ML17266A507

Proposed St Lucie Plant Preoperational & Operational Biological Monitoring Program.

ML17266A507
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	08/31/1981
From:	ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
To:
Shared Package
ML17266A506	List: ML17266A505 ML17266A507
References
AB-358, MONITOR1-55, NUDOCS 8110010374
Download: ML17266A507 (24)

Text

4 q 0 1+ >

p 3l AB-358 8l STLU1 P,f"g NONITOR1-55 PROPOSEO ST. LUCIE PLANT PREOPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL BIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM AUGUST 1981 8 ii 00i 0374 05000335 8109TO PDR ADOCK P ~PDR

ATTACHHENT 1 PROPOSED ST. LUCIE PLANT PREOPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL BIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM I. GENERAL The ecological baseline study of Florida Power 8 Light Company's (FPL), St. Lucie Unit No. 1 was designed and implemented by the staff of the Florida Department of Natural Resources Marine Research Laboratory.

Five offshore sampling stations were established (Figure 1) and sampling was conducted from July 1971 to August 1974. These results have been reported as St. Lucie Plant baseline data prepared by the Florida Department of Natural Resources (References 4-12). The last portions of the data analyses and report preparation for this baseline study are presently being completed. Following the sampling for the baseline study, the Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS) for the 'opera-tional monitoring program, contained in the operating license for St.

Lucie Unit No. 1 issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), were written. These specifications delineated the biotic communities to be studied and stated that sampling was to be conducted at the same five stations established for the baseline study. The objective of the opera-tional monitoring study was to gather data for comparison with data obtained during the baseline study.

In March 1976, sampling for the operational monitoring program was begun by Applied Biology, Inc. (ABI). In addition to the five stations established for the baseline study, a nearshore site south of the plant was selected as a control station. This control station was located distant from the plant and therefore away from possible influence from warmwater discharges. In accordance with the ETS, collections were made

YARDS KILOMETERS 2000 1000 0 1 SCALE

~ ~

C N-

\

~<

r.

r r'

.\

~ ~

1

,\ ~

~~1 05 0

V4 t ~

.'G.. " ."0

~

m

~ r,; ~ '27 v'

'.03:"-

Offshore

~. Discharge

Vl "i

::~" r 0

St. Luci '-

' =-':

Plant Q

" ':.'.. 'IIOffshore 04

";:! .. ~ ~

Intake

\

I' I,; ~ \

~ '

~ ~ 4 Figure 1, Location of the five offshore sampling stations (1-5) established for baseline study and the control ( C ) station designated for the operational monitoring study.

to assess benthic organisms, plankton, nekton, macrophytes, water quality and migratory sea turtles. The results and analyses of these collections have been reported annually (Ref. 1, 2, 3, 16).

The five offshore stations were established by the Florida Department of Natural Resources (FDNR) before a comprehensive evaluation of the offshore currents was available. More recently, water current data (Ref. 14) have been obtained that indicates that if the stations were relocated they could better evaluate the biological communities in areas of potential plume impact. As shown in Figure 2, the predominant surface currents, and subsequent plume orientation from the point of discharge (Station 1), are to the north. Based on water current eval-uation and the results of the biological monitoring program to date, FPL believes that certain revisions to the program prescribed in the ETS and/or NPDES Permit are appropriate. The program described herein reflects these revisions and would be used by both St. Lucie Unit No. 1 (operational monitoring) and St. Lucie Unit No. 2 (preoperational and operational monitoring)- It is proposed that the program continue for 2 years after St. Lucie Unit No. 2 is operational.

In the regulatory scheme established by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (FWPCA), 33 USCA 5 5 1251 et ~se ., the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was given jurisdiction over all water quality matters relating to non-radiological liquid effluents. in its Yellow Creek decision (ALAB-515), the NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board held that the NRC may not specify water quality restrictions in

C

'"I"

, ss

~

~

f i~

',0 I-'

4

%i S ~ ~

/

~ I r~

r 0; shh

~

2 ~

~

jK

~ h fO-'

1

~ 1 s

.r, gO.

