AECM-87-0090, 1986 Annual Environ Operating Rept
| ML20209J370 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1986 |
| From: | Kingsley O SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| References | |
| AECM-87-0090, AECM-87-90, NUDOCS 8705040273 | |
| Download: ML20209J370 (219) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:-Q & e-e $ y;'.
,'V. . ? . , .) :
'i .. J .
l
-; 4
.. I e
4
-/ }.f ~
4
$ih s
A4 /
.+
J A a p-
,[ GPAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION I ' 1986 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT.
l s t
- y I
- s, e
t
'ga
?
't c .
J. l
- I i
i 4 , n 1, n i g. J20RPT870224 j, . r;w e- ; l
r PREFACE The Annual Environmental Operating Report (AEOR) presents the information and data obtained from the implementation of Grand Gulf Nuclear Station's (GGNS) Environmental Protection Plan (EPP), Appendix B to the GGNS Operating' License (NPF-29), for the period January 1 through December 31, 1986. Historical information has also been included where applicable for comparison purposes. The GGNS EPP requires monitoring for potential erosion along transmission line corridors and impact of cooling tower drift on vegetation. These are the only terrestrial issues required to be addressed by the GGNS EPP. No aquatic issues were identified in the GGNS Final Environmental Statement. Consequently, none are addressed by. the GGNS EPP. Effluent limitations and monitoring requirements for aquatic matters are contained in the GGNS National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit issued by the Mississippi Department of Natural Resources (MDNR). The MDNR regulates matters involving water quality and aquatic biota. In addition to the required terrestrial issues, the AEOR also addresses environmental issues which are not within the scope of the EPP. This is done to provide a more comprehensive report for the Environmental Surveillance Program and to keep the Nuclear Regulatory Commission informed of environmental activities at GGNS. J20RPT870224 - 11 l
I i l l TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE PREFACE.................................................... ii LIST OF FIGURES............................................ iv LIST OF TABLES............................................. v LIST OF APPENDICES......................................... vi SECTION TOPIC
1.0 INTRODUCTION
..................................... 1-1 1.1 GGNS Site Characteristics................... 1-1 1.2 History of Operation and Present Status..... 1-3 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES............ 2-1 2.1 Smoke Control.............................. 2-1 2.2 Erosion Control............................ 2-1 2.3 Transmission Line Surveys.................. 2-2 2.4 Chemical and Solid Waste Management......... 2-3 2.5 Land Management and Wildlife................ 2-4 2.6 Groundwater Monitoring...................... 2-5 2.7 NPDES....................................... 2-6 2.8 Thermal Monitoring.......................... 2-7 2.9 Cooling Tower Drift......................... 2-8 2.10 Meteorological Data........................ 2-11 2.11 Environmental Evaluations.................. 2-12 3.0 OBSERVATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS..................... 3-i 3.1 Smoke Contro1............................... 3-1 3.2 Erosion Control............................. 3-1 3.3 Transmission Line Surveys.................. 3-2 3.4 Chemical and Solid Waste Management......... 3-2 3.5 Land Management and Wildlife................ 3-5 3.6 Groundwater................................ 3-5 3.7 NPDES....................................... 3-7 3.8 Thermal Monitoring..........................'3-9 3.9 Cooling Tower Drift......................... 3-9 3.10 Meteorological Data......................... 3-9 3.11 Environmental Evaluations................... 3-10 4.0 ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS..................... 4-i 4.1 EPP Changes................................ 4-1 4.2 EPP Non-Compliances........................ 4-1 4.3 Non-Routine Reports........................ 4-1 4.4 Potentially Significant Unreviewed Environmental Issues....................... 4-2 i I l i l 1 l J20RPT870224 - iii l i i
W LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE NUMBER PAGE l-1 General Area Map............................ 1-8 2 Property Boundary........................... 1-9 2-1 Local Drainage Basins....................... 2-18 2-2 Transmission Line Routes................... 2-19 2-3 Regional Groundwater Well Locations........ 2-20 2-4 Location of Construction Dewatering & Observation Wells (Perched Groundwater).... 2-21 2-5 Salt Deposition Station Locations........... 2-22 2-6 Salt Deposition Control Stations............ 2-23 2-7 Meteorological System Location............. 2-24 t l l J20RPT870224 - iv l I l
LIST OF TABLES TABLE NUMBER PAGE 2-1 Regional Groundwater Well Locations In Figure 2-3.............................. 2-15 2-2 Perched Groundwater Well Locations , In Figure 2-4.............................. 2-16 2-3 Salt Deposition Station Locations In Figure 2-5 and 2-6...................... 2-17 3-1 1986 TSS Analysis Results.................. 3-11 3-2 Regional Groundwater Monitoring Data (1986).3-12 3-3 Perched Groundwater Monitoring Data (1986). 3-13 l 3-4 1986 Precipitation Measurement............. 3-14 3-S Salt Deposition Data....................... 3-15 3-6 1986 Salt Deposition Rainfall Data......... 3-20 3-7 1986 Joint Frequency Distribution, 50 Meter Level ............................ 3-21 3-8 1986 Joint Frequency Distribution, 10 Meter Level ............................ 3-22 3-9 1986 Percent Bad Data Report .............. 3-23 3-10 Environmental Evaluations - 1986 Summary Sheet......................... 3-24 J20RPT870224 - V
