ML20209J536

Environ Protection Plan 1986 Annual Environ Operating Rept

ML20209J536
Person / Time
Site:	Byron
Issue date:	12/31/1986
From:	Querio R COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:	Davis A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
References
BYRON-87-0464, BYRON-87-464, NUDOCS 8705040306
Download: ML20209J536 (22)

Text

_., -

4 ATTACISIElff A l

Byron Station Environmental Protection Plant 1..

1986 Annual Environmental Operating Report 8'

. Section 3 2 Environmental Monitoring Section 4.2.1 Aerial Remote Sensing

'~

The aerial photographic monitoring program was done in 1986, as scheduled in the Environmental Protection Plan for Byron Station. The aerial photographs and the field survey covered an area of approximately one mile radius centerad at the Byron Station cooling towers. The photographs were taken at a scale of one indi to five hundred feet using false color ir.frared film. The photography was done on August 18, 1986 and the field survey was done on i

September 19, 1986.

The examination and analysis of the photographs and the field survey was performed by a consulting plant pathologist. Dead, dying and stressed foliage signatures and different plant types were identified and marked on the photographs and then inspected during the field survey to determine the cause of the signatures on the photographs.

The plant pathologist prepared a report covering the results of the analysis of the aerial photographs and the ground truthing field survey of the suspect The conclusion being that a wide-range of plant species were observed

. areas.

in the survey area but no saline aerosol or salt injury was identified.

Abnormal foliage signatures seen on the photographs or in the field survey were found to be the result of herbicide applications, plant diseases and water damage or from planting and cultivating problems. A copy of the consultants report is submitted herewith together with a set of positive color transparencies encompassing the survey area.

J The 1986 serial photographic monitoring represents the first operational survey, the aacond operational survey is scheduled to be done during the sunumer of 1987 i

l l

i

)

g5040306 % i,,

-k' S

=ocn 0 ro

[

,c (1342M/0159M) l

t ATTAOLG3rr A (Continued)

Section 4.2.2:

Confirmatory Sound Level Survey i

y A. ' During 1986, sound level surveys were performed at various points around the perimeter of Byron Station as well as at noise sensitive locations

, ithin a five mile radius of the plant. All measurements were performed t

w with Unit 1 under normal operation along with the cooling tower running near it's design water flow rate. Surveys were performed during the winter months (the time of ysar when foliage of deciduous trees is

-largely absent) and, also, during the sunner when the foliage was near 3

it's peak presence.

Real time octave and one-third octave bank data was acquired ati sach p,

microphone location. In addition, a twenty minute tape recorded sampk was taken at each site location which was later analyzed in the '

') i l

Comunonwealth Edison System Operational Analysis Department laboratory to determina the statistical variation of the sound levels. Efforts were*

made during field acquisition to eliminate extraneous noise avsnts from the recorded samples..This was done so as not to bias the tape l

1 recordings with data that would not allow a true assessment of the amount of noise generated from the facility. However, in certain situations, the tape recorded data is simply an indication of the ambient noise as opposed to the station's contribution to it.

This was the case either in i

high background noise areas or in areas distant enough from the Generating Station so that plant activity was not apparent. For some spots, the traffic noise was the dominant noise at the location. Since traffic noise was constant, efforts to eliminate it from the recordings were futile.

In these cases, this information has been not.ed on the data sheets and, therefore, can not be construed to indicate the facilities actual impact upon that area.

/

All measurements taken conform with ANSI Standards and Procedures for a

Type-1 instrumentation setups. The results of the data analysis include the daytime, nighttime, and day / night equivalent sound levels for each location. This analysis included the rangef of sound levels measured and this appears on the data sheets in the form of exceedance levels of L-1 and L-'99.

The L-1 level is a statistical parameter indicating the noise level which is exceeded 1% of the time. This could be considered tho'

+

high range of the noise levels present. On tba other hand, L-99 indicates the noise level exceeded 99% of the time and can be considered to be the lowest levels present at this locale.

. ik The data sheets, also, delineate the"o'verall A-weighted sound level measured as well as the octave bank levels between the frequency bands of 31.5 to 8000 Hs center frequencies. Furthermore, tha appropriate regulatory criteria or guidelines appear on the fo s

(134 M/0159M) s

+

+

r,-,e,-

-= m -v

-,---.=-.w

ATTA09GNT A (Continued)

Section 4.2.2:

(Continued)

Review oT the data indicate compliance with the State of Illinois regulations along with adherence to Federal EPA and HUD criteria.

