ML20069H754
| ML20069H754 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 05/20/1971 |
| From: | FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20069H719 | List: |
| References | |
| ENVR-710520, NUDOCS 9406140015 | |
| Download: ML20069H754 (450) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:P i FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY HUTCHINSON ISLAND PLANT UNIT NO.1 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT l l l l t
'MAY 20,1971 DOCKET NO. 50-335 O %j 9406140015 721025 PDR ADOCK 050003 5 ,
C i a
.- - - -... - ~. _ . -... ..-.. - -- - ..... .. --- _ - .. - -- - _ - - -
1 ! i i
- i. HI 1 l l f l !
i' I i ! TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 I l~ Page ! ? ]
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1 i. 3 2.1 GENERAL 2 l Location of the Facility 2 _ l Physical Characteristics 3 i ] Environment in the Area 5
- Electrical Power Supply and Demand 20 b l p 2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL APPROVALS AND CONSULTATION 22 ;
i- i l 2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED FACILITY 24 l 4 l 1 l 2.3.1 LAND USE COMPATIBILIIT 24 j i l l 2.3.2 WATER USE COMPATIBILITY 27 i i I 2.3.3 HEAT DISSIPATION 30 l l 2.3.4 CHEMICAL DISCHARGES 34 l 2.3.5 SANITARY WASTES 35 . 2.3.6 BIOLOGICAL IMPACT 35 i 2.3.7 RADIDACTIVE DISCHARGES 56 , 2.3.8 CONSTRUCTION EFFECTS 67 I 2.3.9 AESTHETICS 71 , 2.4 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED 72 1 2.5 ALTERNATIVES 73 2.6 SHOR1-TERM USES VERSUS LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY 76 i 2.7 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF ) RESOURCES 77 l I 4 i i I l, 4 _____-_____--..--...-_.._._,.-,-......--.-.~._,.--,,)
. - - _ . . _ . _ _ . . _ . _ - - - . - _m . _ _-_ . . _ _ . . . _ . . _ . . _ . . . _ _ - - __ _ . .
I HI~ 1 i 1 LIST OF FIGURES l Figure i 2.1.1-1 MAP OF FLORIDA LOCATING HUTCHINSON ISLAND PLANT 2.1.1-2 HUTCHINSON ISLAND GENERAL LOCATION MAP 2.1.1-3 HUTCHINSON ISLAND LOCATION MAP - 10 MILE RADIUS , 2.1.1-4 HUTCHINSON ISLAND PLANT PROPERTY PLAN 2.1.2-1 ARTIST'S CONCEPTION OF COMPLETED PLANT e 2.1.3-1 METEOROLOGICAL STATION
]
2.1.3-2 POPULATION DENSITY : 2.3.2-1 0FFSHORE OCEAN CURRENTS $ i 2.3.3-1 INTAKE STRUCTURE - PLAN , 2.3.3-2 INTAKE STRUCTURE - SECTIONS l 2.3.3-3 DISCHARGE JET ISOTHERMS 2.3.7-1 WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FLOW DIAGRAM i 2.3.7-2 WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FLOW DIAGRAM (continued) 2.3.7-3 WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FLOW DIAGRAM (continued) 2.3.7-4 WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FLOW DIAGRAM (continued) 2.3.8-1 PLANT AREA PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION f 2.3.8-2 STATUS OF PLANT CONSTRUCTION JANUARY 27, 1971 ! l h i i
+
r I
-a
HI ( APPENDICES 1 Appendix j j Appendix 1 PLANT DESCRIPTION l l Appendix 2 PAST AND PRESENT CONDITION OF TIDAL LITTORAL PLANTS j AND VEGETATION - DR. DAVIS i-4 Appendix 3 HUTCHINSON ISLAND ECOLOGICAL SURVEYS - DR. LACKEY i Appendix 4 HUTCHINSON ISLAND ECOLOGICAL LITERATURE REVIEW - EBASCO SERVICES Appendix 5 PERMITS AND LICENSES (COPIES OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS) i Exhibit A - Zoning l Exhibit B - Florida Water Pollution Standards ~ Chapter 28-5 i Exhibit C - Dept. of Interior Acceptance of Florida Water Quality Standards Exhibit D - Florida Water Quality Certification for Unit 1 , Exhibit E - Corps of Engineers Dredging Permit Exhibit F - Corps of Engineers Letter Increasing Amount to be Dredged Exhibit G - Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund of the State of Florida-Access Channel Dredging Permit ] Exhibit H - Internal Improvement Fund Permit for l Dredging Big Mud Creek ) Exhibit I - Internal Improvement rund Additional. , , Permit for Big Mud Creek ! I i i Appendix 6 Documents Regarding Historical Sites ! i I 4 i i i I f I f i ! i ? 8 ( l' t l j i f
-iii- t i
HI 1 1 s
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Florida Power & Light Company hereby submits this Environmental Report for the Hutchinson Island Nuclear Plant, as required under 35 FR 18469 .
" Implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969," and in l response to the requirements of Appendix D, 10 CFR 50. !
The Hutchinson Island Nuclear Plant (AEC Docket No. 50-335) is a nominal - 850 Megawatt net electric pressurized water reactor. The nuclear steam supply system is being supplied by Combustion Engineering; Ebasco Services, Inc., is the Engineer-Constructor. At the date of writing the site prep- -! aration work is 55% complete, and the total construction is 12% complete. l The plant is scheduled for commercial operation in midyear 1974. In l selecting the site Florida Power & Light Company has followed its long- l established policy under which all new sites are considered for their l suitability for more than one unit. The " Draft Guide to the Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear ' Power Plants (February 1971)" has been followed in the preparation of the Report, and every effort has been made to be responsive to the suggestions i of this Guide, where applicable. For the convenience of the reader the r format, organization, and numbering system of the Guide has been followed in this Report. The information given herein provides as comprehensive a description of the environmental impact of the project as can be made from such existing I data as Applicant has been able to obtain from a diligent review of all possible sources of such data, and considering such guidelines for the ; scope of the inquiry as are available. The various engineering and environ- ' mental studies which are continuing are described in detail herein. l t r l It l l 4 1 I e 1
. - - . - _~ .-
i HI 1 2.1 GENERAL 2.1.1 ' LOCATION OF THE FACILITY The site for the Hutchinson Island Nuclear Power Plant consists of approx-imately 1132 acres on Hutchinson Island in St. Lucie County about half way l between Fort Pierce and Stuart on the East Coast of Florida. The nearest ' population center is the City of Fort Pierce which is eight miles from the site across the Indian River. The location of the site is indicated on the map of Florida, Fig. 2.1.1-1, as are the major cities of the State. As l an aid in location, the approximate road distances from the site to the , principal cities are: Miami 120 miles, Jacksonville 225 miles, Tampa ! 150 miles, Tallahassee 360 miles, Atlanta, Georgia 550 miles. The Georgia ! state line is some 260 miles away at the closest point. With the ex- ! ception of Lake Okeechobee some 35 miles to the southwest, there are no I major geographic features or important true rivers in the vicinity. ; Figure 2.1.1-2 provides a map of the east-central portion of the State of Florida that locates the plant site relative to the geography of the l State within a 100 mile radius. Figure 2.1.1-3, on a larger scale, pre- r sents an aerial view of the locale out to a 10-mile radius from the plant ; site, and identifies natural and improved features and reference points. ! The Company's property lines are shown in Fig. 2.1.1-4 on a plan of a l portion of Hutchinson Island. [! The site itself is generally flat. Much of it consists of swamp and, , outside the mosquito control areas, the land is covered with a dense vege- i tation characteristic of Florida coastal mangrove swamps. At the ocean I shore the land rises slightly in a dune or ridge to approximately 15 feet above mean low water. The island itself is populated only at the northern and southern ends, the nearest inhabited area being some seven miles north' of the reactor site and the closest inhabited area to the south at a dis-tance of around 4.5 miles. 1 The Hutchinson Island plant then is sited near the center of a long, narrow, offshore island. To the east is the Atlantic Ocean with the north flowing ' Gulf Stream currents evident only a few miles offshore. Near shore a weak ' counter-current flowing south is usually felt. To the west, the island - is separated from the mainland by the Indian River. It should be noted that the Indian River is not a river in the usually accepted sense but more a ; long, thin, tidal lagoon stretching down the southeastern coast of Florida I between the mainland and a long series of offshore islands. Passes or in- ) lets between the islands connect the Indian River with the oceat. while a very limited number of small streams flow into it. Anotherfactofimportanceregarhingthesiteisthat chere are currently no wells producing f resh water on Hutchinson Island and the many attempts to develop wells, even at considerable depths, have proved unsuccessful. This has limited the development of the irland and kept most of the area uninhabited. Development of the northern and southern ends has been pos-sible only because fresh water could be brought from the mainland by pipe lines of limited capacity. I a l 1 1 l l
N ,,,,,,, .
....... - - - -/ PN - --- - . .*
........ ( ' ~
x L. ; ..... ]
- o
- - . - "=
mw .# . . a.*,w.
.." .a
_ }J g -- . . . . . . . ..
- i
,! 3 z p/. v,,
\
3,,,
~ ...
l
,gl 2e.,.. -._
y i
- = = 6
-f7
'L,._ . * ". ."L '8s . 4...y *"1 g;,gg, ,_._
yf
-"a*'.".*.- o 4- . -"'b.. fts( ..
.... x... y,. w.
g s y
, . - t o j - %
7 (
. u,o
/y'-4 ...L
~
--{4 )p.J. **'
....r.. s e
-( nw rn i .nn -- ;
t C % c.,
. =.: u.F - -
Oa*
- F.g l r ;-u,0 m s e,r, l'
-j . Vh f " '; .s
.m k ' . .,.
-- ia W
3 ......
.y s . , l p .-
m,...- a u
,., ; f = , . . = /#
# N,, , u
- ~. :. t.:L..
-1,j *
/ 5
..e .I g .
L, g.**.j - A U.:. b f- -
,,....... m - L a Te g . \I)."m*da' ***" g a i e;. .
- ; ~ -e ..-..._J-. = * * "
- 2"""
JMi ,-:; ;;;, ...ii. % t l~.
,A K p. '
!'" *.y. - ..... n .
,,.j.p a
,~t . L- .
< g . , , , , , g
- r. 'I --
\ u .. q
. g.;
;r **Q ., g,;,/ ., . l-.......... ,
, *"(' ; y ==
----m g I,
- r. :g- *ga; g
.,. )
* " ... l: . ,. =y.,
== .a e n.; .
~
w J "3 a-- !r ,3 7' j..
-.M f I K i
a a 'a.a= ' 4.._,J y
... n'a =*a y- ,. . . , .
d*"t "ter4-1
. 2 l .__ _7_ .
- 1. e. * = =
y
= .. u- ,
. I
.g-
.f g a I
+ . . ......
.s'"t" -a. ~,===.= i =. .......
-,, N -
.a.
a
- g. _, y.m A. . L y,, ,, ,
dh,. yp== 2
. n f=* Ij
,,, : {- .
ge q a* .* ** . 9
- pg
- 4. . ,-.
,i, t...j.
- r. . . g f - ,,
/ ,
3 , ,,,,, [ ggg N
% .4 y - 'M'b"' g gg,.g
,' gg
~ . . s .~' _ ' . y
\ .',,g *'*
- o. .'UE.i 5 ( "****
.1 l j, .
,~
g eg. 4 4
= g, -Ng., uf1. v.eas . ...
. ..?.p_e,_ g g*;, u u. .si.an
. C- \ _we., - 1 u psA C r L w* n .=.~'-
, , . . . .-r \ g . m
.-- i e , g . cyL=-*:q ij. y .
-; *g,y,',%,,,, "a ; J . . = e... na., sie m -.4 s T' . - i '
L .... . . -
~
;;: ,.;, -- z p
L ___l. .:1 :-=-
-=, w y +q * * * * "
- C fg
.-g_.,,,,, , ,
, y.6.a e L L. ._#~
g Q a
% ~.
LEGEND
== e ELECTRtc TPAMSMtSSION LINES 69-IIS 135 240KV =
- m us e ELECTRfC TRAN5 MIS $10N LINES VNDER CONSTRJCTIOh
******* t.LECTRIC TRAN5MISSON LING $- PLANNED MW POINT OF INTERCONNECTION ,,
y, OTriEM elf CTRic LeNts e , F'
.yL %
O GENERATING STATON$ /
/
- 1 9 CITIES & COWMUNITIES SERVED ELECTRsCITY la cong.si.e oreos eme!ser cit.es not stiowa) 4.'
O , .,..
/
HUTCHINSON ISLAND PLANT *
~
/
ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 9 g' - s MAP OF FLORIDA LOCATING HUTCHINSON ISLAND o .m,.,# PLANT, MAJOR CITIES, AND THE FP&L SERVICE AREA
., . . =_= ., FIG. 2.1.1-1
, =;= , FSSF5
r ANSTET , APERTURE ! J
-, r a- c CARD '
e Z i x ' . ' E Also Available on , > ' ^~,Q u
, y Aperture Card ,<' . i .
i g g
. . .. ., ' .I .: ',@=P g*c,,,
= , a o. a g
, a .
' . / ,.
= ~
o-n.g ,' g. r4 5 _ amp a
,4 ,' , . i._"j. ;:,y > "
o a " " i , n u n c s g s - .
'o- i ga n in
". u ni . "c'E1 a,p a,"i'g'
-i
,, n
,= 3 (
n "J ,a
', 4 j- . t g j'i a
~ . g ,. _ i y
-i i i
~~
s ' , . ~, '/ y+j. i ~.. ,~.- s i u '.- , r 1
. ' ,, ' . ' 4. . e,e.;# jn -.. m
,,.
- a- - -
' d b, -
.iP, ,
, 'j[$h, , j' ,! >M{kh .
k '.'j'a, p-h! in w,
, , f ..
- . ag ., e 3,, ,
, 4,,; gg 1,.gn.e.sm#
" j.a . n n if'] .~y 9- , o, . ti .".
,, z f .
- :;/dh ,b;f. ,a, m a
m$3 e:jU m. 7' y:'I':k t ,
,7
_ n- j,,"n s
,a;;"P:
,,. .. %b.g, .3.. [. 7p { b- , p lb_j%)
r,g t %,g; L
,m
= m4.g g 11m?4.,%q.g7.7. .-qp
$Effr k' ' - Y hh, f kf gg, 9 g
.. ;g Qtj gg}%pfg%ggggjag! Mkg; nmgap4.mSfj.a
[uma c4 4+g3 . a,.- nn ? g 9).a rp- ra% c
.,v.
3 sv g y. pJp yu em-y ky if[,'{jf,.;.4:y t f-y.g epp sp 'ff?lkNAqg
.y pgy 7 my m*.(?,g..
s kfgp /i WrEg qjQjdQhgsy.g 96W i 2% d16@ g$ M g p f 1{ f s$$$ N M) h @ M i f d wue a sm. m,+Y g. L. . wru w.g?:14 ; u. g w e mlyl$4 , w myi de ma z
,s M) nbeji .affL2'g, ::.e, .4 F ' ; ')
- g y i:.
. .y a.'~ 'Qf , : L b '
h MM
)
l l l r 2u
' ~
a4 g 8 V " # H8 JIJAe7
~
2
'" 't ~e ,
i e b 'd $ , 'h , , A' [. Q E q q b-Q .. \ . . ., i ,, [. y W&g',qf)mQQ&g.)KAf t ' u ti
",2 2 y gg Z ."n o> w . ; < T 4 &yy,jO s. .G- N Ma __ ,
% 4;: j*j $ggl9 7__,'
g W y m g i g ,, j 1 w ge A .,Q e i , g ,.a j -g n
's'w-rS d .aZ r ci. , q w. h,e r* 2 .
- y. .,_iy.Qag3 l- Jgf <
.a -m -o m m ww L! 0 4 g wW- s 4' ggy 40 s 4 o y M F* I 1
, p., g
* / -s 1 iy g.
.>.C. '4.q C O
<t
, a)g zy O 3 cy : *r .l Ew e "r 2 4
y r. - O_a'...,['g '.. , I 'f,, M . '. .
"pw 2a I $;f r #, Kt @ . -@p,0 ' 7'
' f,4 ;;.g.; ~ } l- 1 ; -D .a >2 o . . . E<
.r . .s -b. . . .g..y-- ,.4e ..Q. .,.,. kg... [f,.. g-4 ,@o 4 s
-y .. .L: J -
o' o-
< uA _v/C 3+. y0 ,
- a. 4 ... g .; g . e.c. owm u, .,e;4,. .. ;
i
.f .. gD n , yvy fa .3 c
/ m. g t b-
-- '3
. u. t-
.n 5 :.> . -,
. t
- v. < (. w
- c fg - ,
p.. .
- 1. I t- a d , :.
.,e
- x. :
. . d.. .p 3 ^. r M p 3 ;i '. J/ ~; L; T 4:.,, 'a., ...,_., ,
4;._J;,j. m' '",r/.,.g f ,W.0, gg' ' . ; , - - wg%. v. n, ".n Q p. f a Y q 'r..._,t'
',p, ; ;), a py
- i v..-, ,% . . , . , , . /, ..
,,,h I
= '. ' [,' N . -W * - .'c [ .,
. i o f :g .
.w ..f o... A e5 ~ 1
. .,. i ;1 : tv
. < y, w w , - w]f. g y%, ..- j )4' sy.,, ' g ,..i<.
3',4, g _w g %:mi, p ;.r :p c4. 9 . ' ,w ;.; , J.. F Jw av .,. M. s g
)T f. g..,~ ./-
'd 7 4 r ,
' I
~
' ' J ;.c hd.k 3
,p 3
}y< , %. . . .
- { - (mh. ' N.sa ' , ,( ,s.l/[;. , , . ' C)- [. . f. 2' . , ;,
.,g
. . ;l ,. , . f. ,
.b;. . D .,. f ,,
, , ;, p y., &p ; ..
,"_~.,.
nq...4. v.r 9. , e q .. p , . , ;) , , , . , a. n '. r . - - * ~ .. $\ . , . s; - ~ , ; I ,, . .. .y .r., ..
.,.7. W- '- ,. -
j,,. . t. .:;,; t".cs. 1 : - , ' s': V - .;,; ....j, f '+ 4 l- .; . * < j,./. N .; .n.,q ,', .f,.r g h,*9 . - j s
- I h , c.
..m-Kg 3
W
- e. , .'.s 5
- 4
.1' j - .p
,[{, (.f;N, 5- i
,( YI
- I
;g f d., JE.' , M d. # M .~' ,
, , . f .#
g , A 7
} 3 i
s e<- .. f : : ; j- y% m,g;WJ,1 a0' .. J' ~
-mo m.. .3 t . , S v,), . w.. ...
p-n. . .' --m..,
. 1, ,
'! . (. w r.
. . j'
/ ll ' ' -.[aE :K- Ad 3 .\
- t g'b J. . '.h
;+g .SMuwtA J J ' v- % * /e f
$',e/*
s- n $ e ' 8, i p. i , c h p%,,.' .,' p.'%.?. s e.
-l1.'ja.T^ -
.. .f.o : '
r
- - - . y y -
i \s N.,-
, *3 o ,-
3 < J a. Y' sI
,2'. l{* "Q".
",, p_ } .2: .e*
. , - .c .g.,T. ..
m...y,
~
*A w- o ,;, ..
s*3 g4 : . . , . lQ *:r d~ g!.x o i-
. g,, . ,
[: f, [b~rt> [ j
< w. .k,'_ ' - m:,2 sh :
mb ,M.3. %*-i* L ' ' - u.+.eA
,e
' of [. ' T!h .f--' d'h
.4 ;<.-
- -d U *)k[
g,N:'r 4c d.u . ..:.v. ;* y" N.
'*VT
,.- %r '~-~ 4' -7, M :i F"1 ; V:.'W %t j y:
. ;/ ,,L ;fy ' ,'h I .t
- i v,4t
. . G.yi: .'.f: .r%,%
x '.
\ y i,f~.g'.y9('AQ'.'..:?c'7
.y f
in . .' 'A.. . o 'p !. n Q.W ,','y't:'-fi. ' ^ ~.V , I
- j' l.: Y ~
,s.'
%* *d' l ;
{m'
.g. .E' t'
.&.iQ k :y jr :f
. ,b.h]
Gl'} ij* i1G fM<'~' f . d'
,-j T ; i[
- 4. g.:n, -d, 'gr.tfm (,2y,..?
iMV :.$ j[MI.
,:'J.6g~,y,\. t..,.Qt(qL. .if E r
)?'..?!' ;'k w^ E G f. :; Y , 35 \r y
- .yQ'.q:::4,;
+ .I yl .
x- . e,. L}.. o .. . . , :: , .
.p G.
.M._d:..,,,
,. .' ,v:o.
. .' '7,4.Q,.,,; ,
Q 4 h , ';~ ~ ' ?% Q'1: ': ', p'.;,1k. s':P y n, ..y',..% y; g ' Q,.y TQ' ..:/. ~ :. Q .:J ?;
.- ,. + :) y%.;&a:n:& bo >?v.. , p~* . '
{ .4;
.r . ay a <y o w.;o'v,b;, , -f.,:.u:.w.s
~-
)f. , t , ,) - .
. c m+
~+ ...+-
y %$:W,., a ,u , . -. .>... . . . .. $ .%x. a, .. , . a -
;%y
, ' . f }f .j
}. m. ..&.- ' ) 4 ,a 4 g . .a... : .:.. . :,,?..
?/., - ,: l 3 .y - %r,,. ys% ';%. . c;l ? ;n:-
.y 4.1 . ',,.. g%: ! ,~ j,L.;. J *n. .p.%;3 n re , ' . . . g . A,e + .. -
. . N: %. "# a. y .. . . . . . %,
.6s.w-*u v -3.*
, , ., . , .r 2 .
a 1 \, 4 :t. }= < - , ' . ,,. a. - g . k : 0:.w 9 .
, , w- as .- 7. vr . e N'f, :4 r '.-.w A. . f.n. v.- L, .
s
'..w.. a s
- o. .h ?*
.w. g ~ , . .oyNq . .
;L r .n-
< - ,i . - <
r
- e. i...,5- g.m n a .. y e < .
\
f , , s . Q~ Y
- O . ;j a 4<,.
' ~."J.,.w .4.M: e. +
- ).
W 2 r l.J. ~r . m,4 . > ?. . , -+' ;-
%.. ~;:( ~~k.+ ,
- l., , . ,A k..h s- ~c . .
,.q *g
%- . 4 ,
i y A ..,, . w._ .,s 5
~n..*., o 2 1 m..
t
>_, . . w , . g.e.
p., c,, *
.v.
~ . ..- . p,
. . y. .j .v.
t n... j . ,,a. ... p }. % .1j; . z, , ,,j . .. y j *. g. , yi , 7 y' .
. .:.. .,gm..
, ;. > ,, ~ .y , s
.w a x .n.,m,.- -+
n, 1 y .. r,
- 1. ..ot.u. n .. '.:..... . . , n; f y;~, .
f- ..,.~,i .
' .. L a
4.. w y _p. , :, + . w : } , . 4. ,., +. ;.c xA. ;a d.'w,m. c.,
'(
i.te . ;. . 'y...g Q g
, . . , . l t. . . . 9 >< ., ,n . :n, %.y ,:.,; .; A:..
-> , , . ' .. ,g a ,v ,.x
..r. i . a> :
, ,s4 l
. / .ea ... ,.,g
,,m ..f.. . .,
m
..ra;w. p.s..c.4ern. .....f
, ;y g, , .%g(.y.x w. c..,3. .:.
+, .p r . e. >- . ,s.. ~~ y <j. .: ,s '
.e
..n A-t . r
-v. 1. -,
- a. ;
., ..q. . q .; p,,.g
.g tr+R.. ;
, , 7 . , - ,;
.. A s tg ~,..; ,e ,y.,
s 9* ,q,j.:,y m r.x.q g,j r
. A q qi, r q
/.
.~ . .;
- 4 c.,. ~ rh.hW ^ hp .~ ,. .T
,.: c .~-. - i t< . q;' *i,c&" .. .tr 3 ~j
~^
'p.
c .) ,; l. c w'w 1 . . D a. : r : h. . . . . . ld ,1
...f M h; .s[ t .7~$h:.U y.-N o M. . f 4 WW WP..%,f'. .}9Mf k @'<.N.h.ff i p h
'- 11$
W
- a. ,i .h C
-M
- n {
.m
. 4. ' .
5.4 p. L~ e w p' -- -.}-Z T , , .3p4 4( dw-i'_.
. . it.hv.,w.y p.m M t tJ;p}i/ P ,r[?;4:;
. p. ~ n.
i f*y .w.,-a. [ 94- K,.g
- do y j.). 4 adm.; p g g.o ' s,.c.9 p 'z s u.,,,y,e
- s
.:.: .r.- u * . . va:.54 _.a,...n q, / f. }o i@%s@
. /. ,e
. j i .
. .'q'
, ,t 3
k, . #.,. , f,%._ a gN ,c 4 2 a .; w , 2;- .
- }. ' p i
. 4' . t - T M" j. 'r , *,
h,,,n it,q [ . s'v' " v 3 " , , d p %p-< $ 5
,g- *. .$o.. , . }M,g.,
% $7 F 7'.i .Ulr$ {]' ,,
.c- , ,
~
t \n . .a,.K y % .
.y,
,a.1 g s -A . .i e e -
ei e
.n,$. k.NJ h , .-+.4 i i.
N h,,k,'h,- I' a . g.- ]M [fg.,ggj.y'[,((b
. (y
.h@. ]e 1.Q.Q,, Gh h,).d R ,, d ,
* ,, y a HUTCHINSON ISLAND PLANT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT GENERAL LOCATION MAP FIG. 2.1.1 NE{5 S, '
- 5. 'YY ,-a- we
.__ , .- .a , kk (
-, ; +
g u .
& s% ~ ~ s a.
T.? ; 1 g} :r':b;;
? t m,I Q4Af :'
x
, fj;.2 ' q-
+ :
, ~
J:p.p:.
'(\*{,. i y$g 'y ' u , ..
l rem y pwy-m -w wmmm e m=r W g??% f 2
),
ym .e glfl. c y .e s 4 y < m., [,, , . ll% >+..x . qiw
'e' ah i s f-<
y .c , f[ ,; j, [ -7 [, 4 #7 K , dt [ Q [h O~ k
- v. ,
'i
.s ;hC
.. Y[ . h[%9%,#Q o
~ &,
3 , Q **l' . J l ,g,, 4 j h w g
~m-
. 3
- i
*,N*
m- , d# iBV r . ag - -l v& 7 ;;. 9 s o g ; - *
. 2 w
g> >
. _ g f, f ",
v . A p. ' , R. 5 3 .F.
. .Mj #e rghn@ ew
. wz (
s a of l w: ,4)s5 "- (%e.m~,; p Oa n ya M g ,hy .p.
== * .
p- . es 4.y dA ,, s
, YY l
- D$$, ,'
.. . g gk(y Y ,f: ~
c c m m v w a
" q%p h. %MW d
; W 'a~ 4;s.g -
., $F w na.7 -5 ..
s mywyc W h,j 9 h s ,,e
, -y n ,?/ 't 3 p v y " ?g + ..-. -. d . .
E ; f- . .j i . . 4 #,
? g%% l% {plg ? ;q . I ?*
> { l ' "3,j'
,, ;g .
_ , My
~
o,. 44 ,W.? J . ,% h '
.~M%D p
. , k, 'y [ *
, , {-
hh , g - r wg % m., Q.. y.: m > , , . . j y g! $ g g g & ? h < f h g, 3gggg k fhfh kffkkwpmg.wem N ff" ,
.cm y 4 g 4 .
8e~ m g .ca,.tsg. A,k,m,w,a.sa,mo wv.:~ Law,c V n r p W? , A '.K m m? .r>- u %.%w:t:e#%n.fDQ1pw" ; wwc wW s" wghs p~pgry f: . i
- p. Q/ h;r~&% : h W ?,m Wr.d p&ny gge!'w% Ni[Mp%W M yo +g?):~ 9[' .
., .~
5 i W ~?.Q; %, . Q@ > ' QMN.b&m& S;.~[o w% tM$w, ~$p$$.y{40$.,M M% df $a l
@nzwyw V; o ;.. , v y:, w,y.a.w. AL . ,,> em.. n, m. . y. e.m..-; Mem u, sm, #g g y<m% _ ~. y -
or e pg w e av . y e : y s y .s ,,g 1 y g y p y hy.g - u,. ggg 9 3 gm,4
;.4 a .
n .% g; ' y .sg ' q. - gc q,d w 11 gWm....w 3 twcmendy p.d m g.s gg . /c g p %- g ,g%./3!v x g w nmsw A mW 4 :, pw
.ggc:o w
m@/
% m@n Wr 9 np4't.0 we-g eh;Mpar$t$hehp v,I u c
-u WN q w1 q. ,s om s ,
p?>:Nw; o F [wh n4 y. .t , Np
.1 A rv v y %;py gp*#
- 7 ap M;c, e
) c;?vp a mg;g 3.9mqA .yag,Ay/g,ep,Ag@
p#,g p:.ig _ 4 .0 ; a - % a ,. %wv'w 5 dI b:TN ~ 474, ocz u Up p MQ *TQ, w:g;Wtpg;g,yn [a JE, 47
'; j.d g< : pX : ."~}m:w?%4.n :.
m % ; ~ K n:m $Qw , y g n g)4u , spn. aow m n
. - a~ n-
.,2 y v a a ~ s. se aq.,4% e kg am%{ #4 *.W W?yX'Q g A;.gg M.wy:w 1(W . , QA;,f; w ~chm w a
it J:? .& %X Mp y % v. n % 4 V4 r .,F , 4 r,. y + , w g, > g Q g n n), ,@: @w q>. ; - j y m%g w gu j
?As l v A;3V 4
sw W a M v M:nP g '.4- )w - S1 &e d1 Ar , %4WW R- '~e:W ~ 4 W 4.-p : 23 1 _ a..bo 'i_ < . 7 ied N E F
,Nh'k h.
n W, N $ $ $ $ h W Y f k $ Y $W $ $h)N h Yf h@p M
%hI ' 4! W g am Wr N M A N n N d
@4 a %q ww %s D ,I 1 :
hR& wMw,a w W %c 2 W p H m M e i s d T x %g98 s ,v u g -u . r m m .s namp a -m,s A wae -n s ~ w
$ bN pan m& Wh&umgW WnNW$p$Y YW
- QW%& QW?%w%QQWW d
T~,, ' M +y; *%e
+ %e . enn y ;
p -e % n. m s /. % %.?.if r m.w w 4,s vd V , >.,. *g-ls+u*?l" Ny
) v"m,, e> nx i ". a 7 ,y
+-- t '.W hCN' . W ' Y .k s $ %CW miW &f nbgM
. %d -:e L & 3" 5LakVVs L 2h A** M TYU,u.,$.QN
-n I, .
MMA
..ad .
gm-m.w,,,,,, 6 T'U a[ 'lWT IF
- U' '4'^. ' W%
(b f# ,, .
.n. _ , . . m. . _, @. c u-n-p P g.n.)r - . . .,~,
i go 32 kU te $ gi:-
. y.
- E;m,fg5 - c s
.f g@ .3_ 4%Q 6 g,p .y ..
e m.q M $,wy 2 - - p< 3
; w 3};
c 4 J ,
;g; hJ7
,W 4 al M t,y t 4 y zy' 1
t ~, y , ,
% t9 t f
L."' ; g~% flf G &~ is '
- ? if I g
$;M gs .dxx . ES Y 2W [ g- r y,;~ < ;, r
, QZ M t 97 -
' 9[), j i ' ,'
e',
,,3O w 0 f '
~& ,
w q ', .y D' 4 4
'!#M ' ^
2 ^ M ' q ,,4 - 4 e.. J.4 .cg f, .-4 9 N [
; .I 1
.p. .' . Y <
07 - F
$ N #
U; !
. : 3:x3 y .&.. hq.yff ' ., _e 3 .
#e. p 4 dg@yz. g g
)I p ; V ( 6,8 ,# , ,
s' - Jp x .,m
.er y 3tz3 e. -
s
,gy
., w,m# .
4
~ '
.- 3 7 ,L> g* W. .. _ - . .rl O O ' ; d ' , 'f O. t + ,
t j i uj j Z f
- p,0 '
4, $ - r ~ U n - . . . y , y,WJN ,
%,,m) &wN$
pf
. 1 v Mf.p$e - ; ,
e' r
,\ ; ,
;' b; , m
- f. .* n e ,.['3 y !
- fy"
~, w
~ -
i .
.a * *&&, @ _pp ,,g < . ;
3 l l$ _ Dj pf ._ g'-jf~ f ' ~ "
<le Jj i, b . . m.4 g . . May 4."',.. - A ,a 67 %- .y. a- .
a m, 6 -; _.. . pw/ < am {,g.hjf "q q m,5ghm[f fx[np ,m alm , n;f. .%, & fyQ
., ' kf.f,y. w} Il r;j r a u
- y *a+ i-,+. J"-u nx .
. nnWpY y ?;y no q-a ,
g o4 4.W
& ~
o. cr e *-
- . ' Q s.
es *,'
+
f;
- q #x,. -
- e i et
.".', Y.T+ ;Jy r >- -
vgl&#%;j ' r.
, o
$. r ,
,i U S ,g w%. ,d,d d' .Y+g)%q. D . M f, f ;"'*\,=., i 'Ci f ':}N.n\ h_ **'l% (% '
M eA $e. % .j e wn (.aq ,, g
. . /. . .
e' j ,y ,
.a ,. . ..w~ 4'-- .. f '-
.w,
.'e, vu .: 2; a i
t
, $ j f j,} Y j 3 .,}
4 +Q i s. [ l*.) .h, ,m} ij%y. rfy ( ~ W, n . - I ly- @, a 3 s' 4 l s ll D N g
.;j M- ' a S ,.py v
~
- n. ;
i . n.,v a y,"tc . . m m .g (p) (, /
-n_
kW Qd}u)[n N 4 R',o/gfs
)
MM s
' nqW. 9 pm O VE .* Men
+
, n#. 4 g %n, #2. g%PY ,' Q.
g
+ ~ %g; [E' ;,n ,y#jk,. , A ~, 'l h~ >*"
9 p Qy q~ -
' +e-I #? '
a ' i
= *~ y! %c q c/-
+ ,,'%' . , J9
< g "~
a
- .E., .", t I
'"~.
v r/. , r%',
"Qg ' -
- -- 4 s-c-
j=, *:r ~w~
~4 Q '. * .
[
&o' w %g ' 'p]',*
y ; ,.1 :.. Q 4 <, ' w. mig y h ( 7 -(. , QI,f j , , *gj ,, 4
. .. v .
*.n 'I '< a,y ;e5 s 4y u
!f *'s' -b 1 . g,;,glnj , 3Q,s <
~ . vq :~_s..' 3'0 h
, %,# 3 s- , } s' ,
n - p mu . q< q4-gu .; d.w . a ,
- - :,. k l V.
a _.S . ,
-,k ,% s 4;l,'.f'O w +
n
- .< ~
':Mj. g _ $c n.
. m> . +
w;e 7 . , r y.
;4* , 4I- i i
,t y. ? >2 Lw -
~ ..$ A r * . "y .% g
-<,4 id- .
.
- g 3 V g ,
O im n$, Q A s d*'
/
6e4
- p/ . k[i, M, -}
$;y'. ,.:-f; 9 (;r ,, ;x
, M p-a';4"NM
+ .
, g",I - _.,.
r -
?g n"
- e. x,y , t
' 9 i
* '4 4 / T M y, -I;s ./ hhv ,M , e7 . m. *.g'^
(3_( ' - - [a , $' f'**.
/f S. .
@ )%
,4 ': t 4 (f.y R &" e 1;, .- -w s h- . ,.a 1 r ; ; p g;
[ ( ', = Ah 1 7 I" s.r. h ; +
. q
~ J-\% l t~r .
nq
.c c .c < - r.a. .- . 4, v,,,
g g r & .i ?L 9 & %g.R ,1 W M Lw APERTURE , O. p i 1n, ' CARD. ; s 4 s
- ,, MY *,
' CW -
"e w* M. .
..yy
- q- - -
N. , h+* .af t t +* k, t..~
,,.yp i c Q[f' *y
- k. .gs n , .
9 8 4+ cb +- , g.4 .
,Y
(.4 , E p'_ }A h ,f , s
*y
. y Dy, Aperture Card; -
1 s ;s.s)y/a e.w. f o(,Q., f ",ar uW;Q_
? < ~ ,
w ; - M'M y,v C /+. , 72,
,: ,(,, c e.
i.
.,..-4'- ; <+ -Y
.e
' L, .pt4+ .t- P A n * ,;y
..E .. < ,
p%E - _-L> y c.
- ? -
".e.~. n * '
&. , v' L: .81; }, m ;
, :; :.'~-
y n h Q ,;m : ge 3,
-: ,y
*-etg?$f O;*.w. j ',,MR f) 4 ' l 4,
{ fu y 5 t '. ' ,"i I ' T@ A ' d M) 4 , 2,
^
,L r .. .
_ , &,c '
' ~
.? ** * * '
w o ,.
+ .+ cu ,
Ejiwpr ap h yp,c t .? I d [ S.#.m av.au;. , c mny., a ym + .g'-v m Ml j/ g . j;(* liFI CH I N SO.N ISLAND 1LAN1 m1 RU.WW A1. TITORT I
+
r . 7g 3, p. ; .. s LUt A_l ]((N - ]O M1[J. rap][g
, S ,g j ,
M*4m W N E?.Nb.b . syk(bggwig l ,bM$bd2ddMQg$pbd y1c, j,j,]_3 l 0 M00 %0 l
f i;f' .; i ;!
)
vOg ,%o} o s,z _ d up v, g ?- h- 1_ E . f _ 8 3 o o t t f, m 4 on 9 K M Y AE T ._ BL n A u 4
'E LD o .
r.
" AR 4 Ty T.d " o NE C x s
+
q H T O H 10D T U E t & s ' AA 7 t t t % u T ML u 5 E A S L \' - A O S DT %. o g T H A RR O $ T. S S C P AF + ,x / S W A q S OF 7 4
=,
K E RO A / . L B T \ E Y H R A S
\ o
)
1 4 T O H C E' OO, \
/. A.A((d o
R R O D \ /.% [2 , s 8 7 G- W#' '\ b / E m \
\s . \
O\ 4 3 8 7 o o \'
\'3 4 b
i g I-E O 0 4 4 o g \es 4 9 p ' pdO ~ i
\
f(l y' 9w 5 \ ;
\ / t
. 8'
' i', bV' 5 8 ,/
/ 8 i
/
\ T k
/[ D,
~Z
- ~
f
.vg 9,. ;p -
' /s ,.c j E[yt s -h -[e v
\ )i.