LIST OF APPENDICES P APPENDIX NUMBER PAGE I Semiannual Transmission Line 4 Surveys................................. I-i II Spill Report............................ II-i III Well Hydrographs........................ III-i IV Thermal Monitoring Summary.............. IV-1 l V Salt Deposition Statistical Analysis.... V-i VI Environmental Evaluations............... VI-i i 1 4 i 1 l l t l l J20RPT870224 - vi j 1 i
, - - , . _ , , , . ~ , , , . , .., , . , , - . . , , ,,
SECTION
1.0 INTRODUCTION
i i l l-i l t l
INTRODUCTION Grand Gulf Nuclear Station.(GGNS) is a nuclear power station operated by System Energy Resources, Inc. (SERI), formerly Middle South Energy, Inc., and owned by SERI and Southwest Mississippi Electric Power Association (SMEPA). The station consists of one operating boiling water reactor rated at 1250 MWE and a similar unit on which construction has been
- suspended.
I l The environmental impact of GGNS operational activities between January 1 and December 31,11986 was monit.. red by the Environmental Surveillance Program. The monitoring results of the Environmental Surveillance Program ~ contained in the following sections indicate the environment was not adversely impacted in 1986 by the operation of GGNS. No harmful effects or evidence of trends toward irreversible damage to the 4 surrounding environment have been observed at GGNS. Factual information about GGNS and its operation is ! provided in the remainder of this section. i
- 1.1 GGNS SITE CHARACTERISTICS i
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station is located in Claiborne I- County, Mississippi, on the east bank of the Mississippi River, approximately 25 miles south of Vicksburg and_37 i miles north-northeast of Natchez. Grand _ Gulf Military Park i borders a portion of the north side of the property, and the small community of Grand Gulf is approximately 1-1/2 l l l t I ! J20RPT870224 1 l l l r l p y . . , , - w a w.-p--- .-
--9 3-+-,-
miles to the north. The town of Port Gibson is about 6 miles southeast of the site. Two lakes, Gin Lake and Hamilton Lake, are located in the western portion of the site. These lakes were once the channel of the Mississippi River and average about 5 to 7 ft in depth. An area map showing the geographical location of GGNS is provided in Figure 1-1. Site and Its Environs The site and its environs consist primarily of woodlands divided between two physiographic regions. The western half of the site is in the alluvial plain of the Mississippi River; the eastern half is in the Loess or Bluff Hills. The elevation of the site varies between 60 and 80 ft above Mean Sea Level (MSL) in the alluvial plain i region, while the Loess Hills portion varies from 80 to more than 200 ft above MSL. The property line shown in Figure 1-2 encompasses the 2376 acret originally purchased. However, due to erosion activity of the Mississippi River along the western boundary of the site, this acreage figure continually decreased until +ae river bank from the barge slip to the north boundary of the site was stabilized through the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers shoreline modification program. The present acreage figure for the site due to erosion is l l 2300 acres. I J20RPT870224 2 L
The site boundary is,the same as the property line except in the southwest and west-southwest sectors as shown in Figure 1-2. A 2-acre residential property within the southwest sector is privately owned. There are no industrial, commercial, institutional or residential structures within the site boundary. No railroads or waterways traverse the site. An unpaved county road which ran through the' site in the south-southeast, south, south-southwest, and southwest sectors was closed to public traffic in 1986. This road had provided access to Hamilton and Gin. Lakes and the Mississippi River from the Port Gibson-Grand Gulf Road. Access i The site area is accessible by two major highways: U. S. Highway 61 and State Highway 18, which connect Port Gibson (6 miles southeast of the site) with Natches, Jackson and Vicksburg. 1.2 HISTORY OF OPERATION AND PRESENT STATUS Unit 1 of GGNS received a Low-Power Operating License on June 16, 1982. Fuel loading began on July 1, 1982 and was completed on August 6, 1982. Initial criticality was i achieved on August 18, 1982. Low-power testing began on September 25, 1983 and was discontinued on November 8, 1983 with 995.3 hours of operation at less than 5 percent power recorded for Unit 1. Low-power testing resumed on J20RPT870224 3
I f-April.22, 1984' and was completed shortly thereafter'. The Full-Power Operating-License was granted on August 31, 1984, and commercial; operation began on~ July 1, 1985. The following list summarizes significant dates-
. associated with-the operation of Unit 1:
T o Low-Power Operating-License ' June 16, 1982 o Initial Criticality August 18, 1982 l' o Began ~ Low-Power Testing September 25,-1983
; o Discontinued. Low-Power Testing November 8, 1983 o' Resumed. Low-Power Testing April 22, 1984 f o Full-Power Operating: License August 31,.1984 o Startup After-Full-Power License September 5, 1984 o First Synchronization October 20,'1984 i o Commercial Operation ' July 1, 1985 o Operational Responsibility December 20, 1986 a Transferred to.SERI l Unit 2 construction has been suspended with approximately.
