ML20095H911
| ML20095H911 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1991 |
| From: | Cottle W ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| GNRO-92-00048, GNRO-92-48, NUDOCS 9204300341 | |
| Download: ML20095H911 (104) | |
Text
Entergy Operations,inc.
ENTERGY mm Re Cicson fE 33150 Trd d)1 t.37 6e8 W. T. Cottle de nya-:
oswa Oval cam fie A4f Eiaw April 24, 1992 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Station F1-137 Washington, D.C.
20555 Attention:
Document Control Desk
Subject:
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Unit 1 Docket No. 50-416 i
i License No. NPF 29 Annual Environmental Operating Report for 1991 GNRO-92/00048 Gentlemen:
In accordance with the Grand Gulf _ Nuclear Station Facility. License NPF-29, Appendix B (Environmental Protection Plan), attached is the Annual Environmental Operatine Report for the period January 1,1991 through December 31, 1991.
If you need additional information, please contact this. office.
Yours truly, or %
WTC/GWR/mte attachment: Annual Environmental Operating Report L
cc:
Mr. D. C. Hintz-(w/a)
Mr. J. L. 'Mathis (w/a)
Mr. R. B. McGehee-(w/a) 1 Mr. N.-S. Reynolds (w/a)
Mr. H
-L. Thomas (w/o).
i
.Mr. Stewart D. Ebnet'erl-(w/a)_
Regional Administrator.
U.S.: Nuclear Regulatory Commission-Region II:
{
u 101 Marietta St.,1LW.-,: Suit'e 2900 :
, Atlanta, Georgia 1.30323.
4 Mr, P. W. O'Connor, Project Manager (w/2)
Office ofLNuclear Reactor Regulation
=ry c n,% p p
- U.S, Nuclear Regulatory Cosnissien
..u o v. J xail stop:13n3
-[Q[
Washington. D.C.
20555 4
9204300341-911231
-PDR-ADOCK 05000416-
/ /j
- )=
R PDR:
^ l
a i.
i t
4 s
'I i
4 l
GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION 4
E a
i 1991 4
1 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING
~
l REPORT j-
?-
5 A
i i
i.
i i
t i
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR 4
1'
.....,.... _,., -,,.... ~,,, -.,,
PREFACE The Annual Environmental Operating Report (AEOR) presents information and Jata obtained from implementation of Grand Gulf Nuclear Station's (GGNS) Environmental Protection Plan (EPP), Appendix B to the GGNS Operating License (NPF-29), for the period January 1 through December 31, 1991.
llistorical information has been included, where applicable, for comparison purposes.
The GGNS EPP requires monitoring for potential erosion along transmission line corridors and impact of cooling tower drift on vegetation. These are;the only
~
terrestrial issues required to be addressed by the GGNS EPP.
No aquatic issues were identified in the GGNS Final Environmental Statement.
Conocquently, none are addressed by the GGNS EPP.
Effluent limitations and monitoring requirements for aquatic matters are contained in the GGNS National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit issued by the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ). The HDEQ regulates-matters involving water quality and aquatic biota.
In addition to the required terrestrial issues, activities associated with the Construction Permit are also discussed, llowever, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission app oved cancellation of Constructinn Permit CPPR-119 for Unit' 2 on August 21, 1991-(GNRI-91/00176); therefore, monitoring and reporting activities' associated with the-construction permit were terminated at the end of' September.
The AEOR also addresses environmental issues which are not within the scope of 1
the EPP.
This provides a more comprbhensive report for the Environmental' Surveillance Program and informs the Nuclear Regulatory Commission:of environmental activities at GGNS.
- AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-11 m -
n---3-.
r -,.
y
, - o.
~..r
..,U
- ,3
, m m_n
.4,-,-
+...,,,,,. wry
...,,y
.wg y...,.,y
-,.y e.,
.v, p.,
~
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE PREFACE....................................................................
11 LIST OF FIGURES............................................................
iv LIST OF TABLES............................................................. V LIST OF APPENDICES......................................................... VI SECTION TOPIC
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1-1 1.1 Impact Assessment and Summary...........................
1-1 1.2 GGNS Site Characteristics...............................
1-1 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES...........................
2-1 2.1 S mok e Con t r o 1..........................................
2 - 1 2.2 Erosion Contro1...........
2-1 2.3 Transmission Line Surveys..............................
2-2 2.4 Liquid and Solid Waste Management....................... 2-2 2.5 Land Management and W ild 11 f e............................ 2 2.6 G roundwa t e r Moni toring.................................
2-3 2.7 NPDES Permit............................................ 2-4 2.8 Thermal Monitoring Program.............................. 2-5 2.9 Cooling Tower Drift Program............................. 2-6 2.10 Meteorological System...................................
2 2.11 Environmental Evaluations............................... 2-9 3.0 OBSERVATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS....................................
3-1 3.1 E mok e Con t r o 1..........................................
3 - 1 3.2 Erosion Contro1........................................
3-1 3.3 Transmission Line Surveys.............................
3-1 3.4 Liqu id and Solid Was te Management....................... 3-1 3.5 Land Managemen t and W11d li f e............................ 3-2 3.6 Groundwater............................................
3-3 3.7 NPDES..................................................
3-4 3.8 Thermal Monitoring.....................................
3-5 3.9 Cooling Tower Dr1ft.....................................
3-5 3.10 Meteorological Data....................................
3-6 3.11 Environmental Evaluations..............................
3-6 4.0 ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS.....................................
4-1 4.1 EPP Changes............................................
4-1 4.2 EPP Noncomplianc e s.....................................
4-1 4.3 Nontoutine Reporta.....................................
4-1 4.4 Potentially Significant Unreviewed Environmental Issues.................................... 4-1 AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-lii
LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE NUMBER PAGE 1-1 G en era l A r ea Ma p...........................
1-3 1-2 Property Boundary..............
............:1-4 2-1 Local-Drainage Basins....................... 2-14 2-2 Regional Croundwater Well Locations........
2-15 2-3 Location of Constructioa Dewatering and Observation Wells (Perched)................
2-16 2-4 Salt' Deposition Station Locations..........
2-17 2-5 Salt Deposition Control Locations........... 2-18 2-6 Meteorological System Location..............--2-19 3-1 Sediment Basins A & B, 1985-1991 TSS Results................................. 3-24 3-2 Regional Well llydrographs..................
3-25 3-3 Perched Well Hydrographs...................
3-31 3-4 Rainfall Data, 1985-1991...................
3-39 3-5 Rainfall Data, 1991........................
3-40 l
l l
LAEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-iv i
LIS'i 0F TABLES-TABLE NUMBER PAGE 2-1 Regional Groundwater Well Locations In Figure 2-2..................-............ 2-11 2-2 Perched Groundwater Well Locations In Figure 2-3.............................. 2-12 2-3 Salt Deposition Station Locations In Figures 2-4 and 2-5..................... 2-13 3-1 1991 TSS Analysis-Results, Sedimentation Basins A & B................. 3-7 3-2 1991 Regional Groundwater Monitoring Data....................................... 3-8 3-3 1991 Regional Groundwater Monitoring Summary................-.................... 3-9 3-4 1991 Perched Groundwater Monitoring Data....................................... 3-10 3-5 1991 Precipitation Measurement, Grand Gulf Nuclear Station................. 3-11 3-6 Salt. position ( 1991)..................... 3-12 3-7 1991 Salt Deposition Rainfall Data......... 3-17 3 1991 Joint Frequency D'stribution, i
50 Meter Level............................ 3-19 3-9 1991 Joint Frequency Distribution,-
10 Meter Level............................. 3-20 3-10 1991 Percent Bad Data Report.............. 3-21 3-11 Meteorological Data Recovery.............. 3-22 3-12 1991 Environmental Evaluation Summary...... 3-23 AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-v-a
_. _ ~
LIST OF APPEl!DIC"S APPENDIX NUMBER PAGE I
Perched Groundwater Lovel Measurementa..
1-1 II Thermal Monitoring Summary..............
II-i III Environmental Evaluations..............
111-1 t
i
.i i
i i
t k
-t s
P 5
P
.AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-vi.
- -,.~
..c.
.... -. -,.......-..-~
,.. ~.
9 W
SECTION 3-_').
INTRODUCTION f
I
?
'?
t i
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFI.R-1-1
INTRODUCTION Grand Gulf Nuclear Station consists of one operating lioiling water reactor with a current not maximum dependable capacity rating of 1142 MWo.
A second unit, on which construction had been previously suspended, was cancelled during September, 1989. An application for termination of the Unit-2 Construction Permit was submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on December F._1990 and approved on August 21, 1991 (GNRI-91/00176).
This resulted in termination of monitoring and reporting of most activites associated with the permit.
Any_.
continuing Unit 2 activities were absorbed under the Unit 1 permit.
1.1 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ANIL
SUMMARY
Environmental Surveillance Program (ESP) personnel monitored the environmental impact of GGNS operational activities between January 1 and December 31, 1991.
The_ ESP monitoring results contained in the following e
sections indicate the environment was not adverseily impacted in 1991 by the operatica of GGNS.
In addition, ESP personnel have not observed any harmful ef fects or. evidence of trends toward irreversible damage to the surrounding environment at GGNS.
-Overall, 1991 rmults were comparable to those-of previous years and remained within anticipated ranges.
1.2 GGNS SITE CHARACTERISTICS Grand Gulf Nuclear Station'is located in Claiborne County, Mississippi, on the east bank -of the Mississippi River, approximately 25_ miles' south of
.Vicksburg and 37' miles north-northeast of Natchez. Grand Gu_lf Military Park
. borders a portion of the north. side of the-property, and the small community of Grand Gulf _is approximately one and_'one-half miles to_the north. The town.of Port Gibson is about six miles southeast of the site..Two. lakes, Gin Lake and AEGR.RPT/SRREVFLR-1
-. _. _ _ _.. ~. _ _
llamilton Lake, are-located in the western portJon of the site. These lakes were once the channel of the 111ssissippi River and average about sight to ten feet in depth. An area map showing geographical Ior.ation of GGNG _ is provided in Figure 1-1.
Site and Its Environs The site and its environs. consist primarily of woodlands divided between two physiographic regions.
The western hale of the site is in the alluual.
plain of the llississippi River; the eastern half -is in the Loess or Bluff Ill11s.
- 1 The property line shown in Figure 1-2 encompasues the 2300 acres originally purchased, llowever, due _to erosion activity of the tiississippi-River along the vestern boundary of the. site, this acreage figure continually decreased until the river bank from the barge slip to the north boundary of the site was ctabilized through the U. S. Army Corps.of Engineers shoreline modification program, Based on the-GGNS Updated-Final Safety Analysis Report, the current acreage figure for the site is approximately-2100 acres.
The site boundary is the same as.the property line except in southwest and west-southwest sectors as shown in Figure 1-2.
-A 2-acre residential property within the southwest sector is privately owned.
Access The site area is accessible by two major highways: - U. S.-Ilighway-61 and State liighway 18, which connect Port Gibson (6 miles' southeast of the' site) l with Natchez, Jackson and Vicksburg.
l AE0k.RPT/SRREVFLR-1-2 1
l
+ - --
,as=-
,,n,ve-,
er,-
.er-w-
.-w
+rn - r-m m
e-r-----
e v
. _ ~. _ _ _ _
i
)'
.g.
I Adir wtstcasen,
s hw,,
1 I
j mm y
3>
N asu. '
l l
7 anm i
\\
/ )~' 'tj j
h 6
' C,-
j q"
,.
Q_ - f -_
C&tewitt nTs
_ 1 amusa s.
- u. M i{
aaver f
[
t
- s susessu l
cata ta 4*
k
=
~
.. = - - -
k
/
amant e.
W
=,
e l
y,.
UXJISIANA m
N W
Aenempf MIS $1 IPPI W
w Q_ _4 0 4 m me GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION m,
cm m W a=o % om FIGURE 1-1 GENERAL AREA MAP AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-1-3
/
I W>%
/
s _J Mg -~ -
M t.
(
~
l Y
'~
a....
y~~
g B]
- -C C f..
,,.... --y ik t
~
\\
Y&
, e oo.
e m
6 D
~
N_vm
/
m\\'.
~-
trh h
.M-=
h-
- fl g
/
l
~
-m 1
m p
c
-L b.
' N d
=
l r-
- p' l
l l
N m_. _.
. v ::
l>
\\
E:{q'y f
i :
i
.i FIGURE 1-2 b
PROPERTY BOUNDARY AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-1-4 a
)
(... -.. - -.. -....
)
f-
)
l I
P i
SECTION 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES L
I E
?
i I
i i
F i
f a
. i t
i AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-2-1 i
?
,,,y,
-.E.
_ _ +.,, -,,
.mm...
,sy,, _..... _,..,,, _..,,,_,. _..,.,_,.., _,.. -,,..
~,.,mm..m.,m,...,
.r.-
2.1 SM0hE CONTROI, The GGNS Burn Pit, which was officially closed on February 22, 1990, was filled with dirt during the week of June 11, 1990, thus prohibiting any future use.
2.2 EROSION CONTRQL Erosion control at GGNS is a priority because of proximity of GGNS to the Mississippi River, hilly terrain, avetago annual ?:alnfall of approximately 50 inches and loess soils which are extremely susceptible to erosion. -The methods which have been successfully utilized.Lo control erosion are:
o Revegetation of disturbed areas o
Utilization of concrete chutes and fiumes which channel runoff into two sediment basins, A and 3 (Figure 2-1).
Sedimentation basins help mir.imize ecological effect on llamilton Lake and the Mississippi River.
As a result of Amendment 7 to GGNS Construction Permit Numbers CPPR-118 f
and 119, dated December 23, 1981, monitoring and capacity requirements for the sedimentation basins were transferred to the GGNS NPDES Permit. Environmental Surveillance Program personnel elected = to continue..runof f ' sample collection' on a voluntary basis for an addiiional-period-of time to gather supplemental data on basin sediment removal. Runof f sample collection, 'which 'was required. prior to amending the Construction Permits, was discontinued on January. 31, 1985.
{
Monitoring of sedimentation basins since-January 31, 1985 has been conducted
-j accirding to-parameters established by the GGh5 NPDES Permit.
l 3
[
i w
h AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-2-1 r
r
,re..
.,%s
- ~
,,--,--e..-
--y,,
w-m,-,+.ce-,v w.
e y-
..- ~~
2.3 18MliMlSSION LINE _ SURVEYS The aerial surveys in previous years have confirmed that soll and vegetation have stabilized along the GGNS transmission lines.
Therefore, as permitted by Section 4.2.1, Paragraph 2. of the EPP, the Erosion Control Inspection Program was discontinued in-1988.
2.4 LIOUID AND SOLID WASTE liANAGEMENI Liquid wastes, such as chemicals, fuels and lubricants' which could not be discharged as wastewater, were deposited or diccharged into-tanks and/or containers. These materials, excluding borated water, were salvaged or removed to appropriate of fsite treatment and/or disposal facilit'les.
Dorated water was placed in the onsite resin' pond and in the trected low volume wastewater pond. Care was taken to avoid handling or storing of liquide'in close proximity of major drainage areas to avoid potentially damaging spills to site streams.
Construction scrap and debris were' collected in designated onsite areas
- r for salvage or burial. Noncombustible solid wastes were buried in designated landfill areas.
A contractor began collection and disposal-of Unit 1 and Energy Service Center waste in 1988.
Prior to this arrangement, Unit 2 construction personnel-disposed of this waste onsite.
l
- r f
2.5 LAND MANAGEMENT AND1 WILDLIFE Approximately 2100 acres make up the GGNS site; 94 acres are fenced inLthe immediate plant area, with an addit'ional. 37Lacres. set aside for permanent '
structures. The remaining acreage provides-excillent habitatLfor Mississippi-wildlife.
r t
9 t
1 l
- AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-2-2 r
a w
+ --
r
.w
-4 w
s.-
r
Fringe areas and open fields were normally mowed iwo times'during each growing season to keep opon areas from being overtaken by scrub vegetation.
After the growing season, a series of small food plots were planted in these open fields to help sustain wildlife popnlations through the winter and early spring. A small fruit orchard and two gardens were also maintained on site by ESP personnel.
