORGIA POWER COMPANY EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1979 i l l
. I 1
I 8 o o 4 0103%
g. r
]
HNP ANNUAL REPORT INTRODUCTION This Annual Report is submitted pursuant to paragraph 5.7.1(a) of the Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS), which is Appendix B to the operating licenses for the Edwin I. Hatch Nucicar Plant (HNP), Units I and II, DPR-57 and NPF-5, respectively. This report provides a summary and interpretation of the results of the environ-mental activities at and in the environs of HNP during 1979 and an assessment of the observed impact of the plant's operation on the environment.
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 WATER QUALITY MONITORING Section Title Page 1.1 PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL REQUIREMENTS 1-1 1.1.1 SPECIFICATION 1-1 1.1.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 1-1 1.2 THERMAL 1-5 1.2.1 SPECIFICATION' 1-5 1.2.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 1-5 1.3 pH MONITORING 1-9 1.3.1 SPECIFICATION 1-9 1.3.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 1-9 1.4 CHLORINE MONITORING 1-23 1.4.1 SPECIFICATION 1-23 1.4.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 1-23 CHAPTER 2 RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING Section Title g
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2-1 2.2 DISCHARGES TO THE ATMOSPHERE 2-3 2.2.1 AIRBORNE DUST 2-4 2.2.2 AIRBORNE IODINE 2-6 2.2.3 THERM 0 LUMINESCENT DOSIMETERS 2-8 2.2.4 MILK 2-10 2.2.5 CRASS 2-13 2.3 DISCHARCES TO THE RIVER 2-15 2.3.1 RIVER WATER , 2-15 2.3.2 CLAMS 2-17 2.3.3 AMERICAN SHAD 2-18 j 2.3.4 SEDIMENT 2-18 2.4 DISCHARGES TO THE GROUND 2-20 2.4.1 _GROUN3 WATER HYDROLOGY 2-21 2.4.2 PREVIOUS MONITORING ACTIVITIES 2-22 2.4.3 MAJOR HAPPENINGS IN 1979 2-33 t 2.4.3.1 Nonroutine Report 2-33 2.4.3.2 Leaks From Condensate Transfer Pumps 2-37 !. 2-38 2.4.3.3 Miscellaneous Activities 2.4.4 INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES 2-43 2.4.4.1 Initial Activities 2-43 2.4.4.2 Follow On Activities 2-52 2.4.5 CRITIQUE 2-54 2.4.5.1 CST-1 Area 2-54 2.4.5.2 Area North of Turbine Building 2-56 I~ 2.4.6 FINALE 2-57 2.5 MISCELLANEA 2-58 2.5.1 CROSSCHECK PROGRAM 2-58 2.5.2 INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT 2-64 2.6~ CONCLUSIONS 2-64 i
I HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 3 METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING Section, Title Py 3.1 REQUIREMENTS 3-1 3.2 ON-SITE METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING 3-1 3.3 DATA SUMMARIES - 1979 3-1 3.4 COMPARISON OF 1979 DATA 3-1 . CHAP 1ER 4 BIOLOGICAL MONITORING Section Title Pg 4.1 IMPINGEMENT OF FISH 4-1 4.1.1 SPECIFICATION 4.1 4.1.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4-1 4.1.3
SUMMARY
4-1 4.2 ENTRAINMENT 4-3 4.2.1 SPECIFICATION 4-3 4.2.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4-3 4.2.2.1 Physicochemical Data 4-3 4.2.2.2 seasonal Abundance o_f,Ichthyoplankton 4-3 4.2.3
SUMMARY
4-6 4.3 BENTH0S 4-6 4.3.1 SPECIFICATION 4-6 4.3.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4-7
*.3.2.1 Relative Abundance
- 4-8 4.3.2.2 Species Diversity 4-20 4.3.2.3 Comparison of 1976 and 1979 Data 4-20 4.3.3
SUMMARY
4-34 4.4 AERIAL REMOTE SENSING 4-34 4.4.1 SPECIFICATION 4-34 4.4.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4-34 4.5 SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: TRANSMISSION LINES 4-35 4.5.1 SPECIFICATION 4-35 4.5.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4-35 11
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS CilAPTER 5 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS Section Title Pm 5.1 SPECIFICATION 5-1 5.2 DISCUSSION 5-1 iii
4 HNP' ANNUAL REPORT CHAPTER 1 i WATER QUALITY MONITORING TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 1.1 PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL REQUIREMENTS 1-1 1.1.1 - SPECIFICATION 1-1 1.1.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 1-1 1.2 THERMAL J-5 1.2.1 SPECIFICATION 1-5
' 1.2.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 1-5 1.3 pH MONITORING 1-9 I 1.3.1 SPECIFICATION 1-9 1.3.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 1-9 1.4 CHLORINE MONITORING 1-23
' 23 1.4.1 SPECIFICATION 1.4.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 1-23 a
i 1-1 r - ..
HNP ANNUAL REPORT CHAPTER 1 WATER QUALITY MONITORING LIST OF TABLES Table Title Page 1.1-1 DISSOLVED OXYGEN AND TEMPERATURE DATA FOR 1979 1-2 1.1-2 ALTAMAHA RIVER DATA FOR 1971-1974 1-3 1.1-3 ALTAMAHA RIVER DATA FOR 1975-1978- 1-4 1.2-1 NPDES TEMPERATURE MONITORING l-6 1.2-2 THERMAL PLUME MONITORING DATA COLLECTED DURING SURVEYS 1-8 1.3-1 COOLING TOWER BLOWDOWN pH, UNIT I . 1-10 1.3-2 COOLING TOWER BLOWDOWN pH, UNIT II l-11 1.3-3 SEWACE TREATMENT PLANT pH 1-12 1.3-4 LIQUID RADWASTE SYSTEM pH, UNIT I 1-13 1.3-5 LIQUID RADWAFTE SYSTEM pH, UNIT II l-14 1.3-6 LOW VOLUME WASTE pH (NEUTRALIZATION TANK) FROM: 1/1/79 TO 12/31/79 1-15 1.3-7 LOW VOLUME WASTE pH (PRESSURE FILTER BACKWASH) 1-16 1.3-8 COMBINED PLANT WASTE STREAM pH, UNIT I 1-17 1.3-9 COMBINED PLANT WASTE STREAM pH, UNIT II 1-19 1.3-10 INTAKE RIVER WATER pH (WEEKLY AVERAGE) 1979 1-21 1.4-1 CIRCULATING WATER SYSTEM CHLORINATION, UNIT I 1-26 1.4-2 CIRCULATING WATER SYSTEM CHLORINATION, UNIT II 1-27 1.4-3 SERVICE WATER SYSTEM CHLORINATION, LWIT I l-28 1.4-4 SERVICE WATER SYSTEM CHLORINATION, UNIT II 1-29 e 1-11
i i l l 1 HNP ANNUAL REPORT CHAPTER 1 WATER QUALITY MONITORING LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title 1.1-1 ALTAMAHA RIVER D.O.-TEMPERATURE SURVEY STATIONS 1.1-2 ALTAMAHA RIVER CONTINUOUS TEMPERATURE MONITOR WEEKLY MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM TEMPERATURES RIVER
!!ILE 116.2 ,
1,2-1 ALTAMAHA RIVER THERMAL PLUME TRANSECTS 1.2-2 ALTAMAHA RIVER THERMAL PLUME SURVEY FOR SEPTEMBER 25, 1979 1.2-3 ALTAMAHA RIVER THERMAL PLUME SURVEY FOR ' OCTOBER 31, 1979 l.2-4 ' ALTAMAHA RIVER THERMAL PLUME SURVEY FOR NOVEMBER 1, 1979 l l-111
HNP ANNUAL REPORT
- 1. Water Quality Monitoring 1.1 Physical and Chemical Requirements 1.1.1 Specification The Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Operating License Stage Environmental Report states that a dissolved oxygen and temperature survey will be conducted weekly at pre-selected stations in the Altamaha River. Also, a temporary temperature monitor will be installed on a piling within the estimated mixing zone of the HNP discharge and will remain there until verification of the RNP thermal plume predictive model is completed.
1.1.2 Results and Discussion The Georgia Power Company water quality monitoring program of the Alta-maha River consists of a weekly dissolved oxygen and temperature survey and a temporary temperature monitor in the estimated mixing zone. A map of the dissolved oxygen and temperature survey stations is shown in Figure 1.1-1. The HNP discharge is located between Station 6 and Station 7 at river mile 116.2. Measurements of dissolved oxygen and temperature were taken at depths of 1 foot. 3 feet, 5 feet, 10 feet, and bottom of channel where applicable. A summary of the dissolved oxygen and temperature data collected at the 3 foot lesel during 1979 is shown in Table 1.1-1. Data collected during pre-operational and during Unit 1 operational phases are presented in Tables 1.1-2 and 1.1-3, respectively. Mean D.O. levels in 1979 were approximately 1.0 mg/L higher than pre-operational data and approximately 0.8 mg/t higher than Unit 1 operational data. Maximum D.O. levels for 1979 were 1.6 to 2.3 mg/L higher than pre-operational data and ranged from 0.6 mg/t higher to 1.3 mg/L lower than operational data. Minimum D.O. levels for 1979 were approximately 1.1 mg/L higher than past data collected. Mean temperature levels for 1979 were apgroximately 0.6 C lower than pre-operational data, and were about 0.1 C lower than operational data. Maximum temperatures were approximately the same as pre-oper-ational data, but were about 1.0 C lower than operational data. Mini-mum temperatures for 1979 were the same as pre-operational data, but were approximately S.0 C higher than Unit 1 operational data. This can be attributed to the unusually cold winters of 1976 and 1977. The dissolved oxygen and temperature survey was shortened to 6 stations in September, 1973, and to 3 stations in August, 1977. The temperature data collected from the continuous temperature monitor on a piling downstream of the KNP discharge within the mixing zone are shown in Figure 1.1-2. 1-1 9
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1.1-1 DISSOLVED OXYGEN .*.ND TEMPERATURE DATA FOR 1979 Dissolved Oxygen, (mg/1)' Station River Mlle Min. Max. Mean OBS 6 117.0 6.0 13.0 8.64 52 7 116.0 6.1 12.7 8.54 52
~
9 113.2 6.1 12.2 8.59 52 Temperature, ( C) . Station River Mile Min. Max. Mean OBS 6 117.0 7. 0 29.8 19.20 52 7 116.0 7. 0 30.0 19.30 52 9 113.2 7. 0 30.1 19.33 52 e l l L 1-2
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1.1-2 ALTAMAHA RIVER DATA FOR 1971-1974 Dissolved Oxygen, .(mg/1) Station River Mile Min. Max. Mean OBS 1 1 0.50 5.0 10.8 7.87 83 2 0.50 4.7 10.4 7.36 83 3 135.0 4.9 10.6 7.55 83 4 126.9 4.9 10.3 7.49 83 5 120.5 4.9 10.4 7.59 133 ' 6 117.0 4.9 10.7 7.60 134 7 116.0 4.9 10.8 7.62 134 8 113.1 2.3 12.0 7.36 ' 76 9- 113.2 4.9 10.6 7.67 135 10 111.0 4.9 10.4 7.68 135 11 108.0 5.0 10.6 7.64 118 Temperature. ( C) Station River Mile Min. Max. Mean OBS 1 0.50 6.8 29,8 19.83 83 2 0.50 7.2 30.0 20.25 83 3 135.0 7.0 30.0 20.08 83 4 126.9 7.0 30.0 20.11 83 5 120.5 7.0 30.0 19.86 135 6 117.0 7.0 30.0 19.95 136 7 116.0 7.0 30.0 19.99 136 8 113.1 6.9 30.0 20.27. 76 9 113.2 7.0 30.2 19.94 137 10 111.0 7.0 30.2 20.01 137 11 108.0 7.0 30.1 20.55 120 l i 1-3 i l
- HNP ANNUAL REPORT y
TABLE 1.1-3 ALTAMAHA RIVER DATA FOR 1975-1978 Dissolved Oxygen, (ag/1) Station River Mile Min. Max. Mean OBS 5 120.5 5.2 12.4 7.63 129 6 117.0 5.0 12.4 7.79 203 7 116.0 4.9 14.0 7.79 203 9 113.2 5.1 12.4 7.81 202 10 111.0 ' 5. 4 13.2 7.63 129 , 11 108.0 5.3 12.0 7.65 128 J Temperature, ( C)' Station River Mile Min. Max. Mean OBS 5 120.5 2.2 30.8 19.09 132 6 117.0 2.1 31.0 19.34 206 7 116.0 2.2 30.9 19.43 206 9 113.2 2.2 31.1 19.50 205 10 111.0 2.5 30.9 19.26 132 11 108.0 2. 2 31.0 19.36 131 t e i. i' 1-4 l l'
~ - - - - , - . . .-. .-- .- . - . . . --. . - , . , - . .,_ -
10iP ANNUAL REPORT 1.2 Thermal 1.2.1 Specification As required by Section 3.1.1.1 of the HNP-ETS, Units 1 and 2, temper-atures of the intake water and the discharge from the cooling system to the river shall be measured in accordance with the Environmental Program Description Document (EPDD). The EPDD states that the intake water temperature, temperature af the combined plant waste streams, and discharge temperature shall be measured on a weekly basis. This program is to commence at initial attainment of normal operation of Unit 2 and will continue in accordance with the requirements of NPDES Permit No. CA-0004120. (The NPDES Permit requires that weekly temp-erature measurements be taken at a point 500 ft. downstream of the discharge pipe and at the mixing chamber.) In addition, the NPDES Permit states, "The Georgia Power Company will initiate work on a study to field verify and/or fine tune their thermal plume predictive model not later than six months following the commercial operation of Unit 2". l 1.2.2 Results and Discussion In accordance with the EPDD and NPDES Permit, temperatures are measured on a weekly basis at the intake structure or at a midatream point up-stream of the intake, at the mixing chamber (last point before discharge of combined plant waste streams), and at the downstream edge of the mixing zone (approximately 500 f t. downstream of the discharge point). A complete listing of the temperatures is given in Table 1.2-1. The maximum observed AT was 1 F, which occurred during 14 sampling periods. All temperatures measured are within the limits required by the NPDES Permit (90 F maximum or 5 F rise above ambient). The NPDES Permit also states that CPC will field verify and/or fine tune the predictive thermal plume model beginning not later than six months after commer-cial operation of Unit 2. Three thermal plume surveys were undertaken in 1979: September 25, October 31, and November 1. Temperature mens-urements were taken at depths of 1 foot, 3 feet, and 5 feet from a moving boat along pre-selected transects in the river (Figure 1.2-1) . Temperatures were measured using a temperature probe and continuous recorder. All monitoring equipment was calibrated in the laboratory before the survey and rechecked in 'the field before and af ter each su rvey. Other data collected, in addition to the transects, are listed in Table 1,2-2. The temperature data collected on the transects and the computer model predictions were plotted on Figures 1.2-2 through 1.2-4. The largest AT observed on the 1 ft. transects was approxi-mately 2.3 F on September 25, 1979, and was limited to a distance of about 200 feet downstream of the discharge. Temperatures at the 3 foot and 5 foot levels werc ~1ess than those noted for the 1 f t. transects. Additional thernmi plume surveys will be conducted in 1980 to field verify the thermal plume model. 1- 5
HNP ANNUAL REPORT
' TABLE 1.2-1 NPDES TEMPERATURE MONITORING Mixing Intake Chamber Discharge Data Temp. ( F) Temp. ( F) Temp. ( F) AT, 01/03/79 48 49 48 0 01/10/79. 46 46 46 0 01/18/79 46 47 47 1 01/24/79 47 47 47 . 0 01/31/79 45 44 45 0 02/07/79 45 44 45 0 02/14/79 45 46 45 0 02/22/79 46 47 - 47 1 02/28/79 54 -
53 -1 03/07/79 56 - 56 0 03/15/79 57 57 58 1 03/21/79 63 64 64 1 03/28/79 61 61 61 0 04/05/79 67 66 67 0 04/11/79 67 67 68 1 04/18/79 68 67 68 0 04/27/79 67 66 67 0 05/02/79 67 66 67 0 05/10/79 72 70 72 0 05/16/79 75 73 75 0 05/23/79 76 75 76 0 06/01/79 77 76 77 0 06/08/79 82 80 83 1 06/13/79 80 79 81 1 06/20/79 81 80 82 l' 06/27/79 77 76 78 1 NOTE: AT = Discharge temperature - Intake temperature. Discharge temperature. measured at downstream edge of mixing zone. 1-6 e
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1.2-1 Continued NPDES TEMPERATURE MONITORING Ndxing Intake Chamber Discharge Temp. ( F) Temp. ( F) Temp. ( F) AT Data 83 85 0 07/04/79 85 81 80 81 0 07/12/79 0 83 82 83 07/18/79 0 82 80 82 07/25/79 ' . 0 83 83 83 08/01/79 0 86 85 86 08/08/79 0 82 82 82 08/16/79 84 82 85 1 08/22/79 0 82 82 82 08/29/79 0 82 - 82 09/07/79 79 78 80 1 09/13/79 0 76 75 76 09/19/79 0 70 - 70 09/27/79 0 73 73 73 10/03/79 1 68 67 69 10/12/79 1 68 67 69 10/17/79 0 68 67 68 10/25/79 0 68 67 68 10/31/79 0 62 62 62 11/07/79 0 62 61 62 11/14/79 58 56 57 -1 11/21/79 0 61 61 61 11/28/79 0 54 49 54 12/05/79 0 54 54 12/13/79 54
-1 50 50 49 12/19/79 1 50 - 51 12/26/79 NOTE: AT = Dischstge temperature - Intake temperature. Discharge temperature measured at downstream edge of mixing zone.
1-7
.c 10iP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1.2-2 THERMAL PLUME MONITORING DATA COLLECTED DURING SURVEYS 09/25/79 10/31/79 11/01/79 River Elevation (Ft.) 66.4 64.0 63.9 River Discharge (CFS) 5480 2600 2480 Ambient River Temperature ( C) 22.4 20.2 -
20.1 Discharge Temperature ( C) 26.6 22.7 27.9 AT ( C) 4.2 2.5 7.8 Discharge Volume (CFS) 67.9 62.4 52.3 Discharge Velocity (FPS) 3.54 3.25 2.73 River Velocity (FPS) 1.07 1.43 1.47 NOTE: Ambient temperature taken in River. Diccharge temperatures taken at discharge structure. AT = Discharge temperature - Intake temperature t l 1-8
HNP ANNUAL REPORT 1.3 pH Monitoring 1.3.1 Spc .fication The purpose of the pH monitoring requirement is to assure that the pH of the water being discharged complies with the requirements of NPDES Permit No. GA-0004120. This monitoring program will provide informa-tion needed to determine whether the station is operating in an environ-mentally acceptable manner. During normal operation of the station, the pH of the intake water and the discharge water shall be measured in accordance with the Environmental Program Description Document (EPDD). The EPDD states that grab samples of intake water for pH analysis.will be taken either from existing intake lines or from midstream of the Altamaha River at the surface or a near-surface depth upstream from the discharge. Prior to discharge, a grab sample for pH analysis will be taken from the mixing chamber. 1.3.2 Results and Discussion As specified by NPDES Permit No. GA-0004120, pH is measured on the following process streams: cooling tower blowdown, sewage plant, liquid radwaste, low volume waste and combined plant waste streams. Also, the Environmental Technical Specifications and the Environ-mental Program Description Document require measurement of the intake river water pH and pH of the mixing chamber (combined plant waste streams), which is the final sampling point before discharge to the river. All plant waste streams empty into the mixing chamber at the discharge structure before discharge into the Altamaha River. With the exception of liquid radwaste, all waste streams must meet the limits specified in NPDES Permit No. GA-0004120. The specified limits are 6.0 to 9.0 pH at the point of release except for liquid radwaste, which is measured at . the mixing chamber. With the exception of the sewage plant a :i liquid radwaste, all waste streams are monitored for pH continuously. Twice per year, samples are taken from the chlorine contact chamber at the sewage plant and the pH measured using a standardized laboratory pH meter. Liquid radwaste pH is measured before each batch release using a standardized pH meter, however, pH for this stream is also monitored in the mixing chamber at the discharge structure. 1-9
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1.3-1 4
' Cooling Tower 810wdown pH, Unit I Date pH 1/2/79 6.8 1/15/79 6.4 2/5/79 7.3 2/19/79 6.8 3/5/79 6.2 3/19/79 6.8 -
4/2/79 7.0 4/16/79 7.0 5/7/79 005 5/21/79 005 6/4/79 00S 6/18/79. 00S 7/3/78 005 7/17/78 005 8/6/79 005 8/20/79 7.0 9/4/79 6.7 9/17/79 7.0 10/7/79 7.0 10/15/79 6.5 11/5/79 6.9 11/19/79 6.7 12/3/79 6.2 12/17/79 7. ; Pkximun 7. 6 Minimun 6.2 4
- 00S - Out Of Service 9
4 ! l-10. h
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1.3-2 Cooling Tower Blowdown pH,. Unit II Date pH 1/2/79 00S 1/15/79 00S 2/5/79 7.1 2/19/79 005 3/5/79 005 3/19/79 00S , 4/2/79 005 4/16/73 005 5/7/79 00S 5/21/79 005 . 6/4/79 7.4
-6/18/79 6.9 7/2/79 7.2
, 7/16/79 7.1 6.8 8/6/79 8/20/79 6.6 9/3/79 7.1 9/17/79 6.8 4 10/1/79 7.5 10/15/79 6.8 11/5/79 7.6 11/19/79 7.3 12/3/79 7.8 12/17/79 7.8 Maximum 7.8 - Minimum 6.6 OOS - Out Of Service i 1 .
. . . - . . . . . - . . . - - . - . -. .-=_. _ . . . . . - . .
HNP
- ANNUAL REPORT 1
TABLE 1.3-3 l i Sewage Treatment Plant pH 1 l: Date Location pH
- 1/5/79 2 6.9 1/5/79 3 7.5 i
l 7/5/79 2 6.5 > '7/5/79 3 6.8 Maximum 7.5 Minimum 6.5 \ i 4 i L J i
- i i
i 12 l- .
^
l= . [
. . _ _ _. . . _ _ _ . ..-. _ _ _ _ . . . - - ._. . _ _ - - . _ . . . _ . - _ _ . . . ~ . -
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1.3-4 Liquid Radwaste System pH, Unit I Date pH 4. 1/16/79 7.0 2/6/79 6.9 ! 2/25/79 7.0 3/5/79 7.0
. 3/20/79 7.8 .
4/3/79 7.0 - 4/19/79 6.8 5/7/79 7.0 5/21/79 6.9 6/4/79 7.3 - 6/18/79 7.2 7/2/79 6.4 7/16/79 7.2 8/6/79 7.4 C/20/79 7.4 9/4/79 7.4 9/19/79 7.4 i 10/1/79 7.3 10/15/79 7.4 i 11/1/79 7.3 11/19/79 7.6 12/3/79 7.2 12/18/79 6.9 Maximum 7.8 Minimum 6.4 I i l I i-I- 1-13 l
~ ,.. . _ _ _ _ . . - _ . - - . , . ,
HNP ANNUAL REPORT + TABLE 1.3-5 I s Liquid Radwaste System pH, Unit !! Date pH 1/3/79 6.9 2/6/79 6.7 2/20/79 6.9 3/7/79 6.9 3/19/79 7.0 4/4/79 7.2 4/18/79 7.1 5/9/79 7. 5 , 5/25/79 7.2 6/6/79 7.3 6/19/79 7.3 7/2/70 7.1 7/16/ 79 7.1 8/6/79 6.8 8/20/79 7.1 9/5/79 7.1 9/18/79 7.1 10/1/79 7.2 10/16/79 7.4 11/5/79 7.4 11/19/79 7. 3 12/3/79 7.1 12/19/79 6.9 Maximum 7.5 Minimum 6.7 i t 1-14 I -
k HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1.3-6 LOW VOLUME WASTE pH (NEUTRALIZATION TANK) FROM: 1/1/79 TO 12/31/79 Date pH 1/3/79 7.2 1/16/79 6.7 2/6/79 6.3 2/19/79 6.5 3/5/79 7.2 ,
- 3/19/79 7.1 4/2/79 8.6 4/16/79 6.5 5/7/79 8.7 .
+
5/25/79 7.0 6/5/79 8.9 l 6/18/79 8.9 7/2/79 6.3 7/17/79 8.5 8/7/79 7.2 , 8/20/79 8.2 9/3/79 6.7 9/17/79 8.9 10/1/79 8.5 10/15/79 8.5 11/5/79 8.5 11/19/79 8.8 12/4/79 6.8 12/17/79 7. 8 Maximum 8.9 - Minimum 6.3 i 1-15 l l
1 l l HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1.3-7 Low Volume Waste pH (Pressure Filter Backwash) Date Filter A Filter B Filter C Filter D 1/8/79 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 1/17/79 7.9 7.9 7.9 7.9 2/6/79 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 2/19/79 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 3/5/79 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 3/19/79 7.8 7.8 7.8 7. 8 4/2/79 7.8 .7.8 7.8 7.8 4/16/79 7.8 - 7.8 7.8 7.8 5/7/79 7.8 7. 8 7.8 7.8 5/25/79 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 6/5/79 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 6/18/79 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 i 7/2/79 7. 8 7.8 7. 8 7.8 7/17/79 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 8/7/79 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 8/20/79 7.6 7.6 7.6 7. 6 9/3/79 7.6 7.6 7. 6 7.6 9/17/79 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 10/1/79 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 10/15/79 7.6 7.6 7. 6 7.6 11/5/79' 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 11/19/79 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 12/3/79 7.6 7.6 7. 6 7.6 12/17/79 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 Maximum 7.9 7.9 7.9 7. 9 Minimum 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 1-16
M l i HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1.3-8 Combined Plant Waste Streams pH, Unit I Date pH 1/2/79 8.1 1/9/79 7.9 1/16/79 7.9
- 1/23/79 7.7 1/30/79 7.5 ,
2/1/79 7.4 2/8/79 7.8 2/15/79 7.4 2/22/79 7.7 3/1/79 6.6 i 3/8/79 6.7 3/15/79 6.7
. 3/22/79 7.9 3/29/79 8.1 4/4/79 7. 2 4/11/79 8.0 4/19/79 6.9 4/25/79 7.1 5/2/79 6.8 5/9/79 6.7 5/16/79 6.8 S/23/79 7.0 .
5/30/79 7. 2 . 6/1/79 7.2 6/13/79 7.2 6/20/79 7.3 6/27/79 7.4 7 l l 1-17
, , _, e- . ,.. -. , . _ . . , , _ , n . ,--.,
HNP ANNUAL. REPORT TABLE 1.3-9 Continued -t Combined Plant Waste Streams pH, Unit ! Date pH ' 7/4/79 7.3 7/11/79 7.2 7/18/79 7.1 7/25/79 7.2 7/31/78 7.2
~
8/8/79 7.2 8/15/79 7. 7 8/22/79 7.6 8/29/79 7,6 , , 9/3/79 7. 7 9/10/79 7.1 9/17/79 7. 3 9/24/79 7.0
, 10/3/79 7.6 10/10/79 6.7 10/17/79 7.3 10/24/79 6.9 10/31/79 6.4 11/5/79 6.2 11/14/79 6.9 11/21/79 7.0 11/28/79 7.1 12/3/79 7.1 12/10/79 6.9 12/17/79 6.9 12/24/79 7.0 12/31/79 6.9 r
Maximum 8.1 i Minimum 6.2 I l 1-18
. - . . . -- .. . - ~_ . . _._ ._ __. .. . ... ._.. .-.-.._
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1.3-9 Combined Plant Waste Streams pH, Unit !! Date pH 1/2/79 8.4 1/9/79 7. 9 1/16/79 7.7 1/23/79 7. 7 j 1/30/79 8.2 , 2/1/79 7.6
- 2/8/79 7.4 2/15/79 7.6 2/22/79 7.1 3/1/79 6.6 3/8/79 6.4
' 3/15/79 6.4 3/22/79 7. 0
. 3/29/79 7. 2 4/4/79 7.2 4/11/79 7.0 4/19/79 6.4 4/25/79 7.1 5/2/79 6.9 5/9/79 6.8 5/16/79 6.7 2
5/25/79 6.9 .
- 5/30/79 7.0 6/6/79 7.3 6/13/79 7.3 6/20/79 7.1 6/27/79 7.5 P
1-19
-A , , y , .- e,-s.-- -----.y e - - , 4 _+- . - -
HNP , ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1.3-9 Continued COMBINED PLANT WASTE STREAMS pH, UNIT II Date pH 7/4/79 7. 4 7/11/79 6.8 7/18/79 7.0 7/25/79 7. 3 i 8/8/79 7. 9 8/15/79 6.7 8/22/79 7.2 8/29/79 8.1 9/3/79 8.0 9/10/79 7.6 9/17/79 7.8 i 9/24/79 7.5 10/3/79 8.1 10/10/79 7.6 10/17/79 7.4 10/24/79 6.8 10/31/79 6.9 11/5/79 7. 3 11/14/79 6.8 11/21/79 6.7 11/28/79 7.5 12/3/79 7.4 12/10/79 7.4 12/17/79 7. 0 12/24/79 6.8 12/31/79 7.2 Maximum 8.4 Minimum 6.4 4 4 1-20
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1.3-10 Intake River Water pH (Weekly Average) 1979 Date pji 1/1/79 - 1/5/79 7.0 1/6/79 .1/12/79 7.1 1/13/79 - 1/19/79 7.2 1/20/79 - 1/26/79 7.1 1/27/79 - 2/2/79 7.0 2/3/79 - 2/9/79 6.9 2/10/79 - 2/16/79 6.8 i 2/17/79 - 2/23/79 6.8 2/24/79 - 3/2/79 6.6 , 3/3/79 - 3/9/79 6.7 3/10/79 - 3/16/79 6.7 3/17/79 - 3/23/79 7.0 3/24/79 - 3/31/79 7.1 4/1/79 - 4/6/79 7.2 4/7/79 - 4/13/79 6.7 4/16/79 - 4/22/79 6.2 4/23/79 - 4/29/79 6.3 4/30/79 - 5/6/79 6.8 5/7/79 - 5/13/79 6.9 5/14/79 - 5/20/79 6.9 5/21/79 - 5/27/79 7.0 5/28/79 - 6/3/79 7.1 6/4/79 - 6/10/79 6.8 6/11/79 - 6/17/79 6.8 6/18/79 - 6/24/79 6.9 6/25/79 - 7/1/79 6.9 f ' l-21
- j.
- l HNP ANNlt.4L REPORT TABLE 1.3-10 Continued Intake River Water pH (Weekly Average) 1979 Date pjj, 7/2/79 - 7/8/79 7.0 7/9/79 - 7/15/79 6.9 7/16/79 - 7/22/79 6.9 7/23/79 - 7/29/79 6.8 7/30/79 - 8/5/79 6.5 8/6/79 - 8/12/79 6.7 8/13/79 - 8/19/79 6.7 8/20/79 - 8/26/79 6.9 8/27/79 - 9/2/79 6.8 ,
9/3/79 - 9/9/79 6.5 9/10/79 - 9/16/79 6.7 9/17/79 - 9/23/79 6.8 9/24/79 - 9/30/79 6.6 10/1/79 - 10/7/79 6.4 10/8/79 - 10/14/79 6.6 10/15/79 - 10/21/79 6.8 10/22/79 - 10/28/79 7.1 10/29/79 - 11/4/79 7.0 11/5/79 - 11/11/79 7.2 11/12/79 - 11/8/79 7.0 11/19/79 -11/25/79 6.9 11/26/79 - 12/2/79 7.0 12/3/79 - 12/9/79 6.8 12/10/79 - 12/16/79 6.6 12/17/79 - 12/23/79 6.7 12/24/79 - 12/31/79 6.8 Maximum 7.2 Minimum 6.2 1-22
HNP ANNUAL REPORT The cooling tower blowdown water is sampled in the water analysis rooms of Unit I and Unit II. A continuous pH monitor is provided to assure pH is between 6.0 and 9.0 pH. The neutralization tank is sampled at the water treatment plant where pH is continuously monitored while the tank is being neutralized prior to discharge and during discharge. The pressure filter backwash water is monitored by measuring the samples taken during backwash. The backwash water is also the same water as the water treatment plant influent, which is continuously monitored for pH when the water treatment plant is in service. Plant intake river water is monitored continuously using a pH meter and recorder. Com-bined plant waste streams for Unit I and Unit II are monitored and recorded continuously at the plant discharge structure before being discharged to the river. - Tables 1.3-1 through 1.3-10 follow and summarize the pH measurements taken at Plant Hatch during 1979. The limits on pH of 6.0 to 9.0 pH as set forth in NPDES Permit No. CA-0004120 were adhered to in 1979 with no violations. 1.4 Chlorine Monitoring 1.4.1 Specification The purpose of the chlorination program at Plant Edwin I. Hatch is to prevent the buildup of harmful biological activity in the heat exchangers and associated piping of the service water system and in the main con-denser and cooling towers of the circulating water system. During normal operation of the station, the discharge to the river of f ree available chlorine from the cocoing tower blowdown shall be meas-ured in accordance with the Environmental Program Description Document (EPDD). The EPDD states that free chlorine concentrations in both the plant service water system and the circulating water system will be measured after the chlorination ends, but before blowdowd begins. NPDES Permit No. GA-0004120 states that the free residual chlorine discharged to the Altamaha River must not exceed an instantaneous maximum concentration of 0.5 mg/i nor an average concentration of 0.2 mg/i. 1.4.2 Results and Discussion In order to conform to these operating parameters, samples are taken at various points and analy:ed using an amperometric titrator. During service water system chlorination, all service water is diverted to the circulating water flume where samples are taken at the point of l
- l-23 1
I
HNP ANNUAL REPORT discharge to the flume and at the circulating water pump discharge. During circulating water system chlorination, the blowdown valve to the river is closed and water is sampled at the cooling tower A basin and at the circulating water pump discharge. Samples are analyzed for both free available chlorine and total chlorine residuals. From January 1 until December 1 the circulating water chlorination program was administrated in the following manner. During chlorination of the circulating water system, the free residual chlorine was generally maintained between 0.5 mg/t and 1.0 mg/t for a period of one hour. Due to chlorine demand by the system, chlorina-tion periods may be as long as two hours to assure adequate chlorine-contact time. The upper limit of 1.0 mg/t is imposed to prevent excessive delignification of the redwood in the Unit I cooling towers. A free chlorine residual between 0.5 mg/t and 1.0 mg/t maintained for one hour provides adequate chlorine concentration and chlorine contact time to inhibit the growth of algae or bacteria which might foul heat exchanger surfaces. During the warm months of the year, the circulating water systenhis generally chlorinated once per day. The frequency is decreased as4the weather cools and may be done only three or four times a week during cold weather. From January 1 until December 1 the service water chlorination pro-gram was administered in the following manner. The service water system is chlorinated in like manner to the circu-lating water system. Chlorine residuals between 0.5 mg/t and 1.0 mg/t are maintained in this system for an hour or more each day during the warm months of the year with the chlorination frequency decreasing during cold weather. The circulating water system blow-down is open during service water system chlorination, which requires a technician to take samples at the discharge structure to assure NPDES limits, for discharge of residual chlorine to the river, are not exceeded. Chlorinated plant service water being discharged into the circulating water flume poses no threat to the environment while the blowdown is open because the chlorine is depleted before entering the blowdown line in satisfying the chlorine demands of the circulating water. In December, the chlorination system was placed in the automatic mode of operation. Circulating water was chlorinated three times per day for periods of thirty minutes each. Chlorine concentration was dropped from 0.50 - 1.0 ppm to approximately 0.20 ppm as monitored at the tower basins. Plant service water was chlorinated twice per l day for periods of forty five minutes each. Chlorine concentration i 1-24
HNP ANNUAL REPORT in this system is maintained at approximately 0.30 - 0.60 ppm. There were no violations of the NPDES Permit or Environmental Techni-cal Specifications during 1979. Tables 1.4-1 through 1.4-4 sunmarize the chlorination program at Plant Edwin I. Hatch. In Tables 1.4-1 and 1.4-2 the data collected during the daily chlorination periods has been combined on a monthly basis. Tables 1.4-3 and 1.4-4 show the combined daily data collected on the service water. w 1 4 ' ( 1-25 w- - ,-
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1,4-1 Circulating Water System Chlorination, Unit ! Tower A Tower A Circulating Effluent Effluent Water Lbs. C12 Max. C12 Avg. C12 Blowdown C12 Month Used mg/t r4/t mg/t January 850 1.0 0.5 < 0.1 February 1784 0.8 0.4 < 0.1 March 2365 0.3 0.1 < 0.1 April 5050 1.0 0.3 < 0.1 May NO Chlorination - Unit Outage June NO Chlorination - Unit Outage July NO Chlorination - Unit Outage August NO Chlorination - Unit Outage September 1392 1.4 0.5 < 0.1 October 8348 2.0 0.9 < 0.1 November 2675 1.6 0.8 < 0.1
- December 5625 0.2 0.1 < 0.1 Chlorinator in automatic mode of operation i
1 l 1-26
.e .
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1.4-2 Circulating Water System Chlorination, Unit !! Tower A Tower A Circulating Effluent Ef fluent Water Lbs. C12 Max C12 Avg. C12 Blowdown C12 Month Used mg/t mg/t mg/t January NO Chlorination - Unit Outage Februa ry NO Chlorination - Unit Outage March 750 0.2 0.1 < 0.1 April NO Chlorination - Unit Outage May NO Chlorination - Unit Outage June 2920 1.0 0.4 < 0.1 July 5604 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 August 3192 0.8 0.4 < 0.1 September 2134 1.6 0.8 < 0.1 October 7673 2.0 1.0 < 0.1 November 2332 1.1 0.6 < 0.1
- December 5625 0.1 0.1 < 0.1 Chlorinator in automatic mode of operation l
i 1-27 a
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1.4-3 Service Water System Chlorination, Unit I Service Water Discharge Discharge Lbs. C12 Max. Cl2 Structure Month Used mg/E C12 "9/E January 115 - 1.2 < 0.1 February 76 1.3 < 0.1 March 301 2.0 < 0.1 April 99- 0.3 < 0.1 May NO Chlorination - Unit Outage June NO Chlorination - Unit Outage July No Chlorination - Unit Outage August- 194 2.0 < 0.1 Septcinber 347 2.0 < 0.1 October- 895 2.2 < 0.1 November 150 1.0 < 0.1
- December - 609 0.4 < 0.1
- Chlorinator in automatic mode of operation I
f i-l-28
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 1.4-4 Service Water System Chlorination, Unit II Service Water Discharge Discharge Lbs. Cl2 Max. Cl2 Structure Month Used mg/L Cl2 59/E January 90 1.4 < 0.1 February 125 1.1 < 0.1 March 84 1.0 < 0.1 April NO Chlorination - Unit Outage May- NO Chlorination - Unit Outage June NO Chlorination - Unit Outage July NO Chlorination - Unit Outage August 175 1.5 < 0.1 September 379 2.0 < 0.1 October 1327 2.3 < 0.1 November 268 1.1 < 0.1
- December 609 0.6 < 0.1 Chlorinator in automatic mode of operation l-i 1-29
I b l D gl 8y nlo I y q Gl" l 819 g RI # 21 ~ l l l i l loa l STA. 7-116.0
\ l 7g i
l I 1 .0 SIU l - STA. 9 o i 7 I l 113.2 1 DAVIS LANDING h l & N Rivgg n . uE a m 8 5'iN El,h
'l GEb_RG_IA PQMlER COMPANY
_ __ - ! EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 1979 ALTAMAHA RIVER D.O. - TEMPERATURE SURVEY STATIONS FIGURE 1.1-1
MAXIMUM 90 - - - - - MINIMUM 1 - , 80 - 4 g p 'o "/ \ \_ s 4 g fg # L."g I \ ,1 \ _ ' L' g 70 - -l \
/ 'n
\
o ' *
,n- \
d c 60 -
/
/
's h
/
T
\
us -
~
,) \s H -
/ \
/
50 - / \
- \
/
l
%^y'
%, l
\ f 40 -
I JAN I FEB I MAR I APR I MAY I JUNE I JULY I AUG !' SEPT I OCT I NOV I DEC I MONTH GEORGIA POWER COMPANY s EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 1979 ALTAMAHA RIVER CONTINUOUS TEMPERATURE MONITOR
, WEEKLY MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM TEMPERATURES RIVER MILE 116.2 FIGURE 1.1-2 i
50 ft. e 250 ft. 600 ft. ALTAMAllA RIVER
- 1000 ft.
rung *
/
. -. ?.' : .
-50 et. ' l.sikon
. ; . . fi.,j;'+. ,,,,
'I""
PuAE TRANSECTS y s 200 ei. , ' . : . d.'.I.Eh55.H :<g. . ,, TEMPORARY . RARCE St.lP - h
% 42" $ DISulARGE 800 ft.
0 200 400
~.
100 300' - 500 SCALE IN FEET GEORGJA PO_W ER COMPANY EDWIN I. IIATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 1979 ALTAMAHA RIVER
. THERMAL PLUME TRANSECTS FIGURE 1.2-1
(( RIV CR V CLD CITY . t m*7 7/S RM E5 t CN T RIV CR TCMPC-RTURC O
,_ oCT i~iT ,R u v mu a C.T v . m.----. . m'at.5-t m C o,-C----C TC-R . me.-m ?c -
scef:
--- -- PLUME RECORDED w es es':
COMPlTTER HODEL PREDICTED wuer: -_ 0.7 F
~
=
sme: -
-____.._--/
m saf: '
~.: /
m ees:._: /
~: [ 0.5 F m ees-} / 1.0 F
/ /
/
- ar eres:: .
_~ - __ l Cg3 -
. / ,
- -Oc s ese-:
- a g __ / -
\N 33:: --- '
O.7 F K22 93 1.3 F
= b mms "i
+:: ..
e m es am um ces eres r er e en sa m a eres e a a m er a m es : *-e es a s es a s es : 7 es a s er a sa er rT :: PLRNT -RTCH f=LUMC mT JD Y RLTAMPHR RIV ER /rv X t es GEOAGIA POWER COMPANY EDWIN I. HATCll NUCLEAR PLA!Tr ANNUAL REPORT 1979 ALTAMAHA RIVER THERMAL Pl.UME SURVEY FOR . SEPTEMBER 75, 1979 FIGURE 1.2-2
it .
-~
Riv cR vcLQc Tv . t .Har/sa RM anicNT Riv cM TEMPcRRTURc . 2 es.2 e C mm UcT INITIRL V CL O CIT V a 3.2 E r/m C> TEE CH R R t3 C TcMP e 22.s7 CO scri:
- - - - - PLUME RECORDED
[. eme:: .. COMPUTER MODEL PREDICTED CONSTANT = 24 Heef: 9 2220: 3 mef:
=a esa. -: 0.5 F
! /
mea. 33 ~
,s _ ~.
O .5 F
=ma:i - d
- /7 /
I sec: p' ~ ' ~ ^ ^
?~ E_ _ _. - .
\
l usef: o we.e: *
}:{_
1.0 F 0.5 F . 3 m m tA*
++ g i es am 3m H es Eet ses 7 25 s es s es t uses t es m es t m es i H as I c es I s es 7 2 I ses I ses r s- :: PLRNT HRTCH PLUMC STUPY RLTRMRHR MIV ER / 83* *!* X i es .
GEORGIA POWER COM PANY EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLAhT ANNUAL REPORT 1979 ALTAMAHA RIVER THERMAL PLUME SURVEY FOR OCTOBER 31, 1979 FIGURE 1.2-3
- Riv CR V CLoCi rY a 1.H"# F*/ M mmm -: UCT INITist V Ct C3 CIT Y a 2.*7 3 F*/m RM as t CN T Riv CN TCMPEMMTURC m 2:5.1 es og
- ' O lM CH RNCN C TCMP e 2 7.m as og Emer: ..
PLUME RECORDED cases-; .