In certaiw seasons and in certain locations, the numerical values exceed the criteria as various octave bank frequencies. In these situations, the notation that appears on the data form explains the reason for the high

\\

value. Tonal components were found in the 250 Hz octave band at locations 1 and 2 as noted on the Data Sheets. However, these levels do not exceed the State of Illinois discrete tone rule.

Once Byr'on' Unit-2 becomes fully operational, similar sound level readings will be made at the same locations and a final assessment of the i

environmental impact with both units under normal operation will be made.

B.

Noise Related Complaints No noise complaints concerning Byron Station were received by r'n-nanwealth Edison in 1986.

• 4

,\\

4

't 1

1 4

i

. J

- 'M )

(1342M/Ol39M) 4

-~ -

-c,-

m

,-,,-----n.

ATTACHMENT A (Continued)

Results of the 1986 Foiliar Survey of the Byron Generating Station and its Environs Prepared for Commonwealth Edison Company Chicago, Illinois i

by Barry J. Jacobsen, Ph.D.

1 I

m

Introduction The 1986 foliar survey of the area encompassed by a 1 mile radius around the Byron Generating station was done on September 19, 1986 following analysis of aerial infrared photographs (Cibachrome prints) taken by Aero-Metric Engineering, Inc., Sheboygan, Wisconsin on August 18, 1986.

The photographs were analyzed for indications of plant stress.

This report is the 9th foliar survey report of this area. Unlike the previous eight surveys which provided base-line data for the survey area, this is the first survey since the plant began operation in 1985.

This author conducted the surveys of this area in 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, and 1984.

The primary concern in this survey was to identify plant damage from saline aerosols produced by the natural draft cooling tower now operating at the Byron Ge McCune etal. gyrating Station. Such saline aerosol damage was anticipated by under conditions of high temperatures, high humidity, and prolonged thermal inversions.

Methods and Materials Aerial infrared photographs (Cibachrome prints) were taken on 8-16-86 by Aero-Metric Engineering, Inc., Sheboygan, Wisconsin.

These photographs were analyzed using a 10-20X Steroscopic Viewer for signs of plant stress for the area within 1 mile of the operating natural draft cooling tower. The photographs were generally of good quality for analysis. A systematic ground truth survey was done on September 19, 1986.

Specific sites mentioned in this report are marked on the following photographs: 1-1 through 1-7 (the north flight line), 2-1 through 2-7, and 3-1 through 3-7 (the south flight line). These are summarized on the high altitude photographs 4-1, 4-2, and 4-3 Results.

No saline aerosol or salt related injuries were identified in the survey Abnormal signatures on infrared photos were identified in ground area.

surveys to be caused by weeds in crop fields, plant diseases, the use of herbicide " brush killers" along road right-of-ways, fertility differences, soil compaction, soil type differences or agricultural herbicide drift.

Specific examples given in the following analysis with specific sites marked on the forementioned photographs and are discussed in the following paragraphs.

1 McCune, D., D. Silbernam, R. Mandel, L. Weinstein, P. Freudenthal, and P. Giardina. 1977. Studies on the affects of saline aerosols of cooling tower origin on plants.

J. Air Poll. Conte. Assoc. 27:319-324

. Photograph 1-1 Site 1-1.

Circled areas in this area were identified as damage from oak wilt, dutch ela disease or dead trees likely killed by these diseases. Site 1-2 was identified as dieback likely associated with root damage from cattle pastured in this area. Site 1-3 This is a hackberry showing dieback associated with trunk or root injury, decay, road salt, or herbicide injury.. Dieback was unilateral on the roadside. Since the tree was on private property it could not be ground truthed definatively.

Area fields in this photograph showed evidence of both grass and broadleafed weed infestation and either planter or cultivator problems.

Photograph 1-2 Site marked 1-2-1 are areas of water and rootrot damage in soybeans.

Site 1-2-2 denotes an area of grassy weed infestation in soybeans.

Photograph 1-3 No remarkable sites not previously noted on other photos.

Photograph 1-4 Site marked 1-4-1 was an area of woody plants which ground truth survey showed injury from a brush killer type herbicide.

Photograph 1-5 Site 1-5-1 did not show an irregular signature on photo interpretation but a ground truth survey showed transplant injury to both pine and crabapple plantings.

