ML20034B918

1989 Annual Environ Operating Rept (Nonradiological). W/

ML20034B918
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	12/31/1989
From:	Leitch G PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NUDOCS 9005010162
Download: ML20034B918 (10)

Text

._

EPP 5.4.1 PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY 3904057970 LIMERICK GENER ATING ST ATION P. O. BOX A S AN ATOG A, PENNSY LV ANI A 19464 (216) 3271200, EXT. 3000 April 20, 1990 onanau u.6. rives u..... E.'. l." IE2........,

Docket Nos. 50-352 50-353 License Nos. NPF-39 NPF-85 U.

S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn:

Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555

Subject:

Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 1989 Annual Environmental Operating Report (Non-Radiological)

Gentlemen:

Attached is the Limerick Generati1? Station, Units 1 and 2, 1989 Annual Environmental Operating 9'Jort (Non-Radiological).

This report is being submitted in accor.nce with Section 5.4.1 of Appendix B of the Facility Operating Licenses, Environmental Protection Plan (EPP)

(non-radiological),

and describes the implementation of the EPP for 1989.

If you have any questions, please do nat hesitate to contact us.

Very trul yours 2

KWM/kk Attachment cc:

T.

T.

Martin, Administrator, Region I, USNRC T.

J.

Kenny, USNRC Senior Resident Inspector

%,05010162 so1231

1. -6R ADOCA 05000 'M I p

PDC

m a,'

e

.a w

(p.

r

.'.I_'.',

t

'i 4

3904057970!

+ -

' _i_-

f v

I LIMERICK-GENERATINGISTATION:

UNITS:lLAND~i2.

e s

. +.

. 1989~

4

ANNUhL-' ENVIRONMENTAL' OPERATING REPORT.-

- (NON-RADIOLOGICAL))

JANUARY..1989

DECEMBER.1989; s

FACILITY-OPERATING'-LICENSE'NOS. NPF-39,:NPF-85" DOCKET NOS.'_ 50-352, 50-353' c_

- PHILADELPHI A' ' ELECTRIC;. COMPANY '

O

)

g.

t i

4

/

l

-j

,~.

., l'. -,

-. ~.,. -..

', 3904057970-1.0 Introduction This report _ describes the implementation of the-i Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) from January 1,

1989,

.through December 31, 1989.-

8 Provided herein are summaries and results of the-environmental protection activities required by Subsection.

4.2 of the EPP.

2.0 Environmental Protection' Activities 2.1 Aquatic Monitoring The Environmental Protection Plan states that the NRC will rely on decisions made by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, under the authority of the Clean Water-Act, for any requirements for aquatic monitoring.-

Industrial-Waste NPDES Permit.PA 0051926. dated September 19, 1984,1 provides the mechanism for-protecting water quality and indirectly' aquatic biota.

s In accordance with'the requirements of Section 3 of the Permit,' monitoring results were summarized for each month and reported on Discharge Monitoring Reports-(DMR) which were submitted to'the DER'and EPA.

A summary of the results as reported in the monthly DMR's is on Table 1.

In addition, studies of water quality, benthic macroinvertebrates, fishes collected by seining and electrofishing, fish impingement on the Schuylkill River water intake screens, and quarterly examination of river water temperature upstream and downstream of the LGS discharge, were performed-in support of LGS in 1989.

Additionally, dissolved oxygen was monitored continuously in support of Revisions 8 and 9 of the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) Docket Number D-69-210 CP (Final) authorizing Schuylkill River water withdrawals.

Dissolved oxygen monitoring results were reported several times each day in'1989 to the LGS operating-staff and were used to coordinate releases of'make-yp water from Still Creek Reservoir in accordance with the DRBC docket revisions.

Periodic inspections of Still Creek Reservoir and receiving streams ' reveale d no sign of increased erosion, sedimentation, or other environmental damage.

Preliminary examination of water quality and benthic macroinvertebrate data and field observations indicate that conditions were similar to those reported in 1989

(

i 7' 1 3904057970 and detrimental environmental impacts attributable to LGS operation did not occur.

Problems with sedimentation on buried cylinder samplers (BCS) used-to collect benthic macroinvertebrates were identified-in the 1987. studies and were again evident in 1989.

