ML20137R035

Fes Update

ML20137R035
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	01/31/1986
From:	SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC CO., SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20137R031	List: ML20137R026 ML20137R035
References
NUDOCS 8602070164
Download: ML20137R035 (53)

Text

-

f ENCLOSURE I SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION UNIT I FINAL EhVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT UPDATE DOCKET 50-206 JANUARY 1986 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPAhY AND THE SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPAhY 8602070164 060205 DR ADOCK0500g6

w Q SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Table of Contents Cont _ents P_g g e_s Summary & Conclusions s 1-1 Section 1. Comments 1-1 Section 2 Comments 2-1 Section 2 References 2-7 Section 3 Comments 3-1 Section 3 References 3-11 Section 4 (No comments) N/A Section 5 Comments 5-1 Section 5 References 5-12 Section 6 Comments 6-1 Section 6 References 6-4 Section 7 comments 7-1 Section 7 References 7-2 Section 8 Comments 8-1 Section 8 Heferences 8-2 Section 9 Comments 9- !

Section 9 References 9-2 Appendix A Mi '

.. ology A-1 Attachment 1 I thru 6

r v :

SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Section Page Comment Summary (i) to (iv) The summary and conclusions should be read and

& Conclusions modified as necessary in the light of the infor-mation provided below in this update document.

1.2 1-3 Update Table 1.1 with the following licensing actions *:

Atomic Energy Provisional Operating License No. DPR-13 of Commission / San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station (SohGS)

Nuclear Regula- Unit I provides a complete listing of all tory Commission Amendments and Orders to the initial license.

California 12-17-64 Waste Water Discharge Resolution Regional Water 12-09-74 Amendment to Resolution Quality Control 06-14-76 hPDES Permit Board, San 11-28-77 Amendment to NPDES Permit Diego Region 06-01-61 Extension of hPDES Permit 07-12-82 New NPDES Permit and Time behedule Order 08-29-83 Modification of Time Schedule Order California Air 02-85 Renewal of permits to operate for Pollution Control various plant equipment / ope ra t ion District, San Diego (i.e. , auxillary boiler, blast machine, paint spray room, blast room and gasoline service site.)

1-1 L

.. e t.

SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Section Page Comment 2.2.1 2' 1 Revised information on population distribu-tion.in the vicinity of S0 HGS is available in the January 1984 update of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) for SONGS Units 2 and 3(1).

The military complex estimated to contain 1150 housing units in the 1973 Final Environ-mental Statement (FES) is called San Onofre Heights and contains 600 units. The San unofre mobile home park, located about 1/2 mile south of San Onofre Heights, contains a total of 140 units (2). The proposed school, San Onotre Elementary, has been completed.

The former Western White House was sold in 1963 to an individual who uses it on an irregular basis. A 17 unit subdivision has been approved for lands adjacent to and northeast of the former White House (3).

2.2.1 2 The 1960 Census. indicates populations of adjacent cities are: San Clemente, 27,325; Hission Viejo, 50,666; Oceanside, 76,698; San Diego, 1,704,352; San Juan Capistrano, 18,959; Camp Pendleton, 26,705 (4).

2.2.1 2-4 Tables 2.1-2 and 2.1-9 of the SONGS Units 2

.and 3 FSAR(l) provide actual population

~~ distributions out to 50 miles from the plant.

These updated tables do not include transient or recreational users, which were included in Table 2.1 of the 1973 FES.

( 2.2.1 '

2-4 Table 2.1-8 of the SONGS Unit 2 and 3 FSAR(1)

! provides 1981 population data for the various base camps inside Camp Pendleton.

Presently, there are approximately 27,150 permanent residents and 3,o40 transient persons residing at Camp Pendleton(2).

[

.2.2.1 2-4 The beaches can accomodate the same number of persons as previously indicated. however, l

the estimate of a 40 percent use factor as

assumed in the FES appears to be high when compared with actual attendance. Table 2.1-16 of the SohGS Units 2 and 3 FSAR(I) provides actual beach attendance within a 10-mile radius of the station during the 1980-1981. season i

l 1

2-1 i

. .J SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Section Page Comment 2.2.1 2-4 The annual attendance ot 3,415,800 persons (Continued) is equivalent to about 9,358 persons per day.

2.2.1 2-7 From the data presented in Table 2.1-17 of the SONGS Units 2 and 3 FSAR(1) , the actual 1960/1981 average daily traffic along Interstate 5 is calculated to be 56,953 automobiles and 6539 trucks which, when combined, is alightly lower than the projected 1980 estimate in the FES of 67,000 automobiles. In addition, the estimated 1960/1981 population in these vehicles per day is 128,990 as taken f rom Table 2.1-17 of the SONUS Units 2 and 3 FSAk(I).

2.2.2 2-7 Camp Pendleton has developed several residential areas in the last 10 years and is currently building a Landing Craf t Air Cushion Complex about 10.5 miles south of the SONGS. The complex will include a work force of about 600 military personnel and 50 to 60 civilians. It is scheduled for completion in 1992(2),

Residential development is planned in several locations in Camp Pendleton. In 1986, 300 new homes are planned northeast of Del Mar.

In 1987, San Onofre Heights plans to add 300 new housing units and 100 mobile homes nearby (2),

2.2.2 2-7 Agricultural activity within a 50-mile radius of the station includes truck crops, field crops, citrus f ruits, nursery stock and livestock. Within this radius most agricultural t

• activity is located in San Bernardino, Riverside and San Diego counties. San Diego County is an important agricultural resource area as it is one of the few remaining areas in the country which can be farmed year round, without the threat ot frost. bithin the 50-mile radius this county contains about 67,000 acres of field crops, 66,000 acres of f ruit and nut crops, 28,000 acres of vegetable crops and over 380 million livestock including:

beef and dairy cattle, poultry, hogs and pigs. Some of the agricultural lands along the coast have been developed for residential and other uses in recent years. Areas further inland are being maintained for agricultural uses(5,6,7,8),

2-2

, ?

SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Section Page Comment 2.2.2 2-8 There are seven schools within a 10-m11e radius of SUNbb. As of August 1985, the enrollment was about 5,300 pupils (91 There are three hospitals located within a 10-mile radius of the site. As 01 August 1985 they had a combined bed capacity of 395(IO,11,12),

At present there are few areas (approximately 15 acres) of industrial land use in the City of San Clemente. There are no plans to rezone areas within the city for heavy' industrial use (13). Aside from the Capistrano Rocket Test Facility (5.75 miles f rom the station), the next largest industrial complex in the area will be the Landing Craf t Air Cushion Complex (on Camp Pendleton) previously discussed.

2.4 2-11 Current geological inf ormation is providec' in the Systematic Evaluation Program (SE?)

Topic 11-4, Geology and Seismology (14).

2.5.1, 2.5.2 2-11 The updated hydrological information is provided in the SEP Topic II-3.A. Hydrologic Description, II-3.B. Flooding Potential and Protection Requirements,.and Topic III-3.A Effects of High Water Level on Structures (IS),

2.5.3.1 2-11 More recent data are available in the." Annual Report to the Calif ornia Coastal Co= mission September 1977 - August 197o, Updated Esti-mated Effects of SONGS Unit 1 on Marine Organisms," Sections 2.2.2 and 2.2.3(16),

This report shows that the upcoast and down-coast speeds at the outer surf ace range between 0.06 to 0.3 knots with a net speed of about 0.09 knots downcoast, and a range of 0.002 to 0.6 knots with an average of 0.02 knots upcoast, at the outer bottom. The on-offshore current speeds range between 0.02 and 0.2 knots. These current data are in close agreement with those presented in the Unit 1 FES.

2-3

i. si SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Section Page Comment 2.5.3.2 2-12 Studies to document the ocean surtace temperatures in the vicinity of San Unotre started in 1903 during the preoperational uonitoring program for Unit I and continue to the present time.

Table 3.1 or the Report on 1964 Data, harine Environmental Analysis and Interpretationll7) summarizes the temperature monitoring programs up to 1984 Based on the most recent monitoring results (1962-1964), the ambient surface tem-perature varies from a high of 700 to 73 F in August to a low of 570 to 60 0F in January. The maximum summer surf ace temperature varies by 30 to 60F. The detailed temperature data are available in " Reports on 1982, 1983, 1984 Data -

Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation" (18,19,17).

2.5.3.3 2-12  !! ore recent information on tide levels and wave action are contained in S0 HGS Units 2 and 3 FSAR(I) Sections 2.4.5.21 and 2.4.5.3, and the SEP Topic II-3.A, hydrologic Descrip-tion and Topic II-3.B, Flooding Potential and Protection Requirements (15),

2.6 2-17 Updated meteorological inf ormation is presented in the SEP Topic II-2.A, Severe weather Phenom-ena, Topic II-2.C. Atmospheric Transport and Dif fusion and Characteristics Topic III-2, tor Accident Wind and Tornado Analzsis Leadingst'O) .

Additional wind speed and direction have been reported in the Unit 1 Semi-annual Eftluent Reports 1980-1985(21-28), , tore recent X/Q values have been calculated by the Licensee using the NRC XOQD0Q code and 1979 to 1963 meteorologic data including site-specific ter-rain recirculation f actors developed by bames and Moorel29,30). These revised historical atmospheric dispersion tactors were incorpor-ated into Revision 2 of the Unit i Uffsite Dose Calculation hanual as described in the SONGS Unit 1 Semi-annual Effluent keport for January-June 1985(28),

2.7.1 2-17 A one year background terrestrial survey on the site area was conducted between 1975 and 1976. The study results were summarized in Section 2.5.1 of the FES for Units 2 and 3(31) and the full report was presented'in the Environmental Report - Operating License Stage (ER-UL) for Units 2 and 3, Appendix 2a(32),

2-4

.. I SchGS 1 FES LTDATE Page Comment Section 2.7.2.1 2-18 Data collection on littoral biota continued from 1973. The latest annual monitoring results are published in the 19d4 Marine Environmental Report (17), and a comprehensive review of the littoral sampling results trom 1964 to 1964 is also available in references 18, 19 and 33. The major factors causing changes in the intertidal community since 1973 are human activit ies, such as clamming and exploring tidepools; natural processes or sand and cobble movement; and seasonal varia-tions in biota population. Current data for Table 2.4 are contained in the annual marine environmental reports.

