ML20235D488
Text
. . - - _ - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ . - _ .
p a f. . . . . . ~ . .. , . -
< r . /t!/ ?-] 6, .Q />Y L ~/
Ob 4 fj (f' t 'jQ - 6 { %& '-
f
./
- 5,.
I-DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
,BY THE U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION DIVISIONS OF RADIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND REACTOR LICENSING PURSUANT TO APPENDIX D OF 10 CFR PART 50 SUPPORTING Tile ISSUANCE OF, LICENSES TO COMMONWEALTil EDISON COMPANY AND TOWA-ILLINOIS CAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY AUTHORIZING 20 PERCENT OPERATION OF ;
THE QUAD-CITIES STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-254 AND 50-265 KOT;fE P**T*,yn Of T!:!$ P!Failf ?% IU3,Ik. O _
ggggp,7 EisliMt EI *V8 I33I' eser tt ;trcit tra r.r 22311 p:ssai4 ava$
s&tlity. k^6 J '
- p. < . - ,
. . ( . ~ r. . g ; . ,- n Issued: January 24, 1972 .E .- J t. -
- . , , i.
h;t.:t PfJ110id Di 1:::5 CIPfRI AAf til.').ia:L tt iii'ssii di-h ucti frd taibest'ii,IhIe seps te permt tse k:utut scuikis ana N- *
.v ..
s ,, s. ,s,
, j r,,
s af
-p 8709250242 870921 PDR FOIA ,
.MENZ87-111 PDR
l
. .-a p . .n . . . . . ~ . . . . . . - . . . ~ . . . -. .. ~. . . . . ~
! l E
f G r J l
{ t
'.
- T l r
l l
,jdh- TABLE OF CONTENTS l
.- gr 3
4 Pane '
$]11 l i. nrr R 0 n u CT r o N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... 3 e7- !
'$ 'l l . STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 I p , 1
(
)
& A. DESCRI PTION OF SITE AND ENVIRONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
<g f 1. The Site......................................... 4
+c
'i a' ka 2. The Nea r-Si te Aa ua t ic Envi ronmen t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 jf n
- a. Ri ve r Flow and Tempe ra t ure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 l
3)9 b. W a t e r Qu a l i t y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 j c. Aquatic Ecology.............................. 10
}h p B. DES CRI PTI ON O F STATI ON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 pr B
3 1. Reactor and .S t e am-Elect ri c S ys tems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 M
- 2. E f fl ue n t Sy s t ems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 1
-1 a. Heat Removal System.......................... 15 E b. Chemical and Sanitary Was tes . . .. . . . . ........ 20 p$ c. Radioactive Wastes........................... 23 Hi#
b C. ENVI RONMENTAL IMPACT OF STATION OPERATION. . . . . . . . . . . . 25
- 1. flent Removal System Effects...................... 25 m
.' 2. diemical Effects................................. 31 (9
) 3. Radiological Effects............................. 34
-i 9 g,
4j 4. E f f e c ts of Acciden tal Releas es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 6
Yb Ill. FORECLOSURE OF ALTERNATIVES IN FACILITY DESIGN OR I) O P E RA T I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 3r ed IV. E FFE CT S O F D E LAY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 !
d
$9 v. CO N C i.u S i 0N s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
}3d -
RE FE R E N C E S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 l.1; M HlHl.lOGRAPilY................................................. 54 hi f
f, y 1
'h hif 2
u'.c i
l
- m. _ _ . _
I t
4
'i t
.. ~
- 1. INTRODUCTI ON The Quad-Cities Station (station) is a nuclear power generating farill ty. Jointly owned by the Commonwealth Edison Company and the' Iowa-1111nois Gas and Electric Company (applicants). Applications by' these two companies for operating licenses, which would authorize
[: the operation of Units 1 and 2 of the station at 2,511~ megawatts thermal (Wt) each, are presently pending before the Atomic Energy Commission (Commission). On March 16,19T., a notice of the pro-posed issuance of these operating licenses was published in the hieral Register (36 FR 5008). The notice. offered an opportunity for a hearing, but there were no requests for. a hearing.
On .luly 12, 1971, noti.e of the availability of the Final l Detailed Statement on Envi ronmental Considerations for Quad-Cities l Station Unita 1 and 2, prepared by the AEC Division of Radiological I, and Envl ronmental Protection, was published in the Federal Register t
( % Fit l'3699). The detailed statement considered the environmental aspectn associated with full-power operation of the station. It was prepared in accordance with the. then current requirements of Appendix D to Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 50 (10 CFR
.; Part 50) published' on December 4,1970, ' which implements the Natlonal Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA).
- l. ..On August 25, 1971, the AEC regulatory staff (staff) completed 1
Its' review of the application for licenses and issued its Safety l Ovaluation in which it concluded that there was reasonable asst.rance i
l' that Units 1 and 2 of the station could each be operated up to full power'(2,511 Wt) without endangering the health and safety of the
, publJr. Ilowever, on September 9,1971 the Conaission revised Appendix D to 10 CFR Part 50 to comply with the decision of the Court of Appenis for the District of Columbia circuit in Calvert Cli f f n Coordinat inn Commit teg e t al. vs. the Atomic Energy Commission e tJ . The revised NEPA regulations provided inter alla for a i supplemental NEPA review for facilities such as the Ouad Cities Units.
A supplemental NEPA environmental review of the operation of Units 1 and 2 at full power (including preparation of a section 102(2)(C) impact statement) is presently in progress but has not as yet been ;
completed in accordance with the requirements of Appendix D as re- '
vised September 9,1971.
Appendix D provides a procedure in Section D.3 for issuance of an operating Jirense authorir.ing the loading of fuel in the reactor core and limited operation of the facility. This procedure nny be applied t o applic..:f ono for an operating Jicense for a nucicar fm liit y f or which the Commission published a notice of opportunity for hearing prior to October 31, 1971 and no hearing was requested.
The il,mi ted license may be issued by the Commission, pending the L
~~
. - ". . . . . . . ~ . . . . . - . . . . . - . . . "
.' f j n
I L
l l
l l.
bI l i'
! j '
ro"pletloo of an ongoing NEPA environmental review of a full power
- f .
! license applicnt'Jon, upon a showing that such Ilcensing .etfon will j
ll not have a signI fIcant adverse impact on the quality of the environ-l l ment, or af ter considering and balancing the factors described in g i Sect ion ~D.2 of Appendix D, and upon the Commission's making appro-priate findings on the matters specified in 10 CFR Part 50.57(a).
d On July 16, 1971, the applicants requested that the Commission fd is9ue an operating license for Unit I authorizing the loading of
! fuel in the reactor corc and other activities which require opera- >
tion of Unit I not in excess of one percent (25 Wt) of full power.
r In accordance with the provisions of Section D.3 of Appendix D of 10 CFH Part 50, the low-power 2 cense requested by the applicants was lusued on October 1,1971. The basis for that action was set forth
@h y
f in a public document entitled, " Discussion and Findings by the Divi-alon of Renctor Licensing, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Pursuant
% to Appendix D of 10 CFR Part 50, Supporting the Issuance of an OperntIng License to Commonwealth Edison Company and Iowa-Illinois g Gas and Electric Company Authorizing the Loading of Fuel and Opera-tion not in Excess of 25 Wt, Quad-Cities Station Unit 1, Docket i No. 50-254." ,
' 4 On October 12, 1971(1) , the applicants requested the Commission, !
O in accordance with the provisions of Section D.3 of Appendix D, to I j authorize limited power operatinn of Units 1 and 2 during the ongoing ;
r supplemental NEPA environmental review of their application for l g operation of both units at full power. Specifically, the applicants requested the Commission to issue an amendment to Operating License DPR-29 for Uni t I and to issue an operating license for Unit 2 autho-
.) 4 rizing (1) fuel loading in Unit 2, (2) conduct of all necessary j"ih testing of each unit up to and including its full rated power, and (1) operation of the two units up to an aggregate level of 809 mera-watts electrical (equivalent to 2,511 Wt) untti riarch 15, 1972. On November 18, 1971(2), the request was amended to extend the period !
l of limi ted operation until such ime as a full-power operating
.s IIcense is received. The applictnts stated that the station will i
!! t operate during the testing period at an average of less than 20 per-cent of full capacity (1,004 Wt of the station's full capacity of 5,022 ffWt ) . The applicants submitted further that their request meets
- l either of the two standards established by Section D.3 (summarized above).
A determination has not yet been made concerning the applicants' request to operate both units up to an aggregate total of 809 We (50 percent of the station capacity). The AEC regulatory staff has d
a
,h **
i b) l O?
l ft-M
. .4-(I' ~, ] n
,. W % 7 s _ _ _ . , - . . . , . . - + . ~
..E 1
d_
i
- x w_ .
r f
, ,t '
1 -3 L
5 s:s
-i *
"C
- xomple ted' nn environmental review pertaining to the fuel 'loadin,;,
test ing and operation of each unit up to 20 percent (502.FNt) of rated
' reactor power.
5 -tinder Section'D.3 of- Appendix D, operation.at any level above. 20 percent prior to completion of- a full NEPA ceview may not be authorized' except upon specific prior approval of the Comutissioners.
f
"__ This report is based upon data from the applicants and other sources, including state and federal staff. agencies,'and- the evaluation of the data by.
- )J g the AEC regulatory The following analysis and conclusions are
,g
% ]!mited to the 20 percent case and cover the period ending June 1, '1972, the~
review',date when the final impact statement, based on the ongoing full- NEPA is expected to be completed.
I. r
.[ .
f 5
'f j' r i 2 a i I
, E k
3 m'
, I i-
?
5 u
o w i m 1
-3 4
sr .
r :
lN Av; t
.h q i
k {
I,
,a h
c:
7
{
)
m I
, , ,_,___,,m,,,_,,,,,_,,,_,,,., ._ , _,7, , .
-l i
n l< -
g e
w 2
I.
}
f II. STATI.HEf;T OF I:MVIRONMI:NTAl, I'O!;SIDERNi'10NS I
A wide range of factors was considered in this environmental review. liccause the ' stat lon is esseni.f ally completed, the major environmental impacts of concern are those due to the operation of the once-through condenser cooling system and the radioactive ' effluents.
Thus, the entrainment effects from condenser operation, and the thermal, chemical, and radior ctive discharges are the major points of this' consideration for limited operation of each unit at 20 percent (502 MWt), of. rated power pending completion of the full NEPA review 3
on .Inne 1, 1972. The discussion that follows includes a description of the factifty, the impact of its ef fluents, alternatives to the pro- .
posed action, and the ef fects of delay in facility operation upon the )
- puhile interest, in accordance with the Commission's regulations in (
Serf lon D.2 of Appendix D to 10 CFR Part 50.
A. .f)RSCHIPTION OF HITH AND ENVIRONS f
- 1. The Site
.The Quad-Cities Station is located in' Rock Island County on
' the east bank of. the Mississippi River, about 3 miles north of Cordova, Illinois, and about 20 miles northeast of the Quad Cities-Hettendorf area. 1The Quad Cities are Davenport,' Iowa; Rock Island, Moline and East. Moline, Illinois. Bettendorf, Iowa, is an adjacent l j- : city to the ~ northeast of the Quad Cities. !
The 404-acre site is flat, with a grade icvel about 9 feet above t he maximum recorded flood stage. Surrounding land areas are largely in agricultural use, with an industrial park directly north of the station. There are industrial concentrations in the city of Clinton, Iowa, 7 miles northeast of the station, and in the Quad
[
t Ci t ies-Be tt endorf area.
The geographical location of the station with respect to the upper Mississippi River system is shown on Fig. 1. Moline, Illinois, is located on the map, and the station location is indicated south of Clinton, Iowa, on the Illinois side of the river. The location of the si te with respect to the locks and dams of the Mississippi
_ Hiver is shown in Fig. 2. Sections of river between dans are referred to as " pools" which are numbered consecutively southward from St.
j
- Anthony Falls, Minnesota. Distances along the river are designated ns " river miles" measured northward from the confluence of the Ohio H ~i ve r . The sta* lon ,is located about midway in Pool ll. at river mile 506.5, and at standard river elevation 572.0 feet. Pool 14 is approximately 25 miles long and 0.5 to 1.5 miles wide.
g 4
$, )
1$
$ i C
f[" wz - . . . , . .
. - - ;~
J e i .. r ,
i[)w g
i F
l '5-y si
?
l f-N
.I %
e i ,-
f / a c_ . ) .
St.
7 s.' -
': e I,_Close
/- ,*,,/
- s, 4
/ *
.. l
[
{
[a g
7 Mia... .ii.
brQ
- \ . 5 Paul g' Uftl"['I""-
y t s,
s' ':--
-l-i e
\, e . .a
\
es 4
\ ,/, A1es l(M<g I,e =, 3' . .
)
f '. , = , . mentato ,
i"
- wi,,,,
,1. .<'- g o ,t i ~=s, j 'p'totnester 'G **
' *, .r - -
E
, I,
,,,e**** ,.**..
i ' ~
\ ',.....na.u." a j
\, ""'""
i
}f' .I t 4 ', ca.e ve
[ '
Quad Cities Station
'g' 'Waterles
's, Esttfert '.
S.'
'\g , R., aspids \ -flinto C e d e'r g,g g's, v* ( ge e,, * , -e v
'g's' * ** 's%,
C Motnos %, N. *
' .s Chitsto
$ . poll 8f!
- #g ..,**, ,/ b w' A*8'e t '
r % s-g s. . ',#~ stoues
-)
- [ ---Q, ,
sorii.,i..
r..,i, ici .
fg , ' f""k g ,'
q aicao ,,.
, meree i. ,
/t i ,
s,' ,, .t ,. \ '; ' o serievielv,,s(
e i
st( p e
n /~'a"i i . .
