ML20079R298
| ML20079R298 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 01/31/1984 |
| From: | NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20079R293 | List: |
| References | |
| ENVR-840131, NUDOCS 8402020156 | |
| Download: ML20079R298 (140) | |
Text
MNPS-3 EROLS INSERTION INSTRUCTIONS FOR AMENDMENT 5 O
VOLUME 4 Transmittal letters and the attachments, along with these insertion instructions, should either be filed or entered in Volume I in front of any existing letters, instructions, distribution lists, etc.
Recove Insert Location VOLUME 4 EPQ-1/EPQ-2 EPQ-1/EPQ-2 After January 31, 1983 Tab Q470.4-1/ Blank Q470.4-1 After Q470.3
- Tab - October 7, 1983 After Q470.4 EPQ-1/ Blank 1 of 1/ Blank QE290.2-1/ Blank QE290.3-1/ Blank QE291.19-1/ Blank 9 Amendment 5 1 "of 1 January 1984 8402020156 840120 PDR ADOCK 05000 2 C
HNPS-3 EROLS m
I i INSERTION INSTRUCTIONS FOR AMENDMENT 5
% ,)
Remove old pages and insert Amendment 5 pages as instructed below tamendment pages bear the amendment nu.nber and date at the foot of the page).
r Vertical bars (change bars) have been placed in the outside margins of revised text pages and tables to shew the location of any technical changes originating with this amendment. A few unrevised pages have been reprinted because they fall within a run of closely spaced revised pages. No change bars are used on figures or on new sections, appendices, questions and responses, etc.
Transmitt31 letters along with these incertion instructions should either be filed or entered in Volume I of Part I, in front of any existing letters, instructions, distribution lists, etc.
LEGEND Remove / Insert Colunns Entries beginning with "T" or "F" designate table or figure numbers, respectively. All other entries are page numbers:
-~ T2.3-14 = Table 2.3-14 F2.3-14 = Figure 2.3-14
\
2.1-9 = P' age 2.1-9 EP2-1 = Page EP2-1 vii = Page vii Pages printed back to back are indicated by a "/":
1.2-5/6 = Page 1.2-5 backed by Page 1.2-6 T2.3-14(5 of 5)/15(1 of 3) = Table 2.3-14, rheet 5 of 5, backed by Table 2.3-15, sheet 1 of 3 Location Column Ch = Chapter, S = Section, Ap = Appendix
's_ /
Amendment 5 1 of 3 January 1984
HUPS-3 EROLS IllSERTION INSTRUCTIONS FOR AMENDMENT 5 (Cent)
Remove Insert Location VOLUME 1 EP2-1 thru EP2-8 EP2-1 thru EP2-9 After Ch. 2 Tab 2-i/2-ii 2-1/2-ii 2-ix/2-x 2-ix/2-x 2-xiii thru 2-xvii 2-xiii thru 2-xvii 2.1-3 thru 2.1-6 2.1-3 thru 2.1-6 After 52.1 Tab F2.1-3 thru F2.1-3 thru F2.1-5 F2.1-5 2.2-19/2.2-20 2.2-19/2.2-20 After S2.2 Tab 2.2-23/2.2-24 2.2-23/2.2/24 2.2-33/2.2-34 2.2-33/2.2-34 2.2-63/2.2-64 2.2-63/2.2-64 T2.2-5 (1 of 1)/ T2.2-5 (1 of 1)/
T2.2-6 (1 of 1) T2.2-6 (1 of 1)
T2.2-8 (1 of 1) thru T2.2-8 (1 of 1) thru T2.2-10 (1 of 2) T2.2-10 (1 of 2)
T2.2-14 (1 of 1)/T2.2-15 T2.2-14 (1 of 1)/T2.2-15 (1 of 1) (1 of 1)
T2.2-16 (7 of 7)/T2.2-17 T2.2-16 (7 of 7)/T2.2-17 (1 of 3) (1 of 3)
T2.2-34 (1 of 3)/(2 of 3) T2.2-34 (1 of 3/(2 of 3)
T2.2-38 (1 of 1)/T2.2-39 T2.2-38 (1 of 1)/T2.2-39 (1 of 1) (1 of 1)
T2.2-41 (2 of 2)/T2.2-42 T2.2-41 (2 of 2)/T2.2-42 (1 of 1) (1 of 1)
VOLUME 2 2.3-13 thru 2.3-20 2.3-13 thru 2.3-20 After 52.3 Tab 2.4-1/2.4-2 2.4-1/2.4-2 After S2.4 Tab 2.4-11/2.4-12 2.4-11/2.4-12 2.7-1/2.7-2 2.7-1/2.7-2 After S2.7 Tab EP3-1/EP3-2 EP3-1/EP3-2 After Ch. 3 Tab 3-iii/3-iv 3-iii/3-iv T3.6-3 (1 of 1)/ Blank T3.6-3 (1 of 1)/ Blank After 53.6 Tab EPS-1 thru EFS-3 EP5-1 thru EPS-3 After Ch. 5 Tab 5-v/5-vi 5-v/5-vi Amendment 5 2 of 3 January 1984 h
,9
- g
MMPS-3 EROLS INSERTION INSTRUCTIO!!S FOR A!!ENDl!ENT 5 (Cont) w)
Remove Insert Location 5.1-13/5.1-14 5.1-13/5.1-14 After 55.1 Tab 5.1-51/5.1-52 5.1-51/5.1-52 5.1-61 thru 5.1-64 5.1-61 thru 5.1-64 F5.1-21 F5.1-21 T5.2-8 (1 of 1) thru T5.2-8 (1 of 1) thru After 55.2 Tab T5.2-19 (1 of 1) T5.2-19 (1 of 1)
T5.2-24 (1 of 1)/TS.2-25 T5.2-24 (1 of 1)/T5.2-25 (1 of 1) (1 of 1)
T5.6-3 (1 of 1)/ Blank T5.5-3 (i of 1)/ Blank After SS.6 Tab VOLUME 3 EP6-1/ Blank EP6-1/ Blank After Ch. 6 Tab 6.1-17/6.1-18 6.1-17/6.1-18 After S6.1 Tab 6.1-29/6.1-30 6.1-29/6.1-30 6.1-41/6.1-42 6.1-41/6.1-42 F6.1-14 F6.1-14 6.3-1/ Blank 6.3-1/ Blank After S6.3 Tab
[\ EP7-1/ Blank EP7-1/ Blank After Ch. 7 Tab
\_
7-i thru 7-i/7-ii 7-ii F7.1-3 thru F7.1-6 F7.1-3 thru F7.1-6 After 57.1 Tab EP8-1/ Blank EP8-1/ Blank After Ch. 8 Tab EP12-1/ Blank EP12-1/ Blank After Ch. 12 Tab T12.0-1 (3 of 5)/(4 of 5) T12.0-1 (3 of 5)/(4 of 5) After 512.0 Tab EP-C-1/ Blank EP-C-1/ Blank After Ap C Tab C-19/C-20 C-19/C-20 EP-E-1/ Blank EP-E-1/ Blank After Ap E Tab E-iii/ Blank E-lii/ Blank F E-3 F E-3 EP-F-1/ Blank EP r-1/ Blank After Ap F Tab F-i/ Blank F-i/ Blank
-~ Amendment 5 3 of 3 January 1984
%.J
I MNPS-3 EROLS (January 31, 1983 Letter)
O LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES Page, Table (T), or Revision Figure (F) Number Date EROLS Questions (Index)
(1 thru 2 of 2) 0 April 1983 QE100.2-1 1 September 1983 TQE100.2-1 (1 of 9 thru 9 of 9) 1 September 1983 Q231.1-1 0 April 1983 Q240.1-1 thru Q240.J-2 1 September 1983 FQ240.1-1 1 September 1983 FQ249.1-2 1 September 1983 FQ240.1-3 1 September 1983 FQ240.1-4 1 September 1983 FQ240.1-5 1 September 1983 Exhibit 240.1-1 (25 pages) 0 September 1983 Q240.2-1 0 April 1983 QE290.1-1 0 April 1983 QE291.1-1 thru QE291.1-3 0 April 1983 QE291.2-1 0 April 1983 TQE291.2-1 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 April 1983 TQE291.2-2 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQE291.2-3 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQE291.2-4 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 QE291.3-1 thru QE291.3-2 0 April 1983 O_,
s QE291.4-1 0 April 1983 QE291.5-1 0 April 1983 QE291.6-1 0 April 1983 QE291.7-1 0 April 1983 QE291.8-1 0 April 1983 QE291.9-1 0 April 1983 QE291.10-1 0 April 1983 QE291.11-1 0 April 1983 QE291.12-1 0 April 1983 FQE291.12-1 0 April 1983 QE291.13-1 0 April 1983 QE291.14-1 0 April 1983 QE291.15-1 0 April 1983 QE291.16-1 0 April 1983 QE291.17-1 0 April 1983 QE291.18-1 0 April 1983 QE311.5-1 0 April 1983 TQE311.5-1 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQE311.5-2 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQE311.5-3 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQE311.5-4 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQE311.5-5 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQE311.5-6 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQE311.5-7 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983
~s TQE311.5-8 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 J
Revision 2 EPQ-1 January 1984
10lPS-3 EROLS (January 31, 1983 Letter)
LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES (Cont)
Page, Table (T), or Revision Figure (F) Number Date TQE311.5-9 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQE311.5-10 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQE311.5-11 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQE311.5-12 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 "QE311.5-13 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQE311.5-14 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQE311.5-15 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQE311.5-16 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQE311.5-17 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 QE320.1-1 thru QE320.1-2 0 April 1983 QE320.2-1 0 April 1953 Q470.1-1 0 April 1983 TQ470.1-1 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQ470.1-2 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 TQ470.1-3 (1 of 1) 0 April 1983 Q470.2-1 0 April 1983 Q470.3-1 0 April 1983 Q470.4-1 1 January 1984 0
1 1
Revision 2 EPQ-2 January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS NRC Letter: January 31, 1983
(
Question No. Q470.4 (Appendix F) l
~ Table F-2 should be amended to include both the sport and commercial invertebrate annual harvest for the 80 km region.
Response
The total invertebrate harvest was calculated using seafood consumption rates for an average adult, teen, and child and the 2010 population.
For purposes of calculating doses, it was conservatively assumed that 50 percent of the total was sports catch and 50 percent commercial. ,
s c
Revision 1 Q470.4-1 January 1984-
MNPS-3 EROLS (October 7, 1983 Letter)
LIS1 0F EFFECTIVE PAGES Page, Table (T), or Revision Figure (F) timber Date EROLS Questions (Index) 0 January 1984 QE290.2-1 0 January 1984 QE290.3-1 0 January 1984 QE291.19-1 0 January 1984 O
O EPQ-1 t - _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _
- - MNPS-3 EROLS
! EROLS QUESTIONS 1
?
, MILLSTONE. NUCLEAR POWER STATION - UNIT 3 i DOCKET No. 50-423 i
i i
i NRC EROLS
! Question Section Keywords
- Environmental Engineering Branch (EEB) e d
l E290.2 -
Noise complaint l E290.3 -
Noise related complaints l E291.19 -
Telephone conversation references l
r f
i
}
l 4
?
I 1 of 1
I'
, MNPS-3 EROLS NRC Letter: October 7, 1983
)
- Question No. E290.2 (Section 2.1).
, During _the public meeting held on July 21, 1983, to gather information on environmental concerns ovEr Millstone Unit 3, M.A. Cotter of 50 New Shore Road in Pleasure Beach indicated that representatives of Northeast Utilities visited his residence for the purpose of- obtaining noise level data in response to his complaint regarding noise from the Millstone plant site. Provide the noise level ' data _ gathered, if any, in response to Mr. Cotter's complaint.
Indicate the status of construction (i.e., types of activities) ongoing at the Millstone site during noise measurements and similarly indicate the operational status for Millstone Units 1 and 2.
Indicate' any follow-up actions taken to resolve Mr. Cotter's noise complaint.
Response
The response to this question will be submitted at a later date.
l e
QE290.2-1
MNPS-3 ERCLS O
( j NRC Letter: October 7, 1983 Question No. E290.3 (Section 2.1)
. Provide information on noise related complaints associated with operation of the Millstone Nuclear Power Station. Include date and time of complaint, the location of the complaintant, the nature of
.he complaint and the actions taken by Northeast Utilities to resolve the complaint and to prevent its reoccurrence.
Response.
! The response to this question will be submitted at a later date.
O) b i
i r 1
\s /
QE290.3_-1
11NPS-3 EROLS
,m_
( ) NRC Letter: October 7,1983 V
Question No. E291.19 (Section 2.1)
There are numerous references to telephone conversations in the text of ER Section 2.1 Water Use regarding fisheries types, catch data, fishery growth, seafood consumption and water users (i.e., ER Sections 2.1.3.2.1 Recreation; 2.1.3.2.2.2 Sport Fisheries; 2.1.3.2.3 Commerical Fisheries; 2.1.3.2.4 Aquaculture; 2.1.3.2.5 Human Consumption of Seafood; 2.1.3.2.8 Waterborne Commerce and 2.1.3.2.9 Industrial and Commerical Water Users). Provide copies of these telephone conversation references including the names of the individuals providing the information, their affiliation and address, dates of the conversations. and the information provided.
Response
A copy of the requested telephone conversation references has been provided under separate cover on November 7, 1933.
v v)
QE291.19-1
- - . . ~= - . .-
MNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES Page, Table (T), or Amendment Figure (F) Number 2-i 5 2-ii thru 2-viii 0 2-ix 5 2-x thru 2-xii 0 1 2-xiii 5 2-xiv 0 2-xv 5 2-xvi 0 2-xvii 5 i
l 2.1-1 thru 2.1-2 0 2.1-3 thru 2.1-5 5 2.1-6 0 2.1-7 1 2 2.1-8 4 2.1-9 thru 2.1-10 0 ,
2.1-11 4 i
2.1-12 thru 2.1-30 0
- T2.1-1 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-2 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-3 (1 of 1) 0
- T2.1-4 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-5 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-6 (1 of'1)- 0 1
T2.1-7 (1 of 1) C T2.1-8 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-9 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-10 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-11 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-12 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-13 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-14 (1 of 1) 0 ,
T2.1-15 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-16 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-17 (1 of 1) 0
-T2.1-18 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-19 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-20 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-21 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.1-22 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-23 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-24 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 fs T2.1-25 (1 of 3) 4
. (-- T2.1-25 (2 thru 3 of 3) 0 T2.1-26 (1 of 1) 0 Amendment 5 EP2-1 January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES (Cont) h Page, Table (T), or Amendment Figure (F) Number T2.1-27 (1 thru 3 of 3) 0 T2.1-28 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-29 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-30 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-31 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-32 (1 thru 3 of 3) 0 T2.1-33 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-34 (1 thru 3 of 3) 0 T2.1-35 (1 thru 4 of 4) 0 T2.1-36 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.1-37 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-38 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.1-39 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-40 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.1-41 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.1-42 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-43 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-44 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-45 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-46 (1 of 1) 0 T2.1-47 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.1-48 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.1-49 (1 of 1) 0 F2.1-1 0 F2.1-2 0 F2.1-3 5 F2.1-4 5 F2.1-5 5 F2.1-6 0 F2.1-7 0 F2.1-8 0 F2.1-9 0 F2.1-10 0 F2.1-11 0 F2.1-12 0 F2.1-13 0 F2.1-14 0 F2.1-15 0 F2.1-16 0 F2.1-17 0 F2.1-18 0 F2.1-19 0 F2.1-20 0 F2.1-21 0 Amendment 5 EP2-2 January 1984
HNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES (Cont)
Page, Table (!), or Amendment Figure (F) Number F2.1-22 0 F2.1-23 0 F2.1-24 1 F2.1-25 0 F2.1-26 0 F2.1-27 0 F2.1-28 0 F2.1-29 0 F2.1-30 0 F2.1-31 0 F2.1-32 0 F2.1-33 0 F2.1-34 4 F2.1-35 0 F2.1-36 0 F2.1-37 0 0
O' F2.1-38 F2.1-39 0 2.2-1 thru 2.2-19 0 2.2-20 5 2.2-21 thru 2.2-22 0 2.2-23 5 2.2-24 thru 2.2-33 0 2.2-34 5 2.2-35 thru 2.2-63 0 2.2-64 5 2.2-65 thru 2.2-104 0 T2.2-1 (1 thru 10 of 10) 0 T2.2-2 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.2-3 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-4 (1 thru 3 of 3) 0 T2.2-5 (1 of 1) 5 T2.2-6 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-7 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.2-8 (1 of 1) 5 T2.2-9 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.2-10 (1 of 2) 5 T2.2-10 (2 of 2) 0 T2.2-11 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-12 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-13 (1 of 1) 0 0' T2.2-14 (1 of 1)
T2.2-15 (1 of 1) 0 5 ,
Amendment 5 EP2-3 January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES (Cont) g Page, Table (T), or Amendment Figure (F) Number T2.2-16 (1 thru 6 of 7) 0 T2.2-16 (7 of 7) 5 T2.2-17 (1 thru 3 of 3) 0 T2.2-18 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-19 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-20 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-21 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-22 (1 thru 4 of 4) 0 T2.2-23 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.2-24 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-25 (1 thru 4 of 4) 0 T2.2-26 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.2-27 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-23 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-29 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.2-30 (1 thru 10 of 10) 0 T2.2-31 (1 thru 3 of 3) 0 T2.2-32 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-33 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-34 (1 of 3) 5 T2.2-34 (2 thru 3 of 3 0 T2.2-35 1 of 1) 0 T2.2-36 (i ei 1) 0 T2.2-37 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-38 (1 of 1) 5 T2.2-39 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-40 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-41 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.2-42 (1 of 1) 5 T2.2-43 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-44 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-45 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-46 (1 thru 3 of 3) 0 T2.2-47 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-48 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.2-49 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-50 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-51 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-52 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.2-53 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-54 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-55 (1 of 1) 0 T2.2-56 (1 of 1) 0 F2.2-1 0 Amendment 5 FP2-4 January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS b}
[ LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES (Cont)
Page, Table (T), or Amendment Figure (F) Number F2.2-2 0 F2.2-3 0 F2.2-4 0 F2.2-5 0 F2.2-6 0 F2.2-7 0 F2.2-8 0 F2.2-9 0 F2.2-10 0 F2.2-11 0 F2.2-12 (3 sheets) 0 F2.2-13 0 F2.2-14 0 F2.2-15 0 F2.2-16 (3 sheets) 0 F2.2-17 0
/\ F2.2-18 0 k-s F2 2-19 0 F2.2-20 0 F2.2-21 0 F2.2-22 0 F2.2-23 0
, F2.2-24 (3 sheets) 0 F2.2-25 0 F2.2-26 0 F2.2-27 0 F2.2-28 (2 sheets) 0 F2.2-29 0 F2.2-30 0 F2.2-31 0 F2.2-32 0 F2.2-33 0 F2.2-34 0 F2.2-35 .. O F2.2-36 0 F2.2-37 0 F2.2-38 0 F2.2-39 0 F2.2-40 0 F2.2-41 0 F2.2-42 0
()
F2.2-43 F2.2-44 F2.2-45 0
0 0
Amendment 5 EP2-5 January 1984
MHPS-3 EROLS LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES (Cont)
Page, Table (T), or Amendment Figure (F) Number F2.2-46 0 F2.2-47 0 F2.2-48 0 F2.2-49 0 F2.2-50 0 F2.2-51 0 Summary TC i thru ii 0 2.3-1 0 2.3-2 4 2.3-3 thru 2.3-6 0 2.3-7 1 2.3-8 1 2.3-9 1 2.3-10 1 2.3-11 1 2.3-12 1 2.3-13 thru 2.3-15 5 2.3-16 thru 2.3-17 0 2.4-18 thru 2.3-19 5 2.4-20 thru 2.3-24 0 T2.3-1 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-2 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-3 (1 of 1) 1 T2.3-4 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-5 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-6 (1 of 1) 1 T2.3-7 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-8 (1 of 1) 1 T2.3-9 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-10 (1 of 1) G T2.3-11 (1 of 1) 1 T2.3-12 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-13 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-14 (1 thru '3 of 13) 1 T2.3-15 (1 thru 13 of 13) 0 T2.3-16 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-17 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-18 (1 of 1) '
T2.3-19 (1 thru 2 of 2) 1 T2.3-20 (1 of 1) 1 T2.3-21 (1 of 1) 1 T2.3-22 (1 of 1) 1 Amendment 5 EP2-6 January 1984
n
$ 49 'A ,
k@sj IMAGE EVALUATION
((p%
k//77 g ?/ TEST TARGET (MT-3) 4 / ;%(,,(g, b
'l.77,, p I.0 9 man lf @ HE I
l.1 ['" E I.8 1.25 1.4 I i.6 I
4 150mm >
4 6" - >
4$!kr O
3,% ??<./'%
4l$'
b -_
4> q> c tt IMAGE EVALUATION ///,g/ Ok{g,#
kf7 %! TEST TARGET (MT-3) #% 4 ss'$/@/ \[/ fit I.0 'd 2 M 5!NE I.I [" EEI.8 1.25 I l.4 1.6 I
4 150mm >
4 6" >
[e{23'% i /!b
+,v 7// <>#< ens e 6;& de o
'O w
MNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES (Cont) i Page, Table (T), or Amendment Figure (F) Number
- T2.3-23 (1 thru 8 of 8) 0 T2.3-24 (1 thru 3 of 3) 0 T2.3-25 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-26 (1 of 1) 0
' T2.3-27.(1 of 1) 0 T2.3-28 (1 of 1) 1 T2.3-29 (1 thru 12 of 12) 0
- T2.3-30 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-31 (1 of 1) 2 T2.3-32 (1 of 1) 2 T2.3-33 (1 of 1) 2
, T2.3-34 (1 of 1) 2 T2.3-35 (1 of 1) 2 T2.3-36 (1 of 1) 2 T2.3-37 (1 of 1) 2 T2.3-38 (1 of ;) 2
(N
(_,)
T2.3-39 (1 thru 3 of 3) 1 i
T2.3-40 (1 of 1) 1 T2.3-41 (1 of 1) 0
- T2.3-42 (1 of 1) 1 T2.3-43 (1 of 1) 1
. T2.3-44 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-45 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-46 (1 of 1) 0
- j. T2.3-47 (1 of 1) 1 T2.3-48 (1 of 1) 1 T2.3-49 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-50 (1 of 1) 0 .
T2.3-51 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-52 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-53 (1 of 1) 1 T2.3-54 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-55 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-56 (1 of 1) 1 T2.3-57 (1 of 1) 1 T2.3-58 (1 of 1) 1 T2.3-59 (1 cf 1) 0 T2.3-60 (1 of 1) 0
, T2.3-61 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-62 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-63 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-64 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-65 (1 of 1) 0
\- - T2.3-66 (1 of 1) 1 Amendment 5 EP2-7 January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGE3 (Cont)
Page, Table (T), or Amendment Figure (F) Number T2.3-67 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-68 (1 of 1) 0 T2.3-69 (1 of 1) 0 F2.3-1 0 F2.3-2 0 F2.3-3 0 F2.3-4 (2 sheets) 0 F2.3-5 (2 sheets) 0 F2.3-6 (2 sheets) 0 F2.3-7 0 2.4-1 5 2.4-2 thru 2.4-10 0 2.4-11 5 2.4-12 0 2.4-13 2 2.4-14 thru 2.4-17 0 T2.4-1 (1 thru 3 of 3) 0 T2.4-2 (1 of 1) 0 T2.4-3 (1 of 1) 0 T2.4-4 (1 of 1) 0 T2.4-5 (1 of 1) 0 F2.4-1 0 F2.4-2 0 F2.4-3 0 F2.4-4 0 F2.4-5 0 F2.4-6 0 F2.4-7 0 F2.4-8 0 F2.4-9 0 F2.4-10 0 F2.4-11 0 F2.4-12 0 F2.4-13 0 2.5-1 thru 2.5-2 2 F2.5-1 0 F2.5-2 0 2.6-1 thru 2.6-3 0 T2.6-1 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T2.6-2 (1 of 1) 0 .6A (Cover) - 1 page O Amendment 5 EP2-8 January 1984
_ . ..... . .-..- ... .- ..-- - .. . . . _ - - . . . , . . . . - ..- . ~ . . . . - . . .- ._.. W -.
l i
i ' ..
MNPS-3 EROLS j
i LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES (Cont)
}
t 2
r Page, Table (T), or Amendment 4
I Figure (F) Number I
I Attachment 2.6A - 1 page 0 '
- Attachment 2.6A (letter) - 3 pages 0 Attachment 2.6A (list) - 15 pages 0 ,
Attachment 2.6B (cover) - 1 page 0 -
j' Attachment 2.6B - 1 page 0 Attachment 2.6B (letter) - 2 pages 0 4 2.7-1 5 l 2.7-2 thru 2.7-3 0
- T2.7-1 (1 of 1) 0
} T2.7-2 (1 of 1) 0
, T2.7-3 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 1 F2.7-1 0 a F2.7-2 2 i i t
! I 4
l i
i i
! (
I -
l i i !
i i,
1.
V
- Amendment S EP2-9 January 1984 i
v'99=rP'WTFn'+We- g' ig w-sy'p -ww wry 7- 'ev v w-W-T'y7=F+f' yppyo*-yg--g=ww.**-w--gWMar-- emW9N MM & Mygeep WWr gyr ve+ 9'@NM 99'1 m ,. -
MNPS-3 EROLS h-V CHAPTER 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 2 THE' SITE AND ENVIRONMENTAL INTERFACES. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1-1 2.1 GEOGRAPHY AND DEMOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1-1 2.1.1 Site Location and Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1-1
.; 2.1.2 Population Distribution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1-3 2.1.3 Uses of Adjacent Lands and Waters. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1-5 2.1.4 References for Section 2.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1-11 2.2 ECOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2-1 2.%.i Terrestrial Ecology. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2-1 2.2.2 Aquatic Ecology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2-11 2.2.2.1 Existing Site Water Characteristics. . . . . . . . . . . 2.2-11 2.2.2.2 Phytoplankton Species composition. . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2-11 2.2.2.3 Zooplankton Species Composition. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2-12 2.2.2.4 other Species. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2-18 2.2.2.5 Finfish. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2-47 2.2.2.6 Endangered Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2-77
[\ 2.2.3 Literature Survey. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 2.2-77
's-2.2.3.1 Terrestrial Ecology Literature Survey. . . . . . . . . . 2.2-77 2.2.3,2 Aquatic Ecology Literature Survey. . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2-78 2.2.4 References for Section 2.2 . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 2.2-80 2.3 METEOROLOGY. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3-1 2.3.1 Regional Climatology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3-1 2.3.2 Site Meteorology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3-7 2.3.3 Topographical Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3-11 2.3.4 Short-Term (Accident) Diffusion Estimates. . . . . . . . . 2.3-12 2.3.5 Long-Term (Routine) Diffusion Estimates. . . . . . . . . . 2.3-16 2.3.6 References for Section 2.3 . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 2.3-22 2.4 HYDROLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4-1 2.4.1 Surface Water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4-1 2.4.2 Groundwater. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4-1 2.4.3 Oceanography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.4.4 References for Section 2.4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.2.4-1l5
. 2.4-15 2.5 GEOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5-1 2.5.1 Topography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5-1 2.5.2 Geology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5-1 f-~g 2.5.3 References for Section 2.5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5-2 l
Amendment 5 2-i January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont)
Section Title Page 2.6 REGIONAL HISTORIC, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, SCENIC, CULTURAL, AND NATURAL FEATURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6-1 2.6.1 The Site and Vicinity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6-1 2.6.2 Transmission Line. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6-1 2.6.3 References for Section 2.6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6-2 2.7 NOISE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.7-1 2.7.1 Site Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.7-1 2.7.2 Ambient Sound Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.7-1 0
l l
l i
l 1
l i
l
[
O 2-ii
MNPS-3 EROLS
) TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont)
Table Title 2.3-16 Comparison of Wind Direction Frequency Distribution by Quadrant at Bridgeport, Conn and Millstone 2.3-17 Comparison of Average Wind Speed by Quadrant at Bridgeport, Conn. and Millstone-2.3-18 Occurrence of Wind Persistence Episodes within the same 22.5-Degree Sector 2.3-19 Millstone Climatological Summary
- 2.3-20 Comparison of Monthly-and Annual Average Dry-Bulb and Dewpoint Temperature Averages at Bridgeport, Conn. and Millstone 2.3-21 Comparison of Monthly and Annual Average Relative Humidity
, Averages at Bridgeport and Millstone 2.3-22 Mean Number of Days with Heavy Fog at Bridgeport, Conn. and, Block Island 2.3-23 Wind- . Direction / Stability Class / Visibility Joint Frequency Distribution at Millstone 2.3-24 Persistence of Poor Visibility ($1 Mile) Conditions at Millstone (Hours) 2.3-25 Bridgeport, Conn. Pasquill Stability Class Distribution 2.3-26 Millstone Stability Class Distribution Using Delta-T for Stability Determination
, 2.3-27 Millstone Stability Class Distribution Using Sigma Theta for i Stability Determination i .
