ML073300649

Annual Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report for 2006

ML073300649
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	03/23/2007
From:	Godfrey J M Southern Nuclear Operating Co
To:	George B J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Southern Nuclear Operating Co
References
EV-07-0682
Download: ML073300649 (3)

Text

Intracompany Correspondence SOUTHERN A COMPANY Energy to Serve Your Workr'File: E.00.20 Log: EV-07-0682 DATE: March 23, 2007 RE: FROM: Annual Environmental Operating Reports (Nonradiological)

J.M.Godfrey-Manager, Environmental Affairs TO: B.J.George-Manager, Licensing Please find attached the 2006 Annual Environmental Operating Reports (Nonradiological) for Hatch Nuclear Plant, Farley Nuclear Plant, and Vogtle Electric Generating Plant as prepared by Environmental Affairs for submittal to the NRC.Each Annual EnvironmentalOperatingReport must be submitted to the NRC by May 1, in accordance with the requirements of Subsection 5.4.1 of the Environmental Protection Plans.Please provide a copy of the final reports to Environmental Affairs upon submittal to the NRC."7 Please contact Jessica Joyner ext.7693 if you have any questions.

/f7//1 JMG/JAJ:ahl

/7/:1/J1.i p/i../1.'J.M.Godfrey

Enclosures:

1.HatchAnnual Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report for 2006 2.Farley Annual Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report for 2006 3.VogUe Annual Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report for 2006 cc: Southern Nuclear Operating Company B.D.McKinney R.D.Baker N.J.Stringfellow T.W.Sides SNC Document Management

-Farley (R-Types A4.54), Hatch, VoglJe Enclbsure 3 Annual Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Reports for 2006 VOGTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT*UNITS 1 AND 2 I.Introduction Page 1 of2 In accordance with Subsection

5.4.1 ofthe

Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP)Environmental Protection Plan (Nonradiological), Appendix B to Facility Operating License Nos.NPF-68 and NPF-81, this report is submitted describing implementation of the Environmental Protection Plan for the calendar year 2006.II.Reporting Requirements A.Summaries and Analyses of Results of Environmental Protection Activities Required by Subsection 4.2 of the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP)for the Reporting Period 1.Aquatic Monitoring

-Liquid effluent monitoring was performed in accordance with State of Georgia National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)Permit GA0026786; there was no additional requirement for aquatic monitoring during 2006.2.Terrestrial Monitoring

-Terrestrialmonitoring is not required.3.Maintenance of Transmission Line Corridors a)Herbicide treatment and danger tree cutting was performed on the Vogtle-Thalmann, Vogtle-Wadley, Vogtle-SCE&G and Vogtle-Wilson corridors.

b)Danger trees were cut along the Vogtle-Scherer, and VEGP-Goshen, corridors as necessary.c)All routine maintenance activities within the designated cultural properties located along the transmission line corridor were conducted in accordance with the Final Cultural Resources Management Plan.This plan was developed in conjunction with the Georgia Historic Preservation Officer.4.Noise Monitoring

-There were no complaints received by Southern Nuclear Operating Company during 2006 regarding noise along the VEGP-related, high-voltage transmission lines.B.Comparison of the 2006 Monitoring Activities with Preoperational Studies, Operational Controls, and Previous Monitoring Reports These programs were not required because nononradiologicalenvironmental monitoring programs were conducted during the reporting period beyond those performed in accordance with NPDES Permit No.GA0026786 referenced in Section A above. Annual Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Reports for 2006 C.Assessment of the Observed Impacts of Plant Operation on the Environment Page 2 of2 There were no significant adverse environmental impacts associated with plant operation during 2006.D.EPP Noncompliance and Corrective Actions There were no EPP noncompliances during 2006.E.Changes in Station Design or Operation, Tests, or Experiments Made in Accordance with EPP Subsection

3.1 Which

Involved a Potentially Significant Unreviewed Environmental Question There were no changes in station design or operation, tests, or experiments in 2006 which involved a potentially significant, unreviewed environmental question.F.Nonroutine Reports Submitted in Accordance with EPP Section 5.4.2 There were no nonroutine reports submitted in 2005.