ML20204A385
| ML20204A385 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle, 05000426, 05000427  |
| Issue date: | 01/24/1974 |
| From: | Clark R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Muller D US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20197G423 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-84-663 NUDOCS 8605120151 | |
| Download: ML20204A385 (4) | |
Text
r O
I Docket Nos. 50-424; 50-425, JAN 2 4 1974 50-426 f.'
and 50-427
~
D. R. N11er, Assistant Director, Environmental Projects, L THRU:
B. J. Youngblood, Chief. Environmental Projects Branch 3 MEETING WITH APPLICANT AND ORNL ON V0GTLE On December 12, 1973, we received amendment no. 2 to the Vogtle ER in which the applicant changed the design location of the plant intake from a riverbank structure to one with a 420 ft. Intake canal.
By letter dated December 26,1973 (received January 10,1974),ORNL requested additional information to complete their input to the FES, which was due on January 16, 1974. The request for the additional infonnation was transmitted to the applicant on January ll,1974.
The Vogtle FES is scheduled for issuance on February 21, 1974,' ORNL was, in effect, proposing a month's slippage. To expedite ORHL's review, a meeting was held January 17, 1974 at ORNL with the applicant to discuss the additional infonnation. A sumary of the discussions is enclosed.
8605120151 860131 Richard J. Clark, Project Manager NL84 63 PDR Environmental Projects Branch 3 Directorate of Licensing
Enclosure:
As stated Distribution
-Docket File (ENVIRON) (4)
GDicker, EP-2 Gray, OGC ACC-POR GKnighton, EP-1 Hillyer, OGC kuual PDR RJClark, EP-3 Zittel, ORML EP-3 Reading R0 (3)
LCrocker, LWR-2-2 L Reading H0enton, SS, L RP Reading GWilliams, EP-3 BJYoungblood, EP-3 RFraley, ACRS (3) l WRegan, EP-4 d r.
~
omec*
I.FP-LA
._JpCla@scr uMn)h;;~d~
~
. _..T.E.~.~.~.~_~l-~~~E~I'~T]
~~~
.1.Q74 ---
.m s
1/rt/74 m_,...,
\\\\
s
__ h - ____-___
(
Applicant:
Georgia Power Company (GPC)
Facility:
Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, 3 and 4
SUMMARY
OF MEETING HELD JANUARY 17, 1974 TO DISCUSS ADDITIONAL DATA REQUIRED BY CHANGE IN PLANT DESIGN On January 17, 1974, representatives of GPC and Southern Services met with the EPM and ORNL personnel at Oak Ridge to discuss additional information requested of the applicant as a result 'of a recent change in the design of the Vogtle makeup water intake structure.
Attendees were:
~ Fred E. Ehrensperger, 'igr., Nuclear Systems, Southern Services Lee H. Thonus, Environmental Licensing Engineer, Southern-Services Jim Motz, Mgr., Environmental Programs, GPC Bob Woodall,11gr., Bioloqical Programs, GPC Thomas H. Row, Dep Director, Environmental Impact Statements, ORNL (part Time)
H. E. Zittel, Task Group Leader, ORNL L. Dean Eyman, Aquatic Ecologist, ORNL (part time)
J. C. Randolph, Terrestrial Ecologist, ORNL (part time)
Dick Clark, EPM, AEC Significant points discussed and conclusions are summarized below.
1.
The relocation of the intake structure from the riverbank (as described in the initial Environmental Report) to the bluff and inclusion of a 420 f t intake canal was primarily for economic reasons.
By allowing construction equipment to work on all sides of the structure on dry land rather than in the floodplain and by eliminating the coffer dams and piling, the revised design is estimated to save about $1,000,000.
2.
The applicant presented the additional current velocity measurements and aquatic monitoring data they have develooed since the ER was issued.
The drif t sariple data indicates that a maximum of 20 of the organisms in the river would' be entrained in the makeup water to the plant.
From the data, the staf f concluded that entrainment witn the revised design would not be any greater and probably less than if the int 4ke ;tructure were on the river bank.
Entrainment is not exnected to have an adverse effect on planktonic populations in the river or on the organisms that feed on them.
1
(
. 3.
To minimize impingement, the applicant is designing the intake structure so that the average velocity in the channel is 0.3 fps.
At low flow, the maximum velocity will be only,0.5 fps.
The intake structure remains the same; the maximum velocity through the traveling screens will be less than 1.0 fps.
These design criteria are within the currently recommended quidelines.
4.
The applicant did not have sufficient data on fish densities in the river to demonstrate, conclusively, that impingement would not significantly effect adult fish populations in the river by inclusion of an intake canal.
The applicant is collecting monthly samples on the density of resident and anadromous fish; however, the data for the latter needs to extend through the spawning season.
5.
The status of the preoperational aquatic monitoring program was discussed.
In the DES, the staff had recommended expansion of the renitoring stations on Beaverdam Creek.
The applicant presented results of the nacroolantonic sampling program on the Creek and their plans to determine the extent to which Beaverdam Creek is used for spawning by anadromous fish.
The applicant's documentation of this would, in effect, incorporate this additional monitorinq as part of their stipulated preoperational monitoring program in the ER and eliminate the condition from the FES.
6.
The status of the terrestrial monitoring program was discussed.
The staff had recomaended in the DES that the preoperational monitoring program be expanded.
The applicant has had a terrestrial ecologist on site for the past three months and has largely completed the baseline studies.
The additional data that the staff felt was necessary was an annual strip survey for white tailed deer, carnivarous birds and alligators during the years when most of the excavation is in progress.
As an indication of the level of effort involved, the applicant was advised that the terrestrial monitoring program during these years of construction could probably be completed in no more than one week of field effort.
7.
On January 17,18 and 21, the writer contacted Messrs. Ben C. Rusche and Halter L. Marter, SRL regarding experience with imoingement on the Savannah River Plants' travelling screens.
SRP has two large pump houses ups' ream of the proposed Vogtle intake which withdraw considerably more water from the ri/er than the Vogtle plant would wi thd raw.
Both oung houses nave i":ake canals, one 1350 f t long and other 1909 f t 101g.
The average s elocity in the canals and at the entronce to the river is 1.5 fps.
Except for ger there apparently is no significant accumulation of fish in the intake canals.
The pump e
e i
e m.
(
houses are equipped with traveling screens fabricated f' rom #10 wire with 1/2" openings.
The operators "very seldom" see any fish impinged on the screens and then only in the order of a few.
8.
Construction of the plant intake is not scheduied until March 1979.
Within the next year, the applicant is expected to have the data on fish densities to resolve the question on impingement.
The FES will include a condition that prior to start of construction on the intake structure, the applicant must demonstrate to the staff's satisfaction that impingement with the revised design will not significantly effect the adult, harvestably population of resident and anadromous fish in the Savannah River in the vicinity of the Vogtle site.
e-I
-