2.7.2.2 2-21 Data collection eftort on sublittoral biota has continued since 1973. The San Onofre kelp bed is now well established, occupying a maximum of 100 hectares in 1980; the Barn kelp bed (control site) disappeared in 1980 tollowing major winter storms (34) and showed some growth in 1985. The benthic flora and tauna sampling results are summarized in "1960 Annual Report, Marine Environmental Analysis and interpretation ~(35) and " Thermal Ef fects Studies, Final Summary Report, SuhGS Unit 1"(33) , with the latest sampling results presented in " Report on 1984 Data, Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation"(17),

2.7.2.3 2-23 Recent plankton data are contained in "1981 Annual Report, Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation"l34), and the-latest monitoring results are available in " Report on 1984 Data, Marine Environmental Analysis, and Interpretation"(17),

2.7.2.4 2-23 Environmental monitoring on fish has continued since 1973. Summary reports, "1961 Annual Report, Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation"(34), "1960 Annual Report, harine Environmental Analysis and Interpre-tation"(35), and " Thermal Ef f ects Studies ,

Final Summary Report , SONGS bnit 1"(33) are available as well as the latest monitoring 2-5

.. 7 SchGS 1 FES UPDATE Page Comment Section results, " Report on 1984 Data, Marine Environ-mental Analysis and Interpretation"ll7).

A strong correlation between temperature change and species abundance and composition was exhibited during the El hino conditions of 1982-1984. For e< ample, monitoring results show an increase in warm temperature and subtropical fish species.

2.8 2-24 The per capita dose from medical and dental X-rays has been estimated to be 92 millirems /

year by the National Academy of Sciences Com-nittee on Biological Ettects or Ionizing Radiation (BEIR)(36),

2-6

.. /

S0 HGS ! FES UPDATE References f or Section 2

1. Southern California Edison Company " San Onofre t,uclear Generating Station Units 2 and 3, Final Satety Analysis Report," updated January 1984

2. Shusto, John, Camp Pendleton Public borks Department, September 1985.

3. Lawrence, William C. Company, Inc. , "1903 Land Use Census for San Onofre huclear Generating Station 2&3 (SONGS)," August 1963.

4. U.S. Department of the Census, 1960.

5. Foster, Gary, Riverside County Agricultural Commission, September 1985.

6. Knight, Richard, Of fice or Agricultural Commissioner, County or Los Angeles, September 1965.

7. Escher, Thomas, Agriculture - Weights & Measures, County of San Diego, September 1985.

8. Bracken, Dave, Agriculture - Weights & Measures, County ot San Bernardino, 1980.

9. Tanner, Sharon, Capistrano Unified School District, Superintendent's Office, September 1985.

10. Clover, Cate, Mission Community Hospital, Administration, September 1985.

11. San Clemente General Hospital, Hospital Administration, September 1985.

12. Fiochetti, Teresa, South Coast Medical Center, Administration, September 1985.

13. Pechous, Jim, City of San Clemente, Planning Department, September 1985.

14. Southern California Edison Company, " Systematic Evaluation Program Topic II-4, Geology and Seismology."

15. Southern California Edison Company, " Systematic Evaluation Program Topic Il-3.A Hydrologic Description; Topic ll-3.B. Flooding Potential and Protection Requirements; Topic lil-3.A, Litects of high Water Level

~

on Structures."

16. Connel, J. h. , B. J.11echalas , J. A. liihursky , " Annual Report to the Calif ornia Coastal Commission September 1977 - August 1976, Updated Estimated Effects of SONGS Unit 1 on Marine Organisms," Marine Review Committee Document 78-01, August 1978.

2-7

., f SchGS 1 FES UPDATE References for Section 2 (continued)

17. Southern California Edison Company, " Report on 1984 Data, Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation, San Onotre huclear Generating Station," 85-RD-37, 1965.

18. Southern California Edison Company, " Report on 1982 Data, Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation, San Onofre huclear Generating Station," 83-RD-10, 1983.

19. Southern California Edison Company, " Report on 1983 Data, Marine Environmental Analysis and Inter,retation, San Onotre huclear Generating Station," 84-RD-63, 1984

20. Southern California Edison Company, " Systematic Evaluation Program.

Topic II-2.A, Severe Weather Phenomena; Topic II-2.C. Atmospheric Trans-port and Diffusion Characteristics for Accident Analysis; Topic 111-2, Wind and Tornado Loadings."

21. Southern California Edison Company " San Onot re huclear benerating Station Unit 1, Semi-annual Ef fluent Report;" July - December, 1981."

22. Ibid, January - June, 1982

23. Ibid, July - December, 1962 24 Ibid, January - June, 1983

25. Ibid, July - December, 1983

26. Ibid, January - June, 1984 Ibid, July - December, 1984 27.

28. Ibid, January - June, 1985

29. Southern California Edison Company, " Report on Site-Specitic Terrain Adjustment Factors, San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station," prepared by Dames and Moore, 85-kD-34, April 1985.

30. Southern California Edison Company, " Report on Site-Specific Terrain Adjustment Factors, Unit 1 - Receptor kadii or 1.0-2.5 Hiles," prepared by Dames and Moore, 85-RD-35, May 8, 1965.

31. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, " Final Environmental Statement Related to the Operation of S0 HGS Units 2 and 3," hUREG 0490, April 1981.

2-8

s

/

SONGS 1 FES UPDATE References f or Section 2 (continued)

32. Southern California Edison Company, " San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station Units 2 and 3, Environmental Report - Operating License Stage,'

Docket No. 50-361/362, 1977.

33. Southern California Edison Company, " Thermal Ef tects Studies, Final Summary Report, San Onofre huclear Generating Station Unit 1,"

Augus t 1973.

34. Southern California Edison Company, "1961 Annual Report, Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation, San Onofre Nuclear Gener-ating Station," Vol. III. 82-RD-51, 1982.

35. Southern California Edison Company, "1980 Annual Report, Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation, San Onofre Nuclear Gener-ating Station," Vol. III. 81-RD-9, 1961.

36. National Academy of Sciences, Committee on Biological Ettects or Ionizing Radiation (BEIR), "The Ef fects on Population of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation," National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1980.

2-9

o /

SohGS 1 Fhb UPDATE Section Page Comment 3.1 3-1 As noted in the $0 HGS Units 2 and 3 tk-ut(l) ,

the overhead transmission system serving Units 1, 2 and 3 is also visible trom Interstate liighway 5, with the transnission lines extending overhead.

In addition to portions of the turbine gener-ator and storage tanks, the sphere enclosure building is visible from a point on the beach directly in front of the station.

3.2 3-1 Unit I refueling outages are scheduled approximately every 15 to 16 months.

3.3 3-4 Per current mode of operation at Unit 1, many changes have been made to the plant water use described by Figure i.3 or the 1973 Feb (1,2,3):

o Discontinued use of the flash evaporators (and the associated sulturic acid addition to maintain proper pH) for saltwater conversion to fresh water.

o Fresh water is supplied to the station from the Tri-Cities !!unicipal bater District.

o Deletion of the previous flash evaporator blowdown to the circulatin6 water conduit.

o Discontinued use ot the biodegradable cellulose sealant tor the prevention ot leaks in the main condense r.

o Deletion of sanitary waste flow diversion to a ieach field, now abandoned.

o Flow from the two 50,000 gpd sanitary sewage treatment plants located at Unit 'l but serving all three units can range from the minimum design flow of 7,000 gpd (ae 5 gpm) up to a maximum of about 100,000 gpd (asb9 gpm). The sewage treatment plant erfluent is pumped to the Unit I seawater discharge line.

3-1 I

, d SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Section Page Comment 3.4 3-4 Total travel time or circulating water f rom intake port to discharge port is 14.9 minutes per SONGS Unit 1 316(b) bemonstration Report which was prepared per requirement of Section 316 (b) of the Amendments to the Federal bater Pollution Control Act of 1972(0).

3.4.5 3-9 The top ot discharge structure is 11.5 feet below mean lower low-water level (MLLW) and the exit velocity from discharge structure is 2.5 feet per second (fps) as described in SONGS Unit 1 Provisional Operating License ho. DPR-13(5),

3.4.6 3-9 Under normal conditions, only the intake conduit is heat treated as described in SOSGS Unit 1 Technical S Section 6.19.la(5)pecification Appendix A, 3.4.7 3-9 Three additional study reports summarize the measurements of elevated temperature field due to the operation of Unit 1 between 1969 to 1981. These include the Thermal Effect Study (3) , 1980 Annual Report - Marine Environ-mental Analysis and Interpretation (b) and the 1981 Annual Report - Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation (7). The surface area enclosed by the 40F elevated temperature field averaged about five acres for 1969 through 1972 and 16 acres for 1970 through 1981.

3.4.8 3-19 A minimum initial dilution f actor of 10 was approved by the State Water Resources Control Board based on the model study submitted by the Licensee in 1979(d*9). The minimum dilu-tion factor is defined in the kater Quality Control Plan for Ocean Waters of Calif ornia -

1978(16).- A State-issued companion document (II) provides guidelines and numerical models for estimating minimum initial dilution. The minimum initial dilution factor of 10 is based on a flux-weighted average dilution approach that uses temperature data recorded at the condenser inlet and outlet, at the water surface above the outfall structure and of

. the ambient ocean water. This factor methodol-ogy has been accepted by the State kater Resources Control Board as meeting the intent of keferences 16 and 17.

3-2

S0 HGS 1 FE5 UPDATE Page Comment Section_

3.5 3-20 Per Appendix A of SONOS Unit 1 Technical speci-fication Section 6.15(5), licensee-initiated major changes to the radioactive waste treat-ment systems (liquid, gaseous, and solid) shall be reported to the huclear Regulatory Commission (hKC) in the Semi-annual Et tluent Report for the period in which the evaluation was reviewed. The licensee may choose to submit the information called for in the specification as part ot the annual FSAR update.