l 34% of the unit completed based on the estimated manhours ) to complete at the time of last suspension of meaningful 1 construction activities. The minimal Unit 2 activities j occurring in 1986 were for -the purpose of long term l equipment and structural maintenance.
- Maintenance and operation of GGNS Units 1 & 2 were the V
l responsibility of Mississippi Power & Light Company until-I December 20, 1986. On December 20, 1986, the responsibility 1 was transferred to SERI through amendments to the Unit 1 operating license and the Unit 2 construction permit. i Preoperational Study e
- A preconstruction environmental impact study was
! initiated in 1972. This study was modified and expanded 1 into an Environmental Surveillance Program in 1974 to determine the impact of the construction and operation of GGNS on the environment. l 1 J20RPT870224 4 ' m_________.________._-_______u_.-. _m
The preoperational Environmental Surveillance Program continued until June 16, 1982 when'GGNS received a Low- ' Power Operating License. No adverse environmental impact was observed during the preoperational study. 1982 Annual Environmental Operating Report (AEOR) The operational phase of.the Environmental Survei' lance Program began when GGNS Unit l' received a Low-Power Operating License on June 16, 1982. During 1982, Unit 1 did not begin power ascension; consequently, 1982 operational activities were an extension of preoperational ' activities. No environmental consequences of GGNS operation were noted between June 16 and December 31, 1982. 1983 AEOR Low-power testing of GGNS Unit 1 began in September 1983. No noticeable changes in the environment were detected by the Environmental Surveillance, Program as a result of low-power testing. Results of.the Environmental Surveillance Program during 1983 remained similar to those of previous years. An assessment of GGNS operation by Environmental Surveillance Program personnel at the end of 1983 confirmed there was no adverse impact to the environma7t. 1984 AEOk As a result of the required testing schedule, operation of GGNS increased in 1984. Environmental surveillance was continued in 1984, but no difference J20RPT870224 5
was noted from that of previous years. Surveillance results also remained at the levels of previous years. As assessed by Environmental Surveillance Program personnel, the operation of GGNS in 1984 did not adversely impact the surrounding environment. 1985 AEOR As a result of achieving commercial operating status on July 1, 1985, operating time and power levels for GGNS increased. However, the increased operation did not adversely impact the surrounding environment because surveillance results for 1985 remained in the range of those from previous years. The only significant environmental event occurring in 1985 was the fish kill in onsite Sediment Basin B during November. The fish kill was caused by a water treatment chemical discharge. Acute effects were confined to the general area of the basin and no chronic effects have been observed. 1986 AEOR The first full year of commercial operation of GGNS occurred in 1986. Normal and routine operating levels were achieved and two maintenance outages occurred. Only one significant environmental event occurred in 1986. An underground spill caused by deterioration of sulfuric acid delivery pipes occurred in March 1986. In excess of 6,000 gallons of acid / water mixture were initially recovered from a series of wells. Recovery J20RPT870224 6 i
operations are still under way and may continue for some time. The spill is currently stationary in an area adjacent to and under the northwest side of the Water Treatment Building. During the fall maintenance outage, the Unit 1 cooling tower filler material was replaced. The new filler material has increased surface area and improved the cooling capacity of the tower. Surveillance results for 1986 were comparable to those of previous years. Results remained within anticipated ranges and no adverse environmental impact outside of previously disturbed. areas was observed by Environmental Surveillance Program personnel. 1 The remainder of this report presents Environmental Surveillance Program results for the period January 1 to December 31, 1986. Where applicable, comparisons with results from previous years are provided. l J20RPT870224 7 l I
. - - . ._ -. .. _ - -_. _ - - - - - - - _ - -_ l
I l l l 8, I J I l
~
-n.