- COMPUTER MODEL PREDICTED Huef: -
CONSTA.Yr = 9 H m m-: a m m-: .. 0.5 F *
/ , _
~ ~ ~ " 0.9 F
" " 8f2 0.5 F
//
I' 1.,0 F l mesaf: s/
- ' /- w i Em-:. i- s f
- 8 a <
us s_ _ ' ' N 2.0 F as m-:
..,s s -
r es.es: :: ' -- ' O.9 F _m m u-
+ -* {} t us mes aus H er c es ses res em s es e esas s '
F**r es m es a m as : H as e ces a mes : r es e s es e m PtRNT HRTCH P t W t4 C 25TUDY Nt_TRMRHR Mgygm fey x g gg GEORGIA POWER COMPANY EDWIN 1. HKfCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 1979 ALTAMAHA RIVER THERMAL PLUME SURVEY FOR NOVEMBER 1, 1979 FICURE 1.2-4
r HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS Cl! APTER 2 RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING Section Title _Page
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2-1 2.2 DISCHARGES TO THE ATMOSPHERE 2-3 2.2.1 AIRBORNE DUST 2-4 2.2.2 AIRBORNE IODINE 2-6 2.2.3 THERM 0 LUMINESCENT DOSIMETERS 2-8 2.2.4 MILK 2-10 2.2.5 GRASS 2-13 2.3 DISCHARGES TO THE RIVER 2-15 2.3.1 RIVER WATER 2-15 2.3.2 CLAMS 2-17 2.3.3 AMERICAN SHAD 2-18 2.3.4 SEDIMENT 2-18 2.4 DISCHARGES TO THE GROUND 2-20 2.4.1 GROUND WATER IlYDROLOGY 2-21 2.4.2 PREVIOUS MONITORING ACTIVITIES 2-22 2.4.3 MAJOR IIAPPENINGS IN 1979 2-33 2.4.3.1 Nonroutine Report 2-33 2.4.3.2 Leaks From Condensate Transfer Pumps 2-37 2.4.3.3 Miscellaneous Activities 2-38 2.4.4 INVESTICATIVE ACTIVITIES 2-43 2.4.4.1 Initial Activities 2-43 2.4.4.2 Follow On Activities 2-52 2.4.5 CRITIQUE 2-54 2.4.5.1 CST-I Area 2-54 2.4.5.2 Area North of Turbine Building
- 2-56 2.4.6 FINALE 2-57 2.5 MISCELLANEA 2-58 2.5.1 CROSSCHECK PROGRAM 2-58 2.5.2 INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT 2-64
2.6 CONCLUSION
S 2-64 l 2-1
e HNP ANNUAL REPORT CHAPTER 2 < RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING LIST OF TABLES i Section Title M 2.2-1 ANNUAL
SUMMARY
OF GROSS BETA ACTIVITY IN AIRBORNE DUST 2-5 2.2-2 ANNUAL
SUMMARY
OF SPECIFIC P.ADIONUCLIDES DETECTED IN AIRBORNE DUST COMPOSITES 2-7 2.2-3 ANNUAL
SUMMARY
OF ON-STATION DOSE ACQUIRED BY TLDs 2-9 2.2-4 ANNUAL
SUMMARY
OF SPECIFIC RADIONUCLIDES ' DETECTED IN GRASS 2-14 2.4-1 TRITIUM LEVELS FROM ORDINARY STATIONS . 2-23 ; 2.4-2 TRITIUM LEVELS FROM ORIGINAL STATIONS IN-LOCAL AQUIFER 2-26 2.4-3 TRITIUM LEVELS IN AFFECTED TEST lt0LES 2-27 2.4-4 TRITIUM LEVELS IN OTHER TEST HOLES TAPPING WATER TABLE - PART 1 2-28 2.4-5 TRITIUM LEVELS IN CATCH BASINS OF SURFACE DRAINAGE SYSTEM 2-29 . 2.4-6 TRITIUM LEVELS IN SURFACE DRAINAGE 2-30 2.4-7 TRITIUM AND GAMMA SPECTRAL ANALYSES OF WET SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED ON FEBRUARY 16, 1979 2-35 2.4-8 TRITIUM AND GAMMA SPECTRAL ANALYSES OF WATER FLOWING FROM GROUND ON MARCll 20, 1979, NEAR P17B; GAMMA SPECTRAL ANALYSIS OF MUD FOR THIS LOCATION ON SAME DATE 2-36 2.4-9 TRITIUM LEVELS IN OTHER TEST HOLES TAPl'ING WATER TABLE - PART 2 2-39 2.4-10 TRITIUM LEVELS IN OTilER TEST HOLES TAPPING WATER TABLE - Part 3 2-41 2.4-11 TRITIUM LEVELS IN ADDITIONAL TEST HOLES TAPPING LOCAL AQUIFER 2-42 2.4 NEW TEST HOLES IN WATER TABLE 2-44 2.4-13 TRITIUM LEVELS IN NEW TEST 110LES 2-46 L 2.4-14 CONDUCTIVITY AND TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTS FOR GROUND WATER SAMPLES COLLECTED FROM NEW TEST HOLES ON MAY 10, 1979 2-51
'2.5-1 HNP'S RESULTS IN CROSSCHECK PROGRAM FOR
' CROSS BETA ANALYSIS OF AIR FILTERS 2-59 2.5-2 TELEDYNE'S RELEVANT CROSSCllECK PROGRAM RESULTS IN MILK SAMPLES AND FOR AIR FILTERS 2-61 2.5-3 TELEDYNE'S CROSSCllECK PROGRAM RESULTS'FOR GAMMA ANALYSIS IN WATER 2-62 l'
l 2-11'
,- - ,- ., -- -. - , . . - . . - - .u e-- . ~ - . . . - , ,
o HNP ANNUAL REPORT LIST OF FIGURES CHAPTER 2 RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING Section Title 2.4-1 LOCATION OF THE ORDINARY GROUND WATER SAMPLING STATIONS 2.4-2 TEST HOLES AND THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM 2.4 OUTLYING TEST HOLES t . 4 1 i , s i l 2 l 2-111 e e m.
O e HNP ANNUAL REPORT
- 2. RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING 2.1 Introduction The results of the radiological environmental monitoring program for the calendar year 1979 are reported herein. An assessment of the radiological impact of the plant's operation upon the environ-ment is provided. Reports on various related activities are also included.
A summary, interpretation, and evaluation of the analytical results obtained from the samples utilized to monitor discharges of radio ~ active materials to the atmosphere, river, and ground are provided as feasible in Sections 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4, respectively. The data on samples required by the Environmental Technical Specific.ations (ETS) are tabulated by station or group of stations. As practical, each tabulation consists of: the maximum, minimum and average values of the radiological level; the number of samples (n); and the standard deviation (s). Nominally, summaries are provided for j the control and indicator stations on an annual basis; they may also be provided for other periods of exposure as feasible; the calculated minimum detectable difference (MDD) at the 99% confi-dence icvel between these two groups is provided for comparison with the difference in their average values, L g-L . Any labora-tory analyses performed on environmental samples in addition to those required are also reported. Deviations are permitted from the sampling schedule required by Tabic 3.2-1 of the ETS if spevimens are unobtainabic due to haz-ardous conditions, seasonable unavailability, malfunction of auto- ! matic sampling equipment and other legitimate reasons. Deviations from the required sampling schedule are included in the discus- " l sions for each particular type sample; any significant deviations l are noted. l The interpretation of results includes, as warranted and as prac-tical, a comparison with the results found in the preoperational surveillance report and in previous operational surveillance reports. Wherever warranted, an attempt was made to provide a perspective of the results'within the framework of regulatory limits, background levels, and plant releases coupled with dilu-tion, dispersion and/or concentration factors; where feasible, attempts were also made to correlate the plant releases with the radiological levels found in the environmental samples. Efforts were made to recognize any data trends; plausible explanations are offered for any such trends considered to be significant.
~
2-1
HNP ANNUAL REPORT Any confirmed measured radiological concentrations in an environ-mental sampling medium averaged over any quarterly sampling period which exceed the reperting levels given in Table 3.2-3 of the EIS are discussed. Explanations are postulated to account for high radiological levels. The operational phase of the radiological environmental monitoring program began with initial criticality of the Unit 1 reactor on September 12, 1974. Initial criticality of the Unit 2 reactor was achieved on July 4, 1978. Regular preoperational monitoring began in January 1972, following a period of: installation, calibration and checkout of the sampling equipment; the davelopment of sampling. methods and analytical techniques; and the training of personnel. In recent years there has been a series of detonations of nuclear devices in weapons tests on mainland China; there were also -tests conducted during the early months of preoperational monitoring. These occurred as follows: January 7, 1972 March 13,1972 September 26, 1976 November 17, 1976 September 17, 1977 March 14, 1978 December 14, 1978 About a week after cach of these tests a marked increase in the radiological level in many of the sampics collected in the !!atch environs was noted giving abundant evidence of the appearance of fallout of radioactive material from the cloud created by the test. These were generally corroborated with widespread reports bf simi-lar step increases occurring elsewhere. The early years of opera-tion (of Unit 1) were a period without significant weapons tests being conducted in the atmosphere, a time when there was a general decline in the radiological level for most of the environmental sampics. The effects of each of the 1976, 1977 and 1978 weapons L tests have been noted in the past three annual environmental sur-veillance reports. l Miscellaneous related activities are injected either where appro-priately related to a particular sampling medium or in Section 2.5. Included in this section on misec11aneous activities are the results of the relevant participation in the EPA Crosscheck Program. In Section 2.6 the chief conclusions drawn from the radiological envi-ronmental monitoring activities including the assessment of any radi-ological impact of the plant's operation upon the environment are presented. A summary of all instances of EIS noncompliance along with any corrective actions to remedy same are given in Chapter 5. l l 2-2 . l l
O HNP ANNUAL REPORT 2.2 Discharges To The Atmosphere The media or pathways sampled to monitor discharges to the atmo-sphere consisted of: airborne dust, airborne iodine, external radiation, milk and grass. Airborne dust and iodine were col-lected at air monitoring stations. Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) for measuring external radiation vere placed at each of the air stations and at three other locations. Grass samples were collected from plots maintained at Air Stations Nos. 5, 17 and 21. The sector location and distance to each of these stations as reckoned from the main stack are as follows: Air Stations No. 1 State Prison ENE 11 miles No. 5 Baxley S 10 miles No. 9 Dead River Road NE 1.9 miles No. 15 Roadside Park WNW 0.8 miles No. 17 Site Boundary SE 1.2 miles No. 21 Site Boundary WSW l.0 miles TLD Stations (same as air stations plus) No. 119 East Boundary ESE 1.1 miles No. 126 South Boundary S 0.9 miles No. 133 West Boundary W 1.0 miles Station Nos. 1 and 5 are the control stations; the other stations
-are indicator stations.
All laboratory analyses of the samples collected to monitor dis-charges to the atmosphere are contracted to Teledyne Isotopes, , Inc. of Westwood, New Jersey except for: the gross beta counting
. of airborne particulates which is performed by the plant; the reading of the TLDs which is done by Eberline Instrument Corpora-tion's midwestern facility in West Chicago, Illinois; and the gamma sr an of grass which is provided by the Center for Applied l Isotope Studies at the University of Georgia in Athens, Georgia.
i The gamma isotopic and I-131 analyses of milk were recently changed from Eberline to Teledyne; the samples for the first collection period of the year were analyzed by Eberline, samples for subsc-quent collection periods were analyzed by Teledyne. l t 2-3 ,
HNP ANNUAL REPORT 2.2.1 Airborne Dust The annual summary of the gross beta activity for the airborne dust samples which were collected weekly is presented in Table 2.2-1. The average activity for the indicator stations is seen to be slightly less than that for the control stations. The absolute value of the difference between these averages was less than the HDD. The following air dust data was considered erroneous and was not included in the summary presented in Table 2.2-1. Station Collection Dates 1 3/05, 4/02, 4/09 5 2/05, 7/16, 7/30 9 7/23, 7/30 Each of these had an uncertain and low sampling time which was usually caused by a stopped air pump. Most of the instances of the pump's stoppage came as a result of a fuse blowing in an electric storm. These failures to collect adequate samples are not considered as significant deviations from the required sam-pling schedule. The past three annual reports have clearly pointed out the effects of the nuclear weapons tests on mainland China upon the levels of gross beta activity in airborne dust samples collected in the envi-rons of Plant Hatch. This may be seen by comparing the average weekly activity for all stations at which collections were made for cach year of operations and for the period of pregperations; these weekly averages are given below in units of fCi/m (femto. Curie per cubic meter). , Period Average Activity Preoperations 140 1974 87 1975 87 1976 137 1977 242 1978 133 1979 38 The fairly high icvel of average activity for the period of pre-operations (January 1972 to September 1974) is attributed to the wecpons tests in the early seventies. The lower levels of average activity for 1974 and 1975 show the depletion of these levels due l I 2-4 . L
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 2.1-1 ANNUAL
SUMMARY
OF GROSS BETA ACTIVITY IN AIRBORNE DUST fCi/m Station No. _n, , Maximum Miniatun Average s I Data for Control Stations 1 50 84 13 40 17-5 50 72 9 38 15 Summary 2 40 38 ,39 2 Data for Indicator Stations 9 51 73 13 39 15 15 53 84 11 40 17 l 17 53 67 11 35 13 21 53 76 13 38 15 Summary 4 40 35 38 2 L g -L =- D=8 e L l i l 2-s
HNP ANNUAL REPORT to decay or physical removal during a period without significant weapons tests. The level continued to drop into
-firstthrgequartersof1976was42fCi/m}976;theaverageicvelforthe
, then the average jumped to 412 fci/m for the 4th quarter of 1976 as a consequence of the detona-tions on September 26 and November 17, 1976. The higher level for 1977 shows the carry over of debris from the 1976 tests as well as the effects of the detonation on September 17, 1977. Despite the detonations on March 14 and December 14, 1978, the annual average level for 1978 dropped to about half of that for 1977. The annual average dropped greatly in 1979 to the levels experienced early in 1976.
The activities of specific radionuclides detected in quarterly composites of airborne dust filters by gamma spectral analyses are summarized -in Table 2.2-2 for the entire year. It is seen that only for naturally occurring Be-7 was there a difference between the average icvel at the indicator and control stations; this difference was less than the MDD. Except for Be-7 which as in previous years was present' in nearly every composite, there was a great reduction in the activity levels in com-parison with those over the past few years. Also less than half of the number of different radionuclides were present and their frequencies of occurrence diminished. These reductions indicate a cicansing of the atmosphere of much of the debris from recent weapons tests. 2.2.2 Airborne Iodine The charcoal cartridges used for filtering lodine from the atmosphere were collected weekly and analyzed for I-131 by Ge(Li) spectroscopy. The activity found in each valid sample durgng the entire year was below the LLD which never exceeded 70 fci/m (the maximum allowed by the ETS). As noted in the previous section the equipment malfuctions which pre-vented the collection of several air dust samples in these same instances also prevented the collection of adequate airborne radiciodine sampics. As a result of the faulty sampling times for Station 5 on February 5 and for Station 9 on Jaly 23, the corresponding LLDs reported by the contract laboratory were erroneous: these LLDs were in excess of the limits listed in Tabic 3.2-2 of the ETS. During 1976, 1977 and 1978 detectable levels of I-131 were found for a period of a few weeks af ter the arrival of the cloud fgom a nucicar wea-
- pons test. The highest leveleverfoundwas217fgi/m in 1977. The
! reporting icvel called for by the ETS is 900 fC1/m . The, charcoal cartridges collected on July 9 were lost at the contract laboratory or in transit to the laboratory. An investigation of what happened to the samples was inconclusive. United Parcel Service assured us all shipments at about that time were made. Teledyne assured us the sampics never arrived. No corrective action was warranted for this iso-lated and minor deficiency. 2-6 .
. . . .- ~ . _ - . .
. TABLE 2.2-2 ANNUAL
SUMMARY
~OF SPECIFIC RADIONUCLIDES
- DETECTED IN AIRBORNE DUST COMPOSITES fCi/m f
Radionuclide n Max -Min A3 s L-g g MDD Control Stations Be-7 7 70.1 38.2 56.8 11.4 K-40 0 Ru-106 0 Cs-137 7 1.4 0.4 0.8 0.4 Ce-144 3 4.0 2.0 3.2 1.1 g e w Indicator Stations b Be-7 16 88.3 47.5 64.9 15.4 8.1 18.4 g K-40 1 9.2 9.2 9.2 ,, Ru-106 2 2.7 1.8 2.3 0.6 *S Cs-137 15 1.5 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.0 0.5 Ce-144 9 4.1 2. 3 3.2 0.6 0.0 1.5 e
HNP ANNUAL REPORT 2.2.3 Thermoluminescent dosimeters External radiation is monitored by thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). The total dose acquired by the TLD badges consists of that received when on-station and that received when off-station (that is, in transit, in storage and in handling). It is assumed that a fair estimate of the off-station component may be provided by the average dose acquired by the extra badges which accompany each batch of badges during shipment and temporary periods of storage, and which are kept in a Pb cave at the plant while the regular badges are on-station or in transit to their respective stations in the field. The on-station dose is approxi-mated by subtracting the average dose of these "nonirradiated" extra badges from the total dose reading of each regular field badge before normalizing to the desired exposure period. Although the validity of this method may be questioned, it was shown in the 1975 report that generally the on-station doses were more consistent through.out the year and provided better correlation between the doses acquired over various periods of exposure than the total doses. The on-station dose is fundamentally of more interest than the total dose because it is closer to what is being sought, which is, the dose that might be acquired by external radiation as a consequence of gaseous releases from the plant. Each badge in the field is subjected to local background radiatiot42 consisting of terrestrial radiations from natur-ally occurring radionuclides, cosmic radiations and radiations due to fallout from weapons tests. The large variability in both space and time of each of these components of the local background radiations makes it difficult to discern any part of the on-station dose which can be attributed to plant releases, which part is generally anticipated as being much smaller. The annual summary of the on-station dose acquired by the.TLDs is pre-sented in Table 2.2-3. The average dose for the indicator stations is seen to be less than that for the control stations. The absolute value of the difference between these values is greater than the MDD, meaning that this difference is detectable. A comparison of the average quarterly on-station dose for all stations at which collections were made during recent years shows the levels during 1979 to be somewhat lower; these average values in units of mrem /13 weeks are given below. Year Annual Average 1975 7.35 1976 7.97 1977 7.18 1978~ 6.47 1979 5.52 2-8 , l
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 2.2-3 ANNUAL
SUMMARY
OF ON-STATION DOSE ACQUIRED BY TLDs arem/13 weeks Station No. n Maximum Minimum Average s Data for Control Stations 1 3 8.44 4.42 6.50 2.01 5 4 9.46 4.84 7.04 2.02 Sununary 2 7.04 6.50 6.77 0.38 Data for Indicator Stations 9 4 6.39 3.35 4.91 1.28 15 4 5.43 3.07 4.33 0.97 l 17 3 5.95 4.56 5.37 0.72 21 4 8.01 3.26 5.66 1.95 119 4 6.46 3.72 5.14 1.12 126 4 7.50 2.93 5.29 1.87 133 4 6.98 4.28 5.40 1.14 Surmary 7 5.66 4.33 5.16 0.43 L g -L = -1.61 MDD = 1.19 i e l [ 2-9 .
HNP ANNUAL REPORT One reason for the lower levels is the phasing out of the seven stations along or near the river bank at the end of 1978. It was shown in the 1976 report that generally doses were significantly higher at these stations; this is probably due to a greater con-tent of naturally occurring radioactivity in the soil at these locations. The lack of a weapons test during 1979 may have also been a factor in the lower levels of external dose. A correlation is suggested between the downward trend of the doses and the less-ening Unpact of the weapons tests. The TLDs were missing from Station No. 17 in the 1st quarter and from Station No. 1 in the 4th quarter. TLD badges are frequently - lost due to theft and vandalism. The incidence of missing TLDs in recent years has diminished as a result of hanging the badges in obscure or less conspicuous places wherever this is practical. Failure to collect TLDs in such cases is considered as a permis-sible deviation from the required sampling schedule; the occurrence of only two such incidents during the year is not considered as a significant deviation. 2.2.4 Milk Milk samples were collected biweekly as available from four loca-tions as follows: Station Type Azimuth Distance Collected Analyzed (degrees) (miles) (number) (number) Prison Control 067 11.2 26 24 Sellers Indicator 226 7.5 18 16 Stones Indicator 229 6.5 8 8 Williamsons Indicator 029 3. 2 21 20 The numbers in the second to last column refer to the number of times that milk sampics were collected. The numbers in the last column give the number of times that analyses (gamma isotopic and I-131) were performed. The milk samples collected on July 9 were lost at or in transit to the contract laboratory. As explained in Section 2.2.2 this is
-the same shipment in which charcoal cartridges were lost.
The I-131 analysis for the sampic collected at the prison on April 16 had an LLD of 0.9 pCi/1 (pico Curie per liter); Tabic.3.2-3 of the ETS requires an LLD of not greater than 0.8 pCi/1. This sample arrived at the contract laboratory thickly curdled causing a low 2-10 -
HNP ANNUAL REPORT chemical yield, consequently the detection yield was high. Samples collected at Sellers and Williamsons on May 28 arrived at Teledyne too curdled for analysis. A remedy was provided to reduce the curd-ling (induced by the warm weather) by increasing the addition of sodium bisulfite (NaHSO,) to each sample from 1.5 g. to 40 g. ; this remedy was effected beginning with the collections on June 11. On five different occasions during the year (April 30, July 9, Octo-ber 16, November 12 and December 10) samples were not available at. Williamsons. In each of these instances the family was away for several days or so and no one was at home to handle the milking. Although such deviations from the sampling schedule are permitted, the number of failures to collect a sample from the only good indi-cator location makes these deviations significant; the scattering of these occasions does temper their impact, however. With samples being made available through the splendid cooperation of a neighbor, little can be done to remedy occasional failures brought on by pressing personal problems. The LLD for Ba-La-140 required by Tabic 3.2-2 of the ETS is 15 pCi/1. The lah reports showed a LLD of 20 pC1/1 for Ba-140 for the samples collected at Stones and Williamsons on March 19, for the Prison on April 16 and for Sellers on April 30. This is not considered a defic-iency since the lab reports provide the LLDs to only one place accuracy; thus 15 pCi/l is equivalent to 20 pCi/1. The ETS require collections every two weeks from one control station and from one to four indicator stations depending upon the availability. of milk animals near the plant. The prison was specified as the con-trol station and Stones was designated as an Indicator station since it is the closest reliable station to the plant. Up to three additional sampling stations within five miles and in different sectors are also specified if available; Williamsons was the only location during 1979 to meet this specification. Revised ETS implemented during 1978 climinated the requirement of a second control station. As a result Heads dairy (located 14.1 miles away in the SW sector) which had served as a control station for many years was phased out at the end of 1978. Stones dairy was deleted [ l from the program as milk became unavailable in the latter part of April (1979) with this dairy going out of buainess. Stones dairy was repinced by Sellers dairy without missing a collection period. Sellers is on approximately the same azimuth as Stones but a mile further away. This 7.5 mile distance may be a little far for this station to be considered as an indicator station. ' 2-11 . 8
F HNP ANNUAL REPORT The ETS require a gamma isotopic analysis as well as an I-131 analysis on each sample. There were no positive indications of I-131 during the entire year. From the gamma scans, positive icvels of K-40 were found in nearly all samples and positive levels of Cs-137 were found in about 30% of the samples. This past year was the first year since operations began that there was no positive indication of I-131 in any of the milk sampics. Previous levels have ranged from 0.095 to 88 pCi/1. All significant readings were generally attributed to the weapons tests. The other readings were marginally detectable or questionable. During preoperations all readings were less than the LLD of 2 pCi/1; the LLD was subsequently lowered to~ b.8 pCi/1. The naturally occurring K-40 was found consistently and at levels which only varied between 760 and 1700 pCi/1. The only previously reported K-40 level was 1010 pCi/l for a sample collected at the prison on Sep-tember 4, 1978. The fission product Cs-137 appeared in milk with about the same overall regularity as in the previous year, which was the first year gamma scans were taken on milk samples. The results in pC1/1 for each station are summarized as follows: Station n/no Maximum Minimum Average s Prison 2/24 13.9 12.2 13.0 1.2 Sellers 11/16 57.1 9.3 20.9 15.5 Stones 2/8 17.4 13.0 15.2 3.1 Williamsons 6/20 14.5 8.8 12.2 2.3 The ratio, n/no, the number of positive resulta to the number of analyses performed, shows a relatively high frequency of positive results for , Sellers dairy and a low frequency at the prison. Since the LLD is 15 pC1/1 it is seen that most of the positive measurements are only margin-ally detectable. The highest icvel given above is considerably less than the reporting level of 70 pC1/1 given in Table 3.2-3 of the ETS. The higher Cs-137 levels were found in the spring which reficcts the usual mixing of air from higher to lower altitudes at that time of year. This mixing results in an influx of long lived debris, like Cs-137, from the l weapons -tests of previous years to the carth's surface. Over the remainder l of the year there was a more or less steady reduction in the Cs-137 levels. The positive levels during the previous year ranged from 8 to 25 pCi/l with
~ the average values for the stations ranging from 11.5 to 18.3 pC1/1; no positive results were found at the prison. During preoperations, Cs-137 was measured in milk by a chemical separation technique; the Icvels ranged from 2 to 60 pCi/l with an average value of 19.3 pCi/1. All of these positive indications of Cs-137 in milk,.those during preoperations as well as those during operations, are attributed to the weapons tests. The quantity of Cs-137 released from operation of the plant woula have to be increased by orders of magnitude before it could be detected in milk sampics.
2-12
HNP ANNUAL REPORT The ETS require that a survey be conducted annually to determine the location of all milk animals within 3 miles of the plant stack in each of the 16 azimuthal sectors. For any of the 16 sectors in which nilk animals are not found within 3 miles, the annual survey is expanded to locate the nearest milk animal within 5 miles in that sector. A milk animal is a cow or goat which is producing milk for human consumption. On April 18 and 19 the milk animal survey was conducted. The only milk producing animal found was the cow at Williamsons which has been sampled, on and off, over many years. The reported location of this cow is on an azimuth of 029 at a distance of 3.1 miles. This is the location of the barn; the pasture is actually about 3.2 miles from the main sta:k. 2.2.5 Grass Gamma isotopic analyses were performed on each of the grass samples collected monthly from the three sampling stations. Positive identi-fication of several radionuclides was determined. These have been separated into four groups as follows: (1) Be-7 and K-40; (2) Cs-137; (3) Pb-214 and Bi-214; and (4) T1-208. Pb-212 and Ac-228. Only Cs-137 in the second group is a man-made radionuclide. An annual summary of the activities of these radionuclides is provided in Table 2.2-4. Both Be-7 and K-40 were detected in every sample. There was no discern-ibic difference between the average icvels for the control and indicator stations. The levels of these naturally occurring radioisotopes are not related to plant operations. The fission product Cs-137 was detected in about three quarters of the samples. As happened last year, much higher levels were found at the control station than at the two indicator stations; again there was a discernible difference between the average values for these two type stations. The values shown here are on the same order as those found last year. Each of the radionuclides in the last two groups is a primordial nuclide; those in the second to last group are from the Uranium Series; those in the last group from the Thorium Series. Each of these primordial nuclides had been found in soil samples taken from each of the grass plots on Novem-ber 10, 1977. None of tic 2se radionuclides is produced by operation of the plant. It is seen that f.ie average value for the control station is j greater than that of the indicator stations for both of the radionuclides
- in the Uranium Series but there is no detectable difference between these two average values in either case. Only a few positive results were found for radionuclides in the Thorium Series; these were generally only margin-ally detectabic.
2-13 .
TABLE 2.2-4 ANNUAL
SUMMARY
OF SPECIFIC RADIONUCLIDES DETECTED IN GRASS pCi/kg wet . Radionuclide n Max Min A3 s L -L MDD Control Stations Be-7 10 3480 250 1390 1160 K-40 10 6600 1000 3910 1790 Cs-137 10 1680 720 695 635
.T1-208 0 Pb-212 1 43 43 43 Pb-214 4 131 51 91 35 g Bi-214 4 285 45 141 103 e
- y. .Ac-228
~
O' y Indicator Stations kC) Be-7 18 2750 260 1447 100 57 1157 6310 740 3483 1555 -427 1798 E K-40 18 Cs-137 12 207 15 59 60 -636 601 T1-208 3 20 14 17 3 , Pb-212 3 50 24 37 13 -6 Pb-214 8 85 27 53 21 -38 50 Bi-214 7 90 23 59 27 -82 281 Ac-228 5 103 50 69 22 4 k w 9
l{NP ANNUAL REPORT Grass in sufficient quantity was not available at any of the stations in January and February and also at Station No. 17 in March and April. This number of failures to collect samples is considered to constitute a significant deviation from the sampling schedule. Remedial actions were taken in spite of the fact that deviations due to seasonable unavailability are permitted by the ETS. The remedial actions include the establishment of some redundant plots adjacent to the primary plots, the watering of the plots during dry spells and closer attention to fertilization. The sample collections on August 14 and September 21 were 38 days apart; this occurred at all stations. This spread in the collection dates con-stitutes a deviation from the EIS La that Table 3.2-1 requires monthly collections for grass samples; monthly is defined as once each calendar month at intervals of 30 days + 6 days. A closer watch of the sampling schedule prevented further deviations of this kind. This deviation is insignificant. 2.3 Discharges To The River The ETS require the sampling of water, clams (or fish) and sediment from River Station Nos. 170 and 172 which are about 1 miles upstream and 2h miics downstream respectively. The upstream station serves as the con-trol station and the downstream station serves as the indicator station. The ETS also require the sampling of American shad from the area of the discharge structure. The ETS require a gamma spectral analysis of each sample. This analysis is performed on only the edible portion of the fish and clam samples. A tritium analysis is also required on quarterly composites of river water for each station. All of these analyses are performed by Teledyne Iso-topes, Incorporated of Westwood, New Jersey. . 2.3.1 River Water River water is collected using automatic sampling machines; small samples are collected at intervals which are on the order of an hour. Water thus collected is picked up monthly; quarterly composites are composed of the monthly collections. Although no longer required by the ETS, gross beta analyses were performed on the suspended and dissolved portions of the January samples for both stations. Results in pCi/l are as follows: Station Suspended Dissolved 170 <l.0 1.5 172 4.8 2.2 l l 2-15
O HNP ANNUAL REPORT These readings are typical of what has been reported previously. Cross beta analyses were discontinued at the close of calendar year 1978. A gamma spectral analysis was performed on each monthly sample. There were no positive results. Only scant results have been obtained in the past with this analysis. During preoperation traces of K-40 and radon daughter products were detected occasionally. Since operation began, K-40 and Th-228 were detected in the 3rd quarter of 1974, and Ce-141 was detected during the 4th quarter of 1975. The positive results in units of pCi/l for the tritium analysis of the quarterly composites is summarized as follows for the control and indi-cator stations respectively: n Max Min Avg s L -L MDD f 3 240 100 180 72 3 250 180 210 36 30 214 Although the average readings for the indicator station was a little greater than that for the control station, the difference between the average values for the two stations is far below the minimum detectable difference. These values are typical and well within the range of those found previously. A survey was conducted downstream of the plant on October 1 in accordance with the ETS to determine if water from the Altamaha River was being used for drinking purposes. As in all previous surveys, no intakes for drink-ing water were observed. If river water should become used for drinking, sampling and analysis of the drinking water are required under the ETS. Table 3.2-1 of the ETS requires collections, compositings.and analyc on either monthly or quarterly. In effect the sampling of river water is continuous and the accumulated collections are gathered at intervals of approximately one month. Monthly is defined by the EIS as once during each calendar month at intervals of 30 days + 6 days. Quarterly is defined as once during each successive 3 month period of the calendar year, counting from January 1, at intervals of 13 weeks, + 14 days. These definitions are appropriate for grab sampling and do not fit per-fectly when applied to continuous sampling. There were no gatherings during the' calendar months of February and May, and no compositing dur-ing the second 3 month period of the calendar year. The collections gathered on March 2 were 37 days after those on January 24; the collec-tions on July 26 were 22 days after those on July 4. These are minor ' deviations from the sampling schedule. 2-16 .
I l HNP ANNUAL REPORT Table 3.2-2 of the ETS requires an LLD of 15 pC1/1 for I-131 in water samples. The LLD for I-131 in the sample gathered at Station 170 on April 27 was 30 pCi/1. No remedial action was warranted on this iso-lated and minor deviation from the ETS. Since the LLD is only given to one significant figure, 20 pCi/l is considered to satisfy the LLD ' requirement of 15 pCi/1. The LLD was reported as 20 pCi/l at Station 170 on March 2 and 28, June 1 and July 4, and also at Station 172 on April 27, June 1 and July 4. 2.3.2 Clams The ETS require a semiannual sampling of asiatic clams from the two river stations; if clams become unavailable, samples of commercially or recreationally important species of fish are to be collected. Clams in sufficient quantity were not available during the year. The thermal shock of winter causes a partial die-off of the adult clam population each year. Apparently the dic-off from the winter of '78 '79 was massive, virtually eliminating the adult population in the Altamaha River near HNP. It is also theorized that the run-off of pesticides to the river, particularly following rains in the spring, is also an impor-tant factor contributing to the kill of the adult clams. Clams were sought on five different occasions during the year but only subadult clams were found. Consequently recreationally important red-breast sunfish were collected on July 11 and brown bullheads were collected on December 20. Semiannually is defined by the ETS as once during each successive 6 month period of the calendar year, counting from January 1 at intervals of 6 months + 21 days. The last collections of both fish and clams in 1978 were made on October 17-18. Quarterly collections of both fish and clams were required during most of 1978 by the EIS in effect at that time. Thus this seems to imply that collections should have been made on April 18 + 21 days. Since 1979 is the first full calendar year for impicmenting the revised ETS, it is believed that the first collec-tion in this initial year need be made at anytime during the first 6 month period of the year. The second collection for the year was made 6 months less 22 days after the first collection. These two collection dates constitute a minor deviation from the sampling, schedule. These deviations will be eliminated in the future by better planning. The gamma spectral analysis showed positive levels for the ever-present K-40 in each of the four samples collected. These levels ranged from 1.67 to 4.77 pCi/gm wet which are typical of the values found previously for this naturally occurring radionuclide. The fission product Cs-137 was found in the sample collected at the control station in December at a 1cvel of 39.7 fCi/gm wet which is only marginally detectable. During preoperations and every year since Cs-137 has been detected at low levels in a small fraction of the fish samples.
'2-17 .
I HNP ANNUAL REPORT 2.3.3 American Shad
.Because of its commercial importance, the ETS require that American shad be collected annually during the spring spawning period. The naturally occurring K-40 was the only radionuclide detected in this single sample which is collected in the area of the discharge structure.
The level was 3.08 pCi/gm wet which is on the same order as that found in the sample collected in the previous year. Only K-40 was found in the single previous sample. This previous collection occurred on February 16, 1978, which was before American shad sampling was required. The annual collection for 1979 was on April 26. Annual is defined by the ETS as once per calendar year at intervals of 12 calendar months i 30 days. Since 1979 was the first year that collections were required, the sampling could be done at any
~
time. 2.3.4 Sediment The positive results of the gamma scans on each of the single samples taken from the control station and from the indicator station are pre-sented below in units of pCi/gm dry. Radionuclide Station 170 Station 172 K-40 6.92 7.16 Cs-137 0.31 Ra-226 1.95 Th-228 1.16 1.39 The icvels of each of these radionuclides are typical of and within the range of those found in past years. All are naturally occurring radionuclides except for the fission product Cs-137 which is seen to have been present only at the control station. In the past each of these radionuclides had nearly always been present at detectable levels. During 1978 revised ETS were impicmented which changed the sampling frequency from quarterly to annually. Annually is defined by the ETS as once per calendar year at intervals of 12 calendar months 30 days. During 1978 collections were made on March 30, May 30-31, August 15 and October 18. The 1979 collection occurred on June 11 which is less than 12 months from the last collection in 1978. The shorter interval between the last collection under the previous ETS and the first collection in the first full calendar year for imple-i menting the revised ETS is not considered as a deviation from the ! ETS. 2-18
HNP ANNUAL REPORT The LLDs required by Table 3.2-2 of the ETS are 0.15 pC1/gm dry for both Cs-134 and Cs-137. For the collections on June ll, the LLDs were reported as 0.2 pCi/gm dry for Cs-134 at Station 170 and the same value for Cs-137 at Station 172. This is not considered as a deficiency since the lab reports provide the LLDs to only one place
. accuracy; thus 0.15 pCi/gm dry is equivalent to 0.2 pCi/gm dry.
l f I l 2-19 .
- - -- , , , , + ,- -- ~ ,, - . ., .
-w .-- w - - ,.,e c
1
- i HNP ANNUAL REPORT 2.4 DISCHARGES TO THE GROUND Pursuant to Sections 3.2 and 5.7.2 of the ETS, a nonroutine report (Reportabic Occurrence No. 50-321/1979-021) was filed with the NRC on March 26, 1979 to inform them of high tritium concentrations in ground water samples collected in the plant yard. Several subsequent revisions provided status updates and supplemental information. A portion of this tritiated ground water slowly makes its way to the river via the drainage systems; the tritium levels in these continuous releases are a few orders of magnitude below the high levels found in the plant yard and several orders of magnitude below that permitted by regulation; the offsite doses due to these releases are miniscule.
Thus, there has been no significant impact on the public's health and
~
safety due to these high onsite tritium levels. Because of the interest aroused by this nonroutine report, last year's annual report covered not only calendar year 1978 but also the first five months or so of 1979. In order that the high tritium levels might be adequately assessed, a wealth of background material and historical information was provided; this included the laboratory results on the tritium analysis for each ground water sample dating back to the early years of preoperations. The actions (reporting, corrective and investigative) taken in response to these high readings were described. All extraneous sources of tritium are believed to have been identified in the report; only one of these sources had not been completely eliminated by June 1979. The data presented in the report suggest that the tritiated ground water is located in two separate and unconnected areas of the plant yard. This year's report provides an update on all data and activities through the end of calendar year 1979. The extraneous source of tritium which had not been eliminated earlier in the year was being curtailed at year's end; its complete elimination is. expected to be achieved in 1980. Further evidence is provided to support the hypothesis that there are two distinct and unrelated areas of the plant yard in which there is some tritium in the ground water. An assessment of the current status of this problem and a prognosis of its eventual solution are also provided. 2-20
e HNP ANNUAL REPORT 2.4.1~ GROUND WATER HYDROLOGY There are three distinct water zones underlying the site: a water table, a local aquifer and a regional aquifer. Aquicludes separate and hydraulically isolate these zones from each other. The vast regional aquifer whose top is a few hundred feet below plant grade is not hydraulically connected to surface waters in the vicinity of the site. The shallow local aquifer is separated from the regional acquifer by an aquiclude which is about 100 feet thick; the top of the local aquifer is roughly 65 feet below the grade of the plant yard; it is hydraulically connected to surface waters in the plant environs. The foundations for some of the buildings at the plant enter but do not rupture the aquiclude between the local aquif,er and the water table; this aquiclude is 40 to 50 feet thick. The water table which is charged by the percolation of precipitation through the soil is unconfined. In the plant yard the water table more or less extends from 10 to 20 feet below grade. . Two separate subsurface drainage ditches, whose outfalls are at about 25 feet below grade, provide a system for controlling the level of the water table. This network of subsurface ditches encircles the complex of the main plant buildings - the service, turbine, reactor, control, and radwaste buildings for each unit. Roughly 70% of this encirclement is serviced by Ditca No. 1, the subsurface ditch, whose outfall is north of the plant; Ditch No. 2, the subsurface ditch, whose outfall is east of the plant, services the remainder of the encirclement. When the subsurface drainage system was originally installed, it was thought that liquefaction of the soil might be a problem. However, subsequent soil analyses indicated that liquefaction was not a problem. The subsurface drainage system was kept since it provided additional drainage capability. The water table, according to the natural terrain, will drain both in a northerly direction toward the river, and also in an easterly (downstream) direction toward a swamp area which drains to the river. An analysis of the water levels from various shallow test holes about the plant yard shows that ground water flow in the water tabic has a strong local flavor. This phenomenon is attributed to the excavations performed during construction of the plant and the field routing of water pipes and electrical conduit runs. These pipe and conduit runs are supported by compacted sand; any water introduced nearby will follow a path along the run, as this is the path of least resistance. Moreover, it is likely that some of the excavations formed pockets in the aquielude between the water table and the local aquifer in which ground water accumulates. Movement of water out of these pools might occur only when the pockets fill and overflow. 2-21
a HNP ANNUAL' REPORT 2.4 DISCHARCES TO THE GROUND Pursuant to Sections 3.2 and 5.7.2 of the ETS, a nonroutine report (Reportable Occurrence No. 50-321/1979-021) was filed with the NRC on March 26, 1979 to inform them of high tritium concentrations in ground water samples collected in the plant yard. Severai vibsequent revisions provided status updates and supplemental information. A portion of this tritiated ground water slowly makes its way to the river via the drainage systems; the tritium levels in these continuous releases are a few orders of magnitude below the high levels found in the plant yard and several orders of magnitude below that permitted by regulation; the offsite doses due to these releases are miniscule. Thus, there has been no significant impact on the public's health and safety due to these high onsite tritium levels. Because of the interest aroused by this nonroutine report, last year's annual report covered not only calendar year 1978 but also the first five months or so of 1979. In order that the high tritium levels might be adequately assessed, a wealth of background material and historical information was provided; this included the laboratory results on the tritium analysis for each ground water sample dating back to the early years of preoperations. The actions (reporting, corrective and investigative) taken in response to these high readings were described. All extraneous sources of tritium are believed to have been identified in the report; only one of these sources had not been completely eliminated by June 1979. The data presented in the report suggest that the tritiated ground water is located in two separate and unconnected areas of the plant yard. This year's report provides an update on all data and activities through the end of calendar year 1979. The extraneous source of tritium which had not been eliminated earlier in the year was being curtailed at year's end; its complete climination is . expected to be achieved in 1980. Further evidence is provided to support the hypothesis, that there are two distinct and unrelated areas of the plant yard in which there is some tritium in the ground water. An assessment of the current status of this problem and a prognosis of its eventual solution are also provided. f. 2-20
a HNP ANNUAL REPORT 2.4.2 PREVIOUS MONITORING ACTIVITIES During preoperations between January 1972 and September 1974, and the early years of operations until November 1977, groundwater samples were taken from only five locations. The most remote station was a well located near the bank of the Altamaha River approximately 2 miles west (and upstream) of the plant at Dean's Landing. According to the owner, this well is 535 feet deep; thus water is apparently drawn from the regional aquifer. The onsite stations consisted of two deep wells and the two subsurface drainage ditches. The deep wells tap the regional aquifer. The subsurface drainage ditches tap the water table. The general location of all of these ordinary stations is shown in Figure 2.4-1. These are referred to as ordinary stations because they were either used during preoperation or~were referred to in the old Unit 1 ETS. During preoperation, gross alpha, gross beta, gamma spectral and tritium analyses were performed on the groundwater samples. Traces of radon daughter products were detected occasionally by the gamma scans. The samples were analyzed for tritium by a gas enrichment process which provides a LLD on the order of 100 pCi/1. Detectable levels of tritium were found in only two of the seven samples collected. i Tritium and gamma spectral analyses of quarterly samples from two stations were specified by the old Unit 1 ETS. These ETS were in effect from the time of initial criticality in September 1974 until revised ETS were adopted in November 1978. The old ETS required activation of this phase of the radiological environmental monitoring program only in the event of accidental or unusual circumstances; however, in most quarters samples were collected and analyzed. The well at Deen's Landing and an on-site subsurface drainage ditch were specified as the sampling stations. The gamma spectrpl analyses of groundwater samples never showed detectable levels of activity for any radionuclide. A complete listing of the tritium levels for all samples collected at the ordinary stations (through the end of 1979) is given in Table 2.4-1. It is seen from this table that, since operations began through' the end of 1977, the tritum levels in all samples collected from these ordinary stations, except one, were no higher than those found l during preoperations; that is, no higher than 240 pCi/1. The exception ! was for the November 16, 1977 sample from Ditch No. 1 which had a l measured level of 950 pC1/1. An even higher level was found in a ! sample collected 5 weeks later from a new sampling location. l i 2-22 , O
TABLE 2.4-1 TRITIUM LEVELS FROM ORDINARY STATIO*,S pC1/1 Collection Deen's. Deep Wells . Subsurface Ditch Date Landing No. 1 No. 2 North (#1) East (#2) Preoperation . <8.00 (1)a <7.00 (1) 1.30 (2) <7.00f (1) ' 1/72 - 9/74 <7.00 (1) 2.40 (2) <7.00 (1)' 2/17/75 <7.00 (1) <1.00 (2) <1.00 (2) o <1.00 (2) 9/02/76 <1.00 (2) 2.30 (2) 11/19/76 <1.00 (2) 2.40.(2) 2/23/77 <9.00 (1) <9.00 (1) l- 5/16/77 <1.00 (2) 1.40 (2) 8/24/77 <1.00 (2) 2.20 (2) - 9.50 (2)b 11/16/77 <1.10 (2) 1.30 (2) 1.20 (2) 12/20/77 1.00 (2) 2/17/78 1.00 (2) <1.00 (2) 2.50 (2) 1.80 (2) 5/28/78 <1.10 (2) 1.90 (2)~ 3.80 (2) 1.80 (2) 7/20/78 <1.00 (2) 3.10 (2) 5 8/08/78 <9.68 (2) c w 8/31/78 1.82 (3) <6.64 (2) -- w
" 9/06/78 <1.10 (2) 2.41 (3) 2.70 (2) @k pa 9/29/78c 1.70 (2) 2.70 (2) 1.06 (3) 2.90 (2) Ej 9/29/78 d <7.01 (2) <7.01 (2) <7.01 (2) @
H 11/15/78 <1.10 (2) <1.30 (2) 7.50 (2) 3.30 (2) , 12/01/78 2.60 (2) 1.26 (3) 2.80 (2) 1/24/79 3.12 (3) 1.40 (2) 1/25/79 1.00 (2) 1/26/79 1.20 (2) 2/13/79 1.10 (2) 2/20/79 <1.10 (2) 1.00 (3) 3/09/79 .