I 2.3-28 Comparison of Pasquill Stability Class Distribution at 7
Bridgeport, Conn. and Millstone i 2,3-29 Persistence of Stable Conditions (E, F, and G Stabilities) at Millstone 2.3-30 Seasonal and Annual Atmospheric Mixing Depths at Millstone
- 2.3-31 Median (50-Percent Equal Risk) Ground Level X/Q Values (x10-5 l sec/m3) at the Exclusion Area Boundary for the 0- to 720-Hour l 5 Period Following an Accident .
i 2.3-32 Median (50-Percent Equal Risk) Ground Level X/Q Values (x10-8 l5 sec/m3) at the Low Population Zone for the 0- to 30-Day Period
. Following an Accident Amendment 5 2-ix January 1984 i
. . - , _ _ , , . , - _ , - - . _ . , , ., ..-,-,.,,._,,,,..._,,,,....,.y_.m.,, . . . . . , , . . . . . . , ,e-.,__~_,..,m. __-_..,.m ..,y ..,,, _ , -
MNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF TABLES (Cont)
Table Title 2.3-33 Median (50-Percent Equal Risk) Ground-Level X/Q Values (x10-5 sec/m3 ) at the Exclusion Area Boundary for the 0-720-Hour Period Following an Accident 2.3-34 Median (50-Percent Equal Risk) Elevated X/Q Values (x10-s sec.'m3) at the Low Population Zone for the 0-720-Hour Period Following an Accident 2.3-35 Median (50-Percent Equal Risk) Elevated X/Q Values (x10-7 sec/m3) at the Exclusion Area Boundary for the O- to 2-Hour Period Following an Accident 2.3-36 Median (50-Percent Equal Risk) Elevated X/Q Values (x10-7 sec/m3) at the Low Population Zone for the 30-Day Period Following an Accident 2.3-37 Median (50-Percent Equal Risk) Fumigation X/Q Values (x10-5 sec/m3) at the Exclusion Area Boundary for the Elevatari Release Dose Calculation 2.3-38 Median (50-Percent) Fumigation X/Q Values (x10-8 sec/m3) at the Low Population Zene for Elevated Release Dose Calculations 2.3-39 Radiological Pathway Analyses Distances (to 8 km - 5 miles)
(a) for Millstone 3 Ventilation Vent and Millstone 1 114-Meter (375-Foot) Stack (in Parentheses) (g) 2.3-40 Annual Average X/Q Values (sec/ma ) for Millstone 1 Stack Release 2.3-41 Annual Average D/Q Values (m-2) for Hillstone 1 Stack Release 2.3-42 Growing Season X/Q Values (sec/m3) for Millstone 1 Stack Release 2.3-43 Growing Season D/Q Values (m-2) for Millstone 1 Stack Release 2.3-44 Annual Average X/Q Values (sec/m 3 ) at the Nearest Significant Receptor Locations for Millstone 1 Stack Release 2.3-45 Annual Average D/Q Values (m-2) at the Nearest Significant Receptor Locations for Millstone 1 Stack Release 2.3-46 Ann 2al Average X/Q Values (sec/m3) for Containment Ventilation Vent Release 2.3-47 Annual Average D/Q Values (m-2) for Containment Ventilation Vent Release 2-x
MNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title 2.1-1 General Site Location ;
2.1-2 General Vicinity I
.' 2.1-3 Site Layout 2.1-4 Site Plan 2.1-5 Plot Plan 2.1-6 Town Boundaries 20 km 2.1-7 1980 Population Distribution 0-20 km 5 2.1-8 1985 Population Distribution 0-20 km 2.1-9 1990 Population Distribution 0-20 km i
2.1-10 2000 Population Distribution 0-20 km 2.1-11 2010 Population Distribution 0-20 km 2.1-12 2020 Population Distribution 0-20 km 2.1-13 2030 Population Distribution 0-20 km 2.1-14 County, City, and SMSA Boundaries within 80 km l
2.1-15 1980 Population Distribution 0-80 km i
! 2.1-16 1985 Population Distribution 0-80 km
! 2.1-17 1990 Population Distribution 0-80 km
(
2.1-18 2000 Population Distribution 0-80 km
! 2.1-19 2010 Topulation Distribution 0-80 km l
2.1-20_ 2020 Population Distribution 0-80 km 2.1-21 2030 Population Distribution 0-80 km 2.1-22 Site Area Map I 2.1-23 Towns and Cities within 10 km .
l-
[
2.1-24 Land Uses within 10 km 2.1-25 Zoning within 10 km of Millstone 3 - Waterford Amendment 5 2-xiii January 1984 l
l.
T - ~ -e,,e-w - .-y--w- * - - y.- see.mipya, s.gx- i--,-
""F-*T T"*"*T-"'"-- WT""-M'9W'-"'8 D"T'M P'e v r -wWMvFF9NT-rMvpF """*T-'"""r#"'-4 W4 "'
4
- P"'**TP-
MNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF FIGURES (Cont)
Figure Title 2.1-26 Zoning within 10 km of Millstone 3 - East Lyme 2.1-27 Zoning within 10 km of Millstone 3 - Old Lyme 2.1-28 Zoning within 10 km of Millstone 3 - City of New London 2.1-29 Zoning within 10 km of Millstone 3 - City of Groton 2.1-30 Zoning within 10 km of Millstone 3 - Groton 2.1-31 Transportation Facilities within 10 km 2.1-32 Major Industries and Medical Facilities within 10 km 2.1-33 Schools and Colleges within 10 km 2.1-34 Parks and Recreation Areas within 10 h 2.1-35 The Region within 80 km 2.1-36 Land Uses within 80 km 2.1-37 Transportation Facilities within 80 km 2.1-38 Major Coastal Recreation Areas 2.1-39 State-Owned Coastal Boat Access Sites 2.2-1 Terrestial Sampling Locations in Vicinity of Plant Site, Waterford, Connecticut 2.2-2 Site Vegetation Map 2.2-3 Total Phytoplankton (Cells A 108 liter) and Chlorophyll (mg/ma )
2.2-4 Total Zooplankton (4/m3) and Dry Weight Bicmass (mg/m3) 2.2-5 Observed Intake Water Temperature 3 '*C) !:r Week over an Annual Cycle 2.2-6 Composite Colonization Curve for All Panels 2.2-7 Ordination of Data from Wood and Asbestos Panels '
2.2-8 Dendrogram of Stations by 1980 Exposure Periods 2.2-9 Summary of Number of Species Occurring on One-month Exposure Panels, 1968 - 1974 2-xiv
MNPS-3 EROLS I ) LIST OF FIGURES (Cont)
Figure Title 2.2-10 Dendrograms of Station Affinities Based on 1980 Data 2.2-11 Esasonal Abundance of Mytilus edulis on Six-month Exposure Panels 2.2-12 Seasonal Abundances of Balanus eburneus, Balanus improvisus, and Balanus crenatus 2.2-13 Average Abundance of Wood-boring Arthropods during 1980 Exposure Periods 2.2-14 Average Percent Attack (Destruction) of Panelt by Shipworms l5 (Teredinids) for 1980 Exposure Periods 2.2-15 Average Abundance of Shipworms during 198'O Exposure Periods i 2.2-16 Number of Specimens and Stage of Development of Teredo navalis 2.2-17 Clustering Dendrogram of Percent Similarity 2.2-18 Clustering Dendrogram of Percent Similarity
/ ) 2.2-19 Ascophyllum Growth 1979-1980 NJ 2.2-20 Ascophyllum Growth 1980-1981 l 1
2.2-21 Ascophyllum Growth 1979-1981 1 2.2-22 Location of Subtidal and Intertidal Sand Stations 2.2-23 Intertidal Sediment Characteristics at Millstone Stations 2.2-24 Subtidal Sediment Characteristics at Millstone Stations 2.2-25 Location of Lobster Sampling Stations 2.2-26 Monthly catch per Unit Effort, (CPUE per 100 Pot Hauls) Wood Pots 2.2-27 Monthly catch per Unit Effort (CPUE per 100 Pot Hauls) Wire Pots 2.2-28 Size Distribution of All Lobsters Caught 2.2-29 Molting Patterns for Lobsters in the Millstone Point, 1974-1980 2.2-30 Size Distributions of Impinged Lobsters at Millstone 1 and 2 f- s (1975-1980)
\
m) l Amendment 5 2-xv January 1984 1
~
MNPS-3 ER0LS LIST OF FIGURES.(Cent)
Figure Title 2.2-31 Regional Distr.bution of Sand Lance 2.2-32 Seasor.al and Regional Distribution of Anchovies 2.2-33 Seasonal Distribution of Sand Lance 2.2-34 Seasonal Distribution of Atlantic Menhaden 2.2-35 Seasonal and Regional Distribution of Killifishes 2.2-36 Seasonal and Regional' Distribution of Sticklebacks 2.2-37 Seasonal Distribution of Silversides 2.2-38 Regional Distribution of Silversides 2.2-39 Seasonal and Regional Distribution of Grubby 2.2-40 Winter Flounder Catch per Unit Effort 2.2-41 Niantic River Winter Flounder Population Estimates and Mean CPUE 9
s 2.2-42 Winter Flounder CPUE Catch per 15-minute Traw1, 2.2-43 Seasonal and Regional Distribution of Winter Fleunder 2.2-44 Fecundity of Winter Flounder by Length and Weight 2.2-45 Percent Number of Niantic River Winter Flounder 2.2-46 Seasonal and Regional Distribution of Windowpane 2.2-47 Seasonal and Regional Distribution'of Scup 2.2-48 Seasonal Distribution of Cunner 2.2-49 Regional Distribution of Cunner 2.2-50 Seasonal Distribution of Tautog 2.2-5. Regional Distribution of Tautog 2.3-1 Topography in the Vicinity of Millstone Point 2.3-2 Topographical Profiles within 5 Miles of Site 2.3-3 Topographical Profiles within S Miles of Site 2-xvi
MNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF FIGURES (Cont)
%./
Figure Title 2.3-4 Topographical Profiles within 50 Miles of Site 2.3-5 Topographical Profiles within 50 miles of Site 5 2.3-6 General Topography - 50 miles 2.3-7 Meander Factor vs Wind Speed 2.4-1 Public Water Supplies within 20 Miles of Site 2,4-2 Onsite Well Locations 2.4-3 Groundwater Contour Map 2,4-4 Locations of Hydrographic Field Survey Stations June October 1965 2.4-5 Tidal Currents Measured by Essex Marine Laboratory 2.4-6 Bottom Profiles Established by Essex Marine Laboratory 2.4-7 Approximate Location of Field Survey Stations, February 1974 2.4-8 Area Modeled by 2-D Hydrodynamic Model 2.4-9 Flow Pattern Simulted by 2-D Hydrodynamic Model Strength of Flood 2.4-10 Flow Pattern Simulated by 2-D Hydrodynamic Model High Slack 2.4-11 Flow Pattern Simulated by 2-D Hydrodynamic Model Strength of Ebb 5 2.4-12 Flow Pattern Simulated by 2-D Hydrodynamic Model Low Slack 7
2.4-13 Water Quality Sampling Locations 2.5-1 Generalized Surficial Deposits 2.5-2 Tectonic Map of Eastern Connecticut
-, 2.7-1 Locations of Sound Level Measurements in the Millstone Station q
Area 1
O Amendment 5 2-xvii January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS (n)
/
Point B is 1,003 meters (3,290 feet). Point B is northwest of both the turbine building and the Millstone 1 stack.
The gaseous release doses from normal releases given in Chapter 5 are calculated at Point A because the maximum doses occur at this point rather than at Point B.
2.1.2 Population Distribution The Millstone Nuclear Power Station is located on the shore of Long Island Scund in the Southwest corner of the town of Waterford, Connecticut, approximately 5 km from the nearest boundary of the city of New London. The 1980 U.S. Census counted a total of 17,843 people residing in Waterford (U.S. Department of Commerce 1981) at an estimated population density of 194 people per square km (Population Density calculation). This population density is considerably lower than the Connecticut average population density of 247 people per square km (Population Density Calculation), and, with the exception of East Lyme, well below the average densities of the other towns which are totally or partially within 10 km of the station. The 1980 population and population density for cities and towns within 20 km of the station are shown in Table 2.1-1. Town political boundaries are shown on Figure 2.1-6.
The region within an 80-km radius of the station contains portions or all of 8 Connecticut counties, 4 Rhode Island counties, and 1 New (s) k' York county. Also, within the region are portions or all of 10 Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSA). Political boundaries of counties and population centers within 80 km are shown on Figure 2.1-14. l5 Population projections for the year 1985 are being used for the year of initial plant operation. The difference between the population of 1985 and 1986, the year of actual commercial operation, should not differ to any significant extent. Therefore, since projections are calculated at 5-year intervals based on the decennial census, the year 1985 provides the best estimate of population distribution at the start of commercial operation.
2.1.2.1 Population Within 20 km The 20-km area surrounding Millstone 3 contained approximately l
146,065 people in 1980 (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1981 and i Stone & Webster (SWEC) Computer Program). This population is projected to increase to about 175,575 people by the year 2000 and to about 210,279 people by the year 2030 (U.S. Department of Commerce 1981; Office of Policy and Management 1980; and l
Stone & Webster Computer Program). The area contains portions of New London and Middlesex counties in Connecticut, as well as a part of l
i Long Island, New York. The two major population centers w!'hin the
! 20-km area are the cities of New London and Groton, which contained I
/N 1980 populations of 28,842 and 10,086, respectively (U.S. Department i ('') of Commerce 1981). The total populations of cities and towns which comprise the 20-km area are shown in Table 2.1-1. Political l
Amendment 5 2.1-3 January 1984 i
UNPS-3 EROLS boundarism of cities and towns within 70 km are shown on Figure 2.1-6. Population by sector within 20 km for the years 1980, 1985, 1990, 2000, 2010, 2020, and 2030 is shown in Tables 2.1-2 5 through 2.1-8 and on Figures 2.1-7 through 2.1-13.
Population distribution within 10 km of the plant is based on a house count from U.S.G.S. 7.5 minute quadrangle maps on which houses are symbolically identified (U.S. Geological Survey). The map house count was supp2emented by a windshield survey, conducted on September 23, 1981, in which new housing (since 1970) was located, mapped, and counted. Houses were multiplied by people per household factors, for their respective towns, to obtain population.
Population distribution between 10 and 20 km is based on 1980 United States Census uata and was determined by assuming that the population of a minor civil division (MCD) (town, city, village) is distributed evenly over its entire land area. The proportion of each MCD's area in each grid sector was determined and applied to the MCD's total population, yielding the population in each grid sector. Population projections supplied by the State's Office of Policy and Management provided growth factors for projection of MCD populations in each sector (Office of Policy and Management 1980).
2.1.2.2 Population Within 80 km The region within 80 km of Millstone 3 contained a 1980 population of about 2,661,424 people and is expected to grow to an approximate total of 3,795,566 by the year 2030. Population distributions, within 80 km, for the years 1980, 1985, 1990, 2000, 2010, 2020, and 2030 are shown in Tables 2.1-9 through 2.1-15 and on Figures 2.1-15 through 2.1-21.
Over 75 percent of the region's population is classified as urban and is contained in one of the 10 Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSA) which fall either partially or entirely within the 80-km area (U.S. Department of Commerce 1977). City and SMSA boundaries within 5
l80km are shown on Figure 2.1-14. SMSA populations for 1980 are shown in Table 2.1-16.
Population distributions end projections within the 80-km region are calculated in the same manner as decribed for the area between 10 and 20 km radii (Section 2.1.2.1) but also include information from New York and Rhode Island.
2.1.2.3 Age Distribution As shown in Table 2.1-17, the current age distribution of the population surrounding the Millstone Nuclear Power Station does not differ significantly from that of the state or country (U.S.
Department of Commerce 1981). Since projected populations are expected to maintain about the same distribution, no pro 3ected age distributions are presented in this report.
Amendment 5 2.1-4 January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS
.- 2.1.2.4 Transient Population The general area surrounding Millstone 3 - contains a considerable seasonal and daily transient population. Facilities attracting transient populations are identified and described in Section 2.1.3.
Sector transient populations within 20 km associated with school enrollments and industrial employment are shown in Tables 2.1-18 and 2.1-19, respectively. Local beaches and recreational facilities are known to attract daily populations primarily during the summer i months. No estimates are available, however, regarding the usage of local recreational facilities. Visitation estimates at state parks within 20 km are available and are shown in Table 2.1-20. l l
2.1.3 Uses of Adjacent Lands and Waters 2.1.3.1 Land Use 2.1.3.1.1 Land Use within 10 km ;
Millstone 3 is located on a 200-hectare (500-acre) site in Waterford, Connecticut. The site, formerly a granite quarry, is presently used for the generation of electricity by Millstone 1 and 2. New Millstone Road provides access to power plant facilities from Route 156. Plant facilities are shown on Figure 2.1-4.
1 A recreation area provided by NUSCo. for community use is located on
. y/ the site adjacent to Route 156. The Shore Line used by Amtrak and Conrail trains crosses the site approximately 547 meters (1,795 feet) l north of the center of the Millstone 3 containment structure. Rail spurs serve Millstone 1, 2, and 3 from the main line. ,
i The site is surrounded by water, transportation, and residential land uses. Long Island Sound is located south of Millstone Point, with Niantic Bay to the west and Jordan Cove to the northeast.
l Residential development occurs along Old Millstone Road, Gardner's l Wood Road, and south of Route 156. Shoreline recreation areas are located east and west of the site on privately owned property. These areas are outside the exclusion area boundary, as shown on Figure 2.1-22.
Six towns or cities fall within 10 km of Millstone 3. The towns of Waterford, East Lyme, Old Lyme, and Groton and the cities of New London and Groton are shown on Figure 2.1-23 in relation to the 10-km (6 miles) radius. ThenearesttowncenterisNiantic,inthetownofl5 East Lyme, approximately 2.5 km (1.6 miles) northwest of the site.
New London, the nearest urban center, is approximately 5 km (3.1 miles) northeast of the site.
l l The towns of Waterford, East Lyme, New London, and Grcton are parts of the Southeastern Connecticut Planning Region. Old Lyme is part of l the Connecticut River Estuary Planning Region. Current land'use data f
\
provided by regional planning agencies for these towns are shown in Table 2.1-21 and on Figure 2.1-24. The predominant land use in the 10-km region is undeveloped or agricultural land.
Amendment 5 2.1-5 January 1984
MMPS-3 EROLS The total nuaber of milk cows in the 10-km (6-mile) region is 41.
The only dairy operation in the region is located 7.2 km (4.5 miles) west-northwest of the site, where approximately 1,100 pounds (500 kg) of milk are produced daily (Telecon, Smith 1981a). All milk is sold to Agri-Mark Dairy in Andover, Massachusetts (Telecon, Smith 1981c).
Agri-Mark takes 1,000 kg (2,200 pounds) of milk from the Bride Brook every other day and loads it onto a truck that holds 22,200 kg (49,000 pounds) of milk. Sometimes milk is processed directly from the truck; at cther times, it is placed in a silo with four to five other truckloads before processing (Telecon, Smith 1981b). Agri-Mark produces betweert 453,600 and 9,525,500 kg (1 million and 21 million pounds) of milk each month (Kwider 1981), of which seventy-five percent is used for powdered milk and butter. Agri-Mark's milk is occasionally sold to other major dairies for processing (Telecon, Smith 1981b).
The approximate number of milk goats in the 10-km (6-mile) region is
- 33. All milk produced in the five locations shown in Table 2.1-22 is consumed by families or, in one case, shared with friends. In some cases, cheese is made from the goat milk. None of the goat locations is a dairy operation, and no milk is reported sold to dairies. The nearest milk goat location shown in Table 2.1-22 is 2.4 km (1.5 miles) north-northeast of the site. Goat milk is consumed by infants, children, and adults in the 10-km (6-mile) region.
Table 2.1-22 contains the distances in each of 16 sectors from Millstone 3 to each of the following within 10 km (6 miles):
- 1. Nearest milk cow
- 2. Nearest milk goat
- 3. Nearest residence
- 4. Nearest site boundary
- 5. Nearest vegetable garden Areas committed to active recreation (e.g. state parks and golf courses) and extensive institutional properties (e.g. Connecticut Correctional Institute and Connecticut College holdings) are other low intensity land uses which occupy large areas.
The most extensive developed land use is residential. Typical suburban residential development in the region is one to two dwelling units per acre (one acre = 0.4047 hectare). High density residential development (more than two dwelling units per acre) exists along the shore in old Lyme and Waterford.
Areas of mixed urban uses are shown on Figure 2.1-24 at Niantic, New 1 ndon, and Groton. The largest industrial areas are in Groton, wuere General Dynamics Electric Boat Division and Pfizer Chemical are located on the Thames River. In addition to the road and rail network, areas committed to transportation, communication, and 2.1-6
I I
,1 f * % *.,"*DNEns
~ ~ ~ ***D en,0 \
' N, _ ~
l' EXCLUSION AREA BOUNDARY RECREATIONAL AREA ,
LEASED TO THE TOWN OF WATERFORD
.e p l My 8 RACE ROCK mE E4g 8
,, 0 'j ( GUN SMC
- - . " o '.F AL8ACORE og,yg
"#"L 8N drive DISTANCE 1 SITE BOUNI
( .j e
i,,
547 NETEI (524 METS g*% CONTAl2 LLsyn t 8040
. l / <
/
/ SWITC s
-Qry EXCLUSION AREA BOUNDARY a N,N,
\*s
'N.N / ,
l LEGEND -
f '
RECREATION ARE A j L- ,/ q BASEBALL FIELD -
e e
- s,T,n '
' jst O 500 1000 so ot SCALE-FEET O 250 500 \
SCALE-METERS BAY N
l N / A N T/C %
l NOTES f
( ~
- GASEOUS EFFLUENT RELE ASE POIN1b ARE TriE EXISTING STACK AND THE UNITS MAJOR STRUCTURES j @ E. @ SEE SECTION 2.1.1.4 1
m B
4 COAD __
r7 ROAD O7IDi '
- IL 1
- v gK .g.
n.,
%s-
} q .
-on con lAPERTURF cA9n -
NEAREST
- Y g g 79,,y p j DISTANCE TO NE AREST
'0 " "
g F ;O
"$f'hh 'RS (24 82 EXCLUSION ARE A BOUNDARY r b 7 %
1 g N O FOX g l k ISLAND
^:: 5 \
Q* \
- \
TAI.D /,-):s D ANNEL
/ # LIQUID EFFLUENT
- RELE ASE POINT
. j
- STACK i
DISCH ARGE QUARRY l ,
- UNIT 2 UNIT 1
--UNIT 3 I m
/ n NORTH-SOUTH w
]Q '
/ B ASE LINE e' - ,I
?
\CIRCUL ATING AND "7
S,%!,'EU" Also ^vailable Gn
"" ! Aperture Card
/
/ FIGURE 2.1 -3
/
/ SITE LAYOUT
\ / MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION N f
/ UM f 3
%~ ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE i
i AMENDMENT 5 JANUARY 1984 L 8402020156-ol
g o > o ROAD 8
i
, R ACE ROCK o
(
8(
E f z ,~
i ' j E5000 GUN SHOT ROAO J i -
\,
% v/
PROPERTY LINE f E joRD A N cove E2OOO 1
l 4
DISTANCE To p T I NEAREST SITE t'
$$7 RS g
\ #
e N"Ne 52 CONTAINME E ERS FROM b DISTANCE TO NEAREST
/ wA ) #o ^ k'96 ME E S
'[ st- ~ 0627.38 I l l
[SwtTCHyARD N [~D g
- s. *hg %l% > '
/
%. s x x x d E 1000
~~' N e
7 N Q' YL=: -tt. = &y \ ,
t(k#:;, '
' \
, Q,__ -i </
@% == $ U' Qi ${ i i ((g# 0p( So ON AINMENT STRUCTURE N1510.50 / E t HS Ij 1 T) e',' E 369 50y i.i - y .
;'/ l UNIT I 4., .
Gj ~pr Of M uNnT 2 ,._. oto_ _ mttSToNE *
,e e -
RoAo - W CL!!r -a n
' tic, 11 g,u=" gl, - i46 y g,:,s*:
-CiRCULAf tNG AND SERV 1CE WA PUMPHOUSE UNLT S W L 0h
)~
w1000
,, w ic en
% ~
gay POIN T ?
o 8 8 9 h W ' h ) Q [T "W EXPL ANAT ION l i\ U A CONTAINVENT STRUCTURE )C " { B TURBINE BUILDING ~ l s , _ C FUEL BUILDING D WASTE DISPOSAL BUILDING sl l [J E AUXILIARY BulLDING F SERVICE BUILDING G CONTROL BUILDING H MAIN STE AM VALVE BUILDING J ENGINEERED SAFETY FE ATURES BUILDING K EMERGENCY DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING FOX L TECHNICAL SUPPORT CENTER ISLAND M WAREHOUSE 6 UNIT 2 CONDENSATE POLISHING FACILITY N AUXILLARY BOILER O CONDENSATE POLISHING ENCLOSURE / g DISCH ARGE CHANNEL
/- k LEGEND
,=f,g'x PRIVATELY OWNED METEOROLOGICAR '
M =* RECREATION AREA QUARRY DCHARGE [T 3 ' j Aho Xvailable On Aperture Card I 500 5 x 0, 25,0 i
- N NORTH SOUTH SCALE-FEET C BASE LINE O 125 250 SCALE-METERS l
,G /SLAND SOUNO FIGURE 2.1-4 SITE PLAN MILLSTONE NUCLE AR POWER STATION UNIT 3 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE 1 \ AMENDMENT 5 JANUARY 1984 l 84 0 2 0 2 015 6 -OL '
i 1
' N f w , N . % %
- w. "*~~, I a ilYi4 C, L.44 5
, N, N, 6*f-2
*N,,~ s. . ,
~ . . ' ~~
N
~~~ <
,,k
. . '% m , , s '-.. \
~~ x 8-F L T' *I
' ~
N.. eni e LINf 5 -%' ~ ' ' ' . _% i \
~%
u%iT- 3 N ( 3 ina't i d i g 9, yt,,,
%_ Era TRAi M "N, 1
/ ~'%_ '%.~ % ~~ef .\ \ \
g
\
%./ %.w., ~ \ \ \ \
4
N _'
'N [~x s s
s s
\ \\
\
-. ~
. N.,. w \% \fARE n T",A
- 2t a
\ \
'C. (t e 4 % %- gV y[y\ ' g gi \
s j jsdlE(\TETds $ti$s.f T [4W # f \ e warm ;4 4 Oil o. I; 4,
.e } j st-
-- i *1 f =,
'QJ, ,Wsp osQ6' M.s van % nam: . rg ,,
etain . 4a ,3 Q( \ s s
\ '
s i , N
,g
+ -+-4 \ \' j- 4
- f. g f i')
. j 'p ..e. wi sh.-
(:/
/ ,5 we,m f 2
h p'*.. wim g
-\' y' ,' 0,\
r a<= ! 4'L
+ I-
;f ,
7 .. [X_. 4.Q g g s p p\'\
.. s a 't av
- i
{. 's } ! .( e u .' A g
\ \ yr \ , 1;\ {o ;
,, t-- /. '
%> .: ('/ w. " g an w .-'\
t
' u +O s ,
' =
l, %9** l} .sba' . . .o. .- C& >e% ' \
' ' , .l i ' 4 4 t,,
r 3g ,.J: l' e.4;c r
- gy 9g w' .w e avm, - f 4 i // g'*g7 t9*** w%/ $'CR \; \f p, /aw v . V,h 9'
',.e
){ \ /
*tW ftD , {Lprg A n % ._q ,'h i
- da'sC E ( 9 /
(>f tu(4 WA4.WE PiY ~4--R a 3r#<5 Wrf' , graspe-6 '
, i
't~"4 M I . L g enrE71 _---7
/
{ jkhE, ,j,,-'
/ ' 'i s--] -p t % 9. *-C # * * * * ' ' .A;TLi f 4 ., . 9( ( j\y5 - -
t POAE =4' i + 4 i-
'O{g, 3l \,
F - :. [aAuf st wee 4-- A - \9 . e -,
;: - . \, - w/\I
,7 [4'M 9 V I
'u*
w ,.a *> \ :/ n n[ ,q.4 t: t sg. s j ;i f s
/ ; .y C '" ^ - (h- s Q ;. y '7 24, ,p\
8
,, , A: \
4c ,,,*/.'?...i se s, u,i d g; L pr A.g;Hs., , I df t-pi'M 4 i
$qd w g' j.,r;eg .u.a .~
\
' 7 3. _
\ \
t me 't 3, i t ST TAM -
. . - u q - - --a===( _ _ _ _i , ,, ,, ,,,c,g -. 5 _ _ _%:: 3 .w.
