Text

Environ Rept for Facility,Vol 2
	ML19337A055
Person / Time
Site:	Clinton
Issue date:	08/29/1980
From:	; ILLINOIS POWER CO.
To:	;
Shared Package
ML19337A053	List: ML19337A052; ML19337A055;
References
	ENVR-800829-01, ENVR-800829-1, NUDOCS 8009080211
	Download: ML19337A055 (726)
	v • d • e

. _. . .. ..

THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS P00R' QUALITY PAGES O

CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE Q VOLUME 2 ILLINDIS \

SO ND PCh POWER l O

80000802'11

CPS-ER(OLS)

/'~'\ CLINTON POWER STATION - UNITS 1 AND 2 v'

ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT - OPERATING LICENSE STAGE GENERAL TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER TITLE VOLUME 1 Purpose of the Proposed Facility and 1 Associated Transmission 2 The Site and Environmental Interfaces 1 3 The Station 2 4 Environmental Effects of Site Preparation, 2 Station Construction, and Transmission Facilities Construction 5 Environmental Effects of Station 2 Operation 6 Effluent and Environmental Measurements 2 and Monitoring Programs

.f%

(,) 7 Environmental Effects of Accidents 2 8 Economic and Social Effects of Station 2 Construction and Operation 9 Alternative Energy Sources and Sites 2 10 Station Design Alternatives 2 11 Summary Cost-Benefit Analysis 2 12 Environmental Approvals and Consultation 2 13 References 2 l

1

(~')

m-1 1

l

CPS-ER(OLS)

O N/ CHAPTER 3 - THE STATION TABLE OF CONTENTS 1

PAGE 3.1 EXTERNAL APPEARANCE 3.1-1 3.1.1 Structures 3.1-1 3.1.2 Arrangement of Structures 3.1-1 3.1.3 Architectural Features and Aesthetic Considerations 3.1-1 3.2 REACTOR AND STEAM-ELECTRIC SYSTEM 3.2-1 3.2.1 System Description 3.2-1 3.2.2 Fuel Description 3.2-1 3.2.3 Reactor Description 3.2-2 3.2.4 Turbine Generator 3.2-2 3.3 STATION WATER USE 3.3-1 3.3.1 Circulating Water System 3.3-1 3.3.2 Service Water System 3.3-1 3.3.2.1 Essential Shutdown Service Water System 3.3-1

(^T 3.3.2.2 Station Service Water System 3.3-2 k 3.3.3 Potable Water System 3.3-2 3.3.4 Water Treatment System 3.3-2 3.3.4.1 Steam Cycle Makeup System 3.3-2 3.3.4.2 Condensate Polishing System 3.3-3 3.3.4.3 Wastewater Treatment System 3.3-3 3.4 HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM 3.4-1 3.4.1 Amount of Heat and Load Factors 3.4-1 3.4.2 Intake Structure 3.4-1 3.4.3 Condenser, Discharge Flume, and Discharge Structure 3.4-2 3.4.4 Supplemental Cooling System 3.4-3 3.4.5 The Cooling Lake and Water Temperatures 3.4-4 3.5 RADWASTE SYSTEMS AND SOURCE TERMS 3.5-1 3.5.1 Source Terms 3.5-1 3.5.1.1 Introduction 3.5-1 3.5.1.2 Sources of Radioactivity in Liquid Effluents 3.5-2 3.5.1.3 Sources of Radioactivity in Gaseous Effluent's 3.5-2 3.5.1.4 Sources of C-14, H-3 and Ar-41 3.5-4 3.5.1.5 Sources for the Solid Radwaste Processing System 3.5-5 3.5.2 Liquid Radwaste Systems 3.5-6

,_ 3.5.2.1 System Description 3.5-6 k.!

3-1

CPS-ER(OLS)

CHAPTER 3 - THE STATION g TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.)

PAGE 3.5.2.1.1 Equipment Drain Subsystem 3.5-6 3.5-8 3.5.2.1.2 Floor Drain Subsystem 3.5-9 3.5.2.1.3 Chemical Waste Subsystem 3.5-10 3.5.2.1.4 Laundry Waste Subsystem 3.5-10 3.5.2.1.5 Summary 3.5-10 3.5.2.2 Ins trumentation and Control 3.5-11 3.5.2.3 Liquid Waste Release 3.5.2.4 Radioactive Discharge Quantities 3.5-12 3.5-13 3.5.3 Gaseous Radwaste System 3.5-13 3.5.3.1 Description 3.5-13 3.5.3.2 Sources of Radioactive Gases 3.5-15 3.5.3.3 Gaseous Radwaste Process Description 3.5-17 3.5.3.4 Instrumentation and Control 3.5-17 3.5.3.5 Gaseous Waste Release Point 3.5-17 3.5.4 Solid Radwaste System 3.5.4.1 System Description 3.5-18 3.5.4.1.1 Wet Solid Waste Subsystem 3.5-18 3.5.4.1.2 Wet Solid Waste Packaging and Handling 3.5-19 Subsystem 3.5.4.1.2.1 Radwaste Drumming Equipment 3.5-19 3.5.4.1.2.2 3.5.4.1.2.3 Drum-Handling Equipment Smear-Testing and Decontamination 3.5-19 g Equipment 3.5-20 3.5.4.1.2.4 Solidification Agent Storage and Feed 3.5-20 Equipment 3.5-20 3.5.4.1.3 Dry Solid Waste Packaging Equipment 3.5-20 3.5.4.1.4 Drum Storage Areas 3.5-21 3.5.4.1.5 Pre-Shipment Monitoring Facility 3.5-21 3.5.4.2 Packaging and Shipment 3.5-21 3.5.4.3 Instrumentation and Control 3.5.5 Process and Effluent Monitoring 3.5-22 3.6-1 3.6 CHEMICAL AND BIOCIDE WASTES 3.6.1 Cooling Water Systems 3.6-1 3.6.1.1 Circulating Water System 3.6-1 3.6-2 3.6.1.2 Service Water System 3.6-2 3.6.2 Makeup Water Treatment System 3.6.3 Potable Water System 3.6-3 3.6.4 Wastewater Effluents Treatment Facility 3.6-3 3.6.5 Total Dissolved Solids in the Cooling Lake 3.6-5 3.7 SANITARY AND OTHER WASTE SYSTEMS 3.7.1 Sanitary Waste System 3.7-1 3.7.2 Waste Water Treatment Facility <

3.7-2 9

3-li

CPS-ER(OLS)

CHAPTER 3 - THE STATION A

V TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont' d.)

PAGE

- 3.7.3 Gaseous Effluents 3.7-2 3.8 REPORTING OR RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL MOVEMENT 3.8-1 3.9 TRANSMISSION FACILITIES 3.9-1 i

3.9.1 Introduction 3.9-1 3.9.1.1 138 kV Line Route 3.9-1 3.9.1.2 345 kV Lines South 3.9-1 1

3.9.1.3 345 kV Line North 3.9-3 3.9.2 Radiated Electrical and Acoustical Noises 3.9-4 3.9.3 Induced or Conducted Ground Ourrents 3.9-5 l APPENDIX 3.9A-Radiated Electrical and Acoustic Noise Measurements On Lines Eranating From The

Baldwin Power Station And On Li.ie Routes From 3.9A-1 Clinton Power Station l 3.9B-1 APPENDIX 3.9B-Ground Resistance Test l

O) l t

l 3-111

~ y r g .n- -, , , . , + - ~ , . ,,,,--,w,- . ,,,.. - ,,w w, .,-,,,, ,, -,--,--,en--_- ., - - - - - . . ..y.- ,- -

CPS-ER(OLS)

CHAPTER 3 - THE STATION ggg LIST OF TABLES NUMBER TITLE PAGE 3.5-1 Data for Radioactive Source Term 3.5-23 Calculations Per Unit 3.5-2 Clinton Power Station Input for BWR-GALE Computer Code Calculation 3.5-32 3.5-3 Liquid Waste Management System Compo-nents and Design Parameters 3.5-34 3.5-4 Expected Inputs to the Liquid Radwaste System During Normal and Anticipated Operating Conditions of Clinton Power Station-Units 1 and 2 3.5-36 3.5-5 Design-Basis Activity Concentrations in Major Liquid Radwaste Input Streams 3.5-38 3.5-6 Expected Releases of Radionuclides from Normal Operations and Opera-tional Occurrences Compared to 10 CFR 20 Limits 3-5-40 3.5-7 Gaseous Radiation Release Rates Per Unit 3.5-42 3.5-8 Off-Gas System Fbjor Equipment Items 3.5-43 3.5-9 Design-Basis Noble Radiogas Source Terms 3.5-47 llh 3.5-10 Solid Radwaste Management System Components and Design Parameters 3.5-48 3.5-11 Annual Weight, Volume, and Activity of Radwaste Shipped from the Clinton Power Station-Units 1 and 2 3.5-50 3.5-12 Solid Radwaste System Storage Area Design Capacities 3.5-51 3.6-1 Chemicals Stored on Site 3.6-6 3.6-2 Regeneration Frequency and Total Wastewater per Regeneration of the Makeup Demineralizer System 3.6-7 3.6-3 Chemical Wastes per Regeneration of the Makeup Demineralizer System 3.6-8 3.6-4 Sludge Rate Entering Settling Pond 3.6-9 3.6-5 Estimated Composition of Waste Stream Leaving the Settling Pond and Applicable Limitations 3.6-10 3.9-1 Land Use Breakdown for the 138 kV Route 3.9-6 3.9-2 Land Use Breakdown for the Proposed 345 kV Route South 3.9-7 3.9-3 Land Use Breakdown for the Proposed 345 kV Route North 3.9-8 3.9-4 Line Data and Estimated Costs of Proposed Transmission Line Route for Clinton Power South 3.9-9 ll) 3-iv

CPS-ER(OLS) 3 CHAPTER 3 - THE STATION

> LIST OF FIGURES NUMBER TITLE 3.1-1 Architectural Rendering 3.1-2 X, Y Coordinates of Liquid and Gaseous Release Points 3.2-1 Simplified Boiling Water Reactor Flow Diagram 3.2-2 Net Plant Heat Rate as a Function of Exhaust Pressure 3.3-1 Water Usage Flow Diagram 3.4-1 Diagram of Heat Dissipation System

^ 3.4-2 Anticipated Monthly Distribution of Plant Load 3.4-3 Location of Intake Structure 3.4-4 Location of Intake Structure (Screenhouse) 3.4-5 Circulating Water Screenhouse General Arrangement 3.4-6 Calculated Water Velocities Within Screenhouse for Normal and Low Water Levels 3.4-7 Discharge Flume 3.4-8 Diagram of Discharge Structure 3.4-9 System Layout for Spray Modules in Discharge Canal 3.4-10 Canal Discharge Temperature to Lake Clinton Units 1 & 2, 92% Plant Load Factor, 1964 Sunmer Months,

(_s) 232 Spray Modules in Discharge Canal 3.4 tm Canal Discharge Temperature to Lake Clinton Units 1 & 2, 92% Plant Load Factor,1962 Summer Months, 232 Spray Modules in Discharge Canal 3.5-1 Liquid Radwaste System Simplified Flow Diagram 3.5-2 Gaseous Radwaste System Simplified Flow Diagram 3-5-3 Station Roof Plan 3.5-4 Solid Radwaste System Simplified Flow Diagram 3,.6-1 Flow Diagram for Wastewater Treatment System 3.6-2 Process Flow Sketch 3.9-1 Proposed Transmission Line Routes (I, F-G and H) and Field Intensity Check Points ( l through 5) 3.9-2 Radio Influence Voltage for 345 kV Unshielded Insulator - Hardware Assemblies 3.9-3 Type HV-IB 345 kV Tangent Structure -

3.9-4 Type HV-2B 345 kV Angle Structure 3.9-5 Type HV-3B 345 kV Angle Structure 3.9-6 Type HV-4B 345 kV Angle Structure 3.9-7 Type HV-5B 345 kV Angle Structure 3.9-8 Type HV-6B 345 kV Angle Structure 3.9-9 345 kV Double Circuit Tangent Structure Clinton Power Station to Line 4571 3.9-10 345 kV Double Circuit Light Guyed Angle Structure Clinton Power Station to Line 4571 I')

v 3-v I

CPS-ER(OLS)

CHAPTER 3 - THE STATION LIST OF FIGURES (Cont'd.)

O NUMBER TITLE 3.9-11 345 kV Double Circuit Light Unguyed Angle Structure Clinton Power Station to Line 4571 3.9-12 345 kV Double Circuit Medium Guyed Angle Structure Clinton Power Station to Line 4571 3.9-13 345 kV Double Circuit Tap Structure in Line 4571 Clinton Power Station to Line 4571 3.9-14 345 kV Double Circuit Tangent Structure Line 4571 to Oreana Substation 3.9-15 345 kV Double Circuit Light Angle Structure Line 4571 to Oreana Substation 3.9-16A 345 kV Single Circuit Tangent Dead End Structure Clinton Power Station to Line 4571 3.9-16B 345 kV Single Circuit Tangent Dead End Structure Clinton Power Station to Line 4571 3.9-17 345 kV Single Circuit Guyed Dead End Structure Line 4571 to Oreana Substation O

O 3-vi l

l

CPS-ER(OLS) 4 CHAPTER 3 - THE STATION O

i 3.1 EXTERNAL APPEARANCE 3.1.1 Structures Clinton Power Station Units 1 and 2 (shown in the architectural rendering in Figure 3.1-1)are comprised principally of a group of interconnected buildings shaped roughly in the form of the letter H. The station is oriented generally in a northeast-southwest direction. The southwest end of each leg includes a containment building, and the northeast end of each leg includes a turbine building. Interconnecting structures are the radwaste building, control building, and the diesel generator and heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) building. Along the northwest side of each turbine building is a heater bay, and a machine shop is located on the interior side of the northeast turbine building. A service building is situated beside the southwest auxiliary building. Each containment building houses a boiling water reactor (BWR) and associated reactor coolant system. A common station HVAC vent alongside the southwest containment building extends 10 feet above the roof at elevation 935.5 feet above mean sea level (MSL). This is the release point for all radioactive exhaust gases. Liquid radioactive effluents are released into the discharge flume at elevation 709.8 feet MSL. The station grade elevation is 736 feet MSL. , Figure 3.1-2 shows the location of the gaseous and liquid release points in terms of coordinates related to the centerline of Unit 1.

[}

Other major facilities are: a screen house that serves as an intake for cooling water from Lake Clinton and also houses the circulating water pumps; a structure for housing the essential service water pumps; and the main power transformers, which are located at the ends of the turbine buildings. Railroad sidings service each of the reactors, the machine shop, and the turbine buildings, and an access road circles the principal structure.

Relationship of the plant structures to the overall site is discussed in Section 2.1.

3.1.2 Arranaement of Structures Structural arrangement is shown in the architectural rendering in Figure 3.1-1. Further details on the layout, including designation of the plant perimeter and exclusion boundary, are shown in Figures 2.1-5 through 2.1-7.

3.1.3 Architectural Features and Aesthetic Considerations The layout of the facility has been planned to achieve a blend of functional and aesthetic considerations. While the major construction material is concrete, colored metal siding is employed as part of the architectural treatment to provide variety of texture as well as color. The structures are 3.1-1

CPS-ER(OLS) interconnected for ease of accessibility, yet the grouping provides a balance and symmetry of design and a pleasing variety h

in roof and corner lines.

In summary, this is an industrial facility, but effort has been expended to provide it with an aesthetically pleasing design and appearance.

O i

I O'

3.1-2 l

_ - l

1 l

l i

j l

. w w ,r:- m em ,mr,w p~,y c., - - - ,. - ~-,.~ . 7?pra-w. , .~r . .~ ~

,,; . , e i

j -

l l

g__ _

--~-

---u-...z.__m Q _ _-___- - y m % 4 s e ev. A .__

S t

W

=

y-

.~necFwnf ~'~ .g>-:rW~uanis?

~

m ;~n:: ; ": ~~- Q7

% 4 56 i

D

.y _j ,rce *'" - ~

, -~. ,. g . ,_ _

~ .

- ~m. ,

% 3yb- .

~

wm*=vrfse%

.7-i_ w i

" Q,;, .,

~ ]"7 '-

~;.j, s 7 ~

sg 'M s

Q . > . .

N%&

! . ;j - e v s y y ,. ,. - -

l

. g ., ,f .

Af M ..s..

( s. \ ~9 ..

N, A p._a, s -

s 7

. ,e,

, , -. , . g.s

- -+

,e ,

c, e

s ,3... ,.[*

. .;~,

'Mq;.

q . &5Ql: {- e - _

i CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRO NM E NTAL RE PORT *O PE R ATING LIC& MSE STAGE FIGURE 3.1-1

.]

ARCHITECTURAL RENDERING 0F CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2

+Y O +

As '

L t

-x - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - + + x N

wB i

" L

-y COORDINATES POINT E LE V A TIO N UNITS IN FT.

"T ^=ove O x v MEAN SE A A: CENTERLINE. 0 0 LEVEL UNIT 1 B: GASEOUS -20 -94 935.5 DIS CH AR GE C: LlOUID +559 -1968 709.8 DISCH ARGE C

F E

\~13 CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NVIRONME NTAL RE PORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE O hg-# 10 0 o 100 200

~

E S X, Y C0 ORDINATES OF LIQUID AND

~M R g GASEOUS RELEASE POINTS 1

CPS-ER(OLS)

() 3.2 REACTOR AND STEAM-ELECTRIC SYSTEM 3.2.1 System Description The Clinton Power Station has two nuclear units, each consisting of a General Electric Company (GE) boiling water reactor (BWR/6) with a rated core thermal power level of 2894 megawatts and a de-sign thermal power level of 3039 megawatts. GE is the prime

+ contractor to design, fabricate, and deliver the nuclear steam supply and the turbine-generator systems; fabricate the first core of nuclear fuel plus 15 annual reloads; and provide technical direction for installation and startup of the equipment. Sargent & Lundy is the architect-engineering firm retained by Illinois Power Company to perform the overall design engineering for Clinton Power Station Units 1 and 2. The station is designed to provide a useful unit operating life of 40 years.

^

3.2.2 Fuel Description Fuel rods and assemblies are of similar design to those of other BWR units manufactured by GE. Each fuel rod consists of a Zircaloy-2 cladding tube with an outside diameter of 0.483 inch, a wall thickness of 32 mils, and an external length of about 160 inches. The fuel rod is filled to an active height of about 150 inches with cylindrical pellets of sintered uranium dioxide (UO2). A 10-inch void inside the tube contains a spring to keep the pellets in place during handling. This void provides a space f3

\_/ for fission gases to accumulate. The filled tubes are evacuated and backfilled with helium at three times atmospheric pressure and sealed with Zircaloy plugs welded in place.

Completed fuel rods are assembled into bundles of 62 fuel rods and two water rods forming an 8 x 8 array. The reactor core is made up of 624 bundles (comprised of 38,688 fuel rods) with movable control rods interspersed among them. The total mass of uranium in the core is about 114,000 kilograms.

The fuel consists of natural and enriched uranium. The enrichment of uranium varies depending on the location of the fuel rod in the core. This enrichment arrangement is designed to reduce local power peaking. Average enrichment for the initial fuel load is 1.706%, with the enrichment ranging from approximately,1.2% to 2.6% of U-235 by weight. Subsequent fuel reloadings will use similar ranges of enrichment.

2ircaloy-2 is an alloy containing 1.5% tin and small amounts of iron, chromium, and nickel, with the remainder being zirconium.

It has the desirable properties of high strength, corrosion resistince and radiation resistcace under the conditions of high temperature, high pressure, and high radiation intensities existing in the core of the reactor, thus providing the necessary reliability to the fuel containment enclosure. It also offers relatively little opposition to the passage of thermal neutrons, thus aiding neutron economy.

3.2-1 l

CPS-ER(OLS)

In a fully assembled core, fission occurs when a neutron splits a uranium atom, producing heat and setting free additional neutrons. Some of these freed neutrons then split other uranium atoms, producing more heat and setting more neutrons frae tn llh establish a self-sustaining chain reaction.

3.2.3 Reactor Description The reactor core is contained in a large cylindrical steel tank called tt+ reactor pressure vessel. Entering the core through the bottom of the vessel are the control rods. The 145 movable control rods contain boron carbide, which absorbs neutrons to prevent them from continuing the chain reaction. The rate of fission is controlled by moving these control rods into or out of the core. When the control rods are fully inserted in the core, the self-sustaining fission chain reaction is stopped. To resume operation, the control rods are withdrawn from the core to allow the self-sustaining chain reaction to be resumed and heat to be produced.

The water in the reactor vessel serves as coolant and moderator for the core. It is circulated through the core by recirculation pumps. As the water passes through the core, it is heated to the point that boiling begins. The resulting steam passes through steam separators and dryers mounted above the core. These devices remove entrained water from the steam. The dry steam from the top of the reactor vessel is piped to the turbine. In going through the turbine, the steam expands, imparts its energy to the turbine, and cools. The steam is condensed in the main condenser and is treated by the condensate demineralizers to remove impurities that may have been picked up in the reactor, llk pipes, turbine or condenser. The treated water is then heated and pumped back to the reactor to begin the cycle again. To condense the steam in the main condenser, the circulating water system pumps cooling water from Lake Clinton through tubes of the condenser to absorb the heat from the condensing steam. The heated cooling water is then returned to Lake Clinton where the heat is dissipated. Figure 3.2-1 is a simplified flow diagram of the BWR.

3.2.4 Turbine Generator The turbine-generator unit (TG) manufactured by GE consists of one high pressure turbine, two low pressure turbines, generator, exciter, controls, and standard accessory systems. The turbine, which operates at 1800 rpm, is a tandem-compound four-flow reheat steam turbine with 43-inch, last-stage blades. The generator is a direct driven, three-phase, 60 hertz, 22,000 volt, hydrogen cooled, synchronous generator rated at 1,100,000 kilivolt-amperes at a power factor of 0.90 and a maximum hydrogen pressure of 60 psig. The exciter is the self-excited, direct-driven type. The control system is an electrohydraulic type. The turbine-generator unit can accept up to 135% of the reactor rated steam flow for transient and short term conditions.

3.2-2 h

CPS-ER(OLS)

The gross electrical output of each TG unit is dependent upon its

() condenser backpressure, which is dependent upon the seasonal variation in cooling lake water temperature. During the late fall, winter, and early spring months, when the lake temperature is 600 F or less, the rated gross and the design gross electrical output will be 985 megawatts electric (MWe) and 1025 MWe, respectively. Similarly, net electrical output is dependent on seasonal variations in station electrical loads for heating and cooling, and supplemental equipment. During the cooler seasons mentioned above, approximately 52 MWe are used for auxiliary power, resulting in a net electrical output of 933 MWe. The net station heat rate is based on the net turbine heat rate and the station auxiliary power requirements. For the net electrical output of 933 MWe, the net station heat rate is 10,588 Btu / Kwhr.

The relationship of net station heat rate to turbine backpressure is shown in Figure 3.2-2.

O O

3.2-3

-_ - - _ . - - _. . ~ _ . . .

O O .

O SEM COOLING LAKE p M f -

1 TURBINE GENERATOR g.

- % i 1r if REACTOR VESSEL MAIN CONDENSER CIRCULATING I I x=a. WATER PUMPS CONDENSATE g- - 1 h

J L g PUMPS If JL I! il b J FEEDWATER 37

,,, & --> CONDENSATE

" ^

E \ / DEMINERALIZERS

! I' g

m i

l 0 a 1' i CONTROL RODS

'r 5

cn ; E z

r.

5 mCo

?

@S 2

S hZ "m1 RECIRCULATING PUMPS FEEDWATER PUMPS aC 6- 37 55 w A>@ m hg hy y FEEDWATER 2 ;;j "

iug HEATERS x

x [ ""!

g 2 O Q "

E 1 -

E I

i 13.200 -

i 50% RATED 13.000 - STEAM FLOW i

i 12.300 -

l I

i 12.600 -

1 l

12.400 -

i I 12.200 -

9 I 12.000 -

t 3

s 11.800 -

3 e

v

$ 11.600 -

75% RATED O F j 11.400 -

STEAM FLOW I

1 H k II.200 -

S i H

. 100% RATED

~

STEAM FLOW l

1 10.900 -

10.600 - e l

10.400 , ,_ , , ,

1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 j EXHAUST PRESSURE ON. HG ABS.)

I CLINTON POWER STATION '

UNITS 1 AND 2 l E NVIRONM E NTAL RE PORT-OPE RATING LICE NSE STAG 6 i

' FIGURE 3.2-2 1

NET PLANT HEAT RATE AS A FUNCTION 0F EXHAUST PRESSURE !

i

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

CPS-ER(OLS) 3.3 STATION WATER USE

Clinton Power Station Units 1 and 2 require water for the circulating water, service water, potable water, and make-up water treatment systems. Figure 3.3-1 shows the esti-mated quantities of water required for these purposes. The source of water for these systems is the cooling lake, Lake Clinton.

3.3.1 Circulating Water System Condenser cooling water is supplied from Lake Clinton by three pumps per unit with capacities of 205,000 gal / min each (at a water elevation of 690 ft. MSL). Approximately 4 mg/ liter of chlorine is injected upstream of the condenser three times per day far approximately 30-minute periods to prevent buildup of biological growths in the condenser. Heated water exiting the condenser is routed to Lake Clinton via a 3.4-mile-long open flume (see Section 3.4. 3) . The lake circulation pattern is clockwise from the discharge structure on the Salt Creek arm to the intake structure on the North Fork of Salt Creek branch.

Anticipated losses for the proposed circulating water system will be from evaporation, seepage, overflow, and a guaranteed downstream release of 5 cfs. These losses will be replenished by makeup from Salt Creek and the North Fork of Salt Creek and

'T from normal runoff and precipitation from the drainage area s/ upstream of the dam.

3.3.2 Service Water System Certain auxiliary equipment heat exchangers, exclusive of the main condenser, require service water for cooling. Two ser-vice water systems provided for the station are the plant service water system and the essential shutdown service water system.

3.3.2.1 Essential Shutdown Service Water System The essential service water system supplies water to cool safety-related equipment such as diesel-generator coolers, residual heat removal heat exchangers , and other equipment necessary for a safe shutdown of the reactor. Each unit has water provided by three full-size pumps , two having 16,500 gal / min capacities each and one having a 1100 gal / min capacity and are located within the circulating water screen house.

The pumps take suction from the water intake area below the pump supporting floor. The source of water is the ultimate heat sink. After passing through traveling screens into the water intake area, the water is pumped through all necessary .

cooling heat exchangers and then discharged back to the ulti- !

mate heat sink. l

' 3.3-1 j l

J

CPS-ER(OLS) 3.3.2.2 Station Service Water System lll The station service water system supplies water to cool equip-ment (such as the turbine oil coolers, generator coolers, and component cooling heat exchangers) that is not safety-related or essential for the safe shutdown of the reactor. Service water is supplied by six pumps (two pumps operational and one spare per unit) housed in the intake structure. The pumps maintain a maximum flow rate of about 44,000 gal / min to each unit. Water from the cooling lake is chlorinated before enter-ing the service water system, with the service water system's take-off common to the water treatment system. Service water is routed back to Lake Clinton via the circulating water dis-charge flume.

3.3.3 Potable Water System The station potable water treating system supplies water for drinking and sanitary purposes. Potable water requirements are provided by prechlorinated and pretreated lake water stored in the filtered water storage tank. The effluent from the potable water system is routed to the sewage treatment sys-tem and returned to Lake Clinton via the circulating water dis-charge flume.

3.3.4 Water Treatment System High-quality water is required for the steam-cycle makeup. The water treatment system consists of pretreatment, demineraliza-tion and condensate polishing equipment. Makeup water is pro-vided by Lake Clinton, and all regenerative wastes are routed back to the lake via the waste treatment system.

3.3.4.1 Steam Cycle Makeup System The steam cycle makeup system pretreats and demineralizes cool-ing lake water for the supply of feedwater makeup. During pretreatment, raw water from Lake Clinton is prechlorinated, retained in a retention tank (for chemical reaction), and pre-mixed with alum and coagulant aid in a premix tank before being routed through lime softening equipment. Lime is added to the water in two parallel lime sof tening units (each normally operating at 50% capacity) and allowed to interact in the clear-well. Water is then pumped through three parallel pressure sand filters to a filtered water storage tank. This pretreat-ment system handles a flow of about 500 gpm, of which 150 gpm is available for the potable water system. The rest of the water flows through three parallel carbon filters to the demineralizer.

During demineralization, pretreated water passes through two parallel demineralizer trains, each consisting of the following four vessels (in order): one strong acid cation vessel, one weak base anion vessel, one strong base anion vessel and one mixed bed vessel. Each makeup demineralizer train has an aver- llk age daily capacity of 165 gpm or a minimum net capacity of 237,600 gal / day.

3.3-2

CPS-ER(OLS) 3.3.4.2 Condensate Polishing System Circulating water leakages can alter the chemistry of the water entering the reactor to a point that is unacceptable.

To maintain acceptable water quality, each unit has eight condensate polishing (mixed bed) vessels operating contin-uously, and one spare vessel. During normal operation, the condensate polishing system will handle a flow rate of 26,000 gpm per unit.

3.3.4.3 Wastewater Treatment System The wastewater treatment system receives and processes wastes from the pretreatment and demineralization equipment that re-sult from backwashing, rinsing, blowdown, and resin regenera-tion.

Sand and carbon filters . (pretreatment equipment) require back-washing once per day with filtered water from the filtered water storage tank. The sand filters are backwashed for 10 minutes per day at a flow rate of 550 gpm. The carbon filters are backwashed for 10 minutes per day at a flow rate of 300 gpm.

Lime softening units (two per unit) require intermittent sludge blowdown for 4 minutes every 20 minutes of operation at 50 gpm.

Demineralization exhaur.ts the capability of the ion exchange O. resins to remove anions and cations. After an estimated 238,000 callons of water have passed through each demineralizer train, 1.ne resins require regenerat ion. Regeneration of the primary train-(cation and anion vessels) occurs once daily,2 and regeneration of the mixed bed vessel occurs once every weeks. Regenerative wastes total 850 lbs of 98% H SO4 2 and 413 pounds of 100% NaOH per unit, with a maximum possible wastewater flow rate of 205 gpm from each primary train and 100 gpm from the mixed bed units. A total of 39,930 gallons (per train including the mixed bed) of wastewater results from each regeneration.

Two existing construction run-off ponds , which are divided by a dike, are provided for the removal of suspended solids in the waste streams. These ponds accept clarifier underflow and makeup demineralizer ion exchange syatem regenerent waste.

' Filtration is provided in the filter house, and the effluent is discharged to Lake Clinton. Backwash water from these filters is routed back to the sedimentation ponds.

Regeneration of the mixed bed condensate polisher vessels is required approximately once every 7 days based on normal operation. Regeneration requires the use of 1300 pounds of 93% H 2 SO 4 , 715 pounds of 100% NaOH, and 34,200 gallons of demineralized water and produces 29,725 gallons of low-con-ductivity, high-crud waste; 11,800 gallons of low-conductivity, O 3.3-3

. - , - ,. -c - - - - + . - . . - - -

CPS-ER(OLS)

- low-crud waste; and 10,725 gallons of high-conductivity wastes. These wastes are neutralized and then processed by the radwaste system for the removal of solid wastes. The a W

low-crud, low-conductivity waste water is recoverable and is intended for reuse during subsequent regenerations.

9 3.3-4 g

t 0

STORM I DR AIN S if DISC H A RGE TO SALf CREEK c (2250 GPM. MIN.)

ji il IL 20.160 G PD 47.520.000 GPD SHUTDOWN ,

IP MIS C.

S E R vlC E DR AIN S WATER AND o O O a a scattN WASM Q O PLANT O o

8 h : S E RvlC E 4 $

O f WATER a @ e J e 6 3,3 60.0 0 0 G P D I q, PRETREATME SEWAGE POTABLE CH L ORIN A TION 1 h TREATMENT WATER C ',

SYSTEM SYSTEM DE MINE R AltZ 216,000 G PD di If 1P W ATER l CIRC UL A TING N' CONDENSA1 SYSTEM (C O N D E N S E R) 23 7.600 G PD if f ueliNE OENERATOR LOW C R Ul i, TANK elACTOR -

l -

CHE MIC A L POLISHE R l WASTE T AI l WASTE W COLLECTIC

l TANK PLANT PLANT OuYDOOR OIL 2 TO COOLING LAKE WASTE OR AIN S SEPARA7OR I

=

IP IN-PLANT 9 OIL SEPARATOR 1r l

'(

S OLIDiFIE D , AADWASTE WASTES ' SYSTEM I l'

h 20.160 G PO _

PRE CePIT AtlON O E v APOa A TION O ,

J 1r M AKE UP FROM L AME CilNION O 8"' "

(4895 ACREI A ND NORTH FORK OF SALT CeEEE G hv C MLORIN A TION if SEEP AGE $

0 6

0 e

BACKWASM POND WASTE 4 SLO WDO WN EAST S A SIN

% FIL T E R 4 % SEDIMENT AYtON RE GE NE R A TIVE

' MOUSE W ASTE S WEST B A SIN 1

1 t\

w m

RECYCLED D U RIN G REGE NE R A TION NOTE: 1. F LOW S INDIC A T E D ARE FOR 1 UNIT OPER A TION ONLY.

2. 4 FLOW R ATE S ARE V ARI ABLE.

CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRO NM E NTAL RE PORT *O PE R AT ING LICE NSE STAG (

as FIGURE 3.3-1 )

m I o WATER USAGE FLOW DIAGRAM

CPS-ER(OLS) d 3.4 H__ EAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM 7~

kJ 3.4.1 Amount of Heat and Load Factors A diagram of the heat dissipation system for Clinton Power Station is shown in Figure 3.4-1. The station will have two 985 MWe boiling water reactors. During June, July, and load factor of 92%

August, station operation with a will result in an average of 11.8 x 10 maximpBtu/hr of waste heat to be dissipated. Under normal conditions of 70% load fact-or in February, March, April, May, October, and November and an 80% load factor during January, September, and December, the average amount of heat to be dissipated will be 9.0 x 109 Btu /hr and 10.3 x 109 Btu /hr, respectively (see Figure 3.4-2).

The maximum Clinton Power Station load f actor for the two hottest summer months was calculated using the following pro-cedure. The hourly system demands for July and August of 1985 were projected by multiplying the respective values for 1970 by the ratio of the projected 1985 peak load to the 1970 peak load, 5234 MW to 1827 MW, as shown in Table 1.1-2 of the Environmental Report - Construction Permit Stage. The esti-mate of the 1985 peak load has since been revised to 3770 MR, as shown in Table 1.1-3 of this report. The assumptions of the lake temperature study should thus be conservative. Based on the earlier estimates of the 1985 system loads, hourly load factors for Clinton Power Station were determined by assuming

/ the demand is met first with minimum hydroelectric and fossil-

\]) fueled generating capacity on the Illinois Power Company sys-tem. Remaining demand is assumed to be met by Clinton Power Station. The hourly values were then averaged to obtain a 2-month maximum load factor of 92% for the Clinton Power Station. Due to the assumptions made regarding the minimum hydroelectric and fossil fueled generation, the actual Clinton Power Station load factor for this period will probably be less than 92%.

3.4.2 Intake Structure The location of the cooling water intake structure is shown in Figure 3.4-3 and Figure 3.4-4. Plan views of the structure are shown in Figures 3.4-5, A and B. Typical cross-sectional views are shown in Figure 3.4-5, C and D. The intake struc-ture houses six circulating water pumps with capacities of 205,000 gal / min each (at a water elevation of 690 feet MSL) .

The intake structure also contains six plant service water pumps (four will be operational, two spare) with capacities of about 22,000 gal /nin each, and six shutdown service water pumps with four pumpa rated at 16,500 gal / min each and two rated at 1100 gal / min. The shutdown service water pumps will operate only uuring shutdown conditions. The intake structure is designed for an intake approach velocity of 0.62 ft/sec at x

3.4-1

CPS-ER(OLS) a lake normal elevation of 690 feet MSL; at a drought lake 4Eb elevation of 685.5 feet, the intake approach velocity will W

be 0. 76 ft/sec (see Figure 3.4-6) .

The intake structure is equipped with 14 bar grills to pre-vent heavy debris from interfering with the operation of the screens. Twelve of these, 29 feet high and 13 feet wide, pro-tect the circulating water traveling screens. Two, each 29 feet high by 5 feet wide, protect the fixed screens and the shutdown service water pumps.

Twelve traveling water screens, each 42 feet high by 13 feet wide, protect the pumps from small debris. Each is formed of 12-gauge galvanized steel wire with a mesh opening of 3/8 inch. Required maintenance for the traveling screens can be performed while the pumps are operational. Maintenance equip-ment will be used for the removal of trash collected at the bar rakes , which protect both the intake structure and the screens. Slime and algal growth will be removed manually as necessary.

3.4.3 Condenser, Discharge Flume, and Discharge Structure The condenser at the Clinton Power Station is designed for a 22.50 F rise at 100% load factor. This corresponds to gpprox-imately 20.80 rise during periods of 92% load, and 18.1 F rise and 15.90 rise during periods of 80% and 70% load fact-ors. The condenser length is about 70 feet. With a velocity ggg of 6.5 feet per second, the travel time for water across the condenser will be about 10.8 seconds. Figure 5-2 and Tables 5-2 and 5-3 of the Clinton Power Station's Section 316(a) application outline the circulating water system residence times and velocities. These are shown in Appendix 5.1A of this report.

After passing through the condenser, the water is discharged into an open flume 3.4 miles (18,040 feet) long. The water velocity in this flume is approximately 1.3 ft/sec, resulting in a 3.9 hour1.041667e-4 days 0.0025 hours 1.488095e-5 weeks 3.4245e-6 months travel time from the condenser to the lake.

Circulation time in the lake (based on an elevation of 690 feet MSL) from the discharge structure to the intake structure is approximately 11 days, based on 11 miles of flow length, a mean depth of 15.6 feet, a mean width of 2658 feet, and a flow rate of 2534 cubic feet per second. For a drought with a recurrence interval of 50 years (water elevation-685.5 feet FEL) , when the mean lake depth would be about 13 feet, the time required for water to travel from the discharge struc-ture to the intake structure is about 9 days. Under such drought conditions, travel time through the discharge flume will remain essentially unchanged at 3.9 hours1.041667e-4 days 0.0025 hours 1.488095e-5 weeks 3.4245e-6 months .

The discharge flume is depicted in Figure 3.4-7. This 3.4 mile open flume has a 3:1 (horizontal-to-vertical) side slope and a 120 foot bottom width. Due to terrain configurations, the flume contains two drop structures. The first is designed for (l) 3.4-2

CPS-ER(OLS)

The secon'd is designed for a drop of 26

(^ a drop of 18 feet.

~

\ feet.

Natural drainage in the area of the discharge fiume is main-tained by culverts under the fiume (see Figure 3.4-7). Bar-riers are provided along both sides of the flume and near the discharge structure to prevent public access.

The discharge structure at the lake shore end of the discharge fiume is shown in Figure 3.4-8. This structure is designed to minimize erosion by means of the energy dissipating teeth" located on the ramp surface. Flow into the lake is smooth (about 1.3 f t/sec) and will cause no disturbances to boating in the vicinity of the discharge area.

3.4.4 Supplemental Cooling System Waste heat is transferred primarily to the atmosphere through the 4895-acre (3880 acres , effective) cooling lake (Lake Clinton) , which will be augmented by a supplemental cooling system within the discharge flume. The supplemental system will be operated when the temperature of the water discharge It is designed to main-from the condenser exceeds 960 F.

tain the temperature of the water at the dischargeTo structure achieve at 960 F or less during normal summer operation.

this, system modules (see Figure 3.4-9) will operate as fol-lows. In the late spring when the condenser discharge tempera-I ,i ture reaches 920 F or on June 1, whichever comes first, the

supplemental cooling system will begin operation at approxi-mately 1/15 of the total capacity. Each day thereafter another 1/15 of the system will begin operation, until by June 15, at the latest, all spray modules will be operating. In the late summer when the condenser discharge temperature reaches 92 on the declining side of the time / temperature curve, or on Sept-ember 19, whichever comes last, the supplemental cooling sys-tem will begin to be sequenced off, with approximately 1/15 of the modules being shutdown for the first 6 days. Each day thereaf ter another 2/15 or less of the modules will be shut off, until by September 30, at the earliest, the complete system will be turned off.

The applicant is currently updating the thermal modeling of the lake. Subsection 3.4.5 presents a brief description of the LARM model being used. It is planned that the modeling results along with current biological data will be evaluated to determine if a thermal standard different than that presently in effect might be appropriate for Lake Clinton. If Illinois Power Company feels that an alternate thermal standard would be acceptable, the appropriate proceedings will be initiated be-fore the Region V U.S. EPA and/or the Illinois Pollution Control Board (IPCB) as allowed under the Clean Water Act.

(~h

( 0

/

3.4-3

CPS-ER(OLS) 3.4.5 The Cooling Lake and Water Temperatures The water from the discharge flume will be dischar ed into O Lake Clinton for cooling. The physical features o Lake Clinton are described in Subsection 2.4.1.4.

Meteorological data for 1955, 1962, and 1964 were used with the LAKET computer program. Based,on the analysis of 23 years of meteorological data, 1962 was selected as a typical year, 1955 as a 1-in-50-year drought year, and 1964 as 1-in-10-year hot summer. The predicted lake temperatures during these years are shown in Tables 5-4 through 5-8 and in Figures 5-8 through 5-12 from the Clinton Power Station Section 316(a) application.

These figures and tables are included in Appendix 5.lA of this report. The predicted values were calculated using the load-ing schedule discussed in Subsection 3.4.1.

For comparison, Figures 3.4-10 and 3.4-11 show the temperature /

time transients expected for two-unit operation during a typi-cal year (1962) and a 1-in-10-year hot summer (1964) includ-ing the effects of the supplemental cooling system. Tgese figures demonstrate that a discharge temperature of 96 F will occasionally occur for short durations during the 1-in-10-year hot summer. The maximum temperature during the summer of an average year (such as 1962) will be approximately 92o F, with the temperature for the most part being less than 900 F.

Illinois Pollution Control Board (IPCB) Rules and Regulations (Chapter 3: Water Pollution, Part II: Water Quality Standards) lll Ruge203(i)specifiesthatwatertemperaturesmustnotexceed 90 F from April through November and 60 F during the remain-der of the year. However, Rule 203(1) (11) exempts the Clinton cooling lake from the general provisions of the rule and sets a limit of 960 F, with the provision that the supplemental cool-ing system operate in the manner described in Subsection 3.4.4.

Available data from the Section 316(a) application for adverse conditions (see Tables S-7 and 5-8 and Figure 5-12 provided in Appendix 5.lA) indicate that water temperatures at the dis-charge of the spillway will comply with the ruling set forth by the IPCB. The operation of Clinton Power Station will also be in compliance with the U.S . EPA thermal discharge effluent limitations specified in 40 CFR 423.13(1)(2) .

The applicant is presently having the hydrodynamic and tempera-ture distribution of Lake Clinton remodeled using the Laterally Averaged Reservoir Model (LARM) . LARM has features that repre-sent the longitudinal and vertical equations of fluid motion, continuity and heat transport and incorporates a coupling of buoyancy between the temperature distribution and the equations of motion as well as surface wind fo;ces. LARM has been devel-oped for the analysis and prediction of two dimensional (longi-tudinal and vertical) hydrodynamics and temperature structure 3.4-4

CPS-ER(OLS) using time varyi g inflow, outflow and meteorological data (Edinger and Buc ak 1977).

{} LARM represents an advancement in the state-of-the-art of impoundment and cooling lake analysis and prediction. It was originally developed for the Ohio River Division of the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers and has received extensive testing and verification by application to Sutton Lake, West Virginia, Center Hill Reservoir, Tennessee, and comparison to laboratory fiume tests at the Waterways Experiment Station in Vicksburg, Mississippi. The LARM model has also been applied to the study of chlorine transport in a stratified cooling lake, safe shut-down impoundment analysis and multiple thermal discharges on a stratified run of river impoundment.

Develo) ment of the LARM hydrodynamics and transport code has three )asic steps including: (1) integration of the three-dimensional equations of fluid motion and transport to the laterally averaged form; (2) manipulation of the laterally averaged equations to arrive at the solution technique; and (3) development of the numerical finite difference form of the equations for computer coding.

Hydrological data such as mean monthly runoff, rainfall, and natural / forced lake evaporation data are given in Tables 2.4-2 and 2.4-10. The water level of Lake Clinton is not expected to fluctuate in ordinary seasons more than 12 inches. Since the lake will not be used as a public water reservoir, no draw-O down is expected during dry seasons. A maximum fluctuation of 1 v 4.5 feet (during a 1-in-50-year dought) would expose that part of the lake bottom above. 685.5 feet MSL, a total area of i approximately 985 acres.

1 I

d

(_/ 3.4-5 i

- _ . _ _ . . . . . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ , , , . . _ . _ . _ . _ . . . _ _ - . _ , , _ , = _ , . .-_,

MAKE-UP FROM SALT CREEK AND NORTH FORK

1f il RAINFALL

PLANT I PLANT SERVICE SERVICE 44,000 GPM r W WATER WATER SYSTEM SYSTEM UNIT 1 UNIT 2 I L 44.000 GPM

~_

EVAPORATION

O ji Z

O 0- Mii o--,4 --a F

3 C MAIN MAIN

_j d r CONDENSER CONDENSER C UNIT 1 UNIT 2 2 C j C (615,000 GPM j g C J 615,000 GPM h

p 17,600 GPM OR 33.000 GPM I

C 17 600 GPM OR SEEPAGE

33 000 GPM SENT C r ENG 2244 GPM C WATER WATER SYSTEM SYSTEM UNIT 1 UNIT 2 f l

I lI f - l I

DISCHARGE TO SALT CREEK

CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E* NV I RO NM E NT AL R E. PORT *O PE R AT I NG LIC E NSE STAGE o eu"es ricuat 3.4-1 O

STANDBY PUM P LINES DIAGRAM 0F HEAT VARIABLE RATES i

I !

I

O M

.E 11.8 n:v 0,

7 o

ll " 'f[/[/ !

1 1 /

' ' I O ' ' ' ' ' ' '

s J F M A '

M J J A S O N D 1

i TIME IN MONTHS CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRO NM E NTAL, RE POR T-O PE R AT ING L.lC E NSE STAGE FIGURE 3.4-2 ANTICIPATED MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF PLANT LOAD

t ago,ooo

. ~ *1 ~.v.. ... a-

-_ . -.----r-----,-

, < ..,i, A .. 1 u? y 'G.fr.A-

,'Q j

,/

f 4 - , ^ q k ,' ' ,'[,/,o, /) ,\ f a( =s-\ 4U\ fle f .I'I\/(', )l.-

\

yIh[N[ . .

i

/. /

s

'l , f d ( h.h*~r<4)('*h

~

i, q g.; L ,, h,i , n$, gf- s{

W-r%

,_,2 W-

.c.f -[.h

. L ,g .'., ;

u.

,w s

e -,

.! L ;~/N A~e. : - , Y.~

. . e% f- ;7 l I * "-[.2 ' i, %* .k, .'. '. M Y,7 ( f' . h, h( M,

f , p ' ' .hl(

l

~

W < \ ..a.' Qf,f' w,

\"' e

,'.A'- ',R 7 *" ' i

\

f b,: _ .,el;i',_ % '0} f 9 nfl<.. /

c s,, ., 4 .V l *. y ft --. . g K * .

s,,

7)* v. (? -

^ .: -+f ;