3s f o i e e,
\f ;
j k7 x$ 0 l' \O O pi~ \T 'J o 0 0 3
,[
'O ,/- O T, M T,2 9 / [ !(3 \
- i f -
! p
/
f 'q 09 ., 0 p
!S -
l 1
'b 9 '
$C, 4- f O~ ' \
p i+ N . k i \
'ss \\
/
W 4 0 1 \ ' 9
; j b~
\ o l q 0 16 15 o 0 17 leo
!TA S O9 + CG.3 n 3 r_
J
- , #' #* =
f ' 20 7.1 21 3 22 3 ,, . a ,,.
; . (
$ ..-s, g
C _Y _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ __ _ O E I FREDERICK C. M AY ER v" - 7
-t_ i w a D \
@ tA I
n I~ n- uC r
/ <?
mg C > 5 : o n
\\ \
-\\
z- e o w-m .~i- \ v?
~ '
- e " m FOUR TRE.ES -
\
'+ m is omw EEW - 'y y x na ASSOCI ATES , U MITED _.] \ \ -
hhO m , 9 SC % C _f_ Mes Pm"s C $ H 0 P4< 38 2 > TJ > %xT \\ t
)
g osM5 E> O iT1 Z 1 rn t Lzg, L QC N,. dc E%
> I co THH
\ (\ ]v r o
i ' i L 5 06 O C~ m i i P, EI 33 O 3 a s* l
HI 1 : I The mainland to the west of the plant site has a low population density. , The heavily populated region begins at the West Palm Beach area 45 miles : to the south. As will be discussed.in detail in the next section, the l immediately surrounding area is agricultural in nature with very limited ; industrial development. r 2.1.2 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FACILITY f The reactor facility is described in considerable detail in the Hutchinson l Island Plant Preliminary Safety Analysis Reportl (referred to subsequently ! in this report as the PSAR). For the convenience of the reader with special- j ized technical interests, certain portions of this PSAR have been excerpted j and included as Appendix 1. A brief description of the facility follows. : An artist's concept of the plant when completed is shown in Fig. 2.1.2-1. l The Hutchinson Island plant utilizes a pressurized light water moderated and ; cooled reactor to extract heat from the fissioning uranium. The rating l of the plant is to be 850 megawatts electrical. The reactor coolant ; system consists of two closed loops connected to the reactor vessel, each : loop containing two reactor coolant pumps and a steam generator. The l i reactor core contains 217 fuel assemblies. Each fuel assembly contains 176 fuel rods fabricated from Zircaloy tubing and containing slightly l enriched uranium dioxide fuel pellets. Control and shutdown capability is achieved by 85 control element assemblies containing boron carbide, j and by soluble boric acid in the reactor coolant water. ! The reactor system will be housed inside a steel containment vessel whose inside diameter is 140 feet. This vessel is in turn surrounded by a j reinforced concrete shield building. ; Numerous engineered safety features have been included in the design of ; the plant. Engineered safeguards systems include the safety injection l system, the containment spray system, the containment cooling system, i and the shield building ventilation system. ! All structures and systems important to safety have been designed to with- l stand without loss of function the most severe environmental conditions which have been postulated for the site, in addition to being designed to [ meet their performance requirements under the many postulated accident ; conditions including the effects of missiles. These structures and l systems contain redundant components and are designed and will be con- ; structed to the highest industry standards in accordance with applicable codes, and to quality standards commensurate with their importance. ; i All structures and systems important to safety have been provided with features enabling them to be periodically tested and inspected throughout their operating life. ' A variety of postulated 9ccidents have been analyzed to provide the basis ; for the design and to provide assurance that no credible event would en-danger the health and safety of the public. Radioactive waste management , systems and operating practices have as their objective the reduction of r
/' contained activity in the discharges to the environment to a level as low i ls as practicable. ' l
- , , e ..-. . - -
HI 1 The interaction of the Hutchinson Island facility with the environment will ,
/ be discussed in detail in subsequent sections. The following lists these interactions and characterizes them according to their occurrence during the construction phase, during daily or routine operations, and as occurring ,
during routine but infrequent portions of the operating phase. The sections in which these interactions are discussed in detail are given in parenthesis.
- 1. Construction Phase ,
Dredging for barge delivery of heavy components (2.3.1 and 2.3.8.2) Excavation and dewatering for foundations (2.3.8.2) Dredging for foundation fill (2.3.8.2) , Construction of buildings (2.3.8.2) Construction of cooling intake and outfall structures (2.2.8.2) 111ghway traf fic effects (2.3.1) i
- 2. Routine Operations Intake and discharge of cooling water (2.3.3)
( Release of chemical discharges in the cooling water (2.3.4) Release of radioactive liquid effluents in the cooling water (2.3.7) Release of radioactive gases (2. 3. 7) Local traffic effects (2.3.1) Local population effects from the plant staff (2.3.1) Increased use of the area as recreational facilities are made available (2.3.1) Limited effects on wildlife as mitigated by the establishment of wildlife preserves (2.3.1) Minimal or zero effects on land use as regards future development of agriculture, industry and tourism (2.3.1)
- s. .
~. _ -
,, , aaw ~ ,~.n en- - .
fW
, ,a \
eY., '~
~
! 4[ f' f,Q+$$,.
^
g
+Y
' j 94r . -
g?slM%? w a
,a ,?yiep@.a %g &C' g; g W' r .<
s#'%yy.: ~~ m ., gG) Q,; ::, fse.yy l I g ,A
- g. %Ukk%
2.- 1
)
l ' i
/
1
/
1 ] l
~
?
[.-;'d '. , _ $ g;;f>nyyyQ c wa s ;.
~_1 yl ,oy
',;g /)yig;y9 q mmwa.
.h5UUk ~ ~ '- .- ,
+, ,.. 7 13 '
v.w n.;;;zm'. m;-. . . . y'
'?,.
,- R;t:ks my..$?l
- o
~~..s.
sy. .g y ggg p}g-
, ~%,.,, .,
jff y; g
+ DA '+
g ne. q s;.w --:e J,,"' n e.
$ if%0t #fh { .
q w;rs } EMS.0[ xd.K, . {i . b. W@egj pwf h.Y ,
~'
y nth hh t # + tl
~# -Q . ;$ ' ' '
.x :G w$~ %
, Lo c:. ,. .
. l; Y ? h k " yh&&,
n, s pb. gj'.;
..s-.
f .%, wmbi , M.z 2: , t: .j , %:l.v 1
%c
' v;;n
] d $l - <npy$y%, . 9 \V gum 7
' h ' kbW_ll)".,f_k,
,c t
>,eRt - _ -
9' {}y o ,t 0 N o 9- :g Qf,,. 1 N$i g ; l,sy: 5.[,h . k ?
,: $ 19% "
._L RWyQ
.}lg + ,k, y_.:C ,
tm -
!3 .
s. ble k hQ' > g;f . M ? .,1 EUTCHINSON ISLAND PLANT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT ARTIST'S CONCEPTION OF COMPLETED PLANT j FIG. 2.1.2-1 J
HI 1 .
- 3. Infrequent Operations Shipment of new fuel, spent fuel, and radioactive !
waste (2.3.1) . i i As discussed in detail in subsequent sections of this report, no per- l manent damage or long-term disruption will result from these activities. . References i
- 1. Florida Power & Light Company, Hutchinson Island Preliminary Safety I i
Analysis Report Hutchinson Island Unit No. 1 (three volumes and Appendices), FP&L, Miami, Florida, January 29, 1969. (Docket No. - 50-335). -! l 2.1.3 ENVIRONMENT IN THE AREA l 2.1.3.1 Climatology and Meteorology l The following summarizes the important factors on site meteorology as re- l ported in Section 2.3 of the PSAR, and as currently being observed and messured in the on-site program. Figure 2.1.3-1 is a photograph of the Hutchinson Island meteorology , station. The tower is located immediately north of Big Mud Creek on the j west side of highway A1A. More specifically, the tower is 2,436 feet ; north of the center of the containment in an area unaffected by the plant l construction. The station has been operational since the first week in ; January 1971. The 200 ft. tower supports an Aerovane transmitter at 50 l ft. and another at 190 ft., and temperature sensors at 10 ft., 110 ft., and } 200 ft. I l The data thus far taken at the site confirms the information given in the ; PSAR and also indicates a very close similarity to_the site data taken at i Turkey Point, 135 miles to the south. Briefly, the site is well ventilated ! with an average wind speed of 10 to 12 mph, and with wind speeds 4 mph or , higher more than 95% of the time. Calms occur less than 1% of the time.
.l The diffusion can be characterized as being slightly unstable a larger !
part of the time with very few occasions that are strongly unstable or ; strongly stable. t l The prevailing meteorology of the coastal site of Hutchinson Island is ! dominated by the presence of the Azores-Bcrmuda high pressure system re- -; sulting in a subtropical marine type climate. Sporadic penetrations of cooler continental air occur in the winter months. The warm waters of : the adjacent Gulf Stream current, located a few miles out in the ocean, tends to inhibit the formation of strong persistent low level inversions. Onshore, intense surface heating during daytime hours provides a deep ! layer for vertical mixing. Mixing depths vary from a minimum of 3000 ft. '! in the winter to 5000 ft. or more in the summer. l The average annual rainfall for the area is 62 inches, occurring year I round but with the largest amount in the summer time. i l i i
HI 1 The major meteorological hazards'are hurricanes and tornadoes. Hurricane l activity is limited to the summer and fall months, and the probability j of a hurricane affecting Hutchinson Island is about one in fifteen for any j given year. Sustained wind speeds associated with hurricanes can be ex- ; pected in the 150-175 mph class as a nominal maximum. The wind speed and ! destruction associated with the Florida-type tornadoes are much less than ; that of a typical mid-western tornado. The wind speeds that have been i estimated from the most severe Florida tornadoes is in the 200 mph class. l The vital structures of the Hutchinson Island nuclear plant are designed i to accommodate 300 mph wind speeds. , 2.1.3.2 Geology and Topography
- The Floridan Plateau is the partially submerged southeastern peninsula of ,
the North American Continental Shelf. The peninsula of the State of l Florida is the exposed portion above sea level of the Floridan Plateau. l This region of study generally includes the Florida Peninsula and in f particular the counties of St. Lucie, Martin, Indian River, and Okeechobee. ! This region is described as part of the Atlantic Coastal Plain physiographic i province. Within this physiographic p ,vince is the Atlantic Coastal Ridge which ex- r tends along the Atlantic Ocear shore as an irregularly shaped strip ranging l from 5 to 10 miles wide between the Eastern Sandy Flatlands and the Ever- ! glades on the west and the Atlantic Ocean on the east. The coastal ridge i has a maximum elevation of about (+) 80 feet found at the summits of sand , dunes. The eastern coast of Florida is described as the emergent or building coast, [ while the western or Gulf Coast is the submergent coast. This means that ; the' Gulf waters are encroaching upon the land and those of the Atlantic are i retreating from it. Hutchinson Island was probably formed as an offshore bar during a high stand of the sea. Hutchinson Island today should be considered a part of the Florida mainland even though it is separated by _ l
~
the generally very shallow Indian River. Both fresh water deposits from the internal part of the state and marine deposits from the ocean are now being deposited in the area of these offshore islands. ; i The topography of the site area is of a bar and swale type. There is a low ; bar near elevation (+) 14 feet on the ocean side of the island. The sur- t face of the island then' slopes downward toward the Indian River to about ! elevation (+) 4 feet, generally forming a swale. To the north and west of the site, both Big Mud Creek'and the Indian River are continuations of the swale and are very shallow, 5 to 10 feet deep. There is a dredged' , channel in the Indian River for the inland waterway. To the east, the , Atlantic Ocean bottom dips very slightly to the east to a depth of about i 120 feet at a distance of about 15 to 20 miles from Hutchinson Island. ! To the west, on the mainland, there is another bar with a maximum elevation ! of about (+) 40 feet parallel to the coast. ; I L
- The geology and topography of the area is described in considerable detail in Section 2.4 of the PSAR from which this material is taken. Some 49 f sources are referenced therein. ,
i I { "Y w .---.- ,---a s t-- y" ee a _
HI 1 The site is covered by a mangrove swamp. There is 4 to 6 feet of peat immediately beneath the surface. This material is a dark brown or black residuum produced by the partial decomposition and disintegration of trees, mangrove roots, and other vegetation. This peat was probably formed during the past several thousand years. Beneath the peat are about 13,000 feet of sedimentary rock formations overlying the crystalline basement in this region. Generally speaking, the upper 600 feet of sedi-ments are soft rock formations consisting of partially cemented and in-durated sands and clays. Beneath these materials are moderately hard and hard formations of limestone, dolomite, sandstone, shale and anhydrite. There was no evidence found in the field or in boring to suggest any significant geologic structure within a two mile radius of the site. 2.1.3.3 Hydrology The surface hydrologic boundaries of the site are the Atlantic Ocean to the east and Indian River to the west. The climate of the site area is humid, sub-tropical. The average annual temperature is 75"F; the average annual precipitation at Fort Pierce is about 62 inches. The average annual water loss due to evaporation in the area is estimated to be 40 to 45 inches.1 Rainfall is seasonal and about 65 percent of the annual amount occurs during the rainy season from June through October. During this period r_ the rain usually occurs in the form of localized heavy showers. High soil permeability provides significant ground water recharge from local precipitation, with little runoff. According to the information obtained from the Mosquito Control Commission at Fort Pierce, some areas of Hutchinson Island, including the site, were flooded by means of a five foot high road-dike, and culverts with flap-valves were provided through the dike. Between the months of September and March the high tide automatically provided the necessary water cover. However, during the remaining months of the year water from the Indian River had to be pumped into the areas. During field investigations, the water level at the site was approximately one foot above the ground surface. A continuous body of water was found at the site down to the depths investigated. The United States Coast and Geodetic Survey maps indicate the average range of ocean tide in this area to be approximately 3 feet, and that the Indian River tidal range is approximately 1 foot. The region under study is the area of St. Lucie, Martin, Indian River, and Okeechobee Counties. Two main aquifers are found in this region: a shallow non-artesian or locally artesian aquifer, and a deep artesian aquifer. The shallow aquifer is the principal source of fresh water supplies in the region. It consists of the Anastasia formation and extends to a depth of about 150 feet below the land surface. It is composed prin-cipally of sand but contains thin lenses of shell, limestone, or sand-stone which are generally more permeable than the sand.2
~
J i H1 1 j i i The shallow aquifer receives most of its recharge from rainfall in the immediate area. In general, surface water runoff is small. A small amount of recharge to the shallow aquifer comes from downward seepage ' of artesian water used for irrigation. The discharge of the shallow aquifer is by flow into streams, or lakes, ! by direct flow into the ocean, by evapotranspiration, and by pumping l from wells. Canals and ditches in the area carry some ground water i away. The transmissibility of this aquifer in Martin County has been ' measured to be approximately 20,000 gallons per day per foot.2 The deep aquifer of the area and principal artesian aquifer of the region j is the Floridan aquifer which underlies all of Florida and southern ' Georgia and consists mainly of permeable limestone beds. The top of . the Floridan aquifer in Martin County is usually between 600 and 800 feet l below the ground surface and underlies the Hawthorne formation which is ! an aquiclude. The thickness of the Floridan aquifer in this immediate ! vicinity is unknown, since no well has completely penetrated it. It is l estimated to be about 2000 feet thick. The artesian pressure head ; (piezometric surface) in the area of the site is estimated to be about 45 feet. I The principal recharge area for the Floridan aquifer in this region is l in and around Polk County where the limestone of the aquifer is overlain ! by semi-confining beds of the Hawthorne formation which are not im- { permeable and may permit downward leakage. The points of discharge of the Fleiidan aquifer are springs and wells and where upward leakage occurs through the confining beds. There are f no known natural springs in the region. j Underlying the 4 to 6 feet of surface peat is the Anastasia formation { which extends to about elevations (-) 135 to (-) 155 feet and consists ' of grey, slightly silty fine to medium sand with varying amounts of frag-mented shells. It also contains discontinuous pockets of cemented sand with shells and sandy limestone. Occasionally, discontinuous thin plastic i clay lenses are found in the upper part of the formation. The Anastasia ) formation is an unconfined or non-artesian aquifer. i t Below the Anastasia, the upper 100 feet of the Hawthorne formation at the i site consists of a green slightly clayey and silty very fine sand. In-dications are that the top of this zone is a semi-confined aquifer. Below about 250 feet and extending to the 400 foot depth of boring termination were sandy clayey silts which form the principal aquiclude ! for the underlying Floridan artesian aquifer, i All public and most domestic supplies of water on the mainland are obtained i from ground water sources. Ground water is also used extensively for , irrigation, stock watering and industry. ; The cities of Fort Pierce and Stuart have publi water supplies from wells ; developed in the shallow aquifer (see Table 2.1..-1, below). The City of
- Fort Pierce water supply wells are 10 miles northwest of the site and
i HI 1 Stuart wells are 11 miles southwest of the site. No large industrial water usage exists in the area. Irrigation and stock watering account for the [ largest withdrawals of ground water. Water from the shallow aquifer is j used for irrigation by farmers growing vegetables and citrus fruits, by ranchers for pastureland, stock watering, and feed crops. Many of the artesian wells were originally drilled for irrigating vegetable crops. TABLE 2.1. 3-1 I i Average ' No. of Average Ground Average Depth Gal. Per [ City Wells Surface Elevation of Wells Day Per Well
- Ft. Pierce 17 +20 110 ft. 500,000 i
Stuart 12 +15 105 ft. 170,000 r l The total use of artesian water for irrigation may be about 10 million gal-lons per day during the dry season. During the rainy season most of these > wells are not used. Despite the adequate, or more than adequate, supplies of well water on the ; mainland, no successful fresh water wells have been found on Hutchinson [ Island.
- Field permeability tests made during this investigation have indicated a ;
seepage rate of flow of about 15,000 feet per year in the top 30 feet of ! the sand deposits at the site. Taking the highest permeability coef- ! ficient obtained and a hydraulic gradient of 100% any discharge introduced into the ground at the reactor site would reach the Indian River in about l a day. The discharge would be greatly diluted immediately. Because of the proxi-mity and width of the Indian River and the presence of slight flow of ground l water toward the coast line, there is no possibility of subsurface flow ' from the site to the mainlands. Hence the possibility of any intrusion of , accidental releases of radioactivity into mainland ground water supplies is extremely remote. L i 2.1.3.4 Population and Land Use j Aside from the power produced, the construction and operation of the Hutchinson Island plant will have a discernible ef fect, if any, only on ! the population of St. Lucie County directly to the west and on Martin , and Indian River Counties which border St. Lucie County to the north and j south. No inhabited land exists in the Atlantic within a radius-of 100 -t miles to the east. The characteristics of the area within a radius of , 40 miles or more can be summarized as follows: I
- a. An expanding area of the East Coast of southern Florida, having i four principal concentrations of population - around the cities '
of Vero Beach, Fort Pierce, Stuart and West Palm Beach - all ( located in the coastal region; t
HI 1 i
't i
- b. An area of low, mostly flat land with elevations running from 50 l O-feet in the western portion to sea level on the east. The central sections are about 20 ft. to 25 ft. above sea level. Swampy i
areas such as the St. Johns Marsh, Loxahatchee Slough, Allapattah - Flats and a portion of Big Cypress Swamp occupy large parts of
- the study area, ,
i i
- c. Agri-business is the dominant contributor to the commercial economy. Citrus, vegetable and flower culture; cattle raising, .:
including dairying; and related enterprises such as packing ! houses, processing plants, farm equipment and fertilizer sales, i etc., are spread throughout the area;
- d. The tourist attractions, and hence heavier seasonal concentrations ;
of population, are found along the Intracoastal Waterway. i I
- e. The general impression is that of an area which will expand its activities and population generally in the coastal regions with ,
more gradual expansion of the agricultural economy to the west- l ward as more land is suitably reclaimed. j Population l 3 $ Data from the 1970 census has only recently become available for major f political subdivisions. The data given for counties are from this source. [ A population density diagram by sectors for a ten-mile radius from the ! plant is given as Fig. 2.1.3-2 and provides projected population densities by sectors for 1968, 1978, and 1990 based on the 1960 census. -Until the more detailed breakdown of the 1970 census data is available this figure , may serve to indicate the expected population growth in the various sectors. Projections from the more recent data are not expected to vary greatly { from the information given in the figure, j Land Use . l A narrative description of generalized land use patterns in the various .[' subject counties follows. Further information describing agricultural activities and their location within the county is provided in this narrative analysis. - S t. . Lucie County
- a. Location $
I St. Lucie County, with its 540 square miles cf land area, is. ; located on the Atlantic seaboard about 230 miles south of Jacksonville and 120 miles north of Miami. It contains the f proposed site for the planned reactor on Hutchinson Island. j It is bordered on the north by Indian River County, on the l west by Okeechobee County and on the south by Martin County. ' Almost all of its area lies within 25 miles of the plant site and its northwestern corner, the most distant point, is about j 31 miles distant. t l
, ~. . . . . - . . _ - . _ - - - -- -, - .- . . - - .
-H1 1 !
L t I
- b. General Description ;
Like its neighbors, St. Lucie County is also flat. The western three-fifths of its area is largely covered by St. Johns Marsh ; in the northern portion and the Allapat tah Flats to the south. The remaining two-fifth, paralleling the coast, is flatwoods > country but much of the area has been put to. productive use j for cattle and citrus operations. The swampy area varies in i elevation from about 50 feet at the western limits to 25 feet , on the east. The flatwoods run east f rom there to sea level at ! the Intracoastal Waterway. Long, narrow, sandy keys known as Hutchinson Island and Sprang , Island'11e along the entire mainland between the Intracoastal ! Waterway and the Atlantic Ocean. They are separated from each other by Fort Pierce Inlet, opposite the city of the same name. : The area near the proposed plant site is not populated nor is ! most of Hutchinson Island. The portion near Fort Pierce Inlet, , however, does have resort developments on it. "
- c. Principal Population Concentration Fort Pierce, the county seat of St. Lucie County, is located on ;
the west shore of the Indian River, a little north of the center of the county, and a distance of 8 miles from the site.3 Its l 40,330 inhabitants in the City and surroundings in 1970 account ks for over 60% of the entire county's population. - I Port St. Lucie is located in the southeastern corner of the county a distance of 8 miles from the site. - It has an area of I more than 51 square miles, about five times as large as Fort Pierce. It too is an incorporated city and has a population ! of 330 persons.3 Other population clusters are located in the north'at Lakewood , Park; adjoining Fort Pierce at Sunland Gardens, Harmony Heights and Paradise Park; and in the east-central section at Collins' , Park Estates. !
- d. Basic Land Uses I i
The Agri-business Committee of the Fort' Pierce-St. Lucie County [ Chamber of Commerce reports that two-thirds of the land area of. !' the county is given over to the general agricultural industry; 41% pasture land; 23% citrus; and,1% vegetables. The citrus. ,
. figures are somewhat higher than those given in estimates by 3 the Florida Department of Agriculture but are considered acceptable. ;
The citrus groves are, in general, -located in two major: areas in
~
I the northern and central sections of the. county and generally ' west of Fort Pierce. The first area is longitudinal.in direction and about three or four miles inland from Indian River, and ex- , tends about ten miles south of the Indian River - St. Lucie ?
._11_ <
E
, . , ,c-s--- , . e- - - - w-, y v w - w- ,
E : I- l 4 HI 1 1 1 I s County line. The second is connected to the first at its southern extremity and turns west of the first area. The near-est of the major grove concentrations are eight or nine miles l l removed from the site. } l ! ! The cattle-raising region is largely in the western half of the [ l county but not limited to that area, with 41% of the county's l land area given to this use. Small beef and dairy cattle herds j can be found between the citrus areas west of Fort Pierce and ; l west of Port St. Lucie. I i ! Vegetable growing is a much smaller part of the county's agri- f { business. Among the crops produced are tomatoes, squash, cabbage { and dandelions. Of these, tomatoes represent the major money. ! crop. The 2,103 crates reported sold in the year ending June 30, .- 1967, represent 99.6% of the entire reported vegetable crop. l The beekeeping industry produces well over 600,000 pounds of j honey a year. Horse breeding, swine production, poultry farms l and a number of ornamental nursery f arms are also part of the , county's agricultural production. l Industrial employers of St. Lucie County are mainly centered around Fort Pierce. Some of these and their employed-force L brackets are: Bell Division of Ward Baking Company 200 + Employees 10 Packing houses with seasonal 101-200 Employees j employment j 6 Packing houses with seasonal 51-100 Employees F , employment f l Sherold of Florida, Inc. - Quartz 51-100 Employees ! ! Crystals (Electronics) { j Plastic Specialties - Plastic Pipe 26-50 Employees ; !- Fittings -l Rinker Materials Corp. - Concrete 26-50 Employees l
- Products '
Wilson-Toomer Fertilizer Co. - 26-50 Employees l Fertilizer l 12 Miscellaneous Employers 11-25 Employees- ) i
- e. Special Features j I
St. Lucie County Airport is located about two miles northwest of j Fort Pierce and is owned and operated by the Fort Pierce Port and i Airport. Authority. It has four 5,000 foot runways 200 feet wide. l l The east-west runway is equipped with-lighting facilities. The { L airport is approximately 12 miles from the plant site. Two small, private airports - Godwin and Sunrise - are three and a { l- ; I half miles west and two and a half miles southwest, respectively, i I i l- i I ! i { \ i ! 3 L : I,. .
r.y HI 1 of Fort Pierce. Godwin is 12 miles from the plant site and Sun-rise is 10 miles from the plant site. None of the airports in St. Lucie County are served by commercial airlines. The deep-water port of Fort Pierce is federally maintained but owned and operated by the Fort Pierce Authority. It is located at Fort Pierce Inlet and the Intracoastal Waterway, 18 miles north of the eastern terminus of the cross-state canal running f rom Stuart to Fort Myers. The port is served by the Florida East Coast Railway. A coast guard station is located on the cause-way just inside the Fort Pierce Inlet. The publicly owned utilities of the City of Fort Pierce include an electrical power generating plant and a 6 million gallon.per day water treatment plant.
- f. Probable Future Land Uses It is probable that some 15,000 additional acres will be added to jl the citrus production land resources inventory by 1974. Another 30,000 acres are estimated to be added by the year 2000. It is further estimated that 25,000 to 30,000 acres of pasture land will be added during the next 30 years. These changes will come about as the result of the reclamation of swampy lands in the western portion of the county, i
l Martin County
- a. Location
! Martin County is on the East Coast of Florida, with its northern l limits near St. Lucie Inlet. Its county seat, Stuart, is lo-cated about. 25 miles north of the City of West Palm Beach and 18 miles south of Fort Pierce. It is bordered on the north by St. Lucie County; on the west by the Lake and County of Okeechobee; and on the south by Palm Beach County. The land ) area of the. county is within 35 miles of the plant site and j its northern border, north of Jensen Beach, is within six l' miles of the site. l
- b. General Description l
j The topography of this county differs somewhat from its northerly I neighbors. The swampy area of the Allapattah Flats and the Loxahatchee Slough, part of the northern reaches of the Everglades, do not extend fully-to the county's western boundaries. 1
- In the wc. stern third of the county, the flats are interspersed j with large patches of flatwoods. The flats, slough and glades j' regions have more open water areas observable.
3 Agricultural activities in Martin County include cut-flower ] . production. The St. Lucie River, with its connections to i the Intracoastal Waterway, the St. Lucie Canal and.the ocean, ! provide boating and fishing activity. I: t__ - _ _. _
H1 1
- c. Principal Population Concentrations 3
! more than Of the 28,035 persons living in Martin County in 1970,Another population one-half live in Stuart. the small city of Indiantown which is located in persons, is at 26 or 27 miles the south-central portion of the county, aboutSmall concentrations will be found southwest of the plant site. These small at Port Sewall, Salerno, Gomez and Hobe Sound. of Stuart, communities are along the k'aterway southsite, and east ranging from 11 to 22 miles from plant
- d. Basic Land tises As of Agriculture is the primary use of land in this county.
Florida Department of Agriculture reported - - December 1967, the that over 39,000 acres of Martin County were in developed groves. This is almost 11% of its total land area. The County Agent estimates that: The citrus groves may be the end of 1968 cover almost 50,000 acres; There are about 500 acres in the ornamental cut flower tradehorticultural in chry-category planted to supply the santhemums, roses, Easter lilies, and miscellaneous varieties; There are about 20,000 head of beef cattle and a minor number of cattle in dairy herds; include tomatoes, The row crops, planted on 2,500 acres, cucumbers, peppers, and watermelons. The County Agent states that the agricultural activities are located we'st of the Florida Turnpike; the cut-flower operations area because of the cli-are west of and close to the Stuart Lucie River. Residential matic advantages provided by of thethe St.Parkway and, in general, and commercial uses are east and also east of U.S. #1. Some industry is found in Stuart clustered near the airport.
- e. Special Features having mile-Witham Field, a county-owned airport Stuart Airport, outside the city limits of long paved runways, is located just It is 11-1/2 miles from Stuart and at its southeastern No commercial corner.
airlines serve this airport. the plant site. Stuart owns and operates its own water system, supplied by deep wells. The water is subsequently treated. O l HI 1 I Five small municipal parks are within the city. Jonathan Dickinson State Park is located in the southeastern corner of t he county, south of Jupiter. It covers some 16 or 17 square miles and lies within 29 miles of the plant site. Its facilities include picnic tables, refreshments, boat ramps and camp sites. The la rge s t industrial employer is Grumman Aircraf t Engineering Corporation, located at the airport and employing about 300 Smaller industries are: Hoosier Metal Fabricators; people. R&H Fittings; Outboard Marine Corporation; and Southeastern Printing Company. Stuart is a boating and fishing resort, and boatmen and fisher-men increase the transient population on both a year-round and seasonal basis.
- g. Probable Future Uses Based upon the information supplied by such authorities as the City Manager of Stuart, the County Agricultural Agent and local real estate brokers, it is believed that future expansion of industr" will be mainly in the Stuart area and probably near the airport's present industrial cluster.
The residential expansion will be castward toward the Waterway and southward toward Salerno. Some westward expansion is antici-pated between Palm City and the Florida Turnpike. A very large housing development, which will site astride the Martin-Palm Beach Counties boundary, is in the " talking" and promotional stage. It is reported to be some 5,400 acres in size and is intended to serve as the development center for a 17,000 acre improvement. Plans are vague at this time. Commercial developac nt of the Stuart area is now taking place and will be expanded. Indian River County
- a. Location All but a few square miles in the northwest corner of Indian River County lie within the study area. Its most southeasterly point is about 15 miles from the plant site. Its north line, at i ts junc tion with the ocean, is 37 miles north-northwest of the proposed plant site. Its eastern boundary is the Atlantic Ocean and on the west is Osceola County. Its two southern neighbore are St. Lucie and Okeechobee Counties.
- b. General Description A generally flat expanse of land, somewhat poorly drained and
r, 111 1 i
.l i i 1
I ! f having the western three-quarters of its area covered by the St. Johns Marsh, this county is one of the major citrus ; producers of Florida. The general land cover is flatwoods. l Major development has been confined to the eastern one- j quarter, along the coast. Agriculture is dominant in the . ; central section of the county, with cattle raising-spotted ; in several areas but noticeably in the southwestern corner !
- of the county, some 30 miles northwest of the pinnt site. l I (
i c. Principal Population Concentrations l b ! l Of the 1970 population of 35,992, about 60% are concentrated { ? in and around the county seat of Vero Beach. Approximately l 10,000 people live in the northeastern eighth of the county ! and the remaining 2,000 are spread very sparsely around the ! l western two-thirds to three-fourths of the county. -i 3
- . d. Basic Land Uses
! I j Crop use accounts for about 15% of the total county land area. j i l' Pasture and range lands cover about one-third of the county. ! l The largest concentration of citrus groves is along the coastal l l region in the southern three-quarters of the county and lying l l between Interstate #95 and the Intracoastal Waterway. Another i j large, but not so extensive, grove area lies along the St. l Lucie-Indian River Counties boundary and west of 1-95. l l'f l ' ( , The vegetable and other row crop area is mainly concentrated l i in the northern part of the county, midway between I-95 and l the Osceola-Indian River Counties boundary and it covers some 35 to 40 square miles of area.
- Cattle raising has previously been commented upon. In this ;
J connection, it should be noted that the directions of ex-j' pansion are west and north, and mainly in the western third of .l l the county. j i , Some 29,000 acres, about 9% of the county, can be designated as l developing urban area and, with the exception of the Fellsmere I community, about 37 miles northwest of the plant, is along the l Wateneay and the ocean. l i There has been recent and appreciable industrial buildup on the ! mainland around the City of Vero Beach. Among the important l employers are: ! Piper Aircraf t Company, Airplanes 1,835 Employees { Verogrand Corporation, Machinery 100 Employees ! Crosby Builders, Building Supplies 57 Employees ' i-liobart Brothers, Electrode Coatings 35 Employees t
- Templin Fabricators, Trusses 30 Employees l 1 Karnish Instruments,. Aircraft Parts 30 Employees- '
- . Airlite Processing, Permalite 16 Employees
' l Miscellaneous Service Employers 100 Employees l I i .
H1 1 -
- e. Special Features The Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge is located along the Intracoastal Waterway at Sebastian, about 35 miles from the plant cite.
There are two airports in the county - Sebastian Municipal located 35 miles from the plant site at the City of Sebastian and Vero Beach Municipal - located at Vero Beach 20 miles from the plant site. Vero Beach Municipal is served by com-mercial airlines. Sebastian is not.
- f. Other A scenic attraction, McKee Jungle Gardens, about three miles south of Vero Beach on U.S. #1 and a horse breeding farm at Fellsmere bring visitors to those areas.
The City of Vero Beach operates its own water system, having deep wells as its source. Its water plant has a capacity of 6 million gallons per day. The municipality also has its own electrical power generating and distribution facilities.
- g. probable Future Land Uses There is little to indicate any major changes in the types of land use in the future. The extent of use will increase, es-pecially in the coastal region where further urbanization will take place. It is probable that strip development along the route of Interstate 95 will occur in the next few years and that such change will be related to the agricultural expansion in the middle and western parts of the county.
2.1.3.5 Environmental-Baseline The Hutchinson Island site is bordered on the east by the Atlantic Ocean and on the west by the Indian River, a brackish body of water. On the north side of the site is Big Mud Creek, an inlet off the Indian River. The Island itself was covered by mangroves. The perimeter included primarily red and white mangroves and the interior was primarily black mangroves. Mosquito control practices, which started back in the 1930's resulted in the destruction of most of the black mangroves. The destruc-- tion of the mangroves resulted in much of the Island being virtually barren (See Appendix 2 and Figure 2.3.8-1). The Indian River, including Big Mud Creek, was surveyed by FP&L during. the initial site evaluation (see Appendices 3 and 4). It was found that the river supports an enormous amount of manatee grass and several . species of macroscopic algae. This forest contains large numbers of gam-morids, shrimp, isopods, small crabs and juvenile fish. Egg masses and single
HI 1 eggs of various invertebrates are also found. Branches and leaves of plants support large numbers of small worms, attaching algae, diatoms, and protazoa. The benthic population is large, containing many shellfish, tube dwelling worms and crustaceans. The Indian River supports the nursery concept very well. It affords protection and an abundance of food to a great many animals. It is a place where the recycling of nu-trients - organic matter to inorganic matter to organic matter - is a normal process. The growth of plants and animals in the River is heaviest toward the western shore; possibly because of addition of nutrients, in the form of sewage and agricultural run-off, from the mainland. The Intercoastal Waterway channel in the Indian River is not nearly as heavily populated as the normal river bottom. Big Mud Creek, which was given its name years ago because it always appeared to be muddy, has been dredged to a depth of about 55 feet. Dredging in Big Mud Creek is by no means a new practice as a great deal of the fill for Highway AI A was - Padged from it. This creek area has been altered and in the future can be expected to develop its own unique biological system. The Indian River in the vicinity of Hutchinson Island supports speckled trout, channel bass, snook, sheepshead, and mangrove snapper. Commercially, black mullet and blue crabs are caught and some bait shrimp are taken. Shellfish, oysters and clams, were harvested in fair quantities until July 1970, when this practice was banned because of pollution from sewage discharges (see Section 2.3.6.1.2). Short term ecological investigations of the ocean off-shore from the site were conducted in February and June 1969, and in April 1970. (The find-ings of these studies are presented as Appendix 3). These studies, which included investigations at a total of 62 sites covering the area in a six mile radius from the plant site, showed the ocean bottom to be devoid of any important sessile marine resources. The species observed included some scallops at one station about six miles off-shore, sand dollars, tube worms, anenones, starfish, sea urchins, and hermit crabs. No grasses, attached vegetation, or reef outcroppings were in evidence. Hutchinson Island, and Jupiter Island immediately to the south, are signifi-cant as nesting areas for sea turtles. In 1968, it was reported that 5,265 turtles nested on Hutchinson Island. Nearly,all of these were loggerhead; only 15 nests were those of the now rare green sea turtle. Commercial fishing in St. Lucie County was a $593,000 business in 1970.
~
The amount of fish taken that year was representative of the fishing prevalent over the past six years. About 74 percent of the fish taken are pelagic and were caught during migration in Florida waters. These include the bluefish and king and_spanish mackerel. Twenty-three percent of the fish were taken from the Indian River. Black mullet comprised most of this catch. In the past few years extensive scallop beds.have been developed off-shore from Cape Kennedy and southward to Fort Pierce. These beds are primarily in 10 to 40 fathom water. In 1970, 154,300 pounds of scallops with a dock-side value of $146,500 were harvested by St. Lucie County fishermen. a -
[. L1 I H1 1 1 l The mangroves which covered Hutchinson Island plant site and much of the other area on the of f-shore island prior to the initiation of the mosquito control program in the 1930's and 1940's provided a very effective breed-i ing and refuge area for many different species. The shallow pools around l the roots of the mangrove.e provided a habitat well suited for many species. from plankton through juvenile forms of crustacean and fish. Insects and j' some reptiles and small mammals inhabited the higher areas and birds used ! j the trees for rockeries and fed in the pools. Some larger animals, such ! 4 as racoons, cougars, otters, and deer, would also frequent the mangrove i areas. p With the destruction of the mangroves, from mosquito control operations, this ecological community dissolved and the area became barren. This was the case at the plant site prior to construction activities and is the case in many areas of the of f-shore island at the present time. i i 2.1.3.5.1 Air Quality The air quality of the si te has never been studied. However, considering g the limited sources of air pollution in the area and the distances from ' 4 the site, the air quality is expected to be very high.