5) r

~ 't"h

~

0)0 r. ~

~~ ~ ~b ~ r rC.". J s

r I  ;=:- F-:= cC I

~ OO 0%0 q): '

~

.O3'v> O 0

e 4

~

)\  :,0 I St.'Lucre'.',,

~,s 0 lan

'rl ~

I s:~. .O.s.

~

r ~

04 h0 0

0 ~ ~

-i(i...

VL' A

rs

~ ~

0(0 s'

0 CP I

~ ~

6.goy

~ ~

Figure 2. Frequency distribution of surface current direction in relation to operational monitoring sampling stations.

excess of those imposed by the EPA. On the basis of ALAB-515 and the water quality effluent limitations and monitoring requirements contained in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued by EPA pursuant to FWPCA for St. Lucie Unit No. 1, FPL has peti-P tioned the NRC for the deletion of thermal and chemical monitoring requirements contained in the ETS for St. Lucie Unit 1. However, this request to the NRC did not address the aquatic biological monitoring requirements also contained in the St. Lucie Unit No. 1 ETS. To remove this state of implicit dual regulation, FPL proposes to incorporate appropriate aquatic biological monitoring requirements into the NPDES permit for St. Lucie Units 1 and 2 and to request their deletion from the Unit 1 ETS. (The NRC operating license and accompanying ETS for St.

Lucie Unit No. 2 have not yet been issued.) The program described below is herewith submitted to the EPA for that purpose.

I I. PROPOSED BIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM

~0b ective - To monitor the populations of sea turtles, nektonic and benthic organisms of the Atlantic Ocean near the plant to determine the extent that plant operations may be influencing the nearshore ecosystem.

Thbilv1dii <<h11b4 terms of abundance and composition of the marine biotic community and 2) in terms of the relationship between physical properties of the waters and the abundance and composition of the biological community.

Communities described below are to be evaluated to determine potential alterations due to plant operation.

A. Benthic Or anisms Benthic organisms will be collected quarterly and inventoried as to kind and 'abundance.

B. Nektonic Or anisms Samples will be collected by gill netting once per month during April through September and twice per month during October through March.

Kind and abundance of organisms present will be determined.

C.

Analysis will be made at the surface at the same time as the nekton sample collections and near the bottom at the same time as the benthic sample collections. Parameters measured will be temperature,'alinity; dissolved oxygen and turbidity.

D. .

Hi rator Sea Turtles Sea turtle nesting surveys will be conducted biannually on the FPL shoreline property and along selected control beaches.. Sea turtles entering the intake will be removed, tagged and released back into the ocean orr a continual basis.

E. 'e ortin Re uirements Results of the aquatic biological monitoring program shal 1 be reported in an Annual Non-Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report to be submitted to the EPA.

~

6

1 4

III. IMPLEMENTATION OF PROPOSED BIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM A. Introduction The monitoring program study design originated and was implemented in 1971 by the Florida Department of Na'tural Resources Marine Research Laboratory. The sampling regime was based on the ecological information available at the time. Sample locations were selected in relation to predicted plume direction, predicted plume'real extent (Ref. 4) and the major macrohabitats known to exist off Hutchinson Island. Stations 1, 2 and 3 were located in the predicted thermal plume area, while 4 and 5 were established as north and south 'ontrols located in the same macrohabitat as Station 2 (Ref. 5).

Since 1972, extensive data on the biological communities near the St. Lucie Plant have been obtained (Refs. 1-3, 6-12, 16). Additional physical data have been gathered on winds (Ref.- 13), currents (Ref. 12) and the thermal plume (Ref. 15).

These biological and physical studies indicate that effects of the P

St. Lucie discharge are limited to surface areas near the point of discharge. The proposed study is therefore designed to evaluate the biological conditions in the near-field area of potential plume impact.

B. Benthic Or anisms To assess the potential that there are thermal effects on the benthic community, quarterly samples will be taken at control Station BC, Station Bl, and at a station (B2) to be located just north of the thermal

plume's warmest spot (Figure 3). Four or more replicates will be taken.

Station 2 of the current program will be retained as Station C1 to help

/

integrate the modified program with the existing data. Station 5 of the current program will be retained as Station 83 for at least one or two years after Unit 2 goes on-line, to document the probability that there is no effect of cbmbined Units 1 and 2 discharge at this location.