~~t .4- {.-;g )\ .._~~

~~t. <"y+,.-..~~
c., r, i . h,, ,.f r -
l .{
ss
~ ;y; l 4.,,. -
r-h.,,,h* * &
. c.
~~,$;^ '~~~
- o, . .- s..,. y - >
. ,,4 y n. ~; . .,- .}.. .. , ~ g.m.) ,t L
~~M.[.~~
c, e ,, ,, . P '*t i gM f. T. *j x . pd'
.m,%_*. - ~w (. . . a .!q 3
a:n. _- - m .,
-* s" -act'j' - 0 V' -
?';,'m
' ,. n ,jy,,'
L; t ,_ .y, ,, -t _,,_
.-p?
.Q,, e ./.
. .>. ~. -
fy - .
p' 5.C.- ' ','% L, t -me ,.
n , . * - ,"* --
Lt
(
~ ^* f .4
,, t * ;4( ' !N.
@k o . ,
)~ } e ' \
y' .
f
^
' y :'
e' ,,' M ***?. , s /- 4 v is %
~~,, " . ~ q ' n ,~~
~~t, h~~
". . Q_ .~s *~ . :-. ._ ? .. , C.
~~qm ')\ 1 , n .n L [' *, ._ l Tg' , .'j a .E~~
',w- uLTiM ATE nE AT S'**K a( E C.s a 'e piouSE .sm CULATING WATER $ CME / .. f[ ". 5LevlCE- M TER PtetP6 5---j uors W r m I' '[; ' . i ~
~~h'Qa. _ 3D BMfitGE D .Srlt Mh 918' 4~~
* % i 4,k.
~~f '" - d g ,...;- .~~
~~' M w. 5_ hs; y -r.~~
~~0 N . yg). d- .~~
~~g. -~~
-, i ].. ,' -. ,,_, ;f ,
~~g 48 7~~
~~, a -~~
f,, g '7.g , ;, - 7, w 3 a
- gw- q ' ,-- [, yj : -T. --
~~g W g% v u.g'd,~~
;1,- - .gm -~~ h. ..- ,.~.-y qs.y, ,,,g, 4 'j ,A ,.c. -., p w tg 8.
~~s t p~~
~~" .~ [ ,% %n ,,,* ** fh ' '. .~~
k? ) a .M.... './h ,gn, ms.
). ,J] ;* -'~ 3 ~ ' p[ .g f' *-[, : Fe c. .,. J. ..e -. - -
~~g,. ,g s~~
~~- s .~~
~~r .y~~
~~,A b. ( ,Nl%. -. - - , -(.p.y# e.f. p..~~
q *v i . ' , .g . " - ,- - g<? ,
'-.;,,* ( *
~~y _ r s .~~
- '. , m s s - g. . e . yW. - , . , s ,
~~_ l ,p _~~
~~'t +.. .~~
t/ ' - 6 . n- : .
. , (ag..g. m*g- ,b <. -? g . . _ i, # . 3 1 '- p g w " ' . / c- g--
~~wy.m..~~
~~'a y.- ...w. _~~
~~w w a,n.w..m.~.m. _m 4 a.f :~~
-% Q 's y* , l , ~
W7 t 9.y4.L - .. *
~~~~ ,i m._- . x, e' a _~~
~~_s t~~
~~/j ,~~
~~i - q'j- ..~~
~~$[ j ', e - %. y . /~~
s
~~;. ! s ,~~
~~x ;~~
.n u+ 9:s .a <f g 'P,
~~(/ <l : 1~~
'( e~ b , , .] ?{ s' > c t9e'*? >- i 1 '
~~i h /' -~~
~~-h p- (',/ 5 ~~~
~~y;), y,.. I g~~
~~.; 1[_ ,~~
x
, ) - - -y v.;y .u:. qv. .
I
- % ,=:r;.h,$ ~t) '- y ! I ' *< ?
~~O.t I~~
.,Q '; - i *- [ - ~ ~ [; -
~~g,t 1 l : j g "~~
~~. ' fC i~~
~~J k~~
s .n. . - .1. s
,,,, f f J h# [ j ' 'ger. ,.s ->i t , ,'ty,?
~~a g~~
'r) '. ..%, fp S.4 , 48 E
s,
'\
~~ji [ , \~~
~~'. j ']'-~~
~~g ( b b b~~
\ i.' 1, - e j l ~
g, - m ,
~~.A.. - .**Wp'W ; y 4., ,~~
x
~~') " .~~
~~{ ;--e'x ,~~
!L I' _ . _ , . ,- z"l )> Nd
l
, . w o u n.~, -3 .4 ass > > -w . _-_ v.Mw3 u w ,-- w. *} ,--_
I
} , . - - - ,,a : - . .n( ..
~~g e, -~~
~~* * ~ ~ * * ' ' '- **~~
p ~ is *
/ 2 -* ., \ ., = .-' ) ( -- - ,f / J f' Eb ,?,. k I'
h , s . 5~ ,l )Nl ^ ( ;' , ( . \~ (,@ .;,t - - ,3 W
~-A f'pl., \ -N I , . *-%_3u. J'i" - *J
y
~~,_ .pg**g q~~
,o -+-. \J , - -.' . h .=- r - . , o +
~~WATE R ELEV.~~
~~?f f w rir~~
A
' ,/ f f .(E ~4,%' 4' 'y ' ' ( w',,,L.......... l , I n ~ l,m .
, .71 PI C.AL SE C,T IO N THRW mLC.H. FLU ME 4- _ - - , + - - <--f-- 'i'I ~
~~_l , g l~~
~ )+ I s, 4 , DCLU Slot 4 fi ,j c.) -. '- .
~~AREA N\l o:r-~~
.) ; m .. " -(s s, "%; ~ . . ; 's q ' ,' -
r -.' .s n , - ix
.- ; ' .t , / , . , . - n. e .< "
~~J . > .zJ T , /~~
\ ,-', - - t ,', \)l!
NI 8,'iL...., . /, ,' / L r,"l.-
' .'(- ,, ,4 b ~ ',M .g ' ~
~~h ji..'J. , _~~
% ) ~ ,t ] ' ~ ~ ' "
~~f'f#~~
/kl~, \ ' * . ,'
~~C ._ r~~
, /g + - + ,# ,p- g ,
~~N +-'j[#, .W* " , o u,~~
;s /, } ,4*? . .,. - ,,r*e .. 4 # '" ]j *+, ' ' % at c t u s. o = ma t.a. q ,_ - .' \ , . ' ,
[ t maosus 975 M. __ i . (. (s / ' . a, . i q>s ; EAce FE*T . P
.. .- y } 4, x s, ,. - e i .' . l-',.'. - . .q e
( ,(k y .. \ , . . , . , 1' ls j
~~N 6, t 76,000~~
+
e, cmcouat,=s ware m !' ' *
[ \' " %; ^. , *.
~~Di sc'** ass - use it s ia a ,~~
~~.-jsq.g / w/ _ n. . . >~~
~~y qA . a g,u, ,, , y;,,* !~ 'r ,~~
~~DI S C HAR6E FLOME />~~
~~. . . e ~ ,'~~
~~i <~~
.pt;h*- a :[ * .a;a x , .. . & e:x. : 3 '- -*'. -T*-
~~A 4~~
~~,, q,,~~
s
,. . .I . ~7 .. _ ,g ' e H y n,. . .. q. .h/ - .,.. c . - h, -S , , -- , .3 r- s ,y ser u, r .. :- . -( , [ , , p,}s... . - -secr m .u m s MEf tOS40t.DGod CAL ro m h[*,*, -* .I ..' ' ,,S 3-,, _[i ,* +' g '. ( ,t ' *
t- .w _' (, .,. ,. . . . . \ N.,{' . ' ~s' '- ,. _v. . . . , d. . . -
~~,e . _wm .~.~~
u-
% os ,' -
~~A 8~~
~~f .-' jj(%-~~
~~c'y' j. 9 p?' ,~~
~~-t i ;g [p ,~~
r
~~- ( yce 'id*k .;~~
~~3,, ,; pe-..._m~~
'h !! :I' h .. - \ 0 400 800 FEET .y -
~~_ .. .. ; [ ,~~
~~<t,g~~
~~( ,. ..3.- qt 6};3,ig'.s\~~
.:q q % <, -}t }' '. ,% L.3 v Vr y,.M , ,4 q.k4 ]' e i CLINTON POWER STATION Qf 0 - (,[/4 ( UNITS 1 AND 2 g! g, ; 3%. MJ _'[5g ._ f M Mi h %' 4,p [ E NV I RO NM E NT A L., R E POR T.O PE R AT I NG t lC E N SE STAGE r . ,. D M
_f:( K '. ' - hef s (
~~. . v.W i' - . - - % ,',/y 6+[~~
pk N / FIGURE 3.4-3 ' v' \h3,f . [f. i -'. l lyby j(.T... . .;- \ l d , y/: . ,, , 'i kp e.i' LOCATION OF INTAKE STRUCTURE
~~~f x f;~ e =p- .-Y _.~~
E'
T p b
' f,- .. . ,y / , ,'k ~ .p#
~~1 4 \ e,~~
~~.j.~~
fe % j
5 54 y ]. < e .' "' *
~~% b .% $4 '~~
~~g a 4 4~~
l g' 4
* , . +
~~4 +~~
') ' g Ma - 2 %,. sf
~~( ,- 6~~
~~,I '* we~~
['
~
W.< - . ,. 4 ..--"O s4 %
\,
~~4 j"'[[~~
~~y ., g.%. ' <~ '% L, .x-,~~
fQ '%.e, s s >.
~~,..w. .,~~
l
- 1 5 ) I. ' ! I' :
_- g. v ' k ITt ITi e - O a_ .( I l l i I 1 i , i
~~~ 1 C::~~
~~l 's a % f, s, !~~
, i l i I 4 i I
i
\ \ > 1 : x!
i
~~' N'N m g 3 .~~
~~I f 3~~
~~. A.~~
~~s-I~~
)
g
~~' * ' / ,~~
~~f s 4 4~~
%, .a' + 5+ [
~~h .N rj,' ..}~~
,g .r'*
~~5 m~~
~ # 'N, b + % /* ?- . .\ yr ' -' /
~~s. -~~
~~nW, ..~~
*= [as 5 ,.,# .. w e 'E ./ '~
4 f& <* f'"'* % g ' y+ . ', ,g
~~% . f.a- , ' # , . T '.L^, , ,~~
~~s a ,e . -~~
~~.,%w=~~
~~3, ,,~~
, , v +"4 h ,
5 & . ,
- l 4 t e . ( t- > ?
f \i g' -- + , I s u ,". , i . - } " . . 3., 3
* - ~'
~~_ ,_ , , ,,', ' s _ -, ..j.. , ,~~
+ . - - s= - '.4 I .a' h' * }
~~y, e,g ,, .~~
+ ,j*. . 4. p f . , . . ' . , ,- ~ ,,! r f ,) , Ts ^
4 * . . ;2 m 5~*
~~~ 4 . s '- . . .p m ~ '~~
~~i ',,' j[.. . . ,i, x~~
~~, , : ... ,. c,,, w , , .g s g ~~~
~~&,-~. ,*p' y . .,,En $a..~~
- \i ~" , +n% f,/s -.:7,:, ,- ,$ l ? , , ., I. t , . ~y s';
~~u ., l~~
,: 7 1 %_q / .w M; , ) W/ , , .+
~~p Y .-~~
~~j w, t' .',, , __ i s ? ,;~~.. . ~ 2 )~~
~~u kc ,,'y 0~~
< , ., ( , ; .<r 'Q)%,- y , ,.?*;f./? ,%.0 's + .- _ .. ~ tl 1 *ge TyM; r > '!f' .
r i; ;. - [d, ,r. g ,, .1 , j . o, . . , ,
~
~~y0 - ' ,k ~ ** '~~
.. it ~ > l(*pf4], fp .,'".: ; V\ ~ ,y j Jg,' _ , ', s i . .p ' > x ); y Q' '%()[ ~ ;- * ^:,,. . '.y 'Y ~5 );I '
~~m rj ; ,, g- -~~
y 4, n. , . f L,;t y . x s
~~u, s s~ n~~
> w "if <,1 . . . , --- - ~
~~s J ., , 3 w. ,- .,~~
., y . ., 2 f, ' % ', -~ . , . s . . %: ;f '
[
- s' .s ,-
~~g. a -i,.., s. L..x f ;.g s~~
}> % /
L
~~? L p** . , . ; g -~~
~~s ~s i~~
~~.s s% s s' .,~~
~~4 s ,<~~
,,.,,,:4 '^ - '3 4 M, w; ._. ~~m , / .-/ J s e_y .
~~y> .~~
~~- sx '~~
s _y . ye ;. , j
. . 3 i e ;q 7 a: i ,..;; ..
~~3,_g . . , .~~
~~~ .~~
~~i i~~
,e . ' - s .!'\ ,._ --59[ s 4 -y, 8 ,u i m- ' "s.h' * . '* \1 ' >< g ,2,;
~~c a x.. s~~
; y ,/ .<1 / , 8 SCREENHOUSE 1 4 -
e g
- . y c- = . g w,.E___J_ .. _ -R u_ __ _ ,M L ~ _. _. J L .
~~it _ - ____n j _ 7~~
. /, _ ,- . < / /
~~N. s's LTIMATE HEAT SINK~~
~~t. '. \. ,// . Nf . <~~
~~~1.~~
~~v, y,1, O - w w~~
~~v. ,-~~
~~, ~/~~
_ .~ " a . ., , ; , L A l
. s . .- / >~ .
y
~~.. ,y *j '~~
i
.L; . ~
~~s 31~~
. ;;i 4 + s- y ## 4 ,
v. i
,A , - , 9 2 . . . y s ,
u v # _. t.- j J " j
~~, t.~~
~~g CLINTON POWER STATION~~
~~.e UNITS 1 AND 2 c ,y ,,o nu E urai. a s eoaT.O PE R AT I NG L tC E P.S E STAGE~~
~~_ i i I t 1: FIGURE 3.4-4~~
~~.- A i L6~~
~~. x : ..~~
~~,,;)_~~
5
- + i \
p, p. . v # ,e j , .?: LOCATION OF INTAKE STRUCTURE q :a % , , , . *
~~.~ q . ,~~
~~> ,m , , . -~~
~~SCREENH00SE)~~
~~, t i w ; ,g ,~~
i
n
. o .. e ; _ __s ___ ; . r o e .re e .x ry--. ,ar-3 ", Y -w m y3 -.4p i ----.ap-,---
~~4_ -; e 7 yj t. gem e f11 -i: ._~~
~~;. .' .. . .. ,, .Ma=.- - t *~-~~
~~h' E V_V?_m _D_V Y_V_V_m : _m ;CNl5~~
~~a tQ k* 4 "-# W W W e d h- n . .:~~
~~M.j dd'. W W @N.~~
' M~ , -- E Y,E6 b - C d ~ ]*
~~_ , = _.! __ . _. ,,.2p.. ...~~
- T . 1 ry'R. _f,- .__ d_ o c .
~~A h I! : N:- i- 'gp27 ';:~~
~~; .!* >= ;;;, 6_. L ,- -~~
i = cs , BD g paqhF"" ' J17._q3_O 'g-- ' I p w c br=== .. .. e >] Jm3_.c};4._._woy8[t -~.e - .+:: - :.= - r m p -Q- -O. n
,_ Q 3 d r!
[ t t.. gl. ~.m m,w tH- th $c hir . .,3 v gg1 i a g/g- P_l18$m $ r- !$4^m-A Fjl Pspog S,a_,
, t .- [
i
~~.wei ..~~
rw . w e.. a w_e .. .a 8 l - -. Lhe a - - 7 - <_ ; L ' L
~~. g ..~~
F : - e --- U lt D D o y \ C
~~. .s. -~~
r i n _; s== l g\ i_y- , m..... q., I _ rce= r*---- . Q M On
~~/ ---~~
D --- k ' % W 4 { Q' M(l ]G' W Wh,L*D A + ='~~
~~! r:~~
~~i W~~
~~.. b.1 il.11 i1J.I '~~
~~EM G LJ!L1 C C.__. I i[ Un G-i ! r--- c. s h h ea = wad J~~
~~.. ..=.~~
h
'N ~ . F -. s::x - * *~" $ V'wm ..a - l )4- S j --- - -
~~m 4 G r I_ 4~~
~~-m . . l.~~
~~C w-- e==u. 4 ;_;..ur.w.-. -. I\, f,,..\ . \ ll [-.--:-_.y~ ~ -~~
~~,he1~Dafhnin: .-s v 7 =:M'd r/ .: -c .~~
~~I lI~~
// *e p , m g '*== pea =---
~~p .4 V ,.~~
~~'"L1".7*. m p , / - e= ===.~~
~~1 l hl~~
~~==~~~
~~_ = . .. _e~~
~~-ow . .xwy.~~
~~g" F'*"" { d~~
~~h. """ k ,_t s k [,. ,,,f E U , W~~
.t r ' ' ' ~ t "'d m W .5C T I.e C*C .a w l
l
9 aus = l e .e *
}_ ,. a u. m u zs. n % (.
g a eATC 1 . I.~ % l'Em ECM8948# *and
-__...5p .a (c t. ws 5 Tennred. ENEtee p .. _ _ -. tM l 66 us tc ta g onaro. ,. _ _ _, .._, .r4_ . . .,< ___ ._'. <_ 4 - -->< -,<-- --.. -a sse.a.a-- 67 wawitt entt a ososeena ;L-3_
~~Oz-22mx-242-14 t, l,v#v _ mmez-E.EEE- _ _-_~~
~~==:~~
_ v v v j v v 94 Cd4 8at owe (,a. Tae
~ lv { ***
{ _O ___. ~ 4~_. ,l __ ' * * " * * * *
~~'d __ _~~
~~O _~o __. ue 2W,homr. (nut H~~
*L-- -
1 I i s, rvar.,w q.y m l'_e, ~J Lm.,, l -' ---"a~' B * '- ~ e ~ it m ..g e. - f 36 stant M asva_v_ w =$
$ 14 Aant sec met
~~Pvar%~~
~~m = =.r-- y b _._1 t~~
~~. n l/ ._c a <,_u,,,<.~~
~~n ,_ . t' % y q ta - , 6,. ._ g _,!__ ... :~~
,fr, f Mr ( . , - '~- [[ fi-i .q' ? U 3 m m w ,yn % t .. .w. H -- r 7-r -
~~u m ,, m' - -- h.IWi,- h h h'. t J .! M- ,th.7- h[--4 _$r"""]i~~
.!. I 3 "* " ' " " * * ' """" * - {- $ L ___ - !. ! nar ' = = a~c a ' $< = o'=
~~y._ 1 x: m q Odd~~
~~'i -N b""y *""~~
b c - h /,, b, 1_.-_ ;;.+p,-+'-g= MF..___g ;5?:* i:MU 7?tk*UCIMii"OtW_ @"!!;}M-t:- 3 4 . * . , .;; **( -- ;--y g.
~~-[ Pyt_~~~
~~w 9~~
~ i fm a= 9 h# .e ma_ r I -!- w2r ,
a5 1" **
-g . .r . . e- - +I , e . < - + . e..
g , I ! i il WTH . - , t
~~.it "~~
~~__..._.._F.._.P_. k[ "-'M* w= t- _ _f- 2m~~
~~! y - I ,l h-"7 y _,~~
~~y l .. .~~
~~, _jaC3 m e-t----~~
~~u r= s-- p ---. {T .. g~~
=
~~r__. .-.~~
~~'l l w Mi T~~
Eh lC/.*h"7 e.A r-- 3 E3 {t r ---
&paff% V'st Q Q& f3.? ; . ~ _e " '~'*
~~et t 8' j~~
. smy = ' - .__ ee e . -. . - -1 e ar esa CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV I RO N M E NT AL. R E POR T O PE R AT I NG l 1C E N S E STAGE FIGURE 3.4-5 CIRCULATING WATER SCREENHOUSE GENERAL ARRANGEMENT /
~~f o I e 4 T R AV ELING SCREENS i 4 STOP LOGS~~
E L. 699*-0" g NORMAL W ATER - -
_Q
~~. ' .. c *.g-:.~~
j., LEVEL E L. 690'-0" EL. 697'-0" A *'i DROUGHT I '*'? __..Y___.. _ _ . _ _ _
~~-- "## N"~~
~~LEVEL E L. 685'-6" ~. . ' .~~
y
~~==-E-~ v::w -m- =- ,h I~~
BAR G RIL L & L. 670'-0, 683M' LAKE BOTTOM E L. 660'-6' Y .. I llli5ll'[=hil; %^i!li?M. i-%. '. e.- l 1 ** I i
~~. EL. 657'-6" f~~
~~T, ' ()~~
~~~, . . . : = h . ' . .'. y ....7 , . . . . g , . ,* o 7; . o , s n.~~
~~. :;'o .**,.~~
~~o : . .*'~~
. .' .r * , ,,;..._. . , ' . . =p , ;.T.. T' . ...:b THROUGH APPROACH ^ LIP " " ^
GRILL SCREEN SCREEN SCR 0.67 1.11 0.74 0.58 1.26 0. VELOCITY IFPS) 0.76 1.40 0.74 0.66 1.43 0.i N O T E: W ATER FLOW PER U NIT (3 CIRCU L A TIN G AND 2 @ I NORMAL POOL E L. 690*-0" 659.000 Gf DROUGHT POOL EL. 685'-6" 644.000 GI 3, _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ ~ _ _ _ . _ _ _
\
l
~~) STOP LOGS .+-- 4 SERVICE W A TER PUMP~~
~~__ *-4 STOP LOGS e ---4 C IRCU L A TING W ATER PUMP i ___, '~~
.e . . r:. .* o . ......:..,....:. ;g :e- . ... . :. . = ;,. .<
~~t I~~
~~\ / I. -~~
~~i. l l '..~~
~~,' l ; <; . _._ ..:Y'.j:,7l':p:y:.'i.'~.~~
e
~~'. t i / \ -~~
~~7...:.o .:. . . C".5 :~~
',r ". i . b.: . . ~ . . : . ;, . .. . . . . : . .?... ; ,. . . . . '. . '.: . : . ~. . . . ;. ,L. . .. , . ....t.. . . %: o.. ' ' ' ' .x. ; , : : ; . ~. . :. . . ... .9. ; ... . . . . . . .... . . . ...:.a. . . a. : , ._. . . . . .
I ER EN 8 NORMAL POOL EL. 690*-0" ' 6 DROUGHT POOL EL. 685'-6"
~~!RVICE WATER PU M P S)~~
I M (1468 CFS) CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NVIRONME NTAL RE 5997 -OPERATING t lCE NSE STAGE f 143s cFS) FIGURE 3.4-6 i CALCULATED WATER VELOCITIES
}
~~WITHIN SCREENHOUSE FOR NORMAL AND LOW WATER LEVELS I - -~~
\
{ - a.
~~, . . - h_s.~~
~~w- w ,~~
~ . - i o . , x s~s 4 s i,4-xx , w. V pp' m- .N . -
~~0 4~~
~ . , }
~~y ,_.g w -x~~
~~,n e~~
~~7v A.- __..._n~_. .. f - .Ng , , W'~~
~- - , ~ 's o , y' ' \ ).
g(") ~ll ~ v ,'M <-x f
~~~l . A' ~~~
~~A,fu~~
,_ - ,s.__._-m .< ' ,. ------ /
~~j j/' 3 [m \ ~~~
~~- ( ]%V -c ' ,-, *E. V ',) _~~
~~1 '. ,' _y :~~
,p * '; . ./,. nQi . '-yg+,. m'..g) u w u. og.ga'-- q~.,/ .- , q , , .
~~u.:a - _. - .~~
.,- .,-.g,., ,~ ~ ' r~p -, f, J i .- -
~~t' - ,~~
,;,:b)* ~ , C ,/ ,l: . y* , ,7 ,) -f.
~~w w.w - '~~
't q \ s q., ,>yt.6 p,_. ,, \/ ~ - t , .._ - ir w~ o w k* g , ]j # ~ ~ . 3..$~,
~~r * *'* ~ # ' e . (m\.I . 4 -( .s"* - ,~~
~~.y__ ,Y - ,~~
~~M.'m# " \ 9-~~
~ ..~. -,
~~js,_~~
-':[, ,. - ,,i - . /r
~~y. \ . '~~
~~/l r .-* e~~
~~_ s l - tr, ? t~~
~~" , -f --~~
~~iI-- m _ g// 7 s & [.[ t~~
s-
', /*') ---4-- l "',,,' ,M ' ). $' , og .. ,, .re-s g:. p - - w4 's, $ - - ,,,,.
~~4-s') +. y , I~~
,%~~.:..-,,_,., a t ' - J>
~~Q%r.~~
~~) ..f % f j & - a-~~
~
~~Y,LT:~[~~g:2 l - N:x-1 , f,_fgW_-; 9.,.i..g: . .s .. . f.~~
~~~ ~ l ,~~
~~n 'g , I f.j I***W :- 6911.1,-'_~~
~~N..~~
~~naCW"N k*_kM4e.- .- . . u,; Am _.a.=- h~~
.Y8f o -o , ~i ~'f'"+.~_,.__...__.....__b#-'~%, .
~~f .e g~~
~~' N, J J 4.~~
~~j %~~
~~-._g,M. /,! ': ,,,~~
3 ~ . _ , - i ! lgp.( j
~~, . .[.$ ,. . ,i-v~~
~~p. .~~
) - -{Rp. -i s ..
w
}.
~~v ,~r+j. - _ ': e j ,u./. 6 s. y~~
~~. [~~
~~t - .. . ..,~~
^1f I ;- _- . . ' e) ' -v . ; %. . . . .i , .T $. ,. h h,ft ---b. ' l. .-- f,p$,. s' 4\
~~d : ;7;,yFhe A .~~
',d~ x 7,h,s - ,,-/ ', Ac a 9 - m. : A(b-- . d- t ..-i/ -
~~b.'" h.~~
~~' b'Uh@,_.,,~~
~~ny gf ln- f.~~
~~E ,~ ; c:~~
! l- _ - /....-. , h Q* g {,^". %
~~4 ;\; n ' l; :\Q . h }. wy ;<'Qg7{~~
.~ - . .' .. y, ~l . Cl ;"I O, uc T,~ = .I T, , , uQ. - ~ l4 , _s . . -,',^
~~w._; j- . ~.w _~_.s i 0~~
~~m. _~~
~~s m, w. , Y ,~~
~~.i i~~
/
o D 6 m m=.e .- wn - - P", 0 [Q % _ i *gk}w 4l c p NGN ,[[u_ (.p_r N, f =y'Q A e p4 ,-
'/ u W u -
~~i s.~~
~~c. ~ u% .~~
~~- ,s& 6%,9;if ?- % -~~
K.
~~! gi e~~
~~N . 1~~
]'
~~l F~~
~~. . !:S7 9~~
Q ! i " T (s , * * * * *
*~+s '% (,' CJ ~O
~~h. ,~~
g
- SR, l I \ ('l ~
~~l /,~~
' ' - l*b~ Mr v f ,,- . r /N ~
~~u[It ,! - v-~~
~
w --. ., - s gtw'v m:-n.ja w, l L i, . p. 4 s .;
~~..I- -~~
~~s%- w pm. .t~~
~~) A6 = p-- xM;,ef' i , +i c.3%, t ' ,1 -. ,. ~?-* -~ !~~
~~h Q~~
~~___*! !~~
/
h'[] . ~ ~ C' ' ' d _ .", - e ., Q< %\.p'G 7y d4 b +i 4.t A F mf %r -p ;3 4 $::: Jl} 1
~~-. m;g pw.~~
wk
/ ! s -Jc .i . n >; _ rL .
~~Q~n- J g - ; ,) f; h >y $o.,~, _c ,Q i. l~~
~~,. : *1= , ,t, ,y y , f-Y,~~
~~_y _. ., ~~ - . -..~~
..n J- , , ni u.- ,gw-c m s
~~1.. - i ( .~~
~~.' v, h-i , ,,~~
~~s t, y - <,4 . -~~
/I y, 9 ) ** 3 j ; :& - ,e ,g ,'m . , - -t 7r/ .
~~f ' ,g r 4.. N _/~~
~ \1 I ; ,,
k , I , l Q ,.,.L'kn)TN .,x it7 ^ h g _
~~, ~ . , q C#CNf, .,. 4'/g ( '~~
~~b.- A. w~~
~~,, '{~~
l+s, ' x, ._ ,. 3s_ i/ (
-J ,l< ,f * . g . } ' ,,, . ' , - sj ,g ,
~~( n- $N O iff -~~
,i , y. %~h{-[f,,i jQg }. -- - < 4 , .. 't ) y'4WL ( -t i > mms u t'.,,,o, ~ > ! ^ . -
1.g \.. i g-q.. _ .,h ; '- +s,a4 { \ . e ,;k, 4 Lj .
~~) ~~~
s a . , l j f Qg' f, . -- 3 T g; )7,. g s y7,p
. ,a 3 g,/ ~y W,y K_ g ,._, J_ ..t'Q, ,3 .
~~pq g~~
~~, . ~ l, . ,_f. 'j l~~
~~l -~~
~~-, ?,']~~
~~(,, T~~
,( & y._f y ,' , , ,
~~p v.-~~
~~+.,'N -~~
~~n.. 4, ,~~
,*h . ., . . * .s(. sc~' 'O~.* ' ~ . [.'.y , ~
~~M. . i ! . ,/, 7' ' ~ '~~
, {. 3 _\ c % i .f:.~ ~ . s.. .& . -*- / - .
p - y . + r
.p a ...s /+g a , - = -- ; ye- H T - -% : 'g' 2-S: ay {p ]..'.$.1)e'g'*.-. g -.- y ' ~% k Id h. Af 3 pi ) ':,;w.g p Q .g . , 7 g. ; _ . - ---. 7 p . - +
~~_7_~~
.+ { ;; y &Qyh'*%l , )%* 'f' . \ ,j-t - \ - )\. ,'M,f'/
~~I e-~~
,,, Q9 ;.;:.. . '.r\[~/(\ .n'.s. N'N ' N g . ' ~*' '~ , .fm - - ~ - ". %.---3.p 'f n-lrA,-w"g" L L ,. .;$-y - ~I , h; or .: / ,L ,w{ , d,MdO ' .s D s ! - ,J*, '-'--t- -' '-~ y g.w :yp-l f Nl,, <,
~~7y i~~
~~.A \ . , - t. /'; l y A' z g*p .- ' y u.~~
(
// '3 , Q'; ' ; .,;'... ",. Q~( 7' .
~~w n_ 4 c_s., 1 1- ,,q~~
<g .m . , .
~~q , n .,~~
.3 _ g- . ,y -; . -:.' q- Def,n u}. ,. < -
n
^ , y ,,
~~( , p ' s -;,~~
-i - f - Q;: ,s j V n+' a-~y n " ~ f'@s b . - , , e .i ., ; - . ,; :. ' . ,' ' , z- ; . (- . ' . ~ h* f r f l.
~~d 3 ,, } # > < W~~
, f gf J 'r GMYe /
~~j f tg d, f,f. (s) s -~~
~~, a l~~
~~m.e h ,,g y~~
~~/ "..~~
J/ - t-! f,, : y enf ,;
i
~~,l.~~
~~(~,f,.~~
; .sk' k '
t-K QR ;f G.= 1 f * ;-_--?$l-
~
~~l W' f :;-f 242 amp &M- w%%} - j{. k,;L'~,. l , ?,\ -~~
\ p\5)ff) ~~&';Y " D~ / '1 , ,7 - ( . - ~, .
gf Q (1 ,. & %[ CL.J&y', ; , C'9 CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRO NM O NTAL RE POR T-O PE RATING LIC E NSE STAGE FIGURE 3.4-7 l DISCHARGE FLUME l l l l t
c -- . . I Q' = i, st i / _ l in ,i o I l { ,/
~~, 14,- 6 .~~
~~IN 25 1~~
~~~ ~~~
~~I 3~~
~~? _ . __~~
O ll __ _ _ __ __f I 5'- 0" 10'-O", l . j ll ll __ . . __ A 11
" SYMMETRICAL {' { jl lIl ~
~~ABOUT ( HALF i_ 14'- 6" _!~~
'b SCALE EL 712 O' i -i ' k N \ ~l EL 702 O[. , bfEs .? ~
1 9l 1 3 EL 695 0, 1 - - - - ;- - - - __. : w _ 11 a r e j N l'-O" RIPRAP ON 8" FILTER l L-(12" C PyE ,- TYPE I BEDDING ""' EL 6e 0-
'Y , SECTION A-A 10 0 10 } ~~
g SCALE iN FELI
I t EL.700 O' ' ' l i
=
~~u. ,~~
~~N l l' a~~
~~/ I I~~
~~t l i I ;l. 6..~~
- ! ll ~ ; , j . ll =
0
-a - li1 JM5b 4 86 j W n . W .. W .. W ..I l .C l j '. I
{
~~.l . .i g.~~
~~__l p o~~
. .. .. l ~
~~20' - O"~~
~~-"l m _~~
~~m__z___m~~
~
~~m ~1 - _-@,,A PLAN 10 _O IN FEET~~
?9
N_
~~~%~ . 's LAKE NORMAL POOL EL 690 O' L~~
~~100 YR LOW WATER EL 682 4'~~
~~/ EL 67910' _~~
~~l /~~
~~//_T/RIPR AP EL 675 O' CLINTON POWER STATION i~~
~~UNITS 1 AND 2 EL 668 60' E NV I RO N M E NT A L R E POR T O PE R A T I NG LIC E NSE STAGE~~
~~!l '~~
e FIGURE 3.4-8 N"'2'- o" ;l DIAGRAM 0F DISCHARGE STRUCTURE j .
4 s.3 a. .o od3i j 'lh jil!lh - ic q ! !his ei i:: d.l F 1 jjuh!:!: f @Fp n [ fhu!? ::.'6,.:h
~~~ ----]~~
~~r-- j;: ( g q)ijj;; n a,~~
~~,s3]o ., a v l i~~
~~s 1;pp;;3lg;;}g, 0~~
~~lh:;puph!,' pHij h ~~~
~~USi~~
~~~P. ' 1:r:!b ui ;~~
~~n apa 3 L ' dU!!p g 6: u pfh:! . .~~
-----}e i 2 }:j ~: :n:: 'in"a3, . : H: pin.pL n:' h, .
8 p 9 2. t a.,e a" g a 3j ;}} : fu .HMff;: u j;ni'M O y}gn% 8 : ,. " "'~ "
~~I. It 14.H.,iP)!U!!!s!d,.!:,~~
~~i ..c s 1'1 { ha! g47.ai::1n..:a~~
y
~~'" 3 a~~
~~liUU I s 1~~
~~,- qga 112,)[ ., ...(w$n$.,NIE.,.F6 . ,....~~
~~l 3 ,!,H.h :tdi@u,. h~~
~~.ga !H. <. ~~~
l DfllIM!! 5h@y$"n!$h , 3 .s. . 8 5_ 3 I l v t.
~~- g- -~~
~~I 3 0 0 I- b; O % C~~
! O ! !i / !
W
~
~~1 - Iii.~~
~~;a 5 !}N 5 I sit~~
[ \. ,-- s l AM P jo r DO* o O C i: tx. - i , . , , i 56 -- _ 1 I H;ya:a
?! r--- iijs;!Pij:jan'P' i u:
~~luhr~~
~~: n~~
.a o, . ,. .n. 4 a ., b.
~~t L b d ;h..r q __________,i .: : -~~
~~<h: ~ C.~ . .L 1 i~~
A
~~.P " j i~~
~~d[ L , . } l~~
I
~~\> ]~~
~~t1 u~~
~~./'^( .~~
~~h:H: us : h:::a hn a A .f , l , Iprjps.p):<:: I~~
~~.:p3:a;p,n: ).~~
~~0 h,i:~~
.qip': {g{pgs ', g n : / '* {;5 , i 1 :
~~j:..Mau:s' N[, i , s llilijf r E;!!~~
~~#R 'l f::}:, ;as:o , o, l ki t_;_ _.~~
~~UEd$;t<:!EI]!!!ll a~~
~~- - = l .:u{ff,r) r[iO!!Iythun!5L..)n,~~
~~}I ana, 1~~
CLINTON POWER STATION l , ~ UNITS 1 AND 2 1 E NV IRONM E NTAL R E PORT =O PE RAT ING LICE NSE STAGE 1 l FIGURE 3.4-9 SYSTEMS LAYOUT FOR SPRAY MODULES IN DISCHARGE CANAL
/ eb
~
~~y i M A L g~~
~~+ %:<.X.2&~~
l O T E i R U T g A R E ; P M E T ]' E G R A 1 1 g k C S I I D L A E { N A C j g' l-ew O -
\ \ %pW l l AUC. 1 UE*1 4E CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV I RO N M E NT A L R E POR T.O PE R AT I NG L IC E N SE STAGE FIGURE 3.4-10 CANAL DISCHARGE TEMPERATURE TO LAKE CLINTON UNITS 1 & 2, 92% PLANT LOAD FACTOR,1964 SUMMER MONTHS, 232 SPRAY k , MODULES IN DISCHARGE CANAL \
~~w E l I F g b a~~
~~- i E~~
K o A j L ~ O i T E e l R U T 1 A R E P o l M E T 1 E G . c R l A I I C 1 S I D a l L A T N A C _ - - - 6 - - m- :
b *a u 1 I m n.1 ME CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV I RO NM E NT AL R E POR T=O PE R AT I NG LIC E NSE STAGE FIGURE 3.4-11 CANAL DISCHARGE TEMPERATURE TO LAKE CLINTON UNITS 1 & 2, 92% PLANT LOA 3 FACTOR, 1962 SUMMER MONTHS, 232 SPRAY MODlllES IN DISCHARGE CANAL
CPS-ER(OLS) 3.5 RADWASTE SYSTEMS AND SOURCE TERMS 3.5.1 Source Terms 3.5.1.1 Introduction During reactor operation radioactive contamination of the reactor coolant occurs by two processes. One process is the activation by fission neutrons of nonradioactive materials normally present in the reactor coolant. The nonradioactive materials activated are commonly oxygen, nitrogen, deuterium and trace metals such as iron, cobalt, and manganese. The other process for contamination is by fission products diffusing through the fuel cladding or escaping through minor cracks that might be present. Reduction of activity levels in the reactor coolant is achieved in three principal ways:
a. the natural process or radioactive decay of radioisotopes;

b. a side stream of reactor coolant (approximately 1% of feedwater flow) is continuously withdrawn from the reactor recirculation system, processed through the reactor water cleanup (RWCU) system filter /demineralizers and returned to the reactor vessel; and
~~("') c. after passing through the turbine, all condensed~~
~~steam is processed through the condensate cleanup system demineralizers and returned to the reactor~~
< vessel. The two cleanup systems (i.e., RWCU and condensate cleanup) remove particulates and ionic impurities from the reactor coolant. The natural process of radioactive decay plays an important role in further reducing the levels of relatively short-lived radioisotopes. Other mechanisms that reduce the activity levels in the reactor coolant are:
~~a. ionic activity removal due to reactor coolant ;~~
~~1 leakage, and~~
b. gaseous activity removal through the steam jet air ejectors. j Calculations of activity concentrations in the reactor coolant and release of radioactivity to the environment in liquid and gaseous effluents are performed by using the BWR-GALE Computer Code described in the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) report NUREG-0016 (USNRC 1979), which is a companion document to Regulatory Guide 1.112, " Calculation of Releases of 3.5-1
CPS-ER(OLS) Radioactive Materials in Gaseous and Liquid Effluents from Light- llg Water-Cooled Power Reactors", April 1976. Parameters used for calculating the coolant activity and the release of activity to the environment in liquid and gaseous effluents from each unit of the station are given in Table 3.5-1. Input for the BWR-GALE code calculation is given in Table 3.5-2. 3.5.1.2 Sources of Radioactivity in Liquid Effluents The following sources are considered in calculating the release of radioactivity in liquid effluents from normal operations and anticipated operational occurrences:
a. processed liquid wastes from the equipmeist drain subsystem (high purity),

b. processed liquid wastes from the floor drain subsystem (low purity),

c. processed liquid wastes from the chemical waste subsystem,

d. processed liquid demineralizer regenerant wastes, and

e. detergen? wastes.
The radioactivity inputs to the liquid radwaste system are based on flow rates of liquid waste streams and their radioactivity levels, expressed as a fLnction of the primary reactor coolant ll) activity. 3.5.1.3 Sources of Radioactivity in Gaseous Effluents The following sources are considered in calculating the release of radioactive materials (noble gases, radioactive particulates, and iodine) in gaseous effluents from normal operations and anticipated operational occurrences:
a. main condenser off-gas system;

b. mechanical vacuum pumps; and

c. ventilation exhaust air from the containment, fuel, auxiliary, radwaste, and turbine buildings.
Clean steam produced from demineralized condensate is used for - the turbine gland seal system. Therefore, release of radioactivity from this source to the environment is negligible. Releases of radioactive materials in ventilation exhaust air from any other building not covered in item c. above are considered negligible. Radioactivity inputs to the main condenser off-gas system are built into the BWR-GALE Computer Code. These inputs are based on O 3.5-2
CPS-ER(OLS) (~)
\/
data from operating BWRs normalized to a power level of 3400 MWt and an 80% plant capacity factor. The iodine-131 input is approximately 6 Ci/yr and average noble gas input is approximately 0.2 Ci/sec with no decay. These built-in inputs are adjusted by the code to a power level of 2894 MWt for Clinton Power Station. Under certain operating conditions the main condenser is evacuated by means of the mechanical vacuum pump instead of the steam jet air ejectors. Use of the vacuum pump is limited to the following conditions:
a. during the early phase of unit startup prior to actuation of the steam jet air ejector;

b. during the last phase of unit shutdown when steam pressure is too low for steam jet air ejector operation; and

c. during containment isolation to salvage and restore condenser vacuum until the main steam isolation valves can be opened.
Following a unit refueling or long ma_ntenance outage, little radioactive gas should be present in the condenser when the mechanical pump would be used for the first stage of condenser evacuation. f) kJ The following releases from the main condenser mechanical vacuum pump are calculated from source term values built into the EWR-GALE computer code: Xe-133 1300 Ci/yr Xe-135 500 Ci/yr I-131 0.09 Ci/yr I-133 0.94 Ci/yr These are considered to be independent of the plaiit's power level. , Leakage of reactor coolant, main steam, and contaminated fluid may occur through valve stems, pump seals and flanged connections in systems carrying such fluids. Some radioactivity may become airborne in the atmosphere of buildings as a result of the following:
a. evaporation or flashing of leaked water,

b. escape of gaseous activity from leaked water to air, c.
direct mixing of steam leakage with the turbine building atmosphere, and O 3.5-3 s (
CPS-ER(OLS)
d. gas evolution from the water in the fuel pool. llh Analytical evaluations of the source of airborne releases to the environment are complicated. Therefore the BWR-GALE code makes direct use of measurements of activity releases from building ventilation exhausts of operating BWRs. These releases are considered to be independent of a plant's power level (except for tritium). Heasured values of annual releases of radioiodine, radioactive particulates, and noble gases specified in the BWR-GALE computer code are modified only as needed to reflect filtration by charcoal and/or HEPA filters prior to release.
3.5.1.4 Sources of C-14, H-3. and Ar-41 The principal source of C-14 in a BWR is from the neutron interaction with 0-17 in the reactor coolant. Another source of C-14 is from the neutron interaction with N-14 dissolved in the reactor coolant and also present in the drywell air. It is assumed that the resulting C-14 reacts with the oxygen in the reactor water, behaves like a noble gas fission product, and is released in total to the environment, principally in the form of CO,. The USNRC (1979) assumes an annual release of 9.5 Ci of C-14 to the environment. In a BWR, tritium is produced by three principal methods:
a. activation of naturally occurring deuterium in the llh reactor coolant,

b. nuclear fission of uranium fuel, and

c. neutron reaction with boron used in reactivity control rods.
The prime source of tritium available for release from a BWR is that produced by activation of deuterium in the reactor water. A small fraction of the tritium produced by fission may escape from the fuel to the coolant. The release of tritium formed in the control rods is believed to be negligible. All of the tritium produced by activation of deuterium in the primary coolant is available for release in liquid or gaseous effluents. The tritium formed in a BWR from deuterium activation can be estimated using the equation: Ract = reVA 3.7x10*P where: Ract = tritium formation rate by deuterium activation (uCi/sec/MWt) O 3.5-4 s
l CPS-ER(OLS) l I = macroscopic thermal neutron cross section (cm-1) {} ;
* = thermal neutron flux (neutrons /(cm2 sec))
V = coolant volume in core (cm3) A = tritium radioactive decay constant (1.78 x 10-' sec-1) P = reactor power level (MWt) For recent BWR designs, Ract is calculated to be (1.3 0.4) x 10-* uCi/sec/MWt. The uncertainty indicated is derived from the estimated errors in selecting values for the coolant volume in the core, coolant density in the core, abundance of deuterium l in light water, thermal neutron flux, and microscopic cross section for deuterium. The fraction of tritium produced by fission that may transfer from fuel to the coolant (which will then be available for release in liquid and gaseous effluents) is more difficult to estimate. However, since zircaloy-clad fuel rods are used in BWRs, essentially all fission product tritium should remain in the fuel rods unless defects are present in the cladding I material. The annual average tritium release rate from the fission source is conservatively estimated at 0.12 i 0.12 l pCi/sec, or 0.0 to 0.24 pCi/sec. Based on this approach, the estimated total tritium appearance rate in reactor coolant and release rate in the effluent is about 20 Ci/yr. {} The quantity of tritium released through the liquid pathway is based on the calculated volume of liquid released with a tritium concentration of 0.01 nCi/ml up to a maximum of 50% of the total quantity of tritium calculated to be available for release. The remainder of the tritium produced is assumed to be released as vapor from the station ventilation exhausts. Annual releases of tritium to the environment via liquid and gaseous effluents from each unit of the station, directly obtained from the BWR-GALE computer code output, are 15 Ci/yr and 58 Ci/yr, respectively. Argon-41 is formed by neutron activation of stable naturally occurring argon-40 in the drywell air and is released to the environment via the containment vent when the drywell is vented or purged. The BWR-GALE Code calculates an annual release of 43 Ci of Ar-41. 3.5.1.5 Sources for the Solid Radwaste Processing System Radioactivity inputs to the solid radwaste system are categorized as wet and dry waste. The wet waste consists of radioactive nuclides accumulated in filters, demineralizer resin, evaporator concentrates, and tank sludge or bottoms. Dry waste consists of O 3.5-5 d f
~~,, - - -vm-,e-.--m e c - +, -n,,,,,-m --,7 , , -g.,,-. a-,,, ,-.,,n,,w---,na q w- , . ,~~
CPS-ER(OLS) air filters, paper, rags, clothing, tools, and equipment that have become contaminated during the course of station operation. (l) 3.5.2 Liquid Radwaste Systems The design objectives of the liquid radwaste systems are as follows:
a. to collect, monitor, and treat all potentially radioactive liquid wastes produced during normal and anticipated abnormal station operation for reuse within the limits of the station's overall water balance requirements;

b. to minimize, monitor, and control processed liquid waste releases to ensure that quantities and concentrations of radioactive material in such releases are "as low as is reasonably achievable" in accordance with 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 50;

c. to minimize the volume of waste material requiring further processing by the solid radwaste system and subsequent shipment from the station; and

d. to give proper consideration (through equipment selection, arrangement, and shielding) to the requirements to keep radiation exposure of in-plant personnel "as low as is reasonably achievable."
lll 3.5.2.1 System Description The liquid radwaste system consists of four major subsystems: (1) the equipment drain subsystem, (2) the floor drain subsystem, (3) the chemical waste subsystem, and (4) the laundry waste subsystem. Figure 3.5-1 is a generalized flow diagram of the liquid radwaste system which indicates the segregation of waste types and their primary process routes. Table 3.5-3 provides descriptions of primary system components. Expected inputs into the liquid radwaste system during normal operation and anticipated operational occurrences are indicated in Table 3.5-4 (Refer to FSAR Section 11.2 for a more detailed description). 3.5.2.1.1 Equipment Drain Subsystem This subsystem collects and processes high-purity (low-conductivity) waste such as equipment drains. The waste is normally treated by settling and filtration followed by ion-exchange demineralization, if necessary. It is then returned, after appropriate sampling, to the cycled condensate storage tanks for station reuse. Major input sources to the equipment drain subsystem include:
~~a. backwash from condensate and radwaste demineralizers, and ultrasonic resin cleaner; O~~
3.5-6
CPS-ER(OLS) (~T b. decantate from waste sludge tank, reactor water k' cleanup system phase separator tank, fuel pool filter /demineralizer sludge tank, and spent resin tank; and
~~c. flows from equipment drain tanks and sumps in containment, drywell, auxiliary, turbine, radwaste, control, and fuel buildings.~~
These wastes are regularly collected in either of two waste collector tanks. Infrequent inputs, including occasional unexpected large volumes, can be routed directly to either of the two waste surge tanks. F_ior to processing, 500 gallons or less of tank " bottoms" are pumped to a waste sludge tank to remove settled solids and minimize downstream filter loading. The wastes are sampled prior to processing to determine the most appropriate method for treatment. The majority of the waste will be pumped through the equipment waste filters, a roughing demineralizer, and a polishing demineralizer. High conductivity waste not suitable for treatment via the waste demineralizers can be transferred to the chemical waste subsystem for treatment. The waste collector and waste surge tanks together provide sufficient capacity to hold _4 days normal station input plus surge and recycle capacity. Effluent from this subsystem is collected in one of the three waste sample tanks. All processed liquid wastes are sampled and monitored to ensure that the appropriate criteria are met for either reuse or discharge. Conductivity is monitored at the output of each demineralizer Cs) prior to going to the waste sample tanks. This protects against contamination of tank contents due to demineralizer malfunction. After adequate precessing, the station water balance is evaluated to determine if the waste system effluent can be reused in the station or discharged. Since the liquid radwaste system is designed to maximize reuse and minimize discharge, the effluent is normally sampled and then transferred to a cycle condensate system storage tank for eventual reuse in the station. If the station water balance indicates excessive water inventory, waste system effluent in the sample tank is sampled and transferred to one of the two excess water tanks and retained until a suitable discharge batch is accumulated. This batch is then sampled and released into Lake Clinton as described in Subsection 3.5.2.3. During extenuating circumstances, such as caused by excessive inleakage of cooling water into the condenser, waste accumulation in the liquid radwaste system could approach the system processing rate. In such cases, processed waste system effluent must be released in a timely fashion to avoid plant shutdown. Under such conditions, the excess water tanks may be bypassed. Processed waste in the waste sample tanks will be sampled to determine the appropriate release rate and then discharged through the same discharge piping used normally. Bypass,ing the 3.5-7
~~.~ .~~
CPS-ER(OLS) excess water tanks requires the use of a normally locked closed valve. This feature assures administrative control of the lll action. (Refer to Subsection 3.5.2.3 for a discussion about release procedures.) 3.5.2.1.2 Floor Crain Subsystem The floor drain subsystem collects and processes low-purity (high-conductivity) waste from the station floor drain systems. These wastes are normally too high in conductivity for efficient ion-exchange treatment. Normal treatment will consist of settling, evaporation, and ion-exchange demineralization with return to the condensate storage tanks after appropriate sampling. Major input sources to this subsystem are from the floor drain collector tanks and sumps in the containment, turbine, auxiliary, radwaste, control, and fuel buildings. These wastes are collected in the two floor drain collector tanks. In addition, two floor drain surge tanks are provided to take infrequent inputs and occasional unexpected or unusual volumes of floor drain water. Prior to processing, approximately 500 gallons of tank " bottoms" are pumped to a waste sludge tank to remove settled solids. Waste in the collector and surge tanks is sampled and then routed to the floor drain evaporator feed tanks for conditioning prior to being batch fed to the evaporators. Interconnecting piping is provided to allow optional prefiltration through the equipment waste filters. Waste conditioning may include settling, flocculation, and chemical addition for pH control. The evaporator concentrates residual wastes into as small a volume as practical for delivery to the solid radwaste system. In so doing, it also provides a condensed distillate that is collected in the floor drain evaporator monitor tanks. This distillate is substantially free of radioactivity and dissolved solids. As the distillate is collected in the floor drain evaporator monitor tanks, it is constantly monitored by a conductivity cell in the tank's recirculation piping. Such monitoring serves to indicate the evaporator's performance and will sound an alarm to indicate problems. After collection in the monitor tanks is completed, the s.istillate is sampled and, depending upon sampling results, transferred to either the equipment waste demineralizers for further treatment or the waste sample tanks. If the quality of the evaporator effluents is acceptable, the station water balance is evaluated to determine whether the distillate will be reused in the station or discharged to the cooling lake. The combined capacity of the floor drain collector tanks, surge tanks, and evaporator feed tanks is sufficient to hold at least 4 days input. In addition, it can also accommodate unusually large 3.5-8
CPS-ER(OLS) surges due to such occurrences as general area washdowns. The ("}
~~\_/~~
two floor drain evaporators are cross-tied with the chemical waste evaporator to provide equipment redundancy and allow for flexibility of waste processing. 3.5.2.1.3 Chemical Waste Subsystem This subsystem processes the highest conductivity waste in the liquid radwaste system. Major types of waste processed in this subsystem include:
a. condensate polishing demineralizer regenerants,

b. radwaste demineralizer regenerants,

c. flows from decontamination drains, and

d. flows from laboratory drains.
These wastes are potentially high in radioactivity, conductivity, and suspended solids including some resin fines. Processing of these wastes is accomplished by settling, chemical , neutralization, evaporation, and/or ion-exchange demineralization. On occasion, waste may be filtered through the waste filters prior to being processed through the evaporator. Two chemical waste collector tanks are used to receive and hold the wastes for 2 or more days for radioactive decay. The r~N collector tanks are large enough to provide sufficient surge () capacity to accommodate variations in the condensate polishers regeneration cycle. Once a batch of chemical waste has been collected, suspended solids are allowed to settle. This sediment or tank " bottoms" is then pumped to the waste sludge tank. Waste in the collector tanks is then transferred to the chemical waste processing tank for mixing, sampling and neutralization prior to processing. Normally the waste is processed through the chemical waste evaporator, although low conductivity waste can be handled by the equipment waste demineralizers. Waste processed through the evaporators is then collected in the chemical waste evaporator monitor tank where its conductivity is constantly monitored. Distillate in the monitor tank will either receive additional processing through the evaporator and/or the equipment waste demineralizers or be sent directly to the waste sample tanks where its ultimate disposition is determined by station water balance requirements. The design of the chemical waste evaporator is identical to the floor drain evaporators, and cross-ties are provided to feed any evaporator with floor drain or chemical waste. Provisions have been made to allow for the filtering of the chemical waste by the equipment waste filters prior to evaporation. This feature will be used when settling time is not available or when suspended particle size is so small as to render settling ineffective.
~~/~') \- 3.5-9~~
CPS-ER(OLS) 3.5.2.1.4 Laundry Waste Subsystem ggg The laundry waste subsystem receives waste from the station laundry facility drains, personnel decontamination showers, and other radioactively-contaminated sources in the station that may contain soaps or detergents. These wastes are accumulated in the two laundry waste collector tanks. Once a collector tank has been filled, the contents are pumped through one of the two laundry system filters to remove lint and coarse particles and then to one of the two laundry sample tanks. The contents of the laundry sample tanks are normally sent directly to the chemical waste evaporator for processing. Laundry waste in the sample tanks can also be sent to the chemical waste collector tank for storage and/or blending with chemical waste prior to processing through the evaporator. This will be done if dilution, neutralization, or settling of the waste is required. Under unusual circumstances, small quantities of laundry waste may be routed from the laundry sample tanks to the excess water tanks for release from the station provided the waste water quality satisfies all discharge requirements. This subsystem is designed to accommodate the large detergent waste accumulation rate expected during major station maintenance outages. 3.5.2.1.5 Summary All inputs to the major subsystem collector tanks are thoroughly mixed and periodically sampled in order to select the appropriate g method for treatment. After the appropriate treatment, each batch is again mixed, sampled, and analyzed in the respective sample or monitor tanks. The liquid radwaste system has the flexibility to adjust processing capabilities to meet the requirement of normal and anticipated operating conditions. A batch of processed waste that cannot be placed back into one of the station water systems is normally transferred to the excess water tanks where it is sampled for total radioactivity. A portion of the processed waste being discharged is constantly diverted through a radiation monitoring system that will sound an alarm if there is an indication of an unacceptable radioactivity level. A downstream valve will automatically close when the radiation alarm is actuated to prevent discharge of the processed waste. The liquid radwaste system is designed for maximum recycling of processed liquid radwaste in order to meet the "as low as is reasonably achievable" criteria. 3.5.2.2 Instrumentation and Control Waste processing by the liquid radwaste system is controlled and monitored in the radwaste operations center (ROC). The ROC serves as the control center from which all processing equipment O 3.5-10
I CPS-ER(OLS)
~~; - is operated. The ROC main control panel is approximately 54 feet~~
long and provides a graphic representation of the major piping and component arrangement. Controls are built into the graphic display to f a

ilitate operation. Instrumentation that provides j information such as tank levels is mounted on the vertical board above the graphic display. . The primary purpose of the ROC main control panel is to provide one control board where all liquid radwaste equipment interface controls are conveniently located, i The ROC also contains the vendor-supplied control panels for major processing components such as the evaporators,
! demineralizers, and filters. The vendor-supplied control panels contain the controls required for special operations such as equipment startup, shutdown, and regeneration. Once a component has been started up on the vendor-supplied control panel, its - control and interfacing with the balance of the liquid radwaste system is controlled from the ROC main control panel.
~~The type of parameters monitored in the liquid radwaste system are as follows:~~
a. tank levels,

b. demineralizer effluent conductivity,

c. evaporator effluent conductivity,

d. radioactivity level of effluent being discharged,

e. discharged effluent volume totalizing, I waste flow rates, f.

g. evaporator system temperatures, and

h. pump discharge pressures.
) l The above information allows the operator to evaluate equipment performance and monitor the waste accumulation rate. This information is periodically recorded by the digital data i" acquisition system (DDAS) in the ROC. The data stored and , printed by the DDAS allows the operator access to follow trends, ! waste accumulation rates and determine equipment performance. l 1 3.5.2.3 Liquid Waste Release ! { The processed liquid radwaste stream terminates at three waste , sample tanks. This allows each treated batch to be sampled to ensure that treatment was effective. If the treated waste sample indicates that the water quality is within the limits required for recycling, and if storage capacity is availabe, the batch is transferred tc_the cycled condensate storage tanks for reuse. If the-station water balance cannot accommodate recycling, the treated waste is normally transferred to one of two excess water
~~. ()~~
3.5-11 l l
CPS-ER(OLS) tanks and held until a discharge batch is accumulated. These a tanks discharge to the service water discharge pipe. This line W is branched and connected to the circulating water discharge pipe. Under extenuating circumstances the need to discharge processed waste may be great. Under such circumstances, the processed waste in the waste sample tanks will be sampled and discharged directly into the service water discharge pipe via a normally locked closed valve. In this case the processed waste is still subject to the radiation monitoring system. The rate of discharge of processed waste from the excess water tanks or the waste sample tanks is determined by the dilution flow available and the various radionuclide concentrations in the processed waste. Administrative controls prohibit the opening of the discharge valves until dilution requirements are met. Discharge to the service water discharge line is controlled by two valves. Both valves are locked closed with the keys under the control of the plant supervisor on duty. The two valves will not be opened until tank contents have been sampled, analyzed, the existence of suitable dilution flow has been verified, and supervisory approval obtained via a discharge permit. The process radiation monitor (PRM) is located upstream of the two valves. A high radioactivity signal from this monitor automatically closes the downstream valve and provides an alarm signal in the radwaste operations center, the radiation protection office, and the main control room. Changes in dilution flow such as that caused by the shutting down of a circulating water pump are controlled in a the main control room. The status of service water and W circulating water pumps is indicated in the radwaste operations center where the discharge process is controlled. All required information regarding a release of processed waste will be recorded on the Illinois Power Company radioactive discharge control form. All conditions on the discharge control form must be satisfied prior to discharge from the station. 3.5.2.4 Radioactive Discharge Ouantities The quantities and isotopic concentrations in liquids discharged into the environment depend upon the operation of the station. The analysis is based on engineering judgment with respect to station operation, design of the liquid radwaste system, and realistic estimation of the input sources. The results of this analysis are considered to represent typical releases over the anticipated 40-year life of the station. The input sources used for calculational purposes are summarized in Table 3.5-4. Design-basis isotopic concentrations in major radwaste subsystem input streams are provided in Table 3.5-5. Lesign-basis decontamination factors are listed in Table 3.5-1. The associated liquid release concentrations (in microcuries per cubic centimeter) for each nuclide appear in Table 3.5-6. O 3.5-12
CPS-ER(OLS) s During normal one unit operation the combined water flow of the s,) circulating water system and service water system is approximately 610,000 gpm. The discharge rate from the liquid radwaste system can be adjusted over the range of 10 to 300 gpm. The release dilution factor for normal one unit operation would then range from 2032 to 61,000. Table 3.5-6 provides expected radionuclide concentrations with a comparison to 10 CFR 20 limits when utilizing a dilution factor of 702 (considered representative of the maximum release concentration that might be experienced during single unit operation). As indicated in Table 3.5-6, the effluent release satisfies the 10 CFR 20 limits. 3.5.3 Gaseous Radwaste System 3.5.3.1 Description The objective of the gaseous radwaste system is to process and control the release of gaseous radioactive effluents to the site environs so that the radiation dose to off-site persons does not exceed applicable regulations and is as low as is reasonably achievable. The annual average exposure at the site boundary during normal operation from all gaseous sources will not exceed applicable regulations. The design basis for the treatment of off-gas is to delay the gas until the required fraction of the radionuclides have decayed and the daughter products have been retained by the charcoal and high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters. 3
%) Sources of Radioactive Gases 3.5.3.2 The major source of radioactive gaseous effluent is off-gas from the main condenser steam-jet air ejectors. This source is treated in the radwaste system by means of catalytic recombination, low temperature charcoal absorption, and delay.
~~Other sources of radioactive gas are relatively minor and are routinely released through the normal ventilating systems or the drywell purge system. These sources are as follows:~~
a. Mechanical Vacuum Pump Off-Gas Air is removed from the main condenser by a mechanical pump that is normally in service only as described in Subsection 3.5.1.3. Table 3.5-7 shows the radioisotopes released by the mechanical vacuum pump and the annual release rate.

b. Drywell Purge The drywell air is exposed to neutron fluxes around the reactor vessel that result in some gaseous activation products. Activity can also be introduced into the drywe'll atmosphere as a result of release of
( ~) 3.5-13
CPS-ER(OLS) activated material from reactor system leaks and drywell sumps. The drywell constitutes a closed (l) system that can be purged with containment air, if necessary, when access is required. The drywell can also be vented during unit startup to accommodate air expansion that occurs with increasing temperature, or during unit operation if potentially hazardous or radioactive gas concentrations should reach specified limits. Air relieved or exhausted from the drywell is discharged through the drywell purge system and its charcoal and HEPA filters. Charcoal adsorbers have a 99.90% iodine removal efficiency. HEPA filters have a bank efficiency of 99.95% on cold-generated DOP (diocty1phthalate). Drywell purge is expected to occur about four times per year. Table 3.5-7 gives the gaseous release values due to the drywell purge. The assumptions used to calculate this release are the following:
1. The drywell is purged after 3 months.

2. A 5 gpm leak is postulated in the drywell continuously for 3 months.

3. The leak is 50% steam and 50% liquid.

4. Forty percent of the liquid flashes to steam. lll

5. A decontamination factor of 100 is used for halogens and particulates.
~~' . A filter efficiency of 90% is used for halogens; a filter efficiency of 99.9% is used for particulates,~~
c. Containment Ventilation The containment building is purged continuously at 30,000 ft3/ min to provide 1.2 fresh air changes per hour, and continuous personnel access is afforded during normal reactor operation. Airborne activity sources can be introduced into the containment by primary system relief valve venting to the suppression pool, primary system leaks or particulate matter in the upper pool area. If radiation levels exceed a predetermined level, the air will be processed by exhausting containment atmosphere through the drywell purge system and its charcoal and HEPA filters. The amount of radioactivity released because of containment ventilation is shown in Table 3.5-7 O
3.5-14
4 4
~~$e%%, A V. imieE EvituiriOs TEST TARGET (MT-3) $*#s l.0 ' m na g~~
~~y !j llE u L" N- 1B~~
~~.8 1.25 1.4 gl 1.6 , < 6" >~~
~~1 MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART~~
~~%4 4% + //p~~
~~+44/f*r~~
~~> > 5,,,,,p % g//'/ ,-~~
7
~~+4+j4jg <>4 . i' 3 .s....._._.._,_~~
~~45> '% tOYh>, 'N Ay~~
~~+++ ,mAeE E A<eA1,em /q %~~
~~4 4 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 5lm5 Ea m it BM l,l~~
~~bb lH I.25 1.4 1.6~~
~~=2m 4 6" =~~
~~MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART~~
~~% +~~
~~dif.(e/, -.zzf c~~
'S ;h ;.s ^^ ;* 'l '
w-. ;- - A.,,...,.--.-...,___
CPS-ER(OLS)
~~d. Radwaste Building Ventilation (J~~
k-N Radwaste building exhaust air is routed through HEPA filters prior to release. HEPA filter elements are 99.97% efficient on 0.3 micron DOP smoke. Thirteen radwaste system tanks containing significant amounts of radioactive iodine will be equipped with charcoal filters capable of removing 95% of the I-131 which would be vented. All radwaste system tank vents dicharge directly into the exhaust air upstream of the HEPA filters.
e. Glaad Seal Condenser Off-Gas Gland seal condenser off-gas is not a significant source of gaseous radwaste in this station because an auxiliary source of clean steam is provided for gland seal purposes from the gland seal steam evaporator and essentially no activity is released,

f. Building Ventilation During routine station operation, the auxiliary, fuel, and turbine buildings are provided with fresh air for ventilation.
This ventilation air is routed to the common station heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) (~3 vent and released to the outside atmosphere. Table 2 L/ 3.5-7 shows the isotopic breakdown of the released activity.
g. Other Potentially Radioactive Gases Other sources of potentially radioactive gases discharged into the common station HVAC vent consist primarily of the laboratory vent systems. The additional radioactivity discharged from such sources is expected to be negligible with respect to the total radioactive gas disposal.
3.5.3.3 Gaseous Radwaste Process Description Noncondensible gases are continuously removed from the main condenser by the steam jet air ejectors during station operation in order to improve the functioning of the turbine. The noncondensible gases consist of air that has leaked in through the turbine shell and condenser, hydrogen and oxygen from the radiolytic decomposition of water in the reactor, activation products, and fission products such as noble gases. These noncondensible gases are mixed with steam in the air-ejector and processed through the off-gas system. A simplified flow diagram of the gaseous radwaste system is given in Figure 3.5-2. 3.5-15
~~- , - - - , - - - - - . .y y-- , ---- ---- - - ,--,-*r -~~
CPS-ER(OLS) Noncondensible gas removed from the main condenser is diluted with steam to reduce the potential for hydrogen explosion. The (l) steam diluted off-gas is passed through the recombiner vessel, whereby the gases are superheated, catalytically recombined and cooled to condense the moisture. The gas stream volume is reduced to that due to condenser air inleakage and traces of radioactive gases. From the recombiner, the gases are cooled by ethylene glycol in a cooler-condenser to about 400F to minimize the moisture content. The gases then $ ass through a dessicant dryer. Two parallel dessicant dryers are used alternately to dry the gases. These dryers contain several hundred pounds of charcoal along with dessicant material that serves to remove short-lived krypton isotopes. The delay time in the dryer is about 10 minutes. Daughter products are retained on the charcoal and dessicant material. A gas cooler and two charcoal adsorber vessels are located in a refrigerated vault that is maintained at a temperature of about 00 F by one of two refrigeration machines. Cold air from the refrigeration machine passes through one side of the gas cooler, thus cooling the incoming dried process gas. The cold gas then enters the adsorber vessels which are arranged in series. These two vessels contain a total'of 24.6 tons of charcoal and are dual pass types. The gases pass downward through the center cylindrical section and upward through an outer annular section. Off-gas effluent from the adsorbers passes through a high efficiency filter before discharge to the common station HVAC vent. This filter prevents charcoal particles or solid decay products from escaping. A listing and description of major off-gas system components is provided in Table 3.5-8. lll The design basis noble radiogas source terms for the annual average activity input to the off-gas treatment system are given in Table 3.5-9 at t= 30 minutes. The system is mechanically capable of processing three times the source terms of Table 3.5-9 without affecting the delay time of the noble gases. Also listed is the isotopic distribution at t=0. With an air inleakage of 40 scfm, this treatment system results in a delay of 52 hours for krypton and 42 days for xenon. The expected air inleakage for the turbine-condenser unit is 35 scfm. The design retention time for the noble gases in the charcoal beds facilitates decay and removal of all the radioactive gaseous isotopes except Kr-85 and some Xe-133. Biologically significant fission products and decay daugt.ters such as Sr-90, Ba-140 and Cs-137 are retained in the charcoal and do not escape. Iodine input to this system is expected to be small, since it is preferentially retained in the condensate and removed by the demineralizers. Iodine that may escape into the off-gas system is adsorbed by the charcoal beds so that iodine release by this path is essentially zero. O 3.5-16
CPS-ER(OLS) Table 3.5-7 lists isotopic activities at the discharge of the () system, and the decontamination factor for each noble gas isotope can be determined. 3.5.3.4 Instrumentation and Control This system is monitored by flow, temperature, and humidity instrumentation and hydrogen analyzers to ensure correct operation and control and to ensure that the hydrogen concentration is maintained below the flammable limits. The ! operator is in control of the system at all times. i A radiation monitor at the recombiner outlet continuously 1 monitors radioactivity release from the reactor and, therefore, i continuously monitors the degree of fuel leakage and input to the charcoal-adsorbers or adsorber bypass line. This radiation monitor sounds an alarm on detection of high radiation in the untreated off-gas. A radiation monitor is also provided at the outlet of the charcoal adsorbers to continuously monitor the release rate from the adsorber beds. This radiation monitor is used to isolate the off-gas system to prevent treated gas or adsorber bypassed gas of unacceptably high activity from entering the vent. The activity of the gas entering and leaving the off-gas treatment system is continuously monitored. Thus, system performance is known to the operator at all times. Provision is (]) made foc sampling and periodic analysis of the influent and effluent gases for purposes of determining their compositions. This information is used in calibrating the monitors and in relating the release to calculated environs doses. 3.5.3.5 Gaseous Waste Release Point The comr.on station HVAC vent is provided for station ventilation exhausts to the outdoors. Base elevation is 736' 0" and the top elev;cion is 935' 6". The location of the common station HVAC vent is shown in Figure 3.5-3. The release point is 199.5 feet above grade. The inside diameter of release ;aint exit is 10.0 feet. Effluent temperature is about 1200 F. The vent is designed to provide an exit velocity of 50 ft/sec during operation of Unit 1 alone (1982-1988) and 74 ft/sec during operations of Units 1 and 2, 3.5.4 Solid Radwaste System The objectives of the solid radwaste system are as fo}1ows: ;
~~a. to collect, hold for decay, monitor, package, and temporarily store prior to off-site shipment all wet n%- 3.5-17~~
~~, , _ , , ,, _ __m . - - . _ . _ v-.. .-m - _,. _ ,_._,e..._,. - -~~
~~CPS-IR(OLS) and dry solid radioactive wastes produced by the & W station during operation and maintenance;~~
b. to prevent the release of solid radioactive waste materials that could conceivably be hazardous to either operating personnel or t'ie public, in accordance with 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 50;

c. to minimize the volume of solidified waste requiring shipment off-site; and

d. to take due account (through equipment selection, arrangement, remote handling, and shielding) of the necessity to keep radiation exposure of in-plant personnel "as low as is reasonably achievable."
~~The major types of wet and' dry solid wastes handled by the solid radwaste system include:~~
a. expended deep-bed demineralizer bead resins;

b. equipment waste filter sludges;

c. deep-bed demineralizer regenerant solutions, floor drain wistes and detergent waste (evaporator concentrates);

d. evaporator boil-out (only if evaporator &
~~decontamination is ever required); W~~
e. radwaste tank bottom sludges;

f. reactor water cleanup and fuel pool filter /demineralizer sludge; and

g. dry radioactive wastes (paper, rags, tools, etc.).
3.5.4.1 System Decript?on The solid radwaste system is common to both units. System operation is depicted by Figure 3.5-4. Table 3.5-10 lists the design capacities of the solid radwaste system's equipment. (Refer to FSAR Subsection 11.4 for a more detailed system description.) The annual output from the solid radwaste system is listed in Table 3.5~11. 3.5.4.1.1 Wet Solid Waste Subsystem The wet solid waste subsystem consists of tanks and associated pumps that serve as an interface between the liquid radwaste system and the drumming equipmert portion of the solid radwaste system. These tanks provide intermediate storage for slurries produced by radwaste decontamination equipment or other radioactive water cleanup systems. O 3.5-18
CPS-ER(OLS) The spent-resin tank serves as a receiving tank for exhausted O' s- ion-exchange bead resins discarded from the condensate polishing demineralizers and the equipment waste demineralizers. The waste sludge tanks are located below the equipment waste filters and receive backwash discharge directly from these filters. These tanks also receive the sludge or " bottoms" from the various collector, surge, processing, or feed tank bottoms. The fuel pool filter /demineralizer sludge tanks are located below and receive backwash discharge directly from these filter /demineralizers. The reactor water cleanup (RWCU) phase separator tanks collect, settle, and hold for decay the sludges from the reactor water cleanup backwash receiving tanks in the Unit 1 and Unit 2 containment buildings. Concentrated bottoms from the floor drain and chemical waste evaporator packages are collected in the concentrated waste tanks. The various receiving tanks allow some decay of radioactivity. The contents of all receiving tanks except the concentrated waste tanks are dewatered to concentrate the waste to a higher percentage of solids to allow more economical drumming operation. Decantate from these tanks is returned to the liquid radwaste system for processing. The remaining sludge is then routed to the radwaste drut. ming equipment. 3.5.4.1.2 Wet Solid Waste Packaging and Handling Subsystem 3.5.4.1.2.1 Radwaste Drumming Equipment Waste to be solidified is transferred from the spent-resin tank, phase separator tanks, filter demineralizer sludge tanks, waste sludge tanks or concentrated waste tanks to one of the waste mixing and decanting tanks. A centrifugal decanting pump removes excess liquid from the waste mixing and decanting tank. The tank contents are then thoroughly mixed by a mechanical mixer and transported by a progressive cavity sludge metering pump to the waste mixing pump. This progressive cavity pump combines the waste with cement as it transports the waste to a shipping drum. A retractable fillport, which includes a fill nozzle extension and splatterproof cover, is used to control transport of the waste from the mixing pump to the shipping drum. Controls for the above equipment and all associated valves and instrumentation is remotely located in the radwaste operations center. The mixing and filling operations of the drumming subsystem are fully automated and are controlled from a panel located behind a shield wall separating the equipment from the radwaste operation center. Preparation of the wastes in the mixing and decanting tank is manually selected to assure the appropriate mixture. 3.5.4.1.2.2 Drum-Handling Equipment The drum-handling equipment consists of a self-propelled, remotely operated handling cart to move containers to the fill, smear test, decontamination, capping, and loading stations; a O v 3.5-19 ( l l L
CPS-ER(OLS) container-capping station for remote capping of filled drums; and ll) a remote drum-handling bridge crane to transport and position sealed drums in the storage area ana to retrieve and transport them to trucks for off-site disposal. A closed circuit television system permits observation of the movement of the drum-handling cart, capping of the container, and operation of the bridge crane. 3.5.4.1.2.3 Smear-Testing and Decontamination Equipment The smear-testing and decontamination equipment portion of the solid radwaste system consists of a penetrated shield wall that permits manipulation of a telescoping tool to obtain a smear test sample of the drum external surface. Pipes and nozzles are also provided for remotely controlled drum washdown if decontamination is necessary prior to storage. 3.5.4.1.2.4 Solidification Agent Storage and Feed Equipment The solidification agent storage and fc?d equipment provides for the unloading, storing, and feeding of solidification agents and additives. The solidification agent normally used will be cement. However, the use of urea formaldehyde is possible with minor solidification system modifications. Additives, such as sodium silicate, can also be used to enhance the shipping efficiency by reducing the cement requirement. The solidification agent handling equipment consists primarily of storage tanks for cement and sodium silicate plus the associated pumps, aeration blower, bucket elevator, hopper feeders and bag lll filter. The cement handling equipment is designed for dust free operation. 3.5.4.1.3 Dry Solid Waste Packaging Equipment A hydraulic baler compresses paper, fabrics, plastics, and light metal, which are manually placed in 55-gallon drums. A hood and filtered exhaust maintain control of contaminated particles during baler operation. The radioactivity of most of the dry waste is low enough to permit handling. Handling and packaging of large waste materials that cannot be compressed will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Typically such items can be packaged in specially designed containers. Smear-testing and decontamination of compacted waste drums can be performed at the pre-shipment monitoring facility or in the drum solidification processing area. Compacted waste drums will be moved to storage by fork truck and overhead bridge crane. 3.5.4.1.4 Drum Storage Areas Shielded areas are provided for storage of sealed drums and compacted dry waste drums. Area capacities are listed in Table 3.5-12. Visual surveillance is provided by television cameras in the storage area and on the bridge crane trolley. Storage space is designed to accommodate 25% of the normal yearly output of 9 3.5-20
CPS-ER(OLS) l i packaged waste. The storage area provided for solidified waste will allow an average decay time of 60 days on a rotating basis. (v~) 3.5.4.1.5 Pre-Shipment Monitoring Facility A shielded cubicle with an open top and equipped with radiation monitors, smear-sampling provisionc, and decontamination facilities is provided for final monitoring of the filled containers prior to loading on a truck. Adjacent to the facility is a scale for determining the shipping weight. The facility is located adjacent to the drum storage area and is serviced by the overhead bridge crane. 3.5.4.2 Packaging and Shipment The solid radwaste system is designed to package radioactive solid wastes for off-site shipment and burial in accordance with applicable NRC and DOT regulations, including 49 CFR 170-178 and 10 CFR 71. DOT 17-H 55-gallon drums are normally used for packaging solidified wastes and dry solid wastes. All containers used will conform to the requirements of 49 CFR 178.115. Packaged waste will ba shipped from the site by special truck to an NRC-approved dispo'ial site. 3.5.4.3 Instrumentation and Control Instrumentation and controls for the solid radwaste handling system are located in the radwaste operations center (ROC). Primary controls for this system are located on the vendor {J supplied control panels with interface controls on the ROC main control panel. The major types of controls and instrumentation supplied for the solid radwaste handling system are as follows:
a. radiation detectors in the drum filling and pre-shipment monitoring areas;

b. TV systems with cameras on the overhead crane, in the drum storage area, and in the drum filling area;

c. crane control and indexing system;

d. solidification agent storage tank levels; and

e. waste metering and mixing pumps.
By locating the solid radwaste system instrumentation and controls in the ROC, coordination of solid waste processing with the needs of the liquid radwaste system is assured. l 3.5-21 l l l
CPS-ER(OLS) 3.5.5 Process and Effluent Monitoring lh There are three release points for radioactive effluents that leave the station. Gaseous effluents are discharged through the common station HVAC vent and the standby gas treatment system (SGTS) exhaust vent (each at elevation 935.5 feet MSL). Liquid effluents are discharoed into the station service water lines, which in turn discharge into the cooling lake (Lake Clinton) via the circulating water system. The common station HVAC vent is constantly monitored. The SGTS exhaust is constantly monitored when it is operating. The liquid radwaste effluent to the station service water is constantly monitored while radwaste is being discharged, and the service water is monitored at the point of its discharge into the discharge flume. Radiation monitors on these three discharge paths do not automatically initiate any alternative treatment systems or divert any flows. The common station HVAC vent radiation monitoring system has no automatic control action. If radioactivity levels in this vent reach alarm levels, operating personnel intervene by tracing down and correcting the causes of the release. The SGTS radiation monitoring system has no control action. If radioactivity levels in this effluent reach alarm levels, operating personnel intervene by switching the flow to the other SGTS cleanup train, terminating purging, or taking other appropriate action. The radiation monitoring system on the liquid radwaste effluent discharge automatically terminates discharge upon high radiation alarm. A detailed description of process and effluent radiation monitors is presented in the FSAR, Section 11.5. O 3.5-22
a rm kj b, d TAEULE 3.5-1 DATA FOR RADIOACTIVE SOURCM TERM CALCULATIONS PER UNIT PETir; ~!
~~; J ET__, _ _ _ ,_~~
~~li bl.SCRIPTION~~
~~1. General~~
,039 FSAP Table 1.3-1 Mausmum co - thermal power level (MWtl (Notes all relevant parameters have been adjusted to 105 percent of full power level. . 3 A:- '. ;, .... -
15 Tritium released in liquid effluent (Ci/yr/ reactor) SE TSAP Taele 11.2-1 Trstium released in gaseous effluent () (Ci/yr/reactori **J Sar7ent . Lur.sy gn 610,000 Annual average dilution flow rate Calculation ISX01 g La for liquid waste discharge (gpm) D1 a LA ,D3 s 8 Nuclear Steam Supply System C) bJ 2. tg 12.453.000 FSAR Table 1.3-1 'd (D Total steam flow rate (1b/hr) a General Electric Company 417.000 Mass of reactor coolant an reactor vessel at full power (1b) 14,900 General Electric Company Mass of steam an reactor vessel at full power tib)
~~3. Reactor Water Cleanup System 124,000 1eneral Electric Company Average flow rate (1b/hr)~~
Genera; Electric Company 2 Number of demineralizers General Electric Company Powdered resin Type of demineralizer Replacement frequency (batch / day): General Electric Company 1/7 days u r al E:e:tric -; ;.sny Normal 1 Startup (1 batch includes 2 filter / deminerlizer backwashes) General Electrac Company 1075 gal / event Regenerant volume and activity, Jeneral Electric Company 1200 curies if applicable
~~Includes both subcooled and saturated coolant.~~
I
TABLE 3.5-1 (Cont'd) ITEM DESCRIPTION INPUT ,_ PEFERENCE
4. Condensate Demineralizers Average flow rate (lb/hr) 1.242 x 10 Contract K-2844 Demaneralizer type Mixed Deep Bed Contract K-2844 Namber of demineralizers 9 Conseact K-2844 (Note: There are 9 demineralizers in parallel including 1 spare)
Size of one demineralizer (ft3) IS5 Contract K-2844 Regeneration frequency, days for 60 Contract F-2044 each bed Contract K-2944 Il Is ultrasonic resan cleaning used? Yes t L'A Water Treatment UI 'd Waste li uid volume due to URC 16,500
~~Drawings A-10794, A-10795 n~~
~~(gal / day per unit) )~~
~~' Regenerant backwash chemical volume 13,505 L'A Water Treatment f (gal / event)~~
~~Drawings A-10649, A-10793 (( Activity of regenerant backwash 2.4959 x 10 curies FSAP Table 12.2-9 h chemical volume~~
5. L1guid Waste Processing Systems FLOW RATE F RACTION 50CRCE (gpd per unit) OF PCA TEFERENCE

a. liigh Purity ( Equi pme n c) Waste Dry well equipment drain Containment equipment drain Auxiliary building equipment drain 7,400 gal / day FSAR Table 11.2-7 Radwaste building equipment drain Turbine building equipment drain AWCU phase separator decant 667 gal / day FSAR Taole 11.2-7 Fuel pool filter - demineralizer sludge decant 285 gal / day FSAR Table ll.J-7 Waste sludge decant 1,500 gal / day PSAR Table 11.2-7 O O O
( , t w) i v s tv/ TABLE 3.5-1 (Cont'd) FLOW 5 TATE FRACTION SOURCE (qpd per unit) OF PCA REFERENCE
~~a. High Purity (rquipment) Waste (Cont'd)~~
Condensate clean waste regenerant and resin 1,169 gal / day FSAR Table 11.2-7 transfer waste Ultrasonic resin cleaner and bed transfer 16,500 gal / day FSAR Table 11.2-7 Total 27,521 gal (av. daily total) 0.1 PCA
~~$7,130 gal (max. single day) FSAR Table 11.2-7 23,900 gal (min. single day)~~
~~b. Low Purity (floor drain) Waste ,~~
~~Radwaste building floor drain Drywell floor drain 7,500 gal / day FSAR Table 11.2-7 g)~~
Containment floor drain Auxiliary building floor drain ph LN Turbine building floor drain and Control fk building hot machine shop ()
M Decantates 1,000 gal / day FSAR Table 11.2-7 gg Total 8,500 gal (av. daily total) 10,000 gal (max, single day) 0.001 PCA FSAR Table 11.2-7 5,000 gal (min. single day)
c. Chemical (Nonregenerant) W.nste Breakdown is not available Turbine building chemical waste sumps Auxiliary building chemical waste sumps 500 gal / day FSAR Table 11.2-7 Radweste building chemical waste sump Total 500 gal (av. daily total) 0.02 PCA FSAR Table 11.2-7

d. Regerant Solution Waste 1,405 gal 0.058 PCA FSAR Table 11.2-7

e. Detergent Waste 500 gal (av. daily total) PCA Not FSAR Table 11.2-7 2,500 gal (max. single day) Applicable
~~TABLE 3.5-1 (Cont'd) Streams~~
f. Holdap Times Associated with Collection, Processing, and Discha rge of All I ' '9; PROCESS DISCHARGE EFFECTIVE COLLECTION TIME [Tpl TIME [Td) DECAY TIME TIME REFERENCE (days) fdays) (days) (Tr + (Td/2 ) ]
HASTE STREAM 0.069 0.091 Sargent & Lundy 0.63 0.056 High purity waste calculation R-C 0.058 0.489 Sargent & Lu ndy Low purity waste 1.67 0.46 calculation R-0 0.243 0.762 Sargent & Lundy 7.09 0.65 Chemical waste calculation R-O O 0 0.243 n.762 Sargent & Lundy 7.09 0.65 Regerant solution waste Calculation R-O M,$ La Capacities of All Tanks and Processing Equipment Considered .n Calculating Holdup Times C) . g. pg 'D COLLECTOR SAMPLE TANK gg l SAMPLE TANK COLLECTOR TANK PCMP NUMBER AND PUMP NUMBER h) TANK NUMBER NUMBER AND PROCESSING EQUITMENT AND DISCHARGE Ch TYPE, NUMBER, AND CAFACITY WASTE AND CAPACITY FLOW RATE (gal) FLOW RATE fgpd) REFERENCE (gal) (gpd) FLOW RATE (gpd) ST REAM Waste Sample Waste San,ple FSAR IWE0l? IWE0lP Waste Filter Table High Purity OWE 02TA/B/C OWE 02PA/B/C 30,000 gal 432,000 gpd 0WE01FA/B/C 432,000 gpd 11.2-3 (equireent) 432,000 gpd 30,000 gal waste Waste Demineralizer OWE 01DA/B/C 432,000 gpd Evap. Monitor Evap. Monitor F5AR lWTOIT IwrolP Evaporator T able Low Purity IWF04T IWF04P (floor drain) 25,000 gal 432,000 qpd 1WF0lS 216,000 gpd 11.2-3 4 3,200 gpd 15,000 gal waste Evap. Monitor Evap. Monitor FSAR JW20lT IWZ0lP Evaporator Chenical OW20lT CW20lp Table waste 35,000 gal 14 4,000 gpd OW2015 216,000 gpd 11.2-3 43,200 gpd 15,000 gal Goes to chemical waste stream; chemical waste strear. data apply here. Regenerant solution waste Note: Discharge to environment if done would be limited to 432,000 gpd.
~~O e~~
~~f3 p A "ABLE 3.5-1 (Cont'd)~~
h. Decontamination Factors for Each Processing Step DECONTAMINATION FACTOk edASTE STREAM PROCESSING EQUIPMENT OTHER IODIGE_ Caf Rb, , REj F{NCE High Purity Waste Filter 1.0E+03 (equipment) 1.-E+02 1.0E+03 NUREG-0016 Rev. 1 waste) waste Demineralizer Iow Pur Evaporator 1.0E+03 1.0E+04 1.0E+04 NUREG-0016 Rev. I waste Cheutcal Evaporator 1.0E+05 1.0E+05 1.0E+06 NUREG-0016, Rev. I waste Regenerant Chemical waste 1.0E+05 1.0E+05 1.0E+06 NUREG-0016, Rev. 1 O solutions Evaporator 9 g waste m

i. Fraction of Each Processing Stream Expected to be Discharged Over the Life of the Plant WASTE STREAM F8tACTYOM DISCHARGED REFERENCE High purity waste 0.01 NUREG-0016, Rev. 1 ,
Low purity waste 0.10 NUREG-0016. Rev. 1 Chemical waste 0.10 NUREG-0016, Rev. 1 Regenerant solutions waste 0.10 NUPEG-0016, Rev. 1
6. Main Condenser and Turbine Gland Seal Air Removal Systems DESCRIPTION INPUT REFERENCE Holdup time for offgases from the main General Electric company condenser air ejector prior to processing 0.033 by the offgas treatment system (hr)
Treatment system for offgases from Recombination of H2 and O2 General Electric Company condenser air ejector Condensing to Remove H2O Drying Charcoal Adsorption Filtering Offgases from the mechanical vacuum pump Not processed by offgas system General Electric Company Air inleakage per condenser shell (cfat 35 scfm General Electric e pany Number of condenser shells 1 General Electrac Company
TABLE 3.5-1 (Cont'd) INFUT REFERENCE DESCPIPTION I-131 5.6 sci /see @ SJAE outlet General Electrac Company Iodine source term f rom the condenser I-133 41.6 aci/sec 4 SJAE outlet Noble gas 350,000 *C1/sec # 30 min. Mass of charcoal in the charcoal delay 24.6 General Electric Company systems (tons) O' General Electric Company Operating temperature of the delay system (*F)
-90* General Electric Company Dew point temperature of the delay system (*F) 2032 cm 3 /gm 9 70'F and 1 atnisphere General Electric Company Dynamic adsorption coef ficient for xenon (cm3/g)
Dynamic adsorption coefficient for 92.7 cm3/gm 9 70*r ar.d 1 atmosphere General Electric Company krypton (cm3/g) g) [d Not applicable General Electric Company 3 Cryogenic distillation system j Steam flow to turbine gland seal (lb/hr) 18,000 to 30,000 CE Drawing 842E420 f O Source of steam to the turbine gisna Evaporating reactor condensate General Electric Company tw seal taken from downstream of the U) coadensate demineralizer
7. Ventilation and Exhaust Systems INPUT REFERENCE ITEM DESCHIPTION

a. Provisions incorporated to reduce radioactivity releases through ventil- on exhaust syatems:
~~Containment building Exhaust may be filtered as necessary through the Design Criteria 1) drywell purge filter units. DC-vG-01-CP~~
11) Drywell purge 3 50% of full carecity filter units, each with DC-VO-01-CP nedium efficiency filter, 1 upstream HEPA filter, I charcoal adsorber, ar.d 1 downstream HEPA filter.
iii) Auxiliary cuilding Not applicable DC-VA-01-CP iv) Turbine building Not applicable DC-VT-01-CP G G e
O f"\ 13 O O U TABLE 3.5-1 (Cont'd) INPUT REFERENCE ITfT DESCRIPT70N* 2 50% of full capacity filter units, each with DC-VW-01-CP vn Radwaste bu21 dang 1 medium efficiency filter and 1 HEPA filters except for Store Room - no filter DC-VG-01-CP va) Fuel building Not applicable 2 50% of full capacity filter units, each with DC-vL-01-CP vii) Control building 1 medium efficiwney filter and 1 HEPA filter: Laboratory only, remainder has no filter
b. Decontamination factors for iodine and particulates: O Charcoal y HEPA (1) 10 NUPEG-0016, Rev. 1 g W il Containment building and 100 p3 g
drywell purge W 0.0 0.0 wuptc.0016 Rev. 1 - ii) Auxiliary building O ' 0.0 0.0 guptc.0016, Pev. I t1
iii) Turbine butiding (1) 100 0.0 NUREG-0016, Rev. 1 iv) Radwaste building 0.0 0.0 W REG-0016, Rev. 1 v) Fuel building INPUT Release rates for radio- HVAC vent - J38,225 scfm : u! 3,033 fpm for Unit 1 FSAR Figure 9.4-11 c.
~~lodines, noble gases, and HVAC vent - 349,825 scfm and 4,455 fpm for Units 1 6 2 radioactive particulates~~
~~d. Description of release Common station HVAC vent - see Figure 3.5-3 FSAR Fiqure 9.4-11 points, etc.~~
~~30,000 scfm continuously FSAR Figure 9.4-11~~
~~e. Continuous containment purge rate efm (maximum t~~
~~TABLE 3.5-1 (Cont'd)~~
~~8. Solid Rahaste Processing System INPUT AMOUNT (Annual)~~
NORMAL GFERATION ET/ECTS GF GPERATIGNAL (Design Basis) OCCURRENCES REFERENCE ITEM DESCRIPTION Expended deep bed 314 ft 78 drums 78 drums FSAR Table 11.4-1 a. domineralizer bead resins Filter sludges 16,579 lb 229 drums 297 drums FSAR Table 11.4-1 b. Evaporator concentrate = 11,439 gal 381 drums 610 drums FSAR Table 11.4-1 c. Evaptrator boil-out 8,000 gal - 266 drums FSAR Table 11.4-1 d. O Tank bottom sludgen 13,113 lb 187 drums 280 drums FSAR Table 11.4-1 e. I Reactor water cleanup 6,248 lb 97 drums 111 drums FSAR Table 11.4-1 f f. w O Fuel pool filcer 13,000 lb 199 drums 199 drums FSAR Table 11.4-1 9 domineralizer sludge w 1,171 drums 1,821 drums FSAR Table 11,4-1 Total solidified Low-level dry 10,000 ft3 545 drums fSAR Table 11.4-1 radioactive waster
~~9. Fuel Pool Filter Demineralizer S'rstem INPUT REFERENCE Volume of fuel pool and canal 138,000 ft Design Criteria a.~~
~~DC-FC-01-CP Source of pool makeup Cycled condensate DC-FC-Cl-CP b. 4 for Unit 1 DC-FC-01-CF~~
~~c. Number of filter /demineralizers 2 for Unit 2 9 9 e~~
~~@ @ 9 TABLE 3.5-1 (Cont'd)~~
~~INPUT REFEPENCE~~
d. Type of filter /demineralizers Powdered resin DC-FC-01-CP

e. Size of filter /demineralizers Element area of 555 ft DC-FC-01-CP

f. Replacement frequency, batch / day Normal 1 batch /30 days Personal Refueling 1 batch /8 hours communication from vendor 9 waste volume per replacement 1,950 gal Personal communication O from vendor T W U1
. I M h. Activity of regenerant backwaste 129 Ci FSAR Table 12.2-8 M i X W e H i. Activity of fuel pool water: O daring normal operation 8.0 x 10*4 pCi/cm 3 FSAR Table 12.2-6 U during refueling 1.0 x 10-2 pC1/cm3 Sargent 6 Lundy Calculation FC-1 3
t.
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 3.5-2 sCLINTON POWER STATION INPUT FOR BWR-GALE COMPUTER CODE CALCULATION (All Values per Unit) P ARAM1:TE R VALUC
~~'tmal power level (MWtl 2,894 in t capaci t y 1.ietor 0.8~~
. Ial steam tI w (million Ib/hr) 12.451 14as of water in reactor vessel (million Ib) 0.511 Fassten product carry-over fraction 0.001 1.i t ogen ca r r y-ove r fraction 0.02 vicinup dcmineral'ter flow (million Ib/hr) 0.092 i .m lensate demines ..lizer regenerat ion t iine (days)
' 60 io, ,, ,,+ . . .e. tw i t .o r 'bronoh can.lensate domineraliper 1.0 iaid Waste inputs li Jh pusLty waste I' l ow rate (qal/ day) 19,070 Fraction of primary coolant activity 0.10 Fractton discharged 0.01 Collection time (days) 0.63 Process time (days) 0.056 Decontaminatton factors 1,000 I
es 10,000 Othe:a 10,000 Low purity waste Flow rate (gal / day) 6,000 Fract.on of primary coolant activity 0.001 Fraction discharged 0.10 Collection time (days) 1.67 0.460 Process time (days) Decontamination tactors 1 100,000 Cs 100,000 Others 1,000,000 Chemica waste inputs Flow rate ( ga l / day ) 1,000 Fraction of primary coolant activity 0.02 Fraction discharged 0.10 Collection time (days) 7.09 Process time (d sys) 0.650 Decontamination factors 1 100,000 Cs 100,000 Others 1,000,000 14e gene ra n t solut1ons Flow rate (gal / day) 1,750 Fraction of primary coolant activity .058 Fraction discharged d.10 Collection time (days) 7.09 i'rocess tam.- (drcs) 0.650 Decentaranatson factors 1 100,000 Cs 100,000 3thers 1,000,000 3."-32
CPS-ER (O'LS )
~~'q TABLE 3.5-2 (Cont'd)~~
O PARAMETER VALUE Gaseous Waste inputs Gland seal steam flow (thousand Ib/hr) 26.5 Mass of steam in reactor vessel (thousand Ib) 11.1 Gland seal holdup time (br) 0.033 Air ejector off-gas holdup time (hr) 0.033 Containment building Iodine release fraction 0.1 Particulate release fraction 0.01 Turbine building Iodine release fraction 1.0 Particulate release fraction 1.0 Release fraction - special design features 1.0 Gland seal vent iodine partition factor 0.0 Air ejector off-gas iodine partition factor 0.0 Auxiliary building i Iodine release fraction 1.0 Particulate release fraction 1.0 Radwaste building Iodine release fraction 1.0 Particulate release fraction 0.01 Fuel building Iodine release fraction 1.0 Particulate release fraction 1.0
)
Charcoal delay system present Krypton dynamic adsorption c >c tficient (cm3/gm) 70.0 Xenon dynamic adsorption coefficient (cm3/gm) 1,160.0 Number of main condenser shells 3 Mass of charcoal (short tons) 98.4 Onsite laundry present
~~,v) 3.5-33 L-~~
T70BLE 3. 5 -3 LIQUID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM COMPONENTS AND DESIGN PARAMETERS DES I GN DESCRIPTJ CN CAPACITY DESICN TEMPE RATU RE HATERIALS Cr (equipment numbersO) (qal) P RES S U P E (
~~F) CONSTRUCTION QU ANTITY TANKS haste Collector (lWE0lT, 2WE0lT) 30,000 Full Water 150 304 SS 2~~
50,000 Full Water 150 304 SS 2 Waste Surge (lWE02T, 2WE02T) 30,000 Full Water 150 304 SS 3 Naste Sample (OWE 02TA, B, C)* 25,000 rull water 150 304 SS 2 Excess water (OWE 0lTA, B)* rioor Drain Collector (lWrolT, 2Wr01T) 25,000 Full Water 150 304 SS 2 O 150 304 SS 93 Floor Drain surge (lwr 02T, 2Wr02T) 25,000 rull Water U) 2 yd 25,000 rull Water 150 316 SS Floor Drain Evaporator reed (lWF03T, 2Wr03T) lf 2 15,000 full Water 150 304 SS 30 2 Floor Drain Evaporator Monitor (lwr 04T, 2Wr04T) ,
)#
Chemical Waste Collector (1W201T, 2W20lT) 35,000 rull Water 150 316 FS hk 2 v) Chemical Waste Processing (1WZO2T, 2W202T) 25,000 Full Water 150 316 SS %s 2 Chemical Waste Evaporator Monitor (0WZ0lT)* 15,000 Full water 150 316 SS 1 Laundry Drain Collector (CWYOITA, B)* 2,%00 Full Water 150 Carb. Stl. 2 Laundry Sample (0WYO2TA, B)* 2,500 Full Water 150 Carb. Stl. 2 NET DEVELCPED DCSIGN FLOW DESIGN HEAD (qpm) (ft) PUMPS Waste Collector (lWE01P, 2WE0lP) 300 313 2 300 313 2 Waste Surge Tank (lWE02P, 2WE02P) a See oA note on second page of table. G G e
~~'J x.J %)~~
TABLE 3. 5 -? (Cont'd) NET DEVELOPE 9 DESIGN FLOW DESIGN HEAD DESCRIPTION - ( g pr.,) {ft) QUANTITY (equipment numbers *) i UMl'S 300 100 1 Waste Sample Tank (0WE02PA, B, C)* 300 100 2 Excess Water Tank (0WE01PA, B)* 300 263 2 Floor Drain Collector Tank (lWF0lP, 2WF0lP) 300 263 2 Floor Drain Surge Tank (1WF02P, 2WF02P) 100 178 2 Floor Drain Evaporator Feed Tank (lWF03P, 2WF03P) 150 1 70 2 Floor Drain Evaporator Monitor Tank (IWF04P, 2WF04P) 100 178 O 2 Chemical Waste Collector Tank (1WZ0lP. 2WZ0lP) N 100 178 to W Chemical Waste Process Tank (lWZ02P, 2WZO2P) I
2 f'1 W 150 170 I 1 Chemical Waste Evaporator Monitor Tank (OWZOIP)* W
^
W 79 Laundry Drain Collector Tank (OWY0lPA, B)* 25 O W 2 100 127 2 Laundry Drain Sample Tank (0WYO2PA, Bl* DESIGN DESIGN TEMPERATURE STEAM REQ'D PRESSURE FLOW (psil (qpm) (* F) (lb/hr) PROCESSING EQUIPMENT 300 120 -- 2000 3 Waste r11ter (0WE01FA, B, C)* 300 104 -- 1500 3 waste Demineralizer (0WE01DA, B, C)* 30 300 18,800 75 1 Chemical Waste Evaporator (0WZ0lS)* 30 300 18,800 75 2 Floor Drain Evaporator (lWF015, 2WF01S) a Equipment numbers followed by asterisk (*) are for equipment common to Units 1 and 2. In general, equipment "2" denotes dedication for Unit 2 I service and a numbers prefixed by a "1" are normally dedicated for Unit service. A "0" denotes equipment common to both units.
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 3.5-4 EXPECTED INPUTS TO THE LIQUID RADWASTE SYSTEM DURING NORMAL AND ANTICIPATED OPERATING CONDITIONS OF CLINTON POWER STATION - UNITS 1 AND 2 1.0 FORMAL OPERATION"' 1.1 Expected Normal Volumes To Equipment Drain Subsystem For Two Units Operating Equipment drain sumps and tanks 14,800 gal / day plus h ywell floor sumps Demineralizer backwashes condensate 6,480 gal /3.75 days Radwaste 3,000 gal /7 days Ultrasonic resin cleaner 33,000 gal / day (average) Decant from sludge tar.ks Phase separators 4,000 gal /3 days Fuel pool F/D sludge 4,000 gal /7 days Waste sludge 3,000 gal / day Spent resin 1,000 gal (infrequent) Average daily total 40,060 gallons Maximum single day total due to coincidence of normal loads (consisting of normal equipment drain plus two condensate badwarh, one radwaste backwash, four URC rinses, all decants, plus one extra filter (backwash) 103,614 gallons Minimum single day (following above maximum coincidences no backwashes, no decants, two URC rinses) 33,000 gallons 1.2 Fxpected Normal Volumes To Floor Drain Subsystem For Two Units In Oneration Floor drains 15,000 gal / day Decantates 2,000 gal / day Average daily total 17,000 gal / day Maximum coincidence (add 3,000 20,000 gal / day gallons decant) Minimum 10,000 gal / day
*Per GE Plant Requirement Documents No. 22A2739A and 22A2707 Envitonmental Protection Branch, Directorate of Regulatory Operations, USAEC, 1973, 'Results of Independent Measurements of Radioactivity in Process Steams and Ef flutmts at BWR's"r draft "As low as reasonably achievable" Regulatcry Guideer and operating erperience data.
The maximum and minimum values due to coincidence represent volumes that can occur during normal operation as a result of variations in scheduling of operations outside of the radwaste systems. The probability of these events is difficult to estimate, but they can happen so they must be anticipated. It should be noted that if the maximum coincidence volume occurs in a single day, the minimum must occur on the following day. Therefore, the average daily volume over any 3- to 4-day period of normal operation should be very close to the stated average. The uncertainty of the stated expcted volumes is est imated at f 204. 3.5-36
CPS-ER(OLS) p TABLE 3.5-4 (Cont'd) \, /
)
1.3 Expected Normal Volumes Tu Chemical Waste Subsystem For Two Units Ope ra ting Regeneration solution Cor.densate polisher 7,025 gal /3.75 days Radwaste demineralizer 5,000 gal /7 days Sample and decontaminacion drains 1,000 gal / day Laundry detergent waste 1,000 gal / day Average daily total 4,587 nal/ day Maximum due to coincJoence 10,000 gallons Minimum due to coincidence 2,000 gallons 1.4 In normal operation, the Laundry waste Subsystem is expected to receive 1000 gallons per day of detergent water for two units in operation. The maximum normal volume is expected to be 2000 gallons per day for two units for a 30-day period of time. 2.0 ABNORMAL OCCURRENCES 2.1 One Unit Startup (maximum flows) Equipment drains Maximum day 100,000 gallons Maximum 3-day average 50,000 gallons Floor drains ps Maximum day 100,000 gallons ( /, Maximum 3-day average 50,000 galicas Con'.ensate polisher Maximum regeneration rate (4/ day) 28,100 gallons Maximum backwash (4/ day) 25,900 gallons Maximum ultrasonic cleaning (4/ day) 66,000 gallons 2.2 Outages Reactor hydrotest 38,090 gallons Reactor expansion water 26,000 gallons CRD testing 18,000 gallons various system vents and drains 10,000 gallons Laundry 5,000 gal / day /30 days 2.3 Other Occurences, Maxima Condensate polisher regenerants (4/ day) 28,100 gallons Condensate polisher backwash (4/ day) 25,900 gallons RWCU backwash (4/ day) ,200 gallons Radweste filter backwash (4/ day) 5,000 gallons Maximum leak rate Equipment drains (20 gpm) 28,800 gal / day Floor drains (20 qpm) 28,800 gal / day /"'N 3.5-37 8
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 3.5-5 g DESIGN-BASIS ACTIVITY CONCENTRATIONS IN MAJOR LIQUID RADWASTE INPUT STREAMS (All Values in pCi/cm ) EQUIPMENT FLOOR LAUNDRY CliEMICAL WASTE DRAIN CRAIN DRAIN SUBSYSTEM SUBSYSTEM SUBSYSTEf1 S_UBSYSTE!! IiUCLIDE F-18 2.0 - 4 4.3 - 3 1.2 -3 2.1 - 6 Na-24 8.4 - 4 2.1 - 3 6.2 - 4 1.1 - 6 P-32 1.8 - 4 2.1 - 5 6.2 - 6 1.1 - 8 Cr-51 7.2 - 3 5.3 - 4 1.5 - 4 2.7 - 7 Mn-54 1.0 ' 4.3 - 5 1.2 - 5 2.1 - 8 Pn-56 3.6 - 3 5.3 - 2 1.5 - 2 2.7 - 5 Co-58 1.1 - 1 5.3 - 3 1.5 - 3 2.7 - 6 Fe-59 1.4 - 3 8.5 - 5 2.5 - 5 4.3 - 8 Co-60 1.4 - 2 5.3 - 4 1.5 - 4 2.7 - 7 Ni-65 2.1 - 5 3.2 - 4 9.2 - 5 1.6 - 7 Zn-65 5.1 - 5 2.1 - 6 6.2 - 7 1.1 - 9 Zn-69m 1.1 - 5 3.2 - 4 9.2 - 6 1.6 - 8 Zn-69 1.1 - 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Br-83 2.4 - 2 1.9 - 2 5.5 - 3 9.7 - 6 Br-84 1.1 - 2 3.9 - 2 1.1 - 2 2.0 - 5 Br-85 7.0 - 4 2.7 - 2 7.7 - 3 1.3 - 5 Sr-89 6.3 - 2 3.5 - 3 1.0 - 3 1.8 - 6 Y-89m 6.3 - 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sr-90 6.9 - 3 2.7 - 4 1.1 - 4 1.3 - 7 Y-90 6.5 - 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sr-91 2.2 - 2 8.6 - 2 2.5 - 2 4.3 - 5 Y-91m 1.3 - 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Y-91 1.1 - 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sr-92 1.1 - 2 1.5 - 1 4.3 - 2 7.5 - 5 Y-92 1.1 - 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Zr-95 8.8 - 4 4.6 - 5 1.3 - 5 2.3 - 8 Nb-95m 1.6 - 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Mb-95 1.1 - 3 4.8 - 5 1.4 - 5 2.4 - 7 "r-97 1.7 - 5 3.8 - 5 1.1 - 5 1.9 - 8 Nb-97m 1.7 - 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nb-97 1.7 - 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Mo-99 4.5 - 2 2.6 - 2 7.4 - 3 1.3 - 5 Tc-99m 5.5 - 2 1.0 - 1 3.0 - 2 5.2 - 5 Tc-99 3.1 - 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tc-101 1.4 - 3 2.3 - 1 6.8 - 2 1.1 - 4 Ru-103 3.6 - 4 2.2 - 5 6.5 - 6 1.1 - 8 Rh-103m 3.6 - 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ru-106 7.3 - 5 3.0 - 6 8.6 - 7 1.5 - 9 Rh-106 7.3 - 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ag-110m 1.5 - 3 6.4 -5 1.8 - 5 3.2 - 8 Ag-110 2.0 - 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.5-38
cpi-ER(OLS) TABLE 3.5-5 (Cont'd) f EQUIPMEI;T FLOOR LAUNDRY 'N ' CHEMICAL WASTE DRAIN DRAIN DRAIN SUBSYSTEM SUBSYSTEM SUBSYSTEM SUBSYSTEM NUCLIDE _ Te-129m 5.9 - 3 3.9 , 1.1 - 4 2.0 - 7 Te-129 3.8 - 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1-129 2.4 - 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 1-131 1.6 + 0 1.6 - 2 4.6 - 3 8.0 - 6 Te-132 3.5 - 2 1.7 - 2 4.9 - 3 8.6 - 6 I-132 2.3 - 1 1.6 - 1 4.6 - 2 8.0 - 5 I-133 1.2 - 1 1.1 - 2 3.1 - 3 5.4 - 6 I-134 1.5 - 1 3.4 - 1 9.8 - 2 1.7 - 4 Cs-134 4.6 - 3 1.8 - 4 5.2 - 5 9.1 - 8 I-135 5.6 - 1 1.6 - 1 4.6 - 2 8.0 - 5 Cs-135 2.1 - 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cs-136 9.1 - 4 1.1 - 4 3.4 - 5 5.4 - 8 Cs-137 7.2 - 3 2.8 - 4 8.0 - 5 1.4 - 7 Ba-137m 6.7 - 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cs-137 4.0 - 3 2.9 - 1 8.3 - 2 1.4 - 4 Ba-139 8.4 - 3 2.3 - 1 6.8 - 2 1.2 - 4 Ba-140 7.9 - 2 1.0 - 2 3.0 - 3 5.2 - 6 La-140 7.8 - 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ba-141 2.2 - 3 2.8 - 1 8.0 - 2 1.4 - 4 La-141 2.2 - 3 0 0 0.0 0.0 Ce-141 2.2 - 3 4.5 - 5 1.3 - 5 2.3 - 8 Ba-142 1.2 - 3 2.6 - 1 7.4 - 2 1.3 - 4 La-142 1.2 - 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 (] As Cc-142 3.6 - 5 4.1 - 5 1.2 - 5 2.1 - 8 Pr-143 3.9 - 4 4.4 - 5 1.3 - 5 2.2 - 8 Co-144 9.8 - 4 4.0 - 5 1.2 - 5 2.0 - 8 Pr-144 9.8 - 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nd-147 1.1 - 4 1.6 - 5 4.6 - 6 8.0 - 9 Pm-147 3.5 - 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 W-187 2.0 - 3 3.2 - 3 9.2 - 4 1.6 - 6 Np-239 4.2 - 1 2.9 - 1 8.3 - 2 1.4 - 4 TOTAL 4.6 + 0 2.9 + 0 8.3 - 1 1.4 - 3 Note: The following assumptions were used to determine the design-basis activity concentrations in the major liquid waste input streams:
a. Maximum anticipated concentrations or radionuclides are present in reactor water and steam (see FSAR Section 12.2).

b. Drain systems receive liquids with the highest concentra-tions (e.g., the containment building drain system re-ceives 100% concentration of reactor water quality).

c. Processing equipment operates at maximum anticipated rates of flow. l g- d. Where more than one stream flows through a processing I
'q)' system, the most radioactive stream flows at its maximum ; anticipated rate. The remaining capacity of the system is composed of the other strears in order of decreasing I radionuclide concentration. 3.5-39 l l
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 3.5-6 EXPECTED RELEASES OF RADIONUCLIDES h PROM NORMAL OPERATIONS AND OPERATIONAL OCCURRENCES COMPARED TO 10 CPR 20 LIMITS CONCENTRATION IN A ANNUAL DISCHARGE TYPICAL DISCHARGE FRACTION OF RATE" (Ci/Yr AFTER DILUTION b 10 CFR 20 NUCLIDE PER REACTOR) (UCi/cc) MPC VALUEc CORROSION AND ACTIVATION PRODUCTS Na-24 5.59-03 2.1-09 1.1-05 P-32 1.86-04 7.0-11 3.5-06 Cr-51 5.92-03 2.3-09 ].1-06 Mn-54 7.75-05 2.3-11 2.3-07 Mn-56 5.76-03 2.2-09 2.2-05 Fe-55 1.12-03 4.2-10 2.1-07 Fe-59 3.07-05 1.2-11 2.0-07 Co-58 2.11-04 5.5-11 5.5-07 Co-60 4.49-04 1.2-10 2.4-06 Ni-65 3.42-05 1.3-11 1.3-07 Cu-64 1.55-02 5.8-09 1.9-05 Zn-65 2.21-04 8.1-11 4.1-07 Zn-69m 1.08-03 4.0-10 5.8-06 Zn-69 W-187 1.12-03 1.98-04 4.2-10 7.3-11 2.1-07 1.0-06 h Np-239 5.52-03 2.1-09 2.1-05 FISSION PRODUCTS Br-83 4.05-04 1.5-10 5.0-05 Br-84 3.00-05 1,2-11 --- Rb-89 1.78-05 6.7-12 --- Sr-89 1.04-04 3.9-11 1.3-06 Sr-91 1.77-03 6.6-10 9.6-06 Y-91m 1.11-03 4.1-10 1.4-07 Y-91 5.49-05 2.0-11 6.8-07 Sr-92 1.23-03 4.6-10 6.6-06 Y-92 2.54-03 9.7-10 1.6-05 Y-93 1.83-03 6.9-10 2.3-05 Nb-98 6.53-05 2.5-11 --- Mo-99 1.61-03 6.1-10 3.1-06 Tc-99m 7.00-03 2.6-09 4.3-07 Tc-101 2.06-05 7.8-12 --- Ru-103 2.03-05 7.4-12 9.2-08 Rh-103m 2.03-05 7.3-12 7.3-10 Tc-104 5.77-05 2.1-11 --- Ru-105 4.55-05 1.7-10 1.7-06 Rh-105m 4.57-04 1.7-10 --- Rh-105 1.11-04 4.1-11 4.1-07 3.5-40
CPS-ER(OLS) (3 . TABLE 3.5-6 (Cont'd) \/ CONCENTRATION OF TYPICAL DISCHARGE FRACTION OF ANNUAL" DISCHARGE AFTER DILUTIONb 10 CFR 20 RATE (Ci/Yr NUCLIDE PER REACTOR) (uCi/cc) MPC VALUEc Ru-106 3.33-06 1.3-12 --- Te-129m 4.01-05 1.5-11 5.1-07 Te-129 2.57-05 9.5-12 1.2-08 Te-131m 7.03-05 2.6-11 4.4-07 Te-131 1.28-05 4.8-12 --- I-131 8.49-03 3.3-09 5.4-05 I-132 3.82-03 1.4-09 7.1-06 I-133 1.50-02 5.6-09 1.4-04 I-134 1.38-03 5.2-10 8.6-07 Cs-134 3.06-04 1.2-10 2.9-06 I-135 9.02-03 3.4-09 8.6-04 C.s-136 7.18-04 2.7-10 2.9-06 Cs-137 2.05-04 7.7-11 1.9-06 Ba-137m 1.91-04 7.3-11 --- Cs-138 5.07-04 1.9-10 --- Ba-139 4.25-04 1.6-10 --- Ba-140 3.69-04 1.4-10 4.6-06 La-140 6.98-05 2.6-11 1.3-06 La-141 1.28-04 4.8-11 1.6-05 (~}
~~' Ce-141 3.18-05 1.2-11 1.4-07 La-142 2.91-04 1.1-10 ---~~
Ce-143 2.15-05 7.9-12 2.0-07 Pr-143 3.77-05 1.5-11 2.9-07 Ce-144 3.32-06 1.3-12 --- All Others 6.54-05 2.4-11 --- Total (execpt tritium 1.03-01 3.9-08 --- Trititum 1.50+01 5.6-06 1.9-03
~~" Based on the assumption that all chemical waste would be discharged after treatment.~~
~~b Based on the following assumptions:~~
1. Annual radwaste discharge volume is 10' gallons per recator.

2. Maximum radwaste discharge rate is 300 gpm.

3. Dilution flow rate is 210,600 gpm.

4. Release batch is 20,000 gallons.
c Based on values of the maximum permissible concentration as ("% \_) given in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table II- no values are listed for some radionuclides. 3.5-41
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 3.5-7 GASEOUS RADIATION RELEASE RATES O (All Values in Curies per Year per Unit) CONTAINMENT TUPBINE AUXILI AM PADWASTt CLAND AIR MECH VAC BL[C . BLOC. SEAL EJFCTrk PI'MP TOTA: NlrLIDt: BLIC.a PLDG. H Al . )CI;NS 1.2-01 2.2-02 1.1-02 0.0 0.0 8.6-02 2.4-01 I - 131 1.1-03 3.0-01 1.5-01 0.0 0.0 9.4-01 3.0+00 I - 131 1.5-02 1.6+00 W[tLI: GAsE# 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8*01 0.0 4.3+vi Ar - 41 1.5+01 0.0
.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 kr - 03m 0.0 2.4+01 2.5+01 3.0+00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Fr - 85m 1.0+00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1+02 0.0 2.1+02 Kr - 85 0.0 0,0 6.3+01 6.1+01 2.0+00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Er - 67 0.0 9.5+01 9.1+01 3.0+00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Fr - HH 1.0+00 5.8+02 2.0+00 2.9+01 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.1+02 Kr - 89 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0+00 0.0 2.5+00 Xe - 131m 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Xe - 133m 0.0 0.0 1.3+03 1.8+03 Ke - 133 2.7*01 1.5+02 0.3+01 2.2+02 0.0 8.0+00 4.0+02 4.5+01 5.3*02 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.9+02 (e - 135m 1.5+01 3.3+02 9.4*03 2.8+02 0.0 0.0 5.0+02 1.2+03 Xe - 135 3.3+01
~~1. 3 +02 8.3+01 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3+03 Xe - 137 4.5+J1 1.0+ 0 3 1.0+03 2.0+00 0.0 0.0 0.0~~
.w - 138 2.0+00 1.0*03 6.0+00 7.3+03 TOTAL NOB 12 GASES FARTICULATES 9.0-04 9.0-04 7.0-06 0.0 0.0 1.0-06 1.8-03 Cr - 51 2 . 0-Ot>
Mn - 54 4.0-06 6.0-04 1.0-03 4.0-05 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6-03 Co - %8 1.0-06 1.0-01 2.0-04 2.0-06 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2-03 1.0-04 3.0-04 3.0-06 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0-04 Fe - 59 9.0-07 Co - 00 1.0-05 1.0-03 4.0-03 7.0-05 0.0 0.0 5.6-07 5.1-03 2n - 65 1.0-05 6.0-03 4.0-03 3.0-06 0.0 0.0 3.4-07 1.0-02 2.0-05 .0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0-03 sr - M 3.0-07 6.0-03 Sr - % 3.0-OF3 2.0-05 7.0-06 .0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7-05 Zr - '95 3.0-06 4.0-05 7.0-04 s 0-06 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.5-04 6.0-06 9.0-03 4.0-08 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.0-03 N12 - 95 1.0-05 Mo - 99 6.0 05 2.0-03 6.0-02 3.0-08 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2-02 5.0-05 4.0-03 1.0-08 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.1-03 Pu - 101 2.0-06 0.0 2.0-06 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0-06 Aq - 110m 4.0-09 7.0-07 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,3-04 Sb - 124 2.0-07 1.3-04 3.0-05 Cs - 134 7.0-06 2.0-04 4.0-03 2.4-05 0.0 0.0 3.2-06 4.2-03 1.0-04 0.0 0.0 1.9-06 5.0-04 Cs - 136 1.0-06 4.0-04 0.0 4.0-05 0.0 0.0 8.9-0b 6.1-03 Cs - 137 1.0-05 1.0-03 5.0-03 1.0-02 2.0-02 4.0-08 0.0 00 1.1-05 3.0-02 14 4 - 140 2.0-05 2.0-06 1.0-02 7.0-04 7.0-08 0.0 0.a 0.0 1.1-02 Ce - 141 l.N-01 1VTA t. l' ART !< 1 I ATF5 H- l r . l e.s wd f e m t ,at ta n - t y l l d i n. vent i l at s ' .n syw em e . 1+01 H-t t. l e a.,r a s t e ne . x,nt ai nm. nt tiu t i d i nq w nt e l .st ier. .1+01 ut al H-t ti le i t v i a qam ou pet t>was 4.4+01
~~~NH* -14 tel.a..a vs.a m.un rond.n wr offaa .u t em =~~
~~a-, four t i me, pe . u.~~
%e l. 3s.- i n i ud..s r. lea r i f t i wn 1: yw ' I e urqin t approxi w b .s t e m r e t t. ane tw & , t riar. l.I L t/ye #.0 .sppe a r l t's Ale s nti l Jau r 4 ti.16 O
3.5-42 r
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 3.5-8 () OFF-GAS SYSTEM MAJOR EQUIPMENT ITEMS Recombiner (2 required, contains preheater, catalyst, and condenser sections) Carbcn steel shell: Shell length, all plant sizes - approximately 23 ft Shell o.d., all plant sizes - approximately 50 in. Total unit height, all plant sires - approximately 116 in Design pressure: 350 psig Design temperature: 450' F Code of Construction. ASME Section VIII, Division 1 Preheater Section Shell and tube heat exchanger Tubes - stainless steel, rolled into stainless steel tube sheet Tube-side design pressure: 350 psig Design temperature: 450' F Catalyst Section Catalyst support: stainless steel Design temperature: 900' F g- Catalyst: Precious methl on ceramic or metal base V) Off-Gas Condenser Section Shell and heat exchanger Tubes - stainless steel, rolled into stainless steel tube sheet Tube-side design pressure: 350 psig Design temperature: 900* F Cooler Condenser (2 required) Shell and tube heat exchanger, carbon steel vessel Shell length - 10 ft maximum Shell o.d. - 2 to 6 in maximum Shell-side design pressure - 350 psig Shell-side design temperature - 32' to 250' F Tubes - stainless steel, welded into stainless tube sheet Tube-side design pressure - 100 psig Tube-side design temperature - 32* to 150' F Code of Construction: TEMA Class C 3.5-43
CPS- E R (OI,S ) TABI,E 3.5-8 (Cont'd) O Deniccant Dryer Smid (2 required) Approximate skid size: length 12.5 ft, width 6 ft, height 9 ft 1:ach skid consists of one Desiccant Vessel and associated valves, piping, and instruments. The Desiccant Vessel is of carbon steel approximately 3.5 ft o.d. by 4 ft high (straiqht side), and contains approximately 30 ft3 of molecular sieve desiccant and approximately 5.0 ft3 of activated charcoal. Vessel design pressure - 350 psig Piping and valving design pressure - 1050 psig Design temperature - 32* to 500* P Code of Construction: ASME Section VIII and ANSI B31.10 Gas Cooler (1 required) Stainless steel exposed-tube heit exchanger Maximum dimensions: length 12 it, uidth 3 ft, height 6 ft Design pressure - 1050 psig Design temperature - -20 to 250" P Code of Construction: ASMP, Section VIII, Division 1 Gas Cooler Heaters 2 - 2 5 kW in parallel 480 V - 3 phase - 60 Hz Charcoal Adsorbers (1 each required) Carbon steel vessels, filled with 24.6 tons of activated charcoal Height - approximately 24 ft Outside diameter - approximately 8 ft Design pressure - 350 psig Design temperatore - -20 to 250* P Code of Construction: ASME Section VIII, Division 1 Seismicly designed to a static seismic coefficient of 0.2 g horizontal and 0 g vertical. The support elements are designed to AISC Manual of Steel Construction, 7th Edition. Filter (1 required) Carbon steel ve_ssel, with removal HEPA filter Height (includes legs) - approximately 6 ft Outside diameter - approximately 2 ft Flow - 250 scfm at 1.0 in H 2 O gauge Design pressure - 350 psig Design temperature - -20* to 150? F Code of Construction: ASME Section VIII, Division 1 0 3.5-44
a-CPS-ER(OLS) 1 J () TABLE 3.5-8 (Cont'd) Regenerator (1 required) l The regenerator skid approximate dimensions are as follows: Length - 15 ft Width - 7 ft 6 in. ! !!cight - 11 ft The regenerator skid consists of the following equipment i pieces, plus associated piping, valves, and instrumen-
~~tation~~

