ML15105A366

Environmental Audit Needs List

ML15105A366
Person / Time
Site:	LaSalle
Issue date:	05/04/2015
From:	License Renewal Projects Branch 2
To:
Drucker D
References
Download: ML15105A366 (13)

Text

LASALLE ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT NEEDS LIST ID # Information Needed Reviewer Alternatives ALT-1 Provide the available acreage and locations on the LaSalle County Hoffman Station (LSCS) site that would be suitable for alternative energy generation. Please identify possible locations during the site tour.

ALT-2 Provide the following primary reference documentation, cited in Hoffman Section 7.2.2.2: "Tetra Tech 2013b. Air Emissions and Solid Waste from Coal- and Gas-Fired Alternatives for LaSalle Units 1 and 2.

License Renewal Chapter 7 Energy Alternatives. Exelon. August 2013".

Microbiological Hazard MH-1 Section 4.5.2.3 of the ER states that water treatment additives are Moser utilized for scale inhibition, silt dispersion, corrosion inhibition, and micro- and macro-biological control. Please provide a summary of Exelon's chlorination procedures for the circulating water and service water systems that includes the chlorine compounds used to treat each system as well as the concentrations and frequency of injection.

MH-2 Please docket the following ER references: Moser

a. Exelon Nuclear. 2009. Evaluation 2009-8466, Rev. 0, Final Issue, Task Report 47 - Environmental Impact Non-Safety Related. LaSalle County Generation Station Units 1 & 2. September 2009.

b. Exelon Nuclear. 2011. LaSalle County Nuclear Station NPDES-DMR for January 2011. Marseilles, IL. February 25, 2011.

c. Exelon Nuclear. 2012. LaSalle County Nuclear Station NPDES-DMR for February 2012. Marseilles, IL. March 13, 2012.

d. Illinois Department of Public Health. 2014. Marshall Email: to Ranek. RE: LaSalle County Station Units 1 and 2 -- Consultation about thermophilic organisms. February 19, 2014.

e. Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. 2014. Good Email: to Ranek. RE: LaSalle County Station Units 1 and 2 -- Consultation about thermophilic organisms. February 28, 2014.

Aquatic AQ-1 Section 3.7.5.1 of the ER (page 3-59) states that since 2001, LSCS Moser has had four reportable fish kills (in 2001, 2005, 2009 and 2010) in the cooling pond, and one small, unreported (approximately 100 shad) event in 2002. The NRC staff is aware of the fish kill events that occurred in 2001 (ML012330070, ML021330421), 2005 (Event Report Number: 41805), 2009 (ML092040381) and 2010 (ML102371289, ML12285A200).

a. Provide the date of the unreported fish kill in 2002. In addition, provide any other applicable reports, letters, or studies that describe fish kills in the cooling pond from 2001 through present.

b. Provide any temperature monitoring data of the cooling pond during each fish kill (if not described in the above reports or studies), as well as a summary of any temperature monitoring data in the cooling pond since 2001.

c. Has Exelon implemented any mitigation measures to reduce the number of fish kills in the cooling pond, other than the Extreme Heat Implementation Plan? If so, describe such mitigation.

Page 1 of 13 ENCLOSURE 2

LASALLE ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT NEEDS LIST AQ-2 Section 3.7.5.1 of the ER (page 3-59) states that Exelon Generation Moser and Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) meet annually to discuss activities within the cooling pond at LSCS. The ER further states that during one meeting, participants determined that smallmouth bass in the LSCS cooling pond do not appear to be thermally stressed, and meeting minutes document that smallmouth bass were in good condition (body weight relative to length) in 2011 and 2012 despite unusually high water temperatures in the cooling pond.

a. Please provide a copy of the meeting minutes that discuss this topic and clarify which staff concluded that smallmouth bass in the LSCS do not appear to be thermally stressed.

b. Please describe the water temperature in the cooling pond during 2011 and 2012, when the temperatures were unusually high.

