Text

Alabama Power Co Environ Rept OL Stage for Jm Farley Nuclear Plant
	ML20069G257
Person / Time
Site:	Farley
Issue date:	07/28/1975
From:	; ALABAMA POWER CO.
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20069G196	List: ML20069G193; ML20069G206; ML20069G215; ML20069G229; ML20069G237; ML20069G257;
References
	ENVR-750728, NUDOCS 9406090270
	Download: ML20069G257 (640)
	v • d • e

.

l O

ALABAMA POWER COMPANY'S ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT--

OPERATING LICENSE STAGE FOR THE O JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT

!Ns, p M M M jhe

43 Q INTRODUCTION ;

The Environmental Repcrt - Operating License Stage for the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 is submitted in response to the Atomic Energy Ccmmission's revised Appendix D of 10 CFR 50. To achieve conformity with the Ccmmission's Regulatory Guide 4.2, Preparation of ;

Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Plants, issued in final form in March, 1973, a cross-reference to the applicant's Environmental Report -

Construction Permit Stoge and the Commission's Environmental Statement has been developed as follcws:

4 The Table of Contents of Regulatory Guide 4.2 was utilized as the base for the cross-reference system. Where material requested by l Regulatory Guide 4.2 has been previously addressed in either the applicant's l Environmental Report - Construction Permit Stage or the Commission's Environmental' Statement, it is referenced.to the appropriate section number in Regulatory Guide 4.2, Where supplemental information is supplied by the Environmental Report - Operating License Stage, appropriate reference to the added material is indicated.

It is the purpose of the cross-reference system to achieve ,

conformity with Regulatory Guide 4.2 while avoiding repetition of material which has already been adequately covered in either the Environmental Report - ;

Construction Permit Stage or in the Commission's Environmental Statement.

This is consistent with the instructions given in General Discussion in Regulatory Guide 4.2, which state that the Environmental Report - Operating i Stage is to be essentially an updating of the first report. Following the m

i I

f specific instructions of Regulatory Guide 4.2, additional information'is furnished to:

i

1. Discuss differences between currently projected environ- i mental effects of the nuclear plant and the effects discussed :

E in the Environmental Report submitted at the Construction Stage. ,

i k

2. Discuss the res6ts of all studies which were not completed at the time of the pre-construction review and which were speci-

i fied to be completed before the pre-operatiomil review. _-

3. Describe in detail the monitoring programs which have been -f and which will be undertaken to determine the effects uf the operating plant on the environment. )

4. Discuss planned studies not yet completed. j Constructica Permits CPPR-85 and CPPR-86 issued to the Alabama I Power Company by'the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission on August 16, 1972 were ;

issued subject to the following four conditions for the protection of the 1 i

environment:

(1) "The applicant will define a comprehensive environmental .

monitoring program (chemical, biological,, thermal, and f radiological), extending for at least one year of plant operation, and considered by the Regulatory staff to'be '

adequate to determine changes which may occur in land and water ecosystems as a result of plant operations. '

If adverse effects are detected, the applicant will ;

analyze the effects and provide a course of action to '

alleviate those attributed to plant operation. Data collected during the monitoring activities will be made available to the public through the Commission's local' repository in Dothan, Alabama."

(2)"The applicant will develop and maintain a program for collecting comprehensive weather data from the site meteorological tower for a minimum of one year prior-to the commencement of facility operations for the purpose ,

of determining the frequency of natural occurring fogging .

A '

v 11 !

's. conditions; and by using analytical methods, calculate the k'- I extent of cooling tower plumes and determine the probability of incremental fogging over those sectors that can be attri-buted to plant facility operation. The information collected and the calculations will be made available to the public through the Commission's local repository in Dothan, Alabama. !

Although it appears unlikely, if significant adverse effects such as icing or fogging conditions which create a hazard to I

traffic are observed, the applicant will set up a system to warn the public about such hazards."

(3) "The applicant will obtain necessary specifications from the manufacturers of the cooling towers and the turbine generators and make a detailed calculation of the noise '

level at the site boundary paralleling Highway 95."

(4) "The applicant will install gaging equipment in the Chatta-hoochee River in the vicinity of the facility so that continuous flow conditions of the river can be recorded.

Since the impact of entrainment of aquatic life depends upon the proportion of the total volume of river water that is '

diverted through the facility, the applicant will also make a further assessment of the impact of entrainment during minimum and average flow conditions."

f-~g Condition one above is specifically addressed in the following V

sections: 6.2.1 Radiological Monitoring; 6,2.2 Chemical Effluent Monitoring; ,

6.2.3 Thermal Effluent Monitoring; and 6.2.5 Ecological Monitoring.

Condition two of the Construction Permit is specifically addressed in Section 6.2.4, Meteorologica. Monitoring. .

Condition three of the Construction Permit is addressed in Section 5.7.1, cooling Tower Noise.

Condition four is addressed in Section 6.3.1, River Flow Monitoring.

i I

<- T

\~ l l

-l 111 t

c

.s

O O 0 REFERENCES ADDITIONAL INFORMATION' TITLE APCO AEC SUPPLIED

-SECTION ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Environmental Report Final Environmental-(AEC GUIDE) Construction Staga Statement Section Page-

1. PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED FACILITY 1.1 Need for Power 1.1 X 1.1 1.1-1 1.1.1 Load characteristics 1.2 X 1.1.2 Power supply 1.1 X Appendix B.12 1.1.3 Capacity Requirement 1.1 X Appendix B.3 1.1.4 Statement on area need 1.1.4 1.1-6 1.2 Other Objectives 1.3 Consequences of Delay Appendix B.3 X

2. THE SITE 2.1 Site Location and 1.2 II-A Layout 2.1 2.2 1

2.2 Regional Demography, - 2.4.8.1 II-B Land and Water'Use through II-D 2.2 2.2-1 2.'4.8.10 2.4.4.1 2.3- Regional Historic, Scenic, Cultural and

Natural Landmarks '2.4.2 II-C iv-

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

r~s ex e~\

O. NA J REFERENCES TITLE APCO AEC ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Environmental Report Final Environmental SUPPLIED SECTION ENVIROMiENTAL REPORT (AEC GUIDE) Construction Stage Statement Section Page 2.4 Geology 2.4.3 II-D.1 -

II-D.3 2.5 Hydrology 2.4.4 II-D.2 2.4.5 Appendix B.21 Appendix B.5 2.6 Meteorology 2.4.6 II-D.4 2.6 2.6-1 2.7 Ecology Appendix C-C 2.4.7 II-E 2.7 2.7-1 2.4.9 Appendix 1 2.8 Background radio- 4.1 V-D.5 2.8 2.8-1 logical characteris- 4.8 tics Appendix B.20 2.9 Other Environmental Features

3. THE PLANT 3.1 External Appearance 2.2 1.4.5 III-A 3.2 Reactor and Steam- 2.2 I Electric System III-C 3.3 Plant Water Use 2.2 V-B 3.3 3,3-1 3.2.4 XII-C 3.3.1 3.3.2 Y _

p r rm N' '-

TITLE APCO ADDITIO M TION C

p SECTION ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Environmental Report Final Environmental (AEC GUIDE) Construction Stage Statement Section Page 3.3 (Contd.) Plant Water Use 3.3.3.1 (Contd.) 3.4.1 3.4.2 3.5.1 3.5.2 3.4 Heat Dissipation System 2.2 III-C 3.2.4 3.3.3.1 III-B.1 3.4 3.4-1 3.3.4 3.3.5 XII-C 3.4.1 3.6.4 3.6.5 Appendix B.1 B.5 B.6 B.7 B8 B.11 B.13 B.14 thru B.19 3.5 gadwaste Systems 4.2 III-D.2 3.5 3.5-1 4.3 Appendix A Attach. K.8 vi

O O O REFERENCES AEC ADDITONAL INFORMATION TITAL APCO Final Environmental SUPPLIED SECTION ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT ivironmental Report (AEC GUIDE) Construction Stage Statement Section Page 3.6 Chemical and Biocide 3.4.1 III-D.3 3.6 3.6-1 Wastes 3.4.2 Appendix B.5 XII-B.5 B.6 B.7 B.8 B.9 B.10 B.11 B.19 l 3.7 Sanitary and other 3.5 III-D.3 Waste Systems 3.8 Radioactive Materials 4.2.1 3.8 3.8-1 Inventory 3.9 Transmission Facili- 2.2 III-B 3.9 3.9-1 ties 2.3 3.2.1

! 4. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF SITE PREPARATION, PLANT AND TRANSMISSION j

FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION l

l 4.1 Site Preparation and 2.2 IV-A .1 l Plant Construction 5.1

! 5.1.1 1 5.1.2 VII-A 5.1.3 5.1.4 7.0 Vii . _ __ _ - . _

O r. p b V REFERENCES TITLE APCO AEC ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Environmental Report Final Environmental SUPPLIED SECTION ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT (AEC GUIDE) Construction Stage Statement Section Page 4.1 (Contd.) Site Preparation and Appendix A Plant Construction Attach. K.15.5 (Contd.)

4.2 Transmission Facili- 3.2.1 IV-A.2 4.2 4.2-1 ties Construction 7.0 VII-B 4.3 Resources Committed 7.0 IX 8.0

5. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PLANT OPERATION 5.1 Effects of Operation 3.2.4 5.2.1 V-A.3 of Heat Dissipation 3.3.1 5.2.3 V-B System 3.3.3.1 Appendix A V-C 5.1 5.1-1 3.3.4 Attach K.l.1 VII-A 3.3.5 K.1.2 XII 3.3.6 K.2.1 3.3.7 K.2.2 3.4.1 K.3 3.6.3 K.4.1 3.6.4 K.ll 3.6.5 Appendix B 5.2 Radiological Impact on 5.2 5.2-1 Biota Other Than Man 5.2.1 Exposure Pathways V-C.1 5.2-1 V-C.2.d 5.2.2 Radioactivity in 4.7 V-C.2.d 5.2-1 Environment V-C.I viii

r) r% -

/

.)

REFERENCES

-TITLE APCO AEC ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SECTION ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Environmental Report Final Environmental SUPPLIED (AEC GUIDE) Construction Stage Statement Section Page.

5.2.3 Dose Rate Estimates V-C.2.d 5.2-3 V-C.1 5.3 Radiological Impact 5.3 5.3-1 on Man 5.3.1 Exposure Pathways 4.4 V-D 5.3-1 5.3.2 Liquid Effluents 4.2.1.1 V-C.2.d 5.3-2 4.3.1 V-D.2 4.5.2 V-D.3.b Appendix A Attach. K.8 5.3.3 Gaseous Effluents 4.2.1.2 4.3.2 V-D.1 4.5.1 V-D.3.a 5.3-3 Appendix A V-D . 6 Attach K.8 XII 5.3.4 Direct Radiation 5.3.4.1 Radiation from 4.4.1 XII-B Facility 4.6 5.3.4.2 Transportation of 4.2.1.3 Radioactive 3.2.2 V-E Materials 5.3.5 Summary of Annual- 4.5 V-D.3 Radiation Doses 4.6 V-E 5.3-3 ix eyeywi e ---

mevc- g h e *.

O O O i

REFERENCES AEC ADDITIONAL INFORMATION i TITLE APCO Environmental Report Final Environmental SUPPLIED l

SECTION ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT (AEC GUIDE) Construction Stage Statement Section Page 5.4 Effects of Chemical 3.4 V-A.3 5.4 5.4-1 and Biocide Dis- Appendix A V-B charges Attach. K.3 V-C.2.C K.5.2 XII-B K.6 5.5 Effects of Sanitary 3.5 and Other Waste Discharges 5.6 Effects of Operation 3.2.1 V-A.2 and Maintenance of

Transmission System 5.7 Other Effects 3.2.3 V-A.1 5.7 5.7-1 Appendix A V-A.3 Attach. K.4.1 5.8 Resources Committed 7.0 VIII 8.0 IX 5.9 Decommissioning and Dismantling Appendix B-30 IX

6. EFFLUENT AND ENVIRON-MENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAMS 6.1 Applicant's Pre-operational Environ-mental Programs 6.1.1 Surface Waters s

x

^

N-

)

REFERENCES TITLE APCO SECTION AEC ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Environmental Report (AEC GUIDE) Construction Stage Final Environmental SUPPLIED Statement Section Page 6.1.1.1 Physical and Chemical 2.4.4.2 V-C.3 Parameters 2.4.5 6.2.2 6.2-20 XII-B 3.7 6.2.3 6.2-21 Appendix B.5 6.3 6.3-1 6.1.1.2 Ecological Parameters 2.4.5 V-C.3 2.4.7 6.2.5 6.2-24 2.4.9 3.7 3.8 6.1.2 Ground Water 6.1.2.1 Physical and Chemical 2.4.4.1 Parameters 3.3.2.

6.1.2.2 Models 6.1.3 Air 6.1.3.1 Meteorology 2.4.6 XII-B.3 2.6 3.3.4 XII-D 2.6-1 6.1.3.2 Models Appendix A V-A-3 XII-D 6.1.4 Land 6.1.4.1 Geology and Soils 2.4.3 2.4.4.1 6.1.4.2 Land Use and 2.4.8.1 II-B Demographic Surveys through 2.4.8.10 xi

O O)

% V REFERENCES TITLE APCO AEC ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SECTION- ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Environmental Report Final Environmental SUPPLIED (AEC GUIDE) Construction Stage Statement Section Page 6.1.4.3 Ecciogical Parameters 2.4.7 II-E 2.4.9 6.1.5 Radiological Surveys 4.1 V-D.5 6.2.1.2 6.2-5 4.'

6.2 Applicant's Proposed Operational Monitor-ing Programs 6.2.1 Radiological Monitoring 6.2.1.1 Plant Ef fluent 4.2 V-D.5 6.2.1.1 6.2-1 Monitoring System 6.2.l.2 Environmental Radio- 4.7 6.2.1.2 logical Monitoring 4.8 V-D.5 6.2-5 6.2.2 Chemical Effluent 3.3.4 Monitoring 3.4.1 XII-B.4 6.2.2 6.2-20 3.4.2 3.4.3 6.2.3 Thermal Effluent 3.6.6 V-C.2.b 6.2.3 6.2-21 Monitoring 3./

6.2.4 Meteorological 6.2.4 6.2-23 Monitoring 2.6 2.6-1 6.2.5 Ecological. Monitoring 3.6.6 V-C.3 6.2.5 6.2-24 3.7 3.8 xii

. _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . . ~ . _ . . . - . _ . _

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION g TITLE APC0 EC

.ENVTRD'; DENTAL REPORT SUPPLIED SECTION Environmental Report Final Environmental (AEC GUIDE) Construction Stage Statement Section Page 6.3 Related Environmental 6.3 6.3-1 Measurement and Monitoring Programs

7. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF ACCIDENTS 7.1 Plant Accidents I. Introduction to 4.9 VI 7.1 7-1 Involving Radio-activity 3.0 Radwaste System 7,2 7-13 Failure 3.1 Equipment Leakage or- IV of 4.9 VI-A Malfunction 3.2 Release of Waste Gas IV of 4.9 VI-A Storage Tank Contents IX of 4.9 3.3 Release of Liquid IV-A of 4.9 VI-A Waste Storage Tank Contents 3.0 Fission Products to Primary and Secondary 7.4 7-19 Systems (PWR) 5.1 Fuel Cladding Defects VI of 4.9 VI-A and Steam Generator Leak xiii t________________.__._._ _. _ _ _

J

O O o; REFERENCES AEC ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TITLE APCO SUPPLIED SECTION ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Environmental Report Final Environmental Construction Stage Statement Section Page (AEC GUIDE) 5.2 Off-design Transients That Induce Fuel Failures Aoove Those Expected and Steam Generator Leak (Such as Flow Blockage and Flux- Maldistributions) VI of 4.9 VI-A 5.3 Steam Generator Tube Rupture VI of 4.9 VI-A 6.0 Refueling Accidents 7.5 7-28 6.1 Fuel Bundle Drop VII of 4.9 VI-A VIII of 4.9 6.2 Heavy Object Drop onto VII of 4.9 VI-A Fuel in Core VIII of 4.9

, 7.0 Spent Fuel Handling Accident 7.6 7-36 7.1 Fuel Assembly Drop in VII of 4'.9 VI-A Fuel Storage Pool VIII of 4.9 7.2 Heavy Object Drop onto VII of 4.9 VI-A Fuel Rack VIII of 4.9 7.3 Fuel Cask Drop VII of 4.9 VI-A VIII of 4.9 r

xiv

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . . . _ _ . ~ . - . _ _ . . . - - - - - - . . . ..-_ _ _. -. , . - . . -. .. . . . _ , . . . - . - _ . _ - _ . . _ . .. ___

O :O OL REFERENCES TITLE APCO AEC ADDITIONAL INFORMATION- 3 SECTION- ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Environmental Report Final Environmental SUPPLIED *

(AEC GUIDE) Construction Stage Statement Section Page 8.0 Accident Initiation 7.7 7 Events Considered in Design Basis Evaluatic n in the Safety Analysis Report 8.1- Loss of Coolant IX of 4.9 VI-A Accidents Small Pipe Break Large Pipe Break ,

8.la Break in Instrument :

Line from Primary III of 4.9 .VI-A System that Penetrates ,

'the Containment-8.2a- Rod Ejection Accident IX of 4.9 VI-A 8.3a Steamline Breaks' IX of 4.9 VI-A (Outside Containment) .

Small Break Large Break

~ 7.2 ' Other Accidents

8. ECONOMICAND SOCIAL EFFECTS OF PLANT CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION i

r XV-

_._.______._.___.___m_ _ . - . _ . . - - . . . . . , . . . . _ _ , . _ - , . _ . . . _ , . . _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ . . _ . . _ . . - , . _ . _ . _ . _ - , - _ . . . . . . _ . . . _ . . _ ~ . . . . . - . _ , . . . . . . _ . - . , . _ .. .,~ _ _ .... - ,..,.__ .

O O O REFERENCES TITLE APCO AEC ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SECTION ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Environmental Report Final Environmental SUPPLIED (AEC GUIDE) Construction Stage Statement Section Page 8.1 Benefits 3.1 3.2 IV-4 Appendix A XI-B Attach. A C

E F

G 8.2 Costs Appendix A IV-4 XI-B

9. ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES AND SITES 9.1 Alternatives not 1.0 Requiring the 6.0-A XI-A Creation of New Generating Capacity 9.2 Alternatives Requiring the Creation of New Generating Capacity 9.2.1 Selection of Candidate 1.2 I-A Areas 1.3 II-D.1 1.5 XI-A 6.0 9.2.2 Selection of Candidate 1.2 I-A Site-Plant 1.3 II-D.1 Alternatives 1.4 XI-A 1.5 6.0 xvi-

- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . = . - . . . . ,. -. - . -. . -_. - . , . - - -. . - . _

O O O REFERENCES ADDIT 10NAL INFORMATION TITLE - APCO AEC Environmental Report Final Environmental SUPPLIED SECTION ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT (AEC CUIDE) Construction Stage Statement Section Page 9.3 Cost Effectiveness 1.2 Comparison of 1.3 Candidate Site-Plant 1.4.3 Alternatives 1.4.4 1.4.5 1.4.6 1.4.7 1.5 6.0

10. PLANT DESIGN ALTERNATIVES 10,1 Cooling. System 3.2.4 (Exclusive of Intake 3.3.3.2 XI-A.3 and Discharge) 3.4 1 6.0 Appendix A Appendix B.6 B.7 B.8 B.15 B.17 10.2 Intake System 6.0 Appendix B.14 B.16 10.3 Discharge System 10.4 Chemical Waste 6.0 XI-B.1.b Treatment

f']\

Q O

rh.,

,)

TITLE APCO C E DITIO N INFO N TION SUPPLIED SECTION ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Environmental Report Final Environmental (AEC GUIDE) Construction Stage Statement Section Page 10.5 Biocide Treatment 3.4.1 6.0 Appendix B.6 B.7 B.8 10.6 Sanitary Waste System 10.7 Liquid Radwaste Systems 10.8 Gaseous Radwaste Syster.s 10.9 Transmission Facilities 3.2.1 6.0 10.10 Other Systems 3.2.2 XI-A.4 3.2.3 6.0

11.

SUMMARY

BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS 7.0 XI-B 11. 11.-l Appendix A Appendix B.9 B.22 B.23 B.24

12. ENVIRONMENTAL APPROVALS AhT CONSULTATION 3.3.6 I-A 3.3.7 3.9 12. 12.-l Appendix B.4 xviii

t 1.0 PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED FACILITY Some of the estbnated peak load and generating capability figures contained in Section 1.1 of this report have been revised to reflect the most recent peak load forecasts, generating unit ratings and availability.

For these reasons some of the figures in this section are not the same as corresponding data in the Construction Permit Stage Report and in testimony presented at the Environmental Hearing. In addition, because of various factors beyond the control of Alabama Power Company, the scheduled initial operation of Farley Unit No. I has been delayed. This delay is such that the unit will not be available during the 1975 summer peak load season.

The schedule for Unit No. 2 will be essentially unchanged and the in-service date will be prior to the summer of 1977.

Table 1.1-1 shows the present estimate and two previous estimates of 1975 peak loads for Alabama Power Company and the other operating L]J companies of the Southern system. This tabulation shows that the present estimate of the diversified Southern system peak load has been reduced by 609 MW since the load estimate of two years ago which was current at the tLme of the environmental hearing for the Farley Nuclear Plant on July 10-12, 1972.

1 At this environmental hearing, Mr. J. H. Miller, Jr., Senior Vice President of Alabama Power Company, testified that based on the planned additions of generating capacity and current estimates of 1975 peak loads, Alabama Power Company's generating reserves would amount to 21.7% with Farley #1 in service and 11.8% without Farley #1. He further testified that the Southern System generating reserves would amount to approximately 17.6% v..ith "ariny "1 in cervice and approximately 14.5%

g y'

.J

- o 1.1-1 Amend. 1 - 11/30/73 h- [s[)

N-- . . a

- - . - - - . . . - - . . . - - - . - - - . - . . . - , . . ~ ~ _ ..- . - - - . . . - . . . _ .n. _,,

.: I s.-

7

.s 4

j; without Earley #1. Using present estimates of 1975 load, plans for. '

generating additions, purchases, and sales, Alabama Power Company's V

j system reserves will amount to 8.9% of load without Farley #1.

However, 2-the Southern System reserves will amount of 17.3% of load. l Alabama Power is planning to obtain power through contractural 1

.f

.i arrangements with its neighboring companies of the Southern System as ',

i needed during 1975 to insure reliable system operation. -j Section 1.1.4 of this report contains a statement on area j need for the southeastern region.

{

j 1.1 NEED FOR POWER

_l Alabama Power Company's maximum territorial peak hour demand ;

?

reached 5248.6 megawatts on July 23, 1973. (This. load does not' include I i

! 78.1 megawatts of load supplied to certain municipalities and co- <j operatives for the account of the Southeastern Power Administration,-

nor do the load and generating capacity figures which follow include this amount of capacity. This peak includes 115.7 megawatts of load of i

4 customers with interruptible contracts that were. interrupted at this? l

< 4 time at the request. of Alabama Power -Company. -The actual load supplied was 115.7 megawatts less or 5132.9. megawatts). l' l i

The Company's long-term average annual; compounded: growth ' rate

] ,

has been approximately 8.3 percent over a.20 year. period. Based on j

~

studies of trends of past load growth, as well as studies of expected Lj l- 1

. increases in sales of energy at load factors consistent with past.

experience, the maximum territorial peak hour demands in' future years

.I

.i are estimated as follows: !

a l

1.1-2

"( )-- Amend. 1 - 11/30/73 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74 i

l k

. ._..:__-.--._.---..--...---.-,--.=. "

. s/

(D 1974 r- 5,586 megawatts 1975 -

6,059 megawatts 1976 - 6,576 megawatts 1977 - 7,136 megawatts The long term growth trends',and future estimated loads are shown graphically on Figure 1.1-1.

The estimated future load growth is based on the most recent projections of the actual load growth experiended through the summer of 1973.

This projected rate of load growth is consistent with the trend for the entire United States. Since 1965 the demand for electric power in the United States hastincreased at an annual average compounded i

~

rate of approximately 8 percent.1 The Federal Power Commission in its Q(m 1 National Power Survey,2 published in 1964, demonstrated a long term growth rate for the period 1920-1963 equivalent to an annual average compounded ,

growth rate of 7.2 percent. The 1970 National Power Survey 3 predicted an even higher annual rate of load growth in the future than the 1964 Survey.

The estimated 1980 nationwide electric energy requirement was placed at 2.8 trillion kilowatt-hours in the 1964 Survey. The 1970 Survey predicted 1

that the 1980 electric energy requirement will reach 3.07 trillion kilowatt-hours, and the 1990 level was placed at 5.8 trillion kilowatt-hours. President. Nixon's Energy Message to Congress 4 in April 1973 recognized a continuation in the growth of electric load and assigned the highest priorities to the research and development needed to provide new sources of electric energy to meet expected requirements. These and e

U 1.1-3 Amend. 1 - 11/30/73 r

V.

l:.

i- 1 l-other studies establish strong justification that the load growth i'

[

experienced in the past will continue 'in future years.

i Prior to the time that the Farley Nuclear Plant is constructed 1

and placed in service, the Company plans to construct- and place in 9

8 service Gaston #5 coal fired generating unit of 910 megawatts net i

capability presently under construction.

I- With the completion of this generating unit, the assignment- l 4

i I

of older coal fueled units to standby service and adjustment in planned i purchases and sales of power to other utilities, the Company's total j generating capability in 1975 will be 6598 megawatts. 2-l i To provide for adequate system reliability, Alabama Power i

j Company plans its generation additions so that each year its total j I' generating capability will exceed its estimated territorial system peak I

hour load by approximately 20% of this load. This 20% reserve in l 1

l

! generation is based on 3% to-account for load swings within the peak

^

hour, 2% for operating margins, and 15% to allow for forced outages of '!

generating units.

2.. Comparing the above 1975 generating capability of 6598 l2.

l, L

. :(

f megawatts with the forecast 1976 peak load of. 6576 megawatts, it is )

l l- apparent that' unless additional generating capacity is added in 1976, l the reserve margin will be only 0.33% of the estimated peak ~ load in l" 2-t 1976. ' Af ter Farley #1 is placed in service in 1976 as proposed,'various I i

y:

anticipated adjustments are made in the purchase and sale of capacity to

'others, and the postponement of planned additional-hydro' capacity-due e :

f to licensing delays, the Company's total generating capability in 1976 !

J J I

. .i l~ 1.1-3A Amend. 11/30/73 .l Amend. 2. 4/19/74 !

_L 1! t

l

= . . -._ -._-- . . . _ . . - . - - _ . _ . . - ._..,-.---..:

< :r

. I i- *

-. r 3 .. .

I t

4- -;

will be 7416 megawatts. This will result in a generating reserve I 2- i

margin in 1976 amountJng to 12.8% of load. l; Comparing the above 1976 generating capability of 7416 mega-l watts with the forecast 1977 peak load of 7136 megawatts, it _is apparent . 'l j

l' t

!> that unless additional generating capacity is also added in 1977, the.

'i t

reserve margin will be an unacceptable 3.9% of the estimated 1977 peak 2 -t ?

i load. Af ter Farley #2 and 100 megawatts of combustion turbines are !

l placed in service in 1977 as proposed, various anticipated adjustments- !

i are made in the purchase and sale of capacity to others, and the post- -{

ponement of planned additional hydro capacity due to licensing delays,- _;

.I the Company's total generating capability in 1977 will be 8335,0 mega ~ 2? i wattr. This will result in a generating reserve margin in 1977 amount- 'i .

i ' 2 .

l-ing to 16.8% of load. l l l'

j. Alabama Power Ccapany is a wholly owned subsidiary of the 4 Sout.bern Company and is closely interconnected with the ~other subsid- i et L 1 aries - Mississippi Power Company, Culf Tower Company and Georgia Power. j i

Company. Because of the physical integration of the facilities of'all ;

.l these companies in accordance with the Securities & Exchange Commission's .

approval under the Public Utilities Holding Company Act of 1935 - :l consideration is also given to the needs of the entire Southern Company

=m i'

system in the planning of additional generating capacity on the Alabama j i

i Power Company system.

l The peak hour load on the Southern Company system in.1976 is

~

, es tima ted to be 20,410 megawatts. At the end of 1975 it is estimated I -

i that the total Southern Company system generating capability will be i

9 l.1-4 Amend. 1 - 11/30/74. !

c Amend. 4/19/74? l

l 3

21,832 negawatte. In 1976 the entimated peak hour load plus generating 2 O reserve requirements, based on 20% of peak load, will amount to 24,492 megawatta. It is therefore apparent that additional generating capacity is needed in 1976 on the Southern Company System to meet acceptable reserve requirements, With the addition of Farley !!1 in 1976 and other 1 planned generating additions oa the Southern System, it is estimated that l the total generating capability in 1976 vill be 24,277 megawatts result-2 ing in a reserve margin of 19% of the es tima ted peak hour load.

The peak hour load on the Southern System in 1977 is estimated to be 22,480 megawatts. Comparing this load with the estimated 1976 generating capability of 24,277.0 megawatts, it is apparent that additional 1 2 generating capacity is also needed in 1977 on the Southern System to meet acceptable reserve requirements. With the addition of Farley //2 in 1977 and other planned generating additions on the Southern System, it is estimated that the total generatin; capacity in 1977 vill be 26,725.0 megawatts resulting in a reserve margin of 18.9% of the estimated peak hour load.

Information on capacity, load and reacrves in 1975 without 2

Farley No. I and in 1976 with and without Farley No. 1 is shown in Table 1.1-2.

I Electrical World, 22nd Annual Electrical Industry Forecast (September 15, 1972),

2 National Power Survey, Vol .1, U. S. Government Printing Office,1964, p.10, 3

The 1970 National Power Survey, Part 1, U. S. Government Printing Office, December 1971, page 1-1-12.

' President Nixon's Energy Message to Congress, Vol. 19, No. 17, Atomic Energy Clearing House, dated April 23, 1973.

e O 1.1-5 Amend 1 - 11/30/73 Amend. 2 - 4/19/64

TABLE 1.1-1 1975 SYSTEM PEAK HOUR LOAD ESTDIATES (Excluding SEPA)

Megawatts Southern Year Ala. Ca. Gulf Miss. System (Diversified)

1. Load estimates of September 1971 1975 6,111 10,578 1,269 1,443 19,219 (In effect at time of Farley environmental hearing of July 10-12,1972.)

2. Present load estimates of 1975 6,059 10,028 1,285 1,412 18,610 September 1973.

1

3. Present load estimates as compared to load estimates at time of environmental hearing. 1975 - 52 - 550 + 16 - 31 - 609 (Comparison of Items 1 and 2.)

Amend. 1 - 11/30/73 G G G

~

TABLE'1.1-2 ESTIMATED GENERATING CAPABILITIES, LOAD AND RESERVES IN 1975 WITHOUT FARLEY'NO. 1 AND IN 1976 WITH AND WITHOUT FARLEY NO. 1 v

Alabama Power Company ,i 1975 Generating Capability without Farley No. 1 6598 MW Estimated Peak Load 6059 i Reserves 539 Reserves as % of Load 8.9 ,

1976 '

Generating Capability with Farley No. 1 7416 MW Estimated Peak Load -6576 i Reserves 840 Reserves as % of Load 12.8-Generating Capability without Farley No. 1 6609 MW Reserves without Farley No.1 33 Reserves as % of Load 0.5-

~2 Southern System 1975

.() Generating Capability without Farley No. 1 Estimated Peak Load 21832 MW 18610 Reserves 3222.

Reserves.as % of Load 17.3 1976 Generating Capability with Farley No. 1- 24277.MW Estimated. Peak Load 20410 Reserves 3867 Reserves as % of Load 19.0 Cencrating Capability without Farley No. 1- 23470 MW Reserves without Farley No. 1 3060 Reserves as % of Load 15.0 NOTE: The above generating capabilities are based on the latest generation expansion plan 74A1.

O Amend. 2 - 4/19/74 g

i.

100,000

(, 10#00 i 90,000 9,00C I

8,000 80,000 7,000 70,000 6,000 60000 5,000 50,000 0 ACTUAL 4,000 j

40,000 b

3,000 30,000 o m ANNUAL 60 MINdTE ,

g PE AK OEM AND 0 g 2,000 20,000 y 2

5 E E d i

3 O i

D 10,000 a j I,000'

' 900 9,000 $

0 8,000

$ 800 a o

E 700 gf 7,000 e w

2 0 6,000 b o 600 NNUAL ENERGY SUPPLY a #

400 4,000 300 3,000 200 2,000 150 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '

I,500 1952 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1977 YEARS ALAB AMA POWER COMPANY JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT ENVIRON M ENTAL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE ANNUAL 60 MINUTE PEAK DEM AND AND ANNU AL ENERGY SUPPLY FIGURE I.1-1

1.1.4 Statement of Area Need

(~)

\> Included in this section is a copy of the preamble of the South-eastern Electric Reliability Council's " Coordinated Bulk Power Supply Program - 1973-1982", dated April 1, 1973. This document was prepared in response to the Federal Power Commission's Order No. 383-2 of April 10, 1970. Copies of the complete report were supplied by the Southeastern Reliability Council to Dr. Paul C. Fine of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Bethesda, Maryland, and to Mr. Tucker Arnold of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

The preamble of this report is included here to show the need for the generating capapability of the Farley Nuclear Plant as part of the total capability of the Southeastern region.

As mentioned in the first page of this preamble, it is the consensus of the utilities in this region that an expression of reserves in percent of load is v

not necessarily a valid measure of the adequacy or reliability of power supply.

Within the region are systems that experience peak loads in the summer and others with winter peaks. The types and inherent reliability of individual generating units in the region vary widely. Because of these and other factors, a uniform regional criteria for establishing minimum generating reserves has not been adopted.

e Table III of the preamble is a tabulation of estimated regional summer and winter peak capabilities, load responsibilities, and reserves.for the years 1973 through 1982. This tabulation includes the capability of Farley Unit No.1 beginning in 1975 and Unit No. 2 starting in 1977. The delay in the initial operating date of the Farley No. 1 unit until the fall of 1975 will reduce the 1975 regional summer capability from 106, 340 MW as shown in Table III to p) 1.1-6

105,533 MW. The regional reserves will ha reduced from 21,534 ' MW to 20,f 27 s- ) and the regional reserves expressed as a percentage of load responsibility (net system load plus firm sales minus firm purchases) will be reduced from 25.0% to 24.0%.

The 1976 regional summer reserves, including Farley Unit No. 1, is estimated to be 22,518 MW or 23.9% of load responsibility, as shown in Table III.

Withouth Farley No. 1 in 1976, the regional reserves would be reduced to 21,711 MW and 23.1%.

The 1977 regional summer reserve, including Farley Units No. I and No. 2, is estimated to be 22,714 MW or 22.2%, as shown in Table III. Without Farley No. 1 and No. 2, the regional reserves would be reduced to 21,063 MW and 20.6%.

From these comparisons, it can be seen that the Farley Nuclear Plant is r- very significant not only to supply the power needs of Alabama Power Company C and the Southern system, but is an important and necessary resource in the southeastern region.

F p> 1.1-7

. m -

s 7

-(_) SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL Coordinated Bulk Power Supply Program April, 1973 ,

PREAMBLE After the filing of the April, 1972 Report, the Southeastern Electric Reliability Council (SERC) adopted criteria for reliability in system planning, which are in keeping with the goals and objectives of SERC. They serve as guidelines for the planning within the region to avoid cascading-type outages.

The entire region is now reporting its load forecasts for one-hour net demands for normal weather. Uniform generator ratings are established -'

/"' +

\

under SERC guidelines which yield summer and winter ratings on a common definition.

Since most peak loads are highly weather sensitive, it should be recognized that on a probability basis, peaks in excess of those being .j reported are likely to occur. It is felt normal weather forecasts better suit the purpose of this'and other reports, with respect to

,i comparing day-to-day operations and reserves. It is the consensus that .

an expression of reserves in percent is not necessarily a valid measure of. adequacy or reliability of power supply. ;

Those using this report should recognize summer and winter ratings !

of generators are not precise,.as actual capability depends upon cool- l l

ing water temperatures, air temperatures, hydro pond levels, clean 11- ,

f- ness of heat transfer devices, quality of fuel, etc. Combustion gas l

./ -

a x

J

turbine ratings are particularly sensitive to ambient air temperature.

() Since SERC covers such a large geographical area and, in fact, its subregions spread over wide temperature zones, then a simple summation of Joad and capability by months and seasons can lead to erroneous conclusions because diversity of peaks is not analyzed in the statistics.

The tabulations in this report of future projects, particularly those in the second half of the reporting period, do not necessarily indicate a committed course of action; uncertainties in market condi-tions, rate relief, availability of sites, and many other extenuating factors dictate a prudent approach of providing for alternate courses of action wherever possible so that the latest information may be used before a decision is made.

1' S

t h

l 1

.e)

I i

P

TABLE I ESTIMATED PEAK HOUR LOAD REQUIREHENTS - SERC (1)

Monthly Loads Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.

1973 Peak Hour - MW 63785 62348 58967 55328 56935 66088 68295 69994 65940 60521 62369 67387 1974 Peak Hour - MW 71197 69611 65602. 61032 63128 73930 76028 77845 72300 66078 69006 73397 Seasonal Peak Loads 1973 '1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 19.82 Summer - EnJ 70018 77879 84806 ^92642 101000 110069 119911 130587 142072 154489 1973-4 1974-5 1975-6 1976-7 1977-8 1978-9 1979-0 1980-1 1981-2 1982-3 Winter - MW 71197 77528 83959 91464 99273 107795 117016 126946 137634 149188 (1) Undiversified summation of loads of four subregions of SERC.

O O O TABLE II PROJECTED CAPACITY INCLUDING ADDITIONS BY TYPE - SERC End of Year 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 Fossil' Steam MW 62354 67627 72453 75888 78028 80276 84760 88167 92272 96026

% 72.7 68.3 64.6 64.1 61.8 59.3 57.8 55.2 52.6 50.1 Nuclear Steam MW 6563 12025 17688 19802 24839 28650 32781 39671 46211 49411

% 7.7 12.2 15.8 16.7 19.7 21.4 22.3 24.8 26.3 25.8 Hydro 6. Pumped MW 9285 10040 11836 12136- 12388 12628 14228 14568 14715 15640 Storage % 10.8 10.1 10.5 10.4 9.8 9.4 9.7 9.1 8.4 8.1 Comb. Turbine MW 7594 9303 10253 10553 10953- 11591 12191 12769 13976 14126

& Diesel % 3.8 9.4 9.1 8.8 8.7 8.6- 8.3 8.0 8.0 7.4 Undetermined MW - - - - -

1100 2750 4580 8280 16520 0.8 1.9 2.9 4.7 8.6 Total MW 85786 98995 112230 118379 126208 134245 146710 159755 17.5454 191723

% 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 ,

l

~

O O O TABLE III ESTIMATED CAPABILITY - INTERCOUNCIL EXCilANGE - RESERVE - SERC Peak Hour Council Firm Power From Total Load Reserve Load - MW Capability ECAR MAIN SWPP Capability Respons.* MW % LR*

1973 Summer 70018 82800 +1050 -260 -1500 82090 71445 12072 16.9 1973-4 Winter 71197 86216 + 400 +260 +1800 88676 68769 17479 25.4 1974 Summer 77879 93877 + 650 -260 -1500 92767 79306 14888 18.8 1974-5 Winter 77528 99425 + 100 +260 +1500 101285 75400 23757 31.5 1975 Summer 84806 107700 + 400 -260 -1500 106340 86233 21534 25.0 1975-6 Winter 83959 112660 - 200 +260 +1500 114220 81831 30261 37.0 1976 Summer 92642 116520 + 400 260 -1500 115160 94069 22518 23.9 1976-7 Winter 91464 118809 - 200 +260 +1500 120369 89336 28905 32.4 1977 Summer 101000 125074 + 400 -260 -1500 123714 102427 22714 22.2 1977-8 Winter 99273 126638 - 200 +260 +1500 128198 97125 28925 29.8 1978 Summer 110069 133066 + 400 -260 - 1500 131706 111496 21637 19.4 1978-9 Winter 107795 134675 - 200 +260 +1500 136235 105667 28440 26.9 1979 Summer 119911 143427 + 400 -260 -1500 142067 121338 22156 18.3 1979-0 Winter 117016 147140 - 200 +260 +1500 148700 114888 31684 27.6 1980 Summer 130587 156002 + 300 -260 -1500 154542 132114 23955 18.1 1980-1 Winter 126946 160185 - 300 +260 +1500 161645 124918 34699 27.8 1981 Summer 142072 171562 + 300 -260 -1500 170102 143599 28030 19.5 1981-2 Winter 137634 175884 - 300 +260 +1500 177344 135606 39710 29.3 1982 Sunnner 154489 189823 +-300 -260 -1500 188363 156016 33874 21.7 1982-3 Winter 149188 192153 - 300 +260 +1500 193613 147160~ 44425 30.2

Load Responsibility is net system load plus firm sales and minus firm purchases.

._._.~.- _ _._.____

e

l F :!

1.4 ENERGY' CONSERVATION

- ((() During a site visit on March 11-13, 1974, representatives of .j F

the Atomic Energy Commission requested information related to energy "

conservation. Their requests dealt with the advertising program of .

Alabama Power Company, the regulatory environment under which the .

' as Company operates , and several aspects of Alabama Power Company's. ;

l Interruptable loads and history of Icad shedding. The AEC staff ;

- members also asked about the impacts of energy conservation activities ]

i in Alabama Power Company's service area. This section of Amendment 2 l

ti

) of the Environmental Report is submitted in response to.those inquiries. _

t i

2. The AEC requests for information were as follows: ;l i

j_

A. Describe the duration and intensity of the advertising programs ;

.1 conducted by the applicant during the last three years. If 2

promotional advertising has been terminated, when was this type l advertising terminated? i i

i h B. Identify the regulatory commissions or bodies that Lregulate the . 'j i .

l

[ retail price of electricity in the applicant's service area.

{, C. Describe the various types.of interruptibic sale contracts thats

. i the applicant has. Provide the . size (MWe) of interruptible sales. .l for each type described. ~ .

J. D. ' Describe the: applicant's record of load shedding andfload' I curtailment methods used in the 'last five years. ' 'Information f

b should be supplied as cumulative duration.of ttme by month 'and l by methods. .This information should include ~3% voltage reductions, !

p. 5% volhage reductions, curtallment of electric power. usage by the ~

1

$' utility, voluntary curtailment by large commercial; and industria1 L

) customers, and discontinuing service. to contractually interruptible ~

c 1 ~

loads.

i

).

o 1,4-1 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74 m y E y,.'r,

-- * - ,, r~.,, .u m-.m.%_..,.mm.1 .w_-,.e.,_,.,..cy_.y,,, ,,h m.w. ,,

n,_.i, w v p ,p... - c y

-[

E. Describe any. impact on demand resulting from the recent- ]

%J'

-l conservation activities in the applicant's service area. ;

Responses to the above are given as follows in the order :;

-.[

_ presented. j i

A. Information on Advertising Programs Alabama Power Company's advertising includes both institutional .

and sales promotional advertising programs. [

}

Institutional advertising informs the Company's customers about -

matters affecting their electric service and urges customers to use j i

electricity more efficiently. .!

Sales promotional advertising is directed primarily toward l Increasing the acceptance of off peak uses of electricity, such as 1

ciectric heating and security lighting. 2 6

1971 Institutional advertising in 1971 called attention to the

~'

recreational value of the Company's lakes, explained efforts'by the Company to restore service during emergency interruptions, encouraged

-i industrial development in Alabama, promoted Alabama Power's Nuclear Visitors Center in Dothan, Alabama, and gave the Company's customers - !

o a

information about matters af fecting their electric service. l A campaign entitled "Out of the Dark" was placed in newspapers ~ j and magazines and on_ television stations in early 1971. ; Subjects _ included -

an explanation of expenditures necessary for the Company to continue it's- ll q

a extensive construction program, the Company's record for reliable service, . '

}

d

.the necessity to-continue the Company's construction, program to meet future' !

customer demand for electricity, and ' efforts by the Company to maintain a-

. l reasonable balance between providing electric service and environmental quality,

]

~ :O i ,

1.4-2 #

Amend. 2 .4/19/74 Il

-l 1

ll _ , Sales promotional advertising in 1971 included a campaign L

explalning the benefits of the electric heat pump, " rural promot1on,"

l a " commercial sales" campaign, " Parade of Homes" advertising,

" incentive" advertising, and " dealer promotions."

L Advertising supporting merchandise sales by the Company in 1971 included not only direct mail, newspaper and radio advertising, but also ten-second television commercials alred in Birmingham, Montgomery 1

i-

!- and Mobile.

N

{ Amond the brochures produced in 1971 were "The Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Visitors Center," "How to get the most from your electric heat pump," " Walk into the World of Nuclear Power . . .," "The Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant -Its vital statistics," a series of rural brochures, and.

" Assured service for your electric heat pump."

Alabama Power in 1971 also participated in " Southern Company"

! advertising and in the " Electric Companies Advertising Program" (ECAP). .!

l i

[

l ECAP is an industry communications program which serves participating

, investor-owned electric light and power companies at the national level. -

, i l The theme of " Southern Company" advertising in 1971 was " working toward

! =-

3 tomorrow, today." As an operating member of The Southern Company system, -

j i .

s

[ Alabama Power pays a pro rata share of The Southern Company's advertising i

! program. Ads placed in national magazines discussed efficiencies of l L j l

power-sharing," the System companies' investments for environmental protection, System recreational f acilities provided by hydroelectric' l i '

!' impoundments .research on solvent-refining of coal by the System companies, and'other subjects. [

[ ' Advertising under the ECAP program in 3971-included.such topics ;

as the' safety of nuclear power generation and the country's growing demand. :

for electric power. ,

i

[ 1.4-3 , l l' Amend. 21 -- 4/19 /74 - .i

, 1

E 1972 In 1972, the Company developed a campaign entitled .

.O " Electricity,liow to use it for all it's worth." The energy conservation i campaign included newspaper advertisements and thirty-second television -!

commercials placed monthly in media in the Company's area: in daily I

and weekly newspapers, on television stations, and in selected magazines including Alabama School Journal, Alabama Clubwoman, Birmingham Magazine, .;

I Mr. County Commissioner, and Southern Living. This advertising suggested

{

~i to customers ways to use electricity more efficiently for cooking,-heating i

and cooling, lighting, and operating household appliances. The advertise- '1a ments and commercials invited customers to send for a free brochure which ~!

contained 64 energy-saving tips. During 1972 and.1973, more than 84,000 '

of these brochures were distributed upon request at the Company's offices, f 1

" Emergency interruptions to service" messages were aired on !

television and run in newspapers in the Company's area on an "as needed" 2- .

basis. l Industrial development advertising in 1972 was placed.to encourage .j i

those who influence industrial site selection to consider locations in the

. :I Company's area. Four-color and black-and-white advertisements were placed. ,!

.i-in magazines, including American Banker , Area Development, Chemical Week, . and ~ ;

l 1ron Age.

To inform the public of the necessity f or nuclear generating ]

i facilities and to attract visitors to the Conipany's Nuclear' Visit' ors. Center, '{

newspaper and radio advertisements were prepared and placed primarily in ]

l media' reaching audiences Jn the southeastern portion of the state. -

l !

i 1

1 1.4-4 O Amend. 2 - 4/19/74

_ J

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

~

1 i

3 . 'f Recreational advertising in 1972 was a continuation of the 1

.O--

program begun in 1971, depicting the lakes created by the Company's 1

i d

eleven hydroelectric-impouniments as. excellent, free facilities for i swimming, fishing, and other family activities. - " Recreational" advertise-ments were placed in daily and weekly newspapers in the Company's area in May 1972 and in Birmingham Magazine. Flood easement ads were also placed'

t au necessary, explaining and warning residents at the Company's lakes of flood easement areas. i l

In 1972, the company again participated in " Southern Company" !

advertising and in the " Electric Companies Advertising Program." Among the subjects discussed by " Southern Company" advertising welc afforts by 'f The Southern Company system to protect natural resources, savings realized .j l

through the coordinated. operation of the system's power pool program, 2!

' i and experiments by the system to determine the economic feasibility of .

{

solvent refining of coal. ECAP advertising, placed in national magazines,.

\

discussed the v 41ue of electricity, nuclear . power plants, electricity's role j in offorts tr improve the environment,.and other subjects. j Through its sales promotional advertising in 1972,the Company - .

I i

contin .ed to promote of f-peak- load by conducting " incentive". advertising. l

.I pr or. .ams . Qualifying builders and developers of all-electric homes, }

'i apar tments, and commercial buildings, or dealers installing electric' heating - !

or electric heat pumps, and dealers of all-electric mobile homes received I

y-l advertising for specified units of electric heating installed or sold. l I

The Company also produced an advertising campaign assisting dealers.

of : electric appliances in the' Company's arca ~ and produced campaigns in }

O 1.4-5 I i

. Amend,.2 - 4/19/74 'i:

t

a

^

4 l

)

U. ;

i magazines directly encouraging builders to develop and. build all-f~ '

s l clectric homes , apartments and- commercial' huildings. {

l

" Rural" advertising was developed encouraging customers to- j ;

contact Company Rural Sales Representatives for free consultation ]

services to assist customers in a more ef fective utilization of electric heating systems, feed handling systems, outdoor lighting, electric motors,- .!

automatic timing devices, and other farm uses of ' electricity. -l

-l Merchandise advertising in 1972 promot'ed sales activities at'the j f

Company's offices. " Sales" were advertised in newspapers, on radio, and through direct mail. .

" Brochures" produced by Alabama Power during 1972. included maps of I

the Company's lakes, " Wiring Assistance for Mobile Homes and Parks," .! 1 and " Electricity. How to use it for all it's worth."

i Institutional messages in 1973 discussed the Company's f(} 1973 2 .

expenditures for construction to meet the growing demand for electricity,. !

ef forts by the Company to keep electricity a good value, reasons why,' f a

customers' bills rise in sunmer. months, and expenditures made by the Company -[

to provide a proper balance between electric scrvice and environmental f quality. !

j Advertisements were placed in fourteen daily newspapers and ;

eighty-four weekly newspapers in the Company's area with one advertisemento j being placed'ench month. Ninety-inch advertisements were placed in daily f

}

newspapers with morning and evening editions; seventy-inch advertisements {

i

'were'placed in other-dallies, and thirty-inch advertisements in weekly .

newspapers. j Sixty-second television commercials were broadcast on stations in f- 1 Birmingham, Montgomery, Mobile, Anniston, and Tuscaloosa. [

I t

1.4-6 .;

\

Amend. 2 - 4/19/74 [

, _=_._ _ _ _ - - . . _ - __. _ _ . _ . - . . _ . _ . ___

t l

In addition, advertisements explaining' Company efforts to restore . 1 O

electric service during emergency interruptions were placed in local media - .

i when conditions warranted. l 3

t Industrial development advertising was prepared to attract new. 'i industry to Alabama. Advertising was directed primarily at metal smelting, i

metal fabrication, and chemical industries. Advertisements were placed one to I

.1 six times during 1973 in a total of seven industry-oriented publications. '!

Recreation advertising explaining the recreational value of the l

-l lakes created by Alabama Power's hydroelectric impoundments was continued; -l t

a one page, black-and-white advertisement was placed in Southern Living I

magazine in May and July for this purpose. Information on fishing opportunities ;

and recreational maps was made available by the Company to interested a

persons. 2 i Advertising also was placed in selected publications to explain -

{}

the economics of the electric industry to business leaders and others 1 who have an interest in the matter. ~1 L

Sales promotional progrmas during .1973 included 'the promotion of ' i electric applicance sales by dealers in the. Company's area; a campaign high-lighting the uses of electricity on the farm;- promotions supporting total- f

~ . . . ;i electric home sales during " Parade of Homes" activities; and advertising.used .

3 as.incentrives to encourage the installation of electric heating by builders and dealers.

,)

" Incentive programs" were conducted to encourage builders of i 1

t homes and apartments and commercial building developers to install electric ;

i heating. Programs were also conducted to encourage mobile home dealers

}

i f

() '

1.4-7 :

Amend. 2 - 4/19/74 :[

t l

f

. t i

I i

to stock and sell total-electric mobile homes and to encourage certified O heating and heat pump dealers to sell and install electric heating.

In 1973, " commercial development" advertising was utilized by. I the Company for the first time. Its purpose--similar to that of 5 i

industrial development advertising--was to encourage commercial developers- I and renitors to locate new shopping centers, department stores, and other ,

i commerc.'al projects in Alabama. Two black-and-white, small-space ads !

were prepared and placed in National Real Estate Investor and in Shopping Center World. _

Black-and-white advertisements ran in selected rural magazines calling attention to the Company's rural specialists as expert sources of free information concerning efficient uses of electricity on the farm.

" Parade of Homes" advertising was provided for local "home show" 2 !

promotions when requested by the Company's six geographic divisions.

The " builder / realtor program" consisted of two black-and-white' i advertisements placed in construction industry magazines read primarily

.i by builders, realtors, and arch 1tects. The ads were designed to inform i t

electric heating prospects of Alabama Power's free consultation service

regarding the efficient uses of electric lighting, year-round comfort ,

conditioning, food service equipment, and water heating, i Advertising placed in city directories consisted of full-page, quarter page, and one-sixteenth page black-and-white advertisements. !

During 1973, two advertising campaigns promoting the sale of f I

electric appliances by the Company.were conducted.

In addition, the f Company participated in other advertising programs, providing a pro rata share of funds for advertising sponsored by The Southern Company. i 1.4-8 Amend. 2 -'4/19/74 !

5

-t

?

a, .. ;

During 1973, The Southern Company placed advertisements in '

'(:)'. national and regional magazines to discuss such topics as carnings, coal !

3 i

reserves, electric rates, construction requirements, and research and -!

i development. !

Also, Alabama Poder provided a pro rate share 'of funds for the i Electric Companies Advertising Program. j i

B. Regulatory Commissions j The Alabama Public Service Commission is the only regulatory l I commission or body possessed with authority to regulate the retail price of electricity in the Company's service area.

C. Interruptible Sales Contracts ~

The Company has two basic types of interruptible sales contracts -

2- I 1

in ferce. One is to be used with customers served at Rate LPL CLight !

\

ar.d Power - Large), and the other for use with customers served at Rate HLF !

(Iligh Load Factor Industrial Power). The principal difference in the two i

. is that the former provides for a credit to the customer of $9.00 per. KVA - t per year (0.75 per KVA per month) for the interruptible capacity. contracted -i for, whereas the latter provides for a credit of $10.00 per KW of.the 1

(nterruptible capacity contracted for. The remainder of the provisions is !

essentIlally the same, i.e. -l (a) that normally, notice of such interruptions will be i

given to the customer 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months in advance but that I i

in emergencies, the notice can be for substantially [

shorter. periods, as little as 15 minutes;

-(b) that the maximum number of interruptions shall be two per day, eight hours per day, 40 hours4.62963e-4 days 0.0111 hours 6.613757e-5 weeks 1.522e-5 months per week and! )

i

() ' 600 hours0.00694 days 0.167 hours 9.920635e-4 weeks 2.283e-4 months per year.

1.4-9 I i

Amend. 2 - 4/19/74

,_,c-.,~.- ,_.-...______._._;_..___.._._..-._._.~._____.._-_._..____.._._._.____. _

)

L -

l

^D. Load Shedding and Load Curtailment

' = O: 1. Contingency plans for operating in emergency . situations and

for possible load reduction or curtailment are described in r

!' the letter (copy attached) from Mr. ' Jesse S. _Vogtle to

! i 1 Mr. Kenneth F. Plumb, Secretary of the Federal Power Commission, -l

{- dated July 12, 1973. j l

j

2. Attached are excerpts from the formal report'of the Southern .

i

{. Company System disturbance of August 7,1973, which depicts- I

j. .

]

i. the load reduction by underfrequency relays in the affected j i

j I j -, area. This describes the method used'by the applicant in ;

}

effecting load shedding. I e

i Throughout its history, Alabama Power Company has had a j

'. g I . *

{ comprehensive program to design, construct and operate its c1cetric. 2 t- .l

[; system for maximum reliability. Over the years its service reliability I

l has been 99.98 percent, i i

The system disturbance of August 7,1973, described in the.

l attachment, represents the only instance within the las.t five years- 1 i

. where Alabama Power Company has experienced an involuntary load reduction,-

i

l. other than'by acts of nature. Furthermore, it has not requested l

. l.

j; voluntary curtailment by large commercial or industrial customers j within this period.

.i

. -l i'

r i k I 'I t' .t l-

... .t, 1-v t

,. 3 1

.t 4 . .. !

L -i i

I f

I . j F

1.4-10 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74 -

,__._...-.-._.._._.__...--.,..__-,_.)

,.- +n uaa, .-~.--.~y~.-e.--.. - - - - ~ _ . . - - - - . ~ . . _ . .~ -.. -._ . - . _ . - .

r j 7 ;..

] !

-c -

ALABAMA POWER COMPANY .

600 NORTH 187H STREtf - P. o, Box 2641 {

6*MiNGHAM, ALAEIAMA 35291 - (205) 323-5341 , l t

i

' Vme n w Pwbot v.vor.Itt Nar AHmm July 12, 1973 -I 4 i I

-.i Mr. Kenneth F. Plumb i Secretary 1 i Federal Power Commission ~)

Washington, D. C. 20426 -l t

Dear Mr. Plumb:

l Pursuant to the Commission's Order No. 445 (Docket No. R-405) - j issued January 11, 1972, adding a new Section 2.10 to'th'e Commission's !

, regulations with respect to reliability of electric service, the company- -j

~

voluntarily furnished in my letter of March 7,1972, its contingency plans j'

, for operating in emergency situations and for possible load reduction or' curtailment. The company. now wishes to revise such contingency plan by '

adding a new procedure "e." and changing exis ting procedure '.'e." to '_'f."'

in the Voluntary Load Curtailment section. The revised contingency plan -

is as follova; and as requested, our submission is made in duplicate. -)

Alabama Power Company is a member of The-Southern Company system.:

t/

The Southern Company system is comprised of . Alabama,' Georgia,. Gulf , and 7 Mississippi Power Companies ~and is operated on a fully integrated and j 2'

coordinated basis. Each of the operating companies'is.n member of the ;j Southeastern Electric Reliability Count 11 (SERC) and through SERC is a 'l member of the ' National Electric Reliability Countil;(NERC). In.cddition -!

to normal contractural ap;reements with interconnected neighbors, The i Southern Company system has bilateral reliability agreements with the '!-

Virginia-Carolina Companics, Florida Power Corporation, Middle Sout.h l

System, and Tennessee Valley Authorit.y. These agreements provide .for coordination of planning and operation of generation and transmission 1 j f acilities, maintenance schedules, selcetive -load retainment.- programs, 'l e

emergency operation, and other matters affecting bulk power supply, j 5

Integrated and coordinated sys tem operation is .provided by the- l Power Coordination Office (PCO) of' Southern Services,lluc. , located in .