~~Regenerator Chiller (2 required)~~
; Carbon steel shell, stainless teel tubes welded into stainless steel tube sheet Shell-side design pressure - 50 psig Shell-side design temperature - 32' to 500* F Tube-side design pressure - 100 psig Tube-side design temperature - 32' to 500* F Code of Construction: TEMA Class C Regeneration Blower (2 required) ; Mechanical blower - 10 hp motor, 480 V - 3 phase, l 60 Hz I
~~() Design pressure - 20 psig Design temperature - 32' to 150' F Code of Construction: Seller's standard Material: Seller's standard Regenerator Heater (2 required)~~
Enclosed element, Calrod-type Each heater is 24 kW - 480 V - 3 phase, 60 Hz Design pressure - 50 psig Design te.perature - 32* to 1000* F Code of Conscruction: Seller's standard j Glycol Cooler (1 required)
Skid-mounted assembly Approximate size is as follows: , Length - 27 ft Width - 8 ft Height - 12 ft The Glycol Cooler consists of the following equipment pieces, plus associated piping, valves, and instrumen-i tation: Glycol Tank (1 required) ! Carbon steel tank - approximatel*f 1000 gallons ! Height - approximately 7.5 ft ! 1 l- 3.5-45 4 t g - + , , - - * ,e. . r r -ww *- +,m--.e *,,, * +-.- =~---e,--+-er~ -w-
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 3.5-8 (Cont'd) O Inside diameter - approximately 5 ft Design pressure - Glycol filled and open to atmosphere Design temperature - 32' F Code of Construction: API 650 Refrigeration Machines (3 required) Freon cycle refrigeration machine Duty - approximately 9 x 10 4 Btu /hr (each) Type - Dunham-Bush Model PCB-020DQ or equivalent Motor - open, drip-proof, 20 hp - 480 V - 3 phase - 60 Hz Codes of Construction: Refrigerant piping - ANSI B31.5 Glycol and cooling water piping - ANSI B31.1.0 Heat Exhanger, refrigerant side - ASME Section VIII, Division 1
~~'ondenser, cooling water 4.de - Seller's standard Coupressor and motor -~~
Seller's standard Glycol Pump and Motor Drive (3 required) Duty 65 gpm at 50 psi total dynamic heat Design temperature - 32* F Motor - open, drip-proof, 5 hp, 480 V - 3 phase - 60 Hz Code of Construction: Seller's standard Material: cast iron Local Panel (1 required) Contains control functions for the Glycol Cooler i Local Panels (1 each required) Contains control functions for, respectively, the upstream and downstream portions of the main process stream. Local Panel (1 required) Contains control functions for regenerator skid. l 1 1 l l 3.5-46 hj . l l l
_ - . _ _ . . . . _ . . _ _ _ . _ ~ . _ . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ -_ . . . r CPS-ER(OLS) O TABLE 3.5-9 DESIGN-BASIS NOBLE RADIOGAS SOURCE TERMS SOURCE TERM AT SOURCE TERM AT t = 0 min. t = 30 min. IIALF-LIFE (pCi/sec) (pCi/sec) ISOTOPE Kr-83 1.86 hr 3.4 E3 2.9 E3 Kr-85m 4.4 hr 6.1 E3 5.6 E3 a 10 to 20a Kr-85 10.74 hr 10 to 20 Kr-87 76.0 min 2.0 E4 1.5 E4 Kr-88 2.79 hr 3.0 E4 1.8 E4 Kr-89 3.18 min 1.3 E4 1.8 E2 Kr-90 32.3 sec 2.8 ES 0.0 Kr-91 8.6 sec 3.3 E5 0.0 Kr-92 1.84 sec 3.3 ES 0.0 Kr-93 1.29 sec 9.3 E4 0.0 Kr-94 1.0 sec 2.3 E4 0.0 () Kr-95 Kr 0.5 1.0 sec sec 2.1 E3 1.4 El 0.0 0.0 Xe-131m 11.96 day 1.5 El 1.5 El Xe-133m 2.26 day 2.9 E2 2.8 E2 Xe-133 8.2 E3 8.2 E3 5.27gegy Xe-135m 15.7 min 2.6 E4 6.9 E3 Xe-137 3.82 min 1.5 E5 6.7 E2 Xe-138 14.2 min 8.9 E4 2.1 E4 Xe-139 40.0 sec 2.8 E5 0.0 Xe-140 13.6 sec 3.0 ES 0.0 Xe-141 1.72 sec 2.4 ES 0.0 Xe-142 1.22 sec 7.3 E4 0.0 Xe-143 0.96 sec 1.2 E4 0.0 Xe-144 9.0 sec 5.6 E2 0.0 TOTALS Approx. 2.5 E6 Approx. 1.0 E5
~~" Estimated from experimental observations.~~
O 3.5-47
TABLE 3.5-10 SOLID RADWASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM COMPONENTS AND DESIGN PARAMETERS cts:cN DESCRIPTION CAPACITY DESION TEMPERATURE MATERIALS CF (equipment numbers") (gal) FPESSURE (*F) CONSTFUCTICN OUANTIT7 TANKS Phase separator (lWX0iT, 2WXO3T) 10,000 Full Water 110 304 SS 2 Concentrated waste (OWX0lTA, B)* 5,000 Full mater 230 Incoloy 825 2 8,500 Full Water 150 104 SS 1 spent resin (OWX04T)* Waste sludge tOWX02TA, Bl* 10,000 Full Water 150 304 SS 2 Fuel pool F/D sludge (1WX027, 2WX02T) 10,000 Full Water 150 104 SS 2 2 waste mixing ar.d decanting (OWK06TA, Bl* 60 f t3 650 ft I T 1 Cement silo (CWXO9T)* U3 3 3 W l Sodram silicate (CWXO7T)
~~650 ft ET1 W I Catalyst W~~
e i O b F NET LEVELOPED C3 @ CESION FLCW CESIGN HEAD * (grm) fft) PUMPS Phase separator sludge tank sludge 10 ') 200 2 Fuel pool F/D sludge tank slud7e 103 200 2 Waste sludge tank sludge 100 56 2 75 55 2 RWCU F/D backwash tank 75 70 1 Spent resin tank decant Phase separator tank decant 75 70 2 Fuel pool F/D sludge tank decant 75 55 2 100 20 2 Concentrated waste tank Waste sludge tank decant 75 90 2 Spent resin tank sludge 100 173 1
~~'See note on second page o* table. # 9 e~~
~~'T bs )' s (U~~
TABLE 3.5-10 (Cont'd) NET DEVE14 PED DESIGN HEAD DESCRIPTION DESICN FI4d (ft) QUANTITY (equipment nambers") DRUMMING EQUIPMENT 2.02 gal /100 rev. 10 2 Waste mixing tank sludge pump (OWX21PA, 8)* 10 gpm 50 2 Waste mixing tank decant pump (OWX25PA, B)* 5.2 gal /100 rev. 10 2 waste mixing pump (OWX24PA, B)* 2 Fillport assembly (OWX14SA, Bl*
~
Remote drum capper (OWX15sA, Bl* 2 static mixer (OWX13SA, B)* O CAPA'ITY q W Cf) e g W D3 i HYDRAULIC BALER A --- y
~~@ 1 Dry waste compaction (OWX16S)* m~~
~~O p~~
~~DPUM HANDLING EQUIPMENT~~
~~$000 lb b~~
2 Drum haadling cart (OWX185)* 5 tons 1 Drum handling bridge erane (OWX175)* OTHER EQUIPMENT 0.26 gal /100 rev. 150 1 Sodium silicate tank pump (OWX27P)* 0.056 gal /LJO rev. 120 1 Catalyst tank pump (OWX28Pl* 1 Cement omg filter (oWX10Fl* 55 gal - 17H
~~- Packaging container In general, equipment numbers~~
~~quipment numbers followed by asterisk (*) are for equipment common~~
*2* to Units 1dedication denotes and 2. for Unit 2 service. A *0" prefixed by a "1" are normally dedicated for Unit I service and a denotes equipment common to both units.
TABLE 3.5-11 ANNUAL WEIGHT, VOLUME, AND ACTIVITY OF RADWASTE SHIPPED FROM THE CLINTON POWER STATION - UNITS 1 AND 2 SOLIDIFIED CCNTAINERS VOLUME SHIPPED TYPE OF WASTE F IOACTIVITY (Ci) WEIGHT (lb/yr) ( f t 3/yr) PER YEAR Deep Bed Resins a 648 162 Filter Sludges Equipment Drain 10 20,580 284 U RC a 13,746 190 Evaporator Bottoms Cond. Polisher Regenerants 864 16,466 566 Radwaste Domin. Regenerants 49 5,545 161 Floor Drains 3,926 2,023 61 g Evaporator Boil-Out a f 12,000 gal 400 h I f y Tank Bottom Sludges URC a 17,064 tu 245 A3 o Floor Drain a 9,437 132 g RWCU Sludge 12,000 12,696 195 h w I'uel Pool F/D Sludge 430 26,000 398 Total Solidified 17,220 2,814 Dry Active Waste Negligible 20,000 1,090
~~" Activity for this item is not estimated separately, but is included as part of the other items.~~
~~6 4 9~~
. _ . - - - .. ~ _ -. -.. -. . - . . . .- .. - . - _ . ...- _
4 l ! CPS-ER(OLS) I d TABLE 3.5-12 SOLID RADWASTE SYSTEM i l STORAGE AREA DESIGN CAPACITIES _ i ! NUMBER OF AREAS DESIGN CAPACITY STORAGE AREA 1 1180 drums 'i Radioactive Drum 1 Dry Uncompacted 100 ft3 [ Waste 1 1 200 drums Empty Drum a Radioactive Drum- 430 drums 1 (Future) i Large Uncompacted --- Waste As Required i I i i O h I a i 1
\
i l O 1 l
~~-3.5-51 4~~
e
.-c..au--, . . - - , , . + v. + m, ...e. ..,-y.. - -.._ y, -- ------,p,-----.,.,y-, ,,.,,m, ,.y.,. . , , ym_w.,. ,.. m r,m,% ,.w.r,,,,, ,w,,A, n.m,._ww,3.,,,.c -r.
~~e WASTE WASTE WASTE COLLECTOR = > _ I ER ALIZER TANKS I I FLOOR FLOOR~~
~~/ FLOOR D R AIN DR AIN~~
~~D R A.,J COLLECTOR EVAPORATOR TANKS FEED T ANK EVAPORATOR N~~
~~CHEMIC AL CHEMIC AL WASTE~~
~
~~COLLECTOR h TANKS EVAPORATOR LAUNDR'Y LAUNDRY DR AIN LAUNDRY~~
~~> > SAMPLE~~
~~( COLLECTOR FILTER~~
~~\ TANKS TANK~~
~~I WASTE EXCESS CYCLED~~
~~> SAMPLE > WATER > CONDENSATE~~
~~TANK TANK TANK h~~
~~TO SPENT RESIN T ANK SERVICE [~~
~~% W ATER PIPE DISCH ARGE FLOOR~~
, DR AIN l EVAPORATOR MONITOR T ANK TO WASTE MIXING TANK CHEMIC AL WASTE I EVAPORATOR MONITOR T ANK TO W ASTE MIXING TANK CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 L NV IRONM E NT AL R E POR T-O PE R A r l NG LICE NSE STAGE i i 1 FIGURE 3.5-1
\
LIQUID RADWASTE SYSTEM SIMPLIFIED FLOW DIAGRAM
l i l
\
~~i GLYCOL p__ _ _ _ ___ _C_OOLER_______q l REFRIGERATION l MACHINE l (3 RE Q'D .D I~~
~~'I l _ ! GLYCOL PUMP i l~~
r r r CO l " *
~~l GLYCOL li l~~
TANK L___ _ _ _ _ .________ __) l JL h l l r----* I I I if l ii \M d VVVV j s.CI p DRYER I HEATER I l 1r () If ! I - ,I
~~) l i~~
L, 1 JL CATALYlO COOLER I RECOMBINER CONDENSER STE AM JET (2 RE O'D. ) (2 RE O'D .) ! AIR EJECTOR l l l lNSTRUMENT L____ AIR DRt k i O
S
~~.i I~~
~~I I l l l l l 1 J~~
~~- l D E S SIC.* N T l DRYER l P-~~~---- 7 f+ l l I l~~
~~JL e s l l l l 'A'~~
~
20ll l i y l l GAS l l COOLER CHARCOAL HEPA FILTER COMMON STATION l l ADSORBERSll HVAC VENT '
DRYER I L_________J p CHILLER l CONSTANT TEMPERATURE l V AULT -10 F NORMAL l l DE S SIC ANT I + DRYER l l ____J )R EQUIPMENT CLINTON POWER STATION l UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV I RO N M E NT Al., 5t E POR T-O PE R AT I NG t _ lC E N S E STAGE FIGURE 3.5-2 GASE0US RADWASTE SYSTEM SIMPLIFIED FLOW DIAGRAM ,
i i e N 37 ALN .. f "' 0" ._Jb I O ' : 23 l
;, , - i _ . __ ,., _ '* Lw+ atec .cs L6p s, . ;r g, ' .; N N N N L
~~s a v.,,n m, w TA We PENTe=>>hd.- A ASW 'l,leQ'. A~~
~~- " - - e~~
b ]i , 2 h,4 4ou-,~. 4 'w A s o.T l~ Lav. P Ill *F E L. Ij g g. ,-
~~s.- E.. \, -S LC#P E !) y sy ea ed~~
~~)'. 5 800 1~~
~~pyps e.a.d,8~~
* %*t 'V s48 ~ , 8t h fGod .. A[h esT R B AT 7tJ 8/8b l N E p#u g* N I G 44 - M e
i 8too F t t , u %et t p, 7 ',' C l 805 '- C* l A.pO P E L . 8 75 k.D'
- _f I pm o e's .g.w- , + A a .. .. .% ',
s . e* r = '. 6. .s g Cd! g
, , wt e.k .ra ,43 ,"g k. f, 'y". r-u , . gen ,
I ***r ' i R Y , ice .# , * - *
.. 9E 64 < . , . .N .,. Je '1 '
~~3 5, 4.+*.F &* h n.s -e~~
'8 .r_ _ .m..w., ,4 3 l d @*=
~~j g-- . _~~
~~.p g m - m.-. s I_. *4 _ _ .~~
l
~~. ffx) F E' L' 8 00'- C' , l -_<.- ,,~~
~~g r_ , k CONTR'~~
*'a . "* a8 yu L* J O' * * = * * . .
~~gg; 1~~
-s maa y., Ol .N--' , N.x>s E t I ~i era esweef .',. I G' d $w o-o* / i g ((_ l u.y$ fCa'w7_' 't -I Li w ATOR i
~~e '[. - ua m r ' p P> V I L D i N G I~~
*I ofc cF FLfy CO NTA *.M E N T 'P, t 61 L b i N r. -*t 'b; 0
~~w - 0, -~~
l
~~- - . - - . , _ . . w 3,n or m . ~.,~~
~~t . ,, a e .a~~
~~'J i N, /~~
~~l p ,y 8, [ f * O'~~
' i - eu , # ,I l ,/ , /
~~k :9 7 9~~
~~. "::. - - &# x.r s s L e,e ty M M ON 59aT O N ,~~
~~{j R g- L- ._. . p p-~~
.,K v( N T - f n ., - P A%;Si JML [UIL Dt N G 'O ROOF E L f -'c d E. ,
i _ t __ _ __ i l .e51 o' i o 3 '- o'
~~, L~, T s l~~
L P6 -- o' A__ no'-o* I t , i
9
/
~~r go ,e .s e -- an.,~~
~~Cf ..e,. w q w syg.s Ye N~~
}1ty~s as.*
~~l a g F6 f ea rram '~~
'In@$'s j h h , ~ L 9 ROOF Ei, - e :swa ( a ago' s ,, g , ._ o._ .$rn_ N 5'o'"_ M >b +9pO48 v geqT$
~~E Th kDs f a t wAf CW I ' N 2 fuf I~~
~~,49g ggy y y a gggqL 4.% "$'. y . *""'T Z 37%~~
~~q' R F E L.~~
~~o e l a~~
~~, a 6~~
~~a6 peot T' *! AP g~~
~~- yngtg !~~
~~a e9 e 's s.~~
~~SS al N 3-r a e l aie )*2' 0* 100 s 4 f' j~~
.-.u...- ! M i 2 -o tx- w..w=~~~ ' '-"I
_ e 6 prW n ' *
' et m.r l AVE ' BLDG ! nWo r-^t E~a 6d-o' g - / n.
~~I i esE AT 4. sC oe 4 AT( 64E in -~~
~~--& ' r o t e o., m '= *-~~
~~L_ Qui t. DIN G -~~
**, "y ^#
~~a t . ao - o a.% n ,, I~~
}
~~N* .vs.s.ow s ..f c.-h* , Wl~~
~~~ -4 -.~~
~~b El E V A TO'%% m N ;~~
, . f' - C ONTAI N M LROUN CONTROL >d TD6AS ARY g, 3 -] { f' - ~4. i v w4 , , # ! CONTAiWMENT. S u l t.D t N 6 )
~~4 . L _ . . .. a .W- _, , - .~~
~~-~'~~
l A A 4 To p o r c_w sh'E a*e *27c b . tsN eT# 2 7 , t
/+ e d U,3 \ - die SE L c E ai d O Nq k88**% *-V AdWJ LEN% '6 I 'assaw1T .I weo (Ty4r**wp FP LE , . e a. . e . n. . s. y 45 taEAT MEN T 4i NT ..b .
~~5 L' E L P.u ll D I Ni ROOF l E L. :CO' C'~~
~~. - ee e a s me.'. y l~~
~~t. ,~~
& Johi eM 4 l ( u r "z L _ M O#_ . i ' d.-$-- __.7 - CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV I RO N M " NT A L R E PORT.O PE H AT l NG L.lC E NSE STAGE
~~'l 0~~
y FIGURE 3.5-3 ( 30 o 30 so $' FEET STATION ROOF PLAN 9 0 9 18 I METERS f
r_ _ -- I
\
l WASTE SPENT DEMINER ALIZER = RESIN > j TANK DRY R ADIO ACTIVE WASTE PHASE z SEPARATOR F P/FD SLUDGE = TANK WASTE SLUDGE : TANK FLOOR DR AIN EVAPORATOR V BOTTOMS > CONCENTRATED WASTE CHEMIC AL W ASTE WASTE MIXING EVAPORATOR TANK TANK BOTTOMS
~~\ -(~~
~~i i PRE SHIPMENT~~
=
~~OFFSITE MONITORING BURI AL F ACILITY h HYD R ALIC~~

~~STORAGE BALER h~~
~~DECONTAMIN ATION S T ATION MENT SODIUM 3 slLO SILIC ATE SMEAR TESTING ST A TION n V V FILL DRUM~~
~~> C APPING PORT S T A TION h~~
CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRONM E NT AL RE PORT =O PE RAT I NG LIC E NSE STAGE FIGURE 3.5-4 SOLID RADWASTE SYSTEM , SIMPLIFIED FLOW DIAGRAM
CPS-ER(OLS) 3.6 CHEMICAL AND BIOCIDE WASTES {} The source of makeup water for the Clinton Power Station Units 1 and 2 is the cooling lake (Lake Clinton). A flow diagram illustrating station water use is shown in Figure 3.3-1. A list of chemicals used at the staticn is given in r Table 3.6-1. The chemical additions to the cooling idKe resulting from station operation will be the waste solution resulting from regeneration of the makeup demineralizers and any remaining traces of free or combined chlorine resulting from its use as a biocide to control slime formation in the condensers, service water system, and sewage treatment sys-tem (see Section 3. 3) . All chemical and biocide discharges to Lake Clinton will meet the requirements set forth in 40 CFR 423. Any excess water discharged from theLaundry liquid radwaste system will be of high chemical purity. waste water is recovered and recycled through the laundry filters and then to the chemical waste collecting tanks. From there the waste water is processed by evaporation in 4 one of the radwaste evaporators. 3.6.1 Cooling Water Systems 3.6.1.1 Circulating Water System Condenser cooling water is supplied by the cooling lake. The chemical composition of the intake water is described in Section 2.2. Biological growths and slime buildup in the main condensers will be chemically controlled by periodic s treatment of the intake water with chlorine. Chlorine gas will be dissolved in water and injected into the cooling water stream ahead of each condenser. Each condenser will receive a 20- to 30-minute treatment two to three times daily. The chlorination schedule will be staggered so that the two condensers are not treated simultaneously. In order to be effective, the free chlorine concentration in the condenser during treatment will be in the range of 0.5 to 1.0 mg/ liter. The addition of chlorine at an average rate of about 4 mg/ liter (5.3 mg/ liter maximum) will be required (due ' to rapid reaction of free chlorine witn reducing substances in the water) to leave a biocidally effective concentration at the inlet to the condensers. Transit time The through the con-free chlorine densers is approximately 10.8 seconds. residual will be reduced to approximately 0.1 mg/ liter at the condenser outlet. Free chlorine residual will be monitored during chlorination and the rate of chlorine addition will be controlled manually to maintain the required level. Water from the condenser will be mixed during treatment in the discharge flume with untreated circulating water from the other unit. The chlorine demand of the untreated water will 3.6-1
CPS-ER(OLS) reduce the free chlorine content to an undetectable level during the 3.9 hour travel time to the cooling lake. Total residual chlorine (free chlorine plus combined chlorine) lll will be monitored at the discharge to Lake Clinton during chlorination t, comply with the proposed conditions of the NPDES permit. A shutdcun of one unit will not significantly affect the total chlorine residual entering the cooling lake. Aeration from the supplemental cooling system during the summer months , the 3.9 hour transit time, and aeration over the two drop structures (see Section 3.4) will limit the concentration of free chlorine and should ensure that the total chlorine resi-dual will be within limits to be prescribed in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. 3.6.1.2 Service Water System Service water (shutdown and plant service water) will also be chlorinated for slime control in the same manner as condenser cooling water in order to limit the free residual chlorine level to a maximum of 0.1 mg/ liter at the discharge and com-ply with the proposed conditions of the NPDES permit. After mixing with the condenser discharge, the contribution of residual chlorine will be in trace amounts and will be fur-ther reduced in the discharge flume. 3.6.2 Makeup Water Treatment System The makeup water supply for the steam cycle and for other O station uses requiring high purity water will be independent of the cooling water systcm, but the makeup water will be obtained from the cooling lake. The makeup water will be purified by chlorinacion, lime sofr:ening , filtration, and demineralization (see Section 3.3). The makeup filter subsystem consists of three fine-sand filt-ers and three carbon filters. All filters are backwashed once a day with water from the filtered water storage tank. The sand filters are backwashed for 10 minutes at 550 gallor.s per minute. The carbon filters are backwashed for 10 minutes at 300 gallons per minute. The discharge from the backwashing operations is routed to one of two cedimentation ponds. The two redundant filter trains have a total of 8 demineralizers. Each train has a strong acid cation, weak base anion, strong base anion, and a mixed bed demineralizer. During the water treatment processes, chemical regeneration xch nge resins will de necessary. Sulfuric acid of (665he Be Hi 2nSO 4 ) and caustic soda (NaOH) will be used to regenerate these resins. O 3.6-2
CPS-ER(OLS) Regenerative wastes, clarifier underflow, and filter backwash water will be routed to one of the two sedimentation ponds. ( 7-,)' The regeneration frequency and amount of wastewater per regen-eration of the makeup demineralizers is shown on Table 3.6-2. The amount of chemicals discharged to waste per regeneration is shown on Table 3.6-3. Chemical regeneration of the condensate polishing system will be required every 7 days during normal operation. The regen-eration process will use 1300 pounds of 93% H SO42 and 715 pounds of 100% NaOH and produce 29,725 gallons of low-con-ductivity, high-crud waste, 11,800 gallons of low conducti-vity, low-crud waste, and 10,725 gallons cf high conducti-vity wastes. Condensate polishing system regeneration wastes will be neutralized and processed by the radwaste system for the removal of solid wastes. The low-crud, low-conductivity wastewater will be recoverable for reuse during subsequent regenerations. High-conductivity wastes containing approxi-mately 5% total dissolved solids by weight will be trans-ferred to the chemical waste storage tank before being evap-orated, solidified, and sent to offsite burial. 3.6.3 Potable Water System , The volume of water used for drinking and sanitary purposes will be small in comparison with that used for other station water purposes. All potable water system wastes will be O treateC by the sewage treatment system described in Section 3.7. The effluent will be continuously chlorinated and the amount of chlorine will be controlled and monitored according to the limitations set forth in the NPDES permit. 3.6.4 Wastewater Effluent Treatment Facility The filter house and pH treatment facility contains the equip-ment shown in Figure 3.6-1. Figure 3.6-2 provides a flow dia-gram of the entire wastewater effluent treatment facility. Wastewater from the makeup water pretreatment and demineralizer systems, specifically lime softener sludge blowdowns , filter backwashes , and demineralizer regenerant wastes , as well as preoperational metal cleaning wastes, will flow to one of the two sedimentation ponds. Effluent from the sedimentation ponds will be pumped to the filter treatment house where the waste-water will be chemically neutralized, if required to meet applicable standards, by addition of acid or caustic through respective feed systems. The neutralized wastewater will flow through two sand filters arranged in parallel and then into Lake Clinton. If needed, a coagulant aid will be added to the wastewater upstream of the sand filters to improve filtration of the suspended solids. A portion of the sand filter effluent will be drawn off to provide dilution water for the acid and caustic feed systems, () and to fill a backwash water storage tank. The water from this 3 6-3
CPS-ER(OLS) storage tank will be used to backwash the sand filters. The sand filters are interlocked to prevent shnultaneous backwash-During the backwashing sequence compressed lll ing of the filters. air will be used for scouring the filters. If the quality of the wastewater does not meet effluent limita-tions for pH, provisions have been made for routing the sand filter effluent back to the settling pond. When the sludge layer in one sedimentation pond builds up to a maximum allowable level, the wastewater from the pretreatment and demineralizer systems will be directed to the other pond. The sludge layer in the full pond will then be dredged and disposed of in an acceptable manner. The sedimentation ponds will normally be utilized on an indi-vidual basis. If the need arises to operate with both ponds, they will be utilized in parallel or in series depending on circumstances. The need to utilize both ponds could occur dur-ing the preoperational flushing of plant piping and equipment. The ponds and filter house equipment will be operated as re-quired to meet the metal cleaning waste limitations contained within the NPDES permit. These requirements are indicated below: Preoperational Pipe Flushing (metal cleaning wastes) Characteristic Monitor NPDES Max. Limits Daily No Limit O Flow (MOD) Total suspended solids Daily 15 PPM Total iron Daily 1 PPM Total copper Daily 1 PPM Total zine Daily 1 PPM Total phosphorus (as P) Daily 1 PPM Ammonia (as N) Daily 0.02 PPM Oil and grease Daily 15 PPM BOD (5) Daily 4 PPM pH (separate dis-charge only) Daily 9 (6-minimum) This effluent will be mixed with other waste streams entering the treatment system. Sampling must occur prior to mixing. The pH limit would not apply v'en all the streams mix since the aggregate effluent would have to meet the limits for the Treatment Works presented in this subsection. There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. An estimate of the sludge rate (excl'uding preoperational metal cleaning wastes) entering one of the sedimentation ponds is shown in Table 3.6-4. The estimated chemical composition of 3.6-4 h
CPS-ER(OLS) {T the sedimentation pond effluent is shown in Table 3.6-5, along with the applicable NPDES effluent limitations (for low-volume wastes) and state effluent and water quality stand-ards. Wastewater processed through this wastewater treatment system will meet the NPDES permit effluent limitations and monitoring requirements. The effluent standards in the existing NPDES permit are the following: Effluent From Treatment Works (includes all waste streams) Chara'cteristic Monitor NPDES Max. Limits Flow (MGD) Weekly No limit Total suspended solids Weekly 15 PPM 011 and grease Monthly 15 PPM pH Weekly 9 (6-minimum) There shall be no floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. 3.6.5 Total Dissolved Solids in the Cooling Lake O The evaporation of water from the surf ace of the cooling lake will lead to an increased concentration of total dissolved solids (TDS). The buildup of'TDS in the cooling lake was dis-cussed in Subsection 5.1.7.2 of the Environmental Report - Constructior. Permit Stage, and the effects of this buildup are discussed in Subsection 5.1.2 of this report. 1 l l 4 3.6-5
TABLE 3.6-1 CHEMICALS STORED ON SITE tm A;; r or p'07tNTIA'ty CHEMICAL OUANTITY H7 -' ARDOUS cur"IC ' , Caustic (Sodium Hydroxide) 10,000 gal Radwaste Bldg. El. 702 feet (50% Solution) Snifuric Acid (96% Solution) 10,000 gal Radwaste Bldg. El. 702 feet Chlorine 32 tons (two tank cars) Yard Alum (alumirum sulfate) 5,000 gal O Polye lectrolite (Proprietary) 165 gal
]
w Lime, (Calcium Hydro 2:ide) 2,600 ft3 [ cn Calcium Hypochlorite 500 lb 3 O (B Trisodium Phosphate 1,000 lb c tn Disodium Phosphate 1,000 lb - Sodium Nitrate 500 lb Hydrazine 110 gal Fuel 011 136,800 gal Diesel Generator Bldg. Lubrication Oil 42,000 gal jRadwaste Bldg. El. 737 feet, 30,000 gal (Turbine Bldg. El. 762 feet, 12,000 gal Glycol (ethylene glycol) 1,000 gal Hydrogen 73,000 ft3 Yard Catbon Dioxide 20,000 lb (two tanks) Acetylene 3,000 ft3 (20 tanks) Radwaste Bldg. El. 7 37 feet Oxygen 6,000 ft 3 (20 tanks) Nitrogen 11,300 ft3 (50 tanks) Argon 9,000 ft3 (30 tanks) No locat. ion indicates that the chemical is not considered hazardous. 9 O O
4 CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 3.6-2 / i v 1 4 REGENERATION' FREQUENCY AND TOTAL WASTEWATER l ' i PER REGENERATION OF THE MAKEUP DEMINERALIZER SYSTEM i i TOTAL WASTEWATER
~~REGENERATION FREQUENCY PER REGENERATION j~~
i Demineralizers (3 Bed) 24 hours 32,440 gal i Domineralizers (Mixed Bed) 2 weeks 7,490 gal f f i i i .1 O ' 4 1 a i i i i e k
~~- O 3.6-7 '~~
I
~~. , , - - _ _ _ . _ , - , _ - . _ . _ . - , _ . . _ . - . . - . _ _ , . . _ . . _ _ . - . . . _ . , _ _ . . _ . ~ . - - _ - . .~~
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 3.6-3 g CHEMICAL WASTES PER REGENERATION OF TIIE MAKEUP DEMINERALIZER SYSTEM AMOUNT IN CllEMICAL WASTE (lb) Acid (II 2SO4 ) (3 Bed Demineralizers) 650 Acid (112 S04 ) (Mixed Bed Demineralizers) 200 Caustic (NaOli) (3 Red Domineralizers) 173 Caustic (Naoll) (Mixed Bed Demineralizers) 240 0 Note; An additional 322 gallons of 50% caustic will be required to neutralize wastes from the 3 bed demineralizer regeneration and 110 gallons of 66* Be' sulfuric acid to neutralize wastes from the mixed bed regeneration. I. O 3.6-8
CPS-ER(OLS) , O TABLE 3.6-4 SLUDGE RATE ENTERING SETTLING "OND CONSTITUENT LB/ DAY
1. CACO 3 Sludge 5664 233

2. Mg (OH) 2 Sludgc

3. TSS Removed from Raw Water 1200 ?

4. Al (OH)3 Sludge 28

5. Inerts from Lime 237 i
TOTAL 7362 , i l (2) i f i Note: Figures reflect pretreatment flow rate design capacity of 500 gpm, once a day backwashing of sand filters and carbon purifiers, and an average regeneration i of one primary demineralizer train per day. l
~~-O 4~~
3.6-9
TABLE 3.6-5 ESTIMATED COMPOSITION OF WASTE STREAM LEAVING THE SETTLING POND AND APPLICABLE LIMITATIONS NFDES EFFLUENT STATE EFFLUENT
~~, LIMITATIONS LIMITATIONS STATE WATER (CAL. LIMIT PARAMETER SETTLIM QND EFFLUEN* f rie) (t rn) ( rm. }~~
Fix syal/ day) '.1'6 .. -- Calcium (as ca) 162 pic Ph os phorus (as P) 1.0 1.0 C O.05' Magnesium (as Mg) 182 ;pa -- Sodium (as Na) 457 ppm -
** 0 . Alkalinity ias CACO 378 ry --
Ikalinity (as CACO t.ntoride (as Cl) 3)3) 10 pra 300 ppm 500 Sulfate (as Sr4) 1,564 p;e -- 500 Q y Jitrate (as N) m 5112-a (as Sic,) 27 7 - 10 (Drinking Water ontv) I
~~' 36 p -~~
M to Sub ;.io f g TSS BOD-5 20 ;c 15 Maximum 15 3 o 4 Average 30 o Tl;s 2, h io um -- 3500; M 50 1,000 M pli 7a 6-9 5-10 g 6.5-9.0 except f or Natural causes - Oil and Grease 15 tte 15 Maximum 75 Maximum None Visible 30 Daily Average 15 Monthly Average Iron, Total (as .+) 1.0 2.0 1.0 Cepper, Total se< Ju) 1.0 1.0 0.02 Zinc. Total (as 2n. 1. 1.0 1.0
" Figures reflect p:eSeatment flow rate at design capatity of 500 gpm, once a day backw ehing of t,and filters and carbon purifiers, and an average regene rat ion of one primary deminerali zer t rain per day ,
bApproximated values, since no dati are available to rerrit calculation of these values. Settlinc pond ef fluent vill be routed to a waste filter house for further reduction of TSS to ensure corpliance with arflicable 11ritations. C Water quality limit in lakes ar.d streams at point of entry into lakes; e f f l uer:t liratations on large discharue to lakes and tributaries thereto. O O O
O D TO LAKE CLINTON ACID FEED C AUSTIC FEED If 1r_ TRANSFER SYSTEM SYSTEM PUMPS Ik If S E T T LIN G
~~\[ POND A f% f%~~
~~SAND SAND FILTER FILTER SETTLING 7A[ POND B~~
~~As %s nf~~
/
~~TO SETTLING PONDS lf L If F 5 7~~
~~\/ d k J L JL VENT B ACKW ASH j~~
~~k PUMP 7% BACKWASH WATER STORAGE TANK~~
\#
AL CLINTON POWER STATION l UNITS 1 AND 2 E NVIRONM E NT AL RE PORT-OPE R ATING LIC E NSE STAGE DEMINER ALIZ E R ' SYSTEM WASTEWATER TREATMENT E0VIPMENT I _
LNE DE MIN ER ALIZ ER PIPE CARBON FILTER S ENER FLUSHING PUR!FIER REGENERANT BACKWASH BLOWDOWN WATER ACTIVITY AI I II - MAX. AND AVG. MAX. AND AVG. I MAX. FLOW MAX. FLOW l FLOW 7 0.015 MGD FLOW 7 0.02 MGD 7 0.03 MGD 7 0.08 uGD l AVG. FLOW AVG. FLOW l 7 0.025 MGD 7 0.03 MGD f if if if If f II j I i il II It LAKE WATER Y STORAGE SAMPLING POINT LAKE RECYCLE MANHOLE TANKS CLINTON FILTER (IFpH DOES NOT
)
TREATMENT MEET EFFLUENT HOUSE STANDARD OF 37 6 TO 9 ) g MAX. FLOW Y 3.143 MGD g ( p H AND. IF NEEDED. /' COAGULANT ) AVG. FLOW 7 0.05 MGD FOR q l 1/2 YEARS. ZERO THEREAFTER (AVG. FLOW '= 0.7 MG PER CLEANING. EACH CONSISTING OF SEVERAL BATCHES. THERE POND WILL BE AN ESTIMATED 40 SUCH CLEANINGS OVER APPROXIMATELY 11/2 YEARS . ) s OVERFLOW POND EMERGENCY CLINTON POWEi STATION OVERFLOW (FLOW =0) UNITS 1 Al i2 E NV IRO NM E NT AL R E POR T-O PE R, NG LICE NSE STAGE D ('d-EFFLUENT FIGURE 3.6-2 SAMPLING P0lNT FLOW DIAGRAM 0F WASTEWATER EFFLUENT TREATMENT FACILITY
CPS-ER(OLS)- 3.7 SANITARY AND OTHER WASTE SYSTEMS O V 3.7.1 Sanitary Waste System The sanitary wastes are collected by conventional means and discharged into a sewage treatment plant located on the Clinton Power Station (CPS) site. The treatment plant is capable of two modes of operation: a temporary mode for the construction stage and a permanent mode for use when the station becomes operational. During the CPS construction ef fort , the sewage treatment plant ' has been operated as a contact stabilization unit cable of treating a maximum waste flow of 37,500 gallons per day. When the inlet flow was not high enough for this mode of operation, extended aeration was used. The discharge of the treated effluent is indirectly into Lake Clinton via a small retention pond and natural drainage through a ravine to the lake. After plant construction is completed, the sewage treatment facility can be converted to the permanent mode of operation as an extended aeration plant. In this mode, 15,000 gallons per day of waste flow from the permanent station service will be treated. The effluent from this mode of operation is mixed with the circulating cooling water and discharged to Lake Clinton via the circulating water discharge flume. If needed, the contact stabilization mode can also be used during station (v~) operation. The effluent from both modes of operation receive tertiary treatment consisting of presettling, filtration, and chlorina-tion. Chlorination of the tertiary effluent is done for pur-poses of disinfection. Gaseous chlorine is injected inter-mittently be means of a timed chlorination to maintain a proper chlorine residual. This amount is carefully measured, controlled, and monitored. Following some erratic operating problems associated with the installation of the facility, the sanitary waste system is functioning in compliance. An extensive sewer pipe lining program was recently completed to minimize storm water infil-tration. A newly issued Illinois EPA construction permit allows modifications to be made to the sanitary plant, thus enabling compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. ILOO3691 requirements. Total compliance was achieved in September, 1979. The final effluent from operation during construction is to meet a daily average of 10 mg/l BODc (the 5-day biochemical oxygen demand) and 12 mg./l of.TSS (tdtal suspended solids). The daily maximum allowed for parameters is 45 mg./1. The chlorine residual is maintained as low as practicab12 to keep the fecal coliforms below the 200 counts per 100 ml. average concentra-p)s (_ tion limit specified in the permit. When the circulating , water pumps are turned on and adequate mixing and dilution is _ provided, the limits for TSS and BOD will be raised to 30 3,7-1
~
CPS-ER(OLb) mg./1. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, the Clean a W Water Act of 1977, and the Illinois Pollution Control Board's Chapter 3 rules and regulations for water pollution control will be met. 3.7.2 Waste Water Treatment Facility For a description of the Waste Water Treatment Facility, see 3.6.4. , 3.7.3 Gaseous Effluents There are 6 diesel engines, 3 per reactor unit, in three separa-tion divisions. These engines are run only in an emergency or for surveillance testing. Operating time for all engines is expected to total 120 hours per year based on testing require-ments and expected emergency conditions. The exhausts from theae engines are discharged out the roof of the diesel genera-tor and HVAC building with no treatment except noise muffling. nd N0 pollutants Total annual discharged are estimated at betweenquantities of SO2 740 to 1209 lbs. and befween 459 to 749 lbs., respectively, considering that some are 3070 HP units and some are 5375 HP units. The auxiliary steam supply, required to furnish steam for various station operations when steam is not available by extraction from the turbine-generator system, is electrically lll produced. O 3.7-2
CPS-ER(OLS) () 3.8 REPORTING OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL MOVEMENT The transportation of cold fuel to the reactor and irradiated fuel from the-reactor to a fuel reprocessing plant and the transportation of solid radioactive wastes from the reactor to waste burial grounds is within the scope of paragraph (g) of 10 CFR 51.20. The contribution to the environmental effects of such transportation to the environmental costs of licensing the nuclear power reactor is the same as given in Summary Table S-4 of 10 CFR 51. () ' l 3.8-1
CPS-ER(OLS) r~ (_b ) 3.9 TRANSMISSION FACILITIES 3.9.1 Introduction Three transmission line rights-of-way connect the Clinton One right-of-way Power contains Station the 138with the electrical kV single network. circuit wood pole line that was built from the South Bloomington - North Decatur Line right-of-way A second 1372 near Clinton, extendsIllinois, south to the Clintonthe Power Station. Latham - Rising 345 kV Line 4571 and continues on to intersect This south to the Oreana Substation north of Decatur, Illinois. second right-of-way contains (1) two parallel rows of single cir-cuit wood H-frame structures with 345 kV lines on the Clinton Power Station property north of State Route 10, (2) double circuit, single column, steel structures with two 345 kV circuits south of State Route 10 to Line 4571, and (3) double circuit, single column, steel structures with, initially, Theone third kV circuit from 345 right-of-way Line extends 4571 to the Oreana Substation. Illinois, and north to the Brokaw Substation near Bloomington, contains single circuit wood H-frame structures with one 345 kV line. The three 345 kV lines (on two rights-of-way) carry the Clinton Pow-er Station generation to the Illinois Power Company (IP) system and also serve as an off-site source of power for unit startups and protection. The 138 kV line serves as a secondary offsite power serves as the source for unit start-ups and protection and aise, ('T \> source of power during station construction. A series of maps, (see Figure 3.9-1) show the transmission line routes with respect to the site and the surrounding area. 3.9.1.1 138 kV Line Route It was The 138 kV line is marked as Route F-G on Figure 3.9-1. placed in service on April 21, 1976. The line and structure data Construction were previously provided Permit Stage (CPS-ER) . in the Environmental Report -The land use breakdown for R shown in Table 3.9-1. 3.9.1.2 345 kV Lines South The 345 kV lines south connect the Clinton Power Station with the
~~existing Latham - Rising Line 4571 and to the Oreana Substation north of Decatur, Illinois. These lines are marked as Route I on Figure 3.9-1.~~
The extension to the Oreana Substation was not presented in the CPS-ER because that substation was required to serve theThe Pecatur trans-load before the Clinton Power Station is in operation. mission system planned at the construction permit stage did not rcquire the Oreana Substation as part of the Clinton Power Station outlet. Later, IP deferred over 20 miles of 345 kV construction beyond the Rising Substation This deferraluntil the itClinton made Power necessary to Station connectUnit the 2 is operational. ("J') Oreana Substation on the Clinton to Rising Line for stability. 3.9-1
CPS-ER(OLS) The new route shown in Figure 3.9-1 was selected for the 345 kV lines south so the line to the Oreana Substation could be lll connected to the Clinton - Rising line. The land use break-down shown in Table 3.9-2 includes data on the 8.4-mile section of line from Line 4571 to the Oreana Substation although this section of line is not directly connected with the CPS construc-tion. Route I between Clinton Power Station and Oreana Substation was selected over Routes A, B, and C, which were described in the CPS-ER, for the following reasons:
a. Route I minimized the mileage of line construction on non-company-owned land, most of which is highly produc-tive agricultural land. Cost and interference with farming were minimized,

b. Route I crosses Lake Clinton at a narrow point where wood pole H-frame structures are used. Routes A, B, and C required very tall steel structures or the con-struction of islands in the lake. The wood structures are less noticeable in the timbered areas surrounding the lake.

c. Route I required the construction of a single structure in the existing Latham - Rising Line 4571, while the alternate routes required the replacement of 1.0 to 6.5 miles of single circuit structures with double circuit structures. Therefore, a line using Route I was con-structed with a few daily outages to the operating Lattam - Rising 345 kV line, while all of the alternate routes would have required that the line be out of ser-vice for several months. The extended outage would have jeopardized the electrical transmission system.
Route I from Clinton Power Station to Oreana Substation is about 20.8 miles long. Two parallel, single circuit lines on wood H-frame structures were constructed for the first 5.4 miles on pro-perty owned by Illinois Power. The remainder of the lines were constructed on private rights-of-way with double circuit, single colunn, steel structures. Two circuits were installed on the steel structures for about 7.0 miles. They connect with and split the existing Latham - Rising 345 kV Line 4571 into two separate circuits. The east circuit connects tha Clinton Power Station with the Rising Substation and the west circuit connects the Clinton Power Station with the Latham Substation. One cir-cuit is installed initially on the remaining 8.4 miles of double circuit steel structures to the Oreana Substation and connects to the east circuit. The single circuit wood H-frame type structures are shown in Figures 3.9-3 through 3.9-8. The type of structure installed depends on the degree of the angles in the line. Two 7#7 Alumo-weld shield wires and three phase conductors are installed on the wood H-frame structures. The phase conductors consist of two 1111 mcm ACSR, 54/19 stranding, subconductors per phase. The 3.9-2
CPS-ER(OLS) m (_) average distance between structures is 660 feet, with a mini-mum height of the conductor above ground of 28 feet at maximum sag conditions. The right-of-way width required for each of the wood H-frane lines is 132 feet. The double circuit steel structures are shown in Figures 3.9-9 through 3. 9-15. Two 7#7 Alumoweld shield wires and six phase conductors are installed. The phase conductors consist of two 1113 mcm ACSR, 54/19 stranding, subconductors per phase in the line section from the Clinton Power Station to the Latham - Rising Line 4571. In the line section from the Latham - Rising Line 4571 to the Oreana Substation, the phase conductors con-sist of two 954 mcm ACSR, 45/7 stranding, subconductors per phase. The average distance between structures is 900 feet, with a minimum heiF h.t of the conductor above ground of 28 feet at maximum sag conditions. The right-of-way width for the double circuit steel structures is 165 feet, 82.5 feet on either side of the center line. Figures 3.9-16A and 16B show a single circuit tangent dead end steel structure. This structure is installed between the single circuit construction on wood poles and the double circuit con-struction on steel. Figure 3.9-17 shows the single circuit guyed dead end structure used adjacent to the Oreana Substation. The land use breakdown for Route I is shown in Table 3.9-2. No permanent service roads are required for construction or maince nance, since access is available along the right-of-way from (_3) public roads. Existing land use is maintained after construc-tion of the line. The estimated cost of Route I is about $7,940,000 based on 1980 completion. The components of the cost estimate are shown in Table 3.9-4. 3.9.1.3 345 kV Line North The 345 kV line north connects the Clinton Power Station to the existing Brokaw Substation approximately 2 miles southeast of Bloomington, Illinois. At the construction permit stage, a double circuit 345 kV line on lattice steel towers was proposed for the transmission line to the Brokaw Substation. The Planning studies later showed that one circuit is adequate. line is built on single circuit, wood H-frame structures. This line is shown as Route H in Figure 3.9-1. Route H from Clinton Power Station to Brokaw Substation is about 22.4 miles long. The wood H-frame type structures that support the line conductors are shown in Figures 3.9-3 through 3.9-8. Two 7#7 Alumoweld shield wires and three phase conductors are in-stalled. The phase conductors consist of two 1272 mcm ACSR, 45/7 stranding, subconductors per phase. The average distance between structures is 660 feet, with a minimum height of the conductor above ground of 28 feet at maximum sag conditions. The right-of-(~3 way width required for this line is 132 feet, 66 feet on either (_/ side of the centerline. 3.9-3
CPS-ER(OLS) The land use breakdown for Route H is shown in Table 3.9-3. No a service roads were required for construction or maintenance since W access is available along the right-of-way from public roads. Existing land use is maintained after construction of the lir.^. The estimated cost of Route H is about $4,400,000 based on 1980 completion. The components of the ecst estimate are shoan in Table 3.9-4. 3.9.2 Radiated Electrical and Acoustical Noises To minimize or prevent radio interference from the 345 kV lines, a horizontally bundled configuration of two conductors 18 inches apart were used for each phase. Th conductor hardware was manu-factured for extra high voltage use and was designed to be " corona free." Figure 3.9-2 is a typical graph of the generated radio interfer-ence voltage (RIV) for a bundled conductor hardware assembly without corona shielding. At strain insulators positions, grad-ing rings were used to shield the conductor hardware assembly. All 345 kV hardware assemblies create a RIV of less than 1000 microvolts at 1000 kilohertz (kHz) for a 230 kV line-to-ground voltage. Radio frequency interference (RFI) and audible noise checks were made on existing single circuit and double circuit towers which emanate from IP s major power station near Baldwin in southwest- a ern Illinois. The towers have a two-conductor bundle of 1113 mcm W ACSR per phase. A check of the field intensity of radio stations along the routes of the proposed 345 kV lines emanating from the Clinton Power Station were also made. The locations of the field intensity check points are shown in Figure 3.9-1. The results of the noise level checks on the existing power lines from Baldwin Power Station and the field intensity measurements at various points along the line routes from Clinton Power Station are given in Appendix 3. 9A and summarized as follows :
a. No audible noise caused by the 345 kV power lines near Baldwin Station could be measured above prevailing ambient noise level, and none is expected from the proposed lines.

b. Radio frequency interference measurements made on the existing 345 kV lines indicated that little or no inter-ference will be experienced in radio receivers located outside the right-of-way of lines emanating from Clinton Power Station, provided that the strength of the signal from the radio stations exceeded 500 microvolts per meter, a value that is accepted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as the minimum for providing good l reception.

c. No electrical interference was experienced in a portable television receiver having a standard rod antenna when operating under 345 kV lines from Baldwin Power Station. ggg l
3.9-4
CPS-ER(OLS)- () d. The weather was overcast and the temperature was 10 F. Within 400 feet of the proposed lines ghosting problems may exist, but past experience indicates that these problens can be overcome by antenna reorientation or'by replacing the existing antenna with a type appropriate for improved reception under the conditions.
~~' Radiated electrical or acoustical noises and corona discharge are not expected from the 138 kV line.~~
4 3.9.3 Induced or Conducted Ground Currents Each steel structure and each tangent wood H-frame structure was grounded. The shield wires of each grounded structure were con-l nected to a grounding system at the structure base. Ground resistance tests (see Appendix 3.9B) were made at each structure before the shield wires were electrically connected to any structure. If the ground resistance value exceeded 10 ohms under normal moisture conditions, additional grounding was installed. To minimize induced electrostatic effects, the fences, metal struc-tures, and other fixed metal objects on the right-of-way were grounded as prescribed in the National Electrical Safety Code, 1977 Edition. Electric fences cannot be grounded. l i t i O ' 3.9-5 i
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 3.9-1 $ LAND USE BREAKDOWN FOR THE 138 KV ROUTE ROUTE F-G
1. Line 138 kV

2. Length and Area 100.0% - 8.25 mi - 67.6 a
~~(% of total-miles-acres)~~
a. Agricultural 68.8% - 6.13 mi - 46.5 a

b. Fallow 0.0% - 0.00 mi - 0.0 a

c. Shrub 2.7% - 0.15 mi - 1.8 a

d. Forest 7.2% - 0.41 mi - 4.9 a

e. Mixed (agric. & forest) 10.7% - 0.60 mi - 7.2 a

f. Ponds 1.0% - 0.06 mi - 0.7 a

g. Industrial 9.6% - 0.90 mi - 6.5 a

h. Gravel Pits 0.0% - 0.00 mi - 0.0 a

3. Creeks Crossed North Fork Salt Creek Tenmile Creek Coon Creek

4. Highways - major crossed U.S. Rt. 51, Illinois ro :. 54 Highways - minor crossed 8 5.

6. Railroads Crossed Illinois Central Gulf - 2 h

7. Farm Houses (within 150 feet) 12

8. Churches (within 150 feet) -

9. Towns (within 1 mile) Birkbeck - South T20N R' il ,
~~Sec. I - Harp~~
10. Long Views (next to Highway) >.9 miles

11. Significant topography changes T201', R3E, Secs.
~~15, 22, 23 - Harp~~
12. Tower Lines Crossed -

13. Recreation (adjacent) Nor :h Fork Sal - Creek Area O
~~3.9-6~~
~~) ' CPS-ER(OLS)~~
~~TABLE 3.9-2 i Q LAND USE BREAKDOWN FOR THE PROPOSED 345 kV ROUTE SOUTH ROUTE I~~
~~1. Line 345 kV SOUTH 2A. . Length and Area of H-Frame Section 100.0% - 10.76 mi - 172.01 a (IP Property).~~
~~$ a. Agricultural 54.1% - 5.82 mi - 91.07 a~~
b. Fallow 5.3% - 0.57 mi - 9.12 a

c. Shrub 2.6% - 0.28 mi - 4.47 a j d. Forest 30.9% - 3.33 mi - 53.15 a

e. Mixed (agric. & forest) 7.1% - 0.76 mi - 12.20 a

f. Ponds 0.0% - 0.00 mi - 0.00 a

g. Industrial 0.0% - 0.00 mi - 3.00 a

h. Gravel Pits 0.0% - 0.00 mi - 0.00 a 2B. Length and Area of Steel Pole Section 100.0% - 15.4 mi -308.0 a i a. Agricultural. 96.5% - 14.85 mi-297.22 a

b. Fallow 0.0% - 0.00 mi- 0.00 a

c. Shrub 1.2% - 0.19 mi- 3.70 a

d. Forest 2.3% - 0.36 mi- 7.08 a

e. Mixed (agric. & forest) 0.0% - 0.00 mi- 0.00 a a

f. Ponds 0.0% - 0.00 mi- 0.00 a
~~. g. Industrial 0.0% - 0.00 mi- 0.00 a~~
h. Gravel Pits 0.0% - 0.00 mi- 0.00 a

3. Creeks Crossed Salt Creek Friends Creek i'

4. Highways - major crossed Illinois Rt. 10 4

5. Highways - minor crossed 7

6. Railroads Crossed Illinois Central Gulf

7. Farm Houses (within 500 feet) 6 i 8. Churches (within 500 feet) ---

9. . Towns (within 1.5 miles) Oreana - East l 10. Long Views (next to highways) ---
~~i i 11. Significant topography changes (1) T20N, R3E Sec. 28 - Harp (2) T19N, R3E Sec. 8 - Creek~~
12. Tower Lines Crossed ---

13. Recreation -(adjacent) Salt Creek Area 3.9-7
~~, , - , _ . ,. ,_ , . _ _ - - . - _ - , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ ,. _ _ . . - , - - - _ -~~
~~CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 3.9-3 LAND USE BREAKDOWN FOR THE PROPOSED 345 kV ROUTE NORTH ROUTE H O~~
1. Line 345 kV NORTH

2. Length and Area 100.0% - 22.4 mi - 358.0 a
~~(% of total-miles-acres)~~
a. Agricultural 87.5% - 19.6 mi - 313.6 a

b. Fallow 0.0% - 0.0 mi - 0.0 a

c. Shrub 0.9% - 0.20 mi - 3.2 a

d. Forest 7.3% - 1.64 mi - 26.2 a

e. Mixed (agric. & forest) 3.9% - .87 mi - 13.9 a

f. Ponds 0.4% - .09 mi - 1.4 a

g. Industrial 0.0% - 0.00 mi - 0.0 a

h. Gravel Pits 0.0% - 0.00 mi - 0.0 a

3. Creeks Crossed North Fork Salt Creek West Fork Salt Creek Little Kickapoo Creek Kickapoo Creek

4. Highways - major crossed Ill. Rt. 54, U. S. Rt. 136, U.S. Rt. 150 Interstate Rt. 74

5. Highways - minor crossed 16

6. Railroads Crossed Illinois Central Gulf Conrail Corp.
~~lll Norfolk and Western~~
7. Farm Houses (within 500 feet) 11

8. Churches (within 500 feet) -

9. Towns (within 1.5 miles) Downs - West T22N, R3E, Sec. 4 - Downs

10. Long Views (next to highway) -

11. Significant topography changes (1) T20N, R3E, Sees. 2, 11, 14, Harp (2) T23N R3E, Secs. 16, 17, 26, 35, Old Town

12. Transmission lines crossed CE-345 kv - 2 (Company-Voltage-Number) IP 138 kV - 2 IP 69 kV - 1

13. Recreation (adjacent) Possible North Fork &
Kickapoo Creek areas. O 3.9-8 i
l CPS-ER(OLS) h TABLE 3.9-4 LINE DATA AND ESTIMATED COSTS OF PROPOSED TRANSMISSION LINE ROUTES FOR CLINTON POWER STATION 4 i 345 kV LINE SOUTH .345 kV LINE NORTH , ROUTE I ROUTE H l Miles of Line 26.16 22.4 i On Plant Property 10.76 2.4 j On Private R.O.W. 15.4 20.0 Estimated Number of j Structures 173 179 I Estimated Costs (1980 completion) Material $4,249,000 $2,011,100 Labor 1,851,000 863,000 Engineering 229,000 141,900 R.O.W. 517,000 768,000 i Sub Total 6,846,000 $3,784,000 O P1ue 16x Overneed 1.095,360 605,440 Estimated Total Cost $7,941,360 $4,389,440 4 5 4 i 3.9-9
~~\ \~~
LEROY iso ROUTE H - f 4 BROKAW 63 SUBSTATION iw i l ' BLOOMINGTON d v b I < EYWORTH l
)
i l i i I,
i i TO RISING SUBSTATION I' m \ 00 i
*LATHAM-RISING \345KV LINE 4571. \
OihN p k ARGENTA % ST T10N k {*
, ei \ :: 1 2 2 t OREANA g \. ROUTE I 3
~~54 Qo] \ OREAN SUBSTATION i 1, FORSYTH~~
~~'A MAR 0A { ; CLINTON~~
~~g @~~
~~aNrls'c s , l 5* l TO LATHAM SUBSTATION~~
~~@ FIELD lNTENSITY CHECK POINTS CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRO NM E NTAL R E PORT =O PE R ATING LICE NSE STAGE I~~
~~FIGURE 3.9-1 yd(gNOT g TO SCAE PROPOSED TRANSMISSION LINE ROUTES (I,F-G AND H) AND FIELD INTENSITY CHECK POINTS I (1 THROUGH 5) f SHEET 1 0F 6 l~~
' N l" ,',,,, ,,,,,, J .y I I., * * $ )*N I ~~ ) l -~ .e[ pon D* % *q i. -
~~Wc p, es .~~
~~) -~~
o* _A 1 & A - - Q . o I . 4 p%
. o i 1-J 1 j 14 . .
5 7 O -% Q ~r'ao p
~~' O $~~
~~l - [ b~~
~~< >n. r 5.~~
~~I AM~~
'"6 : 4 o.t "* ,e,[ ilo ^ /D ~ )
~~J f ~~~
~~t. - /. y~~
~~- + y; "'; 3 - .~~
~~e 1 (~~
~~\ g C9 o :::-) 5 f~~
~~I. ~~~
% 22 ' b 2'3 / M hu/24 ) -
i
~~,1 .- ,- y , , x~~
~~m. .. .~~
~~_? JJ '.-li.'~~
,: I )****~ h c o I & 's,P " s Q
0.~ i ". ' i *r n*
,,, 5 , A JN -~ , gy ,
~~_/ J~~
.y
t.
~~j I~~
~~v w s> %~~
~~~ , -~~
~~(, [ ,.,'. ,~~
/ /,e o o j /
m
~~/.fj ( c"<H' ' ,~M .- m '~~
~~o ,~~~
.k f~\ v' s. l- 3 .
c h_/ *
~~vtVallv &h:~~
~~c, e < D ==I %g_/4~~
,_. .p '-vu ~-J,fT' 2 '.p- )v. ' O c
~~hs% 27 1~~
~ .s g ,
0
~~e.PN ,_;~~
~~'N 9* f -~~
~~f ~. . f-' '~~
~~-C' 2#Y g-. -~~
A'4 C'l'{ '- t4 k.' [ ' fII h e. jf'h D
~ - ~ ' \ 7'7'l ~ . w(['k y'3 "' "' . l.' ~ 7; < ."W % "Q(: %-gw ~
~~J'y, Ti~~
~~&' W)~~
(
~~,e r w ,~~
~~J,. < .t . m <- , P'-~~
~~~- l-L~~
~~[n ,e g--~~
~
~~4 3- 35 q y2 o -rr 31], ,./ ,~~
-3 ) - ;~- ' 'C - 4
_] 3'3 t t 2: . ,. ? G~ .,,--, y
~~- t 3,a 8~~
e, c [' @6 oc - w u.:/: , m 2 /,0z / o=7 a \,,.
.~
~~er - e ,.' -~~
,/, .. 5 r * ,c, ~) f' . s,. % ~'v, ' K. '.- - >sph ^
~~d' go o ,g.. .\ o. 1 Q -- . . . , .m~~
~ t -, - , ,. -x n o, e .., .
~~C= * , n - 2~~
<> . t ,i c4 _)y.--,lD- / < ;,; ;. ny
~~g/ .-~~
~
s
~~.,- .s,. _~,.1.~~
~~o ~'oe w,rn %v a .1~~
~~. s'3 )~~
~~c,/ v " .?~~
,, ? / ,, .
D *
'_/ /' '7.
~~p iPI~ a p i 5 '- g L' a s e*3r%(b c s s / 2~~
e m . g <-' 0, -. ' . ' .2 c,; " ~ p.,, , / .. - - DE
~~f. ,/.~~
/ .; y;g(,nc-,g' y d'E~% g, o . T * ' / <<<.
_ <- bp T./s O .%R , I'. , fc ,,, . es.
~~-s i ~-~~
~~h k ee i mu.,+ se ., w,c -~~
-c y- - e n, .
~~go.w p gx . r w% .~~
~~.=, c z .e ;p -o~~
u ,. # * .
~~JCon O'~~
~~. 9 lO u~~
~~e7 Mf(.1 '.'y ' Mik . Q'c10~~
~~. %. s . %g :~~
~~. m,a.a se,~~
~~_y E ^ e t y c-ymn, 4 <-~~
~~&' . ,~~- .-~~
~~c. o .- -~~
~~. " - ,.xu g w y,m~~
~~_-- g u f y v-~~
~~.L- J r/g., & o t~~
xve, _ - b, ' c =M H
.h.n -g%@[ c. _ ,4 g ., p :rg'ywth ; .acc &ay t aJ c s ,7 5y;o ~. p: .g.y ., vw
/,
~~apc- ) . ra e~~
.? j. < ,s &x nc- /g ,r , - w~ , , . n ,'
~~t << >~~
/T <% v1sn -.,e'@b .E" ..- o + ,
~~L C 'If hQlR f Opi c'.~~
'r O y o Q n[.3 y . /. - ; Ih.7';4 W .$,i I,1 .o ~ , . -, .c j U( 'pk,E. eANA J'$,,%,,)1 ~ % % c>,, qpef
~~v. "~~
'l - ",7 3-f C < #a SUBSTATION l$.
w 3- NO IJ. - g l) v?. e . -tw %- ;
,,: nMU .1.',- 4 a " <. ;4 .( ' s C/~-?K - e- -
~~s%-~~
= w ~ -[ L4 , .
~~r~Wn c s%p-,< . r-... -v~~
~ .. I O<w : s[ n V '.' % , rl=- ^' ~ *=*.r. f. . D.,, \l<~- J :% -
g 't c",'d J @n.\ t , . . . .... 9
\
l i i _____
4 ,,
.. , m. }__.~ .7qy . sm ss. --
i MATCH LINE-6 o ~> - ;' . "* ~..,' & y - ..;~ . '#m .s;- l
'F ' Rf- I ' - E . 'N D S ' /S<.*Cc .& . '/ R ,E E K g 357
~~5 o-a 'f idi. O -n.~~
~
~~IA 23 .: o ' ;. 18 6- 27 d d 26 a I~~
.g c _ :. . , ~. o , .
~~Y,o _.~~
~~--~. ,3. .e. ?~~
~~ss. **- . M<.~~
,.> = , .s , _, c &, ,'_ ,_; j ~. - ' '
~~c -~~
~~~ _ .~ < _~~
~~s h '"~~
, - ' - "c- '
t
~~,,3 d.[ .~~
n 4. . > h "* L.- F* # g - "'
~~.e,- > ki 4- %' ~.. :{'K% W Q' j]%~~
s - e ~ 24 l f1y "*i 20 JM il '*' i ,,p r g. o
~~, ~ <~~
a J 22 - ,s .
/_'--- '.s(. 2 3c% ---%', wA _3. . ,,._, 1 , t -r.
. 4.y W l'
~~/^%~~
~~j \* '. s, 6 76 ' ~.e~~
~~= -~~
~~p9 o E8,5~~
,,, ~ - - , _ " Y_ r gl . .% ~ _f ~ ^ _ Q ,~~- 5
~~_ :_: ,_.+-m- . J p -( 3,, ;\f;;,k'^>@ g'~'.~. = -Q~~
~~% /,y'y~~
~~8-_ /_~~
~~m.(.-~~
.w-. - ' =~ m.y ,- . - '~ .-
~~T 18 M. 1 sJ '.' ji % ~--~'~~
,I'.E 3;a #g ,. ^ 29 . ' -
s s + D 2 9.3-l 1 1 m '
~~,I-S l [b.rM,.C..~~
~~u,,, g ' vM IS'e{JO 'Fs)' R. i s I~~
~~,gacc y, Sch h_ -~~
~~idc% Lod., d* sa,~~
p.
w! i