AQ-3 Section 3.7.1.7 of the ER describes some State-listed species that Moser could occur at or near LCSC. Discuss whether aquatic State-listed have ever been observed on site or within 6 miles of the river screen house or could potentially occur on site or within 6 miles of the river screen house. Further, describe whether LSCSs operation has ever been known to impinge or entrain a State-listed species. Please consider all aquatic species that IDNR lists as potentially occurring within La Salle County, which include the following:

• Alasmidonta viridis, slippershell

• Elliptio dilatata, spike

• Fundulus diaphanous, banded killifish

• Moxostoma carinatum, river redhorse

• Moxostoma valenciennesi, greater redhorse

• Notropis heterolepis, blacknose shiner

• Notropis texanus, weed shiner AQ-4 Section 4.6 of the ER considers the effects of impingement and Moser entrainment on aquatic biota in the Illinois River.

a. Section 4.6.3.1 The ER (page 4-32) states that in 1979, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency issued LSCS an National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with a condition requiring impingement and entrainment monitoring and preparation of a Clean Water Act, Section 316(b) demonstration report. Provide reports, summaries, or documents that were developed or used to the support the 316(b) demonstration report. In addition, provide a copy of the predictive 316(b) demonstration study completed in 1976.

b. In its analysis of entrainment and impingement, the NRC will consider the effects of entrainment and impingement that occur at both the river screen house and the lake screen house. To support this analysis, please provide any reports, summaries, or documents that describe impingement and entrainment rates at the river screen house and the lake screen house since operations began, or any other reports, summaries, or documents that summarize preoperational aquatic biological monitoring data and operational aquatic biology monitoring data that were not cited in the ER.

Page 2 of 13

LASALLE ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT NEEDS LIST AQ-5 Section 4.6 of the ER considers the effects of heat shock on aquatic Moser biota in the Illinois River.

a. Section 4.6.3.2 of the ER (page 4-34) states that the in its Final Environmental Statement (FES) for LSCSs operation, NRC staff predicted that under worst-case conditions (highest blowdown temperature) the thermal plume area (defined by the 3°C/5°F isotherm) would be 2,500 m2 (0.6 ac) and would encompass approximately 9 percent of the rivers cross section. Describe any field studies or modeling studies that have occurred during operations that describe the temperature and size of the thermal plume in the Illinois River.

b. In its analysis, the NRC will consider the effects of heat shock on aquatic biota in both the Illinois River and the cooling pond. To support this analysis, please provide any thermal studies that have been conducted on the cooling pond.

AQ-6 Please docket the following ER references: Moser

a. Fritts, M. W. 2013. RE. Request: Illinois River Reports. Illinois River Biological Station and Illinois Natural History Survey. Havana, Illinois.

June 24, 2013.

b. EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc. 2014. LaSalle County Station 2013 Fish and Benthos Monitoring and Historical Fish and Benthos Comparisons. Deerfield, IL. March 2014.

c. HDR Engineering. 2010. Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program at LaSalle Nuclear Station, 2009. February 2010.

d. HDR Engineering. 2011. Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program at LaSalle Nuclear Station, 2010. February 2011.

e. HDR Engineering. 2012. Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program at LaSalle Nuclear Station, 2011.

f. HDR Engineering. 2013. Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program at LaSalle Nuclear Station, 2012.

g. HDR Engineering. 2014. Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program at LaSalle Nuclear Station, 2013.

Historic and Cultural Resources HC-1 Provide a map detailing the level of previous and existing ground Chazell disturbance at the plant site, including documentation on how this level of disturbance was determined.

HC-2 Provide U.S Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute topographic Chazell quadrangle maps at 1:24,000 scale that show the boundaries of the LSCS property, the plant site, and existing transmission lines up to the first substation. (I will need to take these hard copy maps with me for the file search at the Illinois SHPO; I am not referring to GIS maps with underlying topographic data - the actual USGS-named quad sheets are needed at 1:24,000 scale.)

HC-3 Provide vegetation/land-use maps of the LSCS property, the plant site, Chazell and associated transmission lines. What percentage of land within the LSCS property has been formally surveyed?

