ML20085M609

Response to NUMARC Questions Re Final Environ Statements from June 1984 & Sept 1981

ML20085M609
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	09/30/1981
From:	TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC)
To:
References
RTR-NUREG-1437 AR, S, WM, NUDOCS 9111110213
Download: ML20085M609 (8)

Text

.. ~

/

o- ,

I Texas 04lh h es E tee ln L Co.

UTILITY _ 711 EO o oh(L SITt (6nnconcAO_ bM_

tuctosuats <G Luan b C% ubn m med Emuumma A %hwad Gueuv[ l 03 ) Nol Emovcoemos4n 0 So teed qe 13 s i I

e 9111110213 010930 PDR NUREG 1437 C PDR

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

' ' '- Attachment to Txx-90200 c

o -_ ;Page 1 of 7 F

LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT QUESTIONS

1. Under'the current scheme for LLRW disposal-(i.e.. LLRW Policy Amendments Act of.1985 and regional compacts) is there _ currently or will sufficient  ;

capacity for wastes generated during the license renewal period be available to your: plant (s)? If so, what-is the basis for this conclusion?-

A. This item has not been considered or evaluated )y TV Electric at the present time.

2.- If for any reason your plant (s) is/are denied access to a licensed disposal site for a short period of time, whet plans do you have for continued LLRW disposal?

• A. Onsite storage (present-buildings and fenced in.. designated areas) -

limited storage capacity.

3. In _a couple of- pages, _ please describe the specific methods of LLRW management currently utilized by your plant.- What percentage of yout

' - - current LLRW- (by- volume) is managed by:

A._ Waste compaction? , , ,

B. Waste: segregation (through special controls or segregation at i radiation check point)?

.C.- Decontamination of. wastes?

D. Sorting of. waste prior to shipment?

E. Other (please identify)

A.. _ Comanche Peak. color codes (green and yellow) chemical waste and radioactive waste streams (DAW waste). Limited sorting =is done onsite prior to_ shipment.

All waste handling and processing oper;ations, for volume mi_nimization -

purposes,~are handled by an offsite contractor who primarily uses incineration and super-compaction techniques.

Only tools and equipment for reuse are' decontaminated onsite.

J 4.- In a couple.of pages please describe the anticipated plans for LLRW i- ~ management to be utilized by your_ plant (s) during the. remainder of the-operating license and through the license renewal term. What percentage of-your_ anticipated waste.(by volume) will be_ managed'by:

A. Waste compaction?

B._ Waste segrecation (through special controls.or. segregation at radiation check point)?

C. Decontamination-of wastes?

-D. Sorting of waste prior to shipment?

E :E. Other1(please identify) l A. See response to Question #3.

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

s.

Attachment to TXX 90200 Page 2 of 7 6

WASTE MANAGEMENT GUESTIONS (Cont.)

5. Do you anticipate the need to acquire Additional land for the storage of LLRW for the operating lifetime of the plant, including a 20-year period of license renewal? If so, how much land? When would this acquisition occur? Where? (if answer is "yes", 3-4 sentences)

A. No.

6. To provide information on the timing of future low-level waste streams, if you answered yes to question #9, over what p'eriods of time are these activities contemplated?

A. N/A

7. Do you anticipate any additional construction activity, on-site, or immediately adjacent to the power plant site, associated with temporary LLRW storage for the operating lifetime of the plant, including a 20 year period of license renewal? (yes/no)

A. Only if the opening of the Texas Compact burial ground is delayed much beyond 1994.

8. If you answered yes to question 7. briefly describe this construction activity (e.g., storage areas for steam generator components or other materials exposed to reactor environment).

A. A detailed plan-has not been developed at this time.

9. To provide information on future low-level waste streams which may effect workforce levels, exposure, and waste ' compact planning do you anticipate any major plant modifications or refurbishment that are likely to generate unusual volumes of low-level radioactive waste prior to. or during, the relicensing period for the plant? If so please describe these activities. Also, what types of modifications do you anticipate to be necessary to achieve license renewal operation through a 20-year license renewal term?