3.5.1 3-20 As discussed in the Semi-annual Ef fluent Reports, treated liquid wastes are handled with both " batch" and " continuous" modes of release (10,ll).

3.5.1 3-21 As illustrated in current S05GS Unit 1 piping and Instrumentation Drawings (12) (P& ids),

several changes have been made to the liquid waste-discharge system described by Figure 3.11 of the 1973 FLS.

o Gaseous eftluents from the flash tank and gas stripper are routed to the waste gas surge tank of the gaseous radwaste system and trou there through the waste gas compressors to the waste gas decay tanks. There is no " waste gas storage tank."

o The contents or the auxiliary building sump, the reactor sump and the sphere sump are directed to the decontamination drain tank, and not directly through the radwaste process filter into the monitor tanks.

o The contents of the decontamination drain tank are directed through the radwaste process filter to the monitor tanks, and not directly into the raciochemistry lab drain tank.

3.5.1 3-21 The letdown flowrate may be set at either 45 or 90 gal / min (13). The letdown tiow is processed through the lithium domineralizer tor removal of excess lithium only when and as directed by the Chemistry Group.

3.5.1 3-21 As illustrated in the SONGS Unit 1 PalDs(12),

the shim bleed stream tiowpath from the let-down flow stream to the coolant radioactive vaste processing system (tlash tank) is normally closed.

3-3

4

• SchGS 1 FES UPDATE Section Page Comment 3.5.1 3-26 In February 1982, Unit I was shut down for seismic modifications. The bait was brought back into service during November 1964.

Measured values of radioactivity released from the plant in liquid et tluents f rom January 1973 through June 1985, as reported in the Semi-annual Eftluent Reports, are shown in revised Table 3.5.

3.5.2 3-26 As illustrated in current SchGS Unit 1 P61Ds(12) ,

changes have been made to the radioactive gaseous waste system described by Figure 3.10 of the 1973 FES:

o Each unit of the reactor containment air cleanup system also contains a demister and prefilter in addition to the charcoal absorber and high-efficiency filter.

o Each of the exhaust paths from the reactor containment and the auxiliary building consists of flow through a building-unique prefilter discharging to a common discharge header. From the header a fan forces the exhaust through a high ef ficiency tilter and to the plant vent stack.

o Discharges from the air ejectors and the mechanical vacuum pumps are exhausted directly to the plant vent stack without passing through either a high ef ticiency filter or a fan.

o Radioactive waste gas is no longer processed through the cryogenic waste gas treatment system.

3-4

j .

• i SONGS 1 FES UPDATE TABLE 3.5 (REVISED)

RADIOACTIVITY RELEASED IN LIQUID EFFLUENT DL' RING ACTUAL OPERAft0N(10.11.14)

Curies Excluding l Tritium but In-cluding Noble Curies of Time Period _ Gaaan nNA Ind!n,(a) Tritium __

Jan-Jun 1985 1.48 (+1)(c) 1.08 (+3)

Jul-Dec 1984(b) 1.88 (0) 1.37 (+1)

Jan-Jun 1984(b) g,og (0) 2.02 (+1)

Jul-Dec 1983(b) 1.62 (-1) 2.08 (+2)

Jan-Jun 1983(b) 1.06 (0) 1.11 (+1)

Jul-Dec 1982(b) 8.67 (-1) 3.45 (+1)

Jan-Jun 1982(b) 1.29 (0) 5.11 (+2) 1 Jul-Dec 1981 2.13 (-2) 7.17 (+1)

Jan-Jun 1981 2.51 (0) 1.32 (+1)

Jul-Dec 1980 2.65 (0) 1.17 (+1)

Jan-Jun 1980 1.22 (+1) 1.02 (+3)

Jul-Dec 1979 1.86 (+1) 1.29 (+3)

Jan-Jun 1979 1.02 (+1) 1.03 (+3)

Jul-Dec 1978 2.18 (+1) 6.70 (+2)

Jan-Jun 1978 7.86 (-1) 1.82 (+3)

Jul-Dec 1977 6.39 (0) 1.36 (+3)

Jan-Jun 1977 3.45 (0) 3.65 (+2)

Jul-Dec 1976 1.51 (+1) 9.16 (+2)

Jan-Jun 1976 5.30 (0) 2.47 (+3)

Jul-Dee 1975 1.59 (-1) 2.11 (+3)

Jan-Jun 1975 5.80 (0) 1.89 (+3)

Jul-Dec 1974 2.58 (0) 2.38 (+3)

Jan-Jun 1974 5.18 (0) 1.4 7 (+3)

Jul-Dec 1973 1.11 (+1) 1.21 (+3)

Jan-Jun 1973 5.82 (+1) 2.8 7 (+3) r (a) For a detailed breakdown, see the references for this table.

1 (b) SONCS 1 was shut down for seismic modifications f rom February 1982 through November 1984.

(c) Numbers in parentheses represent powers of ten.

3-5

. I SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Page Comment Section_

3.5.2 3-29 The alternative treatment of the daseous wasto that utilized the cryogenic absorption system is no longer used. The system was abandoned f ollowing unf avorable operating experience.

3.5.2 3-30 As illustrated in the SONGS Unit 1 P61Ds(12),

all vent paths to the plant vent stack do not flow through high etficieecy filters.

3.5.2 3-30 As illustrated in the $USGS Unit 1 Palun(12),

each unit of the reactor containment air cleanup systems also contains a demister and pretilter in addition to the charcoal absorber and high-efficiency filter.

3.5.2 3-30  ::easured values of radioactivity released from the plant in gaseous effluents trom January 1973 to June 1985, as reported in the Semi-annual Et tluent Reports, are shown in revised Table 3.7.

3.5.3 3-33 Spent ton exchange resins are placed within high integrity containers (HICs) and dewatered.

The HIC is shipped to a licensed burial site.

Spent filters are either placed within h1C's or encapsulated in cement. Very low level filters are placed in drums with an approved absorbent.

3.5.3 3-33 Clothing worn in the plant is no longer decontaminated of f site. Unit i laundry is processed onsite at a central decontamination facility along with the contaminated laundry from Units 2 and 3.

3.5.3 3-34 The total volume and radioactivity or the solid waste shipped offsite for disposal are reported to the hRC in the hemi-annual Erfluent Reports (10,11,14),

3.6 3-34 Refer to Section 3.4.6 of this update tor current minier7 initial dilution factor.

3.6.1 3-35 The use of cellulose biodegradable sealant was elleinated in circulating water system as described in the " Thermal httect Study, Final Summary Report, SchbS Unit 1"l3). Also, Sanitary waste is treated by activated sludge process instead at septic tank and leaching field (II.

3-6

SohCS 1 FES UPDATE TABLE 3.7 (REVISED)

RADI0 ACTIVITY KELEASED IN GASEOUS EEFLUENT DURING ACTUAL OPERATION (10,11,14)

TIME CURIES OF CURIES OF CURIES OF PERIOD NOBLE GASES TRITIUti IUDISES Jan-Jun 1985 2.48 (+3)(c) 1,51 (+1) t,lo (-4)

Jul-Dec 1984(b) 8.62 (+1) LLD(d) 4,29 ( e)(a)

Jan-Jun 1984(b) LLD LLD 2.49 (-6)(a)

Jul-Dec 1983(b) Ltu ttu 7,71 (_7)(a)

Jan-Jun 1983(b) LLD 3.93 2.15 (-e)(a)

Jul-Dec 1982(b) 1.01 (-3) 6.42 LLD Jan-Jun 1982(b) 8.61 (+1) 4.99 (+1) LLD Jul-Dec 1981 4.11 (+2) 4.47 (0) 1.30 (-3)

Jan-Jun 1981 1.10 (+1) 9.40 (0) 1.90 (-J)

Jul-Dec 1980 2.80 (0) 1.30 (+1) LLD Jan-Jun 1980 1.05 (+3) 2.43 (+1) 2.53 (-4)

Jul-Dec 1979 4.50 (+2) 1.40 (+1) LLD Jan-Jun 1979 1.60 (+2) 1.50 (+1) 1.22 (-4)

Jul-Dec 1978 8.50 (+2) 2.70 (+1) 1.50 (-4)

Jan-Jun 1978 3.90 (+2) 3.10 (+1) 6.'0 (-5)

Jul-Dec 1977 2.40 (+2) 6.00 (+1) 1.81 (-4)

Jan-Jun 1977 3.11 (+1) 1.57 (+1) LLD Jul-Dec 1976 7.10 (+1) 1.30 (+1) 1.40 (-4)

Jan-Jun 1976 1.10 (+2) 1.11 (+1) 2.90 (-4)

Jul-Dec 1975 7.15 (+1) LLD 1.42 (-6)

Jan-Jun 1975 1.07 (+3) 3.43 (+1) 2.46 (-1)

Jul-Dec 1974 1.04 (+3) 1.76 (+1) 2.31 (-4)

Jan-Jun 1974 7.41 (+2) 7.36 (+1) LLb Jul-Dec 1973 2.06 (+3) 2.90 (+2) 5.11 (-1)

Jan-Jun 1973 8.50 (+3) 7.99 (+1) 1.40 (-1)

(a) All radiciodine released f rom Unit I during this period, except in the fourth quarter ot 1984, was due to processing at Units 2 and 3 radwaste at Unit 1.

(b) SONGS 1 was shut down for seismic modifications f rom February 1982 through November 1904 (c) Numbers in parentheses represent powers of ten.

(d) LLD = Lower Limit of Detection.

3-7

O d SONGS l FES UPDATE Section Page Comment 3.6.1 3-38 Ref er to Section 3.3 of this update f or changes made to Tables 3.8 and 3.9 of the 1973 FES.

Specifically, chemicals related to the use of the flash evaporators and the main condenser biodegradable cellulose sealant have been deleted. Per the S0 HGS Units 2 and 3 ER-OL, Section 3.7.1(I), the process rate of the sani-tary waste disposal for all three units can range from 7,000 to 100,000 gpd (about $ to 69 gpm).

3-8

e 4 SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Section Page Comment 3.7.1 3-40 The current sanitary waste system design information is provided in Section 3.7.1 of the SONGS Units 2 and 3 ER-OLll) .