,m-. - ,
vm sA was
. s s
, \
s
.\ i
, wggy g
----% 3
, , , OGE PECCes3 M A i
.e um o ',.m%. ) }
, . . - ,- y a
,A/'r ,, ., , l T. h h.r-~3 } \ \ ,\
[ l 8'A O'O l
\ \ ,
fy ,#,/- I ej ,..g.+ { % ( y ,# - $f M AGE
, g i / S- , 8' 8' j w . ..[gM E%RATM g b
f 5 T. [ $ 7". f. - - q#0 ETMAC4 f yf Ptf ( ___a__
,g 3
g pgj ' '
,{ , 64 -M
_ . g- - - . ' - 6.,A ~ s[t 5
. _ r , '\p .1,. , %,u .s\ . a'. g g
+Md' cg -
, - /.
;[
t +. Lj i
\
w ry f ,, R WMsNE L
*CCL55 LcCN s
!e
- TA '88 E %T af aut YukE *
, t"b 58544 \ s \
. t
^
g ,, p_ ,,g Ai a a Afrv ik 4 Diet. r 9 4.- g l . . - . 1 [ } , l (ChTAl%W h? hT RUCT UAt g_,, .%, p -
.f f ^' ' 8 E =t p - d @f beeAno TRANr#0RelER '
p we, T p) I A I -~
~h "[LT Ores
;y .,i8, *
- N ---
' + t
'{
* ._f.., .W!)P .4-- #"-
. . - -~
- ~~
t,, 1 g ' ' ' f - m . .', *
*1Y. t h' * DFLUGE valet .'
k- W h'I r. A4 /gud
. 2 y, I
' l7 g. c
.' ?w*s ' 2 "* j'g'ir,Tyd (
4 I es a( ese %E 4K E '$i L.%TR H( A?M , [
/~'-
1 5607 l SU1Wi*8' ,G4 ~'N "- ) _' ._jl l . -_~~~ 5' /N To g.A m g r, gg q ,' i i *, . - ' i n 4, y%m en - n- .,W-e;mr. . - i
*1.8. 3' h'8A.L am
,h - , , ) r--
T. . L r 4--- 1 , it ' gy ,-ww - - - == d- - gs gm., st; t
;.:.u - Q2 s N 6 w
i T,,,,#.
/, e - g .g_ 7
' L J---
, , , ,j - +lj ;; i , ;,(,,; y, tac c-sai srcaact r*'
*d uT uak' J M a *" ,, , , ,, ,,p tw +. 6fstparM-
, -- I= m I -gi g4 f-- (Sgggerg'n, i .!
soci =.
.iei ,;.
q7qua _, ~ --
- ypsnIR f rocs 94CN UP ENG.
6 UEt (h STOHAs f r [- 1 k (6Fettg6
- t __ L i 1
.P5 1- - - - '
- p. g i
Aux ag,,8p3 9 AEH [fi ( z8U.AUST
<*l/J#h WEhT ST ACm
,((d i f..
T A%K,, f * ; -
-----4-[ ,[ ^ji I OI NI#-~ 3! 4 dj . j p a
$ I TR , ,,o' - -
l8 t % '. D .. A r-h W3 R ,~
' '" 4 a ' __J ._; .
j A ly N a - a u*o pous= oust
=a ti; ,. !6 1,ss' t*0I S t/ -&tmat:4sr 604f 9 EhCL g
$3 !
l'
,[k
! }j 6
' d f f % Ce%f f 49T E NLISI*WsG
- ! ll J,._ u_
i t M n--i;-
!( 'l d i. ! I ) 'd r i te *J g s N '.,E EF T EgCL U%if e uswAT S g; II Il f
-i. s ,pmar CEN'E4 00 -t&w p'm' ' l - e*;.. i pd'7VAuf D Y I
, It ,- r
! ,s . ; (i v p) g s - ., %","./*".*.'"_"'"J "" YG E E
'l g l lt r=__...
--___q__-----""'
>> + -+-"-t ~ -~'
ttI++H- ?~M p t + ' ' - - ' ' ' - ' -h
'T N j -- - - _ - - - -
in , , ' ' r
' ; j] , -x_ gy pgyg ,, pigg ggg 4,,g,,, (pg
; 08 't
+~
lj, \ l T( CWI,.L AYi'isG & bERVtCE 4 ATE 84 g l guap +4X.'5E gg-++- f g& f+-+ + ' tQ' 4 g t
.tw- 4${ i,. h i ,' .
( #;I Il;' k; li (l MAvifE ***E# l L"*L 5 -- *bg i , { gy.I h at. { cre.av Y1 C wa te runsPHO'8 UM Cut a'eseG 4 &ElIVICE t i i t
%- 4 4 bg
\
uA-
\ \ ' ,-s' -c . ar % matte a4T AF E Ulul$
i L re w t *G,t aS% g stwg eav g e , g4 gyg., NE m ,- I
_-_4 W 9 s i Lf g; r e i
.N.
; N :~
N JN ,.ni _fD y s, i
,s 71 1h *We \ h#- 1 i
l 15 I Lis q!)
!!d t -
e : 35 - _ _3 -4 s
- s i 1 19 si
- - ., g .,I' sg [t, m
Jc.. dM !:,2 d : ; 5 ,
s: : e e ]g u s, 6 s: , - p --~ u u uji 3 "3VWK V .
' ; i-y A O ,._. ,J - l -
ss !I . J ,i A.. . L i b\ i
\ , Li "
% f* :=r iLikll
~
_ O7 > (',g'qg".ffa"* 12 != i$ ~l .
!\
-3. g. _I e 7, u -
~-
.,.~...00.....,,.. i T 4- ~~ ' 1 4
53"n? #""
- 77 q f' ;r 2
- e . . . j: 1
}! L .11
.f ,- -_ aa.q. a g-y
,.-< t;r , [ ;
e .i r- e
; \ . a ..a -
- xs % i i:n g 1 le 2 1 x t a
r~., > _m..
; f__ N. _7. . - .
s o -. . 5
- L .. _ _ 3
,! /d "d L ,_
, t. - 41 -x ,
_ _ .. _ a t [. i , Tw._ _
- ,- ~~, , !
' ~ ^~
b.J _jl e i, ( g, '., 1, e:
.- L 31!r--
I .
*.o
'! aI. inm . ; 5:3 /<gk
, li I - i ara e 3:
=- 2J
_e ' , , a.m:aL,.,
- m. ,
l
, :a Y. '
o M , i N. ; i - - .g" '
- LEcao u.ar ,. -SEISMIC CATEGORY I STRUCTURES AND COWGNENTS
.3,, l vers? 2 - '
t t
,I l =
_._. ____-____a_ r
,m,.,"' 30 Available Gn
'" ,7 9
,o Aperture Card SCALE-esE Tf #$
I FIGURE 2.1-5 PLOT PLAN MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 3 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE i AMENDMENT S gangUARY 1964 8402020156-03
HNPS-3 EROLS 181 species of invertebrates,r38 and 26 percent, respectively,- have been collected iat 'all' five stations', while 26 and 31 percent have been found'atronly one station-(Table 2'.2-16).
, Abundances- of fouling organisms have varied from exposure period to exposure period and from station to -station. Certain trends 'have been evident in dendrograms resulting from numerical clas'sification.
of 1980 data. When comparing stations by exposure periods, panel communities have generally been more similar within a season than at-a particular station over time.(Figure 2.2-8; Groups A, B,' D, and E). Seasonal _ similarities of' panel communities are primarily caused by the> distinct- seasonal' peaks' of reproduction which
~
result in meroplanktonic stages- of ~ the fouling organisms'being available for recruitment at most' stations, ' simultaneously (Figure 2.2-9). Numerical classifications'of annual percent cover data and numerical abundance data have grouped the stations according to spatia 1 affinities; Giants-Neck and White Point communities have the highest interstation similarity and Effluent, usually, the lowest (Figure 2.2-10). Differences between Intake . and, the White Point / Giants Neck / Fox Island group are due to panel loca' tion. At the former, panels were suspended near the surface .in .d.eep water (6" meters)I and it the"l'atter friim' docks which placed ~them close to the'2 bottom sedlinenti (0. 5'in'e~ter)". # Panels ' ati ' Effluent were 'also suspende'd from"the surface in" deep j a'ter "(8' meters)', but 'thel low similarity;'of this' station t'oanylother is attributed to'the' thermal. O dischargef au .2 3 . v v
= n
~ P'rcent' e ' coverage", data"fofffouling organisms are .prese'nted' in Table 222-17.' ~~During' 198b, ~the. average canopy coverage, panel ~ surface shaded 'byaattshhe'd' organisms',~ ranged from 41~.1' percent at Intake to 2.5 percent at Fox Island, and'the top 5 species' accounted for 81-99 percent of that total canopy cover. Similarly, in 1979 and l'S80dheTaverageprimarycoverage,panelsurfacecovered by ' direct attachment ~"of " organisms,franged' froml~~ 51 percent ' at ' Effluent"to 30'perce'n(atGiants' Neck,"and- the': top 5, species accounte'd' 'for 82-981 percent 'of the : total living primary coverage'. The rest'of'the " primayy' cover # consisted Mf'l free ~ space;o'r dea'd' barnacles. i., #
- l '4 s e r- *~,.s 1* *3 j for.' solitary orgenisms, .' including th' e
- ir .. ..
Numerical f abundance _.da.ta _ presented ',in Table 2.2-17., The top unattachedspecie's,arealsoT[decounted'for8794' 10LspEcies at ,each; station percent.ofthe. total. number;;of individuals; whii:h ranged from an average of " 3,143, - i organisms /panell"atfIntake'tiolan average of 804 at Fox' Island. These
. dens'ities'were closely associated with the extent of canopy _covei,
~
wliiclCprovide'dadditionalhabitat. For example, values'for density' and canopy' cover.were both, hi' g hest :at ' Intake and ~ lowest, at ' Fox Isla,nd!~ ' ."^ . .
~
s . :. of[ til5%ecies that make up the algal canopy, Laminaria saccharina
~
(kelp), commonly 'had the ' highest ' annual average percent cover (Table 2.2-17). However, the relatively low biological ~index value bs (BIV),,which is a measure of. temporal., variability in dominance, D) indicates 'that_ Laminaria ~axperiences ireat seaso'nal fluctuati'ons in abundance. Kelp was generally domiri~ ant only in' May.
~
- 2.2-19
MNPS-3 EROLS In terms of primary percent coverage and number of individuals, Balanus spp. (mostly stages too saall to identify further) was f important at all five stations, but some taxa are characteristic of only one or two sites. For example, Balanus improvisus and Mytilus edulis were common at Effluent and Intake Cryptosula pallasiana was common at White Point and Fox Island; and Balanus crenatus was dominant only at Giants Neck. Patterns of species dominance (Table 2.2-17) indicate the same trends mentioned earlier; namely, White Point, Giants Neck, and Fox Island show considerable similarity to each other while Effluent is the mcat dissimilar station. In summary, during the last 12 years the exposure panel program has documented 285 species within 12 major groups of algae and invertebrates. Temporal and spatial differences in community composition and abundances have been attributed to panel location with reference to the proximity of sediments and dock structures and seasonal fluctuations in the abundance of larval stages. Species of Importance Most of the species of marine plants and animals collected in the exposure panel program are also found on naturally occurring substrata in the Millstone Point area. However, because of their ability to colonize and grow on man-made structures (e.g., boats, buoys, power plant cooling systems), and because of the cost of deterring or removing them, most of these organisms are considered to be nuisance species. Of the 285 species of fouling organisms found locally, four groups are considered important for the purpose of this report; namely, mussels, barnacles, wood-boring arthropods, and shipworms (wood-boring molluscs). Mytilus edulis, the blue mussel, is studied because of its fouling behavior, food value (although not utilized locally), and utility as a biological indicator species (Goldberg et al 1978; Freeman and Dickie 1979; Davies and Pirie 1980). The abundance of Mytilus on exposure panels has shown spatial and temporal variability for the past 13 years (Table 2.2-18). Generally, the highest percent covers have occurred at White Point and Intake and the lowest at Giants Neck. On an annual basis, mussels have been much more dominant in some years (e.g. 1974) than in others (e.g. 1976). Seasonal abundances have only been determined since 1979; these data are 5l presented on Figure 2.2-11. (In the following discussion of mussels and barnacles, White Point is representative of the WP/GN/FI group; patterns found at White Point are typical of those of the entire group). In general, 6-month panels have low percent covers of M. edulis even though large numbers of individuals have been recorded. The large numbers of individuals collected in February are predominately plantigrade stages (<3 mm), so that the abundance of mussels is generally not reflected in a large percent coverage, except at Effluent. At Effluent, vinter temperatures generally remain above 10 C and summer temperatures exceed the lethal tolerance of M. edulis (>27 C) Amendment 5 2.2-20 January 1984
~
1 MNPS-3 EROLS
- O poor swimming ability (Ricketts and Calvin 1952), restricts dispersal
, of these individuals. The molluscan shipworm, Teredo, burrows deeply into wooden structures and causes more destruction per individual than do the wood-boring arthropods. Teredo navalis has been common in wood panels since 1968. A subtropical species, T. bartschi, was first collected in 1975 at Effluent and has continued to be confined to this station. , From 1968-1980 the attack of wood panels by shipworms has fluctuated extensively from year to year and station to station (Table 2.2-21).
. Again, these temporal and spatial patterns are illustrated by the 1980 data. Percent attack of wood -panels has been greatest in November at all _ stations but at Effluent; the most severe panel
- attack occurring at Giants Neck, a station unaffected by the thermal discharge (Figure 2.2-14). Effluent had the greatest panel attack 4
(48-13 percent) in February when the numerical abundance of T. bartschi was highest. However, this maximum destruction of wood
, panels at Effluent in February was caused as much by the increased i size of T. navalis as the maximum abundance of the smaller species, T. bartschi. Warmer temperatures in the thermal discharge from ovember to February were most likely responsible for this faster growth of Teredo and increased panel attack.
Numerical abundance of Teredo in 1980 has fluctuated similarly to the percent attack data, peak abundances occurring in November and g February (Figure 2.2-15). Giants Neck panels have collected the most shipworms throughout the year, reaching a maximum of 297 per panel (i75) in November, and Intake the least, with a total of 73 individuals in all 24 panels. Shipworms less than 5 mm, identified only as Teredinidae, have been most numerous at Fox Island j (3.5 i 4.8), White Point (2.7 3.1), hnd Giants Neck (46.0 i 38.7) in August. Teredo bartschi has been collected only from panels at Effluent and was common only in February. A study was conducted from 1976 through 1978 to monitor the gonad development of T. navalis (Battelle 1979b). Eight stations were monitored for 18 months noting six stages of gonad development (Figure 2.2-16). It was concluded that spawning generally started around June and continued through September for T. navalis. l5 Numerical abundance data in 1980 supported this conclusion. The distribution and abundance of woodborer populations can be related to reproductive strategies and to biological interaction between species. Shipworms were more evenly distributed among the stations than the arthropods, largely as a result of their planktonic larval stages. Teredo navalis larvae (straight-hinge stage), after a short period of brooding by the parent, are released into the plankton where they remain for 2 to 3 weeks before settling (Turner and Johnson 1971; Hoagland and Turner 1980). This long planktonic existence allows these larvae to disperse widely. Teredo bartschi do not release their larvae until a later pediveliger stage which can settle more quickly than the straight-hinge larvae released by T. navalis (Turner and Johnson 1971). Therefore, T. bartschi may be - t Amendment 5 2.2-23 January 1984 2 r - . ,, ,_y ,. --_w .-,--_---.--...m_..y-._,_,,,-._,.----.-.-,_.-_...-.4. _ , _ - - _ . , .
l l HNPS-3 EROLS l able to maintain populations in thermal effluents outside their normal geographical range by burrowing into wood before being carried l out into colder receiving waters (Hoagland and Turner 1980). l Biological interactions which can affect the variability, distribution, and abundance of woodborers include parasitism and competitive exclusion. : During the gonad development study, it was found that occasionally very heavy infections of a protozoan parasite, Minichinia sp., have caused extensive tissue damage, which may have caused fluctuations in Teredo attack (Battelle 1979a). In 1977, the exclusion of Teredo attack at the Millstone Harbor Station was attributed to a Limnoria effect, where intensive wood-boring activity of Limnoria precluded the settlement of Teredo (Battelle 1978). 2.2.2.4.2 Intertidal Rocky Shores The rocky shore in the vicinity of Millstone Nuclear Power Station supports a rich and diverse benthic marine community throughout the year. This community appears to be stable from year to year and is similar to those of other areas of southern New England wh:re the biota have been studied (Lubchenco and Menge 1978; Wilce et al 1978). Since the sampling program reached its present form in February 1979, 114 species of algae have been collected, exclusive of diatoms and blue-green algae; species lists for each station are presented in Table 2.2-22. Data collected prior to 1979 are summarized in Battelle (1979b). Changes in the species list since the rocky intertidal sampling program began in 1968 are primarily due to changes in sampling frequency, intensity, and methodology, as well as nomenclatural revisions; it is unlikely that any species appeared in or disappeared from the intertidal region around Millstone Point as a result of operation of Millstone 1 or 2, or of construction of Millstone 3. Differences do exist, however, between the flora found at the seven rocky shore sampling stations, and at each station at different times of the year. No single collection period, nor the combined collections from a single station, included all species. Species composition of the qualitative collections varied between seasons as well as between stations. Combined data from two yearc of monthly samples (March 1979 - February 1981) are presented as numbers of species in each algal division at each station in Table 2.2-23. The topics of spatial and temporal variability will be discussed in the section dealing with quantitative collections. Methods used for the quantitative collections are fully described in Section 6.1.1.2; briefly, at each of the seven rocky shore stations, five permanent vertical transects (Mean High Water to Mean Low Water levels) are divided into 50-x 50-cm quadrats. The percent substratum coverage of each organism and remaining free space within each quadrat is determined monthly. 2.2-24
MNPS-3 EROLS
!O)
'~'
influence and serves as our subtidal reference site. Five stations, ' l Bay Point, Niantic Bay, Seaside, Little Rock, and Twotree, are located around the plant site in areas progressively removed from the plant. Sites receiving greatest potential impact of plant operation include: Intake, located in front of the cooling water intake of Millstone 2; and Effluent, located nearest the discharge. The Jordan Cove site is located just east of the plant in an area presently within the discharge plume of Millstone 1 and 2 during ebb tide. Since intertidal and subtidal habitats and communities are quite distinct from each other, their general ecology will be discussed separately below. Intertidal Sediments The sandy beach sediments in the Millstone area range from medium to coarse sand with low amounts of silt-clay (Figure 2.2-23). At Giants Neck and White Point, sediments are generally of uniform size over the year and are composed of clean, medium sand with a small silt-clay component. Sediment granulometry at Jordan Cove is more variable between seasons and ranges from coarse to medium sands. These sediments contain higher percentages of fine silt-clay material and often large amounts of detrital algae and eelgrass (Zostera marina). (} V Community Composition Since 1974, a total of 151 taxa have been collected at the Millstone intertidal stations (Table 2.2-25). Of this total, 19 percent cccurred at all sites, 21 percent st two sites, and 60 percent at one site. Nearly half of those taxa collected at only one site are members of the Jordan Cove community. All three communities are predominantly composed of annelids which over the past 4 years, have accounted for over 50 percent of the taxa and 90 percent of the total individuals (Table 2.2-26). Arthropod species are generally more abundant than molluscs; rhynchocoels are usually of low abundance, although in 1979-1980 they accounted for over 30 percent of the organisms collected at two of three sites. Structural differences between intertidal communities are best illustrated by the abundance of oligochaetes. These organisms are dominant only at Jordan Cove, where the effects of wave scour are mitigated by shallow offshore sand flats and large amounts of detritus, a potential food source, which wash onto the beach. At more exposed sites, such as White Point and Giants Neck, oligochaetes are far less important; larger polychaetes capable of inhabiting a shifting sand environment dominate. Density Spatial differences in infaunal community density between intertidal f-~s habitats also reflect the different levels of exposure which Millstone intertidal habitats receive during the year. Over 4 years, ('- ') densities at beaches around Millstone Point have averaged between 429 to 30,422 individuals /m2 (Table 2.2-27), with the highest densities 2.2-33
MNPS-3 EROLS' consistently occurring at the more protected Jordan Cove site, where large numbers of oligochaetes occur. Consistently low densities occur at the exposed White Point station. Since temperate intertidal communities, like those in the area, are subject to extreme ranges in environmental conditions over the year, large temporal fluctuations in community structure and abundance usually occur (Green 1969). All Millstone intertidal communities exhibit these seasonal variations in density and the difference between the maximta and minimum density is often twice as large as the annual mean. In addition, unusually rigorous winter conditions can cause year to year differences in overall densities. For example, in 1977-1978, harsh winter condititns resulted in the lowest seasonal minimum densities at all sites (nu organisms at White Point), in the last 4 years. Species Diversity Annual mean diversity (H') of all intertidal communities around 5 Millstone has ranged from 0.84 to 2.37 (Table 2.2-28). Over 4 years, annual diversity has generally been stable at Jordan Cove and White Point and variable at Giants Neck. On a seasonal basis, measures of diversity (H', J, S) at all sites fluctuate considerably within a given year, reflecting seasonal shifts in density and numbers of species inhabiting Millstone sand beaches. Dominance Numerically, the dominant intertidal organisms are polychaetes, oligochaetes, and rhynchocoels (Table 2.2-29). No arthropod species and only one mollusc, Gemma gemma, have been among the 10 numerical dominants when densities were averaged over 4 years. The Jordan Cove community is typically dominated by oligochaetes; this group has accounted for 78.5 percent of the organisms collected in the last 4 years. Scolecolepides viridis is the second most abundant taxon and has accounted for 10.9 percent of the total. Oligochaetes and S. viridis also have high Biological Index Values (BIV), 96.7 and 93.3, respectively, indicative of their consistently high numerical ranking in the past 4 years. Remaining Jordan Cove taxa have been of low annual mean abundance and have lower BIV's than either oligochaetes or 5. viridis, reflecting their fluctuating position among the annual dominants. These organisms are seasonally abundant, but on an annual basis their overall densities are low, relative to oligochaetes and E viridis. Community composition at Giants Neck and White Point is very similar; over 4 years, 9 of the 10 most abundant taxa have been the same at both si te s . In contrast to Jordan Cove, no single organism numerically dominates at either of these sites. Generally, taxa at Giants Neck and White Point have higher BIV's than those at Jordan Cove, reflecting greater uniformity in species dominance over the last few years. Species characteristically dominant at Giants Neck and White Point include the orbiniids, Haploscoloplos fragilis and H. acutus; and the paraonid, Paraonis fulgens. These species are adapted to living in the well sorted, medium sand typically found at Amendment 5 2.2-34 January 1984
IU1PS-3 ER0LS on the basis of natural variation. Special emphasis has been placed on ur.de rs tanding the dynamics of winter flounder spawning in the
!!iantic River, due to the proximity of this population to the Millstone Power Station and because the contribution from this relatively isolated population to the flounder stock of the greater Millstone Bight is uncertain.
General Distribution The winter flounder ranges from Labrador to Georgia (Leim and Scott 1966) but is most common from Nova Scotia to New Jersey (."e rlmut te r 1947). It is a dominant benthic fish in Long Island Sound, Harragansett Bay, and adjacent estuaries (Pearcy and Richards 1962; Richards 1963; Oviatt and Nixon 1973). The winter flounder is primarily a coastal fish found in bays and estuaries, although an isolated population is also present on Georges Bank (Bigelow and Schroeder 1953; Lux 1973). The coastal populations are considered estuarine-dependent (McHugh 1966), in that estuaries provide habitats required for spawning, development and growth of young, and forage areas for adults. Winter flounder inhabit the area from the intertidal zone to depths usually less than 40 meters (Bigelow and Schroeder 1953), although they have been found at depths up to 143 meters (Leim and Scott 1966). The winter flounder prefers mud and sand bottoms with patches of p eelgrass but has been caught over all types of bottoms (Bigelow and 5 Schroeder 1953). Salinities below 15 ppt are lethal over long periods of time for adults (McCracken 1963), but juveniles have been taken in estuaries at salinities of 0 ppt (Hildebrand and Schroeder 1928; Smith 1971). ' Long term fluctuations in the region 41,, catch of winter floundar appear to be a natural phenomenon. Ug'ene ral decline in winter flounder catches from 1970 through 1976 has been reported from Hantucket Sound,' Cape Cod Bay, and Long Island Sound (MRI and HEPCo. 1978; Figure 2.2-40); numbers leveled off through 1978 and increased thereafter. Other areas have also shown similar. fluctuations. Winter flounAler CPUEsfrom the Sheepse'ott River and Monthweag Bay, Me. ' (MYAPC 19.78) showed a ' general decline from-1971 through 1975 and an increase " during subsequent years ( 1976 "through 1977). Cyclic increases and lecreases in CPUE have~ been , reported ;by Perlmutter
~
(1947) for Boothbay Harbor, ,He. '(191,0 through 1940)', Woods Hole, Mass. (1919;through 19,41), and Cong. Island Sound (1930-through 1941). In Narragansett Bay,'catchTincreased from 1966 through 1968,and then decreased through 1972 (Jeffries and Johnson 1974). !
,y 4 3
Winter flounder form discrete. population's associated with individual coastal areas or estuaries. These are relatively stationary; individuals seldom stray far from breeding ground,,*where.they return dach spring (Saifa ~1961a), 'although migrationi dd ocebr. Howe and,
~'
coates'(1975)' indicated that in southern New England,l winter flounder
' move into the nearshore area from late winter through' spring to spawn
[\ and feed.. Most leave this area during. summer when water' temperatures exceed 15'C to areas h5ving their pYeferred temperature o'f 12 t'o\l5 C
~
i
..g . g t
, s % ,
[" -2.2-63[ s
' i i
[~ _ s , , %
\ %= \" *s
-R _._.--..mmw____-,_._,..._-_____.
e - z.... ,
MNPS-3 EROLS (McCracken 1963) and return after temperatures decrease below 15'c (September through November). When the nearshore temperature decreases below 3 to 4 C in December, most winter flounder return to the relatively warmer offshore waters. Some seasonal movements are not controlled by temperature alone and may represent feeding migrations where flounder move to an area of preferred or greater number of food organisms (Kennedy and Steele 1971). Larval movements are controlled by the seaward transport system. Winter flounder larvae are feeble swimmers and although they can move vertically, most tend to congregate near the bottom. This reduces c 'fshore dispersal since the majority of the net seaward transport occurs in the upper half of the water column in estuaries (Pearcy 1962). Local Distribution Information on the abundance of winter flounder in the Millstone area is available from an intensive mark and recapture program that has been conducted each year in the Niantic Ri.ver since 19?5 (Section 6.1.1.2.8), as well as from the various monitoring programs conducted since 1973 (Section 6.1.1.2.7). During the Niantic River mark and recapture studies of 1975 through 1980, a total of 52,311 winter flounder were marked and 4,019 of these were recaptured. The yearly winter flounder mark and recapture data are listed in Table 2.2-50. The total population of winter flounder over 15 cm total length in the Niantic River during 1975 through 1980 was estimated by the Jolly (1965) method. Significant decreases in population size occurred from 1975 through 1977. Smaller decreases occurred after 1977, but estimates were all within the bounds of the 95 percent confidence interval (Table 2.2-51, Figure 2.2-41). The yearly mean trawl CPUE for the Millstone Point area in 1978 through 1979 (October through September) and 1979 through 1980 were among the highest since the beginning of the trawl study (Table 2.2-52). The 1974 through 1975 mean CPUE sas the only one not significantly lower. These increases were mainly from increased catches at the Niantic River, Niantic Bay, and the Twotree stations (Figure 2.2-42). Annual trends in the trawl catch of winter flounder at Millstone also appeared to reflect those cyclical patterns reported regionally for the last decade (Figure 2.2-40). During the entire study period, the mean catch in the Hiantic River as significantly higher than that at all other stations 5 l w(Table 2.2-52) . The catch there increased significantly from a low in 1977-1978 to a peak in 1979 through 1980 (Figure 2.2-42). Except for these 2 years, small differences were found among the yearly mean CPUE. The length distribution in the Niantic River indicated that the initial decrease in catch after 1974 through 1975 was primarily due to fewer larger flounder, which was followed by a decrease in all sizes through 1978. The increase in catch during 1979 was mainly the knendment 5 2.2-64 January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS I h TABLE 2.2-5 N--l NUMBER OF ACTIVE OSPREY NESTS AND NUMBER OF FLEGDLINGS PRODUCED IN CONNECTICUT AND MILLSTONE POINT
- Millstone Point Connecticut Year Active Nests Fledglings Active Nests Fledglings 1969 1 0 16 10 1970 1 0 13 8 2
1971 1 3 12 8 1972 1 3 10 9 1973 1 2 10 4 1974 1 2 9 7 1975 1 2 9 10 1976 1 3 10 14 O 1977 1 3 14 20 1978 1 3 15 15 1979 1 2 15 25 1980 2 5 15 26 I 1981 2 t 18 37 Total 32 193 NOTE: l
- NUSCo. 1981 i
l l Amendment 5 1 of 1 January 1984 l
r b O e o t c
- - - 1 - - - 1 - - - -
O iv u J 2 2 11 3 2 14 42
?