- Because of the distances from possible sources of pollution to Hutchinson I 2
1sland and the fact that the predominant wind is f rom the easterly sec tor, . there is expected to be an insignificant effect on the air quality at the , site. ) I The background suspended particulate concentration at the site, due to i dust, pollen, etc., is expected to be in the range of 20-30 ug/m3, ! f I i References l 1. Barraclough, Jack T., Eround Water Resources of Seminole County, j Florida, U.S.G.S. and Florida Geological Survey, Report of ! Investigations No. 27 1962. i ! i
- j. 2. Bermes, Boris J., Interim Report on Geology and Ground Water
~
l Resources of Indian River County, Florida, Florida Geological Survey, ! [ Information Ci rcular No. 18, 1958. I f a
- 3. 1970 Census of P.*pulation PC(VI)-11 Florida (Advance Report), [
i- December 1970, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the ! [ Census, Washington, D.C. j !$ l
- i s 2
-1 5 f
- )
I
- till I
i j' ~19- l l-i t s_.~____~_.___..._.__ _ _~_ _ ._
y I l a . . . . , . .. . s - W
' , i l
(, i
. .s.. .
t I . . . . .- . .. . / .-
. . . ... . + ... . . .
.* . 1i .. ,
.3
, . * ,.,*- s :
. . . , '..i..
g 3
. . _ . Q. J ; ' -
. },f ( . :; - . _ . _ . }\, ' * + g
.y
' i
> m
. .. ;Q. . ..-, ,1. v..,. _
E ' s c. y,. . . . . , . , . , , ."w .;;e1,4;xm
,4
- m
- . ,v. .. - '
.y( -
- t
.s,..
7a.. T; .}).y.5% W... .g%.p.
.w . .
(u..: x&re +, - h g f ~ Q&x ;~Q. ..; .
.a
. . ..l? g m.>jg J.,:. g ..=
- 5. @.g , q:: e. ..,r.
- e m. u4 m :; ;wy 4 'c ,
J L 9.; ., .'f J j = %,
..<n..a :w./. :. ? .
i l w.- n;. fw l y e. v m. + .w x . .: .s - c: .,.., 4. g;p3.49'.. T., f! I .
- w. 9x Q e p. ,g: ; 3,;. .
,- . _..'.,,;,,.7 u+.~
, . , . . . . ._ , , ' . . - , n.. w. c
, . [ .r.q .- *
#;; y w _y.y. ) . . , G,. .. ; -. .:. /
' .. .4. - . y ,.
't
[h' } b.* A.'$ j'
, .{ ,[ as v ]-
*i; '.eCl c
;a;4
[. g.4fi,,,
. t,
. '; .l'
* ' o j+','.....'.., ...,a gy ',.'...:..';..".
;.f . - -' ,hi- '
- . . :;,., "j,' ,; ,.-;. , .. . .. _. .. k, WI -
. x.
l-
?
'.p. _7.
d .- ::.: , - a .
'y' e
.,,3*,<j ;& _
,,- Q I I
, l; .e se _p:
+.,'4 15.} ,;. ' '
v 9% #* , , ,
. . . . ' ' * ' 'y ea t .j{ ,4,-
L
, , . } u v. .,. '
. ' c, y ' y. . y 0.w) .'k
' .[
g,} t,p-' ;' ' ' ', "'U,'.., w'
-l .
, g .
4 El ) p; Q lhf j
'g,[# - j 't.
+
^
- m. MQm.
( , h w,Y Wi. f 9~.3. f[e . i~ y :,.y .
, . 2A ~I[3;q "
gp ff hf .
. 3 '_ '
77 n' '. - W . ,' ' [m e p f '".Qh f,~f,y ', g-. . . lx. l' ; %.y.sy,j. ' {vf? '
%:^' '
n' 1
;< ^
n
. b.: w a. . .; Q i m. , -
~~. ?n.eff,^ l 0 r
!, - $;l 7 ,
&f.ff . lf' .l I :.! fy;, ::
W f N ~Q. . -G i_ f ,:l, n
, h. -
* ' r' _c
[ ' ,, h Gs ... .[b,[ . 'q e-m9 ., + 'M.ie- M v e>,W> r- 3 _.3Q ' b.n N' r ~ *.
.* &e .f,(p s . jg.vg __. :h ' w g qu
'; Lg,. r
'w;. %yA
\
l yr 6; , . s ,X^ ,
.' , ViQ
- G+d~: n+l s .a,,
- 1 e
yh: l:M ,>+x
'm. n-n
! ?.. u fe_']
%Q h6%- ,
f{f:)ffh ,
$l' _ Ah hjkN
.g m, .
_ 1
,j r
, & ~
pf. r y
>f, 6f/
_f 3i 4' 2 L_ '
*9 #
f mm .$ __,%.. .g
?+ - w a c
m' a _ 24aw n, , , ~j m<7 y.g ,
.- .~ .,, u. , '
Wt p jp,:7 -
.m. . ..._ _ _ . , , -
- z. :* .m.,.
> m, /Cu A>e; p- p ;
t =_
, g ;* . .s/
. . . 'y -
- b. $,g i
~ ^ n& wg-.
s .s ~,? + . n 3'x '
, ~ .
i
- N ' .. c s) .f.m& 4;,;;M
? .g. Me - af 'll;pa&}:y:z e
C j . [ 5 '( ' L,p{g !.a nl$.. n>
;s - ,,
m s & M O}fpi Q p y
?w r.= . wp% .
, +
- m. v
; y '
.y -n. u
; y ,j Q$y,;
m' ,_
...m...
Wee +wp_ q}- L. . m' q 4Wgg%w,g:geQ gig g Q. 2s ' 9: 4,
.,y 6,ry '.;
n. Mv. i, y' . -y1 - <
, ' s ;4*, ;
/y , t 5r
_e:f,.;kM , -; -
'y/ . pgp p, g **' g V. : . $ (A j g- ,g, 7- ..
g& n p, 3
,.ym.; ,
v, > L % 3w;a- . u "P &
^
T HUTCHINSON ISLAND PLANT 1.m u.u. m ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT
~
._~.a~.w.4%~.,....>,m.,,,7..-,,~~-
,o
- m. .
. .- .~ ; c-. . c. METEOROLOGICAL STATION
-~.
d7 e
-.t' rw
- . - [ b N ( .fif'* O * ! / % hm~,_w_+~-_ ..
A FIG. 2.1.3-1 ' MN'sW &%:2 .o.W' % Qi': C'^*%) M. 4.;L + ..,Y.4* r*((b'.g rm, . 7f 'g.p a I y y s ;a ff. 'y <* f. 4 ' D '.- ' 0.? " (m+*
. w?u, Lam 'v w.
mm., _.- % M' S W,.i l m- *"% V h_ e r.9;.r* q~a:" "%,%s a..
- w. e N s. *y ,
.a---
- '68 4% ,
e78 s1% -
'90
, s9e
',D '
$ y I . , e i
t~ sbS ' 8 o at s J 0 % 9 y q Ai ., k,.
?
e@w s,mo 1
- M q
, e ,
F 1 I .& = m0 '
! V o"-
{ _ k o0 0 e QN'1 l C Q c+gsq l k oSSh s. *
$ fat k. . , *@ -
7* i [I h 03 gr\ ' y_ s &-# b .d.-# s t ; ,,.f.. ,;d l t
'g
\ Q.,?.-m c:. . < #'i
/
. * *,-<g. .pOo :,'o *>n '
#\ r g...a.8
-.. :. p e 1x -.Ar
- (
s b.' (. 3 J S
- c 4
,Y
~
,.---? 3 o - i li~
,, ,- o
.r'"
3M $ o.
- 5. [5 \
-mh" f; b hk..E ' *
(-
+
-4. m,. p .v
/.,././' # ,4,j ar- _ ,,s? ' .,.pC g ,
o 4#.-
- AmMs.Qn b,;[jdiC< a t./ . . .,, -
%ve d 4 44 C , w\. 7 "c: --
-9 y4 p
9 -s -s
*I
* *4 3
./. p~ < . sQ.4*' N . -_
. sy-f. ,S=
,< g e % *M_' m._ Q . . V .< % MQ t
- f,3.e y*: .C Q-
. r.Qib Q . /. % , J:'yn
- l I ,p, .
g:p c . -. c - I', ,-_ , b -. - l% ?, h W Q b5[~ i$'. :---
!; .4 5;i; G, i
~,
sCa f, ,* nq r' R. *N'" ~ .. d i _%. ... -_h:ti x - # 'i 'W ' . -d.- , 4 *' y ~
- x. s.p-[;
--r ,* '. . J l t p
gk,q. w wl" _ ' nw i ' e .- 7 s i y is, '
~ '
. f.,g@g4 c' .m v% - p
.g ;T g u' ,
) ,. * , . : * "M'r ? .' -+. - . . .
+
ims.. l 3 ,w . . . p .. , ,, N ,th;g
)~
, _,
- M!. s^
, - 1,j'N !. .&'I a.,
- 8 U dE w e [mhw ~, r, _-< .
5 h ' [m M h}?f.{f. h,, -h< h*"1 - 1 f Y' u. (1 ),w ,h @ ka' 3 O o,g ,-- .
. y 4 c s . . .
r4 , - [-~ ~ g .
', i . 1 ! . ,
M,a - i I Ji ,( r 4 5 L. f " i, s
- w. 4 y
=.
y s,, y." A..,.+ %.+ m+%'J
.c
; '~T T ,"('* 4 K,
,g . . yr A . 6= 9
,. M,. ~ '/.~.,
.v -
. .s. g y
.~p
. ,, SJ- ~g - # g. ..-
. ; 5 + y:t -
4(w .c, W ., ,- 4I' 49 4 '. " '4
; w; .
e .:
. h- C p g p.p Lm m%
4y b 2
=$
N 4 M, i 8- -- 4 f . a . p? p%- a ;5.g4w 6 ~1 .s.. e 1
. -a: i'g 1
'E ! tm 8 ." k.,1#3:b,i h' , j A5 l.% ('Si y ~z* ?'
- 4'*. . * . _. 3,:
h ~g p.'.. m+t . v" p i,jgr
.ga-d. r.-.j-n
-*; $h.-?x;s^$ [.y c A' .'
a ( , ' ,7jg i l-- - .% \ w. ,.__ :q(_ . _ . ,1. . '. 5P. n; j ' n ., ,,W w. 9-- p W)3%q% ..,q. c:
,+..y
% ...~,4
% g . 4 _ g< q
- - .c
- .. m;,.
y
- n. ,"p- . " =,.e&* .,a .
g. J g
,"i .
e H
, F, r o( e., %. 7 q 3-
* ' ~
- j ." j,
$ENI:n[Ok,5.dANS.W J..E.='k L* I.40 2A. 5 r .!'
- g 3,wRh. M. ..%.f4 ,M, j g .. 00 f.[ \;)
.. a.- .... ,
. . ~ ,~~, w - - .
n..,.,. ..- u . .,
. .~ .e.a.u. _.,,,,p.., ,p,, y,;. .s.s. ., . .
#4pe -
.. a hs nns-~ +,- ,
,cp .
.f=g.
g' ,.4
,j.
- 66. ,
. p, . . . . ,&-.
, -, - +-. -
,P j
,,, +~ @ ,
-l . .. ( s" p t7g _; * ' N ;* t - p, = i B-
-i v,,-s..,s - .w , .
s.m.a, ., . p-m _m_
.p
, .. . _ 2 A. 6 , _a a
.-p..' s. .'
6-
-. .., i e c,
3.
.~
s, a ,
' I k' ,
- k -$S
' f '-- 5 ,# ,e $ e g ter a sa
- y pm .e M .a .,a7" l. 'I * ,
p-9.F ,y?;-j, ._J pg 1^ " u *,. . 4 ;
];
*3k g
,J- . - W-M, ;, i
+
. .
- Aw s. J s-
[8 T ;- kg 6
,a y =g, ' .'
, ;. ,.}
t
%w& . ~ ~ . . , .
,t gg !
k, ' m =*6 , . 's L .. E
, ye . , - '
.C s. g " ;n a- +
,m_..,y .*h.e _m, *b l . .
.. J
<-. >, .* 3 6. ., .4 ., .. . g , ,
-i *' 8 b
,' r-8 1,- -
'[
.v.' .
s b' 8'.
. . < - - - ---._; 4, . J 2 p.. 2. o , . ;
. 6 4 4
, . .M.. w. m. .i. . = -y t"=.y .. ,
=w em *g } , _ . . .
,b
- _g e - - . l . *3*
- hi. 7(I d
,(~7-*y-
~
J
=
} . ., g4 j , ,, ., .,*j g 4 ,, y{, , f ,; ,& ) ,* 3 j
, c, +,a. -
;g g ;- :. -
.E e i q / & ., ,, s . .-- .g 4. i 1,m. E-. - . 7*'
, I h. ..L..
^ !:
. . . ' M'
^
-...-.5 l
..% . 1 l
i
. -- c'TirmsintererefterFPPename=saussfuessumisesiunamanseeunpr e
. ~ - ,/
~ og ~ -
, -7 ,
~
~ 9g' ~ 05 .. ' ;g :E 99* ~
g, o vs. ,mds
- O .p Y r
B 06 s p &t-C, p^Mh
.a- ., x s W .M f
- r. Ip;
~ls 8t, ~ ^*
y g~ f L f, s - 90 89 s ~ o6
.fe .,p.g=,q M y 9 ,y, ~,-,,-s. -
- v
- A 4;s. Gj^ -
6 t, s } eg . !
~
Sf'
- V -
l l
$, Of _ ' M C=f
. p 42 - -
- s. . a
#?ar NN C o # -
Ykkk' !
,t
-g j .+ d y-fs~#
N3 # Q
.g
/3,.3,,/d'[td IpTE' $ y.N ?' /
&hWfhf ... .g
'V \
g% a:: - 5J f, . 1
., C . .g / aj . ' ;;; -W n'* % ' FN 1 w.q. . . ,co.'
&. ,D /. -.t ,i ch< , ;,. s.q_
.~
1 }
/ 1 - ./ ; g r oJ. - $: .. ; , , f fr Mt o
,S/.s, : + ,-Qs% 3 ~ .ew s- , -. , J. a:
mf. ^ ,j t
-.. ; < :.: ce - -
ss., ' q pg y 8 D~ a;, . p .
% &. ; - s -
+;.y.
n. s .g .
.g 3 y/#1Qi o g ,e r,w ys.. .u.:&e : r 3.-
- y %.. e Q ,t y . .
+
d, % ; ,- e e .&.
, /
o Y' e - k' a
'e - n. y>t ,Q g.:q
) 9 ,
.X;*
V . e ca . O '. j ."$ : .n % - ? e, g.jj~ . a j:s ecvM Tg/),T* - ,e , - , l ; gfRi'~4 e a. . g+Qf w-l
./ i g . . ) i gg.
,, *jy ,, -
..g t._ ;. 1 ,
g.w..nl , .
.t S. .Q.p t < m t .; g.,
s - - i
- %Je- m es. .
, ...e ,y
, ) j *t* . {f
~
?) ~~
).' y W u
~
.y Q p.Q;b./ j# N[u
. F
- =
rdp >
<p
.m
~ ~ a ', y
.? k G s.
4 8 - y ry_r n;i p a- <-
,l- '
a ,' ? . %y p" .. sg e ,W, m , >, /r y nw .t-
, i; 0
].! .y.- 4% 1s, - ~
f - j w.q ,. j,1 y e Q f %, 8h [ j h : g 30.0 .p A ,, .y ; c _ ,p]N.% . ' 'g. , )
,*qs ?o,,'.f ;r &y' yf;~ ' l %
gyl,.g,4wg
~
Qf- n.I .g m % ;. ,"; a. - i,s . , -M.- v--- :.u:.- l- -},.:-f . a ,:,, :Y t y r 89 ; ' .' 9f0 y. @ g-
'y q4 1 ( ,_ j t g ,
's
, ^
9 j q{ip ; ^ ] ,"
. 'p i KNSTECN 7 ;
d '
- g. e g #j,l_XPERTUR f Y}i SF ~ '
t .# , J C A R D u' _ W.%Ji _.._L i
-) '
j
, ~ . . ,
--j 4,
m
, '; l
, - f,- ' -" w .
4
,7 '
^ ~ Alsofwailable on L p[i g,
.( /f f'oOgo 4, - . .
3 gpsttyre Cat g, L j l 3
#. _ ...m. _ u _2
-- -#, sbD"DM q, W df, j9 'W'l{
,. t w /8 &f_ .- i i m .- - , ., ,
g- --
--- ] . , ,, ,
566- 500 za . N jf '-V'4$' } 4' 7
- ss Lr' !
06)' '
' 'I S [ "y 1 n y, J , .i ig0 l'900 P ~ -- " ~ ~ d "
" 'n, *' - "
r ,9 , - i :. y" i - g-e P '. g,> . , e
*,f y - -
r yr fC, O 1 l } -l,s p x , t i i.: .
._f .[s ,: : _.
-- e _ _ .-
4
,c. . _% ' s ,- .
} , /
/' , s- ,y '
3_. 5/ e 3 4CT 0.' l
'[ '*=4.:,f.r y , ,. [
'a. ' '
.}k.-- . i- ;$' ---. r A2,f '
g. o , a v '
- 5
,1 '
, HUTCHINSON ISLAND PLANT
/
' ~
4-g4 .g m ; . '
/
^# 8 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT i.L d. I< POPULATION DENSITY p ..e ric. 2.1.3-2 f " u.-
. ~ = _ _ _ . _ (-mygg ~ gggggy _.
.,. u y
111 1 2.1.4 ELECTRICAL POWER SUPPLY AND DEMAND O-The requirement for new generating capacity from Hutchinson Island is best . understood in the light of the historical growth of power requirements on' l Florida Power & Light's system together with projections of this growth ' into the future. The FP&L system is one of the most rapidly growing in , the country. In 1970, electric sales increased 13% during the year for a total increase since 1960 of 233%.1 This can be compared with a growth. I of 104% since 1960 for the nation. In terms of generating capacity this , increase was 213% since 1960 against an increase for the nation of only ! 101%. This tremendous increase in demand is, of course, due to the popu-lation growth in the State of Florida and increased per capita use of electricity. The 1970 census figures show that Florida's growth was , second only to that of California when the total number of new residents is considered, and second only to that of Nevada on a percentage basis. ! This influx of people has since the end of World War II resulted in con-tinually increasing demands for power. As willEbe seen on Figure 2.1.1-1, [ the Florida Power & Light's system covers a large portion of the State j and especially those areas in which population growth is most intense. l In order to meet the continually increasing demand, generating units of I increasing size have been added at least annually to the system, and in j several years two units per year have been added. Committments for equip- i ment and construction services are made as a result of a continuous study ; of area load, growth patterns and forecasts of market and regulatory f conditions affecting unit economics and delivery and construction schedules. ! For example. Hutchinson Island plant equipment was committed in the fall of ; 1967 and construction contracts were finalized in the summer of 1968, some j five years in advance of the then scheduled completion date of spring 1973. j Since that time construction difficulties and regulatory delays have ex- i tended the schedule to 1974. I Table 2.1.4-1 portrays the growth of the FP&L system load and generating f capability for the years from 1961 to 1970, inclusive. The projected ! Icad for the period 1971 - 19'/5..and the presently planned program of I expansion of generating capability are set forth in Table 2.1.4-2. ' The excess of generating capability over peak load is called " reserve". 1 Adequate reserve capability is necessary to cover a variety of contin- f gencies such as actual load being greater than forecast, and equipment, i plant and transmission line outages for maintenance. If adequate re- l serve were not provided, loss of service continuity and reliability ! would occur which in turn would result in great hardship on our energy- } dependent scciety. ! t Adequate reserve is generally considered to be 15-25% of the peak load. ' The generation addition program set forth in Table 2.1.4-2 was planned to cover not only the annual growth in customer load but in addition to pro-vide at all times an adequate reserve. , If forecasts of time required for regulatory approval, equipment. delivery and construction are correct and the units planned come in on schedule, then ! r I
?
f
TABLE 2.1.4-1 FLORIDA POWER 6 LIGl!T COMPANY SUMMER PEAK LOADS AND SYSTEM CAPABILITY 1961 - 1970 Peak Load Year 15-Min Gross - MW Capability MW 1961 1636 1963 1962 1874 2263 1963 2163 2538 3964 2419 2938 1965 2693 3597 1966 3038 3498 1967 3338 3898 1968 4004 4298 1969 4563 5125 1970 5230 5569 l
-i l
O i I
-20A-a i
e l l I t TABLE 2.1.'4-2 FLORIDA POWER 6' LIGHT COMPANY l PROJECTED SUMMER PEAK LOAD & PLANNED GENERATION EXPANSION-1971 - 1975 l Projected 15-Min Capability Total % i Year Peak Load-MW Addition-MW Capability-MW Reserve l 1971 5910 1172 6741 14.1 l r 1972 6670 1128 7869 18.0 ! l 1973 7530 400 8269 9.8 ! I I 1974 8500 1650 9919 16.7 ! i 1975 9600 800 10719 11.7 ! l l t 1 i G i' ! i-b l t l l
'~
i; .j I I e l 1
-20B-i
< I J
L HI 1 i j load increases are met, and reserve margins are adequate. If, after com-mitments are made, regulatory processes lengthen or equipment or construction. is delayed, then schedules are not met, reserve margins shrink or disappear entirely, and the system's ability to meet load increases and maintain're- ! liable continuity of service, is jeopardized. If such delays become apparent l early in the schedule, actions can be taken to supplement the expansion program to mitigate the consequences of the delay. If, however, delay occurs after construction is far advanced, as is the case with Hutchinson Island plant, very few steps can be taken to offset the delay. , Because of the extremely long period of time to bring generating capability into being, it is of critical importance that delays in construction schedules be minimized. 4-l l All other systems are characterized by the same expansion and generation fi addition patterns, and all are beset by the same contingencies which could result in delay. All systems have experienced delays and reserve margins l are low throughout Peninsular Florida and the entire southeast. The re-port of the Southeastern Electric Reliability Council2 reports reserves of only 13% for the summer of 1971, and the adequacy of reserves in ensuing. years depends on dozens of generatsing projects remaining on schedule and entering service as planned. FP&L cannot, however, practically depend on electric generating capability outside Florida. The long transmission , lines that would be required are subject to normal transmission losses and to natural hazards such as hurricanes and tornados. Sound' engineering planning for system reliability requires the siting of adequate generation near each load center, and then interconnecting generation sites with strong transmission inter-ties. When backed up by emergency inter-ties with other Florida systems, maximum reliability and continuity of service- , to customers is achieved. j ,. 1 I I i References l l 1. Florida Power & Light Company Annual Report for 19 70 FP&L, l Miami, Florida, j I i
- 2. Southeastern Electric Reliability Council, Coordinated Bulk Power j
- Supply Program, Report to
- The Federal Power Commission and Cognizant State Public Service Commissions, in Response to Federal I 1 Power Commission order No. 383-2, 1971-1980, April 1, 1971. !
1 i. 4 i H 1 I j ! p -> l l
i HI 1 l l f 2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL APPROVALS AND CONSULTATION { The following discusses the zoning, planning, water quality, air quality, , dredging, fish diversion, and construction effects with respect to the consultations held and the approvals and licenses secured. : Zoning j Af ter discussion with the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission, ; an application for a zoning classification change f or the Hutchinson Island' l site was filed with them on February 6, 1968. After an advertised public hearing was held, the creation of a public service district was recommended l by the Planning and Zoning Commission to the St. Lucie County Commission. ! Advertised public hearings were held on May 21, 1968, June 33, 1968, and i July 2, 1968. The St. Lucie County Commission approved the rezoning as ! a Public Service District by letter of July 9, 1968. A copy of this letter , is enclosed as Exhibit A in Appendix 5. l l Planning i Discussions were held with the St. Lucie County Regional Planning Council ] in mid-1968. This council which is concerned with economics and land use , planning is to be distinguished from the St. Lucie County Planning and l Zoning Commission which is concerned only with zoning matters. Discussions j have also been held with the Director of the Florida State Department of l Community Af fairs at Tallahassee and with Homer E. Still, Chief of the j Bureau of Planning of the Florida Department of Administration. Informal { discussions havc been held with the Director of Planning of the Atlantic ! office of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. These or- ; ganizationa do not issue permits and licenses. . Water Quality Certification has been obtained from the State of Florida. To establish the statutory background for this certification, a copy of Chapter 28-5 j of the Florida statutes " Rules of the Florida Air and Water Pollution Control Commission" is included as Exhibit B in Appendix 5. The Florida j water quality standards were approved by the United. States Department of ; the Interior by letter of January 17, 1969, to Governor Kirk of Florida, l included as Exhibit C in Appendix 5. The certification of the Department of Air and Water Pollution Control of the State of Florida was conveyed i in the. Department's letter of February 12, 1971, to Florida Power and { Light Company. A copy of this letter is enclosed as Exhibit D in Appendix 5. Relevant statutory authority is cited in the above and l subsequent attachments. l Dredging l I Approvals were required from the Corps of Engineers, Department of the Army, l and from the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund of the: State of Florida for the dredging of the access channel into Big Mud Creek and for ; I l t l i i u w s- - -- -- n - - ~yp r--- n- - ~ - , , - - - - ,mr , - a .+ - - , , - - --m ---
d t lI HI 1 ! i 1 i ! fill dredging. The Internal Improvement Fund was established as early as !' 1854 for the purpose of administering Florida State owned lands and for '!j protecting the interests of the public in such lands. Under Florida L statutes, Chapter 253. Title 17, Public Lands and Property, the Fund has ; { title to submerged lands throughout the state and must approve all dredg- l i ing permits on navigable waters. Amendments in 1967 to Section 253.123 : ) and related subsections require biological and ecological studies before '
- j. dredging permits can be issued. Attachments E and F are approvals from j the Corps of Engineers for the Hutchinson Island dredging. Attachments l l G, H, and I are permits from the Trustees of the Internal Improvement ')
j Fund of the State of Florida for the barge access channel and the removal i of fill. I I l c No permit is required from the National Center for Air Pollution Control l l for this installation, nor is a permit concerning air pollution required ! l f rom the Florida Air and k'ater Pollution Control Commission. ) I l l I i 4 i i , 1 i 1 . j i i r i I l 1 I i l-b I i l' l l i i P 1 i _ ._ _ _ _ _ _ _._ k
. . _ . _ . _ _ . . ~ . . . . . . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ . _
i n ! HI 1 l; i f i { j- 2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED FACILITY l 2.3.1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY ! 1 i r The impact of the plant construc tion and operatien on land use will be ! , minimal. Neither the present nor future use of the land in the vicinity j j will be affected and nearly two miles of beach will be preserved in its ' } natural state for the enjoyment of the public. i j The present use of land within a 25-mile radius has been discussed in i q detail in Section 2.1.3. The construction and operation of the plant is , expected to have effects as follows: i
)
j a. Industria] Operations " i No industrial operations of any size are now carried out in the ; vicinity of the site. Small concerns in the area are, to a l large extent. associated with the building and citrus industries, l and it is difficult to see that they would be in any way affected , by the plant. . b. Transportation -l During the construction of the plant, some of the heavier com . j ponents will be shipped to the site through the inland waterway i ] and Big Mud Creek. There will be increased truck traffic on l l State Road A1A and probably on State Road 70, connecting to the ' j florida turnpike. Route A1A will, of course, be used by the i employees at the plant during its operating life. With less than
; 75 employees at the site, the passenger car traffic in the area will not be noticeably affected. Trucks will be required for a
the transport of new fuel. Their route will probably be l cver the south bridge on the island and then directly to the ) Florida turnpike. The possibility of using barge transport for spent fuel is presently being considered. k c. Recreational Uses l l The site has no developed recreational areas. The beach is used by the public for bathing and fishing and the Big Mud Creek and Blind Creek areas are used for fishing. There is casual use l-of other areas for camping and hunting. FP&L does not anticipate that the project will result in change in these uses.
- d. Wildlife Preserves i
l ! Since most of the site area will be preserved in its natural state, it will continue to serve as a refuge for migratory , water fowl and other water birds. l' i l i l l ._. - _ .
=
i
+
). !.- H1 1 'l i , l- l ( , g e. Population Distribution j i , The only direct effect will be a slight increase in permanent ! residents in the area as a result of the operating staf f of the i plant. The less than one hundred or so families involved will j have a proportionally limited effect on the growing population ! l of St. Lucie County. j 4
- f. Waterways j j
There will be some use of the inland waterway as mentioned above, , but there will otherwise be no effect on either the Indian River J j waterway or the Atlantic. { , g. Military Installations and Concentrations of Hazardous Materials j l
- There are no military installations in the nearby area. The closest installation is Patrick Air Force Base approximately 60 i j miles to the north. No small Installations at closer distances l
l are known. There are no known concentrations of hazardous I }. materials such as explosive stores, chemical warehouses, or ; j ammunition depots within the area. I ;
- - 2.3.1.1 Impact of the Facilitv l 1
i i j Regarding the future use of the land, it .seems reasonably safe to predict -l ] that Hutchinson Island will follow the pattern of other similar Florida j , beaches and the precedent set by the developments now present at both ends of the island. If and when water supplies become available to the l as yet uninhabited center portion of the island, it can be expected that i , housing developments will appear and the area will be occupied,. possible ! l to a large extent by retirecs, by- summer and winter visitors, and by a
- transient tourist population. It is difficult to conceive any'way in j which such a development would be affected by the Hutchinson Island plant _,-
l particularly as the FP&L property will provide a buffer zone between the nearest privately held land, both to the south and north, and the plant j l area itself. It is believed that keeping this nearly two miles of beach j in its natural state for the convenience of visitors will serve as a i i considerable attraction, both to the permanent residents of Hutchinson l Island and to the tourists on which so much of Florida's economy depends. : . i 2.3.1.2 Preservation of the Environment- ! t j o As discussed above, plans are under development which will.both preserve l j the natural ecology and protect the indigenous wildlife while at the same i F time provide some accass to the beach for the public for swimming, fishing, [ picnicking, etc. FP&L's intentions and concepts were first discussed with representatives of the National Park Service, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and 3 i e Wildidfe, the Bureau of Recreation and others on April 16, 1969. ! { 2.3.1.3 Historic Sites i ' There are no sites -or locations either in the plant site or on Hutchinson ! V Island of any known historic significance. There is a' local t radition that ' 1 J 1 ! J , I .
. - . - - - . - ~ ~ _ .- - - .. _.. -.-. - .. ,-~ ~-- -.- --..- -
I HI 1 1 1 , 9 there may be Indian mounds within the site area and a.few have been iden-tified. It'is doubtful that any will be encountered during construction but appropriate steps will be taken through the proper State agencies 'to 1 i properly preserve anything of archaeological or other'importance, if found. -j A few fossils of possible interest have been found during excavation and ! brought to the attention of Florida State geologists. "The National Register i of Historic Places"I and the Federal Register 2 have been consulted and the i only two sites listed as being even close to the area are the Pelican Island i National Wildlife Refuge and the Site of Salvors Camp for Spanish Wrecks. i Both sites are near the town of Sebastian in upper Indian River County and i ' are more than 30 miles from the site. At this distance, no effect from the ! plant is considered possible. A letter from the Advisory Council on Historic j Preservation of the Department of Interior (copy enclosed in Appendix 6) states that "no properties are affected which are listed on the National Register" and raises no comment. Letters from the State of Florida Board of Archives and History and a map of the area are also enclosed in Appendix-6. The map shows the location of middens and mounds of possible interest l all away from the plant area. FP&L cooperation in preserving sites of ; historic significance is acknowledged. t I t' References
- 1. The National Register of Historic Places 1969, United States '
t J. Department of the Interior-National Park Service, Washington, D.C. ' O 2. Federal Register, Vol. 36, No. 35, p. 3316, Feb. 20, 1971, and
- for March 2, 1971, p. 3931.
I b t
'?
4 i 4 l l l
-i O
i
' .}
a.--._
.e_. . - - _ . . , . , . _ . . ~ -. .., - . - - -.. -------#
_._ _ ~- _ . . . - - - _ _ _ _ - __- _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ ~ _ . _ . _ _ _ b HI J i e. L l 2.3.2 WATER USE COMPATIBILITY l-l The only cooling water employed will be that takon from and returned to
- the Atlantic Ocean. The procurement of the necessary permits for the. use
! and discharge of this water is discussed in detail in Section 2.3.3.6. The l fresh water requirements are relatively small, and this water will be pro-cured from the City of Fort iierce Municipal System. Any water rights necessary will be part of the contract now being negotiated with the City. The f resh water resources available to the City of Fort Pierce are con-
- -sidered to be more than adequate for all foreseeable future demands.
- 2. 3. 2.1 Seawater Temperatures and Curren ts Seawater temperatures are now being measured and continuously recorded from a point offshore. roughly corresponding to the intake and discharge locations.
- Table 2.3.2-1 shows the temperatures at five-day sample interval s, the daily maximum and minimum values for the surface and bottom 1cvels during the first six months for which the continuous calibrated recording station has been operated.
l t During the period July 12 to July 20, 1969, a series of current measure- I 4 ments was conducted'at a location approximately 1500 ft. offshore in a !
- ' water depth of approximately 25 f r. The current meter was located approxi- l mately 9 ft. below the water surface. Continuous measurements of speed and j 1
direction were obtained. 1 i l I The currents were generally oriented parallel to the sh'oreline. The pre- ! j dominant currents were directed south; however, reversal of currents to the i j north and slack currents occur for short periods of time. The threshold of j the' current meter (propeller type) is estimated at 0.1 ft./sec. There ; seemed to be some correlation in current direction with the 24.8 hr. tidal ' period; however, the correlation was very weak. The predominantly southerly j current direction may be due to a reported weak counter current of the Culf Stream. The maximum south and north currents are 1.2 ft./sec. and l 0.6 ft./sec., respectively. Periods of apparent slackwater were observed l j to occur for durations up to eight hours. A histogram of the measured cur- . j- rents for this 8-day period is presented in Fig. 2.3.2-1. ! i i 4- There are no known water quality standards, either State or Federal, con-cerned with the gas concentrations and chemical composition of the seawater. The shape of the warm water plumes and the isopleth characteristics are dis-
- cussed in Section 2.3.3. 1 t
2.3.2.2 Impact of Water Use e ! +: ;
- Except for biological and ecological effects, as discussed in Section 2.3.6, !
j there is believed to be no other impact of importance due to the use and ! , discharge of the seawater. As previously stated, fresh water supplies are f i of such an extent and the amount used by the plant is so comparatively j small that no effect on municipal or industrial uses can be fereseen. The intake and discharge structures will not significantly affect use of the l l- beach. 4 L 0 w
!~ J t
- )
- u. -a .
s - - - - .>a u --- . = us - _ _ . . . _ _ . HI 1 ; I i () 2.3.2.3 Temperature Effects i The Atlantic Ocean can be considered the world's second largest heat sink l and the over-all ef fect on it of the heat released is almost infinitely
- small. The only effects of importance to be considered are those thermal changes in the immediate vicinity of the discharge. These are discussed ;
in Section 2.3.3.4. It may be of general interest to consider the volume j of cooling water discharged in a year by the plant as compared with the [ total volume of the Atlantic Ocean. The Atlantic Ocean, as given by one p reference,1 has an area of 33,420,000 square miles and an average depth i of 12,257 ft. Using these presumably rather approximate figures, the Atlantic would contain some 8.55 x 1019 gallons. The cooling water dis- ! charged is approximately 530,000 gpm so that in one year approximately l 2.5 x 1011 gallons will have been discharged. The total amount of water [ pumped through the plant in one year is then roughly one one-hundred- ; millionth of that of the volume of the heat sink into which it is discharged. r It also may be of interest in considering manmade versus natural heat .i sources to consider the heat released by the plant as compared with the f heat absorbed by the ocean water f rom sunlight. There are considerable [ differences in the values given by different sources for the heat intensity i of solar radiation. However, a standard handbook 2 gives values between 75 , (7 AM) and 296 Btu /hr/sq ft at noon for the latitude of Hutchinson Island. From the referenced table a value of 100 Btu /hr/sq ft would be quite con- i servative. The plant, when operating at capacity, releases 1640 Mw of thermal energy to the sea. This is equivalent to 5.6 x 109 Btu /hr. At the 100 Btu rate given above, this same number of Btu's is received by 2.02 square miles of the ocean's surface after exposure te sunlight for ' only one hour. It will be seen then that the plant release is minute in comparison to the energy received by the ocean from natural sources. , i References
- 1. The World Almanac, Newspaper Enterprise Association, Inc.,
1969, p. 713. t
- 2. Strock Clifford (Ed.), Handbook of Air Conditioning, Heating and Ventilating, The Industrial Press, New York, N. Y., 1959, pp. 1-183. ,
i
.s e
t I
i I j H1 ]~ j i TABLE 2.3.2-1 REPRESENTATIVE SEA WATER TDIPERATliRE DATA l ' As taken near surface (two feet below MLW) and two feet above sea floor. I (approx. 30 ft. depth) and 2000 ft. offshore. Condensed by listing data- 'I' l for every fifth day. l- Temperature "F ; Surface Bottom i
- i Year Month Date Max. Min. Max. Min. !
i l 1970 Sept. 1 84 82 81 79 6 86 84 78 77
- 11 86 85 83 81 ;
) 16 84 83 84 84 l ] 21 84 83 83 83 26 81 81 82 81 1
- 1970 Oct. 1 82 82 81 80 i
- 6 81 81 81' 81 11 81 81 80 80 16 82 81 80 80 21 81 81 78 78 26 - -
79 78 I 1970 Nov. 1 - - - - i 6 - - - - lG
-11 - - - -
l 16 75 71 76 73 8 21 77 72 72 71 26 67 67 67 66 1970 Dec. 1 76 75 75 71 !
- j. 6 76 75 75 74
- j. 11 72 72 +
71 71 , j 16 74 73 75 74 I l 21 73 73 73 73 ! i 26 73 72 74 73 i 1971 Jan. 1 67 67 68 68 . i 6 72 71 73 73 1 ! 11 74 73 75 73 i 16 72 69 73 73 i 21 62 61 69 65 ! 26 71 70 69 68 ! {- , I 1971 Feb. 1-1 72 69 69 67
- 6 72 71 70 70 11 - -
66 65 j 16 70 69 69 68
'l 74 72 73 72 26 75 73 74 72 !
