ML20069G012
| ML20069G012 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 03/09/1971 |
| From: | DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20069G005 | List: |
| References | |
| ENVR-710309, NUDOCS 9406090191 | |
| Download: ML20069G012 (300) | |
Text
PREFACE This report is submitted by Duke Power Company in support of its application to the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission for permits to construct the William B. McGuire Nuclear Station, Units I and 2, in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. This report is intended to be fully responsive to Code of Federal Regulatioas Part 50, Appendix 0 as published in the Federal Register on December 4, 1970, pur-suant to the Natlonal Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
9406090191 720501 DR ADOCR0500g9
I TABLE OF CONTENTS Os Page Number
- 1. _I N_TR090C T l 0N 1-1
- 2. gf CRIPTION OF McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION 2-1 2.1 STATION AND CYCLE DESCRIPTION 2-1 2.2 5;TE DESCRIPTION 2-2 2.3 BASIS OF NEED 2-3 2.4 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT OF THE SITE 2-5 2.4.1 METEOROLOGY 2-5 2.4.2 GEOLOGY 2-6 2.4.3 SEISMOLOGY 2-7 2.4.4 HYDROLOGY 2-7
3.1 DESCRIPTION
AND MULTIPLE USE FEATURES 3-1 3.2 COORDINATED PLANNING 3-3 3.3 RECPsEATION 3-5 3.4 FISHING 3-6 3.5 WILDLIFE 3-7 3.6 M TFP SUPPLY 3-8 37 FLOOD CONTROL 3-9 3.8 FORESTRY AND S0ll CONSERVATION 3-12 39 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SANITATION 3-13 3A _RECREATIGH
" LAKE NORMAN - THE INLAND SEA"
- 4. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION 4-1 4.1 THERMAL EFFECTS 4-1 v
4.1.1
SUMMARY
4-1 1
1 1 I
I l )
!- i TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT INUED) f 1' l l Page Number j
4.
1.2 BACKGROUND
STUDIES AND LONG-RANGE PLANNING 4-3 4.1.3 LAKE NORMAN MONITORING PROGRAM 4-3 j 4.1.4 RESEARCH PROJECT RP-49 4-4 4
I 4.
1.5 DESCRIPTION
OF CONDENSER COOLING WATER SYSTEM 4-5
- 4.1.6 EFFECT OF WARMED DISCHARGE ON LAKE WATERS 4-5
- 4.1 7 ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS 4-8 4.2 RADIOLOGICAL EFFECTS 4-10 l
l 4.2.1
SUMMARY
4-10 i
- 4.2.2 PAD 10 ACTIVE LIQUID RELEASES 4-10 I
! 4.2.3 RADI0 ACTIVE GASE0US RELEASES 4-12 1
4.2.4 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL 4-13 i
4.2 5 COMPARIS0N OF RADI0 ACTIVE GASEOUS AND LIQUID WASTE 4-13 RELEASES WITH ESTABLISHED STANDARDS AND LIMITS ,
4.2.6 THE ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY MONITORING PROGRAM 4-17 f
! 4.2.7 POSSIBILITIES AND CONSEQUENCES OF ACCIDENTAL RELEASES 4-19
! i 4.2.8 EMERGENCY PLANS 4-19 l 4.2.9 TRANSPORTATION AND REMOTE PROCESSING OF SPENT FUEL 4-20 4.3 OTHER WATER QUALITY EFFECTS 4-22 4.3.1 MECHANICAL CLEANING OF CONDENSER TUBES 4-22 4.3.2 MECHANICAL FILTRATION OF STATION WATER SUPPLY 4-22 4.3.3 NON-RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE WATER DISCHARGES 4-22 i 4.4 LAND USE 4-26 ;
l- 4.4.1 McGU IRE NUCLEAR STAT ION 4 26 4.4.2 NEARBY TRANSMISSION LINES 4-27 4.4.3 IllSTORIC LANDMARKS 4-28 l- 4.5 CONSTRUCTION EFFECTS 4-29 l
l j- II I
i ,
I __,
.~ . . - _ - .. - - - _ . _ . -. - -
i I
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
O Page Number i
4.6 AESTHETIC IMPACT 4-30 i 4.7 McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION AND THE ECONOM_Y_ 4-31 j 4.8 UNAV0lDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 4-34 ;
l 4.9 RELATIONSH I P BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF MAN' S 4-35 i ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF j LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVlTY 4.10 IRRETRIEVABLE AND IRREVERSIBLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES 4-36 !
4A THERMAL EFFECTS EFFECTS OF THERMAL POLLUTION UPON LAKE NORMAN FISHES 4B HISTORIC LANDMARKS l 1
5 ALTERNATIVES TO McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION 5-1 [
5.1 ALTERNATIVE TYPES OF GENERATION 5-1 5 1.1 HYDRO AND COMBUSTION TURBINE CAPACITY 5-1 '
5.1.2 PURCHASED POWER 5-2 1
5.1.3 " EXOTIC" SOURCES OF POWER 5-2 !
l 5.1.4 NUCLEAR AND FOSSIL FIRED STEAM-ELECTRIC CAPACITY 5-2 !
5.2 ALTERNATIVE SITES FOR NEW CAPACITY 5-4 5.3 ALTERNATIVE COOLING SYSTEMS 5-5 'I 5.4 ALTERNATIVE RADIDACTIVE WASTE TREATMENT SYSTEMS 5-6
- 6. REGULATION AND COORDINATION WITH GOVERNMENT AGENC IES 6-1 6.1 FEDERAL AGENCIES 6-1 6.2 STATE AGENCIES 6-2 6.3 LOCAL AGENCIES 6-5 6A CERTIFICATIONS, PERMITS AND AGREEMENTS III
. . ~ . . . . . . - . . . - . - . . . ~ - - . . . . . - . . - _ .
1 l
1 I
I I
I i
TABLE OF CONTENTS i
I Section -
Pace Nuniber I I
i
- 1. INTRODUCTION 1-1 (
i i
i T
i 4
) I e
t t
I 1
I
]
i I
T
)
?
P i
i
+
h f
i R
i
+
I I
i I
- S I l
t 1-i
- . . . . . - - - - _ . . . . __- -- ..-.-- . - ~ . . . - . . _ . . . _ - .
-~
?
t I
- 1. INTRODUCTION ,
Duke Power has a long history of environmental concern and commitment, in ,
1923 the Company's first full-time environmental department was established, '
headed by a public health physician. Subsequently, additional groups of full- i time environmental specialists have been formed and are continuing to work .
towards assuring that the Piedmont Carolinas is indeed an attractive place to ,
live.
The Company's connitment to environmental quality is for two fundamental reasons. ,
?
First, the type of environment directly affects the quality of life of the people who live in the Company's service area, and it is recognized that no electric ,
utility can long succeed serving an area marred by blight. Secondly, man has j not yet devised a way to generate large quantities of electricity needed to '
meet the public demand without involving land, water and air resources. To ;
minimize adverse impact on the environment and even to enhance the environment I wherever possible has been a fundamental consideration in the Company's plan-ning of generation facilities for many years. In support of this objective, the Company has long engaged in environmental research and investigations. I Plans for the McGuire Nuclear Station on Lake Norman in Mecklenburg County have 7 been supportel by long-term environmental studies, as well as continuing pro- !
grams. Fo r e xampl e, in 1957 limnological and water quality studies began as part of the t.esign studies for Lake Norman, then in the planning stages; in 1961, more taan fourteen years before the first generating unit at McGuire is scheduled f ar commercial service, plans for the McGuire cooling water intake structure and related thermal effects were coordinated with appropriate federal and state agencies; in 1962, consistent with this planning, the low-level cool-Ing water intake structure to serve the future McGuire Station was completed and lies waiting on the bottom of Lake Norman; ir,1963, Lake Norman filled and the Company's water quality monitoring and sampling program was expanded to include the lake waters, thus beginning the development of water quality para- i meters serving as input to the detailed design of McGuire; and in 1967, after several years of coordination with the planning agencies of the three other counties neighboring on Lake Norman, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Planning Commis- j sion zoned the McGuire site appropriate to power plant use. From the environ- !
mental studies, it is concluded that McGuire Nuclear Station can be developed at its site; will be environmentally compatible in all significant respects; will fully comply with all current environmental quality standards of cognizant governmental regulatory agencies; and any adverse environmental impact will be j minimal when compared to alternative means of generating the same electricity. ]
McGuire's power generation is essential to meet the area's needs of population l growth coupled with the increase in the per capita use of energy as reflected !
in residential, commercial and industrial demands. Only wi 3 additional energy ;
can there be gains in production, comfort, health care, education, communications, the economic status of people in the area and even environmental quality. Fai lu re :
to provide additional generating capacity when needed can have traumatic conse- !
quences on human and environmental values.
During the pre-operational and operational periods, erivironmental studies and l monitoring programs associated with McGuire Nuclear Station will continue. If i subtle adverse effects should be identified from these programs, timely correc- ;
tive action will be taken as appropriate. j 1-1 !
?
I
--Y
TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Number ,
i
- 2. DESCRIPTION OF McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION 2-1 f 2.1 STATION AND CYCLE DESCRIPTION 2-1 l 2.2 SITE DESCRIPTION 2-2 f 2.3 BASIS OF NEED 2-3 l 2.4 NATUF,AL ENVIRONMENT OF THE SITE 2 -5 '
2.4.1 METEOROLOGY 2-5 !
2.4.2 GEOLOGY 2-6 l 2.4.3 SEISM 0 LOGY 2-7 2.4.4 HYDROLOGY 2-7 f I
)
i i
o i
2-1 i
9 I
i r
6 LIST OF FIGURES l 9 ;
Figure Number Title e 2.1-1 Simplified Flow Diagram l
(
2.2-1 General Area Map 2.2-2 Plot Plan and Site Boundary i 2.4-1 Regional Geologic Map j 2.4-2 Plan and Profile of the Catawba River .
I i
i i
i 9 1 :
l I
i j
P G !
l I
l 2-il ;
-, -. _,. .. .. - . . __ . _ - _ . _ _ . . . - . __ __ _ _ ._.___.____A
l i
- 2. DESCRIPTION OF McGUIRE _ NUCLEAR STATION 2.1 STATION AND CYCLE DESCRIPTION The McGuire Nuclear Station will have two units each with electrical output of about 1150 Mw (1 Mw=1000 kw); The Westinghouse Electric Corporation will furn- {
ish the nuclear steam systems, some of the engineered safety features and most [
of the waste disposal equipment for the station. The nuclear steam systems ;
are of the four-loop pressurized water design similar to twelve other ' four- l loop plants which precede McGuire. The waste disposal equipment will be the !
very latest and most efficient available. A description of the radioactive !
waste disposal system's performance can be found in Section 4.2 of this report. !
i in the pressurized water design (see Figure 2.2-1), a closed system of water, l known as the Primary Coolant is circulated through the fuel elements in the ;
reactor vessel. This water picks up heat produced by the nuclear reaction '
but is kept under sufficient pressure that, even though it rises to about !
600*F lt does not boil but remains 1iquid. ;
This hot water is then pumped into adjacent " steam generators." There the i water flows through thousands of U shaped tubes and gives up its heat to I another, entirely separate water system, called the Secondary Coolant. The :
Primary Coolant is then pumped back into the reactor vessel where it is used !
over and over.
I The Secondary Coolant flows around the tubes carrying the hot Primary Coolant !
in the Steam Generator, picking up the heat from the Primary Coolant. The secon- !
dary Coolant boils and produces steam to drive the turbine. l After doing its work in the turbine, this steam is condensed into water and !
. pumped back into the Steam Generator, forming the second closed cycle. The ;
waters of these two systems do not contact each other. l A third water system is used to condense the Secondary. Coolant steam back !
into water as it leaves the turbine. This cooling water is taken from Lake Norman and is discharged back to the lake. This system is separated from l the reactor by the two closed cycles, the Primary and Secondary Coolent '
systems. j
.The electrical output of the McGuire units will be delivered J.cu 230 Kv and j* 525 Kv transformers to the switching station, south of N. C. Highway 73.
Construction of this switching station began in 1970 to serve system 1. .
transmission needs during the 1971-1975 period prior to operation of McGuire. j in connection with construction of McGuire, the switching station will be ;
expanded to receive and transmit the nuclear station's output. !
The two units to be installed at McGuire are estimated to cost $440,964,000 ;
y*
exclusive of fuel. The cost of initial fuel cores is estimated to be $64,550,000 '*' ;
for a total station cost of over $505 million. The significant economic impact i of this investment in Mecklenburg County is discussed in Section 4.6 of this l report. l f
i 2-1 Revision 1 5-1-72 ;
__~
2.2 S ITE_._ DESCR I PT 10N The McGuire Nuclear Station will be located in Mecklenburg County, idorth Caro-lina, near the Cowans Ford Dam approximately 17 miles northwest of Charlotte.
The plant site is on the shore of Lake Norman about 1000 yards east of the Catawba River Channel as shown on Figure 2.2-1.
The plant site is bounded on the west by the Catawba River channel immediately downstream of Duke Power Company's Cowans Ford Hydroelectric Station, on the north by Lake Norman impounded by Cowans Ford Dam, on the east by private property and Lake Norman, and on the south by N. C. Highway 73 The inter-section of the centerline of the two reactor buildings and the centerline between the reactor buildings is located at Latitude 35*-25'-59" north and Longitude 80*-56'-55" west.
The Exclusion Area is that area within a 2500-f the inter-section of the two centerlines mentioned above. g radius Th centered ow at Zone as Population that area within five and one-half miles of the plant. I There are 26 popula-tion centers within 100 miles of the site. The largest of these are as follows:
Population 1970 Distance Center Population From Site Direction from Site Charlotte, N.C. 239,049 17 miles South-Southeast Winston-Salem, N.C. 133,820 59 miles horth-Northeast Greensboro, N. C. 140,660 78 miles Northeast Columbia, S. C. 111,706 98 miles South The Exclusion Area will be posted. A security fence will be crected around the immediate site area. A plot plan showing major plant features in the Exclusion Area, the site boundary and the controlled access areas within the site boundary are shown on Figure 2.2-2. Transmission lines and right-of-ways in the site area are discussed in Section 4.4.2.
(I) As defined by Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 100.
2-2 l
~
d
. _ m _ . _ _ . - __. __ _ _ _ _ . _ .
I t
i 2.3 BASIS OF NEED i
At the present time Duke Power has a total generating capability of 6744 Mw with an additional 14 Mw resulting from net purchases and interchanges for a
~
total net resource of 6758 Mw. During the period 1964 through January, 1971, [
the peak demands experienced by Duke were as follows: l 1964 3522 Mw !
1965 3826 Mw !
1966 4440 Mw !
1967 4579 Mw !
1968 5364 Mw }
1969 5614 Mw !
1970 6284 Mw .
1971 (to date) 6399 Mw i l
The demand for electricity in Duke's service area is increasing at a rapid !
rate. This is due to a continuing growth, both in the number of customers i served and in usage by all classes of customers. There is a continuing strong {
trend in usage for comfort conditioning, that is for air conditioning during ;
the summer and heating during the cold weather months. Ai r conditioning is
- expected to have an increasing effect in our peak loads and will require increas- i ing amounts of capacity dedicated to supplying weather induced peaks. f i
The 1969 peak load of 5614 Mw which occurred at noon on July 21 was exceeded j less than six months later on January 8, 1970, when the load reached 6023 Mw, l and exceeded once again on July 29, 1970, when the load reached 6284 Mw. A !
peak of 6399 Mw occurred in January, 1971. It is expected that this most recent peak will be exceeded during the 1971 summer. Future peak loads as i currently estimated are: !
1971 6856 Mw ,
1972' 7516 Mw i 1973 8237 Mw !'
1974 9027 Mw 1975 9890 Mw :
1976 10833 Mw i 1977 11862 Mw [
t Severe weather occurrences could add as much as 563 Mw to the estimates in !
1977 l
Duke's planned capacity in 1976, including McGuire 1, is 14,172 Mw and in 1977, including McGuire 2, is 15,322 Mw. Including an allowance for severe weather, the Company's reserve in these years will be 31% and 29% respectively. l Without either McGuire unit the reserves would be 20% and 10% respectively in '
1976 and 1977, and in the event of severe summer weather would drop to 15%
and 5% well below accepted levels. Therefore, the McGuire units must go in service as scheduled to assure an adequate and dependable supply of electricity.
Whereas McGuire Unit 1 is needed to meet the summer 1976 load, it is scheduled for service in late 1975 to permit flexibility in maintenance and operation of other equipment in the 1975-76 winter.
2-3
Schedule highlights are tabulated below:
Unit 1 Unit 2 May, 1971 With Unit 1 Break ground and start pre- l construction earthmoving l November, 1971 With Unit 1 Receive construction permits !
)
i November, 1971 August, 1973 start concrete foundation May, 1973 september, 1974 set reactor vessel ,
June, 1974 October, 1975 start turbine-generator erection j l
Decembe r , 1974 April, 1976 Start precritical testing i
June, 1975 October, 1976 Load fnel November, 1975 March, 1977 Begin commercial operation P
1 1
l 4
l
- e 4
2-4
. _. - -. . _ - - - - ~
)
i 2.4 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT OF THE SITE !
To better understand the site, its natural properties, its compatibility with !
the planned development and the long-term phenomena to which the site may be :
subjected, studies of the site and general vicinity meteorology, geology, i hydrology and seismology have been made and design criteria relative to these !
study areas have been established from evaluation of these studies.
l 2.4.1 METEOROLOGY ,
The long-term climatology of the McGuire Nuclear Station site can'be described ~
by data f rom the local Weather Bureau at Charlotte, North Carolina. The follow- j ing summary is from material prepared by the Environmental Science Services
^
Administration of the U. S. Department of Commerce (now the National Weather Service of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). l l
" Charlotte is located in the southern Piedmont, an area of rolling country l transitional between the mountains to the west and the Coastal Plain to the east. The mountains extend from southwest to northeast, being about 80 or ;
90 miles from Charlotte on both the west and north. The general elevation l of the area around Charlotte is about 730 feet, with the land rising toward l the mountains to the southwest, west and north and decreasing toward the Coastal Plain to the east and southeast. The ocean is about 160 miles distant in the nearest direction, which is southeast, and is about 260 miles distant t to the east. ,
"The mountains have a moderating effect on winter temperatures, causing appre-ciable warming of cold air coming in on west or northwest winds. The ocean is too far away to have any immediate effect on summer temperatures but in winter an occasional general and sustained flow of air from the warm ocean waters to ;
the southeast results in considerable warming. ;
" Charlotte enjoys a moderate climate, characterized by cool winters and quite f warm summers. Because of the sheltering effect of the mountains winter tempera- ,
tures average about three degrees higher than at weather stations in the northern ,
Piedmont section of the state. Temperatures fall as low as the freezing point on a little over one-half of the days in the winter months. Winter weather is changeable, alternating between mild and cool spells, with occasional cold !
periods. Extreme cold is rare, below zero temperatures having occurred only '
four times since 1878. Snow is infrequent, occurring on the average only once ;
in each month, December through March. The first snowfall of the season usually >
comes in late November or December. Heavy snowfalls have occurred, but any ;
, appreciable accumulation of snow on the ground for more than a day or two is rare.
" Summers are long and quite warm, with af ternoon temperatures in the low ninetles i rather frequent. There is considerable cooling at night; however, as the. tempera- l ture usually falls to the upper 60's or low 70's by norming in the warmest months. j On the average, temperatures as high as 100 degrees are experienced about twice !
in three years. The growing season is also long, the average length of the
- annual freeze free period being a little over 230 days. On the average, the l last date in spring with a temperature of 24 degrees is February 21; of 28 ;
degrees, March 10; and of 32 degrees, March 21. In the fall, the average date l
of the first minimum temperature of 32 degrees is November 15; of 28 degrees, '
i 2-5 i i
November 29; and of 24 degrees, December 11.
"Ra i nf al l is generally rather evenly distributed throughout the year, the driest weather usually coming in the fall. Summer rainfall, which comes principally f rom thundershowers, is sometimes erratic, with occasional dry spells of one to three weeks' duration. The longest dry period on record was in the fall of 1886, when there were 40 consecutive days with less than
.01 of rain each day.
"Hu rricanes which have struck the coastal areas have not as a rule caused severe winds at Charlotte. However, a hurricane that moved northwestward across South Carolina, July 14, 1916, caused an hourly wind of 47 mph, five-minute wind of 60 mph and a fastest mile of 74 mph. The greatest rainfall with passage of a hurricane, 7.22 inches, occurred September 16-18, 1945."
Tornado frequency in the site area (square area about 125 miles by 125 miles) totaled 50 for the period 1916 to 1955. (l) To put in terms of probability for a point (nuclear plant), such a translation predicts a recurrence interval of 4,405 years . (2)
Nuclear Safety related structures and equipment will be designed for appro-priate combinations of wind velocities up to 360 mph, positive differential pressures of three psi and resistance to tornado missiles.
2.4.2 GE0 LOGY Studies of site and regional geology have been made to identify the various general and specific geologic features underlying the site and the surrounding area.
In general, the site is located in the Charlotte Belt within the Piedmont Geologic Province. This belt consists of metamorphosed sedimentary and volcanic rocks of which granitic gneiss is the principal intrusive unit.
At a later time gabbro, diorite and syntite were intruded into the Charlotte Belt rocks. Several ancient faults have been mapped within the region; the closest being the Kings Mountain Fault which is about 12.5 miles from the site as shown on Fi gure 2.4-1. None of the known faults have been active since the end of the Triassic Period, about 180 million years ago. Air photo studies were made of the general vicinity to verify and supplement geologic features shown on published maps and described in the published literature. These studies of the regional and vicinity geology revealed no geologic structures which would adversely affect the site.
Over 100 borings were made at the site to determine subsurface conditions under the major structures, and the suitability of those underlying materials from site development. Also, rock cores from borings made in the nearby Cowans Ford Dam area had been retained and were examined. An examination of rock cores from these sources and a petrographic analysis of rock samples generally confirmed the published literature relative to emplacement order, age and rock (I) United States Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau, Technical Paper No. 20, Tornado Occurrences in the United States, L. V. Wolford, Office of Climatology, Washington, D. C., Revised 1960.
(2)Thom: Tornado Probabil i t ies , Monthl y Weather Rev iew, Washington, D. C., 1963.
2-6
, -_ . .- -. -. _ -- - - . - . - . ~ - - . - ,, - .
t f
t t
types. The four major rock types found include dark green meta-gabbro, light ,
gray fine and medium grained granite, black and white fine grained diorite ,
and black and white coarse grained diorite. Though the geologic structure-at .
the site is very complex and old, there were no features in evidence which [
would present any problems in the design, construction and future operation j or safety of the plant. ,
t 2.4.3 SEISM 0 LOGY ,
i The regional ancient faults and geologic structures have not been active during l the past 180 million years. The historical record of earthquakes in the south- i east indicates that there is no known relatforship between known faults and historic earthquakes.
Detailed studies of the larger earthquakes near the site have been made using ,
newspaper accounts, interviews with older residents, examination of damage j which is still visible and a study of local geologic conditions. These studies [
indicate that the greatest seismic intensity the site has experienced due to !
these larger earthquakes has been VII, Modified Mercalli Scale, from the Charles- I ton earthquake, August 31, 1886, located 185 miles southeast of the site. [
f Three earthquake epicenters have been reported within 50 miles of the site. l All three of these earthquakes are reported to have produced an epicentral !
intensity of V, Modified Mercalli Scale.
No identifiable active faults that could be expected to produce surface dis- l placement have been recognized within 200 miles of the site or anywhere within the Piedmont Geologic Region of the site. ;
i The foundations of the Reactor and Auxiliary Buildings will be located on rock l which has excellent strength properties and small amplification of ground l motion resulting from an earthquake. The operating basis earthquake (l)has l
been given a value of acceleration of six percent of gravity at the top of rock -
and the design basis earthquake (2) has been given a value of acceleration of ,l twelve percent of gravity at the top of rock. I i
Seismologically the site is well suited for a nuclear station, j i
2.4.4 HYDROLOGY o
i Hydrology studies for site suitability included characteristics of vicinity .
streams and their associated drainage areas, Catawba River flood studies and i site groundwater.
The principal stream which drains the site is the Catawba River. The Catawba River begins at the Blue Ridge Divide near Old Fort, North Carolina, and flows :
in an easterly direction to a point near Millersville,' North Carolina. It i then flows in a soucherly direction and becomes the Wateree River near Camden, j South Carolina. The Catawba upstream of Wateree Dam has a length of approxi- i mately 240 miles and a drainage area of approximately 4,750 square miles.
(1) Plant designed for continuous operation during operating basis earthquake (2) Plant designed for safe shutdown during design basis earthquake 2-7
+
Lake Norman and Cowans Ford Dam are a part of Duke's Catawba River hydroelectric system containing eleven hydroelectric reservoirs and dams, and extending along approximately 221 miles of the Catawba River. Lake Norman forms the tailwater of Lookout Shoals Dam, located 34 miles upstream from Cowans Ford, and Mountain Island Lake forms the tailwater for Cowans Ford. Mountain Island Dam is located 15 miles downstream f rom Cowans Ford. Refer to Figure 2.4-2, Plan and Profile of the Catawba River.
A United States Geological Survey Gaging Station was located 30 miles upstream from the present location of Cowans Ford Dam near Catawba, North Carolina, until it was inundated by the waters of Lake Norman in 1962. The average discharge past this point for a period of record of 30 years and a drainage area of 1,535 square miles was 2,337 cubic feet per second (cfs) . The maximum flow recorded at this point was 177,000 cfs on August 14, 1940, and the minimum flow was 85 cfs occurring on September 15, 1957 The average flow at the Cowans Ford site is approximately 2,670 cfs. On July 16, 1916, the river reached a known flood stage of 44.1 feet at the USGS gage near Catawba, N. C. It has been estimated that this storm produced a flow of 199,500 cfs at the McGuire site on July 17, 1916.
Lake Norman has a surface area of 32,510 acres and a volume of 1,093,600 acre-feet at a surface elevation of 760 feet above mean sea level (MSL). Cowans Ford Dam's spillway is equipped with eleven gates with a total spillway capac-ity of 210,650 cubic feet per second with upstream water surface elevation at elevation 760.
The proposed site lies within the Piedmont Groundwater Province. All ground-water in this area is derived from precipitation. The depth to the water table depencs primarily on topography and rock weathering. The level of the water table varies from the ground surface in the valleys to more than 100 feet below the st rface on sharply rising hills.
The level of Lake Norman is the primary factor which governs the location and movement of the groundwater at the site. The elevation of groundwater coincides with the elevation of Lake Norman along the northern boundary of the site, and the groundwater moves downward in a south and southwesterly direction until it intersects the Catawba River and a small stream which drains into the Catawba.
There is no potential for harmful radioactive contamination of well water sup-plies via int roduct ion of Lake Norman waters into groundwater. The concentra-t ion of radioact ivity in Lake Norman is shown in Section 4.2 to be a small fraction of the limits imposed by AEC regulations. These concentrations would be further reduced by the ion exchange action of the soil through which the groundwater flows. Chemical analyses were made to determine the cation exchange capacity of the soils at the site. The results of these analyses have shown that any radioactive contaminant will move less rapidly through the soil than the groundwater (by a factor of 45 to 1 for strontium) because of the absorp-tion of the contaminant by the soil particles.
Groundwater studies indicate that the groundwater conditions, including local wells used for water supply, will not be adversely affected by the construction of McGuire Nuclear Station.
O 2-8
f u fJ f o
I /
~-e*--9 SECONDAR (Y COOLANT SYSTEM STEAM)
..t,'*.*.
- .*.*.::;:.'. t
'*
- HICH PRESSURE A LOW PRESSURE P:E$suRaER ' * - -
- INT. PRESSURE TURBINE TUR8INES i puup KEACTOR
"'" EY;f N!
r :
f Y,8b_!, -
- N _I
-- v m ,
- i
~'
U
.[ ' if,y,
! . f
- 2 :
i E._g g
3 "
4
!5 l s : % d
(* . :* .
( .*.....
- . . .. . M e
H 1
, iE i .
t
- . . . ; *. lf &.:. .t.7./1.. : :.;.. _ . ._ .'. .: .;t q;:[)..o
(-
1
.s- >.._.y.,..
+
4 GENERATOR / E x cit E R J f . . . . .c . . . . . . _ . f . ; . . - _ . . ; c . .: . .c_ . .. : . . .7 s
l j 7
. y _[_
l f.:..*.. .**.'*..*..?_ . *.
._..1;_c._...- D b*'--*8" C"W*' "*- ' ' ~~ ' I 'A- ; * -- * - *
- r - O
'. \ CONTROL )
C ~ ~- ~ - - -
! RODS pgyp j -
- CONDENSER NUCLEAR PUMP \ SECONDARY COOLANT SYSTEM f
\ ATER) RETURNED TO REACTOR BLDG WALL THE LAKE l
FROM THE L AKE PRIMARY COOLANT SYSTEM g.2 di PRIMARY COOL ANT p..'. .,. ..; j SECONDARY COOL ANT 9 !-il WAT E R l * * * .* *
- f e .1 STEAM SECONDARY COOLANT l l L AM E WAT ER WATE R t i FOR COOLING SIMPLIFIED FLOW DIAGRAM trouts McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION Figure 2.1 - 1
- _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . . - _ - -,_ _ . .-- . - - -. .- .. .~. - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - - _ - _ - _ _ .
2_ .m- . - g.f . Mr 3 R_
wg h
y . ' - S p g .'
4
- n o jjlj'y bnnbo, 7 I
, e w-. . n]., y* n~%4 ', 5 -,,'t'. a :1. , .~ -
gD r.
p g . -
,Y f ,f ' geg# ; b , . _ ' W ig s
- P-g -sokh
}?, 0, g, mo -a , y g{gg]gg8Yhk.
, fj .g \;' ggl{ }
(
y, 3 3
4 Aa
,jgn ;..
na%gggg -
g .9 m < .y; ~gg ps # g[ 2 .
w{ & > w m $ mumf'bbb 2&b b A ? $y y $
p y; p ~ %u on J -; p,l k 5Q ,: 1,gh.h .L?'a i &~i0 S$p -
0 - -
I M,p d d_2(@.a. @t,\-l,
.. - i
/,
- 5 N.
p hYQrv9r.%? {.'
. . .f E
vi jd,ys
% um l
~ ,
i',.
M. r; f E6Q,s,E.
- t, a# ;"\y~? ,. bedj.y
- .,~ cx jm n. .,7, 4.g]m - .ynmn-e; s
- e9.E f
,,.a C %g r n .. p\ y g
.p .
.m, w,gw . . -
j w-w.x .
.y ww
-~ ,;y x ,,
- A m-m',, [
$'j p/.y m.
Q ,'.. yn] gjn , . w p _ g.
e rg , ,e '
- n.
7.Q .; , - ~[,
c.m 7." ~" x .( s y- '. .
mf g, w ,.m,gy A,3,g '
en e, e s mm[romu;!m d en !a1
' yu n w sp,7%m.,9 c
\\ .
., c.
~~
- p ~+ c;r
~~
.l l iE m m-' e.. g m n-
. g/,
y J_.~m. .
~
, c&/ / lhY y -u, f
f S f ;nf h,' f R\;MK*"^?(N _h$f
% : ) mL s
%W fE W(
+g.y % sy DW. % wW,a.w ;i ^ \yy %u<M - 4 (;%
.,xpw.,~
k 'U ,:l.
n w ,s e .
. um,+_L -
t .e s
t--+%
..c 4'
m "lh xs %$
,: ! g s %- ? y ,@ ] fhljl w
. 14.tq d p ;q'.. ms_a 40mjuulwi pp . 4e , t oo u wa . idku{am'h y.-qp..om
.n - e 4 t, ew /. %%, x f Ml ja j' M h; " ;, x-.. y]ti a n.u [\, [ -_pqh .m35 -bF]k( l 3 n; y . .
A, xy ] p mf
^"f m
, so
\- ~
.( My a n .m )
ffd
.- ) ++
.l.
wc / - . . )%,y sa .as-y- vpv . g-gs /.
Ls,swe v - s 4 . ,., . . > . ue 4 Q:;-- ..
^ : ca %e ,
--+ f
. j-
~[T! t N 1J g I i;
/
.n %o
,. NN i; %
[
\ \(', -w ur J &.
Q, 4 -
x -
- M..%/Wk]~/'
m
' 't: ,/4 . 'l /.
b, mkm
' """g'%
'n WR
,Q = +\
j~ j_
\( y\. / /j 1n K
] < , .
/
s \3 3 T ,.e' -
wm j y i, N r -t,,...
p A
__.s 3
%k q ELTON
/
v/, c,
)
n
=
-,a-
/
un %,-
m , : o,.e x g &ow , -
Ns4 % c n .p i
. a
/** /$ ; ' ,'
- /)?' v 1 4
\ % s
~
L
~
~lW~w y s 3 b '% r ' u .c D ;:
'vs\x L7 _. . s s s v 'c=
,,[/
i *1 8 %
x
\ unm )-g.u.m
,. % - n, o m-. vs. A y, \
/1
~A--'
Af
~ ,, ,/ x s %r,%- s' ,t e.& w/;^6'f, -Q Q :tP' .,2 l o y Jimc l
,i
%Q \
'~
s
'\N,N ^
sn., , , , .e r i .. .- siaTutt mL L s I'" I" '"
- b ,.m. *ammaes.
- OUNT AIR 1 ,5 g h ,
[m '~'
[/ ' '
~
h '
,, . we.., e 0- - '" "'
% - A Yf !
~
,et
- l' j nh-
-J U' t / -
\
Wrv.f:e \c 7 itM f N Nc O '
,,' b,, ,
? d3 '
%" % 7 7 , w4 m [t,- [ g ng ,,, < [ fe l e- '\N\N$b'M,f ht L
,, 5%
u d u. ib u f' l , .g O 'y ,,a ,,-
Liu{u 11, ,, ., , ,1,, ,, i t; ,
< /,/ \ c. +- -- /oq;ys
,m. c\,1,uWo <' "s ss"
- N sr.a , e n vis t k ypS.t f ei ! v; 7: p p "^"' "" kl \ Qg
- ' TC c.
4 J ,
- (c ;34 . a- 4 (j
,'l / s I w--
-M% ,,mn ['g"Mi \.
) [' [ N. -. j ;
} %I. .
/
- ( = o
- ' e,c s d < ,'
k'
(
x e N4jj' - ma p_e v j subwL
,r' -
f\ - -
fp.p.3 /~h3 p]
7 - ,
/
f f -
3,r' ' \ ,.) ) ,,
(
,t ,,
/-
+ NOOH SpHf 3 ,
s ,_ f
/ W
, . '. ,q , we
?\
\
g g_ .,
-/ .. ,6
( \
}
,) y a,/
g;
/ '
}y s -
\
,, ,- }
'\> \g)' a ns,cw
'j 5+-ag( (,\( -7 j , 'v N9 (
}
I v i \ '7 , , , * .* % ' * !
s \ '.
5 88, . /,-
4N j,,
'N s ]y- g i , 7, g ( z
~
, '.s,a
" 5,bihpnom (
g \ oo {
- k oumpN h 5067 f AG j
\ g \ *
- ' *s ,
, ' ;e lfp t - . \ .
) /'
l 775 * , , (,- f ' g.e ,#
1
. ,' / / ..
a.ll uun y. u ; au .,, . ) , u nu u,uy.u j,Ij,.535o "7 j(qfw
}u, k, % f Avfl1E p&% ^~ >
Q ,__ q p u' -
4 '
/ -
d' [ . U nmu f [.
/l' dl l s u L~J ! - : II E ,
(
Q[\f __
%s'#N"- f 4 1
[ s hiacia, o / 7s ~~T ' / '
]
[ d F [ . Z .T'.r q p Qf _
- )
pjo{.
go,,
s,[ompcg us per.o,- .a cornmene
[ ,
' ,1 5 "^"""'"""" 9
,.- l . kNr a % ta(7- -
tM% ' " " "'"'""'
Caou' 5' and'"G ' c o"o5.r.cyet t 1
[ }
C~ 'a ' n'a m
j
/venho.
(N Q' /
' "< SC ALE 1:1,000,000 Lod
[
,,m.,n.:
g, CONTOUF INil P V AL N ,97 L f,h ,
.g
-f) / e 'te' d
1' f ,[ v H GHf ST T F & F AIN ele. obc r s
,g/y
+ #
an ,
l ,, '
........,h a _,_, ,
4' / imoted m 3 3 ' 4 6 N 8 2 ' 16 W !
' " 4 *"
- i * ~t
{ j v i. , '
j 2nng30\ f
- l H D 40' e n o' o" .d254 _J I
/ App
- c a .,no'c e .c*chu- Ucc
[#/C AMDf N ,,
q
/,, ,_
'g % y [ -' . ,/ pu m caer.uns we ,n u o,eo t., ,,,,,,,,n ;
/, [. <
'""'~
, non,[ . .a : hN # '"* '"' k" "'" "'"' " 'l
- t *. g h, v GENER AL ARE A MAP
<[V McGUIRE PJUCLEAR STATION :
i i \ [ , t' /f'! s, o{
Iso I4o Iso l,no ____"'
to loo lio ino I ,o
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ n . e ,
I me m esseen i
1 l
)
n<
')' ,., / d-4 T,
\ x /'
,/ .. _. ! ' . \ ,
U'
'L's'%,
i
~
) [ 3x .
s [ /' 4 s, .
j., '
{m,(
f m, / G,\\ t j \
- t
J. '
m, Y
/ , .' 5,.'D (s, j f '
N l
l 'N , ' ,' Qs ? : )
}
j.
i f
) i \., )
.,/. : t
/ ( / .I f
? !
/ %f f.
t g U
. 'f . _ ' '
(
h% t 5'
)') ,
/ 'f .
,x .. J
\j o
t_
k b
,gs '\\ ;,
~
' /
I) r ', Q .g-. _.
g.
= -' 1, ft/ je 4Tc
. -) , s,; p'O\ j y, p,e sq
~ l p ( ',/
,M- jg N (
s ^%%/s ~
K'# '
/ ,
, ,( ).
-1 N s' % 1
- y. %, ,, . n ..
- g. ,
Nf- 4 6:,' !
gg@ r' g- (4; {^]
- 3. > ,
_. ~;, c-
% f y*.*;*,l = /, g*/ %, ' %,; ::n;gg% 8q .~ s
.s
- p p=aom- g,, . +;
.L s s
,r
.t
/ .
y) .,
t l
_.,,m....
one nas ' %
N,.,,,A, Ae 7
"*',)
'h\ \
- Q:( l
( r,
\.
l-Q stacea . ' '.
~ \ {\ ' '
n' E '%
\ NN %(y r
4 .. m. .
!t MM
, /
,~
Q W ^x,n, .-
inL.p( (e yf
%,N } "cs, \ ,' \ s >g.
l/ .*
' qj D..
' ./
,/ '
i w , p, f s ..
\' ~ \,
,y.
_.j' e
/u,, -
~~^
v-
\
%=, u; J, . ,,
S
, i >-
s , ,
5\ \, -> , ' ' '
- g f
(! .
\
hh {t -
~l j ,.
j
- ' 'e /p; .
- 1 ~
) ( J,,'l, j ,
r
\ .
gl ., . - . . ,
c',
- l. _ ' gl L .
's
-~ v .y n. _' \\> e m ,'. f t,, f , -
~ -
3 s y ; . l-js - -
*~v
, ~. % l ;
, w:_
s-.. %. .->'. j 1 % n,, ; }1 ; j7.-;
\ ./
l >- / l y; !. " ' i./',
/
',)~
l i: ,
./:
.l
/. '
jr ' .y(z s l ,~ -
.i
+
1 r
.g i, .
I 4n M b(jQ. y. .
;l_ q' l ~'%JN?
.,,c , ,. . , .c
&) .i w
.j' l
=~
- ' w./~ n< f !
%,., y4p:y'1.
3 :;/ :
.7 (r,_qbS u. ':.:., ' ~ , 6 m N.g' ..
(c,.~ c.- .#/ t p w . e
; 7., u f 'v 0 G- L x ; )_ l gwe . ,. y ,
it 3 // rs.') s i ) h i' i
^
jbf 7 1 i% 1=F) ( ;- !
.s 11
./,
( (i n o . i > y ' s . 'N { '.> '
/ '
, r
\'
' ))t.
/
_ 1. ._.- 7 - . . , k' ,. ww 7 m Wg~ } y i .
.Js\L 4s s 1 \ fa x
l
.=.,. j l. .. xA
. y '
.., ; _-.,_. a. a vs .
x t\J / Yw s f e = e L*T" ( ANSTEC ! C [_">g3 'Q , , 1 APERTURE CARD
;b %l$m N,3 -
q"Q % f}7-'){f;s V
~q
,j,] ,1A
. == == = p~ A .. , , n, Also Ava.lable i on
- 7. . S pR - , ( g ,,/ - l- i, Aperturo Card
,s
. _ .-~l g-gef=?W j , ..
~~ x~~ "
c , 1 1 as - .mq j. ; > ,q - / h y'*%., 4 (
- g. 7
% s , -
-(, (., Q ) \ } .
/-
t .>.
.I n' -
, ;, J q7 *
[,J,- E. - -' '
\ _
j i
~
fg10% . * . .
,/' / c'ada L' '-
I f, W) '/ , 4rg p =
"";a;l"
.g
,a ,
# [0; ~' kf) PLANT SITE AREA
%,/ , z 3
.'v.s , , ; ;;/ .
m., t7
/
'l
'.l
/~47
/*
i WQ Us CONTROLLED ACCESS AREA t
,i \ s ;
~- -
,.l ~
J' ~- l 4- [, ' PLOT PLAN AND SITE BOUNDARY I o m ox . ud-qg r McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION : Figure 2.2 - 2 r
, ,n. - . -- . , . . -
( g% '
/ VA. ,,
g + N.C.
\
Q. 1 9 -
+
b gDFATagg G FAUL7 g V 4 i b G p .. / tj N a
, s.c.
10 0 s
/ 1 v
s S tb # A
/l - . . - N.C.
/
3, g - -. (
'. LEGEND .
l e ,
@- BREVARD BELT 4 3
na
-INNER PIEDMONT BELT >
[L T 4 E- KING S MT. B E LT ,> p , v6
-CHARLOTTE BELT p
A 7e >v r>4 't.'
~ "' ^
rv' . . . .*-. ' , . -
~
* - CAROLINA SLATE BELT
# ' :' Y$.*. ':,A v>y *::. ,. (
- e v a ^ .
(.- ~
@- TRI ASSIC BASIN
-UNCLASSIFIED FAULT o
5
' ^
to is 20 25 . .- v "
*I*[*'.i.
Y. SCALE IN MILES
~,
,2% .- ..::^ 7
~ ~ . .
- n. 4:n.4: /
O\,,5 ,. .. . , - . . y4 .J 4 4a
- g Q A;" .-
. . ,9 9,9 g\ Dst. ( . * , .
sTON1
/ /'g$Y ,
=
, . .. !:::.N;.
*.:..: :.i. :.
N :.:
- .. .i.:::::.::.:. ..
.:. l r... .
.o . . . . ......: ....
p _' s^ -
> p s * ..
s::::::::..* :.: m*-
. ......*.......:. . +.
./ *'*
) V *
- p n<
t vy V ar n - 7 a t. 7r >v a a >.v ^ . .:::.Q....................,*.:*:.i:f.:~..
"n .J* jib'. :i*:*itt:: 'i::: .i *
[a :.: :a c c ^ t r e>, n s > t y y y v
. . . . . . , '..........s,-
v v :. .' y. .. :: . . s .:: . . ' :::. t? ..'
.M f v s <
n - s ........ :: . ?. :.:.:. .e..... , .,,
. . .: .:.... > . : . :: . . . .. * , J ..:.
t
- . : ..*. ::.y
. ... .*.. .:.v.:..:..~..
. . . :* . . . : :::~-
1 y . 6 s ' r
. s::l::.::: ..p V...:.l......
. .... . . . .' . . . . . . . . . .. .m.p.
.*::s. :*
>c , t O. * : s.,.s.. ... .*
.. ..............u..~.
f :.
- .:*/. .. u.~..
p . v
, <. .. ., . m. _......
.~
r c v , . n a . : : . .. .. .f :...:.:..
..... - ..=
A > s *
- y. *y::.. ::. :::::::. .;: .. . .;;;.; :n:'
x t
..t v.: ::. .'
. u
.~ .
^'5 , <h
....e .
4 r
.n......... $'v n , ,n ,' > b
- 0.
- .:{.; ........!lll....=*...
.s:$:: . lll. l!i-..............' n k 9 %
a< , ," s# ,$...i.i.*:.i.'/.:fj!:.: 1:/././/,:ie:.,t::}y.::lll.+:.?';"g
.::-(+l.::'.) .._gl r
v 0stTU n v e ........ . : r>a...
, P v <> .. ... .
..... ~4..
3 Y y ..*
.* . * * +++
a P .4 3 3 . - u. . . .n. . ( 4
,v t n ... . . ... . -. .
> < ^,:* ![ii::f}q ?': *9.,'. , . :il . i'. # ~~
r '
}.f.,i:::1
. . . . . . . , , . . ..:!! : . . . ~ . . .
v >v e v cW4 2;- .
,v<' +
v c .. . a ::l.:.!.: :::i::::::!!?d..:+:.;:0. .!? a ' n,a v> a< : %. ,t %er
- +:4 . 9 d. i .. :... :.::::
x :
" , " " r ' <*
h< r n r , a 'a " ' .9: ..:s::v:.g::.::.:. v:.): :..~ c < i:.i '.5:. : /////.{ i:!i.!.3: + .RTUME y 9' na
- p :::
' * ' :c.::1::;
- u..;;::.av.
- . :ii. y..=ii:g...:.:t -: y a v a. v :.< v r v T..
; :.. :i:::::!::!:::::i::s;!::r:c:::: r:%..mvanate aponure cara on 9 n , ,
, n<>^,
v
,.s .:.c.::::
- .:v.::~:.:
. . . . - u.
~:.:...;.;.i".a.:.:::F
- c. . . . .uv .: :.:.:l -
< >y t- ..
. . . ~.. . . . . . . . . ., .LAW
* .. .ENGINEERING
. . . . . ~ . . TESTING . CO.
7
>v< '7 y V A t'.*. it*,*.!.. : :/: *
- . ! * :-l: * *lv*,. *:.*. . ...
- .., :, iiiCliit CH ARLOTTE. NORTH CAROLINA 1Y * . y
~
s t
.y p *::*::ll: j:;'*:i*.
!. t[.in ; eM
.'...,,.. ^
p-
..+ n ? .:: . ~~
1
. . . .::. . . . . . . . \
. r n ,v. . : :.... :::. ,
(.::. .a< 9 > r v
... v. . .v. ::
. .::. . . :. S
.* q .... .....
REGIONAL GEOLOGIC MAP
'
- l.
- . I5fbl * *$*'.
...... ... ........ o m, McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION
## :.*.'. *.7.:..*.*::
- ! .'.: : :::..... (, .
Figure 2.4 - 1 9 Olo919 L Q3 -
~
OVERSIZE DOCUMENT l PAGE PULLED .- . l l SEE APERTURE CARDS l 1 1 NUMBER OF OVERSIZE PAGES FILMED ON APERTURE CARDS ! l 440(o@olc'_ot: APERTURE CARD /HARD COPY AVAILABLE FROM RECORDS AND REPORTS MANAGEMENT BRANCH I 1 l l l <
^
s C '; TABLE OF CONTENTS
%)
Section Page Number
- 3. LAKE NORMAN GENERATING COMPLEX AND ITS ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES 3-1
3.1 DESCRIPTION
AND MULTIPLE USE FEATURES 3-1 3.2 COORDINATED PLANNING 3-3 3.3 RECREATION 3-5 3.4 FISHING 3-6 3.5 WILDLIFE 3-7 3.6 WATER SUPPLY 3-8 3.7 FLOOD CONTROL 3-9 3.8 FORESTRY AND S0ll CONSERVATION 3-12
,n i ) 3.9 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SANITATION 3-13 g
3-i
)
3 LAKE NORMAN GENERATING COMPLEX AND ITS ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES
3.1 DESCRIPTION
AND MULTIPLE USE FEATURES Lake Norman and its impounding structure, Cowans Ford Dam were completed by Duke Power Company in 1963. This event marked the final major step in a com-prehensive plan to develop the hydroelectric power potential of the Catasba-Wateree River system in North and South Carolina. The plan was conceived by Duke's founders in the early 1900's and was implemented in stages between 1904 and 1967 with the construction of eleven reservoirs and thirteen hydroelectric generating plants having a total installed capacity of 804,940 kw. The fourth and final hydro unit was installed at Cowans Ford in 1967 to give that plant an installed capacity of 372,000 kw. In 1935, the extent of the basin's development was recognized by Mr. A. E. Morgan, then Chairman of the Board of the Tennessee Valley Authority. Mr. Morgan wrote in the December,1935, issue of Civil Engineering:
"On the Catawba River in North and South Carolino, the Duke Power Company has worked out a completely unified development for power with results, I understand, that reflect great credit on the techni-cal skill involved in that great undertaking."
Attached Figure 2.4-2, Plan and Profile of Catawba River shows the completed hydro development scheme which utilizes 86 percent of the availabic head in the included reach of the river. I Beginning in the 1920's and continuing through current engineering design for McGuire Station, Duke has further developed the water resources of the Catawba Valley by using three of the hydro reservoirs for condenser cooling water at three large steam-electric generating plants. McGuire Station will be the fourth such plant on Catawba reservoirs and the second on Lake Norman. Duke's recently completed 2,137,000 kw Marshall Steam Station has been operating on Lake Norman since 1965 and has, for five consecutive years, been recognized as the most efficient steam-electric plant in the United States. Lake Norman continues to serve as the site for one of the most comprehensive research pro-jects yet undertaken to gather scientific data on thermal effects of large steam-electric plants on lakes and reservoirs. This project is discussed in Section 4.1.4. Before Lake Norman was built, Duke's engineering and environmental studies showed that the reservoir was capable of supporting more than 10,000,000 kw of thermal cooling capacity. Existing Marshall Station and proposed McGuire ! Nuclear Station will together utilize less than half the projected safe cooling capacity of Lake Norman. Additional sites on the east shore of the lake will be developed as needed and will utilize the cooling water. resource of the' Lake ! Norman generating complex. Such development will be done in full compliance l with then'applicabic state and federal water and air quality standards, best availabic research data and operating experience from existing plants and Duke's long standing commitment to maintain a high quality environment in its service area. j i '- The following comments were made on September 29, 1964, by North Carolina Gover-nor Terry Sanford as he took part in dedication ceremonies for newly completed 3-1 i
Lake Norman and Cowans Ford Dam:
"Because of its conviction in regard to the steady economic growth of this area (and) the consequently increasing demands for electricity, Duke Power Company today announces for the first time the full dimensions of its development plans for the Lake Norman area. It is a program calling ,
for the construction of ten million kilowatts of new steam-electric genera- ' ting capacity around the shores of Lake Norman and designed to make this vast project a well spring of power for the growing Piedmont Crescent."
"Now under construction (is) the first of this new era of generating plants, Plant Marshall, located on the shore of the lake near Terrell in Catawba County. Other plants will follow Marshall until a total of four or five generating centers have been built around Lake Norman."
"Whereas the first two units at Plant Marshall will use coal as fuel it is entirely conceivable that other capacity in this new program will utilize the energy of the atom and be nuclear powered."
The Lake Norman generating complex is geographically and electrically near the center of the Duke service area and of the Piedmont section of North and South Ca rol i na . This area is recognized as one of the fastest growing market and population regions in the United States and yet it continues to be considered one of the most desirable areas in which to live and work. The continued orderly and prudent development of the water resources of the Catawba Valley including the Lake Norman generating complex is deemed to be in the best inte-rests of maintaining a high quality environment in the geographic region served by Duke Power Company. O 3-2
t b 3.2 COORDINATED PLANNING \ As long-range planning and orderly implementation of work were hallmarks of the development of the Catawba for hydro-power, so has carefully coordinated planning continued to characterize the development of the Lake Norman genera-t ing complex. Relocations of and alterations to roads, water works and other public and pri-vate facilities necessitated by the construction of Lake Norman were provided for and coordinated with a number of public agencies. These included the North i Carolina State Highway Commission who jointly with Duke held a number of public j hearings on relocation of roads. Duke worked with governing bodies of three ' municipalities to relocate and upgrade raw water pumping facilities and sani- ! tary waste facilities. Detailed coordination was also carried out with a rail- I road, a gas pipeline company and a number of telephone, electric and gas utili- . ties in relocation of their facilities. There was and continues to be careful ! coordination with the North Carolina State Board of Health, Board of Water and l Air Resources and a number of county health departments in matters of public ! health, water supply, mosquito control and disposal of solid waste and sewage. j Before beginning of filling of Lake Norman, an association of three county i planning boards and a city-county planning commission was formed for the purpose of coordinating land use planning and regulations in all of the four [ counties around Lake Norman. l This body studied land use patterns, zoning needs, health and sanitation require- ; ments, transportation access and acted as a general coordinating group between ! local and state governmental agencies and Duke Power Company. In 1962, before the lake was filled, a General Development Plan was published by the four-county - group. The majority of the recommendations made in this report were adopted and l are being implemented by the individual counties. While the four-county assocla- l tion is no longer functioning, it made a substantial contribution to the orderly , development of the Lake Norman area. Duke worked closely with the planning bodies i of the four counties and with a number of local bodies in matters of solid waste ; disposal and control of litter, boating safety, waterway markers and area develop- i ment. ! 1 Duke has historically worked closely with individual property owners whose lands { or residences were affected by necessary power developments. Many of the com-pany's land purchases date back to the days of a predominately agricultural economy. Duke has normally been willing to purchase not only the needed low ! lying bottom lands but also the then less valuable uplands which were outside l reservoi r l imi ts. This often allowed a farmer to relocate his entire opera- I tion to a nearby area rather than have to give up agricultural work due to i loss of his most productive lands. By means of land trades, fai r purchasing 'l practices and careful planning, Duke has been able to assist many families in relocation to nearby comparable areas. While there were some landowners and - residents who were not entirely satisfied with sale of their properties, it l is significant that of 1200 individual property transactions completed in development of Lake Norman, only about two percent of these acquisitions were ) made through condemnation. l 1 In 1961, fourteen years before the currently planned operating date for McGuire l Unit 1, Duke made provisions for development of a future steam-generating site 3-3 i i
I i adj acen t t o Cowan s Fo rd Dam b y con s t ruc t i on o f a l ow- l eve l intake structure aid cooling water condui ts. This work was coordinated with and approved in advance by the Federal Power Commission and the North Carolina Department of l W3ter and Air Resources. Installation of necessary facilities to utilize the cold waters from the lowest levels of Lake Norman to minimize thermal effects , would not have been practical after the lake was filled. Thus, the combination ! of long-range planning and early investment in needed facilities will provide means to operate the McGuire units in compliance with current environmental standards which were not drafted until many years after these provisions were made. l I O 3-4
i 3.3 . RECREATION Public recreation usage of Lake Norman waters has been encouraged by Duke in many ways. Consequently public, private and Company developed recreational ! facilities have become firmly established and widely used in all of the four county areas contiguous to Lake Norman. Appendix 3A, " Lake Norman - The Inland Sea" describes boating, fishing and , water sports usage of the lake, public access and recreational areas, fishing and boating regulations and water safety rules, parks, campgrounds and access areas. Also described is the program to make much of the company-owned shore- ,
~
line available for leased recreational lots. There are illustrated some of the cottage sites that have been developed by individuals under this program. In 1962, before Lake Norman filled, Duke donated to the State of North Carolina , a 1328 acre tract of land for development as a state park. Now known as Duke Power State Park, this facility has become very popular over a wide area and is continuing to be developed in stages by the state to meet the growing ; recreation demands. I I f 1
+
I [ i i 3-5 : h
3.4 FISHING Even before it completed filling in 1963, Lake Norman was beginning to gain a O reputation as a fine sport fishery. Native species including largemouth bass, crappie and a variety of bream and sunfish experienced such rapid population growth that stocking was unnecessary. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission has subsequently stocked several non-native species including the striped bass, the gizzard shad and the threadfin shad, the latter two species being forage fish for game varieties. Sport fishing is not only one of the major recreation activities on the lake, but also an important contributor to the economy of lake-side communities through sales of boats, tackle, fuel, food and other supplies. In 1970, the North Carolina Championship Bass Tournament was held on Lake Norman and is scheduled to be held again in May, 1971, under sponsorship of Sportsman's Shows of the Carolinas. Primarily to enhance fish life downstream of Cowans Ford Hydro Plant, Duke con-structed an underwater weir to insure that water discharged through the hydro units would be drawn from the oxygen-rich upper levels of Lake Norman. This structure, which was built at a cost of over $480,000, has functioned as planned to maintain levels of dissolved oxygen downstream which have served to support and enhance the fisheries resources of the Catawba. O O 3-6
3.5 WILDLIFE in cooperation with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, in 1962 Duke established the Cowans Ford Waterfowl Refuge downstream of Lake Norman. No hunting is allowed by the commission in this refuge and consequently sub-stantial numbers of migratory waterfowl use this area in transit and on a semi-permanent bas is , in all other areas around the shoreline of the lake, state hunting-fishing regu-lations are monitored and enforced by the game protectors of this commission. In addition to geese and ducks, a variety of small game including rabbit, quall, racoon, fox, dove, muskrat, opossum and other species is taken by licensed hun-ters. Deer and turkeys are occasionally sighted, but there is no legal hunting season for these in this area of the state. 1 1 l l l l 3-7 )
\
3.6 WATER SUPPLY The towns of Mooresville, Davidson and Huntersville, North Carolina, take their raw water supplies f rom Lake Norman. Charlotte, North Carolina, takes its raw water supply from Mountain Island Lake at a point about eleven miles downstream f rom Lake Norman . The large volume of Lake Norman assures these four towns and cities an almost unlimited supply of high quality raw water. Duke has never made any charge for raw water withdrawn f rom its reservoirs for municipal use. A total of 21 cities and towns in North and South Carolina, having a total population of almost one-half million obtain their water supplies f rom , Duke reservoirs . l O L l l } l I i ) i ) O 3-8
37 FLOOD CONTROL There are four hydroelectric reservoirs upstream of Lake Norman (Lakes James, Rhodhiss, Hickory and Lookout) which were built and placed in operation from 1919 to 1928. Lake Norman and Cowans Ford Station were placed into commercial operation in 1963. Allowances for flood capacity, freeboard and wave run-up ' for these reservoirs were provided in accordance with sound and accepted engi-neering principles in use during these periods. These hydro developments were reviewed by the Federal Power Commission and Corps of Engineers as a prerequi-site of the issuance of FPC License No. 2232 in 1958 covering these developments ' plus six other developments downstreain. (See Figure 2.h-2, Sect ion 2.) Two notable floods have occurred within recent times in the Catawba River Basin. The July, 1916, flood resulted in record flood flows upstream of Catawba, North Carolina, which is about 30 miles upstream of Cowans Ford Dam. The August, 1940, flood resulted in record flood flows downstream of Catawba, North Carolina. Geological Water Supply Paper 1066, " Floods of August, 1940, in the Southeastern U. S.," describes the 1940 flood and credits the four upstream reservoi rs with reducing flood flows as follows: i Maximum Mean Hourly Outflow ! Rese rvo i r Plant Inflow (cfs) (cfs) Lake James Bridgewater 141,760 43,700 Lake Rhodhiss Rhodhiss 167,740 104,000 ( Lake Hickory Oxford 183,620 158,060 : Lake Lookout Lookout 191,320 177,400 ; The paper further states "The storage in these reservoirs undoubtedly prevented a very severe and destructive flood in South Carolina." The flood flow at Catawba, North Carolina, was 177,000 cfs. Physical data on Cowans Ford and developments upstream are as follows-Individual Cumulative l Drainage Area Drainage Area Development (Sq. Miles) (Sq. Miles) Bridgewater 380 380 Rhodhiss 710 1090 0xford 220 1310 Lookout 140 1450 Catawba (Gaging Stat ion) 85 1535 Cowans Ford 340 (Lookout to 1790 Cowans Ford) 3-9 l i
In 1968, the engineering firm of Cha rles T. Main, Inc. of Boston, Massachusetts, was retaiaed to review the major storms on the Catawba Basin and to evaluate the safety of the dams. This report covered the five developments mentioned above plus six hydro developments downstream of Cowans Ford. Eight storms were studied:
- a. August, 1940, a s it actually occurred.
I
- b. August, 1940, with 90 percent surface runoff.
- c. August, 1955, transposed " Diane"* with runof f as it occurred.
- d. August, 1955, t ransposed " Diane" with 90 percent surface runof f.
l
- e. August, 1955, transposed " Diane" rainfall data and unit hydrographs based on storm "Gracie'em with retention based on no preceding rainfall.
- f. Same as (e.) except retention based on 24 hours prior rainfall.
- g. July, 1916, with retention based on no prior rainfall.
- h. July, 1916, with retention based on 24 houre prior ra infa ll . l New England hurricane
'" September, 1959, hurricane storm over Catawba Basin The Main report included the following comparison of Probable Maximum Precipi-tation (PMP) with rainfall from the July, 1916, stonn and the transposed Diane storm. The precent of PMP shown is based on 90 percent runoff f rom these storms divided by 70 percent runoff from PMP.