3 7 9 1 R E B O T C O y D a N M - 1 - - - - - - - - A) 4
,7 Y9 L1 U
J . o
,C YS AU MN
( N I , r 3 e S D d L 6 EE n O 3 R 2 RO E 2 SS E OL VN ET BL es l a m a a e 1 f o O S L I k k 1 P B SM ad a N A N ne n M T AF sn s IO i B rl r IS e- e d g HN to tg a PO MR e m rw atg g ro ar t o o rg AI a g g g o o gf g fo V N o r o r nr r no r DN nrf f nd a r df NE n f f re rr cf r A o ehn r ea i an E m d gd tto e tp rd pe SH m o oo sre e so eo oe ET o o ro aor r ae mo er L C W FW ENC C EL AW LC IN TI P E R F O Y R A M M a U st s S i a i l e r l a n o a t; d t r i a a i r a e i s t t r i t m si o o r s o a d b n n o d n N n s a a c s n a a i a t l i a l t t t e e e l t y e ic S a a m m n a S r m f t e i t s e i a d a d r n s s l r d u a s s t ) c o) n) ii n h) n ) i o) n c r) n n 1 i o2 ic a3 sl a s4 a n5 s s o6 ai u7 s a e t w t t s t r t o n w c t n n t S c dt li y a en y iu Fm l v s dy rt ai Hn cm u
.l py ss a
v Sy ni an iu t rm n cy si ibm h p a o e c i l a ay i Mt l n i au c tm l m a i y se st ii si i n mu o sm n h p pi n dy rt ai Hn m cm i u as r v el a y y dt i ei nn i ou pc dm ei p a l m O m a im a a am m r a sm a nm m a im o a nm a a do n so r n po a n ao n ao a n ro f n ao n n lC a oC a a iC h u a oC a rC h a eC u a bC a a O( R M( R R R( l ER C( R T( TR X( BH A( R R
IUlPS-3 EROLS TABLE 2.2-8 DUNCAM !!ULTIPLE RA!!GE TEST (for differences in logi, transformed densities ( a=0.05) by year) l5 Taxon Years (Decreasing Mean Density) High Density Low Density Unknown centric diatom 77 78 79 80
!!elosira sulcata 79 78 77 80 Skeletonema costatum 77 78 79 80 Chaetoceros spp. 79 77 78 80 Detonula confervacea 79 78 77 80 Leptocylindrus minimus 77 78 80 79 /~'s Rhizosolenia delicatula 77 78 79 80 Unknown pennate diatom E 78 79 80 Hitzschia spp. 77 78 79 80 Asterionella japonica 77 79 78 80 Thalassionema nitzschoides 79 78 77 80 Unknown chlorophycean 78 79 77 80 Phaeocystis spp. 77 78 79 80 Cryptomonadaceae 78 77 79 80 Unidentified microflagellate 78 77 80 79 NOTES:
- 1. Entrainment phytoplankton data from the discharge in the years 1977 through 1980 have been used.
O
\ 2. Years connected by the same line are not significantly different.
Amendment 5 1 of 1 January 1984 l
MHPS-3 EROLS TABLE 2.2-9 ZOOPLANKTON SPECIES COMPOSITION
!!ean of Annual Densities Density Range Percent #/m3 (!!in - Itax) !!!
Holoplankton2 acartia hudsonica 31.3 317.3 80.4 - 525.6 393 Acartia tonsa 28.7 291.1 162.8 - 441.' 378 T:mora longicornis 12.8 129.5 95.5 - 156.4 405 Pseudocalanus minutus 8.6 87.3 52.1 - 148.2 417 Centropages hamatus 8.3 83.7 69.3 - 104.7 477 Pseudodiaptomus coronatus 2.3 22.8 8.3 - 36.0 293 Acartia spp. copepodite 1.4 14.1 4.8 - 37.1 245 Eurytemora herdmani 1.3 13.2 3.2 - 37.6 108 centropages spp. copepodite 1.2 12.6 6.0 - 21.1 342 Evadne spp. 0.7 6.9 4.4 - 11.9 136 Meroplankton2 Gastropod egg 38.7 44.3 24.2 - 65.4 389 Gastropod veliger 14.8 16.9 7.4 - 26.3 319 Cirripedia nauplii 13.4 15.3 6.3 - 41.2 290 Brachyuran zoea 11.6 13.3 9.9 - 21.9 228 Cirripedia cypris 11.1 12.7 4.3 - 22.4 197 Polychaete nectochaete larvae 4.0 4.6 0.8 - 11.6 116 Decapoda larvae 2.1 2.4 1.5 - 4.3 140 Pagurus spp. zoea 1.3 1.4 0.2 - 2.5 93 Hydrozoan medusal stage 1.1 1.3 0.1 - 4.4 60 Caridean zoea 0.5 0.5 0.6 - 1.4 29 Tychoplankton a Gammaridea 72.1 41.6 8.0 - 94.3 447 Harpacticoida 16.5 9.5 6.1 - 12.5 368 Mysidacea 6.7 3.9 2.8 - 6.0 261 Cumacea 0.9 0.5 0.1 - 0.7 105 Caprellidae 0.4 0.2 0.1 - 0.4 88 Brachyuran megalopa 0.4 0.2 0.01 - 0.5 35 Pagurus spp. megalopa 0.3 0.2 0.0 - 0.6 13 Crangon septemspinosa 0.2 0.1 0.0 - 0.3 54 Paguridae 0.2 0.1 0.0 - 0.5 13 Acari 0.1 0.1 0.0 - 0.2 4 1 of 2 O
i
!!NFS-3 EROLS f i
i ; TABLE 2.2-9 (Cont)
!!OTES :
1
- l i
j 1. !!ean of annual densities (#/m 3 ), range of annual densities and j number of samples in which a species or group was observed at l the discharge from 1976 - 1980.
- 2. Holoplankton, meroplankton, tychoplankton are kept separately I as three different categories.
t ,I i l l I , I l ' i 6 ! i i k I i till , t i l l [ i i l t ! t 2 of 2 , f 1
11:!PS-3 EROLS TABLE 2.2-10 DUIICA!! !!ULTIFLE RA!!GE TEST 5l (for differences in logt, transfora:ed densities ( a=0.05) by year) Species Discharge Station 5 (!!id-Niantic Bay) High Low High Low Density Density Density Density Pseudocalanus minutus 80 78 77 79 76 78 80 79 77 76 Eurytemora herdmani 79 78 77 80 76 79 78 76 80 Centropages typicus 78 77 76 80 79 78 77 76 80 79 Tortamus discaudatus 78 80 77 76 79 77 78 80 79 76 Chaetegnatha 80 78 76 79 77 77 78 80 76 79 Gas ropod egg 76 80 78 77 79 78 80 79 O Cirripedia nauplii 80 77 79 76 78 80 79 77 78 76 Cirripedia cypris 80 79 77 76 78 80 77 79 78 76 Hydrozoan medusal stage 77 80 78 79 77 78 76 80 79 Decapod larvae 78 80 77 79 77 73 76 80 79 Polychaete nectochaete larvae 78 76 80 77 79 US Podon sp. 78 80 79 76 77 NS Acartia hudsonica 80 77 79 78 76 NS 9 Amendment 5 1 of 2 January 1984
MUPS-3 EROLS TABLE 2.2-14 v DUNCAN MULTIPLE RANGE TEST (for differences in logg, transformed densities (n = 0.05) by year) l5 Taxon Years (decreasing mean density) High Density Low Density Total eggs 76 77 80 78 79 Total larvae 77 80 79 78 76 Anchoa spp. 79 77 80 76 78 Ammodytes spp. 77 78 79 80 76 Pseudopleuronectes 80 78 77 76 79 americanus fs Myoxocephalus 77 80 79 78 76
.,) ' '
Tautogolabrus 77 80 76 79 78 adspersus Tautoga onitis 77 76 80 79 78 NOTES:
- 1. Entrainment ichthyoplankton daca from the discharges in the years 1976 through 1980 have been used.
- 2. Years connected by the same line are not significantly -
different. I I l l I C)
'v Amendment 5 1 of 1 January 1984
IIIiPS-3 EROLS TABLE 2.2-15 , NUMBER OF SPECIES WITHIN HAJOR TAXA (Collected on Exposure Panels at Each Station From 1968 - 1980) Stations Taxa EF Ill FI WP GN Total Chlorophyta 19 18 19 21 20 28 Phaeophyta 11 11 16 15 13 23 Rhodophyta 31 40 30 38 38 53 Porifera 1 2 5 3 3 5 Coelenterata 4 4 2 3 3 5 Platyhelminthes 2 3 2 2 2 3 Polychaeta 20 18 32 25 25 44 Mollusca 19 18 23 23 24 36 Arthropoda 37 29 38 40 40 65 Bryozoa 5 11 7 10 11 14 Echinodermata 1 1 0 1 0 2 Chorodata 1 4 4 6 5 7 Total 151 159 178 187 184 285 MOTE:
- 1. EF u Effluent IN = Intake FI = Fox Island WP = White Point GN = Giants Neck 1 of 1
- - . _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ -_. . _ _ _ . . _ _ _. m _. .-_ - - -_
4 MNPS-3 EROLS TABLE 2.2-16 (Cont) ( Stations
- B. FAUNAL S'ECIES c GN EF IN FI MP TOT I
Platynereis dumerilii 1 1 l Pleusymtes glaber 1 1 1 3 ! Podarke obscura 1 1 1 3 Polycirrus eximius 1 1 2 Polydora aggegata 1 1 1 1 4 Polydora ligni 1 1 1 1 1 5 Polydora socialis 1 1 1 3 Probolides holmesi 1 1 i Proceraea cornuta 1 1 2 Sabella microphthalma 1 1 1 1 1 5 Sabellaria vulgaris 1 1 1 1 1 5 Saxicava artica 1 1 Schizoporella unicorr.is 1 1 1 1 4 . Scypha ciliata 1 1 1 1 4 Serpulid tubes 1 1 1 1 1 5 Sertularia pumila 1 1 1 1 4 Sphaerosyllis erinaceus 1 1 Spirprbis borealis 1 1 1 1 1 5 Stencpleustes gracillis 1 1 Stenothoe gallensis 1 1 O. Stenothoe minuta Styela partita 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 j Stylochus elipticus 1 1 1 1 1 5 Syllis gracilis 1 1 1 1 4 Tanais cavolini 1 1 Tegella unicornis 1 1 2 Terebella lapidaria 1 1 Teredinidae 1 1 1 1 1 5 .- Teredo bartschi 1 1 Teredo navalis 1 1 1 1 1 5 ! Tubularia crocea 1 1 1 3 Tubularia larynx 1 1 Tubulipora liliacea 1 1 2 Unciola irrorata 1 1
, Unciola serrata 1 1
! Urosalpinx cinerea 1 1 1 1 4 NOTE: {
*GN = Giants Neck EF = Effluent FI = Fox Island IN = Intake l5 i WP = White Point O Amendment 5 7 of 7 January 1984 j
l
MNPS-3 EROLS TABLE 2.2-17 1979-1980 AVERACE PERCENT COVER AND NUMERICAL ABUNDANCE (COL'NTS OF INDIVIDUALS)- A COMPARISCN TO ANNUAL BIOLOGICAL INDEX VALUES (BlV) FOR DOMINANT ORGANISMS (ASBESTOS EXPOSURE PANELS IN THE MILLSIONE PolNT AREA) Five Dominant X Ten Dominant X Taxa Percent Cover BlV OlV Taxa Count BlV BlV 1979 and 1980 1979 1980 1979 and 1980 1979 8Q 12_8 WHITE PolNT F l o ra l Ca nopy( 1 ): Fauna (3): Lamina ria saccha ri na 13.1 - 42.6 Batanus spp. 495.9 97.4 86.8 Ulva lactuca 4.9 - 67.6 Co rophium acutum 135.1 - 83.5 Bac i i l a ri ophyceae 4.4 - 67.6 Mytilus edulis 133.2 50.0 64.5 Polysiphonia niorescens 3.5 - 78.7 Co roph i um spp. 116.7 - 74.3 Ca l l i thamnion roseum 1.6 - 65.4 Ba lanus c rena tus 101.5 59.0 50.6 Co r_op h i um t ub e rc u l a t um 83.2 - 5 /.9 Fauna (2): Dexamine thea 80.0 - 65.8 Co rop _h i um ache ru s i cum 59.7 - 65.8 C ryplo su l a pa l l a s i a na 7.8 77.8 68.8 Co roph i um insidiosum 46.0 80.7 46.0 Ba lanus crenatus 6.2 61.1 60.4 Jassa falcala 37.6 - M. 3 Balanus som. 5.5 68.5 70.8 Balanus eburneus 3.8 74.1 60.4 Botrvl los schlosseri 2.8 48.1 70.8 FOX ISLAND F l o ra l Ca nopy( 1 ): Fa una ( 3 ) : Ba c i l l a ri ophycea e 1.1 - 55.0 Balanus spp. 306.2 100.0 6 /.4 Derbesia ma rina 0.7 - 56.2 Co roph i um tube rcu l a tury 104.5 - 33.7 Cyanophyceae 0.1 - 60.0 Ba lanus crenatus 117.8 80.4 53.8 Lamina ria saccha ri na 0.1 - 60.0 Sp i ro rb id tubes 86.5 72.5 64.1 Polysiphonia denudata 0.1 - 60.0 Corophium spp. 38.2 - 68.5 Balanus i mp rov i sos 13.5 48.0 42.4 Fauna (2): Co rophium acutum 13.4 - 83.7 Dexamirie thea 10.5 - 61.9 Q ryp_to su l a pa l l a s i a na 24.4 80.9 70.2 C.2 p re l l a penantis 8.5 41.2 52.2 Ba lanus crenatus 12.6 57.1 64.4 Stve la pa rt i ta 6.7 - 40.2 Balanus spp. 7.8 80.9 63.5 Botryllus schlosseri 1.6 52.4 48.1 Stye t a pa rt i ta 1.3 - 52.9 1 of 3 O O O
MNPS-3 EROLS TABLE 2.2-34 / k_- TEN MOST ABUNDANT TAXA COLLECTED AT MILLSTONE SUBTIDAL STATIONS l5 (September 1976 - June 1980) Annual Abundance *, Percent Contribution, and Biological Index Valve X* % Cum % BIV FT** Effluent: Oligochaeta 495 27.2 27.2 96.7 DF Chaetazone spp. 443 24.3 51.5 65.8 DF Aricidea catherinae 219 12.0 63.5 86.7 DF Polycirrus Iximius 218 12.0 75.5 83.3 DF Protodorvillea gaspeensis 41 2.2 77.8 68.3 0 Exogone hebes 33 1.8 79.6 61.7 DF Tellina agilis 32 1.8 81.4 63.3 DF Parapionosyllis longicirrata 31 1.7 83.1 45.0 C _ Capitella spp. 28 1.5 84.6 51.7 DF [.') V Rhynchocoela 22 1.2 85.8 42.5 C Giants Neck: Oligocheata 710 31.1 31.1 100 DF Aricidea catherinae 404 17.7 48.8 91.1 DF Chaetozone spp. 296 13.0 61.8 83.9 DF Tharyx spp. 186 8.1 69.9 64.2 DF Medicmastus ambiseta 154 6.7 76.6 55.3 DF Polycirrus eximius 88 3.9 80.5 60.7 DF Phoxocephalus holbolli 56 2.4 82.9 42.8 DF Capitella spp. 39 1.7 84.7 50.0 DF Lumbrineris impatiens 37 1.6 86.3 37.5 H Protodorvillea gaspeensis 36 1.6 87.9 41.1 0 Intake: Aricidea catherinae 74 15.8 15.8 91.6 DF Capitella spp. 68 14.4 30.3 93.8 DF oligochaeta 58 12.4 42.7 92.4 DF Ampelisca vyrrilli 36 7.6 50.3 62.5 SF Chaetozone spp. 29 6.2 56.5 77.8 DF Tellina agilis 20 4.2 60.6 67.4 DF Mediomastus ambiseta 17 3.5 64.2 52.8 DF Exogone hebes 15 3.2 67.4 52.1 DF 7 ~s Sabellaria vulgaris 14 2.9 70.3 30.6 SF ( ') Spiophanes bombyx 10 2.2 72.5 29.9 DF v Amendment 5 1 of 3 January 1984
=
MMPS-3 EROLS TABLE 2.2-34 (Cont) 5* % Cum % BIV FT** Jordan Cove Oligochaeta 1331 51.0 51.0 100 DF Medicnastus,ambiseta 371 14.2 65.2 67.0 DF Aricidea catherinae 253 9.7 74.9 89.3 DF Polycirrus eximus 96 3.7 78.6 78.6 DF Chaetozone spp. 73 2.8 81.4 67.9 DF Lumbrineris tenuis 53 2.0 83.5 60.7 DF Lubrineris impatiens 52 2.0 85.5 47.3 H Capitella spp. 43 1.6 87.1 46.4 DF Parapionosyllis longicirrata 37 1.4 88.6 53.6 C Tharyx spp. 27 1.0 89.6 37.5 DF Bay Point: Oligochaeta 379 40.2 40.2 100 DF Aricidea catherinae 164 17.4 57.6 91.7 DF Parapionosyllis longicirrata 37 4.0 61.6 72.9 C Exogone hebes 36 3.8 65.4 70.8 DF Polycirrus eximius 35 3.7 69.1 64.6 DF Tellina agilis 27 2.8 71.9 57.3 DF Protodorvillea gaspeens;s 26 2.7 74.6 54.2 0 Protodrilus sp. 24 2.5 77.1 37.5 DF Polygordius sp. 22 2.3 79.4 26.8 SF Ampelisca verrilli 16 1.6 81.1 31.3 SF Little Rock: Oligochaeta 410 35.5 35.5 100 DF Polycirrus eximius 119 10.3 45.8 88.9 DF Chaetozone spp. 109 9.5 55.3 60.9 DF Mediomastus ambiseta 92 7.9 63.2 55.6 DF Capitella spp. 35 3.0 66.2 67.8 DF Tellina agillis 33 2.9 69.1 60.0 DF Exogone hebes 32 2.8 71.9 57.8 DF Aricidea catherinae 28 2.4 74.3 56.7 DF Polydora caulleryi 25 2.1 76.5 30.0 DF Lumbrineris tenuis 23 2.0 78.5 33.3 DF Niantic Bay: Nucula proxima 436 51.6 51.6 78.4 DF Oligochaeta 68 8.1 59.7 78.4 DF Mediomastus ambiseta 56 6.6 66.3 88.2 DF Mitrella lunata 54 6.4 72.7 41.2 C Ampelisca verrilli 33 3.9 73.6 76.5 SF Tellina agilis 32 3.7 80.4 70.6 DF 2 of 3
MNPS-3 EROLS TABLE 2.2-38 I YEARLY PERCENTAGE (%) AND YEARLY MEAN CARAPACE LENGTH (CL) (mm) 0F BERRIED FEMALES COLLECTED j (1974 - 1980) l5 ) Intake Jordan Cove Twotree Overall Year (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) i i 1974 0.8 1.6 4.1 2.1 l 1975 3.5 4.5 9.7 6.7 l 1976 3.3 2.0 11.0 5.9 i 1977 3.5 1.4 6.2 3.7 9 i 1978 2.8 1.7 5.4 3.4 1979 2.8 1.7 5.2 3.1 1 . -, 1980 1.8 2.8 5.0 3.3 < \) CL Range 4 N (mm) (mm) X S.D. 1974 6 83.0 t 3.7 79-88 1975 7 79.1 t 3.7 73-84 1976 16 82.9 7.7 70-102 1977 35 79.7 1 6.4 68-92 1978 58 80.1 4.0 74-88 i 1979 67 80.6 5.4 64-93 f 1 1 1980 71 79.2 5.1 72-93 d Amendment 5 1 of 1 January 1984
._ ,,-,,.e - ,~.--n.- -e - - - - , , . . , , - - - - - - , - - - -,,,ea , ,. --ww,n,--.. , - - . n,_,,------,,..._,,,ne r,n, we em, m,,,,,,,m,-~,,w,nw
MllPS-3 EROLS TABLE 2.2-39 YEARLY PERCE!!TAGE OF CULLED LORSTERS 1975 - 1980 Percent !!issing Percent !!issing Total Year One Claw Two Claws Percent Cull 1975 7.8 1.9 9.0 1976 13.5 2.0 15.4 1977 10.4 1.2 11.7 1978 14.1 0.9 15.9 1979 15.0 2.5 17.4 1980 12.9 1.7 14.5 1978 - 1980 Pot Percent Missing Percent Missing 7etal Type One Claw Two Claws Percent Cull 1973: Wood 14.1 1.9 15.9 Metal 14.0 0.9 15.0 1979: Wood 15.0 2.4 17.4 Metal 14.4 1.2 15.5 1980: Wood 14.7 2.2 16.9 Metal 11.9 1.4 13.4 1 of 1 O
} 9 9 9 ! , f l MNPS-3 EROL3 j TABLE 2.2-41 (Cont) Estimated 1 Total Sta nda rd Estimated Number Sta nda rd Probability of Sta nda rd ! ! Number E rro r of Recruits Deviation Survival Devistion I N i Ng By B O Og t f I i 1979 i
- June 4637 922 7682 1727 0.62 0.11 j July 10557 1959 -334 1084 0.63 0.10
! Aug 6317 1119 2026 575 0.34 0.06 j Sep 4174 852 1822 -
0.45 0.09
- Oct 3700 -
1446 - 0.54 -
! 1980 l
i June 8654 2120 8538 2772 0.77 0.17 ! July 12442 3348 5386 2244 0.45 0.11 Aug 10417 2735 88 693 0.41 0.10
- Sep 3050 730 - -
0.29 0.07 l Oct 5284 - - - - - l s ! l i 4 ( l l I l L 2 of 2 i
MNPS-3 EROLS TABLE 2.2 2 YEARLY IMPINGEMENT OF LOBSTEFS AT MILLSTONE 1 AND 2 (1975 1980) l5 Year Unit 1 Unit 2 Both Units 1975* 734 56 790 1976* 479 663 1,142 1977 240 310 550 1978 245 261 506 1979 323 426 749 1980 368 405 773 Total 2,389 2,121 4,510 NOTE:
- 1975-1976 values are based on seven days of sampling per week. The 1977-1980 values are based on three days of sampling per week and are extrapolated based on flow rates to represent the estimated total number impinged.
Amendment 5 1 of 1 January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS X/Q = relative concentration, in sec/m3 v n = windspeed at 10 meters above plant grade, in m/sec U n = 3.14159 Ly = lateral plume spread with meander and building effects Iy Iy == May,)for(M-1 oy 800 distances m + o y, less for than or equal distances greater to 800 meters than 800 meters Oy = lateral plume spread in meters 15 oz = vertical plume spread in meters Figure 2.3-7 depicts the functional relationship of M (meander factor) with respect to wind speed and atmospheric stability. If the X/Q value calculated in Equation 2.3.4-1 is less than the greater X/Q value of either of the following equations: X = _1 (2.3.4-2)
-- u (noyzo + A/2)
Q io _1 1= u (3noyzo) (2.3,4-3) Q 10 - ('% where: A = the smallest vertical-plane' cross-sectional area of the containment structure (sq. m) it is retained otherwise, the applicable X/Q value is the greater of i those calculated by Equations 2.3.4-2 and 2.3.4-3. For all A, B, and C stability conditions, and for D,E,F, and G stability conditions when the wind speed is greater than 6 meters per i second, the greater of the two X/Q values calculated from l Equations 2.3.4-2 and 2.3.4-3 becomes limiting. Each valid hour of the January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1981 onsite meteorological data was utilized for the calculation. An hour of data was considered valid if recovery of the wind speed, wind i direction, and temperature differ:ence ( t.T) was simultaneously accomplished. For the January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1981 < . period at Millstone 3, 94.67 percent of the data fulfilled this criterion. Thus, the 90-percent recovery requirement of Regulatory Guide 1.23 was met. For each valid hour of meteorlogical data, an X/Q value was calculated as described above, where the wind direction determined the downwind sector. The EAB and LPZ distances were used (along with the stability class) to determine magnitudes of oy and i O o. z Amendment 5 2.3-13 January 1984 __ - . - - -- _ _ _ _ . .- _ _ . - . . _ - . . . . . - _ - , _ _ - . _ . - ~ _ - - _ . _
MNPS-3 EROLS For the hours with calm winds, a wind speed of 0.5 meter per second was assigned. The wind directions during these calm conditions were assigned in proportion to the directional distribution of the non-calm through 1.5 meters per second wind speed conditions. Regulatory Guide 1.145 states that non-calm windspeeds below 1.5 meters per second provide a reasonable method for defining the distribution of wind directions during light winds. For the hours with variable wind directions, the last valid wind direction and the actual recorded wind speed were coupled. For each overland downwind sector, all non-zero X/Q values were stored and arranged in descending order, and 50-percent equal risk values were chosen. These values were compated and the sector with the largest X/Q value determined the ultimate design basis 50-percent equal risk X/Q for use in Chapter 7.1 for dose calculations. The 50-percent elevated 5.0 (totally elevated) E q T = 0.30 - 0.06 (ue /Un2) when 1.5 < ue/U n2 55.0 (partially entrained) 5l ET = 2.58-1.58 (u /u142) when 1.0 < u /un2 $1.5 (partially elevated) Amendment 5 2.3-18 January 1984
i
- HNPS-3 EROLS 3 51.0 (totally entrained) l5 ET = 1.0 when ue / :43 The Millstone i stack is more than twice the height of the nearest adjacent, solid structure and is considered to be a totally- elevated release. The Millstone 3 containment and turbine ventilation vents ,
are within 1 to 2 times higher than adjacent solid structures and, ! t therefore, are considered to be conditionally elevated releases. I Within 8 km in each downwind sector, Equation 2.3.5-1 was used to determine annual X/Q values by sector at the site boundary, population wheel receptors, nearest resident, nearest vegetable , garden, nearest milk goac, and nearest milk cow. Since X/Q maximizes beyond the site boundary for the Millstone 1 stack releases, for all routine releases occurring at the Millstone 1 stack, a maximum X/Q value determined for the resident and vegetable garden within the 5-kilometer distance for each sector is conservatively applied to the nearest resident and vegetable garden receptor. There was no meat animal reported in the area of interest. The annual average period is represented by the January 1, 1974 through December 31, 1981 onsite data period, while the seven-month
- growing seasen is represented . by the months of April, May, June, j July, August, September, and October during the 1974 through 1981 onsite data periods. This data period is of sufficient length to provide a climatically representative data base.
