TXX-9809, CPSES Units 1 & 2 1997 Annual Environ Operating Rept (Nonradiological)

CPSES Units 1 & 2 1997 Annual Environ Operating Rept (Nonradiological)

ML20217R017
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	12/31/1997
From:	Terry C, Walker R TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC)
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
TXX-98092, NUDOCS 9805130087
Download: ML20217R017 (12)

Text

= '3ll  :

, 1""" """"

~"

Log # TXX 98092

. - C. - File # 225 1UELECTRIC April 29, 1998 C. bace 'Ilerry Senior Vice President

& PrincipalNuclear Officer U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk -

Washington, D.C. 20555

SUBJECT:

COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION (CPSES)

DOCKET NOS. 50 445 AND 50 446 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT FOR 1997 Gentlemen:

Pursuant to Section 5.4.1 of the Environmental Protection Plan (Appendix B to CPSES Unit 1 and Unit 2 Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-87 and NPF 89, respectively), TU Electric hereby submits the CPSES 1997 Annual Environmental Operating Report in the attachment to this letter.

If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Bruce Turner at (254) 897 8901.

Sincerely, 8.2 %

C. L. Terry By: OCBd M '

RogeVD. Walker Regulatory Affairs Manager CLW/grp l Attachment  ;

e- Mr. E. W. Merschoff, Region IV Mr. J. I. Tapia, Region IV (clo)

Mr. T. J. Polich, NRR Resident Inspectors, CPSES 9805130087 971231 PDR ADOCK 05000445-R PDR s e (f

COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION P.O. Box 1002 Glen Rose. Texas 76043-1002

I

.- 1 l

j 1

l 4

l l

. j TU ELECTRIC l COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION l

UNITS 1 & 2 1997 l i

ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT (NONRADIOLOGICAL)

FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. NPF-87 & 89

t e

• l Attachment to TXX-98092 Page 2 of 11

1. INTRODUCTION This report describes implementation of the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) for the calender year 1997 as required by Appendix B to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-87 & 89 for Units 1 & 2.

During 1997, the CPSES Nonradiological Environmental Monitoring Program  !

was effective in implementing and monitoring all of CPSES's environmental regulatory commitments. Program effectiveness was substantiated by environmental audits conducted in 1997 by in-house compliance visits by Environmental Services (TU Services) and compliance evaluations conducted by the CPSES Nuclear Overview Department. Also, the Texas Natural l

, Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) performed regulatory i j inspections of CPSES's programs pertaining to solid waste, wastewater, and underground petroleum storage tanks. The TNRCC found no violations or deficiencies during these inspections, j in addition to routine environmental monitoring to meet existing CPSES ,

environmental permit requirements, CPSES purchased and installed a  !

dewatering system for processing Clarifier decant basin sludge. This l dewatering system reduces waste volumes that are transported for off-site l land filling.

l l 11. SCOPE l Section 5.4.1 of the EPP requires that CPSES submit to the NRC an Annual l Environmental Operating report that shall address the following environmental protection activities:

A. Summaries and analyses of the results of the environmental protection activities required by Section 4.2 of the EPP, including a comparison with related preoperational studies, operational controls (as appropriate), and previous nonradiological environmental monitoring reports, and an assessment of the observed impacts of plant operation on the environment, if harmful effects or evidence of trends toward irreversible damage to the environment are observed, a detailed analysis of the data and a proposed course of mitigating action is required. Section 4.2 of the EPP pertains to results from:

1. Groundwater levels and station water use monitoring.

2. Water treatment facility outages impact assessment and reporting.

1

. 1 Attachment to TXX-98092 Page 3 of 11 B. The report shall also include:

1. A list of EPP noncompliances ~and the associat<3d corrective actions.

2. A list of all. changes in station design and operation, tests, and experiments made in accordance with Subsection 3.1 of the EPP_ which involved a potentially significant unreviewed environmental question.

s

3. A list of nonroutine reports submitted in accordance with Subsection 5.4.2 of the EPP.

4. A summary list of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit related reports relative to matters e identified in Subsection 2.1 of the EPP which were submitted to the EPA Region VI during the report period. Subsection 2.1 of the EPP pertains to 'Jatic matters that are addressed by the effluent limitations, and the monitoring requirements contained in the EPA NPDES station wastewater discharge permit.