M I i )
- t
l 111 1 l O FREQl'ENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF OCEAN CURRENTS OFFSHORE OF BIG MUD CREEK, BASED ON AN EIGili DAY MEASUREMENT l'ERIOD: SUSDtER 1969 i
, */o O C C U h r4 E N CE
,1 30 y
/
Slack Current Condition Occurred: A ppror.ituately 10". of the Titre f,;~ O / 1.4 A%iFJ&N 1,2 1. 0 0.8 0.6 04 k 0.2 O O.2 A%'10.4 0.o SOUTli NORTH ; VELOCIT Y ( f t./sec.) j i
!!lfTCillNSON ISLAND PLANNT O I:NVIRONMI:NTAL REPORT OFFSliORE OCEAN CURRENTS FIG. 2.3.2-1 1
HI 1 2.3.3 HEAT DISSIPATION t j 2.3.3.1 Condenser Cooling Water System The condenser cooling water is provided by the circulating water system which consists of intake and discharge pipes in the ocean with canals to ! the plant. Pumps at the intake structure provide 530,000 gpm of flow. ! The system is shown in Figure 2.3.3-1. The maximum design temperature j rise at 850 Mwe of the water passing through the condenser will be approx- ; imately 24*F. However, the temperature rise for normal full load operation ; will be 21*F. The temperature rise averaged over a day will be less than ' 21*F because of daily plant loading. 2.3.3.1.1 Intake System i The water will be +aken from the Atlantic Ocean through two 10.5 ft.-ID [ reinforced concrete nipes originating about 1200 ft. offshore of the beach. , The intake pipelines will be buried until the (-18) f t. mean low water (MLW) contour is reached because any obstructions along the ocean bottom inshore of the 18 ft. depth could interfere with natural littoral processes.
- Because each intake pipe requ res a vertical section to prevent sanding and a " velocity cap" to minimize fish entrapment, there would be about 8 ft. 7 l
of water over the top of each velocity cap. The velocity caps insure a i horizontal direction of approach in the near vicinity of the pipes' inlets t and also limit the velocity to about 1 fps. l ' The intake pipes will be located approximately 2300 ft. south of the dis-charge pipe. They will be buried from the intake points for a distance of j about 1600 ft. beneath the ocean bottom and under the beach, terminating i in a canal on the west side of the sand dunes. After passing through the inlet pipes at about 6 fps., the circulating water will be conveyed in the canal about 900 ft. to State Road A1A and will pass under this road through ' culverts. After passing under the road, the water will be conveyed in a canal at 0.3-0.5 fps. for approximately 4000 ft, to the plant intake l structure. The intake structure is shown on Figure 2.3.3-2. This rein-forced concrete structure consists of four bays. Each bay has a coarse , i screen, a traveling screen, a circulating water pump and is provided with auxiliary equipment. The approach velocity to each bay is less than 1 fps. From the intake structure, the water is conveyed through a buried pipeline to the condenser. The water then flows at a velocity of less l than 7 fps. through the tubes of the condenser, located in the turbine ; building, into the discharge water boxes. 2.3.3.1.2 Discharge Systems s The circulating water discharge system is shown on Figure 2.3.3-1. From the seal well, the discharged condenser cooling water will be transported [ approximately 500 ft. in a buried pipeline and then about 580 ft. in a canal to State Road A1A. The water will be carried under the road in t [ culverts. Once past A1A, the cooling water will travel abput 1155 ft. in a canal to an outfall structure, located on the western side of the sand dune line. From the canal outfall structure, the cooling ' water discharge will be carried about 1425 ft. in a 12 ft. diameter pibeline; buried under s the beach and under the ocean. The pipeline will terminate'atfa depth y (Rev. 7-14-72
. ~ , -
HI I (~'% of 18 ft. (MLW) and at a distance of about 1200 ft, from shore. At its (, ) te rmina tion , the 12 ft. diameter pipe will be modified with a short tran-sition section and a two port, Y-type high velocity jet discharge will be added. Both ports in the Y will be 7.5 ft. in diameter and will result in a horizontal discharge of about 13 fps. A short sloping trench will be excavated from the inverts of the ports, daylighting at the natural ocean bottom. The trench will be lined to prevent scour from the jets' discharges. Preliminary temperature data collected of fshore of the site of surface and bottom water of the Atlantic Ocean are given in Table 2.3.2-1. Tem-perature data collected by the ' United States Coast and Geodetic Survey (USCGA) at Canova Beach, some fifty miles to the north are given in Table 2.3.2-2. The maximum temperature recorded at the FP&L monitoring station is 86 F. The maximum temperature recorded over an eighteen year period at Canova Beach, is 87 F although there is no thermocline, bottom temperatures are frequently a few degrees cooler than surface temperatures. The tem-perature of the released water will be rapidly reduced as the discharge water mixes with the surrounding cooler ocean water. 2.3.3.1.3 Main Condenser System The main condenser system consists of two 50 percent capacity, divided water box surface condensers, of the single pass type, with 7/8 inch OD tubes arranged perpendicular to the turbine shaf t. The condenser is of the deacrating type and is sized to condense exhaust steam from the main turbine under full load conditions. 2.3.3.2 Facilities or Techniques As discussed above, heat removal from the condenser at Hutchinson Island will be accomplished by a circulating water system which receives water from, and discharges water into, the Atlantic Ocean through Y-type jets at the end of the subaqueous discharge pipe. The discharged cooling water will be carried well away from the shoreline for a distance of approximately 1200 ft. The method used for discharge - high velocity subaqueous Y-type jets - will result in rapid dilution and' decreased temperature at the water surface. This is accomplished by discharging the heated water at a depth of about 18 f t. through the two port diffuser with an exit velocity of about 13 fps. Discharging the water as a sub-sursurface jet produces a reduction in temperature of the discharged water as the heated liquid travels to the surface. The horizontal dis-charge proposed, with both mementum and buoyancy effects, is effective in causing the induced dilution 1 and'also carries the discharged _ water further offshore. The favorable location of the Hutchinson Island near the edge of the ocean permits the use of the highly effective method of heat dissipation, precluding the necessity of any additional heat facilities. 2.3.3.3 Environmental Impact of Heat Removal Facilities There will be no adverse effects such as icing, fogging, drift and noise, amo.g others, resulting from the methods used for waste heat removal at the Hutchinson Island Plant.
HI 1 2.3.3.4 Characteristics of Thermal Discharge O The location of the Hutchinson Island Plant was heavily influenced by the ability to use the subaqueous Y-type high velocity jet discharging into the ocean as the means of dissipating the heat released from the plant. This system is a very effective method for removing. heat with a minimum effect on the environment. After the heated water is discharged near the ocean bottom, it will rise to the surface (because it is warmer and, therefore, lighter than the surrounding water) and will spread out, establishing a temperature field in an upper layer. For a given temperature at the discharge, the tem-perature at the point where the water reaches the surface will be signif-icantly reduced by mixing with surrounding water of ambient temperature. As the water reaches the surface, it will spread out and be carried away from the discharge by natural currents and secondarily by the flow pattern produced by the discharge itself. As the water flows away from shore, the temperature will decrease due to heat loss to the atmosphere, dif-fusion and entrainment of adjacent waters. In order to calculate temperature fields due to a discharge of heater water, it is necessary to have measurements or estimates of (1) currents. (2)- mixing characteristics of the receiving waters, and (3) the climatological factors (primarily wind speed) affecting heat losses to the atmosphere. In July of 1968, the Florida Power and Light Company entered into a con-tract with the Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station, College of Engineering, University of Florida, for a preliminary study to evaluate the hydrographic effects of the Hutchinson Island Plant. A report2was prepared af ter completion of this program which indicated that the site location was suitable for a once through cooling system. Based on these favorable preliminary findings, FP&L contracted with the University of Florida in May 1970 for a detailed hydraulic model study of the sub-aqueous Y-type high velocity jet. The study was initiated in the summer of 1970, using a 1 to 30 scale factor. In addition, Ebasco was authorized by FP&L in July 1970 to evaluate alternative intake and discharge systems. The selected schemes have already been discussed in Section 2.3.3.1. Results obtained from the parametric study conducted as part of the hy-draulic model study have been used to obtain the differential between surface and ambient temperatures for the selected system. The results of the model studies indicate that the maximum surface temperature rise above ambient with the selected scheme is 5.5*F at normal full load 'oper-ation. Using this result and the temperature data published by USCCS, the maximum absolute surface water temperature will be less than 93 F at the discharge point. In order to determine the areas enclosed by specific isotherms of temper-ature rise, analytical methods presented by Dr. Pritchard in Ref. I were utilized. These isotherms for 3*F and 1.5'F are shown en Figure ' 2.3.3-3. The corresponding areas enclosed by these isotherms are approximately 25 acres and 400 acres, respectively. These calculated areas are conservative since heat dissipation to the atmosphere has not been included. In ad-dition the formula presented by Dr. Pritchard has been applied in a con-servative manner.
~32-
, , _ . - ~
. -. .- . ~ - ~ , -- .-- .~ . - - .. - . i H1 1 _j l i Based on a dye release program conducted during the summer of 1970,3 it was ; found that the heated discharge would probably be confined to the upper l 8 ft. in the water column. With the geometry of the intake pipes, water ( will be withdrawn from below the 8 f t. depth. In addition, because of ! the large separation between the intake and discharge, no measurable re- ; circulation will occur. I t
?
The model studies referred to above are being continued in order to provide j detailed thermal profiles which will result from the Y-type high velocity ) jet. A final report will be issued on the analysis, testing, and final design of the discharge system. 2.3.3.5 Thermal Standards ; t The thermal standards applicable to the water discharged from the Hutchinson f Island Plant are given in Florida's " Rules of the Department of Air and i Water Pollution Control," Chapter 17-3, Pollution of Waters. The criterion ' relating to temperature reads as follows:
" Temperature - shall not be increased so as to cause any :
damage or harm to the aquatic life or vegetation of the ! receiving waters or interfere with any beneficial use ' assigned to such waters." This State standard or criterion has been approved by the Department of the Interior. t Florida Power and Light will conduct studies during plant operation to j determine what effects, if any, heated water will have on the environs i offshore of Hutchinson Island. The results of such studies will be com- i pared with similar studies conducted before plant operation to determine what effect, if any, the discharge of heated water.has upon the aquatic environment. 2.3.3.6 Water Quality Certification , h On April 3,1970, the Water Quality ' Improvement Act was enacted, which ' ! amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Section 21 (b)(8) of the l amended Act requires that applicants for a construction permit or operating ? license for any nuclear power plant which will discharge effluents into the navigable waters of the United States provides the AEC with certification from the State or interstate pollution control agency, or the Secretary of the Interior, as appropriate, _ that there is reasonable assurance that the i plant will not violate ~ applicable water quality standards. Under Reorgani- ! zation Plan No. 3 of 1970, the functions and duties of the Secretary of the 1
. Interior under this Act have now been transferred to the Administrator of- l the Environmental Protection Agency. i Since the effluents from the operation of the Hutchinson Island Plant will be into the Atlantic Ocean, which is considered to be a navigable waterway, the water quality certification discussed above is required. Such a ;
certification was issued to the Florida Power and Light Company for the l Hutchinson Island facility on February 12,1971 . by Florida's Department
- k. of Air and Water Pollution Control. A copy of the certificate is in-cluded as Exhibit D in Appendix 5.
11 d an**. ! spo AM I Ist's E~
}_ jT iii. gy_,,,]
<rea.
_ _.te06 g m vett*see .,s.. n. i's.
, g e qq ,I 11.1
- s a m;g ,- ,,
,l
- - t],I ,; }j-j
~ I, . .
1 1 ,
'- IAA l g-l As.
lt -
- - - -- t -- - gO "i t
I e . .t. , .. I 1e ir- i i 1 a 8-
'a i
i ! I i j i i< >
)eno+d, no. '
l l i l' *"""*"'""* l 1 i son c-= o a . . uo... ,I 5),, g==*===. *5 lu T't."?,.',' l I' ll t- -
; I ;
.? l
'$ ;j ! i
, e i yJ rd , , .. . _. I l ._ :Ri_.,.
3 i s, , l' a
- .i , - - .
... l w : .w_o i, , - -
8'*1.,
, .' h e l 1
[ 1,, l ,.
. - g_ _p i aa .
;x . .. ..
t(. N; __' j ill__ I' m e ,s ....->
. ne ,,
3 l
, s : ;1 . .
c s , . .
.rni- .
e - i - i!!:!,* ;.* , . I 3 - 1 :
, l ;7, -';
- f jgb : , i %%- us.1., l'1
'.h. a
}
!jf.,
s MsN,Nh \=4ca v.tv6 eit 7 (w1 sm - 4 j 4- g [ i _a I dd- bl i , i m y>D e. l b el ! O O, ! l [ 7 _.y . ..
..____ - 8 i ; , ,
a' 4y1+i _ ft .. et 6 y , .
. > e
. ..a (n,,*gy p}4:r.w "
- l !,y ;1
.t , i l 4.c i q *s !
p[ ; i t . .t . g , 0
- m E**~* *?* *2**-
T l* g { .f l
.y IWI ---i 7..,,, y #@' .
u , - "i II - t . s_.,.- n.:.,9l.p ____...n. m. ==-4."> a& 4o s.. e
,1 j ..- _- _ _ . . _ _ . . -
gt . i j i.,,.___._ g _ _ _: _ - _
- i. g..,,,,,,
m ,,(*;<tgagg ;
, '^t'"*""'
T"""'"*' Ik 4 I
;... .77 8
_. _ _ _ _ = _ _ = _ _ _. .- ,. ._ _ .
~
.E, , , , , , , _ , _ - *
, , , ,, , , , ,M; W ; ,
.N. !'e ....
- hA i . - , - , - . . == ; ie son cea sne . s ow. I f., *I *"*-4-**1**' s4 ri .,,,, . j._ l i
.ut.' * " 7 9 k h2.
w ;ny nn o n i f
+--* '-" yy
,f 5.jsu N';
,. .5 .'4.***'e'sf".*.*
o u] y *2fNsE"* FA ,I
.w '
.t ,' I .
. .- I,
.. ._ -g
_.p'*,._._,_____.._...______L,_.
. e _ .t. _ . , _
d s - 1 ! ..l,l
,1. , , O ~ 01 ,bm dC-
._ .;. p ___ _ _ _.___ ... e .4_ __. g ._. Tm LT- @ M._ e W.e-@- lL1- m' iII t t so ,
[ ,,,, M**?,U* 3 ' { man jl't;,uJ
.l.,85 ,_. - __
F
-m_
1P m-i i b;:+ g
',-- m,g..o b 3 ('I,el le. c
.*, .wo n
u.
""".-_ i .
el e ..il
.t r >
, w W ._ .ma .t we sei es
.m- +. g
,q
. . . M* _4,f .
_.m___m __.__ 7_
= pM r I f
] l m-u p:= -
- . i 4,i . c .
_ __ ___ j __ _
~~ ~
,!e g _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4, . *
( i, lj 44 .[4
-Q ue o e te
( 8"'.~){, i %_, .,yd e
..w 4 ,, .:d, ..
' .... ,. . , 3 lL . .. tt
..s iQ ..t.a 9%_
L.jd . _ .. ... _ w . _ l i 1, t Top Detx ptAu e
~ ,
I i 1 w - . . . . . . . . - . . ~ ~ _ , . _ . _ _ . . , - - - . - - . - . . _ . . _ . -..
i _ _ 7 LECT';A. .msno.5 e'Dit60LA'W3pi 4 DE' h,avtrun.
/ EC5 OwG-8'70 6- 545 1 j CAT C _ .)i sat l ,._ .. It' @_._
.p__ F 4. _ .. - .
. . j _._4 W 1 yu pt.,,_,y j _ . , .. .
, ,_,_,_,___g,,go,__ , , _ _ _ _ _ , , , _ _ .
o
, i j. i! p, '
1 -. m - , . > 4 cat m*> h-
. r, t>DO-er e41 .
beei t )*<.,s."**s".'-. L c- ..~..,s
$*I ,; '
Sno g.s,.. t. .. -m g lt . .i i q
, -:x, .ofDrm het .It O.t*e 3RR j
- g ,, .,.< e' t
\
i
- _; + 'r 7. J.-"
g - I i i I
* {
i a
! i
~
t. r ! . 5 __..._+( }
..i I Y e il T .
7 1 J.. , t l l!'I
'd.%T'
^
l l l
*"q't,W;* -_ *".c?-
77 . . i y, , , , ,
'
- t I .L .b g ;
I i son T;.,es . .. - t e ewg allo g.h.,
+ 6 e i S
. . i i i 1 I jw, 1 i
it.s *i* y. m._l l l m. ;
%[ f .* i,
--,c., t s l
i r i t
- p. .}
b Vo . l
.1 ____ l'
. r. ;. cc
' ,.,,.,a... ~ . '
i ._.._ ___ ,_ ______ _____..____L-_.
#_] , l
.u. ..
___,. ;3 -- -_ _, - _ _ . _ . - . - _ _ _ . - - < _ I 7<.
- j. __ - .
I L_ .lpt3 _J . 1{p
. ., ,+ .. ..... , .. ,. . 3 9 5r ,,
i .i l 1 ^
- .iNa ] f
. *0*.",',.!."
. .r . ,
j
-c U
g t m ,r,4,,.,, w m,, , , , . , , c , . . , . . - , g' m, tcf* e t, ,, _y ,
~m. .. - . . .. ,.. .. -. , :-
g
;p.
.;i
- e '
- 7. ,:. . . : :n - . F.
! j: .. . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
CARD
., 3 g f. . O - - - - .--b. . .
?_ L SE y ,ht0!,il ..I______; ________._________J_-_.
I I. __1' gg fxs' admin
'g"on ,
% ;*' ': 7,'.,1.J geitW0
.it.,,.
; _ __ _. _____ } '
na m.s .q m.'
- m. :-i; p,) I
}
$h
~~ -h. [. ___ .._ j .
----------------,--3-r , ,
.i, W cm l
._._.______.____.__p ._ '_ _t 4 ._ . _
.* bN l, -l , . _
g;;;;,1"*' 3 *t ,* Me ,6 :rg i 3 c.,,.r , c- . . , w ,<
.,,....i..
; rus 1 in c < ri....> ~ ey sn u sv o l
as . o, _ -- a . .r. p ul __ ...___..___.._q f GL w.so O ]N 'b b&I b HUTCHINSON ISLAND PLANT , ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT INTAKE STRUCTURE-PLAN FIG. 2.3.3-1
p a me
, - - . _ 6 6'*O --. -.. . -
s s .- -- .* t,e St e**u to sg,,a p . tw go ,im.iast - - - ~ * ' i gio -o toe I so.o. g SteveWes sones St**tw 4* * - 4 so< S uet,.S.t*6t v f.a.m.e tea.t swa.ste . o.ueses ( c w pue
, --.. t ?'~_CL __i,--_ _ I'1 _ +.d C L_# . f JL . _,4 S 4 + - .-, _ - * * 'l , .- - _ ---..- , -J.- , = 1 t i'.
b y f f 5 *e i 41
. ;w , , , r. JJ' c 4
?
._,c...wis.;np.,unm>',,,,, p ; 14 _ _
. l .--s 'i i j!, jf /4 , r -
( **a s tasm
..t . 1 .
- -. {'
j ..t' -\'i. '.:' )4;I; g'**1 4, -
,Mws L l g .- -e n . .
j' . 9% l: i
-4 i) i s-+a-toooua j! # ,e a ji l ! +t , i< ,,
wom. -. , 4,
*' ' * * * ^ ~
- e -- er f j.. I ? ...I , - - - --- +-
'.."[ t @'.l! '-1 4
; Ii 8 Ce
- l. -
t
.l.>
n. 54 4 '190'
- ,, , inse,t.,st
.,,s'; p ,
Q
.--t. +.e fo,
,7 . , ,, n_ p _
%7 t
. p._ . _%7
, , .: ! ; ; I L.,L t Rome j, 6% t l
l l *"'*'b
, z ,<n p 3 l' l .
; u . ..r. ,
\ '. n, '
?
f.1_. gs.9.. e . .
\ } * ,
{ n o dsooetseve.es.ee 4 lg F-*J .1' S 1E W 7 vanne ) ,t 7 **cc*c==~~~5 ? ,; !. ;- isonsv
,j; j . . at o - , tis , ; s,a
\
j k It -' j l I'l ,% y a_,.._,___ yh
**1 o % -, a 4 h
;j ..,-
.; . 9tp_. _ , - . _ , _,_. .
L et
- ee
. _ . ,, j g l 1
' l!
l e.,.. e,. s n $ ?3'%,~ bs M.*e*.'.* I
~ 4.;
/: h l i
( ;
*eam L w t 6' 130 g pey, 6 j,',"[ .
!!: g gf eut !
n .t e t -s ,. . S ' o,, .ao' + t _ _ ., ,
.f ,
_.d e . _ ,
, w
. Wu , _ j a'e h .9 aa , _ . _ _ _ W 1 5' ea** * *ad DL-9t
- 'l g
,1 t a l,/
;i I
,j s>
j 4 t
,.3,o........,_
- s. .... ..c... m !l . .
. 13,. , i ,
, _ 4, , o, - . , . v . ,
i t .w ; l 1-1; .ls: *eL 1 i
. , H q y.
, h at.sto4 j3 1 ,g. m
. - .M, t., 9 ' I Q[$/x - we. .
- e e s n ..g so l- ,o - c- --
Y j'U p gf r I E- .v,,
..,s., 4
! !j; --e sw ,
r ' -e [ i.res=s 'a.* n- *
- sis l '; 54 t
'4"Y fI
~~*~
l '
*>s e ssl .___, ,
n 3 I
.~ .
\#
/ .
f I;
. ' Son 6 e Pvt p,96 6t
, __ - < . . 8 i )
- t?' ;.:l ,I "'-+----+t,,e l .
ij !. - t.t.el s t
;. , e '-
; i - i l ,
.,e...,...us
. L
/!f j 2 l [ \ 3 1
I f; . .
. i ir a d i s a +eo4kejo,j , il :l ,
i ,/ 7Iii e j! y y l j
- s. . .a. . m.#,.m . es . , m.1 m 4, i ; ; .
{ s,o,'e*s* *.*,"g g / p . .- .~ 'ij!bh, -
- f ///
- e. f *'"* (, l. !g;rI ,! 70*=h , j
- l /
+-- u,* .
o . p c,, a, +----,L.*
*me , ' * *
-l#~~
- e. .
, .t_ _
-o I
- s. ,* 1 i
' ! 'F# b,
, 4 % : Sa oo K
' ~ ~ "
/ w= p%-- t j
,1. ? @s
, . _ . . O s '_, _..
, ,s'9..,
_ 99 % g g'., __. k SECT . A- A teno-. ..y. ,3 t I f h vw _*****"'-- a _ - --
- f. vim v.uct
.._____._.___te's _4 wh9 hYa; !.'il . Y*; H% .-k% .19 I- 4 g..Me_ , eqib ;En j san #
4am l g a., r'4 s- j
; y cow. ..a ,. ,~ - . j s. l,,.
.m.tg j -
9
; ;\ , i *m am ,
i i l I I ll r
- o. i l I\ l l l l .f $'
- a. i _ _ _. . , t% ____,.
,___,__g , , , ; j
- n.
- i' }s su 3 l a
.w.._ .
_+ a
, ,j U ,
/l ,
S .}I *h.-.'o
s._,.__
j 9'-O .
. , . __ _j",h _ _ . -._ ,U ~__. .h.'_
I
-..lm._.
; ,a4m a 1 l
, ,i i i.--w, ~.
h*r ~to ,e ..g une w .., e ,
, l
, .. . I
>dc i mzdu/u 4_< r.a. =
- t - ..
s .-
,j_
s' i , 3
- -+
l 4
,, x. ~ ;% , .,. ,, ,.,., a,. n.s. .
l g; e a -o ,s o anoo .y . . n . ! W m g, r1 1
-1 f
, m _ __2 iT - 1
.m_. .. -a ....e-,, ! I.
;';;*j;, . g.t ., e.........u I j
i i f- -M y '- M. .iT. /
.,6..,., n.
u ?a{ -. A-o
. vm *s,
?* l { f
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' '
l h a WT.'.'=" i, r ., -, t .2 -
.-... - , l
'i I l} s) . p,[ ] ~l - I
.1' ..IL. [ ._' t' r1,! .'
. ,, e h- _1 . _,, il l l >- . . . ,
i, .
) i j -L ._._ # 5 4
.t . - _ . _4._ .. g_
i _ l .. at i on L, j _. _ __..
., ______r f j
r-~ - . _ . 5, ___._...____q. _ . _ _ _ . g . _}_ i ; i g i F*} frac > g __ . _. g
,_Ii1
-h'-
2 c.,, <,.. ,,u ,
-{~_- t- ---'
e' *. / i ot%' ., t y ! u re,o,.a .u=.
} i t ) ,
y 3, L . .i t -si ce ) 3 i; "'a ' l i % e -
.,m.,..
r ?, t ., . .n.., g 9 . . .... ~ ..m*yn
..s.n .> j .. g I i*S
. ,
- I r
u_ LL_. ,. w f y......,... ... ,,,... . . .. pi 1 x 1
, g3. g
;i _
___ g3 p 4 .,u 's - s 3 i#n r,a,
- w. a e
_ m r . .. i ~ _p . . . . , . _y. ; 4 y i 3
,' f 8t
; nn_ _. _ g,.
-...e_.e,,..,
e,; ..,,,;,,,,.., s3 : _t _ ___ _ _ .. 7- __m _ .. _ _ =f _ i .. .a
,f..,...... 1r Jv ' - ,* i 'Ii.i. >i ii i 1 .. i.i .ii i i .ii i
3i i o ~ 5} s. .n D ,. u --- e
-..m ,
r , m
; ,v,v . A, ,
d * ' =,_n.
- .n' e.r.n' ,- ,
- ,, i ,-~ .p,,,. .e 1
.e ,. .
. i o a ._..._- . ... 1.c ; .
1 ?'* o . '!$ , L . .. s . t... ,
!,)n n, -
_ , , . . ,.... i _...<...,_.,l.. ,. g .I i 6... t
..u , ._.; _ , ..
?__. .wa
.m.
2.a_ m. . m. w
,,,L. tJ....C.L c.M..w.. .,....m c-t - . Serf,.L_PLu - n .D-o. , ,_ ..<o ANSTEC APERTURE CARD ok @0,5-06 l-HUTCHINSON ISLAND PLANT Also Avau.,.ble en "^
ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Aporture L,ad INTAKE STRUCTURE-SECTIONS F I L,, . ,. 3.3_2 _ I .. . _ _ _
- . . - e. - w - .4 a.- , .
F I t h i e .
, x e
'p 4 b p' L, ,
'{
- m c , i s ;;,
a W Y g, 1 ).i f r
..G
^ '
T ad & ofJ
& 4 p
- i
) , , ,
g ,,3 v n t w n u. WI d 9 ,,p 4 y
+
i ... e
-<-/
~
3 j c y a , J p a.
# J m % , e.
r, j 4 3 e; w, rj j
$ .j s
>,_ ,-4
, n .. j-1 i 4 5"
$" . pr G g 4 > , ".' g A .., ,
a , m t [- k'. L l' g i,. # 3 ,y ,.- ,
, . e x w ,. 7 a l t
+
4 a %
- ~ ., t Ap.,
- tf 4 $ t ..r
}
, w . =
D 4 W4 I A I e J 1 , 3 , S s i eb 4
+ E w J 2 ,
- a
,1, b
' e ,
.a w
.f .* O h f*
4
, ... 4
. ~
n. 2 a
* .n }U " V f/
y s ,e a .s a ,3 d e -
-a , n 4
$ X l $ k
, .'3 el^ *L *[ N h g ,'
j $ r k. e, e- ,. , . .m, a, ~ ' ,',. m
* *y i n
- r ~ r 6 k.
l ,
- o. ,,
- 4 A ,4 t<
1 w
- 3 ,. g g a
p
; vo yyg n o .: J , J. c* '
m
< . % 7
- L , ,
$ ..a
- p ,7 .s .
> -c , , .
n a p
, 4, ,.,- '
6 m 4 e 85 . A % e e n
" ~ g 4 'A ~
.g,. + ~ ;
a,/)e/t8
, ~ t g
A - r, _.
'V- j 'U -
.y. ~ . <
c ~ 3
-- r *t 0; Q *p*-
,4 W, , . .
r t K
.f. p ': y 2 .,
y , Rffg .. vt.;j-. m a s.
- c ,. .
- r a " *
- 4 ' , m q g $, ,-
7 __?[,,." ' 'm . . l ~Y
~
3 *) -) s ? '; % y Q N l - 1 3
" 7 ;;
M f,, ,.f.* 'f' o y ,, v,j)' i i
# j, Ag -
~ -
, 3 n
g g . 3 4 t a .. 0 1 , r-a 4
. ~ , ,/. .
r4 ) i L
- o. #j, ( 2..sy yh t s
< s
- e .
h r G e 7, % e N I I E c . m,a . : v - . h j :x/ W,e:v a. q n $;
~ R g -,~, -- s, (,, / ,.
- ~ f , /e */
, p" y
2 s{- vlt * ;' -~
'~._P'e f
~ #
% k % %
h z'ut ~.. *Q,y,I, -
~
} a. ,f" f
- f.'Q4.* k, . y, /o .y yf '
e n a ~ -
,,/s ,
_ n
, i ?_ ^ _
; me = ,
- v . ~v, m')' ? '
. y" 'y- _/ j
,p d*
g.y,/fW n/ .
'l
~^
,e. Q~
n , c
~, s ,f ,,/)q
. _y } a,/ . . . e
' ?,' , ' '* % ' \
p# ,/ .r ~} */ -
~ . .'\ ,,(; mf . :.
u [
) 3) a y ;~ .s
/a x.. .nec . pa ? ./ e,s / .. y 2,f,4v m~ .'^ .
,.",,--.,_,,/*.
n
' _. - + s ; + w \v*g - g, Q~%_
j j r'
,_ /
p p f g-e t E, I _ -3 4
, p :.2"\ a% kp .% ~
s v,c p. ~ - x ;4 <<Q pJ .
,-t r. .'yl .
v eD ..rf
<b
{f y 7..I
. t 4V- .-
- J h p Qs \ '
./ a y d
% 'Q, K *: ?. '-f \_. \ ) } ,e , f * , s: *s f/ V' lli7 ;
.. +
~. 2 o y, y al d.- o' ,,hz ;? ' f
+
/./h t' qn f, " , - a
'ty &w .Q "-
a,,- %- - p
- c. y., ;,)
- x s @<yV< /-f
... % ,lfgy,~'v( ,,.m
'i Vf% .. \ s '
,, < . ,p, *. "; # *' $yLf .s
_.s. V ", ri' Al - .
--q---- ,
s '"* g.a' f k s,.<. h V'y a
- p;. . . _
j *- f * ._._..\..____._.__
,,,,*'g ,- dy ,gg, t + _ ._
e 6 .n p.- 7 *. x;
./ , ,
^ ' '. s 1: n.
,/ g h
e w '></
- ,y m
[.. A'
< V (k d t rame w
_ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ - - _ , n,,m ,--- ---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -u- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -----------------g------------------------ n ts - n,
\ \
\ Max. AT '<3. 5Fs ,
s
' ' ~
s s .
.-2; y 8 % -
+ ,
t *
~. ,
; \ .
s
..'4,- i s x
.a s 3
' 'i ,s g .g: , ,
4, s * ' 1 ~ . s s.
, 1_
, , y, .
3 1 i,4
~
s , g : 4
*) k \ ~
-; s
, 4 s
e'
}
s - t,r % "
. y ,
k <
'r. 4 4
- f gj
* =
, , s . .
.# f , r i
~
._ ~
so. , h
.4 s,
3 st 3 s. e ,- , x s U s \ ,t i .- ,,
-c ,,
6..s e, .' 1; N s \, f . 3 9 >- a l
), ,
~~
i g. 1 dt i () meine 4 d
- i k,M I ao Up + \
, , v- i . J > n <+ w Fm }
l c Os .,m. t e7-
.-,a.... . , ,2 3./
. vw ns .
^~
m (_tni.. , % w' .D 7,.O .t - 1
. if -* .-*
(' s \ ; -
% N o ff ;TJ - { _{ T c! . .ws:. e. \ A \m 4 PEr O C rri y -c' t? m
.# \mry ' >
Wo DO A <' l s f
\ oV'g'
- 0. a ' gl,' -
e' i lM s ',# s
- ' =
a ITI 1 3 r : 1.% -<; "Im men.. 11 t ' . 3 - ~
, K,' 1
, g/ \ " [.h '!tr ir 3 _# .I i 1 j
% 3;m A . .." *%. a
\ fi ! c,.
< c; ~
g ea ! is
+5 ' \ i, s s.
\ iug 2 a
, s, s ;
.(-
K Qg j , i (j,g o, . '7 ,/e\' ,i ,' . 4 - . l s
,.o
.,3,+o' s J -~ s ,
s,. . . , . sm j s i t N' , e N^ !,* \ . * ""
- s
-; 5' y
HUTCllINSON ISLAND PLANT tt. "', l - j y, g g'
' ". gs n i 1 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT ' '
- E W> k: L' N DISCHARGE JET ISOTHERMS
, . ,, . . _ _ - . . , "--,4. 2' et
* ~
4 FIG. 2.3.3-3 * - ' ' '~~
?*
*y
~ _Noh;-h t u c %,
[, [ x y [,y-h ,\, i s r r -
+
", , 's i- 4 r ,, 4' i NAUTICAL mites ;
w-+ 4 ' Pid ' ( \ W,, . s 5
- N s ' s ;
e)'a s?h ,f s
- a 3
- g %. g ; ,a s s I \ .r
\ /
5
r .. . . _ . . f HI 1 I 2.3.3.7 Effect of Discharges on Quality of Waters in Other States The cooling water is released into the ocean at a point where it will have no effect on any bordering states as the distance to.the nearest state, Georgia, is approximately 260 miles. References
- 1. Pritchard, D. W., " Design and Siting Criteria for Once-Through Cooling Systems", Chesapeake Bay Institute, The Johns Hopkins University (Presented at the American Institute of Chemical Engineers 68th National Meeting, Houston, Texas, March 2,1971).
- 2. " Temperature Field Predictions, Hutchinson Island Nuclear Plant .
Outfall", Department of Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering, Florida Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, May 1970.
- 3. " Drift and Dispersion Study - Hutchinson Island, Florida", April, 1971, Dr. J. H. Carpenter, Chesapeake Bay Institute, Johns Hopkins A University, Baltimore, Maryland.
2.3.4 CHEMICAL DISCHARGES The systems handling chemical discharges are in the early stages of design and processes and quantities are not final. However, at this stage of design the systems can be outlined as follows: The chemicals used in non-radioactive secondary and auxiliary equipment ' cleanup will be drained through the floor drain system into one of two diked areas to be retained. Incorporated in the plant is a water treatment system which refines city ! water into very high purity water for plant processes. This system utilizes chlorine, sulfuric acid and caustic soda. The spent solutions of these chemicals will be discharged to a retention basin where they will be neutralized and tested for pH. The neutralized solutions con-taining sodium calcium, salts, magnesium, and trace quantities of other metallic ions extracted from the city water, will be released to the circulating water system with a pH of 6.0 - 8.5. j l A chlorine solution will be fed into the sea water ahead of the intake structure for 15 minutes every other day to control slime formation. The solution enters the circulating. water and open cooling water system in ; regulated quantities such that the residual chlorine at the condenser ! outlet will be nominally one ppm and no greater than 1-1/2 ppm at any time. 1
HI 1 t i (#~') There will be times during operation when it will be necessary to discharge
\s,) highly pure water which will contain small amounts of boric acid (in the order of 1%). Af ter dilution by the circulating water the presence of boric acid will be undetectable.
No other chemical usage which would result in additional chemical discharges is presently contemplated. l 1 2.3.5 SANITARY WASTES During the early phase of construction, sanitary wastes are retained in ! portable chemical toilets. During the late phase of construction and i throughout the operating phase of the facility, sanitary wsstes will be treated through two septic tanks and their associated leaching fields which will be located above the local water table. The sanitary waste ; treatment system will meet the Florida State Department of Health requirements. ; 2.3.6 BIOLOGICAL IMPACT i The Florida Power & Light Hutchinson Island nuclear facility presently ' under construction is expected to go on line in 1974. Both the physical structure and the thermal enrichment of cooling water will impact on the environment in various predictable ways. The over-all ecological effect of this facility will be minimal to the marine and freshwater resources of the area. The details supporting this conclusion are presented as the aquatic biology phase of this report. All existing available information ' relating to the environment of Hutchinson Island has been examined. Papers of major importance are included as Appendices 2 and 3. Biological and environmental studies to provide the long-term data to substantiate the , existing information are discussed. 2.3.6.1 Environmental Evaluation , 2.3.6.1.1 Indian River Biological Survey : i Beginning in 1968, a study was carried out on the Indian River in the : vicinity of the FP&L plant. This investigation formed a part of a report submitted to the State of Florida for a construction permit for the nuclear facility.1 Nine stations were established from Little Mud Creek south to , Herman Bay. Microscopic forms in the sediment as well as an inventory of ; plankton were made as one phase of the investigation. In addition a survey - was completed of the macrophytic grasses and algae serving as nursery areas for juvenile marine invertebrates and fish of commercial and sport value. A census was also made of the species caught in trawls of the river. The results of this study showed a rich and varied ecological system that would represent a significant loss if disturbed or unbalanced. Dr. James e Lackey, principal investigator, summarized as follows: ; O
i
-HI-1 l
- 1. Indian River supports an enormous biomass of manatee grass and several species of macroscopic algae. Turtle grass >
(Thalassia) was not found. The dominant algae was Gracilaria, ; but.several others are common. Most of them are red algae, ! although patches of Sphacelaria, a brown alga, were found. , This forest, often ten inches high, contains large numbers of ! gammarids (scud), shrimp, isopods, small crabs and juvenile ; fish. Egg masses or single eggs of various invertebrates ; are found here, and the branches and leaves of the plants i support large numbers of capre111ds, bryozoans, very small l worms and very small attaching algae. The leaves of manatee grass are a substrate for the attachment of vast quantities [ of organisms, mostly diatoms such as Licmophora, but also
- various protozoa such as the colonial ciliate Zoothamnion.
Altogether Indian River supports the nursery concept very l well indeed. It affords protection to a very large variety and number of animals. It offers an_ abundance of food for many animals, especially the smaller ones who browse on the - attached diatoms and other plants. It is a place where re- l cycling of the nutrients - organic matter to inorganic matter to organic matter - is a normal procedure. Three character- i istics of this stretch of estuary should be noted, in view j of the discussion which follows: t i
- a. The growth is heaviest toward the western shore. !