Benthic sampling at other offshore stations (3 and 4) will be terminated..

C. 'ekton The sampling program will consist of nearshore gill netting. Two sampling stations will be established near the intake structure and three in the discharge area (Figure 4). The discharge station samples will provide data on near, intermediate and distant effects of the plume on fish distribution. Stations will be located in the thermal plume's warm-est spot and approximately 200 meters and 450 meters from this warmest spot. These stations will be sampled as follows: once per month during April through September when the commercially important migratory species are generally not present offshore the St. Lucie Plant and twice per month during October through March when these species are present.

Station 2 (Cl) will be retained to help integrate the data from the modified program with the exisiting data.

D. Mi rator Sea Turtles Sea turtle nesting surveys will be conducted biannually during odd-numbered years to monitor species, numbers and nesting characteristics.

The nesting surveys will be conducted during the summer nesting season on

YA OS KILOMETERS C V

~ ' 2000 1000 0 1 2 3 SCALE P

'le Q

4' 0

1 ~ ~

';r.'

~

5~

I ~

r O B3

~

eo ~

O O

> ~ a ~

Q . IA

~

~

~

oe

~

O '.

ITl Oc1 0.'

G ia

' ~

St. Luci "

'B1

'.:r':: Plant 1

~ ~

Vw 8 ~

0 BC (CONTROL STATION)

~ 4 Figure 3. Location of benthic sampling stations.

I I

I I II I I I

I THERMAL PLUME I

I OF5,I NOTE: These stations will be oriented T I as needed to maintain their N l! positions re'lative to the plume.

DISCHARGE CANAL T-".

gal@

rL UnittFischarge (submerged multiport diffuser)

ST. LUCIE Unit 1 Discharge (submerged 2-port Y diffuser)

POWER PLANT

,c OF2 INTAKE CANAL Q Submerged Intake Structure Fl I:

IND I AN R I V E R

.5km 0

iI

\

Figure 4. Location of gill net stations.

the FPL shoreline property and along selected control beaches. Specifics of the nesting surveys, such as sampling frequency, and the amount of beach sampled, vary between study years and are established following input from the appropriate state and federal agencies.

Sea turtle removal from the intake canal is conducted on a continual basis. The turtles are removed with nets from the canal, measured and weighed, tagged and released back into the ocean. The utmost care is taken so as not to injure the animals.

K. WIIW1 Samples for water quality analysis will be collected. concurrently with the biological samples.

IV. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FROtl THE ETS MONITORING PROGRAM The ETS contain a provision for modification of the program based upon the data accumulated after two years of operation. The program pro-posed in Section II above differs significantly from that prescribed in the St. Lucie Unit No. 1 ETS in several respects. These changes "and their bases are described below.

A. Plankton - The monthly collection of phytoplankton and zooplankton has been deleted.

Justification Interstation comparisons have shown that concentrations of zooplankton, phytoplankton and chlorophyll a generally have been higher in the area of the Station 1 discharge than at the other stations, suggesting some enhancement of plankton concentrations due to the thermal input.. It is unlikely that differences in plankton concentrations are significant in the high energy, nearshore location under consideration.

Continued plankton monitoring does not appear to be justified.

B. Nektonic Or anisms - Collecting of samples by trawling and seining has been deleted and gill net station locations have been revised.

Justification The ETS allowed collection of samples by "trawling, seining, or other suitable method". Trawling and beach seining are sampling tech-niques that are highly selective for bottom dwelling and surf zone dwelling forms. During operational monitoring, neither of these com-munities appeared to be influenced by the thermal discharge (Ref. 3).

Gill netting obtains samples in the water column and is an effective method for collecting sport and commercial fish species. The proposed schedule emphasizes collections during the period of the year when migra-tory species such as bluefish, Spanish mackerel and king mackerel are near the St. Lucie Plant. Stations moved to the immediate plume area will better assess the influence of the thermal discharge on the move-ments of fishes in the area.

12

I C. ~hh - fh q I 11 I f dl q tation has been deleted.

Justification The highest diversity of algae, 88 species, was collected during the third year of the study. The number of species collected was lowest in early spring and highest in summer and early fall. This seasonal pattern was typical for subtropical marine vegetation. Diversity was higher near shore because, drift (unattached) algae were the predominate forms and these were carried inshore by the prevailing winds and currents (Ref. 3).