HC-4 Provide a breakdown of the percentage of types of land use (i.e., farm Chazell land, industrial, forested, water, etc.) within LSCS property. What percentage of land within the LSCS property is undisturbed?

Page 3 of 13

LASALLE ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT NEEDS LIST HC-5 Provide map(s) of site locations and previously surveyed areas within Chazell the entire LSCS property (plant site and plant property) and along existing transmission lines, up to the first substation, which will be needed during the site visit. These maps will not be docketed, as they are considered sensitive information. NRC will be independently collecting and verifying the location data as available at the Illinois SHPO, but that will likely be after the site visit is completed.

HC-6 Provide copies of any archaeological surveys performed on LSCS Chazell property and referenced in the ER. These surveys will not be docketed, as they are considered sensitive information.

HC-7 Verify if geomorphological work was conducted for the archaeological Chazell surveys to determine the depth of deposits and how deep archaeological remains may be present.

HC-8 Provide a copy of the applicants administrative controls in place to Chazell protect cultural resources, as referenced in Section 4.7 of the ER, and any other environmental review procedures for land-disturbing activities (e.g., trenching, clearing, digging) on or associated with LSCS property as described in the ER. Describe how inadvertent discoveries are considered by LSCS during normal operations.

HC-9 Provide a description of how a proposed activity on the LSCS site is Chazell evaluated for cultural resource impacts.

HC-10 Provide information on management around less-developed areas of Chazell the plant site, especially near known historic and cultural resources or near unsurveyed areas.

HC-11 Provide documentation of construction projects that have occurred on Chazell the property since the construction of LSCS to determine how historic and cultural resources were considered. Any documentation demonstrating compliance with existing environmental procedures would be useful. What materials are used by the LSCS staff to determine whether the SHPO should be consulted?

HC-12 Provide any information on cultural resource training required for Chazell LSCS staff.

HC-13 Provide copies of all letters and communications to and from the Chazell Illinois SHPO specific to determining the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)-eligibility of all cultural resources identified to date within the LSCS property, including the plant site and along existing transmission lines, up to the first substation.

HC-14 Provide any information on procedures for consulting/interacting with Chazell Federally recognized Indian tribes that have ancestral or historical ties to the project area and surrounding lands.

HC-15 Provide consultation letters and other communication documents Chazell indicating correspondence to and from the Illinois SHPO and to and from Federally recognized Indian tribes that have ancestral or historical ties to the project area and surrounding lands that you have received or sent since submittal of the ER or not included in the ER.

Additionally, has any contact been made with local historical societies or other local organizations with an interest in historic preservation?

Page 4 of 13

LASALLE ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT NEEDS LIST HC- Provide knowledgeable applicant staff familiar with the cultural Chazell Mtg1 resources within the LSCS property to review cultural resource management procedures to determine how they manage resources, avoid impacting historic and cultural resources, and deal with inadvertent discovery of historic and cultural resources and human remains. Is any cultural resource training required for staff?

HC- Provide knowledgeable applicant staff and transmission line Chazell Mtg2 maintenance staff to discuss any procedures in place regarding protection of historic and cultural resources along existing transmission line corridors.

HC- General site tour Chazell Tour1 HC- Transmission line tour up to the first substation (including any Chazell Tour2 archaeological sites recorded along the lines)

HC- Tour of the ROW for the makeup and blowdown pipelines from the Chazell Tour3 cooling lake to the Illinois River HC- Tour of archaeological sites and architectural resources within LSCS Chazell Tour4 property, preferably led by an archaeologist or staff familiar with location of cultural resources within the LSCS property Human Health (Non-Radiological)

NR-1 Provide NPDES monthly discharge monitoring reports for the past 5 Chazell years.

NR-2 Provide a copy of the plant procedure that workers use for identifying Chazell industrial hazards prior to performance of jobs. This procedure is discussed in Section 3.10.1 of the ER.

NR-3 Provide any information relative to the processes used by the plant to Chazell control electrical shock hazards as discussed in ER Section 3.10.2.

