ML20069H672

Annual Environ Surveillance Rept,1982

ML20069H672
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	03/09/1983
From:	GEORGIA POWER CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20069H653	List: ML20069H651 ML20069H658 ML20069H672
References
NUDOCS 8304060296
Download: ML20069H672 (150)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:GEORGIA POWER COMPANY EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT CALENDAR YEAR 1982 s O O 8304060296 830309 PDR ADOCK 05000321 PDR R

t i I i e i GEORGIA POWER COMPANY f EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT 4 i ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT j CALENDAR YEAR 1982 i I n i i l 1 i i ? . e i i 4 I I i I a l l O -. ~ - - - -. +, -,

^ g HNP \\ ANNUAL REPORT INTRODUCTION This annual report is submitted pursuant to paragraph 5.7.1 (a) of the Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS), which is Appendix B to the operating licenses for Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant (HNP), Units I and II, DPR-57 and NPF-5, respectively. This report includes summaries, analyses, interpretation, and statistical evaluation of the results of the environmental monitoring at and in the environs of HNP during 1982. O i n N l l l

.= I HNP l ANNUAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING i Section Title Page

1.1 INTRODUCTION

1-1 1.2 DISCHARGES TO THE ATMOSPHERE 1-2 4

1. 2.1 AIRBORNE DUST 1-3 1.2.2 AIRBORNE IODINE 1-8 1.2.3 THERM 0 LUMINESCENT DOSIMETERS 1-9 1.2.4 MILK 1-11 1.2.5 GRASS 1-15

l. 3 DISCHARGES TO THE RIVER l-17 1.3.1 RIVER WATER l-18 1.3.2 CLAMS 1-19 1.3.3 AMERICAN SHAD 1-20 1.3.4 SEDIMENT 1-20 1.4 DISCHARGES TO THE GROUND 1-21

1. 4.1 CST-1 AREA 1-23 0

1.4.2 AREA NEAR THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE UNIT 1 TURBINE BUILDING l-25 1.4.3 OTHER LOCATIONS AND OTHER RESULTS 1-27 1.5 CROSSCHECK PROGRAM 1-32

1.6 CONCLUSION

S 1-37 i } CHAPTER 2 j METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING i Section Title Pm 2.1 SPECIFICATION 2-1 2.2 ON-SITE METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING 2-1 2.3 DATA SUMMARIES - 1982 2-1 2.4 COMPARISON OF 1982 DATA 2-1 i O i i

l O HNP ANNUAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 3 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS Section Title Page 3.1 SPECIFICATIONS 3-1 3.2 DISCUSSION 3-1 I l O !O 11

hbp ANNUAL REPORT CHAPTER 1 RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page

1.1 INTRODUCTION

1-1 1.2 DISCHARGES TO THE ATMOSPHERE l-2 1.2.1 AIRBORNE DUST l-3 1.2.2 AIRBORNE IODINE l-8 1.2.3 THERM 0 LUMINESCENT 00SIKTERS 1-9 1.2.4 MILK 1-11 1.2.5 GRASS 1-15 1.3 DISCHARGES TO THE RIVER l-17 1.3.1 RIVER WATER l-18 1.3.2 CLAMS 1-19 1.3.3 AMERICAN SHAD l-20 1.3.4 SEDIMENT l-20 1.4 DISCHARGES TO THE GROLND l-21 1.4.1 CST-1 AREA 1-23 1.4.2 AREA NEAR NE CORNER OF THE l-25 UNIT 1 TURBINE BUILDING 1.4.3 OTHER LOCATIONS AND OTHER RESULTS 1-29 1.5 CROSSCHECK PROGRAM l-32

1.6 CONCLUSION

S 1-37 1-1

F HtP ANNUAL REPORT CHAPTER 1 PADIOLOGICAL MONITORING LIST OF TABLES Table Title Pg 1.2-1 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

OF GROSS BETA ACTIVITY l-4 IN AIRBORNE DUST 1.2-2 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

OF SPECIFIC RADIONUCLIDES 1-6 DETECTED IN AIRBORNE DUST COWOSITES 1.2-3 LOCATIONS OF TLD STATIONS 1-10 1.2-4 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

OF ON-STATION DOSE ACQUIRED l-12 BY TLDs REQUIRED BY ETS .l 1.2-5 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

OF ON-STATION DOSE ACQUIRED l-13 BY TLDs AT SITE BOUNDARY AND AT 4-5 MILES 1.2-6 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

OF SPECIFIC RADIONUCLIDES 1-16 DETECTED IN GRASS 1.4-1 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

OF TRITIUM LEVELS IN GROUND l-24 WATER SA WLES FROM CST-1 AREA 1.4-2 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

OF TRITIUM LEVELS IN 1-26 q GROUNDWATER SAWLES FROM AREA NEAR k/ tE CORNER OF THE UNIT 1 TURBINE BUILDING 1.4-3 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

OF TRITIUM LEVELS IN 1-30 GROUNDWATER SAWLES FROM OTHER AREAS 1.5-1 CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS FOR AIR FILTERS 1-33 1.5-2 CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS FOR MILK SAMPLES 1-34 1.5-3 CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS FOR WATER SAWLES 1-35 l l Q 1-11 l l

O HtP ANNUAL REPORT CHAPTER 1 RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title 1.4-1 TEST HOLES AND THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM i O 1 O l O 1-111

O n ANNUAL REPORT 1 1. RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING 1.1 Introduction The results of the radiological environmental monitoring program, which is described in Section 3.2 of the Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS), are reported herein fcr the calendar year 1982. An assessment of the radiological impact of the plant's operation upon the environment is provided. Reports on various related activities are also included. A summary, interpretation and evaluation of the analytical results obtained from the samples utilized to monitor discharges of radioactive materials to the atmosphere, river and ground are provided as appropriate in Sections 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4, respectively. The data on samples required by the ETS are tabulated by station or group of stations. As practical, each tabulation consists of: the maximum, minimum and average values of the radiological level; the number of samples (n); and the standard deviation (s). Nominally, summaries are provided for the control and indicator stations on an annual basis; they may also be provided for other periods of exposure as feasible; (~' the calculated minimum detectable difference (MDD) at the 99% confidence level between these two groups is provided for comparison ~ with the difference in their average

values, L -Lc.

Any i laboratory analyses performed on environmental samples in addition to those required are also reported. Deviations are permitted from the sampling schedule required by Table 3.2-1 of the ETS if specimens are unobtainable due to hazardous conditions, seasonable unavailability, malfunction of automatic sampling equipment or other legitimate reasons. Any deviations from the required sampling schedule are' included in the discussions for l each particular type sample; any significant deviations are noted. The interpretation of results includes, as warranted and as practical, a comparison with the results found in the preoperational surveillance report and in previous operational surveillance reports. Wherever warranted, an attempt was made to provide a perspective of the results within the framework of regulatory limits, background levels, and l plant releases coupled with dilution, dispersion and/or concentration factors; where feasible, attempts were made to correlate the plant releases with the radiological levels in the environmental samples. Efforts were made to recognize any data trends; plausible explanations are offered for any such trends considered to be significant. l Any confirmed measured radiological concentrations in an environmental sampling medium averaged over any quarterly sampling period which exceed the reporting levels given in Table 3.2-3 of the ETS are w discussed. Explanations are postulated to account for any high radiological levels. l l-1 t

1 Regular preoperational monitoring began in January 1972, following a period of: installation, calibration and checkout of the sampling equipment; the development of sampling methods and analytical techniques; and the training of personnel. The operational phase of the radiological environmental monitoring prcgram began with inilial criticality of the Unit 1 reactor on September 12, 1974. Initial criticality of the Unit 2 reactor was achieved on July 4, 1978. In recent years, there has been a series of detonations of nuclear devices in weapons tests on mainland China; there were also tests conducted during the early months of preoperational monitoring. These occurred as follows: January 7, 1972 March 13, 1972 September 26, 1976 November 17, 1976 September 17, 1977 March 14,1978 December 14, 1978 October 15, 1980 Usually, about a week after each of these tests, a marked increase in the radiological level in many of the samples collected in the O environs of the Hatch Nuclear Plant (HtP) was noted, giving abundant evidence of the appearance of fallout of radioactive material from the cloud created by the test. These were generally corroborated with widespread reports of similar step increases occurring elsewhere. The first two years of operation (of Unit 1) was a period without significant weapons tests being conducted in the atmosphere, a time when there was a general decline in the radiological level for most of the environmental samples. The effects of the 1976, 1977, 1978 and 1980 weapons test were noted in the annual environmental surveillance reports for 1976 through 1981. The fading of the effects of these recent weapons tests is noted in this 1982 report. i In Section 1.5, the results of the EPA Crosscheck Program are provided. In Section 1.6, the chief conclusions drawn from the radiological environmental monitoring activities including the assessment of any radiological impact of the plant's operation upon the environment are presented. 1.2 Discharges To The Atmosphere The media or pathways sampled to monitor discharges to the atmosphere consisted of: airborne dust, airborne iodine, external radiation, milk and grass. Airborne dust and iodine were collected at air monitoring stations. In accordance with the ETS, thermoluminescent (] dosimeters (TLDs) for measuring external radiation were placed at each of tne air stations and at three other locations as shown below. Starting with the 1st quarter of 1980, additional TLDs were placed in the site environs to conform with Revision 1 of the Technical Position 1-2

i ' O of the Radiation Assessment Branch of the NRC, dated November 1979. The locations of these new TLDs are described in Section 1.2.3. The locations cf the milk sampling stations are provided in Section 1.2.4. Grass samples were collected from plots maintained at Air Stations Nos. 5, 17 and 21. The sector location and distance as reckoned from the main stack to each of the air stations and to each 4 of the TLD stations required by the ETS are as follows: Air Stations No. 1 State Prison EE 11.1 miles j No. 5 Baxley S 9.9 miles No. 9 Dead River Road NE 1.8 miles i No. 15 Roadside Park WNW 0.8 miles No. 37 Site Boundary SE 1.2 miles No. 21 Site Boundary WSW l.0 miles 1 i TLD Stations l (same as air stations plus) No. 119 East Boundary ESE 1.1 miles No. 126 South Boundary S G.9 miles 4 [ No. 133 West Boundary W 1.1 miles O StLtion Nos.1 and 5 are the control stations; the other stations are i indicator stations. All laboratory analyses of the samples collected to monitor discharge to the atmosphere are contracted to Teleayne Isotcpes, Inc. of Westwood, New Jersey except for: the gross beta counting of airborne particulates which is performed by the plant; the reading of the TLDs l which is done by Hazleton Environmental Sciences of Northbrook, Illinois; and the gamma scan of grass whicc is provided by the Center for Applied Isotope Studies at the University of Georgia in Athens, Georgia. In previous years, the TLDs were read by Eberline Instrument Corporation; Hazleton began performing this task at the beginning of the year. 1.2.1 Airborne Dust The annual summary of the gross beta activities for the airborne dust I samples which were collected weekly is presented in Table 1.2-1. The average activity for the indicator stations is seen to be slightly less than that for the control stations; the difference between these averages is less than the MDD. l t 1-3 l l ---.. -. - - - - - ~ -. - - - -

TABLE 1.2-1 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

OF GROSS BETA ACTIVITY IN AIRBORNE DUST fCi/m3 Station No, n Maximum Minimum Average s Data for Control Stations 1 52 93 6 36 15 5 52 102 8 33 15 Summary 2 36 33 34 2 Data for Indicator Stations 9 51 61 12 33 12 15 52 137 11 35 18 17 52 14 0 5 31 19 21 52 63 17 33 10 O s"mmarv 4 35 31 1 l1 - Lc = -1 MOD = 5 ( i i l 1-4 f') 'LJ

The data summary does not include the June 1 collection at Station 9 because of a faulty laboratory reading of that sample. For exhibition purposes, air dust samples were also collected at the Visitnrs Center. The results were cbout the same as those found at the other stations during the same time period. Recent annual reports have clearly pointed out the effects of the nuclear weapons tests conducted on mainland China upon the levels of gross beta activity in airborne dust samples collected in the environs of HtP. This may be seen by comparing the average weekly activity for all stations for each year of operation and for the period of preoperation; these weekly averages are given below in units of fCi/m3 (femto Curie per cubic meter). Period Averace Activity Preoperations 140 1974 87 1975 87 1976 137 1977 242 1978 133 1979 38 1980 48 1981 195 1982 33 The fairly high level of average activity for the period of preoperations (January 1972 to September 1974) is attributed to the weapons tests conducted during the early seventies. The lower levels of average activity for 1974 and 1975 show the depletion of these levels due to decay or physical removal during a period without significant weapons tests. Higher levels for the next three years reflect the detonations during those years. The detonation in the fall of 1980 furnished high readings in the spring of 1981 when there was mixing of the air from higher to lower altitudes. The low and rather constant levels during 1982 indicate a fairly complete recovery from the effects of the weapons tests in the atmosphere. The activities of specific radionuclides detected in quarterly [ composites of airborne dust filters by gamma spectral analyses are summarized in Table 1.2-2 for the entire year. The average readings l were higher at the control stations in all cases. However, no discernable differences are indicated between control and indicator l stations for the two radionuclides where there are sufficient data to make this determination. The radionuclides in the table may be divided into three distinct groups as follows: ] (1) Be-7, K-40 and Th-228 (2) Cr-51, Co-60 and Zn-65 (3) Cs-137 and Ce-144 1-5 ~

4 3 4 t Q TABLE 1.2-2 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

OF SPECIFIC RADIONUCLIDES DETECTED IN AIRBORNE DUST COWOSITES i fC1/m3 L Radionuc11de n_ Max Min A3 s_ L t -Le-MD0 4 Control Stations Be-7 8 80.3 44.8 58.1 12.8 K-40 1 6.0 6.0 6.0 .l Cr-51 0 Co-60 0 I Zn-65 0 Cs-137 4 0.8 0.4 0.6 0.2 Ce-144 1 2.4 2.4 2.4 Th-228 0 t i Indicator Stations l Be-7 16 85.5 35.5 53.7 14.5 -4.4 17.0 ll K-40 1 5.9 5.9 5.9 -0.1 Cr-51 1 8.3 8.3 8.3 O co-60 1 21.1 21.1 21.1 Zn-65 1 24.8 24.8 24.8 1 I Cs-137 4 0.7 0.3 0.5 0.2 -0.1 0.4 Ce-144 1 0.9 0.9 0.9 -1.5 Th-228 2 2.1 0.4 1.2 1.2 1 5 i I l l l l l l l 1-6 1 0

The first group of radionuclides are all naturally occurring. As (D usual, Be-7 was present in each sample while K-40 and Th-228 were present in only a few of the samples. The levels are a little lower than generally found. The level for K-40 is seen to have been only trely detectable as its LLD is nominally 7 fCi/m3, The Th-228 tevel of 2.1 fCi/m3 for station 21 in the 4th quarter provided a new maximum level; the previous high of 0.8 fCi/m3 cccurred at a control station in 1976. Th-228 has never been detected more than a few times a year, often it is not detected at all; its LLD is nominally 0.4 fCi/m3 The second group of radionuclides are activation products. The single positive reading for each was found with the first quarter composite for Station 15. Cr-51 and Zn-65 had not previously been detected in the air dust samples. Co-60 had been detected in a few samples in 1975 through 1977, but at levels which were about an order of magnitude lower; its presence during that time period was attributed to the weapons tests. The presence of these radionuclides in 1982,

however, is not attributed to the weapons tests, at least not primarily.

Plant releases would be suspected to have attributed at least partially to these readings. Station 15 is only about three quarters cf a nile frcm the release points. Thic is probably not a good it,cstion for an environmental station because what is being monitored may better depict onsite rather than offsite conditions. This ststion (') should be moved to the site boundary. The gaseous releases during the 1st quarter were somewhat above average for Cr-51, about average for Co-60, and as usual, there were no Zn-65 releases. The 1.12 Mev Zn-65 decay gamma could perhaps have been shadowed by the 1.17 Mev Co-60 decay gamma. Nevertheless, the calculated values of the average airborne concentrations during the 1st quarter at Station 15 due to the releases of these radionuclides are estimated to be lower than the measured values by approximately a factor of 50 for Cr-51 and a factor of 600 for Co-60 and Zn-65. Since neither the weapons tests nor plant releases can adequately explain these readings of the second group of radionuclides, it seems plausible that the 1st quarter composites for Station 15 might have become inadvertently contaminated. Each of these radionuclides is regularly present in liquid releases and in solid radwaste. Contamination might also have possibly occurred at the contract lab. It might also be possible, but unlikely, that this composite had been inaovertently swapped with one from some other customer of the contract lab. According to the ETS, a Reportable Level (RL) is exceeded if the potential annual dose to an indivicual is equal to or greater than the design objective doses of Appendix I to 10CFR50. For this second group of airborne radionuclides, the RL is that concentration which (O would render a dose of 15 mrem to an individual through inhalation 6 over a period of The RLs were calculated to be 7x10, one year. 2x103 and 1x104 fCi/m for Cr-51, Co-60 and Zn-65 respectively. Hence, although the reading for each of these radionuclides are considered to be significant, each was at least an order of magnitude below its RL. I 1-7

The third group of radionuclides are fission products. These two Q radionuclides are frequently present; their levels this year are lower than that found during preoperations. Their presence is attributed to weapons tests although these radionuclides are regularly among the gaseous releases from the plant. All but a few of these positive readings occurred in the first half of the year when some of the debris from-past -weapons tests lodg2d in the stratosphere re-enters the troposphere. All of the readings were low and most were only barely detectable; the LLDs for Cs-137 and Ce-144 are nominally 0.3 and 1 fC1/m3 respectively. The lessening impact of the recent weapons tests may be seen by a comparison of the radionuclides detected this year with those detected ) last year. The number of positive samples and the level of activity are respectively reduced roughly by factors of 3 and 3 for Cs-137 and 9 and 14 for Ce-144. Last year's roster showed positive levels for six other radionuclides whose presence was attributed to the weapons tests. 1.2.2 Airborne Iodine The charcoal cartridges used for filtering lodine from the atmosphere were collected weekly and analyzed for I-131 by Ge(Li) spectroscopy. The sample collected at Station 15 on April 26 showed an I-131 level of 37.2 fCi/m3; a confirmatory recount put the level at 39.2 fC1/m3 This level is barel detectable as the maximum LLD i Q permitted by the ETS is 70 fC1/m. No other samples showed positive indications of I-131; the activity was always less than 40 fC1/m3 During the week from April 19 to 26 approximately 48.7 mci of I-131 i were released from the main stack and 5.5 mci were considered to be released at ground level. Station 15 is located near the center of the WNW sector; the wind was blowing into this sector about 14% of the time at the level of the elevated release point and about 10% of the time at the levels of the lower release points. With due consideration for the atmospheric stability classifications and the average wind speeds during these

times, the average I-131 concentrations at Station 15 due to releases from the main stack and from lower release points were calculated to be 1.2 and 76.6 fC1/m3 respectively.

The conservative assumptions and approximate nature of this estimate is seen to place the calculated value about 80% greater than the measured value. Nevertheless, this measured value is considered to correlate very well with the calculated value. It is interesting to note that the releases from the lower release points i had 570 times the impact at Station 15 than those from the main stack. l It is concluded that the positive level at Station 15 is due to plant [ releases. On all previous occasions, the presence of I-131 in j charcoal filters was attributed to weapons tests. During 1976, 1977 I and 1978 detectable levels of I-131 were found for a period of a few weeks after the arrival of the cloud from each of the nuclear weapons O tests. The highest level ever found was 217 fCi/m3 in 1977. The RL called for by the ETS is 900 fC1/m3 1-8

t 1.2.3 Thermoluminescent Dosimeters External radiation is monitored by thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). The total dose acquired by the TLD badges consists of that received when on-station and that received when off-station (that is, in~ transit and in storage). ~It is assumed that a fair estimate of the in transit component may be provided by the average dose acquired by the two control badges which accompany each batch of badges during shipment. When the shipments are unpacked at the plant, these two control badges are stored in a well shielded container, while the other badges (those soon to be placed in the field and those available as replacements) are placed in a make shift cave composed of Pb bricks. The average dose acquired by the replacement badges, which have not otherwise been irradiated, less their in transit component, provides the basis for determining the in storage component of the dose for each of the badges placed in the field; this average dose ranged from 7.1 mrem in the 1st quarter to 11.6 mrem in the 2nd quarter. The in storage compcnent for a particular badge will be in proportion to the number of days that badge was stored in the make shift cave. Usually the quarterly batch of field badges will be stored in the make snift cave for accut a week or 10 days; however, periods of two weeks or so are not uncommon, The on-station dose acquired by each field badge during its on-station period of exposure i is cetermined by subtracting the off-station dose (botn the in transit and the in storage components) from the total dose readings; the g results are then normalized to a 13-week exposure period. i V l The en-station dose is fundamentally of more interest than the total dose t.ecause it is closer to what is being scught, which is, the dose that might be acquired by external radiation as a consequence of gaseous releases from the plant. Each badge in the field is subjected to local background radiation which consists of terrestrial radiation from naturally occurring radionuclides, cosmic radiation, and l radiation due to fallout from weapons' tests. The large variability in both space and time of each of these components of the local background radiation makes it difficult to discern any part of the on-station dose which can be attributed to plant releases, which part is generally anticipated as being much smaller. The locations of the TLDs by sector and by distance from the main stack in miles are provided in Table 1.2-3. Two badges are placed at each station. At the beginning of 1980, an attempt was made to establish two TLD stations in each sector (in accordance with Revision 1 to the Technical Position of the Radiological Assessment Branch of the NRC, dated November 1979), one near the site boundary and the other at a distance of about four or five miles. Suitable locations were not found in the East Sector. In addition to the locations for these two rings of TLD stations, the table provides for the locations of the control stations and the stations of special interest. j O 1-9

i d 1 (:) TABLE 1.2-3 i ^ LOCATIONS OF TLD STATIONS Sector Site Boundary 4-5 Miles l No. Miles No. Miles N 19 2.0 25 5.0 I NNE 26 2.6 28 4.9 i NE 9 1.8 29 5.0 ENE 27 1.7 30 5.0 j ESE 119 1.1 12 5.0 SE 17 1.2 11 4.3 SSE 13 1.2 10 4.7 5 126 0.9 8 4.4 i SSW 14 1.0 7 4.3 SW 16 0.9 6 4.5 WSW 21 1.0 4 4.5 W 133 1.1 3 4.4 WNW 2 1.3 23 5.5 NW 18 1.1 22 4.6 i nrm 20 1,7 24 4.8 () Additional TLD Stations N No. 31 at 7.8 miles, Toombs Central School ENE No. 1 at 11.1 miles, Control Station i S No. 5 at 9.9 miles, Control Station WNW No. 15 at 0.8 miles, Roadside Park l 1-10 0

The annual summary of the on-station doses acquired by the TLDs which are required by the ETS is presented in Table 1.2-4 The average dose for the indicator stations is seen to be a little greater than that for the control stations. The absolute value of the difference between these values is much less than the MDD, meaning that this difference is not discernable. The annual summary of the on-station doses acquired at the site boundary and at 4-5 miles is presented in Table 1.2-5. The average dose for the site boundary is seen to be a little greater than the average for the 4-5 mile ring. However there is no discernable difference between these two values. The en-station quarterly doses acquired by the TLDs placed at Station 31 (Toombs Central School) i ranged from 10.1 to 14.3 mrem with 11.4 mrem as an average. TLDs are frequently lost due to theft and are frequently damaged by vandalism. Although Tables 1.2-4 and 1.2-5 indicate there were TLD readings at each station for each quarter, there was r:ot in every case TLD data from two badges at each station for exposure during the sntire quarter. At monthly intervsls the TLD stations are checked for missing or damaged badges, replacements are provided a5 needed. A total of 15 badges from 5 different stations ware fcurd to be missing ouring the year; usually both badges from an affected station would be found to be missing. To diminish the frequency of missing or damaged badges, TLDs are placed in less conspicuous places wherever this is practical. 1 ~ 1.2.4 Milk Milk samples are cc11ected biweekly as available at three stations. Gamma isotopic and I-131 analyses are performed on each sample. This is the fifth consecutive year for performing the gamma scans. l 1-11 O

TABLE 1.2-4 O ANNUAL

SUMMARY

OF ON-STATION DOSE ACQUIRED BY TLDs REQUIRED BY ETS mrem /13 weeks Station No. n Maximum Minimem Average s Data for Control Stations 1 4 15.3 10.3 11.9 2.3 5 4 14.9 10.7 12.0 2.0 Summary 2 12.0 11.9 12.0 0.7 Data for Indicator Stations 9 4 13.6 10.9 11.7 1.3 15 4 13.4 8.8 10.6 2.0 17 4 15.7 11.9 13.2 1.7 21 4 12.8 9.4 10.6 1.5 119 4 15.3 10.8 12.2 2.1 i 126 4 14.4 10.1 11.7 1.9 133 4 19.1 13.4 16.0 2.4 Summary 7 16.0 10.6 12.3 1.9 Li - Le = 0.3 MD0 = 4.9 l-12 O

TABLE 1.2-5 O ANNUAL

SUMMARY

OF ON-STATION DOSE ACQUIRED BY TLDs AT SITE BOUNDARY AND AT 4-5 MILES 1 i mrem /13 weeks Station No. Il Maximum Minimum Averace s Site Boundary 19 4 14.3 10.5 11.6 1.8 26 4 13.5 9.3 11.2 1.8 9 4 13.6 10.9 11.7 1.3 27 4 20.1 11.7 14.9 3.9 119 4 15.3 10.8 12.2 2.1 17 4 15.7 11.9 13.2 1.7 13 4 13.8 9.4 11.2 1.9 126 4 14.4 10.1 11.7 1.9 14 4 16.4 11.6 13.2 2.3 16 4 12.5 8.9 10.1 1.6 l 21 4 12.8 9.4 10.6 1.5 133 i 19.1 13.4 16.0 2.4 2 4 14.2 9.3 11.2 2.2 18 4 15.7 10.4 12.7 2.2 20 4 14.8 10.9 12.5 1.8 O Sunnary 13 16.0 10.1 12.3 1.6 4-5 Miles e i 25 4 12.4 9.1 10.1 1.6 28 4 12.7 8.7 10.2 1.8 29 4 18.3 14.2 15.8 1.8 30 4 17.6 11.6 13.9 2.6 l 12 4 13.2 9.3 10.6 1.8 l 11 4 15.8 11.3 13.0 2.1 10 4 12.9 8.8 10.2 1.9 8 4 12.0 8.3 9.9 1.7 7 4 11.1 7.5 8.9 1.6 6 4 15.0 8.2 11.1 2.8 4 4 11.8 8.1 9.9 2.0 3 4 14.3 9.5 11.0 2.2 23 4 11.6 9.5 10.7 1.0 i. 22 4 15.1 11.2 12.6 1.7 24 4 12.3 9.7 11.4 1.2 Summary 15 15.8 8.9 11.3 1.8 l LSB-L _5 = 1.0 MD0 = 1.7 4 m 1-13 1 v- -r.- .,-,.--------.-,,----,,-,.,-,-,-,-r -, - ~ - - - - -. -n-,~-

The locations of the milk sampling stations and the number of samples Q collected were as follows: Sector Azimuth Distance Station (Compass) (degrees) (miles) n Prison EE 067 11.0 '25 ~ Johnson Brothers SW 223 8.5 25 Williamsons NNE 029 3.2 26 The samples collected on February 1 at the prison and November 22 at Johnson Brothers were lost in transit to the contract lab. The state prison is the control station. The Williamsons who have the single available milk animal within 5 miles of the plant provide the indicator station. Johnson Brothers dairy, the next closest reliable station, is a bit too far away to be considered as an indicator station. There were no positive indications of I-131 in any of the milk samples during the year. This is the second straight calendar year and the third since operations began that this has occulred; the first such year was 1979. Previous levels have ranged from 0.095 to 88 pCi/1. All signi ficant readings were generally attributed to the weapons tests. The other readings were marginally detectable or questionable. Curing preoperations all readings were less than the LLO of 2 pC1/1; the LLD was subsequently lowered to 0.8 pCi/1. The RL Q is 3 pCi/1. As usual the gaxna scans showed naturally occurring K-40 present in each sample at levels which varied between 724 and 1680 pCi/1. These levels are Ebout the same as those found in previous years. The gamma scans also showed positive indications of the fission product Cs-137 in a seventh of the samples collected, as compared to a quarter for last year and to a third in the previous year. The levels were found to be about the same as those for last year. The results in pC1/1 for each station are summaried as follows: Station n/n Maximum Minimum Average J n Prison 1/25 11.0 11.0 11.0 Johnson Brothers 9/25 21.3 12.4 17.1 3.0 Williamsons 1/26 11.8 11.8 11.8 Q 1-14 ,---_,e, m- -,,-_-m,

The ratio, n/n, the number of positive results to the number of o p analyses performed, shows relatively high frequenies of positive v results for Johnson Brothers. All but two of the positive readings were found during the first 15 weeks of the year. The minimum LLD required by Table 3.2-2 of the ETS is 15 pCi/1; in practice, however, an LLD of 7pCi/1 is usually achieved;

thus, these cositive measurements are only marginally detectable.