, n. tevis
,! , t'.. '
/ /
N
.' 1f I b' p,
g i.s o. is so n in
%g _
si.i. io n u.i c, FIGURE 1. Upper Mississippi River Basin I
'I h')
Wh
_ _ - - -_. h
... . - - ,, ,. . . < . * , ,es .....*-% r...-e.- 4 -..~...y.
a - % * -- .- - . , _ . -
a-. A
\
- f" t
0
1
. b i
i l
1 1] A31 V35 Nv3W 3A08V 1333 NI N0!1VA313
-O O O' O O- O O O O O O O O O O o U O'~ O O O O O O O. O O O O O ;O o '
s e , vi g M N - .O Os - 40 N @ m *' M gw
- I l- 1 I I I i l l I I I I I - -
,1
- s u
O.
- : e u-
' O-N.
C -.O'o D
.4
,gg DN$.O.N' -- .<
, -- u
't , <-" H 0 ,f g
- 0 N .
y.
o O
C: 't!'ON. I '"
I O W
" - K ugg ON - O, ,-
,12'ON - 2 T
f' .
,og*0N O .;. ,6 t a c y @ o" - : 8 4 e n _. o ,o w - w
= _
o ,j u --O O a
_ e , : -
( st sv eC- -
e
.Ll'ON w y o :
s p'$ ,
, 91*ou b ne," .5 :
n
". o# . S !
- 0N 40e% O - a
- # y['0N $tt 7 o j ',$
- Q lEl'ON Oo a
t u a
~
a C
^O ..
O - 4ra %,
2 t ' 0!;
-U i
= - it'ON - o k
/j -
O , e e >
~
( fO!'ON
~
. j -y
, l o
- e6*0N ""-
-4 o_ t 9 +a > - - a O - t%g9 8 ON - :
= ,o<
L.'CN
- - O n - .
' - O - m 9'ON 5 - ~ m
'o VS*0NDc 2
~
Y D, a 5'ON s . m O t ,e p*0N :
2 O . '
- O w co - .
%E.ON , - O e 1 56ultsrH ft
- 0 N ;- :
- g !
^
_ ${lej /uoyluy '3s ,'.ON oe : 3
( Ived *a a -
O eqouy -
O. c, n m .. C M
- O
-O gag I
l l l l ! ! J ! ! l l l 1 ! :l .o O O O' O O O O O O O O O ~
C'5 O O b O O O O O O O C' O O O O O O O O N @ VI w m N - O cn ce n e en w M N
- e= w sm. ,= - - an.
13A31 V35 NY3W 3 A0?Y 1333 NI N0!1YA313
________a
,.e
m ;,
j -.
-7_
t l
i t
- 2. The ' Near-Si t e Aquat ic Environmen t Mississippi River flow is controlled' below flood stage
!)' throurbout its lencth by a series of-. locks and dans so that its j0 channels are available f or transportation. The river water in Pool i
,:7 14 is a source of municipal and industrial water and is also used ~
. f or commercial and- sport fishing. -River shore development within hq a 25-mile radius of the station consists of residences, industrial plants, a wild 11re refuge and recreational sites, G. j 4 n. River Plow and Temperature
.Q. p.
p' Mississippi River flows by month in Pool 14 are presented
- in Table 1. High flows result in the spring from melted snow in the t
jl Mississippi headwaters. Maximum flow usually occurs in April, the rec- 't ord being 307,000 cubic feet per second (c fs) on April 28, 1965. The
- , lowest flows are observed in winter, usually in December or January.
t, The record low was 6,500 efs during December 25 to 27,1933.
f l
^I '
Monthly maximum, average maximum and average water tem-peratures, during the period 1962-70, at the Davenport, Iowa, water
- f. plant are.shown in Table 2. Similar temperature data for Pool 14 are not available. 'Ifowever, the temperatures in Pool 15 at Daven-t port, Iowa, representative 22.ofmiles thosedownstream in Pool 14. Mea fromsuthe station,grg) remen ts s believed to be in' Pool 14 h.1ve indiented temperatures up to 88'F in shallow backwater areas.
'h. Water quality I
Although municipal and industrial waste discharge from i t he Clint on, Iowa area have occasionally resulted in excessive slime s
growths in the slough areas in the vicinity of the station, Pool 14 is a relat ive4y unpolluted environment. Limited water quality analyses conducted by the a licants' consultant, Industrial Bio-Test Laboratories, Inc. (1110-Te s t ) (5 , indicates evidence of nutrient enrichment pri-marily f rom agricultural runoff, but no large-scale pollution. Bio-Test st udies during 1968-70 indicate that t emperature, dissolved oxygen (DO) and ammonia nitrogen values in Pool 14 are less than maximum limit s established by the Illinois Sanitary Water Board. g As ' discussed Jnf ra, addit ianal water quality data, including specific l
element analysis performed and evaluated by Bio-Test, suggest that suf ficient baseline information is availabic t'o determine any future wat er quali ty degradat ion.
I k
I .
ll [
t >
I Ltd
<N v
0
!S i 8 O
e TABLE 1 I
l I
Monthly Mississ ippi River Flows (4)
}
d 7-day Low Flow 1-Day 90% Low Flow b'c a
y Mean On ce in 10 y rs .
l j Month cfn cfs cfs
}9 p .lan. 25,800 1 7,000 15,900 '
Q Feb. 26,900 16 ,800 15,800 ,
iIj Men . 49,000 2 4 ,800 20,500 '
q
.Q S Apr. 94,000 4 3 ,000 32,100
$) May 74,000 3 3 ,000 24,000
'd . lune- 62 r)00 26 ,200 19.700 5
g lu l y 52,200 20 ,500 17,300 je' Aun. 35.000 1 7 ,800 15,700 Sept. 34,000 1 8 ,300 16,300 y!i Oct. 34,300 18 ,000 15,400 j Nov. 33,700 20 .000 17,400
- y Dec. 27,000 17 ,500 16,100 p
l "Only the record since 1938, for the present sys tem of locks and dams,
- is considered here. These flows are measured at Clinton, Iowa. Actual .
!$ Ilows at the plant are about I percent higher, due to confluence of the gi Wapsipinicon R i ve r.
,A 4(l The one-day low flow whic.h is exceeded 90 percent of the time for the j, pe r lod s ince 1938.
.w p
lk' "The lowest daily f l ow s J nce 1938 was approximately 11,000 cfs.
The low flow f or a period of 7 consecutive days, the Inwest such value expected on a f requency of once in 10 years; statistic for the period g since 1938.
L;->.
Id G
p 2
q, bkN '
hf
).
.i f(, '
5 i t l
l
- p. '
1 k
fi TAlli.E 2 M<>nthly Maximum, ' Averay,e Maximum and. Average Water' Temperature, 1962-70, at . Davenport , Iowa Water Plant
.. Max! mum Average Maxfmum hverage' y -l. Man,t b (*F). (
- F) - (*F) g .fanuary 36 35 33 Feb r'ua ry 38-
. .34 .33-Ma rch 54 44- 37 Ap r'l J 63 56 49 May 73 70 62'
. lune 81 79 73
.lu i yl 85 81 78 Aur,us t 83 81 76
=
Sep t embe r_ 80 75 69 5
Oc t e>her 69 64 57 I
Neivember '55 50 44 December 42 I 39 34 i y
4 !
E I
(
n M
-.- i F,
e.
___________-_a
, 4 . . . . . . ,...+. - * ' " **
h .
V i
1 m )
. it 1
i c' . Aquarte I:co lony Pool 14 encompasses a variety of aquatic habitats and j rummunities In' the vicinity of the station. A recent report (7) covers t he general history and provides a description of aquatic habitatsif rom llastings, Minnesota to Alton, Illinois. Major Missi-Hslppi River habitats.ncar the station are the channel habitat, of f- -1 i
channel habitat, near-shore habitat, running slough habitat and dead slough habitat.
These habitats are chiefly defined by location, depth, bot tom material and vegetation.
. The main channel in the vicinity of the station is char-acterized by a scoured sand bottom and the highest current velocity.
Directly below the station in the main channel border are several small islands with adjacent, relatively. quiet, shallow water areas.
Furthe'r downstream, across from the main channel, are extensive areas of side channel and slough habitats.
j The applicants initiated preoperational environmental studies: for .the station in 1968. A preliminary study (8) has been
' followed by a continuing physical, chemical, and biological moni-Loring program conducted by Bio-Test.
t' Dio-Tes t's fi rs t report (5) was based on samples collected ;
at 22 locations in different habitats of Fool 14, from river mile !
507.6 to river mile 501.3, during the months of August and November 1969, and April 1970. Measurements were made of coliforTn bacteria !
concentrations, phytoplankton, periphyton, and benthos populations, !
and various physical and chemical parameters. The results indicate that the benthos population density (animals per square meter) is relatively-low in the main channel, whereas popu?ation density and speeles diversity is highest on rocky bottoms in areas of reduced current. The number of benthic animals in the vicinity of the station is dominated by insects, with fewer crustaceans, oligochaetes, and molluscs. The phytoplankton population (cells per liter) is dominated by diatoms. Blue-green algae never formed a major part of the phyto-plankton, Bio-Test 's second report is based on physical, chemical, and biological data collected at 35 stations in July and October 1970.
The study covered an area in Pool 14 from 2 miles above the station ti 13 miles downstream. This report is more comprehensive than the .
fi rs t in that additional water quality parameters were measured and the 'blological work ' included flah sampling and analysis of fish stonach contents as well as more intensive observations of phytoplank-Lon, periphyton, and benthos populations. The report includes no zooplankton data but indicates that zooplankton and aquatic insects l
?
-I e
'l -
predisminate in the stomachs of small fish. Diatoms comprised at least 80 percent of the tot al phytoplankton cell concentrat!ons during bot h .luly and October 19 70.
No excessive growths of attached algae were reported. The henthos population appeared to be dominated by pollution-tolerant tubificid worms at a few stations but generally are con-consisted of organisms such as burrowing mayfly nymphs that sidered to be indicative of relatively unpolluted water.
other biological studies ~ have established the existence of relatively diverse and productive plankton, periphyton, and benthos 5 communities supporting significant commercial and sport fisheries in Pool 14 and other pools in the Upper Mississippi River.
' The locks and dams on the Mississippi River system effectively Ups t re am luolate adolt fish populations except during periods of flood.
5 minrat ions of species are hampered, whereas downstream drif t occurs between pools. Serious ecological disturbances in one pool could
- possibly cause subsequent changes in the ecology of downstream pools, part leularly since downstream drif t is aAlthough major mechanism in energy ecological changes t ransfer and dispersal of organisw.
result Ing f rom ?orks and dams and industrialization have occurred, In Pool g
there remains a wide diversity of fish species in the Recent river., however, surveys I4 alone, 64 species have been identified.
E L
have collected fewer fish species, suggesting that the diversity may k have decreased in recent years.
5 A considerable amount of sport and commercial fishing occurs
.5 in Pool 14, about equal in size of catch by pounds per acre to that l@ of adjacent pools. The combined value of tg fishing was conserva-y , of which about one-
-h tively estimated at about $150,000 for 1968 third was commercial. It was estimated that 20,000 anglers spent
'h 105,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> at Pool 14 in 1967 to catch 104,750 fish. The 16-year g average annual commercial catch was 318,650 pounds.
(1953-68) 7M Primary sport species f n Pool 14 in approximate order of f fisherman preference are bluegill and crappie, cat fish, and sauger and h~ walleye (Table 3). Certain sport species, such as the northern
' pike, yellow perch, walleye and sauger occur in ilmited numbers;These species they are more numerous further upstream (e.g. , Pool 4) .
[
are apparently not well adapted to conditions in Pool 14 andfar are 7 numerous there, although they do appear in pools as not as to be a succession of 1 downs t ream as Pool 18. Thus, t.here appears 7 species composition occurring in a downst ream di rection as a resul t i
.J of channing environmental conditions. -
2
!? C inmercial cat ches (Table 4) are primari]v composed of carp, buf f alo, cat f ish, drum, and s t urgeon, with cat fish being t he preierred speclec (highest" market price).
' k(
k
.m
1 t
r l'
The upper Miu f ssippi River 'Alldli fe and Fish Re fuge, adminis-
. tered by tiu Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, is located on
- the west bank of the river opposite the site. The Savannal-Clinton District of the refuge, which includes. the northern half of Pool 14 .
repurted peak populations of 60,500 ducks and 2,500 geese in 1965.
i . These populations were present in this district of the refuge a suffi ,
cient period of time to accumulate more than 2.5 million waterfowl-use
' days. A signi ficant amount of. food consumed by waterfowl using the re fuge is produced in the marshes along the river.
On the basis of the Bio-Test studies * . it appears that
, - the'rhannel habitat. in Pool 14 is the least productive in numbers q
of organisms and .does not serve as a major feeding or spawning area.
Tho ofI-channel and slack water habitats show greater productivity-and probably provide a more favorable environment for reproduction and feeding. . These habf tats would be especially favorable to fish bernuse of the abundance of prey organisms, relatively weak river currents, variable water depth and sufficient cover for protection against predation. . For the majority of fish species occurring in pool 14, spawning begins in early spring and extends into summer and' probably occurs , to the greatest extent in the slack water areas.
Specific spawning times and locations (e.g. , the exact month and slack water site) for the fish species in this pool are not well known.
B. DESCRIPTION OF Tile STATION 1
1
- 1. Reactor and Steam-Elect ric Sys tem The station has two forced-circulation boiling-water reactors and two turbine generators supplied by the General Elect ric Company.
Each reactor has a rated thermal output of 2,513 MWt and each turbine generator a net electrical capacity of 809 MWe.
The reactor fuel consists of slightly enriched (2 or 3 per-cent by weight) uranium oxide pellets sealed in Zircalloy-2 tubes.
Water is both the moderator and coolant. Two recirculation loops force reactor water through jet pumps up through the reactor core, 1 where steam is generated at about 1,000 psi. The saturated steam l passes through pipes to the turbine, where some of the thermal energy ;
is converted to mechanical energy and, in tun., by means of the l generator, to elect rical energy, Phaust steam is condensed to water (
which is pumped through deminercli .crs back to the reactor vessel. 1 The condenser cool a ng wa' '- la 1.. veparate system which does not come in cont act wi th the reac t s,i water ste m.
\
,,,,, 7 __ _ . _.
- - - ~ ~ ~ '
r ..