~1 Birmingham, Alabama; and this of fice operates under guidelines established ' f I-by'an Operating Committee, comprised of operating representatives of;the j four operating companies and of Southern Services,,Inc., a wholly. owned.

j service company of The Southern Company. A primary responsibility.of l[

this office is the coordination of. operation ~of' system resources in~such: j a'mannertto assure reliability of bulk power supply. Current information ,

- available.at the PCO includes the following:

i

.,0. a

?

, 1.4-11' ' Amend. 2 4/19/74 i H E .. L ' P 1. N G'-

D t V -E L o P' A t A' B A M-A' )

k 9- mW" e--ww -w ke'd---, eve ,w-awww--v.w,wre w a vom.e,-r's,ss.,,eesi-ar , rs-'Tre-- eat e www erWe-a r'% edP11mrwi ,cwww,ww.> Wsis.-e a-m-f t.e se e 14 i - - 3 ve N uryay gr e t wy-+awiy--ay gpuseu.---t% sy wiyy pp qq.qswgg py gv y- -t 9p e +. Mr q gus-=T+t

.g . . -

i i

f Mr. Kenneth F. Plumb -July:12,fl973

. L ;

1. Power flows on transmission tie lines with neighboring-systems. [

'l

2. Power output of system generating resources. {

3. System frequency i

4. Availability of generating resources.. !

5. System operating reserves (load-capacity comparisons). -f j

6. Capacity available from neighboring systems.

7. Load-capacity situation of neighboring systems. j i

8. General assessment of system transmission loadings I and voltage conditions. j Most of the above information is obtained through 'the control -l offices of the respective operating companies and of neighboring systems. ;

llowever, provisions are being implemented in a Power System Coordination. j Center (PSCC), now under construction, whereby system conditions (line 2 !

() le, dings, voltages, etc.)-will be available continuously in the .' SCC.

General procedures for minimizing the consequences ,of bulk power t supp3y interruptions or shortages are accomplished in the following order':

?

1. Load-capacity comparisons are continuously made '

and operating reserves assessed.. --

2. Operating reserves are estimated several hours in advance (as well as estimates for several days in.

advance), and the operating companies are advised ,

of system conditions. >

'i 3.

~

If operating reserves are anticipated to be below ,

desired levels, interconnected neighbors are con- l tacted and regional conditions generally assessed. !

Commitments for receipt of power are made as required and as available. 3

4. _ Should it become necessary to obtain additional l operating reserves, the operating companies are i requested to reduce interruptible: loads under !

contract. !

5. If operating reserves are anticipated to be less ;

1- '

J than desired, the respective control offices of

( .

the operating companies are notified for any j preliminary action which may be required. I t i, 9

f 1.4-12 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74 .

I Mr. Kenneth F. Plumb July 12, 1973 I 4

.. r L .

6. Continued shortages or reduction of operating [

reserves is monitored by the PCO, and requests 1 would be next initiated to the operating companies to implement- load curtailment based upon the ?

procedures established by the individual operating .!

companics. _i

.r Interruptible loads under contract would, if necessary, be .f reduced to prevent interconnected neighbors from interrupting firm j customer load because of emergency conditions. j In summary, the role of the PCO is to act as a coordinating [

group and to assure adequacy of bulk power supply to the system. No '

actual switching orders are initiated by the PCO, since switching-is i under the direction of the operating companies, but proper coordination :

is made by the PCO should intercompany or interconnected transmission ,

lines be involved. .

In the event of a notice from the Power Coordination Office (PCO) of a pending bulk power supply shortage, Alabama Power Company - i plans to place into effect the following procedures to the extent con- !

sidered necessary, and in the order named: i Voluntary Load Curtailment

a. Utilize the interruptible capacity available from industrial customers in accordance with provisions !

of contracts with such customers. :

b. Reduce and reschedule production plant station .

service load in a manner that does not affect the !

reliability and integrity of. generating capability.

l

c. Reduce nonessential electrical loads at all company. .[

offices and warehouse facilities. This load encompasses !

such areas as lighting, air conditioning, heating, etc. ;

I t

d. Request preselected industrial customers to make ,

capacity available by means such as increasing. ;

customer-owned' generation, reducing nonessential -l load, reducing actual load and, if time permits,. !

rescheduling processes to ef fect curtailment of '

load during a specified time period.

\

c. Request all customers to reduce unessential load, '

h- such as lighting and. air conditioning, by public appeal through' news media. '

i

f. Request rescheduling of water pumping and other electrical load to effect a curtailment of load .!

during a specified-time.

f I

i 1

1.4-13 Amend. 2 4/19/74~

l

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

- '^ i

, i

?

I

.Mr. Kenneth F. Plumb July 12, 1973 :

f

' Involuntary Load Curtailment .}

l

-a. Place into effect, through standing orders and 'f instructions, provisions for manual load shedding. 't

, This procedure incorporates length of interruption' j to preselected and classified feeders. i d

b. Automatic selective load shedding, underfrequency ..

relays are installed as part of a selective load i retention program for conditions where-there is- j an excess of load over available'gtneration which -l results in a rapid decline of system frequency and l it is not possible to impicment norual corrective ;

action in time to avoid intolerable frequency [

Icvels. The purpose of this application is to ,

interrupt load of sufficient magnitude to conserve i essential load and enable the system to recover :

from the underfrequency condition. j F

In addition to the above, Alabama Power Company has designed I and applied a scheme to automatically load its hydroelectric generating units when system frequency drops to a specified level. Operation of j this scheme is initiated at a frequency above that at which underfrequency l aclective load retention would be initiated. j

, O(./ .

We are furnishing a; copy of this plan, in duplicate, to the 2

l

, Alabama Public Service Commission and the Southeastern Electric Reliability j f

Council. 1 y

. Yours very truly, l

Jesse S. Vogtle j JSV:gdt l i

cc: Alabama Public Service Commission 'l Post Office Box 991 ;

Montgomery Alabama 36102 l

' Southeastern Electric-Reliability Council l c/o Mr. Wm. R. Brownlee j

' Administrative Manager )

, Daniel Building. .

j Birmingham, Alabama 35233 I

h) ] :

i 1.4-14 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74:

i I

.u...__.._.._;1- _ _ _ . _ . _ _ . . _ . _ . _ _ . . _ _ . . . . _ . _ _ . - _ . . . . - - - - _ , . _ , - _ , . . - - - . _ . - ,

'I L

Genera)-

The sy e t e:r disturbance was ir.itiated at approximat ely 7 :53 a.m.

on August 7, 19 7 3, and the approximate territorial J oad and resources serving the load on 'Ibe Southern Company System were as follows:

System Gross Load 11,472 MW Systen Gross Generating including SEPA 10,234 MW Sys tem Ne t Receipts 1,238 MW Gross Available Capabilit;. including SEPA 14,165 MW Generation Of the tota) };eneratien shown above , there was approximately 3,74S MW of generation in the area which var subsequer tly isolated.

This generation is shown .n Table 1.

A list of generation w!:Ich w is unavailable for service for various reasons is shown in Table 11. Alco incluch d in fable Il is the ICA peak period net megawatt capability for the steam units not in service.

Nor;nal Net Peak-Period Unit Generation Gorgas Unit No. 10 (Alabama Powcr Company) 69 7 MW Bowen Unit No. 1 (Georgia Power Company) 690 MW liatraond Uni t No. 4 (Georgin Power Company) 495 MW Branch Unit No. 3 (Georgia Power Company) 257 MW 2,139 MW Table 11. Generating Units Not In Service I

l All the above steam units are located in the northern portion l 1

i of The Southern Company system causing a deficit of generation in that portion. A large portion of that deficit was bein;: ' supplied by generating 1.4-15 Amend. 2 - 4/19 /74

y ,

i

s. 1 6

?

plants in the subsequently isolated Gulf Coast quadrant of the system producing a heavy flow out of that area. j 7: Hydroelectric output in the northern portion of the system i

! 'i j' was abnormally cut back 'to zero due to t.he requirement to conserve l P

energy for use during the peak demand period of the day. SEPA (Southeastern Power Administration) hydroelectric plants were operating; '!

at practically zero output as they normally would for the early part- l

(

of the day in question.

. General Description of System Reaction ;

i Upon the initial breaker operations which tripped from service l all lines out of the McIntosh substationU) , a number of line outages !

occurred in a cascading fashion resulting in the complete' isolation. ;

of the Southwest quadrant of 'The Southern Company system from the l

't t

interconnection.

e.

2 '!1

.Immediately upon separation, frequency in the isolated area -j

.. ~i Increased. rapidly and stabilized at approximately 61.2 Hz. j r

i

! Figures 1 and 2 are the strip charts from frequency recorders ,

F .

. I

j. Jocated in the Gull Power Conpany Control Office and .the Power

+

, . I

p. Coordination Office in Birmingham, respectively. Figure 3 is an 'i i ,.!

expanded time scale reproduction of frequency in the isolated area j t

, - over the time of -the disturbance - approximately 7b minutes. It .

should be noted that at about. 2 minutes af ter the initialidisturb'ance, !

t the frequency deviation shows the point at which apparently the Watson

~

l No. 4 unit was isolated f rom the network by breaker operation. At.about: :f 1

I 3 1/3. minutes, the effects of an' unsuccessful reclosing of the j.

Watson-SW.Hattiesburg 230 kV line'is seen. The chart also shows that ] .

a t ab out 3 minutes af ter the initial dis turbance frequency began a

~

j i y .

. slow downward trend reducing to below 60 Hz and triggering under- :

l. i

~ frequency. relays, i

't

], 1.4116 f Amend. 2 - 4/19/__74 ._ _ _._ _ _ . -

..r - - .--.. - - .- - .- - - - ----- - .. .. -

r i1 ,

l 7.- -

. .. -[

q

<r g j 1.oad reduction by underf requency relays in the af fected area was .]

A- ; -

.' approximately as follows: ;

1 Alabama Power 130 W ;

Mississippi Power 90 W :t Gulf Power 40 MW ;

k

. i e :t

. Investigations thus far indicate that because of the continued ,j

- +

l oscillation of the various units, as well as continued high frequency, l e attempts were being made to reduce firing on the units to prevent :

I

+. .

p subsequent damage. It is difficult to ascertain all of the ;

' i automatic controls and operat.or action.which may. have been af fecting ,

i. i 1 the downward trend of generation, but the probable explanation is ,

general reduction of generation, along with possible load-increase. -l 3:

s during the morning pickup, resulted in sufficient-deficit of; .

2 l, . .

I J-generation to drive frequency through the first two steps ofs

. under- -l 2 l

. frequency relaying. l I The reduction of load by underfrequency relaying apparently _

~

l helped to arrest the frequency decline and to begin restoration toward- l

'l l 60 Hz at about the same time the Logtown breaker was reclosed , thus- -j stabilizing' the isolated area and resulting in subsequent automatic

~

i- '

and manual. reclosing of lines. System loads tripped by underfrequency. l

..- ~l were then reconnected ; to the system with all loads being restored by i

-8:45 a.m. '!

i 1

1 !

Detailed discussion of initial breaker operations !

included in Section IV.

i 1.4-17 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74- l l

r

---,,w...o..,,~-,. _,,m..-,.n,........,,,___.__,,_.

)

s E. ' Impact of Recent Conservation Measures

.- The Company's projected and actual maximum territorial 1 demands in kilowatts.for the winter of 1973-1974 are given below:

= November December January- February

. Projected 4,090,000 4,085,000 4,142,000 4,062,000 Actual 3,694,600* 4,024,400**- -3,619,900 3,974,700*** q

Includes actual 92.7 of interruptibles off on. peak

- Includes actual 103.5 of interruptibles' off on peak l

- - Includes actual 130.8 of interruptibles off on peak Above loads exclude 78.1 MW of load in Alabama supplied by 2 Southeastern Power Administration (SEPA) and also excludes firm power -l sales to Alabama Electric Cooperative, Inc.

Due largely to the abnormally mild weather experienced I throughout

-I most of this period, it is difficult to determine how much of this reduction ' l lk . can be attributed to weather and how much can be " attributed to conservation '

1 measures. The Company is currently developing methods to make that .;

I determination. Ll l

1 i

1 l

1 0

1.4-18 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74

~

w O O iOL ;

~

TABLE 1.4-1 - -

INTERRUPTIBLE CUSTOMER CONTRACTS (l) (2) [

Expected kW Energy Total Interrup tible Reduction Rate Customer Location kVA kVA Upon Notice M111s /kWh (5)

Alabama Abex Corporation. Calera 12,500 (3) 5,000 5,000 5.2

- 15,000 (4) (7)

. Alpha.PortlandLCement Birmingham 6,000 3,000 3,000 5.3 (8)

H. K.LPorter Company Birmingham 27,000 8,500 5,700 5.2 Coosa River Newspring Childersburg. 75,000 15,000 15,000 4.0 (6)

Diamond-Shamrock Chemical Mobile 16,000 6,500 6,300 4.0 (6) 4.9

~

Griffin Wheel Company Birmingham 11,000 5,000 4,000 International Paper Co. Mobile 16,000 (3) 5,000 4,100 5.2

- 24,000 (4) (7)

National Cement Company Ragland 10,000 5,000 4,900 5.2 Republic Steel Corp. Gadsden 75',000 (3) 20,000 -

5.2 2-100,000 (4) (7)

Southern Electric Steel L. cham 16,400 8,200 7,500 5.2 '

L U.S. Steel Corp. -- Fairfield Birmingham 135,000 35,000 35,000 5.2 5.2 Woodward Iron Company Birmingham 15,000- 7,500 7,500 4 Total (As of March 1,1974) .

414,900 (3) 123,700 98,000 1 450,400 (4)

Notes: (1) Twenty-four hour notice time; in emergencies, a minimum of 15 minutes is required.

(2)' Maximum of 2 suspensions..per-day;.8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months per day; 40 hours4.62963e-4 days 0.0111 hours 6.613757e-5 weeks 1.522e-5 months per week; 600 hours0.00694 days 0.167 hours 9.920635e-4 weeks 2.283e-4 months per year.

(3) Effective.7AM-9PM. i (4) Effective 9PM-7AM. 4 (5) ~ Basic rate does not include fuel cost adjustment or tax adjustment.

.(6) Rate computed from 0.26c adjustment for each 0.1% departure from 90% load factor. "

j Equivalent rate is about 4.0 mills.

(7) This contract has a Rate Rider RN (night time capacity) .

(8) 5.2 mills- plus 1.8% FT Tax adjustment or approximately 5.3 mills net. ,

' Amend. 2 - 4/19/74

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - _ _ . _ , - - . . _ . _ . . . , , _ _ . _ - _ . . . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ . . _ _ . = . _ _ . . . . . _ _ _ . . _ . _ . . . - , , . . . . . . . _ _ _ . . , . _ _ . . , _ . _ . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . _ , . - , . . , _ . . _ . . . , , _ . . . , , _ . _ . .

i 2.2 Regional Demography, Land and Water Use Figures 2.2-1 through 2.2-4 give revised projections of population distributions for the vicinity of the Joseph M Farley Nuclear Plant, This revision was made to reflect the 1970 census.

Population projections within the 1 to 5 mile radius of the plant site were based on a dwelling count of the area. Population was then estimated on the " average population per occupied unit" from the 1960 census, since the study was undertaken prict to 1970 census data, a ccmparison indicated the 1960 data gave a higher or scre conservative estimate than the 1970 cen-sus.

Populatien projecticns within the 5-50 mile radius are based cn estimates derived from reference 1. Population projections for the 5-50 mile radius were made in the following manner:

jllg 1. Total population and rural population icr each county was projected for the years 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005, and 2015 by linear interpolation of the estimates mentioned above.

2. The major city population p:ojections were based en percentage growth as estimated for the county,

3. The rural population of each county was divided by the area of that county.

4. The area of each county in the radial sectors was determined.

5. Rural population in a sector was determined as the product of I

the area and the pcpulation per square mile.

6. Total population was the sum of the rural population and the population of any cities in the sector.

f -'s 1. Environmental Protection Agency, Regicn IV. Populatiot. Bv County-Historic (j (1940-1970) and Projected (1980-2020), Regicn IV. Atlanta, Georgia.

EPA, 1972.

21 2-1 I

1 m

)( The Environmental Report - Construction Permit Stage, stated that there were no known downstream users of the Chattahoochee River or Apalachicola River for drinking water. Recent investigations have revealed that the city of Port St. Joe, Florida could possibly obtain water from the Apalachicola River.

The intake for the Port St. Joe Paper Company is on the Chipola River near the junction of the Chipola and Apalachicola. This 1 is approximately 122 miles downstream of the Farley Plant. The city of Port St. Joe purchases water from the St. Joe Paper Company.

The paper company representatives have stated that under high flow conditions , the water drawn by their intake is mostly from the Apalachicola River while under low flow conditions the Chipola River water is predominate.

Table 2.2-1 list all downstream users of water which could be affected by the Farley Nuclear Plant.

__/

I 2.2-2 Amend. 1 - 11/30/73

'. (~}:

)

%J TABLE 2.2-1 JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLFAR PLANT DOWNSTREAM USERS OF RIVER WATER Agricultural Mr. Lemuel Mercer Approximately 20 river miles downstream of Farley - Uses a -

maximum of 576,000 gallons per 1 day during. dry weather. ,

Mr. Herman Rowan Approximately 20 river miles downstress of Farley.- Uses a maximum of 1,728,000 gallons per day durinF dry weather.

Industrial

~

Great Northern Approximately 4 river miles 1 Paper Company downstream of Farley - Average use 112 mgd.

O St. Joe Paper Company On the Chipola River approximately #

122 river miles downstream of Farley - Maximum use of 48 mgd to supply the following:

1. St. Joe Paper Company 30 - 45 mgd.

2. Basic Magnesium Company ;

60 Mg per month

3. City of Port St. Joe, Florida -

20 Mg per month.

Municipal City of Port St. Joe, Florida As noted above

[\

\w ), ,

Amend. 1 - 11/30/73 '

l I

~ :

N o hh h

$ ' " s'u7tes h &

2 f f

u: :

a !

$ g#

$ o,

s u '* s'mus

r gM,

g# ,/a') 8 '

$9 ,o o o o E7 +p

['S,o ,, k, o sfmts *o O y [f Q h5 s !s, # e* c o *j*

o o a i

,9) , 'g 0, , o*o sooo r nns n*o o Q p '

Nig Ng O O n U h 1 g, o o o %

o 4 k ho 'J o o i tp

3 $$e#e

[r og ,g e

. o o o o 9 .

o o 20*

'985 o o g

, O o o go\b 1975 o o $2 8.4 0 o o 19 %

2015 13,0 0 0 5 0 0-19.2 '

0 0 0 1995. E W 1995 10.5 17.2 17.2 _.

1985 g,4 15.4 15.4 Q0 o 0 2005

- g3,8 13.8 0 0 B o 2075 6.6 O; 1975 20\b 0

o 69 sp o o

0

'o 1975 ps

0 o a 6%

o o.

o o

o IQ o

SW o o

. ,R o o '#9 s s .

+s* o $ "o o

y* o 20 0s

$ $ 5 s> . o o , % 2, 0s ;

'97 94 5 $8 o n o o o o o o - a o ,

o 9oka,h, sooo nes

's g e, 3 *

e -

i g4 sg _ $ ~ ,o qs

, o,*o is a o\o o

,o o g * %, ,4 l

$m E y 'v smas o

o

'o s 's 4g$ ' Eo ajo o o m

" '

o g "g "s, * ,

Ssw $ *n af g i i?

s%s s i AL AB AMA POWER COMPANY ~ .

JOSEPH M.' FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT ENVIR ON M ENTA L- REPORT. i OPER ATING LICENSE STAGE 4

POPULATION DISTRIBUTION 0-3 MILES :

FIGU RE 2.2-l ]

N i gM gC $'$Ef2 g NNp 5 $s , O @ fe i ,a Y$# ":- s u7us_ psf g _S S du us ~

d #o !

g +,,,4'< e, ,

p" : ~ ~*

't,"s

,,'s ,,", s c ,* :~,s"

i a,; ",p* -f9,ks,+, p .

'9

's N, ,,

a s,#

O s, , e. *

,p O 4 'o s, 'O o9 So

0 #C '4 b 1s y 24 'O 9 sO ss1 k 200g Ms Esl# ~$ $ ssb h 19, 9 No No O h gssse 47 90 0 p.% '

US 4 42.o O_

s 2$

1973 3?,p h6 0 g4) 20 20!5 58.5 0 197 !

% ,% 64.8 24.0 2005 52.9 27,4 ' O 1985 j 58.6 W 1995 47.3 42.0 30.7 0 1995 E -

42.3 34.0 ' o.

a':,';

1985 2005 o ::' ;' 7973 7

i 2016 gS.i 6 2 .3 68 #

goes 16.S #S.a st" 8s o 0 1333 N-l i

Sob 9

hs9* $69 f 'O Q o ##8

'00s 8g 4 s%b s sy $ #'s o

ss ** 3 's # ' 's

,oO &*5

o,e,',%r e% 's p ., ,

'sb4 4

4e

+y+,+,p

@9 s S'

g q'4 N ,8 s u,us a v. m R

a n

e e

$o

$ ; Ms "oNs o,o

s #

4 #e 's,s os 4 9, " e/; g~ y; p s t ~'s,s,g '

ssw

[/g e m'"3"~m e a R B i e % 3 *# -

4 s

ALABAM A POWER COMPANY JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT ENVIRON MENTAL REPORT ;

-O OeeRATiNG License STAGE PO P UL ATION DISTRIB UTION -

3-5 MILES' :

FIGU R E 2.2-2 I

O O- 0:

(

- s,1%\i 8 a*l!g %

s e ue u s xE y fp#

s+ s nss s en a m- ggfg - s 5 % ,g* q" *s *

u ue e ~n g s

~f *p$p %

% s.s ss ~afy i,,% "' % .

s s a E $f. *+

g p+p/p

% %' %s'%q* ssag%kh n essysg fpVe

+,, r ss $ sh h# h sb\

& %s % #+> %, ' hp' h Lb s $

18 % q 3 g1 9 4 gg gtk I 1995 133,

@ #ss sS L

0 M s608 so0L 0Se%# e 80s 9' stLL *g

'97s 2so, 2cq 70c 96 ,ott c6EOL ,,ng

9 62: 695 ggge regg . '#

go,g 552 843s g 801 2433

008 egg 841 2372 1985 g 714Gf2541g _

-

g 304 j 891 J 2542 fl995 z

]95j 6204 j 2191 j 678_ f g igss" 5309"1900 E 596 =

374 22 a 943 ,,,, a 200s-g s y 32 37,,

o m mr m>

s m 1975 u ss 168 szt 20o 08 o 8"* go 2py 77s T

C Tzt>

m<

2- 9107 ggtt 40 v991 g,r

+,

ig

?,

717 876 D2 goot 9s9 9sv '#**

m F

an ~o,e q .

s**~ $$

e s e# ' 'o,

+

- >> # %, %s%s #

O C 0*

o

m s#

$$ s %*> y % eq %%+,,

m' go ef"Q 5 2Q m $

$p /

p p#p4 ,,8og#E 6 %%*s E

, 5l5 %

~ cm m>" " p#/~p f

G

,s 4 U$ h,ka me o s y9/s#se 5

sess

's- %

5 s- St s+%

,p w + 8 o w

C y

a mm e i;! o w #// f ~/e,e g , ge ye un~ g "g 's *5 g%

5 g g 2,2 ;g #4e -s e us.

z 4 f/a,/fgjae e a =es%,S,<

a -p L Iz ,,, - a m

i

._._.-.m_ . , _ . . - . , _ - .

. - . . . - ~ - - - - . -- . . . _ . - , _ - .._.___.L... - . - . . . . . _ . _. . - . . . _ _ . . . _ - . . _ . . . . .

Lj N

t## 3 $ **r s, *s * ;$;"t"g

$ k. ** *e Bl s s ' %, h 5 ..bh5h$$ h

$'s,%,l'*s,%*s @ @ 2 2 = ~ ? / j / %

o ,,

o's

<> * , q ,.Q \ !~:yy $g $$

m as

'o ss rg% + %y% s

i O *$$ $

k '%s is h

'*+'

Ji %

*d,p,

'Se$l$ f$

$$ 1

$19g, **4 #

4op W $ ss ss d5 '9so 'k"k; $$ 2$5 i #

' ors f f, G99e 1s* goo 1 ors

,,2, 2015 31269 2714 39 5 2005 27254 d g5(,9 2662 1985 W 1995 24423 4366 1638 2783 1995 E g

3395 19'* 9673f22 e 797 2015' 9

20 16 91 2 6 I97s s** p

22 Qos 2c , #59 igg ,

e

sp$ $41b <a 44 e 2 ,9

<e , ,%9s y q '4 %;

&'k W $$ $ $l+ 'e, #s% '!r 'hs r

l $ $ hh i $, s

e, "o, '

$. $f $$- *

's 'e s n 'l g % ,*t, ,*

g e# s.. 4C,s dit",,

9 '*see p ssw 2 ERgi%*3 sst 5

AL AB AM A POWER COMPANY JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT ENVIR ON M ENTAL REPORT

.m OPERATING LICENSE STAGE L)

POPUL ATION DISTRIBUTIO N 30-50 MILES FIGURE 2.2-4 .

l

. (~ ~) 2.6 Meteorology

- % ,A 2.6.1 Data Sources Regular meteorological observations have been made at Dothan, Alabama, 16 miles to the west, and at B1skeley, 15 miles northeast of the plant site.

Some observations of tempe:ature, precipitation (24-hour rainf all) and wind have been recorded over a period of 30 to 50 years between 1902 and 1954, at Dothan and summarized in a " Climatological Summary" for Dothan.

Hourly wet bulb and dry bulb temperatures at Dothan Airport were obtained for the period 1940-52; records were alsc cbtained from a rain gauge which was operated at the Airport during the 10-year period 1940-50. Observations of temperature and precipitation have been made at Blakeley from 1877 to the present.

The site elevation is about 150 teet lower than the meteorological

,o

'$ _) station at Dethan Airport and the other locations in or near Dothan where the temperature observations were made before the present airport weather station was established. The site elevation is about 100 feet lower than the locations where the Blakeley observations have been made. Thereform the site should have slightly higher maximum temperatures, but probably by no more than one or two degrees, than those reccrded and discussed below for Dothan and Blakeley. At the site, minimum temperatures are likely to be somewhat lower than recorded at Dothan and Blakeley because of the more " valley-like" location, but differences are not expected to be significant.

The closest "first order" metecrological stations are at Montgomery, Alabama,100 miles to the northwest, and Apalachicola, Florida, 110 miles to g

2. 6.1 m- d

the south-southeast of the site. The estimates of frequencies of strong winds, heavy precipitation and humidity over periods less than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months are derived mainly by interpolation between these and other first order stations.

This procedure is considered accurate for general meteorological information where the topography is relatively flat as it is in this region.

\

The on-site meteorological measurement program has been in operation since March, 1971. A one year period of record of these data has been summarized in this section. A magnetic tape containing five years of WBAN records from the Dothan Airport was obtained from the National Climatic Center, and was evaluated for the period 1950-54. These data appear in the appropriate subsections below and are referred to as "Five Years of Record from Dothan Airport".

The instruments for measuring pertinent meteorological parameters at the site are installed on a 240-foot tcwsr located in a cleared area north of the plant site. The data are not affected by large plant structures. Instrument elevations and descriptions are given in Table 2.6-1.

2.6.2 Temperature, Dewpoint and Humidity Data Average daily mean, maximum and minimum temperatures, absolute highest and lowest temperatures during the period of record, frequencies that temperatures were above and below various limits in different calendar months, and other temperature statistics for Dothan and Blakeley are listed in Tables 2.6-2, 2.6-3 and 2.6-4. The periods of these records are not the same, being about 30 years, from 1925 through 1954 at Dothan and from 1941 through 1970 at Blakeley.

Some of the differences in the average temperatures for the two stations are possibly due to a general cooling trend during the last two or three decades.

7.6 -2 J

f qlll The average daily maximum temperature is highest during the period of June through August, being 920F at Dothan and 910 F at Blakeley. The average maximum in December is 620F and in January 63 F at Dothan. At Blakeley in December it is 620F and January 610F. The daily minimum temperatures average 410F at Dothan and 40 F at Blakeley in December and January. The maximum on record at Dothan is 104 F, and 107 F at Blakeley. The lowest minimum temperature recorded for either station was -10F at Blakeley on February 13, 1899. The lowest recorded at Dothan was 12 F. During the periods of the observations summarized in the ref erences, the temperatures at Dothan and Blakeley remained at or below 32 F on less than one day in two years, and the maximum temperature exceeded 90 F on about 100 days a year at Dothan and 89 days at Blakeley.

Figure 2.6-1 shows the menthly averages and the average of the daily

()

'/ - extremes of dry bulb temperatures, based cn five years of record at the Dothan Airport.

Water Vapor Average hourly relative humidity for each month of the year, based on observations made during the pe riod 1940 through 1952 at Dothan are listed in Table 2.6-5. These illustrate that the climate is humid, with average after-noon humidities around 60% in winter and 55% in summer. The air is driest in spring and autumn, with average afternoon relative humidity of about 45% in May.

Figures 2.6-2 and 2.6-3 show the monthly averages and averages of the daily extremes of wet bulb temperature and dewpoint temperature based on five years of record from the Dothan Airport. Figures 2.6-4 and 2.6-5 show the daily and monthly averages of extremes of relative and absolute humidity respectively,

_ based on the same airport data.

! i 2.6-3

c -, ,

i l

i 2.6.3 -Wind Characteristics

. g- - .

4 %>

The mean wind speed for each month and the most frequent wind )

1 direction for Dothan are listed in Tabic 2.6-6. The fastest monthly average winds occur in winter and spring, with a maximum of P

10 mph in March; and the slowest.in summer, about six mph. Figures 2.6-6, l i

2.6-7 and 2.6-8 are monthly, seasonal and annual wind roses for the five years of record from the Dothan Airport. Figures 2.6-9, 2.6-10 and 2.6-11 N.'s are monthly, seasonal and annual wind roses for a complete year as measured ~'

at the 50 ft. level at the Farley meterological station. The strongest sustained' winds on record are given in terms of the " fastest mile" of wind. This information is not available for Dothan or Blakeley. At Apalachicola, where the strongest sustained winds are due to hurricanes, the speed for the i s

"f astest mile" during the period of record (26 years to 1970) was 67 mph in September, 1947. At Montgomery, the speed for the fastest mile on record is 69 mph, which occurred in March, presumably associated with an extra-tropical storm though this has not been verified. Fastest sustained winds at the site are expected to be due to extratropical storms in winter and spring, '

as at Montgomery. From the distribution of extreme winds analyzed by ThomI2) ;

it is expected that the magnitudes of extreme sustained winds at Dothan will -

be somewhat less than those at Montgomery. Thom has fitted extreme wind data to i a statistical distribution allowing extrapolation to higher speeds.

Atmospheric Stability Parameters which can be used to determine-atmospheric stability are being measured at the site at low levels (i.e., less than 200 ft.) in the on-site meteorology program. Table 2.6-7 shows joint frequencies of occurrence !

i of wind speed and direction for seven vertical temperature difference groups,

()

1 based on the first f ull year of on-site data. Table 2.6-8 shows joint frequency l J

2.6-4 i

O'

\/ of occurrence of wind speed and direction for seven direction range groups, based on on-site data. Both tables are from the 50 ft. speed and direction instrument, with wind speed extrapolated to the 33 ft. level. Vertical temper-ature difference is that between the 200 ft. and 35 ft. levels.

2.6.4 Precipitation Data Table 2.6-6, precipitation data, shows the average total monthly, the maximum and minimum observed in a month, and the maximum 24, 48, and 72-hour period totals observed at Dothan during the approximately 33-year period of record. The largest monthly totals occur in summer, and the largest monthly total on record is 20 inches. The maximum 24-hour precipitation recorded at Dothan was 9.0 inches. At Blakeley, the maximum 24-hour rainfall during the 1941-1970 period was 6.7 inches. Figures 2.6-12 and 2.6-13 are seasonal and annual precipitation wind roses, respectively, based on five years of record

.(-

from Dothan Airport.

Due to the low relief of this region the. terrain has relatively little influence on the meteorology. However, the topography affects the drainage of cold air in winter as illustrated by the statement that "there is con-siderable irregularity in the distribution of the last spring or first fall freezes in all sections".(1) Due to the inland location of the site, the strong winds associated with tropical storms and hurricanes are much reduced.

2.6.5 Storms Accompanied by High Velocity Winds 2.6.5.1 Heavy Precipitation Heavy rain lasting for several hours in this region is usually associated with tropical storms or hurricanes. Heavy rainfall for shorter times is usually caused by thunderstorms in summer.

~-)

2.6-5

() Rainfall estimates of 30 minute to 10 day recurrence periods have been presented in Technical Papers Nos. 40 and.49.(3,4),.in the form of maps and are shown in Table 2.6-9. The maximum recorded. rainfalls for periods of one hour to 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months at Dothan, 16 miles west of the site, in the ten-year period 1941-1950, when a recording raingage was in use, are listed in Table 2.6-10.

These agree closely with the ten-year recurrence interval values for the corresponding times, shown in Table 2.6-9.

2.6.5.2 F. ail Severe hailstorme are infrequent in the area. The occurrences of heavy hail (greater than 3/4 inch) number approximately 5 in 13 years or about ,

one every two or three years, for a one degree (latitude and longitude)

" square" (see Figures 2.6-14 and 2.6-15).

2.6.5.3 Ice Storms -

t 4

%/ Freezing rain resulting in heacy ice loading is very rare in this area..

Bennett(5) refers to one study in which no glar,e storms were reported for the 28-year period ending with the winter of 1952-1953. However, one study referred to by Bennett showed at least one storm was observed in this area during the nine-year period 1928-1929 to 1936-1937.. According to this study, the accumulation of ice did not reach 0.25 inches. ,

2.6.5.4 Thunderstorms The incidence of thunderstorms is significant.in. relation to associated weather including strong winds, heavy precipitation and lightning. The frequency of strong winds associated with thunderstorms is included under the heading " strong winds", below, and heavy precipitation has already been r discussed.

O 2.0-6

/ The average number of thunderstorms per year reported by observers V]

at Montgomery, 100 miles to the northwest, is 61 with the majority occurring from April to September, and the peak in July. At Apalachicola, Florida, 110 miles to the south-southeast, the distribution is similar except that-the peak number occurs in August, with an annual average of 62.

2.6.5.5 Tornadoes The probability of a particular point being affected by a tornado is a function of the average number of tornadoes occurring in a given region and the average area covered by a tornado. Figures 2.6-16 and 2.6-17 give tornado occurrences in the United States by 2 and 1 sque st respectively.

Based on a 40-year record (6) , the number of tornadoes reported for the two degree square in which *.he site is located, is one to two per year. In 1955-67 the average number of tornadoes for the one degree square, including the site, was about 2.5 per year, or approximately six per year for the two degree square. The recent increase is typical for these kinds of data, and arises in part from increased public awareness of tornadoes and more complete reporting. Since even the latter frequency may be an underestimate of the true frequency, a conservative estimate would be twice that. reported for the latter pericct or three per year for the one degree square.

A typical maximum tornado may be about a quarter of a mile wide; be in contact with the ground for about 10 miles; and cover an area of about 1-1/2 square miles. The one degree square at this latitude has an area of approximately 4000 square miles. A conservative estimate of the probability of a given point being affected by a tornado is therefore approximately one in 500, calculated as follows:

2-1/2 x 3 "

1 4000 500.

O o

2.6-7

O)

( Thus, a given point might be expected to be affected by a tornado once in 500 years.

2.6.5.6 Strong Winds The frequency of strong winds, 50 knots or greater, as estimated from damage reports, has been analyzed in WBTM, FCST 12(7) for the 13-year period 1955 through 1967. The results given in Figures 2.6-18 and 2.6-19 show frcquencies fo.r two degree and one degree squares, respectively. For the site, the number of occurrences for the 13-year period is about 50 per two-degree square and 16 for the one-degree square. Since a' considerable number of occurrences are likely to be overlooked or unreported, a reasonable con-servative astimate would be about twice the given frequencies, or approximately 2-1/2 per year for the one-degree square of about 4000 square miles.

2.6.5.7 Probabilities of High Wind Speeds Due to Tornadoes O The probability of a given point in the site being exposed to strong winds, greater than a given val.se, has been estimated considering the ' joint probability of the following three events:

1. that the path of a tornado encompasses the site;

2. that the area covered by the very strong winds in a tornado includes the point considered, if the path of the tornado encompasses the site. This probability is estimated from the fraction of the area svept by a tornado that is subject to destructive winds, which is considerably less than one ; and

3. that the destructive winds (consistent with the definition adopted under 2 above) are greater than a given value.

2.6-8

The joint probability is the product of the individual probabilities of p) these (presumed) independent events. The above individual probabilities were estimated from observations mainly in the Midwest and South Central United States, reported by Fujita('}. Item 1, the probability that a point in the site will be affected by a tornado, has already been estimated above. Little-information is available for the estimation of the probabilities under 3.

For the present purpose, we assume an average of 200 mph for the destructive winds in tornadoes, based mainly on Fujita's observations. The winds are assumed to be normally distributed with a standard deviation of 25 mph.

Since there are few reliable estimates of wind speeds in tornadoes, the probabilities of the higher wind speeds given.below may be subject to con--

siderable uncertainty. Based on the above considerations, expected recurrence periods for winds greater than a given speed striking a given point are shown ,

f in the following table:

Recurrence Period gximum Wind (mph) (Years) 150 3,200 175 3,700 200 6,200 225 19,700 250 136,000 275 3,100,000 v

2.6-9

(-) References - Section 2.6

1. U. S. Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau, "1955 Climatological Summary, Dothan, Alabama, 1902-1954".

2. Thom, H.C.S., "New Distributtons of Extreme Winds in the U. S.",

Journal of the Standards Division, Proceedings of the American-Society of Civil Engineers", Volume 94, Number ST7, pages 1787-1801,.

1968.

3. Rainfall Frequency Atlas of the U. S. (prepared by D. M. Hershfield),

Technical Paper Nc. 40, U. S. Department of Commerce, U. S.

Weather Bureau, 1963.

4 Fujita T. T. , "Lubbock Tornadoes of 11 May 1970," Report No. 88, 5

Megometeorology Project, Department Geophysical Sciences,

(} University of Chicago, 1970.

5. Bennett, I., " Glaze, Its Meteorology and Climatology, Geographical Distribution and Economic Effects:, U. S. Army, Quartermaster Research l and Engineering Command, Technical Paper EP-105,1959.

6. Wolford, L. V., " Tornado occurrences-in the U. S., " Technical L

Paper No. 20, ESSA (now NOAA), U. S. Department of Commerce, 1960.

7.- Pautz, M. E. (ed), Severe Local Storm Occurrences, 1955-1967, Technical Memorandum, WBTM, FCST,12, ESSA (now NOAA), U. S. ,

Department of Commerce, 1969.

i 5

O.

2.6-10

i i

l TABLE 2.6-1

+ WEATHER INSTRUMENTATION AT FARLEY SITE i

i i

Approximate Height Above Sensed Recorded ;

-Tower base (ft) Parameter Tarameter Instrument Characteristics i j -

t j Ground Rainfall Rainfall Climet Model 0501-1 Accuracy 1/2% of full scale {

l Ground Solar Solar Pyrometer (Climet 503-1) - Responds to ;

radiation radiation wave lengths of 0.32 to 2.5 microns ;

I l 32.8 Wind Speed

Wind Speed Climet Model WS-011-1 (speed) - Accuracy ?

j and wind and Wind of 0.15 mph or'1% of full scale, which- [

direction Direction ever is greater. Response distance ;

l constant is 5 ft.; vane has 1 mph l

threshold and damping ratio of 0.4. . !

l Climet Model 012-10 (direction) - Accuracy ;

I. 3 degrees, linearity 1/2% of full scale. L i

! 32.8 Horizontal Horizontal Bivane Clianet Model 012;11 - Accuracy - ,

[

! and eleva- and eleva- I3 degrees,linearity_1/2%offullscale...j g

tion angle tion angle !

Temperature - Ambient EG and G Model 110S-M thermistor in (

Temperature aspirated shield - Accuracy 0.5 F i over range of 0-100'F. 6[ r 35 Dew point Dew point EpandGModel110S-M-Accuracy 10.5F. f above dew point of -20 F - Responds 3 F i

,' per second above 32 F. l t j j' 35 Temperature Reference Matched pair thermistors in aspirated .

I for T solar radiation shield - Accuracy- -l 10.15 C. j I.

i: 100 Temperature T100-T35 Thermistor in aspirated solar radiation -l shield - Accuracy 0.15 C. j

,. .c 150 Wind ' Speed

Wind speed Same as 32.8 ft. level given above ;

l and wind and wind i ;

i i direction direction i !

j 200 Temperature T200-T35 Thermistor in aspirated solar radiation j j- shield - Accuracy 0.15 C. ,

4

+

Mounted on S.E. side of the tower. I

]

i. b J f- Amend 6 - 7/28/75 l 1 1 l ')

1. ,__

J

O O O TABLE 2.6-2 TEMPERATURE AVERAGES AND COMPARATIVE DATA FOR DOTHAN. ALABAMA (deg F) n U

, 4 o o E 1 9 1 % e w ? T t . .

O ma D N 5 $

g yo a a a m s >.

s . .

es k y

k k &

=5 CB % %" tu ? .u n U U 5 83 82 e e% 21 u 2* u ;m e* e e e e

_$ 55 50 5 55 $$ $ $$ $ ba kb & 5 5 5 Jan 63.4 41.4 52.4 22.0 83 1949 12 1940 400 228 52 ' 48, 45 77 Feb 65.3 43.0 54.2. 22.3 84 1944 12 1951 322 181 54 49 45 73 Mar 71.1 48.1 59.6 23.0 188 1954* 21 1943 212 99 59 56 49 71 Apr 78.9 54.9 66.9 24.0 95 1942 31 1940 57 15 67 60 55 69 May 86.8 62.4 74.6 24.4 99 1953 44 1954 5 0 74 66 62 68 Jun 92.2 69.8 81.0 22.4 104 1952 52 1954 0 0 80 73 70 73 Jul 91.7 71.1 81.4 20.6 103 1952 62 1953* 0 0 80 74 72 80 Aug 92.2 70.6 81.4 21.6 103 1954* 60 1952* 0 0 80 74 72 79 Sep 87.6 66.2 76.9 21.4 100 1951* 47 1949* 2' O 75 70 67 78 Oct 80.9 55.9 68.4 25.0 98 1954 30 1952 43 11 67 61 57 72 Nov 69.4 44.8 57.1 24.6 88 1950* 17 1950 253 145 57 52 48 73 Dec 62.5 40.8 51.7 21.7 82 1951 18 1945 414 271 51 48 45 81 i YEAR 78.5 55.8 67.2 22.7 104 Jun 12 Jan 1708 950 66 61 57 75 1952 1940 Feb 1951

Also on Earlier Dates

e Y

W$?

a<n NNU W5N mae umn

$NU nwo 5 l

isi ;

i rt e ss s %

x m mee meu o w as eam .01 or more '

S l 8 9ue weU e as os uww .05 or more w edw emo uuu w as e .10 or more g Q

$ uww u cs u uoe uuo .25 or more -

N s o O wws w&> www eww .50 or more @

^

l Q

$ we* www sss nss 1.00 or more E o m

d *** sw* *** s** 2.00 or more g N

s m 8 oon UUU UUs ooo 90* or above y 2 a w s e B e

W "o" 95* or above

{ $

5 g "

u ooo *s* soo ooo 100* or above :2 g m

o ooo ooo ooo o o o 105* or above ;

5 U mw* eoo oo* w e w432* or below s

U ds5 oeo ooo suo 30* or below m ,E

> swe oao ooo esn 25* or below

^

s **o ooo ooo o*s 20* or below 4 v

o ooo ooo ooo o *

15* or below h o ooo oco o00 0 0 0 10' or below o ooo ooo ooo o o o 5* or below h

. . . . . x. . . .

9 C o 5- c > v 4 niuob.

"1 . f5 O d 'f:. M' ;3 ~ "3 nO "t.* O O @

m u. 2 -t Z n m"3< mono >

xo[oq. . -

n R a coaccoe oooooo o .

I i e

n Pur,o n .

(.) o O Ao'taq u

- p 4 eeom.

oc oco.mm o. a d PU' .EC .%,

e o mojoq

.o a o. ococo coooco . '

y [' g. Pu* .EC a P Z o^oge J

.o -nnnoo m a, pur.os n c c o - o-- m ~n- = a, o amus 2cr a

Z gou! Or dlo*2d obb r-oom

-mommN

~

O mem M sn W an tn o g an @

j p g^T m cm on .a m c.

. - s-e .chw g V

+8 AlPP o m.

m m=Hooe ooeoo a. m. u g J e isopa29 ~ o ~ ~ ~4 1 o - .a

- + + u 8

- U3 in e on m in 4

*Mo

W U

2co A

cn m m "h c cn O g y --- - -

a a e

c 0 o

" Q .Q g d{tpuotu to O a o m.m.

m

~o Hooo ooooo -

'A.

~

g a

=

7 ~

N

,5 o mnmtre;q'

< d C. be ,, ,,

~

ura}q m .ppooo ooooo u. , .

n o o o

e,

s ,

O v

e:,

m y

e -

p 1 3,3 A m n w o .< o m m o m e,- oe w (n a .

o co o, n, c. on cn c am n.

o o mes, m. e, m a . ------ --m . .m

-t .a: w g w A O D a ceNnom~ w int- - - m et i~

O o Apepisopo2D m *n' 'o.

m' '". ,".mn ~ . " . ' . ~ . " .".

~ . ~,nnnnm

^

e" .

N m . . y u

9 y J O 1 %

k A Y <rommoo u m m e s m .- -. Y O a.

s "Q ura R- o ~.

m o, . o. ". o. e..*.~.=.=. m. s b g n @ W *? -r @ nn .T n N <r a

9 r4 g 2 *

=

3 e %

v

.]

5 sXeP ea2f>oP urol.i ooooooo oooooo m-mmm mn*

o o =i w

a E

O x ..

.mn -

n, e e

e o o

e - m,m o,o ,m e-e-t- n o n ~

x.

w o.

6 o .n ooom no e 5 e m&

IIOk Ch

- .C m m m--Ch

. ---- Ce

- m O Cn .C.h. & .Cn y Q, y g e

8 .!!

~ ~

a isomo{ e o o--mn ec n m m, e-en e o m e e o - =

m mm*m- a e a

e paoaag 6o oa v ,

C vn . .

unnn-m n

a e l .w m 2rak e n r on . ~ ~, m, ome, m -

=,

n meo. n n m e, m m m .n, m a e . --- - mome--

cs e a

, e e g,

asoq6;q pioaog

,,,m,,

mmmmmoo --

n ,., , , , ,

ocoomm o

fa68 p., m a

, o n .e m e.mmsun m - g H XI 91uo}q ,o g ,4 .; ; ,4 g m m m o r. ..

==,agg; gg

- omm o

n Q

4 mDIuIu]m @. @ r. m. @. **.

. P a. 5. a. @. o. m. m.

.o c n m .* c M - so o m o M sa ch w m

[{IrQ mM M m44 b 4@mvm f

s o) bj tunmIxvm o n .n. e . o. o. m.

m-nomoo

- ~ .n. s . m. ,.

.- - r- en ch n s.

4 I

A[fG c @ tw t- = Ca ChC5eDb @ @ b

, . . . . . >. . . . . . 3 t((UO}q e g ,o w a >, c .* u n. u > u e

.- n o e n. n a aaouoo b nu2<2m m < m oar. o l

A_ \

V {V (d' ;

TABLE 2_6-s AVERAGE HOURLY RELATIVE HUMIDITY. DOTHAN. ALABAMA (PERCENT)

Month A.M. P.M.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Jan 87 88 88 89 90 90 91 89 85 79 72 65 62 59 57 57 61 67 72 76 79 81 83 85 Feb 81 84 86 86 86 88 86 85 80 72 66 61 57 53 52 53 54 61 66 72 75 77 79 81 Mar 82 83 84 86 86 87' 86 84 79 70 63 59 55 53 51 51 52 55 62 69 73 75 78 81 Apr 82 84 86 87 88 90 87 81 73 65- 59 56 52 49 48 48 50 53 59 65 70 74 78 80 May 83 86 88 89 90 90 85 7'8 69 , 62 56 52 49 47 46 47 43 51 57 64 71 74 78 81 Jun 87 89 91 92 93 91 87 80 72 66 61 57 54 52 51 52 54 59 64 71 77 81 84 86 Jul 92 93 94 94' 95 95 89 85 _78 71 68 64 62 62 62 62 65 69 76 82 85 87 89 91-Aug 91 .92 93 94 95 96 90 87 79 72- 66 63 60 59 59 60 63 68 75 81 84 83 89 90 Sep 89 90 92 93 94 94 89' 86 78 72 66 62 59 59 60 60 61 66 73 79 82 84 86 87 Oct 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 84 74 65 58 54 50 49 49 50 54 62 69 74 78 79 81 83 Nov 83 85 86 87 87 88 89 83 79 67. 61 58 54 53 52 52 58 66 70 ,74 77 79 81 82 Dec- 87 88 89 90 91 91 '90 89 85 79 74 70 68 66 65 66 71 76 78 80 83 85 86 87 MEAN 86 87 89 90- 90 91 90 89 78 70 64 60 5 57 55 54 55 58 63 68 74 78 80 83 85-

emo mon m>4 4v> -m4 n<n occ mmw c Em usn F m c2 Month W

nau -

vi e

&wN vi vi u &we vi u e '

o u

b 'o 4 vi vi N Lb6 03 w N 6LL w 00 m L"b s vi e e Normal vi w

ews

. . . u v. i .as

. .e u .e

. o .e .e Record .

e wem ouo e-s s os w Mean e d e co co co s now uwe

? FPN e v> w

'P* PPP *** . createst 24-o omu u-- .we i o oou oou o o vi ) os n hour Amounts j I, b o

en nn eee e-u wee wwe eee eoa eee www Year H

e vi w N eem owe e u as W

~ ~ s r

es F P's uuu oms NNe

.c .d r wwe r ,e m mee createst 48- i $

m aos owe as e e enn hour Amounts l >

Gi er

- ~~~

www

~~~

eee

~~~

mee

~~~

eee g

wn w-u wwe eoe we Year ' a e sun mom ouo com m

! w I

w ~ ~ k w

PPM P*N

P .*

. ." P N createst 72- a u vi u bee mue www itour 3 mounts o e oow vi os vi wee euo g g

^

$ 5 GW GGG GGG GGG GGG E g E wn N-u wwe eoe mon Year i 9 N e sww mem owe eeu ,

a g

= ,

N HHH HNW H HHH l g o uoN won co m w e o as >

6 6 "w b 66L LLb b L 6 ,createst Monthly 9 vi se- os vi w Nwo o os e m

o H> wwH HHH wwH wHH N ec eee eee eee mee e un vi w w wwe eew Nww Year o e wow eem Num eem d

9

"" E msw

r. P P.. Least s uos sum meu i Monthly >

wu uow amo ewe

5 wo www www www www :

l 5

en mee eee eee eee g-un eww eNo eNo euN ; Year e os s e o vi w vi w w vi - u l

e see ooo ooo ses ' Average Snowfall 2 $M$ M$$ $$$ $ $ $ , Prevailing Wind

, Direction y yym yym o e os ,o e oo : Av IIourly Wind m uN* wow mon oNm ; Velocity (mph) g

O O O TABLE 2.pi (Sheet 1 of 4) g3 - .,.7 JOINT FREQUENCY OF WIND SPEED (33 f t) AND DIRECTION VS. VERTICAL TEMPERATURE LAPSE .RATEturG_r/100FT)_LESS.THAN_0R EQJAL_TO _-1'.0-__ _ __.__________ _.. -- --

S 8 4- E 0 . __N..._ tlNE__._r2E.. .EAE.. _ E.._._ESE _ SE _ SSE._ _.S S S 1_ . SIL_ __M S W 'd HMW NW "J14w_T.O T AL _RERCENT_

0 MPu 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 "PH n 1 , 0, . 0 0 .O_. 0_ .0_. 0 .. . _ O _ _._ . 0. _ _ _ 0 O _ . _ 0 . __ _ 0 . _ _ 0 .._ _ 1 __ . _ 1 .

/ "Pu 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 13 1.0 3 P u !? 17 9 _._6 2. 2 __ _ 6. _. 2_ 3. ._.5 ____4.___. 2 . 87 - 6.8 4 cou 14 A 3?

11 _. 19 11 ._ o 7__ ._ 43 _ ._ 9. 1 . _.6 .. 3 2 la 11 3 6 10 147 11.5 5 **pu ?7 12 16 .3 8 4 17,__, ?. _ __ _.,9 _ 11 9 4 a 8 8 12 __167 1 3 . 1 _._

e4 uu iS 9 13 12 9 6 3 Y 5 4 8 7 15 10 11 13 151 11.8 7 "Pu 13 11 7 3 , ___10 7 6 9 7 1 6 7 5 11 6 ____1 0 _. . 6 . _13 9 .. 10.8 4 9P4 11 la 12 9 17 6 4 3 3 4 7 7 5 12 13 13 144 11.3 17 MP9 24 J? 50 29 12 6 14 13 9 23 15 12 8 14 53 ___29 ,_ 343 ,P6.9:

IN dun 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 6 5 4 3 0 2 7 19 11 76 6.0 27 4P4 _ . . 0__. 0 _ 0_.__.0g- 0 . ._. 0 __ ,_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 0 8 6 9 O' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 ' '

37. %.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0.0 T O T .~. t. 127 1/6 143 101 71 du 4B 56 41 51 57 52 63 37 1 '> 0 97 1276 190.0 P'a:Eer 10.n _9.9_ 11.7 J . 9 ,, 5 , 6 . . _ 3 . 8 ___.3 . S _ 4 . 4 __ 3 . 2 ._4,0. 4.5 4,1__.4,9_,5,3 ;0.0 7.6 100.0 _ .

Av Sen S? 6.4 6.7 6.1 6.0 5.4 6.4 7.4 6.8 8.2 7.1 5.9 5.9 7.6 9.3 7.6

_A V E ,1 a r;F_ SP E E D, F 0 4_ T H _! .S ,T A P L F F 004.L S 6.9 LAPSE _aATE(DEG F/100FT3..GREATCH iTHAN.-l.0_9UT I.ERS THAN OR Ecual.TO. .9 _ _ _ . . __- _ . .

S f'E r u

.b E .. NE EAE E._._ESE. .SE _SS6- S SSW. %l .WSW _. .W-. .WNW._ RW Nh . TOTAL PFRCENT _

0 <wu 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 ,

* *' u . ._ _ . 0 . .~ . .G . 1.__.__ D. ____.E' O . __ _ _ Q ._ _ _ . 0 0 . __ __ _ Q _ ._ _ _.0 _0 0. 0 0 1__ . 2__._

? =Pu 1 4 2 2 1 2 0 1 0 4 1- 0 1 0 2 0 71 3.7

_3 *Pu __. 3 _ . ._9 9 4 6 ._._ 6 .2 .3___.1___.___.6 _ .6 .7 3 2 6. . .__ _. 3 . 76.. 13.2.

< *Pu 6 6 5 6 6 7 11 4 8 3 3 5 4 6 4 6 92 16.0

_s ou J . ___ _7 9 6 6 4 7 6 3 ___ . _ 2 . 5 . . ._ _. 9 .__ 8 .__ . . 6 5...__ 6 ._.94 16 . 4..

6 9Pu 3 ? 7 10 5 2 1 4 5 6 14 6 8 8 4 3 98 15.3 7 p u 2 3 9 3 4 4 1 3 4 2. 9_ 3 4 4 5 2 67 . 3 0 . 8_ ___

8 *Pu 2 4 5 3 3 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 5 2 36 6.3 17 *Pu 3 4 7 8 2 1 2 . 5 ___.11 9 10 2 .2 4 9 .7 B6_ _15.0._.

18 *Pu O O O O O O O O 4 5 2 0 0 0 4 1 16 2.8 24 wPu O O O O O 0 0 0 O _, _ 1 0 _._._ . 0 0 .0 1_ 0 2 3__

37 MP4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

37. Pon _0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _0 0 .0 0 0 0 .0 . D . O __

TOTAL 25 41 53 43 33 27 25 77 37 40 52 33 32 31 45 30 574 100.0 PE 9C E" T_ d.4__ !.1._.__.9 2 __7,5 _._5.7_,. 4.7__ 4.4.__.4.7__.6.4 _ 7. 0_._.9.1 . 5.7_ _5.6 5.4 7.8 __5.2 100.0. _. __.

Av SPn 5.1 4.6 5.4- 5.5 4.8 4.3 4.5 5.5 7.4 6.9 6.3 4,7 5.1 5.5 7.1 6.2 AVEp Ar:E_S?.EFD FOR.THIS. TARLE, EQUALS _ _ S._6 _. _ , _ _ _ _ _ ,_ _ .. _ _ _ . _ _ _ ._. ._ _ _ _ _ , . _

t

O O. O ,

+

TABLE .2.6-7 (Sheet 2 of 4)

JOINT FREQUENCY OF WIND SPEED (33 ft) AND DIRECTION VS. VERTICAL TEMPERATURE, _ _ , _ , _

__ < - . LAP.SE R A T E(DEG_E/100Fil_ GREATER JH AN __ .?_BUT LESS.TH AN OR EQUAL _ID_._ .6-

__. SPEED 'l OF Np up r FRE RE_ _._SSE M MSW CW __MSW W W N W. NW N N W__I.D.IA L_P ER C E N T~

0 t'P u 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 _ __. 0 . ._ _ 6 1 t:Pu O O 0 0 0 ._0 0 0 0 . _ _ __0 0 1 1. . . :

? Cpu 0 2 0 .0 0 1 0 'l 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 8~ 4.9 __

3 MPd 2 4 2 13 3 __,__.0. 0 0 0 1 0_ __ 0 .3 1_ _._ 1. _ ._ 0 .___ 2 0 _ _ 12.3 ..__

4 PPp. 1 4 2 5 2 0 5 1 0 1 1 4 3 2 1 0 32 19.6

, 5 eP4 2 0 0 0 _a 2 1 0 1 1 1 2 5 4 2 0 ?3 14.1___

6 mph 0 4 2 l' 1 1 0 1- 2 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 17 10.4 7.wpu 0 g 5 O. 2 0 ... 2 1 3 . ._ .__ . 0 _ __1 ._ 2 ._1._ .3 _____1_ 0._ ___ .21 . _.12 . 9 ____ _

9 ttPu 1 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 1 1 2 15 9.2 12 Mpu 0 0 '3 2 0 0 2 ._ 0 1 3 2 0 1 0 0__ _ 6 70 12.3 _,_

16 MPH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 3.1 24 M7u O 0 0 'O __ 0 0 0 0 0 0 _1 0 0 0 .0 0 1

~32'NPH 0 0 0 0 0 C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 660 32, MPH .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ _ . 0 _,. _.. D. _ __. . _ 0 0 0. _ . O _ _. . __ 0 , ___. 0 . D ._ _

TOTAL 6 '15 17 12 10 4 _ 0. __ 0 10 4 __.. _ 9 0 _' .13 9 13 14 12 6 9 163 100.0 PERCE*37 3.7 . 9. 2 10.4 7.4 ,_6.1,_2.5_ 6.1,__2.5 __5,5_ 8.0.___5.5 8.0 8,6 _ 7.4 3.7 5.5. 100.0 _ ____

Av'5Pn 4.1 39 6.4 4.6~ 4.2 3.8 5.6 4.2 8.2 6.8 7.3 5.0 4.0 5.1 4.9 9.6 AVE 4 AGE SPEFD F09 THIS TARLE.E00ALS '5.5

. . _ LAPSE _RATECDEG.F/100FT) .iHE AT ER TH I AN.._. . B BUT .LESS TH AN. OR.. EQU AL . T O._ _

.3. __ _ . . .