ys:., "
. t-q' ' w yL5 s' ..: . ,. ,ae, ~ , 'j' gt;Iltd ' q ,j {'Q , , 1 e
~~p f~~
~~'a fY,?,,~~
~~e L' ~~~
~~-' ~~~
~~34 j y/ -, K _-~~
? -l % _ --~-4.,, 7, . ' 3?yf ,\ --
~~I' , a* ' {. ;4~~
~~-\-33 ,e~~
3 6- d'1 YT - ' /IG M .,
~~_a~' '~~
~ '&- W'q' ~-[2r-f-:-~ .g =~ c. $ ' .- \
~~9; s +,,,+iWel^~l'~~
. , 'l , ,n . .;/ .v :
1
"* E - ***
~~6e{ - ' e ,- u~~
~~, n . i n e - o ,~~
~~e ,a o~~
~~. t: -~~
0
,, ._,':- 1 '_ y _. - *c 9 "/ -' V .se y' ,c v ,
t
,a. 3 s g I. . .,'. .} : '& Q ',- w
~~[ <-~~
, _ , - . <l' . <., R.,7', - ','
~~l e s '$~~
**- .\. \,p* ,- _ ../- _
t.
,-,k' 5'\- - , ns' - .g b-' f67 1 .)
h
~~'~,.'~~
~~Zi'*) F Nh a.~~
~~~ . gs, * * '~~
~~j ,J .-~~
~~y ,~~
~~.4,. . '.g%,hhg, j_g.i,y{y; i .~~
~~p . . . _ i . a ...7~~
~~-Ir c .! - - c9,,-- ,~~
~~69 -'~~
~
~~ky/ $ Nb -~~
~~- f. ~< l ,, q k,'I~~
_ 7< . i-i - -- N d- , gg i y,, _f_--e-- -- - g4 sa
~~,7 _,~~
~~i Rb g- g )$ I l ~' %',, . ,~~
~
~~f;,- it M M 3dLv17~~
~
1 o a e ~ '4 uf.xm, e w ., f<
~~. j -' -~~
~~l -- [ /r D d} Q~~
s . '- ; N -:::. 0'm ' f n u ".
~~w scn .t . d,rt f 9 s~~
-L.a s f, - = ' g g /_Y,g ,/-
~~f'.. , . .m f~~
~~7 ca.; M,.__ s , ;q - .d 1 -- sps -~~
-r.,, 3 T.17 N q -< see ' ~ -
~~Q'~ 1.r - , 7,- 'i. Q .- s N .~~
' bj , -. : * ,s 4'- - - --
~~24 'Y h 1~~
.sy , , .er . . <
~~, _j , h r ' h.. '. h & &__ Q[ .. _ .~~
$&c~;: L-CLINTON POWER STATION x UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRO NM E NTAL R E PORT *Q PE RAT ING LICE NSE ST' AGE SCALE-1 INCH =1 MILE FIGURE 3.9-1 PROPOSED TRANSMISSION LINE ROUTES (I,F-G AND H) AND FIELD INTENSITY CHECK POINTS (1 THROUGH 5) i SHEET 2 0F 6 l 3
~~, r,r m _~~
~~k _~~
*l [NI. Oj }Q NQ % enc _
~~Ls ;4K5%%%%% I li h yyflQW;,4jg~~
M
' A_ _~_ ,~ ? , , , ' \ e n ;
~~fN%" C'r'~~
~~-h .~~
~~J R. il 3 Un kkg+ i\ - f::~~
d:s ie 3hMyhh.keks$[ '
~~brw' < v r ~, y b==** e~~
~~#%v , fh :. < ,~~
~~jf.O C, Ith .--- m p~~
~~O' h OO u 19 : %1 tt ,,, , g; . , 20 4 d'8 ay,'7 [f',,c(p s 24 (h\~~
,!" -]o <..g % y..
l
~~~ %,v ,1 !M -[~~
~~g .' V a~~
$ c ') ,L . 'b - M' V, % mp 5
~~Q nr f m 57*( g M~~
%'& .N . ~ '
W
~~, jj a res O O s O ,M . , k~~
t
~~7 I 2' '~~
~~~ , ep -~~
~~SW, x, . p g+ y%W :' y vv % -l~~
,s - ;- .- i c '1 ~ . CY '
~~J- } [ +~~
~~/ #~~
O
jN " A^ Nl' 5 1 07$N(VD( ' f 0'O f' 34 31 s
~~f^ _^f 5. 32~~
-,f__, . 30 \ ,5 ,
~~34 Jg % C^ #%~~
~ 's k n, A, Q3 ;
~~j tJa ,~~
*J (i [ \ -
~~n oc . ?~ P.~~
~~~ + /~~
1 y f; D G 'ftn N# . Ng 9 - d ot.w rr m . .a.,,, - n 4 7f ' Tl-
~~-b x . u/'# mh ;m 9 ~~~
~~C , ,a o cu d8 s-~~
\
e -* c s x s' ' I: -
- v l, e ,7 ~, %~~ ?, 2 5 }. j '5,? ^ ?.,.':{, '.
~~L' Yy, ~ . h fb p k r ['. s j __ a 2 ._ _ __ .,; _p -~~
/
~~w-es, SgGJ . h c g " Q, . w , .-~~
,_: ' b;.wps@ ,,f, -~ . i q:.,wa . \
~~6, / 1 > .~~
/, s e ._ J : . ;' ~ ~ &. : xl /) - ' , /_ pp f l w_i ..:-[: c ,
~~t i~~
\
l I w .g .g., , , . ag y , .- . - 1 . . .e.u. --=.,r.-...r- .""" -"
* -le* ' yY h ,+ ) '. , ,,
~~g y , /, c. x = A . g. s . V s . ....~~
~~, ,a 4 .:~~
a , s/< d,.. b-<A.e . . . - . y y ,. I m . , , , -
~~,'f ,, - .,~~
~~3- 1 j{r~~
~~e '1 ( l .Ms~~
~~_\.~~
~~> u y - '~~
x: 'r I (=) ayl 4t*' . . ,p _,, < p,) L,.1, x , g4 : ' m
^
~~n: 5. . y ' :m .~~
,4 C*f s *> 'Y 'l'1 ,.,,'l , <, J * ~"'
~~l .2 ;~~
~~. .-- _1 c * ('l ?),t , ;; .7~~
o
~~>, Q'tIp, o ' " f-Q^k. .' ' e cr i-r*ny,a ; w; +i f mso \. ,, .~~
~~i2 a w ~o,s y , n ._ s ,1,f -~~
~~.jjs( ;s.~~
~~t t, PeWo;%$. $ .-----~~
. ,, ,p - p , ., L _) /
~~h_,( .~~
,_ ~ k' L. J,' ,
- _;,. . + _ . f.,c ;- . , ,,.c . 7 r.
y
.{
~~b c. . d'. ..qe/, ' p J. ' - > l. t l' 'W ) ' l~~
~~):C~~
~~[0,1 A)I {is e .. c4- o~~
,-y S 7 .a ' f, 4\ v { to ; . (m
N.
.(
~~w: . L~~
~~'-> _y_..~~
~~j J~~
, 7-s > N .:g,s,_X i
~~1 O m N a ts~~
~~.t-e . . .~~
~~E , r g, t 't . . f, i~~
~~} '^~~
a
~~~,',#~~
~~R 4L F .~~
~~.t .L.>~~
~~4 ,~~
~~% y< ' n- 1 i,J '~~
g>
] ~ j %* ~ . & * ,1 O
~~c 'e O o~~
. p. An c. ; m + Ape ,% u' p' q* w c i e 2 c., , ~ ,
~~m .x ,,[f , k~oo !n~~
~l l ~~ O lp .- -<.~ . e-y . y . - m. % ,. !, (c. s/J ,e u .., v." (
~~o. -~~
~~. . - s 3 -~~
~~3 c.~~
^
p,
~~'24 2S 30 28 l.~~
rd ,,, --. o- N o *
/
G l reem p l ig S. 3,.-- - see
~~...r................. '~~
~~KQ M.. . ,~~
~~- 8~~
%4 g . 4 *', ' e3- [ [1 m y 35 *3 ,
~~32 33~~
% ***' C oy ,,.J -)>/ >P. 0 c t; t. .- t . ) . '~ l. c0 "Y A, '
~~e ;m Q ' . . \ b 1. peg . p" **)f.y#,2 .~~
.D. f . ggp // \ > h h ,a 2 ]r 5
[[d54 4 3 gj khwh: g P'L/ 6 ~ jbd'd f' h,4g l
~~],4.=u .m. ,,,9 e _. % ~j x~~
~~o~ ,, ,. .i~~
~~~ =~~
~~v. - -~~
a
'Q i v- e- *~ 450 f !. !, '** O ). l .* , I, . .E ) < >,
~~s ls*] ,1 r~~
') >, .) ' * , ese p 's . < , .m N . c ^' % l: 7 ;. . t,.. < -
~~e g .. g' .. ,, i q '. g , ,f d*'~~
~
~~q {g .~~
~~' p'*; pnQO ~ & jj&,O,& ,~~
~~_ %~ gW'~~
~~. KST .~~
~~ppt b ~ .abM.2 e ? Si a 4,, s -~~
~~,,m MATCH LINE-/~~
CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRO NM E NTAL R E POR T=O PE RAT I NG L ICE N SE STAGE FIGURE 3.9-1 PROPOSED TRANSMISSION LINE ROUTES (I,F-G AND H) AND FIELD INTENSITY CHECK P0INTS (1 THROUGH 5) SHEET 3 of 6
m vm cq.xymww,=
~~,,, mmmb:w a weru~ ~ aas v4EMe M T:27%1x ',cqg- % ',rrsg g~~
s
,y, . 6yv w 5 ,q .v.
~~q;[%%} c:. ~v- ~',' . ?_ .[l ag. . 9f?,p,, #kM) m~~
2' '*
g
~~,, ; c.4 x e - .~~
c
~~~ s .~~
t.
% %. , y'.r. -19 , ,d a.. vh>s z ~em> .c.=u w: .x. 2 ADw e +v cs s 1
~~ttea,m G. 9 . r.-~~
~~=1 y ,an n. ,.e.x y xe-w. . Gc e, p :~~
~~g j n~~
.'-wi a ul ,6 .
n
~~- ~~~
p
~~- s. sx.,xy2~~
~~c. m. ., . . ..~~
n
~~~ ~- .~~
g?y'%;f;,-fir K ll '~ Q ~ 4 , W 3 n a , . w
~~,8 -~~
~~7f.~~
~~. f. . s, .c c-f. /s< , o. : 1- l- .. - m - '~~
~~9g ,u a gig - .w~~
~
~~W.; P u. o f ur 7 - o j%".w- @a. . Mwv 3 A - M.n/ g o~~
~~.a .~~
~~e o ra~~
~~. a.p,co _grp .Ar.g aa ceA a -~~
~~xet g c~~
-1 m m. ..[b n .m r- - ,
~~f. .~~
~~f , h --(',< {~~
~~." sNilhN h.rh ' '~,~~
~~r .~n o$m -~~
~~,, n' .. Qw_~~
~~_{UC% m 2 7j bAd'N }}mD )" I a~~
~~,k, 'i ' ' fg;' ., L' $ y$8h Yk.~~
l I ff of I' n \ ' fi~h 4r. d .; h O "~* [ g'I mue ,o a. -m ;2 mz , y 3;5 n!%" n .tk ., yk/; M& i/ mn. o . pv , ,. e -
~~.x .c -~~
~~{," j&?! E,Qffir '~~
~
~~llgllb [ ??W s~~
~~'h' n i s m . s., '~~
3,
~~' _ .g,n 7~~
~~,~. ,~~
~~dI n~~~
~~ro SQg *:} g/~~
~~m ', , v [ ~1~~
~~~ .m.) - W ms <Q pf f 'x- , {.~~
y
~~,_ g~~
~~_hb ~ .o .t m1 ,i A WL ' -~~
~~7' A~~
s I.
Vhr2 5-----
~~% Y M m Y.~~
~~r.74P4 EMWW FX7 -~~
~~L*V MATCH LINE-C P Q3~~J T- -3 Mi %%fMMM&M6'~~
~~< S, .,"sj 9 ' ~ S' ,~~
~~F 4" ,"~~
'=o ' 2 ' t an a ,
~~7 g.; f w,..~~
~~,,g 4~~
~~Py% : . so ', g 29 2e~~
.%f . <> ==
O N b a "ThM -( U T L E D G'E 7,f.j-Q y > q n~ t ,x v y- .- ~- 9
, . , J, . g' g = - J, A - -
~~g s "g 8 f Mt + it hg . r t' { ." ~~~
~~.? % . [@u"g .~~
~~n I a :,a w >, n (~~
~~1. ,!, .~yt'3_. i~~
.g x,hn ,, ,i ss , . .- - *) " e l ,f p, gf p t c vv ..
1 ~p; ~' s' .. , . . 3 - a b v'. - A j,. s T' '
P
~ .'+4, Nn Fr7 trp,. V i ,o i
~~n 64.Ju. d,qr. - .p n.; i dnis-)i Pt'. !. <~~
~~p~ ,r 1 m s c & f.= 's,4,\~~
~~y. = " ...~~
....')mh.*.. ."'y, .i p .QLE, .y -1 s , l . M l Y D ],3[, I: , . . , , . D '
~~f f ;_; w L~~
~~"M 3~ ., } .~~
~~lg',\ y&/ ~ m,~~
~~\ p- .~~
i
~~h m%ff,'~~
~~hMigt. E' fM d d.: ?~~
~~! M~~
~~\ ,i- v~~
~~/_, . -A n~~
~~r. D~~
~~a. ,~~
~~_- I'~~
.' #G7 .1rliem .~1 lfi e Witt ~
gr.7 J- "" e - a g* r s: fi c- g. / r T gh .~ wa>-w, m((i\f, . wg-g. t - s,
~~- 2. .~~
a.
~~~~~~~
~~atn?y~~
s e .m , t
~~q. .~~
x Ng<gm42s: E jj;t.; ,(l y yn, ' T -- j% '~.:,
- % M LhW gb .' - ,,, ... y , .y 49> p 2,'
~~u l.'[.A~h~~
,n . .~ ,a ,,. ..,.,
{h' '" h~f,. ). ;M}l'l}3 - . 'l l-C- a i ,
.. ~.- ,- -.,, a ,
~~w; b. M s:~~
/ m? ) G f[c$.,,;. ~ ~ ... Y .- m. :
~~r' e 3-.j L % L m.~~
~~.l9,.x ,s,yy 4 ,~~
~~f', -~~
~~- )t .~~
u
~~. e%. ,, .t.~~
~~u 74~ u , .i 4~~
. '{ b[,-p_q{ > yQQ 1, ,;.;h b,.c f , - p-C" M M M WEBM M " MATCH LINE-CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 .Pw" E NV IRO NM E NTAl RE PORT = OPERATING l lCENSE STAGE FIGURE 3.9-1 SCALE--i HCH=1 MILE PR05OSED TRANSMISSION LINE ROUTES (I,F-G AND H) AND FIELD INTENSITY CHECK P0INTS (1 THROUGH 5)
SHEET 4 0F 6 [ 4l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __--_._..-----------------'----0
avpr IfiddMEdMediPds'; r ; 4597. spgg l 3 Md RW
~~!&W &sn#"2f8@2Tk..i 3 WEti "31 ~~~
~~Y c,%s~~
~~e. ~o , m~~
~~,a ,y c . :~~
~~m x,. w 3r k f^ :s .3_.y ., N 9 s>_ e gp .g~~
~~,s m7~~
_,j_Q NN$ 1 dI9....Tt Y tfgd?Il&:-lh, kNycf li ; yna $ml(,. SRyrregggp 4p ~
~~r.p;p M69 or a' @py&g& .~~
~~lkN%PM6am m v if ' Q bMry@p .,* . iMMu 98.Qp "oQ~~
~~k. k uA;.)f%!!Ei$dYM kg'?Tk Egp971 ~ :*4se32 ptges ge~~
~~""=~~
~~Ask - m9 i u,qfoe/rn r *1k~~
~~'Tt W Ql c~~
~~S.sL%ebs . uAtac v w u-~~
\
l, k- _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _
tfdb >&r% 2,m M I
- - 1 DiW6 l %/. ?* P F k: !i y g3 p ;O I.e" Roy *g ' .W ';A 1
o i;o a s NE.' i r n 2 MW (!) 3 - wl (6 . ?(% ; 4 2 b y. .. E - m e",2$se m l-YST .fas W m M h M., MN@ O
~~- k I$a s o e;~~
~
~~,. m .~~
~~r Y ' eh Nhy lf~p.],Q~~
~
6 .. h, p % % LW@b8I , 1 ' y 0 , a... g7 , ,, _;
~~. c, .~~
~~w ,_ J> 4 _, a s Jn 58 ep , -~~
~~<t % h $ p G = .~~
~~h= y - 2 4 ge* ,y- . - SL,~~
~~.N h ipQ o % L 'c~~
~~T4 y_~~
r - Y b N ) b,$d d_ dh5kEk',,,;yATCH LINE-C CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRO NM E NTAL RE POR T-O PE R AT I NG t.tC E NSE STAGE l FIGURE 3.9-1 SCALE-l INCH =1 MILE PROPOSED TRANSMISSION LINE ROUTES (I,F-G 1 AND H) AND FIELD INTENSITY CHECK POINTS (1 THROUGH 5) SHEET 5 0F 6 i L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ \
4j:ui vstmsja Itg p- g2s ps,p
~~'!g%ligrggegitoeQp)p'$#xrtiqmpe>~~
~~s P M D w( i,%_ y jd k_f, Q Mi g Ty$ N55ED)$f f P N%;gg$d ilhBREeE W D67-~~
~~!gP&dM5EMasifusi4#~~
~~e4 9 se o ?n o%+ww~~
~~./ o_. 4 wwer b.srw wc MMkN ef*l[kiW cAhap)fu3@[4kkM $1 % 4 8Y70 7 A g[ h [}h f hkhh #~~
h ?[ hh3h mydBgp$y$wmay ha hd@e(dR%a9.m_e_ di Q 5 43hEd m s.. _s e e p5g 9e rs h $. fl nkh $h wx: 9 :gg,Tm awespe L .! h}dkott
~~;mmarn t ::u a A < a>na~~~
~~wran mw 1 m z. .a. ._ _r___v~~
~~.r m . :rm %.a #~~
~~l l 1 I l 1~~
~~' l l~~
~~P I . . WLPjgW" 9t * -~~
~~%..Wt vGLfD ^' >e Q % $~~
~~NM#ifMr'%mwW PW#Jg3L%gtsch m g .. gby'{n w r:cox% m~~
~~.kT. f '~~
~~n" , , 2 Sg q r~~
, ,[- $ , yh .h Ve$${W% Qf 'y Ra5 h ef Wdda y g g Qm weg& a m ~n te yaw y..,we >a
~~[ % C y ~) j. Mb k[I-hf M'~~
~~'; %c 8~# % V _. M W KM ..;,,~~
M
'[ - u / 1 .x O 2 N.O _C ~~ ~
_ _ _ _ _ _ MATCH LIN E- D CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRONME NTAL RE PORT-OPER ATING LICE NSE STAGE FIGURE 3.9-1 i SCALE-1 INCH =1 MILE ) I PROPOSED TRANSMISSION LINE ROUTES (I, F-G AND H) AND FIELD INTENSITY CHECK POINTS (1 THROUGH 5 SHEET 6 0F 6) I ( . _ _ ____ ____ _-_
i O wJ ,
~~/ i / / ,~~
r
-, h Ib 10. b / I f a I I a i / I I R
~~It I I I w Ig I~~
~~4 / /~~
la /s Is . s - U \ JE e n g n l8 1 S i
~~$ v M N [5 p ~~~
~~O ' N 100~~
~~D IE i 1 5 s N I i IO~~
% IX l @h (x = ly l ly Ie I-@ Ic lR ~ ja ja ja 5
s2 r *a F ta fn fE A 0 50 1]O ly 200 250 3 '~ EILO70LTS -- L: Z T U G'lG.f!D CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 : 3 E NV IRONME NT AL RE NRT=OPER ATING LICE NSE STAGE FIGURE 3.9-2 RADIO INFLUENCE VOLTAGE FOR 345 kV UNSHIELDED INSULATOR-HARDWARE ASSEMBLIES
f O g'.go"
~~; o . . .I _~~
su
~~=g g r-lO .i.s ' 'N" '~~
i O'- 7 _!_ . t i 2 e'- o" ky 1, _ // 2e'o" _i 1 3 O'- Y to - 90 '- I " 7 e f 4 4 7 & 1
~~'2 e'- O "~~
d . d CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NVIRONME NTAL RE PORT.O PE R ATING LIC E NSE STAGE O FIGURE 3.9-3 TYPE HV-1B 345 kV TANGENT STRUCTURE 1
~~-r - , - + . . . . . - - --- - , , ,, -, , . ,--v-..--, s~~
~~O O g'. 6 " A - g= r-8 O" i 1.- _~~
~~, 12'- 8" , '~~
~~[y-26'-O"~~
~~-l: '2 6'- O" 1 O~~
~~2 6'-10" 87'-4 to # m x w x~~
~~> cr '2 6 '- O " __,_~~
3 O '- 9 " F I i i CLINTON POWER STATION i UNITS 1 AND 2 ; E NV IRO NM E NTAL RE PORT-O PE RAT ING L IC E NSE STAGE lh FIGURE 3.9-4 i TYPE HV-28 ! 345 KV ANGLE STRUCTURE
O 2'- 6 m
~~. _.3. _~~
~~i x- m n -~~
~~, g'- 6~~
~~i O'- 6" _ .-d ,_ M -' ~4 1 i 3 3 '. o" to l 8 9 '- 6 " i i 2 6'- O" R 6'- O " j ( I~~
~~\ :~~
N i l N CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRO NM E NTAl RE POR T-OPE RATING t.lCE NSE STAGE FIGURE 3.9-5 TYPE HV-3B 345KV ANGLE STRUCTURE
O i 8" u
~~- .L - ,_ 'r . in rL.~__J -.. Qi ~~~~
~~, -g -.~~
~~.. s 16'- 8" l 6'- 8" l2l- R,"~~
~~__ _J' - . l. [ .~~
~~.___JL .~~
2
~~\ ./. -~~
~~M .a --~~
/
~~l O R,6'- 6" to S S'- O" x x~~
& x & m 3 4'- O" 3 4'- O" y \ ?
~~I CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRONM E NTAL RE PORT-OPER A T O NG LICE NSE STAGE FIGURE 3.9-6 O TYPE HV-48 345KV ANGLE STRUCTURE~~
~~= _ - - ._~~
~~O n 8 ',' O " _. . d - __..L.~~
*~ ~}
~~l9C _i x;- , I8' 8" l 8'- 8" 14- %" U~~
~~-. 3: -~~
~~\. /~~
L
~~b. -~~
~~O 2 3'. 9'r to 8 2'- 3" x x m CP' [P" l~~
~~- 3 4'- O" 3 4'- O " .~~
s l l CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV I RO NM E' NT AL R E PORT.O PE R AT I NG L IC E N SE STAGE FIGURE 3.9-7 TYPE HV-5B 345 KV ANGLE STRUCTURE
l O , if 8 r g O"
~~- - . .L _ . _ ~ 7- _-.7 i B'- 8" =. .= - . .~~
~~p = k / w:._ n~~
~
~~. O 2s'.o" to 84'-6"~~
~~.c x x i~~
~~34'.o" ; 3 4'. o" -~~
~~! l i l i~~
CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NVIRONMENTAL REPORT OPEH ATING LICE NSE STAGE FIGURE 3.9-8 TYPE HV-6B 345KV ANGLE STRUCTURE _ _ - . ~. . , _ - _ - . _
5 '*- 0" - G'] u : -t ..
~~u. ;~~
~~a 6 ! 6~~
~~, 0 u.~~
~~I _14 ' -6" ; _ 15'-6" 36'-0" a t i~~
/ __o__._.__.= _ --u- -i i l h h h .i y g ij
_ 25'-0" _l_ 16'-0" 61' to 87' __ O = r CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRONME NT AL, RE PORT = OPE RATlNG l lCE NSE STAGE O FIGURE 3.9-9 b 345 KV DOUBLE CIRCUIT TANGENT STRUCTURE CLINTON POWER STATION TO LINE 4571
S - 0 " V'
~~,-__----o- -4 = - _ _ s_ a V~~
Dg
~~. i .g r~~
~~k,3+g - . 13'-0" _17'-0"~~
~~.14'-0" _ 16'-0" 36'-0" ~~~
~~i d3(k. 9~~
~~- i a a-- + t e -- u .~~
~~q, 12 '}-0" g, %g "e, h'g'% o _.y~~
~~% . k , Al , ,~~
~~g% 25'-0" -_ - _ 18'4" .14'-0"_ 25'-0"~~
~~/ ~'~~
62' O 2 ir f 1 CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IMONM E NTAL R E PORT-OPE R AT j NG LICE NSE STAGE Q FIGURE 3.9-10 345 KV DOUBLE CIRCUIT LIGHT GUYED ANGLE STRUCTURE CLINTON POWER STATION TO LINE 4571
5',-0" , _ _ . _ _ o - t. . . . l
~~%__p . - -- - u i~~
~~(]- "~~
% % 'n % %. A . 4, . 4 ,
~~_12'-0"_ _19'-0"~~
~~' ~ 13'-0" _~ ~_17'-0" _~~
~~36'-0"~~
~~) (~~
~~3r t--- --- - 9 c. ---~~
~~-- t t e c ,~~
~~f % %. , 14'-0" b4 4- 1,% (%.~~
~~%, %- 'A f - '~~
25'-0" _ _ 19'-0" 13'-0"_l 25'-0" = 79' __ ir l g CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRONME NTAL RE PORT *O PE RAT ING LICE NSE STAGE FIGURE 3.9-11 ( ' 345 KV DOUBLE CIRCUIT LIGHT UNGUYED ANGLE STRUCTURE l CLINTON POWER STATION TO LINE 4571
5' 0" f ' _ I t - s 1 L tt / hi 4
/
~~f : t 36'-0" y ,-6'L 14'~9" 12'-5" 16'-10" 10'-0" 2 r _~~
~~o Ow $ I~~
~~/ / / / / \~~
~~u 25'-0" 24'-5" 17'-0" _~~
20'-0" 69' to 99' , ., O *
+
i
/
~~I, j l CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E H,V IRO NM E NTAL RE PORT~~
~~OPE R AT ING L OC E NSE STAGE FIGURE 3.9-12 O 345 KV DOUBLE CIRCUIT MEDIUM GUYED ANGLE STRUCTURE CLINTON POWER STATION TO LINE 4571~~
~~L L [ N~~
~~- *- 26 -0 12'-0" .} 12 ' -0" _ .10 ' .~~
S 6 $ lCl :: 5 M--.-x r 24'-0" *
~
~~22'-0" a n f. -r . l a v 4 j- 9 24'-0" 131'-0" P 1~~
~~~ ~ C1 F - =~~
~~e O~~
~~\ \~~
~~i t Y ,__ '~~
~~.__._2.~~
~~CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRO NM E NTAL RE PORT~~
~~OPE RAT S NG LIC E NSE STAGE FIGURE 3.9-13~~
!O l 345 KV DOUBLE CIRCUIT TAP STRUCTURE IN LINE 4571 f CLINTON POWER STATION TO LINE 4571
5'-0" h_ (v -) . o r I b 5 l J ! i _16'-6"i_15'-6" _15 ' -6" _ l _16 ' -6" _ 41'-0" i
~~) I m - u N~~
~~y m i ' jj.-0" ' '~~
~~/ I i~~
~~l x l I~~
~~/ .t , 24'-0" i.12'-9" 12'-9" _i_~~
24'-0" l 69' to 86' O = f I I CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV I RO N M E NT AL R E POR T-O PE R A T I NG L ICE NSE STAGE FIGURE 3.9-14 O("N 345 KV DOUBLE CIRCUIT TANGENT STRUCTURE LINE 4571 TO OREANA SUBSTATION l l
5'-0" (-] a s ,r s
% g% , i 41'-0" _12'-0" i 18'-0" g- ,.13 ' -0" _17'-0" 3 ( , J " . . a- t t o - .
13'-6" sg Q h4 l 30'-0" _ 18'-8" ; 13 ' -2' _ 30'-0" _ l - . _ I' l 90'-0" l l CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRONM E NTAL R E POR T= OPE RAT I NG LICE NSE STAGE FIGURE 3.9-15 [] 345 KV DOUBLE CIRCUIT LIGHT ANGLE STRUCTURE LINE 4571 TO OREANA SUBSTATION
a li' T O 20'-0" 30'-0" _ 12'-0" _,
., - l j g= L .: ; > - 1-l [ '
I i I sl (i, I I h 24'-0" & (35'-0") l_ 15'-0" q
~~" l" O~~
e 21'-0" & (20'-0") F /~\ j- g FRONT VIEW CLINTON DOWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV I RO NM E NTAL R E POR T-O PE R AT I NG LICE NSE STAGE 3 FIGURE 3.9-16A {J 345 KV SINGLE CIRCUIT TANGENT DEAD END STRUCTURE CLINTON POWER STATION TO LINE 4571
o 20'-0"
~~/ ^ ' : C- : :. w. ^p .--_.~~
~~i) s, il ,N s~~
~~- N 3 45'-0" (55'-0") , 4 >~~
h
~~/ /~~
~~l I' .~~
~~" - sms SIDE VIEW l~~
1 CLINTON POWER STATION ! UNITS 1 AND 2 { E NV IRO NME NT AL RE POMT= OPE RAT ING LICE NSE STAGE j 's FIGURE 3.9-16B 345 KV SINGLE CIRCUIT TANGENT DEAD END STRUCTURE CLINTON POWER STATION TO LINE 4571
a o AA 20'-0" P l* 24'-0"
~~- ---4 ;~~
~~24'-0" 130' " er_ O~~
/
o i i \ _ CLINTON POWER STATION UNI'i :51 AND 2 E NV IRONM E NTAL RE PORT =O PE RATING LICE NSE STAGE FIGURE 3.9-17 345 KV SINGLE CIRCUIT GUYED DEAD END STRUCTURE LINE 4571 TO OREANA SUBSTATION m v, e.-- s1,er-W- -+-m v -
CPS-ER(OLS) O 1 a 1 APPENDIX 3.9A RADIATED ELECTRICAL AND ACOUSTIC NOISE MEASUREFENTS ON LINES EMANATING FROM THE BALDWIN POWER STATION AND ON LINE ROUTES FROM CLINTON POWER STATION O 1 k
/
O
~~--g a -, - - - p - -m ,~~
~~e , v.ww,,.y , - - ---- , --- - - - - +www~~
~~,. CPS-ER(OLS)~~
() APPENDIX ~3.9A RADIATED ELECTRICAL AND ACOUSTIC NOISE MEASUREMENTS ON LINES EMANATING FROM THE BALDWIH POWER STATION AND ON LINE ROUTES FROM CLINTON POWER STATION l I. AUDIBLE NOISE No audible noise could be measured on lines emanating from the Baldwin Power Station above the prevailing ambient noise level at the three locations tabulated below: , Location Ambient Level in dBA Line #4521, Structure #4 44 Due to Baldwin Power Station Line #4541, Struct2re #7 40 Due to Baldwin Power Station and traffic Line #4521, Structure #27 38 Due to. wind These readings were taken with a General Radio Company 1551-C Sound Level Meter which meets ASA 51.4 and IEC R123 specifica-tions. All readings were identical at each location when mea-sured at the right-of-way line or directly under the power line. j The temperature was approximately 30 F with a relative humidity ) of 30%. All measurements were completed November 30, 1972, be-4 tween 5 and 7 P.M. and the noise level is not unusually high or
~~, low for the. conditions as described above.~~
4 II. RADIO FREQUENCY INTERFERENCE Radio frequency interference (RFI) radiated from these lines at approximately 500 kHz and 1 MHz was measured under the center of the line and at the 82.5 foot right-of-way limits. These measure-ments were completed mid span south of Structure #4 on Lines 4511 and 4521 and mid span south of Structure #27 on Line 4521 and are tabulated below: Meter Peak Readings of Microvolts per Meter Location Setting Right-of-Way East Center Line Right-of-Way West Mid span between 500 kHz 150 140 80 j Structures #3 & 1 MHz 80 45 80 j #4 i l Mid span between 500 kHz 100 200 80 , Structures #26 & 1 MHz 40 40 30 ! #27 0 i Temperature was 10 F, relative humidity was 30%, with a slight ! . wind and a clear sky. All readings were obtained using a Stoddard NM20B Radio Interference and Field Intensity Meter, on December 6, This metering equipment meets the re-i 1972, between 1 and 4 P.M. t quirements of Category A instrumentation in specifications MIL ; 26600 (USAF) and Class 1 instrumentation in specifications MIL 16910 and MIL-1-6181. . 3.9A-1 1 i
~~. , , , . , . - . - . . . - , - , -, ,, .- , , _ . ,,,.- ,-- .-,w, . . . - - , , , . , ~ . . ~~~
CPS-ER(OLS) {} There was no electrical interference on any television channel that could be tuned in with a picture, namely St. Louis, Missouri, l channels 2, 4 and 5 at the above locations. These tests were. con-1 ducted using a portable Motorola television set having a standard j rod antenna. t Some interference could be heard on some broadcast radio stations l and will exist any time the field intensity of the signal is lees than ten times the radiated RFI level. Field intensity of five j stations was recorded at the previously mentioned locations and, i an expected, interference existed in two stations. These results a re tabulat ed below: Field Strength in Station Microvolts per Meter Reception Under Line i KSD 550 kHz St. Louis 5000 Clear j KXOK 630 kHz St. Louis 6000 Clear KSTL 690 kHz St. Louis 600 Horse
WHC0 1230 kHz Sparta 4000 Clear KWK 1380 kHz St. Louis 400 Noisc j
Reception of KSTL and KWK is clear at any point beyond 200 feet of l the line. Some " ghosting" problems or multiple path transmission from the tele-vision transmitter can be expected in those locations at which a tele-vision antenna is operated within 400 feet of the power line. How-ever, this problem has been successfully reduced or eliminated by antenna reorientation or by replacing the existing antenna with the type appropriate for improved reception under the conditions. III. CORONA INTERFERENCE Corona interference of broadcast radio can be expected when broad-cast radio reception is attempted in immediate proximity of the line. The extent of expected interference has been determined for several stations in the Bloomington-Clinton area at five locations as tabulated below: Field Intensity in Microvolts Per Meter Field Check Locations Frequency Sign Location #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 550 kHz KSD St. Louis 2000 1600 1400 1200 1000 630 kHz KXOK St. Louis
120

200 600

100

300 670 kHz WMAQ Chicago 4000 4000 4000 4000 2400 t
720 kHz WGN Chicago 2400 3200 2800 2000 2800 780 kHz WBBM Chicago 2400 2400 2800 2000 2000 i 890 kHz WLS Chicago 3000 2000 3800 3600 4000 970 kHz WMAY Springfield 1000 800 1400
400

400 1020 kHz WPE0' Peoria 1200 1600 1400 1400 1600 O- 1050 kHz WDZ Decatur 6000 4000 3800 1800 1600 1120 kHz KMOX St. Louis

200 4000 1400 800 600 l
3.9A-2
CPS-ER(OLS) i- Field Intensity in Microvolts Per Meter i Field Check Locations l Frequency Sign Location #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 1230 kHz WJBC Bloomington 8000 10000
200 800 6000 1290 kHz WIRL Peoria 1100 6000 3200 2400

400 1340 kHz WSOY Decatur 2400 4000

200 1000 1000 1400 kHz WDWS Champaign 1000 4000 2000 1200 600 e 1490 kHz WDAN Danville

200 1000 1600 1400

200 i
~~1520 kHz WHOW Clinton 36000 80000 24000 3200~~
150 j 1580 kHz WKID Urbana 600 1000

400

280

200 t
l The readings were recorded in microvolts per mete'r using the Stoddard 1 NM20B on 12/7/72 between 10 A.M. and 3 P.M. The temperature was
; 10 F with slight overcast. Locations are (see Figure 3.9A-1): #1 2 Miles Southeast of Lane #2 5 Miles East of Wapella
~~#3 4 Miles East of kapella i #4 North edge of Downs~~
~~#5 South edge of Downs '~~
~~The asterisks (*) refer to those locations at which the indicated station had. noise in the detected signal. These points were less than 500 microvolts, the accepted udnimum level for satisfactory~~
; reception as established by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The stations indicated by an asterisk probably will have 4 , additional interference in the signal when tuned-in under the new
~~lines.~~
~~k 1 i I 4~~
~~'O i~~
f 3.9A-3 l.
i ( ,
.&, w.g ~w e&s ,.gpywGwW. m4 = 3 r g. .yW gr m4 r,;4.;n,.q3.qarm ,
L.rg wa pd e.gw. 4,y. A.,,#. yv e
~~< =_.. q.. -~~
~~11)w, 3.p~by, ,e yw' .;n ,nof;s~~
~
~~z r w+ew y . .;~~
~~)n . =p ; ' *s,~~
~~n.,y--- +. 9.. yA. &l n. <~~
~~. .. i f, ,&y Y ~~~
L
** l; , 4tmah ' - , , , ' g.
k
~~.Y.-- .Lm Ai ,' ,IlQ*?;~~
~~4 x3 o I.3y,.,5~~
.1 .;m'6 , g&.'e n ~ 'Q--, f . ~ 4 K_M
f.
~~r .-Y' A+ A Nl *h* A~~
,: . p i . .. 4) ,- .9~, . ~.gm~ ;l4 Q'.g y' qY .., g, c . mly;ww<.w), .m r y .
~~y wep. u!~~
~~-1 1~~
~~y)= .n. . . -(h 3 c~~
%j ., . .~v ,N~*f"*d la : .'9 *a *- = - ~
~~3*3 ~-. .p_ ~~~-~~
~~~[~ g ,~~
~~k_('$_ 1.'f, gj p ' k 7 h V.] ,, %7>! I "d , E __ f' s~~
~~,L ^~~
~~d' '1 .,,,if. 'y}hE~~
',9** ] j' Q(~i , 'i'* l / 1P4 $f
4 - ,
~~g /> a~~
,'./*, [ t [%,f . o a> +r' r.' -) (~ .e a r -e %2 , s 0 e m , 2. p .%e ,
1,Ca;c[ .T Wa.i n p ,. b' jn%s WK4.. a / M, d 1. u m.n g i., M1 S ., ge r a l M, M' .', b."W. ". r. ' 4 A A
~~~ $ l. ,: ' -~~
~~s. 1 . 'r...E~~
~~. . . . . m.o)'..m.h. .~~
~~a..~M..g,,. <~~
. :, - ',Y (,].@@ydiMi~4$.-%, ~ f. .A /d% [A Ti +.y l J' \ . e' .
c . eQ.,jllh.. ,. c, . . pqm w i ,
;.' j. p.y ..; r g:.-y/gc' ,g;. g .3 .pk . .;r<y;. m :1F .. rug W ,4, . _ , %y p . gf , < - f. .
~~S 4~~
, ,, mn , -,. .= <
~~2 . , . p ,,. . g,. 9~~
~~,y r( 3 c- 1g'; g .9_o# q t; 3. g ,.s. .~~
~~_ . 4.m ;.~~
- ,o . .y.x, - .y ;) rA .-a . lag d,4 J.,,; u . y , A., 3 e
~~t , 7 =~~
. p.. . . - ,. w .~, .,. , ,-,e, . . , . - . .L,.
m) ' * .k., - - ff['
~~'1.* . ,~~
~~BROf(AW~~
.\.-f 'j*c n 4 . ' l $s .E'l , .
h': N$8N, _/. '* .h /( ,'. [a[lud)[a.I1~ .. m. . 'h(g,7k.. +D r u.</ F. .n. . ,
~~w. .'~~
. . + . ,. 1 .. _. ., n., . - -
~~M, A.-pl~~
.. .#.- .1 . ~ ~ F '- .,) r 7 , , '5' y ~---- ,,1.1 g Y.fh,h 3,l':, , . ., ak' 'n.t' >. 4 V ? ig. . /( J -@gn_ lo,*' I I Q. ,9gt g :,
t
~~,n i ;~~
n
~~.p m.,s g- .r.:~~
i
~~; i. v..~~
~~x 6r nl'- \e,.n. 9', <~~
~~'t '*-~~
~~p-. S..pw.w. , O~': i~~
~t "--s. .w 3<,5r t - i,. -
~~L,_ - b tj w,-%l;.--~~
~~. t t - c ,'; .2 C r,- '~~
pn .,,4.Gyjd y, I
,y , y: a . _.gg ;pr ,. + ~.j ' < : , 7. . %
~~m:Lg. c,n .~~
' , V,p.yla uq~ i _z%..- A m+. , y m k1.s . , %g ..g 'qV . .
r a m, ; ,, r , y! ; . . if ,.y , o s 2f..Q(l';:1'Q}
~~$'i4'f, cyl:' yQ R([' lll;*i n._lfR@&, .~~
~~y f&,..; Q. Q f y f g % fy,.Qy %, - . i m.~~
*~
~~1 l~~
- ,q!p) u a 1 c,.a . r3 spgg@vM . ,.n .mdb;.. a.=~.p..m Mf (1 4.,.. r%m .
e
~~.u._..m eu /~~
~~J l b i t~~
~~-'{t '~~
~~ti; s ' ,il " ~..M~~
2. , -,.-m......... 8 k T7'l ,,\ S, '. j f . -- '-... Os '
, %i V(, .. . . . ~ *J l ' 'b i' s
k# t . m ,, ,.mA j i 'E f (, 3 - - ;-.p t c[ 5:' 1 - - -.A s. ~ r W- <: p t_..i__ _1 ,.= /f
~~.-[I n.ok v'.)e c t' i --~~
~~y'W,-'--l. (, M,m agi.%,h___- . .A ' Q~~
~~.g 1 ,~~
~~j j '. . ' , f- ( .* *. 'L ;j "Q,go~~
~~' , u. . .t i '~~
~~p . h - %x i: ., 4k $. . cpi > { , 4~~
~~-- ' - - h- s e- '~~
~~k,..f. fy. . g,_ gI l;- '1- - -, --.4- .ypi-M , ' -- ---%. , y- - - , -[n .~~
) ----- , i -[[ M-9h seg- q , - dd =.'.- r ']
i. ( *
~~2 ' ,b) .s t # -~~
~~2 2 s. ' }. ; Q f (. -,~~
- f, ., pg, 1 y s , a *..t t ', %a ;, cu= To,e t / l{ 4 i( , \ <";,i i . t _ ' _. _ _ .:.
1 Eb .,' - l i 7_ ,, , - 7 45 p- 'f), s e\r
- ~ , , , %y,- *c.,)9 J ' (
~~i, , ,~~
,.g**) ' Y ' * ' ' d }, f j O <',
y -) M},y p.,i . , '-q,-,' , u ;;,A, -Q-.p{ >,d~;i.,"O=.' U m .. e 2 . s l,s> , . 3 i
~~> ,. , }, f .' .~~
~~rc}.--~~
~~h. .~~
~~- r-, A ' A ' '~~
~~i 'C ' . - ~, - - p N.ii~~
>%w),(., - .. i 'q.. .. ..
i
.+
j
~~' ,g;', 7 jf.' ygl'.~~
Qq, . . ')j.- f * . <3].
-
~~M..- g . { i,j 7 %x, ; . e~~
~~;- [ "l= r t, s.:,_ ' ". ; . ' t 5~~
{ .5 -- 1.x , 2 e > > .\',_____7 y~
~~~'. . , ,,~~
t
,, , ^j - i g q.;,y*y;. p %~';c.4____s w
t , _2 _ _ _ . .-q ',g . l , ; 7 O,
, , , . g, , ; ,,3 g i .2 .,_ i . n. _' n" , _+
~~t t . ,< 4 4~~
~~. g~~
~~f. }}y . ) ,, '~~
~~u\1 i, ,.~~
~~, r) : 5M Uy.y*dD k'> -ip' . )~~
61 ! ,d - '. . . b, a - i2 i . . , . . 4 i * . I, ', . = a 3 , ' A. \ . ., i } -: - l j
~~- ' {^-~~
~~i t,i },'ta~~
.k_9 'p j \
y _ _.S._ .), , .h
,, , , _. - . _s e l phyye y p ,r, .t4' im f.f, -r .,' p- ----- g. ,r (, s r.
~~i i n l t 17a ,t~~
~~,*t, .~~
~~p '. s,J '*'3f-i~~
~~i. 4~~
~~, o -~~
~~o f M ,* - a~~
,, ( e i i \.-. ,- + .,i ,g s i } ' (p - . ; ^ - .7l fp .
i4.M ,[, - '- f" " - - l - -' Y '[4]
)
~~iE \, : 1,i' P' l'; f ' '~~
~~'- N '\' <4 's k[M,i.e.3 ' R :th a~~
~~Y,,.', $ , ,I ' , ' .~~
l !, , ' y __ i a,rr wI . ;J d t <!
s
' +-e 4 .m M ... d e- ~ -[i ( .
s
~~., I,/ [' ' ' ' ., }\ =,~~
a S.>,q .--- . [.T w rm( _L, j, s g. g.. i m m gp s
~~._(. . y,. . . .....g.-~~
rf j _ ,. _s % ' .,[ j7.L.!
~~,,L .~~
k .. : ', H J. i ' ; ?r , d % ,, L' . /d. f k gc .
' ,i a A. .,h -
g
~~- %.=-_. o, , . . . = <~~
~~m...__-- ,~~
~~f. -~~
g . A rq - CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IOO N M E NT AL R E POR T-O PE R AT I NG L IC E NS E STAGE FIGURE 3.9A-1 PROPOSED TRANSMISSION LINE ROUTES (B, F-G AND H) AND FIELD INTENSITY CHECK POINTS (1 THROUGH 5) e
--,s-eo n n. a -m .a,m-mm-mmm4.--, ass a mmmaaumw+m-w m m.sme m- w mm, - ..u-a meam - -asm,--no+.m---- --- - - ,-+m -.am. - a f
l i g f l O , CPS-ER(OLS) l l, i O APPENDIX 3.9B GROUND RESISTANCE TEST i I l I i i i I I l l O
CPS-ER(OLS) O APPENDIX 3.9B i GROUND RESISTANCE TEST I i Ground resistance tests were made at each transmission line tower before the shield wire was electrically connected to any tower. If the ground resistance value was found to exceed 10 l ) ohms, under normal atmospheric conditions and not while the ground was damp from rains or heavy dews, additional ground rods l were installed to meet the 10 ohm criteria. The ground resistance test was performed as follows: 1
1. An auxiliary current electrode (a ground rod driven approximately two feet deep is generally satisfactory) was located approximately 120 feet from the tower to be tested.