NR-Mtg Discussion with knowledgeable plant personnel Rautzen Note: If the following areas are discussed on the tour, a meeting for these areas may not be needed:

Radiation Protection Program: Overview of the program with emphasis on the as low as is reasonably achievable (ALARA) program to control worker radiation exposure (annual dose goals and status).

Are there any proposed changes or upgrades to the program being considered during the license renewal term?

Radioactive solid waste: Review how the plant plans to handle low-level radioactive waste (Class A, B, and C, mixed waste, and spent nuclear fuel) during the license renewal term (onsite storage, potential expansion of storage facilities, and disposal options). Are there any proposed changes or upgrades to the program being considered during the license renewal term?

Radioactive gaseous and liquids effluents: Review how the plant processes radioactive effluents to maintain radiation doses to the public to levels that are ALARA. Are there any proposed changes or upgrades to the program being considered during the license renewal term?

Page 5 of 13

LASALLE ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT NEEDS LIST NR- General tour of the plant site and buildings. Rautzen Tour Tour radiation protection/access control area to observe the following:

-Low-level radioactive waste storage and processing areas, including mixed waste.

-Radiological environmental monitoring program (REMP) - a small sample of monitoring stations (e.g., air monitoring stations, thermoluminescence dosimeter (TLD) stations, drinking water, milk, and vegetation, including monitoring stations co-located with State monitoring stations).

Land Use and Visual Resources LU-1 The ER (Section 3.2, p. 3-5 and 3-6) states that the LSCS site is 1,568 Grange hectares (ha; 3,875 acres (ac)) in size. Of that area, the cooling pond occupies 833 ha (2,058 ac); industrial or developed areas account for 60 ha (150 ac); undeveloped areas account for 101 ha (250 ac); and the LaSalle Fish Hatchery occupies 18 ha (45 ac). Describe the land use(s) for the remaining 556 ha (1,372) ac.

LU-2 The NRCs supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) for Grange LSCS license renewal will include a description of fuel at the LSCS site that mirrors Section 3.1.6.2 in the NRCs 2013 GEIS (ML13107A023).

To facilitate the staffs preparation of this section, provide the following information:

a. How much nuclear fuel does each LSCS unit contain in pounds or metric tons? The approximate or average weight is sufficient.

b. On average, what percentage of reactor fuel does Exelon replace during each outage?

c. Describe the use and storage capacity of all onsite fuel storage tanks, including diesel, gasoline, and natural gas.

d. How does LSCS power its heating, ventilating, and air conditioning systems?

e. Does LSCS have an onsite waste oil incinerator(s)? If so, please describe the incinerator(s).

LU-3 Section 3.1 (p. 3-2) of the ER states the following: The Chicago, Rock Grange Island & Pacific Railroad, in this area parallel to and slightly north of the Illinois River, is the closest railroad line. A 10 km (6 mi) rail spur connects LSCS to the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railroad south of the site (ComEd 1977).

a. Are these railways operational today?

b. Does the onsite rail spur remain active?

c. If these railways are not active, what are the closest operational railways to the LSCS site?

LU-4 Does Exelon maintain a barge slip for LSCS or otherwise receive or Grange ship equipment for LSCS by barge?

Page 6 of 13

LASALLE ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT NEEDS LIST LU-5 Regarding the transmission lines and onsite switchyard, please Grange provide the following information.

a. Who owns and operates the onsite switchyards?

b. The Final Environmental Statement for Operation of LSCS (FES-O; ML14353A388) states that of the four 345-kV lines that connect to the onsite switchyard, two lines connect to the Plano substation and two lines connect to the East Frankfort substation. However, the ER (Section 2.2.6, p. 2-13) states that two lines connect to Braidwood Station, and the East Frankfort substation is not mentioned. Please clarify these seemingly contradictory descriptions.

c. The FES-O describes the 138-kilovolt line connections to Mazon, Illinois and Streator, Illinois as temporary. Do these lines remain active?

d. While the NRC staff understands that Exelon considers the transmission lines connected to the LSCS switchyard to not be in-scope for license renewal (as stated in Section 2.2.6, p. 2-13 of the ER), the staff assumes that ties exist that connect the turbine buildings to the switchyard and that these ties would be in-scope for license renewal. Please describe any transmission lines that connect the nuclear power plant to the substation where electricity is fed into the regional power distribution system. Please also describe any transmission lines that supply power to the nuclear plant from the grid in accordance with Footnote 4 of Table B-1 of 10 CFR Part 51, Subpart A.