I' The effective release heights were computed from the following 1 equation: h =h - (h ) +h e r j (2.3.5-2) Values of topographic heights were conservatively represented by the maximum topographic height that exists within a particular annulus-i sector (annsect). An annsect is an area bounded by a 22.5-degree sector and two given radial distances from the release point. For Pasquill stability classes A through D (extremely unstable-f neutral), plume rise for nonbuoyant sources was calculated by the , following algorithm: l when: l u,/uh 1 1.5 i r :y3 V3 h = 1.44 d (2.3.5-3) l l l Amendment 5 2.3-19 January 1984 l (
MNPS-3 EROLS O when: ue/uh <l.5 V3 u \* r [u* }:y 3 [x\ d-3 1.5 - e i d (2.3.5-4) j (d) h = 1.44 I u j_ l Pr g _ r and Iu ) h =<3 d pr - (uhj (2.3.5-5) r The result from Equations 2.3.5-3 and 2.3.5-4 (whichever condition is applicable) is then compared t c, Equation 2.3.5-5 and the smaller value of h pr is used. For Pasquill stability classes E through G (slightly stable to extremely stable), Equations 2.3.5-3, or 2.3.5-4 and 2.3.5-5 are i compared with: i h = 4 (Fm/S) Pr j (2.3.5-6) J l and l l l 2.3-20 l l 1
MNPS-3 ER0LS [] 2.4 HYDROLOGY b 2,%.1 Surface Water The public water supplies within a 32-km (20-mile) radius of the site are identified on Figure 2.4-1. The characteristics of these pablic water supplies are listed in Table 2.4-1. The information contained on Figure 2.4-1 and Table 2.4-1 was furnished by the Bureau of Sanitary Engineering of the Connecticut State Health Department. The nearest surface public water supply is the New London Water Company's Lake Konomac, 9.2 km (6 miles) north-northwest of the site. No surface drainage from the site could affect this reservoir because of the distance involved, the surface conditions,the expected groundwater gradient from the reservoir area to the site, and the generally impervious nature of the overburden on and near the site. The bedrock surface is exposed at the south end of the site, but covered with a dense glacial till at the north end. Because both are quite impervious, precipitation does not permeate into it readily, and much of the precipitation runs off the surface directly into Niantic Bay or Jordan Cove. Some ;urface water collects in depressions in the northern part of the site. There are no major rivers or streams in the vicinity of Millstone Point, nor are there any water courses on the site. A number of _s' small brooks flow into the Niantic River and then to Niantic Bay, ( west of the site. Any flooding of these brooks would not directly \m ; affect the site or significantly raise the water levels in Niantic Bay, Jordan Cove, or Long Island Sound in the vicinity of the site. All site drainage, including the roofs of safety related buildings, will be designed on the basis of the probable maximum precipitation to assure against the local flooding of station facilities. 2.4.2 Groundwater The Millstone site has several shallow wells un it, the nearest being about 1.2 km (3/4 mile) from the station area (Figure 2.4-2). None of these provides water for domestic purposes, but one is used to water a nearby baseball field and ta supply a drinking fountain at the field. Ridges of granite between the station and these wells create a drainage divide which would keep any water or chemicals accidentally released from the station from reaching these wells. Groundwater observations at the site have been documented in previous reports (EBASCO 1966; Bechtel Corp. 1969). Observations of the water levels in the granite quarry at the site show that the water level in the quarry, before the existing discharge channel opened to the 5 ocean, typically lay approximately 5.2 meters (17 feet) below the level of the adjacent Long Island Sound. It is significant that this quarry was worked for over 100 years (1830 to 1960) at distances of as little as 61 meters (200 feet) from the waters of Long Island
~s Sound without experiencing notable inflows of water.
(v) Amendment 5 2.4-1 January 1984
HNPS-3 ER0LS These observations confirm ~previour findings documented during the Millstone 2 construction phase that the permeabilities of the bedrock and the overlying ablation till and the dense basal till are extremely low. Little er no groundwater flow has been observed in the crystalline bedrock, and virtually all of the groundwater movement is rentricted to the soil overburden. Measurements taken during previous investigations in August 1969 showed average influx rates into 0.61 meter x 3.7 meters (2 feet by 12 feet) by 3-meter (10-feet) deep test pits of about 30.3 liters (8 gallons) per hour. Observations at the site prior to construction of Millstone 3 were made in several borings between 1971 and 1973. Piezometric surface readings of these boreholes appear to be subject to considerable seasonal fluctuations and vary with locations. A stabilized groundwater level contour map, based on the seisonal high water levels measured in January 1972, and extrapolation of data to post-construction site conditions, were plotted. This map (Figure 2.4-3) is representative of higher than average water level reading as determined during the site study and from visual observations during construction. Figure 2.4-3 also indicates a groundwater piezometric surface with a 3-percent gradient generally sloping from northeast to southeast. Localized perched groundwater ccnditions probably exist because of the irregular distribution of ablation till materials of varying gradation and porosity. It is also likely that shallow, ponded water exists in localized bedrock troughs. The prevalence of bedrock outcrops to the north and northwest of the site indicates that bedrock acts as a groundwater divide, isolating the soils of the tip of Millsterie Point from soils further inland. Thus, groundwater recharge would primarily be due to absorption of local precipitation, with probable migration to the waterc of the immediate adjacent Long v.sland Sound. Water pressure tests were also performed in three boreholes and during installation of rock anchors in the turbine and service building. These tests indicated that the rock within the site area is generally massive with slight to moderate interconnected jointing. Low pressures observed from these tests, as tabulated in Table 2.5.4-16 of the Millstone 3 FSAR, further verified the low permeability of the rock mass. 2.4.3 Oceanography 2.4.3.1 Tides Normal tides at Millstone Point are semidiurnal with a mean range of 0.82 meter (2.7 feet) and a spring range of 1 meter (3.2 feet). The mean periou of the tide is 12 hours-25 minutes. Tides in excess of the mean high water occur on an average as follows: in excess of 0.9 meter (3 feet), about once a year; in excess of 0.6 meter (2 feet), about 5 times a year; and in excess of 0.3 meter (1 foot), about 98 times a year. 2.4-2
-- i w
-* ., Qya- ,
s ,- - j ,3 .e '
*O ', (a N \ l
,.1 .r r 9* / 'A.
(-
'N 1'vs
, ,MtIPS-3 Eh0LS -
- .s s 3 *
% J. eu p. _
Zinc a
% * \
\ s v ', 3
,w .
g
~
The rean~ concentrations of .totalszi lic ranged from b.4piah(Quarry ' s Cut, 1260)- to 22 ppb (Twotree ' Island, 1s73). The lowest. mean concentrations for all stations were trecodded in 1980., The avekage concentration,of total;7inc for the 1973-1930 period .was 10.2 ppb.
, , The annual ave'rageN concentritions' ranged form 3.0 ppb in 1980 to
"' 16.1 ppb in.19762 . : s s y M' 1 a' '
The monthly' ave'iage(tataITE1ntcon'centrationon)ebbandfloodtide during the 1974 baselirJ*, study.is pressnted in Table 2.4-4. Total l5 zinc concentr6tionP ' habe- seasonal . fluctuations, with* average
~
concentraticns ranging from.3 to 12 ppb he, tween. January and April. During thejay r6noff' period,t av=Page concentrations reached 35 to 45 ppb." Afted'a decl,ine .tT 6, td -7, ppb in - June, . tCtal Zinc c concentrati60s it'crMsed y , toe 25- to 26.p @ ih July. Concentrscions i decreased to 4l t&S ppb'in fogusti and then ' gradually increa' sed from August to December-to=15 to-21 ppb. Y g' '," *
*+..
y s- . x s ,. Iron '
- .g * ,,
g' , m,, ,t _s ~
*: , , ~
Mean annual'concentrationssof total iron fluctuated randomly between 1973 and 1980, wit'h annual mean concentrations ranging from 59 ppb ~ (Quarry Cut, 1975) to 856' ppb (Giants Neck, 1977). Annual average
~
concentrations (all stations) ranged from(67 ppb in 1975 to_ 327 ppb g in 1977. The average chncentration of total iron for the entire
) 1973-1980 period was 156 ppb. '
w' - During the 1974-ba'selind istudyl the range of average total iron concentrations =b,etween January, and May was,100 to 200 ppb, and betkeen June and December the range decreased'to less than.100 ppb. An exceptiidn to the low range of concentratio6s - recorded from June through December wa'sc recorded . in September when many stations recorded between 100 .and -209 ppb total' iron,1 and concentrations greater'than 200. ppb were recorded at'five l'ocations. Chromium ,. Mean " annual' concentrations 06 lota1 chromium reported during the
~
,1973-1980 study period Seversekceeded 2 ppb for all stations
- monitored. Clapp Laboiatorios ',(NUSca. 1973) reported no total i chromium concentrations'in eastern Long Island Sound which were great!er than 5 ppb on six sampling' dates between February 1973 and FebrGary 1974. Soluble chromium ^ concentrations reported by Clapp Labrsatories nevei- exceeded 1 ppb. During the 1974 baseline study, soluble chromium concentraYions ~ were measured from July through Deceraber and never exEeeded 1 ppb at all stations,in; all samples, i -s t Leaci " N. a '
Mean annual concentrations,of' total lead ranged from less than 1 ppb (N, (Mil'lstone Intake, :1980) sto E.4 bpb s(Ndtree Island,1976) during the t / 1973-1980 period.A The lowest mean' concentrations for all stations . U \s i ,, r - u. ~ Amendmhnt 5
, (
- 42 4-11 January 1984
,. s -
l'
* ~**~-1 %% ,s x ,
MNPS-3 EROLS were reported in 1980. Average annual concentrations ranged from less than 1.2 ppb in 1980 to 5.3 ppb in 1976. Clapp Laboratories (NUSCo. 1973) reported total lead concentrations in excess of 5 ppb in 5 of 24 samples collected between February 1973 and February 1974. The maximum total lead concentration detected was 15 ppb, of which 14 ppb were insoluble lead. During the 1974 baseline study, soluble lead concentrations were less than 2 ppb at all staticas between June and December. Aluminum The concentration of total aluminum recorded during 1974 ranged from less than 0.2 mg/l to 3.7 mg/1. Maximum average aluminum concentrations ocdur.during July when concentrations on ebb and flood tide are 3.7 and 2.3 mg/1, respectively. Minimum aluminum concentrations of less than 0.2 mg/l were reported in October, which is the high salinity period when there is minimum dilution of high salinity water entering eastern Long Island Sound through The Race from Block Island Sound. Runoff may be a major source of aluminum input into eastern Long Island Sound. Manganese The total manganese concentrations measured during the 1974 study have seasonal fluctuations. The maximum average concentrations (37 to 45 pg/1) are recorded during the spring runoff period of March and April. Since the manganese concentrations include metal associated uith suspended matter, the spring runoff period probably contributes manganese to eastern Long Island Sound. Manganese concentrations generally decrease from June to December with December concentrations below 5 pg/1. Nickel The concentrations represent total nickel. Monthly average total nickel concentraticas on ebb and flood tide are presented in Table 2.4-4. The range of average concentrations of nickel was between 75 and 170 pg/l between January and July, except for a March maximum of approximately 240 pg/l. The March yearly maximum occurs when runoff conditions may contribute part.culate nickel to the water column. A decrease in the magnitude of nickel concentration occurred in August when concentrations averaged approximately 21 pg/1. A September increase to approximately 45 pg/l is followed by a decrease to less than 5 pg/l in December. Arsenic A range of arsenic concentrations in sea water of 9 to 22 pg/l has been reported by Rakestraw and Lutz (1933). Other seawater values reported include 2 pg/l in the ocean (Preston 1972), 1.12 to 1.71 pg/l in Japan (Chemical Abstracts 1977), and 5.6 pg/l in the Atlantic Ocean (Chemical Abstracts 1977). 2.4-12
MNPS-3 EROLS
/ 2.7 HOISE k /
x_/ 2.7.1 Site Characteristics The Millstone station, with two of its units operating and the third under construction, is situated on the tip of a small peninsula extending southward into Long Island Sound. Small residential communities, as well as Route 156, bound the site to the north and northeast. The residential areas are mostly year-round suburban communities, but many of the commercial businesses and other land uses are centered on summer tourism and vacationing. The resulting seasonal effects include slight increases in population and traffic volume during the summer months. Noise-sensitive areas were determined through the use of United States Geological Survey maps and an inspection of the site environs by the survey personnel. Measurement locations were chosen in the residential communities of Jordan Cove, Pleasure Beach, Millstone Road, and Black Point to ensure that a complete and accurate description of the ambient sound levels could be drawn for all areas in the vicinity of the Millstone site, and that a comparison of sound levels could be made with those obtained from previous noise surveys at similar locations. In all, eight measurement locations were selected as representative of the different noise-sensitive areas surrounding the station. Two (,, _ ) locations were chosen in each of the Jordan Cove and Pleasure Beach
\~ l areas. These communities have an unobstructed view of the Millstone site, and plant noise is generally audible. Three locations were chosen in the Black Point area and a single location in the Millstone Road community, where the plant was generally not audible. The eight measurement positions described in Table 2.7-1 are shown on Figures 2.7-1 and 2.7-2.
lQE291.5 2.7.2 Ambient Sound Levels The statistical descriptors selected to delineate the ambient sound levels include residual, equivalent, and day-night sound levels. Residual sound levels are represented by the L,, percentile level, l which is the sound level exceeded 90 percent of the time. This l residual level represents the minimum er background sound level. The equivalent sound level (Leg) is the le el of steady noise which would have the same total sound energy as the fluctuating noise actually l measured in the community. The day-night sound level (Ldn) is similar to Leq, but has a 10-dB weighting applied to noise occurring during the night since nighttime noise is considered more annoying than the same noise during the day. The Ldn is calculated by 5 combining the daytime hourly Leq values for the 15-hour period from , 0700 to 2200 hours with the 10 dB weighted nighttime hourly Leq l values for the 9-hour period from 2200 to 0700 hours. Table 2.7-2 I provides a statistical summary of hand-held and automatically monitored measurements at each site. Table 2.7-3 furnishes more l 7-
! i detailed information.
i J Amendment 5 2.7-1 January 1984
MHPS-3 EROLS The Jordan Cove area is a year-round residential community located 914 meters to 1,219 meters (3,000 to 4,000 feet) northeast of the plant. Dominating noise sources for the residual and equivalent sound levels wera observed to be plant and wind noise, with residual sound levels ranging from 30 to 45 dBA, and equivalent sound levels of 40 to 50 dBA. A slight decrease of approximately 3 or 4 dB occurs from daytime to nighttime for both residual and equivalent sound levels. This reduction of sound level seems to stem from a decline in traffic and decreased construction activity on Millstone 3 during the nighttime hours. A similar residential community, the Pleasure Beach area, is situated some 1,676 meters to 2,286 meters (5,500 to 7,500 feet) directly east of the plant site. Traffic and cricket-like noise dominate all percentile levels in this area, with residual sound levels in the order of 32 to 42 dBA. The equivalent sound levels, in the small residential community close to the shore, generally range from 35 to 50 dBA, while on the more heavily traveled street further onshore, 30 to 55 dBA. Nighttime residual sound levels are generally 6 dBA lower than daytime levels due to a decline in human activity, decreased construction activity on Millstone 3, and an absence of cricket noise. In the same manner, nighttime equivalent sound levels are reduced 8 to 10 dBA due to the decline in traffic and aircraft flyovers. Plant noise was clearly audible during the nighttime, often accompanied with a no wind or a favorable westerly wind condition. Mearurement Location 3, located 1,372 meters (4,500 feet) north of O the plant on Millstone Road, represents another residential community. Traffic noise from Route 156 and cricket-like noise govern the sound levels in this area. Both the residual and equivalent sound levels were epproximately 40 to 50 dBA during the daytime, while nighttirae residual levels generally ranged from 30 to 40 dBA, and nighttime equivalent levels from 35 to 45 dBA. Differences between day and night residual and day and night equivalent sound levels are again attributed to the decline of human activity, most notably, the variation in traffic volume during plant workers commuting hours, and the intermittent construction activity on nearby Millstone 3. Measurement locations on Black Point are 2,591 meters to 3,505 meters (8,500 to 11,500 feet) to the west northwest of the Millstone site. The three measurement locations include a towr. park, a yacht club, and a residential street. A variety of noise sources control the ambient sound levels, including traffic, wave, wind, and cricket-like noise. On only one occasion uas the plant audible, when an east wind allowed for sound propagation in the direction of Black Point. The daytime residual sound levels fell in a range from 30 to 45 dBA at the yacht club and residential area and 40 to 50 dBA in the park due to the heavier traffic volume. The same effect is seen in the equivalent sound level data, with ranges of 40 to 50 dBA at the yacht club and residential area, and 45 to 65 dBA in the town park. Differences in day to nighttime measurements reveal a slight decrease 2.7-2
MNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES [}
'u Page, Table (T), or Amendment Figure (F) Nember 3-i thru 3-ii 0 3-iii 5 3-iv thru 3-v 0 3.1-1 0 F3.1-1 0 3.2-1 thru 3.2-3 0 F3.2-1 0 F3.2-2 0 F3.2-3 O 3.3-1 2 3.3-2 0 T3.3-1 (1 of 1) 0 F3.3-1 0 3.4-1 0
[/} N. 3.4-2 thru 3.4-2a 3.4-3 thru 3.4-6 T3.4-1 (1 of 1) 2 0 2 F3.4-1 0 F3.4-2 0 F3.4-3 0 F3.4-4 (2 sheets) 0 l 3.5-1 thru 3.5-12 0 T3.5-1 (1 of 1) 0 < T3.5-2 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 ( T3.5-3 (1 thru 3 of 3) 0 ( T3.5-4 (1 of 1) 0 i T3.5-5 (1 of 1) 0 T3.5-6 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T3.5-7 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T3.5-8 (1 thru 3 of 3) 0 l T3.5-9 (1 of 1) 0 T3.5-10 (1 of 1) 0 T3.5-11 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T3.6*-12 (1 thru 3 of 3) 0 T3.5-13 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 l T3.5-14 (1 thru 3 cf 3) 0 l T3.5-15 (1 of 1) 0 ! T3.5-16 (1 of 1) 0 T3.5-17 (1 of 1) 0 l , s) l(' F3.5-1 F3.5-2 0 0 Amendment 5 EP3-1 January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES (Cont) Page, Table (T), or Amendment Figure (F) _ Number F3.5-3 0 F3.5-4 0 3.6-1 thru 3.6-2 0 3.6-3 2 3.6-4 thru 3.6-5 0 T3.6-1 (1 thru 3 of 3) 1 T3.6-2 (1 of 1) 0 T3.6-3 (1 of 1) 5 F3.6-1 0 3.7-1 thru 3.7-3 0 T3.7-1 (1 of 1) 0 T3.7-2 (1 of 1) 0 T3.7-3 (1 of 1) 0 T3.7-4 (1 of 1) 0 T3.7-5 (1 of 1) 0 T3.7-6 (1 of 1) 0 3.8-1 0 3.9-1 thru 3.9-3 0 F3.9-1 0 F3.9-2 0 l O Amendment 5 L'P3-2 January 1984 l
MNPS-3 EROLS p 4 N - i LIST OF TABLES Table Title 3.3-1 Station Water Use 3.4-1 Service Water Flow and Heat Load Requirements Under All Operating Conditions 3.5-1 Iodine and Noble Gas Inventory in Reactor Core and Fuel Rod Gaps 3.5-2 Parameters Used to Describe the Pressurized Water Reactor with U-Tube Steam Generators (Volatile Chemistry) 3.5-3 Expected Reactor Coolant Equilibrium Concentrations 3.5-4 Tritium Production 3.5-5 Reactor Coolant N-16 Activity 3.5-6 Expected Secondary Side Liquid Equilibrium Concentrations 3.5-7 Expected Secondary Side Steam Equilibrium Concentrations k_,,) 3.5-8 Liquid Waste Systems Components and Capacities 3.5-9 Radioactive Liquid Waste System Sources Estimated Quantities and Flwo Rates per Unit 3.5-10 Expected Decontamination Factors and Holdup Times 3.5-11 Radioactive Liquid Releases 3.5-12 Radioactive Liquid Concentrations from Each Stream for Radioactive Liquid Release Estimates (pCi/gm) Following Treatment 3.5-13 Radioactive Gaseous Waste and Ventilation Systems Components
- and Capacities 3.5-14 Radioactive Gaseous Releases 3.5-15 Ventilation and Exhaust Systems Decontamination Factors 3.5-16 Ventilation and Exhaust System Release Point and 5
Rate / Millstone 1 Stack Release Point and Rate 3.5-17 Radioactive Solid Waste System Components Rad Capacities ( ) 3.6-1 Chemical Additions to Water Used for Station Operation is 3.6-2 Chemical Composition of Regeneration Wastes from Hakeup Demineralizer System Amendment 5 3-iii January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF TABLES (Cont) Table Title 3.6-3 Characteristics of Steam Generator Blowdown Prior to Treatment and Recovery e 3.7-1 Typical Septic Tank Effluent 3.7-2 Raw Sewage Analysis 3.7-3 Auxiliary Boiler and Fuel Parameters 3.7-4 Auxiliary Boiler Emissions
~
3.7-5 Diesel Generator and Fuel Parameters 3.7-6 Diesel Generator Emissions O O 3-iv
MNPS-3 EROLS i TABLE 3.6-3 CHARACTERISTICS OF STEAM GENERATOR BLOWDOWN PRIOR i TO TREATMENT AND RECOVERY Average Maximum
- Concentration pH 9.0 9.3 Conductivity (umho/cm) 40 50 l5 Ammonia NHa (ppm) 0.1-0.7 0.1-0.7 4
; Sodium (ppm) 0.1 0.1 Chloride (ppm) 0.05 0.05 Dissolved oxygen (ppb) 0-5 0-5 Hydrazine (ppm) <0.02 <0.02 Silicon dioxide (ppm) 0.3 0.3 h Iron (ppb) 500 500
-Copper (ppb) 200 200 Total suspended solid (ppm) 1.0 1.0 Lithium (ppb) 0 <0.07 Boric acid (ppb) 0 <170 NOTE:
Average concentrations shown are those expected with zero primary to secondary coolant leakage. Maximum concentrations shown are those-i expected with a 20 gpd primary to secondary coolant leakage. 1 Amendment 5 1 of 1 January 1984 L i
,,.w.____ _ _ . _ . . , _ . . _ _ - . _ . _ . , . . - , . . - _ _ , - , , , ,
MNPS-3 EROLS ( LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES i Page, Table (T), or Amendment Figure (F) Namber j 5-i thru 5-iv 0 5-v 5 5-vi thru 5-viii 3 5.1-1 thru 5.1-12 0 5.1-13 5 5.1-14 thru 5.1-50 0 5.1-51 5 5.1-52 thru 5.1-60 0 5.1-61 5 5.1-62 0 i 5.1-63 5 i 5.1-64 thru 5.1-79 0 T5.1-1 (1 of 1) 0 T5.1-2 (1 of 1) 0 T5.1-3 (1 of 1) 0 3 T5.1-4 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T5.1-5 (1 of 1) 0 (~'g T5.1-6 (1 thru 3 of 3) 0 () T5.1-7 (1 of 1) T5.1-8 (1 of 1) 0 0 T5.1-9 (1 of 1) 0 T5.1-10 (1 of 1) 0 T5.1-11 (1 of 1) 0 T5.1-12 (1 of 1) 0 T5.1-13 (1 of 1) 0 T5.1-14 (1 of 1) 0 T5.1-15 (1 of 1) 0 T5.1-16 (1 of 1) 0 T5.1-17 (1 of 1) 0 T5.1-18 (1 of 1) 0 l T5.1-19 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 i F5.1-1 0 F5.1-2 0 l F5.1-3 0 l F5.1-4 0 ! F5.1-5 0 F5.1-6 0 F5.1-7 0 . F5.1-8 0 I F5.1-9 0 L F5.1-10 0 , F5.1-11 0 l F5.1-12 0 F5.1-13 i i O F5.1-14 F5.1-15 0 0 0 Amendment 5 EP5-1 January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES (Cont) Page, Table (T), or Amendment Figure (F) Number F5.1-16 O F5.1-17 0 F5.1-18 0 F5.1-19 0 F5.1-20 0 F5.1-21 5 F5.1-22 0 F5.1-23 0 F5.1-24 0 F5.1-25 0 F5.1-26 0 F5.1-27 0 5.2-1 thru 5.2-11 0 5.2-12 2 5.2-13 2 5.2-14 thru 5.2-15 0 T5.2-1 (1 of 1) 0 T5.2-2 (1 of 1) 0 T5.2-3 (1 of 1) 0 T5.2-4 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T5.2-5 (1 of 1) 0 T5.2-6 (1 of 1) 0 T5.2-7 (1 of 1) 0 T5.2-8 (1 of 1) 5 T5.2-9 (1 of 1) 5 T5.2-10 (1 of 1) 5 T5.2-11 (1 of 1) 5 T5.2-12 (1 of 1) 5 T5.2-13 (1 of 1) 5 T5.2-14 (1 of 1) 5 T5.2-15 (1 of 1) 5 T5.2-16 (1 of 1) 5 T5.2-17 (1 of 1) 5 T5.1-18 (1 of 1) 5 T5.1-19 (1 of 1) 5 T5.2-20 (1 of 1) 0 T5.2-21 (1 of 1) 0 T5.2-22 (1 of 1) 0 T5.2-23 (1 of 1) 0 TS.2-24 (1 of 1) 0 T5.2-25 (1 of 1) 5 F5.2-1 0 F5.2-2 0 F5.2-3 0 F5.2-4 0 Amendment 5 EPS-2 January 1984
A MNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES (Cont) i Page, Table (T), or Amendment Figure (F) Number 5.3-1 0 5.3-2 2 5.3-3 thru 5.3-4 0
- T5.3-1 (1 thru 2 cf 2) 0 T5.3-2 (1 thru 6 of 6) 0 T5.3-3 (1 of 1) 0 5.4-1 thru 5.4-4 0 T5.4-1 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 5.5-1 thru 5.5-7 0 f 5.6-1 thru 5.6-6 0 T5.6-1 (1 of 1) 1 T5.6-2 (1 of 1) 0 T5.6-3 (1 of 1) 5 5.7-1 0 5.8-1 thru 5.8-2 0 i
T O , Amendment 5 EP5-3 January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS (v ) LIST OF TABLES (Cont) Table Title 5.2-13 Annual Doses to Maximum Individual in The Teen Group from Gaseous Effluents 5.2-14 Annual Doses to Maximum Individual in The Child Group from Gaseous Effluents 5.2-15 Annual Doses to Maximum Individual in The Infant Group from Gaseous Effluents 5.2-16 Annual Doses to Maximum Individual in the Adult Group from Gaseous Effluents 5.2-17 Annual Doses to Maximum Individual in The Teen Group from Gaseous Effluents 5.2-18 Annual Doses to Maximum Individual in the Child Group from Gaseous Effluents 5.2-19 Annual Doses to Maximum Individual in The Infant Group from Gaseous Effluents (\') 5.2-20 Annual Doses to Maximum Individual in The Adult Group from Liquid Effluents 5.2-21 Annual Doses to Maximum Individual in Ihe Teen Group from Liquid Effluents 5.2-22 Annual Doses to Maximum Individual in The Child Group from Liquid Effluents 5.2-23 Comparison of Maximum Calculated Doses from Millstone 3 Nuclear Plant with Appendix I Design Objectives 5.2-24 Calculated Annual Doses for Projected Population within an 80-km Radius 5.2-25 Calculated Pcpulation Dose Commitment 5.3-1 Water Quality Standards (Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection 1977) for Class SB Waters in the Vicinity of Millstone 3 5.3-2 Effluent Limitations at Millstone 3 5.3-3 Long Island Sound Water Quality rN 5.4-1 Maximum Ground Level Concentrations (pg/m3) and Their [5 k ) Locations for Various Millstone 3 Fossil Fueled Sources under Normal and Special Diffusion Conditions Amendment 5 5-v Januacy 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF TABLES (Cont) Table Title 5.6-1 Measured Ambient of Millstone 1 and 2 and Estimated Station Sound Pressure Levels 5.6-2 Frequency of Occurrence of Ceiling Range O to.500 Feet and Visibility Range 0 to 1.0 Mile 5.6-3 Summary of Power Plant Related Bird Mortalities O O 5-vi
MNPS-3 EROLS (m) the June 1971 the rmal study overestimated the size of the area enclosed by the 0.83'c and 2.2 C (1.5 F and 4.0 F) contours. This led lo the March 1972 VAST, Inc. (1972b) study to determine the thermal cistribution due to the circulating water alone. The rcsults of this study were in closer agreement with predictions than the June 1971 study. Table 5.1-1 summarizes the results of these comparisons. The differences between the prediction of May 1966 and those of February 1970 in the near field were attributed to the effects of momentum entrainment which had not been compensated for in the 1966 e study. It must be noted that the temperatures for the February 1970 study were obtained by linear interpolation from Figures 1 and 2 in the February 1970 report to the Millstone Point Company. Thus, the predictions which reflected the average tidal conditions were in general agreement with the data taken during the March 1972 VAST survey (1972b), and the conclusions c'rawn by Pritchard-Carpenter relating to the operation of Millstone 1 were justified. Comparison among the temperature and dye plumes and the infrared survey taken on July 29 and 30, 1977, indicated that the shape and extent of the temperature and dye plumes for the same tidal phase were in general agreement with each other. The temperature and dye plumes were also in general agreement with the infrared survey results. Table 5.1-2 summarizes the surface areas for isotherms AT=4.4'C, 3.3 C, 2.2 C, and 0.83 C ( AT=8 F, 6*F, 4*F, and 1.5 F) 15 (~'}
\s_,- resulting from the hydrothermal survey and the infrared imagery survey.
