ML19319B878

Total Impact Assessment of Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. Prepared for State of Oh Dept of Natural Resources

ML19319B878
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	07/30/1972
From:	Duke K, Raines G, Ritzman R Battelle Memorial Institute, COLUMBUS LABORATORIES
To:
References
NUDOCS 8001280732
Download: ML19319B878 (133)

Text

'

p r ,

FINAL REPORT P I bo on v

TOTAL IMPACT ASSESSK'NT OF THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION n

to L.

r-I- THE STATE OF OHIO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES by u

R. L.- Ritzman, G. E. Raines , K. M. Duke, S . G. Bloom y T. E. Carroll, G. S. Stacey, J. K. Baker, J. R. Finley, N. Dee, and S. E. Rogers

_}

July, 1972 c

w, d

BATTELLE I - Columbus Laboratories

" 505 King Avenue p_, Columbus, Ohio 43201 4 -

mCD # g e

L soot 2%ns2

m TABLE OF CONTENTS r Page 1.0 1N1R0ouCT10N ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 5 -

1.1 Purpose and Scope

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

~

1.2 Approach and Plant Alternatives Considered . . . . . . . 1 P ~

2.0 ASSESSMENT OF PRECONSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1 Site Description . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.2 Hydrology ... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.3 Geology and Seismology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 n-2.4 Meteorology and Climatology . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.5 Natural Radiation Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2.6 Aquatic Ecology .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.7 Terrestrial Ecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 I~

2.8 Social Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3.0 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3.1 Heat Discharges . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

[- 3.2 Chemical Discharges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 3.3 Radionuclide Releases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

( 3.4 Other Operational Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 3.5 Social Impacts . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 4.0 ASSESSMENT OF PLANNED ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM . . . 74 w

. 4.1 Materology and Climatology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 4.2 hadioattivity .... . . . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . . 74 4.3 Aquatic Ecology ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

- 4.4 Terrestrial Ecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,6

g. 4.5 Social Consideratione . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 5.0 EVALUATION IN REGARD TO ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS . . . . . . . 78  ;

a 5.1 Air Quality Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

- 5.2 Water Quality Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 g 5.3 Radiation Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

- 6.0

SUMMARY

OF IHPACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

7.0 REFERENCES

. .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 H

t 1- .

- W= -emem . en . seem. + - m_....m . , . , , . , . . ~ -

p- ,

t TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Page APPENDIX A

-+ . RADIATION DOSE CALCULATIONS .. .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1

APPENDIX B

~

OTHER ALTERNATIVES. . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1 APPENDIX C

- ECONOMIC IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-1 i

o- APPENDIX D HUMAN INTEREST IMPACT ASSESSMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D-1 L

L g-*. ,

r e**

6 Y.._

F 4

l I-l au r

r, e e

G

1.0 _ INTRODUCTION -

l.1 Purpose and Scope f

Battelle's Columbus Laboratories (BCL) has been conducting a p . program for the State of Ohio to develop and apply nethods for assessing the total impact of nuclear power facilities in Ohio. The assessment

~

emphasizes interactions' of a nuclear power facility with its su'rrounding

~ natural and social environment in an effort to determine the effects

-, that facility construction and operation will have on this environment.

The assessment technique was used to examine the total impact of two T' currently planned facilities; the William H. Zimmer Nuclear Power Station, to be constructed near Moscow, Ohio, and the Davis-Besse Nuclear

?' Power Station, which is under construction near Port Clinton, Ohio. This report describes the total impact assessment that was developed of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station.

0 1.2 Approach and Plant Alternatives Considered

t. The approach that was utilized consisted primarily of the review

. . . and analysis of the planned facility as described in the Davis-Besse

. Supplement to Environmental Report (D-BSER) ( ,- the Environmental Report ( } ,

b and data supplied by direct contact with Toledo Edison staff through a

p. site visit and telephone calls. The study was conducted by qualified BCL h_ professionals in the areas of limnology, biology, ecology, botany, chemistry,

[ radioactivity, heat dissipation; aesthetics, economics, and sociology.

t l- The aim of the _ evaluatio*n was to quantify each identified impact in appro-r b priate (but not necessarily uniform) units by determining the relative H change in existing conditions that would be introduced by the existence i

of the nuclear plant.

,- Two design alternatives were selected for detailed evaluation.

l

.(1) The Present Plant Design - This is the facility N design for which a construction permit has been issued. It includes the nuclear reactor and d ,

r 7 6

. -m .2 b

' associated power production systems, the natural

['

draft cooling towet operating closed-cycle, the

- chemical effluents settling basin, the water 7,

collection basin, the comitted radwaste treatment systems, the electrical transmission lines, and

{ 'E other various. components as described in the Davis-3

{ Besse Supplemental Environmental Report.

(2) Once-Through Coolina Alternative - This alternative

[ design replaces the natural draft cooling tower i

operating closed cycle with open cycle cooling p using Lake Erie water in direct flow through the plant's condensers. It is assumed that the cooling F water and the plant service water would be dis-

-charged back to the lake from a slot discharge at a I velocity of 6.7 feet per second. The station water intake system would also be designed to achieve

[. intake velocities of abeut 1.5 feet per second. No settling basin or collecting basin would be required for this alternative, but all other plant systems

^

would be the~same as for the present design.

~

The detailed evaluation of these two alternativcs provides adequate illustration of the ah> plication of the technique cf '.' total impact assessment".

In a comprehensive application, however, more alternatives would and should

.. ~ be examined .to provide' a basis for identifying a facility design which 3; would have minimum overall environmental impact. Some guidance on the

. various alternative designs that could be inc uded l in such an analysis is outlined in Appendix B and general coments are provided to indicate the

~

-- ' relative advantages and disadvantages of each.

S' hauk *

.-1 J

? .4 S

r ce

• ye -'* Wew,, & w q ,,-,w- , ,,-,wr'-ev --

yv vy -M e Ten--vyWw'= -+-Twr*y'%

" "' v-=

• e 9

7 l

3 r

2.0 ASSESSMENT OF PRECONSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION i'

2.1 Site Description l 2.1.1 Regional e-

.' The region is an _ area surrounding the power station sufficiently 1arge to place this plant in perspective with the other power plants, g- industrial facilities, municipalities, and natural resources within the I state that this station might influence. Since power plants are usually

, located near a water source, the drainage basin supplying this water is I

often large enough to constitute a-region. The Davis-Besse Power Station

{-

is located on the western basin of Lake Erie. This portion of Lake Erie and the tributaries draining into the Jake (Sandusky, Toussaint, Maumee, Portage Rivers and other rivers and streams of importance) may be classified I- as a region. A map with supplementary written description of all portions F of the region around Davis-Besse would be sufficient to describe the f

regional site. According to the D-BSER it' appears that the regional

,r aspects of the site were adequately investigated.

f: 2.1.2 . Local .

L.

The local area is the one within 10-20 miles of the plant site.

The description of the local area is in greater detail than that of the region because most of the environmental impacts are local in nature. A f general description of the topography, geology, and biology (biome-level J_

discussion) as well as the location of cities and towns and other important e

landmarks are needed. Predominant industries or agriculture should be identified. Based on information in the D-BSER most of these requirements were met but data on local topography and biome-levels appeared scanty.

2.1.3 Site Specific '

~

This area .is confined to the site itself and the area nearby (within 1-3 miles of the site) . The impacts of the construction and operation of tha power station are usually greater on the site and the

- area immediately surrounding it.

9

. r; l-4 I

q The exact location of the site should be specified, including its relationship to nearby highways, railways, towns, and industries. Any

- structure not on the main site (substations, transmission lines, pumping 7-station, etc.), should also be accurately located. Maps and photographs 7' .~ are particularly useful. Also needed to complete the site description are property plats showing the location of the various structures on the

( site as well as offsite structures such as the cooling and service water intake and discharge facilities.

I On the basis of information and data given in the D-BSER, Toledo  ;

Edison has - developed appropriate description of the site specific environ-F ment. In Figure 1 a plot is given showing station facilities and adjacent marshland areas.

l 2.2 Hydrology

(

The preconstruction hydrological studies included investigation of lake hydrology, stream characteristics, terminal disposal of storm runoff, historic flo.oding, grounhter hydrology, and water supply. The f

' hydrologic factors considered were lake levels and currents, dilution and

[' diffusion, groundwater occurrence and movement, wells, groundwater quality, and radioactive ion m,igration. This satisfies the requirements of a basic

[*

hydrological investigation.

Data collected on lake behavior included the once-in-100-years i high and icw lake leve;. long-term high and low lake level, maximum annual l.

lake rise and drop, and seiche phenomena. This information is required in order to ascertain the site elevation necessary to protect structures during pp riods of extrc: high lake levels, and to determine if sufficient x

amount 1, of cooling water will be available during periods of extreme low 1ake levels. The investigations and evaluations appear to be adequate for

[{

. - making such determinations.

.h-W.

. N

,' 5 b

(y

('

3# 33 Ac i

~

~

'7^*-

c /

~

f l

a Do y+==w/ e,,

a c l IIh 7,w- #

s DEL [ ,

L WASHA 7l'* e

,,1 ' - I- " l NAVARRE D .O l 33 3,, MARSH j.....Igl

• • " I

. . . . _ _ _ _ _ . .! 4 4 7 ^*-

E I f .

't v 188 Ac.

+

y

~

i TOUSSAINT RIVER ' '

I"= 1500 '

[ SCALE:

TOTAL STATION SITE 954 AC.

6 MARSH AREAS NOT LEASED BUT NAVARRE TRACT 524 AC. J MANAGED BY BUREAU 66 AC.

[. (532.9 DEED AC.) l L

- 50 YR. LEASE TO BUREAU y GRADED & FENCED STATION l 447 AC. ARF' 56 AC.

25 YR. :. EASE TO BUREAU #

97 AC. b BORROW PITS & QUARRY 46 AC.

r i L-FIGURE 1. DAVIS.BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION SITE AREAS

1 I

6 i

2.3 Geology and Seismology 5

Investigations into the geology and seismology of the site were performed for the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report. The geological investi-gation included a geological description of the site which was backed up by an exploratory program consisting of soil-rock borings, auger probes, piezometers and seismic refraction survey. Appropriate testing was made on

_ selected soil and rock sampics. The seismological investigations included l

literature research to compile ar historical record of the seismicity of the

, area, evaluation of the geolog'c structure and tectonic history of the region, field geophysical surveys to evaluate the in-site dynamic properties of the

2. foundation materials, and an analysis of these data to aid in selecting seismic parameters for design.

2- The geologic study indicated that the bedroch underlying the site consists of horizontally bedded sedimentary rock of the Tymochtee formation.

The site is on the east flank of the regional Findlay Arch. The Bowling Green fault is located 35 miles from the site at its closest point. This r

fault is believed to be inactive. Faults closer to the site are not known

. to exist and none are suspected to exist.

The seismologic study indicated that earthquakes have been felt at the site with a Modified Mercalli intensity of V and that an earthquake y . felt at the site with the intensity of a low MM VI should be considered to have a reasonable chance of occurrence during the life of a nucicar power station. Taking into account the conservatism required for the design of a nuclear power station, it was recomended that an earthquake felt at the site with the intensity of a medium MM VII 97.5) be considered to be capable of occurrence. Based on the seismologic study, it was recommended that a maximum probable earthquake (the smaller earthquake), and a maximum ground acceleration of 0.15 g be selected for the maximum possible earthquake (the larger earthquake).

. The discussion of the geology and seismology in the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report indicates that adequate attention was paid to this

. subject and there is no apparent evidence to contradict the conclusions.

p

( 7

[ 2.4 Meteorology and climatology The baseline investigations into the meteorology and climatology included a general climatological description of the area and an evaluation of

[ the Cleveland and Toledo meteorological and climatological data. In addition, a 300-foot meteorological tower was installed on the site in the fall of 1968 f' to provide detailed data on a local scale and to assess the comparison of the site meteorological data with the Toledo and Cleveland data. The evaluations

! of the data were used to (1) estimate the dispersion of airborne radioactivity from the facility, (2) estimate the occurrence of fog and visible, plumes from y the cooling tower, (3) estimate the wind loading on the structures, and (4) assess the probability of tornadoes.

F The onsite toer will make continuous measurements of wind speed,

, direction, and directional variability at 20- and 300-foot levels; tempera-f ture and temperature differences at and between 5 ,145 , 297-foot levels; and occurrences and nonoccurrences of precipitation. The data obtained thus far indicate that the Toledo data are representative of climatic conditions at the site.

[ The meteoroldgical investigation indicated that the meteorology of

,. the Locust Point site of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, while Senerally cont'inental in nature, is modified by the presence of Lake Erie,

, which moderates the extremes of temperature and increases the humidity and cloudiness . Precipitation is moderate and evenly distributed throughout the year. High winds, when they occur, are usually associated with summer u

., thunderstorms or wintertime cyclonic storms. While tornadoes are rather common in Ohio, the probability of one striking a point within the one-degree

-4 square in which the site is located is 6.3 x 10 . The associated recurrence interval is once in approximately 1,590 years.

p The surrounding terrain is flat and low lying. The only natural feature which must be considered as to possible influence on atmospheric n

g dispersion is lake Erie lying to the north and east of the station site.

Differential heating between the land and lake surface, particularly durir.g

)

the simunct months, leads to the development of a " lake breeze". Analysis of on-site data indicates the importance of the lake breeze is more in determin-ing the direction of travel of material released into it rather than the rate at which it will be diepersed.

F t

r-l 8 Critical winds for the site are those from 90 to 100 degrees which f

would transport any airborne effluent towards Toledo, or from 300 degrees

~

s which would give a trajectory towards Port Clinton and Sandusky. On-site data

. gathered during the fall, winter, and spring months indicate trajectories

~

}

towards Toledo would occur 8.4 percent of the time and towards Sandusky 6.8 percent of the time.

, The baseline meteorological and climatological investigations appear to be adequate for the uses to which the cata were put. The refine-

] ments that will come from more on-site data should add more confidence to the estimates based on the present data. However, there are no indications that

(,

g measurements are being made of the amount of precipitation at the site.

These measurements could be valuable in refinirs some of the fog estimates

, from the cooling tower and it is recommended that these measurements be added to the data being collected on site.

i

[

i

. 2.5 Natural Radiation Background _

I. .

L Based on the information available very little baseline data regarding the natural radiation background in the vicinity of the Davis-Besse site has been ctilected. For the purposes of an environmental l impact assessment much of the needed baseline data can be estimated from national averages or from information gathered at similar sites. However, data specific to the actual site location is much more desirable. Ambient radioactivity levels in all portions of the environment (terrestrial, aquatic, and atmospheric) are needed with emphasis on the physical and biological components. The survey should concentrate on the critical

. pathways for radioactivity movement to humans and sampling locations should be dictated by man's use of the local environment. Such a program is

[ usually sufficient for assessing relative radiological impacts to the ,

biological component also.

e 4

e

2 i .

v.

t 9 l F

f Toledo Edison has recently developed an environmental radiological *

.y . ,

monitoring plani 3) which is to be carried out for 2 years prior to the beginning of plant operation. This preoperational monitoring program will

include the collection and radiometric analysis of airborne particulates, air iodine, ambient radiation levels, surface water, ground water, precipitation, bottom sediments, fish, freshwater clams, food crops, i* vegetation, milk, domestic meat, wildlife, and soil. This is responsive

_ to the general requirements given above. The planned samplin7, f quencies, sampling locatiors, and radiometric analyses should provide an . _quate p inventory of the ambient radioactivity in the environment around the Davis-Besse plant.

~

}.

p i

2.6. Aquatic Ecology 2.6.1 Species Present j For preconstruction investigations, a preliminary field survey of the aquatic biota near and/or on the site is usually required. Rarely is up-to-date literature available describing the specific site proposed for the pwer station. Consequently, a survey-type field program is usually appropriate where the' boundaries within which measurable effects (if any) might be anticipated are delineated and the various habitats within these

. boundaries are examined for the species living there. Techniques should bc

[. such. that quantitative estimates of the dominant species can be made.

Groups that should be sampled are (1) phytoplankton, (2) zooplankton, Y (3) periphyton, (4) benthos, and (5) fish. The results of such samples along with literature data on similar aquatic communities should be used j to describe the quality of the aquatic community found near the site. Site-specific published or unpublished data may be available on the densities y of some of the species found. Such data on sport and commercial fish are

. frequently available. Similarly, any unusual or unique relationships among i, the species found near the site may be documented in the literature.

Toledo Edison has performed both a literature survey and preliminary field surveys.. All' groups with the exception of periphyton were sampled.

This omission is minor since this group .may not even be found in the Davis-11

4 i

10 i Besse locale. Using the results of the preliminary survey, the aquatic -

. environment near the site has been classified as a " biological desert"( )

(

~

when compared to the more productive comunities located offshore.

2.6.2 Rare and Endangered Species

[ It is important to determine if any species classified as rare I

or endangered by either federal or state fish and game agencies occur near l' the site. Such species are particularly sensitive to any additional stress t

and could suffer proportionally greater damage than other species. Their presence may require that additional safeguards be incorporated into the station design to prevent damage to them.

I L No rare or endangered aquatic species were apparently identified.

There appears to be no documentation indicating that the appropriate literature sources and state and federal agencies had been consulted concerning the possible occurrence of rare or endangered species.

2.7 1'erres trialicology ,

Baseline information accumulated for pre-construction assess-ment of the terrestripi environment should include a study of vegetation, g

animals, and soils. Vegetation sampling need not be cxtensive but should include general species composition and habitat characterization by de-fining vertical stratification for each habitat represented at the site.

Animals studies should include sampling of invertebrates (insects and soil arthropods), birds, and mansnals. Soil investigations should be h

considered in terms of the biota. Measures of available nutrients, com-pactabil'ity, and erodibility are very helpful in assessing environmental impact.- USDA-Soil Conservation Service association classification is  ;

~

sufficient when available. Ottawa County was studied in 1928.(4) Pre construction engineering studies can yield extensive information through r

j. - borings, sheer tests, etc. Rare'or endangered plant and animal species should be determined from the . literature or by contact with local author-

-ities.

F

[

i.

I 11

[

,- The Davis-Besse site lies in an area where over 78 percent of

[ the land is cultivated.(2) Livestock, poultry, and crops of the area should

_ be catalogued in detail. Literature from agricultural sources should 'e I_

[ sufficient.

. . A sampling program for the site should be based on, but not limited l

to, a station program. Station selection should include all major or important habitats in the vicinity and should consider the meteorological I data for the area, particularly the wind rose, and the location of the transmission lines and other access corridors to the site. At Davis-Besse this would include roadways and the barge canal as well as the transmission lines. In addition to the station monitoring program a limited random spot and transect sampling program would prove beneficial to locating unexpected or isolated impacts.

L The scope of the program indicated in the D-BSER was considerably below the ideal in terms of pre-construction assessment. liabitat descrip-

~ tion consisted of acreages only, no vegetation studies were included.

Waterfowl were considered in terms of numbers nione and even cyclic changes in these figures were not considered. There are no apparent plans to identify rare or endangered species of animals. Birds found on the marshes of the Lake Erie shores, which are officially listed as rare or endangered include the Greater Sandhill Crane, Kirtland's Warbler, Wood Ibis, and the Peregrine Falcom (5)(6) Determination of the extent and location of Bald Eagle nesting in the area is another important concern. All other animals L.

were represented by a list of major mammals of the region. While major impacts are not expected to affect the terrestrial habitat at Davis-Besse,

> long-range impacts cannot be detected without good baseline information followed by periodic supplemental monitoring. While the construction plans in the D-BSER indicate extensive measures to reduce environmental harm and often to provide benefits to the natural environment, for example, the improved dikes and dams, plantings of these, or simply the wetting

, . down of exposed land during dry spells during construction, the success or value of these effects will not be known because of the limited base-

, line information.

O .

eh -

-e- --g-

I;.-

i 12 2.8 Social considerations, The pre-construction investigation of the plante site and surround-ing area -should consider the social factors in the area that may be affected.

Some of the factors that should be considered are (1) recreational usage made of the area, (2) present use made of the land and compatibility of proposed new use to surrounding land uses, (3) the number of homes and businesses that would be disrupted and the extent to which they would be, (4) t3s aesthetics of ;he area in light of changes caused by the presence of the plant, (5) the economy of the area, and (6) the type of community nearby the plant site that would feel an impact from the presence of a plest.

The Davis-Besse pre-construction investigation of the plant site

!. included some basic information that served as a basis for social impact analysis, including: land use of plant site area before designation of plant site location and adjacent land uses in areas surrounding the plant site; some population characteristics of the area surrounding the plant site; and data on increase in tax b'ase in the affected school district.

Historical archaeological aspects of the area were investigated and considered.

However, recreationa-1 usage made of Lake Erie in the vicinity of the plant site was apparently not considered. Consideration of factors of a social nature was reasonably broad in the pre-construction investigation of the

~

Davis-Besse plant site, but more detailed data would be useful in deter-mining what social ' impacts the plant will have on the surrounding area and

~

its people.

t k'

N' ,

s e

e . -

I i

13 3.0 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 3.1 Heat Discharges 3.1.1 Atmosphere 3.1.1.1 Physical Impact Present Plant Design The proposed Davis-Besse facility will use a closed-cycle system, evaporative type cooling tower to reject the heat in the condenser cooling water directly to the atmosphere. The cooling tower is a counter-flow I design unit utilizing a hyperbolic shell to provide the natural-draft flow I of air required. The design flow of the condenser-cooling tower system is 480,000 gpm with a temperature rise across the condenser and drop through the tower of 26 F at full station load with a heat rejection under these

- conditions of 6.21 x 10' BTU per hour. The tower design conditions are for an approach temperature of 18 F at a wet bulb temperature of 72 F, which has a 10 percent occurrence for the four warmest months in the site area. At 77 F wet bulb temperature, which has a 1 percent occurrence, the approach is 16 F and with the extreme high wet bulb temperature of 81 F, the approach is 14 F. Therefore, the cold water temperature would be 90 F at the design l.

w point of 72 F wet bulb temperature, 93 F at 77 F wet bulb, and 95 F maximum at 81 F wet bulb.

~

The cooling tower shell is 414 feet in diametar at the base, which

narrows to 247 feet at the minimum diameter and is 275 feet in diameter at the top. The cold water basin is at grade elevation of 584 feet and the top of the tower is 493 feet above this elevation. An air flow opening 39 feet high completely around the tower allows for the ambient air entry into the cooling tower. Evaporation of water from the tower is greatest during the higher wet bulb condie. ions and amounts to 10,400 gpm during warm weather periods and reduces to a value of 7,000 gpm during periods of cold weather operation. The drif t, or loss from entrained moisture droplets, is expected

• . to be about 0.01 percent of design flow or 48 gpm. No estimate was given for the velocity of the air leaving the tower but experience with similar towers indicates that the velocity should be between 1 and 5 m/s (2 to 10 mph).

?

14 The heat discharged to the air is not expected to have any signifi-cant environmental impact since the atmosphere has ample capacity to dissipate and remove such quantities of heat. The exit velocity of the air from the tower is comparable to normal winds in the area. The water (in the form of vapor and drif t) and the salt (dissolved in the drif t) can have significant physical impacts and these are discussed in later sections.

Once-Through cooling Alternative There are no localized thermal discharges to the air with once-through cooling. Loss of heat from the lake in the vicinity of the station outfall will occur mainly by convection and conduction and will be spread over a relatively large area. Local air temperature changes would probably be difficult to measure.

3 .1.1. 2 Biological Environment s

The heat discharged to the atmosphere, the changes in local atmospheric conditions caused by that heat, and the structures required to discharge the heat may affect flying organisms, primarily birds. Migratory and resident waterfowl as well as song birds and birds of prey use the air space near the Davis-Eesse site. According to Bellrose, two important migration carridors, the Chesapeake Bay Corridor and the Central Ohio Corridor, are located in the Davis-Besse area ( ). Use of these corridors by migratory

^

waterfowl is moderate-to-heavy. About 125,000 dabbling ducks (65,000 mallards, L

35,000 baldpates, and 25,000 fpintails) use the Chesapeake Bay Corridor

[ extending from the upper Mississippi River to the Chesapeake and Delaware bays ( }. The Lake Erie marshes, including those onsite and nearby, provide tihe last resting and feeding areas before they make a 400-mile non-stop

~

flight' east to the Chesapeake Bay region (7) About 430,000 diving ducks (250,000 lesser scaups; 130,000 canvasbacks, and 50,000 redheads) also use j

this corridor (7} The Central Ohio Corridor, from Lake ' Erie south to Florida, is used by approximately 100,000 lesser scaups and redheads (7) .

I' - Canada Geese also use the area near Davis-Besse(7}

l

. Of course, not all theca l

birds fly over or use the area near the site. Table 3.1.1.2-1 gives spot I

counts of waterfowl seen in 1971 on the Narvarre Refuge Unit located onsite.

-r ~ *'

i t.

15

(- TABIE 3.1.1.2-1. WATERF0WL COUNTS ON NAVARRE MARSH IN 1971 Waterfowl Oct. 20

~

Sept. 17 Sept. 24 Oct. 7 Oct. 14 Teal 50 200 500 30 350 l' Malland and Black 175 450 1,350 1,800 100 12 950 100 ,

Pintail 15 0 Widgeon 1,250 1,675 1,250 100 1,800 i Wood Duck -- -- 15 0 14 15 0 i Shoveler -- -- 50 -- --

Coot -- 350 450 -- 400 h Canada Geese -- -- -- -- 120 4

f Source: DBER.

'i .

^

Y L More complete data concerning the actual usage of the area on and near the site by waterfowl and o,ther birds are not available. Thus, the quantification of the impact on birds is not possible. However, useful qualitative estimates can be given which will permit the comparison of the impacts of the alternatives.

L' The presene Davis-Besse design uses a natural draf t evaporative F, cooling tower to discharge the heat. Potential impacts on the avian popula-I-- tion include updraf ts disrupting flight patterns, fogging and/or visible plume

~

formation obscuring vision, collision with the 493-f t tower, and disruption C of avian navigation through the use of high intensity aircraf t warning lights r on the tower.

