ML21174A092

NRC-2021-000150 - Responsive Records (Part 2 of 3)

ML21174A092
Person / Time
Issue date:	04/21/2021
From:	NRC/OCIO
To:
Shared Package
ML21174A088	List: ML21174A090 ML21174A091 ML21174A092 ML21174A093
References
NRC-2020-000123, NRC-2021-000150
Download: ML21174A092 (365)

Text

Note to requester: Both attachments, that are immediately following this email record, were provided in full in t he final (5th) response to FO IA NRC-2020-000123. The pages of the shorter attachment are included in the longer attachment.

Portions of the email record are redacted under FOIA Exemption 85, Deliberative Process Privilege.

From: ford William To: Prasad Rajiv Cc: folk Kevin

Subject:

Turkey Point CCS Model Descriptions Date: Thursday, August 30, 2018 10:16:35 AM Attachments: Combined CCS Modeling Reports 2012-2017.odf ccs Model Calibratjon Parameters 2012-201 zodt Hi Rajiv, (b)(5)

Thanks, William Ford Senior Physical Scientist Division of License Renew al Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclea r Regulatory Comm ission 301-415-1263

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections present the data and, depending upon the findings, a decision could be made whether to formally publish a report.

The USGS assessed the depths at which the results could be reasonably interpreted and concluded the depth was typically limited to 12.5 to 15 m below the Bay bottom. The USGS stated that the data are considered to have a vertical resolution no better than 5 m and the horizontal resolution is generally considered to be 1/2 the e lectrode spacing (5 m).

Based primarily on the lack of depth penetration, it is FPL's interpretation that the CRP survey will not be very helpful to further delineate the extent of CCS water at depth nor conclusively discriminate between water of different densities and variations in the subsurface geology without the aid of substantial data collection. The porewater and surface water sampling in Biscayne Bay already provide insights into whether there is a measurable influence of the CCS in Biscayne Bay. As such, FPL reconunends that further efforts associated with the CRP not be conducted. FPL also does not recommend the use of DTS to track warmer CCS water in the ground since the well temperature data indicate little to no thermal influences away from the ccs.

5.4 Water and Salt Balance Model Tetra Tech GEO developed a model of the water and salt balance for the CCS. The purpose of this model is to quantify the volumes of water and mass of salt entering and exiting the CCS over a period of time. This analysis builds upon a prior study of the CCS water balance (Golder 2008) by revising methods of calculation for the various components of the CCS and by incorporating new hydrological, chemical, and meteorological data collected in and around the CCS between September 2010 and June 2012. The model described herein is an extension and update of the wate r and salt balance mode l presented in the 201 1 Annual Monitoring Re port (FPL 201 1b). This section describes the conceptual model of the CCS water and salt balance, key calculations, and results to illustrate the components of the water and salt balance model. All assumptions are clearly indicated. These ca lculations are performed in an Excel spreadsheet, which is provided in a separate data file. Findings regarding the operation of the CCS are based upon the results of the current calibrated water and salt balance model and are provided herein.

5.4.1 Conceptual Model The first step in the modeling process is the development of a hydrological conceptual model (HCM). All data available for the site are ass imilated in the HCM in a framework that fac ilitates the development of a quantitative model. Such data includes information about the bathymetry of the CCS, Biscayne Bay, ID and SFWMD canal L-3 lE. The flow and chemical characteristics of these water bodies and of the underlying groundwater are thoroughly monitored. These monitoring data are also incorporated in the HCM and he lped to formu late a control vo lume that is primarily comprised of the CCS.

A control volume defines the entity being analyzed. The transfer of water and salt within the control volume is not characterized. Rather, the water and salt balance model foc uses upon the 5-16

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections transfer of water and salt into and out of the control volume. The control volume analyzed is comprised of the canals of the CCS and the adjacent ID. Raised earth berms between the individua l cana ls are not con sidered as a pa1t of the control volume. The base of the control volume is assumed to be the bottom of the ID and the cooling canals, whose elevation ranges from approximately -3 feet NAVD 88 to approximately -30 feet NA VD 88. This interpretation of the control volume was developed based upon the hydrological monitoring plan in place for the CCS. The components of the water balance model for this control volume are depicted in Figure 5.4-1. In this figure, canal L-31E is red, the ID is green, discharge cooling canals are purple, return canals are dark blue, and Biscayne Bay is light blue.

Water elevation and quality are recorded at seven stations throughout the CCS, three locations in the ID, three stations in canal L-3 lE, two locations in other adjacent canals, seven locations in Biscayne Bay (four of which measure only salinity), and fourteen wells in Biscayne Aquifer (at 3 depths each); it is important to note that, based upon the control volume, only shallow groundwater monitoring stations contributed to the characterization of groundwater elevations and groundwater quality in this analysis. The surface and subsurface monitoring locations, in addition to data provided by SFWMD and FPL, faci litate straightforward calculation of the components of water and salt transfer into and out of the control volume:

• Surface water monitoring stations in canal L-3 lE a nd the ID perm it a straightfo rward calculation of lateral seepage of water and salt between L-31 E and the control volume;

• Surface water monitoring stations in the southern collector canal of the control volume and a monitoring station in a canal adjacent and parallel to the southern face of the control volume provide a means to calculate the seepage of water and salt through the southern face of the control volume;

• Surface water monitoring stations in the CCS return canals and in Biscayne Bay facilitate the calculation of seepage between Biscayne Bay and the control volume;

• Surface water monitoring stations in the CCS canals and groundwater monitoring stations beneath and adjacent to the CCS help to define water flow and salt transport through the bottom of the proposed control volume;

• Meteorological stations in the CCS and immediately to the north and south provide data to calculate the loss of water from the control volume to evaporation; and

• Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD) precipitation data provided by SFWMD inforn1ed an accurate assessment of water gained by the CCS from rainfall.

Intermediate modeling results, based upon the control volume and the HCM presented herein, were presented to SFWMD for a calibration period between September 2010 and December 2011 (Andersen 2012). Based upon the intermediate results, FPL received concurrence from SFWMD on the proposed control volume and HCM.

5.4.2 Bathymetry Cettain components of the water and salt balance model require an understanding of the control volume's surface area. For instance, precipitation-based inflow to the control volume is a function of the amount of rai nfa ll (e.g., in inches) and the surface area of the water body onto wh ich the rain was deposited. Also, the conductances fo r the bottom seepage zone are a fu nction 5-17

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensi ve Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections of the water surface area. Due to the sloping sidewalls of the canals in the CCS, the water surface area changes as the water elevations in the CCS change. Based upon a detailed survey of the CCS bathymetry (Morgan and Eklund 20 l 0), a relationship between surface area of the control volume (sub-divided into 5 zones, Figure 5.4-2) and water elevation was defined. Thus, because water elevations in the CCS vary daily so, too, does the water surface area (surface area is proportional to the water e levation); the time-varying surface areas for each of the 5 zones in Figure 5.4-2 are known for the calibration period. Likewi se, the bathyrnetric survey results permitted the characterization of the relationship between the CCS water elevations and CCS storage volume; like surface area, storage volume decreases as water elevations decrease. This refined understanding of surface area and volume of the CCS significantly improved the performance of the model and eliminated much uncertainty with respect to the inflows to and outflows from the control volume.

5.4.3 Water Balance Calculations As Figure 5.4-1 depicts, the water balance for the proposed control volume is comprised of seepage (lateral through the sides and vertical through the bottom), blowdown (additional water pumped from other units to the CCS), precipitation (including runoff from earth berms between canals) and evaporation. Water pumped into and out of the CCS from Units 1 through 4 is also a component of inflow to and outflow from the control volume; however, these flows are assumed to be equal and have a net zero effect on the water and salt balance. Seepage to and from the control volume comprises a s ignificant component of the water ba lance. The approach to calculating seepage to and from the control volume, as well as necessary assumptions, is provided below. Other means by which water is transferred (e.g., evaporation) are calculated in distinct manners and are discussed separately. Calculations were performed for a 22-month period from September 2010 through June 2012. This period marks an extension of that which was defined in the preliminary model presented in the 2011 Annual Report (FPL 2011 b ).

Average flows into and out of the control volume were calculated for each day of this period.

The average daily flows were summed to estimate the amount of water that enters or exits the control volume during each month and the entire 22-month period. These ca lculations are intended to demonstrate and validate the methodology, as well as illustrate the hydrologic mechanisms by which the CCS functions.

The general equation fo r seepage flow employed in the water balance analysis is :

Q = C x 1:J.h (1)

Where:

• Q = Volumetric flow, [Length3/Time]

• ilh = Head gradient between control volume and external source/si nk, [Length]

• C = Conductance of the media between the control volume and the external source/sink with which it is transferring water, [Length2/Time]

5-18

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensi ve Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections (2)

Where:

• K = Hydraulic conductivity of the media through which water flows, [Length/Time]

• A = Area of the face of the control volume through which water flows, [Length2]

• D = Distance water flows between the external source/sink and the control volume,

[Length]

In accordance with widely accepted modeling convention, flow into the control volume is positive (+) and flow out of the control volume is negative (-). Calculated flows are reported in 106 gallons per day (millions of gallons per day [MOD]).

The mass flux into or out of the control volume is calculated by multiplying the volumetric flow by the salinity of the body of water from which the water is flowing. Salinity was monitored at all groundwater and surface water stations employed in the ensuing calculations and was reported in the practical salin ity scale (PSS-78), wh ich is equiva lent to grams per liter (g/L).

Calculated mass fluxes are reported in thousands of pounds per day (lb x 1000/day).

The data monitoring locations, seepage face dimensions (where relevant), additional equations, and assumptions that support the estimation of the individual components of the water balance for the control volume are discussed below. Draft results of water and salt balance for the entire 22-month period are discussed in Section 5.4.5 and are provided at the end of Section 5.4.

5.4.3.1 Seepage To/From L-31E (Western Seepage)

Three surface water monitoring stations record the water e levations and salinities in L-31 E (TPSWC-1 , TPSWC-2, and TPSWC-3). Three con-esponding stations (at similar longitudes) record water elevations and salinities in the ID (TPSWID-1, TPSWID-2, and TPSWID-3). The locations of these monitoring stations are plotted in Figure 5.4-3.

Using data recorded at these monitoring stations, the seepage through the west face of the control volume was calculated. In order to calculate this seepage, the western face of the control volume was subdivided into two sub-faces (Figure 5.4-3). For this calculation, the following assumptions were made and seepage face dimensions estimated:

• TPSWC-1, TPSWC-2, and TPSWC-3 were used to interpolate water elevations and salinity along the L-31E;

• TPSWID-1 , TPSWID-2, and TPSWID-3 were used to interpolate water elevations and salinity along the ID;

• The northernmost section of the west seepage face is approximately 18,800 ft long; the southernmost section of the west seepage face is approximately I 0,200 ft long;

• Along the northernmost section of the west seepage face, L-3 lE and the ID are separated by approximately 950 ft; the average separation between the two canals in the southernmost portion is approximately 2,434 ft; and 5-19

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections

• Elevation of base of the ID is approximately -20 ft NA VD 88.

The subdivision of seepage through the west face of the control volume is based on the orientation of L-3 lE. The conductance of and seepage through each of the sub-faces were calculated using Equations (1) and (2). The resulting component of the water balance is presented in Table 5.4-1. Salt balance estimates for this seepage face were calculated by multiplying the salinities in the sources of water by the calculated flow (Table 5.4-2). For instance, where the flow was to be calculated into the control volume, the salinity of L-3 1E would be multiplied by the calculated flow to derive the mass flux of this balance component.

5.4.3.2 Southern Seepage Seepage through the south face of the proposed control volume is primarily driven by the water elevatio ns in the southern end of the CCS and in the canal adjacent and parallel to the southern edge of the control volume. One monitoring station records water elevations and salinity in the southern end of the CCS (TPSWCCS-4). Likewise, one monitoring station measures water elevations and salinity in the adjacent canal (TPSWC-4). These monitoring stations are plotted in Figure 5.4-4.

Using observed data recorded at these monitoring stations, the seepage through the south face of the contro l volume was calculated. For this ca lcul atio n, the following assumptions were made and seepage face dimensions estimated:

• Water elevations and salinities recorded in TPSWC-4 are representative of the southern externa l cana l;

• Water e levations and salinities recorded in TPSWCCS-4 are representative of the southern CCS collector canal;

• The depth of the southern CCS canal is assumed to be that at TPSWCCS-4, where the canal bottom is an approximate elevation of -22 ft NA VD 88; and

• The length of the seepage face is approximately 9,300 ft.

The southern external cana l is 155 ft south of and parallel to the southern edge of the CCS.

The application of data observed at TPSWC-4 to the entire southern canal was necessitated by the absence of other monitoring stations in this external canal. Likewise, TPSWCCS-4 is by far the most proximate and relevant monitoring station to the seepage face. The conductance for this seepage face was calculated using Equation (2). The flow through this seepage face was subsequently calculated by E quation ( 1) using water elevation differences between the two monitoring stations. The calculation flow associated with this component of the water balance is provided in Table 5 .4-1. Salinities of the source water were multiplied by the calculated flows in order to estimate the salt mass flux and total mass through this seepage face (Table 5.4-2).

5-20

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections 5.4.3.3 Eastern Seepage Seepage through the eastern face is assumed to flow into the control volume from Biscayne Bay or out of the control volume into B iscayne Bay. In order to calculate th is seepage, the eastern face of the control volume was subdivided into two sub-faces (Figure 5.4-5). Canal depths at these two locations and stage variation within the CCS necessitated the subdivision of the eastern seepage face. The elevation of the cana l bottom at TPSWCCS-5 is approximately -22 ft NA VD 88; the elevation of the canal bottom in the vicinity ofTPSWCCS-6 is lower (approximately -30 ft NA VD 88). Water characteristics in Biscayne Bay are observed at a number of monitoring stations along the seepage face; the monitoring station with the longest period of record for water elevations is TPBBSW-3.

Using observed water elevations from relevant monitoring stations, the seepage through the east face of the control volume was calculated. For this calculation, the following assumptions were made and seepage face dimensions estimated:

• TPSWCCS-5 water elevations and salinities effectively reflect conditions in the return canal adjacent to the southernmost seepage sub-face;

• TPSWCCS-6 water elevations and salinities effectively reflect conditions in the return canal adjacent to the northernmost seepage sub-face (TPSWCCS-5 salinity employed when data was not available for TPSWCCS-6);

• Reliable water e levations at TPSWCCS-6 were not available for much of September 2010 and a ll of April and May 2011; water elevations during these times were estimated from the measurements at TPSWCCS-5 by adding the average difference in water elevations between the two sensors to TPSWCCS-6; likewise, water elevations measured at TPSWCCS-6 were adjusted and employed as surrogates for TPSWCCS-5 water elevations when the latter were not available;

• TPBBSW-3 water elevations and salinities are representative of Biscayne Bay along the eastern seepage face of the return canals (TPBBSW-10 water elevations and TPBBSW-4 salinities were employed when data for TPBBSW-3 were not available);

• TPBBSW-10 water e levations and salinities are representative of Biscayne Bay along the intake canal seepage face (water elevation and sal inity measurements at TPBBSW-3 and

-4 were employed when data were not ava ilable for TPBBSW-10);

• The average elevation of the canal bottom along the southernmost seepage sub-face is assumed to be -22.5 ft NAVD 88 (elevation at TPSWCCS-5);

• Interval-valued bathymetric data defines a range of depths below water fo r the northernmost seepage sub-face between 20 ft and 40 ft. Based on this data, an approximate elevation of the canal bottom was defined to be -30 ft NAVD 88;

• The length of the southernmost seepage sub-face is approx imately 22,500 ft; and

• The length of the northernmost seepage sub-face is approximately 8,340 ft.

The conductance for this seepage face was calculated using Equation (2). The flow through this seepage face was subsequently calculated by Equation (1) using water elevation differences between the each of the two monitoring stations in the control volume and the Biscayne Bay monitoring station. The calc ulation of flow associated with this component of the water balance 5-21

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections is provided in Table 5.4-1. Salinities of the source water were multiplied by the calculated flows in order to estimate the salt mass flux and total mass through this seepage face (Table 5 .4-2).

5.4.3.4 Northern Face Seepage Seepage through the northern face of the control volume (Figure 5 .4-6) is defined by the difference in water e levations between the northernmost discharge canal of the CCS and shallow groundwater elevations to the north of the control volume . TPSWCCS-1 is the most proximate monitoring station to the northern seepage face. Groundwater elevations were adjusted for freshwater equivalency and Lnterpolated a long a transect that is parallel to the northern edge of the CCS, starts at a point with the same latitude as TPGW-12 and same longitude at TPSWCCS-1, intersects TPGW-12, and terminates at a point with the same latitude at TPGW-12 and the same longitude as plant outflow meter TPFM-1 (Figure 5.4-6). Groundwater elevations along this transect were interpolated based on data recorded at shallow monitoring wells TPGW-6, TPGW-10, and TPGW-12. Freshwater equivalent heads were calculated using Equation (3).

hr = (h - z) x (:f- 1) + h (3)

Where:

• h/= freshwater equivalent bead, [Length]

• h = measured water elevation at the sensor, [Length]

• z = elevation of the sensor, [Length]

• p = measured density of water, [Mass/Length3]

3

• P1= freshwater density (0.997 g/cm )

Using freshwater equivalent water elevations from the CCS monitoring station and interpolated shallow groundwater elevations along the transect, the seepage through the north face of the control volume was calculated. For this calculation, the following assumptions were made and seepage face dimensions estimated:

• Water elevations, densities, and sal inities recorded in TPSWCCS-1 applied to the entire north canal of the control volume (TPSWCCS-7 data were used when TPSWCCS-1 data were not reliable);

• A hydrau lic gradient was ca lculated along a straight line between TPGW-6 and TPGW-12; this gradient was employed to estimate groundwater elevations along the transect west of TPGW-1 2;

• A hydraulic gradient was calculated along a straight line between TPGW-12 and TPGW-1O; the gradient was employed to estimate groundwater elevations along the transect east ofTPGW-12;

• The salinity at TPGW-12 was assumed to apply across the length of the transect;

• Length of the seepage face is the lateral distance between TPSWCCS-1 and the plant discharge pump station;

• The distance between the northern edge of the CCS and the transect is the difference between the latitudes ofTPGW-12 and TPFM-1; 5-22

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensi ve Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections

• Based on bathymetry data, the elevation of the bottom of the CCS varied from -11.5 to -

25 ft NAVD 88 along the northern canal.

The conductance for this seepage face was calculated using Equation (2). The flow through this seepage face was subsequently calculated by Equation ( l) using water elevation differences between the monitoring station in the control volume and interpolated shallow groundwater elevations along the transect. The calculation of flow associated with this component of the water balance is provided in Table 5.4-1. Salinities of the source water were multiplied by the calculated flows in order to estimate the salt mass flux and total mass through this seepage face (Table 5.4-2).

5.4.3.5 Bottom Seepage The calculation of flow through the bottom of the control volume employed monitoring data from five shallow groundwater wells located beneath and adjacent to control volume (TPGW-1, TPGW-3, TPGW-1 1, TPGW-12, TPGW- 13) and four monitoring stations in the CCS (TPSWCCS-1, TPSWCCS-2, TPSWCCS-4, TPSWCCS-5). For this calculation, the control volume was subd ivided into fou r zones (Figure 5.4-7), based on the locations of the CCS monitoring stations and the conceptualization of bottom seepage to and from the control volume (primarily downward flow in the no1tbern and middle portions of the discharge cooling canals; primarily upward flow in the return canals). The seepage through each zone of the control volume was calculated; bottom seepage was calculated by summing the flows through the four zones.

Surface water elevations and salinity for each zone were defined to be those measured at the monitoring station within the zone (e.g., water elevations and salinity observed at TPSWCCS-1 and TPSWCCS-7 were applied to Zone A; Zone B: TPSWCCS-2; Zone C: TPSWCCS-4; Zone D: TPSWCCS-5). In general, water elevations decreased from Zone A to Zone D. Groundwater elevations beneath each zone were defined based upon proximate groundwater monitoring stations (Zone A: TPGW-1, TPGW-10, and TPGW-12; Zone B: TPGW-13; Zone C: TPGW-3 and TPGW-11; Zone D: TPGW- 1l ). Groundwater salinity flowin g into each zone was characteristic of the salinity measured at each zone's relevant groundwater monitoring station (Zone A: average ofTPGW-1 and TPGW-12; Zone B: TPGW-13; Zone C: TPGW-10; Zone D:

TPGW-1 0); the inflowing groundwater at Zones C and D was assumed to have a fract ion (80%

and 90%, respectively) of the salinity measured at TPGW-10 due to the mixing of regional freshwater and saline water. The thickness of the seepage face varied amongst the zones, since the approximate average elevation of canal bottoms for each zone varied (as approximated from bathymetric survey data).

The calculation of seepage through the bottom of the control volume was predicated on the following simplifying assum ptions:

• Groundwater elevations beneath each zone are reflected by the groundwater elevations at underlying or proximate monitoring wells, as described above;

• The elevation of the canal bottom as representative for each zone was interpreted from bathymetric survey data and assumed to be constant throughout the zone; 5-23

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensi ve Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections

• The surface water elevation and salinity observed at a monitoring station within each zone was applied to the entire zone, as described above;

• Water elevations employed in the seepage flow calculation were not adjusted for density.

This assumption was made because although the concentration of the CCS water and the groundwater beneath the CCS may be different from ground or surface waters at other locations, the concentration of the CCS water and the concentration of groundwater immediately beneath the CCS at a given monitoring location are approximately the same.

Because the concentrations are the same, the densities are the same, and no adjustment to account for density difference is required to compute flows; and

• Water elevations measured at TPGW-11 M acted as surrogates for TPGW- 11S water elevations when the latter were not available.

Based on these assumptions, the conductance of and flows through the four zones were calculated using Equations (2) and ( I), respectively. The calculated flow is provided in Table 5.4-1. Mass flux was calculated by multiplying the volumetric flow by the salinity of the source (Table 5.4-2).

5.4.3.6 Evaporation The estimation of evaporative loss from the control volume is a unique case of evaporation from a surface water body due to the elevated heat of water entering the CCS from the FPL Tlll'key Point power plant and the variability of sa linity of water in the control volume. The elevated heat of water has the general effect of increasing evaporative loss, whereas salinity is inversely proportional to the rate of evaporation (Salhotra et al. 1985).

Numerous approaches for estimating evaporation have been developed; they generally fall into two categories: energy balance methods and Dalton Law methods. The former method is widely applied to surface water bodies in spite of being a "costly and time-consuming method" (Mosner and Aulenbach 2003). This approach to calculating evaporative losses requires calculation of individual components of energy fl ux into and out of the control volume due to solar radiation, surface water, groundwater and precipitation. Evaporative loss is then indirectly estimated as the difference between net energy flux from the control volume and the sum of the individual calculated energy flux components (Lensky et al. 2005; Mosner and Aulenbach 2003). This indirect approach can necessitate the detailed measurement of solar radiation, fraction of penetrating solar radiation, brine mass and c loud cover and can be unreliable for water bodies with elevated temperatures (Leppanen and Harbeck 1960; Bowen 1926).

The Dalton Law approach, on the other hand, relies upon an understanding of the vapor pressure gradient between the surface water and the overlying air, as well as the wind speed above the surface water. Use of this method is limited in practice since wind speed is often the least known parameter in evaporation estimation (Lensky et al. 2005).

For the control volume, wind speeds are measured at 15-minute intervals at meteorological station TPM-1 (Figure 5.4-8) and at 1-hour intervals north and south of the control volume. As such, the Dalton Law approach is employed herein to estimate the rate of evaporative loss, E, from the control volume. The general fo rm of the equation is:

5-24

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections

[Length/Time] (4)

Where:

• f(W) = wind function; Wis wind speed, [Length/Time]

• fJ = coefficient of water activity 2

• e(T) = saturation vapor pressure [Mass/(Length x Time )]

• Ts, TA = temperature of surface water and air, respectively [0 C]

• If/ = relative humidity[%]

The wind function, f(W), is an empirically derived formula that uses wind speed at 2 meters above surface to quantify to the effect of air convection above the water surface on the rate of evaporation. The thermal loading of the Turkey Point power plant can increase forced convection at the north end of the control volume. Approaches to explic itly consider free and forced convection are available (Adams et al. 1990), though they are tailored to estimating energy lost due to evaporation, rather than water lost due to evaporation. Though free and forced convection are not explicitly characterized herein, the wind function employed in these calcu lations was derived for heated cooling water and based upon the following equation:

f(W) = 0.301 + 0.113

• W (5) where wind, W, is measured in meters per second (mis) (Williams and Tomasko 2009). ln order to achieve a well-calibrated model, a coefficient Cw was incorporated into Equation (5) and was ultimately adjusted during calibration:

f(W) = Cw X (0.301 + 0.113

• W) (6)

The coefficient of water activity, ~. varies in the range [0, l] and is intended to account for the reduced evaporation from saline water bodies. It decreases with increasing salinity; at salinity levels in the CCS, ~ does not vary significantly (Salhotra et al. 1985) and is conservatively assumed to be 0.9; this value for~ is empirically consistent with salinities approximately equal to 100 PSU (Salhotra et al. 1985).

The saturation vapor pressure relationship used in these calculations accounts for elevated water saturation gradients that resu It from heated water and provides reliable estimates of saturation vapor pressure for temperatmes, T, up to 40 °C (Jobson and Schoelhamer 1987):

6788.6 esatCT) = exp(S.2.4185 - - - - 5.0016

• ln (T T-273.16

+ 273.16)). (7)

Temperature of the surface water is measured at monitoring stations TPSWCCS-1, TPSWCCS-2, TPSWCCS-4, and TPSWCCS-5. Air temperature and relative humidity are measured at meteorological station TPM-1.

5-25

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections In order to estimate evaporative loss, the control volume was subdivided into four zones (Figure 5.4-8). Zone 1 covers the northern area of the discharge canals; wind speeds applied to this zone are measured no1th of the control volume and water temperatures are measured at TPSWCCS- l.

Zone 2 covers the middle area of the discharge canals; wind speeds applied to this zone are measured at TPM-1 and water temperatures are measured at TPSWCCS-2. Zone 3 covers the south area of the discharge canals; wind speeds applied to this zone are measured south of tbe control volume and water temperatures are measured at TPSWCCS-4. Zone 4 covers the return canals; wind speeds applied to this zone are measured at TPM- 1 and water temperatures are measured at TPSWCCS-5. The surface area from which water is lost to evaporation in each of these zones changes through time with the changing water elevations in the CCS, and is calculated based upon the 5 zones presented in Figure 5.4-2.

Additional assumptions made in order to estimate evaporative flux include:

• The air temperature and relative humidity measured at TPM-1 are applicable to the entire control volume;

• Wind speeds north and south of the control volume were measured at 10 meters above ground surface; an empirical relationship between wind speed and elevation was used to estimate wind speeds at 2 meters above ground surface at these stations; and

• Wind speeds employed in evaporative loss calculations were daily averaged values.

Calculated water flow from the control volume due to evaporation is provided in Table 5 .4-1.

No salt mass is lost from the control volume to evaporation.

5.4.3.7 Precipitation Precipitation is measured at the site at meteorological station TPM-1 every 15 minutes, and these data informed the precipitation-based inflow in an earlier version of the model (FPL 2011 b).

However, a more accurate understanding of spatially-varying precipitation-based inflow was derived from NEXRAD rainfall data and provided by SFWMD. SFWMD converted NEXRAD precipitation data into daily rainfall amounts for the 5 zones depicted in Figure 5.4-2. Coupled with a detailed understanding of the changing surface areas for these zones, the NEXRAD data produced an accurate definition of the daily volumetric inflow of water to the control volume from precipitation. Th is approach to the calculation of precipitation-based inflow significantly improved the mode l's match to observed water elevations and sa linities in the CCS, as well as eliminated the uncertainty introduced by applying TPM-1 rainfall amounts to the entire CCS.

Quantities of water entering the control volume due to precipitation are provided in Table 5.4-1.

No sa lt enters the control volume through the precipitation. Runoff into the control volume from earth berms between canals was initially assumed to be 50% of precipitation that falls on the berms. This percentage was adjusted during calibration.

5.4.3.8 Blowdown Blowdown refers to water added to the control volume from a number of sources: the Unit 5 cooling tower (originally Floridan aquifer water), Miami-Dade wastewater, and Units 1 through

4. Flow from blowdown into the control volume was initially assumed to be a constant 7.8 MGD; this is an approximate value employed in a previous study of the CCS water balance 5-26

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections (Golder 2008). Estimates and measurements of blowdown contributions to the model were revised based upon available measurements and institutional knowledge. Added water from Un its 3 and 4 were assumed to be freshwater (non-saline); Unit 5 blowdown salinities are not known with certainty and were adjusted to between 20% and 80% of seawater (35 PSU) to improve calibration to observed salinities. Inflows to the control volume are presented in Table 5.4-1 for water and Table 5.4-2 for salt mass.

5.4.3.9 Pumped Interceptor Ditch Water The operation of the interceptor ditch requires that large volumes of water be pumped intermittently from the interceptor ditch in order to create seaward flow from L-31 E. This pumped water is a blend of ID water and groundwater and is subsequently added to the CCS, comprising a component of inflow to the control volume that is much larger than the regional inflow through the western face of the control volume. Interceptor ditch operation occurs primarily between the months of January and June; pump rates have been as high as 50 MGD and average 4.5 MGD over the 22-month calibration period. The incorporation of this pumped water in the water and salt balance model significantly improved the simulation of water elevations and salinities over prior modeling efforts.

5.4.4 Storage The gain/loss of water and salt mass within the control volume during some period of time results in a change in the control volume's water and salt mass storage. Increased water storage, for instance, occurs when more water enters the control volume than exits. Storage, the n, can be estimated by summing all of the components of the water (and salt) balance. When the net flow is positive (into the control volume) during a specified period of time, the storage of control volume increases. Conversely, a net negative (out of the control volume) flow implies a decrease in storage during a specified time period.

Another manner in which a change in storage can be estimated relies on direct measurements of water elevations and salinities within the control volume. A change in water elevation within the control volume can be calculated as a difference between water elevations at the beginning and end of a specified time period. The product of this change in water elevations and the surface area of the control volume provide an estimate of the change in the volume of water contained in the control volume during that period of time. Estimates of daily storage changes derived from this method are used to fu1ther calibrate the water and salt balance model to ensure an accurate simulation of temporal trends CCS water elevation and salinity.

5.4.5 Results and Discussion The individual components of the water and salt balance were simulated for each month from September 20 l 0 through June 2012, as well as for the collective 22-month period. The individual components of flow are summed in order to calculate a simulated change in volume for each month and for the 22-month period. These simulated changes in storage were compared to observed changes in CCS water and salt storage for each month and the entire calibration period. Enws between the simulated and observed storage changes were minimized by 5-27

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections adjusting key variables associated with the flow balance model; this process is called calibration.

The calibration process ensures that the model can accurately reflect the average changes in CCS storage over the 22-month time frame, while also effectively capturing day-to-day changes in CCS water and mass storage. Calibration of the water and salt balance model was achieved by adj usting hydraulic conductivities of the aquifer materials adjacent to and beneath the CCS that factor into the calculation of seepage to/from groundwater and Biscayne Bay. Additional adjustable parameters include an evaporation factor that adjusts the coefficients in the wind function (Equation 6), the amount of runoff that enters the control volume as percentage of precipitation, the amount of Unit 5 cooling tower water that is lost to evaporation before entering the CCS, and the salinity of the Unit 5 blowdown as a percentage of seawater. The calibrated model parameter values are provided in Table 5.4-3.

The horizontal hydraulic conductivities laterally adjacent to the control volume were calibrated to range between 150 ft/day and 450 ft/day. The calibrated vertical conductivities beneath the control volume ranged from 0.1 ft/day to 2.6 ft/day. The northern portion of the discharge canals and return canals, where it is assumed deeper canals intersect a high flow zone underlying the muck and Miami limestone, w ere calibrated to have higher vertical hydraulic conductivities

( 1 ft/day and 2.6 ft/day, respectively). Lower vertical conductivities were calibrated for the mid-and southern portions of the discharge cana ls, as well as the southern portion of the return canals (0.1 ft/day).

Results of the simulated 22-month water and salt balance model are provided in Tables 5.4-1 and 5.4-2, respectively. Month ly balance results fo llow in Table 5.4-4 through Table 5.4-47. The mode led net flow of water, as calculated by the summing the components of the water balance for the 22-month calibration period, is denoted as the "Modeled Change in CCS Storage" and was calculated to be an average outflow of 0.62 MGD over the 22-month calibration period. The observed change in storage, which is the difference in the volume of water in the CCS between the final and first days of the calibration period, divided by the number of days in the period, was observed to be 0.11 MOD. Thus, the model correctly simulated an increase in CCS storage (a gain of water over the 22-month period). Though the model overestimated the change in storage by approximately 0.51 MGD, this error is small rel ative to the observed monthly changes in storage, which range between and loss of 46.6 MGD (October 2010) and a gain of 52.1 MGD (September 2010).

Likewise, the model correctly simulated a loss of salt over the 22-month period at rate of 607 .9 (lb x 1000)/day. The observe d rate of salt outflow was calculated by multiplying the average observed salinity in the CCS on the final and first day of the calibration period by the corresponding CCS volumes on those days. The difference between these two products, divided by the number of days in the calibration period, provides the net outflow of salt, 591 (lb x 1000)/day. As in the case of water flow, the model overestimates the rate of salt flow from the control volume; however, the overestimation is small (16.9 (lb x 1000/day) relative to the monthly average flows, which range from an outflow of 13790 (lb x 1000)/day (October 2010) to an inflow of8659 (lb x 1000)/day (June 201 1).

5-28

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensi ve Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections The model's capability to simulate day-to-day changes in average CCS water elevations and salinity is illustrated in Figure 5.4-9, which plots modeled average CCS water elevations and observed average CCS water elevations for each day in the 22-month calibration period. The observed values reflect the mean of daily-averaged water elevations across the seven sensors in the CCS. Simulated water elevations are calculated by dividing the simulated daily change in CCS storage by the average daily CCS surface area and adding the resulting value (which reflects a change in water level) to the previous day's simulated water elevation. It is evident from this figure that the model effectively captures the general trend in CCS water elevations over the 22-month period, and accurately simulates average CCS water elevations throughout much of the calibration period.

Similarly, Figure 5.4-10 demonstrates the model's ability to simulate average CCS sa linity.

Observed salinities are the mean of daily averaged salinities measured in the CCS sensors. The simulated CCS salinities are calculated in a manner similar to the CCS water e levations. The simulated daily net flow of salt is divided by the simulated volume of water in the CCS, which results in a change in sal inity. This change in salinity is added to the simulated sa linity calculated for the previous day to produce a simulated salinity for the current day. As in the case of water elevations, the model perfo1ms very well with respect to simulating both the temporal trends in CCS salinity and the magnitude of daily salin ities throughout the calibration period.

Inspection of Tables 5.4-4 through 5.4-47 reveals clear trends in wet and dry season flow. For instance, bottom seepage, one of the most dominating components of the balance model, demonstrates a dichotomy associated with flow direction. Net flow through the bottom of the CCS is genera lly out between the months of September through February. This suggests that lower groundwater elevations from the end of the wet season through the middle of the dry season cause outward flow from the CCS. Conversely, higher water groundwater elevations during much of the wet season, drives flow into the CCS. Intuitively, precipitation-based inflows to the CCS are greater during the wet season; average inflow from precipitation during the wet season is more than twice that for the dry season.

Two major revisions that are included in this year's water and salt balance are the use of a surveyed bathymetric surface of the CCS and the use of a more spatially detailed precipitation function that relies on NEXRAD data derived by SFWMD. These two revisions are described below.

Though the surface area and storage of the CCS changes daily, as water and salt flow into and out of the CCS, the 9-month water and salt balance model (FPL 201 1b) employed a constant surface area and assumed volume throughout the entire calibration period. However, based upon a bathymetric survey (Morgan and Eklund 2010), detailed information regarding CCS water surface area and volume was incorporated into the current water and salt balance model. This information provided a quantifiable relationship between CCS water elevations and both surface area and volume, such that daily averages of CCS water surface area and volume could be calculated from observed CCS water elevations. These re lationships were critica l to understanding how much water and salt was gained to and lost from the system on a daily and monthly basis, as wells as how these gains and losses impacted the daily water elevations and 5-29

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections salinities in the CCS. As a result of their incorporation, the bathymetric data improved the accuracy of the model in simulating the changing water elevations and salinities in the CCS throughout the 22-month calibration period.

ln addition to a detailed assessment of measured CCS storage characteristics, the simulation of precipitation-based inflows to the control volume was improved due to the availability of SFWMD-derived NEXRAD data. The NEXRAD data provided an accurate representation of the spatial variability in predpitation across the CCS. The spatially-variable daily rainfalls were defined for the five zones for which detailed water surface area data were available. Thus, the accuracy of precipitation inflow to the model due to spatial variability was improved through use ofNEXRAD data and the more accurate surface area obtained from the bathymetric data (the mode l computes inflow volumes as the product of daily precipitation and CCS surface area).