_. SPEED. __.N ._N1E__ NE.._ ENE__._ E ..___ESE SE_ _SSE. _ S.. _.SSW..___SW___WSW _.__W .__ M N W- NW_.__hNW _ TOTAL PERCENT _ i 0 tiP H 2 1- 1 2 0' 3, 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1- 13. 6 1 MPu O 2 l' 0 2 2' O O 2 1 2 0 1 0 -2 1 16 ,7

~3 ~ '* P i s 10 12' 11 .11 9 10 5 6 10 6 '5 1'1' 4 3 4' 6 125 5.3 1 3 "Pu 16 29 24 21' 21 14 _ _12 12 13 8 13 16 17 8 7' 13.__?44 10 . 4 _ _

.4 "PH 77- 34 78 26 12 21 16 22 23 26 27 .22- 20- 11 6 14 335 14.3 5 MP4 19 36 36 23_ _ 23,_, 11 15.. 18___ 20_. ,25 22_._ 12 8 6 6 __ f 18 _298 __12.7 __

6 MPH 16 30 56 78 16 13 10- 12 27 18~ 6 14 1 17 1*4 295 12.6 12 15 50 18 15 6 10 19 18 25 ?1 7 8- 10 12 21___267 11. 4.___

_7.PPu 16 16 15 12 7 5 5 14 20 105 8.3 0 HP9 14 19 ?3 12 5 5 5 12 "Pu 3D . 22 37 28 ~9 1 8 26 50 64 38' 9 5 14 32 46 419 17.9___

19 MP4 3 .4 2' 2 3 0- 2 6 22 29 13 3 1 9 18 7 174' 5.3 24 MPu 0 . _ _ _ . 0 _ __ . 0 , .,_ , _ _ 0 0 0 0 0 .7 -

1 0 0 - '1 1 . D _ _ 1 0 ___ . 4 __,

O_

32 HPH 0 0 0 'O 0- 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0- O. 0 0. 0 0.0 32t; MPH 0 0 'n' O O _q 0 0 _0 .0 0 J- 0 0- 0 .0 0' L.(__ '

TOTAL if9 294- 269. 7 11 115 66 85 139 2n3 223 172- .93. 83 68 120 161 2341 100 0 PEACENT 6.4 a.7' 11.5 7.3 _'4.9_ ,,3.7_ ,_3.6' 5,9__ _8_,7 ~9.5. _ _7.3 4., 0 ~ 3.5_,_2,9 5.. t _6 . 9._1.0 0 ..Q '

AV.SPD 5.6 51. 5.7 5.4 . 4.9: 3.9 5.0 6.0 7 . 0 .. 8.1 6.6 4.8 4.6 _7.2 7.7- 6.7 ~

AVEAAGi? SPEED FOR-THIS TAHLE EQUALS 6.0

_ . ~ . . . . . ._. . . - . - - ..;.-. . . . ~ . . _ . . _ _ . - , . . . _ . . . _ . -

i d- s/ (Q./

TABLE 2.6-7 (Sheet 3 of 4)

JOINT FREQUENCY OF WIND. SPEED (33 f t) AND DIRECTION VS. VERTICAL TEMPERATURE L t.P S E R AIEI DEG ._E/100F L) _ GHE AIER _LHAN__ z.LaVI LESS IttAN. 0R_.Euu AL TO _ 8. _ . . _ . . . . _ . ._ . ..

.SphED_. _ *. _ .TJ C UE _ EAP r N ME "E S._ _SSW_. _ Sw.__.wSW w ww a N N w__It11 A L_ EE RC E NT n MPH 4 4 4 1 0 2 3 2 0 1 0 3 1 1 4 2 32 1.6 1 MPH 5 1 - 2 7 2 3 5 9 6 3 6 6 5 6 4 .. . 2. 72 3.6 7 *PH 34 19 19 15 16 16 19 23 P1 19 14 28 16 9 . . _ 12 22 302 __ 15.3 3 *Pw 44 36 24' 29 71 16 20 34 36 73 19 . 29 75 17. _ 14 27 414 21.0 4 MPu S7 42 32 19 18 19 17 22 23 26 32 13 21 15 74 25 405 20.5 5 MPis ?S 26 75 21 10 6 8 18 23 18 19. _ . ._t 3 5 18 18 29 2 H 2. 14 . 3 __ _

6 'tPH 9 18 16 11 2 4 8 16 16 30 19 2 4 8 14 23 201 10.2 7 " P 58 T 4 ._ __. 2__ ___._ 2 . . 2 2 5 _ _.17 77 16 _ . 1 _. *1 2 12 _ 12 113 5. 7 8

P >s 3 _.- 52 0 0 1 1 2 2 8 12 7 0 1 1 6 8 54 2.7 17 " u >4 s 6 __ 2_ .._0 .Q. 2 _.__.2 __ _ 8 _ 12 14 16 1 2 2 7_ 7 H6- 4.4 I t* H Pia 0 ~0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 4 1 1 0 0 2 91 6 24 "P 68 0 0 -

0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0._ 0 0 _Q._ __ 0____. 1 . 1 .__

3? dPH

~

0 0 0 ,

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 3 / + mm 0 - 0 . _ . . . . O __ _ . 0 _ _ 0 __. . . 0 . _ _ 0 _. 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 f a t As. I !* M 159 I?B i n '> 72 71, 86 ,140 166 174 15'2 97 82 79 115 _1 59 1973 100.0

3. 6 _ 3.6 __4.4 . 7.1 6.4 8.8 7.7 4.9 4.2

~

P L '.s c t u t 9 . 's M.1 ,_6.5 _ 5. 3 4.0 _. 5.8 _ 8.1 100.0 .

av Ar- ... J.? 3:2 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.6 4.4 4.8 4.8 2.7 3.1 3.5 4.2 4.2 AMPA".E.5 9 0 {nd T H l_S T a n: : * ,.JALS._ 3 . 8_ _

LtPcE HATE (DEG F/100FT) GREATER.THAN.- .3 BUT LESS THAN 09 E'20AL TO 2.2 ._

SPEFD N rifiE . . ._ NE ENE E _ ESE ._! SE .SS6 5 5S4 . 'iW WSW W kNW NW NNw TOTAL PEHCENT 0 "Pu 5 1 ., 5 3 . 1 4 . 3 . 7 8 1 1 2 1 1

2 2 47 5.1 1 "P" 7.._._. 5._ m ._8 t. 6_ _ . _ 3 . _ __ 6 i 3 . 5 7 7 4 4 3 8 4 5 n5 9.3 __.

/ M P 64 . .. 21 ,13 , 13 10 6 8 12 12 -10 11 12 14 13 12 9 17 .,193 . 21.0

-* ** P d 29 1 4 _ .. _. 1 8 ._ 12 .._; _. 8 :_1 ,16 _ it? _ *16 S 11 12 15 __.15 _. 19._ 29 248 27.0 __

= *PH 41 la 11 -i 8 7 8 i 8 ill 70 7 13 7 9 14 15 28 2?S 24.5

's " P 8 15 13 ._6 ._1..__uO___u3. _. 1_ 1. _ _ _ , 5 2 2- 0 . 3__ 11 _ 6.. 6 75' 8.2

Wo 2 0. 1 ,

0 , 0 1 , 0 0 7 2 2 0 1 8 2 3 29 3.2

' 3 '- 9

.7*4 _ _ . _ . _ 0 .._ _ _3 J_ . 0 . O u D. . .Q 0 3 __ _ _ _0 ._ .1 _. .O_____ 0. 1 1. O ____

A ;4 P'4 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 3 3 l' "P 4 _. 0 . __ _ 0 0__.., 0 .. .. 0 .- .Q _..O_ 1 , __ 0 0._.. O __ 0 . _ _. . 0 ._ . _1. _1. O__ 3 . __ _ . 3__

1A -' P d 0 0 0 ,0 0 ,0 0 0 0 _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 74 "P* 0 0 0 , 0 ___s a_,0.. O __ 0 0 . __ 0 p _._. 0 . 0 0 . 0 . _ _ .. D . .__0.0 _ . .

O _ , .0 3? 'P a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0- 0 0 0 0 0.0 34 "" .0 _ 640 ,._2 0, .._._0_., 0 . 0 _ _ ._ . O . i 0 . ___. O . _ , 0 _ .___. 0_ ___ . 0 .Q 0 _0 (L __..._0___ _Q.0

' 3 T Ai, 17q _62 , 40 25 . 37 , 43 54 7d 38 47 39 -45 73 61 91 917 100.0 Pi -i'E"i 11.1 7.0 6.8 4.4 ,'2.7 4.0. 4.7 _ 5.9...B.5 4.1 5.1 4.3 .4.9 8.0 __6.7 9.9.120.Q.. -

Av.%Pn 2.7 '2.8 2.3 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.1 2.2 2.6 2.3 2.6 2.0 2.4 3.2 3.0 2.7 A vi-w Ary Sr M I) FO-t TH J L T AHLE EQU ALS __ - R . 6. . __ _ _ _ __...-- . _ _ . . . .

_ . ~

~ .

T9 18 5 3 9 .9 6,0 0 0 0. 0.. 0 0 O' N E018464 C1 1 221 R

0000000 _ 0 1 _ _

E _ _

E. _- -

l4 69282B50000004 0 6 .

a9 0 415 4 80 t

o 2 2_1 0 1

t_ .

W63211630000Q00213 -

4 .

N11464 112 N_ _

2_

E W8250500000000G010 7 . .

N 221 R

82 L ,

T _ _

A . _

R W 6 17 8 5 7 12 0 O 0 0 0 0 73 3,7 E N P _. W A2 M .

E _ .

T _

L w.7744700000000095,5 1 3 A 4. 1 C ._

I .

T .

R W3 61712 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 03 5 7, E S 1 i_ 31 V .

W S .

V w38362210000000517 3 .

_ t 1 4 1 N m_

O ,

I .

T w4 686311100000005,9 C s .3 E 31 R

O

) . S_ _.

- 4 I _ _ _

7 D _ _

f 83180300000000337

- o D s 12 1 6 .

6 N _

2 4 A 7_1 E t ) ._ ,

L e t .

E21286100000000389 B e f _ s 1 3 3,1 .

A h s _

T (S 3 3

( 2 D 2 E2 s 6,9 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 2 4 7 .

E .

31 E ._. _

1 P N -

2 S A ,

H E415 4 010 0 0 0 0 00 0 5 7 5 .

1 D T S E

1,1 N R I -

W E ., , -

T .

F A E F 5'647330000000002,9 2 O R 31S Y

La C G_ -

0 1

N T E2 5 0 7 60000000000580 E F N 1 - 3 E U 0 ._

31 Q 0 E_

, E E

R 1

/

_ ; - _' L P.

F A F E2 4 7 8 N -

4 t 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 6.20 9. T T G , 31 N E _ S I D _ _ H I O ( , - .

J E F7 4 6 8 2 0 1 1 O 0 _n 0 0 0 93 5 7. T T N. . 1 A t i-41R O

R_ _ _ F E

S

~N114 2 34 510 51 5 11 O 0 0 0_0 0 a7 .6 4'. DE.

O'- P A

L 1O2f

? P S

n w .TS D L F.

EuuH44aauu44W4ot EPPPPPPPPPPPPPNAEPA t

" " MN~ MF "

P*

s f

, - M Fw '.TCSA O4 VV E

_.n 1/ ?4 ; 5 6 7 4 21l h 2,34 ? 32 T CPA A.

e I i! I ,

i 1

4

. , - i l .

i i i , ;

I i .

!. - ; I ,

5 l

t-r. N N. w. c. to. f%. o . N.o. o.e..o o. o. o. 6-v 2 . N.to. N . to. N . &. N . .o .& 80. .o. o. o o. <

p WONoev o oooaooo WeD ca o ts c w e4 N o o u o _. l . .i un n - .o u - N n, - l .o : i 1 4- o: - -

,- E

u. '

l i

- , e ,

u, .

1' esc

! i oooomeco

' n

ce&&ce~No-ooo-o

- l l i .i .

, .N m , ~ *1 o - , , i

.~o

. N ,- c o v 1

N no

. l.

. i . .

e -

o Q *

t C3

' -4 *-

l hano, I l 4 l l ' .1 i x .

oooaoaocoo,om. - . .

a c c o , e

.-- - e4 .

4 o o o o o m o ,m i .c. o.

m x o, 2 i i . . . n-i l '

a u ' l : l 3 i

' l l l i *

l l I l 1 mel n o o o n o o o a o o o o v rs o J i i

i :

3 N 9 W .4 N .4 o o o o o o o o i I 5 o n . . 2 . .

a fs

- PO.N.

m l l !

" j B

i l l g i ; i i l ! *i " '

N j 1 i s i '

' I t l l l 'l '

P 6 2 umNww i ooaoaoooomc.o

.i s 2e. m i.4 N e n - o,o a o a o a o a o.

i .

g ! 2 , l l . I att e4

! l 3

l i'

l c' N ,

l l i -

j !. j t i ! l 75 , ; i. . !

0 < N o o o o o oo o o oo o e -N 'N a c w N N - o.o o o o o o c- a. n.

W l . . 2 -

I 3 i i n ,

H I j e .s

I : i cN ,

i i i. ' i l j l , i ,

l

=

t) '

' t l 1 l 1 ! ! I i !

14 ! '

s i 4, P:s a . . .

H wm x o m m o .4.o o o o o o o o m e.o.

Q m 4- o o n o n o a o n o o c v c.

g

, . m -

M-2 I ! i n ; 2 ! l l -

A i i I '

i j i' !

l '

Z ! i t ! l 1 l i

i. i ' l -

! i . t s J . . I ,

3 o N @ v,N u o o o o o o o o v e @ j, 3 2 e1 e4 N o .4 o o n o n o a o T3 f% C. O.

u i .

v) i , p. t- . .i

. l l l w. ,

l l

. . v- >

m t

. I i ' i l-I ,

> i i l- ; ; j l )

i .

I i

r i

g i .it e v e .4 o e o - o, o u o o o e4e4c.m.

I w o n #1 - o e4 o e N N .4 o o o.4rs n.y.

v>

o , m ,

V I' i f% '4 o V8 i !

I itt o '

m N i l 3

' ' l l '

O c0. .

$ l, l (U N i I ;

h

'- m .c o - v m m o - o o o o N N o l.

l-

e. o g i.y o e19

- 4 N .4 o oi o o o oo i oN N e.o .

ut N e4 ,

c . . ; ,

I Od O 4 CM N H A 6 e t

i .- >4

'. l ; -

i e4 i

l 1 l i

}

1 l '

4 : l* g M u O l y e .

O Lilf% .4CNNOOOOooooo@ at.

O ut i e4 "O. e4 . I o Wa7 in

eN. . N. 3 4 o o o o o o o o' 4 w e.e4.

Q E '

N- -

O M i 4 l NN H Vm ^

u

%, 1 l - I W t e *

! i i i g g ' I' M I e ,

i .! CE" O

8 WN c N O o o C3 o o o o o c o @ NN*

VI ,

1 8

O ' W.) L* PO C N .4 o o o o o to o o . o o1NN.C. . i M i l @ -l Z , *D e4 V l', j *

-l FO

'z4 L

j l I'

,' tt.: [ <

q !

i .

Q . , i 8

i >- i .

a. N.

W C3 Wf\' N o o o o o o o o o o c o y N 90 m WpO-v4 #1 Y e4 o c o e o o o o o N es'c N

V) , ,

ED M , te4 . *

[ W PO -

D4 u)

N et W ,l 6

N

-f to W j,' s

! .i ,

!

A .J - j -

I- *

, , 8

1 l A e e g O NNononoococnoovtsn ka.

W o c o N r3 c o c o o,o o c O N e w. . I J w v. m e i

. . 3 8

-N M 8

N LO .23

$ J 4

l 4 -l, .

1 a

4 o

- i -

t

'l l-

, - a4 ' i A l

- t f

o' . o o 7 O

I Ued N o o o o o o o o o o o o o 4.fi O N . Wo - ed o o o o c3 o o o o o o N @ a#9 O-l W .C g e .

W. .4 2 '

W 'f fj.t , .

N W

!' , j g ,4 ;

T I

W' i g ; W-g C

I J 2."g

' I l 1 I J

- .l . . , . m I , . ! . . I E' >

g 2 WN e4 o o o o o o o o o o o o 70 4 . M. *E t-WN N v v o e4 e4 o o o o o jo o e' e= v.&. =E >=

8 i i i

g. g j L* >

T l N Er + f v, .4 l

W i

~

W g *j ,

t g i-e to , p' g.

vt .

6 i 3' . i . 1 2:I H to WN to o o, .4 e o o c:s o o cd c2 o o .4 > p.1 .- W Wo .4 e e m o.o .+o o o e o o c o c p-:

Z W ;5 j ' , * *

Cr --

3 1 I

. *e4

I N

o .J M l l i

, vi ctl

. c. (3,

- l

i. i

' c N fr,i c.

'") W I W ! l l i 4' o f. . . I rs n

, I . i o-r 7 es r w w o e o o n o o o c o r e.g e. - e. au,' .g g eOc.,,o ,

e,rs o o o.o o o o o o,-e.e.u., 1 .

a8 l'

{

g , , *4 ,

I E j ! I 8 u l CF'e* W t

i 3

i .,

' n. . l i l <-ci .

\ Q l to' O l l ,.

! g .to

.i . . . .

, 2 ,

** L3 2. >-' us 13 ! 2 *= 64;

' 3 W7 33 3322 22 7' 7 ** 7 a _J & f' C)

. 3 La. 3 277223 2 7 lI J J 2O _J . ' C. C W;L a (L 1 :L CL ft 1 Q. a fl. 3 il 14 .d G. 4 W.L a it a 3 l' 1 1.1 a (L a Q I et .U (L 4

f. 1 % y 1 T 3 1 7 l' 2

I 7 F- U ./. tr C1 3 3.

3 2 : ;- 3 1 I lF 6- t.; t-) Er th e O Or av M 4 O ft W ,

C e4 N ** w its @ b EC A, C 4F f\ f 4 >=d.> ;> i o .

N Pr, eC@ P%.T .'\ T T f\ f\ f.- A ** > I e a ** *'* N.*O M O4 *E , j . 3 i ., e4 e4 N *O 80-, 1 =E af

c _

p v v J TABLE 2.6-8 (Sheet 2 of 4)

JOINT FREQUENCY OF WIND SPEED (33 f t) AND DIRECTION VS. WIND DIRECTION RANGE (50 ft)

WIPD aACE_.GPEATER THAN 22 0.3UT_LESS THAN OR EQUAL..TO. 45.C _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . - __ _ ____ ___ _ _ _ . _ ._ _

SP'En c N..__ NNE .N E ENE E ._ __ _ E S E KE__SSE____5 SSW R W . _ H S .i . H.__NNH RW _ _hNW ..ID T A t_ .2ERCEN T

__.0.rpu 8 9 3 0 1 4 3 1 4 2 0 0 2 2 6 9 54 2.5 1 HPu 12 3 5 4 6 3 3 7 5 7 7 6 2 2 3 5 80 3.7

? *Pu 61 to 17 12 12 17 20 19 22 77 17 19 18 15 75 _. 36 _ 355 16.5 3? 38 25 17 25 37 57 498 22.9 3

4 ,pa MPs -'~- s'70y 36 - 34 19 24 - 13 ~ 14 - 29 17.

22

40 ~ 35 24 46 21 36 19 34 6 17 11 18 37 42 469 22.4 5 3 36 __15 . a g von . __.31____.27 _.. 16 .__ -..__4__. 3.__.. 8 __ . 12

.. 25 _ _18 3 . _ - _._21 2?S -.._ 10.3 7 cro 1 1 1 0 0 ' 1 1 4 ?3 34 17 0 0 3 11 0 97 4.5 M Mpu 0 0 2 ~ 0 ~' 0 'O ~' 1 1 id 22'~ 6 0 0 2 2 0 54 2.5 17 npu ~ 0 ~~ 0 2 ~~ 0 0 1 2 ~ 42 60 19 0 0 0 0 0 177 5.8 14 *pu 0 'O ~~' 1O O 0 0 0 - 0 17 23 2 0 0 0 1 0 43' 2.0 24 "Pu o .

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? 1 32 "Pu O O O O O O O O O O O 3 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 37 Mos 0 0 0~ 0 0 n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 TOTAt 775 ' 19 7 ' ' 170 71 56 59 ' 90'~~122 291 3n1 ~~ 155 51 51 98 i47 ~ 162 2176'~ 100.0 P F N C E 'IT 12.6 5.8 ,, 5 . 5 3.3 2.6 _ 2. 7 4.1 5.6_ 13.4 13.8 _.7.1 2.3 2.3 4.5 ._6.8_ 7.4 100.3 Av SPn ?.7 29 3.0 26 2.4 24 28 32 5.6 6.4 4.7 22 22 3.4 33 26 AVERAGE SprFD reR THIS TAHLE FQUALS 3.8 utr0 RAVE GREATEa THAN 45.0 bui LESS THAN OR EQtl AL TO 75.0 . . . __ _ . . _

~~ .

Si EC D.._. P: N'IE _ t!E _E% .' E _ ESC ._SE SSE .S. SSW SW WSW W W _NNW T07at PFRCENT

. n t'Pu 4 ? 2 1 2 2 1 a 0 0 1 3 1 __ dR 1 A'2 2 3 28 9 1 MPu 3 ? 5 4 2 4 2 1 7 2 4 7 4 2 4 3 56 1.8

' i~r' P 4 '? 4 26 to 17 13 14 10 11 12 9 10 21 17 9 7 29 ?45 7.9 3 mpu _-

45..._ 40 g .._..24 35 .. 31. - . ~ 25 id 16 ~ 14 21 ~ 32 23 12~ ' 15 49 401 ' 13.1 4 ' 'id 21~ ~' 11 15 ~~~1718 32 26 ' P 4 ' ~ ' '14 16 'i 4 462 14.9 5 PPL 38 57 %2 36 ?2 16 20 20 11 17 77 18 a 23 15 ~ 40 420 13.5 ~

% :. p u 7 "PH 13'~40 ; so '" 23 " 6"11[11

8 6 14 21 20 14' ' ' 1 rl 19 18 31 28 a

9 11 8~

14 6 27 23 P6 19 334 PA9 10.8-9.3

- . 6 _17

61. ..16

-6 9~ ~~ ~~ ( ~ ~~~ ' 7 N'~ 9 '~ ~- 9 " -~ 15 ~~-~1 D ' ' ~~ ~~ 5 ' 6 74 18 Pn5 6.6 17 t' P s. 18 41 ~56 P4 3 ~~ 2 21 46 39 47 57 15 4 30 69 37 511 16.5 l 1A HPw 2'~ 5' 3 1 1 0 2 14 18 17 17 3 1 6 27 9 173 4.1 24 " P t. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 0 0 2 9 0 19 6 3? PJ n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,0 0.0

37. eek 0 0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'O 0,0

- icrAC'~' 930Tf0~ M9 "'~194 118 100 122 - ~ ~191~~155 -~17eS~-245~~~~1 '5 4~~106 127 238 28J ~31TI 100.0 P iW h ".T , _ 7 . 4 ,_10 . n_,,,1 1. 2 6.3 3,8 _ 3.2 3.9 6.2_,.5,0 5.7 7.9. 5,0 _3.4 4.1._._7.7 _,9.2_100.0 _ _ . _..

Av SPG 4.2 5.1 5.7 4./ 3.9 3.7 5.3 6.5 6.8 7.3 6.5 4.2 3.8 6.5 7.9 4.9 AVERAGE.SAEFD FOR__Tifl$ TAALE FOUALS.. .

5.6..___...__,._____.._.___ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . ._ ..

I l

l

_ _ - _ _ - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ -- = __ _ _ _ _ ~ .- -

-g f -~g 3

\

TABLE 2.6-8 (Sheet 3 of 4)

JOINT FREQUENCY OF WIND SPEED (33 f t) AND DIRECTION VS. WIND DIRECTION RANGE (50 f t)

W IND M A N G E _laHE &IER._lH Ah___7 5 0._BUI_.1.ESS Y w a u ria_E QU Al,__.IQ_10 5. D - ___ __ . _. _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . l 2 5 kE ENA 5 09E C5 995 C RCk SW- WS" W WME "u- .AS E._lAI AL__R E R C E MT 0 14 8

..USPEED tivu ____h[__ 0 2 4 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 D 1.7 1 P H . _ 1~ _.2_ 1 _2_ _ i 2 ___(L 1 . 1. . _. _ 0 _ _ _.3 _.. 3._____ 5 _ .._ 5 ___. 1 ___ 1_ . . 29 7 MPH 5 10 11 11 6 6 4 5 12 7 5 14 5 1 5 5 112 6.7

'5 "Pu 12 I ? . _ ___16 _. _ 1 2. .___.13 ___ _. A 5 6 5 _ 5_._ .6 10. _10._._.10 . _.10 _. 10. .16 3 _ . . 9.8 _

13.4 4 *Au 76 48 13 16 16 15 11 10 10 7 5 15 24 9 8 10 223

% upv 2 .4 in 15 21 22 to 12 6 '8 4 _9_ 16 _14 _8 4 ?0 -_207 12 * ? _ __.

6 "Pu 19 13 70 31 21 17 9 6 5 1 10 9 28 14 8 21 232 14.0 7 =Pu 4 . _13 24 15, . 19 9 6 10 2 4 11 8 1A _. . . 9 _ __ 6 21 196 11.2 ._

6 "P ts 15 17 16 15 16 5 4 1 2 2 7 7 7 13 8 P6 159 9.6 35 37 17 6 6 4 1 4 5 9 12 5 ;27 54 285 17.1 . . .

1? MPu 21 P 2_

la MPu 10 4 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 2 8 13 12 56 3.4 24 "Pu n 0 0 -0 0 0 0 1 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ _.Q _ _ _1 _ . 1. __

37 "Pn a n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

32. Mow 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .t____0 .0 0 0 0 O _ 0 0 0.0 1r T At. 1 70 136 154 165 .133 78 58 50 47 34 66 93 125 ._.930 . _ . 90 180 '1662 100.0 P 8- 9 F E **T in,/ , 8 . 2 _ . _9 . 3 9.9 8.0'.__4.7 4.5 3.0 __.2.8 2.0 4.0 5.6 7.5 __*).O __5.4 1C.8 100.0 . .

Av %PO t.5 -5.5 5.8 5.7 5.4 4.7 5.0 5.0 3.6 4.6 5.4 4.6 4.9 6.0 7.4 7.1 4"8"'A" E. F W t .0?_RlS J.A DL E i u'J A L S_ _ 5 7 _. '

. _ - . .~. _..

a l M % ?. 6 L uME A TER .1 H A's1G b . 0 .tsu f .LESS$.TH A N .OR..EQU AL T0_135.0

.E.__ ESE__._SE__.__SSE__. S SSw _ .Sw W5w. . w ._ . . . w h w .. _. . Nw - ENw TOTAL. PERCENT .

SPEFc .

s t E _ _ a E JEAE. 4 1.0 4 "Pi- I c. h. .@ 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 "P".._. 3* '-_._( 1_ _ _'_' 3 ) n . D___ 1 0 3

1 . _. . . I 3 3 _.

O 5 __.

_1. _ _ _ 0 _ __ ._ .1 _ . 1 ._ . 1 3 .

1 0 5 0 40 3 .1.___

9.6

> -99 3 3 ,3 2 I b ,3 5 vPu 6 1.Q ., _ ,7 , _ _ . 8 .. . _ __ J ,_

6 .Q ___ __ .1 1 4.. 3 8 5._. . 1 . __. __ 0 .__ . _ 2 . 63. 15.7 22.7 _

4 "Pu 6 7 6 12 3 6 8 8 7 5_ 3 3 6 8 4 3 7 94 V . _. . 5 4_ .? 2 . __ _ . _ _ 6 - J_ 2_ .3 4 _. 9 ._. 4 __ ___ 2 __ 3 . 63 15.2_ .

S .' P u . _ . .4 _ _ _ _ 1. _

49 11.8 6 "pu 3 3 3 6 5 1 D J 0 2 'l 4 3 5 2 4 4 5 1 3 .__7 2_, 1 Q .__. 0 . O _ __ . 1 4 2 _2 .0. 3t_ _2 7 . 2__ _

/ 9 4 . _ . _ _.2 1 1 4 1 ?$ 6.0 4 .4 o 5 1 1 2 3 4 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 ..._. 5 ._ 4 3 . 2 _ . Q. 1. O. *O . _ 0 . _ .. O __ 1 __ 0 5 . . ._. 4 _ _ . 2 9 7.0 17 "P" 3 .

~ 3 7 15 ,P.a *t 0 0 0 1 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1

/4 ;P s. 1 0 0 0 , ,. _0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 __ _. _ 0 _. 0 _ _ _ , 0 __ 0.0 3 > "Wa 0 0 _,.0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 O __._,. 0 0 0 0 Q_ 0 0.0____

3'+ W 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 re 14 >. 41 . 14 46 45 ?6 25 12 2 3,.._..._13 15 18 29 34 17 24. 23 415 100.0 _

en r:t e r ,,9 n.?. ,8.7 10.6 6.3 6.0 2,9 5,5. 3.1 3.6 4.3 7.0 __8.2.._.4.1.._3 8.__5.5 100.0__ .. . _.

l Av sua 4.o .5 . 8 . 4.6 3.9 5.4- 4.7 4.1 3.9 3 . *> 3.2 3.4 3.5 4.6 4.8 5.3 5.6 A n use.E 3: r i r, rM THI9,TAPLE 8'O'J ALS . _ _ . 4. 4 , . .

l

_ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ._ _. ._- ~ -

G O O

_ TABLE 2.6-8 (Sheet 4 of 4)

JOINT FREQUENCY OF WIND SPEED (33 f t) AND DIRECTION VS. WIND DIRECTION FANGE (50 ft)

. WIND MANGE _ GREATER THAtl 135.0 ___.__... _ .___ __. . _ _ . . _ _ . _ , . . _ . _ . _ _ . .

SW _ MSW M WNW PW NN W._lD.I A L_P.ER C E NT SDEEn 2:. *11' A hE_ EhE F ESE SE _ SSE .__.1. S S W.

1 0 2 7 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0.sPu 0- 0- 0 0 0 0

1. . 0 _ __ 2 0 . _ _ _. 2._ 1 0 0 11._. . '3.8 .

1

P u . ... . . . _ 4 .1 0_ _ _. 3__ __ 0 0 1_ 0 5 3 4 51 17.5 2 MPH 4 .4 3 4 4 0 3 4 4 1 3 2- 3 8 4 4. 4 5.__ 0 1_ _4 _.6 3. 3 5 8 .2. Z 1_._ _2 4 . 4 ._ _

3 " P u. _._ __ _.6 B.

4 MPH 8 4 2 5 5 1 4 2 5 4 3 8 6 5 5 5 72 24.7 7 4 5 5 1 2 2 4 2 4 3 1 4 6 57 19.6 5 *Pu 7 0 5.2 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 1 1 1 15 6 "Pu 2 2 2 1 0 0 1 .0 1 __0 0 0 0 _ ____.0 0_'_._._ 0 _1 ._ ___ _ 2 . _6_ _ _.2.1 ._

/ W 4 _. 1 9 f 0. _.

n 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 3 1.0 4 MPu 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 7. _ _

12 "Pu O .0 0 0 0 01 4 0 0 0 3

1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1M PPu o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28

~-

t P u o 0 0 6 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

'32 "PH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

O O 0 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 O O O O O

37. MoH^~

TOTAL 0

29' ~ ' 19 ' ~ 72 0 0 22 13 10 15 d -- 14 13 20 18 20 18 25 20 291 100.0'~

PER;E*T 10.0 6.5 7.6 7.6 6.2 3.4 -5.2 2.7 4.8 4.5 6.9 6.2 6.9 6.2 8.6 6.9 100.0 " '~"~~

Av SPD 3.6 2.8 d . 4 ' " 3. 0 '3.2 3.6 2.B 2.6 2.5 3.3 3.6 3.4 3.5 2.7 3.5 3.7 AVERAGE SPEED rnR THis TABLE EQUALS 3.3

r_ -

l TABLE 2.6-9

' ESTIMATE OF RECURRENCE INTERVAL '

FOR VARIO1tS RAINFALL RATES FOR DOTilAN (in.)

Recurrence Interval (years) .

Period of Rainfall 1 2 5 10 50 100 30 min 1.5 1.7 2.0 2.2 2.8 3.0 1 hr 1.8 2.1 2.6 2.8 3.5 3.8 2 hrs 2.2 2.5 3.2 3.7 4.5 5.0 3 hrs 2.4 2.8 3.5 4.0 5.0 5.5 6 hrs 2.8 3.4 4.3 5.0 6.5 7.0 12 hrs 3.3 4.0 5.2 6.0 7.7 8.5 24 hrs 3.8 4.7 6.0 7.0 9.0 10.0 O 2 de,s 5.5 7.0 8.3 11.0 11.5 4 days 6.7 8.5 9.5 13.0 14.0 .

7 days 7.5 9.5 11.0 14.0 14.5 10 days 8.5 10.5 12.5 15.0 17.0' l

s

?

i O ;

i

l l

l i

TABLE 2.6-10 MAXIMUM PRECIPITATION RECORDED FOR DOTHAN (1941-1950)

Period of Rainfall Amount (2n.)

(hr) 1 3.28 2 3.60 .

3 3.55 ;

6 3.67 12 4.39 24 6.75 t I

i 4

l I

r%

i i

l

,j lIllI! !liI IlIl ll E

Y L R T I U N A T A DA YL NP TG E E GR E )4 A P 5 O ARRA PAOT R M1 MEPS EE-OLEE VT 0 9

A B9 51 -

CCR S 1 6

RU DL NLN E AE AB T NU 2 WYTC ROE OEN IL E YP R PLE GRRU RMG A DI G AANI E F MF N R AI F A OT V ON B MRA IR A S A AHVE Y E TH LPNP AEEO H LME O S T R D O NT(

J OX ME O

j5 i , ' i i' . '

+ ,

C

1' E

- - D V

1 j*t ' i '! r ! ' i O!

E GyU Al51 Rl EA1 Vg4 5

~

i N

T C

O A R _ .

P i~

y? ' *

'EGYU N l[ id ' E S

!/_, ALE RIl e

F

1. A EAN VDI B

II' G

U A

Y G

L

,l - ' ji ,

A R

d. -

iil JJ U

E ..

V A E

_ - N

, - - !j ;t

.I!IlA U J .

Il +

i '

'_ T A

N i' i -

R P

A

"; fii

, l ,

_ - i {__ .

! R1 ;'

! i'I! I ; - ,

. I A

-_ N .

B -

E

_. _ 1_ - - F O ,i!*

- ' u. f - !2 -_ . - , E N

A J

i j 0 , 0 s O g 9 3 9 g 8 -

0 , 8 i E $ 4 3 2 g 1

c _ y=5k% SE 5 o

l (L(j!i lIlI!j, r' t!lII ljfilllifll,jlf Il

O! O ..OF.

L, I

j _ . _ . _ q __ _ __.__ _ .

i I

AVERAGE i DAILY t . es 4 -- --

-7= --

- j -- ,3, , ,y, -

70 , l L 60 "

i I- i y U '-

?

Y

.A,ERAGE l

50 ; j ;

l- ,

=

r

=-

g .- 4 g _ _ _ . _ . _ . . ..

'l AVERAGE DAILY -- '---

g '

MININUN

- :" 3, j _. _, ._

S

lll !

_ 23 - - + r

= ,i .

t.

, 10 {

t- e l

JAN FEB NAR 'APR MAY JUNE JULY . AUG ' IEP DCT NOV DEC' 1 i t 1 1 AL ABAM A POWER COMPANY JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT .

i ENVIRON M ENTAL REPORT i OPERATING LICENSE STAGE MONTHLY AVERAGE AND AVERAGE OF DAILY >

EXTREMES OF WET BULB TEMPERATURE

'(DOTH AN ' AIRPORT 1950-1954) l FIGURE 2.6-2 l

l i'

. _ . . _ _ _ . . . . . . ~ - . . _ . _ . _ _ . -

t Y

L ,

A E I

T DR e

N A F U L OT A )4 YPT EG E R 5 o

N RR A G E 9 A A P 1 PA OT R -

MEPS EM0 O LE E VE5 3_

CR S AT9 -

C 1 ULN DT 6 RNAE E NNT R 2 TC I A O OE.

WYNIL OE E E P P R PLRM G GWR U-IA G AANI N AE RD I

F MF A.OT E FN VOA B M IRA R A AH VE S H LP NP YE TO A EEO L M S H E (D O T R J NT OX ME i

O ig,

~

C E

, 5

- - D

~

E - 4 GYU}

AL5

.h N *

~

~' V O

N RI EA11 -

YDA T A - 5! C O

j i{ ! i rf. l1 i E P

S G

N U

- U 7! !E G iJ -

I N A

_. A N R - Y l

_ E E L U

V A J E

N

- U t J

_ Y

- A

, j i! f!

M

- ~ R e

- P A

l

- l'

- ~ R

~

- ' A

.l ' I!

R iI l f_ .

B

_ E

- ' T

~

~ N

,~- A fo i Iil l-J

~ -

. ~' ,

~~ ~ ,

~

0 0 3 0 0 0 D 0 7 6 5 4 3 2 I

. ~ ,.

- . ';i*

L .i l

,! i . g 4 I

,y w 2S *-5e "

' ; .! [.- i t ;I T

9 G

T Y

L

$ i I

T A N D e A F Y M YL OT) u L

W -

NPTE I

ED4 O

(

AR RG GI 5 P AOA A M9 MEPT S R U-1 OLE E H0 CCRE S V E5 4 A 4 R ULN V 9 -6 EN AE DI T

1 T

p t.

WYTC N OENIL A AR 2 +

r PLE LO E i E

RMG G R. R U E P R AA FNN AR FI A G M.OT I

E O I e F

AMRA B IR AEA V S 'N AHVE -

Y MH s

LPNP a

AEEO LET S H RO O T TD F J N E' X(

O i

+

M .

T g

e 3

4 p

g v

r -

e ni 7

O f p

P W

.I ., l.'ii! j .! ,l . ' i i, s

s u

e s

E 1

j= n

,e 1 ii' ! ' I

~ u M

E m

/

~

E E ~ G W GYU A w e -

ALN R .

_ e n

RI E W EAXI T

V VDA A N A m

- - w m

/ u -

rY~

C r

l L a r u

- - M 7 u u

d E E m GYU

~ ALN RI I EAN

's 9

a 9

m

,jti*

VDI ri 1 u u

7 CA'B 5

p J 4 e

t n e

' y-t s t

- _ i i

a m g

- w s

- (

4

.( 4 u

r 4 i

' _ a W

-- n

~ - A m

4

- .. s+

- It !! rl a t e

] - s u e O

.1 Iih i l

,i.:

m

' ; !k

! s i .

o t

h%'-l64 g

- _ r e f

p u

' : t- - - , ;

! n a

w

- - d

- -- _ J t

G S

0 8 ,O e s-o S g g 3 y g g

B be

g=5:= W W

W

q L1 bq) L/

_ _ _ _ ..._m ._. . _ . . .

(_g4, g . .. - ___

) t t j i !

- t AVERACE 22,0 . . ._. _ . _. _ _ . _ _ _ _

~

--20.0 , '\t_.--

NAllEUM

.-'-1

~

l ,

AIIRAGE i i , .

l t

>_pg,g . 4 _ . -__ . _ _ _ _ . _ _. _ . _ _p._____.

! i

I

-~

p 14.0 '

, . AVERA.GE .

h"- ,

l DAILY

12 0

_. M, l.

. i m. ,

2 gg,g I --- ! .._ _.

i ! - I

{

a i

,g i

l

% 5.0 -- -- - - - - - -- - - - - --- - - -- b - f

-3 ! , L ! .

l '

& i + t ,

,_g ,

..__.i___. _ _ _ _ . __. _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ ___.. k _ .._ _ _ . . . _ -

I JAN FEB RAR. APR RAY JUNE JULY AUG SEP BGT NGV DEG AL A B A M A POWER COMPANY

' JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT ENVIRON M ENTAL REPORT

_ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ ._ -~

OPER ATING LICENSE STAGE MONTHLY AVER AGE AND AVERAGE OF DAILY.

EXTREMES OF ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY (DOTH AN AI RPORT 1950-1954)

. FIG U R E 2. 6-5

t-e.

n-z

?

e f(L/

Es

.ag@g < z z

gwam O e o

udE.w mm = = E . a.

WZ _J h O _m N R >- < u i - w OwH- m' O g aa z .a wnO Ewo 44 VJ mO

.s'2g O O- w z- a YOy C

,z_m z siSEE E m wo >_

O J-7 I H

z O

2 m

- a - g' O :<

- E W

- I e

=

[ ed E

= g as 7 2-

. e pg > .

'r\i )

nn -

E g

= gEEE-

.. e--o !

- .m 5- - ~5ddimmg.

> - N ky y l [ " [' o

Ins! !

[ ;

g 555 EIZ g Im _- l . l -

WWW q w

n

_v-e

.,EE" S

r.

f e.. r .t

...d .-

a e e e l

44 at 9 -

i

.1

-5 m u- e

..m 5 $

(~ d:W ! i ggg5 E 8 -

2ww 5 gd"m b mz osz =g2 r. a w m z - 0S E R$s0 a m -ee ag,ez z @~ w EiEU m m o

z !

a z

O ,

3 l

/ !

=

o 8 ! r -

. l . .s l (q. .

9

?

s i 1

. e - 5

~I k y m

n v t

.e

e

?

e s es g y

() zm me z

<"m t; a<os o

e e

E'i ' " %4 UOEW o Ch N Ehgh W

A I oOO W

g 3><w owz- W*

p m

3 o

L W J OO ~

q<Eo22 0 2A 4 .O p ~2 CD 34 3

<z>E >

Jazy

<gw O z o e

' O 2

E y d 4

u .

O p E 2

O o q) # ,

w $

8 R- 5o

' GL

,p f . -

1 I'

U 4

U b E 5 0 O

A

i k-E

+=

L =

s

.s

<=

> s.

q 3 py 4 to 2 I. : 0E 04 4 2 y# Ahm I g' g.

ONW $E.ab

= =Z _. ; ee W 4w O e W 3>Ho 6 OE R$b3 Es

$5 E 2o OC 462Z O E

= miEE 9' m

4Z W _$

.J a a 4 0 4 o

, 8 y.

M P

3 E -

.$s O 5 i ! .

. , w r , , /m i

? JC v

m.

ETE 3Em g **"

y- -

g a "y -

g ERR E

=

tt . $ - ###

y 5 888 ***

,, M

} -. le 555 8- zrr N/

m I 'l E I E' l ;

E I 1

s*jls er, '1 ,

n o- >-

g g,_

g yyyy

- V' o $ $8. k'-

kb lh 992s stE#

W9 N 6

[

t. _ -

s , t - t . : . i5 b I :; .

e t

p e

g n

u n

i e

~

T' T R

O

,N A

P =

YL R e o

TE

N P RG I m A e AROA N e P AP T A MEES H -

OLRE CC T 8 u

S O w R ULN D 4-6 g g

ENAE R Ogg2 WYTC F . E g OENI P RMGLE L ES $gR a

N n

Og U e

A ANN R n

g G MF I I r A .OT RA N D F

+

BM V IR W ra I

A L H N E A EPEO P AL S U r e

N s

O J N -

e A

! +

g e,

d 4

g e

s s

ai p

e e

i w

w

+

y e

w w

g e

a.

iv -

e e m p

e o t g

f.

s s

y e

i s

l S t

r 9

M L

A C '

- T n

e w

N E %

e

~ w M

g e

=

r a

i. t 9

h +

m W

R

=

1 1

e w

t

,t _ e

_ ' > e N

r l

t 9

HHH i

e w

PPP e MMM~ w

=

a 372 1

=i e

e d

OOO e e

TTT' W LLL' AAA 4 5

UUU QQQ m EEE'

= RRR

OOO N N N r AA A HHH' ta t

TTT' e S SS SSS M '-

S EE D O; E L

E SS D

E LL EE DDPS EE t

u r

s r

E EE NI PP D 4 v

+

P S SSW -

ODD P NN L L 4 a

IWWmA s

'e r

e A * == ** w 1

m s r

+

w e

h

$a, m , 2 + J .a a 2 2

>J n Z4 W p 4 o w-1 < m b W O b' E o

"uEM egg M u)$ m g g t .ak.

5,Es5>Eu me- W e N.