Unlia song birds and predatory birds, the migratory waterfowl normally fly at high altitudes (3,000 f t or greater )(8) which would greatly c reduce their in;eraction with the cooling tower. However, because of the 1"'

attractive marsh habitat located onsite and nearby, the migratory waterfowl

~ I frequently use

• his area as a stopover for resting and feeding. This signifi-cantly increases the potential for interaction of the tower with these

-' - waterfowl.

+

I' 16 ,

It is expected that birds will be able to avoid or successfully p

fly through the updraf ts, localized fog, and visible plume caused by the I . natural draft tower. Collisions with the tower may cause some problem, especially with migratory waterfowl descending to or ascending from the

! ' marshlands near the site. Collisions are mostly likely at night or during times of heavy natural fog. The toser should not cause significant amounts

[-

F of low level fog. However, t'ne noise of the falling water within the tower j may provide an audible landmark for birds when visibility is reduced. Large numbers of resident birds are not expected to be destroyed by collision with the tower. During the migratory seasons (spring and fall) when large numbers

{

of waterfowl use the air space around the Davis-Besse site, the numbers killed

[ may increase, but this is not expected to significantly reduce the migratory I

waterfowl population. Monitoring should be done to confirm this expectation.

High intensity white lights can interfere with the nighttime navigation of resident and migratory birds. The high intensity strobe lights used atop the natural-draf t tower at Davis-Besse will be turned off at night and should not cause significant interference with birds.

The once-through cooling alternative would avoid all the potential impacts stated for the natural draf t towers. While some steam-fog formation i might be expected on the lake at certain times of the year, its extent, intensity, and duration would be very small. Thus, the heat discharge of the

{

once-through cooling alternative would not be expected to cause any adverse

] impact on the avian population.

l 3

L "

17 3.1.2 Surface Waters -

~

7

. 3.1.2.1 Physical Environment i

l

. Present Plant Design p-

• The only heat of any significance discharged into Lake Erie I . will be that contained in the cooling tower blowdown. Since the blowdown I

flow is relatively constant (average flow of 9,225 gpm with a range of 7,500 to 10,400 gpm), the amount of heat discharged is dependent on the tempera-ture difference between the lake water and the cooling tower blowdown.

The cooling tower blowdown which is taken from the cold water side of the system is entirely dependent on the wet bulb temperature of the air and so the amount of heat discharged to the lake from station operation is related to the ~ difference between the atmospheric wet bulb temperature and lake temperature. The greater this temperature difference, the greater the amount of heat discharged. During certain short periods in early fall and winter, this temperature difference can be negative, which will result in lake heat being discharged to the atmosphere from the makeup-blowdown system.

The maximum temperature difference between the lake and the discharge from

_. the collecting basin will be limited to 20' by supplying ambient water, when necessary, from the intake canal uirectly to the collecting basin to dilute the tower blowdown and, thus, lower the temperature of the discharge.

With this diluting water added to the blowdown, the discharge flow to Lake Erie can be as high as 13,800 gpm under normal conditions. This latter

' flow with the maximum 20* % rise will result in the maximum quantity of 6

heat discharged to Lake Erie which will be 138 x 10 BTU / hour.

. The slot-type discharge point at the terminus of the discharge n pipe in the lake is designed to provide a relatively high velocity discharge L to the effluent entering the lake and induce rapid jet entrainment mixing IL-of the discharge with ambient lake water. The rate of mixing and resulting g ', isotherms in the lake have been calculated by Dr. D. W. Pritchard*( ).  !

0

. Under the conditions of the maximum heat discharge of 138 x 10 BTU / hour ,

y . . the resulting areas and' dimensions of the thermal plume isotherms are shown below.

i

• L Consultant to Toledo Edison. i 1

f

>*+W, w sa ,, ., - -- - ,- ., - . ,

r 18 i Temperature Plume Dimensions, f t Area, t1 Above Lake Length Width acres

~

[ 6 F 125 31 0.08

. 5 F 152 38 0.11

'4 F 199 50 0.20 3 F 2 64 66 A.34 f- 2 F 377 94 0.70 1 F 658 165 2.14 I

l This plume condition, including the vertical configuration, is also shown f graphically on Figure 2.

I The resulting area of the lake that will see temperatures of I

t l' F or higher than ambient lake temperatures resulting from this discharge is 2.14 acres for the maximum conditions of heat discharged. This area extends for 658 feet from the discharge orifice, which in contrast is 5,000 r

. feet away from the mouth of the Toussaint River and 16,250 feet from Toussaint Reef, which is the closest offshore reef of a group of reefs which are

of concern as fish spawning area, particularly pickerel. In contrast with the 2.14-acre size of the area having a 1* F or higher temperature, the 3* or higher area envelops only 0.34 acre and extends only 264 feet L from the discharge orifice. These relatively small areas are not expected to have r.dverse effects on the lake.

L Once-Through Cooling Alternative Several once-through cooling alternatives were considered by Toledo Edison in addition to the present plant design using a cooling tower.

~

The most thoroughly studied alternative would have the cooling water dis-L, charged at a velocity of about 6.7 fps through a slot about 38 feet wide.

The total flow would amount to 685,000 gpm at a temperature rise of about i 18 F, which .is equivalent to 6.21 x 10 BTU /hr. . The size of thc resulting

[' '

isotherms in the lake were computed by Dr. Pritchard and are given below  ;

, for the case of no longshore current: '

f.

O s ewn ~

. - - - em

, _ _ , . . ..,,..,...m.%. .g__ _. ., .. ., ._

.) , _ . , .. ,

- 4

{ ,

W

/

/

/

sumansasso otsCMAR$t g 4, - =r - -

3 3 l3+

y*y pgggg

' 2'2 2,(

N N

'AN

• 1e

. sv tAtt WAffE SUtF_ACS ._ -

_ -f ____ -

6* 5' 4* 3* 2* l' 4

S*F DISCHARGE t Aue sanoen E L EVATION moein.SCALtus . f-so' veevicas e 1"* Y FIGURE 2. DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION LAKE THERMAL PLUME CONFIGURATION a_ _ - _ _ _ _ - _____ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _

l

~

7 L

20 L

~

r Temperature Plume Dimensions, ft. Area, Above Lake, F Length Width acres

{

, , 10 786 196 4 8 1,280 320 9

. 6 2,490 623 35

[.

j -4 5,760 1,44 0 185 2 15,000 3,750 1,169 r

1 34,100 500 6,680 r

These dimensions indicate that, with no (or nearly no) longshore current, the water temperatures at Round Reef and Toussaint Reef would be less than 1 F above normal lake temperatures. Other areas considered important with

respect to fish spawning would be exposed to lower excess temperatures.

Dr..Prkchard also calculated the thermal plume for the case of f

a longshore current of 0.67 fps. He cited measurements which indicated that the longshore current seldom exceeds this value. The size of the

. plume bent by this longshore current is given below.

FI Plume Dimensions Along Temperature Axis of Plume, ft Area,

, Above Lake. F Length Width acres 10 . 1,040 389 9

~

8 2,500 936 54 I

6 6,250 3,590 5 17 4 13,400 4,490 1,380 2 31,400 6,730 4,844 L 1 43,200 8,210 8,127 If the current is directed toward the southeast, these calculations indicate

( that the mouth of the Toussaint River will be exposed to temperatuts i between  ;

l'and 2 F above the normal lake temperature. If the current is directed

.w a

toward-the northwest, the vater temperature at Locust Reef, the nearest reef to the plume, will be . less than 1 F above the normal lake temperature.

i i-

-p -

m v

F -

21 t

For a current of about 0.1 to 0.2 fps directed toward the northwest, water

. temperatures at Toussaint Reef, Crib Reef,' Flat Reef, Round Reef, and

. Niagara Reef could be between 1 and 2 F above normal lake temperatures.

lI However, no area. considered importan't with respect to fish spawning would

. . be exposed to temperatures in excess of 2 F above normal lake temperatures.

I.

r .

~

i 4

e e

O L

r e

p.

} ,

F, .

a

> . I

i. .. . .

+

" ^ ' % ~'- n 4 ,e-. ,yu - n.

r w n gw--

7 1

l 22 4

i 3 .1. 2 . 2 uiological Environment l The aquatic biota subject to potential thermal effects of heated

~

water dist.harge to Lake Erie include phytoplankton, zooplankton, periphyton, r

benthos , and fish. Phytoplankton are predominantly diatoms with the genera f Melosira, Diatoma, and Fragilaria being commonly found. Densities reported in May,1969, ranged from 1,700 to 12,000 cells per ml. Blue-green algal p blooms have been reported to be increasing in recent years in the western i basin of lake Erie, although they don't normally constitute a significant portion of the phytoplankton. Zooplankton densities vary about 5 fold during i the year. May populations (25-186 organisms per liter) are larger than October

> populations (4-40 organisms pcr liter). Cyclops bicuspidatus and Daphnia retrocueva are dominant in the spring; Bosmina spp. in the fall. Benthos also vary seasonally. Densities in the spring range from 129 to 6,581 indi-viduals per square meter. In the fall, densities are lower, 0-3,418 individuals

[

per square meter. Oligochetes and Tendipedidae predominate. Data on peri-L phyton are not available, It is not known if this group is found in the lake near Davis-Besse. Data on fish are sparse. Fourteen major species and 5 minor species are reported in the area. The 1969 commercial catch for Iake Erie was 59 million pounds, with Ohio fishermen landing 9.5 million pounds of the total. The western . basin of the lake produced 75 percent of the catch.

More specific data indicate that 2.5 to 3.0 million pounds are brought in annually at Toledo and Port Clinton. The catch has declined since 1954. Test firings from Camp Perry near the site have terded to reduce the fish popula-tion 2 2 the area. Comercial species include wolleye, uhite bass, yellow perch, sheepshead, carp, goldfish, channel catfisl and suckers. In 1970, L

12.975 million pounds of sport fish were taken from the lake in Ohio. Yellow

. perch comprised the great majority of the fish taken. Spawning areas for fish

{i include several offshore reefs near the site. The Toussaint and Round Point

~

. Reefs are the closest, about 3 miles offshore. Other reefs occur 3-7 miles N - .from the site, The Toussaint River immediately south of the site is also '

of some importance as a spawning area. The inshore area near the site has been classified in the DBER s a " biological desert" when compared to offshore areas. Many of the species found (Melosira, oligochetes, carp, goldfish, etc.)

^

ere pollution' tolerant, indicating that the quality of the aquatic biota near the site'is fair to good.

g .- .- .

?

23 4

The potential effects of the thermal discharge on the aquatic biota l

include outright thermal kill, displacement of biota, and altered reproduction, I growth, and metabolism. Shif ts in species composition as well as changes in i

. numbers may accompany these effects. Thermal ki'l is usually not a problem

~

i in tempera:e waters where natural temperatures rarely approach the lethal

(

temperatr.res for organisms. Other effects may be reduced zone of passage for I fish cr.used by the plume, reducing short-term local movements and/or migratory L

success. Benthos and periphyton may be scoured by a high velocity discharge.

The effects on the aquatic biota of the heated water discharge to lake Erie by the natural draf t alternative are small. The thermal plume from

'r the station covers a maximum of 2.14 acres at the 1 F isotherm. The upper tolerance limit for yellow perch is about 84 F . Other fish species, such as carp and goldfish, can withstand substantially warmer temperatures ( ). The tolerant limits for phytoplankton and zooplankton are about 94 F and 97 F, T

i respectively(10) . The average maximum summer water temperature near Davis-Besse is about 77 F. It is expected that the area of the plume between F

94 and 97 ? will be near 0 (maximum blowdown temperature will be 97 F) and

[

tb; area of the 84 F isotherm will be extremely small (less than 0.08 acre).

The discharge is about 'l mile from the Toussaint River and 3 miles from the closest reefs and should not interfere with these spawning areas. The effects of the heated water discharge should be limited to some scouring of benthos from the area near the high velocity discharge point.

i The once-through cooling alternative would be expected to influence h a much larger area and volume of the lake. Using an average maximum summer

. water temperature of 77 F and a temperature rise of 18 F in the condenser, only a very small area of the plume would exceed 94 F, the critical temperature for many algal species. No area of the plume would reach 97 F, the critical temperature for zooplankton. Using 84 F as the critical temperature for fish, about 9 to 35 acres of Lake Erie would be affected (assuming no L longshore current; area af fected would be 54-517 acres with a longshore

~

s, current) . While some fish may be killed, most will simply avoid this area

, of the plume. More subtle secondary effects would result in the areas where

, the density would be increased by these displaced fish. The benthos and periphyton within the warmer isotherms of the plume would not be able to avoid such temperatures. However, the area affected would be expected to be

- . . , n_ ,

e

. 24

(- .

i smaller than the surface area of the plume since the heated water will tend to i

float on the cooler lake water. Benthos and periphyton will be scoured from I the warmest area of the plume where the discharge velocity is high. The area

! , affected by securing would be substantially greater than that for the natural draf t alternative because the once-through flow (685,000 gpm) would be about t

50 times greater (80 times greater if the 1,027,000 gpm flow is used).

I Poikilothermic organisms (cold-blooded) generally show the Q10 "

phenomenon wher'.: the metabolic rate doubles for every 10 C (18 F) increase in temperature. Table 3.1.2.2-1 shows the expected metabolic rate increase for several isotherms in the plume and the area affected.

I 1

~

TAB 1.E 3.1.2.2-1. THE PERCENT INCREASE IN METABOLIC RATE EXPECTED FOR POIKILOTHERMS IDCATED IN THE THERMAL PLUFE AND THE AREA 0F 1AKE ERIE AFFECTED ic Temperature Above Lake, Percent Increase in Area Affected, 7

C (F) Metabolic Rate acres

(. 10 (18) 100 4 8 (14.4) ,

80 9 L 4 (7.2) 40 185 7

1 (1.8) 10 6,680 L. ,

The biota of a significant area of the lake (6,680 acres) would be exposed to at least a 10 percent increase in metabolism and an accompanying increase in i growth. This would be expected to result in altered reproductive rates and probably altered timing of the reproductive or spawning seasons. The implica-tions of these changes in the balance of the natural aquatic ecosystem are not fully understood.

While the changes discussed above (thermal exclusion and/or kill and altered metabolic rate) .are not expected to cause major shif ts in species

\ .

composition, they will probably enhance seasonal and other, more permanent i shif ts which are already occurring in this portion of the lake. Most notable b . is the shif t to warmwater " trash" fish such as carp and goldfish and the '

seasonal shif t to blue-green algae resulting in periodic algal blooms. Neither of these shif ts is desirnble. ,

p .

I 25 The offshore reef and Toussaint River spawning areas may experience f

some slight ef fects from the once-through cooling alternative. The maximum. ,

temperature increase which would be expected at the closest reefs is less than

. 1 F. Should longshore currents shif t the plume to the southeast, the mouth of the Toussaint River would experience a temperature rise of no more than 2 F.

Fish are quite sensitive to water temperature during spawning. Spawning usually takes place over a narrow .-ange of temperatures. During the spawning e

season when the natural ambient water temperature is at or near the upper limit of that range, a 1 or 2 F temperature rise caused by the plume could force fish into other unaffected spawning areas or prevent their successfu-spawning altogether. Similarly, when the ambient water temperature is just below the lower limit of that range, a small rise could induce spawning

i. artifically. This alteration in the time or place of spawning could be beneficial or harmful depending on other environmental conditions.

Arean where the temperature is above the normal preference temperature of fish may block both short-term local and migratory movergents of fish, i Assuming that the location of the discharge structure would be the same for the once-through cooling alternative, it is believed that an adequate zone of

[, passage will be maintained in Lake Erie near the thermal plume. The discharge 7

structure is 1,000 f t offshore, leaving a large, shallow water area between

._ it and the shore for fish movement. Longshore currents may temporarily reduce

_ the size of this zone. Fish should also have adequate passageways in the deeper water offshore from and under the thermal plume (the heated water will L tend to float).

. The impacts of the once-through cooling alternative upon the aquatic

! comunity are estimated to be minor.

l

. t c

v

~

26 f 3.2 chemical Discharges

1. . 3.2.1 Atmospheric  !

l

. 3.2.1.1 Physical Environment

. Based on information supplied by Toledo Edison the Davis-Besse facility will normally use internal sources of hot water for heating purposes.

Only occasionally, when the plant is not operating during cold weather, would auxiliary heating be furnished from an oil-fired package boiler.

Experience with other nuclear facilities has shown that, even when package I boilers are used as the primary heating source, air pollutant emissions result in expected off-site concentrations that are at most a few percent l~ )

of the Federal secondary air quality standards ( '

. Since the emissions from the Davis-Besse facility should be lower, the effect on the air quality

[- '

of the immediate and surrounding areas will be insignificant. This conclu-

[ ,

sion applies to both the present plant design alternative and the once-through cooling design alternative.

3.2.1.2 Biological Environment g,

1 The secondary air quality standards were established on the general basis of protecting natural biota from harmful effects. Since air

", pollutant emissions from the Davis-Besse facility are expected to be well N within these standards, the effects on avian wildlife and terrestrial biota should be insignificant.

L 3.2.1.3 Human Environment The secondary air quality standards were also established on the o

basis of' protecting the personal comfort and well being of the general public . Since air pollutant emissions - from the Davis-Besse facility are

, expected to be well within these standards, the effects on the nearby

' human environment should also be insignificant.

1 .

L,L v .

27 l ^

3.2.2 Terrestrial 3.2.2.1 Physical Environment Present plant Design Under the present plant design the only direct discharges of chemicals to the surrounding land would result from the dissolved solids r contained in the sptay drift from the natural draft cooling tower. Drift losses from the tower are expected to be about 48 gpm and since the water

~

could contain up to about 478 ppm of dissolved neutral salts (mainly calcium and sodium sulfates), the rate of solids discharge will be about L' 274 lb/ day. The mist droplets or tiny salt particles should be carried several miles in the cooling tower plume and dispersed over a considerable area by atmospheric turbulence. However, a conservative deposition rate was estimated by assuming uniform deposition over a 10-square mile area. This produces an average delivery rate to the terrestrial environment of about p 16 lb/ acre / year. Assuming all the deposited salt is dissolved in the rain water which falls on the same area (annual rainfall is about 30.5 in.)(13) ,

an average salt concentration of about 2 ppm would be produced. This

(~'

concentration is insignificant compared to the dissolved solids content of t

the lake water (478 ppm).

Once-Through Cooling Alternative

? For the case of once-through cooling no cooling tower is used and thus no salt depositios via drift will' occur. Since no other chemical discharges to the terrestrial environment are anticipated, this alternative plant design will have no impact in the terrestrial category.

l, 3.2.2.2 Biological Environment k~

. The salts in the natural-draft cooling tower drift will be

>. deposited on the terrestrial environment around the site. The maximum annual deposition rate probably will not exceed 16 pounds per acre. The normal precipitation in the area should be adequate for leaching these 4

- l

i,

~

c- .

28

}.-

j_ salts, preventing salt buildup in toxic amounts on the vegetation or in

~

the soil. The annual precipitation (about 30.5 inches) should dilute

~

• n the 16 lb of salts deposited per acre per year to a concentration of j

about 2 ppm. The precipitation is more abundant in the summer months,

~

but remains adequate throughout the year, so that the salts will not

{~

. have a tendency to build up during any one season.

"~

j Principal cations in the drift are Ca++, Na+, and Mg++. Anions include SO4 , NO ", and C1~. None of these are toxic to plants or animals 3

in the concentrations released and most are nutrients which could be utilized by the plants. Salt deposition from the cooling tower alternative is not expected to cause any adverse impact on the terrestrial environment.

Chemical discharge to the terrestrial environment from the w

once-through cooling alternative would be insignificant and no biological effects would be expected.

3.2.2.3 Human Environment For the plant as designed the estimated amount of neutral salt deposition on the surrounding landscape should have no noticeable effect on the public. No health hazard is apparent and rains will wash away the salt that might deposit on vehicles or structures. The estimated average concentration of the salt-rainwater solution (~2 ppm) should cause no adverse impact to the human environment. '

Chemical discharges to the terrestrial environment from the once-through cooling alternative would be insignificant and no effects on people would be expected.

d D

e

)' e

- - * - W + yv-- w- - > * ~ - ' ' - - - - -

l-

- 29

{ 3.2.3 Surface Waters 3.2.3.1 Physical Environment j Natural Draf t Cooling Tower Alternative 3e principal wastes of a chemical nature that will be discharged from the natural draf t cooling alternative to I4ke Erie include dissolved solids t

originating from the cooling tower blowdown, the makeup water demineralizers, and processed effluent from the nuclear areas and residual chlorine resulting from the periodic chlorination that' takes place at several points within the station.

All water discharges to Lake Erie occur from a collection basin ,

where the various plant sources mix and exert a mutual dilution effect. The I

major source of water inflow to this basin is the cooling tower blowdown.

The blowdown flow at Davis-Besse is based on a concentration factor of 2 and I

so this water contains the same dissolved solids as found in the lake water,

_ but at twice the normal lake conca.ntration. Since the concentration of dissolved-solids in lake water near the. station intake point is only about 170' mg/ liter, thi blowdown water will contain about 340 mg/ liter. Additions

- to this from the other plant processes will . raise the concentration to about 359 mg/ liter with a one-hour peak of 443 mg/ liter. Ta'e neutral nature of the j- added salts and the rapid dilution that will occur in the discharge plume ky indicate that these levels of dissolved solids in the plant effluent will

[ have' negligible effect on lake water quality.

. A high percentage of 'the total volume of water entering the Davis-i Besse Plant will be chlorinated at one or more -points in the water systems.

( ~

l' The chlorination treatment will be applied at four different points in the

water systems of the plant

.(1) between the intake screens and the pump suctions, (2) the filter clarifier, (3) in the sewage treatment plant, and

.- , (4) in the closed-cycle ' cooling towers system. The Supplement to the l, Environmental Report indicates that all water entering the plant will be

s. . chlorinated between the ~ screens and the pump suctions , but it does not ,

L . elaborate- on the concentrations to be applied- or the_ frequency of the l'

L treatment. ' ' A-better definition of the intended frequency of chlorination -

l n , -

m .

e-p 30 F

[ and the concentrations to be used is requmd. Chlorination will ye done on L'

a continuous basis in the filter clarifier and tt, sewage treatment p!:;.:

~

i effluent. Periodic additions of chlorine to che condenser-cooling tower syi; tem will be controlled to maintain a free re::idual on the outlet of the cond aser of 0.5 ppm.- Since the blowdown will be taken from alcernate pump

. discharges other than those receiving the chlorine, the water must pass through the cooling towcr where some of this residual is lost, so that less than 0.2 ppm will be present in the blowdown water.

According to the Supplement to the Environmental Report, the only systems .in the Davis-Besse plant which will~ contain suspended solids are the backwash effluents from the filter clarifier unit and from the secondary system condensate polishing demineralizers. Since these effluents are directed to the settling basin with only the clear effluent tieing pumped to the station a collecting basin for discharge to the lake, no suspended particulates should be released to Lake Erie.

f The only disc $arge from the Davis-Besse station to the Toussaint River under normal operating conditiens will be from the storm-surface runoff system. Minor amounts of oily wastes may enter this system with the runoff from. paved parking areas and roads. The quantity of such wastes should be small and the dilution factor large, when mixed with the total runoff. The dilution water (rainwater) will be of good quality. Erosion sediments could also enter this system. IL -aver, the landscaping plans for the site should reduce such sediments to a low level. The discharge ditch which parallels the Toussaint River for approximately 7,000 feet before discharging into the h river may permit the settling out of suspended solids if the current velocity

h. is low.

j Also discharging to the storm / surface runoff system and hence, the q Toussaint River, is the miscellaneous drain system from the station itself.

g This includes water collected by the floor drains within the plant. All water collected by this system will pass through an oil separator before v .

3 , . entering . the storm / surface runoff system. The water quality should equal or .

r, exceed that 'of the lake. No radioactive wastes enter this drain system. ,

b_. Should the pump on the settling basin (used to pump the settling basin water to the collecting basin) fail, the water frcs the settling basin

- . will drain through an err.ergency overflow wier into the discharge ditch and 4

,~

i u .

! 31

~

then to the Toussaint River. The settling basin receives the water from the demineralizing system clarifier and the backwash from the condensate polishing demineralize r. The former source contains both the suspended solids and dissolved sclids. The latter being highly purified condensate water, contains

[ only suspended solids from the polishing filters. The purpose of the settling

. basin is to remove the suspended solids. If the basin does this task effec-tively, the water discharged under an emergency 'to the discharge ditch should contain both dissolved and suspended solids at lower concentrations than

[' those in Lake Erie.

During the construction period, discharges to the Toussaint River

[ will be from the storm / surface runoff system and the aeration pond. The storm / surface runoff system drains the station construction area. The soils used in the site grading and their placement are designed to reduce erosion and the 7,000-foot drainage ditch to the river should aid in i

settling out silt which does enter this system. However, because of the bare, unvegetated naturc of the site during construction and the activities of heavy construction equipment, the potential for erosion is high and monitoring of the drainage ditch water is advisable to detect any siltation problems which might" occur.

Groundwater from the rock aquifer leaks into the areas where excavation into the bedrock was necessary. This water is pumped from the excavated areas into 'an aeration pond. The pond drains into the Toussaint via the drainage ditch. This water is higher in dissolved solids than lake or river water and, depending on the actual concentrations and the volume discharge, could influence the river and lake water quality.

The reactor vessel will be delivered to the site by barge. A

,- deep channel will be dredged in the lake and the shore in front of the intake canal will be excavated to permit the barge to enter. The dredgings, predominantly sand, will be stockpiled alongside the channel. The channel will be open for only about 3 months and after delivery of the vessel, the dredged material will be replaced so that the bottom contour of the lake is L. restored.- The nature of the sediments indicates that introduction of pollutants from the bottom sediments into the water during these operations will be negligible (14) .