Incorporation of the NEXRAD data, coupled with the detailed understanding of CCS surface areas, proved to be a key element in facilitating a model match to observed monthly flows, water elevations, and salinities. The superiority of the current model calibration, relative to that wh ich employed solely TPM-1 precipitation data, suggests that the NEXRAD data be employed in future applications of the water and salt balance model. Though precipitation data from TPM-1 are not c urrently used to evaluate rainfall-based freshwater inflow to the CCS, these data are valuable inasmuch as they validate NEXRAD precipitation data. However, additional rain gauges located in the vicinity of the CCS provide no value to this model; the continued measurement of precipitation at these gauges is unnecessary.

The accurate simulation of changing CCS inflows, outflows, water elevations and salinities is complex due to the different components of the balance model and their varying impacts upon CCS water and salt storage. For instance, vertical flows into and out of the control volume are substantially larger than hori zontal flows, and have a greater impact upon CCS water elevation.

The salinity of inflowing water, however, can vary depending upon the source of the water. For example, horizontal flow from the west (L-3 l E) is non-saline and has a pronounced mitigating impact upon CCS salinities; vertical flow from groundwater beneath portions of the discharge canals is hyper-saline and generally increases the salinity of the CCS. The correct balance of both water and salt mass flow is difficult to procure. This complexity, however, constrains the number of possible solutions to the correct simulation of water and salt balance and bolsters confidence in the resulting calibrated model.

ln spite of the complexity, this relatively simple spreadsheet-based model accurately simulates the processes that govern and impact the operation of the CCS. The accuracy of the model is evidenced by the model 's abjlity to accurately simulate average net water and salt flows for the 22-month calibration period (Table 5.4-1 and Table 5.4-2) and for each individual month in the calibration period (Table 5.4-4 to Table 5.4-47). The simulation of transient water elevations and salinities in the CCS (Figure 5 .4-9 and Figure 5 .4-10) further demonstrates the quality of the mode l calibration.

The abili ty to model complex dynamics associated with the CCS over a 22-month timeframe demonstrates the value of the model as a tool for understanding how the CCS has and will 5-30

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections operate under varying meteorological, hydrological, and operational conditions. The model's accuracy underpins FPL's firm understanding of processes that control the CCS and the manner in which the CCS interacts with the adjacent aquifer and water bodies. Additionally, the model accuracy validates the fact that the most appropriate data are being collected to effectively capture CCS operations, identify interactions between the CCS and the sunounding environment, and suppo1t FPL's comprehension of historical and future operations of the CCS.

5-31

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-1 . Water Balance for 22-Month Period (September 2010 through June 2012)

Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.49 329.66 E. Seepage 6.47 4329.53 N. Seepage 0.00 2.28 S. Seepage 0.74 493.67 00 u Bot Seepage 7.3 1 4887.72 u Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation 24.20 0.00 16 192.89 0.00 0

......, Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.37 247.70

~= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.87 4.59 583.87 3068.24 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 45.05 30135.56 W. Seepage -0.06 - 1.87 E. Seepage - 1.77 -1186.58 N. Seepage -0.01 -3.92 00 S. Seepage 0.00 -1.20 u Bot Seepage -11.09 -7420.00 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -3 1.49 -21067.54 0

......, U nit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Inta ke Equal to Outflow Total Out: -44.43 -29681.12 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 0.62 454.44 Observed Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 0.11 74.55 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. gal = Gallons. ID = Interceptor Ditch. MGD = Millions of gallons per day.

5-43

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-2. Salt Balance for 22-Month Period (September 2010 through June 2012)

Water Balance Component lb/day (x 1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3.77 25 19.53 E .. Seepage 1913.88 1280384.11 N. Seepage 0.76 505.87 S. Seepage 145.99 97668.79 00 Bot Seepage 202 1.90 135265 1.06 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q

..,,_ Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 50.98 0.00 34108.26 ID Pumping 649.59 434574.13 Plant Outflow Eq ual to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 4786.86 3202411.74 W . Seepage -56.00 -37464.48 E .. Seepage -656.46 -439170.75 N. Seepage -2.69 -1797.60 00 S. Seepage -0.78 -523.83 u Bot Seepage -4678.82 -3130127.24 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Q

..,,_ Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5394.74 -3609083.91 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -607.88 -406672.17 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -590.61 -395118.74 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-44

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-3. Calibrated Model Parameter Values 2.6 North Seepage Face Horizontal Hydraulic Conductivity ft/da 300 West Seepage Face Horizontal Hydraulic Conductivity ft/da 450 Soutb Seepage Face Horizontal Hydraulic Conductivity ft/da 150 East Seepage Face Horizontal Hydraulic Conductivity ft/da 400 Evaporation Factor (Equation 6) Unitless 0.57 Runoff as Percentage of Rainfall (added to precipitation Unitless 46%

Percentage of Unit 5 Blowdown Lost to Evaporation Unitless 80%

Concentration of U nit 5 Blowdown as Percentage of Seawater (35 PSU) Unitless 20%

Key: ft= Foot. PSU = Practical salinity units.

5-45

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-4. Water Balance for September 2010 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.35 10.41 E. Seepage 4.33 129.87 N. Seepage 0.01 0.27 S. Seepage 0.76 22.84 00 Bot Seepage 2.36 70.86 u Precipitation and Runoff 8 1.96 2458.65 u

Evaporation 0.00 0.00

.....Q

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.29 0.98 8.64 29.36 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 91.03 2730.92 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2.42 -72.73 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.05 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -8.93 -267.82 u

t,...

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -37.98 -1139.48 Q

..... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -49.34 -1480.08 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 41.69 1250.84 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 52.14 1564.08 Key: CCS =Cooling Canal System. gal =Gallons. ID =Interceptor Ditch. MGD =Millions of gallons per day.

5-46

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-5. Salt Balance for September 2010 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 0.73 21 .79 E .. Seepage 1000.37 3001 1.06 N. Seepage 1.95 58.53 S. Seepage 3 1.45 943.47 00 Bot Seepage 492.65 14779.60 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q

..,,_ Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 57.18 0.00 1715.4 1 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Eq ual to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 1584.33 47529.85 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E .. Seepage -977.74 -29332.09 N. Seepage -0.60 - 18.07 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -4536.14 - 136084.31 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Q

..,,_ Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5514.48 -165434.47 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -3930.15 -117904.62 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 1464.29 43928.58 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-47

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-6. Water Balance for October 2010 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.1 2 3.73 E. Seepage 0.30 9.19 N. Seepage 0.00 0.09 S. Seepage 0.61 18.96 00 Bot Seepage 0.75 23.20 u Precipitation and Runoff 14.14 438.35 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.29 0.75 8.93 23.11 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 16.95 525.56 W. Seepage -0.01 -0.1 6 E. Seepage -9.77 -302.98 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.12 00 S. Seepage -0.01 -0.34 u Bot Seepage -22.44 -695.59 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -26.68 -827.09

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -58.91 -1826.27 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -41.96 -1300.71 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -46.60 -1444.52 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. gal = Gallons. ID = Interceptor Ditch. MGD = Millions of gallons per day.

5-48

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-7. Salt Balance for October 2010 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 0.23 7.14 E .. Seepage 59.81 1854.15 N. Seepage 0.6 1 19.05 S. Seepage 2. 18 67.44 00 Bot Seepage 332.43 l 0305.45 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 43.54 0.00 1349.79 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 438.81 13603.03 W. Seepage -50.77 - 1573.99 E .. Seepage -3777.60 -117105.67 N. Seepage -1.42 -43.87 00 S. Seepage -4.41 - 136.56 u Bot Seepage -85 16.95 -264025.54 u

c.,..

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -12351.15 -382885.62 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -11912.34 -369282.60 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -13790.42 -427502.87 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-49

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-8. Water Balance for November 2010 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.14 4.32 E. Seepage 1.94 58.25 N. Seepage 0.00 0.08 S. Seepage 0.53 15.95 00 Bot Seepage 1.20 35.95 u Precipitation and Runoff 27.97 839.20 u

Evaporation 0.00 0.00

.....Q

~ = Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.29 0.50 8.64 14.98 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 32.58 977.38 W. Seepage -0.03 -0.94 E. Seepage -3.16 -94.92 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.06 00 S. Seepage -0.01 -0.20 u Bot Seepage -14.43 -433.05 u

t,...

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Q

Evaporation -26.01 -780.3 1

..... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -43.65 -1309.48 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -11.07 -332.11 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -5.02 -150.50 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. gal = Gallons. ID = Interceptor Ditch. MGD = Millions of gallons per day.

5-50

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-9. Salt Balance for November 2010 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 0.34 10.17 E .. Seepage 457.48 13724.36 N. Seepage 0.6 1 18.16 S. Seepage 19.19 575.66 00 Bot Seepage 388.92 11667.59 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 29.18 0.00 875.37 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 895.71 26871.32 W. Seepage -306.18 -9 185.32 E .. Seepage - 1187.68 -35630.52 N. Seepage -0.82 -24.62 00 S. Seepage -2.61 -78.43 u Bot Seepage -5336.39 -160091.80 u

c.,..

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow To tal Out: -6833.69 -205010.69 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -5937.98 -178139.37 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -2876.16 -86284.89 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-51

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-10. Water Balance for December 2010 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.40 12.46 E. Seepage 7.28 225.71 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.48 14.92 00 Bot Seepage 3.90 120.8 1 u Precipitation and Runoff 3.90 120.88 u

Evaporation 0.00 0.00

.....Q

~ = Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.29 0.72 8.93 22.33 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 16.97 526.05 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.20 -6. 10 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.25 00 S. Seepage 0.00 -0.04 u Bot Seepage -11.51 -356.87 u

t,...

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -24.73 -766.57 Q

..... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -36.45 -1129.82 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -19.48 -603.78 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -12.72 -394.29 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. gal = Gallons. ID = Interceptor Ditch. ID = Interceptor Ditch.

MGD = Millions of gallons per day.

5-52

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-11. Salt Balance for December 201 0 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.44 44.71 E .. Seepage 1890.00 58590.08 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 90.83 2815.76 00 Bot Seepage 990.62 30709. 15 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 42.08 0.00 1304.34 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Eq ual to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3014.97 93464.05 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E .. Seepage -72.24 -2239.56 N. Seepage -2.87 -88.91 00 S. Seepage -0.53 - 16.39 u Bot Seepage -41 63.59 -129071.18 u

c.,..

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -4239.23 -131416.04 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -1224.26 -37951.99 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -1555.92 -48233.42 Key: CCS =Cooling Canal System. lb =Pound.

5-53

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-12. Water Balance for January 2011 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.83 25.80 E. Seepage 3.98 123.23 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.41 12.85 00 Bo t Seepage 2.62 8 1.37 u Precipitation and Runoff 19.86 61 5.73 u

Evaporation 0.00 0.00

.....Q

~ = Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.29 0.82 8.93 25.40 ID Pumping 4.9 1 152.24 Plant Outfl ow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 33.73 1045.54 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1.67 -51.90 N. Seepage -0.0 1 -0.27 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -15.15 -469.50 u

t,...

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -24. 18 -749.43 Q

..... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total Out: -41.00 -1271.10 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -7.28 -225.56 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -2.54 -78.88 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. gal = Gallons. ID = Interceptor Ditch. MGD = Millions of gallons per day.

5-54

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-13. Salt Balance for January 2011 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3. 18 98.49 E .. Seepage 1077.95 33416.50 N. Seepage 0.0 1 0.42 S. Seepage 78.05 2419.52 00 Bot Seepage 683.66 2 11 93.44 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q

..,,_ Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 47.87 0.00 1483.96 ID Pumping 185.05 5736.69 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 2075.77 64349.02 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E .. Seepage -654.00 -20273.95 N. Seepage -3.51 -108.76 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -6108.34 -189358.53 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Q

..,,_ Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -6765.85 -209741.24 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -4690.07 -145392.21 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -910.35 -28220.95 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-55

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-14. Water Balance for February 2011 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.59 16.65 E. Seepage 10.09 282.47 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.84 23.51 00 Bot Seepage 9.24 258.62 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.71 19.8 1 u

Evaporation 0.00 0.00

.....Q

~ = Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.29 0.70 8.06 19.46 ID Pumping 2.25 63.03 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 24.70 691.62 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.15 -4.31 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.34 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -14.17 -396.64 u

t,...

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -29.42 -823.64 Q

..... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -43.75 -1224.93 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -19.05 -533.31 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -14.26 -399.40 Key: CCS =Cooling Canal System. gal =Gallons. ID =Interceptor Ditch. MGD =Millions of gallons per day.

5-56

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-15. Salt Balance for February 2011 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.03 56.74 E .. Seepage 2692.11 75379.20 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 140.7 1 3939.92 00 Bot Seepage 2305.86 64564. 13 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 40.60 0.00 1136.86 ID Pumping 73.70 2063.56 Plant Outflow Eq ual to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5255.02 147140.42 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E .. Seepage -67.69 -1895.27 N. Seepage -5.44 -152.45 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -6339.60 -177508.74 u

c.,..

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -6412.73 -179556.46 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -1157.72 -32416.04 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 1264.60 35408.76 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-57

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-16. Water Balance for March 2011 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.67 20.71 E. Seepage 8.33 258.32 N. Seepage 0.00 0.04 S. Seepage 0.92 28.50 00 Bot Seepage 9.57 296.60 u Precipitation and Runoff 7.23 224.04 u

Evaporation 0.00 0.00

.....Q

~ = Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.29 0.66 8.93 20.55 ID Pumping 9.37 290.40 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 37.04 1148.09 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.12 -3.80 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.l 1 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -9.55 -295.97 u

t,...

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -30.85 -956.26 Q

..... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -40.52 -1256.14 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -3.49 -108.05 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 3.19 99.02 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. gal = Gallons. ID = Interceptor Ditch. MGD = Millions of gallons per day.

5-58

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-17. Salt Balance for March 2011 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3.43 106.48 E .. Seepage 2496.42 77388.93 N. Seepage 0.30 9.25 S. Seepage 187.39 5809. 16 00 Bot Seepage 2394.47 74228.63 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 38.73 0.00 1200.58 ID Pumping 774.24 24001.46 Plant Outflow Eq ual to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5894.98 182744.50 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E .. Seepage -59.27 -1837.47 N. Seepage -1.57 -48.55 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -4384.63 -135923.56 u

c.,..

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -4445.47 -137809.58 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1449.51 44934.91 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 2504.94 77653.08 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-59

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-18. Water Balance for April 2011 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.53 15.82 E. Seepage 11.76 352.70 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1.13 33.79 00 Bot Seepage 13.19 395.55 u Precipitation and Runoff 10.50 3 15.01 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.29 l.13 8.64 33.95 ID Pumping 7.46 223.80 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 45.98 1379.27 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.32 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -9.86 -295.69 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -31.86 -955.93

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -41.73 -1251.94 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 4.24 127.33 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -7.85 -235.45 Key: CCS =Cooling Canal System. gal =Gallons. ID =Interceptor Ditch. MGD =Millions of gallons per day.

5-60

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-19. Salt Balance for April 2011 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3.77 113.23 E .. Seepage 3758.99 112769.81 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 294.59 8837.65 00 Bot Seepage 33 18.51 99555.44 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 66.10 0.00 1983.0 1 ID Pumping 751.05 2253 1.49 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 8193.02 245790.62 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E .. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -4.51 -135.23 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -4200.79 -126023.58 u

c.,..

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -4205.29 -1261 58.82 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3987.73 119631.80 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -4057.29 -121718.78 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-61

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-20. Water Balance for May 2011 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.68 2 1.08 E. Seepage 19.10 592. 18 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1.31 40.72 00 Bot Seepage 20.78 644.29 u Precipitation and Runoff 7.08 2 19.47 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.29 1.16 8.93 35.93 ID Pumping 14.81 459.13 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 65.22 2021.73 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -0.02 -0.72 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -15.50 -480.56 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -37.32 -1156.97

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -52.85 -1638.25 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 12.37 383.48 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 11.51 356.77 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. gal = Gallons. ID = Interceptor Ditch. MGD = Millions of gallons per day.

5-62

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-21. Salt Balance for May 2011 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 12.42 384.92 E .. Seepage 6362.11 197225.56 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 433.44 13436.66 00 Bot Seepage 5223.08 16 1915.41 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 67.70 0.00 2098.75 ID Pumping 3405.55 105571.94 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 15504.30 480633.24 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E .. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -1 1.06 -342.71 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -7418.52 -229974.09 u

c.,..

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -7429.57 -230316.80 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 8074.72 250316.44 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 6228.37 193079.32 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-63

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-22. Water Balance for June 2011 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.75 22.58 E. Seepage 15.32 459.74 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1.28 38.38 00 Bot Seepage 22.07 662.08 u Precipitation and Runoff 8.20 246.08 u

Evaporation 0.00 0.00

.....Q

~ = Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.47 1.02 14.23 30.60 ID Pumping 16.13 483.83 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 65.25 1957.53 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 -0. 11 N. Seepage -0.02 -0.60 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -1 2.21 -366.29 u

t,...

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -40.23 -1 206.80 Q

..... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -52.46 -1573.79 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 12.79 383.74 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 10.30 309.07 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. gal = Gallons. ID = Interceptor Ditch. MGD = Millions of gallons per day.

5-64

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-23. Salt Balance for June 2011 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 18.78 563.38 E .. Seepage 5643.47 169304. 22 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 447.06 13411.94 00 Bot Seepage 559 1.99 167759.66 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q

..,,_ Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 59.59 0.00 1787.60 ID Pumping 4597.36 137920.85 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 16358.26 490747.65 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E .. Seepage -1.84 -55.08 N. Seepage -9.89 -296.60 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -6075.97 -182279.20 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Q

..,,_ Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -6087.70 -182630.88 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 10270.56 308116.77 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 8658.55 259756.64 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-65

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-24. Water Balance for July 2011 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.91 28.14 E. Seepage 2.01 62.39 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.47 14.67 00 Bot Seepage 7.60 235.47 u Precipitation and Runoff 46.74 1449.08 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.48 l.13 14.76 35.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 59.34 1839.51 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -4.1 1 -127.34 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.26 00 S. Seepage -0.02 -0.61 u Bot Seepage -13.34 -413.61 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -41.06 -1 272.84

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -58.54 -1814.66 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 0.80 24.85 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 9.24 286.59 Key: CCS =Cooling Canal System. gal =Gallons. ID =Interceptor Ditch. MGD =Millions of gallons per day.

5-66

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-25. Salt Balance for July 2011 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 12.43 385.28 E .. Seepage 673.04 20864.34 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 142.73 4424.78 00 Bot Seepage 1535.56 47602.47 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 65.96 0.00 2044.75 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 2429.73 75321.62 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E .. Seepage -2055.70 -63726.75 N. Seepage -4.13 -128.1 6 00 S. Seepage -9.25 -286.73 u Bot Seepage -6701.62 -207750.29 u

c.,..

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -8770.71 -271891.94 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -6340.98 -196570.32 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 3237.34 100357.40 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-67

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-26. Water Balance for August 2011 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.02 0.75 E. Seepage 6.85 212.30 N. Seepage 0.00 0.07 S. Seepage 0.77 23.82 00 Bot Seepage 11.40 353.50 u Precipitation and Runoff 39.06 12 10.89 u

Evaporation 0.00 0.00

.....Q

~ = Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.47 1.04 14.56 32.25 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 59.62 1848.14 W. Seepage -0.01 -0.40 E. Seepage -0.38 -11.79 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.02 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -8.82 -273.37 u

t,...

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -37.78 -1171.15 Q

..... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -46.99 -1456.73 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 12.63 391.41 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 20.17 625.23 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. gal = Gallons. ID = Interceptor Ditch. MGD = Millions of gallons per day.

5-68

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-27. Salt Balance for August 2011 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 0. 17 5.26 E .. Seepage 2391.19 74126.89 N. Seepage 0.62 19.1 1 S. Seepage 111.1 7 3446.4 1 00 Bot Seepage 4 186.36 129777.23 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 60.78 0.00 1884.07 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Eq ual to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 6750.29 209258.97 W. Seepage -483.19 -14978.79 E .. Seepage -16.77 -5 19.93 N. Seepage -0.29 -9.02 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -3409.18 -105684.58 u

c.,..

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -3909.43 -121192.33 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 2840.86 88066.64 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 4028.64 124887.94 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-69

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-28. Water Balance for September 2011 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.39 11.72 E. Seepage 4.04 121.17 N. Seepage 0.00 0.01 S. Seepage 0.63 18.90 00 Bot Seepage 3.05 9 1.40 u Precipitation and Runoff 38.92 1167.54 u

Evaporation 0.00 0.00

.....Q

~ = Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.49 0.98 14.73 29.36 ID Pumping 5.74 172.08 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 54.23 1626.91 W. Seepage -0.01 -0.33 E. Seepage -0.82 -24.55 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.14 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -9.62 -288.60 u

t,...

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -40.57 -1217.25 Q

..... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -51.03 -1530.87 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3.20 96.04 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -5.14 -154.17 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. gal = Gallons. ID = Interceptor Ditch. MGD = Millions of gallons per day.

5-70

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-29. Salt Balance for September 2011 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.34 40.22 E .. Seepage 1119.18 33575.49 N. Seepage 0.07 2.07 S. Seepage 8 1.28 2438.27 00 Bot Seepage 888.78 26663.45 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 57.18 0.00 1715.4 1 ID Pumping 406.90 12207.06 Plant Outflow Eq ual to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 2554.73 76641.96 W. Seepage -37 1.9 1 -1 1157. 19 E .. Seepage -322.30 -9669.08 N. Seepage -2.27 -68.02 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -4756.06 -142681.75 u

c.,..

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5452.53 -163576.04 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2897.80 -86934.09 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -3663.57 -109906.97 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-71

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-30. Water Balance for October 2011 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.35 10.96 E. Seepage 2.49 77.18 N. Seepage 0.00 0.06 S. Seepage 0.74 23.06 00 Bot Seepage 2.99 92.8 1 u Precipitation and Runoff 55.25 17 12.81 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.47 0.75 14.43 23.11 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 63.05 1954.43 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -3.95 -122.5 1 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.15 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -14.38 -445.78 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -29.09 -901.94

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -47.43 -1470.37 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 15.61 484.05 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 8.79 272.51 Key: CCS =Cooling Canal System. gal =Gallons. ID =Interceptor Ditch. MGD =Millions of gallons per day.

5-72

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-31. Salt Balance for October 2011 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 0.70 21.8 1 E .. Seepage 1244.83 38589.87 N. Seepage 0.23 7.27 S. Seepage 48.75 1511. 19 00 Bot Seepage 2437.55 75564. 10 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q

..,,_ Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 43.54 0.00 1349.79 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3775.61 117044.03 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E .. Seepage -440.32 -13649.83 N. Seepage -2.39 -74.02 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -1 825.99 -56605.8 1 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Q

..,,_ Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -2268.70 -70329.66 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1506.92 46714.37 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -3871.33 -120011.08 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-73

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-32. Water Balance for November 2011 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.22 6.64 E. Seepage 5.82 174.56 N. Seepage 0.00 0.13 S. Seepage 0.68 20.31 00 Bot Seepage 4.03 120.94 u Precipitation and Runoff 1.29 38.6 1 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.42 0.50 12.59 14.98 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 12.96 388.76 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.43 -12.93 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.04 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -6.95 -208.54 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -33.96 -1018.90

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -41.35 -851.65 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -28.39 -462.88 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -25.56 -766.91 Key: CCS =Cooling Canal System. gal =Gallons. ID =Interceptor Ditch. MGD =Millions of gallons per day.

5-74

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-33. Salt Balance for November 2011 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 0.72 21.55 E .. Seepage 1026.23 30786.95 N. Seepage 0.75 22.36 S. Seepage 92.38 277 1.44 00 Bot Seepage 633.86 19015.69 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q

..,,_ Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 29.18 0.00 875.37 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 1783.11 53493.35 W. Seepage -1.42 -42.48 E .. Seepage -175.61 -5268.21 N. Seepage -0.83 -24.90 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -3795.03 -11 385 1.04 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Q

..,,_ Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -3972.89 -119186.63 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2189.78 -65693.28 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -3673.05 -110191.36 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-75

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-34. Water Balance for December 2011 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.49 15.07 E. Seepage 8.46 262. 14 N. Seepage 0.00 0.09 S. Seepage 0.76 23.45 00 Bot Seepage 7.25 224.86 u Precipitation and Runoff 1.82 56.48 u

Evaporation 0.00 0.00

.....Q

~ = Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.54 0.72 16.69 22.33 ID Pumping 9.14 283.37 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 29.18 904.48 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.09 -2.71 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.08 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -7.26 -225.18 u

t,...

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -27.94 -866.27 Q

..... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -35.30 -1094.23 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -6.12 -189.75 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -11.66 -361.51 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. gal = Gallons. ID = Interceptor Ditch. MGD = Millions of gallons per day.

5-76

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-35. Salt Balance for December 2011 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.39 43.13 E .. Seepage 1598.07 49540.20 N. Seepage 0.6 1 18.79 S. Seepage 155.78 4829.10 00 Bot Seepage 1112.42 34485.04 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

~

=

=

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 42.08 1304.34 1D Pumping 431.13 13365.08 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3341.47 103585.67 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -44.16 -1 369.05 N. Seepage -1.21 -37.57 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -4135.25 -128192.86 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00

~ Evaporation 0.00 0.00

=

..... Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -4180.63 -129599.47 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -839.16 -26013.81 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -3828.22 -118674.85 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-77

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-36. Water Balance for January 2012 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.79 24.34 E. Seepage 10.17 315.38 N. Seepage 0.00 0.01 S. Seepage 0.84 25.94 00 Bot Seepage 9.89 306.52 u Precipitation and Runoff 2.87 89.0 1 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.53 0.89 16.35 27.50 ID Pumping 15.39 476.96 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 41.36 1282.01 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.01 -0.39 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.3 3 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -11.42 -354.05 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -28.41 -880.83

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -39.86 -1235.60 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1.50 46.42 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -9.98 -309.33 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. gal = Gallons. ID = Interceptor Ditch. MGD = Millions of gallons per day.

5-78

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-37. Salt Balance for January 2012 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3.23 100.03 E .. Seepage 2454.87 76100.84 N. Seepage 0.09 2.88 S. Seepage 183.33 5683.23 00 Bot Seepage 29 19.37 90500.59 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 51.82 0.00 1606.43 ID Pumping 2219.37 68800.40 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 7832.08 242794.40 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E .. Seepage -6.39 -198.09 N. Seepage -5.00 -154.85 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -5281.53 -163727.51 u

c.,..

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5292.92 -164080.44 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 2539.16 78713.95 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -2625.35 -81385.79 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-79

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-38. Water Balance for February 2012 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.59 17.09 E. Seepage 4.87 141.21 N. Seepage 0.00 0.13 S. Seepage 0.61 17. 71 00 Bot Seepage 5.40 156.46 u Precipitation and Runoff 36.40 1055.68 u

Evaporation 0.00 0.00

.....Q

~ = Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.47 0.78 13.50 22.68 ID Pumping 1.50 43.56 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 50.62 1468.02 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.66 -19.12 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.02 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -7.93 -230.08 u

t,...

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -27.84 -807.25 Q

..... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -36.43 -1056.46 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 14.19 411.56 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 12.36 358.44 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. gal = Gallons. ID = Interceptor Ditch. MGD = Millions of gallons per day.

5-80

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-39. Salt Balance for February 2012 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.62 75.86 E .. Seepage 1490.74 43231.51 N. Seepage 1.06 30.70 S. Seepage 139.50 4045.55 00 Bot Seepage 2043.67 59266.34 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 45.68 0.00 1324.84 ID Pumping 189.46 5494.29 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3912.73 113469.10 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E .. Seepage -1 1.04 -320.18 N. Seepage -0.31 -8.86 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -2808.80 -81455.07 u

c.,..

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -2820.14 -81784.11 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1092.59 31684.99 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 3362.46 97511.42 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID= Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-81

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-40. Water Balance for March 2012 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.43 13.35 E. Seepage 6.60 204.74 N. Seepage 0.01 0.40 S. Seepage 0.86 26.63 00 Bot Seepage 9.1 1 282.49 u Precipitation and Runoff 2.46 76.17 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.32 0.99 9.78 30.56 ID Pumping 4.10 126.99 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 24.87 771.10 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.22 -6.83 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.01 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -4.37 -135.32 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -28.85 -894.42

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -33.44 -1036.58 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -8.56 -265.48 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -11.24 -348.30 Key: CCS =Cooling Canal System. gal =Gallons. ID =Interceptor Ditch. MGD =Millions of gallons per day.

5-82

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-41. Salt Balance for March 2012 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.91 59. 15 E .. Seepage 2072.56 64249.32 N. Seepage 2.96 91.61 S. Seepage 199.90 6197.0 1 00 Bot Seepage 2790.33 86500.25 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 57.59 0.00 1785.20 ID Pumping 187.62 5816.11 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5312.86 164698.66 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E .. Seepage -16.20 -502.25 N. Seepage -0.13 -4.04 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -1 733.97 -53753.20 u

c.,..

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1750.31 -54259.48 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3562.55 110439.17 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -500.48 -15514.87 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-83

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-42. Water Balance for April 2012 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.69 20.65 E. Seepage 7.18 215.31 N. Seepage 0.01 0.15 S. Seepage 0.84 25.21 00 Bot Seepage 9.86 295.67 u Precipitation and Runoff 52.1 7 1565.03 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.35 0.98 10.44 29.41 ID Pumping 9.76 292.86 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 81.82 2454.73 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.1 1 -3.36 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.03 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -5.44 -163.10 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -30.35 -910.52

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -35.90 -1077.01 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 45.92 1377.72 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 33.69 1010.73 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. gal = Gallons. ID = Interceptor Ditch. MGD = Millions of gallons per day.

5-84

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-43. Salt Balance for April 2012 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 6.91 207.36 E .. Seepage 2259.55 67786.52 N. Seepage 1.1 8 35.26 S. Seepage 228.24 6847.28 00 Bot Seepage 2634.67 79039.99 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 57.26 0.00 1717.78 ID Pumping 1035.51 31065. 19 Plant Outflow Eq ual to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 6223.31 186699.39 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E .. Seepage -54.03 -1620.98 N. Seepage -0.59 - 17.72 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -2899.81 -86994.31 u

c.,..

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -2954.43 -88633.01 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3268.88 98066.38 Observed Change in CCS Storage: 4132.59 123977.58 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-85

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-44. Water Balance for May 2012 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.58 18.00 E. Seepage 0.22 6.82 N. Seepage 0.01 0.44 S. Seepage 0.28 8.68 00 Bot Seepage 1.06 32.8 1 u Precipitation and Runoff 42.56 13 19.51 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.36 0.97 11.22 30.04 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 46.05 1427.54 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -6.10 -189.16 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.01 00 S. Seepage 0.00 -0.01 u Bot Seepage -11.72 -363.27 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -29.06 -900.80

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -46.88 -1453.25 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -0.83 -25.72 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -2.89 -89.62 Key: CCS =Cooling Canal System. gal =Gallons. ID =Interceptor Ditch. MGD =Millions of gallons per day.

5-86

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-45. Salt Balance for May 2012 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3.99 123.80 E .. Seepage 66.83 2071.87 N. Seepage 3.32 103.06 S. Seepage 36.12 1119.86 00 Bot Seepage 476.73 14778.5 1 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

....= Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 56.61 0.00 1755.02 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 643.62 19952.13 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E .. Seepage -2630.79 -81554.38 N. Seepage -0.1 8 -5.65 00 S. Seepage -0.18 -5.72 u Bot Seepage -4991.24 -154728.51 u

c.,..

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -7622.40 -236294.26 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -6978.78 -216342.13 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -4664.11 -144587.53 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID = Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-87

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-46. Water Balance for June 2012 Water Balance Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011 6)

W . Seepage 0.31 9.37 E. Seepage 1.49 44.65 N. Seepage 0.01 0.29 S. Seepage 0.50 14.87 00 Bot Seepage 3.52 105.45 u Precipitation and Runoff 3 1.83 954.85 u

Evaporation 0.00 0.00

.....Q

~ = Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.19 1.03 5.80 30.98 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 38.88 1166.26 W. Seepage 0.00 -0.03 E. Seepage -4.30 -129.06 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.01 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -8.70 -261. 14 u

t,...

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Evaporation -28.76 -862.90 Q

..... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 = Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -41.77 -1253.15 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2.90 -86.88 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -3.50 -105.04 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. gal = Gallons. ID = Interceptor Ditch. MGD = Millions of gallons per day.

5-88

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-47. Salt Balance for June 2012 Water Balance Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 0.97 29.03 E .. Seepage 326.55 9796.4 1 N. Seepage 2.25 67.36 S. Seepage 69.92 2097.49 00 Bot Seepage 1092.63 32778.88 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q

..,,_ Evaporation 0.00 0.00

~= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 60.32 0.00 1809.60 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant J.ntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 1552.63 46578.77 W. Seepage -17.56 -526.7 1 E .. Seepage -1746.75 -52402.41 N. Seepage -0.17 -5.02 00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 u Bot Seepage -3478.73 -104361.78 u

~

Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 Q

Evaporation 0.00 0.00

..,,_ Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5243.20 -157295.92 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -3690.57 -110717.15 Observed Change in CCS Storage: -2740.38 -82211.41 Key: CCS = Cooling Canal System. ID= Interceptor Ditch. lb = Pound.

5-89

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections L31-E seepage Bisca:n1e Bay Seepage (A)

EYaporation L31-E seepage 1 1 1 1 (B)

Figure 5.4-1. Flow (A) Into and (B) Out of the Proposed Control Volume, Shown in Cross-Section.

5-121

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections Figure 5.4-2. Locations of the Five Zones Where the Time-Varying Surface Areas and Storage Volumes are Known.

5-122

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections Figure 5.4-3. Locations of L-31 E and ID Monitoring Stations; Conceptualized Seepage from L-31 E into the ID is Shown.

5-123

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections Figure 5.4-4. Locations of TPSWCCS-4 and TPSWC-4 Monitoring Stations; Conceptualized Seepage from Southern Collector Canal into the CCS is Shown.

5-124

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections Figure 5.4-5. Locations of TPSWCCS-5, TPSWCCS-6 and TPBBSW-3 Monitoring Stations; Conceptualized Seepage from Biscayne Bay into the CCS is Shown.

5-125

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections Figure 5.4-6. Locations of TPGW-6, TPGW-10, and TPGW-12 Shallow Groundwater Monitoring Stations, TPSWCCS-1 Surface Water Monitoring Station, and TPFM-1 Plant Outflow Meter; Conceptualized Seepage from the CCS into the Shallow Groundwater is Shown.

5-126

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections Figure 5.4-7. Locations of TPGW and TPSWCCS Monitoring Stations and Four Zones that Subdivide the Control Volume (Zone A Extends Eastward along the Northern Canal to Plant Outflow, Zone D Extends North to the Plant Intake).

5-127

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections Figure 5.4-8. Locations of CCS Monitoring Stations, Meteorological Station TPM-1 and Four Zones that Subdivide the Control Volume (Zone 1 Extends Eastward along the Northern Canal to Plant Outflow, Zone 4 Extends North to the Plant Intake).

5-128

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections 2.5

- - Simulated Water Elevations 2

• Measured Water Elevations 00 00 C 1.5

~

Z 1

~

.2 C 0.5 n,

a, 0 w

~ -0.5

~ -1 V) u u

- 1.5

-2 Figure 5.4-9. Modeled Versus Measured Water Elevations in the CCS over the 22-Month Period; Used to Validate the Conceptual Model and Calibrate the Water Balance Model to Temporal Trends in Water Elevation.

5-129

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Uni ts 3 & 4 Uprate Project - October 2012 Sections 90 . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- -Simulated Concentration (g/L) 80

• Measured Concentration (g/L)

r70 +---------------------------

bl)

• 2 60 n,

V)

V) u u so - + - - - + - - - -.#=--.....' - - - - - - - - - - ~--

40 +---------------------------

30 +-----.---.--.--....----.---.-----,.--....----.----.---,--.-----.----.---,--.---,----,--,-------, -,-

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

o'.l/'-lo"'-l/'-!6'-l-1 '-l/r'.l;'-l/k-1J'-1,1 '.l-l~'.lf'-l/'-l,1"'-lf'.lJ'-l,2 '.ljr,/,t-1/Y'.l;'.l<

Figure 5.4-10. Modeled Versus Measured Salinities in the CCS over the 22-Month Period; Used to Validate the Conceptual Model and Calibrate the Salt Balance Model to Temporal Trends in Salinity.

5-130

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 20 10 and June 2012. C urrently, the modeled period extends through May 2014 and encompasses a Post-Uprate period.

The conceptual model and associated calculations are predominantly unchanged since Last presented in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report. As such, only a brief surrunary of the model is provided below. In addition, model results and corresponding conclusions regarding the operation of the CCS, based on the current calibrated water and salt balance model, are provided herein. The Excel spreadsheet that comprises the model is provided in a separate data file.

5.3.1 Model Summary As Figme 5.3-1 depicts, the water balance for the proposed control volume is comprised of seepage (lateral through the sides and vertical through the bottom), blowdown (additional water pumped from other units to the CCS), precipitation (including runoff from earth berms between canals), and evaporation. Aside from evaporation and precipitation, these are the same mechani sms by which salt flows into and out of the CCS. The means by which water and/or salt is transferred (e.g., seepage, evaporation) are calculated using various equations provided in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Report (FPL 2012). Calculations were performed for a 45-month period from September 2010 through May 2014. Average flows of water and salt into and out of the control volume were calculated for each day of this period using hydrologic, water quality, and meteorological data measured within, beneath, and adjacent to the CCS. The average daily flows were summed to estimate the amount of water and salt that enters or exits the control volume (i.e., the CCS) during each month and the enti re 45-month period. These calculations demonstrate and validate the conceptual model of the CCS and, in so doing, illustrate the hydrologic mechanisms by which the CCS functions.