LU-6 Clarify whether the ERs offsite land use information (Section 3.2, p.3- Grange

5) is based on the 2006 or the 2011 Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (MRLC) National Land Cover Database. If this section is based on 2006 data, provide any applicable updates to the section resulting from the 2011 data.

Meteorology, Air Quality and Noise M&A-1 Provide the following meteorological information from the data Martinez recorded at LSCS meteorological facility. The meteorological data should include the most recent 5 years for which data is available.

a. mean monthly and annual temperatures;

b. mean monthly precipitation and annual precipitation; and

c. Provide seasonal and annual summary wind statistics in the form of wind direction, wind roses, annual average wind speed and peak wind gust.

M&A-2 The ER identifies that LSCS is subject to the emission standards for Martinez hazardous air pollutants for reciprocating internal combustion engines, 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart ZZZZ. Please clarify if the gasoline dispensing facility and fuel storage tank are subject to National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Gasoline Dispensing Facilities (40 CFR 63, Subpart CCCCC). If available, please provide annual hazardous air pollutants (HAP) emissions from LSCS permitted emission sources.

M&A-3 Provide supporting calculations (e.g., operating hours per year, fuel Martinez consumption and rates, etc. as applicable for each source) for the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions presented in Table 3.3-2 of the ER.

Page 7 of 13

LASALLE ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT NEEDS LIST M&A-4 Are there expected upgrade/replacement activities for Martinez equipment/operation that could increase or decrease air emissions over the license renewal period?

M&A-5 Describe the compliance history associated with LSCS Federally Martinez Enforceable State Operating Permit (FESOP) permit No. 75040086.

Provide the five most recent annual emission reports submitted to the IEPA associated with LSCS FESOP permit No. 75040086. Has LSCS received any Notice of Violations (NOVs) from the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) regarding the FESOP? If so, provide copies of such NOVs.

M&A-6 Provide a copy of the FESOP permit renewal application dated July Martinez 15, 2005, referenced in the ER. Has Exelon received any correspondence from the IEPA regarding the FESOP permit renewal application? If so, please provide copies of such correspondence.

M&A-7 Section 4.2 of the ER states that [a]ir quality effects of transmission Martinez lines were not evaluated because, as is explained in Section 2.2.6 of the ER, no LSCS transmission lines are within the scope of the LSCS license renewal environmental review. Section 2.2.6 of the ER discusses that the offsite transmission lines are not in scope in accordance with footnote 4 of Table B-1. However, Section 2.2.6 does not identify the in-scope transmission lines, which as defined in footnote 4 of Table B-1 are transmission lines that connect the nuclear power plant to the substation where electricity is fed into the regional power distribution. Section 2.2.6 of the ER identifies electrical connections between the main plant and the LSCS switchyard. Therefore, the Category 1 issue, Air Quality effects of transmission lines is applicable to LSCS. Provide an evaluation of any new and significant information that pertains to the Category 1 issue, Air Quality effects of transmission lines for those in-scope transmission lines that connect the nuclear power plant to the on-site LSCS switchyard.

M&A-8 Provide the following ER reference: (IEPA 2000) Illinois Martinez Environmental Protection Agency. 2000. Federally Enforceable State Operating Permit for LaSalle County Generating Station No.

75040086. December 11, 2000.

M&A-9 The ER provided GHG emission inventory for the year 2013. Does Martinez Exelon have a GHG inventory for prior years? If so, please provide this information for the most recent 5 years.