2. An auxiliary potential electrode (same as the auxiliary ,
~~A current electrode) was located approximately 75 feet 1 !l U- from the tower being tested.~~
3. Using a null-balance tester, connected to the tower j' ground and the auxiliary current and potential elec-trodes in accordance with the tester manufacturer's instructions, the ground resistance of the tower ground was read directly.
I i f 1 1 3.9B-1
CPS-ER(OLS) - CHAPTER 4 - ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF SITE PREPARATION, STATION CONSTRUCTION, AND TRANSMISSION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 4.1 SITE PREPARATION AND STATION CONSTRUCTION 4.1-1 4.1.1 Land Use 4.1-1 4.1.2 Water Use 4.1-4 4.1.3 Monitoring Program 4.1-6 4.1.3.1 Terrestrial Studies 4.1-6 4.1.3.1.1 Flora 4.1-6 4.1.3.1.1.1 Abandoned Pasture (Site 1) 4.1-7 4 4.1.3.1.1.2 Upland White Oak Woods (Site 2) 4.1-7 4.1.3.1.1.3 Mesic Woods (Site 3) 4.1-8 4.1.3.1.1.4 Floodplain Woods (Site 4) 4.1-9 4.1.3.1.1.5 Xeric Woods (Site 5) 4.1-9 4.1.3.1.2 Fauna 4.1-10 4.1.3.1.2.1 Small Mammals 4.1-11 4.1.3.1.2.2 Medium-sized Mammals 4.1-12 4.1.3.1.2.3 Birds 4.1-12 4.1.3.2 Aquatic Studies 4.1-14 () 4.1.3.2.1 Water Chemistry 4.1.3.2.2 Periphyton 4.1-14 4.1-15 4.1.3.2.3 Benthos 4.1-16 4.1.3.2.4 Fish 4.1-16 4.2 TRANSMISSION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION 4.2-1 4.2.1 General 4.2-1 4.2.2 Construction Activities 4.2-1 4.2.2.1 Material and Storage Yards 4.2-1 4.2.2.2 Field Offices and Headquarters 4.2-2 4.2.2.3 Right-of-Way Clearing 4.2-2 , 4.2.2.4 Structure Erection 4.2-5 4.2.2.5 Wire Stringing 4.2-6 4.2.3 Biological Changes 4.2-6 4.2.3.1 Vegetation 4.2-6 4.2.3.2 Wildlife 4.2-7 4.2.4 Aesthetic Values 4.2-7 4.2.4.3 Line Routes 4.2-7 4.2.4.2 Herbicide Effects 4.2-7 4.2.5 Land Crossed 4.2-7 4.2.5.1 Lines 4.2-7 4.2.5.2 Access Roads 4.2-8 (} . 4-i
~~.. _ - - _ - _ _ . . , _ . . _ ~ _ . _ . _ _ - .~~
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) O PAGE 4.3 RESOURCES COMMITTED 4.3-1 4.3.1 Land Resources 4.3-1 4.3.2 Water Resources 4.3-5 4.3.3 Material Resources 4.3-7 4.4 RADIOACTIVITY 4.4-1 4.5 CONSTRUCTION IMPACT CONTROL PROGRAM 4.5-1 4.5.1 Background Information 4.5-1 4.5.2 Program Res?cnsibilities 4.5-2 4.5.3 Control Measures 4.5-3 4.5.3.1 Noise 4.5-3 4.5.3.2 Erosion 4.5-3 4.5.3.3 Dust 4.5-3 4.5.3.4 Transportation Access 4.5-4 4.5.3.5 Rainfall Runoff 4.5-4 4.5.3.6 Channel Blockage 4.5-4 4.5.3.7 Ground Water 4.5-4 4.5.3.8 Fuel, Oil, and Chemical Wastes 4.5-5 4.5.3.9 Aquatic and Terrestrial Ecology - 4.5-5 a 4.5.3.10 Disposal of Unmerchantable Timber 4.5-5 W 4.5.3.11 Habitat Improvements 4.5-5 1 1 I l i l l l 1 l j 4-ii 1
1 CPS-ER(OLS) 1 e 1 l CHAPTER 4 - ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF SITE PREPARATION, STATION : r x i CONSTRUCTION, AND TRANSMISSION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION l LIST OF TABLES i. TITLE PAGE i ( NUMBER 4.1-1 Numbers and Types of Craftsmen Employed by Month during Construction of the Clinton Power Station 4.1-19 i
~~'4.3-1 Land Use Comparison 4.3-8 l~~
! 4.3-2 Summary of Timber Sold from Clinton Power Station Site 4.3-9 4.4-1 Annual Person-Rem Exposures to Unit 2 4 Construction Workers 4.4-2 i i i i !O . i l l i l
~~O ,~~
i l 1 4-iii
CPS-ER(OLS) CHAPTER 4 - ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF SITE PREPARATION, STATION CONSTRUCTION, AND TRANSMISSION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION LIST OF FIGURES NUMBER TITLE 4.1-1 Area Zoned Industrial at the Clinton Power Station Site O l l l i 0 0 4-iv
CPS-ER(OLS) tm V CHAPTER 4 - ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF SITE PREPARATION, STATION
ONSTRUCTION, AND TRANSMISSION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION 4.1 SITE PREPARATIOP AND STATION CONSTRUCTION The construction of the Clinton Power Station began in October, 1975 with the activities specified in the Limited Work Authori-zation (LWA) (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (U.S. NRC3 1975). Full construction activities commenced with the issu-ance of Construction Permits Number CPPR-137 and CPPR-138 on February 24 (U.S. NRC 1976).
The effects of site preparation and construction activities on land and water use and the results of the non-radiological en-vironmental monitoring program are describea in this sectic.. The primary unavoidable effect was the removal of about 7000 acres of agricultural land from production. Another important effect was the replacement of about 22 miles of lotic habitat, i.e., about 14 miles of Salt Creek and 8 miles of the North Fork of Salt Creek, with the lentic habitat of the 4895 acre cooling lake. 4.1.1 Land Use (]) A total of approximately 14,092 acres was purchased for the Clinton Power Station site. Table 4.3-1 presents an approxi-mate comparison of previous land use to the land use pattern during station operation. A total of about 980 acres was used for the construction area of the station complex, of which 333 acres has been zoned Industrial. This 333-acre area is fenced and is the location of the plant facilities and associated structures (see Figure 4.1-1). About 80 acres of the Industrial site is inundated by Lake Clinton at the normal pool elevation of 690 feet (MSL). In addition to the area zoned Industrial, the discharge flume and spoils occupy about 285 acres. The dam and spillways occupy 380 acres of which about 20 acres is inundated. Approximately 20 acres were used for construction of the Visi-tor's Center and associated facilities. About 1500 acres is being leased for farming. A marina and associated facilities are built on about 150 acres. About 10,700 acres of land were required for the 4,895 acre lake, the 100-year floodplain, the erosion control zone, and maintenance access around the lake. Much of this area and the marina and Visitor's Center are available for public recreation. A total of 10,420 acres of the 14,092 acre site is open to public use, with 10,250 acres being managed by the Illinois Department of Conservation (IDOC) and 170 acres managed by Illinois Power Company (IP). (^)s (_ Subsections 2.1.3.3 and 5.6.1 describe the Lease Apreement between IP and the IDOC that delineates each party s responsi-bilities and describes the land under IDOC control. 4.1-1
CPS-ER(OLS) Site preparation was completed in two stages. The first stage consisted of stripping, excavating, and backfilling the a areas to be occupied.by structures and roadways. The second W stage consisted of developing the facilities needed to sup-port construction, such as access roads, parking lots, con-struction offices , warehouse, trackwork, unloading facilities , water wells, construction power, and construction drainage. A daily log is maintained of construction activities under-taken, and this log provides a chronological record of all major activities. Table 4.1-1 presents the manpower require-ments for the construction effort through 1978. The clearing of areas of natural vegetation, disposing of trash, and excavating and land filling activities during construction of the reservoir, dam and spillways, power sta-tion, and intake under dis-harge canals altered existing terrain features and wildlife habitats. Disturbances to soil and vegetation also occurred in areas peripheral to construc-tion sites. The effects that represent a commitment of re-sources are discussed in Section 4.3, and a summary of the results of the baseline and construction non-radiological environmental monitoring program is presented in Subsection 4.1.3. During the construction of the submerged dam (for the ultimate heat sink) and the main dam, the normal water flow was re-routed through excavated channels to allow work to proceed. Dewatering was accomplished by pumping the water into the heat sink from the power block and then pumping it into the lll North Fork of Salt Creek. In effect, the heat sink was used as a settling basin and the water was reasonably free of silt before it was pumped to the creek. Data from the water quality monitoring program is included in Section 2.2. Site roads as well as the main work areas were watered to control dust. Pore pressure buildup in the main dam was monitored by means of pneumatic pressure cells. Groundwater levels in the abut-ment and downstream of the main dam were measured by means of observation wells. Data gathered are discussed in Section 2.4. When filling of the lake was begun, on October 12, 1977, a continuous flow of water was maintained in Salt Creek below the dam by allowing water to flow through the outlet works into the concrete stilling basin (at the downstream end of the spillway) and finally into a channel that flows into Salt Creek. The upstream end of the channel, i.e. , just below the stilling basin, has been riprapped to prevent scouring. Clearing of the lake bed was begun in October, 1975, with the receipt of the LWA and was completed in late summer of 1977. l Areas of the lake bed were cleared in the following sequence . the ultimate heat sink area, the main dam area, the area from ! the main dam up Salt Creek, and the area from the main dam up ggg 1 4.1-2
CPS-ER(OLS) r~} the North Fork of Salt Creek. Most of the area on the North (_- Fork of Salt Creek above State Route 54 did not require ex-tensive clearing because it was primarily agricultural land. In general, only the riparian timber strip and several small ravines in this section of the North Fork of Salt Creek re-quired clearing. During the clearing process, a belt of vegetation was maintained along the creeks to the extent prac-ticable to serve as a filter for runoff water. Even areas that were completely denuded soon developed a dense stand of such annuals as ragweed, giant ragweed, evening primrose, foxtail grass , velvet leaf, and jimson weed that served to break up falling rain and to filter runoff. The waste material generated from clearing was disposed of by selling all timber - of commercial value, burning in accordance with applicable regulations, and in some instances , burying. The majority of construction activities occurred at the loca-tion of the power plant. The area near the plant has been used for material laydown, material warehousing, construction offices, craft change rooms, a vehicle maintenance garage, " the central laboratory, and a concrete batch plant. This area is fenced for safety and industrial security reasons. Some of the area immediately outride the fence has been used for mater-ial laydown and a parking lot to accommodate the construction workers. This unpaved lot is watered as necessary to control dust. O A railroad spur of approximately 2 miles was built from the Illinois Central Gulf Railroad line north of the site. Trees have been planted on both sides of this spur south of State Route 54. This track parallels the main entrance to the 4 ] plant. The remainder of the land along the spur (outside the
~~; right-of-way) has been allowed to revert to a natural state.~~
~~The trees planted at the entrance, in October of 1976, were a J~~
~~mixture of American beech, European beech, white ash, blue I ash, Kentucky coffee tree, tulip poplar, red oak, sawtooth l oak, and American linden. This planting covers about 15 acres.~~
l These trees were inspected during 1977 and those that had not survived were replaced with balled nnd burlapped stock during 1978. Standard-noise control devices on trucks and other equipment have been sufficient to keep offsite noise to below accept-able limits. Section 2.7 presents data gathered during a noise monitoring program. This program was designed to deter-mine noise levels at the site fence, at the closest residence in each direction, and at the three nearest communities: Birkbeck, DeWitt, and Lane. Birkbeck is located about 2 miles west-northwest of the power plant site; DeWitt is located about 3 miles east-northeast of the plant site; and Lane is located about'3.5 miles southasouthwest of the plant. h~' The mitigation measures designed to lessen the impact of con-utruction are described in Section 4.5. 4.1-3 .
CPS-ER(OLS) The only historical site in the immediate area was the Valley Mill, which was constructed in 1845. It was unusual in that it had a vertical reciprocating saw. IP was in the process of (l) negotiating an agreement to move the mill into the town'of Clinton where it would have been preserved. Unfortunately the mill was vandalized and burned before this move was accom-plished. Archaeological resources in the area were explored through the Illinois State Museum. "An Archaeological Survey of the Pro-posed Clinton Reservoir, DeWitt County, Illinois" was submit-ted as Appendix 2G of the Environmental Report-Construction Permit Stage (CPS-ER) with Supplement 3 (February 21, 1974). That report was an assessment of the surficial archaeological resources in the proposed reservoir based on the field study funded by IP. The report documented 132 previously unrecord-ed archaeological sites in the region and recommended that some subsurface testing be conducted at several of the sites that were of potential significance for understanding Illinois prehistory. IP funded the subsurface testing that was conducted at 10 sites. Appendix 2.6A presents the detailed report of this work, the purpose of which was to assess the possible archaeological significance of each site. The results of the study showed that two of the sites (the Pabst site and the Miller site) had undisturbed archaeological remains preserved beneath the surfi- a W cial zone. The other eight sites generally had been destroyed by farming and/or soil erosion. The Miller site was extensively excavated during the study. The Illinois State Museum, at the request of IP, made appli-cation that the Pabst Site be nominated to the National Regis-ter of Historic Places, and the site was accepted on April 30, 1975. IP then funded the scientific investigations of the Pabst site. Excavations were undertaken in 1975; Appendix 2.6B describes and discusses these excavations and the non-organic remains collected. The depositional history of the site is outlined and an attempt is made to place the prehis-toric occupations in perspective. Sufficient data was collect-ed for a meaningful analysis of the significance of the cite. The Wilmore Cemetery (Section 28 of Harp Township) is the closest cemetery to Lake Clinton. The bank between it and the lake has been heavily riprapped to reduce bank erosion and preclude the possibility of subsequent disturbance to the cemetery. 4.1.2 Water Use Construction of the Clinton Power Station and its associated cooling water lake had both beneficial and detrimental effects a on aquatic biota in the impounded creeks. During site prepara- W tion and plant construction, the surrounding terrain was altered 4.1-4
CPS-ER(OLS) . (~)' by grading, dredging, transporting dirt for fill, clearing '~ the land of terrestrial vegetation, and other construction activities. These activities lef t areas subj ect to erosion and consequently 1ad to some siltation in the adj acent creeks. Measures were taken to minimize the effects of runoff, but a limited amount of silt deposition in the creeks was unavoid-able. All stream habitat within the bounds of the cooling lake was destroyed by lake filling. Subsection 4.1.3 pre-sents the summary conclusions of the monitoring study that was conducted to determine the effects of construction and lake filling on the aquatic and terrestrial habitats at the Clinton site. The data collected during this monitoring are presented in Section 2.2, and-the methods used in the pro-gram are described in Chapter 6. Care was taken during clearing and construction activities to minimize erosion as much as possible and consequently prevent the destruction by siltation of productive down-stream habitat that supports fish, macroinvertebrates, and plants. Weekly erosion control checklists were used (see Sec-tion 4.5) to locate areas where erosion was or could become a problem. A flow of 5 cfs is the design minimum discharge rate for Lake Clinton. This value is approximately 2.5% of the past 29 r3 year average flow in Salt Creek, which was 202 cfs , but is (J seven times as great as the recorded low flow of 0.7 cfs at Rowell, 12 miles downstream from the lake discharge point. During lake filling, a minimum of 40 cfs of water (as speci-fled by the U.S. NRC) was passed through the main dam outlet works and into Salt Creek. This quantity is almost 20% of the average flow and 57 times the recorded low flow. When the lake was closed in October, 1977, the calculated flow through the outlet works was about 88 cfs, or more than twice the required flow specified in the U.S. NRC construction per-mit. This 88 cfs is more than 40% of the average flow and more than 125 times the recorded low flow. These flow rates were considerably higher than the 5 cfs (design minimum dis-charge) evaluated in the CPS-ER, and the concomitant effects on the Salt Creek ecosystem were less than those predicted in the CPS-ER. As mentioned previously, a stilling basin is in place to reduce water velocity and hence reduce down-stream erosion and siltation from the water that flows through the outlet works or over the spillway. A channel about 1000 feet long connects the spillway to the original stream bed of Salt Creek downstream from the dam. The upper end of this channel is riprapped to reduce erosion scouring by the release flow. The small portion of Salt Creek circumvented by the release channel (about 1500 feet) is thus completely dry except for runoff, dam seepage, and the backwater from the discharge channel. (}) 4.1-5
CPS-ER(OLS) The major aquatic impact of the Clinton Power Station is obviously the creation of a large lake habitat in place of the former stream habitat. The effects of this dramatic change were predicted in Subsection 4.1.2 of the CPS-ER for lll each of the major types of biota, i.e., aquatic macroinver-tebrates, plankton, periphyton, macrophytes, and fish. In summary, the overall effects of lake formation on the aquatic communities to be inundated were described as beneficial to some species and detrimental to others. "Those species which require flowing waters for their survival will no longer exist throughout approximately 22 miles of stream. Other species, which have less stringent habitat requirements, will survive and may even assume dominance in their respective communities. Although the impoundment will ultimately eliminate some aquatic populations, other species will succeed them and fill the ecological niche which has been vacated. This succession may lead to a reduced species diversity for the benthic inver-tebrates; however, it will probably increase the diversity of the plankton communities." As stated previously, a monitoring program is being conducted to document the changes that occur as the result of lake formation. 4.1.3 Monitoring Program During 1972-1973, a baseline (preconstruction) monitoring pro-gram was established to document the existing ecological characteristics of the site area and to serve as a frame of reference for predicting the effects of lake formation and a W station construction. In May of 1974, the monitoring program was resumed. The data collected during 1972-1973 and from 1974 to the beginning of construction in October, 1975, thus reflect the preconstruction condition of the site. The data collected from October, 1975, until plant operation reflect the condition of the site during the construction and lake fill-ing phases. The monitoring program methodology is described i in Chapter 6 of this report. The following subsections present l summary information from the preconstruction, construction, l and early lake filling phases of the monitoring program. This l monitoring was conducted by NALCO Environmental Sciences I (formerly Industrial Bio-Test) of Northbrook, Illinois. The full results of the monitoring program appear in the annual reports (Industrial Bio-Test 1975, NALCO 1976, 1977, and 1978) . More detailed ecological information from these annual reports , is presented in Section 2.2. 4.1.3.1 Terrestrial Studies The results of ecological monitoring of terrestrial plants and animals are discussed in the following subsections. 4.1.3.1.1 Flora Five habitats were monitored during the study. These included O 4.1-6
CPS-ER(OLS) the Abandoned Pasture (Site 1), the Upland White Oak Woods g-)s x_ (Site 2), the Mesic Woods (Site 3), the Floodplain Woods (Site 4), and the Xeric Woods (Site 5) (see Subsection 2.2.1.1 data for vegetation monitoring) . Comparisons among years are made in the following subsections and generally show no discernible impacts directly attributable to station construction. 4.1.3.1.1.1 Abandoned Pasture (Site 1) Woody species have gained importance at this site since the 1972 baseline survey, and a well-defined upper stratum of trees and shrubs has developed. Because no quantitative tree-and shrub data were collected before 1977, no definitive com-parisons can be made between preconstruction and construction data. Little vegetational change occurred in the ground layer be-tween May, 19 7 7 , and May , 19 76 , or 19 75 , i . e . , during the construction period. Corresponding to the minimal change was the relatively high degree of floristic resemblance of 79% and 80% (see Figure 2.2-1). Cox (1972) found that indices in excess of 85% similarity should not be expected, even when comparing replicate data from the same community. In the pre-sent study, compositional changes occurred only among species g occurring in the community at less than 7.5% frequency. The Abandoned Pasture ground layer data from 1972 and from 1974 ([) showed a richer, more diverse species composition than that of 1977. Since the termination of grazing pressures in 1971, several introduced weedy annuals, such as Japanese brome (Bromus j aponicus) and common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) have largely disappeared or decreased in importance as secondary succession has progressed. In addition to compositional changes from secondary succession, compositional differences between 1977 data and 1972 data are also the result of seasonal variation between May sampling in 1977 and June sampling in 1972. , 4.1.3.1.1.2 Upland White Oak Woods (Site 2) During 1977, the structural and compositional data of the over-story and understory of the Upland White Oak Woods, particu-larly that data involving the dominant and important species, were very similar to that of 1976, 1975, and 1974. A slight reduction in the combined density and basal area of trees and 4 saplings was due to the loss of some trees through wind dam- I age in May, 1977. Dominant species of the shrub stratum in 1977 were similar to those of previous surveys. Moderate change i in the ground layer frou 1976 to 1977 was reflected by the relatively low degree (58%) of floristic resemblance between the two years (see Figure 2.2-1). {} 1 4.1-7 1
CPS-ER(OLS) Composition of the dominant groundlayer species has been largely unchanged since 1974; however, in 1977, both the number of species and their absolute frequencies were lower. Although the total number of species had declined, ti., ground llI layer cover at Site 2 was higher than usual probably aue to the occurrence of higher-than-normal temperatures in day, 1977. Difference in transect placement in 1972 and that of later years resulted in larger variation between 1977 data and baseline data, although the dominant species were similar. Canopy species recorded in the 1972 transects but absent in the 1977 transects included honey locust (Gleditsia triacanthos), hawthorn (Crataegus sp.), crabapple (Malus sp.), black walnut (Juglans nigra), sassafras (Sassafras albidum) , and catalpa (Catalpa sp. ) . Major differences between baseline and 1977 ground-layer data were reflected in the low degree of flor-istic resemblance caused by a drop in species diversity. Major dominants of all strata remained highly similar. Dif-ferences observed are likelv due to differences in transect
~
location, secondary succession, and climatic fluctuations. 4.1.3.1.1.3 Mesic Woods (Site 3) Little phytosociological change occurred in the Mesic Woods from 1975 to 1977. Overstory, understory, and shrub strata composition were highly similar in 1975, 1976, and 1977. Although shrub stratum composition was similar between these sampling periods, the estimated cover value varied. It was (g) 47.4% in 1975, 19.7% in 1976, and 22.6% in 1977. These dif-ferences are likely related to a difference in shrub sampling methods. Year-to-year comparisons of ground layer data yielded lower similarity values than in previous years (see Figure 2.2-1). Disturbance of some peripheral vegetation at this site by a private landowner took place in July, 1976. In 1977, domi-nant species were similar, but a significant number of annual species had invaded disturbed portions of the transect. Newly recorded annuals included speedwell (Veronica peregrina) , lamb's quarters (Chenopodium album), clearweed (Pilea pumila), common ragweed, and white dwarf plantain (Plantago virginica). The difference in transect locations on the mesic slope in 1974 and 1977 resulted in a broadened data base but limited compari-sons between these years. For example, sugar maple (Acer saccharum), red oak (Quercus rubra), and basswood (Tilia americana) were dominant overstory components of the 1974 data, but were of low importance in 1976. The degree of floristic resemblence between the two different transects, as indicated from ground layer composition, was a low 39%. Cammunity trends indicated by compositional variation among size classes and strata included the temporal increase of ggg 4.1-8
CPS-ER(OLS)
% mesophytes. Those species occurring as large trees (great-('J ~ er than 40 cm dbh) but poorly represented as saplings, such as black oak (Quercus velutina) , can be expected to eventually drop in importance. Species represented by various-sized sap-lings and trees, such as white oak (Quercus alba), can be expected to persist. The data indicate that the community dominants will retain their respective positions of importance, but, with community maturation, mesophytes and shade-tolerant species such as sugar maple and basswood will eventually increase.
4.1.3.1.1.4 Floodplain Woods (Site 4) During July of 1976 (after the May 1976 vegetation survey)about 7% of this site was cleared by a private landowner to create i a small pond. Consequently, this site lost its value for mak-ing comparisons to determine impacts after this time. The un-flooded portion is, however, being sampled to fulfill the
~~! requirements listed in the Final Environmental Statement (FES)~~
(U.S. Atomic Energy Commission {U.S. AEC) 1974) and to illus-trate the rapid invasion of the community by weedy species. The overstory and understory composition in 1976 (the first sampling after the beginning of station construction) was very similar to that recorded in 1975 (the last sampling prior to the beginning of station construction). The few differenecs (]) between these data were likely the result of successional maturation, t Shrub cover changed from 83% in 1974 to 32% in 1975 to 11% in 1976. Variation in transect location and sempling technique are responsible for thic wide range. Ground layer composition in 1976 was similar to that of 1974 and 1975 (see Figure 2.2-1). Data from each year showed cleavers as the dominant species. 4.1.3.1.1.5 Xeric Woods (Site 5) The location of the sampling transects at this site have varied from the baseline study to 1977, and phytosociological data from the community has varied accordingly. Permanent transects were established and marked in 1975; however, after the 1976 ~ l vegetation survey and before the 1977 survey, transect markers were removed on two 6f the three transects. Sampling-point i locations were approximated for these transects. Due to the varied sampling point locations , the utility of making in-j depth comparisons between 1977 data and that of previous years l will be diminished. l Although elms (Ulmus sp.) dominated the transects sampled in "x the Xeric Woods in 1972 and 1974, oaks (Quercus sp.) were fair-(d ly well represented. The placement of the 1975 sampling tran-sect near the dry ridge top resulted in more xerophytic species 4.1-9
CPS-ER(OLS) such as oaks being recorded as more prevalent in the over-story than in previous surveys. Hickories (Carya sp.)were a recorded as more common in the previous two surveys than in W 1975, 1976 and 1977. Little change occurred in the canopy and shrub layer between 1975 and 1976. White, black and red oaks, white ach (Frasinus americana) , and slippery elm (Ulmus rubra) dominated the over-story and eastern hop-hornbeam (Ostrya virginiana) , white ash, sugar maple, and slippery elm dominated the understory. Shrub stratum composition varied little from year to year, although the relative importance of minor species changed. In 1977, hackberry (Celtis occidentalis), appeared as new species in the overstory, understory, and shrub stratum and the import-ance of poison ivy increased greatly in the shrub stratum. The increased importance of these mesophytes was probably due to the new location of a sampling point in a mesic depression atypical of the general nature of the sampling tranc.a ts . Ground layer species composition at Site 5 was decreasingly similar between 1977, 1976, and 1975 (year-to-year similarity indices of 70% and 55%, respectively; see Figure 2.2-1). Generally, dominant species were similar from year to year, but the relative importances of less frequent species varied. Average ground layer cover was 42% in 1975 and 1977 and 24% in 1976. The reduced ground layer in 1976 may have been the effect of the unseasonal frost that occurred in the late spring of 1976. (l) The 1975-1977 phytosociological data indicate that the Xeric Woods was sub-climax in successional status. Fugot maple and eastern hop-hornbeam, generally climax components of dry-mesic forest (Curtis 1959), dominated the undet. tory and shrub stratum and were not present in the overstory. Sugar maple will probably become associated with oaks in the overstory and may eventually dominate. As light intensity in the lower strata decreases and mesicity increases, black oak, a rela-tively shade-intolerant oak species, is expected to be eliminated. At Site 5, species of the larger size classes were not represented in the sapling classes. Many older black oak trees appeared low in vigor, thus suggesting that the reduction of this species is emminent. Table 2.2-67 presents a phylogenetic listing of all the plants found at the Clinton site from 1974 through 1977. 4.1.3.1.2 Fauna The faunal surveys were conducted in the Abandoned Pasture, the Floodplain Woods, and the Xeric Woods from 1974 through 1978 (see Subsection 2.2.1.2 for data collected during these surveys). Comparisons among years are made in the following subsections and generally show no impacts directly attribut- a W able to station construction. 4.1-10
CPS-ER(OLS) 4.1.3.1.2.1 Small Mammals ({} Small mammal data were comparable from the baseline study through the 1977 monitoring study in the Abandoned Pasture and among the four monitoring years in the Floodplain Woods and Xeric Woods. However, the 1977 capture data from the Floodplain Woods represented a partial census, since the site was not sampled in November, 1977, because of flooded condi-tions (see Subsection 4.1. 3.1.1. 4) . Species richness was greater in the Abandoned Pasture than in other communities sampled in baseline and monitoring studies. Six small mammal species were recorded during the several years of study at this site. The white-footed mouse (Peromyscus leucopus) was captured during all five study years ; capture rates of this species followed a cyclical pattern and ranged from a low of 0.17 per 100 trap nights (TN) in 1975 to a high of 1.17/100 TN in 1974. Population fluctuations are normal for this species. Two species, the meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus) and southern bog lemming (Synaptomys cooperi) were only captured during the baseline study and the 1974 monitoring study. The house mouse (Mus musculus) was recorded in this community for the first time in 1977. The short-tailed shrew (Blarina bervicauda) declined in numbers from the 1974 monitoring study and was not observed during 1977, whereas the least shrew (Cryptotis parva) was present Os only during the 1974 and 1975 studies. Two species of small mammals were recorded in the Floodplain Woods during four years of study. The white-footed mouse was present during all four monitoring years , but the short-tailed shrew was only noted in 1974. The white-footed mouse main-tained a high population level in 1974 and 1975 but declined 52% between 1975 and 1976, and 73% since 1976. The decline from 1975 was probably a direct result of the removal of vege-tation from the Floodplain Woods. The decline in 1977 compared to 1976 was probably due to flooded conditions since the land-owner had cleared the site to make an impoundment. The white-footed mouse was the only species captured in the Xeric Woods during all four monitoring years. A cyclical I pattern of abundance occurred, with low capture rates in 1974 (1.33/100 TN) and 1976 (1.50/100 TN), and higher rates in 1975 (3.67/100 TN) and 1977 (4.50/100 TN) . The high capture rate in 1977 may have been due to the loss of habitat in the adjacent Floodplain Woods in Novamber forcing emigration to nearby areas. The mean. numbers of eastern cottontails (Sylvilagus floridanus) observed along the 20-mile route in May and~ July, 1977, were 0.5 per 20 mi. and 3.5 per 20 mi., respectively. Population I) levels in the spring census declined in 1974 from the base-line study in 1972 and remained stable through 1977. Summer counts of eastern cottontails also declined in 1974 from the 4.1-11
CPS-ER(OLS) baseline study, remained fairly stable through 1976, and in-creased in 1977. The cause of this recent increase during the summer census in 1977 is unclear. Eastern cottontail counts ll) were highest in the 1972 baseline study when 6.0 per 20 mi. and 4.5 per 20 mi. were noted in the spring and summer, respec-tively. Baseline values were higher than or equal to the 10-year (1960-1969) mean of eastern cottontails sighted per 20-mile route in the spring (2.8) and summer (4.9) in Game Regico 4, which includes DeWitt County (Preno and Labisky 1971T Spring and summer counts of cottontails near the Clinton Power Station were considerably lower than the 10-year mean during all monitoring stud _es. 4.1.3.1.2.2 Medium-sized Mammals Medium-sized mammals were live-trapped and visually observed in the five habitats during the monitoring program. A total of nine species were seen on site. In addition to these nine species observed in the sampling habitats, the beaver (Castor canadensis) and the river otter (Lutra canadensis) were also observed in the course of aquatic field work. 4.1.3.1.2.3 Birds Bird data from the three wooded communities and one grassland community were comparable from May, 1974, through February, 1978. Data collected in the Floodplain Woods during 1977 were a not directly comparable since they represented a partial cen- W sus. However, those months in which sampling did occur can be compared with data from previous years. Total species richness and abundance were lowest in the 1975-1976 study year, higher in 1977-1978 than in 1974-1975, and highest dur-ing 1976-1977. The specici composition and abundance in all communities except the Floodplain Woods during 1977-1978 were similar to those of previous years; most differences can be attributed to natural variation. The total of 9 species observed in the Floodplain Woods during 1977-1978 was lower than in previous monitoring years: 33 species each in 1974-1975 and 1975-1976, and 41 species in 1976-1977. This decline can be attributed to the disturbance of this community in 1976 resulting in a parti:1 census in 1977-1978. In addition to the decrease in number of species observed, a decrease in number of individuals was noted in the months that were sampled in 1977-1978. Changes in species composition were evidenced by the absence of all permanent residents in the Floodplain Woods during May and July, 1977. Permanent residents common to all previous moni-toring years but absent in the Floodplain Woods in 1977 in-cluded the mourning dove, common flicker, downy woodpecker, blue-jay, black-capped chickadee, tufted titmouse, cardinal, and American goldfinch. Therefore, changes in the avifauna lll 4.1-12
CPS-ER(OLS) of the Floodplain Woods were particularly evident in the (^l k> fourth monitoring year as a result of disturbances to the site that were unrelated to plant and cooling lake construc-tion. The total number of species recorded along the 20-mile survey routc (78) in 1977-1978 was greater than in any previous moni-toring year (77 species in 1976-1977, 73 species in 1975-1976, and 75 species in 1974-1975). The numbers of observations in May, July, and November,1977,were similar to corresponding months during the past three monitoring years but avian abun-dance during February was extremely variable trom one year to the next along the route. l , The total number of observations (1166) in February, 1978, was 50% less than that of 1977, 70% less than that of 1976, and 40% greater than that recorded in 1975. These variations from year to year were associated with variable weather conditions in February and not to site-related activities. In general, , species composition in 1977-1978 along the route reflected expected seasonal trends during migratory, breeding, and win-ter periods similar to those noted in previous monitoring years. Three upland game species, the bobwhite (Colinus virginianus), l Ring-necked Pheasant (Phasianus colchicus) , and Mourning Dove i were recorded along the 20-mile wildlife survey route. l (*h s_) The average numbers of bobwhite recorded per 20 miles in May l and July from 1974 to 1978 were 4.5 and 7.0, respectively. In May, 1978, bobwhite population indices remained constant i since 1976 but have generally declined since the 1972 base-l line study. Similarly, bobwhite population levels in July l declined from 1972 to a low of 7.0 bobwhite per 20 miles in 1975, recovered slightly to 12.0 bobwhite per 20 miles in
~~1976, and returned to 7.0 bobwhite per 20 miles in 1977. No j bobwhite were recorded during November, 1977, or February, 1978.~~
l In general, bobwhite population levels along the 20-mile route have declined since the 1972 baseline assessment. The numbers of ring-necked pheasants noted along the route dur-Eng 1977-1978 ranged from 0.5 birds per 20 miles in November to 9.0 birds per 20 miles in M ay. Numbers of ring-necked pheasants observed along the 20-mile route in May, 1977,(9.0 birds /20 miles) recovered slightly from the gradual decline since 1972. Ring-necked pheasant l population indices also increased in July, 1977, from the 1976 monitoring year, but were still lower than levels in 1975. The ring-necked pheasant population may continue to increase in the future as some of the cultivated land surrounding the reser-voir is allowed to revert to a natural state. Iu ,') 4.1-13 . I l
CPS-ER(OLS) Mourning dove observations in 1977-1978 ranged from a low of 0.0 birds per 20 miles in February to 12.5 birds per 20 miles in July. There were 11.0 birds per 20 miles and 12.5 birds per 20 miles recorded during May and July, 1977, respectively. lll Both figures were lower than the grand mean of 21.0 per 20 miles noted by Preno and Labisky (1971) for the years 1956-1966 in Game Region 4, which includes DeWitt County. Mourning dove counts in May and July have fluctuated since the 1972 baseline study, but a general decline was noticeable from 1975 to 1977-1978. 4.1.3.2 Aquatic Studies The aquatic monitoring results are summarized in the follow-ing four subsections; they consist of the water chemistry, periphyton, benthos, and fisheries information. In general, only two effects were noted due to construction activities. As would be expected, there was an increase in turbidity and nonfiltrable residue downstream from the main dam construction. Also, periphyton community changes were noted after dam closure. 4.1.3.2.1 Water Chemistry Water chemistry is discussed in Subsection 2.2.2.1. The moni-toring showed that weather, particularly precipitation that causes surface runoff, is the major controlling water quality variation in the study area. The precipitation data for the study period is shown on Figures 2.2-2 through 2.2-5. ggg The over one year of below average rainfall from April, 1976, to June, 1977, followed by precipitation peaks in August and Octo-ber caused maj or changes in certain constituents . In general, water temperature and dissolved oxygen concentra-tions followed natural seasonal trends. Oxygen concentrations were always above levels adequate to support aquatic life ex-cept in January, 1977, when ice cover at several locations pre-vented reaeration of the water column, and in July and August, 1977, when high organic loading probably reduced oxygen con-centrations. Concentrations of trace metals concentrations, PCB's, and pesticides in sediment were characteristic of unpolluted areas and were well below the levels considered potentially toxic to aquatic life throughout the monitoring period. The fecal coliform bacteria densities frequently exceeded the standards of the Illinois Pollution Control Board (IPCB) . Mercury and phosphorus concentrations were above the standards occasionally. This was common both before and after the start of construction. 9 4.1-14
CPS-ER(OLS) (~m
\J A comparison of preconstruction and construction phase data shows that few changes of importance occurred in water quality as a result of construction activities. Means for turbidity levels and nonfiltrable residue (suspended solids) concentra-tions did not show a major increase after the start of construc-tion activities. However, turbidity and suspended solid maxima did show large increases downstream from the dam con-struction site.
4.1.3.2.2 Periphyton Periphyton are discussed in Subsection 2.2.2.2. The dominance by diatoms during periods of cooler water along with the occasional dominance of green and blue-green algae during periods of warmer water is typical and has been repeat-edly documented during the monitoring programs of Salt Creek. In addition, almost all of the dominant periphytic algal taxa recorded during the five years of monitoring have been indica-tive of somewhat nutrient rich conditions. No meaningful shifts in dominant taxa were apparent from preconstruction to the construction phase programs. The most evident control of crop size noted during all of the l em, monitoring programs has been the effects of scouring caused t ,) by fluctuating water levels within Salt Creek. Stable water l levels caused by little or no precipitation usually resulted in the largest yearly crops. During November, 1977, and February, 1978, relatively large crops of periphyton as measured by biomass and chlorophyll a values were recorded. Relatively smaller crops were usually obtained during these times. These larger crops may have re-sulted from the stabilized creek flow caused by dam closure in October, 1977. Many researchers have correlated periphyton abundance and community structure to current rate (McIntire l 1966; Dillard 1969; Reisen and Spencer 1970). A progression from species initially colonizing a substrate to a later stabilized assemblage composed of different species can occur. Throughout this progression particular current velocities may I cause variable abundance patterns. The peak abundance noted after dam closure was probably due to the assemblage acclimated to the steady current velocity. Prior to dam closure, a more variable stream flow probably did not allow for any stabilized abundant assemblage. Dam closure also resulted in a general reduction in *.urbidity downstream of the dam, which may have allowed for a more abun-dant periphyton assemblage. A turbidity reduction could result in less mechanical abrasion of the periphyton, less blanketing (~T of substrates in areas of relatively slower current, and more l kJ light penetration through the water column (Cairns et al. 1972; Blum 1956). l l 4.1-15
CPS-ER(OLS) 4.1.3.2.3 Benthos Benthos are discussed in Subsection 2.2.2.3. O The total number of taxa and the kinds of taxa collected in 1977-1978 are similar to previous years. The only exception may be 1976-1977 when several more taxa were collected than during any other year. Apparently this was an exceptional year for macroinvertebrate colonization in Salt Creek. Throughout the years in which the macroinvertebrate community in Salt Creek has been sampled (1972-19 78) , the number and kinds of taxa have been similar, indicating that the environ-mental qualities of Salt Creek have been stable throughout this time period. Density of the dominant benthic macroinvertebrata groups col-lected in 1977-1978 in both riffle and pool habitats (i.e., Naididae, Tubificidae, Elmids, and Chironomidae) did not change dramatically from densities reported in previous years (see Figures 2.2-6 and 2.2-7). There were some variations through-out the years, but there was no consistent tr and. These varia-tions were apparently due to differences in sampling techniques, water level, current and flow conditions, substrates, and natural annual variability in the benthic macroinvertebrate com-munity structure. A comparison of the number of benthir macroinvertebrate taxa ggg collected and the densities of dominant groups between 1977-1978 and previous years indicated there were no derectable effects on the macroinvertebrate community attributable to construction activities. 4.1.3.2.4 Fish Fisheries are discussed in Subsection 2.2.2.4. The 37 fish species collected between May, 1977, and April, 1978, from Salt Creek, the North Fork of Salt Creek and Lake Clinton have been compared with collections made during pre-vious years. Of the 51 fish taxa, 21 were collected during each study year and 10 were collected in all but one of the study years. Only eight species were present in just a single study year and of these, one taxa was a hybrid and two were generic classifications of shiners and darters that were too small to identify to the species level. Members of the minnow family have consistently represented over 81% of tne total catch in each of the studies; game species have averaged 6.6% of the catches; and rough fish have averaged 3.2% of the catches. Species that have consistently been present in relatively large numbers during most of the studies include striped, red, sand, and redfin shiners and bluntnose minnow. The red shiner was the most abundant species collected during this study. Although lll 4.1-16
CPS-ER(OLS) this species has beon present in relatively large numbers in (_j previous collections, it has not been the most abundant. The sand shiner, which was the second most abundant species col-lected during the 1977-1978 study, has been the most abundant species in all out one of the previous studies. In Missouri, these two species share a remarkably similar distributional pattern in the prairie regions of that state (Pflieger 1975) . Game species that have been present in collections of each of the stuites include black and yellow bullheads, green sunfish, Eluegill, largemouth bass, and white crappie. Of these, the lack bullhead and bluegill have been among the five most al.undant species collected in one of the studies. Rough species
. c have been present in collections in all or all but one of the studies include gizzard shad, carp, white sucker, northern hogsucker, silver and shorthead redhorse, and stonecat. None of these has been among the most abundant species. Carp were present in noticeably larger numbers during the 1977-1978 study than in any of the previous studies.
Some species listed in previous studies have been deleted from the current table of all taxa collected in the area of the Clinton Power Station site, including the spotfin and comer. shiners. Common shiners can be confused with striped shir_rs when they are small; however, they do not occur in the Sangamon River drainage area (Smith 1972). Young spotfin shiners are e~S similar to young red shiners, and, according to Dr. Philip _/ Smith of the Illinois Natural History Survey, do not occur within the sampling area. Construction began in October, 1975, with earthmoving activity in the areas of the plant site. Sampling locations, however, were not directly disturbed until late 1976, when the banks of Salt Creek were cleared and bulldozed in the area of Location 2 and bridge building occurred in the area of Location 3. Prior to the May, 1977, sampling, the area around Location 3 was cleared and bulldozed, as was Location 4 on the North Fork of Salt Creek before the August, 1977, sampling. Dam closure occurred in October, 1977, and Location 2 was flooded by the November, 1977, sampling. Locations 3 and 4 were within Lake Clinton during the April, 1978, sampling. Lake-filling phase monitoring commenced during the November, 1977, sampling period. Electroshocking was added as a sampling method in conjunction with gill nets at Locations 3 and 4 dur-ing the April, 1978, sampling. Location 3 was not accessible by boat during the April, 1978, sampling trip; consequently, only seining was done. Locations 1, 5, and 7 remained creek locations and were sampled with hoop nets and minnow seines. Sampling methods and effort have varied during the course of the y ,) present study and consequently can only be discussed in a gener-i al way. Catch results of numbers of species and individuals collected at creek and lake locations are compared in Table 4.1-l'
CPS-ER(OLS) 2.2-139. The differences in the number of species collected at Locations 2, 3, and 4 after inundation of these locations (gg are within the range of variation shown in past studies, as is the variation in numbers of individuals collected. From the results of seining in November, 1977, and April, 1978, many of the forage species present before dam closure were still in the same areas. Game species did not make up a high percentage of the catches from lake locations; however, they were not consist-ently abundant in previous collections. There was an increase in the number of rough fish, especially carp, in the April, 1978, collections. All of the carp were collected by gill nets or electroshocking at Locations 2 and 4. Since these two sampl-ing methods were new and most of the carp collected were adults, it can be assumed that carp have always been present, but were not susceptible to the sampling methods employed prior to the lake-filling study. Locations 1 and 7 are downstream from Lake Clinton and Location 5 is upstream from Lake Clinton. Locations 1 and 7 provide a variety of habitats, including pools, riffle areas, and shallow sandy banks, which accounts for the greater numbers and variety of fith collected. This occurrence has been consistent through all of the study years. Location 5 has provided greater numbers and variety of species in past studies than in the current study. !A boctver dam was built below that location before the November, 1976, sampling, a which resulted in some habitat alteration that may hare account- W ed for the decrease in species variety seen in the present study. Consequently, based on the data from the studies done prior to dam closure and those from the early lake-filling study, there appear to be no immediate discernible effects of dam clo-sure and subsequent lake-filling on the species composition and relative abundance of fish found in Salt Creek, the North Fork of Salt Creek, and Lake Clinton in the area cf the Clinton Power Station. O 4.1-18
O O O TABLE 4.1-1 NUMBERS AND' TYPES OF CRAFTSMEN EMPLOYED BY MONTH DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE CLINTON POWER STATION 4 1975 1976 l A S O N D CRAFTS O N D J F M A M ,J, O 7 16 12 14 18 26 33 51 51 64 87 86 103 123 135 Carp./Piledrivers 7 13 21 22 19 24 26 29 29 35 26 j Boilermakers 3 3 2 1 Bricklayers
~~' Cement Finishers 2 1 2 2 2 6 15 15 16 14 23 24 20 14 9 o m ,~~
a 79 64 61 M 5 6 12 16 29 45 61 76 87 96 119 104 i
~~. Electricians e~~
2 4 5 9 14 19 28 32 43 48 96 249 331 366 338 $ d e Ironworkers ^ 28 53 61 63 64 100 141 200 260 263 302 297 215 252 256 @ Laborers 3 1 1 3 4 2 2 2 4 2 2 j Millwrights 47 92 101 162 132 119 167 222 279 304 327 332 257 288 199 Operators 4 1 1 Pipefitters ] 15 22 23 28 39 48 57 68 76 80 96 135 162 172 Sheet Metal workers 12 17 19 27 27 28 51 72 94 107 119 121 91 103 83 Teamsters , j Total 107 204 234 319 321 395 569 752 921 998 1181 1342 1265 1409 1281 t i Total Man-Months 1975 = 545 1976 = 10,753 I Note: These numbers are averages based on daily logs. f 4
}
TABLE 4.1-1 (Cont'd) 1977 J J A S O N D J F M A M CRAFTS , 177 249 369 465 459 465 479 299 Carp./Piledrivers 93 93 157 169 65 76 90 116 107 125 156 165 18 17 34 47 Boilermakers 2 Bricklayers 22 21 21 25 25 22 15 5 15 15 16 21 Cement Finishers 65 85 110 116 122 127 67 53 50 65 65 53 Electricians 256 283 233 340 405 416 376 243 169 86 259 289 Ironworkers O 476 495 602 615 619 585 366 207 340 345 410 Laborers 186 $ ^ 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 M g Millwrights % 344 373 364 398 375 362 2E2 154 1 135 115 193 233 to Operators O O 125 112 109 116 111 136 145 139 151 130 e Pipefitters 156 120 u) 1 2 Sheet Metal Workers 156 147 164 160 153 119 82 55 63 91 109 143 Teamsters 1582 1818 1967 2354 2409 2428 2279 1523 871 768 1283 1388 Total Total Man-Months 1977 = 20,670 Note: These numbers are averages based on daily logs.
~~O e~~
9
\
a
% g .' g- - %J s ,.- a, r- j - ,
~~s.4.y#p , w~ ..-:y;* r, . 7, 3r.,b-~~
*3 i 'y vt g* \ 4 \* e ., - . .,.,,. * ... s*% u ~ & ~ e ., _ ~ ,.,, . L ./A f3 e ..., . - ' *V ~ w2 +~, > - ,f [ . f~
~~i. ,>~~
[+ .. sa I . >> 33 I >< ; g p ? 's ,N, j/ , i; m. 1 O
~~- s \ ( '~~
~~1 l 1,~~
~~. -),; ' s -~~
i
* .4' f
~~L- %' ,,I ~ ~; ~~~
\ ~, ,-
f
~~,f , .I~ " '~~
~~g v-. , ,r J T, r< ' j g,/ J ,~~
~~'t%." , %" i ;~~
~~4 I~~
~~^ ,~~
~~t '--~~
's 4, '.<C .y[~. ,x r-st -^ . g ; ,t. ~
i
~ ~ m -- y..*,/4 , , . .. , , , ,~- ,
~~d' yQ 1 f i .l' ),a~~
*L pt**. / , ; ,'<,
~~n 'I I~~
I
;,, r I < r -; \ ) ' ,r ~
i ' ' \ ,g , e- . I l %- ,
~~t. I~~
~~./ .~~
~~la. , _~~
~~~ I - ~~~
~~y . ,) a~~
~,
~~1 .~~
~~c ..~~
~~,f" /~~
~~C' ! 'r~ 4~~
~~.,y _ " ~f -~~
t
.fg, - , - e ... - p,s . [. .
f'
~~, _ ~ .~~
~~w: . - , . ,~~
I
^ m . : ~~ .,[ - , - . 1 I I i { .I ,, ~ \ / .,,, , .,i, l'* :
A 5-~ { ,1 j I /
~~-f -~~
4 , 4,, ,/ l -- g' *,' J , 1, .. - g .. y ,
~~. .u .c, , t -~~
~~l s , ,~~
# ~ 'l .- , ec . , % , __ ~~ !*) .
~~m e 4.~~
! \. ~ \~ ~ ~ I 's~
~~3 ~ ..q/ f 3, g G* ', ,a ,~~
~~'k' Af./ / .[~~
h
._ ; ,. I n\ QW(jf ~% ,
~~l Eg ,~~
% / ' : ; , s 'm $ ., $ ' ,' ,. '.\Hk ' k> , -N %g ? <,- 1 'j 4 g '
e
~~-{'.,,.<, N, , J . .\~~
~~J'h'. ' , , c ,,~~
=
f
.r h --,, ),g a "./., * .,~ '
f . .e. r~ p e ,&% d ,,'
~~,. 8 f ,,g.. * .~~
~~s s - o r- - ..~~
~~- s t u~~
M'
,k E- = , , 7 . *g . s i v l.EGENO:
~~Q INDUSTRIAL zongD AREA m r~~
~~'ts f~~
( e l
I k l
? 4 f l , p .tJ110 l'( k fh I'g ,t ' !J '- N
~~7) , I' T L 1: DGE j,~~
~~. h ud /~~
~~i T 1.{ 1'. 1, ', a . !~~
~~; '%[,.~ d ,~~
~~sM _. 2., ,_ i~~
+
n, , . c p 3 -
' ~ .,..., . . , %y< . . . .,. .
~~r ~ % ^ y f, 2 ggn,-~~
~~,. , ke h \ '~~
~~4 / / w;.N b.- - - -~~
~~. -g- ,- - -, p. !~~
s . s i , 7 r 1.s 6 g 4 +
;8 ,%,, l .c 3- a, f .s I i ., -r .. g{
~~4. ., ,~~
~~. l ,.~~
j {a,}c[> f UL i '
~~'f I'a {'~~
l
} ' *' \, . :ds. .. %>s..
~~d ') /, ) s~~
,1, g ~/7' 'h
/
~~l .' h~~
~~, .;p,-~~
f ' " ' g f
~~' '5/ ,~~
~~g s ,s. ,,~~
.- r ,;. . . , / ,- /' i s.. ,
~~(p ,~~
~~} _ . -__ 2 ..~~
l ., l , e ' , 2"
, [fT '*% 3 __.A[ f j -
{
~~
\
~~,1% W .tt e~~
~~L' . .~~
/
g ,, s l> ; $ I 1w ; w ,g """',e . i I> . E l $ '
~~%p l~~
f ?, - i {* -- - { , , ,_.___L__i l -h . h i/ , [ '
~~? '~~
~~I j~~
~~' ~ , 'R _'li %; jy ,d --~~
~~t - 3 I I .~~
- l 4* .,,
4.
~~, (~~
~~t 5 f- - M ~ ~ ~ ~~~
, i. 4 s/ ' ,e , j $ ! ,/ 1 l $^ * *r l ,
i , . __.._.p...._...s_.- 2 -- r- --- - - g l ) ! 7 k j
,g s a '
i I c. . - l l ,, l , , i, . , . , l !
- e .. w. ~ ~ ~ , 67 ~ ~-*
~~l t L [ b s.~~
~~# o l~~
~~x. P. . ..~~
g
~~.a ~- -~~
j - ' CLINTON POWER STATION 3 ,a ,; UNITS 1 AND 2 E NVIRONME NTAL RE PORT-OPERATING l.lC E NSE STAGE _i__ _ .. _ _ _ _ t 2 ,- __-
~~m. FIGURE 4.1-1 AREA ZONED INDUSTRIAL AT THE CLINTON POWER STATION SITE~~
}
J
CPS-ER(OLS) 4.2 TRANSMISSION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION ' () 4.2.1 General The following sections discuss the methods for constructing the transmission lines (described in Section 3.9) from the Clinton Power-Station. These methods vary considerably from place to place and time to time, because of varying restrictions by dif-ferent property owners, road commissioners, legal requirements, and changing weather conditions. In most situations, the methods used were those developed during many years of construction experience and are those found to be reliable and economical while meeting the applicable legal, safety, and environmental requirements . In both normal and special construction situaticns, the methods used were selected to minimize the impact on the local environment. In the following sections describing the construction methods, an explanation of the impact of these methods on the environment is given. Action was taken to minimize an environmental impact. 4.2.2 Construction Activities 4.2.2.1 Material and Storage Yards Material for the construction of these lines can be described by the following major categories:
a. steel for steel structures;

b. poles for the wood structures;

c. cross-arms, braces and other framing material;

d. conductor;

e. insulators; and

f. conductor hardware Railroad sidings and storage areas at Illinois Power Company's Clinton Power Station, Brokaw Substation, and Oreana Substation were used for receiving material. Two additional storage yards (at Lane and at Maroa) adjacent to existing rail sidings were leased. After the leased storage yards were no longer needed, they were returned to original conditions reculting in no perma-nent damage to the area.
Smaller items were received by truck either at the storage areas or at existing company service facility yards. . 4.2-1 1
CPS-ER(OLS) 4.2.2.2 Field Offices and Headquarters Requirements for field offices and headquarters for transmission line censtruction were small. The contractor for construction lll of the lines set up headquarters at various oil company service stations convenient to the work area. These locations served as places to headquarter construction equipment and as a central area for workmen to assemble before going to work. Parking lots for construction workers occupied existing places at the service stations. Illinois Power Company (IP) employees concerned with these projects worked out of the IP headquarters and required no separate field office. The construction headquarters used for these projects caused little or no detrimental effect to the environment other than the temporary accumulation of automobiles and construction equip-ment. 4.2.2.3 Right-of-Way Clearing Clearing trees, brush, and other vegetation from the transmission line rights-of-way was required for two primary reasons:
a. to permit construction of the transmission lines, and

b. to provide adequate electrical clearance for the ener- a gized lines. W Clearing for such purposes resulted in the removal of some natur-al vegetation, which affected soil stability, water runoff, wild-life habitat , and aesthetics, and created waste material that required disposal. The e.ffects were minimized during construction by application of one or more of the following procedures:

a. restriction of cutting to the minimum necessary to satisfy the above two primary requirements;

b. removal of vegetation by cutting and trimudng, rather than bulldozing, where possible. Clearing in this way reduces soil disturbance, creates less waste material, and allows retention of the root systems of certain species for revegetation by sprouting;

c. leaving a screen of natural vegetation at the junctions of rights-of-way with major highways and rivers , when it is available;

d. tapered cutting of rights-of-way through forested areas instead of straight slash removal of vegetation; and O
4.2-2
CPS-ER(OLS)
~~e. selective basal spraying of environmentally acceptable~~
(-) herbicides to eliminate trees where a line traverses (_/ wooded areas. Only resprouting tree species were treated, and United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) approved herbicides were used. The manner in which clearing was done largely depended on the requirements of the property owner. If he wanted complete clear-ing and reseeding, this was done. In the absence of other require-ments, clearing was done in accordance with recent guidelines out-lined in (1) the U. S. Department of the Interior / Department of Agriculture publication entitled " Environmental Criteria for Electric Transmission Systens" and (2) the Federal Power Commission publication entitled " Electric Power Transmission and the Environment". These guidelines include the following:
~~a. Restricted cutting along creek banks and on steep slopes.~~
~~Restricted cutting required that all cutting be done by hand methods to reduce damage to ground cover. All brush and trees less than 15 feet high were left, except for~~
~~" fast growing species." " Fast growing species" were cut if over 5 feet high. The existing root system and low-growing trees and brush remained to reduce possible erosion.~~
~~b. A combination of rough and clean cutting was used on flat or on gently sloping land where there were no~~
() plans for future seeding. Tree stumps were left in place to minimize ground disturbance. For rough cut-ting, brush and low-growing species that did not inter-fere with the operation of trucks and equipment were not cut. For clean cutting, brush and low-growing species that did interfere with structure erection and wire stringing were cut. Clean cutting was used mainly for the center section of the easement strip which is under the conductors. Rough cutting was used for the outside section of the easement strip, which lies between the center section and the outer edge of the easement. In agricultural areas, farming is permitted under the lines, and only the structures themselves removed land permanently from use. Waste material generated in the clearing operation was disposed of in any of several ways, depending primarily on the require-ments of the property owner. The following methods were used:
a. haul to landfill area;

b. establish a windrow along edge of right-of-way and allow to deteriorate; (3 c. place brush and logs in washes and gullies to assist in
(; preventing erosion; 4.2-3
CPS-ER(OLS)
d. chip all vegetation and spread it evenly over the right-of-way where it will deteriorate naturally;

c. remove commercially valuable wood for sale; and

f. burn under controlled conditions in accordance with applicable regulations.
After the right-of-way is cleared, it is backbladed with a bull-dozer, if necessary, to eliminate large ruts or rough areas. The list of disposal methods above was revised to include items e & f, which were not specified in the Environmental Report - Construction Permit Stage (CPS-ER). In connection with the clearing work, culverts were installed in road ditches to make access possible from the roads to the right-of-way strip. Culverts were also installed in drainage ways at other points along the right-of-way to make traversing the right-of-way possible. Culverts in public road ditches were installed by placing them at the flow line in the ditch and covered either with existing dirt from an adjacent field or with gravel hauled in from a local pit. Culverts in field drainage ways were installed by laying the culvert in the flow line of the drainage way and bulldozing earth from adjacent areas over it. Occasionally it was necessary to haul in gravel to cover a culvert. There was little or no effect on the environment from the installa-tion of culverts since they were sized to handle the expected flow of water. Except where property owners requested that culverts llI be left in place for their convenience, culverts were removed and the area was restored as nearly as possible to its original condi- , tion after construction of the transmission lines. l At the time of culvert installation, cpenings were installed in fences along the right-of-way to provide access. Depending on the requests of the property owner, one of the following types of openings were installed:
~~a. Temporary opening, which involves bracing existing posts on either side of opening, cutting existing fence at one i side of the desired opening and attaching the free end of !~~
~~the fence wire to the opposite post to facilitate handling; ( or I~~
~~b. Permanent opening, which involves bracing existing posts on either side of opening with the possible installation !~~
of a heavier post on one side on which a gate may be hung I and then cutting the fence out of the opening and install-ing a permanent, usually galvanized metal, gate. The land environment will not be adversely affected by the gate installations. Temporary gates were removed and the fence was restored as nearly as possible to its original condition. Perma- gg) nent gates were left for the convenience of the landowner. 4.2-4
CPS-ER(OLS) 4.2.2.4 Structure Erection (~3 Structure assembly and erection includes distribution of materials, (._/ excavation for structure footings, assembly of whole structures or subassemblies on the ground, and erection of the whole structure or subassemblies into the completed structure. Materials for assembling all structures were delivered from the material storage rard to the structure site by suitable vehicles and assembled into subassemblies on the ground in a laydown area. These laydown areas required clearing a radius of about 50 feet around the structure's location. Subassemblies were erected using both large rubber tired mobile cranes and tracked equipment. The excavations for all structures were made by a truck mounted hole digger. The adverse effects resulting from excavation pri-marily involved some disturbance of the soil, with slight erosion occurring in sloping areas. As a structure footing was excavated, the earth removed was deposited on the ground nearby. After the structure was installed, the excess earth was leveled with a bull-dozer. If this was not agreeable to the landowner, the excess earth was hauled away to a suitable landfill area. The steel tap structure placed in the Latham - Rising Line 4571 has foundations of the drilled pier type. These foundations re-quired the following operations:
~~a. excavation of the footings with a tracked crane mounted~~
() hole digger,
b. placement of reinforcing steel and forms, and

c. placement of concrete, delivered in transit mixers.
All of the other steel structures and all wood structures required for the transmission lines have footings consisting of the butt sections of wood or steel poles directly imbedded in the ground. Backfill is concrete for the steel poles and crushed limestone for the wood structures. The preceding statements were revised from those presented in the CPS-ER to describe the assembly and erection of wood and steel pole structures instead of lattice steel towers. As for all other phases of the transmission line construction, adverse effects during erection of structures were the result primarily of soil disturbance caused by construction equipment. Pluch of the construction was done during the drier than normal summer and fall of 1979. This greatly reduced the soil disturb-ance. On completion of construction, the right-of-way was re-stored as nea,rly as possible to its original condition. As the (~3 v 4.2-5
_~ - CPS-ER(OLS) Contractor completed his operations, he backbladed the right-of-way with a bulldozer and graded the area, if necessary. The property owner was then paid for further conditioning of the soil to make it suitable for seeding. In some cases, an outside con-tractor was brought in with subsoiling equipment to do the finish-ing work. 4.2.9.5 Wire Stringing The conductor installation on these lines used the tension string-ing method, which required tension-pull sites the full width of the right-of-way, 3 to 4 acres in size, at intervals of approximately 1.5 miles along the route. In this method light " sand" lines were pulled through the stringing dollies on the structures by a bull-dozer traversing the right-of-way between structures. The " sand" line was then used to pull in the heavy steel line, which in turn pulled in the conductor. At the tension-pulling sites, temporary anchors were installed in the ground to support the conductor. The temporary anchors caused slight disturbance of the soil that was corrected upon the comple-tion of this activity. After the conductor was sagged and clipped in, the right-of-way restoration was carried out as described in the previous section. This work included the removal of all ec,2ipment, cribbing, pack-ing cartons, scrap wire, etc., and the restoration of the soil. Construction inspectors and project engineers inspected the l right-of-way to make sure that it had been properly restored. 4.2.3 Biological Changes 4.2.3.1 Vegetation I As previously stated, most of the land crossed by the lines is agricultural. The base or footings of each structure required no more than 40 square feet of land. Except in the few forested areas that were crossed by the transmission lines, all land l within the right-of-way not occupied by structure bases remained ; , in cultivation. Farming is permitted under the 345 kV structures because of their specific design. Tables 3.9-1 through 3.9-3 give an exact breakdown of land use. The only significant natural areas are small sectionc of forest located mainly in the creek bed areas. Some of the trees in these l areas have been cut down and removed. Thd cutting method followed l recommended federal procedures (see Subsection 4.2.2.3). USEPA l approved herbicides were used to kill selected trees immediately under the lines. The removal of vegetation was as small as
~~necessary. A subclimax of shrubs, forbs, and grasses will be maintained beneath the conductors in most areas that were previously wooded.~~
9 4.2-6
CPS-ER(OLS) The above reference to the square feet of land occupied by struc-ture bases has been revised from 60 to 40 to reflect the change of structure design. Wood or steel pole type structures were () used. Only one rectangular based steel structure was used for the required transmission lines, instead of all 345 kV lattice steel towers as specified in the CPS-ER. 4.2.3.2 Wildlife The majority of the wildlife in the transmission line rights-of-way were able to avoid the construction areas. Some nests and dens located on the rights-of-way were destroyed. However, most species were able to undergo the slight moving necessary without major disruption or elimination. The removal of selected forest trees and shrubs removed sources of food and shelter for the wildlife. Both occurrences can be assumed to have little lasting impact, as the wildlife moved to other nearby areas for such food and protection. Clearing through a forest establishes an ecotone, which maximizes habitat for many species of wildlife. Birds can nest on the right-of-way and woodchucks may dig their holes on it, probably next to the structure footings for the protection such footings provide. The Illinois Department of Conservation is developing the CPS site area to maximize its ability as a wil ' life habitat. Approximately 0.5 million trees have been planted in abandoned fields to replace timbered areas used for the lake. Any animals forced from the transmission line rights-of-way can find suitable habitat in these reforested areas. The net capacity rm, of the area as a wildlife habitat has been improved, rather than (_/ reduced by the overall project. 4.2.4 Aesthetic Values 4.2.4.1 Line Routes Where a line crosses a major highway in forested areas, trees were judiciously pruned rather than felled. This procedure helped to screen the structures from public view. 4.2.4.2 Herbicide Effects With the selective basal spraying used on the wooded portions of the right-of-way, there was no visual pollution as would result from a broadcast foliage spray. Such a broadcast spray creates a
" brown streak" of dead vegetation wherever applied. The method used here, selective basal treatment, kills only the designated trees. There was, therefore, no outright " browning" of the right-of-way.
4.2.5 Land Crossed 4.2.5.1 Lines The lines cross mainly agricultural land. In addition, smaller (~') areas of fallow, shrub, forest, and mixed field-forest areas were '- crossed. Tables 3.9-1 through 3.9-3 give the exact amounts of each type land traversed. The major natural a eas are the forests 4.2-7
CPS-ER(OLS) along the creek systems. Minimum amounts of these areas were altered, and specific clearing methods designed to minimize impact as previously described in Subsection 4.2.2.3 were used. lll 4.2.5.2 Access Roads No permanent access, construction, or maintenance roads were required. The construction occurred on the right-of-way. Main-tenance needs will be initially checked by aerial reconnaissance, and specific areas where work is required will be approached along the right-of-way from public roads. Existing farm lanes were used, with the property owner's permission, where this facilitated access or reduced crop damage. In rough areas, temporary access roads were developed off the right-of-way to avoid gullies and lake areas. e 4.2-8
CPS-ER(OLS) 7_s 4.3 RESOURCES COMMITTED V The construction of the Clinton Power Station (CPS) involves both the permanent and temporary uses of land, water, and other resources. This section describes the resources com-mitted during construction of the station. 4.3.1 Land Resources Activities related to site preparation and plant facilities construction have caused some irreversible and irretrievable commitments of natural resources. Approximately 14,092 acres of land have been purchased for the project; of this total, 4895 acres are inundated by the reservoir at nornal pool level of 690 ft. (MSL). Table 4.3-1 provides a comparison of land use prior to plant construction and site preparatien to the land use pattern that will be present during the operation of Clinton Power Station. During the construction phase, approximately 2000 acres within the reservoir basin were cleared to prevent clogging of intake structures, to reduce potential sources of nutrient enrich-ment, and to enhance recreational potential. The reservoir basin was composed primarily of floodplain forests, i.e., about 2000 acres, agricultural cropland, and pasture land, i.e., about 2900 acres. The loss of agricultural cropland, ("N pasture land, upland and floodplain forests and other terres-
~~\-) trial vegetation types was unavoidable.~~
The clearing of the reservoir basin resulted in the destruction of a variety of plant communities, the most important of which were floodplain forests and mixed floodplain and upland forests. These community types and the majority of their associated spe-cies within the site boundaries were not unique; however, they comprised a significant portion of the forested lands in DeWitt County, i.e., about 1000 acres of timber were cleared out of a total of 8883 acres of timber in DeWitt County. All merchantable timber from this clearing was sold, ao d-rected in the Final Environmental Statement. The positive values of this sale are:
a. salvage of a natural resource,

b. reduction of total nutrients left in the lake, and

c. cost reduction of clearing and disposal operations.
A summary of the timber sold is presented in Table 4.3-2. An analysis of this data reveals that the timber was lacking in quality and quantity. About 35% of the total money received was for soft maple, i.e., a fast-growing, low-value, bottom-7s ( ,) land hardwood. The average payment per acre of harvested timber was about $76.00 and the average number of board feet 4.3-1
~~- ~. . . . . - - - .~~
CPS-ER(OLS) per acre harvested was about 1,682. Both of these average values would be considerably higher in good stands of ma- lll ture timber. The reforestation program undertaken by 1111nois Power Company as a mitigative measure is described in Section 4.5. This reforestation has totaled over 375,000 trees on about 680 acres from 1975 through 1979. Future tree planting will be coordinated with the IDOC. The plant site area (Sections 23 and 26, T20N, R3E) is lo-cated on what was relatively level cropland and pastureland; it will be lost for future agricultural use. To the extent possible, the forested tract in the NW of Section 26 and NE% of Section 27 was lef t undisturbed. Three retention ponds were constructed in small ravines in Section 26 to serve as settling ponds to remove silt from runoff water before it entered Salt Creek or the North Fork. This construction caused a small amount (less than 5 acres) of forested land to be flooded. Excavation for the intake and discharge structures and the discharge flume route required about 140 acres. The dis-charge flume route extends east from the NE% of Section 26, T20N, R3E to the NW% of Section 29, T20N, R4E. The land use and associated vegetation types along the route were primarily agricultural. Open and lightly forested pasturelands and croplands made up approximately 95% of the land use types along the route. g Spoil from the plant site and the discharge flume has been placed on 60 acres in the SE% of Section 23 and the NE% of Section 26, T20N, R3E. One hundred and sixty acres in Sec-tion 30, T20N, R4E are being used for placement of spoil from the flume route. All of the acreage used for spoil placement in Sections 23 and 26 was crop or pastureland; the overall impact to native plant communities and wildlife habi-tats in this area is judged to be minor in comparioen to the impact that spoil placement would have had in surrounding areas. The spoil placement area in Section 30 was primarily open and forested pastureland and cropland. During construction of the dam and spillway, about 150 acres of pastureland, cropland, brush, and timberland were exca-vated. A major portion of the spoil was used in construction of the dam; portions of the remainder were placed adjacent to the dam on the downstream side. Some spoil from spillway construction has also been placed in the E of Section 4, T19N, R3E. The final work on the dam was in the Fall of 1978 at which time revegetation of the dam and downstream spoils (including Section 4) was accomplished. The dam site was mostly agricultural bottomland; however, some upland and floodplain habitat were destroyed. Dominant species within these communities primarily included oak, hickory, silver naple, elm, black cherry, sycamore, and boxelder. lll 4.3-2
CPS-ER(OLS)
~T The most significant impact of excavation and spoil place-(U ment activities during construction of the power station, intake and discharge structures, flume route, and dam and spillway has been the removal of agricultural lands from productivity. The loss of -his agricultural land is re-garded essentially as irreversible and irretrievable.
In the Environmental Report - Construction Permit Stage (CPS-ER) a prairie plant community of about 2200 acres was proposed (Tall Grass Prairie Restoration) for the peninsula between the plant site and the main dam. This prairie
~~" restoration" has been abandoned for two major reasons.~~
First, the Illinois Commerce Commission has recommended that the land be kept in production. (Most of it was previously in rowcrops.) Second, this area was probably never a large prairie in pristine times as shown by the soil characteristics. Rather, most of the peninsular soil is Birkbeck silt loam developed under hardwood forests. Some small prairie remnants on Sunberry silt loam are present, but make up only a small portion of the peninsula. Leasing this cropland to maintain its productivity has somewhat reduced the negative impact originally described in the CPS-ER and is in compliance with the Illinois Commerce Commission's recommendation. The development of a smaller prairie community is described in Section 4.5. () The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Conservation Service prepared a map showing the areas in the vicinity of the site that meet national criteria for prime farmland. This map was prepared using the DeWitt County soil report published in June 1940, plus soil maps of individual tracts made since 1940 that show slope and erosion phases. No farmlands in the site vicinitv meet the definition of unique and, in fact, there will be no areas in Illinois iden-tified as unique farmlands. A planimeter measurement indicates that about 2,964 acres of land designated as prime farmland lie within the Clinton Power Station site which is approximately 21% of the total 14,092 acre site. All but 810 acres of this is on the peninsula area between the two arms of the lake. In comparing the prime farmland map with the DeWitt County Soil maps, it appears that USDA has included generally the follow-ing soil types which are listed in order of their productivity according to the University of Illinois "DeWitt County Soil Report" published in June, 1940. The productivity is rated on a base of 1 to 10 with the best being 1 and _he poorest being 10.
~~a. The Drummer Clay Loam and Flanagan Silt Loam group~~
(~' comprises about 60% of the total DeWitt County land and has a productivity rating of 1 and 2, respective-ly. 4.3-3
CPS-ER(OLS)
b. The Catlin Silt Loam comprises about 9% of the County land at productivity rating of 3 to 4. (g)

c. The Alexis Silt Loam comprises only about .5% of the County land and has a productivity rating of 3 to 4.

d. The Sunberry Silt Loam comprises about 2% of the County soil and occurs as a transition belt be-tween forest and prairie soils. It has a product-ivity rating of 3 to 4.

e. The Camden Silt Loam comprises about 1% of the County land and has a productivity rating of 5.

f. The Birkbeck Silt Loam comprises about 10% of the County land and was formerly covered by mixed hard-wood forests. It has a productivity rating of 5 to 6.
According to USDA, all of these soils meet the national cri-teria for prime farmland. However, locally the Drummer-Flanagan group is considered to be the prime farmland with the Birkbeck soil being a much less desirable type. Of the land in the site designated as prime, the soil maps indicate that approximately 70% is Birkbeck, and 20% is Camden. The Drummer-Flanagan group would be about 1% or less being in 4 m or 5 small scattered spots. W Station utilization of the 2,964 acres designated as prime farmland can best be shown by dividing the land into five general areas. The first area is the lake. There are about 710 acres of designated prime farmland inundated by the lake, of which 110 acres are Alexis soil and 600 acres are Camden soil. The 710 acres are in 11 scattered locations on the floodplain designated by the DeWitt County Zoning Ordinance. These low lands are known locally as "second bottoms". The weather conditions each year dictate the degree of success of the crops in the second bottoms, and local farmers state that they have some loss 2 years out of 3 years with a com-plete failure at least every five years. Approximately 100 acres of the Camden soil have been stripped for a sand and gravel quarry. The second general area is the power station complex which contains about 705 acres of designated prime farmland. The complex includes all of the generating facilities, transmis-sion substations, plant offices, laydown area northeast of the plant, and spoil area southwest of the plant. Of this, 62 9eres will continue to be farmed with a possibility of another 140 acres being added when the plant construction is completed. O 4.3-4
4 CPS-ER(OLS) The third general crea is the west peninsula between the two e- arms of the lake and south of the power station complex. This (_)/ area contains about 922 acres of designated prime farmland of which 840 acres will continue to be farmed. The 82 acres not to be farmed are located on ridges near the lake and will be planted in trees and other vegetation to control erosion and maintain a green belt around the lake. The fourth general area is the east peninsula which lies east of the power station complex, rest of County Highway #14 (De-Witt blacktop), and north of che lake. The proposed discharge flume extends through this area. The east peninsula contains about 527 acres of designated prime farmland of which 344 acres will continue to be farmed. Approximately 80 acres will be in the discharge flume and the remaining 103 acres will be partially planted in trees and other vegetation or will be used as part of the recreational area. The fifth general area comprises the various fingers of designated prime farmland which extend down the ridges along the two arms of the lake and contain a total of approximately 100 acres. All of these areas will be returned to forest or allowed to naturalize for erosion control along the lake. Therefore, of the total 2,964 acres designated as prime farm-land in the site, 710 acres were inundated, 723 acres will be in the power station complex and flume, 285 acres will be planted in trees or other vegetation, and 1,246 acres (42%) (]} will remain as crop land with a possibility of another 140 acres being added when construction is completed. In summary, the most significant terrestrial impact of con-sttuction has been the removal of about 7000 acres of agri-cultural land from production. Additionally, about 2000 acres of floodplain forests and their accompanying wildlife habitats were displaced. About 1300 acre- of reforestation will have been accomplished by 1979 to restore some of this wildlife habitat. This reforested land was previously pas-ture or cropland. Some additional agricultural lands surround-ing the lake are being allowed to revert to native plant communities to provide additional cover for wildlife popula-tions. 4.3.2 Water Resources The most significant aquatic effect of constructing Lake Clinton is the inundation of Salt Creek and the North Fork of Salt Creek basin resulting in the substitution of a lake environment for a flowing water environment. The reservoir basin extends approximately 14 miles upstream from the dam site into the Salt Creek and about 8 miles upstream into the North Fork of Salt Creek. The reservoir flooded about 4895 g3 acres of adjacent floodplain and upland areas. No other sur-(/ face waters within the reservoir basin have been affected, except for several intermittent drainages and small farm ponds. 4.3-5
~~- -p y -- , - -- , ,- --~~
CPS-ER(OLS) Lake bed clearing was accomplished as previously described. The impoundment of the reservoir was offf.cially begun on October 12, 1977, when dam closure was it.it*cted. Some runoff water was already accumulating in the reservoir prior ll) to dam closure. The flow through the dam outlet work was calculated to be 88 cfs when dam closure was completed; this was over two times as much as required (40 cfs) in appropriate regulatory permits. Large quantities of precipitation caused lake filling to be accomplished somewhat more rapidly than anticipated with the elevation of the water reaching 690 feet MSL by May 17, 1978. The flow through the dam outlet works was calculated to be 125 cfs in December, 1977. The construction of the dam has caused about 21 miles of lotic habitat to be lost. Accompanying this loss of the stream habitat is the loss of all aquatic biota that require flowing waters for their survival. This environmental effect is re-garded as unavoidable and irreversible. These lost species are, however, being replaced by new species which will pros-per under the new environmental conditions. The monitoring program described in Chapter 6 is being used, in part, to document the changes from a lotic to a lentic environment. Data from the aquatic monitoring program are presented in Section 4.1 and Chapter 2. Those portions of Salt Creek and the North Fork of Salt Creek which were impounded were previously of limited value for water oriented recreational activities. They did support a mini-mal amount of canoeing, swimming, and fishing from local g recreationists. The quality and quantity of recreational opportunities that will be provided in the cooperative manage-ment of Lake Clinton by Illinois Power Company (IP) and the Illinois Department of Conservation (IDOC) should more than compensate for the loss of these resources. IP has leased most of the site to the IDOC for recreational management (See Subsection 2.1.3.3) The lease agreement describes the responsibilities of each organization in the management of those portions of the site which will be open to the public. These portions of the site have been developed to provide for a wide variety of quality public recreation opportunities with emphasis on resource management and are an attempt to demonstrate multipurpose use of finite resources. The management of the lake has been developed jointly by IP and IDOC. The lake and adjacent site land were officially opened for limited public use in late August, 1979. As additional facilities are completed they will also be opened for public use. Subsection 2.1.3.3 describes the tentative schedule for opening various facilities. G 4.3-6
CPS-ER(OLS) 4.3.3 Material Resources O The material resources, i.e., other than land and water, used for Clinton Power Station are basically of two types.
1. those used in the construction of buildings and associated station facilities (such as the dam, intake structure, discharge flume, etc.), and

2. fuel.
Construction materials include structural and reinforcing steel, cement, electrical cables and fixtures , plumbing sup-plies and fixtures, and paint. While these materials are permanently committed during the plant life, some of them could be partially reclaimed if the plant is dismantled. Highly contaminated or activated materials would not be reclaimable and would be disposed of as described in Sec-tion 5.8, Decommissioning and Di; mantling. Section 5.7, Resources Committed, presents the discussion on the use of fuel and the use of other resources which will be committed during station operation. () l ($') 4.3-7
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 4.3-1 LAND USE COMPARISON PRECONSTRUCTION SlarION USE (acres) USE (acres)
~~1. Lake Area * --~~
~~4895~~
a. Homesteads 5 --

b. Agricultural land 2845 (710 prime) --

c. Timber /Brushland 2000 --

d. Miscellaneous 50 --

2. Timber and Grassland (Greenbelt)* 1450 5871

3. Agriculcural Land 7742 (2254 prime) 1451 (1246 prime)

4. Silphium Prairie * --
60
5. Station Facilities

a. Station complex --
~~980~~
~~b. Discharge Flume --~~
~~285~~
~~c. Dam & Spillway --~~
~~.380 gg~~
6. Other Facilities **

a. Marina --
~~150~~
~~b. Visitor's Center --~~
~~20 Total 14,092 14,092*.5~~
~~Land available for recreational activities. A total of 10,250 acres of this land has been leased to the Illinois Department of Conserva-tion to manage as a recreation / conservation crea.~~
**These facilities are open for public use by IP. ***All of the site property was purchased primarily for the construc-tion and operation of the Clinton Power Station. Secondary usage of some of the acreage is provided for agricultural and recreational purposes.
~~(l) 4.3-8~~
~~. - . _ . ~ . . . . .._ . . .- __ _ . . - - _ _ . =.~~
CPS-ER(OIJ3) () TABLE 4.3-2 StiMMARY OF TIMBER SOLD FROM CLINaCN POWER STATION SITE 1 t BD. FT. SPECIES C'tADE VOLUME STUM" AGE TOTAL VALUE l Ash #1 8,753 $ 70.00/M $ 613.00 i Ash z 23,144 40.00 926.00 Basswood 1 3,138 50.00 157.00
~~Basswood 2 4,570 25.00 114.00 j Cherry, Black -~~
1,227 150.00 184.00 l Cottonwood - 224,012 25.00 5,600.00 Elm - 23,169 25.00 579.00 ? Hackberry - 19,052 25.00 476.00 Hickory - 39,003 25.00 975.00 i Locust - 20,604 25.00 515.00 ! Maple, soft 1 159,503 75.00 11,963.00 Maple, soft 2 482,537 30.00 14,476.00 Maple, sugar 1 5,910 75.00 443.00 Maple, sugar 2 11,500 30.00 345.00 Oak, B1 & Red 1 44,803 70.00 3,136.00 Oak, B1 & Red 2 152,861 30.00 4,586.00 Oak, White-Veneer A 306 200.00 61.00 Oak, White-Veneer A+ 1,732 400.00 693.00 3 O Oak, Whita Oak, White 1 2 35,675 138,589 50.00 25.00 1,784.00 3,465.00 Sycamore - 227,071 23.00 5,678.00 Walnut - Veneer A+ 681 3000.00 2,043.00 Walnut - Veneer A 864 1000.00 864.00 Walnut - Veneer B 1,290 500.00/800.00 1,032.00 Walnut - Lumber - 51,695 300.00 15,509.00 1,681,689 Avg.$ 45.32/M $76,217.00 4.3-9 i 1
~~~,e c ,e-- --~~
~~w- + , .y- . , , ,vyy .,e-,c~~
~~...y.g -,,,,p. -~~
me-.yn,---,.-eme,,,w.,- , -
CPS-ER(OLS) O 4.4 RADIOACTIVITY There are differences in the construction schedules of Clinton Power Station (CPS) Units 1 and 2. Unit 2 is scheduled for construction after the startup of Unit 1. Hence, the Unit 2 construction workers will be exposed to direct radiation and to the radioactive effluents from Unit 1. These doses to the construction workers are reported in detail in the CPS Final Safety Analysis Report, Section 12.4. Considered in this dose evaluation is direct radiation from the turbine, containment building, radwaste building, fuel and auxiliary buildings, and the radioactive gaseous effluents from the station. The total annual dose values are given in Table 4.4-1. i 1 i O M 4.4-1
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 4.4-1 e ANNUAL PERSON-REM EXPOSURES TO UNIT 2 CONSTRUCTION WCRKERS ANNUAL DOSE AREA AFFECTED (person-rem) Whole-body 208 Skin 30 Thyroid 11 O O Note: Average number of workers per year is 1,795. , 4.4-2
] 4 CPS-ER(OLS) O u 4.5 CONSTRUCTION IMPACT CONTROL PROGRAM This section is not an update of material presented in the Environmental Report - Construction Permit Stage (CPS-ER) . This is a new section as suggested in U. S. Nuclear Regula-tory Commission Regulatory Guide 4.2, Revision 2, which be-came effective after the CPS-ER was submitted. 4.5.1 Background Information In order to minimize the environmental impacts of construc-tion activities at the Clinton r'ower Station (CPS), Illinois Power Company (IP) made various commitments to institute con-trol measures during construction. The U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, now Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) , imposed other restrictions on IP in the Final Environmental State-ment (FES); these were referenced in the Limited Work Authori-zation of October 1,1975, and the Construction Permits Number CPPR-137 (Unit 1) and CPPR-138 (Unit 2) of February 24, 1976, issued by the NRC. Commitments pertaining to routine environ-mental monitoring are described in Chapter 6. Commitments that deal with activities to be controlled during construction are listed in Table 4.5-1. On April 20, 21, and 22, 1976, Mr. G. T. Gibson of the NRC, (%ssl Region III, conducted the initial environmental protection inspection. During the inspection he " reviewed environmental program conduct and management; examined preconstruction base-line, and construction period environmental monitoring program results; reviewed program quality control, audit, and review; and performed site inspection of construction activities. No items were noted for noncompliance. . ." (U.S. NRC 1976) . On March 28 and 29, 1977, Mr. W. B. Grant of the NRC, Region III, conducted an environmental protection inspection. Dur-ing the inspection he. . ." Discussed the NRC inspection program and the environmental protection requirements of the CPPR with licensee management; reviewed environmental program conduct and management; examined construction environmental monitor-ing program results; reviewed program quality control, audits and reviews ; and performed site inspection of construction acti :';i6s. Two items of noncompliance were identified: the licensee's failure to prepare a required control program to assure compliance with conditions of CPPR-137 and CPPR-138 and the licensee's failure to perform chemical analyses of fish as required by the CPPR by reference to the FES." (U.S. NRC 1977). IP's written response to these items of noncompliance was sent to the NRC as required in Section 2.201, Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations. For corrective action, a documented () control program was developed as describedlin Subsection 4.5.2 and implementation began in June, 1977. While this program was not formally documented at the time of the inspection, erosion control checklists, Environmental Affairs Department perform-ance of construction activity audits, and the use of the site 4.5-1
CPS-ER(OLS) r.onstruction contractor to implement the appropriate environ-
~~'nental protection requirements are all acknowledged in the inspection report and it is IP's position chat environmental commitments were being fulfilled.~~
The failure to perform chemical analyses of fish was the re-sult of insufficient sample size to provide valid data on < pesticide and trace metal levels. The required ant. lyses had been routinely performed on bottom sediments rather than fish since May of 1975. It was felt that this action met or ex-ceeded the intent of the original commitment and that com-pliance was never an issue. Subsequent discussion with NRC personnel supported this position and no corrective action was required. 4.5.2 Program Responsibilities IP is responsible for ensuring that the environmental commit-ments (made by IP or imposed by regulatory agencies) tc. help minimize the adverse effects of construction and/or mitigace construction impacts are met. Within IP, tho iesponsibility for these activities rests with the Environmental Affairs Department (EAD). The Director of EAD reports directly to a Vice President, thereby separating EAD from other departments such as the Engineering Department and the Construction Depart-ment. The Manager of Clinton Site Activities and the site construction contractor, Baldwin Associates , are implementing the environmental protection requirements during construction. Other contractors used are under the control of the Supervisor of Site Development. i The documented Environmental Control. Program for Construction Activities - Clinton Power Station (ECP) was implemented in June, 1977. This program is essentially an inspection pro-gram in which EAD judges the effectiveness of the measures being taken at the site to fulfill the environmental commit-ments. The program requires that at least a monthly inspec-tion of current construction activities be conducted by way of site visits or documenta; ion checks for compliance with applicable environmental trotection commitments. Unsa tis fact-ory findings are reported and follow-up action is taken to correct the problem. Problem areas are reinspected on subseq-uent inspections to determine that follow-up action is ade-quate and complete. A log is maintained to assure that all listed commitments are being tracked to completion. The Environmental Affairs Department has management responsi-bility for the non-radiological environmental monitoring pro-grams (see Chapter 6). This responsibility includes the scheduling, data review, and reporting of the monitoring re-sults. For the baseline, preoperational and part of the con-struction phase stuides, IP (through Sargent & Lundy) re- (l) tained Hazleton Environmental Sciences Corporation (formerly 4.5-2
CPS-ER(OLS)
~~/") NALCO Environmental Sciences) of Northbrook, Illinois, to provide all aquatic and terrestrial sampling ord analysis.~~
Since April, 1978, all aquatic monitoring has been conducted by IP's Central Laboratory, which is located at the CPS site. Hazleton Environmental Sciences has continued to perform ' terrestrial sampling. EAD will retsin responsibilities for reporting requirements and management of the consultant re-The Central Laboratory will tained for terrestrial studies. also provide for sample collections for some parts of the radiological environmental monitoring program (see Chapter 6). The EAD had management responsibility for the meteorological program until September 1, 1979, when the responsibility was transferred to the CPS operations staff of the Power Produc-tion Department. The radiological environmental program is managed by the CPS operations staff of the Power Production Department. A con-sultant is being hired to perform required activities under this program. The program conforms to the NRC Branch Techni-cal Position on radiological environmental monitoring programs dated March, 1978. The program will start about April, 1980. 4.5.3 contro Measures 4.5.3.1 Noise A noise monitoring program was initiated in late 1977. The de-tails of this program and the data collected are described in Section 2.7. Muffler requirements are enforced on all con-struction vehicles to help eliminate unnecessary noise. 4.5.3.2 Erosion Erosion control received much attention in minimizing the ad-verse environmental effects of station construction. The commitments numbered 9, 10, 13, if , 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 27 in Table 4.5-1 all dealInwith activities to reduce erosion addition, erosion control check-as much as practicable. lists were used to locate areas where erosion was or could become a problem. These checklists were completed weekly dur-ing the time at which the maximum potential for erosion exist-ed, i.e. , during lake clearing and initial station construction work. Seeding and mulching Gn conjunction with the use of erosion control materials such as " Hold /Gro" and "Enkamat" in potentially troublesome areas) has been accomplished at various locations around the site. This is done when construction in an area is complete. 4.5.3.3 Dust On-site areas that become dusty are watered as necessary to con-() trol dust. The craft ;_; King lot area is also watered (prior to shift change) in order to maximize dust control. A daily 4.5-3
CPS-ER(OLS) visual inspection is used to determine when watering is required. ll 4.5.3.4 Transportation Access Several road modifications were required due to the formation of Lake Clinton. These included township road route modifica-tions, State Highway Routes 54, 48, and 10 bridge construction and route modification, county highway 14 bridge work, and Lhe Davenport and Parnell bridge work. All this work was conduct-ed so that it did not prohibit traffic flow except on roads that were to be abandoned. Traffic on. local roads increased somewhat during the construc-tion period as the result of the influx of workmen (see Sec-tion 4.1). Heavy equipment did not present traffic problems as it was used primarily on on-site roads. 4.5.3.5 Rainfall Runoff Three retention ponds were constructed to serve as stilling basins for rainfall runoff to minimize the amount of silt
~~eaching Salt Creek and the North Fork of Salt Creek. In addition, a belt of vegetation was maintained (to the extent practicable) between the creek bed and site clearing area to filter runoff water.~~
4.5.3.6 Channel Blockage Channelization of Trenkle Slough and a portion of Salt Creek upstream of the lake was required to provide adequate drain-age of the Trenkle Slough Drainage District. This channeliza-tion work was performed under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' 404 permit and the agreement reached on March 2, 1977, between IP, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Illinois Department of Conservation. Clearing for this project began in late September, 1977. Trees that were to be left standing were marked and clearing acti-vities were monitored by EAD to assure that the approved plan was being carried out. Seeding with grass was accomplished to provide ground cover after the channelization was completed. 4.5.3.7 Ground Water Wells to be inundated by the lake were filled in accordance with the State of Illinois Department of Mines and Minerals Rule XI-A of an Act in Relation to Oil, Gas, Coal, and Underground Resources. This was done to prevent possible contamination of the ground water. Well filling affidavits were completed on all filled wells. Ground water level hae been monitored at the dam and around the lake to document the effect of lake formation on ground water lll levels. A discussion of well filling and ground water level 4.5-4
CPS-ER(OLS) ( )) monitoring is provided in Subsection 2.4.2. 4.5.3.8 Fuel, Oil, and Chemical Wastes Fuel for construction equipment is stored in tanks with a total capacity of slightly over 350 barrels. These tanks are located in areas with little or no slope. Liquid leak-ing from these tanks would soak into the soil and there would be no direct flow to ditches or the nearby streams. A spill plan for these tanks has been prepared and the faci-lity has been inspected by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) Region V, and certified to conform with the requirements of 40 CFR 112. Used oil is stored in a buried tank in the' construction vehicle maintenance, area. When required, this tank is emp-tied by a scavenger and the contents hauled offsite for commercial use. Chemical wastes, such as pipe flushing solutions, are sent through waste stream treatment facilities where pH control, flocculation, etc., are performed as required. All discharges are made such that compliance with NPDES permit No. ILOO36919 is maintained (except as noted in routine reports) . 4.5.3.9 Aquatic and Terrestrial Ecology {)T
~
~~The preconstruction, and construction phase ecological monitor-in; programs were designed to document the impacts of construc-~~
~~ton.~~
Data summaries and conclusions are presented in Section 4.1. The methods used in the preconstruction and construction ecological monitoring programs, as well as those proposed for the operational monitoring program, are presented in Chapter 6. 4.5.3.10 Disposal of Unmerchantable Timber All unmerchantable t'imber and other vegetative wastes were dis-posed of by open burning in accordance with state regulati'ons. Other alternatives (such as burial and producing wood chips) were explored but proved "o be uneconomical. 4.5.3.11 Habitat Improvements As suggested in the FES a five-year reforestation program was bcgun in 1975. To avoid a mono-culture, a 10 x 10 foot spac-ing was adopted for most areas. Such a wide spacing permits native trees, grasses, and shrubs to re-establish themselves amongst the planted trees. The plantings, by years, are as follows: 1975 - a planting of 128,000 trees on about 120 acres along the I) shore of Lake Clinton. Species planted were: breen ash, European black alder, pin oak, bald cypress, river birch, and sycamore. 4.5-5
CPS-ER(OLS) 1976 - planting of 115,000 trees on 230 acres on upland por- a tions of the site. The species planted were: white T pine , red pint , and red cedar. 1977 - planting additional trees on 260 acres of site upland. The species planted were: red oak, hackberry, walnut, European black alder, pecan, and white pine. 1978 - no plantings were made during 1978, due to the uncer-tainty of which areas could be planted without possible future conflicts with construction or recreational development. 1979 - planting of about 30,000 trees on 70 acres; these were mostly associated with recreational areaa, such as the Lane Day Use Area and the West Side Access Area. Species planted were: mixed oak, white pine, bald cypress, autumn olive, and red bud. These plantings were accomplished in cooperation with the Illinois Department of Conservation (IDOC) in such a way as to be completely compatible with the proposed recrea-tional program. The 1980 tree planting will be a cooperative effort between the IDOC and IP. A small (approximately 6 acres) prairie remnant east of the North Fork of Salt Creek in Section 11 of Harp Township was lll discovered durint, the winter of 1976 (see Figure 4.5-1). The remnent has been named Silphium Prairie and was expanded in July, 1977, by planting prairie grass and 'forbs in an adjacent 14 acre cornfield. In 1978 or 1979, Silphium Praicie was fur-ther expanded to total approximately 66 acres. Some small oak-hickory groves are left within the prairie to offer divers-ity of habitat and to illustrate that the original prairie was " struggling" with constantly encroaching trees. Silphium Prairie is being substituted for the peninsular prairie restora-tion described in Section 4.3 of the CPS-ER. Seeds of the following plants were applied to Silphium Prairie during 1977:
a. turkeyfoot grass (Andropogan gerardii),