July, 1916, Storm Olane D ra i na ge 48-Hour PMP 48-Hour % of 48-Hour % of A rea Inches Precipitation PMP Precipitation PMP Sq. Miles Inches Inches 500 28 18 83 17 78 1000 26 17 84 16 79 4750 19 8 54 12 81 The Main report concluded that the developments from Cowans Ford upstream had adequate f reeboard during floods except for Rhodhiss. Subsequently the concrete bulkheads at Rhodhiss have been raised 2'-6" to assure its adequate freeboard. Having a yard elevation of 760 feet above mean seal level, the McGuire site is just downstream of the east earth section of the Cowans Ford Dam. Pertinent elevations and flood levels are tabulated below: La ke No rma n , no rma l f u l l pon d l eve l - - - - - - - E l eva t i on 760 Level of maximum flood waters - - - - - - - - - - Elevation 764.1 Top of Cowans Ford Dam, concrete sections - - - - Elevation 770 3-10
i g-~) Top of Cowans Ford Dam, earth embankments - - - - Elevation 775 I ( j Minimum freeboard, flood level to top of earth , embankments - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Elevation 10 9 ft. ! In accordance with our recent understanding of AEC requirements, we have retained l Charles T. Main, Inc. to prepare additional flood studies based on the following: ;
- a. Calculation of the Probable Maximum Flood on the drainage basin upstream '
of Cowans Ford and an assessment of its effects on the McGuire site. I
- b. Calculation of a Standard Project Flood on the drainage basin upstream of !
Cowans Ford coincident with a failure of any single upstream dam and an i assessment of its effects on the McGuire site. 1 in summary, Duke's hydro developments upstream of the McGuire site, which have been licensed by the FPC, will safely pass and control major floods. Results of additional current flood studies, being performed by Charles T. Main will be available upon request af ter the studies are completed. i P h 6 i i i i
'I 5
1 h I I l
)
i 3-11 i
3.8 FORESTRY AND 50ll CONSERVATION Duke Power's comprehensive, scientifically-managed forestry program plays a vital part in the preservation and restc ration of the Piedmont Carolinas' environment. The company owns a large amount of property that is not presently needed for the production or delivery of electricity. The land is, however, very impor-tant to Duke's watershed management. To make sure this land is definitely separated from the land for utility purposes, Duke has transferred it to a wholly-owned subsidiary, Crescent Land and Timber Corporation. Crescent is continuing the policies of watershed management, recreation and conservation established long ago by Duke Power. Through these policies, thousands of acres of land in the watershed of the Lake Norman generating com-plex have been placed under scientific forest management to maintain soil stability, rebuild topsoil, eliminate erosion and return worn-out farm land to productive use. Currently, Crescent is planting seedling trees at a rate of over two million each year. In the past 30 years, Duke Power and its subsidiary have planted over 38 mill ion trees on 49,812 acres. Besides soil stability and erosion elimination, these trees contribute to a good environment in other ways. For instance, each acre of planted southern pine returns between two and three tons of organic matter to the soil each year. Several years ago, Duke started a program for utilizing the cleared land under existing transmission lines as cover and food for small wild game. Duke offered owners of the land under the transmission lines a free and complete job of pre-paring the land for planting and growing various kinds of vegetation. On newly constructed transmission lines, at the request of the landowners, Duke clears, plants and fertilizes the rights-of-way so that quail, rabbits and other small game are provided cover and food. In one year the company buys 100,000 pounds of seed and over a million pounds of fertilizer just for this purpose. Under both these programs, hundreds of miles of transmission 1ines rights-of-way have been restored to attractive, productive use. Duke's new construction activities often involve large scale land clearing and carth excavation operations. For years it has been company practice to restore grass and tree cover to such disturbed areas in early stages of construction to reduce erosion and downstream siltation. Roadway banks, earth borrow pits, slopes of dams and other earth structures and banks of canals are thus provided with vegetation cover and restored to a stable condition and pleasing appearance. O 3-12
3.9 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SANITATION \^~) The ent ire basin of Lake Norman was completely cleared of all t rees and brush before impoundment. The basin was under continual surveillance by state and local public health officials and Duke Power Company's Environmental Health Department before clearing operations were begun. Through filling operations, surveillance is continued today. Mosquito surveys were conducted before and during filling of the reservoir. Control measures were introduced when necessary during clearing and filling operations. A larviciding program for mosquito control is carried on each year during mosquito breeding season; usually April through October. No insecticides are used in larviciding operations. A mixture of No. 2 diesel fuel and transformer oil is used as recommended by the North Carolina State Medical Entomologist. As a result of coordinated development of sanitary standard; with four counties prior to lake construction, other sanitary conditions around Lake Norman are excellent. The majority of the residents 1ive in modern homes with approved sewage disposal systems and protected water supplies. Solid waste disposal is the sanitary problem of the greatest magnitude in the greater Lake Norman area today, but the problem is spotty and not of a general nature. The problem is improving as both local and state health officials are aware. For his work in solid waste management, the sanitarian for two of the counties surrounding Lake Norman received the 1969 award given by the North g Carolina Board of Health for the most outstanding project of an environmental health nature. Public Health Personnel of Duke Power Company work closely on a continuing bas is with officials of local health departments and the North Carolina State Board of Health c,n matters concerning mosquito control, water supplies, sanitary waste, solid waste and any other public health problem. O 3-13
._..._-m._.. m. . . _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ = . . . ~ _ . . . _ . _ . . - . . - . . - . . _ _.__. _._ __.~.._ __.--- - .
h d a a .i TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Number 4 4 4 3A RECREATION } !. " LAKE NORMAN - THE INLAND SEA" I a W d t 8 i !9 J a a i l 1 i i f 4 I r e l
).
I L l - l 6 l 3A-i l I
I mr a S 9P a a xe c) orman THE INLAND SEA l
. \.
T s- _,p V
)
[~;n.. , k.. ..
.W 7 N
{ ye <
-v-m .
h"' 6
,. w: N .,,
-v..
P \x E . i ~ %- o. . . .
/
C w e 4 %.,a k h , M< ., . J Qw yi n &.#.%h4% .ig I .
~,
w; y ,n., i . .e y n. .w . ~.,.., a a.: - - - D .,,-.n., J.kn ..=. %*-%!
,g~.4
~ * ' ,%'- * "~.
g+ f,; . - -f +e W%a e...~~...n - rm:- .a.-
- 7. , -
- s. 1 r ,,,,,,,, og g; h. _,
w
---s L. ,
.. -__ C7y, p'(; 7 r" 1 M"'" I* *
,,e < . .,#*? '- . '- e g +
.,4 pf :
J': f, m.f."' .
" , ^
[4,,5._ ,- [ .k
.n ,
' ;. :. - . ~. . n~ n x . .,
. .g ,
ps 4
- . ~
m .
- t. *mA., j."' ' , , .,,. r- .
+ - ~ , ,
y,_ -, p, ~~ g%
'i
'T',,"*1s ht. 1 '
~ ~ ., f km~,,
.hi~. ._
'-' ., . g ,gt
.,g e .,.1
- ~. .,~
..,) ~E, -,. .. . .-p*-*
.-. .tw.
.,y -
p- ,, T ' 3~
, ..j-:-,,
.' ' g g
,)
',[ ;' , w<%
m R.G r %d]
~~ . ,% '".& e w ,y).es
..n.* p-
+~.
' M_ , #~^ J"' s
% %, ,, w - . s
..~,..s.*-*
m , . , . ,~ . ,..
.;*; y M..- ; g A - --' " .% . --e (4nue 'e W ,-
E & h k [. O' @ ,g m. gg w aw; .+ 8
-% ,[ w%' -
- 3. -
~
.*.s ,, -
- s. .. . .40 p
L w av~*: i c .m. ..r,.,, e ,w. ,w [
^We ( f A- . .# ,
[i
.-[* [,g% h t h V--" [
+ y ;,'Y .c
. . . . . s., .
s w ,
- . t 31 f.,'
wy'. )
- ", y + 4 s *[
N d.':% 2:w' = , , p.ne .
.r; \
o g, _; w ';.n"
. ~
g% .uf , .. ("'.wh~
, m ...,.[
( = n s p%y%ns.,;,.%o,,+J , -;; a;.
.n ag._
.f-w n */.
,', _t q
%;%;py an W' M. -
'y
~ "
s 3 , ' em. 9 ;; rg., - , ; 2.:. Of [ - ) s. 3 1
" p } Q ;,;;,;.g ;;Qfy ;acy 4,QU WW-Q f'; Q -~ . . !
%W"
.,u
i , .bi .
\%sf .Gr# 5.~i
*?,,,,4.
A 29
- 24g m.,
)lg&M % % %.% % L. &.; s q&_ Q J,;,i'_,; & & Q
... pay.~ "w" p.mr 1
" . . +, , e W, ~s. g-- yp* .
- .Am e
J
+w qW,v. s j
,gt ti,A' . /Y ,%
dEd$hNM %,GD $3' n%,.,m'mMdd. N+>DG.6~.W~y ' ,-[M' W.d~.. c'4,'yh!M,%
% 4,,%n . f,;;S m o nn-7..,gg,w.g 4. w.,.q,,4%CMjg n.p+b?g g\'s-'dMQQ.S f.%
i c m.,,,w@ j3ggw,M.g N. yA.~pr&~%%e. - *.g n +n. gq. g T;>y;.;,<. , a"-.,,'
#nsy gewvw~aQwsQs%
Nhh@h@bN3N2dYk %wwgwgI53Nb Nfh MMlkh=ggg[mwww. dh h m,ng % w~~;2 w a L x ywue s W$,k?.n.sn.: n ds;94 m&y? ,9.$ w... Qy m w,? ' $w W.5k. mw nM~$$Y- &y ~h4, J. d5 gf% ys&g, ,am m..~,nw b }$~gq gs,m, g?s&n
-n q h .
%$f f& D s, &y?h RM y,.9% Mg'&',W@,'Nfh& w f% :.~ ;Q:r D h ,~L ki .n n, .,u - m c . .,.r. .
g a
. j'f ' , . ++ ~xg&W O hmnaw
,i f- g% 4v eQ 'd a~R Vgg
,v m e n.fkh
- wm
,s
%).. MQ ag' x~ & 7~. , . ., ,.rgn% y ,.
gng n L m.qw. - w- yg ;t re#n e . . w. : ,:,..,y.* .e, u. > p f
- g. a a, a:J -
f 4
, _y.' ,j ,
,u.h;.'4* qg' E. %
e M ,. ~ , -
~,,.;
p* 2
' :ch&,
q '/ Y: y ,. , . , . 4C * ' ' '
'e, a..
,',% ~.
u
.?
<ppy ^ .e _p.
t J .'] 6+ ' , , " E'g; - 8 45 b
, b' & Y w
il ...
'..t ~
\
.., ,w -ff i q
r qwy%
. , vi.,
A e.m'% 'st f i l
, QG.a 3l s; ..; -
i-
/'
i I
-3
/
t ' %f.'
"I (gi<e yhp Y %m./
p
- y. -. j.
/I t-e y/'4
;- .-- .- i. ;
-j idl ' d
;O
\ z j' , % +f' i rly >'
.? 9 /I ,\ $G J' l
' h*N 4f Q6 r
j& w%* 1, , ca% /y 1,fi }(
~
51 % Wlgh
. .y q,y sh.x~
- fy ,/,
~'
, d Yg
, n
-c, g 9.
y ,y ,s - y;
..- _, . s:- ~, , ,,M (2?o'i
&, ty
'~ ' ~
s -
; &, ,, V 7 /4 . Q [yi,,c / f ~&.f l, ',D h ( '.g ' .?th 'i A
', ' ' ~ 4 Q'pl .hlf[
h zn { ~ kf +, ~' QQ ' , ' y(' ~' U 4 , 1
- ,ef +
f;- n ,, *
. .c w,,4 p y
/
q t . /w
+
g , 1 j #
. -/ ,
$? l
- \,'
. 1 N' i l
1 Horses reared and lunged in wild-eyed fright. The crack of musketry mingled with screams of the newly wounded and sobs of the dying. Frantic hands rammed home powder, patch, ball and a final patch. l Angry eyes lined up the long rifie barrels, and fingers squeezed deadly triggers. j That was Cowans Ford, a narrow, shallow spot in the slow-flowing Catawba River-184 years ago. { Today, a high bank of white concrete holds out two arms of red Carolina clay, and together they push back a shimmery lake that fingers its way 34 miles in a northwesterly direction. Twenty miles away to the ; southwest a switch is flipped and the silence is interrupted by the boil of suddenly-freed water behind the j bank of concrete.< I m, m , . This is Cowans Ford now-a, mile-long hydroelectric dam tra,nsforming that samWslow-flowing Catawba
$7 l%ths.p - afaster in-feesth Candissf9?@Qj,yMdy } jgy
[% W , %u <e.m g %g innend4~ ~
. .;;;_yy ;qmmmagy x , . ; -
xm maw & M- ~Mm 7.. . .
~' ~
~ ~
. ... ... ...,... '.~ ' l'.. ' ,i. . .
- 1. _ '- ~
" i - N M. $
I
~
\ h-
/ =
~
i= , g a
* ,a 9
_- ~' s
- w. N g,
lt was February 1,1781, when a band of North Carolina militia, commanded by General William Davidson, fought a heroic battle it had no hope of winning at Cowans Ford. Davidson's forces merely hoped to delay British Commander Lord Cornwallis in his pursuit of General Daniel Morgan [ and his American irregulars. l General Davidson died in the battle, and a tri-cornered stone near Cowans Ford Dam contains a marker commemorating the historical skirmish. A few hundred yards away another metal marker contains these " nameplate" facts about Cowans Ford Dam, the lith and last hydroelectric installa-tion bui!t by Duke Power Company on the Catawba, and the resulting Lake Norman. The length of the dam, including its earthen arms, is 7,906 feet-stretching between the coun-
} 'q}
ties of Mecklenburg and Lincoln, with the generat- ' T. , y< pm ing facilities on the Lincoln side. - J Construction of the dam was begun in 1959 and
- completed in 1964, and the peaking power capac- hv ^Y
, (%p t s
! ity of its four units is 372,000 kilowatts. l The height of the dam is 150 feet,25 feet above t the maximum water depth in front of the dam, Surface area of Lake Norman, when full, is 32,510 86= acres and this massive body of water is encircled by 520 miles of shoreline bordering four counties. , , , Plant Marshall, the first of a $1 billion steam gen- f erating complex planned for Lake Norman, is under construction on the Catawba County extremity of Highway 150. Marshall has activated two of four eventual units, and when completed it will be one of the world's largest capacity steam plants at over 2 million kilowatts. Cost of construction for the first two units was 580 million, with the completed plant to cost $198 million. 4 The lake was named for Norman atwater Cocke, retired Duke Power president, and was dedicated to the service and growth of the Piedmont Caro-
~
linas, along with Cowans Ford Station, by Governor NORMAN ATWATER COCKE Terry Sanford on Sept. 29,1964. EARL TRANS CATAWBAiHISTORD '* v7/ J2It:.ct;c., e m g { %.q- '" ', h l Y nt "p", , ,,,
'h*
g( p ; . Henry oeffingen an- Unrty se'$ # f6, w'# ' N,. / .,. g ; Loretz was the first mtaister of the Germen g A g'/ 3 keformed Church in greateen . brth Cardene. . 5'ai";fi>?MM&v.#esl,y.de~t l . gs&, M. 7 o g ; n,-hca fu a a we
~
tablished .
---7~.- .] ~
p a-s j[ ,# f. p'n * -
~
. Graham, and others between i723 and 19o4 l' homrWres of D.vverd Off- Tirtehl 1.presmgsd) '
N y .r,/ i ~ f
, jo , -
.'.tnkd IEZ*'R" ,
firrnace
'N"ln' l1",",%') Lgll"R 4Ht baDt by Peter Forney attti staudt The *0res Sank" e citief snorce et tece pT 1 i
*q' A.
w cre. was near (Netarge pt:s te be scent-7 J'NAc*.r$mN'rN?tMl"e*C,0 E,% - i 3
' in M47 Adim Sheditiind his 8 stwd ink rath n5r a les cf Yh g3' from Penwaytvante and acitled west ' eb thc? f Platna.
- Trentort Srn wine. and ' Emanowthe i on,4 Ikhert R nsorr fbetWr of Dawkison t
Catewba 14 cr. the.C.towba. also crossett By bly.1749. Jcim Scotty and ' Ford (A D College esWf - femer,' h*rriffe slaw cf Generats D. H.- attei smdcrwater) and Beatty's Fo*d Ul-wnderA 'MH - ered Mientmalf ' Jechsen. Im *mrte t watert were named for thesi. Anoiner ford essd.. MacripeJah churchyard do.prese gb , ,- g f try the orig 6 ant settlers was Island ford 4CL f - One of the outstandma homes " fr During the inte 1740's Andreas Elftere kohere Catawba region to -.*'ingicaide~ i d i M= teeper. J cob Forney. Pieter Heyl. and John built by Dennet R Fornew son - Clark acttled on crecks which today bear ; and grandson of the -3nonSwl NML l yag;g^re-ingly ca:e,a empr=.s -u,'ga,,qm,v .nc. ,M-m g c.s hno Th s,te o, royedt e ,eu,c m uom.ho,n, s1u r,u cpi.re . h 3.iti refer ior h<n w e e aset u s ~ a=
- i. the ca 1g
\
t at *s: gm - eord the cemesi o . m,,d
%n;1'a,mu ,e,,
. a. eve rord m ro.d roa.ds es g n;ef; nd
,t. t h t es were Co.s.wr m,enera gg,,,,
.er di, seantor-2 a t . e-, As nd ran . c y0. g fs aA W 1 f(
E*" " " _ -_' 5*c*o UnYr N fF Yl.Ife$ Yi*) 7,,yedIes e _
I 1 i l LAKE NORMAN-THE N ARD SEA By Brooks Lindsay, AP O l Charlotte Power Squadron "Welcome to the Inland Sea!" So what does this mean to you? Nothing, except He looked like every old fisherman in the world that like the well-known storm on the Sea of Gali-1 -short grey hair, a day-old stubble of beard, a lee, Norman can throw up some nasty weather cigarette in the side of his mouth and a sizable occasionally. It's deceptive! On a calm day, it looks < string of fish in his hand. like the neighborhood pond. In ten minutes time I was anxious to get my boat off the trailer it can whip up wind and wrect to swamp a small but I couldn't pass that up. fishing boat. This is bec%se the wind has a chance "Come again?" to build up waves over a long distance. If it doesn't (
"I've caught fish this morning," he said, as he swamp you, it can turn your heart to ice as you j moved off to his car,"on a lake that in some places fight your way to shore. It's worse if you have loved
! would be called a sea." ones aboard. ) " Read your Bible!" Perhaps if one were to throw all the facts about j Later, I did. Also, I did some quick research. boating, lake size and knowledge of boating by the i user of the lake i FACT: Sea of Galilee-fo.urteen miles l.ong, eight average,ble be possi to come upithw,nto a good a recommended computer it would
; miles across at widest point.
boat size. If we had to guess, to pick a size, it would FACT: Dead Sea- o. y-ei rniles long, ten pr bably be around , seventeen feet. i The reason for this is the larger boats are de-
- miles acr,oss. Salt water. signed so well today they'll usually get a poor sailor
, FACT: Lake Norman-e,ght i miles wid,e at one home. But what about our old, salty, dyed-in-the-pomt, thirty miles long. wool fisherman? He wants to fish off the points, I,resh, water. Largest inland in the reeds, bullrushes and up the coves. He likes lake in North Carolina. the small, flat-bottomed skiff. Okay, here it is FACT: Lake Norman-built by Duke Power Com- straight. He'd better be a better boatman than the it carry the gany, peak ici electr,lpshe ,ty lo large boat sailor . . . Not claim to be, but be. He'd the Piedmont Carol, mas,ads,, of better know what that little skiff can take and know when to try for home or when to try for a fee shore.
; Admittedly, it isn't the shape one normally thinks Lake Norman isn't interested in his pride. When of as a sea, but there are similarities. he plays with her, he plays her rules.
, s . - 1 -
d 4 I n . J
~
> . p .
4, ._
.i
~ e . -
#
- h lt y , ,}*" ff .
y_ 'y- p*~
'1* ' -
- 8
.'. ' l$ '. ...m.- _4,
. ..~ ? -
g a . s .e* . , . n wu :. w e' *O' m , w" y & dbh W ' :"' ['j~ a; m u .) }g QlV ' ' { af :: Mrv.:7-r ,,. ;. 4
- y <5 v i$ % .. .f~
T &, y W(%Q$, % Y. hhhhj.th..,,~ _ , O sy. ;#fh % - r - -.;~ - , w I E i. ;
,k d 1 .j.-J A $k. A E , ., ' 1 " . h LN T a wm E-an=O$an$W?%S@wm&&~$$a$ NA s=
1
The "Ragpicker" or sailboat man, if he's expe-rienced at all, will love this lake. He understands , , wind and waves because it's the first thing he j learns. It propels his boat. So, if one learns a bit about boats, a little about the weather and something about the Rules of the ! Road (driving regulations) this "lnland Sea," in
, addition to being a power producer, is also perhaps the most pleasant recreation area in the state. -
As we said, it produces power (which Galilee [#. ;N
- doesn't), it gives more immediate recreational ad- ,$_ / . &
vantages than the ocean, there is no charge for its use, and it's close to home. So, l'Il see you around Lake Norman either
*W-a" ' -
[ at the State Park or at one of the many access , . Y I areas; at my own lot at the foot of Crazy Man Bay ^, h (leased to me by Duk.e Power), or in the middle of the lake. And if I blow my whistle (horn) I'm . ,, not telling you to get out of the way, I'm only tell- ing you which way I'm steering my boat. f ;w' And if you'd like to know more about anything i you've read here, including Lake Norman, come
- look us up in Charlotte in the Spring or Fall. A great bunch of guys who like people, boats and
; boating just like you, the Charlotte Power Squad-ron, will be happy to share their knowledge with ,,
you-and the nice thing about it is . . It's FREE! , j Happy boating! , 4 ;,,4 g
, x 4
'l,
->J
+
%)
-J
~Jf L. Brooks Lindsay, Jr. has long been associated l ,. ;
with boating activities and boating safety in the Carolinas. He is a charter member of the Char-lotte Power Squadron and was a driving force 4 in formation of the Squadron. l Lindsay is a past commander of the Charlotte 4 A Power Squadron and holds permanent rank of l l commander in the U.S. Power Squadrons. He l
~"'~~"D"^ holds the educational grade of Advanced Pilot, l l- having progressed through Piloting, Seamanship and Advanced Piloting courses.
l , , l He has attained five merit marks, awarded l l
/ one per year by the Chief Commander of the U.S. Power Squadrons for service beyond normal l y 'n
( l. duties, and this qualifies him as a senior mem-t - y-.a qm__ [l k- ber of the U.S. Power Squadrons. y< , yn t' e .: _ . db , Lindsay is an instructor for the Charlotte P j;7y 7:_$hl Q Power Squadron, as are all Squadron members, and is a key figure in the several 11-weeks
.f < 4 g .1$k
' C(p[g%#g%: E Ef l- m+ p Tb piloting courses offered free to the public each N h QZ: .dHIM Q {"M d Q Q f8 y Kyf year by the Charlotte Squadron. For informa-h stb / p ,.. r3 4 .e/jgA d T.W D" Awsy hb:N$b gg tion about the next class contact Lindsay or any Squadron member. sq pqq w -- ~ M m w&.. suh w ;; n Q v'~3w,.-.kg l [d,(,mudW4,,,"d22Wr ' W D$adeirN:-.% QNb.W f I
1 ? l
< )
T M,
}TM j 3 C [N N
@D D 1.Y@N - @D' fN y 9 .,fSYMQtp y'~i fD.NEYD"'
^. yn .. % ,
.. _. ;a' g. yc,e % p.4.W l 3, s J e t u v !;- jg y , e ~ y- :;)(., ; p$ m l <
cv~ - g1 s.,- ,
, x, ny e , ,
-6 s ,
^
3 u:p y4AbiEk%&k$$BybG Wh $
- N J)n;WlBtdWOM;hh$dd:.'5f-).Y::; memane,G . dCM;ED M4i,i% i s.M)f F '"b$ a~N F % 1 e ~m nn ; v, ca_w m. yw&,vn v- m3 %.m(s:. ; . peAw
- ~
o II 1 p,
, t .3
+
.;e, o r 3g.o A;. , s 3 1 1 9 ~ ~.. ,
g,ugg w y.o.s .E w,; c ,~ t ,/ w w hy qqp, jds ga .o. e z t J m, . . , r. ' m ;g v.:.t a v. v
\:
;l;p s
,'< , ,. .; t W:...e , m .m eh"
- j ~..fg3 , 47:y{: ; ' < ypt , .Qw. { ,yy g Q yy }M ,
? 'yf
- n g, , . <
s c l= g.g. jg; .qqg}w Q+f+g%cy '
, A j =
- y. . yh '.
y '
, 3 }. f;; ' :' ( '.l
/ l; ;* ; QV Q Y.i;& > vf
' si .hYlWlQ.c m. m. Q y .M Q;9 <,u.
f: c,": ,b:; !.i _ , , J:}A 1 .-a ,
,7' ;
< r
~ < m,.
my,i . ; p 9 eQ ? 4 M- t d a s
' L
<'",,w' i q;3 .. , u. 5.U
>>1 e *'
a t yg j,f.. . .. , " ; , j ; g* 3
,V.
, e,_ -
* ,, 2 3.,
- 3. a >
,_, .:. . . . + .i;
>r " <'?t_.d X i: 2
- YllH"Q:
hy
'.9::+ Q- l:.'g j
lg#%)vp: cy gQ ,Jjgg 5-7 [.i , e. p f y gg' '
-J l.] i, * ' %
, _l # ' x a? { ,
, y Q, j >
ll';
.y U
s p- ' q x g,ny<;g 9 ,4 V ,< f;yhl ' ' r '> ;h w n'
,. ., , *, 1%
L ,
. _ _ 7 yg g/ ./9 &g' y* Qh h a)<ggg;3 c .- x- ,,
- : awa ;
m:m 3C O m, , ..#a gn f A _ , g Sp nM
- P af pe x + ggmg r 4
; i l
- n xy . ' 4,g ,
h j gg g 4 C _ , - c.//d g (_ p ; hn I
. m;f M , ' um m .- 4e a J- A
.3 ~ %y 1
;;t 2 lt g :
i
,4 2
8 ~
;n._
,q , s y
- na
, ,j j
- l'( ' " }n$w w,
7 t /r M ; j - Qk l ) ag% F
+ .. n .
t w . My . a g ggg .
~ dg,LL ': Ei_l .
A
^
. ,. ._.,nne l
-; . - s 1 1 !
, - ' ' ~- . - - . _ . .. :
l
. ~ .
= - :
i N& %..+
~mw:;
- ..- s,
\
, . ,a2 " - - l
] T , . '&. - ,1 ,
j H" ; 1 ) I
- l. .
i ,i l I ! l 1 1 By Sandy McKeel , Lake Norman Yacht Club With much wider expanses of open water and depends upon not only wind velocity, but also the ; i general!y lower shoreline than other Piedmont length of time the particular wind blows and the : power impoundments, Lake Norman offers excel- " fetch," or distance from the windward shore (the lent, opportunities for pleasure sailing, competitive d shore from which the wind is blowing). ' sashng and over 1 , body of water w. night cruising. ill present conditions However,wh.ich should the larger While i.t requires 10 hours and a 75-m.le i fetch . be anticipated by the novice and even by experi- for a 20-knot w. m d to bu.ld i waves to the.ir maxi-l enced sailors who have confined their sport to mum he,ight, the v,olent i wmds m a sudden hne I smaller lakes. squall have been observed to deve'op 2-3 foot waves j Whereas high winds usually produce only a (some swamped skippers have claimed 4 feet) on chop on smaller lakes, a moderate breeze on Lake Lake Norman in 10-15 minutes over a 1%-2 mile l , Norman can build substantial waves. Wave height fetch.
- - m.-.,, m. , , . . , , . _ , _ , _ _ _ , , . . , _ , _ , . _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . , .. . ,
(h g 'f( jjW I
'M F#
Q j y j lt shou!d be remembered that there can be as , h+; Il much as an 8 mile fetch when a NE wind is blow- e 4 ( ' ing toward Cowans Ford Dam out of Reeds Creek. R '3v e
?
,J}
Whitecaos first begin to appear in a moderate ( for 10-12 ,l
<0y n h'1#,. 1
(") breeze of about 13-18 mph, generally safe foot boats. A fresh breeze of 19-23 mph produces [' F - l/ =1a' M
;[$ )q long waves with whitecaps covering the water, and f_ 'n i is safe for larger boats-although sailing may be rough and wet.
L" f y",',y,~
- When you see a cumulo-nimbus cloud, you have i
[j f f
~ 'W' ;.
h> - j j about 30 minutes to make shore before the thunder- F /J y storm hits. It you can't reach safety, prepare to j' 7 , take the usual precautions. Don't be deceived by the first moderate winds blowing toward the storm.
- j. J[k
/<
r '
> md '
They will be followed by sudden gusts striking # ,". / .V 3 savagely from several directions. ! /f' ' i % %'#% ; ~ When day sailing in a sustained, moderate or kf ,
~Q; ~. . %; A 2 fresh breeze, remember that the waves which may F /J 4 L g:
be small when you start out will be bigger later in the day with no increase in wind velocity. j;
-i W" "G '
When beating into waves, try to meet them head-on and then bear off to pick up speed before heading up into the next one. Non-breaking waves release very litt!e energy and don't push you back. Gravity makes the boat slide backward down the face of a wave, and the wind striking the increas-ingly exposed hull as it rises in the water pushes the boat back. Breaking waves in shallow water (depth less than half a wave lengt a % % .g g g M pq and should be avo,h) , ided.release considerable In a heavy sea, try toenergy plan j. f .L , , your course near the windward shore where the u 4 4M%r' C waves will be smaller, and by all means keep your k + - (,N/ boat moving. It's easy to be a second wave while recoven, b . ngstalled from thecompletely previous by , 4 one. The chances of swamping or capsizing are i then very good. __ 'A .7 Have fun sailing, but make sure that your boat ~F > and rigging are sound and that you are familiar h 2; ~ i with heavy weather sailing before venturing onto .M Lake Norman. It's a great lake for the " bed sheet brigade" but it's also different. p. 7 p /
;1 #
pf ~ Charles B. (Sandy) McKeel is a former commo-dore of the Catawba Yacht "ub, located on Duke Power's Lake Wylie, and the Lake Norman Yacht C!ub. He has been sailing for sport for 20 years, and it's now a family fun affair with his wife, Mary
,7 N Frances, and daughter, Debbie, joining in.
The Lake Norman Yacht Club is a member of the South Atlantic Yacht Racing Association and the y,~~n
.y North American Yacht Racing Union. Although the i~ -
club's facilities do not accommodate casual vis- [ yl ,; . [7 ~K y9- itors, persons interested in sailing or joining the I .}; cW ~ f
club are invited to contact a member.
( V Complete sailing facilities are available and are p L 's y er; gradua!!y being expanded at the club site off [ %g&+@ County Road 1100. Regular class races are held L .y . ' on weekends, and as many as 150 boats from all [/f E over the Southeast participate in the club's annual invitational regatta each May.
) \
_______._______._;t.______.__ f x
1 l 5 STATE FISHING AND BOATING REGULATIONS Fishing in Lake Norman will be among the best waters such as Lake Norman. In brief, these regu-available anywhere in the state of North Carolina lations require that all boats mounting motors of l during the lake's first decade. This is the biological over 10 horsepower must be registered with the i history of such power impoundments, and it follows state and mount easily visible state registration j the truth that Nature abhors a vacuum. New lakes numbers, and that a lifesaving flotation device be ) ' usually have excellent food conditions, and this carried for every person aboard a boat. I ! sets off a fish population explosion that continues All boat operators are expected to follow the l ! for some five to seven years after the lake fills. usual " rules of the road" safety precautions, and l Lake Norman includes largemouth bass, crap- reckless operation or operation of a boat while i pie, bream, white bass and sauger (an import from under the influence of alcohol can lead to citation i l Tennessee) among its game fish, plus catfish, carp and arrest by Wildlife Commission personnel or ' i and threadfin shad. The shad were introduced to other peace officers. I provide food fish for the carnivorous game fishes. Regulations concerning water skiing require that l i North Carolina Wi!dlife Resources Commission the tow boat either carry an observer in addition j l fishing regulations apply to Lake Norman waters, to the driver, or be fitted with a rear view mirror h i just as they do to all public waters in the state. of sufficient size and design to allow the driver ; A county resident may fish in Norman waters to observe his skier, or the skier must wear a flo- : bordering his county without a license-provided tation device. The use of the " downed" skier flag I he uses live bait. The use of artificial bait requires is recommended. l l a county license costing $1.65. A state license, The Wildlife Commission urges that all persons i i costing $4.25 for a North Carolina resident, will boating, skiing, or fishing in public waters such as ;
- al!ow a person to fish anywhere in the state, in- Lake Norman observe all safety precautions and )
- c'uding all the waters of Lake Norman, and use practice courtesy in their relations with other users. j all types of lures and baits. This will lead to safer, happier use of these recre-Special regulations cover the use of seines, fish ational facilities with which the people of North j traps, trotlines, and " bottle" or "can" fishing. Be Carolina have been so wonderfully endowed.
sure to check these regulations before engaging ! in these types of fishing. - j The wise fisherman, should he be fishing Lake y, J.J.~ , A l
- Norman or any strange waters for the first time, e b 7 I will inquire of marina or fishing dock operators what recent conditions have been in regard to fish- l ing. These people will gladly offer advice, instruc- y b.
hh tions and directions as to how best to fill your l stringer that particular day. - The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commis-sion is charged also with the enforcement of boat-l4'E. ; { ing regulations and safety laws on inland state '
, , . , . .p n. l
-- ; e,[fh A, i a, :, N .. .. [I? .1 .
'A ,
mM ! A -
)
j
~
%pdef i p ;
j y4 a:A :;;;;; V _ -- - i 2-w h ~ 4e j .= y7 A r( y,(4g i,. 4 ,4 > F qpr_w
,6 6'
% aa:a:n wss-F
=
M
)
. *S Q'N'O 4
-s e- ,
j N..' ...Jain . y , 1 i ti %p 19 : I I f I
~ '
l f V l e 4
WANA 4 r-KAFETY RULES 4 %$Q:
\ ,
,^%
b Do not swim ocross chonnels If N possible, designato swimming nd stay wit in these.
\
~_
I l -
;.:c):7;y3;.i.T[J$fh., [ I.NIk ?
M.W fi:if Q
,,,y.,,--
1
# j 7p
'3 1 8 m
~~~
. wm k D
? s_ pip;i"",jl,,,
BCATERS 4 @
-+ Keep 300 feet from shore, and , fr own to 'no we'Le"spYed. oo \' $ '
- oiso o
should be - i'
'?
w, facilities-unless skier. dropping
/c d ow ke" in coves a E NOR p 195 cnsi ion ca nmen
- dama
$ low.ncsca}}.*ptrgisreccamendedin a'ge caused b
=1buvrboatsshouldslay ticar .
ndaroundallcongestedareas Allboatmen vforswill shculdremain rowboats,a sail boats and swimmers .
==
ticalRules and be courteous. .
=%oyage system e Roadapply is7edenst and fito alllinffic system cated
' *Mpernightlyting andIVepreserniform Afarting Syst Lake Ahrman waters vers requirrd. .
arv dangerous to smalla boats in b d wrather 9
g s
..u e
. . . . .; 1 .
y i g,; K. M p ' F , NW '? - k A POWER LAKE . l6
.~
4Aa RISES AND FALLS .~
d ,
df' } Lake Norman, like all power impoundments used is due to several factors such for hydroelectric generation, will fluctuate in level fall, Duke's need for hydroele. according to the generation needs for which it was given time, and emergency o built. Ford due to removal of other To meet the needs for electric service, the servicing, etc. Cowans Ford Hydroelectric Station, which is part Generally, during an average r. of the Cowans Ford Dam, was designed to operate sonal fluctuation of the pond at maximum efficiency from full pond to 15 feet eight feet over a period of th y un n, , , ni n gn, , ,,., p,,y .n, ,,, ,, , ,, , , , , ' " drawdown, and to operate satisfactorily to 25 feet This may be exceeded, howev s' , o , ! ,' ', > , l g ,1 , drawdown. conditions. Maximum drawdow us '.l#,ql, ,,,,, ,;,'l,, ,, ',
.g ,,, "" ' a s
The operation of Cowans Ford has to be coordi- is seldom more than two feet a nated with the operation of other plants on Duke's ations, or emergencies may c p
, f/
Catawba River system to fit into the overall system operation in the most efficient manner. If boat docks or piers are co side lots, it is suggested tha l / The level of Lake Norman, as is customary with given to a hinged, floating porti. l .- / all power lakes, will vary from time to time. This of course, rises and lowers wit-
~
RULES OF TH * ,j
' are ppe c hmg each ,, ,, _ %,,,,g ,. .
8' fd t ,,h,, __ 5' 9
, y to th a t to storbo d ' -
g 6 o4 n ther rboord tright",8 " boot head.on, tP to -5/ /U" ~
\ kE make this peachegg, b 'OPM W the e.g =
' ~
,,g 7 ' f , 4,,,, 9 P N%
T , 'm-oumapoweneo , , , , , boot es '
,P smam.m
( p oo ,
+
e s y 8
- M 4
e s, s ~ w l , p .. I ;. , , . . .s
.*2
% * % g
.., 4
,- , j k .. ~ . x%_
. . 4.%, -
l*. M f* 4 ;
'. - j s:> - u ,, .. -
- ' g' _- *^ Adg = y'
.a~ . - p _ . . . . ,
.- * ,# ,. ' . , /
N* , = . * + io. M - 9 ,
PARKS (;g i g* dg.g. CAMPGROUNDS ,l4 p. N. '
~ 5 .. .
t +y N i V ACCESS AREAS p gb -
'j- Q^ M .: e n in 1962 Duke Power Company made available to the state of North Carolina a 1,328-acre tract
]~ ,
,c.,
.}l . 1 on the iredell County shores of Lake Norman for a
? w -
9 ; state park. Some portions of the park are now in '* ~ use, and additional facilities will be added in later j ym_ :L^ .. , _ _ years. h..,.- - +r - - The park, known as Duke Power State Park, ' features a 33-acre, constant-level swimming lake, ' J~4 R6 5 cV*D ' - an initial camping area of 150 sites, picnic areas and a boat-launching ramp. Both the camping and Q %%Dr p s
. ,..? k.
picnic areas will have running water and electricity. s A dam holds the swimming area at a constant ' level, and heavy sand covers the 400 yards of COTTAGE SITES beach. Bathh,ouses and all other swimming facili- Another Duke Power practice has been to make as he State dv sory Budget Commission approved mugh of the shoreline of its power lakes as possible in 1965 an additional $220,000 appropriation for available for recreational lots on a lease basis. further development of the park during the nuxt Certain areas, of course, must be set aside for few years. Oren Hawkins has been named super- future steam generation plants, and other areas for intendent of the park. transmission lines and related facilities. Forestry in addition to the boat-launching facility park, and numerous launching ramps atwately- pr,at the r5[ sets for rehabilitation or preservation of the t i owned marinas around the lake, Duke Power alto watershed are necessary in some areas. has provided 10 access areas open to the boating The choice lakeside lands available after fulfill-or fishing enthusiast. Parking space that could ac- ing necessary company functions were then survey- ,
! commodate 30,000 cars has been made available .
at these 10 areas. ed into sites for recreation cottages, and leased to j j Lake Norman's " big" waters have caused changes the public on a first-come basis for a reasonable 1
- in the boating habits of the Piedmont water en- annual fee. Duke Power builds end helps maintain
- thusiast. With some 33 miles of open channel from the necessary roads to reach these lakeside sites,
; the dam to the lake's headwaters, and, with nu- and pays taxes on all the land involved.
merous deep coves to explore, the cabm cruiser l has become a common sight on the take. Some 2,600 tots, averaging three-fourths acre The large boats still are outnumbered by out- each, were made available on the shores of Lake board and stern-drive runabout units, however, and Norman alone. Most of these have been leased advocates of these smalle,r craft have discovered to individuals, and dozens of attractive cottages that weather must now be meluded in their boating plans. Squalls over the wide sections of the lake now dot the coves and points of the big lake. (eight miles at its widest point) can cause uncom- in addition, much land under private ownership l fortable moments for small boats, particularly if has been sold for home sites on the shores of all T a lboa'ter can find plenty of uncrowded f ur counties bordering Lake Norman. Paved streets water to pursue his sport, and the sight of jaunty have been provided in some instances, and thrivmg i sails billowing in the breeze has become a common colonies of summer-fun seekers are springing up, i sight on brisk summer afternoons. _ }, l ,4 ..,, ; W 4 4 j h y* f
. , w . . . , n a, '
ou -
. _n glf ' T -
f. 5x -
,e 4
& {
e
.g
,M 1
~
' ' ' .v.
g .' > - y' wm w,w4R-
~
s- a. 4 i 3[ g 1Bl!V W MT;Qg- ! my y
,M -
d%!$F7-jg..,4 NM L cr W l( f ' a 3% _ f(-n lx } y? ,g% i gnbQdk n&cM,f%? g Q $ m$ } _ a m
;g; y
l'% Q Q-i c
;hp ,
l i p u , _ y,r _ ,..,_m y m_ ,. ,, m. . , , ,
~y 'e j
- ' ~ h' nm /
,/
, y.
L / 11\ 11 ) ;
;w l L:n,, l~
y ,. M } N
, m
.:..c,..__~,.n.
.. .,~
n n
)
I i N N / x l i
~/ L ff -
hhhtki '
' ' 4%
\
v' I
- r,@pR; a
- ~.
~ xA. ? oD! ", L -
- j ll y / \
;_.-A '
/ CD: n r:, % /
< v_ ~A ~E",",'*
, i a \ \
/ \
'/\N l1 d fgg =
/ LONG ISLAND . o
-__~.y y nAWS / 5
<enar 7t*way tvagn s meggg-www+;. morn,m m yw *i.14 'he ' -
N ._ jig s
'N
~. ;
' .e.
t~._ DA ,% x. 1 r/.%W.l ' :L.
.;,..a!Pf -t
.. .. L ' ' . '. ' }-
f y@ N { f' ? L', 7 , j s ,5 \ g , .
.y n: n,.e ^
y'. , w ., ,
. j p% .
+ ..~, o . . , g 1 . , ,
+< ' ~~- w .w. _, _'
- ~ ~ _n -
'* 'l i
,, _gp.~ ~i
% . g- i.
(
' g,g m,
- ~ . dgpys.t \ \
,}ep.,fk
^
j ~ I ff
'L "
y %!T 6v -
\ w, f:l[3k"f li;Qp&h j ,
Y xx / ,1
.-.-..~. ,~ 5f ,
t / . 7, A more detailed map of Lake
~
U.' l Norman and all of its f acilities, x )! including the secondary road N - 1, aW+r*
$g. 1 systems and privately operated \' A i
~;
+ _, . - .6 qj marinas, is available from LITTLE CK' O JM&%MC% 4 Duke Power Company. You 2 R Aws \
*F: . oM may receive a copy of this map " ~N N i
E P NLW%S"#tp. .. %gd free by writing Public Rela- n,N ' .-
%;ggfQpt Mr,E;q tions Department, Duke Power (
L. % * * ~.M r ;- w g* Co., 422 South Church Street, M & M yi W "??& & t Charlotte, N. C.
\
's
~
L., p, ./N. , k%xw% :u,.l* , *** **l'M .4 e ' BEATTY FORD ~ f 'A*5 i y N ' " -
) 'i ; & , , b,g 'QM nyj @-gA . ': ' ' %
,.t.
#F- ~ '.x
..u *fu
/
. [s.
a - = "
, 6 A .f ,m
/
U3'*' n , ,
"4 p.,-aw
,'^*'"
-) , , q 'fia. p l
4
"- M Gnm , .,3_ , ._~q4%# .s fa .c 1 C H A Fi t o ry g
\ <'S witig,
WATER WETY RULES
, \y r -~
( Do not swim across channels. If I , Ag' M, o r possible, designate swimming
,; areas with floats or markers, l; ,.. and stay within these, y lR;W' h " ,, a . , p- m ,,
y " gg ,3:.74["ygg}:~_ , ',3, ; :,;,i:rgy'y EsaggA sme _. m' _ ,. w e4 :exa l
- . p#77"& w? , y.,; m ,y i -m~ ,
,- y pf .
k N_ gp thu
# e eg; , _gg t ,,
BCATERS
"# m Keep 300 feet from shore, and S" if boot is brought closer slow it Og4 1
+ down to "no wake" speed. Boots also should be slowed to "no j
fj!' - woke" in coves around dock jg facilities-unless dropping o
~g skier.
- w .: ,.
-? *
~ ~W . ', .Q.'W
/
C >_ [ c m.
'a .
' r;; +
, .,~.o- l p , .:_ - !t l
s 7:
~a:
.j .. .,:o. - -
- ~ h -+
* }%df
~
~ -
- Do not ski or boat through o 1
(
,f' , -( swimming orco
'; ,u '/ I- 4 a~ .( d c~ Sailboats have the right of way f j '. J over power boats, and power
- l. -- J -
-4 boats pawng smaller boots of l -
.g any type should slow down to minimize the danger or discom ;
fort of a high woke l 6,. . - -, 4 4mmem .--.- C gc
#j E
D / T he boat ow ner or driver who does not provide a lif esa vin g
;_ p f 3
flotatmn devne for every per ~1 J j son abooed is stupid as well as ! g j^ . ' a lawbecaker Don't ride with j k^gi ,
~ . . _
s. j}' (g . W ... .. . ..
'x l
;%, ~ I J' , l
-, s),f'?
w ., 4; m .
! ') .
Remember, scots I do not indicate i copocity. I l;,
~
a -- y_
~~~'"~1:
- . :. ; *:.. A Y'
Q . =2 EGCD"V EMPlL@ CD
,) '
If you must stond, or change
. Tl f
sects keep to the center with both hands c>n gunwoles, keep IO w 2 y
; }w'
~ e
' % oge KHP W4%H M l f'
~
[ I
/>
f '(' .- s l for rocks, logs or other obstructions, os we s
!' i,
on ore opproac hing each other et on ~% HEN o retokmg onether boot. the boot bemg g ongle end there is a p%ubility of a (pileuon, the boat overtake n hos the right of ooy if you ore bemg to port 'lett must givt .oy to the boot to storboord o*rrto6cn or bemg possed, you must momtom your k'h'd OnER.
i right - course end spred s * , , ,
-% HEN meeting another boot head on, 6eep to -5AILBOAT5 or boots without motori ol.ots have -"
storboord right unless you are too for to port left r the right,of .oy c.er power boots unless the motor This booklet courtesy Duke Po e, Ce f to p as poub re o i ,
R '*h ' a k ..@, It should be remembered that there can be as much as an 8-mile fetch when a NE wind is blow- 1 1 g- '
]h d
r'N ing toward Cowans Ford Dam out of Reeds Creek. i k Whitecaos first begin to appear in a moderate . 3' p'w s VdO breeze of about 13-18 mph, generally safe for 10-12 , ?. O:Ir " FM? ',u j foot boats. A fresh breeze of 19-23 mph produces long waves with whitecaps covering the water, and ((L i is safe for larger boats-although sailing may be rough and wet. [f . f f[. M13 M ]J ' ,h 1 4 ; When you see a cumulo-nimbus cloud, you have f W
~
. $' 1'n/
s , j about 30 minutes to make shore before the thunder- !
, 7 storm hits. It you can't reach safety, prepare to I [/ U '
3~ l take the usual precautions. Don't be deceived by ; !.
, the first moderate winds blowing toward the storm.
7 E p[ .,m W l They will be followed by sudden gusts striking I ' 2ff'* ./ 4 M savagely from several directions. T % A= # k[ 'f
.. 4 j
~
$ When day sailing in a sustained, moderate or ?
fresh breeze, remember that the waves which may : [../; L 9 be small when you start out will be bigger later " f' i 7 - @# in the day with no increase in wind velocity. . I ' When beating into waves, try to meet them head- , , on and then bear off to pick up speed before %* ' heading up into the next one. Non-breaking waves release very litt!e energy and don't push you back. Gravity makes the boat slide backward down the face of a wave, and the wind striking the increas-ingly exposed hull as it rises in the water pushes the boat back. Breaking waves in shallow water (depth less than w%.ggggggy qpg half a wave length) release considerable energy and should be avoided. In a heavy sea, try to plan 4 r 9 your course near the windward shore where the [
'" *** F Q waves will be smaller, and by all means keep your %.rt ,
.. j
[- (/ boat moving. It's easy to be stalled completely by I. , j a second wave while recovering from the previous r M i '4 one. The chances of swamping or capsizing are then very good.
, gj
- > < gg Have fun sailing, but make sure that your boat and rigging are sound and that you are familiar N ES i i >
's W
. . .i with heavy weather sailir.g before venturing onto .' '
Lake Norman. It's a great lake for the " bed sheet
^
brigade" but it's also different. u ,,
, j
$ Y
[ Charles B. (Sandy) McKeel is a former commo-dore of the Catawba Yacht Club, located on Duke Power's Lake Wylie, and the Lake Norman Yacht Club. He has been sailing for sport for 20 years, y and it's now a family fun affair with his wife, Mary n3 Frances, and daughter, Debbie, joining in. e , The Lake Norman Yacht Club is a member of the c South Atlantic Yacht Racing Association and the c~c North American Yacht Racing Union. Although the
/ \
ayy[ .") -Y u:
~7 ' [9 . club's facilities do not accommodate casual vis-iturs, persons interested in sailing or joining the "p%
-$ 3 M N. W club are invited to contact a member.
c 'p Complete sailing facilities are available and are L y gradua!iy being expanded at the club site off
%j ...qgf County Road 1100. Regular class races are held (AV) [
4 f, on weekends, and as many as 150 boats from all [Fy'f P 7 over the Southeast participate in the club's annual invitational regatta each May. s
STATE FISHING AND BOATING REGULATIONS Fishing in Lake Norman will be among the best waters such as Lake Norman. In brief, these regu-available anywhere in the state of North Carolina lations require that all boats mounting motors of during the lake's first decade. This is the biological over 10 horsepower must be registered with the history of such power impoundments, and it follows state and mount easily visible state registration the truth that Nature abhors a vacuum. New lakes numbers, and that a lifesaving flotation device be usually have excellent food conditions, and this carried for every person aboard a boat. sets off a fish population explosion that continues All boat operators are expected to follow the for some five to seven years after the lake filis. usual " rules of the road" safety precautions, and Lake Norman includes largemouth bass, crap- reckless operation or operation of a boat while pie, bream, white bass and sauger (an import from under the influence of alcohol can lead to citation Tennessee) among its game fish, plus catfish, carp and arrest by Wildlife Commission personnel or , and threadfin shad. The shad were introduced to other peace officers. provide food fish for the carnivorous game fishes. Regulations concerning water skiing require that North Carolina Wi!dlife Resources Commission the tow boat either carry an observer in addition fishing regulations apply to Lake Norman waters, to the driver, or be fitted with a rear view rnirror I I just as they do to all public waters in the state. of sufficient size and design to allow the driver A county resident may fish in Norman waters to observe his skier, or the skier must wear a flo-i bordering his county without a license-provided tation device. The use of the " downed" skier flag he uses live bait. The use of artificial bait requires is recommended. a county license costing $1.65. A state license, The Wildlife Commission urges that all persons costing $4.25 for a North Carolina resident, will boating, skiing, or fishing in public waters such as l al!ow a person to fish anywhere in the state, in- Lake Norman observe all safety precautions and ciuding all the waters of Lake Norman, and use practice courtesy in their relations with other users. all types of lures and baits. This will lead to safer, happier use of these recre-
- Special regulations cover the use of seines, fish ational facilities with which the people of North traps, trotlines, and " bottle" or "can" fishing. Be Carolina have been so wonderfully endowed.
sure to check these regulations before engaging in these types of fishing. -
- /-
y . T.E. 7- - - ~ -n r N l The wise fisherman, should he be fishing Lake , ksf Norman or any strange waters for the first time, - a.> T . will inquire of marina or fishing dock operators X' # what recent conditions have been in regard to fish- * - ing. These people will gladly offer advice, instruc- , . A tions and directions as to how best to fill your stringer that particular day. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commis- DUKf mRCMm sion is charged also with the enforcemcnt of boat- - '
"""I574 '
ing regulations and safety laws on inland state +. v 4 , j c . E ag4 . -*4=_gi p%;*f7 MhpMgg _
.* h. ,
s /
. , %j %" m 1*
86 .? - i5bc; W s **f
...-4 --
t
?M a
uju l f*}lfW,- > %., - - f"
- Y(&Ww -
2 g f,,j ([ amma ,c .~. m w- 4 pag *w a3 i 3 9; ft , g, . ;i i n. l L. ( .. S 's?. S . { i '
- ^ ~ " ~
.%+
\
3.
%},
.f.
.j ['
/,
L. I -
? .
m 5 223
i 4 i l LAKE NORMAN COMMISSION
. The four counties surrounding Lake Norman- navigational marker, safety marker, danger marker, , Lincoln, Catawba, Iredell and Mecklenburg-have or information sign or structure erected upon or joined in creating a Lake Norman Commission to in the waters of Lake Norman, or upon the imme-li assist in promoting safe use of the lake's waters. diate shores thereof, by the Lake Norman Com-
- This commission, authorized by state law, consists mission acting as the joint regulating authority of
! of representatives from each of the four counties Catawba, fredell, Lincoln and Mecklenburg Coun-j involved, ties. The Commission, after several study sessions, SECTION 11: ! agreed to establish a uniform marking system on it shall be unlawful for any person to operate j the lake and asked that, under the authority of any water borne craft upon the waters of Lake ' the "Four County Act" Chapter 1025 of the 1965 Norman within one hundred fiftv feet (150') of Session Laws of the State of North Carolina, and any launching area, dock, pier, marina, boat stor-also under General Statute 75A-10 through 75A-15 age structure, marked swimming area, or private that the following ordinances be passed into law: or public boat service areas, at greater than "No SECTION 1: Wake" speed if said areas are marked by a "No Wake" sign. These regulations will be enforced by it shall be unlawful for any person to move, re- N. C. Wildlife Commission personnel and officers ! move, deface, damage or destroy or obliterate any representing the Lake Norman Marine Commission. l These ordinances became effective after adoption by all four counties in June,1966. g ..cg W " [ , ,,g e m_ , n.m e ~ W @ fh d^ n i
+
,5
, \
> i
;u y
~ ~
n]m \
, ++
, aa W
i . s> I :
\
\
\ Xctice ic Ji!?ottimen k \
; ~
THis LAKE IS 0F REGULATED 1959 BY ETY THE ACT . NORTH C
*150000orsix-months Reckless orneyhgent imprisonm ent, vperalien a on. carries a t m penally of (
\ =-
~
*Creratoris Stow,ne utdelegally sp_cedis responsiblefor recommended damage in cau ;
\ sed by boats wake. \ *Mer boats shouldstay clear ofrow boats, sail boatanda \ Allboatmen shouldremain aled s and b \
- Opem/ ors will beymsecuiedforeperafinye courteou
) *Naulinti system
*Suoyage Rules isofFederal n the Road and fiapply
- s. if to all ~inffic ..,
sys
*Mpermyht hyhting andlifepreserv orm .4(arkiny S ,
*1akeAbraan waters areers dangerous t reyuired. ' ystem.
-,e I o smallboats in bad wrather-1
\
i . j ' 1 . [
\
1 1
,l; ;. :Q. -
i
- < w
~ ;.
~ . , ,
A <
~ *!-
pg. 7 , A POWER LAKE j , i l RISES AND FALLS ~ ; l 1 Lake Norman, like all power impoundments used is due to several factors such as: amount of rain-for hydroelectric generation, will fluctuate in level fall, Duke's need for hydroelectric power at any l 1 according to the generation needs for which it was given time, and emergency operation of Cowans , i built. Ford due to removal of other units on system for , To meet the needs for electric service, the servicing, etc. i Cowans Ford Hydroelectric Station, which is part Generally, during an average rainfall year, the sea- ; of the Cowans Ford Dam, was designed to operate sonal fluctuation of the pond level will be about ; at maximum efficiency from full pond to 15 feet eight feet over a period of three or four months. i' drawdown, and to operate satisfactorily to 25 feet This may be exceeded, however, due to unusual drawdown. conditions. Maximum drawdown for any one week , The operation of Cowans Ford has to be coordi- is seldom more than two feet, but extreme situ- ' nated with the operation of other plants on Duke's ations, or emergencies may change this rapidly. , Catawba River system to fit into the overall system if boat docks or piers are constructed from lake- ' operation in the most efficient manner, side lots, it is suggested that consideration be i The level of Lake Norman, as is customary with given to a hinged, floating portion at the tip which, , all power lakes, will vary from time to time. This of course, rises and lowers with the water. i
~
4 j
~
0u
- uJ l
h., ' f E I
^
fl 16x __ . - , _ . ,
~'
~ 'y i g _, t .
- A
,' (
' 8'*
- z. ~ ,
, ,s--
. [ #.
- - ,2,c _,,, sa x ;
3 ,'
}p- m h'
- e '
s , 4( , -- , l i 1 , - _ #- ~ ' y
~
p - W
- p. .
.msp***"" ' " ~q 1~
7* i
; .-- . ,. - pa g .3 :;
, ws- - . -
9 m
, [,e , a
# M*
f .y ' ~ , -f . . ;* '
*S '
'_f' e .,
y, S' ' '
#<hz * -"
a~ ~ - - ' *** . . . g _ l l i I
PARK.S C ,?
- 4 - t O CAMPGROUNDS , 9 %
G + ACCESS AREAS ; . g %:, , In 1962 Duke Power Company made available to the state of North Carolina a 1,328-acre tract on the fredell County shores of Lake Norman for a state park. Some portions of the park are now in use, and additional facilities will be added in later .
.jggg= e e~m yea rs.
The park, known as Duke Power State Park, features a 33-acre, constant-level swimming lake, an initial camping area of 150 sites, picnic areas . t and a boat-launching ramp. Both the camping and picnic areas will have running water and electricity. A dam holds the swimming area at a constant level, and heavy sand covers the 400 yards of COTTAGE SITES beach. Bathhouses and all other swimming facili- Another Duke Power practice has been to make as he State Adv sory Budget Commission approved mugh of the shoreline of its power lakes as possible in 1965 an additional $220,000 appropriation for available for recreational lots on a lease basis. further development of the park curing the next Certain areas, of course, must be set aside for few years. Oren Hawkins has been named super- future steam generation plants, and other areas for intendent of the park. transmission lines and related facilities. Forestry in addition to the boat-la ing facility at the park, and numerous launch,unch.mg ramps at privately- , ro'} sets for rehabilitation or preservation of the owned marinas around the lake, Duke Power also watershed are necessary in some areas. has provided 10 access areas open to the boating The choice lakeside lands available after fulfill-p or fishing enthusiast. Parking space that could ac- ing necessary company functions were then survey-da e 00 cars has been made availabt ed into sites for recreation cottages, and leased to Lake Norman's " big" waters have caused changes the public on a first-come basis for a reasonable in the boating habits of the Piedmont water en- annual fee. Duke Power builds and helps maintain thusiast. With some 33 miles of open channel from the necessary roads to reach these lakeside sites, the dam to the lake's headwaters, and with nu- and pays taxes on all the land involved. merous deep coves to explore, the cabin cruiser has become a common sight on the lake. Some 2,600 lots, averaging three-fourths acre The large boats still are outnumbered by out- each, ' vere made available on the shores of Lake board and stern-drive runabout units, however, and Norman alone. Most of these have been leased advocates of these smaller craft have discovered to individuals, and dozens of attractive cottages that weather must now be included in their boating plans. Squalls over the wide sections of the lake now dot the coves and points of the big lake. (eight miles at its widest point) can cause uncom- In addition, much land under private ownership fortable moments for small boats, particularly if has been sold for home sites on the shores of all i ur counties bordering Lake Norman. Paved streets h a lboater can find plenty of uncrowded water to pursue his sport, and the sight of jaunty have been provided in some instances, and thriving sails billowing in the breeze has become a common colonies of summer-fun seekers are springing up. sight on brisk summer afternoons. W .
'# d } 3 t
gg 7 j, A. t (v j (My
?^ ?g i e
-~
p, , y. x ygg bn ~ e p' C E 3mmmmm %% @j ]@A a8 f 6,'Y,[t ;
~k P - .d '
s ; .( f(.% ;
-- i -
5'( '9+
. he $ -
&ktO M. SAS j 0 *
, e M 3
-W ,, 'h h
- v. ,y m,-y - - ,,--.- n f e m - - w y 1 a r r T,
;- 4 Ag7 :w, LfU([3 u,.. 4
; e u,,,,
g
~
, '_ Dum D,C ""~
p. f '1 r
- a. i
,f Q< T* f ' ^ Q~ g / 'v '
A
,tg yi - % . g $g mdgh,qi q
%m ,
- ^
p y; . x. S x.
- s. . u L % '
4a . y .ys 7$- ' dill',\T,k
/ y - ~ ~ w _g w+ ,,.
w 4
, \
' \
x kI ( yO.' { LONG ISLAND \' '
'; / 2 RAMP 5 N
r W**_ .. . . i m .my*mev .m ye ** e p gana g q =+- @
;f '\
Q<p~ig - . _ . N
' A . ..a.,m. ~
, QQjtl-
- x
"} T
&~
p# -Am ;
~
{l Q Nm43,, ,
'! , 4 :
w-W,* %< h i x ._ s (.,, , .py + -
/
?% w '
\/ j /
A more detailed map of Lake ~\iC l Norman and all of its facilities, s
\j including the secondary road
~ '~ ~ ' "
'3 T
.y-+4; 9 systems and privately operated M t M c;;:t % = d h J..u.. ~~ n W~Mj marinas, is available from Duke Power Company. You
\
N LITTLE CK. k YMMW *M,, , g,m= may receive a copy of this map ". x N 2 RAMP 5 s' gg v.xg g f free by writing Public Rela- n 2 -r OU WWSWp* gy ;.m [e cg+=rf
- tions Department, Duke Power Co., 422 South Church Street, s
y, ~ _ E(IE4~ %sMDM Charlotte, N. C. i
/
L , > ,/\ 'w -
#AC C m ., _ 7 . _ .,c 1
- s Ramps 4
k ,,. , L ,. p ' q['t .w,_ b , , , A
;r .-
y;r ... e7 s A
~. ' ' - - .