During construction, storm drainage from the cooling tower area and the western portion of the site will flow into the borrow pits and be

-,w

p

~

32 r- retained there. There will be no discharge to the Toussaint River from these areas.

j While staps have been taken to insure that good quality water is

. discharged to the Toussaint River, monitoring the discharges from the storm /

f -

surface runoff system and the aeration pond are advisable during the construc-tion period to insure that they treet expectations.

f~

Since other chemical properties or water quality aspects of the station discharge water will be unaffected (no addition of toxic substances) or perhaps improved (higher DO and nearer neutral pH), the chemical effluents from Davis-Besse are expected to have insignificant impact on the Iake Erie j water quality and will meet the most stringent existing criteria for public water supply, aquatic life A, and recreational use.

Once-Through Cooling Alternative r

I' Under this alternative no settling basin would be used and the

~

condenser circulating cooling water would flow directly to lake Erie. It is f

f expected that a slot-type high velocity structure would be employed to achieve rapid mixing with the lake water. The volumetric flow which would be avail-able for dilution of plant discharge wastes under these conditions would be at least 685,000 gpm. No concentration of the lake water dissolved solids L~

would occur in the plan't condensers and so only the neutralized demineralizer regeneration wastes (9 gpm at 6,650 ppm) would contain dissolved solids higher than the ambient concentrations in lake water. For the flow rates and dissolved solids contents specified, the dissolved solids content of the plant discharge to Lake Erie would be less than 1 ppm greater than the lake water itself.

Under this alternative, the once-through cooling water would be chlorinated periodically, and af ter passage through the plant's condensers

[ returned directly to the lake. If anticipated practices for the present design were followed, then less than 0.2 ppm of free residual chlorine would be present in the water after condenser passage. This level of chlorine should be dissipated in the plant discharge system and so no residual chlorine would

~

be expected to reach the lake. Since no other chemicals of any consequence should be released in liquid effluents, the Davis-Besse Station, under the once-through cooling alternative, would have insignificant effect on water quality with respect to chemical discharges.

7..-

[-

33 Discharges from the storm / surface runoff system and discharges to the

, Toussaint River during construction would be similar to those reported under

! the natural draf t cooling alternative. No significant degradation of the river 1 . or lake water quality should occur.

~

3.2.3.2 Biological Environment *

. The water discharged to Iake Erie from the natural draf t cooling

tower alternative (13,800 gpm) contains dissolved solids at about 2 times the 7 lake concentration. Dilution of this volume, discharged at a high velocity, in lake water will bh rapid. The pH of the discharged water will be near

> neutral (maximum of 7.6) and the suspended solids will be less than that in o the lake. No toxic :.ubstances will be released. The chlorine used in the various systems within the station should be less than 0.2 ppm in the discharged I'

water. Water discharged to the Toussaint River should be similar in quality to that of the river and lake. Thus, no change is expected in the biological communities of the river and lake due to chemical discharges from the natural draft tower alternative.

L For the once-through cooling alternative, the chemical quality of water discharged to the lake and river should be similar co that of these two water bodies. These discharges should not affect the aquatic biota.

- 3.2.3.3 Human Environment For either plant design alternative the slight increase in the dissolved solids content of Lake Erie water due to Davis-Besse Station effluente should be insignificant at locations where the water is withdrawn for either industrial or potable uses. The water at these points is also P expected to be unchanged or improved by plant operations with respect to bacteria count, odor, dissolved oxygen level, pH, and other chemical P- constituents. 'Ihus, State of Ohio water quality criteria for public water

?- and industrial water. supplies should not be violated, and on this basis liquid chemical effluents from the Davis-Besse Station are expected to have insignificant effects on the nearby human environment.

M - - - - -

F l

L y ,

34 3.2.4 Groundwaters 3.2.4.1 Physical Environment i

As stated in the D-BSER, groundwater at the site is located P -

within the bedrock. An artesian effect is characteristic in this area.

I Thus, when the bedrock is penetrated pressure is exerted outward-water

[~

being expelled from the rock. Contamination by an inward flow of a sub-st'ance is h!ghly unlikely.

Neither construction nor operation of the plant in either alter-native is expected to discharge chemicals to the groundwater. The soil on and near the site is reported to be nearly impermeable, so even accidental spills of chemicals would not be expected to penetrate through the soils.

Careful sealing during excavation and piering of the reactor containment f #

vessel and turbine should eliminate the possibility of groundwater contamina-(, tion. Therefore, no change in local groundwater should occur due to the Davis-Besse plant.

3.2.4.2 Biological Environment Vegetation remaining in the immediate site area is associated with the marsh and characteristically very shallow-rooted. Any deep-rooted vegetation would not be able to penecrate the shallow bedrock to the location of the aquifer. Vegetation tapping the groundwater supply is already quite limited at the plant site and no contamination of the groundwater is anticipated. Thus, no impact is expected.

3.2.4.3 Human Environment

+

';he primary source of potable water in the area around the Davis-Besse site is Lake Erie. Most other drinking water is trucked into the area because well water is usually too hard a. i sulfurous for drinking and cooking.

.. The lack of the use of well water combined with the fact that no chemical contamination of groundwater should occur as a result of plant operations, s indicate that no effect will occur to the population in the area.

?

r- . 35 t

{.

~

3.3 Radionuclide Releases I

, 3.3.1 Atmospheric Estimated Gaseous Emissions _

.r,.

l

- According to the D-BSER the annual average emission rate of I ' radioactive noble ' gases is expected to be about 52.8 uCi/sec. This is based on 0.1% defective fuel, equilibrium fuel cycle conditions and retention in gas decay tanks for 30 to 60 days before release. The I total interval. each year, during which releases will actually occur should

.be 150 days; the time required to vent the plant's five decay tanks. The major source of gaseous radioactive iodine emissions will occur from the waste evaporr, tor vent, and the annual average rate for the most critical

-5 uCi/sec. The discharge data nuclide, I-131, is expected to be 5.6 x 10 f' for the individual noble gas and iodine radienuclides are sunnarized ir.

Table 3.1. In this table release rates are given for 1% defective fuel as well as for 0.1% defective fuel. While 0.1% defective fuel probably rep-

, resents a fuel performance icvel that can be realized in practice, it was considered advisable' for this analysis to base radiological effects 2stimates on a performance range. The 1% level should be considered a

j. 1 conservative upper limit for fuel performance. Therefore, annual average

[. gaseous radioactivity emissions from the Davis-Bes.e plant would neve. be expected to exceed the rates pertaining to this degree of fuel failure.

l_. The data in Table 3.1 also apply to both plant cooling alternatives being

.,' examined hare (the present design, which employs a natural draft cooling towcr operating closed cycle, and the alternative design which uses once-through cooling).

3.3.1.1 Physical Environment The annual average emission rate of the radioactive noble gases may range from about 52.8 uCi/see to 528 uCi/sec. Using the maximum X/Q

s

{~  :

4

. . 36

( l

~

f l

TAB 1E 3.1 ESTIMATED DISCHARGE OF GASEOUS RADIONUCLIDES FROM THE CASE 0US

$- RADIOACTIVE WASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM

c.  :

l

~

r Annual Average Release Rate, uCi/sec 0.1% Defective Fuel 1% Defective Fuel Ntselide

'- KR-85 42.4 424 i

Xe-131m 1.1 11 XE-133m .0006 .006 Xe-133 9.3 93

[

I f Total 52.8 528

~

I

-5 -4 I-131 5.6 x 10 5.6 x 10

-5 3.4 x 10

-4 I-132 3.4 x 10 l -5 -5

I-133 . 5.8 x 10 5.8 x 10

-6 1-134 7.0 x 10 7.0 x 10 ~5

- I- 135 ,

3.0 x 10 -5 3.0 x 10'0 s

1 S-y-

l T

l 1

f..

4x .

l

j ,

i

! 37

' -6 sec/m3 , the maximum airborne reported in the D-BSER, i . e . , 1. 5 x 10 I off-site concentration of radioactive noble gases would range from about 8 x 10 -11 to 8 x 10

-0 uCi/cc . These concentrations are about 0.027 and 0.277. respectively of the 10CFR20 maximum permissible concentration for

~

T the noble gas mixture.

l

. .The annual average release rate for I-131 may range from about

-5 -4

[ 5.6 x 10 uCi/see to 5.6 x 10 uCi/sec . Again using the maximum X/Q i

value, these concentrations would result in a maximum off-site atmotpheric

~ -16 concentration of from 8.4 x 10 to 8.4 x 10 uCi/cc. These concentra-tions are respectively about 0.0000847. and 0.000847. of the 10CFR20 maximum permissible concentration for 1 2131 in air. In addition, the concentrations are respectively 8.4% and 847. of the limits that are considered "as low as practicable" in the proposed Appendix I to 10CFR50.

{ On the basis of the above data the airborne radioactive discharges from the Davis-Besse plant should have no measurable effect on the atmospheric properties of the area.

3.3.1.2 Biological Environment

( The airborne radioactive noble gas concentrations resulting from emissions frcm the Davis-Besse plant are anticipated to range from

[ 0.027 to 0.277,10CFR20 and to result in radiation exposure to atmospheric

- biota of less than 0.'2 millirad / year. Natural radiation background in the United States averages approximately 125 mrad / year.( 5) The Station related radiation exposure would be less than one percent of natural

.i background radiation and, consequently, the effect on the atmospheric biota is considered insignificant.

3.3.1.3 Iluman Environment -

U Gaseous radioactive discharges may result in ingestion of radioactivity and radiation exposure by the population in the vicinity of the Davis-Besse plant. The extent ' of the radiological health impact to individuals and to the population has been assessad for direct exposure to and inhalation of the ambient atmosphere. The effect of ingestion of I-131 from gaseous discharges through consumption of cow's milk is con-sidered- under terrestrial impacts .(Section 3.3.2.3) .

i 4

38 l ~

The maximum direct whole body exposure to an individual from

-5 i radioactive noble gas release is estimated to range from about 2 x 10

. rem / year to 2 x 10 -4 rem / year based on the release rates given in Table 3.1, I-the maximum X/Q value, and continuous occupancy at the plant site boundary.

,_ The relationship of the maximum expected whole body exposure I from noble gases to the natural background of radioactivity and to establish

~

and proposed AEC radiation standards are:

(1) The maximum dose from noble gas release is from y- 0.016 to 0.16 percent of the natural background of 125 mrem / year, (2) 0.004 to 0.04 percent of the 10CFR20 off-site limit

[t of 500 mrem / year, and

{ (3) 0.2 to 2 percent o; the proposed 10CFR50, Appendix I off-site limit of 10 mrem / year.

r .

The estimated radiation exposure to the population within a

[

50-mile radius of the station from noble gas release during normal operation ,

( is given in the D-BSER. With respect to the emission data in Table 3.1 the value would range from 0.131 man-rem /yr to 1.31 man-rem /yr for the

[i expected 1980 population. This should be compared to a population exposure

, due to natural background radiation of 332,000 man -rem /yr . Therefore, the

[ estimated exposure re,sulting from radioactive noble gas releases from the

, , Davis-Besse plant will represent an insignificant addition to the radiation dose burden of this population.

- Iodine-131 released to the atmosphere may also result ir radiation

- exposure by inhalation. The maximum estimated thyroid dose due to inhalation of I-131 could range from 9 x 10

-7 to 9 x 10 -6 rem /yr based on the emission rates given in Table 3.1, the maximum X/Q value, and the equation given in

, Appendix 7A of the D-BSER. Either of these dose values is insignificant L compared to the approximately 0.050 rem /yr that an individual's thyroid receives from penetrating natural background radiation.

~ . ,

1 s . l

)

7 I.

39 .

9 I

~

3.3.2 Terres trial-

. 3.3.2.1 Physical Environment I.

Radioactive iodine and particulates released from the Davis-Besse plant will deposit on the soil and surface flora in the vicinity of the site. Iodine-131 deposition may be estimated from the release data given in Table 3.1, the maximum X/Q value (1.5 x 10 -6 sec/m3 ) given in the D-BSER, a deposition velocity of 0.01 m/sec, and the decay constant value of

-6 ~

l I-131 which is 1 x 10 sec . The calculation yields maximum concentrations 2

of I-131 on soil or' flora surfaces ranging from about 8 x 10 uCi/m t,

-6 8 x 10 uCi/m .

The D-BSER does not give a numerical estimate of the extent of F the discharge of radioactive material,in particulate form, but particulate f

activity release from the gaseous radioactive waste treatment system is

expected to be virtually zero. The results of environment surveys around the Dresden Power Station by the U. S. Public Health Service ( 6) indicate l that radioactive particulate emissions from a nuclear power station do not L. produce detectable levels of radionuclides in the terrestrial environment.

l l

During the 1968 USPdS study, no radioactivity attributable to the Dresden

, Station was found in soil, cabbage, grass, or corn husks. Therefore, the

!.. particulate discharge,s from the Davis-Besse Station, which has an improved gaseous waste treatment system, should not produce a measurable increase in

, the level of radioactivity in the soil and surface flora around the site.

The deposition of radioiodine and radioactive particulate emissions e

from the Davis-Besse plant on the soil and surface flora is not expected to

- significantly increase the level of radioactivity about the background from natural radioactivity (40g,232Th plus progeny, and 226

, Ra plus progeny) and fallout radioactivity from atmospheric testing of uclear devices. Therefore,

_ the Davis-Besse Station should not have a measurable effect on the surrounding terrestrial environment.

3.3.2.2 Biological Environment The biological effect of radionuclides released to the terrestrial

> environment is assessed by estimation of the dose to the thyroid of a cow

L I

p -

40 g

which grazes on grass on which I is deposited. Although I deposition l -on the soil and surface flora would not be expected to have a direct 131 r . biological ef fect, concentration of I in the thyroid of a cow may occur l' 2 because a cow grazes over a large area (50 m / day) and the thyroid concentrates iodine. This exposure pathway is expected to result in the maximum biological impact on the terrestrial environment and the animal . life it supports.

q The equation used in calculating the cow thyroid dose is given in Appendix 4. Using the emission rates from Table 3.1 the maximum possible

-4 cow thyrcid dose is estimated to range from 5.1 x 10 to 5.1 x 10~ rad / year.

The narest cows to the Davis-Besse plant are, according to the Preliminary i Safety Analysis Report, located 1-1/2 miles to the south-southwest. Based

~7 3 on a X/Q value of 2.5 x 10 sec/m for this location (See Appendix 7A of

-5 the D-BSER) the corresponding range of cow thyroid dose would be 8.5 x 10 to 8.5 x 10 ' rad / year. These values are about 0.1 and 17. respectively

~

of the exposure that would be received due to natural background. Thus, 1,

. the biological effect of I-131 cmissions from the Davis-Besse plant on terrestrial organisms is considered insignificant.

3.3.2.3 Human Environment Radioiodine (1-131) released to the atmosphere may result in radiation exposure to individuals by ingestion through the grass-cow-milk-

~ '

man food chain. Estimates of the radiation dose to a child's thyroid resulting from drinking milk produced by cows that graze only near the Davis-Besse plant site are summarized in Table 3.2. These estimates were g

obtained using the I-131 emission rates i;iven in Table 3.1 and the equation <

given in Appendix A of this report. The potential dose for cows grazing at the site boundary is shown for reference only; no milk cows currently are located this close to the plant. Nevertheless all dose estimates given in Table 3.2 are well below the 1.5 rem / year limit of 10CFR20 and also satisfy the 5 mrem / year l'imit of proposed Appendix I to 10CFR50. The

~0

' largest dose estimate value in the table (3.9 x 10 rem / year) is also less than 0.57. of the expected radiation exposure that a child's thyroid should

[', experience from penetrating natural background radiation (abou 0.050 rem / year)(15) ,

Since this path for radiation exposure of humans represents the most critical, it is concluded that the effe cs of radioiodine emissions from the Davis-

. Besse plant should be insig:,1ficant with respect to the human terrestrial environment. .

r. 41 l

r

(

l

[ TABLE 3.2 THYROID RADIATION DOSE FROM MILK CONSUMPIION (DAVIS-BESSE PLANT)

[ Distance Direction Number from' from of Child's Thyroid Dose, rem /vr Plant Plant Cows 0.1*/. Defective Fuel 17. Defective Fue'.

1/2 mile Site Boundary 0 3.9 x 10-5 3.9 x 10 -4 1-1/2 miles SSW 2 6.5 x 10 -6 6.5 x 10 -5 ,

2-1/2 miles WSW 59 3.9 x 10 -6 3.9 x 10 5 L

3.3.3 Surface Waters Liquid Emissions For Present Plant Design The data in the D-BSER and that obtained from Toledo Edison indicates that the annual radioactive liquid waste discharge to Lake Erie

-2 will be about 10 Ci of mixed ifssion and corrosion products and about 350 i

Ci of tritium. The composition of the mixed fission and corrosien product s

accivity is detailed in Tables 4-3 and 4-5 in the D-BSER. The average

, discharge rates and effluent concentrations given in those tables are based

, on 0.17. defective fuel and assumed performance for the radioactive waste processing equipment. Since the overal' waste treatment system decontamina-tion factors that were assumed probably underestimate the capabilities of the equipment, this tends to compensate for the somewhat optimistic assumption for fuci performance. On this basis the radionuclide concentrations in the I' station effluent and the activity release rates given in Tables 4-3 and 4-5 ,  ;

> of the D-BSER represent realistic estimates of the results of plant operation. l Therefore, the data will not be repeated here. It should be noted that the I

l

p k

f' ~

42 I

. annual average specific activities given in the tables actually constitute l average- specific activities (concentrations) during only the period of

_ , discharge, which occurs for only about 60 hours6.944444e-4 days <br />0.0167 hours <br />9.920635e-5 weeks <br />2.283e-5 months <br /> over a year's calendar time.

Thus the values are about 140 times greater than if they had been expressed

_  ; as a true annual average. In the sections which follow, annual radiation

~

dose estimates that are developed from these data consider the time factor; c that is the dose values are lowered by a factor of 140 to obtain true annual i averages.

,. Regarding tritium releases to Lake Erie, the value of 350 Ci/yr is also based on 0.1% defective fuel. Since the liquid radioactive waste c treatnent system does not remove t'ritium during processing, no conservative decontamination factor is available to compensate for the assumed low degree of fuel failure. Therefore, tritium discharges and their effects will be calculated on the basis of both 0.1% and 1% defective fuel. For 1% defective fuel the annual tritium discharge from the Davis-Besse plant would be about 440 Ci based on tra information given in Table 8A-4 of the e . D -BSER . Again these tritium discharges (350 Ci/yr and 440 Ci/yr) would occur during a period of only about 60 hours6.944444e-4 days <br />0.0167 hours <br />9.920635e-5 weeks <br />2.283e-5 months <br /> within a calendar year. In calculating annual radiation dose values therefore, the releases will be treated on a true annual basis using the same time factor as described above for the fission and corrosion product activities.

Liquid Emissions For Once-Through Cooling Alternative e

P It is assumed that the emir,sions would be the same as for the present design. However, the much greater flow of water for dilution (685,000 gpm versus-20,000 gpm) would result in radioactivity concentrations in the discharge water which would be 34 times low;r than are expected for the present plant design.

7 f

g. 3.3.3.1 Physical Environment

)

L

, Present Plant Design ,

j -

The annual discharge of radioactivity into Lake Erie is expected L to consist of about 10 mci of mixed fission and corrosion products and from 350 Ci to 440 Ci of tritium. The average concentration in the water

. 43

-8 g.

effluent during discharge is estimated to be less than 2 x 10 uCi/ml for

-3 fission and corrosion products and from 1.6 x 10 to 2.0 x 10-3 nci/mi

-. . for tritium.

The expected fission and corrosion product concentration is les.s than 207, of 10CFR20 maximum permissible limits for an unidentified mixture.

On an annual average basis the estimated fission and corrosion product

-10 Ci/ml which is only activity in the discharge would be about 1.4 x 10 about 0.77. of the limit in proposed 10CFR50, Appendix I, part A. The tritium concentrations range from about 537. to 677, of the 10CFR20 maximum a permissible concentration for tritium. On an annual average basis the

-5 o tritium concentration in the discharge would be 1.2 to 1.4 x 10 Ci/ml

- which is about 3 times the limit in proposed 10CFR50, Appendix I, part A.*

It appears tb.c no radiological monitoring data have been collected

, in the vicinity of the Davis-Besse site. However, natural water bodies in

-8 the United States usually contain 1ess than about 10 Ci/ml of gross beta f radioactivity ( ) (excluding tritium) and a survey of tritium in surface waters around the country ( ) indicates concentrations of several hundred picoeuries per liter (1 pCi/1 = 10 pCi/ml) are common. Adjusting the effluent-cencentrations to an annual average basis, the fission and corrosion product concentrations in the water uelivered to the lake would be only about one percent of the estimated natural gross beta radioactivity level, but the tritium concentration in the discharge water would be about a factor of 50 greater than the estimated ambient tritium concentration in the lake.

Therefore, even assuming a factor of 10 dilution in the station outfall

[ mixing zone, tritium discharges from the plant would probably be measurable I at this location in the lake. The corresponding concentration of discharged tritium in the lake water near the beach at Camp Perry, which is located about 2.8 miles from the Davis-Besse site, can be estimated from the sur face concentration distribution data given in Table 4-6 of the D-BSER. This estimate yields an average annual tritium concentration at that location of

~

$~ about 8 x 10 Ci/ml or roughly 207. of the anticipated ambient tritium

~

concentration in the lake. Since dispersion increases with distance into However, it should be noted that tritium discharges from the Davis-Besse plant will satisfy the requirements of proposed Appendix I ander part C, since radiation doses to people should be well below the 5 mrem /yr limit.

A r

F 44 i

the lake, the tritium concentration at the Camp Perry potable water intake l-. should be about the same or a few percent higher than the general level

- . in.the lake.

Once-Through Cooling Alternative Under this~ alternative the radioactivity concentrations would be 34 times lover than for the present design. Thus the expected fission and corrosion product and tritium concentrations in the discharge water would be at any time about 0.6% and 1.5% to 2% respectively of the 10CFR20 maximum permissible limits. On the basis of a true annual average the corresponding concentrations would be about 0.02% and 10% of the proposed 10CFR50, Appendix I, part A lhnits.

3.3.3.2 Biological Environment I '

Present Plant Design

• ~

The radiation dose to benthic organisms residing in the bottom i

. sediment of Lake Erie is estimated on the basis of accumulation of long-lived radionuclides (Cs-137, Cs-134, co-60, and Sr-90) in t he sediment af ter 40 years of plant operation. It is also conservativo,y assumed that all of the above radionuclides that are released from the plant deposit P uniformly over a one-square kilometer area near the station outfall. Based on average activity release rates for these radionuclides as given in

" bles 4-3 and 4-5 of' the D-BSER, the assumptions lead to an estimated total radioactivity content of the bottom sediment af ter 40 years of plant operat'ons of about 0.12 pCi/ gram. The resulting radiation dose to benthos residing in this arei as estimated from the equation given in Appendix A is about 1 x 10'k rad / year. Limited data appear to exist concerning the natural radioactivity content of Lake Erie bottom sediment. Some measurements are reported in the Das Es-Besse Environmental Report which indicate that the gross activity of sediment near the site ranges from 7 to 24 pCi/g. Another

~

estimate can _ be made based on the average abundance of the naturally occurring radionuclide K-40 in the earth's crust. The average value is ,

about 22 pCi/g on a dry weight basis.(19) 1his estimate compares favorably

~

i

i 45 with the measured gross activity noted above. Since bottom sediment should be about 507. water, the K-40 content of sediment will be taken to be 11 1

~ ~

pCi/g. This specific activity for K-40 would produce a natural radiation

~1 dose to benthos residing in the sediment of about 1.1 x 10 rad / year.

," Since the dose contribution estimated for Davis-Besse operations is only about 17. of the natural background dose, no significant effect on benthic organisms is expected.

The radiation dose to fish due to liquid radioactive discharges from the Davis-Besse plant to Lake Erie was estimated using the combined average discharge specific activities given in Tables 4-3 and 4-5 of the i D-BSER adjusted to a true annual average, and assuming a dilution factor of 10 to approximate lake concentrations in the discharge mixing zone.

{ Tritium concentration in the discharge mixing zone of the lake was likewise based on a true annual average concentration in the plant discharge (i.e.,

1 -

1.1 to 1.4 x 10

-5 pCi/ml) and the factor of 10 dilution to obtain 1.1 to 1.4 x 10 pCi/ml. The equation used to compute all dose values is given in Appendix A. The results of the calculations indicate that even con-sidering the accumulation factors for radionuclides in fish, the dose due

! to tritium will be gteater than that from all fission and corrosion products combined . The values are; dose from tritium, about 2 x 10

-4 rad / year, and

' -5 rad / year.

dose from mixed fission and corrosion products, about 4 x 10 L

Since the natural radiation background for fish should be about equivalent to that for man (U. S. average of 0.125 rad / year), the dose to fish from Davis-Besse plant effluents is estimated to be less than one percent of natural background exposures. As greater dilution occurs in the lake waters, the station dose to fish will be reduced proportionately. Therefore, liquid radioactive waste releases from the plant should have an insignificant effect on fish in Lake Erie.

3e p Once-Through Cooling Alternative

<~

d Under this alternative the radiation dose to benthos would be i the same as for the present design because the dose depends only on g activity released and not on concentrations of radioactivity in the dis-charge. The radiation dose to fish, however, would be about 34 times less O

46 than for the present design, assuming equivalent performance of the rad-waste treatment system, because of the projected lower concentrations in

~ '

the plant discharge water. The radiological effects on both forms of aquatic biota would be insignificant.

( .

3.3.3.3 Muman Environment i

Present Plant Design The principal aquatic pathways for radiation exposure to humans are through consumption of water and fish taken from Lake Erie. The

~

radiation exposares through these pathways has been calculated using the t appropriate equations and data in Appendix A, and the results are presented in Table 3.3.

.l The doses from eating fish are based on consumption of fish taken from the immediate vicinity of the plant discharge. Therefore, the radio-r .

nuclide concentrations in the fish are the same as the concentrations used in Section 3.3.3.2 for estimating the radiation dose to fish. A consumption rate of 30 g of fish per day is assume,d and doses to several critical human organs were estimated. The whole body dose (due mostly to tritium) is largest but the value is less than 0.003% of the estimated exposure due to natural background.  !