3 UE EU,6,0 ra ms $.

[) 623 [h

.OH 2J 4 -

b m bg OE ,

6 w

.a aza 2 g, (WWO M g

0 O-g 5

I e

M

$ N

g o
(-
- t 5 B O
e t' lg i
5 8 6 0
E e
, f o r
. {}\ / . - .
j 1
u I
- i
iU gill
' . .- e
- EEE !
5 l!! ,
! k A
o '
ENER*
$EE8 l
???Ye 4 +K h
I:.
F Z
4
Q l t"\ ' HC O
.) f @O' 0 D"2m z$
O gwy We-m :
UUEM E f ,N o e
?
6gJh O Ok N
=>se *WP OWZJ 3bg
,W i
" 3
" dye >;b) o 44 zb I " b E !
OH Z -J 4Ng4 g- 7 ED _g O 4 ,
4Z>w XL J 0. Z c.
4WWO , $ :.
O '
7 e i
g E
~
9 LO e - !" '
i u =n :
. N ,
gi '
gy
_ l i
't 4
u o
' E ~ E u u 5
= r" E 2.
o N :
i-p o
u .
. - . - - . . .. .- - . . . _ . , . ~ . -
'i i
4 p-
>. ;g 8 ' E l
-.. l 2 mO 2 q wn O
.j 8
. b. $
v G. mw NW o
=sa*
- -i 8d=w 3 M O qNW i
> u EON 5 a i
yw,g OWwa H g g ,
@3gE)z hg3 0 !
- e '
. m!i $ w>.
4
' l m2 J ;
4 oE .
J I 4' i
<O -l
= = ;
o o e
.7 A- l t
t I
i b
i E s !
s 4 ;
- o 5 g ;
o w
, 'O 5 g -i O
EE W 3.4 - i
~ ~ O y l 1
i
/ 't t
. g. . f t lE I M ~
O 0 .i r 5 g ?
a- ,
2 W l' 'O.
a l = !
7 t-
$ l m ;
l b
> 9; L e
e sr e
e m
e-r c
T -
N ) -
r A T. e LT S F O-Y P -
E0 a
N R S r
e ARO O (5 0
t e
' PA P -
m R TA MEE 6 -
L;' OLR CC DA 2 w
I
' UL ND I
e r
RNA E E T WE~ T0 R
+
< WYN LI S U v
f(, OEE PL A G e
w NY I
R M OE( F m AAN SL v
MFO n
A .R AR e e
BMI EA m -
A HV SF t w
o N
L R APE
- E O S F O
J -
m w
r e -
r r
v e
w e
w m
u r 3 t _
w A w L -
A t C ,
O i
t T a N +
p E n R
E P
7 e r
4
N
_g5 m
w N t t
4 s
w w
~
N r
a e
HHH PPP -
t
t. S S MMM m 8 M R M 372 w w
E L E L 1 w
T A N C M
M A 'O o 0 ' m WI T U C T
TT 7 --
S N LtL N
E C
E AAA C UuU R r R QaQ ' -
E P
E EEE '
P e RnR w 6 7 OoO
% 8 0
t 4
t AAA NNN c
~
HHH w TTT m v-N r I
E SsSS w
~ SsSD -
EEEE w LL L E O \ e. l SsS DnDS EEE EEE N PPPl SsSw P
D w e
DDD NNN LL -
MwWA I ,
=*= =
A+ * = n e
i l ; i ,.
l ,!
i J T .
N .
A YLTE R T. )
NPRG A ROA O F F
P APT O 5 ME E OLRE C
S CLSN O E5 S(
0 A
1 1
6 R UA R T .
. =
ENTE D D A 2 C
5 WYNI OEEL N
I E
~
I RE .
- PLMG WT !* U I p A RNN A LS ( G I MFOI T A Y F .
A .R A U E .
BMI N L A HV E R NR L PNP A A F A E EO ,.
S .
O _.
J
~ .
I O .
S ..
M L
A C
_ T _
N E ,
C ,
R -
E .
P 0 .
3 ..
1 N _
H HH i.
P PP ~
_ 6
_ " MMM N
_ 372 1 i
OOO -
TTT~ .
LLL
_ AAA .
UUU QQQ -
EEE -
RRR OOO NNN AAA ,
HHH TT T .
SS S c SSSS EEED ,-
LLLE E -
SSS P .
DDDS O
EEE EEED PP PN .,
SSSM DDD .
NNN LL I ! I .-
WwWA E
=* a * .
A+ u e .
t * , a L .T I e
Yf T E N'
A S
O YLTE R NPRG D T _
AROA _
PAPT IN R O MEES W O OLRE CC LS P
N R 4-I O A 5 6
) 1 2
RUNAE N I T 92 _
E T C A N 1 WYNI TA 0- ER OEEL P TH 5 I PL MG U R
I C D O 91 G .-
A ANN ( I MFOI T E R R
. F -
A .R A P O _
BMI R A HV E L F _
L A A PN P U EE O N
) S .
O N A _
J t -
O -
S
- M L
A b
C T .
N E -
C R -
E .
P .
7 -
6 4 _
N , t c HHH PPP _
MMM ST2 1
, O O' O _
TTT LLL - _
_ AAA .-
UUU _
QQQ .
EEE - . .
RRR
- OOO NNN AAA _
HHH TTT -
SS S S SSS EEE D O LLL SSSP DDDS EEE EEE E
E D
PPPI N SSSW DDD NNNI LL I I W W =W A.
+ m.
I - - {[ ti r . [:. i. r y . I, 1
T E' .
N S _
A- O YL -- R _
NPTO 0 A R PRO MAPb WO OEE D -
NT I
R P
CLRC N .
OIR 4,
) .
RUL I A 5 ENA T 9
WYTN A T N 1 OE I A -
PL E P H 0p .
RM I C T 5 AAN E O 9 _
MFO R D (1 p A .R BMI P R' .
' A HV L F~ O L N A A EPE N .
S O S
O A .
J E S ._
.I S .
S n W M L L A .
A . C C T T N O.
N E
C 3 E
C R
E .
R P .
E -
G P 4 N 1 L 0_
I 3- L $
R -
P a A S
F
[g .
N h N .
y .
S S -
L M e ' M L PPP HHH -
A A WMM C C 372 1 T ' T -
N N OOO E
C E
C TTT RLL L R
E 9 EAA A .
e P PUU QQQ U'
R R 7 E
8 0 E
7. E _
. T M RRE ER' .
IN 4 MU S. C C O .
W .
S -
.NN AAA'N' .
J MHM N }. N -
- TTT SSS SSS C
EEE S D
LLL E
.S SS~ E DDD PS EEE EEED _
- PPPN SSSt w DDD
- NNNL I I I L WWWA
= e a. a A+= e _
O O O
's.) ' '
f .. .} '7 .
t. ,.;
5 j -}-=s ~,_j { _
'y
~^
'c - ,? ?
^ i Q' %_
l' N_
/
% __~!" x a
gnum .
&= .
f_
,,l
~
;_ b JhiQ;j;f 3 kk /'OT'-
\g\ _p
,! / \
e
.;.[f._--hkhh p- .
"=h p
a: gEj- ,~ ' = =/u ' ' '(
A. 'f'"l i i / S
/ \ rv' 1 *E'v d n
FiVEj ! : ;. ~__._. Q yg=_:' ;ggg
! 1
.g;=.-
l "C 1
= . .
'., cgg: :: bg,g-- N\ N'4' r.
.f -
\ 'g. ;
g%.,
N ..
[ G-s___ __p~
k \ y _?
C 300 +
\. Kw . , .
U 150 -300 I
N _.N #
- T ALAB AM A POWER COMPANY JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT
@ 75 -150 OPE A ING L C NS STAGE
@ 25- 75 TOTAL H All REPORTS 3/4 INCH 5- M AN D GREATER 1955-1967 BY 2' SQUARES FIGU RE 2.6-14
{
O. O- O
/ . ,f i
k
.1 - , 3 l ,. 7 --~..0.-... .] % L_. \ ? - s *
~:lit ,],. ,N ' . ..,l,,, '!.' , ~- [ D._s..w. \-
W
.! n ',
s
-L ,.sh,, all,, > < > >, ,
. t et 7::. wg %v } u \ 4, :.', p 1
.a 1; *t# ' "a f,y : s , ,:,:wd a r
97 u 1
- - ,l- , , 'i '=>M. , , . ,,g it,. ... t 4p ygdp.gt. ; = ,,pc,;;
( - '/>j ,' + .' ' . g ,j ,
. ;Q ,. ,, , j ,.
a
= fg p g.y ?{. ,
1 p.
', ***h 2 * ,) $,% u ,s ,. is u }r , , k ,' . ,j Q , (' ./> - , ' 1"Ja gu n ,, ,,),q' p,7Q) i_ ,, n n n n
(.. . .. ,, e_ ai ,gA.. r"y ,, '7, , p,
/ . ,, -I s a.s... y .. ,.
s p-
\ ,- d s ,f ,l.,'..... *l82 _
22 8,
.. ., .. ,i 1, ,a ..
w. .ky *,
, , , , , 3 p y/ . * \, ' , _
g ' 8
.;- , , p- -a_ .p ]., * ,s ., i. , ,, ,, 3, ,, g, ,, , , ,J,Q.{ , a g,,
g {. . - Y' 3 . v {-
., m,-, .S. #ji.!12 -
i
>>, ; , , **' " > g2n ,. !n ..!,, ,. ,.. ., ,, ,. ,, ,, ,, .. '. c , 71,yp : $3 ~ /
Mgl',,.?,aa,!".,'-
r
>=- >, , n .. n u t ,,, ,, ,, ,. c, , ,, ; , 5l, y n , ,l , ; ; . w.. ." .. .. .. .. nn . ,. , ., - + -
c 1
\ ,j ~m,s _ --.;y--
s rL'.g ,, , , :,.
=' " ~ n n - --- -n n ,-
n "
2 = .. 2 L2. ,
-h r n n . . .. . , ,, 9 ,.
t,'h[ a ? [ I If a '
,/ ['$ = s .. i. .. .. . . /, , 7 "ij ./
4
). , ,s e s ,s .2
V TwS kg$
)
ALAB Anm A POWER COMPANY JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT f' n L [_. ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT
._._.--f . + -.. s . .I s . _,
OPERATING LICENSE STAGE
- l- -
TOTAL Hall REPORTS 3/4-INCH
, ,t. 1 // r -- ----3 %-- - .- . - . -t .; AND GRE ATER 1955-1967 BY l' SQUARES .r ! $_, . .._- - - ._.y_,. FIGURE 2. 6-15 I I l
!. u - _ l' . ::.-~ :-n ~ ~~,:-
l _______-m_ _ . _ __m___i._. ...sw..... ,'..
, ,.-~.,% ..m,.... . , - . , . , . . . . , ,,,,a....._._ , ., y 3,-c .,x m'. . ,-,,,,.,n_,,, . .U-E,_ m. ,cm,.,.-c.w,-. ,,4_n, ,,,,.m_,y,%,v.,,
C\ "% ~ O () ' .. T * - - , j j .,.
' ~ .
r- 'z
% u _ .m o I, '
N.s ft' f k C- -.J r s, y )q j/- /]v't .( o
,/
nss - , '. - :%x% ' ~
' ?? *-g
(, e f T
&r -- ,-
j - {s s g
%- : /e ~~ l }[ jh) N,~_ l' I ~K Q % L (r/
l if h ih h '. ."!{j. ... .s cl}} 4khh Wph ^M;" 1 h:3;O.',^! v- k 5 j\
;f' wf l
S \
/
f
! 3 <7 $:feX- $$4 ' \'M H% \
W ' $2:g;.;lSDI.:.:'q);;Ej-pdii:yQ 3{l%.Q['Q',$>{(&.E{hD:
% : l 4 .OAX vf... 4 s .- - -- '- 7 'g / '. ,.(S,[("if;<y^s ~ % R.i . 2!0':iiF%$hw .. ... 5 s;$ $' r'*[$j:y$g:-
S 1 17
,f .sgsj ::'/.-fs.;;2.j .= ,,
s.,^v :;.'ys guj:. ;;pf,0$$
;: 5rQ.vg <'?
8 c... g- "'-- , .j v (_m _. l
-M-g/7N T -v ' _ . _ ; f;%!g;/!i,igijji S'ij{;jj:ij jg;!"* _- --'K9';($2: E ;. WN UNS r's --
f ' M. ! f
.i \ \ -
i . U. -
'i G . f J' W- ,v>'?'n:2.:::i+q--
i'iiiiiM:i'~ .
r::..:f;'$r/P @,;qc >
./, s ,. - . , - - -l - ,rn .
f gf.s : D !; - :::n:/q s'g:;.sbgn'$Mi s '-7"(e,. s y,,. .. .pgD+'-00$ . -k s, f 20.f 3 Ri 0 \ \N
# I p. X h t !!$d 4 \ .v!
g N .f
% % I'-- - f'g Di >sho; *;Y<:.. \ \ w. 5 'N '\ YJ 300 + s ;(j .;$(R!$3!jf kxF s.% .
ns=j 200- 300 g d$!!!k.y. Q;yc 4 D:
- _ '*M' "' g v ' k. - ALAB AMA POWER COMPANY 's>. 100 - 200 '
M '< JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT ENVIRONM ENTAL REPORT OPER ATING LICENSE STAGE Q 50 - 100 % .' . . TOTAL TORN ADOES 1955-1967 10 - 50 BY 2' SQUARES FIGU RE 2.6-16
; ,- 1 - s u 2se ,yidv . ,
e T, N m - o d1 b{&p;.Q$u1" h 1y s
\_ \ \
4@v' 1nT L
\
w- A L E YP TG N A RRA PA O S ME P EE T 7 6 9 1 5 5 7 A O L RS 9
\ + ' S 1 CC N 1 y4 1 >. ,
p, wM v' U LE S R E 6 - h g1 ,
,c,'
t
.ygc - \ RNA E
W Y NL O U E OEE G D Q R TI C E A 2 1Jt a PLR MN A N S U y- .H -
\
AA MF A TNI AO
. IR R O R 0 T Y 1
G I F v
, . ym ta ' #r4,W, , ~ \ . BM VE B Y )3.wt \
L u ,\ 1
* , A NP LH EO A T
AP (
,m E O m jh % g3 n . T S -
O
; a ., t. =
1 MJ s
,, ,,,,;i. \ I jl) m ~"
Tg94
\
u
' I " " \
e f ,-
' i . . e9 y
g f .x[ m'id.5i3e,!g" w i 1 t nh 1 G . g-e in, i.Q".g.,@~ L t.1 p ). 1 g ~-
%p4 . ;,,d._*
t m
. q, [l,. Yh C t, p Qwf.i,gy,$y.g.-; w, i 1,
(+ t. t
;) , . ., n ;} + ,u::m.x!D I . 'r i
r . i,' . . ,
. . t.
l,k.
, , . *T ,a o . , *T n,.,,,.,... , , . , . . . . -a . , , u , . l *
t. . , ,
l_ e
. 7 c. . , . , , . .
g3, . i, l 39 ,.i. . . , --
,,3~ . .
f'-
m e
.n i,. . n a-M J,, . 1 l , , . ' ' . T .. . ! f f r . . u : .
i . i!. I y1,j ,
, \
fp.....,..,r.l 4
. r11l p ;, . n - :
t t n l. l
, 4 L; 11. nl i
,. '4 -
l.! - 1lN . h Kl ws.ilU.i.l. l n. f' ji
,~ . > , l@ . 3 I l ,
l k
~i ml.h!_ - + ' .' l + -
l
< J. B m
7
.:3
* /
- l 4 f
v l. L,+ / ;,
/
s d
'o c, ?. , i / = =
f a gQ. ,3, , , 2, , n ,, l:w
. J L
k f
flm,g;:i J/
. ' / / - &r d,l '
P
,; p~. , , x 4 Dw i , ' / ,
n w-
,,' dy . a.
u-3
, j . ! = ' y q O
u
/ - ;
m. cl~/r /
i , Ii f. - y
. q e
j f
,r g , 3 /
f , : s. 's a p
? / '- 'q w4 A ,
I , y 4 s a h
N.
.y.
O G ~) rs "5'm ~ .ji 1" % ..': ' x
----.~.- t ,~ \ .- -- s k N. -,,
u-.[? (
-"'-th,' .' _
4d I e j, k _ LESS - - be i k gg '
/
x - ' p 'Qjg
/
TNAN
' w(
c' - . k' w. gjbh$' Mgmggp&Td it[<'issp$.'3d.g:
<w ..
5+M 5 mf xg}'g' ec D.2:n n n: r - --- inan *- = se* iES la$ h.D MdF NWpA, M= : Weh'.XEXMv;h* Y;Uid g% g(P =VM*
N,_ "G$<j):: n . .isp n.n=:,nnn.nn(i..= $9S
- 23iii :n tw$3p;'gf;R':fM:36E,i -p@Q \ /, ! N' Y ' ti;=iEEliiE""~"" n :=2 mun(
. .v ed,. n;;f
.ds e .:n= -
s = <. .
f U M 4k , : .)- =: "1::~ - ,nnn nzn==n-- = : - :: : %?.
j nf.g-b h ::= ;v<y&AO. y .;.p:fx' q>: . d - v
\
g-
,f- -z, ,.
y xn v,>...nn-c
~~:::%==- o:.:n-=t = --. ,, v- .6. a. 3 g
g !a =--(= = =.c C h w v e = W 8 m:i P1V s
\
E i.
.mxm' fe4im=-:==: .
x
,.di . l. i.:.=. .ru ... nn :nn r:=::=gn:n=--:n=pn.X4.
r enD/. s.- n n-..;g:: m.sc:M ' s
, 'O:4; . c.- ocM , ~ : . ^y<s <
s
.:,s;0qU .t.O.
v. sg: Xg 88.f..,n:nHH!E:
.c:4 N . 'M 4 ., p.jNs%l7 __ - _- := == ln= topM ~
a M%.s } ;(q:q;=: innAn .*=:n. g:.=:,,,yggyxd'
.r ,. ,;49 % .f .>, ,. n. f . vy n.:: .g.<, s nnWy. . a s 0:0. .,, :c;.>gg..pc,p;ygv,..c. ,. < p , .s .-
se,v.wce. n- c.c v..,x.p, y .& ' s e 'm ..
M
.-._.....~...s...s. ._....+. .nn==.yy ; xx7 Q9.Ov1.:.u::...
a
. . .s , ? 1.- S$b4dt'<Ys .,s.- 0 ..,, e dii! -M;;1(--t q0, b.=-.'*X D. dM;g:<).<h /.:U.$. v. 4 ' . '". .T' j ,\' !
g. a. ; n.. i..:.'1 2iliEliP S!?' f. :$. F<7E::. ...n=jip.Q@.4 K ;{+;2,g?.X. .Oxq;e.:e^
(A
m. .a 3 . A f nm.
N g
~. ,a:}.n..nh, /.n...=.. A- :s r q,: X cy.<p; ..:.sN..,
p-- ' 6)e ::!=.t.A <0:- N I L___.4 J ,g=E.n=3:g:s*;p , Jp: Mg:y T q .m :--- n:
--f i / 'c %n. ggg! v 4Rp'gW\ >yf;p::=ij5ijEi-lijigf(g:pp40.Q;$$ -~=:n=VXs40 a?qheX N -g / v.
3:=T .......D;p;+kgX t:q p+xq:O e9 G8::n:....
- -u::n+ p>#S- v ;p ONb..w 0Se <
nig:=: :n-f3 : 3;i4.0Xq:f; "yqM'o?. 7:#qygggg<0SA+
/ =...~. g fgp-. .an. $'O..X/-;
XOW "qq:gg.[f X +;. W~ =Z : N
}Xpd!
vs ... . . .s :, z ... ..sv
;p$$g" ~ \ N y hg. Mii*i" "b N \ . ff~fs 200 4- s !:=4 100 -200 f, '
4V_ E ' ALAB AM A POWER COMPANY 50 - 100 l JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT'
\ ENVIRON MENTAL REPORT 25- 50 !' O P ER ATlNG LICENSE STAGE 4
TOTAL WINDSTORMS, 50 KNOTS
~ ' 5 - 25 AND GRE ATER 1955-1967, BY 2* SQUARES FIGUR E 2.6-18
n tL-) U
'\ n/
i I r h y ! 0
, % sj,'!: - l j_ Lt : n.., .g. .% ;
4, m r,t. ! ' : . . , ,1,: : ,: : : : : :- ;/t .
' g,s u y8 y( wp.gmy ,xq , ' . . a! :, - , = ,,i, ,
9 n.... j. , i i. . s
,,, > > , , , ' ~! ,,h l . 2. ' '#'O ' * % , ,y,. " b, "M.-g;h>4't' iE M "\ '- j 4!.. , ,. , ,, ,, ,, ,, ,,
a 1" ' *
'l- 3 4 ..t.. 6w .i. / *2,,, , L. , , ,, , , . ,. , , ,.
s
',5. . T . . ,;24 ,,; c W ,2, > " - .y m;h(. g. ,, ,. i';. t , . l' i' a a a t. :"' C , ",w..' ,l ,
f '
, , , 7 > , , ' . . - ,
n . . , , (,, n.. u, 1
' ./ ,, et'2.= . n ,, i. \s n ny . . oin a " ,* " '" ,a , 3 , s Y ' ~
2 ~!= .. n n ,, ., p r , 1
,g.t.,,. m a "f' " , ,,, ,. g l.. ,, p, ,. ,, ., ,, ,.. .. ,, 1 ) '" . u i u'i n u ti" " ', ,g,p o o p. . g 11 g, .' _ .,
ni. . . . .. in o n o
,. .. ,. i, ,,
ji u
\
i ,1 h, "lij s.
,, 114_' ., . u ., ,
alir""'""'T',.,ym"'g{' , ,, .. . e- 1 !
>,, j, 1b ~ i. ,- \ +,,..g!"a'.'l". * * ' ly,,,~,f Q A -k -
il!" ., n n .. .. .. ,, ,, ,, ,, d wt.. ., ,, ,, ,;. ,, .. ,, v 1,, ..
. ', ,g ,; p_A - ,
y
.',..t,1~',' ",,-1.u vm. 1M ~.,.,,>>, . ~ .. . .. .. .77,q, ,v ,. ,.[,," y .1. -pi; - + , .y r . , ... , . n a n n ,, .. n ,, ., n' u'pn a . , , , , . , ,, , ja y ,j ,
j
,y---
aya .. . ,, , ,. S ,, g h, ,, g ;_ ' , %2 ,
#- 1 - p-w-
n [dW~g /' * [- ALAB AM A POWER COMPANY i
~ ~
s \ . . .. 3 , a - -- JOSEPH M.FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT ENViRONM ENTAL REPORT
~
f 1 k , . ,, d % -t
~
OPERATING LICENSE STAGE
' - + - TOTAL NUMBER OF WINDSTORMS \ --
50 KNOTS AND GREATER
\
t3 .
-
__.L 1955-1967 BY l* SOUARES 1 _
/
I i ' l l gi (; *+- i ', i I 'J FIGURE 2.6-19
2.7 ECOLOGY in the Environmental Report - Construction Permit Stage, a brief discussion was presented on the terrestrial flora and fauna at the l Farley Nuclear Plant site. Extensive data and discussion were offered on the aquatic biot.a of the Chattahoochee River. For the Environmental Report - Operating License Stage, an extensive review of the biological l I t erat ure was carried out for the Chattahoochee River and the counties 2 that surround the Farley Nuclear Plant. This information is presented an Appendix 1. Forestry and terrestrial botany, and aquatic invertebrates and botany were discussed in the AEC's Final Environmental Statement. 1 Information on terrestrial invertebrates, terrestrial and aquatic verte-brates present ed in Appendix 1 was obtained f rom both published and un-published studies. References and literature cited are presented after () the narr at ive on each major taxon. In some cases the complete life histories and ecological requirements are not discussed since the standard references providing this information are cited in the references seetlon. Rare and Endangered Vertebrates of Alabama - 1972 was used in c i t lin; spec ies in an endangered or precarious status which might reside in the vicinity of the Farley Nuclear site and in the nearby Chattahoochee River. Consultation was sought from qualified vertebrate ecologists who are knowledgeable of the vertebrates residing in Houston County, Alabama. , Alabama Power Company has consulted the College of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Georgia concerning wildlife diseases. Their letter, 2.7-1 (~}, Amend. 1 - 11/30/73 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74
I which Indicates no record of diseases involving wildlife, is attached. , i, A letter is also ' attached from the Georgia Department of Natural Resources - concerning populations of game . animals in Early County , Georgia. Since extensive ecological studies of aquatic and terrestrial r blota were not required for the Environmental Report - Construction Stage, 1 _ the environmental impact of plant construction on rare and endangered species which might reside at the Farley Nuclear site and nearby Chattahoochee River j can he based only on data and information presented in Appendix 1. i Section 1.3 of Appendix 1 presents information on commercial and sport species of fish which could be expected to use the stretch of river between the Columbia Lock and Dam and the site of the Joseph M. Farley i Nuclear Plant. Section 1.3 of Appendix 1 contains information on the 2 HpaWning habits and species life history for those important species of 1 fish. The information presented in Appendix 1 can be utilized to ascertain those species preferring river and headwaters habitat at various life stages in contrast to those species which might complete their life cycles in , Lake Seminole. , The populations of any rare or endangered and any common species , which might reside in the vicinity of the Farley Nuclear Plant site and !
.)
in the nearby Chat tahoochee River should not be adversely affected by l l the plant construction so far as genetic drif t and reproduction, and j distribution throughout their known ranges are concerned. Section 4.2 of ! i this repoert presents the results of an aerial survey of Alabama Power j Company transmission line rights-of-way conducted by.Dr.'Julian L. Dusi j of Auburn University. The reconnaissance was to seek p,otential habitat 'j
-l and asness the impact of'those species discussed in Section VII-B or the- 1 AEC Final impact Statement. Dr. Dusi's report indicates no expected impact on those species.
2.7-2 Amend. 1 - 11/30/73 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74 1
k i COPY ALABAMA POWER COMPANY Birmingham, Alabama 35202 March 16, 1973 Dr. Frank A. Hayes, Director i Southeast Cooperative Wildlife Study College of Veterinary Medicine University of Georgia Athens, Georgia 30601
Dear Dr. Hayes:
I am employed as a biologist by Alabama Power Company. I am in l the process of compiling added ecological and environmental information relative to the Farley Nuclear. Plant near Dothan, Alabama. The new AEC Guidelines request information specifically on wildlife disease outbreaks near nuclear plant sites. I would appreciate your contacting me by mail if there is documented information on wildlife disease outbreaks in Houston County, Alabama, Early and Seminole Counties, Georgia and Jackson County, Florida. {}, Your help in this matter would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, ; Harold Wahlquist, Ph.D. Aquatic Biologist Room 635 HW:1 P i
i 6
) f COPY SOUTHEASTERN COOPERATIVE WILDLIFE DISEASE STUDY ,
PARASITOIDGY COLLEGE OF VETERINARY MEDICINE _, The University of Georgia ! Athens, Georgia 30601 ! March 27, 1973 t Dr. Harold Wahlquist , Aquatic Biologist , Room 635 , Alabama Power Company Birmingham, Alabama 35202 '!
Dear Dr. Wahlquist:
In reply to your letter of March 16, 1973, our records do not indicate that any diseases involving wildlife have occured within the j i counties under consideration. In the event that such should occur, we I will notify you immediately. I Very sincerely, l Frank A. Hayes, D. V. M. , Director FAH/gm n l f ls-}- i I I m...
I 7N COPY k,A ALABAMA POWER COMPANY Birmingham, Alabama 35202 March 5, 1973 Mr. Jack Crockford, Director Game and Fish Division Department of Natural Resources 270 Washington St., S.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30334
Dear Mr. Crockford:
I am writing to inquire about the availability of wildlife in-formation from Early County near the Farley Nuclear Plant. I need information on the status and densities of game animals in this area for elaboration on the environmental impact statement. I would appreciate copies . of Dingell. Johnson reports, or other reports, that.have dealt with wildlife' investigations in this area and information on possible incidents of wildlife disease outbreaks. Your consideration in this matter would be
/) %)
greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Harold Whalquist, Ph.D. Aquatic Biologist Room 635 HW/pak 5 f f t
J ) COPY DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Game and Fish Division P. O. Box 911 Bainbridge, Georgia 31717 March 13, 1973 Mr. Harold Wahlquist, Ph.D. Aquatic Biologist Room 635 Alabama Power Company Birmingham, Alabama 35202 { I
Dear Dr. Wahlquist:
Your letter to Mr. Crockford f or information of game populations and den-sities in Early County has come to my attention, j The only game surveys this Department has conducted in Early County was i I for deer and turkey. The river section has the highest deer population in the county. I would estimate on (1) deer per 60 acre which is not a ('T high population, but based on other sections of this area is a fair population, i kl There are very few turkey in Early County and most of those are in sections other than the river area. Other game speciep found along the river area are. squirrel (gray and fox), racoons, beaver, Quail and dove. During. winter months migrating waterfowl are available as well as resident wood duck at all seasons of the year. There are no reports available.concerning. game for any of these species in this county. I apologize for the amount of data available but hope this will be a help to you. l If I can assist you again, please call on me. Very truly yours, 1 j Oscar Dewberry l Regional Game Supervisor Region V OD/bjm t'~i
.)
() 2.8 Background Radiological Characteristics There is no reason to believe that radiological conditions'in the region of the Farley site differ in any significant degree from conditions elsewhere in' south-eastern United States. The estimated whole-body dose from cosmic. radiation in the state of Alabama is 40 mrem / year, that from natural terrestrial radioactivity is 70 mrem / year _ (A. W. Klement, Jr. , et.al, Estimates of ionizing radiation doses in the Unite d States 1960-2000, EPA report ORP/CSD 72-1, August 1972). Thus, the expected external dose rate from natural causes is expected to be about 110 mrem / year. Recent data on radioactivity concentrations in the State of Alabama are sum-marized in Tables 2.8-1 through 2.8-4. Table 2.8-5 summarizes the preliminary measurements of concentrations of' radio-active materials on and around the Farley site. Figure 2.8-1 gives the I@ cations of the sampling stations. The measurements of radiation and radioactivity planned for the pre-operational and operational phases of the program-are'describedlin-Section 6.0. q-V 2.3-1
- TABLE 2.8-1 x
MONTHLY AVERACE CONCENTRATIONS IN MILK, MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA
In 10~9 pCi/ml Month Sr-90 1-131 Cs-137 1971 July 6. <10. 13.
August -
<10. 15.
September - - 23. October 8 -
<10.
November - - 11. December - - 13. 1972 , January 8 - 4 10. February - -
< 10. +
March - -
19. i April 6 -
410. May - -
16. !
June - - 15. July 5 -
< 10. .
TABLE 2.8-2 O AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS OF TRITIUM TN WATER, AIABN4A* U in 10 ^ pCi/ml Tap water Precipitation, Tennessee River, Month Montgomery Montgomery Browns Ferry 1971 ! April ( 2. 42. 5. - May -
7. -
June -
3. -
July < 2. 4. 6, 1 August -
8. -
September -
<2. - ;
October 3. 3. 4. November -
6. -
December -
< 2. -
1972 January 2. 42. - February -
3. -
March -
42. - !
i
Radiological Health Data and Reports, Nov-Dec., 1971 Radiation Data and Reports, January-November 1972.
O i I
TABLE 2.8-3 GROSS RADIOACTIVITY IN AIR AND DEPOSITED ON THE GROUND, MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA * , Month Air. uCi/ml Denos1 tion. uCi/m 2 971 (x10-1.2) (x10-3) July 1 148 August 1 .28 September 1 108 October 2 9 < November 2 98 December 1 18 + 1972 January 1 15 February 1 7 March 1 7 April 1 3 . May 1 17 : June 1 25 July 1 18 TABLE 2.8-4 STRONTIUM-90 DEPOSITION, BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA
l Month p.Ci_/Jq ,
1970 (x10-0) July 1.2 August 1.3 September 0.1 October 0.8 November 0.8 December 0.8
Radiological Health Data and Reports, Nov.-Dec. 1971.
Radiation Data and Reports, Jan.-Nov., 1972. O
l i TABLE 2.8-5 MEASURED CONCENTRATIONS OF RADIONUCLIDES
Sample Concentration, pCi/g (wet weight)
(location)** Sr-90 Ru-106 Cs-137 Ru-226 Th-232 1.4x10-10 Well water _ _ _ _ (site) j l River water _11 (Sta. 1-8) 2.3x10 ~ ~ ~ ~ (Sta. 9) 1.5x10 10 - - - - Estuary water -10 < (Sta. 11,14) 1.8x10 - - - - , i Bass ;
-7 (Sta. 1-8) 9x10-9 -
1.8x10 - -
-8 '
(Sta. 9) 1.4x10 - 1.3x10-7 - - Mullet'
-9 (Sta. 11,14) 9.0x10 - - - -
Oyster O< (5ta. 11,14) 1.4x10-8 _ _ _ _ Juncus (Sta. 9) 2,3x10-8 _ _ _ _ (Sta. 11,14) 3.2x10-8 _ , _ , ( Milk _9 _9 (Silcox farm) 4.5x10 - 8.1x10 - - Corn ~0 (Silcox farm) 2.3x10 - - - - Soil (Silcox farm) 2.4x10~7 2.8x10-7 2.1x10 ~7 8.0x10~ 6.0x10~7 l t Sediment 1.6x10-7
~ -6 (Sta. ~1-8) 2.3x10 -
2.1x10 2.2x10_6 (Sta. 9) 1.6x10~7 -
'4.0x10-7 1.1x10 (Sta. 11,14) 1.4x10~7 -
7.2x10-8 1.3x10~7 4.2x10- 3.4x10-7
Stewart Laboratories, Inc., Alabama Power Company, Final Report, Radiological Survey, J. M. Farley Nuclear Power. Plant, July 7,1972. ;
Locations are shown en Figure 2.8-1.
-O Silcox Farm located approx. 10 miles WSW of Farley Nuclear Plant, Houston County.
O b 4 1
. . . .. =
RIVER e~ 1_ MILES .; STATION 21 COLUMBI A LOCK AND DAM H P L A N T SIT E t--+- H STATION # 2 40- EH STATION 2 3 , t H STATION #4 NEAL'S L ANDING, FL A.182, W = -{ STATION 4 5 $ GA. #91 HIGHWAY CROSSING 20- , P 10- , i JIM WOODRUFF DAM HO- ---- STATION # 6
o j
~30- , :>
i 20-i 10-
- STATION # 9 i
APAL ACHICOLA B AY }+-O - --- STATION 11: 11
. ALABAMA POWER COMPANY :
JOSEPH.M. FARLEY NUCLE AR PL ANT. ENVIRON MENTAL REPORT U # ' " ' " # # STATION N 14 }-+-OCHLOCHONEE BAY S AMPLING LOC ATIONS FIG U R E 2.8 i O ,i
+
i 1 3.3 PLANT WATER USE r~~s The Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant will require the use of surface , and/or groundwater in the following major systems:
1. Circulating Water System

2. Service Water System

3. Potable Water System '

4. Fire Protection System

5. Demineralizer Water System Figure 3.3-1 is a schematic representation of the water use system.
Table 3.3-1 is a tabulation of water use for major systems under various plant operating conditions. 3.3.1 SURFACE WATER USE Water withdrawn from the Chattahoochee River will provide service water and makeup water for the cooling towers and circulating water sl system. The withdrawal rate vill be approximately 31,000 gpm for each-unit during normal operation. The service water system provides water for component cooling water heat exchangers, containment coolers, diesel generators, safe-guaro ptsp vnom coolers, letdown chillers and turbine room heat ex-changers. Makeup water will be required for the circulating water system to replace losses due to evaporacicn, drift, and blowdown. The makeup will be supplied from the service water system discharge. The makeup water requirement will be approximately 17,800 gpm per unit during normal operation. The remaining 12,800 gpm of service water flow will , be mixed with other discharges and returned to the river. Consumptive-3,.3-1 , l I 1
.. j
4 b Joss of approximately 12,700'gpm will occur in the cooling tower circuit-f
- for'each unit. This will be'due to evaporation and drift from-the cooling : ' towers. Cooling tower blowdown will be discharged at the rate of approxi-mate ly 5,100 gpm. l 3.3.2 GROUNDWATER USE j v
The plant requires a maximum of 380 gal, per minute of groundwater' :! for the following operations: , Make-up demineralizer 320 gpm r Domestic 60 gpm , TOTAL 380 gpm : Groundwater is also used to provide make-up for the fire ! protection system. Storage for 600,000 gallons of water for the fire ]; protect ion system will be provided in two 300,000 gallon tanks. The maximue 'i 1 i instantaneous demand on the ground water system would be 1.1 million gallons 2 {
~
per day. This would occur if maximum use of the demineralizer and potable
~0- water supply was called for during a period when both fire protection. tanks 1 -were being filled. As discussed below, this demand is significantly less ]:
1 than the reported yield of the major . deep aquifer. l i Two onsite water wells, located about 4000 f eet to the north and j about 2500 feet to the southwest of the plant, provide groundwater for plant -l operation. These wells are 775 and 980 feet deep respectively, and draw { water from the major deep aquifer. The deeper well also draws from the l underlying Providence formation. Each well is equipped to produce over 500 gal, i per minute. The combined producing capacity of the two wells is more than .)
\
twice the maximum plant usage. -j
-i No adverse effects to offsite wells should occur as a result of i onsite pumping from the major deep aquifer. Two wells within three miles of' l Y
O..
3.3-2 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74 i
,, , - - <,-,c. - , - - . . ,....w_. _ . . . -a-,.., n ,- -.- . , - , , ,- nn .<b
~ _ _
i the site presently produce small quantities of water from the major deep !
. aquifer for irrigation, stock, and domestic usage. The nearest area of
_ (_/:
~
concentratrf withdrawal from this aquifer is at Columbia, Alabama, five miles ! i north of the plant, where 62 gallons per minute are withdrawn. The ! I Ceological Survey of Alabama reported that the major deep aquifer will yield
.i' over one million gallons per day (700 gpm) to individual' wells in all parts t
r of Ilouston County. The maximum plant groundwater requirement that could be produced from a single well in the aquifer is about half that' amount. The
=i reported quantity of water available is such that offsite wells producing f rom the major deep aquifer should not be affected by onsite pumping. [
In the unlikely event of an accidental release of radioactive 'f4 4 contaminants onto the ground surface at the site, movement of contaminants into the ground water system would be affected by several factors. First,
'l on exchange and absorption properties of the soil deposits would restrict !
the migration of the contaminants to some extent. Secondly, downward movement L( ) of the contamimants would be limited to the unconfined aquifers of the upper ; portion of the major shallow aquifer. This limitation is due to the extensive j claystone and siltstone aquiclude within the Lisbon. formation, and to upward i artesian pressures associated with the underlying confined aquifers. .l Seepage of contaminants into the major deep. aquifer is unlikely because of an l i additional aquiclude formed by clays in the upper part of the Tuscahoma l, f o rma t .f on . Construction of the plant . water wel'is (completed in the major deep . aquifer and Providence formation) includes a' cement ' grout seal to prevent I seepage downward along the well bore. The ' general direction.of groundwater flow in the upper major shallow l I aquifers in the site vicinity is eastward, toward the-Chattahoochee River. ' 1 S.ince the plant property extends to the river, there are no potential' ground water recharge areas within the influence of the plant. 3.3-3 Amend. 2.- 4/19/74 l r .., . ,. , ,4... ,, , . . , - - - y,-. -- , , . . ~.
No reversal of the castward gradient should occur at the site as a result of present or future offsite or onsite pumping. Offsite wells would only be influenced if there was a reversal in the gradient. The projected withdrawal from the uncenfined aquifer by the year 2015 is 11,200 gallons per day (about 8 gpm) f rom 26 projected wells. The projections are based on the estimated population in the area west of the Chattahoochee River by the year 2015. The analysis of groundwater gradient is made by the following two procedures: (a) Utilizing a value of permeability obtained from field tests of 4 x 103 f t per year, the estimated amount of water available in the unconfined aquifer along the 5000 ft. western plant boundary is 88,000 gallons per day or about 61 gpm. If all of the projected offsite wells were pumping 2 alony, this boundary, there would be a surplus of 76,800 gallons per day, or 53 gpm, remaining. (b) Based on drawdown curves determined from observation wells monitoring the aquifer during site dewatering operations, there is a calculated underflow of 308,000 gallons per day (214 gpm) along the western nite boundary. This is a surplus of 296,000 gallons per day (206 gpm) over the projected of fsite requirement. The surplus values for groundwater avail-ability indicate that no reversal in the eastward gradient will occur. For an analysis of the rate of movement of'the radioactive contaminants toward the river, it is assumed that the spill will occur in the immediate plant area. Inasmuch as the exact location and elevation of the spl11 arc unknown, it is conservatively assumed that there will be a rapid downward infiltration of the contaminants into the unconfined groundwater system, and that the movement of contaminants will not be retarded by absorption-or lon exchange. Once into the eastward flowing unconfined system, the shortest flow path to the river would be about 3500 feet. The average hydraulic 3.3-4 Amend.'2 - 4/19/74 e
I'
.f gradlent along this path is approximately 0.011 based on' 1969 pre-dewatering contours. The average permeability of the soil deposits along _
the flow path, obtained from laboratory tests, is conservatively estimated [ t to be 3 x 10-2 cm/sec, or approximately 3 x 10 f t per year, which is about 4 l 2 ten times higher than the permeability obtained from the field tests. This j indicates a conservative rate of movement of approximately 325 ft. per year. l It is therefore conservatively estimated that at least ten year,s would be required for migration of t.he contaminants to the Chattahoochee River. ! i a i e l , l 1
-t J -)
i i 3.3-5 , I
' Amend. 2 - 4/19/74. l i
l
4 t t d' RIVER HO SERVICE WATER 7 : : I TO WATER PONO RIVER SYSTEM 3, esAME-UP CIRCUL ATIN G , WATER SYSTE M B COWDOWN A 1r & r EVAPOR ATIO N EVA P ORATIO N
& 8 SEEPAGE DRIFT t
itA CKWASH "- CHEMICAL - WASTE SYSTE M I
^
d CONDENSATE % DEM IN E RALIZER 6
; ; !REAC'IDR MAIEE-UPL+ RAD A E 3 ,_J misc. compostTs 6 dk i seau t - up l' j, WELL O
_ POTA B LE I ag WAT E R WATER SANITARY l SUPPLY - S TR E ATME NT I 1r I FA CI L I TY ' I I ! l SOLIO . 1 { ; [ WASTE' l FIRE I (DISPO S AL I < P ROT E CTIO N ----J'-1----- - - -I SYSTEM AL A B AMA POWER COMPANY JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLE AR PLANT . i . EN VIR O N M ENTA L REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE j , WATER USE(GPM) NORMAL M AXIMUM ' PLANT' WATER USE I
G RO U N D WATER 380 1,000- FIGURE 3.3 -l j SURFACE 64,2 0 0 90,000..
Qc < v J , % --i l
. - ~ . - . . . . - - - . - . . - . . . . . . . - . . . - . . - . , . . . . . . . . . . .. . --- , .- _- _
TABLE 3.3-1 1 WATER USE PER UNIT - FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT Normal Cold Hot System Operation Shutdown Shutdown i E Circulating Water Makeup 17,800 gpm - - ! 1 Service Water 30,585 38,085 gpm 30,585 gpm ;
i Potable Water Supply 86,400 gpd 86,400 gpd 86,400 gpd l2 Fire Protection - - -
i Demineralizer Water 460,800 gpd 460,800 gpd 460,800 gpd 2 r i 3.4 HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM
.f The circulating water system and service water system will serve as -l I
heat transfer mediums for the Farley Nuclear Plant. A quantitative schematic j of this system for normal one-unit operation is found in Figure 3.4-1. This O i t system will dissipate approximately 6.5 x(10 9) BTU /hr. Approximately l 6.3 x(109 ) BTU /hr. will be dissipated to the atmosphere through the cooling. tower circuit. The remaining 0.2 x(10 )9BTU /hr. will be dissipated in the ;
-j river. The heat discharged to the river will result in a negligible impact !
as discussed in Section 5.1 of this report. } 3.4.1 WATER SOURCE AND WITHDRAWAL SCHEME !
-i The river intake system of the Farley Nuclear Plant consists of a canal '
approximately 200 feet long, extending from the Chattahoochee River tofthe' ; l 5 mouth of the intake structure. The intake consists of three bays equipped L j
~w ith vertical traveling screens. The screens will have a stainless steel -I R,
mesh opening of 3/8 of an inch. The intake system is designed so.'that the
)
maximum velocity-in the canal is less than 0.5 feet per second and the-maximum 3.4-1 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74 l l l 1
=.
e velocity across the traveling screens is less than 1.0 feet per secondfat ! the mean water elevation of 77 feet. Trash and debris will be washed ; from the vertical screens into a trough at the top of the intake structure. l l The trough will flow into a steel mesh basket to trap the trash for disposal.. 2 The river intake structure will house ten pumps.with a total capacity. ! of 97,500 gpm. Normal two unit withdrawal rate will be approximately f 62,000 gpm. The river water will be pumped to a 108 acre storage pond. The pond intake structure will house ten pumps with a total capacity of 90,000 l. gpm to nerve the service water and circulating water make-up systems. ., t 3.4.2 SERVICE WATER SYSTEM l The service water system will provide cooling for the components shown ! i in Table 3.4-1. The heat rejection rate for this system under normal operation will be 129 x(10 6) BTU /hr. for each unit. The flow requirement .; i for the service water system will be 30,585 gpm per unit under normal l operating conditions. This will produce an expected temperature rise of ^ 8.5 F. In the service water system. Chlorine will be added to the service ! water at a point behind the screens at the storage pond intake structure. Chlorination will be required f or the prevention of organic fouling which -l r could degrade the performance of the-components served. Chlorination will f be performed on a one-unit-at-a-time basis at a rate of'0.5 ppm._ .! The service water system can also provide by-pass water for discharge ;
. i dilution purposes. The dilution flow available will be approximately j 14,400 gpm per unit, or the excess pumping capacity above the 30,585-gpm; -
service water flow requirements. No heat will be'added to.this water in l t the.<ystem. ! i I O l, 3.4-2~ Amend. 4/19/74' 1
. ~ -
i i 3.4.3 CIRCULATING WATER SYSTEM j
.O' The circulating water system is a closed circuit which includes.the ,
condensers and cooling towers. The system will circulate 635,000'gpm. Make-up water for this system will be provided from the discharge of the service . water system. The makeup will be required to replace system losses due to evaporation and drift from the cooling towers and system blowdown. Evaporation and drif t are estimated to be approximately 12,700 gpm. Drift rate is estimated by the manufacturer to be less'than 0.005% of the , circulating water flow. Evaporation is estimated to be 2%. The blowdown rate will be approximately 5,100 gpm to maintain a dissolved solids concen-tration f actor of approximately 3.5. .; Chlorine will be added to the circulating water system at a point on FJ gu re 3.4-1. Chlorination will be performed for 30 to 60 minutes each day
=
t o control biological growths in the cooling towers. The quantity of chlorine used will be suf ficient to attain a concentration of 1. ppm at the - top of the cooling tower cells. No other chemical additions are expected to be required for the control of scaling or corrosion. Taps will be provided for using other chemicals should they prove necessary. However, by operating s with a concentration factor of 3.5 cycles, scaling and corrosion are expected ~ to be controlled. Three cooling towers containing 14 cells each will be
~
installed for each unit. The tower design conditions are.as follows:
1. Approach to wet- bulb,11 UF. ~'

2. Design wet bulb, 78 F. !

3. Water temperature to towers, 1090F. ;
?
4. Circulating water temperature, 89 F.
Each cooling tower utilizes 2100 H.P, which, according to the manufacturer,- produces a sound power level of 138 dB (re 10-13 watts). ' 3.4-3 ! L y - - -
.~.
3.4.3 DISCllARGE SCllEME ! The discharge structure is shown on Figure 3.4-2. It is located 1740 feet downstream from the intake structure. The discharges from Units 1 and 2 will be combined and carried to the discharge structure through a single 60" diameter pipe. The discharge is directed downstream by the discharge structure being constructed at an angle of approximately 300 from the bank. The structure will be designed so as to obtain the maximum mixing of the dincharge with the waters of the Chattahoochee River. The concrete pad onl the base of the discharge structure will prevent scouring. Under normal operation, the discharge from the service water system and cooling towers will be 17,900 gpm per unit. The velocity'of the dis- , charge under normal one-unit operation will be approximately two feet per second. With two units operating under normal conditions, the velocity of the discharge will be approximately 4 feet per second, i Controlled quantities of radwaste, demineralizer regeneration waste, and sanitary waste will be added intermittently to the discharge. During any period of low river flow, dilution water may be added to' the. g discharge should it be needed to prevent river water temperature from exceed-inn permissible limits. Under the extreme conditions which might necessitate. the use of dilution, the velocities of the discharge would increase. For t one-unit operation with full dilution flow, the velocity of the discharge , would bc approximately 3.7 - feet per second. The. velocity.of the discharge would be approximately 7 3 feet per second, with two-unit operation and full ; i dilution flow. j 10 3 4-4 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74- ;
-i
.. .- = - . . . - . _ _ _ _ __ ,
t ..' 3.4.4 DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN INTAKE AND DISCilARGE WATER TEtiPERATURES During normal operation, the temperature rise across the auxiliary heat i exchangers will be approximately 9.10F. The temperature of the cooling l' towers' blowdown will be 89 F. under maximum design conditions. For example, if the storage pond water is 86 F., the resulting temperature of j i the mixed service water and tower blowdown will be 93.4 F., representing a i rise of 7.4 F. The rise in temperature between water withdrawn and dis-charged under the above conditions can be limited to 5 F. with the addition of 9000 gpm of dilution water (Fig. 3.4-1). Available dilution flow of 14,400- , 3 gpm could be used to reduce the discharge temperature to 90 F. under these t conditions. The above conditions are based on the design wet bulb temperature of 78 0F. Since - the wet bulb temperature is normally lower than this, the temperature of the blowdown will usually be less than 890F. A detailed 3 -( f discussion of the impact of the operation of the heat dissipation system is : found in Section 5.1 of this report. A diffuser system for the Farley dischargefis not considered practical.
The quantity of discharge is small compared to river flow and dredging 1 ;
operations.are performed by the Corps of Engineers to maintain navigation on , the Chattahoochee River. F L
-l i
l I l 4 L l 3.4-5 Amend. 1 - 11/30/73 l b y w , - . ,m.- ,
l l l TABLE 3.4-1. { SERVICE WATER SYSTEM DESIGN FLOWS Flow - gpm , Nortnal Operation Component cooling heat exchangers 10,000 Containment coolers 3,200 : Control room at 240 -t Pump ro:m'ccolers: , i RHR (LHSI) 80 l Charging (IIHSI) 315 { Containment spray 210
,r l
Auxiliary feedwater 210
I, Component cooling 210 Letdown chiller 500 ,
Blowdown heat exchanger 2,000 [ t RC pump moter air ccoler 500 Turbine building heat exchangers 12,000 5 Diesel generators 1,120 l
.. )
Total 30,585 Figuret. given are for cne unit. O i! I s
- e n c - - , - n
O O O EVAPORATION 8 DRIFT 12/00 GPM t COO LIN G CHLORINE TOWERS
; \ /
INJECTION A CIRCULATING WATER 635,000 GPM BLOW OOW N 17,800 G PM sk 1' S iOO GP M TURBINE ROOM 12,q00 GPM X HE AT EXCHGR. 12,8pOGPM AUXILgRY IBROOGPM EXCHGRS. v I UNIT NORM AL DILUTION WATER WITH DRAWAL 30,600GPM ( M AXIM U M I 4,4 0 0 G P M ) g "LO ' MA iMUM PUMPING RATE fNJ CTl 4 5,000 GPM RADWASTE 8 DEMINERALIZER 0 REGENERATION WASTE HOLDIN G POND DISCH ARG E u FROM 2nd UNIT -
' t N TA KE F ~ ^ ' " - ~i DISCH A RGEi-- - -
C H ATTAH O OCH E E di---FLOW RIV ER
^
n. -
AL AB AM A POWER COM PANY JOSEPH M.FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE HE AT DISSIPATION SYSTEM FIGU R E 3.4-1
p 11 5 llO' 10 0 90 80 76 4 ' 1 3OO's N .TS. 4 4 y 1 O
, 1%N$
a NT M 9kE g6f pg . .. t
*l 2:1_
W 110
~
{ DISCHARGE a STR% , $ $ l 100 E jEo h d [ o 4 - 90 x ; 80 i
\
E h N O b I a ,w 5
/ I ,
l } y o I 350. NT.S 4 __ 115 11 0 10 0 90 80 76 i PLAN O : e N 5 N r s 8 p 6'- O" . i_ 5 a s e _E L 116 '- O" NATURAL 04 a MMM & r, # 0* S4 0 +0 6.. 4' t-( EL. 91 ; c4 si u ~~ 60' %
' 'i A/AE' EL. 71'- O" E L . 87 '-7 '" " "
i EL. 76*-O" MEAN LOW WATER OF ROCK _ E L. 68'-0"/ ~ 115 0 ELEVATION - A A AMENDMENT 2 41974 O 10 O 10 20 30 40 ALABAMA POWER COMPANY JOSE PH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT SCALE IN FEET OPERATING LICENSE STAGE VERTICAL 8 HORtZONAL DISCHARGE STRUCTURE FIGURE 3.4-2
i
?
f f '(Y 3.5 RADWASTE SYSTEMS
\_,/ ,
3.5.1 DESIGN OF WASTE PROCESSING SYSTEMA t Alabama Power Company will ins tall the latest Westingh;use design c ncep ts I including the Gaseous Waste Processing System and Steam Gene rator B1:wdown f Treatment System in both of the Farley Units, These systeas will provide j i means to limit the radioactree releases irem the plant to the envircnment
-l to levels as law as praccicable c;nsistent with 10 CFR 50, The term "as low- 1 as practicable" as used in 10 CFR 50 means "as 1:w as is practicably schievsble.
i taking into account the state of techn:1:gy and tne acenamics cf impr ovement in , relation to benefits to the public health and salecy and in relaticn tc the utilization of atomic energy in tne public interest."( ) A scmm8ty' description. of the systems f or liquid, gaseous and sclids waste processing as well as the
~
expected radioactive release rates with isotopic breakdown is given in the
-{
following sections, 3.5.1.1 Liquid Waste System .i
.i 3.5.1.1.1 Liquid Waste Processing System 'I Overall radioactive release limita are estsblisheo as a basis for i i
controlling plant oischarges during opersticn witn the ccturzen;e of a c;mbi-
l nation of equipment faults of moderate frequency include.cpe:Stien with fuel ]
cladding defects in :cmbination with saen Occurrences as: ,
-l
1. Steam generator tube leaks, 2 i

2. Malfunction in Liquid Wasta Prc:essing System I

3. Excessive-leakage in Reactor Coclant System equipment,

4. Excessive leakage in ouxilisty system equipmente
- (l) Draf t Environmental Statezent Ccncerning Proposed-Role Making Action: .
I Nomerical Guides for Design Oojectives and Limiting Cloditicns ict Operation to Meet the Criterion "as 1sw as practicsble" for Raalcactive Material.in Light Water Cooled Nuclear F: war Reac tor Ei f1 cents. USAEC,l January 1973. 3.5-;
/w. The radioactive releases from the plant resulting from equipment faults of.
moderate frequency are within the 10 CFR.20 limits on a short term basis and will-be "as low as precticable" for normal operation on an annual average basis over the forty year life of the plant. The Technica1' Specifications governing effluent releases will assure that the releases of radioactivity from the J. M. Farley site will be "as low as practicable". , 3.5.1.1.1.1 Design Objectives The Liquid Waste Processing System (LWPS) is designed to receive, segregate, . process, recycle and discharge liquid wastes. The system design considers potential personnel exposure and assures that quantities of radioactive. releases. t to the environment are as low as practicable, Under normal plant operation,. the total activity from radionuclides leaving the LWPS does not exceed'a small fraction of the discharge limits as defined in 10 CFR 20.. ; i 3.5.1.1.1.2 Systems Descriptions ( ]) The Liquid Waste Processing System collects and processes potentially radioactive wastes for recycle or for discharge. Provisions are'made to sample and analyze fluids before they are recycled or discharged. Based en the laboratory analysis, these wastes are either released.under controlled conditions. via the cooling water system or retained-for further processing.. A permanent record of liquid releases is provided by analysis of known volumes of waste. The bulk of the radioactive liquids discharged from the Reactor Coolant System are processed by the Boron Recycle System. This limits input to'the Liquid Waste Processing System and results in processing of relatively'small' quantities of generally low-activity wastes. P 4 O- 3 5-2
O The Liquid Waste Processing System is arranged to recycle as much reactor i grade water as possible. Thie is implemented.by the segregation of equipment drains and waste streams which prevents the intermixing of liquid wastes. The ; Liquid Waste Precessing System consists of two main sub-systems designated as Drain Channel A and Drain Channel B. Drain Channel A normally processes all l water which can be recycled and Drain Channel B normally processes all vater which is to be discharged. A drain system is also provided inside the containment to collect drains and leaks, and transfer them to the recycle holdup tank. Capability for handling and storage of spent demineralizer resins is also provided, t Instrumentation and centrols necessary for the operation of the Liquid Waste Processing System are located cn a control panel in the auxiliary t building. Any alarm on this centrol board is. relayed to one common annuciator on the main control board in the control room. A simplified Process Flow Diagram is shown:on Figure 3.5-1. All lines in the Liquid Waste System, including field run, are considered as potential carriers of radioactivity. i Table 3.5-1 and Figure 3.5-1 gives process parameters for key locations in the system. Expected volumes to be processed by the Waste Processing System ] t are given in Table 3.5-1. Assuming the volumes presented in Table 3.5-1 are processed at a uniform rate the input to the waste evaporator will be ' approximately 0.2 gpm while the evaporator is designed to handle 15 gpm. ! Hence, excess capacity is available to handle off-normal operating conditions. ; i This will only change the load on the system, otherwise the' operating features i i will not change. Component f ailures in the Waste Processing System are taken (::) i 3.5-3 1
m . . care of during system shut down. The system is designed so that interchange of components.is possible. 3.5.1.1.1.2.1 Recycle Portion (Drain Channel A - Tritiated and Aerated Water Sources) Drain Channel A is provided to process reactor grade water which enters the Liquid Waste Processing System via equipment leaks and drains, valve leakoffs, pump seal leakoffs, tank overflows, and cther tritiated and aerated water i sources. Deaerated tritiated water inside the reactor containment from sources such as valve leskoffs, which is collected in the reactor coolant drain tank, need i not enter Drain Channel A. These may be routed directly to the boron recycle holdup tanks for processing and/or reuse. j Administratively controlled equipment drains are the major contributor of water which can be recycled. Valve and pump leakoffs outside the reactor containment are also ecllected in the waste holdup tank for processing and recycle. Abnormal liquid sources include leaks which may develop in the reactor coolant and auxiliary systems. Considerable surge and processing E capacity is incorporated in the recycle portion of the Liquid Waste Processing-System to acccmmodate abnormal operations. The basic composition of the liquid collected in the waste holdup tank is l < boric acid and water with some radioactivity.- Liquid collected in this tank is evaporated to remove radioisotopes, boron, and air from the water so that-it '! t may be reused in the Reactor Coolant System. Evaporator bottoms are normally. ; drummed unless found acceptable for boric acid recycle. The condensate leaving the waste evaporator may pass through the waste condensate demineralizer and , 3.5-4
- , y- t -- w--- c
O then enter the condensate tank. When a sufficient quantity of water has collected in the waste condensate tank, it is normally transferred to the reactor makeup water storage tank for reuse. Samples are taken at sufficiently frequent intervals to assure proper operation of the system to minimize the ! need for reprocessing. If a sample indicates that further processing is-required, the condensate may be passed through the waste condensate dominer-alizer or if necessary returned to the waste holdup tank for additional evaporation. 3.5.1.1.1.2.2 Waste Portion (Drain Channel B - Non-Reactor Grade ' Water Sources) Drain Channel B is provided to collect and process non-reactor grade liquid wastes. These include floor drains, equipment drains containing non-reactor grade water, 1cundry and hot shower drains, and other non-reactor grade () sources. Drain Channel B equipment includes a floor drain tank and filter, laundry at.d hot shower tank and filter, chemical drain tank, waste monitor tank demineralizer and filter, and two vaste monitor tanks. Non-recyclable reactor coolant leakage enter the floor drain tank from system leaks inside the containment via the containment sump and from system leaks in the auxiliary building via the floor drains. Unless an extremely } I large leak develops this liquid would not be recycled because it is diluted and- ! contaminated by water entering the floor drain tank from other sources; i.e., laboratory equipment rinses, hose water, component cooling water leaks, etc. Non-reactor grade leakage which enters the floor drain tank from the contain-ment sump and auxiliary ficor drains are fan cooler leaks, secondary side-steam and feedwater leaks, component ccoling water and hose water. This-O : 1 i.5-5 l 1 l m
i i j leakage is assumed to not contribute significantly to activity release. The r? activity level is normally reuch less than 10-7 uCi/gm. , Normally the activity of the floor drain tank contents is well below- ; permissible levels. Hence, the contents may be transferred directly to the Waste ; Monitor Tank. .Following analysis to confirm the acceptable low level, the tank ; t contents are discharged without further treatment. However, sheuld spills, leaks i or equipment failures causa radioactive water to enter the floor drain tank, ? this water is processed in the waste evaporator.
'. In general, if the activity in the floor drain tank is greater than 10-5 .h fx ;
uC1'
/ sin the liquids should be processed. If such a case should occur, the waste l ., t evaporator concentrate is drummed and the condensate returned to Drain Channel B for ultimate discharge, Laundry and hot shower drains are the largest source of liquid wastes and normally need no treatment for removal of radioactivity. This water is trans-ferred to one of the waste menitor tanks via the laundry and hot shower. l i
filter. A sample is taken and, after analysis, the results logged and the water discharged if the activity level is below acceptable limits. [
-i The basic criteria for the laboratory drain subsystem is that' strict I
segregation of radioactive and non-radioactive liquid wastes be maintained. .; i b Two separate drain sinks are to be provided f or this control. One is used to j i dispose of spent and excess radioactive samples directly to the chemical drain ; tank for later disposal by drumming. The second sink is provided for' normal l laboratory equipment decontamination and rinsing, This liquid waste is i directed to the floor drain tank. The sampling room contains two sinks; { Excess sample purges of reactor grade coolant is drained from one sink to'the .l O 1 3.5-5 ] 4
,__-)
waste holdup tank for recycle. The other sink is used for draining non-reactor grade excess samples to the floor drain tank. Liquid wastes are released from the waste monitor tanks to the discharge canal. The discharge valve is interlocked with a process radiation monitor and , closes automatically if the radioactivity concentration in the liquid discharge exceeds a preset limit. Liquid waste discharge flow volume is recorded. > 3.5.1.1.1.2.3 Waste From Spent Resin The spent resin sluice portion of the Liquid Waste Processing System consists of a spent resin storage tank, a spent resin sluice pump, and a spent resin sluice filter. The equipment is arranged such that the resin sluice water after entering a demineralizer vessel returns to the spent resin storage tank for reuse. The basic criteria for the system is to transport spent resin to the spent resin storage tank without generating large volumes of wante liquid. This is accomplished by reusing the sluice water for subsequent resin sluicing operations. 3.5.1.1.2 Steam Generator Blowdown Processing System As part of the comprehensive steam side chemistry control program employed in this plant, the steam generator blowdown system functions to eliminate harmful concentrations of chemical deposits from accumulating in the steam generator. The effluents from the secondary side of the steam generator are normally - dispersed to the environment following dilution with cooling tower blowdown water. In the event the secondary side does become contaminated with primary side coolant, the blowdown fluid will be radioactive. Under these conditions 0 a 3.5-7 i
t .. f k - the blowdown processing system conditions the water such that it can be reused on the secondary side, and collects the radioactive contaminants and other solids for off-site disposal. Multiple forms of instrumentation used to detect primary-secondary leakage are provided to assure that the public health and safety is not i compromised by use of the steam generator blowdown processing system. , 3.5.1.1.2.1 Design Basis Secondary side water chemistry control specifications require 5 gpm continuous blowdown from each steam generator to achieve optimum effectiveness from the steam generator chemistry control program. The steam generator blowdown processing system is designed to accommodate blowdown under a wide range of conditions. j (} Under conditions of steam generator tube leakage and/or condenser leakage, a continuous blowdown rate of 12.5 gpm maximum per generator may be required j l to maintain proper chemistry control in the generator. The design basis of j the processing portion of the blowdown processing system is 50 gpm. This permits 12.5 gpm continuous blowdown for each generator plus some additional J l capacity as margin. However, the normal blowdown rate is expected to be 25 ' gpm on a continuous basis. To facilitate the removal of any accumulated solids from the tube sheet-when no tube leaks exist, the system is designed to accommodate, through the bypass portion of the system, an intermittent blowdown rate of 50 gpm per- ! generator or 150 gpm total. If solids removal is required coincident with steam generator tube leakage, the processing system can accommodate only one steam generator blowing down at the maximum rate. O 3.5-8
l l 'O Although processed system effluent will ordinarily be recycled to the main , condenser, the system is also designed to permit. continuous release of : processed steam generator blowdown without exceeding an average discharge concentration of 2 x 10-8 uc/cc. 3.5.1.1.2.2 System Description and Operation , J t Each reactor unit has three steam generators and each generator has its own blowdown and sample lines. The flow of blowdown fluid from each of the three steam generators is i individually controlled before rea :hing the blowdown line manifold outside of the containment barrier. Fluid from the steam generator manifold enters under pressure into a shell-and-tube heat exchanger, where the fluid temper-ature is reduced by plant service cooling water. The pressure is then ; reduced, and the blowdc,wn is directed through the inlet filter. A simplified system flow diagram is shown in Figure 3.5-2. Normally,when the radioactivity of the blowdown fluid is below required limits, the fluid flows through a radiation monitor into the surge tank. From this surge tank, the fluid is normally pumped to discharge through a process-controlled isolation valve. Instrumentation is provided in the discharge line to record the instantaneous activity concentration of-the blowdown fluid. This alarm in the discharge section of the system, plus the radiation alarm located upstream of the surge tank that closes the process isolation valve. downstream of the blowdown heat exchanger, provides [ automatic isolation of the blowdown fluid. Should the radioactivity level of the blowdown fluid be such that its untreated discharge would exceed release limits, the flow would be diverted O 3.b9 ,
through a pair of series-connected cation demineralizers, a pair of series-connected mixed bed demineralizers, another filter, and then through the radiation monitor into the surge tank. From this surge tank, the fluid would. normally be recycled to the main condenser but may be discharged through the discharge line when required. Batchwise cleanup of blowdown fluid in the surge tank can be accommodated by pumping fluid through the demineralizers via the recirculation line at the pump discharge downstream of the flow control valve. The Steam Generator Blowdown Processing System is designed to operate continuously. Af ter the proper flow path is made available, a discharge-recycle pump is started, and the blowdown isolation valves are opened, the blowdown rate (from each steam generator) is manually controlled from the main control board. Once established, the blewdown rates are maintained as O (_/ - desired by automatic control of the pressure differential across the high pressure portion of the system. In this manner, any flow fluctuations due to 9 team generator pressure variations are avoided. Low pressure instrumentation .i downstream of the pressure control valve automatically modulates service water flow to maintain a constant heat exchanger outlet temperature and automatically controls the discharge of the recycle flow rate to maintain a constant level in , t the surge tank. A process controlled isolation valve just downstream of the heat exchanger is interlocked to close on abnormally high pressure, temper-. . ature, flow rate, radiation level, or surge tank water level. Low level pump , shut-offs protect the discharge recycle pumps and the spent resin sluice pump. 2 A high radiation signal from the discharge-recycle radiation monitor closes t the discharge valve. All automatic closures require system analysis and 3.5-10 , l
manual reopening from the local control panel. Other instrumentation including pH meters for establishing resin saturation and pressure indicators for determining component pressure drops provide additional process related information so that system performance can be reviewed. . 3.5.1.1.3 Turbine Building Floor Drains Liquid from turbine building leaks is collected alternately into one of two sumps, each with a capacity of approximately 32,000 gallons. Based on established high liquid levels in each sump the pump, in the sump being used, is automatically started and discharges about 800 gpm from the sump to the dilution pipe. After approximately 2000 to 3000 gallons are discharged, a low sump liquid level signal automatically turns the pump off. 3.5.1.2 Gaseous Waste Systems The radioactive gaseous waste treatment systems at Farley consist of (1) O a gaseous waste processing syscem fer removal and storage of radioactive gases from the reactor coolant system, (2) a filter system for processing the potentially radioactive condenser air ejector discharge and (3) ventilation filter systems for those areas that contain radioactive systems. Of these systems only the gaseous waste processing system is shared by the two units. .; Figure 3.5-3 presents a simplified process flow diagram showing gaseous release paths from the Plant. Although plant operating procedures, equipment inspection, and preventive , maintenance are performed during plant operations to minimize equipment ; malfunction, overall radioactive release limits have been established as a basis for controlling plant discharges during operation with the occurrence of a combination of equipment faults of moderate frequency. A' combination of l () 3.5-11 i I
(- V) . equipment faults which could occur with moderate frequency include operation with fuel defects in combination with such occurrences as:
1. Steam generator tube leaks.