, u a. ,,,,,
f n .ca ,. ,
** -s -s,;,$ h} < %.,..m %
CM A plOn E
*fE estre,
__ n cNORMAN
- W" l
1 ni
~
l lO ! YhQ ~ i i
~ - gg2.u am.v. . j _ . ,,
L & , ~n2
, TROUTMAN Y 5
4
,g ... . . - -
!pJ b ,s j( 7.-7, -- 4 'A ...
.....,J' v s,,,, .
ir , r, ' si TERN HILL 'S
~
1 RAMP i 1z @ f4 ' v- \= ,e - is. / i . '\ ./ \ ff
- x. '
40 - sttiger ex. =t 'l ff IRAMF k(.
- l. -
- l ,\ ,.
\ #
\ l
, 'Q PINNACL'r
""# ~
- Je x 3 RAMPS - -
).Q ()McCRARY x CK. _ 2EAMP5 N-j.
/
, ;[ M00iiESVltLE -
, Y ,
~
p, y i Jf. '. $r . 'k Ap ^
. g g .Hl.GER CK.
flRAMP sp' VTQ.A k
=_ , -: +
_.j . nv an
@3 ' V unt' a: b ..
- N h.,b '
s 4b l r, %
- ~-- .
j.
. _ _ . _ __ s ,
~
l WILLIAMSON - !. p 2 RAMP 5 MMSDN mmn+w++m
- n ~*- ri- emp i ,
- t. y-k-
1 l
) ~y' CDRNELIUS
- / ~ r wy 4
W{ L}
-s o. /cRausEv{Cx.4 RAMP 5 N
e i/ y q -r, , y x .j. 42 4 W- * * , . .~ . v -<m , j C H A R LOTTE I s _ . _ _ _ . - - ___ - ___ - ? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - -
l ) I l WEATFTER? Watch it!
. ,w O\
i 4 i I; u e
^% l (.. l W
ig .
+ -$ , ;
' ." 3 + .g [p
- g. {
y r ," m 1,h1 M3 ta. c 1 3, Ag,g . 9dde , [y h?.?% *w 3g ~ n h i /g w .- y,+, I l w" . m0 -
^
FAIR WEATHER CUMULUS-This cloud form is aptly called r , the fair weather cloud. It has little or no vertical development Q%- and is usually accompanied by light winds and mostly clear QQff
'no"->F' I
skies. However, under certain conditions, in summer, this l 4 cloud can achieve gradual, vertical development and increase CUMULONIMBUS-CALVUS-This is the thunderstorm produc-
- in magnitude to a towering cumulus and a cumulonimbus. ing type of cloud which, because of its limited vertical de-velopment, lack of sharp outlines, and absence of the anvil i Normally when these stages occur the resultant thunderstorm will be isolated and take place during the late afternoon. or plume. is not as potentially dangerous as the cumulonim- j bus capillatus or anvil type. l ww ', .y . . . -. r%
k~ / , M* P # The weather associated with this cloud includes gusty winds, l ]{'M-k
%g4 %} j_ g#aaJ rain, thunder and, lightning. However, the intensity of ,each weather element is to a lesser degree than that which is ex-i
~.
Pw a
% 'y' 94 M perienced in an anvil-shaped cumulonimbus. ,
.w.
~$7
""d ~
In view of the difficulty in ascertaining whether this type cloud will retain its form or increase to an anvil type, all mariners shuuld proceed with extreme caution. Normally the
"" . e. e.~ cloud is scattered anel forms during the late afternoon in '
i d - c.Qg*j d spring and summer. Radio static is also produced by the activity withm the cloud,
)
j rm,,,,,,,,,,,,,_ ,
. _ d C "**T i l 7j _y ' ~
DY58* { t . 4 $rEF q
- W_ ~ _ n ..
.==&:un n
- ALTOCUMULUS-This cloud form is composed of white or j gray layers or patches of solid cloud otten with a wavy or 3
rolling appearance. This type cloud indicates the approach of a front. If the clouds thicken and the sky becomes over-
*p ' gi
/
4 l cast, precipitation can be considered imminent. ?.mW g} i. , ; i l i This cloud can be accompanied by strong winds but the in-
}* y _
crease in velocity will be steady producing a gradual buildup r~
- y of the waves. ' af-ns; + y. . >; . ;:--
^
y b;[. i ... :: . i
~
_. lS '.
, j. A CUMULONIMBUS CAPILLATUS - This is the thunderstorm
..-~.J.~ ,"?
- fj t .- g. .
i 4 p <- ; producing cloud. It has a heavy and dense structure with
?y
,A F' * '"
~j considerable vertical development in the form of a mountain l
- e. ^g g h @g@, #
or a massive tower. Often the cloud top is in the form of an anvil or vast plume, the leading edge of which indicates the ] I{ direction of movement of the clouds. The base of the cloud 4
- i j is often very dark with low ragged clouds.
STRATUS FRACTUS OF BAD WEATHER-This cloud form in-This is a potentially dangerous cloud. It is frequently ac-J 4 dicates that bad weather is occurring over the area. Usually co,mpanied by strong and gusty winds moderate to heavy ' 4 the weather is in the form of intermittent or continuous rain rain, thunder, lightnmg and sometimes hail. Occasionally it j 1 with decreased visibilities accompanied by gusty or moder. produces a tornado or waterspout. Over water areas o can ately strong winds. produce danrerous waves withm a relatively short time (less -
- than an hour) after the onset of the strong winds.
J Over water areas waves can attain dangerous heights depend-ing upon the fetch and direction of the wind. These clouds are causef by the approach and passage of warm and cold fronts. Frequent!v they occur as late after-y 4 This cloud form will be the finale in a gradual sequenct Si noon thundershowers on days with high humidity in spring i deterioratmg weather conditions. This s:tuation can per..st and summer. The duration varies quite widely depending on over long periods of tirne, therefore extreme caution is war- the type of weather Dattern prevailing. Thunderstorm activity l
- rented af boating takes place under such inclement con- is usually accompanied by radio static and therefore should ditions. be used as a cautionary sign by the boatman.
4 4
l
)
l h k ' gg W~' q 1? q-sg ~ r j i D*'ts .,%.7.,,1 , G't i[
- t~-a'-- ,
-M p i e,
) >
..u
' ~- - w~ .s . .
';y &'& ~ &-
~e x.
g MsG ll M_.. g M 4 9lg c$m $p $y g i;;%h ~ @3 .2
'My m.,. ,
(*C hiMxwn %:4 ,$ E-Qh %&V u.%Y W;.$ J <tSie
.- x W h .. x :.;;,
M Q &. W+%.? 2 n *wl$ v , W%m M,,k . ,C L.Od %' a.n w wc ,.W M,S,$o m .w b %
$ i?
{ 4% w,
- e SJ:s
- c.p a h
. hp n ~
$h .?$nN$kf? f Q$.:{- ; . .G r# h Mu wp ~yM,.%"
b
. ,,gw g/A.,. f _w _ + , l i-0 ~
- % %r .7 g '7"Kyy%A@Q;4;f .yH
' W %,. ,,> r , WQ p 3 ;g gjg g B>
. }# e .
I ' arg.iFq%.g %ft.. ; e Q'~' W ' wa,p.9' ~n,M K_;n 8y p:;;q a W % ,4 w l N a. 2.);v.; - :m&%yf.,p34 % &p 4 e tr . . . . y;L-s p@ 7gg h*% i y g ;g A
# D; g a .9,7 , QfhQN.9%5 $
4 . W.,y ....s
.y &w M pqA WM.$p~G% ..$iMOv5M- w.sp.m w ..
i One of the several hundred total-electric homes dotting the shores of Lake Norman is this beautiful recreation residence { built by Charles C. Johnson, Jr. of Winston-Salem. It incorporates a 160-year-old log cabin still standing and in excellent
- condition on a Duke Power lease lot. The intricately fitted logs are still as solid as the day they were put into place for a
[ doctor, also named Johnson, who served western tredell County during the early 1800's. Mr. Johnson is director of pur.
- chasing for R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company.
1 I If you want convenience, low cost and trouble- that require it, dialing temperatures precisely to l free operation, then insist on electric heating for your choosing. And, thrifty electric heating floodn i that lakeside recreation lodge or weekend cottage. out to fill every nook and cranny with an even, gentle l Electric heating is constantly ready. Even if warmth.
- you're using the cottage for the first time in a month, Flameless heating means no smoke or soot, so f just flick or twist-and you've got instant heat with things just naturally stay cleaner much longer. This l no fuel storage problem. means fewer housekeeping hours, assuring more Electric heating offers unbeatable convenience of what you built or bought the lakeside house for for those unseasonably cool nights and chilly morn- anyway-leisure, ings, or to maintain a low heat in the dead of win- Finally, electric heating is easy and economical ter when pipes and toilet tanks and bawls might to install. It's the perfect heat for that lakeshore be in danger of freezing. home. For that matter, it's the perfect heat for There's a thermostat in each room with electric any home. Call your nearest Duke Power office comfort heating. You may heat only those areas for information on your needs.
l l l l N, DUKE POWER I
( r e I f The Federal-Uniform Marking System odopted by notional booting orgon- , LAKE NORMAN isotions for use in both ocean ond inland watees is the system now in effect i on Lake Normon. i Large information signs are on lond tips at moier water junctions to give TER further directions. Signs listing safety rules and beating eegulations are posted of most marinos and public boot levnching oreos. e NOTE: ladividuals shall not erect any sign such as those in fegures 1 through
- 5. All such signs are erected by the Four-County Lake Normon Commission, j ond it is unlawful to deface, demoge or destroy any of the signs. g I
yy**hw- f[ >W h%*ve byW9: e"h?wM ff,h Q [ *yy l 1he irit side of the channel going upstream from Cowens Ford Dom will be The creek svr tems which branch outward from the moin channel ore marked marked with odd numerals on square, black signs. The right side of the wi*h onemt signs. Black signs with odd numbers are on the lef t poing away ? channel going upstream from Cowens Ford Dom will be noorked with even from the main channel, and red signs with even numbers are on the right numerals on red triangle signs. going away from the main channel. 2 5 i DANGERI xROCK BOATS-KEEP OUT 57
%y"?
%?"K y
*mT >nW$ #
% , O%WhQY s , ,
Y"?WW?'c WM*'%wff%yr?QO y"mh
* -1 O
l A yellow diamond indicates donger with the hoserd painted on the sign A yellow diamond with cross is another danger indicator, and boots should 5 in block. not progress beyond that point. 3 ANCHORING CONTROLLED MOORING KEEP l Yo# l CLEAR AREA - WAKE g BUOY
#E 25 d# YARDS w & mn % g % ee % m Q --w yp % &pm% y%?*yp a yellow circle indicates a controlled area (such as e docki and boots should Individuals may use a blue banded white buoy with on anchoring ring for heed espionatoon within circle. anchoring boats near shore or docking areas.
A red flag with a white diogonal band on a float indicates a skin diver. Give at least 25 yards clearance. O' 17031
TABLE OF CONTENTS O i Section Page Number
- 4. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION 4-1 i
4.1 THERMAL EFFECTS 4-1 4.1.1
SUMMARY
4-1 4.
1.2 BACKGROUND
STUDIES AND LONG-RANGE PLANNING 4-3 4.1.3 LAKE NORMAN MONITORING PROGRAM 4-3 4.1.4 RESEARCH PROJECT RP-49 4-4 i 4.
1.5 DESCRIPTION
OF CONDENSER COOLING WATER SYSTEM 4-5 4.1.6 EFFECT OF WARMED DISCHARGE ON LAKE WATERS 4-5 i i 4.1.7 ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS 4-8 l 4.2 RADIOLOGICAL EFFECTS 4-10 l 4.2.I
SUMMARY
4-10 4.2.2 RADI0 ACTIVE LIQUID RELEASES 4-10 ! 4.2.3 RADI0 ACTIVE GASE0US RELEASES 4-12 { 4.2.4 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL 4-13 ; 4.2.5 COMPARISON OF RADIOACTIVE GASEOUS AND LIQUID WASTE RELEASES WITH ESTABLISHED STANDARDS AND LIMITS 4-13 ! 4.2.6 THE ENVIRONMENTAL RADI0 ACTIVITY MONITORING PROGRAM 4-17 4.2.7 POSSIBILITIES AND CONSEQUENCES OF ACCIDENTAL RELEASES 4-19 ' 4.2.8 EMERGENCY PLANS 4-19 : l 4.2.9 TRANSPORTATION AND REMOTE PROCESSING 0F SPENT FUEL 4-20 4.3 OTHER WAT ER WATER QUALITY EFFECTS 4-22 'l l 4.3.1 MECHANICAL CLEANING OF CONDENSER TUBES 4-22 4.3.2 MECHANICAL FILTRATION OF STATION WATER SUPPLY 4-22 4.3.3 NON-RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE WATER DISCHARGES 4-22 4-1 I
I i i TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) Section ' Page Number
- 4. 4 LAND USE 4-26 l 4.4.1 McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION 4-26 4.4.2 NEARBY TRANSMISSION LINES 4-27 !
4.4.3 HISTORIC LANDMARKS 4-28 j 4.5 CONSTRUCTION EFFECTS 4-29 i 4.6 AESTHETIC IMPACT 4-30 4.7 McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION AND THE ECONOMY 4-31 4.8 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 4-34 [ t 4.9 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF MAN'S ! ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF i LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY 4-35 ; 4.10 O IRRETRIEVABLE AND IRREVERSIBLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES 4-36 ! h i i f O ! 4-ii
l LIST OF TABLES . ( Table Number Title j 4.1-1 Extreme (Warmest) Climatic Conditions ) Forecast of Monthly Average Water Temperatures l 4.1-2 Normal Climatic Conditions { Forecast of Monthly Average Water Temperatures l 4.2-1 Design Estimates of Annual Quantities from Two Units j i 4.2-2 Equilibrium Fission Product and Corrosion Product Concen- I trations in Reactor Coolant 4.2-3a Normal Operation Estimates.of Annual Radioactivity Releases l in Liquid Waste from Two Units 4.2-3b Design Condition Estimates of Annual Radioactivity Releases ; in Liquid Waste from Two Units 4.2-4 Estimate of Maximum instantaneous Radicactivity Discharge ! Concentration l 4.2-5 Steam Generator Tube Leak Analysis ; 4.2-6 Maximum Radioactivity Concentrations in the Effected Por- . tion of Lake Norman Resulting from Operation of McGuire ! 4.2-7a Normal Operation Estimates of Annual Radioactivity Releases in Gaseous Waste from Two Units 4.2-7b Design Condition Estimates of Annual Radioactivity Releases ! in Gaseous Waste from Two Units ; 1 4.2-8a Annual Whole Body Dose Added by McGuire (mrem) ; 1 4.2-8b Annual Atmospheric Dose (mrem) 4.2-8c Radioactivity Concentration in Lake Norman Excluding Tritium (uCi/ml) 4.2-9 Effects of Reconcentration l 4.2-10 The Environmental Radioactivity Monitoring Program for the McGuire Nuclear Station 4-ill I
]
- , - . ~v., - .m -
I [ t g LIST OF FIGURES Figure Number Title i 4.1-1 Lake Norman Thermal imagery Survey [ 4.4-1 Transmission Lines and RigFts-of-Way ; 4.4-2 Estimated Population Distribution 0-5 Miles 4.4-3 Estimated Population Distribution 5-20 Miles ! 4.4-4 Estimated Population Distribution 20-50 Miles l 4.4-5 Land Use (Acres) Within a 50 Mile Radius ; 4.4-6 Milk Cows Within a 50 Mile Radius ! k 5 i V I l l t i l
?
I l f /~ i (s . l 4-1v
-c,
t l
- 4. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF McGUIRE NUCl. EAR STATION i 4.1 THERMAL EFFECTS 'f f
4.1.1
SUMMARY
The construction and commissioning of McGuire liuclear Station on Lake Norman [ is another step i, the development of the Lake Norman generating complex j conceived in the late 1950's. l
\
Realizing that larger generating facilities must mean greater involvement in water resources, Duke Power launched a comprehensive water research program ; described in other sections of this report, in the late 1950's, the findings r of this program were incorporated in the design of Lake Norman and four ther- i mal station sites were selected on the lake. Examples of important results of water research factored into the Lake Norman facility are - l
- a. Cowans Ford submerged weir - for the purpose of discharging high quality f water downstream from hydro units. [
i . b. Marshall Steam Station - skimmer wall to provide condenser cooling water ; supply from lake bottom. l t
- c. Low-level (bottom) intake for future thermal station near Cowans Ford Dam - !
now the site of McGuire Nuclear Station. ! As each step was taken in the planned development of the Lake Norman genera- l ting facility, field studies were made to check predictions and establish j further base-line data for the next step in the development. Based on field , performance, where appropriate, similar features have been incorporated in the ; design of Duke's Lake Keowee-Oconee Nuclear Station now under construction in ! northwestern South Carolina. ; I To confirm measured influences of the physical thermal effects of Marshall ; Steam Station on Lake Norman, infra-red thermal imagery aerial mapping was 'j made of the project in the fall of 1970. The fall season was chosen because j water discharge temperatures would be highest. The black and white image l shown on the left of Figure 4.1-1 was made by an infra-red scanner from an ! altitude 8,200 feet above Lake Norman. The scanner converts the intensity l of the infra-red light which it " sees" to an intensity of visible light which is recorded on photographic film. Since infra-red intensity depends on the j temperature of the "seen" obj ect, a thermal image (picture) is produced in j which the coolest areas are the darkest and the warmest areas are the lightest, l or whitest. j The " Inlet" arrow on the figure indicates the point of entry of the cooling ! water into Marshall Station, and the " Discharge" arrow shows its point of re- : entry into Lake Norman after passing through a short discharge canal l The condenser inlet water is the darker (cooler) water in the cove to the upper right of Marshall. The far-right boundary of this cove (the short, straight j line between the dark and lighter water) is the skimmer wall. This wall with .l' openings at its bottom has allowed only the cool water at the lake's bottom to be drawn into the cove. Subsequently after the water has passed through the l f 4-1 ! h i
Marshall condensers, it re-enters the lake in this instance only a few degrees warmer than the lake's surface. The low-level intake which will be utilized at McGuire will have a similar effect on water temperatures there. The photograph was made in the late forenoon and southern slopes of shores, parking lots, exposed fields, a golf course and other areas such as highways which have been warmed by the bright sun also appear white. The white bank innediately north of the McGuire site represents the southerly slope of the Cowans Ford Dam. The area to the south of the site is partially wooded and appears darker since the forested areas are cooler than the lake. The signifi-cance of this photograph lies in portraying the limited area of the warm water plume leaving Marshall Steam Station, thus confirming rapid heat dissipation when the warm water enters Lake Norman. The distance separating the Marshall and McGuire sites prevents interaction of their thermal effluents. The warmed waters leaving the thermal station are out of natural temperature equilibrium and rapidly cool over a predictable area. The colored photograph on the right of Figure 4.1-1 is a color enhancement, reduced in size, of the black and white imagery (photograph) shown on the left in this figure. Color enhancements are often made to aid in the inter-pretation of thermal imagery. Over twenty different colors can be introduced to span the temperature range seen by the infra-red camera, ranging from the coolest to warmest scenes in the imagery. In this particular color enhancement, the warmest colors are reddish and the coolest bluish. Infra-red scanning and color enhancement of the resulting thermal imagery to indicate exact surface temperatures is a direct result of space technology. The use of this technique by Duke Power Company represents Duke's continuing policy of utilizing modern technology to help solve future problems before they actually occur. The physical behavior and thermal characteristics of Lake Norman will be objectives of continuing studies. A study of the aquat ic ecosystem of Lake Norman is, of course, linked with the physical studies. These studies, which are continuing, are described within this section of this report. McGuire Nuclear Station will operate in compliance with RULES, REGULATIONS, CLASS IFICAT IONS AND WATER QUALITY STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO THE SURFACE WATERS OF NCRTH CAROLINA, adopted by the North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resour-ces on October 10, 1970, and approved by the Environmental Protection Agency on January 20, 1971. Applicable regulations include RECULATION NO. XI 4.J. which states that Class A-11 Later (Lake Norman is A-II) is not "to exceed 5'F above the natural water tempe rature, and in no case to exceed... 90"F.", REGUL AT ION NO. XI 4.k. which limits gross beta activity, and REGULATION NO. IV , which provides that tests for compliance with the standards be made only after l " reasonable opportunity for dilution and mixture" In summary, responsible usage of water resources by McGuire Nuclear Station is a product of long-range planning, con fi rmed by extensive field testing, and this usage will comply with all applicable water quality standards. As the ! station site is developed, an environmental water quality monitoring program (Section 4.1.3) will monitor activities as a safeguard. This program will also establish the significance of any environmental change produced by McGuire, as well as establish base-line data and guidance for planning and design of future developments. 4-2
I P l I i 4.
1.2 BACKGROUND
STUDIES AND LONG-RANGE PLANNING McGuire Nuclear Station is the second of four thermal stations planned for ! Lake Norman. Environmental considerations played a major role in initial { and final concept of this project. Models of natural thermal regimes in- ! Lake Norman were based on limnological studies of other reservoirs in this . region. Models of natural thermal regimes were then expanded to include l artificial heat rejected from the planned thermal stations, thus developing j an inventory of water resources stored in the zones of the epilimnion, thermo- l cline and hypolimnion during lake stratification. Limnological studies dicta- l ted the uses of these zones of water. One example is the submerged weir around I the hydroelectric units in Cowans Ford Dam. This weir effectively curbs hypo-limnetic waters and thus only high quality waters are discharged downstream l by the hydroelectric units. Further, it was clear that by using a skimmer wall to curb epilimnetic (surface) waters, the waters of the hypolimnion [ (bottom) could effectively be used as thermal station condenser cooling water r supplies. Hypolimnetic waters in regional lakes during periods of lake strati-fication are relatively barren biologically, very cool and devoid of oxygen. These cool waters can be passed through the condensers of a thermal station , and returned to the lake at temperatures near the lake's surface temperature. The use of hypolimnetic (bottom) waters as a cooling water source wcs employed i in the design and development of the first thermal stat ion on Lake Norman, i Marshall Steam Station. Since Marshall's initial operation in 1965, predictions ; have been confirmed by field studies. For the fif th consecutive year, Marshall ( has been the nation's most efficient thermal station which means the waste heat rejected to the environment per kilowatthour output is the lowest in the U. S. , quantitative knowledge of hypolimnetic resources in the late 1950's led to the i design and installation of a low-level cooling water intake system, for a future j thermal station, during the construction of Cowans Ford Dam. This site has been ! chosen for McGuire Nuclear Station. Originally conceived as a fossil station l site, cooling water supply arrangements have been adequately revised to conser- ! vatively accommodate the nuclear station commensurate with minimal thermal effects. 4.1.3 LAKE NORMAN MON ITORING PROGRAM l Upon filling in 1963, Lake Norman was included in Duke's routine reservoir ; limnological program. Natural thermal regime forecasts were checked and the > design of the condenser cooling water system for Marshall Steam Station was finalized. The 350 Mw unit No. I at Marshall began service in March, 1965, l and an expanded physical study of the lake in the vicinity of this first thermal generating facility was also started. In Apri'l, 1966, Unit No. 2 at ! Marshall began commercial operation bringing the nameplate capacity of Marshall Station to 700 Mw. During 1969 and 1970, Units 3 and 4 were brought into ; commercial service at Marshall, completing development of the site with a st6 tion nameplate capacity of 2000 Mw and a peak capability of 2137 Mw. - i The scope of Duke's continuing sampling program is described below: {
- a. Sampling has been conducted at twenty-six (26) selected synoptic stat ions 1 th rou ghou t the lake as follows:
t
- 1. At nineteen (19) stations to gather physical data for lake water pro-files. 4 5
i 4-3
1 2 1 1 l 3 2. At fourteen (14) stations to measure as many as twelve (12) dif ferent I parameters such as phosphates, nitrogen, i ron, silica, manganese, etc. $ 3. At six (6) stations to establish plankton species distributions and , j populations in support of coincident fish sampling by the N. C. State 4 Fisheries biologists, h i 4. At nine (9) stations, including Cowans Ford tail race, to fi t Lake Norman into a regular monthly limnological program covering Duke's other lakes { as well. ; l i > t
- b. Continuous sampling consists of:
l , i 1. Four (4) permanent l y installed cont inuously recording ins t rument s in t l operation since October of 1967 at the following locations for water ! ! temperature profile measurements: [
- a. Adj acent to McGuire site just upst ream f rom Cowans Ford Dam.
! b. On a fixed raft in the discharge from Marshall Steam Station into ; Lake Norman . ! c. On both the lake and station sides of the skimmer wall in the ' Marshall intake cove. I
- 2. Continuous recording of dissolved oxygen and temperature in the waters !
discharged downstream f rom Cowans Ford Dam. ! 1 i Analytical models used in the design of McGuire's cooling water system were f based on the results of seven years' sampling on Lake Norman as outlined l 4 above. ; e i i The present monitoring program will be expanded to assess the influence and , significance of McGuire Nuclear Station on Lake Norman. It is also the goal of this program to develop further f actual information to guide the develop- l ment of the two remain ing the rmal s i tes. l 4.1.4 RESEARCH PROJECT RP-49 i i Supplementing a comprehensive physical study, which began in the summer of !' 1966 to assess Marshall Steam Station's influence on Lake Norman, a coinci-l dental field biological research program was initiated in mid 1968 to study l aquatic life in the zone of Marshall Steam Station. In thi s research, Duke i Power Company is cooperating with the Edison Electric institute which sponsors i the study and Johns Hopkins University in Baltinore, Maryland, which directs j l it. The proj ect is identified as Research Proj ect 49 (RP-49) . Lake Norman
- is one of several sites across the nation which were chosen for this study.
The N. C. Wildlife Resources Connission is cooperating and has assigned fis-i heries biologists and other personnel to conduct the Lake Norman fisheries i ! studies. Under the guidance of Duke's consulting limnologist at the Univer- f { sity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, an ecologist at University of North l Carolina at Charlotte is making species and population studies of fresh water l plankton, which are important links in the fish food chain. Studies of ' i Benthic organisms and fish diseases are an inportant part of this program. - Duke's Water Research, Chemical and Envir s ental Engineering nroups are con- i i ducting segments of this progran. r
j; i-4 3 !. The goal of this project is to establish the significance of any offset in the j aquatic ecosystem of Lake Norman due to the use of the lake waters as a source of thermal station cooling. i RP_-49 is a broad study of thermal ef fects, encompassing more than the Lake Norman investigation. Though no final results of the Lake Norman studies have been published to date, the RP-49 project has generated six reports covering physical, biological and siting considerations of thermal effects. l 4.
1.5 DESCRIPTION
OF CONDENSER COOLING WATER SYSTEM Each of the three chief components of the McGuire condenser cooling system, i.e., the intake structures, the condenser and the discharge canal has features designed to safeguard the aquatic life in Lake Norman. ! There will be two intake structures. One was built adjacent to and upstream of the base of Cowans Ford Dam before the lake filled, and will be used during the summer to draw cold water from the bottom of the la ke. The other intake i l will draw water from about 30 feet under the lake surface. Both intakes have i i low intake velocities so as to avoid physical and biological harm to the lake, l with the lower one capable of providing less than half the required flow and
- the upper one able to furnish the whole flow by itself. The water from the lower ,
l intake will feed into the pump forebay of the upper intake. Trash racks and i intake screens will be provided for both intakes. During unusual or extreme l weather conditions, when the upper water is warm enough to produce discharge I temperatures higher than the N. C, water quality criteria limits, the cold ! - water from the lower intake can be mixed with the warmer upper water to lower j the discharge temperature. j f i The condenser will utilize mechanical methods for tube cleaning, eliminating f the need for injecting chlorine, or other biocide, into the circulating water. l The McGuire condensers are also sized to permit water temperature rises as low l
- as 16"F when the units are at full load. Duke's previous experiences have been I
with condensers allowing an 18"F minimum rise, and though no aquatic damage has I been evident, it is felt that the added flexibility of the 16* condensers will , be beneficial. ! The discharge facilities at McGuire will be designed to allow the warmed water i to float on the surface. This will f acilitate cooling and will allow passage , for fish and other aquatic life beneath the plume. ! I l 4.1.6 EFFECT OF WARMED DISCHARGE ON LAKE WATERS i 1 ! The ecological and direct biological impact of warmed effluent from McGuire l Nuclear Station are discussed in paragraph 4.1.7, Ecological Ef fects. l l Estimated condenser cooling water intake and discharge temperatures are based } l on current analytical (mathematical) modeling of Lake Norman. The first such ; j model was developed in the late 1950's to predict the limnological behavior - l 1 including temperature and dissolved oxygen - of the then proposed Lake Norman. ! Subsequent refinements of this model were developed in the early 1960's to forecast intake and discharge cooling water temperatures expected at Marshall j i Steam Station on Lake Norman. Extensive field testing (1966 to date) has vali- I l dated the predictive techniques used. In 1961, the initial concept of the 4-5 ; f r -e w v-a -,, e-w - _ _ . - - - - -
I I l cooling water system at the McGuire site was incorporated into the model, and , the results of these studies were submitted to the North Carolina State Stream Sani tat ion Committee leading to Federal Power Commission approval of construc-tion of the low-level cooling-water intake structure now to be used for McGui re. TFe maximum cooling water flow required for the condensers serving McGuire Nuclear Station is 4400 cubic feet per second. In the analytical technique used to determine probable water temperatures to be experienced during operation of McGuire Nuclear Station, it was necessary to begin with historical water temperatures in Lake Norman and to assess the ef fects of adding the rejected heat in the condenser cooling water to the reservoir. Historical water temperatures reflect ef fects of meteorology, in flows, hydro operation and any influence of Marshall Steam Station. The follo-wing parameters were considered basic to the studies made:
- a. Ext reme monthly Lake Norman surface elevations (full pond, El 760') are assumed as 745' in July and August, and 750' for all other months.
- b. Based on Charlotte, North Carolina ESSA (now the National Weather Service of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) 30-year (1940-1969) meteorological records, extreme monthly conditions, as adversely affect surface cooling, are assumed to exist.
- c. Maximum condenser cooling water outlet temperatures of both 90*F and 95"F are considered.
- d. Maximum withdrawal th rough McGu i re's exi st ing low-level cool ing-water intake O at Cowans Ford Dam is limited to 2000 cf s.
- e. Monthly inflows to and outflows from the condensers in McGuire Nuclear Station are considered as discrete layers of water within Lake Norman.
Volumes of water assigned to the layers were determined from the Lake Norman Area-Volume Curve.
- f. Seven years of historical water temperature profiles on Lake Norman are considered with particular emphasis on the monitoring station located upstream of Cowans Ford Dam adj acent to McGuire's low-level cooling-water intake.
- g. The opening of the high-level intake is being designed to withdraw between elevations 720' and 735', while the opening of the exist ing low-level Intake was designed to withdraw approximately between elevat ions 655' and 670' .
The cool ing water temperat ure predict ion nethodology is briefly sunmarized as follows: Starting with the warmest Lake Norman water temperature profile of record for each month, condenser cooling water tenperature rise and flow rate is com-puted to meet a specified maximum condenser discharge temperature. The initial step in the analytical procedure is to select a starting month in the series of twelve months and proceed throughout a twelve-month period. Using the extreme historical tenperature profile for the month selected to initiate the study, a new expected temperature profile is constructed 4-6
reflecting adjustments required by operation of McGuire, lake level varia-tion, rate of heat dissipation based on meteorological conditions for the month and postulated artificial heat residual. Low-level intake water is used only as necessary to avoid exceeding the specified maximum cooling water discharge temperature. The condenser cooling water temperature, c1though not to exceed the maxi-mum monthly averages indicated, is intentionally maintained above the com-puted equilibrium (natural) temperature of the lake to maximize surface cooling mechanisms in order to conserve lake heat sink potentials for use during abnormally hot summer months. Having constructed a lake temperature for the starting, or Initial month, the method proceeds chronologically to the second month. Here again the extreme (warmest) historical profile of the second month is reconstructed to represent withdrawals, any lake level changes, any artificial heat residual from previous month and water tempe-rature constraints. This iterative analytical procedure is followed until the particular study is completed. Based on studies outlined above, Table 4.1-1 presents monthly average conden-ser cooling water inlet a,d outlet temperatures for Extreme Conditions of record, and a 95*F maximum condenser outlet temperature with a 16*F tempera-ture rise during the warmest months. The forecast under these extreme condi-tions is conservative inasmuch as the composite year is made up of the twelve warmest months from seven years of lake records and 30 years of meteorological records. Studies also show that based on Probable Conditions, using monthly average Lake Norman water temperatures and meteorology, a 90*F maximum condenser outlet tem-perature can be attained as shown in Table 4.1-2. As an additional degree of conservatism, the forecasts of water temperature are based upon continuous full load operation of McGuire throughout the year, whereas actually there will be periods of lower loads. Tables 4.1-1 and 4.1-2 present analytical results reflecting minimum condenser cooling water flows consistent with limitations on condenser discharge tempera-tures shown. As the lake begins to stratify in the spring, it is important to conserve the cool hypolimnetic waters for later use should the summer prove exceptionally warm. l In the cooler months of the year, the condenser cooling water system has the flexibility to increase cooling water flows to reduce cooling water tempera-ture rise to 16*F should this mode of operation be found necessary. The following conciusions are drawn from the studies outlined above:
- a. Under probable, or averane experienced conditions of record, the condenser cooling water discharge temperature will not exceed a monthly average of 90*F.
- b. In the improbable compilation of the twelve warmest months in 30 years of Weather Bureau records, January was the warmest winter month and June the warmest summer month. These months represent, therefore, the extreme impro-bable, adverse cooling conditions. Under these conditions studies show:
l 4-7
r
- 1. During the warmest June, the natural equi 1ibrium water temperature at the surface is 88*F, and 3500 surface acres are required to cool the McGuire condenser effluent f rom 95 F to comply with 90 F maxi-mum temperature criterion.
- 2. Again during this same June, only 940 acres are required to cool the effluent to 5'F above the natural equilibrium water temperature, or to 93 F.
3 During the warmest January, coincidentally, again 3500 acres are required to cool the McGuire condenser effluent to within 5*F of the natural equill-brium water temperature.
- 4. No cooling allowances due to advection or precipitation were included in the above calculations. Any residual heat at the end of one month was carried forward into the next month as described earlier in this section.
- c. From the above, 3500 surface acres (10.87 of the lake's surface area) will provide the required cooling area to comply with water quality temperature criteria. Measurements of existing warm water effluent plumes, particularly at Marshall Steam Station on Lake Norman, enable prediction of actual volumes of water both within the mixing or dilution zone and the remainder of the relatively undisturbed body of water. The volume of water within the mixing or dilution zone will:
- 1. Under drawdown to elevation 745 feet m.s.t.
- a. Represent 12.5% of the lake volume beneath the 3500 acre surface area and
- b. Only 2.l'/ of the entire lake volume
- 2. And at surface elevation 760 m.s.l. (full pond)
- a. Represent 11.9/ of the lake volume beneath the 3500 acres and
- b. Only 1.3/ of the entire lake volume
- d. Duke concludes that the prescribed mixing or dilution zone defined herein provides aquatic biota and wildlife a safe, adequate and usable passage up and down Lake Norman.
4.1.7 ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS Research Proj ect EE I RP-49 (see paragraph 4.1.4) and " Organic Productivity as Determined by Periphyton Accumulation on Glass Slides" by Dr. Charles M. Weiss, Consulting Limnologist, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, are two principal studies def in ing the aquat ic ecology of Lake Norman. The important sport fishes in Lake Norman are listed by the North Carolina Wild-life Resources Commission in terms of percent - catch as follows: "41/ sunfish, 33' trappie, 13/ largemouth bass, S/ catfish, 4! white bass, 3/ carp" (A Catalog of the Inland Fishing Waters in North Carolina, 1968). A more recent publication 4-8 A . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _
.-. _ _ ... _ __ - _.._.~._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _. _ . _ -
t notes that "the lake currently supports good warm-water sport fisheries for l largemouth bass, white bass and crappies" (Effects of Thermal Pollution Upon
- Lake Norman Fishes, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, 1970, see l Appendix 4A).
l. u l There are no commercial fisheries in Lake Norman and no unique fish species i present in the lake, with possible exception of stocked striped bass and ; l threadfin shad. Threadfin shad, Dorosoma petenense, is the primary forage { . . species required to sustain the important game spc:!es. y . i Since the locale under consideration is a lake community, no barrier to migra- i l tion is likely. It is anticipated that some spawning will occur in the region , i of the McGuire discharge. Although spawning times of some species may be ; ) modified by variations in water temperatures between the discharge and ambient l j lake areas, no detrimental effects are expected (Appendix 4A). i ): McGuire Nuclear Station will probably have its most noticeable impact on local l ) fish populations during the winter period of low ambient water temperatures. [ ] During this period, the plant's heated effluent will facilitate the overwinter- ! l ing of threadfin shad. It is anticipated that in response to the concentrations ! of threadfin shad in the region of the plant's discharge, a migration of piscl- l l
- vorous (fish-eating) species into the region of the discharge is likely, with !
l a consequent development of sport fisheries (Appendix 4A). j ' 1 As mentioned in the preceding section, the volume of the lake effected by 1 i- McGuire will be only 1% to 2% of the lake's total volume. i Aquatic ecological and limnological programs will be expanded under the guidance ! of coc:oltants to detect any significant ecological changes which may result ! from McGulia Nuclear Station. The ecological monitoring program will include j thermal, chemical, radiological, hydrological, mechanical and meteorological i ef fects of McGuire kuclear Stat ion on the ecology. l e i I i 4 I t I i 4-9 ! 1 i
4 ) f 4.2 RADIOLOGICAL EFFECTS 4.2.1
SUMMARY
l ! Conservative analyses demonstrate conclusively that there will be no adverse
- effects on the environment from discharges of radioactive material resulting j f rom normal or unusual operation of McGuire. The evaluation of the expected 4
performance of the waste disposal systems shows that these systems will pro-i cess potentially radioactive wastes and reduce discharges to levels far below the limits of 10 CFR 20. ; 1 l When viewed in perspective, the radiological effect of McGuire upon a person l living cont;nuously next door to the station property is negligible. The effect of the station may be compared to radiation from other causes as follows: i i Annual Average Dose in Source U. S. (millirem) i r l Background radiation from cosmic rays 74 - 159 earth, etc.il), (2) Normal food, water and air intake (I) 21 t I Estimated dose from man's activities-medical l ! x-rays, materials of conptruction, weapons fallout, etc. (2), (3), (4) 84 - 145 l i Total without McGuire 179 - 325 i t An individual living at the site boundary will receive an additional estima- i ted dose due to normal operation of McGuire of 0.22 millirem t An environmental radioactivity monitoring program will be established to verify that discharges from the station are as predicted. This program will monitor J all critical exposure pathways which could possibly lead to radiation exposure ! to man, at activity levels for below those that may be considered harmful; ! thereby allowing ample opportunity for corrective action. i 3 4.2.2 RADI0 ACTIVE LIQUID RELEASES l i Operation of the station results in some waste liquids which must be treated ! before they can be reused or discharged. The liquid waste disposal system I provides this treatment capability for liquids which may contain radioactivity. t (I)" Report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation,' General Assembly, Official Records: 21st Session, Suppl. No. 14 (A/6314), p. 35, United Nations, N. Y. (1966) l
,2)L.
\ R. Solon et al., ' Investigations of Natural Environmental Radiation," ;
Science, 131, 903 (1960).
R. L. Penfil and M. L. Broun, " Genetically Significant Dose to the United ;
States Population from Diagnostic Medical Roetgenology, " Radiology," 90, 209 i 1963), 1964. ! ( b ) "Fe b r ua r y , Population Dose from X-Rays," U. S. 1964, U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service, PHS Pub. No. 2001 (October, 1969). i 4-10 i I l
I i I The liquid waste. disposal system is designed to (1) collect reactor grade water and process it for reuse and (2) to collect potentially radioactive liquid 1 wastes and process them to forms suitable for release or shipment offsite. This i design objective is attained by segregation of equipment drains and waste streams ! to prevent mixing of water which is normally reused with that which is normally discharged. Process equipment includes holdup tanks, filters, demineralizers and an evaporator. { In addition to the waste liquids described above, discharge of some reactor , coolant may be necessary for control of tritium concentrations in the station. l Routine discharge of this reactor coolant will not be necessary. However, j the contribution to the liquid waste discharge from the station of the largest j amount of reactor coolant which may be discharged in one year has been included ; in the analyses incorporated in this section. This quantity of reactor coolant , can be treated for release by either the liquid waste disposal system or the boron recycle system. , The estimated volumes of potentially radioactive liquid wastes resulting from operation of the station are presented in Table 4.2-1. Liquid radioactive ! discharges are far below the limits of 10 CFR 20, as shown in Table 4.2-3 . Discharges are shown for two conditions: (1) normal operation and (2) design - (upper limit) conditions. Routine station discharges are expected to be no more than those shown for normal operation. Design condition discharges are ; shown to illustrate the expected performance of the liquid waste disposal system during limited periods of operation with ninor defects in one percent of the fuel. The radioactive discharges shown in Table 4.2-3 are based on the following assumptions: i 1
- a. Fission product and corrosion product concentrations in the reactor cool-ant as shown in Table 4.2-2.
i
- b. Non-recycleable reactor coolant leakage of 13,000 gallons per year. l I
- c. Maximum discharge of 150,000 gallons of reactor coolant in one year for 'j control of tritium concentration. :
t
- d. An eight-hour process period. ;
- e. A process decontamination factor of 6.1 X 103 . I
- f. Dilution in the average condenser cooling water flow of 1.63 X 10 6gpm.
The maximum instantaneous concentration of radioactivity in the condenser cool- ) ing water discharge is based on the flow of condenser circulating water. The { instantaneous discharge concentration is shown in Table 4.2-4 for the normal flow and for minimum flow. '! !n* increment of radioactive material released due to fuel defects and miscel- ! lous system leakage is already included in the discharge quantities shown iable 4.2-3. Defects in steam generator tubes, which results in small leaks i om the reactor coolant system into the secondary side of the steam generator, j w 11 not result in radioactive liquid discharge. In the unlikely event of i st eam generator tube defects, the steam generator blowdown water will be treated and reused. 4-11
l l 1 The potential buildup of radioactivity concentrations in Lake Norman was inves-tigated by a conservat ive model which ut ilized a portion of the lake waters (less than two percent of total lake volume) near the station for dilution of station discharge. The result of this analysis is reported in Table 4.2-6. These concentrations are far below the limits of 10 CFR 20 and would be diluted even further before reaching any of the public water supply intakes on Lake Norman or downstream from the lake. These analyses demonstrate that concentrations of radioactivity in Lake Norman result ing from normal operation of the stat ion are quite small when compared to the limits of 10 CFR 20 and there will be no adverse environmental effects from liquid releases from the station. 4.2.3 RADIOACTIVE GASEOUS RELEASES The gaseous waste disposal system functions to remove potentially radioactive gaseous contaminants from the reactor coolant and to collect gases generated " ! by operat ion of the boron recycle evaporator. These gases are contained during normal station operation, and there is no need for intentional discharge of j radioactive gases via the gaseous waste disposal system. i
- A portion of the non-recycleable reactor coolant leakage denoted in Section i 4.2.2 was assumed to occur inside the containment and the remainder inside i the auxiliary building. Gases resul t ing f rom leakage inside the containment j will be contained until the containment is purged. The containment will be i purged periodically to increase the time an operator can spend in the contain-1 ment. This added time permits more frequent inspections of equipment, parti-cularly instrumentation, inside the containment. The activity level in the containment atmosphere was based on an assumed reactor coolant system leak.
Activity buildup in the containment was calculated for a seven-day period. l This activity was then discharged to the atmosphere by the containment purge i system. Gases resulting from leakage inside the auxiliary building were ' assumed to be released without further decay to the atmosphere via the auxiliary building ventilation system. The concentrations of gaseous activity at the Exclusion Area boundary resulting from the combined releases f rom the contain-ment and the auxiliary building are presented in Table 4.2-7 and are based on j the following assumptions: I j a. Fission product and tritium concentrations in the reactor coolant as shown in Table 4.2-2.
- b. All the tritium contained in the leaking reactor coolant remains in the I
vapor state and is discharged to the atmosphere. All the xenon and I Krypton and one percent of the iodine is released from the reactor cool-ant. l l c. Total leakage if reactor coolant of 13,000 ga llons pe r year, of which 4,000 gallons is assumed to lcak inside the containment and the remainder inside the auxiliary building.
- d. Dispersion in accordance with the 30-day and annual atmospheric diffusion i
models for release from containment and auxiliary building, respectively. 1 l 4-12 1
t
?
.,. Defects in steam generator tubes, as discussed in Section 4.2.2, are a possible ; source of radioactive gaseous releases from the secondary side through the air I ej ec tor . The resulting discharge of radioactivity will be controlled and limi- 7 ted. The analysis of a radioactive discharge resulting from a postulated steam . generator tube defect, including simultaneous fuel defects (design conditions), ' is summarized in Table 4.2-5 These analyses demonstrate that the concentrations of gaseous radioactivity at the Exclusion Area boundary resulting from operation of the station are ! quite small when compared to the limits of 10 CFR 20. There will be no ad- I verse environmental effects resulting from gaseous releases from the station. 4.2.4 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL f f The solid waste disposal system provides the capability to package solid wastes ! for shipment in a variety of AEC or Department of Transportation approved con-tainers to an offsite licensed disposal facility. Evaporator concentrate and r
. pent resin will be handled in the waste drumming room or directed to a truck- :
mounted shipping container. Other solid wastes of low activity or no activity, such as soiled clothing, rags, paper and gloves, will be compressed in drums i by a hydraulic compactor. Adequate monitoring of this material will be pro- : vided to assure safe storage prior to shipment. Shipping container design and permissible radiation levels external to the con- ; tainers are governed by regulations of the AEC and the Department of Transpor- ; tation. Duke will meet the requirements imposed by these regulations to assure j safe transportation of solid wastes. ! Ultimate disposal of solid wastes will be by burial in an AEC or Agreement State l licensed facility meeting the requirements for such facilities imposed by the ; AEC. These requirements govern the form of the solid wastes and the integrity [ of the burial container, assuring safe disposition of solid wastes. { 4.2 5 COMPARIS0N OF RADI0 ACTIVE GASE0US AND LIQUID WASTE RELEASES WITH ; ESTABLISHED STANDARDS AND LIMITS !
- a. Gaseous and Liquid Releas.:s f
The radioactive waste handling and processing systems at McGuire are designed [ in accordance with the latest available technology. Therefore, it may be i expected that any release of radioactive materials will be as low as is prac-ticable. It has been shown in Tabies 4.2-6 and 4.2-7 that expected radio-active liquid and gaseous releases result in concentrations of radionuclides , which are small f ractions of the applicable maximum permissible concentra- l tions (MPC) found in 10 CFR 20. Correspondingly, the resulting doses to i individuals are expected to be a small fraction of the applicable limits. Using the results of Tables 4.2-$ and 4.2-7, dose estimates were made for radioactive effluents. These dose estimates are presented in Table 4.2-8 which compares these doses with naturally occuring background doses and concentrations and with applicable limits. j The dose estimates from radioactive gaseous releases are conservatively ! calculated assuming that an individual is continuously exposed to the maxi- l 1 4-13 l
mum downwind concentration of radionuclides at the Exclusion Area boundary (Table 4.2-3) for one full year. Dose estimates from radioactive liquid releases were made in two parts. First, the dose resulting from assuming that an Individual's total water intake for one year came f rom that portion of Lake Norman containing the maximum concentration of radionuclides as shown in Table 4.2-7 Second, the dose resulting f rom continuous exposure due to swimming, boating, fishing or walking along the shore of the lake for one year was calculated. These doses may be summarized as follows: Dose Estimates (millirem per year) Normal Design Operation Conditions Gaseous Waste Re l ea s es (2) ,11 jo Liquid Waste Releases (drinking) .11 .18 Liquid Waste Releases (swimming, etc.) 7 X 10-6 .0005 TOTAL .22 10.2 The total liquid and gaseous dose estimate of .22 millirem for normal opera-t ion and 10.2 millirem for design conditions may be compared di rectly to the Federal Radiation Council /AEC limit (Radiation Protection Guide) of 500 millirem per year maximum dose to an individual and 170 millirem per year to a suitable sample of the exposed population group. The result ing gaseous doses of .11 millirem for normal operat ion and 10 for design conditions may be evaluated as fcllows: A study by the National Center for Radiological Health,(I) shows the average gamma background dose rate for the measurements made in East-ern North Carolina to be 8.0 uR/hr (.r03 mrem /hr) and the average for similar measurements made in Tennessee ;o be 9.4 uR/hr (.0094 mrem /hr) . Assuming the dose rate at McGuire to be somewhere within this range, which has been confirmed by measurements made at the site by Duke, the annual gamma background dose at this location prior to construction is between 70 and 82 mRen. (This dose represents garma only and excludes other cont ribut ions to the total background dose.) (I) Radiological Health Data and Reports, Vol. 9, No. 11, November, 1968,
" Summary of Natural Environmental Gamma Radiation Using a Calibrated Portable Scintillation Counter,' National Center for Radiological Health.
(2) The doses resulting f rom containment purge as discussed in Section 4.2.3 are based on a 30-day atmospheric diffusion model. This is conservative since the purging could be accomplished during more favorable atmospheric conditions in which case the resulting doses would be lower. 4-14
in order to evaluate the significance of liquid waste releases from ficGuire as they relate to background conditions, comparisons have been made with published data taken from " Radiological Health Data and Reports," a publi-cation of the U. S. Public Health Service. A study made in 1967 by the Radiological Health Section of the North Carolina State Board of Health (1) shows the average background radioactivity concentration in the Catawba River at Charlotte, North Carolina, and presumably also in Lake Norman as being 2.65 pCi/1 (2.65 x 10-6 uti/ml), gross beta (other than tritium) . This value may be compared with Table 4.2-6 which shows that the maximum equilibrium concentration of activity in the affected portion of Lake Norman as a result of expected liquid waste releases is 2 5 x 10-12 uCi/ml for design conditions. Sampling results for the yeer 1970 by this same agency (2) show the gross beta activity other than tritium to average 2.4 pCi/l (2.4 X 10-9 uC i/ml) . Comparison of these gross concentrations may be made with the U. S. Public Health Service drinking water standards. These standards, based on consi-derat ion of Federal Radiation Council recommendations, set the limits for approval of a drinking water supply at 1000 pCi/l (1.0 X 10-6 uCi/ml) gross beta radioactivity (when strontium 90 is at a negligibly small fraction of its limit of 10 pCi/l or 1.0 X 10-8 uCi/ml. It can thus be seen that concen-trations resulting from radioactive liquid waste releases are small in com-parison to the U. S. Public Health Service drinking water standards. Using the average concentration noted in the study referenced above, (2.65 pCi/l), the total amount of background radioactivity in Lake Norman at full volume was calculated to be 3570 mci at any moment during 1967 > (and about the same in 1970(3)) . Also, based on average streamflow, more than 6300 mci of act ivity flowed by Cowans Ford during the year. These amounts may be compared directly with the eight mci per year of gross beta activity, other than tritium, expected to be released from the station in liquid effluents during normal operation and with the 710 mci per year during design conditions. In other words, the concentration and the gross beta radioactivity other than tritium in Lake Norman resulting from liquid waste disposal operations will only be a small fraction of the amounts that have existed there and that exist there now without the nuclear station. The source of this existing background radioactivity in Lake Norman is described as follows:
"All waters contain traces of radioactivity originating from naturally radioactive minerals dissolved from rock strata or from radioactive particulate matter or gases in the atmosphere. Common among these (I) Radiological Health Data and Reports, Vol. 10, No. 5, tsay 1969 ,
" Radioactivity in North Carolina Surface, Ground and Cistern Waters, January-December, 1967," Sanitary Engineering Division, Radiological (2) Health Section, North Carolina State Board of Health.
Radiological Health Data Reports, Vol. 9, No. 11, November, 1968,
" Summary of Natural Environmental Gamma Radiation Using a Calibrated Portable Scintillation Counter," National Center for Radiological (3) Health.
Unpublished data (1970). Gross beta activity, Charlotte Surface Water. North Carolina State Board of Health, Radiation Protection Program. ! 4-15 L .. , . . _
materials are trace elements of potassium-40, radium, thorium and uranium. Such trace elements are dissolved by water, both on its way to and flowing in the water courses. Precipitation is the major mecha-nism by which particulate matter or radioactive gases such as thoron and radon are removed from the atmosphere. The combined radioactivity of these materials constitutes what is known as background radioactivity of the water. The total radioactivity would include both background radioactivity and cont ribut ions f rom f allout and other man-made sources.
"A knowledge of the concentration of the background radioactivity, as well as the total activity, is an important factor in the appraisal of water quality since standards pertaining to radiation exposure or concentration within drinking) water are expressed in terms of additions to the natural background."(l The above comparison was made based on gross beta activity other than tri-tium. The remainder of this paragraph will consider the significance of tritium in liquid waste releases from McGuire. Table 4.2-6 shows the maxi-mun equilibrium concentration of tritium in Lake Norman. The resulting dose f rom drinking this water would be 0.11 mrem per year. This 0.11 mrem dose is 1/4500th of the Radiation Protection Guide for an individual and 1/1500th of the Radiation Protection Guide for a suitable sample of the exposed population.
- b. Evaluation of Possible Exposure Pat hways to Man Al though the amount of radioact ivit y added to the envi ronment from station operation is minimal, possible critical exposure pathways to man have been evaluated in order to estimate the maximum dose to an individual and to establish the sampling requirements for the Environmental Radioactivity Monitoring Program. These pathways include:
- 1. Drinking water from that portion of Lake Norman affected by the radio-active liquid waste releases or from wells directly associated with this portion of the lake.
- 2. Swimming, boating, fishing or walking along the shore of lake within this same area.
3 Eating fish from within this portion of the lake.
- 4. Whole body dose from gaseous waste releases.
5 Drinking milk from locations affected by gaseous waste releases.
- 6. Eating foods grown in areas affected by gaseous waste releases.
Items 1, 2 and 4 above have been enumerated previously in this section. l In regard to item 3, an individual would have to eat a minimum of 1,452 ( Radiolc I r 11 Hea l th Data c ad Report s , Vol. 10, No. 5, May 1969,
'Radioc. ity in North Carolina Surface, Ground and Cistern Waters, January-December 1967," Sanitary Engineering Division, Radiological Health Section, North Carolina State Board of Health.
4-16 1
pounds of fish a day, every day, in order to reach the allowable annual O dose limit (Radiation Protection Guide),-under the maximum design condi-tions and assuming the maximum reconcentration factors in the environment. See Table 4.2-9 l i e Concerning exposure pathways 5 and 6 outlined on the preceding page: i An extensive study of the Dresden Nuclear Station was made by the i U. S. Public Health Service (l) using very sensitive instruments. The ; Dresden Nuclear Station is an early boiling water type reactor which ; discharged more than 800,000 curies of radioactivity in-gaseous and I liquid waste ef fluents in 1969 (compared with less than 927 curies [ total expected from McGuire). No radioactivity attributable to Dres- ! den was found in samples of rainwater, soil, cabbage, grass, corn ' husks, milk, deer, rabbit, surface water, drinking water or fish. However, traces of radioactivity, far below acceptable limits, were found in three other samples. The study concludes with the statement i that, "On the basis of these measurements, exposure to the surrounding ! population through consumption of food and water from radionuclides i released at Dresden was not measurable." c The extremely small amounts of iodine and other radioactive particulates that are expected to be released, even at design conditions, make milk : and other food crops of no significance as a possible critical pathway to ; man. Use of Lake Norman water for irrigation purposes will also not be ! of significance in regard to radioactivity in food crops. It is also ; important to note that although tritium is the major constituent in the ! waste releases, tritium does not reconcentrate in biological materials beyond the concentrations found in water. ; in conclusion, it has been shown that the normally expected releases of ; radioactivity from McGuire are far below applicable safe standards and ' regulatory limits for the release of these materials in air and water. l The resulting doses _ to man, even assuming large reconcentrations in the environment, are negligible and well below applicable Radiation Protection i
-Guides. Although the amounts released, concentrations and resulting doses !
can be calculated, it is doubtful that concentrations of radioactivity so ! far below limits in the environment can actually be measured beyond the } Exclusion Area and differentiated from the normally existing background radiation. The radi.) logical effects on man and his' environment from ! releases of gaseous and liquid waste from the McGuire Nuclear Station will be essentially til. I i 4,2.6 THE ENVIRONMENTAL RAD I0ACT IVITY MON ITORING PROGRAM j The goal of_the Environmental Radioactivity Monitoring Program will be to measure and evaluate the extremely small population dose and ecological signi-ficance of the contributions to the existing environmental radioactivity levels that result from station operations. j
?
t (I) " Radiological Surveillance Studies at a Boiling Water Nuclear Power { Reac tor," Report DER 70-1, Ma rch 1970, U. S. Public Health Service. j i i 4-17 !
l This program will, by measuri ng the concentrations of radioactivity that occur in the biological and physical environment, serve primarily as a check upon . the adequacy of controls exercised by the station over the release of radio-activity in effluents and over the sources of radiation. It will also serve to moni tor any cri tical pathways that could possibly lead to significant radiation exposure to man. This monitoring program will include the published recommendations of the U. S. Public Health Service in its design and will be conducted in coopera-tion with various state and federal agencies having appropriate jurisdiction or concern in the area of environmental radioactivity. Among such agencies , will be the N. C. Wildlife Resources Cumnission and the N. C. State Board of ll Health, Radiation Protection Program. Summary reports of radioactive waste releases and environmental monitoring results will be given appropriate distribution to these agencies and other inte rested persons . The Env i ronmen t a l Radioactivity Monitoring Program will be put into effect at least one year prior to the cperat ion of Unit I and will continue during the o:< rating period. The preoperational and operational phases of the pro-gram will therefore be similar. Radioact ive materials f rom station gaseous and liquid waste releases, if detec-table at all in the environment, are most likely to be found in samples of air anJ water fron locations where these materials are dispersed by stream flow and wind. Air and water samples also serve as one of the earliest indicators of change in environmental radioactivity. Therefore, air and water samples will receive primary emphasis, both in the number of samples collected and in the frequency of collection. These samples will ordinarily be counted for gross alpha and gross beta activity. If the gross activity exceeds a predeter-mined small fraction of ury ef fect ive maxinum permi ss ible concent rat ion (mpc) allowed in such a sample (such as one percent of the mpc's for air and water in an unrestricted area, listed in 10 CFR 20 Appendix B), analysis to deter-mine the component radionuclides will be made by use of a mult ichannel ganma analyzer. Additional radiochemical analyses will be made for Strontium 89 and 90, which are beta emit ter s and cannot ordinarily be detected by gamma analysis. Measurements of ganma dose and dose rate will also be made. Thermoluminescent dosimeters located both in the prevailing wind direction and immersed in water downstream of the liquid effluent release point will measure the direct dose e f fect s of gaseous and liquid act ivi t y releases during the operating period. Water will also be analyzed for tritium. The sensitivity of these analyses and the size of the samples taken will pe rm i t absolute measurement of existing preoperational and operational radioactivity levels to be made even though they may be far below permissible lirits. Sanple- of secondary importance in regard to numbers of samples and frequency of collection include lake bottom sediment, terrestrial and aquatic vegetation and plankton, fish and milk. Fish sanples will include both game fish and rough species (bot t or feeders). Botton sed irmnt , vegetation and plankton will also be counted for jros alpha and yrm< beta activity. Again, if the gross activity e>cech a predeterr4ined < mall fraction of any effcctive mpc limit, 4-lb
additional analyses will be made by use of a multichannel gamma analyzer and by radiochemical means. Fish and milk will be subjected to gamma analysis as well as radiochemical analyses for gross beta minus Potassium 40, Strontium 89 and 90. Since reconcentration of radioactivity can occur in the environment, particular attention will be devoted to evaluating the significance of any buildup of activity in these samples and in determining any unusual or unexpected critical pathways to man. Dose estimates to man will be made if the above analyses show that significant amounts of radioactivity from station releases are accumulating in environmental samples, i.e. amounts that could possibly result in doses in excess of one percent of applicable limits. The design of the sampling program will be such that these dose estimates can be made. Analysis and conventrations of specific radionuclides in environmental samples will be correlated with known station releases of the same nuclide. Although the one year of preoperational monitoring results may serve as a base line for comparison with operational levels, such comparisons have been complicated in the past by fallout from nuclear testing and variations in naturally occurring radioactive materials and radiation. Therefore, to assist further in evaluating the effect of the station releases on the environment during the operating period, the station contribution of activity will be differentiated from existing environmental levels by comparing levels found in similar samples collected at the same-time in different locations. This is done by collecting samples both within and beyond the Exclusion Area, upstream and downstream, upwind and downwind from the station and in control locations sufficiently far removed from the station to be beyond its influence. (7' Table 4.2-10 describes the Environmental Radioactivity Monitoring Program for \ the McGuire Nuclear Station. The samples and measurements include all critical exposure pathways relating to dose to man that have been determined to be of
-possible significance for this station.