A permanent sewage treatment plant is located at Unit I which serves Units 1, 2 and 3. The plant consists of two 50,000 gpd units, each with aeration tank, blowers, final digest-ing and settling tanks, and a chlorine con-tact tank. The minimum design flow during normal operations is 7,000 gpd. The eftluent from the treatment plant is pumped to the sea through the Unit I discharge line.

The etfluent produced by the plant indicates biological oxygen demand (BOD) value of 30 parts per million (ppm) with suspended solids less than 10 ppm. Colitorm counts have been noted to be 43 most probable number (MPS) per 100 milliliters af ter chlorine treatment and dilution by circulating water.

3.7.2 3-40 Emergency station auxiliary power is supplied by two diesel electric generators, each rated at 6,000 Kw. The 600 Kw units described in the SONGS Unit i FES have been removed and the 3,800 Kw units later planned for this site were never installed.

The hourly air pollutant emissions in the exhaust gas from an individual 6,000 Kw diesel generator are matimated to be as f o11ous(15):

Pollutant Emissions (Ib/hr/ generator)

Carbon monoxide 2.13 Hydrocarbons 1.15 Nitrogen oxides 36.50 (as nitrogen dioxide)

Sultur dioxide 19.27 Particulates 3.04 3-9

e i SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Section Page Comment 3.7.2 3-40 Surveillance testing or the diesel generators, as specified in the Technical Specitications, Appendix B, Section 4.4(5), requires engine operation under load at 31 day intervals (conthly) for a minicum of one hour. The diesel generators are typically operated tor about two hours at that t i me . In. addition to the monthly surveillance testing, the diesel generators are operated under test for other reasons such asi o Verification of operability of one diesel when the other diesel is removed f rom service, o Diesel generator operation following over-haul or other major maintenance, and o Surveillance testing at refueling outages Total test operation of each diesel generator will not normally exceed 50 hours5.787037e-4 days <br />0.0139 hours <br />8.267196e-5 weeks <br />1.9025e-5 months <br /> per year. Un that basis, the resulting total annual air pollutant emissions from the diesel exhaust are calculated f rom the hourly emmissions to be as tollows:

Pollutant Emissions (tons /yr/both diesels)

Carbon monoxide 0.11 Ilydrocarbons 0.06 Nitrogen oxides 1.82 (as nitrogen dioxide)

Sulfur dioxide 0.96 Particulates 0.15 Sustained operation of the diesel generators in an emergency mode is uncommon and the test operation emissions listed above are, there-fore, a good representation at the total annual air pollution contribution of the emergency 4 auxiliary power system. This quantity at pollutants, distributed over the year, has a negligible impact on overall air quality.

3-10

. I SchGS 1 FES UPDATE Reterences ror section 3

1. Southern California Edison Company, " Environmental Report - Operating Ltcense Stage, San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station Units Z and 3," 1977.

2. Southern California Edison Company P&ID No. 5178380-4, " Service and bomestic water bystems," dneet 1 ot J.

3. SouthernSanCalifornia Report, OnofreEdison Company, Nuclear " Thermal Generating b fUnit Station fect 1 Study

" Vo[. Final Summary

1. August 1973.

4. Southern California Edison Company, " San unof re Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1 316 (b) Demonstration," January 1983.

5. Southern California Edison Company, " San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1 Provisional Operating License No. DPR-13."

6. Southern California Edison Company, "1960 Annual Report, Environmental AnalySie and Interpretation," 1981. Vol. III, 81-RD-9.

7. Sot :hern California Edison Company, "1981 Annual Report, Environmental Ana ysis and Interpretation," 1982. 82-RD-51.

8. Southern California Edison Company, " Study on Initial Dilution," sub-mitted to the California State Water Resources Control Board, prepared by Koh, R.C.Y. and E. J. List. 1979.

9. NPDES Permit No. CA0001228 for SohGS Unit 1, issued by San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board, 1982.

10. Southern California Edison Company, " San Onofre Nuclear Generating Sta-tion Units 1, 2 and 3 Semi-annual Ef fluent Report," January - June 1965.

11. Southern California Edison Company, " San Onof re huclear Generating Sta-tion Unit 1 Semi-annual Ef fluent Reports," January - June 1961 through July - December 1984

12. Southern Calif ornia Edison Company, " San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1, Piping & Instrumentation Diagrams," Series 517d000.

13. Southern California Edison Company, " San Onof re buclear Generating Station Unit 1 Station Manual, System Descriptions," October 1965.

14 Southern California Edison Company, " San Onof re Nuclear Generating Sta-tion Unit i Seni-annual Operating Reports," January - June 1973 through July - December 1980.

15. California Air Pollution Control District, " Fuel Use and Emmissions from Stationary Combustion Processes," July 1976.

16. State of California, " Water Quality Control Plan for Ocean Waters of California - 1978."

17 State of California, " Water Quality Control Plan, Table B Guidelines, Ocean Waters of California," 1978.

3-11

SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Page Comment Section_

5.2 5-2 Data regarding the measurements or elevated receiving water temperature fields reconded between 1976 and 1981, the last full year or Unit 1 operation, are available in the corres-ponding annual marine environmental reports and summarized in the 19d1 Annual Report - harine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation (l).

5.3 5-3 The presence of radionuclides in 1981 terres-trial species (i.e. rabbits), representing the last full year of Unit 1 operations prior to the seismic modifications shutdown in February 1982, found no significant variations from the preoperational levels (2).

The evaluation of non-migratory marine species found station-released radionuclides had accumulated to a measurable level greater than that found in a controlled environment. A calculation based on the composite mean activ-ity. concentrations reported tot 1981 yields an internal dose of approximately 16 meads /yr for the marine biota (3). This dose has been calculated with the methods presented in Appendix 5.1 of the Staf f 's FES related to the proposed Units 2 and 3(4); the product of GWb (Cb = bioaccumulation factor for the biota, W = radioactive concentration in water),

utilized in Appendix 5.1 was replaced with the marine biota activity concentrations evaluated in the operating report (3).

5.4.1 5-3 Measurements of direct radiation tanen near the 50 HGS in 1981 showed a maximum increment of 1.0 uR/hr to the natural background at 0.1 miles SSW of the sitel3) , which was relatively lower than the value presented in the 1973 FES of 3.2 uk/hr adjacent to BOO-feet long seawall.

5.4.2.L 5-4 The dispersion of gaseous effluents from Unit 1 is ad (S*D'jressedintheSONGSSemi-annualReports

). In these reports, release rates / air doses are presented in terms of percent Technical Specification Limit (TSL). The intent of these Technical Specification Limits is to require compliance with 10CFR20 Appendix B. As shown in the reports, in no case did the percent TSL exceed 100.

5-1

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

i SONGS 1 FES UPDATE 1

i Section Page Comment 5.4.3 5-6 The Statt's annual radioactive liquid ettluent esti-mates in Table 3.4 of the 1973 fts have proven to be

reasonably close tot liquid releases excluding tritium j and conservative for tritium. Actual Unit 1 liquid releases from 1973 through 1985 are presented in revised Table 3.5 of this update and the data tor the ,

period 1973 to 1961 (prior to shutdown for seismic modifications in February 1962) yield an annual average release of 20 C1/yr excluding tritium and

, about 2550 C1/yr of tritium.

i 4 The Staf ts annual radioactive gas release estimates in Table 3.6 of the 1973 FES have proven to be conser-vattvu for noble oases anc reasonably civue tur iuctnes.

Actual gaseous activity releases for the 9 years trom 1973 through 1981 have averaged about 1920 Ci/yr noble gases and 0.10 Ci/yr iodines as calculated f rom the data in revised Table 3.7 of this update.

5.4.3.1 5-6 The airborne radiation readings during the period from January 1979 through July 1982 (encompassind the final three years of Unit 1 operation prior to the February ,

. 1962 shutdown for seismic moditications) avera6ed 8 gross beta activity of 0.019 pei/m3(2). This value is i

much smaller than the values reported f or preoperational i period of 1964 to 1967(2). This decrease may be *

attributable to the cessation of atmospheric nuclear l

weapons testing, and implies the FES-reported immersion dose of 1.12 man-rems is now conservative. t The presence of radionuclides in 1981 soil samples (representing the last full year of Unit 1 operations j prior to the seismic moditications shutdown) show detectable levels of Strontium-90. Cesium-137, Radium-226 and Thorium-232. of which only 5trontium-90 and Cesium-137 are station-related radionuclides, although l l Strontonium-90 can also be doe to nuclear weapon test-ing(3). the 1981 concentrations of these two radionu-i clides are approximately the same as those reported in 1975(7), thereby implying no trend f or the accumulation 4 of these isotopes in the soil environment.

5.4.3.1 5-10 The extent of agricultural activity within a 50-mile l radius of the station is addressed in Section 2.2.2 of this update. The concentrations of radionuclides in crop samples in 1981 (representing the last tull year of Unit 1 operations prior to the seismic modifications i shutdown) show no detectable lovels near the site (2*II. i 5-2

j .

• 1 S0 HGS 1 FES UPDATE i Section Page Gomment i.

5.4.3.2 5-11 The concentrations ot radionuclides detected I in 1981 beach sano samples (representing the last tuli year or Unit 1 operations prior to the scismic modifications shutdown) show meas- j urable levels of Cesium-lj7. Kadium-226. and l

the Thorium-232 decay chain, or which only Cesium-137 is a station-generated radionuclide(4).

I The activity level of this isotope is commen-surate with activity levels at the control i location, indicating a ne  !

I the beach sand media (2). gligible ettect on l f

J The ocean water radiation readings on gross beta activity during the period of January  ;

)

1979 through December 1982 (encompassing the j i final three years of Unit 1 operations prior l

to the February 1982 shutdown for seismic i modifications) show that SONGS Unit I has had

! a detectable, but minimal, e11ect on this i

environmental media (2),

i 5.4.4 5-12 Based upon the actual 1980 population data (8),

the aggregate annual exposures received by the population within 50 miles of the station

" are 031,000 man-rema for natural background i

radiation exposure assuming 115 mrem / person- .

l year (1973 FES Section 2.8), and 505,000  !