The highest level given above is considerably less than the reporting level of 70 pC1/1 given in Table 3.2-3 of the ETS. The positive levels found during the past four years ranged from 6.7 to 57.1 pCi/1 with the average values for the stations ranging from 10.2 to 20.9 pCi/1. During preoperations, Cs-137 was measured in milk by a chemical separation technique; the levels ranged from 2 to 60 pCi/l with an average value of 19.3 pCi/1. All of these positive indications of Cs-137 in milk, those during preoperations, as well as those during operations, are attributed to the weapons tests. The ETS require that a survey be conducted annually to determine the location of all milk animals within 3 miles of the plant stack in each of the 16 azimuthal rectors. For any of the 16 sectors in which milk animals are not found within 3 miles, the annual survey is expanded to locate the nearest milk animal within 5 miles in that sector. A milk animal is a cow or goat which is producing milk for human l consumption. On May 17 and 18, the milk animal survey was conducted. The only milk producing animal found was the cow at Willismcons which is presently Deing sampled. 1.2.5 Grass Gaaraa isotopic analyses were cerfarned on each of the grass samples collected monthly from the three sampling stations. Positive indication of several radionuclides were determined. These have been separated into four groups as follows: (1) Be-7 and K-40; (2) Cs-137 (3) Pb-214 and 81-214; and (4) T1-208, Pb-212 and Ac-228 Only in the second group is there a man-made radionuclide. An annual summary of the activities of these radionuclides is provided in Table 1.2-6. It is seen that there are no discernable differences between the average values of the indicator stations and the control station. As usual Be-7 and K-40 were detected in every sample. The levels are on the same order of magnitude as those found previously. The K-40 level for the January sample at Station 17 was more than twice the previous maximum for grass. This high may reflect a spurt in growth; gamma scans of soil samples collected at each of the grass plots on Novmeber 10, 1977 showed very high K-40 concentrations at Station 17. 1-15

.l t f TABLE 1.2-6 , Q ANNUAL

SUMMARY

OF SPECIFIC RADIONUCLIDES l DETECTED IN GRASS pCi/k; 9t Radionuclide n Max Min FLvjl s L -L MD0 Control Station I. Be-7 12 2070 117 1013 687 i K-40 12 12100 3530 7156 2818 I Cs-137 12 397 28 99 113 T1-208 3 15 12 14 2 Pb-212 0 Pb-214 3 288 38 190 133 81-214 8 539 21 164 230 l Ac-228 0 Indicator Station 4 Be-7 24 4780 143 1379 1296 366 1096 i K-40 24 41600 1120 7507 7754 351 4867 Cs-137 13 342 15 65 88 -34 113 T1-203 6 97 21 45 29 31 48 Q' Pb-212 6 190 31 77 61 i Pb-214 11 82 23 46 20 -142 749 81-214 14 169 26 68 41 -96 283 Ac-228 6 216 46 111 65 I 1-16 O

As has been often the case, Cs-137 was the only fission product O detected and as usual it was detected in about 70% of the samples. However, its average level was half that found last year and about a sixth of its average for the 3 years prior to last year. It might also be noted that last year this second group contained 7 other man-made radionuclides whose presence, like Cs-137, was attributed to the weapons tests. Each of the radionuclides in the third and fourth groups is a primordial nuclide. None of these radionuclides is produced by operation of the plant. The radionuclides in the third group are from the Uranium Series. Those in the fourth group are from the Thorium Series. The levels were generally 50 to 100% higher than seen before; new maximum and average levels were found for each radionuclide. Each of these radionuclides were found in soil samples taken from each of the grass plots on November 10, 1977. The ETS requires an LLD of not greater than 25 pCi/kg wet for I-131. This limit was exceeded on thirteen occasions as follows: Sation 5 17 21 January 52 65 41 March 28 38 l April 30 28 35 t May 26 29 Q September 32 October 31 31 Iodine has a strong affinity for water; the moisture content in these samples was low due to very dry weather. The January samples were only about 30% their normal weight; the dry and cold weather made the task of obtaining adequate samples difficult. These deviations are not considered as significant. An adequate sample was not available at Station 17 in March due to dry weather. The sample collections at all stations in March were 22 days i following the collections for the previous month. This spread in the collection dates constitutes a deviation from the ETS in that Table 3.2-1 requires monthly collections for grass samples; monthly is defined as once each calendar month at intervals of 30 days + 6 days. j A closer watch of the sampling schedule should prevent _ further deviations of this kind. This deviation is insignificant. 1.3 Discharges to the River The ETS require the sampling of water, clams and sediment from River Stations 170 and 172 which are about 1 1/2 miles upstream and 2 1/2 miles downstream, respectively. The upstream station serves as the control station and the downstream station serves as the. Indicator 1 station. The ETS also require the sampling of American shad from the Q area of the discharge structure. 1-17

The ETS require a gamma spectral analysis of each sample. This pJ analyis is performed on only the edible portion of the fish and clam samples. A tritium analysis is also required on quarterly composites of river water for each station. All of these analyses are performed by Teledyne Isotopes, Incorporated of Westwood, New Jersey. 1.3.1 River Water River water is collected using automatic sampling machines; small samples are collected at intervals which are on the order of an hour. Water thus collected is picked up monthly; quarterly composites are composed of the monthly collections. As usual there were no positive results for the entire year on the gamma scans of the monthly collections. Only scant results have been obtained in the past with this analysis. The only man-made radionuclide ever detected was Ce-141; this occurred only once at an indicator station in the 4th quarter of 1975. The positive results in units of pC1/1 for the tritium analysis of the quarterly composites is summarized as follows for the control and indicator station, respectively. n Max Min g s L i-Lc. MOD 2 230 210 220 14 4 240 100 165 75 -55 260 The average reading for the indicator station was less tnan that for the control station, the difference between the average values for the two stations is less than the minimum detectable difference which indicates there is no discernable difference between the values cotained at the two stations. These values are typical of and within the range of those found previously. The monthly sample for April was also inadvertently analyzed for tritium; the level at both stations was found to be less than 120 pC1/1. On May 5 it was discovered that the raft upon which the automatic water sampling equipment is mounted at Station 172 was missing. It was not found in an immediate search that extended a few miles downstream. A week or so later it was found at Davis Landing which is located several miles further downstream. On May 19, the raft was back on Station. The sample for May consisted of a composite of the weekly grab samples collected during the May 5-19 period, along with the sample collected with the automatic sampling equipment. Table 3.2-1 of the ETS requires monthly collections. In effect the sampling of river water is continuous and the accumulated collections are nominally gathered at intervals of approximately one month. l Monthly is defined by the ETS as once during each calendar month at intervals of 30 days 1 6 days. This definition is appropriate for grab sampling and does not fit perfectly when applied to continuous 1-18

sampling. The monthly collection on January 27 was 19 days following O' the previous collection date. As a co1 sequence of the very short January sampling period, the 1st quarter sampling period was for only 75 days which is 2 days short of the 13 weeks + 14 days required by the ETS. These are minor deviations from the sampling schedule. A closer watch of the sampling schedule should prevent further deviations of tnis kind. The January sample for Station 172 was lost in transit to the contract laboratory. A sufficient quantity had not been kept in reserve to provide a make-up sample. A procedure change is warranted to assure that a sufficient quantity is held in reserve for a period of time. In accordance with the ETS a survey was conducted downstream of the plant on October 7 to determine if water from the Altamaha River was being used for drinking purposes. As in all previous surveys, no intakes for drinking water were observed. If river water should become used for drinking, the ETS require sampling and analyses of the drinking water. 1.3.2 Clams The ETS require a sen.iannual sampling of asiatic clams from the two river stations. Ca;. lections were made ca May 10 ar.d November 9. The gamma spectrtl analysis showed positive levels cnly for K-40, Co-60 and Cs-137 in the November collections. O The lwels for natually nceurrina K-40 wre 0.216 and 1.29 pC1/gm wet at Stations 170 nnd 172, respectiv61). An LLD of about 0.8 pCi/gm wet is normally achieved; hence the higher reading is not much beyond being margically detectacle. This radionuclide occasionally appears in clam samples. The highest reacing previously found was 1.25 pC1/gm wet at Station 170 in the fourth quarter of 1976. The activation product Co-60 was detected only at Station 172 at a level of 0.116 pC1/gm wet. Generally an LLD of 0.03 pCi/gm wet is achieved; the maximum LLD permitted by the ETS is 0.13 pC1/gm wet. The RL is 10 pCi/gm wet. Co-60 had not previously been detected in l environmental samples for monitoring discharges to the river. The fission product Cs-137 was detected only at Station 172 at a level of 0.0728 pCi/gm wet. Usually an LLD of 0.03 pC1/gm wet is achieved; the maximum LLD permitted by the ETS is 0.13 pC1/gm wet. The RL is 2 l pCi/gm wet. Cs-137 had previously been detected in clam samples in j two instances, in 1976 and 1979 at levels of 0.014 and 0.0397 pCi/gm - wet, respectively. These measured levels in the clams are equivalent to maximum annual doses to an individual of 0.0233 mrem to the GI tract of an adult due to the Co-60 and of 0.0412 mrem to the liver of a teenager due to the Cs-137. These maximum annual doses are based upon the assumption that Q some individual would consume the assumed maximum quantity of clams 1-19

which had Co-60 and Cs-137 concentrations of 0.116 and 0.0728 pC1/gm p wet, respectively. These calculated doses are well below the design objective of 10 mrem per year to any organ for liquid releases as s specified by Appendix I to 10 CFR 50. Assumed values for the dose factors and uptakes were taken from Revision 1 of the Regulatory Guide 1.109, October 1977. P Both Co-60 and Cs-137 are usually amongst the radionuclides comprising the liquid release. An estimate of the average concentrations of these two radionuclides in clams at the indicator station due to the 4th quarter releases were a few orders of magnitude below the measured levels. Thus there is no correlation between the release data and the measured values. It may then be concluded that these measured levels are due to past weapons tests. There also exists the possibility of sample contamination in their handling at the contract lab. In previous years the following radionuclides had each on one occasion been detected in clam samples: naturally occurring Th-228 at a level of 0.0995 pCi/gm wet in 1976; Zr-95 at a level of 0.25 pCi/gm wet in 1977; and Zn-65 at a level of 0.239 pC1/gm wet in 1981. 1.3.3 American Shad Because of its ccmmerical importance, the ETS require that American j shad be collecteo annually during the spring spawning period. The collection was made on March 17. Naturally occurring K-40 was the fm only radionuclide detecteo in this single sample. The level was 2.15 V pC1/gm wet which is about the same as that found previously. Only l K-40 has been found in previous samples of American shad. 1.3.4 Sediment The annual collection of sediment samples took place on May 28. The positive results of the gamma scan on each sample are presented below in units of pCi/gm dry. Radionuclide Station 170 Station 172 Be-7 1.24 K-40 11.3 11.7 Cs-137 0.285 0.141 Ra-226 2.75 3.26 Th-228 1.81 2.24 The levels of each of these radianculides are typical of or on the order of those found in past years. Each of these radionuclides appears regularly in sediment samples. All are naturally occurring except for the fission product Cs-137. Last year's sample contained l four other man-made racionuclides whose presence like Cs-137 was ] attributed to the nuclear weapons tests. 1-20 1

1.4 Discharaes to the Ground As reported in previous annual reports and also by LER No. 50-321/1979-21 (including its revisions, quarterly updates ano other supplements) groundwater with high tritium levels has been found to be positioned in two separate areas of the plant yard, namely, an area centered just south of the Condensate Storage Tank for Unit 1 (CST-1) and an area near the NE corner of the Unit 1 turbine building. These areas appear to be essentially unrelated to each other in that the causes of the high tritium levels are different and there appears not to be a good hyoraulic connection between the two areas. All of the extraneous sources of tritium to the groundwater are believed to have been identified and to have now been eliminated. A portion of the tritiated groundwater slowly makes its way to the river via the drainage systems; the tritum levels in these continuous releases are generally a few orders of magnituude below the high levels found in the plant yard and that permitted by regulation. The offsite doses due to these release are small. Thus, there has been no significant impact upon the public's health and safety due to these high onsite tritium levels. There are three distinct water zones underlying the site: a water table, a local aquifer and a regional aquifer. Aquicludes separate and hydraulically isolate these zones from each other. The vast regiona) aquifer whose top is a few hundred feet below plant grade is not hydraulically connected to surface waters in the vicinity of the id-site. The shallow local aquifer is separated from the regional acquifer by an aquiclude which is about 100 feet thick; the top of the local aquifer is roughly 65 feet below the grade of the plant yard; it is hydraulically connected to surface waters in the plant environs. The foundations for some of the buildings at the plant enter but do not. rupture the aquiclude between the local aquifer and the water table; this aquiclude is 40 to 50 feet thick. The water table which is charged by the percolation of precipitation through the soil is unconfined. In the plant yard the water table more or less extends from 10 to 20 feet below grade, l l The water table, according to the natural terrain, will drain both in a northerly direction (toward the river) and also in an easterly (downstream) direction toward a swamp area which drains to the river. An analysis of the water levels from various shallow test holes about the plant yard shows that groundwater flow in the water table has a strong local flavor. This phenomenon is attributed to the excavations performed during construction of the plant and the field routing of water pipes and electrical conduit runs. These pipe and conduit runs are supported by compacted sand; any water introduced nearby will follow a path along the run, as this is the path of least resistance. Moreover, it is likely that some of the excavations formed pockets in l the aquiclude between the water table and the local aquifer in which l groundwater accumulates. Movement of water out of these pools might l occur only when the pockets fill and overflow. 1 1-21 l l l l l

Two separate subsurface drainage ditches, whose outfalls are at about O 25 feet below grade, provide a system for controlling the level of the water table. This network of subsurface ditches encircles the complex of the main plant buildings - the service, turbine, reactor, control, and radwaste buildings for each unit. Roughly 70% of this encirclement is serviced by Subsurface Ditch No.1 (SSI) whose outfall is approximately NNE of the plant about midway between the intake and discharge structures. The eastern side of this enciIrlement is serviced by SS2 whose outfall is on the east side of the protected area. The surface drainage system includes a network of catch basins connected by underground ditches. Runoff from the building roofs and the plant yard flow into these catch basins. The outfall for the surface ditch in the vicinity of the discharge structure is referred to as Yard Drain No. 1 (YD1). YD2 which services the east side of the plant yard has its outfall near that for SS2. The outfall for YD3 which services the NW portion of the plant yard has its outfall from beneath warehouse No. 6; the effluent would subsequently reach the river near the intake structure. These surface ditches are separate from each other. Groundwater samples are sent to the Center for Applied Isotope Studies at the University of Georgia in

Athens, Georgia.

A liquid scintillation detector is used to determine the tritium content. Results are usually obtained within a few weeks; LLDs of about 100 pCi/1 are attained. In subsequent subsections, data summaries for the year are presented for the groundwater samples taken from the locations associated with each of the two key areas and for other locations. Nearly all of the locations are shown on Figure 1.4-1. For each sampling location, the j maximum and minimum tritium levels are presented along with an average value of the positive readings and the ratio of the number of positive i readings to the total number of readings. The annual average was I determined by averaging the quarterly averages. Other information or datum associated with the particular area may also be presented. Where warranted, an assessment is provided for specific sampling locations. Any significant events or activities associated with these areas are discussed. I l l

O 1-22 l

l

l 1.4.1 CST-1 Area i O Tne CST-1 erea is centeree ebout test note e16 wnicn is 1ocatee eeout 5 yards south of the CST-1 dyke and several yards east of the condensate transfer pumps. A pool of tritiated water appears to be trapped in a pocket of the aquiclude which underlies this area. Samoling locations affected. by this pool area: test holcs N7A, P16, T10 through T16 and T18; outfalls SS2 and YD2; and catch basins PY12, PY16 and PY24. Test hole N7A taps the local aquifer, all other locations tap the water table. A data summary of the tritium levels for each of these locations is presented in Table 1.4-1. This data should be reviewed in the light of related events and activities. l The source of the tritium in the CST-1 area is the leakages from the condensate transfer pumps and associated plumbing. During 1980, dykes were erected around the pumps to preclude water from any future leaks from entering the ground. In July 1981 and again in January 1982 the dyke floor became flooded when leaks occurred to one of the transfer pumps. Soon after each of these incidents the tritium levels in nearby groundwater samples increased sharply. Leak tests on the dyke confirmed that the dyke was leaking. The tests consisted of flooding the dyke floor to a depth of a few inches, of placing several inches of water in nonleaking containers with vertical sides, and of positioning these containers about the dyke floor in a manner to approximate average evaporation conditions; then subsequently comparing the rate by which the water level recedes in hw the dyke with that in the containers. To stop the dyke leakage: all joints were filled with a sealant, and an epoxy paint was applied to the floor and to the inside walls to several feet above the floor. Also the blockouts (the depressions in the dyke floor which accommodates the discharge piping of the pumps) were filled with a sealant. This waterproofing treatment was also applied to the dyke for CST-2. Leak tests were again performed, the results indicated that the dykes were sealed. Test wells T10 through T13 each showed substantial increases in their tritian levels within a month or so of the January 22 pump leak; the levels then generally declined for the remainder of the year. An exception was T12 where the readings increased in the latter part of the year; this test well seems to be at a pendulous location as it has a history of wide swings in its readings. The tritium levels were reportable (that is, the quarterly average was in excess of 3.0 E4 pCi/1) at T10 and T12 for the 1st quarter and at T12 for the 4th quarter. It is noted that the level at T16 on December 21 was 7.81 E3 pCi/1. The previous maximum at this location was 1.80 E3 pCi/1; this occurred on October 12, 1981. 1-23 l E

TABLE 1.4-1 ANNUAL SUMNARY OF TRITIUM LEVELS IN GROUNDWATER () SAMPLES FROM CST-1 AREA pCi/1 Location n/n Max Min Avg n N7A 6/6 5.01 E3 3.48 E3 4.13 E3 P16 4/4 1.76 E5 1.16 E5 1.45 E5 PY12 1/1 1.82 E2 1.82 E2 1.82 E2 l PY16 1/1 9.64 E2 9.64 E2 9.64 E2 PY24 1/1 2.44 E2 2.44 E2 2.44 E2 SS2 21/29 2.41 E3 < 9.00 El 5.75 E2 l T10 18/18 4.89 E4 1.01 E4 2.37 E4 Tll 18/18 3.69 E4 3.32 E3 1.44 E4 T12 18/18 1.52 E5 5.77 E3 5.19 E4 T13 17/17 1.73 E4 2.49 E3 '8.28 E3 T14 8/8 3.67 E3 1.05 E3 1.93 E3 T15 7/8 4.03 E2 < 1.08 E2 2.23 E2 T16 8/8 7.81 E3 1.57 E2 2.26 E3 T18 16/16 1.69 E5 1.76 E4 1.20 E5 YD2 15/21 1.14 E3 < 9.00 El 2.97.E2 I l I l-24

The tritium levels at P16 and T18 have been reportable for several years, ever sirce samples were collected there. Test hole P16 was dry Q for most of ths year, however two samples were obtained early in the year and two are were obtained in July; the levels were somewhat higher than the 1981 levels. The levels at T18 increased steadily during the first half of the year, but declined at a greater rate during the latter half of the year. It takes a longer time for the impact of the pump leaks to reach these two test holes. 1.4.2 Area Near NE Corner of the Unit 1 Turbine Building An early cause of the high tritium levels in this area was eliminated in March 1979 as has been previously reported. It was discovered that process water had been entering the ground a few yards from Pl78 through an open ended half-inch line buried to a depth of about 8 inches. Sampling locations which became affected by this extraneous source of tritium include: test holes N98, P158, Pl7A, Pl7B, T2, T3, T4 and T8; and outfall SSI. Test hole P17A taps the local acquifer, all other locations tap the water table. A data summary of the tritium levels for each of these locations is presented in Table 1.4-2. Judging by the rise and subsequent decline of readings in succession at Pl78, T4 and N98 and by the results of c'ye tests, the main body of this tritiated water which had entered the ground near P178 appeared to have migrated to the vicinity of the NE corner of the Unit 1 turbine building. Test Hole N98 is located at this corner. O Pe k re dings were: 2.97 E5 pCi/l at P178 on 2/16/79 2.05 E5 pC1/1 at T4 on 8/09/79 2.08 E5 pC1/1 at N98 on 5/13/80 The readings at Pl78 then dropped below 3.0 E4 pCi/1, the RL, in the 4th quarter of 1979 and have subsequently remained below the RL. The readings at T4 dropped below the RL in the 3rd quarter of 1980. The level at N98 dropped to 8.17 E4 pC1/1 in June of 1981, but subsequently rose to 1.14 E5 pC1/1 by mid December of 1981. Increases in early 1982 were rapid, reaching 4.71 E5 pC1/1 on February 19; readings then remained near that level for several months. Several yards to the west and to the east of N98 are test holes T3 and T8, respectively. These test holes, especially T3, generally reflect the readings at N98, but at a somewhat lower level. The levels at T3 also increased dramatically early in the year. The readings at both N98 and T3 were reportable for the entire year. Around midyear: the level at T3 declined significantly; slight declines also began at N9B and T8. 1-25

TABLE 1.4-2 ANNUAL St.NMARY OF TRITIUM LEVELS IN O ca0uN0wnTea Sa,LeS ra0M naEn Nena Ne C0aNea OF THE UNIT 1 TURBINE BUILDItG pC1/1 Location n/n Max Min M. n N98 26/26 4.80 ES 2.55 E5 3.85 E5 P158 5/5 7.63 E3 1.50 E3 3.46 E3 Pl7A 1/4 1.59 E2 < 8.80 El 1.59 E2 Pl78 8/8 1.64 E4 3.01 E3 8.00 E3 Pipe Chase 24/24 2.80 E5 1.95 E2 2.44 E4 PYA 1/1 4.17 E2 4.17 E2 4.17 E2 PYS 22/22 6.54 E4 4.10 E2 1.47 E4 SS1 13/17 1.12 E4 < 8.80 El 3.58 E3 T2 11/11 5.44 E3 1.98 E3 2.86 E3 T3 26/26 1.60 E5 2.12 E4 7.64 E4 T4 9/9 3.41 E4 4.12 E2 9.56 E3 T8 18/18 7.99 E3 4.53 E3 6.51 E3 YD3 21/24 5.17 E3 < 9.00 El 9.44 E2 O l-26 O

An investigation was initiated in the first quarter to determine the cause of the sudden increases at N98 and T3. Early in May a new O extremeous source or trittu= to tne arouoe eter in enis eree es discovered. This source is the leakage from the Unit 1 precoat tank of the condensate polisher system which is located near the north wall i of the turbine building on the 130-foot level. Spillage to the floor flows to the north wall and then under the wall panel to the outside of the building; it then collects in the pipe chase for the auxillEiry steam boiler. Open joints between the pipe chase and the turbine building basement wall allows water to enter the ground and flow along the basement wall. This likely provides an easy path to Ct e area of N98 and T3. The precoat tank overflowed on April 30; gamma scans of water taken from the pipe chase early in May were found to be similiar to gamma scans of water taken from the precoat tank. The open portion of the i turbine building north wall which provided this path to the outside of i the building was promptly sealed. The precoat tank may have overflowed in the past. 1 The tritium level in the pipe chase on May 4 was 2.8 E5 pCi/1; all subsequent readings for the next five months were 2 to 3 orders of magnitude lower. This reduction was believed to have resulted from the elimination of further leakages from the turbine building. The readings for the pipe chase were reportable for the 2nd and 4th quarters. O "orme11v. *nea the teve1 or eter to the stee= pipe enese reaches e given height, a sump punp removes the water to the drain lines of the turbine building roof which joins the yard drain system further downstream at manhole PY1. Subsequently, this portion of the yard drain system passes through several catch basins to outfall YD3 which emerges from under Warehouse No. 6, and then to an open ditch leading to a culvert from which discharge is made near the river. Samples are being taken regularly from PY5 which is the first catch basin downstream of manhole PY1 and from outfall YD3, as well as from the pipe chase; the results are included in Table 1.4-2. Since correlating water in the pipe chase with that in the precoat tank, the steam pipe chase sump pump has been tagged out. A gamma scan is run on a sample of water from the pipe chase before pumping out the chase. If manmade radionuclides should be detected, the water would be drummed and sent to radwaste. l 6 O 1-2T l t

l Abrupt increases in the tritium level were noted in the sample collected on October 19 in the pipe chase. Gamma scans were run by O ene contrect 1eb on tne semp1es tewen on Octoeer 19 ene Novemeer 2. These scans were for 30,000 seconds; the results in pC1/1 were as follows: Radionuclide 10/19 11/02 Mn-54 2.31 E2 Co-58 6.02 E2 Co-60 7.07 E2 Zn-65 3.79 E3 1.76 E2 Cs-134 1.89 E2 Cs-137 3.21 E2 It appears that condensate water was present in these samples. It has not yet been determined how condensate water could have gotten into the pipe chase. The pipe chase had been pumped out sometime before September 11; it was not pumped out again until December 12. Gamma scans were run on i samples from the pipe chase on September 11, October 23, November 2 and 9, and December 12. Naturally occurring K-40 was the only radionuclide identified. These scans were run for 3000 seconds on the GeLi detector except for the October 23 sample which was run for 1000 seconds. Ncw, each time samples are collected in the pipe chase for tritium analysis, 3000 second gamma scans are run. O The occurrence of April 30 as described by LER No. 50-321/1982-038 when about 30 gallons of condensate water were spilled near the NE i corner of the Unit 1 turbine building may have also had some impact on the tritium levels measured in the N98 area. Late in the year, the levels at T4 suddenly became reportable after being below the RL for 9 consecutive quarters. This resurgence at T4 might be attributed to a slight shift of the main body of the tritiated groundwater. The levels at P158 which is on the west side of the Unit 1 turbine building are noted to average more than 2.5 times those in the previous year. The levels are still nct considered to be excessively high, however. The increases might be indicative of a movement of the tritiated water. I l-28 O l l e _,_,.,_..,,,..---,,.-__-,v... _, _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _. _., _. - -. _...,. _ ~ - _ _. _ _.,,.,, _ _,. _ _ _,. - - -.