Twe iskes located on the site, Gin and Hamilton, were used for sport and commercial fishing by area residents. Use of the lakes and surrounding local lands by water dependent species (waterfowl) was seasonal ~, with most activity occurring during fall and winter migrations.
Hunting on site was limited to bowIhunting for in-season animals, pursuant' to the requirements of Mississippi hunting laws.
Other hunting activities were prohibited on the GGNS site.
2.6 GROUNDWATER MONITORING The groundwater monitoring program was continued during 1991 at GGNS to:
4 o Provide data on seasonal fluctuation of the regional groundwater table
[
Monitor level of the perched groundwater table around Power Block areas.
~
o Location of Monitoring Wells Twenty-seven wells were used to-monitor the regional.and perched groundwater underlying GGNS:
o Twelve wells for regional groundwater levels on site area Fifteen wells for perched groundwater levels-around Power Block areas.
o Locations of monitoring wells are shown in' Figures 2-2 and 2-3 and listed in Tables 2-1 and 2-2.
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-2-3
--m-.-,m-3 v
v w,
c
Reelonal Groundwater Wells used to monitor regional groundwater levels (Figure 2-2 and Table 2-1) were normally_ measured'at least twice a month.- Ilowever, cancellation-of the GGNS Unit 2 Construction Permit in 1991 reduced monitoring frequency to-twice per year (April and Septemoer).
Perched Groundwater GGNS has a monitoring and dewatering system (Figure 2-3 and Table 2-2) located around the Power Block and Standby Service Water Basins to monitor euul dewater the underlying perched aquifer.- Seven monitoring wells _(MW-1 through MW-7) were used to monitor water levels in-the perched aquifer. Eight dewatering wells (DW-1 through DW-8) were in place to dewater the aquifer if-t water levels approached or exceeded the GGNS design basis elevation of 109 feet mean sea level (MSL). Water levels in perched aquifer-wells were observed.and recorded once a month.
2.7 NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No.
MS0029521 was amended and reissued to GGNS on October 9, 1990. The permit as issued in October 1990 consisted of 13 outfalls..
The permit allows GGNS-to discharge wastewater, 'in accordance with NPDES
~
regulations, into llamilton Lake and the Mississippi River. NPDES reporting-requirements are established by the State of Mississippi.
Monthly _ Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) for each outfall were prepared and sent to the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality and U. S. Nuclear' Regulatory Commission.vla NPDES Monthly Reports.
t P
J f
r
-AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-2-4 P
m g
me w
t
,,r rs0 -
en~
e e
+>-+v-4
~+ ~~
r---<-r,
- - v g
i 2.8 IllERMAL MONITORING PROGRAM Grand Gulf Nuclear Station's NPDES Permit requires that GGN3 effluents and the Mississippi River mixing area be monitored to determine what effects, if any, will result from GGNS's heated discharge in'to thn river.
The NPDES Permit r
states:
The receiving water shall not exceed a maximum water temperature change of 2.8'C (5.0*F) relativo to the upriver _ temperature, outside_n mixing zone.
not exceeding a maximum width of 60 feet from the river: edge and a maximum length of 6000 feet downstream fron the point of discharge, as measured at a depth of 5 feet.
The maximum water _ temperature shall-not exceed 32.2'c (90'F) outside the same mixing. sono, except when ambient temperatures approach or exceed this value.
The amended permit as issued in October I990, only requires monitoring
- when river stage is less than 15.4 feet during wjnter months (November-April) or, is les than minus 1.2 feet during summer months (May -.0ctober). - In addition, once monitoring has been performed at river stages less than the 15.4
^
and minus 1.2 feet limits, the river stage which existed at_ time of monitoring
' k will becomo the t..w limit.
Initially, the thermal monitoring program had 72 reference = points 100- feet apart along the river bank, llowever, as-a result of the amended permit, thermal monitoring was required near tlue shoreline-only :at Points 1 and 7 and in the barge slip outlet.
Calibrated digital thermometers were used to obtain temperatures at a
- depth of five feet and at the surface.
i i
a P
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-2-5 i
-w
-r
/
vr 5 -
ee-
-. ms h < w e.m
. - - -v.
.s
.wm
..e-+-ew
,e-w.w--c--w--m.*v.
v.-
2.9 COOLING TOWER DRIFT PROGR&B
]
The Environmental Protection Plan requires a study to determine environmental effects of salt deposition from cooling tower drif t.
After reviewing suitable st'udy methods, GGNS personnel elected to' conduct a quantitative and qualitative cooling tower drif t study which would identify salts deposited on vegetation in the surrounding envir ' ment and determine the quantity of each salt.
Ealt Deposition Station Loqations Eight sampling sites were utilized to measure cooling tower drif t deposition.
Six of the eight sampling sites were located in areas where maximum salt deposition is predicted.
These areas were extrapolated.from the Bechtel-Salt Deposition Model developed for the GGNS Final Environmental Report. The remaining two sampling sites are control sites. The first is located south of Raymond, Mississippi.
An additional control site was added at Port Gibson, Mississippi, in 1985. Four of these-sampling sites were equipped with replicate sampling devices. The lleavy llaul Road and Glodjo locations had duplicate sampling devices which were not-installed-until 1985..Tho'1985<
duplicate were established to strengthen the. program's statistical trend analysis and to improve sampling-and analysis quality assurance.
The location 4
f salt deposition sJ tes are identified in' Figures 4 and 2-5 and-listed 'in Table 2-3.
Fallout samples'were collected in plastic buckets on a quarterly basis.
The buckets were located four to six feet above ground, fitted with bird rings and' covered with fine mesh screens to. exclude leaves and insects.
4 AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-2-6
Samolo Analysis and CollectiQB Samples were collected quarterly and analyzed for ten constituents:
o Calcium o Magnesium o Sodium o Iron-o Phosphate o Nitrate o Chloride o Fluoride o Sulfate o Total dissolved solids.
These parameters were selected because past analyses have shown them to be T
l prevalent in the Plant Service Water System.
Salt constituents were also determined for the domineralized water. used in initial setup of-collection -
l buckets. Rainfa11' data was recorded ~for each sampling site, i
I Screens were washed with dolonized water, and the wash water volume.
measured and deposited in the collector, on a quarterly basis. The volume of j
l water in_the collector was then measured, and-a composite sample of collector's i
contents was placed in a clean cubitainer, scaled and. labelled. The.date of removal, total collector volume, total rainfall and location of site were recorded on the appropriate data sheets, k
4 Salt Deoosition Rate Calculation Salt deposition _ rates (SDR) were calculated on a constituent-by--
l constituent basia from:
t o
Total volume of water contained in sampling bucket.
o Concentration of a constituent in this' water l
I E
o Volume of demineralized water placed11n sampler initially-1 o-Concentration of constituent in dominera11 zed water
-o Sampling area of bucket.
l AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-2 v
?
.F Therefore, for a particular constituent, SDR = (V C ) ~ (V C )
TT DD A
SDR = Salt Deposition Rate (mg/m )
where:
VT = f N 1 sample volume (1)
T = final sample constituent concentration (mg/1)
D = seeded volume of demineralized water (1)
CD = domineralized water constituent concentration (mg/1) 2 A
= collector area (m ),
2.10 METEOROLOGICAL SYSTEM The GGNS meteorological tower, with a base elevation of 156 feet above 1
MSL, is approximately 5000 feet north-northwest of the GGNS Unit I reactor building, which has a finished grade of 132 feet above MSL.
The location of the meteorological tower is shown in Figure 2-6, 3
The aren around t.he metecrological-tower is flat and covered by grass.-The nearest bluffs are approximately 362 feet west of the tower; with trees approximately-35 feet high along the bluffs. Approximately 400 feet east'are trees greater than -50 feet high. The nearest trees ' south-greater thau 50 - f.a.t high are approximately 690 feet from-the tower.. A-county road passes the meteorological tower-approximately-400 feet.to the-north..The tallest!
structure, GGNS Unit I natural draf t cooling tower, is 522 feet high.and 1s -
l situated approximately 6000. feet south-southeast.of meteorological tower.
t Due to its : location in a relatively-open area and its proximity to GGNS, the tower site -is expected to accurately represent the same ' meteorological'
[
characteristics as the region into which airborne macerial could be' released from.GGNS.
l1
[
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-2-8
-+-
ymw.
-tp.g-e fsy-aw w-
,e-4
--w--
wi
-e
-e---4
- - -. - - -4
. - - =
y.
-we
--r 1
w
+am i
T 3
The meteorological system consists of duplicato sensors (Channels A & B).
Data recorded by meteorological instruments are stored in digital and analog forms via magnetic tape and strip charts.
The following meteorological parameters are monitored by the system:
Change in Temperature (delta T) o Wind Direction o
o Wind Speed o Dow Point o Temperature o Surface Precipitation.
Meteorological data was included in -the Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports submitted to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
2.11 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATIQhS The Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) for GGNS ' permits changes in GGNS design or operation and performance ci tests or experiments that affect the environment, provided they do not involve a change in the-EPP or an unroviewed environmental question. -This n.eans that changes,-tests or experiments-which do not af fect the environment are not subject to requirements of the EPP. Also, requirements of the EPP do not relieve GGNS of requirements in 10 CFR 50.59,
" Changes, Tests and Experiments," which address the question of safety associated with proposed changes,_ tests _and experiments.
Changes in plant design or operation and performance of tests and experiments were reviewed by GGNS personnel for possible effects they might have on the environment. When review determined change, test or experiment could affect the environment,- an environmental evaluation was prepared and r acorded before-additional construction or operational. activities associated with the change, test or experiment were begun.
However, the EPP < xcluded changes, tests or experiments _from the evaluation:
o If all measurable environmental _ effects were confined to onsite nreas previously disturbed during site preparation and plant construction, or If they were required to achieve compliance with other federal,' state, or o
local; requirements.
-AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-2-9
. _ _ -_... ~
One of three groups-reviews changes, tests and experiments at GGNS:
o Nuclear Plant Engineerhg
__ Nuclear Operations o
o Nuclear Support.
The originating organization performs an applicability determination on each proposed change, test or experimen to ascertain if activity might af fect t' e environment. Only those which have potential to affect the environment are required to receive environmental evaluations.
The originator of a proposed change, test or experiment completes an environmental evaluation o: documents that one is not required.. Completed environmental evaluations are forwarded to Nuclear Support for an lndependent review. After providing independent review, Nuclear Support reports results of environmental evaluations to the NRC in the GGNS Annual Environmental l Operating Report.
AEOP.RPT/SRREVFI.R-2-10
_.. -... _..,.., _.. ~.
TA3LE 2-1 REGIONAL GROUNQHATER WELL LOCATIONS IN FIGURE 2-2 LEGEND WELL NUMBER SECTOR LOCATION DESCRIPTION 1
PS, OWS B
NE Lay down Area - Unit 2 Bluff behind Unit 2 2
OW209A, P209 D(E)
OW202 E
Bluff north of Switchyard 4
OW10 A
West end Met. Tower field Former County Road -
5 OW4, OW4A, P4 R
Adjacent to Stream A 6
OW29A Q
West Lay down Area - Unit 2 7
OW69A P
Field - North side Haul Road' 8
OW7 N
Across the south Plant Access Road and south of Basin B 9
1 AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-2-11
TABLE 2-2 PERCHED GROUNDWATER WELL LOCATIONS IN FIGURE 2-3 WELL NO.
UNIT NO.
LOCATION DESCRifIIDS MW1 2
North end of Unit 2 Turbine Bldg MW2 2
Northwest corner of Unit 2 Auxiliary Bldg MW3 1
Northeast of SSW D Ban 3n (between fences)
MW4 1
Southwest side SSW A Basin MW5 2
Northeast GGNS-Maintenance Shop MW6 1
North of Condensate Storage Tank MW7 2
East of Unit 2 Turbine Bldg DW1 2
East of Unit 2 Turbine Bldg DW2 2
Corner Auxiliary Bldg - Turbine Bldg Unit 2 DW3 2
Northwest c.orner of Unit 2 Auxiliary Bldg by electric panels DW4 2
Southwest corner of Unit 2 Auxiliary Bldg DW5 1
Between SSW-A and SSW B Basins DW6 1
In front of Diesel Generator Bldg _
(under manhole) l DW7 1
Corner Unit l' Turbine Bldg - Auxiliary Bldg DW8 1
Behind Radwaste Bldg - Unit 1 i
l AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR 12 t
l
TABl# 2-3 EALT DEPOSITIO.H STATION LOCATIONS IN FIGURES 2-4 AND 1-1 LEGEND ID NUMBEll SLCIQR LOCATION DESCRIPTION-.
-lleavy lisul Road - adjacent to Ilasin il 2
SDS 2, 2A, 211 A
Fenced storage area by Met.
n Tower
\\
s 3
SDS 3 C
Catwalk on truck bypass road 4
SDS 4 E
Fo r.act locatien of Haggie Jackson Residence Bald 11111 Road j
Support Services Conter (Old Training Center) 4 Dald 11111 Road 6
SDS 6, 6A L-Glodjo Ren!dence - Cald 11111
- Road 7
SDS 7 D
llinda County Vocational School
- Raymond, MS (control) 9 SDS 9 0
City Barn - Port Gibson, MS (control)
Noto: Identification number 8 la assigned as a dolonized water control sample -
4 AEOR.RPT/SPREVFLR-2*13-t
___..___._____._____i__.__._-_ _.__
.m
a.ir e M4 bE 5J L.h<L4.m.ra_.-_4=.md..e.4e.Lh, 44 -
.*m.__m.,.whu4 J._4.4m4__-,s4_4As&W,E.w4_&*v_._
44ba J_m
&_,+
s,pga,#.Jh,.A_4.,-____k q
f,m,.4.,,844L.m.4 a;.3,4.e W M A,
.A,.3_M _ As.a4.41_s m -33 e
i f H
g a
Jh,lhm$.{WT [, +sbNh,hq
[
4
,m
);
D (l!J l } ?
l p ;,p. g:q. 2 A;)g
./
.r e pg.
2 apQg.y
_f & ~..., --n
~ < c.r ggs~ g
- w.y
. w- :- v::
e-s.. n 3 1
~
s v 8 bI
't')
o w,
nwm k;D
, q' c,m. -s.
m.
i i
.m
- 'f
/
1 3
.r-Q, m+. ~, g t g/
p.
64
,de..m [;;. %y,%
y-
- x..
, J~
q/.
\\
y
\\
y%
y.,
3 n
g " y b '7 W.... * %& ?lE5h Y g
)
.t bT at '\\. -
i
,g g
Q -
N~g, r.
. -}\\
1 2:,W *
- ;org' ~; ~*" R
?-,
'}
I?
)f 6
r h
?
~l i
~
3x @%=%34*p %m,y..W
%g,---, -4,.----.*.c
- i l-n l'
~
~
L _ __.. s < -
y
/
.N.
- L,.. _
.e
+
c l
l i
i 4
h.
i O N y 18J-4 l'
'/
+3 \\
x 4 l-
's.
..... 4.,'...,, y o
' i, +.;.
j d
!g
/
-~
.g s t
Uiddtgygg 1
a c-g t
u._a..,o.n__
_.u.4
%. -.-_a
_2 e
_4s-4___,a;
,-----s 4
-,--2 4-,-,-
.___m. - - -
29
$2 m
A sy I {f(
g
\\
w o
A
$d
\\.
F g.
g
,a C
sd l'
\\(-
32 I
'y 3__--
/
)
l
]
l I
P 1
l
~
\\
. +.......... =.
y~
N i
l _hl
~~
~
W
, f
(.,
t
/
s\\,1
- * 's
}
/ -
v u,,,... -
i e
(%
l 1
?
I l
l i
4 lLt) ~8 lj7 __
l(
i f(
'l
~
l) R l
i l-l
.l4 i
l.
j l
i k j
]
_ f-AEOR.RPT/SEREVFLR-2-15 I
I I
1 l
I i
s m,, r-F a
_1 = >
m,,........
m ee., Q
%t* *h A.,
e v,
, p
_ _. _I s_,
.rr
/
.f
~
e It
....-,o p
i y
d
~1 3
1 I.
~ '[. 4;;,9_....L y---..-
-s l
+
- 4-n.
gagg,,
-...3 h0gW 4 f
bew4 e,
@3 y),,,..
h.
y
~,..
s i_
s x-
.s
- o c
j j
. 4 i
i e"
.b, 1
- a- -:
+ < n.a;
~
m..