l g Delle West C ARROLL ,* N 3 ;- - rrs/ VAZ00 EA L g 4 s
- L (g,
! J g 4,iss u ,
--j
~
MAOls0N i p ,'.__ p ".3 ,
L .-
8 t fett ( 4 ,
/
# # L- -m hN N .. octui l #
*# ~
i- T LLULAH _ e- ,
"O
,,D ADis0N y s'~~, ,
/ ) .) C, d 28 '
g AA r aseo aAanin ~ 1 j h, ') - r f 9 f I menos
'. RO y l CALOW[LL y, .g j l
# wtLLTON
['
,liscant
- a. _ . . .____
/
c -i . _____... __ W Tillsas , k, l r S Lf
, _. c, i
- p,[,( ,
i,Mn.- e - R t t T8a** t catan uta i
- Jtr enn - %
. .. g ,
*g vT f i
) o l ,
am eta
& dR CR g i hi .nArenaz
,, **0 g.
- e
'y e to a j 4 Asaus 'g < . g ._
g Lle g IQfM . I
\
\
p ;- l
- t *g LOUISIANA *, s HerantM/o , igg a
som Mrhom/
- MISS IPPI
^] ' Mrs/ ,,f, 0
6 D M M ower GR AND GULF NUCLEAR STATION l two, UNITS 18: 2 l source: on w he , , . L on=w he=, ==, w tism ) 1 FIGURE 1-1 GENERAL AREA MAP i , 1-8
---------nw---,,--------,--,-n,--,--------------w - - - - - - - - ,-,-w ---,---,-------------e, --,--------,-=---a w-----w-e -,--e --,v,, , - , - -
! i!'
[
=
g J- l l Y
/1 R _
$~ 'v 2 l
A D N O U
'G B
. h / E R
U Y T t G R I E g j F P O R P g I',.h'- ..
~ A
~
/ i
,g
~
i r_ j.
~
~
~ ' '-
_ T [w / : g g
......,4,.'
y,I! II x-y s ,t N. e,
~ _.'
s / i.- - g y 1l
\
g -. I i b I fRj - hs
. . 9
.. ' - M_
l
- sg
> m.
/ -
- 4 -
i g_
~
Q _ 1 me s a 7,.
/
p
~ _
=
=
/
.. - - 7
.~
.~
L . i. l 1
,: I
, < ! i
I i l l l SECTION 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 1 1 J20RPT870224 1
-i 2.1 SMOKE CONTROL Burning at GGNS has been confined to the burn pit located near the main (northeast) spoils disposal area.
Burnable-materials such as scrap lumber and paper are transported to the burn pit which is 40 feet long, 10 feet wide, and 12 feet deep. The pit has vertical walls of reinforced concrete with a refractory lining and an air curtain destructor apparatus along the top of the south wall. Through the use of the air curtain device, combustion of burnable trash is more efficient and smoke d levels are routinely kept within the limits set by the Mississippi Air and Water Pollution Control Commission. Daily (Monday through Friday except holidays) inspections of the burn pit are made by Environmental Surveillance Program personnel to ensure compliance with Mississippi air quality regulations. Uncontrolled burning and unauthorized fires are expressly prohibited. 2.2 EROSION CONTROL 1 Erosion control at GGNS is a priority because of the proximity of GGNS to the Mississippi River, the hilly
- terrain, the average annual rainfall of approximately 50 inches and the loess soils which are extremely susceptible l
to erosion. The methods utilized to control erosion are o Revegetation of disturbed areas o Utilization of concrete chutes and flumes which channel runoff into two sediment basins, A and B (Figure 2-1). l l J20RPT870224 1 l
Sedimentation occurs in the basins which helps to minimize the ecological effect on Hamilton Lake and the Mississippi River. As a result of Amendments 7 to GGNS Construction Permit Numbers CPPR-118 and 119, dated December 23, 1981, monitoring and capacity requirements for the sedimentation basins were transferred to the GGNS NPDES Permit. Environ-mental Surveillance Program personnel elected to continue runoff sample collection on a voluntary basis for an additional period of time to gather supplemental data on basin sediment removal. Runoff sample collection as required prior to amending the Construction Permits was discontinued on January 31, 1985. Monitoring of sedimentation basins since January 31, 1985 has been conducted according to the parameters established by the GGNS NPDES Permit. 2.3 TRANSMISSION LINE SURVEYS The four transmission lines associated with GGNS (Figure 2-2) are: o Port Gibson Substation Route o Baxter Wilson Steam Electric Station Route o Franklin EHV Substation Route. o Ray Braswell EHV Substation Route The 115 kV transmission line from Port Gibson, Mississippi, , supplies construction power and emergency power to GGNS. The 500 kV Baxter Wilson and Franklin transmission lines terminate in Warren and Franklin counties respectively. J20RPT870224 2 l 1