5.1.2.5 Results of Thermal Plume Prediction The method used to predict the area and shape of the thermal plume of the cooling water effluent consists of a two-part analysis. The first part consists of a field measurement of the Millstone 1 and 2 thermal plume conducted by ENDECO and T.I. , Inc. durino July 1977 (Liang and Karbces 1978). The second part of the analysis consists of two analytical models which use the field information from the ENDECO survey to make them " site sensitive" to the hydrodynamic conditions at Millstone Point. The first model was used to predict the near field-intermediate field thermal plume, while the second model was used to predict the farfield plume. The field information was also used to estimate re-entrainment of heat caused by the reversal of tidal current direction (Stolzenbach and Adams 1979). As indicated in the descriptions of the near field mathematical model (Adams et al 1975) and far field mathematical model (Leendertse 1970; Tsai and Chang 1973), their principal concepts can be summarized as follows:
- 1. Plume prediction in the near field and intermediate field regions are made by modifying the near field integral surface jet model developed by Adams, Stolzenbach, and
[s\- '} Harleman (1975) so as to include intermediate field effects. The pure near field computational structure of the original Amendment 5 5.1-13 January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS Adams model is retained up to the point in the plume where momentum induced mixing virtually ceases and the buoyancy of lf the plume is the dominant near field process. Beyond that point, the computational scheme is changed to one in which total longitudinal and lateral momentum and he,at continue to be preserved but in which lateral plume growth is augmented by specified turbulent diffusion coefficients and in which additional mixing is determined by a condition that the ratio of buoyancy and momentum remains constant. Calculated plume temperatures are increased to account for re-entrainment by specifying the induced temperature rise in the re-entrained flow.
- 2. The far-field temperature distribution is calculated using the Leendertse far field model as applied te Millstone by SWEC (Liang and Tsai 1979). This model a sumes a uniform temperature ever a layer of constant thicknet as a function of tidal currents and of turbulent disperrion and surface heat loss rates. This model provides a truly transient temperature prediction which is of particular significance during slack tidal conditions.
The models described above were calibrated using the thermal plume field data obtained in July 1977. Calibration of the near field model was made by adjusting both turbulent diffusion coefficients and re-entrainment parameters. The parameters varied in the far-field model calibration were the assumed plume depth and the dispersion coefficient. Tidal currents used in the modeling had been pre-calculated by a hydrodynamic model which was it:cif verified by current measurements at the site (NUSCo. 1975). Although surface heat was also varied, the calculation indicated a relative insensitivity to the parameter. Since there are no major rivers or streams in the vicinity of Millstone Point, the thermal plume is mainly affected by tidal currents. Seasonal effects on the predicted characteristics of the mixing zone and temperature changes in the receiving water body are minimal. An annual current rose (frequency of occurrence) of an offshore location is shown on Figure 5.1-5. Current data was recorded by an ENDECO Model 105 current meter from May 23, 1975 through May 30, 1976 (Liang et al 1978). Daily currents may vary slightly due to changes of wind. However, the prevailing current varies mainly with tidal flow. The results of the thermal plume predictions described in this section are based on the combined flows from the once-through quarry discharge system of Millstone 1, 2, and 3 for both average and extreme cases. An average case characterizes the mean trend of the data, and an extreme case envelops the high range of measured centerline temperature increases. In both cases, the heated water from the condenser is first discharged into the existing quarry, and then from the quarry into Long Island Sound through an open channel. 5.1-14
MNPS-3 EROLS [m where: V) Bo = LOGE No = -1.35 BT = d = -0.357 X = T or length increment Using this relationship, the density in any length increment could then be calculated backwards or forwards to the larval density in any other interval, thereby accounting for natural mortality by length (NUSCo. 1981a). Using the calculated natural mortality coefficient of winter flounder and the actual length distribution of entrained larvae, alternative estimates of the number of equivalent reproductive adults were made. For example, under actual 2-unit operating conditions in 1980, the number of winter flounder larvae entrained was summed by 0.5-mm length intervals and totaled 205 million larvae. If these larvae experienced the mortality shown by the Niantic River larvae, they would be equivalent to about 60 x 106 metamorphosed (10 mm) larvae. Doubling this figure to 120 x 106 to account for the increased cooling-water volume needed for 3-unit operation and using life-stanza-specific survival coefficients, an estimate of the number of age 3 reproductive adults was made. With a survival of about (} s j 30 percent per month for the 8 months after reaching 10 mm (Pearcy 1962), these 120 x 106 prejuveniles entrained by 3-unit operation would be equivalent to 7,884 age 1 recruits. At 30 percent survival to age 2, the 7,884 fish would be reduced to an equivalent of 2,365 age 2 fish. With 38.4 percent annual survival found in the h winter flounder population dynamics study for the third and fourth year of life (NUSCo. 1981a), about 908 age 3 or 348 age 4 reproductive adults would ultimately be the equivalent of the 410 x 106 larvae potentially lost in a year of 3-unit operation. Using available data from local populations and the literature, these nodifications have, in the case of winter flounder, actually reduced the number of reproductive adults estimated by more than tenfold from 10,000 to less than 1,000. In summarizing the equivalent adult calculations for winter flounder, an annual average of about 9 x 106 eggs and 199 x 106 larvae have I been entrained and 9,117 larger fish impinged during 2-unit operation at Millstone. The smallest number of larvae (54 x 106) was entrained in 1979 and the largest (214 x 106) in 1980. Thus, the range of estimated equivalent adults lost due to entrainment and calculated by the method of Horst (1975) by 2-unit operation ranged from 1,890 per year to 7,490. The projected number of equivalent adults lost from 3-unit operation based on several methods of calculation ranges between 1,000 and 10,000. The presence of fish return systems, however, are expected to redace the impingement losses of winter flounder from the historical average of 9,117 to a projected 3-unit loss of 5,614. Thus, even though additional equivalent adults will
/}
5 x_- be lost due to entrainment during 3-unit operation, about 3,500 winter flounder will be saved with the return systems and the net I
- Amendment 5 5.1-51 January 1984 i
l
MNPS-3 EROLS effect will be a reduction in the average impact on the winter h flounder population. Since historical plant impacts have not been detected in the time-series catch data (Figure 5.1-13), it is not anticipated that projected impacts will adversely affect future abundance. The following population model provides an estimate of the cumulative effect of low-level impacts on the local winter flounder population over the expected life of the plants. Winter FJounder Population Dynamics Model
Background
Winter flounder modeling combines hydrodynamic, concentcation, and population submodels in a simulation of impact to the Niantic River winter flounder spawning population, which may result from the operation of Millstone 1, 2, and 3. This effort, directed by Dr. Saul Saila of the University of Rhode Island, is detailed in reports to NUSCo. and has been reported in the scientific literature as well (Sissenwine et al 1973, 1974, 1975; Vaughan et al 1976; Saila 1976; Hess et al 1975). At the early stages of mode) development, plans were made for model verification. This involved several hydrographic and ecological studies, including ichthyoplankton sampling, winter flounder population dynamics, and dye release studies. A summary of model development and output is provided in the following sections along with a comparison of initial model results given by saila (1976) with model output based on winter flounder life history parameters derived from onsite studies. Introduction The return of adult winter flounder to a specific breeding site has been documented by saila (1961a). For the purposes of modeling power plant impacts, it was therefore assened that the Niantic River winter flounder population is reproductively isolated, although some exchange of larvae and adult fish with nearby populations certainly occurs. Isolated populations may be particularly sensitive to localized environmental stresses, since losses due to entrainment are not easily offset by input from other populations. Therefore, it is important to assess the impact of the entrainment of winter flounder larvae on the Hiantic River population. The effect of entrainment considered here assumes organisms passing through the plant suffer 100 percent mortality. This effect can be considered as a plant mortality acting in addition to the natural mortality, so that fewer winter flounder larvae survived to their benthic stage with the power plant in operation. In this study, the effects of natural and plant mortality are separated to simplify calculations. The approach used in this study is as follows. First, a hatch of organisms in the Niantic River and other possible breeding areas, and the movement of the larvae under the action of tidal-currents around 5.1-52
MNPS-3 EROLS (9,287).(413,627).(0.45) = 1.729 x 109 hatched eggs result in 97,517 yearling winter flounder or about 6 per 100,000 if the simulated population is at equilibrium. In order to apply the. model described en Figure 3.1-23, a relationship between egg production and recruitment to year-class -1 is required. The ratio of 55 yearlings per 100,000 hatch eggs could be used to define such a relationship as follows: YCg (1) = 0.000055.P 1_g (5.1.3-25)
.where i refers to the year and a 10 percent successful hatching rate is assumed. This relationship is density independent, in that the survival rate to a year of age is independent of the numbers of eggs produced. 'Since the population cannot compensate for loss due to powet plant mortality, even a very low value of Mpt will result in an 15 exponential decay of the population eventually approaching zero.
This situation is unrealistic,.since most populations are stabilized by density dependent stock-recruitment relationships (Ricker 1954). The following density dependent relationship between egg production and recruitment was adapted from Ricker (1954): a-b YCg (l) = Pg _t [e . P _g l (5.1.3-26) where a and b are parameters. Using several values of YC i (1) and PI_l, a and b can be estimated by linear regression after some linearization of Equation 5.1.3-26. Unfortunately, such data are rarely available, and when they are, the range of Pg _; is often so limited, that little confidence can be
.placed in the results. Therefore, a deterministic procedure for parameterizing Equation 5.1.3-26 based on a limited' amount of data was developed.
If Sr is the fraction of females in the population, FEC is the average fecundity and R 3 is the expected number of recruits from N 3 mature fish, then using Equation 5.1.3-26: i- R l a = log +b.S . FEC . N (5.1.3-27) eS. FEC . N, r i i The Ricker stock-recruitment function is based on the assumption that ! in the absence of fishing the population will adjust itself to a j maximum level, N max, at which it is at equilibrium (ignoring i environmental fluctuations). This unfished equilibrium level occurs i j f) Nm/ when the loss due to natural mortality equals the addition of recruits. Therefore, the seco..d parameter of the stock recruitment Amendment 5 5.1-61 January 1984 2 a
,,,,,,,n .---,,,,,,-,n,,. ,,,n.,,-.4ge- ,...,-.___,,m,., ,, , .,,,-.,~,.,.g,,,,., ,m,.- ,- w--v,.., n
MNPS-3 EROLS function can be calculated if the size and average fecundity of the virgin (unfished) stock and level of natural mortality are known. The annual natural mortality rate (M) times Nmax was set equal to the recruitment to year-class 1 (for N max mature fish) times the survival rate from age 1 to sexual maturity (s). Equation 5.1.3-27 was substituted and the result was solved for b, yielding the following: R log [ M ]~l E e [ l ] (5.1.3-28) e
- s. S . FEC N I
. S . FEC r r FEC . S r
(NI -Nmax) A reasonable estimate of Nmax was sought in the historical literature. The longest series of relative abundance for a New England fishery was recorded by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Hatchery at Boothbay, Maine, from 1910 through 1940 and reported by Perlmutter (1947). The Fish and Wildlife Service used fyke nets to collect mature female winter flounder fer hatchery use. Tnese data indicate that the Maine fishery has gone through three rather distinct levels of relative abundance (an indication of population size). The mean catch per net for the periods 1910 through 1919, 1920 through 1933, 1933 through 1940, was 267, 107, and 39 fish, respectively. The level of exploitation during the first period was probably very low since the level of landings prior to 1919 was low, according to the limited amount of catch data available. A comparison of the mean relative abundance between the first and third period indicates that the level of exploitation reached during the late 1930's in Maine waters could reduce the population size of a virgin winter flounder stock by a factor of 7. Perlmutter's (1947) comparison of fisheries throughout New England and New York indicates that later trends in the Maine fishery were reflected in Connecticut waters. Poole (1969) showed that the level of exploitation reached during the late 1930's for the Great South Bay, New York, winter flounder population was similar to the present level of exploitation. Therefore, the assumption that N max = 8N g seems reasonable, since the population size of Boothbay stock may have declined slightly from its virgin level prior to 1910. Values of other constants in Equations 5.1.3-12 and 5.1.3-13 were assumed based on the earlier discussion of population parameters M = 0.483; and (N g = 5,996; R 2 = 83,724; FEC = 350,296; S = 0.7; s=ssi a = 0.0751). The estiwstes of a and b were -9.66 and 7.54 x 10-11, respectively. The results are based on the assumptien that the average fecundity of the breeding stock was similar for populations of N 2 and Ngax individuals. When the population was simulated using these estimates for zero fishing mortality, it converged to an equilibrium population level of 47,842 mature fish. 5.1-62
MNPS-3 EROLS r~N (%' ) This level is about 8 times the initial level assumed for the simulated population as desired. The life expectancy of a nuclear power plant is about 35 years. Therefore, the system described above was simulated for 35 years at 1 percent entrainment mortality (Mpi) and for an additional 65 years with Mpl= 0. After 35 years, there was a 5.92 percent decrease in , the number of winter flounder in the Niantic River due to entra;nment l mortality with a recovery to within 0.84 percent after 65 additional years for the initial model run (saila 1976). Model output based on parameters derived from the ongoing population dynamics study (NUSCo. 1981a) was similar. After 35 years, the number of winter flounder decieased 5.45 percent at an M 3 of 0.01 and recovered to within 0.35 percent after65additionSIyearsofnoplantmortality (Table 5.1-19). Since the Ricker stock-recruitment function was based on a rather limited amount of information, the model was also run under the unrealistic assumption that recruitment is density-independent (Equation 5.1.3-25), thus there is no corpensation for entrainment losses. The results do not differ drastically during the first 35 years of the simulation. The population levels reached in 35 years are about 4 percent lower than with the Ricker stock-recruitment function at an Mpl of 0.01. Using density independence, l5 there is no recovery of the population after entrainment is (g/ terminated. The results based on Equation 5.1.3-25 are conservative ( , since they do not permit compensation for entrainment mortality and thus certainly overestimate the potential effect of the plant. Conclusion For the level of 41 indicated by the larval dispersion model (1 percent or less), there is a potential 5 to 6 percent reduction in the total population level after 35 years. When the population was then simulated with a 65-year recovery af ter the termination of power plant related impingement mortality, the population recovered to within 1 percent of the equilibrium population. It must be emphasized that results probably overestimate the effect of entrainment, since they ignore vertical stratification of larvae and vertical variations in velocity; the survival of some organisms passing through the plant; immigration of winter flounder; input of larvae from outside the bight; and density-dependent growth, fecundity, adult mortality, and, in some cases, larval mortality. Therefore, the results should not be taken as predictions, but as limits on the potential impact based on the available information. 5.1.3.3.4.11 Windowpane Even though this flatfish is encountered in entrainment samples, it is not present in large enough numbers to generate equivalent reproductive adult figures. Therefore, assessments of potential [\ -) m impact from 3-unit operation will be based prirearily on historical impingement and trawl data. The windowpane was the third most Amendment 5 5.1-63 January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS abundant trawl species. The CPUE data frora this monitoring program provided forecasts that were not significantly different from 1980 observed values from four stations (Figure 5.1-24; NUSCo. 1981a). The impingement losses have ranged from 371 to 1,145 per year with an annual average of 683 (Table 5.1-9). Changes in trawl catches corresponding to these fluctuations in impingement have not been detected. Since the projected annual losses due to 3-unit impingement (606; Table 5.1-9) are less than the historical average annual losses, no impact to the windowpane population from impingement is expected to occur. 5.1.3.3.4.12 Scup This summer migrant, which has been well represented in trawl samples (second most abundant species; Table 2.2-46), has not been impinged or entrained in great numbers (NUSCo. 1981a). The forecasts generated for scup in 1980 (Figure 5.1-25) were not significantly different from the observed values in any region (NUSCo. 1981a). Even though impingement losses for 3-unit operation (197 per year) are projected to more than double the average annual historical losses (97 per year; Table 5.1-9), they represent only a fraction of the 1.9 million fish reported for the 1979 Connecticut sport catch (Sampson 1981). Thus, it is believed that the population will remain relatively unaffected. 5.1.3.3.4.13 Tautog Both eggs and larvae of the tautog have been entrained regularly at Millstone; larger fish frequently have occurred in both impingement an trawl catches. From 1973 through 1980, trawl CPUE of tautog varied, but remained fairly predictable (Figure 5.1-26); time-series analyses indicated that CPUE in 1980 was significantly lower than predicted at only two regions (NUSCo. 1981a). An average lifetime fecundity of 887,817 eggs per female (NUSCo. unpublished) and a calculated S E f 0.0225 (giving an St of 0.1 x 10-3) were used to generate the number of equivalent reproductive adults lost due to entrainment of tautog eggs and larvae under various operating conditions (Table 5.1-11). Three-unit operation will nearly double the equivalent adult loss due to 2-unit operation; more than two-thirds of the projected loss (8 x 103 of 12 x 103) will be due to the entrainment of tautog eggs, Because only 2 years of entrained egg data are available, it is difficult to put these equivalent adult losses into historical perspective. An average of 751 tautog have been impinged annually since 1976. With the fish return systems installed at Millstone 1 and 3, the estimated impingement losses for tautog with 3-unit operation (554: Table 5.1-9) will be less than the historical average and will mitigate, somewhat, the increased losses due to entrainment. While these projected nurubers seem large, they represent only 3 percent of the 1979 recreational catch for Connecticut of 423,000 individuals (Sampson 1981). O 5.1-64
O INITIAL - AFTER ONE - CONDITION HALF TIDAL CYCLE - F ' F '
/ 1000
/,m , g
~ -
50 Q plant
- 0.0 ] 10
% ,- /
I I I I [ TOTAL MASS:100% J T L OTAL MASS = 95.3 % j
-l T AFTER ONE -
TIDAL CYCLE i f_
-~s 1 50 7L 10 vs i
\ )1 TOTAL MASS: 19 % %
NOTE: V2 E, t TIDAL CYCLES AFTER HATCHING IN JORDAN COVE GE 5.IG SIMULATED CONCENTRATION DISTRIBUTION OF LARVAE MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 3 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE AMENDMENT 5 JANUARY 1984
-, , . ... - -, . ~ . . . - -_ - . . . - ., .- ___ - - - -... _ - .
i 4 LA 1- O +*
- U O = N e O m
,- e O O O O O e L + e e a + -
2
** w w w w w l w e W 00 4 @
. N.
6 O *
- b M N 4 "3
N O 8e
+
O a O O e e O
+ , ' O w w w w w C e e p @. O. . b. .
J
- N m N N 4
f
- N O I
9 80
+ e 0 0 e
e 0
+
C w w w w w U @ <D N
- v. b. .
X *
- M M N CL 3
O I &
- e V O - O - O
't - 0 O O O O i
- O + e + e +
J J L w w w w w D > W W * @ N O g . . . 4 >
- N e N O w
Z e-M a Ze w a
=Z Z L O - *
- O w w > O O O O O
- JD N L + e e e +
m 4a E E e w w w w w u-J co .3m a e > an e o @ O i o e Ow u - @. - . E Mw
- E J * * * @ N *
'w . N. > 10 w
- c wm
' n OD O @ r a w 2O e W J mw e O CL to e o O 2 4 E< C O N N
- O
! E
- e - O O O O O E' O V +
+
} wE -e e3 @ w w w w e e a w i xo C C @
- m. ao. cn e p,
we e C O - E La. m 4 to - e 6 m N i w ' O i m M O 8 8 O C w w g a O. O. O. m J
< m -O O O
- V O +
go O . - - O O O O -O O e + n e e + 4 w w w w w
** @ CD e b W O - -
y e e e e N e O x V C
- 3 C
'O C O #
L O - O - ++ 0
** 4 O V 4 +* +
@ ** @ w W
+* C 9 O $ @
@ O O G m * **
-C
- @ > O
- C
> +* > U @ i e E 4 V
- b 3 m - Z @ - 4 E ** C m L e ut
** C E @ O +*
- G C O C L ++ 0 C E CL U - o e > Z <
l
-, ,..~~-n-,n-,,- ,,g..n-nr,-,. -
, ,,n,.-,,_nen,,n,.. __n_...-,-,--,--n.--, . - - - - , - , - - - - - , ,
LS U O - N - O co C O O O O O c) L + e e e + -
+e w w w w w e @ co
- r. o >
- e. g Os * - 4 4 N e m
7 8O
+
e n O O e a o O
+
C w w w w w C @ N N
= . r. CD. .
J
- N n n N n O 0
8e0
+ e 0 0 e o-e 0
+
C w w w w w
-V
@ c0 @
v v 2 * - D D N CL 3 O u O t 0 - - e O O O O O O 2 -0 + e e e + w L w w w w w w > @ co 4 e w g . . o. .
> v N C0 m n w
Z 2O a
. > w e 2 2 L O -
- 0 0 Jw w > 0 0 0 O O at 3 N L + e e + +
e 3 .J E E @ w w w w w J C) O6 .x W > @ cc O O c) O e =w a - . cr c3 >w - E J e e e e N w - D Om co. M 23 O W e w =O s) D J w @ O CL CD Em O O 2 4 34 C O N N - 0 2 W 10 @ ~ O O O O O e U e + e i e + x2 - 3 @ w w w w w so-40 m C C @ - r- @ n O Ea @ C O - - - - 6 Cr 4 CD
- N @ @ N e O w 9-M w
8 O 8 8+ Cl su w g J -l e O. O. O. c) a 3 ml - 0 0 0 -
?.
4 et V O + to O - N
- O O O O O O
- + s e e +
C W w w w w
+' @ to v 0 m O - - -
>~ e e @ @ N e O
X U C - 3 C O C C e L 0 - G - +' O
- m O V 4 * +
W +* @ w m
++ C @ G W @
C O C W1 *e C -O @ > 0 - C
> ~ +* > D @
C E C V + E 3 e - f C - U f ** C en L C w C
- C f W O ** F W C O C L +d O O C CLe O - A M F- 2 <t
. . . -- .-- ... - - . . . --- - - ,_. . - -- . . . .- ~ - . . . n._. . ~ - -
+
t 1
- i 1
it) f
- ** w U O ~ N - O e i 4 O O O O O m 6 L + e e e + -
i +e w w w w w w e @ @ M.
@ 4 >
y L 3 0 - - 4 m N 4 I e 7 i l o- - n -l o O O O C1 O
+ i e e +
l Ot w w w w w Cl @ m N 3, M. . m. JI *
- 4 @ N 4-j- O .. - N
- O
- > 0 O O O O
@ + e i e +
C w w w w w
' V @ @ @ W b M * * @ W N 4
0 g f- 3 [- o . 2 , o V O - O e O s
- O O O O O O O + + + s + e J L w w w w w
= g @
h. N W { u >
- N
- c M
! w i O - , in Zu W ^
-2 w
2 w L O - - O o
- 0 0 0 O O
.J D N L + e e + +
eJ O <J E E @ w w w u. w
- Dw .x @ > @ @ M & @
.i. o e ow a - - - g N ww - E J - - *
- M i w - > w %
m um to. . -O j \ M s ut OD 2O O @ e e e _ =w @ O 4 (D m U 2 < 34 C-O 0 N - 0 0 1 E > 30 @ ~ O O O O O V + + I eeI -e e3 @
+
w e w w w s w xo C C @ b - m N
- 4a @ C O - -
! Iw a < (D
- N *
- M w
O e m , a 8 8 i O + + ' c C w w
- 0)
O. O O. e
- .J x -
< m - O O O -
4 i V
- O +
!' to O
- N
- O i! O O O O O t - + e s e +
4 W w w w w I ** @ @ O N @ l 0 - - i > e * @ to N
- O
' X V c 7 - i ' 3 C O C O e L O
- O - +* Q w e o D N * +
@ +e @ w m
+* C @ O @ @
N O O @ en ** C e @ > 0
- C
> - +* > V @
l e E
-4 V + E 3 g r @ - .. V
! I ++ C e L 4 w C i +* C L @ O * * > @ C O C L +* O O E { a o = 6 m > 2 4 i s =.
..-sm.- -..w. . . . -v. ., #~w.--ym., .,,-_---,s.s- , . _ , ,,c....,y,-,., ,e..e ,.y. m p w ~, __m,y,,,eg.,,.m.,,-ymp-.--,m-,.-pn
i to 8 L 8 81 8 :
- W W W y
@ b 8
". g C e C) *-
D C m 7 8 5 8 W W W C @ e & al e e e w 8 8 8
# W W W V @ N 5 EL 3,
C) r O e e L
. W8. 5W 8us s- @ O CD f ~ -
Z.4 > n W I w W
- ZH W ^
** Z Z L Q N Q W W > O O O
!D N L: + e 4 M e at J E E G W , uJ w -
3 Dw .it & > @ a(> b , O "a Ow a
'J
- @ +-
E n ** W - E
- W -
> cc.
w O c e@ M QD Q U ,, e W O e M J == W @ O
- 0. tu m O O' Z <t 2 *E C .. o NI O E
- 30 @ - 0 Of O E D N + il + '
wI -E g -@ C w W) O w@ KO 4k W C C - Au 2 .< (D - * .* w O n M 8+ 8 O W O -C, w mO - m J .Y et to e Q w D i D O s f5 88.1.8W+
+
4J L: I 6 @ 3 m O , tvl - 5 e ml e e O e X 3 o a L On - 9 e -- 6,
@ w e
- C @ @ ,
C O me g 0- - C - g
> -
- U g R E C e y 3 e - e ..
' g I
- 4 t' W
- C f w w 4 O C 0 p- ,E a v - - .c.
)
i
. - . .. .. . - _ - . . - - . , . - . . - ~ -- . .... _
iA e w U - N N N N - e e O O O O O O e i L i a e e e e i
- w w w w w w e o N >
w O. N. M. O. L 0 - M - W 9 M e 7
" N M N N -
Oe O O O O O e i e e e
- O w w w w w w C m N y r. 9. . O. . O.
J e M m e m M e N N N N *
> 0 0 0 0 0 0
@ e e e e i e C w w w u w w V 4- 0 N
. t a. o. o.
X
- M e e Cn M CL 3
, O a a 1 0 W V e N
- N e
- i 2 0 0 O O O O t w 2 -O e i e i i e J L w w w w w w 3 E > W O. v, CD. m. v.
q o .g I
< w <= c - 4 w a0 9
W Z N m @ 2H L <=
-Z 3 s - N N N -
w
- x 0 0 0 0 0 0 *
.J 3 m s L e i e e e e e N 4 .J e E @ w w w w w w &
J
- 3w CL @ > c m. Cn. O. C.
C o- e og a . . , a N - ** w
- E J e M - CD N O
- w * > 4 w W wm O M O3 0 @
s e w ZO m M .J == w -. O . CL c0 91 w Q t 2 < E4 2
- M N N e *
-2 e 2 - O O O O O O E' C e a e e e e e M E E 3 9 W w w w w w j x0 .is C C m o N N e v Wa C C - + - -
- - Em 9 4 m e N e e - M O N i
W U w c - - in @ < O O
- O V e e r Q - C w w m -
- o. O. O. e
.a e x e. O.
I
< a m - O O O O -
4 D l C e 1 03 - N N N -
- O O O O O O
- e e e e e i C w w w w w w
- O t- @
O . CD. c. 7 u N_
- M e en e e .
l O i P I x C 3 C O C O e L O - Q e w *
- e* O V E s
@ * @ w @
- C @ O @ @
N O O @ .It n C - @ >
- O - C O > - * >
I' { N E @ f D -E V - -- t
\ E 3
4
- 4 m L
- C w C
>
- C C @ O @ * > @
4 O C L
- O O O E a O M E e 0 F 2 4 L.