4.2.7 POSSIBILITIES AND CONSEQUENCES OF ACCIDENTAL RELEASES Liquid and gaseous waste releases resulting from normal station operation are described in Sections 4.2.2 and 4.2.3, respectively. Inadvertent releases are precluded by design features of both liquid and gaseous waste disposal systems. Liquid wastes are released in batches by deliberate operator action from the waste monitor tanks only to the condenser cooling water system. The liquid discharge valve is interlocked with a process radiation monitor and will close automatically when the radioactivity concentration in the liquid discharge exceeds a preset safe limit. During normal operation of the gaseous waste disposal system, the gaseous inventory can be contained for the life of the station. Certain postulated hypothetical accidents resulting in the rele&se of radio-active gases were analyzed. (None of these accidents results in the release of liquid waste from the station.) These analyses demonstrate conclusively that doses resulting from these hypothetical accidents are far below the limits of 10 CFR 100. 4.2.8 EMERGENCY PLANS There is no credible accident that can endanger the public because of the 4 _J
redundant st ructures and systems provided in the plant to control the conse-quencies of any mishap. No member of the public and no plant employee has eve r received radiat ion injury f rom a nuclear power plant. This includes Duke Powe r's expe rience in the operation of the CVTR Nuclear Station in Parr, S. C, which was built by Carolinas-Virginia Nuclear Power Associates of which Duke was the major partner. Neve rt he les s , to be on the safe side the results of an incredible accident are evaluated so that there will be a positive program to protect the public. Thus, a comprehensive emergency plan is developed and rehearsed to be available in the event of this incredible accident situation. An emergency plan for the McGuire Nuclear Station will be established for the protection of life and property in all eme rgency and acc ident s i tuat ions . It will particularly apply to those situations involving radiation and contamina-tion where the health and safety of station personnel and the general public may be involved, but it will also include other general industrial emergency and accident condit ions such as fi re, vehicular accidents on s ite, na t u ra l disas ters , med ical injury or illness and civil disturbance. The emergency plan will be a coordinated effort involving station personnel, facilities and equipment; the emergency resources and capabilities of Duke Powe r Company; outs ide eme rgency se rvices; and various local, state, and fed-eral agencies having appropriate jurisdiction or concern for the public health and safety including: the North Carolina State Board of Health Radiological P rotec t ion P rog ram, Charlotte-Mecklenburg County Civil Defense Agency, the She ri f f's Department for Mecklenburg County, the Mecklenburg County Police, the North Carolina Highway Patrol, the AEC Emergency Radiological Monitoring Team, the AEC Region II Compliance Office and the Mecklenburg County Health Depart-ment. The plant will include the protection of construction forces who will be on site du r i ng t he ope ra t i on o f Un i t I for the construction of Unit 2, members of the public who will be within the Exclusion Area at various times (through highway traffic, v i s i to rs , boating and recreation on Lake Norman, etc.) and the general public and property in locat ions beyond the Exclus ion Area. 4.2.9 TRANSPORTAT ION AND REMOTE PROCESS ING OF SPENT FUEL The spent fuel shipping cask design and permissible radiation levels external to the cask are governed by regulations of the Department of Transportation and the AEC. Duke Power Company will meet the requi rements imposed by these regu-lations to assure safe transportation of spent fuel. 1, Duke has entered into agreements with Allied-Gulf Nuclear Services for spent 1, fuel reprocess ing through 1984 The Allied-Gulf reprocessing f acility is located i n Ba rnwe l l , S . C. (approx imately 140 air miles f rom the McGui re s i te) . Releases f rom the reprocessing facility will be only a small percent age of the 10CFR20 limits. Reference the Barnwell Nuclear Fuel Plant Environmental Report for detailed information on the reprocessing f acility. O 4-20 Revision 1 5-1-72 L
i
- 1. l l 1. f The design, construction and operation, including waste storage, of a spent !
fuel reprocessing facility are subject to review and licensing by the AEC and conformance to the same AEC regulations for protection of the public to which McGuire is subject. The inventory of radioactive wastes accumulated (a (af ter. recovery of fuel materials and Isotopes useful in medical and_other , applications) in reprocessing will be stored in liquid form for periods up ! to five years in high integrity containers under controlled conditions and ! continuous surveillance. These wastes .are then converted - to a solid, insoluble form and shipped to a federal repository within a specified time period. The federal repository will assume responsibility for long-term storage and sur- t veillance of these solid radioactive waste materials, although this service is paid for by the user. 4-21 Revision 1 5/1/72 J
1 i 4.3 OTHER WATER QUAL ITY EFFECTS 4.3.1 MECHANICAL CLEANING OF CONDENSER TUBES McGuire Station will be equipped with a mechanical system for cleaning of con-denser tubes to prevent the fouling of condenser heat transfer surfaces. Clean-ing of these tubes is necessary to avoid a reduction of thermal efficiency and a corresponding increase in waste heat rej ection to the cool ing water. The mechanical cleaning system injects sponge rubber balls into the condenser inlet water box where they disperse and flow with the water through the condenser tubes to achieve a scrubbing of the tube surfaces. The sponge balls are collec-ted by a strainer in the condenser discharge water pipe and pumped back for re i nj ec t ion into the inlet water box. Operating experience with this type system at the Marshall Steam Station, which uses Lake Norman water for cooling, has shown it to be a satisfactory method for maintaining clean condenser tubes without the use of chemical treatments. 4.3.2 MECHAN ICAL FILTRATION OF STATION WATER SUPPLY At McGuire Station, the supply system for filtered water will utilize diatoma-ceous earth filters to accomplish the filtration process without the use of chemicals. The 1,000 gallon per minute purification system uses a layer of inert diato-maceous earth as the filtering media, and the spent material is periodically flushed with the filter backwash water to a waste water collection basin (des-cribed in Section 4.3.3, paragraph f) where the filter media and the collected solids settle out and are retained. The environmental effect of using this filter system is a reduction of more than 100,000 pounds per year in the dissolved chemicals being passed downstream as compared to amount which would result f rom the use of conventional municipal type water purification. 4.3.3 NON-RAD IDACT IVE WASTE VATER D ISCHARGES
- a. Summary in addition to the potentially radioactive liquid wastes described in Sec-tion 4.2.3, there are other miscellaneous licuid wastes which are not radio-cctive but which may require treatment from a chemical or public health standpoint. These liquid wastes include the station's domestic sewage, drains which may contain small quantities of industrial chemicals and ordinary floor drains.
Each of these sources of waste water is treated as required to make it suitable for transfer to a single waste water collection basin which serves the entire station. in this collection basin, settleable materials are removed and further treatment such as chemical neutralization can be carried out if needed prior to discharge of the waste water to the river. 9 4-22
1 A l i j b. ~ Temporary Sewage Treatment Systems 4 i During the period of plant construction, all domestic sewage from the field Il toilets, field office toilets and mess hall will be collected and treated i in three pre-fabricated extended aeration type sewage treatment plants having a combined capacity of 20,500 gallons per cay. The effluent from l l these treatment plants will receive further treatment by the use of gaseous l chlorine in a chlorine contact chamber, and then be pumped to the station's i
- j. waste water collection basin (described in paragraph f) where the water !
ultimately is discharged back to the Catawba River. ] l These sewage treatment facilities meet all applicable stat ards of the State' ] of North Carolina; approval of their construction and operation will be ob-i tained from the North Carolina Department of Water and Air Resources and ! the Mecklenburg County Health Department; and they will be operated under ' t the supervision of a trained waste treatment plant operator who is certified i by the State of North Carolina. i l i 1' c. Permanent Sewage Treatment-System j l All domestic sewage f rom the station will be collected and treated in one . 4,500 gallon per day capacity pre-fabricated extended aeration type sewage
- treatment plant. The ef fluent from the treatment plant will receive further l treatment by the use of gaseous chlorine in a chlorine contact chamber and I then pumped to the station's waste water collection basin (described in I i paragraph f) where the water ultimately is discharged back to the Catawba l l River. I i
t This sewage treatment facility meets all applicable standards of the State ! i of North Carolina; approval of its construction and operation wiii be obtained ! [ f rom the North Ca rolina Department of Water and Air Resources and the Meck- i , lenburg County Health Department; and it will be operated under the super-vision of a trained water treatment plant operator who is certified by the l State of North Carolina, i l l l d. Waste Water Containing Chemicals ; i i l A representative listing of chemicals which are expected to be used in l 1 various plant processes and the waste disposal considerations for each of i j these chemicals is as follows: 1 l' j Chemical Process Chemicals Typically Used Disposal Considerations I Secondary Coolant very dilute water solu- Small quantities and no i l'ecdwat er Conili t ion ing tion containing Ammonia, special-hazards involved. Hydrazine, Sodium Phos- l Drains containing these i phate chemicals normalIy wilI be j
- pumped to the plant waste I water collection basin !
) (described in Section 4.3.3.f) l with no special treatment ! required. j 'O i l i i
'{
h [ 4 4-23 i p : i' j
..=_...-.-.=.-.--------__--_-__D
e Chemical Process Chemicals Typically used Disposal Considerations Equipment Dilute water solutions These are all mild chemi- . Cleaning Solutions of Sodium Phosphate, cals and normal disposal l Phosphoric acid, Organic is to the plant waste { acids such as EDTA, water collection basin Household Detergents with no special t rea tmen t ; required. Demineralizer Regene- Water solutions of These are strong chemicals ration Sulfuric Acid and but involve no harmful Sodium Hydroxide res idues af ter neut ral iza-tion. The spent acid is mixed with the spent caus-tic to assuie neutraliza-tion, then the waste water is pumped to the plant waste water collection basin. Corrnsion Controi in Dilute water solution These treatment chemicals Closed Cooling Systems of Sodium Nitrite and are not normally discharged Borax but no special hazards would be involved and any leakage or spills from these cooling systems would be pumped to the plant waste , water collection basin. Primary Coolant Dilute water solutions No special chemical hazards Water Conditioning of Boric Acid, Lithium are involved with dilute Hydroxide, Hydrazine solutions of these chemi-cals. Any spillage or , leakage of these chemicals during storage or handling ' would be recovered or appro-priately neutralized for discharge to the waste water r collection basin. (Note : Since the primary coolant i t sel f will contain some d radioactivity, any primary coolant drains will be pro-cessed through the radioactive liquid waste disposal system described in Section 4.2.2.) P Chemical Laboratories Misc. chemical recgents Very small quantities of chemicals are involved in the laboratory procedures and no special chemical waste treatment is required. (No t e : Drains from the " Hot Lab" may contain smalI quanti-ties of radioactivity so all 1 4-24
- .. - - - _ - . . ~ . - .- - - _ . . - .- -
i 1 Chemical Process Chemicals Typically Used. Disposal Considerations Chemical Laboratories Misc. chemical reagents drains from this lab will (Continued) be processed through the radioactive liquid waste . disposal system described l In Section 4.2.2.) I
- Drinking Water Disin- Chlorine No disposal considerat ions !
fectlon, Sanitary involved. ! Waste Water Post- ) Treatment ! In addition, the station's overall waste disposal capabilities take into l account the possible need for the handling of other chemicals. For example: . if some new chemical or combination of chemicals should be needed for the j cleaning of plant equipment items, the resulting waste water could be appro- ]' priately purified for release or concentrated and collected for disposal as chemical or radioactive waste material.
- e. Other Drains All miscellaneous floor drains from the turbine building and similar plant areas where radioactive systems are not involved will be collected in sumps !
and pumped to the station waste water collection basin (described in para- i graph f) where the water ultimately is discharged back to the Catawba River. j
.i A system of yard drains collects the ordinary surface water runoff in the vicinity of the station and conducts this runoff to the Catawba River. I i
- f. Waste Water Collection Basin !
t All non-radioactive waste water from the station except the cooling water i and the surface runoff from the yard is conducted to a single outdoor col-lection basin which is sized for a retention time of approximately-30 days. Provisions are made for sampling at the single discharge from the basin and the water level can be controlled by discharge valves to allow for ! planned holdup as desired. l The water discharge from this basin will be completely suitable for unres-tricted discharge to Lake Norman or to the Catawba River, and the discharge will be returned to the Catawba River at a point between the Cowans Ford Dam and the adjacent Highway 73 bridge. The construction and operation of this waste water facility will be carried out in full compliance with the permit to be obtained from the North Caro- I lina Department of dater and Air Resources and the Mecklenburg County Health. Depa rtmen t . l i 4-25
l l 4.4 LAND USE ) 4.4.1 McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION t ) McGuire Nuclear Station is largely situated on properties acquired for siting the existing Cowans Ford Dam and the 230 and 525 KV switching station located to the west and south of the plant site. All property within the 2500-foot radius Exclusion Area, 452 acres, will be owned by Duke. Lake Norman const i-i tutes approximately 25 percent of the Exclusion Area. The portion of the site occupied by the plant proper, its yard, waterways and I transmission rights-of-way was prior to development, covered with scrub pines, b rush and a very sparse amount of timber. The ground on which the plant build-ings and most of the yard will be situated is the site of an old borrow area , from which materials for the east Cowans Ford earth dam were excavated and has remained cleared. Coordination of land use with appropriate planning agencies is described in Sections 3.2 and 6.3, paragraph c. The site is ideally suited for plant development for the following reasons : 3 l
- a. Requi res no publ ic road relocat ion. }
- I j b. Requi res relocat ion of only one private hone.
j c. Ut il izes swi tching stat ion f aci l i t ies sited for system requirements inde- ' i pendent of station siting.
- d. Utilizes to a large extent properties owned by Duke prior to plant con-struction. i
- c. Utilizes many existing transmission rights-of-way.
- f. Site topography provides natural site for standby nuclear service water ,
pond and other ideal surface drainage features. 9 Utilizes low-level intake installed in Cowans Ford Dam du ring i ts const ruc-tion, adding a feature not otherwise available. t
- h. Has remoteness advantages without access disadvantages.
1 !
- i. Utilizes land which is not otherwise suited for any other type of develop-nent due to site's proximity to Cowans Ford Dam. ,
j . Is close to public highway and railroad access. ; Lands not owned by Duke adj acent to the plant property consists of small deve- , loped and undeveloped farn lands and a small number of part and full-time resi-j dent lake cottages and homes along the edge of Lake Norman cast of the plant s i:e E> cept for the lake hones and cottages the area is typically rural for Piedmont Carolina. These properties should in no way be affected by the nuclear plant aesthetically, functionally or value-uise except for some increased traffic a and activity in the general site area during and due to plant construction. Of ! the area within a two-nile radius of the site, 33 percent is lake surface at l
~
4 elevation 760, 31 percent is Duke property, excluding the inpoundment and the remaining 36 percent is other privately owned property. 4-26 s
immediately to the south of the plant site, downstream of Cowans Ford Dam and ,,,) ( on either side of upper Mountain Island reservoir, company-owned lands have \/ been leased to the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Cor.nission for a water-fowl refuge area. (See Section 3.5.) The switching station has been located approximately 1400 yards south of the plant and incoming and outgoing transmission lines (Figure 4.4-1) routed along rights-of-way some distance from the plant to improve aesthetic appearance of plant. Although the site is located geographically in the heart of the highly indus-trialized and populated region of the Carolinas, the immediate vicinity of the site is relatively unpopulated and without industry or commerce of any impor-tance except for electric power and recreational opportunity. Figure 4.4-2 shows the population distribution within five miles of the site for 1970 and the estimated distribution for year 2015 Figure 4.4-3 shows distribution for the same years for areas five to twenty miles from the site and Figure 4.4-4 for areas twenty to fifty miles from the site. Figures 4.4-5 and 4.4-6 show agricultural land usage within a fifty-mile radius of the site. The nearest commercial product industries are located between six and seven miles from the plant site in six locations in or near Cornelius and Hunters-ville, North Carolina. The nearest airport with scheduled commercial service is 14 miles south of the site. The nearest airport is ten miles southeast of the site serving only light private aircraft. The nearest commercial a i rway is approximately one and one-half miles east of the site. No active military installations are located within a fifty-mile radius of the site. A natural gas pipe line is routed south of the plant approximately one mile away at the , nearest peint. 4.4.2 NEARBY TRANSMISSION LINES The McGuire 525/230 KV switching station now under construction and scheduled for initial system service April, 1971, is located about three-fourths of a mile south of the plant as shown on Fi gu re 4.4-1. The station was planned at this location to meet system requirements and will now be used for plant needs, it was purposefully located remote from the plant site in order to route in-coming and outgoing transmission lines some distance from the plant and improve the overall plant appearance. The transmission lines leaving the station on routes which must cross to the { west s i de o f t he Ca tawba R i ve r do so on t he down s t ream s i de o f t he N . C . H i gh-way 73 bridge so that lines will not obstruct or impair view of the McGuire plant site or Cowans Ford Dam when v iewed f ran the highway and historical ob-servation area. The only overhead lines routed onto the plant site will be those connecting the plant's transformer station with the 230 KV and 525 KV portions of the switching station. i Rights-of-way hate been selected, insofar as was practical for the land avail- l able, to preserve the natural and developed landscape and minimize conflict wi th the present and planned uses of the lands on which they are located. The joint use of rights-of-way by more than one line to reduce the number of rights-of-way has been planned wherever feesible Whe re natural growth exists fringes of growth uili be left standing 1o screen the view of paralle1 Iines or 1ine 4-27
crossings wherever possible. Where natural growth does not exist planted , screens will be placed at appropriate locations to improve the view from ! public roads and access areas. Low growth will be left standing in right s- l of-way where clearing to the ground is not necessary for construction reasons. Low growth will be restored to areas cleared to the ground wherever practical . Cover planting of cleared rights-of-way with grass, etc., will provide cover i and feed for wildlife. Refer to Section 3.8 for Duke's soil conservation i practices on transmission rights-of-way. For appearance reasons, the galva-nized steel switching station structures are of low-profile, rigid frame or l cantilever construction. Transmission towers for all permanent incoming and outgning lines are and will be ctnventional laced sel f-support ing galvanized steel structures. Where feasible and practical the guidance and suggestions for reduction of environmental impact of transmission systems contained in the U. S. Depart-ment of the Interior and Agriculture publ icat ion " Environmental Criteria for Electric Transmission Systems" will be implemented. 4.4.3 H ISTORIC LANDKARKS Cowens Ford Dam, located immediately west and upstream of the McGuire Plant, was the site of a Revolutionary War Battle in which American General William Davidson was killed when his forces encountered British Commander Lord Corn-wallis' troops in 1781. A marker commemorat ing this historic event was erected in the plant yard accessible to the public at the entrance to Cowans Ford Dam by the Battle of Cowans Ford Chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution. During site exploration for McGuire Nuclear Station, an old monument, lost and covered with vines and brush, erected to cuamemorate the falling of General Davidson was found and preserved. A new landscaped site with access road and parking f acilities has been const ructed to relocate the old monument at the entrance road to the plant's switching stati on on company property. This site affords the public conspicuous access to the historic marker. Duke Power Com-pany unde rtook th is p roj ect in cooperation with the Mecklenburg Historical ! Associat ion and a formal dedicat ion of the plaque was held February 1, 1971. See Appendix 4B for copy of let ter regarding dedicat ion ceremony, invitation to ceremony and newspaper clipping. Jamediately west of the plant site across the Catawba River and north of N. C. Highway 73, another historic marker has been erected in a public observation area provided for public viewing of the Cowans Ford Dam and its associated structures from a downstrean vantage. This marker prepared and furnished by the North Carolina Archives and Highway Departments, depicts early Trans-Catawba history giving location and brief descript ion of many of the more important historic sites in the vicinity of the dam. This observation area is also loca-ted in a conspicuous location and nrovides off-road public parking facilities. The marker was relocated in this area, by Duke, from a location nearby in couperation with the North Carolina State Highuay Connission and the North l Carolina Department of History and Archives i I i
l J 4.5 CONSTRUCTION EFFECTS During construction, efforts will be made to reduce the environmental impact. < Erosion, sedimentation, dust, smoke, noise, unsightly landscape and waste dis-posal will be controlled to practicable levels. I 1
; Erosion in the construction area and the resulting sedimentation will be con-trolled by providing piped drainage systems, intercept and berm ditches and ground covers where necessary to control the flow of surface water. Spoiled , earth materials will not be deposited in or near the lake or river in such an j uncontrolled manner that high water or surf ace runoff will transport materials to the water body.
l Good drainage, dry weather wetting and the paving of the most traveled construc-1 tion roads will reduce dust generated by vehicular traffic. Bare areas will be j sown to provide a ground cover of vegetation wherever and whenever practicable. l l. Excessive and obj ect ionable cons truction noises will be reduced to acceptable levels where possible and practicable. Cont ractor's and the company's motor powered equipment will be equipped with the available noise reducing equipment j and maintained in good order. Tree lined fringes left around most construction
- areas for appearance reasons will contribute to noise reduction.
Care will be taken to control smoke or other undesirable emissions to the atmos- . phere during construction. Duke Power will adhere to applicable air pollution
- control regulations of Mecklenburg County and the State of North Carolina as 1 they relate to open burning and the operation of certain fuel-burning equip-
- ment. Permits and operating certificates will be secured where required.
I Efforts will be made to keep fuel-burning construction equipment in good mech-i anical order to reduce excessive emissions. All reasonable precautions will be taken to prevent accidental fires on the construction site and brush or forest fires on adj acent lands. i Wastes such as chemicals, fuels, lubricants, bitumens and raw sewage will not l be deposited or discharged onto the natural watershed where surface runof f can , transport these materials to Lake Norman or the Catawba River adj acent to and downstream of the site. Traffic problems will be reduced by providing parking and unload points for , commercial carriers off public roads with convenient points of access. On-i site parking will be provided for construction workers. Since an access rail- , road will be provided, many of the large commercial hauls for transporting laroc equipment to the site will not require use of the public roads. Whe rever poss ible in areas where trees stand, tree fringes will be left to l screen the construction plant and activities from the public view. Construc-tion buildings, storage and naintenance areas and parking areas will be main-toined in a neat manner to improve the construction plant appearance. When construction nears completion, the areas used for const ruc t ion purposes ni11 be restored where practicable by lendscaping to blend with the natural and developed landscape. 4-29
4.6 AESTHETIC IMPACT The McGuire Nuclear Station architectural concept will be contemporary in O spirit and fact, and imaginative in functional design. The rectangular forms of the enclosed turbine buildings and auxiliary building related to the cylindrical forms of the reactor buildings will provide surf ace planes to break up the massive areas into aesthetically pleasing patterns. The administration building, approached on a gracefully curving ent rance roadway, will be in the same contemporary spirit as the other structures. An aesthetic l blend of contemporary buildirig materials, in earth colors, will be used to l relate structures to one orio t ne r . 1 Yard areas around all structures, as well as parking areas, will be landscaped with native growth to blend with the site. The existing forested areas on the site will be disturbed as little as possible and selected areas will be re-forested at the completion of construction. The station switchyard is located across N. C. Highway 73 from the station and screened from the highway by the topography. The switchyard is constructed of low-profile, rigid framed structures. Overhead lines will connect the stat en with the switchyard. O l l 9 4-30
.I
_ __ _ _ . _ . ~ .. __ . ._ _. l i 9 i 4.7 McGUIRE NtfCLEAR STATION AND THE ECONOMY Construction and operation of the McGuire Nuclear Station will have important direct and indirect effects upon the economy of both the area immediately in ti e vicinity of the station and of the entire Duke Power service area. Among the direct effects are: construction and operating payrolls and local - purchases; direct taxes, such as property taxes and indirect taxes, such as ! li.come taxes coming f rom the business represented by the sale of the electrical ! output of the station. { The principal indi rect effect is the benefit to the economy of the area from j the assurance of an adequate, reliable supply of additional electric power at a reasonable rate. { Construction of a project of this size is a major engineering effort. Construc-tion employment is expected to reach a peak of 1500 and will run about 1100 i during most of the construction stage. Since Duke Power constructs its own i generating stations, a substantial number of the workers are regular company i employees who will move to the McGuire site as other projects now underway are [ completed. There are, however, a number of construction skills which are not ! needed continually. These skills will be employed from the local work force or brought in from other areas for the time their work-is needed. It is a j characteristic of labor in this part of the country to commute from considerable ; distances. This will spread over a number of communities any strain on local i employment and a<oid a serious dislocation of existing work forces. l Locally purchased materials and services are expected to total $13,600,000 in addition to the $10,000,000 to be spent on turbine blades manufactured in Winston Salem and :he $22,000,000 for the low-pressure turbines themselves i which will be made in Charlotte. The total construction payroll will be about l
$67,000,000. Most of this will be spent in communities near the site.
Upon completion of the plant, the annual operating payroll is expected to be , about $737,000. The number of employees as related to the plant investment ! will be small. About 66 full-time employees will be required for regular. opera-tion of the station. These employees and their families will add to the economy , of the area but do not comprise a sufficiently large group to produce any serious ! effect on schools and other public services. The plant itself will be self l sufficient requiring no addition to tax-paid police or fire staffs. ! l The station is adjacent to North Carolina Highway 73 which was rebuilt to modern j standards early in the 1960's. This was done largely at Duke Power expense as ! part of-the highway relocation made necessary by the construction of Lake Norman. ! No' additional public highway construction will be required by construction or operation'of the nuclear station. ) I Al though the permanent payroll is not large, it is a steady payroll. Employ- j ment at the station will not vary materially with fluctuations in the general i business cycle. Station employment will therefore exert stabilizing influence I I on the local economy. The McGuire Nuclear Stat ion will create very substantial revenues for Mecklenburg County. The investnent of $431,000,000 will be the largest in the two Carolinas. The investment in this single facility is greater than the appraised value of all property in each of 82 of the 100 counties in North Carolina. 4-31
r As mentioned earlier, this plant is an unusual asset to the county as it is ( practically f ree of demands on tax supported agencies of the county. No publicly supported water, sewer or trash disposal services will be required. j Almost the entire county tax payment ($4,000,000 per year in property taxes), therefore, is a net gain to the county government whereas tax income from ; most industrial investments are to quite some e. stent offset by related expenses to t ax supported services. l s 1 The business created by the sale of electricity from the McGuire Station will add substantially to state and federal tax revenues. According to the formula used by the Federal Power Commission, an investment in generating facilities of $431,000,000 will create over $13,000,000 in federal taxes each year. While it is more difficult to measure in dollars and cents, the indirect impor-tance of this station to the economy of the Duke Power service area is signifi- ' cant. The area served by the company, the Piedmont section of North and South Carolina, is a growth area. There are no indications that this growth will slow down in the foreseeable future. it is, however, predicated upon a con-t inuing adequate supply of electricity. In the past Duke Power has kept pace with the economic development of its ser- i vice area and at no time has a new business or industry been turned away due l to the inability of the company to provide the electric power it needs. The massive construction program Duke Power now has under way is intended to meet the growing needs of the area for electricity. The McGuire Nuclear Station is a vital part of this program. > The economy of the Piedmont Carolinas has undergone a dramatic revolution since the end of World War II. At that tine, textiles was by far the predominant industry with furniture and tobacco manufacture making up most of the remainder. t These industries have grown substantially in the post-war period. Yet, even j with this growth, they represent a much smaller portion of the total industry of the area today than ever before. { The reason for this is that there has been a large influx of widely diversi-i fled industries ranging from light industry such as Western Electric's several manufacturing facilities to heavy industry such as the Westinghouse and General : Electric turbine plants. i This trend has created a labor market wh ich has of fered a wide spect rum of oppor- ! tunity to workers of this area. With the aid of the outstanding technical edu- ! 1
~stion programs of both Carolinas, nat ive workers f rom this sect ion have had little difficulty mastering the skills and trades required by this wide diversity of industrial opportunities.
- Some environmentalists have clained that indus t rial development is a harmful factor to an area and should not be encouraged. There may be certain heavily built-up portions of the country where this is true, but the Piedmont Carolinas are far from reaching this point and regional planning is aimed at avoiding such concentrations. This part of the country is not developing into large metropolitan centers which may create more problems than they solve. Most ,
new industrial plants are locating in the large expanses of open space in rural
- area utilizing land that has largely been lying idle since the demise of cotton
) ) 4-32 l
l ( P as the money crop of the South. The state has been among the nation's leaders in establishing effective pollution control standards for environmental protec-tion. The excellent network of existing paved rural roads gives employees easy ; access to the plant and to the cultural advantages of the neighboring small cities. l i This program of encouraging diversification of industry is making headway on l one of the most pressing economic problems of the region - that of raising the ! per capita income. In 1960, North Carolina ranked 45th and South Carolina 48th ! among the states in income per capita. In 1969, North Carolina had improved to hist and South Carolina to 47th, if the people of this area are to enjoy a standard of living equal to the average in this country, per capita income j in the area must be drastically further improved. It will be if the selective f industrial recruiting programs of the two Carolinas can be maintained. For j this momentum to be maintained, however, it is essential that power generating ; facilities be built to sustain the industrial development. The two generating ! units of the McGuire Nuclear Station must be in operation by the dates scheduled i if the development of the Duke Power service area is not to be hampered by a shortage of electricity, E i I I f l l i; I I I f 4-33 i 6 J
l 1 I i I i 4.8 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS l l Public need for electricity requires generating plants which, of whatever t 1 type, will have some unavoidable environmental effects. The design of McGuire l Nuclear Station has been aimed at avoiding adverse effects wherever possible. ! Those unavoidable effects, which some may consider adverse are: [ i i j a. Use of land for generating plant and transmission facilities. This impact , is minimized by aesthetic design and plantings described elsewhere in this ! report. i I
- b. Use of natural material resources, such as uranium and other metals, in the I
consumed fuel. ! c. Production of fission by-products which, in view of the extensive control and containment procedures and regulations, will have no adverse impact ; except ultimate occupancy of space in storage. i a 1 i l' : 4 i i i I 4 I I i 1 1 y 9 1 I L-34 r
-_ _ __ -. .-_.-.-- ~-- __-
. . . ~ _ . . - - - -
E r l ) l~ 4.9 RELATIONSH IP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF MAN' S ENVIRONMENT l AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY 1 McGuire Nuclear Station during its useful lifetime and thereafter will not l i release heat, radiation or radioactive materials in a manner or in sufficient j quantities to harm life around the station. i j Energy f rom minerals whose other uses are limited to military purposes will be
- converted into more useful electric energy, using these materials in the pro-
[ , cess of conversion. Needed electrical energy will be available for production, ! transportation, waste treatment and the creation of many useful artificial j environments (home and of fice interiors, ref rigerators and f reezers, medical p life-sepport systems). Af ter the nuclear station's useful lifetime has been served, all highly radio-
- active materials, such as spent fuel in the reactor, will be removed, reprocessed and residuals sent to federal repository facilities. Public access to areas of
. remaining low-level radioactivity will be carefully controlled as required until, l' by combination of cleaning and/or decay time, these areas can have unrestricted access. This restriction will be of little, if any, significance to long-term _ productivity or use of station environs. 4-35 1
l l 1 4.10 IRRETRIEVABLE AND IRREVERSIBLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES The recreation, fisheries resources, water conservation, flood control and beauty afforded to the general public by Lake Norman makes the lake so attrac-tive that few, if any, would want to return the lands beneath the lake to their l former uses. Building McGuire Nuclear Station is another carefully planned step in the development of the Lake Norman electrical generating complex. The fuel which McGuire Nuclear Station will convert into energy will be irre-trievably lost. In the sense that man may not use them in the near future, the highly radioactive waste by-products and the off-site caverns in which they will be stored might be considered irreversible losses, but the passage of time or the advent of new technology may make them available again to future generations. All other resource uses by McGuire will be temporary. O e 4-36
- .- - . . - . . - - ..-.-.. - - .-._----.-.-.- - ._ . - - -..-.-. ..-....~_,
i.-
.. e TABLE 4.1-1 9 McGuire Nuclear Station Extreme (Warmest) Climatic Conditions l
Forecast of Monthly Average Water Temperatures l t Condenser Cooling Water (*F) i
.i Surface of Main i inlet (*F) Discharge (*F) Body of Lake (*Q ;
Low Upper Average ! Level Level After { Month Intake intake Mixing j January ---- 48.5 48.5 80.5 48.5 ], February ---- 46.0 46.0 78.0- 46.5 - l March ---- 48.5 48.5- 80.5 53.5 Apri1 ---- 68.0 68.0 95.0 70_.5 ! l May ---- 65.0 65.0 95.0 72.5 June ---- 75.0 75.0 95.0 88.0 July 59.5 86.0 79.0 95.0 86.5 August 64.5 86.0 79.0 95.0 87 5 september 64.0 80.5 79.0 95.0 80.5 October ---- 69.5 69.5 95.0 71.0
- November ----
63.0 63.0 95.0 65.0 December ---- 53.0 53.0 85.0 54.0 NOTE: Low-level intake used in only July, August and September O
\
\
\ \
\
t
...,--,..----v---- . . - - - ~ . . - . , . ~ . - - . - - , , , - . , - .----n.~.-..-n --,,v- -
------.cne --,-w.----,o-, --,-,-.~,wr- n--,---,----. --.n. --ws
TABLE 4.1-2 McGuire Nuclea r Station Normal Climat ic Condit ions Forecast of Monthly Average Water Temperatures Condenser Cooling Water (*F) Surface of Main inlet (* F) Discharge ("F) Body of Lake (*F) Low Upper Ave rage Level Level After Month Intake intake Mixing January ---- 44.0 44.0 76.0 44.0 Feb ruary ---- 42.0 42.0 74.0 43.0 March ---- 45.0 45.0 77.0 47.0 April ---- 53.5 53.5 85.5 59.0 May ---- 60.5 60.5 90.0 66.0 June ---- 67.5 67.5 90.0 77.0 July 53.0 76.0 74.0 90.0 82.0 August 55.5 79.0 74.0 90.0 81.0 September 58.5 76.0 74.0 90.0 76.5 October ---- 69.5 69.5 90.0 69.5 November ---- 59.0 59.0 90.0 60.0 December ---- 50.0 50.0 82.0 51.0 NOTE: Low-level intake used only in July, August and September I
Table 4.2-1 9 Design Est imates of Annual Waste Quantities f rom Two Units l Vol ume (gal /yr) Reactor Coolant Treated and Discharged for Tritium ControI II) 150,000 Treated Non-Recycleable Reactor Coolant System Leakage 13,000 l Decontaminations, Lab Rinses, Laundry, Showers, Other l Leakage (all treated) 329,000 TOTAL 492,000 (I)lf discharge for tritium control is required, maximum quantity discharged in one year is shown. This effluent can be processed in boron recycle system. O
Table 4.2-2 Page 1 of 3 Equilibrium Fission Product and Corrosion Product Concentrations in Reactor Coolant Isotope Concentration (uC i/ml) (I) $ (N) l Fission Products Normal Ope ra t ion (2) Design Conditions (3) H-3 1.1 1.1 sr-89 5.0 x 10-0 2.8 x 10-3 sr-90 3.4 x 10-5 8.1 x 10-5 sr-91 8.5 x 10-2 1.4 x 10-3 sr-92 -------- 5.4 x 10-4 Y-90 -------- 9.6 x 10-5 Y- 91 5.8 x 10-4 4.0 x 10-3 Y-92 9.1 x 10-2 5.3 x 10-4 Zr-95 6.1 x 10-5 4.9 x 10-4 Nb-95 6.1 x 10-5 4.7 x 10-4 Mo-99 1.1 x 10-2 3,9 l-131 1.9 x 10-3 1.8 l-132 5.3 x 10-2 0.66 I-133 2.9 x 10-2 2.9 l-134 .I .41 1-135 5.2 x 10-2 1.6 Te-132 7 0 x 10-3 0.19 Cs-134 -------- 0.15 (I) Concentration based on reactor coolant temperature of 585*F and pressure (2)of 2235 psia. in fuel. Trace uranium contamination on fuel rod exterior surfaces. (3)No Cladding defects defects in one percent of the fuel pins. (4) Concentration is given in scientific notation where, for example, 5.0 x 10-4 neans .0005 or 5 parts in 10,000 parts.
1 l l l Table 4.2-2 (Continued) Page 2 of 3 O V Equilibrium Fission Product and Corrosion Product ! Concentrations in Reactor Coolant j
~!
Isotope Concentration (uCl/ml) (I) = (N) l i Fission Products Normal Operat ion (2) DesignConditions(d l 1 Cs-136 2.6 X 10-6 ,j Cs-137 -------- 0 76 l Ba-140 2.6 X 10-4 3.1 X 10-3 l
.i La-140 2.1 X 10-2 1.1 X 10~3 f 1
Ce-144 1.2 X 10-4 2.0 X 10-4 l Kr-85m 2.3 X 10-2 1.6 l Kr-85 -------- 3.4 l Kr-87 4.1 X 10-2 ,9 l Kr-88 5.2 X 10-2 2.7 ! l r Xe-131m -------- 2.0 l I Xe-133m 2.4 X 10-3 2.3 l l Xe-133 2.9 X 10-2 210 i i Xe-135m 2.4 X 10-2 ,ja j i Xe-135 5.2 X 10-2 4.6 j i Xe-138 8.3 X 10-2 5 l Corrosion Products Mn-54 5.6 X 10-4 5.6 X 10-4 f l Mn-56 2.1 X 10-2 2.1 X 10-2 l (I) Concentration based on reactor coolant temperature of 585'F and pressure f ( (2)of 2235 psia. Trace uranium contamination on fuel rod exterior surfaces. i (3)No Cladding defects in fuel.in one percent of the fuel pins. defects I (N) Concentration is given in scientific notation where, for example, 5.0 X 10-4 l means .0005 or 5 parts in 10,000 parts. l i i
?
i e i j Table 4.2-2 (Continued) Page 3 of 3 ) _ Equilibrium Fiss ion Product and Corros ion Product 1 Concentrations in Reactor Coolant l J Jsotope Concentration (uCi/ml)(I)$ (b) Corrosion Products Normal Ope ra t i on (2 ) Design Conditions (3) ' Co-58 1.8 x 10-2 1.8 x 10-2 Co-60 5.4 x 10-4 5.4 x 10-4
- Fe-59 7.5 X 10-4 7.5 x 10-O 1
Cr-Si 6.8 x 10-4 6.8 x 10-4 , i l i f (I) Concentration based on reactor coolant temperature of 585* F and pressure of 2235 psia. (2) No defects in fuel. Trace uranium contamination on fuel rod exterior surfaces. (3) in one percent of the fuel pins. IN) Cladding defectsis given in scientific notation where, for example, 5.0 x 10-b Concentration ' means .0005 or 5 part s in 10,000 parts, i
Table 4.2-3a Page 1 of 4 Normal Operation Estimates of Annual Radioactivity Releases in Liquid Waste from Two Units isotope Annual Release Average Additional Fraction Discharge Concentration of Limit (I) (uci) (uCi/ml) Fission Products Sr-89 1.5 x lo l 4.7 x 10-15 1.6 x 10-9 sr-90 1.0 3.2 x 10-16 i,i x 30-9 ) I sr-91 1.5 x 103 4.5 x 10-13 6.4 x 10-9 Sr-92 --------- ----------- ---------- y-90 _________ ___________ __________ Y-91 6.9 x 10 1 2.1 x 10-34 7.1 x 10-10 Y-92 2.3 x 103 7.0 x 10-13 1.2 x 10-8 i ! Z r-95 1.8 5 7 x 10-16 9.5 x 10-12 Nb-95 1.8 5.7 x 10-16 5 7 x 10-12 Mo-99 1.2 x 103 3.7 x 10-13 i,9 x 10-9 l-131 5.6 x lo l 1.7 x 10-14 5.8 x 10-8 l-132 1 5 x 10 2 4.5 x 10-14 5.6 x 10-9 l-133 6.8 x 102 2.1 x 10-13 2.1 x 10-7 l-134 5.6 1.7 x 10-15 8.6 x 10-11 1-135 6.9 x 10 2 2.1 x 10-13 5.3 x 10-8 Te-132 2.0 x 10 2 6.1 x 10-14 2.0 x 10-9 Cs-134 --------- ----------- ---------- Cs-136 3.1 x 10-1 9.4 x 10-17 1.0 x 10-12 Cs-137 ----------- ----------- ----------- Ba-140 7.8 2.3 x 10-15 8.0 x 10-11 (I) fraction of 10 CFR 20 Limit
a i l Table 4.2-3a(Continued) Page 2 of 4 ! Normal Operation Estimates of Annual Radioactivity Releases in Liquid Waste from Two Units l Annual Release Average Additional Fraction ~ Isotope Discharae Concentration of timit(I) (uC i ) (uCi/ml) Fiss on Products 1 i La-140 5.6 x 10 2 1.7 x 10-13 8.6 x 10-9 te-144 3.6 1.1 x 10-15 i,i x jo-lo i
- Corrosion Products l
Mn-54 1.7 x lo 5 2 x 10-15 5.2 x 10-II i Mn-56 7.4 x lo l 2.3 x 10-I4 2.3 x 10-ID , Co-58 5.4 x 10 2 1.7 x 10-I3 1 7 x 10-9 i ! Co-60 1.6 x lo l 5.1 x 10-15 i,o x io-10 i Fe-59 2.3 x lo l 7.0 x 10-15 1.2 x 10-I0 gg l l Cr-51 2.1 x lo 6.3 x 10-15 3.2 x 10-12 l TOTAL 8. 0 X 103 2.5 x 10-12 3.6 x 10-7 ! Tritium 911 curies 2.8 x 10-7 9.4 x 10-5 ll i l l i i l I e i (;I fraction of 10 CFR 20 Limit )
i Table 4.2-3b Page 3 of 4 Design Condition Estimates of Annual Radioactivity Releases ; in Liquid Waste from Two Units l
< i Isotope Annual Release Average Additional Fraction :
of Limit (I) Discharge Concentration (uCi) (UCi/ml) : Fission Products l l sr-89 9.8 x 101 3.0 x 10-I4 1.0 x 10-8 sr-90 3.5 1.1 x 10-15 3.6 x 10-9 sr-91 1.5 x 103 4.6 x 10-I3 6.5 x 10-9
-16 g,4 x ig -12 sr-92 2.1 6.5 x 10 I
Y-90 1.1 x 10 3.2 x 10-I9 1.6 x 10-10 ! Y-91 5.5 x 10 2 j,7 x 30-13 5.6 x 10-9 i Y-92 2.3 x 103 7.0 x 10-I3 1.2 x 10-8 l Zr-95 1 7 x lo l 5.1 x 10-15 8.6 x lo-II Nb-95 1.6 x 101 4.9 x 10-15 4,9 x jo-11 , Mo-99 4.3 x 105 1.3 x 10-10 6.6 x 10-7 . 4 1-131 5.3 x 10 1.6 x 10-II 5.5 x 10-5 l-132 1.9 x 103 6.0 x 10-I3 7 5 x 10-8 : 1-133 6.9 x 10 4 2.1 x 10-II 2.1 x 10-5 [ 1-134 2.8 x 10I 8.7 x 10-15 4,4 x 30-10 4 1-135 2.2 x 10 6.7 x 10-12 1 7 x 10-6 Te-132 5.6 x 103 1.7 x 10-12 5.8 x 10-8 Cs-134 1.8 x 10 4 5.5 x 10-12 6.1 x 10-7 Cs-136 1.2 x 10 4 3.7 x 10-12 4.1 x 10-8 i 4 Cs-137 9.0 x 10 2.8 x 10-II 1.4 x 10-6 Ba-140 1.0 x 102 3.1 x 10-34 1.0 x 10-9 I . V t (1) Fraction of 10 CFR 20 Limit k
.w
Table 4.2-3b(Continued) Page 4 of 4 Design Condition Estimates of Annual Radioactivity Releases in Liquid Waste from Two Units Isotope Annual Release Average Additional Fraction Discharge Concentration of Limit II) (uC i) (uCi/ml) Fission Products La-140 5.8 x 10 2 1.8 x 10-I3 9.0 x 10-9 Ce-144 9.7 3.0 x 10-15 3.0 x 10-IO Corrosion Products tin-54 1.7 x lo l 5.2 x 10-15 5.2 x 10-II Mn-56 7.4 x lo l 2.3 x 10-I4 2.3 x 10-IO Co-58 5.4 x 10 2 1.7 x 10-13 1.7 x 10-9 Co-60 1.6 x 10 I 5.1 x 10-15 j,o x jo-10 Fe-59 2.3 x 10 3 7.0 x 10-15 1.2 x 10-IO 2.1 x lo l 6.3 x 10-15 3.2 x 10-12 Cr-51 TOTAL 7.1 x 10 5 2.2 x 10-10 8.0 x 10-5 Tritium 911 curies 2.8 x 10-7 9.4 x 10-5 i
7 I Table 4.2-4 Estimate of Maximum Instantaneous Radioact ivity Discharge Concentrat ion , f Fraction of Limit (I) : Normal Design Operation Condition ; Normal Condenser Cool ing Water Flow 0.051 0.072 l t Minimum Condenser Cooling l Water Flow 0.21 0.29 II) fraction of 10 CFR 20 Limit i
1 Table 4.2-5 St_eam Generator Tube Leak Analysis O Assumptions: (I) Steam generator tube leak of I gpm. 1 (2) Duration of leak is 30 days. (3) Discharge averaged over one year. Average Downwind ; Concentration at Exclusion Fraction of Air Ejector Gaseous Release Area Boundary (uCi/ml) 10 CFR 20 Limit Normal Operation 1.1 X 10 ' 2.4 X 10- ~ Design Conditions 2.0 X 10-0 7 9 X 10-2 i G 9 B 4 9
I 1 q Table 4.2-6 Page 1 of 2 l I i Maximum Radioactivity Concentrations in the Effected l Portion of Lake Norman Resulting f rom Operation of McGuire l Concentration (uci/ml) Fraction of Limit (I) Normal Design Normal Design l Isotope Operation Conditions _ Operation Conditlons i Fission Products i sr-89 1.1 x 10-14 7.0 x 10-14 3.6 x 10-9 2.3 x 10-8 sr-90 7.5 x 10-16 2 5 x 10-15 2 5 x 10-9 8.5 x 10-9 j sr-91 3.6 x 10-13 3.7 x 10-13 5 1 x 10-9 5.2 x 10-9 > sr-92 ----------- 2.3 x 10-16 ---------- 3.3 x 10-12 Y 00 ----------- 5.6 x 10-15 ---------- 2.8 x 10-10 Y 4.9 x 10-14 3.9 x 10-13 1.6 x 10-9 1 3 x 10-8 Y-92 3.0 x 10-13 3.0 x 10-13 5.0 x 10-9 5.0 x 10-9 l Zr-95 1.3 x 10-15 1.2 x 10-14 2.2 x 10-11 2.0 x 10-10 , Nb-95 1.3 x 10-15 i,i x 10-14 j,3 x jo-11 i,i x jo-10 ; Mo-99 6.5 x 10-13 2.3 x 10-10 3,3 x jo-9 1.2 x 10-6 l-131 3.6 x 10-14 3.4 x 10-11 1.2 x 10-7 i,i x jo-4 l-132 1.4 x 10-14 1.9 x 10-13 1.8 x 10-9 2.4 X 10-8 1-133 2.4 x 10-13 2.5 x 10-11 2.4 x 10-7 2.5 x 10-5 l l-134 2.4 x 10-16 1.2 x 10-15 1.2 x 10-11 6.2 x 10-11 1-135 1.4 x 10-13 4,3 x 10-12 3.5 x 10-8 1.1 x 10-6 : Te-132 2.3 x 10-14 6.5 x 10-13 7.6 x 10-10 2.2 x 10-8 Cs-134 ----------- 1.3 x 10
-II ----------- 1.4 x 10 -6 Cs-136 2.1 x 10-16 8.1 x 10-12 2.3 x 10-12 9.0 x 10-8 Cs-137 ------------
6.6 x 10-II ------------ 3.3 x 10-6 (I) Fraction of 10 CFR 20 Limit ; l
1 Table 4.2-6 (Cont inued) Page 2 of 2 Maximum Radioactivity Concentrations in the Effected O Portion of Lake Norman Resulting from Operation of McGuire Concentration (uC i/ml ) Fract ion of Limit (I) Normal Design Normal Design isotope Operation Conditions Operation Conditions Fission Products _ Ba-140 5.2 x 10-15 6.8 x 10-14 1.7 x 10-10 2.2 x 10-9 La-140 2.6 x 10-I3 2.7 x 10-I3 1.3 x 10-0 1.4 x 10-0 cc-144 2.6 x 10-15 7,o x 10-15 2.6 x 10-10 7 0 x 10-10 Corrosion Products Mn-54 1.2 x 10-14 1.2 x 10-14 1.2 x 10-10 1.2 x 10-10 Mn-56 7.8 x 10-15 7.8 x 10-15 7.8 x 10-11 7.8 x 10-Il co-58 3.9 x 10-13 3.9 x 10-13 3.9 x 10-9 3.9 x 10-9 Co-60 1.2 x 10-14 1.2 x 10-I4 2.4 x 10-10 2.4 x 10-10 Fe-59 1.6 x 10-14 1.6 x 10-I4 2 7 x 10-10 2.7 x 10-10 Cr-51 1.4 x 10-14 1.4 x 10-14 7 2 x 10-12 7 2 x 10-12 Total 2.5 x 10 3.9 x 10 4.4 x 10 1.5 x 10 Tritium 6.6 x 10 -7 6.6 X 10 -7 2.2 x 10~ 2.2 x 10" ! (1) Fraction of 10 CFR 20 Limit
c I Table ~ 4.2-h a Page 1 of 2 i i Normal Operation Estimates of Annual Radioactivity f Releases in Gaseous Waste from Two Units ! Average Downwind Concentration Annual Release at the Exclusion Area Boundary i isotope (uCi) (uCI/ml) ofFraction Limit LI ) { i Kr-85m 1.1 X 10 6 2.3 X 10-13 2.3 X 10-6 l Kr-85 --------- ---------- ---------- l Kr-87 2.0 X 10 6 4.0 X 10-I3 2.0 X 10-5 2.6 X 10 -33 2.6 X 10 -5 Kr-88 5.2 X 10 Xe-131m --------- ----------- ---------- Xe-133m 1.4 X 10 5 3.5 X 10- 1.2 X 10 -7
-6 5 1 X 10 -I3 6
Xe-133 1.8 X 10 1 7 X 10 Xe-135m 1.2 X 10 6 2.3 X 10-I3 7.8 x 10-0 h , Xe-135 2.6 X 106 5.5 X 10-I3 5.5 X 10-6 i Xe-138 4.1 X 106 8.1 X 10-I3 2 7 x 10-5 'j l-131 1.2 X 103 3.6 X 10-16 3.6 X 10-6 l-132 2.6 X 104 5.3 X 10-15 1.8 X 10-6 t 4 1-133 1 5 X 10 3.4 x 10-15 8.6 X 10-6 ; 0 l-134 4.9 x 10 9.8 X 10-15 1.6 x 10-6 1-135 2.6 X 10 4 5.4 X 10-15 5.4 X 10-6 .
-12 sub-total 1.6 X 10 7 3.3 X 10 1.2 X lo-H-3 7.3 X 107 2.3 X 10-II 1.1 X 10-N ;
Total 8.9 X 107 2.6 X 10-II 2.3 X 10-4 .: I T II) Fraction of 10 CFR 20 Limit f t
r 3 Table 4.2-7b Page 2 of 2 Deslan Condition Estimates of Annual Radioactivity Releases in Gaseous Waste from Two Units Average Downwind Concentration i Annual Release at the Exclusion Area Boundary Fraction i isotope (uCi) (uCi/ml) of Limit (I) ! I Kr-85m 3.0 x 107 1.6 x 10-11 1.6 x 10-4 Kr-85 2.4 x 108 7.4 x 10-Il 2.5 x 10-4 . 1 Kr-87 4.4 x 107 8.8 x 10-12 4.4 x 10-N Kr-88 1.3 x 10 8 2.7 x 10-Il 1.3 x 10-3 xe-131m 1.3 x 10 8 3.9 x 10-11 9.8 x 10-5 xe-133m 1.3 x 10 8 3.4 x 10-11 1.1 x 10-4 xe-133 1.3 x 10 10 3 7 x 10-9 1.2 x 10-2 xe-135m 6.9 x 10 6 1.4 x 10-12 4.5 x 10-5 xe-135 2.3 x 10 8 4.9 x 10-Il 4.9 x 10-4 xe-138 2.5 x 107 4,9 x 10-12 1.6 x 10-4 1-131 1.2 x 10 6 3.4 x 10-13 3.4 x 10-3 1-132 3.3 x 105 6.6 x 10-14 2.2 x 10-5 l-133 1.5 x 10 6 3.4 x 10-13 8.6 x 10-4 5 4.0 x 10 -I -6 1-134 2.0 x 10 6.7 x 10 l-135 8.1 x 105 1.7 x 10-13 1.7 x 10-4 sub-total 1.4 x 10 io 3.9 x 10-9 2.0 x 10-2 H-3 7 3 X 107 2.3 x 10-11 1.1 x 10-4 Total 1.4 x 10I0 3.9 x 10-9 2.0 x 10-2 (I) fraction of 10 CFR 20 Limit
Table 4.2-8 Os a. Annual Whole Body Dose Added by McGuire (mrem) i i No rmal Design FRC/AEC : Operation Operation Limit , t From Gaseous Waste Releases .11 10 t From Liquid Waste Releases .11 .18 ; i Total .22 10.2 500
- b. Annual Atmospheric Dose (mrem)
Normal Operation Design Condition Addition by McGuire Addition by McGuire Existing Background
.11 10 70 - 82
- c. Radioactivity Concentration in Lake Norman Excluding Tritium (uC1/ml )
Normal Operation Design Condition Addition by McGuire Addition by McGuire Existing Background 2.5 X 10-12 3,9 x ig-10 2.4 X 10-9 J
Table 4.2-9 Effect of Reconcentration Showing Ef fect of Reconcentration of Various Representative Radionuclides of Interest in Fish in that portion of Lake Norman containing the Highest Equilibrium Concentration of Radioactivity: Hypothetical intake Limit for Fish Concentration Fa c t o ri: Concentration in Corresponding to Limit for Watersid Radionuclide 1/Kg Fish, uCi/Kg, (wet wt.) Kilograms per day (wet st.), every day H-3 0.9 5.96 x 10-4 1.1 x 104 (24,200 pounds) Co-60 500 5.95 x 10 -9 I.8 x 107 (39,600,000 pounds) Sr-90 40 1.01 x 10-10 6.53 x 106 (14,300,000 pounds) 1-131 1 3.42 x 10-8 1.8 x 104 (39,000 pounds) Cs-137 1000 6.56 x 10-5 6.6 x 10 2 (1,452 pounds) Nb-95 30,000 3.36 x 10-7 6.5 x 105 (1,430,000 pounds) i Assuming density of 1 Kg/l in fish flesh. A-/c A t wa t e r intake of 2.2 liters / day; i.e., wt. of fish in Kg/ day = 2200 ml/ day x soluble 10 CFR 20 limit in uCi/ml (Jivided by concentration in fish in uCi/Kg. NOTE: (1) Maximum Design Figures of radioactivity were used to prepare this table. (2) Intake 1imit in pounds of fish that can be eaten, every day, so as not to exceed 500 mrem per year, Radiation Protection Guide, for highest individual. O O -- 9
O Table 4.2-10 Page 1 of 3 The Environmental Radioactivity Monitoring Program for the McGuire Nuclear Station CRITERIA FOR SELECTION TYPE SAMPLE OR MEASUREMENT OF SAMPLING LOCATIONS COLLECTION FREQUENCY
- 1. Water For comparison purposes water samples are Monthly; sample b will be collected: collected continuously
- a. Upstream, well beyond Site and Exclusion during operation; Sample Area, (Lake Norman, control location) e will be collected semi-
- b. Within 500 ft. of point where liquid effluent annually enters Lake Norman
- c. Downstream, well beyond Site and Exclusion Area (Mt. Island Lake)
- d. Charlotte Water Supply (11 miles downstream)
Huntersville, Mooresville and Davidson Water Supplies (Lake Norman)
- e. Well water samples at nearby locations and elsewhere within Low Population Zone Measurements of Tritium in above samples. Quarterly for a, b, c, d.
Semi-annually for e.
- 2. Airborne Particulates Comparison of on-site vs. off-site locations Monthly, sample collected Rain and Settled Dust at distances up to 10 miles near towns and continuously populated areas; and in prevailing wind directions and control location.
3 Radiation Dose and Dose Rate Comparison of on-site vs. of f-s ite locat ions Dose: Quarterly, near towns and populated areas; at distances Integrated total, up to 10 miles and in prevailing wind direc- duplicate samples tions; also within 500 ft. of point where at each location l iquid ef fluent enters Lake Norman; -and Dose Rate: Quarterly control locations. Single Measurement
Table 4.2-10 Page 2 of 3 The Environmental Radioactivity Monitoring Program for the McGuire Nuclear Station CRITERIA FOR SELECTION TYPE SAMPLE OR MEASUREMENT OF SAMPLING LOCATIONS COLLECTION FREQUENCY
- 4. Lake Bottom Sediment For comparison purposes, sediment samples are collected:
- a. Upstream, well beyond Site and Exclusion Qua r te r l y Area (Lake Norman, cont rol loca t ion )
- b. Within 500 ft. of point where liquid Qua r te rl y ef fluent enters Lake Norman
- c. Downst ream wel l beyond Si te and Exclus ion Quarterly Arca (Mt. Island Lake) 5 Aquatic Vegetation, Plankton, For comparison pum oses, samples are collected:
Bottom Organisms a. Upstream, well beyond Site and Exclusion Qua r te rl y (as available) Area (Lake Norman control location)
- b. Within 500 f t. of point where liquid ef fluent Quarterly (as available) enters Lake Norman
- c. Downst ream, well beyond Si te and Exclus ion Quarterly (as available)
Area (Mt. Island Lake)
- 6. Terrestrial Vegetation and Comparison of nearby upwind and downwind direc- Quarterly Crops tions in Low Population Zone and in control Crops (in season), corn, locations. beans, others
- 7. Milk From nearby farms in prevailing wind directions Quarterly and from control locations.
- 8. Fish Fish samples wili include both game fish and Quarterly (as available) rough species (bo t tom feeders) collected:
- a. Upstream, well beyond Site and Exclusion Area (Lake Norman, control location)
- b. Within Exclusion Area where liquid effluent enters Lake Norman
- c. Downstream well beyond Site and Exclusion Area (Mt. Island Lake) 9 e e
O O O Table 4.2-10 Page 3 of 3 The Environmental Radioactivity Monitoring Program for the McGuire Nuclear Station CRITERIA FOR SELECTION
- TYPE SAMPLE OR MEASUREMENT OF SAMPLING LOCATIONS COLLECT 10N FREQUENCY 9 Miscellaneous investigation of special situations found as a As Necessary result of the monitoring program and/or station operations, to provide extended coverage; also as may be required due to nuclear testing or unusual fallout conditions not associated with the McGuire Nuclear Station. t L
+
i r L o~ ~ - - - - mm. . . --.-,-..-............-..r,w....m.., . .,w,-- ._m... ,., . .,,,.-,...-,,r....g-.~.,,,e...w,-. ..*-em ,- . , w- , ,, . ,,,,w. ,,,-,.wwm..- -.my,,..w+,,,,,,,,,,, ,wc -, w cpy,,,mg,,e....,, .,r.-.9,.r
.;ep W ffd wr, '
f
.}ff? NQ{
%.-QWfqqrb 'f)fy&p/l up ,
ft vrt,[,y 1 espr dMs . m.,y Q h ..W a;;f ya k tv . g,. w@. _ pw qq, 4 '"y .g
. - Steam Station Marshall NI f.
g '.. ..
%;(b.;y
% 4
- 6-s7' ew? p s dh n.
'l 3
-.o 4, . ,
zy, my y m '
.. QYf lli ' ,l p l$}/y'qp[p[
Ifff.Ci
-j$
.t YP 1 Cooling Water Temperature N
!a.p. g.yk. <:,
;s m~gu m g%,Any, ' e .g+ I th ~y;- ~
e "Z \ nlet 73*F I k'c py ' }[$f$ l Discharge 89 F max.
*g% y y ~.'ry'f&.yf.??&e. xf }~
1
%{ t
) Ytt;4,a .,
'{'," 2'VQ&x.,R '*
j-l 'f'i }%.yjp - ih?uw,t ,'.' 7 y
+
^d$y.
, pg g% m, Wh Y>f %,.'\i))
MQ 54 . j
> v e ,. . cuA '
g:} y>?@tQg f ,9'Q i gpre . Kj p34 Eff . 3h% 4 McGuire NucIear - hlN;V
;n A ' ' d @fydd 8 Station Site I4furs l. ., .
>4.[xvfhl5..p g:2(jg*( - N$@is%
.i Color Enhancement
- hgi of Photo at Left.
22nn% 4
- y b :
- t t;SjpQ': } hy,i,gy (
war
%'Jjfy; @JWL se s ' " 7Ah jf m
r [y+1.,;t7ppn
.jpf$k*SM . e[ig51.y LAKE NORMAN z'
Mkk[
~;%v4 - 1.
"d[ hp3 ag.m THERMAL IMAGERY SURVEY I I[M: ' Ik h+ ?d4 I970
; y % % c.A 7. 4 54 3 f fA ,t h d ? D h j ~, ' 2Octaber I,
; k .s i
Coolest - Black Warmest - White I mirowiN McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION E s' Figure 4.1 - 1 l < . _ _ _ _ - _______-_- _____________- _ ____-_-________-___ A
p 1/ s
\
l
'\
{N '. .. ,. 1 l N .> i f l ( y %.
) o i
/
y f y; ,/ ic
.l' -
l f i f, N -m (' . 1
\ . , ,
l 6
\ ~, {,k /
4 , +j ' > 7,
' y_. ,i .
/
3 7 NN, ,w. ) { / i,f j < ,
- m. ,f, 'M.,. f ;
s.
- ,ssw' k s, 6
{c . % , y *
.s QQg(J ' Qj fy L
'- - . \
f ~
,,,q
..,,,,o
/ i , x g ;' ~g g g iv q ,__:, - % r.
s.. ,h fc u.ai em s.
,._2s ' 3
, s
,4 3 er m eva p Q..%~
sq ;.