I'$ -
7 ABLE 3 l l Sport Catch Statistics - Pools 4, 13, 14, 18 '
- )
i ua i
% Total Catch. ( ) indicates fisherman preference rank k!h ) ,$ Species Pool 4 (1967)
,b Pool 13 (1967) (Pool 14 (1956-58) Pool 18 (1967)
- ,, l I Walleye and <
h Sauger 33.3 (1) 1.9 (3) 8.7 (3) l';lbl Carp 0.2 6.3 (3) 2.3 2.2 3.0 V
ja Catfish 6.4 4.9 (2) 6.8 (2) 40.5 (1)
Whitebass 7.0 9.8 9.4 8.9 k! , Drum 2.8
' 12.4 9.9 12.3 1.ars;emouth bass 1.1 1.9 1.6 1.5 h[ f Illuegill-c rappie 44.3 (2) 57.4 (1) 48.5 (1) 24.1 (2)
Yellow perch 1.4 0.8 0 0 Jg f
llullhead 0.2 8.3 7.8 3.2 j
Northern Pike 2.1 (3) 0.1 0 0 other 1.2 0.2 5.1 0.2 '
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 k
h Q$ a t-e.s y p
- ib '
C F-l k
t(P b g?j
?$0!
as
~ ~ . ... _ .._._..
k
[
, v.
- .i TABLE 4 ,
9
' Commercial Fishe y. Statistics /P ois;14,15,19 Total Cat.ch (1bs) in 1968 Pool 14 - Pool 15 Pool 19 Sfyrl es ..
80,000 17,000 3k2,000 C:irp 15uIIn lo ' 129,000 19,000 197,000 Catf1sh' 78,000 11,000 149,000-Drum 34,000 9.000 .120.000 J
b f
/
.i
,5 k
i
}
o
,y
- \
l
,___'_____l__.____._____________.______
_ __ I
. - ~
i-I I.
. l 5 l.
b
- ' . CffIuent Systemu a, llen t Removal Syst ems; Approximate)y one-third of the heat generated by the
,' 'st at ion is' converted to electricity. The remaining two-thirds is relcawed t o the' environment by way of Mississippi River water which is passed through the station's condensers in a once-through cooling syst em and back- to the river. Full power. operation of both generating units at a total of 5,022 MWt will cause a 23*F temperature rise in
.I 2,270 cfs of Mississippi River water, the maximum flow through the con-
- densers. At lower station power levels the temperature rise is
~' proportionately lower (e.g., at 50 percent of full power, about 11.5*F
', temperature rise; at 20 percent of full power, about 4.6'F temperature rise).
?
f (1) Condenser' Cooling Water Intake The supply of cooling water for the condensers is
' .obtained through a short inlet canal with a mouth about 180 feet wide and 12 feet deep. At the maximum flow rate of 2,270 cfs, the intake velocity is calculated to be about I foot per second. A floating boom which extends 33 inches beneath the surface is pro-vided at the mouth of the canal to deflect floating material. It stay also heJp to reduce the entrainment of flonting fish eggs,
- larvae and f ry. ,
- Between the floating boom and the condensers there 1s. a row of vertical metal bars, commonly referred to as a trash rack. The bars are spaced 2-1/2 inches apart and extend from about 20 feet above the waterline to the bottom of the intake canal. The purpose of the trash rack is to collect and remove large pieces of debris that get past the floating boom.
Each condenser pump is further protected by a set of traveling screens with a 3/8-inch' mesh. These screens change positions at preset time interials or when activated by a butidup of pressure due to the collection of debris, The screens collect t he smaller bits of debris that get through the trash racks. They also prevent organismn larget than the mesh from passing through t he pumps and condensers.
(2) Condenser Six pumps take the water f rom the intake canal and force it through the secondary side of the condensers at 2,270 cfs.
f - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.,4.q , . . . . . . - - -
j n
q r M i R
v l
h
'f The exhaust steam from the t'urbines flows through the primary side of the h condenser where it is condensed back to water. This water is returned to 1 he reactor to be reheated. At the same time, the heat released by the
- steam heats t he cooling water to a maximum of 23*F above the ambient tem-perature of the river; The negative pressure 'in the turbine and in the l primary side of the condenser assures that leakage in the condenser will g) not release radioactivity from the turbine to the river.
The condenser tubes are cleaned by periodically Injecting sodium hypochlorite into the water as it enters the condenser.
Details of the sodium hypochlorite injection are given in the section on
$(. chemical and sanitary wastes.
4 (3) Condenser Cooling Water Discharge System M_
h Cooling water from the condensers goes to the cooling water discharge canal, where it falls over a 3 foot weir and then passes to the river through a canal 600 feet long and 75 feet wide.
The original plan called for this warmed water to be dispersed by a wing dam located immediately downstream from the discharge canal.
yI Upon f urther consideration, however, the applicants found this plan
- to be inadequate and it was discarded.
, e )
Af ter conducting studies of alternate cooling '
methods which included ponds, spray can cants proposed a " jet-diffuser system"(g and ,
coolingthis Briefly, towers, theisappli-system
-y (I designed to disperse the warmed water through a series of jets in a large pipe laid across the Mississippi River. At the present time, the b pollution Control Board has accepted
- this system in principle (34), Illinois
' but h
the Iowa Water : ollution Control Commission has not. In any case, the jet dif fuser system vill require 8 or 9 months to construct and thus canriot be made operable before about Septembe r 1972, w
i
!jh *The Illinois Pollution Control Board granted the applicants a permit to
. %j operate the station at 50 percent of full power which extends for two
'N years from November 15, 1971. This permit grants a temperature variance I rom the proposed State standards (35) until April 1,1972. In essence
@h this will permit operation at 50 percent of full power until April 1,1972.
Af ter this date supplemental cooling v111 be required unless the power
]kt level is lowered appropriately, since the proposed State standards require l
[ a limit 5 F af ter a 600 foot mixing zone. The Applicant 's supplemental a report ( provides modeling test data which indicate that operation at 50
{ percent of fu]1 power will violate the proposed State standards if the y " side jet" discharge systen. is the only cooling system used.
cS .
.e n
om I
_ ____m_ __ i
Q_ng: ,
W
-u + - -
L , 1 e
, .iI ,
k 1; '
r -
6 -
17 -
WI,ru the a;'p11 rants app]Ied for an' interim lic;ense.
'l or ope ra t i on up to 50 percent of.. f ull power, an interim cooling wat er dis charyn 'syst em was proposed which consisted of narrowing t hh exit of the. discharge canni to achieve a maximum amount of jet not rainmen t . .This In. ref erred to as the " necked-down, s dinc harge , syst em(l)' nr tho " side jet" discharge system (Ige jet'.'
, which
. lu considered by the .appilcants to be the most ef fective interim method for reducing the area of heated water in the river.
~ According t.o the temperature rise contours
- ' derived.
f rom modeling experiments related to 50 percent operation and full condenser cooling water flow (2,270 cfs), a river flow above 11,000 cfs y forces the warm unter.against the east shore of the river and around j the islands. inrnediat ely downstream f rom the station. The temperature rise contour of water :5.8'F above ambient for the 50 percent case will likely extend a short distance beyond the island group immediately
, . : downst rea'n f rom the 's tation. (Fig. 3). Below these islands, the main channel l moves over to the east bank of the river (Fig. 4). We assume that the warm water will dissipate in this channel a short distance beyond. The area of warm water defined by the 5.8'F temperature rise contour 18 about 0. 3 square-miles (1/5 mile by 1-1/2 miles long). This 2
is approximately 5 percent of the estimated total area in the lower hai f of Pool 14 (1/2 mile wide bv 12 miles long). Furthermore, the Island area immediately downstream from the site amounts to 10 ~
. percent or lees of-the total island area in the 5 mile section below t the station, y-
. Thc : taff has estimated that operation of the station
' at 20 percent of full power, and full condenser cooling water flow (2,2 70 cf s) , will result in similar warm water patterns surrounding the
, Islands immediately below the site. This estimate indicates that the temperature rise contour which defines the warm water area will be more nearly 2.3*F as compared to the 5.8*F contour for 50 percent operation.
- b. Chemical and Sanitarv Was tes Small amounts of chemicals from regenerating the
. dem ine rali ze rs (other than those used in 11guid-radwaste treatment)
~~c and cleaning the condensers will be int ermittently discharged to the r i ve r. lie f ore they are discharged, all such aqueous effluents will be sampled and c hemically analyzed fnJ < omp1tance with rules and regula-tions of the Stat e of 1]Ilnois.(35
'; h e regenerarien of domineralizer resins will resu l t in an ..garegate total of 2 ppm of sulfuric acid, magnesium sul f a*te, and c alcium sul f ate J n the st ation condenser discharge for about I hour every 2 or 3 days. This concentration is based en a
_a . - - - .s *~
v c.
t'
- 58 35 12 4,
Wi h IN STITUf f Of H YORA ut lC RE SE A RCH UN'VI R 517 Y Of lOWA 98
'""TT,' Cy NJ,',"!%!,"'
_( !ONI IGilRA fiON w ng Dom 29, S de Jet b ,
M .
J.ee.-.reav .M e - W. :- .J. l' s, c J 4.16 /; .i f x 4.i6 7i. 1 e ,d,-H-FH-d _['E'S' e
, g ,y p ,a p v.
ce k
to FIGU RE 3.
TEMPERATURE-Rh . CONTO'JRS A T 6 TT BELOW WATER SURTACE FOR INTERIM SIDE JET I
I d
,' D~ ,e 19 - s z r 3 urstr>msccz:s .;.;.
NN '
st I h,. .} e w**)
h i
- )8456 67
- 3<
? 6
) 22 e, %
- 60 gCUAD-CITIES
.v. b9, NUCLEAR POWER PLANT c{ cg, {,mts3-
.. E y ,
l
.e g esTg.4 ,
,,4
) ^
y l
- 67
.,, ['
{ l
) 'I
[ .
1 \
, \
f
- 3 g .
3 .
' , 72* \
y !
I.
/,/
4 : !
4 ./j, e77 j
, g 0/f I l .
3 g
D <.l.
t,
/
73 -
l
!; ,f o'
- G i"
\
1 ag . ,
l .,
7e ,
e I
u, ,Jg, ;
, ,f' .
~ .:::.s!.$Y'-
'/
t ... ^f:!::
l I ,3 1 b' .N:!:.$,El{:.7
- '^ ~ -
^
5 L ~ 'f..:v::.
.. ?. .O g,?' . . _:_:4. . .:i.;. .';;::*:::
INCETON / i .W '
E 74 n c. 3 9) i.oc m ow:
'tJ[l)'h
, 9 . g .1 ,,1 xi.. , ,.1 x.
- f. .
o _-_ _ -- - . - .l
o
'.h t
1 l
]
I
- 7) ..
1 oni-t ero averugo p1 ant water requirement of 600,000 to 900,000
~
snel lons per minut e. Extreme conditions pointed out by' the appli-cdnt W'k could increase' the concent ration to 6 ppm.
Sodium 'hypochlorite solution is added to the condens'er cooling water three times per day in t.0-minute periods to reduce growth of bacteria and other microorganisms in the piping and. the enndenners. . Present practice is to add the solution to each of the (nur condenser _ half-units (one at a time for 10 minutes each) every 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />. Ten gallons per minute of 15 percent sodium hypochlorite
~
solutlon are ' injected with 525 cfs of water. This water is subse-o
.quently ~ diluted. in the discharge canal and discharged into the river.
, The. concentration of chlorine (from sodium hypochlorite) ]l in the cooling water of the condenser-half being treated is calculated .. '
by the staff, f rom the applicants' procedures, to be 3.7 ppm. . . The quantity was~ chosen by experience to yield a " typical" value of about 0.5 ppm (rn esw C. 2 to 0.7) "fg) chlorine"* af ter mixing with the unchlorinated
- ha l f-condenser . stream . The rate of addition will be modified in the light of experience to maintain this level of f ree chlorine, according to prasent plans.
~
In normal operation, the water from the condenser bcing treated will be- diluted 2 to I upon mixing with the output of i
- the, other condenser, and will then flow into the discharge system.
Typically, a substantial reduction in residual chlorine content can
- be expected to occur prior to discharge due to the reaction 'of chlorine with oxidizable material in the unchlorinated water. This reduction might - be variable with time and with chlorine levels. Recent measurements during unheated operations have shown chlorine levels at the sampling station (perhaps two-thirds of the way down 'the discharge canal) of about
-20 percent of the amount at the condenser center line during experiments at unusually high-free chlorine Icvels and at higher temperatures, the
- The useful chlorine is present in the forms of the hypochlorite ion ,
and hypochlorous acid, with the relative quantities determined by I the pH of the water (1:1 at pH 7.5). The concentration of molecular chlorine in water that would have the same chlorine oxiding capacity I as is present in the OCI - and HOCI is called the " free chlorine" level.
The 1 ppm free-chlorine half-condenser effluent will contain 0.5 ppn CL in the form of OCI- or HOCI, since in these forms the chlorine has twiec the oxidizing. capacity per gram as elemental chlorine (valence changes from 1 t o -1 during reaction versus the change from 0 to -1).
- The chlorine demand of water is the elemental chl'orine equivalent of the amount of f ree and combined chlorine that will react with oxidizabic j substances in the water. The substances that provide the chlorine de' mand I vary f rom case to case, and the rates of oxidation of these substances vary over a considerable range. {
1, c__.__ = . - - . - -
t L
I level) and t he higher ron t !"n rat es can be expec ted to Jead to greater rhlorIne reduct li n before discharge to the ri ve r, the r hlorin" demand, in addition to reacting with the substances comprising f ree chlorine al.so reacts quickly (at the river water pH) wi th any dissolved ammonia present to form chloramine.