M&A- Describe the LSCS off-site noise environment and primary noise Martinez 10 sources in the vicinity of LSCS.

M&A- The ER states that Illinois does not have regulations or guidelines for Martinez 11 environmental noise. However, Illinois has a noise regulation with allowable octave band sound levels according to emitting and receiving land-use classification and time of day (IAC, Title 35:

Environmental Protection, Subtitle H: Noise). Please clarify if LSCS is subject to Illinois noise regulation and if LSCS is in accordance with these regulations.

Page 8 of 13

LASALLE ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT NEEDS LIST M&A- Meetings requested: Martinez Mtg Provide a knowledgeable individual to discuss the air quality and noise portions of the ER and who can discuss the following aspects of facility operations:

a. Sources of air pollutants operating at LSCS.

b. Air permits and emission inventories M&A- Tours requested: Martinez Tour a. General Site Tour

b. Major air emission and noise sources

c. Nearby noise sensitive receptors Socioeconomics SE-1 Provide updated permanent workforce data, preferably a residential Rikhoff distribution of permanent workforce by county in Table format.

SE-2 Provide updated property tax information, similar to the data provided Rikhoff in Tables 3.9-2 and 3.9-3 of the ER. Include data for 2013 and 2014, if available.

SE-3 The latest settlement agreement was signed in July 2013 and covers Rikhoff the next 7 tax years starting with the 2013 tax year. What is the expectation for future tax years beyond the next 7 years during the license renewal term? Please provide any relevant information.

SE-4 In addition to property tax payment information presented in Section Rikhoff 3.9 of the ER, describe any other major annual support payments (e.g., emergency preparedness fees), one-time payments, and other forms of non-tax compensation (if any) provided to local organizations, communities, and jurisdictions (e.g., county, municipality, townships, villages, incorporated places, and school districts) on behalf of LSCS.

SE-5 Provide information about any anticipated changes in state and local Rikhoff tax laws, rates, and assessed property value or any other recent or anticipated tax payment adjustments that could result in notable future increases or decreases in property taxes or other payments.

Special Status Species Spec-1 Provide any information on potential or suitable habitat for the Indiana Logan bat or northern long-eared bat that may occur on the site, particularly summer roosting habitat. If any such habitat exists, please include that habitat as part of the ecology tour.

Terrestrial T-1 List and describe all terrestrial wildlife or habitat surveys that have Grange been completed on the LSCS site, including preoperational studies.

Include ongoing monitoring associated with LSCSs Wildlife at Work program, if any.

Page 9 of 13

LASALLE ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT NEEDS LIST T-2 Regarding the LSCS Wildlife at Work program, please provide the Grange following information.

a. When did Exelon first receive Wildlife Habitat Council certification for its Wildlife at Work program?

b. Does Exelon intend to maintain Wildlife Habitat Council certification during the proposed license renewal term?

c. Provide the following ER reference: (Exelon Generation 2013b)

Exelon Generation. 2013. LaSalle County Generating Station Wildlife Management Plan.

T-3 The correspondence between Exelon and the IDNR in Appendix D of Grange the ER indicates that the Marseilles Hill Prairie Illinois Natural Areas Inventory (INAI) is in the vicinity of the LSCS site. Where is this INAI site in relation to the LSCS site?

T-4 Does Exelon maintain any Clean Water Act Section 404 permits for Grange the discharge of dredge or fill material into wetlands? Does Exelon anticipate applying for any 404 permits during the proposed license renewal period?

T-5 Provide copies of Exelons landscape maintenance procedures for the Grange LSCS site.

T-6 Describe any site procedures that Exelon maintains for assessing and Grange mitigating the environmental effects of new ground-disturbing activities or other new site activities. Provide copies of such procedures, as applicable.

T-7 Following a review of the past 10 years of operation (2004-2014), the Grange NRC staff did not identify any non-routine reports of unusual or important environmental events submitted to the NRC in accordance with Appendix B, Section 5.4.2 of the LSCS Current Facility Operating Licenses (ML052990324 and ML052990387). Confirm that no such reports have been submitted to the NRC during this time period.