IR k
in b
- w
,m1
,.: j]
. et Aur ca.ot_gt ono*
/.; -
48 # 4 PL AN
-- ~ 6... 6 +
a e.-, y,.....
l l
't i
l
[
r GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION FIGURE 2-3 LOCATION OF CONSTRUCTION-DEWATERING-AND OBSERVATION WELLS (PERCHED) k AEOR.RPT/SRREVTLR-2-16 r
.n.-,,..
,n~~..,,-.--..n.
,,-,,,,n..
.c.
.n
m ZZ 00 mm 1
HH E
Ed 23 es a
[!!
\\
- x:
W n
az
\\
b O
Hm
~=
m x
\\
tu JH
/
l \\-
ndm A[yd
)
l
.. l b I
-l -
l
_b h
-w l
A
't I
'* L g
o o,
,,,, llj
')
\\
,,,]
~
?
y' ',
~
("
,, ~
], /
\\
I
\\
/[
[
\\
lI ( [/
"I
/
~
~
/
i l
b l
3xI l86 l/ ~/
I~
l llN@
i
!R i/-
1 t,
l j
ig
,f i
i-l, I
{
l i
I AEOR. RPT/SRREVFLR 17
e a
i s'
b
[ v.1'
~~
LetiT;
$N
- gjj, N
SCens will CARRML
,4*%.
- c.. g 7;
9
/; ---sz-f 7, -,,dbis Onir wAo.$oN q
o
[
- y. p{,. g pRAYMON 9 f'
J
$0h
\\ n Nim y-
~., -
y',,n 5
/
ggggly e
/
' ~ ~ ',
A 4 --
", ~
/ f i
s.
8&ORO g
N
,J HINDS \\
?,
j E b M Ill (R ktIN
/
eut -
\\*d'
, ELLTON
//
N g---
\\
n.----------
[
U HM 0111 CRYSTAL $PRINGS I
(
,,ggg,
SlwP10N 5Al T JOSEPH.e-f 9, *
')
\\
/
2
\\
i WATERPROQ(
CATANtnA y
jg, g g,
,,,s q
h 9
u,j t
r fN k
~~
~
f v$kt RIDGECR${LIA
.i BR KHAVE s
g VIBA
- NATCHEZ Nsf0 N
~1
_/ /
W500 4 4
/
icius N
llN;MN h
4
~
,vey
.--,2 % >
- k rw&/o
,,,g i
y
- "*'k r is t 0 h s
h N#h0M/
i MISSISSIPPI rurs/
3,,j, 0
6 D
/0 ?0 nier l
l N E F NUCLEAR STATION 1
FIGURE 2-5 SOURCE: Offical hviwy map. Louisena 0970s SALT DEPOSITION CONTROL LOCATIONS Omew hem p. ummina nnu ACOR.RPT/SEREVFLR-2-18
-r---.-%
J.
sh-h-
-.b24 3-.--a
. - - - - + -.
-J.A4 e.
4
--4wm-.ma---2 hah.A A--e.-n 4
4 u
====-
g lif
. \\
[
k-
=
v I-
^ i Wl,
)
I I
f
, s y~
c.
,y g i
i i
J Il
.,\\
'/'
~
N_
(.,
l s
N. i
.... in N~
l n- -,
l e
- \\j'
~
[
. \\
![ / ~/
i
(
y y
p -i l } l$$
l/ ~/
i
- !Ng n-i I%
\\l~
1-i j
n
~
T i
1
-l rzcunE 2-6 b
5 i
i atoa.xrr/ssarvrta-2-19 METEOR L SYSTEM.
I i
1..
m.
SECTION 3.0.
OBSERVATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS
?
7 s
?
i t
h
- AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3-1 u.
t t
3.1 SMOKE CONTROL The GGNS Durn Pit, which was officially closed rebruary 22, 1990, was i
illied with dirt during the week of June 11, 1990, thus prohibiting any future j
I use.
3.2 EROS 10N CONTROL f
The GGNS NPDES Permit requires grab sampics collected from the outfalls of
[
Sediment Basins A & D for total suspended solids (TSS) analysis. Normally, t
sampics were not collected if prevailing meteorological conditions (such as t
heavy rain) could skew analysis resnits.
[
Analytical results are presented in Table 3-1.
As shown in Figure 3-1, j
I results indicate that, overall, the basins function at similar efficiencies and i
i L
that minimal erosion is occurring en the GGNS site, j
3.3 IRANSHISSION LINE SURVEYS The aerial surveys in previous years have confirmed that soil and i
i t
vegetation have stabilized along GGNS transiaission lines. Thurefore, as permitted by Section 4.2.1, paragraph 2, of the EPP, the Erosion Control l
l Inspection Program was discontinued in 1988.
r f
3.4 LIOUID AND SOLID WASTE HAMAGL,iMI Liquid Waste j
t GGNS did not incur any serious problems or incidents-with liquid waste l
t control in 1991. Liquids which were suitable fer reuso were recycled through :
t local contractors and nonprofit organizations.. Nonhazardous liquid wastes j
(borated water and cooling waters)- were disposed of through National Pollutant i
Discharge Elimination System outfalls.
?
i I
i
'AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3-1
,j
,_,_._..,~._.,.____,...,_._.._,._..,......,_,,-..m.
i i
l Solid Waalc Solid waste generated at GGNS during 1991 did not present any unanticipated problems or adversely affect the environment.
Solid wanto which was not salvagnable was buried at an approved landfill.
i Waste Management, Inc. has been contracted since 1988 for collection and i
disposal of solid waste from GGNS Unit 1 ai.d the Energy Services Conter. Theno.
consisted of offico, warehouse, cafeteria and maintenance wasten.
Final disposal was at thn Vicksburg landfill, lla?.ardous Wasto The Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) inspected the Hazardous Wast.o Storagn Arna and rotated activitics on April 11, 1991. The r
purpose of the inspection was to confirm regulatory complianco with the GGNS Ilazardous Wasto Management Permit. No violations woro noted.
Enlyshlorinated Binhenvis (pcBa)
[
No known exposure or offsito rolonsn of pCBs occurred in.1991.
3.5 LAND MANAGEMENT AND WILDLIFE Based on field observations by ESP personnol, the 1991 operation of GGNS had no apparent ecological of fect on thn GGNS wildlife populat ion.
Common wildlife, such as deer, turkey and fish continuo to be abundant based on hunting and sport fishing activities.
Also, no. adverse impact was observed on I
threatened or endangered species known or suspected to inhabit the GGNS site.
Land management practices continued as in past years.
Fielda near the meteorological tower were used. for agricultural production and mowing machines s
were used to maintain other cleared areas. The majority of the sito can still
{
I be classified as predominantly hardwood forest.
Thus, diverso habitats were maintained to promoto the wildlife population.
AEOR.RPT/SEREVFLR-3-2_
u -,.. a - - - -
-.m-,..
L,....
r..
..-w I
--,---._..m..,--..,~,i.
-,.~,.,- ----4.
.,~,y
--<-..~,,..-,..-.-m..n
-. - ~.. - -. -.
3.6 GROUNDW4TER Regionail arourdwatrr Regional groundwater monitoring data is presented in Tables 1-2 and 3-3.
Vater 1cvols recorded in 1991 were generally consistent with preoperational and operational data.
Thin indicates the radD 1 well pumping operation is not affecting the regional water table.
A bydrograph for. each regional well is provided in Figuro 3-2.
Perched Aoulfor Perched groundwater data is presented in Tabic 3-4 A hydrograph for each perched aquifer well is_provided in Figuro 3-3.
Dewatering Well'DW-8, Page 8 of Figure 3-3 exceeded the 109.0 foot HSL during routine Environmental Survoillance Program monitoring In August due to mechanical problems, which was reported to the NRC in GNRO-92/0001, dated 02/07/92.
In_-addition, Nuclear Plant Engineering observed elevated lovols above the.109.0 foot HSL in Dewat<3 ring Wells HW-6 and DW-8 during non-routino monitoring activities in May and October, respectively whleh are not shown on Pago 8 of Figure 3-3.
The HW-6 and DW-8 well problems were reported to the NRC in GNRO-91/0138 dated 09/06/91 and GNRO-92/0001 dated 02/07/92, respectlyoly.- llowever, all_ problems were corrected and elevations returned below the 109.0 foot MSL, Well measurements taken during 1991 are included as Appundix 1.
Rainfall data for 1991.is presented in-Table 3-5. : - Figuros 3-4 and 3-5 show rainfall data from 1985 through 1991 and_1991 cumulative rainfall data, l
respectivoly.-
l l
l' AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3....... -. -..
... ~
~ ~. _ -... -
1 3.7 liU)LS The 1991 monitoring results f or all perrait t ed outf alls were reported in the National Pollutant Discharge Elinination System (NPDES) reports.
The Hississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) and the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission recofvod copies of these reports.
Soveral items noted during 1991 and included in the NPDES reports aro summarized in the followings o
The following were routino dischargos that occurred during the year.
Datn Dunntitv SanInc 07-06-91 300,000 Gallons
.riro Water Storago Tank "A" 08-10-91 2,000 Gallons Div 3 D/0 011 Collection Sump Dischargos were within NPDES limits or limits imposed by the HDEQ.
The following NPDES noncomplianco notifications occurred during the year.
o Action Proventivo D.ato Qktfall Dgscription Inken__
Action March 010 liigh F/C count 6 low Adjusted-Checked chlorino level at chlorino
-chlorIno now sewago treatment levels levels facility frequently March 014 liigh pil reading in."D"
- None Nono due to algao July 016 liigh pil reading duo.
to algan Oct 010 liigh chlorino lovel Adjusted Repinced at sewage treatment.
chlorine' injection facility feed system
-Dec 013
!!igh TSS in "A" Basin
- None Nono.
i caused by heavy erosion
- Rainfall flushed Basin'"B" returning pil values -within NPDES limits.
i
- lloavy rainfall ceased allowing Basin."A" to return within NPDES limits.
Noncompliances woro reported to the MDEQ and correctivo action taken ! -
{
return outfalls to within NPDES limits.
f a
-AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3 4-
-l
._., _ _. -. - -.._.. a.-. _ _. _,_ a - -.;_. _._.
.a
_...~._,c__.,_.,,_._._-...._.._
t 3.8 IllERMAL MONITORING l
Thermal monitoring (Section 2.8) was conducted on November 5, 1991 by ESP personnel. No limit imposed by the NPtn 3 Permit was exceeded. A summary of thermal monitoring conducted in 1991 is prc/ided as Appendix II.
3.9 COOLING TOWER DRIFT During 1991, cumulative salt deposition samples were collected for four l
quarterly periods. Replicate samplos were taken at four locations (Stations 1, 2, 5 and 6) as described in Section 2.9.
Table 3-6 presents the calculated salt deposition rates (SDRs) for eight monitoring sites in the GGNS Cooling Tower Drift Program.- These SDRs form bases for statistical analysis required by-Section 4.2.2 of the EPP.
Section 4.2.2 of the EPP required the Cooling Tower Drift Program to begin
[
at least 3 months prior to operation of Unit 1 above 5% power and continued xor j
three years of operation.
Section 4.2.2 further states ~ that if no statistically significant amounts of analyzed components are detected during this time period, then a proposal can be made to the NRC to terminate the-
[
r program.
In 1989 Nuclear Plant Engineering conducted an analysis of variance comparison between preoperational and operational data. Results or this l
r comparison revealed no statistically significant amounts of salt were detected
-between preoperational and operational samples. On Febtuary. 19, 1991,-GGNS j
submitted a proposal (GNRO-91/00029) to-terminate the Cooling Tower Drift'
]
t Program based on results of the 1989 analysis without revising,the EPP.
e I
i t
r l
5 AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3-5 a
...,,_.,,,.,.,..r.v-,,_,.y.my,-..,,w.we,,,.y,__[.
ge,'....,,.
s
,,,.,w%,y..
..%,._-.wm w.,,.,n v....,,,..,,.-,-..,w.
-u..,..y v
wy.,.,,,_vy,,.. -
llowever, the NRC recommended that the EPp be revised to reflect deletion of this seguirement.
Therefore, a formal request to discontinue the Cooling Tower Drif t Program was submitted to the NRC (GNRO-92/00017) in February, 1992.
A statistical analysis for 1991 data shown in Table 3-6 has not been performed pending outcome of the termination. proposal.
Rainfall data collected at each sampling site is provided-as Table 3-7.
3.10 METEOROLOGICAL DAIA Heteorological data for the 1991 reporting peciod was included in the -
Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports submitted to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Data contained in these reports is summarized-in the following tables:
o Joint Frequency Distribution, 30 Motor Level (Table 3-8) o Joint Frequency Distribution. 10 Heter. Level (Table 3-9) o Percent Bad Data Report (Table 3-10).
Table 3-11 shown-the percent meteorological data recovery since 1986.
This table indicates the meteorological system is performing satisfactorily, as well as providing consistent data.
3.11 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATIONS Dur4ng 1991, no-unreviewed environmental questions were found.
Environmental evaluations reviewed by Nuclear Support personnel-were routine matter, within the scope of expected activities. No environmental consequences have been observed as a result-of conduct of the activities evaluated.-
i
-AEOR.RpT/SRREVFLR-3-6 l-
.___._._,_...-u-.
m.
P I
TABLE 3-1 1991 TSS ANALYSIS RESULTS1 l
SEDIMENTATION B.ASINS A & B t
Sedimentation Sedimentation Basin A Basin B
__ Collection _
(Outfall 013)
(Outfall 014)
{
_JAN (2) 27.8
_ TEB 39.4 13.0 i
[
-48.7 15.1 i
_APR 12) 26.8 i
MAY (2) 21.2 i
[
JUN 51.5 33.0
_JUL 31.8 29.4 AUG 32.9 16.7
[
I
._SEP 79.0 16.0 OCT 15.6-9.5 NOV 15.0 4.4 8
i DEC 25329 10.8
_Learly Aysrane 63.6 18.6 t
' Analysis results exprested as mg/1, Data obtained from NPDES data sheets.
t
- Unabic to sample due to flooding.
- Value high due to heavy rainfall, low basin retention capacity and-j shortened retention time.
t 4
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3-7
_m TABLE 3-2 8
1991 REGIONAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA DATE ow-4 HW-liA. DX-22A oW-209A P-s ow-7 P-4 ow-69A ow-202 ow-5 ow-10 P-209 01-03-91 69.7 70.4 68.7 80.7 66.2 73.5 60.7 68.6 77.0 74.6 77.4 90.5 01-14-91 (2)
(2) 69.1 91.2 76.3 75.4 (2) 71.3 79.1 75.6 78.4 91.1 01-31-91 (2)
(2) 73 1 91.4 77.0 77.0 (2) 73.2 80.2 76.3 79.0 91.2 02-14-91 75.0 74.1 74.6 92.1 77.5 78.2 62.5 74.0 79.7 77.2 80.2 91.2 02 27-91 75.2 75.2 75.1 92.0 78.1 78.7 63.6 74.8 79.8 77.7 80.4 91.8 03-14-91 75.7 76.5 75.9 91.9 77.8 78.7 64.6 73.1 79.9 77.4 80.9 91.5 03-29-91 75.8 75.7 74.1 91.4 79.0 79.4 64.0 75.3 80.1 78.8 81.5 91.7 04-11-91 76.2 76.6 74.0 92.2 79.1 80.2 65.1 76.2 80.4 78.7 81.3 92.0 04-26-91 77.3 78.3 77.7 92.4 80.2 81.6 66.4 77.8 81.4 80.1 82.0 92.1 05-10-91 (2)
(2) 78.8 91.9 80.9 82.6 (2) 78.5 82.6 80.6 82.5 92.0 05-22'91 (2)
(2) 79.2 92.7 81.3 82.5 (2) 78.6 81.8 81.1 82.9 92.4 06-07-91 77.2 78.2 78.2 92.7 81.1 82.6 66.8 77.5 81.4 81.0 83.0 92.3 06-19-91 77.6 76.5 77.2 92.9 81.0 82.1 65.8 73.5 81.0 80.5 83.2 92.8 07-01-91 76.0 75.2 75.8 93.2 80.5 81.4 65.1 75.0 80.2 80.2 83.0 93.0 07-17-91 74.1 74.3 74.8 93.2 80.6 80.6 65.0 73.7 79.9 78.6 79.8 92.6 08-02-91 74.0 73.2 73.7 93.4 79.6 79.3 62.7 72.3 80.1 79.0 82.6 93.3 08-15-91 73.5 72.7 70.6 93.4 79.5 78.6 62.9 69.8 78.9 79.0 82.6 93.2 08-28-91 72.6 71.9 72.0 93.6 78.9 78.0 62.1 70.9 78.9 78.2 82.0 93.4 09-12-91 72.4 71.5 70.9 92.9 77.9 77.3 61.3 70.6 78.5 77.8 81.5 93.0 09-26-91 71.7 71.0 69.5 93.3 77.9 76.6 60.7 70.0 78.3 77.4 81.3 93.3 10-11-91 71.2 70.5 69.9 93.5 77.8 76.1 59.9 69.1 77.9 77.2 80.9 93.4 (1) Water level expressed at Mean S<
Level (HSL)
(2) No reading due to river flooding l
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3-8 l
TABLE 3-3 1991 REGIONAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING
SUMMARY
S
_WELL NO.