Sedimentation is not directly related to LGS operation.

E Construction activities for LGS Unit 2 contribute to the Schuylkill River's sediment load via the Possum Hollow Run watershed which drains the LGS plant site.

However, this fraction is small compared to the-sediment load contributed by the entire watershed upstream of LGS and construction activities were being curtailed.

1 Data from fisheries. studies conducted in 1989 were analyzed and compared to prior' years.. No evidence exists to suggest damage to Schuylkill1 River fish communities from LGS operation.

Only 34 fish were found'for the entire. year during impingement monitoring.

The fish community near LGS displayed changes in relative abundance that were within the range of natural variability determined prior ~to LGS start-up.

Prolonged high flows through much of' spring 1

and early summer depressed the reproductive success of many species, especially of nest-btilding sun fishes and smallmouth bass. LA similar phenomenon was last i

observed in 1984 prior to LGS: operations.

l l

No fish kills or therms' plume effects were ever-observed below the of LeS discharge.

Since the discharge is diffused into a wide riffle area, no distinct. thermal plume develops.- Further' evidence of 1

the lack of significant impact 1from LGS operation was l

provided by the results of a macroinvertebrate' study 1

conducted in 1989.

Macroinvertebrate samplers placed i

immediately upstream and' downstream of the LGS j

effluent discharge were colonized by similar, numbers and kinds of macorinvertebrates, organisms.which as a group are particularly sensitive and respond'quickly

{

to environmental degradation.

'j i

I

.I 2.2 Terrestrial Monitoring I

No terrestrial monitoring is required.

I I

2.3 Maintenance of Transmission Line Corridors

]

I

}

-3904057970

?,

Transmission line maintenance records.concerning.

herbicide use are being maintained by-the Company's; Electric Transmission and Distribution Department.

As required by the EPP,.these records can be made available to the NRC upon request.

'2.4 Noise Monitoring-Noise surveys were required in 1989 only for-the Point Pleasant Pumping Station.

The post operational survey for LGS Unit 1 was completed in 1986.

Since of LGS Unit 2, and Bradshaw Reservoir-were not fully operational in 1989, no sound surveys *were made.,

3 Noise surveys for LGS Unit 2 and Bradshaw Reservoir, are planned for 1990.

In accordance with the Atomic Safety Licensing Board (ASLB) ruling LBP-83-ll, dated March 8, 1983, sound surveys were conducted in the vicinity;of Point Pleasant Pumping Station.- The operational noise-surveys were. performed on September 9, 1989, between 2:00 A.M. and 4:00 A.M. When both pumps lwere--operating.

at full capacity.

The sampling locations were those required for analysis by the'ASLB ruling LPB-83-11. -

All acoustical measurements were made using a Gen Rad type 1988-9700 Precision Integrating' Sound. Level' Meter

.{

and Analyzer and a Larson-Davis 3100 RTA Integrating.

~l Real Time Analyzer.

The_ specifications of_both 1

instruments meet the requirement for precision-(Type j

1) sound level meteru (ANSI 51.4-1983, IEC 651-1979, and DIN 45 633/1, 1970).

Filter _ characteristics of both instruments also meet the standards of-ANSI 51.11-1966, IEC 225-1966 and DIN'45-652, 1964.

Measurements were taken in accordance with ANSI standard 51.B-1971, " Methods for the Measurement of 2

Sound Pressure Levels.'"

A review of the operational versus' baseline ambient surveys as compared with currently accepted methods for predicting the potential for community. noise annoyance-including subjective audib'i'lity criteria has concluded the following:

The operation of the Point Pleasant transformers o

are inaudible at all off-site receptors as compared with the audibility methodology required by ASLB ruling LBP-83-11 and recommendations of the NRC staff contained in the Environmental Statement related in the operation of Limerick Generating Station.

l

1-7904057970

_3_

Based on the preferred."Modifled Composite Noise.

a o

Rating-(CNR) procedure published by the' Edison >

Electric Institute's " Electric Power Plant-Environmental Noise Guide", thezaverage expected community response-at the-nearest residences to the j

pumping station' is: "No Observed Reaction",

Based on'U.S. Department of. Housing =and Urban-o Development sleep threshold guidelines,. operational-l noise from the pumping' station will cause no sleep J

-interference.