The Ray Braswell line, a planned 500 kV transmission line, will connect GGNS to an existing 500 kV transmission line in Warren County. A semiannual aerial survey of these lines is conducted to observe vegetation growth and monitor erosion. When problem areas are identified, ground patrols make a closer observation. Recommendations are then made to the Mississippi Power & Light Company (MP&L) Engineering f Department for corrective action. Problem areas are closely monitored during follow-up aerial surveys to determine the effectiveness of the corrective actions. Techniques designed to minimize erosion are used to reelear and control vegetation on these transmission lines. Highway, surface water and railroad crossings are hand cut, usually leaving buffer strips adjacent to the crossing. The use of heavy equipment in clearing right-of-ways is limited to piling brush and pushing brush piles. Potential erosion areas are seeded and malched. Synthetic erosion prevention m.iterial is utilized when necessary. The long growing seauon in this area provides excellent early root formation which also helps prevent damaging erosion. 2.4 CHEMICAL AND SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT Liquid wastes, such as chemicals, fuels, lubricanus, bitumens and flushing solutions, are deposited or discharged into tanks and/or containers for salvage or subsequent removal to appropriate offsite locations. J20RPT870224 3
Adequate care is taken to avoid the handling or storing of liquids in close proximity of major drainage areas to avoid potentially damaging spills to site streams. Construction scrap and debris are collected in designated onsite areas for salvage, incineration or burial. Unusable combustible materials are burned on site in a burn pit equipped with an air curtain destructor. Noncombustible solid wastes are buried in designated landfill areas. 2.5 LAND MANAGEMENT AND WILDLIFE Approximately 2300 acres make up the GGNS site; 94 acres are fenced in the immediate plant area, with an additional 37 acres set aside for permanent structures. The remaining acreage provides excellent habitat for Mississippi wildlife. Agricultural leases with local farmers have been established at GGNS. Some lands have been leased to area farmers for grazing purposes and hay production. The farmers use available resources to have a productive operation and enhance wildlife. Fringe areas and open fields are normally mowed two times during each growing season to keep open areas from being overtaken by scrub vegetation. After the growing season, a series of small food plots may be planted in these open fields to help sustain wildlife populations J20RPT870224 4
through the winter and early spring. A small fruit orchard and two gardens are also maintained on site by Environmental Surveillance Program personnel. Two lakes located on the site, Gin and Hamilton, are used for sport and commercial fishing by area residents. Utilization of the lakes and surrounding local lands by water dependent species (waterfowl) is seasonal, with most activity occurring during fall and winter migrations. Hunting on the site is limited to bow hunting for in season animals, pursuant to the requirements of Mississippi hunting laws. Other hunting activities are prohibited on the GGNS site. 2.6 GROUNDWATER MONITORING A groundwater monitoring program has been established at GGNS to: o Provide data on the seasonal fluctuation of the regional groundwater table o Monitor the level of the perched groundwater table in the Unit 1 and 2 Power Block areas. Location of Monitoring Wells Twenty-seven wells are used to monitor the regional and perched groundwater underlying GGNS: o Twelve wells monitor the regional groundwater levels in the site area o Fifteen wells monitor the perched groundwater levels in the Power Block areas. Locations of monitoring wells are shown in Figures 2-3 and 2-4 and listed in Tables 2-1 and 2-2. J20RPT870224 5
Regional Groundwater Wells used to monitor the regional groundwater levels (Figure 2-3 and Table 2-1) are normally measured at least twice a month. Seasonal fluctuations in groundwater levels correspond to those of the Mississippi River. Perched Groundwater GGNS Units 1 and 2 have a monitoring and dewatering system (Figure 2-4 and Table 2-2) located around the Power Block and the Standby Service Water Basins to monitor and dewater the underlying perched aquifer. Seven monitoring wells (MW ' through MW-7) are used to monitor the water levels in the perched aquifer. Eight dewatering wells (DW-1 through DW-8) are in place to dewater the aquifer if water levels approach or exceed the.GGNS design basis elevation of 109 ft mean sea level (MSL). Water levels in perched aquifer wells are observed and recorded once a month. , 1 2.7 NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) 1 PERMIT National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. MS0029521 was amended and reissued to GGNS on June 1, 1982. The permit was issued in accordance with the provisions of the Mississippi Air and Water Pollution Control Law (Section 49-17-1, Mississippi Code of 1972) and the regulations and standards adopted and J20RPT870224 6