YEAR FORMAT 10N' MIN 8 MONTil MAX 8 MONTil AVERAGE OW4 1991 A
69.7 JAN 77.6 JUN 74.4
_DW4A 1991 A
70.4 JAN 78.3 APR 74.2 OW29A 1991 T
68.7 JAN 79.2 MAY 73.9
_Qh'203 A 1991 T
80.7 JAN 93.6 AUG 92.0 P5 1991 C
66.2 JAN 81.3 MAY 78.5 OW7 1991 T
73.5 OCT 82.6 MAY 79.1 j
P4 1991 C
59.9 OCT 66.8 JUN 63.5 OW69A 1991 A
68.6 JAN 78.6 MAY
.73.5
_0W202 1991 T
77.0 JAN 82.6 MAY 79.9
.0W5 1991 T
74.6 JAN 81.1 MAY 78.4 OW10 1991 C
77.4 JAN 83.2 JUN 81.3
_E209 1991 C
90.5 JAN 93.4 AUG. OCT 92.3 A = Alluvium; C = Catahoula; T = Terrace Deposits i
^
Water Level Elevation (Feet above HSL) 8 Average Elevation for Non-Dry Readings (Feet above MSL) i 1
8 r
L AEOR.R'r/SRREVFLR-3-9 P
+
y-ry yw----
y w
-w-
-wv.,,,v,,w-v-s,--yw
.-=
GO.
CO 9%
t%
N.
O.
st m
~1 M
O.
O to e
e e
e i
t%
ts tw 9%
c0 tm tw c0 in O
O O
O O.
O O
O O
O O
O O
e-e c4 M
en e
e4 w<
eA e4 e4 e-e em tw so.
to.
M.
N.
M.
4 O
cc to.
O.
M.
tw e
e e
4 tw to to
-t 0%
c0 tw tw 5
tw 1E O
O O
m o
O Ch O
O O
O O
Q cA e4 eg e1 eg e-o en c1 M
e4 N.
H N.
N.
(q ed m.
M.
to.
e to tw tw 4
CO cc tw ts
- E O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O Q
eA M
M cA em cA H
M H
eA e4 cA N.
CO M.
o.
M N.
N t%
N.
N.
M tr, e
e e
i N
N fq M
4 st 4
t'l (q
fq M
M
- s O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O Q
en eA e4 eA eA H
e4 rA en e4 e4 e4 Ch.
4 (C.
4 M.
(9 0
m.
M.
e4 4
4 e*
N N
N
-1 st 4
4 eq (q
M eq O
O O
O O
O.
O O
O O
O O
Q vn cA c=e cA e4 r-cA e4 rA H
e4 eA m.
eq tw N
O.
Ch.
N (q
m O
n e
e e
e e
e e
e4 N
N N
=$
st to (9
M M
M N
e.
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
<C D
e<
en es e4 cA en M
em cA e<
en ed b<A tw e4 N.
O M.
N.
M M
co.
co.
M.
N e
e e
bD e
O e-4 M
(q
=$
a4 N
N ed e4 tr O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O M
Q en en e<
e<
ee e<
en eo ee e<
en em N
t e4 to.
ao.
M.
M.
m.
tw f*
M.
(q M
e so m
m Ch o
O O
Ch m
m m
m O
- s m
Ch Ch Ch O
o O
m Ch m
m m
E Q
e4 c4 e4 4
e tw et to.
to.
M.
o.
o.
em t~
M.
ten ts W ' *C
- 1 (C
Ch Ch Ch D
O O
O O
m Ch Ch m
Ch m
Ch o
O O
O O
Ch m
m Q
h*
e4 e4 e4 cA e4 54
- C(*
t%
M.
Ch.
Ch m.
N.
cc.
N.
e4 g
w e
to N
N co cc tw N
is O
O O
O O.
O O
O O
O O
O C
E e4 cm e4 e4 c-e-4 eg e-o cA e4 cA
.1 i
1 J
tw M.
b.
M.
N.
N.
O.
CO.
O.
O tw tri e
i N
M M
(9 to to to to t
t
=t 4
m
- E O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O A
.E em e4 M
v4 e-e M
em M
M e4
.M em to M
Ch E
v 0%
b Ch.
to.
to.
CO.
O.
to.
N.
N Ch rw cH
-t e
e e
e.g a
st
- t to to to to to to
- E O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O E
M M
M M
M M
M M
H M
M N
O.
N.
H.
4 O.
t%
e4 to.
4 N.
N.
to en e
O e
N N
(q (q
4 4
-t M
(9 fq M
M M
'3 O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O E
em em e4 e4 et em e4 eM e4 e4 cA e4 C$
ed (C
M.
M M.
O.
st.
M.
(q e4 ed
-E O.
Ch.
N e
e I
e4 N
N N
t st t
M to M
M N
4J O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
10 cm E
cA cA
.H eA es M
e-e eA cA em M
cA e
M CO.
m.
to ee Ch 4
Ch m.
tw (q
(q t
el e
e e
e w
1 O
O O
N st
+4 N
e4
- H e4
. e4 e4 En lE O
O O
O O
O-O O
O O
O O
y E
c1 ed e4 c4 M
e4 eg H
e4 e4 eg H
44 4
ee e4 e<
e4 en e4 e4 ed eg ca H
s Ch Ch Ch Ch Ch Ch Ch 0%
Ch Ch 0%
8 I
i 1
4 I
I e
I e
i 1
tw b
(q to 4
CO Ch 00 is N
co c4
- CO N
O O
O O
N e4 H
N ed H
N H
W 14 H
e i
e a
a e
t 4
e e
I e
4 WC N
M st 4A f%
CO 0%
O eM N
O N-O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
H cA H
A N
3:
44 O
f; G
N
/
A
.O W
ke
>s A
e*
60 4
4J 0
M
- C C
(C to O.
to D
-D D
4)
O O
e cd E
h fa.
E
- C E
h h
- C to O
it.
A
- E y
TABL2 3-5 1991 PRECIPITATION MEASUREMENT GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATIQH OBSERVED AT SITE' MONTil IRCllES
_)ANUARY 7.48
_ELhRUARY s.34 MARCil 8.10
_AERIL 17.20-MAY 4.71 JUNE 1284 JULY 1.67 AUGUST 2.27 SEPTEMBER 2.58 OCTOBER 1.16 NOVEMBER 5.25 DECEMBER 6.12 TOTAL 66.72 (1) Rainfall measured adjacerit to the GGNS Meteorological System l --
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3-11
TABl.E 3-6 Page 1 of 5 SALT DEPOSITION (1991)
SDCall CALCIUI (u/s n.)
IIDili 32891 62891 92691 1392 SDS!
141.60 40(,13
!!9.37 571.43 SDSll 141.90 476.83 287.30 634.76 SDS2 ft.!!
167.91 65.08 272.88 SDS21 77.30 153.33 76.51 203.49 SDS23 71.27 117.13 70.63 150.00 5053 (1.13 110.16 f.' 37 61.13 SDSt 62.38 15!.13
$5.56 106.98 SDS5 70.00 311.43 81.92 167.30 SDS$1 15.03 235.71 85.71 167.30 SDS53 (5.03 212.!(
116.67
!!(.92 SDS6
!!3.02
!!).40 84.13 158.(1 SDS6A 107.16 210.59 71.60 86.98 SDST 32.22 159.05 15.56 (6.03 SDS9 70.32 398.(1 84.13 141.43 SDC191 CHLORIDI (n /a n.)
?!!!DD IID15G 32391 6-2391 9-2691 13-92 SDSl
-310,00 8(3.33 320.79 161.90 SDS11
-316.03 123.73 166.83
!!3.17 SDS2 63.33
-856.67 30.16 131.75 SDSIA 196.67 897.91 52.06
!!2.10 SDS2B
-55.56 318.(1 '
156.67 135.56 5033 16.03 1016.03 50.16 67.30 SDSI 164.92 819.21 22.38 86.51 SDS5 38.25 790.00.
20.00 137.78 SDS51
-12.56 858.(1 34.29 125.71 SDS$3 87.30 393,17 30.(8 119.3(
SDS6
-1052.70
-819.!!
24.((
133.02 SDS6A 956,19 f$7.16
!(.((
f5.31 SDST-150.63 273.17 54.44 137.75 SDS9 507.78
-807.14 21.11 106.35 1
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3-12
TABl.E 3-6 Page 2 of 5 SALT DEPOSITION (1991)
SDio391 liftift(st, sit.)
Fil!0D IIDl!G 32891 62891 92691 1-392 SDS!
225.10 164.29 0.16 106.18 SDS11 225.40 815.08 2,25 61.75 SDS!
186.51 1112.06 85.61 22.54 SDS!A 317.94 538.89 3.97 22.54 SPS2B 267.30 1027.11 122.22 179.52 i:53 198.41
!!8.25 163.97 135.25 SDS4 300.79 630.95 167.62 194.44 SDS5 300.79 972.!!
155.71
-164.29 SDS$1 351.79 678.51
!!3.17 200.48 SDS5B 283.!?
565.21 158.73 207.14 SDS6 255.08 696,98 71.59 118.25 SDS6A 291.59 C94.((
109.68 169.66 SDS7 305.56 796.03 266.83 176.35 SDS9 233.!9 536.35 30.32 113.51 l
SDFo491 fl0Sfilf!(sg/sst.)
FI!!0D IIDllG 3 28 91 62391 92f91 1392
~
SDS!
16.98 39.52 3.02 16.33 SDS11 14.29 216.03 3.02 16,83 SDS!
21.90 94.13 3.91 16.53 SDS!!
22.86 31.90 3.97 16.83 SDS2B 22.36 112.56 4.44 17.!(
SCS3 12.33 21.43 3.97 15.87 SDS(
43.31 73.81 3.02 16.83 SDS5 13.33 36.67 3.0!
16.83 3.02 16.53 SDS51 13.33 38.57_
SDS;B 13.33 115.21 -
51.27 16.19-SDS6 14.29
!!9.05 3.97 15.87 SD561 329.51 151.27 3.97 15.37 i
SDS7 12.38 17.62 25.40 10.16 SDS9 15.21 73.97 2.22 14.92 AEOR.RPT/SRSEVFLR-3-13
.=
TABLE 3-6 Page 3 of 5 SALT DEPOSITION (1991)
SDEgli
!!GIIS105(s/ssq.)
fill 0D IIDlIG 32391 61891 92611 1391 SISI
" 5.08 89.!(
53.02 6(.16 SDSil (9.68 108.25 58.57 73.81 SD32 22.22 (1.27
!!.90 16.51 SDS2A 19.05 39.05 23.51 19.52 SD323 19.05 39.84 20.63 11.29 5053 12.70 26.83 20.00
!!.70 SDSI 13.65 (3.49 11.30 13.49 SDS$
11.11 (4.60 18.89 16.51 SDS5A 13.65 (6.83 16.51 13.(9 SDS5B 23.0!
39.84 18.25 13.49 SD36
!!.70 50.16 19.05 12.70 SDS63 28.57 (f.94 19.05 12.10 SDST 17.16 39.05 20.48 f.9(
SDS9
!(.13 57.18 29.21
!!.90 SDR91 50DIUI(ag/ meg.)
f!!!0D IIDilG 3-2391 628-91 9!$71 13f2 l
SD$l 18.51 251.30 (1.43 196.19 SDSil
-140.00
!83.65 50.95 356.03 SDS2 88.10
!!6.19 52.22 323.89 SDS21 165.87 181.l(
39.84 172.06 SDS2B 61.11
!!!.86 38.10 207.30 SCS3
-174.60
-384.76 56.98 103.10 SDSI 190.95 255.40 (9.37 150.95 SD35 122.33
-!!6.89 55.71 169.05 55.71 160.00 SDS51 178.25
!!6.35 ~
17.78 196.35 SDS!B 16.67 291.90 SDS6 212.36 106.83 (9.37 133.81 SDS6A
!(0.63
-243.33 (2.70
!!5.24 SDS1 20.63
-82.38
!!8.89 161.43 l
SDS9 107.78
-!(5.56 59.68 123.02 l
l l
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3-14
t TABLE 3-6 SALT M?051fl01 (1991)
PAGI40F5 SD$oll!
SUtiitt(ag/ sit.)
l
!!!!0D llDlIG 32891 62891 12691 1392 l
SDS1 513.65 1991.43 425.58 360.48 l
SDSil 486.61
!!02.54 154.92 381.59 SDS!
469.84 939.05 168.25 34!.!$
SDS!!
$51.75 831.11 336.83 342.38 SDS!B 530.16 913.65 193.65 355.24 5053 318.73 410.48
!$4'.44 232.06 SDSI 507.30 126.35 285.08 309.!!
SD$5 481.90
!!45.40 176.35 324.29 SDS$1 597.30
-911,18 286.83 327.30 SDS5B.
474.60 1D66.03 315.08 313.65 SDS6 486.61 916.13 239.68
!$2.06 SDS6A
$46.98 1921.59
'!54.92 166.35 SDST 417.78 1113.97 126.35 370.16 SDS9 459.68 154.92 332.10 334.29 SDfDS91 70fiL DIS $0LTD SOLIDS (ag/s sg.)
Pill 0D IDllG 32891 6-2891 32691
-1392 SDS!
507,34 813.t!
1460.!!
3063.49 SDS!!
31.15
.193.65 1898.41 3666.61
__14.21 952.38 1
SDS!
2825.40 396.83 SDS21 3047.62 333.33 809.52 1851.14 SDS!B 1693.41 '
285.71 1888.89 5053
-2492.06
-1428.57 1900.00 31,75-SDSI
- i m :
4365.08 1142.86 47.6!
SDS5 1333.33 634.92.
507.94
'650.19
~
SDS$1 2349.!!
511.43 666.67 650.19 SDS5B
-698.41 3984,13-603.17 349!!
SD56
-!!90.48 3952.38 236.10 2317.46 2 SDS61
-!!!6.98
!!63.84 333.33 1746.03-SDST
-1777.18.
114.29 1666.67 888.89 SDS9
!!!9.84 851.14 746.03 15.81 L
A" " A Data Not Available AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3-15
- .=
..== :. x..-= - J :a
=-.
TABIE 3-6 Page 5 of 5 SALT DEPOSITION (1991)
SDiell
!!0X (ss/s n.)
fit!0D IIDilG 32391 62891 92691 1392 SDSI 14.50 33.33 12.70 25.56 SDS11 25.40 32.54 33.33 19.52 SIS 2 18.25 23.57 6.98 16.51 SDS!A 19.05 26.98 6.98 13.49
!DS!!
19.05 27.78 3.17 14.29 SCS3 10.32 18.25 7.94
!!.70 SDS4 11.!!