, ~~- -
.. man. ,
.: t ,
\? i "* n,,, N L, fs. s -
,\ \ .,
i N } ";
, t l'
,1 ;
' m :(
' \( ,. .
i.(\p/ , '*%.,Qiw,,,y if l~.
- i. , <
\ ;*imem wu: l s .3
,m *1 ( '
![i /s 7 .. ., s ,
N _. \
", /,
;/tva:ue, s . urgVs?
v [ s , ,,
'O
.- QsN i -
h,/ .--- e( i
. 5,
'Nb'
., %% ;;_ . 1 *
, e ,rj't . wfR , .. %; .,
s . r Q( Y W
'~,m' -
. . M. w ;~ %e 3 . ,.
y ,f 4
".. , i g
uv-N .
' r--l m .
i d # 1, ,f 4
~\ '
\ ... .- p
/
v 1, r- < t L i ' n ~f- . J~w.
;z 7_ -
~( y y M i.V: yn 9-':- R; 4a $
h-) uj,' . { f ('
~'
j n\ . . ., ,l/ ' ~ ~~ ' ]
- 6 ...s.
~s
- x. j]#
f% K ,., b. '; , r~ n-p! . l
~
= w'
-, a p r.r ---[-( %,
/e
/ ,,
_= . a . ,7 _
.2 *Ethme=
k . . _ .
l l fr ANSTEC APERTURE 4 l
' CARD Q
h%g Also Available y Aperture Card l Q . s t , yv=, . -
...x,
-men' '
l
- eP '-" ..=;,-,.. r ...m.
I i !- .'d " # : ei N
.. , m.,u
. a j i jhf k .m .. [^ ..
c y..h ,-, ~h -- f . l,},?g;ifb fy' ,.m ,
- .e Q)hif'Q s m
- [h O
Q
=
\ .
~ . . .
, .- m__
f ~ ~- ' ,g .&#{ ~%, k.
~
h,a22 eG-y #. s ,, jy (/ c.
'\ x
, 1 j ,
N .. p~., - E < S m - m. .4- m. ..
.J.3
- 41 a ,.s, r-o/3padj o ,- ,
f } ( rx l m
""'*r'"
--(/ (i\ , ,g, ease-m
.y ) . .g*
7 y . ['\ ,.,- _.s ,
~
.'~~
( W }N; lJ{ , lb'
.f
( '
\ r.
u ( f y; m ;, ccoggqo c;__o5 TRANSMISSION LINES AND RIGHTS-O F-WAY i i i i McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION Figure 4.4 - 1
l OVERSIZE l DOCUMENT ) PAGE PULLED : SEE APERTURE CARDS '
~
NUMBER OF OVERSIZE PAGES FILMED ON APERTURE CARDS OlH06090Jc I - O 6 , APERTURE CARD /HARD COPY AVAILABLE FROM
-07 '
RECORDS AND REPORTS MANAGEMENT BRANCH ' . 1 l 'l 4
. se VA.
2 AL L EG ANY TENN. , N . C. wATAUGA WIkEII SO MI YA DKlh GulLFORD
^
AVERY 40W1 . J m CALQWELL sC&VtE ALENANDER \ m ' DAVID 56m
/'
N. C* / 20 hir - RANDOLPH
/80ARE '.
McDOWELL cATA NOWAN D Mi
/ 3 ~
LINCOLN RUTHERFORD (- C BARAus
,. , , , 'wonTeewtRv 0
\ WECELENSURS
\ .
\ HERCKINT
\ '
I 1 un tCN . gyggy
\, v0ns
'N xQ /
S. C . N /L Ame AsTE R cutsTER l
' North Carolina Farm Census summary 1969. Compilation for North Carolina counties made by Professor Guy S. Parsons, Extension Dairy Husbandry Department, North Carolina State University.
' United States Census of Agriculture for South Carolina 1964.
8 Denotes percent of county area f alling within the 50 mile radius.
" North Carolina and USDA crop reporting service.1967 crop year.
- ' Tabulation gives the total land use acreage for each county, although 14 counties are only partially within the 50 mile radius.
A e 9 - (< ,A c.,~.m APERTURE LAND USE (ACRES) WITHIN A 50 MILE RADIUS nfn. r, n V nv NORTH CAROLIN A' Abo AdaNe cri Aporture Card Cropland Pasture All Other County % Area' Harvested Idle Improved Unimproved Land Alexander 100 14,709 11,595 18,140 6,553 34,347 Anson 16 34,383 20,185 24,273 4,154 131,412 Burke 58 13,010' 12,499 10.228 4,642 90,316 Cabarrus 100 35,257 20,248 27,265 9,333 80,367 Caldwell 53 5,524 19,056 6,808 8,506 104,286 Catawba 100 37,616 31,332 27,664 5,896 86,303 Cleveland 100 42,873 65,757 37,719 5,121 101,172 Davidson 58 39,443 46,367 22,974 11,959 136,362 Davie 100 23,868 18,487 28,166 5,213 77,285 Forsyth 02 24,959 24,532 15,581 5,858 89,620 Gaston' 100 20.077 23,003 15.282 6,968 60,303 Iredell 100 55,229 45,059 55,720 11,549 132,099 Lincoln 100 33,903 29,003 14,908 5,455 66,316 Mecklenburg 100 20,155 38,399 20,603 13,294 93,354 Montgomery 06 16,622 9,184 5,745 1,767 96,138 Rowan 100 58,131 37,828 35,791 16,464 98,493 Rutherford 31 19,396 36,214 20,657 6,182 141,097 Stanly 99 48,370 25,859 30,696 4,563 92,139 Union 94 89,049 40,874 49,448 11,808 169,991 Wilk es 26 26.520 13,895 27,105 12,552 197,546 Yadkin 35 51,455 19,384 19,810 5.863 101,762 710,549 588,760 514,583 163,700 2,210,708 SOUTH CAROLINA
- Cherokee 65 20,554 10,622 28,545 15,653 44,036 Chester 28 24,068 7,770 60,567 43,339 73,595 Lancaster 29 12,130 3.375 34,194 20,873 44,177 York 100 31,420 12,101 62,461 34,647 75,789 88,172 33,868 185,767 114,512 237,597 c/ C OL;C)o0 0 01C, LAND USE (ACRES) WIThlN A !
50 MILE RADIUS l ocu re McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION
- Figure 4.4 - 5 l
r
.n VA.
E f I
> u u.A.,
TENN. , N . C. s R ATAUGA WtLEE5 SO- MI V A DKIN FOR$YTH
,,, f 40 W1 P"
~N.
C A LQ4 ELL VIE ___ AL E X ANDE R [ "
% DAVID $
'""" \
N. C.
/ sura t 20 Me k\ RANDOLPH McDOWELL CATAwEhV RQWAN I
'O kt p , s -
7LINCOLM RUTHERFORD ( T3 g C ARRUS N NONTSCMERY utEELENBURG HERDEEf {
'h t)MtON YO RK ANSON
/
N l
'f
;1"} /l /
S. C . j CHESTER L ANCASTE R
' North Carolina Agricultural Statistics.
2 South Carolina Livestock and Poultry Statistics. 2 Tally compiled by Professor Guy S. Parsons, Extension Dairy Husbandry Department, North Carolina State University. Denotes per cent of county area f alling within the 50 mile radius. s Tabulation gives the total number of milk cows for each county, although 14 counties are only partially within the 50 mile radius.
e=% I MILK COWS WITHIN A 50 MILE RADIUS *
' North Carolina - January 1,1969 ' South Carolina - January 1,1969 County d
% Area' Number County % Area Number Alexander 100 2,850 Cherokee 65 900 5
5 Anson 16 1,700 Chester 28 3,400 Bu ke 58 1,300 Lancaster 29 300 Cabarrus 100 3,300 York 100 2,000 Caldwell 53 1,600 6,600 Catawba 100 4,800 Cleveland 100 4,700 Davidson 58 4,050 Davie 100 5,500 Forsyth 02 2,600 ANSTEC I'e7 00 i$,' APERTURE Lincoln 100 3,150 CARD Mecklenburg 100 3,450 Montgomery 06 000 Also AvaHable ort Rowan 100 8,350 Aperture Card Rutherford 31 2,150 Stanly 99 3,650 Union 94 5,500 Wilkes 26 2,750 Yadkin 35 4,300 81,850 9cobocfo A'- O MILK COWS WITHIN A 50 MILE RADIUS Of ' McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION Figure 4.4 - 6 fW$
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ . _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ __._..________.-________.___...--_._.__.__U
i TABLE OF CONTENTS ! 9 Section Page Number 4A THERMAL EFFECTS l 1 EFFECTS OF THERMAL POLLUTION UPON LAKE NORMAN FISHES l t I l i. i i 1 1 - e 4
.f I
l i 4 ]I l i i 1 , h > r ,) 1 l i 4
}
s ) 'i i ) 1 i 4 iO I 4A-1 i _..,_._;.__.,..._...____._.._..__,_.__._.,._...._...._..__.____._,__._..._.__,.__._..._...__..,_._._.-_..f
1 l l North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
--Division of Inland Fisheries--
STATEWIDE FISHERIES RESEARCH Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Project F-19-2
--Summary Report-O STUDY IX. River Basin Studies Job H-C. Effects of Thermal Pollution Upon lake Norman Fishes William D. Adair David J. DeMont Fishery Biologists l
l
- Raleigh, N. C.
1 June, 1970 0
Study II: River Basin Studies Job IX-C: Effects of Themal Pollution Upon lake Norman Fishes Period Covered: July 1, 1968 to June 30, 1970 Prepared by: William D. Adair and David J. DeMont
SUMMARY
A study of the effects of a heated effluent from the Marshall Steam Plant of Duke Power Company upon the fishes of Iake Noman is reported for the period January 1,1969 to April 1,1970. Profound differences were noted between the fish populations of the intake and discharge coves when compared to the two control coves. Seventeen of the thirty species of fishes known to occur in Iake Norman showed concurrent sig-nificant numerical differences between the discharge cove and the control coves, while ten species showed similar significant numerical differences between the intake cove and the control coves. Marked differences were noted in the reproduction of certain species when comparing the intake and discharge coves to the control coves. Fishes avoided the discharge during the late summer when dissolved oxygen concentra-tions were low. The wam-water discharge facilitated the overwintering of threadfin shad in the discharge cove with a consequent movement of piscivorous species into the cove in response to the abundant food supply. Fungus of the family Saprolegniaceae was noted to infest 12 5 percent of the largemouth bass taken from the discharge cove during the winter, while no fungus infestations were noted in other areas.
-INTRODUCTION-The use of water by the electric generating industry for condenser cooling may pose a threat to the natural aquatic environment and its dependent organisms. This industry accounts for approxirately 80 percent of all industrial cooling water used in the United States and, with the expected increases in electric production by both fossil-fueled and the less efficient (from a waste heat standpoint) nuclear fueled steam electric stations, the amount of heat rejection is predicted to increase almost ninefold by the year 2000 (Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, 1968).
Steam electric stations presently are discharging cooling water into several major reservoirs and rivers in North Carolina. To help evaluate the impact of these discharges upon the aquatic environment, a study was initiated in July,1968 to investigate the effects of the heated effluent from a steam electric station upon the fishes of Iake Noman. Lake Noman is a hydroelectric impoundment of the Catawba River located in the Piedmont region of North Carolina (Fi Eure 1). The Iake was impounded in 1963 by the construction of Cowan's Ford Dam by Duke Power Company. It has a surface area of 32,500 acres, a maximum depth of 120 feet, and a shoreline of 520 miles at full-pool elevation of 760 feet (Geyer, et al. ,1968). Annual fluctuations in water surface elevation approxirate 12 feet. The lake currently supports good wam-water sport fisheries for largemouth bass, white bass, and crappies. l l l
The study area is located near the Marshall Steam Plant of Duke Power Company. This is a base load plant which operates continuously throughout the year. Eapid changes in power generation, with associated abrupt changes in discharge volumes and discharge temperatures, are minimal. The generating plant draws condenser cooling water from the main reservoir under an inverted skimmer wall. The wall extends from the surface to a depth of 60 feet when the lake is at full-pool elevation (Gray and Stephenson, 1968). Thus, the cooler hypolinnetic waters are utilized during the summer period of thermal stratification, an important factor in enabling this plant to be rated the most efficient (in terms of Btu / kilowatt hour) of all steem electri; stations in the United States for the last four consecutive years (Edison Electric Institute,1970). Marshall Steam Plant employs a "ence-pass" cooling s/ stem with the intake water passing through an intake cove of approximately 200 surfaca acres into the condenser system and tnen discharged via a 2,200-foot canal into a receiving cove of the lake. Retention time of the water in the intake cove, with three units operating, is approx-imately 30 hours. The discharge canal and cove combined have a surface area of approximately 60 acres. The distance from the intake at the skimmer wall to the discharge structure is approxirately 2.5 river miles. Marshall Steam Plant had a three-unit nameplate generating capacity of 1,348 megawatte during most of the report period (April 15, 1969 to April 1,1970). Average discharge volumes during this period varied from 505,000 gpm in winter to 633,000 gpm in summer with the greatest volume, 698,000 gpm, being discharged during the fall overturn. A period (January 1, 1969 - April 14, 1969) when only two generating units were in operation also is reported. Average discharge volumes were approximately 252,000 gpm during this period. Results obtained during the periods of two- and three-unit operation were canpared.
-0BJECTIEES-The objectives of this study are to isolate and evaluate the separate effects of the increased temperatures, induced currents, and seasonally depressed dissolved oxygen concentrations caused by the cooling water discharge from the Marshall Steam Flant upon the fishes of Iake Norman, and to compare these effects with conditions concurrently found in unaffected portions of the reservoir.
l
-METHODS AUD PRO ^EDUL: -
i Gill-Hetting Gill-nets were set at monthly intervals at sampling stations located as follows: the intake cove (#2) and#6,respectively5,dischargecove(#4),upstreamanddownstreamcontrolcoves(#1 and two main-1ake stations (+3 and #5) (Picure 1). wh11e the
i l l main-lake stations were intermittently influenced to varying degree by the discharge, both control coves were well out of any zone of influence. Physical characteristics t of the control coves (such as bottom type, slope, and shoreline distances) were similar to those of the discharge cove, t Three 120-foot gill nets in bar mesh sequences of 2:1:2 inches, respectively were ! set in parallel at each station. The nets were checked at the end of 24 and 48 hours. ! This sampling technique generally provided a sample of the larger littoral zone fishes j with some pelagic forms being collected. ; i Electrofishing Monthly electrofishing was initiated in the discharge cove and two control coves during March, 1969 Each cove was sampled on one of three consecutive days. A Smith- t Root Mark V electrofishing unit was used to produce 425 volts of pulsed D.C. current i at 60 Hertz with a pulse width of 6 milliseconds. Electrofishing operations generally were confined to the shoreline area in water ; less than three feet deep. This sampling technique generally yielded a sample of the i I small fishes of the littoral zone. j s Trawling ! O Monthly trawling was initiated in the discharge and two control coves during August, 1969 Each cove was sampled on one of three consecutive nights at approx-imately the time of the new moon. The midwater trawl, composed of a 25-foot long i net mounted on a 3- by 9 - foot rectangular frame, could be regulated to fish as a surface tow (between the surface and a depth of four feet) or as a deep tow (between depths of eight and twelve feet). The towing speed was approximately 4.5 mph. Both surface and deep tows were made in the two control coves and the discharge l cove. Discharge cove samples were comprised of separate tows made in the discharge ! canal and in the receiving cove. This technique yielded a sample of the fishes, l mostly shad, present in the pelagic zone. } Cove Sampling with Rotenone Portions of the intake, discharge, and control coves were sampled with five i percent emulsifiable rotenone at an estimated final concentration of 0.05 ppm : rotenone on one of four consecptive days between June 2nd and 5th, and again ! between September 22nd and 25 t n of each year. The areas sampled were small coves l of approximately 1.5 surface acres (Figure 1). These samples indicated the j relative abundance and reproductive success of the various species of fish in i each cova. j i Catch Data Recorded [ All fishes collected by gill nets, electrofishing, and trawling were identified, weighed, total length measured, and tagged when of appropriate size (see tagging i procedure). Fishes collected from the rotenoned coves were measured to inch-class, ; and weighed, j l
-4_
Fish Tarfing A tagging study was inithted to learn about the horizontal migrations of fishes. The minimum lengths of fishes considered suitable for tagging were: game species E 6.0 inches; and rough fishes a 7.0 inches. Creek Census A creel study of the discharge canal and cove was initiated in March, 1969 to provide supplemental information concerning fish populations and fisherman usage. The census was taken each Saturday from 0800 to 2000 hours. Census data collected yielded information about the number of fishermen per day, total time fished, baits used, species sought, and size of fish caught. Temperature and Dissolved Oyygen Determinations Water temperatures and dissolved oxygen concentrations were determined and pro-filed by the Environmental Testing Section of Duke Power Company. Profiles were obtained at the end of the first 24-hour period at the offshore end of each net set. Profiles for the trawling samples were obtained on the middle day of sampling at the mouth of each cave, with an additional determination being made in the discharge canal approximately half the distance from the point of discharge to the end of the canal. Profiles also were obtained at the mouth of each cove to be sampled just prior to the application of rotenene. Detemination of Statistical Differences O+ To detect differences between the fish populations of the intake and discharge coves and those of the controls, a statistical comparison was made of the total number of fish obtained for each species by' the different sampling techniques during the entire sampling period. This was accomplished by testing for significant dif-ferences between the expected and actual catches in the test cove (intake or dis- , charge) as opposed to the controls. Since the same effort was expended in each cove, it was assumed that each test cove should produce 33 percent of the total number re-covered from all three coves (test cove plus two controls). The actual percentage contributed to the total by the test cove was compared to 33 percent in the binomial tables at the 95 percent level of confidence. A similar test was used to provide a month-to-month comparison between the discharge cove and each control cove using monthly totals from each samplirg technique. Since the discharge cove was compared to each control cove individually, the actual percentage of the total number of each species contributed by the dis-charge cove was compared to 50 percent in the binomial tables. Again, the 95 percent level of confidence was used.
-RESULTS A!!D DISCUSSIO!I-Species Composition and Variation A total of 30 species of fishes representing 10 families have been collected since the project was initiated (Table 1). Computation of the total number of
i
/
species caught in each cove by the various sampling techniques disclosed that both the discharge cove and the upstream control cove yielded the greatest number of species - 29 (Table 2). Thus, the discharge cove yielded at some time during the sampling period the total complement of species found in the lake except the t mosquitofish. This rarely caught species was also not collected in the downstream control cove. Only one blue catfish, the only species not caught in the upstream control cove was collected during the sampling period - it was netted in the dis-chargc cove. : The downstream control cove yielded a total of 24 species. The intake cove yielded the fewest number of species (23) but this cove was sampled only with gill nets and rotenone. . The total number of species caught per gill-net sample was chosen as an indicator , of the monthly species variation between coves because of the sustained use of gill-nets throughout the sampling period and the large number of species obtained (Figure e 2). The discharge gill-net station consistently yielded the greatest number of species of any cove during the entire sampling period except for the September and October samples. Although the intake cove usually yielded fewer species than the discharge cove, its seasonal fluctuation in numbers of species generally corresponded with that of the control coves. Both discharge cove and intake cove populations were found to differ markedly , from the two control cove populations when the results of statist". cal comparisons were compiled (Table 3). The conclusions reached for each species in Table 3 are ; necessarily based upon subjective decisions. For example: there was strong evidence that yellow perch were present in significantly greater numbers in the discharge cove than in the control coves considering the fact that that species was caught in signif-icantly greater numbers with three out of the four sampling techniques. In addition, the technique (trawling) which noted no significant difference yielded a total of only seven individuals. Based on this information, the conclusion was made that signifi- ; cantly more yellow perch were in the discharge cove then in the control coves (Table 3). Even though no Moxostoma spp. were collected by trawling and no significant difference was noted between the discharge cove electrofishing and rotenone samples, the significant difference noted in gill-net results determined the final decision , of significance. Because the gill-net samples produced substantially more Moxostoma i opp. than the rotenone and electrofishing samples combined, and because a significant , variation was found in the gill-net sample, the conclusion was made that there was a significantly smaller population of Moxostoma spp. in the discharge cove than in the centrol coves (Table 3). Purthermore, a significant difference between coves caused by large numbers of recently spawned fish was not considered to be a true indicator of the fish population. ! Thus, even though a significant variation was noted for black bullheads and large- ! mouth bass collected in the intake cove by rotenone, the conclusion of no significant i variation was reached considering the large number of recently spawned fish involved
- in that determination (Table 3).
As a result of the interpretation of various test results, it was concluded that
' 17 species (56.7 percent) of the 30 species present in the lake showed significant numerical differences between the discharge and the control coves (Table 3). Eleven species were found in significantly greater numbers in the discharge cove than in
(
the control coves. These were as follcws: (1) forage fishes -- gizzard shad, threadfin shad, golden shiner and satinfin shiner; (2) game fishes - largemouth bass, striped bass, white bass and yellow perch; and (3) rough fishes -- carp, longnose gar, and white catfish. Six species were caught in the discharge cove in significantly lesser numbers than in the controls. These were: (1) a forage fish -- Johnny darter; (2) game fishes -- bluegill, black crappie, white crappie, and redbreast sunfish; and (3) a rough fish - Moxostoma sp. Parthermore, ten species of the thirty species in the lake displayed significant numerical differences between the intake cove population and the controls. Three species were found in significantly greater numbers: (1) a forage fish -- golden shiner; and (2) rough fishes - carp and white catfish. Seven species were found in significantly lesser numbers: (1) game fishes -- white bass, bluegill, black crappie, white crappie, redbreast sunfish, and warmouth; and (2) a rough fish -- Moxostoma ,syq. Eight species were found to be in either significantly greater or lesser numbers in both the intake and discharge coves than in the controls. Found in significantly greater numbers were: golden shiner, carp, and white catfish; found in significantly lesser numbers were: bluegill, black crappie, white crappie, redbreast sunfish, and ! Moxostoma spp. The definite differences noted between the populations of the four coves was not constant throughout the sampling period. Results of the monthly statistical comparisons between the catch in the discharge cove and each control cove noted periodic differencec in the cove populations (Table 4). An attempt at explaining these differences and other notable occurrances will now be discussed in chronological order beginning with the start of the three-unit operation and continuing through an annual cycle. Months in the follcwing headings denote general, rather than precise, time periods. April (Reproduction) All observations concerning reproduction will be presented in this section. Marked differences were noted in the reproduction of certain species when comparing the intake and/or discharge coves to the control coves. Spawning by a clupeid fish occured in the discharge cove in April and May 1969 Eggs were observed most numerous near the point of discharge adhering to the discharge structure and to rocks and vegetation lining the discharge canal. The eggs became less numerous as the distance from the structure increased. While most were covered to varying degrees with fly ash and/or pollen, the eggs were found viable. They hatched in the laboratory in 2 to 24 hours at a temperature of 72"F. A reconraissance of both control coves at that time revealed similar eggs, although not nearly so numerous as found in the discharge cove. Similarly, on February 21, 1970 a small number of eggs were observed in the discharge canal. It is believed that this marked the onset of a spawn similar to that noted in 1969 Soon after this date, however, circulating pump tests for the new generating unit caused increased discharge volumes and decreased temperatures in the discharge canal. Spawning apparently stopped as a result of these discharges since no further observations of eggs were made during the sampling period.
Concurrently, the large schools of threadfin shad present in the discharge canal just prior to the February pump tests were not observed following the tests. In support of this observation, only 1.7 threadfin shad per minute were collected by trawling in the discharge in early March, 1970 compared to 87.2 threadfin shad per minute collected in early Febr'u ary. Threadfin shad did not emigrate from the dis- l charge cove until early April the preceeding year. ' In response to the higher water temperatures, largemouth bass spawned earlier in the region of the discharge cove than in the control coves. This conclusion is supported by the observation of numerous young-of-year largemouth bass in the dis-charge canal and cove in mid-April, 1969, while none were found in either control until mid-May. A standard "t"-test a;. plied to data obtained from young-of-year the May electrofishing sample showed discharge cove largemouth bass collected fish to be significantly during(at the 99 percent confidence level) larger both in larger length and weight than those concurrently collected from the upstream control cove. Early spawning of largemouth bass was further indicated by results from the June, 1969 retenone cove samples in which largemouth bass in the two- and three-inch classes were collected in the discharge cove while no largemouth bass of these size classes were collected in either control cove (Figure 3). Largemouth bass spawned later in the intake cove compared to the discharge and control coves during the periods of both two- and three-unit operations; this pre-sumably in response to the slower rise in water temperature of the intake cove. Length-frequency data from rotenone samples disclosed that no one-inch largemouth bass were collected in the intake cove in June, 1969, while fish of this size class were collected from the other coves sampled (Figure 3). Also, largemouth bass from the one-inch class were collected from the intake cove in both September 1968 and 1969, whereas all fishes collected from the other coves sampled then were of larger cize classes (Figure 3). I Yellow perch spawned earlier in the downstream control cove, and somewhat later in the discharge cove and upstream control cove, during 1969 This is indicated by the length-frequency rotenone data for June 1969 in which yellow perch had already grown to the two-inch class in dhe downstream control cove while they were still within the one-inch class in the discharge and upstream control coves (Figure 4). Yellow perch either did not spawn, or spawned unsuccessfully, in the intake cove ao indicated by the absence of one- and two-inch fish in the June,1969 l rotenone sample (Figure 4). Substantial immigration of yellow perch into the intake l cove is indicated by the large number of two-inch individuals obtained in September, , 1969 during three-unit operation, while no immigration apparently occurred in 1968 during two-unit operation (Figure 4). Late spawning of bluegill in the discharge cove was disclosed by length-frequency data from the spring and fall, 1969 rotenone cove samples (Figure 5). Foor representation in the smaller size categories in the fall,1969 intake cove sample disclosed that either no spawning, or an unsuccessful spawn, of bluegills o: curred that year. A pair of flathead catfish preparing to spawn were collected in the discharge rotenone cove during the June, 1969 sample.
Mev (Observations During Periods of Similar Temperatures in Discharge and Control Coves) Water temperatures were similar (62.80F. - 66.00 F.) in the discharge and control coves in May, 1969. During chis period, the greatest number of species was caught at the discharge and upstream control cove gill-net stations, while the downstream control cove yielded but one species less than its greatest number (Figure 2). Even though the May sample yielded the greatest number of fishes caught during the entire sampling period, the only significant difference noted was that gizzard shad were more abundant in the upstream control cove compared to the discharge cove (Table 4). In March,1970, when water temperatures were again similar (53.1 F. - 57.9 F.), the number of species caught at the discharge cove and control cove gill-net stations once more reached its peak (Figure 2). The only significant difference noted from this sample was that Moxostoma spp. were more abundant in the downstream control compared to the discharge cove (Table 4). Although little significant variation was noted between any gill-net catches in March,1970, both electrofishing and trawling samples from the discharge cove yielded significantly more threadfin shed, gizzard shad, golden shiners, bluegill, and yellow perch than those from either control cove (Table 4). Apparently caused by the slower increase in water temperatures, the number of species caught at the intake gill-net station during May, 1969 and March, 1970 lagged behind the increase noted for the discharge and control coves (Figure 2). Surface water temperatures in the intake cove were 51.60F. in May, 60.10F. in June, 1969, and only 45.0 0F. in March, 1970. June and July (Similar Temperatures in Control and Discharge Coves with Decreasing Dissolved Oxvgen Concentrations in Discharge) Temperature profiles for the discharge and control coves were similar during the months of June and July, 1969 The surface water temperature varied from 76.1 0F. to 76.60F. in early June and from 85.2 F. to 87.5 F. in early July. The only signif-icant variation noted from gill-net samples taken during this period was that a significantly greater number of gizzard shad was caught in the discharge cove than in the control coves during June (Table 4). A substantial difference did exist, however, between the fish populations of the upstream control cove and the discharge cove as noted in the June rotenone samples. Significantly more centrarchids were collected in the upstream control cove, while significantly more yellow perch and white bass were collected in the discharge cove (Table 4). The variation noted between the downstream control cove and the discharge cove was comparatively small, with significantly more bluegill being collected in the downstream control cove. It should be noted that while the dissolved oxygen concentrations in the control coves were near 100 percent saturation, values of approximately 50 percent saturation were recorded in the discharge cove. The highest dissolved oxygen concentration recorded in the discharge cove just prior to rotenone application was 4.7 p;n.
l i August to Mid-September (Low Dissolved Oxygen Concentrations in the Intake and i Diccharge Coves) ; As a result of thermal stratification, the dissolved oggen concentrations of l hypolimnetic water drawn into the intake cove were below the 10 percent of saturation l in early August, 1969 The highest concentration noted at the intake gill-net station was 0.8 ppm at the surface at a temperature of 65 7*F. Concurrent determinations made at the two control coves yielded dissolved oggen concentrations raniging from 80, , to over 100, per/;ent saturation. During this period of low dissolved og gen concen- I trations the intake gill-nets yielded ten species of fishes, the same number as both control coves, and numerically more fishes than either the upstream or downstream control coves (Figure 2). The only significant numerical variation noted was that the intake cove yielded significantly more yellow perch than either control cove. i i The discharge net station was not influenced by the effluent containing low dissolved o g gen concentrations since temperature and dissolved og gen profiles obtained were almost identical to those of the control coves. The plant's discharge plume at that time apparently was hugging the opposite shore of the cove. Under 1 these conditions, the discharge cove yielded the greatest: species varktion; total l number of fishes; and total weight of fishes of any net station for that sampling ;
^
period. By late August all water in the discharge canal contained extremely low dissolved og gen concentrations (0 3 - 0.4 ppm), while water in the receiving cove contained comewhat higher concentrations (1.1 - 4 5 ppm). Concurrent electrofishing and i trawling data indicated that fish were avoiding the discharge canal during this period. ! Only three fish (threadfin shad) were collected by electrofishing in the discharge O' canal, while 160 fishes -- representing 11 species - were collected in the receiving j cove. Only two white catfish and one threadfin shad were caught in the discharge canal by trawling, while 37 fishes -- representing five species -- were caught in i the receiving cove with identical effort. [t Dissolved oggen concentrations still were quite low at both the intake (1.1 - 1.7 ppm) and discharge (1.1 -3 5 ppm) gill-net stations during the September sample I although the fall overturn had begun. Under these conditions both the intake and , discharge net stations, uniquely, yielded fewer species than either control cove i (Figure 2). Moreover, the decrease in number of species caught in both the intake and discharge coves coincided with an increase in number of species caught in both control coves (Figure 2). Also, the discharge gill-nets yielded fewer fishes than did either control cove, while the intake cove gill-nets yielded more fishes than . either control cove (yellow perch and carp comprised 82.4 percent of the intake cove ' catch). These results are in complete agreement with those obtained during the earlier period of two-unit operation wherein the species variation in the discharge cove was minimum when the dissolved og gen concentrations were the lowest. The catch rates determined from creel census data also reached a low point ! during this period of 1cw dissolved o g gen concentrations. The catch rates were 0.12 and 0.11 fish per hour of effort in August and' September, respectively. On , three census days (August 23, 30, and September 20), the catch dropped to zero. i Tagging data indicated that a carp migrated underneath the skir:mer wall into i the intake cove during the period when the dissolved og gen concentrations were , near zero. j i f L
~ Mid-September to Mid-Oct ober (Fall Overturn -- Increase in Both Temperature and Dissolve Oxygen Concentrations in the Discharge Cove) An increase in both temperature and dissolved oxygen concentraticns developed in both the intake and discharge cove waters with the fall overturn. The highest water temperature recorded at the point of discharge was 92.00F. and it occurred on October 3,1969; the dissolved oxygen concentration at that temperature was 3.5 ppm. This high temperature discharge was of short duration and affected only the immediate area of the discharge structure (for example, the maximum te=perature obtained at the point of discharge only one week later on October 10, 1969 was 89 F.) Although the 92.0 F. temperature noted is above the recommended maximum for the growth of largemouth bass, bluegill, and crappie (National Technical Advisory Committee, 1968), no detrimental affects on the fish population were noted. In fact, in response to the increased dissolved oxygen concentrations and the discharge current (Calhoun,1969), an almost immediate influx of fishes, principally threadfin shad, developed into the discharge cove and the region of the discharge structure. These observations were confirmed by the electrofishing sample of October 1 when large numbers of threadfin shad were collected. Despite the large numbers of threadfin shad, however, the over-all catch rate by electrofishing in the discharge cove (0.86 fish per minute) was substantially less than that for either the upstream or the downstream control coves (2.0 fish and 2.1 fish per minute, respectively). Although the discharge gill-net sample again yielded a low number of species in October, an increase in the catch of white bass and longnose gar was noted (Figure 2). Results of rotenone samples taken at the time of overturn revealed that significantly greater numbers of threadfin shad, satinfin shiners, yellow perch, and carp were taken in the discharge cove than in either control cove (Table 4). Also, the creel census catch rate increased to 0.50 fish per fisherman-hour (Figure 6). These results concur with observations made during two-unit operations of the previous year when threadfin shad and piscivorous species migrated into the discharge cove soon after the onset of the fall overturn. With the increase in dissolved oxygen concentrations, the intake gill-net station exhibited an abrupt increase in the number of species caught as illustrated ; by the October sample in comparison with the September sample (Figure 2). l Mid-September through November (Decreasing Ambient Water Temperatures) A period of steadily decreasing ambient water temperatures occurred following the completion of the fall overturn. Following the initial influx of threadfin shad into the discharge cove during the overturn, a numerical decline then occurred. As noted in the trawling data, the catch per minute declined from a high of 8.7 in September to 1.5 in November. In contrast, the creel data noted a sharp increase in the catch rate from its lowest point in September to its highest point (0.89 fish per hour of effort) during November (Figure 6). A great number (194) of the fish caught by anglers in t'he discharge cove were white bass. l
December through February (High Discharge Temperatures and Low Ambient Temperatures) With a continuing decrease in ambient water temperatures, threadfin shad again ; migrated into the discharge cove. The December trawling sample produced substantially ' more threadfin shad (9 5 fish per minute) in the discharge cove than were collected r the previous month. This catch rate was also substantially higher than-the December . catch rate of either control cove. At the time of the December samples, the highest ! water temperature recorded at the point of discharge was 72.0*F. while those of the , upstream and downstream control coves were 47.2*F. and 51.8"F. respectively, t With an even further decrease in ambient water temperatures to approximately 40*F. in late December, a massive migration of threadfin shad into the discharge cove (especially into the area of the discharge structure and the discharge canal) was - noted. The trawling sample in the discharge cove on January 8th yielded the highest , catch rate (432.7 threadfin shad per minute) for the entire sampling period. : A winterkill of threadfin shad occurred in other portions of the lake, including ; the control coves, in late December and January. This kill was so extensive in the intake cove that the generating plant's cooling water was threatened from the dead , and dying threadfin shad clogging the intake screens. Temperature profiles taken during the time of the kill (Janua q 21,1970) ! revealed essentially isothemal conditions in the main lake at 38.8'F., while the ! temperature at the point of discharge was 67.0*F. The surface temperature at the mouth of the discharge cove on that date was 58.O'F. ; The temperature susceptibility of threadfin shad is apparently a major factor limiting populations outside its natural range (Domrose,1963). Water temperatures ! below 41*F. usually are fatal (Parsons et al., 1954; strawn, 1965) although it has ! been recorded that threadfin shad can successfully overwinter in a heated effluent (Dryer el g., 1957). l Thus, the massive migration and subsequently successful overwintering of this ; species in the discharge cove was facilitated by the increased discharge water , temperatures. These results agree completely with those obtained under the two-unit , operation the previous year. ! Results of both trawling and electrofishing during January and Februaq indicated that very small numbers, at best, of threadfin shad overwintered in the control coves. However, in lieu of the fact that this species maintains a continuing population only in North Carolina lakes having electric steam stations (McNaughton, 1967), it seems apparent that the fish overwintering in the discharge cove serve as the major spawning . - stock for the entire lake. In response to the abundant supply of threadfin shad, and possibly because water i temperatures were much nearer their optimum (Federal Water Pollution Control Adminis- i tration, 1968), numerous piscivorous species also were collected in the discharge cove during the December,1969 to Februaq 1970 period. By January, although the creel catch rate was declining, a substantial increase in the discharge cove catch ; by all other sampling methods was noted. Along with the increase in threadfin shad , already noted from trawling, the discharge cove yielded the~ greatest number of species (6) recorded for trawling during the entire sampling period. The discharge , gill-net station yielded 11 species and 199 fishes, while the downstream control cove . yielded only two fish -- both golden shiners. Ice cover prevented gill-netting in the upstream control cove in January. Although fewer fishes were caught, more species were obtained in the discharge electrofishing sample (10) than were collected from the , two control coves (7).
Stor.ach analysis of predator species acquired from the discharge cove during the winter revealed an almost exclusive fish diet, with all but one of the identifiable fish remains being that of threadfin shad. Tagging data indicated that white bass make feeding excursions into the discharge cove. Temperature profiles showed that these fish apparently moved freely from dis-charge cove temperatures of at least 60.O'F., to ambiant temperatures of less than 45.O*F. - Fungal Infestation of Fishes in the Discharge Cove During the sampling period, same largemouth bass, bluegill, white bass, and white crappie collected in the discharge cove were found to be infected with a fungus of the family Saprolegniaceae. Although this fungus is widespread geograph-ically (Hoffman,1967), no fishes exhibiting fungus infections have been ecllected from other areas of the lake to date. As noted in results of the electrofishing data, the incidence of infestation reached a considerable magnitude in largemouth bass during the winter (Table 5). Tagging As of the end of this study period, a total of 1,345 fishes have been tagged, with a return rate of 4.4 percent. Except for the migration of white bass already noted into, and out of, the discharge cove in winter, little movement of tagged fish from the point of release has been detected.
-LITFilATURE CITED-Calhoun, Alex. Inland fisheries management. State of Cal. , Res. Agen. , Dept. Fish and Game. 546 pp.
Domrose, Robert J. 1963 Evaluation of threadfin shad introductions. Va. Comm. Game and Inland Fish., D-J Proj. F-5-R-8. 8 pp. Drver, William and Norman G. Benson. 1957. observations on the influence of the new Johnsville Steam Plant on fish and plankton populations. Proc. 10th Ann. Conf. S. E. Assoc. Game and Fish Comm. pp. 85-91. Edison Electric Institute. 1970. Interim Report - 1969 average station heat rate. 3 pp. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. 1968. Industrial waste guide on themal pollution. 112 pp. Geyer, John C., John E. Edinger, Willard L. Graves, Jr., and Derek K. Brady. 1968. Cooling water studies for Edison Electric Institute. Johns Hopkins Univ., Dept. Env. Eng. Sci. 124 pp. Gray, R. Fred, and J. Ben Stephenson. 1969 Diffusion of cooling water discharge from Marshall Steam Plant into Iake Uoman. ASCE Hat. Meet. Env. Eng. 9 pp.
Hoffman, Glenn L. 1967 Parasites of North American freshwater fishes. Univ. Cal. Press, Berkeley, Cal. 486 pp. , McNaughton, William D. 1967 The threadfin shad in North Carolina waters. N. C. ' Wild. Res. Comm., D-J Proj. F-16-R, Job X-A. 6 pp. l National Technical Advisory Committee. 1968. Water quality criteria. U. S. Gov. Print. Off., Washington, D. C. 234 pp. Parsons, John W. and J. B. Kimsey. 1954 A report on the Mississippi threadfin shad. Prog. Fish Cult. pp. 179-181. [ Strawn, Kirk. 1965 Resistance of threadfin shad to low temperatures. Proc. 19th , Ann. Conf. S. E. Assoc. Game and Fish Comm. pp. 290-293 l t i
-CONCLUSIONS- !
- 1. The heated effluent had a profound effect upon the fish population present in the '
discharge canal and receiving cove. This was illustrated by the significant numerical differences noted for numerous species when comparing the discharge ; cove and control cove populctions. - I 2 The variation noted between the populations of the intake and discharge coves compared to the control coves was not constant, but showed periodic differences in response to changes in temperature, dissolved oggen concentrations, and current. ; 3 Spawning did occur in the discharge canal and cove. Due to water temperature differences, however, spawning by certain species did not occur at the same the in the discharge cove as in the control cove.
- 4. Due to a slower rise in water temperature, certain species spawned later in ,
the.dntake cove than in the control coves. Some species either did not spawn, , or spawned unsuccessfully, in the intake cove. { 5 While fishes did survive in the intake cove during periods of extremely low dissolved og gen concentrations, an almost complete avoidance of the discharge water of 1cw dissolved og gen concentrations was evident. l
- 6. No detrimental effects upon fishes were noted during the short period when dis-charge temperatures were the highest (92.0*F.).
- 7. The discharge current did stimulate some migration of threadfin shad into the :
discharge canal. Higher discharge temperatures compared to ambient temperatures, l however, was the cause of a massive migration of threadfin shad into the discharge canal and cove during the early winter. These higher temperatures facilitated the overwintering of threadfin shad in the discharge cove. ! 3 Piscivorous species migrated into the discharge cove during the winter to feed i upon the abundant forage, and possibly partially in response to the temperatures ! being nearer to their optimum.
l
- 9. The heated discharge did facilitate a higher incidence of fungus infestations in '
certain species during the winter.
-RECOMENDATIOIG-
- 1. Continue the project as currently documented, to evaluate the difference, if any, between a three- and four-generating unit operation.
- 2. Intensify investigation of the fish populations in the discharge canal and receiving cove particularly as they relate to prevailing temperatures and dissolved oxygen concentrations. Investigate more thoroughly the species present in the intake cove as they relate to low dissolved oxygen concentrations.
3 Identify all species which reproduce in the discharge cove, as well as the effects of the wamer discharge upon their eggs and fry. 4 Detemine the response of various fish species when exposed to the discharges containing low concentrations of dissolved oxygen. 5 Intensify the study of fish diseases and parasites as they relate to the wamer discharge waters. O 9
t L O Table 1 ! l Common and scientific names of fishes collected from Lake Norman, North Carolina, t July 1, 1968 - April 1, 1970. i Longnose gar Lepisosteus osseus (Linnaeus) ; Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum (LeSueur) . i Threadfin shad Dorosoma petenense (Gunther) ' Carp Cyprinus carpio (Linnaeus) 3 Golden shiner Notemigonus chrysoleucas (Mitchill) ! Satinfin shiner Notropis analostanus (Girard) Greenfin shiner Notropis Eloristius (Jordan and Brayton) Redhorse suckers Moxostomus surs ! Quillback Carpiodesc3rinus(LeSueur) ! White sucker Catostomus epgnersoni (Lacepede) : Flathead catfish Iylodictis olivaris (Rafinesque) Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus (Rafinesque) . White catfish Ictalurus catus (Linnaeus) ! Blue catfish Ictalurus furcatus (LeSueur) Yellow bullhead Ietalurus natalis_(LeSueur) Brown bullhead Ictalurus nebulosus (LeSueur) Black bullhead Ictalurus melas (Rafinesque) Flat bullhead letalurus platycephalus (Girard) Mosquitofish Gambusia affinis (Baird and Girard) , Striped base Roccus saxatilus (Walbaum) ; White bass Roccus chrysops (Rafinesque) ; Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides (Iacepede) j Warmouth Chaenobryttus gulosus (Curier) j Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus (Linnaeus) ; Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus (Linnaeus). ! Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus (Rafinesque) Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus (LeSueur) White crappie Pomoxis annularis (Rafinesque) I Yellow perch _Perca flavescens (Mitchill) Johnny darter Etheostoma nigrum (Rafinesque) 1
Table 2 List of the species known to occur in lake Noman that were not collected in one or more coves sampled by the various sampling,t,echniques during the period January 1,1969 - April 1,1970.f/ All other species known to occur in the lake were caught in all coves. Upstream Intake Discharge Downstream Species Control Cove Cove Control Black bullhead + + + - Blue catfish - - + - Channel catfish + - + + Flathead catfish + - + - Greenfin shiner + - + + Johnny darter + - + + Iongnose gar + - + - Mosquitofish + + - - Satinfin shiner + - + + Striped bass + + + - M A plus (+) indicates that the species was caught, while a minus (-) indicates that the epecies was not caught. Table 3 Statistical significance of numerical differences noted for each species between the test cove (intake or diacharge) compared to the combined control ecve data fer each samplir.g technique during the period January 1, 1969 to April 1, 1970. e e
, e . as a,, =
u af"
,A 3' 51" RS& 18%jef58}4j u tu
% a gg 3
.c . .8 e ?"
1 22e t
& ret 8It "5 1cw 33gts, E"at gto8,3 3d{j'e3Ed t
*#~2214 "
e
- Art 3g o gb#5 a" l4 toK g3oa g g ~ 5 y *8*g "S S g ~3 . amgmtAEea di o< 8 a" o e cyssEdsmeAtu
- Tu"!a mAm A "s s %1e Gill Net 0 - - + 0 / / - 0 0 / 0 + 0 0 0 0 + / 0 - 0 0 / IO - - + /
Rotenone / + + + + 0 / 0 / 0 0 0 0 / 0 0 + - 0 0 0 - - 0 - - - - - O d Conclusion O O O O + + 0 1 - 0 0 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 - 0 - - - - 0 0 Electrofish 0 + + 0 0 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 0 0 / 0 0 0 0 - 0 - 0 + -
+ + + + 0 0 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 / + + + 0 / 0 0 0 0 + /
E Cill Net / / -
/
0 + 0
. Rctenone / - + + 0 + / 0 0 0 0 0 0 / 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - 0 - - - -
I' 0 f Trawling 0 + + / / / / / / / / / 0 / / / / / / / 0 0 / / / / - -
/
3 ca Conclusion./ 1 + + + + + + 0 - 0 0 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 + + 0 0 - - - - + - Key: + Cignificantly more fish.
- Significantly fewer fish.
O No numerically significant difference.
/ No fish caught by the sampling technique noted.
N. A. Not applicable (fish caught by the technique not recorded). M The conclusien for each species is subjective rather than arithmetic. I 1
Tatie & Eignificant sonthly differences, species, between oeves as noted by the various ass @ ling techniq4es. ' Enth tiretream Contrcl Diacharge Cove Downstream Cont rol [m Jan., 1969
- Cienrd shad (ii)
Tellow peret (n) Blueg1M (e) White taas (n) fodbreast sunfish (e) March largervath base (e) Teno r perch (e) heareast eurfish (e) hedbreast surJish (a) Bluegin (e) Cary (e) A pril Gissard stad (e) -
!argewath base (a)
Yellow perch (e) May Gissard stad (n) - - Bhagin (r) Gissard stad (n) Bhegill (r) Bhex crappie (r) Yellsv pereh (r) Gissard stad (r) White teos (r) June largewath tese (r) Fodbreast sunfish (r) barviouth (r) White crappie (r) July - Tellow perch (e) - Threr i. fin shad (t) Cimmard shad (n) (e) Threadfin stad (t) Aug. Threadfin shed (n) YeMow perch (e) Radtreast sunfish (e,r) Carp (r) Sept , Glasard shad (r) rettrJin shiner (r) - Threadfin stad (t,r) Yenow perch (r) Gissard stad (n) Bluegill (e) Oct . Johnrv s darter (e) - Redbreast sunfish (e) Redbreant surJish (e) Tatinfin shiner (e) Threadfin stad (t) Jchrq darter (e) No v. Eadbreast sunfish (e) - Ledbreast sunfish (e) Wa:touth (e) Bluegill (e) Threadfin abad (t) SatirJin shiner (e) Lee, Giasard stad (e) Eadbreast surdish (e) <O Satinfin shiner (e) Gissard shed (e) Gissard stad (n.t) Satir. fin shiner (e) V Jan. Threadfin stad (t) 17'9 Whiteperch Tellow base(n(n) ) Dluegin (e) 018'"'8 'h* 3 (E) Feb. Iargamm.th base (e) Threadfin ehed (t) White tens (n) - White catfish (n) Tellcw terch (r .e) Bluegin (e) Kr etma m (n) Gingard etad (e) March - Golden chirer (e)
'"hreadfin shad (t)
Tenow perch (e) M Epecies listed in the discharge cove were caught in significantly greater numbers tran in either control, while species listed in a contrcl were caught in significantly greater nebere in that ccvs carapared to the dis-etarge cove. [./ The sen411r.g techniques which yialded the significant differences are noted as fouows: (e) electrefistir.g, (n) gill nets, (r) rotenoras covo san +1es, and (t) trawlingi Tatie 5 De incidence cf furg.a (!4prclegniaceae) irJections obeerved on fishes ocUected by electrcfistird in the discharge cove of the Marshau Steam I"aant, Iake Normar., March,1969 - Febna ry,197J. Iargamouth bass N aber Neber Infestation I fea sati Ca .gh t 1 Jected fate l Fall (Sept . - Nov. ) 32 0 0.05 1 Winter Dec. - Fetr. ) Ei, 3 12.5i l
. Spring krch - May) f2 2 3.25 4
[g k Surener Jane - Aq.) 42 0 0.0% j Totals 160 5 3.2% Leg ill Fan (Sert. - Nov.) & C O.Cf winter (Lee. - Feb. 78 1 1.3I Sprird (March - May 326 1 COf Sunster (Jane . Aug. i.9 O C.05 ) i Totals $35 2 041
l ss E 4, h; .
' y i
\f i,
i 1 1[l d' ff*'f,\aY K_N m N
\ \
p i.
' ,,~~ g- $
s x j bx-xx x 4 .< ;<.4g %gN e i, x N 4
~
'N i ,
7 :
~N'Q'i'x\~:l i.i
? e : bxg s, s\' . 4 " m,. 3'N $3 e_: ' s
f t v t.J v 16-I"~
- 4. 44
/jN'N /
j 'N, ' = -- -= j'y 3 12 -
,y N. ~. j -
x_
;p
=
l- y N / ~,
~
lI 10-
\
\ /f \ f
\
\ ,e _ ~ _ s '
's s%
/.
/ , s.V ,
0 g
\
\ '
p
/
/ .\r
=
\
\ , \ .
8-s ,- ./ = , 5 \ l [
/
g a \
- E 6- o 4 l WEY
'N A
[
./ ~.
A UPSTRE AM CONTROL COVE N. lj ,
! $ INTAKE COVE 4- g
- N, 3 DISCHARGE COVE
\
- O DOWNSTREAM CONTROL COVE e 2-
\ -4! \^
- JAN. FEB. JULY OCT, 1969l l MARCH l APRIL l MAY l JUNE l l A'2 0. l SEPT. l l NOV. l DEC. lJAN. 1970l FEB. l MARCH FIGURE 2. Number of Species Caught at Each Cove f rom Monthly Gill Net Samples, Lake Norman. January I. 1969 - April 1 1970 I
1
SEPTEMBER. 1968 JUNE. 1969 SEPTEMBER. 1969 INCH CLASS INCH CLASS INCH CLASS g- 2" 3" 4" 2" 3" I" '4 " I" 2" 3" 4' 147 6 80-60-5 r h E 5 s E x E h b a e E
?
h t E l 2> j 5 ' i E 5 5
! 5 = = E ! 5 5 0 " " EN E
; ijPSTREAM CONTROL Samnied with Rotenone Curing September. 1968 and June and Seotember, 1969 lHTAKE COVE I
DISCHAdbE COVE g _SmAl, e_
O O O SEPTEMBER. 1968 JUNE. 1969 SEPTEMBER. 1969 lhCH CLASS INCH CLASS INCH CLASS l' 2' 3' 4' l' 2' 3' 4' l' 2" 3" 4'
- g3 "i ,, ,,.
y ,. l-1 s
! l l i R
i
<0-
!= != !=
= = = : =
b [ b b I 5 / 5 e i z !
!"~ /s 5 $ _5 =
- = dis gt =! ! !
i f 1
!i 2 1 =
$ ! 5 ; a !E ! ! ./ .
5 I l ! 20- ; g g 3 g g; g _j s I
! ! q ! f ! [h; ,
L i i c i (! ll$ i diid
~
e E l ! . iih _ jeeSmA-_L , , ee. . 7;;;;;; ;g.;. ;;;;;;;7 7;;;..;,;;;;_ ;;,;;g;; .7,;;- C_ S.,- lHTAKE COVE l DISCHARGE C0dE DOWNSTREAM CONTROL
JUNE. 196~ SEPTEM6ER. 19:9 l h C t* C L A$:s INCH CLASS l' 2' 3" 4" i" 2* 3" 4" w?
>9
{'5 33 2 0 ig. 23 h' y, '6 g ,. 0q 80 - I 5
- 5 5% E 5 . E Eh 5
, =
E r ' E _
- ! - 5 5
= = =
5 - 5 5 5 y 60 - ].h
= ;! =
l.5
$ h .
5 h
& ll\ E E I [l $j 5 b -
x is 1 < 5 = = 5"~ ' h h ! h . l t ! q a 1: 5 5 I?? h 5 5 5 20 - (t -; a I 5 3 s 5 a E a
*CY f
=
y%j g 4 5= f t;PSTRE Ati CON TROL y { /] 'j 7E
]
O - tNTA*E COVE FIGURE 5. Lengtt-F recuenc y Cata f or Young-of-' r
- ar Bluegill Collec tec f rer Coves Ol5 CHARGE CCiE S voleo witn hotenore Curir; June and September. 1969 D0wh5TREAP CONTROL
_--__m__ ---- e_m o w e
/x V)
( l.00 - r 0 0.75-S b e 8 x z 0.50-U O e* 5
~ 0.25-0 i i i i i i i i i i i i APR. 14AY JUNE JULY AUG. SEP. OCT. NOV. DEC. JAN. FEB. t4AR.
FIGURE 6 Catch Per Fisherman Hour of Effort in the Discharge Cove, Lake Norman, Aprit. 1969 - t-iarch. 1970 fN C,
0 Sectlon Page Number 48 HI STORIC LANDMARKS O l 9 4B-i
. l
i L i I i i Tirs Durs Powra CourAxy um Tun Mterxxxnunc Hisierucu. ASSoCIADON request the honour of your presence at the dedication of the plaque l at Cowan's Ford Dam to General William Ixe Davidson f on the one hundred and ninetieth anniversary ! of his death l February 1,1971, at four-thirty P.M. , i i t
i ., t ] l
, .. ,Q ) *G k i.
g
] .
} N ---
r :l' ~
~
i A t
+
a. u s. *
}
~ -
^- _ ,
y - - '
. LO }
,L' Q ':- '
_ s -% Yb gag t , y, - .
'A / jrf 4
poo.ne. '.. . _ , - '. .b ew- - , - w ; fuent staff Photo by leep Hunter , Marker, Old Cannon Mark Spot Of History ! TAPS AGAIN Gen. Davidson Wemorial Dedicated el. By KAY REIMLER plaque which states that the memorial was ms sten weer erected at the site where Gen. Davidson fell F.e b. 1, 1781: Bridg. Gen. William Lee off his horse and died after being shot about a < Davidson and a small band of volunteer mih- quarter of a mile away on the riverbank. I tia from Piedmont North Carolina were Dr. Davidson's history, retold on the new ! trying to slow British Gen. Cornwallis' cross- memorial, has a slightly different story. It l Ing of the Catawba River near Cowan's Ford. says the general died at the river bank, now . A Tory sympathizer shot md killed the under water. !' 34-year-old revoh.tionary general after whom Davidson College and Davidson counties in HERE'S THE REST of the story as the North Carolina and Tennessee are named. Davidson College professor related it: Almost 200 > cars later, a Duke Power Co. Lord Cornwallis' army was pursuing Gen. bulldozer operator, clearing a wooden area Nathanael Greene's main revolutionary forces i for the McGuire Station site near Cowans when it encountered Gen. Davidson's small i Ford Dam, found an eight-foot stone memori- band of militia at Cowan's Ford. During the al, covered in ivy and honeysuckle, a forgot- battle, Gen. Davidson was killed and the Bri- ; len monument to Gen. Davidson. tish crossed the river but the encounter - slowed them "sufficiently to permit the main TIIE RECENT discovery by the bulldozer army to escape to Guilford Coarthouse where operator spurred an investigation by Duke Green gave successful battle to Cornwallis." Power people, the Mecklenburg Historical As-sociation and specifically Dr. Chalmeres Dav- Dde m ergam h idson, head of Davidson College's hinory de- cendent history professor, a popular leader partment and a descendeut of the general. and one upon whom Greene relied to bring ; This afternoon, on the 190th anniversary out the " impulsive and often reluctant militia forces" of the area, of Davidson's death. Duke Power and the his-torical association were to have dedicated a The general was buried in Hopewell Pres. I General Davidson Memorial Area on highway byterian Church yard rather than in his own 73, a few miles from the Highway 2t intersee- [ church, Centre, because that are was "m-tion. fested with British and Tories." The new plaque reads: "He was married . Duke Power landscaped the area, moved to Mary, daughter of patriot Squire John Bre-the old monument and erected a new one vard, and left a large family of small child-near it with a short history of the general, ten." written by Dr. Davidson. A number of Davidson's descendents, in- I cluding some from Alabama and Virginia, l The old monument, put up by another wer expected for today's dedication ceremo-l descendent, Baxter Davidson, has a metal ny. C8HNd/b AM~S h t - 7/ i
y g>99 ,po$
'Ol '
r$kghMg({MegdI 6+p %m7)
,. y, ,7. m W> ,
LN 1. t
,,1,'!%gof'gs!!I gC h
7,.- 9 f' ,'.h.s* h' 4 4 , c,;e,,9, . ,., p , ,, %p g 4 2'.' I
., 9s 9p$ g s,p':1 "U#%s ggfs,1) 3.g.fsat '
q( pp 3 c(
,gp.x-
,s, og ><;,4e t
(} t'pj$:s\ re eg,y 9 - e 1, f
\; .lfb W e?te,.'3hp;#9 Tis #> asge.##e+ae. sos %>. g r R ' &(s T' i$ot r*;,;e# amo1re i
s%gs mm. Wy,;92%'w j sm ";j'm' $f> 9(q$hW*s 2 m!'k ' u STemr5%ss3[g . tWW> , g tt.h Jt>> ; i toCOI. poli #' mfr;;$//a ge s;', '
- ypygd M" ,,u.S g , es &
s ca gu owAS
\ ,ma. ,1,, . ma gin,>ys,
$gT1Gj{g,L'ua.n$#gy.ns se -"a e54%u d? .
e#p, cauvnum'#
.ua.wmr. .am .f$$$wg>1 op y m'tu%'MYN^_0,#,,,.w,.a1e.l,,mw 33.g, suu un uhne,wtS.v. tW 1MS
- , au v
' int *D ym,mac.w.sw;*;p"%.[-)%2%010 ex m ta d h .m . -
y9 3 GALL cu hMW15Mu'h h'A,, .
,,,g noswn m lbO'W d-
,, y~ 1g. wn:tu \
u t,, watov . ; qc--. \
\
.hfecklenburg historical . Association f-) Chartone, North Carolina 28209
() MRS. E W. MORGAN February 3, 1971 MRS. JANET S. THOMPSON PRE SID E NT SECRETARY A. H AYNES DUNLAP A. NEAL GOODSON FIRST VICE PRESIDENT TREASURER J. RUDOLPH THOMPSON JR. t SECOND VIC E PRE B IDE N Y Mr. W. B. McGuire, President, Duke Power Company, 422 South Church 5treet, Charlotte, N.C. 28201
Dear Mr. McGuire:
On behalf of Mecklenbur6 Historical Association I wish to thank you for invitin6 us to join with you in the dedication of the marker to General William Lee Davidson on Monday, February 1, 1971. The park makes a significant roadside attraction. Duke Power Company did a fine thing in establishing this site that has now become a renewed part of Mecklenburg 's history. It will be enjoyed by multitudes of natives and tourists alike who otherwise may never have known much about it. It was such a pleasure working with Mr. Pierce and Mr. Hurst. They were thorough to the least detail, and the project from its inception to the conclusion of the dedication service attest to that. Yours sincerely,
$'d - T- hy, Mrs. E. W. MorEan, President, Mecklenburg Historical Association.