promulgated thereunder, and authority granted to the Mississippi Pollution Control Permit Board pursuant to Section 402(b) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. The permit as issued in June 1982 consisted of 15 outfalls, but was revised in May 1984 to add Outfall 016 and combine Outfalls 007, 008 and 009. The Permit allows GGNS to discharge wastewater in accordance with NPDES regulations into Hamilton Lake and the Mississippi River. NPDES reporting requirements are established by the State of Mississippi. Monthly Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) for each outfall are prepared and sent to the Mississippi Department of Natural Resources and the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission via NPDES Monthly Reports. 2.8 THERMAL MONITORING PROGRAM Grand Gulf Nuclear Station's NPDES Permit requires that GGNS effluents and the Mississippi River mixing area be monitored to determine what effects, if any, will result from GGNS' heated discharge into the river. The NPDES Permit states: The receiving water shall not exceed a maximum water temperature change of 2.8'c (5.0'F) relative to the upriver temperature, outside a l mixing zone not exceeding a maximum width of 60 feet from the river edge and a maximum length of 6000 feet downstream from the point of discharge, as measured at a depth of 5 feet. The maximum water temperature shall not exceed 32.2'C (90'F) outside the same mixing zone, except when ambient t temperatures approach or exceed this value. l l l J20RPT870224 7 l 1 l
1 l
)
Monitoring is conducted semiannually (once in winter and once in summer) when at least one unit is operating at a j minimum of 25% power. To initiate the thermal monitoring program and obtain i baseline data, the river bank was surveyed to establish and permanently mark 72 reference points 100 ft apart. Sixty-six of the reference points are located downstream of GGNS' discharge into the river, and the remaining six are located upstream of the discharge. Calibrated digital thermometers are used to obtain temperatures at a depth of 5 ft and at the surface. At each reference point, measurements are taken 100 ft from the river bank, then at 10 ft intervals until reaching the bank. This provides 20 temperature data points for each reference point. 2.9 COOLING TOWER DRIFT PROGRAM The Environmental Protection Plan requires that a study be conducted to determine the environmental effects of salt deposition from cooling tower drift. After reviewing suitable study methods, GGNS personnel elected to conduct a quantitative and qualitative cooling tower drift study which would identify the salts deposited on vegetation in the surrounding environment and determine the quantity of each salt. Salt Deposition Station Locations Eight sampling sites are utilized to measure cooling tower drift deposition. Six of the eight sampling sites are located in areas where maximum salt deposition is predicted. These J20RPT870224 8
d o 4 1 .
\ s.
areas were extrapolated from the Bechtel Salt Depositi'oN Model developed for the GGNS Final Environmental Report. The remaining two sampling sites are control sites. The first is located south of Raymond, Mississippi. An additional control site was added at Port Gibson, Mississippi, in 1985 to evaluate the possibility of replacing the Raymond, Mississippi, control site with a closer, more accessible location. i 4 Four of the above mentioned sampling sites are equipped with replicate sampling devices. Two of the replicate sampling sites have triplicate sampling devices. i
; Heavy Haul Road and Glodjo locations have duplicate sampling devices which were not established until 1985. ,
r
- The 1985 duplicates were established to strengthen the
! program's statistical trend analysis and improve the sampling and analysis quality assurance. Location of salt deposition sites are identified in Figures 2-5 and 2-6 and listed in Table 2-3. i Fallout samples are collected on a quarterly basis using buckets with a known volume of deionized water. The buckets are located four to six feet above the ground, fitted with bird rings and covered with fine mesh screens to l exclude leaves and insects. 1 l Sample Analysis and Collection Samples are collected quarterly and analyzed for ten l constituents: J20RPT870224 9 4 1