The readings on December 12 at SS1 was 1.12 E4 pCi/1; this established i a new maximum level for a sample collected at the outfall of one of O ene ereineae systems; it e1so neinee esteb11sn e new meximum acerterix average of 6.55 E3 pCi/1. The readings at outfalls are important because they measure releases to the public. The previous maxima were set last year at SS2 where the reading on November 13 was 6.87 E3 0C1/1 and the 4th quarter average was 2.42 E3 pCi/1. The significant increase in 1982 is of concern. The new individual maximum reading is a factor of more than 260 below the MPC for tritium in unrestricted areas as given in 10 CFR 20. The new maximum quarterly average is equivalent to a dose of 0.17 mrem. This dose estimate is very conservative because it assumes that some individual were to obtain all of his drinking water directly from the outfall which is generally inaccessible. The quarterly dose limit resulting from liquid releases as established by Appendix I to 10 CFR 50 is 1.5 mrem. The average annual concentration of tritium for drinking water in community water systems is required to be less than 2 E4 pC1/1 according to EPA's National Interim Primary Drinking Regulations, 40 CFR 141.16. 1.4.3 Other Locations and Other Results Tritium contamination of a lesser degree was found in some of the groundwater samples at most of the other locations. The causes of the contamination at these locations generally differed from those for the two key areas. A data summary of the tritium levels for each of these locations is presented in Table 1.4-3. All of these locations tap the water table except for test hole PI5A which taps the local aquifer. O The readings at test holes N88 and N108 are noted to have more than doubled their usual levels; these readings are still quite low, however. The average level for yard drain YD1 has also doubled; it is possible that the new high reading at this location could be due to cross contamination or mislabelling. In subsequent paragraphs an explanation is offered for the readings at test hole A2 and at test holes N38 and P13B. Previous readings at A2 had ranged from 1.40 to 3.00 E2 pCi/1. The higher readings shown in Table 1.4-3 are probably due to the leaks to the ground resulting from the seal failure to one of the Unit 2 condensate transfer pumps which occurred on September 30, 1981. As previously reported, the penetration in the dyke wall which allowed water to flow out of the dyke has been plugged. As reported in LER No. 50-366/1982-074, on July 15 about 100 gallons of condensate water flowed out of the Unit 2 turbine building subsequent to the overflow of the condensate demineralizer precoat tank. The water was contained, but a small area outside the building was contaminated. The cause of this event was equipment failure compounded by procedural deficiency. 1-29

TABLE 1.4-3 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

OF TRITIUM LEVELS IN GROUNDWATER SAPPLES FROM OTHER AREAS pC1/1 Location n/n Max. Min. Avg. n A2 3/3 1.52 E3 1.10 E2 1.00 E3 N38 2/2 4.42 E2 1.70 E2 3.06 E2 N8B 1/2 8.41 E2 <l.08 E2 8.41 E2 N10B 2/2 1.15 E3 6.57 E2 9.04 E2 P138 1/1 1.07 E3 1.07 E3 1.07 E3 PISA 0/2 <9.90 El YD1 6/8 5.14 E3 <9.50 El 1.09 E3 O 1-30 1 (J3 L

The contaminated water was vacuumed up and sent to radwaste; seven barrels of sand and gravel and other contaminated materials were O removed. The defective equipment was repaired; a procedure change was promptly initiated. The tritium level on the date of this event in the condensate dcmineralizer resin slurry tank was 3.07 ti6 pCi/1; the tritium ' level i in the water contained outside the building was 2.11 E6 pCi/1; and the tritium level in water standing in a nearby yard drain was 1.01 E3 pCL/1. The impact of the spill on the tritium level in groundwater might be monitored by samples from test holes A3, N38, NSB and P138. On each attempt to take samples at A3 and N58, the test holes were dry as is i often the case. Samples were collected, however, on August 31 at N38 and on November 16 at both N3B and P138. The twice normal but still low reading at N38 on November 16 might be attributed to this spill. Only two samples had been previously obtained at P138, both were less than the LLD; the November 16 reading which is about an order of magnitude above the current LLD is attributed to this spill. It had been noticed that sometimes the elevation of the water level in the annular portion of test holes N9B and N10B was near the top of the pipe. Out of curiosity samples were collected from the annuli of these two test holes on April 28; the tritium levels were 2.12 E4 and 5.31 E2 pCi/l for N98 and N108, respectively. These levels are about Os half of what might be expected in samples collected in the normal manner at these locations as indicated from the data in Tables 1,4-2 and 1.4-3. 1-31

1.5 Crosscheck Prooram Laboratories performing the analyses required by the radiological environmental monitoring program as delineated in Table 3.2-1 of the ETS participate in EPA's Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory Intercomparison Studies (Crosscheck) Program conducted by the Environmental Monitoring and Support.Laboratcry in Las Vegas, Nevada or in an equivalent program. ' Not all of the sample media / analyses combinations listed in the ETS are covered by the Crosscheck Program. Reported herein are the results of relevant participation in the Crosscheck Program by these laboratories. Relevant participation is considered to consist of those analyses for sample media covered by the EPA Crosscheck Program which are the same as those required by the ETS to be a part of the radiological environmental monitoring program. HtP conducted the gross beta analysis of air filters; all other relevant media / analysis combinations were conducted by Teledyne. Because of the time lag involved in obtaining results from the EPA and the subsequent reporting of these results by the contract laboratories, not all of the 1982 results were available. The results reported herein also include the 1981 results which were not available last year. Any results of determinations in the Crosscheck Program for which disagreement can be established using the NRC's " Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements" as described in Attachment 1, are investigated to determine the cause of the disagreement. Corrective actions are taken as warranted. The results of any such investigations and corrective actions are reported in this section. Since all of the results reported herein are presented in the same tabular format, an explanation of the column headings is provided. "Date" means the collection date given by the EPA. "Known" refers to the EPA known value + one standard deviation, s. " Result" is the average value measured by the laboratory experimental s. + " Resolution" is determined by dividing the known value by its s value. " Ratio" equals the " result" (value determined by the laboratory) divided by the "known" (value determined by EPA). An explanation is provided in the text for any comparisons showing " Disagreements". It should be noted that whenever the EPA known value is zero or the laboratory determined result is a "less than" value, a comparison by the NRC criteria cannot be made since the ratio cannot be determined. The results of the gross beta and Cs-137 analyses of air filters are given in Table 1.5-1. The results of the I-131 and the Cs-137 analyses of milk samples are listed in Table 1.5-2. The results of l the gamma and tritium analyses of water are tabulated in Table 1.5-3. ( All comparisons show agreement. l l-32

i rs TABLE 1.5-1 \\ CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS FOR AIR FILTERS pCi/ filter Date Known Result Resolution Ratio Gross Beta 3/26/82 55 + 5 49.7 + 1.5 11.0 0.90 9/24/82 67 + 2.9 50.3 + 1.2 23.1 0.75 Cs-137 9/25/81 19 + 5 32 + 2 3.8 1.68 3/26/82 23 + 5 38 + 4 4.6 1.65 9/24/82 27 _I 5 23 _7 2 5.4 0.85 i k i l l-33 I l l

TABLE 1.5-2 {]) CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS FOR MILK SAMPLES pCi/1 Date known Result Resolution Ratic Co-60 4/23/82 30 + 5 36 + 3 6.0 1.20 l l I-131 10/23/81 52 + 6 50 + 1 8.7 0.96 7/23/82 5.4}[0.8 6.1]+0.6 6.8 1.17 Cs-137 10/23/81 25 + 5 27 + 7 5.0 1.08 4/23/82 28 }[ 5 32][2 5.6 1.14 n Ba-140 (_/ 7/24/81 0.0 <9 10/23/81 0.0 < 10 4/23/82 0.0 < 8.3 l l O 1-34

TABLE 1.5-3 O Ca0ssCsECx es0caAs aEsutis FOR WATER sAWLEs pC1/1 Date Known Result Resolution Ratio. Cr-51 2/05/82 0.0 < 90 6/04/82 23+5 < 87 4.6 10/01/82 5115 < 100 10.2 i Co-60 2/05/82 20+5 19+1 4.0 0.95 6/04/82 2975 2773 5.8 0.93 10/01/82 2015 2512 4.0 1.25 Zn-65 2/05/82 15+5 < 10 3.0 6/04/82 2675 31+5 5.2 1.19 10/01/82 2415 2513 4.8 1.04 O au-106 2/05/82 20+5 < 43 4.0 6/04/82 0.0 < 50 10/01/82 30 5 < 57 6.0 1 Cs-134 2/05/82 22+5 20+2 4.4 0.91 l 6/04/82 3575 3371 7.0 0.94 l 10/01/62 1915 1913 3.8 1.00 Cs-137 I l 2/05/82 23+5 21+4 4.6 0.91 6/04/82 2575 2672 5.0 1.04 10/01/82 2015 2212 4.0 1.10 i H-3 12/11/81 2700+355 2713+188 7.61 1.00 2/12/82 18207342 22707182 5.32 1.25 4/09/82 2860+360 2947+ 90 7.94 1.03 6/11/82 1830+197 1737+ 21 9.29 0.95 8/13/82 28907390 28577 64 7.41 'O.99 O 10/08/82 25601204 2467_T105 12.55 0.96 l 1 1-35

ATTACHMENT 1 Q Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements 4 This attachment provides criteria for comparing results of capability tests and verification measurements. The criteria are based on an empirical relationship.which. combines prior experience and the accuracy needs of this program. In these criteria, the judgement limits are variable in relation to the comparison of the Reference laboratory's value to its associated one sigma uncertainty. As this comparison, referred to as " Resolution" increases, the acceptability of a licensee's measurement should be more selective. Conversely, poorer agreement should be I considered acceptable as the resolution decreases. The values in the ratio criteria may be rounded to fewer significant figures to maintain i statistical consistency with the number of significant figures reported by the Reference Laboratory, unless such rounding will result in a narrowed category of acceptance. The acceptance category reported will be the narrowest into which the ratio fits for the resolution being used. RESOLUTION RATIO = LICENSEE VALUE/REFERET E VALUE Possible Possible Agreement Agreement "A" Agreement "A" l <3 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 2 3 and < 4 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 No Comparison > 4 and < 8 0.5 - 2.0 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 2 8 and <16 0.6 - 1.67 0.5 - 2.0 0.4 - 2.5 116 and<51 0.75 - 1.33 0.6 - 1.67 0.5 - 2.0 151 and<200 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33 0.6 - 1.67 1 200 0.85 - 1.18 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33 "A" criteria are applied to the following analyses: Gamma spectrometry where principal gamma energy used for identification is greater than 250 kev. Tritium analyses of liquid samples "B" criteria are applied to te following analyses: Gamma spectrometry where principal gamma energy used for identification is less than 250 kev. Sr-89 and Sr-90 determination. F Gross beta where samples are counted on the sanie \\ date using the same reference nuclide. 1-36 l i . ~ _ _ _. _ _ _, _ _ _.. ~ _ _ _ - _ _. _ _. _ _

1.6 Conclusions This chapter has shown the licensee's conformance with the radiological portions of the ETS. It has shown that all data were carefully examined. A summary, an interpretation and an evaluation (where warranted) of the results of the laboratory analyses for each type sample collected have been presented. A barely detectable level of I-131 in a charcoal filter was correlated with atmospheric releases. This marks the first time that l radiological levels in environmental samples were shown to be due to plant releases. A measurable radiological impact upon the environment as a consequence of discharges to the river was not established. The radiological levels in the environmental samples collected during 1982 showed the impact of the nuclear weapons tests conducted in recent years by the Peoples Republic of China to have diminished. The environmental impact of the high tritium levels found in groundwater samples during 1982 has increased, but it continues to be small. The relevant comparisons of the analytical measurements made by HP and contract laboratories with those made by EPA in the Crosscheck O Program showed Agreement in all cases. l l 1-37 l

,l 4 YD1 / / ss1 O O / ..DEMIN / O / o MHC4 MHPY58 / j / 'MHl2 IMHPY4 yy .CBR69 YD3 /> - - - - - MH15 BRS DIESEL .CBR65ii g T6 T7

• O l

B LD.G., PY21 l Pl7a 'F I. RE N t ^ l ,0FFi GAS CU', ' RECOMB'% / ~ pi A MHil/ CBR63 J 19 i BLDG ~~ ~~~~~ I$ O O MH 9 CBR61r e IPPY5 T2 -O NBA T g g py $ b pyj g PIPE CHASEh Nj,B T8O o N88 MHl4 l P YI,5 IIPYl6 i TURBINE' l Nfo l ElPY4 Pl5B BLDG. T16 E e

RAD ri23 q CBR58 s

l p,0 WASTE Tis cst-i G PT l3 5A 7,3 MHB REAC. TOR, o b 9 16 h FLUM MH Q 2 ' T I 3 ( PY 14t g BLDG. N7A p 42AO UNIT.1 Riis \\ l N28Q gl Ni2 Bd CBR57 i SERVICE CONTROL ) ( 72o P PY27 l WASTE I BLDG. BLDG. PY24' f I I A2 REACTOR PYl2 I . GAS I BLDG. l MH6 MH7

---

o UNIT 2 MpyI l YD2 cst 2 TURBINE RAD

'"" E o I BLDG. WASTE g,- N3B N3A I MH l7 eo 1 l I p MH l e i l I l I MH4 M H 5 0- - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - - M H 3O- - ~ ~ - - - - - ol P138 O O Pl3 A MH2 'T (V .S UBS URFACE DRAIN SYSTEM GEORGIA POWER COMPANY O - TEST HOLE .EDWIN I. HATCH. NUCLEAR" PLANI E -CATCH BASIN 10 0' .TES'T HOLES.AND THE..DR.AINAGE SY5T ~ h

I HNP ANNUAL REPORT CHAPTER 2 METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title g 2.1 SPECIFICATION 2-1 2.2 ON-SITE METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING 2-1 2.3 DATA SUMMARIES - 1982 2-1 2.4 COMPARISON OF 1982 DATA 2-1 O l I f l l t O 2-1 j

O nNP ANNUAL REPORT CHAPTER 2 METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING LIST OF TABLES Table Title Page 2.2-1 JOINT FREQUENCY TABLES OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION 150-FT. LEVEL 2-3 2.2-2 JOINT FREQUENCY TABLES OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION 75-FT. LEVEL 2-11 2.2-3 HATCH 1982 MONTHLY AND ANNUAL PRECIPITATION 2-19 2.2-4 RATCH DATA RECOVERY 1/1/82-12/31/82 2-20 O u 2-11

HNP ANNUAL REPORT CHAPTER 2 METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title 2.2-1 150-F00T 1982 ANNUAL WIND ROSE 2.2-2 150-F00T QUARTERLY WIND ROSE (1/1/82-3/31/82) 2.2-3 150-F00T QUARTERLY WIND ROSE (4/1/82-6/30/82) 2.2-4 150-F00T QUARTERLY WIND ROSE (7/1/82-9/30/82) 2.2-5 150-F00T QUARTERLY WIND ROSE (10/1/82-12/31/82) 2.2-6 75-F00T 1982 ANNUAL WIND ROSE 2.2-7 75-F00T QUARTERLY WIND ROSE (1/1/82-3/31/82) 2.2-8 75-F00T QUARTERLY WIND ROSE (4/1/82-6/30/82) 2.2-9 75-F00T QUARTERLY WIND ROSE (7/1/82-9/30/82) 2.2-10 75-F00T QUARTERLY WIND ROSE (10/1/82-12/31/82) 2.2-11 1982 AMBIEND TEMPERATURE 2.2-12 1982 DEW POINT TEMPERATURE O l l 2-111

l RNP O ANNUAL REPORT 2. METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING 2.1 Specification The on-site meteorological monitoring program is carried out as recommended by the USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.23.

2. 2 On-site Meteorological Monitoring Program The on-site meteorological monitoring instrumentation, data acquisition, and maintenance and calibration programs are as described in Section 3 of the HNP-1 Semi-Annual Report for September - December, 1974, and Section 2.3 of the HNP-1 Final Safety Analysis Report.

2.3 Data Summaries - 1982 Joint frequency tables of wind speed and direction by stability category for the 150-foot and the 75-foot level are presented in Tables 2.2-1 and 2.2-2. Wind roses for 150-foot and 75-Foot levels are shown in Figures 2.2-1 through 2.2-10. These are shown as annual and quarterly wind roses. Ambient temperature and dew point temperature are shown in Figures 2.2-11 and 2.2-12. These are presented as the average maximum, the average, and () the average minimum for each month. Monthly and annual precipitation totals are shown in Table 2.2-3. The percent data recovery for the para-meters is shown in Table 2.2-4. 2.4 comparison of 1982 Data The meteorological data from Plant Hatch for 1982 agrees quite well with previous years considering normal year-to-year climatic variations. The data recovery for the pertinent parameters of wind speed and direction 150 f t. and delta temperature 150-33 ft. was about 88%. Data recovery for all parameters averaged about 98%. Wind rose data from 150 f t. and 75 ft. agree well between levels on the tower and between years. The major difference between 1982 and other j years is that there were more winds from the northeast to east, particu-larly during the fall season. In correlation with the additional north-j east to east winds, there were less southwest to west winds during 1982. The temperature data for 1982 compares reasonably well with previous years for both ambient and dew point temperatures. The ambient tempera-tures were generally cooler during the period of January through April, about average for the summer months, and warmer than normal during the fall season. This parallels the temperature trends across the U.S. during 1982. The dew point temperature readings from 1982 were generally warmer than normal throughout the year. l [ 2-1 l [

The joint frequency data for wind speed and direction 150 f t. versus () delta temperature 150-33 f t. in comparison with the previous four years is shown below. There were less hours of unstable conditions and more hours of neutral conditions than in previous years. This may be accounted for in part by the increase in northeast winds which are generally strong and, in some cases, indicative of stormy periods. Strong winds and/or rain usually result in neutral stability conditions. Plant Hatch Stability Classification Percent Stability Stability Year Group 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 5-yr. Average A 16.2 21.7 25.2 19.5 21.8 20.9 B 3.8 4.6 3.0 4.0 4.1 3.9 C 2.3 2.0 1.2 2.2 2.1 2.0 D 20.8 19.0 14.2 20.7 20.4 19.0 E 34.3 29.1 31.3 27.2 29.3 30.2 F 14.8 11.7 13.3 13.6 13.1 13.3 G 7.8 11.9 11.8 12.8 9.2 10.7 TOTAL HOURS 7725 7944 8361 7320 7537 The precipitation total for 1982 was 26.66 inches. This represents one of the lowest amounts ever from the Plant Hatch site. It may be indica-() tive of rain gauge problems that did not show up on the strip charts. Plant Hatch personnel have been requested to investigate this problem. A comparison of the data from Plant Hatch with other local National Weather Service sites will be made when the data becomes available. Pre-cipitation in the eastern U.S. was generally considered about normal during 1982. Normal annual precipitation for the Plant Hatch area would be about 45 inches. 2-2

TABLE 2.2-1 JOINT FREQUENCY TABLE OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION 150 FT. VERSUS DELTA TEMPERATURE 150-33 FT. (1/1/82 - 12/31/82) SITE: PLANT HATCH HOURS AT EACH UIND SPEED AND DIRECTION PERIOD OF RECORD = 82818181-82123124 STABILITY CLASS: A DT/DZ ELEVATION: SPEED: DIRECTION: LAPSE: UIND SPEED (IPH) UIND DIRECTION 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL N 1 13 11 5 8 8 38 NNE 1 9 14 4 0 8 28 NE 4 23 48 38 2 8 187 ENE 6 59 90 39 11 0 286 E 3 59 55 18 3 8 138 ESE 4 31 22 1 8 8 58 SE 3 18 21 4 8 8 46 SSE 3 17 18 5 1 8 36 S 1 18 18 2 1 2 34 Q SSU 5 13 28 18 8 1 57 SU 4 29 34 12 2 0 81 USU 1 32 44 28 8 8 185 U 3 41 58 38 9 4 145 IJIU 3 28 59 19 7 8 116 NU 1 12 7 16 4 1 41 NNU 8 18 7 11 0 8 28 TDTAL 43 484 518 234 48 8 1248 PERIODS OF CALM (HOURS): 19 UARIABLE DIRECTION 12 HOURS OF MISSING DATA: 1835 O 2-3

I TABLE 2.2-1 (CONTINUED) SITE: PLAMT HRTCH HOURS AT EACH UIND SPEED AND DIRECTION PERIOD OF RECORD = 82810181-82123124 STABILITY CLASS: B DT4Z ELEVATIDM: SPEED: DIRECTIDH: LAPSE: UIND SPEED (PFH) UIND DIRECTION 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL N 8 8 2 1 8 8 3 i NNE 1 1 3 2 8 8 7 NE 1 4 11 7 8 8 23 ENE 2 13 24 3 8 8 42 E 4 17 8 1 8 8 38 ESE 2 15 3 2 8 8 22 SE 2 6 7 2 8 8 17 SSE 1 2 4 1 8 8 8 S 8 6 4 1 2 8 13 O SSU 8 7. 11 3 8 1 22 SU 1 8 8 3 2 8 22 USU 8 8 13 4 8 1 26 U 1 8 11 6 1 8 27 LFfu 8 6 18 7 8 1 24 NU 2 1 6 2 8 8 11 NNU B 2 8 2 8 8 4 TOTAL 17 104 125 47 5 3 381 PERIDOS OF CALM (HOURS): 19 UARIABLE DIRECTION 1 HOURS OF MISSING DGTA: 1835 O 2-4