<1.45 (3) <1.45 (3) 3/20/79 -
<1.50 (3) <1.50 (3) 3/27/79 2.72 (3) <1.64 (3) 4/04/79 2.10 (3) <1.45 (3)~
4/10/79 '
<1.58 (3) <1.58 (3) 4/17/79 <1.48 (3) <1.48 (3) 1 4/24/79 <1.40 (3) <1.40 (3) j 5/02/79 <1.50 (3) <1.50 (3)*
5/08/79 <1.70 (3) <1.80 (3) <1.70 (3) 5/09/79f' <1.70 (3) a) indicates < 8 x 10 1 c) Teledyne e) split < 1.50 (3) b) recount 1.08 (3) d) APT f) < 1.70 (3) at MH18
TABLE 2.4-1 CONTINUED TRITIUM LEVELS FROM ORDINARY STATIONS pCi/1 Collection Deen's Deep Wells Subsurface Ditch Date- landing No. 1 No. 2 North (#1) East (#2) 5/17/79 <1.70 (3) <1.70 (3) 5/23/79 <1.70 (3) 5/24/79 <1.70 (3) 5/31/79 1.74 (3)* 6/04/79 2.80 (2) 6/13/79 1.25 (3) 6/14/79 3.00 (2) 6/26/79 1.22 (3) 1.50 (2) 6/28/79 <1.10 (2) 7/03/79b <1.10 (2)- <1.10 (2) 7/11/79 1.30 (3) 2.00 (2) w 7/12/79 <1.00 (2) p 4 7/26/79 1.63 (3) 2.10 (2) 8/08/79c 8/10/79 1.49 (3) 2.80 (2) ;E 8/23/79 1.50 (2) $$ " 8/24/79 1.16 (3) E 9/05/79 2.10 (2) EI 9/06/79 1.52 (3) 9/19/79 1.52 (3) < 9/20/79 <1.10 (2) 10/04/79 d 1.60 (3) 9.70 (1) 10/11/79 10/19/79 1.40 (3) 1.42 (2) 11/09/79 , 1.55 (3) 3.43 (2)- 11/16/79 . 1.26 (3) 1.60 (2) 11/30/79 2.81 (3) 4.14 (2)* 12/03/79 1.71 (3) 1.29 (3) 12/13/79 2.09 (3) 2.80 (2) 12/26/79 - 1.74 (3) 3.21 (2) a) indicates 1.74 x 10 3 c) 1.05 (4) at MH10 and 8.71 (3) from pipe in Mll10 leading from Recombiner Building b) State comparison program d) 9.33 (3) at Mil 10 e) recount 1.32 (3)
a HNP ANNUAL REPORT Sampling at a few new locations came about as follows: The U. S. Department of Interior, in their comments dated June 28, 1977 on the Draft Environmental Statement for HNP-2, suggested ground water sampling of the local aquifer as its top is about 5 feet below the foundation of the Unit 2 radwaste building. It should be noted that the local aquifer had not been monitored previous to this time. Consequently, in the 4th quarter of 1977 samples were collected from three test holes, N7A, N8A and P17A. Each of these test holes has a d:pth on the order of 80 feet. The tritium level in the sample taken from N7A which is located about 15 feet south of the Unit 1 Condensate Storage Tank (CST-1) dyke was 1550 pCi/1. The tritium concentration in the samples from the other two holes was below the icvel of detection. A complete listing of the tritium levels at these three locations (through the end of 1979) is given in Table 2.4-2. All three holes lie within several hundred feet of each other. The locations of these holes (as well as the other sampling locations discussed in subsequent paragraphs) are shown in Figure 2.4-2. . While the next few readings from Ditch 1 showed the levels to be only slightly above normal, elevated levels persisted at N7A. Consequently, in June 1978, samples began to be collected from several test holes (N8B, N9B, N10B, P16 and P17B) in the plant yard which tap the local water table; a few months later collections began in several catch basins and from the outfalls of the surface drainage system. A complete listing of the tritium levels for samples from these locations (through the end of 1979) is given in Tables 2.4-3 through 2.4-6. The tritium levels were found to be high at two locations and above normal at several others during the latter half of 1978. At P16, a 13-foot deep test hole located only about 8 feet from the errant N7A, readings of around 1.5 x 10 5 pCi/1 were found; at P172, another 13-foot deep test hole which is located adjacent to the southeast corner of the diesel generator building, the readings rose f. rom 8.5 x 10 2 pCi/l in June to 2.6 x 105 pCi/1 in December. Readings of a few thousand or so pCi/l were found in Ditch No. 1, in Catch Basins PY-12 and PY-24 which are a little south of CST-1, and in N9B, a 17-foot deep test hole at the northeast corner of the Unit 1 Turbine Building. l Near the end of 1976 it appeared that there were two principal areas j of the plant yard affected by tritium contamination of the ground i water in the water table. This suggested that the extraneous tritium
- sou ce for each area might be different. One area was centered about the high readings found at P16; this test hole is located about 15 feet south of the CST-1 dyke. Also associated with this area are the above normal readings found in the catch basins and at N7A, and the slightly above background levels found in Ditch No. 2. The other
- 2-25
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 2.4-2 TRITIUM LEVELS FROM ORIGINAL STATIONS IN LOCAL AQUIFER pCi/l Date N7A N8A P17A 11/16/77. <1.10 (2)a 12/20/77 1.55 (3)b <1.10 (2) 2/17/78 1.66 (3) 2.50 (2) <1.00 (2) 5/28/78 1.:" (3) <1.10 (2) 2.90 (2) 7/20/78 1.46 (3) 8/08/78 1.02 (3) 8/31/78 1.55 (~' 9/06/78 1.70 (3) <1.10 (2) 9/29/78 1.33 (3)C 11/15/78 1.27 (3) 1.80 (2) 3.s0 (2) 12/01/78 1.20 (3) 4 1/24/79 2.82 (3) <1.10 (2) 7.90 (2) 2/14/79 1.84 (3) . 3/28/79 <1.64 (3) <1.64 (3) 4/10/79 2.12 (3) 6/05/79 1.50 (2) 7/11/79 2.46 (3) 4.60 (2) 10/10/79 3.83 (3) <9.50 (1) 1.21 (2) 12/04/79 5.41 (3)d 4 A> I 2 a) indicates < 1.1 x 10 b) recount 1.71 (3) c) splits 9.85 (2) and 1.49 (3) d) recound 6.19 (3) i !- 2-26
o HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 2.4-3 TRITIUM LEVELS IN AFFECTED TEST HOLES pCi/1 Date N9B P16 P17B 6/18/78 1.44 (5)* 8.50 (2) 8/08/78 3.55 (3) 1.64 (5)b 7.88 (3) 8/31/78 3.48 (3) 1.51 (5) 1.05 (4) 9/29/78 3.67 (3)e 12/01/78 4.49 (3) 2.64 (5) 1/24/79 1.66 (5) 1/26/79 1.37 (5) 2/14/79 1.32 (5) 2/16/79 9.63 (3) 2.97 (5) 3/09/79 1.21 (5) - 3/13/79 2.80 (4)d 2.32 (5) 3/20/79 4.56 (4) 1.12 (5) 2.49 (5) 3/27/79 5.40 (4)* dry dry 4/04/79 5.97 (4)f
~
1.09 (5)B 2.29 (5) 4/10/79 1.07 (5) 2.36 (5)h 4/17/79 6.79 (4)1 1.14 (5) 8.47 (4) 4/24/79 6.67 (4) 6.60 (4)d 9.52 (4) 1.66 (5) 5/02/79 6.89 (4) 9.55 (4) 7.88 (4) 5/09/79 8.64 (4) 1.11 (5) 5.69 (4) 5/17/79 7.68 (4) 7.78 (4) 2.88 (4) 5/23/79 8.99 (4) 8.20 (4) 4.71- (4) 6/04/79 1.06 (5) 6/05/79 7.66 (4) 3.06 (4) 6/13/79 1.02 (5) 6/26/79 1.43 (5) 7/11/79 1.37 (5) 7.62 (4) 3.46 (4) 7/26/79 1.47 (5) 8/09/79 1.43 (5)k 6.07 (4) 5.31 (4) ' 8/24/79 1.28 (5)1 6.62 (4)
- 7.12 (4) 9/05/79 7.6C (4) 9/06/79 1.34 (5) 2.33 (4) 9/18/79 1.42 (5) 7.44 (4) 5.18 (4) 10/02/79 1.72 (5) 6.01 (4) 10/05/79 1.62 (4) 10/19/79 1.80 (5) 6.67 (4) 4.51 (4) 11/02/79 1.68 (5) 7.17 (4) dry 11/16/79 1.86 (5) dry 3.33 (4) 11/30/79 1.55 (5) dry dry 12/03/79 6.55 (4) 12/14/79 1.58 (5) 5.31 (4) 2.65 (4) 12/26/79 1.79 (5) 6.59 (4) 2.13 (4) t a) indicates 1.44 x 105 g) split 1.01 (5) b) recount 1.51 (5) h) split 2.21 (5) c) split 2.95 (3) 1) split 6.90 (4) d) recount 2.95 (4). 2-27 j) split 6.93 (4) e) split 5.13 (4) k) split 1.41 (5) f) split 5.73 (4)- 1) split 1.28 (5) ,
o gM' M
TABLE 2.4-4 TRITIUM LEVELS IN OTHER TEST HOLES TAPPING WATER TABLE'- PART 1 pCi/1
.Date Al A2 N8B N10B N11B N12B
'6/14/78 1.80 (2)a 2.00 (2) 8/08/78 <9.68 (2) <9.68 (2)
'9/29/78 b 1.10 (2) 9/29/78c <7.01 (2) 12/01/78 3.00 (2)
.1/24/79 1.70 (2) 2/15/79 <1.00 (2) 2/16/79 3/13/79 <1.45 (3) <1.45 (3)-
3/16/79 <l.45 (3) <1.45 (3) dry 3/28/79 dry 4/10/79 <1.58 (3) <1.58 (3) 5/09/79 <1.70 (3)
- n. 6/05/79 3.30 (2) g h* 7/11/79 1.00 (2) 2.50 (2) $
10/10/79 <7.80 (1) 1.62 (2) dry @; g 10/11/79 1.41 (2) 6.40 (2) n, 12/03/79 6.10 (5) n, ,
.O a
a) indicates 1.80 x 10 2 - b) Teledyne c)-APT 9
a HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 2.4-5 , TRITIUM LEVELS IN CATCH BASINS OF SURFACE DRAINAGE SYSTEM pCi/l Collection Date PY24 PY12 PY16 8 8/08/78 2.75'(3)b 2.40 (3) 1.22 (3) 8/31/78 dry 1.54 (3) dry 9/29/78c 1.52 (3) 1.63 (3) 9/29/78 d <7.01 (2) 1.34 (3) ' 12/01/78 6.80 (3) 5.00 (2) 2/22/79 6.32 (3) 2.50 (2) 3/09/79 8.73 (3) <1.45 (3) 3/13/79 '
<l.45 (3) 3/16/79 8 3/28/79 2.82 (3) 4/10/79 <1.58 (3) <1.58 (3) 7/13/79 3.40 (2) 1.40 (2) 8/03/79 4.90 (2) 1.40 (2) 8/09/79 7.00 (2) 3.10 (2) 10/10/79 2.67 (2) dry 10/11/79 1.77 (3) 12/03/79 f 5.60 (5) a) - <7.89 (2) at PYl7, MHPY4 and CBR63; <9.68 (2) at CBR61 b) indicates 2.75 x 103
, c) Teledyne d) . APT e) 1.91 (3) adjacent to MHil f) 6.18 (5) for CST-1 sample;-6.09 (5)oon ground next to slab for CST-1 condensate transfer pumps. I' 2-29 i - _ _ _ _ _ _ _..._.--
i I HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 2.4-6 TRITIUM LEVELS IN SURFACE DRAINAGE pCi/1 Collection Outfalls North (#1) East (#2) Unit 2_ Date dry dry 8/31/78 b 9/29/78 2.40 (2)a 9/29/78c <7.01 (2) dry dry 3/16/79 dry dry , 3/20/79 dry dry 3/28/79 dry dry 5/02/79 dry dry 5/17/79 dry dry - 5/23/79 dry dry 6/04/79 dry dry 6/14/79 dry dry 6/26/79 7/11/79 1.10 (2) 7/13/79 1.80 (2) 7/19/79 <1.30 (2) 1.00 (2) 1.30 (2) 2.30 (2) 7/23/79 1.20 (2) <1.20 (2) 7/26/79 1.70 (2) 1.10 (2) <1.40 (2) 1.10 (2) 8/10/79 8/23/79 4.00 (2) dry 8/24/79 <1.10 (2) 1.30 (2) 9/05/79 ~ 9/06/79 1.60 (2) 9/19/79 1.00 (2) 9/20/79 1.30 (2) 10/05/79 1.20 (2) 1.56 (2) 10/19/79 <9.50 (1) 1.45 (2) 11/02/79 4.32 (2) <8.40 (1) 11/16/79 dry 1.70 (2) dry dry
. 11/30/79 dry dry 12/03/79 dry dry 12/13/79 12/26/79 dry 5.18 (2) 2 ua) indicates 2.40 x 10 b) Teledyne.
c) APT 2-30 I
o ! HNP ANNUAL REPORT area which is generally north of the turbine building was mainly associated with the high tritium readings at P17B, but also involved above normal readings at Ditch No. 1 and N9B. Due to the distance between Pl7B and N9B, some doubt existed that the tritium found at these two test holes came from a common source. The Unit 1 circulating water tunnel runs from the east side of the turbine building at the northeast corner to the cooling tower flume. This tunnel provides a barrier between the two areas of tritiated ground water and thereby increases the probability that the two areas are not hydraulically connected. It was hypothesized that P16 was tapping a " pool" of tritiated water I, which was trapped in a pocket. The source of this contaminated water was uncertain, but leaks from the nearby condensate transfer prmps slab was a possibility. These pumps are mounted on a small concret.: (roughly 6 to 8 feet on a side) which is located on the south sideonof The soil the southeast corner of the dyke surrounding the CST-1.sometimes the west side of this slab had occasicaally been wet, soaked. The pumps had occasionally hadIn leaking seals and valves; addition to the ordinary repairs were made in a routine maraer. repairs, reflectors were mounted on the pumps to direct any spraying from such leaks to the slab; there is a drain from the slab to radwaste. As mentioned in the annual report for 1977, these leaks were considered in attempting to determine the cause of the above normal levels at N7A. After some deliberation that notion was discarded since at that time these leaks were thought to be small. It was thought at the end of 1978 that the break which occurred in the offgas line at the point where it entered the ground as it exited the Turbine Building (which is perhaps 80 feet or so west of N9B) might have caused significant contamination of the ground water in the plant yard north of the Turbine Building. This break which
-became known in May 1978 (and which was punctually fixed after having been properly reported) resulted from the settlement of the Turbine Building. The gases in this line are laden with tritium; it is likely that a significant quantity of the gaseous tritium could have escaped to the ground; such leakage may have been happening for some indefinite period of time before the discovery of this break.
i The contribution (if any) of this lealage to the tritium levels in this area is uncertain. An investigation of these abnormal tritium readings began slowly and informally in August of 1978. The underground piping systems which carry high levels of tritium were identified from a study of the piping diagrams. Many of these piping systems were hydrostatically e i 2-31
a HNP ANNUAL REPORT tested to some extent; results were generally inconclusive, neither positively confirming nor excluding leakage to the ground from these systems. The sampling was intensified by an increase, not only in the frequency of collections, but also in the number of sampling locations. All of the readings up to mid-June 1978 were associated with Unit 1, not only because an Operating License for Unit 2 was not issued until June 13, 1978, and initial criticality was not achieved until July 4, 1978, but also because all the piezometers which had been sampled were on the north side of the plant yard which is physically in the proximity of Unit 1 and relatively remote from Unit 2. The ordinary sampling stations, however, do monitor each of the units more or less equally. It should be pointed out that ground water sampling 'is not required by the Unit 2 ETS. A nonroutine report on the discovery of the high tritium levels at P16 was not required by the old Unit 1 ETS since this did not involve a significant environmental impact. The environmental impact was not considered significant as this location was well within the protected area, the water was not being used, there were no planned usages of this water, and its movament through the ground is rather slow. The old Unit 1 ETS did not specify reporting levels for radiological environmental samples. The high reading at P16, however, did spark efforts to obtain laboratory results sooner, and the initiation of actions that might lead to the discovery of the cause of the high readings; it also brought about an increase in the intensity of sampling. All of the ground water samples collected through July of 1978 had been analyzed by Teledyne Isotopes, Inc. of Westwood, New Jersey. A gas enrichment process was used to determine the tritium level of each sample. Although the LLD was very low, nominally about 100 pCi/1, the results were generally not forthcoming for 6 weeks or so; some-times the wait was in excess of 2 months. To obtain quicker results; the services of a closer laboratory were procured through Applied Physical Technology (APT) of Smyrna, Georgia; and it was decided that a liquid scintillation detector should be used in the laboratory analysis for tritium. Although results were obtained more quickly (from several days to several weeks), the LLD was much higher (ranging from about 700 to 1700 pCi/1). The services of Teledyne continued to l be employed also. l-l l l 2-32
e I HNP i ANNUAL REPORT 2.4.3 MAJOR HAPPENINGS IN 1979 Significant events related to the tritium problem with the exception of investigative activities are described and discussed in this section. These include: the events leading up to the reportable occurrence of March 26; the discoveries of significant leaks from the condensate transfer pumps; and other miscellaneous activities. Investigative activities are discussed in Section 2.4.4. 2.4.3.1 Nonroutine Report On November 16, 1978, an amendment to Appendix B of the Unit 1 Ope-rating License was issued whereby the old ETS were replaced with the new ETS, that is, those issued with the Unit 2 Operating License in June 1978. Although these new ETS do not require ground water sampling, they do specify that if a confirmed measured radionuclide concentration in an environmental sampling medium averaged over any quarterly sampling period should exceed the reporting level given in Table 3.2-3 of the ETS, then a written report shall be submitted to the NRC within 30 days from the end of the quarter or after con-firmation, whichever is later. The reporting level for tritium in
- water is 3.0 x 104 pCi/1. The ETS defined " confirmed" as a con-firmatory reanalysis of the original, a duplicate, or a new sample as appropriate.
There was some doubt then, that this reportiva level shauld apply to any of the ground water samples, even those trom the ordinary stations. Thus, it was questionable that a nonroutine :eport should be made regarding any high tritium levels such as thase found at Pld and P17B. Due to the inocet&Tibility of these locations to the general public, samples gathered here probably shoul! not be considered as radiological environmental samples. December 1, 1978, a sample was collected at Pl7B; shipped to Teledyne on December 4. The results were received on January 24; the tritium icvel was 2.64 x 105pCi/1. The previous maximum reading at this station had been 1.05 x 104 pCi/1. A new esmple was collected from P17B on January 24 to confirm this.new maximum reading, it war shipped to Teledyne on January 27; the laberatory report was received on March 12; the tritium level was 1.66 x *,.05 pCi/1. On January 26, j a sample was collected at P16; it was shipped to Teledyne on January 27; the result was received on March 12; the tritium level for P16 was 1.37 x 105 pCi/1. A wet spot on the ground near P17B had been noticed. There were also j _ wet spots on the ground adjacent to the condensate transfer pumps which are near P16. On February 16, wet soil samples were collected 2-33
o HNP ANNUAL REPORT from these two locations; on February 22 these samples were shipped to Teledyne for tritium and gamma spectral analyses; in early April the results were received; the results are presented in Table 2.4-7. The levels for the various radionuclides found in the soil sampics from the wet spot near P17B are indicative of the presence of reactor water except for Ra-26 and Th-228 which occur in the soil naturally. Although the levels found in the soil collected near P16 are generally a few orders of magnitude lower, they too indicate soae local contamination. After receiving the laboratory analysis reports for the tritium levels at P16 and P17B on March 12, it was decided that despite the doubts regarding the reporting requirements, a nonroutine report would be submitted. However, before the writeup of the report' was completed, the cause of the high tritium levels at P17B tavealed itself. The' report was filed on March 26 which was before the laboratory reports on the two soil samples collected on February 16 were received. During construction of Unit 1, a half-inch temporary pipe carried nitrogen from a tank in the yard adjacent to P17B to the feedwater heaters in order to keep them from corroding before the plant was put in service. After Unit 1 was put into service, the tank in the yard was removed leaving an~open line buried about eight inches below the yard grade; the end of this line was roughly 10 feet SW of P17B. The heater end of this temporary line was not removed after startup of the unit. The presence of the line went undetected until the events of March 20 led to its discovery. On March 20, water was discovered bubbling out of the ground to a height of one to two inches from the very spot where a soil sample had been gathered on February 16. Water would flow out around 10 seconds, then stop for perhaps 5 minutes or so. This cyclic phe-nocenon occurred several times over a few hours; it may have been caused by changes of pressure in the feedwater heater at that time. Water samples from the flow and mud samples from the ground at this
. spot were collected for tritium and gamma spectral analyses. The results are given in Table 2.4-8. Where comparable, these levels ace seen to be generally higher than those found in Table 2.4-7.
On March 21, a check of the valve on this temporary nitrogea line at the feedwater heater showed the valve to have been partially open. The valve was promptly closed. To prevent any possible recurrence, the line was severed inside the turbine building by removing a pipe coupling. Caps were ther placed on both the line and the heater con-nection. On March 22, the open end of this temporary nitrogen line was unearthed. The line lay horizontal pointing north. A portable radiation detector 2-34 O
o HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 2.'4-7 TRITIUM AND CAMMA SPECTRAL ANALYSES OF WET SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED ON FEBRUARY 16, 1979 I Radionuclide Near P16 Near P17B H-3 1.91 (3)a pCi/1 1.03 (6) pCi/1 Mn-54 <4.00.(1) pCi/kg dry 7.70 (1) pCi/kg dry Co-58 <5.00 (1) pCi/kg dry 7.44 (2) pCi/kg dry Co-60 1.36 (2) pCi/kg dry 9.37 (2) pCi/kg dry Zn-65 <9.00 (1) pC1/kg dry 3.49 (2) pCi/kg dry I-131 <7.00 (2) pCi/kg dry 3.93 (3) pCi/kg dry Cs-134 8.52 (1) pCi/kg dry 1.78 (3) pC1/kg d~y r i -Cs-137 1.61 (2) pC1/kg dry 1.75 (3) pC1/kg dry I Ra-226 2.05 (3) pCi/kg dry 1.52 (3) pci/kg dry Th-228 1.08 (3) pCi/kg dry 6.02.(2) pCi/kg dry i t i-l a) indicates 1.91 x 10 3 l
-i I
l 2-35 s , ~;' .! . m. - . e ,... . -- ._
r HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 2.4-8 TRITIUM AND GAMMA SPECTRAL ANALYSES OF WATER FLOWING FROM GROUND ON MARCH 20, 1979, NEAR Pl7B; GAMMA SPECTRAL ANALYSIS OF MUD FROM THIS LOCATION ON SAME DATE Radionuclide Level Sample No. 1 Sample No. 2 Water (pCi/1) H-3 1.05 (6) 1.08 (6) Kr-85m 1.79 (3) 1.68 (3) Xe-133 2.46 (5) 2.45 (5) ~ Xe-133m 7.30 (3) 7.23 (3) Xe-135 6.10 (4) 5.90 (4) i Mud (pC1/kg dry) . Co-58 3.40 (3) 1.11 (3) Co-60 4.07 (3) 1.88 (3) Zn-65 2.10 (3) 9.65 (2) Xe-133 1.50 (4) 4.98 (3) Xe-135 1.60 (3) 6.87 (2) Cs-134 2.90 (4) 1.34 (4) Cs-137 3.27 (4) 1.51 (4) Ba-La-140 9.88 (2) 4.51 (2) 4 - 2-36
o HNP ANNUAL REPORT showed activity in the soil near the end of the pipe. There was no measurable activity in the soil beyond 2 feet from the end of the pipe. Hence, it may be concluded that all activity except tritium was confined to the immediate point of discharge. The contaminated soil was placed in drums for shipment to a licensed low level burial ground. The open end of this temporary line was capped off. On March 26 the events of March 20, were reported to the NRC as a Licensee Event Report (LER). Attached to ':his LER was an Anomalous Fieasurement Report which revealed the high tritium levels at P16 and Pl7B. As shown in Table 2.4-3, the tritium level at N9B was undergoing a vigorous rise during the winter of 1978-1979. The first sample to exceed the reporting level was collected on March 20; its level was 4.56 x 104 pCi/1. By mid April the level seemed to have more or less reached a plateau of around 6.7 x 10 4 pCi/1. All of the tritium levels measured from samples taken from N9B, P16 and Pl7B through April were reported to the NRC on April 30, as a quarterly update to this reportable occurrence. The next revision to this reportable occurrence was dated June 27; it consisted of that portion of the Radiological Section of the 1978 environmental surveillance report which addressed the problem of tritium in ground water. Further revisions to the reportable occurrence dated July 30 and October 31 were quarterly updates. The July 30 revision added test holes T4 and T18 to the list of locations from which reportable levels were found. These wells were drilled in the spring of 1979 in connection with the investigation of the tritium problem. 2.4.3.2 Leaks From Condensate Transfer Pumps In Section 2.4.2 the possibility that leaks from the condensate transfer pumps might be the cause of the high tritium levels in the area about P16 was suggested. The reality of such a suggestion seemed improbable in late 1978, however. Leakages from these pumps and associated fittings, if they should occur in spurts, might go unnoticed for some tLne since normally no one is in this area. On May 2, however, the engineer supervising the installation of the new test holes noticed that just as operation was switched from one of the condensate transfer pumps to the other, there was a momentary small release of water to the ground at the point where a pipe covered with insulation enters the ground. Sub-sequently, the insulation was removed and was found to have been completely soaked. The check valve for the pump, when not operating, was found to have been the principal source of the concealed Icakage. The check valve was repaired punctually. Consequently, a surveillance program was established whereby the pumps and associated plumbing were checked once per ship. Any leaks discovered were repaired in a timely manner. 2-37
o HNP ANNUAL REPORT Af ter the observation of the leaks on !by 2, the area was surveyed with a portable radiation monitor to determine the extent of contamination. Gamma spectral analyses were performed on soil samples which were collected at various points in order to confirm the radiation measure-ments taken with the portable monitor. Near the middle of May 1979, the contaminated soil was placed in drums for shipment to a licensed low level burial ground. Over the past two yeara gamma spectral analyses have from time to time been performed on soil samples which were collected near these condensate transfer pumps. Typical results were presented in Table 2.4-7 (for "Near P16"). The insulation on the pipes adjacent to the condensate transfer pumps has providad a mask which could have allowed persistent leakage to the ground to go unnoticed. It seems likely then that this leakage which was observed on May 2, and believed to have occurred in the past, had been much greater than previously thought. Since repairing of the pumps and the installation of reflectors may have not been sufficient actions to entirely preclude releases of contaminated water to the ground, it was decided that the pad for the condensate transfer pumps is to be enclosed by a dyke which will be connected with the CST dyke. This is to be done on both units. At year's end the design had been essentially completed. On December 3 it was discovered that a seal on one of the condensate transfer pumps had blown.resulting in the leakage of about 450 gallons of water from CST-1 to the ground. Consequently, there were sudden and large increases in the tritium level at adjacent sampling locations. These tritium levels are discussed in Section 2.4.5. This spill was reported to the resident NRC inspector by an information letter dated January 3,1980. To preclude or reduce releases under similar circumstances, temporary confinement measures about the transfer pumps were made until the permanent fi:: described above can be installed. The temporary measures consisted of the installation of more effective metal reflectors to direct any spraying from the pumps or related plumbing to the con-crete slab upon which the pumps are mounted; a curbing was added around the concrete slab to prevent run off to the ground. 2.4.3.3 Miscellaneous Activities In the latter part t the winter a number of additional test holes in the water table were sampled to determine the extent of tritium migration in the plant yard. The tritium icycls found in these samples and other in 1979 are listed in Tables 2.4-4 and 2.4-9. All results are either less than the LLD or at background levels. 2-38 l
TABLE 2.4-9 TRITILH LEVELS IN OTHER TEST HOLES TAPPING WATER TABLE - PART 2 pCi/1 Date A3 N2B N3B NSB P13B PISB 2/16/79 2.1G '?)a 3/13/79 <1.45 (3) 3/16/79 <1.45 (3) <1.45 (3) <1.45 (3) <1.45 (3) <1.45 (3) 10/10/79 2.40 (2) 10/11/79 1.59 (2) 2.16 (2) E u D=
$ 5 e
2 a) indicates 2.10 x 10
e HNP ANNUAL REPORT In the second week of May 1979, a group of camples were taken and split with the NRC as per their suggestion. Included in this group were samples taken from outlying test holes which were a few hundred to about 13 hundred yards away. These were taken to provide assurance that ground water tritium had not migrated offsite. The outlying test holes tapping the water table were N13B, N14B, N15B, P102A and P108A; subsequently P105A was added to this group. Those tapping the local aquifer were P102B and P108B; subsequently P105B was added to this group. The locations of these test holes are shown in Figure 2.4-3. The tritium levels found in each of these outlying test holes throughout the year are listed in Tables 2.4-10 and 2.4-11. Almost without exception, the tritium levels were low or less than the LLD. Beginning in June samples were taken from four other locations in the local aquifer; all of these locations were within a few hundred yards of CST-1. Again the tritium levels were low or less than the LLD. These results are also listed in Table 2.4-11. , Starting in October all ground water samples were sent to the Center for Applied Isotope Studies at the University of Georgia in Athens, Georgia. Results are usually provided in less than 2 weeks; LLDs of
- about 100 pCi/1 are attained.
2-40 l .
i TABLE 2.4-10 TRITIUM LEVELS IN OTilER TEST 110LES TAPPING WATER TABLE - PART 3 pC1/1 Date N13B N14B N15B P102A P105A P108A I' -5/09/79 <1.70 (3)a <1.70 (3) <1.70 (3) <1.70 (3) <1.70 (3)
' 6 /26/79 .- 2.40 (2) 1.40 (2) 6/28/79 2.10 (2) 6.80 (2) 2.00 (2) 7/11/79' 1.90 (2) 7/12/79 1.30 (2) 4.30 (2) 3.30 (2) 1.70 (2)
- , 7/26/79 3.90 (2) 1 10/11/79 <9.50.(1) 2.28 (2) s
,> kx E
2 0 , a) indicates <1.70 x 10 3 9
g TABLE 2.4-11 TRITIUM LEVELS IN ADDITIONAL TEST HOLES TAPPING LOCAL AQUIFER pCi/1 Collection Date- N2A' N3A P13A PISA- P102B P105B P108B 5/09/79 ..
<1.70 (3)a <1.70 (3)
-6/05/79 <1.20 (2) 3.10 (2) <1.10 (2) 2.10 (2) 6/26/79 <1.00 (2)
~6/28/79 <1.10 (2) 17/11/79 <1.20 (2).
7/12/79 <1.20 (2)
~
<1.00 (2) <1.00 (2)-
7/13/79. <1.00 (2) ~1.00 (2) 7/26/79 1.00 (2) Y E O N 3 n a) indicates < 1.70 x 10
l e l HNP ANNUAL REPORT 2.4.4 INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES In this section an attempt was made to describe in more or less chronological order the investigation of the high tritium levels. The investigation might be divided into two parts: the initial activities and follow on activities. The initial activities con-sisted mainly of what was learned from the 17 new test wells - both in their installation and the data obtained therefrom. The chief follow on activity was a dye tracer study. 2.4.4.1 Initial Activities As menticned in Section 2.4.2, a tentative investigation of the high
~
tritium levels began in August of 1978, but there were no conclusive results. Six months later Dr. James R. Wallace, a Professional Engineer and Chief Hydrologist for Law Engineering Testing Company of Marietta, Georgia, was engaged as a consultant in planning and implementing this investigation; his work was initiated on February 16. In order to determine the seepage pathways to the source points where extraneous tritium was entering or had entered the ground, a study was made of the piping diagrams, water levels in the test holes (in conjunction with precipitation records), and the tritium levels. It was decided that about twenty test holes should be drilled (to depths of around 20 feet) in the vicinity of the three test holes (which tap the water table) with the high tritium levels. The following infor-mation was to be sought from each of these new test holes in hopes of determining if an extraneous source exists: l a) the gamma spectral analysis of soil samples at various depths, b) the gamma spectral and tritium analyses of the ground water samples, , l c) the electrical conductivity of the ground water samples, and l l. d) the temperature of the ground water samples. The designation of the test holes actually drilled, the date of installation, the hole depth, and the depths at which the aquiclude was reached are listed in Table 2.4-12. The locations of these test holes are shown-in Figure 2.4-2. The contour of the aquiclude in the proximity of CST-1 seems to form sort of a trough running under CST-1 and aligned in a more-or-1.ess NNE-SSW direction with the southern end of the trough being slignely deeper. Piezometer P16 appears to lie in this trough. The aquiclude contours in the area a little east of the Unit 1 Recombiner Building (as judged by T5, T4 and T8) show a 2-43
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 2.4-12 NEW TEST HOLES IN WATER TABLE Designation Installation Depth Acquiclude* 1979 (ft) (ft) l T2 5/04 21.5 21 T3 5/03 17.5 >17.5 T4 4/24 20.0 17 T5 4/24 20.0 12 T6 4/27 20.0 12.5 T7 4/26 20.0 13.5 T8 5/02 23.0 >23 T10 4/20 18.5 18 Til 4/19 20.0 18 T12 4/19 23.5 20 T13 4/20 18.0 15 T14 5/01 15.0 13 T15 5/01 22.5 20 T16 4/27 20.0 18 T18 5/02 18.0 13 T19 5/03 19.0 16 T20 5/04 23.0 21 6
- Approximate depth to aquielude
- i. 2-44
'E..~+ m., on . + ~ . -
- - - , a
o HNP ANNUAL REPORT downward slope in a south to southeasterly direction. This suggests (with all other conditions being the same) that the discharges of process water that took place through the open half-inch line near P17B would tend to flow to the vicinity of N9B. While constructing each of the new wells, soil samples were generally collected at five foot intervals and at intermediate depths in some cases. A gamma scan employing a GeLi detector was run on each sample. Gamma spectral analyses were also run on ground water samples from each of the new test holes which was not dry. In a few instances naturslly occurring radionuclides were detected; there were no other positive results. The soil acts as both a filter and a demineralizer; its efficacy in these capacities was demonstrated by the virtual elimination within a few feet of all of the gamma activity being diacharged from an
. open line as was noted in Section 2.4.3. Thus, the detection of gamma activity in a soil sample would have likely meant that an extraneous
- source existed within a few feet. .
< The results of the tritium analyses for the samples from the new test holes are presented in Table 2.4-13. Most of the test holes were dry from a few days to a few weeks following installation. Most of the test j holes can be associated with one of the areas of tritiated g:c ;und water discussed in Section 2.4.2. These results were helpful in giving better definition to these areas. A discussion of the results from individual test holes is provided in Section 2.4.5. Since conductivir.y of the de-ionized process water is nominally less than 1 p mho/cm, whereas the conductivity of water obtainable from normal ground water sources nearby is generally about two orders of magnitude higher; a very low conductivity found in a ground water sample would indicate that such a sample was likely to have been collected close to some leak of the process water. Since generally the temperature of the water in the piping systems of interest does not run.many degrees above ambient, not much could be expected to be learned from the temperature of samples. Listed in Table 2.4-14 are the conductivity and temperature measurements for samples collected from the new test holes on May 10. None of the conductivity measurements was low, some were rather high; the variation
- in values probably reflects the variation in the mineral content of the i soil at each location. The test holes with the higher temperatures are l located where there are more piping systems which may provide slightly i
higher temperature to the ground water in that area. There reemed to be no particular significance to any of the conductivity and temperature values as no correlation was established between these values and the tritium levels. 2-45
o HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 2.4-13 TRITIUM LEVELS IN NEW TEST HOLES pCi/1 Collection Date T2 T3 T4 T8 4/24/79 a 4/27/79 c 6.27 (3)b 4/29/79 2.41 (4) 5/01/79 4.77 (4) 5/02/79 a 5/03/79 dry a 7.33 (4) dry 5/04/79 dry" dry dry 5/07/79 - dry dry dry 5/10/79 7.74 (4) dry 5/14/79 <1.70 (3) 7.17 (4) 5/16/79 <1.60 (3) dry dry 5/17/79 dry 4.66'(4) dry 5/21/79 <1.70 (3) 8.76 (4) <1.70 (3) 5/24/79 <1.70 (3) 1.08 (4) 1.15 (5) <1.70 (3) 5/28/79 <1.70 (3) 1.03 (4) 1.34 (5) 6/01/79 1.34 (5) 1.06 (4) 6/05/79 1.41 (5) 6/11/79 1.20 (4) 6/13/79 1.20 (4) 1.56 1.63 (5)d (5) 3.63 (3) 6/26/79 1.46 (4) 1.79 (5) 3.93 (3) 7/11/79 2.03 (3) 1.19 (4) 1.72 (5) 2.15 (3)f 7/26/79 1.26 (4) 1.87 (5)* 3.73 (3) 8/09/79 2.23 (3) 1.24 (4) 2.05 (5) 4.53 (3) 8/24/79 1.04 (4) 1.81 (5) <1.70 (3) 9/06/79 2.33 (3) 1.20-(4) 9.22 (4)8 <1.70 (3) 9/18/79 1.77 (4) 1.51 (5)h 5.99 (3) 10/02/79 1.69 (4) 6.74 (4)
- 1.01 (4) ~
10/10/79 1.18 (3) 10/19/79 2.20 (4) 1.89 (5) 1.07 (4) 11/02/79 2.07 (4) 1.66 (5) 1.03 (4) 11/09/79 1.19 (3) 11/16/79 2.27 (4) 1.79 (5) 1.23 (4) 11/30/79 1.87 (4) 1.46 (5) 1.14 (4) 12/06/79 1.47 (3) 12/14/79 1.72 (4) 1.35 (5) 1.10.(4) 12/26/79 2.23 (4) 1.55 (5) 1.23 (4) a) installed d) split 1.60 (5). g) split 8.94 (4) b) indicates 2.41 x 10 4 e) split 1.75 (5) h) aplit 1.52 (5) c) split _6.72 (3) .% split 4.13 (3) 2-46 ph-me Y Mm -ha ' ~,
o HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 2.4- 13 (Continued) TRITIUM LEVELS IN NEW TEST HOLES pCi/1 Collection Date T5 T6 T7 4/24/79 a 4/26/79 a 4/27/79 dry a dry 4/29/79 <1.38 (3)b 5/01/79 dry <1.48 (3) dry 5/02/79 dry dry 5/03/79 dry <1.50 (3) , dry 5/04/79 dry dry 5/07/79 dry dry 5/09/79 <1.70 (3) 5/10/79 . dry 5/14/79 1.75 (3)c 5/16/79 dry dry 5/17/79 dry dry 5/28/79 <1.70 (3) 6/07/79 <1.60 (3) l 7/11/79 dry 1.00 (2) <1.95 (3) 8/09/79 dry 1.00 (2) 5.00 (2) 8/24/79 dry 9/06/79 dry 1.50 (2) 1.40 (2) 10/10/79 <9.50 (1) <9.00 (1) 5.48 (2) 11/09/79 <9.50 (1) 1.30 (2) 1.10 (2) 12/06/79 1.07 (2) 1.06 (2) dry l { a) installed b) indicates <1.38 x 103 i-I c) rerun 3.25 (3). i 2-47
o HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 2.4-13 (Continued) TRITIUM LEVELS IN NEW TEST HOLES pCi/1 i Collection Date T10 Til T12 a a 4/19/79 4/20/79 a dry <1.20 (3)b . 4/23/79 2.50 (3) 4/24/79 dry 4.76 (3) 4/26/79 < 1.59 (3) ' 1.46 (4) 4/27/79 dry 4/29/79 < 1.38 (3) 4/30/79 dry < 1.48 (3) 2.21 (4) 5/01/79 < 1.48 (3) . . 5/03/79 < 1.50 (3) < 1.50 (3) 2.42 (4) 5/07/79 < 1.50 (3) < 1.50 (3) 2.26 (4) 5/10/79 < 1.60 (3) < 1.60 (3) 3.13 (4) 5/14/79 < 1.70 (3) 1.82 (3) 2.14 (4) 5/17/79 <1.60 (3) 5/21/79 <1.70 (3) 5/24/79 <1.70 (3) 5/28/79 < 1.70 (3) < 1.70 (3) 5/31/79 <1.70 (3) 6/05/79 <1.70 (3) 6/11/79 1.06 (3) 6/13/79 <1.60 (3) 6/26/79 1.59 (3) 7/11/79 6.40 (2) 9.20 (2) 1.04 (3) 8/09/79 2.90 (3) 2.60 (2) 7.80 (2) 9/05/79 1.23 (3) 2.60 (2,) 5.30 (2) 10/10/79 5.46 (2) 8.22 (2) 10/11/79 5.43 (2) 11/09/79 5.19 (2) 5.86 (2) 1.25 (3)
-12/05/79 4.53 (2) 5.47 (3) 12/06/79 4.64 (2) 12/26/79 3.65 (5) l a) installed 3
b)- indicates <1.20 x 10 2-48
a HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 2.4-13 (Continued) TRITIUM LEVELS IN NEW TEST HOLES pC1/1 Collection T16 Date T13 T14 T15 4/20/79 a 4/24/79 dry a 4/27/79 <1.53 (3)b
-4/29/79 <1.38 (3) 4/30/79 <1.48 (3)# <1.48 (3) a a 5/01/79 5/02/79 <1.33 (3) -
5/03/79 <1.33 (3) <1.62 (3)
<1.33 (3)d 2.12 (3) 5/09/79 5/10/79 <1.60 (3) <1.60 (3) <1.60 (3) <1.60 (3) 5/14/79 <1.70 (3) <1.57 (3) <1.57 (3) <1.57 (3) 5/16/79 <1.60 (3) 5/21/79 <1.70 (3) 5/24/79 <1.70 (3) 5/28/79 <1.70 (3) <1.70 (3) <1.70 (3) <1.~0 (3) 7/11/79 2.50 (2) 1.90 (2) 2.20 (2) <1.10 (2) 8/09/79 2.40 (2) 1.00 (2) 1.00 (2) <1.20 (2) 9/05/79 1.80 (2) 9/06/79 3.20 (2) 1.60 (2) <1.10 (2) 10/10/79 <9.50 (1) <8.50 (1) <9.00 (1) e 11/09/79 2.13 (2) 1.78 (2) 1.74 (2) 1.53 (2) 12/05/79 1.59 (4) 12/06/79 dry 1.24 (2) <9.00 (1) a) installed 3
b) indicates <1.59'x 10 c) split <1.48 (3) d) rerun 1.96-(3) e) lost in lab preparation l l 2-49 L
r HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 2.4-13 (Continued) TRITIUM LEVELS IN NEW TEST HOLES pCi/1 Collection T19 T20 Date T18 5/02/79 a a dry dry 5/03/79 dry a 5/04/79 dry
<1.62 (3)c 2.62 (4)b 5/07/79 2.20 (4) 5/10/79 <1.60 (3) j 5/13/79 2.27 (4) 5/14/79 3.57 (3) ,
5/16/79 6,07 (4) 1.24 (4) 2.00 (4) 5/17/79 2.23 (4) 5/21/79 7.88 (4) 1.86 (4) 5/24/79 1.91-(4) - 1.92 (4) 6.82 (4) 1.88 (4) 1.78 (4) 5/28/79 1.84 (4) 5/31/79 6.91 (4) 1.98 (4) 6.49 (4) 1.88 (4) 1.87 (4) 6/05/79 2.08 (4) 6/11/79- 7.02 (4) 2.09 (4) 6/13/79 6.55 (4) 1.72 (4) 1.85 (4) 5.71 (4) 2.04 (4). 6/26/79 2.06 ' (4)d 1.69 (4) 7/11/79 6.57 (4) 1.74 (4) 8.83 (4) 1.58 (4) 1.21 (4)
- 7/26/79 1,82 (4) 8/09/79 8.08 (4) 1.52 (4) 8.27 (4) 1.25 (4) 1.39 (4) 8/24/79 2.58 (4)
- ~
9/05/79 7.18 (4) 1.13 (4) 9/18/79 6.70 (4) 1.36 (4) 2.37 (4) 10/02/79 1.78 (4) 3.05 (4) 10/05/79 4.65 (4) 7.40 (4) 2.23 (4) 2.86 (4) 10/19/79 2.74 (4) 11/02/79 7.64 (4) 1.95 (4) , 8.36 (4) 2.03 (4) 3.06 (4) 11/16/79 2.41 (4) 11/30/79 dry -1.58~(4) 12/04/79 2.56 (5) 2.75 (4) 12/05/79 7.06'(4) 12/14/79 6.02 (4) 2.76 (5) 2.31 (4) 12/26/79 6.75 (4) 1.96 (5) 2.68.(4) a) installed 4 b) indicates 2.62 x 10 c) approximated date d) split 3.88_(4) 2-50
e l HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 2.4-14 CONDUCTIVITY AND TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTS FOR CROUND WATER SAMPLES COLLECTED FROM NEW TEST HOLES
- ON MAY 10, 1979 Well Conductivity Temperature No. . (p mhos/cm) ( F)
.T2 T3 T4 126 71.6 '
TS T6 1 T7 *
- T8 .