,.---w c w--i-,,--ww- -i-n-r -y----w-w ---_e -- - ', re-- w w w ry--- fw --,g- t -wv e t- --T--r
l l l i i o Calcium o Magnesium
' o Sodium o Iron x o Phosphate o Nitrate o Chloride o Fluoride
, / -
o Sulfate o Total dissolved solids. i These parameters were selected becausa past analyses have i i I shown them to be prevalent in the Plant Service Water t-System. Salt constituents are also determined for the a demineralized water used in the initial setup of the
./
collection buckets. Rainfall data is recorded for each sampling site. Screens are washed with deionized water, and the wash water volume is measured and deposited in the collector on a quarterly basis. The volume of water in the collector is, then measured, and a composite sample of the collector's contents is placed in a clean cubitainer, sealed and labeled. The date of removal, total volume in the collector, total rainfall and location of the site are recorded on the appropriate data sheets. Salt Deposition Rate Calculation Salt deposition rates (SDR) are calculated on a constituent-by-constituent basis from: o The total volume of water contained in the sampling i bucket o The concentration of a constitu2nt in this water 4 o The volume of demineralized water placed in the sampler initially o The concentration of the constituent in the demineralized water o The sampling area of the bucket. J20RPT870224 10 l
- L s
Therefore, for a particular constituent, SDR = (V CT T) ~ (vDD A SDR = Salt Deposition Rate (mg/m ) where: VT = final sample volume V D = seeded volume of demineralized water CT = final sample constituent concentration C D = demineralized water constituent concentration A = collector area (m ). -> 2.10 METEOROLOGICAL SYSTEM The GGNS meteorological tower, with base elevation of 156 ft above MSL, is approximately 5000 ft northwest of the GGNS Unit 1 reactor building, which has a finished grade 132 ft above MSL. The location of the meteorological tower is shown in Figure 2-7. The area around the meteorological tower is flat and grass covered. The nearest bluffs are 362 ft to the west of the tower with trees 35 ft high along the bluffs. Approxi-mately 400 ft to the east are trees greater than 50 ft high. To the south, the nearest trees greater than 50 ft high are approximately 690 ft from the tower. A county road passes the meteorological tower 400 ft to the north. The tallest structure, the GGNS Unit 1 natural draft cooling tower, is 522 ft high and is situated approximately i 6000 ft south-southeast of the meteorological tower. J20RPT870224 11 ' l
V, Due to its location in a relatively open area and its proximity to GGNS, the tower site is expected to accurately represent the same meteorological characteristics as the region into which airborne material could be released from GGNS. The meteorological system consists of duplicate sensors (Channels A & B) at the 162 and 33 ft. (50 and 10 meter) elevations of the meteorological tower. Data I recorded by meteorological instruments are stored in digital and analog forms via magnetic tape and strip charts. The following meteorological parameters are monitored by the system: o Wind Direction o Change in Temperature (delta T) o Wind Speed o' Dew Point o Temperature o Surface Precipitation. The data for the Meteorological Program is included in the Semiannual Effluent Release Reports submitted to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 2.11 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATIONS The Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) for GGNS permits changes in GGNS design or operation and the performance of tests or experiments that affect the environment, provided they do not involve a change in the EPP or an unreviewed environmental question. This means that changes, tests or experiments which do not affect the environment are not subject to the requirements of the EPP. Also, the requirements of the EPP do not relieve J20RPT870224 12 1