2. Malfunction in Liquid Waste Processing System.

3. Malfunction of Gaseous Waste Processing System.

4. Excessive leakage in Reactor Coolant System equipment.

5. Excessive leakage in auxiliary system equipment.
The radioactive releasos from the plant resulting from equipment faults of moderate frequency are within 10 CFR 20 limits on the short term basis and will be "as low as practicable" for normal operation on an annual average basis over the forty year life of the plant. 3.5.1.2.1 Gaseous Waste Processing System (} 3.5.1.2.1.1 Design objectives The Gaseous Waste Processing System (GWPS) is designed to remove fission product gases from the reactor coolant and have the capacity to contain these throughout the forty year plant life. This is based on continuous operation with reactor coolant system activities associated with operation with cladding . defects in the fuel rods generating one percent of the rated core' thermal power. The system is also designed to collect and store expected fission gases from the boron recycle evaporator and reactor coolant drain tank throughout the plant life. This eliminates the need for scheduled discharge of radio-active gases from these sources. Thus, the gaseous waste processing system reduces the react.or coolant equilibrium activities thereby reducing the gaseous releases from the plant due to primary coolant leakage. Gaseous activity released due to equipment leakage in the GWPS during Q V 3.5-12
i i I '( normal operation of the plant is mixed with ventilation exhaust and is further t diluted by atmospheric dispersion. Table 3.5-9 and 3.5-10 gives estimated ! leakages from the Gaseous Waste Processing System with corresponding activity discharges from the plant vent stack. ! 3.5.1.2.1.2 system Description l The Gaseous Waste Processing System consists mainly of a closed loop { I comprised of two waste gas compressors, two catalytic hydrogen recombiners, and gas decay tanks to accumulate the fission product gases. The major input to the Gaseous Waste Processing System during normal operation is taken from the gas space in the volume control tank. The volume control tank gas space is purged at a rate of 0.7 sefm. There are no liquid seals in the system. The system is designed to preclude explosions L by keeping the concentratian of hydrogen and oxygen below the explosive limits.. ; O A simplified Process Flow Diagram is shown on Figure 3.5-3. All lines in- l the Gaseous Waste System, including field run, are c nsidered as potential I carriers of radioactivity. Table 3.5-2 gives procee. parameters for the L system. The radioactivity inventory in the system is given in Table 3.5-3 and Figure 3.5-5. ! 3.5.1.2.2 Condenser Air Ejector Filter System ! Radioactive gases will be released with the condenser air ejector discharge l when the combination of failed fuel and primary-to-secondary steam generator i leakage exists. A filter system consisting of a humidity control device, a high efficiency particulate filter and a charcoal adsorber will be installed' l to process this release. The system will be utilized in accordance with the
~{
Technical Specifications to assure that releases from the plant will be "as l 3.5-13 i I
)
low as practicable". The charcoal adsorber.will have a minimum gas residence time of 0.25 sec and will be impregnated with an agent for the removal of organic iodines. A simplified process flow diagram is given in Figure 3.5-4. 3.5.1.2.3 Ventilation Filter Systems Those areas in the station that have the potential for leaking hot reactor coolant have filter systems on the ventilation exhaust. These. filter. systems contain high efficiency particulate filters and charcoal adsorbers. The charcoal adnorber will have a minimum gas residence time of 0.25 see and j will be impregnated with an agent for the removal of organic iodines. The 4 containment and the primary auxiliary building contain filter systems of this type. (AdescriptionofthesystemsispresentedinChapter12.2ofthe.- FSARandaschematicprocessflowdiagramisgiveninFigure3.5-4.) The containment purge filter system is utilized when required in . accordance with the Technical Specifications. The primary auxiliary building ventilation exhaust from those areas. containing hot reactor coolant (chemical and volume control system) is routinely filtered. 3 The waste disposal building, which serves both units, has high efficiency particulate filters and charcoal filters on the ventilation exhaust. Releases from this building are described above under the GWPS. 3.5.1.3 Solid Waste System 3.5.1.3.1 Design Objectives The solid waste systen is designed to encapsulate spent resins, evaporator concentrates and chemical tank effluents and filter cartridges. A separate system is available to bale low-radiation level, solid, i [~S l %] l 3.5-14 l l I
. ~ . . . . - . . - - . _ . . .. - -. - . - . . .I I
compressible wastes such 'as paper, disposable clothing, rags, towels, floor. coverings, shoe covers, plastics, cloth smears and respirator filters. In ! addition, two separate systems are utilized _to process primary and secondary system spent resins. It is estimated that 1000 to 2000 cubic feet of waste are produced each year. i The systems are used to package radioactive vastes within the limita-tions specified by 10 CFR 71 and 49 CFR 170-178. Shielding is designed to limit the radiation levels in the work areas to 10 mr/hr. j 3.5.1.3.2 Equipment Description 1 3.5.1.3.2.1 Processing System' Design l l The Jolid waste system is designed to package all solid wastes in j i standard 55 gallon drums for removal to disposal facilities. In addition, a. :
.O system has been designed to permit bulk shipment of spent resins. (The i process flow diagram for the solid waste system is shown in Figure 11.5-1 of the FSAR.)
Spent resin, evaporator concentrates, and chemical drain tank effluents are encapsulated in the drums _(or transferred to bulk shipment ~ containers). , i while solid wastes such as paper, clothing, rags, towels, etc., are compressed directly into the drums. i
}
1. Encapsulation Process - The evaporator bottoms, spent resins, and. !
chemical drain tank effluent are transported in pipes to the drumming.' area. The evaporator bottoms and spent resins are dispensed from a common. , } manifold using six separate valves, while the chemical drain tank - l effluent is dispensed from a single and separate valve. These valves are . l O 1 3.5-15 _{ 1 i
O d failsafe, air-operated diaphragm valves. Waste evaporator bottoms and chemical drain tank effluent are encapsulated in 55 gallon drums that are prepared in a nonradiation area, separate from the drumming room The drums are positioned upright and an injector assembly is suspended within the drum. A vibrator, which is strapped to the vertical surface of the drum, is energized and four bags of vermiculite-cement are gradually poured into the drum. This mixture completely surrounds the liquid injector assembly. The drum lid is installed, and the clamping ring is secured in position. The drum is now ready for use. Spent resin slurries are encapsulated in 55 gallon drums that are prepared in a nonradiation area, separate from the drumming room. The drums are positioned uprighr, and a mixture of water and cement iO is poured into the drum until the bottom surface is covered with a one-inch thick layer. This operation is followed by placing a 16 gauge thick carbon steel casting sleeve in the drum, and filling the annulus between the casting sleeve and the inside diameter of the drum with the water-cement mixture to a height of twenty-nine inches. 'After the cement liner has become compact, the drum vibrator is strapped to the outside surf ace of the drum and then energized. A one-inch layer of dry vermiculite-cement is then poured into the bottom of.the casting sleeve. A resin cage assembly, which is fabricated of 12 gauge thick carbon steel, and resembling a DOT-2R container, is suspended inside the l casting sleeve. The void between the cage and sleeve, and the area above the cage, extending to the top of the drum, is filled with the dry j O . 3.5-16
I vermiculite-cement. The drum lid is then installed, and the clamping _ ring is cecured in position. The drum is now ready for use. f[ 2. Baling Proces,s - The baling process involves the use of 55 gallon r l drums. The baler is equipped with a dust shroud to prevent the escape of. radioactive particulate matter during the compaction process. This shroud is connected to the building exhaust system. After the drum has been ! I filled with compacted wastes, it is sealed and transferred to the storage i area. ; 3.5.2 ESTIMATES OF RADI0 ACTIVE DISCHARGE QUANTITIES The following documents have been issued by the AEC to provide regulations and i i guidelines for radioactive releases: !
1. 10 CFR 20, Standards for Protection Against Radiation [

2. 10 CFR 50, Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilitics The total plant liquid and gaseous releases meet these regulations by providing assurance that the exposures to individuals in unrestricted areas are as !
low as practicable during normal plant operation. Normal operation, as.n'-d in con-junction with radioactivity treatment and effluents in this report, includ , [ t expected operational occurences which deviate from steady state operation. The parameters used in the calculation of normal operation radioactive effluents, as - i presented in Table 3.5-4 are realistic average values expected over forty years .l of operation. The extent and ductrion of operational occurrences will be governed by the plant technical specifications for effluent releases which are formulated on the "as low as practicable" criterion. As stated previously, "as low as practi-- , cable" is defined as "as low as is practicably achievable taking in'a account the. state of technology and the economics of improvement in relation to benefits to the public health and safety...". 3.5-i7 i I
3.5.2.1 Liquid Wastes 3.5.2.1.1 Expected Liquid Waste Processing System Release The quantities and isotopic concentration in liquids discharged to the Liquid Waste Processing System, and hence the releases to the environment, are highly dependent upon the operation of the plant. The analysis for Farley is based on engineering judgement with respect to the operation of the p' .at and the Liquid Waste Processing System and realistic estimation of the potential input sources. 11 enc e , the results are representative of typical releases from one Farley Unit. The input sources ecsumed in the study are summarized in Table 3.5-1. (The isotopic concentrations at key locations in the Liquid Waste Processing System are given in Table 11.2-2 of the FSAR with the locations indicated on the Process Flow Diagram, Figure 11.2-1oftheFSAR.)Theassociated releases in curies per year per nuclide are given in Tatie 3.5-5. It is assumed that the vaste entering the floor drain tank is twenty gallons per day of reactor coolant and forty gallons per day of non-reactor grade water and 40 gpd of decontaminated water without detergent. The isotopic composition of reactor grade water is based on 0.257. fuel defects. The Liquid Waste Precessing System in ascumed to operate as described in Section 11.2.4 of the FSAR. 3.5.2.1.2 Expected Liquid Releases from the Steam Generator Blowdown System (SGES) Ordinarily, when operating without steam generator leakage or when the system effluent is being recycled back to the main condeneer, there will be essentially zero release of radioactivity from this system. liowever, in the event system ef fluent is discharged to the environment when operating with concurrent fuci defects and steam generater leakage, radioactivity discharge rates will depend on the combinations of these parameters which are assumed. 1.5-16
The system is designed to limit average discharge concentrations under ' A ( ') these conditions to 2 x 10-8 uc/cc or less. This average has been taken as being the average quarterly and the average annual discharge concentration for release to the environment. For the conditions 'f ?O gpd steam generator leakage and 0.25% fuel defects, the average discharge concentration will be considerably below the above limits ("1.1 x 10-9). If conditions of higher tube leakage are postulated, the system could meet the average quarterly release limits assuming two months operation at 20 gpd steam generator leakage at 1 percent fuel defects and one month operation at 144 gpd steam generator leakage at 1 percent fuel defects. Following this period, the plant would require shutdown for steam generator tube repair if such is the case. (The seco,dary side activity, assuming 0.25% fuel defects and 20 gal / dayprimarytosecondarysideIcakageisgiveninTable11.2-8oftheFSAR.) The blowdown from the secondary side is normally recycled to the con-denser, however, the liquid may be discharged if required. The activity released to the environment from such discharges is estimated in Table 3.5-6. 3.5.2.1.3 Expected Liquid Releases from Turbine Building Drains i The concentration of isotopes in steam or liquid leaked to the turbine building is considered to be a factor of 100 lower than secondary side con-Tritium concentration inleak-centrations for all isotopes except tritium, age is assumed to be the same as in the secondary side. The factor of 100 accounts for limited carry-over in steam. Steam leakage of 5 gpm (condensed) and liquid leakage of 12 gpm is assumed to be discharged through turbine building drains. Discharge rates for each isotope are given in Table 3.5-7. 3.5.2.1.4 Estimated Total Releases n The potential releases f rom each source have been evaluated as indicated b in above sections. As shown in Table 3.5-8 the total expected releases from 3.5-19 ! i i
the plant is a fraction of the regulations as outlined in Section 3.5.1.1.1.1. h (It is further shown that the expected liquid releases from Farley are well below releases in presently operating plants as shown in Table 11.2-6' of the FSAR. Hence, the releases from the plant are in accordance with the design objectives as outlined in Section 11.2.1 of the FSAR and the Technical Specifications, Chapter 16 of the FSAR.) 3.5.2.1.5 Release Points The Liquid Waste Processing System is designed to minimize the' total radioactive fluid released to the environment by processing and recycling as much water as possible. Ta plant is designed with only one release point for potentially radioactive liquid waste. 3.5.2.2 Gaseous Wastes 3.5.2.2.1 Expected Gaseous Waste Processing System Releases The Gaseous Waste Processing System removes fission product gases from the volume control tank and recycle evaporator and has the espacity to contain them through the lifetime of the plant, eliminating the need for regularly scheduled discharge of these radioactive gases to the environment. Since the system reduces fission product gas concentrations in the reactor coolant during unit operation, it significantly reduces the escape of radio-active gases arising from reactor coolant leakage. Design is based on continuous operation with reactor coolant system activities associated with operation with cladding defects in fuel rods generating one percent of the rated core thermal power. Table 2.5-3 shows the maximum fission product inventory in the Gaseous Waste Processing Systems over'the forty year plant life based on 0.257 fuel defect level. O 3.5-20 L.
t Figure 3.5-5 shows.that for a given power rating the quantity of fission gas activity accumulated in the gas system after forty continuous years of operation is () only twice the activity accumulated af ter thirty days operation with the same fuel defect level. This is because most of the accumulated activity arises from A short lived isotopes reaching eqailibrium in one month or less. The dif f erence between the thirty day and forty year accumulations is essentially ;
~
a'l Krypton-85. ThisaccumulationofKrypton-85isnotahazardtotheplantoperatorf i because: h
1. Radiation background levels in the plant are not noticeably affected by ,
i the accumulation of Krypton-85 which is a beta emitter, for which the tanks themselves provide adequate shielding.
2. The system activity inventory is distributed in several tanks so that the maximum permissible inventory in any single tank is actually less ,
than that of earlier Gaseous Waste Disposal System designs.
3. Since this system permits fission gas removal from the reactor coolant during normal operation, it will reduce plant activity levels caused oy a leakage of reactor coolant.
With operation of this system, it is possible to collect virtually all' of I the Kr-85 released to the reactor coolant and to achieve a reduction in the fission product gas inventory in the Reactor Coolant System. Provisions are also made to collect any residual gases stripped out of solution by the boron recycle - evaporators and gases from the reactor coolant drain tank. Table 3.5-9 and 3.5-10 gives calculated activity discharges from the plant L W, vent stack due to Gaseous Waste Processing System leaks. (To further ensure design basis releases in accordance with the "as low as practicable" philosophy the Technical Specifications, Chapter 16 of the FSAR: establish limits for the releases.)
/
3,5-21 1
1
? ' t, t
3.5.2.2.2' Expected Gaseous Radioactive Releases from-Ventilation Systems. ! and Condenser Air Ejector
).
A detailed review of the entire plant has been made to ascertain those. items that could possibly contribute to-airborne radioactive releases. LSepa-
.i rate analyses were made for noble gases and iodinen. !
During normal plaat operations, airborne noble gases and/or iodines'can [ l i originate f rom reac;or coolant leakage, equipment drains, venting and sampling, ; i secondary side leakage, condenser air ejector and gland seal condenser ex-hausts, Gascous Waste Processing System leakage, refueling operations and j
)
evaporations from the spent fuel pool. j i The assumptions used for this study are given in Table 3.5-4. The noble gases and iodines discharged from the various sources are entered in Table j t
'3.5-9, 3.5-10 and 3.5-11. j 1
3.5.2.2.2.1 Sources of Radioactive Noble Gas Emission I i () During normal plant operations, airborne noble gases from the J. M. Farley ~ f j t Plant can originate from the following sources: L Reactor ecolant leakage to the auuiliary building. Equipment draire and sampling in the auxiliary building, f Waste gas processiag system leakage. Steam generator tube leakage and resultant secondary system releases. { Eeactor coolant leakage to the containment building. ; Refueling operations. l f The quantities of wsste liquids in the various systems during plant {. operation are administrative 1y controlled. However, conservative estimates. [ of these quantities were used for purposes of this study. l t 9 i
C

) i 3.5 22 t e
i 3 3.5.2.2.2.1.1 Auxiliary Building te ta ^=x111 rv 8 11a1 cz teri 8 rieer nr 1 r *) O: xe cter cee1 t te>* This effluent is non-recycleable reactor coolant from system leaks in & the auxiliary building. These wastes enter the floor drain tank via the floor r drains. It is assumed that the total amount of equivalent reactor coolant leakage is 20 gal / day per unit (2) . The total volume of reactor coolant { liquid from this source is ~7000 gal / year. Equipment Drains and Sampling (Entering Waste Holdup Tank) The source is a result of equipment drainage for maintenance and daily , i sampling to insure proper reactor coolant system operation. The specific , contribution from each source is based on the following: , Tank Drains - 5% of the volume of all tanks that contain recycleable water and could have dissolved noble gases are drained on a once per year cycle. ; Filter Drains - Each filter is drained and flushed once per month at an assumed rate of 50 gallons per filter. Only those that may have dissolved l noble gases are included. Demineralizer Drains - 1 drain per year of each demineralizer at an average rate of 250 gallons per drain. The following demineralizers could have dissolved radioactive gases: Cation Demineralizer Mixed Bed DemineralAzers (2) Thermal Regeneration Demineralizers (4) Recycle Evaporator Feed Demineralizers (2) Heat Exchanger Drains - The water equivalent of 100% of the heat exchanger volume based on its overall dimensions is assumed to be drained and flushed once a year from each heat exchanger. All inplant heat exchangers except (2) Whenever gallons of liquid are referred to in this section, it should be assumed that it is a 1 atm and 70eF. O ! 3.5-23 ] l l l
-l
~ . _ . - I for the Spent Fuel Pit Heat Exchanger could have dissolved noble gases. These' , include the following components: Excess Letdown Heat Exchanger Letdown Chiller Exchanger 7 Letdown Heat Exchanger Letdown Reheat Exchanger Moderating Heat Exchanger i P.eactor Coolant Drain Tank Heat Exchanger . Regenerative Heat Exchanger > Seal Water Heat Exchanger Sample Sink Drains - 3000 samples per year of reactor grade water at a volume of 1 gallon per sample was assumed, based on recommended sampling procedures. All of the above liquids are assumed to be at ambient conditions. Total volume of reactor coolant liquid which may contain dissolved noble gases from equipment drains and sampling is 19,000 gal /yr. Waste Gas Processing Leakage During continuous operation of the plant, releases from the gaseous waste processing system are not planned. However, as with all pressurized.
-(} ,
systems some leakage should be anticipated. The estimated leakage from this system is 100 standard cubic feet per year. This leak rate is based on every potential leakage point in the system leaking at just below the detectable limit. In addition, it assumes that as soon as activity reaches the detect-able limit, corrective action is taken. 3.5.2.2.2.1.2 Turbine Building Steam Generator Tube Leeks ; Radioactive emissions from the secondary side are minimized by the
~
physical separation of the reactor coolant cycle and the steam cycle. How-ever, small leaks in the steam generator may occur. These leaks will result in release to the steam cycle of radioactive liquids and gases. 3.5-24
~
e
?
3.5.2.2.2.1.3 containment Building () Reactor Coolant Leakage to the Containment Building Exhausting the air in the containment prior to entrance for maintenance or refueling can be a normal, but intermittent, source of radioactivity in airborne effluents. The airborne activity will come from the evaporation of refueling water during refueling and leakage through valves, pumps and flanges while at power. During continuous operation of the plant, it is assumed'that the equilibrium containment airborne activity results from a reactor coolant leak rate of 40 lbs. per day into the containment. No credit is taken for plateout of any isotope. For refueling operations, the noble gas activity in the refueling canal will go directly into the environment. 3.5.2.2.2.2 Sources of Radioactive Airborne Iodines Liquids containing radioactive iodines are present in the various systems of a PWR. Components containing these 11gulds are located in the auxiliary building, turbine area and containment building. The quantities that become airborne from the solution will depend upon various factors. A brief discussion of each source follows. 3.5.2.2.2.2.1 Aux 111ary'Bu11 ding Chemical Drain Tank ' A 600 gallon atmospheric tank is available to collect the chemically contaminated water from the laboratories. These spent and excess samples may contain radioactive iodine. It has been estimated that 1000 gallons per , year are placed in'this tank of which the equivalent of 150 gallons will be reactor grade water. , Spent Resin Storage Tank The primary purpose of this tank is to provide a collection point for r- spent resin to allow for the decay of short lived radio-nuclides before
%J 3.5-25 1
1 'N' j
w 1 drumming. It has been assumed that 6000 ft.3 of air (mostly N2) is released : I from the tank per year. Waste Holdup Tank one 10,000 gallon atmospheric tank 1s provided to collect equipment drains, equipment leakoffs, sample room sink drains and other water from i aerated tritiated sources. The expected drains into the tank are estimated to be 60,000 gallons per year. Of this quantity, 1600 gallons enter the tank having iodine concentration equivalent to reactor coolant, and another 10,000 gallons of liquids containing iodines will have passed through the mixed bed demineralizer before entering the tank. The remaining quantities should contain negligible iodine concentrations. Reactor Coolant Leakage to the Auxiliary Building This source is the same as that used for noble gases, However, for analysis of iodine releases, 1 gal / day is estimated to be from sources con-taining primary coolant at greater than 212 F. The remainder, or 19 gal /dey,- is assumed to be from lines containing primary coolant at less than 212 F. Waste Evaporator Vent Condenser This component condenses the dissolved gases stripped from the process feed flow. Dissolved air will come out of solution bringing with it entrained iodines. These iodines are in equilibrium with the iodine packing in the gas stripper column. 3.5.2.2.2.2.2 Turbine Building Air Ejector Activity release from the air ejector is dependent upon having concurrent fuel defects and steam generator tube leaks. Iodine transport from the steam generator has been assumed to be caused by both liquid entrainment in the steam and volatility. The steam is then carried over to the condenser from 3.5-26
d which iodines are assumed to be released. () . Gland Seal Condenser Exhaust i The mechanisms used to determine the iodines released from the air ejector are similar for the gland seal condenser. The exhaust rate is 2000 lbs/hr of insoluble gas. Secondary Side Steam Leakage This source of activity is miscellaneous component leakage from the . secondary systeas that are operating above 2120F. No credit for any plateout in the secondary system is taken. ; Secondary Side Liquid Leakage Liquid leakage is defined as component leakage from systems operating below 212 0F, This leakage was assumed to be at a rate of 12 gal / min. 3.5.2.2.2.2.3 Containment Building Containment Purge Releases Purge releases are based upon reactor coolarit fission products released to the containment at a rate of 40 lbs/ day. These releases are allowed to build up to an equilibrium state. From this starting point, the preaccess filter system is operated for 16 hours with an iodine efficiency of 90%. The purge flow rate for the system analyzed is 25,000 scfm, and the preaccess filter system flow rate is 20,000 scfm. 3.5.2.2.2.2.4 Miscellaneous Sources in addition to the above, the following additional components were reviewed and found to release negligibic iodines during normal operation: Laundry and Hot Shower Tank Waste Monitor Tanks Component Cooling Surge Tank Refueling Water Storage Tank -i Spent Fuel Pit Pool 1 3.5-27 l t 9 r - s- "
3.5.2.2.2.2.5 Estimated Total Releases of Gaseous Radioactivity- .' The potential release from each source has been evaluated as 1ndicated in the above sections. The total releases of gaseous iodines and noble gases from the plant are given in Tables 1.5-10 and 3.5-11. These estimated releases have been used in calculating the .ite boundary doses as shown in Section 5.3 of the Environmental Report. The dose calculations, based on the estimated total plant releases, show that the releases are in accordance with the design objectives in Section 3.5-1, and meet the regulatiens as outlined in the Section. (Further, the total plant releases are within the Technical Specifications as out-linedinChapter16oftheFSAR) 3.5.2.3 Solid Wastes 3.5.2.3.1 Expected Volumes The v:lume of solid radioactive wastes is expected to total 100 drums of spent primary resins, 600 cubic feet of spent secondary resins and 100 drums of evaporator concentrates per year. However, if excessive equipment leakage occurs, the total volume cf evaporator bottoms alone may be as much as 50 to 60 drums per month. Experience at plants presently in operation confirms this possibility. Chemical drain tank effluents are expected to total approximately 1000 gallons, cr 33 drums, per year. The total volume of compressible waste, such as paper, disposable clothing, rags, towels, etc. 1s approximately 120 drums per year. Table 3.5-12 gives the anticipated total solid waste generated per year. The expected curie content of the evaporator concentrates is approxi-mately 3.2 microcuries per cubic centimeter. On the basis of about 30 gallons of evaporator concentrates per drum, the content of each drum is 0.34 curies. The curie content of the chemical drain tank effluents totals O approximately 0.63 curies per year, or v.02 curies per drum. In the case 3.5-28
of primary spent resins, the curie content totals approximately 6400 curies () per year, or 64 curies per drum. Secondary system spent resins are expected to account for 17 curies per year. The principal nuclides shipped from the plant site include the follow-ing: Iodine - 131 Cesium - 134 Cesium - 136 Cesium - 137 Cobalt - 58 Cobalt - 60 Iron - 55 Iron - 59 Manganese - 54 t
\ Manganese - 56 Molybdenum -
99 Strontium - 89 Strontium - 90 Chromium - 51 3.5-29 4 j
TABLE 3.5-1 FARAFETERS USED IN THE CALCULATION OF ESTIMATED ACTIVITY IN LIQUID WASTES Collection Volume of Period Assumed Collector Tank With Liquid Before Sources Wastes Basis Processing Comments Reactor Coolant Drain Tank 225 gal / day 0.05 gpm/R.C. pump #2 seal leak Feed & bleed Recycled to 0.002 gpm/R.C. pump #3 seal leak BRS Waste Hold-up Tank
1. Equipment Drains 57,000 gal /yr Filter drains, heat exchanger drains, tank drains, demineralizer drains

2. Excess Samples 3,000 gal /yr 3000 samples /yr at 1 gal / sample Total 60,000 gal /yr 20 days Recycled to RMW Floor Drain Tank

1. Decontamination Water 15.000 gal /yr 40,000 ft2 section once per week with 20 gallons of water per 5000 ft 2 with remainder for fuel cask, vessel head, etc.