30.16 5.56 16.51 SDS5 11.11 30.95 10.32 13.49 SDS$1 13.11 32.54 11.11 16.51 SDS53 11.11 52.54 11.90 13.49 SDS6 11.90 56.83 16.51
!!.70 SDSIA 19.52 33.33 14.60 15.56 SDS7 10.32 78.41 6.98 7.94 SDS9 15.56 80.63 19.C5 28.10 SDT91 fi,0DilDI IIII00 110116 32391 62891 91691 1-392 SDSl 96.51 5.71 65.71 4T'2T SDSIA 158.57 1.43 30.00 53.33 SDS!
204.13
-2.22 16.35 119.68 SDS2A 183.97 2.54 28.73 44.29 SD323
!!4.13 28.41 68.25 33.81 5053 109.68 4.29 '
18.25 61.75 SDS4
!!$.10
-1.90 13.33 62.38 SIS 5 143.33
-1.*5 10.16 77.46 SDS51 133.25 1.43.
!!.54 53.33 SDS5B 96.67 6.51 f.!!
111.90 SDS6 30.32 0.95 13.49 38.!9 SDS!A 142.70 1.27 25.87 56.03 SDS7 135.87 1.59 -
12.54 32.22 SDSS 160.16 2.38 6.19 63.49 AEOR RPT/SRREVFLR-3-16 L-
TABLE 3-7 1991 SALT DEPOSITION RAINFALL DATA FIRST QUARTER Station No.
Date_
inchen SDS #1 03-28-91 14.30 SDS #2 03-28-91 12.20 SDS #3 03-28-91 17.$0 SDS #4 03-28-91 15.00 SDS #
03-29-91 14.10-SDS #6 03-28-91 13.20 SDS #7 03-28-91 13.10 SDS #9 03-28-91 13.05 i
~
r 1991 SALT DEPOSITlQH EAIHEALL DATA SECOND QUARTER Station No.
Date Inches
[
SDS #1 06-28-91 35.30 SDS #2 06-28-91 32,*i0 SDS #3 06-28-91
$4.20 SDS #4 06-28-91
- 32. 5.*
f SDS #5 06-28-91 33.30 SDS #6 06-28-91 17.33*
FDS #7 06-28-91 26.35 i
SDS #9 06-28-91 26.55 F
-*0nly partial data available.
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3-17
= -.... -. a.... -..
.. -. ~
.. _. -. -. -. _ =.. ~...
- -. ~ - -.
l l
TABI.E 3-7 12213 ALT DEPOSIT 10E
]{MNFALL DATA TilIRD QUARTER Station Nm
.Dato.
Inchga SDS #1 09-26-91 7.15 SDS #2 09-26-91 7.70 SDS #3 09-26-91 8.55 r
SDS #4 09-26-91 8.65 SDS #5 09-26-91 8.25 SDS #6 09-20-91 6.50 SDS #7 09-26-91 10.70 l
SDS #9 09-26-91 7.75 1991 SALT DEPOSITION RAINFALL DATA FOURTil QUARTER S.tation No.
Date Inghag 53S #1 01-03-92 12.20 SDS #2 01-03-92 12.60 SDS #3 01-03-92 11.65-SDS #4 01-03-92 12.95 SDS #5 01-03-92 12.75 SDS #6 01-03-92 8.05 SDS #7 01-03-92 11.05 SDS #9 01-03-92 11.40 AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3 j
TABLE 3-8 1991 JOINT FREOUENCY DISTRIBUTION:
TOTAL FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION PERIOD OF RECORD:
1/1/91, 000 -- 12/31/91, 2300 WIND SPEED (H/S) AT 50-H LEVEL TCTAL FREQUENCY DISTRUBUTION PERIOD OF RECORD:
1/ 1/91r 000 -- 1/ 1/92r 000 WIND SPEED (M/S) AT 50-M LEVEL 18 AVG C-1 3-5 6-9 9-11 12-14 15-17 AND UP TOTAL SPEED _'
a 2.7 2.6
.1
.0
.0
. 0~
.0 5.5
.2 NNE 2.6 1.7
.1
.0
.0
.0
.0 4.4
.1 NE 2.3 1.?
.1
.0
.0
.0
.0 4.9
.2 E.N d 2.7 2.6
.2-
.0
.0
.0
.0 5.4
.2 0 1 2.3 4.4
.3
.0
.0
.0
.0 7.6
.3 I in 4.6 6.3
.2
.0
.0
.0
.0 11.3 4
A di 4.2 4.7
.3
.0
.0
.0
.0 10.0 4
d I 552 3.4 3.1
.9
.0
.C
.0
.0 7.5
.3 Ic3 3.4 2.1
.5
.0
.c
.0
.0 6.0
.2 N T 33*
3.6 1.5 4
.0
.0
.0
.0 5.6
.2 oI 3h 3.4 1.!
.3
.0
.0
.0
.0 5.3
.1 0.ss 2.6 2
.2
.0
.G
.0
.0 3. '.
.1 aw 2.5-9
.1
.0
.0
.0
.0 3.5
.1 WN.
2.3 1.3
.2
.0
.0
.0
.0 4.3
.1 N.
2.s 2.5
.5
.0
.0
.0
.0 6.0
.2 Nrrn 3.7 3.3
.3
.0
.0
.0
.0 7.3
.3 CAL.1 0.7 7
TOTAL 51. 6 42.6 5.4
.2
.0
.0
.1 100.0
.2
- 73. HOURO SF 9AD CR MISSING DATA OR
.9 PEAC3HT FOR
$760 HOUS S i
Met Data obtained from Semiannual Radiological Effluent Re. lease Report.
l L
r AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3-19
TABLE 3-9 1991 JOINT FREOUENCY DISTRIBl!IIEL TOTAL FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION PERIOD OF RECORD:
1/1/91, 000 -- 12/31/91, 2300 WIND SPEED (li/S) AT 10-H LEVEL l
TOTAL FREQUENCY DI.STRUBUTION PERIOD OF RECORD:
1/ 1/91, 000 - 1/ 1/ 92e 000 WIND $ PEED (M/S) AT 10-M LEVEL 18 AVG 0-2 3-5 6-6 9-11 1 2-14 15-17 AND UP TOTAL S PE ES N
5.5
.5
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0 6.1
.1 Nhi c.1
.2
.]
.0
.0
.0
.0 6.3
.f NI 3.0
.2
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0 8.3
.1 Ihi o.!
.1
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0 6.6
.1 4.5
.1
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0 4.5
.1 0 2 I i:5 4.1
.1
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0-4.2
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0 4.7
.1 A 5E 4.2 e i 352 f.2
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0 6.0
.1 1C $
4.?
1.!
.J
.0
.0 n0
.0 6.3
.1 N T 3I4 4.$
.6
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0 5.2
.1 0 I 3 '.
2.2 4
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0 3.6
.1 0 dia 3.2 4
.5
.0
.0
.0
.0 3.6
.1 2.2
.1
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0 3.0
.0 N
- WNa 3.2
.2
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0 3.2
.0 Nw 4.3 4
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0 4.3
.1 NWa 5.9 1.2 1
.0
.0
.0
.0 7.2
.1 CALM 3.7 15.3 TM AL 72.2 7.5
.4
.C
.0.
.0
.0 100.0
.1
- 52. HCURS OF SAD CR MISSING DATA.OR
.9 -P ERCINT FOR 3760 HO UR S a Het Data obtained from Semiannual Radiological Effluent Release Report.
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR 20
. ~... ~. ~.., -,
TABIiE.3-10
-1991 PERCENT BAD DATA-WEPORT -
PERCENT BAD DATA REPORT-REPORT COVERS 8760--Il0URE-PERIOD OF RECORD:
1/1/91, 000 - :-12/31/91, 2300 r
i
-:r 1
PERCENT EAD DATA REPORT-
+
REP;AT CCVERS 8760 HOURS HOURS PERCENT SOM DIRECTIch
.2 s '.
.'30 '
50.1 WIND-EPEE 0 27.
. 31 -
10M DIRECTION.
- 31. -
.-3 5 t
10.9 ~ WIND SP153 30.
,34 TEMPE3ATURI S.-
.09 j
.0EW POINT-46 !.
5.31 i
'0 ELTA-T-5?..
.67 i
PRECIPITATION 41
. 50 i
l r
I
.!.j r Met Data obtained'from Semiannual Radiological Effluent Release Report.
,a
-I
- j. -
i A
AEOR.XPT/SEREVFLR-3 _.J..,,
.....-m..
.. _,.. _ _. ~.. _. _. _ _. _. _....
TABII 3-11 METE 0EOLOC7 CAL DATA RECOVERYg 1986 %
~ 1987 %
1988 %
1989 %
1990 5 1991 7,
_fARAMETER RECOVERY RECOVERY RECOVE R_REQDyERY RECOVERY RECOVERY S0 Meter WD 99.90 100 99.27 98.98 100 99.70 50 Meter WS 99.38 100 98.0 98.90 100 99.69
_j0 Meter WD 99.90 100 99.26 98.85 99.77 99.65 10 Meter WS 99.38 100 98.14 98.72 100 99.66
._Tspne ratu re 99.85 100 98.67 97.59 199_.
99.91 Dew Point 89.20 99.28 87.92 92.74 98.0 94.69 Delta T 98,05 99.82 99.03 97.10 100 99.33 Prec1p.2tation 99.74 99.69
_19,35 99.18 100 99.50
)
Het Data obtained from Semiannual Radiological Effluent Release Report.
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3-22
TABLE 3-12 1991 ENVIRONMENTALEVALUATION
SUMMARY
Identifying Number Dea f ip,ilpn 009/91 Replacement of Betz 3641A % PSW with 12% Na0C1 014/91 Addition of hydrogen peroxide to the circulating water system to clean the fill medium I
E e
P
+
4 l
l
,f r
r I
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3-23
i i
FIGURE 3-1 SEDIMENT BASINS A & B t
1985-1991 TSS RESULTS r
i SEDIMENT BASINS A & B RANGE OF TSS RESULTS I
i FOR 1985 - 1991 i
I i
mg/l 0
100 200 300 400 l
i l
BASIN A (23.7 - 63.6 ANNUAL AVERAGE REStA.TS)
.y 4
1 4
BASIN B (16.2 - 50.8 ANNUAL AVERAGE RESULTS)
I t
[
g g
4 j
BASIN 8 (1.0 - 211.0 INDIVIDUAL RESULTS) 1
)
i i
1 l
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-3-24 1
-r.-,-.
~. -
=..
FIGURE 3-2 Page 1 of 6 REGIONAL WFT.T. HYDROGRAPHS REGIONAL WEll OW-4l FOR 1991 3
n ust l
l * -2.3 ft MSL WELL BOTTOW too NOTE : NO 1-14,1-31, 5-10 AND 5-22 DATA DUE TO FLOODING.
)
- S-3 2 - 14 2-27 s - 14 3-29 4-11 4-2s 6-7 6 - 19 7-1 7 - 17 e-2 e-15 s-2s 9 - 12 s-2s 10-15 REGIONAL WELL OW-4A FOR 1991 ft us.
120 l * -1.7 ft MSL WELL BOTTOM 100 NCTE NO 14,1-31, 5-10 AND 5-22 DATA DUE TO FLOODING.
l
.1-3 2 - 14 ' 2 "t7 3 - 14 3-29 4-11 4-26 6-7 6-19 7-1 7 - 17 8-2 8-15 8-28 9 - 12 9-26 10- 11 AEOR.RPT/SEREVFLR-3-25
~A m
Lea,A, a
w s.
5 4 2
A
=
5 N
N N
2
\\N :e c
e i
N I
i 4
- 4 3
m 4
A
~
s b-
\\
N 2
a
. n a
_ n a
o A
4 gn g
e 5
e 5
e cea Y'
A g"
=
8 a
2 x-E e
4 8
4-
~
S W
A 4
- 9 9
N N
\\
A A
I G.
. 9.
,3 n
g, n
g.
=
N s
9 8
,=
NNs N
N
- 1 7
g 4-m 4
s u
a O
b N
N
{
n g
4 W-4 Eh dh A
8 8
i e
g 8
A E
2 e
W 2
8 4
2
=
4
=
g 3
d
[
- {
s a
n N
NN 4
N%
v Ns
, N,
.,1 r
W a
i t
9 3
8 W
r
4 M
$9
'9l l
'9l x' x i
s S
e
. ]
b
{
" d T
D h
Ib s
a g
s T
8
- I i
a
-~
a.
e g
s E
'l f
j\\ jli l
Nr e
4 E
a J
A A
n 3
N n
~
pf g.
l-
,8 g
a s
e a
gg a
s e
a,=~
ij
=~
=
t t
9 s
e s
e
_a J
d.an.y-g O
s 4
4 g
n v
4
- 4 I
\\
~
'N
\\ z!
I
-i r
N 2 s
7 I
It g
8-e 2
NE
}
lE h
-b db S'
d cas s
=
8
\\xN x1
\\ !
'N !
\\ i M.. i
. Ai xR b
d<
e 4
a A
~
w E
..&4 A
w 2m A
A
,4 e
2 Ni nI 5
%gxl 5, \\ !
o.
e h
\\
\\
_ h i
.h!
.a w t
m.-
. eae 5
E 2
y
'i
?
-c
I L
r
+
/
W W
O O
T T
T T
O O
B B
i L
l L
E E
W W
L L
S S
M M
tf tf 5
5 2
0 9
9 1
. 1 9
9 N'
'N A
A J
J S
N N
H O
O P
I l3 T
I ll T
A 1
A 2
A RG f1 V
8 O
9 E
- 1 VE L9 L
9 L
X L1 E
i 9 E
3 f
w E
l1 S
E S
o W-S W-I I
3 H
S 1
G A
E T..
N B
G A
9 9
N B
R e
T I
8 I
8 G
g F
R9 N
R9 N
0 a
W O1 I
O1 G
F'.
I R S
T IG P
T R
S
)
I N O E
T E
N O E
O F D
D O F H
M L
M L
CR S
S E
W 0
M 0
P 9
t 9
t f
f
, N' N
9 A
9 A
0 J
0 J
1 1
1 3
3
-R 9
9 L
'8 8
F N
N' V
0 5
0 5
A 0
5 0
5 A
E 2
1 1
0
.J 2
1 1
0
.J R
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
RS
/
TP R.
R O
[
l e
i
/
M M
O O
T T
T T
O O
B B
L L
L L
E E
W W
L L
S S
M M
p t
t f
f
/
6 4
9 29 l
1 1
9 9
N' N
A A
N J
N J
IO O
I T
T A
A V
V S
E E
L L
!!P E
E A
S IS R
I
. G 9
S 9
S 8
O A
A 3
K B
B f
U N
N 3
o Y
G G
H I
S E
2 9
S 9
I R
T..
8 E
8 E
9 D
9 D
U e
T G
g F
L L
I a
W F
P R
S S
O M
M liF t
F t
/
f f
HC 9
R 0
0 9
. 0 0
1 9
E 1
9 P
N
. N A
A J
. J 2
3 3
9 9
8 8
R N'
N F
L 5
0 5
A 0
0 A
V 2
1 1
0 2
1
.J J
1 1
E 1
1 1
1 e
RR S
/TP R.
I
/
W W
O O
T T
T T
O O
B B
L L
L L
E E
W W
L L
S S
M M
t t
f f
4 6
6 6
9 9
1 1
9 9
N' N'
A A
J
. J S
H N
N A
I l
P O
O T
T I
R A
A G
9 V
9 V
8 O
E E
3 k
L L
f u
E E
3 o
Y S
1 S
1 I
I E
3 9
S 9
S R
L 8
A A
U e
L 9
B 9
B G
g E
1 1
I a
W N
N G
F P
R R
G I
u S
O SI E
F E
F E
H D
D U
R LS 0
L E
S 0
P M
9 W
9 N'
'N t
t f
A f
A J
J 9
9 0
0 1
1 3
3 3
98 9
R w5 8
L N'
F 0
N' V
A 5
0 A
E 1
1 J
2 1
1 1
1 J
R 1
1 1
RS
/TP R.
i I
c:
fk
!i.:!
s i
l:t
?3 7
e ?
i
/.
W
/
O TTO D
L.
D W
LSM tf 48 1
9
'N A
J SHP ll N
AR 7
O I
G
- 1 T
9 A
8
)C 3
M L9 V
f D
L1 E
E L
3 o
1 E
n W-E 4
G 9 S
S I
R T.