The doses f' rom drinking water are based on consumption of water from the Camp Perry Water Intake located about 2.8 miles southeast of the Davis-Besse plant site. This is the nearest point that uses Lake Erie as L.; a water supply. The radionuclide concentrations in the lake water for the location were estimated according to the procedure outlined in Section 3.3.3.1.

The results again indicate that the whole body dose (due almost entirely to

, tritium) is largest. However, the value is only about 0.01% of that which would be received from natural background.

The effect on utilization of Lake Erie near the station site for l ' recreational purposes has been assessed by estimation of the potential radiation exposure to swimmers and boaters. The whole body dose to a swimmer

, . who might spend 100 hours0.00116 days <br />0.0278 hours <br />1.653439e-4 weeks <br />3.805e-5 months <br /> per year in the water nest the liquid discharge outfall is conservatively estimated to be 1.8 x 10-9 rem / year . The dose l

l e - - , . c

. y -- ;- - . s - , , ,, c- , , ,

. . . . .. ,_ ~. , . . ., .. ._

.

• t

'i, TABLE 3.3

SUMMARY

OF RADIATION DOSES TO HUMANS RESULTING FROM RADIOACTIVE LIQUID DISCHARGES Method of Radiati_on Dose to Organ rem /vear .

Ingestion Whole Body GI Bone Kidney Thyroid a)

-6 2.3 x 10~0 -10 ~7 Eating Fish 3.3 x 10 4.3 x 10 -7 6.9 x 10 2.9 x 10 Drinking Water ( ) 1.3 x 10 -5 4.3 x 10 -10 2.3 x 10 -8 3.5 x 10 ~11 7.4 x 10 ~7 (a) Child (b) At Camp Perry, 2.8 miles to southeast, Dilution factor value of 144.

C

i.

r -

48 y

to a boater who spends 250 hours0.00289 days <br />0.0694 hours <br />4.133598e-4 weeks <br />9.5125e-5 months <br /> per year in the same area would be about

! 2.3 x 10 ~9 rem / year. The equations given in Appendix A were used in

( '

estimating these doses in conjunction with true annual average radionuclide discharge' water concentrations plus a dilution factor of 10 due to mixing P in the lake at the station outfall zone. These whole body doses are less than 0.00002% of the whole body dose that individuals would receive from r , natural background.

I

• Based on all the above estimates the anticipated liquid radio-

' active discharges from the Davis-Besse nuclear plant will have an insigni-ficant effect on humans in the area around the plant site.

r I

' Once-Through Cooling Alternative r

! Under this alternative the radiation doses originating from liquid r .

radioactive discharges from the Davis-Besse plant would be about 34 times less than the values presented above for the present plant design. Conse-r - quently, the effects on the human environment would be quite insignificant.

L 3.3.4 Croundwater ,

3.3.4.1 Physical Environment Neither alternative is expected to discharge radioactivity to f th,e groundwater. The soil on and near the site is reported to be quite impermeable so any 1-131 that may be deposited on the ground from the atmosphere should not reach the groundwater. Therefore, radioactivity emissions from the plant are expected to have no effect on the groundwater in the area.

O 3.3.4.2 Biological invironment On the basis of the information presented in the previous section no affect on biota which may utilize groundwater in the vicinity of the .

Davis-Besse plant should result from radioactivity releases at the station.

• S.

49 i-r 3.3.4.3 Human Environnent I

p . Since ne radioactivity. from the Davis-Besse plant should reach

) the groundwater, no radiation exposure to the public is expected due to g

consumption of groundwater in the area.

1 t

3.4 other Operational Impacts C .-

l' '3.4.1 Consumptive Water Use 3.4.1.1 Surface Water

[. Present plans' call for an average withdrawal of 20,730 gpm of water from Lake Erie, of which 11,505 gpm will be returned through the i

I discharge pipe. The difference between these two flows (9,225 gpm) represents the average consumptive water usage for the plant. The only f -

-significant consumptive use of water is the evaporative loss from the

(~

' cooling tower, which can vary between 7,500 and 10,400 gpm with an average loss of 9,225 ggn. There are no plans to withdraw water from the Toussaint River.

Since all the water which is consumed comes from Lake Erie, the effects of this water loss should be insignificant. The average water IL flow through the lake is on the order of 79 million gpm and the consumptive use represents about 0.01 percent of this flow. Therefore, this consumptive ,

us.e of water will have no significant effect on the lake or its use for other purposes.

_ For the . once-through cooling design there will be essentially no evaporative loss of water from the therani plume in the lake. .

r 3.4.1.2 Croundwater There are no plans to withdraw water from groundwater sources.

Consequently, there would be no consumptive use of the groundwater

~

• resource by the Davis-Besse Station.

l I~

-,v. -- -- , ,, a w-m- -..er--s., r.. - . n , -we ,,a -w~-

e J 50 i

T i 3.4.2 Entrainment Ef fects

[ 3.4.1.2 Surface Water Biota r The entrainment of planktonic organisms and weak swimmers (phyto-a

.t plankton, zooplankton, fish eggs, fish larvae, and fish fry), and the impinge-( , ment of large fish on the traveling screens are potentially the most severe l impacts power plants can have on the aquatic community. Damage may be mechanical r (frcm the traveling screens and/or pumps in the system), thermal (from the abrupt temperature rise), or chemical (from biocides and other harmful chemi-

{

I cals discharged to the water). The available data on these biological groups has been given in section 3.1.2.2.

F The natural draf t cooling tower alternative will require a maximum i

42,000 gpm to be withdrawn from Lake Erie. This represents 0.05 percent of

[ .

the average water-flow through the lake (79 million gpm). If the larger fish (larger in diameter than the 3/8-inch mesh of the traveling screens) were f '

randomly distributed in the lake and could not avoid the intake structure,

about 0.05 percent of the fish population of that size would be destroyed by f the traveling screens. - However, the fish are not randomly distributed (fish density near the intake structure is reportedly lower than in other regions of f the lake and spawning does not take place near the structure)and they can, by swimming, avoid the intake structure. The horizontal intake velocity is 1.5 fps

?' and larger, healthy fish should be capable of swimming against that velocity.

k Thus, under normal operating conditions, it is doubtful that even 0.05 percent i

of the larger fish in the lake near Davis-Besse,would be impinged on the

,". traveling screens. It is recommended that the intake structure be monitored l for any debris buildup which might reduce the intake area and consequently increase the intake velocity. Velocities much greater than 3 fps may be too e strong for some fish to swim against.

Pelagic fish eggs, fish larvae and fry, small fish species, zooplank-

~

_. ton, and phytoplankton will all pass into the Davis-Besse Station with the u .

water. According to the D-BSER, all the water withdrawn from the lake (42,000 gpm) will be chlorinated to prevent algal slime buildup in the various cooling water

[ systens. While' most of the entrained organisms would be able to withstand an I abrupt, but short-term temperature rise, and the passage through the various pumps, the biocides introduced to the intake water is expected to be lethal to l

I e 4

n j 'i.

r . 51 most aquatic biota. This loss is about 0.05 percent of the organisms in the

[f average lake water-flow s'olume, 79 million gpm (assuming a random distributier.

~

I of planktonic organisms). Thus, losses due to impingement and entrainment under normal operating conditions are insignificant.

I.

(

In the once-through cooling alternative, about 685,000 gp= is with-drawn from'the lake. This is 0.9 percent of the average water-flow through the lake. Assuming an intake velocity similar to the natural draf t tower

! +

alternative (about 1.5 fps), the increase in impingement of large fish on the traveling screens for the once-through alternative should be directly propor-tional to the increase in water flow over the natural draf t alternative, about 18 times. Probably less than 0.9 percent of the larger fish population in the river near Davis-Besse would be affected. Effects on entrained phytoplankton, j zooplankton, fish eggs, and fish larvae and fry in the intake water would be primarily mechanical and chemical. The larger entrained organisms (zooplank-ton and fish larvae and fry) may suffer mechanical damage from the various pumps in the station. Stuilies at Commonwealth Edison's Waukegan Station on Lake Michigan have indicated a less of about 7 percent of the zooplankton

, population passing through the station due to mechanical damage. If similar damage is realized at Davis-Besse, about 7 percent of the larger entrained organisms will be destroyed. Assuming a random distribution, this would be 0.06 percent of those organisms in the average water-flow through the lake.

' Losses due to chemical e'ffe .: would be incurred by all entrained organisms.

I Assuming a chlorination schedule of 1-1/2 hr per day (typical of many power plants), about 6 percent (1-1/2 hr per day + 24 hr per day) of the entrained biota vould be destroyed. This would be 0.05 percent of these organisms found

- in the average water-flow-through the lake. Most planktonic organisms can withstand abrupt temperature rises for short periods without significant consequences (9, 0,2g) While small losses may occur, recovery to normal s population levels is very rapid (20) Since the servi.e and cooling water flow

,. , through the station at a rapid rate, exposure time to elevated temperatures

, is short. ,,

Thus, the impacts of the once-through cooling. alternative on Lake

.- Erie biota while significantly larger than the natural draf t tower alternative, are estimated to be negligible.

L e

J m h --ae- we r *w - --p----m y = y- .+e+ .-y ,  ?-ge-W'- T"'=w*

1 l

r -

52

• I i'  !

^

3 T 3.4.3 FoRRinR and IcinR 61

(' - 3.4.3.1 ' Physical Environment, _

i

[ .' Present Plant Design L- ,

l

~

_A comprehensive study of the environmental effects of the  !

I.

cooling tower was done by the NUS Corporation for Toledo Edison. This study 4

analyzed a representative five-year period of meteorological data from the Toledo Express Airport to determine those conditions related to the natural f occurrence of fog. The use 'of Toledo Airport data was necessary since the recording of occurrence of fog conditions was a part of the data required to I be analyzed and data from no closer point was available. The analysis of l the Toledo data formed the basis for eva'luating the potential of producing f~ - or intensifying local fog conditions. A comparison of the Toledo data with on-site meteorological data collected over a two-year period showed that the r -

~ Toledo data is quite representative of climatic conditions at the Davis-Besse

-- site.

b The results o'f the NUS study indicated that the average visible vapor t.

plume is 1.5 miles long. Visible plumes longer than 5 miles were estimated to occur 3 percent of the time, while plumes longer than 9.3 miles were estimated to occur 0.01' percent of the time. The vapor cloud was not expected to be visible over population centers of Toledo or Port Clinton or

- present any hazards to aircraft operations. The maximum increase'in the

{, occurrence of fog in the absence of downwash conditions was calculated to be

- 3.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> at 24.8 miles from the tower. The increased occurrence of fog

, conditions does not represent discrete cases of fog, but rather represents the .

- possibility of fog occurring earlier and lasting longer than normal. The maximum predicted increase in icing conditions attributed to-the cooling tower affluent was one minute for any 22.5 sector for the winter season. '

(, The occurrence of downwash conditions under which the cooling tower effluent is caught in the turbulent wake of the tower structure and brought'

[. down to the surface was not considered to be a frequent effect and the 1

persistence of these conditions would not be great for any direction due to L expected gustiness and varinbility of the wind. Downwash conditions may jr i

s

r l;

[ 53 i

o "f .' occur as of ten as 12.8 percent of the time during the entire year (about 1121 hours0.013 days <br />0.311 hours <br />0.00185 weeks <br />4.265405e-4 months <br /> per year) and 0.79 percent of the winter season (about 17 hours1.967593e-4 days <br />0.00472 hours <br />2.810847e-5 weeks <br />6.4685e-6 months <br />).

The winter downwash could result in icing on surfaces off-site at a rate of

{

, 0.03 - 0.07 inches of ice per hour. However, these calculations were con-r -

sidered to -be extremely conservative upper limits since downwash occurrences i

have not been verified in actual cooling tower operations in the United States.

e.- .

b Once-Through Cooling Alternative F

Once-through cooling does not use a cooling tower so no water will be discharged to the air. Also, the surface area of the lake occupied by the thermal plume would be too small to cause any significant radiation fog.

Therefore, there will be no significant fogging or icing from the once-i through cooling alternative.

(

1 l

f' -

3.4.3.2 Biological Environment

?

i For the natural draf t cooling alternative without downwash the maximum ground level fog that would be caused by the tower would be 3.5 hr L per yr occurring about 24.5 miles from the site. Increase in ground level atmospheric moisture content short of fog formation would be expected more f) frequently. Such moisture increases are not expected to have any direct adverse effects on the biota. Increases in soil moisture which might be caused i by the tower may actually be beneficial to vegetation during the growing

?

l season.

Y Under conditions of downwash using a conservative prediction tech- -

nique, ground fog was calculated to occur about 12.8 percent of the year--1121 hr.

.W Icing would occur under these conditions abcut 17 hr per yr. The increaseu in soil moisture caused under downwash conditions may be beneficial to the vegeta-

[' ~

tion. The icing may damage some vegetation, especially trees and shrubs.

However, much of the land around the site is farmed and extensive woodlands are not found there. Consequently, the damage to biota from ground level fogging and icing is estimated to be insignificant.

The once-through cooling alternative will not cause any significant increase in the moisture content of the air and no adverse biological impacts are expected from this alternative.

4 e

,. , _ u a - - - . _. y y __--,. - _me -__ _ , . .

7 - ,,y-,y c- , . - - - - ,

r b '

l 54 i

. l 3.4.3.3 Human Environment

, Present Plant Design The NU3 calculations indicated the maximum fog occurrence was at 24.8 miles from the tower and was 3.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> per year. This amount of fog

_ would not cause any adverse effect on the human environment. However, the NUS calculations also implied higher fogging frequencies could occur with downwash conditions and these conditions, in turn, could occur up to 1121 hours0.013 days <br />0.311 hours <br />0.00185 weeks <br />4.265405e-4 months <br /> per year (12.8 percent of the time) of which 17 hours1.967593e-4 days <br />0.00472 hours <br />2.810847e-5 weeks <br />6.4685e-6 months <br /> is during periods when

_ ice could form. These higher occurrences would have a significant impact due to the presence of Rouce 2 (a potential driving hazard) and the lake (a L

potential shipping hazard) within 1 mile of the tower.

It is recognized that the downwash calculations were very conserva-

. tive and probably grossly overestimate the occurrence of fog. Modeling studies referenced by NUS indicated the fogging and icing from downwash conditions can only occ,ur within about 4 tower heights (about 2000 feet) of the tower, which would confine the effect within the site. In such a case, the impact on the human environment would not be significant. However, it L would seem advisable to try to narrow the variation in these fogging and icing estimates by further calculation or model tests.

Once-Through Cooling Alternative Once-through cooling will not cause any significant increase in a fogging or icing. Therefore, there can be no impact on the human environment.

a.

t e

b I

me .

p-, -

r i

i p

l 55

~

r 3.4.4 Noise I

[

3.4.4.1 Physical Environment C Present Plant Design i

- In general, nuclear power plants are relatively quiet facilities as compared with other industrial plants of the same approximate physical size.

The more noisy equipment such as the reactor, turbine, and pumps are normally located in buildings which substantially attenuate the noise transmitted to i the outside. However, the cooling tower is not located within any special enclosure so that the noise produced by the tower could result in objectionable

[4' sound levels in the area.

The noise generated by the cooling tower would be broad-band in character and, if not too loud, may actually be pleasant. The noise would be the sound of falling water, and this might blend with sound of the water in i the lake. Noise levels, as a function of distance from the tower, have been estimated for a similar cooling tower at another power plant. Assuming these I estimates apply to the tower at the Davis-Besse plant, the estimated noise levels are 74 dBA at 100 feet, 53 dBA at 1000 feet, and 50 dBA at 1400 feet.

Continuous noise levels of less than 50 dBA are considered normally acceptable.

H .

l

[ ,

Once-Through Cooling Alternative Once-through cooling does not use a cooling tower. Since the other noisy equipment will be located in buildings, no significant noise, above background, is expected.

3.4.4.2 Biological Environment w

. Present Plant Design  ;

~

The increased noise levels due to the cooling tower operation may have some effect on wildlife in thb area. However, since the sound is from )

falling water and since this is a sound " familiar" to most wildlife, this l effect will probably be. insignificant.

i

I r ,

56 4

g j Once-Through Cooling Alternative i

Since once-through cooling would not use a cooling tower, no

, significant biological impact is expected from noise.

r ,

3.4.4.3 Human Environment r .

Present Plant Design

/

The increased noise levels due to the cooling tower operation could f

have an adverse effect on the residents in the area. Continuous noise levels greater than 50 dBA are normally considered unacceptable. Most of the area f_ within the 1400-foot radius which would be subject to levels greater than or

. equal to 50 dBA is on the site and only plant personnel would be subject to f -

l these noise levels. Also, as mentioned previously, this noise is the sound of

?

falling water and the noise may not be unpleasant. Thus , people may be more tolerant of this type of noise than the noise from a jet engine at the same dBA level, therefore, no human health impact is expected from noise.

Once-Through Cooling Alternative "

Since once-through cooling would not use a cooling tower, no significant human health impact is expected from noise.

W E

g

)

F- .

I*

~

m...

Sy 7

3.4.5 Land Use i

t.

3.4.5.1 ' Physical Environment +

The Davis-Besse site is located on the southwestern shore of I . Lake Erie in Ottawa' County, Ohio, approximately 21 miles east of Toledo and approximately 9 miles' northwest of Port Clinton, Ohio. The area is generally agricultural with no major industry in the vicinity of the station.

Prior to acquisition of the 954-acre site, land utilization consisted of marsh and beach-front ridge areas (approximately 620 acres), farmland (230 acres of which only 80 were cultivated), and wooded areas and/or low-lying grass areas unsuitable for farming (100 acres) .

About 126 acres will be affected in some manner by construction and operation of the Davis-Besse Station and related facilities, as follows:

[ '

1) 24 acres of marshland are required for construction of the intake canal

2) 56 acres of original upland area will be graded and fenced for the station structures

3) 46 acres of upland area are being utilized for borrow' pit and quarry. operations.

The remaining land area, primarily marshland, will remain essentially unchanged and either leased oi managed by the U. S. Bureau of ,

Sport Fisheries and W'ildlife as a wildlife refuge for migratory water-fdwl. Also, approximately 15 acres in the southern portion of the western half of the site will remain under cultivation. Twenty-five percent of p this crop will not be harvested, and will be used to provide field forage for waterfowl.

3.4.5.2 ' Biological Environment The Navarre Marsh and other marshland habitat comprise a total of about '610 acres of the site. This marshland is under the management r . of the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife as a wildlife refuge. It is of good quality and is used by waterfowl, especially migratory species , ,

f- -

o r

b e- ,

f en

• w

i

. 58 during the spring and fall. Species observed in some numbers on the marsh include Widgeon, Pintail, Black Duck, Mallard, and Teal. Coot, Wood Duck, and Canada Geese also use the site. The area is also inhabited by numerous other animals. Muskrat is the most common with raccoon, skunk, weasel,

~ '

. mink, red fox, and opossum being found. The mix of marshlands, woodlots (which border the marshlands, lakefront, and Toussaint River), and cultivated

~

. lands on and/or near the site provides excellent breeding and feeding areas as well as nest or den sites for many species of wildlife.

The connitment of the Davis-Besse site to the construction of a nuclear power plant will result in removing some 126 acres from use as a wildlife habitat or agricultural cropland. The station structures are i

located on 56 acres in the center of the site on the original upland, and therefore, have not required any use of the marshland areas. The only

~

construction in the marshland areas was tha*. involved with the intake canal (24 acres). As mentioned above, the borrow pit and quarry operations i . . -

involve about 46 acres of original upland area.

e ..

1,uring 'the %tation construction activities, some small mammals,

[ birds, and other animals inhabiting the plant site will be temporarily F

l displaced from those' areas of the site experiencing high levels of construc-L tion activity. The displaced wildlife species can be expected to relocate in similar habitats adjacent to the site area or into those areas of the w .

site not affected by ' construction activities. The impact of construction activities associated with the intake canal was minimized, since the work was scheduled so as to not interfere with nesting wildlife in the spring and sunaner, and to have construction completed before the arrival of major migratory flights of waterfowl.

Eventually, many of the displaced species. will probably reinvolve the areas of the plant site not distrubed by construction nor 'actually e covered with site structures. Thus, the impact upon land use, terrestrial biota, and migratory waterfowl as a result of facility construction and j operation is expected to be negligible. Also, the work done in coopera-

. tion with the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife (i.e., dike repair j,

and installation of permanent pumping facilities to control marsh water level) has reportedly enhanced the large marsh area (more than 600 acres) for wildfowl.

\

59 3.4.5.3 Human Environment 6

The area surrounding the Davis-Besse Station is an active year-

round recreational area. For instance, within an 18-mile radius of the

_ , plant'sitt in Ottawa County there are some 16 park and recreational areas encompassing such activities as fishing, hunting, boating, swimming, picnicking, and camping. In regards to the plant site proper, over 600 acres of prime marshland and wildlife habitat are contained within the

. site boundaries. With the exception of the intake canal, these 600 acres will not be used in connection with station operations, and through coopera-

_ tive agreement with the U. S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, will l be maintained in the same or better condition as prior to acquisition.

y Furthermore, Toledo Edison Company plans to cooperate fully with the Fish

[. and Wildlife Service and local authorities in protection of the recrea-

_ tional attributes of the site environs. The Davis-Besse Station, therefore, should have no adverse effect on these activities.

p- . No areas of historical significance are e.ncompassed by the site.

The National Register of Historic Places lists Perry's Victory and Interna-L tional Peace Memoria1 National Monument (on South Bass Island about 16

_ miles northeast of the site) as the nearest area of historic significance.

The Ohio Department of Natural Resources locates the nearest historical or cultural area in Port Clinton about nine miles from the site. No E'-

, historical structures or sites of significant archaeological or historical merit are reported on the site by the Ohio Historical Society. Therefore, the station would have no effect on landmarks or other points of historical y significance.

Segments of the Armed Forces utilize some areas of Lake Erie J adjacent to the site for training missions involving aircraft, ground weapons, and airborne weapons. A detailed study of the use of these M Restricted Areas was made and reported in the Environmental Report. This

. study concluded that the use of these Restricted Areas would not significantly

. affect the safety of the station.

41

i-e- - 60

~

3.4.6 Transportation of Radioactive Matdrials

. 3.4.6.1 Physical Environment The transportation of radioactive materials in connection with operation of the Davis-Besse plant will involve shipment of new fuel elements t'o the site, shipment of highly radioactive spent fuel from the site, and shipment of _ low to high level solid radwaste from the site. New fuel is shipped by truck in federally approved protective containers. Since the

>T

- fuel has not been irradiated, only alpha particles and low energy gamma radiation are emitted by the uranium dioxide. Thus, radiation levels l near the shipment during transport are negligible. Spent fuel elements are expected to be shipped from the site by rail in a sealed, federally approved chield cask. Radiation levels should be less than the limit of 10 mr/hr at six feet from the surface of the cask as required by federal regulations.

The cask is designed to retain all radioactive material, including gases, during routine shipment. Solid radwaste is expected ;o be shipped in steel drums by truck to a disposal location outside Ohio. No escape of radioactive

,, material should occur during routine transit, and regulations require that the radiation level at 6 feet frcna any side of the vehicle must not exceed 10 mr/hr. This very localized radiation % vel is approximately 700 times the level due to natural background.

3:4.6.2 Human Environment No significant radiation dose to humans will occur from shipment i of new fuel to the Davis-Besse plant. The doses to the public caused l from routine transportation of spent fuel and solid radwaste may be estimated g on the basis of the allowable radiation levels given above (i.e. 10 mr/hr

_ at 6 feet). For these shipments individual doses would be limited to the brief period (probably minutes) when persons would be located within six y . feet of the vehicle (railroad car or highway truck) . Under such conditions

, individual doses might approach one millirem or roughly one percent of the -

annual natural background dose. For rail shipments these doses would I

[- . probably be confined to a relatively few railroad workers. Assuming 100 S

w* e, s --ee r - q

1 l

61 workers and 6 rail shipments per year O) , the population dose would be t-less than about 0.6 man-rem per year. For truck shipments relatively more

- members of the general public could be exposed during movement of the

, shipment along highways and in traffic. Assuming 5,000 individuals and r- -

9 truck shipments per year , the population dose would be less than about

! 50 man-rem per year. The corresponding annual radiation dose to this e population from natural background would range from about 600 to 6,000 man-rem depending on whether,the same or different persons are exposed to each of the shipments. Since the population exposure due to transportation

, of radioactive materials should be only a few percent of that received from r- natural background the effect is considered a negligible impact on the I

i human environment.

l. 3.4.7 Accidents Involving Radioactivity 9

Accident events in a nuclear power plant are not routine operational occurrences. The analysis of accident cases requires detailed design data and specialized calculational models which could not be developed

- in the present study. The USAEC requires an evaluation of the environmental effects of a series of postulated accidents and such an evaluation has been submitted for the Davis-Besse plant in Chapter 8 of the D-BSER } . This y evaluation is used as, the basis for the following summary of accident effects.

For each of the eight classes of accidents, ranging from small spills of radioactive liquids or gases up to a major loss-of-coolant accident,

- the quantity of radioactivity that may be released to the environment is

.. calculated using expected system conditions rather than worst case assumptions.

This includes operation of any safety systems that are installed in the plant to control and limit the consequences of the accidents. This results in

. relatively small releases over time periods ranging from seconds to days, depending upon the particular accident event. The environmental impact is  ;

Im , assessed by calculating the integrated radiation dose to the population t-W, within 50 miles of the plant for each accident, assuming it occurs. Again

. average dispersion conditions for the released activity are used rather

- than worst situation assumptions. i

~

p l

62 The results of such calculations for thc Davis-Besse Plant predict l

very low man-rem (population dose) values for all accident classes; that is, j

14 man-rem or less per accident. This is about 0.0037. of the annual exposure for the same population from natural background radiation. Most of the accidents should occur much less frequently than once a year, and on this

{, basis the environmental impact would be even less than the above comparison f . indicates. However, the use of more conservative assumptions in the calcula-

' tion of radioactivity releases could eliminate this advantage. Even so the analyses indicate that the environmental effects of accidents are expected to be essentially negligible. A key item in the analyses is the operation of reactor protective devices and safety systems. This is recognized in the design of nuclear plants by providing redundant equipment. If assurance in the operability of such equipment should be seriously reduced as a result

{

of current and future studies or experience, then the effects of accident events would be quite different than has been estimated here.