2. Laboratory Equipment 16,000 gal /yr e v60 gallons / day for 5 days / week

3. Non-Recycleable Reactor 7,000 gal /yr "v20 gallons / day Coolant-

4. Non-Reactor Grade Leaks 13,000 gal /yr **40 gallons / day Total 51,000 gal /yr 30 days Discharged Chemical Drain Tank 1,000 gal /yr 3000 samples /yr at 1/8 gal / sample -90 days Drummed plus rinse water Laundry & Hot Shower Tank 120,000 gal /yr .300 gallons / day with remainder for 5 days. Discharged abnormal and refueling operations.
TABLE 3.5-2 PROCESSING PARAMETERS FOR GWPS Power Level 2766 MWt Kumber of Units 2 Purification Flow Rate from RCS 60 gpm Vo.Yume Control Tank Volumes vapor 175 ft3 Liquid 125 ft3 Volume Control Tank Noble Gas Stripping Fractions and Iodine Partition Coefficients Isotope _ Stripping Fraction Isotope Partition Coefficient i
Kr 85 2.5 x 10-1 1 131 100 Kr 85m 2.9 x 10-1 I 132 100 Kr 87 6.0'x 10-1 1 133 100 Kr 88 4.3 x 10-1 I 134 100 Xe 131m 2.5 x 10-1 1 135 100 Xe 133 2.5 x 10-1 ;
c Xe 133m 2.6 x 10-1 ' Xe 135 2.8 x 10-1 ! Xe 138 8.0 x 10-1 Volume Control Tank Stripping Efficiency 40% liydrogen Purge Rate in Volume Control Tank 0.7 scfm Number of Gas Decay Tanks '
- Normal Operation 6 - Shutdown 2 Volume of Each Gas Decay Tank 600 ft3 O
V
l l l 1 l l TABLE 3.5-3 ACCUMULATED RADIOACTIVITY IN THE GASEOUS WASTE PROCESSING SYSTEM AFTER FORTY YEARS OPERATION * , Activity Following Plant Shutdown (Curies) l Isotope Zero Decay 30 Days 50 Days Kr-85 11,890 11,820 11,780 Kr-85m 5.5 "' O a* 0 Kr-87 0.75 ** 0 ^' O Kr-88 7.0 ^- 0 a- 0 Xe-131m 197 19 5.8 Xe-133 12,000 232 17 () Xe-133m 96 0.01 ** 0 Xe-135 45 ^' O a I-131 .166 .0126 .00226 , 1-132 .000684 0 0 I-133 .0259 0 0 I-134 .000144 0 0 I-135 .00504 0 0 '
The table is based on forty years continuous operation with 0.25% defects.
TABLE 3.5-4 r*% 's ) J. M. FARLEY - ASSUMPTIONS USED IN SOURCE TERM CALCULATIONS (For One Reactor) Reactor Power 2766 MW(t) Capacity Factor 80% Number of Steam Generators 3 Number Cold Shutdowns per Year 2 Reactor Containment Volume 2.05 x 106 ft 3 Number of Containment Purges per Year 4 Weight of Water in Primary System 4.0 x 105 lb Weight of Water in Secondary System 4.1 x 105 lb Weight of Steam in Each Steam Generator 6.3 x 103 lb Weight of Liquid in Each Steam Generator 9.1 x 104 lb Clean-up Demineralizer Flow 2.98 x 104 lb/hr (7 Total Steam Flow in Secondary System 1.22 x 107 lb/hr O Reactor Coolant Flow Rate 1.0 x 108 lb/hr Blowdown Rate (Per Loop) 5 gpm Fraction of Power from Failed Fuel 0.25% Equipment Drainage & Sampling of Reactor Grade Fluid 19,000 gal /yr Waste Gas Processing System Leakage 100 scf/yr Air Ejector Flow Rate 60 scfm Preaccess Filter System Flow Rate 20,000 sefm Purge System Flow Rate 25,000 scfm Halogen Filter Efficiency in Containment 90% Liquid Leak Rate into the Turbine Building 12.0 gpm Escape Rate Coefficients (Sec-1) Xe and Kr 6.5 x 10-8 I, Br, Rb, Cs 1.3 x 10-8 Mo 2.0 x 10-9 Te 1.0 x 10-9 m Sr, Ba 1.0 x 10-11 'O Others 1.6 x 10-12
c TABLE 3.5-4 () (Contd. ) j J. M. FARLEY - ASSUMPTIONS USED IN SOURCE TERM CALCU1ATIONS (For One Reactor) .; i Fraction of fission products passing through primary coolant demineralizer (except 3H, Y, Mo, Cs, Rb) 0.1 3 11, Y, Mo , Cs , Rb 1.0
.i Fraction of iodine passing through :
containment building filter (charcoal) 0.1 Auxiliary building filter (charcoal) 0.1 1 Air Ejector Cleanup System 0.1 Leak rate of primary coolant:* l ()I Reactor containment building (hot water) 40 lb/ day Auxiliary building (hot water) 1 gal / day Auxiliary building (cold water) 19 gal / day
-1 Steam generator 20 gal / day Leak rate of turbine steam (condensed) 5 gal / min i
r Gland seal steam flow (condensed) 2000 lb/hr i
Gallons in this section of the table refer to gallons at 1 atmosphere and 70*F. ,
i O
TABLE 3.5-4 (Contd.)' J. M. FARLEY - ASSUMPTIONS USED IN SOURCE TERM CALCUIATIONS (For One Reactor) Decontamination Factor I Cs. Rb Y Mo Others Demineralizers Mixed-bed (Li -B03 3 form, CVCS) 10 1 1 1 10 Mixed-bed (H+-OH- form, clean waste) 10 10 1 1 10 Mixed-bed in waste evaporator condensate 10 10 1 1 10. Cation bed 1 10 10 10 1 Anton bed 10 1 1 1 10 Evaporators 3 3 Waste 103 193 10 3 10 10 Boron recovery 103 103 103 103 10 3
. . IODINE SEPARATION FACTORS Source Separation Factor 4
Chemical Drain Tank ( ) 10 Spent Resin Storage Tank (1) 104 Waste IIoldup Tank (1) 104 Floor Drain Tank (1) 10 4 Waste Evaporator Vent Condenser (I) 104 Liquids on Auxiliary Building Floor (2) 2 10 2 Volume Control Tank II) 10 Air Ejector Condenser Vent (3) 10 4 Gland Seal Condenser Vent (3) 10' Steam Leakage (4) 10 2 Steam Generator (4) 102 Steam Pinnt Liquid Leakage (2) 10 2 o
?
f
A TABLE 3.5-4 k_). (Contd.) J. M. FARLEY - ASSLMPIIONS USED IN SOURCE TERM CALCUIATIONS (For One Reactor) IODINE SEPARATION FACTORS (Contd.) (1) This factor is the ratio of the activity concentration in the Liquid (pci/cc) to the activity concentration in the vapor (pci/cc). (2) This factor is the ratio of the total activity in the spill (pei) to the activity lost to the air (pci). (3) This factor is the ratio of the activity concentration in the steam generator liquid (pci/cc) to the activity concentration in the vapor
) leaving the component (pci/cc) .
(4) This factor is the ratio of the steam generator liquid activity (pci/gm) to the activity in the steam leaving the steam generator (pci/gm). O V
-O TABLE 3.5-5 C# EXPECTED ANNUAL DISCHARGES FROM LIQUID WASTE PROCESSING SYSTEM (0.257. Fuel Defects) (807. Plant Capacity Factor) Total Annual Total Annual Discharge Discharge , Isotope (ci/yr/ unit) Isotope, (ci/yr/ unit) Rb 88 1.7 x 10-7 Cs 134 1.3 x 10-2 Sr 89 2.8 x 10-6 Cs 136 5.8 x 10-5 Sr 90 1.2 x 10~7 Cs 137 4.2 x 10 -2 Sr 91 3.2 x 10-8 Ba 140 1.7 x 10-6 Y 90 1.2 x 10~7 La 140 1.7 x 10 -6 Y 91 4.2 x 10-6 Ce 144 1.3 x 10-3 Zr 95 6.9 x 10-4 Pr 144 1.3 x 10-3 Nb 95 1.8 x 10~3 Cr 51 2.2 x 10
-6
!] Mo 99 3.2 x 10-3 Mn 54 2.3 x 10~0 I 131 6.9 x 10-4 Fe 59 2.8 x 10-6 I 132 4.2 x 10-5 Co 58 2.1 x 10-3 I 133 1.5 x 10-4 Co 60 6.3 x 10-4 I 135 2.3 x 10-5 Total Excluding Tritium .067 Tritium 96.0 A N..]
. TABLE 3.5-6 J. M. FARLEY FISSION AND CORROSION PRODUCT RELEASES IN TREATED BLOWDOWN WATER FROM ONE UNIT ~ Basis: a) Leakage of 20 gal / day from primary to seco6dary side.
b) Total steam generator blowdown rate of 15 gpm. c) Percent of fuct cladding defects = 0.25"/. d) Blowdown Process System Decontamination Factor - 100 e) 807 plant capacity. (Mil 11 curies / (M1111 curies / Isotope year / unit) Isotope year / unit) Br-84 4.88 x 10-2 Te-132 1.24 x 101 Rb-88 7.36 x 10 0 Te-134 4.33 x 10-2 Rb-89 5.38 x 10~2 Cs-134 1.43 x 10 1 Sr-89 2.22 x 10 1 Cs-1?6 7.62 x 100 Sr-90 7.71 x 10~3 Cs-137 7.21 x 101 Sr-91 3.00 x 10-2 Cs-138 '1.07 x 100 Y-90 8.88 x 10-3 Ba-140 2.13 x 10~1 Y-91 3.31 x 10~1 La-140 1.31 x 10~1 Y-92 8.19 x 10-3 Ce-144 1.81 x 10-2 Zr-95 3.78 x 10-2 Pr-144 1.81 x 10 -2 Nb-95 3.81 x 10-2 Cr-51 5.05 x 10-2 Mo-99 2.18 x 10 Mn-54 4.28 x 10-2 I-131 1.21 x 10 2 Mn-56 1.44 x 10~1 1-132 1.54 x 10 1 Co-58 1.36 x 10 0 1-133 9.78 x 10 1 Co-60 4.14 x 10-2 I-134 1.12 x 10 Fe-59 5.38 x 10 -2 I-135 2.48 x 10 1 Total Excluding Tritium 590,9 millicuries /' year-L~ Total Tritium 76.4 Ci/yr ( . I
..j
rw TABLE 3.5-7 .Q- EXPECTED TURBINE BUILDING DRAIN EFFLUENT Discharge Discharge Isotope (Ci/yr/ unit) Isotope (Ci/Vr/ unit)
-5 Br-84 5.7x 10 Te-132 1.4 x 10-2 r ~
Rb-88 2.7 x 10 Te-134 4.9 x 10-5
~
Rb-89 6.2 x 10-5 Cs-134 1.6 x'.10
~
Sr-89 2.5 x 10 Cs-136 8.6 x 10-3
~
Sr-90 8.6 x 10 Cs-137 8.2 x 10-2 Sr-91 3.5 x 10-5 Cs-138 1.2 x 10~3
-6 Sr-92 4.3 x 10 Ba-140 2.4 x 10-4 ~
Y-90 9.9 x 10 La-140 1.5 x 10-4 Y-91 3.8 x 10 -4 Ce-144 2.1 x 10"$ Y-92 9. 2 x 10 -6 Pr-144 2.1 x 10-5
-5 Zr-95 4.3 x 10 Cr-51 5.7 x 10 -5 Nb-95 '4.3 x 10 -5 Mn-54 4.9 x 10 -5 Mo-99 2.5 x 10 -1 Mn-56 1.6 x 10~4 I-131 1.4 x 10 ~1 Co-58 1.5 x 10-3 I-132 1.7 x 10 -2 Co-60 4.6 x 10 -5' I-133 1.1 x 10-1 Fe-59 6.2 x 10 -5.
1-134 1.3 x 10-3 H-3 8.6 x 10 1 I-135 2.8 x 10-2 Total Excluding Tritium 0.67 Tritium 86.0
TABLE 3.5-8
.f-) - (>
TOTAL LIQUID EFFLUENT PER UNIT Discharge Discharge Isotope (Ci/yr/ unit) Isotope (Ci/yr/ unit) Br-84 1.1 x 10-4 Te-132 2.6 x 10-2 Rb-88 1.0 x 10-2 Te-134 9.2 x 10-5 s Rb-89 1.2 x 10-4 Cs-134 4.6 x 10-2
-4 Sr-89 4.7 x 10 Cs-136 1.6 x 10-2 Sr-90 1.6 x 10-5 Cs-137 2.1 x 10~1 Sr-91 6.5 x 10-5 Cs-138 1.2 x 10-3 -6 Sr-92 4.3 x 10 Ba-140 4.5 x 10-4 Y-90 1.9 x 10-5 La-140 2.8 x 10-4 Y-91 7.1 x 10 -4 Ce-144 1.6 x 10 -3 O Y-92 1.7 x 10 -5 Pr-144 1.3 x 10~3 Zr-95 9.0 x 10 -4 Cr-51 1.1 x 10 -4 Nb-95 2.2 x 10-3 Mn-54 9.5 x 10-5 Mo-99 4.7 x 10-1 Mn-56' 3.0 x 10-4 I-131 2.6 x 10~1 Co-58 5.4 x 10 ~3 I-132 3.2 x 10' Co-60 8.5 x'10-4 I-133 2.1 x 10 ~1 Fe-59 1.2 x 10-4 I-134 2.4 x 10-3 H-3 2.6 x 102 I-135 5.3 x 10 -2 Total Excluding Tritium 1.33 Tritium 260.0 b
V-
;y; ing- n - - --- ;=
m ===-~a. - p
,.~, "?;; r,. ~ ;m ' - f L.) ' ' ~ L). lL) - ?
g TAhI2 .,.5-9 AIRBORNE IODINE DISCHARGES TO AUXILIARY BUILDING * (curies / year / unit) Waste Uaste Chemical Spent Resin Waste Floor Evaporator- Gas Drain . Storage Holdup Drain Liquid Vent System Tunk Tank Tank _ Tank Leakage Condenser Leakage Total I-131 0.000035' O.0048 0.0062 0.0013 0.0069 0.000036 0.0046 0.018 I-132 0.000013 0.00022 0.00022 0.00047 0.0025 0.000013 0.000019 0.0035-I-133 0.000057 0.0008 0.00098 0.0021 0.011 0.000058 0.00072 0.016 I-134 0.0000085 0.0000013 0.00015 0.00031 0.0017 0.0000087 0.000004 0.0022 I-135 0.000031 0.000014 0.00054 0.0012 0.0061 0.000032 0.00014 0.0081
Represents releases from auxiliary building services to the auxiliary building ventilation system.
Does not include filtration by the auxiliary building ventillation system. _ _ _ _ ._._-_.2..______..._ - . . _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ u . _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _.. _..._... .._-- .. _ _ _ __.._ .. _ _ . _ . _ . . . _ , _ _ . . _ . . . _ . . . . _ . . .
g; m 3 f~s TABLE 3.5-10 NOBL" GAS RELEASES (curies / year / unit) Aux. Bldg. Component GWPS Spent Fuel Secondary Refueling Containment Total Isotope Leakage Drains & Samples Leakage Pool Side Releases Operations Purging Releases Kr-85 0.77 2.5 170 0.46 0.77 0.034 0.19 174.7 Kr-85m 11 36 2.6 0 11 0 0 60.6 Kr-87 7.1 23 0.24 0 7.1 0 0 37.4 Kr-88 21 68 2.6 0 21 0 0 112.6 Xe-133 440 1440 760 0.61 440 20 12 3312.6 > Xe-133m 8.4 27 8.8 0.029 8.4 0 0 52.6 Xe-135 31 100 22 0 31 0 0 184.0 Xe-135m 1.1 3.6 0 0 1.1 0 0 5.8 Xe-138 3 '. 8 12 0 0 3.8 0 0 19.6
.(~
a r TABLE 3.5-11 IODINE RELEASES (curies / year / unit) Air Gland Seal Steam Liquid Leakage Contain. Aux. E_ lector Condenser Leakages Secondary Side Purging Building lotal ; I-131 .0036 .0002 .04 .001 .0015 .0018 0.0481 1-132 .00046 .000026 .0052 .00013 0 .00035 0.00616 I-133 .0029 .00016 .033 .00082 .0019 .0016 0.0404 I-134 .00003 .0000019 .00037 .0000094 0 .00072 0.00063 1-135 .00074 .000041 .0083 .00021 0 .00081 0.010 _ . . . . . _ , . . . _ . . . ~ _ . _ . _ . _ _ . - . _ . _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ -._
TABLE 3.5-12 ANTICIPATED TOTAL SOLID WASTE GENERATED PER YEAR PER UNIT Total Total Volume (Ft3) curies Spent Primary Resins 200 6400 Evaporator Bottoms 370( 34 Chemical Drain Tank Effluents 134( 0.63 Dry Waste - 4.0 Spent Filter Cartridges - - SGBS Spent Resins 600( ) 17 (1) 2775 gallons (2) 1000 gallons (3) 20 gpd primary to secondary leak 5 gpm per steam generator blowdown rate i O ,
- , .- _ , . , , , - - . , - - . , , c . . , , , w,
e w
', -Q- 2 H l 4 m a- 4 i >J g-x f ZR Fw w
a m eO
*8 .' A q ta.: " w , u >
o4 t ., l I w I-m a w- r.j._. l I ,%. . G, - '?' ~3 'd1$ c- 0 23 m o>u o
~o s
4 w 4 .., ,. s I r. ,p;- 2m o
+ o cr ueo wn <
o T ' ., L oo 21r iy " *' y Q, ; ';; - *ow _
) o T yA4 t.
4 I> m3az w 4w O 2; in i
' 4 N % $"a ,
f,M ~ l
. h_ wo $E 3F o w .[. a m, ed ~ ~ ~
7,J cn3 x o.
.L 4 l['Mt o n
e 2, s 53 r 4 O. J w O y _a w w m
., g,,
e "' o t .v< l- - ! ' . z 8 1d O
1: 03 MZ 4
N 2 I' OM U-o s M > O m s , & i n o ow 4
u. O F O M u, .
~ --f / ,,f m - -- m g 4 # J $ I 4 4 0 r5 3> wn oNp w k,
d 4Jar >2 1 u M a . warm l 0 :. tJ FW e em.c o m O_ u w ( .4 0 4_, g
n. n _ e, r ., 4 g g en u o s t 4w wo ~) a
~. . .m M g tu 0
t. 1 ,.~ z O OM
, e 3 0, () g O ,o3 _
s. ~-A l FG m i o 04 U 2 J O n
6 u a v4 9 et -. J5J ( 2 tiw
- ~ l o r-n F5 ". 7 n e,7'3 , a "i er) o S O bas -C *-.~'*;. gr i J g) J E '
lj $ x l J_= _ Jj3,5n
.. 3 by _
tif d no j% 3 e~ I m u
;" e- ,.e . . -i u 6e r; u o t .1 a> ,r o
a n. sa
'd C rr '--m *t- 1 - o ou l 9-. c ~- 4. -> ef .
g- **) a w - n. -t .1 0 o m
.3 _
n>o.: s P' s ;c,2 H -20 o~ I w.
-- -+ u ,J ai 6J &
s .. a o a,a n m< g 1J -. .y [L+ l -. .,.y (
? W 2 >. <a j ? . i.,
u- .2M <9 o I , o 4 (. p 5 "g C M' i
).9 y (u ,b w : ., j m ,. -o - A J- u n i 1, - . _
g3 0? o s a;
~w , l m. .
_S s. ; ,i $ o, V) )s I y ej
-n +! ..t. y l u p ' J; - "r , - 1 -
h. o 4 - I.
-, O I s' -I )] 43 l l y z w
3-as r_-- I i (I m 4y - c., n
'. b "
o 1, 1 Q m___. so g, .J I* l OM
. I, . '. ..y . j .n i; o a ..
ua
, t-e ; 7 o,
T~
~
I-[.} l- " Mb, ne y I' h h n, i i l i
-m
[ h o a .#. - +a. i e . , .
~ O. -~
I 1 l o r ' .'., \ \ l r i f A > > G a
7. 3
, a n ~~ o .d a e . 4 p a /s a _, 'I h .-o n- J l r u g l a w o" z g .s . o I u. .:
n , p u. < 11
) W 2
1. . .. 1 -
l < mou-o ] r m a 7 { es o ea syn o~n l l < w s o.,. t l E \J y '.aO' tm l 3 D 2O A, l N . .. pl A 2, {
; vv ,~o i t > r, 5I '* :ric }>a g *2 WL 0 $ ' 3 0
, - Ib> ' '
" 'd 2
n a pa _?. j '
'@"'. .A -__ A s 2r I j O " b, *"* e. i ed W so; 2OU ,; , s') t e u r r e c o a w y o y e nr, e- I, e y a : o i. %.a n - e t w a, n.: vo w- w b g Y O i'* h* 3 n. a. Y y s A 'g u"*1 rs [a c d
4.c s c - a w
.c 1 i 8 1
o b ;;3 u. r ;.:l l
' < o *1 E,3 I u l'A s'^-I W y q . l o.uo {% . j( g E ox .z 2#
e, . m j o s4 g -
?
F* o aa 2 n,- _ u a 15 m a, a,.. -ea n MMS r< _ .;, ue y mCs xx o" "
"ms i <ua ,s. r
e. . w l a
aw o , s, - n: v - .o z y< o< e ;; <z +
< <.s moe U "**"G- )o)2 y i > '; ""-N h h 4 "? w r, l. ,) fy *{ "=* ~ - % o p g D k, X O b d' r-
e. t wo u .( l ,S4_i, "~ } o s_ e,v m 9 3o<o ,r < o u1vo ero %[ [.[ < ,
a w n.- - a~ et-j e> ,e+ c,y 2. , m
. F a- oz o- a, m : n .c 4 e r
ia i.s ea . .o. i, 4 J [1 W s I{ j g o4 aF O b, p D 49 e .- W W e
}(
U p M ;.!
, , w A g C -
z a. no
\ O+
l O l 1 O M So I a bn A A
~ l ss. J. A A I
D ,l 1 F MD b r xs-ot e a
)
n E - I I, i 2 m u e A m cc h O k. id w z . s o U g g y . 3 p y n a (L x- m < QO 4. < h' y * > sr % g
.t e'
w b- tr.1 L.d u z ' M ,e j Q J o m ed n sM I " ;< z ro m g"=, a m 0 cc w i 4 a i ; o ,.m as , w CJ y _J > I e 3
oD Q >*t -
W 2 J w , M *! -4 eo 3 4 O at O ,.,. > ,e,g q em x = w e 'x
~. N > ,e w l .t m ia J mnwo o ,
w
,;3 o o n. z a G w y 4
oo IJ J l s ; tuJ ;7= e
.7u t;
9
4 _
z a gom,
~ . / ;
g
. o fa.- l a < . <m< z z m a , ,
i l E No <l,f$ $ SOIR S 5 E E 40 ~~ - y U " u,- 7 U >Z >- < - M m m - g oo- l w 9 w o'w
,c : u nu w 4 ' o ;- - .
J
. a
p. t O" I xgg o
& t -. F- al! u. h* '~ O g u =
n < g z 3 O a b" 5 *-,' m l o m os- m J 'A o ,g r n e 3 *( *! 2 ') O 3 M2 O3o h b 1O g I O W kq WOO "f O ,J 3 af G :P
,,3 O O ou Q 3 w a > avw > quwa a z w m n
( ; q,,/ s_ - x -. ' TURBINE ST E AM LIN E _ STEAM u GENERATOR (] A -' COilC ENSER ' BLOWOOWN LINE F E EDWATER y BYPASS
,e -- L-- A PRIMARY h '
COOLANT c ATIO N MtXED Bec SURGE 4 7 - FILTER F ot M I N E R-murta e cr uiNta-atirtR dFILTER h- TANK HEAT EXCHANGER t O mm m
>> O -_- _~
m n, Tn r-> #- -
-4 K %o m2I PC _
zm "5E
-m 42 HO mg m RIVER o mx C2p CHATAHOOCHEE S $$ 'E2 o
in _a o mr7 m x C2mO P g n -4
s vi m r
mb 2r zm 2 N o O f.h c g nM O O o en " mO E O -4 E
>O>m om m>
n -4 x 2 t* % 2
-4 _
e 4 O . l l i r-----------------7 g ____1__ i i g: f
) un er o
ta
~
e o [ _ _ ~l tt_ IF !!;
<d c.- ) "f'f" ms ..-
f;b m + i l d 7 ,,, _ s iQ'I~ a m$
0. f.a I
1 m .: m ef3.L) g
@ l &- e i R - ) h y- x tr I I' r- La << t>J l 1 & ) {$ y2 4 5E l LAJ .o ro n Q :, 't. ,U a -.
t' 1 e z3o - ci s mI c o o D z, i W o [ 6- 'dll s3 p. m 7 m II U) . l A
!. T_lj 7 ~f, 5 .:
id O
! ._f _ _ ._ J o a O W
D
'l m j \1 t 1 i e x rr, O O
I '4)'. m Y
,- a * & f 0 0 a "I
C E o 0 cr m o 5; ,_ - 6 g'a<12 6 L I
'a $ 5 o o o a >.
t u k, O ta
> x C) t-V) D U u o < $$ $ AL A D A IA A POWER COMPANY O, J O S E PH f.t. FA R LEY NUCLE A R PL AN1 ENVIR O N TA EfJT A L R EP ORT OPER ATING LICEf2SE ST AGE G ASEOU S WAST E PROCESSifJG SYSTEr.'
FOR ONE UNIT FIGURE 3. 5-3 L. __ _ __ _ __.._._ _ __ . - . _
- w
TURBINE _A BUILDING A _, _ _ _ OUTSIDE AIR--[~[ g ,,{rTURBIN EA s f - -- _ --- OUTSIDE AIR r3 g n RA^ [O At J CONDEf4SER j ! AIR y 7 I EJECTOR , --- STEAM v L. ____ _ __.__ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ y _ I '
/
GEN E RATOR >= I . SECONr ARY SYSTEM DORIC ACID EVAPORATOR r- H 2 02 CHEMICAL AND VOLUME CONTROL _ C l [ ' RECOM3* E R .,.
~
ITwo umTs) STE AM EQUIPMEf4T VENTS WA GAS l l l LIQUID RADIDt.CTIVE WASTE PROG , C APF RS CESSING SYSTEM EQUIP. VENTS ] l l REACTOR DRAIN TANK ' " GAS STORAGE o TONTROL TANK! b" " l HYDROGEN-CONTAINING TA4KS I R ADIO ACTIVE GAS SYSTEM g
* ~~~~ - ~~~~~~ - ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~
FUEL-POOL SYSTEM ' EOUIPMENT VENTS - m 6 GAS STORAGE A A A44A MISCELLANEOUS WASTE m HOLDUP VENTS GAS COLLECTION HE ADER ll p G (IN AUXILIARY B'JILDING) AER ATED LOW ACTIVITY
' YY GAS SYSTEM WASTE GAS SYSTEM A
b
~' + FUCL HAND E0 /T np 'g T'O T C1dTI AL ir
{
' O ~
OUTSIDE AIR sYtIs _ _ _ - .
~
AUXILIARY BUILDING MOTHER ARE A3 ! N[ Io~ SUPPLY FANS - AU XILI ARY BUILDING VENTIL ATION SYSTEM
~
g su s sq q p.y gw. r PURCE INLET P A C OUTdT INTE R N AL ~~"~~ LEGEND RECIRCULATING Sf t. P PR E FILT E R A HIGH EFFICIENCY PARTICULATE FILTER C CHARCOAL ABSORDER CONTAINMENT VENTf L ATION SYSTEM rm AL AD AM A POWER COMPANY (U ) JOSEPH M. FA R L EY N UCLEA R PL A NT ENVIR O N M EfJ TA L REP ORT OPER ATING LICENSE STAGE j GASEOUS WASTE DISPOSAL AND VENTh L AT IO N SYSTEM J. M. FARLEY NUCLE AR PL ANT FIGUR E 3.5- 4 i
. . . . l
1 20 24 < G 20 TOTAL ALL ISOTOPES W e o O I o
-- 16 e
o V z w
> 12 Z GALL GASES EXCEPT KR-85 t's/ ,
m O z o 50
?u.
s
?
o
4 0
10 20 30 40 TIME (YEARS) AL A B A fA A POW ER COfA PANY i ~ ~ '( JOSEPH FA. FA R LEY N UCLE A R PL A NT l
~' ENVIR O N fA EN T A L R EP O RT OPER ATING' LICENSC STAGE ESTIMATED WASTF GAS PROCESSING SYSTE FISSION GAS ACCUMUL ATION BASED ON CONTINUOUS CORE OPERATION WITH 0.25 % FUEL DEFECTS FIGURE 3.5-5
. 3.6 CHEMICAL AND BIOCIDE WASTES ,
Chemical and biocide wastes will be generated by chlorination, demineralizer regenerations, and reactor coolant makeup water treatment. Cooling tower blowdown and drif t will contain solids at 3.5 concentrations of the solids level of the Chattahoochee River. 1 3.6.1 CHLORINATION OF SERVICE WATER SYSTEM AND COOLING TOWERS Chlorine will be added to the servic.2 water system at the pond intake structure to a level of 0.5 ppm for 30 minutes to 115 hours during 1 each operating shift. The cooling tower circuit will be chlorinated from : 30 to 60 minutes each day to a concentration of 1 ppm at the top of the i cooling tower cells. l i The residual chlorine content of the discharge is expected to be l 1 negligible. The water of the Chattahoochee River has a chlorine demand of 0.5 to 1 ppm. The travel time through the service water system from the intake at the pond to the discharge at the river will be sufficient for the ; chlorine to react completely with the demand in the water. Only one unit ; will be chlorinated at a time, which will allow dilution with unchlorinated ; water from the other unit prior to discharge. Also, the service water , 1 l system and cooling tower circuits will not be chlorinated at the same time. The chlorination point for the cooling tower system will be downstream of the blowdown take-off (Fig. 3.4-1) . The chlorinated water will pass through the ; condensers and the cooling towers before reaching the blowdown discharge. The cooling tower blowdown and the discharge from the service' water system i will be mixed prior to discharge to the river. Assuming that the residual chlorine content of the blowdown is virtually zero and the service water discharge contains a maximum of 0.5 ppm free residual, the discharge to the' ;
\
river would contain a maximum concentration of 0.18 ppm of f ree chlorine even ! I if no demand was present in the service water. However, the content is expected to be negligible since the chlorine 1 demand has been determined to be 0.6 to 1.0 ppm for waters of the Chattahoochee River.- 3.6-1 Amend. 1 - 11/30/73
f Figure 3.6-1 illustrates the relationship between chlorine dosage () and a chlorine demand of 0.5 ppm Ammonia Nitrogen. Figure 3.6-2 illustrates the relationship between chlorine dosage and a 0.6 ppm chlorine demand composed of both Ammonia Nitrogen and organic Nitrogen. From these two figures, the following concentrations of chlorine residuals for the Farley Plant can be estimated: Cooling Tower Circuit Dosage - 1 ppm Residual with 0.5 ppm Ammonia Nitrogen demand - 0.5 ppm Residual with 0.6 ppm Ammonia and organic Nitrogen demand - 0.4 ppm Service Water System 1 Dosage - 0.5 ppm Residual with 0.5 ppm Ammonia Nitrogen demand - 0.2 ppm Residual with 0.6 ppm Ammonia Nitrogen and organic Nitrogen
\~ demand - 0.2 ppm For the stated conditions, the residual would be predominately monochloramine.
The concentration of monochloramine in the discharge under the operating conditions cited above would then be as follows: 4 Concentration in Discharge During Cooling Tower Chlorination Blowdown - .5100 gpm @ 0.4 to 0.5 ppm Monochloramine Service water - 12,800 gpm Discharge from 2nd Unit - 17,900 gpm Concentration - 5100 (0.5) = 0.07 Monochloramine 35,800 O- 3.6-2 Amend. 1 - 11/30/73
L (-} (s I o- 7
N. CONTACT TlWE o.s PPM Ammonia NiTRostN
- 0.7 j 6- a True.so.P - 0.6 c.
h W 5 AMMONIA NITROGEN O ed[ -05 4-
-OA $
E 3- g/ / /,;b - 0.3 1
> 2- qD/ (v -0.2 j u AMMONIA 2 g
NITROGEN O I 2 3 4 b6 7 8 9 l0 il f CHLORINE DOSE, PPM FIG . 3.6- 1 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN AMMONIA NITROGEN A ND CHLORINE h" [n$ contact Tsue 2 o.3 PPM AM MoNia NITROGEN ( a 6.0" o.3 PPM ORGANIC NITROQ( y S.o- Q 8
- 4.o-S * .
3.o- p 4 5 t.0- O S +q
$ s.o-o s!o 2'.o $.o 4'.o do do T'.o s'.o s'.o fo is CHLORINE DOSE, PPM FIG. 3.6-2 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN AMMONIA NITROGEN AND ORGANIC NITROGEN AND CHLORINE ADOPTED FROM W HITE , G. C.1972 HANDBOOK OF CHLO R IN ATIO N.
VAN NOSTR AND REIN HOLD CO. NEW YORK. Ame ndment # 1, Nov. 3 0,1973 f
1 i Concentration in Discharge During Service Water Chlorination ) Blowdown - 5100 gpm e 1 j Service Water - 12,800 gpm @ 0.2 ppm Monochloramine i Discharge from 2nd Unit - 17,900 gpm Concentration - 12,800 (0.2) = 0.07 ppm Monochloramine 35,800 3.6.2 SOLIDS CONCENTRATION { The cooling towers will be operated to maintain approximately-3.5 ; cycles of concentration. The average concentration of solids in the Chattahoochee River is 63 ppm. The cooling tower blowdown and drif t will , therefore contain 220 ppm of total dissolved solids. The cooling tower blowdown (5100 gpm) will be mixed with the service water discharge (12,800 gpm) prior to discharge to the river. The , resultant concentration of solids in the discharge will be 108 ppm. The cooling tower drif t has been estimated by the manuf acturer to . be 0.005% of the circulating water rate, or 32 gpm. The total solids concen-tration in the drif t will be 220 ppm. 3.6.3 OTHER CHD4ICAL DISCHARGES The quantities of chemical and biocide waste from other plant ; operations will be the same as set forth in Alabama Power Campany's Environ-mental Report - Construction Stage - and the AEC Final Environmental Statement. I b ' 3.6-3 Amend. 1 - 11/30/73
'i
3.8 Radioactive Materials Inventory () During the course of normal plant operation, radioactive materials will, from time , i
~
to time, be transported to and from the site. These materials will include new fuel, spent or irradiated fuel, and processed radioactive wastes. I 3.8.1 New Fuel ; New fuel shipped to the site consists of bundles of fuel rods called fuel assemblies. f The fuel rods are made up of zircaloy tubing containing slightly enriched l uranium dioxide pellets and sealed at each end. The average enrichment of the initial core is approximately 2.7%. Each fuel assembly contains approximately i 460 kilograms of uranium-The initial fuel loading for each of the two units will consist of 157 fuel assemblies. About 56 new assemblies are expected to be loaded every year into each of the units af ter they begin commercial operation. These fuel assemblies will have been f abricated at a fuel f abrication plant and shipped to the plant site shortly before they are required. It is anticipated that l these shipments will be made by truck. Each container can accommodate two fuel assemblies and six or seven containers would constitute a truckload. Thus, ; for each unit about twelve to fourteen shipments will be required for the initial loading with only about four or five shipments every year thereafter. 3.8.2 Spent Fuel The fuel fo: the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant is designed for a peak ! pellet burnup of approximately 50,000 Megawatt Days per Metric Ton of Uranium (MWD /MTU), and on average discharge burnup of 33,000 MWD /MTU. At the end of design r cycle life, the irradiated fuel will be stored at the plant for at least 100 days while the short half-life isotopes decay. The fuel vill then be transported to a reprocessing plant for the necessary reprocessing services. It is anticipated () that these shipments will be made by rail. 3.5-1 !
i The railroad car will carry no other cargo _and there will be no intermediate handling of the centainer system between the Farley Plant and the reprocessing ( ]) plant. The container will be able to accomodate from about six to about sixteen fuel assemblies, depending upon its size. It is anticipated that approximately I r
.56 rpent fuel assemblies w111 be discharged from each vait annually. Thus, for each unit the shipment of from four to ten containers will be required each year.
3.8.3 Processed Radioactive Wastes Radioactive wastes processed for shipment to off-site burial facilities [ are prepared by the solid waste handling syatem. The Farley Plant will have a l I solid waste handling f acility for each unit. Liquid wastes to be processed will come from the primary and secondary
spent resin storage tanks, the waste evaporator concentrate tank, and the chemical :
t drain tank. These spent re,in slurries, waste evaporator bottons and chemical drain tank effluent are piped to the drumming area where they are encapsulated j
) in 55 gallon drums. The drums will have been prepared in a non-radiation area, l separate from the drumming room. The drums for the evaporator bottoms and chemical drain tank effluent will be partially filled with a mixture of vermiculite and cement, while the drums for the resin slurries will have an inside coating of cement as well as the vermiculite-cement mixture. The liquid wastes are solidified in the vermiculite-cement mixture and the drums are sealed and if ,
necessary, shielded. They may be shipped offsite immediately or stored at the plant in the drum storage area. Solid, compressible vastes will be products of the plant operation and i maintenance. They will be comprised of low-radiation level material such as paper, disposable clothing, rags, towels, floor coverings, shoe covers, plastics, cloth smears, and respirator f11ters. These materials are compressed directly ; 3.8-2
f into 55 gallon drums by a baler, which is equipped with a dust shroud to prevent l
'- the escape of dust or particles that may be emitted from the drum during compression of the wastes. When a drum is f ull, the lid is installed and secured by a clamping ring, and the drum is stored pending shipment.
The volume of radicactive wastes is expected to total 100 drums of spent primary resins, 600 cubic feet of spent secondary resins from the steam generator blowdown processing system, and 100 drums of evaporator concentrates per year for each unit. Chemical drain tank effluencs are expected to total approximately 1000 gallons, or 33 dreas, per year The totcl volume of compressible wastes will be about 120 drums per year . The expected curie content of the evaporator concentrates is approximately 3.2 microcuries per ccbic centimeter. On the basis of about 30 gallons of evaporator concentrates per drum, the content of each drum is 0.34 ceries. y The curie content of the chemical drain tank effluents totals approximately e l
./
0.63 curies per year, or 0.02 curies per drum. In the case of primary spent resins, the curie content totals approx 1motely 6400 curies per year, or 64 curies per drum Secondary system spent resins are expected to account for approximately 17 curies per year. Table 3. 8-1 gives the anticipated tctal solid waste generated per year, and the associated curie :;ncent, for each unit.
~3
3. 6- 3
1 r ~s TABLE 3.8-1 ANTICIPATED TOTAL SOLID WASTE PER UNIT GENERATED PER YEAR t (0.25% Fuel Defects) i Total Volume (ft3) Total Drums Total Curies
Spert Primary Resins 200 100 6400 Evaporator Bottoms 370 100 34 2
Chemical Drain Tank 134 33 0.63 Effluents 3 200 17 SGBS Spent Resins 600 Dry Waste 2500 120 41 . 1 2775 gal. 2 1000 gal. , 3 20 gpd primary to secondary leak, 5 gpm/SG Blowdown O AJ . r l
3.9 Transmission Facilities The electrical power generated at the Joseph.M. Farley Plant will be delivered to the interconnected transmission system over 230 kV and 500 kV transmission lines.. The size, voltage levels, and routings of these lines were determined primarily on che basis of reliability of electrical service. Initial studies for these transmission facilities. began in 1968. Load flow and transient stability studies simulated peak hour conditions in the period 1975-1977 with the initial operation of the two Farley units in 1975 and 1977. Three basic plans involving different combinations of lines and different voltage levels were studied. Alternatives of different line conductor sizes were also considered. The plan selected is: (a) One 230 kV line directly to Alabama Power Company substation at Pinckard. One 230 kV line to the substation at Pinckard by way of
,,,, Webb.
() (b) One 230 kV line to Georgia Power Company. (c) One 500 kV line to Georgia Power Company (Initial operation at 230 kV). (d) One 500 kV line to Alabama Power Company substation near Montgomery, Alabama. Georgia Power Ccmpany will be responsible for the. transmission connections from the Farley substations to the Georgia system which is adjacent to the Farley Plant on the east side of the Chattahoochee River. The first 230 kV line to Webb will be energized by mid-1973 to supply plant testing power. The other 230 kV lines, including the 500 kV line to be operated initially at 230 kV, will be ccmpleted between 1973 and.1975. The additional 500 kV line will be required for service with Unit No. 2 by 1977, along with ! conversion of the initial 500 kV line from 230 kV operation to 500 kV operation.
/"+
I u/ l 3.9-1 1
f Underground transmission lines to deliver the amount of power to be produced 4 at the Farley Plant are not considered technicclly feasible or economically justifiable. Transmission of such blocks of power at 230 kV underground is estimated to cost in the order of 10 to 40 times more than conventional overhead construction.1 Projection work was begun on the Farley transmission line routes early in 1970. Aerial maps and other geographical data were obtained. Detailed field investigations including aerial survelliance, local land research and on the ground inspections were conducted. Consultatiens were ccnducted with local county and city officials with respect to local land planning. Alternate routes were developed and final routes selected from these as shown in Figure 3.9-1, sheets 1,2 & 3. The four routes selected are discussed below: (a) Farley-Webb Section of the Farle_y-Webb-Pinckard 230,000 Volt Line
; This line is approximately 10.5 miles long and runs in a westerly
(~'/ direction from the Farley Plant Substation to the Webb Transmission Sub-station. The right-of-way will be 125 feet wide. The present land use along the right-of-way route is primarily agricultural. There are no towns along this route; therefore, the route runs in an almost straight line with only slight deviations for churches, homes and road crossings. There are no places in this area listed in "The National Register of Historic Places, 1969", published by the National Park Service, U. S. Department of the Interior. There is no public use land along this route, except for roads and highways, and the route is located in an area which is not subject to floods f rom the Chattahoochee River. The area traversed by the route is served by a network of roads which will provide a means for easy access for construction and maintenante of the transmission line. It is anticipated O V i.9-2
i that land in.this' area vill continue to serve agricultural needs and the area j will remain essentially rural. This line will therefore have little or no ~ impact on land use. A straight line route 1s desirable because it requires the least amount of land and is the least costly to, build. The major l adverse environmental impact resulting from construction of this line will j be its effect on agricultural use of the land, and this will be minimal. It will not appreciably affect production of trees, shrubs, grass or other
plants, and will have little effect on birds, animals, fish or other fauna., f Cultural factors, such as land use and recreation will not be affected to f
any extent by the selection of this route. ( Route selection was also evaluated on the basis of the Federal Power Commission's. Guidelines for the Protection.of Natural, Historic, Scenic ~and ' Recreational Values in the Design and Location of Rights-of-Way and Trans-mission Facilities. The route selected complies with applicable items of .j
?O- this document. This line is currently scheduled for' service in July, 1973. .
(b) Pinekard-Webb Section of the Farley-Webb-Pinckard 230.000 Volt Line'
.i This line is approximately 18.0 miles long. It begins at Pinckard .l Transmission Substation and runs 0.8 mile east and then parallels an existing f i
115,000 volt line 8.2 miles, then northeasterly 0.9 mile to a point north of Dothan, and then southeasterly 8.1 miles to the Webb Transmission Substation. : The land along this route is now used primarily for agriculture. There are- 1 no places in this area listed in "The National Register of Historic Places, ! 1969t'. There is no public use land along the route, except for roads and highways, and the route is located in an area which is not subject'to i floods from the Choctawhatchee River. The area traversed by the route -! e has a network of roads providing easy access for construction and maintenance-- l of transmission lines. It is anticipated that land in this area vill remain !
.O essentially rural except for the land between Highway 231 and Highway 431. I 3.9-3 ;
O l
-_- _ , _ . . _ . , - _ c . _ , ,
Construction of this line should have little impact on the environment of n
.k-)' this area. The major adverse environmental impact resulting from construction r of this line will be from its effect on agricultural use of the land, and this will be minimal. It will not appreciably affect production of shrubs, trees, grass or other plants, and will have little effect on birds, animals or fish. Cultural factors, such as land use and recreation will , not be affected to any extent by the route choice. Route selection was also evaluated on the basis of the Federal Power . Commission's Guidelines for the Protection of Natural, Historic, Scenic and Recreational Values in the Design and Location of Rights-of-Way and Transmission Facilities. The route selected complies with applicable items of this document. This line is currently scheduled for service December 1, 1973. (c) Farley-Pinckard (South Route) 230,000 Volt Line
-s This line is approximately 34.0 miles long. The line begins at the # Farley Plant substation and runs southeasterly 6.7 miles to a point south-east of Ashford, then west 14.5 miles south of Dothan, and then 13.8 miles northwesterly to the Pinckard substation. The right-of-way is 125 feet wide.
This line was routed around the City of ~uothan. There are no places in this ; area listed in "The Register of Historic Places, 1969". There is no public use land along this route, except for roads and highways, and the route 1 I is located in an area which is not subject to floods from the Chattahoochee River. The area has a network of roads which provide a means for easy access for construction and maintenance of the transmission line. Currently there are no major transmission lines in the area south of Dothan. Additional l power requirements for this area could be served from this line. (O-> l 3.3-4 1 1 l 1
l The environmental impact of this line will be limited to the effects .
.m i b of the line'on agricultural development in the area, and this will be minimal.
The route selected is expected to remain out of heavily populated areas . of Dothan for many years. Construction of this line will not appreciably affect production cf trees, grass er other plants, and will have little' f effect on birds, animals or fish. Cultural factors such as land use-and recreation will not be affected by the selection of this route. Route selection was also evaluated cn the basis of the Federal Power. > i Commission's Guidelines for the Protection of Natural, Historic, Scenic and Recreational Values in the Design and Location of Rights-of-Way and Trans-mission Facilities. The route selected complies with applicable items of this document. This line is currently (June, 1973) being surveyed. Right- l of-way acquisition is scheduled for completion by early 1974. The line is scheduled for service by January 1, 1975. O (d) Farley-Snowdoun 500,000 Volt Line l This line is approximately 96 miles long. It runs in a northwesterly direction from Farley Plant substation to the Snowdoun Transmission Substation. i The right-of-way is 200 feet wide and the line is almost a straight line ! passing northeast of Headland, Newville, Ozark, Brundidge, and Troy. The I line runs through farmlands across Houston, Henry and Dale Counties, through !
'mostly timberland in Barbour and Pike Counties and'through pasturelands in l
Montgomery County. The line crosses the Choctawhatchee, Pea and Conecuh 3 i Rivers. There are n:, places in this area l
~i listed in "The National Register of Historical Places, 1969", published by l r
the National Park Service, U. S_ Department of the Interior. There is no public use land along this route except for roads and highways. The area traversed ! i O l 3.9-5 i _s
by the route is served by a network of roads which will provide a means .
) of easy access for construction and maintenance of the transmission line. <
It is anticipated that land in this area will; continue to serve agricultural, timber and pasture needs and the area will remain essentially rural. This line will therefore have little or no impact on land use. A straight line route is desirable because it requires the least amount of land and is the least costly to build. The major adverse environmental impact will be its effect on agricultural use of the land, and this will be minimal. It will not appreciably affect production of trees, shrubs, grass or other plants, and will have little effect on birds, animals or fish. Cultural factors, such as land use and recreation will not be affected to any extent by the selection of this route. Route selection was also evaluated on the basis of Federal Power Commission's Guidelines for the Protection of Natural, Historic, Scenic and O Recreational Values in the Design and Location of Rights-of-Way and Trans-mission Facilities. The route selected complies with applicable items of this document. The right-of-way for this line is currently under survey. The scheduled completion date for acq.uisition is September 1, 1974. Line clearing and construction is scheduled to start in September, 1974 and be completed by September, 1976. The economic effects of these transmission rights-of-way can be evaluated on the basis of estimated loss of income to the owner. In Figure 3.9-2, the four transmission line routes selected are divided into use and revenue evaluation by county. Land use classifications are wood product areas, farm crop or cultivated areas and pasture areas. Acreages devoted to such uses were determined from maps made from aerial photographs. The revenue O
3. 9--6
derived per acre from these land uses is based on data' supplied by the Annual I Report of the respective county agents. In Table 3.9-1, Sheets 1 through 12, the total farm income for each county is shown on a crop-acre-income basis. Gross. figures supplied in the. data have been modified to represent a net income figure by the application of a 30 percent factor as an averaged multiplier to reduce gross to net. This factor is an estimated amount and was suggested by some of the county agents. Annual average income from cultivated areas was combined with that from wood j products. To determine the reduction of annual income from the property caused by the construction of the transmission line, a devaluation factor was applied which represents the estimated reduction in productivity. Wood products will ; be eliminated on the transmission line right-of-way and, therefore, a devaluation factor of one was used. Cultivated land is not affected to any great extent since less than one percent of the land will be removed from productivity. However, a devaluation factor of one-tenth was assumed for this type of property G use, based on considerations of inconvenience to the owner. Pasture land ~is only , i slightly affected by transmission lines and therefore a devaluation factor of zero was applied to pasture areas. Figure 3.9-2 shows these reduction facters and the total annual loss of revenue in dollars per acre by county for land used for right-of-way. This is compared with the estimated annual-tax payment which is expected to be made tn ea:h ccunty for the transmission lines. It is recog-nized that only a small portion of the tax payment will benefit the landowner. Therefore, the initial price paid for the right-of-way is treated as a direct purchase from the landowner. The economic effect on the area of construction of these transmission lines will be small and will be compensated for by tax payments to the counties as well , l as by purchase of the rights-of-way, s . l
)
3. 9- 7 1
1 1
- . , . . . ~~. . . - .
i 8-During construction, rights-of-way will be cleared and smoothed. [. ( Stumps will- be sheared and high banks and other obstructions leveled to , I facilitate future maintenance with mowing equipment. Culvert pipes will T! be installed wherever necessary to maintain the natural flow of water. . Natural screens composed of native shrubs and trees will be utilized at
.4 road crossings where practical to avoid long views of transmission line corridors.
Reclearing of the rights-of-way will be done every three or. , four years by bush-hogs and the use of herbicides in such a way that the i ground cover of native shrubs and grasses will not be disturbed. Only 1 ; herbicides approved by the Environmental Protection Agency will be used under controlled conditions predominately by helicopter application according. to label instructions. All transmission lines als patrolled on a monthly , basis by fixed wing aircraft. ! Alabama Power Company encourages property owners to convert their rights-of-way brush acreage to permanent pasture, row crops,' wildlife ! food plots, or some other useful crop by providing technical assistance and sharing in the initial cost of establishing .such areas. 1
-1 l() 3.9-8 Amend.1 - 11/30/73 1
i
. TALLE 3.5-1 1970 - HOUSTON COUNIY FARM INCOME TOTAL RURAL ACREAGE - 350,000
1. FARM CROPS, FRUITS AND NUTS 130,000 Acres Available - 106,725 Acres Harvested Acres Cross Ince=c Crop Harvested Cross Income Per Acre _
Cotton 7,300 1,586,462 217 Peanuts 31,215 8,615,340 276 Soy Beans 1,500 66,000 44 Corn 40,000 1,600,000 40 Sorghum 6,000 270,000 45 Grains 9,200 196,000 21 Pecans 500 128,000 256 Vegetables 9,000 1,500,000 167 - -{'} Watermelons ' Canteloupes 2,000 240,000 120 Fruits 10 10,000 1,000 TOTALS 106,725 14,211,802 133 Estimated net income at 30% of gross income = $40/ acre harvested
2. TIMBER LANDS Total Acreage - 130,000 1970 Harvest - 6,000 Acres 1970 Income - $650,000 1970 - $108 Stumpage Based on cutting each 20 years, annual value of wood products / acre = 108/20 = $5.40
,f -] Sheet 1 of 12
(> f I
*l TABLE 3.9-1 (Continued)
3. . LIVESTOCK AND PASTURE (55,000 Acres)
~
Cattle and Calves $ 2,000,000 Hogs and Pigs $ 2,344,000 Dairying $ 365,000 Bro 11ers $ 100,000 - Eggs $ 905,000 Total $ 6,714,000 Gross income equals 6,714,000/55,000 = $122 per acre. Net income @ 30% of gross equals $37 per acre.
4. Remaining acreage not in use or rented.to. Federal Government - 58,275 23,275 Acres Idle Crop Land 15,000 Acres Govt. Programs 20,000 Acres Non-Productive Land (3
~
Government payments plus hunting rights = 221,060 and assuming this is averaged over above land = $3.79 per acre. a l
)
Sheet 2 of 12 O
1 i TABLE 3.9-1 (Continued) 1972 - BARBOUR COUl:TY FARM INCOME TOTAL RURAL ACREAGE - 575,400 t
1. FARM CROPS, FRUITS AND NUTS 79,620 Acres Available - 66,620 Acres Harvested Acres Gross Income Crop Harvested Cross Income Per Acre '
Cotton 2,270 401,973 177 Peanuts 20,000 4,862.100 243 Soy Beans 950 52,725 56 ; Corn 30,000 1,090,214 36 Sorghum 200- 6,500 33 Grains 200 5,200 26 Pecans 13,000 337,500 26 4 Vegetables 0 0 0 Watermelons Cantaloupes 0 0 0 Fruits 0 0 0 TOTALS 66,620 6,756,212 101 Estimated net income at 30% of gross income = $30/ acre harvested ~' f a Sheet 3 of 12 , O
TABLE 3.9-1 (Continued) (Barbour County) O9 .
2. TIMBERLAhTS Total Acreage Used 382,500 1972 Harvest 18,000 1912 Income $ 2,756,000 1972 Income / Acre Harvested $ 153 Stumpage Based on cutting each 20 years, annual value of wood products / acre - 153/ 20 = $7.65

3. LIVESTOCK AND PASTURE (66,249 Acres)
Cattle and Calves $ 613,100 Hogs and Pigs $ 1,872,800 Dairying $ 221,000 Broilers $ 425,250 Eggs $ 606,000 TOTAL $ 3,738,150 Gross income equals 3,738,150/66,249 - $56 per acre Net income @ 30% of gross equals $17 per acre
4. Remaining acreage not in use or rented to Federal Government = 60,031 13,000 Acres Idle Crop Land 30,031 Acres Goverrunent Programs 17,000 Acres Non Productive Land Governtnent payments plus - hunting rights = 755,911 and-assuming this is averaged over above land = $12.59 acre Sheet 4 of 12 O
TABLE 3.9-1 (Continued) \_- 1972 - PIKE COUNTY FARM INCOME TOTAL RURAL ACREAGE - 317,904
1. FARM CROPS, FRUITS AND NUTS 110,876 Acres Available - 46,473 Acres Harvested Acres Gross Income Crop Harvested Gross Income Per Acre Cotton 60 6,540 109 Peanuts 14,500 4,045,000 210 Soy Beans 350 21,420 61 Corn 18,000 210,600 12 Sorghum 3,000 12,540 4 Grains 2,650 25,400 10 Pecans 2,500 225,000 90
. Vegetables 373 78,850 211 Watermelons Canteloupes 8 1,200 150 Fruits 32 9,000 281 TOTALS 46,473 4,685,550 101 Estimated net income at 30% of gross income = $30/ acre harvested.
Sheet 5 of 12
, ~
x.c._ l
h f.g TABLE 3.9-1 (Continued) l Q (Pike County) [
2. TIMBER LANDS Total Acreage - 143,190
1972 Harvest - 5,000 Acres 1972 Income - $899,512. .
1972 Income / Acre Harvested - $180 Stumpage Based on cutting each 20 years, annual value of wood products / acre = 180/20 = $9.00 ,
3. LIVESTOCK AND PASTURE (102,005 Acres)
Cattle and Calves $ 3,542,000 Hogs and Pigs $ 2,372,500 Dairying $ 451,635 Broilers $ 1,396,395 Eggs S 2,091.500 Total $ 9,854,030 Gross income equals 9,854,030/102,005 - $97 per acre. Net incon.e @ 30% of gross equals $29 per acre. !
4. Remaining acreage not in use or rented to Federal Government = 26,236 :
e 11,236 Acres Idle Crop Land 10,000 Acres Govt. Programs 5,000 Acres Non-Productive Land Government payments plus hunting rights 801,800 and -! assuming this is averaged over above land = $30.56 per acre. i j j l Sheet 6 or 12 ] O i
TABLE 3.9-1 (Continued)
1972 - MONTGOMERY COUNTY FARH INCOME TOTAL RURAL ACREAGE - 454,562 l
1. FARM CROPS, FRUITS AND NUTS 75,000 Acres Available - 66,063 Acres Harvested ;
Acres Gross Income Crop Earvested Gross Income Per Acre , t Cotton 4,600 773,325 168 Peanuts 0 0 0 Soy Beans 18,000 1,512,000 84 Corn 3,000 98,250 33 Sorghum 1,200 48,000 40 Grains 2,400 90,000 38 : F Pecans 1,733 288,000 166
-t Vegetables 125 35,500 284 - l Watermelons Canteloupes 5 1,200 240 i Fruits 0 0 0 ,
Hay 35,000 150,000 4 i IOTALS 66,063 2,996,275 45 Estimated net income at 30% of gr oss income = $14/ acre harvested. , I i Sheet 7 of 12 ) i l 1 i l
[; 1ABLE 3.9-1 (Continued) (Montgomery County)
2. TIMBER LANDS Total Acreage - 206,200 1972 Harvest -
7,000 1972 Income - $750,000 1972 Income / Acre Harvested - $107 Stumpage Based on cutting each 20 years, annual value of wood products / acre = 107/20 = $5.35
3. LIVESTOCK AND PASTURE (162,000 Acres)
Cattle and Calves S 7,614,000 Hogs and Pigs $ 553,925 Dairying $ 4,460,400 Bro 11ers S 81,400 g () Eggs $ 310,000 Tetal $13,019,725 Gross income equals 13,019,725/162,000 = $80 per acre. Net income @ 30% or gross equals $24 per acre.
4. Remaining acreage not in use or rented to Federal Government = 20,299.
4,532 Acres Idle Crep Land 8,137 Acres Govt,. Programs 7,630 Acres Non-Productive Land Government payments plus hunting rights = 499,265 and assuming this is averaged over above land = $24.59 per acre. Sheet 8 of 12 /~s
.1 i
9
^
TABLE 3.9-1 (Continued) f i 1972 - DALE COUNTY FARM INCOME : TOTAL RURAL ACREAGE - 300,000
1. FARM CROPS, FRUITS AND NUTS 70,246 Acres Available - 36,288 Acres Harvested Acres Gross Income !
Crop Harvested Gro.ts Income Per Acre Cotton 0 0 0 , Peanuts 16,438 3,496,197 213 Soy Beans 150 11,850 79 , Corn 14,000 71,500 5 ! Sorghum 1,000 40,000 40 , Grains 3,500 175,000 50 l Pecans 500 100,000 200 L Vegetables 500 150,000 300 Watermelons 200 45,000 225 ! t Fruits 0 0 0 t TOTALS 36,288 4,089,547 113 Estimited net income at 30 % of gross income = $34/ acre harvested ,. Sheet 9 of 12 ; 1 ($)
e
A TABLE 3.9-1 (Continued)
2. TIMBER LANDS Total Acreage -
220,000 i 1972 Harvest - 9,000 ; 1972 Income -
$1,150,000 [
1972 Income / Acre llarvested -
$ 128 Stumpage ]
Based on cutting each 20 years, annual value of wood products / acre = 128/20 = $6.40 l t
3. LIVESTOCK AND PASUTRE (20,000 Acres)
Cattle and Calves $ 690,000 l v t Hogs and Pigs S 995,000 $ Dairying $ 0 Broilers $ 500,000 Eggs $ 100,000 : Total $ 2,285,000 - Gross income equals 2,285,000/20,000 = $114 per acre l 5 Net income @ 30% of gross equals $34 per acre
4. Remaining acreage not in use or rented to Federal Government = 23,712 13,184 Acres Idle Crcp Land 2,528 Acres Government Programs ,
'8,000 Acres Non-Productive Land f Government payments plus hunting rights = 450,431 and l assuming this is averaged over above land = $18.99/ acre I
i f Sheet 10 of 12 l
,- . -- - - . .n - - . _ _ _ - - . _ _ - - - - - - - - - . .
TABLE 3.9-1 (Continued) 1972 - HENRY COUNTY FARM INCOME TOTAL RURAL ACREAGE - 341,000
1. FARM CROPS, FRUITS AND NUTS 75,000 Acres Available - 73,300 Acres Harvested Acres Gross Income Crop Harvested Gross Income Per Acre Cotton 1,050 160,000 152 Peanuts 31,434 9,500,000 302 Soy Beans 1,000 65,000 65 Corn 25,000 350,000 14 Sorghum 756 7,800 10 Grains 9,000 75,000 8 Pecans 5,000 30,000 6 Vegetables 50 5,000 100
(~) \_/ Watermelons 10 2,000 200 Fruits 0 0 0 TOTALS 73,300 10,194,800 139 Estimated net income at 30% of gross income = $42/ acre harvested Sheet 11 of 12 / \ %,/ e-
t I TABLE 3.9-1 (Continued) (V-)
2. TIMBER LANDS Total Acreage -
186,900 1972 Harvest - 6,500 Acres 1972 Income - $ 750,000 1972 Income / Acre Harvested -$ 115 Stumpage ! Based on cutting each 20 years, annual value of wood products / acre = 115/20 = $5.75
3. LIVESTOCK AND PASTURE (35,000 Acres)
Cattle and Calves $ 2,500,000 - Hogs and Pigs $ 1,600,000 Dairying $ 500,000 Broilers $ 0 Eggs $ 250,000 Total $ 4,850,000 Gross income equals 4,850,000/35,000 = $139 Net income @ 30% of gross equals $42 per acre
4. Remaining acreage not in use or rented to Federal Government = 45,800-35,000 Acres Idle Crop Land 5,800 Acres Government Programs 5,000 Acres Non-Productive Land ,
Government.. payments plus hunting rights = 804,927 and ; assuming this is averaged over above land = $17.57 per acre. l Sheet 12 of 12 [ 4 8 5 b
a n -, ..a.. ... -. . . . . . . , - .. 4 l
h. + .
td . nw g .ggg ; rps....9V,q lq~iq.g;4.tig,,y 4 - g g ,{n 4 3 g"y. " p,j=q p r 1 .. fpM b y/ ge [y 2 t b x s: pr 3 'v F = , y;Mjb- g4c Sh EE; ,
< s.....g ,,q 1 geg -
p A 1 ; f y i
*hm lp+ . $1 \
u..w. g s .
} .
p.gaqrews Tjft$r ' 7 u. s? g ,
~-
g\ c . g O E mg-Lyq q, y qg,% 2
,Tx ';")4.- vJ,4 f : .Agj % wy; T
s'j (a ; 9
,1 =~ 'gh,g 7 c 1 ,a -; n*:S ;l:,* , ' w+ay ,,- g , ) Vg. wg
[m
't _'s _, . $ ,- -
r; j C, a - ' e (-
@k 3 d 9. 4 S. .h- I , - r' 1 -
d.'2 1 o m g . hyghk[ a a$h[w$$d9e i W3 h +kIk$l g y ~ . , - J gfqngt gg m -
~
h [p; . N 8 $h eumsemmim ;
l ?fD
,qN""TQ!p V y . .f A, ?we;%vlQ . .. a _' u -Q -
frhM .. gri' .n #WL
/ a) jgh.. A sl . 8 ,a a-o . ' ;l ;
s.
$ .) ,k - i .[.
sg.7,
. gn.wm,x.ggg ge eu .o . -
g, {
't 4,a g p'p s '4 *. t ,9.<>
Y. y O.D ;,,, dl&p.R'N'e.v} h,%,q'( .%, ny ,V :s f*2 5 WQsffA i Qi![$ NQTgh i 9: !* d Y ,$ W6;A,$N )u,h-Je;;2 a 4 + g. _ e[I 74 Qb.r4 1 4
~4 .
Yi. . .
~ ,I9gn,.,l, 5 .[N '
y[y/.& "a. %n '? . ')w' ;R,. n
,-z - ~ p m. . ~ :.
f'
~f;' %.\, ,
f~ifk};l'r [}, . I E aji ~~ a.. ,, tl."M.k(H.n#Wk' 1 Nfx jl Q- -f
.l)i. . ,1 C tp'%.2 , (i il 6 3 tW3 3
[f[!,:lj::,m 3 y' - : I Q,y>/vg' WA O ~--J -A;a/y-../.
N n f r y . .
g4 } w t s it$rdse l
% %w$$jdb3fQQ w$kjh k] M ~
o
~
5 y,' lm,. N 4 s YM @ w , w& k w n g /
~
Y'; . %- Y15,
$L ra,). l sv, m ) , ,". g,[t.
a &. (g 3 ? .n dww$zhu i ? c.. i [. c u Y )%lt.;w.- g q L..
.. 'y. . .h ~ ,
. 4 1 . .
h5 g~,'~[,fs 2 & h..%, t ; ,
,"p* k+
i
' [h ~~ ]l :. > Qf, ' l1%+gQ .. r ,
(y%s$$, QM. 4 g 4, s
f .. g ,g1 } - L%, y 1QL-
- E .. }jk =V. <+-. +fy < c . ay.g f5 bwp f e hb* fb hih d : g}
k b.
wnb:):Q
.m. p g~ g.
fiq 334 gf ;y y y )L f.:Q 4q i pg %
\ / A ly'bb ' , gr. , ,Q. .ff. f . lgg .ty m'(j'..fl r
c . Q[,'b, %w', 'l' 9 o tj q..t v p . %a e p+
. ,i . . . ,4, , m. .. y st v3 #y;y a ~ 'r ,'
e V & '{mN Rs ..
. cA m ;; c p , 2, .
i' b/ .i/ ) i{N' jN Y K .) ' J
)k-Mktf_ . A
(.,,,N}jMc ' h {,I .8'N s O A ki c.< b?',7 ' 'LY Y$ % [M ?]
o :!! ! RM8%Nw@}iysk m,4<
+
l gy
.* b}g .
ic
' j) 1 )L";
nn,g4 xh m 4
- lh w%q._ . ,?
z vi fi :ly b l _U l hy%M1 $$ @ Tdhg h %)fL y ga 5
,~ ;S 4 3
4 ' ,14 g ,g_ j
,5 gQ4 m hh6 @ ,p g g b m .,
f
ydi' %. s u, , c.,

g g
[L g, 4s % My hiMWf p % !<
)npt j (jiqqp Ws f..4 ': }}, -L r/ _ hip >ws ;)M[;iiW @r; ,N ~ ' ' ^', .
r ,.~ : y, ? ' # g , A - I a3
.a nt ;.. e. '
as GT m,y2 At}w.6 r $:. g,b wg.q af i -
;q; &v=43 , lJ ,a 7,9,t ,citbyg$u4;,')c u ns t n g,T . w. s( g g**, ,ma,d t ,,.., 9 , T- 'y h{1 a: _
vf .;
q. r. s,#u . $RQ q -

. - .] ~~q* !mk t ie< J;1 7:;
2 Q3 '
!s:8.,?' $ t 'i g%If.s '3 x . . . - _ . % '@t'jff I, $.Q.W[M"')fap.dk&
F &% M
& &M"&f Q { % k]6W)= @ $ % s% w; $ $ [ < ~t 2' 9 : -r w- .ww:. mu
n. x <
% n NK }/ j s Airk;=bPk f m.h: , .. yhg ygg 46 3
alf l ;f ; ((] . r.rn 4 %<nngga vwxsw x w ~ yp . iu gn/a>t,;,up:;'W.Mbi,'m-.s [ g. A T y_r4,,g ~ 4 d f# :.a- n. QF fp s
& e W S~"'
N~j!Q,yS:3ki M
$dfi f FTw"N n ?.
o' D , dew' %)'% y; .
,l sli m-%',>
n
'! c' . s. .
ffg gg;gy
a. p f by g)g{td%j,[pggQ
A & TOTAL ANNUAL LCSS OF REVFRJE PER ACRE Annual Estimated Devaluation Annual Loss Total Length Acres Acres Acres Tax Paid Arnual Total Annual Rev. Factors Due to Line of Revenue Annual Loss in in R/d in R/4 in To County Tax Per Frem Present Use Due to Trans.Line of Revenue Miles R/4 Woods Fam For lines Acre Timber Farm Timber Fam Past. Timber! Fam Past. Per Acre I FARLEY-h"4BB 10.5 Miles
1. Houston Co. 10.5 159 51.5 107.5 51,060 S6.67 $278 $4,300 1 .1 0 $278 $430 0 84.45

2. Dale Co. 0 0 0 0 - - 0 0 1 .1 0 0 0 0 0 II hEBB-PINCKARD 18.5 Miles

1. Houston Co. 12 181 49 5 131.5 1,210 6.67 267 5,260 1 .1 0 267 526 0' 4.38

2. Dale Co. 6.5 98 27 ~ 71 630 6.41 146 2,840 1 .1 0 146 284 0 4.39 III FA*lET-PINCKARD South 31 Miles

1. Housten Co. 27 408 126 282 2,721 6.67 680 11,280 1 .1 0 680 1,128 0 4.43

2. Dale Co. 4 60.5 19 41 5 386 6.41 103 1,660 1 .1 0 103 166 0 4.45 IV FARLET-SNCWDCL1 500 kV 96 Miles

1. Houston Co. 8 194 ~85.3 108.7 1,408 7.26 461 4,348 1 .1 0 461 435 - 4.61

2. Henry Co. 18 436.4 192 244.4 3,168 7.26 1,110 10,130 1 .1 0 1,110 1413 4 . 95

3. Vale Co. 11.5 27 8.8 214.7 64.1 1,943 6.97 1,370 2,180 1 .1 0- 1 370 2,18 -
5 Jo
4. Barbour Co. 12 290.9 180.4 110.5 2 7 26 l 3,320 1 .1 0 1,380 J32 5 88

5. Pike Co. 23.5 569.7 364.6 205.1 3,112
,474 6.10 3,fRJ 40 ' 6,153 1 .1 0 3,280 615 - 6.83 -6. l'entgemary 23 551.6 278.8 778.8 3,400 6.10 1,492 6,690- 1 .1 0 1/.92 669 3.91 Co.
h y ,$, *sased on current method of tax payment and estimated value of $80,000 per mile for 230 kv and $125,000 per mile for 500 kv ,E - **See individual county reports for revenue per acre for timber products and fam values E @> 9'h w E: ror purposes of annual land incom., all open land assumed as crop lands with devaluation factor of .1 g gg gg p - yh ?* t
@[g8
O"g ee, ::i5-m5 5
5
.~
)
4.2 Transmission Facilities Construction
}
Section VII B of the AEC Final Environmental Statement - Construction Stage - addressed specific rare and endangered species which might reside in the area of the Farley Nuclear site and along the transmission 1 corridors. In response to this question, Alabama Power engaged as a consultant Dr. Julian L. Dusi. vertebrate ecologist, Professor at Auburn University's Department of Zoology and recognized authority on Alabarn birds to investigate these concerns. The proposal made to us by Dr. Dusi 1 specifically included provisions for on the ground reconnaissance for areas which he considered questionable from the air. Dr. Dusi's report which is included as Section 4.2 of the Environmental Report - Operation Stage - indicates that he was fully able to make the conclusions in regard to rare and endangered species from the aerial reconnaissance work and from his 1l h extensive knowledge of the endangered species in question. Ilis report which addresses this particular aspect follows:
?
4.2-1 Amend. 1 - 11/30/73
AERIAL RECONNAISSANCE (' ' 0F THE PROPOSED TRANSMISSION LINES \ FROM FARLEY STATION TO ALABAMA by Julian L. Dusi Procedure In preparation for the flights, it was necessary to transfer the transmission line routes to county road maps so that accurate' check points to road intersections, towns, etc. , would be present so that we could exactly keep on course and also be able to plot exactly any eagle nests or special habitat that would require exact location from the ground. To do this, it was necessary to xerox the portions of county maps needed, fit them together, plot in the transmission line routes, cut this into 8 x 11 inch size pages, copy these master pages and attach them together so that daey could be referred to while piloting the aircraf t. 1-
-s On Friday, April 27, Rosemary Dusi and I . drove to Dothan and' the airport there and arranged rental of a Cessna-150 from Napier Air Services, then we flew the Farley Station to Pinckard substation transmission line routes, to the north and south of Dothan. We also flew part of the Farley Station to Montgomery line to a point north of the Dothan airport. .
On Saturday, April 28, we flew the rest of the 'foatsomery line, in the morning, O-4.2-1A Amend.1 - 11/30/73 l l
7- _r. On Friday May 11, we flew frcm the Auburn airport in a Cessna-150, rented from Auburn School of Aviation, to the end of the transmissicn line at the south a Montgomery substation, rechecked part of the line to Farley Station and then checked the right-of-way from the south Montgomery substation to the 500KV switching station in Montgtmery The weather was excellent for the ilights. Visability was at least 10 miles, few clouds were present and turbulence was light. This permitted excellent visibility and it was relatively easy to keep the aircrait cn heading. We flew at 1,000 feet above ground level and with the excellent visioility, were able to observe accurately a path at least Ih miles wide on each side of cne aircraft, with our most accurate observations covering a path several hundred feet wide under the direct path of the plane. This permitted the recognition of any swamps, which might be habitat for the alligator, Bachman's Warbler, or wading birds, It also permitted recognition of any possible nests cf the Bald Eagle and the cpland habitat which might be used by n Red-cockaded Woodpeckers or tne Florida panther. Notations of observations were made (v) and possible 1ccations marked on the maps used. Results of the Reconnaissance Farley Station - Pinckard SubstAtien Transmissicn Lines There were no cagle nests, swan.ps that were alligator habitat or wading bird nesting sites, no swamps with saltable Bacnman's Warbler nasting habitat, or open stands of lcrge pine tiees inat were typical Red-cockaded Woodpecker habitat. The forested area alcng the Chattahoor. nee River and tributaries of the Choctawhatchee River, near Pinckard, are areas where the F1 rida panther or ccugar might travel. The northern part cf this line from Farley Statica te Pinckard substation was already cut and the line par tly const ruc ted. This prevented our seeing any eagle nests that could have been present buc since tnis was definitely not eagle nesting habitat, it is hardly likely that any were present. r\ b 4.2 2