- b. The character of the water, especially salinity and turbidity, varies considerably from time to time. j
- c. The growths are so thick as to trap and hold free floating particulate matter whether copepods, protozoa, l eggs or invertebrates. The grewths act much like a l sieve such as Purdy long ago ascribed to the macro-scopic growths in the Potomac below Washington. j
- 2. Indian River supports an abundant and diverse plankton. l It owes its character to a constant raindown of organic !
matter in the overgrown area, i.e., those from 0.0 to 4.0 feet, sometimes more, of depth. This organic matter under- ; goes bacterial decomposition on the bottom,' and the mineral ; salts liberated are utilized by the algae, and the bacteria l by protozoa, ratifers, copepods, etc., to maintain a high { population. ! Samples collected at nine stations showed the plankton pop-ulations to range from 200 to 20,000 organisms per milliliter 1 with a median range of 1000 to 8000 organisms per milliliter. Chemical analyses and water samples collected at the same time showed concentrations of orthophosphate to be 0.18-0.26 ppm, nitrate as. nitrogen 0.03-0.06 ppm and copper 0.11-0.12 ppm. t l J
HI 1 i i i
- 3. The sediment water interface is densely populated and it is- !
inferred that it is a place of intense biochemical activity. i This conclusion may not be valid for large areas, since only [ four cores have been examined. !
- 4. The benthic population, as shown by Carr (Appendix 3) is !
large, containing many shellfish, tube dwe] ling worms and crustaceans. These either dwell in the mud or in tubes or f crawl about in the macroscopic growths or on the bottom. Accordingly they are hardly susceptible to being displaced and swept along by a moderate current. ' Shrimp and juvenile fish are also abundant although not l benthic. These are more responsive to current action, but for those which are hatched in the ocean, such as shrimp, , it is hardly likely that all of them enter the River on the incoming tides at the two inlets. In fact, both are fre-quently brought up when scooping up a mass of algae and grass. In other words, many are not readily dislodged from the " forest." '
- 5. Tows in Big Mud Creek and in the channel of the intracoastal waterway revealei very few eggs or larval forms - only cala-noid copepods. Certainly there is no vast assemblage of sus-pended invertebrates, eggs and juvenile forms routinely present in the river. ,
- 6. Plankton tows in the two inlets (Ft. Pierce Inlet, 8 miles north :
of the site and St. 1,ucie Inle t, 14 miles to the south) show : considerable numbers of estuarine organisms being carried out on the outgoing tide, and considerable numbers of oceanic , organisms being brought in on the incoming tide. Very few oceanic organisms persist in the River, and few estaurine organisms are found in the samples taken either by net or water bottle, in the ocean stations east of Big Mud Creek. j Whether they die in the ocean or whether they are widely i scattered is not determined.
- 7. The only organisms of direct economic importance (aside from an occasional fish) found thus far in the River have been shrimp, young blue crabs and a very few conchs. Normally the River is fine for speckled trout, but in May and June at least, fishermen were far more abundant in both inlets. ;
Channel bass, trout and snook appeared to be most commonly taken, but many other species such as drum, sheephead and mangrove snappers were also caught. I t The complete report prepared by Lackey is presented as Appendix 3 of this i report. I i i i i l
r - HI l-2.3.6.1.2 State Board of Health Edible Shellfish Program The Florida State Board of Health has jurisdiction over all coastal waters for the harvesting of edible shellfish and, through representatives in County health departments, maintains a surveillance on the bacteriological quality of water overlying shellfish beds. In the area around Hutchinson Island the commercial shellfish catch is limited and doesn't offer much promise for commercial development for oystering.2 However, fair' quantities of oysters and clams are harvested by sportsmen each year and is a prime recreational activity for many people living in that area. Unfortunately, urbanization of the mainland has caused a progressive ' de-crease in water quality, and shore areas along the west bank of the Indian River from Middle Cove to St. Lucie Inlet were closed for the taking of shellfish several years ago. Periods of rainfall especially impact on the river as runoff carries heavy bacterial burdens into the shellfish environment. Stormwater runoff as well as domestic waste effluent con-stitute a health hazard since feeding oysters readily concentrate in-testinal pathogens. When raw shellfish are consumed those carrying pathogenic bacteria and viruses can easily cause a serious infection. During the spring and summer of 1970, a sanitary survey related to these waters was completed by the health department. The results pinpointed sources of pollution from sewage treatment plants, residential septic tanks and boat wastes. The latter source was considered significant, especially during the winter when traffic is high. In July 1970, the southeast regional engineer recommended that the area of the Indian River extending from Sebastian Inlet at the north to the St. Lucie Inlet at the south no longer be certified for the taking of shell-fish. These recommendations were based on his report as follows: This area is presently experiencing a very rapid rate of growth with the end result of a predominately urban con-centration of population. The open' spaces between the principal population centers of Vero Beach, Fort Pierce, and Stuart are being filled in with such large scale developments as Johns Island and The Moorings on the island and Sebastian Highlands, Vero Beach Highlands, and Port St. Lucie of General Development Corporation on the mainland. The storm water runoff from these develop-ments alone is enough to contribute substantial con-tamination. The sewage effluents from these larger sources are so distributed as to subject the greater part of the Indian River to possible major pollution in case of an accident or breakdown. In addition, numerous smaller developments with sewage treatment plants represent the continuing possible hazard due to lack of continuous supervision and maintenance. This problem is further aggravated by lack of available personnel in this office to provide ade-quate surveillance. The potential for sewage con-tamination is further enhanced by thousands of HI 1 ;
-l l
i septic tank installations in marginal soil conditions ! which can and do contribute significant pollution [ during periods of heavy rain. ! I wish to also point out that an extensive agricultural l drainage system discharges into these waters. It drains [ areas intensively planted in citrus with consequent i potential for pesticide contamination. There is also l a significant contribution of waste from the dairy and j beef cattle industry. s I In addition to the foregoing sources of contamination [ from the land, there is a significant and increasing j contribution from watercraft. The Indian River is , the locus of intracoastal waterways and this presents ! a constant hazard by the contribution of small quantities I of fresh sewage. As a result of the reappraisal the waters in the Indian River essentially [ from the Indian River County line on the north, south through St. Lucie [ County and into Martin County were closed to the taking of shellfish : in August 1970. l I The State Board of Health informe'J the Directors of the three county i health departments that the wate's in question can be " reclassified , t as conditionally approved shel'11sh harvesting waters provided the follow-ing studies are conducted and favorable data is concluded from these studies: r I
- 1. An evaln fi a of each actual or potential source of pollution is made and the pollution sources are eliminated.
- 2. Floa studies are conducted to determine the dispersal ;
of tim waters surrounding the potential pollution sources. i f
- 3. Extensive bacteriological sampling, under adverse weather conditions, i.e., unusually high tides and heavy rainfall resulting in runoff from the watershed, io conducted to :
determine the water quality after these adverse weather l conditions. i
- 4. Assurance that constant surveillance, bacteriological, f shoreline reconnaissance and domestic-industrial waste !
treatment facility operation will be provided, if these f areas are reclassified as ' conditionally approved'." ! 2.3.6.1.3 Ecological Investigation Offshore of Hutchinson Island l I During February and June, 1969, and April, 1970, studies were conducted ; offshore from Hutchinson Island in the vicinity of plant site to evaluate ! the existing marine resources in the area. During these three periods l observations were made at a total of 61 locations within a 6 mile" radius l of the plant. The location of these sites and a summary description of j the conditions at each site are included in Appendix 3. r i i t
l I HI 1 i The observations indicated that the ocean floor in this area is a flat, barren, sandy plain. There are two shoals offshore; one about two miles out and another about 6 miles out. The depth of water at both of these , locations is about 20 ft. Between shore and the first shoal the bottom ; is a broad, gently sloping trough with a maximum water depth of about 40 ft. A similar trough exists between the two shoals. The maximum water depth in this area is about 50 ft. Beyond the second shoal - 6 miles ; offshore - the bottom drops of f slowly to a depth of 120 f t. about 12 miles offshore. ? In the entire study area the bottom was observed to consist of sand mixed > with varying amounts of shell fragments as shown in photographs in Appendix
- 3. At no place was there mud, silt, or organic matter. Even though the '
transparency of the water was generally good, bottom growths did not develop because of the lack of nutrients. No rock. formations or coral growths were noted within the area, even in the vicinity of the shoals. The benthic organisms present were representative of a typical array of sublittoral bottom forms. The predominant animals at most bottom stations were polychaete worms, barnacles, amphipods, bryozoans, starfish, sand dollars, chitons, and slipper shell. A total of 63 benthic species were identified in samples collected at 9 sites in June, 1969, but other than the ones listed, they were present in very small numbers. None of the animals collected were of commercial importance. i One of the principal reasons for extending the limits of the study area 6 miles offshore was to determine if there were areas which were attractive for commercial or sport fishing. In particular, an objective was to de-termine whether the calico scallop beds which are located off Cape Kennedy. ; extended into the area. These beds were only recently discovered and have ' been worked commercially since early 1969. The primary concentration of ! scallops is off Cape Kennedy in water 60-240 ft. deep (6-10 miles offshore). l The beds of commercial interest reportedly extend southward to about the ' Ft. Pierce inlet. A dredge tow between Ft. Pierce and Jupiter inlets in 80-300 ft, deep water produced only 0-0.5 bushel of scallops per 30 minute tow whereas further north nea 17 bushels per 30 minute tow.g Daytona Beachdredging Commercial the production off Capewas as much Kennedy com-as monly produces 10-20 bushels of scallops in a 30 minute period.' , Observations made during the June, 1969, study further substantiated the fact that the scallop beds do not extend into the Hutchinson Island off-shore area. At one station 6 miles offshore the scallop density was about 1 per 2 sq. ft, of bottom. At other sites the density was 1 scallop per 10-50 sq. ft. and at most sites no scallops were observed at all.
- The lack of bottom grasses, rock outcropings, and coral reef previously discussed led to the conclusion that nowhere within the 6 mile radius would there be an attractive fishing area.
During February, 1969, water bottle samples were collected from the sur-face at 8 sites between 3 and 6 miles directly offshore from the plant site.
*40-I
HI 1 ! I i i The total number of nanoplankton species in all the samples was 41. This i did, however, include all major groups of algae plankton except the blue ! green and all major groups of protozoa except rhizopods. Diatoms were ; the most common species. The number of organisms in the 8 samples ranged i from 32-132 per m1 with the greatest number occurring 6 miles offshore. l This number compares with an average range of.1000-8000 organisms per ml ! in the Indian River. i In June, 1969, samples were collected at 9 sites within a 2 mile radius of l the shore adjacent to the plant and examined for plankton. About 63 species j were observed with diatoms accounting for over 50 percent of this number. i Again, as in April, the species diversity at each station was high but l at all orations the number of organisms was less than 100 per ml. ! Another set of samples was collected from 4 stations between 1100 and 5500 ft. offshese in April, 1970. At this time the total number of species f ( was 41 and coneisted primarily of diatoms and dinoflagellates. The di- ! versity was gcod at each station but the number of organisms was again ; less than 100 per ml at all 4 stations. ' The findings of the three surveys indicate that the area has a very low I productivity. The water is of good quality as indicated by the high diversity of species but is low in nutrients as indicated by the low i numbers of species. Chemical analyses for nutrients in the shelf water ; showed orthophosphate concentrations to range from 0.02-0.03 mg/1, nitrate ; nitrogen to be about 0.01 mg/1, and copper to range between_ 0.004-0.005 ; mg/1. For comparison, orthophosphate concentrations in the highly pro- , ductive Indian River range between 0.18-0.26 mg/l and nitrate nitrogen j range between 0.03-0.06 mg/1. The findings of the three offshore surveys were consistent with those of . I j a two year study of the shelf waters by Lackey 5 of f Pompano Beach, Florida, an area 75 miles south of Hutchinson Island. In this study samples were , collected and examined monthly over the two years. The bottom was similar i to that off Hutchinson Island, i.e., devoid of grasses and sessile species,. j and plankton numbers seldom exceeded 100 per ml although the diversity was ; again high. The nutrient levels in this area were similar to those observed off Hutchinson Island. ' During the February, 1969, survey, observations were made at the Ft. Pierce l inlet about 8 miles north of the plant site. The ocean bottom near the ' inlet did support patchy stands of grasses and the general' condition of i the area, while not highly productive, showed evidence of nutrient and ; organic material discharge from the Indian River. Net plankton samples { collected in the inlet during flood and ebb tides showed about the same i number and diversity of species entering the River on a flood tide as f being flushed to the ocean on an ebb tide. I E i t [
HI 1- ; 1 i i, t [ It is interesting to nate that even with the discharge of water high j ( enough in nutrients to support the luxurious growths in the Indian River 6 from inlets 8 miles north and 14 miles south of the plant and with northerly or southerly currents 90 percent of the time, the productivity of the area offshore from the plant site is very low and the nutrient - levels are in the range expected in ;cean water.3 [ In discussing the study Dr. William Carr, a member of the survey team and ( an assistant professor at the University of Florida, described this [ offshore area as amenable to receive cooling water due to the absence i of any important sessile marine resources. The offshore environment is ! the direct opposite of the Indian River which is a rich and valuable ! resource.
-l t
l 2.3.6.1.4 The Beach as Nesting Habitat for Sea Turtles f The beach along Hutchinson Island serves as habitat for nesting sea turtles. lt Two species mainly are present, the loggerhead turtles (Caretta caretta caretta) and the green sea turtles (Chelonia mydas mydas). Of the two species the loggerhead predominates. Existing informatien relating to y turtle nesting activities on the island is sketchy. R. A. Routa reporting ; to the Florida Academy of Science 6 estimated 5,265 sea turtle nests for j the entire 22.4 miles of beach on Hutchinson Island. Of these he estimated j some 15 to be of the green sea turtle. Mr. Frank Lund has actively engaged J in turtle research mainly on Jupiter Island to the south. Lund's7 opinion ; is that these two areas comprise the most significant loggerhead nesting I area within the continental U.S. Lund also feels that Routa's estimates i of green sea turtles nesting, which is the only published record of green ! sea turtles nesting in Florida, is low. Lund's studies of Hutchinson t made within the past two years indicate that the green turtle population ! is at least twice Routa's earlier estimate, or some 30 turtle nests. In i this regard, nesting of the green sea turtle is sufficiently limited so i that neither Hutchinson Island nor any part of the United States is in- ! cluded as a ' principal nesting ground of the species as shown in a National l Geographic paper.8 Presently the main detrimental effect on sea turtles aside f rom nest de- ! struction by predation or poaching is misorientation of hatchings. Lights ! such as carbon arc lights will attract the young turtles. Migration of l the young toward point light sources has caused mortality mainly j from cars as the turtles attempt to cross roads. A situation such as ! this will not occur in the plant area as a buffer zone of Australian j pines, sea grapes, palmetto shrubs and sand dunes which screen the beach ' from lights at the plant. I i No data indicates any reason to believe that the plant will have an effect on turtle nesting. 2.3.6.1.5 Commercial and Sport Fishing i An investigation of available literature revealed no published inforniation i on studies related to fish census or behavior patterns in the offshore l vicinity of Hutchinson Island. A report prepared by the Bureau of ! j
, , ,. , ~- --
i H1 1 Commercial Fisheries on the Cape Kennedy area, about 65 miles to the ! north, indicated the Cape area to be very productive biologically.9 f At the St. Lucie inlet, 14 miles to the south, large numbers of snook con- ! gregate about 600-1000 yards off-shore during the spring of the year.10 ( The cooling water discharged from the power plant will not influence this } area, however it has also been observed that near the St. Lucie area there appears to be a definite change in the marine ecology l0 attributed to the ' circulation patterns in the area and climatic regimes. To the north, in- 4 cluding the Hutchinson Island area, the ecology is temperate. To the j south, the environment takes on several tropical characteristics. Ob- l I servations made by Lackey during three surveys of the shelf water offshore from the plant site (Appendix 3) revealed no attached grasses, rock out- ! croppings, or coral reefs that would provide a suitable habitat for a [ fish population. Scallops were observed at some locations but the popu- ; lations generally were one scallop per 10-50 sq. ft. of bottom area. At ' one site, about 6 miles offshore, the scallop density was about 1 per [' 2 sq. ft. of bottom area. At none of the sites examined were spiny lobster or clams observed. i Fish landings are not, of course, indicative of the catch. area. The , data are included, however, as an indication of the extent of fishing in [ the vicinity of Ht.tchinson Island. ! Commercial fishing in the St. Lucie County area can be divided into three geographic subdivisions: the Inside Waters (the Indian River), the Shelf I Waters (within the 10 fathom limit of the Atlantic Ocean), and the Off-Shore Waters (beyond the 10 fathom limit). In the shelf waters the blue-fish, the king mackerel, and the spanish mackerel are the most heavily ! fished. They represent about 86 percent of the weight of fish taken from these waters in 1970 and about 81 percent of the annual value. None of : these fish spawn in the Hutchinson Island area, however.4 ! l Commercial landing of fin fish from St. Lucie County have been quite vari- ! able during the 1965-70 period. Catches hcve ranged from 2,239,038 lbs. I to 3,444,608 lbs. The most important species in terms of weight and value [ are listed in Table 2.3.6-2. These species account for over 90 percent _ of the fish landed and over 99 percent of the commercial value of fin fish. ! The 1970 annual dock-side value of these fish was $692,156. j In addition to fin fish, there are, in general, sporadic landings of shell fish. Shrimping has been good during certain past years; however, in the period 1968-70 a total of only 9546 lbs. were landed and over 7800 lbs. of these were landed in January, 1970. This sporadic landing pattern is l attributed to the migratory habits of the shrimp in this particular area.g ' k l I
HI 1 TABLE 2.3.6-2 COMMERCIAL FIN FISH LANDING IN ST. LUC 1E COUNTY ' 1968-70 P 1970 Atlantic Ocean Indian River Species 1968 1969 Weight (Ib) Value($) Weight Value ; Bluefish 546,884 541,483 711,644 78,718 13,500 1,612 Red Drum 4,989 7,338 500 84 4,500 762 . King Mackerel 883,854 584,483 994,901 302,725 -- -- I Spanish Mackerel 541,022 488,057 1,234,589 177,246 7,500 891 l i King Whiting 85,111 51,851 35,000 6,226 16,900 3,009 Black Mullet 213,917 221,515 25,000 2,295 168,600 15,473 Pompano 80,008 37,731 4,000 3,892 30,418 35,573 () Sea Trout 118,436 112,047 4,500 1,558 72,956 10,738 Spot 204,005 194,533 15,000 3,039 189,100 38,315 Total 2,678,226 2,239,038 2.941.134 $575.783 503.474 $106.373 , Total Weight Total Value ; 3,444,608 lbs. $692,156 i [
?
f k O i
HI 1 l l t i Clams have also been taken somewhat irregularly. In 1970 about 4300 lbs. ! were reported; mostly during the period January to July. These were ; taken from the inland waterway which have since been closed to commercial I she11 fishing because of the potential of sewaje pollution. 'f i The blue crab is taken sporadically with monthly catches of up to 9400 ; Ibs. (January,1969) reported. Over the three year period (1968-70), ! however, only 17,433 lbs. have been reported. In 1970, 6700 lbs. of ! blue crab were taken from the Indian River. These crabs had a dock- i side value of $711. t t The landings of spiny lobster have decreased during the past 5 years. In 1966 landings of 39,049 lbs. were reported whereas in 1970 only 1256 lbs. were reported. A Calico scallops appear to be the only shellfish in the St. Lucie area that I are harvested with regularity commercially. The Bureau of Commercial ' Fisheries has found extensive beds of these scallops off-shore in 10-40 fathoms of water, but the primary concentration of the beds is off the-Cape Kennedy area and some six to ten miles offshore. It is reported j that 20-40 bushels per hour of scallops are dredged by commercial ! fishermen. i In St. Lucie County landings of calico scallops began to be reported in \ May 1969. Since then monthly landings have averaged over 19,000 lbs. with i a range from 0 to 51,655 lbs. In 1970, 154,300 lbs. of scallops, with a j dock-side value of $146,545, were harvested. Oysters apparently have not been harvested co.nercially in St. Lucie County - ! at least not in the period 1968-70. Since the ludian River is closed to shellfish harvesting due to sewage pollution this trend ill not change ' for the next few years. The Hutchinson Island site area is not heavily used for recreational l activities, including sport fishing. In the Indian River there is some ! shore fishing and fishing from private or rental boats. ' In the Atlantic Ocean, there is some surf and boat fishing in the vicinity ! of Hutchinson Island. 2.3.6.1.6 Importance of Locale as Nursery Area i I ' The Indian River is of recognized importance as a marine spawning and l nursery area. As a result of this, the original plans for withdrawal of , condenser cooling water from the Indian River were changed to a with- , drawal from the Atlantic Ocean. This change was done at considerable I t J
,a - ,
o HI 1 I
/ i increase in cost and effort. There are no significant spawning areas near
("'/}
\m_ the discharge of the cooling water. Consequently the plant will have no significant effect on spawning or on nursery phenomena.
2.3.6.2 The Impact on the Environment 2.3.6.2.1 Parine Ecology Effects The studies of the marine environment conducted between 1968 and 1970 were instrumental in the FP&L decision to use the ocean both as a source of cooling water and as a heat sink for disposing of the water. The alternative of using the Indian River as a source of cooling water was eliminated after the area was discovered to be highly productive and a significant nursery area for many species important to the area, while the ocean, on the other hand, was discovered to be very barren. The offshore area, in general, contains no unique features and it is not a spawning area for any known species of fish or shellfish. It was con-cluded that the site is an ideal location for an electric power generating station. Several studies have been undertaken fairly recently to evaluate the effects of calefaction on aquatic and marine systems. Unfortunately, methods of investigation have not been standardized, hence the results reported are not always directly comparable. Furthermore, many of the studies have teen con- ,, - - ducted under laboratory conditions and there has been criticism of extra-(' j polating these results to natural systems. Another f actor which makes the results of this type study difficult to interpret is the extreme natural variability of biological systems. An example of the latter is a statement made b> Reeve in describing effects on zooplankton:13 "The natural fluctuations of biomass in the bay from station to station and between successive sampling dates are so large (as are temperatures and salinities) that several years of intensive sampling might fail to correlate these fluctuations with the operations of the power plant under present operating conditions, except perhaps in the very limited path of the inshore thermal plume." The same problem is faced by every investigator observing effects on mobile species in a natural system. The effects on benthic organisms and plants is easier to define but there are effects in addition to calefaction which are sometimes overlooked. These include the effects of biocides and the effects of erosion. Taking into consideration the overall effect of cooling water discharges on the benthic population, there is little doubt that some disruption occurs near the mouth of the discharge conduit.14,15,16 Another effect to consider in the operation of an electric power generating plant is that of the entrainment of various species in the cooling water (~) (j system. Several studies are underway to evaluate the ef fects of thermal shock, the magnitude of temperature rise, the maximum temperature reached, the use of biocides, and mechanical damage due to pumping.17,18,19 These l
HI 1 i l i 4 /'~ studies again report conflicting data in part. Some facts are quite clear, (_ however. For example, there is little disagreement on the fact that chlorine used for cleaninn the condenser tubes does cause extensive damage to the prganisms entrained at the time the chlorine is injected. A,t Hutchinson g/Islandthiswillbeforabout15minuteseverysecondday.{Thereisalso a trend which indicates that increasing the temperature of m1 water when the ambient water temperature is in the 16C (61F) range will increase the productivity of the organisms present whereas a similar increase when the ambient water temperature is in the 23-25C (73-77F) range will suppress productivity.17 The magnitude of the temperature rise which will cause this phenomenon Jnd not result in damage due to thermal shock is not agreed upon.))Jor that matter neither are the 16C (61F) nor the 23-25C (73-77F) ranges. Warinner and Brehmerl4 report that a 5.5C (10F) temperature rise t above an ambient temperature of 15C (59F) will depress the productivity while North 18 reports an increase in productivity with a temperature rise of llc (20F) over an ambient temperature of 16C (61F). The magnitude of the temperature rise, of course, will have to be less to prevent damage as the ambient temperature approaches the maximum critical limit for organisms. Here again, there is no agreement on the maximum critical limit temperature for most organisms. For organisms present in the Hutchinson Island waters this temperature is reported to be in the 23-35C (73-95F) range.20,21 There is some general agreement on the fact that some damage to organisms is incurred due to the mechanics of pumping and the transport through the ,-~s cooling system.17,22
- u. >
2.3.6.2.2 Impact of the Hutchinson Island Nuclear Power Plant on the Marine Ecology When evaluating the effects of calefaction on a natural system it is al-most always necessary to draw upon knowledge developed at another site for a basis of extrapolation. Although necessary, this should be done with great care to avoid unwarranted conclusions which might be detrimental to the environment or to the utility company. As discussed in previous sections, the Hutchinson Island offshore waters appear to be an ideal place to dispose of thermally enriched water be-cause of the barren nature of the system and because no unique features exist in the area. Furthermore, the system is not confined. Currents, southerly 65 percent of the time and northerly 25 percent of the time, , almost continually flush the area with new water. It has been calculated , that within two miles of shore, with the average southerly current of 0.6 fps the volume of water flowing past Hutchinson Island is 210,000 cfs. With the average northerly current (0.2 fps) the flow is 70,000 cfs. The flow through the cooling system is 1140 cfs. With a northerly current about 1.7 percent of the water flowing within two miles of Hutchinson Island will be utilized for cooling purponez. , This-water will be raised in temper-ature normally ll.6C (21F), maxina.? .3C (24F), and at periods of low load 5.5C (10F). O
7 HI 1 l ~' During the summer months when the ambient water temperatures reach 30C (87F) there is little doubt that a temperature rise of ll.6C (21F) will , cause some damage to the entrained organisms. Even a 5.5C (10F) tempera- I ture rise on top of this ambient temperature will probably cause some damage. Assuming the worst case, i.e., complete destruction of all entrained organisms, the impact on the environment would be negligible; first, because of the barren nature of the water to begin with and second, because only a small volume of the offshore water will be used for cooling. Since the low plankton counts in the water are due to nutrient limitations j and because there will be species of organisms not affected by entrainment the ecological system will re-establish its equilibrium within a short distance of the end of the outfall. Such recoveries have been observed in several systems.13,14,15,17,19,22,23,24 From the above considerations, and from the 1cvel of radioactivity release from the facility being less than one percent of maximum permissible concentration (10CFR20), no radiological disturbance to the marine ecological system is anticipated. The discharge system consists of a main conduit with two points of dis- ; charge which form jets whose initial velocity is about 13 fps to promote rapid dilution with surrounding water. The computed surface area affected , by temperature 1.7C (3F) above ambient is 25 acres and by temperature 0.9C (1.5F) above ambient is 400 acres. The effects on organisms in the outfall water mixing zone are considered secondary to the effects on the entrained organisms which passed through the plant condenser. The effects on the s entrained organisms inventory in the area was concluded to be negligible. The plume of heated water will not result in a thermal block to migrating fish or turtles because of the small area affected in comparison to the open water on the shelf. 2.3.6.2.3 _ Terrestrial Ecology Much of the western shore of Hutchinson Island was originally covered with mangrove swamp. Beginning in the 1930's, a mosquito control program was ' initiated to eradicate several of these insects capable of transmitting disease. The program consisted of eliminating the breeding grounds of the mosquito by flooding the mangrove swamps on the island. In addition to eliminating mosquitoes, this program resulted in the de-struction of much of the black mangroves on the island (Appendix 2). This also destroyed the area as a habitat for birds, small animals, and nany of the aquatic species that normally inhabit the protected waters around the mangrove roots. Photographs taken of Hutchinson Island before construction on the power plant began (Fig. 2.2.8-1) show that most of the mangroves in the interior i a E l HI 1 .h I i of the island were dead or damaged. The mangroves around the perimeter i of the island, primarily white and red mangroves, were not as badly af- I fected and appear in the pre-construction photograph to be quite healthy. [ These perimeter trees still exist, although some have been damaged by the- ! construction of a road around the site perimeter. Plans are to maintain j this perimeter of mangroves. Because of the condition of Hutchinson Island prior to construction work, f it is felt that very little adverse disruption to the environment re- l sulted from the activities presently underway and from the use to which ; the land will be put when the plant is completed and in operation. j i 2.3.6.3 Studies to Resolve Environmental Impact Questions ! Some pre-construction environmental surveys have been conducted in the ; intercoastal and off-shore waters near Hutchinson Island to provide the ; bases for development of the site and the nuclear facility. Further studies ; will be conducted to extend the original studies over several seasons l and to investigate in more detail certain aspects of the ecology.
- 2. 3. 6. 3.1 Off-shore Ecological Study The studies conducted during the 1968 to 1970 period were of short duration.
The findings of the studies were consistent with one another, i.e., there ! was no seasonal change in the marine ecological system, and the results l O were consistent with the results of a long term study of the shelf water at Pompano Beach, Florida, 75 miles to the south. To further substantiate these findings, a study sponsored by FP&L was initiated in April, 1971. The objective of the study is to continue the ; observations of preoperational conditions offshore from the site. ThT l study will continue throughout the remaining preoperational period and l will probably be continued into the post-operational period. The study l is being directed by the State of Florida. Department of Natural Resources. i Specifically, the study will continue the monitoring of benthic a.d plankton species. The Jatter will include nanoplankton as well as net plankton. The study is being conducted by two full-time biologists stationed at a l laboratory at Jensen Beach, Florida. Approximately 10 sampling sites will l be selected to be representative of the marine envirranment at various j
~ distances offshore and along the coast. It is anticipated that each of i these sites will be sampled extensively every two months.
l
] 1 0
HI 1 O Physical information, i.e., water temperature, salinity, currents, and meteorological data, is being routinely collected at this time. data will continue to be collected and will be correlated with the bio-These logical sampling. 2.3.6.3.2 Sea Turtle Nesting Study The habits of the green and loggerhead turtles have been under study by Frank Lund for quite some time. It is his opinion that Hutchinson Island and Jupiter Island, immediately to the south, is the most significant loggerhead nesting area in continental United States. A study is planned to further observe the nesting habits of the sea turtles on Hutchinson Island during the remaining pre-operational phases of the plant and during plant operation. The details of this study have not been worked out at this time. 2.3.6.3.3 Fish Diversion Study A study will be initiated in the near future to investigate the various means of reducing the number of fish and other organisms entrained in the cooling water circulation system. The results of this study will be used in the final design of the cooling water intake system. Factors considered will include velocity caps at the mouth of the intake conduits, the horizontal and vertical velocities at the point of-intake and velocities in the intake conduit and on-shore intake canal. Diversion screens in the on-shore canal with a return to the ocean will also be investigated. 2.3.6.3.4 Terrestrial Ecological Studies Since the construction of the plant has adversely disrupted little in the way of terrestrial ecology no studies are anticipated in this area. 2.3.6.4 Monitoring Programs Monitoring programs planned into the overall schedule of the Hutchinson-Island nuclear power plant can be divided into three categories; those that monitor:
- 1. Releases from the plant,
- 2. Environmental conditions that influence the transport or effect of materials released from the plant, and
- 3. Environmental systems affected by the plant.
H1 1 2.3.6.4.1 Monitoring Systems for Releases from the Plant The releases from the plant include gaseous releases from the containment vessel, liquid wastes from the vaste management system, sanitary wastes, and the discharge from the cooling water systems. The gases from the radwaste system, after up to a 30 day hold-up, are released through a vent at the 140 foot elevation. Means are provided to sample the gases for gross radioactivity in the gas decay tanks prior to discharge. The discharged gas activity is also monitored continuously for gross activity and the release rate controlled. The liquid wastes f rom waste management system are monitored in tanks for - 1 gross activi' y prior to discharge and occasionally will be monitored for. ! specific nuclides. The discharge from these tanks is monitored continuously for gross activity as it flows into the cooling water discharge system. Sanitary wastes will be discharged subsurface through a septic tank system and will not be monitored. The cooling water system will be continuously monitored for temperature at the inlet to the condensers and for temperature and chlorine at the outlet of the condensers. A monitoring system is located in the ocean near the anticipated point i of discharge for the cooling water. Surface and bottom temperature, ( salinity and current direction and speed are recorded continuously. This program will continue indefinitely. 2.3.6.4.2 Radiological Monitoring Two major environmental surveys are included in the operation plans for the plant. One, the off-shore ecological survey, was initiated in April 1971 and will continue in a pre-operational phase until the plant goes on line in 1974. The study will then continue in a post-operational phase until questions regarding the environmental impact of the plant are resolved. The other major environmental monitoring program is the radiological program. This is being conducted by the State of Florida Department of Health and is presently underway in the pre-operational phase. ! The surveillance program is designed to demonstrate and monitor radio-nuclide pathways to man. In the pre-operational phase of the surveil-lance measurements are also being made to establish the radiological characteristics of the area so that trends which might develop in the operating phase may be differentiated from normal background radiation.
HI 1 The pathways which are being investigated are:
- 1. External exposure
- a. Exposure to radionuclides resulting from release of gaseous waste.
- 1. Particulate material in air
- 2. Immersion in a cloud of radioactivity in gaseous form.
- b. Exposure to radionuclides in seawater.
I
- 2. Internal Exposure Exposure to radionuclides in fcod chain
- 1. Drinking water
- 2. Milk
- 3. Seafood
- 4. Food crops To accomplish this program the following media will be sampled:
- 1. Particulates in air
- 2. Background gamma exposcre (external)
- 3. Feawater
- 4. Beach sand, silt, and soil
- 5. Drinking water
- 6. Milk
- 7. Beef grown on local pasture
- 8. Citrus fruit
- 9. Other food crops as available
- 10. Fish and crustacea from Indian River. Shellfish will be sampled as available.
J l
I HI 1 j i l Radionuclide concentration analysis of these samples in whole or in part will consist of:
- 1. Tritium (H-3) in water. }
f
- 2. Radiochemical separation of strontium 89 and strontium 90 in milk.
l j
- 3. Gamma spectroscopy of milk for cesium 137, iodine 131, ,
barium 140, and potassium 40. i
- 4. Radiochemical separation of cobalt 58, cobalt 60 and iron 55.
)
l
- 5. Strontium 90 and phosphorous 32 in selected seafood samples by liquid scintillation counting.
l
- 6. A gamma analysis by spectroscopy of all media including !
the following nuclides. .; ,
- a. Cerium 144
- b. Iodine 131 ',
- c. Ruthenium 106 ;
- d. Cesium 137 '
- e. Zirconium 95 j
- f. Manganese 54 ;
- g. Zinc 65 i
- h. Barium 140
- 1. Potassium 40 Determination of external gamma exposure is made utilizing thermoluminescent dosimetry. Particulates in air are sampled utilizing air movers and filters with a weekly determination of gross beta activity and an analysis of monthly composites.for gamma activity as outlined above.
Sampling locations have been established on the' basis of calculated dilution factors adjusted for population density in sectors and the wind direction i frequencies. l P I i
?
)
l 1 -m. -_. . _ _ _ . _ _ _ - . _ _. -- , .. _
i HI 1 i REFERENCES i
- 1. Florida Power & Light Company. Application for Construction Permit for a Nuclear Facility. Miami, Florida, 1970.
v
- 2. Keys, Vernon. Florida State Board of Health. Personal Communication, i March 1971. l
- 3. Ebasco Services, Inc. for FP&L. Hutchinson Island Ecological i Literature Review. April 1971. i
- 4. Anderson, W. W., and Gehringer, J. W., Biological-Statistical ~
f Census of the Species Entering Fisheries in the Cape Canaveral : Area. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific-Report - Fisheries, No. 514, July 1965.
- 5. Lackey, J. B. , Personal Communication, May 1971, t
v
- 6. Routa, Robert A., " Sea Turtle Nest Survey of Hutchinson Island, ,
Florida," Quarterly Journal, Florida Academy of Science, j 1968. ,
- 7. Lund, Frank. Personal Communication, 1971.
-l
- 8. Carr, Archie. " Caribbean Green Turtle - Imperiled Gift of the Sea," National Geographic, 131:6, June 1967. .
- 9. Hudson, H., Tropical Atlantic Biological Laboratory, U. S. Department
{ of Interior, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Miami, Florida. j Personal Communication, April 1971. I
- 10. Christensen, R., Miami Dade North Junior College, Miami, Florida.
Personal Communication, April 1971. ;
- 11. Johnson, Lloyd. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, Miami, Florida. i i
Personal Communication, March 1971.
- 12. U. S. Department of Interior, Florida Landings, 1968, 1969, 1970 '
Summaries, and Personal Communication with Lloyd Johnson.
- 13. Reeve, M. R., Seasonal Changes in the Zooplankton of South Biscavne ~
Bay and Some Problems of Assessing the Effects on the Zooplankton of Natural and Artificial Thermal and Other Fluctuations. Con- i tribution #1271 from the University of-Miami, Rosenstiel School ! of Marine and Atmospheric Science, December 1970. l {
- 14. Warinner, J. E. , and Brehmer, M. L. , "The Ef fects of Thermal Ef fluents on Marine Organisms," International Journal Air & Water Pollution, l Vol. 10, 1966. !
I -15. Merriman, D., "The Calefaction of a River," Scientific American, l May 1970. l b l
HI 1 16. ('~' Roessler, M. A. , and Zieman, J. C. , The Ef fects of Thermal Additions on the Biota of Southern Biscayne Bay, Florida. Contribution
#1165 from the University of Miami, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, December 1971.
- 17. Morgan, R. P., and Stross, R. G., " Destruction of Phytoplankton in the Cooling Water Supply of a Steam Electric Station,"
Chesapeake Science, 10:3&4, Sept.-Dec. 1969.
- 18. North, Wheeler. Personal Communication, April 1971.
- 19. Lackey, J. B., and Lackey, E. W. for FP&L. Thermal Effects at Turkey Point. April 1971.
- 20. Lackey, J. B., Personal Communication, 1971.
- 21. Thorhang, A., Biologically Allowable Thermal Limits. Contribution from University of Miami, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, December 1971. ,
- 22. Jensen, L. D., Cooling Water Studies for the Edison Electric Institute. July 1970. j
- 23. Bloom, S. C., Heat - A Gaining Water Pollution Problem. Monograph
#14, Environment Report, May 1970.