I man-rems for exposure to cedical and dental j diagnostic x-rays assuming 92 mrem / person year (Section 2.8 of this update). In contrast, the total anticipated increment of population j exposure from Unit 1, as shown in Table 5.2 ,

of the FES is 1.b man-rems.

i l 5.5.1 5-13 The most recent tupact analysis is contained in the 50 HGS Units 2 and 3 Final Environmental i

Statement - Operating License Stage (FES-OL)(9),

which is in agreement with the previous assess-

j ment in Unit 1 FES and Unita 2 and ) Final Environmental Statement - Construction Permit Stage (FES-CP)(').

i 5.5.2.1 5-13 The monitoring results of SchGS Unit I thermal i discharge (1964-1975) on plankton coumunities l were presented in Unita 2 and 3 EK-OL Section 5.1.3.4(10). No measurable changes in species l diversity or abundance were found.

i i

r

! 5-3 I

• i

< i

SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Section_ g Comment 5.5.2.2 5-15 The fish impingement study f or Unit 1 began in 1968. The 1975 to 19b4 study results were presented in the 1980 to 1984 annual reports on Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpre-tationll'II'lk). The total we1 6hts of fish killed between 1975 to 1984 ranged f rom 24 to 316 lbs per normal operational day. The 1980 to 1984 data identified that the total weight of fish killed per heat treatment ranged up to 441 lbs. The total number or species impinged during normal plant operation ano heat treatment varied trom 33 to 70. The tluctuations can be attributed to the season in which Unit 1 was in operation and seasonal movement and reproductive patterns of season-ally abundant species.

The plankton entrainment study for Unit I was conducted in 1974 and the results were summarized in Units 2 and 3 ER-OL, Section 5.2.3.4.2(10). A study on ichthyoplankton was persented in the SONGS 1979 Annual Opera-ting Report (IS). Another special ichthyoplank-ton entrainment study was conducted f rom 1979 to 1980 and the results were presented in the 19h3 316 (b) demonstration report (16),

5.5.2.3 5-19 Turbidity measurements / studies f or SONGS Unit I were initiated in 1963 and continued through 1981. The operational monitoring results were presented in annual reports un Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation (1968-1981). The study results since 1976 were summarized in 1981 annual report and it was concluded that the influence trom Unit 1 was strictly local in scope and produces less than natural variability with space and time in the nearshore coastal environment (I).

The impact, therefore, was considered negli-gible. The same conclusion was reached during the hearing on SONGS Unit 1 turbidity impacts conducted by California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB) San Utego Region in 1983.

5.5.2.5 5-29 No sodium hydroxide or sulphuric acid is presently discharged to the seawater. The remaining chemicals identified on this page (copper, nickel, sodium, calcium, magnesium, phosphates, and hydrazine) are discharged in amounts that are not significantly different from those described in the FES.

5-4

SONGS 1 FES UYDATE Section Page Comment 5.5.2.6 5-31 The plankton monitoring program concluded in Phytoplankton 1982 based on the results of previous studies

. which indicated no measurable etfect of SohG5 Unit 1 operation on the plankton resources.

Results are presented in the 1980 and 1981 annual reports entitled " Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation"(l . ll) and the Marine keview Committee report (17).

In the 1973 FES, a slight increase in phyto-plankton abundance was reported, which was attributed to the thermal discharge f rom SONGS Unit 1. Subsequent analyses have indicated, however, that phytoplankton species composition and density are similar between the Unit 1 discharge stations and the control stations.

The variability in abundance tot ditterent sampling periods reflects natural population fluctuations and are not a result of Unit 1 operation. Results of phytoplankton tloures-cence studies indicate a healthy phytoplankton population in the SONGS offshcre area (11).

A comparison of data collected during six years of monitoring studies when Unit I was opera-tional, followed by tour consecutive plankton surveys when the unit was not operational, showed no difference in composition, distribu-tion or abundance ot any plankton species analyzed.

5.5.2.6 5-32 Since publication of the 1973 FES for Unit 1, Kelp Heds the following changes have been made in the sampling program which has enabled a more accurate assessment of the impact or plant operation on the kelp beds. Aerial photog-raphy surveys have documented fluctuations in kelp canopies on a quarterly basis. In addition, hard substrate monitoring and benthic community monitoring was initiated in 1975. Sutrient surveys and the qualitative exanination of the health of the kelp plants by divers began in 1917. Results ut these monitoring ef f orts are reported annually in the "ttarine Environmental Analysis and Interpru-tation" reports. The Marine Review Committee has also conducted independent monitoring studies and experimental kelp transplant studies to determino the impact of SOSGS Unit 1 oper-ation. Results are reported in the " Updated Estimated Effects of 50 HGS Onit 1 on Marine Organisms"(17) and the " Predictions of the Effects of SOSGS and kecommendations"(IB).

5-5

SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Section Page Comment Since 1973. the San Onof re kelp bed has become well established, occupying an average area of 40 hectares. The Barn kelp bed disappeared in 1980 following major winter storms (l) and it started to show some new growth in 1985. Fluctuations in kelp bed conditions appear to be independent of SONGS Unit 1 operation and are related primarily to high temperature and nutrient deficiencies in the summer. loss of adults in winter storms, and loss or substrate due to sand movement.

5.5.2.6 5-32 The plankton monitoring program ended in 1982 plankton based on the results of previous studies which showed no impact of SONGS Unit 1 opera-tion on the zooplankton population. Results of the zooplankton studies are reported in the 1980 and 1981 annual reports entitled

" Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpreta-tion"llell). In addition, a special 316(b) demonstration study was conducted from 1979 to 1960 to assess the amount of ichthyoplank-ton entrained during Unit 1 operation.

Results are presented in the 1963 310(b)

Demonstration Report (16) which was prepared to nect the requirements of Amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972.

Previous studies reported in the 1973 FES indicated an increase in abundance of zoo-plankton species during periods of Unit 1 operation. Subsequent sampling indicated, however, that the variability in abundance was due to natural fluctuations and not a result of plant operation.

The collected data show a change in the domi-nant species of copepods since the 1973 FLS.

This is attributed to changes in sampling design and the addition or stations that are further offshore. The most common copepod species collected from 1975 to 1980 are Acartia and Paracalanus species.

A review of over ten years of data, including periods of operation and shutdown of Unit I and independent Marine Review Committee studies have shown that operation of S0 HGS Unit I has not significantly affected plankton resources in the San Unotre area (IleAIeld).

5-6

S0 HGS 1 FES UPDATE i Section Page Comment 5.5.2.6 5-34 The benthic monitoring program has become Benthos more quantitative in scope since 1973 as i sampling methods improved (IA). The current program to satisfy teational Pollution Discharge 4 Elimination System (hPDES) permit require-ments include an assessment of substrate cover (percent sand and rock) as well as the abundance of dominant kelp and grazer species in the San Onofre and San Mateo Kelp beds.

The sandy intertidal sampling program ended in 1980 with the completion or construction

! of Units 2 and 3. ho adverse effects of operation or construction on the sandy beach intertidal community were found.

i Changes in the intertidal cobble community were attributed to human activities such as clamming and exploring tidepools, natural processes at sand and cobble movecent, and seasonal variations in population. There was no evidence of changes in the intertidal j cobble biota due to the operation of SohGS

! Unit 1.

The infaunal sediment saupling program con-tinued until 1960 and thereatter was reduced in scope. The stations immediately adjacent to Unit I showed an elevation in the number of species and individuals which is attributed to an elevation in the sediment organics.

The hard benthos sampling program is currently limited to the kelp bed areas. An analysis of the data collected to date indicates no long term ecological effects associated with the operation of Unit I at the inshore and offshore cobble stations and the kelp stations.

5.5.2.7 5-35 Fish sampling has been conducted since 1963 although more quantitative sampling techniques have been employed since 1973. Results are presented in the annual " Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation" reports. Examples 4 of these reports are d ven i in References 1 l and 11 through 14.

There is substantial spatial variability in fish populations in the San Onotre area that is related to depth and stability.of substrate.

The collected data indicate no unique fish i

5-7

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

+

1 l 4 SONGS 1 FES UPDATE 1

Section Page Comment

! groups near S0 HGS Unit 1 and no numerical domination of a given species near the discharge site. A comparison or data collected when Unit I was in operation and when Unit I was shut down indicates no significant differences in the fish community. All of the data col-4 lected to date indicate that the variability inherent in the fish community and governing physical factors exceed any differences that-can be attributed to thermal discharge from Unit 1. Impingement studies began in 1968 f and were changed to include more quantitative analyses in 1974. Data collection is continuing as part of the NPDES permit requirements and results are reported annually in the " Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation" reports, typically References 1 and 11 through i

14, and the SONGS Unit 1 316 (b) Demonstra-tion Report (16) ,

l I

The impingement studies between 1975 to 1984, j presented in the 1980 through 1964 annual j

j reports (1 ll-14), are discussed earlier in

• Section 5.5.2.2 of this update.

(J In no case was the probability of a species l being impinged or entrained greater than 3.2 percent of the species population in the immediate vicinity of the plant and in most cases, the probability was less that 1.

f' percent. Theref ore, it was concluded that the operation of Unit I has an insignificant i impact on the nearshore fish population in the San Onofre area, l

i 5.6 5-38 The applicant conducted surveys in March 1970 to determine the residential location of SONGS l Unit I workers and to evaluate the proposed l development of S0hGb Units 2 and 3. The I

results of these surveys, and the economic

' impact on the communities identified by them, are presented in the SONGS Units 2 and 3 1

l ER-OL, Appendix 8A(10),

}

5.7 5-39 Unit I refueling outages are scheduled to

,~

occur every 15 to 18 months as compared with j

the previous estimate of once a year in 1973

' FES.

t T

! 5-8 l

l-I

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

SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Section Page Comment 5.7.1 5-39 The November 1985 refueling outage required five shipments of new fuel. Each shipment averaged five hRC and Department of Transpor-tation (DOT) approved containers, with two fuel elements per container.

5.7.2 5-39 The transport o'f irradiated fuel to the General Electric Processing Center in horris. Illinois has been suspended, and the irradiated fuel is currently being stored in the spent fuel pool.