T10 204 79.2 Til 236 80.6 T12 99 82.4 T13 296 72.5 T14 181 71.6 T15 81 70.7 T16 92 75.2 T18 T19 + 79.7 T20 114 73.4 I I i'
- dry.
+ sample was too small' for measuring apparatus l-l l
l-2-51 e . - ,
9 HNP ANNUAL REPORT 2.4.4.2 Follow On Activities By the summer of 1979 it had baen postulated that the causes of the the leakage from the condensate trans-abnormal tritium levels were: fer pumps for the area south of CST-1, and the process water released near P178 (via a half inch nitrogen line from one of the feedwater heaters) for the area generally north of the turbine building; in addition, the break in the offgas line from the turbine building which was discovered and fixed in the spring of 1978 was thought to have possibly made a significant contribution to the tritium levels in the area north of the turbine building. The leakage from the condensate transfer pumps was the only source which had not been completely eliminated. The trends in the tritium levels added, plausibility to these postulates, but further assurances seemed to be warranted. Also at this time there were three lines from the recombiner building which were suspect as sources to the area north of the turbine building since they may carry liquids with a high tritium content. These lines were: the condensate return line from the recombiner condenser to the hotwells of the main condenser; the drainline to radwaste from the floor drain sump; and the drainline to radwaste from the equipment sump. ' Hydrostatic tests were performed on these lines by early August; the tests showed each of them to be water tight. The hypothesis that the tritium levels at N9B (as well as T3 and T8) were due to migrations from an extraneous source located near P17B could be questioned, not only on the grounds of distance, but also due to the fact that a leg of the subsurface ditch (between MH9 and MH10) was interposed between the source and the sampling location (s). If such a ditch was functioning properly in an ordinary terrain, it is unlikely that much ground water would migrate across the ditch. It then became a task to determine the operability of this leg of the subsurface drainage ditch. The suggestion also arose that it would be worthwhile to conduct a dye tracer study. In early August MH-10 was opened. There was some flow in the sub-surface ditch (a 12-inch corrogated pipe) at this point, but there A was a quantity of debris in the ditch causing a partial blockage. probe of the ditch in an easterly direction showed that it was open at least as far back as the recombiner building. The ditch jogs beneath the recombiner building; it was possible that the ditch was The top of MH-open, but the probe was unable to negotiate the turn. 9 is about 4 feet below the present-yard grade. It could not be uncovered as it seems to lie just beneath an electrical pull box. l Thus, it was not determined with certainty that the subsurface ditch between MH-9 and MH-10 was functioning properly. 2-52
r HNP ANNUAL REPORT On September 20, a dye was injected into the ground near two known sources or ex-sources of tritium - the shallowly buried nitrogen At each of these source line, and Unit 1 condensate transfer pumps.one near the bottom of the locations, two dye releaser were made: nearest test hole which taps the water table, and the The other in injec-dye a two-foot deep hole near the tritium source or ex-source. tions near the surface were made since each of the tritium sources or ex-sources was at or near the surface; the dye injections in the test holes were made since the tritium correlation is based upon samples from the test holes. Subsequent monitoring for the. dye in samples from nearby locations should aid in determining the pattern of ground water migration. Specifically the existence of ground water pathways from the P17B area to T4 and N9B, and from the Unit 1 condensate transfer pumps to the sampling locations in the vicinity of CST-1 was to be determined. A good approximation of the ground water travel times from the monitoring data was expected to be attained. Each dye dose contained 300 ml of Rhodamine WT dye mixed with about 3.9 liters of demineralized water. Dye was injected into test holes P17B and T18, and into two shallow holes; one hole, approximately at the location of the nitrogen line, was 2 feet east of the diesel generator building and 18 feet north of the south face of that building, approximately on an east-west line with P17A; the other hole was about one foot west of the center of the concrete pad supporting the condensate transfer pumps. Within a month of the dye injection, uncertain traces of dye appeared at P16 which is about 10 yards from the condensate transfer pumps; by mid December the dye's appearance was strong. By year's end, there were marginal indications of the dye's presence at T19 and T20, and also but with even less certainty at other test holes in this area. It could be ascertained by year's end that there was a strong hydraulic connection between P16 and T18 or the immediate area of the condensate transfer pumps. The dye injected at or near P17B reached N9B with rather astonishing speed. A month after its injection, the dye appeared at N9B at a ver" slight level; two weeks later the level was 10 times greater. By year's end the dye was also found at low levels at T2, T3, T6 and l T7. The dye appeared slightly at T5 af ter about 3 weeks; by early l November the concentration was at a mild level. By year's end there were only marginal indications of the dye's presence at T4 and T8. From the dye monitoring data gathered by year's end some preliminary conclusions might be drawn. There is a very easy pathway for the The dye injected at and near ground water from the P17B area to N9B. Pl7B was dispersed rather quickly in many directions by evidence of
~its mild appearances at T5 to the east and N9B to the south, and its slight appearance at T6 and T7 to the north, at T2 to the west, and T3 to the souch.
2-53 : i
o HNP ANNUAL REPORT The pathway from the P17B area to N9B is probably in the sand backfill along water pipe runs. Whether the leg of the subsurface drainage ditch between MH-9 and MH-10 is functioning or not becomes a moot point l as there is a pathway which hops the ditch. 2.4.5 CRITIQUE An explanation and prognosis of the tritium levels at each of the key locations in each of the areas where ground water is contaminated s'ith tritium are advanced in this section. As has been stated in previous sections, the tritiated ground water is grouped into two distinct areas. These areas are distinct because they are believed to be hydraulically unconnected and because the extraneous tritium source is different for each. The source for the CST-1 area is believed to bs leakage from the condensate transfer pumps. The source for the area generally north of the turbine building is believed to be the release of process water from a buried and (previously) open-ended nitrogen line near P17B. Where it seemed necessary, an attempt was made to bring these levels into perspective by showing their environmental impact and their relation to the l regulatory limits. Until December, the levels seemed to show a general though gradual decline through in the latter part of the year. This indicates a shutdown or curtailment of the extraneous tritium sources thereby allowing the tritium concentrations to diminish by dispersement and dilution afforded by precipitation, and also by radiological decay. Tritium has a 12.3 year radiological half life, so the reduction by decay was minor. There were locations where there were minor increases or essentially no change in the tritium levels. The increases might be due to the migration of ground water with a higher tritium con-centration through that location. As related in Section 2.4.3.2, about 450 gallons of water from the Unit 1 condensate transfer pumps leaked to the ground on December 3. This caused a sudden increase at several sampling locations in that area. Some of the data discussed in this section is believed to be erroneous. It is very easy to contaminate a sample and thus create the impression ! that the ground water from which the sample was taken is contaminated. If the bailer, the implement used for collecting the sample, is not properly rinsed before taking a sample, a small quantity of highly tritated water remaining from the previous collection may cause a false reading for the next sample. False data seems the only plausible explanation for some extraordinary readings. 2.4.5.1 CST-1 Area P-16 It has been hypothesized that a " pool" of tritiated water is trapped in the water table in a pocket of the acquiclude on the south side of 2-54
o HNP ANNUAL REPORT CST-1. It appears that P16 provides a tap to this " pool". The readings at P16 have shown a gradual but steady decline from August 1978 to mid December 1979. (See Table 2.4-3). This indicates that the extraneous source had been substantially curtailed. A modest increase is expected at this location due to the leak in December. Should the leakages from the condensate transfer pumps cease, the levels at this location and others sampling the " pool" are expected to diminish. It is estimated that the tritium would drop below the report level at P16 within two years. New Test Holes The new test holes (see Table 2,4-13) have helped to define the extent of the " pool" referred to above. Test hole T20, which is 1ccated about 10 yards south of P16 has maintained steady but high readings (just a little below the report level); the readings here are about a fourth of those found at P16. Test hole T18, which is located just weot. c0 the pad supporting the condensate transfer pumps and about 8 yards or so northeast of P16, has also maintained steady but higher readings; the readings here are about half as high as those found at P16. The readings at T19, which is located about 8 yards north of P16, were very similar to those found at T20. The other new test wells have generally shown low readings although high levels were found at T12 at first. This was believed to have occurred because this well was pumped dry a few times soon after its installa-tion to observe its recovery rate; in so doing water from the " pool" was apparently drawn to that location. Some of the water from the pump leak on December 3 flowed across the ground surface to the south face of the CST-1 dyke. Samples collected within the next few days at T19 and T13 showed level increases of one and two orders of magnitude, respectively. Catch Basins . Samples taken from the catch basins south of the " pool" have per-sistently shown above normal tritium levels (See Table 2.4-5). These catch basins are believed to be hydraulically connected with the pool. It was learned while installing the new test wells that ( layers of sandy soil are found several feet below yard grade. This l porous soil provides an easy pathway for horizontal movement in the ) water table. After periods of precipitation the " pool" would overflow and the surplus ground water would flow to the catch basins. A high reading has never been found in a sample taken from the outfalls of the surface drainage system. (See Table 2,4-6). l Some of the water from the December 3 pump leak flowed south as i evidenced by the sample collected that day fro A1, a 7-foot deep i test hole which is usually dry, and from catch oasin PY12. Both places had levels of about 6 x 105 pCi/1 or abtit the same as that found in samples taken from the slab and from ChT-1. A witness to 2-55
t 4 HNP ANNUAL REPORT the incident related that the leaking water flowed along and into the ground; all of the water had entered the ground before it reached the PY12 grate. This phenomenon seems to indicate that there is indeed a pathway to these catch basins through the ground. Ditch No. 2 The water from the " pool" is expected to gradually work its way to the subsurface drainage system and exit at the east outfall. The levels at Ditch No. 2 (see Table 2.4-1) have averaged only several 3 pCi/1 on hundred picoCuries per liter. The reading of 1.3 x 10 December 3 is probably false; it is unlikely that a spill of only 450 gallons at CST-1 could double or triple the level at Ditch No. 2 so quickly. In any event regard this spike is below the EPA drinking water standard by a factor of 15. N7A This test hole in the local aquifer passes through the hypothesized
" pool" of tritiated water referred to above. The tritium levels have persistently been about an order of magnitude higher than what might reasonably be expected. The levels increased substantially during the year. (See Table 2.4-2) . Some seepage to the local aquifer from the water cable is taking place. It can be expected that the levels at N7A will increase so long as the high levels in the water table are maintained. When all seepage from the water table stops, the levels at N7A can be expected to diminish at a very slow rate.
Because hydraulic movement is so sluggish in the local aquifer, radiological decay is expected to be the chief mechanism for removal. Migration in the local aquifer is toward the river at a rate of about 5.65 feet /yr. At this rate it would take a few centu ies to reach the river. By that time, the tritium would be effect,1vely non-existent. 2.4.5.2 Area North of the Turbine Building P17B The tritium levels collected here showed a dramatic increaseAfter in the fall of 1978 and the winter which followed (See Table 2.4-3). the nitrogen line which permitted a release of process water near It P17B was shut off on March 21, the level here began It istoexpected decline. that had dropped an order of magnitude by year's end. an order of magnitude drop per year will be repeated in 1980. T4 The'high tritium icvels at this test hole (see Table 2.4-13) are believed to be caused by migration from the P17B area, although the dye has not yet shewn this to be conclusive. The level seems to have reached a rather broad flat peak in June which extended to December. A slow reduction is anticipated. 2-56 .
o HNP ANNUAL REPORT N9B Like those at T4, the tritium levels at this test hole (see Tabic 2.4-3) and adjacent test holes T3 and T8 (see Table 2.4-13) are belfeved to be caused by migration from the P17B area. The dye study has amply supported this postulate. The tritiuu levels appear to have reached or neared a broad peak at all three places. Increases are more likely at T3 or T8, however. Further increases are not likely to be substantial and decreases are expected to be sluggish. Ditch No. 1 The icvels at this outfall (see Table 2.4-1) have been rather steady for about 18 months. The average level has been about 1500 pCf/1. There is little doubt that the Icvels here are primarily caused by migrations from the P17P area. The levels measured at MH-10 which is nearer to that source have been around 10,000 pCi/1.. The highest measured quarterly average concentration was 1.78 x 103 pCi/1; this is equivalent to a dose of 0.046 mrem. This dosa estimate is very conservative because it assumes that some individual were to obtain all of his drinking water directly from the outfall which is generally inaccessible. The quarterly dose limits resulting from liquid release as established by Appendix I to 10 CFR 50 is 1.5 mrem. The average annual concentration of tritium for drinking water in community water systems is required to be less than 2 x 104pC1/1 according to EPA's National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations, 40 CFR 141.16. The highest measured concentration in an individual sample was 3.12 x 103 pCi/1 on January 24, 1979, which is three orders of magnitude below the MPC for tritium in unrestricted areas as given in 10 CFR 20. 2.4.6 FINALE A complete account of the tritium problem in ground water in the plant yard has been described - its history was narrated; all data were presented; key areas were identified; explanations were offered; the actions taken were given; prognoses were provided; the icvels were shown to be well within the various regulatory limits; and the environmental impr:P. was shown to be miniscule. 2-57
o-HNP ANNUAL REPORT i 4 2.5 Miscellanea i This section contains topics or activities related to the radiological. environmental monitoring program but which do not seem appropriate to l a particular sampling medium or to a particular category of discharge. . j
- The results from relevant participation in EPA's Crosscheck Program by laboratories analyzing the radiological environmental samples are dis-JL cussed. A synopsis of an independent radiological environmental assess-l ment in' the environs of HNP by- the Environmental Protection Division (EPD) of the State of Georgia is.provided.
- 2.5.1 Crosscheck Program - Laboratories performing the analyses required by the radiological environmental monitoring program as delineated in Table 3.2-1 of the ETS participate in EPA'a Environmental Padioactivity Labora-l tory Intercomparison Studies (Crosscheck) Program conducted by
'the Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory in Las Vegas, Nevada or in an equivalent program. Only some of the sample l
l media / analyses combinations listed in the ETS are covered by the l Crosscheck Program. Reported herein are the results of relevant participation in the Crosscheck Program by these laboratories. ' -Relevant results are considered to be those analyses for sample media which are the same as those required as a part of the radi-ological environmental monitoring program. Because of the time
- lag involved in obtaining results from the EPA and the subsequent
! reporting of these results by the contract laboratories, it is not possible to obtain all results from the previous calendar year in time for submission in'the annual environmental report. The results reported.herein generally cover the period from mid-1978 through mid-1979.
I' Any resul'ts of determinations.in the Crosscheck Program which do not show " Agreement" using the NRC's " Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements" as described in Attachment 1 were investigated to deter-mine-th'e cause of the disagreement; corrective actions were taken. as - [= warranted. The results-of any such investigations and corrective actions are also reported herein. V Since all of the results reported herein are presented-in about tha-same tabular format. an explanation of the column headings is provided.
"Date" means the collection date given by the EPA. "Known" refers to l' the EPA' known value + one standard deviation (of ten. designated by o, sigma, or s). " Result" is the_ average value measured by the labora-tory + experimental s. " Resolution" is determined by dividing the l
' known value by its a fvalue. " Ratio" ' equals the " result" (value deter--
mined by the laboratory) divided by the "known". (value . determined by EPA). JAn explanation'is provided in'the text for-any comparisons not, showing " Agreement." 2-58
-- , . , , . , - . , - . --,,-,r.- , . , - - - - ,, , , . . -_ . .-,...,.,,,w..,. . ,.
o HNP ANNUAL REPORT Table 2.5-1 HNP'S RESULTS IN CROSSCHECK PROGRAM FOR GROSS BETA ANALYSIS OF AIR FILTERS pCi/ filter Date Known Result Resolution _ Ratio 12.6 1.77 3/30/79 6315 111.7 1 2.3 6.0 0.92 8/10/79 30 1 5 27.7 1 1.2 6.2 0.85 10/05/79 3115 26.3 1 0.6 4 5 2-59 m - e . . - ,
HNP ANNUAL REPORT Relevant participation by the radiochemistry laboratory at HNP is limited to the gross beta analysis of air filters. Due to a change in the Crosscheck Program, air filters which are nominally distributed quarterly were not sent out by EPA in September 1978. Also the next quarterly filter (EPA collection date was January 5,1979) was not sent to HNP due to a misunderstanding by EPA of IINP's request to par-ticipate in the Crosscheck Program. This problem has been resolved and filters are being received. The results of the gross beta analy-ses are given in Table 2.5-1. The sample collected on March 30, 1979, shows only "Possible Agreement". A T1-204 efficiency rather than a Sr-90 efficiency was being used. The EPA laboratory in Montgomery, Alabama recommended that a T1-204 efficiency should be used for air-borne dust samples in this area of the country. " Agreement" was obtained with the EPA subsequently by use of a Sr-90 efficiency. The Crosscheck Program provides for the bimonthly analysis of I-131, Cs-137 and Ba-140 in milk samples which are appropriate to require-ments of Table 3.2-1 of the ETS. Last year's environmental surveil-lance report provided Eberline's results through July 1978. EPA did not send out milk samples in September or November 1978. The next sample sent out had a collection date of January 26, 1979, by which time the milk samples in the environmental monitoring program were being analyzed by Teledyne instead of Eberline. Teledyne's Crosscheck results for milk samples during the first half of 1979 are given in Table 2.5-2. These two milk samples were not spiked with oa-140. The EPA apparently is having difficulty in meeting its bimonthly distri-bution schedule. The collection dates during 1979 were January 26, April 27, September 27, and November 2. The Crosscheck Program provides for quarterly analyses of Cs-137 in air filters. Since Teledyne does this analysis by a gamma scan, reporting of the results is appropriate. Last year's environmental surveillance report provided Teledyne's results through June 1978. The next air filter sent out by the EPA was dated January 5, IL19; this was followed by samples dated March 30, August 10, and October 5, 1979. The results for the January 5 and March 30 samples are listed in Table 2.5-2. The EPA spikes water samples with six gamma emitters (Cr-51, Co-60, Zn-65, Ru-106, Cs-134 and Cs-137) . The frequency of distribution of these samples seems to have been changed in the fall of 1978 from bimonthly to every four months. Teledyne's results are listed in Tabic 2.5-3; all results of this type rendered since the present ETS became effective are listed in this table. The sample col-lected on June 8,1979 was spiked only for Co-60 and Cs-134. It might be noted that when the EPA known value is zero or the labora-tory determined result is a less than value, a comparison by the NRC criteria cannot be made since the ratio cannot be determined. 2-60 O
Table 2.5-2 TELEDYNE'S RELEVANT.CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS FOR MILK SAMPLES AND FOR AIR FILTERS Radionuclide Date Known Result Resolution Ratio Milk (pCi/1) I-131 1/26/79 105 1 5 117 1 6 21.0 1.11 I-131 4/27/79 96 1 5 115 1 16 19.2 1.20 P Cs-137 1/26/79 49 i 5 51 1 9 9.8 1.04 h O' .Cs-137 4/27/79 .154 i 8 182 1 21 19.3 1.18 h O N Air Filters (pCi/ filter) , Cs-137 1/05/79 .615 710 1.2 1.12 Cs-137 3/30/79 2115 1913 4.2 0.90 O t B _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _
)
Table 2.5-3
. TELEDYNE'S CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS FOR GAMMA ANALYSES IN WATER pCi/1 Radionuclide Date Known Result Resolution Ratio Cr-51 8/04/78 105 + 5 ' < 100 21.0 Cr-51 10/20/78. 117 i 6 121 + 19 19.5 1.03 Cr-51 2/02/79 0~ < 70-
'Co-60 8/04/78 27 + 5 28 + 3 5.4 1.04 Co-60 10/20/78 23 1: 5 26 i 2 4.6 1.33 Co-60 2/02/79 9i5 13 12 2 1.8 1.44 P-Co-60 6/08/79 47 ][ 5 49}[7 9.4 1.04 k
y 2n-65 8/04/78 62 + 5 63 1 13 12.4 1.02 h
$ Zn-65 10/20/78 82 1 5 82 1 2 16.5 1.00 h 4.2 0.90 o Zn-65 2/02/79 2115 19 i 6- @
Ru-106 8/04/78 4115 < 60 8.2 , Ru-106 10/20/78 46 + 5 < 60 9.2 Ru-106 2/02/79 0- < 50 CL-134 8/04/78 9+5 11 + 1 1.8 1.22 Cs-134 10/20/78 25 i: 5 27 i 2 5.0 1.08 Cs-134 2/02/79 6 II 5 7i2 1.2 1.17 Cs-134 6/08/79 71}{.5 71][8 14.2 1.00 Cs-137 8/04/78 15 + 5 19 + 2 3.0 1.27 Cs-137- 10/20/78 125.l:6 132 1 8 20.8 1.06 Cs-137 2/02/79 12 ][ 5 15][3 2.4 1.25 9
o I I HNP ANNUAL REPORT ATTACHMENT 1 Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements This. attachment provides criteria for comparing results of capability tests and verification measurements. The criteria are based on an empirical relationship which combines prior experience and the accu-racy needs of this program. In these criteria, the judgment limits are variable in relation to the 2- comparison of the NRC Reference Laboratory's value to its associated one nigma uncertainty. As the ratio, referred to in this program as
" Resolution," increases, the acceptability of a licensce's measurement should be more selective. Conversely, poorer agreement should be con-sidered acceptable as the resolution decreases. The values in the ratio criteria may be rounded to fewer significant figures.to maintain statistical consistency with the number of significant figures reported by the NRC Reference Laboratory, unless such rounding will result in a narrowed category of acceptance. The acceptance category reported will be the narrowest into which the ratio fits for the resolution being used.
t
-RESOLUTION RATIO = LICENSEE VALUE/NRC REFERENCE VALUE Possible Possible Agreement Agreement "A" Agreement "B"
<3 .
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
>3 and <4 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 No Comparison 74- and <8 0.5 - 2.0 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 78 and <16 0.6 - 1.67 0.5 - 2.0 0.4 - 2.5 Il6 and <51 0.75 - 1.33 0.6 - 1.67 0.5 - 2.0 751 and <200 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33 0.6 - 1.67 I_200 0.85 - 1.18 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33 i
"A" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
Gamma spectrometry, where principal gamma energy used for identification is greater than 250 kev. Tritium analyses of liquid samples.
"B" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
Gamma spectrometry, where principal gamma energy used for identification is less than 250 kev. Sr-89 and'Sr-90 determinations. Cross beta, where samples are counted on the same date using-the same' reference nuclide. lY 2-63 iU .
o
)
l HNP ANNUAL REPORT 2.5.2 Independent Assessment A limited radiological environmental monitoring program was recently initiated in the vicinity of HNP by EPD. This program was proposed by the NRC as a means of obtaining an independent radiological environmental assessment around this NRC licensed facility. The essence of the EPD program involves sample splitting with HNP and the use of several of HNP's sampling locations. Sample media collected by EPD include airborne particulates and radioiodine, TLDs, river water, fish, milk and vegetation. The first report on the results of this program was issued on August 16, 1979 as a part of EPD's Environmental Radiation Surveillance - Report for the period from the Fall of 1977 to the spring of 1979. An examination of the results shows the data presented to be generally comparable with that provided by the KNP radiological environmental
~
monitoring program during this period. None of the data indicates a harmful impact upon the environment due to plant operations. 2.6 Conclusions This chapter has shown the licensee's conformance with the radiological portions of the ETS. It has shown that all data wera carefully exanined. A summary, an interpretation and an evaluation (where warranted) of the results of the laboratory analyses for each type sample collected have been presented. A measurable radiological impact upon- the environment as a consequence of discharges to the atmosphere and to the river was not established. A general decline was noted in the radiological level for most of the environmental samples during 1979. This is attributed to the absence of nuclear weapons tests which are accompanied with significant releases of radioactive material to the atmosphere. The* year 1979 was the first calendar year since 1975 without such a test. The environmental impact of the high tritium levels found in ground water samples during 1979 was miniscule. Resolution of the ground water problem is progressing satisfactorily. r. 2-64
\
)
( )
/
/.. - O j i ISCHARGE STRUCTURE INTAKE STRUCTURE l
l
. Y , c-
~ _
CONTROL WELL l ALTAMAHA (DEEtt'S LANDING) OUTFALL , k//I , OUTFALL>
~
SUBSURFACE DIRECTION OF RIVER FLOW + - SUBSURFACE DITCH NO. 1 STACK. DITCH NO. 2 L-. DEEP WELL---*e i NO. 2 SCALE IN FEET MAIN PLANT BUILDINGS DEEP WELL NO. 1, I
-- " G.P.C. PROPERTY LINE g
x l
? GEORGIA POWER COMPANY l EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT l ANNUAL REPORT 1978.
! L') CATION OF THE ORDINARY GROUND WATER SAMPLING STATIONS. l FIGURE 2.4-1 l__________-.
e
. \
SUBSUR #1 J
/
O /
.DEMIN f O i MHC4 /
j
**;.____.____%2MHpy33 sus '""."qM. .
e' DIESEL cans 7 d csassi Bas 41 l
/ rs ry , g j
/
BLDG ( 0 0 PY .g
~
.'0FF EAS
' F{RE CL, j
ors
,,/ R.ECOMB g pirA stoa. , .cen.3 ,
Sf -- - - - - - Yao- g % Ms , . c ,,,A py,3li
. vg e
- -O 8 $ NSA l "I* TS 0 @ PYl8 3, ggg4 g PYis ilPYis ,4, l, TURBINE i i nc) y BLDG.
- Page . RAD ria kCBRSS ,
l PY13 y p@, WASTE ril . est i
- j 7,3 0 ' I ,, ,,7 " "' "i MH8 REACTOR NTA b!
g BLDG. p1 ,,, ( - N2AO l UNIT 1 Sn e; \ ' N20 Q g NI2 8^-*O JC sCOR57 i I
~ SERVICE CONTROL BLDG.
/
PY24 (72[ P.Y27 i I WASTE BLDG. A2 GAS l REACTOR PYl2 I I BLDG.
- I us. .
#l 3__FMU_g. ,
MH7 --_-____o UNIT 2 , ,,g . _ 3 TURBINE RAD o l BLDG'. WASTE o g
)
l NIS N3A *- O MHl7 l l l eo ' I i l p MH l I e I I MH4 Mo36_ _ _ _ _ _ ____'.o__ _ _ _ _ _ __._MH3
. c______.____
Pl380O P134 W2
--- SUBSURFACE DRAIN SYSTEM GEORGIA POWER COMPANY O -P!EZ0 METERS EDWIN ! . HATCH. NUCLEAR PLANT a -CATCH 8ASIN 10 0' TEST HOLES AND THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM. i Scale FIGURE 2.4-2
e F . g 'i. ., t z s w u) <, o
- 2
., ?4,1 .= .
- I < J e i
la-c'. o
- 5. 6 t li r bs es r l
. I N
$~459..IEI.?.U, -
$ I-- W
>. o
' ; s ,m c w e ny ry . wesag.,- tz. 3, y=. >
cw 7; s w o i a ( g o s i 5 E! N !E s l g gI
. i ,
I -
-1 t !;a - .s.i1s oI >-
J o
= u.-
N., N l
'l - g
<c g
o
\ o
] f '- I
, ~$ -s ( : L, a / 1.
- we m., t ,/ li =.
) .
/ / ,s 1, \
./ ; rs\, t\_n -
(/
,/
/
3
' gd(xsw-
. a: J N') !- .:::&
f~
/[ t /Yi \
(
- / -
? ,.fn ,-
\lJ o,c l
\_v }/
- l / s t
~~7 I
,j, /
\
t
-=-
, l / P i
\ ( , ,
- .:r'r
.' ' (' \ k- \ /__ 8
/ ,
L4 ;._h_ . i. .m.Asamilao A- [ [ o/ _t
-c=rs-
.p. 7 .s .s k ', r.;f '.,-sT~""[g.
- i
~
// l\
--. , .,w:.r o .>
5 g c
\y, f .
l to9/ j - @c ,i kn.y j i g :- t g ~ . ,. .. e.- .
..jf ,! }
, e.
. l( I- . ,I f
! i,j!.-5 % i -- 3 !
- - e%, c o/
6 y gi d
, !j li (' \- +
c- % f
.;'s. s.
s s. l' [ -
/. [] [ s {'\ ,
,k( ~- '
h.i ^h . \' ~ y' N r), l] l .wr p ...l r ------ : - v -
. /: ,
.=
..~..
a - k t' ~ ... _ .
,4 .
x .p,
. s.1. ,,
tj . n i . I Is e
,c. -- rI 7.. ts /y... ( _.. ..'y,,i
.- - - - - - . . a.: .
. ?J 1, - ----. --
-,m- . ( 7 .. ~ - ..
N,
,,f oh
~-})
-/ . c ..
- ' ,bo <, /
() s
.......m.~, / i %, h /
~~ ~
. [ '_ w
~
* 'vm]/ (ij l
(.
. . . . . . i .
./ , - , ... -
i.. .!y ,i i ', a i 5 /1== t .. . 5 - ;lv ! e4 ?! ll. . . ..L_I i i 1
-. m e.e.-,. . *i li 't! li l/ i li E I! l J dl o ._
HNP ANNUAL REPORT CHAPTER 3 METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Pm 3.1- REQUIREMENTS 3-1 3.2 ON-SITE METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING 3-1 3.3 DATA SUMMARIES - 1979 3-1 3.4 COMPARISON OF 1979 DATA 3-1 1 f i 3-1 I
~ e-- ---- -----------
t HNP ANNUAL REPORT CHAPTER 3 MEIEOROLOGICAL MONITORING LIST OF TABLES Table Title g 3.2-1 JOIlff FREQUENCY TABLES OF WIND SPEED 3-2 AND DIRECTION 150 Fr. LEVEL ' 3.2-2 JOINT FREQUENCY TABLES OF WIND SPEED 3-6 AND DIRECTION 75 Fr. LEVEL 3.2-3 HATCH 1979 MONTHLY AND YEARLY PRECIPITATION 3-10 3.2-4 HATCH DATA RECOVERY 1/1/79-12/31/79 3-11 i 9 3-11
~ HNP ANNUAL REPORT CHAPIER 3 METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING -
f-LIST OF FIGURES
, F_igure i Title 3.2-1 150-F00r ANNUAL WIND ROSE 3.2-2 150-F00r SEASONAL WIND ROSES 3.2-3 75-F00I ANNUAL WIND ROSE 3.2-4 75-F00r SEASONAL WIND ROSES 3.2-5 1979 AMBIENT TEMPERATURE 3.2-6 1979 DEW POINT TEMPERATURE i'
l l 3-111
1 l HNP ANNUAL REPORT
- 3. METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING 3.1 Requirement The on-site meteorological monitoring program is carried out as recom-mended by the USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.23.
3.2 On-site Meteorological Monitoring Program The on-site meteorological monitoring instrumentation, data acquisition, and maintenance and calibration programs are as described in Section 3 of the HNP-1 Semi-annual Report for September - December 1974 and Section 2.3 of the HNP-1 Final Safety Analysis Report. 3.3 Data Summaries - 1979 Joint frequency tables of wind speed and direction by stability category for the 150-foot and the 75-foot level are presented in Tables 3.2-1 and 3,2-2. Wind roses for ISO-foot and 75-foot levels are shown in Figures 3.2-1 through 3.2-4. These are shown as annual and seasonal wird roses. Ambient temperature and dew point temperature are shown in Figures 3.2-5 and 3.2-6. These are presented as the average maximum, the average, and the average minimum for each month. Monthly and annual precipitation totals are shown in Table 3.2-3. The percent data recovery for the parameters is shown in Table 3.2-4. 3.4 Comparison of 1979 Data The meteorological data for 1979 from the Hatch Plant meteorological tower were quite good. The only problems of any duration were with the delta temperature in June and the wind speed at 150-feet during April. The overall data recovery for the pertinent parameters of wind speed and direction 75-feet and delta temperature 150-33-feet was about 91%. The ambient and dew point temperatures compare very well with the last few years. Overall, the temperatures in 1979 were slightly lower than in previous years. The wind roses for both 75-feet and 150-feet show excellent agreement between levels and with recent years. During the course of the year, there were somewhat less northeast winds and more west winds than in previous years. This difference was more pronounced in the fall than in any other season. The minor differences in data from year-to-year can be attributed to normal climatic variations. The rainfall data for 1979 agreed much better with nearby National Weather Service stations, for the time periods available, than in any previous year. Therefore, the 1979 rainfall data are believed to be the most accurate in comparison with other years of Hatch rainfall data. 3-1 9
HNP ANNUAL REPORT J l 3 l w.s .......a .
... .s.
.,.,...a,.....
... .... ....... .. ~.a.....
-~,.< .
...... e i og -~~ oo -~~
.. j i ; - 5, . e O. :'.:l * .* *. " :i.i. t.' *.. 1. " T* ':" t.i. .
- l
- I
_ T. . . . . ~; .I. , 2
., .I.****- m ...i..... 4; 2 ~;l;;* 1* l 2
- i. ...........
. .........._i -
i ~ 4 -2. . i 6 ':' a .........an.
~.a ; a -- . a l l~ ~ 2 l l ~;l; ~
= . ..-...-.. ... ., . ........ .
=
a
..a l :
.a. -
l l o l
..I....~.a..
g g
...~~~... ,
Ai I 52 l
;* 3 ",. .-
- A 2 * * . - ':
;- , , . A
****-*****.7:
- 3" % % *: ""
.w 2- % a
.. a n
~* 2s .
* '. *** ..-....' 4.;.
; "" 2a . ..........
! :;9 e3. :;u.9 S1 . m e
9- Is, -
- o. ..o.-....
.......s...
-~ -
.t. *
=,. ... --.....
m. n
- a. d :*-,
a, :a- *
-1, ra a
9.:. ... 25: . **:* "** -*. . . - . 91- .at. . &. * ' * * * * * *.: .5>."
.m c
s-
"15:'O 32:. , . !. ."
w . .....,...
- l. . .
I
" . 50' 3: !* .
- . . ,~
l
.i ,s -u r. a e .. s U < .
e., w t.# O W 2 JC-EMM Q, weWDUE JC-.WW o* 5 ,;'ec51 l-, Ow w , . .,.. . . . . '.. -
- . . 2
-- ::' E'.
. 9w, . a~...'.....
. .c a.
. . .. - in i . . .
.. j > ===
U .2.I U2o 00- U Uto I iS W*w Iw
; . .. - .,~ ........ ...
*3g 0 ;*a. , l
...- ...~. - .
=. o =
- i
~ **
S - 1, :* g
*g*j i**.* , b m.
- 'E .
.o .. ' j .g l
., i
'. S* *
**~
. a '- 's 2*: * '
..a-,-....a 7.1 . .t ' ,. *44. l 7"-Y , i.t.
. " J J D,l 1
g: ** ... -,i.. .. .i . g r., y. - ~ . . . .... o! t. w
**~
t
- . .s t
1 i
"as*.
- .J
= -
l 8:
. . . . . . . l. . 3 5
,- l g w .ia*a . . , .-a.......aw-
" - ~4;ws 5
~ J- J 5.
l i". l l i* 7
. ~. -.~... ..:s : . .... ....-a:3 i -. *44.-
- 5 JJ,.
l l l Tw % 'l d
...a....a.. : .r .-~.~.... ~ :
* - -
- iS: 2 14 5 l l *c .,;, N.I.
ei
*
- t ":":": :::I.
..t ~. t
- i.t
--~a
.t.o .
. - ~ . . ~ ,
--~a m
.....t -Ifw 1 . . . . . . . i. .; fa y,.*
...i
,e9
-CU- e *. i-
, Gs
-C.. 3, .e ,. , , e. . .e C. v. q.
. . . .a.' S3 *. ***4.*8 DGS ess , a >e .~.41.. fle t,& .> .e.,
- h*
- b8 3
.e
- e. ee ,
- 2. Q', 3
.d edMMA.*~N
& .= 0
, y1 g q w. . ! 3-2 J'J o . L t
704_.. ft**tpafunt J0l=1 p as.QuthCv tantt s or u t ho **t10 ago 0 34s C T Iow ,__ .. ._, . _ Oltreets*Cetner. ringerti rm attu inag _ . . . .
.e mest LE%s ina's 04 toual to a.a Slft MaTCM
__,,,,,,,,,_,.,__ ,,Piet04 or atC06n re0* 79010108 In , 79323126 EPet0 a=0 nistCff0w reon 15877 Level TrmateaTURE 03rrEnthCE.ptlWttN 5%8Ff A%0 33rf _w t hq.Gl*f C T. low 18troluoma N esNE ht Eht r ESE . %E %%t S 55v Sw w$w w kNw seu anew 10f'aL PtoCENT 610 4ra4 _.lg, aw. - 3., i . . 4
,, ,_ ,,, 5r03. 8 7 2 i i , , 2 i 2 , . . : i, n., ,.
_ 3.4,=_12.1 7.6 = 5 1 1 2_. t 1 5 4_,4 6 5 4 2 1 0 2 0 2 5 3 I _,,,,,,,3 9 . 21 9 4.%I 3 T 2 2 32.6
- 14.5 0 0 4 0 2 2 e e l
3 2 0 2 a a 5 0 ba 31.6 g.46 18.6 -26.5 _ 0__,5_,,_0 _ 0_,,.2,,__l e _,,,_ l 8__ .I 0,,,,,,,, 0 1 0 2 2 6 5 7 8 49 Ster .19.46 76.6 - 32.5 e o 0 0 e e e a e e e 3 _ 8_ 85__,e.2 _ 2013 37.** O O O 4 0 0 e e e e 1 I I 3 18 26.72 0 0 0 0 total _ 2 g_ e _ 6._, _g a _ l e _ _ _6 g to e 4 0 0 0 04 8.40 _Pt*Et47 1.2 15 6.9 3.7 88.0 11 0 2.*5 3.5 13.0 37 6 33 5._____5 _ 14__,_,25 J 9 3_ let a.0 a.st . av 184 75 14.2 18.6 4.A 9.9 e.3 7.7 a.3 9.6 4.9 3.1 9.8 15.3 11 7 8.8 180.0 a vreact.setto rom fuls vaatt EcuaLS . 3 0.s _ 7.9 Set 10 5 13.4 Stel 13.8 > pove5 In aeovt vante vien vastaatt DIntCylow . e t-* lI: Z w g
-- --- N w '8 JOINT retouCNCY TaRLF4 0F w!NO 58tto aNO OIRFCilDN O roa,,,,Itupta31ualplyggetNCa tets r/B00rtl spratta Imaw,_ ..n ,not,Le g5.lba.11.98J0 Mat 70
$1TC $4aTCH
.3 g PEWl00 m/ atC0an ra0w 79010103 10 79123824 e ,, sort.) au0 nietcriow room 15 ort.ttvt u ,
tracteatuRE Oltreat=Ct etTWrtN 85cri a40 33rf C .. _ . vfwo clotCt10m 6CN ~ set*Alieff si ==t ht tut r-Est sst 5 ssis7e wsw CJ %E w www av
~
anw7 07aL' PfeCt=7'st0 = taw I 0 SP0t**M8 g5C ]3 _Calu cal 4. ,,- _ 3.5 0 O 9 8.,,,,,,,,0 0 ,,,,,__ e 1_ . 6 9_.0 8 t _, O _ 0 rZ- 3.4 = 1.5 2 6 1 5 2 _ *32_.16 34 le 5 8 5 4 3 3 6 9_I_.8_,,,,,,,,, .58 3 e6 S.7 M 7. 4 ,=,,12. 5_,I l N P.6 - 19.5 2 16 s_4 6,_70 4 16 36 79 13 ___,4 7_ 2 9_11_,_,,,7 2_3 5_,,,,,,,3 6_29_2 4 22 22 16 29 28 17 IS 3 382 28 6 ____5 3__,,, 6 2_4 8 ,_,_2 0_6 3 7_,,6 8. e 2.26
%.50 0.76 el 18 77 20 73 Pt il 20 17 14.4 - 26.5 0 0 0 4 6 82 38 65 64 17 6et 24.5 16.a6 1 6 l 2 F=d 26.4 O 2.) e e _ 0_ _ e _.__, 0 _ 0 e e e 3
e 3 e 6 18 26 0__ . I __,
& I 69 6.6 2a.62
~32 6. e o e e e o e e e e e 2m . I _ __I o ___ . 7 26 67 70 fat o e o e e.e C.7_ -- , 78 20 123 12e - 136 96 e o e.es gQ p
_ fortgf 1.6 8.5 e.6 9.0 et 62 49 85 70 78 157 172 ITS 49 Isl6 g.e 7.aq av s*4 4.5 7.1s.33_18.9 9.6 _ 4.3__,,6.59.97e.J_S.9 6 s.6 a 6_,,,,$.8 L 7,7 9.6 _ le.8- Tr .3 t_ 9.6 4.9 3
,,ll.3_ II.5 3.0 100.0 avreact speto 70s t=ls tantt touats la.6 no.1 18.5 13 1 18.5 7 1.4 >
(t3'a _ =0u.s i= a vv1_Igett_xite_vanI m c_01a.g tan * . a , I m
. 'O
- =a b
6=== TABLE 3.2-1 (Continuedj
HNP ANNUAL REPORT
-._-.-~.. l.. - .-_I~-..-I Y iiT*itt 700 55;;;;
.; -e gg-. %g ~e g...t d
=a -
l si E
=.,,. ~ ~~t.-.s : - -
.-- e n . et:--:-
I~ ----- 8 -
< l,,:::e ~l i A* :t r, i
~
l l g
-e-a eg ;
.. :::::~ n
.g n
--...---].g l l
~..
r; I.a~.~~-..g'y l
- j .
e j
, -.-.2 --.., 1--.._---:q, 1I I i 2
l I-- ~r-l,
,1 - ::- ,-- ,
_ _t~-
. .- ::-i ::.
I:. . -~:::~ -s- l I
. - :::---:,l I I I s:
- .~
II I s.,.
- ::I:~--:s... r-5: =*
25 : a
- .- :l:-
l
---se ~
i 2:
=5 : "
~
x
=
l l l *.: l e I $
- e. .
_ -: :---- ::- : - - ~ ~ : -- .-- : 1l- = s- ::i i-s a. -e-a
-3 4_ . .I2 --:::-- I r :
er := I r . :., I::--14 ---
- : 2: -
- se a m
i:-i::i r :: - i i .-. I _I_ n s= g .. :::: - : i n -a . _ i E=-::--l--As; !, s:ii~e i -:::-- n-
. :: i:; ; :::--- ;7 ~
d
*i!a~d c:::=
cy -- 3 i
! l -l~ . i c:: i
- .::r a i- l l l 5
=
o
- a: -
-m z: ;5
- z. ; I ::j:: . i :=: :.=r - - - -
v: e:-:: elv-l-:::---:n _s 8 5 . - - . - v: e. ,.- [=. I t l v: . - ==~---:t l I 3:
- e. ad.~ ::::,--:en: --
- e. sr.a
-l
- r .::
_ ;- a I
-: 2:---~. : .
- I es :x .3:
- jr l~I l l l a.=i zy : :. .- e ' egr r:
,a
= ~ :a*I.
l g:
.- l l i r = -
- l. t 1,.a:
- . :::-- :-,.. - e.:
- s .x.,l.- l i --.. se lr -l ::1:- .-:s..
'g
.r-at::---33i l
3 3-s 2-i. '
,(' ! I i-c lr --:::-~::.'
l l i- is y :-- i: ---i3 .:' i y ---:i- .-::.; j
.. i . -.
l
, - ~ .I. ., - - - .l . - .5..3 - .g.-
.E a
-- I -
l l 29
-g
,,,..." SI # ceae Se
- ;;;;;; :: - A *;; .*; r3 is . e,
- i is.e*.
!! I l
i 3 ...--~a
;3gy g . ;3 g-s it..; f n!**'M';Ei>::
. . ,.Y.,.;,
l
. san-~.. . ---,
g ,. v .-~ g
-.~~ . ..
gn . . ga . g..w.g v (- - ~p~ =[ .>. =l
~
l
HNP ANNUAI. REPORT
. l~
l l I
' y!:::f t::::
. :;;;i , :;
3 e . l, 7I
= -,,~.----
*I *R:" I l**h s
t '*:"--::~- :I* t
".....l...*l...l:-
1 *'44 l l 1 ** ****.*". I i I ! . i. g . . g . . . . . ;I gg
- ~
t
~
4 * '...l...l..-l= 8: 1 I iI 24.a .
' i. -5 .. : -*:s.:_- :*i Yi : xi " **
f I l ' 3 "l l l 1
= = . . d. ? i
-::::-- ;;t. Q
=
g .
. -3
. %.*. I a SE 2! *
- 1-**1"- '
r I l l 6" s- s= , - :::-- :l - -* ow=
- " a h. l l
I I l B E ; '!
- Mw l
.....-a=
t
*s:" -
N A t*%2"$ t l l - lAs !!.:;.5; "i Q g l. . .I. . .I. . ;l- . v: ::a - e 3 .,w
- { B:! . "l l l j**.* *
.,-*:: ---un
- ! 8.* j .
z; S-
- . I l j*- :.
y ::'a-- gqi..a g .. . s.
- c l i l jf .
. i y -*:4*-- ;-i== .
,........h..t*
l'
,,....-...gg #
l -- 8. l ! . l ." .eee.ee SE
-l444's; j ee.... ~~**
J e ". . t
, ggg-t ,. I *.*. *.*.*.