Calculated water flows are reported in 106 gallons per day (millions of gallons per day [MGD]).

The mass flux into or out of the control volume is calculated by multiplying the volumetric flow by the salinity of the body of water from which the water 1s flowing. Salinity was monitored at a ll groundwater and surface water stations employed in the ensuing calculations and was reported in the practical salinity scale (PSS-78), which is equivalent to grams per liter (g/L).

Calculated mass fluxes are reported in thousands of pounds per day (lb x 1000/day).

The gain/loss of water and salt mass with in the control volume during some period of time results in a change in the control volume's water and salt mass storage. Increased water storage, for instance, occurs when more water enters the control volume than exits. Storage, then, can be estimated by summing all of the components of the water (and salt) balance. When the net flow is positive (into the control volume) during a specified period of time, the storage of control volume increases. Conversely, a net negative (out of the control volume) flow implies a decrease in storage during a specified time period.

Another manner in which a change in storage can be estimated relies on direct measurements of water elevations and sa linities within the control volume. A change in water elevation within the control volume can be calculated as a difference between water elevations at the beginning and end of a specified time period. The product of this change in water elevations and the 5-4

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 surface area of the control volume provide an estimate of the change in the volume of water contained in the control volume during that period of time. Estimates of daily storage changes derived from this method are used to further calibrate the water and salt balance model to ensure an accurate simulation of temporal trends CCS water elevation and salinity.

5.3.2 Results and Discussion The individual components of the water and salt balance were simulated daily and sunnned for each month from Septern ber 2010 through May 2014, as well as for tbe collective 45-month period. The individual components of flow are summed in order to calculate a simulated change in volume for each month and for the 45-month period. These simulated changes in storage were compared to observed changes in CCS water and salt storage for each month and the entire calibration petiod. Errors between the simulated and observed storage changes were minimized by adjusting key variables associated with the flow balance model; this process is called calibration. The calibration process ensures that the model can accurately reflect the average changes in CCS storage over the 45-month time frame, while also effectively capturing day-to-day changes in CCS water and mass storage. Calibration of the water and salt balance model was achieved by adjusting hydraulic conductivities of the aquifer materials adjacent to and beneath the CCS that factor into the calculation of seepage to/from groundwater and Biscayne Bay. Additional adjustable parameters include the coefficients in the wind function (FPL 2012),

the amount of runoff that enters the control volume as percentage of precipitation, the amount of Unit 5 cooling tower water that is lost to evaporation before entering the CCS, and the sal inity of the Unit 5 blowdown as a percentage of seawater. The calibrated model parameter values are provided in Table 5.3-1.

The horizontal hydrau lic conductivities latera lly adjacent to the control volume were ca librated to range between 500 ft/d and 950 ft/d. The calibrated vertical conductivities beneath the control volume ranged from 0.1 ft/day to 4 ft/d. The northern portion of the discharge canals and return canals, where it is assumed deeper canals intersect highly permeable material underlying the muck and Miami limestone, were calibrated to have higher vertical hydraulic conductivities (3.8 ft/d and 4 ft/d, respectively). Lower vertical conductivities were calibrated for the mid- and southern portions of the discharge canals, as well as the southern portion of the return canals (0.l ft/d).

Results of the simulated 45-month water and salt balance model are provided in Tables 5.3-2 and 5.3-3, respectively. Monthly balance results follow in Table 5.3-4 through Table 5.3-5. The mode led net flow of water, as calcu lated by the summ ing t he components of the water ba lance for the 45-month calibration period, is denoted as the "Modeled Change in CCS Storage" and was calculated to be an average inflow of 0.05 MGD over the 45-month calibration period. The observed change in storage, which is the difference in the volume of water in the CCS between the final and fi rst days of the calibration period, divided by the number of days in the period, was observed to be 0.3 1 MGD (inflow). Though the model underestimated the net inflow of water from the CCS, the residual error between the simulated and observed flow is only 0.26 MGD.

This error is small (0.26%) relative to the monthly net observed flows, which for the entire 45-month period range from a net outflow of 46.6 MGD (October 20 I 0) and a net inflow of 52.1 5-5

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 MGD (September 20 10). During the Post-Uprate period (June 2013 - May 2014), the monthly net observed flows range from a net outflow of 31. 1 MGD (June 2013) to a net inflow of 19.6 MGD (July 2013). The model simulates a net outflow of 3.26 MGD of water from the CCS during the Post-Uprate period, which matches the observed net outflow of water during Post-Uprate (3.42 MGD) reasonably well. The net outflow of water during this timeframe is predominantly attributable to a relative lack of precipitation (which accounts for 30% of the simulated inflow during this timeframe) and relatively high evaporation (which accounts for 85%

of the simulated outflow). During the simulated Pre-Uprate and Interim Operating period (September 2010 through May 2013), precipitation accounted for 39.4% of inflow ing water to the CCS and evaporation accounted for 63.7% of the outflowing water from the CCS.

The model simulated a net influx of salt over the 45-month period at rate of 1,938 (lb x l ,000)/day. The corresponding observed rate of salt inflow was calculated by multiplying the average observed salinity in the CCS on the final and first day of the calibration period by the corresponding CCS volumes on those days. The difference between these two products, divided by the number of days in the calibration period, provides the net inflow of sa lt, 497 (lb x 1,000)/day. The error associated with the mass flux is an overestimation by approximately 697 (lb x 1,000)/day. As in the case of water balance simulation, the magnitude of this overestimation is small (3.1 %) relative to the range in monthly average flows for the entire 45- month period; the monthly net mass fluxes range from an outflow of 13,790 (lb x l ,000)/day (October 2010) to an inflow of 8,659 (lb x 1,000)/day (June 2011 ). During the Post-Uprate period (June 2013 - May 2014), the monthly observed net salt mass fluxes range from a net outflow of 6,529 (lb x l ,000)/day (December 2013) to a net inflow of 5,847 (lb x 1,000)/day (Apri l 2014). There was a net gain of salt with in the CCS during the Post-Uprate period of2,2 16 (lb x 1,000)/day. This gain in salt is likely to be attributable to two factors. First, the relative paucity in freshwater precipitation resulted in reduced CCS water levels. As such, groundwater and associated salt mass account for much of the inflow to the CCS during the Post-Uprate period. Second, the low water levels and relatively high evaporation (which removes freshwater from the CCS and leaves salt behind) resulted in seepage to groundwater being a relatively small component of the water and mass outflow from the CCS. Thus, CCS salt mass outflow was not a pronounced e lement of the salt balance during the Post-Uprate period and salt mass from evaporation was generally retained. As a result, the CCS gained salt between June 201 3 and May 2014.

Figures 5.3-2 and 5.3-3 illustrate the model's ability to match the magnitude and direction of net monthly flows of water and salt, respectively. Figure 5.3-2 compares observed and modeled net monthly fl ows of water into and out of the CCS. There is a seasonal trend in observed flows to/from the CCS, where inflows are generally associated with the wet season and outflows are generally associated with the dry season. The model is able to replicate this trend reasonably well. However, there are isolated months where the model does not accurately simulate the net flow (e.g., Apri l and September 2011). Figure 5.3-3 compares observed and modeled net monthly flows of salt into and out of the CCS. Like the modeled water flows, estimated sa lt mass fluxes generally match observed fluxes well, though there are individua l months where the estimated mass flux is less accurate.

5-6

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Implicit in the model's ability to simulate monthly net water and salt mass flows is the accurate simulation of daily flows to and from the CCS. Because the model is able to characterize the daily flows of water and salt, the model estimates the daily changes in CCS water and salt storage. As previously mentioned, these changes in storage are associated with daily changes in CCS water levels and salinity. Figure 5.3-4 shows the model-calculated water level in the CCS, which varies over the period of record. These modeled water levels range between approximately

-1. 5 ft NAVD 88 and 1 ft NA VD 88, and reflects an average water level throughout the entire CCS. Also shown in this figure are the observed CCS water levels over time; the observed values reflect the mean of daily-averaged water e levations across the seven sensors in the CCS.

Simulated water elevations are calculated by dividing the simulated daily change in CCS storage by the average daily CCS surface area and adding the resulting value (which reflects a change in water level) to the previous day's simulated water elevation. It is evident from this figure that the model effectively captures the general trend in CCS water elevations over the 45-month period, and accurately simulates average CCS water elevations throughout much of the calibration period.

Similarly, changes in salt mass storage within the CCS can be used to calculate average CCS salinity changes over time. The simulated daily net flow of salt is divided by the simulated volume of water in tbe CCS, which results in a change in salin ity. This change in salinity is added to the simulated salinity calcu lated for the previous day to produce a simulated sa linity for the current day. Like the simulated CCS water level, the model salinity reflects a representative daily salinity throughout the CCS. Figure 5.3-5 compares the simulated salinities to those observed in the CCS over the period of record. Observed sali nities are the mean of da ily averaged salinities measured in the CCS mon itoring stations. The modeled CCS salinity changes over time match changes in the average observed CCS salinity throughout the 45-month period of record. This timeframe includes the recent rise in salinity from approximately 60 g/L to approximately 90 g/L. That the model can match this notable increase in CCS salin ity reinforces the conceptual model, which suggests that changes in CCS salinity are predicated solely on changes in the flow of water into and out of the CCS.

The accurate simulation of changing CCS inflows, outflows, water elevations and salinities is complex due to the different components of the balance model and their varying impacts upon CCS water and salt storage. For instance, ve1tical flows into and out of the control volume are generally larger than horizontal flows, and have a greater jmpact upon CCS water elevation. The salinity of inflowing water, however, can vary depending upon the source of the water. For example, horizontal flow from tbe west (L-3 l E) is non-saline and has a pronounced mitigating impact upon CCS salinities; vertical flow from groundwater beneath portions of the di scharge canals is saline to hyper-saline and generally increases the salinity of the CCS. The correct balance of both water and salt mass flow is difficult to estimate in the model. In addition, the simulated timeframe encompasses both Pre- and Post-Uprate periods, during which CCS water temperatures slightly increase. The model addresses associated impacts to the CCS by explicitly simulating the effects of water/air temperature gradients on evaporation. Whereas myriad sources and sinks of water, varying salinities, and changes in water temperature do increase model complexity, the need to accurately simulate these different components of CCS operation constrains the number of possible solutions.

5-7

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Though the model is able to simulate the complex dynamics associated with the CCS over a 45-month timeframe with reasonable accuracy, there are periods of time where the simulated flows of water and salt do not accurately reflect observed conditions. Consequently, the simulated water level and salinities in the CCS deviate from those that have been observed at various times in the simulation period. However, the overall performance of the model reinforces its utility as a tool for understanding how the CCS has and will operate under varying meteorological, hydrological, and operational conditions. This is best demonstrated by the fact that the same conceptua l model employed to characterize changes in CCS storage of water and salt during the Pre-Uprate period is used to explain changes in storage during the Post-Uprate period. This is a period of time during which water levels have generally decreased, salinities have dramatically increased and water temperatures have risen within the CCS. Nevertheless, the exchanges of flows between the CCS and surrounding environment during Post-Uprate are governed by the same hydrologic principles as during the Pre-Uprate period. This robustness and accuracy in the model underpins FPL' s firm understanding of processes that control the CCS and the manner in which the CCS interacts with the adjacent aquifer and water bodies. This accuracy in simulating the historical changes within the CCS bolsters confidence in the model's utility as a tool to evaluate the sensitivity of CCS operations to certain factors such as changes in operation, drought conditions, storm events, and other potential environmental stresses. Additionally, the model accuracy validates the fact that the most appropriate data are being collected to effectively capture CCS operations, identify interactions between the CCS and the surrounding environment, and support FPL' s comprehension of historical and future operations of the CCS.

5-8

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 TABLES

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-1. Calibration Parameters Vertical Hydraulic Conductivit Ve11ical H draulic Conductivit 0.1 Vettical H draulic Conductivit 0.1 ft/da Vertical H draulic Conductivit 4 ft/da West Face H draulic Conductivit 950 ft/da East Face Hydraulic Conductivit 1000 ft/da North Face H draulic Conductivit 500 ft/da South Face H draulic Conductivit 500 ft/da 0.69 Runoff Modifier as % of Preci itation 34%

Blowdown Eva oration Factor 20%

Blowdown Concentration (as% of Seawater) 0.4 5-10

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-2. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components September 2010 to May 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10A6)

W. Seepage 0.92 1256.7 1 E. Seepage 15.37 2 1044.68 N. Seepage 0.01 13.96 S. Seepage 2.39 3274.42 Bottom Seepage 11.47 15708.95 tJ:i u Precipitation and Runoff 20.44 27984.72 u

-0

....=

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.47 0.92 0.00 648.79 1256.99 ID Pumping 3.3 1 4529.48 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 55.31 75718.69 W. Seepage 0.00 -3.91 E. Seepage -4.12 -5642.9 1 N. Seepage -0.0 1 -8.68 S. Seepage -0.12 -162.98 00 Bottom Seepage -12.48 -17091.43 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

"""0 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-38.53 0.00 0.00

-52744.39 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -55.26 -75654.30 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 0.05 64.39 Observed Change 0.31 417.57 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

gal = Gallon.

ID = Interceptor Ditch.

MGD = Million gallons per day.

5-11

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-3. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components September 2010 to May 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 6.55 8965.03 E. Seepage 4324.59 5920366.26 N. Seepage 2.30 3150.21 S. Seepage 466.15 638163.40 Bottom Seepage 3350.12 45863 12.27 rJ:J u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

.s

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 107.28 146861.12 TD Pumped Water 363.67 497869.29 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 8620.66 11801687.58 W. Seepage -42.58 -58287.90 E. Seepage -1632.46 -2234836.5 1 N. Seepage -3.05 -4179.04 S. Seepage -63.49 -86913.97 rJ:J Bottom Seepage -5685.41 -7783332.80 u

u 0

Q

=

Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 S lowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1D Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P la nt Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -7426.99 -10167550.22 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1193.67 1634137.36 Observed Change 497.04 680445.13 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

ID = Interceptor Ditch.

lb= Pound(s).

5-12

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components September 2010 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1OA6)

W. Seepage 0.73 2 1.80 E. Seepage 10.82 324.68 N. Seepage 0.02 0.45 S. Seepage 2.54 76.13 Bottom Seepage 8.29 248.59 rJj u Precipitation a11d Runoff 78.65 2359.64 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.29 0.98 0.00 8.64 29.36 ID Pump ing 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 102.31 3069.29 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -6.06 - 18 1.83 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.08 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJj Bottom Seepage -7.18 -215.33 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-38.1 l -1143.43

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -51.36 -1540.66 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 50.95 1528.63 Observed Cham!e 52.14 1564.08 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

gal= Gallon.

ID = Interceptor Ditch.

MGD = Million gallons per day.

5-13

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components October 2010 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.25 7.86 E. Seepa_ge 0.74 22.98 N. Seepage 0.00 0. 15 S. Seepage 2.04 63.20 Bottom Seepage 6.04 187.28 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 13.60 421.63 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.93

"""' Blowdown 0.75 23.11 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 23.71 735.14 W. Seepage -0.0 1 -0.33 E. Seepage -24.43 -757.44 N . Seepage -0.0 1 -0.19 S. Seepage -0.04 -1.13 00 Bottom Seepage -23.74 -735.81 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

'-- Evaporation -29.88 -926. 14 0

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -78.10 -2421.04 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -54.38 -1685.91 Observed Chan2e -46.60 -1444.52 5-14

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components November 2010 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.30 9.12 E. Seepage 4.85 145.62 N. Seepage 0.00 0.1 4 S. Seepage 1.77 53. 17 Bottom Seepage l.67 50.1 5 00 u Precipitation and R unoff 26.93 807.85 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....Q

=

.... Uni t 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.64 Blowdown 0.50 14.98 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 36.32 1089.69 W. Seepage -0.07 - 1.99 E. Seepage -7.9 1 -237.30 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.11 S. Seepage -0.02 -0.66 00 Bottom Seepage -14.98 -449.29 u Precipitatio n and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

'- Evaporatio n -29.1 6 -874.94

....Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Un it 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outfl ow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -52.14 -1564.29 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -15.82 -474.60 Observed Change -5.02 -150.50 5-15

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components December 2010 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.85 26.31 E. Seepa_ge 18.20 564.28 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1.60 49.75 Bottom Seepage 2.36 73.31 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 3.79 117.56 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.93 Blowdown 0.72 22.33 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 27.82 862.46 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.49 -15.24 N . Seepage -0.0 1 -0.4 1 S. Seepage 0.00 -0.13 00 Bottom Seepage -15.08 -467.61 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-27.76 0.00 0.00

-860.43 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -43.35 -1343.82 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -15.53 -481.36 Observed Chan2e -12.72 -394.29 5-16

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components January 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1QA6)

W. Seepage l.76 54.46 E. Seepage 9.94 308.08 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1.38 42.83 Bottom Seepage 2.80 86.95 rJj u Precipitation a11d Runoff 19.42 602.16 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.29 0.82 0.00 8.93 25.40 ID Pump ing 4.9 1 152.24 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 41.32 1281.04 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -4. 19 - 129.74 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.45 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJj Bottom Seepage -1 8.38 -569.72 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-26.80 -830.84

= U nit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -49.38 -1530.75 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -8.06 -249.71 Observed Chan2e -2.54 -78.88 5-17

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components February 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage l.26 35.15 E. Seepa_ge 25.22 706.19 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 2.80 78.37 Bottom Seepage 10.00 279.99 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.70 19.51 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.06 Blowdown 0.70 19.46 TD Pumping 2.25 63.03 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 43.21 1209.76 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.38 -10.77 N . Seepage -0.02 -0.56 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -19.59 -548.63 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-32.26 0.00 0.00

-903.41 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -52.26 -1463.38 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -9.06 -253.62 Observed Change -14.26 -399.40 5-18

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components March 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1QA6)

W. Seepage l.41 43.73 E. Seepage 20.83 645.80 N. Seepage 0.00 0.08 S. Seepage 3.06 94.99 rJj Bottom Seepage 11. 11 344.53 u Precipitation a11d Runoff 7.12 220.82 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.29 0.66 0.00 8.93 20.55 ID Pump ing 9.37 290.40 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 53.87 1669.85 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.31 -9.51 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.14 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJj Bottom Seepage -17.95 -556.34 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation -105 1.21 I..,

-33.91

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -52.17 -1617.21 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1.70 52.64 Observed Change 3.19 99.02 5-19

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components April 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage l.11 33.40 E. Seepa_ge 29.39 881.74 N. Seepage 0.00 0. 13 S. Seepage 3.75 112.65 Bottom Seepage 16.92 507.68 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 10.36 3 10.85 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.64 Blowdown 1.1 3 33.95 TD Pumping 7.46 223.80 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 70.43 2112.84 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N . Seepage 0.00 -0.06 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -18.57 -557.09 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-35.31 0.00 0.00

-1059.27 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -53.88 -1616.42 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 16.55 496.41 Observed Chan2e -7.85 -235.45 5-20

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components May 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1QA6)

W. Seepage l.44 44.50 E. Seepage 47.76 1480.44 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 4.38 135.75 rJj Bottom See page 28.64 887.78 u Precipitation a11d Runoff 6.92 214.50 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.29 1.16 0.00 8.93 35.93 ID Pump ing 14.81 459.13 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 105.39 3266.96 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -0.04 - 1. 19 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJj Bottom Seepage -51. 71 -1603.15 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-42.03 -1302.87

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -93.78 -2907.21 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 11.60 359.75 Observed Change 11.51 356.77 5-21

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components June 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage l.59 47.67 E. Seepa_ge 38.3 1 1149.35 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 4.26 127.95 Bottom Seepage 28.84 865.18 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 8.02 240.68 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.53 15.99 Blowdown 1.02 30.60 TD Pumping 16. 13 483.83 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 98.71 2961.25 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.0 l -0.27 N . Seepage -0.03 -1.02 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -43.32 -1299.71 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-46.24 0.00 0.00

-1387.09 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -89.60 -2688.10 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 9.11 273.16 Observed Chan2e 10.30 309.07 5-22

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components July 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1OA6)

W. Seepage l.95 60.52 E. Seepage 4.8 1 149. 10 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1.56 48.21 rJj Bottom See page 5.9 1 183.20 u Precipitation a11d Runoff 45.19 1400.79 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.54 1.13 0.00 16.59 35.00 ID Pump ing 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 61.08 1893.42 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 12.01 -372.46 N. Seepage -0.0 1 -0.43 S. Seepage -0.05 -1.58 rJj Bottom Seepage -14.48 -449.03 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-46.43 -1439.30

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -72.99 -2262.80 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -11.92 -369.38 Observed Cham!e 9.24 286.59 5-23

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components August 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage l.1 6 36.08 E. Seepa_ge 14.19 439.99 N. Seepage 0.00 0. 13 S. Seepage 2.56 79.39 Bottom Seepage 7.27 225.36 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 37.76 1170.55 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.53 16.36 Blowdown 1.04 32.25 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 64.52 2000.11 W. Seepage 0.00 -0.05 E. Seepage -2.37 -73.46 N . Seepage 0.00 -0.03 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -3.97 -123.00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-44.75 0.00 0.00

-1387.17 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -51.09 -1583.72 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 13.43 416.39 Observed Chan2e 20.17 625.23 5-24

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components September 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1OA6)

W. Seepage 0.83 24.75 E. Seepage 10.10 302.92 N. Seepage 0.00 0.02 S. Seepage 2.10 62.99 rJj Bottom See page 3.65 109.50 u Precipitation a11d Runoff 37.53 1125.82 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.55 0.98 0.00 16.55 29.36 ID Pump ing 5.74 172.08 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 61.47 1843.99 W. Seepage -0.02 -0.70 E. Seepage -2.05 -61.38 N. Seepage -0.0 1 -0.21 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJj Bottom Seepage -8.12 -243.67 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-44.87 -1346.23

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -55.07 -1652.19 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 6.39 191.81 Observed Chan2e -5.14 -154.17 5-25

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components October 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.75 23.15 E. Seepa_ge 6.22 192.95 N. Seepage 0.00 0. 11 S. Seepage 2.48 76.86 Bottom Seepage 6.96 215.70 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 52.98 1642.32 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.52 16.21 Blowdown 0.75 23.11 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 70.66 2190.41 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -9.88 -306.26 N . Seepage -0.0 1 -0.24 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -12.38 -383.88 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-32.60 0.00 0.00

-10 10.53 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -54.87 -1 700.91 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 15.79 489.50 Observed Chan2e 8.79 272.51 5-26

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components November 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1QA6)

W. Seepage 0.47 14.01 E. Seepage 14.55 436.40 N. Seepage 0.01 0.22 S. Seepage 2.26 67.69 rJj Bottom Seepage 6.76 202.89 u Precipitation a11d Runoff 1.24 37.18 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.47 0.50 0.00 14.14 14.98 ID Pump ing 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 26.25 787.53 W. Seepage 0.00 -0.0 1 E. Seepage - 1.08 -32.32 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.07 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJj Bottom Seepage -4.06 -121.76 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-34.24 -1027.32

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -39.38 -393.94 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -13.13 393.58 Observed Change -25.56 -766.91 5-27

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components December 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage l.03 3 1.82 E. Seepa_ge 21. 14 655.36 N. Seepage 0.01 0. 16 S. Seepage 2.52 78.16 Bottom Seepage 7.44 230.79 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 1.77 55.02 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.61 18.76 Blowdown 0.72 22.33 TD Pumping 9. 14 283.37 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 44.38 1375.75 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.22 -6.77 N . Seepage 0.00 -0.13 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -13.23 -410.20 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-30.89 0.00 0.00

-957.49 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -44.34 -1374.58 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 0.04 1.16 Observed Chan2e -11.66 -361.51 5-28

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components January 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1QA6)

W. Seepage l.66 51.39 E. Seepage 25.43 788.46 N. Seepage 0.00 0.02 S. Seepage 2.79 86.45 Bottom See page 10.43 323.45 rJj u Precipitation a11d Runoff 2.83 87.58 u

=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.59 0.89 0.00 18.37 27.50 ID Pump ing 15.39 476.96 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 60.01 1860.18 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.03 -0.97 N. Seepage -0.02 -0.54 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJj Bottom Seepage -29.36 -910.08 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-32.79 -1016.63

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -62.20 -1928.22 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2.19 -68.04 Observed Change -9.98 -309.33 5-29

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components February 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage l.24 36.07 E. Seepa_ge 12. 17 353.03 N. Seepage 0.01 0.23 S. Seepage 2.04 59.02 Bottom Seepage 6.98 202.37 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 35.50 1029.63 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.52 15.17 Blowdown 0.78 22.68 TD Pumping 1.50 43.56 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 60.75 1761.77 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 1.65 -47.80 N . Seepage 0.00 -0.03 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -9.41 -272.99 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-31 .84 0.00 0.00

-923.30 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -42.90 -1244.12 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 17.85 517.65 Observed Chan2e 12.36 358.44 5-30

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components March 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1QA6)

W. Seepage 0.9 1 28.1 8 E. Seepage 18.19 563.76 N. Seepage 0.02 0.67 S. Seepage 2.86 88.75 rJj Bottom Seepage 12.57 389.53 u Precipitation a11d Runoff 2.42 74.90 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.35 0.99 0.00 10.99 30.56 ID Pump ing 4.10 126.99 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 42.40 1314.32 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.54 -16.60 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.01 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJj Bottom Seepage -7.89 -244.56 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-33.1 8 -1028.59

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -41.61 -1289.77 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 0.79 24.56 Observed Change -11.24 -348.30 5-31

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components April 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 1.45 43.59 E. Seepa_ge 17.94 538.28 N. Seepage 0.01 0.25 S. Seepage 2.80 84.04 Bottom Seepage 14.20 426.09 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 50.85 1525.64 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.39 11.73 Blowdown 0.98 29.41 TD Pumping 9.76 292.86 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 98.40 2951.89 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.28 -8.4 1 N . Seepage 0.00 -0.05 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -13.20 -395.99 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-35.04 0.00 0.00

-1051.09 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -48.52 -1455.54 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 49.88 1496.35 Observed Chan2e 33.69 1010.73 5-32

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components May 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1QA6)

W. Seepage l.23 38.01 E. Seepage 0.55 17.06 N. Seepage 0.02 0.74 S. Seepage 0.93 28.94 rJj Bottom See page 11.40 353.36 u Precipitation a11d Runoff 41.18 1276.57 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.41 0.97 0.00 12.61 30.04 ID Pump ing 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 56.69 1757.33 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 14.73 -456.50 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.02 S. Seepage 0.00 -0.04 rJj Bottom Seepage -12.23 -379.01 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-33.39 -1035.06

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -60.34 -1870.64 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -3.66 -113.31 Observed Change -2.89 -89.62 5-33

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components June 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.66 19.79 E. Seepa_ge 3.72 111.63 N. Seepage 0.02 0.48 S. Seepage 1.65 49.57 Bottom Seepage 7.95 238.37 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 30.82 924.74 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.66 Blowdown 1.03 30.98 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 46.14 1384.22 W. Seepage 0.00 -0.06 E. Seepage - 10.75 -322.64 N . Seepage 0.00 -0.02 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -13.23 -397.04 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-33.57 0.00 0.00

-1007.10 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -57.56 -1 726.87 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -11.42 -342.65 Observed Chan2e -3.50 -105.04 5-34

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components July 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1OA6)

W. Seepage l.06 32.85 E. Seepage 0.02 0.63 N. Seepage 0.02 0.73 S. Seepage 1.05 32.46 Bottom Seepage 14.22 440.68 rJj u Precipitation a11d Runoff 29.66 919.46 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.34 1.07 0.00 10.51 33.07 ID Pump ing 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 47.43 1470.39 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 12.89 -399.63 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.05 -1.46 rJj Bottom Seepage -13.30 -412.33 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-39.84 -1235.10

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -66.08 -2048.51 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -18.65 -578.12 Observed Chan2e -7.97 -247.19 5-35

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components August 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage l.09 33.71 E. Seepa_ge 6.43 199.31 N. Seepage 0.02 0.64 S. Seepage 1.86 57.76 Bottom Seepage 12.81 396.99 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 40.10 1243.25 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.27 8.51

"""' Blowdown 1.10 34.11 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 63.69 1974.28 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -6.81 -211.21 N . Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.02 -0.67 00 Bottom Seepage -8.84 -273.91 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

'-- Evaporation -39.04 -12 10.28 0

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -54.71 -1696.07 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 8.97 278.21 Observed Chan2e 21.72 673.22 5-36

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components September 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1OA6)

W. Seepage 0.74 22.06 E. Seepage 2.79 83.61 N. Seepage 0.01 0.37 S. Seepage 1.69 50.83 Bottom See page 7.98 239.35 rJj u Precipitation a11d Runoff 30.04 901.3 1 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.73 0.96 0.00 22.00 28.93 ID Pump ing 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 44.95 1348.46 W. Seepage -0.0 1 -0.20 E. Seepage - 11.11 -333.35 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.03 -0.77 rJj Bottom Seepage -15.01 -450.33 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-38.60 -1157.98

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -64.75 -1942.63 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -19.81 -594.17 Observed Chan2e -5.35 -160.61 5-37

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components October 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.31 9.61 E. Seepa_ge 21.31 660.75 N. Seepage 0.02 0.63 S. Seepage 2.62 81.26 Bottom Seepage 15.41 477.83 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 14.29 442.88 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.89 27.69 Blowdown 0.94 29.23 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 55.80 1729.88 W. Seepage -0.02 -0.55 E. Seepage -4.96 -153.62 N . Seepage 0.00 -0.06 S. Seepage -0.01 -0.40 00 Bottom Seepage -7.18 -222.59 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-38.34 0.00 0.00

-1188.48 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -50.51 -1565.69 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 5.30 164.19 Observed Chan2e 7.58 235.01 5-38

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components November 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1QA6)

W. Seepage 0.43 12.93 E. Seepage 8.63 259.02 N. Seepage 0.02 0.71 S. Seepage 2.20 66.04 rJj Bottom Seepage 14.44 433.3 1 u Precipitation a11d Runoff 1.73 51.85 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.79 0.66 0.00 23.74 19.70 ID Pump ing 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 28.91 867.29 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2.76 -82.85 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJj Bottom Seepage -3.44 -103.32 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-28.02 -840.52

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -34.22 -1026.70 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -5.31 -159.41 Observed Change -3.88 -116.28 5-39

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components December 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.84 26.02 E. Seepa_ge 0.48 14.75 N. Seepage 0.02 0.57 S. Seepage 1.07 33.05 Bottom Seepage 8.05 249.53 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 1.87 57.85 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.50 15.62 Blowdown 0.75 23.17 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 13.57 420.55 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -8.92 -276.63 N . Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 -0.01 00 Bottom Seepage -7.14 -221.42 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-22.81 0.00 0.00

-707.02 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -38.87 -1205.08 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -25.31 -784.53 Observed Chan2e -28.66 -888.55 5-40

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components January 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1QA6)

W. Seepage 0.95 29.50 E. Seepage 7.94 246.29 N. Seepage 0.02 0.57 S. Seepage 2.38 73.65 rJj Bottom Seepage 9.83 304.76 u Precipitation a11d Runoff 1.06 32.80 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.52 0.87 0.00 16.25 26.94 ID Pump ing 2.40 74.25 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 25.97 805.01 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2.66 -82.60 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJj Bottom Seepage -2.09 -64.77 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-23.85 -739.42

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -28.61 -886.79 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2.64 -81.78 Observed Chan2e -10.70 -331.69 5-41

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components February 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage l.07 30.08 E. Seepa_ge 10.79 302.00 N. Seepage 0.01 0.35 S. Seepage 2.55 71.41 Bottom Seepage 9.59 268.52 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 5.45 152.71 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.34 9.50 Blowdown 0.82 22.83 TD Pumping 8.45 236.52 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 39.07 1093.92 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -3.25 -9 1.04 N . Seepage 0.00 -0.01 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -7.21 -201.87 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-22.90 0.00 0.00

-641. 16 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -33.36 -934.09 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 5.71 159.83 Observed Chan2e 1.10 30.86 5-42

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components March 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1QA6)

W. Seepage 0.88 27.34 E. Seepage 21.89 678.71 N. Seepage 0.01 0.18 S. Seepage 3.17 98.25 rJj Bottom Seepage 16.08 498.39 u Precipitation a11d Runoff 5.20 161.33 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.52 0.96 0.00 16.05 29.83 ID Pump ing 7.4 1 229.77 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 56.12 1739.86 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.1 3 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJj Bottom Seepage -11.23 -348.23 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-27.1 5 -841. 74

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -38.39 -1190.10 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 17.73 549.76 Observed Change 3.84 119.01 5-43

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components April 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 1.09 32.79 E. Seepage 25.76 772.76 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 2.60 78.12 Bottom Seepage 10.33 309.85 rJ1 u Precipitation and Runoff 23.05 691.63 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.7 1 2 1.24 Blowdown 0.96 28.69 ID Pumping 9.24 277.20 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 73.74 2212.27 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.14 -4.26 N. Seepage -0.02 -0.66 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -25.36 -760.88 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""....0 Evaporation -37.37 - 1121.21

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Slowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Inta ke Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -62.90 -1887.02 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 10.84 325.25 Observed Change 12.76 382.66 5-44

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components May 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1QA6)

W. Seepage l.02 31.48 E. Seepage 14.39 446.22 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1.87 57.86 Bottom See page 4.02 124.74 rJ1 u Precipitation a11d Runoff 49.66 1539.39 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.93 1.08 0.00 28.68 33.35 ID Pump ing 6.15 190.71 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 79.11 2452.43 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 1.90 -59.04 N. Seepage -0.0 1 -0.41 S. Seepage -0.02 -0.69 rJ1 Bottom Seepage -16.77 -519.88 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation lo,,.