b. little blue stem (Schizachyrium scoparium),

c. Indian grass (Sorghastrum nutans),

d. prairie coneflower (Ratidiba pinnata) ,

e. purple coneflower (Echinacea pallida)

f. wild quinine (Parthenium integrifolium),

g. rattlesnake master (Eryngium yuccifolium), Ih 4,5-6
~~CPS-ER(OLS) (]) h. purple prairie clover (Petalostemum purpureum),~~
i. rigid goldenrod (Solidago rigida),

j. lead plant (Amorpha canescens),

k. blackeyed susan (Rudbeckia hirta), and

1. prairie blazing star (Liatris pycnostachia).
Except for some miner allocations for back packing trails, roads, and primitive campsites, all IP land north of the Davenport bridge is allowed to revert to natural vegetation. The second growth timber west of the North Fork of Salt Creek in Section 11, Harp Township, provides excellent habitat for wild orchids , wild ginseng, and other unusual plants. Other relatively undisturbed woodlands in Sections 14 and 15 of DeWitt Township and Sections 26, 28 and 35 of Harp Township will be allowed to grow naturally. In addition to the wildlife habitat improvements as described in the preceding paragraphs, about 100 wood duck boxes were installed in early 1979 in forested areas near the lake. Houses for small owls and sparrowhawks are being considered for future installation. IP is cooperating with state authori-ties to establish refuge and controlled hunting areas. Adequate station landscaping will be accomplished after construc-tion is completed in accordance with IP company policy. n U 4.5-7
CPS-ER(OLS) CHAPTER 5 - ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF STATION OPERATION TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 5.1 EFFECTS OF OPERATION OF HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM 5.1-1 5.1.1 Effluent Limitations and Water Quality Standards 5.1-1 5.1.2 Physical Effects of Operation of Heat Dissipation System 5.1-1 5.1.3 Biological Effects 5.1-3 5.1.4 Effects of Heat Dissipation Facilities 5.1-3 APPENDIX 5.lA-Predicted Lake Clinton Temperatures 5.lA-1 5.2 RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT FROM ROUTINE OPERATION 5.2-1 5.2.1 Exposure Pathways 5.2-1 5.2.1.1 Exposure Pathways for Biota Other Than Man 5.2-1 5.2.1.1.1 Terrestrial Pathways 5.2-1 < 5.2.1.1.2 Aquatic Pathways 5.2 2 5.2.1.2 Exposure Pathways for Man 5.2-3 (J
~'s 5.2.1.2.1 Terrestrial Pathways 5.2-3 5.2-4 5.2.1.2.2 Aquatic Pathways 5.2.2 Radioactivity in Environment 5.2-5 5.2.2.1 Surface Water Models 5.2-5 5.2.2.1.1 Transport Models 5.2-5 5.2.2.1.2 Sediment Uptake Models 5.2-5 5.2.2.1.3 Water-Use Models 5.2-5 5.2.2.2 Groundwater Models 5.2-5 5.2.2.3 Gaseous Effluents 5.2-5 5.2.3 Dose Rate Estimates for Biota Other Than Man 5.2-6 5.2.3.1 Gaseous Effluents 5.2-6 5.2.3.2 Liquid Effluents 5.2-6 5.2.3.3 Dose Effects on Biota 5.2-7 5.2.4 Dose Rate Estimates for Man 5.2-7 5.2.4.1 Liquid Pathways 5.2-7 5.2.4.2 Gaseous Pathways 5.2-8 5.2.4.3 Direct Radiation from Facility 5.2-9 5.2.4.4 Annual Population Doses 5.2-9 5.2.5 Summary of Annual Radiation Doses 5.2-9 5.3 EFFECTS OF CHEMICAL AND BIOCIDE DISCHARGES 5.3-1 APPENDIX 5.3A-Illinois EPA Water Quality Certification per Section 401 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 5.3A-1 o ,V 5-1
CPS-ER(OLS) g CHAPTER 5 - ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF STATION OPERATION TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.) PAGE APPENDIX 5.3B-U.S. EPA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit per Section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act 5.3B-1 S.4 EFFECTS OF SANITARY WASTE DISCHARCES 5.4-1 5.5 EFFECTS OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE TRANSMISSION SYSTEM 5.5-1 5.5.1 Road Construction 5.5-1 5.5.2 Vegetation Control 5.5-1 5.5.3 Biological and Scenic Values 5.5-2 5.5.4 Inspection of Lines 5.5-3 5.6 OTHER EFFECTS 5.6-1 5.6.1 Land Use and Water Use 5.6-1 5.6.2 Noise Effects 5.6-2 5.6.3 Interaction with Other Plants 5.6-3 5.6.4 Spills 5.6-3 5.7 RES0eRCES COMMITTED 5.7-1 5.7.1 Uranium Resources 5.7-1 5.7.2 Land Resources 5.7-1 5.7.3 Water Resources 5.7-1 5.8 DEC0FEESSIONING AND DISMANTLING 5.8-1 5.8.1 Long Term Land Use 5.8-1 5.8.2 Irretrievable Commitment of Land 5.8-1 5.8.3 Decommissioning Plans 5.8-1 5.8.4 Environmental Impact 5.8-2 5.8.5 Decommissioning Costs 5.8-2 O 5-11
() CPS-ER(OLS) CHAPTER 5 - ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF STATION OPEPI.TIg LIST OF TABLES NUMBER TITLE PAGE 5.1-1 Predicted Number of Hours of Lake Steam Fog in Area 1 5.1-10 5.1-2 Predicted Number of Hours of Lake Steam Fog in Area 2 5.1-11 5.1-3 Predicted Number of Hours of Lake Steam Fog in Area 3 5.1-12 5.1-4 Predicted Number of Hours of Lake Steam Fog in Area 4 5.1-13 5.1-5 Predicted Number of Hours of Lake Steam Fog in Area 5 5.1-14 5.1-6 Predicted Number of Hours of Lake Steam Fog in Area 6 5.1-15 5.1-7 Predicted Number of Hours of Lake Steam Fog in Area 7 5.1-16 5.2-1 Site Boundary X/Q Values and the Rela-tive Deposition Rates in Each 22.50 Sector 5.2-11 7- Atmospheric Dilution Factors Used in s 5.2-2 Determining Offsite Doses at Several Locations of Interest 5.2-12 5.2-3 Relative Deposition Values by Downwind Sector for Clinton Power Station Site Based on Meteorological Data of May 1972 Through April 1977 5.2-13 5.2-4 Expected Individual Doses from Gaseous Effluents 5.2-15 5.2-5 Dose to Biota Other Than Man from Liquid Effluents 5.2-17 5.2-6 Bioaccumulation Factors for Aquatic Biota in Fresh Water 5.2-18 4 5.2-7 Assumptions Used to Calculate Radionuclide Concentrations and Doses to Biota Other Than Man 5.2-19 5.2-8 Whole Body and Critical Organ Pathways Doses from Liquid Effluents per Unit 5.2-20 5.2-9 Consumption Factors for the Maximum Exposed Individual 5.2-21 l 5.2-10 Estimated Annual Population Dose from Direct Radiation 5.2-22 5.2-11 Summary of Data and Assumptions Used for Calculating Dose from Direct Radiation 5.2-23
~~5. 2 -l?. Estimated Annual Whole Body Doses to~~
~~- the General Population Within 50 Miles~~
( w) s. of the Site Resulting from Operation of the Clinton Power Station 5.2-24 5-111
CPS-ER(OLS) CllAPTER S - ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF STATION OPERATION LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd.) NUMBER TITLE PAGE 5.2-13 Estimated Whole-Body Doses to the Population Within 50 Miles of the Site Resulting from Natural Background and Man-Made Radiation Sources 5.2-25 5.2-14 Dose from All CPS-Related Sources and Natural and Other Man-Made Background Radiation Sources 5.2-26 O O 5-iv
r~) (_/ CPS-ER(OLS) . CHAPTER 5 - ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF STATION OPERATION LIST OF FIGURES NUMBER TITLE 5.1-1 Areas Studied for Steam Fog Impact 5.2-1 Possible Radiation Exposure Pathways for Local Flora and Local and Migratory Fauna 5.2-2 Possible Radiation Exposure Pathways to Persons 5.5-1 Swamp Buttercup Cover on a Right-of-Way 5.5-2 Love Grass and Fragrant Sumac Cover on a Right-of-Uay 5.5-3 Mixed Vegetative Cover on a Right-of-Way 5.5-4 Shrub Species Mixed Cover on a Right-of-Way 5.5-5 Shrub Cover 5.5-6 Shrub Cover 0 v l 1 O 5-v
CPS-ER(OLS) O CaiPTER 5 - Env1RousenTit EPPECTS or Srir1on oPEaATlon 5.1 EFPECTS OF OPERATION OF HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM 5.1.1 Effluent Limitations and Water Quality Standards Federal and state of Illinois thermal standards applicable to effluent from Clinton Power Station - Units 1 and 2 into Lake Clinton are discussed in this subsection. The thermal limitation currently applicable to the condenser cooling water discharge from Units 1 and 2 into Lake Clinton is contained in Chapter 3, Section 203(1) (11) of the This Illinois Pollution Control Board (IPCB) Rules and Regulations. limitation has been imposed by three different regulatory bodies. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (U.S. NRC) im-posed the limit in the construction permit based on certifica-tion from the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (Illinois ! EPA) pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. This certification, in turn, was based on the initial variance grant from IPCB for Lake Clinton and subse-l quent rule changes specifically for Lake Clinton. The U.S. EPA also imposed the same requirements through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permir process and a Section 316(a) " alternate" thermal standard that was granted for Lake Clinton and incorporated into the permit. []} Chapter 3, Section 203(i) (11) of the IPCB Rules and Regulations as it applies to Lake Clinton is as follows: , (aa) Lake Clinton The thermal discharge to Lake Clinton shall meet the following standards and conditions:
1. The effluent temperature shall not exceed 96 F.

2. All conditions adopted by Board Order in PCB 75-31 (July 31,1975) .
' Due to the site distance from the state border, it is not anti- < cipated that the effluent will, in any way, affect other states. 5.1.2 Physical Effects of Operation of Heat Dissipation System Surface temperatures at different times and locations on 4895-acre Lake Clinton were analyzed by a one-dimensional mathe-matical lake transient model called LAKET (see Appendix 6' of the Construction Permit Stage - Environmental Report ECPS-EM3). The model performs a mass and energy balance on the lake by f- representing the lake as a long rectangular channel with the (_)s length being the actual distance from flume discharge to plant intake, the width being the average width of the lake, and the depth being the average depth of the lake. The lake effective 5.1-1
CPS-ER(OLS) area is defined as the total area of the lake minus two-thirds of the lake finger area, or 3880 acres at a lake lll level of 690 feet above mean sea level (FSL) . Data for the model were taken from meteorological records for the area and loading schedules for the station. Peoria, Illinois, meteorological records from 1962 were used as a typical year, with 1955 chosen as the worst conditions (1-in-100-year dought) and 1964 chosen as a 1-in-10-year hot summer. The following loading schedule was used: 92% load in June, July, and August; 80% load in January, September, and December; and 70% load in February, March, April, May, October, and November. Lake surface temperatures that would occur under varying meteorological and hydrological conditions are shown in Appendix 5.lA. 8 ""St The IPCB rule not exceed 900 203(i) F fromspecifies that November April through water temperatuS*F and 60 during the rest of the year. However, rule 203(i) (11) exempts Lake Clinton from the ggneral provisions of rule 203(i) and sets a yearly limit of 96 F, with provisions for a supplemental cool-ing system. Illinois Power Company is committed to install 112 spray modules with Unit 1 and 120 spray modules with Unit 2, along the 3.4-mile-long effluent discharge canal. When the discharge tempera- ggg ture reaches 920 F or on June 1, whichever occure first, approx-imately 1/15 of the spray system capacity will be switched on, with approximately 1/15 of the system capacity switched on every day thereafter. When the discharge temperature is lower than 92 F, or on September 19, whichever occurs last, approx-imately 1/15 of the spray system capacity will be shut down on each of the first 6 days. Each day thereafter, approximately 2/15 or less of the capacity will be shut off, until on Septem-ber 30 at the earliest, the complete system will be off. Using this spray system, it is estimated that the discharge tempera-ture will peak at 960 F during a 1-in-10-year hot summer and at 920 F during an average year. Natural warming of waters in the spring and summer and the addi-tion of the heated circulating water from the Clinton Power Station will cause thermal stratification in Lake Clinton. Dur-ing the preoperational period, Lake Clinton has been stratified from June to September with the thermocline at about 8 to 10 meters deep at the main dam (Location 8). During station opera-tion, thermal loading will tend to cause stratification earlier in the year and extend stratification later into the fall. It will also extend the thermocline below its normal depth. Colder autunn and winter temperatures will cause a breakdown in the thermal stratification. Stratification was not taken into account in the LAKET model, but the layer of hot water on top will increase heat dispersion to the air and, hence, decrease the overall lake temperature estimated in the model. lll 5.1-2
CPS-ER(OLS) Estimates of the discharge plume characteristics for the (^3 worst thermal conditions in a typical year were assessed (> using the " Workbook of Thermal Plume Prediction," by M. A. Shirizi and L. R. Davis (1972), and the following input para-meters: 960 F discharge temperature; 840 F naximum ambient lake temperature; 2000 feet from discharge structure to oppo-site shoreline; and 20-foot maximum lake depth at discharge. The thermal plume is expected to extend completely across the o 2000-foot Salt Creek area, with a maximum temperature of 93.6 F on the shore opposite the discharge plume. Since the thermal plume generally will float over the cooler lake water and since southwesterly winds predominate in July and August at the Clinton site, the plume could possibly be blown upstream to a portion of Salt Creek not normally part of the cooling loop. With an assumed average wind velocity of 10 mph, a shallow 0.2 mph current is expected. However, a countercurrent will occur due to the circulating water pattern and the natural flow in Salt Creek. The temperature of the shallow layer will be reduced to ambient in a short time as the shallow layer mixe.s with ecoler upstream water and evapora-tion and heat dissipation to the atmosphere take effect. 5.1.3 Biological Effects Projected impacts on aquatic biota due to thermal discharges from Clinton Power Station (CPS) into Lake Clinton are dis-cussed in Section 5.1 of the CPS-ER; in the U. S. Atomic Energy (~) k/ Commission's Final Environmental Statement (FES); in the Application for Thermal Effluent Limitations Pursuant to Fed-eral Water Pollution Control Act, PL-92-500, Section 316(a), Type 2 Demonstration; and in the Illinois Pollution Control Board's Opinion and Order PCB 75-31. See also Section 2.2 of this report for the baseline ecological data summary. Projected impacts on aquatic biota due to operation of the intake and discharge structures, including condenser passage, are discussed in Section 5.1 of the CPS-ER, the FES, and the 316(a) demonstration. See also Section 3.4 of this report. The conclusions presented in the earlier documents concerning i thermal discharges and operation of intake and discharge structures at CPS are unchanged. 5.1.4 Effects of Heat Dissipation Facilities Operation of the station will influence the local micrometeor-ology as a result of discharging warm water into Lake Clinton. The principal meteorological effect of this will be to produce a steam fog over the lake when cold air (410F or less) moves over the significantly warmer (~59 F or higher) lake water. The rate of condensation of the evaporated water vapor (and thus the formation of steam tog) will be greatect at the lower ambient air temperature during winter. With heavy steam fog g
\-
5.1-3 1
CPS-ER(OLS) and relatively light wind speeds (approximately 2 meters per second - 5 mph - or less) , noticeable drift of the steam fog a W off the lake surface is possible. The characteristics of such steam fog will vary with the water temperature, the dis-tance traveled over the water, and the low-level ambient air temperature, relative humidity, vertical stability, horizontal wind direction fluctuation, and the transporting wind speed. An analytical model was used that acocunts for the processes of evaporation, condensation, and diffusion downwind and includes the variables listed previously as input conditions. A description of the model is provided in Subsection 6.1.3.2. Icing caused by condensed water vapor from the lake will have an effect primarily on vertical surfaces adjacent to the lake shores. Horizontal surfaces will accumulate much less rime. Observations of icing conditions from the Dresden Nuclear Power Station in Illinois indicate that icing on horizontal surfaces is not a significant problem beyond the #4.rst 200 feet from the edge of the lake. The increases in water temperature in portions of Lake Clinton due to station operation were determined by use of the LAKET (Transient Lake Temperature Prediction) computer model. The variations of temperatures with time and natural and forced evaporation were also predicted by LAKET. This program sim-ulated the effects of varying weather conditions and station heated-water discharge on the surface temperature and evapora-tion rates of a lake or river. The time-varying temperature ggg distribution along the water body's central axis is computed against time, along with the natural and forced evaporation. In the case of lakes, the variation in the lake level is also computed. Inputs to the computer program include data on the lake, the station, and the weather. Lake data include total surface area, salt content, seepage rate, initial teri.perature, and the length and width of the segments used in the analysis. Station data include temperature rises, flow rates, latitude, longitude, and altitude. Weather data include dates, wind speed, dry bulb temperaturea, relative humidity, dew point, barometric pressure, air vapor pressure, cloud cover, and precipitation. Output from the program provides time-varying temperature along the water body, natural and forced evaporation, and plots of temperature vs. time at nine locations. The computational approach consists of modeling the body of water into an idealized system of prismatic volumes , each having geometric and physical characteristics (i.e., width, depth, area, and flow) unique to its location and time. Using input weather data, the natural water temperature is determined, 5.1-4 g
CPS-ER(OLS) and based on the station rise, the downstream temperatures are computed. A one-dimensional finite-difference procedure (-
~~/~') is used.~~
Hydraulic and thermal balances and the energy budget method are used for determining the evaporation from the lake or river. The energy budget method takes into account such items as calar radiation, reflected solar radiation, and energy trans-ferred from the lake or river back to the atmosphere. Specific areas of interest within the immediate vicinity of Lake Clinton were defined for detailed study and evaluation of the steam fog potential and resulting impact. The seven areas selected are shown on Figure 5.1-1 and are as follows:
a. Area 1 - road crossing the lake south of DeWitt,

b. Area 2 - the county road that runs east-west along the southern edge of the lake just west of State Route 14, l c. Area 3 - State Route 10 where it runs along the south-ern edge of the lake,

d. Area 4 - the northwest-southeast portion of State Route 10 that is parallel to the spillway,

e. Area 5 - State Route 10 and the connecting roads that run north-south along the western edge of the site,

f. Area 6 - the portion of State Route 54 that is close to the lake including the bridge over the lake, and

g. Area 7 - the containment building complex.
~~Calculations showed no significant probability of the lake~~
, steam fog extending to DeWitt. Similarly, the probability of the lake steam fog reaching the town of Lane is so low that the town did not require designation as a special area. The remain-ing sections of roads around the lake also were not affected significantly by the predicted lake steam fog.
j The steam fog prediction model described in Subsection 6.1.3.2 + was used to calculate the occurrence of restricted visibility 'r-caused by steam fog in each of the specified areas. This dete mination required the calculation of evaporation and diffusion for each of six to ten combinations of temperature and relative
! humidity for each of the seven major wind directions that would affect one or more of the areas of interest. This process was repeated for each month to account for the monthly difference in water temperature. The results were several hundred maps showing the concentration of water vapor and water droplets for the lake and adjacent areas.
~~5.1-5~~
~~- - -,- - - -, , - - - - ,-, n,.., -~~
CPS-ER(OLS) The time required to run the model and to evaluate the results did not permit complete variation of all the factors that would influence the horizontal extent and intensity of steam fog from the lake. Therefore, a set of values was selected lll and used in the model to produce what are considered the probable " worst case" for contiguous 30-day periods. Assumptions and variables used in the model are described in Subsection 6.1.3.2. Briefly, these assumptions are as follows:
a. The wind speed shear in the layer into which water is evaporated is 1 m/sec.

b. The mean wind speed in the layer is 1 m/sec.

c. The vertical and horizontal stability in the layer is Pasquill stability category C during the period August through April.

d. The calculated lake water temperatures apply uniform-ly across the width of the lake.

e. The edges of the lake do not freeze and reduce the amount of surface water available for evaporation.
~
f. Visibility is defined by the empirical curves derived from previous fog research and presented in Subsection 6.1.3.2.

g. The horizontal visibility is measured at a height of llh 1 meter above the surface of the lake.
The vast majority of predicted hours of steam fog off the lake occurred when the air temperature was 50 C or less with the water temperature 100 to 250 C or higher. These conditions would produce an " unstable" lapse rate within the layer of interest. Stability category C was selected to represent this type of ste :'ity lapse rate. The calculated number of hours of various categories of visi-bility due to steam fog from the lake for each selected area are presented in Tables 5.1-1 through 5.1-7. The values in these tables are the sum of all the hours of various combina-tions of air temperature, relative humidity, and wind direc-tion that could affect a given area. Thus, the values do not apply uniformly over an entire area, but rather just for that portion immediately downwind of the lake for the occurring wind direction. The fog prediction model also ice eer used to predict the hours of steam fog during the summ - aw ns. Using the same assump-tions as for the other montc9 ,e year, the model predicts a greater number of hours to,an woub.i be expected or is verified by the calibration data. Ra her than attempt to refine the model to obtain more precise (smaller) values , the derived values are 5.1-6 O
CPS-ER(OLS) presented to serve as an upper limit on the number of hours that off-lake steam fog could be expected.
/
The magnitude of lake steam fog during the summer months was not fully determined. Results showed steam fog forming during the cooler nighttime temperatures and periods of high relative humidity. Additional calibration of the model is required for these summer warm fog tc.nditions before values can be pre-sented. The values presented in Tables 5.1-1 through 5.1-7 are consid-ered to be representative of the worst probable monthly average conditions expected for the month. The basis for this conclu-sion is the conservative nature of the input values, described in the preceding paragraph, that were used in the model. Normal station operating conditions were used to determine the lake water temperatures. Normal station operating conditions are defined as a lake elevation of 690 feet; a 70% load factor for February, March, April, May, October, and November; and an 80% load factor for June, July, August, September, and January. Occasional periods of heavier loads or lower lake elevations would not significantly affect the predicted steam fog hours. This conclusion is possible because continuous (365 days per year) operation under extreme station operating conditions re-sul5S in ^ nat incre Se in "^5erFtemperature 5.5 F at the discharge and 3 of approximately at the intake during the
/~' winter. These changes would have their greatest impact immed- \ lately below the discharge point; the impact would decrease rapidly downstream with the requirement to transport more or heavier fog farther off the lake surface into the areas of l
I interest. Test results with slightly (20 to 50 F) increased water temperatures showed negligible change in the resulting steam fog for a given meteorological condition. erobably the most influential conservative factor used The in the model is the assumed low-level wind speed of 1 m/sec. impact of this assumption is severalfold. First, it reduces the thickness of the layer to reach saturation more rapidly and achieve a greater concentration of condensed water vapor. Second, the low wind speed then moves the steam fog off the lake in a relatively uniform mass, albeit a shorter distance, l before off-lak. evaporation improves the visJaility. Wind speed data collected at the Clinton site 10 meters above the ground during the period of record showed that only 8% of the hours had a wind speed of 1.5 m/see or less. Nevertheless, it l ' is felt that a wind speed of 1 m/sec should be used for a con-servative approximation of the near-surface wind speed that will affect the horizontal visibility in the first 3 meters I above the ground in the designated areas of interest. l The maps (not included) produced by the compter fog model show l the horizontal extent of various concentrations of water vapor s_- 5.1-7 l
CPS-ER(OLS) or condensed water that occur with a given wind direction for a specified combination of air temperature and relative humid-ity. Analyses of these maps show that the maximum extent of reduced visibility beyond the lake from the lake steam fog lll will be generally confined to the area south of the lake and , east of the town of Lane. Steam fog can occasionally drift over Route 54 where it pe,ses near the northern edge of the lake. A shallow open fiume about 300 feet wide will be used to carry the discharge water from tue station to the discharge point in the lake approximately 3 miles due east of the sta-tion. Because of the water temperature, steaming in the flume is expected with the same frequency as for Area 1 (see Table 5.1-1) . However, the relative narrow width of the flume will limit the volume of air exposed to the water surface and there-by limit the amount of air to reach saturation. Under most meteorological conditions, any excess water vapor acquired over the flume will mix with the drier ambient air as soon as the parcel of air is beyond the flume. With low-level wind speeds of less than 2 m/sec, the expected extent of signifi-cantly reduced visibility due to steam fog from the flume will be limited to , at most, a few hundred feet immediately down-wind of the flume. With higher wind speeds, any steam fog should dissipate within 200 feet of the flume. A greater horizontal extent will occur when the ambient air is very near saturation before it is exposed to the flume. In this case, natural fog would be expected and the steam fog from the flume will act to increase the intensity of the ambient restriction to visibility immediately downwind of the flume. lll The impact of fogging and icing conditions on emergency pro-cedures for a coincident station accident is primarily in the area of transportation. The safe speed of vehicles through an area downwind of the lake and affected by lake steam fog could be reduced if the lake steam fog is sufficiently dense. As a conservative estimate, a speed of 10 to 15 mph could still be maintained through an affected area in all but the most extreme cases. The maximum horizontal extent of steam fog from the lake along a road is approximately 1 mile or less. The extent of extrone-ly dense steam fog would be limited to the road area immediately adj acent to the lake. Once vehicles are through an affected area, the speed of the vehicle is controlled by other factors. Icing from lake steam fog should not be a problem. Roads lo-cated 500 feet or more from the lake are not expected to be affected by ice from the lake steam fog. Vertical surfaces within 500 feet deenwind of the lake could accumulate rime ice under certain meteorological conditions. A horizontal surface, such as a road bed, is seldom affected by lake ice if it is 50 feet or more from the edge of the lake. If signi-ficant icing should occur on any critical road due to natural 5.1-8 h
t CPS-ER(OLS) I or cooling lake influences, standard highway maintenance procedures will be followed to reduce the impact of theThe ice O on vehicle movement over the affected critical roads. white or hoary accumulation of ice on vertical surfaces along a roadway can alert drivers and maintenance personnel to the possibility of icing conditions on the road. I f ) i 1 ! ( ) i I l l i O t 1-i i I I i [- 5.1-9 I
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5.1-1 PREDICTED NUMBER OF HOURS OF LAKE STEAM FOG IN AREA 1 !. VISIBILITY 100 FEET 1/16 MILE 3/16 MILE 1 MILE MONTH OR LESS OR LESS OR LESS OR LESS January 218 299 395 419 February 120 235 349 360 March 108, 151 181 195 April 25 77 151 109 May 1 1 1 5 June 0 0 1 4 July 1 1 2 7 August 60 93 134 144 Septe=ber 77 131 157 173 October 84 133 231 288
~~November 133 342 399 430 December 227 416 453 465 i~~
~~1 i~~
~~Fog prediction model indicates minor steam fog for these conths.~~
Values shown are from Peoria, Illinois (1960-1970). 5.1-10
CPS-ER(OLS)- l l TABLE 5.1-2 O PREDICTED NUMBER OF HOURS OF LAKE STEAM FOG IN AREA 2 VISIBILITY. 100 FEr~.T. 1/16 MILE 3/16 MILE 1 MILE MONTH OR LESS OR LESS OR LESS OR LESS January 108 163 163 163 February 44 143, 152 152 March 41 72 76 76 April 0 33 44 46 May 1 1- 1 5 June O O 1 4 July 1 1 2 7 August 93 99 103 111 O September 80 97 .107 107 October 72 102 105 109 November 44 135 149 149 December 60 139 139 148 i
~~Fog prediction model indicates minor steam fog for these months.~~
Values shown are from Peoria, Illinois (1960-1970). O 5.1-11
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5.1-3 PRI :CTED NUMBER OF HOURS OF LAKE STEAM FOG IN AREA 3 O VISIBILITY 100 FEET 1/16 MILE 3/16 MILE 1 HILE MOSTH OR LESS OR LESS OR LESS OR LESS January 7 65 114 144 February 3 71 99 116 March 3 39 49 68 April 0 16 20 22
S Pay 1 1 1

4 June 0 0 1

7 July 1 1 2 August 17 47 53 59 Septe=ber 22 61 61 64 90 96 O
~~October 3 90 November 7 65 100 111 December 14 147 138 148~~
~~Fog prediction codel indicates minor steam fog for these months.~~
Values shown are from Peoria, Illinois (1960-1970). O 5.1-12 l 1
CPS-ER(OLS) .. TABLE 5.1-4 PREDICTED NUMBER OF HOURS OF LAKE STEAM FOG IN AREA 4 VISIBILITY j 100 FEET 1/16 MILE 3/16 MILE 1 MILE MONTH' OR LESS OR LESS OR LESS OR LEss January 7 7 17 50 February 3 3 5 34 March 3 3 4 28 April 0 0 1 8 May- 1 1 1 5 I
~~June 0 0 1 4 t~~
~~July~~
~~1 1 2 ~7 2~~
i August 0 0 1 6 September 1 7 8 14 ' October 3 10 14 21 1 I Novecber 4 4 9 26 4 December 2 2 6 24 l ? l i i
~~Fog prediction model indicates minor steam fog for these months.~~
Values shown are from Peoria, Illinois (1960-1970). O 5.1-13 . l
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5.1-5 PREDICTED NUMBER OF HOURS OF LAKE STEAM FOG IN AREA 5 VISIBILITY 100 FEET 1/16 MILE 3/16 MILE 1 MILE M0ffrH OR LESS OR LESS OR LESS OR LESS January 7 20 38 87 February 3 10 39 75 March 3 5 20 38 April 0 0 1 6
5 Hay 1 1 1

4 June 0 0 1

2 7 July 1 1 August 0 17 24 47 September 1 29 48 63 h October 3 14 46 59 November 4 26 34 48 December 2 7 21 60

Fog prediction model indicates minor steam fog for these months.
Values shown are from Peoria, Illinois (1960-1970). l 5.1-14
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5.1-6 O PREDICTED NUMBER OF HOURS OF LAKE STEAM FOG IN AREA 6 VISIBILITY 100 FEET 1/16 MILE 3/16 MILE 1 MILE M0hTH OR LESS OR LESS OR L'ESS OR LESS, January 7 87 123 156 I February 3 21 47 88 1 2 March 3 8 17 38 April 0 6 11 18 i
~~5 j hy 1 1 1~~
'
4 June O O 1 July

1 1 2 7 August 3 12 24 37 September 9 57 82 88 October 6 81 141 147 Nove=ber 15 74 125 168 December 6 60 102 144 i