- E Y . : *I
. uu
##"* *14.t*T n t i
) a D
nur ANNUAL REPORT l l l l l 6 l l
. ll -..: .
,;.it?H.i.i.i* , .I!?
.;. ,. *12?i.h..i
';i j I- c,-
I
- e. i. . a -- i t t i. t. i. . i. .* i t -. t t i. ti.
i i <e-i i
,:_.:-::- .: .- ~
CiiI :::: 2 i - :- i ,.n
'. l. ;l. u .l . . gl . ), ( .l. . .l. - .1. . .3i.
Il i ~~ a s.
. l -
1 - : --- :-- : I.. .
- --::: - i.s I i r*
.?.
1--:--l-v! l 7
- I-i 1 l l
.--i l "l
- 1. .
- - 3a s e "j *
- g* *: .* . ,
i- * * * " * - - * : t..*. 54 l 5I
- s uw 3g
.l
- :::---:I-1~
i j v =. _ a --j :..- - ~l l --- g
". 8 : 1 25 :: I l l*
o, gg, . I. . .I. . .I. .**.l.: . o ,- g3 .. .-...-.. .. 1; *:5 i td i t 7i.; *:! s, l I I I v l S* 20: r: -.:, i i= - S; 20: r e. _.: 3 a
**:2---
I l 1 m
. , . I I I * ' 2 *i r I I I l A.
s: ::: .. -- m -- =- 2 ::: , . --~ -- -~"*i m 7 7*" l 1* * ~~ r 723 - I w
. ~ " '. a t i I : I I 4 -t2.
- .an l
-- :~-- :-~' .5"'8.#
- ,r: --- ----:v: a 6' l n atr '
c=::: >
- .*cEr
" 7
- l0",0i * *i l l
** "* I". .* i; c= :: i .3 I l I i "i
- ' ,- E r ' i * --***-*. *.-
,1 Eo h I -f* : .1 aoh
- l E ~l "l*: "
Y! 03" i i I l i Y: "i" l re og * =
-~::<-- ::t ** * , n or :
S t. t* c.*,2tr. l l .g . ! 45 i '*. eE gt: 32 *
- :7 !- j- . :*I**J. E' 8
. I 3
,, i
- a i t : * *l*.e i
.r lI-:::" * * * * :: :-
41' e :r ~ * * *: '. zy : :: - i i e s: $~ l I i 1. : 8; * - I i ! l :: r y **:7**** ':".* . t. Y **". ****:':1.*' y"l..ag; .l..;Ig#0
. a t j i a 2'#5 i~ l ; 9 i l
....--...gga :
at g . y
. 5.g.;w. i <
, ..w.
l
. l l l ** O l l
' l l /01 *.
l
. ...........I S' w ..........
' ; 5 I ~;J.7 Y 5 ' l l
, l l l -Tw l l ;lJ7=' 7 3 ..--....... :
l*
".:Ja:
N, e, '*
- J1;'
l l -
...... :: ......- =
i'"'$$$$ ...... __,5f j l;$ . .55$ , g5fl
....i.:
3 3;g- _ ,g
? .;'.... *'"' 'S n'i ". ". *. '. '. ; E Y . .. g Er :*
r : "* 4 tat 2 i.* "l 1141-1r*ig y , r T F'*'r I "t l
-6 INhhh, k
HNP ANNUAL REPORT 4 7...~. ... t , : ...~.....
; ; * * * * * '; i .t .t l 7 -.~
; '. * *.". i. ' i. . .t .*
..-.~ .... .
oo
~~
31 -
,.l..... ...
?a
... ~ -...
. . ~..
.l nln .~. -l l
.:.. .l......l'..
l .,
. .~.
...n ........ a. . . . . ..
!. ; : ,; --*~~-
I- 3: i
..l to j.
.....-.i.~.- -~
i 24 . i * "J a q
, .e-.--..-
e-~
-~.
e.
- o. g -
la .
........a~.~.
, .- ~ .s ,. . ... ...
..~ ...
. . a- 2 . -
8 ,
-- o-t g"4
. , ":: * * -" ,':': 3 , *
- 2 3 ;;a " * .:
!. , I l 52 O. & 'T
*J-
- 5. .:
0.t a T
.I...I.~
..l.
4 l. Es ts a a JJ g , :" s; 9 "a m o e,& t *;9 . e, 5c t-
*;J G
- a. i'.
e , . ............
*I .
o '. . .. .,.... ... c s
.e . .
; ;; ; .; .. ~;; 3e
. l ~.;
g,
.- . . .i a
'd ;g r
- =5 3* --........=.~:
4
! :="
!! ;;r 5*I
. ........~.
J v 6
- r. - i a r.-- l
.. .r..==
..s .
ia o t.r
. . . .I. . . . . ~ . . ;,
...= ".~,3 .
s , -o
. I.
.,..I.....
e4 e4
-3 oum =* ...on .- .
M
.F . . *,,1. ;. ? . ........... t. . . * . T
-- ce.
. ... -- ee 9............
-. .. sa
; ;om; =, * * * * ,, t' g en = t- -**
- a
- y. uno gr.!
og
..~~......l..,l u.
g" , o .. una
. ~
l l m s
..>=i ., tre
- s s*! i ..-..~.;. l**.-
l
. 4! *s g*! l .i. .... ..l. . .!. . . . . .*.!. 4 !; '
;- r; t - -
se :: : ; - - * -
;e .=
-Y. I 1 . -, . . 1 W*
i gr * -
. Y . ~ e s I. .- e.I .. .a - ., ,
I . . .. .. ..i.o1 .
= ,= ? t.
~ --*g=
l'* ~ g w
=
.-.'......a:
c
. - J' l.' . . ~ .l. . .l. 3.. .
3 . Il.. 44.3 5- .:JJ.:
* *l I t*
~---..... **
s
'.;l l l i.,
l
. .'... . .....--. . .. ~~
1 i t t JJ.- is. ,
**J,-
- 7. *
- i 7..
l 's 1' l l - I,5..--.-.'...s
.. - .. e -,
b .
. .. . .e . ...... .eo,
-l A;4 * ~4 f: - 'A;;; *4 , t i.
* ,-~~
- i -
- I 1.i . . . . . . " ... e. . , :i,
. l....-~a ... . .,e...,.
; a . , .......
. . . 2 0. *. 2. .. :E.. ,8,. .. .. ... .. .. ;. t. *. T. .. .'
i
!, .W i "I Y
" 4 4 lta
- T.48 a
I. ft""t*44 t*t.al I i i* 2Ia .i. l i I l l J-IlAIM MMOML 37 i i l
HNP ANNUAL REPORT i i i
- st:::::::::
g:.::55::: l .y.:::ig::; I
;I i !: i
- T I f',e r*~i i
- < -::::I--::
~~- ;;- :: .
i
- !. :l. - .I. . :l: y .l~ ... - ~l. . .i. . ,l.
l
;l- :::-- ;l, -l cs.:
i _. l l
- l l l.. -
4 1 l l l a - I 1.l .-l ::~l- c. :e -- l l -l-si ls
- ._~.
.---:--l:.:~l a
. - ::l l .l.
. --- s e.n.
a.l-:l---::.. _ :s
- ::n-a- :--
l :: : : sg.e se, l:. --:-l- :n-- .-::.lq l .
=
g 53 :1 .i i e l Ua a
- ::=
i e ' se:
*b .
- - ::--- ::l:
l a r 9; 21:: i l I ~l l 'l--
- J _: %':
9; ta: l I l- - g . : ****** -
- :-t*I *l- - M
--- - ,::: m.
5::.e gs.l 3: I . l i :.e ,a lgs l
. l l. l' ~
1 _. : :::----:. :r z. : -:: ----: :- ,.;
- a:v i tr_z:r c=::: i i l l I.- c ::: aI
. I l l l s-
- , : . _ -:::~-- : - :- ,z: : : -: ---- :-~.
--- - -- - ;s v.:: :,. za i -
; : .: =
v: e,.- l i p
.. s:-
.; l:.
.i i --
i - p
. s:1
.- x -:::----:
r- ; Er gt: l . I E i :P_g: t 1 I *
' :E
.y t
.- >I p - i :t-- ;... e: er w :. -
l 1 ui e i r -::: ---:n- .-. :: ,
; ; ' -: t; l1 l I - a.
- I. .:2: s lr . .
s i
.r.
- i.-- _.-..
s
. i.
- i i<..
,; y1- :=---- :.:=.
y ~ - ---::- -- l i l l l l, ,- y,.I.. I...i i.:n:.
.r , ,
._...:,,2,
.- e . . .
l l w l .J eeeeee C: ****** ::
- #*'$$5,$ ,,kf } ,"*$$$$ 5ft 1
I* *e,' : {:g-
- : ' ' ' ' '
- 2 2, . .
n C **. ". :.: * *. *.*: :I .d t: e##"*2*:4 l *. ". ". *.I *. : :: d. T**l _1 . l:ir g"l :I n
, wo -
i 1 I< w iw l i rujdtr ditl A o
ANNUAL REPORT I l II
. 5
='
g
.E a&
.e...... *
- , en . M. =. ~. .. . e.
. . m.e l
. .3 ***"r***
3 *. . I....
- e. a d. .
gg
.. N. . e. e.
g* l l
. a o.a. s..~.
, *. l * *l7 i
i ~*-
, m -
n;; l a
;; ...g ... gag
,e - .
5, U! '; -"
*JJ -
, 3" ~ n n l a .s -s =
..--....a..
m s
-; :;9 u .
Olf- a
*3 Id , w a ens = ...e....~n. . u
- . "* *~
*JJ - c
- n. ... ::, l o
o,s. . ..
,~1 . .o ..
s- -
. N,
.s of moo.Ju..5 s,e a= e,r
, w .......... N.
, - 8 .': g, I *;I *
"44 m ty:'20- t I ra if*e$ -
E l ys r:=. l. _ y .. l :!*** **;c* sot - s
}* 4og tt..
8 5 l'
- s. 8 , . l1 ...~n 5
... ~ -
- f * :: I '
* .* J !O l
I
-t%.
- r. .
a
..~~.....'. ,..-
n l 5 , l i2 .
- n
. y . . -.
i
.I. . . . *;J.: .!.*.*.3 : -
l I l ** e= l t l
- t 1.y .- . .I. ...~n-- - := zw
'. . e . .'.l . .g.."i l
. , '4A3' l
l N. e wo l n-assa;4 :: i i ! e el.s
- a,a ,8ei-* g-- * " J , " ,
=, ,
a b d sM
- e. <<<e.........4.
d . % . h, . I
& .~. .E. W W &
.DL3 IM i i.e i ;
3-9 mm m q' m \ b O O
~ J\ si l n
l $r HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 3.2-3 l HATCH 1979 MONTHLY AND YEARLY RAINFALL Rainfall Month (Inches) January 4.20 February 4.38 March 0.89 _ April 4.17 May 7.91 , June 0.33 j July 5.47 l l August 0.96 September 7.27
' October 0.27 i
November 1.04 i Decembe r 2.68 Total 39.42 . t l l l t 3-10 i t . I
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 3.2-4 HATCH DATA RECOVERY 1/1/79-12/31/79 Recovery Parameter (s) (Percent) Ambient Temperature 33 Ft. 98.4 Delta Temperature 150-33 Ft. 92.1 Dew Point Temperature 33 Ft. 99.1 , Wind Speed 75 Ft. 98.7 Wind Direction 75 Ft. 99.3 , Wind Speed 150 Ft. 91.2 Wind Direction 150 Ft. 98.3 , Solar Radiation 99.3 Rainfall 99.8 Composite (s) Wind Speed and Direction 75 Ft., Delta Temperature 150-33 Ft. 90.9 Wind Speed and Direction 150 Ft., Delta Temperature 150-33 Ft. 83.6 4 + 1 i 3-11 i t
I N Jt W ~
= ;E I
i a e!M artta Lese tvuus 3.8 erg
, ele artta LEM fus f.3 syn a elas artZe Lise inan stJ syn ,
, esse ertzs Less fmus eas.s are
.t PERCENT CALns .
! S scatns acrino as arcto u ss inns o.sarn: GEORGIA POW ER COM PANY EDWIN I. IIATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 150-F00T A5NU K WIND ROSE FIGURE 3.2-1
E E
% I
~1 9 e o i I 3
5 5 S S E E m E W E S , S o 5 5 b Q b Q EE E S dd da uu ou a , ,
~ "
t E f - a N ie z -
%. z g 2 2 o *
- u a a
% i 2 5 -
{
, 5 5 3 e 4
.e e
r 1 y
- m E E
- + ,
g 3 5 ., 5 b b Q Q MM M 44
- 55 - 55 55 55
= . - =
w w b b o - Z i ~ ; < r>5 2 #
- iN
/
5 5 l E E i E E 1 3
. \ a pipe FCES Ltse than T.8 Me
. . .. u - . . . . - GEORGIA POWER COMPANY
. . = etss use * ' " ' " " EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLMir ANNUAL REPORT 150-FOCfr SEASONAL WIND ROSE FIGURE 3.2-2
I l N l l tI 1 I W - = "- -
- == E i
e a WI88 SPIT.8 Lff0 TW 3.0 MPW
, Sfp3 $Ptt3 Lg30 FMAN f$ nrg 3: 5188 SFUA Ltse tuas it.g nru
, eine artta use Inna ses.s new e
.1 'cRCcNT CALMS S scatna octruco es artco tcss inna o.snen i L l
l ! GEORGIA POWER COMPANY EDWIN I. IIATCl! NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT l 75-F00r ANNUAL WIND ROSE l FIGURE 3.2-3 l l I
2 -
,5 ,m o a
~
l 1 5 5-3 S
- e. .
e = n = l l r , v e . c E E
- n . n di ou da ou e t z
= , J z y . 4 N
o I
. l-
,,5 4 3 5
m i 4
= =
1 3 5 3 0 3 0-
= =
n
- o e
- o y v
. 3 5 o
- 5o o
== n di di uu t : - 5 o ,
z .- ma z 4' m-e :
'7 N 5 5 7 E
. a = m 3 3 a ~ "= u" ~
. ,, nw au r. ".. n~.~
l . $l
. ..., am u -
. " .' ' . . " . " GEORGIA POWER COMPANY EDWIN I. IIATCil NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 75-F00T SEASONAL WIND ROSE FIGURE 3.2-4
@55}5~ SEi EI2 5{5 i =3E [M_~3 Nd5 5~_ .i5-i.E N k- 55 EEEiE~ Ei=ER=tE W= 9t " === =; :s ==L _ _ _. r.=f =Ei==J 100 -----
- + -
-. = ,2 u
.: _i-t:== == . -_::: . = =L _===t=r
_a =y =; =. # -
, y : _
- -{g .~=.._1=-. . .._r_._y_ d=. _=- r ___ , . :r 2 ..=; :=_ : .:=___
.. . . _ . _ _ . .. =_ _:=2.lE m- - w 90 C=.- t : = -- E := br -__ C-'I "'- '-2. ;_- := T= n --- -- =-i- ~~. __._=___=_d_-:.=_.___=._=
=T=.i2 0'i=
=__l==p-- =r=.: y=:=~:; ::a = r
==2 ==m:=[m-.N .,
- =:=,2 :
- _==-
- .=.r2=2=
=t_=_=. _= - .--j:=:=:==
=--J:
.g-w;,-_{n__ .;::=- L=r= _, _-
f :::=: -~ =4,==. =m_:,r_._
- -- ;_:r..= __2_. __
2 ,_ ._ ,_ ,
..;_ x _ _
m _.
=-- = ,=--.
- - _.a f- -- = k- : =: _ __., _..._:_.-
U'- %5'555555:Mh{El -dE_:: =, %'=-- 55E'f_T3'5@55 Q
=_r= t =_5=- . c =-.={-_.f'=====_.t=~ :=---. t --I.._ =M --=.;_Nm: %_ _f
- _.,_._.L=:=
- t r.t - =. I __- 2 :- ~-* --: : _ . . .: =
70 m ._ .
= =._- . . .: - y= %- -:t r = .'
= .Q:~-
_ _;=_j 2:{__.q.. t . g_ 71.=. - - g;: - -f_.,=--
==nec :hu _: =_e = __ a :- :----s==: .=.
rrp :-- _=-
,er.-2;.: -/- +-r-
= r I===--= 3.
g
= {z=_ i .__._-r _ .I =r_~T=m=- -
. ___ t=K=' A= 2:-Ka 5GI.s;-Ni y
- u. M{n_.=i.=.-_W'.:rf-
=__t_
3ME5M=_~WE-lEEfE
-. - . . . _ . . - _ . _ . . . - = ~ - $._,iTR i;;.-. Avc. MAXIMUM _._
a 50 2'"r. . .:ru --- j ' .. .'_'y~ .y~. ~::=: ;: :.t :.: = r =p~ .p~ r == =~=:~ p~r ..: #(__' -" ' _3
- ~ ~ ~ ~~
- - ~ ~ ' ~ -
= : . u .r- Average
= .{ = - : : : r ----J. . . _u -= :=:=:.
- :=w == ; 2_w4 p
.q. / ,
/ .._:.- . .=. . ."-^"~~=_:=- . .
._=?.: .:. :-- -: : .u_==
_--y..~.._...1..-l.=.=_=.=_..~.=_.__.__.._y_
. ._ q._ _ _-..s..
. 1 g -_
_ w . - , _ . . --- i;" 'b.S- N d f W =f 2 O N f'j 5 'EriEf5@=%_:[=: A *
~ ~ " * ~ =n= =a===+=s= t== === p~ ^='==~ ~=~*=g=lm=51=3==
=^~~'~~ ~ "' ' ^ ~ '
'M_ i =5-h::Kwiuf f~=Ek'='N'55E;!51Ef
~ ~ " ~ ~
30 ~~~
' Ni 5 -jNf" 5 5j555 95 EjiEMd=j
._...w___...[___'_..
~~7=---_=---+=-f-...=_....._-.;._._._._.
- . _ . g -. ; ;;;. .
.;7 . . - ...._t._.....
. _ ._. .-:_{,_--=_-
EE- =";_.?. =:i= M M -EI:iid_; _i-El- ~ T =_ _.__ - -- g _ _;
- ~~-M: 54 'i'l:EIMr tIF Qi'=.
.g.g.
-'~ ' '
10 ~ ~ - ' ~ ' - ~
==f552.I'&5f:(
- h i =1.' & =W %= ' Mi" d-M M M- =iih; i=i=
0 Y ! l '! D UI 5 'E 'M @ Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec MONTil c S_EQRG_lA POWER COMPAtiY EDWIN I. IIATCil NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 1979 AMBIENT TEMPERATURES e FIGURE 3.2-5
e
- . , , .l u
7, ~
.:.. ; .- 4' ;"..]...~..
' - *ll~ E * ,, r. ~.~.~*~.:
" ' [ ..*.* l '.' .14. ' ."'.. r~ ~~1.'T. .. *'.
. . . ' *. I ~.-.1._
,' ;;;.. _ . _...j~
. . - " * . -':*r ..:.
_. _ ,) .".lr *~
- .'l ' ' 1, :
I 7 . l-~". {*. { ,.[, _.l t. 100 - - __4 L } - 8 9.=_'[~i . . _ .. =..= r.._ :t-.=. _ J .. . =.: .. r. .=.l r_ t.- . t.=_' _. _a .Q 8 - 2.m.= .=+ : f.m w=,i:
.ya W M 5 % M-N-5~.f-b55_N M b 5
'-~l=-:t
= .= r.
- .- ;. :. ===
=-- ::: -
= = = - -
- :r : r =
= =-- s:: ==
&$?MM.5hWim5l
--'---s
=. :=1. . .
=1=::.: - s. r.
4_=.==m :. =t. .=_ t= ==
- ar: =_
Eh. _ [t- =_
. _ . =. . E5 .= Ef ? . D . -E . i.,G .~ . i. Xl ~.=. =. . _=.1. i. n_.~. =. 5 i.l .=. i.=5. =. f' '~. .~. . ~. . . ~..'. ~~._~ .' _~.~ '. = =. ~_'
80 g
. _. g._.._:;...._ . ,_q.._.._.q_ _. . g p_ .. _,. p,jgg: _:.4...q...u...._p;,,,.,_..w_____..
. _.a _.; m-. a. ..n . .
4.--.:. -
...-.,_.:= a .u.._._z.,=-_,._-._,==..___.
- t = =.- =-.=re.- :- = m::-l =~:; . ~.=~ t =:~L- .:=v - ' m - =
70 =.= =- . s - , f =2;; .; p_;=- .g=. . _: - =r.=:=:_:. = _=r =:=
=F= v..~ . t== =-, . . . .m _1. v_.i,-. u .a - e %.;; ._ .-t----- =;.m :: =
p ' F:E #E-i=="EE 5-15=f"?f.-X-r ;E=iv-En Mi?_=IL~u~;d-i- =iE E E g si~.5jh-5IidiSN2 _;=_t. E=. .$- .:.~i.S. . . I:7-Nr;i-..d %@p$ h M'i8- W-5-fEt % N- .5. E EA E 555P t-h :.3pEd:~i.~.~~_
-. .-. . - .f.E._5._;,i.! 2._5_Q =y_.C. . .I::=_r*~.. .,. ._.?
SG w --*-- ==:: J : = =: -* * - - ~ ~ ~ - *
- V = ,7. - _ . ' L./: L. ~ -:' - l::: .. .,. . =
p \ 2 1 v_ . _ -- _: AVC.. -- '- 7 p. ~p~ __...:._. d> 40=_:, Et_= _=_E_.=. __I==d. MAXIMUM
==W ----h_- __- =,=-i._.__.a=_:= ~M 3X=~r! .: E (a
- __- . . _,f..;_.:.=c:;
m =-
- ;=.i r- --
q:=..s. r_u\ x_..
._=
==t=~. _.$ _ _y_- __- . i=/ i==~~~.
. _ _ _w_=- =__:
l=3 _~=t=H=< t =_-_7a_ ---__ _s.
~
Average
- ~=i= ..- . _. L ...L._ = =%
30
=El .;: g e
i f.:: ..= p _ -=- =_4=.= =3 == --f= . . . - . _. - _.s_.
-. :.=
AVG. MINIMUM 20 7~ N "i" W . 5f5[@2-l5{2- i N~~ ::= ::ii : : E E:~lE- :-*;:: ='= .::F- --- - - - - - - d=
- =. :t. =. ;q ,=, .:. :; = --*--- l g g. . ; .d . :j :.:. :_ .4, =.. :.a. =. .. =. .=. t,.:.. _. . = ; _ ..n-._ -. _ .. ._: = .. . _=__ _ =.. =e: =
i p5WP: ni -- i ~-i " :p : f," - EtIE 5 :' : Ej:= r::l:- :--q EE-
- :- ..j :- . .j ._~~ l 0
~
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
- MONTH GEQRGIA POWER COMPANY EDWIN I. IIATCll NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 1979 DEW POINT TEMPERATURES FIGURE 3.2-6 r
e)
.+
%pG~4>A 0
n o a'e. g* r/ Nff77 \"
/ f,s,9s,;
4)Nff Q lllll s
't hi'
\ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) l.0 lllllBA 7
a "a" l!!g=2_2 l.I bnallll-l2.0 i L 1018 1.25 1.4 1.6 4 6" > MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CH ART
! b
## 'S S di ,' xxx)/ .
'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ - ' ' I
HNP ANNUAL REPORT CHAPTER 4 BIOLOGICAL MONITORING TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 4.1 IMPINCEMENT OF FISH 4-1 4.1.1 SPECIFICATION 4-1 4.1.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4-1 4.1.3 SITMMARY 4-1 4.2 ENTRAINMENT ~4- 3 4.2.1 SPECIFICATION 4-3 4.2.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4-3 4.2.2.1 Physicochemical Data 4-3 4.2.2.2 Seasonal Abundance of Ichthyoplankton' 4-3 4.2.3
SUMMARY
4-6 4.3 BENTH0S 4-6 4.3.1 SPECIFICATION 4-6 4.3.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4-7 4.3.2.1 Relative Abundance 4-8
; 4.3.2.2 Species Diversity 4-20 4.3.2.3 Comparison of 1976 and 1979 Data 4-20 4.3.3
SUMMARY
4-34 4.4 AERIAL REMOTE SENSING 4-34 4.4.1 SPECIFICATION 4-34 4.4.2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4-34 4.5 SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: TRANSMISSION LINES 4-35 4.5.1 SPECIFICATION 4-35 4.5.2 dSULTS AND DISCUSSION 4-35 f l l I 4-1
HNP ANNUAL REPORT CllAPTER 4 BIOLOGICAL MONITORING LIST OF TABLES Table Title Page 4.1-1 SPECIES AND NUMBERS OF FISH COLLECTED IN 4-2 Tile IMPINGEMENT SURVEYS AT PLANT EDWIN I. HATCH FOR 1979 4.2-1 COMMON NAME, TAXA, NUMBER OF LARVAE COLLECTED .4-4 PER SURVEY. TOTALS FOR THE DAY, NIGHT, DAY AND NIGHT COMBINED AND FOR EACH SURVEY, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF EACH TAXA 4.3-1 N1'MBERS OF INDIVIDUALS COLLECTED ON DENDY . 4-9 SAMPLERS 4.3-2 NUMBERS OF INDIVIDUALS COLLECTED IN PETERSEN 4-11 SAMPLES 4.3-3 TAXA, TMAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION 4-12 0F ORGANISMS COLLECTED ON DENDY SAMPLERS AT STATION 115.5 4.3-4 TAXA, T(7FAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION 4-15 OF ORGANISMS COLLECTED ON DENDY SAMPLERS AT STATION 115.9 ) 4.3-5 TAXA, TUTAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION 4-17 0F ORGANISMS COLLECTED ON DENDY SAMPLERS AT STATION 116.6 4.3-6 TAXA, TOTAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION 4-21 0F ORGANISMS COLLECTED IN PETERSEN SAMPLES AT STATION 115.5 4.3-7 TAXA, TOTAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION 4-23 0F ORGANISMS COLLECTED IN PETERSEN SAMPLES AT STATION 115.9 4.3-8 TAXA, TOTAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION 4-24 e OF ORGANISMS COLLECTED IN PETERSEN SAMPLES AT STATION 116.6 4.3-9 AVERACE VALUES AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR 4-25 HBAR DATA FROM PETERSEN SAMPLES COLLECTED IN OCTOBER 1976 AND OCTOBER 1979 4.3-10 AVERACE VALUES AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR 4-26 NUMBER OF TAXA COLLECTED IN PETERSEN SAMPLES IN OCTOBER 1976 AND OCTOBER 1979 4.3-11 AVERACE VALUES AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR 4-27 NUMBERS OF INDIVIDUALS COLLECTED IN PETERSEN SAMPLES IN OCTOBER 1976 AND OCTOBER 1979 i-f 4-11 7
IINP ANNUAL REPORT CHAPTER 4 BIOLOGICAL MONITORING LIST OF TABLES Table Title M 4.3-12 AVERACE VALUES AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR 4-28 HBAR DATA FROM DENDY SAMPLERS COLLECTED IN OCTOBER 1976 AND OCTOBER 1979 4.3-13 BONFERRONI MULTIPLE COMPARISON OF AVERACE 4-29 VALUES (pij .) FOR HBAR FROM DENDY SAMPLERS 4.3-14 AVERACE VALUES AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR 4-30 NUMBER OF TAXA COLLECTED IN DENDY SAMPLERS IN OCTOBER 1976 AND OCTOBER 1979 4.3-15 BONFERRONI MULTIPLE COMPARISON OF AVERACE 4-31 VALUES (pij.) FOR NL'MBER OF TAXA FROM DENDY SAMPLERS 4.3-16 AVERACE VALUES AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR 4-32 NUMBERS OF INDIVIDUALS COLLECTED IN DENDY SAMPLERS IN OCTOBER 1976 AND OCTOBER 1979 4.3-17 BONFERRONI MULTIPLE COMPARISON OF AVERACE 4-33 VALUES (pij .) FOR NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS FROM DENDY SAMPLERS. l r l 4-111 u._
~
HNP ANNUAL REPORT CHAPTER 4 BIOLOGICAL MONITORING < LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title 4.1-1 ALTAMAHA RIVER WATER TEMPERATURES FOR THE 1979 IMPINCEMENT STUDY (START OF SURVEY) 4.1-2 ALTAMAHA RIVER WATER TEMPERATURES FOR THE 1979 IMPINGEMENT STUDY (END OF SURVEY) - 4.1-3 ALTAMAHA RIVER ELEVATION FOR THE 1979 IMPINGLENT STUDY (START OF SURVEY) 4.1-4 ALTAMAHA RIVER ELEVATION FOR THE 1979 IMPINCEMENT STUDY (END OF SURVEY) - 4.2-1 AIR TEMPERATURES FOR THE 1979 ENTRAINMENT STUDY 4.2-2 ALTAMAHA RIVER WATER TEMPERATURES FOR THE 1979 ENTRAINMENT STUDY 4.2-3 ALTAMAHA RIVER DISSOLVED OXYGEN FOR THE 1979 ENTRAINMENT STUDY - 4.2-4 ALTAMAHA RIVER pH FOR THE 1979 ENTRAINMENT STUDY 4.3-1 COMPARISONS OF SPECIES DIVERSITY (HBAR) VALUES BETWEEN SAMPLING STATIONS AND QUARTERS FOR DENDY AND PETERSEN SAMPLES TAKEN AT HNP DURING 1979 4-iv i
HNP ANNUAL REPORT
- 4. BIOLOGICAL MONITORING 4.1 Impingement of Fish 4.1.1 Specification Impingement collections were conducted according to the National Pollution Disenarge Elimination System permit No. GA. 0004120 as approved by the Geotgia Environmental Protection Division:
Collection of impingement samples will be accomplished by inserting a wire basket with 3/8 inch mesh size into the screen backwash sluiceway. Samples will be collected monthly for a period of 12 months beginning in March following the initiation of commercial operation of Unit 2. Species, length, weight, and life stage will be determined for each individual impinged; total number of individuals will be recorded. 4.1.2 Results and Discussion Sixteen samples were taken in 1979, beginning February 1,1979, and ending December 20, 1979. Each sample lasted approximately 24 hours. Twenty fish were impinged (Table 4.1-1) representing five species. The most abundant species was Trinectes maculatus, with 16 individuals Impinged. The remaining four species were represented by one specimen each. These were Centrarchus macropterus, Lepomis gulosus, Lepomis macrochirus, and Percina nigrofasciata. The average length (millimeters) and weight (grams) of impinged Trinectes maculatus were 61.4 mm and 5.4 g., respectively. The length and weight of the remaining impinged species are as follows: Centrarchus macropterus 74 mm and 6.9 g., Lepomis gulosus 33 mm and 2.2 g. , Lepomis macrochirus 44 mm and .8 g. , and Percina nigrofasciata 82 mm and 5.8 g. , Water temperatures taken at the beginning and end of the survey are presented in Figures 4.1-1 and 4.1-2. The highest temperature recorded was 28.3 C on August 14, 1979 (Figure 4.1-1), while the lowest was 5 C recorded on February 2,1979 (Figure 4.1-2). River elevations are presented in Figures 4.1-3 and 4.1-4. The highest, 81.8 feet, was recorded on March 6,1979 (Figure 4.1-3), while the low-est, 63.1 feet, was recorded on November 13, 1979 (Figure 4.1-3). 4.1.3 Summary During 1979, one or both units were shutdown over a major portion of the year. As a result, very little data were collected while both units were operating. The Georgia Environmental Protection Division has agreed to allow Georgia Power Company to repeat this study in 1980. It is hoped that. sufficient data will be collected so that the effects of both units on the ichthyofauna may be determined. I i 4-1
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4.1-1 SPECIES AND NUMBERS.0F FISH COLLECTED IN THE IMPINGEMENT SURVEYS AT PLANT EDWIN I. FATCH FOR 1979 Date Common Name Species Collected
- 2/1/79 Warmouth Lepomis gulosus (1) 2/7/79 NOSP**
2/28/79 Flier Centrarchus macropterus (1) 3/6/79 Hogchoker Trinectes maculatus (8)- Blackbanded darter Percina nigrofasciata (1) Bluegill Lepomis macrochiru's (1) 3/13/79 Hogchoker Trinectes maculatus (2) 3/20/79 NOSP 3/27/79 Hogchoker Trinectes maculatus (3) 4/17/79 NOSP 5/15/79 NOSP 6/14/69 NOSP 7/18/79 NOSP 8/14/79 NOSP , 9/19/79 NOSP 10/17/79 NOSP 11/13/79 Hogchoker Trinectes maculatus (3) 12/20/79 NOSP l i.
- Number collected.in parenthesis l ** Indicates no species collected i-4-2
HNP ANNUAL REPORT 4.2 Entrainment 4.2.1 Specification Entrainment studies were conducted according to the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit No. GA 0004120 as approved by the Georgia Environmental Protection Division: Diel entrainment samples will be collected monthly at the
' intake st occure. Sampling will begin in March following the init.ation of commercial operation of Unit 2 and will continue through September. Georgia Power Company biologists will meet with Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Game' and Fish Division biologists by October 15th, to decide if late summer densities warrant the collection of additional data. In any case, no more than twelve (12) monthly,collec-tions will be made. Samples will be collected using twin 0.5 m diameter plankton nets with a resh size of 760 p. Sample duration will be determined by measuring river velocity, and with a predetermined chart, a time factor allowing for the filtering of approximately 500 cubic meters of water through the net. In situations of very. low velocities, the net will remain set for a maximum of two hours.
4.2.2 Results and Discussica 4.2.2.1 Physicochemical Data Temperature data are presented in Figures 4.2-1 and 4.2-2. The highest air and water temperatures were recorded in July and the lowest temp-eratures were recorded in February. Dissolved oxygen readings are presented in Figure 4.2-3.. The highest reading was recorded in the January night sample, while the lowest was recorded in the July day sample. Figure 4.2-4 presents the pH recorded during the study. Values are not available for March 14, due to pH meter malfunctions. A high of 7.8 was recorded for t he April night sample and a low of 5.4 was recorded for the February dty sample. 4.2.2.2 Seasonal Abundance of Ichthyoplankton Larvae representing 13 taxa and 7 families were collected in the 1979 drift samples. The results are presented in Table 4.2-1. A total of 151 fish larvae were collected. Thirty-nine individuals, or 26% of the total, were collected in the day and 112 individuals, or 74% of the total, were collected in the night samples. I l l 4-3
ILNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4.2-1
~
COMMON NAME, TAXA, NUMBER OF LARVAE COLLECTED PER SURVEY, TOTALS FCR THE DAY, NIGHT, DAY AND NICIIT COMBINED AND FOR EACll SURVEY, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF EACH TAXA Number Of Larvae Collected Per Survey Survey Dates Common Name Taxa 1/16 2/05 2/12 2/21 3/14 3/19 4/10 5/17 6/11 7/16 8/15 9/19 American Shad Alosa sapidissima 1 1 j' 3' Pickerel Esox sp. 1 _ Minnows Cyprinidae 7 6 2 1 30 Silvery minnow Ilybognathus nuchalis 1 1 23 2 liighfin carpsucker Carplodes velifer 1 1 10 Spotted sucker Minytrema melanops 15 Snail bullhead Ictalurus brunneus 1 1 Brown bullhead Ictalurus nebulosus 1 Flat bullhead Ictalurus platycephalus 1 Sunfish Lepomis spp. 17 10 1 6 Black Crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus 1 Darters Percidae 1 Yellow perch Perca flavescens 8 Totals 0 1 1 0 '9 6 40 32 14 1 7 40 9
IINP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4.2-1 Continued COMMON NAME, TAXA, NUMBER OF LARVAE COLLECTED PER SURVEY, TOTALS FOR THE DAY, NIGHT, DAY AND NICllT COMBINED AND FOR EACH SURVEY, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF EACll TAXA Total Number Of Larvae Collected Common Name Taxa Day Night Combined Composition American shad Alosa sapidissima 2 2 1.3 Pickerel Esox sp. I 1 .7
,, Minnows Cyprinidae 19 27 46 30.5 3, Silvery minnow Ilybognathus nuchalis 2 25 27 17.9 liighfin carpsucker Carpiodes velifer 6 6 12 7.9 Spotted sucker Minytrema melanops 2 13 15 9.9 Snail bullhead Ictalurus brunneus 2 2 1.3 Brown bullhead Ictalurus nebulosus 1 1 .7 Flat bullhead Ictalurus platycephalus 1 1 .7 Sunfish Lepomis spp. 3 31 34 22.5 Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus 1 1 .7 Darters Percidae 1 1 .7 Yellow perch Perca flavescens 5 3 8 5.3 Totals 39 112 . 151 4
HNP ANNUAL. REPORT The data show that spawning began in February, increasing in April and May. June through August showed a sharp decrease, with a sharp increase in September. Two specimens of Alosa sapidissima were collected, comprising only 1.3% of the total larvae collected. The most abundant taxa were the cyprinids (Cyprinidae and Hybognathus nuchalis combined), with 73 individuals comprising 48.4% of the total larvae collected. The next most abun-dant taxa were the Lepomis spp., with 34 individuals accounting for 22.5% of the total larvae. The least abundant taxa were Esox spp., Ictalurus nebulosus, Ictalurus platycephalus, Pomoxis nigromaculatus, and Percidae. Each taxon was represented by one individual, comprising
.7% of the total larvae collected for each taxon.
In order of abundance, the seven families represented are as follows (per cent composition in parenthesis): Cyprinidae (48.4%), Centrarchidae (23.2%), Catostomidae (17.7%), Percidae (6.0%), Ictaluridae . (2. 7%) , Clupeidae (1.3%), and Esocidae (.7%). ~, As a result of maintenance, refueling, and unscheduled shutdowns, Units I and II were not operating a major portion of 1979. Unit I was oper-ating for the January through April sampling, but was not operating for the May through September sampling. Unit II was not operating for the January sampling and the February 21 to June sampling. Unit II did operate for the July through September sampling. Both units were operating for the February 5 and 12 sampling, but only one fish larvae was collected per day. Because of the small number of larvae collected and the actual time both units operated concurrently, the effects of both units on the ichthyoplankton cannot be determined. 4.2.3 Summary The Georgia Environmental Protection Division has agreed
- to allow Georgia Power Company to repeat this study in 1980. This was necessitated by the shutdown of one or both units for a major portion of 1979. It is hoped that sufficient data will be collected so that the effects of both units on the ichthyoplankton may be determined.
- 4. 3 Benthos 4.3.1 Specification Benthos studies were conducted by HNP-ETS 3.1.2.1.1 as follows:
The benthic macroinvertebrates shall be sampled to detect and assess the significance of changes in species compo-sition, diversity, distribution, and abundance as related to power station operation. 4
, 4-6
HNP ANNUAL REPORT All samples shall be collected and all analyses shall be performed as specified in the Program Description developed by the licensee in accordance with Section 5.6.1. This monitoring program shall commence on January 2,1979, and continue until approved for modification or termination of this monitoring requirement is obtained from NRC in accordance with Section 5.7.3. I l- These studies were also conducted in accordance with NPDES Permit No. GA-0004120, Part 1B-2, Page 10. "to document that the mixing zone will not create objectionable or damaging pollution condition,s." 4.3.2 Results and Discussion Six Dendy multiplate samplers and six modified Petersen dredge samples were collected at each of three stations on January 31,1979, April 26, 1979, July 16, 1979, and October 9, 1979. The sampling stations were located at approximate river miles: 116.6, upstream from the HNP discharge; 115.9, in the mixing zone; and 115.5, near the downstream edge of the mixing zone. The Dendy samplers were constructed of tempered masonite plates with a combined surface area for all six samplers of 0.5 square meters. The samplers were suspended 0.2 meters below the surface at each station i during the six week exposure. Modified Petersen dredge samples were taken on a transect at each station. The substrate was predominantly loose sand and the combined area sampled for the six grab samples was 0.15 square meters. The HNP Annual Surveillance Report for 1976 compared Dendy and Petersen data for the years 1973, 1974, 1975, and 1976, and demonstrated that HNP-1 had no adverse ef fects on the benthic populations. The purpose of the 1979 study was to evaluate the combined effects of HNP Units 1 and 2 on the benthic populations. HNP Unit 2 did not become fully operational until September, 1979. Therefore, only the October samp- , ling period was subjected to the discharges of both Units. Using the i 1976 report as a base and allowing for the modification cf the sampling locations for the HNP-2 study (HNP Procedure E3V-04-02, Rev. 1) as com-pared with those for the HNP-1 study (HNP Procedure ENV-04-01), it was l determined that a comparison of Stations 115.5S, 115.9S, and 116.6S for October,1976, with Stations 115.5, 115.9, anc 116.6 for October, 1979, would be sufficient to demonstrate the combined effects of HNP units 1 and 2. These stations for 1976 were most similar in location to those in the present study and provide the best comparisons with the least sample bias. 4-7
HNP ANNUAL REPORT 4.3.2.1 Relative Abundance A list of the taxa collected at each station by Dendy samplers at KNP during 1979 is presented in Table 4.3-1. Eleven taxa of Ephemeroptera (Mayflies) were collected, with Stenonema sp. being the most numerous. Heptagenia sp. and Baetis sp. were also present in.large numbers. Generally, these species were evenly distributed among the stations. Tricorythodes sp. was more numerous at 115.5 than at either of the other stations. However, of the total number collected, 95% were taken in July. Large numbers of the other dominant mayflies were also taken in July and they were evenly distributed among the stations. It appears that this occurrence of Tricorvthodes sp. is seasonal and the large number of individuals at 115.5 was a result of natural aggregated dispersion. Paragnetina sp. was the most abundant of the seven taxa of Plecoptera (Stoneflies) collected during the year, with the higher numbers being present at all stations in the October sample. Ten taxa of Coleoptera (Beetles) were taken, with Stenelmis sp. adults being the most numerous. Again, the greatest numbers of these species occurred in July. Trichoptera (Caddisflies) were represented by cleven taxa, with the flydro-psychidae being the dominant group. The distribution of this group appears to be related to current velocity, with larger numbers inhabiting areas of greater velocity. Three taxa of Diptera (Flies) occurred, with the Simulidae being present in the greatest numbers. Their occurrence was highly seasonal, the majority having been collected in April. The Chironomidae were also present in large numbers. Table 4.3-2 shows the numbers of taxa collected by Petersen dredge samples at HNP during 1979. Ceratopogonidae and Chironomidae were the predominant Diptera collected. Corbicula sp. (Pelecypoda) also occurred in large numbers. Distribution of the taxa among stations was generally even, with peaks being attributable to locally dense populations or seasonal variation. ' Examination of the data for percent composition of organisms collected in 1979 on the Dendy samplers (Tables 4.3-3 through 4.3-5) showed that similar taxa dominated each station within and among date periods. In January, Ephemeoptera,'Trichoptera, and Chironomidae were the dominant groups present and comprised 97%, 94%, and 97% of the total number of organisms present at Stations 115.5, 115.9, and 116.6, respectively. The April sample showed dominance by the above three groups, with the addition of a large, seasonal, increase in Simulidae. The April totals showed 98% (115.5), 97% (115.9), and 99* (116.6) of the organisms present
-being composed of Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, Chironomidae, and Simulidae.
4-8 l
. j
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4.3-1 NUMBERS OF INDIVIDUALS COLLECTED ON DENDY SAMPLERS Station Taxa 115.5 115.9 116.6
*Ephemeroptera 1 Isonychia sp. 6 1 7 Tricorythodes sp. 192 77- ,
55 Ephemerella sp. 11 10 3 Caenis sp. 2 1 2 Stenonema sp. 238 353 330
*Heptageniidae 54 48 36 Ileptagenia sp. 131 117 90
*Baetidae 10 3 17 Baetis sp. 251 172 227 Pseudocoleon sp. 1
*0donata 1-
*Anisoptera 1
*Plecoptera 3 4 2 s
*Perlidae 15 9 9 Taeniopteryx sp. 1 4 Neoperla sp. 11 12 5 Perlesta sp. 11 8 5 Acroneura sp. 2 2 2 Paragnetina sp. 49 75 41 Megaloptera .
Corydalus sp. 23 25 19 Coleoptera Cyrinus sp. Adult 1
'Stenelmis sp. Adult 245 352 205 Macronychus glabratus Adult 6 7 6 Phytobius sp. Adult 1 l
*Elmid Larvae 1 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 20 10 8 Ancyronyx variegatus Larvae 1 1 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 29 23 11 Coptotomus sp. 1
! liydroporous sp. Larvae 1 I 4-9 i
._~
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4.3-1 Continued NLHBERS OF INDIVIDUALS COLLECIED ON DENDY SAMPLERS Station Taxa 115.5 115.9 116.6
*Trichoptera 6
*Polycentropodae 1 Chimarra sp. 1 1
*Hydropsychidae 348 183 -
132 Hydropsyche sp. 73 31 21 Hydropsyche incommoda 396 187 115 Hydropsyche orris 387 234 99 Cheumatopsyche sp. 210 158 106
, *Hydroptilidae 74 9 28 Decetis sp. 1 Ceraclea sp. 7 1 1 4 Diptera
- Chironomidae 994 543 429
*Simulidae 2150 1565 2677
*Empididia 6 1 4
*011gochaeta 9 7
~* Pelecypoda 1
*Hydracarina 2 1
*Mematoda 1 i .