- 24. Warinner, J. E., Impact of Thermal Alterations on Estuarine and f
Coastal Environments. June 1970. i t 6 f i I t i I i ( \ l
3 HI 1 I 2.3.7 RADIOACTIVE DISCHARGES l The Florida Power and Light Company has always reviewed, from the initiation ! of the Hutchinson Island project, the design and proposed operating pro-cedures to assure that every effort will be made to maintain radiation releases to levels "as low as practicable." The applicant believes that ; the radwaste system's design meets the definition of "as low as practicable" + as given in Part 10, Section 50.34a of the Code of Federal Regulations in which it is stated that such term means "as low as practicably achievable ' taking into account the state of technology, and the economics of improve-ments in relation to benefits to the public health and safety and in l relation to the utilization of atomic energy in the public interest." The radwaste system's equipment installed will be capable, by virtue of successive process components and/or recycling features and the appro-
- priate storage facilities, of reducing the contained activity in discharged ;
liquids to, or nearly equal to, natural background levels, with the pos- l' sible exception of tritium. However, even the tritium releases will be kept well below the permissible limits. Storage facilities are provided j to reduce the gaseous activity levels by decay before their release. ! Nevertheless, in spite of the strong belief that the presently designed l radwaste system is most adequate, Florida Power and Light will stay in- l' formed of developments in this area of radiation control and, if nec-essary, would consider the incorporation of advanced treatment equipment l into the present vaste management system as such systems are demonstrated ! to be practical and necessary. l The effects of any radioactive releases on the aquatic and terrestrial ! ccosystems will be measured in the radiological monitoring program. It > l is believed that the monitoring program will show no adverse effects be-cause of the extremely low amounts of radioactivity released from-the l plant. On the basis of the information given in the following subsections, ! it is concluded that there will be no messurable radiological impact on ; the environs as a result of the operation'of the Hutchinson Island Plant. ; 2.3.7.1 Description of the Waste Management System l The waste management system, located in the auxiliary building, is com- l posed of tanks, process equipment and pip".ng necessary-for handling radio-active wastes within the confines of the plant and for preparing these l wastes for reuse or for offsite disposal. The waste management system j includes two subsystems; (1) the boric. acid recovery system for normally- i recoverable liquids, and (2) the waste treatment system for nonrecoverable ! liquid, gaseous and solid wastes. . i The boron recovery system treats the recoverable hydrogen bearing liquid effluent from the reactor coolant system. The design of the. system is , based on the requirements for processing both the ' fission products which ! may be released while operating with 1 percent defective fuel and the radioactive corrosion products carried in the effluent. It should be noted that 1 percent defective fuel is a design number only and affords ! protection in the event of either transient or long time increases in ! the amount of failed fuel. The anticipated percent of defective fuel is expected to be at least an order of magnitude lower. The activity level ,3 of the liquid effluent is substantially reduced by decay during holdup : and by filtration, ion exchange and degasification before it is con- ' l
, - - - . , , - - - , ,. - - , . . - . , ,. . - . . . - n. . - - , .,,-.-- ~ ,-.-.
- - - -- - _ __ - .. - . - _ ~ -. - - .
H1 1 i centrated and then monitored for either discharge or for reuse in the j plant. Normally this treated liquid will be reused. l I
~
The waste treatment system treats all nonrecoverable radioactive liquid wastes, solid wastes and gaseous waste mixtures. The system is also designed to process effluent with an activity level based on plant op- ; eration with 1 percent defective fuel although, as indicated above, the ! anticipated percent of defective fuel is expected to be well below this. { The basic processing methods used are storage, filtration and concentration. } Radioactive solid wastes are compacted in drums for offsite disposal. Any releases of gaseous and liquid effluent from the waste treatment processes ; shall be in accordance with the provisions of Part 20 of Title 10 of the ! Code of Federal Regulations. Means are provided to sample potentially i radioactive liquid and gaseous wastes in storage tanks prior to their ; release. l i The waste management system is designed to provide controlled treatment l and disposal of gaseous and solid wastes and either disposal or reuse [ of liquid wastes. The principal design criterion concerning disposal is ; to insure that the general public is protected by maintaining all re-leases of radioactive materials well within the limits of 10 CFR 20. Re- l leases of radioactivity will be via the batch process after the stored liquid or gas to be released has been sampled. Liquid will be released j to its circulating water discharge canal, which has an 1140 cfs (~510,000 f gpm) flow. Gases will be discharged to the plant vent which is located on the side of the shield building and is released to the atmosphere at an elevation of 140 ft. Filters are located in the gaseous discharge [ line. The waste management system flow diagrams are shown in Figs. 2.3.7-1, j 2.3.7-2, 2.3.7-3, and 2.3.7-4. A description of the subsystems follows-Boron Recovery System l This portion of the system is shown in Figs. 2.3.7-1 and 2.3.7-2. The major source of liquid waste containing hydrogen is reactor coolant letdown that occurs during plant startups and dilution operations. These are transient situations which the system can readily accommodate. . Minor sources inside the containment are accumulated in the reactor drain tank i during normal operation. These minor sources include leakoff, drain and j relief flows from valves and equipment inside the containment which con- l tain reactor coolant. The liquid wastes either pumped from the reactor crain tank or released f rom the chemical ana volume control system are sprayed into the flash tank. The dissolved hydrogen and any fission gases released from solution are purged to the gas surge header by nitrogen. The nitrogen is. main- l tained in the flash tank at a pressure slightly above atmospheric to ! prevent air in-leakage and the formation of an explosive hydrogen-oxygen mixture. The flash tank pump operation is controlled automatically by a signal from the tank level. Pressure and level instrumentation with alarms inform the operator of any malfunction. l j i
._- - _-._ _ -- _. J
1 HI 1 J f The liquid is pumped from the flash tank to one of the four holdup tanks where it may be stored until a sufficient volume has accumulated for efficient operation of the boric acid concentrators. The gross activity of the liquid is significantly reduced during storage by the_ decay of radionuclides. A nitrogen gas blanket in the tanks is automatically maintained above atmospheric pressure to prevent air in-leakage. The-nitrogen cover gas is released to the gas collection header or displaced ! into other holdup tanks as liquid fills the tank. Any further transfer of hydrogen or fission gases from the liquid to the cover gas takes place , by molecular diffusion. Pressure and level instrumentation with alarms are provided on each holdup tank. Should the flash tank equipment malfunction, the letdown flow is . automatically diverted to the holdup tanks where it can be stored until ' i the flash tank is back in service. At such time, the holdup tank liquid can be recirculated via the flash tank to remove the dissolved gases. i Flexibility is provided in processing the holdup tank liquid before it ; enters the boric acid concentrators. Flow paths are provided to re-circulate the holdup tank contents through the flash tank or through j a filter and/or an ion exchanger. Filters remove particulate matter l and strainers serve as a backup to the ion exchanger retention elements. j Differential pressure instrumentation is provided for the filters and : ion exchangers. In this way, the activity level of the liquid is further j reduced before being processed in the boric acid concentrators. [ t I The boric acid concentrator piping located in the system is shown in Fig. 2.3.7-2. The liquid is precessed in one or both of the boric acid } concentrators and the concentrate is collected in the boric acid holding l tank. The capacity of a concentrator is 20 gpm. The recovered boric acid ; is sampled; it may be diluted or reconcentrated as required before it is pumped to the boric acid tanks in the chemical and volume control system. , The distillate, after flowing through one of the ion exchangers, is col- l 1ected in the condensate tanks and sampled and analyzed for both radio- i activity and solids content. The water can then be pumped either to the ' j primary makeup water tank for reuse, recirculated to the holdup tanks or the condensate ion exchanger for further processing, or released to the j I circulating water discharge. It is anticipated that most of this liquid, approximately 780,000 gallons annually, will be reused in the plant. Any 'l' liquid that is released will be monitored for radioactivity and automatic valve closure would be initiated if the activity exceeds a preset level. Level instrumentation with alarms is provided on the boric acid holding i and concentrator condensate tanks, and the boric acid holding tank is : equipped with a heater and with temperature instrumentation and alarms. ' The bottoms from the boric acid concentrators will be pumped to the drum- i ming station for ultimate offsite disposal in government approved containers. [ Waste Treatment System l Liquid Wastes f I Liquid wastes which are normally not reusable, approximately 156,000 gallons annually, include such sources as laboratory sink drains, decontamination 4
- .- . - _ - -- ~ -
HI 1 e area drains, equipment drains, building sumps, laundry effluent and con-taminated showers-(Fig. 2.3.7-3). These wastes are collected in the equipment, chemical and laundry drain tanks. Contaminated, aerated and dirty liquid drains and building sumps discharge ; to the equipment drain tank. Drains from the sampling system, decontamin- ; ation drains and chemical laboratory drains flow to the chemical drain tank. When a sufficient volume is collected in the drain tanks, the ef-fluent is pumped through a filter to the waste concentrator. The capacity of the concentrator is 2 gpm. The bottoms from the waste concentrator are pumped to the drumming station, and the distillate is collected and . monitored in the waste concentrator condensate tanks. After the distillate has been sampled and analyzed, it may be released to the circulating water . discharge or, if necessary, it can be retreated as required. The activity ' of the effluent in the line to the circulating water discharge is monitored and, should the concentration exceed preset limits, the discharge is auto- - matically stopped. The liquid would then receive further treatment before its release via the same line. All tanks are provided with level instru-mentation and alarms. The laundry wastes are collected in the laundry drain tanks and are normally pumped through a filter directly to the circu!.ating water discharge. Should the concentration exceed the preset limits, the disc harge is automatically i stopped and additional processing commenced. The activity level is closely ' monitored and, should the need arise, the laundry wastes can be processed using the waste concentrator. Caseous' Wastes . This portion of the system is shown in Fig. 2.3.7-4. The gaseous waste system processes potentially radioactive mixtures of waste gases which are ' either aerated or contain hydrogen. Gaseous effluents satisfying the , concentration limits are discharged to the plant vent. ! The majority of the gaseous waste is nitrogen cover gas that is displaced by liquid accumulation in the holdup tanks. Sources of radioactive waste gas mixtures containing hydrogen include the reactor drain tank, flash tank, volume control tank in the chemical and volume control system, and , the pressurizer quench tank. Aerated radioactive waste gas sources in-clude the equipment drain tank,' chemical drain tank, laundry drain tanks, and concentrator condensate tanks. The aerated gases are processed ; separately from the gases containing hydrogen to prevent the possibility ' of explosive mixtures. Aerated waste gas mixtures are vented to the gas ; collection header and then to the plant vent, j Hydrogen and fission gases stripped in the flash tank and vented from other , tanks flow to the gas surge header and then to the gas surge tank. A nitro- l gen blanket in the gas surge tank automatically maintains a slight positive i pressure in the system. The gases are compressed into the gas decay tanks , by means of the waste gas compressors. : The gases are retained in the tanks until the activity level has been re-duced by decay so that, when controlled release to the plant vent occurs, i i 1 I
H1 1 l
~ the concentrations at the site boundary will be well below the concentration '
limits of 10 CFR 20. Storage capacity is sufficient for 30-day holdup. Means are provided to sample the radioactive gases in the gas decay tanks prior to discharge. The discharged gas activity level is monitored and ; controlled. The interconnection of the holdup tanks provides a large volume for dilution of any fission gases or hydrogen which may diffuse out of the liquid effluent thereby assuring that discharge will be within the limits of 10 CFR 20. The holdup tank nitrogen cover gas and aerated waste gases are vented to the gas collection header and then to the vent. - The gas system also includes the nitrogen and hydrogen controls, consisting l of relief valves, pressure regulators, pressure instrumentation with alarms ! and valving to allow safe and flexible operation. A gas analyzer provides the means to automatically sample at frequent in- [ tervals the components that may contain mixtures of hydrogen and air. t Provisions are made to purge these components with nitrogen. ; i Solid Wastes [ i Radioactive solid wastes consist mainly of dewatered ion exchanger resins, , the waste solidified from the concentrator bottoms, filter elements, and contaminated disposable solids such as plastic bags and protective clothing. , I O The spent resins may be stored in the spent resin tank for decay before being sluiced to the drumming station. The contaminated disposable solids are collected in suitable containers and removed from the site by licensed i i
.j contractors in accordance with Department of Transportation and other i applicable regulations. I 2.3.7.2 Released Activity l An estimate of the quantity of each of the principal radionuclides ex- ,
pected.to be released in liquid and gaseous effluents during normal reactor , operation has been calculated and is given in Table 2.3.7-1. The quantities ! are given as fractions of their maximum permissible concentrations (MPC) ! as given in Appendix B of 10 CFR 20. It is believed that presenting the results in such a way is more meaningful than listing the total curies of i a discharged radionuclide. The curie amount by itself is not really in- l dicative of its effect on the environs. The fractions given in the table ! are then compared with actual measured fractions for operating pressurized water reactors as given in Ref. 1. i The values given in Table 2.3.7-1 assume that plant operation takes place ! with 0.1% failed fuel and that the gaseous activity is held up for the full thirty days before its release. The full delay time is consistent ; with keeping releases as low as practicable. The results indicate that : the yearly average concentrations of the released liquid activity will be ! about one half of one percent of the 10 CFR 20 limits and for the released ! I r 4
)
l i I
7 HI 1 TABLE 2.3.7-1 ESTIMATED YEARLY AVERAGE RADIONUCLIDE RELEASES A. Liquid Releases Average Concentration in Circulating Water Discharge, Fraction of MPC(DCi) pCi MPC in Circulating Radionuclide (ml) ml Water' Discharge
-3 23.1 x 10~
~4 H-3 3 x 10 7.7 x 10
-3 -9 -6 Cr-51 2 x 10 2.8 x 10 1.4 x 10
~0 -11 2.3 x 10
~7 Mn-54 1 x 10 2.3 x 10
-10 -5 Co-58 9 x 10~ 88.2 x 10 9.8 x 10
-5 -10 -5 Co-60 3 x 10 12.3 x 10 4.1 x 10
-5 -12 -7 Fe-59 5 x 10 8.5 x 10 1.7 x 10
-6 -13 -7 Sr-89 3 x 10 7.8 x 10 2.6 x 10
-14 ~7 Sr-90 3 x 10~ 3.9 x 10 1.3 x 10
-5 -10 -5 Y-91 3 x 10 3.3 x 10 1.1 x 10
-5 -12 2r-95 3 x 10 21.6 x 10 7.2 x 10~
-9 1. 3 x 10 -5
~4 Mo-99 2 x 10 2.6 x 10 Ru-103 8 x 10
-5 63.2 x 10
~1' 7.9 x 10
~9
~
Ru-106 1 x 10~ 3.7 x 10~ 3.7 x 10 '
~7 -10 I-131 3 x 10 6.0 x 10 2.0 x 10~
-6 -10 -4 I-133 1 x 10 8.3 x 10 8.3 x 10
-6 -10 -
Cs-134 9 x 10 52.2 x 10 5.8 x 10 '
-5 Cs-137 2 x 10 2.6 x 10~ 1.3 x 10~
Ce-144 1 x 10
-5 -13 5.9 x 10
-8 5.9 x 10
-2 I = 0.49 x 10 (not including tritium)
I = 0.57 x 10~ (including tritium).
. . - _ . - . - - . . . - - . - - - . = . . . - - - .------ - -- ._
HI 1 l TABLE 2.3.7-1 (Continued) , 9 i l l B. Gaseous Releases ' i MPC(UCi) Fraction of MPC at- . (ml) i Radionuclide Boundary of Restricted Area
- i i !
Kr-85 -7 -4 3 x 10 5.1 x 10 l 2
-7 -4 l Xe-133 3 x 10 5.8 x 10 i i
-4 I E = 10.9 x 10 ;
2 0-2 1 i D 1 i 1 4 This assumes an atmospheric dispersion factor (x/Q) of 2.4 x 10 -6 sec/m 3 ! i l at the site boundary of approximately 5000 f t. Actual measurements of l 4 dispersion are being made and it is believed that the X/Q value will be ! of the order of 1 x 10-6, j l I i i l I v i
! [
l 1 i
- i i !
! i i
- +
- st TE-er ? e Tr- N ur + T-**r us et-rirew ww w e * -r m. m -m e-- ++- --'me*- * * = = - * " * <* * - - - - --**a* - * *- --
- HI 1 gaseous activity, slightly greater than one tenth of one percent of the limits. The average concentration of the released tritium is expected to be less than one tenth of one percent of its permissible limit.
Reference 1 presents results for both gaseous and liquid discharges for operating reactors in the United States. Although pressurized water, boiling water, and the one gas cooled reactor are listed, the most mean-ingful information is obtained by comparing the calculated results with the results given in the tables for pressurized water reactors. The most significant tables are 4, 7, 9, and 10 of the reference. These tables clearly show that there is a fairly wide range in the percent of allowable limits that have been released, although all releases are well-below the 10 CFR 20 limits. For liquids, exclusive of tritium, the per-cents range from less than one tenth to slightly above five. For tritium, the percents range f rom 0.005 to 0.15, and for gases all the releases are below one percent, with most being below one tenth of a percent. The estimated releases are thus seen to fall within the range of. actual re-leases that have occurred during the operation of other pressurized water facilities. 2.3.7.3 Pathways to Man and Annual Radiation Doses A number of potential pathways of radiation exposure to man exist from operation of the Hutchinson Island Plant. These include both external and internal exposure paths. The external exposure pathway is via the release of gaseous waste from the facility and possibly also directly from radionuclides in the seawater. The internal exposure pathway is via the food chain. This would include seafood, milk, food crops, and drinking water. While some estimates of the effects of the pathways to man can be made, reliance for detailed information must really be placed on the surveil-Iance program (refer to Section 2.3.6.3). In the pre-operational phase of the preyram, measurements will be made to establish the radiological characteristics of the area so that trends which might develop during
-the operating phase may be differentiated from normal background radiation.
External Exposure During normal operation of the facility, external exposure from released gasecus activity (essentially only Kr-85 and Xe-133) is expected to have nardly any effect. Based on the gaseous releases listed in Table 2.3.7-1, the dose to a person standing at the plant boundary for year would be slightly greater than a half of a mrem. 'Such a dose is less than a person would receive from cosmic rays during a one way flight across the United States in a jet plane. The annual dose from released gaseous activity to a person standing on the west bank of the Indian River for a year would be even lower, about a quarter of a mrem per year. This is completely insignificant when compared with the total. yearly dose of 120 mrem from natural sources. Population groups, further inland, would, of course, receive even lower doses. i
, . - - . =. = - - , - . _ - . _ . - .- - - - . . . l HI 1 l l I Direct external radiation exposure from discharged activity in the ocean f is expected to be insignificant due to the fact that the very low level ! activity discharge takes place well away from the shore line and also because it undergoes good dilution. Water that is already low in activity : precludes any concern from this potential pathway. 4 Internal Exposure : Since liquid effluents from Hutchinson Island will be discharged directly > into the Atlantic Ocean, the marine food chains will be monitored as pos- _i sible pathways to man. For fin fish, Cs-134 and Cs-137 are the critical ! nuclides because they are " reconcentrated" in the edible flesh of fish. Thus, while the fish might be in water containing a certain concentration : of cesium, the flesh of the fish will contain a higher concentration because of the reconcentration effect. Other radionuclides which are reconcentrated in fin fish include Co-58, co-60, Sr-89, and Sr-90. ; However, these radionuclides are, in general, not as significant as , radiocesium from a population dose standpoint because they tend to con- j centrate in the non-edible portions of fish, i.e., strontium in the bone, i and cobalt in the liver and kidney.2 j i For shellfish, such as lobsters, shrimp, crabs, etc., the effluent radio- ! nuclides, Cr-51, Mn-54, Co-58, Fe-59, Co-60, Zr-95, Ru-103, Ru-106,1-131, I I-133 and Ce-144, are reconcentrated in the edible tissues. Strontium is concentrated in the shell and is not expected to be of public health significance, unless the shell is employed in animal feed.2 A conservative calculation of the amount of seafood that would have to ! be eaten daily to reach the general population limits has been made. Re- [ concentration factors, as given in References 3 and 4, have been applied ; to the average concentration of nuclides in the circulating water dis-l charge. No dilution of the effluent was assumed and the fish were assumed i exposed to this activity for the time required to reach their maximum j activity concentrations. Even with these extremely conservative assumptions, ; the results indicate that a member of the general public could eat about ! 2.0 lb. of seafood every day of the year and still not be exposed to an ! internal dose exceeding the permissible limits. Reference 3 refers to a !
. report that says the annual fish consumption of commercial fishermen is j 37 lb., or only about 0.1 lb. per day. Thus, even assuming that the diet l of the general population is similar to the diet of commercial fishermen, [
which is unlikely, the amount of seafood that would be needed to be con-sumed is much larger than is reasonable. As such, it is concluded that i the internal dose from the consumption of fish caught in the ocean off- -[ shore from the Hutchinson Island Plant would be negligible. Of course, ! the fish living in the Indian River would be unaffected by any plant ,; releases. t The existence of commercial dairy and crop farms in St. Lucie and surround-ing counties suggests two other possible routes to man for radionuclides { in effluents discharged to the atmosphere: (1) the air grass-milk-child : and (2) air-soil-food crop-man pathways. The critical radionuclides for the'first route are I-131, Sr-89, and Sr-90, which are readily concentrated t
?
J i a ! I k
.. . - - . .-- . ... . _ . ~ . -. .--
5 HI 1 , 5 O in milk. Cs-134 and Cs-137 may also contribute to this pathway. food crop pathway, Cs-134, Cs-137, Sr-89 and Sr-90 are the critical nuclides. For the Sr-89 and Sr-90 enter the food crop chain either through ab-sorption by plant roots or direct plant contamination, while Cs-134 and ' Cs-137 enter the chain by direct contamination. However, as stated in Ref. 2, experience at operating pressurized water reactors which utilize gaseous waste treatment facilities has not indicated a measurable ex- i posure hazard via these routes. The final pathway to man that has been considered is from drinking water. l Obviously there need be no concern from water in the Atlantic Ocean, ! because its salt content precludes its use as a supply of drinking water. ! The only sources of drinking water that could be potentially affected by [ the plant's operation would be wells or other drinking water systems in i the general area of the facility. While it is believed that such waters on the mainland will not be contaminated from reactor effluents, the i surveillance program will assure that this is, in fact, correct. In summary, it is concluded that the released radionuclides will have an insignificant effect on the environs. An evaluation of the Hutchinson Island Plant by the Public Health Service2 did not reveal any information that the plant could not be operated without any undue risk to the sur-rounding population. In addition, radiological surveillance studies at the Dresden Nuclear Power Station for Dresden I concluded that the
" exposure to the surrounding population through consumption of food and water from radionuclides released at Dresden was not measurable."5 Even Oi though Dresden I is a boiling water reactor, the conclusions are never-theless relevant. A similar study on a pressurized water reactor (Yankee Rowe) has been completed, but the report has not yet been released. How-ever, referring to this study, Ref. 6 states the following: " Preliminary ;
data indicate that exposure in the environs from the discharge to the atmosphere of gaseous radioactive wastes from this reactor was not de-tectable. In addition, sampling of the aquatic environment did not reveal
- radioactivity levels that would produce measurable exposure to the public." ,
t 2.3.7.4 Radiological Effects on Important Species l As discussed in Section 2.3.7.2, the amount of activity released during plant operations is expected to be quite low, less than one percent of l the 10 CFR 20 limits. While it is true that radiation standards for safe-guarding aquatic organisms and wildlife are more difficult to establish ; than those prescribed for man because of the many species involved, the ! following statement was made by Dr. Raymond Johnson, Assistant Director, ' Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, Department of the Interior:7 j t
"However, in spite of this problem (numerous species l involved),* virtually all published data show that con- l centration of radionuclides required to injure fish and l wildlife are much higher than the maximum permissible i concentrations prescribed in title 10, part 20, of the !
Code of Federal Regulations." ) k
- Parentheses added for clarification.
I
\
HI'l l 4 Dr. Johncon went on to say that the cushion provided by the 10 CFR 20 f limits appears to be adequate for acute toxicities or effects on aquatic' ) 1 organisms. On the basis of the above, it is believed that the anticipated releases i of radioactivity from the facility will have a minimal radiological effect l on the important species in the environs. Verification of this tentative ! conclusion will, of course, have to wait on the results of the .preoperational l and operational radiological monitoring programs. References
- 1. Radioactive Waste Discharges to the Environment from Nuclear Power i Facilities, BRH/ DER 70-2, U. S. Public Health Service, Bureau of {
Radiological Health, hbrch 1970. i
- 2. Pliner, G., "Public Health Evaluation - Hutchinson Island Plant, Unit No. 1," U. S. Public Health Service, Bureau of Radiological. Health, i April 1970. ,
t
- 3. Weaver, C. L. , "A Proposed Radioactivity Concentration Guide for ;
Shellfish," U. S. Public Health Service, September 1967. j
- 4. Freke, A. M., "A Model for the Approximate Calculation of Safe Rates :
O of Discharge of Radioactive Wastes into Marine Environments," Health Physics, 13, November 1966. I
- 5. Kahn, B., et al, " Radiological Surveillance Studies at a Boiling Water Nuclear Power Reactor," BRH/ DER 70-1 March 1970.
- 6. Radiclo31 cal Health Data and Reports, Vol. II, Number 7, July 1970.
- 7. Statement made on November 5, 1969 at the Hearings before the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, Congress of the United Stctes, Ninety-- l First Congress, First Session on " Environmental Effects of Producing Electric-Power." l i
i
'l
-i f
i i
,y. - - - - -
*@ *mmo 1%IDE Dufsf 0f bawPL 66 Svb1(es
( DEf 7aI4M f erf <cgf aiespf mf ag g ,g y 3 5) - - - 1
'~ '
- v0 Lisut ( 0=1#01
' "' l 'I 'IC #E N ~ ~ '
- -g- - - va t vt Lisa0f Fb e_
- c. 5 t as va==
Ri t ai t tT aet I;o Gi-i T
- - - me- - - 515 ( > t t a vaist t rama(.f s tar tiv i ssJ t ( tecas Ta hn b#aswS L51 % ) e ahu g
op , * - - a ta t ten toop pasistrell) 6,#,'; hup 66 k -*-- - (wi nc es sans Daain te( s) C Dw'a thal a f 3,,,,, gg , g gg t u w P *-i f *, . , _ _p , g, g ,g g ,9,, g , g ,9 g , g ,, ,,, g ,
'It u I, ,_
e Gf AC104 ('OOg Ah;T p(typ g
, -4 - - ( C hTROt t f D 6(I f D s f at t ef f (C v( $) gg_ ;; l' ,'
e.7 (s e g ' d'
- - + - -(OCRDL ROO DRIVE tt Amorr L i t ho s e ~
- 3p 4, p' (L vf M ,
,l, w ww-sTaar a. o
_. J
=
- p. 4g ...< ,e. 1 wpen 2
,{
ran '
'h -G =;,:,' ram ~~
@ G-( -
j "-N. c -o -*. . .a
=
. ,o<
p ha MULDUEIs%R
-c - - , . w ..a..s iv s o?.M .
y jr r, 5-
" ,, at u. .
"3t.*!.,it*' r, s ! .
4- s ,,2 mc s, i Y n en 4 -' 7 " " L monumammum maammmensaaammuum \2 m I' F l al= 1r ta== P L, WP $
<. - + ie . . . . .
v o 49 [ ,-
. . , + . .
7-
.N .< *W 4 -
,,a,. .a.. . . . . ,
Il a f a c tro pa a.es poweg
.c
= -
7*
}
m. ir pi ib
^
2* -; y'1 - y Mm . - a p -g - , k
'M l f' Up Opa su e t, y a g ( g 6 ' 50 L%
t E N Eb M
--4%
-*s M ac._ 2*
.,N M-
-o Eblh 1I ^
1. I L abes Y Al,F qp t I a, U++'5 !a y
--"'""tX
*4,,
n . . w .~ . , .c . t I4 e M L5 L. ok ~- t "rm' "'s ' "9j sat i
~ _
D
- w. k .. LC ee 1
r- J g_ ? = , P f- - P l - P - - ,.u-; "l:'ry'< s3 o , x. . . .
~, a e.a w ct s ( n ..N (( v( s) l -4 8 p ( W. NE.( h
- 8, *9 4. 588 (f% vt 5) f b ' - * * " ' ' " ' '
O- !" ! O-!~ :: I'~ 0 -:: 5.6
.L, !
- p. .,! - _
- - ~_ . . . ~ , _ .
r.
-_r,c,.,s.,u,<,.,.,..
. - , . ~ , - e. n v. - n %._ n wa
-g . .q .-9.q 4 .rg; _q q
_e 4 ._. 3 g _g q _94 wj i
/j J c.--
-.-.w_ , , . _ , .
f :. ; I i. I ! ! ll : i i l
= _. .
s = h II _- .--__l- 3o y~c.. rru_ O
, m ps.p F_1.T. _A i_;I P. i Fm
- - e. a
- s a F-* m
{v!A n i.) I Alca Av e 2:n on i e ,
)
~
m .~
' I .,.- Apenuta Ocid u ~._.
T
- v ;
'; ; E Tl r '
! I ,hi I
- i e IuE __ii L
- [p _ _. _.) I >
L._ .
. _ ~
7- - s ! -m h i -
. l A &, i
" h ?:n' . '.. "
. !! ,J j
s i [ } t , . a s , . m . . . . . . ., v , . , , o ,
%ll n& 9 2 l l ..n..w,,.<s.,.....,,
i ; , . s ~n i, su . ,2. m 3. ..e ,,4
,. , . . ~ . ,.1 . _ _ _
r - ; m. m_
- f. i P
" t 3, l
'Is j, _ g_m ___
s, { c ll 1 r }-~ _ = m ,
- w -- . w __.
l' i b i r m.;n,:r v .s .> "- o- -- , --_, ,, r L __. n. q-_...-. g q .-
~
l g i
~-'
L_ t __ _1 = , g:g,. e,,,,
.,xs,,,o I
4=4% Waste Management System - nurcun< son 1stmo PLAT ncuRt Flow Diagram ENVIRO MENTAL REPORT 2.3.7-1 p rL' g LL , l , f- -
- - a.-> - -;. -. ..-.,a - , - - ...n> .. a .. .+=w.-- -n. ..a. .e=- j t
t 80 % , S ( H 4 44E 9 $ % N.,
- 7-.
c {FtG is-f) 65H N t- -} {
. I *s 1,
't',
pr w - --. --.d4a. m
< < = cs =s ir e- --[s} - Q -s.v 4 3-le tww - - - 4 1. +-
Bea v( a( D tow ( t e f ea tch
~
p( PARAd t ,
", = l t
e F
.s i
4 ( % ~ ~ ~- 4 e >W k i t a s - 2 --- y r i o ; il , i,
* * *
- Soest aCtB Taast(t vt$) W----
M - - ~ ~ -e= di M > CapuurwG Staf spos (flG lt-3} I f ec n
,5? ,y _.
I u M p 1 \ h n {" _ Ay
. em 9-I
i k .-u C(' """" 4' \ '" w' L s. e,-,
~~taan
% j
-w
.n ua. %
i li I v, .~ 'l %_ J
%z-de- '"
m .__ _*I
-q^y 4) .'.'.-c
-n
= -
y _ Ms mc . q~
, b.
L l _ . ~ , , 1 enup -(towe)3-- _ t l Ltet a ait Y W
- 444 w_ I. -~
i , G_T ""~~#"" ee06 ttu* te 4P S =eB -M - ~ ' [0M gri t* ie is) wote,,,s eu.c5 Peter 1 e kE 4 . . .M -
. .-d-h c o.eo
,or
. ,.c. ..c.o
,t.es. .e, it ' H' $ C = 6.* ,,g,,
E GwDt m>ATI P owPS -- 45 NE6 to ?) 1
-. , )
e , n --..- - . - -. ,~ , - , . , - , - - - --
, - - - . . . . _. - - - - . . . - - a =.aa.. ..-a.n.
's i
i
,e s l l .
I't ? I g Gies l1
.I
! l .
t5 [*3 T' Q S __.
..r.; . _ _. - . %. . . s e s s u 4 y I' .. , . - - _ .. . + ttinat=Satt w . g .3 - - P ar a et+est M it = g ut oa Det ,.
m }t w - c.a - - it i i I
- 3. CONtitTh*TED BORsC AC fD LlHES ARE HEAT 1RaCf D
- 2. 8 0h ab Dif '0*aL *at?E a amar,t wr mY sur r T b, bt t D6 U-1.H 3.AND H-4 )
- 1. f pa svenots a=3 age t viationg SE E 87692 wt tt 5; l
= . .
..t m.. .u.,s.......,i,.i,...,
m y 1
- v. = = u.
e 1, . A t v.to a .t,_ a,, i ._ _ _ . __ __i ! 'is i i ANS,_1EC i :: 8 ~~}; i, 1 x s v !
'9- -4 x :
APER 7URE W ' o i. M~-- n e..< .o.
; a CAnD ,
uvy'
@ d- es r n .t , ~ , .. .a .o.
,<.,1
. t .c .
Also Available on .
, , . 4 _.
= ~ * *
- Aperture Card n
8 m_ ! - < .l ) -u -+- m *
-l y c u-
- ]. q d' f __ ;--
p_. r s *
.x :: b t ::
i
... m:-?- - . L. >
cog ;Ir91 p
=
x 4 l9 e ,C . . i.,
'~ ~ ' ' ' ' ' '
P--- - h L _ _ .1,...c
'"'"~"
J [4[kWaste. Management Flow Diagram System - HUTCHINSON ISLAND PLANT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT FIGURE 2.3.7-2
a W-# % d 9URII e f a1ICsN B0 0s E # C ha asLf A i {t = { 5) ,, , ri sem a t tesc st es ,, , I A(Mah,E R b viil l uf L l' u 2 L s.% ___ _ fathanL{p 4f t %) P .si, C a( e 0 ' 0= fif h (m y , , gg,,,,,, e:es ( e I ma sebf kas y ,g y ,. g g er.es { g[ Ma es6g 5 % 0%> g I l' lII6 Ib 2)
,[
m I v + na s... 6 v.r i o = sa.
@ - @- ! O, ,4, a f,' ?
- ;!mi s ,, a.e _ _ .4a4 _
e , (Q$lhl %baIk 4- ,a l- =m h ,.- d
- h =
hNY
%Mt
! *._U
%J ea5't t o.r s M' #CLOV*
Pa( a a
-- M - M C
~ p ues p S
- l. ass buf f T t l I
m. l Parm - w.- > p.4 8f26II EW0 lI1( a flC 4 Ivel , g,'e, 9 ,g i 3i"a46f #bi:w($I -lggg e, -a a . ..s .;. _. - , f s[ wa ti,f R ; vsgi
. .. . m. . .:.
, ,i A =s . o o u
. .. _ s ,
[ t- = I 9, ;6.A nL t. .a t.t 0..e..,t=5 - mig , ,x t F tG lt 2) est (c=cr= reason 44 N Eas pa a Gf R$ me-----* If { f 16 "1 21 1
- n. ro ..c s1a m..
8 l
= . ~ h.
. aN.s.bC.&
s ii, o Q De& O W II
- 5s4 =5 ef 5e= tamp
- * - PISC ( CN1stNanthT twalks 4 = .$ $ Y A* Lj U O' lla4QEI)
T
* - ed ' $ ( # t ti (f ae39 5 5
-*-en t au.e =t e r os a .ei,
,; .ea . .a r m . . c as. 3 48 M ( DefTal# Eta OJW~~
8 ( 4- ((**hf=* t r a k +4(, (ma a b (I CSI pasass M-I'I M [ e[ ts,Lat lab 4 . es > > ( t a ket uvipfL L-e h _ _ l I D4aler$ _ . a, . a <m. r,. A s. 5,,, . .u., v , sn 5f5'E u a .,,c -- * - f
;cc o.esa t 3 ys': pt v,
- ae- 5 5 f es t his >w t a ne s paa .e Irm.5 t wW
. e - ( ; su ta inemi es f ", vase (S i bi
, ao . r ., .a. ,a Lhy
; v .Ma ' (-,..(.
_._ ,a . . . ..t,.. o. . c.a j W- ' + u * * %Sf at 40h _ we b T { ( 04( { 4
- D e t OR f a 48 (TW
- S D W b a k
1
-_ .a s , , m a . 4 , c . . . . . . . . . <. . , e .o ..
)Wg A e -- - ,
Um } V 2 tua va4WA S aseD sebuf vciriers ut _ F 4G p - 2 me am t.cp.m. ess *# .a mast ut a t sugg?% Sir
' f***
t I $6h Il-l,l' 2. AND 18-4 I d u p ','.9. Wh
/
e s. i
. W1 e i
_.-.v.
"- ~
~EI-b+8, firefig, .Qas Pf ?.f 4.1 O s,...
m_.,............._s...........
.&- 5y, (E 16 f 5" 2)
H -.-4A , un v e. 4 _ 4
'i qa '! q
'I q). A ANSTEC i
r, i a APERTURE
"_ o". ~
CARD IN A Also Available o 1 s . 4 _. Aperture Card ts _ w Jo.4_ O,, 1
..s.,
- r. , . - e u. ~ . 1, .1 3 ,i i.
L ._y: ~~" A_;: ) 3r 1 L- u -- .. ,r m.2
} y
____o
&wn Z
^
-M- ;w.
)
n -.-w-mh v
! P- l n
! ! l l
E y_ -
. . .,. . . . . I. I...
m.u Du L t L ..HieJ4'r
, e g.q .-aG- .
n.,-,.. . m .s x i . _ w._,, a s s u. I r- ; { l 4 m. __n -a n J (, l I
~
t 9 g WW l
! l i
' y
...., .... fO -Si q pO /.] ]-O-g
- -' ( j . . , . , . . . . , . . . , t !
. J s == - H -
>\
C n4I $ f' G'.) l j T ,, 1
, - - - ry n y-
,)
=
w-m w= m % ) l i t -s 4
' .j) i v
~;;c ~g-
-- -.- n __-.- . .__._ ., - . - . - .- - ,- - .-. - --
Waste Management 5ystem - nuTcu1NsoN ISLANI) PLANT FIGURE Flow Diagram ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 2.3.7-3 olol' /5 -
/ .. .
k [w- O + - a w -- spreW8" "'""# I I' s tasm tama 7 (fig il-l) m vtt - - - - - - - - - - - - * - \ r v ., i n a. . . , 4 n s i - - - - _ - 3 y a B3 Sit A( r 0 it ast e ef ea tumt --.w_
]
tr.6 n e 7 f,4 N_ > _
--e
$ b - - -- * - =**==*h ,
Ta mmt o q, M HO.L..D.hp0 STADY a $7{pp ~ " ~
- O'
( Dept'( %Da t l l OLII s lD$ d OhIOO%UE NI w MS S e t ea k 1 D( ( Deg14 thWI M T _ _ p i4 2
, < ,s o,
.o, - , M ,
j gp( M m melisumu
-- -- - i s
, __,, MM g i it [
g es t iv tes it t som -8
~
..s s 4 si - "
- 31 l
- =
o i - entssumna o.;ruc= iana.. - Si* ,a y l#C $) O I
.t..,..., _. ...., _ _ .t. . .... ,
f Beedyb? N' N I4 b + Fa 4 "" wasts c on< s minetta I (Fifels-2 AND ie-3) _ m' e80609P lane -
*t (F Me l'* l) ,
s) Bohet 4(I D g wa41f ( 0=CE mf 84 TOR 7 C (OmDL kbe T g tagab
!! Fis sea aban-2 _ __ ,,,,,, ,,,, ;
'1 '
et.cacio oto. s i... u F5 "-0 ' F (F :6 66- 1.) _. .l_ notsur1sme E 's (F if. IF O
*u -
< wa mer ei c.e. '= t e n. :
(F tG e b 3) **D E D u* 18 8* I
, - --, c
* (res u-o
_ tav = pe r t aa.m vaasu s pi6 n-r
'- g. g g c :; L* 5 S hef,( 14 m=
h a<b P=W 9t ant , _
"I d Gal 9i(et 144mg
** (Tas h Dw6I 6 5 t*
m _ . . < , 64 x 9 bRE 64 Y a bt n .
t i p @ i4p (p 9 ,
,~ _
,4 s6 .