Vegetation distribution and growth at all nearshore stations sur-veyed seems to be limited by a lack of appropriate substrate for vegeta-tion attachment. Well-developed macrophyte communities may occur on isolated rock outcroppings, but the chances of the collecting dredge encountering one of these outcroppings is remote. Because the attached macrophyte community is so limited, it is not considered an important food source or habitat for organisms living in the St. Lucie area.

Because of the above, the sampling provides little useful data and there is no need for further monitoring of macrophytes.

'13

Justification Data from the control station, located distant from the St. Lucie Plant, were compared with results from station-specific water parameter analyses. Data from the literature for marine waters of nearshore coastal environments adjacent to the plant were also compared with the present study. Datd comparisons (Ref. 3) indicated:

a~ Nearly all parameters measured varied significantly during dif-ferent months of the year; and

b. There were no significant differences in parameters among sta-tions or at different depths.

These results show that the operation of the St. Lucie Plant has no significant effect on the selected nutrients in this study. Continued nutrient analyses does not appear warranted.

E. Mi rator Sea Turtles - Various requirements relating to the effects.

of the discharge thermal plume and temperature stress, hatching and rearing factors for migratory sea turtles have been deleted.

Justification The requirements of the ETS have been satisfied. A report was pre-I pared (Ref. 2) and submitted to the NRC by FPL letter No. L-78-109, dated

'30 March 1978, that described studies performed to determine the effects of the discharge thermal plume on turtle nesting patterns and turtle hatchling swimming. Additionally, control studies on temperature stress, hatching and rearing factors conducted using turtle eggs from displaced nests were reported. The resu1ts of the studies of turtle hatchlings

.14

show no evidence that potential nearshore surface temperatures from the plant will cause permanent impairment or mortality (Ref. 2).

F. Entrainment of A vatic Or anisms ETS 4.1 - Various requirements

,P relating to assessment of the effects on planktonic organisms of passage through the plant condensers have been deleted.

Justification The results of the ichthyoplankton and zooplankton sampling have been presented in the Annual Non-Radiological Environmental Monitoring Reports for 1976, 1977, 1978 and 1979 (Ref. 1, 2, 3, 16).

These studies show that the inshore ocean waters near the St. Lucie Plant are not typical of a productive fish nursery area. Physical characteristics needed in a nursery area are low or fluctuating salinities, silt-sand-mud bottom, and extensive beds of rooted aquatic vegetation. Chemically, the waters in the St. Lucie Plant area are homo-geneous with little seasonal variations. Physically, the nearshore areas are characterized by the presence of relatively constant salinities, shell-hash sediments and the absence of significant macrophytic grassbeds.

Important migratory sport and commercial fishes were not found to be spawning in the area of the St. Lucie Plant. In general, low con-centrations of fish eggs and larvae have been recorded in the intake canal, which confirms that entrainment is not significant. Zooplankton losses through entrainment are not significant.

1S

Based on the above, the required Entrainment Studies need not be included in the operational monitoring program.

16

LITERATURE CITED

1. ABI. 1977. Ecological monitoring at the Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Plant, annual report, 1976. Report to Florida Power & Light Company, Miami, Fla.

2. . 1978. Ecological monitoring at the Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Plant, annual report, 1977. Report to Florida Power & Light Company, Miami, Fla.

3. 1979. Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Plant annual non-radiological environmental monitoring report, 1978. Vol. II and III. Biotic monitoring. Report to Florida Power & Light Company, Miami, Fla.-

4. Florida Power & Light Co. 1971. Hutchinson Island plant unit No. 1 environmental report Docket No. 50-335. 20 May 1971. Florida Power & Light Company, Miami, Fla..

5. Florida Department of Natural Resources. . 1972. Preliminary environmental studies of coastal waters near Hutchinson Island, Florida. Progress report to Florida Power & Light Company, Miami, Fla.

6. Gallagher, R.M. 1977a. Nearshore marine ecology at Hutchinson Island, Florida: 1971-1974. I. Rationale'nd methods. Fla.

Mar. Res. Publ. No. 23:1-5.