1 2.5 Envihonmental~ Protection Plan There were no Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) r l

noncompliances identified by,the 1989.EPP Audit by'the Nuclear' Quality Assurance Department.

't 2.6 Changes in Statiori Design on' Operation', Test, or Experiments

-s Environmental evaluations were performed for'the H

~

following changes in the Limerick Generating Station operation.

In-accordance with the requirementsLof-Section.3.1 or the Environmental Protection' Plan,'each' 1'

change includes a brief description', analyses,-

interpretation,~and evaluation, M

a. Environmental Evaluation No.-89-1 Environmental Evaluation'No. 89-l' assessed the effect of the continuation in 1989.of:three L

temporary changes in plant operation. :These-l involved the withdrawal of waterifrom the" Schuylkill River for consumptive use at LGS.

The changes were:

1. substitution-of instream monitoring of dissolved.

L oxygen levels in place of the 59 degrees F temperature constraint'on withdrawals; y

2. consumptive use-at LGS'when consumptive-use at.

Titus Generating Station:or Cromby Genera' ting Station was curtailed;.and j

L

3. consumptive use at LGS when an equal. volume.of-water was released from Borough of Tamaqua Reservoirs upstream of LGS.

]

3904057970 The instream monitoring of dissolved oxygen levels was evaluated in 1985 and was summarized in-the' 1985 Annual Environmental Operating Report..The env!ronmental advantages of directly measuring dissolved oxygen continued-to be applicable in

~

1989.

Automatic D.O. monitoring and transmitting facilities, which were installed in 1986,, continued, to be used.

Use of'the Titus/Cromby allocations enhanced the flow in the reach between Titus.and Limerick by 3.5 mgd over the amount:which would occur if Titus,were in operation.

On the other hand,- the reach downstream of LGS to.the1Cromby plant was depleted by 1.7 mgd. -Because-the quantities involved-were a:

very small fraction of existing = river flow, the effect on Schuylkill River' water quality was determined to be negligible.

Environmental-monitoring in 1985 through 19891 confirmed the negligible effect on water quality.

The use of water from the Borough of Tamaqua reservoirs provides increased' flow of.high quality water.in'77 miles of stream.

Therefore, no. water" quality problems were expected in 1989.

These changes were also evaluated for their-combined effect on-impingement and entrainment.

Since these changes were made under the same docket =

condition as in 1986, no significant effects were.

t expected.

The 1989 monitorin.g program-found no significant effects.

y c

2.7 Non-routine Reports Submitted I

Eight non-routine reports were submitted in accordance-with EPP Subsection 5.4.2.

Copies of all letters were-supplied to the NRC.

I A.

Twenty-four Hour Notifications

1. On February 26, 1989, sewage tanks overflowed.

Sewage was discharged to Possum Hollow through Discharge Point 002.

The Pennsylvania DER was informed by telephone on February 26, 1989 and 1

L by letter dated March 16, 1989.

l l

2. On April 4, 1989, a sanitary sewer line overflowed to a storm drain.

Sewage was discharged to Possum Hollow through Discharge I'

.h'

_7_ -

'3.904057970 Point 012.

The Pennsylvania DER was' informed by.

telephone on April 4, 1989 and April 6, 1989.. A waiver of 5 day written' notification was received on: April 6, 1989.

.A notification letter was sent dated April-10, 1989.

3. On April 5 and 6, 1989, the spray pond overflowed with the majority of flow through Discharge Point 001.. An additional 200 gpm r

(estimated). ' overflowed a manhole: and discharged '

through-Discharge Point 009.

Oral, notification-was provided.on April 6, 1989.

On April 11, 1989, the manhole again overflowed and discharged through Discharge' Point 009.

A notification letter covering both events'was~

t sent, dated April 27, 1989.

4. On May 17, 1989, cooling water overflowed a manhole and discharged to Possum Hollow Creek.

The Pennsylvania DER was informed by' telephone on May 18, 1989, and by letter-in May 24,.1989.

A follow-up letter was sent'on June'20, 1989.

5. On July: 14,'1989, the: spray pond manhole

~'

overflowed.