TABLE 2.2-1 (CONTINUED) O SITE: PLANT HATCH HOURS AT EACH UIND SPEED AND DIRECTION PERIOD OF RECORD = 82818181-82123124 STABILITY CLASS: C DT/DZ ELEURTION: SPEED: DIRECTION: LAPSE: UIND SPEED (PFH) UIND DIRECTION 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL N 8 1 8 8 8 8 1 NNE 8 2 2 1 8 8 5 NE 8 3 7 6 8 8 16 ENE 8 6 18 9 0 8 33 E 1 13 8 1 8 8 23 ESE 8 8 1 1 8 8 18 SE 1 4 3 1 8 8 9 SSE 8 3 3 8 8 8 6 S 2 4 4 2 8 8 12 SSU 1 1 6 1 4 1 14 J SW 1 8 5 2 8 8 16 USU 8 7 4 8 8 8 11 U 1 3 3 2 8 8 9 LFfu 8 4 2 1 8 1 8 NU 8 2 2 1 1 8 6 NNU 8 0 2 8 8 8 2 TOTAL 7 69 78 28 5 2 181 PERIODS OF CALM (HOURS): 19 URRIABLE DIRECTION 3 HOURS OF MISSING DATA: 1835 O 2-5

f TABLE 2.2-1 (CONTINUED) SI'IE: PLANT HATCH HOURS AT EACH UIND SPEED AND DIRECTION PERIOD OF RECORD = 82818181-82123124 STABILITY CLASS: D DT/DZ ELEURTION: SPEED: DIRECTION: LAPSE: UIND SPEED (PFH) UIND DIRECTION 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TUTAL N 8 6 17 6 8 8 29 NNE 3 8 16 8 8 8 35 NE 4 17 98 22 1 8 142 ENE 8 53 128 31 8 8 212 E 7 86 76 6 8 8 175 ESE 13 47 55 12 1 0 128 SE 8 39 41 14 8 8 182 SSE 9 31 28 18 8 8 78 S 6 34 37 8 1 8 86 O ssu 9 45. 4s ai i e iee SU 12 62 41 19 1 8 135 USU 5 46 45 13 2 8 111 U 5 28 57 15 8 8 185 IJiu 2 28 43 16 1 8 98 NU 2 0 17 19 3 8 41 NNU 8 7 3 18 8 8 28 TUTAL 93 537 732 238 11 8 1683 PERIODS OF CALM (HOURS): 19 URRIABLE DIRECTION 5 HOURS OF MISSING DATA: 1835 O 2-6 i

l I TABLE 2.2-1 (CONTINUED) SITE: PLANT HATCH HOURS AT EACH UIND SPEED AND DIRECTION PERIOD OF RECORD = 8281E181-82123124 STABILIT( CLASS: E DT/DZ ELEURTION: SPEED: DIRECTION: LAPSE: = UIND SPEED (IPH) UIND DIRECTION 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL N 3 8 17 5 0 0 33 NNE 8 12 37 28 8 8 69 NE 6 26 133 26 2 8 194 ENE 14 75 161 8 1 8 268 E 25 123 132 3 8 8 283 ESE 15 189 184 4 8 8 232 SE 28 99 143 6 8 8 268 SSE 28 84 81 3 8 8 188 S 14 56 87 12 8 8 169 O' SSU 15 59 122 18 8 8 214 SU 17 67 68 21 1 8 174 U5U 18 57 67 11 1 8 146 U 18 44 75 19 2 8 158 LFfu 2 25 76 19 8 8 122 NU 3 9 38 52 2 8 96 NNU 4 8 23 16 8 8 51 TUTAL 178 861 1356 243 9 8 2649 PERIODS DF CALM (HOURS): 19 UARIABLE DIRECTION 9 HOURS OF MISSING DATA: 1835

O l

2-7 l l

1 i TABLE 2.2-1 (CONTINUED) SITE: PLAMT HATG1 HOURS AT EACH UIND SPEED AND DIRECTION PERIOD OF RECORD = 82818101-82123124 STABILITY CLASS: F DT/DZ ELEVATION: SPEED: DIRECTION: LAPSE: UIND SPEED (PFH) UIND DIRECTION 1 -3 4-7 8-1P 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL N 5 4 13 2 8 8 24 NNE 8 12 12 5 8 8 29 NE 4 21 55 17 8 8 97 ENE 5 37 62 5 0 8 189 E-18 49 42 8 8 8 181 ESE 9 51 42 8 8 8 184 SE 14 51 36 8 8 8 101 SSE 5 42 34 3 1 8 85 S 17 32 27 3 8 8 79 Q' SSU 9 33 32 3 8 8 77 SU 18 31 37 7 8 8 85 USU 4 23 27 4 8 8 59 U 2 24 37 8 8 8 71 Lifu 5 8 33 3 8 8 49 NU 3 5 19 17 8 8 44 NNU 2 2 15 7 8 8 26 TOTAL 184 425 523 84 1 8 1140 PERIODS OF CALM (HOURS): 19 UARIABLE DIRECTION 3 HOURS OF MISSING DATA: 1835 O 2-8 ~ - -.

TABLE 2.2-1 (CONTINUED) SITE: PLANT HATCH HOURS AT EACH UIMD SPEED AND DIRECTIDN PERIOD OF RECURD '- 82818181-82123124 STABILITY CLASS: G DT/DZ t ELEURTION: SPEED: DIRECTION: LAPSE: UIND SPEEDCPPH) UIND DIRECTION 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TUTAL N 2 1 5 0 8 8 8 NNE 1 8 9 1 8 8 19 NE 4 21 56 28 8 8 181 ENE 9 16 27 3 8 8 55 E 8 14 38 1 8 6 53 ESE 1 21 18 1 8 8 42 SE 5 14 14 8 8 8 35 SSE 5 18 7 2 1 0 26 S 3 18 4 5 8 8 22 O SSu 5 i 3. 22 5 6 8 36 SM 2 28 17 2 8 8 41 USU 7 12 22 1 8 8 44 U 8 17 26 2 8 8 45 LifU 1 11 22 G B 8 48 l NW 1 6 9 9 8 8 25 NNU 8 1 7 3 8 8 11 TUTAL 54 195 285 68 1 8 683 PERIODS OF CALM (HOURS): 19 URRIABLE DIRECTIDH 4 HDURS OF MISSING DATA: 1835 l l O 2-9 l

TABLE 2.2-1 (CONTINUED) SITE: PLANT HATCH HOURS AT EACH UIND SPEED AND DIRECTION PERIOD OF RECORD = 82818101-82123124 STABILITY CLASS: ALL DT/DZ ELEVATION: SPEED: DIRECTION: LAPSE: WIND SPEED (tPH) UIND DIRECTION 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TUTAL N 11 33 65 19 8 8 128 NNE 6 52 93 41 8 8 192 NE 23 115 408 128 5 8 688 ENE 44 259 582 98 12 8 917 E 58 361 351 22 3 8 795 ESE 44 282 245 21 1 8 596 SE 53 231 265 27 8 8 578 SSE 43 189 159 24 3 8 419 S 43 152 181 33 4 2 415 O SSu 44 m e57 Gi 5 3 542 SU 47 225 218 66 6 8 554 USU 27 185 222 61 3 1 582 U 22 165 259 98 12 4 552 12tu 13 118 245 78 8 2 449 NW 12 35 98 116 18 1 264 NNU G 38 57 49 8 8 142 TUTAL 496 2595 3689 926 72 13 7725 PERIODS OF CALM (HOURS): 19 UARIABLE DIRECTION 37 i HOURS OF MISSING DATA: 1835 l O 2-10

l TABLE 2.2-2 JOINT FREQUENCY TABLE OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION 75 FT. VERSUS DELTA TEMPERATURE 150-33 FT. (1/1/82 - 12/31/82) SITE: PLANT llATCH [ HOURS AT EACH UIND SPEED AND DIRECTION l PERIDD OF RECORD = 8281D181-82123124 STABILITY CLASS: A DT/DZ ELEURTI0ti: SPEED: DIRECTI0ti: LAPSE: UIND SPEED (PFH) UIND DIRECTION 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL N 4 18 9 1 8 8 32 NNE 4 12 1 P_ 8 8 8 28 NE 8 35 35 13 8 8 92 l ENE 14 88 62 6 8 8 178 l E 35 84 48 3 8 8 162 ESE 18 42 28 1 8 8 73 SE 13 28 6 8 8 8 39 SSE 7 19 7 2 8 0 35 S 8 17 13 2 8 8 41 l O SSu 11 21 19 2 8 8 54 l SW 22 33 38 7 8 8 93 USU 28 58 41 2 8 8 121 W 21 67 74 11 1 8 175 LFlu 28 33 29 4 8 8 86 NU 13 16 23 6 8 8 58 NNU 5 6 7 8 8 8 18 TUTAL 215 569 427 63 1 0 1277 = PERIODS OF CALPt(HOURS): 78 URRIABLE DIRECTI0tl 24 HOURS OF MISSII!G DOTO: 11GG l I O 2-11 ..-. - _ =. -., _ - _ _ _ ~.

TABLE 2.2-2 (CONTINUED) SITE: PLANT HATCH HOURS AT EACH UIND SPEED AND DIRECTION PERIOD OF RECORD = 82818181-82123124 STABILITY CLASS: B DT/DZ ELEURTION: SPEED: DIRECTION: LAPSE: _ _ = -.- - - - - - -=_ UIND SPEED (!PH) UIND DIRECTION 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL N 8 8 1 1 8 8 2 NNE 8 1 2 1 8 8 4 NE 2 7 12 2 8 8 23 ENE 4 13 15 1 8 8 33 E 4 25 7 8 8 8 37 ESE 6 11-8 8 8 8 26 l SE 1 8 1 2 8-0 12 SSE 6 4 1 8 8 8 12 S 3 9 5 2 8 8 19 n v SSU 4 9 8 8 1 0 22 SU 1 11 9 2 1 8 24 USU 1 11 9 8 0 8 21 W 6 18 12 1 8 8 37 LitU 1 6 6 1 8 8 14 NW 2 1 2 1 8 8 6 NNU 8 3 1 8 8 8 4 TOTAL 41 137 99 14 2 0 296 l PERIODS OF CALMCHOURS): 78 l URRIABLE DIRECTION 1 HOURS OF MISSIIiG DATA: 1166 l l 1 O i 2-12

TABLE 2.2-2 (CONTINUED) SITE: PLANT HATCH HOURS AT EACH UIMD SPEED AND DIRECTION PERIOD OF RECORD = 82810181-82123124 STABILITY CLASS: C DT/DZ ELEVATION: SPEED: DIRECTION: LAPSE: UIND SPEEDUtif) UIND DIRECTION 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TUTAL N 8 1 1 8 8 8 2 NNE 8 1 2 8 8 8 3 NE B 4 12 1 8 8 17 ENE 1 13 14 8 8 8 28 E 9 6 6 8 8 8 23 ESE 1 11-1 8 8 8 13 SE 1 5 2 8 8 8 8 SSE 1 4 2 8 8 8 7 S 1 G 2 2 8 8 11 O SSU 3 5 4 4 1 8 17 SU 3 8 2 8 1 8 14 USU 2 8 3 8 8 8 13 U 4 5 3 8 8 8 12 IJiu 8 4 3 1 0 8 8 NU 8 2 1 8 8 8 3 NNU 1 8 8 8 8 8 1 TUTAL 27 83 58 8 2 0 188 PERIODS OF CALMul00RS): 78 VARIABLE DIRECTI0tt 8 HOURS OF MISSI!!G DATA: 11GG O 2-13 ~ ~

~ TABLE 2.2-2 (CONTINUED) t SITE: PLAMT HATCH HOURS AT EACH UIND SPEED AND DIRECTION PERIOD OF RECORD = 82818181-82123124 STABILITY CLASS: D DT/DZ ELEURTION: SPEED: DIRECTION: LAPSE: UIND SPEZ1)(PFH) UIND DIRECTION 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL N 3 6 9 2 8 8 21 NNE 2 18 18 6 8 8 44 NE 5 38 98 8 8 8 149 ENE 15 106 83 1 0 8 285 E 23 182 41 8 8 8 166 ESE 21 82-45 5 8 8 156 SE 19 46 22 1 8 8 98 SSE 14 47 3 1 8 8 67 S 17 54 19 4 8 8 95 Q SSU 12 66 39 8 8 8 125 SU 13 88 34 3 8 8 138 USU 13 88 27 2 8 8 122 U 18 55 29 1 8 8 95 LMU S 29 38 2 0 8 74 NU 4 12 18 18 1 8 45 NNU 8 5 8 8 8 8 13 TOTAL 1k6 826 531 54 1 8 1597 PERIDOS OF CALM (HOURS): 78 UARIABLE DIRECTION 5 HOURS OF MISSING ORTA: 1166 i O 2-14

TABLE 2.2-2 (CONTINUED) l SITE: PLANT HATCH HOURS AT EACH UIND SPEED AND DIRECTION PERIOD OF RECORD = 82818181-82123124 STABILITY CLASS: E DT/DZ ELEURTION: SPEED: DIRECTION: LAPSE: _==__--- l UIND SPEED (PFH) UIND DIRECTION 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL N 5 8 18 1 8 8 24 NNE 8 24 27 3 8 8 54 NE 14 67 131 5 0 8 218 ENE 60 178 54 8 8 8 285 E 58 163 44 8 8 8 266 ESE 31 196-37 8 8 8 266 SE 51 156 15 8 8 8 228 SSE 48 95 11 1 8 8 156 S 36 126 22 8 8 8 186-O SSu 38 12i 28 8 i 8 i8i SU 34 125 39 1 8 8 199 USU 19 187 19 8 8 8 146 U 11 89 44 1 8 8 145 LFiU 12 39 45 5 8 8 181 l NU 2 13 37 8 8 8 68 NNU 3 9 22 8 8 8 34 TOTAL 414 1588 585 25 1 0 2549 PERIODS OF CALPt(HOURS): 78 URRIABLE DIRECTION 18 HOURS OF MISSING DATA: 1166 O 2-15

TABLE 2.2-2 (CONTINUED) SITE: PLANT HATCH HOURS AT EACH UIND SPEED AND DIRECTION PERIOD OF RECORD = 82818181-82123124 STABILITY CLASS: F DT/DZ ELEURTION: SPEED: DIRECTION: LAPSE: UIND SPEED (PPH) UIND DIRECTION 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL = N 2 4 7 8 8 8 13 NNE 5 12 9 1 8 8 27 NE 4 22 52 4 8 8 82 ENE 38 74 14 1 8 8 128 E 41 79 3 8 8 8 124 ESE 38 72-2 8 8 8 112 SE 28 62 2 8 8 8 93 SSE 18 33 4 0 8 8 56 S 23 59 1 8 8 8 84 O SSu 19 68 to 8 8 8 98 SU 16 52 9 8 8 8 77 USU 12 47 0 1 8 8 68 U 8 35 13 1 8 8 57 IJiu 4 28 25 1 8 8 58 NU 6 18 22 1 8 8 39 NNU 7 3 5 8 8 8 15 TOTAL 269 644 178 18 8 8 1187 PERIODS OF CALMCHOURS): 78 URRIABLE DIRECTIDH 3 HOURS OF MISSING DATA: 1166 O 2-16

TABLE 2.2-2 (CONTINUED) SITE: PLAliT HATCH HOURS AT EACH UIND SPEED AND DIRECTION PERIOD OF RECORD = 82818181-82123124 STABILITY CLASS: G DT/DZ ELEURTION: SPEED: DIRECTION: LAPSE: i UIND SPEED (PFH) UIND DIRECTION 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TUTAL N 6 3 1 0 8 8 18 NNE 3 12 9 1 8 8 26 NE 12 25 35 3 8 8 76 ENE 13 58 6 8 8 8 78 E 19 44 4 8 8 8 72 ESE 18 22 1 8 8 8 34 SE 12 18 8 8 8 8 32 SSE 8 5 3 8 8 8 17 S 14 16 6 8 8 8 38 O SSu 7 et 2 8 8 8 32 SU 19 28 1 8 8 8 48 USU 15 21 8 1 8 8 37 i 1 U 17 22 7 1 8 8 47 Litu 8 13 8 1 8 8 30 NU 6 5 5 8 8 8 17 NNU 6 2 2 8 8 8 18 l TOTAL 175 299 98 7 8 8 588 ( PERIODS OF CALM (HOURS): 78 UARIABLE DIRECTION 2 HOURS OF MISSING DATA: 1156 O 2-17

TABLE 2.2-2 (CONTINUED) SITE: PLANT HATCH HOURS AT EACII UIND SPEED AND DIRECTION PERIOD OF RECORD = 82810181-82123124 STABILITY CLASS: ALL DT/DZ ELEWTION: SPEED: DIRECTION: LAPSE: UIND SPEED (PFH) UIND DIRECTION 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL N 28 48 38 5 0 8 184 NNE 14 88 79 12 8 8 186 NE 45 198 375 36 8 8 657 ENE 145 514 248 9 8 8 919 E 189 583 145 3 8 8 858 ESE 117 436 114 6 8 8 688 SE 125 315 48 3 8 8 582 SSE 182 287 31 4 8 8 358 S 182 287 68 18 8 8 474 O SSU 86 303 118 14 3 8 521 SU 188 329 124 13 2 8 577 USU 82 332 99 6 8 8 528 U 77 291 182 16 1 8 568 l 12iu 58 144 154 15 8 8 363 NU 33 59 188 26 1 0 228 l NNU 22 28 45 8 8 8 95 TIITAL 1317 4866 1968 178 7 8 7594 PERIODS OF CALM (HOURS): 78 WRIABLE DIRECTION 45 HOURS OF MISSING DATA: 1166 O 2-18

I i TABLE 2.2-3 PLANT HATCH 1982 MONTHLY AND ANNUAL PRECIPITATION Precipitation Month (inches) January 1.64 l February 2.29 I March 2.90 April 5.08 May 1.39 i June 2.97 I July 5.24 I August 0.74 September 0.25 October 0.25 i November 1.56 December 2.35 1982 TOTAL 26.66 l l l lO 2-19

TABLE 2.2-4 7-V RATCH DATA RECOVERY (1/1/82 - 12/31/82) Recovery Parameter (percent) Ambient Temperature 33 ft. 99.6 Delta Temperature 150-33 ft. 90.7 Dew Point Temperature 33 ft. 98.2 Wind Speed 75 ft. 98.0 Wind Direction 75 ft. 96.6 Wind Speed 150 f t. 99.2 Wind Direction 150 f t. 97.9 Solar Radiation 99.7 Rainfall 99.6 O'v' Composite Wind Speed and Direction 75 ft., Delta Temperature 150-33 ft. 86.7 l l Wind Speed and Direction 150 f t., l Delta Temperature 150-33 ft. 88.2 l l l l l O \\_s 2-20

O N / a = 3 lt t = WIND ROSE (WINDS FROM) N t O 4WIMD $ PEED LESS THAM 3.5 MPH , WIND SPEED IJss THAM 7.5 MPH i xWIND SPEED LESS THAM 12.5 MH ,WIMD SPEED QREATER THAM 12.5 MPH 0.3 PER0ENT CALMS (CALES DEF2NED As $ PEED LESS THA1 0.53 O GEO RGI A POWER COMPANY EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 150-F00T 1982 ANNUAL UIND ROSE j FIGURE 2.2-1

OV G 4 2 4 \\!! .I 4 4 4 WIND ROSE (WINDS FROM) H 4 WIND SPEED LESS THAN 3.5 MPH , WIND $ PEED LES8 THAN 7.5 MPH xWIND SPEED LESS THAN 12.5 MPH , WIND SPEED GREATER THAN 12.5 MPH 0.4 PERCENT CALMS (CALMS DEFINED AS SPEED LESS THAN 0.5 ) GEORGIA POWER COMPANY /T '~ EDWIN 1. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 150-F00T QUARTERLY WIND ROSE (1/1/82 - 3/31/82) FIGURE 2.2-2

O \\"/ = '40 WIND RCSE (WINDS FROM) N t l O n 4 WIND SPEED LEss THAN 3.5 MPH , WIND SPEED LESS THAN 7.5 PPH xWIMD SPEED LES$ TH4N 12.5 MPH eWIMD SPEED GREATER THAN 12.5 MPH 4.0 PERCENT CALMS (CALMS DEFINED as SPEED LEss THAN e.51 1 O GEORGIA POWER COMPANY EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 150-F00T QUARTERLY WIND ROSE (4/1/82 - 6/30/82) FIGURE 2.2-3

l O 5 4 2 4 l N 4 4 ^ WIND ROSE (WINDS FROM) M i n O 4 WIND $ PED LESS THAM 3.5 MPH , WIND SPEED LESS THAN 7.5 MPH xWIND SPEED LESS THm 12.5 MPH ,WIMO $ PEED GREATEA THAN 12.5 MPH 3.4 PER0!NT CALMS (CALMS CEFINED pg SPEED LESS THAN 0.51 O GEORGIA POWER COMPANY EDWIN 1. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT AN'4UAL REPORT 150-F00T QUARTERLY WIND ROSE (7/1/82 - 9/30/82) FIGURE 2.2-4

OO G t o 2 4 4 4 l 0 WIND ROSE l (WINDS FROM N n O 4 WIND $ PEED LESS THAN 3.5 MPH ,u1ND SPEED IISS TMN 7.5 MPH xWIND $ PEED LESS THAN 12.5 MPH , WIND $Pf1D 04 EATER THAN 12.5 MPH 0.1 PERCENT CALMS (CALP8 DEFINED A3 SPEED LESS THAN 8.5 ) l i '^ "'" C " "^ " Y O EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 150-F001 QUARTERLY WIND ROSE (10/1/82 - 12/31/82) FIGURE 2.2-5

i l O i l I 4 4 5 2 ~ WIND RCSE tu!NDS PROM) M 1 O l 4 WIND $ PEED LES$ THAN 3.5 MPH , WIND SPEED LESS THAN 7.5 MPH xWIND SPEED LEff THAN 12.5 MPH eWIND SPEED GREATER THAN 12.5 MPH 1.4 PERCENT CALMS (CALMS CEFINED AS SPEED LESS THAN 0.53 O GEORGIA POWER COMPANY EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 75-F00T 1982 ANNUAL WIND ROSE FIGURE 2.2-6

l O l 2 4 4 \\N g = i i O WIND ROSE (WINDS FROM) o N t i l O 4 WIND SPEED LESS THArt 3.5 MPH , WIND SPEED LIS$ THet 7.5 MPH xWIMD SPEED LESS THArt 12.5 MPH eWIND GPEED GREATER THAM 12.5 MPH 3.7 PERCENT CALPI (CALMS DEFINED As SPEED LEss THAN 0.53 i l l l i I O " * ' ^ " " ' " C " "^ " Y EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT t 75-F00T QUARTERLY WIND ROSE l (1/1/82 - 3/31/82) FIGURE 2.2-7

O E % y 4 UIND ROSE (WINDS FROM) M o O 1 l \\ n AWIND SPED LESS THAM 3.5 MPH , WIND $ PEED LESS THAN T.5 FPM xWIND 8P M D LE80 THAN 13.5 PrH , WIND 8 PEED GREATER TNAN 12.5 MPH 8.8 PERCENT CALMS (CALMS DEFINED AS SPEED LESS THAN 8.53 l l l 8' '^ " " ' " C " " * " ' O EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLA.T V j ANNUAL REPORT 75-F00T QUARTERLY WIND ROSE (4/1/82 - 6/30/82) FIGURE 2.2-8

O l l 6 4 2 4 i 4 4 1 i WIND ROSE (WINDS FRCM) ( N \\ t 15 l l (~)h 46!ND SPEED LESS THAN 3.5 MPH , WIND SPEED LIS$ THAN 7.5 MPH xWIND SPEED LLS$ THnN 13.E M9H , WIND $ PEED GatfATER THAN 12.5 MPH 0.3 PERCEh? CALMS (CALMS CEFINED As $ PEED LE85 THAN 0.53 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY s-) EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 75-F00T QUARTERLY WIND ROSE (7/1/82 - 9/30/82) FIGURE 2.2-9

O E E 2 2 N 4 WIND ROSE [ (WINDS FROM) N t 4 ' O l 4 WIND SPEED 1488 THAN 3.5 MPH , WIND $ PED LESS THAN 7.5 MPH xWIPS SPEED LEff THAN 13.5 MPH , WIND SPEED QREATER THAN 12.5 m s.4 PEA 0ENT CALMS (CALPs CEF:NED as SPEED LESS THAN e.5 3 GEORGIA POWER COM PANY EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 75-F00T QUARTERLY WIND ROSE (10/1/82 - 12/31/82) FIGURE 2.2-10

/% I ) %d ._ -. a r-- - f - __ ;.-. -. w - _ T-- r-d _--: = --t 100 _ _ Z -~ __ i ~-~. _-~_-._~ Z d '~~ _ _ Z . _. ~ _ _.. ._._._1 [ 5$% s- - M_ - 80 .___.-__.._.._l---.:-x._.__.-.-- ._..w_ p -- .g .-- _/- f , W 5_: '.'n 70_ _. _ - .-1_- gf _ gg .~ g f. _m r Maximu::1:. / x / .-__z____.._-;__ .' s, , _a 60 - _ _ _ _ - i_.. _.g,_.. - - - f-m.-+_. i__A r_,= , s _. _%- ~V' gy,r,9,=r P 50. '_,. _, _ -. _, ~. _. - -. ~ _ ~ ' ' ~. ~ _ _ ' - _ - _ _ ' _ ^ _ ~ ~ ~ O. E _-- A :----- - - t __.._._.f p_--__7g' ~ ~! Minimum E.. g____. .._ ;_ y. p ._-.--_3___ __i_=_:_=~.t===:=-=--.___..__.._,__. _.. _ _ _, _ _... _ - ,_ /_ __ j %J

=

u---

1,

m__ - -

-- G -1 ____. _. _I

. { ;__.,_ _. _.._. _ c-l.. _ _ __. _ I _ _..._ i =_ l==#I= =- 9.E SG.I ~ ~~ t =4 rZC-- 30

._m 20

. __'r l= ; .Tf : ---@.; , _...__6._ l ~ ~_ p_ f-1_. _ 7 2;=i:.7- _. _ i_

F L 6 2-l= '..J F Ci. _. _. _.. _._ _.... __. ! Z

___._. _, _. _ _.

-c-j E M ZT;"- = -W ^-i. __Q--]- l += j = T-? T =:== = T'- ^=:Tb-- - --MEi~=- --t- -M 7--- 10 3 _: - : - -. - n _._= =.._. =. l _ - _ g- ._-r-. _;_.___ _,.____.: _,y _ _. --..___l___.___-------t-------- "i.I_~_3fEC: j =-$EE-J.._ ~i ~ } '.E- $ i T-lirr -== :-- -~- } = = = = f === --,-- Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec GEORGIA POWER COMPANY /'N k. EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL REPORT 1982 AMBIENT TEMPERATURES FIGURE 2.2-11

O t. I % s' i-- t._ _. _.. --t--t-..___._. t : =,- _. _=-.--.__y_- & "- = -55r_ j- _ l_ ] _=_. _.-- __. r" 100 ' - - ~ -~ t _.:__.. 90 --~~N._Z--'~~i'~'-'"-----~-

=

80 t__t__.__. L-_ - - _M _.