- Were not identified beyond the indicated taxonomic level.
I I l i 10 _c-, _ , - - - . -,m. - , - -- , ,
HNP ANNUAL REPORT Table 4.3-2 NUMBERS OF INDIVIDUALS COLLECTED IN PETERSEN SAMPLES Station-Taxa ! ! 5. 5 ! I 'i. 9 1,l fe . fi Ephemeroptera
> n_
Caeng sp. 1 1 2 Stenonema sp. 1 Pseudiron sp. 1 Baetis sp. 1 2 Cloeon sp. 1
*Plecoptera 1 9 l-
*Perlidae 1 Neoperla sp. 1 Coleoptera '
Stenelmis sp. Adult 2
*Elmidae Larvac 1 1 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 21 69 71
.Macronychus glabratus Larvae 1 grinus sp. Larvae L
.Trichoptera
*Hydropsychidae 2 4 Macronema sp. 3 liydropsyche incommoda 1 2 Hydropsyche orris 5 Cheumatopsychi sp. 68 5 Diptera Chaoborus sp. 4
- Ceratopogonidae 112 67 , 35
- Chironomidae 110 597 113
'*Simulidae 3 3 4
*Empididae 1 Mollusca
- Gastropoda 1 1
- Pelecypoda. 65 2 30
[ Corbicula sp. 99 198 279 l Annelida
*0ligochaeta 83 87 123
*Hirudinca~ l 1
- Trematoda 127 72
- 11 L
i Prostoma r Srum' 28 13 10
'
- Nemat oda 24 39 15
*Hydracarina 1 1 flere_not identified beyond the indicated taxonomic level.
4-11 , g v "
, HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4. 3-4 TAXA, TOTAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF ORGANISMS COLLECTFD ON DENDY SAMPLERS AT. STATION 115.9 Total Number Percent Date Taxa Of Organisms Composition 01/21/79 Ephemerella sp. 9 2.6 Stenonema sp. 53 15.6 Heptageniidae 1 0.3 Heptagenia sp. 30 8.8 Baetis sp. 29 ,
8.5 Plecoptera 2 0.6 Neoperla sp. 7 2.1 Paragnetina sp. 2 0.6 Gyrinus sp. Adult 1 , 0.3 Stenelmis sp. Adult 2 0.6 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 1 0.3 Ancyronyx variegatus Larvae 1 0.3 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 2 0.6 Hydropsyche incommoda 49 14.4 Hydropsyche orris 58 17.1 Cheumatopsyche sp. 64 18.9 Chironomidae 25 7.4 Simulidae 2 0.6
!!ydracarina 1 0.3 04/26/79 Isonychia sp. 1 0.0 Ephemerella sp. 1 0.0 Stenonema sp. 22 0.9 lieptageniidae 17 0.7 Heptagonia sp. 31 1.2 Baetidae 2 . 0.1 Baetis sp. 43 1. 7 Perlidae 1 0.0 Neoperla sp. 4 0.2 Perlesta sp. 8' O.3 Paragnetina sp. 7 0.3 Stenelmis sp. Adult 26 1. 0 -
Macronycl s glabratus Adult 3 0.1 Coptotomus sp. 'l 0.0 l Stenelmis sp. Larvae 1 0.0 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 11 0.4 Hydropsychidae 109 4.4 Hydropsyche sp. 30 -1.2 Hydropsyche incommoda 50 2.0 Hydropsyche orris 135 5.4 l Cheumatopsyche sp. 55 2.2 , Hydroptilidae 4 0.2
- ceraclea sp. 1 0.0 Chironomidae 372 14.9
-Simulidae 1556 52.4 Pelecypoda 1 0.0
'4-15
HNP ANNUAL REPORT l TABLE 4.3-4 Continued TAXA, T&rAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF ORGANISMS COLLECTED ON DENDY SAMPLERS AT STATION 115.9 Total Number Percent Date Taxa Of Organisms Composition 07/16/79 Tricorythodes sp. 77 7.1 Stenonema sp. 254 23.4 4 Heptageniidae 23 2.1 Heptagenia sp. 36 3. 3 Baetis sp. 69 6.3
'Perlidae 6 0.6 Acroneuria sp. 1 0.1 Paragnetina sp. 40 ~
3.7 Corydalus sp. 19 1.7 Stenelmis sp. Adult 307 28.2 Macronychus glabratus Adult 2 1.8 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 6 0.5 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 3 0.3 Chimarra sp. 1 0.1 Hydropsychidae 35 3.2 Hydropsyche incommoda 61 5.6 Hydropsyche orris 34 3.1 Cheumatopsyche sp. 37 3.4 Chironomidae 75 6.9 Simu11dae 1 0.1 10/09/79 Caenis sp. 1 0.3 St.enonema sp. 24 7.7 Heptageniidae 7 2.2 Heptagenia sp. 20 6.4 , Baetidae 1 0.3 Baetis sp. 31 10.0 Plecoptera 2 0.6 Perlidae 2 . 0.6 Neoperla sp. 1~ 0.3 l Acroneuria sp. 1 0.3 j Paragnetina sp. 26 8.4 4 Corydalus sp. 6 1. 9 Stenelmis sp. Adult 17 5.5 Macronychus glabratus Adult 2 0.6 Phytobius sp. Adult 1 0.3 Elmidae Larvae 1 0.3 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 2 0.6 2.3 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 7 Hydropsychidae 39 12.5 Hydropsyche sp. 1 0.3 Hydropsyche geommoda 27 8.7 Hydropsyche orrie 7 2.3 , Cheumatopsyche sp. 2 0.6 i Hydroptilidae 5 1. 6 I Chironomidae 71 22.8 Simulidae 6 1.9 Empididae 1 0.3 4-16
. I e o
l 1 HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4. 3-5 TAXA, TOTAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF ORGANISMS COLLECTED ON DENDY SAMPLERS AT STATION 116.6 Total Number Percent Date Taxa Of Organisms Composition 01/31/79 Ephemerella sp. 2 0.9 l Stenonema sp. 26 12.0 Heptageniidae 1 0.5 neptagenia sp. 19 8.8 Baetidae 2 _ 0.9 Baetis sp. 20 9.2 Taeniopterfx sp. 4 1.8 Neoperla sp. 3 1.4 Hydropsyche incommoda 22 - 10.1 Hydropsyche orris 33 15.2 Cheumatopsyche sp. 50 23.0 Chironomidae 35 16.1 l 04/26/79 Stenonema sp. 12 0.4 l Heptageniidae 24 0.7 Heptagenia sp. 21 0.7 Baetidae 4 0.1 Baetis sp. 47 1.5 Pseudocoleon sp. 1 0.0 Perlidae 1 0.0 Perlesta sp. 5 0.2 Pcragnetina sp. 10 0.3 Corydalus sp. 1 0.0 Stenelmis sp. Adult 13 0.4 Hydroporus sp. Adult 1 0.0 l Stenelmis sp. Larvae 1 0.0 Hydropsychidae 39 1.2 Hydropsyche sp. 19 0.6 i Hydropsyche incommoda 27 0.8 Hydropsyche orris 47 1.5 t Cheumatopsyche sp. 32 1.0 Hydroptilidae 3 0.1 Ceraclea sp. 1 0.0 Chironomidae 230 7.2 Simulidae 2664 83.1 l 011gochaeta 1 0.0 i 4 .
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4.3-5 Continued TAXA, TOTAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF ORCANISMS COLLECTED ON DENDY SAMPLERS AT STATION 116.6 Total Number Percent Date Taxa Of Organisms Composition 07/16/79 Isonychia sp. 7 1.0 Tricorythodes sp. 50 6.9 Caenis sp. 1 0.1 Stenonema sp. 255 35.1 Heptageniidae 27 3.7 Heptagania sp. 27 3.7 1.5 Baetidae 11 i Baetis sp. 94 12.9 Anisoptera 1 0.1 Perlidae 7 1.0 Acroneuria sp. 1 0.1 Paragnetina sp. 16 2.2 Corydalus sp. 5 0.7 Stenelmis sp. Adult 122 16.8 Macronychus glabratus Adult 2 0.3 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 3 0.4 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 6 0.8 Hydropsychidae 6 0.8 Hydropsyche incommoda 11 1.5 Hydropsyche orrfs 9 1.2 Cheumatopsyche sp. 13 1.8 Hydroptilidae 7 1.0 Chironomidae 43 5.9 Empididae 2 0.2 + 4 4-18
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4.3-5 Continued TAXA,ThrALNUMBERS,ANDPERCENTCOMPOSITIONOFORGANISMS COLLECTED ON DENDY SAMPLERS AT STATION 116.6 Total Number Percent Dats Taxa Of Organisms Composition 10/09/79 Ephemeroptera 1 0.2 Tricorythodes sp. 5 0.9 Ephemerella sp. 1 0.2 Caenis sp. 1 0.2 Stenonema sp. 37 , 6.4 Heptageniidae 4 0.7 Heptagenia sp. 23 4.0 Baetis sp. 66 11.4 Odonata 1 0.2 Plecoptera 2 0.3 Perlidae 1 0.2 Neoperla sp. 2 0.3 Acroneuria sp. 1 0.2 Paragnetina sp. 15 2.6 Corydalus sp. 13 2.2 Stenelmis sp. Adult 70 12.0 Macronychus glabratus Adult 4 0.7 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 4 0.7 Macronychus glabratus larvae 5 0.9 Hydropsychidae 87 15.0 Hydropsyche sp. 2 0.3 Hydropsyche incommoda 55 9.5 Hydropsyche orris 10 1.7 Cheumatopsyche sp. 11 1.9 Hydroptilidae 18 3.1 Chironomidae 121 - 20.8 Simu11dae 13 2.2 Empid11ae 2 0.3 011gochaeta 6 1.0 f 4-19 1-'
HNP ANNUAL REPORT In July, the Simulidae were replaced by Elmidae and the four groups comprised 95% (115.5), 99% (115.9), and 90% (116.6) of the organisms collected. Likewise in October. Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, Chirono-midae, and Elmidae cominated, with 90% (115.5), 81% (115.9), and 88% (116.6) of the organisms present. The October, 1976, Dendy samples also showed the Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, Chironomidae, and Elmidae dominating, with 92% (115.5S), 80% (115.9S), and 84% (116.6S) of the total organisms. The Petersen data (Tables 4.3-6 through 4.3-8) were more variable, but similar dominant taxa occurred from station to station within each date period and there were common taxa between date periods. Two of the more numerous taxa were the Diptera and Pelecypoda, which were present at all stations for all date periods. 4.3.2.2 Species Diversity Species diversity (HBAR) values for Dendy and Peter'sen samples taken at HNP during 1979 are presented in Figure 4.3-1. HBAR values for Dendy samplers were similar throughout the year, except in April. The depressed values in April were caused by a seasonal increase in Simulidae, which comprised 65%, 62%, and 83% of the tota 1 number of individuals at 115.5, 115.9, and 116.6, respectively. The Petersen samples exhibit more variability in HBAR. Again, as with the Dendy values, the April values were the lowest. The low HBAR for Station 115.9 was due to 94% of that sample being composed of Chirono-midae. Similarly, 72% of the individuals collected at 115.5 were Trematoda. 4.3.2.3 comparison of 1976 and 1979 Data An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed on the Petersen data for HBAR, number of taxa, and number of individuals for the October 1976 4 and 1979 samples. Factors analyzed were station, year, and station-year interaction. This analysis showed no significant differences among the factors tested (Tables 4.3-9 through 4.3-11) . ANOVA was also performed on the Dendy data for HBAR, number of taxa, and number of individuals for the October 1976 and 1979 samples. Again, the factors analyzed were station, year, and station-year interaction. When significant differences among stations or between years were detected, Bonferroni multiple comparisons among means were performed. For HBAR, the analysis of variance showed no significant differences among stations in 1976 and in 1979. Analysis also showed that all stations had signifi-cantly greater diversity in 1979 than in 1976. The comparisons for number of taxa indicated that all stations were greater in 1979 than in 1976. Only Station 116.6 had a significantly greater number of individuals in 1979 when compared to similar stations in 1976 (Tables 4.3-12 through 4.3-17). 4-20 i
l l j
- HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4.3-6 TAXA, TOTAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OR ORGANISMS COLLECTED IN PETERSEN SAMPLES AT STATION 115.5 Total Number Percent Date Taxa Of Organisms Composition 01/31/79 Stenonema sp. I 1.7 Pseudiron sp. I 1.7 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 3 5.0 Hydropsyche incommoda 1 1.7 Hydropsyche orris 1 1.7 i Cheumatopsyche sp. 12 -
20.0 Ceratopogonidae 1 1.7 Chironomidae 6 10.0 Corbicula sp. 3 5.0 Oligochaeta 3- - 5.0 Prostoma rubrum ~ 28 46.6 04/26/79 Ceratopogonidae 1 1.9 Chironomidae 10 16.9 Simulidae 1 1.9 Gastropoda 1 1.9 Corbicula sp. 2 3.8 Trematoda 38 71,7 07/16/79 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 7 2.1 Macronema sp. 3 0.9 Hydropsychidae 2 0.6 Hydropsyche orris 4 1.2 Cheumatopsyche sp. 56 16.7 Ceratopogonidae 77 23.0 Chironomidae 55 . 16.4 c Simulidae 2 0.6 Pelecypoda 49 14.6 Corbicula sp. 26 7.8 Oligochaeta 19 5.7
. Trematoda 28 8.4 Nematoda 7 2.1 i.
e i
.4 .-
m 10lP
- ANNUAL REPORT
. TABLE 4.3-6 Continued TAXA,' TOTAL NUMBERS,.AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF ORGANISMS COLLECTED IN PETERSEN SAMPLES AT STATION 115.5 Total Number Percent Date Taxa Of Organisms Composition-10/09/79 Caenis sp. 1 0.3 Plecoptera 1 0.3 Stenelmis,sp. Larvae 11 3.6 Ceratopogon.dae 33 10.7 Chironomidae 39 ,
12.7
. Pelecypoda 16 5.2 .
Corbicula sp. 68 22.1 Oligochaeta 61 19.8 , Trematoda 61 . 19.8 Nematoda 17 5.5 t 4 1 2 i i i-
..~
( 4-22 e -, w . - + , - r e+ < ~ ,-w.e -- ,- ----w.ree, ,e- -
ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4. 3-7 TAXA, TUTAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF ORCANISMS [ COLLECTED IN PETERSEN SAMPLES AT STATION 115.9 Total Number Percent Date Taxa- Of Organisms Composition 01/31/79 Stenelmis sp.' Larvae 5 8.9 Cheumatopsyche sp. 2 3.6 Ceratopogonidae 2 3.6 Chironomidae 6 10.7 Corbicula sp. 28 St.7 Prostoma rubrum 12 21.4 04/26/79 Stenelmis sp. Adult 1 0.7 Stenelnis sp. La rvae - 1 0.7 Hydropsychidae 1 0.7 Ceratopogonidae 1 0.7 Chironomidae 133 93.7 Simulidae 2.1
] + Corbicula sp.
3, 1 0.7 Trematoda 1 0.7
-} 07/16/79 Elmidae Larvae 1 0.2
- Stenelmis sp. Larvae 26 4.2 i Ceratopogonidae 51 8.1 Chironomidae 338 54.0 I Pelecypoda 2 0.3 Corbicula sp. 53 8.5 l Oligochaeta 65 10.4
; Trematoda 52 8.3 Nematoda 38 6.1 I 10/09/79 Caenis sp. 1 0.3
-l Baetis sp. 1 0.3 Cloeon sp. 1 0.3 l Plecoptera 9 2.5 i Perlidae' 1 0. 3
' 0.3 Neoperla sp. 1 Stenelmis sp. Adult 1 0.3 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 37 10.5 Hydropsychidae 3 0.8 Hydropsyche incommoda 2 0.6 Cheumatopsyche sp. 3 0.8 Ceratopogonidae 13 3.7 o Chironomidae 120 33.9
.Empididae 1 0.3 Corbicula sp. 115 32.5 Oligochaeta 22 6.2 l- 'Hirudines 1 0.3 i Trematoda 19 5.4
-l Prostoma rubrum 1 0.3 ll Nematoda 1 0.3 Hydracarina 1 0.3 I
l
.i 4-23
_. m __
IC4P , ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4.3-8 TAXA, TOTAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF ORGANISMS COLLECTED IN PETERSEN SAMPLES AT STATION 116.6 Total Number Percent Date Taxa Of Organisms Composition 01/31/79 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 10 18.9 4- Ceratopogonidae 3 5.7 Chironomid,e 2 3.8 Corbicula sp. 32 60.4 011gochaeta 1 1.9 Prostoma rubrum 4 7. 5 Hydracarina 1 1.9 04/26/79 Ceratopogonidae 2 7.7 Chironomidae 14 53.8 3 Simulidae 4 15.4 Lastropoda 1 :3.8 Corbicula sp. 3 11.5 Trematoda 2 7.7
-07/16/79 Caenis sp. 2 0.4 Baetis sp. 2 0.4 Plecoptera 1 0.2 4
Elmidae Larvae 1 0.2 Stencimis sp. La rvae 44 10.0 Ceratopogonidae 27 6.1 Chironomidae 68 15.4 Pelecypoda 30 6.8 Corticula sp. 123 27.8 011gochaeta 122 27.6 Trematoda 5 , 1.1' , 'Prostoma rubrum 4 0.9 ! Nematoda 13 2.9 10/09/79 Cyrinus sp. Larvae 1 0.5 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 17 9.2 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 1 0.5 l Chaoborus sp. 4 2.2 L Ceratopogonidae 3 1.6 Chironomidae 29 15.7 Corbicula sp. 121 65.4
- Hirudinea 1 0.5 Trematoda 4 2.1 Prostoga rubrum 2 1.1 Nematoda 2 1.1 a
l-4-24
- -- , ~,-.--4 v
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4. 3-9 s AVERAGE VALUES AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR HBAR DATA FROM PETERSEN SAMPLES COLLECTED IN OCTOBER 1976 AND OCTOBER 1979 Average of six samples'for each date and station: Year Station Average 4 115.5 115.9 116.6 for Year 1976 1.64 1.52 1.63 1.60 1979 1.60 2.08 1.10 1.60 1 Average for Station 1.62 1.30 1.37 1.60 Analysis of variance: f . Source df ss ms f Station 2 1.133 0.56 1.43 NS Year 1 0.0002 0.0002 0.00 NS Station
- Year 2 1.781 0.89 2.25 NS
- Error 30 11.884 0.396 Total 35 14.798 d
i f 5 f. l 4-25 L
HNP
^
ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4.'3-10 AVERAGE VALUES AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR NUMBER OF TAXA COLLECTED IN PETERSEN SAMPLES IN OCTOBER 1976 AND OCTOBER 1979 Average of six samples for each date and station: ( Year Station Average 115.5 115.9 116.6 for Year
- 1976 4.00 5.17 4.83 4.67 1979 5.00 7.00 4.00 5.33 Average' for Station 4.50 6.08 4.42 5.00
. Analysis of variance:
Source df ss ms f Station 2 21.17 10.59 1.77 NS Year 1 4.00 4.00 0.67 NS Station
- Year 2 11.17 5.58 0.93 NS Error 30 179.67 5.99 Total 35 216.00 I
) e 4-26
-w +
l I l HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4.3-11 AVERAGE VALUES AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR NUMBERS OF INDIVIDUALS COLLECTED IN PETERSEN SAMPLES IN OCTOBER 1976 AND OCTOBER 1979
. Average of six samples for each date and station:
4 Year Station Average 115.5 115.9 116.6 for Year 1976 17.17 43.00 16.17 25 44 1979 51.33 59.00 30.83 47.63 Average . for Station 34.25 51.00 23.50 36.25 Analysis of variance : Source df ss as f Station 2 4609.50 2304.75 1.60 NS Ye3* 1 4203.36 4203.36 2.92 NS Station
- Year 2 712.06 356.03 0.25 NS Error 30 43141.83 1438.06
- - Total 35 52666.75
- 4 l
l I-4-27 y , , ,
1 I HNP ANNUAL REPORT-TABLE 4.3-12 AVERAGE VALUES AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR HBAR DATA FROM DENDY SAMPLERS COLLECIED IN OCTOBER 1976 AND OCTOBER 1979 Average of six samples for each date and station:
, Year Station Average-115.5 115.9 116.6 for Year 1976 2.80 2.65 2.59 2.68 1979 3.33 3.20 3.21 3.25 Average for Station 3.07 2.93 2.90 2.97 Analysis of variance:
Source df ss ms f Station 2 0.185 0.93 0.917 NS Year 1 2.86 2.86 28.31 *** Station
- Year 2 0.014 0.007 0.07 NS Error 30 3.024 0.101 Total 35 6.0o3
*** Significant for a = 0.005 t
4 . L-
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4.3-13 BONFERRONI MULTIPLE COMPARISON OF AVERACE VALUES (uij.) FOR HBAR FROM DENDY SAMPLERS Significance . Li Li (Li Bs(Li)
"11 "12 0.15 NS "11 "13 0.21 NS
-0.53 * "11 "21 "11 "21 U12 "13 0.06 NS U22 -0.55 * "12 # "22 u12 "21 "22 0.13 NS "21 "23 0.12 NS "22 "23 -0.01 NS U #
"13 "23 -0.62
- 13 "23 4
a = 0.10 B = T(1 - a/2S; (n-1)ab) = 2.691 a =2 , . S'(Li) = 2 MSE = 0.0u67 (n-1)ab S(Li) = 0.082 b =3 . n =6 Bs(Li) = 0.22 MSE = 0.101 S =9 .
Conclusions:
.1. No detectable differences exist among stations in 1976 or 1979.
- 2. All stations have significantly greater diversity in 1979 when coepared to the same station in 1976.
l
!.-29 i.
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TA!!I.E 4. 'l- 14 AVERACE VALUES AND ANALYSIS OF' VARIANCE FOR NUMBER OF TAXA COLLECTED IN DENDY SAMPLERS IN OCTOBER 1976 AND OCTOBER 1979 Average of six samples for each date and station: Year. Station Average 115.5 115.9 116.6 for Year 1976 12.50 11.83 10.67 11.67 1979 15.17 13.50 16.00 14.89 Average - for Station 13.83 12.67 13.33 13.28 d Analysis of variance: Source df ss ms f Station 2 8.23 4.115 0.87 NS Year 1 93.45 93.45 19. 7 6 ** ** Station
- Year 2 21.54 10.77 2.27 NS Error 30 142.00 Total 35 265.22
**** Significant for a = 0.001 k
me 4-30
HNP ANNUAL REPORT f TABLE 4.3-15 , BONFERRONI MULTIPLE COMPARISON OF AVERAGE VALUES (uij.) FOR NUMBER OF TAXA FROM DENDY SAMPLERS Significance Li Li (Li Bs(Li)
"11 "12 0.67 NS , "11 "13 1.83 * "Il " "13 "11 "21 -2.67 * "11 "21 "12 u13 1.16 NS "12 "22 -1.67
- U12 * "22 "21 "22 1.67 * "21 "22 "21 u23 0.83 NS U
"22 "23 2.50
- 22 > v23 "13 "23 -5.33 * "13 * "23 a = 0.10 B = T(1 - a/2S; (n-1)ab) = 2.691 a =2 S(Lk) = 2 MSE
= 0.31 (n-1)ab S(Lk) = 0.56 b =3 ..
n -6 Bs(Li) = 1.51 MSE = 4.73 S =9 .
Conclusions:
- 1. The numbers of TAXA collected at Station 115.5 is greater than those collected at Station 116.6 (the control) in 1979.
- 2. .The' number of TAXA collected is greater in 1979 than
.in 1976 for each station.
i I_ l 4 , . g -
HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE 4.3-16 AVERACE VALUES AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR NUMBERS OF INDIVIDUALS COLLECTED FROM DENDY SAMPLERS IN OCTOBER 1976 AND OCTOBER 1979 Average of six samples for each date and station: Year Station Average 115.5 115.9 116.6 for Year 1976 88.17 47.67 45.83 60.56 1979 101.33 51.83 96.83 83.33 Average for Station 94.75 49.75 71.33 71.95 Analysis of variance: Source df sa ms f Station 2 12156.83 6078.42 8.57
- Year 1 4669.55 4669.55 6.60
- Station
- Year 2 3705.51- 1852.75 2.62 NS Error 30 21264.00 708.80 Total 35 41795.89 f
- Significant for a = 0.05 i
I l 4-32
, . _ . . - .. . -.m -_. _ _ _ _ . . _ . . . _. __ __ .
f b HNP ANNUAL REPORT 4 TABLE 4.3-17 BONFERRONI MULTIPLE COMPARISON OF AVERAGE VALUES (uij.) FOR NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS FROM DENDY SAMPLERS Significance A 4 4 Li Li (Li Bs(Li)
"11 "12 40.50 * "11 "12 "11 "13 42.34 * "11 " "13 .
f "11 : "21' -13.16 NS "12 "13 1.84 NS u12 u22 4.16 NS' "21 "22 49.50
- u21 * "22
- "21 "23 4.50 NS "22 "23 45.00 * "22 "23 "13 D23 51.00 * "13 "23 a = 0.10 B = T(1 - a/2S; (n-1)ab) = 2.691 a- -2 S (L1) = 2'MSE
= 47.20 (n-1)ab S(Li) = 6.87 b =3 .
n =6 Bs(Li) = 18.5 l MSE =.708.8 i S 9 . w'onclusions :
- 1. The ' number of individuals collected is greater at Station d
115.5 than at Station 116.6 (the control) in 1976, but.not in 1979. . 2. : Station 115.9 had the fewest number of. individuals during' 1979. k i - i' 3. Only Station 116.6 had a significantly greater number of individuals in 1979 compared to-1976. [- 4 - s
,a
HNP ANNUAL REPORT 4.3.3 Summary Examination of the data obtained from Dendy and Petersen samples taken at HNP during 1979, with respect to relative abundance, numbers of taxa, and HBAR, indicates a healthy benthic macroinvertebrate community both upstream and downstream from HNP. Seasonal population cycles were in evidence as was aggregated dispersion of some taxa. The population peaks in 1979 are probably due to yearly cyclic changes. Comparisons of October 1976 data with October 1979 data, when both units were fully operational, showed significantly greater values for 1979 than for 1976 for the Dendy data for numbers of taxa. numbers of individuals, and HBAR and showed no significant differences for HBAR, number of taxa, or number of individuals for the Petersen data. Based oa these results, HNP ".ts 1 and 2 have had no adverse effects on the benthic macroinvertebrate populations, nor have they created an objectionable or damaging pollution condition in the Altamaha River in the vicinity of HNP. 4.4 Aerial Remote Sensing 4.4.1 Specification Aerial remote se. sing of the HNP site was conducted according to the RNP-2-ETS 3.1. 2. 2.1 as f ollows : Plant communities of the site shall be aerially photographed to detect and assess the significance of damage, or lack thereof, related to deposition of coolir.g tower drift. IR photographs and vegetation reconnaisance in the drift field are the methods recommended for detecting possible adverse effects of drift deposition on vegetation. 4.4.2 Results and Discussion Color and color infra-red aerial photographs were made of the HNP site at approximately 10:30 a.m.. October 23, 1979. A Zeiss RMK 15/23 6 inch focal length mapping camera was used with Kodak aerochrome infra-red 2443-Estar base film. The prints are stereoscopic pairs with 1:12.000 scale. Flight altitude was approximately 6,700 feet. The film is sensitive to green, red, and inf ra-red. The photographs were examined with a stereoscopic viewer for the occurrence of stressed vegetation. None was observed. A field reconnaisance of the site revealed no dead or stressed vege-cation due to other than natural causes. No areas of dead or stressed vegetation were observed on IR aerial photographs or in the field recon-naisance. This indicates that cooling tower drift from HNP has had little, if any, noticeable effect on the plant communities in the drift area. 4-34
HNP ANNUAL REPORT 4.5 Special Requirements: Transmission Lines 4.5.1 Specification Special requirement studies for transmission lines were conducted according to HNP-2-ETS 4.1 as follows: Aerial patrols will.be made along the 500 kv transmission line right-of-way f rom HNP to the Bonaire substation to determine if significant erosion damage to the right-of-way has occurred. When areas of significant erosion or areas subject to potential significant erosion are located by the . surveys, maintenance crews equipped to repair tae damage by planting and/or feplanting or regrading and planting are necessary will restore the area to a stable condition. The measures described above will assure that maintenance.of transmission line rights-of-way will be carried out so as to minimize disruption of vegetation, wildlife, recreational lands, and visual effect due to erosion conditions on the rights-of-way. Semi-annual aerial patrols will continue until stabilization of soil and vegetation of the rights-of-way is reached. 4.5.2 Results and Discussion The Bonaire line was flown in April and Oc*ober of 1979. No severe erosion was observed on either flight. Past aerial surveys, as well as those conducted in 1979, indicate that the right-of-way has reached a point of soil stabilization as far.as soil erosion is con-cerned. .Therefore, no further aerial surveys will be made and the requirement will be terminated.
~4-35 l
l
29 - 28 . 27 - 26 - 25 - 24 -
,23 -
O
- 21 -
N 20 - fso19 18 - h17_ 16 - 5 15 - h14-13 - . 12 - 11 - 10 - 9-8- 7-6~ 5 g i , , g g g g y g g , , , , , 1 7 28 6 13 20, 27 17 15 14 18 14 19 17 13 20 F M A M J J A S O N D MONTHS GEO RGI A POWER COMPANY EDWIN I. IIATCil NUCLEAR PLMiT A!ciUAL REPORT 1979 ALTAMAllA RIVER WATER TEMPERATURES FOR Tile 1979 IMPINGEMENT STUDY (START OF SURVEY) - FIGURE 4.1-1
29 - p 28 - 21 - ) 26 - 25 - 24 - 23 - 22 - 21 - G 20 - 19 - d 18 - N 17 - h 16 - I' 15 - ' N 14 - fa 13 - Q 12 -
- 11 -
10 - 9-8- 7-6- 5-1 l t 1 I I I I I I I I I I I i 2 8 29 7 14 21 28 18 16 15 19 15 20 18 14 21 y M A M J J A 'S O N D MONTHS GEORGIA POWER COMPANY EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 1979 ALTAMAHA RIVER WATER TEMPERATURES FOR THE 1979 IMPINGEMENT STUDY (END OF SURVEY) FIGURE 4.1-2
j . l I{l ~ Y 3 - N 1 A 9 7) 4 P - 9Y T 1E E M N A L ER U HU G V R - $ O P 9 TS I F C R7 RF OO - A9 F1 F R L C! SE E UR OA NO IT TS - P i 0 2 D W HE CR V A( EY O T AL LD EU P HA T I 3 N .UN RS E , 1 IN A VT A N IN I I REf l 7 1 O G WDE AD HC R AN MI O AP TM 1 9 S E LI A 1 G i 4 A 1 I 8 J 1 I 4 J 1 I 5 M 1 I 7 A - 1 I 7 2 ' I 0 2 S l i T N O - I 3 M 1 I 6 M I 8 2 I 7 4
- 1 1 F - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - -
21 0 7 88 8 987 77 67 57 47 37 2177 07 98 66 76 66 56 46 36
,,8 4$" h E
4 1 N 4 A 9 7 P T 9
- 1) E N Y R M A L
EE U G iV l i O P TRU FI 9 C R7 RS A9 O E1 FF L O R CT N OD E UR I N NO P TA (E g 1 2 D W HE CR T V EY O AL HA LD EU P .UN RS T l 4 N 1N E 1 A VT A I N I W IN RE M D AE l 8 1 O G E l l AN C R MI AP O TM LI l 0 S E A 2
. G I 5 1
'A I
9 J 1 I 5 J 1 I 6 M 1 I 8 A 1 I 8 2 I 1 2 S l i T N O I 4 M 1 I 7 M _ I 9 2 I 8
' I 2 F 2 1 098 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 09 8 7 6 5 4 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 6 6 6 6 6 zh$"y x$E
I l 39 34 - 33 - Day 32 - A
/ \
31 - ---- Night / \ f 30 -
/ \
29 f \ 28 l g f 27 - 26 - l \ I \ 25 -
. / I 24 -
23 - 1 l L,'N I G 22 -
/
l t 21 - f
\ '
l g 20 -
/ \
E 19 - / k " "" J l 6 18 - 17 - f
/
O 16 -
/
g 15 - / 4 14 -
/
13 - p' 12 - - 11 - f 10 - '
- j 9- N "
8-1 i l i I i i e I i 1 l 16 5 12 21 14 19 10 17 11 16 15 19 l J F M A M J J A S Mo.mtS l GEORGIA POWER COMPANY EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 1979 AIF TEMPERATURES FOR THE 1979 ENTRAINMENT STUDY FIGURE 4.2-1 J
I l l l l l l l l 1 l I l ? l 34 - 33 - 32 - 31 - \ Day g 30 - \ j 29 - ---- Night ,, \ 28 - t 2' 26
- f l .
- 25 - /
,U 24 23 -
t
/ .
E 22 -
/
E 21 - h 20 - g 19 - a 18 - g 17 - 16 - Q - 15 - 14 - 13 - 12 f 11 / 10 - f 9 8 - =^~~? ~ .g ' l 1 - ' l 6 l l 1 1 I I I I I I I I i 16 21 5 12 14 19 10 17 , 11 16 15 19 J F M A M J J A S MONTHS GEORG_lA POWER COMPANY EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 1979 ALTAMAHA RIVER WATER TEMPERATURES FOR THE 1979 ENTRAINMENT STUDY FIGURE 4.2-2
Day
- - - - Night 12 - , _
's
\
11 - g O - - + " I? r 10 - \ g; \ y c 9- -
\
s'A \\
\
\
l h 8- V d 's i' E 7- . ..g N
,r - -.
/
\ /
\
6- g ,/ V-5- I I I I I I I I I I I i 16 5 12 21 14 19 10 17 11 16 15 to J F M 'A M J J A S M0!rrIIS GEORGIA POWER COM PANY EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLRiT { ANNUAL REPORT 1979 ALTAMAllA RIVER DISSOLVED OXYCEN FOR 1 THE 1979 ENTRAINMENT STUDY l FIGURE 4.2-3
Day Night 8-t 4 i
\.
\
/ g 7- / \
I
\
, ~~% \
,a* ,
,/ 's . 's g( % 's /
6 E 5 l l l 1 l i 1 1 I I I i 16 5 12 21 14 19 10 17 11 16 15 19 i J F M A M J J A S i MONTHS l GLORGIA POW ER COMPANY EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 1979 ALTAMAHA RIVER pH FOR THE 1979 ENTRAINMENT STUDY FIGURE 4.2-4
SPECIES DIVERSITY (llBAR) SPECIES DIVERSITY (HBAR)
- w u e.
i t E e
~ w w e M 9"8 a H N
- W m vi vi
'm b L [I$f;$ffjhM(M35%!Af 2.4 n n n -
gyjpfgdfgp%Qfi@]2.9
- - - .$ 2. 0 3.2 g 1.8 s 3.0
_@yll@INih.1.3- @hMIf4'gyl($$ 2.0 g m g
- l0.5 Q , 2.1 2.0 Q
m o 1.2 M E d
~ o to n " .< @MMO u uze- Q
- 4 d P g 0l@fS!Bj'6(,%$1Ed$[th 3.0 E 4
, $$$$iY236$![N'yfjYjkijjj'j.
e omoz m m p 2.2 8 3.7 { m o . 3.2 m .
.c. 2.7 3.2 Qro MHm g "z 55m M N M
C zmm pg g yNh 3 pj Q ES$[$pjgdg/pgQ 2.8 }jl4f'fggg,fg:M9l$g@j]3.6 4mmo mx m o rzo oz 2.6 O 3.7 mmh m < Nd m - Hn 1.7 1 HUE o-E N :--j 3. 6 p e to ag n ri o msC< n m - H g Q C d Mem" E
/
" 3 b o
.""y" uoo<
)
i CN L
~5z O
C M to
IINP ANNUAL REPORT CllAPTER 5 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 5.1 SPECIFICATION 5-1 5.2 DISCUSSION 5-1 I I-l l L 5-1
HNP ANNUAL REPORT
- 5. ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS 5.1 Specification In accordance with Section 5.7.1 of the HNP-ETS, Units I and II, the HNP Annual Environmental Surveillance Report will include a summary of: all instances of ETS non-compliance, changes in Federal and State permits and certificates, changes in the Environmental Program Description Document (EPDD), changes in station design or operation which could involve an environmental impact, changes to the EIS, and copies of all reports regarding station discharges made in accordance with NPDES Permit No. GA-0004120.
5.2 Discussion As required by Section 5.6 of the Environmental Technical Specifica-tions, detailed written procedures shall be prepared and ,followed for all activities involved in implementing the ETS. Contrary to the above, an NRC inspection revealed a deficiency in that the temperature of the weather station building was greater than 75 F and the air conditioner was not functioning properly as required by procedure HNP-7900, paragraph 4.a. In addition, contrary to paragraph 4.j of ghe same procedure, it was observed that a difference of more than 20 existed between the top and bottom wind direction indicators and the required additional checks were not performed. A review of the weather station surveillance procedure was made and found to be adequate for providing reasonable assurance that the weather instruments are maintained in proger operating order. The 75"F amolent temperature limit and the 20 direction difference limit are written into the procedure as guidance limits for potential pro-blems existing with.the heating / cooling system and wind direction instrument. The limits are prefaced by the words "should be" and, thus. are not strict compliance limits as implied in the deficiency. This deficiency, as well as the weather station surveillance procedure,
~
has be=en thoroughly discussed with the responsible technician to assure that the technician fully understands the requirements of the procedure and operation of the equipment. In the future, technicians assigned the duty of performing the surveillance procedure will be adequately trained and advised of the necessity for prompt notification to respons-ible parties if malfunctioning weather station equipment is indicated by the surveillance checks. Procedure HNP-7900 was revised to reflect an upper ambient tempera-ture guidance limit of 85 F. This new limit will be more reasonable f rom an operational view. but still will be well within the weather instruments specifications. 5 t O
HNP ANNUAL REPORT Sections V and VI of the Hatch QA Manual provide that measures shall be established to assure that obsolete or superseded documents are controlled to prevent inadvertent use and that compliance with the applicable 10 CFR 50, Appendix B is insured. Contrar, to the above, a Georgia Power internal audit of the environ-mental monitoring programs, October 17 and 19,1979, noted a deficiency in the control of the Environmental Affairs Center Procedures Manual and several procedures. To correct these problems, the procedure manual was numbered and contains a distribution list and the receipts of recipients. The survey procedures were changed to make it under-stood the principal investigator is responsible for completing, signing and dating of data sheets, and that photocopies of the data sheet's are to be put into the Environmental Affairs Center control file. In addition, all strip charts and data sheets will contain instrument identification numbers. The Hatch Environmental Specifications provide that any change affecting Company organization depicted in Figure 5.2-1 of the Tech Specs be reported to NRC within 30 days. Cc trary to the above, a Georgia Power internal audit of the environ-mental monitoring program, October 17 and 19,1979, revealed a delin-quency of notification to NRC of the transfer of the Nuclear Engineer from the Chief Engineer to the Manager of Nuclear Operations. Notifi-cation took place via a letter dated October 18, 1979, from W. A. Widner, CPC Manager of Nuclear Operations, to J. P. O'Reilly, NRC Region 2, Atlanta. As of November 14, 1979, the Manager of Environmental Affairs assumed responsibility for informing the NRC of any further changes in Company organization af fecting Section 5.2 of Appendix "B". As required by Section 3.1.2.1.3 of the Hatch Environmental Technical [ Specifications, an impingement monitoring program will commence on January 2, 1979, and continue until approval for modification or termi-nation of the monitoring requirement has been obtained from NRC in accordance with Section 5.7.3. l Contrary to the above, impirgement samples were not collected during January 1979. Section 5.7.1 of the ETS requires that the annual environmental surveil-lance report be submitted within 90 days after January 1. The radiologi-cal portion of this report for calendar year 1978 was submitted three months late. Executive vigilance is precluding a recurrence of this deficiency. 5-2 .
HNP ANNUAL REPORT There were no changes to Feaeral and State permits and certificates, or changes in station design or operation during 1979. Effective March, 1979, the sampling frequency in the EPDD for Entrain-ment Monitoring and Impingement Monitoring was changed from weekly to monthly, as per letter from C. F. Whitmer, Vice President of Engineer-ing, to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Canniasion dated March 13, 1979. Copies of all reports regarding station discharges in accordance with NPDES Permit No. GA-0004120 are included in Appendix A. O e t I !^ r 5-3
idP ANNUAL REPORT 4 e APPENDIX A NPDES OPERATION MONITORING REPORTS FOR PLANT EDWIN I. HATCH FOR 1979 t e
..x.. - . _ _ __. _ - _ _ _ _
y//- U .4 2.- ( (_
\
M
. , - : , W - . *- m - n ' 'd!'
April 16, 1979 ' Mr. Gene B. Welsh. Chief flater Protection Branch Environmental Protection Division 270 Washington Street, S.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Re: Plant Arkwright - NPDES Permit No. GA 0026069 Plant Bowen - hTDES Permit No. GA 0001449 Plant Branch - NPDES Permit No. GA 00'26051 Plant Hammond - NPDES Permit No. GA 0001457 Plant Hatch./' - NPDES Permit No. GA 0004120 1- Plant McDonough-Atkinson - NPDES Permit No. GA 0001431 Plant McManus - NPDES Permit N'o. GA 0003794 Plant Mitchell - NPDES Permit No. GA 0001465 Plant Wansley - NPDES Permit No. GA 0026778 1 Plant Yates - NPDES Permit No. GA 0001473
Dear Mr. Welsh:
As required by the above referenced NPDES permits, we hereby submit the Operation Monitoring Reports for each of the correspending power plants for the quarter ending March 31, 1979. If you have any questions or comments, please advise.
, Sincerely, T. E. Byerley-Manager of Environmental Affairs li - D!!E/chg P
Attachments xc: Mr. ' W. M. Jernigan (h '0 Attachments)
~
C i I be: Mr. G. J. Cosa Mr. O. C.'Rittenhouse (W/ Attachments) Mr. R. J.~ Kelly Mr. C. L. Donaldson.'Jr. l Mr.-D. M..Ratcliffe-l p' l
P a g h 1 o f .1 ( (
,...,.. n. .s. ..,..
. .. . s . 3. ,..n. . . . 4.. . , ., . . , n. n. .,.
;e.) . .. - -
F rr,n : 01-01-79
.' '.- u. To: 03-31-79
... . . . . . . 'f e. t. :erait 'fuc er: 000'.'20
.- :: m e e '.oct: ion: 001.i, 7.ou '.'o lun e 'das te freutralicaticn tank)
T t :e of Sanele: Grah Fruc :ene!. ' of .\nn.:.v.41s : 2 / cia
?ar r.u:.:c: Je::,0c deu .'o' id.: C!.'. & Grr:ase pH
-i- mt /1 oH ' ni:s Limi:a: ave . .0 Av-y -
15 ?in. ') . J
.v.- .' :. .
.e,. . .a . ...
. . c.
a
.... a. . rJ n .. .. ,
01-02-79 55.6 <5 7.2 01-17-79 16.2 <5 7.3 02-06-73 1.8 <5 6.3 02-19-79 0.8 <5 6.5 03-05-19 2.1 <5 7.2 03-19.-79 1.0 <5 7.1 Number of Samples: 6 6 6 Average Value: 12.9 <5 -
- a::imun va1ue: 55.6 <5 7.3 24inimu. t Value:
0.8 <5 6.3 - Limits E:<cceded: 0 0 0 l if . A . A .\. m
( Pago .' ci 3 (
. . , . . , .. , , , . ..,.... . . , . , ,s, . . . ... m. . . ...
. . c. ,...,,,,,
.. ... . o . . . . . . . . .
Geer .- ' -
"ren: 01-01-79
,o 03-31-79
't .
?urnit :.unb e r :
000!.120 A : '.r . . i ; ; . . r .: .x . . : . .- - A.
.ow Volunc '!as c a (pressure fi':er backta.sh)
*: : .- : s. .. .: G r . :,
- r..: .; u e n .c :- .f .'a. .. '/ua .
Paramo:cr: Suspended Solids Oil & Grease oH mc / '. c/'. , . . nH 'Jn i s s..,.
. . n n.
. av ..._
....o. . o- . ,.
. . .. .c. - . , .. . .. . .v. , .,
- c. . ,,
2 ' - - - ::.:. . . l-Filter A 01-05-79 0.9 <5 7.8 Filter S 01-03-79 1.9 <5 7.8 Filter C 01-08-79 1.3 <5 7.8 Filter D 01-08-79 1.5 <5 7.8 Filter A 01-17-79 2.4 <5 7.9 Filter 3 01-17-79 2.7 <5 7.9 Filecr C 01-17-79 3.4 <5 7.9 Filter D 01-17-79 2.7 <5 7.9 Fil:or A 02-06-79 1.2 <5 7.6 Fil:2 3 02-06-79 8.1 <5 7.6 Filcar C 02-06-79 2.8 <5 7.6 Fil:2r D 02-06-79 2.8 <5 7.6 - Filter A 02-19-79 1.4 <5- 7.6-Filter 3 02-19-79 0.4 <5 7.6 Filtar C 02-19-79 0.3 <5 7.6 Filter D 02-19-79 2.8 <5 7.6 Filter A 03-05-79 0.3 <5 7.8 Filtor 3 02-03-79 0.3 <5 7.3 Filter C 03-05-79 0.3 <5 7.8 Filter D 03-05-79 0.7 <5 7.8 Filt2r A 03-19-79 1.3 <5 7.8 Filtor 3 03-19-79 3.6 <5 7.3 Filtar C 03-19-79 2.8 <5 7.8 Filtar D 03-19-79 3.5 <5 7.8
.'! umber of Samples: 24 24 24 Aversg2 Value: 2.1 <5 -
Ma:-:in := '/a luo : 8.1 <5 7.9 Minimum */alue: 0.3 <5 7.6 Limit: D:cceded : 0 0 0 0- D "39' 9
' tM ddAR .