~

3.5 Social Impacts 3.5.1 .. Aesthetics The aesthetic quality os. - 'dition of the environment is deter-mined by the personal opinions of the members of society. Because individuals

_ vary in their perception of the environment, it is often difficult to qutntify

[ and to reach a consensus of tht.ir views. However, by using certain aesthetic standards and values that have a high sensitivity toward the i

L.

environment and social values, it is possible to analyze aesthetic consider .

- ations on a relatively objective basis.

I The use of aesthetic criteria in comparing developmental options,

,- such as nuclear power plant design alternatives, has become necessary as 6 a result of the emphasis placed on aesthetics by society. Society has

p. .

become increasingly conscious of the value of the natural environment, L/ , and how man's development can destroy the unique and beautiful things in

, . nature. Because any development by man is likely to alter certain aesthetic

.[- characteristics while creating new ones, it is desirable to select an alternative which is compatible vita the natural environment while still L- meeting the objective of the development.

f 63 Aesthetic impacts associated with the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant design alternatives were determined by considering the overall

- composition of the environment and the elements that define this composition:

4 land, water, air, biota, and man-made objectives. Each of these aesthetic indicators is expressed in commensurate " aesthetic impact units" to aid in comparing the alternatives. By expressing the aesthetic value judgments in commensurate units it is possible to determine the net aesthetic impact of an alternative as the net difference between beneficial and adverse impacts.

The aesthetic evaluations include both spatial and time dimen-sions. The plant site and the transmission routes are the major spat:a; concerns while construction and operation are the major time frames that muet be analyzed.

r-t Present Plan't Design Construction t -

4 The construction activity will be confined to approximately

} 350 acres of the 954-acre site. The only activity in the marsh areas t'

will be during the construction of the dike and the intake canal. The I construction activities for the dike were scheduled to avoid disturbance of the waterfewi nestings and the water fowl arrival at the marsh. ~ The site for the structures will be backfilled to raise the l: ground elevation. This process will expose the subsurface material at the strucutres site, at the borrow pits on the western edge of the site, and at the settling basin. Exposure of this material during the construc- [ tion phase will make t?e view of the site from the adjacent highway aesthetically unpleasing. However, because the site is flat, the visi-bility of the exposed area to those on Route 2 is somewhat limited and I therefore of only minor importance. f

        .                         The construction of the railroad spur line and the transmission P          .

lines will necessitate the movement of large vehicles in areas adjacent , to the lines and roads. It will also require clearing, grubbing, and other l

[ 64 L -- , I operations te prepare the routes. Because all three routes have been

                     . selected to avoid steep terrain, public areas, marshes, scenic areas, j                    and wooded areas, it is expected that this construction activity will cause minimal aesthetic damage.

The construction of the reactor and turbine buildings, the cooling tower, and other structures is expected to create interest in I' . the site because of the human a:tivity and the different kinds of struc-tures. The impact- from these structures will be discussed in the plant l operation section. The construction activity at the site is :xpected to create noise and dust conditions. In addition, there is expected to be storm runoff with high sediment into the marshes. This problem has been recognized and control measures will be used to reduce erosion, sedi-mentation, and runoff. J. Operation The proposed design for the reactor, turbine, and auxiliary l buildings is simple, functional, and has varied roof lir.es. These strue-tures are expected to be compatible with the surrounding environment in all things except their height. The land surrounding the site .is flat y and has a predominanc,e of low profile buildings. The significant differ-ence in heighth between the nuclear power plant and che othcr buildings is expected to be noticeable in the area near the station. This disruption f, , of the existing landscape is minor in nature. L The switching station by its very nature is a significant detraction from the natural landscape that surrounds the site. The negative L aesthetic impact from the station is expected to be reduced by landscaping

     ;               along the highway and a lower profile design of the station.                     .
     ..                         ~ Three routes are proposed for the transmission lines: Bay Shore, lJ
            .        Lenoyne, and Beaver substations'. Each of these routes has been selected         I d                    to minimize the impact on the environment. For the most part, these lines avoid wooded areas, marshes, scenic areas, and population centers. Lattice towers between- 120-130. feet are used to carry these transmission lines.

t L

t' f j 65

            . Because ornamental poles are not used near the site, over the Ohio Turn-pike, and in other sensitive areas, it is expected that these lines will adversely affect the aesthetic setting of the area.
!'                         A railroad spur line is located along the right-of-way of the
,         . Lenoyne transmission route. By locating the rail line in this fashion the land disturbed by the power plant construction and operation is reduced.

r- The site will be landscaped to blend as much as possible with the natural marsh lands. This landscaping will include planting of trees near the settling basin, switching yard, and other areas, and making lakes out I of the quarries and borrow pits. The natural !andscape will be enhanced

-               by the purchase and improvement of the Navarre F.arsh by Toledo Edison as part of the plant site. This marsh will be opr rated by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife as a National Wildlife Refuge.

J The natural draft cooling tower of approximately 490 feet has a pleasing and interesting design, but its massiveness completely dominates the surrounding flat landscape. The presence of this tower will change the

         -      aesthetic setting for the residences at Sand Beach, Long Beach, and the Toussaint River, the recreation areas near the site; and the boating on Iake Erie near the site. The flat terrain near the site is expected L                to accentuate the massiveness of the tower on one hand, but because the f-               terrain is flat the view of the tower from any distance would be limited
  .-            by obstructions such as trees and buildings.
~
                  .        The overall aesthetic impact of the present design is negative in direction and major in nate;e. The significant negative impacts are caused by the cooling tower and the transmission lines, while significant positive impacts are caused by the establishment and operation of the wildlife refuge.

if Once-Through Cooling Alternatives J The overall aesthetic impact of once-through cooling is negative {

.- ,            in direction and miner in natur. The significant negative impact is caused    ,
       -        by the transmission lines.                                                    >

I

                       ~

66 . I. l 3.5.2 L Economic Factors S . The information source for examining the economic factor impacts of the Davis-Besse plant was the D-BSER . Since the data in this report 3, , does not lend itself to a detailed economic impact inalysis, the statements i - regarding economic impact founc in this section are qualitative rather than quantitative. They are, therefore, much more conjectural than would be l

                 ~

appropriate for an adequate economic impact analysis. A guide to developing ,. an economic impact analysis is presented in Appendix C. l In the discussion here the nuclear power plant is assumed to be providing all new power which means none of the output will be used to

  !                        replace plants which are phasing out.        To the extent that the power from the 7,

Davis-Besse plant is used to replace power from outmoded facilities this L assumption results in a misstatement of the impact. For example, the power benefits contributable to the Davis Lesse plant assuming it is all to be new power when in fact a portion of it is designed as replacement power results in an overstatement of the total benefits to be gained from the additional power. On the other hand,-to the extent that the Davis Besse Nuclear facility represents replacement power rather than simp 1'y new power, l' there will be some misstatement of the true impact on property values. This

 -                         is true because the nuclear aower facility can be expected to have less total impact on prope,rty values than would the location of a fossil fuel f$ red power plant at the same spot.
    ,,                                In this analysis the base against which the impact of the Davis Besse plant is compared is a situation of no power plant. No attempt is W                         made in this discussion to compare the Davis Besse plant and its effects of other forms of power facilities on the same site.
  -                                   The following sections deal alternatively with several of the major economic parameters which should be considered and any impact                                      ,.

O analysis. These parameters include: employment, incomes, taxes, land

             .             values, and power benefits.                                                                            i L'
    -(s W       .

i E l l O 'W  % .* g

[t

                     ~

I 67 j 3.5.2.1 Power Benefits

  .              .                 The benefits from the power generated by the Davis-Besse generating e

plant are measured by the value of *.he output for the life of the plant

                +

to the extent that public regulatts s has artificially suppressed the price

 !                     of power the value of benefits based on market price may also mean the 7-                      demand for power is artificial. If this were the case and if prices were
;                      allowed to rise, the " demand" for power would probably be reduced. To estimate the benefits from power requires that the market prices to different I

sectors be multiplied times the rate of use by these sectors. The major j sectors one would consider are industrial, commercial, and residential. Although one hesitates to attribute increases in employment or increases in , e- incomes directly to the power generated by a particular nuclear power plant, I it is generally true that the power generated by a plant will produce j , positive economic be7efits. L 3.5.2.2 Incomes Electric power beyond that necessary to replace outmoded equip- ! ment will probably have positive economic effects on incomes in the service area. While the immediate area surrounding the plant may experience increased incomes these will probably occur only at the expense of other areas or communities 'in the service area. Although increases in income to s6rvice areas such as restaurants and other tourist serving activities will probably occur, these income increases will probably be relatively small and scattered. Thus the impact is assessed as positive in direction and minor in magnitude.

                       '3.5.2.3 Employment Construction on the plant will have a positive effect on employ-
            .          ment, some of which will remain after the transitory employment that comes about because the initial construction has disappeared. Even after the completion of the construction, it will probably be a positive employment effect on the local community because of the requirements for service
                                                                                                       ' ~0
        >M-I i

[j [ ~ 68 g industries' and the' incentives of the existence of the plant to local residents to upgrade their skills so that they can find employment. Just because

 ;-                       there is additional power available from the Davis-Besse plant should not be the reason to attribute increased employment opportunities to the service area. There are too many variables other than power associated with developing i

new employment opportunities. There is no reason to suspect that, simply (- , because the power is availabic that there will also be associated with the power all of the other variables that are necessary. In addition, new

 ;                       opportunities which might provide employment have a great chance of drawing employees from the existing employment rather than simply providing "new"
 !.                      jobs for apparently unemployed persons in the conmunity. Therefore the impact on employment is assessed as negligible.

r 1 3.5.z.4 Taxes , f* Substantial increase tax revenue will accrue to the local community as a result of the location of the Davis-Besse power plant. This occurs simply as a result of the increase in the assessed value of the property y upon which the plant is constructed and surrounding the plant. The comunity to which the additioh revenues accrue will be in a position to develop more and better public services. To this extent the Davis-Besse plant

 !                      should produce , significant positive economic effect.      .It should be pointed out, however, that if" the Davis-Besse plant were not constructed, it is

[ highly likely that either another non-nuclear power plant would be built on the site or else the non-nuclear power plant (or nuclear for that matter) would be constructed on another site. In either case the increased tax revenues would accrue to some community in the service area. Thus, the true impact with regard to taxes is the difference between those resulting from the Davis-Besse plant and those resulting from some alternative plant.

~'i 3.5.2.5    Land V-lues                                                                   '
       ~

Construction of the Davis-Besse power plant will have impact on , industrial, residential, commercial, and recreational land values. Any , industrial land which could conceivably be used for industrial purposes and which after the installation of the Davis-Besse plant has access to

     , .1,5       -

69

                 ~

power where previously it did not have access can be expected to increase in value. Land at the Davis-Besse site or immediately adjacent to the site T ' which had been slated for use as residential property will probably experience a relative decline in use as residential property and therefore will suffer f a decrease in value. Agricultural land in the inmediate vicinity near the l . Davis-Besse plant will probably decrease in value. This is due in part to [' . the fac't that even though one mighc not expect the proximity to the Davis-Besse plant'to result in any type. of dangerous radioactive contamination, any farmer, given the alternative to locate near Davis-Besse at one price or to locate on an equally attractive piece of land at a site more remote from Davis-Besse is most likely to choose the site more remote from Davis-Besse. Thus, land in use as agricultural property will probably decline c in value in proximity to the Davis-Besse nuclear power facility. There may I also be some positive effects on residential property and cocmercial property which will be brought about as a result of the increase in the labor foru and in the nambers of construction workers living in the immediate vicinity during the period which the Davis-Besse facility is actually completed. ( Demands placed on land for purposes of residing there or for purposes of undertaking certain commercial ventures such as small restaurants and bars f is likely to have a positive effect on property values. After the completion f - of t.he Davis-Besse site, however, much of the increased demand for land will probably dissipate. The only remaining intensive uses of land that may be different from what they were prior to the construction of this facility are those uses to which land may be put in serving either individuals who f, work in the plant or in serving individuals who for one reason or another visit the plant. Thus the impact of the plant on land values will be mixed in direction and possibly taoderate in magnitude. [. As a summary note on conclusion of economic factors it should be

 !                     pointed out that all the variables that are considered under the section on economic factors sre really. meant to be variables which provide a surrogate measure of the impact of the facility on the economic activities of individuals who reside in the affected connunities. For example, the
       ,               value of property and the way in which it changes in response to the c

J N

8 e, 70

                   -     -   existence of a new power plant provides an excellent measure of the social value of the existence of the power facility. The market value of property
                 .           is essentially being kept alive by the value of the stream of benefits that an individual perceives to be accruing from a particular piece of property.
                -            The changes in the stream of these benefits is reflected in changes in the
              ~

I- market price of the property. 1 .

                       ,     3.5.3 !!u, man Interest Factors Background Information f
 !                                      The Davis-Bess nuclear power plant is being constructed in p

Carroll Township, Ottawa County, on the shores of Lake Erie. The plant facilities will utilize approximately 56 acres of a 954-acre site. The nearest towns to the plant site are Oak Harbor (population-- 2,900) 6 miles southwest of the site and Port Clinton (population--6,900)

               ~

located 6 miles southeast of the site. Toledo is 21 miles west of the [ site. Located within a mile of the site are several residential areas h.- including both summer and year-around residences. North of the site is

                                                   ^

[ Sand Beach which has approximately 75 homes, one-third of which are

 ,                           permanent homes. Along the Toussaint River near the site are many cottage-sunner homes plus a few year-around residences.

p , Two of the larger recreation areas in the vicinity of the plant are: Crane Creek State Park, 6 miles to the aest, and the Toussaint - Wildlife Area, 4 miles to the west. Perry's Monument, a registered national f.' historic site, is 16 miles northeast of the site.

                                                          ' Summary of Impacts f

I. A part of the plant, as designed and currently being constructed,

            .                is the natural draf t cooling tower which will stand approximately 494 feet
      -                     h igh . The tower will produce a plume which will vary in length from 1/2

! mile to 1-1/2 miles. Since the prevailing inds are from the west-south-

                           . west , southwest, 'and south-southwest , the s. ime will probably be over Lake Erie rather than over any populated area.        he plume, if dense enough,
                           - could have an effect on lake recreationists.

                                 -t-

{ I:

                                                                           - 71'       ,
                                      .The plans for the plant do not include an information or visitor's' center; therefore, there will be no benefits of a recreational or educational
  ,.         .          nature usually attributed to such a center.

The plant will employ approximately 65 persons when completed, b - 4 Since the number of jobs' created is so small, and because some of those

           ^

b jobs will-be filled by people transferred to the area for that purpose, ,

                       - it is anticipated that the plent will have relatively little impact on employment in the area. Construction jobs are being filled by people either from the immediate area or within reasonable commuting distance;                                                                             ,

therefore, the construction labor force will have only small impact on the community (if any) in the form of small service needs, e.g., meal ' service.- The methods developed and used to assess the social impact of -

  $I                    the Davis-Besse . plant are described in Appendix D. Within this framework                                                                    ,    \

three areas of social impact have been identified (see Figure 3.1); one is negative, one positive, and one that could be -either positive or negative. p 3.5.3.1 Psychological Impact The presence of the cooling tower and the resultant vapor plume will cause a negative Lmpact. Even though the plume will be over water H' area, simply the existence of the plume and the existence of' the cooling tower structure itsel'f (because of the size of the structure) are considered negative impacts.  ; 1 3.5.3.2 Economic Impact Other new firms may locate in the area. This impact may be either positive - or negative, depending upon the nature of the new firms, . 5 - the nu'mber of: firms, and the manner. in which their location in the area

p. takes place.

it .  ! / h 7 p w = -em -.--,e --

                                                        -4 e-     m r--          n       . +-re ,,-         -g-a----a =- e n =ss- e,----o-.xv    n rw,1,         wn-r-.---

r

                                                             - 72                                   -

_. . 3.5.3.3 Polity Increase .in real estate, tax income to the local school distr. 't will have a positive impact on the educe tonal system. There will be an

                   ~

i:

                       - increase of $3,450,000 in payment of ta; es to the Benton-Carroll-Salem r.
               .        School District. This school district currently receives $800,000 annually p.

from local property tax. e (;

  \

b a 9 f 9 p

  'O' i

I . Y e s= e i I. r

                                                  -    ,        -                             ~  .,      .,-

n -

T't .

                   ~

( 73 l

g. .

                                                                                 -                    @4 j-                                                Impact to:

N w[ 4 O 4 h { e Impact from: LO p[ p @o* [

• I 1. 2. 4 .t8 4. 4 .E 6. 4 .U l

1. Psychological 1:1 (Individual)

(Institutional) 2. Family b . l 3. Economy 3,3

  -                      4. Polity                                                  4,6

5. Religion

6. _ Education-Scientific p, (Community) - 7. Connunity i~

'~ FIGURE 3.1. SOCIAL IMPACT ANALYSIS MATRIX A' ?J

a .

1 e i* mh l ?

                                                                                                    - ~

74 4.0 ASSESSMENT OF PLANNED ENVIR0hHENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM 4.1 Meteorology and Climatolony A 300-foot meteorology tower was installed on the site in the fall of 1968 to provide detailed meteorological data on a local scale. Continuous measurements are made of wind speed, direction, and directional variability at 20- and 300-foot levels; temperature sad temperature differences at and between 5 ,145- and 297-foot levels; and occurrences and nonoccurrences of precipita-tion. Wet bulb measurements are also being made in order to provide humidity f L. data. The tower is located about 2000 feet south of the cooling tower and

 ,             this might not be a large ecough distance if the wind is from tb north.

Investigators at a different power plant with a similar cooling tower indicated q that the wake from the cooling tower would be discernible up to approximately 4000 feet downwind with winds of 5 to 10 mph or more. Since the meteorological tower is downwind from the cooling tower about 10 percent of the time, consid - ( eration should be given to moving the meteorological tower to a more suitable location. F , L 4.2 Radioactivity l 4 The radiological monitoring program for a nuclear power facility should be designed to examine the terrestrial, aquatic, and atmospheric environments for evidence of station emissions and identification of specific radionuclides if sufficient activity levels are measured. Emphasis should be placed on the human and biological components and on )[ monitoring the pathways whereby radioactivity can reach these receptors. Sampling should be done at critical locations of human or biological activity in the area, (i.e. , from public water supplies, at the nearest dairy farms, g near the effluent discharge points, etc.). Sampling schedules should be

       .       designed.to detect changes in plant operational effects. For example, 4

general radiation levels should be monitored continuously, sampling for i shorter lived radionuclides, such as I-131, should be frequent, while J - sampling for longer-lived radionuclides suck as Cs-137, might be done on

     ,         an annual basis.
                      .                                                                                 1
                                                    .                                                   l

l e 's

T- . 75 Tha Toledo Edison Company has developed a preoperational environ- { mental radiological monitoring plan. The program wi11' include the collection J _and radiometric analysis of airborne particulates (continous air samples)

        ~

air iodine (weekly), ambient radiation levels (monthly, quarterly, and I annually), untreated surface water (weekly grab and monthly ecmposites), treated surfaca. water (daily grab and weekly composites), goundwater a-(quarterly),' precipitation (monthly composites), bottom sediment (quarterly), fish (quarterly), food crops and vegetation (semi-annually), wildlife (semi-annually), and soils (semi-annually). The sampling sites appear to be appropriately located and the type of radiometric analyses should provide ,' an adequate inventory of the ambient radioactivity in the environment around the Davis-Besse plant. A continuation of the same general program j is recommended for the operational lifetime of the plant also. [ 4.3 Aquatic Ecology , ( r

.l 4.3.1   Entrainment and Condenser Passage Field data will be necessary to measure the effects of entrainment on organisms with the cooling water and of the subsequent passage through the condensers. Most entr$ined fish are removed by traveling screens before entering the condensers. Very small fish and fish eggs, larvae, a~ fry as

% well as phytoplankton and zooplankton are not affected by the screens and pass through the condenser where they are subjected to potential damage from the

i various - pumps in the system, from thermal shock, and from, biocides which may be used to prevent slime buildup in the system. These effects can be evalu-

', ated, using a sampling program designed to measure the change in numbers of individuals in each of the three groups listed above (differentiating between fish eggs and juveniles and the larger fish) due to entrainment and/or condenser passage as well as any shif ts in species composition. .. There is no indication in the D-BSER that monitoring the effects of entrainment and condenser passage' on the aquatic biota will be performed. The program outlined in the PSAR seems to include only a radiological monitoring program for aquatic biota. While this is an important aspect of any planned environmenta.' monitoring program for nuclear power plants, the study of ecolog-ical impacts of entrainment and condenser passage mtist not be neglected.

{ 76 r - 0 4.3.2 Thermal Plume ( i If heated water is discharged to any receiving body in quantities l' sufficient to create a measurable thermal plume, the aquatic biota within the plume as well as near the plume should be monitored to determine 4 ,' the effects of the thermal plume on the squatic community. Biota of interest include (1) phytoplankton, (2) zooplankton, (3) periphyton, (4) benthos, and F .

                 .   (.5.) fish. Studies should be designed to detect changes in density and shif ts

[ in species composition.

 ;                               In the discussion of the aquatic monitoring program in the D-BSER mention is made of a program designed to measure the effects of the thermel

[ i plume on the aquatic biota.* The thermal plume from the heated water discharge at Davis-Besse is reported to be tmall (2.14 acre surface area at AT = 1 F). Under these circumstances, an extensive , aquatic monitoring program is not justified. However, occasional (seasonal) samples of the aquatic biota near and within the plume would be desirable to confirm the expectations that the thermal plume is not altering the lake community. 4.4 Terrestrial Ecology Because the emissions from nuclear power plants to the terrestrial environment and the resulting impacts are usually quite small, extensive

                   , terrestrial biota field programs are not necessary. Displacement of l

some of the bie*a located on the site to nearby areas, changes in micro-climate caused by evaporative cooling devices (increased humidity), and the

 ;                   minor obstruc : ion of flyways by tall structures are some of the effects that can be c used by nuclear power stations. Periodic sampling of the terrestrial b ota (vegetation, invertebrates, birds, and mannals) will
 ,                  _ enable any cht ages in density and species composition and diversity to be F,

detected. Bece se of the particular importance of waterfowl in the Davis-l Besse Site area special attention to these and to the endangered birds of , .g , the area would be expected.

• This program may be a. study being conducted by the Stats of Ohio on

                         " Environmental Evaluation of a Nuclear Power Plant", (Pr1 ject No. F     ;                     R-2). This program appears to satisfy the monitoring needs in the thermal
 ,                       effect area, but the utility should utilize the data developed in the study to interpret power plant effects in reports of their operations.

( 77 . F - f At the present no terrestrial monitoring program has been planned ri or begun at Davis-Besse.' There is a definite need for such a program. i The construction and operation of a power station in the center of an already fast disappearing marsh area demands such a study. The station ( site required only minimal amounts of marsh and extensive plans were developed to minimize harm from construction and to use this construction { , to increase the quality of the marsh as a habitat for waterfoul. Is it not, then important to study these benefi'cial effects? With housing and industry { , 4 further encroaching the marsh in the area, this management may well be critical to the survival of these flocks of waterfowl. Furthermo.e, the 1 Davis-Besse Site provides an excellent location for baseline and long- { 4 term studies of the effects of cooling tower operations on migratory birds. [ 1 4.5 Social considerations T' Impacts or changes occurring to some social factors could be [ determined by an effective monitoring program after the plant is in opera-f tion. Data obtained from the monitoring program should be analyzed to [ identify changes or patterns .that are occurring which could influence ( aspects of a physiological nature affecting human beings. Other programs that could be instituted to monitor impacts of a social nature are (1) monitoring the pre'sence of the vapor plume from the cooling tower {

~

to determine its length of life and prede=inant direction traveled, (2) analysis of presence of fishkills in light of effect such losses have I on fishing done in the area, (3) daily records of visitors to the vistiors' center, and (4) survey of the surrounding community to determine attitudes I expressed before the plant was built. L. There is no real indication that a planned program has been developed to monitor social factors and attitudes after t.se Davis-Besse plant begins operation. Although an extensive effort is not needed it is recommended , F1 that such information be accumutated so that beneficial as well as detrimental . e~ ' effects of operation will be identified and documented. t . z,

78 I 5.0 EVALUATION IN RECARD TO ENVIRONMEhTAL STANDARDS ( i 5.1 Air Quality Lta,ndards t I ( The air quality standards selected as being applicable in this [ , evaluation are the secondary Federal Air Quality Standards for sulfur

  }                oxides, nitrogen oxides, particulates, carbon monoxide, photochemical p-          ,     oxidants, and hydrocarbons. According to the analysis of chemical discharges I                 to the atmosphere as given in Section 3.2.1.1, the Davis-Besse plant will operate well within the required limits of these standards.                       .[

r 5.2 Water Quality Standards l. Temperature Standards r[ Ihere are no emission standards applicable to the Davis-Besse Station and the water quality standards are those adopted by the Ohio Pater Pollution Control Board. There has been no further federal approval of lake

 !                Erie criteria and accordingly there are no federally approved temperature standards for Lake Erie.

The latest action of th'e Ohio Board with respect to Iake Erie is r ( its resolution of April, 14, 1970, which is not federally approved. Here temperature criter!.a were prescribed under aquatic life A, and were " applicable

                                                                                                ~

at any point in the stream except for areas necessary for the admixture of waste effluents with stream water". Subject to this general provision as to mixing zone:

                              "C. Maximum temperature rise at any time or place above natural temperatures shall not exceed 5 deg. F. In addition, the r                                  water temperature shall not exceed the maximum limits indicated in the following table."

p. e w n l P

79

               .                           Maximum Temperature in Deg. F During Month j                 WATERS             Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June Julv Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.

1 All watera

            '*     except Ohio f                 River                50   50    60   70    80    90    90    90  90    78   70  57 I           .