When the shipments are resumed, they will comply with the applicable transportation requirements of the NRC and the DOT (19).

5.7.3 5-40 Details on Unit I shipments of solid radioact-ive waste to approved waste disposal sites are reported to the NRC in _ the Semi-annual Effluent Reports (5,6,7). The tabulation on the following page (5-10) sumnarizes the information in these reports for waste shipped during the time period from January 1973 through June 1985.

5-9

ASSUAL SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE SHIPMENTS (5,6,7)

Time Total Number of Period Volume (m3) Radioactivity (C1) Shipments and Destination 1985 450.0 586.0 23 to Richland, Wa 1984 291.2 15.3 29 to Richland, kA 1983 332.0 226.8 20 to Richland, WA 1982 927.0 76.0 43 to Richland, WA 1981 1,618.4 78.2 82 to Richland, WA 1980 711.9 383.0 1 to Beatty, NV 36 to Richland, WA 1979 83.5 92.4 6 to Beatty, NV 1 to Richland, WA 1978 182.4 8.6 4 to Beatty, hV 19 spent fuel assemblies to Morris, IL 1977 368.4 60.2 14 to Beatty, NV 27 spent fuel assemblies to Morris, IL 1976 144.4 697.6 9 to Beatty, NV 55 spent fuel assemblies to Morris, IL 1975 79.6 26.0 6 to Beatty, SV El spent fuel assemblies to Morris, IL 1974 68.2 230.4 11 to Beatty, NV 12 spent fuel assemblies to Morris, IL 1973 112.7 381.0 13 to Beatty, hv 9 spent fuel assemblies to Morris, IL 5-10

. I SchCS 1 FES UPDAih i Section Page Comment

! 5.7.4 5-40 The transportation of radioactive material ,

is regulated by the DOT and NRC.

i 5.7.5 5-40, 5-41 Potential exposure during normal new fuel l

transport is evaluated in the Commission's

" Environmental Survey of Transportation ot l

i Radioactive Materials to and trom huclear j Power Plants," WASH-1238(20). The environ- '

mental impacts of transportation or new fuel, irradiated tuel, and solid radioactive waste, with respect to both normal and accident conditions of transport, are set forth in

' Table 5.4 in 10 CFR Part 51.52(21). Trans-portation accidents involving radioactive materials are addressed in Section 7.2. t

] 5.7.6- 5-42 The total number of shipment miles per year to the plant has changed because of 1) a new

fuel shipment frequency to support refueling

' at 15 to 18-month intervals (2,400 miles each trip) instead of refueling at 12-month intervals assumed by the staff in the 1973 FES, 2) the implementation of a new solid waste disposal site (1,200 miles each trip) ,

since 1979, and 3) the cessation of irradiated fuel shipments after 1978. As a result, a total of less than 0.1 million truck miles i

for each year of plant operation would be 1 expected, if all trucks must be returned to-their points of origin.

4 l-i i

!' 5-11 t

. l

~

SONGS 1 FES UPDATE References for Section 5 t

1. Southern California Edison Company, "1981 Annual Report, Marine Environ- {

mental Analysis and Interpretation, San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station'," Vol. III. 82-RD-51, 1982.

2. Southern California Edison Company, " San Onof re Nuclear Generating

, Station Units 1, 2 and 3 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for 1984," Docket Nos. 50-206, 50-361 and 50-362; License Nos.

DPR-13, NPF-10 and NPF-15, April 30, 1985.

i i 3. Southern California Edison Company, " Annual Operating Report of SONGS Unit 1 for 1981, Corrective Maintenance, and Radiological Environmental Monitoring," Docket No. 50-206, License No. DPR-13, 1982.

4. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, " Final Environmental Statement related i to the proposed San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Units 2 and 3."

Docket Nos. 50-361/362, March 1973.

5. Southern California Edison Company, " San Onof re Nucle'a r Generating Sta-tion Unit 1 Semi-anaual Report," January-June 1981 through July-December 1984

, 6. Southern California Edison Company, " San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station Semi-annual Effluent Report," January-June 1985.

a

7. Southern ~ California Edison Company, " San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1 Semi-annual Operating Reports," January-June 1973 through July-December 1980.

8. Southern California Edison Company, " San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station Units 2 and 3 Final Safety Analysis Report" updated January j 1984 Tables 2.1-2 and 2.1-9.

l 9. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, " Final Environmental Statement Related to the Operation of San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station Units 2 and 3," NUREG 0490, April 1981.

10. Southern California Edison Company, " Environmental Report - Operating l License Stage, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Units 2 and 3,"

l 1977.

11. Southern California Edison Company, "1980 Annual Report, Marine Environ-mental Analysis and Interpretation, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station," Volume III. 81-RD-9, 1981.

12. Southern California Edison Company, " Report on 1982 Data, Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation, San Onofre Nuclear Gener-ating Station," 83-RD-10, 1983.

5-12

, ._ -- - _ ~

4 + da - 4 g .

24.-. 4 - 4 41___ J_ ,AJ. ,.ga_L __ a - _ d a_: ~.4 4 a_JA_4_ _.-sA __ 2_. s _ . ..- _

SONGS 1 (EE UPDATE References for Section 5 (Continued) a

13. Southern California Edison Company, " Report on 1983 Data, Marine Environmental Analysis' and Interpretation, San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station," 84-RD-63, 1984.

t i

14. Southern California Edison Company, " Report on 1984 Data, Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station," 85-RD-37, 1985.

15. Southern California Edison Company, ~1979 San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Annual Operating Report," Vol. V, 80-RD-100. Chapter 6A. 1960.

16. S'outhern California Edison Company, " San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1 316 (b) Demonstration," prepared for California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region, 82-RD-95, 1983.

17. Marine Review Committee, " Annual Report to the California Coastal Commission, September 1977 - August 1978, Updated Estimated Effects of San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1 on Marine Organisms," ,

1978.

18. Marine Review Committee, Report to the Marine Review Committee to the California Coastal Commission Predictions of the Effects of San Onof re Nuclear Station and Recommendations," Part 1: Recommendations, Pre-  ;

i dictions, and Rationale. MRC Doc. 80-04 (I), 1980.

19. Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations Part 173 Subpart I, " Radioactive Materials."

20. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, " Environmental Survey of Transportation of Radioactive Materials to and from Nuclear Power Plants," Report WASH-1238, December 1972.

r

21. Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 51, Section 52, " Environmental i Effects of Transportation of Fuel and Waste."

l 1

1 5-13 i

.. ,w,., .

,-m_m __ -. - - - . _ _ -y .m- ,.,m- , - , . - - - .-,.,,---_s-. -_, . --. - - - - -

SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Section 'Page Comment 6 6-1 The environmental monitoring ~ programs have changed over the years to (1) reflect the ef fect of construction and operation of SohGS Units 2 and 3 and (2) meet the new monitoring requirements imposed by the NRC and CkbQCb(1,2) ,

6.1 6-1 The previous environmental monitoring program for SONGS Unit I was completed in 1974 and subsequently modified to expand the operational monitoring program for SONGS Unit I and serve as the pre-operational monitoring program f or Units 2 and 3. Details are provided in Section 6.2 of this opdate.

'i 6.2, 6.2.1- 6-1 The current biological environmental =enitor-ing programs are described in detail in the latest Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report (3) and Section 6 of the FES for Units 2 and 3(4),

The original aquatic monitoring program for SONGS I has been expanded to determine the environmental impact of construction and operation of Units 1, 2 and 3 and to meet the NPDES permit monitoring requirements for these units. A summa ~ry cf the major marine ecological programs at SONGS is presented in Table 2-2 of the latest Annual Marine hovi-ronmental Report (3). Marine studies which were proposed in the FES for Unit 1 (1973) have since been completed and the data anal-yzed. kesults are included in the annual reports entitled " Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation."

A one year terrestrial monitoring progran was undertaken as part of SONGS Units 2 and 3 construction permit requirements (4), 3a endangered plant or animal species were dis-covered and no operational monitoring program is required. However, in accordance with the California Coastal Commission require-ment, an erosion control program to protect the bluffs south of the plant is active (5),

6-1

SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Section Page Comment 6.2.2 6-2 The present radiological environmental monitoring program and the monitoring sample locations are described in detail in the SONGS Unit 1 Technical Specifications, Section 3.18, and the 1984 Radiological Environmental Operating Report for Units 1, 2 and 3(6,3). Appropriate pages from these references are included as Attachment 1. The current program represents an expansion of that presented in the FES (1973) in terms of the number of monitoring stations and the inclusion of ocean water samples.

Results are published annually in the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating keport for SONGS 1, 2 and 3.

The latest report (3) indicates that the radio-logical impact of operating SohGS Units 1, 2 and 3 through 1984 has been minimal, and that 10CFR50, Appendix I and 40CFR190 criteria tor radiological dose exposure to the public have been met.

6.3 6-3 The CRWQCB requirements for monitoring fish entrainment and receiving water specified in the hPDES permit (2). quality are The current operational program includes temperature and aerial turbidity monitoring as well as trawling, fish impingement studies and kelp bed measure-ments in response to these requirements.

The onsite meteorological tower provides data in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.23 and the SONGS Units 2 and 3 Technical Specifica-tions. The program was modified in 1975, 1961 and 1982 by extending the tower height, adding dewpoint and precipitation sensors, and installing a backup meteorological tower.

Details are provided in the S0 HGS Units 2 and 3 FSAR(7). The meteorological tower data are printed out on a strip chart recorder in the control room and are available on a computer display at the Technical Support Center.

Other related studies include (1) the heat treatment optimization study to support the 316(a) exemption of the Amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 for SONGS Units 2 and 3; and (2) the Marine Review Committee of the California Coastal Commission study to independently evaluate the impact of plant operation on the marine environment. These studies are described in detail in the SONGS Unit 2 and 3 FES(4),

6-2

SONGS 1 FES UrDATE Section Page Comment 6.3 6-3 Additional studies are (3) the onshore tracer studies to determine the validity of meteoro-(continued) logical tower data (8) (4) the construction marine monitoring program for Units 2 and 3 l9) ,

and (5) the fish return system evaluation and study on the effects of El Nino on the marine environment (I).

l I

l 6-3 x

SONGS 1 FES LPDATE

. References for Section 6

1. Southern California Edison Company, " Report on 1964 Data, Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation, San Onof re huclear Generating Station," 85-RD-37, 1985.