Ill. P.RSULTS OF ACTIVITIES

, A. As required by Subsection 4.2 of the EPP, the following are summaries and analyses of the environmental protection activities during 1997. Based on the results of these activities, there were no observed adverse environmental impacts resulting from plant operation during 1997.

1. Groundwater Pumpage As indicated in Table 1, groundwater pumpage during 1997 averaged 22.9 gals./ min. (gpm) or 11,930,500 total gallons withdrawn for the year. This withdrawal rate represents a 20%

decrease from the 1996 average rate of 28.8 gpm.

Groundwater withdrawal was hignest in July at 26.6 gpm and low" in January with an average withdrawal rate of 18.7

< :m.

^

sundwater withdrawn during 1997 was used primarily for

, otable and sanitary purposes with only a very small amount used as make-up to the plant fire protection system. No groundwater was used to supplement the station's Surface Water Treatment System.

- n - s -

i Attachment to TXX-98092 Page 4 of 11 The average annual pumpage rate of 22.9 gpm for 1997 represents 18% of the predicted operational pumpage (127 gpm) identified in Section 3.3 of the Station's Environmental Report - Operational License Stage. This rate also represents approximately 14% of the actual average withdrawal rate (158  !

gpm) reported in the Station's Final Enviranmental Statement -

Operating License Stage (Section 5.3.1.2) of the period 1975 to May 1979.

The combined annual rate for all recorded preoperational groundwater pumpage averaged 68.8 gpm, while the average operational pumpage for the period 1990 through 1997 was 32.5 gpm. Therefore, the average operational rates are 53% l less than the groundwater pumpage during the preoperational  !

period. Figure 1 illustrates the annual fluctuation of groundwater withdrawal over the entire preoperational and operational period.

1

2. Groundwater Levels I As indicated in Table 2, the groundwater level in the on-site observation well OB-3 (intersection of Highway 56 and the i Plant Access Road) fluctuated during 1997 from a high levelin l June of 538.2 ft. Mean Sea Level (MSL) to a low level in October of 531.4 ft. MSL. Overall, tl- water level in 08-3 during the reporting period (January through December) i decreased 1.5 ft. (0.5m).

In October 1997, a new groundwater monitoring well was  ;

placed into service to serve as a replacement for the original OB-4 monitoring well. This well will continue to be designated as 08-4 and is located approximately 50 ft. southwest of the original well. The new we!! was necessary due to an ,

obstruction in the original well that interfered with taking well probe readings. The water level in the new well i.;

approximately 0.5 ft. less than the water level in the original well. Consequently, readings taken during the period January through September do not exactly correspond for comparison purposes to readings taken for the period October through December (unadjusted). However, the unadjusted data presented in Table 2 pertaining to annual groundwater level change for well OB-4 reflects a decrease in water level that is 0.5 ft. greater than actual (conservative). This conservatism is also reflected in the trending data presented in Figure 2.

i Attachment to TXX-98092 Page 5 of 11

]

The 1997 annual average groundwater levels in well 08-3 and 08-4 were 534.8 ft. MSL and 574.5 ft. MSL, respectively.

These average levels demonstrated an increase of 1.8 ft. (0.5m) for 08-3 and a decrease of 2.0 ft. (0.6m) for 08-4 from the respective overage 1996 levels (Figure 2).

3. Surface Water Treatment System Operation The station's Water Treatment System processed 167,244,800 l total gallons (318 gpm) of surface water during 1997 for plant process use. There were no outages during 1997 that required ,

reporting in accordance with Section 4.2.2 of the EPP.

The following is a summary list of monthly surface water usage:

MONTH SURFACE WATER ,

PROCESSED (GALS.)

l JANUARY 14,371,300 FEBRUARY 12,816,300 MARCH 14,300,000 APRIL 13,147,200 MAY 14,046,000 JUNE 13,711,100 i JULY 14,205,000 j AUGUST 13,603,500 k

SEPTEMBER 13,718,300 }

1 1 OCTOBER 14,245,000 NCVEMBER 14,021,700 DECEMBER 14,459,400 3 TOTAL 167,244,800 I

B. EPP Noncompliance and Corrective Actions - Subsection l 5.4.1(1)

There were no noncompliances with the requirements of the EPP during the reporting period.