A. Not addressed at this time. since TU Electric has just received an Operating License for Comanche Peak Unit 1.

Attachment to TXX 90200 Page 3 of 7 AQUATIC RESOURCE QUESTIONS

1. Post-licensing modifications and/or changes in operatior3 of intake and/or discharge systems may have altered the effects of the power plant on aquatic resources, or may have been made specifically to mitigate impacts that were not anticipated in the design of the plant. Describe any such modifications and/or operational changes to the condenser cooling water intake and discharge systems since the issuance of the Operating License.

A. None since issuance of the Unit 1 Operating License.

2. Summarize and describe (or provide documentation of) any known impacts on aquatic resources (e.g., fish kills, violations of discharge permit conditions) or National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (HPDES) enforcement actions that have occurred since issuance of the Operating License. How have these been resolved or changed over time? (The response to this question should indicate whether impacts are ongoing or were the result of start-up problems that were subsequently resolved.)

A. None since issuance of the Operating License.

3. Changes to the NPDES permit during operation of the plant could indicate whether water quality parameters were determined to have no significant impacts (and were dropped from monitoring requirements) or were subsequently raised as a water quality issue. Provide a brief summary of changes (and when they occurred) to the NPDES permit for the plant since issuance of the Operating License.

A. There has been no change to the NPDES permit for the plant since issuance of the Operating License.

4. An examination of trends in the effects on aquatic resourcer monitoring can indicate wheth?r impacts have increased, decreased or remained relatively stable during operation. Describe and summarize (or provide documentation of) results of monitoring of water quality and aquatic biota (e.g.. related to NPDES permits, Environmental Technical Specifications, site specific monitoring required by federal or state agencies). What trends are apparent over time?

A. CPSES has insufficient operating history (approximately 3 months) to identify trends in the effects on aquatic resources. However. first quarter biomonitoring conducted on the Main Circulating Water discharge indicated no toxicity to aquatic biota.

5. Summarize types and numbers (or provide documentation) of organisms entrained and impinged by the condenser cooling water system _since issuance of the Operating License. Describe any seasonal patterns associated with entrainment and impingement. How has entrainment and impingement changed over time?

l Attachment to TXX-90200 Page 4 of 7 4

AQUATIC RESOURCE QUESTIONS (Cont.)

A. There are no available data at present to evaluate intake structure effects on aquatic organisms.

6. Aquatic habitat enhancement or restoration ef forts (e.g., anadromous fish runs) during operation may have enhanced the biological communities in the vicinity of the plant. Alternatively, degradation of habitat or water quality may have resulted in loss of biological resources near the site.

Describe any, changes to aquatic habitats (both enhancement and degradation) in the vicinity of the power plant since the issuance of the Operating License including those that may have resulted in different plant impacts than those initially predicted, A. Although little operating history exists for CPSES, there has been no observed enhancement or degradation of aquatic habitat in the vicinity of the plant, including the cooling water reservoir.

7. Plant operations may have had positive, negative, or no impact on the use of aquatic resources by others. Harvest by commercial or recreational fishermen may be constrained by plant operation. Alternatively commercial harvesting may be relatively large compared with fish losses caused by the plant. Describe (or provide documentation for) other nearby uses of waters affected by cooling water systems (e.g., swimming, boating. annual harvest by commercial and recreational fisheries) and how these impacts have changed since issuance of the Operating License.

A. The only aquatic resource of importance in the vicinity of the plant is the Company owned station cooling water reservoir (Squaw Creek Reservoir).

The public is allowed access to this reservoir for recreational use only (i.e., boating, swimming, and fishing). Since this reservoir was not in existence prior to construction of the plant, the addition of this aquatic resource for public use has had a posttive impact. The operating history of the plant is insufficient to evaluate changes to the reservoir aquatic resources. However, there have been no observed impacts.

3. Describe other sources of impacts on aquatic resources (e.g., industrial discharges, or other power plants, agricultural runoff) that could contribute to cumulative impacts. What are the relative contributions by percent of these sources, including the contributions due to the power plant. to overall water quality degradation and losses of aquatic biota?

A. There are no other contributors or sources of impact to the station cooling water reservoir. Agricultural runoff only contributes to a minor extent from the upper reaches of the watershed impounded for the cooling water reservoir. To date, this runoff has shown no significant effects on the aquatic resources of the reservoir.

O Attachment to TXX+90200 ,

Page 5 of 7 s

AQUATIC RESOURCE QUESTIONS (Cont.)