T-8 Provide the terrestrial resource sections (including any applicable Grange tables, figures, and appendices) of following ER reference: (ComEd 1977) Commonwealth Edison Company. 1977. LaSalle County Station Environmental Report Operating License Stage. Volume 1. May 10, 1977.

Waste Management & Pollution Prevention WM- Provide a list of waste haulers and offsite treatment, storage, and Chazell NR-1 disposal facilities used to disposition hazardous and mixed waste.

WM- Provide a list of waste haulers and offsite treatment, storage, and Chazell NR-2 disposal facilities used to disposition non-hazardous waste.

WM- Provide a copy of Exelon Generation procedures for managing Chazell NR-3 universal wastes and other recyclables as discussed in Section 2.2.8 of the ER.

Page 10 of 13

LASALLE ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT NEEDS LIST WM- Provide a map showing the location of all of the Resource Chazell NR-4 Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 90-day collection points and copies of applicable state or Federal RCRA audits for the last 5 years.

WM- Provide copies of the following ER references for the NRC staff Chazell NR-5 Review: (Exelon Generation 2012d) Exelon Generation. 2012.

LaSalle Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures. Revision 16.

June 2012; and, (Exelon Nuclear 2009a) Exelon Nuclear. 2009.

Document Based Instruction Guide: LaSalle Station Sewage Treatment Lagoon System TQ-AA-223-F070, Revision 1.

WM- Please arrange a breakout session with waste management personnel Chazell NR-Mtg to discuss processes and procedures.

WM- Please arrange a site tour of interim storage areas and RCRA 90-day Chazell NR- collection points.

Tour Groundwater GW-1 Tours requested: Ford

a. The river intake structures

b. Intake and discharge pipelines between the river and the plant

c. The perimeter of the cooling pond

d. The area of groundwater contamination (wells MW-LS104s, TW-LS-116S, TW-LS-118S, TW-LS-119S, TW-LS-120S, & RW-LS-100S)

GW-2 Review La Salle Fleetwide Hydrologic Investigation Report for 2006 Ford and later years (2012 etc.). We would like to review the following assessment and any others that have been prepared. (CRA 2006)

Conestoga-Rovers & Associates. 2006. Hydrogeologic Investigation Report - Fleetwide Assessment, LaSalle Generating Station, Marseilles, IL. Revision 1. Prepared for Exelon Generation Company.

LLC. September 2006.

GW-3 Provide the following reference: (Exelon 2011b) Exelon Corporation. Ford 2011. LaSalle U1 CY Tank Leak - 10CFR50 75(g) entry June 2010.

May 17, 2011.

GW-4 Provide the following reference: (Exelon Generation 2012d) Exelon Ford Generation. 2012. LaSalle Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures. Revision 16. June 2012.

GW-5 Provide the following reference: (Exelon Generation 2005) Exelon Ford Generation. 2005. 2004 Annual Environmental Operating Report - LaSalle County Station. April 2005.

Surface Water SW-1 Please provide Illinois Water Inventory Program reports and Folk/Ford associated transmittal correspondence (surface water and groundwater portions) for years 2010 through 2014 and 2015 year to date.

Page 11 of 13

LASALLE ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT NEEDS LIST SW-2 Provide a diagram(s) clearly illustrating the configuration of the river Folk/Moser makeup intake "flume" channeled into the bottom of the river and "funnel" as referenced in the ER. Note: as cited in Section 3.2.2.2 of the 1978 Final Environmental Statement (FES), Figures 3.4-4 and 3.4-5 from the 1977 Operating License Stage ER may provide the necessary illustration (if it is consistent with the as built configuration).

In addition, describe the space between bar grills.

SW-3 ER Section 4.6.3.1 (p. 4-31) states that in its FES for LSCS operation, Folk/Moser NRC staff predicted that the velocity at the face of the travelling screens in the river screen house is 0.2 m/sec (0.5 ft/sec) during one pump operation and 0.3 m/sec (0.9 ft/sec) during occasional operation. Describe any field studies or modeling studies that have occurred during operations that describe the flow through velocity at the traveling screens at the river screen house and at the lake screen house.