{

l i

I Attachment to TXX-98092 i Page 6 of 11 l 1

C. Changes in Station Design or Operation. Tests, and Experiments J Made In Accordance With Subsectinn 3.1 Which involved A Potentially Significant Unreviewed Environmental Questions i There were no changes in station design, operation, tests or experiments conducted during the reporting period that are reportable under this subsection.

D. Nonroutine Reports Submitted In Accordance With Subsection 5.4.2 There were no nonroutine reports submitted under this subsection.

1 E. NPDES Permit-Related Reports Relative To Matters identified in  !

Subsections 2.1 and 5.4.1

1. Routine monthly Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMR) for ,

all wastewater outfalis were submitted to the EPA and l I

Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission )

(TNRCC) for each inonth during 1997. The following is I a summary list of correspondence (DMRs and related documents) submitted to the EPA. I MotJTH log NUMBER /DATE '

MONITORED JANUARY TXX-97032 / 2-25-97 FEBRUARY- TXX-97065 / 3-25-97 MARCH TXX-97060 / 3-10-97 (DMR oA Study No. 16(1996))

TXX-97085 / 4-25-97 APRIL TXX-97117 / 5-25-97 MAY- TXX-97116 / 5-09 97 (Bio-Monitoring Submission)

TXX-9 7126 / 5-30-97 (Bio-Monitoring Submission)

TXX-97137 / 6-25-97 JUNE TXX-97155 / 7-25-97 JULY- TXX-97176 / 8-25-97 AUGUST TXX-97196 / 9-25 97 SEPTEM8ER TXX-97219 /10-25-97 OCTOBER TXX-97242 /1125 -97 NOVEMBER TXX-97267 /12-23-97 DECEMBEa, TXX-98007 /1-25-98

\

l Attachment to TXX-98092 Page 7 of 11

2. There were seven (7) NPDES wastewater discharge permit noncompliances in 1997. All seven (7) noncompliances pertained to the domestic waste treatment plant (NPDES Outfall 003). Five (5) of these noncompliances resulted during startup of the new domestic waste treatment system in January 1997, while efforts were being made to stabilize operating conditions and parameters of the plant.

The total noncompliances in 1997 represent a decrease of two (2) noncompliances from 1996.

3. There were no on-site spills during 1997 that required reporting in accordance with the TNRCC's 24-hour notification requirements.

1 i

i m

S Y _

ANEG S .

D EN 8 8 8 6 8 9 4 9 8 2 2 FWD 8 _

1 1 _

2 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 6 _

O ETAE 3 _

O.BR N

7 3 7 1 3 4 6 8 9 9 2 8 9

. . r .

8 9 9 3 1 4 6 4 2 5 6 0 2 gls ein 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 AGvaPM S _

L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 _

A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .

T 5, 3, 7, 8, 1, 0, 1, 4, 5, 3, 6, 2, 5, O 2 9 2 9 9 9 2 7 1 4 4 8 0 T 5 7 9 9 5 1 0 3 2 5 5 5 3 7 7 7 1, 8 0, 3, 0, 0, 1, 0, 9 9, .

l .

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _

as t l 1 _

oa TG _

0 9 3 0 0 0 1 2 2 5 9 7 0 _

E gl

.r

. sen 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 G 2 vaPi M A L AG P L E _

M W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U F 0 0 0 8,

0 4,

0 0 4,

0 0,

0 7,

0 0 0,

0 0 0 P S 5, 1, 3, 1, 5, 6, 4, O 0 0 3 5 1 2 5 9 2 7 8 2 8 R N las 4 4 5 5 4 4 5 4 5 6 3 3 6 E 5 T

t l TG oa _

A W7 1 1 9 4 0 9 1 1 2 2 3 9 8 1

. sein E D 99 r 0 0 0 0 1

gl 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L N 1 L AGvaPM B U r L E

A Oo W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TRF F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G S 3, 7, 9, 4, 8, 9, 5, 7, 6, 3, 0, 1, 2, O 6 6 5 3 8 6 2 9 4 7 5 7 4 F .

4 3 5 5 3 4 5 4 5 5 3 3 6 N las O t l oa 5

Y TG R

. il A . .

5 4 6 7 8 2 3 4 4 4 G. 4_ 2 M 2 gls r ei n

. 6 9 6 0 7 2 6 9 0 1 0 4 1 2

M L L AGvaPM 1 1 1 2 1 1 E

U S W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 6, 1, 2, 7, 9, 7, 8, 4, 8, 5, 1, 8, A

L .