D 1 l The land-use is strongly agrienitural. Almost 50% of the already-cut line was forested and it will probably be the same for the rest of the line.- l Farley Station - Montgomery Substation Transmission Line ge#4 f /[ Along this line, there was no suitable habitat for eagles and no nests were found. No swamps suitable for alligators or wading bird colonies were seen. Suitable nesting , habitat for Bachman's Warblers or Red-cockaded Woodpeckers was not present. The ; forested river bottoms of the Chattahoochee, Choctawhatchee and its tributaries and I the Conecuh and its tributaries, appeared to be suitable habitat and travel ways 1 l for panthers. At this stage of agricultural land preparation, it appeared that at least 50% ; of the land was cropland and plowed. The pasture land added to this would leave only about 30% in unpastured woods and river forests. The transmission line was ! probably laid out so that it was in forested land where possible, so'that it did traverse 50% farm land and 50% forested land. Thus the much higher use of agricultural land would have adversely affected animal populations. ! Montgomery 500kV Switching L.ation - South Montgomery Substation Transmission Line This short line is completely out of habitat required by any of the species ! concerned and none were noted present. .) Discussion and Conclusions i None of these transmission lines in Alabama will affect a highly important~ t or sensitive enrivonmental area of great concern to naturalist. Most.of it has already-been modified by agriculture, so that relatively little of the_right-of-ways l could be considered to be traversing untouched natural habitat. i Well managed right-of-ways, kept in low herbaceous or shrubby vegetation, ' will actually 1mprove the present habitats, providing edge effect and a' stable I habitat, so that more wild animals will be able to exist. ;
't 4.2-3 i ?
b. _ _
1 The effects of these transmission lines on the five endangered species follow:
1. The Southern Bald Eagle. No nests were seen or expected. There is no nesting habitat for these birds and only occasional migrants pass through the area.

2. nachman's Warbler, None of the swampland observed seemed to be typical nesting habitat. These lines are still a number of miles south of the known nesting range in Alabama. Dr. Henry M. Stevenson, reporting on the recent history of this warbler in the Wilson Bulletin of September 1972, said that only 30 Bachman's Warblers were seen between 1950 and 1966 and that none have been seen since 1966. This precludes any possible impact from l the construction of these transmission lines.

3. Red-cockaded Woodpecker. No suitable habitat for these birds was noted.
The nearest colony known to us is at Hurtsboro, over 50 miles away. It is always possible that some small colcnies could have been overlooked. [3 LJ The chance of a narrow right-of-way being directed through a small colony is so slight that. no impact is expected.
4. Florida Panther. This species exists in some of our big river swamps. It could be present along the Chattahoochee River, Pea River and its tributaries and the Conecuh River and its tributaries. It requires extensively forested river bottoms and this exists in the above. The transmission line-right-of-ways are narrow and do little to interrupt this habitat. After the transmission linss are constructed they would have no impact on this species.

5. The American Alligatore This species could exist in swamps of suitable size throughout this area and also in large r1 vers and lakes. No suitable swamps were located by the aerial reconnaissance and since the disturbance at rivers will be slight, it is felt that the transmission lines would have no impact on this species.
g C/ 4.2-4
No other species that aggregate or nest in large concentrations were seen along the proposed right-of-ways. Therefore, any other species would be only slightly affected by these lines and no more impact would occur than regularly occurs in agri-practices that are regularly practiced. I i l 1 4.2-5
. .........._a
, ~l i f I l jeN- .)
\n,} 'I i !a t
5.1 EFFECTS OF OPERATION OF HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM .i Approximately 3% of the total station waste heat is dissipated in
'l the Chattahoochee River. The discharge volume equals about 6.6% of- ,
the river flow at minimum conditions and approximately 1% at most 4 probable conditions. Under these circumstances,and particularly since the ; blowdown from the cooling towers and the service water discharge can t be diluted before discharge by water taken directly from the storage pond, very little temperature elevation is likely when the water is ; returned to the river from-the discharge structure. I There will be little other change in the quality of the water return-' 'I ('")%
s. ;
ing to the river, both because the quantity of discharge from the cooling . r system is small and because it is diluted with water of normal mineral ; content pumped from the storage pond. The operation of the plant will 6 comply with water quality standards of both the States of Georgia and Alabama. l
+
1 i 1 i
[
i i i 1 5.1-1 ! i 1 j
I r~N d i
?
5.1.1 THERMAL IMPACT - No appreciable biological impact is expected from release of [ heated water effluents by the Farley station. The cooling towers are l designed on the basis of a 780F. wet bulb temperature, with an approach of Il0F. ; When the design wet bulb temperature prevails, the blowdown water temper- ! ature will be 890F. However, the wet bulb temperature will be less than f 78 F. most of the time and the blowdown water will usually be cooler than > 89 F. The tcwer blowdown water (5100gpm) will be mixed with service . t water discharge (12,800gpm) and can be diluted with water at approxi- ! I () mately river temperature before discharge. Using an intake water temperature of 86 F. (a maximum summer J river temperatura), a maximum blowdown water temperature of 89 0 F., [ service water temperature of 94.5 F. with the lowest reported 1-day j minimum flow in the Chattahoochee River since 1929 (1210 cfs), a simple
l thermal balance calculation indicates a discharge temperature of 93.4 F. j ;
and a'resulting temperature increase in the river of 0.5 F. after mixing. This estimated maximum increase in river water temperature is well within ! requirements of water quality standards fur the Chattahoochee River which -! 1! allow a 5 F. rise after mixing and a maximum of 90 F. For the most. 1 probable river flow, 8000 cfs, the expected rise in river water temperature, . i i 5.1-2
l 1
.- o- l I
following the assumptions made above, is 0.070F. Sufficient dilution- j water is available (14,400 gpm) to limit the temperature of the discharge to 900F. under the extreme conditions outlined above. 1 Estimates have been made of the temperature distribution along the centerline of the discharge plume and of the width of the plume at the point where the centerline temperature falls to within 50F. of the initial river temperature. In January, assuming average ambient river and air temperature conditions, the temperature of the plume centerline falls to within 5 F. of i ambient river temperature approximately 135 feet from the discharge point. e (measured along the plume centerline) where the plume has a width of 126 feet. In the summer months of July and August, the 05 F. temperature differential - 1 (At) between the discharge and the ambient river water should be reached within 65 feet of the discharge point (measured along the centerline, > assuming average ambient conditions). ~; Table 5.1-1 is a tabulation of discharge temperatures and At values 1 i for average ambient conditions. The maximum At (13.3 F.) occurs in January. t The maximum discharge temperature of 89.10F. occurs in July and August. Also show'n on Table 5.1-1 are the two worst case conditions of extreme-wet ! bulb temperature for January and July. Under these conditions,~the maximum
At is 16.60F. in January with a maximum discharge temperature of 90.50F.
i occurring in July. The wet bulb temperature on which the worst ' case is based -t occurs approximately four hours during each year. ! 1 Table 5.1-2 and 5.1-3 show estimates of mixing distances and plume f widths for the average ambient and worst case conditions mentioned above. The ! estimates of Table 5.1-2 assume a river flow of approximately 1200 cfs, while those of 5.1-3 assume no river flow. The maximum distance to_'obtain mixing l to within 5 F. of ambient is 218 feet from the discharge point. This
.hg 5.1-2A Amend.1 - 11/30/ U ?
i i t {
i occurs under the worst case of a high wet bulb temperature in January, with no river flow. ! The basis for these estimates is derived from curves (shown in [ i Figures 5.1-1 and 5.1-2), extracted from published work by K. D. Stolzenbach and D. liarleman. These curves model the centerline temperature, plume P geometry (depth, width and centerline position) as a function of the f ollowing j dimensionless parameters: Froude number, ratio of jet height to jet half-width (aspect 2 ratio, bottom slope, ratio of centerline - ambient 'l temperature difference to initial temperature difference, ratio 1 of surface heat loss coefficient to jet velocity. Of these .i parameters the bottom slope (barring actual interference with .! ; the jet) and the heat loss parameter are not critical in the l region of interest. The analysis by Stolzenbach and Harleman , assumes large Reynolds numbers and fully developed turbulent- l ; flow in both the discharge jet and river. j 1 t Notes on tables and graphs: l
1. Symbols. f l i IFg = Froude number of jet at discharge .,- ;
V/uo= River velocity / jet discharge velocity j ;j K/uo = Surface heat transfer coefficient / jet discharge velocity i A= Aspect ratio - discharge jet' height / discharge jet half-width , A Tc/ATo = (T z -T a )/(To-Ta) = Difference of centerline to ambient { water temperature / Difference of dis- .; charge to ambient water temperature. -j 1)o = Diameter discharge jet. [ Do *111/z = Scaling factor. 'j X = Distance along centerline of jet, measured from discharge ; point. ! Xr = Deflection of jet downstream,' measured from ' discharge point. , Y = llalf width of discharge jet, measured along perpendicular from centerline. .l Z = Depth of bottom of jet, measured from top of discharge pipe. i l q I An Analytical and Experimental Investigation of Surface Discharges of Heated f Water, E.P.A. - Watcr Pollution Control Series #16130 - DJU - 02/71. { 2A User's Manual for Three-Dimensional Heated Surface Discharge Computations, E.P.A. - R2 133. { 5.1-2B Amend. 1 - 11/30/73 'f' Amend. 2 - 4/19/74-2: . _ _
1 1O 10 O 1000 , -. ~s 1.0 _
'iiiiij i ' i ' s i ii l i i"t i
v 0.5 --
~
ATc ATo - 2.0 0.1 _ _
~
0.05 ~ 2 Depth of bottom of jet 2.0 - E _ _ 5 - DK2 - I I ! I I'" ! I ! ! !" ! ! ! !!" 10 O ,r) _ _ (J _ _ 10 0 - Jet half width 7 2.0 :
~ _
Y 2.0 10 - Do1Y2 Centerline - or m : def lect ion : XR : ~
- ~ ~
Do W/2 - ~ DyT/2 l . i n i iii,1 I! u i i i .il e iisii>> I 10 10 0 1000 . X Position on Centerline D)T/2 Fig. 5.l-l det Parameters for IF =o 10.0, V/ u =o 0.05, k/u =o 0, A = 2. O .] Amendment # I , Nov. 30,1973
1. 0 I 10 10 0 1000
.iil . ..,..l . . . i i i i i__
,s . i) '~ 0.5 -
~ ~
ATc ATo O.1 _ _ 2.0 _ - O.05 - O : l lillll l l l l lll1 l l ' !!!!! Depth of bottom of jet ; - E - 2.0 - 5 - - 10 , , , , , , , , , , , iiiii e i i i iii ~ 1000 f-2.0 - Jet half width 10 0 -- -- y - _ y _ _ Dpir/2 - - 10 _ _
: i 1
I .....il i iieii.I i i i iiiii i 10 10 0 1000 X _ Position on D}Tp' Centerline em, Fig. 5. l- 2 Jet Parameters for IF =o 10.0, V/u = o0 , k/u = 0, o A= 2.0 v-Amend. l- 11/30/73
]
2. Undiluted Flow: No dilution water supplied from storage pond. Discharge rate - 35,800 gpm. [N-The major differences between the model used for the above estimates and the actual Farley discharge are:
1. There is a higher ratio (V/uo) for the Farley discharge than is assumed in the model studies, even at the minimum recorded river flow rate of 1200 cfs.
1
2. The discharge at Farley is submerged while the model assumes a surface discharge. The heat transfer across the air-water interface is negligible in the region of the jet and all computed temperature reduction is due to dilution of the plant discharge with entrained river water.
Due to the submerged nature of the discharge at Farley, dilution should occur more rapidly than predicted in the model. Both of the above differences are conservative and the actual centerline distance at a specific temperature differential should be less than that estimated. ( ,f The U. S. Geological Survey is in the process of rating the spillway and lock at Columbia Dam, approximately 3 miles upstream from the Farley site, for the purpose. of measuring discharges, which constitute most , of the streamflow in the Chattahoochee River at the site. This work is being done at the request of Alabama Fower Company and information will be telemetered from Columbia Lock and Dam to the control room at Farley. The U.S.G.S. program is described in Section 6.3 of this report. This information will be utilized to coordinate discharges from ; Farley with streamflow in the Chattahoochee River. Should the streamflow fall below that required to obtain suitable mixing, the plant operator will take steps to prevent the temperature of the discharge from exceeding 900F,
/~%
5.1-2C Amend. 1 - 11/30/73
g-) As indicated previously, the ratio of river velocity to jet discharge ! V velocity of the Farley discharge is greater than the ratio used for estimating the mixing distance. From Figure 5.1-1, the ratio from the model studies was 0.05. Under minimum recorded flow conditions of 1210 cfs, it is 2 estimated that the velocity of water in the Chattahoochee River would be approximately 0.4 feet per second in the plant discharge area. This estimate is based on a velocity profile measured adjacent to the outfall site by the U. S. Geological Survey on May 31, 1972 for a measured discharge of 1,620 3 cfs. The average velocity on that day was 0.509 feet per second across the cross section. A proration of this discharge from 1620 to 1210 results in a i calculated average of velocity of 0.4 feet per second. The ratio of river 2-velocity to jet discharge velocity for normal two-unit operation under these condJtions would be approximately 0.1. Therefore, the mixing conditions ('T estimated by the model would be the same for a river flow of approximately %J . t 600 cfs. - The normal water elevation of Lake Seminole is 77 feet above msl. -At : i this elevation the centerline of the Faricy discharge will be approximately ! 6 feet under water. At a flow of 1210 cfs, it is estimated that the maximum j 3 depth of the river would be approximately 15 feet and that it would have a i width of approximately 340 feet. The most probable flow at Farley Nuclear Plant is approximately 8,000 cfs. At this flow the discharge from the plant ] would be approximately 7.5 feet under the surface with the river having a i depth of 16 feet and being approximately 340 feet wide. The average ! I velocity at- this flow would be approximately 2.1 feet per second. . I l i (J
~%
i 5 1-2 D Amend. 2 - 4/19/74 l i 1
_ Since the Farley discharge is submerged and since the estimates illustrated above indicate that suitable mixing could be obtained down to a river flow of approximately 600 cfs, the use of dilution water to limit the temperature of the discharge will only occur during very extreme conditions. 2 Dilution water would only be required during those periods of high wet bulb temperature, coupled with an extremely low river flow. The gaging work being done by the U.S.G.S. will provide the necessary information to coordinate the use of dilution water at the Farley plant. 5.1.2 ENTRAINMENT Water for the cooling towers' makeup and the service water system ' (approximately 62,000 gpm) will be drawn from the Chattahoochee River through a 200 foot long entrance canal and pumped approximately one mile into a 108 acre pond. Water from this storage pond, which will contain approxi- 2 g mately 1000 acre-feet under normal conditions, will be pumped into the U station. Organisms amall enough to pass through the 3/8 inch mesh screens of the intake structure are likely to be drawn into the storage pond and then into the station. This passage will expose these organisms to mechanical shock, chemicals, and elevated temperatures. It is assumed that all entrained organisms will be killed. The_ impact of entrainment depends upon the proportion of the total volume of river water that is diverted through the station. About 11% of the minimum recorded flow (approximately 1210 cfs) in the Chattahoochee will be affected by this process. In the case of the most probable river flow (8000 cfs), only 2.0% of the river flow will be drawn into the station. .Under these i conditions, a relatively small fraction of the river biota would be affected. ' 5.1.3 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74
j I TABLE 5.1-1 [ DISCHARGE TEMPERATURE CALCULATIONS (Based on One Unit) i
.?
Avg. Avg. Blow-Down Service Discharge ; Water (l) llourly Temp.(2) Water Temp. . Temp. .- Temp. Wet Bulb (5100 gpm) (12800 gpm) (17900 gpm) ATo= ! Jan. 48.00F. 48.00F, 71.70F. 0 57.1 F. 61.30F. 13.3 F.-- Feb. 50.6 49.0 72.3 59.7 63.3 12.7 l Mar. 52.2 56.0 75.9 61.3 65.5 13.3 j Apr. 65.8 60.0 78.1 74.9 75.8 10.0 ! May 71.2 66.0 81.6 80.3 80.7 9.5 . June 78.8 73.0 85.9 87.9 87.3 8.5 l July 81.1 74.0 86.5 90.2 89.1 8.0' ! Aug. 81.0 74.0 86.5 90.1 89.1 8.1
1. .
Sept. 76.4 70.0 84.0 85.5 85.1 8.7 i Oct. 66.0 61.0 78.7 75.1 76.1 10.1 1 1 Nov. .58.4 52.0 73.8 67.5 69.3 10.9 ] Dec. 51.0 48.0 71.7 60.1 63.4 12.4 Jan.(3) 48.0 69.0 83.4 57.1 64.6 '16.6 July (3) 81.1 81.0 91.2 90.2 90.5 9.4 (1) Geological Survey of Alabama, A Compilation of Surface Water Quality
. Data in Alabama, Circular 36, University, Alabama,1966 (2) =
Manufacturer's Cooling Tower Performance Curves (3). Maximum Hourly Wet Bulb Temperature
, Amend. 1 - 11/30/73 ;
_ ._. . _ . , - - . _ _ - . _ ~ - - - . -
TABLE 5.1-2 C D) MIXING DISTANCES FROM POINT OF DISCHARGE (At Minimum Recorded Flow of 1200 cfs) Model Parameters: IFo = 9.6; V/uo = .103; K/uo = o; A = 2.0 i i Plum'. Width Approx. Centerline @ Centerline Distance where Month ATo A t = S OF . At = 50F Jan. 13.30 F 132 ft. 126 ft. Feb. 12.7 113 100 Mar. 13.3 132 126 ' Apr. 10.0 94 79 May 9.5 88 73 June 8.5 75 65 July 8.0 63 56 1 ( ~} Aug. 8.1 63 56 Sept. 8.7 75 65 Oct. 10.1 100 83 Nov. 10.9 107 88 Dec. 12.4 113 100 Jan.* 16.6 178 188 July
9.4 87 73 ,

Assumes maximum wet bulb temperatures for January and July of 69 and 81 F. ,
respectively. Assumes average ambient river temperatures. i e Amend.1 - 11/30/73 i
.)
e
'l it -[ .
TABLE 5.1-3 MIXING DISTANCES FROM POINT OF DISCHARGE ! (At Assuma! Zero River Flow) l Model Parameters: IFo = 9.6; V/uo = 0; K/uo = 0; A = 2.0 l I r 1
-f Approx. Centerline Plume Width l Distance '@ Centerline '
Month ATo At=50F where ! At = 5 0F' Jan. 13.30F 170 ft. 144 ft. Apr. 10.0 116 88 Jul. 8.0 86 68 1 Dec. 12.4 152 113 Jan. 16.6
218 204 Jul. 9.4* 113 88

Assumes maximum wet bulb temperatures for January and July of 69 and 810F.,
respectively. Assumes average ambient river temperatures.
.O Amend. 1 - 11/30/73
i i i Section 6.2.5 outlines an operational monitoring program to quantify entrain '. ' ment effects. -I The benthic populations of animals in the Chattahoochee River are ! i minimal since the bottom of the river is sandy, and the shifting bottom prevents case building and burrowing of the animals. Further, the scouring i
.I action of sand during periods of power generation by upstream dams exerts a '
destructive effect on the benthos and markedly reduces their density in this { area. The physical situation in the river bottom created by operation of i the upstream dam is catastrophic to both animal and plant benthos. Neverthe-l 1ess, there are some benthic species which will be affected by the operation 1 of the Farley plant. Some benthic species have weak-swimming or floating ' stages in their life cycle. For example, during the pupal. stage of its life ; I cycle, the Tendipedidae (midges) can be carried by the current and passed ! through the station's cooling-water system. All such organisms.will be t killed there. These organisms do not travel a great distance downstream; ! therefore, only the organisms developing in the vicinity of the station will l be involved in entrainment. Depending upon the dilution of chemical dis-charges and heated water, a difference in abundance and species composition if is likely to occur near the outfall of the water discharge. Typical species ! that occur in such areas are tubificids (segmented worms) and pollution-tolerant species of chironomids (midges). Since only 2% of the river flow will be used by the station during i normal flow conditions, the benthic species in the water withdrawn will be - i small in number. The resulting kill by heat and other mechanisms will have ! a small adverse impact. I
?
5.1-4 l
f i l t it is estimated that approximately 3200 tons / year of small primary i producers and consumers will be withdrawn from the river. This estimate is based on a density of 85,000 organisms per cubic foot of river water and a r withdrawal rate of 138 cfs. In a closed-cycle system all of these entrained i organisms will probably be killed. This represents organisms in only about 2.0% of the most probable river flow. Repopulation of these organisms i should occur in downstream Lake Seminole, which supports a much richer blota. The estimate of loss of fish larvae through entrainment is 1.8 tons / year. The species composition of this loss by weight is bass, 3%; sunfish, 17%; catfish, 5%; carpsuckers, 19%; and forage (shad), 56%. 5.1.3 IMPINGEMENT
i Excessive loss of fish due to impingement should not occur at Farley because the velocity of flow across the screen will not exceed 1.0 fps when f
() the river is at its normal minimum pool Icvel of 77 feet above mal, and 0.5 2 fps in the canal leading to the intake structure. Velocities at the screen ; and in the 200 foot long entrance canal vill diminish as water level , elevation increases, because of the increase'in area across the flow section. Because the discharge is located 1740 feet downstream from the intake, no recirculation of discharged cooling water is expected. Therefore, warm , water from the discharge will not attract fish to the intake. If a fish j does enter the intake canal, the relatively low velocity will not prevent l escape. Section 6.2.5 outlines a monitoring program to quantify the magni- l' 2 tude of impingement effects. { The Farley intake structure has been designed to minimize the effects of l 1 impingement. The low intake velocities in the canal and across the screens l l /"'\ ! U i i 5.1-5 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74 i
l and the location relative to the discharge structure are such that' a fish O would not be attracted to the intake. Therefore, that are no provisions 2 I included in the Farley intake structure to return any fish which might be impinged after it is washed from the traveling screens. [ S.1.4 COOLING TOWER DRIFT ! Approximately 61 acres of land have been allocated for the cooling towers. Nearly all the waste heat from both units will be dissipated to the environment through these towers. A small amount of water is entrained . and carried by the sa.urated air leaving the towers. Since the water con- , tains minerals, such as sodium, calcium, and magnesium, that will be concen-trated by a factor of 3.5, there will be some increase in mineral content of the water 1 caving the towers in the form of drift. These miners 1s are - essentially of the same composition as the natural water from which the station is fed. Consistent with the drift loss as guaranteed by the tower manufacturer and with the analysis of the minerals in the water being used ! as makeup for the circulating system, approximately 24 tons / year of river- . I water minerals will be distributed on the land in the vicinity of the tower. i Since the particle-size distribution of this material is not known, it is not possible to predict how it actually will be deposited on the land. It will likely be deposited within the site boundary. If an even distribution were assumed, deposition would amount to 0.01 ton /(acre year) over the 1850- [ acre site. This value may be compared with reported quantities of cations l that are leached from trees by rain. Depending upon the type of forest, 1 inch of rain may leach from 0.1 to 9.5 lb/ acre of Ca, Mg, K, P, and Na from , i tree follage. O 5.1-6 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74
Any significant accumulation of chemicals on adjacent land ' areas due [ t i to drift loss would be offset by leaching back into the river and to the soil as well as normal uptake by vegetation. The minerals being. recycled i to the river are essentially the same, in chemical composition, as in the 'I
-i river itself. Hence little change in the river water quality is expected. '
The chemicals being leached into the soil are to a great extent the same . as found in commercial fertilizer, but in smaller concentrations. On the basis of the quantities of chemicals to be deposited on the soil and in the j i river and on experience with operations of similar capacity, marked changes ; are not expected in the river or soil, leading to an adverse environmental effect on the ecosystem. O O 5.1-6A' s
i
. l 5.1.5 -Fogging Potential and Noise from Cooling Tower Operation- q Construction Permit No's. CPPR-85 and CPPR-86, issued to Alabama Power Company on August 16, 1972, centain provisions for assessing l i
natural fogging potential and noise at the Farley site. As part of the . t benefit-cost analysis for the construction permit stage environmental report, - -l
.I an estimate was made of natural fogging potential using the saturation 'f*.
i deficit method.1 The data utilized for this estimate were dry bulb j i' temperature and relative humidity from the Dothan area during the winter - t months. i The AEC Final Impact Statement for the construction permit, ; referenced th$s limited study and recommended that the analysis be extended l to other seasons if climatological data were available to predict the total j annual probability for increased fogging.2 According to reference (1), fogging potential has an extremely _ ( low probability as long as the " delta mass" is not less than 0.5 grams per cubic meter. For a " delta mass" less than 0.5 gram per cubic meter but greater than 0.1 gram per cubic meter there is a low probability of fogging 1- ! potential. For a " delta mass" less than 0.1 g:ams per cubic. meter, there is ._ a highaprobability of fogging potential. Analyses have been made utilizing the saturation deficit method j for each month of the year with the Dothan area data.3 One analysis utilized average hourly dry bulb temperature _and average hourly relative humidity to obtain the saturation deficits for each hour. The results of i this analysis indicated that fogging potential would have an extremely low ; probability for all hcurs of each month. During the months of January and i p December, the saturation deficit or " delta mass" fell below 1.0 grams per cubic meter but did not f all to 0.5 grams per cubic meter. A "deltia mass" V of less than 1.0 grams per cubic meter cccurred frcm the hours 3 a.m. to j i 8 a.m. for January and December. _;
)
5,1-7 Amend. 1 - 11/30/73- l
'l r
~
4 An additional analysis has been made utilizing the average hourly minimum temperature and maximum average hourly relative humidity _ , from the Dothan area. This analysis indicated that a " delta mass" i of 0.6 grams per cubic meter would cccur in January and December. Under t the conditions of average minimum temperature, a relative humidity of . approximately 93% would produce a saturation deficit of 0.5 grams per cubic meter while a relative humidity of approximately 99% would be r I required to produce a saturation deficit of 0.1 grams per cubic meter for the months of January and December. During the period June through September, relative humidities of 97% and 100% would be required to produce , saturation deficits of 0.5 and 0.1 grams per cubic meter respectively at the average minimum temperature. The above discussion indicates the necessity for the accurate {} measurement of high relative humidity conditions in order to adequately assess fogging potential. Data is also needed for input to analytical . plume dispersion models. It is for these reasons that thermoelectric dewpoint cells are being installed on the site meteorological tower. These cells will provide comprehensive site data for one year prior to facility operation, as required by Construction Permits No's. CPPR-85 and CPPR-86. As data become available, further studies are being planned in order to assess natural fogging frequencies and to be used in models to predict increases in ground fogging due to cooling tower operation. These studies are in > accordance with the Construction Permit requirements as discussed in Section 6.2.4 of this report. e i A preliminary analysis, based on manuf acturers data, has been made () to determine noise levels due to cooling tower operation at Highway 95. 7 e 5.1-8 Amend.1 - 11/30/73 r i I i
13 - (_/ This analysis indicates an expected level of 40 dBA. The analysis of noise sources, including cooling towers, turbo-generators and switch yard is found in Section 5.7 of this report. 1 National Thermal RES. PROG., Pacific N.W. Water Lab and Great Lakes Regional Office. U. S. Department of Interior, Federal Water Quality Administration, Feasibility of Alternative Means for Cooling for Thermal Power Plants on Lake Michigan, 1970, pp. VI-9-ll. 2 U. S. Atomic Energy Commission. Final impact Statement Related to the Construction of Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. June, 1972. pp. V-7. 3 U. S. Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau, Climatological Summary, Dothan, Alabama, 1902-1954, Montgomery, Alabama,1955. O V i 9 O 5.1-9 Amend. 1 - 11/30/73 t
f' 5.2 RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT ON BIOTA OTHER THAN MAN ( The small amounts of radicactive materials in gaseous and liquid effluents i i from the Farley plant will result in a slight increase above the annual background radiation dose received by organisms other than man. Naturally-occurring radiation sources will continue to contribute most of the total dose as they have in the past. This section outlines exposure pathways for organisms other than man ; ans presents dose estimates for several important organism types which have high ! potential for exposure to radiation from plant effluents. 5.2.1 Exposure Pathways ; i Figure 5.2-1 is a simplified illustration of exposure pathways in the aquatic ! t environment. Figure 5.2-2 is the corresponding illustration of exposure pathways ; i in the terrestrial environment. The irrigation pathway is shown as a broken line i because essentially no irrigation takes place downstream from the site. The figures show organism groups of major importance. Organisms having higher than normal {~} potential for radiation exposure from plant effluents include aquatic organisms such as fish, plants, and invertebrates which inhabit waters near the liquid effluent j discharge. point, and terrestrial organisms, such as the raccoon or muskrat, which ! i may feed on the aquatic organiems. j I Figures 5.2-1 and 5.2-2 illustrate in a general way, the complex relationships , l affecting distribution of radionuclides in the environment. i 5.2.2 Radioactivity in the Environment -j l This section describes the distribution of effluent radioactive materials in the 1 l
.i aquatic and terrestrial environment.
5.2.2.1 Concentration of Isotopes in Receiving Water Liquid effluents are discharged into the Chattahoochee River. Annual average discharge rates for each isotope are listed in Table 5.2-1. In estimating 5.2-1 1 l
concentrations.in receiving water, instantaneous and complete dilution of liquid
O
~ effluent by river water is assumed. For estimating concentration in river water near the plant, the average annual flow rate of the Chattachoochee River, 11,500 cfs, is used. For estimating concentrations in the Apalochicola Bay and in the Apalachicola River below Lake Seminole, the flow rate of the Apalachicola River I below Lake Seminole, 21,900 cfs, is used. Estimates of receiving water concentra- l tions are given in Table 5.2-1. 5.2.2.2 Concentration of Isotopes in Air , Ground level air concentrations of isotopes in gaseous effluent are calculated from the discharge rate Q(Ci/ year), and the annual average dispersion coefficient .j values are tabulated by distance and direction from the plant in Section 7.1. Appendix 2 describes the calculation of ground-level air concentration. Noble gas discharge rates are listed in Table 5.2-2. Iodine isotope discharge rates and r maximum off-site grcund level air concentrations are shown in Table 5.2-3. 5.2.2.3 Deposition on Vegetation and soil Radioactive noble gases will not deposit to any appreciable extent on soil or vegetation because they are chemically inert and relatively insoluble in water. , Since water receiving liquid effluents is not used for irrigation, there will be no deposition from irrigation. Thus, the only important effluents from the stand-point of deposition on soil and vegetation will be iodine isotopes in atmospheric effluents. The methods and assumptions used in the calculation of deposition on , vegetation and soll are described in Appendix 2. Results of these calculations are. i
~
presented in Table 5.2-3. The vegetation calculations assume a deposition velocity of 0.01 meter /second, an initial retention of 100%, a " field loss" half-time of. 14 days, and radiological decay. The soil resutis assume a deposition velocity of 0.01 meter per second, an initial retention of 100%, and loss by radioactive decay only. 5.2-2
r 5.2.2.4 Cumulative Buildup i Although certain radioactive noble gases have fairly long half-lines, rapid I dispersion in the atmosphere will prevent the accumulation of~significant quantities - or concentrations of these isotopes over the life of the plant. Iodine isotopes have short half-lives which will limit cumulative buildup of these isotopes in the j environment. Calculations in the previous section estimate upper limit accumulation [ t of iodine on soil. There will be no appreciable cumulative buildup from radio-- active materials discharged to the atmosphere. A stable element study described in Section 5.3.1 will help determine the potential for accumulation of effluent isotopes by local sediments and other environmental media. 5.2.3 . Dose Rate Estimates Isotope concentrations in river water near the plant and fresh water bio- l accumulation factors from Table 5.2-4 are used to estimate the concentration in O fresh water fish, invertebrates, and plants. Isotope concentrations in estuary water and salt water bioaccumulation factors in Table 5.2-5 are used to calculate , i concentrations in estuarine fish, invertebrates and plants. Isotope concentrations in aquatic organisms are given in Table 5.2-6. Annual internal doses are calculated from concentration of isotopes in an organism. The method is described in Appendix 2. External doses are derived from human swimming dose calculations'in. Section 5.3. Results of equatic organism internal and external dose estimates are . given in Table 5.2-7. ; Terrestrial organisms which feed upon aquatic organisms are likely to receive a higher dose from plant effluents than animals which do not consume aquatic organisms. A generalized model, described in Appendix 2, is used to calculate the Lisotope concentration and resulting dose to a small mammal such as a raccoon or muskrat. The model assumes the animal weighs 1,000 grams and consumes 100 grams / day [) 5.2-3
of aquatic organisms. Isotope concentrations in the terrestrial organism are given ) 1 /~ in Table 5.2-8. An estimate of external dose to the terrestrial organism assumes. l (l/ ; that the dose.from the plume and soil is the same as the total body received by I 1 a man at the site boundary. Terrestrial organism dose results are given in Table 5.2-7. Other -portions of this report show that the operation of the Farley Plant poses no possible threat to the health of the people living in the vicinity. The radiation doses to the public anticipated from the plant are well below the limits recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection and the National Council on Radiation Protection. Thereuis no question that the b operation of this plant will be safe for humans. It follows that the operation can have no possible effects on wild species liv-ing in the vicinity. This contention is supported by several observations. With a single exception, no ef fects of any kind have been observed at radiation () levels up to, and considerably larger than, the public limits recommended by ICRP and NCRP. The single exception is the report of Polikarpov that drinking , water concentration of strontium-90 produced injury to fish eggs. Several attempts have been made to repeat Polikarpov's experiment, but none has shown the effects which he reported. Perhaps the most recent such attempt is that of Trabalka (doctoral thesis, University of Michigan), who found no differences between any of a number of species, including spawning fish, in a pair of matched tanks, one of which was maintained at a concentration of cerium-144 well.above the drinking water limit. During the past 20 years much of the world's surface has experienced levels of radioactivity f rom fallout which at times were considerably larger than the levels that may be produced by the Farley Plant. In spite of widespread and
, - intensive study, no ecological effects have been recorded. ,
( b.2-4
I .C -N -- Finally, it can be stated that the radiological monitoring program will i detect the presence of radioactive materials from the Farley Plant in the-environment at levels many orders of magnitude lower than those which can possibly produce effects en species in the area. This monitoring program will , detect and give notice on unexpected concentrations so that if corrective , action is necessary, it can be taken long before any ecological effect is , produced. f
?
I i O 5.2-5
(~} TABLE 5.2-1 (/ FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT LIQUID EFFLUENT ANNUAL AVERAGE DISCHARGE RATES AND RECEIVING WATER CONCENTRATIONS (TWO UNITS) Concentration In Apalachicola Bay Discharge Concentration In And River Below ; Rate Chattahoochee River LakeSemgnole Isotope (uC1/yr) (i>Ci/cm3 ) (*C1/cm ) H-3 5.20E+08 4.92E-08 2.66E-08 CR-51 2.20E+02 2.08E-14 1.13E-14 MN-54 1.90E+02 1.80E-14 9.73E-15 MN-56 6. 00 E+02 5.68E-14 3.07E-14 FE-59 2.40E+02 2.27E-14 1.23E-14 CO-58 1.10E+04 1.04E-12 5.63E-13 CD-60 1.70E+03 1.61E-13 8.71E-14 BR-84 2.20E+04 2.08E-12 1.13E-12 RB-88 2.00E+04 1.89E-12 1.02E-12 RB-89 2. 40E+02 2.26E-14 1. 22 E-14 SR-89 9.40E+02 8.90E-14 4.81E-14 SR-90 3.20E+01 3.03E-15 1.64E-15 1 SR-91 1.30E+02 1.23E-14 6.66E-15 p SR-92 8.60E+00 8.14E-16 4.41E-16
\ Y-90 3.80E+01 3.60E-15 1.95E-15 Y-91 1.40E+03 1.33E-13 7.17E-14 Y-92 3.40E+01 3.22E-15 1.74E-15 ZR-95 1.80E+03 1.70E-13 9.22E-14 NB-95 4.40E+03 4.17E-13 2.25E-13 MO-99 9.40E+05 8.90E-11 4.81E-11 TE-132 5.20E+04 4.92E-12 2.66E-12 TE-134 1.80E+02 1.70E-14 9.22E-15 I-131 5.20E+05 4.92E-11 2.66E-11 ,
I-132 6.40E+04 6.06E-12 3.28E-12 l I-133 4.20E+05 3.98E-11 2.15E-ll I-134 4.80E+03 4.54E-13 2.46E-13 1-135 1.10E+05 1.04E-11 5.63E-12 ) CS-134 9.20E+04 8.71E-12 4.71E-12 CS-136 3.20E+04 3.03E-12 1.64E-12 CS-137 4.20E+05 3.98E-11 2.15E-11 CS-138 2.40E+03 2.27E-13 1.23E-13 BA-140 9.00E+02 8.52E-14 4.61E-14 LA-140 5.60E+02 5.30E-14 2.87E-14 CE-144 3.20E+03 3.03E-13 1.64E-13 PR-144 2.68E+03 2.54E-13 1.38E-13 .s q
A i
O .
i I i TABLE 5.2-2 l FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT t NOBLE GAS EFFLUENT DISCHARGE RATES (C1/yr) Discharge Rate , Isotope (two units) ! Kr-83m - Kr-85m 1.21E+2 Kr-85m 3.50E+2 ' l (~% Kr-87 7.48E+1 N Kr-88 2.26E+2 ! Kr-89 - ! Xc-131m - Xe-133m 1.05E+2 I Xe-133 6.62E+3 ; Xe-135m 1.16E+1 Xe-135 3.68E+2
Xe-137 -
Xe-138 3.92E+1 l i
'I I
7 i t i
/'g '
s-) , i I
('3 t/ - TABLE 5.2-3 FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT GASEOUS EFFLUENTS OTHER THAN NOBLE GASES (TWO UNITS) Maximum Maximum Off-Site Off-Site Maximum Annual Ground Level Accumulation Off-Site Discharge Air On Accumulation Rate Concentration Vegetation Isotope (Ci/Yr) @C1/cm3 ) (aci/m2 ) OnSoig) ( Ci/m I-131 9.62 x 10-2 1,71 x 10-14 1.08 x 10-4 1.74 x 10-4 I-132 1.23 x 10-2 2.18 x 10-15 2.53 x 10-7 2.55 x 10-7 I-133 8.08 x 10-2 1.43 x 10-14 1,42 x 10-5 1.51 x 10-5 1.26 x 10-3 2.24 x 10-16 9.77 x 10-9 9.80 x 10-9 I-134 I-135 2.00 x 10-2 3.54 x 10-15 1.21 x 10-6 1.23 x 10-6 d- ,
..(/ TABLE 5.2-4 CONCENTRATION FACTORS FOR ORGANISMS IN CHATTAHOOCHEE RIVER, LAKE SEMINOLE, AND APALACHICOLA RIVER (AC1/gm per ACi/cm3) ' Algae and' Isotope Fish Crustacea Molluscs Plants ' H-3 1 1 1 1 CR-51 1 10 10 20 MN-54 1000 40000 40000 10000 MN-56 1000 40000 40000 10000 FE-59 5000 10000 10000- 5000 CO-58 50 200 200 1000 CO-60 50 200 200 1000 BR-84 130 100 100 750 RB-88 2000 2000 2000 1000 RB-89 2000 2000 2000 1000 SR-89 1 20 20 500 SR-90 1 20 20 500 SR-91 1 20 20 500-Q
\_/
SR-92 Y-90 100 1 20 1000 20 1000 500 10000 Y-91 100 1000 1000 10000 Y-92 100 1000 1000 10000 ZR-95 10 100 100 1000-NB-95 30000 100 100 1000 M0-99 100 100 100 100 TE-132 400 75 75 100 TE-134 400 75 75 100 I-131 .1 25 25 100 I-132 1 25 25 100 I-133 1 25 25' 100 I-134 1 25 25 100 1-135 1 25 25 100 CS-134 1000 1000 1000 200 CS-136 1000 1000 1000 200 CS-137 1000 1000 1000 200 CS-138 1000 1000 1000 200 BA-140 10 200 200 500 LA-140 50 500 500 10000 CE-144 50 500 500 10000 PR-144 50 500 500 10000 (Q)
-.(h) TABLE 5.2-5 CONCENTRATION FACTORS FOR ORGANISMS IN APALACHICOLA BAY f i (HCi/gm peraci/cm3 ) Algae and i Isotope Fish Crustacea Mo11uses Plants H-3 1 1 1 1 CR-51 100 1000 1000 1000 MN-54 3000 10000 50000 10000 ! MN-56 3000 10000 50000 10000 i FE-59 1000 4000 20000 6000 CO-58 100 10000 300 100 CO-60 100 10000 300 100 BR-84 3 10 10 100 -, RB-88 30 50 10 10 ) RB-89 30 50 10 '10 SR-89 1 1 1- 20 SR-90 1 1 1 20 , SR-91 1 1 1 20 SR-92 1 1 1 20 Y-90 30 100 100 300 Y-91 30 100 100 300 > Y-92 30 100 100 300 ,
- (\- ZR-95 30 100 100 1000 NB-95 100 200 200 100 MD-99 10 100 100 100 TE-132 10 10 100 1000 '
TE-134 10 10 100 1000 I-131 20 100 100 10000 I-132 20 100 100 10000 I-133 20 100 100 10000 I-134 20 100 100 10000 1-135 20 100 100 10000 CS-134 30 50 10 10 , CS-136 30 50 10 10 CS-137 30 50 10 10 CS-138 30 50 10 10 BA-140 3 3 3 100 LA-140 30 100 100 300 CE-144 30 100 100 300 PR-144 100 1000 1000 1000' [ O . l
O- O O TABLE 5.2-6 FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT CONCENTRATION OF ISOTOPES IN AQUATIC ORGANISMS Chattahoochee River Apalachicola Bay Isotope Fish Crustacea Molluscs Plants Fish Crustacea Molluscs Plants H-3 4.92E-08 4.92E-08 4.92E-08 4.92E-08 2.66E-08 2.66E-08 2.66E-08 2.66E-08 CR-51 2.08E-14 2.08E-13 2.08E-13 4.17E-13 1.13E-12 1.13E-11 1.13E-11 1.13E-11 MN-54 1.80E-11 7.19E-10 7.19E-10 1.80E-10 2.92E-11 9.73E-11 4.87E-10 9.73E-11 MN-56 5.68E-11 2.27E-09 2.27E-09 5.68E-10 9.22E-11 3.07E-10 1.54E-09 3.07E-10 FE-59 1.14 E-10 2.27E-10 2.27E-10 1.14E-10 1.23E-11 4.92E-11 2.46E-10 7.38E-11 CO-58 5.21E-11 2. 08 E-10 2.08E-10 1.04E-09 5.63E-11 5.63E-09 1.69E-10 5.63E-11. CO-60 8.05E-12 3. 22 E-11 3.22E-11 1.61E-10 8.71E-12 8.71E-10 2.61E-ll 8.71E-12 BR-84 2.71E-10 2.08E-10 2.08E-10 1.56E-09 3.38E-12 1.13E-11 1.13E-11 1.13E-10 RB-88 3.79E-09 3.79E-09 3.79E-09 1.89E-09 3.07E-ll 5.12E-11 1. 02 E-11 1.02E-11 RB-89 4.51E-11 4.51E-11 4.512-11 2.25E-11 3.65E-13 6.09E-13 1.21E-13 1.21E SR-89 8.90E-14 1.78E-12 1.78E-12 4.45E-11 4.81E-14 4.81E-14 4.81E-14 9.63E-13 SR-90 3.03E-15 6.06E-14 6.06E-14 1.51E-12 1.64E-15 1.64E-15 1.64E-15 3.28E-14 SR-91 1.23E-14 2.46E-13 2.46E-13 6.15E-12 6.66E-15 6.66E-15 6.66E-15 1.33E-13 SR-92 8.14E-16 1.63E-14 1.63E-14 4.07E-13 4.41E-16 4.41E-16 4.41E-16. 8.81E-15 Y-90 3.60E-13 3.60E-12 3.60E-12 3.60E-11 5.84E-14 1.95E-13 1.95E-13 5.84E-13 Y-91 1.33E-11 1.33E 10 1.33E-10 1.33E-09 2.15E-12 7.17E-12 7.17E-12 2.15E-11 Y-92 3.22E-13 3.22E-12 3.22E-12 3.22E-11 5.22E-14 1.74E-13 1.74E-13 5.22E-13 ZR-95 1.70E-12 1.70E-11 1.70E-11 1.70E-10 2.77E-12 9.22E-12 9.22E-12 9.22E-11 NB-95 1.25E-08 4.17E-11 4.17E-11 4.17E-10 2.25E-11 4.51E-11 4.51E-11 2.25E-11 MO-99 8.90E-09 8. 90E-09 8.90E-09 8.90E-09 4.81E-10 4.81E-09 4.81E-09 4.81E-09 TE-132 .1.97E-09 3.69E-10 3.69E 10 4.92E-10 2.66E-11 2.66E-11 .2.66E-10 2.66E-09 TE-134 6.79E-12 '1.27E-12 1.27E-12 1.70E-12 9.18E-14 9.18E-14 9.18E-13 9.18E-12 I-131 4.92E-11 1.23E-09 1.23E-09 4.92E-09 5.33E-10 2.66E-09 2.66E-09 2.66E-07 I-132 6.06E-12 1.51E-10 1.51E-10 6.06E-10 .6.56E-11 3.28E-10 3.28E-10 3.28E-08 I-133 3.98E-11 9.94E-10 9.94E-10 3.98E-09 4.30E-10 2.15E-09 2.15 E-09 2.15E-07 I-134 4.54E-13 1.14E-11 1.14E-11 4.54E-11 4.92E-12 2.46E-11 2.46E-11 2.46E-09 I-135 1.04E-11 '2.60E-10 2.60E-10 1.04E-09 1.13E-10 5.63E-10 5.63E-10 5.63E-08 CS-134 8.71E-09 8.71E-09 8.71E-09 1.74E-09 -1.41E-10 2.36E-10 4.71E-11 4.71E-11 CS-136' 3.03E-09 3.03E-09 L O3E-09 6.06E 4.92E-ll 8.20E-11 1.64E-11 1.64E CS-137 3.98E-08 3.98E-08 3.98E-08 7.95E-09 6.45E-10 1.08E-09 2.15E-10 2.15E-10 CS-138 2.27E-10 2.27E-10 2.27E-10 4.54E-11 3.69E-12 - 6.15E-12 1.23E-12 1.23E-12 BA-140 8.52E-13 1.70E-11 1.70E-11 -4.26E-11 1.38E-13 1.38E-13 1.38E-13 4.61E-12 LA-140 '2.65E-12 -2.65E-11 2.65E-11' 5.30E-10 8.61E-13 2.87E-12 2.87E-12 8.61E-12 CE-144 1.51E-11 1.51E-10 1.51E 3.03E-09. 4.92E-12 1.64E-11 1.64E-11 4.92E-ll PR-144 1;27E-11 1.27E 1,27E-11 '2.54E-09 1.38E-11 le38E-10 1.38E-10 1.38E-10 ;
^ .I i
f i
<g : ?% si' ;
r TABLE 5.2-7 .! FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT '! ANNUAL DOSES TO ORGANISMS ! 4 (rads /yr) i Organism Internal Dose External Dose Total [
.i Fish near Farley Site 9.2 x 10-4 2.7 x 10-6 9.2 x 10 4 l Mo11uses near Farley Site 9.1 x 10-4 2.7 x 10-6 9.1 x 10-4 Crustacea near Farley Site 9.1 x 10-4 2.7 x 10-6 9.1 x 10 :
Aquatic Plants near Farley Site 6.9 x 10-4 2.7 x 10-6 6.9 x 10-4
]
Fish in Apalachicola Bay 3.2 x 10-5 1.5 x 10-6 3.3 x 10-5 1.7 x 10-4 1.5 x 10-6 1.7 x 10-4 (}. Molluscs in Apalachicola Bay Crustacca in Apalachicola Bay 1.6 x 10-4 1.5 x 10-6 1.6 x 10-4 f Plants in Apalachicola Bay 5.7 x 10-3 1.5 x 10-6 5.7 x 10-3 l
'i Terrestrial Animal near Farley 5.9 x 10-3 1.7 x 10-3 7.6 x 10-3 Site i I
P i 1 1 c v i e l l I 1 I I
p l l
'\
TABLE 5.2-8 FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT , I CONCENTRATION OF ISOTOPES IN TERRESTRIAL ORGANISM ; NEAR FARLEY SITE i (4Ci/gm wet weight) ! Isotope Concentration H-3 3. llE-05 CR-51 1. 67 E-14 ., MN-54 3.93E-09 j 4.19E-12 MN-56 FE-59 3.59 E-10 'i CO-58 5.48 E-09 ! CO-60 2.25E-08 , BR-84 4.94E-12 , RB-88 2.89E-12 I RB-89 3.47E-14 j SR-89 1.64E-10
SR-90 1.12E-09 l SR-91 1.78E-13 ;
/) \ /-
SR-92 3. 32 E-15 i Y 1. 38 E-13 [ Y-91 1.12E-10 . Y 6.61E-15 } ZR-95 1.62E-11 NB-95 2.11E-ll ! MO-99 3. 56 E-09 TE-132 1.llE-10 TE-134 3.80E-13 ' I-131 5.70E-09 . I-132 8.30E-12 l I-133 4.82E-10 !!! I-134 2.37E-13 I-135 4.17 E-11 ; CS-134 3. 01E-10 l CS-136 1.21E-09 CS-137 2. 07 E-08 [ CS-138 1.46E-13 l BA-140 3.93E-11 i LA-140 1.28E-12 CE-144 6.22E-08 ; PR-144 2.22E-12 !
.i e
i k r
O O O l LIQUID DISCHARGE l l ATMOSPHERIC DISCHARGE l f I l RIVER WATER l t SEDIMENT ir y ir { F ZOO- PHYTO- PERI- MACRO-PLANKTON PLANKTON PHYTON PHYTES
/s es es /s /s e'% }, r ,r 1r p MACRO INVERTEBRATES es es es es l
if f ir if f 1r fj r 1r ir PLANKTON- INSECT. BENTHIC AQUATIC WATER F. FISH F. FISH F. FISH RODENTS FOWL rs es es
/s r's s /VQ gg g o y yir ir ,r ir SE on M, AMPHIBIANS FISH 'g2g & REPTILES F. FISH mr $ 5 .E "
3 53 dO pr es es g 58 $rm" " 'r P 'r t "1 ' 'f [g C"h SHORE BIRDS OF SMALL s
-g S>zy m Q$ BIRDS PREY CARNIVORES
1. gr e g m"Eg E
3 s,05 g ;-< -r 5
k r lQUID DISCHARGE ATMOSPHERIC DISCHARGE
-p .j RIVER ,' -s\ v 'l r IRRIGATION SOIL j t
I e u j TERRESTRIAL VEGETATION j
/N l t
ir 1r INVERTEBRATES 3 r% r% 1r P INSECT-SEED- FEEDING AND , OMNIVOROUS BIRDS O v v v v GALLINACEOUS ' RODENTS UNGULATES BIRDS i i r% /N IVN ryL 1 p p 1r AMPHIBIANS B f REPTILES l 3 i t"% y 1r y { o .1 r
'If .
BIRDS .SMALL ' OF PREY OMNIVORES I l AL AB AM A POVIER COM PANY - JOSEPH M. FA R LEY- N UCLE AR PL ANT .l . O' . ENVIR O N M ENT A L' REPORT OPER ATING LICENSE STAGE , PRINCIPAL FOOD PATHWAYS'IN THE l TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENT
FIGURE 5.2-2 l
f
D i i J 4 5.3 RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT ON MAN i The small quantities of radioactive materials in gaseous and liquid - effluents from the Farley plant will add a small increment to the annual back- , ground radiation dose received by man, Naturally-occurring radiation sources ! will continue to contribute the largest part of the total dose to man. This -l section outlines exposure pathways for man and presents dose estimates for the regional population and for individuals having the maximum exposure potential. l 5.3.1 Exposure Pathways Radioactive releases in the liquid and gaseous effluent from the facility , result in a small external and internal exposure to man in-the vicinity of the Farley plant. Figure 5.3-1 depicts the routes by which man is exposed both .
-( externally and internally to radioactivity in the aquatic environment at the ,
B Farley site. Swimming, boating and fishing are in general responsible for external exposure to radioactivity in the water and sediment. The ingestion of. i fish, molluscs and crustacea are responsible for internal exposure. Figure 5.3-2 depicts routes by which man is exposed, both externally and internally, to radioactivity in the terrestrial environment in the vicinity of 4 the Farley site. External exposure arises from radioactivity in the air and on { the ground, and internal exposure arises predominantly from inhalation and the ingestion of contaminated milk and vegetables. t Ts) , 5.3-1
- 5.3.1.1 Other Exposure Pathways d It is.unlikely that pathways not discussed in this report will result in . radiation doses significant relative to those estimated herein. However, a stable analysis. program is being conducted to identify any site-specific anomalice in the environmental distribution of effluent isotopes.
5.3.2 Liquid Effluents The expected annual average concentrations of radionuclides in the Farley receiving waters and down stream in the estuary are obtained from Table 5.2-1. The pathways by which man will be exposed to this activity have been described in Section 5.3.1. Receiving waters below the Farley site are not used as a source of irrigation or drinking water. Accordingly, the only source of internal radiation from l aquatic radioactive releases is the ingestion of fish and invertebrates. Table (} 5.3-1 presents the annual commercial fish catch from Farley receiving waters. Invertebrates are of little economic importance near the Farley site, but are important in the Apalachicola Bay. Table 5.3-1 shows the annual catch of crustacea and molluscs harvested from the Apalachicola Bay. The main sources of external radiation exposure from liquid effluents are swimming, boating, and shoreline activities such as fishing and picnicking. The expected radionuclide concentrations in aquatic organisms which inhabit waters near the plant are presented in Table 5.2-6. These concentraitons were calculated using concentration in the Chattahoochee River and fresh water bioaccumulation factors. Concentrations in estuarine organisms are also shown in Table 5.2-6. The Apalochicola Bay concentrations are used with salt watet bio- , accumulation factors from Table 5.2-5 to calculate concentrations in estuarine e organisms. A U 5.3-2
Table.5.3-2 gives assumed consumption rates and occupation times used to compute the maximum probable organ doses received by an individual. Table 5.3-3 is a table which summarizes results of these dose calculations for 11guid effluent pathways. Methods used for dose calculations are described in Appendix 2. 5.3.3 Gaseous Effluents Table 5.3-4 is a summary of maximum probable organ doses received by an adult and an infant through gaseous effluent pathways. These dose estimates are based upon effluent discharge rates from Tables 5.2-2 and 5.2-3, and consumption rates and occupation times from Table 5.3-2. The thyroid is the only. organ for which dose to an infant is calculated. Doses to other infant organs are assumed , to be the same as doses to adult organs. External plume dose is calculated for an individual at the site boundary where the X/Q for noble gases is 5.6 x 10~ sec/m3 . Doses due to ingestion of milk are calculated for the nearest farm west 3 southwest of the site where the X/Q is 5.5 x 10 sec/m . Doses for all'other ( pathways are determined for the site boundary. Methods for calculating doses are described in Appendix 2. It should be noted that doses expected to be received by people near the Farley site do not exceed existing or proposed federal standards. 5.3.5 Summary of Annual Radiation Doses Tables 5.3-5 and 5.3-6 summarize the total body radiation dose to the regional population from all plant-related sources. Dose estimates use a pro-jected 1995 regoinal population of 393,000. Average consumption rates for aquatic organisms are estimated by assuming the locally consumed fraction of the edible portion of the catch is evenly distributed among the regional population. In these calculations, the edible fraction is taken as one-third for fish and one for other organisms. The fraction consumed by the regional population is assumed to be one-half for fish, one-quarter for crustacea, and one-tenth for molluscs. Tables 5.3-5 and 5.3-6 also list assumed numbers of persons, occupation times, and
) other data used to estimate population total body doses.
5.;-3 L_
l. t i
/~'T !
(_/ TABLE 5.3-1 i Estimated Annual Quantity of Fish and Shellfish Taken From the River System and Apalachicola Bay - I i Catee.ory Quantity l Fish Chattahoochee River.and Lake Seminole (including the Flint River portion 1,025,000 lbs. j of the lake) J Apalachicola River 900,400 lbs. l (north of the bay)
.Apalachicola Bay 264,000 lbs.
Oysters Apalachicola Bay 2,000,000 lbs. (meat) Shrimp ; I Apalachicola Bay 265,000 lbs. I I i i
TABLE 5.3-2 FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT CONSUMPTION RATES AND OCCUPATION TIMES USED TO ESTIMATE MAXIMUM PROBABLE DOSES TO INDIVIDUALS Pathway !dult Infant External Dose from Plume 8,760 hr/yr 8,760 hr/yr External Dose f rom Soil Dapasition 8,760 hr/yr 8,760'hr/yr Inhalation 20 m3/ day 3 m3/ day Ingestion of Milk 1,000 cm3/ day 1,000 cm3/ day Ingestion of Vegetation (3 mo./yr) 100 gm/ day 50 gm/ day External Dose from Swimming 88 hr/yr O'hr/yr External Dose from Boating 500 hr/yr 0 hr/yr Ingestion of Fish 200 gm/ day 50 gm/ day Ingestion of Molluscs 10 gm/ day 5 gm/ day Ingestion of Crustacea 10 gm/ day 5 gm/ day External Dose f rem River Bank 500 hr/yr 500 hr/yr Fishing and Picnicking O l l-. l
O TABLE 5.3-3 , FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT (2 UNITS) ANNUAL DOSE TO MOST EXPOSED INDIVIDUAL LIQUID EFFLUENTS (rem /yr) 4 Total Adult Infant Pathway Body Skin Thyroid Thyroid Bone GI Tract Ingestion of fish caught 2.0x10-4 2.0x10-4 5.2x10-4 5.4x10-4 ~6.9x10-4 4.3x10-4 near Plant Ingestion of fish caught 3.2x10-6 3.2x10-6 9.8x10-5 2.3x10-4 1.4x10-5 1.1x10-5 in Bay Ingestion of molluses 1.3x10-7 1.3x10-7 2.3x10-5 5.7x10-5 2.3x10-6 2.0x10-6 from Bay Ingestion of crustacea 3.5x10-7 3.5x10-7 2.4x10-5 5.8x10-5 3.7x10-6 2.7x10-6 from Bay External dose from 2.7x10-8 6.5x10-8 2.7x10-8 0 2.7x10-8 2.7x10-8 swimming near Plant External dose from 7.7x10-8 7,7xio-8 7,7xio-8 0 7.7x10-8 7.7x10-8' boating near Plant Fishing and picnicking 1.2x10-4 1.2x10-4 1.2x10-4 1.2x10-4 1.2x10-4 1.2x10-4 on River Bank /'N
l TABLE 5.3-4 : FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT (2 UNITS) . ANNUAL DOSE TO MOST EXPOSED INDIVIDUAL CASEOUS EFFLUENTS (rem /yr) Total Adult Infant Pathway Body Skin Thyroid Thyroid Bone GI Tract External Dose from 1.7x10-3 3.3x10-3 1.7x10-3 1.7x10-3 1.7x10-3 1.7x10 3 Plume
Inhalation

3.6x10-7 3.6x10-7 2.3x10-4 2.0x10-4 4.9x10-7 6.4x10-6 ,
External dose from 4.5x10-6 4.5x10-6 4.5x10-6 4.5x10-6 4.5x10-6 4.5x10-6 Soil deposition * , {} Milk ingestion ** 1.1x10-7 1.1x10-7 6.9x10-6 6.9x10-5 1.4x10-7 1.3x10-6 Vegetation ingestion
9.6x10-7 9.6x10-7 6.1x10-4 3.0x10-3 1.3x10-6 1.1x10-5

Site boundary: X/Q = 5.6 x 10-6 sec/m 3 '
** Milk farm: X/Q = 5.5 x 10-8 sec/m3 assumed. See 5.3.3 for explanation.
i i f
^
r i fw -v TABLE 5.3-5 FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT (2 UNITS) f POPULATION TOTAL BODY DOSES , LIQUID EFFLUENTS ~ Average Population Average Occupation Total Body- i Consumption Time Dose Pathway People Exposed Rate (hr/yr) (ma'n-rem /yr) ; i Ingestion of fish f rom 3.93 x 10 5 0.54 gm/ day - 2.1 x 10-l' i Chattahoochee River an ' Lake Seminole r Ingestian of fish from 3.93 x 105 o,47 Em/ day - 1.0 x 10-1 l Apala:hicola River Ingest.on of fish from 3.93 x 10 5 0.14 gm/ day - 8.8 x 10~4 l Apalachicola Bay Ingestion of molluses 3.93 x 10 5 0.63 gm/ day - 3.2 x 10-3 { (h from Bay Ingestion of crustacea 3.93 x 105 0.21 gm/ day - 2.9 x 10-3 from Bay . External dose from 1.0 x 103 - 88 2.7 x 10-5 1 swimming near Plant 4 External dose from 1.0 x 103 -
-500 7.7 x 10-5 l boating near Plant ,
3 Swimming and picnicking 1.0 x 10 - 500 1.2.x 10-l~ ! on River Bank i f i i i l l
\
i I
i I L i i l i
.I TABLE 5.3-6 FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT ,
t POPULATION TOTAL BODY DOSES i GASE0US EFFLUENTS Average Population Average Occupation Total Body l Consumption Time Dose .i Pathway People Exposed Rate (hr/yr) (man-rem /yr)- < i External dose from 3.93 x 10 5 - 8,760 2.92 x 10 0 Plume Inhalation 3.93 x 10 5 20 m3/ day - 5.99 x 10-4 5 External dose from 3.93 x 10 .8,760 5.76 x 10-2 () Soil deposition
~f r
[
.L f
1
?
I I
) +
t
N A O r
== _~ : : = k M l
RL T , EW . r TO AF W l E _~ . G R A H - C S I D C' I R - E H P s - S S r OE . O RT r C Y 8 M S T A PH E . A M T l A R O B R R E u C E A T T T u R A N M E E V W1 O R E M I D E l}
}
N I V I S . R . g NT s ' s o _ f// r
" C H I ' H _
H S TF I u o HS SI F ' N N I F . l r I O T \ s % P E .E B h' v o E _ i RY / r r t'e E EH G PP _ R A _ H . C . S I N s r TH - D O r 1 C S I
% s OT E F v SS E D r TK S . r N L _
I U i YN N E AI Q HA I I T I PL P u BP I L IHE PR r " M - A & l N s N O r OH _ T T S _ OK KI o ON NF Z LA A . b 6g;' E
;m #
hob 5 i5 O l P LE P gs"
%gs5r E SN hOsb h w g "i &!:h8gf 3[E $5gs E$f gE[I _
i l o 1 q i ATMOSPHERIC DISCH ARGE { r y' IN H ALATION , j DIRECT EXPOSURf ;
.. y l SOIL DIRECT EXPOSURE l
V __ Y i TERRESTRI AL VEGETATION INGESTION OF VEGETATIOM_ ' Y ; U NGUL ATES -
.i + i' FOOD PRODUCTS INGESTION OF MILK O !
i
-Y MAN -
i t I i i I
-l t -t ALAB AM A POWER COMPANY
JOSEPH M. FA R LEY NUCLEAR PL ANT , ENVIRON M ENTAL REPORT . ; OPER ATING LICENSE STAGE .
.j PRINCIPAL RADIATION EXPOSURE PATH- [
WAYS FOR M AN IN THE TERRESTRIAL l ENVIRONMENT ' FIGURE 5.3 I i
, ,w..e.n,. - < --, - ., s, I
., - . = - . . - . - . . . - _. ._ . .- .- - - - _ .
6 s t
-C:) 5.4 EFFECTS OF CHEMICAL AND BIOCIDE DISCHARGES j The maximum amounts of chemicals in the discharge to the I Chattahoochee River are given in Table 5.4-1. After the blowdown water is j o
diluted with bypass water, the discharged water contains about 107 ppm < of , dissolved solids at a pH of about 7.8. Even before dilution and mixing in the river, concentrations of sodium (23 ppm), chloride (10 ppm), sulfate (31 ppm), and boron (0.05 ppm) in the discharge are below reported harmful , concentrations. Free residual chlorine is the most potentially toxic chemical released i in the discharge. The application of chlorine to cooling water will be j intermittent and only one unit will be chlorinated at a time. Gaseous chlorine will be added, depending upon the need for biocidal treatment of ,
'I cooling water. Chlorination of the cooling tower circuit will occur for a j period of 30 to 60 minutes during the day. Chlorination of the service water will be for a period of 30 to 90 minutes during each operating shift. Dilution-t before discharge, the dhlorine demand of the Chattahoochee River water !
l (0.5-1.0 ppm), and further dilution in the-river will reduce the residual - j chlorine level to undetectable limits. ,, A residual chlorine monitor will be placed on the Farley discharge line to detect concentrations in excess of 0.2 ppm. This monitor will alarm i 1- ; in the control room should the level rise above 0.2 ppm. ) y The chemical effluent monitoring program (Section 6.2.2) will be- -I conducted for one year af ter plant operation begins. - Should this program.
. indicate significant adverse impacts due to the chemical discharges, the applicant will take steps to mitigate those effects.
O- 1 5.4-1 Amend. 1 - 11/30/73 I i l
i I j f-~s ( ,- TABLE 5.4-1 ESTIMATED MAXIMUM CONCENTRATIONS OF CHEMICALS IN COOLING WATER DISCHARGE TO THE CHATTAHOOCHEE RIVER , 1 s Concentration (ppm) From In Cooling-Tower From Steam From Makeup Total i River Blowdownb and Generator Demineralizer in Watera Service Water Blowdown e Regeneration d . Discharge Sodium (Na) 8.0 14 0.2 9 23 Potassium (k) 1.8 3 3 Magnesium (Mg) 1.25 2 1 3 Calcium (Ca) 5.8 10 1 11 Manganese (Mn) 0.11 0.2 0 0.2 Iron (total)(Fe) 0.3 0.4 0 0.4 Silica (SiO2) 7.5 13 2 15 Nitrate (N) 0.09 0.1 0.1 Ammonia 40.1 <0.1 40.1 [ Phosphorus (P) 0.15 0.2 0.3 0.5 5.0 22 31 6 Sulfate (SO4) 9
, Chloride (C1) 5.0 9 1 10 Chlorine (Cl2 ) < 0.1 0.1 Boron (B) 0.05 < 0.05 Lithium (Li) 0.01 < 0.01 a Analysis of samples collected near site at U. S. Highway 84 bridge at Alaga on September 3, 1968. Also determined: pH, 7.42.