U e
T I
8 A
N G
g F R9 B
I a
W O1 F
P i
I R
GN T
i I
v N O S
/
M O F E
U M
D RE L
/ 0 P
S 9
W
. N' t
A f
J 90 1
/
4 3
/
3 9
R 7/
L 8
L S
'N F
M0 0
0 A
V 2
1 0
J E
t f
1 1
R 1
RS
/TP R.
i
- l;
- r L
4
- :b 1
- ?:
j ;
4 l
I i
W
/
M O
O T
T T
T O
O B
B L
L L
LE E
W W
L L
S S
M M
t t
f f
3 5
t 1
0 8
9 1
1 9
9
'N N
A A
J J
S N
N H
O O
I P
I T
A 1
T 2
A A
R
- 1 V
- 1 V
G 9
E 9
E 8
O L 9 L
L 9 L
3 R
L1 E
L1 E
f D
E E
3 o
Y W-S W-S I
H IS S
E 5
G G
9 A
9 A
R T.
N 8 B
N 3 B
U e
T I
G g
R
!R9 N
E1 G
R9 N
I a
W E1 G
T IS F
P T
I AR D
AR S
/
WO E
WO E
E EF D
EF D
D L
L D
L S
E S
0 M
0 I
I W
9 9
F t
M N
f N
A A
9 J
9 J
0 0
1 1
j 53 3
9 9
R L
L 8
L 8
F S
N S
N' V
M 0
0 A
M 5
0 5
A E
1 0
eJ 0
J R
1 1
t t
1 1
1 1
1 f
f RS
/TP R.
ROEA j
]
4 b
d N
d 2
2 C
L C
1 g
\\
~
I k
. k 8
~
-i c i
e i
2hl N
N a
m e
g K
Km 2
Z e.
z g<h h
g<hO R
7 h
E
~
o g
" "e g
-g o'
g o'
g g
o 1
o me 4
e 4
N
'N'N
's
'N M
L i'
. ' 8 E 52 8 8 8 8.5
'n 9
9 88 8d 6
f/3 -
a S<
,N'1s
! '1 d
i N
d 2
2 C
C
?
\\
?
b j
j k
5 2
d d
d R-E E
d 5 3l o
d b
?
s g g o
m o
h
[
i a
e se s
sa d
""m:
am 2
am
=
x 0
t O
=
\\\\\\
o o
NNN ;
~
NN 4
. 4
\\_
b,
. AN
, 1
'n 9
8 8
85 "R
9 8
8 85 b
e-e-
g v2 H
M 1
a O<
Aw a
9 S
1 l
1 N
d 2
2 C
C x-m
.v Z
Z b
mumme B
r 5
t-E 8
?in d
_ag d
m da d-m n
a m
A l
E G
W i E
~
o i
a a
s
=
o.
i e m d
- 8 5
- g 5
S 6 \\
$$5 5
N
~
<e o
o c
68 d
E o'
d W
=
. o o
o 2
w e
a e
.m 4
z k
s
~
h h.
l d
e-g m
h a
?a
01 w
s!
N.
\\\\
@o g
o o
o o-
FIGURE 3-5 RAINFALL DATA FOR 1991
. INCHES 80 60 l 1991 MONTit.Y CUMULATNE 40
_...... *n g.
g.
1985 -1991 WEAN WONTILY CUWULATNE 20 p.
g.O g.
g.*
g....
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
O
'JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC AEOR.RPT/SRREYFLR-3-40 L
i SECTION 4.0 ADMINISITATIVE REQUIREMENTS 1
l l
l i
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-4-1
. -. -.. -. ~. -
-4.1 EPP CHANGEh Thu GGNS Environmental Protection Plan (EPP)-had no changes during 1991 and was implemented as written.
Section 4.2.2 of-the EPP ' requiring the Cooling Tower Drif t Program will be' deleted pending approval by the NRC staff as discussed in Section 3.9 of this report.
The erosion control inspection monitoring -requirements wore discontinued in 1988.
4.2 EPP NONCDMPLIANCES There were no EPP noncompliances during 1991
.7nvironmental Surveillance Program personnel successfully conducted sampliag and surveillance activities
~
according to the EPP schedule without a -report abic dev1stion.
4.3 NONROUTINE REPORTS
-There were no nonroutine reporta in 2991.
4.4 POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT UNREVIEWED R VTRQSF WIAL'JSSUES There were no potentially significant unrev'fewed environmental issues encountered in 1991. Changes lu station design and op9tation, tests and:
i experiments, of which none resulted in an unre' viewed environmental question, were made in accordance with the EPP, paragraph 3.1,JPlant-Design'and-~
Operation.
Section 2.11 provides a discussion of how the EPP, paragraph 3 1, is-implemented.. Activities at GGNS during 1991 which were related to the EPP, paragraph [3.1, are discussed in Section 3.11 of this report. Completed-1991L f
-)
environmental evaluations are included-as Appendix Ill.
-r i
i i
?
~
'[
, AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-4-1
,,r__.
. m. -. _ _..,
f.4-APPENDIX I PERCHED GROUNDh'ATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS 4
l t
1 s
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-I-1
_~
b omosm mm lot m2D 00mmit um msmmt D171 5-1 5-2 5-3 5-4 5-5 5-6 5-7 W-1 2-2 54 W-4 W-5 W-6 N-7 N-8 01/07/91 100.6 101.8 102.0 IN.7 102.7 1)$.6 90.7 - 90.7 100.7 101.9 101.9.102.2 105.6 106.7 107.8
[
01/14/91 101.0 101.8 102.4 105.5 102.9 IN.1 - 99.1 N.0 101.11 101.9 101.0 102.6 ?1N.1 107.3 108.0 01/22/91 IN.5 102.9 102.8 105.1 103.0 106.7 99.2 99.1 100.8 101.1 - 101.(
102.7 106.0 E7 - 107.5 01/28/91 IN.7 102.2 102.7 105.1 103.1 106.7 99.1 99.1 -100.9 102.2 E3 102.6 106.6 107.7 - 107.3 02/07/91 100.8 102.3 102.7 1H.9 103.3 106.7 -99.1 99.1 101.1 - 102.3 0 101.8 1N.6 E8 107.8 -
02/13/91. 1N.7 -102.4 102.8 105.1 103.3 107.199.4 99.3 101.0 102.5 = 102.6 103.1 106.8 E 6 107.1 02/18/91 100.9 102.0102.9 1N.9 103.5 107.0 98.3 2.4 101.1 102.5 - E5 103.0 106.8 10 0 m -
02/27/91 IN.B 102.2 103.0 105.4 103.3 - 107.3 99.4 5.2 100.8-W 102.5 103.11 10 M E 2 -100.4 03/06/91 1M.9 102.3 103.2 105.6 103.7 "If.6 99.5 99.5 101.2 102.6. 102.6 103.3 E2 -E5 - E7 03/11/91 100.9 102.5 103.2 105.4 103.6 Itu 99.6 99.5 100.9 E7 E8 E3.107.3 100.3 El i
03/20/91 E2 102.3 103.1 IN.9.103.8 107.2 '
39.4 9.5 101.5 W :E7 L 102.8 E6_ llu E3 03/27/91 101.9 102.6 103.1 105.0 E 9 107.2 N.5 99.3 102.2 101.7 100 103.1 10 M W E 6 Ou03/91 102.8 101.3 103.1 A.5 103.7 107.3 N.5 99.5; 103.0 -101.7 102.8 10 U 107.1 II.3 E 7 62?/91 1H.1 1N.1 IN.4 106.5 105.3 IN.9 100.61N.6-1H.3 E2 LIN.4' E3_1N.6 100.2 E2 7
06/1(/91 101.9. IN.0 IN.0 IN.8 105.2 100.9 IN.6 IN.5 102.2: IN.0 IN.3 1N.2 E2 E3 E0 07/18/91 102.L IN.1 1H.1 IM.0 105.2 107.9 100.3 J N.3 161.3 L E 0 104.3. 194 1 E 2 N.0 10 U 08/29/91 101.9 103.1 _ 103.6 : 105.7 105.0 107.2 100.0 99.9 E3.E9 1N.0 103.7L 107.3. W!
09/18/91 101.9 103.3 103.5 105.5 1N.8 106.8 IN.0 99.7 101.81103.2 103.9 103.6-107.1 107.8 1N.4 i
10/02/91_ 102.2 103.5 103.7 105.8 IN.9 106.8 100.2 E0 102.1 IM.8 103.9? IN.1 107.3 15.1 ' 108.1 '
l
_101.7 103.3 103.4 105.2 1N.6 106.699.7 99.7; 101.8 = 103.6 103.6 103.2 - 106.9 ' 167.5: 106.1 i
10/17/91 11/22/91 101.3 103.0 103.2 106.2 IN.0 106.2 99.7 99.3 : 101.6 103.3 : 103.5, - 103.2 106.3 - E0.1871 12/18/91 101.3 102.9 103.2 105.9 IN.0 106.1-99.3 99.3 : 101.5 102.9 103.1 103.5 106.5 107.1 108.0 -
5 o
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-I-1
_j
a eu--
.J, a
a y
t P
APPENDIX II-THERMAL MONITORING
SUMMARY
h D
T n
6 e
h a
e r
b AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-II-i-
+
-y>,sh J
e GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION THERMAL MONITORING 1982 - 1991 i
l l'
I AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-II-1
n.
(
amnfARY
' Radiological & Environmental Services (R&ES)' pesannel established a program.to nonitor' Grand Gulf. Nuclear. Stat be s (GGN8) liquid affluent touperature according to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System-(NPDES).- The 2.8 *C temperature change; limit for water surrounding the mixing zone (Attachment.-I) was _not exceeded.
METHOD Nuclear Plant Engineering (NPE) personnel surveyed the river bank to mark 72 reference points 100 feet apart (66 downstream and six upstream of the bar.te slip, Attachment I).
R&ES personnel conducted monitoring once in. winter and once in summer when operating at 2, 25%, power.: They used calibrated digita1
~
thermometers to obtain temperatures at a -depth of five: feet - and at the surface.
At each reforence point, : measurements were - taken - 100. feet from the river bank, then at ten-feet intervals until' reachint the bank.
RACIEROUND Monitoring has been conducted 16 times, beginning in September 1982. :
I Four background measurements-were me.to before'GGNS;wan= operational; five were made during winter! operating conditions;.and'seven were made during summer operating' conditions.-
Survey referencu points that were monitored'_ for each summer and l winter period are shown.in Attachment'II.: Temperature,.riv3r and plants operating = data are summarized in Attachments III and IV.-
DischarteL temperature.-upriver. temperature and percent. power are shown graphically-in. Attachment V.
Ambient and:Outfall 0011teeperatures are shown in Attachment VI.
Miseissippi-River stages f are plotted:in Attachment VII.
t ELELD
=
Since. June 1986 -(summer) the number._of survey. reference points monitored has. been reduced-as shown. in Attachment II.. This L reduction :
occurred-based - on the' fact L that there were no. significant temperature -
changes observed in. the water surroundiog the mixing zone.1 The monitoring resultsl(Attachments III and IV):show'under' normal l
summer flow and temperature conditiona, the ' thermal. plume rarely.
extended into the. river and-was usually. confined toi the barge slip and -
mixing zone.. Under normalminters condition's,: the; thermal plume 'usually _
i extended a.few: feet downstream.
3 Radiological & Environmental Services personnel did observe that-discharge outlet temperature readings recorded during the winter monitoring periods of 1986 and 1987 were the; highest.- However,:upon-investigation ~ of the-cause(s),~ we concluded it was a combination of -
i e
river stage, ambient temperature, -blowdown flow and percent; plant '
[
power,. with river stage being the most dominant 1 factor.
The dominant effact. of river stage -.on the discharge outlet Jtemperature is further substantiated by_ the. fact that the_ discharge pipe becomes uncovered ce
_[
a river stage of approximately 20 feet (Vicksburg gauge).=_
-)
AEOR'. R'PT/ SRREVFLR-II-2
- = -
Haximum temperature changes (delta _Ts) relativa to theiuprivor-r temperature are provided in Attachments III and IV for the discharge outlet, barge slip outlet and surrounding water.
Discharge and barge slip outlet delta Ts are shown in Attachment VIII.
The 2.8 *C delta T limit for water surrounding the mixing zone was not exceeded as shown in Attachments-IX and X.
Delta Ts for the discharge outlet were obtaiaod by subtracting the upstream river surface or 5 feet temperature reading, whichever gave the highest value, from the reading recorded in-the discharge outlet.
Delta Ts for the-barge slip outlet were. obtained by subtracting the uystress river surf ace or 5 ' feet temperature reading, whichever gave the highest value, from the reading recorded in the barge slip outlet.
Delta Ts for the surrounding water were obtained by subtracting the upstream river surface-and 5 feet temperature readings from the maximum surrounding water surface and 5 feet readings, respectively.
The delta Ts shown in Attachments III and IV are shown as absolute values, therefore there were no negative numbers.
CONCLUSIDW A review of the thermal monitoring data shows the Mississippi. River supplies a volume of water sufficient for dissipating the heated discharge from GGNS within the required mixing -zone.-
Summer and winter thermal monitoring data show the turbulence and volume of the Mississippi River six the heated discharge and cause little toeperature difference.
The only area influenced by GGN5 heated disebtge 'is the barge slip and the associated entry into the Mississippi-River.
i l
5 m
[
e AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-II,
,e-rw
-.e
'^
<v, e-
-*<2ry<
y-g-
y-
sw
~-.
a wm
< :s o
ATTACllHENT 11 EMrR /.ND_RIRIf.R SURVEY POINTji j M fjLl'I;E10D POINTS M0:4170)TQ_ M jlR.PERIQQ fOINTSliONlTORED 8
, _,EcrjJ 982 1-20
_ reb 19_83
_1-51 and 64-70 4
Jily 1983 1-70 Feb 1986 1-40 and surfaces /5 ft reading 30 ft from shorelino at
).ung_.1204 1_Zj polnts 41 - 49
,1gne 198.5 1-71
)
Juno 1986 1-34, 36, 41, 46 J'sh 1987 1-39 St. 59, 62, 63
- 68. J1
-Pob 1988 1-48 8
jicpf_.121ft.,____,
1-39 Mar 1919 6-10
,_,1giv 1987 1-33 Feb 1990 1-11 s
Aug 19B8 1-38 Nov 1991 1 and ? plus barge sifp
,Aun 1989
_ 1 _11 byn 1990 0-11 l
1991E Points monitored Wr're limited due to hjgh river level and flow.
8 8 tmmer river stage did not go below minus 1.2 feet (May - Octobor).
6 AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-II-4
___________]
SECTION PROCEDURE PROCEDURE No. RP-M-7 REY. NO.,,,s.,,
VOLUNE III DATA SELET 1 PAGE 1 OF l DATA SnrrT 1 TimRMAL rf0NITORING i
I.
Date Performed
.//**S'9/
II.
Ambient Air Temperature 7' i
'C w
III. Gotfall 001 Recorder Temperatura 3I 7
'O IV.
River Level at Vicksburg
/0 7 ft V.
Discharge Outlet Temperature Surface MS O
',C 2 G, f
.C 5 ft VI.
Barge Slip Outlet Towporature
. Surface 22.o
'O
-5 ft
}4.0
- C VII. Upriver Temperature (Pt. 1)
Surface
/ 6~* O
'C
-5 ft
/f* 1
'C c.
VIII.Downriver Temperature (Pt. 7)
Surface
/ f' /
'C
-5 ft lS* Y
- C MOS' 9/
Prepared By />
h Signature /Date Reviewed
%~
- AAA OVN?l Sup'ervisor, Environmental Services /Date 4
9 l
t 1
AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-II-5
r i
APPENDIX 111 ENV1RONMENTAL'EVALVATJDNs t
l'
( :-
l I
(
I:
l l
l l
l AEOR.RPT/SRREVFLR-III-1 wr 4.
_..._._.... _ _.. _ _ _ _.. _ _ _..~ _._.
9 i
l ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 009/91 AND 014/91 3
i
?
This evaluation 009/91 Installa valven, pumps, and piping to allow injection of sodium hypochlorite and additional dispersant to PSW for the control of biological fouling.
t This evaluation 014/91 Addresses chemient cleaning of the Circulating Water System cooling tower fill medium.