Trees in motocross course area located in the upper left quadrand of the course had shown dieback associated with root damage in prior surveys.

Dieback was not identified in either the infrared or ground truth surveys.

Photograph 1-6.

No remarkable sites are located on this photo.

This area was intensively ground truthed and no sign of salt related injury was noted.

Photograph 2-1 l

Site 2-1-1 denotes areas of brush-killer type herbicide injury to a wide range of woody species along Black Walnut Road. Site 2-2-2 were areas of poor l

stands most likely involving damping off or root rot damage to soybeans. Site 2-2-3 are trees which show stress signatures in infrared photo analysis.

1 Ground truth only identified decay as a potential source of stress.

Ground truth survey in the area east of Black Walnut Road identified the

)

following problems. Corn; coanon and southern rust, eyespot Stewart's leaf blight, and corn borer damage. Soybeans; brown stem rot, Septoria brown spot, downy mildew, and bacterial blight.

Hawthorn; cedar-hawthorn rust &

leafspot. Ela; leaf miner and black spot. Raspberry; Septoria leafspot and l

-,----y,--

,,,--, y.<

,.<,.,,----,,,,m.---,,e-.-

...,-.-,,,-,,,-.%,,,~

_a l

, anthracnose.

Wild grape; Isariopses leafspot.

Sudex; northern corn leaf blight & bacterial blight.

Hackberry; nipple gall site damage.

elm) and burdock, grand and lesser ragweed, and sma flecking similar to that caused by Command herbicide drift fields to which it was applied.this herbicide was common throughout Illin soybean Photograph 2-2.

Site 2-2-1 was found to be trees showing false signatures.

was identified as ela trees showing signs of dutch ela disease.

Site 2-2-2 Photograph 2-3.

Site 2-3-1 was identified as areas of water damage.

the area planted to woody ornamentals.

Site 2-3-2 denotes and dogwood all showed good growth.

Ash, hawthorn, norway and scotch pine, majority of dogwood observed.

Septoria leafspot was observed on the Photograph 2-4.

There were no remarkable observations on this photo.

Photograph 2-5.

The area encompassed by this photograph was intensive surveyed.

alfalfa / cat / clover planting. Common leafspot and leaf hopper damage were w

Rust, on clover.

powdery mildew and anthraenose were noted damage noted in earlier surveys.The hickory trees located at site 2-5-2 n growing in this area as was bacterial blight of burdock.Septoria leafspot was co Minor black spot damage was observed on multiflora rose Photographs 2-6 and 2-7.

There are no remarkable signatures identified on these photos.

have recovered from construction injury although some st evident on some specimens.

Honeysuckle plantings showed damage from russian aphid.

trees showed damage from Marsonina leafspot and rust.Boxelder sh Poplar

I

. Photographs 3-1 and 3-2.

foliage had been cut. Site denoted as 3-1-1 and 3-2-1 both denote an oat field signature on the grey background. Weeds and alfalfa growth are providing the pink water damage or planter / cultivator problems.Other marked areas were found to be eith Photograph 3-3.

while showing normal infrared signatures did show he Maples problems were observed on maple, white pine, grape, prunus, walnut No foliar cedar at this site.

, ela, or Photograph 3-4 Site 3-4-1 denotes a poplar planting showing dieback from Cytospora canker.

Photograph 3-5.

sunflower growing at this site were healthy. Site 3-5-1 denotes a Cedar and Walnuts showed minor anthracnose damage.

Photograph 3-6.

Site 3-6-1 denotes a catalpa showing dieback most likely associated with decay.

Pine, spruce and cedar growing at this site were healthy.

s =

Photograph 3-7.

of individual trees located on private property.There were no re Other Ground Truth Survey Observations.

Roads was surveyed. Vegetation along Holcomb Road between Black Walnut and boxelder were observed to be healthy Maples at site 2 were s senescence. The cause was not identified.

located at site 3 on this photo.

Ebenezer Reformed Church is Phomopsis blight and from salt applied to the parking lot. Juniper plantings sh showed premature defoliation due to the apple scab disease. Crabapple trees trees at this site were healthy.

Mountain Ash 9

Vegetation along Razorville Road' between Deer Path and Acorn Road was also observed.

survey which did not appear on photo 1-6 nor the high altitude p Other than ainor black leafspot damage to Siberian ela no significant problems

5 were observed on poplar, scotch pine, white pine, hickory, sumac, wild grape, multiflora rose, boxelder, or blackberry. Damage from road work in 1984 was no longer evident.