4 I L y -e - ygr t 'T - N=w we wy- eps-Ms-~<9---ee-ye ce - , ew
to
**! T U
- N m N N e co e O O O O en L e e e e O. O. e
- W W W ha .e4
.s. @
e e
.Q_w . . n. g,,
C O
- M (D s ID @ M C
")
e N M n N - O O O O O O
- s e e o a o
w w w .tu w W O O, o. e to o 3, , .
.JI e v @ 6 c0 m i
e N m N e
- W O O O O O. O.
w e i e a C w w w 6 w w U O e e O M
. . N. . .
E e n (n e,
- v CL 3
0 tx ~ c w V e N - N - O 2 e O O O O 6 2 2 O O. + w L w e w' s w N w w m w w E 0 @ @ - W 4 I - -
> e m e @ @ e w t I -
F N 2 >0 L a 2 3 L .* N N e e *
+' > O e
.J w 0 0 0 0 0 43 e N L e e i e a e w
e M 3 .J e E @ w w w w w w
.2 e
,0. w CL @ > c n e @ n O O e . w tr e - - en.
cr N.
>w +e g
E J e M e e M @ e w w
@ Om O m 3 0 @
s W 2.a O e m a w .. O CL to 2m w O 2 < 34 2 e n N e * - 2 p- 2 e O O O
.I c e e O. O.
w e w i O, w XX E 3 @ w w w
<O .s C C o o e e CD @
Zu C O - - w v < cc e m e e e
- O -
>- N e @
w u e C e
- O @ O O O V e e C w -
w 4 J e e x co O O O O - - co Q a m - 0 - 0 0 C1 e 4 s I 4 l D o e gj e n n e el e e O O O Oi 01 i e O. . , i t C m w w w w w
- m -
,0 O 6 @
O - - - -
> v n e r e v O
X O V ' e C 3 C O C
- L 0 eO r Q e *- -
** e O V e
- a ,
@ +- @ w c
** C @ O @ m m O @ .1g m +e C eO @ > e O = c
> e ** > + V @
m E m V E
- E 3 m e f @ - U C ** e M L +* C w C
- C C @ O e * * @
m O C L *e o O C E CL U M w W c >- 2 < a s
s I MNPS-3 EROLS i TABLE 5.7-14 " 4 ANNUAL DOSES 10 MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL IN THE CillLD GROUP i FROM CASE 00S EFFLUENIS I (Residence 2.4 km NNE; Goat Pasture 2.4 km NNE)
]
Annual Dose (mrem /yr) Pathway Total Body Skin Bone Liver thyroid Kidney Lung C l-t rac t 1 Contaminated ground 1.5E-01* 1.8E-01 1.5E-01 1.5E-01
- 1.5E-01 1.5E-01 1.5E-01 1.5E-01 j inhalation 2.7E-02 0.0 4.5E-03
- 2.8E-02 5.7E-02 2.7E-02 3.5E-02 2.7E-02 Fresh vegetation 1.0E-02 0.0 1.8[-02 1.9E-02 1.7E-01 1.1E-02 8.2C-03 8.2E-03
- Stored vegetation 1.4L-01 0.0 2.4E-01 2.6E-01 1.1E-02 1.5E-01 1.2E-01 1.1E-01 1.7E-01 Goat milk 0.0 4.5E-01 5.6E-01 1.4E+00 2.4E-01 '1.4E-01 g,6E-02 ,
j lotal dose 5.0E-01 1.8E-01 8.6E-01 1. 0 E + 0,0 1.9E+00 5.8E-01 4.5E-01 3.8E-01 , l ! NOTE:
- 1.5E-01 = 1.5 x 1(i I 15 i i
l 4 i l i i l i l.
- 1 of 1 1
l _ ._
MNPS-3 EROLS TABLE 3.3-13 ANNUAL DOSES TO MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL IN THE INFANT GROUP FROM GASEOUS EFFLUENTS (Residence 2.4 km NNE: Goat Pasture 2 4 km NNE) Annual Dose (mrem /yr) Pathway Total Body Skin Bone Ltver Thyroid Midney Lung GI-tract Contaminated ground 1.5E-Ot* 1.8E-01 1.5E-Of 1.5E-Ot 1.5E-Of 1.5E-01 1.5E-01 1.5E-Of Inhalation 1.6E-02 0.0 3.OE-03 1.6E-02 4.3E-02 1.6E-02 2.1E-02 1.6E-02 Goat milk 2.1E-01 0.0 7 . "JE -01 1.OE+00 3.2E+00 p.8E-01 ?.3E-01 1. _4 E -O f Total dose 3.8E-01 1.8E-Of 8.8E-01 1.2E+00 3.4E+00 5.5E-01 4.OE-Ot 3.1E-Of NOTE:
- 1.5E-01 = 1.5 x 10-'
iI Amendment 5 1 of 1 January 1984 O O O
. , & a. - - - - . . ~ , . . = - - - - - - - - - - _..-- ~.- -._ .~_ ~-._.- .--- _ - . ! to -
i
** w ) U M M w M M N e O O O O O O e
L s e e e i e .e
.
- w w w w w w
,I .e N. . O.
- o e.. .
O b N e e e = g
! 3
! G
> r
! t M M w M M N ir O O O O O O j e a e e e e S w w w w w w i C N.
9 > w e e 3 . . J b N e M * *
- I i
r M M w M M N
> 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' e e e i e e e C w w ew w w w 3 .
X w N. b N
. 0 e v
. wN . b.
a. EL t) 8 2 a m c =V M M M M N N 0 O O O O O
, b 0 e e e e e i .J L w w w w w w D E > N w e
.j O a r . N. .
. e. ch. i r
4 > b M N M
- M N
W - i I b e r L
.Z 2u 3 L M M M M M N
- w +* > 0 O O O O O e
- JD M N L e 6 6 e 4 6 m W 4J e g e w w w w w w w 1 J - cL e > N * - e - O O O e 5' w sr * - * - O.
, - c1 N .-e w ) E A 6 N = @ g N e
^, w * > o w e m u m
w h w a 0
, to e O 4 4 M w w M M N I > 0 - O O O O O O i E e e e e e e s m3 m g w w w w w w MQ 4 CE Ew N
4 m O N b M
+
n tn w M
-e -
N 5 6 1 O
- e
' M - 1 w e M M i e V O O i O - e e i O e C w w , e ~ w O. O. O. O. w a n m . . I 4 w e e o O O O to
~
\ i > V O + co M M M M M N
~
O O O O O O e s e e a e a w w w w w w
+- N e O M M e 0 - - -
- - =
l > b N
- O M *
- f i
> O.
. I X
N 3 C i 0 C 0 m L 0 - O ** M 1
- e O
; V e **
- e ** e W m
.
- C e O e N J e O O e en - +d i
A -C w e > 2 O N C e, y - V e E e V *
- 3 e - E e E -
T ** e en L e .u
- C f e O 3 *
- O i e O C L
- O O E a u = w m o > Q <
4 4 +
,----r==vv.m-.w~-, vy------- ,-y w%,9-,- -e-w.,gw w. gr -r --,e..e,--=---- , ,,-w-
iA
- 4 0 m m e m m N co e O O O O O O cs L e e i i e a -
- w w w w w w a
N.
. m. O.
M m > g c b N O O N *- e 3 C e 7 m M v m m N O O O O O O e e e i e i c w w w w w .a C N @ c) & to 7 . . . N. . J t- N 4 m N e m m v m m N
> 0 0 0 O O O e i e e e e e C w w w w w w V N - N
- . O O. . O.
E & N @ c n N CL 3 o a a 0 3 -V m m m m N N 2 O O O O O O 2 J O e s *
- i e w L w w w w w w w E > c) p a g N. O. e. O. . .
>- 6 m t. O N c w N I
>- 6 20 t
>- L a 2 3 L M m v m m n
.J w +*
- O O O O O O -
= 3 e s L i e a e e e e t- 3J m E @ w w w w +3 w =-
J *- Ow CL 4 > N N. r. ei. e W O p , . g a . L3 N >w 3 E J b N to 80 W N - W - = 0 w m om u m 3 e a w 2. o .. m o a w 3 O CL (D 2m 2 o 2 at 3 as 3 m v v m m s. 2 >- 10 - 0 0 0 O O O
== E C e 6 a e a e xI s 3 g w w w w w w eo C t N e v c m N 11 N C O - - - - - -
w - 4 (D 6 M ED ED U") N O 6 m U w C o e m m o V O O Q e e i m w w J e -C 4 4 a 2 O. O. O. O. v. g - m e O O O O e 2 4 V O + go m m e m m N O O O O O O
- a e i a e i c w w w w w w
- N - e o o o O - - - - -
- t- t- N W c m N -
O X N D - C 5 3 C O C O a L 0 o - ., m C O V 4
- i e
- e w c
+* C o a G N C
-O o @ m - **
C @ > x 0 6 C
> - * > U c e
3 E 4 - e I V
-E
+ E V
I,
- c e L c w C
+ C I C O 3 ** * @
m O C L
- O O o E CL U - w e O P- 2 at
. . - . . . . . .-- - - . . . - ___ - - . - . . - . . -=-=_._-.~. .-~,= - - ~ - - . - - .
I l in W q r / r O e M M =r M M N W L Oe O O O O e a e e o e e e j .
- W W w w w w [
.a. N.
e M. e. O. M. > g O b
- W W 4 N 5
$ "3 i M M 9 M M N 1 Oe O O O e O O e e e e O W W W w w w ' 4 C N. M. v. - e v.
- 3 .
j J b N @ @ 9 N 5 M M 9 N M N ! > 0 0 e0 0 0 0 , -@ e a e e e C W w w w w w
@ W e 6,
-D N. . . . T.
, M > * > * @ N i CL 3 C a a 0 V M M M M Nl N O O O O O O O - O e e e i e e
.J L W w w w w w
== E > N in @ @
( I .: c . . O. . v. > u >- N M co 01 m cc N w - I N m e 2 >= L a
== Z = L M M M N N N w **
- O O O O iO O
- J3 m N L e e e e e o ce e .J 4 E 9 w w w w w w m-J e 3w tlL 0 > m @ - 6 0 O e Ow a - N. .
m N == w 3 E J 5 * * *
- M
- W - '> 0 w c *= m u M 03 @
e w a n m .J .Z=wO O ID m O 4 4 M V M N N N
> 0 - O O O O O O E 4 e e a e i *
.= 3 .g 3 e w w w w w w x0 -
C C N
- c
- M M wa N C O - ~ - -
Iw - < cD & v
- N a- 9 c
>- e i I
m N i ' w e M M e o O O O - e e O m C w w e - w O. O. O. O. w
.; a .g . .
e - e co 'O O O O co 4 V O + (D M M *t N Ml N s== Ol Ol O O Ol O 8 g g I e w w w w w w
- N O=
M O N in 0 - . - - - =
~ N
- 5 e m N a O
x N V + C & 3 C O C O a l L O - o - - M
- cw O V e a c w e w m
+- C @ O W N 4 O O t M -
- C = G > .t O > C
> - w > - V @
A I 4 3 E 4
- e e C
- I U
e L E - g w
+
{C
++ C C @ O 3 +* >- 8 C O C L +* O O O E CL U ==.E o U e- 2 e
. . _ _ . . ~ _ _ _ _ . - . _ _ . . . . . . _ . _ _ , . - _ . _ _ . _ . . , . - . . . . . . . . . , . , _ . . _ _ . . . . . . . , . . . . . _ . , . _ , _ _ . . , _ . _ _ , - . . _ _ , . . . . . , . . _ -
MNPS-3 EROLS TOBLE 5.3-19 ANNUAL DOSES TO MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL IN THE INFANT GROUP FROM GASEOUS EFFLUENTS (Residence 7.2 km WNW: Cow Pas ture 7. 2 k m WNW) Annual Dose (mrem /yr) Pathway Total Body Skin Bone Liver Thyroid Kidney Lung GI-tract Contaminated ground 7.2E-03* 8.4E-03 7.2E-03 7.2E-03 7.2E-03 7.2E-03 7.2E-03 7.2E-03 Inhalation 1.1E-03 0.0 2.9E-04 1.1E-03 2.6E-03 1.1E-03 1.4E-03 1.1E-03 Cow milk 8 OE-03 Q10 2.3E-02 2.OE-02 1.3E-01 1.1E-02 8.OE-03 6.7E-03 Total dose 1.6E-02 8.4E-03 3.OE-02 2.8E-02 1.4E-01 1.9E-02 1.7E-02 1.5E-02 NOTE:
- 7.2E-03 = 7.2 x 1 ' 5 Amendment 5 1 of I danuary 1984 O G G
MNPS-3 EROLS O) ( TABLE 5.2-24 CALCULATED ANNUAL DOSES FOR PROJECTED POPULATION WITHIN AN 80-km RADIUS Population (man-Rem /yr) Whole Body Thyroid Liquid Effluents: Ingestion of fish 9.3E-01* 3.7E+00 Ingestion of other seafood 1.9E-01 2.6E+00 shoreline recreation 1.9E-01 1.9E-01 Swimming 6.4E-04 6.4E-04 Boating 1.3E-03 1.3E-03 Total 1.3E+00 6.5E+00 Gaseous Effluents: Submersion 1.3E-01 1.3E-01 Inhalation 8.8E-01 1.7E+00 Standing on contaminated ground 3.2E+00 3.2E+00 Ingestien of fruits, grains, and vegetation 7.9E-02 2.3E-01 Ingestion of ccw milk 3.5E-01 1.9E+00 Ingestion of meat 1.8E-02 2.3E-02 Total 4.7E+00 7.2E+00 NOTES:
- 9.3E-01 = 9.3 x 10-1 i
I O V i e 1 of 1 i
MNPS-3 EROLS TABLE 5.2-25 CALCULATED POPULATION DOSE COMMITMENT (Contiguous U.S. Population Dose) Annual Dose per Reactor Unit Total Body Thyroid (man-Rem) (man-Rem) Liquid effluents 1.3E+00* 6.5E+00 Noble gas effluents 1.5E-01 4.1E-01 Radiciodines and particulates** 2.2E+01 2.4E+01 Total 2.3E+01 3.1E+01 O NOTES:
- 1.3E+00 = 1.3 x 10' l5
** Carbon-14 and tritium have been added to this category.
O Amendment 5 1 ef 1 January 1984
-~
(,y ) U t V
}
(v) MNPS-3 EROLS TABLE 5.6-3
SUMMARY
OF POWER PLANT RELATED BIRD MORTALITIES Tower Height On flyway or Total Number Plant Name Owner meters f f t ) Co rrido r Monitorina Period Birds Killed Davis-Besse Toledo Edison 14') (490) Yes-heavy use 1 year 157 (Toledo Edison Co. Co. by waterfowl 1974) Three Mile Island Metropolitan 0.6-122 (2 - 400) Swans, geese, 2 years 66 (Mudge & Firth 1975) Edison Co. Coolin9 towers ducks, osprey Monroe Generating Detroit Edison - - 1 day 15-50 (Jackson et al 1974) Plant Co. Beaver Va lley Duquesr.o 152 (500) - Spring 1975 (2.5 months) O Light Co. Spring 1976 (2.5 months) 1 (Duquesne Light Co. Fall 1974 (3 months) 13 1976) Fall 1975 (3 months) 3 Fall 1976 (3 months) 3 Nanticoke Gene ra- On ta ri o 200 (656) - Spring 1970 300 (Johansen 1975) ting Station Hyd roe l ec t ri c (2 rossil stacks) Spring 1971 17 Spring 1972 NR* Spring 1973 174 Sp ri ng 1974 0 491 fall 1970 2,999 Fall 197: 803 Fai1 1972 1,519 Fall 1973 2,768 Fall 19T4 _L_1_13 17,N( Lennox Cenerating Ontario 199 (653) - Spring 1972 NR* Station Hyd roe l ec t ri c (2 rossil stacks) Spring 1973 244 (Johansen 1975) Spring 1974 92 336 FaIi 1972 5,326 = Fali 1973 Fall 1974 697 _1.188 l0 7,211 NOTE:
- Not repo rted i
Amendment 5 1 of 1 Janua ry 1984
.- . _ - _ _ . _._ _ _ __._ .. ___- ___ ~ _.__ _ - _ _ -.- _ _-- . _ _ - -
MHPS-3 EROLS LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES l 1 i Page, Table (T), or Amendment Figure (F) Number l
)
l i thru ii 0 6-i thru 6-v o 6.1-1 thru 6.1-17 0 6.1-18 5
- 6.1-19 thru 6.1-28 0 6.1-29 5
t 6.1-30 thru 6.1-41 0 ' 6.1-42 5 6.1-43 thru 6.1-50 0 T6.1-1 (1 of 1) 0 T6.1-2 (1 thru 3 of 3) 0 T6.1-3 (1 of 1) 0 T6.1-4 (1 of 1) 0 i T6.1-5 (1 of 1) 0 , T6.1-6 (1 of !) 0 T6.1-7 (1 of 1) 0 T6.1-8 (1 thru 5 of 5) 0 , T6.1-9 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 ; , T6.1-10 (1 thru 5 of 5) 0 F6.1-1 0 F6.1-2 0 l F6.1-3 0 ! F6.1-4 0 4 F6.1-5 0 l F6.1-6 0 i F6.1-7 0 l F6.1-8 0 l F6.1-9 0 F6.1-10 0 F6.1-11 0 i F6.1-12 0 ' F6.1-13 0 F6.1-14 5 F6.1-15 0 F6.1-16 0 F6.1-17 0 F6.1-18 0 6.2-1 thru 6.2-6 0 T6.2-1 (1 of 1) 0 6.3-1 5 6.4-1 0 (- i Amendment 5 EP6-1 January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS (n) panels was collected after exposure periods of 6 months, an exposure interval determined through a special intra-station variability study (Battelle 1979a). This new strategy provided information concerning natural variability of communities of fouling and wood-boring organisms, and decreased the potential loss cf data thrcugh the panel deterioration caused by woodborers or physical factors such as storms. It was initiated in November 1978 and continued through November 1981 at five of the original six sites (WP, FI, EF, IN, and GN). Processing of Panel Communities The processing of exposure panels from 1968 through 1978 consisted of collecting panels from all sites, wrapping them in wet newspaper, and transporting them to the laboratory where they were held in flowing seawater until examined. In 1976 the storage of panels was changed from flowing seawater to refrigeration at 4 C. Data for floral and faunal components of the panel communities included counts of individuals or percent cover of organism on panel surfaces. When individuals were too numerous to count, 6.45 cm2 (1 ina ) subsamples were randomly counted. Woodborers were sampled after the wood panels had been scraped of flora and epifauna. Limnorids (wood-boring isopods) were quantified by the percent cover of tunnels and teredine borers (molluscs) by both percent destruction of wood and number of individuals. As of May 1971, limnorids were quantified by numbers of [_T individuals, as well as percent coverage of tunnels. (/ In 1979, the 6-month, six replicate exposure panel study maintained the same general approach to panel processing as the previous study. However, wood and asbestos panels were separated for analysis to discern variability in community composition and abundance between panel types. In February 1980, the parameters of canopy cover, freespace and dead barnacles were added to impreve the descriptive account of panel communities. Canopy cover of an organism was measured to characterize those species (notably algae) that can obscure large areas of the panel surface, but whose holdfasts, or point of attachment to the panel (i.e. primary cover) is small. Freespace was unoccupied panel surface, and dead barnacles were empty tests or basal plates attached to panel surfaces. In May '1980, the procedures of X-raying wood panels and processing of panels by site immediately after collection were implemented to establish permanent records of wcodborer abundance and to improve the condition of organisms on the panels for identification. Analysis of Data Community analysis of organisms collected or. panels has been composed of three types of data for quantifying abundances. From 1968 to 1978 plants and animals were either counted (number of individuals) or given a percent of the exposure panel covered (primary cover). In p 1980, 2-percent cover estimates were used to distinguish between canopy cover and primary cover of plants and animals on panel (V) surfaces. 6.1-17
MHPS-3 EROLS Prior to 1979, monthly counts and percents were not replicated, but annual averages were calculated as monthly values averaged over the year. After 1978, the quantitative measures used were calculated for each exposure period by averaging counts and percents of taxa on the six replicate panels (# or %/ panel) and annually by averaging counts and percents on all 24 panels (# or %/ panel) collected at each station. Though spirorbid tubes and serpulid tubes are not species, they were easily identified entities and treated as distinct taxa in all analyses. Biological index values (BIV) of McCloskey (1970) were calculated for the 10 most abundant species by assigning a numerical rank based on the abundance of each species for each exposure period and then summing these ranks over the entire year. The sum for each species was then expressed as a percentage of a theoretical maximum sum, which would occur if a species ranked first for all exposure periods. The BIV helps to differentiate species that are dominant in one or two exposure periods and rare or absent in the others, from those that are moderately common throughout the year. The Czekanowski similarity coefficient, as modified by Bray-Curtis, is one of the most frequently used quantitative measures in ecological studies. In this report the index was used to classify sites (normal analysis) using log transformed species counts (In[ count +1]). The coefficient was calculated as: O (6.1.1-2)
,X )
{2 min (X i S jk
= (Clifford and Stephenson 1975)
L,(Xij + Xik) where: X 1) = abundance of attribute i at entity j q X ik = abundance of attribute i at entity k Since the Czekanowski similarities represent only pair-wise comparisons. . cluster analyses were performed to illustrate relationships among five stations (entities). The group average strategy, also referred to as the " unweighted pair-group method using arithmetic averages" (Sneath and Sokal 1973), was used for all analyses. This clustering strategy produces groups of entities which are linked at decreasing levels of similarity. Linkage of entity groups is based on the mean similarity of each member of one entity group to each member of a second entity group. All entity pairs and groups are then connected at decreasing levels of similarity, thus forming a dendrogram, the dendrogram illustrates relationships among all entities included in the analysis. For normal analysis, stations Amendment 5 6.1-18 January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS O The monitoring data from the various stations sampled in the three programs prior to October 1979 were used to construct separate mathematical models for total catch, number of species, and selected species catch. Because long term constant values were hypothesized, the data were not detrended (long term trend removed from the data by regression). Detrending data that are primarily the results of stochastic processes is a procedure that may given misleading results in forecasting models (Box and Jenkins 1976). Auto correlations between a variable's value at some time i and its value n time units away (up to 13 in this case) were determined. If euch correlations were significantly different from zero at a = 0.05, they were l5 included in the model as autoregressive terms of "An." For example, if the total catch was found to be positively correlated with its value 12 months away, the time series model for forecasting total catch would include an autoregressive term for 12 lags, designated A12. Constants and autoregressive terms were determined using PROC FORECAST from SA579. These models were then used to forecast data for the time period October 1979 through September 1980. The forecasted data points were compared to the data actually collected and the variance examined. To determine how consistent the 1980 data were with historical data, this variance was compared to the residual mean square of the time series model to produce a test statistic with an F distribution: S (aI-fi) F = i=1 2 (6.1.1-6) cale s-1 2 e 3 m where ai = actual data point for time period i ft = forecasted data point for time period i s = number of time periods forecasted 32 = least square estimate of the variance of the model m This f ratio has s-1 and n-p degrees of freedom where n is the number of observations used to build the time series model and p is the number of terms estimated by the model. 6.1.1.2.8 Winter Flounder Population Dynamics The assessment of potential impact on winter flounder, Pseudopleuronectes americanus from the construction and operation of Millstone 3 has been based on a comprehensive program of study encompassing estimates of impingement and entrainment at Millstone 1 and 2, long term studies of population dynamics, and predictive modeling. The methods'used to quantify entrainment and impingement ! p are detailed in Sections 6.1.1.2.1 and 6.1.1.2.2, respectively, while t the life history modeling is described in Section 5.1.3.2. Studies of winter fic, unde r population dynamics, which began in 1973, are detailed below. These investigations included estimates of Amendment 5 6.1-29 ~ 'uary 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS population size, age structure, fecundity, and growth of the h population which spawns in the Niantic River each winter as well as routine monitoring of abundance, distribution, and movements of young and adult winter flounder in the entire Millstone area. Population Dynamics The methods used and the types of information obtained during studies of winter flounder population dynamics are shown in Table 6.1-5. In 1973 and 1974, sampling and merking were conducted throughout the Millstone area. Subsequently, studies of population size and age structure were restricted to the Niantic River, since the river had been identified as a major spawning area. From 1975 through 1980, sampling was also limited to 6 to 11 weeks from March through May. Concentrating the effort during this period in the Niantic River provided larger numbers of marked fish and better estimates of population size than were obtained previously. The Niantic River was divided into eight sampling stations; Stations 1, 2, and 4 were located in the channel; and Stations 3 and 5 thru 8 were outside the channel (Figure 6.1-15). Sampling was usually conducted on two consecutive days each week, allowing for mixing of fish between weeks. Winter flounder were sampled with a 9.1-meter otter trawl with a 6.4-mm bar mesh cod-end liner. Tow duration varied from 5 to 30 minutes according to conditions such as the size of the area to be towed, expected catch, or the amount of clogging of nets with eelgrass and algae. The flounder caught were held in water-filled containers before processing. The size of flounder tagged and the marking methods were modified over the years in order to increase the number of marked animals at large and to estimate a larger segment of the population. The size of flounder marked was decreased from 25 cm during 1973 to 20 cm during 1974 and to 15 cm from 1975 through 1980. Flcy anchor tags and fin clipping were used experimentally in the early years of study but were replaced with freeze branding in 1977. Freeze branding was found to be considerably more efficient, as it provided a larger number of mark variations and had minimal effect on the fish. Each branding iron consisted of two 15.9-mm brass letters or numbers. One letter designated the week and the other the station. Liquid nitrogen was used as the coolant. Brands were applied to the pigmented side of each flounder, midway between the dorsal fin and the lateral line. All recaptured fish, including those from previous years, were noted and then remarked with a brand designating the present week and station of recapture. The length distribution of the study population was determined from total length measurements (mm) taken from 100 to 200 fish each week. Sex distribution was obtained by sexing all mature fish according to the method suggested by Smigielski (1975), which is based on sexual dimorphism. In addition, the sex of the flounder used for aging by otoliths during 1977 and 1978 was determined by gonad examination l similar to that described by Kurtz (1975). 6.1-30
MNPS-3 EROLS (, } each of the plant communities selected for qualitative or
\- / quantitative analysis (Figure 6.1-18).
In each plant concunity selected for quantitative analysis, 90 to 100 snaptraps were set in triplicate within a radius of approximately 0.9 meter (3 feet) from a central point. Fifty traps placed in a similar manner were set in plant communities selected for qualitative analysis. An interval of 8-10 meters (25-30 feet) between stations was used. Traps were set along the same line transects that were used for vegetation analysis. Traps were normally left in the field for three nights at each station and were checked once daily. Sex, weight, and selected body measurements were recorded for each species that was captured. All observations or sign of mammals along the transect routes were recorded. During each phase of field work, observations of mammals were made throughout the area. Mammalian nomenclature and/or identifications follow Murie (1954), Blair et al (1957), and Burt and Grossenheider (1952). Birds The relative abundance of birds was determined in each plant community selected for qualitative or quantitative analysis. The same transect route that was used for vegetation sampling nd mammmal
<' trapping was followed when tallying bird species. Censuses were (N,) taken along the transect routes on two or three successive mornings during May, July, and October 1973 and January 1974. Transect routes averaged approximately 440 meters (480 yards) in length. Species were identified by sight or sound. Birds flying overhead were counted. Progress along each transect route was on foot, alternating between slow walking and brief pauses to look and listen.
Records were kept of bird activity and habitat use throughout the site area. Scientific and common names of each species are those of ! the American Ornithologists' Union (A.O.U,) (1957) and the Thirty-l Second Supplement to the A.O.U. Checklist (A.O.U. 1973). t l Reptiles and Amphibians i Reptiles and amphibians that were observed along each transect route
- were callected and identified. Specific searches for these animals I were made in productive-looking habitats, i.e. under logs, and rocks.