-42.31 -131 1.46

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -61.02 -1891.48 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 18.10 560.95 Observed Change 22.68 703.18 5-45

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components June 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage l.07 32.22 E. Seepa_ge 7.03 210.99 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1.06 31.66 Bottom Seepage 2.24 67.19 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 18.55 556.60 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.56 16.94

"""' Blowdown 0.99 29.80 TD Pumping 0.68 20.52 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 32.20 965.92 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 15.80 -474.03 N . Seepage -0.02 -0.66 S. Seepage -0.63 -18.87 00 Bottom Seepage -23.48 -704.44 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

'-- Evaporation -45.1 7 -1355.04 0

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -85.10 -2553.03 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -52.90 -1587.12 Observed Chan2e -31.07 -931.98 5-46

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components July 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1OA6)

W. Seepage 0.92 28.55 E. Seepage 15.42 478.03 N. Seepage 0.00 0.02 S. Seepage 2.04 63.12 Bottom See page 7.38 228.73 rJj u Precipitation a11d Runoff 48.46 1502.27 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.55 1.02 0.00 16.95 31.72 ID Pump ing 0.70 21.78 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 76.49 2371.18 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -3.03 -94.08 N. Seepage -0.0 1 -0.33 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJj Bottom Seepage -10.00 -310.06 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-51.16 -1585.93

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -64.21 -1990.40 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 12.28 380.77 Observed Cham!e 19.61 607.86 5-47

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components August 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.78 24.32 E. Seepa_ge 22.08 684.41 N. Seepage 0.01 0. 16 S. Seepage 2.50 77.35 Bottom Seepage 8.36 259.08 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 32.70 1013.62 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.70 21.73 Blowdown 1.28 39.82 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 68.40 2120.49 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -3.02 -93.58 N . Seepage -0.0 1 -0.29 S. Seepage -0.03 -0.78 00 Bottom Seepage -7.51 -232.82 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-73.27 0.00 0.00

-2271.47 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -83.84 -2598.94 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -15.43 -478.45 Observed Chan2e -6.11 -189.45 5-48

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components September 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1OA6)

W. Seepage 0.27 7.98 E. Seepage 16.35 490.64 N. Seepage 0.01 0.43 S. Seepage 1.85 55.50 Bottom Seepage 12.61 378.33 rJj u Precipitation a11d Runoff 21.01 630.35 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.36 0.73 0.00 10.89 21.80 ID Pump ing 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 53.20 1595.93 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.28 -8.28 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJj Bottom Seepage -0.63 -19.03 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-34.46 -1033.67

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -35.37 -1060.98 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 17.83 534.95 Observed Cham!e 10.23 307.04 5-49

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components October 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.32 10.00 E. Seepa_ge 20.94 649.25 N. Seepage 0.03 1.02 S. Seepage 3.47 107.62 Bottom Seepage 27.04 838.34 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 7.44 230.56 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.55 16.96 Blowdown 1.1 3 34.94 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 60.93 1888.70 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.70 -2 1.55 N . Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -0.25 -7.81 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-53.02 0.00 0.00

-1643.73 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -53.97 -1673.08 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 6.96 215.62 Observed Chan2e -5.40 -1 67.52 5-50

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components November 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1QA6)

W. Seepage 0.30 8.93 E. Seepage 17.55 526.60 N. Seepage 0.03 0.82 S. Seepage 3.34 100.05 rJj Bottom Seepage 22.26 667.85 u Precipitation a11d Runoff 32.66 979.94 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.49 0.90 0.00 14.56 26.92 ID Pump ing 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 77.52 2325.68 W. Seepage 0.00 -0.03 E. Seepage -0.97 -29.03 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.52 -15.71 rJj Bottom Seepage -1.3 I -39.43 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-42.96 -1288.94

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -45.77 -1373.13 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 31.75 952.55 Observed Cham!e 13.98 419.29 5-51

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components December 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.38 11.64 E. Seepa_ge 5.56 172.29 N. Seepage 0.01 0.21 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage 4.28 132.60 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 4.49 139.14 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.50 15.50 Blowdown 0.90 27.77 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 16.10 499.14 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -4.05 -125.64 N . Seepage 0.00 -0.03 S. Seepage -3.28 -101.80 00 Bottom Seepage -6.13 -190.01 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-40.62 0.00 0.00

-1259.22 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -54.09 -1676.69 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -37.99 -1177.56 Observed Chan2e -21.47 -665.45 5-52

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components January 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1QA6)

W. Seepage 0.66 20.51 E. Seepage 11.24 348.43 N. Seepage 0.02 0.48 S. Seepage 1.55 48.07 rJj Bottom See page 9.95 308.55 u Precipitation a11d Runoff 8.57 265.64 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.47 0.84 0.00 14.68 25.90 ID Pump ing 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 33.30 1032.26 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 1.39 -43.04 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.59 -18.28 rJj Bottom Seepage -2.37 -73.59 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation -1174.16 I..,

-37.88

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -42.23 -1309.07 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -8.93 -276.81 Observed Chan2e -6.40 -198.28 5-53

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components January 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1QA6)

W. Seepage 0.66 20.51 E. Seepage 11.24 348.43 N. Seepage 0.02 0.48 S. Seepage 1.55 48.07 rJj Bottom See page 9.95 308.55 u Precipitation a11d Runoff 8.57 265.64 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.47 0.84 0.00 14.68 25.90 ID Pump ing 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 33.30 1032.26 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 1.39 -43.04 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.59 -18.28 rJj Bottom Seepage -2.37 -73.59 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation -1174.16 I..,

-37.88

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -42.23 -1309.07 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -8.93 -276.81 Observed Chan2e -6.40 -198.28 5-54

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components February 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.79 22.17 E. Seepa_ge 15.37 430.48 N. Seepage 0.02 0.57 S. Seepage 3.49 97.74 Bottom Seepage 14.67 410.76 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 10.41 291.45 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.48 13.58 Blowdown 0.81 22.76 TD Pumping 1.35 37.89 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 47.41 1327.40 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.41 -1 1.39 N . Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -0.94 -26.25 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-51.37 0.00 0.00

-1438.25 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -52.71 -1475.89 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -5.30 -148.49 Observed Chan2e -7.95 -222.68 5-55

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components March 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1QA6)

W. Seepage 0.79 24.35 E. Seepage 16.02 496.70 N. Seepage 0.02 0.71 S. Seepage 3.19 98.98 rJj Bottom Seepage 14.92 462.52 u Precipitation a11d Runoff 6.87 212.90 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.39 1.01 0.00 12.07 31.25 ID Pump ing 1.93 59.76 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 45.14 1399.24 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.0 l -0.37 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJj Bottom Seepage -1.40 -43.38 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-49.14 -1523.26

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -50.55 -1567.01 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -5.41 -167.78 Observed Chan2e -7.86 -243.70 5-56

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components April 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.75 22.64 E. Seepa_ge 27.81 834.36 N. Seepage 0.02 0.67 S. Seepage 3.92 117.48 Bottom Seepage 22.82 684.73 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 2.40 71.92 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 s

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.33 10.01 Blowdown 1.21 36.35 TD Pumping 3.19 95.76 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 62.46 1873.92 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N . Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -5.24 -157.10 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q 0

=

Evaporation Un it 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-50.28 0.00 0.00

-1508.52 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -55.52 -1665.62 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 6.94 208.31 Observed Chan2e 1.08 32.37 5-57

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components May 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1QA6)

W. Seepage 0.76 23.63 E. Seepage 41.30 1280.37 N. Seepage 0.01 0.18 S. Seepage 4.24 131.29 rJj Bottom Seepage 28.85 894.27 u Precipitation a11d Runoff 7.42 229.90 u

-=

....= Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.00 0.46 1.10 0.00 14.40 34.21 ID Pump ing 7.00 217.08 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant lntake Equal to Outflow Total In: 91.14 2825.32 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.06 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJj Bottom Seepage -12.07 -374.12 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

- Evaporation I..,

-67.69 -2098.40

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -79.76 -2472.58 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 11.38 352.75 Observed Change 3.55 110.04 5-58

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components September 2010 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 1.53 45.92 E. Seepage 2500.92 75027.64 N. Seepage 3.26 97.90 S. Seepage 104.83 3144.88 Bottom Seepage 1942 ..1 2 58263.66 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

.s

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 114.36 3430.81 TD Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 4667.03 140010.82 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2444.34 -73330.24 N. Seepage - 1.00 -30.03 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -3732.66 -111 979.85 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= Evaporation 0.00 0.00 i,,,.

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -6178.00 -185340.12 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -1510.98 -45329.30 Observed Chan2e 1464.29 43928.58 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

ID = Interceptor Ditch.

lb= Pound.

5-59

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components October 2010 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 0.49 15.06 E. Seepage 149.53 4635.38 N. Seepage 1.03 32.01 S. Seepage 7.25 224.80 Bottom Seepage 1882.00 58341.96 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 87.08 2699.59 TD Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 2127.38 65948.81 W. Seepage - 103.73 -32 15.68 E. Seepage -9444.01 -292764.1 8 N. Seepage -2.35 -72.84 S. Seepage -14.68 -455.19 00 Bottom Seepage -9054.26 -280682.01 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -18619.03 -577189.91 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -16491.65 -511241.10 Observed Change -13790.42 -427502.87 5-60

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components November 2010 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 0.72 21.47 E. Seepage 1143.70 34310.91 N. Seepage 1.02 30.47 S. Seepage 63.96 1918.87 Bottom Seepage 538.98 16169.37 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Un it 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 58.36 0.00 0.00 1750.73 TD Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 1806.73 54201.83 W. Seepage -646.37 - l 9391.23 E. Seepage -2969.21 -89076.29 N. Seepage -1.36 -40. 70 S. Seepage -8.71 -261.42 00 Bottom Seepage -5590.81 -167724.26 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -9216.46 -276493.90 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -7409.74 -222292.08 Observed Change -2876.16 -86284.89 5-61

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components December 2010 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 3.04 94.39 E. Seepage 4725.01 146475.2 1 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 302.77 9385.88 Bottom Seepage 674.69 209 15.5 1 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 84.1 5 2608.67 TD Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 5789.67 179479.65 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 180. 6 1 -5598.89 N. Seepage -4.76 - 147.53 S. Seepage -1.76 -54.64 00 Bottom Seepage -5505.29 -1 70663.9 1 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5692.42 -176464.98 Modeled Change in C CS Storage: 97.25 3014.68 Observed Change -1555.92 -48233.42 5-62

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components January 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 6.7 1 207.92 E. Seepage 2694.88 83541.26 N. Seepage 0.02 0.72 S. Seepage 260.16 8065.07 Bottom Seepage 805.49 24970.29 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Un it 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 95.74 0.00 0.00 2967.93 TD Pumped Water 185.05 5736.69 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 4048.06 125489.88 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1635.00 -50684.88 N. Seepage -5.83 - 180.58 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -7338.77 -227501.97 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -8979.59 -278367.43 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -4931.53 -152877.56 Observed Change -910.35 -28220.95 5-63

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components February 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 4.28 119.79 E. Seepage 6730.29 188448.01 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 469.04 13133.08 Bottom Seepage 2790.13 78 123.66 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 81.20 2273.71 TD Pumped Water 73.70 2063.56 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 10148.64 284161.82 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 169.22 -4738.19 N. Seepage -9.05 -253.36 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -8852.81 -247878.63 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -9031.08 -252870.18 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1117.56 31291.64 Observed Chan2e 1264.60 35408.76 5-64

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components March 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 7.25 224.79 E. Seepage 6208.79 192472.59 N. Seepage 0.57 17.59 S. Seepage 624.64 19363.87 Bottom Seepage 31 13.68 96524.02 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Un it 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 77.46 0.00 0.00 2401.17 TD Pumped Water 774.24 24001.46 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 10806.63 335005.48 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 148.18 -4593.68 N. Seepage -2.1 5 -66.72 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -8266.32 -256256.01 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -8416.66 -260916.41 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 2389.97 74089.06 Observed Change 2504.94 77653.08 5-65

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components April 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 7.97 239.04 E. Seepage 9397.48 28 1924.52 N. Seepage 0.96 28.87 S. Seepage 98 1.96 29458.82 Bottom Seepage 4763.76 1429 12.67 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 132.20 3966.02 TD Pumped Water 75 1.05 2253 1.49 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 16035.38 481061.43 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N . Seepage -0.90 -27.12 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -7890.82 -236724.70 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -7891.73 -236751.82 Modeled Change in C CS Storage: 8143.65 244309.61 Observed Change -4057.292603 -121718.78 5-66

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components May 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 26.21 8 12.61 E. Seepage 15905.29 493063.91 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1444.80 44788.85 Bottom Seepage 8038.52 249194.22 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Un it 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 135.40 0.00 0.00 4197.49 TD Pumped Water 3405.55 10557 l.94 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 28955.78 897629.03 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage - 18.40 -570.36 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -24742.36 -767013.22 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -24760.76 -767583.58 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 4195.01 130045.45 Observed Change 6228.37 193079.32 5-67

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components June 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 39.65 11 89.35 E. Seepage 13544.39 40633 1.65 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1490.22 44706.45 Bottom Seepage 8 163.9 1 2449 17.2 1 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 119.17 3575.20 TD Pumped Water 4597.36 137920.85 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 27954.69 838640.72 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -4.59 - 137.70 N. Seepage - 16.95 -508.48 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -21348.75 -640462.48 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -21370.29 -641108.66 Modeled Change in C CS Storage: 6584.40 197532.06 Observed Chan2e 8658..55 259756.64 5-68

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components July 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 22.97 712.22 E. Seepage 1630.60 50548.47 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 475.00 14724.90 Bottom Seepage 1945.63 60314.59 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Un it 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 131.92 0.00 0.00 4089.50 TD Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 4206.12 130389.67 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -5721.60 -177369.67 N. Seepage -6.85 -2 12.23 S. Seepage -23.87 -739.95 00 Bottom Seepage -8531.61 -264479.96 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -14283.93 -442801.82 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -10077.81 -312412.15 Observed Change 3237.34 100357.40 5-69

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components August 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 7.40 229.41 E. Seepage 5237.66 162367.43 N. Seepage 0.98 30.43 S. Seepage 370.58 11488.05 Bottom Seepage 3 135. 13 97 189. 15 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 121.55 3768. 14 TD Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 8873.31 275072.61 W. Seepage -65.8 1 -2040.1 2 E. Seepage -56.73 - 1758.59 N. Seepage -0.60 -18.59 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -1 578.95 -48947.5 1 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1702.09 -52764.81 Modeled Change in C CS Storage: 7171.22 222307.79 Observed Chan2e 4028.64 124887.94 5-70

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components September 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.83 84.91 E. Seepage 2797.96 83938.71 N. Seepage 0.12 3.49 S. Seepage 270.92 8127.56 Bottom Seepage 1137.2 1 34116.32 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 114.36 0.00 0.00 3430.81 TD Pumped Water 406.90 12207.06 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 4730.30 141908.85 W. Seepage -785. 14 -23554.07 E. Seepage -805.76 -24 172.7 1 N. Seepage -3.46 - 103.68 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -3949.78 -118493.44 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5544.13 -166323.91 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -813.84 -24415.05 Observed Change -3663.57 -109906.97 5-71

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components October 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 1.49 46.05 E. Seepage 3 112.09 96474.66 N. Seepage 0.39 12.19 S. Seepage 162.49 5037.32 Bottom Seepage 5213.92 161631.44 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 87.08 2699.59 TD Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 8577.46 265901.26 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 1100.79 -341 24.58 N. Seepage -3.96 -122.70 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -52.38 -1623.93 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1157.14 -35871.22 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 7420.32 230030.04 Observed Change -3871.33 -120011.08 5-72

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components November 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.52 45.49 E. Seepage 2565.58 76967.38 N. Seepage 1.24 37.3 1 S. Seepage 307.94 9238. 14 Bottom Seepage 25 10.60 75318.05 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Un it 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 58.36 0.00 0.00 1750.73 TD Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5445.24 163357.10 W. Seepage -2.99 -89.68 E. Seepage -439.02 -13170.52 N. Seepage -1.38 -41.50 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -1521.48 -45644.54 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1964.87 -58946.24 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3480.36 104410.86 Observed Change -3673.05 -110191.36 5-73

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components December 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 2.94 9 1.04 E. Seepage 3995. 18 123850.50 N. Seepage 1.01 31.46 S. Seepage 51 9.26 16096.99 Bottom Seepage 2237. 19 69352.75 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 84.1 5 2608.67 TD Pumped Water 43 1. 13 13365.08 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 7270.85 225396.49 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 110.41 -3422.62 N. Seepage -2.01 -62.16 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -6366.94 -1 97375. 12 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -6479.35 -200859.90 Modeled Change in C CS Storage: 791.50 24536.58 Observed Change -3828.22 -118674.85 5-74

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components January 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 6.81 211. 17 E. Seepage 6137.16 190252.10 N. Seepage 0.16 4.83 S. Seepage 611.10 18944.11 Bottom Seepage 3217.71 99748.94 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 103.64 0.00 0.00 3212.87 ID Pumped Water 2219.37 68800.40 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 12295.95 381174.41 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 15.97 -495.22 N. Seepage -8.30 -257.3 l S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -14015.44 -434478.71 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -14039.72 -435231.24 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -1743.77 -54056.83 Observed Change -2625.35 -81385.79 5-75

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components February 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 5.52 160.1 5 E. Seepage 301 9.88 87576.55 N. Seepage 1.78 51.48 S. Seepage 465.01 13485.18 Bottom Seepage 3938. 11 11 4205.18 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 9 1.3 7 2649.68 TD Pumped Water 189.46 5494.29 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 7711.12 223622.50 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -792.88 -22993.52 N. Seepage -0.50 -1 4.6 1 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -5050.78 -146472.57 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5844.16 -169480.70 Modeled Change in C CS Storage: 1866.96 54141.81 Observed Chan2e 3362.46 97511.42 5-76

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components March 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 4.03 124.88 E. Seepage 5251.0 1 162781.35 N. Seepage 4.94 153.03 S. Seepage 666.34 20656.69 Bottom Seepage 4261.43 132104.46 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 115.1 7 0.00 0.00 3570.40 ID Pumped Water 187.62 5816. 11 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 10490.55 325206.92 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -271 .03 -8402.01 N. Seepage -0.2 1 -6.62 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -3822.04 -118483.22 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -4093.29 -126891.84 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 6397.26 198315.08 Observed Change -500.48 -15514.87 5-77

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components April 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 14.59 437.77 E. Seepage 5648.88 169466.3 1 N. Seepage 1.97 59.07 S. Seepage 760.81 22824.26 Bottom Seepage 4206.65 1261 99.62 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 114.52 3435.57 TD Pumped Water 1035.51 3 1065.19 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 11782.93 353487.78 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 135.08 -4052.44 N. Seepage -0.98 -29.32 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -7211.96 -216358.94 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -7348.02 -220440.70 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 4434.90 133047.07 Observed Change 4132..59 123977.58 5-78

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components May 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 8.43 261.37 E. Seepage 167.09 5179.69 N. Seepage 5.55 172.14 S. Seepage 120.42 3732.88 Bottom Seepage 3176.41 98468.64 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 113.23 0.00 0.00 3510.03 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3591.12 111324.74 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -6338.52 -196494.19 N. Seepage -0.30 -9.32 S. Seepage -0.62 -19.08 00 Bottom Seepage -5139.67 -159329.63 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -11479.10 -355852.21 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -7887.98 -244527.47 Observed Change -4664.11 -144587.53 5-79

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components June 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 2.04 6 1.29 E. Seepage 816.37 24491.01 N. Seepage 3.75 ll 2.60 S. Seepage 233.05 699 1.63 Bottom Seepage 2430.80 72924.06 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 120.64 3619.20 TD Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 3606.66 108199.80 W. Seepage -37.06 - 1111.94 E. Seepage -4366.87 - 13 1006.04 N. Seepage -0.27 -8.24 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -5327.02 -1 59810.66 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -9731.23 -291936.88 Modeled Change in C CS Storage: -6124.57 -183737.08 Observed Change -2740.38 -82211.41 5-80

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components July 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.64 81.86 E. Seepage 5.03 155.99 N. Seepage 5.49 170.22 S. Seepage 67.33 2087.08 Bottom Seepage 3725.02 115475.55 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 124.64 0.00 0.00 3863.85 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3930.15 121834.54 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -5218.3 1 -161767.61 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage - 19.]4 -593.20 00 Bottom Seepage -5299.15 -164273.54 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -10536.59 -326634.36 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -6606.45 -204799.82 Observed Change -2497.19 -77412.85 5-81

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components August 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 2.56 79.25 E. Seepage 1461.90 453 19.00 N. Seepage 4.79 148.53 S. Seepage 121.94 3779.99 Bottom Seepage 33 12.48 102686.78 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 128.56 3985.44 TD Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 5032.23 155998.99 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2580.57 -79997.52 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -8.82 -273.56 00 Bottom Seepage -3380.97 -1 04809.92 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5970.36 -185081.01 Modeled Change in C CS Storage: -938.13 -29082.02 Observed Chan2e 1642.83 50927.78 5-82

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components September 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.47 44.10 E. Seepage 623.77 18713. 19 N. Seepage 2.87 85.98 S. Seepage 27.07 812.14 Bottom Seepage 1848.79 55463.79 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 112.67 0.00 0.00 3380.18 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 2616.65 78499.38 W. Seepage -77.47 -2324.18 E. Seepage -4199.05 -125971.36 N. Seepage -0.02 -0.64 S. Seepage -9.90 -297.00 00 Bottom Seepage -5567 .1 1 -167013.34 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -9853.55 -295606.52 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -7236.90 -217107.14 Observed Change -2600.46 -78013.94 5-83

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components October 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 0.86 26.69 E. Seepage 3782.89 117269.47 N. Seepage 3.25 100.85 S. Seepage 453.5 1 14058.84 Bottom Seepage 3995.58 123863.13 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 110.18 3415.60 TD Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 8346.28 258734.58 W. Seepage - 187.80 -582 1.75 E. Seepage - 1844.55 -57 18 1.05 N. Seepage - 1.16 -35.89 S. Seepage -4.83 - 149.83 00 Bottom Seepage -2616.30 -8 1I 05.23 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -4654.64 -144293.77 Modeled Change in C CS Storage: 3691.64 114440.81 Observed Chan2e 6379.02 197749.67 5-84

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components November 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3.11 93.25 E. Seepage 1982.22 59466.75 N. Seepage 4.16 124.84 S. Seepage 507.20 15215.92 Bottom Seepage 3748.30 112448.92 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 76.71 0.00 0.00 2301.26 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 6321.70 189650.93 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 1089.28 -32678.52 N . Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -1345.04 -40351.31 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -2434.33 -73029.83 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3887.37 116621.10 Observed Change 2368.82 71064.75 5-85

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components December 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 7. 16 222.04 E. Seepage 120.97 3750.04 N. Seepage 4.21 130.51 S. Seepage 21 3.94 6632.26 Bottom Seepage 2 162. 13 67026. 11 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 87.33 2707.18 TD Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 2595.75 80468.14 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -3727.6 1 - 115556.04 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0. 17 -5.27 00 Bottom Seepage -2787.01 -86397.17 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -6514.79 -201958.48 Modeled Change in C CS Storage: -3919.04 -121490.34 Observed Change -7753.08 -240345.33 5-86

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components January 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 7.13 221.15 E. Seepage 2137.92 66275.51 N. Seepage 4.36 135.08 S. Seepage 509.08 15781.57 Bottom Seepage 2831.19 87766.98 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 101.55 0.00 0.00 3148.06 ID Pumped Water 60.40 1872.54 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5651.64 175200.90 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 11 94.63 -37033.67 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -886.76 -27489.51 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -2081.39 -64523.18 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3570.25 110677.72 Observed Change 525.54 16291.69 5-87

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components February 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 9.73 272.46 E. Seepage 2944.36 82442.07 N. Seepage 2.94 82.3 1 S. Seepage 662.7 1 18555.81 Bottom Seepage 2727. 16 76360.57 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 95.25 2667.00 TD Pumped Water 324. 14 9075.87 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 6766.29 189456.09 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 1539.9 1 -43 117.37 N. Seepage -0.1 4 -3.95 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -3737.34 -1 04645.54 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5277.39 -147766.86 Modeled Change in C CS Storage: 1488.90 41689.23 Observed Chan2e 1710.98 47907.57 5-88

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components March 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 10.9'2 338.65 E. Seepage 6720.90 208347.99 N. Seepage 1.42 44.00 S. Seepage 907.96 28146.66 Bottom Seepage 2775.04 86026.14 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 112.44 0.00 0.00 3485.58 ID Pumped Water 347.2 1 10763.51 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 10875.89 337152.53 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -2.06 -63.94 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -4630.17 -143535.30 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -4632.23 -143599.24 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 6243.65 193553.29 Observed Change 4065.17 126020.42 5-89

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components April 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 13.29 398.66 E. Seepage 7583.24 227497.21 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 621.43 18642.97 Bottom Seepage 301 6.09 90482.64 00 u Precipitatio n and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

.s

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Un it 5 Blowdown 111. 74 3352.32 TD Pumped Water 478.94 14368.08 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 11824.73 354741.89 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -67.89 -2036.72 N. Seepage -10.84 -325.20 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -1 2414.68 -372440. 38 u Precipitatio n and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= Evaporation

~

0.00 0.00

= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -12493.41 -374802.29 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -668.68 -20060.41 Observed Change 4774.59 143237.63 5-90

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components May 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 6.46 200.39 E. Seepage 4085.2 1 126641.42 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 458.41 14210.60 Bottom Seepage 1178.02 36518.75 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 125.70 0.00 0.00 3896.83 ID Pumped Water 287.40 8909.54 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 6141.21 190377.53 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -829. 74 -2572 1.93 N. Seepage -6.57 -203.76 S. Seepage -9.41 -291.63 00 Bottom Seepage -8045.67 -249415.76 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -8891.39 -275633.07 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2750.18 -85255.55 Observed Change 1237.57 38364.62 5-91

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components June 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 4. 14 124.1 7 E. Seepage 2 150.78 64523.46 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 192.72 5781.63 Bottom Seepage 659.63 19788.97 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 116.04 348 1.32 TD Pumped Water 15. 15 454.46 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 3138.47 94154.00 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -6840.75 -205222.53 N. Seepage - 10.10 -303.10 S. Seepage -272.05 -8161.40 00 Bottom Seepage -10583.21 -317496.26 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -17706.11 -531183.29 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -14567.64 -437029.29 Observed Change -4607.17 -138215.25 5-92

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components July 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.99 92.71 E. Seepage 4378.23 135725.17 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 385.67 11955.68 Bottom Seepage 2207.77 68440.94 00 u Prec ipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 119.57 0.00 0.00 3706.56 ID Pumped Water 16.53 5 12.41 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 7110.76 220433.48 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 1372.52 -42548.06 N . Seepage -6. 19 -19 1.85 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -4865.49 -150830.09 u Precipitation and R unoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -6244.19 -193570.00 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 866.56 26863.49 Observed Change 4833.38 149834.84 5-93

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components August 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage l.89 58.46 E. Seepage 4344. 14 134668.40 N. Seepage 0.40 12.37 S. Seepage 323.17 10018.35 Bottom Seepage 1637.07 50749. 12 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 108.99 3378.64 TD Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 6415.66 198885.33 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 1329.80 -41 223.88 N. Seepage -6.00 - 186.11 S. Seepage -11.98 -371.29 00 Bottom Seepage -3824.23 -11 855 1.1 9 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5172.02 -160332.47 Modeled Change in C CS Storage: 1243.64 38552.86 Observed Chan2e 3101..52 96147.08 5-94

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components September 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.44 43.23 E. Seepage 5544.96 166348.73 N. Seepage 3.92 117.62 S. Seepage 550.99 16529.68 Bottom Seepage 4740.46 142213.90 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 127.36 0.00 0.00 3820.73 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 10969.13 329073.89 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 149.50 -4484.98 N. Seepage -0. 19 -5.75 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -375.37 -11261.16 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -525.06 -15751.89 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 10444.07 313321.99 Observed Change 5122.20 153666.00 5-95

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components October 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage l.1 1 34.27 E. Seepage 4338. 18 134483.49 N. Seepage 7.80 24 1.71 S. Seepage 638.39 19790.19 Bottom Seepage 77 19. 11 239292.29 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 13 1.68 4082. 17 TD Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 12836.26 397924.13 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -35 1.11 - I0884.34 N . Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -1 27.96 -3966.81 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -479.07 -14851.15 Modeled Change in C CS Storage: 12357.19 383072.99 Observed Chan2e 5172.10 160335.08 5-96

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components November 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.54 46.14 E. Seepage 3784.29 113528.78 N. Seepage 6.40 192.02 S. Seepage 788.22 23646.53 Bottom Seepage 4634.87 139046.00 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 104.86 0.00 0.00 3145.67 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 9320.17 279605.14 W. Seepage -24.64 -739.25 E. Seepage -522.89 - 15686.55 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -280.41 -8412.37 00 Bottom Seepage -1054.80 -31643.98 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1882.74 -56482.15 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 7437.43 223122.99 Observed Change 3117.41 93522.19 5-97

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components December 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage l.72 53.40 E. Seepage 1116.93 34624.86 N. Seepage 1.41 43.82 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 Bottom Seepage 1208.70 37469.70 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 104.66 3244.56 TD Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 2433.43 75436.35 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2 138.7 1 -66299.9 1 N. Seepage -0.72 -22.30 S. Seepage - 1832.93 -56820.81 00 Bottom Seepage -3278.69 -1 0 1639.42 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -7251.05 -224782.44 Modeled Change in C CS Storage: -4817.62 -149346.09 Observed Change -6529.12 -202402.80 5-98

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components January 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.72 84.28 E. Seepage 2474.28 76702.81 N. Seepage 3.76 116.46 S. Seepage 197.48 6121.95 Bottom Seepage 2808.39 87059.94 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 97.62 0.00 0.00 3026.14 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5584.24 173111.57 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -733.83 -22748.81 N . Seepage -0.1 l -3.52 S. Seepage -322.82 -10007.33 00 Bottom Seepage -1256.16 -38940.86 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -2312.92 -71700.52 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3271.32 101411.05 Observed Change -445.87 -13822.03 5-99

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components February 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 3.45 96.5 1 E. Seepage 4009.26 112259. 16 N. Seepage 4.91 137.49 S. Seepage 305.60 8556.90 Bottom Seepage 41 37.32 11 5844.97 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 94.98 2659.47 TD Pumped Water 26.82 750.88 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 8582.34 240305.39 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2 I 6.72 -6068.14 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -527.63 -14773.52 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""'Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -744.34 -20841.66 Modeled Change in C CS Storage: 7837.99 219463.73 Observed Chan2e 625.60 17516.93 5-100

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components March 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3.87 120.12 E. Seepage 4519.76 14011 2.41 N. Seepage 5.56 172.22 S. Seepage 282.87 8768.83 Bottom Seepage 4212.27 130580.33 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 117.78 0.00 0.00 365 1.1 8 ID Pumped Water 44.9*0 1391.85 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 9187.00 284796.94 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -7. 14 -22 1.35 N. Seepage -0.08 -2.45 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -949.86 -29445.56 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -957.08 -29669.35 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 8229.92 255127.58 Observed Change 3657.01 113367.46 5-101

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components April 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 6.46 193.90 E. Seepage 9 135.3 1 274059. 17 N. Seepage 5.79 173.62 S. Seepage 674.16 20224.71 Bottom Seepage 6679.44 200383.16 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 14 1.58 4247.38 TD Pumped Water 100.96 3028.93 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to O utflow Total In: 16743.70 502310.88 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -3970.68 -11 9120.46 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -3970.68 -119120.46 Modeled Change in C CS Storage: 12773.01 383190.43 Observed Chan2e 5846.87 175406.11 5-102

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components May 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 19.46 603.27 E. Seepage 14107.29 437325.92 N. Seepage 1.45 44.98 S. Seepage 1396.99 43306.83 Bottom Seepage 8690.90 269417.84 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-= 0

.... Unit Evaporation 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 128.95 0.00 0.00 3997.50 ID Pumped Water 392.49 12167.09 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 24737.53 766863.42 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -1.50 -46.56 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -9219.39 -285801.22 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"'....0"' Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -9220.90 -285847.79 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 15516.63 481015.64 Observed Change 5312.43 164685.21 5-103

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 L31-E seepage Biscayne Bay Seepage (A)

I I I I Evaporation L31-E seepage Seepage (B)

Figure 5.3-1. Flow (A) into and (B) out of the CCS, Shown in Cross-Section.

5-116

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August .2014 Section 5 60 ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Modeled Flow Observed Flow 40 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --+-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

o 20 - -------------------- -- ------ ~ - -- -----

C,

-~

-40 +----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --+-- - - - - - - - -

-60 ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Figure 5.3-2. Modeled versus Measured Net Monthly Flows of Water for the CCS over the 45-Month Period.

5-117

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project-August .2014 Section 5 20000 ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Modeled Flow 15000 +------------------------ =--=O=b-=-se=rv-'-e""'d"--'-'

Fl-=-

ow

'-'-----+-

10000

> n,

~ 5000 +------

0 0

.-4 X

..c 3:

0 U::: -5000 +-...it -.......-

n, Vl

-10000

-15000

-20000 ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Figure 5.3-3. Modeled versus Measured Net Monthly Flows of Salt Mass for the CCS over the 45-Month Period 5-118

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August .2014 Section 5 2.5

- Simulated Water Elevations 2

• Measured Water Elevations 1.5 00 00 0

~ 1 z

~

C: 0.5 0

QJ 0 w

QJ

~ -0.5 Vl u

u

-1

-1.5

-2 Figure 5.3-4. Modeled versus Measured Water Elevations (NAVO 88) in the CCS over the 45-Month Period; Used to Validate the Conceptual Model and Calibrate the Water Balance Model to Temporal Trends in Water Elevation.

5-119

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - August .2014 Section 5 100

- Simulated Concentration (g/L) 90

• Measured Concentration (g/L) 80

-:s

~ 70

~

iii VI 60

~

u so 40 30 ,......,-,-r m-r ~ r-,-r---r ~ ~ i--r-r-r ~ ~ r-,-y--""T Figure 5.3-5. Modeled versus Measured Salinity in the CCS over the 45-Month Period; Used to Validate the Conceptual Model and Calibrate the Water Balance Model to Temporal Trends in Salinity.

5-120

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 May 2015 and encompasses the Post-Uprate period. This period of time includes the increases in both CCS salinity and temperature (that were observed to begin in fall 2013), the drop in salinity due to the addition of L-31 E water in the fall of 2014, and the subsequent rebound in salinity in the CCS.

The conceptual model and associated calculations are predominantly unchanged since last presented in the 2012 Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report. As such, only a brief summary of the model is provided below. In addition, model results and corresponding conclusions regarding the operation of the CCS, based on the current calibrated water and salt balance model, are provided herein. The Excel spreadsheet that comprises the model is provided in a separate data file.

5.3.1 Model Summary As Figure 5 .3-1 depicts, the water balance of the control volume (i.e., the CCS) is comprised of seepage (lateral through the sides and vertical through the bottom), blowdown (additional water pumped from other units to the CCS), precipitation (including nmoff from earth berms between canals), and evaporation. Other than evaporation and precipitation, these are the same mechanisms by which salt flows into and out of the CCS. The means by which water and/or salt is transferred (e.g., seepage, evaporation) is calculated using various equations provided in the 2012 Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report. Calculations were performed for a 57-month period from September 2010 through May 2015. Average flows of water and sa lt into and out of the control volume were calculated for each day of this period using hydro logic, water quality, and meteorological data measured within, beneath, and adjacent to the CCS. The average daily flows were summed to estimate the amount of water and salt that enters or exits the control volume during each month and the entire 57-month period. These calcu lations demonstrate and validate the conceptual model of the CCS and, in so doing, illustrate the hydrologic mechanisms by which the CCS functions.

6 Calcu lated water flows are reported in I0 gallons per day (mgd). The mass flux into or out of the control volume is calculated by multiplying the volumetric flow by the salinity of the body of water from which the water is flowing. Salinity from the same groundwater and surface water monitoring stations used in the 2012 Comprehensive Pre Uprate Report (FPL 2012a) were used in the calculations and reported in the practical salinity scale (PSS-78), which is equivalent to grams per liter (g/L). Calculated mass fluxes are reported in thousands of pounds per day (lb x 1,000/day).

Over time, the gain/loss of water and salt mass within the control volume results in a change in the control volume's water and salt mass storage. Increased water storage, for instance, occurs when more water enters the control volume than exits. Storage, then, can be estimated by summing all of the components of the water (and salt) balance. When the net flow is positive (into the control volume) during a specified period of time, the storage of control volume increases. Conversely, a net negative (out of the control volume) flow implies a decrease in storage during a specified time period.

5-6

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Another manner in which a change in storage can be estimated relies on direct measurements of water elevations and salinities within the control volume. A change in water elevation within the control volume can be calculated as a difference between water elevations at the beginning and end of a specified time period. The product of this change in water elevations and the smface area of the control volume provides an estimate of the change in the volume of water contained in the control volume during that period of time. Estimates of daily storage changes derived from this method are used to further calibrate the water and salt balance model to ensure an accurate simulation of temporal trends in CCS water elevation and salinity.

5.3.2 Model Calibration The individual components of the water and salt balance were simulated daily and summed for each month from September 2010 through May 2015, as well as for the collective 57-month period. The individual components of flow are summed in order to calculate a simulated change in volume for each month and for the 57-month period. These simulated changes in storage were compared with observed changes in CCS water and salt storage for each month and the entire calibration period. Errors between the simulated and observed monthly storage changes were minimized by adjusting key variables associated with the flow balance model; this process is called calibration. The calibration process ensures that the model can accurately reflect the average changes in CCS storage over the 57-month time frame while also effectively capturing day-to-day changes in CCS water and mass storage. Calibration of the water and salt balance mode l was achieved by adjusting hydraulic conductivities of the aquifer materials adjacent to and beneath the CCS that factor into the calculation of seepage to/from groundwater and Biscayne Bay. Additional adjustable parameters include the coefficients in the wind function (FPL 2012a), the amount of runoff that enters the control volume as a percentage of precipitation, the amount of Unit 5 cooling tower water that is lost to evaporation before entering the CCS, and the salinity of the Unit 5 blowdown as a percentage of seawater. The calibrated model parameter values are provided in Table 5.3-1.

The horizontal hydrau lic conductivities laterally adjacent to the control volume were calibrated to range between 500 ft/day and 900 ft/day. The calibrated vertical conductivities beneath the control volume ranged from 0.1 ft/day to 4 ft/day. The horizontal hydraulic conductivities of the side faces of the CCS are relatively high due the assumed incising of highly permeable material that underlies the muck and Miami limestone by deeper canals. For the same reason, the northern discharge canals and return canals were calibrated to relatively high vertical hydraulic conductivities (4 ft/day and 3.8 ft/day, respectively). Lower vertical hydraulic conductivities were calibrated for the middle and southern portions of the discharge canals, as well as the southern portion of the return canals (0.1 ft/day).

A notable deviation from the conceptual CCS water and salt flow balance is the recognition of reduced flow in the plant discharge canals. In early 2014, FPL noted that water flow was quite low in some plant discharge canals. In some cases, it was observed that CCS water did not flow in parts of individual canals. The lack of flow in certain individual canals limits the inte nded function of the CCS as a radiator, such that water preferentially flows through other canals at a faster rate than normal. The greater rate of flow of CCS water in some canals inhibits the 5-7

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 process of evaporation and the cooling effect tha t evapora tion provides to the CCS. This phenomenon was simulated by reducing the CCS discharge canals' surface area between January 2014 and May 2015 by between 16% and 20%. Though coarse, this approx imation accounts for both a physical reduction in surface area as well as the related limits on the evaporative process.

5.3.3 Model Results and Discussion Results of the simulated 57-month water and salt balance model are provided in Tables 5.3-2 and 5.3-3, respectively. Monthly balance results follow in Tables 5.3-4 and 5.3-5. The modeled net flow of water, as ca lculated by the summing the components of the water balance for the 57-month calibration period, is denoted as the "Modeled Change in CCS Storage" and was calculated to be an average outflow of 0.22 mgd over the 57-month calibration period (Table 5.3-2). The observed change in storage, which is the difference in the volume of water in the CCS between the final and first days of the calibration period, divided by the number of days in the period, was observed to be 0.54 mgd. Though the model underestimated a net outflow of water from the CCS over the whole time period, the residual error between the simulated and observed flow is very small (0.32 mgd). This error is small (0.3%) relative to the monthly net observed flows, which range from a ne t outflow of 46.6 mgd (Octolber 20 l 0) and a net inflow of 52. l mgd (September 2010).

The model simulated a net influx of salt over the 57-month period at rate of 597 (lb x 1,000)/day.