2. California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region,

' NPDES Permit, Monitoring and Reporting Program No. 82-14 tor the Southern California Edison Company, San Onofre huclear Generating Station, Unit 1, San Diego County, July 12, 1982.

3. Southern California Edison Company, " ban Onof re Nuclear Generating Station Itnits 1, 2 and 3 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for 1984," Docket Nos. 50-200, 50-361 and 50-362; License Nos.

DPR-13, NPF-10 and hPF-15, April 30, 1965.

4 Nuclear Regulatory Commission, " Final Environmental Statement related to the Operation ot San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station Units 2 and 3," Docket Nos. 50-361/362, NUREG-0490, April 1981.

5. Southern California Edison Cocpany, " San Onotre huclear Generating Station Units 2 and 3, Environmental Report-Operating License Stage,"

Docket Nos. 50-361/362, 1977.

6. Southern California Edison Company, " San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1 Provisional Operating License No. DPR-13."

7. -Southern Californis Edison Company, " San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Units 2 and 3, Final Safety Analysis Report," Docket Nos.

50-361/362, updated January 1984.

j 8. Septoff, M., A. E. Mitchell and L. H. Teuscher, " Final Report of j

Onshore Tracer Tests Conducted f rom December 1976 through March 1977 at

~

San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station," Report NUS-1927, hub Corporation, l

Rockville, Maryland, 1977.

j 9. Marine Biological Consultants, Inc., " Construction Monitoring Program L

for San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station Units 2 and 3, December 1970

- December 1977," 78-RD-21, 1978.

l l

l 6-4 l

j SchCS 1 FES UPDATE 1 i

3 Section Page Comment 7.1 7-2 The 1980 population distribution assumed by the Staff (FES. Table 2.1) for evaluating radiological effects of accidents as reported in Table 7.2 continues to be conservative when compared with actual 1980 population data provided in the SchGS Units 2 and 3 updated FSAR(I). Within the five-mile radius, the Staff assumptions for 1980 con-servatively exceed the Licensee projections j out through the year 2020(l).

i '

7.1 ,

7-5 In conjunction with licensing proceedings

related to the construction of SONGS Units 2 and 3, the Exclusion Area Boundary (EAB) and Low Population Zone (LPZ) were reduced f or SONGS. To maintain calculated post-ac

ident radiation doses at the smaller EAB and LPZ distances with'in 10CFR100 limits, certain 3'

nodifications were made to SONGS Unit I as described ic keferences 2, 3 and 4. These i modificatioas, which were implemented during 1976, inciade:

o The addition of a reintorced concrete enclosure building around the steel containment sphere to attenuate post-accident direct radiation dose rates at the EAB; o Modification of fluid systems penetrating containment and changes to the containment ~

leak rate testing program to ensure isolata-bility and leak tightness of the containment sphere in order to mitigate post-accident indirect dose rates at the EAB and LPZ; and o Modifications to the containment spray system to mitigate both direct and indirect j post-accident dose rates at the EAB and LPZ.

Additional information on exclusion area is also available in the SEP Topic II-1.A. Exclusion l Area Authority and Control (5f ,

7.2 7-6 Based on the current transportation activities described in section 5.7.0 of this update, the total maximum shipment-miles estimated 3 by the staff in the Unit 1 FES was conserva-i tive.

l l

l l 7-1

e .'

SONGS 1 FES UPDATE References for Section 7

1. Southern California Edison Company, " San Onofre Units 2 and 3, Final Safety Analysis Report," Docket Nos. 50-361/362, updated January 1984.

2. Amendment 52 to the Final Safety Analysis, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1, Sphere Enclosure Project Report, December 3, 1975.

3.. Letter, Southern California Edison Company to R. A. Purple, NRC, Sup-plement to the Sphere Enclosure Project Report, !! arch 1, 1976.

4. Letter, Southern California Edison Company to K. R. Goller, hRC, Second Supplement to the Sphere Enclosure Project Report, March 25, 1976.

5. Southern California Edison Company, " Systematic Evaluation Program Topic II-1.A Exclusion Area Authority and Control."

t 7-2 i

SONGS 1 FES UPDATE Section Page Comment 8.1 8-1 Chapter 2 of the 1905 valifornia Electricity Report prepared by the California Energy Commission (CEC) contains current statewide and applicants' service areas energy fore-casts (I). Table 2-2 of Reference 1 provides for peak load and electricity demand forecasts.

Tables 2.2-19 and 2.2-36 of Reference 1 Appen-dices Vol. I provide a comparison of peak demand f orecasts between applicant utilities (SCE and SDG6E) and the CEC (l)-

The SCE and SDG&E area peak demands in 1984 were 15,169 MW and 2,342 MW, respectively on September 5(2,3). When compared to Table 2.2-19 of Reference 1 Appendices, Vol. 1, it shows that the 1984 SCE peak demand has already exceeded the CEC forecast for 1989.

Plans for the Kaiparowits Coal Generation Project and the Piru Creek Pumped Storage Project are no longer active.

8.4.3 8-10 As discussed in the update to Sections 5.5.2.2 and 5.5.2.7, recent entrainment studies sup-port the original conclusion in the S0 HGS Unit 1 FES that fish loss due to entrainment and heat treatment does not constitute a threat to the local population of species involved.

8.4.4 6-10 The recent turbidity study results and con-clusions were contained in the SCE annual reports on Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation and are described in Section 5.5.2.3 Update.

8.5 8-10 As noted in the SONGS Units 2 and 3 FSAK, the S0 HGS site is comprised of 84 acres or which 16 acres are occupied by Unit 1.

Units 2 and 3 occupy 52.8 acres of the site (4).

8.5 8-11 The Staf f 's assessment of the alternative procedures that may be used in the decomis-sioning of reactors has been updated, and is presented in NUREG-0586(5). The bohGS Units 2 and 3 FES-OL details these alternative procedures (6),

8-1

_m

. s' S0 HGS 1 FES OPDATE References for Section 8

1. California Energy Commission, "The 1985 California Electricity Report

- Affordable Electricity in an Uncertain World," May 1985.

2. Southern California Edison Company, " Annual Report, 1984."

3. San Diego Gas and Electric Company, " Annual Report, 1984."

4 Southern California Edison Company, " San Onof re Nuclear Cenerating Station Units 2 and 3, Final Saf ety Analysis Report ," Docket Nos. 50-361/

362, updated January 1984

5. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "Draf t Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Decomissioning of Nuclear Facilities," USNRC Report NUREG-0586, January 1981.

6. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, " Final Environmental Statement Related to the Operation of SohGS Units 2 and 3," AUREG-0490, April 19o1.

8-2

.'e'. .

i

! SONG'S 1 FES UPDATE 2

Section Page Comment 9.2.2.3 9-13 through The septic tank was removed and disposed 9-14 of in late 1982. The leach fields have been abandoned in place. A more sophisticated

' secondary sewage treatment system installed at Unit 1 presently serves Units 1, 2 and 3.

It consists of two 50,000 gpd units, each with an aeration tank, blowers, final digesting and i settling tanks, and a chlorine contact tank.

a The effluent from this plant is discharged through the Unit I circulating water system (I).

f 4

9.2.3 9-16 Test results on the effects of changing cool-ing water flow direction (2) indicates that:

1) Flow reversal of the cooling water system to control biofouling of intake / dis-

charge structure may have changed the composition i of the benthic communities near the structure due to changes in the thermal plume; 2)

Potential effects of increased turbidity I would have a negligible effect due to the

naturally high turbidity levels in the area; 2 3) If changes in flow direction affect the texture of the sediment bottom, the biotic community would be expected to respond by alterations of species composition; 4) The

, inlet and outlet would experience a shift in l- community structure during flow reversal.

The area, however, would still remain produc-tive; 5) Increased fish loss is expected to occur during flow reversal because the dis-charge structure does not have a velocity cap. Velocity caps, such as the one on the intake structure have been proven to reduce f fish _ loss by 90 percent. To date, Unit I does not plan to use flow reversal as an alternative to heat treatment.

i i

9-1

SONGS 1 FES UPDATE References for Section 9

1. Southern California Edison Company, " Environmental Report - Operating License Stage for San Onof re Nuclear Generating Station Units 2 and 3,

• Vol. 2, 1977, Section 3.7.

2. Southern California Edison Company, " Turbidity at San Onof re Unit 1,"

in Doc. 78-RD-58 1978.

3. Southern California Edison Company, " Report on 1984 Data, Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation," h5-RD-37, 1965.

9-2

,=,s I t

SONGS 1 - FES UPDATE Appendix A - Meteorology Tables of frequencies of wind speed and direction for various stability categories and X/Q values have been presented in the San Onof re Units 2 and 3 FSAR and ER-OL Section 2.3. Joint wind speed and direction frequency distributions by atmospheric stability class, also appear in the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station 1981 to 1985 Semi-annual Effluent Reports. None of this more recent data has indicated any significant change in site meteorology compared with that presented in Appendix A of the FES.

A-1

1. 9.

TAULE 3.18.1

• i HADIOI.OGICAl ENVIRONH, ENTAL. HONITORINC PROGNA,g Esposure Pathway Number of Samples semptlng and anJ/or Sample anal Sample f.oc a t i onsa Type and Collection Frequencre [ e3uency of Analyses

1. AIR 00RNE Samples from et least 5 Continuous operation of Nadiolodine and Radiolodine cartridge.

locations sempler with sample Analyets at least once Particulates 3 esaples from offette collection as required per 7 days for I-131.

locations (In different by dust loading but at Particulate sampler.

sectors) of the highest least once per 7 days.d Analyze for gross beta calculated annual everage redloactivity > 74 hours8.564815e-4 days <br />0.0206 hours <br />1.223545e-4 weeks <br />2.8157e-5 months <br /> ground level D/Q. following filter change.