Typleal river water levels of anrnonia nitrogen (ca. 0.2 ppm) are utof rblome t rically equivalent to 0.5 ppm chlorine in hypochloric acid (or 1.0 ppm free chlorine); there is an excess above that
( requi red to react with the 0.25 ppm diluted free chlorine present at E
the beginn!ng of the discharge canal. '.he extent of the reaction
[ will largely depend upon the relative concentrations of ammonia and
- f ree chlorine, since the equilibrium constant for the reaction be-tween these substances favors essentially complete conversion to 6
' monochlora g g the river pH. The higher chloramines are reportedly 0:
not stable . Any chloramine formed will then react with the chlorine demand constituents. Since this reaction is less than that 5
- reducing the free chlorine, quantitative estimation of the degree f to which all residual chlorine (the sum of free chlorine and combined rhlorine) will have dissipated before discharge to the river is difiIcult.
I F
These considerat f ons suggest the expected residual chlorine concentrat lon in the coolant discharged to the river to be substant in))y less than 0.25 ppm in a flow of 2,270 cfs. This concen-
.} t rat Jon will be present, under normal full condenser flow, during three 1
40-minute periods per day. Dilut ion factors in the river will range
'j i
from 7 at a minimum river flow of 15,400 cfa to 20 at the average flow rate of 46,800 cfs. Thus, the expected residual chlorine con-
[ cent rations dif fused in the river during periods of chlorination i will be substantially less than either 0.04 ppm during minimum i flow periods or 0.01 ppm during average flow.
s An additional amoun t of chlorine will be added to
- the discharge canal in the service water discharge. The service
- 1) water is chlorinated for two 20 minute periods per day, during which j the residual chlorine in the 67 cfs (30,000 gpm) discharge f rom the i service water unit will be about 0.5 ppm (again expected to vary in j the range 0.2 to 0.7 ppm). When diluted in the condenser discharge a ranal at full operat ton, the service water cont ribution will be j about 0.02 ppm during the chlorination periods, before natural
( decay as discussed above. The possible chlorine contribution to the river during a 20-minute pet.od is about one-tenth that of the i
y condenser chlorination.
Q Bn g
- l. owes t average 7 day rate in 10 year period, s ee Table 1, pg. 8,.
f A
- t G .
4 n
kk,I
_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . - - - 1
N M
b f r
-n-a The station has .ai eperable sew ige t reat ment plant which f is den inned for 15,000 gillons of sew. ige e f f l uen t per dav. The plan t is
} Ili eeemd by t he St a't e ol Illinois and is under the supervision of a licenwed newnp,e-t rea t ment operator. It le current ly operat ing at about
[$ 5.000 gallons per day. The et f luent is chlorinat ed according to the h State standards.
Radioactive Wastes c.
l
' ] In the operation of nuclear power reactors, radioactive material is produced by fisolon and by neutron-activation reactions J
of metals and material in the reactor system. Small amounts of gaseous d and liquid radioactive wastes enter the effluent streams, which are M monitored and processed within the plant to minimize the radioactive Q nuclides that will ultimately be released to the atmosphere and the
, ,/ l Mississippi River at low concentrations under ' controlled conditions.
l The radioactivity that may be released durir.g operation of both Units 1 y) and 2 at 20 percent of fu)) power will be as low as practicable and in accordance with the Commission's regulations, as set forth in 10 CFR pa r t 20 and 10 CFR Part 50.
. kg (1) Gaseous Wastes l
'M Present System M
j During power operation of the facility, radioactive l
.h m.i t e r i a l s released to the atmosphere in gaseous ef fluents (which arise Fj from the non-condensable gases lef t af ter steam condensation from the h turbine generator) include fission product noble gases (krypton and l h xenon), activated orgon and nitrogen, halogens (mostly iodines), t ritium j
@ contained in water vapor, and particulate material including both D fission products and activated corrosion products. Fission products are released to the coolant and carried to the turbine by the steam if (g defects occur in the fuel clad or if uranium is present as an impurity in the clad i tsel f.
The systems of treatment of radioactive gaseous
% waste currently inst alled at the station are described in the Final Saf ety Analysis Repo rt (19) and in the applicants ' Envi ronmental Report.
1 l The applicants' response of
- i 11,1971 (see re f 15, Appendix I) to j comment s on t he d ra f t Environmental Statement describes the system p proposed for future Installation to maintain gaseous effluents at low levels during ext ended full power operation, y The majer source of gaseous was te act ivi ty will be d t he condet.ser af r e lector ef fluent , nther sources inc]ude the t urhine fJjl hullding exhaust, reactor building exhaust , drywell purge and release ;
,13 i
- u h
- .9 y
u
(& {.
k
i '
I 2
r
')-
from the gland sen] off-gas systen.. Prior to release, the gases from the main condenser air ejector are delayed in a 30 minute holdup pipe (to allow decay of activity of short-31ved radioactive noble gases), filtered through high ef ficiency particulate ' filters and then discharged to the at mosphere t hrough a 310-foot stack.
Turbine building ventilation exhaust contains low concentrations of activity, primarily from steam system leakage, and is discharged to atmosphere without treatment through the main stack. Like-wise reactor building ventilation exhaust contributes little activity, partleularly at the ;20 percent power level, and is discharged without
. treatment to the building vent stack. Drywell gases are normally purged and exhausted f rom the reactor building vent stack but can be processed through the standby gas treatment system if the activity level is high.
The small quantity of radioactive gases released by way of the gland seal
[. of f-gas system is delayed for about 2 minutes to allow decay of the 7 major activation gases (N-16 and 0-19) prior to release through the main y
stack. All sources of gaseous waste are continuously monitored to assure that effluent releases are within applicable standards.
On the basis of operating experience with power rearturs of similar design, it is expected that the off-gas system described above will keep release of gaseous radioactive wastes within small fractions of the limits specified in 10 CFR Part 20 at 20 percent power. In order to reduce these levels to the lowest practicable during extended full power
- -operation.which may entail local failures of fuel clad integrity, the applicants will install additional gaseous-holdup equipment. A modifi-I cation to the present system will allow recombination of the hydrogen
._ and oxygen formed in the reactor coolant, a condenser to remove much of
- - the water vapor, and an 8-bed charcoal system to provide additional re-tention time for the krypton and xenon and to provide additional absorption 5 for particulate matter. These modifications will be operabic within
- 2-1/2 years and should further reduce offsite exposures from gaseous
, radioactive releases from the condenser air ejector by a factor of about
! 40.
At power Icvels of 20 percent or less in each unit with the presently installed gaseous waste system, discharges will be at
' low levels since little fuel f ailure is expected at this low powe'r and little dif fusion of fission products from the fuel pellets wil' take e
place at low operating temperatures. On the basis of startup experience at other operating plants with similar gaseous waste systems, we anticipate 5
I activity releases at the rate of less than 2,000 uC1/see from each unit I
r or a t ota] of less t han 4,000 vC1/ste f rom the station, primarily noble 5
O l
[
N k
d 2 : I s
c
' na se s .- Some iodines may also. be = released in gaseous fbrm , We anticipate i x
. releases.at .the.' rate of less than 0.25 C1/ year of 1-131 f rom both units fromlthe stack and less than 0.01 C1/ year from both units from the reactor building vent at 20 percent power.
(2). Liquid Wastes
/
Liquid radioactive wastes from drain sumps, drain
~
tanks, and floor . drains are collected, filtered, and temporarily stored prior to discharge co the Mississippi River. During normal operations, wate.r f rom the primary reactor system'will be demineralized and placed in the condensate storage tank- for reuse in the reactor. The condensate from1 the future off-gas. system will also be placed -in condensate storage.
. Spent resins from the radwaste demineralized are not regenerated but are disposed of as. solid radwaste. The use of non-regenerative demineralizers leads to smaller volumes of liquid wastes, and.thus. lcss addition' of ~ activity to the environment, than if a regenera-LJnn resins system were' used in the same manner.
The applicants plan to recycle water as a fundamental
. plant process. Iloth the condensate-demineralized system and the rt: actor-water cleanup system are designed to assure requisite purity and activity levelu 'to permit recycling of most of the plant water that contains radlnnuclides. Recycling is also provided fcr about 60 percent of the water that goes through the liquid-radwaste system.
The only liquid wastes expected to be discharged of fsj t e are from floor drains and sumps, laboratory drains, decontamina-
- elon solutions (very infrequently), and laundry wastes. After filtration and sampling, these wastes are diluted and discharged into the Mississippi River.
11 s
The applicant indicates ( '
- 6) that further processing equipment will be installed in the liquid waste system which will reduce discharges to the Mississippi River to less than 1.2 curies per year af ter December 3, 1973. At 20 perce at power or less in each unit with the preo.cnt ly installed liquid radanste system, discharges will also be at very low levels. On the basis of startup experience at other operating plants with similar floor drain systems, we anticipate activity releases at t he rate of about 3 curies / year from each unit or a total of about 6 curies per year from the station, primarily activated corrosion products.
1,en than4 4 curf ew of tritium are also anticipated to be released.
1 M
i I
(- !
(3) Se)1J Wastes of spent Solid wastes f rom the reactor operation are composit es are resins from the liquid-radwaste demineralized and precipitates densate insoluble phase mot ter that comes f rom filters or is washed into the con-separator.
The spent resins and the slurry from the l rondensate phase -separator are dewatered in a centrifuge. Separated y
liredd waste returns to the liquid-radwaste stream, whereas the solids
'I are mixed with c. ncrete in drums for shipment of fsite to a licensed hurial ground.
.se drums will be shipped by vehicles with suitable shielding in compliance with ACC and l>0T regulations.
', g C. ljNVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF STATION OPERATION Va
^
o
- 1. llea t Removal System Effects W a. Condenser Cooling Water Intake i
g The floating barrier at the mouth of the intake canal presents R a retarding influence on fish eggs and larvae as well cs floating debris.
We have reviewed the applicants data as well as searched for additional data elsewhere but have found that there is no evidence available that
- w.
indicates the ef festiveness of the barrier in reducing the flow of fish eggs and larvae into the intake canal, thus protecting them from being entrained in the condenser cooling channel. Some rather large tree branches were observed on the trash racks during the site visit
- which indicated that debris.
the barrier is not completely effective in stopping large pieces of With all six intake pumps operating at full capacity (2,2 70 cis), we have calculated the If near velocity of the water at the floating barrier to be about 1 foot per second (fps). Since this velocity is i
nearly the same as current speeds in the river, all but immature fish h,Q and plankton will be able to enter and leave the intake canal at will.
Some fish and other organisms may enter the intake canal and establish
( cemi-permanent populations. The canal may be an attractive habitat for
} .
a variety of reasons, i.e., available food source, spawning sites and
) --
- A site visit was made by AEC environmental protection staf f members to aid in their independent review of the station and its effects. The i
site visit included detailed observation of the site environs, inspec-7 t ion of the station, and discuss;ons with the applicants' environmental j consultants and staff,
@iE .
Ai]
- h e
W gj ;
M ! '
U eI N
y 4
M I
k - :,s .
i 5
a j
e protective cover. I 3 Ilowever, should concent 1tions develop to the extent j that high densities result and persist on olme, damage to fish may-l occur due to increased incidence of disease. A possibility exists that
] walleye and sauger, which are believed to spawn predominately in the e i rocky areas near the Jocks and dams, may utilize the rock-lined intake
! canal f or spawning. Such an occurrence would probably result in {
- entrainment of a large fraction of the annual spawn.
5
_=
f Teash rack bars, spaced 2-1/2 inches apart and extending to
]
E the bottom of the intake canal, are the first obstacle between the floating E barrier at the entrance of the intake canal and the condensers. Such a mesh size will certainly permit the passage of small organisms. Small i fit h can pass between the bars and reach the traveling screens.
A set of traveling screens with 3/8 inch mesh protect the ent rance to the pumps and condensers. These screens are normally stationary and change position at preset time intervals or when activated by buildup of pressure due l
to the collection of debris. Plankton will pass t h rough
' these screens, as will fish eggs and larvae. The traveling screens are not M expected to mechanically damage the larger fish that swim through the trash racks becoune the screens are not in continuous motion and the j- water velocity is still low at this point (we calculate about 1-1/2 fps).
il ,
5 There will be entrainment of phytoplankton, zooplankton and
! Immature stages of fish. However, since plankton concentrations in the
= vicinity of the stations are not well known, and since the actual spawning locations have not been well identified, the percentage of aquatic life
$ that will be entrained is impossible to estimate. Obviously, if the
" ma jority of the crewning adults of a particular f. h species spawn immediately abovc within the intake canal, t' _ . greductive success of
^ 4] that species will a reduced. The staff has takm ecu ant of these considerations in its overall assessment (see below}.
5 E In summary, the non-motile organisms (those which either do
, ] not swim or cannot overcome the current) which are small enough to pass j through the traveling screens will be entrained. Those ncn-motile
=_ organisms which are too large for the screens will be trapped on the screens and lost. Motile organisrts , mostly fish, may be attracted to the g area between the trash rack and screens and congregate in large numbers.
g Such congregations could be detrin, ental to the fish (e.g. , increased
=
disence susceptibility) and to the operation of the station, b
g These pr oblems will occur to some unknown extent , and deter-a mint Jon of the degree of occurrence and the need for remedial action, j if called for, will be part of the environmental surveillance program.
E' a '=
i !
~
4,
I I
L n.
i
- h. Cond g g _Pesag in pass ing throaga the condensers and the discharge canal, the ent ralned organisms will he sub jected to' n sudden increase in temperature (up to 4.6"F) which will last about 5 minutes. The entrained organisms will also be subjected to periodic chemien1 damage when sodium hypochlorite is used to clean the condenser tubes, and to continuous mechanical damage due to turbulence and abrasion against tubing walls. These chemical and thermal effects are not readily separable f rom each other or from the mechanical effects; hence, individual assessment of each effect is not entirely possible. When jetake temperatures are relatively high (June,
.luly and August, Tabic 2, p. 9), and the reactor is at full power, nearly 100 percent mortalj ty of entrained organisms may occur. At 20 percent power the mortality rate will be lower because of the lower thermal impac t (4.6*F vs 23*F) and because the lower maximum temperature (intake tempera-ture plus thermal impact) is not as near the lethal limits. However, we do not expect the maximum possible mortality rate of 100 percent of the ent rained organisms in the condensers to cause more than a 20 percent reduction of the total plankton (assuming plankton population proportional to water intake) immediately downstream during low flow (11,000 cfs).