_.'s 70

.rs . _ -- --,r.Nf.- f,&f y 60 ___4 2Y27"-CE .__:Ni_1_. _m.r_ ,p/. r -._. s_.g._y_ t_ -. m

1. --'~~

- ' - ' ~ " - - '& :---iMaximum E 2__- OF 50 . -_ ' - -- ~'-- ' - ~ --* 4.' ', Ave r a 9 e E_ 'E r - - - - 1 r _ ;~ _ 7 - - -,*-- - 7._.. - %- re _.___._.____._.../ b..A _._ Y-i__ .-l___._ r E N T..C bh h 40 \\ f

- r g_~_ y t._. _ _. _. _. _,1-t - -- t : t - ar- - I _.. __..------[_..-___-_ -Minimum I 1

v __-._s ~-- t I_____. I ----- - --r -- ~ s"r.-l n : _ - -l =. _ -- -i - _'._ 7_- 30

. -:--

=~i_._. = --- t-----.--I 2: .1__,.____ 1___.____ __Q.__. }.5 : l== 2ur;_-i= }5.i!_-Q _ -~ T. ~== 2i-7 =- 20 ~55$-Ml=-55 N !-# l=i -M-: I;r?t@f C--'+ Z-iki l = 2.---- i - _ n_ _ h _..__ F r - ~ f. :---lE := FIE l'. ' - j_... . __ _ l _g4 g_, 2 10 = --L--g-d- ; -j '- _ _ ..! ~fi_ ?- . {. -i I-r -. - {.9. - " - "- ~ --_ _ _ ' ' - - . _..F_-_ .T_.. _ _ 2 0 ~ ~ ' - ~ ~ Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec GEO RGI A POWER COMPANY A EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT (,i ANNUAL REPORT 1982 DEW POINT TEMPERATURES' FIGURE 2.2-12 t

O HNP ANNUAL REPORT CHAPTER 3 AD:11NISTRATIVE CONTROLS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 3.1 SPECIFICATIONS 3-1 3.2 DISCUSSION 3-1 O O 3-1

~. 1 d HNP s/ ANNUAL REPORT 3. ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS J 3.1 Specification In accordance with Section 5.7.1 of the HNP-ETS, Units 1 and 2, the HNP Annual Environmental Surveillance Report will include a summary of all instances of Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS) noncom-pliances and corrective action taken, changes in federal and state permits and certificates, changes in the Environmental Program Descrip-tion Document (EPDD), changes in station design or operation which I could involve an environmental impact, changes made to the ETS, and l copies of all reports regarding station discharges made in accordance with NPDES Permit No. GA-0004120. 3.2 Discussion In accordance with HNP-ETS Section 5.3.2.2, audits of facility activities shall be performed at least once a year under the cognizance of the Safety Review Board (SRB) to ensure conformance of facility operation to all provisions of the ETS. Contrary to the above, audits of consultant i' analytical programs were not performed in 1980, 1981, and 1982 through December 6, 1982. In a letter dated December 27, 1982, NRC Region II outlined the findings of the NRC routine safety inspection conducted on November 30 and December i 6, 1982. The letter included a Notice of Violation for failure to comply l with HNP-ETS 5. 3.2.2 and a Notice of Deviation for deviation from commit-ments to the NRC. i Georgia Power Company submitted a written statement in reply to the NRC i Region II in a letter dated January 31, 1983. GPC stated that QA audits j for the three vendors conducting ant.lytical analysis for the environmental program had been changed to specifically call out these audits on an annual basis. Full compliance would be achieved with the completion of vendor audits by February 28, 1983. The problem of failure to implement an iden-tified commitment through full completion had been resolved by the develop-ment and staffing of the Regulatory Compliance Department at Plant Hatch. Audits of the three vendors conducting analytical analysis for the l environmental program at Plant Hatch were completed January 20, 1983. The t Regulatory Compliance Department at Plant Hatch has been functioning since February, 1983. l l Pursuant to the Georgia Water Quality Control Act and Federal Water l Pollution Control Act, the Georgia Department of Natural Resources issued i a Naticnal Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for Plant Edwin I. Hatch. The effective date of the permit is December 30, 1982, and shall expire December 5,1987. O 3-1

(O Pursuant to HNP-ETS 5.2, Georgia Power Company notified the NRC of a %/ change in Company organization as depicted in HNP-ETS Figure 5.2-1 in a letter dated March 12, 1982. There were no changes in station design 3r operation in 19S2 which could involve an environmental effect. Copies of all reports regarding station discharges made in accordance wit.In NPDES Permit No. GA-0004120 are included in Appendix A. (O l I l l l i O 3-2

.m___.. l HNP ANNUAL REPORT l a 1 l + l t I i I.. I I I i i l i l I l Appendix A NPDES Operation Monitoring Reports l j Plant Edwin I. Hatch j 1982 l l { l i i i I l l l I l l I i

f~ f Pi \\ s; 1,o p e , - +. O V h ta p: Power po=, seo a noin ..o r. 3, = 3..

a April 15, 1982 Mr. Gene B. Welsh, Chief Water Protection Branch Environmental Protection Division 270 Washington Street, S.W.

Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Re: Plant Arkwright NPDES Permit No. GA 0026069 Plant Bowen NPDES Perdit No. GA 0001449 Plant Branch NPDES Permit No. GA 0026051 Plant Hammond NPDES Permit No. GA 0001457 Plant Hatch NPDES Permit No. GA 0004120 Plant McDonough-Atkinson NPDES Permit No. GA 0001431 Plant McManus NPDES Permit No. GA 0003794 Plant Mitchell NPDES Permit No. GA 0001465 73 Plant Wansley NPDES Permit No. GA 0026778 (_) Plant Yates NPDES Permit No. GA 0001473

Dear Mr. Welsh:

As required by the above ref erenced NPDES Permits, we hereby submit the Operation Monitoring Reports for each of the corresponding power plants for the quarter ending March 31, 1982. If you have any questions or comments, please advise. Sincerely, l JW T. E. Byerley Manager of Environnental Affairs CHH:bjk Attachments bc: With Attachments 7-_ N~,) l W.O. Simmons l R. H. Bo hler File: EV925-022 E

O- ~~ 1-yt As NxLY ult.h!,TIO:: :M:::T0!; ::C REPORT Ceo rs;ia Pos.e r Co. pan Frca 01-01-82 Plant ilatch 70 03-31-82 P.O. ba.x 454) Atlant.1, (;<urgta '.' n ? Termic :.unner. OJU-120 1 Di s c h a r;;c Location 03'h - Cooling Tower Blowdown I Frequencv of Analysis. 1/wk. Location: Intake 5tixing Zone Tower Type of Sample : In Situ In Situ Crab Pa ram.e t e r ; Temperature Temperature Chlorine -. -.M OF F mr/l Cl: ,a Limits: H of 5 -s aT of 50 Avg. 0.2 ~ ? > ax. 90' Max. 900 F:ax. C.5 Date 01-04-82 3 2 01-11-82 33 33 01-20-82 37 37 01-27-82 36 35 02-04-82 43 43 02-10-82 46 46 02-18-82 47 47 02-23-82 48 48 m 03-03-82 45 45 03-10-82 48 48 03-19-d2 35 85 03-24-82 70 70 Number of Sa=ples: 11 11 Maximum Value: 85 85 Mini..us value: 33 35 Limits Exceeded: O f

otes

1) No river survey taken week of 01-04-82.

2) !;PCES regulaticas no longer require reporting of this discharge.

he a ._ : J. l "d + l m 3 M , ar1: ~w 4 -r v

g.,,

Pm, _ 2 of 3 QU,mTERLY Ol'ERATI. MO:: T'M I:,( REl'0:iT Ceorgia Power Ccmpany From: 01-01-82 Plant Hatch To: a3-31 e2 P.O. Bov 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Permit lJumber: 0004120 Discharge Location- 001^3 - Law Vo lume '.ia a t e (neutralization tank Type of Sample: Grab Frequency of Analysis: 2/mo Parameter: Suspended Solids Oil & Grease mg/l m2/1 Limits: Avg. 30 Avg. 15 Max. 100 Max. 20 Date 01-03-82 0.6 <5 01-19-S2 0.3 <5 02-01-32 0.1 <5 02-15-82 0.4 <5 03-01-82 0.1 <5 03-15-82 3.9 <5 Number of Samples: 6 6 Average Value: 0.9 <5 Maximum Value: 3.9 <5 Minimum Value: 0.1 <5 i L1=its Exceeded: 0 0 l 1 i i t ,h.F f . :s. 5 a. ,.s E.

.'a., e 1 of 3 QL'/aTJRLY Of'CLiT1 L "'H'!!GR IZ RE!' ORT Georgia Power Company Frei: it-at-a2 Plant Hatch To: M-31-82 P.O. Ecx 454; Atlanta. Geo r ;ia 30302 Permit tiumb e r : 00041 0 Discharge Location: 001A, - Low Wlume Lste (pressure filter bachwash) Type of Sample. Crab Frequency of Analysis : 1/Qtr. i l Parameter: Suspended Solids Oil & Grease ec/l mc/l -~ m . _.4 Limits: Avg. 30 Avg. 15 Max. 100 Max. 20 Location Date Filter A 02-01-82 0.4 <5 Filter B 02-01-82 4.4 <5 Filter C 02-01-82 8.2 <5 Filter 3 02-01-82 4.6 <5 l Number of Sa:tples: 4 4 Average Value: 4.4 <5 Maxir.um Value: 8.2 <5 Mini =um Value: 0.4 <5 L1=its Exceeded: 0 0 e q we w =7 + go mk y.i trJ l y .Y.- O ik. -.w*ff 4 mw .%F -a) Wr 3 k* ~

t F k Pue. et s Qt:Ai;TLRLY Ol'LIG\\ TIC:. !L::I To.. ::G ::Li ORT Ceorgia Power Company l' r o"i. CI-.;-62 Plant Hatch Te-o ]- n-3 P.O. Uc x !. 5 '. 5 Atlanta, Georgia JJJul P e rr'i t :;ur.b e r : 0004120 Diacharge Location: 001C - Se-age Treatt:en:. Plant Type o f San:ple : Grab l Frequency of Analysis. 2/yr. Parameter: Suspended Solids 5-Dav B00 Free Chlorine n'g / l rO/1 j Limits: Avg. 30 Avg. 30 - mg/l C1, 4-Max. 45 Max. 45 . [-j Date 01-25-32 6.4 3 t,; Li.~iits E:cceeded: 0 0 1, f l WemE ~ a.'. mean .. a, .e m-N,..., y -x tes [",' -?_ m Wd s :, .j"e a a

Pau 5 af S QL'\\RTERLY OPr.RATIU:1 MO::IT0nI:.0 REl' ORT Georgia Power Company F r era 01-01-42 Plant Hatch Tu. 03-31-C P.O. Box 4545 Atlanta. Georgia 30302 Pe rc.i t Number: 0004120 Discharge Lacstion: 001D4-Liquid Radwaste System (Unit 1) Type of Sample: Grab Frequency of Analysis: 2/mo. Parameter: Suspended Solids Oil & Grease pH ma/l me/l M Units Limits: Avg. 30 Avg. 15 Max. 100 Max. 20 Date 01-04-82 0.75 6.1 6.8 01-18-32 16.3 2.1 5.3 02-01-82 8.5 3.5 6.0 02-15-32 0.5 1.1 6.7 03-02-82 3.3 12.0 7.4 03-15-32 3.1 0.3 7.6 Number of Samplos: 6 6 6 Average Value-6.3 4.2 Maximum Value: 16.8 12.0 7.6 Minimum value: 0.5 0.3 5.8 Limits Exceeded: 0 0 t 1 l t t

P 2.,c o i.i Qu AKTL.<LY Ol'ER.iTI::C ::0::ITuRI::C Ei"JRT i l' Geor;;ia Power Conp.m F r -.: y t.,n.3; Plant Hatch To 03-31-82 P.O. Box !.545 Atlanta, Georgia 30J02 Permit :iumb e r - 00041:0 n -c Discharge Location: 001D - Liquid Radwaste System (Unit II) ft Type of Sample: Grab .iT Frequency of Analysis: 2/mo. s .r= f^ Parameter: Suspended Solids Oil & Grease pli ar/1 mg/l Limits. Avg. 30 Avg. 15_ pH Units Max. 100 Max. 20 Date i 01-06-32 1.4 0.02 5.4 01-13-82 4.3 2.3 5.2 f 02-02-82 4.5 7.0 6.7 02-15-32 0.9 0.2 7.0 a 03-01-82 1.6 0.6 7.5 03-15-32 1.4 0.4 7.2 Number of Samples: 6 6 6 Average Value: 2.4 1.8 Maximum Value: 4.3 7.0 7.5 Minir.um Value : 0.9 0.2 5.2 L1=its Exceeded: 0 0 t t [ L \\ l l l \\

'f i L ~1 i's % .s l QUARTERLY OPERAT U: "u::ITORING REPO:ti Georgia Power Con:pany troa: c1-01-82 Plant Hatch io. 23-31-62 P.u. Box 454) Atlanta. Georgia 3 0 R.' Permit N uznb e r. 0004120 Discharge Location: 001E - Combined i'lant W.iste (Unit I) i Frequency of Analysis: 1/wk. Type of Sample: In Situ Grab Grab Average Free Parameter: Temperature Chlorine pH Limits: ~ 'F mc/l Clr pH Units Min. 6.0 Max. 9.0 Date 01-07-82 6.8 01-08-82 54 <0.1 01-13-82 46 <0.1 6.5 01-20-82 44 <0.1 6.9 01-27-82 48 <0.1 6.0 02-04-32 52 <0.1 6.8 02-10-82 60 <0.1 6.1 02-18-82 58 <0.1 6.8 02-24-82 69 <0.1 6.9 03-02-92 62 03-05-32 <0.1 7.0 03-10-32 73 <0.1 7.1 03-19-82 80 <0.1 7.3 03-24-62 79 <0.1 7.5 Number of Samples: 12 12 12 Average Value: Maximum Value: 80 <0.1 7.5 Minimum Value: 44 <0.1 6.0 Limits Exceeded: 0

• $s_

E. cs-1 h-l l l 1 l

.w ..U i L' r-L 6 QUAn ,LY uPE:GT10:1 ::0: 1TO:. ::G URT Ceorgia Power Company From. %-01-82 Plant Hatch To. 03-31-32 ~g P.O. Isox 454) Atianta, Georgia 30302 Permit :;unbe r : OC04120 Discharge Location: 001C - Combined Plant Waste (Unit II) 2 Frequency of Analysis. 1/wk. Type of Samples: In Situ Grab Grab Parameter: Temperature Average Free pH Chlorine 'F mz/l Cl-cH Units Limits: fun. 6.0 Max. 9.0 Date 01-07-82 6.4 01-08-82 63 < 0.1 01-13-82 50 < J.1 6.4 01-20-82 46 < 0.1 7.0 01-27-82 49 < 0.1 6.1 02-04-82 64 <0.1 6.2 = 02-10-82 54 < 0.1 6.3 02-18-82 56 < 0.1 6.8 02-24-82 63 < 0.1 6.8 03-02-82 52 03-05-82 < 0.1 6.8 03-10-82 58 < 3.1 6.7 03-19-82 71 < 0.1 6.7 03-24-82 68 < 0.1 6.S Number of Samples 12 12 12 Average Value: Maximum Value: 71 <0.1 7,o fp;> Mini =um Value: 46 < 0.1 6.1 }, 1.1=its Exceeded: o e I certify that I am familiar with the inf or ation contained in this report and that to C the best of my knowledge and belief such informatien is true, complete, and accurate. / T. C. Byerley P.anager of Environ ental Affairs I April 15. 1932 i g;. JBS:mja R l l l i

. ~. - .. ~. - - -.. -. =.. _ -.. - -. -. _.. - e_. I ? 1 r t 1 O c i \\ ATTACIDIENT Ceorgin Power Ce pany Plant Hatch E I i t i 4 i o The following six (6) pages contain i chlorination data for the cooling tower blowdowns at Plant Hatch. [ 9 i l + [ i l l l l l l L 9 { WWWW ~~..m^ ~"" * " '- -- ---.e e. meM+ Tem he tw eewewe eerver m e m m m er 'sm ew ="MwwwT-*=weTw ee m w wmum-w e e-e e -'w ew me mF re--%'W

1 1 .. h rG n. ;,- e J ) M. Y t c; s j i i i 9 i i 1 1 1 r d i l ( 4 i 6 j 4 i l CIRC WATER C11LORINATIOf! DATA j E i CATA S11EET 1 1 UNIT 1:03 WEEKLY ( - --=- I i CllLORINATORS DIOTREt3D Cl2 _= - -- _==_____-_ = _.:. DATE FREQUE::CY CLp It: JECT t:0. 1 1:0. 2 UErORE AFTER FREE reg /l* DISCifARGE INITIALS =_=- "o_', O CYCLE / DAY !!IN/ CYCLE ' f/24 !!a 1/24 IIR TI:-:C TI:1C AVG. MAX ' !!OUR/ DAY .. a%.. i.___._______)__._A_ _ _(f_ _ __ ~ h,,3 m .N_t___L_ .f.u sL_ ~ f _1___ .________.__I..t_ _ _ _ _ _.0_ _ $_ _ __l '_/_ _( ^1 t a m u / r f.s. s._~_-r_.. _ _ ~ _ _ _ _7_y(, t.n >g .) ' p' L ~~~ '__ f.L,__ sf l'__._.'. O , /_ ?h____.*_%^=_~~~~~~~~ ^ I* s s _ -- i 5 0 (.J L 7 1,0._1___=_2________..______-Q:.(_ _ _,_. _ e_, _ .__(_ _W_ _ _ _, ' " _ _. '. ' ' ., y;'__p_ - - + _._9_ _ _: p n-

• nl,

_-._c_._._ = = - - - o ._L u___ l% Mm_ ._______-=__m __7 ____ h '. _=_ _J _.,. f l.1; .h., p___ ./ ._ ___- :_w ~ "W l w ,h.: -= I' ____- = =- e 2 1, . =________________.________.________ I lit:IT 0.20 0.50 2 Ita/ DAY i s l g ~ l* !!EASURED AT TOWER OVERFLOff DURIt:G CIILORINATION CYCLE f m h.. I t -J O 1 o I I m i i I g <. l g l l. i 4, W l l

• =

o tn e i i l I d

e

i i, e Os"o

3*. ju~~

,,f

.,,5 4

y gg> 5 G.0 r .m g,4s t

• Um" ~ -

k u ,.w % n.* p, p m E -N * /

1. [c p '.

l O i . Q $'__$"__'d______ f s_ 9N q' L_ A_ gv H.Y___5'_s__ I T_ W,d a u0 I _ l Y._

• s.,_ E_.

N_ I _ Y_ M' 4 h u:

m. d., d^

E_ _Y_>__ b c n A-f c_A = D- / a_D _ R _. !' k,__. _ 2 aM C__ _ R __ o. u C_/_ r _ _M,. e I U _ t c I

c. $c s_O_

/ __ E _ I D_H_ 0 /, i d. hftbf 1 1 _ 0 _ c _ / _'X _ a, _ N'ra__ I m (R T 2_i_ 5 '( c l _ A._ h._ I j g-A _ _ 0 _ IR - eM_ ^ i i

2.._

N hC t _ 0 c _ / s,._ =_ E_G_ . ~ __ ~._ a_ _ 0_ 4 E_V _ / A n T _ F_A_ 4 h~. 4 A _ _ ~~_ '_ m____ D I R_ _ ~ ' _ ' E_C_ N 4 1 O I _D_T_t A._ T _ y_.._. _ T ,j - I F_I T l _ :t - M g A _ E_ _ I L N T _ R_ ~_ p__ _ L C

e. _

T_ I E _ o_E_E_' ~ Y n E a_ o !l _._._ '7/_ C _ i _ o _ 't _._ V, ~ i S t n_r_I _U_T _$'_ v_ /_ _E 1 l O C A + I T T R A E D _ R _ A '). r_ N _E __ N_ 'L f I T _I s_2 I A _ lf_ A_ l42_ / R n _ o. _ 4 . W T_N_/_ _L L I. I O o _ 2 ._A C H R _1 A_ y C I _ R _' /L_ / __ _6_ C G !'i_/v._.d'__w a_ _o_1_H i_ t I _L_ R __f ._4 1 _ V_ i' 1 s_2 U C_o_/_ D _t W O _T L r _ C __ E _ R E_L E J_C_ = V Y _. O.0__

t O

I _ C_ f_ 2_ / _ _ l R L_l 1 E. _C_I W t O Y_ T L Y_Y_ x-T K ._ C_A_ E

• t

= A E _ D _ E_/_ W 4 __ D U_E E Q L _

_ G __ b

R E_C _ U R _ Y _ S F_C_ A ?__ E M _E_ _h_ _ W}/, ! h]_., T_ A_ D_ ',I m 9O n n7$ g '.i m 7 ' ^ i ' . s .h{ [... " .g*, . i i : 3t>.e I:. t, ? l:; ,8s ): i 3. .y. 4 ,h 4'; ,]j A), .;], 1 i!a1 ,.:i' .4t.