i b Estimate assumes a concentration of minerals in blowdown stream 3.5 times that of the river analysis diluted by a service water flow of 12,800 gpm. c Estimate assumes a steam generator leak of 1 gpm, 890 ppm B and 2.2 ppm Li in primary loop, and sodium phosphate concentration 10 times that based ' on an annual requirement of 3600 lb. per unit. d Based on the batch discharge of 19,000 gal, of neutralized waste into 35,800 gpm of circulating water over a period of 2.5 hr. (127 gpm) . ;
,R (s \ ' s/ Amend. 6 - 7 /2W75
v 5.6 EFFECTS OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE TRANSMISSION SY3 TEM . (h Staf f members of the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission during a visit to ' the site on March 11-13, 1974 asked the following questions concerning trans- ' minnlon lines:
1. Discuss the potential for induced or conducted ground currents associated with the operation of 500 KV lines. Describe the permanent structures such as residences and farm buildings that would be within 100 yards of the 500 KV rights-of-way.

2. Discuss the use of herbicides in maintaining the transmission system (i.e., types, volumes, concentrations, frequency of use, methods of application, conditional controls of helicopter broadcasts on inaccessible sites, and wind conditions, etc.).
An estimate of the number of permanent structures within 100 yards of the Farley to Montgomery 500 KV rights-of-way has been made from aerial - (~h
\' / photographs and U.S.G.S. maps. It has been determined that there are approxi-mately 50 structures within 100 yards of this 500 KV right-of-way and that approximately 50% of these are residences. The majority of these structures are found in the vicinity of road crossings. A listing of the number of structures alang the rights-of-way by county is as follows:
Houston - 5 Barbour -5 Henry -7 Pike -6 Dale -5 Montgomery - 22 Attention has been given to the matter of hazard, or lack of it, of. electrostatic induction associated with EHV transmission lines. Recent informa-tion indicates that currents from parallel fences up to 1000 feet in length,
- trucks, and structures in or near EHV transmission line rights-of-way
() 5.6-1 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74
5 do not present a hazard, even if well insulated.( } They may, however, parti- l cularly under dry conditions, provide an unpleasant steady stimulation or a momentary shock, which may vary from very slight up to a considerable jolt. For this reason structures such as fences are grounded. Fences which cross , rights-of-way in a direction generally transverse to the line do not exhibit perceptible voltages and current, but it is considered good practice to ground these fences also, particularly when a gate is involved or when the i fence attaches to a portion of fence which runs parallel to the line. . Although electrostatic induction in fences, vehicles or roofs of moderate size may be annoying but not lethal, a much more serious problem with induction occurs between parallel transmission lines. For this reason, in maintenance work or wire stringing, proper grounding procedures are followed, and all ; l crews are well instructed in proper procedures. Attention has also been directed to the matter of electromagnetically 2 (h induced voltages and currents. Studies based on field tests have shown that l s magnetically induced voltages along a fence strand due to overhead currents
.h are only approximately 1/13 MV in a 1000 foot long test fence. Concern has been expressed over the possibility that injury could be sustained by contact with a fence within the right-of-way running roughly parallel to a trans-mission line. For this reason fences on rights-of-way are grounded.
The following practices are employed in connection with the construction ' of EHV transmission lines for Alabama Power Company: (a) Construction of-i 500 KV lines will be based on use of three (3) 1033 mem conductors per phase, ; arranged in a triangular pattern of 18 inches per side. The phases will be [ i O (1)F. A. Jenkins, L. W. Long, "EHV Transmission Lines - Fences and Things". . Paper presented to Southeastern Electric Exchange Meeting on Sept. 20-22, 1972. .i 5.6-2 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74
.l t
oriented in a flat configuration, with a spacing of 31 feet in a " delta" ; arrangement. The ground clearance is based on a minimum of 33 feet at 100 C. (b) Grounding provisions are specified so that all towers will be grounded with driven-rod groundfields with a design objective of a maximum resistance of 15 ohms per tower. Standard counterpoise will be installed on the fence line. Fences, both across and immediately parallel to Alabama Power Company 4 rights-of-way, will be grounded. There is no anticipation of any problem-with induced voltages off the Company rights-of-way. (c) In selecting routes for the transmission lines, every effort will be made to avoid or minimize conflicts with residences and to minimize curtilage problems. It is the practice of Alabama Power Company to utilize the following herbicides in connection with maintenance of its transmission line rights-of-way: 2
1. 2,4,5-T LVE !
O 2. 2,4,5-TP
3. Tordon 101

4. Tordon 10 K Pellets .

5. Amchem's 170 (2,4-D and 2,4-DP) [

6. Banvel (Dicamba)
Although the above; herbicides are now used by Alabama Power Company, . t i newer, more effective herbicides may be developed in the future, and there i may be future additions to this list. Only herbicides which have been ; approved by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U. S. Department i of Agriculture are considered for use by Alabama Power Company, and all' ' herbicides are applied in strict accordance with instructions contained on the labcis. 5.6-3 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74 i J
-=- -
l The predominant means of application is by helicopter. Some locations b sms/ may require ground application. Generally, the first spraying is done in the second or third growing i season after initial clearing. The next spraying is usually done again in l l about three years to give the windrow (if present) and other debris more time to decay and break down before mechanical mowing equipment is again used on the l I right-of-way. Af ter the first mechanical clearing, the density of the growth, i the rate of growth and the accessibility to the area will all be factors in j 2 determining exactly when the next spraying is necessary. The following controls are utilized in the application of herbicides: (a) Spraying is done only when the wind velocity is such that the herbicides ' can be applied on the target plants. This involves restricting applications to times when wind velocity is less than about three miles per hour. (c) Care is exercised in the selection of herbicides; those used are characterized by low O toxicity and low volatility and are applied according to label instructions. (c) Only professional pilots with a demonstrated level of competence and mature judgment are employed. F F i i f l 5.6-4 Amend. 2 - 4/19/74 1
~
5.7 OTHER EFFECTS OF PIANT OPERATION () 5.7.1 COOLING TOWER NOISE The Farley Construction permit issued on August 16, 1972 contained the following provision:
"The applicant will obtain necessary specifications from the manufacturers of the cooling towers and the turbine generators and i make a detailed calculation of the noise level at the site boundary paralleling Highway 95" In accordance with the above directive, the following information has been developed:
From extensive measured data, Ecodyne Cooling Products Company has developed a sound power level versus total horsepower chart. Each cooling tower at Plant Farley represents 2100 horsepower, which from the chart, produces a sound power level of L, = 138 dB re 10-13 watts. Although numerous factors such as humidity, temperature and frequency enter the evaluation of sound attenuation as a function of distance the attached Figure 5.7-1 gives reasonable values (attenuations are based on a 10-13 watt reference for sound power level). A typical calculation for the dBA sound level of a tower assumed to be 4800 feet from the Highway 95 follows: t- ,
.i 5.7-1
Center Frequency, Hz f O ! _b 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Ly 138 138 138 138 138 138 138 138
, Attenuation -84 -89 -103 -107 -118 - ----
L 54 49 35 31 20 -- -- -- P dBA correction -25 -16 -9 -3 0. L 29 33 26 28 20
# (dBA) l l l l .3 .
I io 35dBA TOTAL Therefore, one would expect a 35 dBA sound level 4800 feet from a
~
tower. Summing up the contributions from all of the towers 1ndicates-an approximate sound level of 40 dBA and 60 dB overall at the site boundary along Highway 95. O 5.7.2 Turbogenerators , Although the sound level inside the turbine room may be in the mid-90 dBA range, the exterior walls should-reduce this by i 20 dBA. As a comparison, the sound level at the base of the cooling towers will be approximately 85 dBA, whereas outside the turbine enclosure the sound level will be approximately 75 dBA. Therefore,
- the additional sound level contribution due to the turbogenerators - .I '
as measured at the site boundary should be small. 5.7.3 Switchyard ! Large transformers produce sound levels in the order ; of 80-90 dBA but the sound spectrum is predominated by low frequencies ( 500 Hz). These low frequencies may produce a hum slightly above Q the background noise level during very quiet periods. Properly I b ! 5.7-2 t r .
muffled circuit breakers should not cause any noise problems at the site
.U Q boundary.
In summary, the sound level at the site boundary near Alabama Highway l 95 should be in the order of 40-50 dBA during operation of the plant. i 1 O
^
f b 1 I t
.O 5.7-3 }
10nno ,- M
- n-r a. A, .d.w. .i _ W. i.l 21. . i Fr. -l ~ ri~ i-~+
1 ~~ I 3 t 'i: - 3- * = 1 -I
,,eo . 'I'~ ' I ' '000 m M W- W= "* P Ys
f*
7oo. 1 . WNN &: _ , _ r+ - ,; g ,q ;=_ .r m;
=N, '~\ M. -\~. ,A W_ _ h,F. rv = 7' . )+r l.== rr ==r h_a, pN ==
g o, w : -( _._ ,, .
,3 4 ~ . . .- .;._ a u._ _,_., ;. c m. u ~_ . a.
yw %o. 2. ,
,. y-r 3 pi- . .a t .-_ . \_.3 1 ;- , 7 2
_ ,_ 7 7;7 . . - -r. _ c,- .
, , - #~
1 ew 9- % - _ .,_ ~,_ -y-52,, _, __r .O u n' W ml * , S ,
. .- h +a- .--r yt+ +4+ j S., -_,_p- : v y .f._'Tn . M'h i~h.1 ; . i~ h h b g[
m .i , -. II.-, N- kMZ YM AHL M M N E; lam r
? YN+n MW % =% d fi WY & WL W2 W d=.5 @ ,W. M _ .
W
'syo, 4Q@oM EW5Mh Y$S NIM .- i= EEri D-S_@~*~ --._. ~_ _ ! .._= "rE WJ yggg my Wy Eg genN=;g pm gd p-B 3y O g +- : .- a g . . ,.c ,a 4 .wH_.
u
. w -.o -++ p_e q- ,
t 4r>w-n:
+
0:. g-g-
. .a a_ &; -l_2 ; i q- -- W' .. ~.
Q,, -N+y; 3. f&.. . %n a >
<- ~. '- -
t 02
's1 m .-r g g4 _ .. . s
_4 w-v~,mm ,n r r
.e Ti m- .- .
L _g. ,- e cI 5,orp. _d.q!1. _.H.., -,.j-
\ g_ .L v r m-e-- -tm . r pj . . , ,
2 p4 .. _.- . 7.p y . H_ -
-u t i. ., - ~ '-^ ' - "-
t ' s
- 6 . . - - ? - "}- ~]
4
.+ ,n ; 7' ,y m- -
a;,g, . , 7 7
^"-
f . 1. . , , , r :- - ' " -
-' 1} ~ ~* i I
1000 y s ;oo w K.
. .tx. y 'y ; , y :\. . y\q i i = m' mL 9e -
4 . A \:-\ t \h1 -F ' a o L M N
% .%k Wa A H\ \M- 1 - @ l 40 ddi M5 1 ' -
W hoo g w - 1g.. . . 4- , . .. t.. g q.. . .
+ .\ t. p .
4 . w g= wm
;' c - \;. _n, ; . ;. .n _. 1: : lo...., ;
7. - p, - 2:L; g- ~~ . i,arar . cra.4 q
_,a.e N.t >
.y O.,.
o Q ._.1 .
... .. .._ 7- . - ..
3_ -.
"+-+--+ "' ~4-Hr m -,--n ,-r +- - -~ -s t 1 . , 1 , . - . - - . t' . g . . . ' 6 ,\.. . .. -*H- --~Ts- v*- -
s._u;.. a,r .
.4 . ..e. . _w - . - . . - , . - ..- m. - ny +- n++A-n,y+-r- .L , ~ .._. . --. * - - Ar 4-+ \ +-f + H ,-k. w, + '~ - 4 - -+ ~ -- --+4 ~
m- - r-W g, tn y 4,# -g# u - % 1 4%\: =A\ t* #=UW= mo
,! 1 1 -* . 2 ok,:
r 4\ t =h ' -
r. ^ 4 "
hm.n\:1 x
u\ho -
x= r \ ,7 .- *war. \ t- n.\tcr =MTrrm g 1 w. _p m. + ,. - =. r ,r: ,...m. i .
..L ..
s. .u.- '
c- .
1. w e u-u :p
.p_ .'- - +
w: _.~.4 -e, az w =--Fc41
.y"\. ..,. T .1 r .,a_,-, --.4, .-
k n.\_ .=.-- e - . - -
4. y .
. - -. ~ -- - -- , . g __,m .. m .-
g ,. m ,aq'. .t '%...
-i. ,_ . ..i., -4 +.J - . + ,- e-- ~*f,--
o -t .t - -' 4. ,w~~*--
-+.-- i--* ~+t-+-~t-" - H v- t--e a_q-1_.2.
(
, .q . -. %.%. 4.a,. Q,M.
t L. v L,
. 4 . . . . ~ ~. -. -. - nd .+i+. _7 .4 q ~ r+-Q ; . .. p. .H. -.. . . . -t. + H+ .e. : , .rr mm .y . ; , _ . t a 4 . . -. . g 4o g -- - -
1 a1 ' a- - t eLg b gJq\ n -- _J _1.. L, .q .
, N3- g q , --.
a e.....
- . %_ - g ,y-t- f+ 4 -. ' . pp.ha .-c h- _p ;_ .M'",q,_ 45L - _ j _.L L. , - - " *+ 9tt a ... a- 7m-t,*7. w _. 3.r FNn; i H + vc - =r rdr ~ ..g vb- H ,
e-" +-' - t Q bp w a. ..m am _W .. t. a .% 4, A 1 w 4. Q .. a . _ ,3 . .2.--- Ma- . mi ad a. 4u q LLE M_l4 - im g
..gj.y yl -.p Jag } ! Q. . g 5p i p - %v g ..y .{- 4.L G i _
y 7 m ng, ,.y p+w c
, , g g.
r, m m m
,m w , a u _ y #- __ 4 g -p g 2 -4 -
m g q gg . , yg\b -\\N . ggy .A g gt @ ,
, q p+ % 7m -%p w wgo o gg y -\\y = A\ c e gg &
e_ N m#mw. \WM\\ MF= WMAE M y=.,tMMi
.g
u. . m w
.T...,_ i E1h,)
l.L. 4 . - . -.,. .{.._.+.
=w mm =_= 4 # - .=a-.+%..4 * .4 4 -
u r. _=a . . .a . ... 4.._.n=
. ~ . -
_ . ao.. _ . . n, . . . + . =.a
+~4..
_ __._4._. p=.m..=r=_r.
+ ...4. .-., _m~ . ,}j~..~.=.;_._
c. _. a + ._ 6 % .
.r L93. J. _&.+_ w w
g (E ,. , ;
. .r. - ._,. m_4 .. . , ~ . . . - -
_,y4..e ,..%. . , - . w M. . ,L..,+._. . a. a.%...i ,
. 4 .-_ +__n__- ,
_ r, g . ,..
.y .d-t__..+ .p.
_a
,y . ,__ ._r ,..., +.T w#_t _. . . . . . . ._4_f.. ,q o 4_.,
m ; .L4+c. a-
.+ r._4 ..r_w47- +.2._ ,+
_.p4
+ _4 +.. 4 + - - g wm +& a.-.%._ _,.. 2_ , _g-_v.
_r_.+. n , 4
- 4.~_.Le, r. .g.s+. ~ .
ra_4_ --, _ Q-4. j,h f, H - Q-jf" .Q-Q Ei- Q -- i:-iij. j:j -i ., i-Q-., Mjd @y ' g. .y,r pf. MM_ .-_ - Y y Y *
~~
S : h w r.n- 4L. r,p .> = t zq,_u._ve_, - a. ep . : , ; g,;-=
-~
_H.p._.4
..r .g g . g+.,4 .4 a.n.4_x 4_a,+y -
_4.+., 4
.__m. _4.~, _ . ._ . _;, 1
_ ._._2
,._ . 4_..w;
_ . . , ,v..i.4_gt .. ..._g mp,.o. _u.a .r. y v..c: .q. ._ t
-..,.a._..
g a n.p 4 - s__9. . p . _w , s .e
...4.+ . rt +.,
j. 4
. ..,_w 4._a # ..y.,.m.. * "+__ . _,_,9~_ ,. . u _44
_4 . . .
._4..,_.. , . . . _ . 4 ._4 _ _ , . _ , . ._u .w . . . .p.,4-_,
l_. 4 .,+
g. ,
.g.4._, ..
M~
+ sg p . .t ~ ._a ..".,W -+; 4_ p "a 4 +
4 v- u -- 4.b-a 7
+4 . . + 4 + 4- .a,_. +
6 '-
+ 4 + +4 + +M 5
F1.
..' .a _3_ .L 4- & q._t 4" .4 +-- g 'p _ , .Li J'.-
4.j . 4 Q .
.&-;_9 . .q , + . . . _, _4 y-..+.. }. .. ; 4 s .J ., _ . , . .. p 9 7 .g_ 4.a 4_.g .L._t
_. .. # a7 a... + -._ r_L , ; -. , . .._.# 7_. . 4 %g ___ _ y _.7._. _ _g %q. .,14 c. 4 , .j . . L,. . L _. _Q4. g _. .,. r. .q .4.r 4r._t_ 3 +{_.g 4._L. .q a_ _ ; _;c __L. _g . . 7- 4. .t_.--_p w 91 t 4 + ;
, , . p_ q . , _g,_4 m.%, ,; .. p .. ;. ._.7 . ' . ._
_q- _ . . _ _ y ,Jg.+_ i .e_..e4 -_e - . . ,_ , . . - . a. . -.i. , , . . , . - . . ,,g,,, g ,.,,.g .. ,
.t .n ~.
g. g-7 ak, m oJ3_. ggq oqp 3y o pg"a,-.
yl .q__.L{ g %, 7 wL ,gg* 7q]"t y__ . . a _.o
;1 ~
p- ! . I yi.i i t ,i . ! 9i 73_ ; ii _ silt i i i! .rsii ! T1 T i i t~-li
i L [' '
\v s' s !
i I 6 .' 1 PRE-OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS The pre-operational environmental monitoring program. for the l- Farley Nuclear Plant includes both radiological and non-radiological aspects. . This program is designed to provide one years data prior to fuel. loading, j i
!. Comparison of the data collected during the pre-operational phase with that i >l 1
collected during the operational phase will form the basis for determining i
! the environmental impact associated with the operation of the Farley Nuclear ! Plant. ,
Certain phases of the pre-operational program began-November 1, 1974. l 6 . This was based on the previously scheduled fuel loading date of November 1, 1975~. f The operational and pre-operational programs are described fully _ [ \ in Section 6.2 of this report. The sampling locations and frequencies for s- ! both the operational and pre-operational programs are delineated as well as l l the methodology to be used in conducting the programs.
'I 1
I I j i 1
! I l .i -
I 6.151 Amend. 6 - J/28 /75 .! fs l
.t \s i J ! a 5
a
1 1p 'i i l' ) 6.2.1 RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING 6.2.1.1 PLANT EFFLUENT MONITORING SYSTEM The following instruments monitor the liquid and gaseous effluents from the Farley Plant. A brief description of each monitor is also provided. Plant Vent Gas Monitor 6 The plant vent gas monitor detects radioactivity passing through the vent to the atmosphere. It consists of four thin-walled, self-quenching-type Geiger--Mueller tubes (high sensitivity beta-gamma detectors) operated in aprallel. Remote indication and annunciation are provided on the Waste i Processing System control board. , Condenser Air Ejector Gas Monitor - This channel monitors the discharge from the air ejector exhaust , header of the condenser for gaseous radioactivity which is indicative l( of a primary to secondary system leak. The gas discharge is routed to the - [ plant vent. A beta-gamma sensitive Geiger-Mueller tube is used to monitor I the gaseous radioactivity level. The detector is inserted into an in-line I l fixed volume container which includes adequate lead shielding to reduce the
effect of background radiation so that it does not interfere with the detectors' i
maximum sensitivity. l Waste Processing System Liquid Effluent Monitor 3 This channel monitors Waste Processing System liquid releases from each unit. Automatic valve closure action is initiated by this monitor to 4 d I prevent further release after a specified radiation level is indicated'and 6 j alarmed. A scintillation counter in an in-line sampler assembly monitors
\
w.) 6.2-1 Amend. 6 - 7/28 /75 ' l ] I l
f d these effluent discharges. Remote indication and annun-ciation are provided on the Waste Processing System control board. Plant Vent Air Particulate Monitor An air sample is taken from the plant vent and monitored by a scintillation counter fil'.er paper detector assembly. The filter paper collects 99 percent of all particulate matter greater than 1 micron in size on its constantly moving surface, and is viewed by a photomultiplier-scintillation crystal combination. The detector assembly is in a completely enclosed housing. The n detector is an hermetically sealed photomultiplier-tube scintillation- , crystal (Nal) combination. The pulse signal is transmitted to the Radiation Monitoring System cabinets in the control room. The filter paper has a 25-day minimum supply at normal speed. Lead shielding is provided to reduce the effect of background radiation to a level-that t does not interfere with the-detector's sensitivity. The filter paper mechanism, an electromechanical assembly.which controls the filter paper movement, is provided as an integral part of the detector unit. Plant Vent Gas Sample Monitor This monitor is provided to measure continuously the gaseous beta-gamma radioactivity in the plant vent. This channel takes the continuous air sample after it passes through the air particulate monitor, R-21, and draws the sample through a closed system to the gas monitor assembly. The sample is monitored by a Geiger-Mueller tube located in a fixed 1 6.2-2 I I j
-( - (_/ . n shielded volume. The detector assembly is in a completely enclosed ' housing containing a beta-gamma sensitive Geiger-Mueller tube mounted in a constant gas volume container. Lead shielding is provided to reduce the l cffect of background radiation to a point where it does not interfere with the detector's sensitivity. Steam Generator Blowdown Processing System Monitors The Steam Generator Blowdown Process Radiation Monitor is provided to monitor the liquid activity level of the blowdown fluid entering the surge tank. This full flow, in-line monitor detects large ! fluctuations in activity concentration due to variations in steam generator { , inleakage conditions or to radioactive breakthrough of the system : demineralizer train. A high signal from this instrument sounds an alarm j and stops blowdown by closing the system's process controlled isolation l valve. , The Steam Generator Blowdown Discharge Radiation Monitor is provided l to monitor the liquid activity level of the discharged fluid. This full flow, in-line monitor provides the radioactive control of the syst'm's i effluent. A high signal from this instrument sounds an alarm and closes the discharge valve if it should be open. A tabulation of the effluent radiation monitoring channels is found in Table 6.2.1.1-1. The minimum sensitivity listed in the table is based on a C0 60 background level of 2 mr/hr. The alarm setpoints for () the process radiation are listed in Table 6.2.1.1-2. 6.2-3 7 3 P
i Liquid effluents from the turbine building will be sampled and analyzed periodically when the steam generator blowdown processing system monitors ; and the air ejector monitors indicate significant radioactivity in , the secondary system. , l 1 t i Y 4 5 5 5 i v 6.2-4
t r r it ( TABLE 6.2.1.1-1 PROCE'3S RADIATION MONITORING SYSTEM CHANNEL SENSITIVITIES AND ENERGY BY ISOTOPE f Monitor Indicating Devices Detector Sensitivity Monitor Type and Alarms Type Range *4Ci/cc Plant vent Radioactive Log rate meter and Geiger- 5.0 x 10-7 l monitor gases alarms on control Mueller to room monitoring 1.0 x 10-4 ' panel
. Condenser Radioactive Log rate meter and Geiger- 1.0 x 10-6 air ejector gases alarms on control Mueller to gas monitor room monitoring 1.0 x 10-3 3 panel (5x10-7 for Kr85) e Liquid Liquid Log rate meter and NaI 1.0 x 10-5 ,
to waste alarms on control scintilla-1.0 x 10-2 , processing room monitoring tion monitor panel detector e Plant vent Air Log rate meter and NaI- 1.0 x 10-9 air particulate Particulate alarms on control scintilla- to 6 monitor room radiation tion 1.0 x 10-6 ; monitoring panel detector ( , Plant vent Radioactive Log rate meter and Na1 5.0 x 10-7 , gas sample gases alarms on control scintilla- to ! monitor room radiation tion 1.0 x 10-4 ; monitoring panel detector 5 1.0 x 10-6 ! Steam Liquid Log rate meter and Na1 generator alarms on control scintilla- to - blowdown room radiation tion- 1.0 x 10-3. processing monitoring panel detector { system . S i
Range not for all isotopes. ]
l i i
~\ \ \s-) Amend. 6 - 7/ 28/75 !
6
_ _ - .-. ~ . . . . 1 TABLE 6.2.1.1-1 (Continued) )
. o-Sample Principal Detector Effluent Flowrate Isotopes Energy Steam and Expected- 2 Monitor Monitored Response Flowrate Velocity Service Plant vent Kr 85 100 key Continuous ,
monitor A41 to 3.0 ; Xe l33 mev- 7 Xe135 200 mey to 3.0 ! mev B ; e Condenser Kr85 100 key to Continuous ! air ejector A 41 3.0 mev- y ! gas monitor Xe (Kr85) l Xe 200 key to : 3.gmevB ! (A ) ! Liquid 1 131 100 key to Continuous I waste 1 133 3.0 mev- y ; processing Cs 134 l monitor Cs 7 . Co . Co 60 131 100 key to Plant vent I Continuous 133 3.0 mev-y air parti- 1 culate Cs monitor C9 58 . C 60 88 Rb ; Plant vent Kr85 100 key to continuous 41 gas sample Ar 3.0 mev- Y monitor (Kr85) 200 key to 3.0 mev B (A 1) , Steam .I 100 key to 15 to 37.5 Continuous generator I 3.0 mev- Y gpm blowdown Cs 134 2" and 3"
. processing Co S8 Sched. 40 i system Co 60 ;
monitors Ce l37 i O ! f r a
,e e e
rs i ,) TABLE 6.2.1.1-1 (Continued) Back- Monitor ground Normal Maximum Alarms and Control unn<ent mR/hr Activity Activity Their Basis Function Plant vent 2.0 Normal Post 1. Circuit monitor operation- fuel failure al auxili- handling 2. High ary build- accident radiation ing vent activity level exhaust level 3. Test mode activity levels Condenser 2.0 Normal Post steam 1. Circuit air ejector condenser generator failure gas monitor exhaust tube rup- 2. High activity ture radiation levels accident level activity 3. Test mode levels Liquid 2.0 Normal Anticipa- 1. Circuit waste radio- ted opera- failure
) processing active tional 2. High
(/
\_ monitor waste occurrences radiation activity radioactive level level waste 3. Test mode activity level Plant vent 2.0 1. Circuit air parti- failure culate 2. High monitor radiation level
3. Test mode Plant vent 2.0 1. Circuit failure gas sample 2. High radiation monitor level

3. Test mode Steam 1.0 Normal Post 1. Circuit failure Isolates generator steam steam 2. High radiation steam ,
blowdown generator genera- alarm lx10-5 generator processing activity tor tube ACi/cc meeting blowdown system <l.0x10 rupture low as practi- process
monitors Atc/cc accident cable 10CFR50 system and activity for continuous discharge level discharge line on
3. Test mode high alarm (V)
[ V I TABLE 6.2.1.1-2 PROCESS MONITOR ALARM SETPOINTS Monitor -Alarm Level Plant Vent Gas 7.6 x 10-5 uCi/cc Condenser Air Ejector 1.0 x 10-3 uCi/cc Waste Processing Liquid Effluent 1 x 10-3 uci/g , 6 Vent Air Particulate 2.5 x 10-8 uCi/cc
-5 uci/cc Vent Gas Sample 7.6 x 10 Steam Generator Blowdown 5.3 x 10 -5 uCi/g Processing System Liquid Amend. 6 - 7/28/75
6.2.1.2 ENVIRONMENTAC RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING
l 6.2.1.2.1 EXPECTED BACKGROUND i
As discussed in Section 2.8, external dose rate from natural causes is expected to be about 110 mrem / year. Recent data on radioactivity concentrations in the State of Alabama are summarized in Tables 2.8-1 through 2.8-4. Table 2.8-5 summarizes the preliminary measurements of concentra-i tions of radioactive materials on and around the Farley site. The measurements of radiation and radioactivity planned for the pre-operational and operational phases of the program are described in Section 6.2.1.2.3. 6.2.1.2.2 CRITICAL FATHWAYS 6.2.1.2.2.1 Expected Liquid and Gaseous Releases In Table 6.2.1.2-1 the quantities of radioisotopes anticipated in () the liquid effluents from Farley Units 1 and 2 are evaluated for relative importance with respect to radiation doses. Column 1 gives the isotope; column 2, the anticipated quantity discharged from both units in curies I per year; column 3, the half-life of each isotope in years; column 4, the equilibrium quantity of each isotope which will be present in the environment at the end of plant life; column 5, the maximum permissible concentration of each isotope in public drinking water, soluble or insoluble form, whichever is lower; column 6, the volume of water (V x 106 cc per year) necessary to dilute the annual discharged quantity to , the NPC; column 7, the concentration factor of each element in fresh-water fish given in a generally accepted reference; column 8 gives the value of relative importance, W = VxC.F.; and column 9 gives the rank of each radioisotope according to its importance, i.e., the largest value EG U 6.2-5
l of W is rank 1, etc. ) In Table 6.2.1.2-2, the 20 most important radioisotopes are listed in the order of decreasing importance. It-is noteworthy that a number of ' isotopes of tellurium appear among these 20 radioisotopes. The reason is the very large concentration factor (C.F. - 1x10 ) 5assigned to tellurium by Chapman, et al, in view of the absence of published data on this element. Measurements made by the applicant in Chattahoochee River water and in fish give concentration factors for tellurium in fish of 6,000 and less. It is proper to conclude that for this river, at least, the W values for tellurium in Tables 6.2.1.2-1 and 6.2.1.2-2 are high by a factor of 10 or more, and l l that the importance of 'N- tellurium isotopes is somewhat less than the - values of W suggest. T. arrows in Table 6.2.1.2-2 indicate the positions , of the tellurium isotopes called for by field measurements. ! Examination of Table 6.2.1.2-2 shows that the important elements in ! the river water-fish-human pathway are: cesium, hydrogen, cobalt, tellurium, iron, strontium, yttrium and iodine, and that isotopes of the 8 elements will account for more than 99.9% of the dose. With regard to atmospheric discharges, only noble gases and iodine-131 (1.5 curies per year from both units) are anticipated. The critical path-way for noble gas is direct, external exposure, and that for iodine-131 is the pasture-cow-milk-infant route. 6.2.1.2.2.2 Pathways of Iluman Exposure In Figure 6.2.1.2-1 are shown the principal food pathways in the aquatic environment of the Farley site. Table 6.2.1.2-3 gives the types. of organisms represented by the blocks in Figure 6.2.1.2-1. Figure 6.2.1.2-2 gives the principal food pathways in the terrestrial environment of the Farley site, and Table 6.2.1.2-4 gives the types of 6.2-6
t c:manisms represented by the blocks in the figure. The possibility that ! () river water might be used to irrigate agricultural land is indicated by the dashed link in Figure 6.2.1.2-2. No evidence of this practice has been-found. The exposure pathways from the aquatic environment to man shown in Figure 6.2.1.2-1 are drinking water from the river, eating waterfowl and the four classes of fish. In addition to these, there is direct exposure ! to the radiations from radioactive materials in the river water and in j the sediment. ! Of the five exposure pathways from the terrestrial environment to man shown in Figure 6.2.1.2-2, only two are of any significance under l conditions of normal plant operation. Under these conditions only noble radioactivu gases and iodine-131 will be discharged to the atmosphere. . The only pathway open to the noble gases is from the atmosphere itself by () direct exposure and, to a smaller extent, by inhalation. The dominant pathway by which airborne iodine-131 reaches humans is that of vegetation to cow and then to milk. 6.2.1.2.2.3 Food Pathways in Accidents In the event of an accidental release of radioactive material to the river, the only qualitative difference from the normal situation would be the presence of short-lived activities. Half-lives shorter than a day or two will not be able to travel f ar along a food pathway before radioactive - decay has reduced them to insignificant levels. Thus, it seems that the pathways indicated in Figure 6.2.1.2-1 will apply to the accident situation as well as to normal operation. ! Accidental release of radioactive material to the atmosphere will change conditions in the terrestrial pathways qualitatively as well as r- , t,_)T ! 6.2-7 ; t
quantitatively. Radioactive isotopes other than the noble gases and iodine-131 , may be present in physiologically significant quantities. In such circum-stances it is possible that all the pathways shown in Figure 6.2.1.2-2 leading ; to man will account for some exposure, rather than only the two which need be , considered for normal operation. > 6.2.1.2.2.4 Mathematical Models Used to Estimate Exposures The purpose of this section is to describe the mathematical models used I f to estimate the human exposures which will result from the several pathways discussed in Section 6.2.1.2.2.2. , Figure 6.2.1.2-3 is a schematic drawing of the means for calculating : human doses which result from the discharge of radicactive materials to the i atmosphere. Figure 6.2.1.2-4 is a schematic drawing of the means fc.r calcu- > 1ating the human doses which result from the discharge of radioactive materials to the river. O 6.2.1.2.2.5 Effluent and Environmental Monitoring Data Used to Confirm the Critical Pathways Measurements of the types and quantities of radioactive isotopes dis- [ charged to the atmosphere and to the river will be made t) confirm or modify the estimates which have been given. These measurements will be made by taking samples from the gaseous and liquid waste tanks before these tanks are discharged. The samples will be analyzed in the laboratory with a gamma spectrometer and with appropriate radiochemical methods as required. In i addition, on-line effluent monitors will be used to measure the actual rates , of release. The results of these measurements on effluent quantities and types will l be examined in terms of exposure pathways to determine whether pathways other j than those anticipated have the possibility of being critical. If such cases () ' 6.2-8 j i h
3 i d in Section 6.2.1.2.3_ ! develop, the environmental monitorf'd Program dracrib9 , will be modified accordingly. 6.2.1.2.2.6 Concentration Factors The; concentration factors used in Table 6.2.1.2-1 are ta' ken from the therefore, necessarily applicable to the ; published literature and are not , l Farley site. Recognizing this limitatlan, a study was rude of stable element concentrations in the area for the purpose of estimating concentra-tion f actors specific to the site. The principle behind this stable element study is the converse of the ! I. well-established use of radioactive isotopes as tracers in biological and i environmental investigations. The principle may be expressed as follows:
.i, CRO < CSO CRW ~ CSW I 4
f where CR0 = the concentration of a particular radioisotope in an aquatic ()
- organism, say a fish, i
CRW = the concentration of the same radioisotope in the water in l l which the organism lives, l ( I CSO = the concentration of the corresponding stable isotope in the ) same organism, CSW = the concentration of the same stable isotope in a filtered l sample of the water in which the organism lives. ] 4 The relation above is valid provided that (1) the concentration in moles, 1- or ppm of the radioisotope in water, is a small fraction of the existing G: . concentration of the stable isotope in water (i.e. CRW4(CSW), in which *
.c case the addition of the radioisotope does not change the chemistry of that i j
element in the river, and (2) the chemical form of the radioisotope is no y ! a more available, biologically, than is the chemical form of the stable .i V. < f . element. The use of filtered water for the determination of CSW assures ' re- [N~s?-
>I ! ^l 4 f. 2-9 .
l
? ,u :
k-.
t [h V ! that the second condition applies. Table 6.2.1.2-5 summarizes the concentration factors which have ; i resulted from the stable element studies of the Farley environment. The values ! for concentration factors in the table are, in most cases, rounded averages of a number of measurements. For comparison to the values measured at the Farley site, published values for freshwater fish and aquatic plants are also [ given in the table. The concentration f actors measured for crops, pork, milk and game animals and birds presume that these organisms obtain their water i from the river, i.e. by irrigation with river water and by drinking at the river's edge. 6.2.1.2.2.7 Food Consumption Rates Table 6.2.1.2-6 gives provisional values for consumption rates and k occupancy times. The typical values are similar to those used by the International Commission on Radiological Protection for the standard man (Report of Committee 2, Pergamon Press, 1959 and by Fletcher and Dotson for the infant (U. S. AEC Report HEDI-TME-71-168,1971) . Other values have been estimated from national averages. 6.2.1.3 SAMPLING MEDIA, LOCATIONS AND FREQUENCY ] i The preoperational and operational environmental radiological monitor-ing program at the Farley Nuclear Plant has been designed to meet require-ments called for in Table 2 of the NRC " Working Paper", Regulatory Guide 4.X l l Environmental Technical Specifications, Vol. 1, Guide for the Preparation of 6 Environmental Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants, August, 1974 I and the EPA Report ORP/SID 72-2, Environmental Radioactivity Surveillance i Program, June, 1972. I v 6.2-10 Amend. 6 - 7/28 /75 l 1
r
;i
\w/ Outlines of the preoperational and operational programs are shown in i Tables 6.2.1.2-7 and 6.2.1.2-7a respectively. The programs are divided into I two phases, airborne and waterborne. The media sampled, number of sampling i stations, collection frequency and types of analysis performed are shown in Tables 6.2.1.2-7 and 6.2.1.2-7a. , The sampling stations are divided into three general categories; i I indicator, community, and background. The indicator stations are those most [ likely to be influenced by the release of radioactive effluents to unrestricted f areas around the plant. The community stations sample certain media in the f i nearest population centers to the plant and should normally not be affected appreciably by routine releases of radioactive effluents. The background stations 6 are located so as not to be influenced by normal releases of radioactive effluents from the plant. The locations of the three types of sampling stations are shown ! s in Figures 6.2.1.2-5, 6.2.1.2-6 and 6.2.1.2-6a and are expected to remain the l same for both the preoperational and operational programs. t The frequencies of sampling shown in Table 6.2.1.2-7 and 6.2.1.2-7a i have been selected considering a number of factors. The frequency of sampling for , airborne particulates is set by the fact that filters clog after about one week so that the flow of air is markedly reduced. The two sample periods for the t TLD's used to measure external radiation are a compromise between the limit- l of detection and the occasional need to determine as soon as possible when l an above normal exposure occurred. Other sampling frequencies are set in , i consideration of environmental time constants (where these are known) and . the lower limit of detection for the methods used to analyze the samples. l (' 6.2-11 Amend. 6 - 7/28/75 i r
l
'f V i
1. Airborne Phase The airborne sampling phase includes particulates, iodine, external l radiation, milk, vegetation, and soil. Airborne particulates are sampled at four !
indicator stations, (along the plant boundary in sectors having the highest j l offsite concentration and at the nearest residence) three community and three background stations. Airborne iodine is sampled at two indicator stations along the plant boundary having the highest offsite concentration, at the nearest f residence, at one community station, and at one background station. External ) radiation and soil are measured at each of the 10 particulate sampling stations j l and in five additional sectors along the plant boundary. Also, external l. radiation measurements are made at two additional background stations. Each j 6 external radiation station contains two (2) thermoluminescent dosimeters one of which is changed and read quarterly and the other annually. t As Tables 6.2.1.2-7 and 6.2.1.2-7a indicate there will be one background milk sampling station and one or more indicator milk sampling stations in accordance with the availability of milk cows or goats. A semi-annual survey 0 is used to locate indicator milk cows in the area around the plant to a distance of five miles and for milk goats to a distance of 15 miles. According to the June, 1975 survey, the nearest milk cow is in the East sector on a f amily farm about five miles from the plant, and thus is used as an indicator station. The Brooks- l l Silcox Dairy in the west southwest sector about 10 miles from the plant is i used as a background station. ; The vegetation shown in Tables 6.2.1.2-7 and 6.2.1.2-7a is of two , types; forage consumed by animals, and vegetables and fruits consumed by humans. ; Forage is sampled along the plant boundary in two sectors of highest offsite . concentration and from one background station in the Dothan area. Vegetables and fruits grown in the~ plant vicinity with the exception of green leafy vegetablesI . - i 6.2-12 Amend. 6 - 7/28 /75
',[\ \ ) J are sampled at harvest. Background samples of the same varieties e sampled in the Dothan area. Likewise, during the growing season from October to March, green leafy vegetables are collected monthly in the plant vicinity and from the Dothan area for indicator and background samples, respectively.
2. Waterborne The background sampling station for all sampics from the Chattahoochee River is above Andrews Lock and Dam. The indicator sampling station for surface water, fish and sediment is in the vicinity of SM *h's Bend at a dis-tance of between one and two miles downstream of the plant discharge. This is the first downstream point at which complete mixing of the plant discharge with the river is expected to be attained. River vegetation and benthos (clams) 6 are collected at the nearest downstream point at which they can be found. Figure-( 6.2.1.2-6a shows the river sampling locations.
Well water samples in the path of ground water flow are normally taken to monitor the inadvertent discharge of radioactive liquid effluents into the ground. In the Farley Nuclear Plant area, the shallow ground water aquifer flows towards the river in generally a southeast direction. No wells are between the plant and the river tapping this aquifer. There is an artesian well in the south southeast sector about 0.2 mile south of the plant boundary. This well and the well supplying water for the nearest residence will be sampled. 6.2.1.4 ANALYTICAL SENSITIVITY 6.2.1.4.1 Measuring Equipment The equipment used to analyze the samples collected in the environmental monitoring program will have, at a minimum, sensitivities as shown in Table 6.2.1.2-8. These sentivities may be lowered due to improvements in detection equipment and techniques. 6.2-13 Amend. 6 - 7/ 28/75
, , i Liquid Scintillation Low Background Parameter Counter Beta Counter O LLD 3.3 cpm 0.5 cpm i Efficiency 60% 50% ~
Sample Sensitivity 2.5 pCi/ sample 0.5 pC1/ sample j The LLD and aample sensitivity for the gamma spectrometer are complex ! because they depend on the isotope to be measured and the geometrical re- g lations between the sample and the spectrometer crystal. A typical limit of. detection for a 2.2 liter Marinelli beaker and'a 3x3 inch crystal is 20 pCi .f per sample, or 10 pCi/ liter. Higher than normal backbround levels and the _f I presence of other garna-emitting isotopes may in some circumstances raise the l l LLD from 20 to 80 pCi/ sample. Use of a larger Marinelli beaker (3.5' liter) J will offset the LLD to some extent and give -=mple sensitivity of about 20 ! pCi/ liter. Aquatic organisms will not gent f be'available in large quantities ! O and will be counted in a container like a one-pint freezer jar placed on top i l t of the crystal. The overall LLD will remain about the same, but because the - i sample size has been reduced (to say 500g) the sample sensitivity will be ; increased (to 0.15 pCi/ gram). . For iodine-131 on charcoal through which 400 m 3 of air has been f f drawn, the considerations above give a sample sensitivity.of 0.05 pCi/m3 , l t provided the collection efficiency of charcoal for iodine is 100% (see { below). The LLD couli probably be reduced if smaller quantities.of char- ,
. coal could be used. ,
l 6.2.1.4.4 Collection Ef ficiency l The collection efficiency of the filter for airborne dust has been .l taken to be 100% because filters of the membrane and glass-fiber types . O : [ 6.2-14 Amend 4 - 11/11/74 i i
have been shown in practice to attain this efficiency (Air Sampling Instruments, Amer. Conf. of Gov. Ind. Hyg., 3rd ed, 1966, p B-2-3). The collection efficiency of charcoal for iodine is a matter on which agreement is hard to reach. Two experiments illustrate this difficulty.
1) Craig, et al (Effect of Iodine Concentration on the Efficiency of Activated Charcoal Absorbers, Health Physics 19,: 223-233, 1970) found that both activated charcoal and charcoal impregnated with iodine had efficiencies of about 90% for removing methyl iodide (CH3 1) at 22 C. , 75% relative humidity i and air concentrations from 2.3 x 10-6 to 2.7 x 10-10, g/cc.
However, for molecular iodine (I2 ) they found that the collection , efficiency began to fall off at a concentration of 1 x 10-5 g/cc and reached 50% at 5 x 10-8A48/cc, the lowest concentration O ed- . The maximum permissible concentration of iodine-131 in public air corresponds to 1 x 10-15Alg/cc.
2) Keller, et al (An Evaluation of Materials and Techniques Used for Monitoring Airborne Radioiodrie Species, Twelf th USAEC Air Cleaning Conf. 1972) found that the efficiencies of both char-coal and iodine-impregnated charcoal were greater than 99% for elemental iodine at concentrations from 10~ to 10-12Alg/cc.
They observed collection efficiencies for methyl iodide of 20 to 35% at 200 linear feet per minute and 50 to 70% at 50 linear-feet per minute for both charcoal and iodine-impregnated charcoal. , The iodine collection efficiencies are based on the work of Keller, et al. because they used materials and devices planned as saraplers (Craig, et al were testing large air-cleaning devices) and because they worked at-6.2-15 Amend 4 - 11/11/74
r p lower concentrations than did Craig, et al. The iodine collection device f
'%)
which will probably be used has a linear flow velocity of about 120 feet per minute, at which velocity Keller, et rl observed the collection-efficiency of charcoal to be about 100% for molecular iodine and about 25% for methyl iodide. , 6.2.1.5 DATA ANALY4IS AND PRESENTATION In cases where the background samples give measurable values, - statistical analyses will be required to determine whether the indicator " 4 samples are significantly higher than the background samplec. The student "t" test for the difference between two normally distributed means will be . used for this purpose. A flow chart which shows how this test will be applied l is given in Figure 6.1.1.2-7. The terms used in the figure have.the following definitions,- ; Xi = measurements at the indicator stations Xb = measurements at the background stations Ni = number of indicator stations Nb = number of background stations N X = mean vr.lue = .1 Xj N {31 4 FN 9 1/2 S = Standard deviation = 1 (Xj - M N-1 , ; Subscripts "1" and "b" are not used in Figure 6.2.1.2-7 because of the 2 requirement that S1}g 2 The necessary values, F We and t table' " " given in A. Goldstein, Biostatistics, and Introductory Text, McMillan Co., i 4 6.2-16 Amend 4 - 11/11/74 , I h
[ New York, 1964, page 244 and 242, respectively. Note that in this t-test, O values for "both tails" are used for t table' 4 The minimum detectable difference is calculated by the method of
-Pelletier (Environmental Surveillance in the Vicinity of Nuclear Facilities, W.C. Reinig, ed., Chas. C. Thomas, Inc., Springfield, 1970):
I d"t table Sp lNI+1 h g N) 2 where M = teinimum detectable difference in the same units as the sample sensitivity t table = the one-tailed value for t for DF = Ny+N2-2, and for P = 0.01 Spl, N1 , N.g are the values used or derived in the t-test
~
O Data will be presented in a form similar to that shown in Table 6.2.1.2-9. 6.2.1.6 PROGRAM STATISTICAL SENSITIVITY The two most important exposure pathways that appear are ingestion of' iodine-131 in milk and external exposure to noble gases. The effectiveness-of the environmental monitoring program will be limited by the sensitivities of the measurements along these pathways. The limit of sensitivity for thermoluminescent dosimeters is about 10 mrem. If the year is covered by 4 quarterly dosimeters, the minimum detectable difference between indicator and background sets may be as low as 10 mrem per year. The sensitivity for the detection of iodine-131 in milk was given as 0.5 pCi per liter in Section 6.2.1.2.4.
- O.__
6.2-17 Amend 4 - 11/11/74 s l [ l
TABLE 6.2.1.2-1 ANNUAL RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIALS IN LIQUID EFFLUENT FARLEY UNITS 1 & 2 Qw T W Isotope Ci/yr Years Ace (2) UCi/cc V (4)- C .F . (5) W (6) Rank Rb-86 9.6(-4) 5.1 (-2) 7.06(-5) 2 (-5) 3.5 (0) 2(+3) 7.0 (+3) 15 Sr-89 9. (-4) 1.44(-1) 1.87(-4) 3 (-6) 6.2(+1) 4 (+1) 2.5 (+3) 18 Sr-90 3. (-5) 2.77(+1) 1.20(-3) 3 (-7) 4.0(+3) 4 (+1) 1.6(+5) 10 Y -90 4. (-5) 7. 31 (-3) 4.22(-7) 2 (-5) 2.1(-2) 1(+2) 2.1 (0) Zr-95 1.5(-4) 1.79(-1) 3.87(-5) 6 (-5) 6.5(-1) 1 (+2) 6.5(+1) Nb-95 1.5(-4) 9.6 (-2) 2.08(-5) 1 (-4) 2.1(-1) 3(+4) 6.3(+3) 17 Ru-103 1.0(-4) 1.08(-1) 1.56(-5) 8 (-5) 2.0(-1) 1 (+2) 2.0(+1) Rh-103m 1.0 (- 4) 1.09(-4) 1.57(-8) 1 (-2) 1.6(-6) 1(+2) 1.6(-4) Rh-105 1.7(-4) 4.10(-3) 1.01(-6) 1 (-4) 1.0(-2) 1(+2) 1.0 (0) Ru-106 9. (-5) 1.01 (0) 1.31(-4) 1 (-5) 1.3(+1) 1(+2) 1.3(+3) 21 Sn-125 1. (-6) 2.58(-2) 3.72(-8) 2 (-5) 1.9(-3) 1(+3) 1.9 (0) Tc-125m 2.9(-5) 1.60(-1) 6.70(-6) 1 (-4) 6.7(-2) [1(+5)] [6.7(+3)) 16 Sb-127 5.5(-6) 1.06(-2) 8.41(-8) - - 4(+1) Te-127m 7.0(-4) 2.99(-1) 3.02(-4) 5 (-5)_ 6.0 (0) [1(+5)) [6.0(+5)) 7 Te-127 7.0(-4) 1.07(-3) 1.08(-6) 2 (-4) 5.4(-3) [1(+5) (5.4(+2)) Te-131m 1.0(-3) 3.4 2 ( -3) 4.94(-6) 4 (-5) 1.2(-1) [1(+5)) {1.2(+4)) 14 Te-131 1. 9 (-4 ) 4.71(-5) 1.29(-8) - - [1(+5)) Ba-140 9.6(-4) 3.51(-2) 4.86(-5) 2 (-5) 2.4 (0) 1(+1) 2.4(+1) La-140 8.1 (-4) 4.59(-3) 5.36(-6) 2 (-5) 2.7(-1) 1(+2) 2.7(+1) Ce-141 1.6(-4) 8.90(-2) 2.05(-5) 9 (-5) 2.3(-1) 1(+2) 2.3(+1) Ce-143 2.3(-5) 3.77(-3) 1.25(-7) 4 (-5) 3.1(-3) 1(+2) 3.1(-1) Pr-143 1.3(-4) 3.72(-2) 6.98(-6) 5 (-5) 1.4 (-1) 1(+2) 1.4 (+1)
l TABLE 6.2.1.2-1 (Centd.) l
) ANNUAL RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIALS IN LIQUID EFFLUENT FARLEY UNITS 1 & 2 (1) MPC ( )
Tis l Isotope Ci/yr Years A- nCifcc V (4) C.F.(5) y (6) Rank Ce-144 8.9(-5) 7.78(-1) 9.99(-5) 1 (-5) 1. 0 (+1) 1(+2) 1.0(+3) 22 Nd-145 5.0(-5) 3.03(-2) 2.19 (-6) 6 (-5) 3.7(-2) 1 (+2) 3.7 (0) Pm-147 9.6(-6) 2.62(0) 3.63(-5) 2 (-4) 1.8(-1) 1(+2) 1. 8 (+1) Pm-149 3.7(-5) 6.06(-3) 3.24(-7) 4 (-5) 8.1(-3) 1(+2) 8.1(-1) Y -91 1.8(-1) 1.61(-1) 4.18(-2) 3 (-5) 1. 4 (+3) 1(+2) 1.4(+5) 11 Mo-99 7.4(-2) 1.61(-3) 8.11(-4) 4 (-5) 2.0(+1) 1(+2) 2.0(+3) 19 Te-129m 7.5(-2) 9.34 (-2) 1.01(-2) 2 (-5) 5.1(+2) (1(+5h [5.1(+73 3 Te-129 7.5(-2) 1.31(-4) 1.42(-5) 8 (-4) 1.8(-2) (1(+5)) (1.8(+3) 20 I -131 2.0(-1) 2.21(-2) 6.38(-3) 3 (-7) 2.1(+4) 1 (0) 2.1(+4) 13 Te-132 3.5(-2) 8.87(-3) 4.48(-4) 2 (-5) 2.2(+1) (1(+5h (2.2(+6)) 6 l Cs-134 8.1(-1) 2.05 (0) 2.40 (0) 9 (-6) 2.7(+5) 1(+3) 2.7(+8) 1 Cs-136 2.7(-1) 3.75(-2) 1.46(-2) 6 (-5) 2.4(+2) 1(+3) 2.4(+5) 8 , Cs-137 4.4(-2) 3.00(+1) 1.90 (0) 2 (-5) 9. 5 (+4) 1(+3) 9.5(+7) 2 Ba-137m 5.2(-2) 4.86(-6) 3.65(-7) - - 1(+1) Cr-51 3. (-2) 7.62(-2) 3.30(-3) 2 (-3) 1.7 (0) 2(+2) 3.4(+2) Mn-54 4.4(-2) 8.30(-1) 5.27(-2) 1 (-4) 5.3(+2) 2.5(+1) 1.3(+4) 13 , Fe-55 1.3(-1) 2.60 (0) 4.88(-1) 8 (-4) 6.1(+2) 3(+2) 1.8(+5) 9 Fe-59 3.7(-2) 1.25(-1) 6.67(-3) 5 (-5) l'3(+2)
. 3(+2) 3.9(+4) 12 Co-58 1.55(0) 1.95(-1) 4.36(-1) 9 (-5) 4.8(+3) 5 (+2) 2.4 (+6) 5 Co-60 4.4(-2) 5.26 (0) 3.34(-2) 3 (-5) 1.1(+4) 5 (+2) 5.5(+6) 4 H-3 ivl . 0 (+3) 1.23(+1) al .8(+4) 3 (-3) N 6(+6) 9. 31 (-1)~5. 6 (+ 6) 3
1. Estimate of annual release frcm both units, Environmental Statement, i

p. III-21.
i
l 1 I TABLE 6.2.1.2-1 (Contd.) p ; \ _ ANNUAL RELEASE OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS IN LIQUID EFFLUENT FARLEY UNITS 1 & 2
2. A6. - Qw Tg/0.693

3. 10CFR20, App. B, Table II, Col. 2, soluble, or insoluble, whichever is smaller.

4. V = A6./MPCw. If multiplied by 10 , V is the volume of water necessary to dilute the equilibrium activity to public drinking water concentrations.

5. W. H. Chapman, et al, UCRL-50564, 1968.

6. W = V x C.F.
i h a r i S
TABLE 6.2.1.2-2 /~~'; ISOTOPES IN LIQUID EFFLUENT RANKED BY IMPORTANCE Q.) Rank Isotope W 1 Cs-134 2.7(+8) 2 Cs-137 9 . 5 (+7,) 3 H-3 N 5.6(+6) 4 Co-60 5.5(+6) 5 Co-58 2.4(+6) SEE TEXT FOR COMMENTS 6 Te-132 {2.2(+6h ABOUT TELLURIUM 7 Te-127 [6.0(+5) 8 Cs-136 2.4(+5) 9 Fe-55 1.8(+5) 10 Sr-90 1.6(+5) /; (/ 11 Y-91 1.4 (+5) 12 Fe-59 3.9(+4) 13 I-131 2.1(+4) 14 Te-131m [1.2(+4)] 15 Rb-86 7.0(+3) 16 Te-125m {6.7(+3 17 Nb-95 6.3(+3) 18 Sr-89 2.5(+3) 19 Mo-99 2.0(+3) 20 Te-129 {.8(+3] 4 4 4 U , l 1 l
i I i q' } TABLE 6.2.1.2-3 TYPES OF ORGANISMS IN THE AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT CORRESPONDING TO THE BLOCKS i IN FIGURE 6.2.1.2-1 I t k I Block Type of Organisms [ Zooplankton Free-floating microscopic animals Phytoplankton Free-floating microscopic plants , Periphyton Diatoms and algae Macrophytes Rooted, marginal and floating aquatic plants, shrubs and trees
Macroinvertebrates Insect larvae, crustaceans, molluscs, etc.
Waterfowl Ducks and geese ! () Plankton-feeding fish Shad and minnows . Insect-feeding fish Sunfishes, crappies and minnows Benthos-feeding fish Suckers, carp, buffalo and catfish ; Aquatic rodents Muskrat and beaver : Amphibians and Salamanders, frogs, turtles and alligators t reptiles j t Fish-feeding fish Large catfish, large crappie, bass and gar Wading and diving Herons, anhingas, etc. .j birds Birds of prey Osprey and eagle j Small carnivores Raccoons, otter and mink i Man ! 1
/~% TABLE 6.2.1.2-4 \u,) I TYPES OF ORGANISMS IN THE TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENT '
CORRESPONDING TO THE BLOCKS IN ?ICURE (. 2.1.2-2 - Block Types of Organisms Terrestrial vegetation Grasses, shrubs, trees, seeds, grain, nuts, wild fruit and crops Invertebrates Annelids, arthropods, etc. Insect f eeding, seed - Sparrows, blackbirds, meadowlarks, feeding and omniv;rcus woodcock, etc. - birds Rodents and Larsmorphs Mice, rats, squirrel, rabbits Gallinaceour birds Dove, quail and turkey () Undulatrr Deer, cattle, pigs, goats ! Ae/aiblans and reptiles Salamanders, toads, snakes, terrestrial turtles Birds of prey Owls, hawks and vultures Small omnivores and Oppessum, raccoon, skunk, fox and carnivores wild cat i I l l 1 I
l TABLE 6.2.1.2-5 i
~
( ~s I\) CONCENTRATION FACTORS IN THE FARLEY AREA River Freshwater River River Aquatic Element Fish Fish
Clams Plants Plants

Antimony 300 40 320 300 -
Arsenic 220 330 210 150 330 Barium 40 10 390 400 500 Cadmium 50 3,000 40 30 1,000 Cerium 200 100 80 130 10,000 Cesium 200 1,000 420 290 200 Cobalt 100 500 200 240 1,000 Copper 150 200 340 160 1,000 m (x, ) Iodine 20 1 20 10 100 Iron 1,000 300 2,500 5,000 Manganese 20 25 320 2,600 10,000 Mercury 300 1,000 170 230 1,000 Molybdenum 100 100 380 400 100 Phosphorus 150,000 100,000 69,000 20,000 100,000 Strontium 30 40 150 120 500 Tellurium 2,000 100,003 1,300 70 100,000 Tin 150 1,000 74 70 33 Yttrium 100 10,000 Zinc 100 1,000 190 120 4,000
W. H. Chapman, et al, UCRL-50564, 1968 Iv ')
TABLE 6.2.1.2-5 , (Contd.) CONCENTRATION FACTORS IN THE FARLEY AREA Estuary , Crustacea Estuary Estuary Estuary Element & Mollusks Snail Plants- Fish l Antimony 20 20 20 20 Arsenic 100 170 80 90 i Barium 10 es/900 20 3 Cadmium 150 200 150 400 Cerium 10 60 15 5 f Cesium 3,000 1,000 1,200 400 Cobalt 20 220 50 10 Copper 70 rs/400 10 13 Iodine 30 es 5 10 5 Iron - - - Manganese 100 1,100 500 6 . Mercury 200 220 200 210-Molybdenum 10 60 6 6 Phosphorus 40,000 40,000 5,000 30,000 Strontium 10 ev200 3 3 Tellurium 5,000 90 - 2,000 Tin 50 40 10 30 Yttrium - - - - Zinc 500 60 120 80 i 6 O 1 i
F TABLE 6.2.1.2-5 l (Contd.) CONCENTRATION FACTORS IN THE FARLEY AREA i e Element Crops Pork Milk ; Antimony 250 160 14 Arsenic 250 80 4 ! Barium 60 6 4 Cadmium 30 200 0.1 ( l Cerium 30 12 0.3 i Cesium 500 600 - Cobalt 50 50 2 Copper 300 120 13 Iodine 10 3 3 Iron - i Manganese 200 4 20 Mercury 200 60 3 ! Molybdenum 500 50 40 , Phosphorus 100,000 80,000 80,000 I Strontium 50 3 7 Tellurium 300 100 2 Tin 100 110 3 l l Yttrium - - l 1 Zinc 150 200 80 l I
D '
O , l
TABLE 6.2.1.2-5 (t/) (Contd.) CONCENTRATION FACTORS IN THE FAP1EY AREA Wild Element Opossum Raccoon Squirrel _ Deer Dove Quail Turkey Antimony - - - 220 - - 300 Arsenic - - - 240 - - 240 Barium 8 16 8 30 10 16 6 Cadmium - - - 90 - - 100 Cerium 2 2 2 30 1 1 30 Cesium 1,200 1,700 1,400 1,300 700 1,000 600 Cobalt 50 70 60 90 20 40 40 Copper - - - 250 - - 120 Iodine 5 9 9 25 10 10 2 f3 (_) Iron - - - - - - - Manganese 8 6 7 4 6 10 4 Mercury 200 200 100 1,600 90 90 170 Molybdenum - - - 40 - - 240 Phosphorus 110,000 90,000 110,000 110,000 60,000 110,000 90,000 Strontium 2 3 2 20 3 2 5 Tellurium 60 90 80 120 90 80 130 Tin - - - 150 - - 100 Yttrium - - - Zinc 500 500 160 300 140 140 120
TABLE 6.2.1.2-6 [ CONSUMPTION RATES AND OCCUPANCY TIMES i Adult Infant t Factor Units Typical Maximum Typical Maximum.- l Shine Hrs /Yr 8760 8760 8760 8760 Immersion in Air Hrs /Yr 8760 8760 8760 8760 Inhalation em3 / day 2x10 7 2x107 3x106 3x10 6 Swimming Hrs /Yr 88 88 0 0 , Boating Hrs /Yr 88 8760 -88 8760 , River Bank Exposure Hrs /Yr 88 530 88 88 A Ingestion of: Marine Invertebrates g/ day 60 100- 0 0 i Fish g/ day 0.8 100 0 0 Water em3 / day 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 Milk cm3/ day 370 1,100 1,000 1,000 Vegetables g/ day 40 100 0 0 , e n
e- - l(w/\). -( 1\ TABLE 6.2.1.2-7 PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM 1 Phase Santple Mediun Number of Stations Collection Frequency Analysis Ind Corn Bkgnd. Airborne Particulates 4 3 3 C-W B, N-Q 7 , Sr-Q 7 2 C-W I Airborne Iodine 3 1 1 External Radiation 9 3 5 C-Q, C-Y R AIRBORNE Milk 1 to 4 - 1 G-M I, N, Sr Vegetation Forage 2 - 1 G-M N Vegetables & Fruits 1 - 1 H N, 1 5 6 Soil 6 9 3 3 G N, Sr(90) (S) (N) N-M, T-Q 7 , Y-Q 7
~
River Water 1 - 1 G-M River Vegetation 1 - 1 G-S N, Sr River Benthos (Clams). 1 - 1 G-S N, Sr WATERBORNE River Fish 1 - 1 G-S N River Sediment 1 - 1 G-S N, Sr(90) Groundwater - 2 -G-Q . N, T
~
(See Attached Sheet for Notes). ,
_ - . _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . ~ . _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ - - . . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _._ ,. _ . __ ._. _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ . .__ ___ ...y l
l
. 'j m Notes for Table 6.2.1.2-7 i
)
(1)' Future operational sampling stations. (2) One weekly sample collected each month. (3) Number of indicator milk sampling stations may, vary with availability of cows or goats as determined by semi-annual surveys. i
-(4 ) One sampling location for each type of vegetable or fruit consumed by -j I
humans in the plant vicinity. ; t (5) For green leafy vegetables. .j i (6) Semi-annual _in, situ ganma measurements only j after initial samples. (7) Composite sample analysis. Symbols: ,
.l C - Sampled continuously B - Gross beta analysis j G - Grab sampic N - Gamma Nuclide Analysis l W - Weekly I - Iodine-131 analysis M - Monthly Sr - Strontium-89, 90 analysis :
Q - Quarterly Sr(90) - Strontium-90 analysis only , S - Semi-annually T - Tritium analysis , Y - Yearly R - Read radiation dose j 11 - Harvest
. i r -I B
Amend. 6 - 7/28/75 , l m < s r
'~ ' , n.... -- - - - _n-- --- - --- . - , -
f-,s [ o ([ ;. 4
</v i TABLE 6.2.1.2-7a
) OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM , i Number of Stations Phase Sample Medium _ Ind. Comm. Bkgnd. Collection Frequency Analysis _ 5 Airborne Particulates 4 3 3 C-W B, N-Q , Sr-Q Airborne Iodine 3 1 1 C-W I I External Radiation 9 3 5 C-Q, C-Y R ! Milk 1 to 4 - 1 G-M I, N, Sr Vegetation
Forage 2 -
1 G-M N Vegetables & Fruits 2 1 - 1 H N, 1 4 Soil (3) 9 3 3 S N 5 River Water 1 - 1 C-M N, T-Q , Sr-Q I River Vegetation 1 - 1 G-S N, Sr River Benthos (Clams) 1 - 1 G-S N, Sr WATERBORNE River fish 1 - 1 G-S N River sediment 1 - 1 G-S N, Sr'(90) G-Q T , 'N
--Groundwater -
2 Amend. 6 - 7/28./75 (See Attached sheet for notes) 1
- _ _- .---m m----,n- .x -- m. ,naa-. - -- .---a . -m=- - --
xm..-
' l.
1 1 O w Notes for Tabic 6.2.1.2-7a s 9 (1) Number of indicator milk sampling s tations may vary with . availability of cows or goats as determined by semi-annual . , J surveys. (2) One sampling location for each type of vegetable or fruit , f consumed by humans in the plant vicinity. (3) Semi-annual in situ gamma analysis is used for soil sampling. 3 l (4) For green 1cafy vegetables. , (5) Composite sample analysis.
-i .l Symbols: i e C - Sampled continuously G - Grab sampic W - Weekly M - Monthly B - Gross beta analysis N - Gamma Nuclide analysis 1 - Iodine-131 analysis Sr - Strontium-89, 90. analysis l
Q - Quarterly Sr(90) - Strontium-90 analysis only S - Semi-annually T - Tritium annlysis j R - Read radiation' dose . Y - Yearly. 11 - Ilarvest f 9
'I O l 1
Amend. 6 - 7/28/75
,..m., ...-,.#~L- ,r-- v..--_...U--_.-.a a _se ,-,'~. --+E_ .~ , -e,,-
TABLE 6.2.1.2-8 SIZES AND SENSITIVITIES OF ENVIR0te1 ENTAL SA>!PLES Sample Size _ Analysis Sample Sensitivity Airborne Particulates 400 m 3 B 3 x 10-3 pCi/m 3 400 m3 6 Spec. 0.0/pci/m3 Sr-89,90 10-3 pCi/m3 Airborne Iodine 400 m 3 1-131 0.1 pC1/m3 External Radiation 3 months Read 10 mrem 12 months Read 10 mrem Milk 6L I-131 0.5 pCi/1 Milk IL [ Spec. 25 pCi/1/ Isotope 2L Sr-89,90 1 pCi/l 8 Spec. 100 pC1/kg 6 River Benthos, Fish 0.5 F4 Plants Vegetation I 1 Kg 8 Spec. 100 pCi/Kg/ Isotope Vegetation II 1 Kg TSpec. 100 pCi/Kg/ Isotope Soil / Spec. 200 pCi/Kg/ Isotope WATERBORNE River Water 41 5 Spec. 25 pC1/1 River Water 11 Sr-89,90 5 pCi/l River Water 11 H-3 200 pCi/l _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -__ -- . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -- _r - a - __._ _ _------_.--T_ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ ___-a _my < _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ -m_ _
4,,,_._,~,. _.. _ _ ._.. . ,_~ . _ .... _ _ _ __ ._ _ _ __ _ _ .____. _____.__ _ _ .- - -. e O O TABLE 6.2.1.2-8 (cont.) Sample Size Analysis Sample Sensitivity Aquatic Vegetation 1 Kg (Spec. 100 pCi/Kg/ Isotope Sr-89,90 5 pCi/Kg Benthos .5 Kg YSpec. 100 pCi/Kg/ Isotope Sr-89,90 5 pCi/Kg Fish 1 Kg(tissue) YSpec. 10G pCi/Kg/ Isotope 6 River i Kg ISpec. 100 pCi/Kg/ Isotope Sediment Sr90 50 pCi/Kg Groundwater- 41 YSpec. 25 pCi/1/ Isotope H-3 100 pCi/1 f
'I Amend 6 - 7/28./75
k TABLE 6.2.1.2-9 FORM OF DATA PRESENTATION "or each sample: Medium (Material) Type of Analysis Date Sampling Began
'1 Sampling Ended
___e Counted, or Measured Value Yor each set of samples: Indicator Stations Background Stations 7h (V y S N F cal F table teal t table If t ,1 e ( ttable, the difference
=
If t 1e y ttable, the minimum detactable difference = The corresponding dose =
l
O O O , LIQUID DISCHARGE ATMOSPHERIC DISCHARGE I o y RIVER WATER
?
SEDIMENT l' 1 , i 1r q 3 { 200- PHYTO- PERI- MACRO-PLANKTON PLANKTON PHYTON PHYTES t
<s es es s /s es " " " 'r '
WATER r MACRO INVERTEBRATES FOWL
<s es es I' 1r IP If 1f IP tr i f if i PLANKTON- INSECT BENTHIC AQUATIC E. FISH E. FISH E. FISH RODENTS <s es es es , "E" *c-o <w ,_ rs es es r ",* nm m
m o mqp <uws r y o , < r}}

ML20069G257

Text

SUMMARY

Dear Mr. Plumb:

Dear Dr. Hayes:

Dear Dr. Wahlquist:

Dear Mr. Crockford:

Dear Dr. Wahlquist:

Navigation menu

Search