Vegetation along River Road showed evidence of brush killer type herbicide damage.

Also a vegetable garden area on Black Walnut Road north of Woodbine Road was observed.

Pumpkin plants showed damage from powdery mildew and gu a y stem blight. Tomatoes showed minor damage from early blight and flea beetle feeding. Plea beetle damage was also evident on austard and eggplant.

Cauliflower, cabbage, and ragweed were healthy.

==

Conclusion:==

No saline aerosol or salt injury was identified in the survey area.

A wide range plant species were observed in the survey area. Abnormalities observed in infrared photos or in the ground truth survey were found to be water damage, planter or cultivator problems, damage from plant diseases or from herbicide applications. Plants observed to be free from salt injury symptoms in the survey area include; white pine, scotch pine, ash, maple (silver and norway), boxcider, hawthorn, locust, ela (American and Siberian),

hickory, catalpa, poplar, sedar, spruce, white oak, cottonwood, multiflora rose, autumn olive, black crorry, hackberry, dogwood, apple, multiflora rose, mountain ash, walnut, grape, ;umac, corn, soybeans, suder, alfalfa, clover, oats, wild cane, sunflower, brose grass, dandelion, saartweed, murdock, ragweed (grant and tassor), cauliflower, mustard, pepper, tomato, cabbage, green pepper, pumpkin, wild strawberry, blackberry, bluegrass, fescue, and timothy.

l

• k a

._._,m,.__..__-

f I

ATTACHMENT A (Continued)

L E

Results of the 1986 Confimatory Sound Level Survey of the Byron Generating Station and its Environs l

Prepared for Byron Station by Daniel Fedor, P.E.

l System Operational Analytical Department Connonwealth Edison Company Chicago, Illinois i

s Martill Rd.

~

~ ' ' ~

d S

E E

c

$ig 8

Black Walnut Rd.

Natural N

h Draft 3

y 1

p,.e,e t. '.a.te t e ?????.eee+ 9??. tete ? ???.te e ???.tet,=.)

COOllng E

m 10.:

Towers E

8 o

B 3:::

2 f7. 5l:5

.M53.!.j

!!5ermariENur'c~fiEd.:

[

~

ili!

. : M::!::A!:i

!:]

M i:P..l.a.:..., !:U:i:iU.:(--t

.i:!!y.

Ebenezer

...tt..:..n. i.:!:i.

!::=

Church

i.

m ::'

g g.:

.:. g

i:i

< :i T.:::..........l........

.......... i:ii. g

^ " ' ' 0: :::

+>a csss+>; <<swaaj@i MechanicaI' h* !S***'

o jji,@ig

i

Draft

^ ::

e

+: e

.)?pi!Coollng Tower i jjjj e g,,, g,,

House

e

. ; ;.:o...........................lil! E N

WE"I!

Houses

• =****asseu us...-

,, i n u,,,n

,.:y/:.0#, Razorville Rd.

!:tii:

..?

ti

.- *:n

.: m:-

4 River

...........,. 5:

"3 g...

en.w is l

Screen House :@

Li 0

4 l

lj vine or.

E i@

Li i

i i

!:i jiji

i Cemetery le,ss River Rd._

^

M

/

th

e. w

i.

4 I NORTN) 43 ITR$N NICLEAR CINERATIN8 STATION

..................... Site Boundary O"ai ar diciiaa 'ac iiaa vNITs 1 &2

^

FIGtJRE 4.2.J..1 l

3000 0

3C 00 I

(

SCALE IN FEET fl0ISE rPE0!CT10fl LOCAllmi.

f LE A F RIVER SYRON '

\\

l vj

\\

8 ST LLMAN

~ 0

^

l PLANT JUNCT ON

\\

h MT. MORRIS

\\

h g

[

HOLCOMB PAY E5 POINT

/

o gg,, ~% '-

O OREGON gggg$

' e O

D AY SVILLE CHANA au ELAGG CENTER f

y u

e

?

ROCHELLE s

e suitts E

stAtt l

BTRON NBCLEAR GENE R AilN G ST All0N

.. U N J T S. _1

& 2

~'

FIGURE 4.?. 2-t LOCATIONS OF COMMUNITIES WITHifl 5 MILES OF THE STATION USED Ifl AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENTS y

c-BYRON UNIT-1 SOUND LEVEL SURVEY DATA SHEET 4.2.2-1 MEASURED NOISE LEVELS DUE TO NORMAL CO.NTINUOUS EFERATION OCTAVE BAND CENTER FREQUENCIE5 IN HERTZ DEA 31 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4.<

ak COM.