The con-esponding observed rate of sa lt inflow was calcu lated by multiplying the average observed salinity in the CCS on the final and first day of the cal ibration period by the con-esponding CCS volumes on those days. The difference between these two products, divided by the number of days in the calibration period, shows that the net inflow of salt is about 405 (lb x 1,000)/day. The error associated with the mass flux is an overestimation by approximately 192 (lb x 1,000)/day. As in the case of water balance simulation, the magnitude of this overestimation is small (0.9%) relative to the range in monthly average flows; the monthly net mass fluxes range from an outflow of 13,790 (lb x 1,000)/day (October 20 10) to an inflow of 8,659 (lb x 1,000)/day (June 2011 ). This error marks an improvement over an earlier version of the model (discussed in the 2014 Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report [FPL 2014a]).

Figures 5.3-2 and 5.3-3 illushate the mode l's ability to ma tch the magnitude and direction of net monthly flows of water and salt, respectively. Figure 5.3-2 compares observed and modeled net monthly flows of water into and out of the CCS. There is a seasonal trend in observed flows to/from the CCS, where inflows are generally associated w ith the wet season and outflows are generally associated with the dry season. The model is able to replicate this trend reasonably well. However, there are isolated periods of time where the model does not accurately simulate the magnitude or direction of the net flow (e.g., March to July 2011 , October 2013, January 2015). Figure 5.3-3 compares observed and mode led net monthly flows of salt into and out of the CCS. Like the modeled water flows, estimated salt mass fluxes generally match observed fluxes well, although there are individual months where the estimated mass flux is less accurate.

5-8

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Implicit in the model's ability to simulate monthly net water and salt mass flows is the accurate simulation of daily flows to and from the CCS. Because the model is able to characterize the daily flows of water and salt, the model is able to estimate the daily changes in CCS water and salt storage. As previously mentioned, these changes in storage are associated with daily changes in CCS water levels and salinity. Figure 5.3-4 shows the model-calculated water level in the CCS, which varies over the period of record. These modeled water levels range between approximately -1.63 ft NA VD 88 and 0.81 ft NAVD 88 and reflect an average water level throughout the entire CCS. The observed CCS water levels over time are also shown in this figu re; the observed values reflect the mean of daily-averaged water elevations across the seven sensors in the CCS. The daily-averaged observed water levels vary across a range similar to that of the simulated water levels (-1.71 ft NAVD 88 to 0.63 ft NAVD 88). Simulated water elevations are calculated by dividing the simulated daily change in CCS storage by the average daily CCS surface area and adding the resulting value (which reflects a change in water level) to the previous day's simulated water elevation. It is evident from this figure that the model effectively captures the general trend in CCS water elevations over the 57-month period and accurately simulates average CCS water elevations throug hout much of the calibration period.

Nevertheless, there were periods oftime where the model either generally under-simulated observed water levels (late 2011 and 2013) or, conversely, over-simulated water levels (mid-20 14 through May 2015).

Though the model over-simulated water levels toward the end of the model simulation, this error is relatively small. Moreover, the temporal fluctuations in water levels are reasonably well-matched. This is particularly relevant since thi s period of time includes fall 2014, when 914 million gallons of L-3 IE Canal water were pumped into the CCS over a 21-day duration. During this addition, the simulated increase in water levels (approximately 0.5 ft) closely matched the observed water level increase in the CCS (approximately 0.4 ft). The model also accounted for water pumped into the CCS from the Floridan Aquifer (PTF5 well #3) and Biscayne Aquifer (PW-1) and the associated changes in stage since July 2013 and January 2015, respectively.

Similar to the calculation of CCS water levels, changes in salt mass storage within the CCS can be used to calculate average CCS salinity changes over time. The simulated daily net flow of salt is divided by the simulated volume of water in the CCS, which results in a change in salinity.

This change in salinity is added to the simulated salinity calculated for the previous day to produce a simulated salinity for the current day. Like the simulated CCS water level, the model salinity reflects a representative daily salinity throughout the CCS. Figure 5.3-5 compares the simulated salinities to those observed in the CCS over the period of record. Observed salinities are the mean of daily averaged salinities measured in the CCS monitoring stations. The model under-simulated salinity between May 2012 and December 20 13 and over-simulated between June 2014 and May 2015. However, these under- and over-simulations were generally small.

Moreover, the simulated temporal trends in salinity throughout much of the 57-month timeframe matched the temporal trends in the average observed CCS salinity.

As in the case of the simulation of water levels in the CCS, it is important to note that the model simulated salinity and daily changes during the November 2013 through September 2014 timeframe, when salinity increased from about 60 g/L to approximately 90 g/L. Moreover, the 5-9

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 modeled drop in salinity (I I g/L) due to the addition of L-31 E Canal water from September to October 2014 closely matched the observed drop in salinity (13 g/L). In addition, the subsequent increase in salinity (October 201 4 through April 2015) was replicated by the model, as was the subsequent significant drop in salinity attributable to a late-April rainfall event. The fact that the model matches these notable fluctuations in CCS salinity reinforces the conceptual model, which suggests that changes in CCS salinity are predicated solely on changes in the flow of water into and out of the CCS. Again, changes attributable to the addition of Floridan Aquifer water from PTF5 #3 and Biscayne Aquifer water from PW-1 are accounted for by the model with reasonable accuracy.

Given that the simulated timeframe is nearly evenly partitioned into the Pre-Uprate, Interim, and Post-Uprate periods, it is appropriate to discuss the water and salt balance model results in terms of these operationa l periods. Inspection of Figure 5.3-2 does not reveal a marked difference in water changes in water storage (inflows and outflows) among the three operating periods.

Perhaps the only distinguishing characteristic is a significant decrease in storage (outflow) that occurs at the inception of the Post-Uprate period in June 2013. This outflow is attributable to increase in seepage to groundwater and in evaporative losses. Figure 5.3-3, however, suggests that mass accrues at a greater rate during the Post-Uprate period than in the other two operating periods. This is consistent with the increase in CCS salinity during this timeframe.

Tables 5.3-6 and 5.3-7 summarize the simulated water and salt flow balances for the Pre-Uprate, Interim, and Post-Uprate periods. Though the net water and salt balances are on the same order of magnitude for each of the three operating periods, the magnitude of the inflows and outflows are fairly different. For instance, the magnitude of water inflows and outflows are greater during the Pre-Uprate and Post-Uprate periods than in the Interim period. Likewise, the exchanges of salt are generally greater in the Pre-Uprate and Post-Uprate periods than in the Interim period.

The modeled water balances match the corresponding observed balances reasonably well in each of the operating periods. Though the match between modeled and observed salt mass balances appears to be slightly degraded when compared to the water balance match, in fact the associated salt mass balance error is relatively low in the context of the range of the individual mass balance components (e.g. maximum inflow minus maximum outflow). Additionally, relative to the variability in observed monthly net salt mass flows, the error between the simulated and observed mass balance for these three periods is fairly low The accurate simulation of changing CCS inflows, outflows, water elevations, and salinities is complex due to the different components of the balance model and their varying impacts upon CCS water and salt storage. For instance, vertical flows into and out of the control volume are generally larger than horizontal flows and have a greater impact on CCS water elevation. The salinity of inflowing water, however, can vary depending upon the source of the water. For example, horizontal flow from the west (L-3 lE Canal) is non-saline and has a pronounced mitigating impact upon CCS salinities; vertical flow from groundwater beneath portions of the plant discharge canals is saline to hyper-saline and generally increases the salinity of the CCS.

The correct balance of both water and salt mass flow is difficult to estimate in the model. In addition, the simulated timeframe encompasses Pre-Uprate, Interim, and Post-Uprate periods, during which CCS water salinity and temperatures fluctuate significantly. The model addresses 5-10

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 associated impacts on the CCS by explicitly si mulating the effects of water/air temperature gradients on evaporation. Whereas numerous sources and sinks of water, varying salinities, and changes in water temperature do increase model complexity, the need to accurately simulate these different components of CCS operation constrains the number of possible solutions.

Though the model is able to simulate the complex dynamics associated with the CCS over a 57-month timeframe with reasonable accuracy, there are periods of time where the simulated flows of water and salt do not accurately reflect observed conditions. Consequently, the simulated water level and salinities in the CCS deviate from those that have been observed at various times in the simulation period. However, the overall performance of the model reinforces its utility as a tool for understanding how the CCS has and will operate under varying meteorological, hydrological, and operational conditions. This is best demonstrated by the fact that the same conceptual model employed to characterize changes in CCS storage of water and salt during the Pre-Uprate period is used to explain changes in water and salt storage during the Post-Uprate period, a period of time during which water levels have generally decreased, salinities have dramatically increased, water temperatures have risen, and algal blooms have developed with in the CCS. Nevertheless, the exchanges of flows between the CCS and surrounding environment during Post-Uprate period are governed by the same hydrologic principles as during the Pre-Uprate period.

This robustness and accuracy in the model underpins FPL' s understanding of processes that control the CCS and the manner in which the CCS interacts with the adj acent aquifer and water bodies. This accuracy in simulating the historical changes w ithin the CCS bolsters confidence in the model's utility as a too l to eva luate the sensitivity of CCS operations to certain factors, such as changes in operation, drought conditions, storm events, added water, and other potential environmental stresses. Additionally, the model accuracy validates the fact that the most appropriate data are being collected to effectively capture CCS operations, identify interactions between the CCS and the surrounding environment, and support FPL's comprehension of historical and future operations of the CCS. This model continues to be refined and improved with further information on the CCS.

5-11

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 TABLES IT

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-1. Calibration Parameters.

0.1 3.0 825 900 500 675 0.71 Runoff Modifier (as % of Preci itation 32%

B lowdown Eva oration Factor 40%

B lowdown Concentration (as% of Seawater) 0.25 5-12 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-2. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

September 2010 to May 2015 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.77 1329.68 E. Seepage 13.59 23557.82 N. Seepage O.Ol 16.37 S. Seepage 3.30 5730.53 Bottom Seepage 8.87 15378.74 IJ) Precipitation and Runoff 19.52 33846.97 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.49 851.01

....= Unit 5 Blowdown 1.96 3393. 11 ID Pumping 3.58 6206.00 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 1.93 3352.82 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 54.02 93663.04 W. Seepage -0.06 -4.67 E. Seepage -1.77 -5941.48 N. Seepage -0.0 1 -10.45 S. Seepage 0.00 -44.05 IJ) Bottom Seepage -11.09 -19504.75 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

,_ Evaporation -3 1.49 -68542.75

....Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0

= 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -44.43 -94047.87 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -0.22 -384.83 Observed Change -0.54 -938.00 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

gal= Gallon.

ID= Interceptor Ditch.

MGD = Million gallons per day.

5-13 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-3. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

September 2010 to May 2015 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass {lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 6.12 10617.41 E. Seepage 3874.04 6717584.84 N. Seepage 1.90 3288.71 S. Seepage 664.37 1152011.09 Bottom Seepage 2471.89 4286258.31

'J) Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

u Evaporatio n 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 5 Blowdown 142.89 247772.59 ID Pumped Water 360.30 624756.49 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 219.43 38049 1.12 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 7740.93 13422780.57 W. Seepage -46. 15 -80019.11 E. Seepage -1467.02 -2543816.50 N . Seepage -3.32 -5753.07 S. Seepage -11.44 -19830.75 00 Bottom Seepage -5615.47 -9737218.65 u

u 0

....0

=

Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Pla nt Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -7143.39 -12386638.08 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 597.54 1036142.49 Observed Change 404.70 701742.27 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

ID= Interceptor Ditch.

lb = Pound(s).

5-14 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

September 2010 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.63 18.92 E. Seepage 11.48 344.30 N. Seepage 0.02 0.45 S. Seepage 3.43 102.78 Bottom Seepage 8.21 246.36 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 77.48 2324.42 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.64 Unit 5 Blowdown 1.96 58.73 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 103.49 3 104.60 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -5.01 -1 50.18 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.08 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -6.05 -181.43 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -39.24 - 1177.31

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -50.30 -1509.00 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 53.19 1595.60 Observed Change 52.14 1564.08 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

gal= Gallon.

ID = Interceptor Ditch.

MGD = Million gallons per day.

5-15 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

October 2010 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.22 6.82 E. Seepage 0.72 22.35 N. Seepage 0.00 0.15 S. Seepage 2.75 85.32

/J'.)

Bottom See page 5.48 169.95 u Precipitation and Runoff 13.40 4 15.34 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.93 Blowdown 1.49 46.21 JD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ua l to Outflow Total In: 24.36 755.07 W. Seepage -0.01 -0.28 E.Seepage -21. 35 -66 1.91 N. Seepage -0.0 l -0. 19 S. Seepage -0.05 - 1.53 00 Bottom Seepage -1 9.27 -597.45 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -30.8 1 -955.14

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -71.50 -2216.51 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -47.14 -1461.45 Observed Chan2e -46.60 -1444.52 5-16 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

November 2010 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.26 7.92 E. Seepage 4.72 141.59 N. Seepage 0.00 0.14 S. Seepage 2.39 71.78 r,J Bottom Seepage 1.43 42.94 u Precipitation and Runoff 26.53 795.80 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....=

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.64 Blowdown 1.00 29.97 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 36.63 1098.78 W. Seepage -0.06 -1.73 E. Seepage -6.82 -204.53 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.1 1 S. Seepage -0.03 -0.89 Bottom Seepage -13.30 -398.86 r,J u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporat ion -30.1 8 -905.40

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -50.38 -1511.52 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -13.76 -412.74 Observed Change -5.02 -1 50.50 5-17 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

December 2010 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.74 22.85 E. Seepage 16.54 512.73 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 2.17 67.16

/J'.)

Bottom Seepage 1.58 48.88 u Precipitation and Runoff 3.74 115.80 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.93 Blowdown 1.44 44.66 JD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 26.48 821.00 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -0.44 -13.72 N . Seepage -0.01 -0.4 1 S. Seepage -0.0 l -0.18 00 Bottom Seepage -15.96 -494.83 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -28.78 -892.1 2

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Un it 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outfl ow Total Out: -45.20 -1401.25 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -18.72 -580.25 Observed Change -12.72 -394.29 5-18 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

January 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage l.53 47.29 E. Seepage 9.42 291.89 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage l.87 57.82 Bottom Seepage 2.08 64.43 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 19. 13 593.17 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.93 Blowdown 1.64 50.81 TD Pumping 4.91 152.24 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 40.86 1266.58 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -3.70 -1 14.58 N. Seepage -0.0 l -0.45 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 i'1 Bottom Seepage -18.5 1 -573.86 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -27.80 -861.81

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -50.02 -1550.70 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -9.1 7 -284.12 Observed Change -2.54 -78.88 5-19 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

February 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 1.09 30.53 E. Seepage 23.22 650.20 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 3.78 105.80

/J'.)

Bottom See page 7.17 200.74 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.69 19.22 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.06 Blowdown 1.39 38.92 JD Pumping 2.25 63.03 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ua l to Outflow Total In: 39.87 1116.49 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -0.35 -9.70 N. Seepage -0.02 -0.56 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -20.78 -58 1.75 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -33.42 -935.67

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -54.56 -1527.68 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -14.69 -411.19 Observed Chan2e -14.26 -399.40 5-20 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

March 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage l.22 37.97 E. Seepage 18.92 586.39 N. Seepage 0.00 0.08 S. Seepage 4.1 4 128.24 Bottom Seepage 7.82 242.27 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 7.02 217.53 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.93 Blowdown 1.33 41.10 TD Pumping 9.37 290.40 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 50.09 1552.91 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.28 -8.56 N. Seepage 0.00 -0. 14 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 i'1 Bottom Seepage -18.45 -571.91 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -34.86 - 1080.73

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -53.59 -1661.34 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -3.50 -108.43 Observed Change 3.19 99.02 5-21 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

April 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.97 29.0 1 E. Seepage 26.45 793.57 N. Seepage 0.00 0.10 S. Seepage 5.07 152.07

/J'.)

Bottom See page 12.05 361.43 u Precipitation and Runoff 10.21 306.2 1 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.64 Blowdown 2.26 67.89 JD Pumping 7.46 223.80 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ua l to Outflow Total In: 64.76 1942.71 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.08 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -1 9.71 -591.1 9 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -36.05 -108 1.54

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -55.76 -1672.82 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 9.00 269.90 Observed Change -7.85 -235.45 5-22 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

May 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage l.25 38.65 E. Seepage 42.98 1332.39 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 5.91 183.26 Bottom Seepage 20.72 642.30 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 6.82 21 1.30 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.93 Blowdown 2.32 71.85 TD Pumping 14.81 459.13 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 95.09 2947.82 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -0.04 -1.19 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 i'1 Bottom Seepage -52.85 -1638.30 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -42.55 -1319.03

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -95.44 -2958.52 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -0.35 -10.70 Observed Change 11.51 356.77 5-23 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

June 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 1.38 41.40 E. Seepage 34.62 1038.51 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 5.76 172.73

/J'.)

Bottom Seepage 21.40 642.01 u Precipitation and Runoff 7.90 237.08 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.53 15.99 Blowdown 2.04 61.20 JD Pumping l 6. 13 483.83 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ua l to Outflow Total In: 89.76 2692.75 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -0.01 -0.24 N. Seepage -0.03 - 1.02 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -44.27 -1327.96 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -45.1 8 -1355.26

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -89.48 -2684.48 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 0.28 8.27 Observed Change 10.30 309.07 5-24 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

July 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage l.70 52.59 E. Seepage 4.33 134.19 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1.79 55.58 Bottom Seepage 4.26 132.21 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 44.51 1379.89 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.54 16.59 Blowdown 2.26 70.00 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 59.39 1841.05 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1 0.96 -339.74 N. Seepage -0.0 l -0.43 S. Seepage -0.12 -3.86 i'1 Bottom Seepage -14.71 -455.93 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -46.46 - 1440.12

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -72.26 -2240.09 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -12.87 -399.04 Observed Change 9.24 286.59 5-25 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

August 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 1.01 31.42 E. Seepage 12.59 390.34 N. Seepage 0.00 0.13 S. Seepage 3.46 107.17

/J'.)

Bottom See page 4.96 153.82 u Precipitation and Runoff 37.20 1153.08 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.53 16.36 Blowdown 2.08 64.50 JD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ua l to Outflow Total In: 61.83 1916.83 W. Seepage 0.00 -0.05 E.Seepage -2.36 -73. 13 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.03 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -4.17 -1 29. 14 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -44.38 -1375.79

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -50.91 -1578.14 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 10.93 338.68 Observed Change 20.17 625.23 5-26 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

September 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.72 2 1.49 E. Seepage 9.09 272.63 N. Seepage 0.00 0.02 S. Seepage 2.83 85.04 Bottom Seepage 2.74 82.09 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 36.97 1109.02 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.55 16.55 Blowdown 1.96 58.73 TD Pumping 5.74 172.08 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 60.59 1817.64 W. Seepage -0.02 -0.61 E. Seepage - 1.84 -55.24 N. Seepage -0.0 l -0.21 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 i'1 Bottom Seepage -8.50 -254.92 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -44.7 1 - 1341.33

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -55.08 -1652.30 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 5.51 165.34 Observed Change -5.14 -1 54.17 5-27 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

October 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.65 20.10 E. Seepage 5.60 173.66 N. Seepage 0.00 0.11 S. Seepage 3.35 103.76

/J'.)

Bottom Seepage 5.71 176.94 u Precipitation and Runoff 52.19 1617.8 1 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.52 16.21 Blowdown 1.49 46.21 JD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 69.51 2154.81 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -8.89 -275.64 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.24 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -10.32 -3 I 9.94 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -32.80 -10 16.88

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -52.02 -1612.71 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 17.49 542.10 Observed Change 8.79 272.51 5-28 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

November 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.41 12.17 E. Seepage 13.09 392.76 N. Seepage 0.01 0.22 S. Seepage 3.05 91.39 Bottom Seepage 5.29 158.61 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 1.22 36.63 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.47 14.14 Blowdown 1.00 29.97 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 24.53 735.89 W. Seepage 0.00 -0.01 E. Seepage -0.97 -29.08 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.07 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 i'1 Bottom Seepage -3.87 -116.07 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -34.49 - I034.58

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -39.33 -443.93 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -14.80 291.96 Observed Change -25.56 -766.91 5-29 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

December 2011 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.89 27.63 E. Seepage 19.03 589.82 N. Seepage 0.01 0.16 S. Seepage 3.40 105.5 1

/J'.)

Bottom Seepage 5.84 180.97 u Precipitation and Runoff 1.75 54.20 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.61 18.76 Blowdown 1.44 44.66 JD Pumping 9. 14 283.37 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 42.10 1305.07 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -0.20 -6.09 N. Seepage 0.00 -0. 13 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -13.1 8 -408.58 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -30.95 -959.30

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -44.33 -1374.09 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -2.23 -69.03 Observed Change -11.66 -361.51 5-30 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

January 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 1.44 44.63 E. Seepage 22.89 709.62 N. Seepage 0.00 0.02 S. Seepage 3.76 116. 71 Bottom Seepage 8.86 274.53 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 2.78 86.27 u Evaporatio n 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.59 18.37 Blowdown 1.77 55.00 TD Pumping 15.39 476.96 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 57.49 1782.10 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.03 -0.88 N . Seepage -0.02 -0.54 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 i'1 Bottom Seepage -29.29 -908.09 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -32.66 - 1012.42

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -62.00 -1921.92 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -4.51 -139.82 Observed Change -9.98 -309.33 5-31 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

February 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 1.08 31.33 E. Seepage 10.96 317.73 N. Seepage 0.01 0.23 S. Seepage 2.75 79.68

/J'.)

Bottom See page 5.10 147.91 u Precipitation and Runoff 34.97 1014.27 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.52 15.17 Blowdown 1.56 45.36 JD Pumping 1.50 43.56 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ua l to Outflow Total In: 58.46 1695.22 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -1.48 -43.02 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.03 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -8.57 -248.40 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -3 1.99 -927.63

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -42.04 -1219.08 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 16.42 476.15 Observed Change 12.36 358.44 5-32 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

March 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.79 24.47 E. Seepage 16.36 507.04 N. Seepage 0.02 0.67 S. Seepage 3.86 119.81 Bottom Seepage 10.20 316.28 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 2.38 73.78 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.35 10.99 Blowdown 1.97 61.12 TD Pumping 4.10 126.99 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 40.04 1241.16 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.48 - 14.94 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.01 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 i'1 Bottom Seepage -7.38 -228.72 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -33.30 - 1032.35

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -41.16 -1276.03 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -1.12 -34.87 Observed Change -11.24 -348.30 5-33 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

April 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 1.26 37.86 E. Seepage 16.15 484.45 N. Seepage 0.01 0.25 S. Seepage 3.78 113.46

/J'.)

Bottom See page 11.02 330.61 u Precipitation and Runoff 50.10 1502.87 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.39 11.73 Blowdown 1.96 58.81 JD Pumping 9.76 292.86 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ua l to Outflow Total In: 94.43 2832.90 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -0.25 -7.57 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.05 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -13.01 -390. 18 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -35.26 -1057.88

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -48.52 -1455.68 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 45.91 1377.21 Observed Change 33.69 1010.73 5-34 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

May 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage l.06 33.01 E. Seepage 0.50 15.35 N. Seepage 0.02 0.74 S. Seepage 1.26 39.07 Bottom Seepage 11.57 358.62 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 40.57 1257.52 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.41 12.61 Blowdown 1.94 60.08 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 57.32 1777.00 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1 3.27 -41 1.50 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.02 S. Seepage 0.00 -0.06 00 Bottom Seepage -9.28 -287.64 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -33.70 - 1044.78

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -56.26 -1744.00 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1.06 33.00 Observed Change -2.89 -89.62 5-35 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

June 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.57 17.18 E. Seepage 3.39 101.59 N. Seepage 0.02 0.50 S. Seepage 2.23 66.92

/J'.)

Bottom See page 8.87 265.96 u Precipitation and Runoff 30.36 910.93 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.29 8.66 Blowdown 2.07 61.95 JD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 47.79 1433.70 W. Seepage 0.00 -0.06 E.Seepage -9.13 -273.94 N . Seepage 0.00 -0.02 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -7.01 -210.24 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -34.00 -10 19.97

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Un it 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outfl ow Total Out: -50.14 -1504.23 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -2.35 -70.53 Observed Change -3.50 -105.04 5-36 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

July 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.92 28.53 E. Seepage 0.02 0.56 N. Seepage 0.02 0.72 S. Seepage 1.41 43.82 Bottom Seepage 14.13 438.04 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 29.22 905.74 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.34 10.51 Blowdown 2.13 66.14 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 48.20 1494.06 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1 1.08 -343.33 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.06 -1.97 i'1 Bottom Seepage -9.56 -296.50 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -40.50 - 1255.63

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -61.21 -1897.42 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -13.01 -403.36 Observed Change -7.97 -247.19 5-37 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

August2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.94 29.28 E. Seepage 5.79 179.38 N. Seepage 0.02 0.64 S. Seepage 2.52 77.97

/J'.)

Bottom See page 12.31 381.65 u Precipitation and Runoff 39.51 1224.70 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.27 8.51 Blowdown 2.20 68.22 JD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 63.56 1970.35 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -6.13 -190.09 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.03 -0.91 00 Bottom Seepage -6.38 -197.72 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -39.72 -123 1.38

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -52.26 -1620.10 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 11.30 350.25 Observed Change 21.72 673.22 5-38 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

September 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.64 19.16 E. Seepage 2.51 75.25 N. Seepage 0.01 0.37 S. Seepage 2.29 68.62 Bottom Seepage 7.77 233.02 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 29.60 887.85 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.73 22.00 Blowdown 1.93 57.86 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 45.47 1364.14 W. Seepage -0.01 -0.17 E. Seepage -10.00 -300.02 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.03 -1.04 i'1 Bottom Seepage -10.96 -328.68 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -39.33 - 1180.03

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -60.33 -1809.94 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -14.86 -445.80 Observed Change -5.35 -160.61 5-39 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

October 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.27 8.34 E. Seepage 19.18 594.67 N. Seepage 0.02 0.62 S. Seepage 3.54 109.70

/J'.)

Bottom See page 14.06 435.85 u Precipitation and Runoff 14.07 436.27 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.89 27.69 Blowdown 1.89 58.47 JD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 53.92 1671.61 W. Seepage -0.02 -0.48 E.Seepage -4.46 - 138.26 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.06 S. Seepage -0.02 -0.54 00 Bottom Seepage -5.43 -168.36 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -39.07 -12 11.07

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -48.99 -1518.76 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 4.93 152.85 Observed Change 7.58 235.01 5-40 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

November 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.37 11.23 E. Seepage 7.77 233.12 N. Seepage 0.03 0.88 S. Seepage 2.97 89.15 Bottom Seepage 13.66 409.80 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 1.70 51.08 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.79 23.74 Blowdown 1.31 39.39 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 28.61 858.38 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2.49 -74.57 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 i'1 Bottom Seepage -2.45 -73.61 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -28.57 -856.97

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -33.50 -1005.15 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -4.89 -146.77 Observed Change -3.88 -116.28 5-41 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

December 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.73 22.60 E. Seepage 0.43 13.27 N. Seepage 0.02 0.57 S. Seepage 1.38 42.89

/J'.)

Bottom See page 7.59 235.25 u Precipitation and Runoff 1.84 56.99 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.50 15.62 Blowdown 1.49 46.34 JD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ua l to Outflow Total In: 13.98 433.51 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -8.03 -248.97 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 -0.02 00 Bottom Seepage -5.5 1 -170.70 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -23.23 -720.01

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -36.76 -1139.70 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -22.78 -706.18 Observed Change -28.66 -888.55 5-42 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

January 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.83 25.62 E. Seepage 7. 15 221.66 N. Seepage 0.02 0.57 S. Seepage 3.21 99.43 Bottom Seepage 8.15 252.64 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 1.04 32.3 1 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.52 16.25 Blowdown 1.74 53.89 TD Pumping 2.40 74.25 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 25.05 776.62 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2.40 -74.34 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 i'1 Bottom Seepage -1.69 -52.47 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -24.23 -750.99

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -28.32 -877.80 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -3.26 -101.18 Observed Change -10.70 -331.69 5-43 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

February 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.93 26.13 E. Seepage 9.75 273.1 1 N. Seepage 0.01 0.37 S. Seepage 3.44 96.40

/J'.)

Bottom Seepage 7.50 209.97 u Precipitation and Runoff 5.37 150.43 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.34 9.50 Blowdown 1.63 45.65 JD Pumping 8.45 236.52 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 37.43 1048.09 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -2.76 -77.32 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -6.60 -184.72 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -23.28 -65 1.88

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -32.64 -913.92 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 4.79 134.17 Observed Change 1.10 30.86 5-44 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

March 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.77 23.74 E. Seepage 20. 14 624.25 N. Seepage 0.01 0.18 S. Seepage 4.28 132.63 Bottom Seepage 12.6 1 390.87 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 5. 13 158.93 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.52 16.05 Blowdown 1.92 59.67 TD Pumping 7.41 229.77 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 52.78 1636.09 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.13 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 i'1 Bottom Seepage -11.51 -356.90 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -27.64 -856. 78

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -39.16 -1213.81 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 13.62 422.28 Observed Change 3.84 119.01 5-45 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

April 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.95 28.47 E. Seepage 23.12 693.51 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 3.52 105.47 Bottom Seepage 7.55 226.58 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 22.71 681.3 I u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

,-. Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.71 1.91 2 1.24 57.39 B lowdown JD Pumping 9.24 277.20 Plant Outflow Equal to intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 69.71 2091.16 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.1 5 -4.51 N. Seepage -0.02 -0.66 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -26.60 -798.04 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -38.01 -1 140.28

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

= 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -64.78 -1943.49 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 4.92 147.67 Observed Change 12.76 382.66 5-46 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

May 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.88 27.34 E. Seepage 12.95 401.59 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 2.52 78.1 1 Bottom Seepage 2.83 87.61 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 48.92 1516.41 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.93 28.68 Blowdown 2.15 66.71 TD Pumping 6.15 190.71 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 77.33 2397.16 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 1.71 -53.14 N. Seepage -0.0 l -0.41 S. Seepage -0.03 -0.93 i'1 Bottom Seepage -17.48 -541.96 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -42.96 - 1331.72

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -62.20 -1928.16 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 15.13 469.00 Observed Change 22.68 703.18 5-47 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

June 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.93 27.98 E. Seepage 6.33 189.89 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1.42 42.74

/J'.)

Bottom See page 1.58 47.48 u Precipitation and Runoff 18.28 548.29 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.56 16.94 Blowdown 1.99 59.59 JD Pumping 0.68 20.52 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 31.78 953.44 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -14.22 -426.63 N. Seepage -0.02 -0.66 S. Seepage -0.85 -25.47 00 Bottom Seepage -21.98 -659.37 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -5 1.32 -1539.52

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -88.39 -2651.64 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -56.61 -1698.20 Observed Change -31.07 -931.98 5-48 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

July 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.80 24.80 E. Seepage 13.88 430.23 N. Seepage 0.00 0.02 S. Seepage 2.75 85.21 Bottom Seepage 5.10 158.03 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 47.74 1479.85 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.55 16.95 Blowdown 2.05 63.45 TD Pumping 0.70 21.78 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 73.56 2280.32 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2.71 -83.88 N. Seepage -0.0 l -0.33 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 i'1 Bottom Seepage -9.67 -299.78 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -51.2 1 - 1587.62

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -63.60 -1971.62 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 9.96 308.70 Observed Change 19.61 607.86 5-49 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

August 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.68 21.23 E. Seepage 19.87 615.97 N. Seepage 0.01 0.16 S. Seepage 3.37 104.42

/J'.)

Bottom See page 6.45 200.05 u Precipitation and Runoff 32.21 998.49 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.70 21.73 Blowdown 2.57 79.64 JD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 65.86 2041.70 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -2.72 -84.23 N. Seepage -0.0 I -0.29 S. Seepage -0.03 - 1.05 00 Bottom Seepage -6.99 -216.74 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -72.85 -2258.31

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -82.60 -2560.62 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -16.74 -518.92 Observed Change -6.11 -189.45 5-50 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

September 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.23 6.93 E. Seepage 14.72 441.57 N. Seepage 0.01 0.43 S. Seepage 2.50 74.93 Bottom Seepage 11.17 335.20 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 20.70 620.94 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.36 10.89 Blowdown 1.45 43.60 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 51.1 5 1534.50 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.25 -7.45 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 i'1 Bottom Seepage -0.44 -13.34 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -34.36 - I030.80

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -35.05 -1051.58 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 16.10 482.91 Observed Change 10.23 307.04 5-51 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

October 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.28 8.69 E. Seepage 18.85 584.33 N. Seepage 0.03 1.02 S. Seepage 3.97 122.97

/J'.)

Bottom See page 24.88 771.30 u Precipitation and Runoff 7.33 227.12 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.55 16.96 Blowdown 2.25 69.88 JD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 58.14 1802.26 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -0.63 -19.39 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -0.17 -5.12 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -53.09 -1645.78

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -53.88 -1670.29 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 4.26 131.97 Observed Change -5.40 -167.52 5-52 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

November 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.26 7.75 E. Seepage 15.80 473.94 N. Seepage 0.03 0.82 S. Seepage 3.45 103.65 Bottom Seepage 19.90 597.10 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 32. 18 965.32 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.49 14.56 Blowdown 1.79 53.85 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 73.90 2216.99 W. Seepage 0.00 -0.03 E. Seepage -0.87 -26.12 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 i'1 Bottom Seepage -0.96 -28.75 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -43.14 - 1294.07

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -44.97 -1348.97 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 28.93 868.01 Observed Change 13.98 419.29 5-53 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

December 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.33 10.11 E. Seepage 5.00 155.06 N. Seepage 0.01 0.21 S. Seepage 2.10 65.18

/J'.)

Bottom See page 3.84 11 8.90 u Precipitation and Runoff 4.42 137.06 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.50 15.50 Blowdown 1.79 55.54 JD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ua l to Outflow Total In: 17.99 557.56 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -3.65 -11 3.07 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.03 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -4.99 -154.79 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -40.83 -1265.84

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -49.48 -1533.74 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: -31.49 -976.18 Observed Change -21.47 -665.45 5-54 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

January 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.57 17.81 E. Seepage I0. 12 313.58 N. Seepage 0.02 0.48 S. Seepage 3.20 99.10 Bottom Seepage 7.97 247.10 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 8.44 26 1.68 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.47 14.68 Blowdown 1.67 51.80 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 32.46 1006.24 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 1.25 -38.73 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 i'1 Bottom Seepage -1.80 -55.73 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -31. 70 -982.74

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -34.75 -1077.21 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2.29 -70.98 Observed Change -6.40 -198.28 5-55 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

January 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 101\6)

W. Seepage 0.57 17.81 E. Seepage 10.12 313.58 N. Seepage 0.02 0.48 S. Seepage 3.20 99.10 Bottom Seepage 7.97 247.10 rJ"J u Precipitation and Runoff 8.44 261.68 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.47 14.68 Blowdown 1.67 51.80 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outfl ow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 32.46 1006.24 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1.25 -38.73 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ"J Bottom Seepage -1.80 -55.73 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00

-3 1.70 0.00 0.00 0.00

-982.74 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equa l to Outflow Total Out: -34.75 -1077.21 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2.29 -70.98 Observed Change -6.40 -1 98.28 5-56 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

February 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.69 19.25 E. Seepage 13.84 387.43 N. Seepage 0.02 0.57 S. Seepage 4.71 131.95

/J'.)

Bottom See page 11.54 323.12 u Precipitation and Runoff 10.25 287.10 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.48 13.58 Blowdown 1.63 45.52 JD Pumping 1.35 37.89 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ua l to Outflow Total In: 44.51 1246.42 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -0.37 -10.25 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -0.75 -21.08 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -43.10 -1206.67

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -44.21 -1238.00 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 0.30 8.42 Observed Change -7.95 -222.68 5-57 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

March 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.68 21.15 E. Seepage 14.42 447.03 N. Seepage 0.02 0.71 S. Seepage 4.31 133.62 Bottom Seepage 11.74 363.92 i'1 u Precipitation and Runoff 6.77 209.72 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.39 12.07 Blowdown 2.02 62.50 TD Pumping 1.93 59.76 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 42.27 1310.49 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.01 -0.33 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 i'1 Bottom Seepage -1.01 -31.30 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

I..,

Evaporation -41.5 1 - 1286.80

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -42.53 -1318.44 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -0.26 -7.96 Observed Change -7.86 -243.70 5-58 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

April 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.66 19.67 E. Seepage 25.03 750.93 N. Seepage 0.02 0.67 S. Seepage 5.29 158.60

/J'.)

Bottom See page 17.23 516.79 u Precipitation and Runoff 2.36 70.84 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

=

Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.33 10.01 Blowdown 2.42 72.71 JD Pumping 3. 19 95.76 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ua l to Outflow Total In: 56.53 1695.97 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -3.73 -111.95 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -42.72 -128 1.73

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -46.46 -1393.68 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 10.08 302.29 Observed Change 1.08 32.37 5-59 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

May 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.68 20.99 E. Seepage 33.43 I 036.20 N. Seepage 0.00 0.14 S. Seepage 4.99 154.57 Bottom Seepage 21.15 655.73 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff 6.93 214.70 u Evaporatio n u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.46 14.40

....= Blowdown 2.21 68.43 TD Pumping 7.00 217.08 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 76.85 2382.24 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.13 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -9.78 -303.28 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

loo.