1 The corresponding maximum ambient lake temperatures by months are as follows: I Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nev. Dec. I i Note 1 41 39 46 57 66 77 81' 82 81 70 61 50 [ Note 2 35.7 35.5 40.7 51.6 63.4 71.8 76.5 76.8 73.6 63.6 52.8 33.4 L Note 1. Maximum temperature over past 28 years at Toledo municipal water F-L intake. Note 2. Average of the maximum temperatures over past 28 years at Toledo municipal water intake. In addition t;o the above criteria, the following conditions were imposed by the Ohio Department of Health. That the proposed facilities for the disposal of waste heat shall be so designed that-- . A. 'Ihe area of Lak) Erie waters heated 5 F or more shall not exceed 40 acres nor extend more than 2,600 feet in any direction under prevailing and favorable wind conditions. Under adverse

 +

wind conditions the area of water heated 5 F o'r more shall not exceed such dimensions for a period of more than 48 hours. B. The daily average increase in water temperatures above ambient over the spawning reefs shall be less than 1.5 F during the months of March, April, and May and less than 2 F at any other time of the year. C. No heat barrier consisting of water heated more than 5 F above ' tributary water temperature shall be permitted to prevent the passage of fish between the -lake and nearby tributaries. r k

80 That continuing studies will be carried out for determining the existing character of the aquatic life of the waters of Lake Erie and the r effect of the discharge of heated waters on such aquatic life. That such additional changes or modifications including the installation of cooling towers or other heat dissipation devices as are { ,

                    - necessary to ' meet the approved Water Quality Standards shall be provided.

I The present-plant design will be within the above criteria. How-

           ,          ever, the once-through cooling alternative would have an isotherm correspond-ing to a 5 F temperature rise which could occupy a surface area greater than 40 acres and extend beyond 2,600 feet. Increasing the cooling water flow from 685,000 to 1,027,000 gpm at the same heat load (6.21 x 10' BTU /hr) would bring the 5 F isotherm within the above criteria.

_ Chemical Standards { . The current water quality criteria applicable to Lake Erie and the chemical waste discharges from the Davis-Besse plant are the Ohio Criteria of Stream-Water Quality as amended April 14, 1970. According [ to the assessment made in Section 3.2.3, the plant as presently designed will operate well within the required limits with respect to debris, oil, scum, suspended solids, bacteria count, odor index, dissolved solids, specific chemical constituents, dissolved oxygen, pH, and general toxic substance categories. For the case of once-through cooling the large increase in dilution water flow should reduce the chemical waste effluent concentrations delivered to the lake to values lower than for the present s system design. 5.3 Radiation Standards . Regardless of which alternative circulating water cooling alternative might be used, all rejected radioactive gaseous releases from the Davis-Besse

   ,                plant will comply with the requirements of 10CFR20, Noble gar emicsions will         '

result in less_than 0.047. of the allowable limit, inhalation of I-131 less than 0.00067. of the allowable, and ingestion of I-131 (via milk consumption) less than 0.267. of the allowable. The conservative discharge estimates will also meet the limits of proposed Appendix I to 10CFR50 and thus gaseous radioactive emissions are considered as low as practicable. L W

b , 81 c., I For the present plant design liquid radioactive waste discharges { 'frcm the Davis-Besse plant will comply with the requirements of 10CFR20. ? On an- annual average basis the combined concentration of fission and [ corrosion product activities in the effluent should be about 0.07% of the I allowable limit and the concentration of tritium will be less than 0.5%

             .         of the allowable limit. The expected liquid discharges also meet the
                      ' limits of proposed Appendix I to 10CFR50 under paragraph C.

I' . For the once-through cooling alternative design at Davis-Besse l the radionuclide concentrations in the plant discharge would be lower due I~ to the large increase in the flow of dilution water. Thus, 10CFR20 and Appendix I limits would be easily satisfied, f i [ r - L r p

  *e
?

e A

t. .

m e f 2.

82 e . . I 6.0

SUMMARY

OF IMPACTS

             ~

f i i The environmental impact evaluations which were presented in detail r - in Section 3.0 are summarized in the following tabular format to provide I ready reference to the principal results of this study. Each category is

           ~

{ listed along the left margin and a phrase describing the environmental 1 effect for each alternative plant design is supplied. These are followed r in each case by an assessment of the degree of impact using five key word 4 i identifiers. A brief definition of*each of the key words is as follows: r Insignificant - Too small to be measured or less than the

;                                              statistical fluctuations of the natural system.

Negligible - Measurable with difficulty and of the I same order as the normal statistical fluctuations. l Minor - Readily measurable effect which natural systems can probably accomodate with small shifts. Moderate - Obvious effects with potentially r ~ severe shift in a sector of the ( environment. Major - Definite severe change or complete alteration of a sector of the environment. r w^ f D 4 O m H r

r 1 3 g g, - ---, , ,

                                                                                             -- -     -,       , -,          , m       ,       -;

TABLE 6.0 SU}HARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT i Present Plant Design i Once Through Cooling ' Design Category Environmental Ef fect i Assessment i Environmental Effect Assessment H2at Discharge to i  ! the Atmosphere I j Phys ical Heat loss = 6.21x10' Btu /hr Insignificant No localized heat discharge l Insignificant Exit velocity of air = 1 to 5 ,m/see . Change No induced updrafts Change Presence of a large structure . No large structure Biological ' Heat and updrafts no problem ' Insignificant No adverse impact on avian No Effect Collision of birds and waterfowl Effect population expected 8 with tower not expected to significantly affect population . Heat Discharged to o3 , Surface Waters " 9 Phys ical Heat loss = 0.138x10' Btu /hr Insignificant Heat loss = 6.21x10 Btu /hr Measurable 1 F isotherm occupies 2.14 acres i Change 1 F isotherm occupies 6680 Changes High velocity discharge ' acres No temperature change at nearby 6.7 fps velocity discharge reefs or mouth of Toussaint R. Longshore current creates 1 to 2 FAT at mouth of

Toussaint R.

Biological Possible scouring of benthes near Insignificant Increased metabolic and Minor Effect discharge Effect growth rate of organisms No expected effect on nearby due to heat spawning areas Greater scouring of benthos Insignificant thermal effect on and periphyton biota Slight effects expected on fish spawning areas Some enhancement of seasonal ' shifts in organism popula-tions

,5 'v &, ov,r - m m 1 - m m- 1 m M TABLE 6.0 (Continued)

                                            'Present Plant Design                    !           Once Through Cooling Design Category                  Environmental Effect         l    Assessment

• Environmental Ef fect __ t Assessment i I Chemical Discharges, l to the Atmosphere 1 l l i i -

Physical tackage boilers used infrequently iMeasurable i Same , Same for heating. Expect very low l Change  ! off site air pollutant concen- l g j trations .  ; , l Biological Pollutant concen'. rations expected Insignificant Same Same to cause no harmful effects E f fect , l I Human Pollutant concentrations expected Insignificant j Same Same to cause no discomfort Effec t t I Chemical Discharges . to Land ' t Physical Salt deposition from cooling tower Insignificant l No expected discharges No Changes l estimated at 16 lb/ acre /yr Change ' l within several miles Biological' No harmful effects on plants or Insignificant No expected effects animals expected l No Effects Effects 8 Insignificant!Noexpectedeffects Human No health hazard or property No Effects

                       ! damage expected                             Effects       '

Chemical Discharges j to Surface Waters , Phys ical ;Less than 0.2 ppm chlorine in  ! Insignificant ' No chlorine expected to Insignificant cooling tower blowdown Change .

                                                                                   ~

reach lake Change No oil expected to reach lake or j No oil should reach lake or Toussaint River - Toussaint River No suspended solids should reach ,  : Dissolved solids in discharge . Lake l 1ess than 1 ppm greater Neutral dissolved solids at 359 than lake water ppm in blowdown f

7 TABLE 6.0 (Continued) 6 Present Plant Design Once Through Cooling Design Catoonry Environmental Effeet Assessment Environmental Ef fect Assessment Biological No toxic effects expected Insignificant No toxic effects expected Insignificant Dissolved oxygen and pH E ffect , Water quality of lake j _ Ef fects better for biota i essentially unchanged i Human  ! Public water. supplies will Insignificant : , not be significantly , Effect l Same Same j affected , Chemical Discharges  ! to Groundwater  ; Phys ical {Nodischargesexpected-  ; No change . Same Same

                       ! Soil is essentially impermeable       .
                       ! Careful sealing of excavations                           '

I recommended - Biological . No e f fect Same lNo effect on vegetation expected , Same Human ;Public and private water supplies , No effect - Same Same j should not be affected i Radionuclide Release to the i l Atmosphere . s ' Phys ical Noble gases up to 0.3% of , Unmeasurable Same Same

                        ! 10CFR20, MPC                              Change
                        !Iodinesupto 0.00087,of l 10CFR20, MPC Biological      Radiation dose of <0.2 mrad /yr          Insignificant                Same                          Same i                                          Effect Human      'Wole body dose -0.27. of natural        Insignificant                Same                          Same
                         ,  background dose                         Effect                                                                -

Thyroid inhalation dose 0.02% of natural background dose

           , ,   y y n; .           ;-  ,    , ym,          ,
                                                                                                                   - m'

• e TABLE 6.0 (Continued)

Present Plant Design i Gnce Through Cooling Design' _ Category Environmental Effect Assessment Environmental Effect ' Assessment i Radionuclide Release to Land' l [ l Phys ical Iodine-131 Surfa e Congentration Unmeasurable h Same Same. of up to 8x10 pCi/m - ' Change 3 Biologica l Cow thyroid dose of up to 51 I Insignificant } Same , same mrad /gr Effect f

• l Human Human thyroid dose of 0.4 mrew/yr I Insignificant , Same i Same er less; 0.57. of natural Effect j l

background dose .  : Rtdionuclide l  ;

Discharge to .

l [ Surface Waters- I j t Physical ITritium=677. of 10CFR20 MFC and Measurable jTritium=27. of 10CFR20 MPC j Negligible

 ~

l about 50 times estimated ambient Change i during discharge Change level in lake on annual average j  ! Fission Products =0.67. of

                      ?

basis  : i 10CFR20 MPC during

                      ! Fission Products =207,of 10CFR20      !                             discharge MPC and about 17. of estimated gross beta activity in lake on     ,                       .
                                                                                                                        ?

annual average basis

                                                                                      '                                 I I                       l Biological    . Benthic organism dose of 1 mrad /yri Insignificaat : Benthic organism dose of                         Insignificant Fish dose of 0.24 mrad /yr                     Effect         i     1 mrad /yr.                  .       Effect Doses less than 17. of estimated      ,                           Fish dose of 0.01 mrad /yr     !

background dose ' Human Dose from drinking water of 0.013 Insignificant l Doses about 34 times less Insignifi,: ant mrem /yr Effect I than for present plant Effect Dose from eating fish of 0.0033 , design values  ! mrem /yr i  ; Doses only about 0.017. of natural background dose

       . c ,,    ,
                     ? ga          r            4- i m             '

r ' 1 -  !

                                                                                                      - " ~
                                                                                                                  ~ ' -'     '      ' ~    '

TABLE 6.0 (Continued)

                                                                                      \

Present Plant Design Once Through Cooling Design Category Environmental Effect Assessment Environmental Effect i Assessment. Radionuclide Releases to  ! Groundwater l No discharges expected Physical - No Change Same Same i i Biological No exposure to biota No Effect i Same Same l Human No exposure to humans No Effect l Same Same Consumptive Water Use , Surface Water $ Evaporation loss of 9225 gpm Insignificaat Insignificant evaporation from Insignificant and only about 0.01% of Effect lake Effect the average water flow through the lake Groundwater ,No groundwater will be used by , No Effect Same Same the plant I Entrainment of Less than 0.057. of larger fish Insignificant Less than 0.9% of larger fish Negligible Surface Water impinged on screens Effect impinged on screens Effect Biota . About 0.05% of planktonie species About 0.05% of small species { in the flow through the lake and plankton in flow through destroyed lake destroyed i  ! l I 1 l

                   - 3       ,               ;-- . g .. ,    ,

7 , 7 a TABLE 6.0 (Continued) . I Present Plant Design I Once Through Cooling Design

 <                 Category                     Environmental Effect                   Assessment:         Environmental Effect       5 Assessment Fogging and Icing '                                                                   I Physical ! 3.5 hrs. increased fogging per yr.             Insignificant N) increase in fog or ice                No Change i Possibly.17 additional hours of
                                                                         ~
                                                                                  . Change         ,  frequency expected
                                   ;     icing per year                                            '

e Biological, : Possible icing damage to vegetation Insignificant :No effect expected No Effect very slight Effect Increased moisture may benefit farm crops f Human ' Potential minor highway driving Probably lNo effect expected No Effect hazard and lake shipping hazard Negligible oo l 00 Noise  ! t I Physical , Sound of falling water. Noise level Measurable ;No off-site noise expected No Effect at 1400 feet estimated to be Change 50 dBA Biological Familiar sound to wildlife Insignificant !N) off-site noise expected No Effect

                                   ,                                                Effect 5

, Human ' Unacceptable noise to people in

                                   ,                                             Insignificant :No off-site noise expected              No Effect            i area doubtful                              E ffect        !

Land Use Physical About 126 acres used for construc- Measurable same Same i

                                         +1on and operation of plant                Change Total land owned is 954 acres Biological       Some displacement of wildlife and           Negligible                   Same                        Same loss of habitat                            Effect Human     . Loss of some agricultural                   Insignificant                Same                        Same cropland. No loss of historical sites. No loss of parklands
                                                                               ?

w

  - - - - c   , 3 ,.;       g,2 m- , .   ,
                                               ;.   , 1-- jm -              ;
                                                                                  ;. 3 -; ;- !           .
                                                                                                              - 7 '

N TABIZ 6.0 (Continued) Present Plant Design Once Through Cool'ing Design Category Environmental Effect I Assessment

• Environmental Effect i Assessment Transportation l Gf Radioactive 1 Materials l

t Physical

• Maximum radiation levels of . Measurable Same Same 10 mr/hr at six feet from Change shipments Human  : Population radiation exposure Negligible l Same Same estimated to be a few percent- Effect l l of natural background 1

1 I . Accidents  ! Population dose estimat a about ' Insignificant Same Same , Involving i 0.0037,of the annual exposure .

• Radioactivity l due to natural radiation back- [

ground (assumes accident i

                        !     control and recovery)                                [
                        !                                                          I Aesthetic              ) Significant negative effect of           Major Negative Undesirable effect of trans-      Minor effect Impact                 'j    huge cooling tower and trana-          Effect        l mission lines
                                                                                   '                              g mission lines. Wildlife                                                             ,

refuge a positive effect. Economic Factors t Power j Power produced has a specified Positive Same Same l value Effects Incomes i Additional income to local service Minor Same j Same 1 l industry employees Effect l 3 Employment Limited net positive effect due Negligible  ; Same Same directly to plant l i

                        ;                                                                                         I

[ i > I i  !

                                                  ~

f:'

                         ' r. j u          vi . . .'. 7 m       f T-   '
                                                                                 ;_                ; ~  1     J -      ~ ~ ~R  T ~-    --' ~"

• T

a TABLE 6.0 (Continued) v Present Plant Decign . Once Through Cooling Design

       ' Category                           Environmental Effect                    ; Assessment       Environmental- E ffect        Assessment Taxes         Possible significant increase                 Poisitive                   Same                      Same in local tax revenues due                    kffect to plant Land Values             Mixture of negative and-positive               Moderate                    Same                      Same influence on local land valubs               E ffect
  . Iluman Interest Factors Psychological'                Oppressive effect of the huge                 Negative                     --                        --

cooling tower Effect Economic Positive or negative effects Uncertain -- -- depending on nature of o expansion Polity Taxes will benefit educational Positive -- -- system in locality Effect _ m. -s, -

I 91 REFERENCES h (1) Toledo Ed'. son Cempany, " David-Besse Nuclear Power Station Supplement to Environmental Report", Volumes 1 and 2, (1971). (2) Toledo Edison Company, " Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Environmental __ Report", (1970). 1 (3) Cohen, L._K., " Environmental Radiological Monitoring Program for the

7. Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station", NUS-886 (NUS Corporation), January,

.' 1972. (4) Soil Survey, Ottawa County, Ohio,1928, United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service,

r. (5) Birds of the Ottawa, Cedar Point, and West Sister Island National i Wildlife Refuge, Refuge Leaflet 249, December, 1970, USDI, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife.

v-f' (6) Rare and Endangerc4 Fish and Wildlife of :he United States. 1968 ed. Resource Publication No. 34. U. S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. (7) Bellrose, F. C., " Waterfowl migration corridors east of the Rocky Mountains in the United States", Illinois Natural History Survey, Biological Notes No. 61 (1968), 24 p. j (8) Wallace, G. J. , Introduction to Ornithology, Macmillan, New York s (1963), 491 p. I (9) Parker, F. L. and P. A. Krenkel, eds, Engineering Aspects of Thermal

 $s                    Pollution, Vanderb,ilt University Press, Nashville, Tenn. (1969),

351 p. (10) Krenkel, P. A. and F. L. Parker, eds, Biological Aspects of Thermal

,,                     Pollution, Vanderbilt University Press, Nashville, Tenn. (1969),

407 p.

g (11) Commonwealth Edison Co. and Battelle-Columbus, " Supplement II to the Dresden Unit 3 Environmental Report", January,1972.

1. _ (12) Consolidated Edison Co. and Battelle-Columbus, " Supplement No. 3 to the Indian Point Unit 2 Environmental Report", February, 1972.

N [ (13)_ Personal communication, U. S. Weather Bureau, May, 1972. (14) Herdendorf, C. E. , " Anticipated Environmental Effects of Dredging at

      -                Temporary Borge Channel at the Davir-Besse Nuclear Power Station",

report prepared for Toledo Edison Coapany, March,1972. (15) " Basic Radiation Protection Criteria", NCRP Report No. 39, January 15, 1971, NCRP Publications, P. O. Box 4867, Washington, D. C., p. 11. L (16) Kahn, B. et al, " Radiological Surveillance Studies at a Boiling Water Nuclear Power Reactor" BRH/ DER-70-1 (1970).

m 92 (17) Eisenbud, M. ,' Environmental Radioactivity, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1963, p.1374. (18) Radiological Health Data and Reports, July,1970, p. 347. (19) Eisenbud, M., op. cite., p. 160.

 ,_                      (20) Environmental Analysts, Inc., "The Response of Aquatic Organisme to j           -

Transitory and Chronic Exposures to Elevated Temperatures", Interim Report to Commonwealth Edison Company, December, 1971. D

    ~

N 4 1 t i L W , .f-N r N E o l Y . fi L q r--

k< l 6 i h i 7 T~ . . t I. i L - f APPENDIX A 11ADIATION DOSE CALCULATIONS r r k. L r . f'~  ; h.

T-APPENDIX A RADIATION DOSE CALCULATIONS [ The following are the equations used in calculating radiation doses to assess the various radiological impact costs.

1. Radiation Exposure to Swimmers t-Swimmers are assumed to receive a radiation dose from being sub-merged in water containing radionuclides which are anticipated to be present in the liquid effluent. The. dose contribution for each radionuelide is calculated using the following equation-T l DSg =CE *

( g i 8760 hrs /yr

• where DSI = dese to a swimmer from the individual radio-

{' , nuclide, rem / year Cg = concentration of radionuclide in water, uCi/ml

          ~

Eg = effective energy for whole body of disintegra-tions from radionuclide, Mev/ disintegration (l) T, = average time engaged in swimming, hours / year 1.87 x 10 = conversion factor, ***~ " **"" ' "*""##" = 4 year-gev-uCi (3.7 x 10 d/s/uci) (1.6 x 10 erg /Mev) (3.15 x 10 seconds / year) (1 x 10' rad / erg / gram) (, (1 rem / rad). __ The total radiation dose to the swimmer is the sum of the doses from

  ,             the individual radionuclides.

DS = DS g

  -             where                           DS = total dose to swimmer, rem / year DSg = dose from individual radionuclides, rem / year 6
   ~
-                                                                                                                l l
       -                                                                                                         \
  ~

(1) ICRP Publication 2, Report of Committee II on Permissible Dose for Internal Radiation-(1959).

7_. A-2

2. Radiation Exposure to Boaters and Water Skiers The radiation dose to boaters and water skiers would be about

( the same as the gamma dose received by a swimmer, i.e., about one-half of the total-dose to a swimmer. Based on this assumption, the radiation dose 7 - to boaters and water skiers is calculated using the equation: 6 r b ~DS" DB i T, . 2. where DB = total radiation dose to boaters, etc.,. rem / year Tb= average time engaged in boating, hours / year , T, = average time engaged in swimming, hours / year DS = total radiation dose to swimmers, rem / year.

3. Radiation Exposure from Drinking Water E

                                                                                                                        's n

Radiation exposure is assumed to occur from drinking water containing radionuclides which are anticipated to be present in the liquid effluent. The consumption of one liter of drinking water per day by a child is assumed in calculating doses from I, Sr, and Sr while an intake of 2.2 liters per day by an adult is assumed in calculating individual doses from all other radionuclides. The concentration of individual radionuclides

-               in the water consumed i,s related to the maximum permissible concentration and implicit dose data in 10CFR20 to calculate radiation dose, w                                                               q                                                       I
~

DWg = MFC i (i 6 where DW = dere to critical organ ( ) from individual radionuclide, rem / year , C g = ccLeentration of radionuclide in drinking water, uCi/mi MPC = maximum permissible concentration of

                                                       -radionuclide in water, uCi/ml (from 10CFR20, Appendix B, Table II) w Rg'= maximum permissible dose to critical organ, rem / year (see Table 1).                                      ;

! (2). See Reference 1 for identification of critical organ. 4 , -

A-3 4 The total radiation dose to the various organs is the sum of the 5 doses from the individual radionuclides. DW = DW where DW = total dose to critical organ from drinking I' J

           .                                            water, rem / year

^ DW = dose to critical organ from individual y radionuclide, rem / year

4. _ Radiation Exposure from Eating Fish p Radiation exposure to man can occur from eating fish which have 4 resided in water which contains radionuclides from the liquid effluent.

The concentration of an individual radionuclide in the fish (uCi/g) is assumed { 1 to be equal to the concentration of the radionuclide in the water in which the fish resides (uci/ml) times a concentration factor (F). This relationship is expressed in the following equation which is used to calculate the con-b

                 - centration of each radionuclide in the fish.                             '

b . CF = CW F f where CF = concentration of radionuclide in fish, uCi/ gram CW = concentration of radionuclide in water, uCi/ml 7 F = concentration factor of radionuclide in fish ( . In calculating the radiation dose to a human, it is assumed that (1) the person consumes an average of 30 grams of fish per day, (2) the fish

 ~

contains radionuclide concentrations as calculated above, (3) the radionuclides

   ~

are uniformly distributed throughout the fish, and (4) all the fish is edible. E l The dose from each radionuclide in the fish is calculated by relating the

 .'               intake of the fish to the maximum permissible concentration for the radio-P                  nuclide in water and implicit dose data in 10CFR20 according to the following equation:

(3) Chapman, W. H., Fisher, H. L., and Pratt, M. W., " Concentration Factors of-Chemical Elements 'in Edible Aquatic Organisms", UCRL-50564 (1968).

(~ A-4 i ' C

                                                       ~

i MP

• 2 00g *

    #               where                        DF = dose to the critical organ from the individual i

radionuclide, rem / year

       ~

l Cg = concentration of the radionuclide in the fish,

                                                         'uCi/ gram
              ,                                 MPC  g = maximum persmissible concentration of radio-nuclide in water, uCi/ml (10CFR20, Appendix B, Table II) 30 grams / day = assumed average consumption of fish per person 2200 grams / day = MPC          g for water in 10CFR20 is based on intake
    ;                                                     of 2200 ml of water per day (1000 m1 for         I,-
                                                           'Sr, and Sr), I m1 is assumed to equal 1 gram C

R = maximum permissible dose to critical organ. rem / year (10CFR20, see Table I). The total dose to the various organs is the sus of the doses from the individual radionuclides. DF = DFg where DF = total dose to critical organ from eating fish, rem / year DF = dose from individual radionuclides, rem / year. TABLE 1. MAXIMUM PERSMISSIBLE DOSES FOR w . SPECIFIC ORGANS (a) (( ' Maximum Permissible Dose, Organ rem / year Whole Body 0.5 Conads- 0.17 Thyroid (child) 1.5 Thyroid (adult) 15.0

s. Bone 1.5 Bone Marrow 0.5

p. Castrointestinal Tract 0.5 (D)

            ^

(a)-- The doses are used in' conjunction with MPC data

j. in 10CFR20.

(b) GI assumed to be the same as whole body. e-- y w -p--

  .s.                            -

A-5 h

5. Radiation Dose'to Benthic Organisms in Bottom Sediment The highest radiation dose is received by benthic organisms residing in bottom sediment because radionuclides released in liquid effluents are frequently concentrated in sedimentary debris. Since the

                                                                   ~

major fraction of the radionuclides is usually confined to the top two L-

                                                                                                                  -e, inches of_ sediment, the highest radiation dose will occur in this region.

F , The dose to benthos from individual radionuclides in the sediment is b '- calculated by the following equation: DBy =Cg (E F + Egg F ) 1.87 x 10 r where DBi = dose to benthos from individual radionuclide, I rad / year F C g = concentration of radiont.lide in top two inches (, of sediment, uCi/ gram lb = average gamma-ray energy, Mev/ disintegration F# = fraction of gamma-ray energy absorbed in sediment, assumed to be 0.3 lbg= average beta energy, Mev/ disintegration F fraction of beta energy absorbed in sediment, g = assumed to be 1.0 " ra -disintegration-gram 1.87 x 10 = conversion factor (3.7 x 10' d/s/uCi) year-Mev-uCi r-(1.6 x 10-6 erg /Mev) (3.15 x 10 seconds / year) l- (0.01 rad / erg / gram) The total dose is derived from the sum of the doses from the .., individual radionuclides.