. ? 3.cr .: c: -
g (
.- ....4.,
.. . ..r.
..,s...,.,,.,...,.,
7,..
. . . ,0. 3...
gey .... -
ro't 01-01-79
;>.,u- .
. To: 03-31-79
- .cmi
- ':urh e r -
00-120
. . . .. ..; e . . .e ' n : 4_- . . . > . l i .m- '"we r 'J iaw.ioun
- c:r . . .'m a 1. s i:. '. / ;':
u....,..
...... * .. c . .e
- . . . . :i: f.n.f Zone Tever
. ._ .--. 1: iu G r ; ~a
?arame:er: Tempera:ure Temperatura .:.orine
... o .:. s/.
y ii
.*6, Limi :: 7t 3. i' 2T o. iC av;. ' C-. .
. 2. , ' 3
. . . . o. n. o r.y. .. o . .,
e. 01-03-79 48 48 ! 01-10-79 46 46 01-12-79 46 47 01-24-79 47 47 01-31-79 45 45 0.1-07-79 45 45 02-14-79 45 45 02-22-79 46 47 02-22-79 54 53 . 03-07-79 56 56 03-15-79 57 58 03-21-79 63 64 03-28-79 61 61
!!umb e r o f S .mo l a s : 13 13
!'a:-:i.~.um '/a 1ue : 63 64
*inimum '/a lue : 45 45
! Limit: E::cceded : - 0 Jotos: 1) 2;PCCS .~tegulations rio longer require reporting of this discharge.
!!cueve r , see Attachment (llatch Log Sheet 16C) for chlorination data.
DO :D
^
V f n bJT M] 3)Yf] uls ,jlj! .,
. ?a *a.
- ii .
7 (
.t .. ..s. . . .. . ., ,.. , , . . , .
....i.,,.,,...v......7.,r..,. .
- s. . . .. .t .
Ge.n . .t ') . : c r .' p*,,-
. .- - 'com: 01-01-79 To. 03-31 79
.s. . .,.
- n. .. < . , u... . '7 e '. -.
. . . . . . 00041.'O
. . . . :=:Lan- 0')LC - 4,: .nt : e Tr. .nr:en - ? '. a n .
- .: of Sar:nia : Gcab
.r>cuene. of .inalysis: 2 / .. r .
Parame:er: ;i Suspended Solids 5-Dav BOD recal Calif a r--
- .! '.ni t s r>; m 2 / 1 ,. .
Colonies /130 ml Limics: Location Min. o.O Avg. 30 A v 7, . rJ Neg. f C0 Max. 9.0 Max. 43 Ma:... 43 . :a x . -00 Date tec3 ten - 01-02-79 =1 Weir - - 1.2 - 01-05-79 =2 Weir - - 25 - 01-03-79 Effluent 7.55 8.0 - - 03-06-79 2ffluen: 7.2 - - 600 2
- u-ner of Samples: 2 1 2 1, N/c r: 72 Value: -
8.0 13 600' Maxi: .u:n Value : 7.55 8.0 25 600 Minimum Value: 7.2 8.0 1.2 600 Limits 2::cceded: 0 0 0 2
!!otos: 2) Sewace treat =cnt plants #1 and #2 are tied together into a ec= men effluent. The high fecal coliform result on 3-6 probably resulted frca impreper chlorination.
D{% dJ
,0 "DV' vu R
_lflJs , m.
. P a ,o 3 Of 3 ( t' i
I
. , , . . . .... . . . . , . , . , . ....., , 7 .. ..o ., .s .
c rrr : 01-01-79
. s .. 70; 03-31-79
.. . r ,
000i'.20
~
. . ;. ..'- U ?crri. N'umb e r :
.....m'.x. 'an: . 0 0'.0 '.ic uia Radt.'a s te S"s ter: ( '.*n i : I)
. .: ia: ue: Gr a
.: /.c ;. An.al :.a: 2. :s.
? a r:.= a : n Suenended sol.de O L'. 5 G r. :uw nH
.- . -,i nH 'Jni:s Limi a: Avg. 30 Ave. 15
... ~ <, ~ , , . . , .. . . .. .m.
( n. _1 I l 1 01-03-79 3 3 3 01-16-79 0.1 16.7 7.0 i l 02-06-79 29.5 24.5'- 6.9 02-25-79 <0.1 4.9 7.0 03-05-79 11.3 1.3 7.0 03-20-79 5.9 8.4 7.3
- umber of Samples: 5 5 5 Average value: 9.4 11.2 -
- !a:umum Value: 29.5 24.5 7.8
- 4i::imum value: <0.1 1.3 6.9 -
Limits E;:cceded: 0 1 0
- otes: 3) ';o samples analy cd because of misunderstanding in Plant.
- 4) !!!.;a all and grease value prob.thly was the result of small 2:nounta a: ci; 3;'illed on the floor being w.tshed inta floor drains.
D** *D ~TV i oc o . ._ . ._2
.( l.
.n..,,.,,-,,,.
.... . , , . .. , , . .s, .. .
- v. ..,; . ., ..
.r ....
e r c ~. - Ol-01-79
.'..n.
70: 03-31-79
. . . . . v.. .
n..._,
.. c.s - , ,
.c. . . . . . ..u . . . e.r..
.Ot3. g. ,,_. . ,0
-. '.c e n t i ps . .' O ' -
- '.i uii: "..dwaste Sys:em (ilni: !!)
. 2.-.,..
Pr rame n r - Sua :anded Solida Oil 4 Crease pH
. , , ... . . . , , ,... . , e.
re....
. . . . - . . . s. . ..
a ,. a, .
~.. a.. .
..v
,a .
. .a w
.n. ,..,. e. .
01-03-79 0.1 4.4 6.9 01-16-79 5 5 5 02-06-79 12.6 1.1 6.7 02-20-79 7.8 2.0 6.9 03-07-79 142 6 13.2 6.9 03-19-79 0.3 < 1. 0 7.0 Number of Samples: 5 5 5 Average '/alue : 32.65 4.3 -
';a;: .n=
'/a 1ue : 142 13.2 7.0
- .n ame */a l ua : 0.1 <l.0 6.7 L;.= . ' :, .;xc ;uCd : 2 0 0
- otuc : 5) ::o cample analy :ed because of misunderstanding in Plant.
- 6) !!igh su pended solids probably resulted from houseclean.tng in which dirt was washed into floor drains.
D**]D D'T oemo .1J _ ,.
.o : ,. , e .- ..
- -; ( (
,,.. m..,,. . ... ,i.- .,,..
. . s . . . _,J
. .. .. .. n.
0 ., .
. .s . . _ , .
G e o r a .: o'v e r Ci
"- From: 01-01-78
- - ::: .. . 2 . e .-
.0: 03-31-79
? .), w . i .. s Ar' ,
r; .-,: ' W.' Per :i ? ': umber: 0004!20 W.;e.. -
. 'ac f i .e : (F;: #: . : , : : 2.c.! D ! . i: t (r.rii . t) c re ;ue:.e- .
A:.a -ys is : 1/'.A . G r.15 Grab Grab Type of Sumple: In ditu Parace cr: Temnerature Free Total Chlorine Chlorine pH OF . 2 . '_ C1: mr/l C1: aH L* nits i .< .. -4 . s
- v. 4 ..,. . o.0 Ma:. 9.O D:.:e 01-03-79 49 8.1 01-09-79 46 7.9 01-11-79 <0.1 <0.1 01-16-79 7.9 01-17-79 <0.1 <0.1 01-18-79 47 01-23-79 47 <0.1 <0.1 7.7 .
01-30-79 44 7.5 7 02-01-79 45 7.4 02-03-79 44 7.8 02-14-79 46 0.,. t
.s / n, / . ,e 0.9. ~ e/,. .q ~ l 9 e-
't i I .t 03-01-79 6.6 .
03-05-79 55 03-08-79 , 6.7 03-15-79 57 <0.1 <0.1 6.7 03-19-79 <0.1 <0.1 0 3 c 2 2-7's 64 7.9 03 .9-79 61 (0.1 <0.1 03-25-79 8.1 03-30 '9 <0.1 <0.1 Number of Samples: 13 7 7 14 Averaga Value: -
<0.1 <0.1 -
Ma::i== '/a lue : 64 <0.1 <0.1 8.1 Minimum '/<:1ue : 44 <0.1 -0.1 6.6 Limi t.: D:c':ed eu : - - - 0
- Jo tes : 7) ::u chlorination during February.
D
' id in 7"M lA D 1 X Y L@
n..,..... . 1.>- ~ ( (
-.,....,,s,..-.3.,
.. s. . .
.s....s,...
,. . . . . n. .. n ., .
C c. - - '- -
~.-
'% om : 01-91-79 9
r -
"' o 31-79
':m h. .. orv '. I:to
. .- 7. c c a t ic:'
0';
. '.~. , - Cam a i e d P l a n :. '.la u t e (Unit II)
.... . . .s , ... .... . .
..,- +
, .,. , .).. ... ., e .: . .
. . < % . :)
a r u.. .) . (.%. s .. *) a
.......3
......L s,
.t.. . .. 7..
. . . .... e
. . . . . . .a-.. . O . . L ;.
n.
.. . _ . . . ,, tf
~
L a.. i. O . . , L,
.s u
,2 .-- .
o r .* .t . ,,1. , r- - .u n.. * .., i. q
- i. .: m a. . a.. .
'f.4
. . . ., . 6 . I)
.a.
. . - a,.0
.)r. ._c 01-02-79 8.4 01-09-79 7.? 01-16-79 < 0.1 <0.l' 7.7 01-22-73 < 0.1 < 0.1 01 ,, ia. o . 01-25-79 < 0.1 < 0.1 01-30-79 8.2 02-01-79 7.6 02-08-79 7.4 02-15-79 < 0.1 < 0.1 7.6 02-21-79 < 0.1 < 0.1 0 ., , , < c> ~., o . 03-01-79 6.6 03-05-79 < 0.1 < 0.1
- 03-08-79 6.4 03-12-79 < 0.1 < 0.1 03-13-79 . 6.4 0 .,. .,. .,. I sa , .,
t.U 0a, s,o n a J J l..,
- umber of Samples: 13 7 7 14 A/ern m Valua: -
< 0.1 :0.1 -
- '3::imum ~/a lue : 64 :0.1 < 0.1 8.4 Olinimun '/a lue : 44 ;0.1 < 0.1 6.4 Limit C::ceeded : - - -
0
- r., : . ;) w: ; : a ;u 7 for temperatura data.
I certif; . hat I am familiar with the information contained in this report anc that to the best of => knowledge and belief such information is true, comclete, and accurate.
~
-v f A
> /
/
J! T.
.ff E. Byerley Manager of Environmental Affairs April 15, 1979 Jas/dct
~
T D 3 f [k D**0D Jaf of_ 11 .YJn" o -
( / ATTAC:DIENT Georgia Pcwer Ccmpan/ Plant Hatch The following eight pages contain the chlorination data for the cooling tower blowdowns at Plant Hatch. e e 1 e O
~
r, *I
. u !
n .\n *
- e. .
e,O, l
.e.. .)- 1
.Cs * ...
&T D
=*
\" g .
s- s . eJ. l
- e. t,-
2
' .s Q
. . . g,
- e (+
'% n.
- 9. ( *, . . . . T. c.
. s.: ans I** ****"""*"' .
r ei, o 4 M
- t. -
.t ge
.. =c.
...,. qlj . , . . . , .,, ., .\rg '.. y
- p. mn ' % - O
= =. ..
m ..=. =.. V . ei. 6 j P%
= . g g __
. a g
l , .; . **%- * 'A N I ". ,
% f3 L e-.
< 6 -
.,.. . ,J G ;g
;'. 3 Vr, V s.
(; .}* *. . N-
, y . - _ _
.g... -
. f*l . h %s % N I * , g
'( ;I '.*# Y ga . u. _N_'_gl
- f2 5.
- ,.NE -
,s a
*\ d ', ,. a
=*
.., e s
\
u l e f 3 ,!a*. :, ** L2 2
.A.
8# s. e. Ic'q , U O e a4 9
.'s
- e .* u. (; p r
f., t o .-
. - 1- .3 !.
g N,
'- c. G u o o
- . ? .* , .~
- p. .> s y
* ,,. g , r .' _- N
.a
. n r-
,,m_ .s
.,. g,I- l
.s.
g
< . . g_p ,s, g, m .i! ,
.a .I g 9
~
v! o
<a
. - - _ , -. e.. . _y -
n,.,
. ]
*8 .y 1 g
- .~
W .
. 't~ s.
> m.
1_
- e- r.,
u rx x n n e ". ,, , s u n.; -
~.., s
,n
\' y. s v V c.
N y x
.m . .e. - o f.a g-EL..e..s
,. - . 1:r .-- o .c
~
. r.. U5.
!? s.
-. ' . . 's e ,, .: .
, ~.
- ~ n n .
M
- g % 'g ,> %, */
- y . e=
-o _.
v .a..- s C,
.: u 3 - y - .- ,w =
o. p c, g- w c&= s t
,c s .,.
~.
3,q . . y[_., m ; 1 u~ r,
~
S. n
;9 m
,,, ,- 4, a.
i
.2 i [3 _g % ~
x '.p ', s s. - '- - 3 > o- . a c. - 4 ., ., . y v y - c
*: [
% .i .,, = . + -
,J , .
l
. - )
, uo c x.') c
.- o -
r g; p.:t(m., u a .
~nw '
~ , ~.
~
v' >- y, v i o v v N
-r v src , pN -
y - . ae a
. .m , _. _ .. ;. s ., v,< .a a m.J a'.:s, : . . a c .,.,. v. ,,
g ,* ~ , .,*,, 3.
,. . { T c,,; +J q
. l % % , , , . . . . * - .
,;., yd ., 6 4 J .'J" O
* .g . -V H
.Ql *J *
- G <0 o
%,,, v .u -
u, n (y ,,,,. j .e -
. - - 46 U
~
.a
. e. '
v= r*
. e ,.lell-
- y%,,
- t,. L. -
* = (a.l C'., g ;g e,j c- ..- - - - . _ - - c- * .
. q .:. o '. .
,)
- 3
. gg o.C *J fJ *A u 4. *.' , ,, '.' (.
a 4.* u s^ *t .). o r-
~ -(]
'"6 C.,
e s r. . r=. s 10 F* r* , 4: e
- .-. e.-
- lr.a J % s
_,- - .... -_ .l1 e *
, o
% j . , -
. "l }- u *C.S C i
.'; .pf Q
- e..
l t.~? ,N .
** .v O ')
=*
.. *
- 9
*a t .t p .
gi _ __ _ - - . -. f.. g ..
.n,'...
- we -N p v-*.;
, . t- e.
. u J '. . %l ., ; -
t', ', , '9; eo. - ' -
- 1. e Z .a_ . ._ .. . . . . . . . . . . . . - . - v. %
,, ,.g,.,
. *.e '
.s. ' i. e . . N Cb it :. . La ** 6' e .*
- c. t.# .. :. .. , N. s?.. a * ... ' *.c'
- j ...
.)
.. 3 ..e,.3:
;n.
I
. l} --*e**
6 e4.. ......L.. _ . . . ~ . . . - _ .
.g
..,...,,.g,,g,e:..#
;. e S
. .__ . . . . .DO ' ~
f .. . . . ., ghg~' . . .!bi
0F r.; _ I;;iP.
. T.EVISIC:! -
5 6 7 3 F/.GE 34 ito?
.. k
* .J
*: . o U . .
(*\ -
\- ( o ku
' it g'
' '~
5- . s' -
.4 g ,', e N -
- o. -
s c.
- S .
(%'sw g .c.
. y, - a c.. .n. 9 -
!. .- ". S 'J- m
,n S
w'. _-__ . j s,
~
. I.. ) .; - %
si N' > ot]
..y: : - -
R.;i a.-
.. i , ,
!2;,!: sj l"i >,
l$"t (C *
\/ y . .t2
. og -
3 _.2..' ~ .r_Q..E: -
- - - - E p. w Nr)
, ' i ,r- o
. . -- .. n. ~~. a o 8:~ U
- 7 C 5 f,.t : +'
~
"1 , ,.
)- r, .%
D l2, N: S
.- b .
-- o
.: - 5'l J-L M iA_sl- .:c 5
- - C m" ., -
- --- m
.ma
[l 'u }5 l
5 - Ni N N I
' l'b' .LN 3 i .
?. 3, s '*
... - g 1 ., 1s -
a 8
~
Q=.1t..:
% , 1.-
u > m. 2 m ,.
.- - *- - 4. (;
_t - .. _ 3..- c 8- . I {t-i W la ! .lj j \ \ "' s s. N.- -- -- 5 ui x t-i s. s s. .- y 3" e o
. 3 M M
.. - .' 2 C %.)
% Q %'.U q % si g u
- o .c
. 6-w
.P'.l cL a._,, -
_. I I I -
-Q
+-
i.: p % i - --- - u y
*G 9 b;t
- 6
'O N,' V M V. V y' d NJ NJ \l
- l. c cs E
, e. -
% 5 =
C- = ; s- =. =
=
=
s s+ee
= e=s ~ v =: s* =* sc e ~
a_rcW 5 ts
- n-1- .m N
,, s s s, ,
c. c. u w
. ' f,b, y -. -
. Q v. NJ. sl V. Y N -
- - N ..
co 5
'.'. ,d N~ - ':- --
> - -- -b' vI$
bN. l'.l.j %.
- t. . u. c
" q M d M N
N N oe o
. tl* u s ;-
uo 5 u..$s x .,
%- s. c.,-> o L. c gI-cI a:
I-- 2 u % %
.s --
?Mc sM d
~.
'<.0 C. sD dN 'c- C a;
a l,.I ,. 54 o E
. e :a u o o Y,i.s. so
- v g,e. o - cv o
- g. .o
. g, =
wv g m - -
< s w -
- t. -
. * .. . .t .
- ,., o .
(~..-=1 N't 1"*4
- y .s .
.'- Q}.r.s:N,6, .
r---
.as % n a
% . .: e& -
-.y- . 9 _ .a-a <_-
v L. --s s oo -
"- r- N
< C.
v.:, o- -
. }
. . Hc ye s -
. s . l ea . n.-
- N.,
-~
.,15 -
l . . . a t . 1 am .-
-~ . m c- c i
i. r . f: e
. I *
-o 3
.. .- s s .
- c. i =
1
- c. v .--
E
.E.: .<'. ., ,
8 l C-sa a o.t;a. n u ,a . . --.
. \
C , ;.- N co-^ s, ro u a_ -
. . - < - - = -
n . . <., n e_ ,
.Y 48 68
. ?.o w :l 1 N e n - . = *-
.-,n ,, CN ,, a s- u e
> ..: > .e
.c s..-
e-o g 73 -
.j
.n. .r.i , ,r x- .iias u cv i
g3 _ __._...:. , .:,,,;,,.,,,.,,,
- y. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
m c.m J hn D D D .o. 00 o k . d h. = .
U
)
\-
g t alun
;0 Joj panoadde s1026L'21 ACH Pa11tmqns se S*1'3 uaya alwit 2 ilun se owes amo3aq ttga 1! wit i 1500) limit i 1 tun ,,3
'llW!! 2 llua .
uado si arteA umopmotg uays mdd l*0 > uoligppe Zt3 .salje aatul puo3 J g paagnba.: lurju. g papacaxa 1}w!t J t 4 alegpammg t 1s!way3 queld XJ 110t$ x I __. n e _.. .
. - . . . . . . . i s*cT7.rTnra t cq nr:17 m z e e.a{ z 9.wl ay zj fl Ei i . l l M 7
;f,
. b? vi _..w. ,
! ! ! N y
;f i
I I ,_
.}.R()I W~ e.7Z2ffy')
t.;fe eq ,bh ^o' My I ' cua I6 3 ir :imr:t in a:r v1w : ' _; t- = .-..~.
, y
)2' >L' hjj ,th ' ,'li JU! 1 -
n G D o2 - CL }ojj nt' 95* Jnr l
, (*? I' 7 t 50/ O2- 0 t* *WE l 4
\
m l l7 r7 35 0] 02' Ol ' Tol , 4 l l, I'2 nol 9 ,- 3/ 551 l ~~
/*7 l' 7 ' 3 00) /7 r? . t+1 l
1p t ' 7 ,0() /.p I' 2 %) l ~~
,1 tly; l7 i7 'D D'$c k) l'? l'7 Ybli l'7 l) 0ll l' 7 I 535 5 I7,I*7 .Y Mh$ 5 sw 1:;:nm.:3u lc3sn p.'_i_n;g]n m . m:1 .1v.im w JaN.Luu_
WYf ' _~~{S5 ' ' I 2*0 4 ;;.EF_D.J.i:13.l'1 .
"C.)__dm!13r>9tJ.rt i_ __.. ">J_ t;_ III). _ei .it _ tut __ _ zf . i, e (r.:st) (urt) vu 131':L31DL )E.lillflEr!)1__
A0111005 213 031;V D]t.E. .:h?!TL_. Jf8/.DJSU bg'.t!.ijy 'or _.t_1 jY. i 11.3 1 31W
& ?.!!! : l N0ll! GOV 613 'J?GtM :.'J:1!CGY ([3 C':h .J.i:J;g tu! ! gt: 3:.ht ,
l 4 . I e84.
.1:nn 39 inns m solvii 3 c:vu 9 . / .
~~
v- J. -
e4 J *~ ~ ~~~
. .. . . .t 4 i t . .J ----- --
............,...g......._....
m, f Cf
*t g 1.
.sr.% e . y-O s.
\ . et
'O
- r.,, .
. , = *
- ,4 s' * . O =
.. ,
- L
@* */ .
(e ta; (A ( , .tut,
* . . - . . .-. . ._ - . . ._ _ .. . ~.
e n . . . _ .. (e . .se t# .
* .m ,
.-*s
,. v'
- s
- e.- ,;. .
*r 03
'~q
~~
i..; a
.e h .>
.;7 ) g, ,, *. . , , ,._
v .p; :y., * . .
),;8 ), ..
- . . - - - _ ...* N,,_ ,
s a .- -
~~
w e '
- ., ^1 yy .L _.-- - _ 1_.. -= Q. 5 .
* [ k'.* f' . b Ed _7*
s' E V h ca '
.~.
o ;,4 .s. .2.- '.N., N' . .' ' J: 8"', O
+.a 2f.,'. .
=& ._.
I t _- , -,. . C +> t f* {d O .r. . s h t..
@ f%
< y
% y 4
rt O by N r- f.=.a
't
.. i s.,.a c _, l g M
- p. >- L a *'* g
. L- ; ,,%.i, .s
% u c. .-
n: v v, v i M a. t
- .c) - i O r, .
.I~ . > -
y - -- , . -
.i ,
' ba' .N - t.
d_ .'1 ', sil .h 0 , , ,
- O
> ] -
,. . 'f..
N.,
. .' at H
* - ~- .
C *
.I e a uuxn x 4-' % -- m O o ' -.3. 1 3 LaJ
. sa.;.
r. s- . . .s n. . %
> ) . . \
p C e
' p. Q p/' F '
a: o.
- O q' c . e!." %. d,, N., ..
N-
- i. .a :.
e '- , a E c .. %
- c $U "C$ I;
- C CE e
. 3 ..
$3
.n a -
e
>3 .,
.'a
.r.j
'.t. .r. . .; .'-
- 6 ""
EE. i
- p- . . % .h c. ...
O. .i.,.., ;. t. .- G .
< 3 g",
p
)
- m - e n,. <
7 t-E c. c. N
.J o e,r d' h
*:n. .y:
,3 4, 'I *
, L . a,gtj % * .
.e.
C ga* h Q.h N-
.i a
,,,,., 2 t
*O C)
. ;2 er h o w t.
. N.
s y: p,s a 7 e ."i- y ) 6 ta Vl r3 U U d'. }.i D. ,
. . j . h_'.
O u g cs n u,..o ro
. c*
.c 3
e, e o, e. r c..
~,
O C U O
>c. a e
m E-r3 2 A : _j s.. s 4., o o ,g 5;. s
- y. .
X
-u a <o a
o u%~ w .r + - u tr .*. . . eg, e N o
... ?- I e ja .
.*~'- *: % te v
- h,J.a i 2. f;-
e p
? *
.t 9 . 1. -
c'..
- s. .s
(, a r. f.M u
- le
=
go . . u;-
.* .c y .
.. a -
n> t)f~ n * ., o N-ao o,g es
*i g - ,
.. - g ,e.s , .a : ,
5
- a'(
e u ,.x. v - -- ,_ a d-m 7,. a y'. ' g \
>ao c. -
e c> OO
'w--
, . w e,. ,. e.,. G-*-a
-->. . . .,.. 2 .. .
s< G . ...t si
, a uo -
, H...
i .
\' -'.; f.;.J. - ,- so X
.' s in
,A pg
.m
- o t- C i ' ..). - . . * , Q . N % gy v e
. . a, se '%n t e- t .p I ty ., . - .- %. es u A
.. u . -- - :
\e. s
- . i. . .e
- e. r. . ( c:
l ?
. . . .s .
4.2,,c.s a,,*-....., e ., n . ,
; y . .. ?.* " .. - -- - - - -- -
~
0g .
.e . - ,.,
. g.s n n
,m L . -. . . l r.' **
.e e ::
, si gs ,
c: *
- s ' " -
4 f s.* r ',:e~- * ' * * *
- v __;
w8 % b . *- 8
. , . , a'ua'
.j
,~ ,. i on
.e v -.:.
- a. _.
- 1 ...c.,
._. . . . . - - - . - - . . = , ,. .:, ,: . . . . , . . . . . .
. -. ,...... . ...,... .. .... . _ .......(34.)....._... . ...... ,. . ,
7 .
'J : 8 . ,
, in _. 1
. _ Sl . . fu _,
y.. - ..... . . . . .
- w, ~ l ! I l
.* s 1 n ..'. .
L.
/ **. **
t.o.
.M. *;* .; , 'O 4 .: - -
=. .,
e.s .
. l4
*. o O. ..
W e ..e gJ
.t
+
4 n. t '.
,e n n r..
. ( . .a 6e to ut *e-
.e) . e a -
*J
. er
.. - e n CO
- .. . ,. _ . --. _n. '~~
Y* . . g. .*- .. %
* -. . O4 m e
- 4 e
- 1,31 {'O.> , , N- u*
,7; . -r'e
- CM- .
.u.
. . ,_3 , *. .....
f*>* . g
.a, k> . ,3 t?
gn .:- - . _ . _ ..
.s a:= < n.:.
... w
., y> i.. y .
om ;-: o
._. ,.- ,. 'm
~ r. e. ,
. a 4. , -.
#.f i C 4.8 +
\
t.. g, U e
.. *: .s _. C. 'G p' i u . .
G -- . O S.}d *4 V n y 4
- c. p. ~3 g'
- f ,'sC ._ . {- g * ,
b - a m .a ! *s g % - - m .? n 5 ,l k %
- N N v' 'J '
f $ "
- _ u. ~. *
*[ .D l .
'e
;: 1. t
- 4 i
't t c
lN s e . o .- (J u ~.. , "< m '>- - -- - o
'D LL3
-3 S '*
M
- i
's { t 3O 5'-
. ' $ :. I '-2 q * ;
5E
'm, s.
E: .- -5
, t.. ~
r: O ,'n': $.
%. - N C's *T
~ N g .O v5 o *; , .% C5 % * . ,
4a 2 q . . c T e - l. 9 -
'- c E S En.-l e*.z >-
.n o. .n. . .l :>, :.: a v -
-E ; ;
a g" .- ,, . . O. %t a - u e-s * * '
. e y tr'
,, [ -
L: ? h_ ~Q % - % - - E N ?
.~
s ta
- c. T D
- c. a O **
gb f. Y **- f @ C ('%f **=
*}
d b 'fi(t..M. 't,-j *i % % (:$
. *~. $ l-
,, 4 oo ,
P. .e.s
.e _
;- vJ pC 9.g.
'e g re o M
.c
.u vi. Gf.
n ,,c
&. t% s s i '
c vI o es 4
- b. . . f 'u J
Q C. N -. a.i. u
. . w'
- t.___.
- C C o I U u.
ar %J,.s g V Q ,. '?
. *rs 'f
.. %O gL'. f >( m.o Q d in 'f.
.Z 5.-
.W E
-.- y :- c"- o
. ; x .
D.c - - .
.- *
- ao o .
,c,
.,f
%J es %4 .u p*
- 64',64 51 g L* Q O .
m .* V *- U
. t/ N o-. N O !
4 [ D r-- A a-* p. 3 A. b.ls 3
-v
.e . ,' s %
.'.'. c g . I _d . .
'. g . s. e '.
. .a -; q"I h.i~'l gg .
u
.* n t~~3 . s
.s.
- r. .s o<
-l.
o .r,- *-* r 3
.. t 3 s ..*. . 9
, -a L l *u* . t'"as O- e* .e u: .a, .y .(
_ .- JJ -
;~- S nu .ce
_ o . . - r; - - 4 ~ 23 Uc
.;.b 1 nlu -
, q- .:
a . e,.. ~ . ., n *
~: n uo .e i.
.m
-o a 1
- t:
.t c.:'s a. t l ' I :- !.i: <: I n v 3
c., _ . .v . ,. .,
-3. ,,g. s. , .
.- e .s
.., , i o ...n..~.. .
v.....
,.n.. a-s v. .
. . - , a- -
, , .y ~ .__ . _ ._. ... -._ _.. -- - n s.
. . . . . . s
..,, o. :.
c.,......,
-:--------- .....~
. .. s
./ .. ,, s., . . . ..
e u ..., u
,- e ., ,,
- 1 ':
.- :3 n e, .
. _ _ . l .._... _. n ___ ._ __ . _. :- : . .
.m ,q-
... .....,_....,_......__. ..._.(3.4.)... _.... ., .. ml.. .t .T H , 9. ,. ... ! ,
;.L s ( sgt;.* i I r -
l l .a h / dt aa 3-
- . I's'.o' .r. ~
. . . . . . -. _. .J .r... _ 14 -.i.'( '. I .a s** - e*.
s. o '3 l e r i S : l
.. .s,-
.U. .
a
.1, , o t.
i. U Y. ~ n
,, T.*
x :
.., .: +
o a * ,
.* I .._._.i_.,
e, o
..s. ,_ _ _ ,
t .s. 4 ( se v* . '8 .e . . . .a e
- 3 .>
r#
- p .3 -
ef (* u. 1 '/ -..p-E g:s . ". .I..l M, ,
- -l- .
g^**.h CO e,] O5 g fMl *.4. '
'4 ' -
- a$l -= a-i==-.'= . -
* ', V f;'*. * ,.
(. ."., Q)-'- * -N
.]- _M.
s
.. . i w (1 'I ~. o'!','
os u _!l
., e N >.
, i N ,' L*.
- h i .M. NM 9
,,Y - [
[
.. -- s y -
, 4.>- i i
* }
a r.c
.o .c i _ *,
l
.:r
. h k, u- ,
t
= c], M o
~. :,J r* g
. . ._. j. ; *
* .- f .
_ C .j i u,
- o a
n c.: n e.s.3 . O "y -
.S
. w[.= , a m 3
2 4 * " - - ar.
... .8t, m
i C (J
\ 1
'8
\
.W t
- l 8
.' , Q \
_ > LA. F-" L.s m '\ n C
, e-
- b. D. v. N O N
. - ? Ls2 4- n'. . ,5 7' M. n Q
*~ 'T ~
i
. %4 b. .
.N' D C*
,- : 3 O E o
. _- <r {' A*8
.: : f +%'
I
%, ,c
'. ." y en p nt . - .*
b
- 3 k.7,f ' '
, .a J N
. .O 4.,
g g
$. hN P- ' *:.
gh[ T Dd lk th ( b C C 2 -El , , t *! 4 4 e-s
** I .
~
si h 's.$$ J paii !g l p, D g 4 i C"L ta 't7
~
- ,e.
,g ;6s L e,3 x.a. +
f^ . g - 7 @ V 7 CL 49
.,g 7 ud : .
.} q .
v c:
- 6 L'5 't w w - .. . :3
% . 0.a .d ? y$ O
- t3 o h 6]'
$4 chl, $t;l ty.,
- I5' f
o .,;. e O
$4
===
4, Y
< UC ~ a Yt
- m
.etW.s- .: \
- iW gc c
* ;_.t L.T- %
s.- e P
<~
T*' -r*'. Q'd*
~; -
ew I - Q D k C G % D 4.7 O M *- E Q
~ ~
._ ~ .
8 s e" C
- a, o
- u "U &y
$ 0 .' A. EC C
- - , I *
. Q',g gi
> r*
N
.O D.
~,.6#*- % *)
- g. y
. . *d*
=
[
** ' ~** . . 9 L.
e-. \ 4 ,% C e=" n)r'# j > - .', -- f% .I i* 9 e= *d e' e= ,.", # N%
- Ase D- on a u k+.{ - ,
m.
===.-
q p
.e=
*tu fx c T O
*"3 (3 ,, ***
g s., N . . tb r"* ~ o / . ( s- C t,j w. e-* e,. _a w - .,. l M , ,,
*=*W**. . b O "O **.
..* ..s
. b~N'
- m. l
% e Q
(. C 7J a .* s a s.r 1 [ .c.
.E.!.I.< ., . , t
-- =.=. .I'.. U.
4 u ,0 ' . . c ,;; .[ t jf . G - u 4.J -
,3 . i. <.
. .l.i.s.- .. - . -
.. a .-
e> Ti e +- g* e. . . e . ^
..- e.
s b ! . . . . .
. . < . - _~
,k.,,, .
.u w !.
o A*8
. n. . .
- t. l L.. .. a
_ . . . . . . , %g . ; , . . . . . .d. _',.1 -
,, J
.j
..'.S. ,y) f.
. n.3 d-
.dl : . . . ,
...'..<-..i s
._i--._..cN :3 r, o 6-e
.. 4 nl< . t ,. .:,:,,: *.3,t,g,,.ee
.-..W' A ,.U .'. 4 0 ..%
. . .. . :),.Q , A '
U .
\ 1 9 a -
,o w ] -
ih - A .a
L 1_. ! L . .L L. . .l . 1 t.. I " ~ " " ' - ~
........-......_.,....I...,..,
=
a, ' } i
. . F N' t. .r . .
m
. . .o. .
s -
; a. . . . . . - _ ,
y r, .
. .- c. , .
.I c
m ., s -
=
e s. .
- s. o .
u
- n.
{J .s .
. ss: '. .C n6
.~ n .. a m se *
us 4
.t...t.# .
G* ,.
.'v'
.% gn
. e .s .
N
.. .y N. ' -
.,,,,,,.,N.'"I m O
l d '. g.
%,- ) '\ [ v
- y N ;, - s ~d II ,* s j .
p[4'.-B r;@ . - 7 - _ e.: N,_ -
.,. i e l tb #[
s. dd h v .C N NJ .' '.
. o .o.. .N. ..._..e .ei.
c .- 0 L a eg V
. *)sa:.
p
.g
- -. CN M . s.
.:4' O O
o ,5 e e- _e4 .".$ ' N, ~'. _. . _ , _ . . . e a O - 9sr EJ 1 4- Gl dj 7 - - -
. o .Q
,c ,. w. v a m
- y G. -- .? .
W
- m .. . %s % -2 3 eG rj u y
.l o a h .5.
,a' r== . .
- e m
.t *
'o .'..
> m. .-
,- - p. g .
g .
- . . c . :
-- 2: to u y- (s pr; (T D. h. b y i O (
.s a .m. . s. 2 -> c.
c q ,.. - 2 o-
. ,:- p o .c
.E g E EI ! .' n. ce.
'f- -
8,n 2 u
/* * ;l, a
M. ; ^s N c .- g . O C b,e1 g o E .
*d O y
- ~ '" " " , '
- 0.
- g g
G 7 {'{ * ==. - == =%. , e. d' d 8 c % t u.s . - M. .
- c .
55 p
-* . "')
na. *;,. .**'
;.s.,j ".Y* - vo
<.'l at , 3 o o -.
- p d' v; ,l' .g ' c< .s co. e. <
. t vi c . u.
g. r. g~ o, e o .
.x1. v
- a. oo c .
.pa .u u, ;y...--
a 9 v, x .- c .
. .v.< >. -
.s .s oa-- a c 'p. -
n .c< .w
-i .% -
-- MD o ,
.-V H 2 0
<w w on .c- r0 v r-
$'* - ~ u .
r A - - .o ,
- 3.p'*N, e wo
. b= I..
- p. %
- g. ,
~
,a? c~ . .~., o .- .
_. - - - u ::
. c,s. , L ..
o a r%l .l2 *
%, . M n 4 ""*
. ca .. f ad. *%.
_ - . , _ . - -a u vo .- v g}C; . O es e- e. . ju - . Fc q-g t*' - *
. lw-J - .,.;
* = em s,.a v .
M., Y,.* w r. t : s...
,s . 6
*** O f ". t,,,)
.G2 we
. . 6e t e., .
- . * - .t t
. c- t .
- J .-
., , a p .,
- o. s . i
. (,,.)**** **
.3 h .s .am (
I . p y . ..I ( U- P>'.* .. e e".I
. C .', *
- l c vs.. . . . -~
a .
.:,- .._ . .. . . -.. .e-- . . . .- - - -. --<. . .-+
,, , g ,3 ,,,.
.' a s. *
* ,m f . . ,' ,, , ya. .a **
l ) .....=.. w .. . .. - t' ,/ s
.. . . . . .~.-. --... - .- .- - - . . - - . .
.n
.e
- s. ,,.3 - < s:
*)
d
. ..s
*) (1 fu .
..g 3.. g a.h l ~..- -..--.... . . - ,4 . . . , ,;, *, ,8, ,,,;..e
. . .. . . .e . ...._......._......_..._.....(.E. .) ... .. ...D .n.;.(4_[Si m
0
. g,a3 ['l b
- o. .
o,...
, A' '
pT g p. - - p.g )
=
v . q .r . s; . g PLA' T E.T. NATCil LOG S': RET !CC , . UtttT ' g/t.~ . . 3 CIRC _l?.ST!;;': VATr:; Cl LC.ilf!ATION ' 9 . .
! I Id t;a m n: cb AnntT:c:a b r:i tPr.: 0nea:m:cdAn91T103 l AFTER c1? Acc!Ttos l 7;Tr. - l I :tte.'m cr (7:rt)
J:Ur m.J'TtTO.Wpn cui. trar Trrnornrwr T Torf.mm - vi Tli%T Cl 7::Yrec': G 6 0 r: i 32 I 1 ,: lI(7:::t; EfD:"l n.i I .1 l%C"hv:ae T,T 7.4'i.
, f ci m i r.i p . i RI:* m st:5*;:.V.s ' _.
'i- I->l fl W ~ ~11 W(Art fTpi ~ T ~:: h 7:"- l.iflWJr T ie;.,TC.2i W C us:3, jj
! lim. jyp) c e g e: ITu a .I ?f 'is <.I j.: /.' '.".'l .Yll30 4.f 4.1 *WC '
I i, i l fi'(! S-",,,.l , 2./
.uv ./ ,I' fu: /iY 4.1 e, l l 1 4.I Ihi i 1AL
- 4 /, / i l
% .I ./ <ne j.I e . .'
1.
! i l{
I l - Im O . 'l ftfi 2.I t. l- l ! i ._ 8 I i i I
.Y I . .l ..'. ... _. !. .. _.d. .. . .n
. . j[
.d ye . e/ ,e .?
~
n/ a , : o r:' r.is I i
.S
- f ;p . - .// 4# t.' .2 ,2 A: M" 7- I t
l 3 ,- i ! ! ,,y.- :/ 4/ b;*: .2 , :4 f.d.li-_INdS# S M--- I ll~ l l l i a ;9 .V in . . :. 2 L - 1 --- ' g ,j ; j - - [. .- - 0 ;-
- ! i .
c=r)
~.t c
- l l l l -=
l i i i, (Q .
,8 I
l'
! I i
i t t l l l . 8 8 I l ! l 1 l i <' M D :l 8,
,r . i , I I l 8 '
's 4 .
; j ;
Wi iT -
.) l i
j ij j Est l : i i i ,
- i. i i i
! I l i i g
i 8 i *
! ' i' t-I;-'
f a '? hr.I;ge lt.*::;.2 i
,.:c 0.2];
j
'r.11 ;_; fd,.: ,
t la M:ni fy Plant Char.is t inn:cdiately if limit exceeded. ' 7: , rec, -
'; . i '..:'2 re'!
l i . i it f. Cend. Inlet a f ter Cl2 addition < 0.1 ppm when blor: data valve is open, _ g e ;" i:::i . I li:it ( fr.it I limit will become same as Unit 2 limit when E.T.S. as sub:nitted l'ay 12,1973 is ap;rcv M for I-i cr. i t 1.) - 1 t l
- e .. - .
. .; ...............,,..........s,..
p g
- e, ow. . .. o... . w.. .p . ,
230 Peachtreo Street Po ,1 Othee fio.c 645 Attarits, ccoegia :.0303 ( Tciconono 40t 522 CGC0 ; l sSE2 J Power Supply Engineering and Services - U July 15, 1979 Mr. Gene B. Welsh, Chief Water Protection Branch Environmental Protection Division 270 Washington Street. S.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Re: Plant Arkwright - NPDES Permit No. GA 0026069 Plant Bowen - NPDES Permit No. GA 0001449 Plant Branch - NPDES Permit No. GA 0026051 Plant Hammond - NPDES Permit No. GA 0001457 f Plant Hatch * - NPDES Permit No. CA 0004120 Plant McDonough-Atkinson - NPDES Permit No. GA 0001431 Plant McManus - NPDES Permit.No. CA 0003794 Plant Mitchell~ - NPDES Permit No. GA 0001465 Plant Wansley - NPDES Permit No. GA 0026778 Plant Yates - NPDES Permit No. GA 0001473
Dear Mr. Welsh:
As required by the above referenced NPDES permits, we hereby submit the Operation Monitoring Reports for each of the corresponding pcwer plants for the quarter ending June 30, 1979. If you have any questions or comments, please advise. Sincerely, T. E. Byerley Manager of Environmental Affairs DHE/mw Attachments xc: W. M. Jernigan (w/o attachments) bc: D. O. Foster G. J. Cosa
- 0. C. Rittenhouse (w/ attachments)
R. J.-golly C. L. Dona ldson. . J r. D. M. Ratcliffe. t I
P[gs.1,of 8 f QUARTERLY OPERATION MONITORING REPORT Georgia Power Company From: 4-01-79
- Plant-Ilatch To: 6-30-79 P.O. Box 4545 0004120 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Permit Number:
Discharge Location: 001A i Low Volume Waste (neutralization tank) Type of Sample: Grab Frequency of-Analysis: 2/mo Parameter: Suspended Solids Oil & Grease pil mg/l mg/l pil Units Avg. 30 Avg. 15 Min. 6.0 Limits: Max. 100 Max. 20 Max. 9.0
'Date .
8 04-02-79 70 <5 04-16-79 0:1 .<5 05-07-79 1022 <5 05-25-79 0.6 <5 06-05-79 73 <5 06-18-79 42 <5 - Number Samples: 6 6 Average Value: 48 2 <5 Maximum Value: 102 <5 Minimum Value: 0.1 <5 Limits Exceeded: 2 0 Notes: 1) pil is reported at Combined Plant Waste (001E t and E ).
- 2) At high pH values there is precipitation of calcium sulfate and this causes high suspended solids.
I I l. Oe be ee e . w -
'Pcga 2 of 8 f f
. QUARTERLY OPERATION MONITORING REPORT Georgia Power Company From: 4-01-79 Plant Hatch To: 6-30-79 P.O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Permit Number: 0004120 Discharge' Location: 001A 2 -
Low Volume Waste (pressure filter backwash) Type of Sample: Grab Frequency of Analysis: 2/mo.