__ = = i o " i
=
l n n n i
-44 ,
----,4 ,. !
t T ! i t Js s ~s ; 9 _ _ _ . , y _____., 9 ., l s- -e
. e 1
8- 6- ; 9
-9 -e !
;; = ., Q' >
= = = ,
e_ e-c
= =
- w
( I ;.,o e7_ :w - e, . . . . s
- m. m.s
.. u
-t A 4
@L~ =
m
- :: l
.- - - ~
......ss...,
- 3 5 ANSTEC r
_ ~ _ _ . , , . . . . .
--_ rm;~
APERTURE i _ _ _ p; g oo ,n .....,e. CARD I
, - -.4 '
. . ...., Also Available on i
._./bp F) 7- -m*"-".,.....
= - _ c,., m...,
Aperture Card i
. . .. . 4 .
.n . . .. . . - -- 9 . . . ,
j
. - . . _ ..., , _ @O- ,
)* " ' .
g' p it
~ _ _ . . ,
i N __.r <m o --* SS YE*"*<aoi 1' t
's
' r
~ j'{ -..--c",,,'"'*- '
? [
( t Q ~6_]~- $: 6 . . . , . *. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , , qix q, ,,y,g,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
..u ,, ,u ,,es n u , e t
._us, t t
2-,-- r i t Waste Management System - mrfCHINSON ISLAND PLANT FIGURE [ Flow Diagram ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 2.3.7-4 l c, g. o $ , l
HI 1 2.3.8 CONSTRUCTION EFFECTS I i The preliminary site preparation efforts which commenced on April 10, 1969, and the start of construction which began with the receipt of the Con-struction Permit on July 1, 1970, were designed to stringently control the effects on the environment and to keep such effects below the threshold : at which any. harm could occur. Fortunately, the care with which this ; construction was planned anticipated the spirit of the National Environ- < mental Policy Act of 1969. By the time the Act had become law (January 1, 1970) approximately 80% of the construction work which would have an effect on the environment had been completed. In addition to the Construction , Permit received from the Atomic Energy Commission, permits affecting con- ! struction had also been received from the Corps of Engineers and The Trustees + of the Internal Improvement Fund of the State of Florida (see Section 2.2). 6 2.3.8.1 Schedule ' A schedule of construction activities is given in TabTe 2.3.8-1. The table has been arranged to categorize those preparational activities which took place prior to receipt of the Construction Permit; those carried out be-tween the receipt of this permit and the preparation of this Report; and the scheduled completion dates. ; 2.3.8.2 Construction Effects on Indian River It is necessary to consider the previous condition of the plant area to I evaluate the effects of construction. Figure 2.3.8-1 is a photograph O- of the plant area taken in August, 1968, previous to the start of any work whatever at the site. It will be seen that this entire area at that I time was a mangrove swamp in which most of the mangrove and related plant l life was dead, due to the flooding and ditching necessary for mosquito ' ; control. The drainage work which had such a serious effect on the vege- l tation had been started for mosquito control in the early 1930's under Works Progress Administration support. (horerecently,theSt. Lucie County Mosquito Control District had, as will be seen from the photo-graph, devoted considerable effort to this particular area. From the rather impressive amount of work which was necessary for mosquito con- ' trol, it would seem that the local residents may have had a rather neg-ative view of the swamp on which the plant is now being erected. A re-port on the past and present condition of the plant site vegetation by Dr. John H. Davis is included as Appendix 4. As given in this report, i Dr. Davis concluded that the site area had become "almost a biological ; desert" before the start of construction, a conclusion borne out by the i color photograph. (Aswillbeseenfromanotherphotograph, Fig.2.3.8-2, { taken on January 2/ ,1971, when construction was well. along, a belt dike ! has been completed around the plant area (visible near the perimeter road ! and the belt of trees) to prevent erosion and the contamination of the ; Indian River from runoff 7 Dewatering operations have been necessary before placing the foundation ri 1, and this rather limited volume of water has { been discharged to Big Mud Creek and the Indian River. This limited quantity l of ground water is negligible in its effects. Because of the nature of'the. earth, little or no blasting has been required during construction. While noise levels are those common for any major construction effort, the dis- i tance to inhabited areas is so great that they are not heard. The effects r
- , -, _ .... ,,. ---., , - ,n. , -. ,- .- ~k
. r HI 1
/"' of construction are apparent only on the Indian River side. These effects, \m from such operations as the initial dredging of Big Mud Creek, are well : within the limits set by the dredging permit as issued by the State of Florida Internal Improvement Fund. There will be no effects of con-struction on local water supplies as no useable aquifers exist below the site (see Section 2.3.2). As discussed elsewhere, the development of ; Hutchinson Island has been limited by the lack of water supply, and the water for the plant will be obtained from the City of Ft. Pierce Municipal System. The city's water resources are considered to be more than adequate for considerable growth in the area. t 2.3.8.3 Construction Effects on the Atlantic on the completion of construction at the plant site, all discharges to the Indian River will cease. A minor amount of work will then be required on the Atlantic side for the construction of the intake and discharge ; systems. The major effort here will be a limited amount of excavation and dredging and the building of the intake and discharge structurcs (see , Section 2.3.3). Some silt will be disturbed at the beach during this time but the time during which silt will be evident in the waters will be relatively brief so that the total effect should be considerably less than found in the dredging for beach restoration of the. type which is now being carried out at Ft. Pierce Beach, a few miles to the north. No fill will be placed on the Atlantic side of the Island. When all construction is completed, the whole area will be intensively landscaped and plantings will be made, as discussed in Section 2.3.9, of , a type which will be effective in controlling erosion. Landscaping, when ', completed, will result in an aesthetically pleasing appearance for the whole area. . I
- - < - < . - ,_, e ._ ._. m. - _ . _ _ , . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ , _ , _ . _ . _ _
HI 1 ,
)
i TABLE 2.3.8-1 ! i CHRONOLOGY OF HUTCHINSON ISLAND PLANT l SITE PREPARATION AND CONSTRUCTION EVENTS i f 1 19 January 1968 - After comprehensive survey of suitable sites for a [ steam-electric plant along the mid-state east coast i of Florida, the Hutchinson Island site was selected ! and land purchase negotiated. f 2 6 February 1968 - Application for zoning classification change filed , with the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning ! Commission. i 21 May 1968 - Advertised public hearing held by the County Commission j at which the creation of a Public Service District was approved. ; August 1968 - Ecological survey of Hutchinson Island property and [ adjacent waters performed by Dr. William Carr and i Dr. Joseph Davis, University of Florida; and , Mr. Terry Davis, and Dr. James Lackey, Consultants. i 29 January 1969 - Application for a construction permit filed with the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. f 10 April 1969 - First preparatory work at the site. 16 April 1969 - Upon reference by the Corps of Engineers to the U.S. ; Department of Interior, a conference was held at the ! Atlanta regional office with representatives of the ! National Park Service Bureau of Sport Fisheries and } Wildlife, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation and the Federal i Water Pollution Control Administration, following which l the dredging permit (69-55) was approved. ; 15 May 1969 - Permits (69-55) issued by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers i to dredge access channel in Indian River and Big Mud i Creek. ! l 2 July 1969 - Meeting held at Atlanta regional office with representa- ; tives of U. S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Sport i Fisheries and Wildlife, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation. [ Natural Resources and Air and Water Pollution Control.- 12 March 1970 - Approval letter issued on the construction permit ! application by the Advisory Committee on Reactor ! Safeguards. I v h i h I 1
El 1 17 April 1970 - Meeting held at Tallahassee with representatives of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Florida Department of Air and Water Pollution Control and Florida Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund concerning the intake and discharge system. 7 May 1970 - Permit application for the circulating water system discharge was filed with the Florida Department of Air and Water Pollution Control. 12 May 1970 - Advertised public hearing was held by the Atomic Safety Licensing Board at Fort Pierce, Florida, to consider approval of construction permit application to the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. 1 July 1970 - Construction permit issued by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. 22 February 1971 - Marine biological study authorized at the site in co-operation with Florida Department of Natural Resources. 1 February 1974 - Scheduled initiation of fuel loading. 1 June 1974 - Scheduled initiation of commercial operation. A
-e :.; . .
,a -
, e ~~r.ggggw,1- ss n%
- j .. a:
vf
.f*,'bg..
{
% sy W "T%< *
)
i.a 19 q , :ya yb, ,&., e-f, r.
.?
;;;j g/.
- e: n* ,5 ny. 2 4a ugl ..
,3 y;. -
< l p,+ . ]Q if, y : >, f ~+f,m.,e(3+L. %.5' ..
.' f .:.. . .g , si ..' -
iI; }.]e ' ,3 i E, *' {y,s?k ,: W*%"*g? 5_t .p.t"&h ~s p4 ?~ _m, g., ..- ', r 3 +
-a [ '
' .-y%e3 q3ps w . 7,g *wwg *y ga- S.a 'w. Q .
.\i ,
s .t" . 5- N pg ?,, : _. J ' " '
. Jy.y , 'q g [qb .?, .6 g _ &,&. .
3.? A,. 9 uh- . jW[h*h ')M I r, J .
%.I.I? %; 2 N : 'p+ *;*~:,z 8 ksW"Eggh .4
.c
~.'n '
~ .
' ' ' ', ^
s . w4&. $$h% ikh 3 b.1/ t',U," g ti f
~
- c. . a.J4 .
;;< p nwynk.(N + W ix M B.,
; f: s
.m/ [ q;$ - # pg"y^y. .
o .x y %,,,2 R ey N..,y *~sp ~i s y? . : r '. i y y s .y pjo s.pgr it .L - s i g
- gw:,x. .a, g we& .ar ,
s
,l. 'L.s tgf.
?
,S.
. g g; (. ;*
4 , ., ,. -
@p 9 j;. ,> $yl4 ^ 7 n!&, * .
y g
. 4 aQ ggJ &!! e 9.
n
.O;*
q
-~ ~ ~T7 . .
70dT c an
; g v
!f; y *'
.1,, . sj',Wif .. , -%
.g.O..j e .-
r@4 o #1 er/ .
+
k y e ,1 3 J ~ Y~ g .m -..d.e,4A. . ,,-w (,... ,- g, 3{ v t ..,}' r * $;W, ._ . . . .
- x( :} ; .gl-
.}x'd ,
.n ' s p 1 l'
~t . ,
L,m ~O~.f, o.1 4 j'). '" a, { fb . j:
, 3 m a a: . < ,.s fU. y. .4
, - t'"~3, ,4-
' ~ ~ ' . . ..
, .- ,: -w
_ ); *
; .y
, $3 r. h h.E -
; g
, _ ;b - j d, c
? Sk?ll; r p .W .
b k;
':, . Amy,m . .. W ., Q .ey %. W
& ~. w+ak b
,n.,/A ff % g # Mg A e,* h tqhgj?'W:h,19$+u [f
.,;! * ~-
}.k? }, 't 1l T, . '
[p a-
.)
i '; - k'I p *4t, y. .
,)
m,-l; .'x
^ ^ ' *
,i - -
- a. ,
y ag em+L ., z
&}? } .
'r ll(4%Rj&
gm 4 ij.% %
- 6 N(k" . $ s,. . *'
r L.v, ' m
".. . o ' ,yyf c
- m. M y y q, .
. yue 3. ,,.;
} _ _
- . j_t f-3
. , - te 1
- e "at , ,
a w ,.
., 6 4x .,
.a t >
a ?%9 - y :: ' lt - s
- W+ , - u p .l%a ~n c; f'1)Ig ,(%
W.
. %. g _
4 . , . , , , . , HUTCHINSON ISI.AND PLANT l ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT l PLANT AREA PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION FIG. 2.3.8-1
.._m
w yn w mqyngm , c y . - - :m l"~ s y' g f- Y
}t l r '
fi , m'k . e M'.MK:
'h /f-, JJ
.,b,'~mj;*:q'y,
'iy :. +b\ yk 1f. '?c A f-iff[
i c .. r ;
"[
p : y ( ,} g - ] - F y +.-! ;C I~ y-p. {'
- 1. }
+* 3 /_
M w @@ 4
,s hf' hq,[ m &)'.,Ok.%;& $
3 p' (f
- s. -
-(
Eh ::- y, *. V ./, 3 kh4 a',y h .' ;i1 . 4 .
": m 'i i
, fg gg '
% t yJ y g, ,
, .y ~. ,.
.,(-+
> . + , [ h. h~ 4 h, n ; ; g \ } p}> [%M: 'I, c
"'"-~~k 5-g j '
h
+ .
\. ;d .-
.:,h-*Ah:Q&[
3 4 '
;? n ' L ,' }f I
~
4 I f ll T > b % t A a .\
/ 1
.J '
c.
, iw' > y ', i 7 i- a:4 f I' l
+
p1 {pg Dg 4 { > %J l . . 4 2 / l 7 raVW ma : s.;
, owe lI, ,f1 gg 1 ,f 4 l gl c 3 i
N ,. l Q Qp. yn p;'jW ff .. $ })g . l }J
$ []g , F ja .
y
-A g 4 j t), /<N' 'N '
)L a 3 :e
;s r L ,
f }\' pi( {B P N* W ,:f hk i l a , 3 l , ;l
.ggd \, N i
?) 4 J iy %1ff t aO f( t M;} s
[ h lh k h ($hQld?gl % Lf,j { I$ gS'
, g%h t ,
'-q -
,L 7,.
~- i e
' f s
Q)&i jg*.f s!
~
.\ , ,
f' D O ( ti
\
g < 4i ,; i . f a n& i a p{k ' ?g N 4 (W
'- $> $A& (; ,e. .('j[;s : Y
~
- ^n k ['
)
" M, '}D t fl 4j 3r i . h',-4 \& ~*
-t
;fy 'I
+%
J (( jfg b z
,' \ ' . . _ .p[r"'s4j .
{ e. - i, * ,, ,
; " ~
liUTCllINSON ISLAND PLANT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT STATUS OF PLANT CONSTRUCTION JANUARY 27, 1971 l FIC. 2.3.8-2
l HI 1 ! I i 2.3.9 AESTHETICS ! The plant structures, in themselves unobtrusive, when seen through the l intensively landscaped site area, will produce a minimum visual impact. l The over-all appearance of the plant will not be out of harmony with its - J surroundings. The absence of the dirt and pollution, as well as the con- i tinuously moving transport usually associated with industrial plants, will l minimize the visual conflict between the natural and the manmade. An ) artist's rendering of how the plant will appear upon completion is shown on Fig. 2.1.2-1. The flat terrain of Hutchinson Island does not permit hiding the plant. The Victorian approach of attempting to disguise it as something which it , is not could hardly be considered. The approach then has been to build ! honest, functional, and unobtrusive structures screened by attractive ! plantings. Only the upper parts of the higher buildings will be visible to an observer on the Island as the switchyards and other low structures l will be totally or partially concealed. The absence of noise audible to the public even at the highway at the plant gate will also help to fit the plant into its surroundings. , The over-all appearance, depending on the observer, is expected to'be at ! worst, unobtrusive, and at best, attractive, with careful landscaping ! preventing any conflict with the surroundings. { Florida Power and Light has always shown concern for the appearance of its necessary structures and, as a matter of policy, strives to preserve both the environment and the amenities. That its efforts in these ! directions have achieved some degree of success is shown in the award , of the Electrical World magazine's 1970 Environmental Action Award to ! FP&L.I The Company was one of the five electrical utilities in the l country so honored. The award cited the Company for " effectively blend- ? ing beauty and function in its production, distribution, and other facil- ! ities, particularly as expressed in harmonious architecture, tasteful j landscaping and provision for recreational facilities." , , t Reference i
- 1. Florida Power and Light Company Annual Report for 1970, FP&L Miami, Florida. j t
i h i l I r
?
.I a
a H1 1 f 2.4 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED f I The ef fects of the construction of the Hutchinson Island unit have been j minimal, and this construction is well along towards completion. As i discussed in other sections, the only important result of this construc- [ tion has been the conversion of a few acres of tidal marsh which may ; have served as a breeding ground for some of the life forms of the Indian ! I River. There have been minor discharges resulting from the dewatering of the site, but these have been minimal and well within the limits j established by State permits. Regarding sociological effects, there has, j of course, been an influx of construction workers into the area but the i total number of people involved will seldom reach one thousand. Because of the heavy dependence of the Florida economy on tourists and winter visitors, these people could be absorbed with considerably less impact than would have been apparent in other parts of the country. , i The construction and operation activities have been reviewed in the light , of Section 101 (b) of The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Referring to the subparagraphs of this section, the following statements can be made: , i
- 1. By preserving two miles of beach in its natural state, the '
Florida Power and Light Company has accepted its respon- l sibility for preserving the environment for succeeding ; generations. I l
'P
- 2. The facility will operate safely, will be aesthetically ;
acceptable, and will provide a useful and essential j commodity - electric power. ;
- 3. The construction and operation of the plant will not degrade f the environment nor will it present any risks to the health and safety of the public as evaluated by the Atomic Energy Commission, the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, and the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.
- 4. The location of the plant will not affect historic and I cultural aspects of our national heritage and will main-tain an undegraded environment. j
\
- 5. Adequate supplies of electric energy are essential to pre- !
serve and expand our high standards of living and the wide sharing of life's amenities. The construction of the Hutchinson Island plant will provide such power with a minimal, efficient use of resources. ; 1 It is believed that the construction and operation of the Hutchinson , Island plant will be carried out in full conformance with both the I spirit and the specific provisions of the above Act. , l l l
]
1
HI 1 i l 2.5 ALTERNATIVES } l Before deciding on the Hutchinson Island unit, the many alternatives for ! securing the power needed were thoroughly investigated and alternate [ sites given very serious study. The various possibilities included: , i
- 1. The possibility of securing an adequate supply of power from f other systems was clearly not feasible. TP&L has been for ;
many years a member of the Florida Interconnected Group of ( Electric Utilities which keeps current their reviews of the ; electric power requirements in the State of Florida as a whole l and.the generating capacity needed to meet these requirements. ; The evidence was clear, as born out by the Southeastern Re- ! liability Reports (see Section 2.1.4), that there is not now, j and will not be in the foreseeable future, excess generating
- capacity in Florida which could be purchased to meet our system needs. Florida is a peninsula so that its only neighboring states are Georgia and Alabama, both a consid- l erable distance to the north of the heavy FP&L load centers. j In neither state will power be available for purchase as shown :
by these Reliability Reports. Even if such power were available, j present transmission capacity from Georgia and Alabama is in- . capable of supplying even a small faction of the states power- [ needs. l It is ethically questionable whether a utility has the right to transfer the inevitable environmental effects resulting-from the generation of electricity from the territory it j serves to a distant territory it does not serve. i
- 2. In comparing candidate sites so as to select one for the new nuclear unit, the following criteria were employed:
t
- a. The distance of the site from population centers. !
- b. The availability of a large area of land at the site.
- c. Natural characteristics of the site such that the impact !
on the environmental would be minimal. j
- d. Proximity to load centers. .
I
- e. Convenient access to navigable water for the transport f of the neavy system components.
j
- f. Provision for a cooling system with a minimum environ- !
mental effect. ! FP&L has attained an intimate familiarity with its service area and with the rest of Florida. Considerable knowledge was there- [ fore available regarding all possible sites. It was found that- ! Hutchinson Island met all the above requirements and was unique ! i l,
..]
i HI 1 t i ("'g as regards the distance from population centers and in the quantity , U of land availabic. The most competitive sites were Port Salerno and a location on Lake Okeechobee. While Lake Okeechobee was attractive from the standpoint of low population density'and ! land availability, there are presently serious questions regard- l ing the availability of water in view of recent drought situ- ; ations and the possible danger to wildlife in the Everglades. ! I While these questions may well be resolved in the future, they ruled against-the Lake site at the time of decision. While Port Salerno had several attractive attributes, it was basically too close to heavily populated areas. The growth of demand in the West Palm Beach area and the necessity of providing adequate j reliability dictated the siting of a plant in this locale so } that dependence would not have to be placed on long transmission i lines. , i
- 3. Regarding the selection of a nuclear unit, FP&L's policy on }
generation is to build a balanced system in which generation i capacity will be divided between fossil, nuclear and gas turbine l plants. It is believed that a properly balanced system of this ! type can best meet the rapidly growing demands with which the j Company is faced. Fossil plants have the advantage of more rapid ; construction, which is extremely important in a quickly expanding- l system, while nuclear units provide minimum effluents to the ! atmosphere. Gas turbines are, of course, uniquely suitable for peaking requirements. Until some technical and economic problems j are resolved as the nuclear industry matures and until con- l struction schedules are shortened, a total commitment to nuclear l is inadvisable. On the other hand, a total fossil system is , not acceptable in view of the limited but, at the present state ; of technology, unavoidable air pollution associated with such ! plants. Practical methods for sulfur dioxide removal for oil fired units may possibly be developed, and FP&L is actively l following such developments. The supply of low sulfur fuel ! oils is limited and obtaining assured supplies is a present dif- i ficulty. In addition, political dif ficulties in the Mideast cast . considerable doubt on any over-commitment to oil fired units. l While natural gas would provide an extremely attractive solution, _ i FP&L is presently unable to eFpand their gas supplies and the [ increase in.such supplies would depend not only on the construction j of new transmission facilities but also on the rather improbable
- development of new sources of natural gas. Florida, because of j its extremely flat terrain, is probably the least suited of all !
the states for hydroelectric power, and even though two small hydroelectric stations have been successfully operated, this method of generation is not a possibility. Therefore, in con- ! sidering the necessity of minimizing air pollution, the avail- ! ability of fuels, the state of the art of nuclear power tech- ! nology and the growth rate of the system, a balanced approach i in selecting power generation methods has been selected. i I i I t v f f
. - . . _ -_ ~ - _.
HI 1 1
- 4. Concerning heat dissipation methods, the once-through ocean f O water cooled method was selected in preference to wet or dry cooling towers, spray ponds, or other methods. A thorough study of the feasibility of salt water cooling towers has been made in connection with the Turkey Point Plant.1 .The major f question and one that appears insoluble in the immediate future j regards the drift of salt water f om mechanical draft cooling i towers. Although Hutchinson Island is relatively remote, the i
possibility of spraying the environs with excessive quantities of salt did not seem acceptable. Natural draft towers min- i imize the salt drift problem but do so at a considerable ad- ; ditional cost. Because of their great height, these towers l would probably be aesthetically unacceptable on Hutchinson } Island. Both of these types of towers, because of their cap- ; ital cost, would add to the cost of generation. The so-called dry cooling tower in which the coolant does not come in con-tact with the air to which its heat is transferred has never i been built in sufficiently large sizes to demonstrate practicality. Further, the use of such cooling towers would require turbine , designs not presently available. In a Florida location where ambient air temperatures are always relatively high, the use of ! dry cooling towers could only result in a considerable and ex- l expensive drop in the unit's output. Cooling ponds require ! hundreds of acres of surface to s,rnly the required capacity. .; While spray ponds which employ T pe jets of water from the- i pond surface require considerabi, '
, area, both types of ponds [
are of such large size that they could not be fitted onto Hutchinson Island. Hutchinson Island provides ready access to the Atlantic Ocean, a heat sink of such tremendous size that no conceivable thermal effect can be expected more than several hundred feet from the discharge diffusers (Section 2.3.2). i i Reference
- 1. An Evaluation of the Feasibility of Salt Water Cooling Towers for !
Turkey Point, Southern Nuclear Engineering, Inc., Dunedin, Fla., ' Feb. 1970. l I
't e
l l 1 I l l
HI 1 i i 2.6 SHORT-TERM USES VERSUS LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY 'f Regarding the effects on the land on which the plant and its related structures are situated, a dead mangrove swamp will have been converted [ into filled land attractively landscaped. The area occupied was never farmed or at any time had any economic importance. From the amount of l effort that was evidently required to control mosquitoes in this swamp [ area, the local people may have taken a negative view of its value. Be- l yond the plant area itself, the other Company property on the island will ! be preserved in its natural state. Since this will protect it from the l future encroachment of the usual Florida beach type of development, it i chould be of considerable value in preserving the amenities. Should it l be desired to decommission the reactor at the end of its expected life, ; the land itself could be returned to a natural state as a filled area i rather than a swamp, or employed for other purposes. Only a low mound l would remain, and the radioactivity levcis would be negligible and not { prevent normal use of the land. l Since there will be no discharge into Indian River, the only effect here i will be felt during the construction period, now approaching an end. The j only long-term effect on the River side is removal of a few acres of tidal j swamp by filling. The mosquito control works constructed on the site prior i to its acquisition by FP&L had substantially diminished any geological ; significance it may have had, and the loss although permanent will be ! extremely small. It should be mentioned that the red mangroves which l are the principal contributors to estuarine productivity have been : preserved. l On the Atlantic side, as discussed in previous sections, no short or long- { term effects on the biota are expected. The chemical and radiological i discharges are so small as to have neither short nor long-term effects. The Hutchinson Island site will produce power which is needed for a j rapidly growing area at a minimal cost in both short-term and long-term j effects. This and such benefits as preserving the beach outweigh by , far any of the limited permanent effects. i
)
ll l 4 i l
i HI 1 i 2.7 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE C0KMITMENTS OF RESOURCES t i s The construction of the Hutchinson Island nuclear plant has a very small , permanent effect on such natural resources as submerged land, as dis- - cussed in the preceding section. Present thinking on the decommissioning of nuclear plants is that techniques crin be developed which will remove , the hazards of radioactivity from the area to the extent that its utili- ; zation for other purposes will not be limited. Therefore, the land itself ( cannot be considered as irretrievably committed. The construction materials and the operating supplies are so small 1n total as to have no significant effect. The only mineral resource whose depletion will be seriously af-fected is the natural uranium required for fuel. Some 33 metric tons of uranium dioxide, equivalent to several thousand tons of uranium ore, will be required each year. The adoption of plutonium recycle processes may , greatly reduce this requirement. There is no apparent future shortage ; of uranium as new ore supplies are continuously being found; the depletion of this natural resource is not considered serious. In view of recent ! discoveries such as Nabarlek in Australia, nuclear fuel may well be the ! most abundant fuel supply available in nature for energy conversion 7 purposes, with the current technology of electric energy production. ,
)
[ l t
?
i
?
t i i N I I t' - x_> , f
~
l 0 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ! HUTCHINSON ISLAND PLANT ! UNIT NO. I t 3 i i i ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT SUPPLEMENT l P o i JANUARY 6,1972 DOCKET NO. 50-335 ; O l e h r _ . - _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
........_m.__-..__._..._..___... . . _ . , _ _ . . . . . _ . . . . _ . _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
i i i HI 1 Il: 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS i 1 Page , , l
- 1. INTRODUCTION I-1 )
I II. TRANSPORTATION 11-1 , i Ill. TRANSMISSION LINES III-l IV. ACCIDENTS IV-1 l V. ALTERNATIVES V-1 - l t A. Power Requirements and Alternative Methods of l Providing Power V-1 l B. Heat Dissipation Alternatives V-5 j i VI. BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS VI-.1 j
'i G .l r
APPENDICES !; A. Internal Improvement Trust Fund of the State of Florida Permit 253.03(7)-230, 11/13/70 B. U. S. Army Corps'of Engineers Permit 70-761, 1/14/71 l l C. Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District Letter ; SSLC-41, 12/18/70 l D. U. S. Coast Guard Letter 2455, 10/22/71 l I i O i I l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ , _ _ , . _ _ ._ _ . . . . _ . , , _ _ , _ , . . . _ . . . . . . _ _ . . }
.. j j ! ] HI 1 ! 4 t 1 j 4 , l TABLES i f i Page q 4 i f 4 IV-1 Accidents Analyzed IV-9 j l IV-2 Results of Accident Analysis IV-10 l t i 4 V-1 Florida Power & Light Company Summer Peak Loads, j ll Capabilities and Reserves V-Il !
. I l-
.I i .l . . l ! , l l r I ~ FIGURES i i j i a ! III-l Indian River Crossing, Plan and Profile ! III-2 Typical River Crossing Structure 4 i i ! d i . k i j i s 1 I d i l I ) f ! O ! : I l 5 i
- 11 .i j 1 i i i i k---.---.
--... - - . ~ . - -
}; !
- HI 1 -
?
i I il 1. INTRODUCTION As required by Appendix D,10 CFR 50, the Florida Power and Light Company I hereby submits this Supplement to the original Environmental Report (May 20, 1971) for Hutchinson Island Unit No. 1. As the Application for Hutchinson ; Island Unit No. 2 has since been tabled, this Supplement refers only to j 4 Unit No. 1. 1 The Hutchinson Island Nuclear Plant (AEC Docket No. 50-335) is a nominal j 850 Megawatt net electric unit utilizing a pressurized water reactor. The j nuclear steam supply system is being supplied by Combustion Engineering; ;
; Ebasco Services, Inc., is the Engineer-Constructor. At the date of writing, !
! the site preparation work is 70% complete, and the total construction is j i 20% complete. The plant is scheduled for commercial operation in midyear i 1974. i
-i The original Environmental Report was prepared in accordance with the Guide l
to the Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Plants of i February, 1971. Since it was submitted, several new guides have appeared ! and this Supplement has been prepared in accordance with: !
-- the Interim Guidance on Modification in Applicants' Environmental l Reports and AEC Statements under NEPA of August 4, 1971; ,
-- the Scope of Applicants' Environmental Reports with Respect to i l
Transportation, Transmission Lines, and Accidents of September 1, ! 3 19713
-- Appendix D,10 CFR 50 of September 9,1971.
A draft Guide to the Preparation of Benefit-Cost Analysis to be Included ; j in Applicant's Environmental Reports has recently been released for comment. ! i While the available version of this Guide applies to nuclear plants which I are approaching completion ~and not to plants at earlier stages of con-i struction, such as Hutchinson Island Unit 1, it has been used for guidance where applicable in the preparation of this Supplement, even though the Guide is in preliminary form. The contents of this Supplement are limited to those matters required by guides and directives issued subsequent to May 20, 1971, as no changes , have occurred which would significantly affect the material submitted in the , Environmental Report of that date. 1 , The material previously submitted has been reviewed by the applicant, as directed in the Interim Guidance on Modification in Applicant's Environ-mental Reports and AEC Statements under NEPA, to assure that the required material will be fully reported. This reporting is as follows: l i 1-1 i. t
*-----4.%- 4 . - , , - - -- - -... . . .-_._--.---.-..~..------#.---------------..m. - - , - - ~ - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - , - - = -----e.--.-._-..ww.- - - - - ~r-
HI 1 -i l ! i :
- 1. Full information on thermal and other effects with respect to !
, l water quality was provided in Sections 2.3.2 through 2.3.6 of l the original Report. Marine ecological effects were discussed i l in detail in Section 2.3.6.2.2. , t t i 2. Alternative methods of heat dissipation-were discussed in . ) Section 2.5.4 of the original Report. Cost data and further , information are provided in Section V of this Supplement. ; l 3. The original Report includes all relevant available information ! l- known to the applicant on the environmental effects of'the l facility as regards land use compatibility (Section 2.3.1), aesthetics (Section 2.3.9), and recreation (Section 2.3.1). i' l 4. The need for the power to be generated by the Hutchinson Island plant and alternative methods for generating this power were [ l discussed in Sections 2.1.4 and 2.5.3 of the original Report. 3 This discussion is amplified in Section V of this Supplement. l
- 5. The benefit-ccst aspects of the plant are discussed and analyzed l in Section VI of this Supplement. !
l 1 l 1 i 1 .i i i i i k i ! i i I I i 1 l' t
- till !
f i > I-2 g l i i
.(
a - ,, .- . . . . - - - .- - - .- HI 1 f 4 II. TRANSPORTATION t Under the terms of the agreement with the fuel supplier, Combustion Engine-ering, FP&L will take title to the fuel after its receipt at the plant. Title to the spent fuel, via a buy-back agreement, will return _to C-E when the irradiated fuel has been transferred to the transporting conveyances + after storage. Fuel transportation both to and from the reactor will be the responsibility of C-E. ! A. Transportation of Fuel Assemblies from the Fabrication Facility i to the Plant Site The environmental ef fects of the transportation of fuel assemblies from the fuel fabrication facility in Windsor, Connecticut to the plant site will be no greater than the environmental effects of any normal material shipment. F Combustion Engineering's containers for transferring unirradiated zircaloy ' clad fuel assemblies containing special nuclear material are identified as Models 927A, 927B and 927C. The Atomic Energy Commission has authorized the use of these shipping containers for the delivery of special nuclear material to a carrier (Amendment 71-3 to Special Nuclear Material License , l+ SNM-1067) and the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) has issued Special Permit No. 6078, including First Revision, authorizing the ! shipment of special nuclear material in these containers. ! The above mentioned shipping container (s) consist of a lower and upper { shell. These steel shells have a positive closure which prevents inad-vertent opening. The outer diameter of the assembled container is 43 l inches. Each container houses two unirradiated Zircaloy clad fuel bundles ! that are individually protected by a polyethylene covering. Internal structures and a clamping assembly secure the fuel bundles within the individual containers. The gross weights of model 927A,_927B and.927C , containers are 6200 lbs., 6200 lbs. and 7200 lbs. respectively. Each { container has a maximum radioactivity limit of 1.4 curies. ; The containers used for the shipment of fuel assemblies from the C-E fuel fabrication plant to the Hutchinson Island plant are designed, constructed, ' and their contents limited by design, to meet stringent safety criteria during normal conditions of transport. Satisfaction of these criteria assures that the contents would remain suberitical even under hypothetical l accident conditions which are assumed to result in the fuel occupying its ! most reactive credible configuration with full water moderation and reflection i on all sides. Qualification tests have also been performed to insure withstanding the con- , ditions expected during normal and accident transport conditions. During ' these tests a shipping container prototype has been subjected to severe ; conditions of heat and cold, pressure and vibration. In addition, free drop, penetration and compression tests for both normal and hypothetical t accident conditions have been performed. The container prototype has passed all of the qualification tests performed, i r II-l {
.. , .~ - . . - . . - - - . - - . .
. - __ -- --. - - - ~ ._ - .- .
e H1 1 l i ' Maximum radiation dose rates and removable radioactive contamination levels for shipments are specified in 49 CFR 173.393 (j),173.389 (f), and 173.397 (a) as follows: ', s
- a. 1,000 millirem per hour at 3 feet from the external surface of the i package when transportation is by closed vehicle-
- b. 200 millirem per hour at any point on the external surface of 5
~
the car or vehicle when transportation is by closed vehicle; .l
- c. 10 millirem per hour at 6 feet from the external surface of the '
car or vehicle; i
- d. 2 millirem per hour in any normally occupied position in the car or vehicle; and
-11
- e. 10 curies of beta-gamma per square centimeter and 10-12 curies l i
of alpha per square centimeter as measured on the wiping material { used to wipe the external surface of packaged radioactivity. j i Experience on past new fuel shipments demonstrates that radiation dose I rates for shipments of fuel elements from the fuel fabrication plant to ! the Hutchinson Island plant easily meet all of the above limits with normal radiation levels seldom exceeding 5 mrem /hr on contact with the external ; surface of the shipping container and dose rates in the vehicle not measurable. . L
+
O,\ The above mentioned new fuel shipping containers will be transported in. } motor vehicles for the sole use of Combustion Engineering, Inc. These con- l tainers are authorized for shipment up to a total of 16 fuel assemblies per vehicle load. The containers are secured by chains in protective covering and shored by wooden blocks. ! I It is planned that the initial core fuel bundles will be transported.from . the fabrication facility to the plant site in approximately-fifteen (15) { shipments over a period of about one (1) month. Thereafter, a fraction of the reactor core will be renewed approximately annually which should result + in approximately five (5) shipments over a period of about one (1) month. ; i It is concluded that the environmental impact of the transportation of new ' fuel from the fuel fabrication facility to the plant site will be nil. B. Transportation of Spent Fuel Assemblies from the Plant Site to : the Fuel Reprocessing Plant
~i t
In the course of power generation the fissionable isotopes in the fuel will { be partially depleted and about annually some of the fuel must be discharged l and replaced with fresh fuel. At this point, the depleted, or " spent fuel", ! still contains some of the original fissionable uranium and also plutonium;. ] both of sufficient value to warrant recovery. This operation can most t safely and economically be carried out at a separate fuel recovery facility ; serving many individual reactors. Therefore, such fuel must be trans- I ported to the recovery facility where valuable uranium and plutonium are recovered and residual radioactive wastes are packaged for safe disposal. 11-2 l
\
r H1 1 ! i l The Hutchinson Island Unit I will. discharge approximately 72 spent fuel ! assemblies containing approximately 28 metric tons of uranium and 240 Kg l of plutonium about once a year after the first 20 months of operation. l The spent fuel will be cooled in the spent fuel pool for a minimum of 4 months prior to shipment to reduce the radioactivity and heat generation in the spent fuel. During this period, the fuel assemblies will be moni-tored to determine whether there are any " leakers" which will require canning prior to insertion in shipping casks to further ensure against l activity leakage. ' After the cooling period, the spent fuel will be loaded into shipping casks { designed and constructed to meet the rigorous requirements of the AEC and l USDOT. These requirements provide for cooling, radiation shielding and -l containment of radioactivity for protection of the public in the event of ! abnormal and accident conditions as well as for normal conditions of ! transport. Prior to use, each cask design and its transport system will ! be reviewed and approved by AEC and USDOT, and transportation will be authorized by license issued by the AEC. License provisions will include { j adequate quality assurance, testing programs and operating procedures to i assure equipment is constructed and used in accordance with approved designs j and procedures. When loaded, the casks will be carefully surveyed for leak ; tightness and surface radioactivity contamination and inspected to assure ' that they have been properly prepared for shipment and fully comply with ; license provisions governing transportation. Shipments will also be placarded in accordance' with federal regulations. j 4 t, The applicant has entered into an agreement with Combustion Engineering, Inc. 1 whereby C-E will buy back irradiated fuel from the applicant and will then ! have responsibility for the transportation of the spent fuel from the plant : site to the fuel reprocessing plant. In turn, C-E has contracted with l Allied-Gulf Nuclear Services for the shipment and processing of the spent i fuel. Casks used for the shipment of spent fuel assemblies are designed, ! constructed and the contents limited in accordance with stringent safety j criteria which help to assure that there will be no release of radioactive i material from the cask during loading and shipping. A cask used for the , shipment of irradiated fuel is constructed and its contents limited by ! design such that, under hypothetical accident conditions (10 CFR 71): '
- a. The reduction of shielding would not be sufficient to increase the external radiation dose rate to more than 1,000 millirems ,
per hour at 3 feet from the external surface of the package. j
- b. No radioactive material would be released from the cask except !
for gases and contaminated coolant containing total radioactivity { exceeding neither 0.1 percent of the total radioactivity of the ! cask contents nor 0.01 curie of Group I radionuclides, 0.5 curie j of Group II radionuclides,10 curies of Group III radionuclides, t 10 curies of Group IV radionuclides and not more than 1,000 curies ( of inert gases irrespective of transport group. l In addition to the above the cask is designed such tha t its contents will ! remain'suberitical under hypothetical accident conditions which result in i the fissile materia' occupying its most reactive credible configuration l with complete water moderation and reflection on all sides. ; i II-3 l i
-e m _ - - , , . .