5 6

1 8

0 7

4 5

6 1

9 2

9 0

6 9

4 1

0 1

6 0

5 5

P las t l 6 3 6 5 3 9 3 3 9 5 2 8, oa 5 TG 2

9 0 9 3 3 4 0 0 9 0 6 3 8 4 0 .

g s. r 0 7 0 0 1 0 3 2 0 1 4 4 9 8 1 vl ein 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 9

L L

A GaPM X E l X W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T T 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0_ 0 o N 1 4, 8, 3, 1, 8, 6, 5, 1, 4, 1, t 1 A L

1 2 6 2 4 1 9 1 2 2 t

1 P !as 2 1 3 6 8 4 1 8 8 4 n t l oa 3 5 4 P 5 5 9 6 9, ef O TG 4 m 8 h

ce ag H r

e r e r e

T y y b r b b t

t a N r a

r a h t

s m e

e m m L

AP O u u r c l y e u t b

o e e A n r i r n y 3 p v c T M a b

e a p a u iu u e t

c o e O J F M A M J J A S O N D T

_ J'

Attachment to TXX-98092 Page 9 of 11 TABLE 2 1997

SUMMARY

OF GROUNDWATER l LEVELS IN OBSERVATION WELLS i WELL OB WELL OB 1 I

- MONTH -. . (G-3) f(G-4): . MSL (2)

DEPTH (1) MSL- (2) DEPTH (1)  !

January- 259.8 534.0 274.2 576.7 l February - 259.7 534.1 274.1 576.8 l March? 257.7 536.2 274.0 576.8 l-l April- 256.7 537.1 272.5 578.4 l

l May- 255.8 538.0 271.9 579.0 l June' 255.6 538.2 271.7 579.2 July 256.4 537.5 271.9 578.9 August 259.3 534.5 277.8 573.0 September 261.2 532.6 279.7 571.2 October 262.4 531.4 (')280.2 ('567.7 Novem'ber - 261.9 531.9 280.9 566.9 December. 261.3 532.5 278.7 569.2 ANNUAL GROUNDWATER LEVEL CHANGE FOR 1997:

Well OB-3: 259.8 ft. - 261.3 ft =- (-)1.5 ft. = (-)0.5m (Decrease)

• Well 08-4: 274.2 ft. - 278.7 ft = (-)4.5 ft. = (-)1.4m (Decraase)

• These values are unadjusted and do not take into account the 0.5 ft.

conservative difference (lower in new well) in water levels between the old well and new well.

NOTES:

(1) Depth to water table (ft.)

(2) Water table elevation (ft.) Mean Sea Level (MSL)

(3) . Began monitoring from new wellliaving a " top of pipe" elevation 3 ft. lower than previous monitoring well (Refer to Section Ill.A.2 for dete?s).

l 7

' ^

9'9

~

999I h c

i 399I

. 4 ,m Y ~

9OI O

,99 ' g 2#

u 7

' ~

9#

m o O

m

> ^

o99 ' }C g~ g a p7 .a CE E mm 8 u zO ~

8'9 a M n

?

m g .,

4

.e ge9 c 2 oz +- 1

<- .a C zO e O CC  ?- 3e91 c OO .5 mMM  %# 2 OZ '

O ma y oU

<. a.e 9#97 9 2 2#91 mE g ma m _

7 8'9 55

$ 0 aa

~

9'

1. 33 OO g?

n

$ ~

87# 22 E ' CC

! /2 e 2 ee

~

g yS ee  %

e a h $? "~ N a o I E: .8 a

d*

eo g"8 8 8

8 o E5 M*

4s

> 2t'

I i

l b

ot L

pc a O O 1

i * '

g ,

997 l

l f

j r n m -

3991 i

i m /

r es#'

i a -

i 2

m a < -

,99 '

l $ l k l l

i Q 8 -

599I l N Z '

M C l

, 2 O a -

ges 'x C 2 '

g '

a o 1

ges! <

d l 3 m o  :

a pe9' G

m l

• ~ e0#

e

3 h * ~

8'#

z .

t 8 ~ ,eS'9

,l E

p8 j 0

• l r

~ m l 8 fo a -

,e9' l a  :

r ge8

%' " E ~

H G M

w 3

,O, -

go 8 a o o o

@a ea a s 8 a E 0

>m Y$

>N