Copies Mr. R. R.. Pierce Mr. J. H. Hurst Dr. Chalmers Davidson l
TABLE OF CONTENTS O\ 5 I Section Paqe Number 5 ALTERNATIVES TO McGUIRC NUCLEAR STATION 5-1 5.1 ALTERNAT!VE TYPES OF GENERATION 5-1 ! i 5.1.1 HYDRO AND COMBUSTION TURBINE CAPACITY 5-1 5.1.2 PURCHASED POWER 5-2 5.1.3 " EXOTIC" SOURCES OF POWER 5-2 5.1.4 NUCLEAR AND FOSSIL FIRED STEAM-ELECTRIC CAPACITY 5-2 ! 5.2 ALTERNATIVE SITES FOR NEW CAPACITY 5-4 5.3 ALTERNATIVE COOLING SYSTEMS 5 -5 5.4 ALTERNATIVE RADIOACTIVE WASTE TREATMENT SYSTEMS 5-6 O : { h O 5-i
5 ALTERNATIVES TO McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION
\
McGuire Units 1 and 2 are needed to meet customers' requirements for electrical l energy in 1975, 1977 and thereafter. The peak demands experienced and expected on the Duke Power system for the years 1964 through 1977 are tabulated and dis-l cussed in Section 2.2. Demonstrated growth in customer requirements for electric l energy and long lead times necessary to perform environmental engineering, pur- l sue regulatory proceedings, perform design, obtain timely delivery of high quality l equipment and build plants on schedule make it incumbent on Duke to choose a j specific site in time to perform all necessary work in orderly and timely fashion. It would be remiss for Duke or any other utility to delay, to waver, or to be less than forthright in making necessary commitments to meet anticipated public needs for electric energy. This could seriously dislocate the economy of the area served. Based on its considerable experience and upon every reasonable assurance that f a suitable generat ing facility could be built and operated safely, with mini- ! mum possible adverse effect on the environment, Duke's management did not con- ! sider the alternative of deliberataly not building to meet expected customer ! requirements. Such an alternative is not acceptable to Duke Power nor to the i public it serves. l l As has always been Duke's practice in plarning new generating facilities, manage- ! ment did consider a number of alternatives in order to develop the optimum plan ! to meet anticipated needs. The important alternatives are discussed below. f 51 ALTERNATIVE TYPES OF GENERATION ! 1 in January, 1971, the Duke system's total generating capacity is slightly more l than 6,700 Mw. The needed increment of capacity to be added by McGuire Units l 1 and 2 is 2,360 Mw. The types of generation which might be considered to i furnish all or part-of this needed increment of capacity are hydro, fossil- l fueled steam, combustion turbines, nuclear-fueled steam, purchased power and {
" exotic" sources. {
l 5.1.1 HYDRO AND COMBUSTION TURBINE CAPACITY I I On a practical basis, neither hydro nor combustion turbine capacity could be considered. Duke's total existing hydro capacity of about 860,000 Kw built in 26 plants over a period of nearly 70 years is less than half of the needed capacity at McGuire. The characteristically low flows of streams in the Duke ; territory further limit the usefulness of hydro capacity to short term peaking i service. There remain only a very few hydro sites available and suitable for l in the Duke terr ! development service. Forfor peakingthe example, service, Federal and nonePower Commission lists 66(j locations ory for base in load l all of North and South Carolina where undeveloped hydroelectric potential exists ; indicating 4.2 billion kilowatt hours to be the total annual energy potential ; of all 66 sites combined. This is less than one-third the annual energy gene- ! ration planned for McGuire. k i. (I) Hydroelect ric Power Resources of the United States, Developed and Undeveloped, j January 1, 1968, Federal Power Commission. i l 5-1 .l l
l i Likewise, combustion turbine units are small (20,000 - 50,000 Kw) and are not , suitable for base load service. Duke's total existing combustion turbine capa- 3 1 city, about 460,000 Kw in 19 units, is less than one-fourth of needed capacity at McGuire. Combustion turbines have high fuel and operating costs. For exam- , plc, during 1970 Duke's fuel cost per kilowatt hour for these combustion tur- , bines was more than five times the expected fuel cost at McGuire. Even if an
, adequate supply of oil or gas were available, use of this type generation for i
) around-the-clock service would be poor stewardship of the economic resources ! I of Duke's customers and of the nation's oil or gas re sou rces . , . l l 5.l.2 PURCHASED POWER l Power in the amount to be generated by McGuire Nuclear Station is not presently , available nor will power in this quantity become available in the foreseeable i future. If such quantities of power became available, the production costs of j such power may be competitive with production costs by McGuire; however, the additional transmission costs would renove any such power from a competitive category. s j 5.1.3 "EXOT 'C" SOURCES OF POWER i What about magnetohydrodynamics, solar power, tidal power and other sources of I energy as an alternative to McGuire? Some of these may some day be practical. , i A great deal of research is now being done on such sources and Duke Power is i j contributing to segments of this re s ea rt.h . When and if they become practical, ' we will be in a position to use them to si.pply our customers' power needs; , however, none are now a substitute for McGuire Nuclear Station. j 5.l.4 NUCLEAR AND FOSSIL FIRED STEAM-ELECTRIC CAPAC ITY ! As Duke's evaluation of nuclear vs. competitive fuels continued with focus on the 1975 and 1977 units, planning studies showed these units to be required in the central part of the Duke system. In addit ion to nuclear and coal, the studies included a comprehensive evaluation of imported residual or crude fuel oil. Proposals were received from several petroleum marketing companies in-l cluding engineering and cost studies of super-tanker terminal facilities on the
- coast and an oil pipeline to the new plant. Also considered was the conversion of several existing plants to oil firing which would have provided a greater annual volume and lower unit cost of oil to the proposed new plant.
The studies showed that a nuclear fueled plant would result in lowest system
- costs. Oil would have had to be available in future years at 32 cents per l million Blu to be competitive with nuclear. Coal would have had to be avail-i able at 28 cents per million Btu to be competitive with nuclear. At the time of the study, fossil fuel prices were substantially higher than these break-even values, and have subsequently skyrocketed to much higher levels.
The studies included evaluation of conpetitive bids from suppliers of nuclear i react or systems f or units in the 1150 Mw class. Among the bids received fiom four maj or suppl iers of nuclear equ ipmen t , the most acceptable offer was sub-
- mitted by Westinghouse Electric Corporation, and an order was placed with that
- firm. These two units will be the 13th and 14th nuclear units of essentially
! this size for which nuclear systems are being furnished by Westinghouse. Ade-l quate time was provided in the design of the Duke units for startup and initial i i 5-2 )
r . I l i i operation based on experiences of several of these sister units. G i When compared to a coal-fired plant on an environmental basis, the nuclear j plant had the advantage of presenting no air pollution problems. f I l I
-)
}
I r l i O ! f i i
?
I r j i
.s t
t 1 i i U 5-3 ! l t
i 52 ALTERNATIVE S iTES FOR NEW CAPAC lTY Following the addition of large units in the southwestern portion of the Duke system at Oconee and in the northeastern portion at Belews Creek, system plan-ning studies indicated the optimum location for the next major generation would lie in the central part of the service area. Detailed economic and engineering studies compared the Allison Creek site on Lake Wylie and Site H (McGuire) near Cowans Ford Dam on Lake Norman. Site H was found to be the most economical primarily because of proximity to major system transmission facilities and the ;
- presence of cooling-water supply facilitles built in conj unct ion wi th Cowans a Ford Dam. Environmentally, the site offered no relative disadvantages when compared to other sites, but rather had a clear advantage with respect to ther- ;
mal effects because of the cool water supply. The site is well suited to con- j struction of a large coal-fired station if the nuclear alternative were not avail-able. The following major f actors were f avorable to the location of a major ; nuclear station at Site H: l a. By using cool bottom waters from Lake Norman blended with the intake of surface waters, studies showed no expected adverse thermal effects from the warmed condenser discharge. . l
- b. In 1965, a preliminary evaluation was made of the many site parameters ;
influencing nuclear safety at this location, and the results were infor- i mally reviewed with officials of the Atomic Energy Commission. Their reaction was favorable,
- c. Considering the proximity of Charlotte population and the Charlotte water intake on Mountain Island reservoir, special design criteria were estab-lished to assure that the environmental radioactivity effects f rom a nu-
. clear plant at Site H would be substantially below regulations that pres-cribe safe levels.
- d. Overall economics were in favor of Site H in spite of the higher ad valorem tax rate in Mecklenburg County when compared to some surrounding counties.
Duke now has no generating plant in the county having its greatest number of customers. Location of this major facility in Mecklenburg will be bene-ficial to the economy of the county and to Duke system operation. l
- e. Preliminary and informal discussions with local and regional officials
- having responsibilities in the areas of environmental health and pollu-
- tion control revealed no adverse factors or reactions.
l f. Duke already owned most of the land required for the plant and the surroun-ding exclusion area.
- e1 !
t i i i
i r i l 53 ALTERNATIVE COOLING SYSTEMS j l The unique advantages of the available means of cooling condenser water 'at ! McGuire site were a strong factor in selection of the site. This system is - described in Section 4.1.5 For surface evaporative cooling, McGuire units ! will have available the largest acreage on an inland body of water in the l Duke service area. In addition, the low-level intake constructed as a part . of Cowans Ford Dam provides means to blend cold waters from lowest levels of l the lake with ' nearer-surface waters drawn into plant condensers to insure j that thermal discharge regulations are met and maintained under the most [ severe climatic conditions. In short, McGuire appears to be the optimum site. ; in the Duke service area for use of the cooling resources of the region. l Natural and forced draft wet-type cooling towers and cooling ponds were evalu-ated in connection with some of the sites which preceded McGuire and one of { the sites considered as an alternative to McGuire. These methods were found ! to be uneconomical and to have definite disadvantages in siting, conservation l of water and appearance, j As a general rule in Duke's service area, where there exists a choice between l use of large wet-type cooling towers and surface cooling from a large body of j water, good conservation of the total water resource favors use of surface i cooling. For large thermal generating units the total loss of water to the atmosphere from wet-type cooling towers averages about 25 cfs per 1000 Mw while forced evaporation from a cooling water surface is about seven cfs or , about 70 percent less. Dry type, or surface to air type cooling towers are not available for large j size units and were consequently not considered a practical alternative. l 1 i 1 l 1 i e I i i I I T 5-5
5.4 ALTERNAT IVE RAD 10 ACTIVE WASTE TREATMENT SYSTEMS One alternate liquid waste disposal system was evaluated. This alternate system did not incorporate the same degree of segregation of equipment drains and waste streams as the liquid waste disposal system in the present McGuire design. Consequently, none of the liquid waste processed by this alternate system would be reused; and the radioactive liquid discharges from the station, while far below 10 C FR 20 l im i t s , wou l d be somewha t greater than those resul- { ting from the present McGuire design. l l Two alternate design concepts were considered for the gaseous waste disposal system. One concept was to provide long-term holdup capacity for potentially radioactive gases, permitting considerable decay of radioactivity. Discharge of these gases from the station would result in offsite concentrations of radio-act ivi ty far below the limits of 10 CFR 20. However, the gaseous waste disposal system in the McGuire design is planned to operate without normal discharge of radioactive gases from the station.(I) The second alternate concept considered was the Freon gas-trapping process, announced in late 1970 by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The gaseous waste disposal system in the McGuire design ' achieves the same obj ect ive as the ORNL sys tem. The liquid and gaseous waste disposal systems designed for McGuire were selec-ted for the following reasons:
- a. These systems reduce discharges of radioactivity to the environment to levels far below the numerical limits of 10 CFR 20.
- b. These systems permit reuse in the station of a substantial portion of the liquid wastes generated,
- c. Normal discharge of potentially radioactive gases from the station is eliminated.
- d. These systems truly represent the most advanced available and reduce dis-charges of radioactivity to the lowest practicable values.
(I) Except for those gases resulting from miscellaneous reactor coolant leakage in the con ta intnent or auxiliary building as described in Section 4.2.3 5-6
I i TABLE OF CONTENTS I h section Page Number i l~ i , 6. REGULATION AND COORDINATION WITH GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 6-1 ! 6,1 FEDERAL AGENCIES 6-1 l $ i l, 6.2 STATE AGENCIES 6-2 !, 1 - 6.3 LOCAL AGENCIES 6-5 l t i 8 i ! i h ! l i ! I 1 J O 6-1
- 6. REGULATION AND COORDINATION WITH GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 6.1 FEDERAL AGENCIES'
- a. The Atomic Energy Commission, under the Atomic Energy Act as amended, has l regulatory jurisdiction over design, construction and operation of the plant, specifically with regard to the nuclear aspects relating to assur-ances of pubile health and safety. Application, with supporting documents, was filed on September 18, 1970, for a construction permit for each of the-two units. On the appropriate schedule, application will be flied for the operating license for the two units, a license for each of the reactor operators and senior operators, licenses to own and possess nuclear mate-rials in the form of nuclear fuel and license to use gamma ray sources in nondestructive testing of piping and other materials during construction and maintenance. Periodic surveillance of construction, operation and ;
maintenance will be performed by the Division of Compliance of the Atomic Energy Commission.
- b. The Federal Power Commission, under the Federal Power Act as amended, has licensing jurisdiction over the Cowans Ford Dam and Lake Norman that it impounds. The license for Project 2232 was issued September 17, 1958, and included Cowans Ford Dam plus ten other hydroelectric plants on the Catawba-Wateree River in North and South Carolina. The original license reserved seven sites for thermal electric generating stations, three of which were located on Lake Norman. On July 31, 1961, application was made for a license amendment covering a fourth thermal plant site on Lake Norman and requesting permission to build the low-level intake structure described in Section 4.1.5 of this report at the time of constructing the. Cowans Ford Dam. This intake structure and the use of Lake Norman as a source of cooling water were planned well in advance of need as a result of Duke's continuing environmental studies. By order issued Ocrober 2, 1961, the FPC approved this intake structure. Any major modifications to the Catawba-Wateree development covered by Project 2232, including Cowans Ford Dam, are subject. to approval of the Federal Power Commission.
- c. Other Federal Agencies During the planning and development of its facilities, Duke has and will continue to cooperate with a number of federal agencies having specific areas of environmental interest. Examples include the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, the Geological Survey, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Public Health Service, the Federal Aviation Adminis- l tration, the Forest Service, The Soil Conservation Service and the Water Quality and Air Pollution Control Offices of the Environmental Protection Agency.
6-1
6.2 STATE AGENCIES
- a. The North Carolina Public Utilities Commission required, prior to begin-O ning construction of a generating plant, that the need for the plant be established and a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity be issued by that agency. Duke filed application for such certificate on December 16, 1970. (The certificate is enclosed in Appendix 6A.) This Commission also has jurisdiction over many other utility matters, including, for example, the Company's issuance of new securities to obtain funds needed to finance the Company's construction program including McGuire Nuclear Station,
- b. The North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resources regulates the control of water and air pollution in the state. For many years, the Company has worked closely with this Board and their staf f (The Department of Water and Air Resources) to assure that Duke's facilities are conceived, planned, designed, built and operated in accordance with their regulations and good pollution control practices.
Discussion of the then proposed Lake Norman generating complex, including its future thermal plant sites, was begun with the Board and staff in 1957 Fran time to time subsequently, the plans for each increment of this complex were reviewed in advance with the staff. Specifically with respect to McGuire Nuclear Station, long-range plans for the use of cooling water at this site and the related thermal effects were reviewed with the staff in 1960 and followed up with an exchange of correspondence including Duke's furnishing preliminary data in 1961. Note that this is more than fourteen years in advance of the scheduled commercial operation of McGuire Unit No.
- 1. Upon completion of Lake Norman in 1963, the lake's waters were embraced in Duke's continuing water quality sampling program, and the data obtained has been useful in the continuing review of future plants for the generating complex. This program has been coordinated with and the data collected shared witF the Department of Water and Air Resources. in the fall of 1964 at the dedication of Cowans Ford Dam, then Governor Terry Sanford stated with respect to the thermal generation capacity around Lake Norman, "Whereas the first two units at Plant Marshall will use coal as fuel, it is entirely conceivable that other capacity in this new program will utilize the energy of the atom and be nuclear powered."
ha early 1970, prior to announcement of the specific timing and type of plant to be built at the McGuire site, plans for this plant were reviewed with the Department of Water and Air Resources. Following additional dis-cussions in the ensuing months, on October 9, 1970, applications were filed for:
- 1. A permit for the discharge of warmed cooling water into Lake Norman.
(Pe rmi t enclosed in Appendix 6A.)
- 2. Certification that there is reasonable assurance that this discharge will not violate the applicable water quality standards. Whereas this section of the Catawba River is not navigable as determined by the FPC licensing of Project 2232, this certification is similar to that required by Section 21b of the Water Quality improvement Act of 1970. (Certifi-cation enclosed in Appendix 6 A.)
6-2
-. . . _ . - - - . - - - _ . . . - _ - .- . ~ _ - - - .
l l l 3 A permit to construct the small dam impounding the nuclear safety . pond i in accordance with the Board's responsibility for review of dam safety 1 in those cases where dams are not subject to other licensing jurisdic- j tion. (Permit enclosed in Appendix 6A.) ! l At the appropriate time, additional applications will be filed before this i Board for permits covering conventional sewage and waste treatmcnt facili-ties, first to serve the temporary construction buildings and later to j serve the plant. Any ef fluents from these facilities will fully comply with the water quality standards of the receiving body. l l
- c. The North Carolina State Board of Health has responsibilities in the areas [
of vector cont rol, sanitat ion, environmental radioactivity and other public. . health matters. Duke's vector control program, conducted on its hydroelec- i tric reservoirs, has been closely coordinated with the State Board of Heal th for more than 40 years. In planning its new lakes such as Lake Norman seve- : ral years ago, the Company works cooperatively with the State Board of Health l to develop high-quality standards of sanitation that, when adopted by the Boards of Health in the counties involved, assure high sanitary quality and l environmental protection with respect to shoreline developments around the periphery of these lakes. The Company and the Radiological Health Section, State Board of Health have consummated an agreement of cooperation with respect to radiological matters. (Appendix 6A) , I
- d. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and Duke have cooperated !
for many years in programs directly related to Lake Norman and other Company l ands and reservoi rs, in addition to the many commer-
- 1. cial marinas and campgrounds to facilitate public recreation, the 1. l Company built and maintains ten public access areas around Lake Norman. i Downstream of the Cowans Ford Dam, Duke has provided on a no-cost lease ,
basis 1000 acres of land and water to ,the Commission as a waterfowl refuge. - This refuge has been under Commission management since 1962 and their pro-gram has included enhancement of the natural waterfowl habitat by plantings of various legumes and feed. The success of this refuge is evidenced by j the large fall and winter populations of mallard, black duck and other species ] that are attracted to the combination of food in the refuge and open water j in the nearby Lake Norman. l Beginning in 1966, fisheries biologists from the Commission have been work-Ing with Company research personnel in studying the effects on aquatic blota of thermal discharges in Lake Norman. This program is a part of the Edison Electric Institute's Research Project No. 49 with overall management pro- < vided by Johns Hopkins University and additional support in the Lake Norman case from local universities. Within the overall project, the Commission staff has conducted the fish sampling and evaluation program. In the Commis- i sion's 1969 - 1970 biennium report to the Governor of North Carolina, their findings to date are summarized as follows:
"--THERMAL ENRICHMENT- "
"The warming of large quantities of water used for cooling condensers at steam plants, while conceivably beneficial up to a threshold point, ulti-O mately may pose a serious threat to the aquatic environment.
and nuclear electric generating plants account for some 80 percent of all Fossil fueled l 6-3 Revision 1 5-1-72 l . _ J
industrial cooling water used in the United States. A study of the effects of the warm water discharges upon Lake Norman fishes, undertaken during the 1966-1968 biennium, has continued. Results to date indicate no signifi-cant effects upon the reservoir as a whole, but certain localized effects have become quite obvious. Thermal enrichment of the waters in the cove receiving the discharge now permits the overwintering survival of threadfin shad, which has increased the forage-fish potential of the resevoi r as well as stimulating an extremely popular sport fishery - particularly for striped bass and white bass. On the other hand, there is some evidence that the higher temperatures have slightly increased the incidence of winter-time fungus infections and infestations by ectoparasites." This slight increase in fungus and parasitic activity is not believed to be of serious significance, and it may well be influenced by the congregation of fish population near the source of food. The Commission and the Company plan continued coope ration on fishery programs on this and other Duke lakes. The above research was conducted around Marshall Steam Station on Lake Norman. As pointed out elsewhere in this report, the cooling water supply for McGuire
- 1. Nuclear Station can be blended with water f rom low levels which also serves 1.
as a source of cooling water for Marshall Stean Station. The effect on fishes of low level water withdrawal at McGuire is expected to be similar tc the effects at Marshall; however, a comprehensive aquatic biological study will be made to assess the impact of McGuire Nuclear Station on Lake Norman.
- e. The Division of Recreation of the North Carolina Department of Local Affairs coordinates and promotes the development of recreation opportunities in the state. For many years, the company has coordinated its plans for generation development with the predecessor North Carolina Recreation Commission and now with thi s agency. The construction of McGuire Nuclear Station will have no adverse effect on the current use nor on the very large potential for expansion of recreation on Lake Norman,
- f. The Division of State Parks of the Department of Conservat ion and Development in 1962 accepted title to 1328 acres of land donated by Duke Power for use as a state park on the shore of Lake Norman. Since its development, the annual usage of this park has increased year by year to where it is now among the most popular in the state. McGuire Nuclear Station will not affect the park,
- g. From time to time there will be coordination with several additional state agencies such as the Highway Commission on moving heavy loads, the State Highway Patrol regarding emergency plans, and others.
O 6-4 Revision 5/1/72 L
___ _ . _ . _ _ . _ _ _ - . . ~ _ . - _ _ _ _ I 1 6.3 LOCAL AGENCIES
-a. Mecklenburg County Manager f I
~ Plans for McGuire Nuclear Station were discussed with the County Manager, who, as responsible county executive, receives copies of application papers that the Company files with the Atomic Energy Commission. l
- b. Mecklenburg County Commissioners l i
Plans for the McGuire Nuclear Station and its relationship to the environ- j ment were discussed with the Chairman and the minority leader of the County ; Commiss ion prior to announcement of the project. From time to time, other matters have and will be coordinated with the County Commission. l t
- c. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Planning Commission During its early conceptual phases, plans for Lake Norman were coordinated j with the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Planning Commission as well as similar commis- l sions in the other three counties surrounding the lake area. For an interim- ;
period, the Lake Norman Planning Commission was formed to coordinate the ; planning fuction among these several counties. On November 20, 1967, the j Charlotte-Mecklenburg Planning Commission zoned the site of McGuire Nuclear g Station as "I-2", which is appropriate for power plant purposes. l
- d. County of Mecklenburg Health Department [
f Plans for McGuire 6nd its relationship to the environment were discussed I with the County Health Officer prior to public announcement. Duke has f and will continue to coordinate its activities with the Health Department ! in all appropriate matters. ; i
- e. City of Charlotte Water Department f Plans for McGuire and its relationship to the environment were discussed I with the Superintendent of the Charlotte Water Department prior to public !
announcement. Charlotte draws its source of raw water from the Company's , Mountain Island Reservoir located downstream of Lake Norman. The Company i will continue to cooperate with the Charlotte Water Department with respect . to both quantity and quality of water required by the' city system. ! r
- f. Mecklenburg County Pol ice, Sheriff's Department, Civil Defense Agency and f Hospital Authority !
Emergency plans and appropriate security measures will be developed in ! coordination with the appropriate agencies. [
- g. Other agencies i Understandably with a project of this magnitude, there will continue from time to time coordination with departments and officials of the county f and nearby cities and towns. ;
I t' 6-5 m
TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Number 6A CERTIFICATIONS, PERMITS AND AGREEMENTS I i l l l l i f i p i I l9 , B e 6 r i i j , i h I e a f Y e i 9 ! [. I' 6A-i f 1 I
. . . , ..-.. _. . . _ - . _ _ . ._ -._ . __ -. _ .. _ _ ._... _..-._ ,. _ .._. _ _ .. ~ _ .._..._ .. _ . ~._ .. , . . -
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DUKE POWER COMPANY AND THE RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH SECTION ! l SANITARY ENGINEERING DIVISION NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF HEALTH +
}v'HEREAS the North Carolina State Board of Health has statutory responsibility i
for ensuring the protection of the public from unnecessary radiation exposure, and i WHEREAS the Duke Power Company plans to construct and operate the McGuire Nuclear Station in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, and wishes to ensure { that the public is adequately protected from unnecessary radiation exposure, l The Duke Power Company hereby agrees to : !
- 1. Promptly advise the Radiological Health Section of the Sanitary '
Engineering Division of any radiation related incidents that are -! required to be reported to the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission,
- 2. Cooperate with the Radiological Health Section of the Sanitary l Engineering Division in the development of an appropriate i-emergency plan that will protect the public's health and safety in the unlikely event of a nuclear accident, and
- 3. Permit the Radiological Health Section of'the Sanitary Engineering ,.
Division to periodically review the results of the Duke Power
- Company's environmental surveillance program. ,
5 i
, Nb C Mbl A. C. Thies, Vice President
[/JacobKoomen,M.D. ; State Health Directer Prodyction and Operation ;
$$h AA' AAv F54rabell Staton, Director
, a $b wd Dayne/ . Iir'own,' Chief H
5 Sanitary Engineering Division Radiological Health Section j i r O Da W.19. //47/ \
O 1 l l I 1 l I l I I l I i
]
l 1 O 4
plate of Karth 6arolitta
)ltilitics 6cntruissimt
[hddh S i 1 DOCKET NO. E-7, SUB 124 BEFORE THE NORTH CAROLINA UTILITIES COMMISSION , In the Matter of Application of Duke Power Company for a Celtificate ) ORDER GRANTING of Public Convenience and Necessity under Chapter ) CERTIFICATE OF 287, 1965 Session Laws of North Carolina (G. S. ) PUBLIC 62-110.1) Authorizing Construction of New ) CONVENIENCE AND , Generating Capacity Near Its Cowan's Ford Dam in ) NECESSITY Mecklenburg County, North Carolina (McGuire ) Nuclear Station) ) PLACE: Commission Hearing Room, Ruffin Building, Raleigh, North Carolina DATE: March 5, 1971 and March 8, 1971 ' BEFORE: Chairman H. T. Westcott, Presiding; Commissioners John W. McDevitt, Marvin R. Wooten, Miles H. Rhyne, and Hugh A. Wells APPEARANCES: For the Applicant: Carl Horn, Jr. George W. Ferguson, Jr. W. Larry Porter Duke Power Company Post Office Box 2178 Charlotte, North Carolina 28201 For the Intervener: Arnold M. Stone Sanders, Walker & London 900 Law Building Charlotte, North Carolina For: Carolina Environmental Study Group, Inc. Mrs. Gayle Waller For the Commission's Staff: Edward B. Hipp and William E. Anderson Commission Attorneys ! Post Office Box 991 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 BY THE COMMISSION. This proceeding was instituted on December 17, 1970, by the filing of Application by Duke Power Company i (DUKE) for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity under ) G. S. 62-110.1 to construct a e generating capacity on a site adjacent to Lake Norman near its present Cowan's Ford Dam in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. By Order of the Commission dated December 30, i
l
?
1970, Notice of the Application was required to be published in I I g newspapers of ger. oral circulation in Mecklenburg County. On January 26, 1971, the Commission, on its own motion, issued an Order set ting public hearing on the Application for March 5, 1971, f in the Commission Hearing Room, Raleigh, North Carolina. The Order ( further stated that Duke would have the burden of proof to support l its Application by testimony of qualified witnesses together with ! exhibits and data and to establish for the record through competent testimony and evidence justification for the proposed plant from i economic, power supply requirements, reliability, and environmental .j viewpoints. Under the Application for a Certificate of Public ., Convenience and Necessity, Duke proposes to construct two nuclear fueled steam-electric generating units each with a nominal rating of 1150 megawatts, with Unit No. 1 to be completed to load fuel by June 1, 1975 and be in commercial operation by November 1, 1975, and . Unit No. 2 to be completed approximately one year later. E. l
}
Application provides that cooling water for the steam plant will be j t drawn through two intakes from Lake Norman designed to draw water ; from the bottom of the lake and from the 40-foot depth foot level, to , be returned to the lake through methods and at temperatures alleged to j be compatible with the enjoyment of recreation and fish and wildlife i propagation, and in compliance with water quality standards of the 1 North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resources, and construction
- permits of the U._S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC).
Under date of February 23, 1971, Petition to Intervene was l filed by the Carolina Environmental Study Group, Inc., and an Order + Allowing Intervention was issued by the Commission on the 26th day of ! Pebruary. { i on March 2, 1971, the Commission received a letter requesting ; I subpoena duces tecum for appearance for Mr. W. S. Lee, Vice President - l Engineering, Duke Power Company, Charlotte, on behalf of the l Carolina Environmental Study Group, Inc. Subpoena was issued by the ! Commission on March 2, 1971. Public hearings were held in the Commission Hearing Room, Raleigh, North Carolina, on March 5, 1971, and on the afternoon of ; March 8, 1971, with counsel for all parties appearing and participat-J
1 I !- iny as shown herr tof or e. The Applicant offered testimony and exhibits of its witnesses, Mr. William S. Lee, Vice President - Engineering, for Duke, and Dr. Charles M. Weiss, Professor of , Environmental Sciences and Engineering, College of Public Health, the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. a The Carolina Environmental Study Group, Inc., offered testimony of j its Secretary, Mrs. Gayle S. Waller, 1233 Biltmore Drive, Charlotte, f North Carolina, in protest to the granting of a Certificate of !
- 1. l Public Convenience and Necessity. The Utilities Commission Staff, !
l
- through co-operation with the North Carolina State Board of Health l
and the North Carolina Department of Water and Air Resources offered the statements and testimony of Mr. Dayne H. Brown. Chief, Radiological I q 1 Health Section, State Board of Health, and a written statement by ' Mr. E. C. Hubbard, Assistant Director, North Carolina Department of Water and Air Resources. l l Testimony of Applicant's Witnesses Mr. William S. Lee: Mr. William S. Lee testified and J. offered evidence as to the economic justification, power supply a requirements, reliability, and environmental impact of the proposed McGuire Nuclear Plant (sometimes referred hereinafter as the McGuire Nuclear Station, McGuire Plant, or McGuire Units 1 and 2), i- In reference to predicted power needs and availabic sources l for Duke's total system, Mr. Lee testified that the probable peak ) load based on average weather conditions is expected to grow at an I annual rate of about 9.5% over a ten-year period and that this compares to ; . + a growth rate of about 10.5% based on actual experience between 1965
, and 1970 and an average annual growth rate of 9% between 1960 and 1970, i
! l Mr. Lee testified that in regard to 1976 and 1977, the years in which ( the proposed McGuire Nuclear Station Units 1 and 2 are to become commercial, j _ Duke's predicted peak load for the summer of 1976 is 10,833 megawatts (MW), and that with the addition of McGuire Unit I at 1150 MW prior to that summer, the system capability would be 14,172 MW resulting in a e reserve capability of 3,339 MW. Mr. Lee further testified that allowing for the demands created by extreme weather, for the possible outage of the largest unit on the system, for other outages and capacity
- - , ~ . . . _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . . .
. -- . ___ _ _ _ . .__ _ _ _ _- _ ._ _ _ _ - . - _ __ _~_ m . -
reduction consistent with Duke's experience on a multi-unit system, I and an allowance for other contingencies including forecast f errors or severe outages, this reserve capability of 3,339 MW, which j k includes the McGuire Unit 1, would closely match the required reserve ; of 3,348 MW, which Mr. Lee alleged to be necessary for reliable service. ! Mr. Lee testified that at the summer peak of 1977, the time McGuire Unit 2 , consisting of 1,150 MW is proposed to go into service, the total reserves ! will be 3,460 MW, against a reserve requirement of 3,469 MW. In reference to the geographic location and justification ; i
~
of the proposed site, Mr. Lee testified that the McGuire site is located in Northern Mecklenburg County on a South shore of Lake l Norman immediately East of the Cowan's Ford Dam. He further testified j that this site is near the geographic center of the Duke service area ! and that its location is essentially at the intersection of existing , major 230 KV transmission routes extending from near Durham, North Carolina on a Northeast edge of Duke's service area to Anderson, South Carolina, on the Southwest and from llickory and Elkin, North Carolina, j in the North to Newberry, South Carolina, in the South, that the site is ) i also at the hub of Duke's developing 500 KV transmission system. a On an economic basis, Mr. Lee testified that taking full { advantage of the transmission system which is now in existence or i being built will effect considerable savings in transmission line costs.
-l He testified that compared to an alternate site on Lake Norman, the f
saving in transmission plant investment would be approximately 11 million F dollars and that compared to another possible location in South Carolina, ;
- a. which is similar to the McGuire site in that a minimum of transmission- l plant is required, the saving in transmission at McGuire would be approximately 5.8 million, but at that alternate site additional $
4 investment of 18 million would be required for cooling water facilities. l J In reference to whether or not adequate generating capacity is available either from sources on the Duke system or available from adjacent systems as an economic alternative to construction of the McGuire Nuclear Station, Mr. Lee testified that there are no hydro sites on the Duke system with sufficient head or stream flow to support 2,300 M4 of firm generation nor is there sufficicnt power i
- t. - +
available for 1976 and 1977 outside 'oke's system which would climinate the necessity of constructing the McGuire Plant. In reference to justification of nuclear fuel as the fuel . i source of the proposed plant, Mr. Lee presented comparative cost l studies which were made for a nuclear plant, a coal fired plant, ; and for a plant fueled with imported residual or crude oil. These , studies showed that a plant using nuclear fuel would result in , i lowest system cost by a substantial margin. Mr. Lee testified that to be competitive with nuclear, oil would have to be available in future at 31 cents per million Btu whereas the best quotations I roccived at the time of the decision in late 1969 indicated oil supply at ,
?
37 cents per million Btu, plus possible escalation in future years. [ To be competitive with nuclear, coal would have to be availabic on a j delivered basis at 28 cents per million Btu. Mr. Lee stated thar i Duke's system-wide cost of coal burned in December, 1969, was 31 cents l i per million Btu and based on then current market conditions was being j evaluated at 36 cents but had actually increased to.47.6 cents per ; g million Btu in December, 1970. At the time of the study, Duke estimated the capitalized value of savings with the two unit nuclear , plant at over 50 million when compared to oil and over 80 million } when compared to coal. Using fuel costs data as of January, 1971, Duke estimated the capitalized value of savings to be 167 million dollars for coal and 376 million dollars for oil. 1 Mr. Lee testified the estimated construction cost of the
)
McGuire Station is $372,220,000 with initial loads of nuclear fuel-at a cost of $59,168,000. Mr. Lee further testified that generation j costs are estimated to be 5.95 mills per Kwh. Mr. Lee testified )I that operating and maintenance labor and supplies expense for the proposed plant would be about equal to that required for a coal fired j plant. l l In reference to availability of nuclear fuel, Mr. Lee testified that Duke had negotiated long-term contracts for the supply of uranium and that these contracts plus options cover all of the g uranium required for operation of the two proposed nuclear units through the 1970's plus about 60% of the requirements for operation during the period 1980 through 1985. Mr. Lee testified that while there are no plants of this size presently in operation, the McGuire
- h. -t -
5. 1 Nuclear reactor systems will be the 12th and 13th essentially f' 1 [ duplicate systems to be supplied by Westinghouse and that this 1
- j. repetitive experience in design is empected to provide further 1-increases in reliability. Mr. Loc stated that Duke expected the f
, frequency of forced outages of McGuire units to be about the same as ? for fossil units of comparable size and that annually each McGuire- ) unit will undergo a three to four-week shutdown for refueling on a i i scheduled basis. Even though no units of the size of the proposed I McGuire Station are now in operation, Mr. Lee testified that similar units with a slightly less megawatt rating are in operation. i l Mr. Lee next testified regarding the environmental impact f' of the proposed plant and the status of all permits required for i construction and operation of the proposed McGuire units. He i testified that an Application had been filed with the Atomic Energy l Commission on September 18, 1970, for a construction permit for the two McGuire units. The AEC, Mr. Lee testified, has regulatory jurisdiction over design, construction, and' operation of the proposed i j plant with regard to the nuclear aspects relating to assurances of i j public health and safety; that approval-has not yet been received' 1 from the AEC for a construction permits and that assuming approval of the construction permit, further application must be filed with the , AEC for operating licenses for the two units. He further testified l [ that theso. operating licenses include the license for each of the plant operators and senior operators, licenses to own and possess 1 nuclear materials in the form of nuclear fuel and license to use l-
- gamma ray sources in non-destructive testing of piping and other materials during construction and maintenance.
Mr. Lee testified that the Federal Power Commission has ! licensing jurisdiction over hydroelectric generating facilities on l'i Lake Norman and specifically the Cowan's Ford Dam which impounds i Lake Norhan; that the license for.this FPC Project No. 2232 was issued September 17, 1958, and 2ncluded the Cowan's Ford development plus ten other hydroelectric tievelopments on the Catawba-Watoree J l River in North and South Carolina; that the original license for a term of 50 years f rom date of issue reservas seven sites for thermal electric generating stations, three of which were located on Lake f
. Norman; that on July 31, 1961, the Application was made for a license J amendment covering a fourth thermal plant site on Lake Norman i
-o
- _ . . ...__m..._m __m_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ - . _ . _ _ _ _ . - _ . - - _ _ - _ _ . _ . _ _ - . _ . . _ _ _
-7 1
i f- and requesting permission to build a low level in-take structure that will serve the proposed McGuire Station; and that at the time of constructing the Ccwan's Ford Dam by Order issued October 2, 1961, q the FPC approved the in-take structure and use of Lake Norman waters j 4 i g 4 for the purpose of cooling waters for the condensers proposed in this j I Application.
-l With respect to State Agencies, Mr. Lee testified that in !
\
j addition to a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity being l ) i necessary from the State Utilities Commission, the Board of Water l and Air Fesources, through the North Carolina Department of Water and j i , Air Hosources, regulates the control of water and air pollution in j the State. He further testified that Duke Power Company had , l
)
applied for the following: ;
- 1. A permit for the discharge of warmed cooling water -
i 1-into Lake Norman. $ . I
- 2. Certification that there is reasonable assurance ,
that this discharge will not violate the applicable j water quality standards.
- 3. A permit to construct the small dam impounding the auxiliary pond in accordance with the Board's responsibility for review of dam safety in those cases where dams are not subject to other licensing jurisdiction.
Mr. Lee stated that the permits and certification approving these systems have been issued by the Department of Water and Air Resources. ,He further testified that at the appropriate time additional applications will be filed with that Board for permits covering conventional sewerage and waste treatment facilities, first to serve the temporary construction activities and later to serve the plant. Mr Lee testified that any effulents from those facilities will fully comply with the water quality standards of the rocciving body. Mr. Lee testified that the North Carolina State Board of O Health has responsibilities in the areas of vector control, sanitation, environmental radioactivitiy, and other public health matters. He testified that the Company and the Radiological Health Section, State 1
-~ ~ . . . . . - - . . - - , - - .
l
.i t
Board of Health, have consummated an Agreement of co-operation i with respect to surveillance of radiological emissions. In reference to local zoning requirements, Mr. Lee testified ; that the McGuire site was zoned for this use several years ago [ l
~
by the Charlotte-Mecklenburg planning Commission. l In regard to the environmental justification of the l J geographical location on Lake Norman, Mr. Lee testifled that the r proposed McGuire site offers no disadvantages and two major l advantages - the first advantage being that Duke can utilize the cool waters in the bottom of Lake Norman as the source of condenser. , I cooling water and the temperature of the water return to the Lake , t i in the summertime will be lower than possible at any other cooling , i lake site on the Duke system, and the second advantage is due to i the close proximity of this site to Duke's largest 500/230 KV l cystem transmission substation which would minimize the land required j for delivery of the plant output to the system when compared to [ any alternate location.- Mr. Lee testified that the output of the , proposed McGuire plant would be delivered over two 500 KV transmission i lines .6 miles in length to the 500/230 KV system transmission sub- } 1 t station located South of the plant and across N. C. Highway 73. He further stated that there would be two 230 KV transmission lines I of similar length between the' substation and the plant to supply start-up power. I In reference to plans for disposal of waste heat including i i any studies made for beneficial use of such heat, Mr.' Lee testified i
- that only a small portion of the Lake would feel the extra warmth ;
of the discharged water and that in this area the waste heat would i l be quickly given up to the atmosphere by the combined cooling ef fects i of evaporation, radiation, and conduction. Mr. Lee further testified , that a researcn program conducted on Lake Norman with the assistance of scientists at-Johns Hopkins University, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the University of North Carolina at [ Charlotte, and the Division of Inland Fisheries af the North Carolia Wildlife Resources Commission clearly shows the beneficial effects l
'- of this waste heat on the fishery resources of this Lake. He 2
testified that the objective of this program was to determine the effect of a similar cooling water system at Duke's Marshall Steam Station located on Lake Norman at a site 17 miles North of the .
~1 I
, I
- l l
1 McGuire. site. Mr. Lee quoted from the Wildlife Resources Commission's l 1969-1970 biennium report to Governor Scott which stated, "A study l of t.he effects of the warmed water discharges upon Lake Norman ) fishes, undertaken during the 1966-1968 biennium, has continued. Results to date indicate no significant effects upon the reservoir as a whole, but certain localized effects have becomo quite obvious. I Thermal enrichment of the waters in the cove receiving the discharge now permit the overwintering survival of threadfin shad, which has increased the forage-fish potential of the reservoir as well as stimulating an extremely popular sport fishery - particularly for striped bass and white bass." Mr. Lee testified that after the f i McGuire units are placed in service, Duke will continue this study to establish that the thermal effects are consistent with the fore- f r casts that serve as a basis for future siting of power plants. In regard to radiation from the proposed nuclear reactors, Mr. Lee testified that the emissions from the McGuire Nuclear Plant will comply with the safety regulalions of the AEC and that the I dosage from the McGuire plant of one millirem per year to a person next to the plant is less than 1/100 of that allowed by one of AEC's guidelines. on cross examination by Commission Staff Counsel, Mr. Lee ! testified that the proposed nuclear fuel source would be-more { T compatible with the environment than any alternative fuel source , because of the inherent air polluting gases and fly ash resulting from the burning of coal when coal is used as a fuel source. Also, Mr. Lee testified that thermal effects from use of cooling water { for the condensers would be no different except that the nuclear ! plant would use more water but would heat it to the same temperature as fossil plants; and that the nuclear plant would not require Jarge land space for the storage of coal and ash resulting from burning the coal. t Extensive and thorough cross-examination was conducted of , Mr. Lee by Counsel' for the Intervener, Carolina Environmental Study ; Group, Inc. The record will show that many of the questions related to safety of the proposed nuclear plant, the ability of' Duke to 1 design and operate a 1,150 MW unit, the possibility L, __ , _
.- . . - . - - .- . _ ~ . - , that AEC may refuse licenses to Duke to build and operate the plant thus requiring Duke to build plants using alternate fuel sources, the possibility that fuel reprocessing facilities may not-he available because of economic and environmental reasons, the possible dangers and problems of transporting nuclear fuel and l nuclear wastes, and the correctness of the cost studies used in justifying the decision to install nuclear fueled units. l l Dr. Charles M. Weiss, Professor of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, College of Public Health, the University of North ! Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina: Dr. Weiss testified that I based on the studies previously carried out at the Marshall Plant l which is on Lake Norman and those studies in.which he has personally participated, it is his opinion that no significant adverse effect on the aquatic biology will occur in the so-called mixing zone to be caused by the releasing of heated water used for cooling at the McGuire Nuclear Plant into Lake Norman. ! Witnesses Presented by the Commission Staff Mr. Dayne H. Brown, Chief, Radiological Health Section,
' tate Board of Health: Mr. Brown testified that the State Board of ilealth maintains an effective program for the protection of the citizens of North Carolina from exposure to radiation; that this program was established under the provisions of Chapter 104 C, ,
North C rolina Atomic Energy, Radioactivity and Ionizing Radiation , baw, of the North Carolina General Statutes, and the Agreement , between the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission and the Governor of North Carollaa; that the North Carolina Radiation Protection Program is administered by the Radiological Health Section of the Sanitary Engineering Division; and that this program includes licensing of radioactive material, registration of x-ray equipment, monitoring of environmental radioactivity and responding to radiation emergencies. Mr. Brown further testified that the radiation protection aspects of the proposed McGuire Nuclear Station are specifically ? under the jurisdiction of the AEC but that the State Board of Health's a responsibilities and concern for the protection of North Carolina citizens require consideration of any possible public health hazards ; related to this facility. . f
. ~; .- . . - - .. - ..- - . .
i
- 11 Mr. Brown testified that his Staff has reviewed'the e-s Preliminary Safety Analysis Report of Duke for the McGuire Station ;
\s_s/ and believes that the normal planned releases of radioactive ! i effulents will result in environmental concentrations well below the limits which have been established by the Federal Radiation Council for protection of the public; that in order to ensure that environmental concentrations of radioactivity are well below thesc ; limits, the State Board of Health will supplement the surveillanco
}
program of Duke by maintaining independent radiation surveillance around the proposed facility and that this independent program will f include surveillance of air, water, milk and direct radiation I exposure at locations in the environs of the facility. i Mr. Brown further testified that based on review of the radiation protection aspects of the proposed McGuire Nuclear Station, the State Board of Health does not object to the issuance of a Certificate of Public . Convenience and Necessity to construct and
- operate the Duke Power Company McGuire Nuclear Station at Lake , ,
Norman in Mecklenburg County. , i Statement of North Carolina Department of Water and Air Resources: A statement from the North Carolina Department of Water and Air Resources confirming Applicant Witness Lee's testimony 'l regarding the Department's issuance of the necessary permits for construction of the McGuire Plant was offered and roccived into i evidence as Staff Exhibit No. 1. Witnesses for the Intervener Mrs. Gayle Waller, Secretary, Carolina Environmental Study f Group; Residence - 1233 Biltmore Drive, Charlotte, North Carolina: l Mrs. Waller testified that reactors require 50% more cooling water f t than conventional plants; that the question of how to disperse such l large quantitics of heated waters without harmful effects is a question of importance; that studies of the effects should be available to the public particularly since Duke began conducting j studies in 1959; that the Commission should withhold any decision l ( until such studies are thoroughly examined by experts who receive t no benefits from industry or would suffer no recrimination for a } knowledgeabic opinion; that Lake Norman.directly serves the water l systems of Davidson and Huntersville and downstream Charlotte and I F
because of this reason, radioactive effluents concern the public as well as heat discharges; and while planned and purposeful radio-O () active leakage into the cooling water may be at " permissible" levels, the long life of some of the isotopes seems to be overlooked as well as the reconcentration factor. Mrs. Waller further testified that the McGuire Plant is sited in an area which has the worst air inversion factor in the East and is only 16 miles from the center of Charlotte; that there has never been a reactor with as little discharge as this nor with the proposed ef ficiency ; that Duke has not furnished anything but conjectures on fuel costs and supplies, efficiency, economies, safety, reprocessing plants and waste storage; and that the future of the nuclear fission is based on conjecture. Mrs. Waller further testified that a Certificate should not be granted to Duke until the company produced its environmental studies. Based upon the entire record of this proceeding, the
,_ Commission makes the following:
\ FINDINGS OF PACT
- 1. That Duke Power Company is a Corporation organized '
and existing under the Laws of the State of North Carolina, and is a public utility oprating in North and South Carolina where it is engaged in the business of generating, transmitting, distributing and selling electric power and energy.
- 2. That the Atomic Energy Commission and the North Carolina State Department of Health, through a working agreement with the AEC, have primary responsibility in er.suring public safety f rom radiation exposure generally as affected by the design and operation of t he proposed nuclear plant; and that an Application has been made but that the AEC has not yet held hearings or granted a permit authorizing construction of the proposed plant.
- 3. That in regard to the normal planned releases of r~s radioactive effluents, the State Board of Health finds that these
\ releases will result in environmental concentrations well below the limits established by the Federal Radiation Council for protection l of the public; that to ensure that these limits are maintained, ' the State Board of Health will conduct on-going and independent
-_ - .,~. . . - - - . - - - . _ . _ . - . _. -. _- . i r radiation surveillance programs around the proposed facility; and , the Commission finds that the project meets all safety requirements so established.
- 4. That the Department of Water and Air Resources, through its agreement with the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, has primary responsibility over the use and/or pollution of the water and air resources generally of the State; that said Department has studied the environmental effects of the proposed McGuire Plant on Lake Norman and has issued permits authorizing the use of cooling water in the plant's operations as outlined in the Application; and the Commission finds that the project meets all environment requirements so established.
- 5. That while the AEC, the State Board of IIealth, and the Department of Water and Air Resources, have primary jurisdiction in the establishment, review, and surveillance of the design and operation of the proposed plant as it might affect the public from radiation exposure and as it might affect the water and air resources of the ,
State, the Utilities Commission retains the over-all responsibility of determining whether Public Convenience and Necessity is to be served by construction and operation of the McGuire Plant.
- 6. That the proposed McGuire Nuclear Units of 1,150 MW j each, if now if operation, would be the largest nuclear units in i
service; that, however, these units are the 12th and 13th essentially , duplicate systems to be supplied by Westinghouse; that similar units 1 of less megawatt rating are in operation; that the estimated construction cost of the McGuire Station is $372,220,000 with initial i loads of fuel at a cost of $59,168,000; that bas 2d on all considerations, economic as well as environmental, there is no other alternate fuel for generation or site location more suitable than those chosen for , the McGuire Station; Ubat Duke will not be able to adequately , serve its certificated area if the total amount of power proposed ! I to be supplied by the McGuire Station is not available by the i latter half of the 1970's; that Duke has the financial ability to
/~'h !
( j/ pay for the construction and installation of the proposed units; and the commisulon finds that public convenience and necessity requires the _ construction of the genera tiori facility. i
.- -.. - . . _ ~ - . _ . f t i CONCLUSIONS l t The Commission concludes that public convenience and
- necessity require construction and installation by the Company of ;
I the new generating capacity hereinaf ter described, subject to , compliance with all design and safety standards which may be imposed I by the AEC or the State Board of Health in regard to protection of r the public from radiation exposure, and by the N. C. Department of i Water and Air Resources for protection of the environment. ; In arriving at this conclusion, the Commission has i considered the testimony and evidence offered by experts from the { State Board of Health and the Department of Water and Air Resources
^
and the responsibility delegated by Law to the AEC in the areas of protection of the public from radiation hazards. Considering the evidence presented and based on the radiation limitations sat by i the Federal Radiation Council and administered by the AEC and the State Board of Health, the Commission concludes that the proposed j McGuire Nuclear Station will not have any significant adverse ef fect on its environs and that, conversely, it will emit much less , volume of gases and particulate matter than similar s t ead coal I fueled steam plants. l
?
The Commission also considered, in arriving at its conclusions, the Company's projected power requirements for 1976 and 1977 and { l while it is not convinced that the Company will require the amount' : of reserve margin indicated during those years, we_have concluded l that growth of power use in the Company's service area will continue . at such a rate that the units will be required _ at least by 1977 l and 1978 and that the Company should proceed to design and construct f
-i these units as planned in the Application. The Commission concludes ),
that based on current fuel cost and cost considerations as developed in ! l this record, these proposed units are the most economical and dependable I type of generating units the Company can provide to meet its expected growth in demand, and that the site chosen is the most suitable from an economic and environmental standpoint. I 1
~ . - - - - ~ . , , - . - - - . . _ , - . , . . - - - , , - - - - - . . . , , - , + , , .,-.,e e n ,,- .r-
The Commission further concludes that it will retain over-all jurisdiction over the design of the plant, as well as its operation, and will require the backfitting of technological advance-ments, as they become available, that provide reasonable additional protection necessary for the public health and safety or protection of the environment. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED: That a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity be, and it is hereby, granted to Duke power Company for the construction of McGuire Nuclear power plant, having a nominal output of 2,300 megawatts, to be located on Lake Norman near the Applicant's Cowan's Ford Dam in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, as applied for in this proceeding subject to the following conditions:
- 1. The plant will be constructed and operated in strict accordance with all applicable Laws and Regulations, including the construction and operation licenses to be issued by the Atomic Energy Commission and the permits issued by the North Carolina Department of Water and Air Resources.
- 2. Duke Power Company shall on a continuing basis promptly furnish the Commission with copies of reports made by and for the Company bearing on (a) the ecology of Lake Norman, (b) the effect of the operation of McGuire Nuclear plant on the environments, and c) technological improvements in the construction and operation of 1 generating facilities. Also, the Company shall on a continuing basis make available for inspection by the Commission Staff all projections and studies made by or for the Company regarding system load projections, system generation outage and reliability records (or studies), its generation site studies (including a listing of possible sites held by any Company-owned affiliates), data on nuclear and fossil fuel sources including suppliers and costs and any contracts executed in regard to fuel obtainment, and data on disposal of fuel wastes.
l I'
- 3. During the month of January of each year, beginning with the year 1972, Duke shall furnish the Commission with a progress report, which shall provide information upon which the Commission may evaluate the current status of the construction of said facility and time at which it is anticipated said facility, or ay part thereof, might become operational for the generation of electric energy.
ISSUED BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION. ,
+
This the /X ' day of May, 1971. NORTH CAROLINA UTILITIES COMMISSION By: h M. Katherine M. Peele, Chief Clerk (S F A L) W e t L i r
. = _ . - -
6 REGULATION AND COORDINATION WITH GOVERNMENT AGENCIES , r A list of the agencies of the Federal, State and Local Governments, from whom ! Ilcenses/ permits were obtained for construction of the Cowans Ford Dam and l also those who have been contacted in connection with the McGuire Nuclear ! Station is given in Table 6-1. ! i i i [ l i t i
)
l l i l ER Supplement i 6-1
-. . . - . . - - - . .- - .- - +
I TABLE 6-1 LIST OF GOVERNMENT AGENCIES Date Cont ac ted Public Hearing Date Gove rnmnt Body or Aqam y or Applic et ion (i f Any) T ype Agree-=nt Date Approved Federal Atomic Ere rgy Comi s s ion 9-18-70 App l ic at i on f or Const ruct ion Pern it 3- 9-71 Submitted Environmntal Report Federal Power Comi ss ion 1-31-61 Application for lice.nse acendment (Proj ec t % 2232, dated 10- 2-61 September 17, 1958) requesting permission to build low-Ic ve l i n t ake structure 3 71 Submitted Environmental Report j !. 2-18-72 Application for license amendment to permit withdrawal of 4500 1, c f s condenser cooling water and revis8on of Exhibit s K and L , U 5 Army Corps of Engineers 3- 3 71 Submitted Environmental Report i U S Geological Survey 3- 9-71 Submitted Enviro 9 mental Report Envirownt al Protect ion Aganc y 3- 9-7I submitted Environmental Report
; Water Quality Of fice and Air and , Pollution Control Office 3-16-71 4
E
- Dep ar tment o f Comme rt e , Bu re au o f 3-16-78 Submitted Environmental Peport f Commerc i a l f i she r ies , National Oc e an ic and Atmospheric Admini-
~
stration U 5 Fish and Wi ldl ife se rvice, 3 71 Submitted Environmental Report Depar tent of t ha interior Fede ral Comun ic at ions Comi ssion August 1960 Mic rowave Const ruct ion Permit , Cowans Ford 10-28-60 Oc t obe r 1961 Mic rowave Estension of Construct ion Fermit , Cowans Ford 10-28-61 Se p t embe r 1%2 Microwave License to cover Construction Permit, Cowans Ford 11-29-62 December 1%) Microwave Construction Permit, Cowans Ford 4-22-64 March 1965 M ic rowave License to cover Const ruction Permit and 5-13-65 Modificat ion, Cowans Ford August 1968 Microwave Const ruct ion Permit, Cowans Ford 11- 5-68 October 1969 Microwave License to cover Const ruction Permit, Ccwans Ford 2-18-70 E August 1970 Mic rowave Modi ficat ion, Cowans Ford l- 7-71 1 5eptember 1971 Mic rowave Mod i f ic a t ion . Cowans Ford - September 1959 Mobile Castruction Permit and License,Cowans Ford 12-21-59
- 3. April 1960 Mobile Modificat ion, Cowans Ford 5- 4-60
- January 1968 Mobile Construct ion Permit and License, Cowans Ford 2-20-68 , August 1970 Mic rowave Construc t ion Permit and License, McGuire St at i on l- 7-71 1
b O- - - - _ - - -_ O .- - - O . _
. _ , ._ m. __m.._. . _._.m_ .._.m._ . _ . _
- i. f i'
G e e 1 I I i TABLE 6-1 (Contd) I Date Contacted Public Hearing Date i Govern ~nt Body or Ananc y or Application fif Any) Type Av*emant Date Approved t St ate North Carolina Pubile Utilities 12-16-73 3- 5-71 Certificate of Pubile Convenience and Necessity 5-18-71 I Ccmai ssion 9-I B- 70 and Submitted PSAR 3- 9-?! 3* 8-71 Submitted Environmental Report [ North Carolina State Highway 7-10-70 Exchange of correspondence concerning construction of Il- 9-70 , Commission Access Railroad Bridge and Approaches adjacent to N C 73 j i 6- I- 71 Exchange of correspondence concerning Temorary Access 10- 7-71 Road, abandonment of portion of SR 2182 and improvements I to N C 73 I North Carolina Department of Water 9-18-70 Submitted PSAR and Air Resources 10- 9-70 Permits for cooling water discharge into { Lake Norman and Standby Nuclear Service Water 3- 4-7) l Pond 4-26-78 Permit to construct Wastewater Collection Basin 6-15-71 5-25-71 Permit to construct sewage disposal facilities for McGuire 6 18-71 i Construction Jobsite i 8-12-71 Permit to construct 6000 gpd extended aeration type wastewater 9-27-71
- 9 treatment plant (No 3) followed by chlorination f acilities
~ v, and fine solids settling basin to serve construction trailer ! E camp l " 3- 9-71 Submitted Environmental Report 'j Departwnt of Administration k-15-71 Submitted Environmental Report 8 North Carolina State Board of Health 9-18-70 Submitted PSAR Rediation Protection Program 3- 9-71 Submitt C Environmental Report Sanitary Engineering Division 3- 9-71 Submittes Environmental Report 11- 2-71 Application for permit to impound water for Standby Nuclear ' 1.l Service Water Pond and Wastewater Collection Basin 11 16-71 l 1 Radiological Health Section 19*70 Written Agreement (See Section 6A of original Environmental 1-19-71 Report) North Carolina Wildlife Resources 9-18-70 Submitted PSAR i Committee 3- 9-71 Submitted Environmental Report I Division of inland Fisherles 3-29-71 Submitted Environmental Report Marth Carolina Department of Labor 3-17-71 Submitted Environmental Report g North Carolina Department of Local 3- 9-71 Submitted Environmental Report ! Affairs, Recreation Division !- 3 Submitted Environmental Report 1 North Carolina Department of 3-16-71
- Conservat ion and Development I Y r .
M North Carolina State University. ~ 3- 9-71 Submitted Environmental Report
- a
( g
~ _ - __. - _ - _ - _ - - . _ _ _ _ _ . .. _ _ _ _
t TABLE 6-1 (Contd) Date Cont acted Public Hearing Date Gn#arnment Bmfy or Aqa nc y nr App l ic at i on (i f Any) Type Agreement Date Approved l St ate - contd l Uni ver si t y of Nort h Carol ina, Chapel Hill 3- 9-71 Submitted Environmental Report ! 2- 9-71 Research on Aquatic Ecosystem Cont r ac t 2-11-71 l 3-17-7I Submi t ted Envi ronment al Report L<< a l Mac k lenburg County Healt h Department 9-18-70 Submitted PSAR l 3- 9-78 Submitted Environmental Report 6-10-71 Permit for McGuire Nuclear Station construction jobsite sewage ) f acilities ) 7- 6-71 Permit for McGuire Nuclear Station construction jobsite Aerobic) 10- 8-71 Digestion sewage f+cilities ) 8 71 Pe rmi t for McGuire Nuclear Station construction jobsite trailer) camp sewage f ac ilit ies ) Mecklenburg Count y, County Manager 9-18-73 Submit ted PSAR 3- 9-71 Submitted Environmental Report 9 w Charlotte Water Dep ar t man t 3-17-71 Submit ted Environmental Report g E f Central Piedmont Regional Counc il 6- 1-71 Submitted Environmental Report of Local Government Mecklenburg County Boar J of Camnissioners 8- 2-71 Resolution to close a portion of SR 2182 at McGuire 9- 7-71 Mecklenburg County Building Inspector 9-18-70 Submitted PSAR Division May 1971 Building Permit for construction of Site H 230 Kv Switch 6-16-71 St at ion Relay House (Zone 1-2) 1 Charlotte Memorial Hospital 3-27-72 Agreement to cooperate with Duke in developing a program of 3-27-72 1. t re at ment for any possible radiation injuries at McGui re 1 i 3 T U O 9 O _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ______ O
P STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA I ( DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND AIR RESOURCES I I ROBERT W. SCOTT S. VERNON STEVENS JR. Govannon CMAlnMAN , P.D.DAVlS ' P. GREER JOHNSON J, NELSON GIBSON. JR 'a Vict-CH AIRM Ah [ WAYNE M ABRY .g i
^
HUGH L. MERRITT .
/r R AYMOND S. TALTON LEE L, POWERS <
JOSEPH E THOMAS , J. A ARON PREVOST ., GLENN M. TUCKER
- W. GR ADY STEVENg H. W. WHITLEY IN REPLYING REFER TO: GEORGE E. PICKETT. DanteTon
'""~ ~ ' * * * * '
WQ 70 LPB E. C. HUBB ARD. Asst. DintCTon j T tt t PMo ms 829 3006 ; R ALEIGH, N. C. 27611 P O. Box 27048 March 4, 1971 i i Mr. W. S. Lee ; Vice President, Engineering Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28201 t
Subject:
Certification to Meet Requirements Public Law 91-224 Section 21 (b) (1) O Duke Power Company McGuire Nuclear Station Mecklenburg County, North Carolina i
Dear Mr. Lee:
f In accordance with your application dated December 18, 1970, and after i advertising as required by the Bot.rd of Water and Air Resources, a certifi-cation required by Public Law 91-224 Section 21 (b) (1) has been issued. l Two copies of Certificate 6-A are enclosed for your use. l If I or members of my staff can be of assistance to you, please advise. Sincerely yours, j
~
i i George L. Pickett Director Enclosure ! cc: Mr. E. C. Hubbard Mr. Tom Rosser i Mr. Frank R. Blaisdell Dr. Jacob Koomen Mr. Roy G. Sowers ; i ( Colonel Clyde P. I-atton Colonel Paul S. Denison j Dr. Peter Morris I i i
NORTH CAROLINA Wake County CERTIFICATE THIS CERTIFICATE is issued in conformity with the requirements of Public Law 91-224 of the United States and subject to the rules of the North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resources to Duke Power Company, Charlotte, North Carolina, pursuant to application filed on the 18th day of December, 1970, to discharge into the surface waters of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, as a result of condenser cooling at Duke Power Company's McGuire Nuclear Station. After publication of notice of the application in The Charlotte Observer on the 31st day of December, 1970, and determination that no public hearing upon said application is necessary, the North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resources hereby certifies, subject to any conditions hereinafter set forth, that there is reasonable assurance that the proposed activity of the applicant will be conducted in a manner which will not violate applicable water quality standards. Conditions of Certificate: Applicable project construction and operation is to be done in accordance with plans and specifications made a part of the North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resources Permit No. 1977. Terms and con-ditions set forth in Permit No. 1977 are by reference incorporated in and made a part of this Certificate. Violation of any of the conditions herein set forth shall result in revocation of this Certificate. This the 4th day of March, 1971. NORTH CAROLINA BOARD OF WATER AND AIR RESOURCES BY w / b/ M GeVrge E. Pickett, Director Certificate 6-A
STATE Of~ NORTH CAROLINA
,.O DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND AIR RESOURCES v HODL RT W bCOTT S v f F4 NON is T E b f.N S Jn i Guvr phon - -
cnno,uAh
*?, .$r *:
P D DAVib .g I' GRF E R JOHNSON
; ~ctsou ciosos. ;R.