Water-was dischargedithrough.

Discharge Point 1009..The Pennsylvania" DER-was "-

informed by telephone on July-14, 1989, and by letter on July 19, 1989.

A follow-upLletter was sent on August 31, 1989.

6. On December 1, 1989, a cooling tower blowdown.

line manhole overflowed.. Water was discharged to Possum Hollow Creek.

The Pennsylvania-DER was informed by telephone on December'1, 1989, and by letter on December 7,-1989.

7. NPDES violations for zinc-concentration at.

Discharge Point 001 on November 1, 1989, and November 17, 1989, were identified on December 19, 1989.

The Pennsylvania DER was notified by telephone on December 19 and 20,-1989,;and by.

letter on December 21, 1989.

4

8. A December 27, 1989' NPDES violation for zinc concentration-at-Discharge Point 001:was identified on January 2, 1990.

The Pennsylvania DER was notified by telephone on January a, 1990, and by letter on January 15, 1990.

9. A December 11, 1989 NPDES violationLfor mercury concentration from Bradshaw Reservoir was identified in January 4, 1990.

The Pennsylvania DER was-notified by telephone on January 4, 1990, and by letter on January 22, 1990.

l

-)

i 2

' f-

3904057970

' TABLE 1 1

YEARLY MEAN AND RANGE OR MAXIMUM-(AS APPROPRIATE) OF-PARAMETERS REPORTED IN THE 1989 DISCHARGE MONITORING-' REPORTS-DISCHARGE NUMBER

• 001

~201A 301A' INLET TEMP.,

F maximum 77 NR**

NR-mean 56 +/- 25***

NR

-NR-DISCHARGE TEMP.,

F maximum 88.

NR NR-mean 70 +/- 19 NR NR j

1 pH, range 7.2 - 8.7 NR NR -

-j FLOW, MGD i

maximum 15.3 0.70 0.094-mean

-8.4~+/- 7.4 0.19 +/-

O'.=10'

'O.013 +/- 0.016 i

CHLORINE,.MG/L

<0.1

-NR NR TOLYTRIAZOLE,.MG/L 0,8 NR NR' SODIUM SILICATE, MG/L 15.4 NR NR l

POLYACRYLATE, MG/L 2.9 NR

NR NALCO 1372, MG/L maximum 37.6 NR NR range 14.1 +/- 9.0 NR NR-l TOTAL SUSP. SOLIDS, MG/L maximum NR 23.3 NR

^

mean NR 8.7 +/- 6.3 NR OIL & GREASE, MG/L maximum NR 8.9 NR

--i mean NR 2.2 +/- 2.1 NR IRON, MG/L

' maximum NR 0.5 NR There were no discharges reported for 1989 from discharge no. 101A NR = not reported.

Reported as mean v/- 2 s.d.

. t

'}

-s.

d e-1 a

. -G

'l ANNilAL ENVIRONusNTAL OPERAhlNG REPORT (NOM ". Adieu rgnic40 -

i-1 TO:

<USNRCtw

,., Washington, DC.wm CC:

T. T. Martin, USNRC Outgoing T. J. Kenny, USNRC Outgoing D. T. Ney, PADER -

Outgoing 4

CHF Region lit, USEPA

. Outgoing 1

INPO-

- Outgoing PADER BRP inspector LGS /335 '

LETTER ONLY:.

Sr. V.P. Nuclear.

- CB/520 Sr. V.P. Legal

- MO/S231 V.P. LGS LGS /200 V.P. Nuclear Eng & Services CB/51 A 1 -

1 General Mgr NQA CB/53A 1 Plant Mgr LGS LGS /A5 : e

' Mgr Nuclear Sup CB/51 A 1.

Mgr Licensing CB/52A,

Supt Services-LGS.

- LGS /AS-1

-Dir. Environmental Affairs MO/S9-2

- Eng. Reg. Sup-LGS :

- LGS /SB3+

Sr. Chemist

- Valley Forge.

l Sr. Chemist-LGS -

- LGS /SB3-3 Reports Supervisor

- LGS /338 Correspondence Release Point LGS /340 -

DAC r

l

.f l

l q

t

'I

~

~

.