LOCATION NUMBER ONE (#1)

Winter Day 38 52 48 43 36 37 34 2:

20 22 Winter Night 24 39 32 25 21 19 16

'. 6 17 la Summer Day 45 44 42 CB 31 28 27 28 29 46 (1)

+

Sume.er Night 63 50 52 49 49 44 37 42 44 59 (1,3)

LOCATIO'4 NUMBER TWO (#2)

Winter Day 29 47 47 36 26 27 21 17 17 17 Winter Night 40 52 46 49 46 2S 2E 17 17 17 t!

Sammer Day 41 49 44 36 27 27 26 28 39 33

.2' b

e Summer Night 49 53 52 48 53 43 37 36 32 45 (1.3)

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL ECARD RULES, SECTION 901.102 Daytime (Rule a) 75 74 69 64 5E 52 47 43 40 Nighttime (Rule b) 69 67 62 54 47 41 36 32 32 COMMENTS:

(1)

• High levels in these octave bands due to the contribution of insect noise.

(2) #

High levels in these octave bands due to the contribution of bird noise.

(3) L Tonal component in the 250 octave band does not exceed the State of Illinois discrete tone rule.

r BYRON UNIT-1 SOUND LEVEL SURVEY DATA SHEET 4.2.2-2 MEASURED NOISE LEVELS DUE TO NORMAL CONTINUOUS OPERATION OCTAVE BAND CENTER FREQUENCIES IN HERTZ dBA 31 63 125 250 500 ik 2k 4k 8k COM.

LOCATION NUMBER THREE (#3)

Winter Day 40 55 56 53 41 -

34 31 28 19 17

' Winter Night 46 56 54 55 41 46 42 34 17 17 (1)

Summer Day 42 57.

55 53 38 37 37 33 27 23 Summer Night 64 56 56 51 39 41 42 36 29 57 (1,2)

LOCATION NUMBER FOUR (#4)

Winter Day 41 60 57 50 36 34 37 33 27 17 Winter Night 33 41 38 36 33 30 29 23 19-18 Summer Day 39 50-50 46 38 32 31 29 30 34 Summer Night 49 52 51 48 40 41 42 36 36 43 (2,3)

ILLfNOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD RULES, SECTION 901.102 Daytime (Rule a) 75 74 69 64 SS 52 47 43 40 Nighttime (Rule b) 69 67 62 54 47 41 36 32 32 COMMENTS:

(1) #

High levels in these octave bands due to the contribution of station activity.

(2)

• High levels in these octave bands due to the contribution of irisect noise.

(3) &

High levels in these octave bands due to full blowdown water flow noise.

i BYRON UNIT-1 SOUND LEVEL SURVEY DATA SHEET 4.2.2-3 MEASURED NOISE LEVELS DUE TO NORMAL-CONTINUOUS OPERATION CCTAVE BAND CENTER FREQUENCIES IN' HERTZ dBA 31 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 8k COM.

DYRON CITY LIMITS Winter Day 38 51 51 48 39 33 34 27 19 17 Winter Night 25 46' 41 33 28 22 18 14 15 17 Sun.mer Day 38 51 51 43 38 33 30 26 26 34 Summer Night 46 42 37 35 32 29 26 34 32 43 (1)

-1 OREGON CITY LIMITS Winter Day 38 48 52 48 35 29 34 29 17 17 Winter Night 28 42 38 32 28 27 21 16 16 18

.g...

Summer Day 38 47.

48 46 32 31 34 30 26 29 Summer Night 39 48 44 41 37 26 21 35 34

- 25 (1)

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD RULES, SECTION 901.102 Daytime (Rule a) 75 74 69 64 58 52 47 43 40 Nighttime (Rule b) 69 67 62 54 47 41 36 32 32 COMMENTS:

(1)

• High level in these octave bands due to contribution of i nsect noise.