.., a);,y,-W gg ~ '" a -
W AYNE M ABR y p* H LJ G H L.. MERRITT , HA) M ONia c, I A L.T ON LEEL e'OW E R E v .' 4 ,./ JOSEPH E 1HOMAS J AAkON PH E VOT., f
- Df .
- GLFNN t* ru.rta W te R A D Y STEVENS H. W WHi f t T Y GLCf.c r i Pit aLTt thhEflOH IN REPLYING REFER TO: E c ['[ (("[j_
WQ71 CAW m.~- ~s wa n a t E.c.n <. . ; ro ,i e o ., . . <.a., March 4, 1971 Mr. W. S. Lee, Vice President Engineering Duke Power Company P. O. Box 2178 Charlotte, North Carolina 28201
SUBJECT:
Permit No. 1977 Duke Power Company f3 McGuire Nuclear Station Cowans Ford, North Carolina (Vl Mecklenburg County
Dear M..r Lee:
In accordance with your application dated October 9, 1970, we are forwarding herewith Permit No. 1977, dated March 4, 1971, to Duke Power Company, McGuire Nuclear Station, Cowans Ford, North Carolina, for the construction and operation of a 2.84 B.G.D. cooling water system, consisting of three (3) low level water intakes at Cowans Ford Dam with pumps to pipe water to an intermediate level lake intake structure complete with trash racks, pumps, controls, etc., and a warm water discharge through an effluent canal into Lake Norman on the Catawba River. This permit shall be effective from the date of its issuance until December 31, 1980, and shall be subject to the conditions and limitations as specified therein. Also, enclosed is a copy of WPC Form #50 " Cost of Wastewater Treatment Works." This form is to be completed and returned to this office within thirty (30) days af ter the project is completed. One (1) set of the approved plans and specifications is being returned to you. Sincerely yours, p Enclosures .
- cc
- Mr. Charles Dewey g. g , #
State Board of Health E. C. Hubbard - Mr. L. P. Benton, Jr. Assistant Director
NORTH CAROLINA BOARD OF WATER AND AIR RESOURCES RALEIGH PERMIT For the Discharge of Sewage, Industrial Wastes, or Other Wastes i In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of North Carolina as amended, and other applicable Laws, Rules and Regulations, PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO Duke Power Company McGuire Nuclear Station Cowans Ford, North Carolina FOR THE construction and operation of a 2.84 B.G.D. cooling water system, consisting of three (3) low level water intakes at Cowans Ford Dam with pumps to pipe water to an intermediate level lake intake structure complete with trash racks, punps, controls, etc., and a warm water discharge through an effluent canal into Lake Norman on the Catawba River, Oc 9 7 in accordance with the application dated -- tober-------------- , 19 1-- , and in conformity with the plans, specifications and other supporting data, all of which are filed with the Department of Water and Air Resources and are considered a part of this Permit. , This Permit shall be effective from the date of its issuance until bEEE9 BEE 512-}280 i and shall be subject to the following specified conditions and limitations: F
- 1. This permit shall become void unless the facilities are constructed in accord-ance with the approved plans and specifications and other supporting data and are !
completed and placed in operation on or before May 1, 1976, or as this date may be amended.
- 2. This permit is effective only with respect to the nature and volume of wastes i described in the application, and other supporting data.
- 3. The facilities shall be effectively maintained and operated at all times so as to meet the temperature standards of SoF increase above natural water temperature and a maximum of 90oF, measured as a daily average one foot below the water surface except within a mixing zone containing an area of not more than 3,500 acres and lying south of a line originating on the west bank at N. C. Coordinates E-1, 416, 900, and N-633, 600 and extending south 70o-00' east intersecting the point of land on the eastern shore, but at no time shall the heated waste discharge increase !
the temperature of the waters at any point within the Lake in excess of 95oF, as a monthly average. O
PERMIT NO. 1977 Page 2 O 4. The Company shall conduct both biological and physical studies necessary to establish the effect of temperature on the environment and shall include bioassays, conducted according to established procedures, to determine the 96-hour TLM temperature value for the most susceptible local aquatic species and life stages. The data obtained from such environmental studies shall be subtritted annually to the North Carolina Department of Water and Air Resources to N used in the evaluation of the facility. Only after such evaluation v511 action be taken on extension of the expiration date contained in this permit.
- 5. In the event there are'significant damages to aquatic life or other beneficial water uses within or outside the mixing zone, the Company shall immediately provide additional facilities as necessary to protect the designated water uses.
- 6. That any or all corrosion inhibitors, scale preventatives, or other chemicals used to treat make-up or cooling water, or contained in the blowdown be adequately treated prior to release.
O 4TH MARCH Per mi t i s sued thi s the --------------- day o f ------------------ , 1971. . By [. $ J -:'=k. ' E. C. Hubbard, Assistant Director Department of Water and Air Resources p Permit No. 1977
t I O , NORTH CAROLINA BOARD OF WATER AND AIR RESOURCES RALEIGH REC.~ ~% OCi i " 1970 w;giER AND AIR POLLUilON CONTROC I APPLICATION FOR THE APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND/OR TREATMENT FACILITIES AND THE ISSUANCE OF 1dgKmKXtTgXMtXXV4)fttWXEX'XM " PERMIT" FOR THE DISCHARGE OF TREATED SEWAGE, INDUSTRIAL WASTES OR OTHER WASTES INTO THE WATERS OF THE STATE APPROVED l Filed By: Duke Power Company !: TITH CAROLINA it i !
*** ~~~
CF W.'sT2R AND AIR f. ! Post Office Box 2178 - g , ,p ( A ddre s s) " ' '
- ,/ /p Charlotte, North Carolina 28201 j_Cer t. s . . r ft 1o / [ 7 7 O
WPC No 1 5M 41-6B
October 9, 39 70 ' } TO: North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resources Raleigh, North Carolina Gentlemen: In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of North Carolina as amend-ed, application is hereby made by Duke Power Company (Name of board, iridividual or others) of the Charlotte , in the county (Name of city, village. town, sanitary district or estabitshment) of Mecklenburg , to the North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resources for the approval (Name of county) of the accompanying plans, specifications, and other data submitted herewith covering the construction of Cooling Water Discharge Structure to serve McGuire Nuclear Station and for a " Certificate of Approval" and/or " Permit" for the discharge of warm water
.. wage, from the condensers industrial waste or other westes) (sewers of treatment plant) sen ing McGuire Nuclear Station into (Name of munscipelsty, anstitutaan, or andustry, etc.) (Name of treatment plant) or surface waters of Lake Norman (surface or ground waters) (Name of water course if surface N/ waters; if ground waters, state water course to which they are tributary) at N618,700' El,419,650 N. C. Grid Coordinates (Esact location of pomi of discharge) I The plans for the proposed works have been prepared by Duke Pover Company (Engineering Firm) or Charlotte, North Carolin It is estimated that treatment works will provide
( Addre s s) adequate capacity to serve the McGuire Nuclear Station for a period of 40 years, at which time it is estimated the average daily sewage or waste flow will not exceed 2.34 billioflallons. It is further expected that the treatment works will effect overall reductions in pollution as follows: B.O.D. (5-day 20cc NA 7c. suspended solids NA Tc, total solids NA 7, NA 7c, and toxic materials . NA 7c. The cost of the proposed works is estimated coliform bacteria to be: sewers $ NA , pumping stations $ M , treatment plant $ M ,other
$ . The works will be completed and in operation on or before May 3g NA = Not Appiicable The applicant hereby agrees that the proposed works will be constructed in strict accordance with the ap-proved plans and specifications or subsequently approved changes therein and further agrees to place its opera-tion under the care of a competent person and to maintain and operate the plant according to the best accepted !
practice and in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the Bo .d. Signat ure Duke Poweb .Coorpsr/ V '~ dd-A Title Vice President, Engineering Post af(WEW2173 Malling Address Charlotte, North Carolina 28231
- Specify percentage reduction for each tonic .ubstance unmg additional sheet if nec es sary. .
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA lq DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND AIR RESOURCES POfsEff f W E C.OT I S. VERNON STEVENS. JR. Gaveta w . CH AIRM AN o{ P. D D A vi5 P. GREEP. JOHNSON J NELSOft GIDSON.JR. .- VIC E CM AIRM AN W A Y N E M A U B4 Y ; H UG 61 i MERRITY ', R AYMOND 5. TALTON L EE L. POW E N S ,$< / JOSEPH E. THOM AS J. AAADN PREVOC1 W (, H A D Y E T L V E rd s - " " ' "
,[ GLENN M. TUCKER H. W. WHITLEY GEORGE E. PICH ETT. DimrctoR IN REPLYING REFER TO: TEun-o~r sao 2003 gr E C. HU BB A RD. Asst. DsRECTOR TEL E PHONr $2 9 3006 R ALE (GH. N. C. 27611 P. O Box 27o48 March 4, 1971 Mr. W. S. Lee, Vice-President Engineering Duke Power Company P. O. Box 2178 Charlotte, North Carolina 28201
SUBJECT:
Permit No. 1982 Duke Power Company p McGuire Nuclear Station V Cowans Ford, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Lee:
In accordance with your application dated October 9, 1970, we are forwarding herewith Permit No.1982, dated March 4,1971, to Duke Power Company, McGuire Nuclear Station, Cowans Ford, North Carolina, for the construction and operation of an impounded 35-acre service water pond for emergency use only to shut down reactors in case Lake Norman water supply fails. This permit shall be effective from the date of its issuance until December 31,19S0, and shall be subject to the conditions and lintitations as specified therein. Also, enclosed is a copy of WPC Form #50 " Cost of Wastewater Treat-ment works." This form is to be completed and returned to this office within thirty (30) days after the project is completed. One (1) set of the approved plans and specifications is being returned to you. ] Sincerely yours, l ( /- -A O \ l (g) E,nciosures '.$.Hubard L cc: Mr. Charles Dewey Assistant Director Mr. L. P. Benton, J r. i l
NORTH CAROLINA BOARD OF WATER AND AIR RESOURCES RALEIGH q b PERMIT For the Discharge of Sewage, Industrial Wastes, or Other Wastes i In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of North Carolina as amended, and other applicable Laws, Rules and Regulations, PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO Duke Power Company McGuire Nuclear Station , Cowans Ford, North Carolina FOR THE construction and operation of an impounded 35-acre service water pond for emergency use only to shut down reactors in case Lake Norman water supply fails, in accordance with the application dated o _gtober9__________,1970__, and in conformity with the plans, specifications, and other supporting data, all of which are filed with the Department of Water and Air Resources and are considered a part of this Permit. This Permit shall be effective from the date of its issuance until _-- DCcembcr 31, l980_,and shall be subject to the following specified conditions and limitations:
- 1. This permit shall become void unless the facilities are constructed in accordance with the approved plans, speci-fications, and other supporting data and are completed and placed in operation on or before Mav ), 1076, or as this date may be amended.
- 2. This permit is effective only with respect to the nature of the operations described in the application and other supportinc data. t
- 3. The facilities shall be properly maintained at all times.
- 4. The Company, at least six months prior to the expiration of '
this permit, shall request its extension. Upon receipt of the request, the Board will review the adequacy of the facilities described herein and, if indicated, will extend the permit for such period of time and under such conditlens and limitations as deemed proper.
/"~~
t \ l'ermit issued this the 4th_. day of _ tl\ llc.H _ , 19. 71 By b bY -- - _.--- ------------ I:. C. Hubbard, Assistant Dircetor Permit No.
~
Department of Water and Air Resources
RECEIVED OCT ,9 1970 WATER AND AIR POLLUTION CONTROL' NORTH CAROLINA BOARD OF WATER AND AIR RESOURCES RALEIGH i t i APPLICATION FOR THE APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND/OR TREATMENT FACILITIES AND THE ISSUANCE OF XerMMXTgXbVK&WJYdWXUKW " PERMIT" FOR THE DISCHARGE OF TREATED SEWAGE, INDUSTRIAL WASTES OR OTHER WASTES INTO THE WATERS OF THE STATE I l l 1 1 { j Filed By: Duke Power Company i (Name) Post Office Box 2178 . e. g ( Addres s) Charlotte, North Carolina 28201 .id:RJN.) AG hE .URCES
.- t i x ..,19 j$.
O
- c,: c r Fern}it No. ..'..-
WPC No.15V4148 J
October 9, 19 70 /,'") TO: North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resources V Raleigh, North Carolina Gentlemen: In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of North Carolina as amend-ed. application is hereby made by Duke Power Company (Neme of board, individual or others) of the Charlotte , in the county (Name of c:ty, vill *6e, town, sanitary district or estatiltshment) of Mecklenbur9 . to the North Carolina Board of Water and Air Resources for the approval (Neme cf county) of the accompanying plans, specifications, and other data s ubmitted herewith covering the construction or a dam to impound _35 acre Standby Nuclear Service Water Pond and for a " Certificate of Ar proval" and/or " Permit" for the discharge of w rm water se wa ge , from the closed heat exchangers industrial m aste or other we ste s) (sewers or treatme nt plant) serving McGuire Nuclear Station into (Name of municipality, anstitution, or industry, etc.) (Name of treatment pl.ent) or surface waters of the above pond ,Oh (surface or ground waters) (Name of water course af surface (") (discharge from pond is to Catawba River) maters, af ground waters, state water course to which they are tributary) at N617,900; El, 420,450 N. C. Grid Coordinates (E sset location of pomf of discharge) The plans for the proposed works have been prepared by Duke Power Company of Charlotte, North Carolina It is estimated that treatment works will provide ( Addre s s) adequate capacity to serve the McGuire Nuclear Station for a pr riod of 40 years, at which time it is estimated the average daily sev =ge or waste flow will not exceed negl igib le gallons. It is further expected that the treatment works will ( 2ct overall reductions in pollution as follows: B.O.D. (5-day 20cc NA cc , suspended solids NA %, :otal solids NA 7r coliform bacteria NA ~, and toxic materia:s . NA - The cost of the proposed works is estimated to be: sewers $ NA _ , pumping stations $ NA , treatment plant $ # , other
$ . The works will be completed and in operation on or before MY -/' 19 NA = Not Applicable The applicant hereby agrees that the proposed works will be constructed in strict accordance with the ap-proved plans and specifications or subsequently approved changes therein and further agrees to place its opera-tion under the care of a competent person and to maintain and operate the plant according to the best accepted practice and in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the Board, Signature _ . . 85L, .S */
DukePaterhTp%ny ' Title Vice Pres: cent, Engineering l l Post Office Bo.x 2178 Mailing Address Charlotte, Wo r (. h Carolina 28201
- Specif y percentage reduction f or eac h tonic subetence, using addit unal sheet, if necc e sary
9 DUKE POWER COMPANY McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION UNITS 1-2 ; I i l i i I l I
?
)
APPLICATION FOR LICENSES DOCKETS 50-369 and 50-370 ! ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT SUPPLEMENT 2 ! t l
.f i
1
-r r
t le r ! May 1, 1972 ! i r I
TABLE OF CONTEtlTS J Pane numy,, 1 INTRODUCTION 1 -1 2 DESCRIPTION OF McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION 2-1 2.4 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT OF THE SITE 2-1 2.4.4 HYDROLOGY 2-1 3 LAKE NORhAN GENERATING COMPLEX AND ITS ENVIROMENTAL 3-1 FLA4UKLb l 3.3 RECREATION 3-1 3.5 WILDLIFE 3-2 3.5.1 FLORA 3-2 3.5.2 FAUNA 3-2 3.6 WATER SUPPLY 3-3 4 ENV I R0tL>iENTAL EFFECTS OF McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION 4-1 4.1 Ijif LFFECTS 4-1 4.1.3 LAnt NORMAN PONITORING PROGRAM 4-1 4.
1.5 DESCRIPTION
OF CONDENSER COOLING WATER SYSTEMS 4-1 4.1.6 EFFECT OF WARMED DISCHARGE ON LAKE WATERS 4-1 4.1.7 ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS 4-4 i 4.2 RADIOLOGICAL EFFECTS 4-6 ! 4.2.2 RADIDACTIVE LIQUID RELEASES 4-6 4.2.4 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL 4-8 j i 4.3 OTHER WATER QUALITY EFFECTS 4-9 4 4.3.1 MECHANICAL CLEANING OF CONDENSER TUBES 4-9 ! I 4.3.3 NON-RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE WATER DISCHARGES 4-10 4.3.4 DEMINERALIZED WATER SUPPLY 4-10 O ER Suppl ement 2 i
I I 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Contd) Pace Number 4.4 LAND USE 4-12 i 4.4.1 McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION 4-12 I 4.4.2 NEARBY TRANSMISSION LINES 4-12 4.7 McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION AND THE ECONOMY 4-13 4.7.1 IMPACT OF CONSTRUCTION FORCES 4-13 7 BENEF IT-COST ANALYSES 7-1 7.5 ALTERNATE OF COOLING TOWER TO LAKE NORMAN COOLING 7-1 O O ER Suppl ement 2 ii
_ - - - . - - _ .__m _ _ _ .. _ . . ... . . . - _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ i LIST OF TABLES Table Number Title 3.3-1 Ten Closest Recreation Areas j 3.5-1 List of Vascular Flora for McGuire Project Area i 3.5-2 List of Probable Mammalian Species of Mecklenburg County ' 3.6-1 Municipalities and Industries Withdrawing Water From Lake Norman, Mt. Island and Wylie Reservoirs on Catawba River 4.1 -3 The Biological Sampling Program for the Aquatic Environs - of McGuire Nuclear Station ; i 4.1 -4 Isotherm Areas - 1 in 10 Recurrence Frequency ! 4.1-5 Median Heat - Tolerance Limits, Median Temperature : Tolerance Limits and Final Preferendum Temperatures for ! Some of the Principal Fishes of Lake Norman 4.2-11 Assumptions in the Lake Model .l:
- 4. 3 -1 Limiting Concentrations of Solids and Chenicals in the l Boil er Blowdown I
'i 4.4-1 Major Industries Within 10 Miles With 100 Employees or l More i h
4.7-1 Estimated Manpower Requirement and Payroll During Construction 7.5-1 Comparison of Mechanical Draf t and Natural Draft Cooling Towers (Once-Through System) , i l l
+
ER Supplement 2 f lii i. i
?
I l l i i LIST OF FIGURES , 1 1 Figure Number Title !
.I 4.1-8 McGuire Nuclear Station Area Topography 4.1-9 Predicted Temperature Profile :
4.1-10 Predicted Temperature Profile 4.2-1 Radwaste Lake Model l i s i i i l h i i i t
-r
)
1 [ t ? I i . l i ER Supplement 2
- Iv -
l l l l 1 INTRODUCTION This Supplement 2 to the McGuire Nuclear Station Environmental Report filed March 9,1971, is submitted to the Atomic Energy Commission as supplemental ! information in compliance with the Commission's letter of April 7,1972. The j following information specifically requested in the letter is included: i 3 a. Plans and procedure proposed to be used to adequately establish the aquatic biota base I tne at the McGuire Site. !
- b. Steps proposed to establish the adequacy-of the analytical model used for i predicting the thermal plume at low lake levels.
l
- c. Details of liquid radwaste model mentioned in the PSAR. .
In addition, information and data developed since submission of Supplement 1 (November 24, 1971) 1s included, f
'l I f 4
l e
)
i
- I i
i I i
?
- l L
i 1 l
- i
- i j ;
, l ER Supplement 2 ,
1-1 ! i i _ _ . _ _ . - . _ . - . _ . . _ . . . _ . - _ _ _ . . ~ , . . . - - , . . - . . _ _ . , -_ -,- -
- . . . - . . - . . - ~
i
- 2. DESCRIPTION OF McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION ,
O 2.4 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT OF THE SITE 2.4.4 HYDROLOGY As required by the Federal Power Commission, License No. 2232 the minimum continuous release f rom Cowans Ford Dam is 80 cubic feet per second. i f i i i I f i I i i i 4 I ER Supplement 2 2-1
3 LAKE NORMAN GENERATING COMPLEX AND ITS ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES O 3.3 RECREATION The distance and direction from the site for the closest ten recreation areas is given in Table 3.3-1. i O : O ER Supplement 2 3-1
3.5 WILDLIFE 3.5.1 FLORA The McGuire Nuclear Site environs consist of secondary and/or tertiary growths of plant communities. The area has been disturbed by recent logging operations and partial clearing for McGuire construction as well as by the construction of Cowans Ford Dam in the early 1960's. Nevertheless, as a whole, the less dis-turbed stands consist of a pine, oak, hickory, tulip poplar, and dogwood association. The re are three pl ant communities which are recognfzable within the McGuire area. The dry ridges support almost pure stands of short-leaf and scrub pine, interspersed with red cedar. The re is very little understory or ground cover in these areas. The oak-hickory communities, mainly of the slopes, consist of oaks, hickorys, and tulip poplars. Understory trees are dogwood, red maple, and black cherry. The forest floor is partly covered with Japanese Honeysuckle, raindeer moss (Cladonia), and moss (Leucobryum). In the logged-over areas, the dogwoods are the dominant tree species. The cove communities consist of tulip poplar, water oak, willow oak, cottonwood, and dogwood. Along the water's edge one can find black willow, se rvicebe rr y, black how, and cat-tails. With the exception of a few cat-tails, the shoreline is void of submerged or semi-submerged aquatic plants. The list of flora was obtained by an on-site investigation by Dr Herbert Heckenbleikner, Professor of Biology, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, North Carolina (Table 3.5-1) . 3.5.2 FAUNA Man has greatly influenced the vegetation of the McGuire Nuclear Station en-virons and consequently the fauna of the area has also undergone environmental changes. As a result of partial clearing for McGuire construction approximately 160 acres have been unavoidably removed f rom use as a possible habitat for native wildlife. The area has been developed, disturbed and logged over fre-quently in the past century. The impact of partial clearing upon the wildlife has been minimal since there were low populations of wildlife inhabiting the area. A list of mammalian species was obtained from a search of the literature (Table 3.5-2) . O ER Supplement 2 3-2
. _ - . . _ . - - _~ .. .._.. _ __._-. -_ _ _ ._. __- . _ ___ .- _ . _ ._. ._.... . . .. _.. ._ - _ ._. .
3.6 WATER SUPPLY , ( Details of industrial and water' supply intakes on Lake Norman and two down-4 stream reservoirs, viz., Mtn. Island and Lake Wylie are given in Table 3.6-1. Average daily withdrawal and nature of use are included. ; i f i a l P . 4 1 I 4 ER Supplement 2 3-3
-- ,- . ,..+ - ,q-+.--_-m.-g -<,-r --
Table 3.3-1 10 Closest Recreation Areas NAME DISTANCE QUADRANT
- 1. Bills Marina 1.7 Miles NW
- 2. Outrigger Harbor 2.27 Miles NE
- 3. Blacks Fish Camp & Marina 3.2 Miles NW
- 4. Ranger Island Marina 3.2 Miles NW
- 5. Joe's Marina I
3.3 Miles NE
- 6. Ramsey Creek Access 3.3 Miles NE 7 Wer-Rena Marina 3.4 Miles NE
- 8. Ye Old Camp Ground 3.4 Miles NE
- 9. Beatty's Ford Access 3.4 Miles NW
- 10. Hol iday Land 3.4 Miles NW O
I I l i i 1 l l I ER Supplement 2 l I
l l Table 3.5-1 l O List of Vascular Flora l l OPHIOGLOSSACEAE (Adder's - Tongue Family) Botrychium virginianum (L.) Swartz, Rattlesnake Fern PTERIDACEAE (Bracken Fern Family) Pteridium aquilinum (L.) Kuhn, Bracken Fern PINACEAE (Pine Family) Pinus echinata Miller, Short-leaf Pine Pinus virginlana Miller, Scrub Pine CUPRESSACEAE (Cypress Family) Juniperus virginiana L., Red Cedar TYPHACEAE (Cat-tall Family) , Typha latifolia L., Common Cat-tall LILI ACEAE (Lily Family) Smilax rotundifolia L. , Greenbrier Smilacino racemosa (L.) Desf, False Solomon's-seal Polygonatum biflorum (Walter) ELL., Solomon's seal l lRIDACEAE (Iris Family) Iris verna L., Dwarf Iris l l SALICACEAE (Willow Family) l Salix nigra Marshall, Black Willow l Populus deltoi des Marshall, Cottonwood l JUGLANDACEAE (Walnut Family) Juglans nigra L. , Black Walnut Carya ovata (Miller) K. Koch, Shagbark Hickory Carya tomentosa (Poiret) Nuttall, Mockernut Carya glabra [ Miller) Sweet, Pignut Hickory FAGACEAE (Beech Family) Faqus grandifolia Ehrhart, Beech Quercus alb1 L., White Oak Quercus ste,llata Wang, Post Oak Quercus ,rs. ora L., Red Oak Quercus cubra borealis (Michaux f.) Farwell, Northern Red Oak Querci;s coccinea Muenchh, Scarlet Oak Quercus falcata Michaux, Southern Red Oak Quercus nigra L., Water Oak Quercus phellos L., Willow Oak ULMACEAE (Elm Family) Ulmus alata Michx., Winged Elm s ER Supplement 2
- Table 3.5 Continued ll, ARISTOLOCHIACEAE (Birthwort Family)
Asarum canadense L. , Wild Ginger PHYTOLACCACEAE (Pokeweed Family)
- Phytolacca ame ricana L. , Poke BERBERIDACEAE (Barberry Family)
Podophyllum pelt at um L. , May Apple , MAGNOLIACEAE (Magnolia Family) Liriodendron Tulipi fera L. , Tulip Tree PAPAVERACEAE (Poppy Family) Sanguinaria canadensis L. Bloodroot i HAMAMELIDACEAE (Witch-hazel Family) l Liquidambar styraciflua L. Sweet-gum ! ROSACEAE (Rose Family) l Potentilla simplex Michx. , Five-fingers l Rubus cuneifolius Pursh, Blackberry i Ame l anc hie r arbo re a (Michx. f.) Fernald var. Arborea (Michx. f.) 1 Serviceberry Prunus americana Marshall, Wild Plum Prunus serotina Ehrhart, Black Cherry l FABACEAE (Pea Family) Gledits ia t riacanthos L. , Honey Locust ANACARDIACEAE (Cashew Family) Rhus radicans L., Poison Ivy Rhus glabra L., Smooth Sumac l , l AQUlFDLIACEAE (Holly Family) l Ilex opaca Aiton, Holly l CELASTRACEAE (Staf f-tree Family) Euonymus ame r ic anos L. , St rawbe rry Bush ACEP,ACEAE (Maple Family) Acer rubrum L., Red Maple VITACEAE (Vine Family) ! Parthenocissus quincuefolia (L.) Planchon, Virginia Creeper Vitis rotundifolia Michx., Muscadine NYSSACEAE (Sour Gum Family) Nyssa sylvat ica Marshall, Black Gum CORNACEAE (Dogwood Family) l Cornus florida L., Flowering Dogwood i ER Supplement 2 i
I i Table 3.5 Continued i ERICACEAE (Heath Family) l Rhododendrum nudiflorum (L.) Torrey, Wild Azalea EBANACEAE (Ebony Family) Diospyros virginiana L., persimmon ' OLEACEAE (011ve Family) Fraxinus pennsylvanica Marshall, Red Ash : LAMIACEAE (Mint Family) Lamium amplexicaule L., Henbit I SCOPHULARIACEAE Verbascum blattaria L. Mullein j RUBI ACEAE (Madder Family) ! Houstonia caerulea L. , Bluets l CAPRlFOLI ACEAE (Honeysuckle Family) Lonicera japonica Thunberg, Japanese Honeysuckle ! Viburnum prunifolium L., Black Haw , ASTERACEAE (Aster Family) Krigia dandelion (L.) Dwarf Dandelion Taxacum officinale Wiggers Common Dandelion ! Antennaria solitaria Rydberg, Pussy-toes , l i I i i i ER Supplement 2 ' P
Table 3.5-2 List of Probable Mammalian Species of Mecklenburg County Cormion Name Species Relative Abundance Habitat Preference Oppossum Didelphis marsupialis Numerous low tangled woodlands along streams. Southeastern Shrew Sorex longirostris Rare Damp woods and swamps. Short-tailed Shrew Biarina brevicauda Uncommon Damp woods, upland fields. 9 Least Shrew Cryptotis parva Uncommon Woody, old fields of abandoned vi farms. E 1 Eastern Mole Scalopus aquaticus Common Cultivated fields, gardens, 3 pine woods and old fields. a Little Brown Myotis Myotis lucifugus Rare Caves, tunnels, hollow trees, w Keen Myotis Myotis keeni Rare Mine tunnels, caves, storm sewers. Silver-haired Bat Laslonycteris noctivagans Uncommon Forested areas along rivers and streams. Eastern Pipistrelle Pipistrellus subflavus Common Caves, wooded areas near water. l Big Brown Bat Eptesicus fuscus Rare Caves, crevices, hollow trees, and abandoned houses.. Red Bat Lasiurus borealis Common Trees and shrubs. Hoary Bat Lasiurus cinereus Uncommon Wooded areas. Evening Bat Nycticeus humeralis Common Buildings and hollow trees. O . O O -
O Table 3.5-2 Continued Common Name Species Relative Abundance Habitat Preference Big-eared Bat Plecotus rafinescul'i Rare Trees, caves, and buildings. Raccoon Procyon lotor Numerous Wooded areas bordering streams ' or lakes. Long-tailed Weasel Mustela frenata Rare Burrows under woodland stumps along forest edges, sparse timbered areas. Mink Mustela vison Common Semi-aquatic along streams m and lakes.
- o E' Striped Skunk Mephitis mephitis Uncommon Open farmland or wasteland.
3 y Red Fox Vulpes fulva Common Woods to open fields. S Gray Fox Urocyon cinereoargenteus Common Dense cover near water, wood- , u lands. Eastern Gray Squirrel Sciurus carolinensis Numerous Hardwood forests, near human habitat-ons. Southern Flying Glaucomys volans Common Open hardwood forests. Squirrel Rice Rat Oryzomys palustris Uncommon Marshy areas, grasses, sedges. Eastern Harvest Mouse Reithrodontomys humulis Uncommon Old fields, wet meadows. ! White-footed Mouse Peromyscus leucopus Common Border of wooded or brushy areas. Golden House Ochrotomys nuttalli Common Forests with dense undergrowth. i i
Table 3.5-2 Continued Common Name Species Relative Abundance Habitat Preference Cotton Rat Sigmodon hispidus Common Overgrown fields. Meadow Vole Microtus pennsylvanicus Uncommon Low moist areas, high grass lands. Rock Vole Microtus chrotorrhinus Common Mossy rocks and logs. Pine Vole Microtus pinetorum Common Semi-underground, open woods, and apple orchards, g Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus Numerous Along ponds, lakes and streams. [ Meadow Jumping Mouse Zaous hudsonius Uncommon Open fields, dry meadows. g Eastern Cottontail Sylvilagus floridanus Numerous Open fields and scrub land. White-tailed Deer Odocoileus virginianus Uncommon Open woods and brushy meadows, w
References:
(1) Burt, W. H. and R. P. Grossenheider, A Field Guide to the Mammals, 2nd Ed., Sponsored by the National Audubon Society and National WiIdlife Federation, 1964 (2) Hall, E. R. and K. R. Kelson, 1959. Mammals of North America, Vol. 1 & 2, New York: Ronald Press. (3) Miller, W. C. A Checklist of North Carolina Species. North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 1969 (4) Hami l ton, W. J. Jr. 1943 The Mammals of Eastern United States. Ithaca: Comstock Publ. Company, Inc. O O O
i Table 3.6-1 ' Municipalities and industries Withdrawing Water From ! Lake Norman, Mt. Island and Wylie Reservoi rs on Catawba River ;
- i. MUNICIPALITIES AVERAGE j RESERVOIR WITHDRAWAL MGD PURPOSE i Davidson Norman 0.22 City Supply Huntersville Norman 0.16 City Supply >
Mooresville Norman 2.0 City Supply Charlotte Mt. Island 34.0 City Supply Belmont Wylie 3.0 City Supply ' Mt. Holly Wylie 1.3 City Supply i l1 INDUSTRIES Southern Dye Stuff Industrial (Mt. Holly) Wylie 1.5 Processing American Efird Thread Industrial Plant (Mt. Holly) Wylie 2.4 Processing Superior Yarn Mills Industrial i (Mt. Holly) Wylie 0.03 Processing O Westinghouse (Charlotte) Wylie 0.04 Industrial Processing t t l l O ER Supplement 2 l
i 4 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION f 4.1 THERMAL EFFECTS 4.1 3 LAKE NORMAN MONITORING PP.0 GRAM l The biological sampling program which will monitor the effects of McGuire -j on the biota in Lake Norman is outlined in Table 4.1-3. ! 4.1.5 DDESCRIPTION OF CONDENSER COOLING WATER SYSTEM The residence times of entrained organisms in the condenser, discharge pipe j and discharge canal are summarized below: l No. of Time in Time in Time in Discharge Canal i Pumps Condensers Pipe Lake Elev. 760 Ft. Lake Elev. 735 Ft. i 2 10.0 sec. 56 sec. 1.37 hr. 0.39 hr. ! 3 7.5 sec. 41 sec. 1.02 hr. 0.28 hr. - 4 6.5 sec. 36 sec. 0.88 hr. 0.24 hr. , 4.1.6 EFFECT OF WARMED DISCHARGE ON LAKE NORMAN The topography in the vicinity of McGuire is shown on Figure 4.1-8. ! i The analysis of the thermal influence of McGuire Nuclear Station on Lake Norman was divided into two parts. Part i of the analysis was the t determination of the vertical temperature profiles (water depth vs water temperature) which w111 occur in Lake Norman with the influence of McGuire. I From these profiles, the inlet temperatures to McGuire's condensers were ; determined and thus the expected discharge temperatures were also determined. .l In Part 2 of the analysis, the distriubtion of heated water on the surface , of the lake was calculated, j Part I Lake Norman's projected temperature profiles were based on profiles actually i measured in the lake in front of Cowans Ford Dam, 1963 - May 1970 These were synoptic measurements taken with a f requency ranging f rom once a month to once a week. For every month of record, the extreme (warmest) measured profile was identified and the average of all the measured profiles was found. Computations for normal yearly conditions were based on the 12 warmest profiles. Thus, the extreme year is a " composite" year formed by : the warmest January, the warmest February (probably f rom different years), i etc. and this extreme year is a most conservative one. l McGuire will have intAes at two levels. The main intake will be a mid- j depth one. For this study, its opening was assumed to be between elevations _' 720 ft and 735 ft (Lake Norman " full pond" elevation is 760 f t). The second intake was built during the construction of Cowans Ford Dam and its opening lies between elevations 655 ft and 670 ft. This deep intake will only be _ used during the months of the year when the water drawn into the upper intake is' warmest. Under these condtions, the deep intake will provide some cool hypo 11mnetic water to " temper" the water from the main intake and thus reduce ER Supplement 2 4-1
McGui re's summer discharge temperatures. Water from the low intake will only be required during July, August and September. A minimum condenser temper-ature rise of 16 F was used. The withdrawal of water from Lake Norman by McGuire will alter the temper-ature profiles since both the high and low level intakes are located beneath the lake's surface. The withdrawal of a given volume of water was represented graphically by removing that volume (measuring upward f rom the bottom of the intake structure) moving the overlying water temperatures down depths within the lake corresponding to the removed volume and returning the withdrawn water on top with a net residual temperature 1 F higher than the existing lake surface temperature. The residual temperature was an estimate based on cooling areas calculated by the methods proposed by Velz and Gannon.1 This procedure was followed for each of the 12 months of the year. Figures 4.1-9 and 4.1-10 will help illustrate the method used. The figures represent the months of June and July respectively. In June, it is seen that withdrawal can be made from the higher intake only without exceeding 74 F average intake temperature (74 F + 16 FoT = 90 F discharge). However, in July, it is necessary that a quantity of water be withdrawn from the low intake so that the discharge temperature will not exceed 90 F. The effect of the withdrawal at the 90 ft depth is easily seen. Also of interest in both figures is the fact that strict adherence to the described methodology sometimes leads to " unstable" profiles (cool water on top of warmer water) and these instabilities must be averaged out. This explains the occurrence at some depths of two lines, both labeled "next mora h 's adj usted prof ile." The smoother of the two lines is the one finally used. Computations for the normal year used monthly average surface elevations which had prevailed on Lake Norman since 1963. It was found that the supply of cool hypolimnetic water is sufficient to limit McGuire's normal monthly average discharge temperatures to 90 F. This meets the maximum temperature criteria set by the State of North Carolina. However, since these temper-atures will still be more than 5 F above normal temperatures, a small mixing zone will be required to comply with the North Carolina regulation which restricts the temperature rise to 5 F. For " extreme year' computations, the lake surface level was assumed to be 745 ft in July and August and 750 ft fo r the remaining months. The hypo-limnetic supply was able to hold discharge temperatures to 95 F under these conditions, and a mixing zone would be required to meet both temperature criteria. Part 2 Velz and Gannon have derived a mathematical expression for integrating heat loss as a function of temperature in order to calculate the amount of area needed to dissipate a quantity of heat. However, the equation does not acco un t for the dilution of the warm plume with cooler water from the lake. I" Forecasting Heat Loss in Ponds and Streams," C. J. Velz and J. J. Gannon l Journal-Water Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 32 No. 4 l ER Supplement 2 4 -2
Temperature measurements which had been made around the Marshall Steam ) Station, also located on Lake Norman, showed that the rate of temperature loss j could not be explained by surface heat transfer alone. There was substantial ] temperature reduction in a small area and this can best be explained by 1 dilution which occurs near the discharge into the lake. ) J Accordingly, initial dilution at McGuire was assumed to correspond to the dilution experienced at Marshall. Then the heat transfer equation was applied to the new lower temperature and the required cooling areas were calculated. ! More cooling area is required in winter than in summer since evaporation is s lowe r at lower ambient temperatures. Meteorological observations for a 30 year period (Charlotte National Weather Service Station) were examined and l conditions were picked to represent the " worst" cooli ng occurring with a ; frequency of 1 in 10 years. The area required to cool within 5 F of normal temperature is about 3500 acres. The summer cooling area is expected to be only 1500 acres. Conclusions The influence of McGuire Nuclear Station on Lake Norman will be minimized in two ways. First, it will employ a condenser capable of restricting the i temperature rise of the cooling water to 16 F. Second, judicious use of Lake Norman's cool hypolimnectic water resource will prevent McGuire's discharge , temperatures from exceeding 90 F except in the most extreme year, and will ; assure that the discharge temperatures will not exceed 95 F even under most adverse conditions. l
?
In order to comply with North Carolina temperature standards, the heated ; condenser cooling water must not be warmer than 90 F and must not be more than 5 F warmer than the ambient water temperatures, after having passed through a mixing zone. The latter criterion is the most difficult to meet and winter conditions prove more difficult than summer ones because heat-trans-fer is slower in winter. A mixing zone area of 3500 acres will be sufficinet to meet all the temperature criteria nine years out of ten. In summer an area of only 1500 acres will be sufficient for meeting the criteria. , i Isotherm areas and lake volumes beneath a 3500 acre plume are shown on l Table 4.1-4. Realizing that larger generating facilities mean greater involvement of water resources and require comprehensive long range planning, Duke Power in 1970 commissioned Alden Research Laboratories of Worcester Polytechnic Institute of Holden, Massachusetts to build a physical hydraulic model of the Lake Norman generating complex. Studies to be made at Alden will supplement Duke's comprehensive water research program, outlined in Section 4.1 of the McGuire Nuclear Station Environmental Report. The object of both programs is to further establish the performance of existing facilities'and to produce design parameters for future development of generating facilities on Lake Norman The projected impact of McGuire Nuclear Station on Lake Norman will be veri- ' fled during the on-going model tests. Thus prior to operation in 1976, the O McGuire design will receive a thorough review. i i ER Supplement 2 4-3 ;
4.1.7 ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS If the reproduction and growth of the principal species of fish in Lake Norman are protected, it seems reasonable that generally the associated aquatic biota will also be protected. There is a substantial amount of evidence that fish arefrequentlymoresensitivegoelevatedtemperaturesthanaremostorganisms lower in the food chain. Mount stated that "Two functions which cannot be altered if we are to have a satisfactory crop of fish are reproduction and growth." Furthermore, he says that "If these are satisf actory, one would be hard pressed to justify any further restrictions on the addition of heat to a body of water, since the ' crop' is acceptable." These two criteria of reproduction and growth were certainly the ones used by the National Technical Advisory Committec2 when they established their maximum temperatures recommended as compatible with the well-being of various species of fish and their associated biota. From the data presented in Table 4.1-5, it can be seen that the final pre-ferendum temperature of some of the principal fishes of Lake Norman is approximately 90 F and that thei r upper temperature tolerance limits are at least 93 F at the upper acclimation temperatures. The maximum tempera tures recommended by the National Technical Advisory Committee as compatible with the well-being of various species of fish and their associated biota is 93 F for the growth of white bass, catfish, threadfin shad, gizzard shed, and 90 F for the growth of largemouth bass, bluegill, and crappie, it was concluded in section 4.1.6 that "under probable, or average experienced conditions of record, the condenser cooling water discharge temperature will not exceed a monthly average of 90 F." Thus, the growth of the various fish species of the lake should be assured under the probable conditions. As noted in section 4.1.7 the spawning times of some fish species may be modified by variations in water temperatures between the discharge and ambient lake areas, but det rimental ef fects are not expected. In fact, successful spawning by three characteristic Lake Norman fish species, shad, largemouth bass, and yellow perch has been reported for the discharge area of Marshall Steam Station. Shad " eggs were observed to be most numerous near the point of dis-charge adhering to the discharge structure and to rocks and vegetation lining the discharge canal."3 Largemouth bass spawned earlier in the region of the discharge cove than in the control coves with " numerous young-of-year large-mouth bass (being observed) in the discharge canal and cove;" later examin-ation showed discharge fish to be significantly larger both in length and weight than those caught from control coves. I Mount, D.I., 1969. " Developing Thermal Requi rements for Freshwater Fishes" in "Blological Aspects of Thermal Pollution." Vanderbilt University Press, page 143. 2 National Technical Advisory Committee. 1968. Water Quality Criteria. Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, page 43. 3Adair, W.D. and D.J. DeMont. 1971. " Fish" in "An Interim Report on Environ-mental Responses to Thermal Discharges from Marshall Steam Station, Lake No rman , North Carolina," page 54 O ER Supplement 2 4-4
i Spawning of some species such as bluegills may be excluded from the discharge' ; canal because of the water flow. However, no detrimental temperature ef fects . i upon spawning or growth of the various fish species under probable conditions should occur. Thus, protection of the spawning and growth of the fishes of , Lake Norman should also afford generai protection to the associated aquatic , biota. i in the event that the extremely improbable adverse cooling conditions occur, a discharge of 95 F may occur. Under these conditions movement of many of the- , fish species into areas where the temperature is near optimum would be likely. . Theabilityofawidevarietyoffishspeciegtodiscriminatebetweensmall In experiments by Bu11,5 temperature diffences has been demonstrated. ; responses were obtained for temperature differences of 0.18 F and less and he , concluded that "in the discriminatory perception of temperature a fish is provided with a sensory field which is so acutely sensitive as to be of obvious value in directive movements." As described in section 4.1.6 during ; the months that represent the extreme improbable adverse cooling conditions, , the area of the mixing zone will be 3500 surface acres. The volume of water within the mixing zone will represent only approximately 12.5 percent of the ; lake volume beneath the 3500 acre surface area, in view of the fact that fishes can discriminate between various temperatures, their ability to avoid the discharge plume, if desired, seems obvious. I i t i 4 Brett, J.R. 1956. "Some Principals in the Thermal Requirements of Fishes", ; L Quart. Rev. Biol. 31 (2): 75-87. I
- SBuli, H.O. 1936. " Studies on Conditioned Responses in Fishes", J. Mar. Biol.
Assoc. U.K. 21,l. ! j ER Supplement 2 j 4-5 J
i 4.2 RADIOLOGICAL EFFECTS j 4.2.2 RADI0 ACTIVE L! QUID RELEASES ., The Average Additional Discharge Concentration shown in Tables 4.2-3a and { 4.2-3b is found by diluting the annual release by the annual average condenser cooling water flow. The maximum instantaneous concentration shown in Table 4.2-4 i is reactor coolant activity as diluted by the ratio of the minimum conderser cooling water flow to the waste monitor tank pump flow. Fractions of maximum , permissible concentration (FMPC) are found by dividing a concentration by the legal limits shown in 10CFR20. The above calculations are based on an uncontaminated water intake to the condensers. i if the condenser cooling water contains activity, then the actual discharge h concentration will be that predicted above plus the concentration of the intake. l In order to predict the intake concentration, a model representing the lake as l two control volumes was used. The first control volume, called the Pool, has i only condenser cooling water discharge as an input. Its only output is an equivalent flow to the other control volume which is called the Channel. In j addition to the flow from the pool, the Channel has as an input and output i equal to the yearly average stream flow. The condenser cooling water intakes ' are also an output of the Channel. These relationships are shown in Figure 4.2-1. The differential equations (l) describing this model are:
~
~
dNc = Rcgy , Rcp + Rco +x Nc dT Vp Vc - dNp = A + Rcp Nc - Rcp + [ Np dT Vc _ Vp - t where: Nc = activity in channel; Nc = Channel concentration Vc Np = activity in pool; lift = Pool concentration Vp Vp = volume of pool r Vc = volume of channel ' i Rcp = condenser cooling water flow ! Rco = flow across dam A = activity addition by McGuire A = decay constant in view of the fact that concentrations are averaged over a period of a year, in accordance with 10CFR20, equilibrium solutions are used. They are: Nc , ARcp Vc (Rcp + AVp) (Rcp + Rco + A Vc) -(Rcp) (Rep) (I)Similar to equations in North Anna PSAR Supplement Volume 2. ER Supplement 2 : 4-6 l l
Np = A(Rcp + Rco + 3 Vc) Vp (Rcp +3 Vp) (Rcp + Rco +P)Vc) - (Rep) (Rep) f The V's in this model correspond to the volumes of the pool and channel and con-centration is assumed to be constant over these volumes and zero elsewhere. The physical situation will not be quite this way. There will probably be some affected volume with some variable concentration as a function of position; however, in order to successfully apply our model to this situation, all this is needed is an appropriately chosen volume. It can be seen from the equations above that volume affects only decay. If A is zero then concentration is independent of volume and when 29 is not zero it is reduced. The re fo re , the choice of a small volume is a conservative one. A listing of assumpt ions and parameters is shown in Table 4.2-11. For a conservative estimate of the di'ution of the concentration of radioisotopes in the water discharged f rom Lake Normac, the following assumptions can be made:
- 1. Ignore decay (short transit times).
- 2. Assume that all additional dilution occurs just upst ream of each hydro station.
The concentrations in the lakes indicated below can be expressed as a fraction of the maximum concentration in Lake Norman as follows: Hydro Station Ave rage St ream Flow (CFS) Cowans Fo rd 2670 Mountain Island 2700 Wylie 4100 Fishing Creek 4860 Great Falls 5150 Mountain Island = Lake Norman Wylie = (2670) x Lake Norman (2700) Fishing Creek = (2670) x Lake Norman (4100) G rea t Falls = (2670) x Lake Norman (4860) Below Great Falls = (2670) x Lake Norman (5150) O ER Supplement 2 4-7
4.2.4 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL - i An estimated volume of 480 ft.3 of demineralizer resins and 1000 ft.3 of evaporator " bottoms" will be generated each year for 2 units. These wastes will range in activity from 0 to a maximum of 6 x 10 5 curies in the resins and 2 x 10 5 curies in the " bottoms" assuming 1 percent fuel defects in each t unit. [ I i i i h I O , ER Supplement 2 4-8 1 l
.~.
4.3 OTHER WATER QUALITY EFFECTS 4.3.I MECHANI CAL CLEANI NG OF CONDENSER TUBES The condenser cooling water tubes are stainless steel. Considering the high purity and nonaggressive nature of the cooling water, there should be no significant corrosion products released f rom the tubes to Lake Norman. i G; l i O , ER Supplement 2 4_9 3
4.3.3 NONRADl0 ACTIVE WASTE WATER DISCHARGES O kl The following chemicals will be used in the primary and the secondary systems at McGuire:
- 1. Approximately eleven pounds of lithium hydroxide will be used per unit per year. The lithium will be removed by demineralizers and the resin will be drummed as solid waste.
- 2. Approximately 18,000 pounds of boric acid will be used per unit per year.
It will be disposed of by concentration by evaporation and then drummed as solid waste.
- 3. Approximately 2,000 pounds of hydrazine will be used per unit per year.
The hydrazine reacts chemically with oxygen in the system to form nitrogen and water, with a small portion of the hydrazine decomposing to form ammonia. t 4 Approximately 26,000 gallons of 30 percent aqua ammonia will be used per unit per year. This is used for pH control of steam generator feedwater and small amounts will be disposed of through the steam generator blowdown.
- 5. The corrosion inhibitor in the secondary recirculating cooling water system will be sodium nitrite and borax. Approximately 1,200 pounds will be used per unit per year. This is a closed system with no blowdown.
- 6. Approximately 800 gallons of commercial liquid detergents will be used annually by the station for normal plant maintenance and cleanup. Any waste
( from this operation will be processed through the plant sewage treatnent system. Powdered detergents used for the decontamination of clothing, equipment, laundries and laboratory articles may be used in quantities up to 3,200 pounds per year for two units. The laundry waste water will be processed through activated carbon filters for removal of organics and dete rgent s.
- 7. Approximately five to 56 pounds of 100 percent hydrazine and approximately.
seven gallons of 30 percent aqua ammonia will be added per day per unit to the steam generator feedwater. The blowdown system on each unit is designed for a maximum capacity of 600,000 pounds per day. There is the normal makeup capability of 475 gpm or 5,700,000 pounds per day for two units. The limiting concentrations of solids and chemicals in the boiler blowdown are given in Table 4.3-1. 4.3.4 DEMINERAllZED WATER SUPPLY The two regenerable mixed bed makeup demineralizers, manufactured by lilinois Water Treatment Company, have a capacity of 475 gpm each. Approximately 137,000 pounds of 100 percent sodium hydroxide and 89,000 pounds of 66 F Baume sulfuric acid will be used per unit per year to regenerate the mixed bed demineralizers. After regeneration the spent acid and caustic will be mixed to assure neutralization. These reaction products are sodium sulf ate and a!kalinity. The average effluent from the waste water collection basin ( will contain approximately 45 ppm of sodium sulf ate and 33 ppm of alkalinity ER Supplement 2 4-10
expressed as Caco 3 When this effluent from the waste water collection basin is diluted by the average flow of 2670 cfs through Cowans Ford Dam it would only contribute approximately 0.0002 ppm alkalinity as Caco 3 and 0.0002 ppm of sodium sulfate to the Catawba River. When flow through Cowans Ford is at its minimum , of 80 cfs, these effluents result in an increase of 0.6 ppm alkalinity and 0.8 ppm sodium sulfate in the cIver water. O O ER Supplement 2 4-11
4.4 LAND USE l l O* 4.4.1 McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION As mentioned in Section 4.4.1, the immediate vicinity of the site is relatively unpopulated and without commerce or industry of any importance. No industry ! employing more than 10 persons exists within one (1) mile of the site. Industries with 30 to 50 employees do not exist within a five (5) mile radius of the site. However, there are 12 major industries with more than 100 employees within ten (10) miles of the site (Table 4.4-1). [ No major food processing industry exists within a ten (10) mile radius of the 1 site. r The nearest farm is located about 0.8 mile from the site in the southeast quadrant. 4.4.2 NEARBY TRANSMISSION LINES The length and width of transmission line rights of way between the switchyards and the plant are as follows: 230 Kv Single 525 Kv Single Circuit Lines (Parallel) Circuit Line East Line West Line Length (Mile) 0.63 0.75 ' Width (Ft.) 200 270(I) 0.76 , Project uses of the above rights of way are: 230 Kv Single 525 Kv Single Circuit Lines Circuit Line East Line West Line Farmland (Mile) 0.51 0.73 0.68 Works related to McGuire Powerhouse 0.12 0.02 0.08 t i k 1 (1) Combined width forthe two parallel lines i L (
- ER Supplement 2 4-12 i
4.7 McGUlRE NUCLEAR STATION AND THE ECONOMY 4.7.1 IMPACT OF CONSTRUCTION FORCES Based on experience on similar Duke projects, it is esti:nated that about 75 percent of the work force will be drawn from the neighboring Mecklenburg, Lincoln, Gaston, Catawba and Iredell Counties; 13 percent will move into this area f rom other Duke jobs and the remaining 12 percent will live within commuting distance or will avail themselves of the bachelor quarters provided by Duke near the construction site. No family housing will be provided by Duke. Very few people are expected to move into the neighborhood to work on the project and as observed on other Duke projects, the completion of the project is unlikely to affect the neighboring countryside materially. No major construction, employing more than 500 workers, is in progress in this area. Estimated manpower requirement and payroll during construction period is given in Table 4.7-1. O O ER Supplement 2 4-13
Table 4.1-3 The Biological Sampling Program For The Aquatic Environs Of McGuire Nuclear Station
~ _ _ _
The program as outlined is the basic plan to be periodically reviewed and revised as appropriate to achieve the program objectives. A minimum of one full year of data will be collected prior to plant operation, plus operational monitoring. The McGuire biological sampling program is to be coordinated with the work of other investigators and sampling programs at other relevant locations to achieve maximum multi-use of data. Objectives:
- 1. To provide a basis for assessing the consequences of thermal discharges.
, 2. To provide baseline information which can be used for future comparison.
E E O g SAMPLING PR0 GRAM a
~
PARAMETER SAMPLING PLAN FREQUENCY OF SAMPLING
- 1. Benthos Sampling stations will be located in Seasonally, 4 times per year front of the intake and the discharge, and then at intervals North of the intake and Northeast of the discharge.
- 2. Plankton Sampling stations will be located at the Bimonthly, 6 times per year
- a. Zooplankton intake and the discharge, plus along two
- b. Phytoplankton ransec s, one North of the intake, the other Northeast of the discharge into Ramsey Creek Cove.
__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _________ __--______-__-_a
Table 4.1 Continued PARAMETER SAMPLING PLAN FREQUENCY OF SAMPLING
- 3. Periphyton Four stations will be maintained. Monthly Sampling at Cowans Ford Dam will be continued, plus new stations will be established in the discharge area.
4 Fish
- a. Identify the spawning areas on a. During spawning /
Lake Norman with emphasis on season ! Ramsey Creek Cove.
- b. Determine species composition, b. To be determined m size class, and age composition of fish in Lake Norman with E emphasis on Ramsey Creek Cove.
3 5
$ 5. Synoptic Water Sample necessary parameters (tempe- As necessary A Quality rature, dissolved oxygen, etc.) to w establish baseline water quality data and to provide supporting data for the benthos, plankton, periphyton and fish sampling programs.
- 6. Continuous Water Besides continuing the temperature Continuous Temperature monitoring station at Cowans Ford Monitoring Dam, several continuous temperature recording stations will be located in the vicinity of McGuire within the expected plume trajectory. (To supplement synoptic program.)
The fish study as outlined will be requested from the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission. If this state agency cannot undertake such a project, other possibilities will be explored. O O __
Table 4.1-4 l Isotherm Areas > 1 in 10 Recurrence Frequency ; Winter: Ambient Water Temperature-40 F; Discharge Water Temperature-72 F; ! I Temperature Area ; 55 F 800 acres , 50 F 1800 acres l 45 F 3400 acres ! Summer: Ambient Water Temperature-84 F; Discharge Water Temperature-92 F; j Temperature Area l 91 F 400 acres ; 90 F 900 acres 89 F 1500 acres Volume of Lake Norman Beneath a 3500-acre Plume from McGuire Nuclear Station i For Various Lake Levels Volume Beneath , Lake Level 3500-Acre Area l 760 f t above MSL (full) 117,800 acre-feet i 755 ft above MSL - 116,300 acre-feet : 750 ft above MSL - 113,500 acre-feet 745 ft above MSL - 112,900 acre-feet l 735 ft above MSL - 111,200 acre-feet l l s b ER Supplement 2
r Table 4.1-5 Median Heat-Tolerance Limits, Median Temperature Tolerance Limits and Final Preferendum Temperatures for Some of the Principal Fishes of Lake Norman Median Heat Final Species Tolerance Median Temperature Tolerance Limits Preferendum Limits Tempe ra ture Time Acclimated to Upper Limit Time (Hrs) F F (Hrs) 4 Gizzard shad 99.1 - 77 93.2 48 - Dorosoma cepedianum (La Sueur) 95 98.6 48 I 7 m Carp 96.3 24 - - -- 89.6 W Cyprinus carpio Linnaeus Golden shiner 94.5 68 89.6 66 fa Notomigonus crysoleucas (Mitchill) - 86 95.0 66 -
$ Channel catfish 59 86 24
[ Ictalurus punctatus (Rafinesque) - - 77 93.2 24 - N Mosquitofish 99.1 59 95 66 Gambusia affinia (Baird and Girard) - 95 98.6 66 - 0 Largemouth bass 97.5 I - 68 89.6 72 86 - 89.6 Micropter us salmoides (Lacepede) 84.0 24 86 93.2 72 4 82.4 24 3 Bluegill 92.8 - 50 90.1 Lepomis macrochirus (Rafinesque) 86 96.9 24 4 Yellow perch 90.1 - 41 69.8 96 69.8 5 2 Perca flarescens (Mitchiil) 87.6 12 77 (winter) 86 96 84.6 1 24 77 (summer) 89.6 96 Numbers indicate the reference cited. O O 9
Table 4.1 Continued References (1) Black, E. C. 1953. " Upper Lethal Temperatures of Some British Columbia ' Fresh Water Fishes." Jour. Fish. Res. Bd. Can., Vol. 10, 196-210. (2) Brett, J. R. 1944. "Some Lethal Temperature Relations of Algonquin Park Fishes." Univ. Toronto Stud. Biol. Ser. 52, Publ. Ont. Fish. Res. Lab.,
- No. 63, 1-49 (3) Fry, F. E. J., and B. Pearson, 1952. " Temperature Preference, Lethal Temperatures, Cruising Speed of the Bluegill." M.S.
(4) Hart, J. S. 1952. " Geographic Variations of Some Physiological and Morphological Characters in Certain Fresh Water Fishes." Univ. Toronto Stud. Biol., Ser. 60; Pub. Ont. Fish. Res. Lab., Nor. 72, 1-79. (5) McCracken, F. D. , and S. H. Strukman. 1948. " Preliminary Observations on the Preferred Temperature of the Perch." MS. ; (6) Pennsylvania Department of Health. " Heated Discharges.. Their effects on Streams" Report by the Advisory Committee for the Control of Stream Temperatures to the Pennsylvania Water Board, Harrisburg, Pa. Pa. Dept. Health Pbl. No. 3, 108 pp. i (7) Pit, T. K., E. T. Garside, and R. L. Hepburn, 1956. " Temperature Selection of the Carp" (Cyprinus carpio Linn.). Can. J. Zool., Vol. 34, 555-557. l l l l 1 I i l ER Supplement 2
Table 4.2-11 Assumptions in The Lake Model (1) Radioactive wastes remain with the water they are released with. (2) Perfect mixing occurs where the waste is added to the condenser cooling water and where its equivalent flow joins the stream flow in the channel. (3) stream flow into the pool and evaporation are neglected. Pa rame te r Value Condenser cooling water 1.63 x 106gpm flow Flow past dam 2670 cfs Volume of pool (Approx.) 10 ft Volume of channel (Approx.) 8 3x 10 ft 3 Waste monitor tank pump 200 gpm flow Minimum Condenser cooling 480,000 gpm water flow 1 1 O ER Supplement 2 { l
i () Table 4.3-1 Limiting Concentrations of Solids And Chemicals in The Boiler Blowdown pH 9.0 - 9.5 Total Dissolved Solids 125 ppm maximum I Suspended Solids 5 ppm maximum Chlorides 75 ppm maximum Silica 5 ppm maximum Free Caustic 0 I ron and Copper 0.1 ppm total I O l ER Supplenent 2
Table 4.4-1 Maj o r Industries Within 10 Miles With 100 Employees Or More(I) NAME DISTANCE QUADRANT CATEGORY (2)
- 1. J. P. Stevens, Stanley, N.C. 9.5 Miles SW 5 !
- 2. Talon Inc. , Textile Fastner Division, Stanley, N.C. 9.5 Miles SW 5
- 3. American & Effrd Thread Mills, -'
inc., Dyeing & Finishing 9.9 Miles SW 4
- 4. American & Efird Thread Mills, Inc., Rush Plant 9.9 Miles SW 3 5 American & Efird Thread Mills, Inc., Textured Yarn 9.9 Miles SW 4
- 6. Fieldcrest Mills, Inc.,
Mt. Holly Spinning Mill 9.9 Miles SW 3
- 7. Gaston County Dyeing Machine Co., Stanley, N.C. 9 Miles SW 4
- 8. Reeves Brothers Curon, Cornelius and Carolina Plant f. Miles NE 5 9 Sout hern Dyestuf f Co. , Mt. Holly 9.9 Miles SW 4
- 10. Florida Steel Corp.,
Huntersville, N.C. 7.5 Miles SE 4
- 11. General Time, Davidson, N.C. 7.6 Miles NE 5
- 12. Magla Products, Huntersville,N.C. 6.5 Miles SE 4 (1) Information collected from " North Carolina Directory for manufacturing Fi rms" (1968) prepared by Division of Statistics, N.C. Dept. of Labor.