I rr r
t i
I
[
t t
I A60RiRPT/SRREVFLR i1II-1 i
l l
L.N^-._,,,.L'.,..~,,
,,. ~ +
,-....,,,..-n.---..
.i.,.,.
a
> ?
4
>..r.'
n,
,,-.n,.
].
l_01-5-06-24 Revislos 11 l
l Attarheent I Fage 3 of 4
_l l
l l
QA RICGF5 INITIALS l
RT = B14.33 NtHkt_m 0F pat #.Sl l
l NON 04 RIC0iiD DATE l
l_ NTITIA~l SAFETT/ ENVIRONMENTAL EVt.Lt!ATION FORN*
Ysi3* IH1-9/-007n o - AJ lMl DOC EVALUATED 15 a4/A 9/astSl IE6dRIl IVALt!ATION N0.
)
PART I o,- o / 9 /
l liHU~l Ramtscas see a#acAed lWarl sTsm AFFICTED M7F/N DESCRIPTION _ see st#M/,cd Requires sa environmental evaluation X If Tes, Complete Part III fis' Ra '
hequires a change to the FSAR If Tes, C/R No.
SAFETY EVAtt1ATION i
PART II A basis supporting each conclusion must be attached.
TES Na IMP!,EMENTATION OR PERFORMANCR OF THE ACTIVITT DESCRIED ABOVE 1 (a) Will require a change to the OGNS Tect ical Specifications.
I 1 (b) Nay increase the probability of occurrence of as accident previously evaluated in the SAR.
_ 1 (c) May increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the SAR.
X (4) Nay create the possibility of as accident of a different type than any evaluated is the SAR.-
4 (e) May increase the probability of occurrence of a as1 function of equipmaat important to safety previously evaluated in the SAR.
X (f) May increase the consequences of a es1 function of equipment important te safety previously evaluated La the SAR.
X (3) May create the possibility of a as1 function on a different type than any evaluated previously in the SAR.
,X (b) Will reduce the margia of safety as defined la the basis for any l
Technical Specificatione.
M
/L ll17lYl
/
/G TI
- - =
hf g.).;0*'
' / '. ahc
/ A1 ATE 01-5-0s-24 ATT I
FSAR 2.2.2.2 Tables 2.2-6,7 l
-FSAR 2.2.3.1.2 (AECH-81/0316)
FSAR Table 3.9-3c FSAR 9.2.8.2 Table 9.3-3 F$AR 9 2.10 FSAR 10.4.5.2. 3 f
NUREG 18.1 40 CFR 423 l
TECH SPECS 3/4.3.7.8. 3/416.4. 3/4.6.6.2 FES 4.2.6,7 FES 3.6.3 l
FES 5.9 FER 3.6 4
FER S.3 i
FER 10.5 i
HPDE5 Permit No. H50029521 i
Environmental Protection Plan (EPP)
This activity installs valves, pumps, and piping to allow injection of sodium hypochlorite and additional dispersant to PsW for the control of i
The use of sodium hypochlorite at a residual i
biologleal fouling.
chlorine level of 0.5 ppm was included as a part of the original. plant This activity increases the residual to 1.0-1.5 ppe.
design.
L l
on site testing has demonstrated the effectiveness of this program for
~
l biological. control and the effect of the residual chlorins levels on system metallurgy (Reference Conco consulting Corporat j
The only metal not tested was Copper alloy _122, the tube t
11/19/90).
gased on a review of the _
(
material in the Drywell Chiller exchangers.
ASM International Metals Handbook, Volumes 2 and 13. no adverse affect l
i f rom this higherf rasidual chlorine level is expected. Copper alloy 122 corrosion coupons will be used in P5W during this activity _to monitor j
corrosion rs.tes.
Although PSW provides makeup to Circulating. Water (CW), CW Chemistry t
Due to dilution alone, 'if Plant -
will not be affected by this activity.
l Service Water (P5W) chlorine ' residuals were-at the maxisum of 1.5 ppe, i
CW residual chlorine would be less than 0.1-ppe, the regulatory l
detection limit.
In addition, demand within the:CW system from
-biological foulinglaeration will consume any residual cSlorine. - No Increase in chloride concentration will occur which could. adversely-af fect condensate. or: reactor water in _ the event of a tube failure.
Hakeup to the P21 syster (tonics Trailer) will be chlorinated during The existing plant charcoal filters will performance of the TSTI.
Plant _ makeup water quality will not be remove any residual chlorine.
affected.
SAFEVAL/SCHwTFLR i i
L
, _ _ _, -. ~.
t In original plant design the cooling tower bypass valve (P44FS02) was interlocked with a continuous chlorine analyser to ensure no chlorine was discharged from the plant. This interlock is not functioning l
because the chlorine analyzer is not functioning. To ensure plant NPDES 11mits are met, the TST! controlling this activity requires monitor lr.g of the plant outfall for chlorine residuals. The P44F502 valve will be manually closed during the test to ensure chlorinated PsW is sent to the CW system rather than directly to the discharge basin.
Cooling tower level for the 2 hour2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> daily test will be controlled by adjusting blowdown flow, as required.
t r
l l
/
t SAFEVAL/SclNTFLR - 2 r---vm-w-m%,--,r r
9ma Q
m,v
-,,y-r--ww w i, t,
3mv, r
--+--*r---+,--
.-+eyy g
g
,,-wy er--
--f,*w g -w pg p--
"~v
-<~+v<,r w.
ep.e, yy
Valves used to inject hypochlorite are not a part of tha primary or A.
secondary containment boundary.
Based on lite corrosion testing, the higher chlorine residual will have no af fect on the F46 valves which function as a part of secondary contal6eent boundary, or valves which function as PSW and Standby Sstvice Water (SSW) isolations.
No change to the Environment frotection Plan is caused The chemical used, sodium hypochlorite does not by this activity.
produce chlorine gass no revision to include chlorine detection is This activity will not affect the ability to maintain required.
reactor coolant chemistry within Tech. Spec. limits, even in the event-of a catastrophic tube fa!!ure.
The ability to process 11guid and solid radwaste will not be affected by this treatment program.
Chlorination of PSV/Ranney Wells is addressed as a part of original 8.
plant design at a chlorine residual of 0.5 ppel this activity On-site testing using PSW raises the residual level to 1 5 ppm.
and test heat exchangers determined corrosion rates for carbon The use of steel. -stainless steel, and 90/10 Copper / Nickel-piping.
three sodium hypochlorite did not increase corrosion rates for the Based on a review act311urgies above the rates for untreated PSW.
of literature Copper alloy 122 (Drywell Chiller exchanger tubes) is not expected to show any adverse-affects from these residuals, copper alloy 122 test coupons will be used during this activity to -.
This activity does not change the control monitor corrosion rates.
or response of the PSW system except for cooling tower makeup / level control, which will be controlled using blowdown. - These systems and their operation are not involved in any accident cause This activity will not increase the evaluations in the SAR.
probability of an accident previously evaluated.in the SAR.
The PSW/Ranney Well Systems have no safety related function to C.
mitigate the consequences of an accident _ (Section 9.2.10.3, However, some PSW valves serve as part of the secondary 9.2.8.3).
The containment boundary and as PSWISSW crosstle isolations.
onsite testing demonstrated-these valves.would not be adversely Valves listed in table 3.9-3c of ths affected by these.residualsi FSAR as ASME Section 111 Code class 2 and 3 which may be exposed to the chlorine residual will not be adversely affected by the higher These components will continue.to perform their residual.
The addition of. chlorinated PSV to SSW will designated functions.
not adversely affect. SSW water quality which is froutinely chlorinated to a higher residual. chlorine level.
The addition of chlorinated water to the P64 storage tanks or use in the fire protection rystem will have no adverse af fect on-system operation.
No increaseLin_the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the SAR will occur.
Chlorination was addressed 'in ~ original plant design using.11guld No chlorine _ gas will be generated during this D.
sodium hypochlorite.
Sodium:
activity even_ in the: event of a sodium hypochlorite sp1'1.
hypochlorite will-be fed from $5 gallon drums at the rate of approximately one drta per day. _ Approximately a one week supply ho new-will be. stored at tae warehouse and reordered as necessary.
hazard to: control _ room habitability 'is introduced by the use of SATEVAL/ScifWTTLR - 3
_a
l sedium hypochicrite on site as d:cumented in 8:chtel calculation M3.6.36 which states that sodium hypochlorite has no OSKA established TLV. Sodium hypochlorite is non-flammable. Operation of the P5W/Ranney Well system is unaffected except for tower levet i
i control which will be controlled using blowdown. Level perturbations in the tower basin would not affect the ability to l
safely shutdown the plant.
Affected components will function as designed.
Wis activity does not create the possibility of an i
accidant of a different type than any evaluated in the SAA.
l q
E.
Based on corrosion testing, the system components which will be i
exposed to the higher chlorine residuals will not be degraded.
This includes secondary containment isolation valves and PSWIS$W crosstle isolation valves.
ssW water quality and its ability to remove heat will not be.affected.
P5W cooling ability of its assigned heat loads such as EST room coolers will not be degraded by this activity as demonstrated by on: site testing. Re -
probability of occurrence of a malfunction of equipment important to ssfaty previously evaluated in the SAR will not be increased.
i F.
The PSW/Ranney Well-System is not designed to mi*: tate the i
consequences of. a malfunction of any equipment in+vrtant to safety.
1 This activity-does not prevent the designed responses of the
{
affected systems including PsW. $$W. and the Fire Protection System. The valves used to feed. sodium hypochlorite are located in the piar.t yard, outside the secondary containment boundary. leakage would not affect any safety-related components or their responses as designed.
The consequences' of a malfunction of equipment -
Important to safety previously evaluated in the SAR will not be increased.
O.
The chemical being fed was evaluated for use in~ PSW including makeup to $$W, and firewater as part nf original plant design. he higher residual will have no adverse affects on system response.
i ne structural integrity of components exposed to this treatment _
+
program will net be degraded. No new hazard is introduced that.
could effect control room habitability or operator response te plant transients.
System leakage has been previously addressed in-
~
the FSAR: the only-new leak paths created-by this alteration-are in i
the plant yard and would not affect the safe shutdown:of the plant.
The' possibility of a malfunction of a different type-than any l
previously evaluated in the SAR is not created.
H.
Sodium hypochlorite will not produce chlorine = gast no change to the basis concerning chlorine detection is required.. Reactor Water Chemistry including chlorides will not be affected by. this
{
activity. No significant increase in_ chlorine levels -in CW which l
141ght affect the hotwell in the event _ of a tube leak will occur as a result of PSW chlorination.
Structural integrity and. response times _ of valves which are a part of the secondary containment boundary-will not be affected.
Thn ' ability of the SSW system to
-i remove heat and system makeup will not be altered.. B is activity-does not affect the operability or availability of the fire
-suppression system.
His activity does not reduce the margin of-
- +
ssfaty as defined in the bases for-any Technical; Specification.
r SAFEVAL!SCHVTFLR - 4
~.t'
,---,n+
-,-.y-v.,,.
-crw.,
-[. p y % m--
.,,..-,-,,-,.m.y.,m.,.
,,ye,,
/
+y,,v
,e, c.
ny,,,-%%,y rmtW- -- ~ < +
~-7-*-4 9-e 'r V-T' - "
,ee-E Y - - - -
,w.-
sr,-%
,,, +
GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION AIRf1NISTRATIVE PROCEDURE l01-8-06-24 Revistes 1!
l l Attachment I Fase 4 of 4 l
I I
SAFETY / ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM (Continued)
PART !!!
l YES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERTORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITT DESCRIBED ABOVE:
1 (a) Requires a change in the Environmental Protection Plan.
SASIS*
8,_ ah /, L 1 (b) Concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluted in the Final Environmental Statement (/ES) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing leard (A8LB), supplements to the FES, environmental impact appraisal, or in any decision of the ASLB.
5ASI8*
d?>. alWKcl> L 1 (c) Concerna a significant change in effinants or power levu!.
BASIS
- 1.
. e 1, L 1 (d) Concerna a matter not previously. reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (b) above, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact.
BASIS
- An _ apf:;2 2 1
l I d ~.a w b a 8 A s c..
/ 4-N-W l NORIO_l ORIG TOR JOB TITIA DATE tO
/ C.IW+f. I
/
7[TI JOB T1712
'DATE 17)
/$
f/
"/ PSRC
/
AA11
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
01-S-06-24 ATT I i
m--
GRAND QULF NUCLEAR STATION EAFEN/MVIRQtterfAL WAGATIM IQBH (Continued) f I
em m i
YES NO IMPLD9NTATION OR PERFORHANCE OF 'IHE ACTIVITY DESCRIBID AB0VI:
X (a) will requin a change in the Environmental Protection Plan.
i BASIS:
Environmental concerns identified in the IPP which relate.o water quality and aquatic biota are contained in the
[
0(BIS WPD88 Permit issued by the Mississippi Department of Invironmental Quality (MD50), and W NRC relies on HD50 for i
regulation, h NPDES Pomit regulations will-be strictly adhered to, and since the use of sodium hypochlorite solution i
does not involve an unreviewed environmental question or change j
W objectives of the IPP, W re -will be no change in h i
Environmental Protection Plan (EPP).
X.
(b) concerns a matter which may result in a signifJeant increams in any adverse environmental impact -previously evaluated in the t
Final Environmental Statement. (FIS) as modified by b NRC staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board I
(AS 2). supplements to W FES, environmental impact appraisal, i
or in any decisions of the AS 2.
l BASIS: hvironmental concerns identified in the FIS whic..
relate to sodium hypochlorite solution won identified it.
association with PSW and 048. The FES stated that sodium
{
l hypochlorite will be added to PSI intomittently and a surfactant may be added to enhance b effect.
N NPDES r
l Pomit limits concentration of cooling tower blowdown discharge i
at the discharse structure to. an averase of 0.2 as/1 and a maximum ' of 0.5 mg/l for free available chlorine and total residual chlorine, and fur b r states that neither free available chlorine nor -total. residual chlorine may be f
discharged for more than two- (2) hours in any one day. Free i
available chlorine in the WS is allowed to dissipate before i
l l
discharse; PSI, when chlorinated, is discharged to LOWS to promote dissination, and low concentrations of fres available chlorine h t are discharged are further redooed quickly by b I
chlorine demand of the Mississippi-River water. On W basis-i l
of expected composition of makeup water, combined chlorine in
-blowdown discharse is expected to be negligible. h discharge concentrations resulting from b proposed injection of sodium-hypochlorite into PSW will not change from previous evaluations -
and the dischargo -is not ' expoeted to result, in adverse impact to the river biota.
I l
X,.
(c)
- concerns a significant-change in' offluents or power level.
BASIS:' Water treatment chemicals have no effect on power level.
l Based on -this evaluation of physical m d chemical _ aspects of injection of sodium hypochlorite solution, no-significant changes in effluents is anticipated, anJ therefore no effect on the Mississippi River is expected.
i
- l --
t 4
~-
~.
...~,m.~
--_-.._.._-.g-.-.-.--.--..
GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION SAFETY /ENVIRONMDfrAL EVAlllATION FORM (Continued)
X.,
(d) concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (b) above, which may have a significant adverse envimnmental impact.
BASIS! Sodium hypochlorite solution, which was previously reviewed and evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FIS), will be injected into PSW and will be discharged into the Discharge Basin throush Cooling Tower Blowdown.
The FES has been evaluated and approved by Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ),
the FIS dictates regulation by the NPDES Pemit, and since all the same guidalines that were previously evaluated will be followed, no significant adverse environmental impact is expected.
l L
l l
2-
- RAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION ADMINISTRATIVE FROCEDURE G
~
l 01-S-06-24 Revision 11 l
l_ Attachment 1 Page 3 of 4 l
l l
l~
QA RECORD INIf!ALS l
l
_ RT :: 81C 33 _
NUMLER OF PAGE'Sl l
l l NON-QA RECORD DATE
_l l MTITLE l SAFETY / ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- 76 7.x a u to - 91 PART I l hXRET _l DOC EVALUATED *0ol-o- ^/
l _ MDOCNO l EVALUATION NO. p I'/ /7/
l MXREF l REFERENCES S(dMBusrJl MSYSNO l SYSTEM AFFECTED 14'og1/ _
DESCRIPTION SEE
/1rraeungp r
.f Requires an environmental evaluation L' If Yes, Complete Part III Yes No Requires a change to che FSAR L If Yes, C/R No.