Normally, the flow is much larger and the percentage reduction of plankton will be much less.
. Our review of laboratory and field studies of condenser passag established the potential for adverse effects on such entrained organisms.T20)
The field studies were conducted at several power plants throughout the country which are using river or estuarine water for once-through cooling (notably.the Tennessee Valley Authority's Paradise Power Plant on the Green River and the Chalk Point Station on the Patuxent River in Maryland) .
The data indicate that the passage of young fish through the condensers of the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Plant (using 6 percent of the river flow during extrene low-flow conditions) causes 100 percent mortality during much r f the low-flow period. Nevertheless, no quantifiable ad-verse ef fects on the fish populations and other blota in the Connecticut
['
Hiver have resulted f rom more than 30 months of operation. (21) TVA's ex-
.perience at the. Paradise plant on the Green River in Kentucky shows that zooplankton populations recovered a few miles downstream f I
greater than 20 percent reduction in passing through the plant.ga
( Hased on the above data, we believe that even if it is assumed g that 100 percent of the organisms entrained in the Quad-Cities condenser
, i cooling water system will be lost (this amounts to 20 percent of the l organisms pausing the station at maximum, which is during the lowest flow E period), reduc t jon in the number of organisms immediat e downs t ream my j l occur, but the ovo all danage to the ecological balance of Pool 14 vill be smalj.
} ;
R g,.x .
1 5
- { 7 4
i dI l
h!
9
' \
y c. Condenser Cooling Water Discharge Al though the mouth of the discharge canal has been necked l ,
down to create a current of 4.5 feet per second, many species of fish I
!( wl1J be able to overrnme the current and enter the canal. The velocity i is within the ability swimming canal of proper many(2.5 fps)(23)also species. well within the sustained I Their presence in the canal makes i them subject to the potential thermal and chlorine effects.
N yj Fish will be attracted to the canal or heated downstream areas when temperatures there are preferable to ambient conditions. Each g species typically has a preferred optimum and upper lethal temperature M limit based primarily on past acclimation experience. Table 5 summarizes fi the laboratory and field works of several investigators relative to the i f ,
temperature tolerances of several species, some of which are common in
& pool 14.
o g During periods of low river temperatures, fish that are at-E t racted to the lischarge canal or immediately below will become acc11 mated h to warmer than ambient river temperatures (see Table 2 on page 9). In p the case of station shutdown, these fish will be exposed to a rapid return j to ambient temperatures and sill experience cold shock, which may be a
- M potent ially greater threat io fich than increased temperature. Mortality y resulting from the inability of fish to acclimate
- y. temperatures in natural systems has been reported.gapidly lowering Although the p'! extrapolation of laboratory bioassay experiments to field conditions is !
L somewhat speculative, the rr.arked temperature ranges between acclimr.ted j
and lower temperature limits in Table 5 suggest that a sudden decrease k or 4.6'F would not cause any large scale fish mortality.
The heated discharge from the canal is likely to affect certain
?W) benthic species such as mayfly and stonefly nymphs and caddisfly larvae, N
h and may also the mixing zoneaffect of theadditional discharge.plankton, Cout an tfish (20, gsand andother larva forms within workers (24,26)
M have r eported the thermal ef fects obscrved in discharge canals and their
{- near environs for a number of operating plants. The most prominent effects noted were seasonal changes in animal diversity and total number of organisms present. At several stations during the summer months, animal diversity and numbers were reduced, indicating thermal stress in the immediate discr ,e 3 area. During winter at ti.ese stations, divercity and numbers of organisms
? Increased. phytoplankton primary production has also been shown to be af fected by an increase in water temperature. (26) Depending on the
% ambient water temperature and other factors, production can be either increased or decreased.
The studies mentioned above show localized damage. No wide-
@ spread changes of the nature described have been observed that clearly W
- N b,
(
4
.d . ,
. pl 0 - 04 8
_ me - 1
. 9. H.
ei 0 4 9 9 9 2 1 T F 8 56 6 6 7 7 d 6 e
r CM r .
4 8
eb - ,
f 0 1 68 e! a. .
6 r 6 0 - 5 9 9 -
P 8 9 7 6 8
. e c
n e
T 0
)
F ~.
r e
f 5
- r -
e
- D ( H 22 00 4 4 666 r L . 7 7 6 6 22 999 - -
m ,
e i
i e e .
l L m S e s i s
I T
.u F p
.-. R E T m
e d t en
_ T 62 02 02 ve
. A .
806 is W pF 93 63 6 3 969
- - ve H r r
- S E
U* 89 89 89 683 up s
o
.. R .
- F r h t
. H s D i y E
n 44 4 4 44 44 f t i , 2 2 22 22 - 22 - - i T L e tl C m M" - (
E L
E pT
.i si eb t a m c 9
5 S e ei T hl
^ 2 E R t p
"" L O .
08 08 08 22 p
- B F w -
A - - f a oE 1 1 21 22 98 o T S L' 4 5 35 34 34 f T t o I
n M I L
M .
ee ce
)
r r E eg I' pe C
- d
. N (
0 A .
5 d R p n
. E m h a
. L e 00 00 00 000 c M '
T O T 86 96 9 7 17 7 _ -
is h n E t 68 58 57 47 7 wo i C R a t N U T i m -
1 i t
I -
A R
E l
c c
s n e o r c d
. P A u 4
2 t l I
T a a r t e n p e mm ei
_ t r e
r p e x t e a
g- h t
l e ) )
wci u n r r ef g r e h a
n h t n c nn ee ri a c e
f h s
g r
c ri u ews s p h; i a 1 , p( (
e s u
F l 1 h e l r 1 s w y t. o s i o e Vf s e f l p l s u t l r l )
a l a e a a a B B C Y C W (
,ll'
L r r l '
1
!+ Indirat" point sources of heat or brief chlorination as the cause. Based on be Linse. data, nny of these incalized effects observed at the station will minimal because of t he reintively low temperature of the discharge water compared to ambient. in Pool 14.
The canal discharge will result in a portion of the immediate downstream surfac area being warmed. However, the temperature increases in the pool downstream will be less than those occurring naturally as a result of daily (diurnal) fluctuations.
~
Downstream arcas that wil1 experience temperature rises consist primarily of the main channel and a small area of islands which comprises only less 5 to 10 percent of the total downstream island and slough area and this than 5 percent of the total dog ( stream habitatin Pool 14. Although Island area has been suggested 7) to be a major area for fish smni.ng and residence, no evidence of these uses exists.
We have concluded that the small temperature elevations that wl11 occur over these islands and main channel (less than 4.6*F at 20 percent power) will not cause thermal fish kills based on our evaluation of the available data (compare Tables 2 on page 9 and 5 on page 28). Ex-amination of Table 2 indicates that the average temperature of Pool 14 could be raised by 7 to 8"F during the summer without exceeding the temperatures that have occurred naturally. The " average maximum" column shows that a rise of 2 to 4'F could occur during summer without exceeding maximum ambient temperatures.
An unlikely addition of 5'F to the maximum recorded tempera-tures would result in localized temperatures which do not exceed the upper thermal limits of the major species present in Pool 14 (Table 5). However, if such localized temperatures are not preferable to fish, the option of retreat is available to them. Mount, et. al (27) have suggested that damage (i.e.
reduced reproductive success measured by occurrence of spawning, percent of fertile eggs and percent normal larvae produced) to the walleye and sauner could occur in the winter as a result of increased water tem-peratures. Their results with yellow perch indicate a decrease in reproductive success at .43*F (35 percent fertile eggs and 31 percent normal larvac) compared to 39'F (70 percent fortf eggs and 53 percent normal larvae). At temperatures p,reater than 43*F reproductive success continued to decrease. We have carefully examined this data in regard to its applicability to Pool 14 and the 20 percent operation under consideration, in this connection account must be taken of several factors: (1) the application of their experimental results to fish in pool 14 represents an extrapolation from the laboratory to pool 14 and a further extrapolation from yellow perch to walleye and sauger; (2) the results of Mount et. al.
apply to a 4*F temperature change while the temperature change around the Jslands below the sta tion at 20 percent of full power will be appreciably less than 4'F; and (3) even assuming that there is a 50 percent reduction
4 I
- i
)
-Ig,. e i I
M 31 - l W
-N- !
p! in ler t ! le eggs sp wned I.v some species in the J r. edi c e forns t rean island to cas , t here 1s no evidenco (see above) that t h i .s will affect the Y . .o o h . l e a l <. t a b i l l t . of l'ool 14. These f actors , as we)) as the extent of t thitotal area affected (as discussed above),. Indicate that t he wa rm wa t e r
. p[ (r e .ul t i ng f rom e,t at J on- generat ion) around the downs t ream islands will not. I have a measureable ef fect on- the overall fish population of Pool 14 due to
(,
r a derren*e in normal reproduction of fish in, that area..
Y. !
y- The ef fccts of small downstream temperature increases on other p river hinta will be minimal. Ef fects on phytoplankton are not likely'to f,
he observed in terms of a reduction in primary production several hundred f eet downs t ream. Benthic populations will not be exposed to increased 4
t empe ra t u res to any extent since the heated water will be primarily a !
surface to mid-depth phenomenon. Slight alterations in the hatching time of insect larvae could occur. in the immediate area of the disc' gg)but the major portions of the downstream areac will be unaffected.
- f- In summary, there are several potential adverse effects that
- #- could be caused by the Heat Removal System: the congregation of fish in h
the intake. canal and'behind the trash rack; the degree of impingement and i damaging of the congregated fish, if any, against the traveling screens; 1- [
C the combined chemical-mechanical-thermal ef fects on the organisms carried through the condenser; the congregation of fish in the discharge canal;
(- the ef fects of chlorine residual and warm water on the fish in the discharge
_ cannt and aquatic biota in the canal outfall; and the effects of chlorine re .ldual and warm wnter on the aquatic biota downstream, p our conclusions are, as previously indicated, that while
-f6 'there may be adverse impacts on the quality of the environment resulting f rom son,e or all of these ef fects , the technical evidence cited in the M discussion indicates that these impacts would not be substantial, that the
' ' .D af fected area will be small (i.e. at most, the area of the downstream W lslands, about 0.3 square mile), and that there will be no detectabic damage h4 beyond the small af fected area. Since, however, the extent of these impacts cannot be definitely determined at this time, the applicant will be re-
@ quired to expand his environmental surveillance program to include an lf m
assessment of the areas of potential effects identified in the preceding paragraph. '
- 2. Chemical Effects i
The chemical effluents are those resulting f rom the regenera tion of
- i the demineralized, chlorination f rom condenser m1 caning and service water, and seware . These have been described in section. II.B. (pp . 20-2 2 ) .
> c
)- E-
^
\
)
L ,
[,
1 l
__-___7 8
n I ]
\ l g *
- 3? -
h
$r 4
P Tabic 6 compares the chemical quantities from the demineralized In the riverwater' to drinking and instandards drinking ,water.
and to quantities of the same chemical already I
It can be seen from this comparison that ' the addition of chemical ef fluents from the station will not increase the concentrations in Pool 14 above existing levels. Furthermore, since the water gradients in the vicinity of the site are toward the river, no chemicals from the station are likely to enter the ground water supplies.
i periods, Sodium hypochlorite solution is added intermittently (40 minu'te 3 times per day) to the condenser cooling water to reduce the growth of bacteria and other microorganisms in the piping and condensers.
The concentrations of chlorine residual in the discharge canal may vary from as much as 250 ppb (0.25 ppm) at the condenser exit to something much !
Icss at the canal exit. The uncertainty in these numbers stems from the !
variability of the chlorine demand 'of the river uter, and the uncertainty of the of feet of the weir, and of the mixing in the canal. Operating experience must therefore be utilized to measure and understand the effects of chlorine residual on fish and other aquatic biota at levels of residual chlorine considerably below 1,000 ppb (1 ppm). .
(f Chlorine is known to be toxic to aquatic life. Although the 1 levels (e.g., at which effects have been noted are subject to certain conditions perature the nature of the receiving water, species of aquatic life, t e.a-etc.
behavior (30) ov)e,r long periods of time.. levels as low as 1 ppb have been shown to More specifically,12 days of continuous exposure at 10 ppb is lethal, and so is 4 days of continuous exposure at 100 ppb. Salmonids are capable of detecting and avoiding concent rations of 10 ppb. Thus, if residual chlorine concentrations were periodically that the (a few times per year) as high as 40 ppb, it seems likely fish reactlons. While exposed to these concentrations would be capable of avoidance there are no salmonids in Pool 14, these data are Indicative of the magaitude the f1sh that live in Pool 14. of the chlorine effect and may apply to some of Our conclusion is that we expect no serious adverse effect on the aquatic biota in and around the discharge canal. Ilowever, due to the g uncertainties enumerated above, monitoring of the chlorine residual will t
be required as indicated in Section II B.
Chlorine residual ef fects on fish in the river proper are the same as in the canal. However, by the time the chlorine residual has gone that dis tance, most of f t has reacted with river water constituents and the levels are much lower. The effects will, therefore, be correspondingly lower.
We have reviewed the literature (see discussion in II b 2) and observed measurements of chlorine residual at the station. The foregoing Indicate to us that modern practices in chlorination, involving the mixing e
Y -
1 L
-733 -
.,.4 Table 6-Chemien1 Content of Water (Parts Per Million) 5a
' Quad Ci ties ' Recommended Limits of Condenser Drinking Water in 100
. Pool ( .6) Concentration in La rges t. Ci ties (33) litscharge (n) 14 Drinking Water. Median- Maximum so ';2. ' 28 ' 2'5 0( 2)-
4 26 572 Mg. 16 50( 3) 22- 6 120 Cn -12 39 75( } 26 /145
- (a) These concentrations:of the listed chemicals are discharged for short. f ractions ' of the~ day and are diluted by the River. -
1 l
+
i Nj f
l^
j 1
I -'
h- i L_ -- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ . _ _ - - - _ - -J
e I J Uf chlorinated s treams wit h Jarger. volumes of unchlorinated wat er .in 'the dlucharge system, lead to lit tic or no chlorine discharge to the rivers nnd- inkes providing the cooling water. 110 wever,'there are no known published data which definitely establish this position. . Because of the uncertainty involved and the -potential adverse effects, the applicant will be required to' monitor the residual chlorine and aquatic biota for chlorine effects so that remedial action may be taken early if necessary.