~ Parameter: Suspended Solids Oil & Grease pH mg/l mg/l pH Units Limits: Avg. 30 Avg. 15 '
Min. 6.0 Max. 100 Max. 20 Max. 9.0 Location Date Filter A 04-02-79 3.2 <5 ' Filter B 04-02-79 4.0 <5 Fi'lter C 04-02-79 4.1 <5 . Filter-D 04-02-79 4.6 <5 i 04-16-79 0.3 Filter A <5 . Filter B 04-16-79 0.2 <5 Filter C 04-16-79 1.6 <5 Filter D 04-16-79 0.2 <5 Filter A 05-07-79 2.5 <5 Filter B 05-07-79 5.9 <5 Filter C 05-07-79 1.0 <5 Filter D 05-07-79 2.3 <5 . Filter A 05-25-79 4.0 <5 Filter B 05-25-79 2.0 < 5' Filter C 05-25-79 4.3 <5 Filter D 05-25-79 2.4 <5 Filter A 06-05-79 0.9 <5 Filter B 06-05-79 5.0 <5 Filter C 06-05-79 2.3 <5 Filter D 06-05-79 2.1 <5 i Filter A 06-18-79 2.4 <5 Filter B 06-18-79 5,1 <5
' Filter C 06-18-79 4.4 <5 Filter D 06-18-79 3.5 <5
[ Number of Samples : 24 24 Average value: 2.8 <5 i Maximum Value: 5.9 <5 Minimum Value: 0.2 <5
. Limits Exceeded: ,
0 0 l Note: 3) pil is reported at Combined Plant Waste (001E, and 001E:). _ . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . _ . _ . . . . . . . - . ~ . . ...
( ( QUARTERLY OPERATION MONITORING REPORT Georgia Power Company From: 04-01-79 _ Plant llatch To: 06-30-79 P.O. Box 4343 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Permit Number: 0004120 Discharge Location: 001B - Cooling Tower Blowdown Frequency of Analysis: 1/wk.
. Location: Intake Mixing Zone Tower Type of Sample: In Situ In Situ Grab Parameter: Temperature Temperature Chlorine OF OF mg/1'C12 Limits: AT of 50 AT of 50 Avg. 0.2 Max. 900 Max. 90 Max. 0.5 Date 04-05-79 67 -
67 . 04-11-79 67 68 04-18-79 68 68 04-27-79 67 67 05-02-79 67 67 05-10-79 72 72 05-16-79 75 75 05-23-79 76 76
~ '
06-01-79 77 77 . 06-08-79 82 83 06-13-79 80 81 . 06-20-79 81 82 06-27-79 77 78
-Number of Samples: 13 13 Maximum Value: 82 67 Minimum Value: 67 83 Limits Exceeded: -
0 Notes: 4) NPDES regulations no longer require reporting of this discharge. Ilowever, see Attachment (llatch log sheet 16C) for chlorination data. 4
. ... . . + . . . . . - .-..,g....
, .,-.,..- g........ . . . ..
rege + vt u (
.. o-f QUARTERLY OPERATION MONITORING REPORT Georgia Power Company From: 04-01-79 Plant Hatch To: 06-30-79 P.O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Permit Number: 0004120 l Discharge Location: 001C - Sewage Treatment Plant Type of Sample: Grab Frequency of Analysis: 2/yr.
Parameter: pH Fecal Coliform pH Units Colonies /100 ml Limits: Min. 6.0 Avg. 200 Max. 9.0 Max. 400 Date 05-03-79 6.8 <16 05-21-79 6.9 -
>6005 06-05-79 7.1 <40 Number of Samples: 3 3 l
Average Value: 73 Maximum Value: 7.1 >600 Minimum Va1.ue: 6.8 <16 Limits Exceeded: 0 0
' Notes: 5) These samples were collected and analyzed in an attempt to correct operating problems in the sewage treatment plant.
. e f'
I 4
, .,- g- c QUARTERLY OPERATION MONITORING REPORT
~ Georgia Power Company From: 04-01-79 Plant Hatch To: 06-30-79 P. 0. Box'4545 Atlanta, Georgia .30302 Permit Number: 0004120
. Discharge Location: 001Di- Liquid Radwaste System (Unit 1)
Type of Sample: Grab Frequency of Analysis: 2/mo. Parameter: Suspended Solids Oil & Grease pli mg/l mg/l pH Units Limits: Avg. 30 Avg. 15 Max. 100 Max. 20 Date 04-03-79 0.0 4.3 7.0 04-19-79 0.8 5.4 , 6.8 05-07-79 0.2' , 1.0 7.0 05-21-79 3.2 9.1 6.9 f 06-04-79 0.0 .0. 4 7.3 - 06-18-79 0.0 0.0 7.2 Number of Samples: 6 6 6 Average Value: 0.7 3.4 Maximum Value: 3.2 9.1 7.3 Minimum Value: 0.0 0.0 6.8 Limits Exceeded: 0 0 0 I I 6 e e 6 . nee
- A
QUART YOPERATIONMONITORINGR[..RT Georgia-Power Company From: 04-01-79 E Plant Hatch To: 06-30-79 P 0. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Permit Number: 0004120 Discharge Location: 001D2 - Liquid Radwaste System (Unit II) Type of Sample: Grab Frequency of' Analysis: 2/mo. Parameter: Suspended Solids Oil & Grease pH mg/l mg/l pH Units Limits: Avg. 30 Avg. 15 Max .' 100 Max. 20 Date 04-04-79 0.2 4.1 - 7.2 04-18-79 5.6 0.8 7.1 05-09-79 <0.4 4.1 7.5 05-25-79 2.6 14 6 7.2 06-06-79 5.0 0.9 7.3 i V6-19-79 0.2 3.4 7.3 Number of Samples: 6 6 6 Average Value: 2.3 4.7 Maximum Value:- 5.6 14.6 7.5 Minimum Value: 0.2 0.8 7.1 Limits Exceeded: 0 0 0 S l.
l Pagn 7 'of 8 b (' QUARTERI.Y OPERATION MONITORING 'll:l' ORT Georgia Power Company From: 04-01-79 Plant fla t ch To: 06-30-79 P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Permit Number: 0004120 Discharge Location: 001Ei- Combined Plant W..ste (Unit I) Frequency of Analysis: 1/wk.
. Type of Sample: In Situ Grab Grab Grab Parameter: Temperature Free Total Chlorine Chlorine pH OF mg/l C12 mg/l C12, p_I Units.
Limits: Min. 6.0
. Max. 9.0 Date 04-04-79 7.2 04-05-79 66 <0.1 <0.1 -
04-06-79 <0.1 <0.1 04-09-79 <0.1 <0.1 04-11-79 67 . 8.0 04-17-79 <0.1 <0.1 04-18-79 67 . 04-19-79 6.9 04-25-79 5 6 7.1 04-27-79 66 05-02 66 6.8 05-09 6.7 05-10-79 70 05-16-79 73 6.8 05-23 75 7.0 . 05-30-79 7.2 06-01-79 76 06-06-79 7.2 06-08-79 80 06-13-79 79 7.2 06-20-79 80 7.3 06-27-79 76 7.4
; Number of Samples: 13 4 4 13 Average Value: -
<0.1 <0.1 -
Maximum Value: 80 <0.1 <0.1 8.0 Minimum Value: 66 <0.1 <0.1 '6.7 Limits Exceeded: - - - 0 Notes: 6) Chlorination discontinued because of unit outage.
Page ' 8 of 8 (~ QUARTERLY OPERATION MONITORING REPORT Georgia Power Company From: 04-01-79 Plant Hatch To: 06-30-79 P..O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Permit Number: 0004120 Discharge Location: 001E2- Combined Plant Waste (Unit II)
-Frequency of Analysis: 1/wk. . -Type of Sample: In Situ Grab Grab Grab Parameter: Temperature
- Free Total Chlorine Chlorine pH OF mg/l C12 mg/l C12 pil Units Limits: Min. 6.0 Ma .c . 9.0 Date 04-04-79 '
7.2 04-11-79 7.0 04-19-79 6.4 04-25-79 . 7.1 05'02-79 6.9 05-09-79 6.8 05-16-79 6.7 05-25-79 6.9 05-30-79 7.0 06-06-79 7.3 06-13-79 7.3 06-20-79 7.1 06-27-79 7.5 Number of Samples: 13 0 0 13 Maximum Value: 80 7.5 ' Minimum Value: 66 6.4 Limits Exceeded: - 0 . Notes: 7) See page 7 for temperature data. < 8) No chlorination during-quarter. . - I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in this report and that'to the best of my knowledge and belief such information is'true, complete, and accurate.
"f h y/9.&Lds9
/
T. E. Byerley Manager of Environmental Affairs July 13, 1979 JBS:dfe-
V i , .. _ . - (- .c u i i-1 ! ATTACID4ENT i t. [ -
. . Georgia Power. Company.
3 .. I
-Plant Hatch f.
j.- i l i The following seventeen pages contain the chlorination i
- data for the. cooling tower.bir" downs at Plant Hatch.
t t 2 f i i. i .I.. i.! 4 h 5/ 1 l'. i h., d 4 i t i i b
+ l
* +
u . C
'9i 3 y
& , y2 F e
.z. ,
4 g ) t , 4 , a M S g. b~. 1 .
,m
*i REVISIC:' ( 5 6 7 8 PAGE,<'9-0F ._r _r._ IINP.
. . . . , ..i
. . . . . . . . . ~ . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . .
_ .I: 1: i u r . - e, d~ _l . .
,e
.r.**! ;
1: 7: N 's **-
"O
- f. . f]. . .I. g . . ,s
- : . . . r*r. -.-
~.-
o ze :. .A . i %s. c;l ~ w a i v. ?, s . n
,"l
- l. e. . t . f!, .,. . . .4:.....
- i. ,o e .. .i ..
., ' .t%1
..u........ .. . _ _.,. .. ._._ .. .. .. . . .
w
.l . ,. . - y i i* ,. ., , <- .-
. , c, j*; *: , .... -
.s
. .s u
..~
. ;.~,
e w
._.. _. .. _ .r; ;. . n,.
a x. 3, .. ., ,., ....,., 7,.~..q.
..e.... ...
j o_. ,) d cd 4 !, h* . N . .. . t h. [..l
.; .., M ' .! f,I . >g;"3 e,' -.. -
e' - t *4 - .
- d. >>
e< B ) '.
- 1.%"ej64 v
- t o .d gi ;. N
- l .. .. ' a o. ."/.
1, a ..j.. g e . . . . _ . _ . . . . _ . . _ . _ . _ . _ .._.. l:c . : iP i! r. :q .4 -
, l p:* ., as 1 1 c; fl e.' u n..
-{ ,
l .-
- m.
cl
.e.sp n)
I ., ,;
..... .. ~ . . .m . e O
a a g:
- s. O 4 LJ . ),3 % p g g c
** 8 a 8
{.* . ,N - _. ._ . . . _ _ _ ., p e. 4 g
- 1. . ..w m % . m
- v. : .** . 4 a e ,s-M
- e, au l ;. I. *7 . N. .. _ \.._. .__g ,_ .
m U,! .';!. ', q> ,s h J 80
%i ,..
. h ._
_ . . _ .Y a . _. c
. __, 3
'N P LhJ Ls %. N % % % .
"' i ' .el . ' .d' d.i IL
( 3o ul bE th.i N} N! N V N k \ \
. \ *{ '
=
5 4 e>.._ P..'. ,j Ell g
, :. t :
',.- =.
s s- N %
. i ,
.* /
.c a .
p (0- ej. ., . =c;. : , .
~'*
'.g ~* . . i. % % '. 12 g w] g \ ( \,; y Q .; v \ O O
(*i C ;N [".=d* d Ig.. ..y g ,.- g7
,l.- . .. '..e .C *-
*I g> g
*f.
ss 3 I' i 4.s f . - y .s
' -l', .
- S '%
. 3 -
- .
- ts.<
* %s
- r- N v.l p
f ,. ,i O
%,.. ..tw.u. .
. . ..a. ,l . s. _..'..'._N. . N I.w. _l. ...'.. . -
b* 1 I N, * -% % 'I : ' ' M
- s. l ,- \.--
N. , .J
%. -~
.e e. . >u;f i e.s
% s, e
- 5. y ,.,
- s. s , iN . -
u yl . . - 3 a., 5 4.%f2f,.... g , 1
.. _ _o a e
cs
,, s>I ' , . 'a g; . , % \. ..\, # J - - . % == %
oV, , to
". ;.d
.t u't .6 ....s ~. '
i-N.i v
g ed, :oi (I ';g f .. s M.
._..~a_
- '- v % > c, e uo u e, -
- m . . _ . . . . _ . . _ . _ . _ , . . . . . -
% *" 'u
",j- j
<. \. ". i' h% ~? s,
.- Y. s.;. ',N. . ,
io l .K . a> a w
%.1 ,a.%...-_. .. . . . o .-n
% .: e, .
. i . s.i..
- t. . ..
. . . . s :_f. _,,. . . . . , _ .
a r- V
,.I
- h
' E eu a
.h 3 * **-
0 tcJ. ' f.
; ' .1. n
%a
,, "Ne - u, ., '
- ~
- 4
- 4. '. I ns. .. I r. . . . . . . . - . . - . ..._. . ... . gy g r; .,)
q ,.a s 1
- 1. -
t** U. ,d.". (* - 8.g -
, - *w , ~M %- t 'As
- . . r . .. - ,,
c* *.9. p .-. a _ .. . - . r .O. as % o 3
.e s..
.' '.*, .' 4.s e
(. . *, * , . 40 =.'" i s.
. u,.
. e.e .
- .). -e*,, *A
- u. 3 ..w,..
...s... _. _. _ ._ _ .- a v0 .-
g s
. es c:s .. ,
.. O
.gs c.
. i. . -
3 s. 3...
~ L, -
i,...****.-'
.s . . r:.J
..t>
~ _ . . . -. . _ . . . ._ .5 ~ ,
*)
av .,. t, .a.*~.n C u \ we <. l -o 7.,
' ,,; g..
- ct.... .,
i GU %. ( s l' s, %. .'. N.- g
. - . . . , ,,. a a g;_
o.- . l , i v . .r* ._ *
**ts rf .-
.- I u e .: .
. c e.> -
-O-
.-~
N. :,e.:
.Q. .:.e * .. .% y....... . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . gn ;- ,,,,
'.% cu *1
.. . s . s .
- w e a a .*e. J .
y
, , %, * ; .n c --.n_ c f* s**** :.
.......3... . - -
l l -, se
.4 .,. ,,. g.g ;3 j
W ' it a sa r-
- g.
.g'
. 9 4 O f1 4
*Is
'...8
. :. ;
- e 6" t _
- 16.*3 ...u..... . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . _ . , _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - , , , ,,, ,
[. 9
.pq.. genq -
U _o o M 3M $.r m.
- g - - .-- , -- ,,,
iw. - . . _ , __ - ,- , _ - - , , - -
510,3 [ r s c. 7 s'. r,7,7 1 r -. g ..r._. . :, 14:J.. f.i.. . e
\~..-... . . . . . . . - . .. . . . .. .. . ,,
I. I e.- ',. l ' (' .n.. . ., b. w I
'l N .
- p. t-o
. . {. . l ...
l N. u
> ~". /.
t* .'.
. /l %. ( '
y. un
.e n
. J. y:m ~n o
.. s
,.,% L
('L 2
.n. .e .,
- N .o .
f.'i :
% t"L o
;,e. o q l .
q..,.,,.....i m A. A 7
.1
* , . .i e
...3 e. .a 3 p. s. ., t
%la.
.* ** CO
.,3 ..,.
...,j..,,, .
rg
< Al ht N d N
N l') l - 8.-. . i, O <*. I
*$. . . Ca... .. .3.
N l.
. _. . _ _ _ . _ . . . . . .._ . . _ . 10 s. .'7 *
- e. , ..
m s,, . h p ' .> e l..a. s N l o. . .. 3J.y ... . ..' . . : .; ; fi.
"g e
**,*. .g e ) .cl
*J 4
.s,.
lt
' 4.
o
.:e e % i 9
{ . 4J a.
*4 6l... .. . ..%. .h-. . . . ... . . . . . . , .... ,. . U '. C a I. ; Cl c., *r * .
.c.o .. .
U -
. O 4
# c. C'I N *s'.
+
D f.* g&.;.'*a **.
- t . . . .
v ,.
.s; : ' %. .
m g ..l6.*u 4 si es o l5 b;. ..
?
in.
p.
-,l..m . - -- -. . . _ . . . . ....4 _ _. . e U ..
e
- s. s % %.
~
s.. . o e. .j -
.m 6
t t.; v. o pw. . . . . s.,* y y v sa Q N g
- N f'v
, .f
. . t c
",. p 3 cs
. ,, Q, .h. .'
- b. .. . . . . . . . .. o .c
'i1 . .'.i ' N -. - s .
- ,. . > - s ..
.- -> g 3 7.9 <E
( .) o r ".; m ,- N N, > w sJ. g U m.i s . c , , , e .J...,.i _ . .. . , o E. s, ,.i
- n .
x .-
,c,
;: = ,.1 g. ..
2 s :e t- 4' <- F .i 3 '- g +_. _.... . . < c . . .. % ~. n m a..
*l s.
19
, . . ,._t-...
- s. l % ~ '- v 's
\
.,s7.- . aw O ,
o cx a o
.a
; ,e s,s '%.*
% ,o
. --.. c.* en m ;. e-'
s- r= C m.,. t ? .. ' 3 % .,
- pI
. . a m .s . .._ _- . _ . . . _ . . . . _ . .. _. __ -..
.c. a p $, 9,,
W , '.y.s[,. C t.. r .z. h T, 9 s. J O vi 0
. l .;...., g- m .'. ~> t. . . .
7,-
. as c c eJ .
...~.e . . . . . _ . . . . ' '
s.t >s . . . . . . . . . ._ . -..._ . .- ua u e . s<s .. ... ~
..l y.- ~
gli .c .n. . r .. ..
- . s - .
e: c, o o
< _ o..
..,.hl.. c. :.:,
3: . -
. .s.,. } _ ay e, .
l ,. ! -t e r, -e , N O f,,a ..G. u,
,, c.
-4 :. - m c
.. . 3 .._ __ _ .._. - o t.r.4
. . m. i. . . .
v
. . . /. *4
;;'r';, ' *e t.
.e .
r. U.%.m- - .c3s 3 v ;' .r- : a1
.. 43 %.
,.* s3 Y. a eu u V. -. . et . .a
... s
.u. +J
, g.; .# * ,'.1 .. __-. ...m. . . . . . -- - . . ~ ~
' u ,(J.;'..I_.__~__ , i V, c. o . E.
l'. . ,.I" . a O'. ; "
, pC
{. . no y w,} l'". j S -. Lt a. y=, i ,
. . . , , y I
l N' ?.I pu MC C eW ** py c a3 - ";j
*,./
..,'..'*M 5.
a l ._ q, sia - p ; .__...l. . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . - . _. .- _ cy a o .. v .- - . -
* *l 8" G
( s
- L,,;5 cf
..a..
- . OM *e
\,
a
...r... . . _ ....-i. .- - .
c *a m - .='.- w eu _6 ,,,. f, . o .e., C. . 1 te sa s> s2 U '.w. .. .< 4.,c,,......
- . .e l.-( . l g ,. . c
( .... ....6 . . . . . ., - .. . - . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- 3. .
. , . ,l
. p. ,9 u jl [
8
! yd o.,
sn_:.a.n G
. . . _. . _ . - . 1 . . i l .. _ _ _ . . . . _
t
.J nc.
, ,,n,
.e
, , ,u,, , , , , , y , ,
f *i Jau oJLAAla .
i . IWe 11 REVIS!03
+l
/ l Sl 6l /l 8 l.
t . . . . Or _.o . m;
&....... l l t i .
-i v, .
l t . g
.f.
,a .. .. ) ,
- 9 2 (t
- . . .'n' . l .. ;;,
.; -s
- l c"., .~n ( *. , :. .
- s. .
- s. v. .
sss o-3 */ ,. ,.#:
. e a: <
m ;' - I
.N . l E.
.L
'... '.f.# d 8
'i
. . .a ,.l 8
k i l c.! c. -
- . . : .. c.
.. .,. I
.m.
.. .t ;, . . .: .4 l fa M. .e-/. i fg *.c._ . ...
' ! c.:
l
- e. - - ;
,.l..,...... e . .
. . , . ..1 .
...e t.s
- ;, . + . ,
p
- e. . . .: e
<t o (,,',1 ! .y . ' e. m
- e. 9 ,I Y.,.?..3 *- 'J .
. . . . ... e 7 ....p./. ......1 l
O
%' M J lt k.y, st.,~-l '; i
[ l l'! j ,
- s >f . . . j . . . , .. . !." .. '. * !.i p,f ! - ,
j g , . .. . .I.. . . . .- .. . . . _ J _ . . ..
..... s: *, 's.e,
.I ,.
ra g ..
- c. e ~Q,,, ) ' ' ., c-e.s
.V.0'
.$a
= l %. g; ge O
. Le :.
L.c..* , 1- g* r . .>. *
'E j
y.8,laj N*.. !.... -.- -. . . . . . a g
". [.c ;:.9. l. 4.
5 ., .
.._ . . . I . .. . ...
, , ~~ vi
- al u . M.
a- , I s
. ... .. . = -. . . ..
fk) ., %. %.. !,!. o
; L&J s'* , 4 y .,
'- "'J C s" 'U . 's* - y s i o
r- - n; * ?.f * * . 4 O .c !-
- p Q f't:4. _
_ .. . . - . . . ~ .
, u s.
.C vJ, ,. ..s , ; ' ..,:
1- , (O
. a r:. .,
*e V, .,a S.a', l $4 '%,' \* ~
o e .*J e s
.t 9.
- . .I s
. ~ ~ . . w-
- 5. .
(' g .s . .,
** .0 N,=y *. f % :,.3'
- .:' ss
;g
. . /* C .' $. s* *= % :
t* #-
) **.'t .
.g 6 N
,U.
.. .c. ! . m. . s .... . ...: . _ . . _
c y e i- I t.J .. s I n. u
.c .
o ;,*, I . d '
,, .e.,.,H...'. M 4 s. N '. s, . .
.c c,-
5.,, j ,, ;. . . . . --- 1 .., ,, e ,f.4 c.],v!-; . s . {.' , , uJ -
- c. ..:
*** 7. t g
;; b* s N ,
.s, N ,,
en C; O f) U ."; hl 44 .t . . - iv i *; f . , , O .*#
- .M M
J ifll.4 i .i. . .. , ' I ** 'J., *i >. r
%g , , s ..s, _.. -.... ... .
.sa
. , -n~. o..
.. . . - . ~ . . .
e
. b,.g - n4 5 zc-
* :.; v ks .3, w
l ci
....!.~..
geh.* C f* gy yu 4 ' Is (.,,.. t
.. j _ _ _ . . - --- ... % "Q
. .. -g L. m
\;* 1 a:I ,n * >=,.A=' R *. , c; .-
7.'d '.'..J g ',_. *J g* N,** yN., Je .e.',
.s
~.
i _.. - ~.. & e .
. g.
.' S P .e?
- e e.o' *=cse *=
*J
- p. ,
1 ' * . s.a r l .c, !g .erf.$ts o;.~~~~'*"*' *~~ * * * * ~~* "*~~-~ ~~ ~~'~ ~ ~ ~ ' ' ~ Z. Y.' ' ~ o . ., y; m.p r T.. , co - - n e g
- e. 6 +
e c . . .. S -t s N ,. e-v ..t...-
.+. .
te s t i,t , .'. (' '
. . . . . _ . . . . . _ ..... . . -. . . .. . - = = , a
.l sv .-
v. W . %c
. . ls.* y i w
g g 4
.e 1 ,. .
. et.. t
'"b. U
+
I n.* L: ~e e s cs
. . ,. .s s.**.~.* .. g-g i, . a a trj..,.....,..,. . . - . . _
L,. > .nm ,,., , , -. - e1* 1 p .e. .. C t..,... , . l - -
- l 9
, ' ,3),,,,,,,,,,*
." ~*
'\ f..'J*.t... .. . . ... . . . . .. .. .L... s... . -
' n. -s f , *a. . ..*.,,
*** ;* * * . * *J ,
. l 6 l % '- . . - .
I 4.. e e ..
...~.......V. ....i..)
., l ,,,J
....., _ ......J-.. .. , . . . . . . .. -. . . . .
*y ...
ea.e
;;> g
* '
- t ..
6 ,a. ** /
- 6 a I .. C* .. . 6
-..-.I..I. "'....'g.3,*** g,p.,,
- g e
. $ M.= *.l t.8 3 ' ...~ .. ..*...... . . . . . . . . . . . .... . ...
~
-- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. ... , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , _ pp ; . ,
,D D, g A o - nn .
REVIS10!! ' S -G 7 8 PAGY*'i 1 - Of r.4 IINP. M
. ,1 L.
0 n..
<., t,
.r. .
%. w y
Q c,: me-m, ,:. .
. y.,
- r. . - . :n. ~ . % O u,9% a' ;(.. ',
5-n. 40 (, { , 4 f(
',* L = m a3 .;j-
. . . . '..t . _. _ . . . . . . . , _ . . . .. .. . . . . ...
m
?' s
.a / l . r. .e .os l. w.
.e 7.,...tl.**8 '3
*t'.
~
M g
........y. _ . .. _.. ._o . . . . .. . . ... at ' ,
n..,
< v,/ f,0 ;v,1 .
- l i; : pI.
o1* -
< , , d, W H_ j.-_ .J.. }Q <J n* .,(.o.',6,-
;,I .w sa
=.
e., a '
....-c :u .. %u.
N ,P 3
.'e. s t e u r:(a .. ._ . le.,L *
/~~l
_ _. _i ;: 9. . .., ..-
.. .c o
.s .
.., el ...
ln <z . c
- a w
e 2 _ _ . . . . . . at O:
,.i., b I -
. .. . = .. . . . . ._
a
.t* ~ u e u i.
, * * . O .o e
" '3 l 4 % o
.M. M t,., s,,' ,a3, f . . . . . .
'[ . : ;. * .J - . g 5 [l1 ,
&;. . . 1)
., N s
.s
~~
*G
> tn.
w ..
. '... _N .U. . __. .. - - _. e F.
La.# s .' ) . . y
=%
d'$ ) / .. s. .- % 6 vl L,a /
. . .g &*
- g Q g w
"- *% ({ \' e v' .
's ..s . "O C o
- e. .. .
*. g gj .,,
3
. , Q . IC. l.. -. . - - . O .c
.) "
}
C
--. '. L,
- 1. .*r
(* t h -
. ..~
y, % y , L$
.a
.* s . M
- 8s .
g yy A, . e
, . e.4 . ,;
\ .. s, _
.s c
- e..: '
. , . . . . . o a q u .c -
g,i i.m . .- -* -. .. ~ . . . , y, sr e>
. ;. ..'s.
v
,s s .7,.'. *
% . .* .% 'E F
,u. .,: 4. ..-. .. e'
. .=.. .,
. f .
% _s s,
._'.,..I,.
- .o .
'..... e m
m __.F_,.. s .s ,. u ~ u- o
- o. .
m- .o r.3 ... -- g n c ,.., F:p- ..
%' y c
- 2. . , y-m
. a;.
.c q . .
,.,.5.
--= _ . _ _ _ . . . _ . ya
. . D y
I
'- -O vi$
^ ^
u. (1 e; U!N. ,)c
'.N y
, ,; I 'v* "'$
Q, --- e o s . c. 3 . ,. cs c 09 . m ut : ....;. e. g. ty ' ;. . . .
.a wl
, . . ve e
.) + , . .- . ,
. . X- <0 S ?" N- Y }. f. %,
! G3 U @
r hl b..f t _, _. C..-. .d % :t .m. .f. . %._ - p . u, [I l -m e-
,N *.
~
am e,= o Q
.a e. 1 - m o
- g. .# S' .-- .O gn
.. l %y
,3.f ! . . ....
p}?. * ; p
' *.= -
* . -l -
- L. -
- f. .r' Ce -.'7- >, -
n s ,:. ., ....,
. . :. . c.*
c: .. . . . __. _.. . . .o.a 2
,w., ,m, ., . as s
, .. u <a a y ', ,~,,, ro .-
t . c..t
- c. 1 t .us. :q. r'_3 .. ... ._ .. . . . . .._ . . ._ . . . .--._ .- .s D o "-
s
- l. . g.n ~.u':- A' -
\ : a., .. co -
. . . . c.. w. 3 .
4;; =e -
\; . .s
.( r u . (.j i; r ~
. a ,
. . . .* . c4 ,;,,.. . .A pg l
-. 4 .
MC C , e,ul * *. *l'.e)P g, $,. M (
. n. o is ,; R. gy .D.
r. g.j.e.4.; ...h.t .e
...-.. gj .
- t. l . . , . . . . . . , . . . . . - _ - . _m . . . . . . ,g % a, pf' *%4 ra ,, , , t y..-.
1 W .T' - l dG o **t';y.~W s a 'O .- - f,., :p. i C cp - "-* . su k. !
.(. .t.i.r ..w. . ... _. .... s..._ . .- ._. . . . . . . - -
_.n,,_- P *$ .i f n. ?-
.D .-
a ..=#; '. e s c. a a .*
- i '. f. * - - * -
-l -
- g
.j
*M t', ,,r :- C* -,
..;.. , .. 3 . .- y ,,; . a
.u- .) .g .. O a y '
.,! i ~
g*, .8 ci o
;* ** a-e e
e n_;.j e.;3 ...a... .
..j . { .;. .... ... - .. ...... ...... .. . . -
... - ......g,,,,g,,...,
e
.'D'TD MD'r
\
\.. '
< gf v a L .L '
IDIM0!! '5 C [. 6
~7 U PAGT." i ' 0F r; m;P. -- - ._7_ws..
.. ... _. . ....._...e.. . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . _ . . . ,
.., 4 i
C,. ' I q:. .: ! t., e .
, :s ,
.. .s ,
. r . . <gs..-
i... .
- c. . .
- g. .
- .s,1 %
t . , (s : t s' 8 {- - 7t . '. -s. w .. s,,,,i, .N.t , o
. . I "1. <;. 4 ,,v . , , . , .
- h(
- F -
I . . c ,;.
. .L._..,.. - :.i . .s l'
.>s 3 1,.
_ . . ._. ...2.. . . _ ...;
;... < .. . .. .n.
y_..-a,; i ....
. , . . ...s... i . . . , e s ..,,
v ,
.g i, j : w .r .s. t
.a o g
;n .-.. .., .. f . ..Ll,L.,......,._.,,,J,a,,
_ . . .e.._..._. ... . .. .
..m r,
;* *,} 's d,. 4 ld m
l ... n .i,:;8. -. [I Ny.,M_ .._N.I.
,3. m . . l..
- 1. ?. ! l
. t . . , x
.A , ? j. 3 - u -
i N n
. gq. .(.1_.5 . . _ . . _
sJ , _ . _ . . _ -_ ._ .. .g._ . .__ . . . . . ._ . . . ._P: . r. , ~
- - - . . . ., .; s. . i ..
.a c.
.s. .
, . . . . .,.l.. .. s . . ~: w: -2 c
- a a
.n ...- _. . _ . . - - . _ . . . . . .... . . . .
a ...
?.', ,g I . . .
o an c. a;g {', . l . .
- :_ => y, 3,
..e . . d I '.! ,
c.,...a,..,. s ~. M
.s .-_.
., e m
- .3
.I .w. 'if d i >
. , .. n..,.-.
,. N.,. t .- --
- p. .
r4
.1 . ,J **s. . .s ,
m
> t.O.
2 ", ..*** s1 ;', ,-3
%y -
_1 i.- c >. W h l'3 % % ?
% ;' l -.
N u r, M.. .U.l .
. y si.
J v 9 3
> . Q, y s ,
g ' .x.... 3.s. , .s . . 6 .c _. ~
",, a
/*-~. . -. :.,...,,
. _si . ,,_ _.
%. N' w v.
M s; N < N g 'O
.(
( . 'J e p-12 y ,y
.A .s Ni -
s * .h p3 o,? x .,. . __.._
,e t,r.b f Q.--l.......,.._. . .
.. a
- y. ,5.!?,?
g ~_,52 . g d .i M... _<.q e v.
.W s' . -
l ,.., l ,h~.q.
-C . , . .l
~
.. ..g, (. . ;=
n m 5, S
>. . i .a l w L, %
% w
- Wj it i3' ',. . .
J c. 4.J
.. t . . . _ .
Y sr. g, , ' sj iy V N %) 'l ,,i sJ .c>
.E.,p.l:N.
g f.; %J . t ne l, . _ _ . . .e o d R' . _ . o ss
?!vi *.. S a u.1 ,.' _. }
% '-' s- % ,. -
.e . ". d:..,. '
.s -
o vi c s.4.. : . iQ NI,i % N
*1 y
"o h.i .',
.. NJ . .
. s . NJ. \1 ..
. \t as c es *
. :-, se
, ; .;. . ... _ s,g ; .. . -,_. . _ _ _ ... _ . _.. _
ux .o .a
- c. ..: -
,. e .. ~n ..e . 4. n.
ql s s
;q vs i., c,, .., g.,
4 _.,e.. e
*(,l !v.;.:
. ..'i ..'.n,. v.s
..'.' !. Q. _
..,s.._ . ':-
- s. '. ~. . .:. .. .'u -
..-. . a: .
o
*A e *C L:
. ._ h~,l 6m o'
; d .* N, w u,
(S.., 8 N -N c
.o N 58 -
- U l . , , -s'. . .._ . . . ' . _... . . . _ , . . ... iy
- . . . s -
I,,v.J.: '.e ../
'v.*lg'<"}i.. -v
.a s. t 4,f L. . e .
w...
, J )is
;., . . '. . - *4 x2 *' .-
[ a g' &.~ (U.l l t'.*w < i$' . . . . - - - - - . - ._
"0'--
g
. . . f-. C ao
- s. ,. [
c.. . .3 . . * * . **.j l. ..3 .. .
. * . .g e. J gs l *s, a g
. ., ej p,r3R } "6...
.s .. . . - .. ... . . ._ . - e- *j ,;
- e. .\._
.e .s%. +
=
. r. *,, ',S ' 'p;. I. . e -
) , 'Ogj ,O. -
A . ., ".1 'agl T a: u .:.3 'd .N % {%. g=
...n u - - .-
y.;l . / :. ba .. . _%...... _. ... . . . . _ ..-.e.. . . . . . _ . . _
, p
.- ,r ,, .- a .o .
t .t. ..a, tf i,
,C
*t. .
Iw 'd g:e.. !. '.'...*
- e .;-. O. .,
.c * ) , g,
.,.c.%, a a
.g,,, ,.,3
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . - .=
n,._.._....3...........__.-.._...... a,.. c. u . .- .- t%i f J u' N y ,. N.
,,a ,,. g_y .
ae...u . m 1 3 O'- .....t.. t ,;: f .. ... .- _ s... s . j.. ...= .. _ _ . .6_. ..) ei v .i, .,.e. ., . s... l, .- -i i n. en . , . a
; .- .. I ,
- l. . ,c. . . . _
.m..._....,,.,.._...__.._..........d.
. g ..n.- . 3l , . .. .,,a,..=,
l n.
.- "w. i j j N : on .
- _:.i..: ._.._. ...
M l 'r- i . . . . . _ . . .. ., - . _ . . .- . . . . _ !s . ..S. .W._ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...i T3
~
'O
" D SD 1 gy,L -
lI
,. .- 3.- .3 . .
1
+ r-s ,
REVISIO:;l l l ( l l := l u; igu l
.n,..,.
..__7__........___.,
- v. ., .
$ \
'0 o t1 a! .'*e* %* Co .
.i N
- I.
- V V
v.
-n ci t -. g %. *g .
h e e*""*'" 6 b: . t j
?$ .
*v 6g ^ h. s
.t' O.
- c. 8 2.
n o. t.r.l. :
; s e m e .. m __. . .. -. _. .
l.~~ J d(:.,.,.E ;
. .m
,,'..e n . . *
' a'j j g .
. c.i,
. .- 4, r .. cc l- _-n.
'- i;.s g e,
- r. .'
.O y
.2 ' . s .. , gr.
' s _ h.
*** y 2 .' 5 ...3..,...,.
~ a c-
..c _ e o -- .
- c. %~ .. ., l
.?.t ! *,
N,._
,4 - 'h, iJ '*.. V -
.g g 4 p s e,. n. y 9
. : 3..
.e Si +
s
*t . s.;, f*a e,,
{,
.. o o,
>. g.
e
< \
.um. , .
o u n3 o > y:. ._ . . . .w c a
.c ei c .o i a m V ei ~.
y s,
" o 3
- .s . .
a.;,w <-]. '".,y _. .._-. yd#* C2
a o.
.I..u: , f u. _. . _ . _ _
w . . _ . . n a y . .4., . -' . - > sn.
,.^,.
p,
.- :. ' c .
w a
-~ .. ,; ,
; - . c f, C
. . . c .,. , fg c.
u :e . . y
.., y. ....
,f~. v.:
o o ..u. ..-J, . .
., s.i .. . .
o
.c. .g
. . g .
9+
. ,e e'l.q.- - - ..
e,. '< .., '3
, .. M. . S u e... 9.. . x. ., . .
~.
c - m fl*y, N ; 4 % ,: . o e
. <3 .';, ;
g., a da .. . W 3 '.c c .>.:. 9, ',4 .. ',; .e ., c i
, / .,
.' .a 7 a c. ..
% E0..!
- .c, . ,, i ,- .,s ; .,
sc ~ g ._.- c m.
. < i .. ; .
- a. u
~ * .s s' e.r .
g = r y -- .. - s n,..
' .e, . . e.
- s. c e c +. , :.-,.
V g,, s. u
.. :s oe i i._ ._ -.
g, l c f* ** % c $, h s' '
- t", ;" s' * fi
- - o u . . .
y sI
~ oe a
- c ,g,g; ;.g,, :-,e m
oo a s .. w ut ... J'. . :. ~. x- .n w e .e w ,. . . d s.*: n ;>'
.. C' a ; C .n .'
C
- a. _:
sl. o a ~, o _l' . s 3::1 =;. ~ -
.s :: L. .D - \ ; ~ :.
o a
,1 c., c. t, o i .,
e., ,
.E
- m u c3 > . ~ o
- m. ,,
.. .a en v
- j. _c .__
,.,. ,s.
u
,n
.. m -. ,~<. ...
.g _- c. ,
sus .- u.o y- . o- a 3
- ?) .r, .. ,.. u n
; ,o .-
> u .- ,.
-a o c:r . :s c., % .e.
v . .;g,. , . . . __ _ . _ . .r.: . .:. . ._. ... _ , _. - J - P. . i 8: L-M.3 - c. w.,aa .:y ya q - c-' ,en a
.v_.'. _ .
n .. .. . _ . . p u .o e C a C
%.i 8 O O s hr".&3J f 1 ','.' d 8 j ev -
1.*; =u ' . o
- r. .
l . . - * = _ <
;. J u w '. E ., . . . .
l-_i .. L, e
'l '.
g* . 49 , *-
*gf.* I. .a e . ,
==c.c
-w_s .
*e;t;::s l <*
"c o ~~e* ~ *-.
ea de \ 0 ...2...... (;" . ',.'.-
. i...
... .. . .A.
T'
. . . - * + * . c ,h
- n. '
C* w M 4.8 r-l* '
..._..". L, _ j... =, *.s.Lc.:- cc u=u
., * :...'._......c' .
- n. ,
.. M o, ,
. _ . . , ... - ...n.. ... n,, .. . , . , 3, ,
.. a ....!.
. .n _ :. i . .n . _ ._._. .__...s. _.. _.. ... ._... ,
0*~D "D W r , AJ o fi J ., ~( ..,
REVIS10.'l .5 6 7 0 PAGE _ OT .._V_._ rip. 7.b ?._P
.. . . . . . . -... ... ._ .... =._.
.I . . - . . .;
l . 9 , s;,1.s . . s. h.*.,% e,O. i I
* !. )\ ( .%,
s ,,
.. U.
o -
;' (- :. . ,:,
, .i ? ,
o .s - :-
.. . ' " r. .
U. < N . P[N..
. E' n
aab 0 Q] ' ( ' 2 m.
<s
. qt. j ,. . . < .
. . , _ . . . _ . e._C..
.e
- ) o .
s es.9
. co
- - e.: ...,.. y : 'g; a- 9 . . _ .. _ _ . . . . _ . . _ . . _ . . . . . . . . . . ._.. . . _ ...
no
- 7. .n * ,, ;g.z 3 . .; :!.
.% t
< u.
3
, ,n S. * ! ! .. l.>. .
a2;...s'! 3
- N
.t e t, I*". , 8 n.
h D" < es .. g n. o< h. 4,, . , : - _ . . . - - _ . ._ ..._ ...._,..... . . .. j '
*. ., J . . ,
} . o j aj, . 3 1 1:cN U
....n.'. *'
- i a .,2 t
. g-
.7.._..._. c.
.e.- y 1 ,.
o u w. . .
.o .
e.
.3 3 i>;& ci _.
r
... = _ . . . . . -- _ _ . . . . _ _ . ." a
- v. r ; .
m
---e".'
t: .
!d , as o
.s . _ , . __. ..
M u.a l *' m
> v.s c
J 8 c De L.3
,s 6
.o i o e 1
c
- e. c. f. . y c_s
,., u , ,a. :. c.;; . ._ .. .. ._. . _ _
o ;. O .o ,+
- n. . r.:, o* .....'. .
l a mg a .. l c .-
=
- g. 7', f. ! _ . _ __- . _ . -
y , s
,, 12 9. ; a -
= . , . r .;- -
N V
- p. F,*
's
. . . - - _. ._. -,- - (
O n :'l I'
;4
!*f ci a-ol 4* .! 7 '.) p C
~:*r;-), ce.6 ~ ..
ys wu. s I.. .
, . . a co, a
.,> .. u
; e.' I, *ea .
- f. "U Vl C 4, i J
. gI '"
+- S t..* C8 C C) -
est , as ; .y .....w.,,,, . ._. _. _._. _ y g g N'.I g x e. o f *' @ 5 fs G) - _ .'c l. _
.~ ._ _ . . . _ - ._ - ---
__. ... p _7 c; .
***"U l5 8 Ec O l ss h *e. U
* - O i . . ji e.N. .C q -
. . . . . . ._ . . . . . .. ,.,... ... 4, g
#1
.. * * .c. -
I L - l t ,c e.'..'...a !.*. e
<m,
_'. ,3.,T I
> as
, o 3
**. I, , I cs w
' ;, & 4 &
[- t-
'..J1 g g3
' .og. I _w
. 4
#U a
l Es g ir , u qr ... .._ ,. . . . , - _ . ... . _ . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . - . _ . . . .e C l e. sc .. 1 D cs .r. l' v. W.*. F- l } CJ - -
- l. ,
8
* .? 3 M
l'.*'-?*J g;. Ms . f*'
- 1. ... . . ~ ._. . .- ... ..- . . _ _ . . _ . - . . . - . . . .
hb
- . o l,
. w - u .o ...
i ., , a.;.. . -
. c . .'.u. .! i e
.o o - .o, e
. n,4 .,
.I ev g
t
- e , _- ... . . _ . _.- -- . _,_... _ . - . - ,,,.,,.,
, m. u.: ._. . I v.,.....
...... u,a r n
ae _3,
- e. .c.- . ~
. g
\ . '
.....,.:._.... . _ ,... ... ._.- - . ..t. . . . _ - . - . . . . > . .. ou *
.; ; .- m - -
.- . . . . . . ci. :2<,- . , n s ,a r
W,e.,..... I
. , f. .'* .i.. **
..., ...7...........
. . . ..I... ._
,. ._.0 ., 6.,
, .L y=u CC C f u
. c-
,u . . .%e, .2 -
. as :.i 3 .
a_.
... w.......L.!...-......,..................._...._..
.4..
oe.,. 0 D u } -] A e[ DaMydf n .
1
/
4
. .* ; (
' REVIS!0!! 5 6 7 8 P,.sf _N _.OF F, imp. M02
. . . . . .. r r -- *- - - - - - -
g-- ' - ---
-l
,, } so va ,
( o l Y \ A Y
- w g- e .; N; 1 V v y?'a 5 s .y ;L !b c c.,
u 5-* 3 0 e W-a RW 3= ,N! (,'5s t a
.1 > .o L-t> -%
- -) 6 rig
-v .-.,.,n.. . . . .
1.*3 e4
-.-----.,.t.. .---, -..-.
.m-oE z .,, , >
i R.
~-
m g;
< ! J. J P.>.
. . . g, . . . B. _ , ..
.x,. N
< _an ,.
,.i..,
s o< * .3*~. , g,, . ts . - ,
..'.- e
_ 'L :f' l.. , *'= 4 3.. :}: .... , ~,w.
., . ..... .. _.. . .. . . . .- ..}..
* .,' g
.o s %
.rs ..,.- U
. ..lr.O! e- f .{-
.a4 6 '.;s ; e %
- dJ
- - - . _. . _ . . . . .... ....l.. ... C 4
. U s
a u
- O
- c. c,-
. e't t
3
- W a,e ' ,. , a*-
QA no . m 5 f l e m
* . . *J i
,g w u o ee
! e.
d i 86 l F. le . . ... . .. .n. . . . c . I .s J a 3 hJ u .. t ss k.g L *O C a
- e. .
j c as
.. ys. .c 3
~ . . . . - _ __ _ . . _. ... . . . . . . o .c .
. sa. i - J.
.b -
"4
. .O 4
i
4 ', ly, e..-
.. . ..d '*.
?
l c a= 8 6 - 3.d -, --- E .h
,, '. 3 r-
* '.t >.' N. . ,
. , t.s ..i .
,. l
?,; _.w C- N 3.*
. . . _ . . . . ~.-
.......r...-.......-.y a j e. p}}