Yes No SAFETY EVALUATION PART II A baals supporting each conclusion must be attachad.
YES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
1 (a) Will require a change to the GONS Technical Specifications.
X (b) May increase the probability of occurrence of an accident previously evaluated in the SAR.
_j(_
(c) May increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the SAR.
(d) May create the possibility of an accident of a different type than any evaluated in the SAR.
X (e) May increase the probability of occurrence of a malfunction of equipment impe:* tant to safety previously evaluated in the SAR.
,f_
(f) May increase the consequences of a malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the SAR.
1 (g) May create the possibility of a malfunction on a different type than any evaluated previously in the SAR.
X (h) Will reduce the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specifications, d &./a
/
S~ r M & i., e e <-
l 7-r t. - 91 l HORI ORIGIN TOR JOB T LE DATE I SHf. &
l 7 9/
g/J9 f s-c
)/ /-
AP VEIL __ -
JOB TITT.E DATE
/ Yl? rl11
/h?
a.
" PSRC
/
j0NTE 01-S-0 24 ATT I
SAFETY EVALUATION - PART I ATTACHMENT I PAGE 1
of 2
REfEREHCES EER 91/6197 FSAR 2.2.3.1.2; FIG 2.2-5 Tables 2.2-5,2.2-6,2.2-7 FSAR 10.4.5.2,3 FSAR 10.4.6.3 FSAR 10.4.8 FSAR 15.2.5 ; Tables 15.2-7,15.2-0,15.2-9 FSAR 15.2.5.5 REG GUIDE 1,56 TECH SPECS 3/4. 3. 7.11; Table 3. 3. 7.11-1. 2.b MSDS Genium Publishing Corp No. 4 4 B, Rev. A FES 4.2.6 FES 4.3.2 PES Table 4.1 FES Table 4.2 FER 3.6 FER 5.3 PER 10.4 FER 10.5 NPDES Permit No. MS0025b21 Environmental Protection Plan (EPP)
CEXO-91/00345 CTC-91/00085 QESJRIPTIOji This Safety Evaluation addresses chemical cleaning of the Circulating Water System Cooling Tower fill medium per TSTI 1W20-91-001-0-N.
The Cooling Tower fill medium has become partially plugged due to biological fouling. Plugging of the fill prevents proper heat transfer across the Cooling Tower and is degrading plant ef ficiency. Chemical cleaning will help eliminate this plugging and improve plant officiency.
Cleaning will be accomplished por the TSTI using flydrogen Peroxide (H202) at 50% concentration.
Hydrogen Peroxide will be injected into each~ Cooling Tower flume, where
.? will be equally dispersed across the fill medium by the norma':
.rculating Water flow.
The Hydrogen Peroxide cleaning will be' performed in a minimum of 6 phases. Results of the first phase will be evaluated to determine effects and effectiveness of the cleaning prior to proceeding to the next phase. The cleaning process will be controlled (per the TSTI) to minimize the impact of solids released from the Cooling Tower to the Circulating Water System.
i l
J
~.-
ATTACl! MENT I PAGE 2 OF 2 i
This cleaning will be performed with both Circulating Water Pumps in service and can be done in Operational Modes 1,2,3,4 and 5.
No change is required to the normal operation of the Circulating f
water system to perform this cleaning.
Iloweve r, additional precautions will be implemented to ensure there is no adverse affects due to the solids released from the fill.
The liydrogen Peroxide has been evaluated for compatibility with materials of construction in the Circulating Water System per This evaluation concluded no adverse effects would be EER 91/6197.
incurred to the materials or components of the Circulating Water I
system at-the specified me. *. mum feed rates and concentrations.
No unreviewed safety or environmental questions were identified as a result of this safety evaluation.
b t
G b
-c-,
--ww
SAFETY EVALUATION - PART II ATTACitMENT II PAGE 1 OF 5 a)
Addition of the !!ydrogen Potoxide to the Circulating Water System to clean the fill medium does not af fect or alter any Technical Specification.
The flydrogen Peroxide has boon evaluated for compatibility with the materials of construction in the Circulating Water System. This evaluation concluded that no adverse effects would be incurred to the materials or components of the Circulating Water System at the specified maximum feed rates and concentrations. Tech Specs does not address water chemistry makeup of the Circulating Water System.
This activity will not affect the ability to maintain the reactor coolant chemistry within Tech Spec limits, even in the event of a catastrophic Condenser tube failure because the addition of !!ydrogen Peroxide will not increase the ion concontration of the Circulating Water System. Cooling Tower blowdown will be increased during thn cleaning process to remove solids that will be released from the tower fill and thus reduce ion concentration in the Circulating Water System.
Dissolved Solids concentration will remain at or below the normal concentrations.
Ionic loading and ion exchanger capacity margins in the condensate cleanup System required by Reg Guide 1.56 will therefore not be affected.
No change to Technical Specifications is needed nor is any new Technical Specification required.
b)
The implementation of TSTI 1W20-91-001-0-N will not increase the probability of occurrence of an accident previously eval"ated in the UFSAR.
Cleaning of the Circulating Water System Cooling Tower fill medium will help restore the system to original design I
efficiency.
No change is required to the normal operation of the Circulating. Water System to perform this cleaning. collection of debree is the design function of the Circulating Water Pump suction screens and on-line cleaning of the suction screens is a normal maintenance practico. Solids released from the fill during the cleaning are not expected to increase plugging of the suction screens above the normal rate.
The TSTI will provide controls to ensure the Circulating Water Pump suction screens are monitored and cleaned as required during the cooling Tower cleaning.
Loss of the circulating Water Pumps during plant operation has been evaluated in UFSAR section 15.2.5.
i I
ATTACHMENT II PAGE 2 OF D r
Evaluation has determined that no adverse effects will be incurred to materials or components of the circulating r
Water System by the flydrogen Peroxide at the specified maximum feed rates and concentrations.
The liydrogen Peroxide feed rate to the cooling Tower fiumes is inherently limited below the maximum acceptable feed rate due to the capacity of the tanker truck feed pump (Approx. 43 ft of head from ground elev. to injection point). In the unlikely event that a full tanker truck load of flydrogen Peroxide (approx. 4300 gals) is inadvertently dumped into the cooling Tower basin due to a
hose break, the maximum acceptable 11202 to circulating Water concentration (5000 PPM) as evaluated by EER 91/6197 would not be excceded.
Circulating Water System leakage has been addressed in FSAR section 10.4.5.3. Injection of the !!ydrogen Peroxide will be located in the plant yard at the cooling Tower and leakage from the injection hoses would not affect any safety related components or the safe shutdown of this plant. The structural integrity of components exposed to the liydrogen Peroxide will not be degraded and no new leakage paths for Circulating Water inventory are created.
c)
The implementation of TSTI 1W20-91-001-0-N will not increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the t
l l
Per UFSAR section 10.4.5.3, the circulating Water System serves no safety function. System analysis has shown that a failure of the Circulating Water System will not compromise any safety-re)ated systems or prevent safe shutdown.
l l
The radiological consequences remain the same as the i
consequences of a loss of condenser vacuum as discussed in t
UFSAR section 15.2.5.5.
I t
i
{
i r
l l
1
ATTACitMENT II PAGE 3 OF 5 d)
The.mplementation of TSTI 1W20-91-001-0-N will not create the possibility of an accident of a different type than evaluated in the UFSAR.
No change is required to the normal operation of the Circulating Water System to perform this cleaning. The TSTI will provide controls to minimize the impact to the solids released from the Cooling Tower fill to the Circulating Water System during cleaning. A trip of the Circulating Water Pumps affects only the plants ability to condense steam and naintain a suitable vacuum in the Condenser and is bounded by existing analysis.
Evaluation has determined that no adverse ef fects will be incurred to materials or components of the circulating Water System by the Hydrogen Peroxide at the specified feed rates and concentrations.
Circulating Water System leakage has been addressed in FSAR section 10.4.5.3. Injection of the Hydrogen Peroxide will be located in the plant yard at ;he cooling Tower and leakage from the injection hoses would not effect any safety related components or prevent safe shutdown of this plant.
The structural integrity of components exposed to the Hydrogen Peroxide will not be degraded and no now leakage paths are created for Circulating Water inventory.
No hazard is introduced that could effect control Room habitability or operatoc response to a plant transients.
The Hydrogen Peroxide will not produce a toxic gas in the event of a spill, is non flammable, is noncombustible and readily de:omposes into water and oxygen.
l t
~
ATTACHMENT II PAGE 4 OF 5 c)
The implementation of TSTI IW20-91-001-0-N will not increase the probability of cccurrence of a malfunction of equipment important to oafety previously evaluated in the FSAR.
Por UFSAR section 10.4.5.3, the Circulating Water System serves no safety function. Evaluation has determined that no adverso offects will be incurred matecials or components of the Circulating Water System by the Hydrogen Peroxide at the specified feed rates and concentrations.The injection of Hydrogen Poroxide into the Circulating Water System will not compromise any safety-related systems or provent safe shutdown.
Injection of the Hydrogen Peroxide will be located in the plant yard at the cooling Tower and leakage from the hoses would not of fect any safety related components or provent safe shutdown of this plant. No new leakage paths for circulating Water inventory will be created. The Hydrogen Peroxide is non flammable and noncombustible and thus no new fire hazards are created.
f.
The implementation of TSTI 1W20-91-001-0-N will not increase the consequences of a malfunction of equipment important to safety previously ovaluated in the UFSAR.
Cleaning of the cooling Tower fill affects only the l
Circulating Water System. A trip of the Circulating Water l
Pumps during plant operation is bounded by existing analysis as discussed in FSAR section 15.2.5.
Por UFSAR section 10.4.5.3, the Circulating Water System serves no safety function. Evaluation has dotormined that no edverse ef fects will be incurred to the materials or components of the Circulating Water System by the Hydrogen Peroxide at the specified food ratos and concentrations.The injection of Hydrogen Peroxide into the circulating Water System will not compromise any safety-related systems or provent safe shutdown.
A Circulating Water Pump trip will not increase the consequences of a malfunction of equipment important to safety.
l r~
g
ATTACl{MEllT II PAGE 5 OF 5 g.
The implementation of TSTI IW20-91-001-0-N will not create the possibility of a malfunction of a dif ferent type than any evaluated previously in the UFSAR.
No change is required to the normal operation of the circulating Water System to perform this cleaning, collection of debree is the design function of the circulating Water Pump suction screens and on-line cleaning of the auction screens is a normal maintenance practico. Loss of the circulating Water Pumps during plant operation has been evaluated in UFSAR sect. ion 15.2.5.
Evaluation has determined that no adverse ef fects will be incurred to the materials or components of the circulating Water System by the flydrogen Peroxide at the specified feed rates and concentrations. This treatment will not degrade the structural integrity of the componnnts.
Circulating Water System leakage has been addressed in FSAR coction 10.4.5.3.
No new leakage paths are created for circulating Water inventory and leakage from the liydrogen Peroxide injection hoses would not effect any safety related r
components or prevent safe shutdown of this plant.
Ilydrogen Peroxide is non flammable and noncombustible and thus no new fire hazards exist.
h)
The implementation of TSTI lW20-91-001-0-N will not reduce the margin of safety as defined in the Basis for any Tech Specs.
Per UFSAR section 10.4.5.3, the Circulating Water System serves no safety function. Evaluation has determined that no adverse effects will be incurred to materials or components of the circulating Water System by the Ilydrogen Peroxide at the specified feed rates and concentrations. The injection of flydrogen Peroxide into the circulating Water System will not compromise any safety-related systems or prevent safe shutdown.
This activity will not affect the ability to maintain the reactor coolant chemistry within Tech Spec limit, even in the event of a catrostrophic condenser tube failure.
Since no Technical Specifications are affected, implementation of this TSTI will not reduce the margin of safety specified in the Tech Specs.
SAFETY /ENVIRONMENTALEVALUATIONFON(CONT'b)
PART III IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF Tile ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
YES NO
)
[V)
(a) Requires a change in the Environmental Protection Plan.
BASIS:
See Attached f
4 Concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any
[}
[V)
(b) adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental impact appraisal, or in any decision of the ASLB.
BASIS:
See Attached
[}
[V)
(c) Concerns a significant change in effluents or power level.
BASISs See Att ached i
[]
[V)
(d) Concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in II(b), which may have a significant adverse environmental impact.
BASIS:
See Attached i
t i
t h 6-L.
I $n<.
4-Ath.
I YA Y' $/
l MORIG j 0 GINATOR JOB TI(LE DATE dh k d4h
'i f
/
IDATE PPROVP.
JOB TITLE
~~"
s[u
/
?/ 9/
/
4/
/ iSRC
/
' /D'A'T E
/
EVHDRO/SRESFLR-2 T'
l
YES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
9
[]
[V)
(a) Vill require a change in the Environmental Protection Plan.
BASIS Environmental concerns identified in the EPP which relate a
to water quality and aquatic blota are contained in the GCNS NPDES Permit issued by the Mississippi Departtuent of Environmental Quality (MDEQ). and the NRC relles on HDEQ for regulation.
Although the NPDES Permit does not directly address the use of hydrogen peroxide, MDEQ has approved its use.
Since 50% hydrogen peroxide at the specitied feed rates and concentrations will not adversely af fect the environment, there will be no change in the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP).
[]
[V)
(b) Concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the_NRC staff's-testimony to the--
Atomic Safety and-Licensing Board (ASLB). supplements to the FES.
environmental impact appraisal, or in any decision of ASLB.
BASIS:
The growth of microorganisms in the cooling tower, promoted by recycling and heating of cooling water in the circulating Vater Syutem-(CWS); are minimized by intermittent additions of non-oxidizing blocides.
Biocides have been evaluated in the FES and approved by the MDEQ.. The primary environmental concern is in the use of chlorine, and-the NPDES Permit limits cooling tower blowdown discharge-for free available and total residual chlorine.
The use of 50% hydrogen peroxide will not af fect any existing NPDES limits however, an increase in solids will be seen initially during-the cleaning process.
Blowdown will be controlled during the hydrogen peroxide cleaning at approximately 2.5 cycles concentration instead of 3 cycles to help reduce the expected increase in solids at the peak of the cleaning.
Soll e concentration will decrease gradually through the make-up/ blowdown process, therefore solids will not significantly increase impact on the environment.
The FES does not directly cover the'use of hydrogen peroxide, but the proposed injection of 50% hydrogen peroxide solution into cooling Tower fill is not expected to result in adverse impact to the river biota.
[]
[V)
(c) Concerns a.significant change in effluents or power level.
BASI $s 50% hydrogen peroxide solution used as a cleaning process to remove the negative effects of bacterial growth (which has a negative effect on cooling tower efficiency) is anticipated to have a positive-influence on thermal performance' by increasing-air flow through cooling tower fill. At the specified, temperature, feed rates, and concentration. this chemical has no-significant-change in effluents because it;will quickly. decompose and dissipate.
Based on this evaluation of physical and chemical-aspects of injection of 50%
- hydrogen peroxide solution, no significant changes in effluents ist anticipated; and therefore no effect on~ the-Mississippi River is expected.
EVHDRO/SRESFLR-3
\\..
I
PART l!! (Cont'D)
YES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
[]
[V)
(d)
Concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated documents specified in II(b) above, which may have a significant adverse environmental Impact.
BASIS:
Svt hydrogen peroxide solution, which was not previously reviewed and evaluated ~in the FES will be fed over a period of one hour into no more than two fiumes of the Cooling Tower fill at a time and will be diluted and circulated through Circ Water System at 2.5 cycles concentration.
The remaining solution after diluting aho dissipating will be discharged through Cooling Tower Blowdown.
Although the FES, which dictates regulation by the NPDES Permit, was evaluated and approvc.d by HDEQ It does not directly discuss hydrogen peroxide however, since no significant adverse environmental impact is expected. the HDEQ has approved its use (CTC-91/00085).
l 1
EVilDR0/SRESFLR-4 1
L
_