• DB = DB where DB = dose to benthos in top two inches of sediment, h; rad / year

        .                                   DBg = dose to benthos in top two inches of sediment                 ,

x. from individual radionuclides, rad / year. M r - '

A-6

6. Radiation Dose to Fish l

The concentration of each radionuclide in fish is determined as described in Section 4. The radiation dose is calculated using these

                . concentrations and the assumptions that (1) the radionuclides are uniformly o
        .         distributed in the fish, (2) the weight of the fish is-1.7 kg, and (3) for the purpose of radiation absorption the fish is a sphere with a radius of I        -

10 cm. (This size and mass are equivalent to the human liver.) The equation used to determine the dose from individual radionuclides in the fish is: 4 DI =C g E 1.87 x 10 r where DI = dose to fish from individual radionuclide, i rad / year Cg = radionuclide concentration in fish, uCi/ gram . p E = effective energy for absorption of radiation

 ;          .                                             in fish, Mev/ disintegration (use data for liver, Table 5 of Reference 1) 1.87 x 10
                             #* ~

I*'"E**##UI "~"#** year-Mev-uCi = conversion factor = (3.7 x 10' d/s/uCi) (1.6 x 10-6 erg /Mev) '(3.15 x 107 seconds / year) (0.01 rad / erg / gram) The total radiation dose to the fish is given by the equation: DI = DI g (- where DI = total radiation dose to fish, rad / year r DI = dose from individual radionuclides in fish, i rad /yean

t. .

( 7. External Radiation Exposure from Caseous Dischargen h ._ The radiation exposure to man from gaseous radionuclides discharged y , into the atmosphere is calculated for a person immersed in an infinite, hemis-pherical cloud containing the radionuclides. The concentration of a radio- , _ nuclide in the cloud is determined among other things by its release rate

     .o         and prevailing meteorological conditions. The following equation used to                               ;

calculate the dose from each of the radionuclides in the cloud: O L

k' . A-7 ( . DG g = (X/Q)g QE gg 8.75 where DG g = whole body radiation dose -from individual radionuclide, rem / year (X/Q)g = meteorological dispersion parameter at the location where exposure occurs Q = radionuclide release rate, uCi/sec Eg e effective energy for the whole body for radiation from the radionuclide, Mev/ j disintegration (use Table 5, Reference 1) 8.75 = conversion factor which is the product of the following factors: geometry factor for hemispherical cloud = 1/2 d/s/uci = 3.7 x 10 erg /Mev = 1.6 x 10'0 r cc/ gram (air) = 830 [- '

                                                      @20c

~ rad / erg / gram = 0.01

                                                                   -6 m /cc = 10
           .                                          seconds / year = 3,15 x 10 rem / rad = 1.0

[ - relative stopping LE power of tissue versus air = 1.13. The total dose is the sum of the doses from the individual radio-nuclides. , where DG = total c te.rnal radiation dose from radio-nuclides in gaseous effluent, rem / year E DGg = doses frc.n individual radionuclides, rec / year.

8. Thrroid Radiation Dose from Drinking Milk 131 I is concentrated in the grass-cow-milk-man food chain. In estimating the thyroid radiation dose from this process it is assumed that a child or adult consumes one liter of milk per day from the dairy nearest the station in the critical wind sector. The cow is assumed to graze on pasture.1/6 of'the year (1,460 hours). The thyroid dose is obtained by e

v - -

{ A-8

  ~.            ,-                                                                                                .

131 relating the concentration of 1 in the milk to the maximum permissible concentration of I in water and implicit dose data in 10CFR20. e The following equation is used: 1.5 rem / year ~ DT c

                                    =
                                             ~                            (9 x 10                    )

p , (3x10 uCi/ml)(10 ml/ liter) uCi/m (0.167) (Vg) ( ) (Q) (f) where DT = radiation dose to child's thyroid, rem / year

.                                       1.5 rem / year = maximum permissible dose to child's thyroid, 10CFR20 (see Table 1)
                                           ~7                                                               131 7 g,
,-                                  3 x 10       uci/mi = maximum persmissible concentration of water, 10CFR20 Appendix B, Table II
                                        ~
                                           "U      'U*'                           31 9 x 10                    = factor et convert          I concentration on grass uCi/m       to concentration in milk (4) l'                                                 0.167 a factor to convert to a grazing time of 1/6

. of the year [- Vg = deposition velocity, 0.01 m/sec L r. E = meteorclogical dispersion parameter, at the 9 site of the dairy, sec/m3 i ~ Q= I release rate, uCi/sec A = deca constant for I on grass, 1.6 x 10

                                                                                                                 -6 sec-    (T1/2 = 5 days).
          ~

The weight of the adult thyroid is assumed to be 20 grams,10 times that of a child's thyroid, therefore: w DT A ' 10 131 there DT = adult thyroid dose from A I in milk, rem / year 131 p DT = child's thyroid dose from I in milk, rem / year. fi '

9. Radiation Dose to the Thyroid of a Cow N- I is concentrated in the thyroid of a cow from grazing on grass '

                                                                                                                                       ~

on which I is deposited. The dose to the cow thyroid is calculated using the following equation: (4) Burnet , T. J., "A Derivation of the Factor of 700' for I-131", Health Physics,18_, pp. 73-75 (1970).

        '.            /

ll A-9 (: . DTC = (A)(R)(F)(G)(C)(g)(Q)(Vg)' y . AAgt" where DTC = dosa to cow thyroid, rad / year * [ A = area the cow grazes per day, 50 m / day <- R = fraction of I retained on grass, 0.25

             ~

] F = fraction of daily intake of I which is transferred to thyroid, 0.3 'l y ? -G = grazing time, 0.167 year

  ~

C = conversion factor, I uCi/ gram of 131 I in the thyroid gives a dose of 4.3 x 10 rad 3 / year X/Q = meteorological dispersion p rameter at the site p where the cow grazes, sec/m 131 Q = release rete of I, uCi/see w Vg = deposition velocity, 0.01 m/sec

s. A 131 -

6 g= deca {constantfor I on grass, 1.6 x 10 ', sec- (T 1/2 = 5 days)

 '                               A                                     131 t = effective decay constant for         I in the cow I

thyroid, 9.12 x 10-2 day-1 { M = mass of cow thyroid, 30 grams.

~ . . .

) 'w, 4 P . O t

  ,=

i. [ i , b+ 4 w ,y- e +- -p

                                               **W. y    --                                              tr

!~

(. 1. s-6 . r I b

?

(

). '

[ f APPEhTIX B

~

OTHER ALTERNATIVES l

      +                                    t e

b-9

+

s a 9

        +

p. -

t I: APPENDIX B j- . OTHER ALTERNATIVES r_. l Other design alternatives that could be examined in detail are l ' 7 discussed below. Each is evaluated in general terms to indicate the

 .                  relative advantages and disadvantages with respect to the two alterna-
           ~

tives that are examined in detail in the body of the report. The alterna-tive designs that are outlined here represent systems that are available now or are expected to be available in the near future. I l Alternate Cooling Designs F L Mechanical-Draft Cooling Towers Operating Closed-Cvele Mechanical-draft cooling towers could be used at the Davis-Bessc site in place of the natural-draft teuers. The system would be designed

           ,        to provide the same degree of cooling (by evaporation) for the circulating water and to operate with essentially the same dissolved solids concen-tration as the natural-draft cooling tower system. The system would also utilize the same plant water intake and discharge structures.

Therefore, this alternative would have the same impact on Lake Erie with

          ~
     ~

respect to heat discharge, chemical discharge, consumptive water use, f , and entrainment effects. The mechanical-draft towers would probably occupy about the same land area as the natural-draft towers and at the F same location on the site. Mechanical-draft towers would, in some respects, produce different environmental impacts than the natural-draft towers. The vapor plumes from such towers are confined to lower elevations and, consequently, are J 1ess rapidly dispersed. Fogging and icing frequencies within a few miles of the plant thus will be several times greater than for the corresponding natural-draft tower. Spray drift losses from mechanical-draft towers may ~~ - be two- or three-times greater than from a natural-draft tower. While the k water consumption that this represents is small compared to the evaporation I' i

                .A m
                                                                    ,we- --

4 B-3 I t . compared to the tall natural-draft tower. Losses of migrating birds I i

           . by collision with facility structures would not be expected unless fog occurrences were to envelop the main plant structures (up to 250 feet high). The spray canal or pond would probably occupy the western i.

portion of the site. It is estimated that about 200 acres would be r L required or roughly 50 times the area occupied by the natural-draft tower. Although use of marshland would probably not be necessary, the sprays would border marshlands on the north, northeast, and southeast. [ cooling Lake Operating Closed-Cycle { F 3. e An artificial cooling lake could possibly be used at the Davis-Besse site.in place of the natural-draft tower. This alternative design would be very similar to the spray canal approach with respect to environmental

,             effects. Lower drift losses (and consequently less salt deposition and 4

j winter icing in the immediate vicinity) should occur. However, the

           ~

size required for the lake is estimated at about 1200 acres in order to achieve the same cooling performance as the natural-draft tower. This is about- 1.5 times the size of the present site (954 acres), and thus [ both additional land and commitment of the marshlands might be necessary.

,            On the other hand, the marshlands could be undisturbed by locating the L             lake entirely on additional land purchased to the west of the present site. This would invol've loss of farmland and probable relocation of some local residents. It is assumed that the lake would be far enough west of State Route 2 to eliminate fogging and icing problems on the
  .          highway.

Natural-Draft Cooling Tower Operating Open-Cycle U The closed-cycle operating mode could be replaced by operating the r . natural-draft tower open-cycle; that is, the tower would simply be used k to achieve some temperature reduction in the discharged cooling water under full-flow conditions. Increased heat release to Lake Erie (compared s to closed-cycle operation) would result, but when compared against once-through cooling, decreased heat release to Lake Erie would occur. Con-sumptive water use should also be intermediate between that for closed- )

1 B-4 cycle operation and once-through cooling operation. The other potential environmental effects would be identical to either the closed-cycle or the once-through case. Thus, the effects on aesthetics, migratory birds, f landscape (fogging, icing, and salt deposition), and noise should be L very similar to the closed-cycle operation and the entrainment effects f; . and the dilution effects on chemical and radionuclide discharges to L like Erie would be the same as in once-through operation. Consequently, F . the ienact of open-cycle operation of the natural-draf t tower is effectively

\            c bracketed by the separate examination o~ closed-cycle operation and the

[' once-through cooling design. I Mechanical-Draft Cooline Towers Operating Open-Cycle L The environmental effects of this alternative should lie between those of closed-cycle operation of mechanical-draft towers and the r once-through cooling alternative. [ f Spray Canal or Pond Operating Open-Cycle [ r The environm' ental effects of this alternative should lie between [ those of closed-cycle operations of a spray canal or pond and the once-through cooling alternative. P Cooling Lake Operated Open-Cycle { i L. , The environmental impact of this alternative should lie between

 ,             those of closed-cycle operation of a cooling lake and the once-through I   ;            cooling alternative.

3 Dry Cooling Towers (Natural or Mechanical Draft) At the present time no dry cooling towers are available commercially

.- .            that can be used for nuclear plants of the size of David-Besse. However, h                such equipment is expected to become available in the not too distant future. The physical size of dry cooling towers should be much larger than their evaporative counterparts. Thus, impacts on aesthetic factors a

[? ~ l B-5 l (- i ~ and avian ecology would be relatively greater. Ilowever, such systems would nearly, if not cntirely, provide fully closed-cycle cooling and so little or no water consumption would occur, no drift loss with accompanying salt deposition on land would occur, and little or no blowdown would be needed. Consequently no thermal discharge to Lake Erie would occur. Water would I-* have to be drawn from the lake, however, to dilute aqueous chemical and 4 radioactive waste discharges to the lake, assuming no change in the present g plant systems for treating these wastes. T i Supplemental Cooling of Blowdown Water from Any Closed-Cvele Evaporative Method f. A small spray pond or a moderate size mechanical draft cooling tower might be used in conjunction with any of the closed-cycle evaporative cooling methods to further reduce the heat discharge to Lake Erie. Reduc- [ tion of the heat discharged by about a factor of two at the expense of small additional water consumptive loss and land use could be expected. f- Also increased noise from the mechanical draft tower and small increases t in highly localized drift from both supplementary systems would occur. [ 1 In a/lition dissolved salt concentrations in the plant discharge might inct ase slightly. Other effects would be expected to remain unchanged compared to that without the supplementary cooling. Alternate F.adwaste Treatment Designs j Increases Stages in Liquid-W3ste Systems F Although the present liquid radwaste treatment system design for the Davis-Besse plant is expected to result in radioactivity emissions f that will comply with proposed Appendix I of 10CFR50, slight improvements could be made by adding more evaporator, filter, or demineralizer stages. These additions would reduce fission and corrosion product discharge

             ,       quantities but not tritium discharges. Tritium releases produce the                                            '

principal radiological impact to the aquatic environment in the present

           ,         design, i

L. l L

{!. B-6 [ , ,i

• l Methods to concentrate Tritium I

[. -

~                       Several techniques have been used on a small scale to concentrate t

[ tritiu.a in aqueous sys tems. These include electrolysis. steam-hydrogen exchange, and water-H 2S exchange. Each is relatively inefficient so a

          ~ multistage processing system would be needed to attain significant separa-
  -        tion factors. Once concentrated the tritium could be bottled (as a gas or liquid) and shipped off-site for waste disposed in federally controlled      .

c facilities. Developmental work is needed to create a system, based on one of these techniques, that would prove effective for large nuclear power plants. p L Cryogenic Distillation of Radwaste Cases, [ , j Decay tanks or charcoal adsorbers can be effectively used to reduce the radioactivity of reactor waste gases to the point where only long-lived Kr-85 (decay half-life of 10.76 yr) remains. To prevent the discharge of Kr-85 in the plant gaseous effluent, a new type of process is needed which is cap.able of separating this noble gas radionuclide from the other gases, so that it could be concentrated into a more readily managed volume. The process which has reached the highest degree of develop-ment is known as cryogenic distillation. It is based on the difference in boiling points between krypton or xenon and the other nonradioactive compo-J nents of the waste gas. The distillation is performed at cryogenic tempera-LJ tures where these materials are liquids and this introduces the need for

 ~~

special equipment and techniques. 'An industrial company is offering a cryogenic distillation unit for installation in reactor plants and it is designed to remove and concentrate the Kr-85. No system has been installed in an operating reactor to date. Following separation, the Kr-85 can be stored as a liquid at cryt> genic temperatures or as a compressed gas in high-pressure tanks. Storage either at the plant site or in a nuclear waste disposal facility  ; could be used. For this system the advantage of not releasing Kr-85 from the plant to the atmosphere must be balanced against the probable increase in radiation exposure to plant workers who must service the separation equipment and participate in handling the concentrated waste prodiet.

F

                 ..                                                                    5                                       N r.

i - m r . 4

                                                 '                                                                  fs i                       n  i
                         *, l
                                                ,,"[                !

9 7 Ac. 7

                                                                                              /

F . 0l l I

                                                                                         /
                                                                                            /                              b' 1

6

             ~
                         $l                             [~~~~       pTr}-- /                                                   'f s                            !                           j           EIb      3,w-                                 .                  #'

Dyg;,3 [  ; WASH /. } pl , l s l $',"t'-l-E-J l N AVA R RE

                          . I                        !              l         33 ac, l         f.V J. M

{. I on==v l i i ei, j { j _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .! ' 4 4 7 Ac-8 r i

                                                                -4                              -

[ { q

                            ..\                                                             v 188 Ac.                 J
                               \
  .                                                                                                                   E->-

TOUSSAINT RIVER v SCALE: 1": 1500 7 , _ TOTAL STATION SITE. 954 AC. ('; '

                                                                                           %           MARSH AREAS NOT LEASED BUT i.e            llAVARRE TRACT 524 AC.                         d        MANAGED BY BUREAU 66 AC.

7 (532.S DEED AC.) 50 YR. LEASE TO BUREAU g GRADED & FEHCED STATION

                                ~.             447 AC.                                                 AREA 56 AC.

b~ P i' A 25 YR. LEASE TO BUREAU 03 , 97 AC. BORROW PITS & QUARRY 46 AC. P FIGURE 1. DAVIS-CESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION 'alTE AREAS

b B-7 p Alternative Intake Sys tem Desiens r Increase Structure Intake Area

f. '

i In order to reduce the impingement losses of fish that might p be experienced with the present water intake structure for the Davis-Besse i plant, a larger structure could be used with greater intake area. This would ef fectively reduce the intake velocity so that weaker swimming species could resist being drawn into the plant forebay. The reduction in velocity is inversely proportional to the increase in intake area. l 7 Use of Air Screens Q. This approach also would tend to reduce impingement losses of (. fish. The concept consists of surrounding the intake structure with { perforated piping connnected to a compressed air supply so that a curtain of rising air bubbles can be created. This shou'Id divert at least some aquatic species (probably the smaller or young fish) from the region around

             , the intake and thus prevent their being drawn into the station intake.

It is assumed here that the air screen will not attract species and that species will not tend to ignore it as they become accustomed to its presence. { Al'ternative Transmission Designs " Ornamental Poles The metal lattic towers that are usually used for overhead trans-mission lines could be replaced with more aesthctically pleasing steel poles. These poles have mast arm supports for conductors and are more graceful in

   '.             design. The required amount of right-of-way would not be different than for     /

g the common lattice towers but more extensive foundation preparation is needed 2

• which could have relatively greater land impact. Specialized erection '

methods (massive cranes or helicopters) for the steel poles may introduce more environmental stress than the simpler erection techniques used for lattice towers. l O-m

?

I t B-8 i Underground Transmission' r t Overhead transmission could be replaced by using underground 7

cables. The capacity of underground cables is such that two transmission r circuits would probably be needed to provide service equivalent to one s overhead circuit. This' requires wider right-of-way and thus greater land use. The significant improvement in visual impact for this transmission-system alternative also must be balanced against greater disruption of the environment during excavation and installation.

{ l .T 4 ] b I

+.

S

 -W L      M -

h h-1 I . m

                                                     . . , -              -          ,+., r
                                                                                                 -w- + %-

F V' ( - T' t .P, F f' i . [ 4 T T t

            -                 APPENDIX C I                   -

k' ' ECONOMIC IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS r L . E e s E t-O (. r L i l' I

E t 9 APPENDIX C ECONOMIC IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS The effects of public investment projects may be analyzed by

         .      considering the total impact of the project. An impact analysis is an assessment of changes in the environment brought about as a result of project activity. The focus of attention in this type of analysis is not on the project (as in cost-benefit analysis), but instead on the charac-teristics of the environment before and af ter the project.* The impact analysis is a.ccasure of the difference between the major parameters des-cribing the environment, both before and after the project activity. The primary focus, therefore, of an impact analysis is not on the characteristics e

of the project activity, but instead on the characteristics of the environ-ment before and after the implementation of the particular project. . Clearly many parameters are necessary to describe the environment. In fact, an infinite number of parameters may be necessary to describe it accurately. To reduce an impact analysis to a manageable level of effort, it is necessary to restrict the number of parameters that are used to describe t ' the alternative environmental states. The selection of the critical para-meters to be used in the description is an activity which is presently under-taken by experts in the field. The critical descriptive variables selected will change as individual's tastes change over time. An example of this might [, be changes in concern over the emissions by certain forms of power generation plants. Twenty or thirty years ago, the critical variables employed in deciding whether or not to undertake projects were not governed by such things as concern over emissions, instead they were associated with the amount of f power provided by the plant and how that pcwer would enhance industrial development for an area. At the present time, however, attention has shif ted E-

• There are certain identifiable parameters which can be used to explain environmental conditions. For illustrative purposes, let us consider three parameters which describe the environments before and after a public or private sector project. Let si equal ages of individuals; let s2 equal

                     ' ypes of biota; let s3 equal educational opportunities. Assume the t

environment (E1 ) is adequately described. by these three major parameters El = (si, s2, s3) .

Now consider project activity which instantaneously transforms El to a r t aw environment, '2E . This new. environment is described by the three major i paraneters in a new form L E2 = *(s ,sj,sj) .

                                                                                     -,n--   r-                ,

pl  ; l c-2  ! i away from the industrial application of the power and tends to favor more i

          -                                                                                                                                  \

than before consideration of emissions which might result from power genera- < tion. Thus, a set of experts twenty or thirty years ago may have selected an entirely different set of evaluation variables from the set that would be selected at the present time. .l Each person, groups of people, and the nation as a whole has a concept of what ideal environmental conditions should be. This ideal set of environmental conditions changes over time and is a function of individual and collective tastes. The parameter chosen to describe the impact of different projects depend very heavily on what the view of the ideal i environment is. The importance of the parameters describing the environment l will fluctuate depending on which parameters best describe the environmental displacement generated by a particular project. Spatial Dimensions of the Analysis - In developing an impact analysis a definition of the spatial dimensions of the impact of a project is required. For the present economic analysis, two major spatial dimensions should be considered. Impacts should be analyzed at the local level and at the regional level. Local impacts should be limited to those effects of the project that are within sight of the project activity 'or that are within the immediately surrounding labor market area. These would include such effects as those on the local communi-ties, effects on local schools, effects on employment opportunities in the immediate project area, and effects on recreational opportunities in the immedin ely adjacent areas. The other level of effects is the regional level, and for this analysis, effects should be restricted to the market area for the power generated by the power plant. ~ Baseline Information ] In the case of a nuclear power plant, the economic baseline conditions may be described by several alternative environmental states. 1 Among these would be a situation with no power plant, a situation with an alternative form of nuclear power, and a situation with an alternative form a

f C-3 . of nonnuclear power. In addition to the problem of deciding on the current

                 ~

baseline, there is also the problem of projecting baseline conditions into l the future. The impact of the power plant will be reflected in how future l conditions with a power plant differ from conditions without a power plant. l

 -                              Another aspect of the baseline problem involves determining whether or not the new power plant is' designed to provide additional power to the community or whether l't is designed to operate as a replacement power source for other plants that are being phased out. If, for example, the plant is designed to be a'new power source for the community, the impact on the entire community and its structure will be quite different from the impact on the community if the new plant were simply designed to replace an existing out-moded power plant. As a new plant in the community, all of the benefits

~ derivable from extra megawatts of power should be attributable to the new facility. This means, therefora, that the total value of the power that is produced represents a net benefit to the community or communities in which the power is being provided. As a new power plant, however, one critical consideration would be the change in the level of emissions into the atmos-phere surrounding the plant. The emission level for the area must of neces-sity be greater for a new plant than it was without it. For a plant which represents new power, the change in emission levels is from none to the level of emissions from the new plant. If the plant were built to provide replacement power the emissions 9 would be the difference between the plant to be replaced and the new plant. In some cases it may not be possible to easily identify whether the new plant is providing replacement or new power. This may make it necessary to assign I a ratio of new to replacement power and use it to calculate the impacts attributable to each. Other Issues Other issues to be settled before beginning an impact analysis, a include a determination of what the effective life of the power plant will be and a decision about the discount factor that is to be applied to any

~

stream of incones or costs to discount them back to the present time period. The effective life of the power plant should not be based on principles of l . w

m= C-4 i . _ accounting which depreciate an asset over a period of time which is advan-tageous from a tax standpoint. Instead, the effective life of the power plant should be based on the number of years which the plant will actually I-t be available for producing power. The choice of the discount factor involves a decision aiout

              ~

whether to use an internal rate of return, a cost of capital to the power plant, or the cost of capir.a1 to the public sector, or possibly the rate of return used in cost-benefit analysis for other projects undertaken by the

 -                   Federal Government. As the time period of the project is longer and longer, so the effect of the discount rate over time becomes greater. As a result, with a project that has a relatively long effect life (30 years or greater) the discount factor critically affects the estimation of the imoact to the
 +                   extent that annual impacts are measured in dollars and discounted to the present.

IDENTIFICATION OF IMPACTS The potential for impacts by a power plant pervade virtually

                 ~

all the major parame.ters that can be identified to describe the environment. . This section deals with impacts categorized as " economic" impats. Excluded f" from this economic impact analysis section, however, are all of those economic consequences.of the power pla'n that have no effect outside the power company itself, and are taken into account in the decision by the t y power company to undertake the project, impacts in this section will,

• therefore, be characterized as "public" impacts. The connotation associated L with particular impacts in referring to them as benefits or costs involves

    ~

the application of judgment on the part of the person who is assessing the impact.. To avoid this problem, the preferred presentation of the impacts is in a form which simply lists all of the alternatives and does not associate them with the concept of either benefit or cost. h

           ~

i I 9 m e

I1

     ~

C-5 r Power The impact of power from a new facility may be adequately estimated by the dollar value of the additional power that will be provided on the

   ~

market. The power is distributed to industrial, commercial, and residential users, and each of these categories may, under certain circumstances, pay different prices for the power they consume. fhe impact, therefore, of the additional power should be estimated based on the dollar value of the power as it is distributed among the major categories according to their price differentials. One problem that arises in using the dollar price of power to estimate the impact from additional power is that the market value of the power may not equal the true impact arising from the power. The reason for this is that the power industry itself has historically been regulated, and the fluctuations or changes in the market price of power have been ( regulated by the public sector. As a result, the market price of the

                .        power, or the price that the consumers have to pay for the power, does not necessarily represent the true value of the power to the community. It is usually argued that the power is considerably underpriced from what it would
~

be in a more free market situation. This would appear to be the case because of the continual pressure on regulating agencies by the power companies to award increases in rates. Power companies request these rate increases because of the pressure felt by them to increase the price of the power to

 ~}

cover the costs of production and of distribution. Thus, using existing power prices to estimate benefits probably understates the total impact. The difference between new power and replacement power is critical in this estinate because no new power benefits are generated by a replacement facility unless, of course, it both replaces some old plant and provides some new power. Economic Crowth and Development x . Economic growth and development encompass a broad category of - impacts, including most of the economic consequences of having a power plant . located in a particular area. The majo'r indicators of economic growth and 0 N a y e

E C-6 , r development for e particular area can be broken down broadly into two cate-N

• gories. These are . incomes to individuals and employment opportunities for i t.Jividur.1s .

d. ,

r Income l p . .The change in inco'me that results from the location of the power t i plant in an area is a measure ofothe economic impact of that power plant. There is a problem in isolating the new power plant as the factor which is

 *}                   directly related to the changr,s in income. It is reasonable to assume that changes in per capita incomes reflect the value in terms of economic development and growth to the members of the affected community. The impact is measured by the discounted present value of the change in incomes.