l!li

,,}4 O_!_ _ . _d.. L _ _...d J_..A _ _ .._ A V, //....G_

• ! i.i w

2-1.3 o - jl/L.d /g-- -- hf/I

• G' t #1 rn

~~~~~ A 8 Q Cid C.I .-_.I 4 7 m p 0 fi Si 3 p----~~ -e ~~~-- ta I s 1 t 1 ,m t ) .r 6 LIMIT 0.20 0.50 2 IIR/ DAY t.. j j e M l } l M r l 14EASURED AT TOWER OVERFLOW DURIt:G CilLORIt!ATIO:1 CYCLE J I

• G 2

l. t-C\\ I l o* t .I .i.. I [ m. w I 1 o vi + l' = ,i t p i ,..... s..... ..+ .a :..,......

O l CIRC MATER CIILORiflATIOtl DATA DATA S!!EET 1 WEEKLY tR1IT !!O: r Ci!LORItiATORS DIOTRE!!D Cl __________2____________ c ______2________.____ cATE rREoUE!:CY CL 1:0. 1 1:0. 2 UEFORE AFTER FREE rr.9/l* DISCITARGE IllITIALS . _ _ _2_ _I t:J E CT CYCLE / DAY lif t!/ CYCLE I/24 !!R 1/24 1(R TIME tit 4E AVG. MAX IlOUR/ DAY ^P .o p, y -.T_5_ U_ _ ..____'3____. -]_D______._%_/_Of")_ _ _ ~ . _ _d

• l_ _..

._ dei ___.._N_ _/_l _ _A_sp_ _. _ _A_tf_ _ _ _ _ __ _T*v_ _ _ _ _ _ _ c 'O / y

, n

'*f c*l ~6 f - L -- - juf------ - * /)- - - - _ - - - tn *:* . W b-A) --- [> y,-- A'1 mo -- L7-to $) - (Yo d I

• I O
• II *r
• i Y

_,p-_--._J Q'._ . _ _/_/ _ _ _ _ _. _N__'_______ "o 5 E _ _ /3 t

vi

---__o,-.___r_--_-_----.---_'._G_-____ -_-__- /- -~_-__ ___ 19

• 3 O

>t- . _ _ - _ _ _ - _ ~ _. .J_t.,------_- p gn ta

• H

-m =. - = - - - - _ _ ___________ LIMIT 0.20 0.50 2 IIR/ DAY 7.:. __________________=---- _. 'o I

• MEASURED AT TOWER OVERFLOW DURIt:G CIILORIliATIOtt CYCLE chJ Qbt g.,

legi~f,2A) Y.DCJ hWn W Y$ tJodite(> n l

rs 0

l rn B l I i,.-.-..... -W--.=1*'- p.

.w-% ~ k. ,b ~m f I CIRC WATER CllLOR,I!J ATIOff DATA DATA SilEET 1 3 IRIIT 1:0: WEEKLY O M C1'LORIll ATORS DIOTPEt:0 Cl2 n CL It1 JECT t:0 1 ! 0, 2 BEFORE AFTER FREE rng/l

• DISC!!APGE I!!!TI ALS DATE FREQUCtlCY

.._2_______- -- __.____._____-__. _ _ _ _ _.. _______. tJ tit C TIttC AVG. 1-1AX ILOUR/ DAY CYCLE / DAY 1:I!!/ CYCLE t /2 4 IIR 1/24 IIR.. _ _ _ _ ' _ _ _ t.3,,P .v,' .b, >3 ___u_____ 4./ 4./ I.5 TL ,o ( cc y M_ _ _. _ _. - _3_ _ _ _ _ _ _1 f() -y . _.,_c_ _ _ _ _ .,,_ y _ _l _ _S_ - _f_n__l _/ (_ K m3 in _'! D_ _ _i _ _____0_---__ 6EC .e, r r_ _ _ _ _ OWX: (Ti tB <1 41__- 3_ 1_0_ 3 3 o 3 1 Y..._____A______ _ _ _ _$_ _0 _ _ _ . M_ _ _M_ c_ _l.F. _ _ _ _ _ ._0_$_ _M_ _ _ ._6_ _t _in_ _ .b_I_ __ \\ _ _ I.. . _ _ _ _l_. _5_ _ _.. .I_: /!!_. _ _ _ "2 :', I u t1 - <.. I _ _ - _ _ _/_. _n_ _.. ._q 0 s.'5k. ~ .-_c_____ .._S_i o u-_-__ . _ _k_ _ _ _____S______._ __3 D ?) (( y o F-' f m r ____-__-_______.__-_ _= 0.20 0.50 2 IIR/ DAY lit!!T

3

• u

[ tiEASURED AT TOWER OVERFLO;l DURItiG CitLORI ATIO!! CYCLE t -1 C\\ O ci I = s I \\ 1 t N I C) p w I I e

/~, -,~ / [ ,V .l i w* ,%u/ .*vM o l I F I CIRC UATER CIILOM11 ATIO 3 t' ATA CATA Sl!ECT 1 l I intIT !!O: I nEExtY O,., _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ -. _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _.. _ _ _ _ _ - W Cl! LORI!J7sT0as BIOTPEtia C12 O I I!!ITI ALS DATE FRCO'J E:;CY CLp IliJECT 1:0. 1 1:0. 2 UEFORE AFTER FREE rr.9/l* DISCHAEGE j d CYCLE / DAY 1:I!;/ CYCLE 1/24 IIR i/24 !!R TITE TI!!E AVG.

AX llOUR/ DAY

^ p;. -~ a, g t 7 p, e j y c, # .n. -- _ _. g 5 - m p D e~.--.___- M 4 al :l'i ! t U) > a l t, j(0 O ~.. O

c. -

i /- - - - _ _. 3, _/ O_. -\\-_______ 10 ~ $0C ~ ^ > j% D,1 5. l u u ~ j -3 /d ( ___-___L_.- d] o g', 3g, _7-[_ _ _ ( _ g)() { - y/ q 8 p v u j q . k s t : l. ) I, i LIttIT 0.20 0.50 2 IIR/ DAY s b .'w4 I "F # l !!ET.SURED AT TOWER OVERFLOU CURItIG C11LORIt!ATIO:t CYCLE N l l l [ n c, r l e O { 5 i es s { g I 4 s 8 1 y g I., O vi a O I o e

• *.. _.s J.

.s w-e. e.

T. a =\\ ,'. s r ( { e /L v k iCi N sl Power Power Supdf Engineerirg ana services .Tuly 15, 1982 Mr. Gene B. Welsh, Chief Water Protection Branch Environmental Protection Division 270 Washington Street, S.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Re: Plant Arkwright NPDES Permit No. GA 0026069 Plant Bowen NPDES Permit No. GA 0001449 Plant Branch NPDES Permit No. GA 0026051 Plant Hammond NPDES Permit No. GA 0001457 Plant Ha tch NPDES Permit No. CA 0004120 Plant McDonough-Atkinson NFLES Permit No. GA 0001431 Plant McManus NPDES Permit No. GA 0003794 Plant Mitchell NPDES Permit No. GA 0001465 Wallace Dam NPDES Permit No. GA 0035581 (~~') Plant Wansley NPDES Permit No. GA 0026778 Plant Yates NPDES Permit No. GA 0001473

Dear Mr. Welsh:

As required by the above referenced NPDES Permits, we hereby submit the Operation Monitoring Reports for each of the corresponding powe'r plants for the quarter ending June 30, 1982. If you have any questions or comments, please advise. Sincerely, T.E.B[erley Manager of Environmental Affairs CHH:bjk Attachments bc: With Attachments 7.s W. O. Simmons R. H. Bohler File: EV925-022[, , ., m a-

P3;e 1 of ;

y. /s.,

.Y s'! :..uT I o N % :. ; ! A...';G .W CRT iIem 3 '.1 - : Georgio Pow t C v: 1;.ns To ,.n..7 Plant Ha t e ti Z< P.d< P O. box. 5 i. 5 Perr.it N icr-00',120 Y'j AtIanta. Georgia 30 a; Discharge tw ation. 001A - 1.cw W la.e 'n'aste (n c u t ra li;:e t t en t an, 4-Type of Sample Greb Fr=quency of Analysis. 2/mo Pa r an.s t e r - Suspended Solids 011 & Crease ec/1 re el Limith. Avg. 30 Avg. 15 Max. 100 Max. 20 Date C4-05-32 0,: 2 < <j 04 19-82 5.4 05-04-E2 3.6 05-17-82 2.5 7 C5-07-32 1,1 ,5 s5 05-22-82 0.2 e Namber of Sarples: 6 5 'o Average Value: 2.2 I Ma xi-:;m Val u e : 5.4 Minimum Value: 0.2 <5 Limits Exceeded: O c 4

• W

~ W Dg

~.1 1& Pa;e Of t Q"ARTEF.LY CFEFaT*C!: M0!;; TOR;!0 FIFCFT e' ~ Geercia Power Company Fr0m 04 ^1 -E ? b-T-Plant Hatch To 05-20 52 P.O. Box 45-5 Atlanta. Gecrgia 303:: Fe =it !urter: 000L120 Discharge Loca:icn- 001A: - Low Volure Waste (pressure fil:er backwash) Type of Sample Grab Frequency of Analysis: 1/Q:r. Parameter. Suspended Sclids Oil & Grease 1 ez/1 er/l L ir.. i t s. Avg. 30 Avg. 15 Max. 100 Max. 20 Location Date Filter A C5-17 -3 2 1.3 <5 Filter 3 05-17-32 1.8 5 Filter C 05-17-E2 2.1 <5 Filter D 05-17-32 2.4 <5 Em:er of Samples: 4 4 Average Value: 2.0 5 Nximum Value: 2.4 5 Minimum Value: 1.8 <5 Limits Excettet 0 0 W. t I 1 h l l l c 9

Pa ;e of 6 QUAE.EFiY CPE?>.!:0:; MJ:;1 TOE!:;0. i.?OET l Georgia Power C rpany Fro 01-32 Plant Hatch To. 06-30-52 P.O. box 454) j Atlant. Georgia 303:2 Pers:: !:r.ber-0004120 I Discharge Locati:n. 001h - Cooling Tower Elowdown Frequency of Analysis: 1/wk. Location. Intake Mixing Zone Tower de. Type of Sample: In Situ In Situ Grab Parameter: Temperature Terperature Chlorine

F 0F rn; / l CI

Li=its ! of 5; OT of 5-Avg. 0.2 Max. 90 Max. 9 0 Max. 0.5 Date 04-07-32 63 63 04-13-82 63 63 04-21-82 57 57 04-23-82 56 56 05-05-22 57 57 05-12-82 63 63 05-21-22 64 64 05-23-22 67 67 05-Gt-82 67 67 06-03-E2 63 63 05-16-E2 63 63 06-23-82 65 63 06-3]-32 67 67 Nester of Samples: 13 13 Maximam Valae: 63 63 Minimum Value: 56 56 Limits Exceeded: O ee y"n Note: (l) See atta hrents fSr c hicri9a ti n da t3, I z i-l u I l i e I -~

Cl I ?.$' Ps;e

• Of 6 QUAF/ RLY CFEE.ATIO.', M~.Sl!ChlS; " iORT g

b-deorgia Poser C0 pany Fre - 0:-01-g2 Plant Hatch To- 06-30 22 P.O.

Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30K2 Permit Su.ber: 0004120 D:scharge Locstion: 001Di-Liquid Raisaste Syste (Unit 1) Type of Sample: Grab Frequency of Analysis: 2/=o. J Parameter. Suspended Solids 011 & Grease pH =c/l er/1 eH Units Limits. Avg. 30 Avg. 15 Max. 100 Max. 20 Date 04-05-22 26.0 12.2 6.3 0"-19-32 5.5 3.3 7.9 05-03-82 2.5 2.2 6.6 05 17-S2 2.8 5.0 7.4 06-07-32 30.5 9.8 5,4 05-21-82 7.6 6.9 7.1 Nuter of Samples: 6 6 6 Average Value: 12.5 6.6 Maximam Value. a0.5 12.2 7.9 MiniTA Value: 2.5 2.2 6.4 Limits Exceeced: 0 0 0 2 ~ l 5. .+ .y.# l .e

4 . r- '.%yg l' P3;e 5 Of 6 Q' ARTLRLY CPEFA!!!;0 MO:;1 TORI:;0 FI70RT Georgia Po-tr Compar.y Fre: 3:. ;1. :- 2 Plant ilatch To. ;5 33 32 F 0. box 45i.5 g Atlanta, Gecrgia 301:2 Fe rit S r.ter. 00*A1:3 Discnarge Location: CCID: - Liquid Radwaste Sya:e (Unit II) Type of Sample: Grab Frequency of Analysis: 2/ 3. i i Paran.eter. Suspended Solidr Oil 6 Grease pH rr/l e c_ /1 pH Units 1.ici t s. Avg. 30 Avg. 13 - i Max. 100 Max. 20 Date 04-C5-82 25.2 0.01 7.5 04-19-82 7.5 4.6 7.0 05-03-32 5.2 3.4 7.6 05-17-82 2.3 6.7 6.6 06-07-92 7.7 2.9 7.1 06-21-32 21.2 4.0 7.7 Number of Sam;:les: 6 6 6 Average Valae: 11.6 3.6 Maxinsm Value: 25.2 6.7 7.7 Minima-Value 5.2 0.01 6.6 Limits Exceede : 0 0 0 fr ' 6 2 ; ' I i -? Si. l 1 l

i Ea e L Of 6 e J 'o ; ) ^ f D.;! ! DN %h !

• d ! % ff. * '

te rgs. Few-r Ca pany Fre.: g;.;;.gy Plant Hatrh TC: O t. 3 0. ;] P.O. boa 4545 Permit Su Lar: Cuv 10's Atlanta. Cecrgia 3030: Loc.tton: 001E - Cc bined Flant W.ste Iype of See; le: In Sita Crab Grab Grab Crab Cenerattoi,Last: One Two One Two Parameter: Tt=perature Average Free Chlorine pH pH 'F eg/l Cl2 cc/1 CI: pH rnits

H t;eit s L1=sts

Min. 6.0 Min. 6.0 Max. 9.0 Max. 9.0 a Oate .a 0*-07-32 71 < 0.1 <0.1 7.4 6.6 04-14-82 70 < 0.1 < C.1 6.6 6.6 0; 82 80 < 0.1 <0.1 7.5 7.9 C4-23 82 64 < 0.1 < 0.1 7.6 6.9 CS-05-22 70 < C.1 < 0.1 6.7 6.7 C5-12-92 71 < 0.1 <0.1 6.1 6.4 05-19-52 77 < 0.1 < C.1 7.0 69 05-26-32 80 < 0.1 <0.1 6.9 7.' 3 05-04-32 79 < 0.1 <0.1 7.2 7.1 C5-09-32 77 < 0.1 <0.1 6.3 6.5 C6-l6-82 82 < 0.1 <0.1 7.2 6.3 C6-23-32 2a < 0.1 < 0.1 7.2 7.0 06-29-82 83 < 0.1 < 0.1 7.3 7,g Nutter of Sa ples: 13 13 13 13 13 ---9 Average Value: < 0.1 <0.1 Maxi m Value: 93 < 0.1 <0.1 7.3 7.9 Min c. Valoe: 64 < 0.1 < 0.1 6.1 6.4 Limits Exceeded: 0 0 I certify that I am fa-iliar with the infor.ation centained in this re;-ort and that to the test of tay kncale:;e and belief s. ch informati:n is true, c:. slete and accara te. T. E. Byerley P'anager of Envir:r ental Aff airs Jaly 15,1932 4 me e w.#- s 'N 9.* 1 'r% D CI~

1 l i i O i I ATTACHME.;T 4 I I Georgia Power Company Plant Hatch The following eight pages contain the chlorination data for the cooling tower blowdown .l O i i l I O

r M. ~O i, s \\ b.. l 4-t I E 4 I I I t I ill 4 ~ CIRC WATER Cilf.ORTHATION DATA i DATA SHEET 1 e 4 3 WEEKLY UNIT NO: 8- ,t da CIILORINATOstS DIOTREND Cl .__-_--___2_____--_ oll i.' DATE rREQUENCY CLp INJF.CT NO. 1 NO. 2 BEFORE A f"TER FREE mg/l* DISCl!ARGE INITI AI.S ^U CYCI,E/ DAY MIN / CYCLE 1/24 HR l/24 HR TIME TIME AVG. MAX HOUR / DAY o, > i .o 3 g ._/_(/b.. _ _ _3_-__--. .__)__--____ N p d.) ...O.__-_-_.._Sw H. > ..}A y_P__-..e.....'_. I___ ) O

l _-

2

c. _._I...<__._I_....r._,______.. S_h_ _ _ _ _ _.

u, Y. Ll. .Yk_ _h_ _ .__ 3 . _ _3_ _0_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __A_____ ._}-____. __3.___ ps u mn . _ _._I_. ._O _____..S '_____.. o, p_ I.>..___3_____-... 3_ _0_ _ __ _ _ _ .__4 ____.g]p_____ ___3..__... +. _ _ _ _ 4.I r ty G p i Yh_ f_/h__ . _ _ _ _ _ - - _ ^ _. ^ ~ .--______-_.._l_'_-____. ~ ___e gl 4._pf_ _."_ _ p ,a g w a . -. = - - - - -...__--_--. I LIMIT 0.20 0.50 2 HR/ DAY g i 'O l* MEASURED AT TOWER OVERFI4W DURING CIILORINATION CYCLE t b & nu h b g '. pa h.*0 56 _f % St 'If On & D" 1Yi m Chlu;uh% wn (erlked.'ld ody. I'sh' Yary - M '4] lse fes.Nn/ hl,. ll b pssue d. a }n's _kll) o r-any

fh r.') ,t i._/ %/ ,,1.a 3 s i ~ v j w CIRC WATER C11t.0Rit2ATIOt! DATA DATA SIICCT 1 UtIIT !!O UECI(Ly rs CllLORIllATORS DIOTPE!!D C12 t. DATE FRCOUCt3CY CIq It3 JECT t:0. I 11 0. 2 DEFORE AFTER FDCE rr.9/l* DISCl!ARGE IllITI AI.S O ^ CYCLC/ DAY !!Iti/ CYCLE 1/24 IIR I/24 IIR TIttC tit 1E AVG. HAX lt00n/ DAY t7, 3* t-3 ,3 ... :n y 9, :, ,o . _- t. - f *_ -_'. - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _.._O O Y y 3 y T $ f__W-.. tn, ?, * ~ l _ _ _e (* iy s ~~~. _ _ ' ~ _ ' _ _ ' ~ - ~~~~ . _ _e_ _o_ t"_ f.r_II A)~._ _ _-__._ - _ _ _ _. _ _. _ - _. ~. _ nts u r3, ._-____3____-~ g)f ,. g g y.."-_ _-____ . _) _[_ _ _ - - _ _ ' I f. 9 . - _.)) '. -_ __-_-_-__.___9_-.-._-______.____-__ ',',5 Q._-- _ __~-. n ~H u l [ ___________________-_________L Lit 1IT 0.20 0.50 2 IIR/ DAY pt j ItCASURED AT TOWER OVERFIDW DURItIG C!lLORIt!ATIO!! CYCr.E 'O I ca f,4 )$e s,r.lre. J a l u No" o

• d '.r ** *$

l )( gx;,t ;. c c. On NOw 1

c. , s %_x ,gs y v ;. ( l w ~, i O 1) l l l CInc wATEn CitLORInATIcts NATA DATA SilEET 1 NEEKIN __h IntIT NO: i n,, - - --=- -=_ ____________________________.___- Cut.onInATons nIorpEno C12 1] ___________________CC INITIA!.S FDEC mg/1* DISCifAR __________________= DATc raEcuCNCY Cfg INJECT t:0. 1 NO. 2 DEFORE AFTER CYCLC/ DAY MIU/CYCf.C f/24 UR 1/24 HR TIMC TIME AVG. MAX llOUR/ DAY ^ P..

n. -

-) Y.h JJ ~_,.. m f 'gt;Y )_S_ _ _(_)_0_Q_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .~________ _f_ _ _ _ _ _ _.. y, ~ ,I' d. o g y,g w _ _ _ _ _ = = - - _. _ - - ~ ^ ^ ~ " ~ ~^ VA in. . ' ~ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ ~ _ ' _ _'.'__'U_____'_~__~ .____ ~____ . _ ~ _ " _ - _ . ~ _ ~ _ _ _ _ ) e} O y/2I .*~ .__.J ' 1, v O ,t. /' j/h_, [. .O_ _O_T_ __ _ _ _...__ ,g u .i ._______I__. \\ } z l Lit!!T 0.20 0.50 2 HR/ DAY ( I /

• 9

( HEASURED AT TOWER OVERPIEW DURING CIILORIllATION CYCLE { 't1 { t 4 ) m l O m "U O w

O _..... q p I (^- . j m e j s CIRC NATER Citt.OnitJ ATIOt3 f1ATA e; DATA SilEET 1 Ut1IT !!O UEEKr.Y ( CIILORIt!ATonS DIOTDEt!D C12

---

I - ----.~----... -----...--..-------..--

D A'I'/. rR? ltJEt!CY Cig Il3 JECT t10. 1 !!O. 2 DETODE AFTER FitEE rnry/1* DISCl!AltCE IIIIT I AI.S E' / DAY ttIII/CYCI.E 1/24 lin 1/24 IIR T!!tC Titic AVC. t1AX IlotJo/ DAY ^ p* t.I,.; s '-.n. ji q 3, og . 3O ,1, y $.t,. g 1 ' m ~ ) '. il)fM f tn :o - - - ~ O ,r* gieb ~ xn Q.,) g).'.C. -* ~ ~ u _.- ^ . - - - ~ ~ ~ - --- ------~~ ~~~-- - .~. --- t 1

• )

t j-tJ g .==---2 a t., :.. .- Lv>-- :.. =. =.--u-4 ~~ -- -~ ~ - . : - =. T.1f $ > 2-....'--. da o d ~il gij ~ >cde} 3.. /n 3 3----------

---

~~--

---

~~~~~

-~~-- -.-~~----. ~~------ - e N -e ts I t i ) lit 1IT 0.20 0.50 2 ItD/ DAY .r). 110ASURED AT TOWER OVERFLOli DURI!!G C11!.ORIllATIO!! CYCLE 't ) e -J l O Y tl *. 4 !.a Cefh INsk be**"; L5 f t - Ut 't3 O m I

y y,,ca. m m. m. I ] ll. m._ I- ] w e a I 1 n 1 l i f t i4 l l l l CIRC WATER Cilt.Onit1ATI0ti DATA, DATA SIIEET 1 tRIIT f10: O N[~ WEEKLY i CllLORIllATORS DIOTPEtID C12 DATE FREQUEt3CY CIq It1 JECT t10. I t10. 2 DEFORE AFTER FDEE tr.9/l

• DISCif ARGE IflIT I A f.S CYCLE / DAY t1Iti/ CYCLE 9 /2 4 lin 1/24 IIR tit 1E TItic AVC.

f4AX ItOUR/ DAY 'g g a v a # # ,.f.i 9 m 6./.dt..c .... e._... ,.... f ,N _fll, //*(. (,.s1),..f.'..~..._.... __...-.. ~..l ' O *,......... ~~. g,- u g f .i o t; y,, . - = - ?- f, yy ....... ~. _......t; s y ( w,g o w 'N......i LittIT 0.20 0.50 2 Ifn/ DAY

l

.J.. p] j al h 'O 11EASURED AT TOWER OVERFLOW DURIt!G CIILORItiATIOtl CYCLE i O C/g, hMMR bME3 , "." ^.m .,,'.,\\g g q g( ) m-2. ,j -gj s ~ A' 6/P '-li o h ~~~ w t. g e 0

mr i

• ,.' u

.o r i 7.,- R o q

f i

h f } i l 'l s t t' k 9I j CTRC MATER Cit!.ORIt:ATI0t! DATA , ti-3 i f y DATA SilECT l_ Ut3IT 110: TAO 3 I e -f UEERI,Y

g.,

l C1 'l Cl!LORItJATORh DIOTDEt1D ...._____.2........_... ....___............. ______3._.-_ DATE FREQt1E!!CY CIg It! JECT t:0. 1 !!O. y DEFORE AFTER FREE rng/l* DISCifARGE I!!!T I AI.C .--_.....___-._a_..__-....... y, f,, p, ^ CYCII/ DAY till!/CYCf.E 1/24 ilR l/24 itR tit!E TIlin AVG. !!AX ll0UR/ DAY l ' '- ~0/. yyf. m - (y > > &.?_... C 3 pg j., / ,q .. Q ..* 1 e. *g. Q,.(. _ ~ (ig) -

D

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

m =

= = = - } . _.---- -_~ / '~~ ~ f-Qr en !, tJ &f- # >3 ) q.jf Dg q~~ ~. g,g rn [g.p / -. t 6-ra n.

---

+

,_,s.-- e .~. l l 1 i i i I,IMIT 0.20 0.50 2 Itp/ DAY I.,,e. i M.. I 1 !!EASURED AT TOWER OVERFLOW DURI!!G CI1 LORI!!ATIOtt CYCLE

r. e.

m t -2 e,, i... - s: g e. p.,. $ *% f

• su. p n

O m i I

t v.- 'A L) O (iMyi.I Power Power Sucply Engineenng ano serv.cn ~ Oc tober 29, 1982 Mr. Gene B. Welsh, Chief Water Protection Branch Environmental Protection Division 270 Washington Street, S.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Re: Plant Arkwright NPDES Permit No. GA 0026069 Plant Bowen hTDES Permit No. GA 0001449 Plant Branch NPDES Permit No. GA 0026051 Plant Hammond NPDES Permit No. GA 0001457 Plant Hatch NPDES Permit No. GA 0004120 Plant McDonough-Atkinson NPDES Permit No. GA 0001431 Plant McManus NPDES Permit No. GA 0003794 Plant Mitchell NPDES Permit No. GA 0001465 Plant Wansley NPDES Permit No. GA 0026778 fj Plant Yates NPDES Permit No. GA 0001473 v

Dear Mr. Welsh:

As required by the above referenced NPDES Permits, we hereby submit the Operation Monitoring Reports for each of the corresponding power plants for the quarter ending September 30, 1982. If you have any questions or comments, please advise. Sincerely, 7 } /(/ . Vi b / T. E. By, ley Manager of Environmental Affairs RDM:bjk Attachments bc: W. O. Simons R. H. Bohler /~; File: EV925-022 Ql 1 _l

i O Page 1 of 3 QUARTERLY OPERATICS MONITORING REPORT 15:- Frcm 07-01-32 ,,N., Geor6 a Power Company i To: 09-30-32 Plant Match M' P.O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Permit Number: 000!.120 Discharge Location: 001A - Low Volume Waste (neutralization tan Type of Sample: Grab Frequency of Analysis: 2/mo Parameter: Suspended Solids Oil & Grease eg/l eg/l Limits: Avg. Ju Avg. 15 Max. 100 Max. 20 Date 07-06-82 145 <5 07-19-82 9 <5 08-04-82 1 <5 08-16-82 3 <5 09-06-82 10 <5 09-20-82 1 <5 Number of Samples: 6 6 Average Value: 23 5 Max. Value: 145 5 Min. Value: 1 <5 Limits Exceeded: 1 0 I l 1 I l ~ 1 l

i l i i ) i l O Page 2 of S c QUARTERLY OPERATION MONITORING REPORT From: 07-01-82 Georgia Power Company To: C3-30-32 Plant Hatch P.O. Box 4345 Atlanta. Georgia 30302 Perrit Nu=ber: 000;120 Discharge Location: 001Ar - Low Volu=e Waste (pressure filter backwash) Type of Sample: Grab Frequency of Analysis: 1/Qtr. Parameter: Suspended Solids Oil & Grease ce/l ec/l Lin.i t s : Avg. 30 Avg. 15 Max. 100 Max. 20 Location Date Filter A 08-11-82 1 <5 Filter B 08-11-82 1 <5 Filter C 08-11-82 1 <5 Filter 0 08-11-82 2 <5 Number of Samples: 4 4 Average Value: 1 <5 Max. Value: 2 <5 Min. Value: 1 <5 Limits Exceeded: 0 a l t l l l l

Page 3 of 9 O4 QUARTERLY OPERATION MONITORING REPORT

a From: 07-01-82

' Ib Georgia Power Company To: 09-30-82 Plant Hatch P.O. Box 4545 Perm t Number: 0003120 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 00lb - Coolins, Tower 31:,wd:.m Discharge Location: Frequency of Analysis: 1/wk. Intake Mixing Zone Tower Location: In Situ Grab In Situ Type of Sample: Para =eter: Te=perature Temperature Chlorine F me/1 CI: f OF l cT of 50 aT of 53 Avg. 0.2 0 Max. 90 Max. 0.5 Limits: Max. 90 Date 07-08-82 70 1 68 07-14-82 l 07-21-82 07-28-82 69 69 08-04-82 gg 08-11-82 93 08-18-82 66 65 08-25-82 67 67 09-02-82 8 8,1 5 51 09-08-82 09-17-82 82 l 09-22-82 3j 8 Number of Samples: 12 1 Max. Value: 89 89 Min. Value: 51 51 Limits Exceeded: Note: 1) Reporting of this dischar9a maint n I nger reTJire. See Attach-ents for - e chlorination data. l