Fog prediction model indicates minor steam fog for these conths.
~~Values shown are from Peoria, Illinois (1960-1970). 5.1-15~~
-._._ _- _ , . . _ . y _. .,_.~ v _ - , _ .--3 _ - , . _ .- , , , , . . _ _ , . . . , . . , - -
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5.1-7 PREDICTED 7"MBER OF HOURS OF LAKE STEAM FOG IN AREA 7 h VISIBILITY 100 FEET 1/16 MILE 3/16 MILE 1 MILE MONTH OR LESS OR LESS OR LESS OR LESS January 3 16 61 128 February 1 15 58 98 March 0 3 4 40 April 0 0 22 45 hy 1 1 1 5 June 0 0 1 4 July 1 1 2 7 August 0 20 22 50 September 4 23 33 52 October 4 22 28 39 November 2 7 23 79 December 1 16 61 138
~~Fog predictica model indicates minor steam fog for these months.~~
Values shown are from Peoria, Illinois (1960-1970). 5.1-16
i i v-- ,
~~. ~ _ __~~
i
= . .. .: / y hf N,,. ,/ - ,,
~~k f(, - ~+ ., y., - = ,~~
,,,V, .: .w~ ' ',*; ,,. W , [C v t
e *v t u j. ..s I n 3 3, 7,7 *8, Q p**k ?*sf 6 ' s 7 'N - t l l d' x, 9
~~'j '~~
On . ~I _%
~~, , , , .I~~
~~_? _ i.) l~~
~~,,~- & _h e_ -~~
~~l > - Ow, r . - p -~ , . . ,,, . . g.,-~~
~~. i> > >~~
g
-- - - - _p , ,gia. 'I - - i
[ / ,,vdc.,'hgf4 t o ', - c,, , T ! o ,- j I
~~,j v . . ,~~
~~so . : n2~~
, n a r g -I, \~ tM -
J ~'T % f-g y & ,' ,( ; f,.-l 6 A, _/. t l
~~'f, . . ;, . 3 p __ ,,~~
~~y lf, N, ,~~
~~= .~~
~~_. ,g h..f f '.>.~~
*lc.
~~4p;#- - - ~- wl.'J- .- .. fr .- '% , { i * ' 1 - ),.- --. A-<4-l 9 ,,_ yrp " p g t~~
^ / :,s- 7 r & p h ;7% y ~* r 7 - . tH 1-y /b'.-f 'e . ~
~~r i~~
. i+ . @ . . ' ,, )u ~
g
. l,. 1;,_ f.. .. ffu 6 ) / u..a' - ~-
~~ri -~~
~~. . _y $..~~
~~_..,.._'l 2 ', -~~
-p. . , 1 T., / 7, ' i .I i V 7,- / ., e .-
J . ; , (- ,,*W J! '
. '. 9 :g on, <' .;,* ., .2 . ~:. ' " * *y )
~~r;~ 2%. r t~~
= .a.. 'g .; '.~,
~~s s., l_~~
~~<* -- av. ~'.' .v.,-- g '.)~~
~~~. Q,: ,l . ym , -- ,,. ( -^'~' v { .- ., .~~
~~J "k pel {~~
~~.~-e-~,,---~~
~~C, Y ,~~
= l lg n ;f , 3, A f, - i , i t , a. -
~~i s~~
, ,,c p 3 . _ , . . , 1 ., - I 4 eM,ar . . -
Es
~ *.- ~ c~ .- s- .
~~g y/ Q , br~~
'* %W d~ 'r'~ - -' ' ',
1
'T .? i .
~~y,gg~~
~~,,y - m. <~~
~~1 g' i , .7~~
~~-s-- -~~
~~1 ;, w - ,, _~~
i
~~. s' .. -~~
~~Ig~ i r.~~
,. ,.,3 ? ,,.- -f~- - "- --- t .,
~~f m.t - .~~
. s __ .v LEGEND: l -- 6 /. CONTAINMENT BUILDING COMPLEX O ^aca sruolEo
~~l* D.~~
~~y'j UTLEDGE i a ,a e y v. s .1, o A s~~
~~g-'p',, w[m,$* ,s IJ Y CI g .~~
~~i. 'i~~
~~) , o* "-~~
~~3 _,c_ V'v. #~~
~~..,. dp g i' , ; .~~
a, r .c p, < c :-
=
~~v..q.~~
,sm7,.. ..
~~3 v. . ,.., _ ., - a . ,-~~
. O , ,h A * ~
~~{ a - v! , - ' :~~
~~+ m. . r.; w - -~~
w'
= - .p C A A )<
~~A j i~~
A
~~t (~~
\
~~4 .- +-* 4. h*.; ue..c i l~~
., w- ., , .' d 's i y , ' ' / g . '/
~~l i g,,[, _, g~~
~~+- - - '~~
7
~~,,,. ., , - p. .~~
~~y u, '~~
, , j'-/' , 'g , . 'c . p<-
s ds m. ~ ,s . r.~ o ( vs
~~. '. - - a ,,~~
~~c ~ ~~ Y j f'" c_l }3, 'pf.~~
*' ~ / : , / ~' ~
l ,e- _ ba $ is . g , g j l g
~~r. ,~~
%f e.c-; f4 3 0 i bj_- & i +
~~i l~~
~~,N Ltt '.~~
~~j p . m~~
~~.a , __f ,~~
j
~~, , , 4 s s,.~~
g
~~. p ,..x- p ,~~
j
/
f
~~~ .Ay ju ;E w g4 ,~~
tf
! ; 1 . __ 1 . . . ; . . _.1 .m._._4_, ,, . e
_
~~, I,^~~
~~q-p e .. . rs~~
~~-' 28 ; ~ , .~~
{$- 30 - .A I y- F - 2' i {-j
,y,,,,,1 ! i a
~~i / 1 ...._.,, .~~
,. g. --. .- - j _ . . .. _.- . 'r'2,.. ..
~~i n I 3 J2~~
, . /, ) \ j SB 6
~~l 0, l~~
~~-q j (~~
~~r -~~
? , t / \ , -} . --_ =,~ w - * " - - - " - ~ - - - L - -f- - * - - - - - - - ' - e 4
~~l 4~~
~~g. '~~
~~.e , . - g -~~
~~3 a i i c . - -~~
- j i i , 4 7
~~l f ,. o~~
,, g 5 4 e. ' . s =.,tl' ,e .
~~p w,,,4,; p g, , [' ,,~~
; ei = _ ;5, ,,g i , e * - , 'Ie4 I' .- l . , ,
~~f :.. u. , , , p, y k n .%... . ,~~
, ,,, , h , 3 j g teg ,,,, o i 46 CLINTON POWER STATION
~~']--'"-- 9 1 2~~
~~} 46 UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV I RO N M E NT AL R E POR T-O PE R AT I NG LICE NSE STAGE l~~
FIGURE 5.1-1 ! AREAS STUDIED FOR STEAM F0G IlPACT i I L tg k
g _, . O i APPENDIX 5.1A - PREDICTED LAKE CLINTON TEMPERATURES e i 1 l 1 I i i 0 1 l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .--_,.-,-.-._.,.,__,_..,_.__,___________.,,.-,_.._,_...m_,,___...,_ - .,_.. ,-... , . . . . . . __._y, _, . . ~ , . - . . . , _ .<
O , l APPENDIX 5.lA - PREDICTED LAKE CLINTON TEMPERATURES Lake surface temperatures that would occur under varying meteorological and hydrological conditions are shown in the following: Tables (5-4, 5-5, 5-6, 5-7, 5-8, 5-9, 5-10) and Figures (5-6, 5-7, 5-8, 5-9, 5-10, 5-11, 5-12) taken from the Illinois Power Company (IP) 316 (a) application 1 to the Illinois Pollution Control Board. These are as close as we can come, at present, to the specified three-dimensional isotherms, since LAKET provided only a two-demensional graph. However, IP is in process of developing a new model which will better protray these conditions. O 4 0 5.lA-1
~~...___._m.. . . _ . ._ . . _ , . _ . - . . _ , . _ , _ , . , . . _ , _ _ . . - . _ . . _ . . . _ . ., _ , _~~
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5-4 PREDICTED Cl.INTON LAKE TEMPERATURES AT INDICATED ACRES (1962) ll LOAD TEMPERATirRE AT START OF INDICATED DAY *F DATE[ FAL TOR ACRES 0 }7_ 768 1500 2231 2962 3694 3880 61 61 55 51 48 45 42 42 Jan. 1 80% 10 59 59 53 49 45 43 40 40 19 56 56 51 46 42 40 37 37 28 55 55 50 45 42 39 36 36 Feb. 1 53 54 50 46 42 40 37 36 54 49 46 43 40 38 37 70% 10 54 19 56 56 50 46 43 42 40 39 28 55 55 50 46 43 41 38 38 Mar. 1 55 54 50 46 43 40 38 38 46 44 41 39 38 70% 10 55 55 50 19 57 57 52 48 45 43 41 40 28 62 61 57 53 50 47 45 45 Apr. 1 64 64 58 55 52 49 47 47 70% 10 67 67 61 58 55 52 50 50 19 69 69 63 59 56 54 52 52 28 76 75 70 66 63 61 59 59 May 1 78 78 72 68 66 63 61 61 70% 10 81 81 74 71 68 66 64 64 llg 19 88 87 81 77 74 72 71 71 28 90 90 82 78 76 74 73 73 June 1 93 92 84 79 77 75 74 74 92% supplemental cooling Ef f ective June 10 to September 10 - See Table 5-5 ; Sept. 10 96 96 88 84 '81 78 77 77 80% 19 95 94 87 82 79 77 76 76 28 91 91 84 80 76 74 72 72 Oct. 1 88 88 84 79 76 73 71 71 70% 10 86 86 80 77 74 71 70 69 19 87 87 80 76 74 72 70 70 28 80 80 74 70 70 65 63 63 Nov. 1 7
/s 72 68 65 63 61 61 70% 10 74 73 68 64 61 59 57 57 19 71 71 65 62 58 56 55 54 28 68 67 62 58 55 53 51 51 Dec. I , ,1 58 55 53 51 51 70% 10 ~ 59 54 51 49 47 46 19 62 62 57 52 48 45 43 43 28 59 59 54 50 46 43 41 40 Note: Two Units operating at indicated load factors h 5.lA-2
O O O TABLE 5-5 PREDICTED CLINTON LAKE TEMPERATURES WITH SUPPLEMENTAL COOLING - SUl+1ER 19M TEMPERATURE AT START OF INDICATED DAY - *F DATE ACRES 0 462 882 1302 1722 2142 2562 2982 3402 3822 3880 JUNE 10 93 90 87 84 81 81 80 76 77 76 76 13 96 90 87 84 82 80 79 78 77 76 76 16 96 92 89 86 84 82 80 79 79 78 76 19 96 92 90 88 86 84 82 81 80 79 79 22 96 92 90 88 86 85 83 82 80 80 79 25 96 91 89 87 86 85 83 82 81 80 79 28 96 92 89 87 86 85 84 83 82 80 80 ACRES 0 452 860 1267 1674 2081 2488 2896 3303 3710 3880 JULY 4 96 91 90 89 87 86 85 84 83 82 82 o vi 7 96 92 90 89 88 87 86 85 84 84 84 ] 10 96 91 90 89 88 87 86 85 84 84 84 g y 13 96 91 89 88 87 86 86 85 84 84 84 $ w 16 96 90 88 87 86 85 84 84 83 82 82 g 19 96 92 89 87 86 84 84 83 83 82 82 & 22 96 91 90 87 86 85 84 83 82 82 82 3 25 96 91 89 87 86 84 83 82 82 82 32 28 96 90 88 86 85 84 83 82 81 80 61 31 96 90 88 86 84 83 82 81 80 79 79 ACRES 0 442 845 1248 1650 2055 2455 2860 3260 3665 38? F AUGUST 4 96 92 89 87 85 84 83 82 81 80 80 , 7 96 93 90 88 86 84 83 82 81 81 60 10 96 92 90 89 86 85 84 82 82 81 81 13 96 91 88 87 86 84 83 82 81 80 80 16 96 92 89 86 85 84 83 82 81 80 80 19 96 93 90 87 85 84 83 82 81 80 80 22 96 92 90 88 86 84 83 82 82 81 81 25 96 92 90 88 86 85 83 82 82 81 81 28 96 93 90 88 86 85 83 82 81 81 80 31 96 92 90 88 86 85 84 83 82 81 81
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5-6 ACREACE AT 90* AND 92* ISOTHERMS 1962 1964 1955 DATE 92* 90* 92* 90* 92* 90* June 10 308 462 348 566 238 356 June 13 308 462 348 631 185 277 June 16 462 742 348 631 238 356 June 19 462 882 348 566 415 658 June 22 462 882 435 696 415 903 June 25 370 672 435 827 415 658 June 28 462 742 827 1415 415 780 July 4 362 860 452 1274 547 800 July 7 452 860 452 863 800 1052 July 10 362 860 589 863 610 1178 July 13 632 656 452 863 610 1178 July 16 301 452 452 863 610 1178 July 19 452 674 863 1137 610 1178 July 22 362 860 1274 1685 989 1555 July 25 362 656 1685 2096 1178 1555 July 28 301 452 1685 2507 1178 1935 July 31 301 452 452 1685 1555 2690 August 4 442 711 707 1040 1548 3050 August 7 576 845 840 1107 604 1920 August 10 442 845 352 640 604 981 August 13 354 576 294 440 604 981 August 16 442 711 440 600 604 981 August 19 576 845 573 840 981 1360 August 22 442 845 440 840 981 1548 August 25 442 845 352 573 604 1548 August 28 576 845 352 573 604 981 August 31 442 845 440 707 334 603 O 5.1A-4
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5-7
~~) PREDICTED CLINTON LAKE TEMPERATURES AT INDICATED ACRES (1955) s -~~
DATE/ LOAD TEMPERATURE AT START OF INDICATED DAY 'F _ FACTOR ACRES 0 37 768 1500 2231 2962 3694 3880 Jan. I 60 60 53 49 46 43 41 41 80% 10 62 62 56 52 48 45 43 43 19 59 59 53 48 46 43 41 40 28 57 56 50 45 42 40 38 37 Feb. 1 53 53 50 45 41 38 39 36 70% 10 54 54 49 46 43 40 38 37 19 54 54 49 44 41 40 36 37 28 57 57 53 49 46 43 41 40 Mar. 1 58 58 53 49 46 43 41 41 70% 10 61 61 55 52 49 47 45 45 19 65 65 59 55 52 50 49 48 28 62 62 56 52 49 47 46 45 Apr. 1 64 64 60 55 52 50 48 48 70% 10 70 70 64 60 58 55 53 53 19 76 76 70 66 64 62 60 60 28 80 80 73 69 66 65 63 63 May 1 81 81 75 71 68 66 65 64 (~ N x 70% 10 83 83 77 73 70 68 67 66 19 85 85 79 75 72 70 69 68 28 89 89 81 78 75 74 72 72 Supplemental Cooling Effective June 1 to September 14 - See Table 5-8 Sept. 14 95 95 87 83 80 78 76 76 80% 19 95 95 87 82 80 78 76 76 23 95 95 88 83 80 78 76 76 28 93 92 85 80 77 75 74 73 Oct. 1 90 90 85 80 77 75 73 73 70% 10 87 87 80 78 74 72 71 70 19 82 82 76 71 68 67 66 65 28 78 78 71 68 65 63 62 61 Nov. 1 75 75 68 64 62 60 58 58 70% 10 70 69 63 59 56 54 53 53 19 67 67 61 58 55 52 51 50 28 64 65 59 55 52 50 48 48 Dec. 1 64 63 55 52 49 47 45 45 70% 10 61 61 56 50 47 44 42 42 19 59 58 53 49 46 42 40 39 28 60 60 54 50 46 44 41 41 Note: Two units ope:ating at indicated load factors 9 5.lA-5
TABLE 5-8 PREDICTED CLINTON LAKE TE10'ERATURES WITH SUPPLEMENTAL COOLING - SUMMER 1955 TEMPERATURE AT START OF INDICATED DAY 'F 415 7E0 1150 1520 1890 2250 2640 2980 3340 3480 DATE ACRES 0 75 '- 96 89 85 82 81 80 79 77 76 June 7 75 96 89 85 82 80 78 77 77 16 - 10 87 84 81 78 77 75 74 74 73 73' 13 96 85 83 80 78 76 75 74 73 73 16 96 89 89 86 83 82 79 78 78 78 78 19 96 92 91 88 86 84 82 82 82 82 82 22 96 92 89 88 87 85 84 82 81 81 81 o 25 96 92 88 87 86 94 83 82 82 82 @ w 28 96 92 90
~~. tb~~
~~ACRES 0 420 800 1178 1555 1935 2315 2690 3070 3450 357'8~~
~
88 87 86 85 85 84 83 83 July 4 96 93 90 93 92 89 87 87 85 85 84 84 83 7 96 90 88 87 86 85 85 84 84 10 96 93 91 91 90 89 88 86 86 85 84 84 13 96 93 93 91 90 89 88 87 86 85 85 85 16 96 90 89 88 87 86 86 85 85 19 96 93 91 95 93 91 90 89 88 87 87 86 86 22 96 - 92 90 89 88 87 87 86 86 25 96 93 93 93 92 91 90 89 89 88 87 87 28 96 94 93 92 91 91 90 89 89 88 31 96 95 94 (Sheet 1 of 2) 4 9 e
_._ _. _..___-.__.__._.__...._..___.___.__.m_m.___.____._..____.__.__..___ _ _ . . . . . . . _ . . _ . . t O O O 1 TABLE 5-8 (Cont.'d) DATE ACRES 0 417 790 1172 1548 1920 2295 2675 3050 3400 3540 4 96 94 93 93 92 91 90 90 90 89 89 August 7 96 93 91 90 90 90 89 89 88 88 88 10 96 93 91 89 88 88 88 87 87' 87 87 13 96 93 91 89 87 87 86 86 86 85 85 96 93 91 89 88 86 85 85 85 85 85 16 96 94 93 91 89 88 86 85. 85 85 85 19 22 96 94 93 91 90 88 87 86 86 85 85 - 96 93 91 91 90 89 87 86- 86 85 85 25 28 96 93 91 89 89 88 87 86 85 85 85 31 96 91 89 88 86 86 85 85 84 83 83 n t
~~. E.~~
w "o O o
~~, n 3~~
~~{ 3 A 4 4 (Sheet 2 of 2)~~
~
i I i .
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5-9 PREDICTED CLINr( # LAKE TEMPERATURES AT INDICATED ACRES (1964) O DATE/ LOAD TEMPERATURE AT START OF INDICd'ED DAY 'F FACTOR ACRES 0 37 768 1500 2231 2962 3694 3880 Jan. 1 60. 60- 54 50 47 44 41 4'1 - 80% . 10 60 60 54 50 47 44 42 41 19 58 58 53 48 45 42 40 39 28 60 60 54 50 47 . JV+ 41 41 Feb. 1 58 59 55 51 47 44 42 41 707. 10 60 59 54 52 49 46 43 43 19 60 60 55 52 48 47 44 44 28 60 60- 60 52 49 46 44 44 Mar. 1 61 61 56 52 49 47 44 44 70% 10 63 63 58 54 51 49 47 46 19 65 65 60 56 53 51 49 48 28 65 64 60 56 53 50 48 48 Apr. 1 64 64 59 56 52 50 48 48 70% 10 67 67 62 57 54 52 50 50 19 72 72 66 62 60 58 56 56 28 76 76 71 67 64 62 60 60 May 1 76 76 71 67 64 62 60 60 70% 10 82 82 75 72 70 68 66 66 19 86 86 81 77 73 72 70 70 28 90 90 84 80 77 75 73 73 I 5.lA-8 l l
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5-9 (Cont'd) . DATE/ I,0AD ~ FACTOR ACRES O' 37' 768 1500 2231 2962 3694 3880 June 1 91 90 83 79 76 74 72 .72 927. Supplemental Cooling Ef fective June 10 to September 19 - See Table 5-10 Sept. 19' 94 94 87 82 79 77 76 75 807, 28 91 90 82 78 75 73 72 71 Oct. 1 88 88 83 78 75 73 7 '. 71 70% 10 83 83 76 73 70 68' 66 66 19 82 82 77 73 69 68 66 65 28 79 79 74 70 67 65 63 62 Nov. 1 79 79 74 70 66 64 62 62 70% 10 79 79 74 70 67 65 62 62 19 77 77 72 67 65 62 61 60 [ 28 70 70 65 61 58 55 54 53 Dec. 1 70 70 63 59 '56 53 51 51 . 8 07. 10 65 65 60 54 51 48 46 46 19 62 62 56 52 49 46 43 43 28 62 61 56 52 48 45 43 42 Note: Two units operating at indicated load factors. 5.1A-9
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5-10 PREDICTED CLINTON LAXE TDdPERARJRES WITH g SUPPLEHENTAL COOLING - SUMMER 1964 TEMPERATURE AT START OF INDICATED DAY *F DATE ACRES 0 435 827 1219 1611 2003 2395 2787 3179 3571 3880 96 91 88 86 84 83 82 80 79 78 77 JUNE 10 91 89 87 85 83 82 81 80 79 78 13 96 96 91 89 87 86 84 82. 81 80 79 79 16 96 91 88 87 85 84 83 81 80 79 79 19 95 92 89 87 86 85 84 83 82 81 80 22 96 92 90 89 87 85 85 84 83 82 82 25 96 93 92 91 89 88 86 86 86 86 86 28 ACRES 0 452 863 1274 1685 2096 2507 2918 3329 3740 3880 96 92 91 90 90 89 88 87 86 86 86 JULY 4 96 92 90 88 88 87 86 36 85 84 84 7 10 96 93 90 88 86 86 86 85 85 84 84 13 96 92 90 88 86 85 84 84 84 83 83 16 96 92 90 88 86 85 84 83 83 83 83 19 96 94 92 89 88 87 85 85 84 84 84 22 96 94 93 92 90 89 87 86 86 85 85' 25 96 95 94 93 92 90 89 88 88 88 88 28 96 94 93 92 92 91 90 89 88 87 87 31 96 92 91 90 90 89 89 88 87 86 86 ACRES O 440 840 1240 1640 2045 2445 2840 _3240 3640 3800 AUG. 4 96 94 91 89 89 88 88 88 87 86 86 7 96 93 92 89 88 87 87 86 86 86 86 10 96 91 89 88 86 85 84 84 84 84 84 13 96 90 86 85 84 83 82 81 81 81 '80 16 96 92 87 84 83 82 81 80 80 79 79 19 96 93 90 86 84 82 81 81 80 79 79 22 96 92 90 88 85 82 81 80 80 79 79 25 96 91 88 86 85 83 81 80 79 78 78 28 96 91 88 86 84 83 82 79 78 78 77 31 96 92 89 86 84 83 82 81 79 78 78 O 5.lA-10 , l l
n's-i:n (oIs ) J 0 610 - - 2500-- N e .' 0 0 0 -- m m s ti O O -- w c U 4 1610 0 -- 1 l
~~,0 0 -- ,, . I .10 6 ' i - - * :,0 0 --~~
~~o ;' o 0 0 -- e e 1300-- O w E O 1000-- 4 l l 30.5-~ O liI <~~
~~~ .4 0 0 0 ~ ;300--~~
~~20X --~~
~
~~1500 -- e u C 1000 -- g~~
~~< i s .w -- 1 3~~
l
~~'O13 1619202528 4 7 101316 19 22252831 4 7 10 131619 22252831~~
( l JU N E l JULY l AUGUST l Figure 5-6. Extent in Acres of the 90*F Isothem in 1962, 1964, and 1955 l l l l O 5.lA-ll
, , , - .,--......~.--- ,.,. .,_ . .,.. - - ,..-,n _, , , - - . . - - , , . , , . , _ . , , , , , , . - - - - . . , , . . . , , . , - .,.-.n, , - - - , - , , _
~~' CPS-ER(OLS) 3000 2500 _ ** 2000 , ?~~
~~1500 , y j 1000 _ 500 ~ e ll i I Ill Illi I 3000 , 2500 _~~
~~], 2000 ,~~
~~C 1500 _ e~~
~~, o <,o _~~
~~500 111 l 11 11 O e aooo _ 2500 _ 2000 _~~
~
1500 _ c 2 b 1000 _ I 500 o 1: 1 l 1 1 101116192225284 7 1013161922252831 4 7 1013161922252831 i l ! l JU tJ E JULY AUGUST Figure 5 Extent in Agres of the 92*F Isotherm in 1962, 1964, and 1955 5.lA-12
~~- . . - ~ . . . _ _ - - _ - _ , . ~ . . _ . - . _ _ _ _ . ~ - . - - - - - . - . . . . . - . . - . . - _ _ . _ . . . _ . - . . _ _ . _ _ . _ - - , - . . ,~~
O O O r 1 4 2 Ur its 70: . - .i 6*y ct t*:;i.
~~'fA] ac et r . m. .~~
~~30% Acr<.: 7L y n g. l l i 37 Acer; gJ i. nc,33pn 37 +~~
.,,1[F m o 4 . ~.s 3
i
~~>f in, .~~
~~ta H L.a~~
/2N TIAc r< c :U f O I
~~y w Acccu f~~
~~! ')3') Acres 6:~~
r, i U*~ ' l 2230 Acres ' f 75 I l i, i i Figure a-8.
~~redict d Lake Temperatun Distribution For October (AveratyI, l~~
i 4
9 2 Units 70% Los: Factr 690 ft MsL 3880 Acres 1962 3700 Acres 51-Plant gDischarge 67*F t.n H
~~> ' 0 v1 1~~
( 1 H tn A 2%2 Acres x 53 7 8 I E 768 Acres i 62 = 1500 Acres Dam 58*F 2230 Acres 55 'F Figure 5-9. Predicted Lake Temperature Distribution for April (Average). O O O
O O O ,
~~? U:.its W. Lnad Factor 386? Acres 36 3700 Acres 36~~'~~
~~Plant Discharge 55 T~~
~~- n m~~
tv tn . l W 2962 Acres y T [ 39 7 3 t-tn 1500 Acres 768 Acres 45' F"" Dav i 2230 i Acres
~~).:' T Figure 5-10. Predicted Iake Temperaturt Distribution For January (Coldest).~~
i
2 21::its 921,Ioad Factor 690 ft MsL 3880 Acres 1962 (summer Maximun) 3880 Acres 3710 Acres 64*F Plant 3300 Acres 84*~ - Discharce 96*F n w 1270 Acres @ i 89*7 $ h50 Acres $ $ WF g m 823 Acres t*
~~'? $~~
h < N1670 Acres . Acres z n- , ~ ey Dam 2080 Acres 2h90 Acres ">7 'F g;> . Figure 5-11. Predicted Lake Temperature Coincie nt With Maximum Discharge Temperature to Lake (Average Year). O O O
2 Units 92% Idad Factor 685 5 ft MBL 3540 Effective Acres 1955 (Smer Maximan) 3880 Acres 09'F Suppler. ental Coolity!; PL'nt in Discharge Flu:ne M Acres . Dischargs 96*F 89 F 102.7/102.4 F h20 Acres 1170 Acres gl*F 4 @ S3*F ? to E f d 4 @ in 3090 Acres ~ 89*F 90 Acres 98'F ~ 1550 Aerea 92*F s
\
Dan 1920 Acres 91*F 2700 Acres - ( 90*F 2300 Acres 90*F 5-12. Fredicted Imke Temperature Distribetion coincident Figure With Maximas Discharge Temiperatures To Lake (Extreme).
CPS-ER(OLS) 5.2 RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT FROM ROUTINE OPERATION During normal operation of the Clinton Power Station Units (TJ l and 2 small amounts of liquid and gaseous radioactive effluents will be released into the environment. This sec-tion describes the pathways of exposure for man and other biota and the estimates of the distribution of radioactive effluents in the environment as a result of station opera-tion. It also discusses possible radiological effects re-sulting from these routine releases. 5.2.1 Exposure Pathways Radioactive effluents from the Clinton Power Station are a potential source of radiation exposure. The possible radia-tion exposure pathways for biota other than man are identi-fied in Subsection 5.2.1.1, and possible radiation exposure pathways for man are shown in Subsection 5.2.1.2. 5.2.1.1 Exposure Pathways for Biota Other Than M g1 f The possible radiation exposure pathways for the important species of local flora and local and migratory fauna, as These described in Section 2.2, are shown in Figure 5.2-1. exposure pathways are evaluated in the following subsection. ! 5.2.1.1.1 Terrestrial Pathways Radioactive effluents from normal operation of the Clinton Power Station may enter the terrestrial environment in the (]) form of liquid, gaseous, or particulate matter. These radio-active effluents can be distributed through the terrestrial ecosystem by the dispersion of gaseous releases, the deposi-tion of radioactive particulates, and the release of liquid radioactive discharges. The distribution of radionuclides in the environment depends on ecological parameters in the ,' transport pathway. The important pathways for exposure of organisms in the terrestrial environment are the following:
a. immersion in a cloud of gaseous effluents;

b. inhalation of gaseous and particulate effluents;

c. direct radiation exposure from rntionuclide "
~~deposition on vegetation, soil, and exposed surfaces;~~
~~d. ingestion of contc-inated water and food chain ;~~
~~components; and~~
~~e. direct radiation exposure from the facility.~~
5.2-1
CPS-ER(OLS) Terrestrial animals near the Clinton Power Station site receive an external radiation dose through immersion in air containing beta- and gamma-emitting radionuclides. The ex-posure rate will be approximately equal for all organisms ll) exposed to the radionuclides in air. Inhalation of the gas-eous effluent cloud will also result in a dose to terrestrial animals. The most critical organ for doses due to inhalation is the thyroid, which is capable of concentrating radioiodines present in air. Direct radiation from contaminated surfaces, another possible exposure route, results from radionuclides deposited on vegetation, soil, and exposed surfaces. This path-way,however, is less important than pathways in which uptake and concentration can occur. Terrestrial plants assimilate radionuclides by foliar and root uptake, and the consumption of these plants by animals results in an internal radiation dose to the animals. Other important exposure pathways include exposure to contaminated shoreline sediments and ingestion of foods contaminated by the uptake of water containing diluted effluents. In addition, terrestrial biota may be exposed to direct radiation from the facility. This pathway may be of little importance, however, since most terrestrial animals may be in locations blocking direct exposure from the facility (i.e., burrowing animals) 5.2.1.1.2 Aquatic Pathways Small amounts of liquid radioactive effluent will be mixed with the circulating water discharge to Lake Clinton. The flora and fauna of the lake,will therefore be exposed to small amounts of radioactivity. The important exposure pathways for aquatic organisms are the O following:
a. external exposure from immersion in contaminated water;

b. internal exposure from ingestion of water or contaminated food chain components; and

c. external exposure from the surface of contaminated sediment.
Aquatic organisms found in the lake may receive an exposure from immersion in water containing radionuclides. This immer-sion dose will result from both beta and gamma radiation. Some aquatic organisms may accumulate radionuclides in their body tissues as a result of diet and direct absorption from lake water. The radionuclides may then be transferred to birds or ather terrestrial organisms that derive all or part of their diet from the lake. 5.2-2
CPS-ER(OLS) 4 () Radionuci des released to the lake may be adsorbed on or absorbed by suspended particles and bottom sediment. The suspended matter will settle to the . bottom of the lake, with the point of settling and the time of settling depending on 4 i the size of the particles and the currents in the l'ake. As a result, radionuclides may accumulate in lake sediments in
~
the vicinity of the Clinton Power Station discharge for the i life of the station. Benthic organisms that live on or in this sediment could be exposed to the emitted radiation. In addition, shoreline exposure of terrestrial organisms may result from gamma radiation from sedimentary deposits that accumulate near the bank and have only a shallow covering of water. ! 5.2.1.2 Exposure Pathways for Man The various possible radiation exposure pathways for man are shown in Figure 5.2-2. 5.2.1.2.1 Terrestrial Pathways l . Radioactive effluents could be distributed in the The terrestrial import-environment as discussed in Subsection 5.2.1.1.1.
~~ant terrestrial pathways for radiation exposure to man are j~~
the same as for terrestrial organisms and are listed below: i () a. immersion in a cloud of gaseous effluents; ! b. inhalation of gaseous and particulate effluents; i l c. direct radiation exposure from radionuclide deposi- , tion on vegetation, soil, and exposed surfaces;
d. ingestion of contaminated water and food chain components; and

e. direct radiation exposure from the facility.
~~.The gaseous effluent concentrations were calculated for each 22.So sector within 50 miles of the Clinton Power Station based on 5 years of meteorological data gathered at the site.~~
Resultant skin, thyroid, inhalation, and whole-body dose rates were calculated for the predicted population in each section for the year 2020 and for.the hypothetical individual exposed continuously to the gaseous effluents at that section of the site boundary where the maximum effluent concentration is found. The resultant calculated exposure rates are conserva-tive_ estimates since occupancy factors and.the shielding afford-ed by terrain and structures , such as houses , were ignored. Some of the most important gaseous effluents include radioactive noble gasos and halogens released during normal operation of the
~~() 5.2-3~~
CPS-ER(OLS) power station. These effluents could become attached to particles in the air and deposit on vegetation, on the ground, llh or on a body of water. These radioactive materials could then be assimilated by land plants or animals, resulting in radia-tion exposure to man if the biota is in man's food chain. Be-cause a milk cow concentrates iodine in its milk and the human thyroid also concentrates it, the air-grass-cow-milk pathway can be used to evaluate the thyroid dose to man that results from the deposition of halogens. Direct radiation exposure from the facility is of little conse-quence beyond the site boundary. 5.2.1.2.2 Aquatic Pathways The aquatic pathways of radiation exposure for man will be essentially the same as those described for biota other than man in Subsection 5.2.1.1.2. The important exposure pathways for man are the following:
a. internal exposure from ingestion of water or contaminated food chain components;

b. external exposure from the surface of contaminated water or from shoreline sediment; and

c. external exposure from immersion in contaminated water.
Water from Lake Clinton will be utilized for station potable water, but it will not be utilized in any way for public con-sumption. There are no nunicipal or industria 1 water intakes on Salt Creek within 50 miles downstream from the Clinton Power Station. Kenny, Illinois, is the nearest town down-stream from the Clinton Power Station. It is located approxi-mately 13.5 miles downstream but does not derive its municipal water from Salt Creek. There is no commercial fishing on Salt Creek. Sport fishing is the major recreational use of Salt Creek and its tributaries. Therefore, the only possible path-way for radiation exposure of the public through the aquatic food chain is the consumption of fish caught by sport fisher-men in Lake Clinton or in Salt Greek near the lake discharge. External dose rates were estimated for individuals boating or swimming in Lake Clinton at the discharge point. The exposure rate from contaminated shoreline sediments was also calculated. A drinking-water dose was estimated, although consumption of water near the discharge is not anticipated. Evaluation of each pathway was based on maximized conditions; no credit was taken for dilution of the effluents by mixing in the lake. - All interactions were assumed to occur with the radionuclide concentrations that will occur at the point of discharge. O 5.2-4
CPS-ER(OLS) 5.2.2 Radioactivity in Environment l () This subsection describes quantitatively the predicted distri-bution in the environment of the small releases of radio-activity in liquid and gaseous effluents discharged from the , Clinton Power Station. 5.2.2.1 Surface Water Models l l The models used to predict the fate of radionuclides released into surface waters estimated the physical effects using con-l servative assumptions. l l The radionuclides released in the discharge from the Clinton l Power Station will be diluted in Lake Clinton. Dilution of l station effluents by ambient lake water occurs immediately ! after the release of a discharge to the lake. 5.2.2.1.1 Transport Models t l The mathematical models used to calculate the liquid effluent exposures are presented in Stancavage (1976) . 5.2.2.1.2 Sediment Uptake Models The mathematical models used to calculate the liquid effluent exposures are presented in Stancavage (1976) . 5.2.2.1.3 Uater-Use Models The mathematical models useu to calculate the liquid effluent exposures are presented in Stancavage (1976) . 5.2.2.2 Groundwater Models Since no radionuclides will be released into any groundwater supplies, the use of groundwater models was not required.
~~'5.2.2.3 Gaseous Effluents .~~
The atmospheric dispersion of gaseous radioactive effluents de-pends primarily on local meteorological and topographical condi-tions. The dispersion (%/Q) values were calculated using the methods and data of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) Regulatory Guide 1.111 (see Section 6.1) . The resulting , site boundary ground-level % /Q values and the relative deposi-l tion rates are shown in Table 5.2-1. Relative deposition fac- ! tors (D/ Q) and the corresponding x /Q values for several loca-tions of int erest are given in Table 5.2-2. These data indi-l cate that the maximum ground-level concentration of gaseous i effluents at the site boundary is expected to occur in the l northeast sector (see Table 5.2-D. D/Q values were calculated ! for radial distances up to 50 miles from the station HVAC vent. These are presented in Table 5.2-3. 5.2-5
CPS-ER(OLS) 5.2.3 Dose Rate Estimates for Biota Other Than Man The calculation of radiation doses to biota from radioactive effluents was performed according to the CRITR and LIDSR (l) programs. 5.2.3.1 Gaseous Effluents The maximum immersion dose to the skin of biota other than man from gaseous effluents is assumed to be the same as the skin dose to man, as shown in Table 5.2-4. These doses assume con-tinuous residence of the organism at the specified location and therefore are conservative estimates. The maximum thyroid inhalation dose to biota was assumed to be similar to that received by an inf ant and is shown in Table 5.2-4. 5.2.3.2 Liquid Effluents The release of small amounts of liquid radioactive wastes to Lake Clinton will result in both external and internal expo-sure to fish, invertebrates, and aquatic plants. The radia-tion doses were estimated for the pathways discussed in Sec-tion 5.2.1.1. 2 and the results are shown in Table 5. 2-5. The immersion dose will be caused by beta and gamma radiation. The sum of the beta and gamma doses is the whole-body dose. Beta particles deposit most of their energy in the first few millimeters of tissue, and only a small fraction of beta ener-gy is converted into penetrating bremsstrahlung radiation. Therefore, the depth of beta particle penetration and the re- llh sulting dose to the organism is a function of the organism's size, and larger organisms receive a smaller overall beta dose i than smaller organisms do. When very small organisms are considered, the beta and gamma doses may be combined ; but for large fish and invertebrates, the gamma dose is nearly equal to the total whole-body dose. The dose to aquatic organisms from internally deposited radio-nuclides depends on the concentration and distribution of the radionuclides in the organism and on the effective beta and gamma energy per disintegration for the radionuclides involved. In all cases, it was assumed that the radionuclides are uni-formly distributed throughout the organism considered. Bioaccumulation factors for fish, crustaceans, mollusks, and aquatic plants are listed in Table 5.2-6. This factor, common-ly used to predict the accumulation of radionuclides in an aquctic organism, is defined as the ratio of the concentration of a radionuclide in the organism to the concentration of the same radionuclide in the water where that organism resides. The factor assumes that equilibrium conditions exist between the organism and the water it inhabits. The use of bioaccumu-lation factors eliminates the need for detailed considerations of aquatic food chains. 5.2-6 h
CPS-ER(OLS) As discussed previously, the radionuclides released to Lake fg Clinton in the effluent can enter the terrestrial food chain (,/ through a variety of pathways. Birds and mammals in the Clinton Power Station site vicinity may derive all or part . of their daily diet from the lake. Two species considered as representative of exposed biota are the raccoon and the duck. Since the previously defined concentration factor approach is not applicable in this situation, the calculation of radionuclide concentrations for these species in the area of the Clinton Power Station discharge is based on diet. Besides considering specific diet, this method takes into 2 account the assumed body mass and the effective radius of the organism. These assumptions are given in Table 5.2-7. Values ' for the biological half-life of each radionuclide and the frac-tion of each radionuclide retained are also considered in the calculations. This approach is conservative since it assumes that an animal obtains all of its food from organisms in equilibrium with the radionuclides in water at the maxi-mum released concentrations. l l Tritium contributes a substantial portion of the external and internal doses to biota, except through the sediment pathway. The external immersion dose to small aquatic plants and ani-l mais results primarily from the beta component of tritium. 1 5.2.3.3 Dose Effects on Biota i Under field conditions, it cannot be shown that organisms are in any way affected by dose rates lower than 1000 millirads j p/ s_ per day (Auerbach et al. 1971). For example, low dose rates seem to have no effect on such commonly used end points as j survivorship, fecundity, growth, development, or suscepti- , bility to infection. It should be noted that these parameters, and thus the determination of radiation effects , apply to populations rather than individual organisms. Since the dose
~~estimates presented in this report are conservative, it is unlikely that any animal population in the Clinton Power Station site vicinity will receive annual doses approaching the computed levels.~~
5.2.4 Dose Rate Estimates for Man The calculation of radiation doses to man from radioactive effluents was performed according to the mathematical models presented in the references for this section. 5.2.4.1 Liquid Pathways Dose rate estimates were made for an individual interacting _ with liquid effluents in the following ways: , a. drinking water directly from the lake near the point of effluent discharge; () 5.2-7
CPS-ER(OLS)
~~b. eating fish or invertebrates caught near the point c.~~
~~of effluent discharge; using the shoreline for activities such as sunbath-e ing or fishing; and~~
~~d. swimming and boating on the lake near the point of effluent discharge.~~
The estimates of whole-body doses and critical-organ doses from each of these interactions are shown in Table 5.2-8. These dose rates would only occur under condicions that maxi-mize the resultant dose. It is unlikely that any actual indi-vidual would receive doses of the magnitude calcultted. 5.2.4.2 Gaseous Pathways Dose rate estimates were made for hypothetical individuals of various ages exposed to gaseous radioactive effluents through the following pathways:
a. direct radiation from immersion in the gaseous effluent cloud and from particulates deposited on the ground;

b. inhalation of gases and particulates; and

c. ingestion of foods contaminated by gases and particulates.
Table 5.2-4 shows the estimated whole-body and critical organ O doses for the identified gaseous effluent pathways. The maximum site boundary dose resulting from immersion and particulates depositep on the ground occurs in the northeast sector and is 1.8x10- mrem /yr. Since these doses assume continuous residence at the site boundary, they are conserva-tive estimates. The highest inhalation dose at th boundary is in the northeast sector and is 5.1x10 g mremsite /yr. to a child and 5.6x10-2 mrem /yr. to an adult. Dose rates were also estimated for ingestion of milk contaminat-ed through the grass-cow-milk pathway. These doses are shown in Table 5.2-4. For the milk pathway, cows are conservatively assumed to graze 7 months per year at the highest dose rate area 5 miles from the station, and an intake rate of 1 liter of milk per day has been assumed. Since milk produced in the vicinity of the station is diluted by milk from other producers, actual dose rates are expected to be much lower than the values shown in the table. The consumption factors for the maximum exposed individual are shown in Table 5.2-9. The models used in these calculations are discussed in Bradley (1979) and Nguyen (1976). 5.2-8 9
CPS-ER(OLS) 5.2.4.3 Direct Radiation from Facility (~S All of the contained sources of radiation have been adequately Al shielded at CPS. The only contained sources of radiation that can contribute significantly to external dose at the site bound-ary are the turbines and the associated piping and the cycled condensate storage tanks. An external dose can result from scattering of radiation in the air (skyshine), since these sources are located outside the building structures and rela-tively near the site boundary. The locations of interest for dose calculation are as follows. The distances to the site boundary in different sectors are given in Table 5.2-1. As can be seen, the nearest location on the site boundary is in the east sector at a distance of 3800 ft. The residence nearest to the station is in the north-west sector 0.7 miles away. The nearest recreational site is Lake Clinton, at locations outside the restricted area bound-ary. There are no schools or hospitals located within a mile of the station. The estimated individual and population doses from the direct radiation sources listed above are tabulated in Table 5.2-10, 4 and the summary of data and assumptions used in the calcula-tions are listed in Table 5.2-11. Skyshine dose was calculated using the computer code SKYSHINE, and the dose from the cycled condensate storage tanks was calculated using the computer code ISOSHLD. 5.2.4.4 Annual Population Doses ({} The population dose due to gaseous effluents to all individuals living within a 50-mile radius of Clinton Power Station Unit 1 was also calculated. For these doses, population data were also projected to the year 2020. The estimated dose from gaseous effluents for the year appears in Table 5.2-12. This table shows whole-body doses resulting from exposure due to immersion, inhalation, and ground deposition. The population dose resulting from natural background radiation to all individuals living within a 50-mile radius of Clinton Power Station is shown in Table 5.2-13. This dose was calcu-lated assuming a dose to individuals of 285 mrem /yr and was based on population data projected for the year 2020. 5.2.5 Summary of Annual Radiation Doses The estimated annual radiation doses to the regional population from all station-related sources, using values calculated in previous subsection, are summarized in Table 5.2-14. This table outlines the dose values for each major exposure pathway. 5.2-9
CPS-ER(OLS) The magnitudes of these doses are within the range of varia-tion in natural background doses to various individuals be-cause of local differences in the concentrations of terres- a trail radioactivity, variations in doses within different T types of buildings, and differences in individual habits and activities. Additional variations in the natural background doses within the United States can be attributed to elevation and geomagnetic latitude, so that doses from natural back-ground radiation to the total body range from approximately 100 to 300 mrem per year. The total whole-body dose to the population expected to live within a 50-mile radius of Clinton Power Station in the year 2020 (see Section 2.1) is calculated as approximately 2.9x10 5 man-rem annually as a result of average natural background radiation. O 5.2-10 0
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5.2-1 SITE BOUNDARY y/O VALUES AND THE RELATIVE '( DEPOSITION RATES IN EACH 22.5* SECTOR SITE BOUNDARY x/Q D/O SECTOR DISTANCE (m) (sec/m3) (m-2) N 1,585 4.5 - 06 1.9 - 09 NNE 1,615 5.7 - a6 2.0 - 09 NE 1,402 6.4 - 06 2.3 - 09 ENE 1,189 5.0 - 06 2.3 - 09 E 1,158 4.6 - 06 3.0 - 09 ESE 4,724 4.0 - 07 4.4 - 10 SE 4,077 5.2 - 07 4.1 - 10 SSE 3,353 7.1 - 07 4.3 - 10 S 3,353 5.6 - 07 3.9 - 10 SSW 4,747 3.7 - 07 2.1 - 10 v
-)
SW 5,121 4.0 - 07 2.2 - 10 WSW 3,482 8.3 - 07 3.0 - 10 W 2,377 1.4 - 06 5.2 - 10 WNW 1,509 3.2 - 06 8.7 - 10 NW 1,5b5 2.9 - 06 9.5 - 10 NNW 1,615 3.2 - 06 1.3 - 09 /~%
~
5.2-11
CPS-Ed(OLS) TABLE 5.2-2 O ATMOSPHERIC DILUTION FACTORS USED IN DETERMINING OFFSITE DOSES AT SEVERAL LOCATIONS OF INTEREST X/Q D/Q LOCATION (sec/m ) (1/m ) Nearest Sitg Boundary 3.0 - 09 (3800 ft E) 4.6 - 06 Nearest Resgdence 3.3 - 09 (0. 7 mi NW ) 5.4 - 06 Nearest Garden (0. 7 mi NW) b 5.4 - 06 3.3 - 09 Nearest Meat Animal (Approx. 1 mi N) 4.5 - 06 1.9 - 09 d Nearest Milk Cow ( Approx. 5 mi ESE) 1.7 - 07 1.9 - 10 Nearest Milk Goat (Approx. 5 mi ESE) 1.7 - 07 1.9 - 10 O l
~~^From CPS-ER(OLS) Table 2.1-6.~~
From CPS-ER(OLS) Table 2.1-11. c From Illinois Cooperative Crop Reporting Service (1976). d No milk cows or milk goats within 5 miles of the site. 5.2-12 0
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5.2-3 7.s h I, , RELATIVE DEPOSITION VALUES BY DOWNWIND SECTOR FOR CLINTON POWER STATION SITE BASED ON METEOROLOGICAL DATA OF MAY 1972 THROUGH APRIL 1977 (All Values expressed as D/Q in m-2) DISTANCE F ROM S r>L' RCE (males) S SSW SW Wsw 0.25 4.4 - 09 4.4 - 09 5.2 - 09 3.3 - 09 0.50 2.3 - 09 2.3 - 09 2.7 - 09 1.8 - 09 0.75 1.5 - 09 1.5 - 09 1.8 - 09 1.2 - 09 1.0 1.1 - 09 1.0 - 09 1.2 - 09 8.9 - 10 1.5 6.3 - 10 6.0 - 10 7.1 - 10 5.2 - 10 2.0 4.1 - 10 3.9 - 10 4.6 - 10 3.4 - 10 2.5 2.9 - 10 2.8 - 10 3.3 - 10 2.4 - 10 3.0 2.2 - 10 2.1 - 10 2.4 - 10 1.0 - 10 3.5 1.7 - 10 1.6 - 10 1.9 - 10 1.4 - 10 4.0 1.4 - 10 1.3 - 10 1.5 - 10 1.1 - 10 4.5 1.1 - 10 1.1 - 10 1.3 - 10 9.4 - 11 5.0 9.5 - 11 9.1 - 11 1.1 - 10 7.9 - 11 7.5 4.7 - 11 4.4 - 11 5.2 - 11 3.9 - 11 10.0 2.7 - 11 2.6 - 11 3.0 - 11 2.2 - 11 15.0 1.4 - 11 1.3 - 11 1.5 - 11 1.1 - 11 20.0 8.7 - 12 8.4 - 12 9.9 - 12 s.2 - 12 25.0 5.9 - 12 5.7 - 12 6.7 - 12 4.9 - 12 30.0 4.4 - 12 4.2 - 12 5.0 - 12 3.6 - 12 35.0 3.3 - 12 3.9 - 12 2,8 - 12
~~'g 3.3 - 12 40.0 2.7 - 12 2.7 - 12 3.2 - 12 2.3 - 12 ,,/~~
45.0 2.3 - 12 2.2 - 12 2.7 - 12 1.9 - 12 50.0 1.9 - 12 1.9 - 12 2.2 - 12 1.6 - 12 W WNW NW NNW 0.25 3.2 - 09 3.1 - 09 3.9 - 09 5.4 - 09 0.50 1.8 - 09 1.7 - 09 2.0 - 09 2.8 - 09 0.7% 1.2 - 09 1.1 - 09 1.3 - 09 1.8 - 09 1.0 8.6 - 10 8.0 - 10 9.3 - 10 1.3 - 09 1.5 5.1 - 10 4.7 - 10 5.4 - 10 7.3 - 10 2.0 3.3 - 10 3.1 - 10 3.5 - 10 4.7 - 10 2.5 2.3 - 10 2.2 - 10 2.5 - 10 3.3 - 10 3.0 1.8 - 10 1.6 - 10 1.8 - 10 2.5 - 10 3.5 1.4 - 13 1.3 - 10 1.4 - 10 1.9 - 10 4.0 1.1 - 10 1.0 - 10 1.1 - 10 1.5 - 10 4.5 9.1 - 11 8.5 - 11 9.5 - 11 1.3 - 10 5.0 7.7 - 11 7.1 - 11 8.0 - 11 1.1 - 10 7.5 3.8 - Il 3.5 - 11 3.9 - 11 5.3 - 11 10.0 2.2 - 11 2.0 - 11 2.3 - 11 3.1 - 11 15.0 1.1 - 11 9.9 - 12 1.1 - 11 1.6 - 11 20.0 6.9 - 12 6.4 - 12 7.3 - 12 9.9 - 12 25.0 4.6 - 12 4.3 - 12 5.0 - 12 6.7 - 12 30.0 3.4 - 12 3.1 - 12 3.7 - 12 5.0 - 12 35.0 2.6 - 12 2.4 - 12 2.8 - I? 3.8 - 12 40.0 2.1 - 12 1.9 - 12 2.3 - 12 1.1 - 12 45.0 1.9 - 12 1.6 - 12 1.9 - 12 2.6 - 12 50.0 1.5 - 12 1.3 - 12 1.6 - 12 2.2 - 12 m
~~) / 5.2-13~~
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5.2-3 (Cont'd) O DISTANCE FROM N NNE NE ENE SJUD?E entles) a.2, 8,3 - 09 9.0 - 09 8.6 - 99 7.1 - 09 u.50 4.2 - 09 4.4 - 09 4.4 - 09 3.6 - O'# u.75 2.7 - 09 2.5 - 09 2.8 - 09 2.3 - 09 1.0 1.9 09 2.0 - 09 1.9 - 07 1.6 - 03 1.5 1.1 - 09 1.2 - 09 1.1 - 09 9.0 - 10 2.0 7.0 - 10 5- 10 7.1 - 10 5.8 - 10 2.5 4.9 - 10 5.3 - 10 5.1 - 10 4.1 - 10 1.0 3. 7 - 10 3.9 - 10 3.8 - 10 3.1 - 10 1.5 2.8 - 10 3.1 - 10 2.9 - 10 2.4 - 10 4.0 2.3 - 10 2.4 10 2. 3 - 10 1.9 - 10 4.5 1.9 - 10 2.0 - 10 1.9 - 10 1.6 - 10
1. 0 1.6 - 10 1.7 - 10 1.6 - 10 1.3 - 10 7.5 7.8 - 11 8.4 - 11 8.0 - 11 6.5 - 11 10.0 4.5 - 11 4.8 - 11 4.7 - 11 3.8 - 11 15.0 2.3 - 11 2.4 - 11 2.4 - 11 1.9 - 11 20.0 1.5 - 11 1.6 - 11 1.5 - 11 1.2 - 11 l
25.0 9.9 - 12 1.1 - 11 1.0 - 11 8.4 - 12 30.0 7. 3 - 12 7.7 - 12 7.7 - 12 6.2 - 12 ) 35.0 5.6 - 12 5.9 - 12 6.0 - 12 4.8 - 12 40.0 4.6 - 12 4.8 - 12 4.9 - 12 3.9 - 12 , 45.0 3.8 12 4.0 - 12 4.1 - 12 3.3 - 12 j
$J.0 3.1 - 12 1.3 - 12 3.4 - 12 2.7 - 12 E FSE SE SSE 0.25 9.0 - 09 9.0 - 09 6.4 - 09 4.8 - 09 0.50 4.5 - 09 4.7 - 09 3.4 - 09 2.6 - 09 0.75 2.9 - 09 3.0 - 09 2.2 - 09 1.7 - 09 1.0 2.0 - 09 2.2 - 09 1.6 - 09 1.2 - 09 1.5 1.2 - 09 1.3 - 09 9.1 - 10 7.1 - 10 2.0 7.5 - 10 8.1 - 10 5.9 - 10 4.6 - 10 2.5 5.3 - 10 5.8 - 10 4.2 - 10 3.3 - 10
1. 3 4.0 - 10 4.3 - 10 J.1 - 10 2.4 - 10 3.5 3.1 - 10 3.3 - 10 2.4 - 10 1.9 - 10 4.0 2.4 - 10 2.8 - 10 1.9 - 10 1.5 - 10 4.5 2.0 - 10 2.3 - 10 1.6 - 10 1.3 - 10 5.0 1.7 - 10 1.9 - 10 1.4 - 10 1.1 - 10 7.5 8.4 - 11 9.2 - 11 6.7 - 11 5.2 - 11 1G.D 4.9 - 11 5. 3 - 11 3.9 - 11 3.0 - 11 15.0 2.5 - 11 2.7 - 11 2.9 - 31 1.5 - 11 20.0 1.6 - 11 1.7 - 11 1.3 - 11 9.8 - 12 25.0 1.1 - 11 1.2 - 11 8.5 - 12 6.6 - 12 3J.0 7.9 - 12 8.6 - 12 6. 3 - 12 4.9 - 12 35.0 6.1 - 12 6.5 - 12 4.9 - 12 3.8 - 12 40.0 5.0 - 12 5.3 - 12 4.0 - 12 3.1 - 12 45.0 4.2 - 12 4.5 - 12 3.3 - 12 2.6 - 's 50.0 3.4 - 12 3.7 - 12 2.8 - 12 2.1 - 12 l
l 5.2-14 l l l l l l l
n (% U L] TABLE 5.2-4 EXPECTED INDIVIDUAL DOSES FROM GASEOUS EFFLUENTS DOSE RATE PER UNIT (mrem / year) __ TOTAL LOCATIOlJ PATHWAY BODY SKIN KIDNEY THYROID Nearest Residence Plume (whole body) 1.3 - - - (0.7 mile NW) Ground Deposition 1.0 - 02 2.1 - 02 - - Inhalation Adult 4.3 - 02 - 6.2 - 02 2.0 Teen 4.7 - 02 - 7.4 - 02 2.3 Child 4.7 - 02 - 7.1 - 02 3.2 o m Infant 3.1 - 02 - 4.5 - 02 3.0 $ Y Nearest Garden Leafy Vegetables Cl (0.7 mile NW) Adult 1.1 - 01 - 1.1 - 01 7.2 - 01 8 Teen 8.1 - 02 - 8.4 - 02 5.8 - 01 y Child 1.2 - 01 - 1.3 - 01 S.8 - 01 -- Produce Adult 6.5 - 01 - 6.4 - 01 6.6 - 01 Teen 9.2 - 01 - 9.2 - 01 9.4 - Ol' Child 1.8 - 1.8 1.9 Nearest Meat Animal Meat (1.00 mile N) Adult 1.5 - 01 - 1.5 - 01 1.9 - 01 Teen 1.1 - 01 - 1.1 - 01 1.4 - 01 Child 1.8 - 01 - 1.8 - 01 2.3 - 01 Nearest Milk Cow Milk (5.0 miles ESE) Adult 9.2 - 03 - 9.6 - 03 1.5 - 01 Teen 1.4 - 02 - 1.5 - 02 2.4 - 01 Child 2.5 - 02 - 3.0 - 02 4.7 - 01 5 Infant 5.3 - 02 - 5.6 - 02 1.2
TABLE 5.2-4 (Cont'd) DOSE RATE PER UNIT (mrom/ year) TOTAL LOCATION PATHWAY BODY SKIN KIDNEY TIIYROID Nearest Milk Goat Milk (5.0 Miles ESE) Adult 1.1 - 02 - 1.2 - 02 1.8 - 01 Teen 1.7 - 02 - 1.8 - 02 2.8 - 01 Child 3.4 - 02 - 8.6 - 02 5.7 - 01 Infant 6.4 - 02 - 6.7 - 02 1.4 o . A Y 3' W O _b O O 9
1 CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5.2-5
\
(V DOSE TO BIOTA OTHER THAN MAN FROM LIQUID EFFLUENTS ANNUAL DOSE PER UNIT PRIMARY ORGANISM FOOD (mrad /yr) Fish - 0.087 Crustaceans 7.522 Mollusks 7.522 Aquatic Plants 2.617 SECONDARY ORGANISM Raccoon Fish 0.099 Crustaceans 0.054 Mollusks 0.054
%) Duck Aquatic Plants 1.545 Muskrat Aquatic Plants 1.556 Source: Releases calculated from BWR GALE Rev. 1 computer program. /~T 'J 5.2-17
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5.2-6 BIOACCUMULATION FACTORS FOR AQUATIC BIOTA IN FRESH WATER ISOTOPE FISl! CRUSTACEANS MOLLUSKS ALGAE 11 - 3 1 1 1 1 Cr-51 20 2,000 2,000 4,000 Mn-54 400 90,000 90,000 10,000 Mn-56 400 90,000 90,000 10,000 Fe-59 100 3,200 3,200 1,000 Co-58 50 200 200 200 Co-60 50 200 200 200 Kr-33m 1 1 1 1 Kr-85m 1 1 1 1 Kr-85 1 1 1 1 Kr-87 1 1 1 1 K r- 88 1 1 1 1 Rb-88 2,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 Sr-89 30 100 100 500 Sr-90 30 100 100 500 Sr-91 30 100 100 500 Y-90 25 1,000 1,000 5,000 Y-91 25 1,000 1,000 5,000 Zr-95 330 7 7 1,000 Nb-95 Mo-99 30,000 10 100 10 100 10 800 1,000 g 1-131 15 5 5 40 1-132 15 5 5 40 1-133 15 5 5 40 I-134 15 5 5 40 I-135 15 5 5 40 Te-132 400 75 75 100 Te-134 400 75 75 100 Xe-133m 1 1 1 1 Xe-133 1 1 1 1 Xe-135 1 1 1 1 Xe-138 1 1 1 1 Cs-134 2,000 100 100 500 Cs-136 2,000 100 100 500 Cs-137 2,000 100 100 500 Cs-138 2,000 100 100 500 Ba-140 4 200 200 500 La-140 25 1,000 1,000 5,000 Ce-144 1 1,000 1,000 4,000 Pr-144 25 1,000 1,000 5,000 Source: Thompson et al. 1972. 5.2-18
n r\ J J TABLE 5.2-7 ASSUMPTIONS USED TO CALCULATE RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS AND DOSES TO BIOTA OTHER THAN MAN BODY MASS EFFECTIVE RADIUS DAILY DIET SPECIES (kg) (cm) (gm/ day) Raccoon 12.0 20 600 fish 600 crustaceans 600 mollusks n Duck 1.0 5 100 algae g I c.n Muskrat 1.0 6 100 algae y " o Note: A radwaste dilution flow of 610,000gpm (per unit) was assumed.
TABLE 5.2-8 WHOLE BODY AND CRITICAL ORGAN PATHWAYS DOSES FROM LIQUID EFFLUENTS PER UNIT WHOLE BODY SKIN THYROID BONE GI-TRACT PATHWAY (mrem /yr) (mrem /yr) (mrem /yr) (mrem /yr) (crem/yr)
' Drinking Water N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A -3 -3 -2 Fish Consumption 5.9x10 -
4.6x10 6.3x10 8.0x10~ Lake Recreational Uso 5.5x10~ 5.9x10~ - - - g m W Design Objective I w Appendix I 10 CFR 50 3 10 10 10 10 M i C
^
M e Gastro-Intestinal Tract O O O
O o O TABLE 5.2-9 CONSUMPTION FACTORS FOR THE MAXIMUM EXPOSED INDIVIDUAL CHILD TEE:: ADULT EXPOSURE PATHWAY INFANT 520 630 520 Fruits, Vegetables, & Grain (kg/yr) - 26 42 64 Leafy Vegetables (kg/yr) 330 400 310 Milk (liter /yr) 330
- 41 65 110 Meat & Poultry (kg/yr) o - 6.9 16 21 I Fish (fresh or salt) (kg/yr) i m 510 730 $$
~~330 510 ga Drinking Water (liter /yr) o~~
~~- 14 67 12 g Shoreline Recreation (hr/yr) 1400 3700 8000 8000 Inhalation (m 3/yr)~~
Note: From NRC Regulatory Guide 1.109, Revision 1, October 1977, Table E-5.
CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5.2-10 llh ESTIMATED ANNUAL POPULATION DOSE FROM DIRECT RADI ATION 2 1 ESTIMATED ESTIMATED l DOSE RATE POPULATION DOSE l LOCATION (mrem /yr) RATE (man-rem /yr)
-3 Nearest Residence 0.9 2.7x10 -2 Recreation Site 7.2x10 4.8x10 -2 l Nearest Site Boundary 0.8 -
O O 5.2-22
m f)/ TABLE 5.2-11
~~SUMMARY~~
~~OF DETA AND ASSUMPTIONS USED FOR CALCULATING DOSE FROM DIPICT RADIATIC'; A. PADIATION SOURCES ACTIVITY ISOTCPE COMPONENT~~
~~!;-16 8.6 Ci II. P. Turbine 4.2 Ci !-16 L. P. Turbine (each) .~~
~~2.7 Ci :-16 Combination Intercept Valve & Piping (each) I-~~
~~~ -4 3 (Mixture of several lcng-lived isoto,ces)~~
~~Cycled Condensate Storage Tank (400,000 gal.) 3.5 x 10 Ci/m 5 un~~
. 7 +, $
9 T. f kJ OCCUPANCY FACTOR AND POPLU TION DATA W B. OCCUPANCY FACTOR POPULATION DISTANCE SECTOR - LOCATION 1.0 3 3700 NW Nearest Residence 0.33 1950 7000* ESE Recreational Site "It is conservatively assumed that all the visitors are located at the car,cing site. bThe population and the occupancy factors are based upon the following information:
1. During the six months of spring and summer, 2500 people will be on the lake for 8 hours per day, and 350 will be on the campground for 24 hours per day.