""*-*T*-"Nt74 T-N-"

" " - - * ~ ' ' -

4' "FW9

.v r

"ir

'Tv' t

e'

BYRON UNIT-1 SOUND LEVEL SURVEY DATA SHEET 4.2.2-4 CALCULATED STATISTICAL NOISE LEVELS DUE TO NORMAL CONTINUOUS OPERATION NOISE LEVELS IN EECIEELS Ld Ln Ldn L-1 L-99

' LOCATION NUMBER ONE (41)

Winter Day 43 41 48 39 WinterENight 23 41 27 20 4

Summer Day 46 65 50 41 Summer Night 59 65 61 56 LOCATION NUMBER TWO (#2)

Winter Day 39 45 47 30

' Winter Night 39 45 43 35 Summer Day 46 51 59 41 Summer Night 44 51 47 42 LOCATICA NUMBER THREE (#3)

Winter Day 43 53 48 40 Winter Night.

47 53 49 45 Summer Day 45 65 53 40 Summer Night 60 65 64 51 Ldn FEDERAL GUIDELINE Envircnmental Protection Agency (EPA) 1 55 FEDERAL CRITERIA Housing & Urban Development (HUD) i 65 COMMENTS:

-(#) High level due to contribution of insect noise.

e

BYRON UNIT-1 SOUND LE9EL SURVEY DATA SHEET 4.2.2-5 CALCULATED STATISTICAL NOIEE LEVELS DUE TO NORMAL CONTINUOUS OPERATION NOISE LEVELS IN DECIBELS Ld Ln Ldn L-1 L-99 LOCATION NUMBER FOUR (#4)

Winter Day 64 62 80 41 Winter Night 35 62 41 32 Summer Day 61 60 78 40 Sammer Night 48 60 55 45 BYRON CITY LIMITS Winter Day 42 43 51 38 Winter Night 34 43 41 26

. Summer Day 43 55 55 37 Summer Night 49 55 51 43

'CREGON CITY LIMITS Winter Day 49 48 59 40 Winter Night 34 48 40 28 Summer' Day 47-48 58 36 Summer Night 38 48 42 37 Ldn FEDERAL GUIDELINE Envtronmental Protection Agency (EPA) 1 55 FEDERAL CRITERIA Housing & Urban Development (HUD) 1 65

-COMMENTS:

(*)

High level due to contribution of traffic noise.

(#) High level due to contribution of insect noise.

ATTACHMENT B List of Environmental Protection Plan non-compliances and corrective actions.

None

=m

.. (1342M/0159M)

ATTACHMENT C List of changes in station design, operation, tests and experiments made

~in accordance with Section 3.1 which involved a potentially significant unreviewed environmental question.

'Mone 99

~~

(1342M/0159M)

(

"-"NT ww--_-__,__

r O

e ATTAC19GNf D List of non-rountine reports submitted in accordance with Subsection 5.4.2.

None L:

9 i

! (1342M/0159M) l

v ho

[CN N

Commonwealth Edison Z )7 4450 North German Church Road Byron Nucirir Stition Byron, Illinois 61010 8 9 April 1, 1987 gM k

LTR:

BYRON 87-0464 FILE:

2.07.300 TO:

Mr. A. Bert Davis Acting Regional Administrator Region.III U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comunission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137

SUBJECT:

. Annual-Environmental Operation Report for Facility License NPF-37 Attached }ou will find the Annual Environmental Operating Report as required by the Technical Specifications, Appendix B, Section 5.4 for Facility License NPF-37. The period of the report is from January 1, 1986 to December 31, 1986. The report was reviewed against the objectives of the Environmental Protection Plan as stated in the Technical Specifications, Appendix B, Section 1.0 Byron Station and it has been determined that these objectives are being met.

The report is contained in Attachments A, B, C, and D as indexed -

Attachment A -

Summaries and analysis of the results of environmental protection activities required by Appendix B, Section 4.2.

Attachment B -

A list of non compliances to the Environmental Protection Plan and the corrective actions.

Attachment C -

A list of all changes in Station design or operation, tests or experiments as required by Appendix B, section 3.1.

Attachment D -

A list of all non-routine reports as required by Appendix B, section 5.4.2.

P

$/f APR 2 81987 (

3 w

e, e

---.,,_..n. - - - - - -,, - -, -,

3:

o In ahcordance with Regulatory Guide 10.1, one copy of this report is provided for your use and 18 copies are being submitted directly to the Document Control Desk, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555.

V 0

f f#

/\\.

Robert E. Querio Plant Manager Byron Nuclear Power Station REQ /lh cc: NRC Resident Inspector Document Control Desk (18 copies)

Site Nuclear Licensing Administrator Environmental Affairs Department Environmental Compliance

,