(2) Employees in different categories: Category 3 - 101-250 Category 4 - 251-500 Category 5 - 501-1000 ER Supplement 2 0 t
____.______..~._.___.m_ . _ ._ _ __ _.._,_ _ . . . _ . _ . - _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . . . . . _ _ _ _ . . , . _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ i I
- Table 4.7-1 Estimated Manpower Requirement and Payroll During Construction j i
f Payroll Amount ' Year (Average) (DolIars) f i 1972 850 5,913,000 ! 1973 1537 14,516,000- l 1974 1810 19,354,000 ! 1975 1654 13,978,000 1976 950 8,065,000 1977 200 1,716,000 i t i J l i r i G ; r i l i 4 l i i J l 4 J 4 l O ER Supplement 2 1
- gr.. , , g.. __ , , , , . . , _ . , _ _ . , , , . _ , _ , _
y J Noc:::yqy r ; t p, 3 g. % ) a %j '- 3 7 7
%;=z gmi i
~-
T J h,, t I . ,L i ( -
~-_
V-w ;ww~~ .,
+G.
w X [:,m Uensg;a&Q@%sw
'E' ~
u%),.q
'5
-),
I j',,fyff:SLh,\-1%' d2 Mww 3' (~ ) . ._.. . .k g" 3 ,
/
.y
- y._~ 7 .-
kl ;k k's (gs!~' ,:[; ,v ] $ $$&yQQf ijQ N, ; , , v~, _; ( q ,
- 'T
- E
)g,sN; -
', , h\ ' /b M /v ,gf,I~ -
i fN ' il .Y_ 9 [ '~' ,,4 'ch,hr .:. on P.?'? ~ .~. /:
. .x W l ,, a%)'k.,
_~ wp N fg/ i l5 &'hlj? ?YN w ? ;) Y' W._ h yn [ p 4hT
,7 L;![L 'hh) ljl
%-.M e.fs i kR4 x l:; .: a$ 5 e l, h A
< ,i 7 -.
y e0- bl2.R~I!c.- (hk, . ~ , y.;M - h , > V );/ r . yk,r8 m n :g hN< w'khL u
.m ~ M[,
(mqm \(_.%- ' -
?' d M8
' 7" s y, .,--y d- - W..(O.= g 4. ,
s .-
/\C ( cw M) ^ uqw _ g '$'a-s
, . N ll G yQ W([t,g)]f ;/ ,
cp jj' fk pnhhg[ lp-((,j'r rk h \\
- A n vh-v.-g f
eg;%'~, p M%g $&
.A
~
r ,./ . b.. , ~ aNM ' d r - s ;~' , 5 k Hf N'j ! wh u<y;M;e-y[ [,-3..m M '
.'M;> Nd ,}
~
t 5
, g g, git a
~5 wx
,3;p' 3 p ~,c4> is Q ,/ , ,.f,lo w m']m . ,lQ ,;;t Y y ,
'-Q ),Q L Q ' 3 )., , ,
g 3q wg gg3 3
-, s _,
. 'j 'F s
p . w M y' q' w\;yygg h gor _ q\ .n g'vM* w c9= r :~ Q 7 ,y -< &j R, s m - f c;
}
W$ L fN
?
" %%ge yy Wby$w,': m r;q e RWWF
%j! mW g f Q% q p
& p ~v , .a r3
,, ~ < + .9 3_
%wamm CARD l Abo Availabio on Aperture Card !
m m swu'.+ k,,. g,\ j'
;i ~1 ,- ., % , ,
s, ~ . , ,
~q 3-;-.;, . .g, ~'7 q m a 'f ~ ,
_- sj - k
~ t ' ;'t ,
T.- 'g 4 k- - r, - p,, . ,i t & f " w u]._ y x y.
,. /
4
/
; (, 4 m
/:- L L;.- p /j; N 7 3' .,
' *,. s ;,. i-
..j/.,7 ~ i ,, . ,
,J F /. <
./
qx ;,;._ ,t -
]
_' ~~ y yl
, -y \
n, .... - , u,t . -
.s.x ..
~
a '
. , i
.x s
,1) p/ -. 2 . ,
f f < N ( ,,
~
)f
.6Ll: '~
4 'f *
>f~'.i',<. 'M
~~
(L. A,.,. ..ue . --
> , j- p 1
u - . . .% ijf -
~
QI ~
)
' l; [ ' .f '(
7 , Mk f, _, . A i ,.q
.I ,
s _ . .- x, .)-
,s 1 h x f' _. d .
*~
#L l y%
'I '
y.
. l l ~ .__, i cs ,j,? _l
^*
& ^ r iis~^ w h'" \ ~ .q 1.
./:
,.- . yy \
.' \ . _
,, , , _ ,'!~ , ..
j
* * ' j [, .#
k j# >
> I k. ',, ,
l ' ' ~ '
/ ," '
i
' u .
8 ', , j )Q :.1 EW,7 ~ . ( .--
- 5. .
.,g i .,. ' W' g ;'p;'il t i
' ' $c 4;9'%
l ,( ' %, lI
/ V.
) a /.1:. :
7-A
;r~[c
.'l '- i ,, r_. g .';:O ;, - y- L '&,..&,,,
, 9 -- w
. , . - , g i
f; ;_7,a_) &.,.p I' rc , l .
- p. -
I, & j\' ? v( % . f h e g./~] / y, ) Wg M /. h @( r[7[M Pbf Q_ e- ] i ~ 22' y >
, . . f s.., .,
o ) j ,D J _ T, R' j $< .
& glh y _ f ' c& Y[ J('t N-W f A&1-
^
&\ ; 7 . l~-
i
.fgj
] %,: ,. ; - .~
=
[ ~ ' f.'~ 3.
~
_i
., t g
. .. g
-(
rE \ ,
' '~ >).
fe. -??$ (g;
'li f
L '
- f. <
lK l 3
' r .-
9 & '(s4) 4
,. ya ,,
' l NO r
-/I ,
J h(
.q W 7
n . p _ ';{g$ C
,\' . gD:r%
m n,_
-t i g
~ ,
- - g
- _ my ~wq u (
D' I
~ ;' _* k't [*. .
~;~
3 39 I - ', - . g Q 7,Ll 996 p> / y o .:26; - & ?, b:. s..= . .i %lr=Q
& f ,,
7 c 1- McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION 9 );.'.[f'<: % _~ t ,,c 3 , . w.i =q7 t 4 + , Q AREA TOPOGRAPHY h cGU RE NUCLEAR STATION Figure 4.1 - 8 j hI ,,
=x
~h2 lih r. .. !I? '
i.m - u j 1 . t. iiii
~ --
P tir - m liii[it!' ~i Pw 1
-'- i[T.
IF;.
. 'u: 2 - -
J.+ <
'n' 1" , .il? ~
_g = d.- - -4
.L t-- q c .- . :;r. r: t :. : ,i .t. -- : g
. ).
t '737 .
.+
- -t- .r L c .: JUNE - .I.r i
i- "':c arru- ur- "- - - -
- f: . har p i 4
l' i t I- . li'.. .;}-- ,';j.- ,g, l
- l : :.,
- :f.f'.**-'t,
~i -
'-~
.g. i - - M- t - " t--- -
'}
. Qj 1.j;.. L:: ', .!"_. : , / p' _/
'p l. j, j
- l l:
T ., . . ..
- 5 ? p' i .}
[
', ... ..# .1-f'[.l: ).
..it . [
i ,
,: (. ~ ' + ' '..t:*"
- }{:
4 . ., : , . . . . *1 .] . . .. ] Y
.f. l -
!' [ ,p I *f. 'I.I. I!'i -
f, . l, . 4
}. .
f . 2 fi #.:'i/. I j 'j :
.) f .
k.
. _i .
._. l - . .-i.-_ 4- . _ _ =- =- ._Q.'r . -.9 i .:-
/.:4.y=}.4{
.f
_ . Qu..:=_u...l .j Lu '.._ p _ i :. 3.u./ r. - i.I + l 1 1 .,i n ,
.i 4 ,
-. j y- .t-
{ . 4
.{.
,l f
~ ~ ' *
- I vU- . p.
I
. ,e <
'..a _Ch. _ q. ___ ..' i 4 . .
I , 8. L. _
^~ ' ' ~
. )d/ . ' l.4u ._
.I.
'+
! '{.
}'
i ;..
.f.* _
. _. j_ [f . .;
I
+
, 4 . .4 g) .*.",U.7 JI 'I '} ;
{
.{: j. '
( . . ;* .j; J. l: {.
.' .i. ' l
[ [ 4 , 4'0 ..'..
. . .. . .I, i.
1 .-
. t.l..,.. . .i 4: r. - ::.
4 l t .. p : : .. - q :b. ..:l : p-- ..m.. .{.- t l
. {--- n-
-t. . . .. . . . r .; .
f i
.j. .: n. .:/ ...:r s. ' : :- '---'l :- ' t, l
- a , ;
- f:'. :11 * .. t :;. e
{ 't ..
!. l
- i. l..
% ' ,l .
' ~
t .
. .. . , . i l.{'...
. . 4 _. .
_.. 4- _.g.. l I d ' l t i [-F ...' , .
-l: !' l l ! -l'
__g__ _.ggo_ .__ p i n .1 ,.
.} -_%e
- i. .f -
L -
- .. y! :; _;_
l
' l
. : #' ,. ?;: .C . ' . .
i
.} _ .
.j
. )--
* [. ; i* 1 ~~ !
. - -7' 0-1 .. l 1,,
4 i' . 1
.I . ,
I lij 'i. I 4 7 .'l .- i I
.,.!_.y..f.___..__{f..2
._ C3. . h .-. . _j.__ . i_ ' . . _ .; .. _ _ -
]
i l . _. 22 .20 'L1{ _..O , C.
.t t . . . . . { ..g , . ..,. .. .. ..
3
' 4
- 1. . -
i RFdlNh LNG 'OF MONTH !.
- 4. _
1 ' l ! i _. li- { -- j r i :- 7 M Fl&lMQW l
- ..=
~
_.s.._. .l 3 _ _.i . - - . ' . - _ :).__l _
~
I' & J_ . ,, l 3 _
.l. l i
.1 I '
;* 'M; 12 'I. .+ _.. . _ !
- l~ l.
I
! ...'4...,
. 'l I
WATEF DI CFARGEE .W/RFRIDUAILHEAT_
.. .:' 1 .. .l l ,
.{ .! :) i ; 4 j i } ..
. :i :. l . -" I i .l
. ; _. .. .: _2 __ .. . ' . _._:2_ . _._ __ . y
~
r '
.. Q._. . _.! '
~ NEXT. WONTHSnRf10FH F DilSTORICAL. L i
u.
...e :.- ..a t.
g l ' ' WYT MONTiE ; n ...;'ADJL
- :l" - '
' STED PRQFILE !
{ ; J.
- 1. . l a . .-. .. .1 :- . . . _ . . - . _ __ _ -,_. . .. . . - . ._.t-~ ...
_.u. . -- 1 i i .. .2 -a L. . ^ !
-j.
g
'q . . .. ,
$ p- .. .
t::L..
- _ . p - : .. .
i i I .
- j. -,
q 7;,
.J . -
i .p._4,.
. ... .. .t.,. ..
.l,
.* . .f. A.1. VE. A4.E..
. . -GON. DIT. IONS. F.
t - - u, -
- i .t-- 1
+
moa MATDISCH "1 EfW PP _ . _ _ __ -.- O_[_ I 3 _ . , _ _ .40! 5 ;5DE ii: 369 - 701- .__. i I O).h .+ 90., $: .2 i 5 l PREDICTED TEMPERATURE PROFILE iti. ii: [ TUhEftd1 URE?
.b :u;- ,
FFf 1 mirown McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION
'a Figure 4.1-9
if-
. .I . _ j! . i O3}
.g g , . _ . . .z s dt ._..i gw g i
4 i j i : i
,a
( d_ I 1-'d_ _ _.! u-o. s
~ ~
o
-H i
m , ' l ; .
.[ < ,
, . g oso O A Od I c"_ <
_ . j pm _ g f i =
, e w w
- c g . ;
4 l , , I _ p.. _ . _. . l __p _ _.;,_g_9_._ s J 9 e a 7_2.2 , I
- ;z a o
[__w -
.g! .+> .. {. ,;. .{. y n . q. . _ l g . g. . . g w _ * . ._ .4__ q . .. ..;4r y
J *.
.! l i . ! I t W E y' i'~ J H : .E <
m I m
.__ ; . j .___.; _. T' ._ ;'
^
d - U c) w.oU ]'w
- _ ___ ._.4 ..__.. __. _.
j t
-~C'" _ g M d d
; c D 5 l
D' . j .. i W. e g _ . .;.;__. >O ._ . ! 2_ Z cn g._ __ ..} . .
; t .
g g
- :n i
_.! : : w _,4.# , i ! .H z v 2 t l W
. . _ ; .. 7 q.. j . .1
___L. ' . _ . . . _ ' _ 'g c o g 4 t; p _ _. g z w o g $= n !- o s i . I, ! t r--- ii , 7 #b , 10
-l .
7, J .. u .. ; j _. _ _J' _ . 4 4,dm4 _ u s u w,1e t_._
+
i
}w
.z , ,
; : .7. ; t a.
__. L L AL.5 e 4 z .y i <
) ' l '
L_ ' - a__ g. [' i :
, I' i , I i . .
i
.; i i, l l _ . _ . .
! __ ,1 _ ._. 3! . .;-_ l . ._ .: .! . .!._ 8: . 'l. '___
._ , . 7 _1, l
$ l '
*I ,l.
s
, }
I l 8 e i e i I i i l _ . , _ - _ , , . ! - ._ . L L is
. 4
~ ' p. 4
*l__
=.
~!
~.... ,i .
f I a .. j
=
l j I i x' ! l. _[ .i i I [M.' ' .h. ,. .(. , s! . _1,
-.c._ ! '
l ' ! ' O! j m,
~! . %. ! ; ,
t -[ _. :,. _ _' ,_. _ l_4 ___;. .L. ._ ;_.. ..-- 4, _
. I- . .I _ 7.___
. l ,
,ls l
4
\ 4. _%_ ,; s~ '
l l l ! i
.I ; ,\ .s ! i i :
._L
_. .a . . .2 1
. p).__ . _.h i
_ .g ..,_.:_. _J_
- ._.1 a . .l . . _ L _.- : , m.
i : , u ; u m t t , ; , r , ; 1 ! O, o i I: f i l* ,
}
f )1 _ '. g. L -,t N-,
.._. _%...l .
1_ .. .._a F I .. . ' ,. . _....__._i._
.._4__...-..._.
1 a
! l 'S .
j i .l. ^! 1 : ,.*) N- -
.g'_+:
.\ -
.} ,
,l 4 ug. .=9. . ., ., .
- cxs g . g;i ;t p.. '9 w 93 m i
. . -4 %, v.
i
; 1 .n
- x. :L _. ._al , -
*l-
._ d..;_.L
! f
.u 1
4.u u
" g 's.J:. 2 ;_n_ 1 i
_ ;in_ l e l _._..;_'_. ____f_.___.a,l __ .x;.t-
._ g ..c . W If. ' ki l I Y ! f: !. f-i : . i ~r : %%=2._..--~~ . . =. +.., a, L m r-
_a.: . . . .z
.L: -
a * ' '
~-
1;
! . , .. ! }
l !- . !. . .. ' f' : .! l l' .$. O;
.? ; '
j ... p:.:
.__!.__ _. j __
, 1
. ' . _. . .; _l . _ .
j __4._ ._.
. _ . L_ . _ . . 2.__.
_ _ _ . __jl.. _.__ L_:_
. e :
i ; 1 i : . 4
~7' , , ,
j i _..y_. __ .p l } 4_ _._...'.i.._.._,i._.~._. 4 g. r_ _y_.. . 1:
. .___.7..
4 i i 1 , l ,
' , I t l i.
l 1. ' ~ 0l3
' .' T{
+:[
.i . : . 4 j . j l [
=.3 4 3 i
. . t . _.-.
.yg.4, .3; 4..-._--
j r_..-_.. - i !. ' }~ .( , . . b . . . '!. i. .'-..-. ! f
. "... Q(D
! r .,
l.
, a' I I
.y.
8
. 4. .J _. 3 . - ,. -
i 4 6 . . l.
. l- Q
.: > ; , t ,
_o. o ;
.o r, 4
.ni ._._ o_ . ,6 t y
, .i
. . .gei, _i._g_
i
. . 8 .1. _ o ,.i. _$: _f
- y ;
( _.
.l___ ' _.__ . l i
1__... 7 L_ ._ _ .. ; __ i n aa n s u so _ ..
- __J...I..-.._4
- ' 1
.f. 4, 1 1 1 !
i 4
! n _2_
{ L,: _ 1.-. ___L_ ;l . _ . .
- I
f-LJ STREAM FLOW ( NO ACTIVITY) V 4 POOL h CHANNEL = LIQUID COOLING WATER WASTE o McGUIRE V STRE AM FLOW l
\
l l O RADWASTE LAKE MODEL McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION Otro Figure 4.2-1 1 j
. 7.5 ALTERNATE OF COOLING TOWER TO LAKE NORMAN COOLING 7.5.1 COMPARISON OF MECHANICAL DRAFT AND NATURAL DRAFT COOLING TOWERS in comparing lake cooling to the alternative of evaporating cooling towers at this site in Table 7.2-1, conventional Mechanical Draft cooling towers were considered. The possibility of installing Natural Draft cooling towers instead of the conventional Mechanical Draft type has also been examined.
The economic and environmental impacts of these two types have been compared in Table 7.5-1. Factors common to both the alternatives have been excluded in this comparison. 7.5.2
SUMMARY
lt is evident f rom the comparison of the two types of cooling towers that Mechanical Draft cooling towers would be a better choice for this site. However, the alternative of surface cooling by Lake Norman is the most economical of the three alternatives and also has distinct environmental advantages over the two other alternatives. O i l l ER Supplement 2 7-1
Table 7.5-1 Comparison Of Mechanical Draft and Natural Draft Cooling Towers (Once-Through System) Particulars Mech. Draft Natural Draft A. TECHNICAL DATA (I)
- 1. Rejected Heat (BTU / Hour) 15.8 x 10 9 15.8 x 10 9
- 2. Range (*F) 24 24 3 Approach (*F) 12 18
- 4. Wet Bulb Temperature (* F) 77(2) 76 5 Condenser Temperature Difference TD (*F) 6 6
- 6. Turbine Absolute Back Pressure (in of Hg) 3.35 3.85 Condenser Cooling Water Flow (GPM) 6 6
- 7. 1.32 x 10 1.32 x 10 B. ECONOMICS
- 1. Capital cost ($) 8,780,000(3) 21,800,000(4)
- 2. Fan Capacity Cost 1,380,000(5) _
- 3. Pump Capacity Cost 3,000,000(6) 3,000,000(6) 4 Fan Operating Cost incl. Maintenance 950,000(7) _
5 Pump Operating Cost incl. Maintenance 3,080,000(8) 3,080,000(8)
- 6. Capacity Penalty Due To Higher Back Pressure - 4,118,000(9) 7 Fuel Penalty Due To Higher Back Pressure - 448,000(10)
Total 17,190,000 32,446,000 FOOTNOTES (1) Assumes Once-Through Cooling Towers (2) 1*F above that for Natural Draft to allow for recirculation (3) Based on Dickey and Cates estimate + 15 percent for variation (Marley Company, Kansas City, Mo.) (4) Assumed 50 percent Relative Humidity for design - based on Dickey and Cates estimate + 15 percent for variation (5) Capacity at $125 per Kw (6) Pump BHP for 75 feet head, and 78 percent overall efficiency, capacity at $125 per Kw (7) Fuel cost at $80 per Kw per year, 80 percent plant factor, 67 percent Fan use. Includes operation and maintenance at 100 percent of fuel cost. (8) Fuel cost at S80 per Kw per year, 80 percent plant factor, includes operation and maintenance at 100 percent fuel cost (9) Capacity penalty at $125/Kw (10) Assumes maximum heat rate for 2 months in a year - capitalized cost of fuel ER Supplement 2
r- 1 l l Table 7.5 continued Comparison of Mechanical Draft and ( Natural Draft Cooling Towers l l (Once-Through System) Particulars Mech. Draft Natural Draft C. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
- 1. Thermal Effect ,
Highest Cold Water Temperature During Summer Months (*F) 89 94 (Larger Mixing . Zone) l i
- 2. Land Use Approximate Area Requi red (Acres) 65 30 !
3 Consumptive Loss (GPM) 23,800 23,800 ; 4 Icing and Fogging in the Local Area Distinct Less possibility possibility due to plume on cold, humid released at f day high elevations i 5 Aesthetics Cover sub- Tall (400 ft.+) stantial area conspicuous but low structures are t structures generally not and can be pleasing in treated appearance architecturally to mitigate adverse ' aesthetic effects on the country-side i i I a ER Supplement 2 1 1 I
T v ' V4..)
/
DUKE POWEn GOMPANY / L4V"W ' ' 0 d Pownu Bt:1Lnrno, Box c17a, GIIAHLoTTn.N. G. 2020: : ) - t>E 5 8 Gee 8 8eGlast t enho r g , May 22, 1972 g h _ h 9' Mr R C DeYoung C W n 9,\% . stA W h Assistant Director for U.S. sSi Pressurized Water Reactors F.d83),$n S'u 40 Division of Reactor Licensing g Atomic Energy Conimission ' m Washington, DC 20545 Re: McGuire Nuclear Station Docket No. 50-369 and 50-370 - Envi ronmental Report - Const ruction Permi t Stage Supplement 3
Dear Mr DeYoung:
In reply to your letter of May 3,1972, we are enclosing three signed originals and 297 copies of Supplement 3 to the McGui re Nuclear Station Envi ronmental Report. The Supplement should be inserted at the back of , the binder after Supplement 2. In addition to the specific information ; requested in your letter, Supplement 3 contains additional background data on the site and information developed since submission of Supplement 2 (May 1 1972). L Also enclosed are three signed originals and 297 copies of Revision 2. ' The revised sheets should be inserted in the Environmental Report as ' explained in " Changes and Corrections." l Very truly yours, s/W H Owen E W H Owen WH0/w Enclosures cc Mr Glenn C Blaisdell, County Manager Mecklenburg County .; 720 East Fourth St reet 1 Cha rlot te, . North Carolina 28202 l (with one copy of enclosures) ! 2755 - I)
b, McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION ' 1 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT l DOCKET NOS. 50-369 and 50-370 REVISION NO. 2 May 22, 1972 Changes and Corrections The following pages are to be inserted as replacements for exist-Ing pages. Please note that vertical lines and revision numbers in each margin identify portions revised unless otherwise noted at bottom of page. Front Back 2-1 2-2 2-7 2-8 O P Duke Power Company Charlotte, North Carolina 0
- 2. DESCRIPTION OF McGUIRE__ NUCLEAR STATION V 2.1 STATION AND CYCLE DESCRIPTION The McGuire Nuclear Station will have two units each with electrical output of about 1150 Mw (1 Mw=1000 kw). The Westinghouse Electric Corporation will furn-ish the nuclear steam systems, some of the engineered safety features and most of the waste disposal equipment for the station. The nuclear steam systems are of the four-loop pressurized water design similar to twelve other four-loop plants which precede McGuire. The waste disposal equipment will be the very latest and most efficient available. A description of the radioactive waste disposal system's performance can be found in Section 4.2 of this report.
In the pressurized water design (see Figure 2.2-1), a closed system of water, known as the Primary Coolant is circulated through the fuel elements in the reactcr vesscl. This water picks up heat produced by the nuclear reaction but is kept under sufficient pressure that, even though it rises to about 600"F lt does not boil but remains liquid. This hot water is then pumped into adjacent " steam generators." There the water flows through thousands of U shaped tubes and gives up its heat to another, entirely separate water system, called the Secondary Coolant. The Primary Coolant is then pumped back into the reactor vessel where it is used over and over. The Secondary Coolant flows around the tubes carrying the hot Primary Coolant in the Steam Generator, picking up the heat from the Primary Coolant. The secon-O dary Coolant boils and produces steam to drive the turbine. After doing ts work in the turbine, this steam is condensed into water and pumped back into the Steam Generator, forming the second closed cycle. The waters of these two systems do not contact each other. A third water system is used to condense the Secondary Coolant steam back into water as it leaves the turbine. This cooling water is taken from Lake Norman and is discharged back to the lake. This system is separated from the reactor by the two closed cycles, the Primary and Secondary Coolant systems. The electrical output of the McGuire units will be delivered thru 230 Kv and
.y
- 525 Kv transformers to the switching station, south of N. C. Highway 73.
Construction of this switching station began in 1970 to serve system I. transmission needs during the 1971-1975 period prior to operation of McGuire. In connection with construction of McGuire, the switching station will be expanded to receive and transmit the nuclear station's output. The two units to be installed at McGuire are estimated to cost $440,964,000 j* exclusive of fuel. The cost of initial fuel cores is estimated to be $64,550,000 for a total station cost of over $505 million. The significant economic impact *
- 2. of this investment in Mecklenburg County is discussed in Section 4.7 of this 2.
report. O 2-1 Revision 1 5-1-72 Revision 2 5-22-72
2.2 SITE DESCRIPTION The McGuire Nuclear Station will be located in Mecklenburg County, North Caro- i lina, near the Cowans Ford Dam approximately 17 miles northwest of Charlotte. The plant site is on the shore of Lake Norman about 1000 yards east of the Catawba River Channel as shown on Figure 2.2-1. The plant site is bounded on the west by the Catawba River channel immediately downstream of Duke Power Company's Cowans Ford Hydroelectric Station, on the north by Lake Norman impounded by Cowans Ford Dam, on the east by private property and Lake Norman, and on the south by N. C. Highway 73 The inter-section of the centerline of the two reactor buildings and the centerline between the reactor buildings is located at Latitude 35*-25'-59" north and Longitude 80*-56'-55" west. The Exclusion Area is that area within a 2500-f radius centered at the inter-section of the two centerlines mentioned above. Thg ow Population Zone as that area within five and one-half miles of the plant. d There are 26 popula-tion centers within 100 miles of the site. The largest of these are as follows: Population 1970 Distance Center Population From Site Direction from Site Charlotte, N.C. 239,049 17 miles South-Southeast Winston-Salem, N.C. 133,820 59 miles North-Northeast Greensboro, N. C. 140,660 78 miles Northeast Columbia, S. C. 111,706 98 miles South The Exclusion Area will be posted. A security fence will be erected around the immediate site area. A plot plan showing major plant features in the Exclusion Area, the site boundary and the controlled access areas within the site boundary are shown on Figure 2.2-2. Transmission lines and right-of-ways in the site area are discussed in Section 4.4.2. U)As defined by Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10 Part 100. 2-2
types. The four major rock types found include dark green meta-gabbro, Iight gray fine and medium grained granite, black and white fine grained diorite O and black and white coarse grained diorite. Though the geologic structure at the site is very complex and old, there were no features in evidence which would present any problems in the design, construction and future operation or safety of the plant. 2.4.3 SEISM 0 LOGY The regional ancient faults and geologic structures have not been active during the past 180 million years. The historical record of earthquakes in the south-east indicates that there is no known relationship between known faults and historic earthquakes. Detailed studies of the larger earthquakes near the site have been made using newspaper accounts, interviews with older residents, examination of damage which is still visible and a study of local geologic conditions. These studies indicate that the greatest seismic intensity the site has experienced due to these larger earthquakes has been VII, Modified Mercalli Scale, from the Charles-ton earthquake, August 31, 1886, located 185 miles southeast of the site. Three earthquake epicenters have been-reported within 50 miles of the site. All three of these earthquakes are reported to have produced an epicentral intensity of V, Modified Mercalli Scale. No identifiable active faults that could be expected to produce surface dis-placement have been recognized within 200 miles of the site or anywhere within the Piedmont Geologic Region of the site. ! The foundations of the Reactor and Auxiliary Buildings will be located on rock , which has excellent strength properties and small amplification of ground I motion resulting from an earthquake. The operating basis earthquake (l)has ' been given a value of acceleration of eight percent of gravity at the top of rock l
- 2. and the design basis earthquake (2) has been given a value of acceleration of 2 fifteen percent of gravity at the top of rock.
Seismologically the site is well suited for a nuclear station. 2.4.4 HYDROLOGY Hydrology studies for site suitability included characteristics of vicinity streams and their associated drainage areas, Catawba River flood studies and site groundwater. The principal stream which drains the site is the Catawba River. The Catawba River begins at the Blue Ridge Divide near Old Fort, North Carolina, and flows in an easterly direction to a point near Millersville, North Carolina. ,lt then flows in a southerly direction and becomes the Wateree River near Camden, South Carolina. The Catawba upstream of Wateree Dam has a length of approxi-mately 240 miles and a drainage area of approximately 4,750 square miles. (1) Plant designed for continuous operation during operating basis earthquake (2) Plant designed for safe shutdown during design basis earthquake 2-7 Revision 2 5-22-72
Lake Norman and Cowans Ford Dam are a part of Duke's Catawba River hydroelectric system containing eleven hydroelectric reservoirs and dams, and extending along approximately 221 miles of the Catawba River. Lake Norman forms the tailwater of Lookout Shoals Dam, located 34 miles upstream from Cowans Ford, and Mountain Island Lake forms the tailwater for Cowans Ford. Mountain Island Dam is located 15 miles downstream from Cowans Ford. Refer to Figure 2.4-2, Plan and Profile of the Catawba River. A United States Geological Survey Gaging Station was located 30 miles upstream from the present location of Cowans Ford Dam near Catawba, North Carolina, until it was inundated by the waters of Lake Norman in 1962. The average discharge past this point for a period of record of 30 years and a drainage area of 1,535 square miles was 2,337 cubic feet per second (cfs) . The maximum flow recorded at this point was 177,000 cfs on August 14, 1940, and the minimum flow was 85 cfs occurring on September 15, 1957 The average flow at the Cowans Ford site is approximately 2,670 cfs. On July 16, 1916, the river reached a known flood stage of 44.1 feet at the USGS gage near Catawba, N. C. It has been estimated that this storm produced a flow of 199,500 cfs at the McGuire site on July 17, 1916. Lake Norman has a surface area of 32,510 acres and a volume of 1,093,600 acre-feet at a surface elevation of 760 feet above mean sea level (MS L) . Cowans Ford Dam's spillway is equipped with eleven gates with a total spillway capac-ity of 210,650 cubic feet per second with upstream water surface elevation at elevation 760. The proposed site lies within the Piedmont Groundwater Province. All ground-water in this area is derived from precipitation. The depth to the water table depends primarily on topography and rock weathering. The level of the water table varies from tne ground surface in the valleys to more than 100 feet below the surface on sharply rising hills. The level of Lake Norman is the primary factor which governs the location and movement of the groundwater at the site. The elevation of groundwater coincides with the elevation of Lake Norman along the northern boundary of the site, and the groundwater moves downward in a south and southwesterly direction until it I intersects the Catawba River and a small stream which drains into the Catawba. 1 i l There is no potential for harmful radioactive contamination of well water sup- ) plies via introduction of Lake Norman waters into groundwater. The concentra- ; tion of radioactivity in Lake Norman is shown in Section 4.2 to be a small fraction of the limits imposed by AEC regulations. These concentrations would ; be further reduced by the ion exchange action of the soil through which the l groundwater flows. Chemical analyses were made to determine the cation exchange capacity of the soils at the site. The results of these analyses have shown that any radioactive contaminant will move less rapidly through the soil than ) the groundwater (by a factor of 45 to I for strontium) because of the absorp- ! tion of the contaminant by the soil particles. l I Groundwater studies indicate that the groundwater conditions, including local l wells used for water supply, will not be adversely affected by the construction ; of McGuire Nuclear Station. O 2-8 l l I
l l O DUKE POWER COMPANY McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION UNITS 1-2 i l h l APPLICATION FOR LICENSES 1 DOCKETS 50-369 and 50-370 l l ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT SUPPLEMENT 3 i i t l i O May 22,1972 t f
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Number 1 INTRODUCTION 1-1 2 DESCRIPTION OF McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION 2-1 2.4 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT OF THE SITE 2-1 2.4.1 METEOROLOGY 2-1 4 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION 4-1 4.1 THERMAL EFFECTS 4-1 4.1.3 LAKE NORMAN MONITORING PROGRAM 4-1 4.1.6 EFFECT OF WARMED DISCHARGE ON LAKE WATERS 4-1 4.1.7 ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS 4-1 7 BENEFIT-COST ANALYSES 7-1 7.2 LAKE NORMAN GENERATING COMPLEX VS ALTERNATIVE 7-1 7.2.1 QUANTIFIABLE BENEFITS AND COSTS 7-1 7.4 McGUIRE PLANT - NUCLEAR VS COAL ALTERNATIVE 7-2 7.
4.1 INTRODUCTION
7-2 . [ I ER Supplement 3 i 1
rs i LIST OF TABLES Table Number Title 2.4-1 McGuire Meteorological Survey Tower Data 4.1-6 Average Temperatures Measured in Front of Cowans Ford Dam, 1963-1970 4.1-7 Warmest Temperatures Measured in Front of Cowans Ford Dam, 1963-1970 4.1-8 Coolest Temperatures Measured in Front of Cowans Ford Dam, 1963-1970 4.1-9 Dissolved Oxygen Concentrations Measured in Front of Cowans Ford Dam 4.1-10 Expected Temperatures in Lake Norman With McGuire Units 1 and 2 Operating at 100% Load b (
)
i i O ER Supplement 3 , ii ! l
i O Figure Number LIST OF FIGURES Title 2.4-3 Surface Wind Rose - McGuire Nuclear Station t 4.1-11 Expected Vertical Temperature Profiles at the Mouth of the Discharge Canal - Normal Conditions 4.1-12 Expected Vertical Temperature Profiles in Front of Cowans Ford Dam - Normal Conditions 4.1-13 Expected Vertical Temperature Proflies at the North and East Edges of the Mixing Zone - Normal Conditions 4.1-14 Expected Vertical Teraperature Profiles at the Mouth of the Discharge Canal - Extreme Conditions 4.1-15 Expected Vertical Temperature Profiles in Front of Cowans Ford Dam - Extreme Conditions 4.1-16 Expected Vertical Temperature Profiles at the North and East Edges of the Mixing Zone - Extreme Conditions O h i i l [ i i l t l (T \~-l . ER Supplement 3 ) fii , __v w
I INTRODUCTION This Supplement 3 to the McGuire Nuclear Station Environmental Report filed March 9, 1971, is submitted to Atomic Energy Commission as supplemental information in compliance with the Commission's letter of May 3, 1972, it contains information concerning the effects of early overturn of Lake Norman, as requested in the letter. Also included is additional background data on the McGuire site and information developed since submission of Supplement 2 on May 1, 1972. O O ER Supplement 3 1-1 J
i l
- 2. DESCRIPTION OF McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION 2.4 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT OF THE SITE 2.4.I METEOROLOGY L The wind distribution at the McGuire site is graphically shown on Figure 2.4-3 and tabulated in Table 2.4-1.
b P 5 6 ER Supplement 3 2-1 ,
, 1 TABLES J /
v v .s/ _ . MCGLIRE SE TE CRCLOGIC ALSURVELTChER C AT A __. FOL P ER I CO. OF. .DEC._1 1969 THRL. ACV.40.14 70 - - - _SUMMAu_DF_P ASCC1L L A+C+D+C eE+C+H w ! AC CC CU ERE!4CE&_SY_4EC7CA *_49EEO_CL A SL- 4 4-CCCbER.9 E9Chil i
- - DATE-EF-DEPCPT- 24-71
_ mlrdo _ SECTCa.- - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- W I N O - S P E E D C L A 5 5- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
.SELTuit _LIEp inia: 1 m.3 2 1.3-L % 5. 6 _7. 8_2. 9- 10. 0. _10.4-12. 3 12. 4- 14. 5_14.6- 16. L1h8- 19.G_1 % 1 -21.2 J21.2 J p A
_ . 45-1.49. 1.5-2.49 2.5-3.49-. 3.5-4.49 4.5-5.49 - 5.5-6.49 -4.5-7.49 -7.5-8.49- 8.5-0.40 >=9.5 M/5-
.360 4 _ AQ. 637 62_ 129_ 130 c^ 76 _ 50- 44 - 3C 11 - 12 -
-N . . PCT. _ 7. E 2. _ - C.76 _ _1.58 1.60- 1.18- -- 0. 9 3 - -- - - C . 61 - 0.5C 0.37- 0.13 0.15-
________________-____.m._. _ __________- - - - _2 2. 5 _ _ ____ N Q 911 ._ _R 4 - 198 _ 161' 127 _ _ S3 _9 9.--. 73-_.---_ _ 39 _ _ _ 19 IS _
-NNL- P C. T 11.19 _. _ 1.03 2.43_ 1.98 1.56 1. 14 1.21 0.9C 0.48 0.23- 0.22_ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ . _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . - - - - _ . . - - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
__4 5. 0.__ _AC ._.E3 3 90 _ 2 31_. - _.__. _13 6_ __ _ _ _ .1 11_ 58_ __ 91 __ _ _ 38 19__.._ 11_- 2__
-?4E- PCT _1 C .23 - 1 10 2.86 .1.67 1.41 1.20 1.12 C . 4 7 -- 0.23_ 0.13 0.02
_67.i _ NC- 142 _42 _ _._ 95_-___ 7 6_... . 3 L _ . _ _ 4 3. _ __ _.- 1 S _ - _ . . 4____.._2___..___J_- O_ ;
-ENE _ PCT . 4.2 C 0.52 1.17 0.93 0.69 G.59 C.23 C.C5 0.02 0.00 -0.00
_90. 0. _AC_. _ _35C_ 4L_ _9 9_ . _ _ 80 _ . 64 - -- _ 41 21 _3 0 1- _ O ._
-t- PCT 4.30 0.50 1.21. 0.98 J.79 C.50 C.26 C.C4. 0.00 0.01 0.00 112.5___._.NG__ _ 23.S 3 &_ _ ._-. _ _.5 6 -_ _ _63 .51- 24- 23___.-_____3 _ 1--..._ _.__ 0 . _ 0- -E5E-. PCT. 3.18 0.47 0.69 0.77 0.63 C.29 C.28 C.C4 -
0.01 0.00 0.00
.135.Q _ hC. _ _3E3 40._ _ .__10D_ _E8 - - los_ 1 L _ _ . _ _ _ 8 -. _4 4 - _ _ o. .. _ . _.1_
-5E- PC T_ 4.13 C.49 1.23 1.08 1.34 C.38 C.10 0.C5 0.05 .O.00 0.01 157.5 NC ___313 3 0_ . _.. _ _.__ a 7_ . _ .10 4 . _ . _. __.7 5 - __.__ 4 6 2 O_ E __ 0_ 3 -_ _0-
-55E- PCI .4.58 . _ _ . 0.37 1.07 1.28 0.92 _ 0. 56 - - - - - _ C .1 C . - .0.00 0.04 0.00
_ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _________- --~______.___-_.___-___--_-__C.24. _ _ _ _ _ . - - _ _ _ . _ _ . . . _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 18 0. 0 __AC_ 173. ___3 9_ _ _ _77_ _ _S 6 _ _ 74. 45 25 a 2_ _3_ _ _. 3 _ _ . S- PCT . . _4 .5 8. . 0.48 0.94 1 18 0.91 . 0. 5 6 - C.1C - _0.02 0.04
. -.________.____--- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ ______________.____--___.--____0.31_ -____--____._..______._-___ _......___0.04_____ .202.5 N0__ _1015 _ _--_._.28- _ _119 -. .__2C8_ -
23 4.._ 234 111 46 11._-_ _ 11._..____ 23-
-SSW. _ PC T. 12.4 L .0.34. .1.46 .2.55 2. 5 3 _ . _ _ 1.36 C. 5 6 --- 0.38 0.13 0.28
______________..__--- _ ________________________2.87_ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ 223.0 Ntt_ 840 53 __182_ .. 196 199 99 SR 25 L3 ._6 ._8- _ - 5 w .. PC T ___10.31 z ._ _0.65- 2.23 2.41 - .2.44- .1.21- . C.71 - _ C . 3 2 -- . 0.16- -0.07 0.10 147.5 ho 3E5 _ _ _ 35 _ _._88_ 103 R2__ 15 27 c ? _2- 2-
-h5k. . PCT _ 4.73. 0.43 1.C8 1.26 1. 01 -- C.43 _ - C.33 C .1 1_ 0.02-
.____________.__-____-__.--_______-_________-0.02-____0.02_ _ _ _ _ _ _____- ___________.
.2 7 0. Q___ML_ _ __3 8 2_ __ _ . . _ . .26 _76 ~ . 110 77 41 29 !? A 2--__ ___ 3 _.
-w _ . PCT 4.65. 0.32 C.93 1.35- 0.94. _ C.53 _ .C.36 __ C.15--__ _0.05, 0.02 0.0 4 --
192.5 NU 2 8.L - _ _ 2 8_.___ . __ _.41_ _ 62_ An 41 2 s_ 11 4. $_. 4_
- WN W . ._ PC T . 3 .
- 2. 0.34 0.50 .0.76. 0.74_ 0.06 0 05
-______ ._______-.~_ _ _.____--. C. 5 0 _-_ C.1L e.--_. _ ___ C.16_ - - 0.0 _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
_315.2 hD. A 14._ .. _ . _3 7_ __ . .._6 Z_ _ SL_ 71__ el 45 11 12 5_ _ __ 7_
-NW- . PC T _ _ S . C 8_ 0.45. C .82 . .0.69 0.87 __ 0.77 _ _ C.55_ _ C.38_ 0.09-
_.__._______ _ _ _ _ _-_____ .__ _______ ____..._______..__-- ____ 0.39_ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _0 . 0 6 - _337.5 Nn 343 4 . 54 Ag sa mn 2m so 16 _ 3_. 9-
-NNW _ _ PCT. .-4.21____ .0.44. 0.66_ _0.60_ 0.66 _ _ _ 0.71 _ _ C.41._- -_C.36 _ ___ 0.20.- 0.04
__ ___.0.11_ _ _ _ CALM NQ 14 _ . . . . _ PCI-_ . C .17_ _- _ . , - - - m- - - - TGTAL - NO - 812S- - 709 1701 1718 - -_.1544 --- 10 46 -. -_-- - 69 0. -- 3 4 8 _- --199 - - 92 PC3 SS.81 b71 Sil RQ 21.In [S SA 12.3 4 8.47 4.27 2.44 1 01__ 1.13_ TOTAL VALID OBSER%ATICh5 8143 . TOTAL CRtFabATinNS 8740
1.0 - 5.5 5 6 -10.0 10.1- 21.2 >21.2 O N SPEED IN hMLES PER HOUR NW ,39 NE
/-
- 10 r Nw ,J ll N
Nji!I
,5 N l'
- g s
\
s s! x\ i CALM
~
W -~
=
on s , 7___ - E I k . .
\ n
-i
'Q 1 5 p'! \ L
.lll%
N_ 30
.N SW N_ ' 5' SE S
Note: Representative of Meteorological Data Filed (Elevation ve ade 13I feet) SU R FA C E WIND ROSE A 'm McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION Figure 2.4-3
( 4 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF McGUlRE NUCLEAR STATION ( 4.1 THERMAL EFFECTS 4.1.3 LAKE NORMAN MONITORING PROGRAM , Average, warmest and coolest temperatures measured in front of Cowans Ford Dam are shown in Tables 4.1-6, 4.1-7 and 4.1-8 respectively. Dissolved oxygen concentrations at the same location are listed in Table 4.1-9 4.1.6 EFFECT OF WARMED DISCHARGE ON LAKE WATERS Table 4.1-10 shows the expected monthly average, maximum daily average, and maximum instantaneous discharge temperatures from McGuire and the expected monthly average and maximum daily average ambient surface temperatures in Lake Norman for normal and extreme conditions. The expected vertical temperature profiles at the mouth of McGuire's discharge canal for each month of the year (normal climatic conditions) are shown on Figure 4.1-11. The vertical temper:ture profiles expected in front of Cowans Ford Dam while McGuire is operating at full load are shown on Figure 4.1-12 and Figure 4.1-13 shows the temperature profiles expected near the northern and eastern edges of the mixing zonc. Figures 4.1-14, 4.1-15 and 4.1-16 give the same information for extreme climatic conditions. p in July under extreme conditions the cooling water discharge will have a dissolved oxygen concentration of 3 mg/l. About 1800 ccres will be required to aerate this discharge to a concentration of 4 mg/1, and 3900 acres of the lake will have concentrations less than 5 mg/1. In August the discharge concentration will be 2 n 9/1. Five hundred acres will have a concentration less than 3 mg/1, 2300 ac.res will have concentration less than 4 mg/1, and 4400 acres will have less than 5 mg/1. The discharge dissolved oxygen concentration in September will exceed 5 mg/1. 4.1.7 EL9 LOGICAL EFFECTS The studies described in 4.1.6 showed that even in the extreme composite year, sufficient cool water will be available to prevent monthly average discharge temperatures f rom exceeding 95 F (Table 4.1-1), and that the discharge will meet North Carolina water quality standards at the boundary of its prescribed mixing zone. Under normal conditions, studies show that McGuire could avoid using its ; lower intake, and still not produce discharge temperatures in excess of 95 F. i By using the cool water under normal conditions, it is possible to restrict the i discharge temperatures to 90 F (Table 4.1-2). Unless altered by artificial means, the natural characteristic thermal strati- . fication sequences of the mesotrophic and eutrophic impoundments of the Piedmont of North and South Carolina, result in rapid generation of hypolimnetic oxygen deficits, in some instances, the water layer above the bottom of the reservoir ; is depleted of oxygen by mid-May or even earlier, and in nearly all instances a zero value is attained by late August. These oxygen deficit conditions initially found just above the bottom spread throughout the hypolimnion l l ER Supplement 3 - 4-1 2
producing a substantial water mass that is anaerobic and ecologically hostile to fish and benthic organisms that require dissolved oxygen. Associated with the absence of oxygen in the natural hypolimnion is generally found an increase in the concentrations of reduced iron and manganese. The higher solubility levels of these two elements under anaerobic conditions permits solution from the sediments of the iron and manganese rich soils of this area. Also, associated with the oxygen deficit of the hypolimnion is an increase in iron phosphate complexes, also, solubilizing from the bottom sediments. The normal or natural overturn pattern of the reservoirs of this area, is generally found to follow a gradual mixing process from the surface down as the surface waters cool, until finally, the overlying water has attained the same temperature as that of the deepest levels. Under this unstable condition, the final overturn proceeds, usually, overnight under cold and windy conditions. This final overturn generally occurs in October or November. During a natural overturn a temporary condition of a marginal oxygen concentration may occur throughout the reservoir. This undersaturated condition with respect to dissolved oxygen will persist until reareation of surface waters overcomes the comsumption of oxygen due to inorganic oxygen demand (oxidation of reduced iron and manganese) and biochemical oxvgen demand (aerobic decomposition). Thus, the normal sequence of stratification ard generation of oxygen deficits in the hypo 11mnion with an Autumn overturn, in the reservoirs of the Piedmont, is basically a natural phenomenon. Reservoirs built by Duke on the Catawba River do not follow the natural pattern of stratification outlined above. The hydroelectric impoundments on the Catawba River, except Loke Norman with its upstream under-water weir, all operate with deep intakes for nower generation. Characteristic of these is Lake Wylie where the hydropower orerating schedule of the impoundment has esteblished a rate of withdrawal resulting in practical exhaustion of hypolimnetic waters and consequently a gradual overturn by late summer, in Lake Norman, withdrawal of hypolimnetic waters by thermal stations produces a similar effect. Associated with the gradual overturn is an increase in dissolved oxygen for the total depth of the lake and reprecipitation of the iron and manganese to the bottom sediments. It might also be noted that the concept of early overturn, or destratification by artificial means, to prevent the formation of hypolimnetic waters with low oxygen content is a procedure that is becoming more widely used to optimize water quality. "The first attempt I at mixing large bodies of water was reported by Hooper, Ball and Tanner in 1952 in their article entitled 'An Experiment in the Artificial Circulation of a Small Michigan Lake.' In the years between then and now (1964), at least 18 destratification attempts have been made. Most of thege have caused an improvement in the water quality of the impoundment or lake." I Hooper, F.F., R.C. Ball, and H.A. Tanner, "An Experiment in the Artificial Circulation of a Small Michigan Lake". Trans. Am. Fisheries Soc. 82: 222-41. July 1952. 2 Symons, J.M., S.R. Weibel, and G.G. Robeck, " Influence of Impoundments on Water Quality-A Review of Literature and Statement of Research Needs." PHS Publ. No. 999-WP-18, Ocotber 1964, Revised 1966. 78pp. ER Supplement 3 4-2
i l Therefore, it might be postulated that .from evidence al ready established on lakes throughout the country, hypolimnetic withdrawal has no detrimental effect, i but, most probably, tends to improve ecological conditions, According to j Symons Weibel and Robeck (1966) " mixing would prevent: (1) low dissolved ' oxygen concentrations; (2) increased iron and manganese concentrations: (3) production of hydrogen sulfide and (4) increase in color, in the , hypolimnion. Mixing would, however, prevent the accumulation of cool waters in the impoundment bottom and might increase overall productivity of the lake by recycling back into the euphotic zone nutrients released during organism decomposition.o2 The projected use of hypolimnetic water in Lake Norman, which could result in an early overturn, will actually be to the ecological benefit of this reservoir. . 1 The record of hypolimnetic oxygen deficit in Lake Norman, since its forma tion is shown on the accompanying table. The dates describe the earliest date at , which the deepest sample at the Cowans-Ford water sampling station fell below 1.0 mg/1. The second date is the last sampling date on which zero values in l the deepest water were also recorded. The precise date of overturn cannot be established exactly, since sampling dates were at a monthly interval and the overturn occurred between the dates shown. Based on the data below, in the event of an August overturn, there would be a period of approximately three months in each year which would remain with an oxygen credit, rather than an oxygen debit, in the hypolimnion. Period of 0xygen Deficit in Lake Norman Station 109.0 0 Year A Cowans Ford Dam B C i 1963 Aug. 5 Nov. 18 Dec. 9 1964 Aug. 25 Nov. 16 Dec. 10 t 1965 Aug. 18 Nov. 4 Dec. 13 , 1966 Sept. 9 Oct. 27- Nov. 23
~
1967 Sept. 1 Nov. 3 Dec. 3 ! 1968 Sept. 1 - Dec. 3 1969 Nov. 11 - Dec. 11 ' 1970 Aug. 18 Nov. 23 Dec. I ! 1971 Aug. 19 Nov. 10 Dec. 2 A - First Sampling Date when DO was 1.0 in sample collected at the bottom. ; B - Last Sampling Date when D0 was 1.0 in sample collected at the bottom. t C.- Sampling Date following 8, which showed a well mixed Lake. ! We conclude, therefore, that hypolimnetic pumping in Lake Norman will prove ' beneficial to the aquatic biota, t 2 Synons, J.M., S.R. Weibel, and G.G. Robeck, " Influence of impoundments on i Water Quality-A Review of Literature and Statement of Research Needs." PHS ; Publ. No. 999-WP-18, October 1964, Revised 1966. 78pp. ER Supplement 3 l 4-3 -
O O O Table 4.1-6 Average Temperatures Measured in Front of Cowans Ford Dam, 1963-1970 Depth Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. (Feet) 1 %.3 42.3 46.1 58.2 65.1 76.3 80.9 80.2 75.5 68.6 59.0 49.9 5 - - - - - 75.6 80.5 80.0 75.4 - - -
- 10 44.2 42.3 45.5 56.7 63.8 74.4 80.1 79.5 75.I 68.4 58.9 49.9 15 - - - - -
71.8 78.4 78.7 75.1 - - - m 20 %.1 42.2 45.1 55.3 61.4 69.7 76.0 77.3 74.7 68.2 58.8 49.8 E- 25 - - - - - 67.1 72.0 74.6 74.6 - - - B E 30 M.0 42.2 M.6 53.1 58.3 63.7 68.5 71.3 72.8 68.0 58.7 49.7 - A 35 - - - - - 60.7 64.1 68.1 72.3 - - - w 40 %.0 42.1 44.4 51.1 54.4 57.8 61.9 64.7 68.3 66.7 58.6 49.8 50 43.9 42.1 44.2 50.4 51.9 54.2 57.8 59.4 61.8 64.8 58.2 49.8 60 43.9 42.1 44.1 49.4 50.7 52.6 54.7 56.5 57.5 61.4 57.7 49.7 70 43.9 42.1 44.1 49.1 50.3 52.0 53.6 54.7 55.6 57.3 56.8 49.7 80 43.8 42.1 43.9 48.7 50.0 51.6 53.I 53.8 54.4 55.4 55.3 49.7
-90 43.8 42.1 43.8 47.9 49.7 51.2 52.6 53.1 53.5 54.1 54.1 49.6 100- 43.8 42.1 43.7 47.9 49.6 50.9 52.1 52.7 52.9 53.7 53.8 49.6 110 43.9 42.1 43.6 47.8 49.3 50.7 51.8 52.0 52.5 49.8 53.2 49.7 120 - '- - - - - - - -
52.6 - - 4
Table 4.1-7 Warmest Temperatures Measured in Front of Cowans Ford Dam, 1963-1970 Depth Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. (Feet) 1 48.5 65.5 52.5 69.0 76.0 86.8 86.0 86.4 79.0 72.0 63.5 53.2 5 48.5 45.1 51.0 69.0 74.5 83.8 85.5 86.0 79.0 71.9 63.5 53.2 10 48.5 45.6 49.9 69.0 74.2 80.2 84.7 85.9 79.0 71.9 63.2 53.2 15 48.5 h4.9 48.5 68.5 74.0 77.0 82.5 85.0 79.0 71.9 63.2 53.2 20 48.5 45.8 49.2 68.5 73.1 74.5 81.0 80.9 78.8 71.9 63.1 53.2 p 25 48.5 44.9 48.9 64.5 71.8 74.5 77.9 80.6 78.0 71.9 63.0 53.2 30 48.5 45.7 48.1 64.5 64.5 68.0 77.0 80.6 78.1 71.8 63.0 53.2 $ 35 48.5 44.8 48,1 64.5 64.2 67.0 76.9 68.2 80.5 71.5 62.9 53.2 40 48.5 45,2 48.1 64.5 64.1 63.5 66.2 75.0 79.5 71.2 62.9 53.2 50 48.5 45.2 48.1 64.5 63.5 60.2 61.5 70.5 74.0 71.0 62. 9 53.2 60 48.5 4.0. t 48.1 55.0 53.8 55.4 59.0 67.0 70.0 69.9 62.1 53.2 70 48.5 45.0 48.1 54.9 53.7 55.0 59.0 61.9 67.1 66.0 61.9 53.2 80 48.5 45.0 M.0 54.1 53.3 54.8 59.0 58.8 61.2 60.0 59.8 53.2 90 48.5 44.9 48.0 54.0 53.3 54.2 58.2 58.6 59.4 56.7 55.3 53.2 100 48.5 44.9 48.0 53.9 53.3 54.0 56.0 58.4 58.2 56.0 55.3 53.2 110 48.5 44.9 48.0 53.9 53.3 53.8 55.8 58.4 55.5 56.0 55.3 53.2 120 - 41.2 45.2 - 49.8 53.3 51.8 51.1 52.5 54.2 54.0 49.8 e 9 9
- 7. .
Page I of 5 Table 4,1-9 Dissolved Oxygen Concentrations Heasured in Front of Cowans Ford Dam 1967 Depth Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. (Feet) 1 7.8 7.3 7.7 8.0 9.3 5 7.9 7.6 7.4 - - 10 8.1 7.6 7.4 7.7 9.0 IS 7.5 7.6 7.4 - - g 20 6.6 7.6 7.4 7. 7 9.5 E y 25 2.6 7.6 7.4 - - g 30 2.1 7.6 7.3 7.5 9.2 S
" 35 1.4 7.6 7.3 - -
w 40 1.4 7.2 7.1 7.5 9.3 50 1.5 7.0 6.4 7.5 8.9 60 1.5 0.1 0.4 7.4 9.2 70 1.6 0.1 0.3 6.7 9.2 80 2.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 8.7 90 2.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 8.7 100 1.4 0.2 0.2 0.4 8.6 105 0.4 - - - - 110 0.1 0.2 1.0 7.9 O O O
O O . O Table 4.1-8 Coolest Temperatures Measured in Front of Cowans Ford Dam, 1963-1970 Depth Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. (Feet) 1 40.7 40.5 41.0 49.8 54.5 68.1 76.6 74.2 71.5 62.1 55.0 44.2 5 40.5 41.0 41.0 49.2 60.9 67.8 44.2 76.3 76.1 71.5 62.1 55.0 10 40.2 39.9 41.0 48.0 53.0 66.5 76.1 75.3 55.0 44.3 71.5 62.1 15 40.2 41.0 40.9 47.8 60.1 65.5 44.3 74.0 74.0 71.3 62.1 55.0 g 20 40.2 39.5 40.9 47.5 52.7 65.0 44.2 69.8 72.5 71.2 62.1 55.0 { 25 40.2 41.0 40.9 47.5 55.8 61.5 61.2 68.0 71.0 62.0 55.0 44.2 30 40.2 39.5 40.9 47.5 51.5 56.0 57.6 57.4 63.0 62.0 55.0 44.2 A 35 40.2 41.0 40.9 47.0 50.1 54.0 55.2 57.4 55.0 44.2 61.0 62.0 40 40.2 39.5 40.9 46.8 49.9 52.2 54.0 54.9 55.0 44.2 56.0 60.6 50 40.2 39.5 41.0 46.2 49.0 51.0 52.2 51.8 51.5 56.6 55.0 44.2 60 40.2 39.5 41.0 45.9 48.9 50.2 51.0 51.0 51.0 54.1 44.2 53.1 70 40.2 39.5 41.0 45.5 48.0 50.0 50.5 50.8 50.8 54.0 44.2 53.0 80 40.2 39.8 41.0 45.2 47.3 49.8 50.1 50.1 50.1 52.0 53.4 44.2 90 40.2 39.8 41.0 45.2 46.9 48.2 50.0 50.0 50.1 52.0 52.2 44.2 100 40.1 39.5 41.0 45.1 46.5 48.0 49.9 50.0 50.1 51.8 44.3 52.0 - 110 40.0 40.9 41.0 45.0 46.2 47.9 49.8 49.8 50.1 51.2 46.0 51.3 120 41.2 42.2 46.1 47.9 49.9 50.8 51.8 51.1 52.5 46.8
Page 2 of 5 Table 4.1-9 continued Olssolved Oxygen Concentrations Measured in Front of Cowans Ford Dam 1968 Depth Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. (Feet) 1 11.6 11.8 12.1 9.8 8.8 8.4 7.7 6.3 7.2 7.8 9.6 5 - - - - 8.9 8.4 5.7 6.5 7.5 - - t to 11.5 12.1 12.6 9.6 8.7 8.5 8.0 6.6 7.8 7.7 9.5 15 - - - - - 8.5 7.6 5.7 6.3 - - 9 20 11.5 11.7 12.4 9.4 8.5 7.7 7.9 3.5 6.7 7.7 9.6 I w 4 25 - - - - - 7.2 7.6 0.8 7.2 - - 3 30 11.4 12.0 12.0 9.0 7.6 7.0 4.6 0.5 6.9 7.9 9.6 3 35 - - - - - 6.3 2.8 0.5 3.7 - - [ 40 11.1 11.4 7.8 9.3 7.6 5.2 3.1 0.4 1.0 5.5 j 9.5 50 11.1 11.4 11.8 9.2 7.6 5.2 3.2 0.6 0.0 7.9 9.4 60 11.1 11.6 11.5 9.1 7.6 5.5 3.4 0.8 0.1 7.4 j 9.6 70 11.4 11.6 11.5 9.1 7.6 5.7 3.6 1.5 0.2 0.4 9.2 80 11.3 11.5 11.2 8.7 7.7 5.7 3.8 1.5 0.4 0.4 9.2 90 11.3 11.0 11.5 8.8 7.8 5.9 4.1 1.3 0.2 0.4 9.2 l 100 11.3 11.3 11.4 6.0 7.4 5.7 4.2 1.6 0.1 0.6 9.0 i 105 - - - - - 110 10.7 11.3 11.4 7.5 7.4 4.3 3.6 1.3 - - 8.2 i L________________________________
Page 3 of 5 Table 4.1-9 Continued Dissolved Oxygen Concentrations Measured in Front of Cowans Ford Dam 1969 Depth Jan. Feb. March April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. (Feet) 1 11.0 11.6 11.7 10.8 9.7 8.4 7.6 7.3 6.8 7.9 8.4 9.8 5 - - - - 9.8 8.3 7.6 7.2 6.9 - - 10 11.0 11.7 11.7 10.1 9.8 8.3 7.3 7.1 5.8 7.9 8.2 9.8 15 - - - - 12.5 8.3 4.9 7.1 6.5 - - g 20 10.7 11.7 11.6 10.0 9.2 8.4 4.3 7.0 6.7 7.9 8.3 9.8 u, j 25 - - - - 9.5 7.8 2.8 6.8 6.6 - - 30 11.0 11.7 11.8 10.0 9.3 6.9 - 5.9 6.7 7.7 8.2 9.6 3 s 35 - - - - 8.9 6.6 2.6 0.2 6.3 - - w 40 11.0 11.5 11.6 10.1 8.9 6.1 2.7 0.3 1.8 7.7 8.3 9.9 50 11.0 11.5 11.5 10.1 9.5 6.3 2.8 0.6 2.1 7.5 7.3 10.0 60 10.9 11.5 11.4 10.1 8.9 7.0 4.1 1.9 2.0 7.6 6.9 9.9 70 11.1 11.4 11.7 9.7}}