2. During the six months of fall and winter the number of people at the recreat4onal site is one-tenth of the above numbers.
CPS-ER (OLS ) TABLE 5.2-12 ESTIMATED ANNUAL WilOLE BODY DOSES TO TIIE GENERAL POPULATION WITl!IN 50 MILES OF TIIE SITE RESULTING FROM OPERATION OF TIIE CLINTON POWER STATION ANNUAL DOSE DOSE PATilWAY PER UNIT
-2 Direct Radiation (man-rem /yr) 5.1x10 -1 Plume Immersion (man-rem /yr to 50 miles) 7.3x10 Ground Deposition for One Adult (mrfyr) 1.8x10" -2 Inhalation for One Adult (mr/yr) 5.1x10 -1 Vegetable Consumption for One Aouit (mr/yr) 1.3x10 -1 Drinking Cow's Milk for One Adult (mr/yr) 1.5x10 Drinking Water not applicable -3 Fish Consumption for One Ad. ult (mr/yr) 5.9x10 -5 Swimming and Boati.g for One Adult (mr/yr) 1.2x10 Shoreline Activit;; L,_ One Adult (mr/yr) -5 4.3x10 \
~~O 5.2-24~~
~~. .. . - - .-. - . _ - _ . . _ . _ - - - . . _ - _ _ . - . _ - - . - . _ - . - . - . . . _ - .. - . --. .-. -.- - _~. .~~
O O O r i TABLE 5.2-13 s ESTIMATED WHOLE-BODY DOSES TO THE POPULATION WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE SITE , RESULTING FROM NATURAL BACKGROUND AND MAN-MADE RADIATION SOURCES ; ANNUAL INDIVIDUAL ANNUAL POPULATION SOURCE DOSE (mrem /yr) DOSE (man-rem /yr) 1 Cosmic Ray Dose at Sea Level 30 to 45 2.4x10 ' 5 Terrestrial Dose 140 1.7x10 5 i Man-made Source Dose 100 1.2x10 n m w 5 m ( . Total Background Radiation Doses 285 2.9x10 en
~~w D d~~
i a 1 w o i i m V ' 8 I l-l i i i i i I t i
~~! i k~~
~~i Source: Based on U.S. AEC, Wash. 1258 (1973). l ) a~~
=
t t 1
l CPS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5.2-14 g DOSE FROM ALL CPS-RELATED SOURCES AND NATURAL AND OTHER MAN-MADE BACKGROUND RADIATION SOURCES DOSE" SOURCE OR PATHWAY (man-rem /yr) Man-made Source 1.2x10 5 Terrestrial Source 1.7x10 5 1 Cosmic Ray 2.4x10 Gaseous Effluents 7.3x10 -1 9 U 2020 population within 50 miles. O 5.2-26
w - O GASEOUS EFFLUENTS NUCLE AR FACILITY Qb LIQUlO e' , h h:Y$$: i:, Y,5 #f j IE ttiSIBI A L 8 0 0 0 IN C15110 N gitECI $ 7_
' ~ " 1RIAtlAll0M d h bI h l 33 E O
~~5~ #'.% , Yb i~~
- j 'A 'e , ., ~
~~N lJ - Q e 1 - ~ ..~~
,,s*s ,,g::f s s ,ef. ;:,;;, O ' ^~ =
~~h ' p , A tt A TIC 7003~~
~~+ ' , , > @q @~~
~~CESilbu~~
~~,(E , '~~
a'
~~.* 'O *=~~
~~9ATER l tilli t tl0 g __ #p m, Pithi~~
'~~ , g,y s,n c t sit e n e .. 's, 5 ~
s(Da g % ' .1 '_ , e We%e ~2* " W h/ CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRONM E NT AL RE PONT=O PE N AT ING LICE NSE STAGE FIGURE 5.2-1 Q POSSIBLE RADIATION EXPOSURE PATHWAYS FOR LOCAL FLORA AND LOCAL AND MIGRATORY FAUNA I
(. . . . . . . . , If, GASEOUS EFFLUENTS;l t..
;;iS p ': NUCLEAR l ACILITY . .A . \ '1 . : .:;. .g. :
~~t:i .{ _. .s .$~~
~~. 5 b;:b~:: -~~
E 8, ea8 h .e $' I' l n. LIQUID EFFLUENTS innaslation j [ '
~~= :r .~~
5 s p r ~ - ' 5 $ "1 i 3 ) E : .E -
~~/u m'l~~
~~FUEL TRANSPORT~~
= d" / ~ ~
~~w, s3 ,,,~~
\ , ;, ,Ssig g. ~ ~ ~
Ge@op f . o' m%,s . ,Ma sa,' ice _ e gege ==
~~. ~~~
~~O t 18818 o ,,,~~
~~# ,y ! s -M~~
~~g g p Y-1 ... . . . :bb I~~
~~$ '. fa_ f 3g M.? .~~
~~m.;.., .:p _c~~
= , = j - zw == ,, ,,s,,, F - -
s
~~- _.:h .- . c _~~
~~{ :~ $~~
~~.: 5 t:~~
~~Z:;: =. Z': 2~~
~~~ ~ - en~~
~~{, 5 ~. ~~.! C L3 {. ." -. b~~
.7 - 1 .Q ' = . _
CLINTON POWER STATION UNITG 1 AND 2 E NV IRONM E NTAL RE PORT OPE R AT lHG LICE NSE STAGE F1GURE 5.2-2 O . eossiste anoinrion exeosUas PATHWAYS TO PERSONS
CPS-ER(OLS) 5.3 EFFECTS OF CHEMICAL AND BIOCIDE DISCHARGES (] v Chemical and biocide discharges and camparisons with applic-able effluent limitations are described in Section 3.6. Water resources andIn station water use this section, are discussedof concentrations in chemi-Sec-tions 2.4 and 3.3. cal wastes at the points of discharge to the cooling lake are compared with ambient concentra. e ions, applicable water quality standards, and, where appropriate, water quality criteria for the protection of various uses of the cooling lake. The circulating water discharge canal will contain treated wastes from the circulating water, service water, sanitary water, and liquid radwaste systems. Chlorine will be added to the plant circulating and Aservice water systems, as concentration of 0.1 mg/ liter described in Section 3.6. free chlorine residual at the condenser discharge will be re-duced to very near zero during the 3.9 hour transit down the discharge flume prior to entering the lake. Total chlorine residual at the point of dischage to the cooling lake will be monitored. Ambient concentrations of chlorine in the cooling lake have been less than the lower detection limit of 0.01 mg/ liter (total chlorine) during construction and lake-filling environmental monitoring (see Sections 2.2 and 4.1) . The effluent from the liquid radwaste treatment system will be closely monitored and eventually discharged into the circulat-ing water discharge pipe (see Subsection 3. 5. 2.2) . The effects of the effluent from the sanitary waste system are discussed ('~s') in Section 5.4. The effluent from the settling ponds, which receive wastes from the regenerative processes , the makeup water treatment system, and runoff will have an estimated chemical composi-tion as given in Table 3.6-5. By routing the effluent through a waste filter house prior to discharge to the lake, all applicable ef fluent limitations will be met. These limita-tions, designed to protect aquatic life, are based on water quality criteria that specify levels that could adversely affect the organisms. Concentrations of those parameters listed in Table 3.6-5 should not have adverse effects on Lake Clinton biota, based on ambient concentrations in Lake Clinton (see Sections 2.2 and 4.1) . Limicing concentrations of dissolved solids for freshwater fish are not precisely known, but may range from.5,000 to 10,000 mg/ liter depending on the species and prior acclimation (Mace 1953; Roundsefell and Everhart 1953). McKee and Wolf (1963) state that dissolved solids up to 2,000 mg/ liter should not affect freshwater fish or other aquatic organisms. When 1 the toxicity of power plant chemicals to aquatic life was sur-veyed, it was found that calcium and sodium sulfates are of low toxicity (Becker and Thatcher 1973). Calcium, magnesium, and . sodium chlorides also exhibit low toxicity to aquatic organisms l I (McKee and Wolf 1963). 7_ ; \_/ 4 5.3-1 l 1
CPS-ER(OLS) The proposed monitoring program for chemical and biocide waste effluents will be in accordance with the NPDES permit, g as discussed in Chapter 6. Appendix 5.3A is a copy of the Illinois Environmental Pro-tection Agency water quality certification to the U.S. NRC pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal Water Pollution Con-trol Act. Appendix 5.3B is a copy of the U.S. EPA authorization to discharge under the NPDES, i.e., NPDES Permit No. IL 0036919 discharge permit for Clinton Power Station pursuant to Sec-tion 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. G 9 5.3-2
!- CPS-ER(OLS) 1 i f O c 4 e i APPENDIX 5.3A i. i Illinois EPA Water Quality Certification i Per Section 401 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act t i t I l. !, O i a 4 4 i a 1 ( l i t 4 l i 4 k' i 4 4 !O i s i i m.m..-4-+e -e.wr...---~~..._,. , . - ,_ _._,w.-,o _- _ -,y--m3-w_,-
4 CPS-ER(OLS) COPY COPY COPY (]) Richard H. Briceland, ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Director 2200 Churchill Road, Springfield, Illinois 62706 Telephone: 217/782-5620 i August 25, 1975 f
~~SUBJECT:~~
~~Illinois Power Company (Clinton Generating Station) Certification to Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. Benard C. Rusche Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Nuclear Regulatory Commission~~
~~! Washington, D. C. 20555~~
~~Dear Mr. Rusche:~~
Thir letter will provide certification pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 to the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission that the discharge from the Illinois Power Company facility, Clinton i' Generating Station, DeWitt County, to Salt Creek with respect
'r to the material storage runoff, construction runoff, conden- \ ser cooling water and blowdown from the cooling lake to be built for this Nuclear Generating Station is as follows:
1) The discharge will comply with the applicable pro-visions of Sections 301, 302, 306 and 307 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, and implementing federal regulations applic-able to steam electric powe.. generating stations, including those interpuer:tions of regulations by Region V, USEPA, in a letter to this Agency dated May 28,-1975, a copy of which is attached hereto.

2) The discharge in question will comply with the State limitations, including those necessary to
meet water quality standards, treatment standards, j or schedules of compliance, which have'been established pursuant to the provisions of the Illinois-Environmental Protection Act and which are in effect pursuant to Section 301 (b)(1)(C) '
~~of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972. ^ i O 5.3A ' l l 4~~
,.. .2-, - ,~, - --y,, . ----.-# - - . - , ., . - , - . . , , - - , , , , , . , .--,,-,.w.--, .-n.-,r. . , - --,,
CPS-ER(OLS) COPY COPY COPY Page 2 Illinois Power Company August 25, 1975 This certification incorporates all applicable provisions of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act and of Chapter 3, Water Pollution, of the Rules and Regulations of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, and the Order of the Board set forth on this project (PCB 75-31) dated July 31, 1975, which is attached hereto, and the applicable provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, and imple-menting regulations adopted pursuant thereto, as if they were set forth in full herein. All such provisions shall become conditions upon any federal license granted. Very truly yours,
~~/S/ Ward L. Akers Ward L. Akers, P.E., Manager Variance & Technical Analysis Section Division of Water Pollution Control WLA:dl Attachments O~~
~~cc: Illinois Power Company United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region V l 5.3A-2 h~~
~~._ -.. . .-.. . .-.- . .._.. . . . . . . . . - .. -. _ _ . . _ = - . . - ~ .~~
S ! CPS-ER(OLS) i i l. O 1 f J i 4 APPENDIX'5.3B . i j U.S. EPA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Syse.em (NPDES) Permit Per Section 402 of the Federal Water Pollu-tion Control Act.
~~!O i~~
~~4 e i 4 1 i 4~~
]
i J I I 4 l 1 4 i . O , I 4 , l
l
~~, , ,,...,...,,__,._,...,....-,,...,,--m.m._,,.,_,,ry,%._... -m_,m__r_-,~..~._,_,.,__.._,_....-,_,.._,..._.....--w,,,,,~~
CPS-ER(OLS) g) COPY k COPY COPY UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION V 230 South Dearb;rn St. Chicago, Illinois 60604 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPr REQUESTED Mr. Larry L. Idleman Director of Environmental Affairs Illinois Power Company 500 South 27th Street Decatur, Illinois 62525 Re: Request for Modification of NPDES Permit No. IL 0036919 Clinton Power Station
~~Dear Mr. Idleman:~~
~~The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has examined the request in your letter of August 23, 1977, for the modifi-(~)'~~
~~'- cation of the above referenced NPDES permit. Our final determination is to modify the permit as follows:~~
1. Outfall 002 has been deleted.

2. The limitations for outfall 003 have been revised.
Because the revisions made in the permit are minor in nature, no formal public notice of the modification will be issued. Enclosed is a copy of the modified permit. This permit is effective 30 days from the date of signature and it super-sedes NPDES Permit No. IL 0036919 dated September 30, 1975. Very truly yours,
~~/s/ Dale S. Bryson Dale S. Bryson, Acting Director Environmental Division Enclosure Modified Permit cc: Mr. T. McSwiggin, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, w/ Permit lo ')~~
5.3B-1
CPS-ER(OLS) COPY COPY COPY O Page 1 of 20 Permit No. IL0036919 Application No. IL0036919 AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq; the "Act"), ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY is authorized by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, to discharge from a facility located at the Clinton Power Station Clinton, Illinois to receiving waters named Salt Creek (Lake Clinton) in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring require-ments and other conditions set forth in Parts I, II, and III hereof. This permit and the authorization to discharge shall ex-pire at midnight, July 31, 1980. Permittee shall not discharge after the above date of expiration. In order to receive authori-zation to discharge beyond the date of expiration, the permittee shall submit such information, forms , and fees as are required by the Agency authorized to issue NPDES permits no later than 180 days prior to the above date of expiration. This permit, modified in accordance with 40 CFR 125, shall become effective 30 days from this date of signature and super-sedes NPDES Permit number IL0036919 dated September 30, 1975. Signed this Oct. 21, 1977
~~/s/ Dale S. Bryson Acting Director, Enforcement Division 5.3B-2~~
CPS-ER(OLS) o 5.4 EFFECTS OF SANITARY WASTE DISCHARGES (_) The sanitary waste treatment system effluent receives tertiary treatment consisting of presettling, filtration, and chlorina-tion prior to release to the environment via the circulating water discharge fiume (Section 3.7). The estimated maximum use will be 15,000 gallons per day during station operation. to The effluent will contain a chlorine residual sufficient control fecal coliform bacteria before combination with the The daily maximum con-station circulating water discharge. centration limit for both the 5-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD q ) and total suspended solids (TSS) presently is 45 mg/1. The maximum allowable daily average is 30 mg/1. The effluent will comply with applicable limitations in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit ILOO36919. Federal standards for municipal systems require only secondary treatment, so the effluent from the Clinton Power Station sanitary system will be below the limits prescribed in 40 CFR 133. The waste volume of 15,000 gallons per day anticipated during station operation corresponds to a discharge of 0.023 cubic feet per second (cfs), assuming that the wastes are released continuously over a 24-hour period. Under conditions of average flow from the discharge flume into the cooling lake (2718 cfs) , the waste discharges will comprise only 0.0008% of the total discharge. Because the sanitary waste effluent will comprise such a small portion of the total discharge r"N into Lake Clinton, the concentrations of BOD , suspended (_) solids, and total residual chlorine at thep5intofdischarge will be changed by less than the present analytical detection lbmits (0.5 mg/1,1 mg/1, and 0.01 mg/1, respectively) . The effect on the aquatic biota of Lake Clinton should be insignificant. O v 5.4-1
CPS-ER(OLS) 5.5 EFFECTS OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE TRANSMISSION SYSTEM C'sl 5.5.1 Road Construction ik) road construction was required to facilitate the maintenance and operation of the transmission lines as suggested in the Environmental Report - Construction Permit Stage (CPS-ER), except for temporary access roads around gullies and lake areas (see Subsection 4.2.5.2). 5.5.2 Vegetation Control The total right-of-way required for the transmission lines in and out of the Clinton Power Station is 733.7 acres, of which only 107 acres or 15% have standing trees. Some of these trees resprouted when cut and will require vegetation control. This regrowth will f be controlled by one or more of the following methods: l
~~a. selective herbicidal treatment, 3~~
1
b. mechanical removal,

c. burning, or j d. grazing by wildlife.
Environmentally acceptable selective basal spraying is used to 73 (_j eliminate tree species that resprout after being cut. They are treated with a direct application of a United States Environ-mental Protection Agency (USEPA) approved herbicide. Natural biological controls (deer, rabbits, After initialand andmice) also eliminate supplemental herbicide some of the resprouts. " creatments have eliminated the tree species, the vegetation cover on the right-of-way will be comprised primarily of grasses , forbs , and shrubs (see Figures 5.5-1, 5.5-2, and 5.5-3). This discussion has been revised from the CPS-ER to specify USEPA l approved herbicides, instead of specifying particular herbicides, any of which might be banned in the future. All herbicides will be used with the following restrictions :
a. Use of herbicides shall be limited to one application per year.

b. Herbicides shall not be applied during or after a heavy rain, and efforts should be made to avoid usage prior to expected-rains.

c. Herbicides of any kind shall not be applied in areas where contamination of water supp. lies is likely.
~~The Final Environmental Statement (FES) dated October, 1974, in-cluded the following three restrictions, in addition to the three gg listed above:~~
~~%) d. Herbicides shall not be applied when winds are greater than 5 mph.~~
5.5-1
CPS-ER(OLS)
e. Use of herbicides shall be replaced by hand trimming and cutting in conservation, recreational, and residential areas. ggg

f. No formulation of herbicides shall be used whose dioxin (2, 3, 7, 8-tetrachloro-p-dibensodioxin) contamination level in the undiluted herbicide exceeds 0.05 ppm.
Since only selective basal spraying is used, the limit on wind speed is not appropriate; this type of limitations is used to reduce drift from broadcast applications. Those portions of the Clinton Power Station site that are traversed by the transmission lines have been leased to the Illinois Depart- , ment of Conservation, making them conservation and/or recreational land. Therefore, the use of herbicides could possibly be excluded from all transmission line right-of-way on the plant site. Since Illinois Power Company (IP) proposes to use herbicides selectively, and only until the tree species are replaced with grasses, forbs, and shrubs, IP believes this use is reasonable and acceptable, and obviates the need for the above item e restriction. Similarly, the above item f restriction is not required as EPA regulations control the use of herbicides. 5.5.3 Biological and Scenic Values The effects of operation and maintenance of the transmission lines on plant life, wildlife habitat, land resources, and scenic values are estimated to be as follows: (gg
a. Plant Life - Tree species are eliminated from the plant communities in the rights-of-way. Thereafter, a sub-climax of shrubs, forbs, and grasses is maintained.

b. Wildlife - Many species of wildlife prefer the " edge" habitat created where a transmission right-of-way passes through a woodeo area. Their food will be secured on the right-of-way; shelter, or protection, will be found in adjacent Limber. Some birds will prefer to nest on the right-of-way. Woodchucks may dig their holes in the right-o f-way . Often they construct their burrows next to tower footings for the protection the footings afford.
~~Where trees are scarce, hawks and eagles sometimes perch on the transmission structures. From here they scan the ground for rodents. They do not constitute a hazard to electric transmission.~~
~~c. Land Resources - Most of the transmission system traverses agricultural land, but only a very small amount of this land is lost because of structures.~~
Each of the two poles of the single circuit wood pole H-frame structures required less than 20 square feet of land, or less than 40 square feet per structure. Narrow farm machinery is able to pass between the poles. Double O 5.5-2
CPS-ER(OLS) circuit structures are of a single column design on a (~} x- base requiring less than 40 square feet of land. All farm machinery is able to pass under these structures, which allows the land under the structures and the farm land within the right-of-way to remain in cultiva-tion. Wherever the lines traverse wooded areas, trees were eliminated and the shrub species were left (see Figures 5.5-4 through 5.5-6). This provided habitat for wildlife and controlled erosion. In the CPS-ER, the transmission line structures were re-ferred to as steel towers or steel structures. As ex-plained in Section 3.9 of this report, both wood pole structures and single column steel structures were used in place of four-legged lattice steel towers. The second paragraph of this subsection was revised to re-flect this change.
d. Erosion - Operation and maintenance of the transmission lines and rights-of-way will not significantly accelerate erosion. In fact, in many areas of right-of-way that are covered with a shrub and grass complex after construction, erosion control may be better than before construction.

e. Scenic Values - Wherever a line crosses a state or inter-('~') state highway in forested areas, trees are judiciously
pruned, rather than felled. This partially screens the structures from the public view. No herbicides are used within these " screens". With the selective basal spray to be used on other wooded portions of the rights-of-way, there will be no visual pollution as would result A broadcast foliage spray from a broadcast foliage spray. creates a brown streak of dead vegetation wherever applied. Conversely, selective basal treatment kills only theThere tree species, a small component of the plant community. will, therefore, be no blatant browning of the rights-of-way. 5.5.4 Inspection of Lines All tran mission lines from the Clinton Power Station will be in-spectel on a routine basis at least once each quarter. The inspec-tion will utilize aircraft. Emergency aerial patrols will be made as required, for example, after a sleet storm, when one or more of the lines may be switched out of service due to the operation of its protective relay control system. Although foot patrols will not be routine, they will be conducted when deemed necessary due to extraordinary occurrences. In the CPS-ER, " fixed wing aircraft" were specified for inspec-tions. This has been changed to " aircraft," as both fixed wing aircraft and helicopters may be used. 7-U 5.5-3
4 O i l I s,c . ,
~~l. .I .Y l i t~~
~~' . f ~) : .; ;g.~~
~~t u. / , 1~~
; 1., ;frN s l > + ' ., , 'I, ! .}\
~~i y,-~~
~~} } .%~~
~~i k { S ..,. 5 i - 2-~~
., c t ! , 4 O i CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NVIRONME NTAL RE PORT OPE RATING LICE NSE STAGE O FIGURE 5.5-1 SWAMP BUTTERCUP l
C0VER ON A RIGHT-OF-WAY l l . ___ _ -.
O
> l CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV I RO NM E NTAL R E POR T+O PE R AT I NG L IC E NSE STAGE Q FIGURE 5.5-2 LOVE GRASS AND FRAGRANT SUMAC COVER ON A RIGHT-0F-WAY
~~O I~~
~~'l i A-f.~~
~~4. .,. ;.~~
~'
j. g,9 ;, *
~~. [Ih i, l , fAf f '_ 'v[g .~~
~~3-g . = '.__~~
~~/ 'a J 2 k,,d >y.~~
~~l_l6- 45 ,: s., _ f'[,,; g~~
~~, y- . ,, ' ' k ' ;" ' '~~
~~g u p ,~~
~~~ m.- * * ~~~
~~O ,~~
~~,y ' A k '. ' . k_~~
~~et thx i ;l:?Y' .. ' _~~
~~'. ; . [. : -~~
S
~~r-l l~~
~~l CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS i AND 2 E NV I RO NM E NTAL R E PORT +0 PE H AT I NG L IC E NSE STAGE FIGURE 5.5-3 MIXED VEGETATIVE COVER ON A R!GHT-0F-WAY 1~~
~~- .- . ._ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ . . _ 1~~
~~l 1 I~~
.T.s r >Wk , i.> M. * ( - +* e =; , :c,s{i -.w. o . ; g t-rM ,, ~ ., ,. :4; .
~~[ . / .f...~~
~~.i 'r, f ~a r\~~
et
~~,v. . ,R ' r;% m, yp~~
~~. C~~
~
~~W n, ~ .' l ~~~
. . . .,- . 4 . h ! 0 . , . ' # ,a m . (*s $ . . , , .. .kb. ' ' N &;. ' ,A.
~~t. s i ' fs~** .' ,$ , ' .~~
~~'- v ' sf d 3'r7 ,,~~
F
~~';j p ( ( 00 ' , - 4bkd, TT g~~
~~w. h....,*.r- e. ' * .,f 9:-~~
~~O j, s~~
~~'g ' , ,~~
~~am ,; q . . . . .' [, 4. . g 4l' ' " w,, ^~~
~~,.;,._\~~
~~y h . .- ' { ', +% 's~~
~~% N. ' - .~~
s
~~~W % ~~~
~~fp- w , s . . ' -~~
~~, w - .. -w g -~~
~~_y t I [" ' 'O~~
'*
~~g- 'd~~
',,W 4 s , . u ,,
~~g ._k~~
~~.. f s~~
CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRO NM E NT AL R E POR T*O PE R AT I NG LICE NSE STAGE FIGURE 5.5-4 SHRUB SPECIES MIXED C0VER ON A RIGHT-0F-WAY
O i l l
~~%.f.) * *'_%~~
~~d_2 x<~~
~~. . u . u A. },a'#*s--~~
p', @i N]i " 4-449!; *, M. . g@44.p't ;.<qc,4Na~ - - 4 <- t-! gm. ~ *
. . , :4 ., g. ,b. . . bo . ..e .g' 1' .$ . , . , - .,~.'~3 A. ^ - fg) \'^f G .1, f* #
~~(. ' .. g '7 ' l- Iif', e (- [ . 4~~
~~' 4.~~
~~f O . .~~
*f f *, w, _ s . QM. f f ,\ ' -. - , ' l' E' .. } -
~~3 _ y .% _~~
'; % k 4 '; ,' .. ' ,' d ;l %. .... w. :. .x.*y 8 .'. ~x> : -. 'Q, w ' " ~ *,, ^ =
~~3 6 _. (- A-i~~
~~- t.f .f SN *s, 1~~
~~I i CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRO NM E NTAl RE PORT OPE RATING l lCE NSE STAGE~~
~~} FIGURE 5.5-5 SHRUB C0VER~~
~~i I l l~~
~~- 5 L g* 'hN y.;,. )'*1 f h X- - 4 g ( .e vQjf& c ,~~
~~j '; .I ' # e c. .>~e gsm,. , 1 a .~~
~~, - .A ;(%,h *y,n 4 . ., .- . > -~~
~~n .. , l h a.. . ;b le ;-t'8 3 :4., - q Gj l~~
~~+ ' '; 4 ,% .= ' R[q',:, 3 *: .-~~
~~jp? '. f*Q']<g:_g ' R(+ 4 <* ~ . . " ~ ,;Y m e?,4~~
..,f,.', -A.*, Q5 + e*n,4 y- ;ra ;* * &&g@ nsL # - < . . 1': k-s - T iN :C = . ff g - ,, a w'& ym , .m.,_.
g &~-.m,;*',. {',,'. ,,,' p ' g l6 ' %,y, ' s e y<y am - - fL, N - P%:hp p . .- . _ _ .Q Jh R; $ ' t
~~-va~~
~~_).; wy Y.. tid &.e*r & y ;, . MC .an~~
~~. ', . i . ft , , ? 'l f.~~
Si" t ' _ yl ,t,b;' 0, R y d'%..yl,%Qr% y(b, p ,.,.i*- g Y., t ; ,.4 . " ' 5 1 l l t CLINTON POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 E NV IRONM E NTAL RE PORT =O PE R ATI NG LIC E NSE STAGE l FIGURE 5.5-6 i SHRUB COVER
CPS-ER(OLS) v' 5.6 OTHER EFFECTS 5.6.1 Land Use and Water Use Changes in land and water use on the site as a result of Clinton Power Station (CPS) are described in Section 4.1 of this report. The socio-economic effects of the station on the local area are projected in Chapter 8 of the Envi-ronmental Report - Construction Permit Stage (CPS-ER). The most noticeable effect of station operation on land or water use beyond the site boundary will probably be the traf fic generated by delivery trucks and approximately 200 regular employees going to and from the site. Traffic increases due to recreational use of Lake Clinton can also be expected. The projected traffic for 200 operation staff members, who will be distributed over three shifts, does not exceed 72 to 122 vehicles during the peak hour. It is expected that a large portion of this traffic will be on State Route 54; the resulting traffic impacts on this road are expected to be relatively small. Bridges and existing State and U. S. Highways have been im-proved, and new bridges and connecting roads have been con-() structed where required to maintain convenient and adequate passage over Lake Clinton. Class "A" service level maintenance for roads is expected. In April,1978, Illinois Power Company (acting on its own be-half and as agent for Soyland Power Cooperative, Inc. (Soyland) and Western Illinois Power Cooperative, Inc. (WIPCO)), leased 10,208.26 acres of the CPS site to the Illinois Department of Conservation (IDOC) for purposes of conservation and public recreation over a forty-year period; the lease is extendable and amendable. The expected recreational use of this area is described in Section 2.1. Under the agreement with the IDOC, IP reserved the right to construct, reconstruct, operate, repair, replace, and main-tain e'ectric transmission and distribution lines, pipelines, condeits, dams, spillways, generator cooling water facilities, instrument stations , roadways , pumping stations , dikes , ditches, and other facilities incidental to the operation of the CPS and IP's business as a public utility, over, under, across, and through any part of the recreational areas. IP also may conduct appropriate studies, vary the level and temperature of Lake Clinton, dredge, place riprap , piling, or breakwater, and dispose of dredged material on any part of the property when necessary. The IDOC will provide permit l l l [V~h 5.6-1 j l
~~. 1 I~~
l I l
CPS-ER(OLS) renewals, routine maintenance as necessary, required monitor-ing, and general operation. Water withdrawals by the IDOC g are subject to approval and control of IP. w In January, 1979, IP, acting on it's own behalf and as agent for Soyland and WIPCO, leased to the village of DeWitt three small parcels of land for the purpose of obtaining a potable water supply from IP wells. The parcels are a well site, a roadway site, and a pipeline site. The village of DeWitt will construct one pipeline, not to exceed 6 inches in dia-meter, which shall be buried at least 3.5 feet below the ground surface except that, at the point of crossing the water discharge flume of the CPS, it shall be constructed above the top of the fiume. DeWitt shall restore the surface of the ground to its original condition after construction of the pipeline. The initial term of the lease is 40 years. 5.6.2 Noise Effects There are few rural families close enough to the site bound-ary to be affected by any increase in traffic noise generated by station employees, delivery trucks, offsite shipments, and recreational enthusiasts. Turbines, generators, pumps, transformers, and switchyard equipment are noise producers. Noise levels in the station will be controlled by engineering design using the following criteria:
a. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) noise exposure limit to workers, and workers' annoy-ance determined through consideration of acceptable noise levels for offices, control rooms, etc.
~~(29 CFR 1910),~~
b. federal (USEPA Report No. 550/9-74-004) noise pollu-tion control regulations, and

c. state or local (I.P.C.B. " Noise Regulations",
Chapter 8) noise pollution control regulations. If any equipment produces noise that violates the above cri-terit. noise control devices will be used at the source or at the point of violation. Equipment manufacturers are required to guarantee that specifications on allowable octave bands will be met. Most equipment will be located inside so that building walls will reduce outside noise levels. Further reduction will be achieved as the noise travels to the property line. In general, transformers and circuit breakers placed a mini-mum of 1300 feet from the site boundary will be within accept-able limits. 5.6-2 g
~~- .~ . - -. - - -- - .. - ._ -~~
T CPS-ER(OLS) () The minimum-distance between the property line and the clos-est noise producing equipment, indoor or outdoor, at CPS will be 3000 feet. Because of the engineering design of the plant and the large distance from noise-producing equipment to the property line, effects of noise produced by operation of-the CPS will be insignificant. Hunting on the territory leased to the IDOC will be permitted. It is unlikely that noises associated with hunting or other occasional or periodic activities will annoy or even be audi-ble to the nearby rural populace as a result of the irregular and wooded terrain. Subsection 2.7.2 presents data on noise monitoring. 5.6.3 Interaction'With Other Plants Clinton Power Station is remotely situated from industrial facilities and. other power generating stations. The closest industry is 6 miles away, and the closest power generating facility. (Kincaid) is approximately 56 miles southwest. Dresden Nuclear Power Plant is approximately 115 miles north-east. No environmental interaction with these installations is expected. 5.6.4 Spills () The potential for spills of oil or other nonradioactive sub-stances is extremely low. The diesel generator fuel oil stor-age tanks, part of a safety-related system, are located inside the seismic Category I, Control and Diesel Generator Building. The relatively small quantities of other oils and potentially hazardous materials maintained on the site are stored in appro-priate containers. For a list of these cheadcals, see Table 3.6-1 Storage and handling facilities comply with the applicable OSHA requirements. The delivery of these materials to the site is by land routes, simplifying transfer problems and eliminating the possibility of spills contaminating the aquatic environment. Oil storage is far removed from water well areas , thus preventing contamination of the wells. IP will develop the required Spill Prevention Control Counter-measure plans as necessary. O 5.6-3
CPS-ER(OLS) p) (- 5.7 RESOURCES COMMITTED No significant irreversible or irretrievable commitments of resources are expected to result from station operation. Some resources, such as uranium, land, and water, are con-sumed or permanently committed, but the quantities are very small compared to supplies. Resources committed during plant construction are described in Section 4.3. 5.7.1 Uranium Resources The reactors are fueled with cylindrical pellets of sintered uranium dioxide with an average initial enrichment of 1.706% (1.2% to 2.6% range) of the fissionable U-235 isotope by weight. Each core consists of 624 fuel bundles, approxi-mately one-fourth of which are replaced annually. Fuel re-quirements for Clinton Power Station operation will depend on fuel management practices and the actual operating sched-ules, but forecasts for the two-unit station predict an aver-age consumption of 2315 pounds (1.05 metric tons) of U-235 annually. At this usage, the station will fission about 42.1 metric tons of U-235 over its 40 year life. This represents a total commitment of about 12,800 metric tons of U 03 8, assum-ing no reprocessing of spent fuel. This takes into account a (^3 capacity factor of 75% and a tails assay of 0.2% for a typical L> yearly cycle. 5.7.2 Land Resources Approximately 510 acres of the 14,092 acre site are occupied by station buildings, roads, dam, spillway, and other station-related facilities. The remaining acreage is composed of leased agricultural land, prairie lands , timber, woodland, grasslands, Lake Clinton, and other recreational facilities. 5.7.3 Water Resources Twenty- two miles of relatively undisturbed stream habitat and its associated aquatic biota was replaced with 4895 acres of lake habitat and its associated aquatic biota during the fill-inq sf Lake Clinton. This is further discussed in subsection 4.3.2. l o
,/
5.7-1 l 1 l
3 CPS-ER(OLS) l i j O 5.8 DECOMMISSIONING AND DISMANTLING i , 5.8.1 Long Term Land Use It is expected that decommissioning will make available essentially all of the site except the immediate area of the l containment structures, which will be lost to other uses for an indefinite period. } It should be noted that the site is expected to have a rela-l tively long operating life for power station and recreational It is therefore reasonable to assume that the decom-
~
i use. missioning of Clinton ' Units 1 and 2 will be carried out 'in j conjunction with the development of some form of replacement generating capacity on the same site. 5.8.2 Irretrievable Commitment of Land An irretrievable commitment is one that either consumes a i resource or excludes certain uses of a resource. Generally, i the land committed for a generating station is not irretriev- ' ably committed except for that portion devoted to building foundations. Beyond this, the amount and type of land commit-ed will depend on the decommissioning plan adopted. Of the land used for various facilities, only a small portion may be irretrievable because of the cost of dismantling and removing - () massive concrete structures and foundations and the limited benefit that would be obtained. 5.8.3 Decommissioning Plans i Detailed decommissioning plans have not been developed at this time. Because of the unforeseeable changes in rules and regu-lations concerning decommissioning, flexibility in these plans must be maintained. Illinois Power Company will evaluate ! pertinent government regulations and guidelines at the time of decommissioning and provide detailed plans at that time. Based on the information concurrently available on plant decom-missioning, the initial phase will probably include the remov-l . al of the nuclear fuel, control rods, and all other removable
~~interials and externals. It will probably also include pro-cetsing and disposal of all water inventories, radwastes,~~
~~! filters , demineralizer resins , and low-level radioactive wastes. i Sealing of the containment area and modification of the security~~
~~! system will probably also be required.~~
Ultimate complete dismantling may not be economically justifi-able or desirable. The degree of dismantling will take into account .the intended new use of the site and a balance among health, safety, salvage ~, and environmental' impact. () . 5.8-1 __.-.-. , .~ -
~~..,.,p4_m j ._.3_ . - ., .m.,.._ _ . . , - , t. ,--,.,,,._.,.,,,,,%,y ,m.,r,m.,,y,.y.wm,,..,._,e- .,e-,,,,r,,,.y.-,-m-,,,,, _ , , - -~~
CPS-ER(OLS) 5.8.4 Environmental Impact The absence of a thermal discharge may have some affect on O the biota of Lake Clinton, but no significant environmental effects are expected from decommissioning the plant. 5.8.5 Decommissioning Costs
~~,t Because of the many variables involved and the difficulties ~~~
of predicting the conditions and technology that will exist some 40 years in the future, it is impractical to attempt to develop the cost of decommissioning the Clinton Power Station. It is assumed, however, that the cost of decom-missioning and dismantling a nuclear power station today would be in the range of 30 to 40 million dollars. O 5.8-2
CPS-ER(OLS) CHAPTER 6 EFFLUENTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL ,o FEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAMS V TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 6.1 APPLICANTS' PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONFENTAL PROGRAMS 6.1-1 6.1.1 Surface Waters 6.1-2 6.1.1.1 Physical and Chemical Parameters 6.1-2 6.1.1.1.1 Preconstruction Phase (May 1974 through September 1975) 6.1-2 6.1.1.1.2 Construction Phase 6.1-3 6.1.1.1.3 Lake Filling and Development Phase 6.1-4 6.1.1.1.4 NPDES Monitoring 6.1-5 6.1.1.2 Ecological Parameters 6.1-5 6.1.1.2.1 Periphyton 6.1-5 6.1.1.2.2 Benthos 6.1-7 6.1.1.2.3 Phytoplankt. .n 6.1-8 6.1.1.2.4 Zooplankton 6.1-8 6.1.1.2.5 Fisheries 6.1-9 6.1.1.2.6 Summary of Preoperational Monitoring Program 6.1-10 6.1.2 Groundwater 6.1-10 6.1.2.1 Physical and Chemical Parameters 6.1-10 6.1.2.2 Models ('~) 6.1.3 Air 6.1-11 6.1-11 6.1.3.1 Meteorology 6.1-11 6.1.3.1.1 Onsite Meteorological Measurements Program 6.1-11 6.1.3.1.1.1 Instrumentation 6.1-11 6.1.3.1.1.1.1 Wind System 6.1-11 6.1.3.1.1.1.2 Temperature System 6.1-12 6.1.3.1.1.1.3 Dew Point System 6.1-12 6.1.3.1.1.1.4 Precipitation System 6.1-12 6.1.3.1.1.2 Maintenance and Calibration 6.1-12 6.1.3.1.1.3 Data Reduction 6.1-13 6.1.3.1.1.4 Control Room Monitoring 6.1-13 6.1.3.2 Models 6.1-13 6.1.3.2.1 Short Term Diffusion Estimates 6.1-13 6.1.3.2.1.1 Obj ective 6.1-13 6.1.3.2.1.2 Calculations 6.1-14 6.1.3.2.1.3 Atmospheric Diffusion Models and Frequency Distributions 6.1-14 6.1.3.2.2 Long-Term Diffusion Estimates 6.1-15 6.1.3.2.2.1 Obj ec tive 6.1-15 6.1.3.2.2.2 Calculations 6.1-15 6.1.3.2.3 Analytical Fog Model 6.1-17 6.1.3.2.3.1 Model Description 6.1-17 6.1.3.2.3.2 Model Use 6.1-19 6.1.4 Land 6.1-20 {} 6-i
CPS-ER(OLS) CHAPTER 6 EFFLUENTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAMS O TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.) PAGE 6.1.4.1 Geology Soils 6.1-20 6.1.4.2 Land Use and Demographic Surveys 6.1-20 6.1.4.3 Ecological Parameters 6.1-20 6.1.4.3.1 Flora 6.1-20 6.1.4.3.2 Fauna 6.1-21 6.1.4.3.2.1 Birds 6.1-21 6.1.4.3.2.2 Mammals 6.1-21 6.1.5 Radiological Monitoring 6.1-22 6.1.6 Proposed Changes to Existing Preoperational Program 6.1-23 6.1.6.1 Water Chemistry 6.1-23 6.1.6.2 Periphyton 6.1-25 6.1.6.3 Benthos 6.1-25 6.1.6.4 Phytoplankton 6.1-25 6.1.6.5 Zooplankton 6.1-26 6.1.6.6 Fisheries 6.1-26 6.1.6.7 Terrestrial 6.1-28 6.1.6.8 Summary of Monitoring Program With Proposed Changes 6.1-29 6.1.6.8.1 Water Chemistry 6.1-29 6.1.6.8.2 Periphyton 6.1.6.8.3 Benthos 6.1-30 6.1-30 ll) 6.1.6.8.4 Phytoplankton 6.1-30 6.1.6.8.5 Zooplankton 6.1-31 6.1.6.8.6 Fisheries 6.1-31 6.1.6.8.7 Sediments 6.1-32 6.2 APPLICANT'S PROPOSED OPERATIONAL MONITORING PROGRAMS 6.2-1 6.2.1 Chemical Effluent Monitoring 6.2-1 6.2.2 Thermal Effluent Monitoring 6.2-1 6.2.3 Meteorological Monitoring 6.2-1 6.2.4 Ecological Monitoring 6.2-1 6.2.4.1 Aquatic 6.2-1 6.1.4.2 Terrestrial - 6.2-1 6.2.5 Radiological Monitoring 6.2-1 6.3 RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENT AND MONITORING PROGRAMS 6.3-1 6.4 PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING DATA 6.4-1 O 6-ii
CPS-ER(OLS) CHAPTER 6 - EFFLUENTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL C MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAM LIST OF TABLES NUMBER TITLE PAGE 6.1-1 Chemical and Bacteriological Constituents Measured During Preoperational Environ-mental Monitoring 6.1-33 6.1-2 Analytical Methods Used During Preoperational Environmental Monitoring 6.1-34 6.1-3 Meteorological and Physical Measurements and Instrumentation Used During Preoperation-al Environmental Monitoring 6.1-37 6.1-4 Methods for the Analysis of Trace Metals in Bottom Sediments Used During Preoperational Environmental Monitoring 6.1-38 6.1-5 Methods Used for the Analysis of Pesticides and Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Sediments During Preoperational Environmental Monitoring 6.1-39 6.1-6 Summary of Water Chemistry Methods 6.1-40 6.1-7 Environmental Monitoring Schedule for Precon-struction, Construction and Lake Filling and ( s, Development Phases 6.1-43 U 6.1-8 Preoperational Radiological Monitoring Program 6.1-44 I 6.1-9 Lower Limits of Detection for Environmental l Sample Analysis 6.1-46 (v^':, 6-iii
CPS-ER(OLS) ! I CHAPTER 6 - EFFLUENTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAM $ LIST OF FIGURES NUMBER TITLE 6.1-1 Aquatic Sampling Locations Before Impoundment 6.1-2 Aquatic Sampling Locations After Impoundment 6.1-3 Terrestrial Sampling Locations and Wildlife Survey Route Before Impoundment 6.1-4 Terrestrial Sampling Locations and Wildlife Survey Route After Impoundment 6.1-5 Location of the Meteorological Tower 6.1-6 Horizontal Visibility Graph 6.1-7 Location of Radiological Monitoring Points e O 6-iv
CPS-ER.(OLS) m CHAPTER 6 - EFFLUENTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL (V MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAMS 6.1 APPLICANTS' PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS The 1-year baseline program used to characterize the exist-ing site and to precitet the environmental impact of the proposed Clinton Power Station (CPS) was described in detail in Chapter 6 of the Environmental Report - Construction Per-mit Stage (CPS-ER). This baseline program was conducted in 1972-1973, and the data obtained during this program are presented in the CPS-ER along with the technical descriptions of the techniques, instrumentation, and procedures used in data collection and analysis. This information is not repeat-ed here. The proposed methodology for the preoperational program, which was begun in May 1974, was also described in the CPS-ER. The preoperational program summarized in this section reflects additions to and changes in the program as required in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) (U. S. Atomic Energy Commission (U. S. AEC) 1974) and Construction Permit CPPR2137 and CPPR-138 (U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (U. S. NRC) 1976). Minor program changes in dates due to schedule changes and changes in other areas are also reflected in this program (]) summary. The purpose of the preoperational program was to obtain addi-tional data on the site as it existed in its preconstruction state, so
~~Sat comparison with later data could be made to identify the impacts of station construction and lake filling.~~
~~The hydrological and ecological preoperational monitoring pro-gram was related to three specific phases of site development:~~
a. The " Preconstruction Phase," which consisted of the baseline data collection period (May 1972 through March 1973) and the May 1974 through September 1975 period.

b. The " Construction Phase," which began in October 1975 and lasted through October 11, 1977. (Although con-struction continued after this date, the remaining period is considered as the lake filling and develop-ment phase.)

c. The " Lake Filling and Development Phase," which began on October 12, 1977, with the closing of the main dam and will continue until Unit 1 becomes operational.
At that time the operational monitoring program will begin. (see Section 6.2). O_- s 6.1-1
CPS-ER(OLS) The data presented in Section 2.2 for the 4 years of ecolo-gical studies from May 1974 through April 1978 were collected ggg and analyzed by NALCO Environmental Sciences (NALCO) of North-brook, Illinois, (formerly Industrial Bio-Test Laboratories). The complete documentation of these data collections and ana-lyses are available in the Annual Reports (Bio-Test 1975; NALCO 1976, 1977, and 1978). Beginning in 1978, Illinois Power Company (IP) personnel began performing the aquatic environmental monitoring, while NALCO continued to perform the terrestrial monitoring. Some minor changes in methodology have occurred during the study period. The methods described in this section are those used most recently. The various components of the preoperation-al program are discussed in the remainder of this section. 6.1.1 Surface Waters The surface waters of concern in the preoperational environ-mental program are Salt Creek, the North Fork of Salt Creek, and Lake Clinton. Lake Clinton began filling when the main dam was closed on October 12, 1977; it reached its normal pool of 690 feet above mean seal level (MSL) for the first time in mid-May 1978. 6.1.1.1 Physical and Chemical Parameters 6.1.1.1.1 Preconstruction Phase (May 1974 through September llh 1975) During this phase quarterly water samples were collected at Locations 1, 3, 5, and 7 (see Figure 6.1-1). Locations 3 and 5 provided data on the water quality of Salt Creek and the North Fork of Salt Creek, respectively; Location 1 provided data on the two streams after their confluence and just down-stream from the location of the main dam; and Location 7 pro-vided data on water quality downstream from the site. t The samples were analyzed for the 24 chemical and bacteriolo-gical parameters listed in Table 6.1-1 using the analytical methods, preservation techniques, analytical detection limits, i and references listed in Table 6.1-2. Duplicate water samples were collected at 1 meter below the surface, whenever possible , using concurrent casts of non-metal-lic Van Dorn or Kemmerer water samplers. At each location, water from several casts was composited in polyethylene tubs or carboys from which sample bottles were filled and preserved for analyses. Samplers and carboys were thoroughly rinsed with l site water before use at each location. Those samples requir-ing refrigeration were packed on ice in insulated cartons. All samples were returned to the laboratory within 6 hours of collection time and iced samples were transferred to refrigera- ggg tors maintained near 40 C until analyses could be performed. 6.1-2
CPS-ER(OLS) During the winter months when ice cover was thick, samples O were collected through openings in the ice using water sam-plers as described in the previous paragraph or, if that was not possible, by direct filling of sampla bottles. However, field personnel always collected samples so that no signifi-cant changes in composition would occur during the process 3 of collection (A.P.H. A. et al. 1976). In situ measurements were made after water sample collection. ! Temperature and current velocity were measured 1 meter below j the water surface, and the depth of the water column was also
~~determined. The meteorological and physical parameters re-~~
~~! corded at each sampling location are presented in Table 6.1-3 4 along with instrumentation, methods, and precision. Ln situ~~
~~measurements for dissolved oxygen and total chlorine were i~~
~~also performed (see Table 6.1-2).~~
The program proposed in the CPS-ER indicated that fish flesh would be analyzed annually for lead, mercury, zinc, poly-chlorinated biphenyls (PCB), a herbicide, and two commonly l used insecticides. However, the required amount of fish i could not be collected, and sediment sampling and analysis for selected parameters was substituted for the fish sampl-ing. Tables 6.1-4 and 6.1-5 list the analytical methods
] used on sediment samples. I The quality assurance program in the chemical and bacteriol- , () ogical laboratories followed the NALCO Quality Assurance Man-ual. It based on the Handbook for Analytical Quality Control in Water and Wastewater Laboratories (U.S. EPA) 1972); includ- , ing the calibration of sampling equipment and field instru-ments; sample collection and preservation techniques; labora-tory analysis, data recording, storage, and retrieval; and chain-of-custody. The bacteriological laboratory is certi-i fied by the Illinois Public Health Department; records and ; procedures used in the laboratory comply with the requirements !
~~of the U.S. EPA.~~
6.1.1.1.2 Construction Phase ! The program proposed in the CPS-ER called for continued I quarterly water quality sampling. However, Construction Per-mit No. CPPR-137 required that " water chemistry shall be sampled, in duplicate, at least once a month commencing with Jthe beginning of construction...". Therefore, beginning in ! October 1975, monthly water quality samples were collected. The four-sampling locations.(1, 3, 5, and 7), sampling methods, parameters measured, and analytical techniques remained sub-i stantially as they were in the preconstruction phase described , previously. l
~~O -~~
~~f. 6.1-3 I t~~
~~,p ,.-~.,c,-, -,. p.y - ., y-, . , yy ,,.,,w.,,-y-..._.v.,p, c ,. m my --rw %.ww,-w,, ,,g -- 3ry~~
CPS-ER(OLS) 6.1.1.1.3 Lake Filling and Development Phase (g) When the main dam was closed the monitoring program was expanded by adding the following locations as shown on Figure 6.1-1: Location 6, upstream from Farmer City, representing Salt Creek water quality abcve the discharge of the Farmer City sewage treatment plant; Location 9, at the point of entry of the Farmer City sewage treatment plant, representing general effluent water quality; Locat: ion 2, where the Clinton Power Station discharge flume enters the lake, representing the water quality of future discharges from the station; Location 4, in the North Fork of Salt Creek near the intake structure, representing intake waters to Clinton Power Station; and Location 8, in the deepest part of the lake near the former confluence of Salt Creek and the North Fork of Salt Creek representing lake conditions near the midpoint of the future cooling loop. ggg Samples were first taken at these locations in November 1977, the first month after the dam was closed. Location 3 was moved to a point at 1.5 miles below Farmer City as required in the FES. The other sampling locations (1, 5, and 7), sampling methods, parameters measured, and analytical tech-niques, remained substantially as they were in the precon-struction and construction phases during the 3 months that NALCO conducted the sampling and analysis during this phase. The sampling frequency remained monthly as required by the construction permit. During March 1978, personnel from the IP Central Laboratory took over all aquatic monitoring, including the water quality sampling and analysis. The duplicate monthly samples are taken with non-metallic Beta bottles and emptied into a compositing tank; the samples for analyses are then drawn from this tank. Samples requiring refrigeration are stored on ice for transport to the laboratory and until analysis can be performed. Generally, mid-depth samples are taken at loca-tions 3 and 6 where water depth is usually less than 2 meters, l a surface sample is taken at Location 9 where the water is l very shallow, and at other locations samples are taken at a depth of 1 meter. Vertical profiles at 1 meter intervals are performed monthly for dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, and conductivity at (l) 6.1-4
CPS-ER(OLS) Locations 2, 4, and 8. Also, when thermostratification
's occurs at these three locations, each thermal layer is sam-pied and treated as a separate sample. Because of the early stage of lake formation and the season, NALCO did not perform these profiles or layer sampling, thus, these were first performed when IP personnel assumed responsibility for the monitoring program in early 1978.
The monthly samples are analyzed for the parameters listed in Table 6.1-1 using the analytical methods listed in Table 6.1-6. The methods employed by IP are as listed in the Federal Register (December 1, 1976 as amended) and approved by the U.S. EPA. The IP Central Laboratory quality assurance program generally follows the recommendutions contained in the Handbook for Analytical Quality Control in Water and Wastewater Laboratories (U. S. EPA 1979). Regulatory-agency-approved sample collec-tion and preservation methods are also followed, and notebooks are maintained documenting that samples have been transferred through a chain-of-custody. Any sample can be traced in the written record from its collection, through all analytical processes, to its final disposal. Duplicate analyses and
~~" spiked" samples are run about 10% of the time. Instrument maintenance and calibration are performed in accordance with manufacturer recommendations and documented in an equipment history notebook.~~
Os 6.1.1.1.4 NPDES Monitoring In addition to the above lake monitoring, IP also performs the effluent monitoring and reporting required by NPDES Permit No. IL0036919. The present permit expires on July 31, 1980 and the applicant will be applying for renewal in early 1980. 6.1.1.2 Ecological Parameters 6.1.1.2.1 Periphyton Beginning in May 1978 and continuing through all three phases (precons truction, construction, and lake filling) of the pro-ject, periphyton was sampled quarterly at Locations 1 and 7 as required by the FES (see Figure 6.1-1) . Sampling was performed in conjunction with water chemistry, and the sampling design followed that established during the baseline environmental assessment. Samples for periphyton analysis were obtained from natural sub-strates (logs) at both of the sampling locations. From May 1974 through February 1978, six biomass samples, six chlorophyll a - phaeophytin a samples , three diatom enumeration ('T
~~'/ samples, and three non-diatom enumeration samples were collect-ed by NALCO from each location each quarter. Each sample 6.1-5~~
I CPS-ER(OLS) consisted of all the periphyton from a 10 cm2 area on the substrate. li samples for algal enumeration were pre-servedin"Mg"(Meyer1971)at the time of collection. ggg The chlorophyll a, phaeophytin a, and biomass samples were processed according to methods 602 C and 602 D of A.P.H.A. et al. (1971). Chlorophyll a and phaeophytin a concentra-tions were reported as micrograms per square centimeter and biomass as milligrams per square centimeter. The diatom samples were cleaned with nitric acid / potassium dichromate to enable species identification (Patrick and Reimer 1966). A diatom subsample was dried on a coverslip and mounted in Hyrax mounting media. Non-diatom algal periphyton samples were agitated in a blender to minimize clumping and prepared as semi-permanent wet mounts. The algal periphyton was identified using appropriate taxonomic references, counted, and reported as units per square centi-meter. Algal units were defined as single cells for both diatoms and unicellular non-diatom algae and as 10 pm lengths of filamentous non-diatom algae. Periphytic algal biovolume was determined utilizing cell measurements taken on 10 randomly selected individuals of each taxon when possible. The biovolume was calculated by using the cell measurements and geometric equation that best suited each taxon (Findenegg 1969). Biovolume was reported as microliters per square centimeter. lll A one-way analysis of variance was used to determine signi-ficant differences (P<0.05) among locations for biocass and chlorophyll a (Steel and Torrie 1960). Species diversity was calculated using Shannon's formula (1948) to the log base 2. Beginning in the summer of 1978, IP personnel conducted the required quarterly sampling at Locations 1 and 7. The peri-phyton samples are analyzed for chlorophyll a, phaeophytin a, and density of diatoms and non-diatons. Samples are obtained from a measured area of natural substrates. Samples for chlorophyll are collected into a dark plastic bottle and pre-served with ice. Samples for identification are preserved with Lugols preservative. The spectrophotometric method is currently used to determine the chlorophyll values. Diatom slides are prepared with a nitric acid / potassium dichromate digestion and mounted as a permanent slide in Hydrax mounting media. Non-diatom algae are counted in Sedgewick-Rafter cells, and semi-permanent wet mounts are used to validate identifications. O 6.1-6
CPS-FSAR (JN s. 6.1.1.2.2 Benthos From May 1974 through February 1978, benthic macroin-vertebrates were sampled quarterly at Locations 1 and 7 by NALCO. Single quantitative samples were collected from pool and riffle habitats at both locations ith a Ponar grab sampler with a sampling area of 530 cm . A single qualita-tive sample was collected from each location with a dip net and by hand-picking on and around logs and rocks. Qualita-tive sampling was conducted for a maximum of 30 minutes or until the investigator was confident that each habitat at each location was thoroughly sampled and that further samp-ling would not contribute a significant number of new taxa. All samples were placed in jars at the time of collection and preserved with 10% formalin with Rose Bengal stain. The Ponar grab samples were rinsed on a U.S. Standard No. 30 mesh sieve (apertire = 595 micrometers). Organisms were picked from the sample with the aid of a dissecting micro-scope. Those organisms requiring higher magnification for identification, such as worms and midges, were mounted on microscope slides and cleared in a non-resinous mounting media before examination with a compound mf eroscope. Other organisms were identified at the time of picking. Taxonomic keys used included Brinkhurst and Jamieson (1971), Burks f- (1953), Edmondson (1959), Hamilton and Saether (1970), (_) Hilsenhoff (1970), Hiltunen (1973), Lewis (1974), Parmalee (1967), Ross (1944), and Usinger (1956). Organism density in the quantitative samples was expressed as number of organ-isms per square meter. Density of organisns present in quali-tative samples was expressed according to the following rela-tive abundance scale: Occasional = 1 through 4, Common = 5 through 24, and Abundant = 25 or more. Beginning in the summer of 1978, IP personnel conducted the quarterly benthos sampling. In addition to sampling Locations 1 and 7 as required in the FES, Locations 2, 4, 13 and 16 are also sampled (see Figure 6.1-2) . Subsection 6.1.6 details all proposed changes to the preoperational monitoring program pro-posed in the CPS-ER or required in the FES or construction permits. The rationale behind these proposed changes are also presented in Subsection 6.1.6. All benthic samples are taken by ponar dredge and consisted of two replicate samples at each lake location (2, 4, 13, and 16) . Two samples are also taken at each stream location (1 and 7); one each from a riffle and a pool habitat. All samples are preserved at the time of collection with 10% formalin, and currently, Rose Bengal stain is added to the sample. The samples are rinsed on a U.S. Standard #30 mesh sieve. Organisms are picked from the sample with the aid of a dissecting microscope. These organisms are currently sent to a consultant for enumeration and identifi-('l cation. It is anticipated that IP personnel will perform \/ these functions in the near future. 6.1-7
CPS-ER(OLS) 6.1.1.2.3 Phytoplankton ggg Phytoplankton sampling was conducted during the baseline study, and the results were described in the CPS-ER and the FES. Because phytoplankton populations normally are not im-portant in small streams, no phytoplankton sampling was con-ducted during the preconstruction or construction phases. 3 Beginning in the summer of 1978, during the lake filling and development phase, phytoplankton sampling was conducted by IP personnel quarterly at Locations 1, 2, 3, 4, 4.5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 16 (see Figure 6.1-2). Each phytoplankton sample con-sists of a composite sample taken with a Beta bottle from the photic zone of the lake as determined by the percentage light transmittance at the time of sampling. The sample is fil-tered through an 80-micron-mesh net and preserved with Lugols solution. Currently the phytoplankton samples are being collected with a 3 meter integrated-depth sampling device. Diatom slides are prepared with a nitric acid / potassium dichromate digestion and are mounted as a permanent slide in Hydrax mounting media. Non-diatoms algae are enumerated in Sedgewick-Rafter cells. Semi-permanent wet mounts are used to validate identification. Samples for pigment analysis are collected in 1 liter dark plastic bottles and preserved in ice. The spectrophotometric method of analysis is used to determine chlorophyll a and phaeophytin a concentrations in each sample. The percentage light penetration is determined with a Montedoro Whitney submarine photometer and the rate of primary produc-tion is determined by the oxygen method (light and dark bottle method) over a 24 hour period. 6.1.1.2.4 Zooplankton Zooplankton sampling was conducted during the baseline study, and the results were described in the CPS-ER and the FES. Because zooplankton populations normally are not important in small streams, no zooplankton sampling was conducted during the preconstruction or construction phase. Beginning in the summer of 1978, during the lake filling and development phase, zooplankton sampling was conducted by IP personnel quarterly at Locations 1, 2, 3, 4, 4.5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 16 (see Figure 6.1-2). Initially, each zooplankton sample consisted of a composite sample taken with a Beta bottle from the photic zone of the lake. These samples were filtered through a 158-micron-mesh net and preserved with 10% formalin. Currently the zooplankton samples are being collected with a 3 meter integrated depth sampling device and filtered through ggg an 80-micron-mesh net. The samples are currently sent to a 6.1-8
CPS-ER(OLS) consultant for enumeration and identification. It is anti-(]) cipated that IP personnel will perform these functions in the near future. 6.1.1.2.5 Fisheries Fish were collected quarterly at Locations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 beginning in May 1974. The dam was closed in October 1977; Location 2 was flooded and part of the lake during the November 1977 sampling. Locations 2 and 4 were part of the lake during the April 1978 sampling, and the lake reached nor-mal pool in mid-May 1978. Methods of sampling were adapted to the site conditions at the time of sampling. Sampling for fish at each location was accomplished by the use of one or more of the following meth-ods: seining, gill netting, winged hoop netting, and electro-shocking. Two to four seine hauls were made using a minnow seine 25 feet long and 6 feet deep, with 0.25-inch ace mesh net. The hoop nets ased were 2.5 and 3 feet in diameter, with two 6-foot leads and made up of 1 inch square mesh. A boat-mounted boom shocker powered by a 230 volt a-c three-phase generator was used for electroshocking. The gill nets were 150 feet long and 6 feet deep, with six 25-foot panels of 0.5 , 1 , 1.5 , 2 , 2.5 , and 3-inch bar mesh. r3 Fish that were collected were identified in the field whenever U possible. Others were preserved in formalin and returned to the laboratory, where they were identified using various taxonomic keys (Becker and Johnson 1970; Hubbs and Lagler 1970; Smith 1972; Eddy 1974; Pflieger 1975) and assigned scientific and common names in accordance with Baily (1970). All indi-viduals were identified to species, and their total length was measured. In add!. tion, sport and commercial fish were individually weighed. The relative abundance and size distri-bution of species were recorded. The species composition and relative abundance of species for each sampling date and loca-tion were determined. Stomach samples were taken from selected game fish to provide ! information on food habits. The relative importance of food items found in fish stomachs was estimated by reporting empir-ical numbers of food items in the stomach, percentage of i occurrence, volume in milliliters, and percentage of total j volume. ) Beginning in the summer o:: 1978, IP personnel conducted the i quarterly fish sampling at Locations 1, 2, 4, 4.5, 5, 7, 8, 16, 4 and 17. The two stream locations (1 and 7) are sampled with i winged hoop nets or trap .tets set for about 24 hours and with seine hauls from pool and riffle habitats. The seven lake l locations are sampled by electrofishing for 1 hour (four 15-
~~' (]) minute periods), using winged hoop nets or trap nets set for about 24 hours, and using experimental gill nets.~~
l 6.1-9
CPS-ER(OLS) All individuals are identified to species and total lengths taken. Weights are obtained for all sport and commercial species. Stomach samples are taken from representative game (l) species from two different areas of the lake. These stomachs are examined for the type and number of forage organisms pre-sent. Scale samples are taken annually from representative sport fish. Edible portions of selected game fish are ana-lyzed for pesticides and heavy metal. 6.1.1.2.6 Summary of Preoperational Monitoring Program Table 6.1-7 presents a summary of the preoperational ecological and water chemistry monitoring program schedule from May 1974 through December 1980. This summary schedule includes the terrestrial monitoring described in Subsection 6.1.4.3. 6.1.2 Groundwater 6.1.2.1 Physical and Chemical Parameters The groundwater study performed on the site area and surround-ing region was described in the CPS-ER and that description is not repeated here. Since the CPS-ER has been submitted, three additional areas have been investigated:
a. Well testing was conducted to adequately document that llh the Mahomet Aquifer could yield the 500 gpm required for station operation without adversely affecting the aquifer or other users. This issue has now become moot since lake water will be used as the source of potable plant water. This switch in sources was made because of the concern of possible methane build-up in water storage tanks if water from the aquifer was used.

b. Semiannual monitoring of four farm wells and wells in or near four communities peripheral to the lake was begun in February 1978. The monitoring was performed to determine whether Lake Clinton water was affecting regional groundwater quality, i.e., intruding into groundwater supplies. The following wells are being sampled:

1. private residence / farm (Weldon),
~~Section 6 Township 19N Range 4 East;~~
~~2. tenant farm (R. R. 2, Farmer City),~~
Section 14 Township 20N Range 4 East (this land is owned by IP); O 6.1-10
CPS-ER(OLS)
~~3. tenant farm (DeWitt),~~
~~(]) Section 27 Township 20N Range 3 East (this land is owned by IP);~~
~~4. private residence (Brikheck);~~
~
5. DeWitt Post Office;

6. DeWitt County Sportsman Club (near Lane);

7. Weldon - City Water Department; and

8. Farmer City - City Warehouse.
~~'6.1.2.2 Models The groundwater models used are described in the CPS-ER.~~
6.1.3 Air 6.1.3.1 Meteorology 6.1.3.1.1 Onsite Meteorological Measurements Program The meteorological monitoring program beghn at the Clinton Power Station site on April 13, 1972. The instrument systems (g and their locations were selected with emphasis on compliance U with NRC Regulatory Guide 1.23. A tower 199 feet high with two levels of instrumentation was erected with the base at 735 feet MSL. There are no trees, _ tall obstructions or significant topographical features in the immediate vicinity of the tower. Soybeans have been raised in the fields surrounding the 370-by-284-foot plot that con-tains the tower. The ground under the tower is covered with 4 short natural grasses and weeds. The location of the tower is shown in Figure 6.1-5. The tower is instrumented at the 33-foot (10-meter) and 198-foot (60-meter). levels. All parameters are recorded on analog charts that are changed on a regular 2-week basis. Heating and ventilation are thermostatically controlled in the instru-ment shed to provide a controlled environment for the signal translating and recording equipment. 6.1.3.1.1.1 Instrumentation Meteorological instrumentation and measurement techniques for the Clinton Power Station are described in the following sub-sections. t 6.1.3.1.1.1.1 Wind System O The 10-meter level wind speed is measured by a Teledyne Geotech 1 6.1-11
CPS-ER(OLS) staggered six-cup anemometer assembly and a Model 50.1 trans-mitter. This system has a starting speed of 0.5 mph. A ggg Quick One vane and Model 50.2 wind direction transmi tter with combined turning threshold of 0.7 mph at 100 are used at the 10-meter level. The lower level wind speed and direction are recorded on a Teledyne Geotech Model 87H dual recorder. The 60-meter wind speed und direction are measured by a six-bladed Bendix Aerovane, which has a starting speed of 1.7 mph and a stall speed of -- 0.8 mph. These winds are recorded on a Bendix Model 141-2 recorder. 6.1.3.1.1.1.2 Temperature System The ambient air temperature and temperature difference between instrument levels are measured with Rosemont platinum tempera-ture sensors (with Rosemont calibration) snd Rosemont precision resistance bridges. A comprehensive error analysis performed by Rgsemont, Inc. gives the maximum delta-temperature error as 10.3 F. This value includes the error component from the sys-tem's Esterline Angus 1124 E. recorder. All tmperature sensors are installed in Teledyne-Geotech aspirated shields nounted on the tower. 6.1.3.1.1.1.3 Dew Point System Ten-meter level dew point is measured with a Foxboro Dewcel and a Rosemont resistance bridge. There is no published error ana- a lysis with the Foxboro Dewcel; however, 30 years of Foxboro experience with the instrument indicate the error is within W +10 F. Dewcel output is recorded on the same Esterline Angus Il24E recorder used for the other temperature measurements. The dew point sensor is installed in a Foxboro Weatherhood. 6.1.3.1.1.1.4 Precipitation System A Belfort Model 545H heat ed tipping bucket precipitation gauge has been installed. This gauge can be used to measure both rainfall and snowfall. The gauge is mounted near the tower, but clear of any rain-shadow effects from either the tower or the instrument shed. Data are recorded on an event chart re-corder. Each 0.01 inch of water equivalent precipitation registers an event mark. 6.1.3.1.1.2 Maintenance and Calibration Illinois Power Company contracted with The Research Corporation of New England (TRC) to install and maintain all equipment in compliance with Regulatory Guide 1.23. Reliability of data collection and prevention of extended periods of outagen are ensured by twice weekly monitoring, weekly maintenance service, weekly inspection of recorded data, quarterly calibration, and necessary emergency service. Resulting data recovery is better than 90% for all parameters. (l) 6.1-12
CPS-ER(OLS) Every 3 months, preventive maintenance and calibrations are g1 (_ performed by trained technicians. Recorded air temperatures are checked against values obtained on the tower with ASTM precision thermometers. On-tower ice baths are used to check both ambient and delta-temperature systems. The Foxboro Dewcel is checked against on-tower psychrometer measurements using a Bendix Psychrox. The Bendix Aerovane is checked for normal operation according to the manufacturer's recommenda-tions. The Teledyne wind sensors are returned to the manu-facturer for factory calibration. 6.1.3.1.1.3 Data Reduction The processing of meteorological strip charts is performed by TRC, For hourly data values, the average value for the 30 minutes preceding the hour is determined directly from the strip charts. The values are transferred to punch cards by a Gerber Scientific Instrument Company semiautomatic analog-to-digital transcriber. This device transfers an operator controlled chart value to a punch card. The punch cards are computer checked for gross errors from one hour to the next - and for logical values and changes in value. After all checks are verified and additional spotchecking is performed on all parameters, a final data base is prepared. All meteorological summaries and calculations are based on this data set. 6.1.3.1.1.4 Control Room Monitoring (]) Meteorological data is recorded on panel P826 of the main con-trol room. In addition, meteorological data is recorded on magnetic tape. The main control room recorders consist of two dual pen strip chart recorders that indicate wind direction and wind speed at i t 10-meters and 60-meters and one multipoint recorder that indi-cates temperature at 10-meters, temperature at 60-meters, dif-ference in temperature, and dew point at 10-meters. 6.1.3.2 Models 6.1.3.2.1 Short Term Diffusion Estimates i 6.1.3.2.1.1 Objective Conservative estimates of the local atmospheric dilution fac-tors (T/Q) and their 5% probability level conditions for the Clinton Power Station site have been prepared for the exclu-sion area boundary (EAB), actual site boundary (ASB), and distances of 0.5, 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, 4.5, 7.5, 15, 25, 35, and 45 miles. Calculations were made for sliding time. period windows of 1, 8, 16, 72, and 624 hours from onsite meteorological data g- for the period May 1972 through April 1977. v 6.1-13
CPS-ER(OLS) 6.1.3.2.1.2 Calculations Calculations o'f ground level atmospheric dilution factors for O the Clinton Power Station site were performed using Gaussian plume diffusion models for a continuously emitting ground level source. Hourly centerline %/Q values were computed from the concurrent hourly mean values of wind speed, wind direc-tion and range, and Pasquill stability class of the onsite meteorological data. The wind speed at the 10-meter level was used in the diffusion estimates for the ground level release. The Pasquill stability class was determined from the measured ' vertical tempera *.ure difference ( A T) and the variance of the horizontal wind field -(c' 6 ) according to NRC Regulatory Guide 1.23. Calms were assigned a wind speed value equal to the starting speed of the wind vane (0.7 mph). Cumulative fre-quency distributions were prepared to determine the values that were exceeded 5% and 50% of the time. 6.1.3.2.1.3 Atmospheric Diffusion Models and Frequency Distributions Gaussian plume diffusion models for ground level concentration ; were used to describe the downwind spread of effluents for ' the Clinton Power Station. A continuous ground-level release of effluents at a constant emission rate was assumed in the diffusion estimates. Total reflection of the plume at ground-level was assumed in the diffusion estimates; i.e., there is g' no deposition or reaction at the surface. Hourly X/Q values were calculated by the following equations-i 1 (2.3-1) l h="10nByZ ' 1 (2.3-2) f=u l0 (" y z +A/2) ; X 1 (2.3-3) Q u l0(3n oy o)z where 3 f = the relative ground level; centerline concentration (sec/m ) at n = 3.14159; u l0 = the wind speed (m/sec) at 10 meters above the ground; E7
=
the lateral plume spread (m), a function of atmos- O pheric stability, wind speed, and downwind distance from the point of release. For distances to 800 6.1-14
CPS-ER(OLS) meters, E = Md; M being a function of atmos-pheric stability and wind speed; for distances
.(]) greater than 800 meters 3 7 = (M-1) y800m + 73 o = the lateral plume spread as a function of atmos-y pheric stability and distance; o = the vertical plume spread as a function of atmos-z pheric stability and distance; and A = the smallest vertical plane, cross-sectional area of the building { rom which the effluent is re-leased (A=2069 m ).
1 i For neutral to stable conditions with wind speeds less than 6 m/sec Equations 2.3-2 and 2.3-3 were calculated and compared, and the higher %/Q was selected. This higher value was com-
. pared to the %/1Q resulting from equation 2. 3-1, and the lower was selected. This procedure is in accordance with U. S. NRC Regulatory Guide Draft 1.XXX. For all other stability and/or wind speed conditions, X/Q was selected as the higher value from Equations 2.3-2 and 2.3-3.
From these hourly %/Q values, cumulative frequency distribu-tions were prepared from the mean values by sliding time win-dows of 1, 2, 8, 16, 72, and 624 hours. These intervals corres-pond to time periods of 0-1 hour, 0-2 hours, 0-8 hours, 8-24 l O hours, 1-4 days and 4-30 days. For each time period used, the mean centerline %/Q value in each sector was computed. 6.1.3.2.2 Long-Term Diffusion Estimates 6.1.3.2.2.1 Objective 4 Annual average dilution factors were computed for routina re-leases from the common station vent along the side of the con-tainment building. The MESODIF model and meteorological data observed on the tower at the Clinton site were used. The period of record was May 14, 1972, through April 30, 1977. 6.1.3.2.2.2 Calculations , MESODIF employs an integrated puff model concept. This proce-dure differs from ordinary Gaussian type models because it allows released materials to be transported back over the i source in the event of a wind shift. MESODIF carries the efflu-ent as a string of puffs released into the wind field as ob-served by the onsite meteorological station. Individual puffs are tracked until they are either too dilute to be of further
' significance or else leave the area being considered. The integrated puff concept yields a conservative estimate of con- -centration near the source. Ground level releases were assumed
(]) in order to obtain conservative estimates. 6.1-15
CPS-ER(OLS) The MESODIF program developed by the Air Resources Laborator- g ies (ARL) personnel at Idaho Falls, Idaho, was described by W Start and Wendell (1974). A program source deck was obtained from ARL in January 1978. Modifications were made to the pro-gram to accommodate input data from a single site rather than a number of stations as used in Idaho. The modifications are described in the following paragraphs. Subroutines ASCND and RNGRD 9 were deleted from the program. Subroutine ASCND is used to move elements of an array. Sub-routine RNGRD9 is used to read the wind direction and speed data, convert the direction and speed to U- and V-components and to interpolate the components from station locations to a grid array. Meteorological data for stability and mixing depth are read in the main program. Since the array in the main program has space available for wind direction and speed, these data were supplied there, and conversion U- and V-components was accom-plished in the main program. Wind direction was provided to the nearest degree and wind speed ti the nearest mile per hour. Conversion to U- and V-components was accomplished using the following formula: 0 = (270 - WD) r/180 (6.1-1) U = S cos 0 e V = S sin 0 where WD is wind direction and S is wind speed for any hour. The U- and V-components calculated in this manner were assigned to each grid point. The U, V arrays are carried in the program because an interpolation is performed to account for changes with time. TRC's modification maintains both arrays at two times. A test case supplied by ARL was run before and after the change. Uniform wind directions and speeds were assumed at all sta-tions for the "before" run. Identical results were achieved for the test runs. Hourly data from May 14, 1972 *5 cough April 30, 1977, were used. Integrated dosages were calculated for each year and the hourly values averaged for the 5-year period. The rectang-ular array of points from 2-mile and 10-mile grids were plotted. Sector centerline values were derived from the data and plotted on log-log graph paper. A straight line was drawn through the points and the relative concentrations were read at the re-quired distances. Actual model calculations were made at dis-tances ranging from 2 miles to 50 miles from the source. 6.1-16
CPS-ER(OLS) j 6.1.3.2.3 Analytical Fog Model 6.1.3.2.3.1 Model Description i The basic problem of predicting steam fog from a warm lake requires the following calculations:
a. determine the evaporation per unit area of the lake,

b. estimate the amount of evaporated water vapor that will be condensed due to existing ambient conditions,

c. calculate the expected downwind concentrations of condensed water vapor, and

d. relate the calculated condensed water vapor to

horizontal visibility.
t A model has been developed by TRC that calculates values for i a, b, and c. A relationship between visibility and condensed water vapor has been established and is used to relate the computed values to expected visibility. ] The model has been calibrated by means of conditions recorded at a large cooling pond for a nuclear power station (Hippler ] 1972). The observed data included water temperatures at various parts of the lake, ambient air temperature and rela-tive humidity, and observations of ambient fog and lake steam - ing by trained weather observers. 1 For the Clinton Power Station study, only air temperaturas
! above -40 F were used, which allows most of the condensed j water vapor to form water droplets rather than condense direct-ly into ';he solid phase as ice crystals.
Evaporation from a unit of surface on the lake per unit of time in a layer from h 3 to h 9 is computed in cgs units by the following equation: (Tnornthcaite, and Holzman 1939; Malone 1951). E = k2p (qt - Q2 ) ("2 "l) In (h 2 / h y)4 (6.1-2) where 4 k = the Von Karman coefficient; p = the density of air; h 2 &h y = the heights of the top and bottom, respectively, of the layer in which evaporation takes place; ;
/~
(,T/ qi & q2 = the specific humidities; and, ut & u2 = the wind speeds. I 6.1-17
CPS-ER(OLS) The value of E from this equation is converted to an equiva-lent line source value using the dimensions of the unit area. The proper values of wind fetch for use in defining a unit area for conversion into a line source were examined and eval-uated in the calibration and verification of the model. The equation used to calculate concentrations of water vapor and condensed water vapor for an orthogonal array of points down-wind is the standard line source diffusion equation for sur-face concentration (Turner 1969)- ~
~~)( (x,y,o) = _ _E erf (y + yo) -- e r ', (Y - Yo) (6.1-3)~~
(Y2 9) 7 27r uoz ( 12o y) where: E = the line source strength determined from Equation 6.1-2; erf= the error function; yg = the half-width of the source; and g y & gz= respectively.the horizontal and vertical diffusion parameters, The predicted concentrations are used to determine the amount a of condensed water vapor that would exist at the downwind points, W after allowing the amoient air to reach saturation. The downwind concentrations are related to horizontal visibil-icy by the following relationship: W=c kr (6.1-4 ) V where: w = the liquid water content of the air; V = the resulting visibility; c = an empirical constant; k = a factor that accounts for drop size distribution ; and, r = average drop size radius. This equation was derived in other research studies on fog where both liquid water content and the drop size distribution were measured. However, such studies on natural fog (Malone 1951, (g) P. 1180) include a predominate number of warm fog cases in 6.1-18
CPS-ER(OLS) which the drop size distribution is different than for cold I () fogs. Therefore, the data for natural fog are used when the ambient air temperature is 360F or higher. For cold fogs, a i mean drop size radius of 10 pma was used with a factor of k = 1.2 in Equation 6.1-4 (Hippler 1972). This produces a curve that is used when the air temperature is 280 of less, and is in good agreement with the results of a U.S. Army study on arctic fogs (Kumal1972). A log-log plot of Equation 6.1-4 is presented in Figure 6.1-6 for the warm fog and cold fog cases. i An interpolation is used between the two curves for transition temperatures between 28 and 36 F. Occurrences of overpredicting downwind concentrations of water vapor were investigated as part of the model development. The problem was related to the evaporative processes on a parcel of air as it travels across the lake. That is, the term (q, - q9) from Equation 6.1-2 decreases with travel time because 6f
~~; tHe following dynamic effects:~~
a. The specific humidity of the air, q2, is initially a function of the dew point and is normally less than the saturation specific humidity. As the ceives water vapor from the pond, saturati,onairisre-a reached, increasing the value of q2' l b. As further moisture is received by the air after it Q has reached saturation, the water vapor condenses into liquid water, releasing the latent heat of condensation of the water vapor and further increas-ing q2-

c. As fog is formed, heat radiated from the pond is re-flected and absorbed by the water droplets, further increasing the air temperature and, hence, q2'

d. Convection of heat from the pond surface to the atmos-phere still further increases q2*
As the value of q2 increases by the previous methods , the term ( 1 go) decreases, and hence, the evaporation into a parcel o ai r Becreases as the parcel travels across the lake. The first two mechanisum are quantifiable and were used to deter-mine the weighting factor for adjusting the evaporation rate with travel time. Radiation and convective effects were not computed and thus were empirically accounted for in the cali-bration of the model. 4 6.1.3.2.3.2 Model Use Predicted water temperatures for six areas of the lake evaluated , 3 to date.are reduced to representative (monthly) values. The : lake is divided into adjoining rectangular blocks that present t h,) an edge perpendicular to the wind direction to be evaluated. ! l' 6.1-19 p , - - e e- .,-e- - . - , - , , - , w. ---, - , -,-.,-- m ,,-4,.r., en --,mp. --g- p <
CPS-ER(OLS) Each of these blocks is used as a source area to compute the evaporation-condensation-diffusion process over the lake and surrounding areas of interest. lll To evaluate the potential for steam fog and subsequent drift off the lake, an ambient air temperature, relative humidity, wind direction, wind speed, and atmospheric stability are used as input to the model for a given lake source area and water temperature. The model output is water vapor concentra-tion at orthogonal gridpoints that cover the area of interest. A grid mesh of 500 meters was normally used, but frequently the size was varied to determine the location of critical values of water vapor concentration. 6.1.4 Land 6.1.4.1 Geology and Soils The basic geologic and soil data for the site obtained from the field data and laboratory testing were described in the CPS-ER and the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report. Additional inform-ation obtained since that time is presented in the Final Safety Analysis Report. 6.1.4.2 Land Use and Demographic Surveys The methodology employed in the land use and demographic surveys ggg were described in the CPS-ER. These methods were also employed to update the data; the results are discussed in Section 2.1 of this report. 6.1.4.3 Ecological Parameters The CPS-ER discussion of the terrestrial ecological monitoring program described the baseline study that had been conducted during 1972. This section provides a summary description of the program conducted beginning in May 1974. The schedule for this program was in accordance with the frequencies listed in Table 6.1-4A of the CPS-ER and as described in the FES. This program is related to the three phases of site development described at the beginning of Section 6.1. This program was designed to monitor the wildlife and vegeta-tion communities in the site area. The program provides data on naturally occurring year-to-year variations within these communities during the preconstruction, construction, and lake filling and development phases. All work was performed by NALCO Environmental Sciences of Northbrook, Illinois (for-merly Industrial Bio-Test Laboratories). 6.1.4.3.1 Flora The five plant communities sampled during baseline study were sampled in May of each year (see Figures 6.1-3 and 6.1-4). lll 6.1-20
CPS-ER(OLS) These communities included the Abandoned Pasture (Site 1), Upland White Oak Woods (Site 2), Mesic Woods (Site 3), (_) Floodplain Woods (Site 4), and Xeric Woods (Site 5). The plant communities were sampled quantitatively once to deter-mine the frequency of occurrence, density, and dominance of individual species. The entire vegetational structure in-cluding trees, shrubs, herbs and grasses was sampled. Impor-tance value was computed according to Curtis and McIntosh (1951) for individual tree species. Sampling methods included the quadrant, gammer, and transect methods (Curtis and Cottam 1962). Sampling points have been distributed systematically (Oosting 1965). The degree of sampling intensity (i.e. , number of sampling points in each community) is adequate to assess each community. Nomencla-ture follows Gleason (1968) . 6.1.4 3.2 Fauna 6.1.4.3.2.1 Birds Surveys were conducted during May, July, November, and February to determine species composition and relative abundance of resi-dent and migratory game and nongame birds. Birds were censused along a 20-mile wildlife survey route on two consecutive days each quarter. (see Figures 6.1-3 and r~' 6.1-4) Surveys were initiated each day during the hour follow-ing official sunrise. Observations of birds were reported during a 3-minute period at each of 20 stops and between stops along the route. Species composition and relative abundance of birds were re-corded in the five plant communities. Sight counts and audit-ory censuses were used along quarter-mile transect routes that followed the small mammal trapping lines. Nomenclature follows the American Ornithologistc Union (1957, 1973, 1976). 6.1.4.3.2.2 Mammals Surveys of small and medium-sized mammal populations were con-ducted during May and November of each year in the Abandoned Pasture (Site 1), Floodplain Woods (Site 4), and Xeric Woods (Site 5) (see Figures 6.1-3 and 6.1-4). A series of traplines using live- and snap-traps were set to census the resident small and medium-sized mammal populations. Cottontail rabbits were censused by standard roadside counts. Time-area counts were used to census squirrels during February in the wooded habitats. Nomenclature follows Jones et al. (1975). In addition to the described surveys, records were kept of all observations of mammals and/or their sign (tracks or scats) during each field trip. In general, all the described census 6.1-21
CPS-ER(OLS) techniques are standard techniques to determine che abundance and distribution of wildlife species (Giles 1971). Table a 6.1-7 provides a summary schedule for the terrestrial ecologi- W cal monitoring. 6.1.5 Radiological Monitoring The preoperational radiological environmental monitoring pro-gram for the Clinton Power Station will consist of activities to monitor airborne, direct radiation, waterborne, and inges-tion pathways. The Radiological Environmental Program will conform to the Branch Technical Position of the U.S. NRC, "An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program," dated March, 1978. Some of the important items of the Branch Technical Position that will be included in the program are the following:
a. During preoperational and operational monitoring annual reports will be prepared and sent to the U.S. NRC. All deviations from the sampling sche-dule shall be documented in the annual report.

b. The laboratory performing the analysis shall parti-cipate in the U.S. EPA Crosscheck Program. The results of the crosscheck analysis shall be included in the annual report.

c. An annual census shall be conducted to determine the location of nearby milk animals and vegetable gardens lll (greater than 500 sq. ft.). If the census results in changes in the sample locations, a written report shall be sent to the Director of Operating Reactors, NRR, within 30 days.
Figure 6.1-7 indicates locations where environmental samples will be taken. Table 6.1-8 indicates the direction and dis-tance, the type of sample, the frequency start date, and the duration of sampling for all samples. Table 6.1-9 gives the lower limits of detection for the various analysis techniques. Radiological sampling Locations 1 and 8 are at the communities of Birkbeck and DeWitt respectively. Locations 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 are near the exclusion area boundary in sectors that have relatively high X'/Q values. Location 7 is the Lake Clinton State Recreational Area (IP land leased to the Illinois Depart-ment of Conservation). Location 9 is nent the point where the Clinton Power Station discharge flume empties into Lake Clinton. Location 10 is upstream of the " 'te Route 48 bridge and will be used as the control location 'o water samples. Location 11 will be 10 to 20 miles south , the station and will serve as a control locatien. Location 12 is the site of the deep well supplying water for the community of DeWitt. Location 13 is on Salt Creek downstream of the Lake Clinton dam. qgg 6.1-22
CPS-ER(OLS) Location 14 is at the Clinton Power Station makeup water ({} pump house. Locations 15, 16, and 17 will be determined by the first annual census of milk animals; their exact loca-tions will be provide.d in the first annual report. Location 18 will be in the general area of the discharge flume. Once every 3 years soil samples will be collected at the air-borne detector locations, and these samples will undergo gamma isotopic analysis. 6.1.6 Proposed Changes to Existing Preoperational Program Since the lake is full and experience has been gained in sampl-ing it as it exists now, the applicant feels that some changes should be made in the existing preoperation monitoring program. These proposed changes and the supporting rationale are pre-sented in this subsection. The proposed changes consist of additions, deletions, reductions, and other modifications. Most of the additions proposed have already been implemented. The implementation of these changes began when IP took over monitoring in early 1978, and these additions were thus in-cluded in the description of the monitoring program given in Subsection 6.1.1. 6.1.6.1 Water Chemistry () The following changes are proposed:
a. add - Location 16 for all parameters (see Figure 6.1-2);

b. add - vertical profile at 1 meter intervals at Loca-tions 2, 4, 8, and 16 for dissolved oxygen, tempera-ture, pH, and conductivity;

c. add - all chemical parameters to Locations 6 and 9;

d. reduce - chlorine measurement to Locations 9 and 3 during the preoperational period, add Locations 2, 3, 4, 8, and 9 after operation;

e. reduce - duplicate sample collection and analysis to only one location each month; and

f. move - temperature station from 5,000 feet upstream to Location 16.
~~These prcposed changes have the following rationale:~~
~~a. Location 16 should be added to provide a control loca-tion for lake water prior to any effluent addition by the plant. Location 3 indicates the quality of the~~
(]) water entering the lake, and Location 2 represents the site of the power plant discharge into the lake. . 6.1-23
CPS-ER(OLS) The water chemistry could be altered by physical, chemical and biological factors characteristic of the lake environments between Location 3 and Loca- lll tion 2. The State Route 48 bridge because of its long causeways and narrow waterways should some-what isolate Location 16 from direct influence of plant effluents. This location will provide a con-trol location for the lake water prior to any plant influence. This location will also serve as an important control site for biological samples.
~~b. Vertical profiles at 1-meter intervals at the lake~~
" location will provide additional information about the thermostratification pattern of the lake. This information will be helpful in more accurately defin-ing the epilimaion, metalimnion, and hypolimnion for the collection of water samples for all chemical parameters.
c. Locations 6 and 9 will be analyzed for all the same chemical parameters as the other locations. This uniformity will be helpful in comparing information between locations. It will also allow measurement of effects of the Farmer City sewage treatment plant discharge, the only potential source of chlorine into the lake aside from Clinton Power Station. Location 3 is downstream of Location 9 and will provide a a check point for any residual chlorine from the sewage W treatment plant discharge.

d. During the operational period, Locations 2, 8, and 4 will likely be added for chlorine. Location 2 is at the only potential source of chlorine into the lake from the power plant. The present limitation of only 2 hours of chlorination per day at 0.2 mg/ liter is so low it probably will not be detectable at Location 2.
~~Location 8 is a potential source of discharge from the lake and will validate the lack of chlorine. Location 4 will provide validation that there is no residual chlorine in the cooling loop.~~
e. Collection of duplicate samples from different loca-tion each month will provide a 10% duplication on the sample collection. Replicate analyses are per-formed on approximately 10% of the samples as a quality control on the precision of the analysis.
Spiked samples are also run approximately 10% of the time as a quality control on the accuracy of the analysis. This quality control program generally follows the recommendations contained in the Eandbook for Analytical Quality Control in Water and Waste-water Laboratories (U.S. EPA 1979). The effort required for complete duplication in the collection of water samples is disproportionate to the additional (l) 6.1-24
CPS-ER(OLS) accuracy gained. Many of the chemical analyses are r-) (_/ required to be completed within 24 hours after collec-tion. This rapid analysis allows additional samples to be taken within a few days of the original to veri-fy any abnormal results or replace damaged samples,
f. One of the seven monthly temperature locations required after start-up is located 5,000 feet upstream of the discharge. It is currently believed that under some wind conditions this location will experience some thermal influence. To provide a more accurate control for the measurement of any thermal effects, this loca-tion should be moved upstream to Location 16. The State Route 48 bridge will more effectively isolate this area from any thermal influence and provide a more accurate control location (see item a above).
~~6.1.6.2 Periphyton i The following change is proposed:~~
~~a. delete - Biomass measurements.~~
~~This proposed change has the following rationale:~~
~~a. The analysis for biomass from natural substrates is subject to several errors. Better information can~~
~~(]) be determined about the periphyton community from the chlorophyll and cell density measurements. 6.1.6.3 Benthos The following changes are proposed:~~
~~a. add - Locations 2, 13, 4, and 16.~~
~~These proposed changes have the following rationale:~~
a. The benthic community is a good biological indicator due to i*.s low mobility and sensitivity to environmental changes. They also represent an important food source for many fishes. The additional locations have been added to assess the effect of plant operation upon this group. These additional locations represent an area with the greatest thermal influence (2), a con-trol location (16), an area about a third of the way around the cooling loop (13), and tne intake area (4) .
~~6.1.6.4 Phytoplankton The following changes are proposed: (~} a. add - Locations 4.5 and 16, and v~~
~~b. delete - Locations 6 and 9.~~
6.1-25
CPS-ER(OLS) These changes have the following rationale:
~~a. Location 4.5 will be added to assess the plankton in O~~
~~a major isolated section of the lake not in the cool-ing loop. Location 16 will provide a control loca-tion for the lake just upstream of any plant influence.~~
b. Because of the rechannelization of Salt Creek, Loca-tion 9 no longer represents a stream, but only the discharge from the Farmer City sanitary treatment plant. Measurements of plankton at this location are no longer appropriate. Location 6 is upstream of Location 9 and is above Farmer City. Any changes that might occur in the plankton at Location 6 or Location 9 could not be due to plant operation and should not be a part of this program. Location 3 pro-vides an assessment of the plankton community enter-ing the lake.
~~6.1.6.5 Zooplankton The following changes are proposed:~~
a. add - Locations 4.5 and 16, and

b. delete - Locations 6 and 9.
~~These proposed changes have the following rationale:~~
~~a. Location 4.5 will be added to assess the plankton in a major section of the lake not in the cooling loop.~~
~~Location 16 will provide a control location for the lake just upstream of any plant influence.~~
b. Because of the rechannelization of Salt Creek, Loca-tion 9 no longer represents a stream but only the discharge from the Farmer City sanitary treatment plant. Measurements of plankton at this location are no longer appropriate. Location 6 is upstream of Location 9 and is above Farmer City. Any changes that might occur in the plankton at Location 6 or Location 9 could not be due to plant operation and should not be a part of this program. Location 3 provides an assessment of the plankton community entering the lake.
~~6.1.6.6 Fisheries The following changes are proposed:~~
a. add - Locations 4.5, 8, and 16;

b. add - catch per unit effort to results; lll 6.1-26
~~CPS-ER(OLS)~~
~~c. add - condition factors for representative game fish;~~
~~/^N (_) d. substitute - Location 17 for Location 3;~~
e. reduce - analysis of weights from all fish to repre-sentative fish; and

f. delete - pesticide and heavy metals analysis.
~~These proposed changes have the following rationale:~~
a. It is hoped that the fish of Lake Clinton will pro-vide an importcut recreational fishery. As the highest trophic level, they also reflect the condi-tion of the lower trophic levels that support them and act as an important index to the condition of the lake. For these reasons the following additional locations are recommended to better assess the fish-eries. Location 4.5 will represent the North Fork lake basin north of State Route 54. This basin could almost be considered a separate lake as it is only connected with the remainder of the lake by a short channel about 10 feet wide. This area has a diverse habitat and will be an important part of the sport fishery. Location 8 represents a point about two-thirds of the way around the cooling loop. This location may be important in determining the effect I')
of thermal discharge on the distribution of fishes. Location 16 represents a basin that should be iso-lated from any plant influence and is upstream of the discharge canal. This location represents the best control location for chemical and bi'ological sampling.
~~b. The analysis of the fishery data will include catch ~~~
~~per unit effort for each type of sampling gear. This analysis will aid in the evaluation of each station over a period of years and will also be useful in comparing Lake Clinton to other lakes.~~
c. The condition factor is a ratio of a fish's length to weight and provides an index to the health of the fish. This information is useful in comparing fish from different habitats and lakes.

d. Location 17 should be substituted for Location 3.
This' location represents the upper end of the lake and adjacent stream. This area has a diverse habitat and will be one of the largest spawning areas. Loca-tion 3 now represents a channelized section of the stream more than 1 mile upstream from the lake and is not representative of the lake fishery. r~s U l 6.1-27 1 1 i 1
CPS-ER(OLS)
e. Individual weights on every fish collected are not realistic because of the large numbers of fish being sampled. Lengths are taken on every fish and llh when used with the weight of representative fish will provide the necessary information about the condition of the fish.

f. Lake Clinton and much of the adjacent land have been leased to the Illinois Department of Conserva-tion (IDOC) for public use. The IDOC conducts periodic sampling of lakes under their management.
Part of this sanpling involves analysis for pesti-cides and heavy metals. Requiring these analysis by IP would needlessly duplicate this effort. In addition to these proposed changes it is also desirable to clarify the conditions when gill nets will be used, the num-ber of game fish that will be used in the food preference study, and the weather limitations on sample collection. The use of gill nets in the sampling program should be at the discretion of the IP biologist responsible for the program. Gill nets cause high mortality and under many conditions are not needed for a representative sample. Flexibility in their use will ensure that representative samples can be made and that unnecessary mortality can be reduced. The food preference study should compare the effects of habi-tat and thermal influence. The stations used during the ({) preoperational period should try to differentiate between major habitats. During the operational period the stations should reflect differences between thermally and non-thermally affected areas. The availability of some game species may vary with each sampling period. The proposed program requires that the stomach contenes of at least six individuals from each of three species of game fish be analyzed quarterly from two loca-tions. The species samples each quarter may vary but at least one species sampled must have been sampled in the previous quarter. The collection of fishery samples during February at all sta-tions may not always be possible even after operation begins. Stations with ice cover will prevent the proper collection of fishery samplea and present a potential danger to personnel and equipment. Maj or changes in the population structure are not expected to occur during this time of year. Factors that could affect the fish population would be noted in the monthly water chemistry samples. 6.1.6.7 Terrestrial The following change is proposed:
~~a. delete - all. terrestrial monitoring. I!h 6.1-28~~
~~CPS-ER(OLS) n i,) s This proposed change has the following rationale:~~
a. The terrestrial monitoring program was designed to assess the impacts of constructing the plant and associated facilities. The major impacts that were expected on the terrestrial environment had tc do with lake bed clearing and clearing and grad-ing of the power block area. The impacts on adj a-cent land have been insignificant, and the major activities that would be expected to cause these impacts are now complete. Thus, it is felt that terrestrial monitoring can now be ended since continued monitoring would be of questionable value.
6.1.6.8 Summary of Monitoring Program With Proposed Changes The following subsections present a summary of the preopera-tional monitoring program as it would be conducted with the proposed changes given in 6.1.6.1 through 6.1.6.7. 6.1.6.8.1 Water Chemistry
~~a. Monthly samples shall be taken at the following locations: 1,2,3,4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 16.~~
~~. rm~~
b. Each month a different station shall be sampled in duplicate for all parameters.

c. Analyses shall be performed for the following para-meters:
Dissolved Oxygen Fecal Coliform Oxygen Saturation Fecal Streptococci Biochemical Oxygen Demand Specific Conductance pH Anmonia Total Dissolved Solids Nitrate Total Suspended Solids Total Organic Nitrogen Turbidity Total Organic Carbon Total Alkalinity Total Phosphorus Soluble Orthophosphate Soluble Silica Copper Lead Mercury Zinc Temperature
d. When thermostratification occurs at Locations 2, 4, 8, and 16, each layer (epilimnion, metalimnion, and hypolimnion) shall be sampled and treated as a sepa-rate location.

e. Vertical profiles at 1 meter intervals shall be per-()g formed at Locations 2, 4, 8, and 16 for dissolved oxy-gen, temperature, pH, and conductivity.
6.1-29
CPS-ER(OLS)
f. Chlorine analysis shall be performed at the time of collection at the following locations:

1) preoperation phase at Location 3, and

2) operational phase at Locations 2, 8, and 4.

g. Additional temperatures shall be taken monthly at the following locations during the operational phase:

1) temperature profiles shall be taken at 1-meter intervals at Locations 15, 14, 13, and 12;

2) temperature will be taken at mid depth at Location 11; and

3) an automatic temperature recorder shall be in-stalled at Location 10.
~~6.1.6.8.2 Periphyton~~
a. Quarterly samples shall be taken from a given area of natural substrate at Locations 1 and 7.

b. Analysis of the sample shall be for chlorophyll a -
~~and density of diatoms and non-diatoms. 6.1.6.8.3 Benthos~~
a. Quarterly samples shall be taken with a ponar dredge from Locations 1, 2, 4, 13, 16, and 7.

1) At lake locations (2, 4, 13, and 16) two replicate dredge samples shall be collected per station.

2) At stream locations (1 and 7), two samples shall be collected per station, one representative of a pool area and one representative of a riffle area.

b. Analysis of the sample shall be for identification}}

ML19337A055

Contents

Text

SUMMARY

SUBJECT:

Dear Mr. Rusche:

Dear Mr. Idleman:

Navigation menu

ML19337A055

Text

SUMMARY

SUBJECT:

Dear Mr. Rusche:

Dear Mr. Idleman:

Navigation menu

Search