An additional amount of chlorine will be added t; the discharge canal in. the service water discharge. As indicated in Section II B 2,.
the service water is chlorinated for two 20-minute periods per day, during
. which: the residua 1 ' chlorine in ' the 67 cfs (30,000 gpm) discharge f rom the service water unit:will be about 0.5 ppm (like the condenser cooling' water, it is expected to vary in the range 0.2 to 0.7 ppm). Possible contribution to the river, during chlorination, is about one-tenth that of the condenser chlorination. This is not expected to add a measurable amount to the chlorine released f rom the condenser cleaning. In any event, it will also b'e included in the discharge water that is monitored.
The station has 'an operable sewage treatment plant which provides
. primary and secondary treatment. The maximum amount of effluent is 0.3 cfs.
This is chlorinated to less than 1 ppm by State regulation, but the small ami,unt of total ef fluent (0.3 efs compared to 2,270 cis) is unlikely to be a
- noticeabic source'of adverse effects. The plant is licensed by the State of Illinois and is under the supervision of a licensed sewage-treatment operator.
. liased on the foregoing, we have concluded that there is not likely to be an adverse ef fect on the quality of the environment due to chemical ef f luents from operation of the s tation.
- 1. Radiological Ef fects
'Ihe staf f estimate of the exposure that may be incurred by the general public f rom plant operation under the proposed license is based on operation of each unit at 20 percent power.
(a) Exposure from Radioactive Materials Released to the Atmosphere The radioactive materials released to the atmosphere in gaseous effluents include the fission product noble gases (krypton and xenon), halogens (mostly lodines) and particulate material including both
.. fission products and activated corrosion products.
The concentration of radioactive materials in the environment
. . depends on the meteorological conrfitions durir.g the period of release.
1 O
_________-__-__-2
r
. - '5 5 -
1 Relea,e s ate J imits -are defined by determir.ing the average concent rations and dose rates en be expected at various locations outside the plant area where public.atcess is not controlled by the applicant. The maximum release rate limit is established in accordance with 10 CFR Part 20. Conditions wiJJ l eve l s, be i..-luded in the Operating License to require the licensee to keep of radioactivity in effluents as low as practicable in accordance with 10 CFR Part 50.36a.
The maximum site release rate limit for nobic gases for the stat ion based on annual average meteorology has been determined to be 0.4 rurie per second. This release rate would limit the annual exposure out-doors at any location on the site boundary to not more than 500 millirems per year.
Actual release rates will be substantially less than the maxi-mom allowable release rates and are dependent on fuel ele. eut performance.
Operat lon at 20 percent power is not expected to result in any significant A fuci element failures. The actual release rate with new fuel is not expected to exceed about one percent of the maximum release rate limit. Under these
[' conditions, the maximum exposure rate outdoors at the site boundary is expected to be no larger than 5 millirems per year. Actual exposures to Individuals offsite, taking into account the distance individuals live f rom the ulte boundary and shielding from living part-time Indoors, would not I exceed 2.5 millirems per year.
=_
The dose from iodine in the thyroid of a child was calculated
,- to be about 0.5 mrem per year by assuming an intake of one liter of milk p
per day produced by cows grazing at the site of maximum deposition for the j t hree months of spring.
i In order te reduce the levels of gaseous radioactivity to the lowest practicable level, assuming that some fuci element failures will
{
occur in the future at power levels higher than 20 percent, the Commission 1 y has inf ormed the applicants that it will be necessary to install additional
-y gaseous holdup equipment in the station. The applicants plan a modification j of the offgas system, to be completed within 2-1/2 years. This modification will fnclude on each unit a recombiner, a condenser, and an 8-charcoal-bed {l
.- treatment system.
(b) Exposures f rom Radioactivity Rc; eased in Liquid Effluents It is estimated, from staff calculations based on experience
- wJ t h s imilar operat ing reactors, that the total quantity of radioactivity '
in liqul1 effluents wjll be less than 6 curies per year of primarily cor-ro.fon products. The expected annual avera MlwJssippi River is expected to be 2 x 10 geO concentration pCi/cc or .less.in the I A
=
m
. I tit 1
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ l
q Il b! ,'
DI
\.'
4 . lielow t he s t a t ion ou t f n i l , the nnnun 1 dose to individuls Q '
wh., ow t he M!ss isu lppi River os their sole source of drinking water would br ed.. .nt 0.000 3 r. rem. The dose to an individunJ f rom consun.~ tion of 50 gm of f Ish per day (40 lbs per year) would amount to about 0.003 mrem per year.
~
(c) Doses to the Regional Populatio_n, Iowa, In 1963, the total fish catgh from the Mississippi River for Illinois and Missouri was 9.3 x 10 lbs. This amount of fish would represent a potential dose from the Quad-Cities liquid effluents of 1 man-rem j- if connumed. The dose to the population within a 50-mile radius of the y plant f rom drinking Mississippi Fiver water will be about 0.2 man-rem, while d the dose from gaseous effluents will be about 3 man-rem. Thus, based on our
[i conservative estimaces, the total man-rem dose from all pathways to the 600,000 persons who live within a 50-mile radius of the plant would be about
$( 4 man-rem per year if the station is operated at 20 percent of f ull power.
E Hy comparison, the natural background dose of about 100 mrem per year per person results in an annual total of 60,000 man-rem for this same population.
4J h (d) Radiation to Other Species G
p- The average annual dose to fish, invertebrates, and plants living in the discharge canal would be less than 100 mrem per year. Tnere is no evidence that dose rates of this magnitude will cause any detectable harm to these aquatic organisms.
! (e) Conclusion
' We therefore conclude that radioactive gaseous and liquid g ef fluents resulting from operation at 20 percent of unit power are expected g to be w211 within 10 CFR Part 20 and Technical Specification limits. In g addition, we have concluded that operation of the facility will contribute 4 only an extremely small increment to the dose that the area residents
( receive from natural background. Since fluctuations of the background dose may be expected to exceed this small increment, the dose will be immeasurable 66 in itself and will constitute no meaningful risk.
c g
% 4. . Effects of Accident Releases t
With each unit operating at 20 percent of rated power, the AEC l
staff believes the probability of an accidert in the station that could
[f have significant adverse effects is extremely small. This low probability h results f rom conservatism in the design of the nuclear steam supply system, E the reactor protection system and the engineered safety features that are
% included in the plant, as well as the reduced power operatinr level . The M potential offsite consequences that could occur in the unlikely event of a
{
M {
a i f
h i
i
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -- - - ~
l t
i
'i 1
l ma jor il91 Report }ccf dent have been shown in the Quad-Cities final Safety Analysis i end the AEC staff's Safety Evaluation (31) to be well within I the guideline values estab'ished by the AEC regulations for the evaluaticu of power reactor sites when calculated by the very conservative methods used in such evaluations.
The environmental consequences of postulated accidents ranging f rom trivial to major have been evaluated for operation of each unit at 20 percent rated power. In making these evaluations, the guidance pre- )
i sented in the Commission document
- entitled, " Scope of Applicants' j Environmental Reports with Respect to Transportation, Transmission Lines, j and Accidents," was followed. This document identified the nine classes of accidents shown in Table 7. In general, accidents in the high consequence i end of the spectrum have a low occurrence rate, while those on the low consequence end of the spectrum have a higher occurrence rate. In contrcs t to the highly conservative assumptions and calculations used for safety ;
evaluations, environmental consequences are determined in this report using j assumptions as realistic as the state of technology permits. The staff's l evaluation of these consequences in terms of population dose is shown in -
Tabic 8.
The environmental consequences of Class 1 and 2 events were evclu-ated by the staf f and have been found to have trivial consequences.
Furthermore, occurrences of Class p accidents are extremely unlikely in i of power. at 100 percent power.(311 They are even less likely at 20 percent operation In addition, defense in depth (multiple physical barriers); }
l quality assurance of design, manufacture, and operation; continued sur-veillance and testing; and conservative design are all applied to provide j and maintain the required high degree of assurance that potential accidents in this class are, and will remain, sufficiently remote in probability of occurrence that the environmental risk is extremely low.
- 197].
Enclosure in the let ter f rom 11. L. Price to applicants dated September 3, l j
)
1 1
l
}
- g s
- t t
- e si y - - -
a um c i l
n r p u rf r - o a
m ji l oa oa p y r g v
a r r s e rf or l n
- x os o t t gr ao t ogo i
- E n n nne i c no v
- ( uo e l e aki p l oi r eaah id e c p o s i l rt xi r ap n v
_ l t u sp o us r oi i
ea l n d a n r n
_ s b c i af ed y ii y ( i a oedk
_ l f r ot n or g s t a si f
r t ca t a ya ;a n n k c t o ggpt ee d l r yc e A ae pn . b or d ep nr nnxn ook mt ag er i aee oca i
g n l S .
B me p
r r m l ee e sd n s ni c
n u np .
sl sl up i i
t l R ir dlii n t aeop s na uo ah uo nmr e acr qt smt qi aee l f ubi n D l io ea h .
o on r eriet l t g e l sl i
= ohC ee r un ow nr a osn oya ut o o t t ccP l p l t oe f nol o al n e go csh epep t S a rte n i euip c gp u r E c o d ie ahbt o ygx nstf e of C i t ei f t c rn e i s d p N l e cvs sl g ser ai - p , nti st E p n aot yn l eet e ml t p eins n R p o eb u ni edl ot ioa or aet a R A N R ao As uib re F sapm roe rogpu r U P ch D caso T C
C G
D e N .t A s ss ssl
- o l r st a t n S sl o a nw t t i cna n i T ei ge .
eef o
N vp e p .
E g td s f i . p ol l s enit esl e po I
D a a t oun d nes or ro d o vl k scqe auo C l a a it grfh rd 7 C s f a e d . y wkl n nt t
- E A
s e em i s l n n o i e ecr t e l et b g D of af c d nc e e eo ma L a l l
8 B E "s e ed ti ot o nt k d guv aid od
. l djc erj 3 A T e l r n eceeen b a
nb s o T A l e a . mns gs a l snb e ceiat c uon i st
- L p r e s puaaat d c i b
y as U m nsk if ere T a e i ea l - t s e l l vl ll v S x n ul l ol e ef aep p eae eea l se qa et eg p O O P
E i mal E mR sR a ufh rx FOt ue a ueu FI f uu Ff C
t ae r I u el d 1 2 3 o 1 2 t F E o t en . . . t o 12 1 O A R S ra 3 3 3 s 44 N 66 7 N
' O I
T A
C t m
I F
n e e
Y S I
S n m
t s
y d
S i n A a s a L t M'
t y C y n n r r o a e c s a d O m m i e i e r r i
r) c
? d i
s l
i u p o
pR W
c a
t a t oP s g t( n s u t h
f t o n i n m t s sm e l e t e d d
i e
s e
t s d c
u ct us d y i
c c
d n
a n c y o os a h
h[
$. i o
i n
- u. s r p
r py g l
t _
e r e
$_ n p l . -
u a
t n na i i
s o od f
%_ r c
i v
l a i i j r l
e 1 s l
a w s so ,
u t
n 8 e i
r m d
a s sc- f e O D T S R i
F i e e p
? F s R S 5
5 f
os s 1 2 3 4 5
. a 6 7
[s
[
ol NC
!lI!
p ay m er a ra x m E fi
( orp s s i se .
s od y l i 7 l s 3 s a ,t n t u .
A no p e'
n g ir n so i n o s ae n e rd o D ti . i st s s ynn s t t ie u n i m c a vt n s c i ni i i t aa d l cl t p aon e p eoo e A
R cc S e
en
.i p ne sl t t nt a .
. ) enht d et n d im e t
n cumm.
cren at ti t .
7 3
- o ssans .
c t nyt ek p 9 ( nisnd a I 3 a oie n I I
, l nyccr o
_ - 7 -
oir cb y o aea n e E ge c k mh e o l L ait pn i b B e f er oi s a A l orpsrl s T T_ p B ed m u m s mt a c n a s) oad e s i x oarrot i E L( ftRS n
- - d. w C 11 23 e o E e h A 88 88 S s s
~
s e e s r a
- u e n- l l
e f
t eu i r
cl s a ai f
svs l a
t ey f n l o8 c esa i g
vin ss o esA a es .
l nb y c a o nl o
l i
t eC d i ne u a t gf r, n r aia isS ea sh f t e t
+
i d e l o n n h ae s o i nt cr i i i e e
~ t t .n t v u p l i
ndi e e t ee a h s v r d r nr t c i eoo oe l s cdi p pr e cit e yo a D A saR Hm c i
r f e os m u
. s 8 9
.a N e ol 2
NC l-a
{ i l l! l
r TABLE 8-QUAD-CITIES NUCLEAR POWEI. STATION (UNITS 16 2)' AT 20% POWER
SUMMARY
0F RADIOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES'0F POSTULATED. ACCIDENT DETERMINED BY THE A.'E. C.
Estimated Dose Estimated Fraction of. ' to Population in "Cinun' Event 10 CFR Part 20 timit at 50 mile Radius,.
_ Site Boundary *f man-rem 1.0 :Trivini incidents '
b/ b/
2.0 Small releases outside containment b_/ . b_/
- 3. 0 ~ Radwaste system' failures 3.1 Equipment leakage or malfunction .002 0.13 3.2 - Release of liquid waste storage tank contents' O.02 0.5 3.3 Release of liquid waste storage tank contents Neg. Neg.