'k 2^ Page 4 of 8 QUARTERLY OFERATION MONITORING PIFORT Fron. 07-01-22 Georgia Power Company To: 09-30-32 Plant Hatch P.O. Box 4545 Permit Number. 000a120 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 W:. Discharge Location: 001C - Sewage Treatment Plant Type of Sample: Grab Frequency of Analysis: 2/yr. Suspended Solids 5-Day BOD Free Chlorine ee/1 me/1 , ce/1 Clr __. Parameter: Avg. 30 Avg. 30 Limits. Max. 45 Max. 45 Date 07-09-82 48 3 0.5 Limits Exceeded: 0 0 0 L jn ~

l 1 Page 5 of 8 QUARTERLY DPEPATING M0!ilTORING REPORT Ceorgia Power Company From: 07-01-82 Plant Hatch I To: 09-33-82 P.O. Boa

• 5 t. 5 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Per=it Number: 0004120 Discharge Location: 001Da - Liquid Radwaste System (Unit II)

Type of Sa=ple: Grab Fr?quency of Analysis: 2/co. Parameter: Suspended Solids Oil & Grease pH eg/l mg/l pH Units eA u Limits: Avg. 30 Avg. 15 Max. 100 Max. 20 gy u-Date 1 07-05-82 12 7 6.9 07-19-82 1 1 7,7 08-02-82 1 16 7.8 , ~ ' ' C8-16-82 8 2 6.9 09-06-82 5 19 6.6 nr . r ~., 09-20-82 5 3 4.8 pc. wQ Number of Samples: 6 6 6 Avera.;e Value: 5 9 Max. Value: 12 19 7.8 Min. Value: 1 3 4.8 Limits Exceeded: 0 0 0 .D s> a t 1

O Page 6 of 3 QL'ARTERLY OPERATION MONITORING RIPORT From: 07-01-82 Georgia Power Company .%1 To g.;;.3; 6 Plant rtaten P.O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30J02 Permit Number: 0004120 p'[ P-Discharge Locstion: 001Di-Liquid '.adwas t e Sys tem (Unit 1) s$g Type of Sa=ple: Grab Frequency of Analysis: 2/mo. Parameter: Suspended Solids 011 6 Crease pH mg/l ec/l pH Units Limits: Avg. 30 Avg. 15 Max. 100 Max. 20 Date 07-05-82 24 3 7.0 07-1 9-82 1 S5 7. 08-02-82 7 c 7* 03-16-82 7 10 7,7 03-06-82 4 8 ,4 09-20-82 7 Number of Samples: 6 6 Average Value: 8 15 Max. Value: 24 55 77 Min. Value: 1 f jS2 Limits Exceeded: 0 '4 '~- _c ( ( ' O

Page 7 of 8 QUARfERLY OPERATION MONITORING REPORT Georgia Power Company From : 07-01-82 Plant Hatch To : 09-30-82 P.v. box 45l.5 Atlanta. Cecrgia 30J02 Permit N cber: C00412C Discharge Location: 001E - Combined Plant '4a s t e (Unit 1) y Frequency of Analysis: 1/wk. ?'" Type of Sample: In Situ Grab Grab Average Free hc Parameter: Temperature Chlorine pH Limits: ~ 'F mg/l C12 pH Units Min. 6.0 Max. 9.0 Date 07-08-82 79 <0.1 7.0 07-14-82 82 7.3 07-16-82 <0.1 07-21-82 90 7.4 07-22-82 <0.1 07-28-82 90 <0.1 7.1 08-04-82 90 <0.1 7.8 08-11 -82 92 <0.1

7. 9 08-18-82 92

<0.1 8.0 08-25-82 95 8.0 08-27-82 <0.1 09-01-82 88 <0.1 7.9 09-08-82 88 <0.1 8.5 09-15-82 88 <0.1 7.9 09-22-82 90 1 7.6 09-29-82 84 <0.1 7.4 Number of Sanples: 13 12 13 Average Value: Max. Value: 92 <0.1 8.8 Min. Value: 79 <0.1 7.0 Limits Exceeded: 0 Note 1: No chlorination, chlorinator out of service. t I Y O l l l

O QUARTEicY CFER.CION MOSITOR'NO RIFCET From. 07-01-22 Georgia Power Ccepany To: 0 9-30-E.2 'p.' Plant Hatch P.O. sex 454) Permit Nu=ber: 0004123 ~ Atlanta. Georgia JU3u2 Tf" Discharge Location: 001E - Combined Plant Waste (Unit II) Ir2 Frequency of Analysis: 1/wk. In Situ Grab Grab Type of Samples: Average Free pH Parameter: Te=perature Chlorine 'F eg/l C1, pH Units Min. 6.0 Limits: Max. 9.0 Date 07-03-82 gj <0.1 7,o 07-14-82 og 7.9 07-16-E2 <0.1 07-21-82 gg 6.5 07-22.e2 <0.1 07-28-82 9 <0.1 7.6 08 04 82 <0.1 7,4 08-11 -82 <0.1 7,7 08-lS-E2 <0.1 8.1 03-25-22 ga 8.0 03-27-52 <0.1 09-01-82 <0.1 7.6 09-09-82 9 <0.1 8.0 'O.I 7.2 09-15-82 C9-22-52 2 09-29-82 78 <0 1 4 Nurber of Sa9ples: 13 I2 13 Average Value: ~~ ~~ Max. Value: 90 C 8.1 Min. Value: 73 <0.1 6.5 ~ Limits Exceeded: bes* r/ kn aled e a eli f sc i

• r-s tr' corpl a d a e' at T. E. Bjerley arager of EnvirenTer.tal Af fairs i

O

/N er m m 'N l ~.N i i s j s i a tw CIRC WATER CllLORINATION DATA i i DATA SilEET 1 i UNIT 110: WEEKLY O,., ,______-__._____________________________________________________.I

D C1 O

CHLORINATORS DIOTREt1D _________2___________. DATE FREQUENCY CLp It1 JECT UO. 1 , NO. 2 DEFORE AFTER FREE mg/l* DISCl!ARGE INITIA!,9 g y, l s -O d i

1. g CYCLE / DAY Mitt / CYCLE 1/24 IIR t/24 IIR TIME TIME AVG.

MAX llOUR/ DAY p,3 g

e. g g,>

1 3 7,7 ,__7____________ g .e.__.... m r. 3 L ../J...,_*_10___._ _t_ _9_ _,g. g_,_,_ _ _.. u, y j!: ._y____ ')- l'l._._D_ _ _ _--- _ _ _ _.3_ _a_ __ _ _ _ _ _ yea _)._4_60_0__ _ ~ mo c h-in *^ 'r L L <) 4_) o ) 9,.___..,.. to 2 y _%_ _ _2_1_ .__3_-- -__8__0_____. _0_0_0_ _ _ 3_ _0_0_ _0_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ),tla.... k*_, _ _ _ _ b o _<** {..l_ * ) _ _ ___b_-__-.. SD -._ Y_______ _ _h_0_0__0_ _ _ . _A__ ~ __ y '*H v. t s c, I -______ = - - t l

== ____ LIMIT 0.20 0.50 2 liR/ DAY I, 3 a MEASURED AT TOWER OVERFLOW DURING C11LORINATION CYCLE 'O 4 a 4 ^ - '5

• 5 Ne S l C S tr.'n N ' in o iu$h l I

Y S + p 4 d i 4 h L., J.,, s ys 4. k.7,,4 g/ g g,j;, g g w

o O

D 1 i m W J I

.. p ( s:, ' [i ' p,, e .Q , I. ,1i e i '1 CIRC WATER CilLORilATION DATA 1 DATA S!!EET l_ i* UNIT NO: WEEKLY o s = _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - U C1 o CitLORINATORS DIOTREtID __________2 t CL NO. 1 NO. 2 DEFORE AFTER FREE mg/l* disci!ARGE INIT(ALS g _ _ _ _2__INJ ECT 2 DATE FRCOUCtJCY HIN/ CYCLE' 5 /2 4 IIR 1/24 IIR TIME TIttE AVG. MAX HOUR / DAY

• -' o, d

o-m _ CYCLE / DAY 0 0 4 h Eis y ~ _ _ _ _7_ _ ____6 ____0 3, n 7 = - - j g

---

jg- <i ao,--

my p oh . _ _. _I_ .e. 1 J. n _____3_______4_'_o_ _ _ __ _ __s__on 3ou

n n O

.- !4& to ?, 1 7 ___ in = _3__a____ __i_.__ 6I

• hr4G -

n s ) o,, 9_ _1_1_ __=3. ___ ff_ _6_ _ __ _ _ ._3_ _0_0_0__ _ __ _ _ _ _p _._ _. -. _ _ _ _'_l_E_ _ _ ____5_______ _ __(l_o_ _ _ __ _ _ ._ _%_ _ _o_ __ _(fp_%_9__ _ _< _. I_ _ _< _l_ _ __ _ *_%___l,y. - ?c8 d0 5 g g -r g', O u gi I ._. : j f V {.' e~ s w a 3' r, f5

I'I o

i f. 3 \\ .c =_ 0.20 0.50 2 IIR/ DAY l ,____________________.l.._l_,. LIMIT i ~ f p3 .S

• HEASURED AT TOWER OVERFLOW DURING CIILORINATION CYCLE j )

i 1 M d O n d b b h),'s /r,t [ l,p ,y 3,,, m

O O

vi e l .._..4.. ~. 5 a - , 3.,.,,,, y ;;.........,, ,a,a

r.eth h. ~u ) .... +. ...uupq. ~. y g, m 5 ~ f

9..

e N ...i p '. w"4 ',, O t 4 i l .% W 1: ,9 \\ , s\\k f,. (,i e. POYE NG // /o./. a e.. CIRC WATER CHLORTNATION DATA 1 DATA SilEET 1 T UNIT NO: WEEKLY g N DIOTREtID Cl o I ___'llLORIN ATORS _________2____________ CL NO. 1 NO. 2 BEFORE AFTER FREE mg/l* DISCilARGE INITIALS g . - = _ _ , _ _ = - y ._ _ _2_INJ ECT DATE FREQUEllCY o d ^ CYCLE / DAY MIN / CYCLE 9/24 IIR 1/24 IIR TIME TIME AVG. MAX HOUR / DAY o> to -.f.~./....___.3___.__..___3_O.____. ._,_2_c_0 0___.___>___..._N_ _k."_~_~_' . &._ _~_.._F _l..c_. _l_. ._.Q._____.../.$_ _ _.h-Y m o _'J_-f _....}______. _ _ _7_ _0_ _ _ _ _ _ __ _/_S_c_ _o_ _ _ .. + ._Ju_/_\\ __ _ .z o l 4

• I ___ _ _ _O

)____._. >h h in mn o g/l /M e,) 4l p - f_,[_ _ ___A_ _. MW 5 m m> ~ _9_ _/_6_ _.-.3 . _ _3_ _D_ _ _ _..._ _.2_0_o_ _ _ ? ty,g___. ay y o \\ Y 1_4__3__ _s_____ = -c _o_ _<v_ _ _ _. =-- ~ g ~H d g__ &_____ ' ' ' _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _.).._}_.k__m u c N _lo_ _I__..Z._______. R -=-__ o> p' ' i LIMIT 0.20 0.50 2 HR/ DAY I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _. _ _ _..F MEASURED AT TOWER OVERFIDW DURING CHLORINATION CYCLE y d On 9.,-sx 0%.s&u T dK tw sb ba W IV1(tindenante-5 bls'y ont

en. u.2 o. q-y-C.V H 0 et b+,

p.ua re, 4.~ w. 7 U w(R W W o w ul b. m e wh k adi*d; tk ' O 9-7-Y1 T. A t >\\dm. vs I f ter. lht cab <l d.e, Sc.keak were 8 ,s..% N m i m.

• Y o,.

cM.d.*(e, I a.d I ce d k 4 *d ' *

57.- -

i .d \\ s os Q i l ~ t 1 i, 6 a e t. i: "I ~ Qty 2 lb~l~$5" \\ .t SERVICE WATER CilLORIt!ATION DATA DATA SilEET 2 I UNIT NO. _ 7 _ t ~ WEEKLY -=_____-----__---- ___... __, = _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _. _ _. Cl2 DIOTREND CllLORIllATORS DEFORE AFTER FREE mg/l** FREE sng /l* DISCHARGE , o CL NO. 1 NO. 2 NO. 3 AVG. MX !!OUR/ DAY h .__2_ INJECT DATE FREQUENCY [ CYCLE / DAY HIN/ CYCLE I/24 IIR 1/24 HR 1/24 IIR TIME TIME AVG. MAX g 3* .. _l_ _._ <_'. /. .--.b-- s t-S. $1.L. A 'o _ ' ~ _ - - -. ._O_ c_n, (% /,

1. 0 %w, e.l e.t

<.[ <.]-. - e__--_b_- $ $.,; i e // / I S S M A g d 6

---

.- c o_--.-

t  ;' .__-- _~ ._t. _I _--Q__- 5<__ e c) I 7_.7_. _- e _o4 _.. 0._. -) ~~~~ < I c.J 4.I o '.f_- ll , ont t_a., I.c. _ _-.i.c_ - _. -a_O. S_. p---- w ~.b_ _O_G.) ' ).M...(-....__~.. h _.__f... _. ~. " " "... '. - _.. _ _ _.~ / w ~ " ' - --2 IIR/ DAY-(* . ___---- _---- - _--_----------- -LIMIT 0.20 0.50 L---__--____.___--.....--_..---__-___--__--_- e ~~ MEASURED AT POINT OF DISCHARGE TO RIVER DURING CitLORINATION CYCLE 'G t4 'm

• HEAStJRED AT SERVICE WATER DISClf ARGE TO CIRC WATER FLUME

$ maMenance_ is bdoc CIcnt ers O I m twind % 4 e Id% P6 O sj@ % F-3<* lI 7

o Psa m km5 eff ck % a dux U.A L styf<lu haht J/ _q o

9 % dad %b w ktm '.?. ,ka d of f. k le afa5* OHA' " Ol cll. l l!

( 7 v_ ( I# .v.. 10 / -82. p SECICE WATER C1ILORINATION DATA DATA SHEET 2 i I UNIT NO. .7 WEEKLY - = - _ _ - _ _ - _ _. _ _ _ _ - - _ - - = _ - _ - = - = _ _ _ _ - _ CllLORINATORS DIOTREND Cl2 = _---. CL NO. 1 NO. 2 NO. 3 BEFORE AFTER FREE mg/l** FREE rg/l* DISCHARGE e .-_ _2_INJ ECT DATE FREQUENCY h h, [ CYCLE / DAY MIN / CYCLE I/24 HR 1/24 ffR f /24 IIR TIME TIME AVG. MAX AVG. MAX HOUH/ DAY a O _t__ . _ _ _o_i_ _ _ n_ _ _ ~ 9_ _- l.[Gf_.__...Cta.___-__ --2"4_L+__ "______ . c_. s_. . _i_ _. _____ __ m k eu a u> > = - co s - g)------pj)--- -a <.I 've <I

---

= o o

q1- -cal. cd. w ti 2: . _._I _..._M____.._s i__..<_. I _ _ _ e f m > .c_._J_._ _ _ _ _. _ _e_d_ _.._ _ _ _ .-_c d_.s....-. - _ _ _ _ _ _ ' _. N_ _.4_ _ _ __ #_ _A o e a t '.H.. s_. M . __Q_&_w-_n_ _ .j)n _- N_a_ _ _. iv a_- o_n_ __ _ _IM. _O________ w ,j % 't. Q_..<__.__ -__. g D --.G... >__._ W ___. N_r[_.Ett__._Nr_t _.. ty'_A_ _-_It//l_. - _0- l-f __-_-_.^.. _ _ _ ' _O_ _ i <1_ 1 -- 6 l

---

---~~-----~~~~~~

l .__.____. __--__--__= - 0.20 0.50 2 HR/ DAY LIMIT ~ 'd HEASURED AT POINT OF DISCilARGE TO RIVER DURING CIfLORINATION CYCLE i 4 m MO e rY(cod nC e. Ih YM ,/

• • MEASURED
• .T SERVICE WATER DISCHARGE TO CIRC WATER FLUME O

O d O n t_ Of / bb $ 46dPM b f

n

-i O I us I i J

(m N . O TW'f ' ,"m .O ~ i 'Q_) .i e. y wf Jo-/-91 ^ ~. CIRC WATER CIILORitiATIOt3 DATA s DATA S11CET 1 tRIIT 110: I WEEKLY O g W CllLORIllATORS DIOTBEt3D C12 o DATE FREQUEt1CY CLp It! JECT 13 0. I 11 0. 2 DEFORE AFTER FREE rr.g/l* DISCif ADGE IllITIALS ~, ^U "3 CYCLE / DAY MIti/ CYCLE ~ 1/24 I!R t/24 liR TIME TIME AVG. MAX ll0UR/ DAY o> (9 N, Y l! ~4 __/_/) O 4\\ 2.l .___0______..t_g ,o 3 o .___'{c) , _b_ _ _w 3 w y 'l_'_I__________ ---}_- -- g- -- --- // _A tn 5 ? V/I t.I z. i 4__9 3 VD 1500 -__s_-___- mo o ~ to x W o Wt_ _..__J_______..__t/__o ._ M__e____ ._ M_-__...,_vA_ __ __ _e, J <,j -_O_.____. _ _ _ _ _ _A N to > s '3Q y ._-____-_)_..$_g ___. .__Q_ g / . _ - _ ~ _ K }.h_...(...._____. "W f }_W_ _ _l. ._f-___'__.~.___ . _ ; ~_ _._ _0_ _%_ _ _ _ .~.~._-_-_-Q_... _ _ _4_%. _ - _ _. '{; o a>

-3

=______.______ r _ -=._____-- LIMIT 0.20 0.50 2 IIR/ DAY I 3.. 1 d2en HCASURED AT TOWER OVERFLOW DURItiG CIILORIt3ATIOt3 CYCLE .f/ f) h,(\\ O rtLn f e. e s 'O e s dont 6n G e.f r._ l l,9 0 4 cs cMa,& fa,,cl[ (U'Wl lIb# '4I' "" f " "

• OjSN *

9. / - E 2 o

I C < II;a M M Lu, w.ww 1 m I r n.J :E ca.J la ca 'v'N .l. S </ 9. o c W 4 us d l.V '. i 16he a )fu mm.um A;&,..L u.* v ...a use .o

im 2 >. s ;.sa,.~.5 - ~ ~. ( ~$ % %%,r y.*. p,;.g. o ..v . g'g .k 1 .u e s ? f..v f.. %

g. ~

8 2

• 4

( 1 i ~ n /q. 'g j 0w fp.f-Q QOY a. CTHC WATER Cill.ORTHATI0ft DATA DATA SiiEET 1_. T UllIT tl0: WEULY O g 73 CIILORINATORS DIOTREND Cl2 O DATE FREQUEtiCY CLp It3 JECT 11 0. 1 NO. 2 DEFORE AFTER FREE rng/l* DISCIIARGE IIIITI ALS -c. 3 ^o 3 i "o CYCLE / DAY Mill / CYCLE l /24 IIR f /24 IIR TIME TIME AVG.' MAX 1100R/ DAY o> t y./....___3_______ ... _3_0. _' _ _ _ _ . _.7_c_0 0.._.__.n_____. _P_ _A_.... . A.d___. _<_. I _ .c_ _ _l...Q______ _,p.?._ __T~ NY ,o n - h f, _ _ _'.'. _ tn y b l 4 *l 0 .T.j_ _ _._-{____..... 3.0...___. -l_f_o_ _o _. . _.. +..... _*_......JU...__.l_e_ _ _ mg g W / JA M M. 9-/6 3 3D 20 0 .[...__..[.[._../_ l 2.l ..p....._. a m2 ~ f f o r f Q QQ) y W ).h_ _3_. ~ l. &y ... _ _ _ _.).. _.'.b n "H a = N .IO..I____c_________ o p y' j___________..________________________________ LIMIT 0.20 0.50 2 IIR/ DAY @4 lal*MFASUDED AT TOWER OVERFI4W DURING CIILORINATION CYCLE

• U 8

~.J N M 0 Q.'c4jan.L~ cul K c p ed b ..g u.,NWsp.u n. 4, aa. ce< na y ~ hO e C' l Yg YLM h8M gwu

O M'

g_.7,y)'.ilp c W i.a.,, I. A t (sw d b a %, O* I S6ke4 we \\ *In c. , c., I 6..*n N *sx 3. 1 "*; ! *.,., ki.,a (,, TdImM k' *b ' /

. c V G c.L Q, l.. gM ~ ~ s. s i 4

t e

f y A. .g [ l ._ _._ __.L I L, t. y SERVICE WATER Cl!LORINATION DATA t ( i ~ DATA SHEET 2 r UNIT NO...[_ r ~ WEERfJ C12 DIOTREND ........._q.__........ CilLORINATORS FREE mg/l* DISCllARCE i NO. 1-HO. 2 NO. 3 BEFORE AFTER FREE mg/.l** a [ CYCLE / DAY Hill / CYCLE t/24 HR I/2 4 IIR 1/24 IIR TIME TIMC AVG. HAX AVG. ifAX If0VR/ DAY f, y Cf.g INJECT DATE FREQUENCY e .. _i._..t.) ...b.._5_.. ML s o ~ ....l. 9_ _1_....O.c..a.l . %__} A %_ _ _. ,_......i 5' a, -,J, - ---(---- ...... = --{-- /. -~~~ 41- --- --- e.) mb>: A. --QO.S-t'

---

t....c J..z...t...c. I.....O_..s<..

na 77 (* M. CsoI. 6-Ed -- - /.s.... =0.4'5..A...-..- 4 ~ ~~~-------- ...p....... o g

f. It....w...i.. -...

.Les. c: -..... ( - M....Q..).. .-}........ s - - - ~ - ~

3. M....(................ -....

o. ~ ~ hQ / .f. R.g (

---

~~~-----

---

~~~------~~~~ ~~~--

--~~--- ..... ~. '...........--.. - - - ------ - -- k - ~ ~ --- -- - -- --- - - - - 2 ( 0. 5 G 2 HR/ DAY L.....L.-..............................-- - 0. L IMIT L

n 4

Z CYCLE HEASURED AT POINT OF DISCl!ARGE To RIVEtt DURING CilLORINATION M I dent en 4

• HEASURED AT SERVICE WATER DISCffARGE 'IO CIRC WATER FLUME

$ m6cicnance_ is be'n m Om .I Qf t.d $)$4.es F-3<

• MU%

(Mols erk Sv fl led.all, IL 19A* .a 9 8/.t gesaw g A h a G., a, 0 hW4 %9. u Wen ), afe, hiehJ8 W O/ eg. j! '7 10h i.,1 ./p .~

f..s f k) (~.,L J 1 6 YJ 8 I l i I f gf( l0 l $2- =re SERVICE WATER CHLORTHATION DATA DATA SHEET _2 UNIT NO. .[I~ ~ WFEKLY Cl2 DIOTREND CitLORINATORS ..........._.__,..._...... 7._.--___ FREE rng/l*

• FREE rml/l*

DISCHARGE , o NO. I NO. 2 NO. 3 DEFORE1 AFTER 7._..__,.____...___........... AVG.IIAX If0UR/ DAY h h# DATE FREQUEt3CY CIq INJECT [ CYCLE / DAY MIH/ CYCLE t/24 liR 1/24 HR 1/24 IIR TIME T!HE AVC. HAX 3 p 5* ...."... tit... ".... _. .. ".......c. I.. 4..* [ _ _.t.\\ .t_ _ L... _n.i _ _.R.. .u A/ 9.. ...[Or f. Q d.l', .._ ~__..... m -~J_~~- N/A ei <.l <I - --~~ ~

---

~~--

I... e o sA sA i. --~~-~~- - ds o ..e_.a.t_.. _...'..____......c_._...- l( Q...$___............... ~....... ~.... ~........_.~...Q. )'y NA....f./.l....N.O.....N & ..N. & - - - _N.A.... O..._..

u. _ _ _ _ _

_._c_._n _F. w ....t...Nr.1....N..r.l.. tY_A....n_/_A_. ..D._.......- Not ~ ~ -- l .._ gvy... ){ 1.0..[..f......_.....'....... M_..a. . 1_7.. _-_.. 0.20 0.50 2 IIR/ DAY LlHIT ] LE HEASURED AT POINT OF DISCalARGE TO RIVER DURING Cl!LORINATION CYC I

• HEASURED AT SERVICE HATER DISCl!AftGE '!O CIRC WATER FLUME M G.rv{Ceidnce. t5 /Enq M

m O* G Gr\\ c Ol hS Ld $ M eik' I I ,) 'n s O m I i e (

F a < ~ 'I4. i 'S W ]O-l'91s CIRC W ATER Clif.ORINATI0tl DATA e DATA SitEET 1 UNIT NO: [ n, WEEKIN _____...q 3' O C12 CitLORIllATORS DIOTItEllD DATE FDEQUEtiCY CLp INJECT NO. 1 NO. 2 DEFORE AFTER FREE mg/1* DISCllADGE I!!!TIALS C3 l "r,3 > t.,! Hill / CYCLE t /2 4 IIR f/24 IIR TIME TIME AVG. MAX HOUlt/ DAY CYCLE / DAY n y) .t) <,n 2,g a e.,. n 'l_ _t 3 yc) g,, w ,o dl

• en Y J'/1 bl z.]