Evaporation -56.2 1 -1742.62

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0

= 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -66.00 -2046.03 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 10.85 336.20 Observed Change 0.67 20.77 5-60 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

June 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.80 24.00 E. Seepage 20.49 614.66 N. Seepage 0.00 0.05 S. Seepage 4.21 126.29 Bottom Seepage 10.99 329.66 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff 26.04 78 1.25 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.62 18.70

....= Blowdown 2.53 76.02 TD Pumping 2.77 83.16 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 68.46 2053.78 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.12 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -2.07 -62.12 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

loo.

Evaporation -54.47 -1634.13

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0

= 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -56.55 -1696.36 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 11.91 357.42 Observed Change 7.55 226.42 5-61 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

July 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage l.01 3 1.16 E. Seepage 11.05 342.53 N. Seepage 0.00 0.0 1 S. Seepage 4.44 137.63 Bottom Seepage 6.53 202.50 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff 31.02 96 1.54 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.62 19.32

....= Blowdown 2.78 86.09 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 3.97 122.96 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 61.41 1903.75 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.40 -12.41 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.32 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -2.34 -72.66 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

loo.

Evaporation -54.1.2 -1677.77

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0

= 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -56.88 -1763.17 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 4.53 140.58 Observed Change 12.49 387.09 5-62 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

August 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.71 2 1.95 E. Seepage 23.67 733.89 N. Seepage 0.00 0.15 S. Seepage 4.97 154.14 Bottom Seepage 12.62 391.37 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff 15.64 484.97 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.61 18.99

....= Blowdown 2.85 88.45 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Added Water (e.g. L-3 l E) 4.09 126.76 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 65.18 2020.68 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.11 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -0.08 -2.62 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

loo.

Evaporation -58.35 -1808.79

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0

= 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -58.44 -1811.52 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 6.75 209.16 Observed Change 4.13 128.17 5-63 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

September 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.32 9.58 E. Seepage 13.56 406.91 N. Seepage 0.01 0.30 S. Seepage 4.53 135.80 Bottom Seepage 12.04 361.16 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff 19.02 570.46 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.53 15.82

....= Blowdown 2.66 79.83 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 9.45 283.54 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 62.11 1863.40 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.45 -13.42 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.03 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -0.28 -8.49 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

loo.

Evaporation -48.30 -1448.86

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0

= 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -49.03 -1470.80 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 13.09 392.60 Observed Change 13.46 403.84 5-64 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

October 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.40 12.29 E. Seepage 0.42 13.13 N. Seepage 0.01 0.24 S. Seepage 1.54 47.83 Bottom Seepage 4.00 124.06 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff 32.55 1009.10 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.46 14.16

....= Blowdown 2.40 74.39 TD Pumping 13.66 423.54 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 25.28 783.62 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 80.72 2502.37 W. Seepage -0.04 -1.27 E. Seepage - 16.02 -496.54 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.29 S. Seepage -0.14 -4.36 rJ) Bottom Seepage -16.88 -523.17 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

loo.

Evaporation -38.09 -11 80.80

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0

= 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -71.17 -2206.42 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 9.55 295.95 Observed Change 24.22 750.70 5-65 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

November 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.71 2 1.39 E. Seepage 4.63 138.85 N. Seepage 0.01 0.15 S. Seepage 2.19 65.78 Bottom Seepage 1.95 58.61 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff 2.44 73.23 u Evaporatio n u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.55 16.60

....= Blowdown 1.89 56.81 TD Pumping 9.89 296.55 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 5.22 156.58 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 29.49 884.56 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -5.95 - 178.35 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.09 S. Seepage -0.04 -1.26 rJ) Bottom Seepage -11.24 -337.13 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

loo.

Evaporation -36.40 -1091.88

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0

= 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -53.62 -1608.71 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -24.14 -724.16 Observed Change -25.31 -759.36 5-66 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

December 2014 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.39 12.19 E. Seepage 7. 13 220.99 N. Seepage 0.01 0.44 S. Seepage 3.66 113.41 Bottom Seepage 6.27 194.27 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff 12.37 383.60 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.48 14.84

....= Blowdown 1.93 59.85 TD Pumping 0.66 20.43 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 3.26 100.98 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 36.16 1120.99 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2.57 -79.74 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.01 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -2.91 -90.34 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

loo.

Evaporation -32.64 -101 l.85

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0

= 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -38.13 -1181.93 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -1 .97 -60.95 Observed Change -9.52 -295.24 5-67 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

January 2015 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.40 12.08 E. Seepage 8. 10 243.11 N. Seepage 0.01 0.34 S. Seepage 3.72 11 1. 70 Bottom Seepage 7.62 228.57 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff I 1.00 329.92 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.55 16.56

....= Blowdown 2.15 64.51 TD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 11.26 337.90 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 44.82 1344.69 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1.43 -42.89 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.01 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -1.58 -47.32 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

loo.

Evaporation -38. 11 -1143.28

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0

= 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -41.12 -1233.50 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3.71 111.20 Observed Change -9.62 -298.36 5-68 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

February 2015 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.62 19.25 E. Seepage 12.33 382.08 N. Seepage 0.01 0.38 3.70 114.85 S. Seepage Bottom Seepage 4.12 127.67 00 Precipitation and Runoff u 5.68 176.18 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.51 15.68

....= Blowdown 1.89 58.71 ID Pumping 5.20 161.19 Added Water (e.g. L-3 1E) 13.46 417.31 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 47.53 1473.30 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1.34 -41.44 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.01 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -9.72 -301.46 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

""" Evaporation -34.02 -1054.70

....Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Inta ke Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -45.08 -1397.61 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 2.44 75.69 Observed Change 2.44 68.30 5-69 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

March 2015 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.73 21.88 E. Seepage 8.63 258.83 N. Seepage 0.00 0.09 S.Seepage 2.81 84.35 Bottom Seepage 0.51 15.27

/J) Precipitation and Runoff 10.46 313.88 u

u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

-=

0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water Blowdown 0.61 2.36 18.27 70.75 ID Pumping 9.45 283.44 Added Water (e.g. L-31E) 15.40 462.02 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 50.96 1528.79 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2.13 -63.78 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.19 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00

/J) Bottom Seepage -28.51 -855.32 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

0 0

= Unit Evaporat ion 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-47.34 0.00 0.00

-1420.23 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -77.98 -2339.52 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -27.02 -810.74 Observed Change -12.11 -375.50 5-70 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

April 2015 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.89 27.54 E. Seepage 26.72 828.47 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 2.88 89.24 Bottom Seepage 10.17 315.32 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff 34.63 I 073.50 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.53 16.42

....= Blowdown 2.39 74.24 TD Pumping 12.06 374.01 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 13.99 433.76 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 104.27 3232.50 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.06 -1 .84 N. Seepage -0.01 -0.46 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -29.22 -905.96 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

loo.

Evaporation -49.98 -1549.30

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0

= 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -79.28 -2457.57 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 25.00 774.93 Observed Change 22.43 672.93 5-71 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components.

May 2015 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 1011.6)

W. Seepage 0.81 24.34 E. Seepage 14.49 434.74 N. Seepage 0.00 0.15 S. Seepage 3.91 117.29 Bottom Seepage 5.15 154.41 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff 4.47 134.06 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.56 16.87

....= Blowdown 2.98 89.47 TD Pumping 1.14 34.20 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 4.25 127.38 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total In: 37.76 11 32.93 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.08 -2.26 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.06 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -10.40 -31 1.85 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Evaporation -46.1.5 -1384.62

....0 0

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Ee ual to Outflow Total Out: -56.63 -1698.79 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -18.86 -565.87 Observed Change -23.99 -743.60 5-72 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

September 2010 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.32 39.74 E. Seepage 2367.81 71034.23 N. Seepage 3.26 97.90 S. Seepage 141.52 4245.59 Bottom Seepage 1757..29 52718.75 "1

u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 142.95 4288.51 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 4414.16 132424.73 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2107.47 -63224.09 N. Seepage -1.00 -30.03 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -3148.36 -94450.90 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equa l to Outfl ow Total Out: -5256.83 -157705.02 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -842.68 -157705.02 Observed Change 1464.29 43928.58 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

ID= Interceptor Ditch.

lb= Pound.

5-73 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

October 2010 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 0.42 13.07 E. Seepage 145.46 4509.2 1 N. Seepage 1.03 32.01 S. Seepage 9.79 303.49 Bottom Seepage 1578.86 48944.78 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

...-=

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 B lowdown 108.85 3374.49 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 1844.42 57177.05 W. Seepage -90.08 -2792.56 E. Seepage -8248. 71 -255710.08 N. Seepage -2.35 -72.84 S. Seepage - 19.82 -614.5 1 00 Bottom Seepage -7351. 71 -227902.88 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 B lowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -15712.67 -487092.89 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -13868.25 -429915.84 Observed Change -13790.42 -427502.87 5-74 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

November 2010 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 0.62 18.65 E.Seepage 1112.86 33385.66 N. Seepage 1.02 30.47 S. Seepage 86.35 2590.47 Bottom Seepage 448.66 13459.68 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Un it 5 Blowdown 72.95 2188.41 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 1722.44 51673.35 W. Seepage -561.32 -16839.75 E.Seepage -2562.68 -76880.5 1 N. Seepage - 1.36 -40.70 S. Seepage -11. 76 -352.92 00 Bottom Seepage -4970.49 -149114.70 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -8107.62 -243228.57 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -6385.17 -191555.23 Observed Change -2876.16 -86284.89 5-75 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

December 2010 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.64 81 .97 E. Seepage 4285.67 132855.83 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 408.74 12670.94 Bottom Seepage 453.49 14058.10 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 105.19 3260.84 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5255.73 162927.68 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -162.55 -5039.00 N. Seepage -4.76 -147.53 S. Seepage -2.38 -73.76 00 Bottom Seepage -5813.63 -180222.52 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5983.32 -185482.82 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -727.59 -22555.14 Observed Change -1555.92 -48233.42 5-76 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

January 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 5.82 180.56 E.Seepage 2552.32 79121.95 N. Seepage 0.02 0.72 S. Seepage 35 1.22 10887.84 Bottom Seepage 583.72 18095.32 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Un it 5 Blowdown 119.67 3709.91 ID Pumped Water 185.05 5736.69 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3797.84 117732.99 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -1442.13 -44705.99 N. Seepage -5.83 -180.58 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -7389.58 -229076.98 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -8837.53 -273963.56 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -5039.70 -156230.57 Observed Change -910.35 -28220.95 5-77 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

February 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3.72 104.03 E. Seepage 6193.40 173415.07 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 633.20 17729.66 Bottom Seepage 2001.44 56040.28 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 101.50 2842.14 ID Pumped Water 73.70 2063.56 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 9006.95 252194.73 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -152.30 -4264.37 N. Seepage -9.05 -253.36 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -9382.55 -262711.31 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -9543.89 -267229.04 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -536.94 -15034.31 Observed Change 1264.60 35408.76 5-78 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

March 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 6.30 195.21 E.Seepage 5635.93 1747 13.82 N. Seepage 0.54 16.89 S. Seepage 843.27 26141.22 Bottom Seepage 2189.25 67866.90 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 U nit 5 Blowdown 96.82 3001.46 ID Pumped Water 774.24 24001.46 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 9546.35 295936.97 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -133.36 -41 34.3 1 N. Seepage -2.15 -66.72 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -8496.44 -263389.76 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outfl ow Total Out: -8631.96 -267590.80 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 91 4.39 28346.17 Observed Change 2504.94 77653.08 5-79 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

April 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 6.92 207.58 E. Seepage 8457. 74 253732.07 N. Seepage 0.69 20.75 S. Seepage 1325.65 39769.41 Bottom Seepage 3391.45 101743.46 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 165.25 4957.53 ID Pumped Water 751.05 22531.49 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 14098.74 422962.29 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -1.16 -34.89 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -8372.65 -251179.64 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -8373.82 -251214.54 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 5724.93 171747.75 Observed Change -4057.29 -12171 8.78 5-80 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

May 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 22.76 705.69 E.Seepage 14314.76 443757.52 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 1950.48 60464.95 Bottom Seepage 5815.91 180293.08 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Un it 5 Blowdown 169.25 5246.87 ID Pumped Water 3405.55 105571.94 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 25678.71 796040.04 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage - 18.40 -570.36 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -25285.18 -783840.65 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -25303.58 -784411.01 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 375.13 11629.03 Observed Change 6228.37 193079.32 5-81 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

June 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 34.43 1032.86 E. Seepage 12237.99 367139.73 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 201 1. 79 60353.71 Bottom Seepage 6058.29 181748.84 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 148.97 4469.00 ID Pumped Water 4597.36 137920.85 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 25088.83 752665.00 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -4.13 -123.93 N. Seepage - 16.95 -508.47 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -21821.28 -654638.29 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -21842.36 -655270.68 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3246.48 97394.32 Observed Change 8658..55 259756.64 5-82 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

July 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 19.96 6 18.77 E.Seepage 1467.54 45493.62 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 542.84 16828. 19 Bottom Seepage 1464. 15 45388.73 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 U nit 5 Blowdown 164.90 5111.87 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3659.39 113441.18 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E.Seepage -5149 .44 -159632.70 N. Seepage -6.85 -2 12.23 S. Seepage -59. 11 - 1832.49 00 Bottom Seepage -8619.80 -2672 13.76 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outfl ow Total Out: -13835.20 -428891.19 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -10175.81 -315450.01 Observed Change 3237.34 100357.40 5-83 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

August 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 6.44 199.73 E. Seepage 4818. 73 149380.50 N. Seepage 0.98 30.43 S. Seepage 500.29 15508.86 Bottom Seepage 2143. 75 66456.30 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 151.94 4710.17 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 7622.13 236285.99 W. Seepage -57.15 -1771.69 E. Seepage -57.86 -1793.76 N. Seepage -0.60 -18.59 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -1809.39 -56091.02 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1925.00 -59675.06 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 5697.13 176610.93 Observed Change 4028.64 124887.94 5-84 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

September 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.46 73.74 E.Seepage 2518.16 75544.84 N. Seepage 0. 12 3.49 S. Seepage 365.74 10972.20 Bottom Seepage 867.21 26016.23 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Un it 5 Blowdown 142.95 4288.51 ID Pumped Water 406. 90 12207.06 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 4303.54 129106.06 W. Seepage -681.83 -20454.85 E.Seepage -725.18 -21755.44 N. Seepage -3.46 -103.68 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -4157 .26 -124717.89 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5567.73 -167031.86 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -1264.19 -37925.80 Observed Change -3663.57 -109906.97 5-85 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

October 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 1.29 39.99 E. Seepage 2800.88 86827.20 N. Seepage 0.39 12.19 S. Seepage 219.37 6800.38 Bottom Seepage 4150.65 128670.25 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

...-=

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 B lowdown 108.85 3374.49 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 7281.44 225724.50 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -990.71 -30712.12 N. Seepage -3.96 -122.70 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -38.92 -1206.45 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 B lowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1033.59 -32041.28 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 6247.85 193683.22 Observed Change -3871.33 -120011.08 5-86 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

November 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.32 39.50 E.Seepage 2309.02 69270.64 N. Seepage 1.24 37.3 1 S. Seepage 415.72 12471.49 Bottom Seepage 1942.59 58277.79 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Un it 5 Blowdown 72.95 2188.41 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 4742.84 142285.15 W. Seepage -2.60 -77.88 E.Seepage -395.12 -11853.47 N. Seepage - 1.38 -41.50 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -1464.94 -43948.27 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1864.04 -55921.12 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 2878.80 86364.02 Observed Change -3673.05 -110191.36 5-87 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

December 2011 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.55 79.07 E. Seepage 3595.66 111465.45 N. Seepage 1.01 31.46 S. Seepage 701.00 21730.94 Bottom Seepage 1765.94 54744.18 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 105.19 3260.84 ID Pumped Water 431.13 13365.08 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 6602.48 204677.00 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -99.37 -3080.36 N. Seepage -2.0 I -62.16 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -6333.22 -196329.83 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -6434.59 -199472.35 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 167.89 5204.65 Observed Change -3828.22 -118674.85 5-88 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

January 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 5.92 183.39 E. Seepage 5523.45 17 1226.89 N. Seepage 0. 16 4.83 S. Seepage 824.99 25574.55 Bottom Seepage 2720. 16 84324.88 rJJ.

u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 5 Blowdown 129.55 4016.08 ID Pumped Water 2219.37 68800.40 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 11423.58 354131.01 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -14.38 -445.70 N. Seepage -8.30 -257.3 1 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJJ. Bottom Seepage -1 3952.78 -432536. 10 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

"""....0 Evaporation 0.00 0.00

s U nit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -13975.46 -433239.11 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2551.87 -79108.10 Observed Change -2625.35 -81385.79 5-89 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

February 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W . Seepage 4.80 139.07 E. Seepage 2717.89 78818.90 N. Seepage 1.78 51.48 S. Seepage 627.76 18204.99 Bottom Seepage 3039.98 88159.42 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

...-=

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 B lowdown 114.21 3312.10 ID Pumped Water 189.46 5494.29 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 6695.87 194180.25 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -713.59 -20694. 17 N. Seepage -0.50 -14.61 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -4974.71 -144266.56 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 B lowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5688.80 -164975.34 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1007.07 29204.91 Observed Change 3362.46 97511.42 5-90 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

March 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3.50 108.45 E. Seepage 4722.94 14641 1.22 N. Seepage 4.94 153.03 S. Seepage 899.57 27886.53 Bottom Seepage 341 2.96 105801.72 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 143.97 4463.00 ID Pumped Water 187.62 5816. 11 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 9375.49 290640.06 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -243.93 -7561.81 N. Seepage -0.2 1 -6.62 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -3587 .83 -111 222.82 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation U nit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -3831.98 -118791.24 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 5543.51 171848.81 Observed Change -500.48 -15514.87 5-91 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

April 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 12.67 380.17 E. Seepage 5083.99 152519.68 N. Seepage 1.97 59.07 S. Seepage 1027.09 30812.75 Bottom Seepage 3222.55 96676.59 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 143.15 4294.46 ID Pumped Water 1035.51 31065.19 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 10526.93 315807.89 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -121.57 -3647.20 N. Seepage -0.98 -29.32 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -7106.70 -213201.07 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -7229.25 -216877.58 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3297.68 98930.31 Observed Change 4132 ..59 123977.58 5-92 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

May 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 7.32 226.98 E. Seepage 150.38 4661.72 N. Seepage 5.55 172. 14 S. Seepage 162.56 5039.38 Bottom Seepage 2945.99 91325.68 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 141.53 4387.54 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3413.34 105813.44 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -5714.04 -177135.24 N. Seepage -0.30 -9.32 S. Seepage -0.83 -25.76 00 Bottom Seepage -3916.75 -121419.1 3 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -9631.92 -298589.45 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -6218.58 -192776.01 Observed Change -4664.11 -144587.53 5-93 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

June 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.77 53.22 E. Seepage 743.75 22312.43 N. Seepage 3.89 l 16.62 S. Seepage 314.62 9438.70 Bottom Seepage 2478.26 74347.84 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 150.80 4524.00 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3693.09 110792.82 W. Seepage -32.19 -965.63 E. Seepage -3706.73 -1 11201.98 N. Seepage -0.27 -7.97 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -2818.78 -84563.47 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -6557.97 -196739.05 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2864.87 -85946.23 Observed Change -2740.38 -82211.41 5-94 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

July 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.29 7 1.09 E. Seepage 4.53 140.39 N. Seepage 5.42 167.89 S. Seepage 90.89 2817.55 Bottom Seepage 3358.12 104101.82 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 155.80 4829.81 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3617.05 112128.55 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -4476.42 -138769. 10 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -25.83 -800.83 00 Bottom Seepage -3810.46 -1 18124.27 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -8312.72 -257694.20 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -4695.67 -145565.65 Observed Change -2497.19 -77412.85 5-95 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

August2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.22 68.82 E. Seepage 1315.71 40787. l 0 N. Seepage 4.79 148.53 S. Seepage 164.61 5102.99 Bottom Seepage 2923.81 90638.04 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 160.70 4981.80 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 4571.85 141727.27 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -2322.51 -71997.77 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage - 11.91 -369.3 1 00 Bottom Seepage -2437.96 -75576.61 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -4772.38 -147943.69 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -200.53 -6216.42 Observed Change 1642.83 50927.78 5-96 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

September 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.28 38.29 E. Seepage 561.40 16841.87 N. Seepage 2.87 85.98 S. Seepage 36.55 l 096.39 Bottom Seepage 1640.38 49211.44 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 140.84 4225.23 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 2383.31 71499.20 W. Seepage -67.28 -2018.37 E. Seepage -3779.14 -1 13374.23 N. Seepage -0.02 -0.64 S. Seepage -13.36 -400.94 00 Bottom Seepage -4064.05 -121921.62 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -7923.86 -237715.80 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -5540.55 -166216.60 Observed Change -2600.46 -78013.94 5-97 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

October 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 0.75 23.18 E. Seepage 3404.60 105542.53 N. Seepage 3.25 100.85 S. Seepage 612.24 18979.43 Bottom Seepage 3429.20 106305.29 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 137.73 4269.50 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 7587.77 235220.78 W. Seepage -163.09 -5055.73 E. Seepage -1660. 10 -51462.95 N. Seepage -1.16 -35.89 S. Seepage -6.52 -202.27 00 Bottom Seepage -1982.01 -61442.38 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -3812.88 -118199.24 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3774.89 117021 .55 Observed Change 6379.02 197749.67 5-98 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

November 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.70 80.98 E. Seepage 1784.00 53520.07 N. Seepage 4. 16 124.84 S. Seepage 684.72 20541.49 Bottom Seepage 3275.44 98263. 10 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 95.89 2876.57 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5846.90 175407.05 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -980.36 -29410.67 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -958.69 -28760.77 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation U nit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1939. 05 -58171.43 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3907.85 117235.62 Observed Change 2368.82 71064.75 5-99 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

December 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 6.22 192.82 E. Seepage 108.87 3375.04 N. Seepage 4.21 130.5 1 S. Seepage 276.39 8568.06 Bottom Seepage 1940.48 60154.80 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 109.16 3383.97 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 2445.33 75805.20 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -3354.85 -1 04000.43 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage -0.23 -7. 11 00 Bottom Seepage -2072.95 -64261.37 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5428.03 -168268.92 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2982.70 -92463.72 Observed Change -7753.08 -240345.33 5-100 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

January 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 6.20 192.05 E. Seepage 1924. 13 59647.96 N. Seepage 4.36 135.08 S. Seepage 687.26 21305.13 Bottom Seepage 2256.99 69966.81 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 126.94 3935.07 ID Pumped Water 60.40 1872.54 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5066.28 157054.65 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1075.17 -33330.31 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -722.42 -22395.07 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1797.59 -55725.38 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3268.69 101329.27 Observed Change 525.54 16291.69 5-101 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

February 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 8.45 236.61 E. Seepage 2663.89 74589.03 N. Seepage 3. 16 88.59 S. Seepage 894.66 25050.34 Bottom Seepage 2063.41 57775.55 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 119.06 3333.75 ID Pumped Water 324.14 9075.87 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 6076.78 170149.75 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1306.60 -36584.73 N. Seepage -0.08 -2.20 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -3429.98 -96039.49 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -4736.66 -132626.43 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1340.12 37523.32 Observed Change 1710.98 47907.57 5-102 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

March 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 9.49 294.09 E. Seepage 6181.90 191639.04 N. Seepage 1.42 44.00 S. Seepage 1225.74 37997.99 Bottom Seepage 2066.77 64069.78 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 140.55 4356.98 ID Pumped Water 347.21 10763.51 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 9973.08 309165.38 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -2.06 -63.94 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -485 1.44 -150394.72 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -4853.51 -150458.66 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 5119.57 158706.72 Observed Change 4065.17 126020.42 5-103 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

April 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 11.54 346.20 E. Seepage 6804.14 204124.17 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 838.93 25168.01 Bottom Seepage 2205.58 66167.30 "1

u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0 .00 0.00

....0

=

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 B lowdown 139.68 4190.40 ID Pumped Water 478.94 14368.08 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 10478.81 314364.17 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -72.08 -2162.45 N . Seepage -10.84 -325.20 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -B020.92 -390627.55 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Un it 5 B lowdown 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID P um ping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake P lant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -13103.84 -393115.19 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2625.03 -78751.02 Observed Change 4774.59 143237.63 5-104 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

May 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 5.6 1 174.03 E. Seepage 3676.69 11 3977.27 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 618.85 19184.31 Bottom Seepage 827.40 25649.44 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 157. 13 4871.04 ID Pumped Water 287.40 8909.54 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5573.08 172765.63 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -746.77 -23149.74 N. Seepage -6.57 -203.76 S. Seepage - 12.70 -393.70 00 Bottom Seepage -8403.65 -260513.06 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation U nit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -9169.69 -284260.25 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -3596.60 -111494.63 Observed Change 1237.57 38364.62 5-105 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

June 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3.59 107.83 E. Seepage 1935. 70 58071.12 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 260.17 7805.20 Bottom Seepage 466.22 13986.52 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 145.05 4351.64 ID Pumped Water 18.96 568.88 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 2829.71 84891.18 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -6156.68 -184700.28 N. Seepage - 10. 10 -303.10 S. Seepage -367.26 -11017.89 00 Bottom Seepage -9970. 74 -299122.23 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -16504.78 -495143.50 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -13675.08 -410252.31 Observed Change -4607.17 -13821 5.25 5-106 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

July 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.60 80.5 1 E. Seepage 3940.49 122155.33 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 520.65 16140.17 Bottom Seepage 1521.54 47167.79 00 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 149.46 4633.21 ID Pumped Water 20.32 629.86 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 6155.06 190806.87 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1223. 74 -37935.92 N. Seepage -6.19 -191.85 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -4747.42 -147169.99 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -5977. 35 -185297.76 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 177.71 5509.11 Observed Change 4833.38 149834.84 5-107 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

August 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.65 51.06 E. Seepage 3909. 73 12 1201.56 N. Seepage 0.40 12.37 S. Seepage 436.28 13524.78 Bottom Seepage 1229.28 38107.54 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 136.24 4223.30 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5713 ..57 177120.59 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 11 96.82 -37101.49 N. Seepage -6.00 -186.1 1 S. Seepage - 16.17 -501.24 00 Bottom Seepage -3601 .96 -111660.71 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -4820.95 -149449.56 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 892.61 27671.04 Observed Change 3101..52 96147.08 5-108 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

September 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.25 37.54 E. Seepage 4990.46 149713.86 N. Seepage 3.92 117.62 S. Seepage 743.84 22315.07 Bottom Seepage 3869.36 116080.74 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 159.20 4775.91 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 10969.13 329073.89 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -134.55 -4036.48 N . Seepage -0.19 -5.75 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -263.07 -7892.07 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -397.81 -11934.30 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 9370.21 281106.43 Observed Change 5122.20 153666.00 5-109 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

October 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 0.96 29.76 E. Seepage 3904.36 12 1035. 14 N. Seepage 7.80 241.7 1 S. Seepage 761.95 23620.31 Bottom Seepage 6513.91 201931.11 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 164.60 5102.72 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 11353.57 351960.75 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -316.00 -9795.90 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -86.56 -2683.26 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -402.55 -12479.17 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 10951.02 339481 .59 Observed Change 5172.10 160335.08 5-110 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

November 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.34 40.07 E. Seepage 3405.86 102175.90 N. Seepage 6.40 192.02 S. Seepage 808.83 24265.00 Bottom Seepage 3906.18 1171 85.38 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 131.07 3932.08 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 8259.68 247790.45 W. Seepage -21.40 -641.98 E. Seepage -470.60 -14117.90 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -769.53 -23085.79 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1261.52 -37845.66 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 6998.16 209944.79 Observed Change 3117.41 93522.19 5-111 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

December 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.50 46.37 E. Seepage 1005.24 31 162.38 N. Seepage 1.41 43.82 S. Seepage 320.93 9948.86 Bottom Seepage 1003.58 31111.07 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 130.83 4055.70 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 2463.49 76368.21 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -1924.84 -59669.92 N. Seepage -0.72 -22.30 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -2688.32 -83337.81 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -4613.87 -143030.02 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -2150.38 -143030.02 Observed Change -6529.12 -202402.80 5-112 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

January 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.36 73.19 E. Seepage 2226.86 69032.53 N. Seepage 3.76 116.46 S. Seepage 462.15 14326.61 Bottom Seepage 2102.48 65 176.86 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 122.02 3782.67 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 4919.62 152508.32 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -660.45 -20473.93 N. Seepage -0.1 1 -3.52 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -953.71 -29565.14 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation U nit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1614 .28 -50042.59 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 3305.35 102465.73 Observed Change -445.87 -13822.03 5-113 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

February 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.99 83.81 E. Seepage 3608.33 10 1033.25 N. Seepage 4.91 137.49 S. Seepage 412.57 11551.82 Bottom Seepage 3078.46 86196.88 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 118.73 3324.34 ID Pumped Water 31.99 895.74 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 7257.98 203223.33 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -195.05 -5461.33 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -419.64 -11749.95 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -614.69 -17211.28 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 6643.29 186012.05 Observed Change 625.60 17516.93 5-114 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

March 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3.36 104.3 1 E. Seepage 4067.78 12610 1.17 N. Seepage 5.56 172.22 S. Seepage 38 1.87 11 837.92 Bottom Seepage 3172.67 98352. 74 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 0

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 147.23 4563.98 ID Pumped Water 58.78 1822. 19 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 7837.24 242954.52 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -6.43 - 199.21 N. Seepage -0.08 -2.45 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -686.46 -21280.39 u

u 0

0

I Precipitation and Runoff Evaporation U nit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equa l to Outflow Total Out: -692.97 -21482.06 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 7144.27 221472.46 Observed Change 3657.01 113367.46 5-115 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

April 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 5.61 168.39 E. Seepage 822 1. 78 246653.26 N. Seepage 5.79 173.62 S. Seepage 910.11 27303.36 Bottom Seepage 4988.04 149641.17 00 u Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

Q Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 176.97 5309.23 ID Pumped Water 100.96 3028.93 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 14409.26 432277.95 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -2828.19 -84845.68 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

-=

""'Q 0

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 P lant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -2828.19 -84845.68 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 11581.08 347432.27 Observed Change 5846.87 175406.11 5-116 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

May 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 19.51 604.92 E. Seepage 11455.78 355 129.18 N. Seepage 0.97 30. 19 S. Seepage 1663.96 51582.86 Bottom Seepage 6357.27 197075.45 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

= Unit 5 Blowdown 161.19 4996.88 ID Pumped Water 376.82 11681.42 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total ln: 20035.5.1 621100.89 W. SeeJDage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -3.53 -109.40 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -7474.33 -231704.37 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation U nit 3, and Runoff Evaporation 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -7477.86 -231 813.77 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 12557.65 -231813.77 Observed Change 1599.21 49575.59 5-117 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

June 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 23.70 710.97 E. Seepage 6914.35 207430.40 N. Seepage 0.41 12. 17 S. Seepage 1226.07 36781.98 Bottom Seepage 3144.95 94348.42 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

= Unit 5 Blowdown 185.05 5551.44 ID Pumped Water 146.27 4388.23 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total ln: 11640.79 349223.61 W. SeeJDage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -3.08 -92.33 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -1625.15 -48754.54 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation U nit 3, and Runoff Evaporation 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total O ut: -1628.23 -48846.87 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 10012.56 300376.73 Observed Change 8607.32 258219.46 5-118 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

July 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 14.9*3 462.74 E. Seepage 3538.20 109684.24 N. Seepage 0. 10 3.20 S. Seepage 715.30 22174.33 Bottom Seepage 1643.69 50954.52 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

= Unit 5 Blowdown 202.80 6286.80 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 72.82 2257.5 1 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total ln: 6187.85 19 1823.34 W. SeeJDage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -293.89 -9 11 0.44 N. Seepage -7.68 -237.97 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -1708.02 -52948.49 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation U nit 3, and Runoff Evaporation 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total O ut: -2009.58 -62296.90 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 41 78.27 129526.44 Observed Change 5113. 71 158525.04 5-119 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

August 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 5.46 169.33 E. Seepage 7697.88 238634.27 N. Seepage 0.36 11.21 S. Seepage 780.04 2418 1.32 Bottom Seepage 3275.25 101532.74 rJ) Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

= Unit 5 Blowdown 208.36 6459.04 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 75.08 2327.35 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total ln: 12042.43 373315.27 W. SeeJDage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage 0.00 0.00 N. Seepage -3. 14 -97.39 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -61 .22 -1897.75 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation U nit 3, a nd Runoff Evaporation 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blow down 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Inta ke Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total O ut: -64.36 -1995.14 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 11978.07 371320.13 Observed Change 7731.72 239683.45 5-120 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

September 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.92 57.51 E. Seepage 4382.24 13 1467.29 N. Seepage 1.1 5 34.56 S. Seepage 1016.29 30488.73 Bottom Seepage 2953.06 8859 1.95 rJ) Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

= Unit 5 Blowdown 194. 3 1 5829.1 5 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 86.86 2605.80 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total ln: 8635.83 259074.99 W. SeeJDage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -324.60 -9738.11 N. Seepage -0.95 -28.50 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -21 1.28 -6338.26 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation U nit 3, a nd Runoff Evaporation 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blow down 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Inta ke Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total O ut: -536.83 -16104.87 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 8099.00 242970.11 Observed Change 1833.21 54996.24 5-121 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

October 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.83 87.86 E. Seepage 103.09 3195.74 N. Seepage 0.50 15.42 S. Seepage 332.18 10297.71 Bottom Seepage 893.37 27694.54 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

= Unit 5 Blowdown 175.24 5432.40 ID Pumped Water 592.23 18359.04 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 90.1 3 2793.93 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total ln: 2189.57 67876.64 W. SeeJDage -948.41 -29400.67 E. Seepage -9654.91 -299302. 19 N. Seepage -7.75 -240.29 S. Seepage -81.25 -2518.86 rJ) Bottom Seepage -9834.43 -304867.45 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation U nit 3, and Runoff Evaporation 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -20526.76 -636329.47 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -18337.19 -568452.83 Observed Change -12726.02 -394506.69 5-122 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

November 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 4.38 135.93 E. Seepage 914.73 28356.77 N. Seepage 1.2 1 37.58 S. Seepage 473.29 14672.03 Bottom Seepage 517.41 16039.64 rJ) Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

= Unit 5 Blowdown 133.82 4 148.48 ID Pumped Water 694. 15 21518.73 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 92.73 2874.76 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total ln: 2831.74 87783.92 W. SeeJDage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -3 19 1.19 -98926.85 N. Seepage - 1.57 -48.8 1 S. Seepage -23.20 -719.15 rJ) Bottom Seepage -6108.72 -189370.45 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation U nit 3, a nd Runoff Evaporation 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blow down 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Inta ke Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total O ut: -9324.69 -289065.26 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -6492.95 -201281 Observed Change -9424.38 -282731.28 5-123 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

December 2014 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.98 92.26 E. Seepage 1559.53 48345.42 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 88 1.57 27328.52 Bottom Seepage 1696. 12 52579.83 rJ) Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

= Unit 5 Blowdown 140.97 4370.16 ID Pumped Water 26.26 814.17 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 59.8 1 1853.98 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total ln: 4367.24 135384.33 W. SeeJDage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 1487.27 -46 105.22 N. Seepage - 1.54 -47.88 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -1719.22 -53295.82 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation U nit 3, a nd Runoff Evaporation 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blow down 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Inta ke Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total O ut: -3208.03 -99448.92 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 11 59.21 35935.42 Observed Change 611.65 18961.30 5-124 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

January 2015 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.78 86.16 E. Seepage 1889.33 58569.13 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 773.79 23987.45 Bottom Seepage 2010.64 62329.98 rJ) Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

= Unit 5 Blowdown 15 1.96 4710.77 ID Pumped Water 0.00 0.00 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 1906.00 59086.05 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total ln: 6734.50 208769.55 W. SeeJDage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -826.80 -25630.88 N. Seepage - 1.3 1 -40.72 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -917.38 -28438.86 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation U nit 3, a nd Runoff Evaporation 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blow down 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Inta ke Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total O ut: -1745.50 -54110.46 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 4989.00 154659.08 Observed Change -870.42 -26983.15 5-125 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

February 2015 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 4.84 150.08 E. Seepage 3093.63 95902.56 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 955.91 29633.23 Bottom Seepage 1270.26 39378.13 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

= Unit 5 Blowdown 138.29 4286.90 ID Pumped Water 236.74 7339.05 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 2784. 16 86308.84 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total ln: 8483.83 262998.80 W. SeeJDage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -896.00 -27775.96 N. Seepage -1.48 -46.03 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -6247 .18 -193662.57 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation U nit 3, and Runoff Evaporation 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total O ut: -7144.66 -221484.56 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1339.17 41 514.24 Observed Change 4227.51 118370.20 5-126 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

March 2015 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 6.84 2 l l.99 E. Seepage 25 14.3 l 77943.47 N. Seepage 0.00 0.00 S. Seepage 736.80 22840.77 Bottom Seepage 150.96 4679.72 rJ) Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

= Unit 5 Blowdown 166.66 5 166.45 ID Pumped Water 679.1 7 2 1054.32 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 3082.46 95556.22 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total ln: 7337.19 227452.93 W. SeeJDage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage - 1398.29 -43347.03 N. Seepage -7.42 -230. l l S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -19423.49 -602 128.07 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation U nit 3, a nd Runoff Evaporation 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blow down 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Inta ke Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total O ut: -20829.20 -645705.21 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -13492.01 -418252.28 Observed Change -2936.23 -91023.19 5-127 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

April 2015 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 10.69 331.39 E. Seepage 8653.51 268258.95 N. Seepage 0.03 0.84 S. Seepage 822.92 25510.60 Bottom Seepage 3021.01 93651.27 rJ) Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

= Unit 5 Blowdown 174.87 5420.98 ID Pumped Water 1658.22 51404.67 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 2860.7 1 88682.03 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total ln: 17201 .96 533260.73 W. SeeJDage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -36.09 - 111 8.73 N. Seepage - 11.26 -349.19 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -22298.06 -691239.80 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation U nit 3, and Runoff Evaporation 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total O ut: -22345.41 -692707.72 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -5143.45 -159446.99 Observed Change 7414. 73 222441.78 5-128 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components.