7. 1977b. Nearshore marine ecology at Hutchinson Island, Florida: 1971-1974. II. Sediments. Fla. Mar. Res.

Publ. No. 23:6-24.

8. Worth, D.F., and M.L. Hollinger. 1977. Nearshore marine ecology at Hutchinson Island, Florida:

- 1971-1974. III. Physical and chemical environment. Fla. Mar. Res. Publ. No. 23:25-85.

9. Futch, C.R., and S.E. Dwinell. 1977. Nearshore marine ecology at Hutchinson Island, Florida: 1971-1974. IV. Lancelets and fishes. Fla. Mar. Res. Publ. No. 24:1-23.

10. Camp, D.K., N.H. Whiting, and R.E. Martin. 1977. Nearshore marine ecology at Hutchinson Island, Florida: 1971-1974. V.

Arthropods. Fla. Mar. Res. Publ. No. 25:1-63.

ll. Gallagher, R.M., M.L. Hollinger, R.M. Ingle, and C.R. Futch. 1972.

Marine turtle nesting on Hutchinson Island in 1971. Fla. Dept.

Nat. Resour., Mar. Res. Lab. Spec. Sci. Rept. No. 37:1-11.

12. Worth, D.F., and J .B. Smith. 1976. Marine turtle nesting on Hutchinson Island in 1973. Fla. Mar. Res. Publ. No. 18:1-17.

13. Dames & Moore. 1977. Graphical and tabular wind roses. St. Lucie, Hutchinson Island, Florida, 1973. Report to Florida Power &

Light Company, Miami, Fla..

17

LITERATURE CITED (continued)

14. Envirosphere Co. 1976. St. Lucie Plant site ocean current analysis.

Report to Florida Power 8 Light Company, Miami, Fla.

15. 1977. Thermal evaluation study. St. Lucie Unit 1 ocean diffuser. Report to Florida Power 8 Light Company, Miami, Fl a.

16. ABI. 1980. Florida Power 5 Light Company, St. Lucie Plant annual non-radiological environmental monitoring report, 1979. Vol. II and III. Biotic monitoring. Report to Florida Power 8 Light Company, Miami, Fla.

'18

ATTACHNfNT II ST. LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 BIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM - OPERATIONAL PHASE ADDITIONS The following additions to the Biological Monitoring Program sub-mitted to EPA on 3 April 1980 are recommended for the program to serve St. Lucie Unit No. 2 in the operational mode.

d. B I 1 1<<. ~Sifts 1 - T ddl tions will be added near the Unit No. 2 discharge. These stations will be in close proximity to the discharge pipe with one north and one south of the pipe. Stations will be sampled quarterly with four or more replicates collected to assess the taxonomic composition and abundanace.

Justification The Unit No. 2 discharge pipe will extend 1875 feet further offshore than the Unit No. I pipe. There is a habitat and sedi-ment change from beach terrace gray sand near shore (e.g. Unit 1 discharge area) to a shell hash substrate in the area of Unit 2 discharge. The ongoing monitoring program has shown these habitats to support somewhat different communities. These different communities may react differently to a heated discharge.

B. Bk . ~5ifi 1 -1 ddf1 '1 ffk Bfll tions will be established. One statiop will be in the middle of the Unit No. 2 thermal plume's warmest area and the other, the control, about 200 meters upcurrent from this warmest spot. The stations will be samp1ed once per month during April through 20

September when the commercially important migratory species are generally not present offshore .the St. Lucie Plant and twice per month during October through March when these species are present.

Justification The adult fish community in the discharge plume from Unit No. 2 should be examined to determine if attraction or exclusion is occurring. The St. Lucie No. 2 discharge pipe will extend about 1875 feet past the Unit No. 1 point of discharge and the discharged water may influence fish movement in the area.

C. ~1i . ~Sifts i - hy i d F11 b measured at the same stations and frequency as the biological samples.

Justification Water quality determinations are made to support the biological program and should be taken concurrently with biological sampling.

This program will enable an evaluation of the impact of the Unit No.

2 discharge to be made. The addition of these stations and sampling h

regimes takes into consideration the option of directing the plant discharge through the St. Lucie Unit No. 2 diffuser pipe if one unit is down ~

21

A