O xo , $_ ____;_f'~_ ~

9..'_l_ _

...'.T.____.______90.____. ._1_5_0_ _0_.- ..a______ v' *^ 'a' _l o>_ to y _ _ _ _ o_ _ __ _ _. 4 .M._ _ _ _ _ _ _<_. _I _

• I j

u __ _t_e_u__ _ _=* T_ _ _h_ _ _ .__._3_______ ___ _ll__b ..) ~ o f }, (- ~_-_ - ~~- ~ ~QQ ) p. -~ ._______q..[_ _m_ _ _ _ _ __ g p__.I_ __ y_____ _ 4__ _ _0_ _.e._ u c3 J' 1 7 0.20 0.50 2 IIR/ DAY 3 LIMIT

g

)H s n s (1}<'t ttn(*:. .S HEASURED AT TOWER OVEDFI4W DURING CIff,ORINATIO!3 CYCLE Y %'done Grc H.p b 'o I on 4 'k

• g S

q.1 -g 1 '"" hY cQrc&s.1^as.) [ C&WY Il'# R'I'" J C t If 0 2 M Au Lui..ww l

o i

S 99.,2 rA Ck\\et.Q us *1~ m l JE au,s/ At f l'.: I%<ls;,*s ila eux,um Aishelo wou ldn ' Q s .h 6 ohd.h -.... t

. ~ -.. - - - - r t v .J J I .'s l s CIRC WATER CilLORIllATI0tt DATA DATA SilEET 1_ WEEKI,y . j _ UNIT 110: O, y 71 l Cl!LORINATORS BIOTREND C12 O DATE FREQUENCY CIq INJECT NO. 1 NO. 2 DEFORE AFTER FREE mg/l* DISCl!ARGE IllITI ALS 3 3 ^U 'n Q CYCLE / DAY Hill / CYCLE 1/24 !!R l/24 IIR TIME TIME AVG. MAX HOUR / DAY 0 3' i pg .g . _ _ _ ' _ _ _ _.a, :s /g) ______-y_. ,f 3 9 - ()Of y 3 n C' l mf f5 _ g.. c mn o /). Q- .. _ _ _ _ _ _..(g _o_o_ __t_ _a _l __d_ _a } _. ._ _U Wn,._...a h_ _ _ _ _ _ _.M *A. T u m3 5 3d 'Jc d c 3000 .i_ d .Y f O hb b Td /cCO <200G A + del ._l

• l

. _ _ _' ela, gn v y v ~v C y _ _ _ _. n w = . e___.--- r N .______x. - = _ _ LIMIT 0.20 0.50 2 HD/ DAY 3 i. e N l8 MEASURED AT TOWER OVERFI4W DURING CilLORINATION CYCLE -J i Af_a-!) i g.c.gy L M I. pe l b w lb o. m. h.p i -/- oi c ie.1.,,Ji f. E*:r n( 6f Atwsv / .e n.... a - (Wf i D.$6*%r. A bled U1 y 7 l...... I 3 sb A

'g)2 en w ~ o, } i r'y %a ~ .s~ CIRC UATER CitLORINATIOt3 DATA DATA SilEET 1 o Uti1T 110 WEExty o, -.____.__.___.__.y

• d Cl O

CitLORIII ATORS DIOTREt!D ___________...._____..._2______...... CL No. 1 No. 2 UEFORE AFTER FREE rag /l* DISCIIARGE IllITI ALS

.~,

._____._____=-.:...__._____... p ._ _.2._It!J ECT ^U d DATE FREQUE!!CY 'j, CYCLE / DAY Mill / CYCLE 1/24 IIR f/24 liR tit!E TIttC AVG. MAX llOUR/ DAY a> t.,o ,g .______.._____........___..__.______..,_M// ay n N p$ . [O c, m g s_________ d' U yW m,H 'Gs. 4 g g 1 . _0_o_ _ _ _.._.___.... -_.. __. ( */ 2 <L s3 I l $..... . __3___.. ...._4_U____.._ _ _l_o_ m_ _ ._~'_,_..s__..i.c'_ss o ._o__f _.c_ a____... to, d .,/,f o _ _ _ __.3_ _ _ g, s, I 9..f.= p r, i N I -.N_____... 5 'N. e ._______;.r.r.- N._ .___.--______.__.....___.__....__.____ _____.....__.._.._____.-......_____L____/ DAY.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 0.20 0.50 2 IIR Lilt!T t j n3 l MEASURED AT TOWER OVERFLO'<i DURI!1G CllLORIllATIOtt CYCLE 'u aa o [3% N ('pM w.] s:M era,,1 w ? DI .. - 1,.,. m F c C - $ .L.'l. T el 1 1t c0( m Cif. o sc~a c. .) l b~ OW5 E k5 Shk( g4J) A, ~.Q,f.v a f:;._., sj y1

• d n

v..

O.n o no sn p <du., 6 t I O

• a

a N g) .N t i J N t 'N* N. s y i t i i O% /4-/ -Q CIDC WATER CitLORINATT0t! DATA DATA SilEET 1 WEEKLY UNIT tiOs J O, = _ _ _, C1 5 i CitLORIt1 ATonS DIOTREt3D .__.______2________ o -____..._____._a.==-- DATE FREQUENCY CLp INJECT NO. 1 NO. 2 DEFORE AFTER FREE mg/l* DISC!!ARGE INITIALS y CYCLE / DAY HIN/ CYCLE 1/24 IIR 1/24 IIR TIME tit 1E AVG. 11AX llOUR/ DAY d "gO g 3 ,o f .j/ _/_ _ _ ____3_______ ____3_o_____.. _,_7_. _,_o_ _ _____4_.___. _M_ _ _F_ _ _ M . _<_,_1__e_ _. _I _ _ ____o._____. _.f_ _ _ _ _3 -__.

-i, >

n 3 O h W ~ f,_s F_ _ y_ _ ____,Z__________TO_ ____. _l.S_c_ _e _ _ _ . _ _ _ + _ _ _ _ _ _ _)U_l_\\ ___ .z_a_l_ _ _**I tn > 5 b 1 y mo o w A A M G, 'A_ _ _ _._/_VA_ _ _ _b_ l _ __<' _( _9__1G__ ____3_______ .__3__D_.._______h__o i o ) n s I -___@ g ____ dO Si $ 7._.8_ _3__ _6______.___ ..______0__0__c_/ - g g i n {}. p_. y ~ ~ ~ ' _ _.-._.__g__ _ _[_,_)_N l K lo-l ( ~H .. = m_ . = = = = n, ) e -1 c'______.._____.__...==- = _=.. a aw.. ___ LIMIT 0.20 0.50 2 Ita/ DAY g i

• U i
  • HEASURED AT TOWER OVERFLOW DURIt3G CilLORINATION CYCLE

-a $ Hen) NE44 'l-i~f.( En b y,yyz;nlentt.nte'. r.5 0.bbs..sthr33-M E N yb..w <tu.L oc c_ H.2 a c M c ~ y C.

• ,70 m

J o esic.sq f..Auie hr (. c,3.pta g > w mah. x e o i 9 _,f. g T. c.A 1 U" d b* b' ' g ' 9 c.... fl 6 thbri.A,o y i n..% the mim. ?> O t "4 M N' * *b ~ y cM.risal <, I M E CS*"d N " ~ q 1

,,3, 'bb^ g ,m t n Lco p.u Power Power Supply Eng:neenng and Scrvices January 31, 1933 Mr. Gene B. Welsh, Chief Wa ter Protection Branch Environmental Protec tion Division 270 Washington Street, S.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Re: Plant Arkwright NPDES Permit No. GA 0026069 Plant Bowen NPDES Permit No. GA 0001449 Plant Branch NPDES Permit No. GA 0026051 Plant Hammond h7 DES Permit No. GA 0001457 Plant Hatch NPDES Permit No. GA 0004120 Plant McDonough-Atkinson NPDES Permit No. GA 0001431 Plant McManus NPDES Permit No. GA 0003794 Plant Mitchell NPDES Permit No. GA 0001465 Plant Wansley 37 DES Permit No. GA 0026778 Plant Yates h7 DES Permit No. GA 0001473 cx( )

Dear Mr. Welsh:

As required by the above ref erenced NPDES Permits, we hereby submit the Operation Monitoring Reports for each of the corresponding power plants for the quarter ending December 31, 1982. If you have any questions or comments, please advise. Sincerely, T. E. Byerley Manager of Environmental Af Cairs RDM:bjk Attachments bc: W.O. Simmons R. H. Bohler File: EV925-022 - ,rn

QUlaTEP.LY OPERATIO!; ".0!;! TORI!;0 REPORT P3ge 1 of 7 Georgta Pe cr Cucpany From: 10-01-82 Plant Hatch To. 1 ?- 3!. 22 P.O. P,o x 45 5 Atlanta, Ceargia 30302 Permit !iu=L e r : 0004120 Dischar;;e Location. 001A - I.cw 'lolume Was te (neutrali:aticn t. 3 Type of Sample: Grab Frecuency of Analys ts : 2/co Parameter: Suspended Solids Oil & Grease ez/1 mz/1 Limits: Avg. 30 Avg. 15 Max. 100 Max. 20 Date i 10-C6-82 13 <5 l 10-18-22 <1 <5 11-01-32 162 8 11-16-82 4 <5 12-07-82 1 <5 12-20-82 <1 <5 Number of Samples: 6 6 Average value: 33 5 Maximum Value: 162 8 Minimum Value: <1 <5 Limits Exceeded: 1 0 h 7:

"d)c g>. QL'ARTERLY CPERA!'CN MC::ITORI:;G REPORT Page 2 of 7 Ce c r,; i a Power Cemnany Fr m 10-01-22 Plant Match To: 12-31-82 P.O. Box.545 Atlanta, Cecrgia 30302 Permit Number. 0004120 Discharge Locacicn: 001A - Low Volu: e Was te (pressure filter backwash) 2 Type of Sample. Grab Frequency of Analysis: 1/Qtr. Parameter: Suspended Solids Oil & Grease ec/1 ne/1 Lin;i t s : Avg. 30 Avg. 15 Max. 100 Max. 20 Location Dare Filter A 11-01-32 4 7 Filter B 11-01-82 1 10 Filter C 11-01-82 3 7 Filter D 11 32 2 9 Leber of Samples: 4 4 Average Value: 3 8 Maximum Value: 4 10 Minimum Value: I 7 Limits Exceeded: 0 0 ...n l O l l

I (UARTERLY OPEFATIC:: MO:iITCP.!:;C PIPCRT Page 3 of 7 Geor;;ia Power Ccmpany Frcm-10-01-22 Plant Hatch To: 12-31 82 gi, P.O. box 454) Atlanta. Centgia 30302 Ferate ;umoer. 00ue120 D Discharge Location: 0013 - Cooling Tower Blowdown e Frequency of Analysis: 1/wk. Location. Intake Mixing Zone Tower Type of Sample: In Situ In Situ Crab Parameter: Te:perature Te perature Chlorine vF F me/1 Clr L1=its: R or 50 t.T or 54 Avg. 0.2 Max. 900 Max. 90 Max. 0.5 Date 10-01-82 73 74 1 10-03-E2 79 75 10-13-22 77 77 10-20-22 63 63 10-27-82 63 63 11-03-82 70 70 11-10-82 60 62 11-17-22 53 59 11-24-82 64 64 12-01-82 66 65 12-03-82 62 62 12-15-82 55 55 12 21-82 51 55 12 23-82 57 57 Number of Samples: 14 la Ma x i um va l u e - 79 75 l M-Minim : Value: 51 55 '.. h Limits Exceeded: 0 i ' lot e : 1) Peterting of this dischrga point is no longer required. See Attactnents for chlorination data. ( l a O

3.'ARTEhi.i OPEFA!!O!; MC:;1TOEI:;G ETPORT Georgta Pm.er Cocpany p3,;e ; of ; Plant Hatch P.O. So n :. 5:. 5 Fr m: 10 01 37 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 To.12 21-22 Per=it iumber. 0004L2: Diacharge Loescien. 001D.- Liquid Rad.aste Systen (Unit Type of Sample: Crab 1) trequency of Analysis: 2/2o. Parameter. Suspended Solids er/l Oil & Grease pH i Limits: er/1 pH Uni s Avg. 30 Max. Avg. 15 100 Max. 20 \\ Date 10-04-82 10-18-82 <1 11-01-82 <1 3 11-15-82 3 11 12-05-82 2 9 12-20-82 3 2 4 2 1 Number of Samples: Average Value: 6 i Maximum Value: 3 6 Mini.m m Va lue: 4 5 a Limits Exceeded: <1 11 0 1 0 t s [ I 'q O

QUARTERLY OPERAT:::C MO:;ITORI::G ?IPGRT Pa ge 5 o f 7 Georgia Po-er Ccepany From: 10-31-82 Plant flatch i To: 12-31-32 P.O. Box 45.5 nelanta, Georgia 3033.' Per=it N umb e r : 0004120 = Discharge Location: 001D: Liquid Radwaste Sys:em (Unit II) Type of Sa ple: Grab Frequency of Analysis: 2/co. Parameter-. Suspended Solids Oil & Grease pH ee/1 mz/1 pH Units Limits. Avg. 30 Avg. 15 Max. 100 Max. 20 Date 10-02-82 <1 <l 10-18-82 4 2 11-01-32 11 3 l 11-15-82 3 2 12-06 82 5 1 l 12-20-82 3 1 Number of Samples: 6 6 Average value: 4 2 Maxim-m Value: 11 3 Minimum value: <l <l Limits Exceeded: 0 0 O

GARTERLY CPEP.ATIO:I Mu i!TCP,1! C REPORT I*'n 6 of 7 e F# ' Georgia Po.er Cv=pany -J Plant Hatch From 10-01-82 P.v. Box 454) To-12-31-32 Atlanta, Georp a 30;02 ."ermit Number 0004120 e Disenarge Location: 001E - Ccatined Plant 'Wa s t e ( L'n i t I) Frequency of Analysis. 1/ *A. i Type of Sample. In Situ Grab Grab Parameter: Average Free Temperature Limits: 'F Chlorine pH __ m2/1 C1 pH Units Min. 6.0 Date Max. 9.0 10-06-32 10-13-82 76 <0.1 10-20 82 80

7. 5

<0.1 10-26-82 71 7.0 <C.1 11-03-82 65 7.1 < 0.1 11-10-32 71 7.2 <0.1 11 17-82 62

7. 0

< 0.1 11-23-22 61 7.1 <0.1 12 01-32 65 7.2 < 0.1 12-C3-32 68

7. 0

< 0.1 62 7.1 12-14-82 <0.1 56

7. 2 12-21-32

<0.1 53 6.4 12-23-82 <0.1 60 6.9 < 0.1 7.2 Number of Samoles: 13 Average 'talue: 13 13 Maximum '/alue: <0.1 80 Minimum Value: <0.1 53 7.5 Limits Exceeded: <0.1 6.4 0 4 e,

QUAn!ELY CFE.u!!O:: M0!J T0itI:0 FIPGhT page 7 of 7 Georgi.a Power Company From: 10-01-32 Plant Hatch To : 12-31-32 P.O. sox 454) Atlanta, Georgia J0302 Permit ::umbe r : 0C04120 Discharge Locatien- 001E: - C :::ined "lant 'ab t e (Unit II) Frequency of Analysis. 1/wk. Type of Samples: In Situ Crab Grab Parameter: Te:perature Average Free pH Chlorine 'F ec/l C1. pH Units Limits: Min. 6.0 Max. 9.0 Date ~Y ~ 10-05-32 79 <0,1 79 10-13-82 79 <0.1 7.' O 10-20 32 72 1 7*2 10-26-32 67 < 0.1 7,2 11-03-32 73 <0.1 7.1 11-10-32 71 < 0.1 6.8 11-17-32 59 <0.1 7,1 11-24-82 63 <0.1

7. 2 12-01-82 32

< 0.1 8.2 12-08-82 62 < 0.1 6.5 12-14 82 60 < 0.1 6.C 12-21-82 78 < 0.1 6.8 12-22-32 64 < 0.1 7.1 --.~wn Number of Samples: 13 13 13 Average Value: Maximum Value: <0,1 82 <0.1 8.2 l Minimum Value: 53 <0.1 6.5 Limits Exceeded: O Note: 1) Unit out of service. I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in this report and that to the best of my knowledge and belief, such infor-ation is true, complete and accurate. T. E. Byerley Manager of Environmental Af fairs 1 \\ O ( %) l - -.... = - - -. -

M. : u.s l s. 's% I f .N. ? 4.cn f:tYl e 10-l-91. CIRC WATER CttLORit:ATIOt! DATA 8 1 DATA SilEET 1 Ut11T !!Os _N WCERLY n. 88 'o CilLORit3ATORS DIOTPEllD C12 CL IllJECT !!O I t:0. 2 DEFORE AFTER FREE rr.g/l* DISCllADCC IllITI ALS

s DATC l'REQUCt!CY

.___2_______.. _ _ _ _. .____..___q.__________ d 'p' P-U' CYCLE / DAY 111ti/CYCLC f/24 ilR 1/24 IIR TIliC TIttC AVG. fiAX IlOUR/ DAY C, Q ____.7____. ,4 s ._J_7_) )) s.} j.g .___o___ .o i_2._____. n 3 ... _7_ _6 p y '.l_ _ t__. , _ _ _o_e_ _ _ _ ._N_____ . _t_. I_ _ ..t _.._- r.___. /__ m,, E! 'l1 A ] .... o_ _c, .__s_________'__.. .'l_ _'_l_. .__'_T______._ _ _ _V_D ~ g W ,A__l.____.___S__. en v.. .n .. _ _ _I-- a.) o . _ _ _a_ _ _. .n_... _. o s v. '_N_t...__._3______.___ tt _0 ,r g,l,..g -__. ag g .. _ _e _e _ _ _ _ -.cg y o ( ~_ _ __ _. "" y 7._.,y h/n '"* H u L_ _ -l.._ _ - _ _ _ _ ~. ^ '..___... -hQd - - ~ ~~~~N g ..rs.._ _...____...__.___. p .._m_- 9 LI!!IT 0.20 0.50 2 IIR/ DAY D) )M8 ItCASURED AT TOWER OVERFI4W DURIt1G CIILORIttATIOtl CYCLC Y l,F}(le 8Nt's tl/i(='_ s*4 'O I G,t sta C j, a t.n e, o ti-m.' y O A '~ C' fQU c h lc ou {e s,.1 ~a. <l l 'd "Y 'I I""

• ~

J Pli? Am Lt.t w.uh l l i i N 3 <pi. a cu.1.Q us Y ..J.7L ca.. J be ekJ i wsu /akte IL'ely ;t ila an.n.a.n f.,.he..Js 'f./ef 3 T e st %

• CL sseb W Obi'

~~ t\\%,s.s r.s

A ,a t. 3 k ,3 - --- w ' \\./ ~ v ! -5 ? f 1 l l l t L r CIRC UATER Clif.ORItJATIOt3 DATA t DATA SilEET 1 U111T 110 uEEgty n,, Clit.ORi t! ATORG DIOTHEt!D C12 O DATE FREQUEt:CY CL2 It! JECT 11 0. 1 (10. 2 BEFORE AFTER FREE mg/l* disci!ARGE ItIITIALS _..q--_- ""' O -i CYCLE / DAY Mill /CYCLC 1/24 IIR f /24 IIR TIME TIME AVG. MAX ' liOUR/ DAY '/ U-r 'if Y,* Y l, 1 . _0.1 0 5: . Mn_... _ _._i___-. .-_D--_.... ._:+_1_c_o _- lo s. . - n _ _ _ _.. ,o ~ m ( yy -) E O, n. g.j. j. ,,',g, O /---- - s IT3 M ...f<J-_-_. e 'j 9.-..3/ ..-_---a.. p vs s . -. _ _ _. ~ - 'y g QC J/ ./ jyn p3 rn tJ ---~~---- H . l,, x, x) },.. y '* H Q g,f; Q'];y T t [ * .t,._.'W__-- --f_.....__._. ../.qly r L J._. pgg yg ( LIMIT 0.20 0.50 2 IIR/ DAY 3 I ~ HEASURED AT TOWER OVERFIDI DURItiG CitLORIllATIOtl CYCLE 'O s-s CT O ( g I a t I 'J3 8 C) us t

i N .s em -h h i 8 1 i 1 CIRC WATER CIILOR.TNATION DATA l t DATA SIIEET 1 ^ WEEKLY UNIT NO: n, .t - __________=---- Cl!LORINATORS DIOTDEllD C12

• 2 4

o I DATE FREQUENCY CLp INJECT NO. 1 NO. 2 DEFORE AFTER FREE mg/l* DISCilARGE INITIALS )

• i CYCLE / DAY MIN / CYCLE l/24 IIR 1/24 IIR tit 4E TIME AVC.

MAX llOUR/ DAY > _ 3_ m.__. "o, O s n.. y .. _ _...(...g. _ .o_ _ _z_ ___ g l 3 e ~., ... _9 . - - = _ r. =___ _.. _ __ _3 _ _ _ _ _'_/ _O_ _ _ _ _ ._&_ _c_ o' _ ._-D _o_d__ _ ._Ril/_}d_. e,I <.C =_s u__ri_g_ -. l[_2_____. vis ji n w ma a _. [j _ / g . _ _ _ _ _ _ d_ L. _ __. i j,/ u) __3 to > v en 2: x o y.. yyy . ____d__e_ .a_______ . _~_ ~___ ._______ 3 y______ 8Q y .a.___________.____ u 3 r .s.t.' _u. n.__3 _ _ ____4_0.__e_n____ _ _S__VOY l_l_t o___ __ .n "____ ._t s..! I __tu_n_ a____.. y _____ l ,\\ i' i ~H n 3 ;_. ~ L ',Lt._____3_____._ ___'_l O_ ____ ._c_o__a_) b '/d_C___ ._N_i_l___ _ . :_tA____.L.I_.t. _I .__sLe :,x_ _....__n______. 3 06 . _I,[_5]it____3___._______'_/_D __0__f.___ __'____ =D_I_O_ _ _ . _l.2_2_$_ __ .d 1 C. _ _ _ _I _ ___ _e_t _C.'_J s'__. ll '_l_l __ _ _. I I ( c1ld1W.4.+rd:$ 11 4,sSdn -[2;rh,[, - )' 0.20 0.50 2 HR/ DAY LIMIT

g q

th)<u , s.m w w *y af,aupt waj. - e'. I

• HEASURED AT TOWER OVERFLOW DURING CllLORINATION CYCLE A s-r.C o verj icsJ,thiu.,tue<A c~ l [8%.. c.

m o I m 1 c:- ~. ' ~.. l t e f e O g 1 ,'l'. tst e g. 4 1 .1; i .j. '* N

• be...-...

s a

s r s r % ds t a. 1 s e l 9 I.l i I SERVICE WATER CHLORTt3ATIOil DATA I f. .D.ATA Siir.ET 2 WEEK r.Y Uralf 130. } CIlf.Onit3ATORS DIOTRENO C1 2 .s J DATE FR EQUEtiCY CIq INJEC1 !!O. 1- !!O. 2 11 0. 3 DEFORE AFTER FilEE seg/l *

• FREE ng/1*

DISCt!ARGE a I . ~. [ ,h,* CYCI,E/ DAY Hill / CYCLE 1/24 IIR 1/24 IIR 1/24 IIR TIttC TIME AVC. ItAX AVG. MAX flOUlt/ DAY .O n, ~ 't. :: m ....__ _/1LLpp r-.:_,_ % 0 h b /t---. _.....t..os_. .i.n y o .qa. .o l . = -. =. --p) N" N N.: .cd .2 0 D Ceo t-I d=$ lI lI NI -..~O,.5 ?'. -ys :i - - '- $ -.- !N ~~~~----

---

~~~--

-~~~---~~~- r: O ~? t5 >3 l (; p $ --~~ ,[ 4 ,/p h p'-. g-------- ~. ---~-- - ~---- ~ M I* M (.;(),3) y, }..)p. ( ----__. _ _. .. _ _t) L. '~ h' k, , gl.s g......._____ =..___. {, ~ ~~

J g $

y ....o.---. (, ) 9 o,j,yp..L..........._-._-..- ._--- _.. _ _....--..o..os_-_. 3 LIMIT 0. 2 11 0.50 2 HR/ DAY y t HEASURED AT 00!HT OF DISCIIARGE TO RIVER DURING CHbnINATION CYCI,E -J mo HEASURED AT SERVICE WATER DIScilARGE TO CIRC WATElt FLUME i m e m t e*

O I

't o ui .I \\

• l t

o

m /~ ^/~~N m O i SERVICE WATER CHf.ORit!ATION DATA DATA SilEET 2 unir nO. ~/ WEref.y _ _................ _ _ _ ___ ____==......-.......... CitLODIN ATORS D10 TREND Cl2 DATE FPEQUEt3CY ' CLp INJCCT NO. 1 NO. 2 NO. 3 BEFORE AFTER FREE rng/1*

• FDEC mg/1*

DISCalARGE E) N CYCLE / DAY filH/ CYCLE 1/24 IIR t/24 IIR 1/24 IIR T!HE TIME AVG. HAX AVG. IIAX llOUH/ DAY P j g, y ) y m (1 Iy.}g}. [ ....f.,,.e.,;........ o m .m y ~ ~ - - - ~. ga / pp f - , ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~y-n j,- a- ~ () O.) -~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > l',)l > ~ t.:: 0 ~~~ ~~~~~- -~~~-~~---- --~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~-~~~~

• ~~~~~

~~~~~~~ ~~~~~' -~~~~- ),. y ~..,_........._... .= ......,7-. %0 rn m ....n. to.g-q /....-.. g o y.......... ...t/.i. .....-.._.. ~....... '. . 6.i.(.JP ........./.'. ~~ lg. --......-.... 2... c.g . ~ - d..... f, LIMIT

0. 2tl 0.50 2 lin/ DAY

_ =. = _ q 8 MEASURED AT POINT OF DISCIIARGE TO RIVER DUR1HG CHLORINATION CYCLE 'J mo

• • HEASURED AT SERVI'E WATER DISCHARGE TO CIRC WATER FLUME m

D O,

u \\ I}}