Records were kept of the habitat type from which each individual was taken. Identification and nomenclature follow Conant (1958). Terrestrial Invertebrates Terrestrial invertebrates were collected from two sampling locations at Millstone 3. One community dominated by herbaceous plants and another dominated by forest vegetation were selected for sampling. These were the old field (Community 1) and riparian stand t (;/ C (Community 3). t I . 6.1-41
MNPS-3 EROLS An aerial insect net, 40 centimeters (16 inches) in diameter and 0.8 meters (2.5 feet) deep, was used tc, make 50 standard sweeps of low herbaceous and shrub-type woody vegetation. One sampling consisted of two separate walks for a distance of 25 paces each. The contents of the net were emptied intc a wide-mouthed jar containing 70 percent ethanol. Identificaticn and zoological nomenclature for terrestrial invertebrates follow Arnett (1968), Baker (1972), Borror and DeLong (1970), Borror and White (1970), Dillon and Dillon (1966), Holland (1968), Klots (1951), Peterson (1960), and Peterson (1967). 6.1.4.3.2 Site Reconnaissance A reconnaissance of Millstone 3 and adjacent environs was made in Octcoer 1977 by Stone & Webster ecologists to update the status of the terrestrial communities. General observations were made in each of the major communities in the vicinity of the former transect locations to note major changes in the character (composition) of the communities since the 1973-1974 field studies. Vegetation was qualitatively sampled and voucher specimens were retained. In addition, bird observations were made in each community, with special attention given to the Wildlife Management Area onsite. 6.1.5 Radiological Monitoring (Preoperational Monitoring) The preoperational radiological environmental monitoring program is unchanged from that described in the ERCPS - Section 5.2.1. 6.1.6 Noise Studies Ambient sound surveys vere conducted in the vicinity of Millstone 3 during October 1979 and April 1980. The surveys were conducted during different seasons to include possible seasonal changes in the sound propagation characteristics of station noise over water. Data collected during these surveys for the residential and other noise-sensitive areas near the site (Section 2.7) are compared with the predicted staticn sound levels to evaluate the station operational noise impact in Section 5.6. The measured ambient sound level data consist of continuous, automatically recorded statistical measurements, as well as manually recorded, 5-minute statistical scmples, taken during both the day and nighttime. Both types of measurements provided residual (L,a), mean 5l (Lso), intrusive (L4a), and equivalent (Leq) sound levels for the measurement period. Continuous automatic monitoring allows data acquisition over relatively long time periods to show the 24-hour cyclic variation in ambient sound levels. The 5-minute statistical samples enable data to be collected quickly at a number of locations. With both types of measurements, the fielti personnel provided a description of the identifiable noise sources and meteorological conditions during the survey. Amendment 5 6.1-42 January 1984
O O
*- m1.-:+r.e..
_.m b IdhkhiM T55555: s LEGEND
^ U ER M AR S
-355555j5j5}5li,k gg- -l ---- SHORE-ZONE. SEINES E_Z5/^ 5:-9 ...... GILL NETS
( l
,<5^%CE h:f f f ^ -
MCCOOK PO C8 ----- Q N g INT [ NB 11^ INT K:;s;;A * *
% gp .A a WP
'^^^^--1 -^
TT (([f$_
-^^ ^: : )
~ Zp5555p", , , ,
SEAR Ot. pol 81T SS GOSNEN
, M -5555555 55^,,pMT m GN : ( 1,
~
- C5-55555-5555555555556-Sip 5 M 4 a
_- O OE-1 ' ' OZ O .-ZO_OZO - -- ~ ~-ZO Z-Z - _f_____ okh h h -- "r b d TWOTREE V NECK '**o eiACK m
, , _ _g.-55:3pg_
= POINT , gg
* ~~~~~
FIGURE 6.1- 14 _ =~ c ^ ^ ^5Z: W +:+:+5i!i:M+ LOCATION OF SHORE-ZONE (SE NES).
'~--- - ~
PELAGIC (GILL NET) AND DEMERSAL
,0 (TRAWL) SAMPLING SITES MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STAT!ON UNIT 3 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE AMENDMENT 5 JANUARY 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS 6.3 RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENT AND MONITORING PROGRAMS In regard to the radiological environmental monitoring program, the State of Connecticut's Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), performs a monitoring program independent from Northeast Utilities. This program is performed under contract to the NRC in order to - provide a quality assurance check of Northeast Utilities' program. During 1980, the DEP program consisted of the following samples for the Millstone Site:
- 1. TLD samples (16) - gamma dose analysis l5
- 2. Air particulate samples (52) - weekly gross beta, monthly gamma spectrum
- 3. Airborne radiciodine samples (10) - I-131 analysis
- 4. Seawater samples (7) - gamma spectrum and H-3 analyses
. 5. Milk samples (8) - gamma spectrum, I-131 and Strontium i analyses
- 6. Fruit and vegetable samples (7) - gamma spectrum and Strontium analyses O Fish samples (2) - gamma spectrum and strontium analyses
( 7. S. Bottom sediment sample (1) - gamma spectrum The number and types of samples to be obtained in future years are expected to be similar to those obtained for the 1980 monitoring program. It should be noted that a similar number of samples is analyzed by the DEP from the Haddam Neck station area, and these analyses essentially check the same program. The TLD, air particulate, and airborne iodine samples taken by the DEP are duplicates to the samples taken by Northeast Utilities. All others are split samples with independent analyses. All DEP results are compared against these obtained by Northeast Utilities. In general, past results have indicated compatible agreement. l l l Amendment 5 6.3-1 January 1984
11NPS-3 EROLS LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES Page, Table (T), or Amendment Figure (F) Number 7-i 5 7-11 thru 7-v 4 7.1-1 thru 7.1-13 0 7.1-14 thru 7.1-28 3 T7.1-1 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T7.1-2 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 T7.1-3 (1 of 1) 0 T7.1-4 (1 of 1) 0 T7.1-5 (1 of 1) 3 T7.1-6 (1 of 1) 3 F7.1-1 3 F7.1-2 3 17.1-3 5 F7.1-4 5 F7.1-5 5 F7.1-6 5 7.2-1 0 O t 7.3-1 0 Amendment 5 EP7-1 January 1984
n . . - -. - _ - - _ . _ - - - - . _-. - __ .. . - _ . - _ - MNPS-3 FCOLS , CHAPTER 7 s m /.
- TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 7 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF ACCIDENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1-1 7.1 STATION ACCIDENTS INVOLVING RADIOACTIVITY. . . . . . . . . . 7.1-1 7.1.1 Trivial Incidents (Class 1 Accidents). . . . . .. . . . . 7.1-2 7.1.2 Small Release Outside Containment (Class 2 Accidents). . . 7.1-2 7.1.3 Radwaste System Failures (Class 3 Accidents) . . . . . . . 7.1-2 7.1.3.1 Release from Boron Recovery Tank (Accident 3.1). . . . 7.1-2
^ 7.1.3.2 Gaseous Releases from the Process Gas Charcoal Bed Adsorber in the Radioactive Gaseous Waste System (Accident 3.2). . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 7.1-3 7.1.3.3 Release from High Level Liquid W1.te Drain Tank (Accident 3.3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1-4 i 7.1.4 Fission Products to Primary System (BWR) (Class 4 Accidents). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1-4 5 7.1.5 Fission Products to Primary and Secondary Systems (Class 5 Accidents). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 7.1-5 7.1.5.1 Fuel Cladding Defects and Steam Generator Leak (Accident 5.1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1-5 [\ 7.1.5.2 Off-Design Transients that Induce Fuel Failure l5
'\~s (Accident 5.2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 7.1-5
, 7.1.5.3 Steam Generator Tube Rupture (Accident 5.3). . . . . . . 7.1-6 7.1.6 Refueling Accidents (Class 6 Accidents). . . . .. . . . . 7.1-6 7.1.7 Spent Fuel Handling Accidents (Class 7 Accidents). . . . 7.1-7 7.1.7.1 Spent Fuel Assembly Drop in the Fuel Pool (Accident 7.1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1-7 , 7.1.7.2 Heavy Object Drop onto Fuel Rack (Accident 7.2). . . . . 7.1-8 7.1.7.3 Fuel Cask Drop (Accident 7.3). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1-8 7.1.8 Accident Initiation Events Considered in Design Basis Evaluation in the Safety Analysis Report (Class 8 Accidents) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1-9 7.1.8.1 Loss of Coolant Through a Small Pipe Break j (Accident 8.1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1-9 l 7.1.8.2 Loss of Coolant Through a Large Pipe Break i (Accident 8.1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1-10 l 7.1.8.3 Break in Instrument Line From Primary System ' that Penetrates the Conthinment (Accident 8.la). . . . 7.1-11 7.1.8.4 Rod Ejection Accident (Accident 8.2a). . . . . . . . . . 7.1-11 7.1.8.5 Small Steam Line Break (Accident 8.3a) . . . . . . . . . 7.1-13 ! 7.1.8.6 ;arge Steam Line Break (Accident 8.3a) . . . . . . . . . 7.1-14 l 7.1.9 Accidents Beyond the Design Bases of the Millstone 3 i Plant (Class 9 Accidents). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1-14 7.1.9.1 Scope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1-14 7.1.9.2 Plant Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1-14 ( g-- 7.1.9.3 Containment Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1-20 ( j~ 7.1.9.4 7.1.9.5 Consequence Analysis . Results.
. 7.1-22
. 7.1-28 Amendment 5 7-i January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS 7.1.10 References for Section 7.1 . ...... . ... . . . . 7.1-14 7.2 TRANSPORTATION ACCIDENTS INVOLVING RADIOACTIVITY . . . . . . 7.2-1 7.3 OTiiER ACCIDENTS. . . . . . . . . ... . .... . . . . . 7.3-1 O 1 0 7-11
- 1. 0 - 6 -
O i 1.0-7 -- m - w P _ m O b 1.0-8 -- 4 : E :
. .9 Y -
a d
$ 1.0-9 --
O 0 : x <- w . o O @ 1.0 -10 w o o W . E -
~
.5 l
1.0-11 -- l :
. I 1.0 -12 L ' 'I ' ' 'I ' ' 'l ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
- 1. 10. 100. 1000. 10,000.
EARLY FATAllTIES FIGURE 7.1 -3 RISK DIAGRAM FOR EARLY FATALITIES DUE TO INTERNAL EVENTS O MILLSTONE NUCLEAR PCWER STATION UNIT 3 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT l OPERATING LICENSE STAGE 1 l AMENDMENT 5 JANUARYl984
- 1. 0- 4 ,
O !
- 1. 0 - 5 --
E - w .
$ - .9 w ~
0 w m g 1.0-6 -- w - 0- : w . .5
~
z
<t -
O w - N w a 1. 0 - 7 r O : , b : , z " W
- 3 .
l 0 - i E l 1.0-8 r
~
1.0-9
*'"'''''I '"' ' ''I ' ' ' ' ' ' "
- 1. 10. 10 0. 1000. 10p00. 100,000.
LATENT FATALITIES FIGURE 7.1-4 RISK DIAGRAM FOR LATENT CANCER FATALITIES , n DUE TO INTERNAL EVENTS MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 3 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE AMENDMENT 5 JANUARY 1984
t 1.0-5 O : E 1.0-6 - w - P -
.9
~
b E - e .5 t I W
< 1.0-7 -
o -
~
Y ~ M w -
- u. -
O . l > i O !> 8 l E 1.0-8 -- l l
' I ' ' 'I ' 'I
- 1.0- 9 ' ' '
- l. 10. 100. 1000. ' ' ' '10000 EARLY FATALITIES FIGURE 7.1 -5 RISK DIAGRAM FOR EARLY FATALITIES DUE TO EXTERNAL EVENTS MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION OA UNIT 3 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE i
AMENDMENT 5 JANUARY 1984
l .0 - 4 O : E .9 W m O U 1.0- 5 -
<t W :
m - E - g . 5 5 ' 8 u - 5 b h 1.0-6 -
, y :
o . E . 1.0-7 ' '' "'I ' ' ' ' " ' ' ' ''"'I ' ' ""
- 1. to. 10 0. 1000. 10,000. 100,000.
. LATENT FATALITIES l
l FIGURE 7.1 -6 RISK DIAGRAM FOR LATENT CANCER FATALITIES l DUE TO EXTERNAL EVENTS MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 3 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE AMENDMEP4T 5 JANUARY 1984
e3+
* +
i - MNPS-3 EROLS ' j .- LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES r Fage,_ Table'(T), or Amendment '
,,._ Figure (F) g Uunber 8-i thru 8-iii 0 8.1-1 thru 8.1-2 0 T8.1-l'(1 thru 2 of 2) 0 8.2-1 thru e.z-2 0 T8.2-1 (1 of 2) 4 T8.2-1 (2 of 2) 0
.m T8.2T2 (2 of 1) 0 1
2 2-f - l
..s' ,
c ( . - _ - r
/ ,
Amendment 5 EP8-1 January 1984
f l i MNPS-3 EROLS LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES 1 Page, Table (T), or Amendment j Figure (F) Number f 1 12-1 thru 12-iii 0 12.0-1 0 T12.0-1 (1 thru 3 of 5) 0 T12.0-1 (4 of 5) 5 T12.0-1 (5 of 5) 0 l 9 l l O Amendment 5 EP12-1 January 1984 i L I
- . - . , - . . , - ~ , - - . . - - - . . . - . - - . . - . . . - _ .
- n. . -
. -.. _~ . . .. -- .
O - ( MNPS-3 EROLS TABLE.12.0-1 (Cont)
> JURISDICTIOK- - PERMITAPPROVph ,
1 4 Sta tute
' ; - Aaency Autho ri ty Pe rm i t ' th) . Desc ri ot ion Pu roose Apolication Gra nted Conn DEP CWA S401 - Wa te r Qua l i ty Ce,rt i f ica te Prerequisite to - Feb. 16, Fede ra l const ruc- 1977 tion permits April 19, 1974 7
/
Conn DEP C.G.S. 19-508 Permi c N/R dir Pollution Source Paint and Jan. 9, 1979 *
, Cona 19-508-3 '
, hydrolase shop 1 Conn DEP- , Sect. 25-7b SD-82-123 Di scha rge Pe rmi t. . , Dump rock and Feb. 4, 1982 May 7, I, y concrete spoil ." 1982
. into qua rry s
* } ~,
Conn PFEC (3) C.G.S. Docket 25 Cert i ficate or Env(ron + Transmission lines Sept. 1, June 4, b. (now Siting 16-50k menta l Compa ta b i l i ty ' a nd , 1981 1982
- Public Need
# , -\
Council [CSC)) 3
=# '
e ,. .) Cotss t ruct/ Ope ra te { Ma rch 1973
/*
April
.f CSC C.G.S. Order No. 4 Certi ficate or Envi ron-S16-50k mental Compatability and Millstono 3 ' 1974 '.,/, ,,
Public Need /
,e Conn DOT (4) Conn Sub- Ae ri a l Obstruction Transmission lines 3rd Qua rter < . ,/
Bureau or stitute House 1982 thru 2nd , I *- Ae rona ut ic s Bill No. Qua rter 1983 j/ '<> 6674, Public Act No. 678 Conn DOT, Road Crossings Transmission line Continuous State and crossing of highway Thru June 1985 I n te rsta te Highway Permi ts 7 Conn Dept C.G.S. Sect. Approval T ra nsm i ss i on Construction of
- Sept. 1982 or Public 16-243 DPUC Line Construction T ransmi ss i on line thru June 1983 Utility Regulation Control Sec.16-11-137 P003377050 Store construction Orig April 6, Ma rch 16, a Wa te rfo rd PZC Wa te rfo rd Sto rage in a rea Zoning Regula- zoned industrial ma te ri a l 1976 1981 tions, C.G.S. park Ma rch 9, 1981 S19-298 Wa te rfo rd Wa te rfo rd 1985 Bu i l d ing Pe rm i t Build inventory shop Jan. 1979 Jan. 1/,
Building Dept. Zoning Regula- 1979 tions, C.G.S. S19-398 3 or 5
MNPS-3 EROLS TABLE 12.0-1 (Cont) JURISDICTION PERMIT APPROVAL Statute Agency Authority r Pe_r_m i t No 2 De sc ri p t i on Purpose Application Granted Wa te r fo rd Wa te rfo rd 1984 Bu i l d i ng Pe rm i t Build painting and J a r. . 1979 Jan. 17, Building Dept. Zoning Regula- hydrolase shop 1979 tions, C.G.S. S19-398 Wa te rfo rd Wa te rfo rd 1786 Building Permit Bui ld Wa rehouses 5 Sept. 1978 Sept. 6, Building Zoning Regula- and 6 1978 Inspector tions, C.G.S. S19-398 Wa te rfo rd Wa te rfo rd 1459 Bu i l d ing Pe rm i t Build reactor Ma rch 1978 Ma rch 14, Building Zoning Regula- storage bui ld. 1978 Insp4ctor tions, C.G.S. S19-398 Wa te r f o rd Wa te rfo rd B-8027 Building Permit Build Mill- July 1976 July 14, Building Zoning Regula- stone 3 wa re- 1976 Inspector tions, C.G.S. house S19-398 Waterford Wa te rf o rd B-7297 Bu i l d i ng Pe rm i t Build timekeeping Dec. 1974 Dec. 9, Building Zoning Regula- building 1974 Inspector tions, C.G.S. S19-398 Waterford Wa te rfo rd B-7022 Bu i l d i ng Pe rm i t Build const. office June 1974 June 11, Building Zoning Regula- 1974 Inspector tions, C.G.S. S19-398 Wa te rfo rd Wa te rfo rd B-7282 Building Permit Build Wa rehouse 2 Nov. 1974 Nov. 14, Building Zoning Regula- 1974 Inspector tions, C.G.S. S19-398 Waterford Wa te rfo rd B-7016 Building Permit Build. Millstone May 17, 1974 June 6, Building 20ning Regula- 3 and related 1974 Inspector tions, C.G.S buildings and 519-398 fencing 5 Amendemnt 5 4 of 5 Janua ry 1984 O O O
.- . _ . . - . . - . . . . - = . . . . - _ . . - . . . . - . . _ _ . . . - . . - . . . . .-
l ! MNPS-3 EROLS i LIST OF EFFECTIVE ? AGES 1 ! Page, Table (T), or Amendment Figure (F) Number Appendix C Titic page 0 C-i thru C-iii 0 C-1 thru C-18 0 C-19 5 j C-20 thru C-23 0 ) FC-1 0 i FC-2 0 l FC-3 0 t i i. i f i t i 4 ) j Amendment 5 EP-C-1 January 1984
MNPS-3 EROLS A C7 EFFLUENT T0XICITY TESTING (v) Effluent toxicity tests were started in 1981 on the discharge water from Millstone 1 and 2. Tests were conducted routinely at two- to three-month intervals to assess if the discharge water is toric to representative test species. Tests are conducted under flow-through conditions with continuously pumped control water from Jordan Cove and effluent from the Quarry. Water is cooled or heated to a test temperature of 20 C (ti) prior to flowing into the test chambers. Entire life cycle tests of the sheepshead minnow (Cyprinodon variegatus) are being conducted; two tests have been completed through juvenile stage. Individuals (10/ replicate, 3 replicates / treatment) were reared from eggs in the two treatments (control and 100-percent effluent). No significant ( a = 0.05) l$ difference in survival or growth rate was found between the two treatments in either test. When the individuals mature, fecundity will be compared and F1 generation eggs hatched and larvae observed for effects. Further routine testing will include additional sheepshead minnow tests, life cycle tests on Mysidopsis bahia, and other suitable organisms indigenous to the Millstone area. (; i
%/
1 A (v! Amendment 5 C-19 January 1984
MMPS-3 EROLS i 1 l C8 REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX C Bayne, B.L. 1976. Marine Mussels: Their Ecology and Physiology. International Biological Programme: 10. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. l Belding, D.L. 1931. The Scallop Fishery of Massachusetts. Marine Fisheries Series No. 3, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Department of Conservation. Berner, L. 1935. La Reproduction des Moules Comestibles (Mytilus edulis L. et M. galloprovinciallis Lmk.) et Leur Repartition Geographique. Bulletin de l' Institute Oceanographique, Monaco. 689:1-8. Chadwick, W.L.; Clark, F.S.; and Fox, D.L. 1950. Thermal Control of Marine Fouling at Redondo Stream Station of the Southern California Edison Company. Trans. Amer. Soc. Mech. Eng. 72:127-131. Coulthard, H.S. 1929. Growth of the Sea Mussel. Contr. Can. Biol. Fish. 4:123-136. Dare, P.J. 1976. Settlement, Growth, and Production of the Mussel, Mytilus edulis L., in Morecambe Bay, England. Fish. Invest. Series II. 28:1-23. DeBlock, J.W. and Geelen, H.J. 1958. The Substratum Required for the Settling of Mussels (Mytilus edulis L.) Archs. neerl. Zool. Jubilee Volume: 446-460. Engle, J.B. and Loosanoff, V.L. 1944. On Season of Attachment of Mytilus edulis L. Ecology. 25:433-400. Freeman, K.R. and Dickie, L.M. 1979. Growth and Mortality of the Blue Mussel (Mytilus edulis) in Relation to Environmental Indering. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 36:1238-1249. l Harger, J.R.E. 1970. The Effect of Wave Impact on Some Aspects of the Biology of Sea Mussels. Veliger. 12:401-414. Holmes, M. 1970. Mussel Fouling in Chlarinated Cooling Systems. Chem. and Ind. 1970:1244-1247. James, W.G. 1967. Mussel Fouling and Use of Exomotive Chlorination. Chem. and Ind. 1967:994-996. Kajihara, T. and Oka, M. 1980. Seasonal Occurrence of Marine Mussel Plantigrades in Tokyo Marbor. Bull. Japan. Soc. Sci. Fish. 46:145-148. Kajihara, T.; Ura, Y., and Ito, M. 1978. The Settlement, Growth, and Mortality of Mussel in the Intertidal Zone of Tckyo Bay. Bull. Japan. Soc. Sci. Fish. 44:949-953. C-20
i t MNPS-3 EROLS i ! l l LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES l " i f l Page, Table (T), or Amendment
- Figure (F) Number Appendix E Title page 0
. E-i thru E-ii 0 . E-iii 5 i ! E-iv thru E-v 0 !
- E-1 thru E-7 0 l El-1 thru El-2 0 i TE-1 (1 thru 3 of 3) 0 TE-2 (1 of 1) 0 TE-3 (1 of 1) 0
! TE-4 (1 thru 3 of 3) 0 ! l TE-5 (1 of 1) 0 j TE-6 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 i, TE-7 (1 of 1) 0 TE-8 (1 of 1) ~ 0 TE-9 (1 of 1) 0 1 FE-1 0 i FE-2 0 l FE-3 5 j FE-4 0 t-i i i l t l l l i l r l-lO I 4 Amendment 5 EP-E-1 January 1984 (-
HNPS-3 EROLS O
}
LIST OF TABLES %/ Table Number Title E-1 Expected Reactor Coolant Equilibrium Concentrations E-2 Radioactive Liquid Waste System Sources Estimated Quantities and Flow Rates per Unit E-3 Expected Decontamination Factors and Holdup Times E-4 Liquid Waste Systems Components and Capacities , E-5 Discharge Streams from Plant E-6 Expected Annual Radioactive Liquid Releases after Dilution and Inclusion of Anticipated Operational Occurrences 5 E-7 Radioactive Gaseous Waste System Charcoal Adsorber Parameters E-8 Ventilation and Exhaust Systems Decontamination Factors E-9 Ventilation and Exhaust System Release Point and Rate / Millstone Stack Release Point and Rate l5 [L.) (~)
' Amendment 5 E-iii January 1983
BINOER PROMOTER & CATALYST OR []j RE ACTOR ACCEPTA8LE ALTERNATE PROCESS VICE 2 SSE +04Cl/YR. 2.59E+ 01Cl/FT 3 RESI S (1) O SHIPPING M OF FSITE OTHER SFRVICE 2,60E +01 Cl/YR, 785 FT3/YR CONTAINER 1.30E-OtCVFTI p I SPENT F;LTERS 6.77E + O2Cl/YR SHIELDING M3SCEL LANEOUS CASKS AS 1.69 Cl/FT 3 INCOMPRESSIBLE REQUIRED OPERArtOng g ? MA!*f TEN ANCE WASTE la) e 900 FT3/yp NEGLIGIBLE 500 F T 3/ ya ACTIVITY 4 b RADIOACTIVE SPENT LIQUID 816 Ci/ YR. RESINS (1) m fySTEM 2.72E-03CI/FT 3 400 FT /YR BORON EVAPOR ATOR BORON 1.27Cl/YR ' BOTTOMS (3) RECOVERY M SYSTEM 8.47-03Ci/FT ' iSOpy3/YR [ REGENERANT CHEMICAL DENSATE 6.lE- 01Ci/Y R EVAPORAT R 2 PROCESSING FACIUTY FACILITY 4 76E-OS Ci/FT3 OPERATION 6 MISCELLANEOUS = M AINT E N ANCE COMPRESSIBLE C WASTES (2) M CONTAIN E RS A COMPA OR O FSIT NEGLl318LE ACTIVITY 3500 FT3/YR NOTES
- 1. Cl/FT3 VALUES BASED UPON VOLUME OF RAW SPENT RESINS
- 2. Cl/FT 3 VALUES BASED UPON VOLUME OF PACKAGED WASTE
- 3. Cl/FT3 VALUES BASED UPON VOLUME OF RAW BOT TOW S FIGURE E-3
- 4. NORMAL EXPECTED RADIATION LEVELS WILL BE NEGLIGIBLE AND EVAPORATION RADIOACTIVE SOLID WASTE SYSTEM WILL NOT BE NECESSARY EXPECTED QUANTITIES MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 3 O
1
J ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE AMENDMENT S JANUARY 1984
, . - . - . - ~ - . .__. -.. . _- - -. . . _ _ . - . - . . _ . -. . _ . _ - . . - . _ . . . . ~ ~ .- - - _ -.. - 3 -
- i. i i l 4
i MNPS-3 EROLS 1 i i, l LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES ' Page, Table (T), or Amendment ; 1 Figure (F) Number !- Appendix F Title page 0 F-i 5
- j. F-iii 0 i F-1 thru F-15 0 .
I TF-1 (1 of 1) O t i- TF-2 (1 thru 2 of 2) 2 i ! TF-3 (1 thru 2 of 2) 0 1 TF-4 (1 of 1) 0 !. TF-5 (1 of 1) 0 l TF-6 (1 of 1) 0 1 4 o I 4 4 i ) h k
- 1. {
i l- ,i ll l [ ! i
=
1 I t J i ! t [ t f. e i Amendment 5 EP-F-1 January 1984 l
,a-w,+,-..- -n- - amm~__ -__--m-_ --
_ _ . _ -. m---- --
i i MNPS-3 EROLS {- APPENDIX F t DOSE CALCULATION MODELS AND ASSUMPTIONS ! l' AND COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS i i ] TAFLE OF CONTENTS h
- Page L
, Section Title Number F.1 Dose Calculation Models and Assumptions . . . . . . F-1 t- F.2 Cost Benefit Analysis . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .
. F-14 l 5 l
f 1 1 I i. i i i 1 l, - 4 ! I < 1 il J 4 1 i i 1
- O
).; Amendment 5 F-i January 1984 I i e )
m d
~ f 4 N 2010F.
Director, Nuclear Reactor Regulation - U.S. Nuclear TO: Regulatory Commission
SUBJECT:
Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3 Transmittal of Amendment to FSAR/ER Docket No. 50-423 Enclosed is Amendment b to the Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3 Final Safety Analysis Reportdnvironmental Report 2 The Control Copy No. of the set assigned to you appears on the above label. Please complete and return the attached form acknowledging that y ave received and incorporated this amendment into your copy of the FSAR A self-addressed stamped envelope is enclosed for your convenience. 1 The insertion instructions enclosed should be used to assist you in incorporating O the revisions, and as such should be retained until the Effective Page Listing is again updated. If you have any questions, please contact me at (203) 666-6911 ext. 3285. Sincerely, 1 l ! Carol J. Shaf fir / I Generation Facilities Licensing Northeast Utilities Service Company l l l l a l l l .
ggg General Offices e Seiden Street. Berlin. Connecticut em co ec' cue tee -e.o e co== P O. BOX 270
/N [,'[ [ "[' '*C"" , HARTFORD. CONNECTICUT C6141-0270
(~ g _ene .,_.._
.svu,ve _._
su m .co , , (203) 666-6911 Mail to: Carol J. Shaffer Generation Facilities Licensing Northeast Utilities Service Company P. O. Box 270 Hartford, CT 06101
SUBJECT:
Millstone Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 3 Acknowledgement of Di.tribution of NRC Questions and Responses and Aa ndment 5 of the EROLS p NRC Questions and Responses and . 'nendment 5 of the Millstone Nuclear Power Q Plant, Unit 3 Environmental Report Operating License Stage have been received. Organization Name l Copy Holder's Nam.: 1 l l Copy Holder's Phone Number Signature Date l ('u/
\
\
ER0LS Copy Number i l l l I}}