SW-4 Please provide the LSCS Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Folk (current revision).

SW-5 As referenced in ER Section 2.2.3, please clarify how often during the Folk year, on average, more than one river makeup pump needs to be operated to supply the cooling pond. Please indicate in what months two-pump operation occurs and for how long. If possible, please provide information for the last 5 years of pump operations.

SW-6 As referenced in ER Section 2.2.3 relative to the circulating water Folk pumps, please clarify and provide the rated capacity of the six circulating water pumps located in the lake screen house.

SW-7 As referenced in ER Section 2.2.3 relative to the screen backwash Folk/Moser systems for the lake screen house and river screen house, respectively, please clarify and briefly describe whether the backwash systems actuate automatically at a set frequency and/or via differential pressure preset, or if operator intervention is required to activate the backwash systems.

SW-8 Please provide a copy of LSCS Extreme Heat Implementation Plan. Folk/Moser SW-9 Please provide copies of NPDES Discharge Monitoring Reports for the Folk/Moser last 2 years (2013-2014), inclusive of 2015 year to date. Also include the Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) for 2010.

SW-10 Please identify when the most recent blowdown pipeline and intake Folk/Ford pipeline breaks have occurred, respectively. For the most recent blowdown line break, summarize the environmental effects of the break (i.e., volume of effluent released, area affected, results of any analyses conducted of the release); the impact on plant operations if any, and corrective action taken. Also, please provide a copy of the release report/correspondence associated with this break submitted to the IEPA.

SW-11 If available, such as from the most recent NPDES permit renewal Folk application, provide a water balance/ flow diagram (showing flow rates) for LSCS.

SW-12 Provide a map of NPDES permitted outfall locations. Folk Page 12 of 13

LASALLE ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT NEEDS LIST SW-13 Please provide copies of any NOVs, nonconformance notifications, or Folk related infractions received from regulatory agencies associated with NPDES permitted discharges, sanitary sewage systems, groundwater or soil contamination, including spills, leaks, and other inadvertent releases of fuel solvents, chemicals, or radionuclides (covering the past 5 years inclusive of 2014). Include correspondence of self-reported violations to responsible agencies.

SW-14 Identify the date when maintenance dredging was last performed at Folk/Moser the river screen house and identify the volume of spoils removed and where they were disposed. Indicate if any chemical analysis was performed on the spoils and provide a summary of the results.

Provide a copy of any activity report(s) submitted to regulatory agencies associated with the dredging event, if applicable.

SW-15 Provide for review copies of Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 Folk/Moser permits, and state equivalent permits, including the following:

Department of Army Permit CEMVR-OD-P-2006-185.

SW-16 Provide a description of any planned operational and maintenance General activities (or projects) anticipated to be undertaken during the license renewal term (as possible, identify expected timeframe, location(s) affected, acres disturbed, and activity/project duration).

SW- Tour: The hydrology/aquatic ecology team would like a general tour of Folk/Moser Tour the plant site and vicinity including associated intake structures and conveyances (i.e., river screen house, lake screen house, river discharge structure, intake canal, discharge canal, cooling pond perimeter, cooling pond spillway, blowdown channel/canal, blowdown/intake pipeline routing ROW); significant streams and other surface water/effluent management features (i.e., north and south stormwater management ponds, sewage treatment lagoons, and the fish hatchery); onsite groundwater wells; NPDES outfall locations; and the Marseilles Lock and Dam.

SW - Provide for a meeting with the applicant's subject matter expert(s) Folk/Moser Mtg and/or the contractor(s) responsible for writing the surface water hydrology and quality portions of the ER to discuss the plant's intake and circulating water systems, effluent discharges, and affected water resources.

Cumulative CUM-1 Provide the name, description, location, and status of any additional Hoffman past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects or actions identified since the applicants ER was prepared.

Page 13 of 13