May 2015 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 8. 19 253.84 E. Seepage 4340.30 134549.32 N. Seepage 1.26 39. 14 S. Seepage 892.08 27654.53 Bottom Seepage 1451.68 45002. 18 rJ) Precipitation a nd Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

= Unit 5 Blowdown 21 0.76 6533.60 ID Pumped Water 54.44 1687.60 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 1165.96 36 144.64 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total ln: 8124.67 251864.86 W. SeeJDage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -46. 13 - 1430.13 N. Seepage - 1.49 -46.24 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 rJ) Bottom Seepage -73 18.65 -226878.25 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation U nit 3, a nd Runoff Evaporation 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blow down 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Inta ke Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total O ut: -7366.28 -228354.61 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 758.39 23510.24 Observed Change -3963.43 -122866.42 5-129 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-6. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components for (Pre-Uprate).

September 2010 to February 2012 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.30 522.73 E. Seepage 5.01 8694.66 N. Seepage 0.00 1.78 S. Seepage 1.08 1871.80 Bottom Seepage 2.29 3968.39 IJ) Precipitation and Runoff 6.74 11687.03 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.13 226.76

....= Unit 5 Blowdown 0.53 925.77 ID Pumping 1.53 2648.39 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 17.62 30547.30 W. Seepage 0.00 -2.67 E. Seepage -l.15 -1986.23 N. Seepage 0.00 -5.93 S. Seepage 0.00 -6.46 IJ) Bottom Seepage -5.65 -9798.61 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

,_ Evaporation -11.34 -19672.07

....Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0

= 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -18.15 -31471.97 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -0.53 -924.67 Observed Change -1.13 -616.65 5-130 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-6. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components (Interim).

March 2012 to May 2013 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.21 362.95 E. Seepage 2.55 4418.8 1 N. Seepage 0.00 7.07 S. Seepage 0.74 1283.45 Bottom Seepage 2.64 4572.75 IJ) Precipitation and Runoff 5.68 9847.12 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.14 243.76

....= Unit 5 Blowdown 0.50 861.70 ID Pumping 0.82 1428.30 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 13.28 23025.91 W. Seepage 0.00 -0.70 E. Seepage -1 .28 -22 12.48 N. Seepage 0.00 -1.38 S. Seepage 0.00 -5.45 IJ) Bottom Seepage -2.47 -4286.45 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

,_ Evaporation -8.85 -15341.70

....Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0

= 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -12.60 -21848.17 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 0.68 1177.74 Observed Change 2.36 1077.38 5-131 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-6. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components (Post-Uprate).

June 2013 to May 2015 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.26 444.00 E. Seepage 6.02 10444.35 N. Seepage 0.00 7.52 S. Seepage 1.49 2575.27 Bottom Seepage 3.94 6837.60 IJ) Pre cipitation and Runoff 7.10 12312.8 1 u Evaporation u 0.00 0.00

....Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.22 380.50

....= Unit 5 Blowdown 0.93 1605.64 ID Pumping 1.23 2129.31 Added Water (e.g. L-3 l E) 1.93 3352.82 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 23.12 40089.83 W. Seepage 0.00 -1.30 E. Seepage -1.0 1 -1742.78 N. Seepage 0.00 -3.14 S. Seepage -0.02 -32. 13 IJ) Bottom Seepage -3.13 -5419.68 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

,_ Evaporation -19.34 -33528.70

....Q Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0

= 0.00 0.00 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -23.49 -40727.72 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -0.37 -637.89 Observed Change -1.76 -1286.06 5-132 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-7. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components (Pre-Uprate).

September 2010 to February 2012 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.28 3952.60 E. Seepage 1454.26 2521693.12 N. Seepage 0.21 369.94 S. Seepage 209.49 363248.88 Bottom Seepage 742.22 1287006.96

'J) Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

=

.... Unit 5 Blowdown 38.99 67601.64 ID Pumped Water 229.35 397692.82 Added Water (e.g. L-3 lE) 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 2676.80 4641565.97 W. Seepage -24. 18 -41936.73 E. Seepage -406.03 -704049.99 N. Seepage - 1.58 -2738.28 S. Seepage - 1.66 -2873.69 00 Bottom Seepage -2516.05 -4362837.54 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation Unit 3, and Runoff Evaporation 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Pla nt Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -2949.50 -5 l 14436.23 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -272.70 -472870.26 Observed Change -502.50 -274869.07 5-133 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-7. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components (Interim).

March 2012 to May 2013 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 1.43 2486.99 E. Seepage 686.33 1190089.51 N. Seepage 0.88 1527.13 S. Seepage 149.36 258989.04 Bottom Seepage 669.24 1160455.22

'J) Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

=

.... Unit 5 Blowdown 36.29 62923.11 ID Pumped Water 47.22 81870.84 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 1590.74 2758341 .84 W. Seepage -4.64 -8039.73 E. Seepage -521.22 -903788.60 N. Seepage -0.39 -684.84 S. Seepage - 1.27 -2199.92 00 Bottom Seepage -1107.53 -1920463.42 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation Unit 3, and Runoff Evaporation 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -1635.05 -2835176.51 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -44.31 -76834.67 Observed Change 372.47 170219.73 5-134 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-7. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components (Post-Uprate).

June 2013 to May 2015 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.41 4 177.83 E. Seepage 1733.45 3005802.21 N. Seepage 0.80 1391.65 S. Seepage 305.52 529773.17 Bottom Seepage 1060.44 1838796.14

'J) Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....0 Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

=

.... Unit 5 Blowdown 67.62 117247.84 ID Pumped Water 83.73 145192.82 Added Water (e.g. L-3 IE) 219.43 380491.12 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 3473.40 6022872.76 W . Seepage -17.33 -30042.65 E. Seepage -539.78 -935977.91 N. Seepage - 1.34 -2329.95 S. Seepage -8.5] -14757.14 00 Bottom Seepage -1991.88 -34539 17.68 u

u

....0 0

=

Precipitation Unit 3, and Runoff Evaporation 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -2558.84 -4437025.34 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 914.56 1585847.43 Observed Change 233.18 170219.73 5-135 0

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Sections L31-E seepage Biscayne Bay Seepage (A)

Evaporation

.:::~!.I I I I'""~-- I : . ,_--

r- 1

~

j

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~.,

4S**pat,;* I (B)

Figure 5.3-1 . Flow (A) into and (B) out of the CCS, Shown in Cross-Section.

5-143 ff

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - March ZOJ6 Sections 60 Modeled Flow Observed Flow 40 20 0

(.!J

~

~ 0 0 g u::

2l 1

3: 20 40

.f,()

Figure 5.3-2. Modeled versus Measured Net Monthly Flows of Water for the CCS over the 57-Month Period .

5-144 B

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - March ZOJ6 Sections 20000 Modeled Flow 15000 Observed Flow 10000

-0 0

0 0

5000 X

.0

~

0 l

~

0 U:: -5000 i

~

-10000

• 15000

-20000 Figure 5.3-3. Modeled versus Measured Net Monthly Flows of Salt Mass for the CCS over the 57-Month Period .

5-145 B

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - March ZOJ6 Sections 1

+ Simulated Water Eleva don, 00

• MNsured Water Elevations CIO 0.5 0

~ *

~ ~

z

~ **

C

... -0:

,!2

~\J (II w..

11>

11>

-1

~ -1.5 t'.)

u

-2 Figure 5.3-4. Modeled versus Measured Water Elevations (NAVO 88) in thie CCS over the 57-Month Period; Used to Validate the Conceptual Model and Calibrate the Water Balance Model to Temporal Trends in Water Elevation.

5-146 B

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project - March ZOJ6 Sections 100

+ Simul*tod Conc*ntration (r/L) 90

• Musured Concentration (g/L)

--~

r 80

~

> 70

-= 60 iv Vl

~

u so 40 30 Figure 5.3-5. Modeled versus Measur,ed Salinity in the CCS over the 57-Month Period; Used to Validate the Conceptual Model and Calibrate the Water Balance Model to Temporal Trends in Salinity.

5-147 B

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August2016 Section 5 Figures 5.1-5 and 5.1-6 depict chloride concentration cross-sections for March 2016. The approximate location of the 19,000 mg/L chloride line is shown. MDC has defined hypersaline water as chloride concentrations above 19,000 mg/L (MDC 2015a). This isopleth represents an estimated extent of hypersaline water west of the CCS and is based on interpolation methods and best professional judgment. Further refinement of this line will be made based on additional monitoring data collected.

5.2 Water and Salt Balance Model Tetra Tech developed a model of the water and salt balance for the CCS. The purpose of this model is to quantify the volume of water and mass of salt entering and exiting the CCS over a 12-month period. Details of this Excel-based model, the underlying conceptualization of the relationship between the CCS and the surrounding environmental systems, key calculations, and results were provided in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2012a). That version of the model simulated water and salt flow to and from the CCS for the period between September 2010 and June 2012. The conceptual model and associated calculations are predominantly unchanged since last presented in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2012a). In the Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report, refinements to the model were made and water and salt flow to and from the CCS was simulated for the period between September 20 l O and May 2015. In this report, the modeled period encompasses the reporting period (12-month period) from June 2015 through May 2016. This period includes the effects of the CCS salinity reduction efforts. A brief sunmrnry of the model is provided below.

Model results and corresponding conclusions regarding the operation of the CCS are based on the current calibrated water and salt balance model and are provided here in. The Excel spreadsheet that comprises the model is provided in a separate data file.

5.2.1 Model Summary As Figure 5.2-1 depicts, the water balance for the proposed control volume for this monitoring period is comprised of seepage (lateral through the sides and vertical through the bottom),

blowdown (additional water pumped from other units to the CCS), added water (pumped from L-3 lE canal and/or groundwater), precipitation (including runoff from earthen berms between canals), and evaporation. Aside from evaporation and precipitation, these are the same mechanisms by wh ich salt flows into and out of the CCS. The means by which water and/or salt is transferred (e.g., seepage, evaporation) are calculated using various equations provided in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2012a). Calculations were performed for a 12-month period from June 2015 through May 2016. Average flows of water and salt into and out of the control volume were calculated for each day of this period using hydro logic, water quality, and meteorological data measured within, beneath, and adjacent to the CCS. The average daily flows were summed to estimate the amount of water and salt that enters or exits the control volume (i.e., the CCS) during each month and the entire 12-month period. These calcu lations demonstrate and validate the conceptual model of the CCS and, in so doing, illustrate the hydrologic mechanisms by which the CCS functions.

5-4

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August2016 Section 5 Calculated water flows are reported in 106 gallons per day (millions of gallons per day [MGD]).

The mass flux into or out of the control volume is calculated by multiplying the volumetric flow by the salinity of the body of water from which the water is flowing. Salinity was monitored at all groundwater and surface water stations employed in the ensuing calculations and was reported in the practical salinity scale (PSS-78), which is equivalent to grams per liter (g/L).

Calculated mass fluxes are reported in thousands of pounds per day (lb x 1,000/day).

The gain/loss of water and salt mass within the control volume during some period of time results in a change in the control volume's water and salt mass storage. Increased water storage, for instance, occurs when more water enters the control volume than exits. Storage, then, can be estimated by summing all of the components of the water (and salt) balance. When the net flow is positive (into the control volume) during a specified period of time, the storage of control volume increases. Conversely, a net negative (out of the control volume) flow implies a decrease in storage during a specified time period.

Another manner in which a change in storage can be estimated relies on direct measurements of water elevations and salinities within the control volume. A change in water elevation within the control volume can be calculated as a difference between water elevations at the beginning and end of a specified time period. The product of this change in water elevations and the surface area of the control volume provide an estimate of the change in the volume of water contained in the control volume during that period of time. Estimates of daily storage changes derived from this method are used to fu1ther calibrate the water and salt balance model to ensure an accurate simulation of temporal trends fo r CCS water elevation and salinity.

5.2.2 Model Calibration, Results, and Discussion The individual components of the water and salt balance were simulated daily and summed for each month from June 2015 through May 2016, as well as for the collective 12-month period.

The individual components of flow are summed in order to calculate a simulated change in volume for each month and for the 12-month period. These simulated changes in storage were compared to observed changes in CCS water and salt storage for each month and the entire calibration period (June 2015 through May 2016). Errors between the simulated and observed storage changes were minimized by adjusting key variables associated with the flow balance model; this process is called calibration. The calibration process ensures that the model can accurately reflect the average changes in CCS storage over the 12-month time frame, while also effective ly capturing day-to-day changes in CCS water and mass storage. Calibration of the water and salt balance model was achieved by adjusting hydraulic conductivities of the aquifer materials adjacent to and beneath the CCS that factor into the calculation of seepage to/from groundwater and Biscayne Bay. Additional adjustable parameters include the coefficients in the wind function (FPL 20 12a), the amount of runoff that enters the control volume as percentage of precipitation, the amount of Unit 5 cooling tower water that is lost to evaporation before entering the CCS, and the salinity of the Unit 5 blowdown as a percentage of seawater. The calibrated model parameter values are provided in Table 5.2-1.

5-5

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August2016 Section 5 5.2.2.1 Parameter Adjustments The horizontal hydraulic conductivities laterally adjacent to the control volume were ca librated to range between 100 ft/day and 500 ft/day. The calibrated vertical conductivities beneath the control volume ranged from 0.1 ft/day to 2 ft/day. 1n order to achieve a better match to observed hydrologic and salt concentration conditions, the northern portion of the internal discharge canals into the CCS and return canals were calibrated to have higher vertical hydraulic conductivities (1.9 ft/day and 0.9 ft/day, respectively) than the middle/southern portions of the internal CCS discharge canals and southern portion of the return canals (0.1 ft/day). The variability in these vertical hydraulic conductivities is attributable to the non-uniform depth of a shallow high flow zone that is variably intersected by deeper CCS canals. The magnitudes of and variability in horizonta l and vertical hydra ulic conductivities are on the same order of magnitude as those in the prior model, where vertical hydraulic conductivity ranged from 0.1 to 3 ft/day and horizontal hydraulic conductivities ranged from 400 to 850 ft/day.

In addition to changes in hydraulic conductivities, revisions were made to both evaporation and precipitation. The equation for evaporation (FPL 2012a) includes an empirical factor. This factor was reduced from 0.66 to 0.60 during the calibration of the 12-month balance model. As the modeled balance is very sensitive to evaporative losses, this was a significant change. The percentage of additional precipitation-based inflow due to runoff from canal berms is an adjustable model parameter. This parameter is time-invariant and increases precipitation-based inflow for all precipitation events; as the precipitation increases, so too does the additional runoff inflow. Since the precipitation is a key inflow to the CCS for moderating salinity, the balance model is sensitive to this parameter. The balance is also sensitive to precipitation-based inflow.

As such, the reduction of runoff-based inflow from 35% to 10% of precipitation was also a notable c hange. This adjustment was necessary in order to match both the ba lance of water and salt flows, as well as the magnitude of CCS water levels and salinity, particularly in months with notable rainfall events.

The impact of the parameters changes, particularly the adjustments made to evaporation and precipitation parameters, is a relatively accurate simulation of the monthly flow balance and simulated daily CCS conditions during the 12-month period between June 2015 and May 2016.

5.2.2.2 Flow Balance Comparisons Results of the calibrated 12-month water and sa lt balance model are provided in Tables 5.2-2 and 5.2-3, respectively. The modeled net flow of water, as calculated by summing the components of the water balance for the 12-month calibration period, is denoted as the "Modeled Change in CCS Storage" and was calcu lated to be an average outflow of 0.63 MGD over the 12-month calibration period. The observed change in storage, which is the difference in the volume of water in the CCS between the final and first days of the calibration period, divided by the number of days in the period, was observed to be an increase in storage at a rate of 1.17 MGD.

Though the model underestimated the change in storage, the residual error between the simulated and observed flow is only 1.8 MGD. This error is small (2.3%) relative to the variability in monthly net observed flows, which range from a net outflow of 34.4 MGD (February 2016) and a net inflow of 42.7 MGD (September 2015).

5-6

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August2016 Section 5 The model simulated a net loss of salt over the 12-month period at rate of3,723 (lb x 1,000)/day.

The corresponding observed rate of salt outflow was calculated by multiplying the average observed salinity in the CCS on the final day and first day of the calibration period by the corresponding CCS volumes on those days. The difference between these two products, divided by the number of days in the calibration period, provides the observed net outflow of salt, 2,958 (lb x 1,000)/day. The en-or associated with the mass flux is an overestimation by approximately 765 (lb x 1,000)/day. As in the case of water balance simulation, the magnitude of this overestimation is small (2.4%) relative to the range in monthly average flows: the observed monthly net mass fluxes range from an outflow of 20,838 (lb x 1,000)/day (November 20 15) to an inflow of 10,965 (lb x 1,000)/day (July 2016).

Figures 5.2-2 and 5.2-3 illustrate the model's ability to match the magnitude and direction of net monthly flows of water and salt, respectively. Figure 5.2-2 compares observed and modeled net monthly flows of water into and out of the CCS. There is a general seasonal trend in observed flows to/from the CCS, where inflows are generally associated with the wet season and outflows are generally associated with the dry season. The key exception to the dry season outflows occurs in December 2015, during which a total of approximately 15 inches of precipitation fell on the CCS. The model is able to replicate the general trends in flow, as well as the unusual inflow of water in December, with reasonable accuracy. However, there are two isolated months where the model does not accurately simulate the net flow (i.e., April 2016 and May 2016).

During these two months, the model simulates a loss of storage (net outflow), whereas an increase in storage was observed.

Figure 5.2-3 compares observed and modeled net monthly flows of salt into and out of the CCS.

A seasonal trend in salt mass flows is apparent (storage decrease during dry season, storage increase during wet season). Like the modeled water flows, estimated salt mass fluxes generally match observed fluxes well. Note that a significant reduction in salt storage (salt outflow) was observed in November and December 2015. The reductions in salt storage observed during these two months are largely attributable to seepage to groundwater. Previously, the greatest observed rate of salt loss (12,726 lb x 1,000/day) from the CCS occurred in October 2014 (FPL 2014); the October through December 2015 salt outflows exceed the October 2014 outflow by 4%, 64%,

and 31 %, respectively. Conversely, the calculated volumetric water seepage in these three months exceeds that of October 2014 (25.65 MGD) by 4%, 21%, and 110%, respectively. As such, the greater salt mass outflow in late-2015 is attributable to greater water seepage at a relatively lower concentration of salt. This is consistent with the observed range of CCS salinity in late-20 15 (34 to 58 g/L) being lower than the range of CCS salinity in October 2014 (65 to 85 g/L). It is important to note that the increased seepage of water from the CCS is a hydrologic response to the addition ofL-31E canal water at an average rate of21 MGD during October and November 2015 and the significant precipitation-based (14.7 inches of rainfall) inflow to the CCS in December 2015.

5.2.2.3 Simulated CCS Water Levels and Salt Implicit in the model's ability to simulate monthly net water and salt mass flows is the accurate simulation of daily flows to and from the CCS. Because the model is able to characterize the 5-7

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August2016 Section 5 daily flows of water and salt, the model estimates the daily changes in CCS water and salt storage. As previously mentioned, these changes in storage are associated with daily changes in CCS water levels and salinity. Figure 5.2-4 shows the model-ca lculated water level in the CCS, which varies over the period of record. These modeled water levels range between approximately -1. l ft North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88) and 2. 1 ft NAVD 88, and reflect an average water level throughout the entire CCS. Also shown in this figure are the observed CCS water levels over time; the observed values reflect the mean of daily-averaged water elevations across the seven sensors in the CCS. Note, the maximum average observed CCS water level (1.7 ft NAVO 88) exceeds the previous maximum (since fall 2010) average observed CCS water level (0.87 ft NAVO 88) by 0.83 ft.

As mentioned above, nearly 15 inches of rain fell on the CCS in December 2015; this amount of rainfall far exceeds the average December rainfall at Turkey Point over the previous 5 years (0.86 inches). Simulated water elevations are calculated by dividing the simulated daily change in CCS storage by the average daily CCS surface area and adding the resulting value (which reflects a change in water level) to the previous day's simulated water elevation. It is evident from this figure that the model effectively captures the general trend in CCS water elevations over the 12-month period, and accurately si mulates average CCS water elevations throughout much of the calibration period.

Similarly, changes in salt mass storage within the CCS can be used to calculate average CCS salinity changes over time. The simulated daily net flow of salt is divided by the simulated volume of water in the CCS, which results in a change in sa linity. This change in sa linity is added to the simulated salinity calculated for the previous day to produce a simulated salinity for the current day. Like the simulated CCS water level, the modeled salinity reflects a representative daily sa linity throughout the CCS. Figure 5.2-5 compares the simulated salinities to those observed in the CCS over the period of record. Observed salinities are the mean of daily averaged salinities measured in the CCS monitoring stations. The modeled CCS salinity changes over time match changes in the average observed CCS salinity throughout the 12-month period of record. Th is timeframe includes a reduction in average observed CCS sa li nity from approximately 95 g/L (PSS-78 scale) in June 2015 to approximately 34 g/L (PSS-78 scale) in December 2015; subsequent to the reduction in CCS salinity between June and December 2015, CCS salinity generally increased to approximately 55 g/L (PSS-78 scale). The ability of the mode l to match both increasing and decreasing trends in salinity reinforces the underlying conceptual model, which suggests that changes in CCS salinity are predicated solely on changes in the flow of water (which includes evaporation) into and out of the CCS.

5.2.2.4 Conclusions The accurate simulation of changing CCS inflows, outflows, water elevations, and salinities is complex due to the different components of the balance model and their varying impacts upon CCS water and salt storage. For instance, vertical flows into and out of the control volume are generally larger than ho rizontal flows, and have a greater impact on CCS water elevation. The salinity of inflowing water, however, can vary depending upon the source of the water. For example, horizontal flow from the west (L-3 lE) is non-saline and has a pronounced mitigating impact on CCS salinities; ve1tical flow from groundwater beneath portions of the internal CCS 5-8

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August2016 Section 5 discharge canals is saline to hyper-saline and generally increases the salinity of the CCS. The correct balance of both water and salt mass flow is difficult to estimate in the model. In addition, observed CCS return canal intake (i.e., at TPSWCCS-6) water temperatures varied over I 7°C (from approximately 18°C to 35°C) during the simulated timeframe. The model addresses associated impacts to the CCS by explicitly simulating the effects of water/air temperature gradients on evaporation. Whereas myriad sources and sinks of water, varying salinities, and changes in water temperature do increase model complexity, the need to accurately simulate these different components of CCS operation constrains the number of possible solutions.

The simulated timeframe includes a 3-month period where salt mass outflows from the CCS exceed the greatest monthly salt outflow from the previous 4.5 years, which occurred in October 20 14. Unlike the salt mass outflow in October 2014, where the outflowing water was of a higher salinity, those mass outflows calculated for October through December 2015 are att1ibutable to a large amount of water at a lower salinity. These outflows occurred due to the higher than normal rainfall that occurred from August through December 201 5 coupled with CCS salinity reduction efforts. Consequently, there were greater outflows of water and salt mass from the CCS to the underlying aquifer, primarily from October 2015 through December 2015.

Though the model is able to simulate the complex dynamics associated with the CCS over a 12-month timeframe with reasonable accuracy, there are periods of time where the simulated flows of water and salt do not accurately reflect observed conditions. Consequently, the simulated water level and salinities in the CCS deviate from those that have been observed at various times in the simulation period. However, the overall performance of the model reinforces its utility as a tool for understanding how the CCS has operated, and will operate, under varying meteorological, hydrological, and operational conditions. This is best demonstrated by the fact that the same conceptual model employed to characterize changes in CCS storage of water and salt during the reporting period was used to explain changes in storage during the prior approximately 4.5-year Uprate monitoring period.

The robustness and accuracy in the model underpins FPL's firm understanding of processes that control the CCS and the manner in which the CCS interacts with the adjacent aquifer and water bodies. This accuracy in simulating the historical changes within the CCS bolsters confidence in the model's utility as a tool to evaluate the sensitivity of CCS operations to certain factors such as changes in operation, drought conditions, storm events, and other potential environmental stresses. Additionally, the model accuracy validates the fact that the most appropriate data are being collected to effectively capture CCS operations, identify interactions between the CCS and the surrounding environment, and support FPL's comprehension of historical and future operations of the CCS.

5-9

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August2016 Section 5 TABLES

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August2016 Section 5 Table 5.2-1. Calibration Parameters 0.1 0.1 0.9 500 100 500 500 0.60 Runoff Modifier (as % of Preci itation 10%

Blowdown Eva oration Factor 50%

Blowdown Concentration (as% of Seawater 0.50 5-10

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August2016 Section 5 T bl 5 2 2 C I I t d FIi .d Fl f Wt Bd

• tC

• t June 2015 to May 2016 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10"6)

W. Seepage 0.45 162.92 E. Seepage 0.69 252.32 N. Seepage 0.01 3.35 S. Seepage 1.40 512.04 Bottom Seepage 0.72 260.35 1'J. Precipitation and Runoff 24.67 9027.57 u

u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...-== Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.55 0.30 202.90 11l.01 ID Pumping 6.43 2353.27 Added Water (e.g. L-3lE) 20.96 767 1.49 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 56.17 20557.25 W. Seepage 0.00 -0.37 E. Seepage - l.91 -697.9 1 N. Seepage -0.02 -5.93 S. Seepage -0.76 -278.48 1'J. Bottom Seepage -17.48 -6399.32 u Prec ipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

0

=

=

Evaporation Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown

-36.32 0.00 0.00

-13292.30 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -56.49 -20674.56 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -0.63 -302.38 Observed Change 1.17 427.31 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

gal = Gallon.

ID = Interceptor Ditch.

MGD = Million gallons per day.

5-11

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August2016 Section 5 T bl 5 2 3 C I I t dM Fl f S It B d

• t C

• t June 2015 to May 2016 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 2.57 942.07 E. Seepage 199.17 72897.33 N. Seepage 0.07 24.17 S. Seepage 335.06 122633.52 Bottom Seepage 230.58 8439 1.66 00 Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 5 Blowdown 44.30 16212.85 ID Pumped Water 563.79 206345.63 Added Water (e.g. L-31E) 3815.95 1396636.59 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5191.49 1900083.83 W. Seepage -80.88 -29603.04 E. Seepage -694.08 -254032.84 N. Seepage -6.16 -2254.91 S. Seepage -279.55 -102315.54 00 Bottom Seepage -7853.90 -2874527.56 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

.... Evaporation 0.00 0.00

=

... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 JD Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -8914.57 -3262733.89 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -3723.09 -1362650.06 Observed Change -2958.37 -1082764.47 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

ID= Interceptor Ditch.

lb= Pound(s).

5-12

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August2016 Section 5 (e.g.

3 L- l~i*:it I Added Water Precipitation (fBlowdown Pumping

(\

1~~;~~1111111111111 n1111:!,.* 1 Bay Seepage (A)

(B)

Figure 5.2-1 . Flow into (A) and out of (B) the CCS, Shown in Cross-Section.

5-19

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August2016 Section 5 60 Modeled Flow Observed Flow 40 20 0

(.9

~

F t -16 0

~ Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Dec-15 0

LL I...

Cl)

~ -20 s

-40

-60 Figure 5.2-2. Modeled versus Measured Net Monthly Flows of Water for the CCS during the Reporting Period.

5-20

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August2016 Section 5 25000 Modeled Flow 20000 Observed Flow 15000

"'>10000 ro

""O 8 5000 0

rl X

...0 0 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 M ar-16 Apr-16 May-16

~

o -5000 u.

~10000

-15000

-20000

-25000 Figure 5.2-3. Modeled versus Measured Net Monthly Flows of Salt Mass for the CCS during the Reporting Period.

5-21

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August2016 Section 5 2.5 2

1.5 00 co 0

~ 1 z

~

C 0.5 0

+:: -

n,

.!! 0 w

....C1I

~ -0.5 u

V) l""J,....' '* '

u

-1

-1.5 +-- - Simulated Wat er Elevat ions

- - Measured Wat er Elevations

-2 + - - ~ - - ~ - - ~ - ~ - - ~ - - ~ - ~ - - ~ - - ~ - ~ - - ~ - ~

"<< -i,.,. -<?~ ~ q,<"< ~ 0~ ~ ~6 ~,..<, i:>,...<, 3/4 ~

" '-<s -<s  :-0,7

"'S S t-...7

"'S c<s "<6' <,

6' 6' 6' ~<6' "<6' Figure 5.2-4. Modeled versus Measured Water Elevations (NAVO 88) in the CCS during the Reporting Period; Used to Validate the Conceptual Model and Calibrate the Water Balance Model to Temporal Trends in Water Elevation.

5-22

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August2016 Section 5

- Simulated Co ncentratio n (g/ L) 90 I ..............n~ * *~ I - -M easured Concentration (g/L) 80

-:s

~

70 iii V'I V'I 60 u

u so 40 + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----;r1c-- - - - - ---:.ai------- - - - - - -

30

~ -i/. -<1" ~ oc-  % a~ ~ ~ '3/4;,-<6' 1o '3/4'.'J,<6' ~

.,<s <s ~<s ;o<s ,.<s ~<s c-<s  :.,<6' <5<6'  ;,-<6'  :.,<6' Figure 5.2-5. Modeled versus Measured Salinity in the CCS during the Reporting Period; Used to Validate the Conceptual Model and Calibrate the Water Balance Model to Temporal Trends in Salinity.

5-23

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 5.2 Water and Salt Balance Model Tetra Tech, Inc. , developed a model of the water and salt balance for the CCS. The purpose of this model was to quantify the volume of water and mass of salt entering and exiting the CCS over a 24-month period. Details of this Excel-based model, the underlying conceptualization of the relationship between the CCS and the surrounding environmental systems, key calculations, and results were provided in the Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2012a).

That version of the model simulated water and salt flow to and from the CCS for the period between September 20 l O and June 2012. In the Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report, refinements to the model were made and water and salt flows to and from the CCS were simulated for the period between September 2010 and May 2015. In this report, the modeled period encompasses the reporting period (24-month period) from June 2015 through May 2017; while the repo1ting period is June 2016 through May 2017, the associated monitoring data were employed to append the repo1ting period to the existing balance model. This approach is followed because many of the parameters adjusted during calibration reflect changed CCS conditions that occurred during or just prior to the reporting period. The 24-month timeframe reflects influences associated with partial canal sediment removal, sa linity reduction actions due to the addition of marine groundwater and L-31 E canal water during the spring through late summer 2015, and decommissioning of Unit 1, the addition of low salinity UFA groundwater, and the extended extraction and disposal of hypersaline groundwater from beneath the CCS beginning in the fall of 2016.

The conceptual model and associated calculations were predominantly unchanged since the previous time they were presented (i.e., in the 2012 Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report) (FPL 2012a). As such, only a brief summary of the model is provided below. Model results and corresponding conclusions regarding the operation of the CCS are based on the current calibrated water and salt balance model and are provided herein. The Excel spreadsheet that comprises the model is provided in a separate data file.

5.2.1 Model Summary As Figure 5.2-1 depicts, the water balance for the control volume (CCS) is comprised of groundwater seepage (lateral through the sides and vertical through the bottom), blowdown (additional water pumped from other units to the CCS), water added for CCS salinity management (pumped from L-3 lE and/or groundwater), precipitation (including runoff from earth berms between canals), and evaporation. Aside from evaporation and precipitation, these are the same mechanisms by which salt flows into and out of the CCS. The means by which water and/or salt is transferred (e.g., seepage, evaporation) are calculated using various equations provided in the 2012 Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report (FPL 2012a). For this report, calculations were performed for a 24-month period from June 2015 through May 2017.

Average flows of water and salt into and out of the control volume were calculated for each day of this period using hydrologic, water quality, and meteorological data measured within, beneath, and adjacent to the CCS. The average daily flows were summed to estimate the amount of water and salt that enters or exits the control volume (i.e., the CCS) during each month and the entire 5-5

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 24-month period. These calculations demonstrate and validate the conceptual model of the CCS and, in so doing, illustrate the hydrologic mechanisms by which the CCS functions.

Calculated water flows are reported in 106 gallons per day (mgd). The mass flux into or out of the control volume is calculated by multiplying the volumetric flow by the salinity of the body of water from which the water is flowing. Salinity was mon itored at all groundwater and surface water stations employed in the ensuing calculations and was reported in the PSS-78 scale, which is equivalent to grams per liter (g/L). Calculated mass fluxes are reported in thousands of pounds per day (lb x 1,000/day).

The gain/loss of water and salt mass within the control volume during some period of time results in a change in the control volume's water and salt mass storage. Increased water storage, for instance, occurs when more water enters the control volume than exits. Storage then can be estimated by summing all of the components of the water (and salt) balance. When the net flow is positive (into the control vol ume) during a specified period of time, the storage of the control volume increases. Conversely, a net negative (out of the control volume) flow implies a decrease in storage during a specified time period.

Another manner in which a change in storage can be estimated re lies on direct measurements of water elevations and salinities within the control volume. A change in water elevation within the control volume can be calculated as a difference between water elevations at the beginning and end of a specified time period. The product of this change in water elevations and the surface area of the control volume provide an estimate of the change in the volume of water contained in the control volume during that period of time. Estimates of daily storage changes derived from this method are used to furthe r calibrate the water and salt balance model to ensure an accurate simulation of temporal trends in CCS water elevation and sa linity.

A significant change to the model since it was last calibrated is the representation of continued additions of UFA water. Since November 1, 2016, an average of 12.8 mgd of UFA water have been added to the CCS for sa linity abatement purposes. Based on historical data from the operation of the 5 UFA wells, the salinity of the added water is assumed to be 2.63 (in PSS-78 scale) and is assumed to be temporally invariant.

5.2.2 Model Calibration, Results, and Discussion The individual components of the water and salt balance were simulated daily and smmned for each month from June 20 15 through May 2017, as well as for the collective 24-month period.

The individual components of flow are summed in order to calculate a simulated change in volume for each month and for the 24-month period. These simulated changes in storage were compared to observed changes in CCS water and salt storage for each month and the entire calibration period (June 2015 through May 20 17). Errors between the simulated and observed storage changes were minimized by adjusting key variables associated with the flow balance model; this process is called calibration. The calibration process ensures that the model can accurately reflect the average changes in CCS storage over the 24-month timeframe, while also effectively capturing day-to-day changes in CCS water and mass storage. Calibration of the water and salt balance model was achieved by adjusting hydraulic conductivities of the aquifer 5-6

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 materials adjacent to and beneath the CCS that factor into the calculation of seepage to/from groundwater and Biscayne Bay. Additional adjustable parameters include the coefficients in the wind funct ion (FPL 20 12a), the amount of runoff that enters the control volume as percentage of precipitation, the amount of Unit 5 cooling tower water that is lost to evaporation before entering the CCS, and the salinity of the Unit 5 blowdown as a percentage of seawater. The calibrated model parameter values are provided in Table 5.2-1.

5.2.2.1 Parameter Adjustments The horizontal hydraulic conductivities laterally adjacent to the control volume were calibrated to range between 500 ft/day (west and north CCS walls) and 1,600 ft/day (south CCS wall). The calibrated vertical conductivities beneath the control volume ranged from 0.1 ft/day to 2.2 ft/day.

In order to achieve a better match to observed hydrologic and salt concentration conditions, the northern portion of the discharge canals into the CCS and return canals were calibrated to have higher vertical hydraulic conductivities ( 1.4 ft/day and 2.2 ft/day, respectively) than the middle/southern portions of the CCS discharge ca nals and southern portion of the return canals (0.1 ft/day). The variability in these vertical hydraulic conductivities is attributable to the non-uniform depth of a shallow high-flow zone that is variably intersected by deeper CCS canals.

The magnitudes of and variability in vertical hydraulic conductivities are on the same order of magnitude as those in the prior model (which simu lated through November 2016), where ve1tical hydraulic conductivity ranged from 0.1 to 1.6 ft/day. Horizontal hydraulic conductivities calibrated in this model are a lso on the same order of magnitude and range of values as those calibrated in the prior model (which simulated through November 2016), which ranged from I00 ft/day (east CCS wall) to 2,400 ft/day (south CCS wall).

In addition to changes in hydraulic conductivities, revisions were made to evaporation. The equation for evaporation (FPL 2012a) includes an empirical factor. This factor was reduced from 0.66 to 0.62 during the calibration of the 24-month balance model. As the modeled balance is very sensitive to evaporative losses, this was a significant change.