, Imther measure, regional product, might be examined to determine the economic impact. As 'in the case of isolating effects on per capita income, product impacts resulting from the location of power plants are difficult to estimate because the effects of one particular power plant are

               ,      so small that regional impact is impossible to identify. There is a fallacy
  ~

in attributing regional income changes resulting from the location of the power plant by using the average regional product per kilowatt hour of power. Analysis frequently suggests that if there are x number of dollars of regional product (income) and there are y number of kilowatt hours of power generated. for that ' region, then there will be x divided by y number of' dollars of  : regional product per kilowatt hour. In some cases this ratio is applied to

  .;                                                                                                                                                                          t provide a measure of the impact of a new plant by multiplying the number 7                   of kilowatt hours produced by the new plant times the average regional product per. kilowatt hour. The problem with this kind of. analyses is that, associated L

with the power requirements for regional product, there must also be additional private sector industrial investments and there must be available labor with

                    - appropriate skills to be applied with the capital investments. Thus, the characteristics of the industrial and public sector capital structure are critical to determining the extent to which additional income in a particular
                                                 ~                                                                                                                          "
 !'                  area is a function of additional available power. An adequate -regional product
                  , measure'of impact does have the advantage over personal income measures
                    'because 'all changes in income (personal and business) are included. ~For this
                    ' reason, estimates of changes ~ in ' regional product would be preferred.
                                                                                 .m._h,,,,,rr.-. ,h,.,--   ,,,        -.-..-,,c,   , , . - . - . ~ , , , , , , , , , . -

F1 ,3 f- - C-7

-                 Employment

( Another measure of economic impact of the location of a new power i facility is additional employnent or expanded job opportunities that are created by the location of the plant. One approach'to the estimation of I' the impact on employment is to measure the amount of energy required per job [' , in the industrial sector on the average. This figure is then divided into I the number of units of energy to be produced by the proposed facility, and p a rough approximation of the number of jobs attributabic to the new facility I is thereby produced. This provides only a rough approximation of the maximum

                . number of jobs which could be provided. The fraction of the power to be used i                  as replacement' power must be subtracted from the total to determine the
                  " job creating" power available.
 ~

Hore refined estimates of job creating power are available through I disaggregating power usage into industry and nonindustry areas. The fraction L' - denoted to industry should be applied to an industry structure outline to determine which industries are most likely 'to expand from the additional power. Assuming tim major constraint is power, one can then examine how many new jobs might-be crea?ed. Finally, of course, even if the power is new capacity, and not just replacement, there is no reason to expect nuclear power to provide more jobs than equivalent nonnuclear power. m-

      ,                      Employment more directly attributable to the plant is that             i V.   .

generated by the construction of the facility and the number of workers required to operate the facility on an on-going basis after it is in full operaticn.- The number of construction workers required to build a new facility is quite large, and the construction period may be quite long, suggesting good employment possibilities. But workers to construct the facility are usually-obtained by contracting with a large construction firm. This means that-in many cases the workers to construct the facility are employees of the construction company and move from site to site with the company as they are required. It is quite possibic, therefore, that local area will, as far as additional employment opportunities are concerned, experience a minimal impact.

I, C . Furthermore, the.new * -'kers required to operate the facility on an on-going [- l' - basis will probably require special skills and experience not availabic in the local labor pool. As a result, the new workers will most likely be drawn [- I from outside the area. Thus, while there are additional jobs created, they will result in very little additional new employment opportunities for the local labor pool. One positive impact of the construction activity in the ~ area is that the demand for local service industries will increase. Recognizing the fact that other forms of power generation may ^ represent viable alternatives to the nuclear power plant puts the issue of both incomes and employment in an entirely different light. The question [ to be answered becomes: What are the number of jobs and the skill levels L and skill classes required for an alternativa power plant, and how does that set of requirements compare with the set of requirements for the nuclear pouer plant? This type of comparison should be made both for the construction ~ workers and for the operating and maintenance workers. Effects on income and employment might also be considered. For example, the analysis might j' consider the number of job opportunities created by the input requirements of substancial amounts of additional fossil fuel as opposed to the input requirements of the nucicar fuel. Taxes Another arta of major impact from the location of a power plant { is on tax revenues. Significant increases in property values are likely to be generated from the location of the power plant. The community in which a power plant is located, if it has a property tax, will probably experience a significant increase in revenues. i new facility valued between a quarter and one-half a billion dollars will significantly increase the property tax base. The repercussions of this er the local community will probably be felt most strongly in the area of education because school districts tend to be financed out of local property tax revenues. There is no question but that the additional tax revenues generated by the location of new power facilities is a clear-cut benefit to the local community. It should be recognized, however, that the re .'nues paid to the local community also S

C-9 c represent higher prices paid for power by those consuming the power produced

                  .      by the plant. This means that even though the local communities receive p                     additional revenues, those who are served by the power are paying a higher

( price for the power to pay for local taxes. To some extent, therfore,

     -                   this " redistribution" may represent a misallocation of resources.

The fiscal effects of a power plant are probably not measurable

  ?             ~

beyond the local community. For the Nation as a whole, any additional tax

  ;I                     revenues from additional incomes in the local area are probably generated

( at the expense of revenues from additional incomer in adjacent areas. As [ -far as state income taxes or state corporation taxes are concerned, the effect of the location of a new power facility is again likely to be minimal. 1 The impacts on revenues generated by the location of a new nuclear power , plant should be compared to the location of a comparable nonnuclear plant.

 %                       Because no power is probably not a viable alternative, comparison with other
   ~

power plants will give a more accurate picture of the tax impact of the

  +-                     location of the nuclear power plant.

Regional Growth-poverty Areas One significant impact of the location of any power facility is the impact it may have on making power available to an area which previously

        ~

had a serious deficiency. Many poverty areas in the United States experience , a significant lack of pcver. Because the lack of power is one of the factors [L contributing to the poverty, any facility providing power in a poverty area f' where power otherwise would not be provided will probably produce a positive. economic impact. To a certain extent, however, the availability of new power { to power deficient urban areas may also have a tendency to make more power available on the periphery of the service area, i.e., in relatively under-h ' _ developed areas.

             ~

Land Values ilC, * -To the extent that land values can be estimated prior to the

implementation of a project and subsequent to the implementation of a

c-10 i 4 project, they provide an excellent measure of the economic impact on the I capital structure and the area surrounding the project. Land values also provide a proxy for individual consumers' tastes for recreation and resi-I dential living in the areas adjacent to the power facility area. More

                  " desirable" land usually commands a higher market price than less " desirable" land. The difference.in these prices provides a dollar measure of the f~               relative social value of the land.

While there is potential for effects from the power facility on

 ,                land values in their current uses, there is also the. potential for effects as land use changes. As land use changes from residential to industrial, I              the property value as residential land declines (negative impact) and property 4

value as industrial land increases (positive impact) . Detailed land use analysis is required to consider all the impacts. One approach is to consider all adjacent land in current and projected use. I

• Industrial Land

                            'The effects of the location of a power plant on the value of indus-l                 trial land in the inim2diately adjacent area would probably be positive.

5 To the extent that the power provided by the plant represented an increase in power to be used for industrial development on land nearby the plant, the L value of the land to ' industry which might wish to locate there would increase. Commercial Land Values f Commercial land surrounding the proposed plant will increase in price (and thus in value) because the general increase in economic activity surrounding the power plant would require additional services such as gasoline stations,. restaurants, food markets, drug stores, and other various i,, household-serving business activity. The requirements for seme of these services, of course, will taper off after construction of the plant has been

j. completed. For that reason, commercial land values may rise only temporarily, dropping again as transient population departs. The final, long-term effect

                     ~
          -       on 1and values will probably not be as large as the initial effect.

l 9

 +
                                                                                                    -t
                                                                          . . _ _ _ _ , _. ,   [

f-C-11 f' i . Residential 1,and

 ;                               The effect of the location of the nucicar power plant on residential c                   land values will be mixed because certain residential land values in the
         ~

I innediate area, especially during the construction period, will rise while

p. ultimately othe. residential land near the facility will probably decrease l ,

in value. The effestr on residential land of the immigration of a large

,                   construction labor force will probably be positive. Immigration will increase the residential land values in the area immediately adjacent to the power g

facility. - However, when construction is completed, many of the temporary l immigrants will leave to work at other construction siten. When this occurs, residential land values will become depressed. Furthermo;e, the construction workers, being transient, may decide to purchase or live in mobile home facilities. This type of dwelling is frequently considered less than desir-L abic in proximity to more permanent residential properties. The influx of construction workers may, therefore, have the effect of depressing the price - of existing some residential properties. 5 Agricultural Land Values The effect of nuclear plant location on agricultural land in the adjacent area is likely to be minimal. However, to the extent that radio-active emissions - falling on the adjacent lands prevent its use as agricultural land, the values of the land in agricultural use will be diminished. The dairy industry is of special interest with regard to the potential for

 ~

radiological emissions from the power plant. While the danger from these emissions is probably minimal, the potential for serious contamination of the milk products does exist. This will probably not result in an exodus of dairy farmers, but, given the choice of locating a dairy farm in the ,

          ~

area surrounding the nuclear facility or in an area which is removed from the nuclear facility, an individual will probably avoid the possibility of

     ,-             the contamination frem emissions by locating more distant from the nuclear
   ~

facility. As a result, the value of the land in its use as dairy land will be diminished. Similar arguments apply to land in other agricultural uses.

p C-12 f r * { Hazards e One of the major costs imposed on the region or society as a whole that is not usually included in the cost / benefit analyses is the potential F~ 1 economic loss that would result from a significant malfunction in the nuclear reactor. Clearly system design and cystem engineering have reduced the i potential for excessive emissions to a low level. There is, nevertheless, a positive probability, however minute, that excessive emissions will occur and cause damage to the environment. As long as there is a positive proba-j bility of the occurrence of damage to the environment, there is a cost incurred I by the environment attributable to the existence of the nuclear power facilit, The main difficulty in assessing this cost is that there is no historical evidence to provide a basis upon which to establish the probabilities of the occurrence of the different hazardous events. It should be pointed out , however, that to the extent that a nuclear power facility is located in close reeximity j to a highly developed area, the potential environmental damage from i hazardous

         ,      release is much greater than the potential for such a release from a facility far removed from sny. type of development. This is true because " hazard" is composed of two major elements, the probability of the occurrence of an event which exposes the environment to harmful effects and an exposed population.

The hazard is composed of both of the elenunts, and the nagnitude of the

     ,          hazard is the product of these two elements. For example, a 1,000-foot cliff
 .~             in an inaccessible area does not constitute the same hazard as a one-inch misalignment in concrete blocks on a busy sidewalk in New York. The reason, of course, is because the level of exposed population is so different.

F The fact that there is a positive probability of the occurrence of an accidental discharge' of radioactive emissions which would inflict damage on the environment surrounding the nuclear power plant indicates the probability of accidental discharge representing a positive cost to society.

 '      ~
               . To ' estimate this cost to society, multiply the probability of the occurrence f                of the event per time period times the number of dollars of loss that would occur if the event were to transpire. This provides an estimate of the
                " expected value" of the occurrence of the event of an accidental discharge of radioactive emissions. There are considerable difficulties in undertaking l

[ L -

I (. s C-13 and completing this estimate of the costs of the hazardous discharges.

           .      Among these is the problem of obtaining the probability of the occurrence of the hazardous event. Due to the absence of historical evidence, the probabilities of occurrence are not based on empirical analysis. Another r                difficulty in estimating the cost of the occurrence of accidental discharges of radioactive emission is, to the extent that these emissiond cause health r-              damage or loss of life, in estimating the dollar value of the damage to individuals' health or of loss of life.

The overall expected value of the damage to the economic environ-ment is estimated by adding the expected value per year of the occurrence of all of the possible accidental discharges of radioactive emissions for i a year. These year-by year totals are then discounted back to the present [ to arrive at an estimate of the present value of the costs incurred from accidental discharges of hazardous emissions. Disposal of Radioactive Waste Material Another major environmental impact usually absorbed far from the f _ nuclear-power plant . site is the impact of the disposal of radioactive waste materials from the nuclear reactor. The nuclear power facility generates

                - radioactive waste materials. These radioactive waste materials must be disposed of so there is no exposure of the environment to the radioactivity.

[' After being processed, it is necessary that the radioactive waste be stored until the radioactive life of the materials has passed. This may involve e very long periods of time during which the materials must be stored and guarded. [ Responsibility for the storage and maintenance of the radioactive materials is not usually assigned. If storage of these materials. and the protection

  ~

of the environnent from exposure to the radioactivity in the waste materials are undertaken by the Federal Government, the impact of additional waste ~ materials will then not necessari*.y be absorbed by either the users of the power or by the community that benefits from the additional power generated l by the nuclear facility. This introduces an allocation of resources which 9

I - C-14

1. . may or may not be desirable. This potential for misallocation of resources k'

• is usually not explored in impact statements. The question that must be answered in this regard is how much and for what length of time can the government afford to take care af without having the burden of that main-

             .             tenance shared by the power industry and the consumers. The proper distribu-tion of th costs would entail having the purchasers of nuclear produced
               .           power pay, in the price of the power that they consumer, an increase in the price which would cover the cost of a fund set up to maintain the protective measures necessary.

L I W G L F s V O

r. -

= h

i

                                              ~

r , b . APPENDIX D I , 7 . HUMAN INTEREST IMPACT ASSESSMEfTr b Introduction An important element of environmental impact as defined by NEPA f, is social in nature and concerns the extent to which human activities will be affected. This approa:n assumes that man's impact upon ma6 should be investigated as well as man's impact upon the natural environment. Many aspects of racial impact are either intrinsically-qualita-tive in nature or extremely difficult to quantify. Methods such as cost-i- benefit analysis provide a' quantitative means by which a decision to opt for one alternative or another may be made on~ an economically rational { i

                               . basis. ' These analyses, however, do not take into account any modifications that human beings may be forced to make in their daily patterns of living.

I , The intent of this section is to develop and illustrate the methodology employe'd by Batte11e's Columbus Laboratories in conducting social impact analysis for nuclear power plants in Ohio. A ma,ior assump-tion of the Battelle research team should be made explicit at thls point. r ' this assumption is: e Where detailed assessment of impact is impossible because +( , i of' the lack of sufficient data or the ill-defined nature of 1

                                                . the impact, professional judgment must be utilized in order-
                                                - to conducc theLanalysis.

This assumption is made explicit for two reasons; first, because techniques , for' social . impact. analysis are not' yet fully developed, and second, because time'.and cost factors of ten preclude the extent to which many aspects of y' , impact may.be evaluated. An additional consideration is that social impacts t of ten become diffuse within a short distance of a project'such as a nuclear ( ' electrical generatin8 plant. Therefore, the . analytical method detailed

                              .below is concerned with localized social impacts rather than, for example,

[' impacts upon the~ entire distribution area of the public utility.

                            +                             .s     .,-

e.. ur . - ,,7__. _.,_.g.i,ep. . ,y p, , y, , e., ., y.me .. , y.. ,. ye-,,%,.--.m..p---g'='""

                                    ^

l e-j . D-2 ( Social Impacts l To assess the environmental impacts caused by nuclear power requires that several aspects of the environment be considered. NEPA is 1 ~ written in terms cf impact on the human environment. Hence, environmental impact assessments must include consideratior of social changes or impacts i . upon people near_ the plant. Socia 1' elements considered are those aspects p of human life that provide something more than what is absolutely necessary { for human exis tence. . They are those aspects which affect the emotions of r PeoP l e; those adding to or detracting from the enjoynent of life. b Man's impact upon man, as well as man's impact on the natural environment, must be considered when identifying the social impacts

       . -              occurring in an area. Experience has demonstrated that if these impacts are not considered, the construction of facilities may be interrupted or i

delayed by court action brought by active er concerned citizens. Such delays often result in increased costs in the form of wasted time and c resources. The analysis procedure used to identify social impacts caused by nuclear power plants utilizes three categories or types of impacts. They are (1) individual impacts, (2) institutional impacts, and (3) community impac ts : - { 1 e Individual impacts are those which affect the physiological

                                        - and psychological reactions of individual human beings.

e Institutional impacts are those that affect interactions

    ~

between five basic institutions in society. g e Community impacts are those that cause change within or to the entire community, and the significance - which would not

       ~
                                        - be as clearly recognizable if viewed only in terms of individual or institutional impacts.

These various types of social impacts and their interrelationships are discussed 'in greater detail below. [' ~ A change in a community may affect one or all three of the cate-gories of impacts. An illustrative potential impact resulting from the , . - construction of a nuclear power plant is a change in the recreational opportunities of a community. This may result in individual impac- (e . g . ,

     -.                                                                                                             a r

J - D-3 a man's favorite fishing hole is destroyed by the construction of the plant), institutional impacts (e.g., the economy of the area might be ~- significantly changed if comercial recreational activities in the area are greatly increased or decreased), and comunity impacts (e.g., if the 4 residents of the comunity, before the presence of the plant, are not oriented toward recrea 2eg but af ter the plant is built with a cooling lake offering several types of recreational opportunities, the comunity (i becomes much more oriented toward recreation resulting in a change in the

t. overall life style of the comunity) . Thus, when identifying changes caused

[ by a plant, each impact must be well defined in terms of what and whom it ( ' is affecting, and to what extent. Individual Impacts I Individual impacts are physiological and psychological in nature. Physiological impacts are those factors which influence the human body, and may be interpreted as any factor which adds stress to the individual. These impac.:s are more thoroughly treated in Sections 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4. I'sychological impacts are factors which influence the mind or I mental processes. Many of the psychological impacts are related to changes L' f n the general category called " Aesthetics". An example of the type of impact caused by a nuclear power plant is the reaction expetienced by someone living close to a 500-foot cooling tower and its ever-present

   ~'

enormity. The same kind of reaction might be experienced from the transmission line towers. The presence of the air plume from a cooling tower may cause a N negative psychological reaction in some individuals. However, the extent of this negative reaction varies with individuals and is difficult to define - , er predict because of the changeable nature of the plu e's drift and length L. . U ^ visibility. Natural draf t towers produce little noise; however, the [" ' noise from mechanical draf t towers could be great enough to disturb people

                ~

who lived very near the to Trs. Because the noise from the towers would

  ~

be continual, the degree of disturbance caused by the noise would be greater than if :.he noise was not continuous. a

                 ,t  ,               ,,                                                      . - , - . ~      ,. r,

m -

p. .

f. D-4 A'nother kind of psychological impact' caused by a nuclear power plant may result from the - need to relocate people from their residences.

                    - The intensity of such impact varies directly with the degree to which
      ~,              residents do or do not want to relocate.

Institutional Impacts

                                   ' Man, as a social animal, cooperates with and competes with other men to perform tssks necessary for survival, procreation of the species, f                    - and other major problems which must be solved if human society is to extend over several generations. Five major functional activities which human societies must perform hava been identified. The five are (1) Procreation and affection
 ~ '

(2) Exchange of goods and services (3) Distribution of social power and leadership (4) Dealing with the sacred and explanation of the unknown or nonempirical events (5) Socialization, training, and explanation of empirical events. Each of the above functional problems is elaborated in more detail in the following paragraph.

• With respect to each functional problem, there is a complex set of norms, rules ~and regulations which govern the behavior of groups and individuals . To the extent that a set of social rules and regulations is

 ~

integrated toward solving a major functional problem, we may define a social institution. Thus,- for each major functional problem of society, there .is a' corresponding social institution. Procreatifon and Affection. A basic survival requisite for any J.

                    - living organism is . procreation. For humans, there is also a necessity for                      , ,

providing the young with affection. In American society, indeed in all

                 ' western societies, these functional problems of procreation and affection

[

are predominately solved by . the family. The American family is typically

      ~

nuciaar in nature, with one or two generations residing in the same

household.

4 e ir-r e w +- - r- s., w m- -.- ,- , . - .- .---r-

i . D-5

r. .

I ( , Exchanne of Goods and Services. The exchange of goods and 7 services is governed by a complex set of formal and informal rules termed the economy. In the United States the economy is characterized by private enterprise and trade, with public control over the entrepreneurial and d trading or exchange functions, such as monopoly regulations. In addition, e there are quasi-public economic organizations which are private in some ) areas of concern and public in others. .

      .                         Distribution of Power and Leadership. The institution which is

[ largely concerned with power and leadership is the polity. The polity d includes government, political parties, and other mechanisms which deal i with the allocation of societal resources. In a generic sense the polity deals with resource allocation, social control, and maintenance of the [ existing social order. More specifically, these are units of government, formal and informal power structures, and political parties and affiliations which must be considered as making up the polity. 4

              ^

Dealing with the Sacred and Explanation af the Unknown or Non-Empirical Events. A major social institution con:erned with man's sacred beliefs and which acts to explain the unknown is religion.* Another insti-tutional mechanism or belief system, which is not dominant in American , society but has historically been utilized to explain the unknown and to f manipulate natural phenomena, is magic. The major concern in impact [ analysis is with the extent to which religion's values, beliefs, and practices are impacted. Socialization. Training, and Explanation of Empirical Events. P" Socialization is the process by which human culture is transmitted from " one generation to the next. Educational and scientific institutions are

            ~

the major means in American society by which problems of socialization and explanation of empirical events are solved. [ --_ Science also endeavors to explain the unknown, and there is conflict between certain religious and scientific beliefs. t

F.. p -

 !               .                                          D-6 I            -

For each major societal problem, as has been discussed in previous paragraphs, there is a corresponding institution. The major. i problems and matching institutional mechanisms are listed below. Societal Function Social Institution Procreation and affection Family [.i - Exchange Economy Power, leadership, and

• Polity distribution thereof k- The sacred and explanation Religion of the unknown

     ..                          Socialization and training                  Education Environmental planning must take into account impacts on each societal problem and each corresponding institution. Many times iepacts are small and apparently inconsequential, but systematic analysis may reveal interaction effects, say between the economy and the educational system, that are major in natura. A proposal for establishing a nuclear power plant in a rural area, for example, may have little direct long-term impact on the economy of the area in terms of new jobs, but may generate enough taxes to
                    -enable the community to provide new and expanded educational facilities.

Such long-term benefits must be weighted against short-term construction phase pressures on the educational system where children of construction workers may double th'e number of teachers and school seats required. I. T~ Community Impacts In addition to individual and institutional impacts, generalized

' community changes are also considered in social impact analysis. An P example of a change occurring in a.comunity as a result of a proposed

. - nuclear power plant is the conflict that may develop in the community > between those people who oppose the plant and those who support it. When l n . a proposed development divides an otherwise unified community, the social costs in terms of' the conflict can be quite disruptive to each of th major social institutions and may have psychological ramifications as well. k nother. example of how a comunity can be affected is the change caused by. the proposed plant ~ to the transportation network of the community. !^, Nuclear power plants require some bethod of cooling the water used in the Y

                                                                 -m   r       --   -                 -

• T e

                 .                                           D-7
+
              .     -electricity-generating process. . One method of cooling the water is to create a cooling lake. The creation of a new lake in a certain area may f                      possibly require the closing or relocation of some roads which would alter the transportation patterns in the area. This change' could also have 1                      impacts on the economy of the community, as well as impacts on individuals.
                                ' Uses = made _ of land in a given area can greatly influence the l                   - character of the community in that area.        If a greater percentage of land is
                   . used f or industrial purposes in a given area than in another given area of the _ same sue, it can be assumed that as the amount of area devoted to industrial purposes increases, the difference in character between the two areas increases. For example, higher levels of air and water pollution and congested traffic patterns are likely to accompany increased

[= indus trialization. In the same sense, a community which has a large proportion of its land devoted to open space, parks, and recreation areas will have a differ-

               ~

ent kind of character than one that has little land devoted to such + purposes. It seems pertinent to point out, therefore, that if a nuclear power plant is constructed in an area and influences the use made of nearby land (e.g., through the presence of more accessible electric power), the plant may very well change the character of that area. Industrial firms sometimes locate in an area just because someone else located there first. Therefore, it is possible that just the presence of a power plant in an area will encourage the location of other industrial firms in the same area. Format for Analysis Within the framework of the three major types of potential social impact--individual, . institutional, and community--the Battelle Research team considers both direct and indirect impacts of a large-scale development. Thus, _ the development may impact tne economy, which in turn may have an

                   .effect on the family life of a community because of, for example, higher standards of living. Such a chain of impact may be illustrated as follows:

mpa ""*

• Development' project s) ? Economy  ; Family d

P L D-8 }_ . In order to concisely display social impacts, a "from-to" matrix may be constructed whereby the direct and indirect impacts may be noted and assessed. (See Figure 1.) The matrix is read from lef t to right. Cells along the diagonal s' are direct impacts, for example, cell (2,2) indicates an impact upon Family

r. Life in the area of the project. All other cells indicate indirect impacts.

Thus, cell (3,7) indicates a change in the economy of the area will result in a generalized community change. Such a changa might result when the economy of an area is impacted to the extent that an area changes from an agricultural economy to a more differentiated economy including commerce , anc industry as a result of a development project. To further illustrate the ts chnique, cell (1,7) would indicate a general psychological impact on f' the community. This type of effect might be observed when a development has the ef fect of influencing individuals toward believing and behaving

   ~

as though a development is either so positive or so negative that the whole community begins to reflect the attitude. The "from-to" matrix is useful { L in identifying specific types of impact. Assessments as to overall magni-

              ~

tude depend on the nature of impe. cts in respective cells and the total t number of cells reflecting impacts. k [ . .=

^'               ~

I D-9

                                                                                                               $ l T~                                                              Impact to:
                                                                                   ~

p0 N[ r . E$ [E Ic: pact from: 1.

                                                                              #[2. e p

4s[40 8 4. c

2. 6.

8 4.

                                                                                                        ./

ff (Individual) 1. Psychological 1,1 (Institutional) 2. Fartily

3. Economy '

3,3

4. Polity 4,6

, . 5. Religion

6. Education-Scientific.

6,6 (Comunity) 7. Comunity L FIGURE,1. SOCIAL DIPACT AI;ALYSIS MATRIX r- . e M l. ms e u E. . >' s c me}}