4 . 0' Fission products' to primary system
- 4. I - Fuel claddf ng defects b/ b/
4.2 Off-design transients that 0.007 0.17 3.0- Fission products to primary and necondary sys tems (PWR) . N.A. N.A.
- 6,0 Refueling accidents 6.1 Fuel bundle drop 'O 0.01 6.2 Heavy object drop onto fuel in core 'O 0.011 7.0 Spent fuel handling accident
)'
7.1 ~ Fuel assembly drop in fuel storage pool 'O 0.01 j 7.2 ficavy object drop onto fuel rack -0 0,004 )
7.1 Fuel cask drop 0.05 0.12 in/ Hepresents the calculated whole body dose as a fraction of 500 mrem (or the equivalent dose to organ),
b/ Thesc releases vill be comparable to the design objective indicated in the ,
proposed Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50 for routine effluents (i.e., .5 miem/yr !
to an individual from all sources).
U Il l
i r
4
- al -
{
TABLE 8 (cont'd.) ;
Estimated Dos e Estimated Frac:fon of to Populat f or. in - ,
' Class . Event 10-CFR Part 20 Limit at -50 mile Radius , . !
Site Boundarya/ man-rem
' H. 0 Accident initiation events con- l sidered in design basis evaluation 1 in the safety analysis report i i
a H.1 . Loss-of-coolant accidents h
Sms11 break - 0 0.026 Large brenic 0 'O.15 H.1 Break.-Jn instrument line 'f rom (u) primary system that penetrates the containment 0 0 l 8.2 . Rod drop accident 0.01 0.18 4
- 8. 3 Steam 11ne breaks Small break 0.006 0.14 Large break 0.12 2.6 9.0 See discussion p. 37 I
)
M
_ Represents the calculated whole body dose as a fraction of 500 mrem (or the equivalent dose to organ).
-bl
-These releases will be comparable to the design objective indicated in the proposed Appendix 1 to 10 CFR Part 50 for routine effluents (i.e., 5 mrem /yr to an -individual from all sources).
=.
1 I
i F
9
_ _ _ _ _ _ _1 m_ _ _ _ _ - . - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . . . _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ <d
R if' i F 3
- 42'-
a I gi
- t l Events included in Class 3 through'8 are considered in the appli-L cants' Safety Analysis Report and our Safe ty Evaluation. Thes e events, )
3l { ~ especially those in Class 8, are used together with highly cons rva-tive assumptions and the design basis events to establish the ps -
- d}. formance requirements of engineered safety features. But these I highly conservative assumptions and calculations are not suitabic for environmental risk evaluation. The probabilities and potential consequences of events in these classes have therefore been reevalu-ated on a realistic basis.
I h In evaluating these accidents, an important consideration is that
. ili each facility will be operated at a fraction of full power.
1
'l At low {
power levels, the potential consequences of accidents (e.g., the !
number of curies of radioactivity that could be released) are much less than at full power. As shown in Table 9, at 20 percent of full-power and during typical operation (TO), the maximum fuel temperature is approximately 860'F (vs. 3470*F at full power) and the fuel rod j I heat transfer performance (average power per unit length) is 2.7 kW/f t j 1
l (vs.13.4 kW/f t at full power). 1 F TABLE 9 h CORE THERMAL CHARACTERISTICS F
'f AT 20 PERCENT OF FULL POWER LEVEL OPERATION C
CORE PARAMETER BOL TO EC 1**
Maximum Power / Unit Length (kW/f t) 2.6 2.7 3.4 Power Density __ ( kW/ liter) 6.0 6.2 7.9
' Maximum Fuel Rod Volumetric Average Temperature, 'F 800 860 1010 h
I Percent of Fission Cases I
Released from Fuel Pellets
[ f into Fuel Pin Cap * <0.01 0.01 1 i
- APED-5756, " Analytic Methods for Evaluating the Radiological Aspects of the General Electric Boiling Water Reactor," dated March 1969.
' ** BOL - Beginning of core life (OMWD/T fuel exposure) 1 TO - Typical operation (7,350 MWD /T fuel exposure)
FC 1 - End of Cycle 1, Design Basis (11,650 MWD /T fuel exposure) l ky
( R6 pa
- )
i eW
l}
I
.A
,Q y 1-ir s ['
f >>Jer tFe ..bove car.J i t ions , the probd ility of failure- of the J ! t uN s i.:d fing either in norm 1 operation or as the result of an
! .o clJent 14 greatly reduced. In addition, the fuel would be operating I
g k noch of Ihe time at lower temperature than for full power and end of
, cycle ], Design Basis (!:C 1), conditions. Since the diffusion of E
fission products through the UO, fuel matrix into the gap between
Jfc the fuel pellets and the fuel cIenent cladding is strongly dependent upon the operating temperature, the fission products contained within
.g the gap (and thus available for release in the event of cladding failure) will be less than 1 percent of that at full power. This
, combination of conditions (i.e., few, if any, cladding failures and low gap activity) means that the radioactive inventory within the main coolant system and in the radioactive waste systems will be g
q very small. It will be due almost entirely to induced radioactivity
- p. of corrosion products. The corrosion resistance of the stainless
{q steel systems involved will assure that this inventory is small.
. As a result, this staf f evaluation of all accidents in Classes 3,
! 4, and-5 which involve releases of radioactivity from the radio-M l active waste system and/or the main coolant system indicated that p the potential offsite radiological consequences are insignificant.
4 j It is not anticipated that any irradiated fuel wi'l be handled during the period of limited operation. However, if it is, the
- 1. ,
staff evaluation of the potential consequences of an accident during I- ! such handling (Class 6 and 7) indicates that these consequences would 9 also be insignificant. The only radioactivity that could be released W in such an accident would be the radioactivity that had previously been released f rom the UO, fuel into the fuel element gap, and this has teen found to be sma1I for the reasons discussed in the previous j paragraph. When this source term is used in conjunction with realis-Q tic evaluations of the ef fects of decontamination from the water 4 and steam within which the irradiated fue] elements are always submerged, the confinement and filtration sys tems provided, and meteorological diffusion f actors, the calculated potential of fsite radiological doses from these classes of accidents are less than one millirem to the whole body and the thyroid. These doses were, there- t
[q fore, also found to be insignificant.
1 Class 8 events, which are considered in the applicants' Safety I
{
J i, Analysis Report and the staff's Safety Evaluation, are used together !
I with highly conservative assumptions as the design-basis eventa to establish the performance requirements for engineered safety features.
j The highly conservative assumptions and calculations legitimately p used for safety evaluations are not suitable for environn. ental risk
- vt q 5
?w l *.. \
i
t r
l . ,
l y g j
%. l l !
J
p -
.i- .
le e
eval'u at jon because :he pr. bahlJ J tv of oc(urrence ir, so low for the.
unf avorable combination of c j rtumstancer. used. For this reason, Clnss 8 events are evalua ted realistica]Iy and would have 'conse-quences predicted in this way that are f ar less severe than those given for he same events deseHbed in Section 4.0 of our Safety Evaluation 31). For example, the staff evaluation of environmental ef fects of a Class E event , assuming a postulated loss-of-coolas t
+
nccident, ~ results in a calculated 2-hour thyroid dose at the site boundary of less than'I. rem, in contrast to the 150 rem given in.
Table 4.0 of- our Safety Evaluation.
l:
It is therefore concluded that no accident during the limited operations up to 20 percent of rated power would result in an adt.. se radiological impac t on the environment.
l-I f
1
< i i
)
i o
t ' -- _ _ _ _ _ . ~ _ - . _ _ . . - _ - . . . . - - - - - . - -- - -
?
, r '
r 4
1111.
, FO:EClif5UPJ. OF ALTERNATIVES IN FACILITY DESIGN OR OPERATION The station has alrea'dy been ' constructed on a particular 'si te. Conse-
~quent ly, . there~ are' no reasonable or- practical alternatives as to plant type or-location, y s t
Major changes. in the condition of the station which could result from authorizing the operation of Units 1 and 2 up to 20 percent of full pewer vould,lfor the period involved, be the discharge effluents, the consumption of enriched urarium and the production of small quantities of fission products.
However, such effluent discharges, consumption ~and fission product production would not foreclose the adoption of alternatives in plant design or operation
_ 'of the type that may' result from the ongoing full NEPA review.
j' While, as .carlier indicated (p. 36), radioactive gaseous and liquid efflu-ents resulting' from' operation are expected to be well within 10 CFR Part 20 and Technical Specification limits, the applicants further ' plan to install a
- modified weste system to reduce radioactive effluents to levels meeting the
- requirements ' of the t'as 710w' as practicable" amendments to 10 CFR Parts 20 and 50.
~
This is to,be effected within the period provided in the amended regulations.
As earlier discussed (p.16),- the applicants have aleo adopted or agreed to adopt -(for the operational period beyond June 1,1972) additional methods of. limiting;the effects of thermalfdischarges. Civil works have been initi-ated and componente have been procured to build a pipe .with diffuser nozzles
- for ' dispersion of heated condenser cooling water near the bottom of the Mississippi River channel. This system is expected to reduce the thermal effects.of the discharged water. Present operation will not foreclose these changes; nor' will it preclude any additional changes to accommodate requirements that may be imposed 'by the Commission as a result of its complete.NEpA review.
l 1 I{
J I.
i i .l a .
l
-_______.__=__
s-IV. gTliCTS OP DELAY IN FACILITY OPERAl!ON U"ON Tile PCbLIC INTEREST A. ' POWER NCED.i The applicants b:.ve stated, with supporting submissions, that electric
..crvice in Chicago, Northern IJ11nois, and all of Iowa will be seriously
.)copardized I f. t he Quad-Cities ' generating capacit y is not available to meet the 1972 summer peak load. In addition, the -Commonwealth Edison Company states that its 75 percent share (1,214 W) of Units 1 and 2 is needed prior to the summer season in order to schedule urgent maintenance of existing units.
l The importance of such maintenance is indicated by the loss of 1,664 W in nencrating capacity that the applicant experienced on a peak load day
'I ~
' in 1970 as a result of forced outages and restrictions. During a similar peak load in 1971, there was a loss of 2,239 W, and the situation, according to the applicants' submission, is likely to be worse in 1972 unless deferred maintenance is' performed.
For the summer of 1972, the Commonwealth Edison Company estimates its
- peak load will be 12,520 W. ' This is subject to an increase of up to 440 W 11 the summer is hotter than average. Without either of the 809 W Quad-Citles units or. Zion 1 (a 1,050 We nuclear unit for which an operating IIcense is also pending), this applicant's system capacity will be 13,189 W, including firm purchases from other utilities.' The reserve capacity would thus be 669 W, only 5.4 percent more than the estimated peak load. This is inr below the applicant's normal target of 24 percent reserve and further below-the 20 percent reserve generally recommended by the Federal Power Commission (FpC) .
Iowa-Illinois Gas and Electric Company has forecast a 1972 summer peak f load on its system of 714 W, which exceeds its dependable capacity of j 568 MW. Instead of a reserve, this applicant will, therefore, have a defici- {
cncy of 146 W without its 404 W share of Quad-Cities Units 1 and 2. The i
lowe Pool, of which the applicant is a member, indicates that its reserve margin without Quad-Cities will be a negative 45 MJ. With 4C4 MW from Quad-Cities, the pool's reserve would be 359 MW, which is 11.5 percent of its predicted peak load.
The situation which faces the app 11 cants is the subjcet of a staff ii
- l report by the FPC's Bureau cf Power which was transmitted to the Atomic ;!
Energy Commission on December 10, 1971. In its report, the FPC views the situation as a potentful power supply shortage throughout the midwest and concludes with the following: "The factors examined indicate that there is an emergency need for interim operation of the Quad-Cities Units 1 and 2, nasuming that the AEC can concurrently deal appropriately with environmental lasues invo]ved in such operation." A copy of the FPC report is appended to this document.
y
- 4 l L, 4
W h,
I i
_ 7 _
1he 11 ll n e!>,
h Contr.c ri e !.ommi c i ,n em;'has i red 'he urgent need for additionc1 renera t i ny, unac i t , i:
i
.spp ar ent that Illinol
. r a er.t
. e' t er t o i bi Ar t;* . whleb stated : "It is
+1 put i n t o oper 1t ian s 90 at v capaci ty now under construction before next mmme i .c t are the cert ,u nty un power outages. The unit i
nout abic to contribute La the required capaci ty are Edi son 's Quad-Citles I and 2, breause thev are reacy far tent ing and operation. "
There is no wav t o assure availab111tv of t he Quad-Cities units for t he summer peak load demand unless the applicants '
program 1.s power operation test undertaken and compiered in advance of that time. Addi tional t ime should be allotted to remedy any deficiencies discovered during the t e n, t program. The applicants have indicated that testing one unit will require 8 weeks at in ef f ort. the minimum, or 72 days for both units with some overlap be required However, for tes tingthey eachestimate unit tothat 32 additional days will eventually full power if operation to only 20 percent of full power is authorized at this time. Taking all of this into account we conclude that authorizing operation at 20 percent of full power of the Quad-Cities units at this time will save the applicants' about 2 month
- In the time i t would otherwise take to start and complete the power opera re vi ew .
t ion ' es program subsequent to the completion of our ongoing NEPA
. l From this discussion it should be noted that there is a critical need fi orof.power f rom the Quad-Cit ies uni ts to help meet the area's summer peak Complete testing, af the units and the 100 hour0.00116 days <br />0.0278 hours <br />1.653439e-4 weeks <br />3.805e-5 months <br /> warranty run at full i power must be completed prior to the July-September peak load months.
Ilowever, even this would not be of help to meet the peak load demand unless operations up to 20 percene of full power were authorized now so that the fuel loading for Unit 2 and the test program for both units could begin.
B. AVAJ1ABLE ALTERNATE SOURCES to To make up their power supply deficiencies, the applicants would attempt purchase liowe ve r , it the required capacity a,d enerpv f rom neighboring utili ties, is uncertain whether powor wl'l be available from adjacent systems, j as noted in the FI'C report which s tat es , "Wi thin the time available, there are r4 no k nown alternate additions of generating capaci ty which could be sub-st .i t " . f or the Quad-C i t i es Un' r e .. .
bot t. Delays in commercial operation of assil and nuclear units a . If My er Sper 4 in adjoining regions ;
theretore. I t would nr.t ce realist' t 10p .d upon imported replacement powe r i n t h is i ns t an e . "
- 1.etter 4cteo October 26. 9 1 to James R. Schlesinger, Chairman of the AEC f rom t.w ' lli noi r Comme, e Comrrissi n (copy at tached) .