Perform gamma isotopich I esople from the vicialty analysts on each semple of a community having the when gross beta activity highest calculated annual everage ground level D/Q.

is t 10 time the yearly -

mean of control samples. E' $

1 semple from a control locallon Perform gamma lootopic $N

- analysis on compoelte _. 9 i

15-30 km (10-20 miles) distant (by location) semple at

, and in the least peavalent o M least once per 92 days. "* N wind directica.C * --

2. DIRECT At least 30 locations including At least once per 92 days. Comma dose. At least RADIATION

• en inner ring of stations in once por 92 days.

the general area of the SITE g 00UNDARY and en outer ring 4 approximately in the 4 to 5 g mile range from the site with n-a station in each sector of each ring. The balance of the

_o stations are la special laterest g areas such as population centere, nearby residences.

S schools, and in 2 or 3 ereas to serve as control stations.

i I

~

c.%

u I

I l

l

Yo9 s .

,JdJ

• v.

Esposure Pathway Number of Samples and/or Sample

, sampling and Type and and semple I.ocatione*

Collection Frequency * [requency of Analjome

3. WATESUORNE

a. Ocean 4 Locations At least once per month Comma isotopic analyene and composited quarterly of each monthly semple.

Teltlum analysts of composite sample et least once per 92 days.

b. Drinking 2 Locations Honthly at each Comma isotopic and location. tritium analyses of each s ample.

c. Sediment 4 Locations At least once per from Comma lootopic analyste 184 days. of each sample.

Shorellne u 2-Y d. Ocean 5 Locations At least once per

$N C Bottom Comma teotopic analysis I*

O 184 day,s. of each sample. "

5 Sediments m A

4. INCESTION &

• ~'

s. Nonalgratory 3 Locatione One esmple from each Marine Comma lootopic enelgels group (lleted below) on edible portions.

Animals will be collected in x . season, or at least once e

per 184 days if not e seasonal. Groups to be a.

. sempted:

1. Fish-2 adult species a such as flatfish, base.

o perch or sheepshead, C 2. Crustaceae-such as

" crab or lobster.

w

3. Holluske-auch as limpets, clame or seeheres.

C i

DD a

Ut I

i 33bb -

Esposure Pathway Number of Semples and/or Semple Sempling and and sangle 1.ocationsa Collection Freguanc1 8 Type and Frequency of Analvene

b. l.ocal Crope 2 Locations Sopresentative vegetables, Camma Isotopic analyele normally I leely and 1 on edible portione saml-fleshy collected at annually en I-131 harvest Lima. At least snelysis for leafy 2 vegetables collected crops.

samlannually from each location.

JADI.E NOTATION

}

e. Sample locatione are Indicated la the ODCH.

b. Ceuma tuotopic analysis means the identification and quantification of samma-omitting redtonuclides that mey Q s! D w be attributable to the effluente from the facility.

1 u, Q C c.

The purpose of thle semple is to obtain background informattdn. OM z

locatione In accordance with the distance and wind direction centeria, If it is not practical to establish control **

5 background date may be substituted. other altee which provide valid 50 _,

d.

Canistere for the collection of redlelodine in att are subject to channeling. These devices should be E carefully lodine. checked before operation la the flbld or several should be mounted la series to prevent loss of

. 1

$ e.

S Regulatory Culde 4.13 provides annimum acceptable performance criterla for thermoluminescence dos tmetry (TLD) systems used for environmental monitoring. One or more instrumente, such as s' press'urland chamber, for 3 measuring and recording dose cate continuously may be used la place of, or in addition to, integrating 2; doelmeters. .For the purpose of this table, a thermoluminescent doslaeter may be conaldered to be one phosphor and two or more phosphore in a packet may be considered as two or more dostmeters. Flla badges should not be used for measurt,ng direct redletion.

w CE 3

c a .>

ATTACHMENT 1 (Page 4 of 6)

RADIO 14GICAI ENVIRCMENTAL MONITORING SAMPLE IDCATIONS sssple Type and Sampligg_ Location f

. Direct Radiation Distance Direction i

1 City of San Clemente (SDGLE Officee) 5.6 NW 2 Camp San Mateo 3.5 N 3 Camp San onofre 2.6 NE 4 Camp Homo 4.5 I

! 5 Camp Las Pulgas 8.5 ISI 6 Old Route 101 -ESE 3.0 ESE l 7 Old Route 101 -ESI 0.5 ISE 8 Non-cosmissioned Officers Beech Club 1.2 NW

! 9 Basilone Road / I-5 Freeway Offramp 2.0 NW 10 Bluff 0.8 NW 11 Visitor's Canter 0.2 NNE 12 South Edge of the Switchyard 0.2 NE 13 Site Boundary 0.13 SE 14 Huntington Beach Generating Station 37.0 NW 15 ESE Site Boundary 0.2 ESE

, 16 East Site Boundary 0.5 E 17 Transit Dose - -

18 Transit Dose - -

19 San Clemente Highlands 5.0 NNW

,! 20 San Clemente Pier 5.0 NW 21 Concordia Elementary School 3.5 NW 22 Coast Guard Station- San Mateo Point 2.7 WNW j 23 San Clemente General Hospital 8.2 NW 24 San Clemente High School 6.0 NW 25 Convalescent Home- San Clemente 8.0 NW 26 Dana Hills High School 11.0 NW 27 U.S. Post Office- Dana Point 10.5 NW 28 Doheny Fire Station- Capistrano Beech 9.5 NW 29 San Juan Capistrano Fire Station 10.8 NW 30 Laguna Beach Fire Station 17.5 NW 31 Aurora Park- Mission Viejo 18.6 NNW 32 Santa Ana Police Department 32.0 NW 33 Camp Telega' 5.7 N 34 San Onofre School 1.7 NW j 35 Range 312 (Marine Corpe Base, Camp Pendleton) 4.7 NNE 36 Range 208C (Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton) 4.0 NE 37 Laguna Niguel Fire Station 13.5 NW l 38 San onofre State Beach Park 3.6 SE l 39 Basilone Road Trailer Park 1.4 NNW 40 SCE Training Center- Japanese Mesa 0.8 NW 41 Old Route 101- I 0.3 I 42 Horno Canyon 4.6 I t

, Distance (milee) and direction (sectors) are sensured relative to the i midpoint between Units 2 and 3.

h

C a O o

• l ATTACHMENT 1 - -

(Page 5 of 6) l RADIGI4GICAL ENVIROM4 ENTAL MONIMRING SAMPLE 14 CATIONS l

Sample Type and Sehng Location Distance Direction Direct Radiation (Con't) 43 Edson Range (Marine Corps Base, 10.6 SE Camp Pendleton) 44 Fallbrook Fire Station 18.0 E 45 Interstate 5 Weigh Station 2.0 ESg 46 San Onofre Beach Park 1.4 SI t 47 Camp Las Florea 8.6 SE 48 Mainside (Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton) 15.0 ISE 49 Camp Chappo 12.8 ISE 50 Oceanside Fire Station 15.5 SE 51 Carlsbad Fire Station 18.6 SE 52 Vista Fire Station 21.0 ESE I 53 San Diego County Operations Center 45.0 SE

, 54 Escondido Fire Station 32.0 ESE l 55 San onofre State Beach (Unit 1) 0.2 W g 56 San Onofre State Beach (Unit 1) 0.1 W J 57 San Onofre State Beach (Unit 2) 0.1 SSW g 58 San Onofre State Beech (Unit 3) 0.1 S 59 SONGS Meteorological Tower 0.3 NW Airborne t

1 City of San Clemente (SDG&E Offices) 5.5 NW l 2 Camp San Onofre (Camp Pendleton) 3 1.8 NE e 3 Huntington Beach Generating Station 37.0 NW g 4 Northeast Site Boundary 0.2 NNE

, 5 Unita 2 and 3 Switchyard O.13 ESE i 6 SONGS Meteorlogical Tower 0.3 NW 9 State Beach Park O.4 ESE I 10 Bluff 0.5 WNW 11 Mese E.O.F. 0.5 NNW Soil Samplee L 1 Camp San onofre 2.5 NE 2 Old Route 101- SE 3.0 SI I 3 Basilone/ I-5 Freeway Offreep 2.0 NW l 4 Huntington Beach Generating Station 37.0 NW 5 East Site Boundary 0.2 NNW Ocean Water I

A Station Discharge Outfall- Unit 1 0.5 SW i B Station Discharge Outfall- Unit 2, 0.7 SW C Station Discharge outfall- Unit 3 0.7 SW D Newport Beach 30.0 NW l

l r

l r

ATTACHMENT 1 -

(Page 6 of 6) t RADIOIDGICAL ENVIR0!NENTAL MONIMRING SAMLE IOCATIONS Sample Type and Samling I,ocatiog Distance Direction Drinking Water j 1 Tri-Cities Municipal Water District Raeorvoir 8.7 w 2 San Clemente Golf Course Well 3.5 Nw 3 Huntington Beach 37.0 m I Shoreline Sediment 1 San onofre State Beach 0.6 SE 2 San onofre Surfing Beach 0.9 w 3 San onofre State Beach 3.5 S3 4 Newport Beach (North and) 30.0 m l

Local Crope l

1 Sem Meteo Canyon 2.6 NW 2 SE of Oceanside 22.0 SE i

Non-migratory Marine Animals 1

, A Unit 1 Outfall 0.6 WSW

! B Units 2 and 3 Outfall 0.7 SSW i C Newport Beach 30.0 NW Ielp

[

A San Onofre Kelp Bed 1.5 S B San Meteo Kelp Bed 3.5 WNW C Barn Kelp Bed as 6.6 SSI D Newport Beach 30.0 NW i

Ocean Bottcm Sediments l

A Unit 1 Outfall 0.5 SW i 5 Unit 1 Outfall 0.6 SW l

C Unit 2 Outfall 1.3 SW D Unit 3 Outfall 0.9 SSW l

I Newport Beech 30.0 NW f Rabbit Saw ling h

i 1 Adult Rabbit 0.5 I l

• • Samples were not obtained from the Baru Ielp Bed because it is in a non-harvestable condition.

t I

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