9. Provide a copy of your Section 316(a) and (b) Demonstration Report required by the Clean Waste Act. What Section 316(a) and (b) determinations have been made by the regulatory authorities?

A. Pre-construction thermal modeling has been performed for the station and the analysis results are included in the attached sections of the Final Environmental Statement (Construction Phase) and Final Environmental Statement (Operation Phase). As indicated, the NRC concurred with the impact assessment of the station's thermal discharge. ,

Section 316(b) demonstration will be made later.

t

AttachCent to 1XX-90200 Page 6 of 7 e-SOCIOECONOMIC QUESTIONS FOR ALL UTILITIES

1. To understand the importance of the plant and the degree of its socioeconomic impacts-on the local region 'estimalt the number of permanent workers on site for the'most recent year for which data are available.

A. Unit 1 - 1302 and Unit 2 11,~as of June 20, 1990.

2. To understand the importance of the plant to the local region, and how that has changed over time, estimate the average number of permanent workers on site, in five-year increments starting with the issuance of the plant's Operating License. If possible, provide this information for each unit at a plant site.

A. Not addressed at this time, since TU Electef

• has just received an Operating License for Comanche Peak Unit 1

3. To understand the potential impact of continued operation for en additional' 20 years beyond the original licensing term, please provide for the following three cases:

A. a typical planned outage:

B. an ISI outage: and C. the largest single outage (in terms of the number o* workers involved) that has occurred to date an estimate of additional workers involved (for the erttire outage and for each principal task), length of outage, months and year in which work occurred, and cost. Also, sstimate occupational doses received by permanent and temporary workers during_each principal task.

A. Not addressed at this time, since TU Electric nas just received an Operating License for Comanche Peak Unit 1.

4. To understand the plant's fiscal importance to specific jurisdictions, for 1980, 1985, and the latest year for which data are available, estimate the entire plant's taxable assessed value and the amount of taxes paid to the state and to each local taxing jurisdiction.

A. See attached table. Please note that the jurisdictional b eakdown for year 1980 is not 'available, however, totals Are shown for nparison.

9

i i: " F ,I: t s >P */) 1 L 5 l iIyI > L $!

9 6 6 6 2 4 4 1 0 5 2 4 2 0 2 6 0 5 9, 1, 2 7, 7, 5, 9, 2, o 9 3 3 5 1 3

• t 5 9 2 4 2 3

• E c, 8, 6, 7, v A 9

• P 6 0 1

• 1 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,

9 3 0 7 3 6 2 9 0 9 9 3, 1 7, 3, 0, 6, $, 2, 3, 1 9 7 9 1 1 9 8 0 8 9 1 1 9 9 0 8 6 9 CS E 3, 4, 3, 3, 4, 9, 7, S 3 3 3 9 5 2 1 E T 4 4 4 5 S A 3, 3, 3, _ 3, S T 4 A 4 4 4 7 1 0 0 4 0 9 0 1 1 1 7 7 0 8 9, 3, 5, 0, ~ 6, 4, 4 3 4 6 6 S S D 2 3 C E I 6 7 S I A 0, 4, 6, E R P 8 S T 3 5 K

A E

P 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 8 3 1 2 9 9 5 9 7, 3, 0, 7, 1, 7, 1

M C

D E

S E S D 6

2 2,

9 4

2 3,

9 0

6 3,

6 2

5 S

1, 6

6 9

6 8

5, 5

- E I 8 8 9 S S A 1, 1, 1, E S T 2 K A 2 2 A

T P

E P

D I

A Y 1 D 7 A 1, S D A A A A A A A A

/

9 1

E I / / / / / / /

I A N N N N N N W N 0, R P 2 T

0 9

9 0 1 9 D 1, E 6 S E S A A A A A A A A 0 E T / /

N

/

N

/

N

/

N

/

N

/

N

/

N 4, S A N 6

_ AS Y e

_ T 0 C 0 I 2 P 0 T 9 S

- I D

X X Y T T R

_ f Y E D T T Y o U S A D T t H C

C C I I

C M T S I 7 I C t I T n f T L E E L N D a o C L S S L J Y P

S T P

C O E I E tO I e 7 D R R T C l t

? S l

c S W P fB R tB L a eg I E r N E D N A t P N D E H C N U A T t a J

" C L L C O P O P t A P J S C C S H C T G I

_