The percentage of additional precipitation-based inflow due to runoff from canal benns is an adjustable model parameter. This parameter is time-invariant and increases precipitation-based inflow for all precipitation events; as the precipitation increases, so too does the additional runoff inflow. Since the precipitation is a key inflow to the CCS for moderating salinity, the balance model is sensitive to this parameter. No change was necessary for this parameter, and it is defined to be 20% of direct precipitation inflow.

The impact of the parameters changes, particularly the adjustments made to the evaporation parameters, is a relative ly accurate simulation of the monthly flow balance and simulated daily CCS conditions during the 24-month period between June 2015 and May 2017. The effect of these parameter adjustments on the earlier period of record (September 2010 through May 2015),

which were previously simulated by prior versions of the water and salt balance model, were not evaluated as a part of this modeling effo,t.

5-7

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 5.2.2.2 Flow Balance Comparisons Results of the calibrated 24-month water and salt balance mode l are provided in Tables 5.2-2 and 5.2-3, respectively. The modeled net flow of water, as calculated by summing the components of the water balance for the 24-month calibration period, is denoted as the "Modeled Change in CCS Storage" and was calcu lated to be an average inflow of l.91 mgd over the 24-month calibration period. In other words, on average over the 24-month period, the volume of water in the CCS increased at a rate of 1. 91 mgd. The observed change in storage, which is the difference in the volume of water in the CCS between the final and first days of the calibration period, divided by the number of days in the period, was observed to be an increase in storage at a rate of 0.39 mgd. Though the model overestimated the increase in storage, the residual error between the simulated and observed flow is only 1.52 mgd. This e rror is small (1.97%) relative to the variability in monthly net observed flows, which range from a net outflow of 34.4 mgd (February 2016) and a net inflow of 42. 7 mgd (September 2015). These monthly net flows are provided in the calibrated water and sa lt balance model included as Append ix K. A summary of the water balance model results for the 2016-20 17 reporting period js shown in Table 5.2-4. Note that, on average, the CCS storage increased at rate of approximately 4.27 mgd during the 2016-2017 reporting period, while a smaller amount of water was lost, on average, in the previous year.

The model simulated a net loss ( outflow) of salt over the 24-month period at rate of 541 (lb x 1,000)/day. The corresponding observed rate of salt outflow was calculated by multiplying the average observed salinity in the CCS (based on salinities measured at monitoring stations TPSWCCS- 1, -2, -4, -5, and -6) on the fina l and first days of the calibration period by the corresponding CCS volumes on those days. The difference between these two products, divided by the number of days in the calibration period, provides the observed net outflow of salt, 1,089 (lb x 1,000)/day. Thus, the model underestimates the salt outflow by approximately 548 (lb x I000)/day. As in the case of water balance simulation, the magnitude of this overestimation is small (2.0%) relative to the range in monthly average flows; the observed monthly net mass fluxes range from an outflow of 16,994 (lb x 1,000)/day (November 2015) to an inflow of 10,593 (lb x 1,000)/day (July 2016). During the reporting period, the direction of net salt mass flow was into the CCS at a rate of 1,844 (lb x 1000)/day (Table 5.2-5). Analogous to water storage, this magnitude of flow is within the range of flows prior to June 2015. This stands in stark contrast to the 2015 to 2016 period, when net salt mass flow was out of the CCS at a rate of approximately 4,400 (lb x lOOO)/day.

Figures 5.2-2 and 5.2-3 illustrate the model's ability to match the magnitude and direction of net monthly flows of water and salt, respectively, over the 24-month period. With few exceptions, the model accurately simulated the direction of monthly averaged water and salt flows into and out of the CCS. Figure 5.2-2 compares observed and modeled net monthly flows of water into and out of the CCS. The wet season should be indicative of increased storage and inflow of water into the CCS and, accordingly, the 2015 and (beginning of the) 2017 wet seasons are periods of predominant inflow. However, due to relatively low precipitation, particularly in July 2016, the volume of water in the CCS generally decreased during the 2016 wet season. Dry seasons are marked by reductions in CCS water storage (general outflow). Net reductions in CCS storage are evident between January and March 2016. However, the addition of UFA water 5-8

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 starting in November 2016 is the likely cause of lower monthly outflows during the 2016/2017 dry season.

Figure 5.2-3 compares observed and modeled net monthly flows of salt into and out of the CCS.

Unlike the flows of water in Figure 5.2-2, there is an apparent seasonal trend in salt mass flows (salt storage decrease during dry season, salt storage increase during wet season). Like the modeled water flows, modeled salt mass fluxes generally match observed fluxes well. Note that a significant loss of salt storage (salt outflow) was observed in November and December 2015.

As previously documented, the salt outflows during these months are attributable to large volumetric seepage from the CCS to groundwater. By comparison, the 2016/20 17 dry season salt outflows are relatively low. The addition of UFA water has aided in the moderation of dry season salinity without significantly increasing the stage of the CCS. As such, seepage to groundwater during the 2016/2017 dry season is low relabve to seepage modeled during the prior dry season. This is discussed further in the conclusions.

5.2.2.3 Simulated CCS Water Levels and Salt Implicit in the model's ability to simulate monthly net water and salt mass flows is the accurate simulation of daily flows to and from the CCS. Because the model is able to characterize the dai ly flows of water and salt, the model estimates the da ily changes in CCS water and salt storage. As previously mentioned, these changes in storage are associated with daily changes in CCS water levels and salinity. Figure 5.2-4 shows the model-calculated water levels in the CCS, which varies over the period of record. These modeled water levels range between approximately -1. 7 ft North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88) and 2.0 ft NAVD 88 and reflect an average water level throughout the entire CCS. Also shown in Figure 5.2-4 are the observed CCS water levels over time; the observed values reflect the mean of daily-averaged water elevations across the five sensors in the CCS (TPSWCCS-1, -2, -4, -5, -6). The model generally matches the seasonal trends in CCS water level c hanges (reductions during the dry season and increases during the wet season). However, between July 2016 and January 2017, the model under-simulates the CCS stage. Changes to the model intended to improve this match resulted in a degradation in the quality of the match to CCS salinity.

Changes in salt mass storage within the CCS can be used to calculate average CCS saliJ1ity changes over time. The simulated daily net flow of salt is divided by the simulated volume of water in the CCS, which results in a change in salinity. This change in salinity is added to the simulated salinity calculated for the previous day to produce a simulated salinity for the current day. Like the simulated CCS water level, the modeled salinity reflects a representative daily salinity throughout the CCS. Figure 5.2-5 compares the simulated salinities to those observed in the CCS over the period of record. Observed salinities are the mean of daily averaged salinities measured in the CCS monitoring stations (TPSWCCS-1, -2, -4, -5, and -6). The model matches the observed temporal trends in salinity reasonably well. However, the model over-simulates the magnitude of CCS salinity throughout much of the simulated timeframe. Interestingly, this bias is eliminated and the model match to CCS sal inity improves in late 2016, when FPL began adding UFA water to the CCS.

5-9

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 5.2.2.4 Interim Activities Affecting Salt Removal While not simulated in the water budget model, it is worth mentioning that FPL proactively initiated removal of hypersaline groundwater (up to 15 mgd) beneath the CCS as part of extended operational testing and monitoring of the UIC well beginning in late September 2016.

Monthly Operating Reports have been submitted to FDEP and are available in the L-31E EDMS site.

Groundwater with a salinity ranging from 54 to 62 PSS-78 scale was pumped from four wells into the injection wells from September 28, 2016, through the end of the reporting period in May 20 17. During this time, a total of 1,661 million pounds of salt had been removed from beneath the extraction wells and injected down the UIC. Table 5.2-6 provides a daily summary of the volume of hypersaline water pumped into the injection well and the mass of salt removed.

5.2.2.5 Conclusions General Conclusions The accurate simulation of changing CCS inflows, outflows, water elevations, and salinities is complex due to the different components of the balance model and their varying impacts on CCS water and salt storage. For instance, ve1tical flows into and out of the control volume are generally larger than horizontal flows and have a greater impact upon CCS water elevation. The salinity of inflowing water, however, can vary depending upon the source of the water. For example, water pumped from the UFA into the CCS is relatively low salinity and, as such, serves to reduce and/or moderate CCS salinity; vertical flow from groundwater beneath portions of the discharge canals to the CCS is saline to hypersaline and generally increases the salinity of the CCS. The correct balance of both water and salt mass flow is difficult to estimate in the model.

In addition, observed CCS water temperatures varied by over 26°C (from approximately 18.3°C at TPSWCCS-6 in January 20 I 6 to 44.4°C at TPSWCCS-1 in August 2016) during the simulated timeframe. The model addresses associated impacts to the CCS by explicitly simulating the effects of water/air temperature gradients on evaporation. Whereas myriad sources and sinks of water, varying salinities, and changes in water temperature do increase model complexity, the need to accurately simulate these different components of CCS operation constrains the number of possible solutions.

Though the model is able to simulate the complex dynamics assoc iated with the CCS over a 24-month timeframe with reasonable accuracy, there are periods of time where the simulated flows of water and salt do not accurately reflect observed conditions. Consequently, the simulated water levels and salinities in the CCS deviate from those that have been observed at various times in the simulation period. However, the overall performance of the model reinforces its utility as a tool for understanding how the CCS has and will operate under varying meteorological, hydrological, and operational conditions. Thi s is best demonstrated by the fact that the same conceptual model employed to characterize changes in CCS storage of water and salt during this 24-month timeframe (June 20 15 through May 2017) was used to explain changes in storage during the prior approximately 4.5-year Uprate monitoring period.

5-10

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 The robustness and accuracy in the model underpins FPL's informed understanding of processes that control the CCS and the manner in which the CCS interacts with the adjacent aquife r and water bodies. This accuracy in simulating the historica l changes within the CCS bolsters confidence in the model's utility as a tool to evaluate the sensitivity of CCS operations to certain factors such as changes in operation, drought conditions, storm events, salinity abatement activities, and other potential environmental stresses. Additiona lly, the model quality validates the fact that the most appropriate data are being collected to effectively capture CCS operations, identify interactions between the CCS and the surrounding environment, and support FPL's comprehension of historical and future operations of the CCS. Continued application and updating of this model is recommended to improve the quality with which it simulates historical conditions in order to bolster the confidence with which futures decisions regarding CCS operations can be made.

Impacts of UFA Water Additions Perhaps the most important e lement of the simulated CCS balance during the 24-month timeframe is the continuous addition of UFA water between November 2016 and May 2017.

Earlier predictive modeling concluded that, under normal conditions, the addition of 14 mgd of UFA water would eventually reduce CCS salinity to 34 PSS-78. Because this has not yet occurred, it is important to analyze model resu lts in order to better understand what is driving the changes in salinity.

Two key elements of the CCS water and salt balance model that influence the temporal change in CCS salinity are precipitation inflows (the addition of freshwater to the CCS) and evaporative outflows ( the removal of freshwater from the CCS). Precipitation-based inflows help to reduce and/or moderate CCS salinity; evaporative losses cause in creases in salinity. Monthly evaporative flow rates are generally greater than precipitation flow rates. As such, the difference between monthly precipitation and evaporation (precipitation minus evaporation) is usually negative. Dm"ing months when this difference is near-zero or positive, CCS salinity will generally decrease. This is evident from September 2015 through January 2016, when positive and near-zero differences between precipitation and evaporation (Figure 5.2-6) helped to produce a reduction in salinity from 79 PSS-78 to 35 PSS-78. Note, FPL also added L-3 l E canal water through November 2015, which also helped to reduce CCS salinity.

In the months that followed (February through July 2016), monthly evaporation was consistently and significantly greater than monthly precipitation (Figure 5.2-6). Accordingly, the average CCS salinity increased from 35 PSS-78 to 70 PSS-78. Much of this increase occurred by the end of May 2016. During the same 4-month period (February through May) in 2017, the monthly differences between evaporation and precipitation were even more negative than in 20 16 (except in March). W hereas salinity increased by 20 PSS-78 between February and May 2016, salinity during the same four months in 2017 has remained relatively stable (increase from 65 PSS-78 to 67 PSS-78). The reason for the stability in salinity in spite of the adverse imbalance between evaporation and precipitation is the addition of UFA water. These additions of low salinity water he lp to offset the disparity between evaporation and precipitation and, in so doing, help moderate salinity. The continued addition of UFA water, combined with less significant disparities between evaporation and precipitation, should help reduce CCS salinity to 34 PSS-78.

5-11

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 When the UFA water-based approach to CCS salinity abatement was proposed, there were concerns that the associated increase in CCS stage would induce significant seepage of hypersaline water into Biscayne aquifer. Figure 5.2-7 plots the monthly average rates of vertical seepage of salt into the Biscayne aquifer through the base of the CCS (negative values represent outflow from the CCS; positive values represent inflow into the CCS). Inspection of this plot reveals that, relative to other months during the simu lated 24-month timeframe, vertical seepage of salt since the full commencement of UFA water additions (November 2016) has been relatively moderate. It is anticipated that the long-term reduction in CCS salinity to 34 PSS-78 will help to moderate the flow of salt from the CCS into the Biscayne aquifer.

5-12

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 TABLES

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 Table 5.2-1 . Calibration Parameters.

0.1 0.1 2.2 500 25 500 1600 0.62 Runoff Modifier (as % of Preci itation) 20%

Blowdown Eva oration Factor 30%

Blowdown Concentration as % of Seawater 0.50 5-13

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 Table 5.2-2. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components from June 2015 th

• h M 2017 June 2015 to May 2017 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10 11 6)

W. Seepage 0.44 318.79 E. Seepage 0.26 186.70 N. Seepage 0.02 13.54 S. Seepage 6.80 497 1.32 Bottom Seepage 2.20 1606.72

00. Precipitation and R unoff 2 1.78 15920.48 u

u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...==

.... Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.59 428.76 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.18 131.98 ID Pumping 3.90 2852.92 Added Water (e.g. L-31E) 18.12 13247.06 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 54.28 39678.27 W. Seepage 0.00 -0.37 E. Seepage -0.26 - 190.50 N. Seepage -0.01 -5.99 S. Seepage -1.22 -891.14

00. Bottom Seepage -13.41 -9801. 13 u Precipitation and Runoff u

0.00 0.00 Evaporation -37.47 -27393.69

=

0

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -52.37 -38282.82 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1.91 1395.46 Observed Change 0.39 288.23 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

gal = Gallon.

ID = Interceptor Ditch.

MGD = Million gallons per da y.

5-14

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 Table 5.2-3. Calculated Mass Flows from Salt Budget Components from June 2015 th

• h M 2017 June 2015 to May 2017 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 1000)

W. Seepage 3.80 2777.73 E. Seepage 68.81 50298.89 N. Seepage 4.09* 2993.06 S. Seepage 1348.98 986102.07 Bottom Seepage 670.41 490068.71 r.,:,_ Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

u Evaporation 0.00 0.00

...=

= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

.... Unit 5 Blowdown 26.37 19274.82 ID Pumped Water 320.25 234102.33 Added Water (e.g. L-3 1E) 3796.45 2775204.60 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 6239.15 4560822.20 W. Seepage -40.50 -29603.04 E. Seepage -1 01.95 -74522.64 N. Seepage -3.46 -2526.71 S. Seepage -447.89 -327409.72 r.,:,_ Bottom Seepage -6 186.75 -4522513.47 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

.... Evaporation 0.00 0.00

=

...= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0 Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -6780.54 -4956575.58 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: -541.39 -395753.38 Observed Change -1089.17 -796183.62 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

ID = Interceptor Ditch.

lb= Pound(s).

5-15

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 Table 5.2-4. Calculated Fluid Flows from Water Budget Components for the Period of Record (June 2016 through May 2017).

June 2016 through May 2017 Water Budget Component Flow (MGD) Volume (gal x 10 11 6)

W. Seepage 0.43 155.87 E. Seepage 0.34 123.65 N. Seepage 0.03 10.23 S. Seepage 9.13 3332.78 Bottom Seepage 3.21 1172.49 00 Precipitation and Runoff 16.64 6072.22 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 u

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.62 225.86

....C Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.66 ID Pumping 1.37 499.65 Added Water 14.67 5353.54 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 46.43 16946.96 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -0.05 -16.58 N. Seepage 0.00 -0.06 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -6.28 -2293.51 u Precipitat ion and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

._ Evaporation -35.83 - 13078.48

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0= Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -42.16 -15388.63 Modeled Chan2e in CCS Stora2e: 4.27 1553.58 Observed Chan2e -0.30 -110.29 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

gal = Gallon.

ID = Interceptor Ditch.

MGD = Million gallons per day.

5-16

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 Table 5.2-5. Calculated Mass Flows from Mass Budget Components for the Period of Record (June 2016 through May 2017).

June 2016 through May 2017 Mass Budget Component lb/day (x1000) Mass (lb x 10A6)

W. Seepage 5.05 1843.29 E. Seepage 88.42 3227 1.84 N. Seepage 6.32 2305.82 S. Seepage 1626.51 593674.81 Bottom Seepage 983.54 358990.3 1 00 Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u Evaporation 0.00 0.00 u

....= Un it 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00

=

.... Unit 5 Blowdown 0.27 96.93 ID Pumping 76.05 27756.70 Added Water 2411.92 880352.15 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total In: 5198.06 1897291.84 W. Seepage 0.00 0.00 E. Seepage -23 .45 -8559.83 N. Seepage -0.09 -3 1.72 S. Seepage 0.00 0.00 00 Bottom Seepage -3331.30 - 1215925.70 u Precipitation and Runoff 0.00 0.00 u

._ Evaporation 0.00 0.00

....= Unit 3, 4 Added Water 0.00 0.00 0

=

Unit 5 Blowdown 0.00 0.00 ID Pumping 0.00 0.00 Plant Outflow Equal to Intake Plant Intake Equal to Outflow Total Out: -3354.84 -1224517.26 Modeled Change in CCS Storage: 1843.22 672774.59 Observed Change 786.86 287202.42 Key:

CCS = Cooling Canal System.

lb = Pound(s).

ID = Interceptor Ditch.

5-17

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 5.2-6. Interim Salt Mass Removed.

Total Total Millions Daily Salt Cumulative Millions Daily Salt Cumulative of Removal Salt Removed of Removal Salt !Removed Gallons (millions (millions of Gallons (millions (millions of Day of Water of lbs.) lbs.) Day of Water of lbs.) lbs.)

09/28/16 6.3 3.0 3 11/05/16 14.8 6.7 274 09/29/16 15.3 7.4 10 11/06/16 14.8 6.6 28 1 09/30/16 14.9 7.2 18 11/07/16 14.8 6.6 288 10/01/16 14.9 7.2 25 11/01/ 16 14.8 6.6 294 10/02/ 16 14.9 7.1 32 11/02/16 14.8 6.7 301 10/03/16 14.9 6.9 39 11/03/16 14.8 6.7 307 10/04/16 14.8 6.9 46 11/04/16 14.4 6.5 314 10/05/ 16 14.9 8.8 54 11/05/16 14.8 6.7 32 1 10/06/ 16 7.7 12.7 67 11 /06/16 14.8 6.6 327 10/07/16 0.0 0.0 67 11/07/16 14.8 6.6 334 10/08/16 7.7 20.2 87 11/08/16 14.8 6.6 341 10/09/ 16 14.9 6.8 94 11/09/16 14.8 6.6 347 10/10/1 6 14.9 6.8 101 11/10/16 14.8 6.6 354 10/ 11/ 16 14.9 6.7 108 11/11/16 14.8 6.6 360 10/ 12/16 14.9 6.8 114 11/12/16 14.8 6.6 367 10/ 13/16 14.9 6.8 121 11/13/16 14.8 6.6 374 10/14/ 16 14.9 6.7 128 11/ 14/16 14.8 6.6 380 10/ 15/ 16 14.9 6.7 135 11/15/16 14.8 6.6 387 10/ 16/ 16 14.9 6.7 141 11/16/16 14.8 6.6 394 10/ 17/ 16 14.9 6.7 148 11/17/16 14.8 6.6 400 1Oil 8/16 14.8 6.7 155 11/ 18/16 14.8 6.6 407 10/19/16 14.8 6.7 162 11/19/16 14.8 6.6 4 13 10/20/ 16 14.8 6.6 168 11/20/16 14.8 6.6 420 10/2 1/16 14.8 6.6 175 11/21/16 14.8 6.6 427 10/22/16 14.8 6.6 181 11/22/16 14.8 6.7 433 10/23/16 14.8 6.7 188 11/23/16 14.8 6.7 440 10/24/ 16 14.8 6.6 195 11/24/16 14.8 6.7 447 10/25/16 14.8 6.6 201 11/25/16 14.8 6.6 453 10/26/ 16 14.8 6.6 208 11/26/16 14.8 6.6 460 10/27/ 16 14.8 6.6 215 11/27/16 14.8 6.6 467 10/28/ 16 14.8 6.6 221 11/28/16 14.8 6.6 473 10/29/ 16 14.8 6.6 228 11/29/16 14.2 6.4 480 10/30/ 16 14.8 6.6 234 11/30/16 14.8 6.6 486 10/31/ 16 14.8 6.6 241 12/0 l/ 16 14.8 6.6 493 11/01/ 16 14.8 6.6 248 12/02/ 16 14.8 6.6 500 11/02/ 16 14.8 6.7 254 12/03/ l 6 14.8 6.6 506 11/03/ 16 14.8 6.7 261 12/04/16 14.8 6.6 513 11/04/16 14.4 6.5 268 12/05/16 14.8 6.6 519 5-18

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 5.2-6. Interim Salt Mass Removed.

Total Total Millions Daily Salt Cumulative Millions Daily Salt Cumulative of Removal Salt Removed of Removal Salt !Removed Gallons (millions (millions of Gallons (millions (millions of Day of Water of lbs.) lbs.) Day of Water of lbs.) lbs.)

12/06/ 16 14.8 6.6 526 01/13/17 14.8 6.7 774 12/07/16 14.8 6.6 533 01/14/17 14.8 6.7 781 12/08/16 14.8 6.6 539 01/15/17 14.8 6.8 787 12/09/16 14.8 6.6 546 01/16/17 14.8 6.8 794 12/ 10/ 16 14.8 6.6 553 01/17/17 14.8 6.8 801 12/ 11/16 14.8 6.6 559 01 / 18/17 14.8 6.8 808 12/ 12/16 14.8 6.6 566 01 / 19/17 15.0 6.8 814 12/13/ 16 14.8 6.3 572 01/20/17 14.8 6.6 821 12/ 14/16 14.8 6.5 579 0l/21/17 14.8 6.7 828 12/ 15/ 16 13.2 5.8 584 01/22/17 14.8 6.7 834 12/ 16/16 13.7 6.0 591 01 /23/17 7.8 3.5 838 12/ 17/ 16 14.8 6.5 597 01/24/ 17 14.8 6.7 845 12/18/16 14.8 6.5 604 01/25/17 14.8 6.7 851 12/19/ 16 14.8 6.6 610 01/26/17 14.7 6.6 858 12/20/ 16 14.8 6.6 617 01/27/17 14.7 6.7 865 12/21/ 16 14.8 6.6 623 01/28/17 14.8 6.7 871 12/22/ 16 14.8 6.6 630 01 /29/17 14.8 6.7 878 12/23/ 16 14.8 6.6 636 01/30/17 13.0 5.9 884 12/24/ 16 14.8 6.6 643 01/31117 14.8 6.7 89 1 12/25/ 16 14.8 6.6 650 02/01/17 14.7 6.7 897 12/26/ 16 14.8 6.6 656 02/02/ 17 14.8 6.6 904 12/27/16 14.8 6.6 663 02/03/ 17 14.7 6.6 910 12/28/ 16 14.8 6.6 670 02/04/ l 7 14.8 6.6 917 12/29/ 16 14.8 6.6 676 02/05/ 17 14.8 6.6 924 12/30/ 16 14.8 6.6 683 02/06/ 17 14.7 6.6 930 12/31/16 14.8 6.6 689 02/07/ 17 14.7 6.6 937 01/01/17 14.8 6.6 696 02/08/ 17 14.8 6.7 944 01/02/17 14.8 6.6 703 02/09/ 17 14.7 6.6 950 01/03/ 17 14.8 6.6 709 02/ 10/17 14.8 6.7 957 01/04/ 17 14.8 6.5 716 02/11117 14.7 6.6 964 01/05/ 17 14.8 6.5 722 02/12/17 14.7 6.6 970 01/06/ 17 14.8 6.6 729 02/ 13/17 14.7 6.6 977 01/07/ 17 14.8 6.6 736 02/ 14/17 14.7 6.5 983 01/08/ 17 14.8 6.6 742 02/15/17 14.7 6.6 990 01/09/ 17 14.8 6.6 749 02/ 16/17 14.7 6.6 997 01/ 10/ 17 11.2 5.0 754 02/ 17/17 14.7 6.7 1,003 01/11/17 14.7 6.7 761 02/ 18/17 14.7 6.7 1,010 01/12/ 17 14.5 6.6 767 02/ 19/17 14.7 6.7 1,017 5-19

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 5.2-6. Interim Salt Mass Removed.

Total Total Millions Daily Salt Cumulative Millions Daily Salt Cumulative of Removal Salt Removed of Removal Salt !Removed Gallons (millions (millions of Gallons (millions (millions of Day of Water of lbs.) lbs.) Day of Water of lbs.) lbs.)

02/20/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,023 03/30/17 14.6 6.6 1,276 02/21/17 14.7 6.7 1,030 03/31/17 14.6 6.6 1,283 02/22/17 14.7 6.7 1,037 04/01/17 14.6 6.6 1,290 02/23/17 14.7 6.6 1,043 04/02/ l 7 14.6 6.6 1,296 02/24/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,050 04/03/ 17 14.8 6.6 1,303 02/25/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,057 04/04/ 17 14.2 6.4 1,309 02/26/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,063 04/05/ 17 14.7 6.6 1,3 16 02/27/17 14.7 6.7 1,070 04/06/ 17 14.2 6.0 1,322 02/28/17 14.7 6.7 1,077 04/07/ 17 14.8 6.6 1,329 03/01/17 14.7 6.7 1,083 04/08/ l 7 14.8 6.7 1,335 03/02/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,090 04/09/ l 7 14.3 6.5 1,342 03/03/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,097 04/ 10/17 14.8 6.7 1,348 03/04/ 17 14.7 6.7 l, 104 04/11/17 14.8 6.6 J ,355 03/05/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,110 04/ 12/17 14.8 6.6 1,362 03/06/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,117 04/ 13/17 14.8 6.6 1,368 03/07/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,124 04/ 14/17 14.8 6.6 1,375 03/08/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,130 04/ 15/17 14.8 6.6 1,382 03/09/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,137 04/ 16/17 14.8 6.7 1,388 03/ 10/17 14.7 6.7 1,144 04/ 17/17 14.8 6.7 1,395 03/ 11/17 14.7 6.6 1,150 04/ 18/17 14.8 6.7 1,402 03/ 12/17 14.1 6.4 1,157 04/ 19/17 14.8 6.7 1,408 03/ 13/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,163 04/20/ l 7 14.8 6.7 1,415 03/ 14/ 17 14.7 6.6 1, 170 04/21/ 17 14.8 6.7 1,422 03/15/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,177 04/22/ l 7 14.8 6.6 1,428 03/16/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,183 04/23/1 7 12.9 5.8 1,434 03/ 17/17 14.7 6.7 1,190 04/24/ 17 12.9 6.6 1,441 03/ 18/17 14.7 6.7 1,197 04/25/ 17 14.8 6.6 1,447 03/19/17 14.7 6.6 1,203 04/26/ l 7 14.8 6.6 1,454 03/20/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,210 04/27/17 14.8 6.6 1,461 03/21/17 14.7 6.7 1,217 04/28/ l 7 14.8 6.6 1,467 03/22/ 17 14.7 6.6 1,223 04/29/17 14.8 6.6 1,474 03/23/17 14.7 6.7 1,230 04/30/17 14.8 6.6 1,480 03/24/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,237 05/01/17 14.8 6.6 1,487 03/25/17 14.7 6.7 1,243 05/02/ l 7 14.8 6.6 1,494 03/26/ 17 14.7 6.7 1,250 05/03/ l 7 14.8 6.6 1,500 03/27/ 17 14.7 6.6 1,256 05/04/ 17 14.8 3.9 1,504 03/28/ 17 14.7 6.6 1,263 05/05/ 17 14.8 6.6 1,5 11 03/29/ 17 14.7 6.6 1,270 05/06/ 17 14.8 6.6 1,5 17 5-20

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 5.2-6. Interim Salt Mass Removed.

Total Total Millions Daily Salt Cumulative Millions Daily Salt Cumulative of Removal Salt Removed of Removal Salt !Removed Gallons (millions (millions of Gallons (millions (millions of Day of Water of lbs.) lbs.) Day of Water of lbs.) lbs.)

05/07/ 17 14.8 6.6 1,524 05/20/ 17 14.8 6.5 1,609 05/08/ 17 14.8 6.6 1,530 05/21/17 14.8 6.5 1,616 05/09/ 17 14.8 6.5 1,537 05/22/ 17 14.8 2. 1 1,618 05/10/17 14.8 6.6 1,543 05/23/ 17 6. 1 0.0 1,618 05/ 11/17 14.8 6.6 1,550 05/24/ 17 7.3 0.0 1,618 05/ 12/ 17 14.8 6.6 1,557 05/25/ 17 0.1 4.2 1,622 05/ 13/ 17 14.8 6.6 1,563 05/26/ l 7 9.6 6.5 1,628 05/14/17 14.8 6.6 1,570 05/27/17 14.7 6.5 1,635 05/ 15/17 14.8 6.6 1,576 05/28/ 17 14.8 6.5 1,641 05/ 16/ 17 14.8 6.6 1,583 05/29/ l 7 14.7 6.5 1,648 05/ 17/ 17 14.8 6.5 1,589 05/30/ l 7 14.7 6.5 1,655 05/ 18/ 17 14.8 6.6 1,596 05/31/ l 7 14.7 6.5 1,661 05/19/17 14.8 6.5 1,602 5-21

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 Added Water Precipitation (e.g. L-3 l~b _~

Pumpmg 1 fr Blowdown

~~

(\

L-31E seepage 11111,ll rHlf  :-j Biscayne Bay Seepage

{A)

I I I I Eva1l0ration

.L -31E seepage 4 Seepag,:)

(B)

Figure 5.2-1. Flow into (A) and out of (B) the CCS, Shown in Cross-Section.

5-31

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 60 40 0

(!)

~

20 3

I 11 ,, ,,~~ .111J 0

LL QJ 0 I

• l/1 I ** *. 11 11

~ I

~> J ro l/1 l/1 l/1 l/1 l/1 <.O <.O <.O <.O ,-.... ,-.... ,-....

s ,-I C

I

,-I

,-I I

tlO

'-;1 C.

Cl)

,-I I

u 0

,-I u

I Cl)

,-I I

C.

,-I I

ro  :::,

,-I I

tlO

,-I C.

,-I t

I w ....,

ro w

,-I ro

,-I a.

,-I ro fili -20 ro

...., <( V) 0 z 0 <(

2 ...., -,

<(

Cl)

V) 0 0 u.. 2 <t: 2 QJ

<(

-40

-60 Observed Simulated Figure 5.2-2. Modeled versus Measured Net Monthly IFlows of Water for the CCS during the Period from June 2015 - May 2017.

5-32

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 25000 20000

>ro "O

0 0

0 15000 10000

.0 X

5000 IIII.I I.. I.

~

0 u..

.:= -5000 ro

(/)

a.,

tl.O

~

a.,

0

-10000

-15000 Lil

...-i C

I Lil

...-i i,, ,~

<( Vl I II ID

~

I ID

...ro C....

...-i I

...-i

<(

I ID

...-i

~

ro I

ID

...-i C

I ID

...-i II ID

...-i 00 I

<(

~I C.

QJ Vl II ID

...-i t,

0 I

~ I!

Z 0

...-i C

ro I

J_

...-i

.0 QJ u..

I 11 11

~

... "... ">ro

,-1 I

'1J

...-i C.

<(

I

...-i

~

I

<(

-20000

-25000 Observed Simulated Figure 5.2-3. Modeled versus Measured Net Monthly Flows of Salt Mass for the CCS during the Period from June 2015 - May 2017.

5-33

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 3 I+ /tr t 't I' / 1 't't+' It ttt ' j t /'-ht I

tr 1 I+ t1 '+1 - Simulated Water Elevations 2.5 I Ti it.'

111

+/-

I! 1!! :ti ,+

• Measured Water Elevations 1 H t1 H++<H++++*'-*1-H+<>H+T,I,..,; ~; ttTI TITT! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~Tr, co 00 2

C

> 1.5 t1 1 1 t l<-i 1

<t z

E. 1 i l 1 I ~ i -j 1: I~ i C

0

~ 0.5

~

QI w... 0 -I

• QI 3::-0.s V'l u

u -1

-1.5 -tt ~

I~ I++  !:U-f+t+t+t+t+HH!tt+t+t+t t+H+t t+IH+tt-l*H ...,_f++'+tttt+t+tf-t+t111m t -f-t-l fti ft tf# t-f-t-1 1j ~

-2 Figure 5.2-4. Modeled versus Measured Water Elevations (NAVD 88) in the CCS during the Reporting Period; Used to Validate the Conceptual Model and Calibrate the Water Balance Model to Temporal Trends in Water Elevation.

5-34

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 120 I I I + I+ l t i+ r++ -+- Simulated Concentration (g/L)

,l t i+

1 I

• Measured Concentration (g/L) 100 I

..~ ' j I j J I _, . l hw l I++

I k-Ti m1 rm 1 n1 n mTT11 lI ir i' 1Ti i Tl ..a 1 i l 1 TI TTi 80 l j -1 l I lj

~ j11J f' 1 .I II I I W lJ+!

~

....> i i] '

ti 1 I L~

~ , ~~ I ~ ~ Ji

'-' H. ' t, ~ _.I '

~Wfflli'~

~ 60 I "II I ..,_ rl I ~ - '

IV u  ; r,- .. 'I I

• +

~

V) I+ H1 V) u I

• +

I J * ,l' .l.!. ' ~'~

• u 40 I

/J J j I' u

• r ""'

r 20 t 1 11

~

J j

... ~

I 0

l j ii I I Figure 5.2-5. Modeled versus Measured Salinity in the CCS during the Reporting Period; Used to Validate the Conceptual Model and Calibrate the Water Balance Model to Temporal Trends in Salinity.

5-35

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 60 2015 2016 40 2017

§ 20 ro 0

0..

ro UJ Ill 0 C:

~

C:

0

• ~ -20

..~

0..

• u Q) a..

-40

-60 Figure 5.2-6. Modeled Monthly Differences between Precipitation and Evaporation (precipitation minus evaporation) for the 24-month Simulation.

5-36

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 5000

>ro 0

• I "O

0 0

0

,-f v'?>

'\'?j<::' 1 *

~<;. ,A ~~

~~

~~  !

~v

~e; c..l ot:f

/...

(.,e;

<:::f X

.o -5000 3

0 u...

V)

V) ro

~10000 ro V) ro u

2015

~15000 2016 2017

-20000 Figure 5.2-7. Modeled Monthly Vertical Salt Mass Seepage between the CCS and Biscayne Aquifer; Negative Values Indicate Seepage of Salt Mass out of the ccs.

5-37

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Pre-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- October 2012 Sections Table 5.4-3. Calibrated Model Parameter Values 2.6 North Seepage Face Horizontal Hydraulic Conductivity ft/da 300 West Seepage Face Horizontal Hydraulic Conductivity ft/da 450 South Seepage Face Horizontal Hydraulic Conductivity ft/da 150 East Seepage Face Horizontal Hydrau lic Conductivity ft/da 400 Evaporation Factor (Equation 6) Unitless 0.57 Runoff as Percentage of Rainfall (added to precipitation Unitless 46%

Percentage of Unit 5 Blowdown Lost to Evaporation Unitless 80%

Concentration of U nit 5 Blowdown as Percentage of Seawater (35 PSU) Unitless 20%

Key: ft= Foot. PSU = Practical salinity units.

5-45

FPL Turkey Point Annual Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project -August 2014 Section 5 Table 5.3-1. Calibration Parameters Vertical Hydraulic Conductivit Ve11ical H draulic Conductivit 0.1 Vettical H draulic Conductivit 0.1 Vertical H draulic Conductivit 4 West Face H draulic Conductivit 950 East Face Hydraulic Conductivit 1000 500 500 0.69 Runoff Modifier as % of Preci itation 34%

Blowdown Evaporation Factor 20%

Blowdown Concentration (as% of Seawater) 0.4 5-10

FPL Turkey Point Comprehensive Post-Uprate Monitoring Report for Units 3 & 4 Uprate Project- March 2016 Section 5 Table 5.3-1. Calibration Parameters.

0. 1 3.0 825 900 500 675 0.7 1 Runoff Modifier (as % of Preci itation 32%

B lowdown Eva oration Factor 40%

B lowdown Concentration (as% of Seawater) 0.25 5-12 0

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report August2016 Section 5 Table 5.2-1. Calibration Parameters 0.1 0.1 0.9 500 100 500 500 0.60 Runoff Modifier (as % of Preci itation 10%

Blowdown Eva oration Factor 50%

Blowdown Concentration (as% of Seawater 0.50 5-10

FPL Turkey Point Annual Monitoring Report September 2017 Section 5 Table 5.2-1 . Calibration Parameters.

0.1 0.1 2.2 500 25 500 1600 0.62 Runoff Modifier (as % of Preci itation) 20%

Blowdown Eva oration Factor 30%

Blowdown Concentration as % of Seawater 0.50 5-13