.l i
HI 1 1 1 The cask is also designed to meet structural standards for load resistance and external pressure which will assure that the containment vessel will ] suffer no loss of contents if subjected to static loads equal to.five times ! its fully loaded weight or external pressures of 25 psig. l During normal conditions of transport, there will be no release of radio-active material from the shipping cask and radiation emitted from the con- t tainers will be within established limits. Furthermore, in the event of a i shipping accident whereby maximum hypothetical conditions are assumed to exist, the environmental release of radioactivity is limited to inert gas, 1 which would pose no radiation hazard, and coolant, that could readily be l contained and disposed of. This assessment is made in light of the rigorous j safety criteria which have been employed during the design and construction j of the shipping casks. ! It is planned that spent fuel will be transported by barge and/or exclusive use truck. Based on this plan, approximately three barge shipments or 36 l truck shipments will be made each year. Destination during the period 1976 to 1982 will be Allied-Gulf Nuclear Services in Barnwell, South Carolina. . The total yearly spent fuel shipping program will be carried out in approx- l imately one month by barge or 2 - 3 months by truck. In all cases, truck shipments will be routed to avoid heavily populated and congested areas ' as well as tunnels, bridges or toll roads which prohibit such ship.m ts. ! Each truck will be manned by two specially trained drivers and progress , will be frequently reported enroute. Instruments for detection of abnormal t, conditions and instructions for immediate action will accompany all ; shipments. j A formal Accident Control and Recovery Plan will be developed prior to 'first shipment which will provide for rapid and orderly utilization of l Applicant, carrier, Allied-Gulf, state and municipal emergency personnel, ! and AEC radiological assistance teams as required in case that any abnornal condition or accident is encountered. Even though the probability of an l accident is remote, the plan will include control of contamination and of i exposure to the public. The plan will also include salvage and recovery ! as well as control of bodily injury and property damage. ! In view of the plans for packaging and transportation outlined above, it is believed that there will be no adverse environmental effects associated i with the transportation of spent fuel from the Hutchinson Island Plant. This conclusion is based on the following: l
- a. The volume of barge and truck traffic added in the region of $
interest is an insignificant part of existing traffic.
- b. Both the packaging and the vehicle will be designed'to withstand normal and accident conditions without harmful radiation exposure j of the'public or release of the radioactive spent fuel.
I
- c. The hazards associated with accidents are largely those associated f j
with conventional heavy object shipments, not radiological hazards. ; i Il-4 J l 1
l HI 1 4' 9 d. The probability of such accidents is lower than comparably heavy object shipments because of the additional equipment design and operational safety requirements as well as personnel screening and training. C. Transportation of Packaged Waste Radioactive Materials f I Detailed plans for the shipment of solid and liquid radioactive waste have 4 l 1 not as yet been developed as such shipments will not be necessary until l 1975. Possible contractors for radwaste transportation and burial are .i being investigated. When plans are finalized, all pertinent laws and { f regulations will be determined and rigorously complied with. 1 i i i l i ! i ; l
\
i i y 1 i i { l i .i j a : ( ? i- f l 1 i ! i ll 4 h i r t
.9 i
11-5
--,.--..--.-,........-,,e.._,- _
. . _ - . . ___ ~ . _ - . - _ . , - _ _ - _ . . . - - . - - - .- . -
. . . , , -t HI 1 ~{
t O E III. TRANSMISSION LINES The Hutchinson Island plant is scheduled for startup in 1974 and operable transmission lines will not be required until roughly a year , in advance of this date. The transmission lines are not scheduled to l be energized until June 1973 so that designs are not as yet complete i and only one-half of the right-of-way on the mainland has been secured. No construction is scheduled to begin until af ter October 1,1972. The entire transmission system will cross the Indian River west of the plant site and then continue overland for some 11 1/2 miles to the present + St. Lucie substation. There will be three circuits of 240 kv in this system. The present transmission lines out of the St. Lucie substation ; are adequate to handle the Hutchinson Island output in addition to l their present loads. A. Indian River Crossing f The transmission lines consist of two portions; one crossing the Indian t River and the second from the River overland to the St. Lucie substation. The Indian River crossing, as shown on Figure III-1, will consist of , three circuits, each of which will consist of three structures in the [ River plus two sets of land structures at each end. The lines of the three circuits will be spaced parallel with their centerlines 100 feet apart. Starting at the Hutchinson Island switchyard, the lines will , proceed almost directly west with the first structure at 612 feet and i the second at 1751 feet farther, both on land. The third structure is t the first with foundations in the River and is at an interval of 2005 feet. The fourth tower is 2005 feet to the west, the fifth, 1648 feet, and the sixth tower is on the mainland at an interval of 2005 feet, with j the final tower of the River crossing section at 1180 feet. l The three towers in the River rise 173 feet above mean high water so that > the conductors will clear the surface by 90 feet at the intersection with j the Intercoastal Waterway. With this clearance and with the spacing between j the towers, there will be no interference with navigation or pleasure craf t j or fishing. On the west side of the Indian River a small bluff rises from i the water and the final tower of the River crossing system is near the top : of this bluff. The 104 feet height of this tower will hold the conductors approximately 76 feet above the ground so that they will clear the trees. , Nearly all of the trees will be preserved so that the landscape will remain 1 undisturbed and the towers will be less obtrusive. A plan and profile of l this crossing is shown on Figure III-1. ; River Crossing Permits. Permits for the transmission lines across the j i Indian River have been received f rom the U. S. Anny Corps of Engineers and from the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund of the State of Florida (I I Board). The Internal Improvement Fund was established in 1854 for the purpose of administering lands owned by the State of Florida and for the protection of the interest of the public of such lands. Under Florida Statutes, Chapter 253, Title 17, the Fund has title to submerged land throughout the State and is, therefore, concerned with such matters as this River crossing. The Central and South Florida Flood Control District has also issued a permit for this crossing. The U.S. Coast Guard has stated that no lighting on the towers for aid to navigation purposes will be required for the River crossing. 111-1 1 I
~ ~
h Machine copies of the above permits are included in the Appendices as is l 1 a copy of the Coast Guard letter. .\s_/ B. Mainland Transmission Lines 1 The design of this system is as yet incomplete but the characteristics of the right-of-way can be described at least generally. From the last j tower of the River crossing system, the lines will proceed westerly for approximately 10 miles. The first quarter mile from the bluff will be , through a rather open bluff area with the next 21/4 miles being an open, ! level savanna. For the next mile the lines will proceed through orange groves. In this area U.S.1 will be crossed. After the orange groves, ; the lines will run through the St. Lucie River basin, a swampy area, for j 3/4 of a mile. The rest of the line will be built in an area of open field ; now used for pasturing and grazing. This area is of the type sometimes referred to as " Palmetto Flats" and is being acquired from a large land development company. The right-of-way will create a natural ' green belt' that can be used for parks and other recreational uses. The last 1 3/4 miles of the line will depart from the westerly direction of the line and run almost due north to the St. Lucie subs tation. The right-of-way will be 660 feet wide and it is expected that the circuits will be supported on two-pole structures. Mainland Transmission Line Permits. Permits will be required from the Florida State Department of Transportation to cross State Roads 707, 5 (US 1), 605 and the Florida Turnpike. Applications for these permits have not as yet been made as the design of the mainland portion of the trans-mission lines is incomplete. It is believed that none of these road crossing permits are concerned with environmental effects. C. Environmental Impact Those structures west of the River crossing are expected to be 80 feet high with an average 650 feet span. While the type and the height of the main-land towers has not been decided, it is intended to keep these structures as unobtrusive as possible. The major impact on the environment is expected to be visual, as the types of lands which will be crossed, as listed, are not of a type which will be, damaged by the construction of the transmission line or by its presence when operating. Since there are no woody areas along this right-of-way, the removal of trees will be negligible. The savanna and palmetto flat will be in no way cffected as regards land use by the presence of the transmission structures. Only those orange trees will have to be removed in the grove area where there is a direct conflict with a structure. The Indian River structures will be visible from the mainland shore but this is at present a lightly populated area which contains no major roads. Since the nearest bridges north and south of this crossing are approximately eight miles distant, the visual impact will be negligible. Special emphasis was placed on the engineering design of the Indian River Crossing structures to create an esthetic appearance and to minimize the number of structures in the water. A sketch of one of these structures is given on Figure I11-2. The construction of the transmission line will have a negligible environmental impact as the placement of structures on the g mainland side is a conventional operation quickly completed. The construction of the piers for the towers in the River is not expected to interfere with marine life, navigation or recreation because of the relatively small size of the piers and the great distance between them. III-2
- e. -=
l u
} (sta co')
N i
\
% s
r !'. s i
s s f s s*
\ g '%
\.
)\ \ \% .'\S%
g\ c
( 'hg, o c. '-
'c f
'q g,\ ';
\\
\ \
g% hi. \\ s %
$6
,,_ g _
\
et $ \\ g4
.? x .. f. .___ \ , _f -p._._______ ( t\ _ _. $1. Lucit ciacucj
__ 4 M_4__ .
-- ] - ___r . \ _ _ _ _ _ _ _14___________..____--p----_-___-\,, .
_ _ .p .). _ _ _ _ p p. tucu oed i +
\-
5 \, \ A s] \[ g
\- \ \
s \ 3 gg
\ \
\ g%; I ND/ A N ht'.
",- 1
\ \ (STA *Cp 1,
i
. 7._ ___ _ _ ....___;.__.. . _ _ .. _ . _ . . . ___._,____.j___ _,___g._. ____ , _ . _ . ,_ , _ _ _ .. _.._ _ . _ . _ _. _.
mp _ . _.__ -- m__ .
=}==------4____. __.__: = 4 == =:r ====== _,_
===== ,y= =1=====1= ==
=l==-- = =-=;==_======--
=
=
==== ======-~1 = ========
=
=. = =
== _zk==t= ==- z==== == = =j= ==.. = - -
=Q===
= ;
== ;= ._====== =d===_=_==_m
= == =: = =z== -
- == ___._= == =q = .===+=== __ $, r===2= == ====
=:=
=: =';
__ ' _ '_._ ..=:==~ _ _ . .' - ^ '^'_
-'.~
_]
=.
.===.~
_'-~7 ___ _ . :== . _ _ . ___._ .
=
$~ =. 7-
, _ _ ' . _==___=
' ' '_=__ .
. ap 4 ,_._
g4 py ag _. _ .. - . -. . _ . _ _ _ _ . . _. . _ _
.._g$ _ _ ..
g .._. . _ _ _. . _ . . _, 1 =::=. = =rr= :g -: --
== ==
rh7 --yfq_m~ .t= w ' - ,. .=== ====- -
- _.==.._ n .. _ _fx= == $ = =
---e ms e
_g,
.. ._ lf=n:x._.. _ .__.._ + h,=====,
y, ===- - -- = - _f_lA
= b _ . . =
-=w=c w .ei _--__ ;r=p z !=xp.:_=%
=
=== :==:
__. = ..-
= pp_ 2=f :=r
~lx ,
- m=q=_ ==
= . .x==
w - --
-u m g c.r: = r=h'.=_ ..:_.. _ _ .= y= _
m=%
-. hw
==z q- -r
,e=f=
... __= g-g
;__. = =&
=4
~%
__2 w ==
=. - - --w uc ---- - M7
=+ . , -p tJV n D ~ W% J-4 =g9 2
- .--En- zC-
= ==y.=:
V- - - - -'- N _._;:_t -=g:==
- 7---
=
1 p--g_= _-=-
== s=2-t-:'--== : 2 =: s ;n *~ nc. ";P=-
==Wg=&= =:y l w == ; ==2==== y L y_p'=====g ==_ . _==x .. . _. _3=
v;===== %g: i g=_
== =
c == ;_ = 3y31 a l u{ =
=
=,t === _ _ _ =1
= -p _
y+3-- =8--
=s.
=A.:===
=__=
=
__qr--% c.;,;,,,,,; t - - : =:. _ _ -.P- --- - - - --- --- -
- g. ==' =2:=h2=_uu_ -g@ {E.8 r. =h --=T-__, = _ === 7y = -
yn ; - -'--- - - n^,,,o . _ . - .._.4-fNvn.-k=Q== _L ..__ 4==e= ;, R T - i=- + - - -=-=
~
~~
?
m N:=..=h[=
-- r
==: -
., nn ...-
___ _ _ ..= si._: St-~~-=M
==m== i =1A=MPm
..t = +,(= amme p= -==m=n wgggg gh=p msWIgIliamsagesusma
= a _. -
_.__.-, Y*
*~"._dH~_TYhT&F :===w K(( ? ==lr 'T"=Ef[-X_ ' -Mr - K2 =-- ===-- =-
-y =t= = -~d.? ==2 -.-_- --+--
===
= == = ===--
=~L==-_L==_ ; n=_=[=.=q= .=_+=. ===t = .
_- - ~
. . . = -
_ _ . _ .._=__ = _ 4====-=- ____-
===
===
.=._-)._-~~ . . ~ , .__4_ - ' - '~_'- _ . . _ ._--' - -
^
_ ' " ~ " .' ~ . _' ._ "' ,, = _ . "^3.= =_ 1..
- - -- - - ~
.._.w_._ ,. _-4_. _ . . , . _ . , __2_ , . . . _ _ _ . , _.._. _ , _ , ___
+ _ _ .,
_==_=. =+____;.._. ;_ . =_ t =.. . = t, = -.=.$ =_= _ . ==
~_
- - -- =_ . __ _
=__.= __
==== = ^~i~ =4 --=== r----=_
=4_p=. =,=L
==n==4 m t = , ,= ir=3=4._ y=d= ;= rt =,,, 3, _ . __ y ,, y_
_ , --tr s, == n .,_ _ _ , , =
c ~ HI 1
/ / /
" / ANSTEC / /
APERTURE, [ Cr.nD / . 1' 1
/
L
) b
/
j H
/\bo AvM.a on g}
N' N 'm/ ApenupCad G
/ .
$ lg't
*uo cRi O lq.%.;,.n ..., - - ~
,5
/ ' WTCain30s 13:33 g
_ ,. PL MT l J
% (J
('? l
\
~[
x ". " , h
@3 %
- 2 /,
/
@.1 3
__. f p ? ar.p .* I
, 4_., .
. -__4[. '
ma.i___________q._______________________a.c_..{ _ _ .4 -
/ m.,
1- ' it"f iniM',;'J :WJ%!aM'CU L 6M
.'s ?.:~".0..m.,0. *
- s.Pti.uWi.".T. m"4.:""A'M".dd"'?
(, .. 3 8L99A710s, tsao a s as,saanecap to mam asa LrwgL (mm).
'y
-) ,% 3 (Tipt ruer 103. t 2400 $rtitt Ac99 at 4 30 89 UJTm";r%*J n.,e'"am*.*Ja'J:!.4" =
R I y l' R
- 4 &s[?) & & ,1 Q Q Ypyggjuy33,
\ '
- 1l"'! J.'n,,'.J"."#,,i"! "i"Ja. "" " '
\ . . .c.wu mn.,,,,- n...,u cor , Lev .
y PJE!*J.' Lu#!#FLfi.!1li" "*" '"
?
w
===== .=1 =..z == = = .==f==-:
t_ = =z====.-=t=== == =__.. .- w,_. -=--- __ -
= ========== == =+====. - - :=- ----- -
====.===- :-. =========- ====-_.- -
= ==== == =m -~
===4= === ===s=== ~~'
~=--
.J'~-' ::===. - ^Z T--~ ;' - - ' ' - ~~ _ - -.--
. ={ = =~C- - ---
~
~2
~" ' ~' ~ , '
X = = - _ _==='- --
. =ht=
==== - =t = ==1 ====== =--~ ~ _t==~
=$"==
_-.=- =- =iq==-=-=- * = ======
= = -
-+ :
===.- ==_=T=_=._
[=. .- = . - . = =_= =< 3 =-
= ,l =_-_=_--.1._ .. - _ _ ---
=
=, ;}_=2.. -
m- .-3.- -- --- =- -===.- -- w. _. =--
=_y ==.==
t=. w-- '= ==
=-.'_. ..--
t_ =_t_..
= - - =:t=-- == ~-~
- r-
,,o .
_ _ -. - - t=_.=f. _ .m-
-e- - -
. _-... ~ _ . - . +-- --
._2 _ __=..
=_ .4_. _m=__w,. .m i ._=f .
_ME'3 =_ o_ x- m== - - - -
./ :-q.= -/
1= c 2==g=- =l =--- - - l =. - t- -
+
t---
~
t=- - -
. 1 1
=h_ a =. 1 . x-' = gO7h. r :hr-q=,-_-.- _- _.--
==-
-- -/zt
=p= J:A+== T 7--~ '
- - ~
~=F==i= =- = d h=2 1- -- ~ t = =s t~DL--
- - ' = ---=
, =W M =e= -)t- = = k==i=h.
-j 'Th k :=, =_ =+ .E =
& e. ---f+= = ==h \=41 *=.-=====} ====,./'%. =
=N '
= _7-=. ~_}--
~
'w
~=-+r.:rpr _L n;-Stg ._gew iW^iW.--3,Of 15 'e
%ymm; _ _~ W=;= +%1=_ = = =4=,
_= - E.
= ~ Q- r~EI,'l v 60 li; h : ---
l =3 === = \= -
.-+1 w
. = . ..g -m dj--- ==g =.; 7=Q = - -.:=----=y f g i =y--_ _.=s = QLL 3
7_- f - 7,
,3 w 1- _.. _
y 4 .. - . - t -- - 73 L . - - - . ---%.- p -
- w--- .J ---
M:. _1 ~ -h r_;;. t= =:
&&m =
_. 1 - 4' .._b- - - - -.__ s:=. . .
- , - - . ~ ~ - -~-m-.
="= -i-=> -
e,
~
==t*i .
a' _. ] _: J } g ._r= - . _ _ . _=..=.t".=_. =- :.: =_ ,F.T. = = T j~ hp . (Ilfy-.20 h;=- ( ELIV 19 S u
. . _ 7.__= _.
_... T .-. ~ t- g,
.-[=
~---"
. -. % _ h u'
-n - - --
== _ _ .=__ 4 - =-= , =.:- -.._.-psq,~
t, -. =-4---:=,= = %= =E
=- ~=. _= -
4 . . p
.4 O , fil3L,.
_ _-y __._ -- -- g_ g. __ggop 4_
-9..__:.d=
z m_ y.=__ :: - _- gg =__-Q=gg- .,_ _ m
+-.- - _ _ -,
- '~
FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY 3--{=-=- ==- ' '"-^" _ euTcsimsoN ISLAND- ST.LUCIE 240 MV LINES moiAN nwER cnossa
- _ _.bb h.b_.5__,.:
ST. LUCtE CIRCUIT No.1 r- PLAN Ano PRoriLE w-t=m=b=m=d--- =trr,4 =- +=p=$_=&=. . _ --. . = _ .=_#__ t =_._ _ 1= x
= ;= -== -~*. - .
FIGURE III-l
,} ==w=== == . , =- -._ =
,, == . . __ . . ==
y-- so Dait ervnam l se l ca l aereovra c % Qb&j -
HI 1
\
(s s u j 8
\ x
\
y'
<tp
~N k
Meteorology - The annual average dilution multiplier,3,at the site boundary , was assumed to be 2.4 x 10-6, the PSAR 30 day estimated value, which is ' greaterthantheannualaveragevalueexpectedfortheHutchinsonIsland is consistent with the value used in Section site. The value of 2.4 x 10- [ 2.3.7 of the original Report, and in Section 14.15 of the PSAR. Actually,- i including expected variations in stabilities, wind speed, and wind direction, [ the value is probably conservative. Further discussion of the climatology j and meteorolor the site is given in Section 2.1.3.1 of the Environmental Report, and ; 'on 2.3 of the PSAR. Events ! Minor release - A release of the gaseous activity contained in 1000 gallons ; of primary system fluid was postulated for this event. All noble gas activity and a fraction of ' iodine activity, assuming a typical liquid-gas partition factor, was - '.ated to be released. A release of this magnitude might be postul .o result from leakage in the Chemical and Volume Contiol System or the Waste Disposal System. Release from nas decav tank - The waste disposal systems are described in-Section 2.3.7 of the Environmental Report and in Chapter 11 of the PSAR. Fission product activity is removed from the reactor coolant during reactor operation and transferred to the gas decay tanks. Activity in the tanks was assumed to be inadvertently released at the completion of filling, which is the time of maximum ity. Inventory of noble gases is based on 0.1% failed fuel. Iodine act .y is negligible due to removal in the ion exchangers, and the partition which is expected to occur in the flash tank. Two accidents were assumed; the release of 10% of the contents of a tank and the release of the entire contents. Fuel failures in normal operation - As described previously, the plant is designed with multiple barriers which prevent the escape of radioactive fission products. Any which escape from the fuel rod gap during normal operation are contained in the reactor coolant system and their escape to the environment is prevented. The fission products are removed from the reactor coolant and collected in the Waste Disposal System. The dose to the environment is negligibic. Fuel failures and steam generator leakage - Operation is permissible with-a small leakage from the primary coolant system to the secondary system. A leak rate of 0.1 gpm was chosen as a typical value. Small amounts of noble gases would be transported to the secondary system, through the turbine, and out the air ejector. lodine and other fission products reaching the secondary system would tend to remain-in the steam generator water, and be scrubbed out of the condenser. No significant amount would be released to the environment under normal operating conditions. Operation under the
~
above conditions was assumedi to continue for 30 days, with the failed fuel value of 0.1%. A loss-of-load, resulting in a loss of off-site power, was assumed at the end of the period. This necessitates use of the atmospheric - k. IV 1 HI 1 , I steam dump valves for reactor cooldown, providing a direct path for !' release of iodine from the steam generator secondary. i Refueling accident inside containment - It was assumed that 14 rods (one ! row) in the hottest fuel assembly are. broken 3 days after reactor shut-down, releasing their entire gap inventory of fission products. Refueling l takes place with the fuel under water at all times. All noble gas activity ! was assumed to reach the water surface and mix with the containment air, while the iodine inventory was assumed to be reduced by a factor of 1000. j Containment building purge was assumed to continue for 2 minutes following the accident, being terminated by the automatic shutoff on high purge activity (the actual time is expected to be shorter). Half the iodine i reaching the containment atmosphere was assumed to plate out inside the ' I containment. Refueline accident outside containment - This event is the same as the- preceding, except that all noble gas fission products are assumed to be transported through the auxiliary building ventilation system and released to the environment. Of the iodine leaving the spent fuel pool, one-half l was assumed to plate out on the surface and ductwork of the fuel handling l building. l Steam line break - The steam line break has been analyzed extensively as reported in the PSAR. This analysis shows that, even under adverse and ; highly improbable conditions, the reactor coolant system and the reactor core remain intact and adequate core cooling is maintained. The activity released is limited to that already in the steam generator secondary side at the time of the accident, which could have entered only through tube l leaks. As discussed previously, noble gases entering the steam generator ! during operation pass continuously out of the system while iodine tends to j be held in the water. Upon occurrence of the steam break, the entire - contents of the steam generator was assumed to be ejected as a steam-water ! mixture. A factor of one-half was assumed for iodine plate-out. Other { conditions assumed were 0.1% failed fuel, 0.1 gpm steam generator leakage, j and 1 gpm blowdown. ; i Steam nenerator tube rupture - The sequence of events following a steam ; generator tube rupture is discussed in the PSAR. Briefly, it begins with ! an assumed double ended rupture of a steam generator tube, allowing reactor ; coolant to flow into the steam generator. Steam is' assumed to flow through ! the atomospheric dump valves to the condenser or to the atmosphere from the j faulty steam generator. During this time the pressure and temperature of j the primary system are reduced below the steam generator secondary design i pressure. At this point the affected generator is isolated, terminating
- the releases. A failed fuel fraction of 0.1%, a release to the steam generator of about 15% of the primary system activity, and a decontamina-tion factor for iodine of 500 were assumed.
,t I
Control element assembly - CEA ejection is a rupture of the primary system, i f resulting in rapid removal of a control rod from the core. This. incident-has been extensively analyzed in the PSAR. This analysis shows that less than 4.5% of the fuel rods reach an enthalpy at which clad damage might occur. For this analysis, the assumptions are the same as those used in the loss-of-coolant accident, except that the activity release is the gap : activity.from only the fuel rods which reach conditions which could cause ! clad damage. ! l IV-5 l l l
HI 1 - i i Loss-of-coolant accident - Previous analyses of this accident show that the Safety Injection System, operating with only partial effectiveness, ! will limit the clad temperature and assure that the core will remain in ' place and substantially intact with its essential heat transfer geometry ( preserved. Therefore, the uranium oxide barrier to fission product release is preserved, and the release to the containment is only the gap activity { from part of the core. The fraction of the fuel rads which overheat and release their activity depends primarily on the eize of the break, varying ; from zero for small breaks to a large fracticr.: for large breaks. All of the rods were assumed to release the fission products contained in the ' gap. Half the iodine released was assumed to be removed from the contain- - ment atmosphere by plateout. The Containment Spray System and the Contain-ment Ventilation System both serve to mitigate the consequences of the accident by removing elemental iodine from the containment atmosphere and by reducing the containment pressure, which causes the leak rate to decrease. ! The filtering system is effective both for elemental and methyl iodine. An initial spray cleanup rate of 10/hr was assumed, with a maximum decon-tamination factor of 100 for both systems operating together. A contain- ' ment leakage rate of 0.25%/ day was used for the initial time period when containment pressure was high. After this period a leak rate of 0.125%/ day ' was assumed. A filter efficiency of 0.99 was assumed for the Shield Building Ventilation System filter. I Spent fuel transportation accident on-site - Although not listed in the classes of accidents in Tables IV-1 and IV-2, a spent fuel transportation ! accident on-site has been considered. Spent fuel is stored underwater ein ! the spent fuel pit before being shipped off-site for reprocessing. This l storage period allows the decay of most of the radioactive noble gas and , iodine isotopes to insignificant levels. (Krypton-85 is the exception to ' this). Additionally, the cask in which spent fuel is shipped must meet , stringent requirements to assure that significant quantities of radioactivity [ will not be released in the event of an accident during shipment. ; i' During shipment of spent fuel the UO2 pellets serve as a barrier to the release of activity just as they do during normal operation of the reactor. Thus only the small amounts of fission products in the gap between the ' fuel pellets and the clad can be released in an accident. The following conditions were assumed: . P
- Release of the entire gap inventory of noble gases from two fuel assemblies;
- One-half of the gap inventory of iodine is released from the two fuci assemblies, and one-half of the iodine released from the fuel leaves the fuel cask; t
- TFe acc; dent occurs in the spent fuel building so that the dilution multiplier of 2.4 x 10-6 is applicable.
- Spent fuel is shipped 120 days after cessation of power operation. !
Assuming the gap activity is 1% of the total xenon inventory plus 1000 Ci Kr-85. IV-6 J
i HI 1 i and considering only the gammas, the whole body site boundary dose is about ; .. .003 mrem. The integrated exposure is about'0.019 man-rem from this accident. l Considering the beta's, the site boundary dose is less than 0.3 mrem. This dose is primarily from long-lived Kr-85. ; The site boundary thyroid dose is less than 0.2 arem, again assuming the : gap inventory of I-131 is 1% of the total activity in the assembly. l l Since these values are much less than those resulting.from the loss-of- [ coolant accident, as discussed elsewhere, the environmental radiological effects are also of less importance as compared to that accident, and are ; judged to be insignificant. i f f i i i l I l IV-7
I i HI 1 l i REFERENCES
?
i i
- 1. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Pa'rt 100, revised as of January 1, 1971.
[
- 2. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 20, i revised as of January 1, 1971. ,
- 3. Information derived from testimony given before the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy by Dr. Victor Bond, !
Brookhaven National Laboratory, January 28, 1970. ~l t
- 4. From testimony before the Joint Committee on Atomic l Energy by Dr. John Totter, Director, Division of j Biology and Medicine, October 29, 1969.
- 5. Di Nunno, J. J. , Anderson, F. D. , et al, " Calculation !
of Distance Factors for Power and Test Reactor Sites," 'l TID-14844, March 1962. ; r i t i
?
?
i k i 1
)
IV-8 l i
w
)
\
j Table IV-1 ACCIDENTS ANALYZED Systems Operating to Event Type of Failure Activity Release Minimize Release
- 1. Minor release of primary Leak; operator error Activity contained in 1000 None fluid gallons of reactor coolant
- 2. Release from gas decay Pipe or valve failure Partial release of contents None tank
- 3. Fuel failures normal Manufacturing defects Activity from 0.1% failures Waste Disposal System operation
- 4. Fuel failures and steam Item 3 plus steam Item 3 plus 0.1 gpm leakage None generator leakage generator tube leakage for 1 month plus atmospheric release from loss-of-load f
e
- 5. Fuel handling accident inside containment Dropped fuel assembly Gap activity from 14 rods Containment
- 6. Fuel handling accident Same as Item 5 Same as Item 5 None outside containment
- 7. Release from gas decay tank Pipe or valve failure Complete release of contents None
- 8. Item 4 above plus steam Pipe or valve failure Activity in steam generator None break
- 9. Item 3 above plus steam Double-ended break of Activity in primary coolant Steam Generator Isolation generator tube rupture one tube steam generator
- 10. Control element assembly Rupture of control rod 5% of activity not contained Containment, Safety Injec-ej ec tion mechanism housing by uranium dioxide tion, Containment Spray, Containment Cooling, Con-tainment Ventilation, Shield Building, Shield Building Ventilation
- 11. Loss-of-coolant . Break of large pipe in Activity not contained by Same as 10 Reactor Coolant System uranium dioxide
HI 1 't
)
Table IV-2 RESULTS OF ACCIDENT ANALYSIS Site Boundary . Doses, Millirem Man-Rem , Event Class Accident or Release Thyroid Whole Body
-3 1 2 Minor release of primary fluid 3x10~ 5x10 0.03 l
-5 2 3 Gas decay tank - 10% contents % 10 1 10~ 8x10~ !
3 4 Failed fuel No Direct Release -- 4 5 Failed fuel and steam 2x10~ 3x10~ 0.2 generator tube leak
-2 -3 5 6 Fuel handling accident 3x10 2.5x10 0.02 in containment
-2 6 7 Fuel handling accident - 8x10~ 6x10 0.5 i fuel building ;
2 -2 7 8 Gas decay tank - 100% 4 10~ 1x10 8x10 j contents
-3 8 8 Steam line break 6x10~ 2x10~ 1x10 ;
-2 -2 9 8 Steam generator tube 6x10 6x10 0.5 break
~1 ~1 10 8 Control rod ejection - 5% 3x10 2x10 1 l gap release i 11 8 Loss of coolant-large pipe 6 3 20 l break j i
i l IV-10
l
. HI 1 l
i V. ALTERNATIVES ; A. Power Requirements and Alternate Methods of Providing Power
- 1. The Need for Power f
Section 2.1.4 of the original Environmental Report described the extremely rapid growth -- one of the largest in the country -- of the power demand l in the FP&L system. Practically the entire southern portion of the Florida ; Peninsula is critically short of the electrical power necessary to ade- l quately and reliably meet projected future power demands and to remedy , currently inadequate reserve margins. The present situation with regard to l the demand for electrical power was accurately summarized in a recent ; article appearing in the August 27, 1971 edition of The Miami Herald which concluded that, "If the demand for power continues to outstrip available supplies at the present rate, the inevitable result will be a succession of forced power cutbacks, brownouts and occasional blackouts." Table V-1 lists the peak load and generating capability for the Applicant's system for the period 1961 to 1970 and the projected peak load and generating capability for the period 1971-1975. The excess of generating capability over peak load is called " reserve". Adequate reserve capability is necessary to cover a variety of contingencies such as actual load being greater than forecast, and equipment, plant and transmission outages for maintenance. A reserve adequate to meet such con-tingencies is generally considered to be 15% to 25% of the peak load. Examination of Table V-1 will show that for the year 1971 the maximum peak-load experienced was 5635 MW while the actual generating capability of the Applicant's system was 6013 MW. This resulted in an actual reserve of 378 MW for a margin of 6.7% in excess of peak load. In 1974 it is anticipated that the maximum peak load will be 8100 MW while generating capability, with-out Hutchinson Island Unit #1, will increase to only 8713 MW. This will provide a reserve of 613 MW and a margin of only 7.6%. With Hutchinson Island Unit #1 on line and on schedule, a reserve of 18.1% will be obtained. In the past, the peak loads of the calendar year for Applicant's system occurred in the summer. However, experience indicates that peaks reached the following January or February are even higher than the previous year's peak. An indication of the critical nature of the available power supply is demonstrated by the necessity to curtail loads in recent years. The
-Applicant already relies heavily on automatic load shedding to restrict the disruption of electric service during system disturbances. If during 1974 (without Hutchinson Island) only the largest Turkey Point generating unit of 760 MW became inoperable or there were' transmission line outages for this unit, a negative reserve of 147 MW would exist resulting in the inability of Applicant to provide adequate service at less than peak load.
With the largest fossil plant out, instead of a nuclear plant, the reserve left would be 194 MW, or a safety margin of less than 2-1/2%. In commenting on aspects of the implementing procedures of the proposed amendments to Appendix D of the Atomic Energy Commission's procedures for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, John N. Nassikas, Chairman of the Federal Power Commission, by letter dated August 31, 1971, V-1
HI 1
\
j to James R. Schlesinger, Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, com- ) mented on the probably negative reserve for the summer of 1972 and antici- ; pated the frequent service interruptions which would occur. It was ob-served that " additional delays of new power plants which would be physically ready for service will almost invariably have serious consequences adverse to the public interest, including detriment to the environment." The detriment to the environment, of course, would be by outages affecting water and waste treatment plants, industrial treatment facilities, and the like. It is further submitted that predictions of service interruption for 1972 clearly hold true for 1974, considering the similarity of reserve capabilities in both periods. i l
- 2. Alternative Methods of Procuring Power !
i Hutchinson Island Unit #1 is needed to furnish power in 1974. It is there-fore necessary to consider whether any alternatives would be available in 1974 in the event Unit #1 were delayed. These alternatives are: t
- a. Transmission From Other Florida Power Systems I The alternative of purchasing power from outside sources is not available to the Applicant, because of the low reserves of all neighboring systems.
The Applicant cannot depend on securing its power from other companies in Florida as is evident from the following table taken from The Miami Herald. l 4 1971 1971 Capacity Reserves ! Company (Megawatts) (Percent) ! Florida Power & Light Company 6,013 1.7 I Florida Power Corporation 2,634 11.1 Tampa Electric Company 1,825 41.9 Jacksonville Electric 966 -1.1 Orlando Utilities 361 12.5 Lakeland Municipal 260 78.1 , Tallahassee Municipal 240 43.7 TOTAL 12,299 10.0 , l All evidence indicates that the situation may become slightly less critical . but will not greatly improve for 5 to 10 years. At present, of the in- , vestor utilities only Tampa Electric has adequate reserves, and its' entire I capacity is relatively low. Problems also exist with maintaining any ; interconnection in the Florida group of utilities. 1The report reviewing j the Florida power supply situation prepared by the Bureau of Power of the j Federal-Power Commission in 1970 made the following comment with regard i to weaknesses existing in transmission ties; "Past performances.have { demonstrated the likelihood that connections in the northern part of the Florida Peninsula, in the general vicinity of Suwanee, Fort White, and Silver Springs in'the Florida Power Corporation's system, will open under power swings which accompany most network disturbances." Note: Figures for capacities and reserves as given above and in Table V-1 were derived V-2
- ~ _ . _ - . _ _ = _ - --
HI 1 i t at different times based on peaks and capabilities projected at the time of preparation.
- b. Transmission From Areas Outside Florida .
To go beyond Florida to Georgia or Alabama would not provide a satisfactory solution because reserve capacities are not high in either of those states. ; The long transmission lines that would be required for out-of-state purchases ; of power would be, of course, subject to normal transmission losses and to natural hazards such as hurricanes and tornadoes. Moreover, transmission lines of the required type will not be available in the near future. In recent comments on power requirements in Florida, the Federal Power ; Commission (letter of Chairman, FPC, to Chairman, AEC, July 2, 1971) stated: l "Furthermore, the distance from Miami to the Florida-Georgia state boundary is approximately 400 miles and, according to the Southeastern Electric Reliability Council's Apr$1 1, 1971, submission of its Coordinated Bulk Power Supply Program 1971-1980 in response to FPC Order No. 383-2, it may be as late as 1980 before 500-kilovolt EHV interconnections, l presently estimated or projected, are in operation. In the meanwhile, existing low voltage interconnections between the i subregions are inadequate for importing sufficient amounts of power in the event of major generation deficiencies within 1 the State of Florida during peak load conditions." l Since power supplies are not available from others, the Applicant must ! generate its own. ;
- c. Other Methods of Generation No other new plants can be put into operation by 1974. Fossil fuel-fired >
plants require an estimated 5 years to complete and an alternative nuclear generating plant would require an even longer time. Peaking Units Gas turbine peaking units which could be installed by 1974 are not acceptable alternatives for a base load plant such as Hutchinson Island Unit #1. As shown in Figure V-1, the Applicant has installed 888 Mwe and will have in-stalled by 1974 a total of 1332 Mwe of these units. Experience has shown that gas turbines are not suited for carrying base loads. Gas turbine ; capacity beyond that already planned for the system would be required to operate for more hours than would normally be the case for gas turbines intended solely for peaking capacity. Especially when base loaded, maintenance is much more often required than for other types of generating , units. Since service maintenance time keeps the turbine off-line to some : extent, a system cannot rely heavily on peaking load units to carry its base load. In addition, fuel costs are high, and this increased cost, l along with raintenance costs is passed on to the consumer. Gas turbines ! ( -( would have a lower capital cost (estimated to be $90.00 per kw excluding transmission) than Hutchinson Island Unit #1 (estimated to be $250.00 per .l kw when completed excluding transmission). However, gas turbines would .l have a much higher production cost (about 25 mills per kwh based on use of j liquid fuel at 90c/MBtu, a fixed charge rate of 17%, and 1500 hours per V-3
HI 1 year operation}}