I iW l 1 3
i i i l
fl c
l - 4N -
l>
! 3 C. - Dl:1AY COSTF l
For each . week flu Quad-Cities Station is not operating, the applicants est imat e the . f ull cost of, r eplacement power at St,200,000. The FPC report' ve r i f l e.% this es timate as reasonable or icss would reduce thie, cost by an amountOperation of both units at 20 percent the percentage of rated output obtained. approximately in proportion to D.
OTHER EFFECTS OFJIAY p
The applicants state that every megawatt not produced at Quad-Cities, which 'enn be replaced, will have to be. produced by the oldest, mos t inef-1Iclent coal-fired units on.the applicants' systems. Such generation is eat imated to result in adding about 70 pounds of sulfur dioxide and 3 pounds of part Iculates per megawatt-hour to the environment.- The Illinois Pollu-tion Control Board, in granting a variance from air particulate regulations f or operation of. several coal-fired units which are to be retired upon com-pletion of rund-Cities Unit 1, stated, "The present petition underlines the .
I inip.r ance of placing Quad-Cities in use at the earliest possible date."
(See I'cB 71-165; Opinion of the Board, September 16, 1971.)
I il il e
L f .'
y a
[
e (
f
a
~
1 i
r
- 4 LJ -
- s. CUN,Cj.U510N We have . omple t ed i ur in-i, ri ca l heal th and saf ety review of the opera t i on nf. t he s tation up to f ull nower under the authority of the Atomic Lnerey Act of 195t, as aniendt :1, and are prepaied to rnake all the necess ary f i ndings pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 50.57(a) for operation _:1 the station at 20 percent of f ull power. The results of thi ra.llulogical health and safety review are set forth in the AEC regulat ory Staf f Safety Evaluation (33) dated Augus t 25, 1971.
We have reviewed the matter of 20 percent operation of Units 1 and 2 during the period ending June 1,1972 in the context of the following rectors specified in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix D, Section D.2:
"(a) Whether it is luely that limited operation during the prospective review period will give rise to a significant, adverse impact on the environ:v nt : the nature and extent of such impact, if any; and whether redress of any such adverse environmental fr. pact can reasonably be effected should modification or termina-t lon of the limited license result from the ongoing NEPA review.
"(b) Whether limited operation during the prospective review period would fore 6 lose subscouent adoption of alternatives in facility design or operation af the type that could result from the ongoing NEPA environmental review.
"(c) The ef fect of delay in facility operation upon the pub tle interes t. Of primary importance under this criterion are the power needs to be served by the fat flity; the availability of alternative sources, if any, to meet those needs on a timely
.> asis; and delay costs to the licensee and to consumers."
Based on ur evaluation of the data and analyses referred to, we have determined that:
- a. Operation of both units at power levels up to 20 percent of rat ed power each, during the period ending about June 1,1972, will likely nive t ise to onl . o minimal impact on the environment. As ellsrussed above, t hi s pot er.t lal impact is due to chemicals, particularly thiorine and chlorine derivatives, and heat added to the condenser cooling watc . This impart would be loc /. f ed and is not likely to have a measureabic cf fe-t on the o"erall aquatic population of Pool 14 Fur t her7nort , should t his the nquatit blota in : ,
n oposed opratf or be terminated, recovery of 14 would be paod aad probably complete.
l
p
- h 7
.) y M - 5, , -
k 1
- b. Operation of the station, at the 20 percent power level will not
, N
. Y (' f or eclose subseq uent adoption of alt ernatives in the f acility design or i
operation of the type that couJd be required as a result of the ongoing
, supplernental fiEPA environmental review.
I i
i c. . The re will be an ad ve rse ef fe c t upon the public interest as a result' of delay in facility operation. The Federal Power Cormission, in its December 20, 1971 letter, has stated that it is essential y that these units be available for power generation by this sumer. Their-ry ict ter and supporting data confirms the applicants' contentions (with N supporting submission) that an emergency situation exists with regard to g the public need for power.
ij In accordance with Section D.2 of Appendix D of 10 CFR Part 50, we yj therefore conclude that, authorization of interim operation at a power
, A Jevel up to 20 percent during the period ending June 1,1972, should be granted.
p a
.f r
(
D i;
1 z
e l
w 1
lo pf i
MI 4 '
- 9
'd
}kd; .,
l r
3
- 3: -
REFERENCES
- 1. .i.etter from Mr. H. Nexon, Commonwealth Edison Co. , to Dr. Peter Morris dated October 12, 1971.
- 2. Letter from Mr. W. Stied, Commonwealth Edison Co. , to Dr. Peter Morris dated November 18, 1971.
- 3. Peterson, D. E.
and R. T. Jaske, Potential Thermal Effects of an N Expanding Power Industry:
June 1970.
Upper Mississippi River Basin, BNWL-1405 4.
Illinois Pollution Control Board - Hearing 71-20, May 24,1971 to J une 9, 19 71.
5.
Preoperational Environmental Monitoring (Thermal) of the Mississippi River near Quad-Cities Station, July 1969-June 1970. Ind. Bio-Test Labs., Inc. , Northbrook, Illinois, 1970, 46 pp.
6.
Preoperational Environmental Monitoring (Thermal) of' the Mississippi River near Quad-Cities Station, July 1970-December 1970. Ind. Bio-Test Labs. ,- Inc. , Northbrook, Illinois , 19 71, 91 pp.
7..
S teinbe rg, R. B. , " Upper Mississippi River Habitat Classification S ur vey-Has tings , Minnesota to Alton, Illinois," Minnesota Department at Natural Resources, St.' Paul, Minnesota, March 1971.
8.
Deer, L. P. , and Pipes, W. O. , A Practical Approach to the Preserva- I j
tion of the Aquatic Environment: The Ef fects of Discharge of Condenser Water Illinois,into the Mississippi 1968, 210 pp. River, Commonwealth Edison Company, Chicago, I
- 9. Galstoff P. S., 1924 Limnological Observations in the Upper M]ssissippi 1921, U. S. Bur. Fish . Bull . 39: 347-438.
J0.
Reinhard, E. C. , The Plankton Ecology of the Upper Mississippi, Minneapolis to Winona, Ecol. Monogr. 1: 395-464, 1931.
- 11. Hurnickol, P. B., and St arret t , W. C. , Commercial and Sport Fishes of the Mississippi R1ver between Caruthersv111e, Missouri, and Dubuque, Iowa, Bull. Ill. .Nat. Hist. Survey 25: 267-350, 1951.
- 12. Carlande r K. O. , et al. 1967.
Populations of _ Hexagenia mayfly nalads in Pool 19, Mississippi Ri ve r , 1959-1963, Ecology 48:
873-878.
4 G
,h i
T
1 4
1 J. Wriglt, K. J., 1970. The 1967-1968 Sport Fishery Survey of the Upper Mississippi River. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, Wisconsin. .A Report of th'e Upper Mississippi River Con-servat ion Commi t tee, .116 pp.
- 14. Cale, W.. F. , , and Lowe , R.' L. , Phyt oplankt on' Inges tion by the Fingernall Clam, Sphaerium transversum (Say), in Pool 19, Mississippi-ulver, Venlogy $2: 507-513, 1971.
' j '; .
Final Detalled Statement on Environmental Considerations USAEC, for the Quad-Cities Nuclear Power Station, Unit I and 2, July 2,1971.
- 16. - ' Environmental Impact Report: Supplemental Information to the Quad-Cities Environmental- Report - Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Volures l'and II - November.1971.
[17 Baker, R. J. , Types and Significance of Chlorine Residuals, J. Am.
Waterworks Association, 41, 1185-90 (1959).
f H .'
~ Corbet t, L R. E. , Metcalf, W. S. , and Soper, F. C. , Studies of N-Halogen Compounds, Part I V. - The Reaction between Ammonia and Chlorine in Aqueous Solution, and the Hydrolysis Constants of Chloramines, J.
-Chemical Soc. (London), 1953, 1927-29.
. I ') .
Final. Safety' Analysis Report, Sections 1-14, Appendices A-C, Amendments to Sections 1-14, Appendices A-F. I 20.. ,Coutant, C.' C. , Biological Aspects of Thermal Pollution 1. r, train-ment and Discharge Canal Ef fects, Chemical Rubber Company, 1970.
'21. Marry,.ir., B. C. , Survival of young fish in the discharge canal of a . nuclear power plant. J. Fish. Res . Bd. Canada, 28: 1057-1060, 1971.
- 22. Churchill, M. A. , and Woj takik, T. A. , Effects of Heated Discharges l
~
on ti e Aquatic Environment - the TVA Experience,1969.
- 23. James E. Kerr, Studies on Fish Preservation at the Contra Costa Power i Plant of the Pacific Cas and Electric Company, State of California Department of Fish and Came Bulletin No. 92, 1955.
- 24. Industrial Waste' Culde on Thermal Pollution, U.S. Department of Interior, FWPCA, Northwest Region, Pacific Northwest Water Laboratory, Corval113, Oregon, Sept ember 1968.
h L
(
6 9
- 25. Coutant, Charles C. 1962.
e The effect of a heated water ef fluent um n the macroinvertbrate ripple f auna of the Delaware River. Penn-e,Ivania Acndemy of Science. 37: 58-71.
- 26. Warinner, J . E. and M. L. Brchmer 1966.
erfluents on marf re organisms. Air and water The effects of thermal 277-289. pollution Int. J.10: l
- 27. Mount, ColumbiaD.(2207-71)
I . , Af fidavit in the U. S.
November 24, 1971.
District Court, District of
- 28. Nebeker, Alan V. 1971.
Effect of high winter water temperatures on adult emergence of aquatic insects. Water Research 5:777-783.
- 29. Nebeker, Alan V. and Armond E. Lemke.1968.
4 Preliminary studies on the tolerance of aquatic insects to heated waters. J. Kansas Entomological Society 41:413-418.
'l0 . Sprague, J. B. , and Drury, D. E.
Nuh to representative pollutants, Avoidancep. 169-179reactions of salmonid in: S. N. Jenkins (Ed.), Advances in Water Pollution Research, Proc. 4th Int. Conf. ,
Prague, Pergamon Press, New York,1969.
'll . Safety Evaluation, USAEC, August '25,1971.
12.
Pubile Health Service PHS-956 U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare.
33.
The Water Encyclopedia, Water Information Center, Water Research Building Manhasset Isle, Port Washington, N.Y.1970.
34.
Illinois 1971. Pollution Control Board Opinion, Case # 71-20 November 15, 35.
Illinois Pollution thermal Standards," Control Board Opinion, Case # 70-16 " Mississippi November 23, 1971. (1111noia Sanitary Water Board Standards SWB-12 and SWB-13, amended by R-70-16, although not yet approved by the Environmental Protection Agency are considered applicable by the liif nois Pollution Control Board, successor to the Sanitary Water Board.)
16.
Quad-cities Environmental Report, Supplement IV, December 30, 1971.
i t I
k r %
r e
> . Biblj ography -(Docke t Nos. 50-254 6 50-26',)
. I'Innt Des ign Analysis ,. Vol.L I and 11.
Safety Analysis Report, Vol. I and 11-~ and amendments . '
~'
Envi ronmental' Report , Quad-Cities. Station Units 1 and 2, November 12, 1970.
Final Safety Analysis Report, Sections 1-14,' Appendices A-C, Amendments' to Sections- 1-14, Appendices A-F.
Illinois Pollution Cont'rol Board - Hearing 71-20, May 24,1971, ]
June 9, .1971.
d
. Brief of Applicants, Illinois Pollution Control Board, Case # 71-20 '
following 5/27-6/9 hearings. 1j Brief. of . Illinois At torney General, Illinois Pollution Control ;
' Board. hearing, Case # 71-20 in opposition to.the application.
f Reply Brief of Applicants.in support of their Joint Application
' under~ Title VI-A, ' Illinois Pollution Control' Board hearing, Case #' 71-20, September 8,1971. -
- 0- ;
l Environmental Impact Report: Supplemental- Information to the Quad- 1 Cities Environmental Report - Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, ;
'l Vol . I, and II, November 1971. (Environmental Report ,' Supplement III)
I i Final Detailed Statemen6 on Environmental Considerations USAEC, for 4 the Quad-Cities Station, Unit I and 2, July 2,1971. (Appendix I is Supplement 1 of the Environmental Report.)
Safety Evaluation, USAEC, August 25, 1971.-
j Technical Specifications (Appendix A to the Proposed Operating
' License DPR-29)
Le t ters f rom Mr. By ron Lee, Commonweal th Edison Co. , to Dr. Peter j
Morris l dated September 13 and 15,1971.
j Telegrams from Mr. Byron Lee, Commonwealth Edison Co. , to Dr. Peter l Morris dated September 13 end 15,1971. j i
I l
9 is
e,
- s'
- L k
(5 -
$^ ?
i l le:1i r ! r s .- s. i on .e, ( - c c-j i, if,t< % tu e: - -
.'7, w i l t h Ed 's en for. >any , t c. f!r i.es ! i r R"rer-19 71 i1.n cf ronmen t ,: hi' ort, S uPr l emer: If!.
- i ! 'f eMr, l ey,M.r m t ron *!r , einyne M ! de, Commonwenith Edison Co.,to l
- (,ro t enh u l s dated September 10, 1971.
.l Discussio;.s and findings supporting the issuance of an Opersting License authorizing the inading of f uel and operation not in excess of I percent (October 1, 1971).
1; i; ,
Le t t er f rom Mr. 11 f: exon, Connonwealth Edison Co. , to Dr. Peter j Morris dated October 12, 1971.
i F
s l Letter from Mr. W. Stiede, Commonwealth Edison Co. , to Dr. Peter Moi ris dated November 18, 1971.
U l
Quad-Cities Environmental Report, Supplement IV, December 30, 1971.
a ft I
f 1
(
?
/ I 1
f 3i p
., , I l
j ,
\
b l l
-