GGNS of the requirements in 10 CFR 50.59, " Changes, Tests and Experiments," which address the question of safety associated with proposed changes, tests and experiments. Changes in plant design or operation and the performance of tests and experiments are reviewed by SERI personnel for the possible effects they might have on the environment. When the review determines that the change, test or experiment may affect the environment, an environmental evaluation is prepared and recorded before additional construction or operational activities associated with the change, test or experiment are begun. However, the EPP excludes changes, tests or experiments from the evaluation: o If all measurable environmental effects are confined to onsite areas previously disturbed during site preparation and plant construction, or o If they are required to achieve compliance with other federal, state, or local requirements. Review or changes, tests and experiments at GGNS is conducted by one of three groups: o Nuclear Plant Engineering o Nuclear Operations ! o Nuclear Support. The originating organization performs an applicability determination on each proposed change, test or experiment to ascertain if the activity might affect the environment. Only those which have the potential to affect the environ-ment are required to receive environmental evaluations. J20RPT870224 13
The originator of a proposed change, test or experiment must complete an environmental evaluation or document that one is not required. Completed environmental evaluations are forwarded to the Radiological & Environmental Services (R&ES) Section of Nuclear Support for a concurrence review. After providing concurrence review, R&ES reports the results of environmental evaluations to the NRC in the GGNS Annual Environmental Operating Report. J20RPT870224 14 _,c ,_
l TABLE 2-1 REGIONAL GROUNDWATER WELL LOCATIONS IN FIGURE 2-3 LEGEND WELL NUMBER SECTOR LOCATION DESCRIPTION 1 PS, OWS B NE Laydown Area - Unit 2 Bluff behind Unit 2 2 OW209A, P209 D(E) Cooling Tower 3 OW202 E Bluff north of Switchyard 4 OW10 A West end Met Tower field County Road - Adjacent to 5 OW4, OW4A, P4 R Stream A West Laydown Area - 6 OW29A Q Unit 2 Field - Northside Haul 7 OW69A P Road 8 OW7 N Across the south Plant Access Road and south of Basin B J20RPT870224 15
TABLE 2-2 PERCHED GROUNDWATER WELL LOCATIONS IN FIGURE 2-4 WELL NO. UNIT NO. LOCATION DESCRIPTION MW1 2 North end Unit 2 Turbine Bldg. MW2 2 Northwest corner Unit 2 Auxiliary Bldg. MW3 1 Northeast of SSW B (between fences) MW4 1 Southwest side SSW A MW5 2 Northeast GGNS Maintenance Shop MW6 1 North of Condensate Storage Tank MW7 2 East of Unit 2 Turbine Bldg. DW1 2 East of Unit 2 Turbine Bldg. DW2 2 Corner Auxiliary Bldg. - Turbine Bldg. Unit 2 DW3 2 Northwest corner Unit 2'huxiliary Bldg. by electric panels DW4 2 Southwest corner of Unit 2 Auxiliary Bldg. DWS 1 Between SSW A and SSW B DW6 1 In front of Diesel Generator Bldg. (under man-hole) DW7 1 Corner Unit I Turbine Bldg. - Auxiliary Bldg. DW8 1 Behind Radwaste Bldg. - Unit 1 J20RPT870224 16
TABLE 2-3 SALT DEPOSITION STATION LOCATIONS IN FIGURE 2-5 AND 2-6 LEGEND ID NO. SECTOR DESCRIPTION 1 1 SDS 1, lA P Heavy Haul Road - adjacent to i Basin B 2 SDS 2, 2A, 2B A Fenced storage area by Met. Tower 3 SDS 3 C Catwalk on truck bypass road 4 SDS 4 E Maggie Jackson residence - Waterloo Road 5 SDS 5, 5A, SB J Energy Support Center (Old MP&L Training Center) - Waterloo Road 6 SDS 6, 6A L Glodjo Residence - Waterloo Road 7 SDS 7 D Smith Residence - Raymond, MS (control) 9 SDS 9 G City Barn - Port Gibson, MS (control) Note: Identification number 8 is assigned to a deionized water control sample J20RPT870224 17
- Z H
k h E
=
a~ T
$8- N M o
e m < a: z s_ m c 11f s2
%v ;sx a' a v mm. a, my n # .
-~ h,,
TJ q
../ h ,y 'a~m
<z-w1 :. .
i+c ; + , <
- 1. ~ :
- w ., _ . cn u? % . _ g#3/, g;y;7.9 3,-
o r,:
-ys1:.- o
.t els A 7 ss - K/) j-x, s
> ,$e rl~
% ,. ,3I ]
=
d,L g
. , . , . N ;-- C' g. "
-~
'\, r/, ~ s y
~
8% (~ k&awig %g;ayg 4queF'*rj Y .=. - . en. Sc 3a g :p9 i. m y ;?$ m m ugg;&g=nE{wllkN,' y$ wkaDW d t+e~.L, s - w^- k,cpl k, s < y+~ ,Q~ a gv 4 f,h;.- *;'. - - 7 ,Y. > - -J =
^ ' Y5 gj.e h af ds$g'&!!
f AGgyu% @fk...4@g'e
% .; w A a y : mQ g . y k g ge 5.J!bfyj
(; y q % $ q=4?[a p\ ?dg;#'3
; n ;g 3'Q 9
/ ..<!'
,%.,.a.
- g#y
./ .) .; ,
7_ .+ - . us-
*, / / ,,
a-
.g '
W
-Q --4 h2 - - -- " -- - ,-
~.
. s ..-
L _. dm,,, ..s q 3. r,. . 3 ;v (
. . . ..- .. . ... x....., _, ,y a s.
N - i i ~ x N g+gt e / I N/1/y , \ n .
- _ /SS/Sg,y ,5
\ Q\ -
l f 1 f DeMa b
-N-Nohono/
hvts/ I 2 3 g)*'
"h fast f Od en2" M ,,l' .
g w ason
's, vienstuac l
Es finf Bosfe > - <go$* naymono. pggg Wi ao J.ES
. .n _ . a ,r. p .,
.- no .
;; n",,7J.mfr 1 soo.nv NEWE LL,0N
/
g 1154V LINE enystat ymmcs
- vnnssa
"'" ~ s.-
a ,,,, . g#,/ SITE , [ A2LawunsT I tser viarnarnoo,e [ ,{+< g
#'+g. I carro~
( I
,,vi m .
,EnnIDA ,j enoonnavan ssee niocacntst
*^
- NArcutz "'s ,e tris /ay ra rn 4 auot' ,
( [
/ * ,, ,
LOUISIANA b Akhono! MISS IPPI reves/ , 3,f, O _ _6 D M to w/r, GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION UNITS 1 & 2 SounCE: 0%at h go e, me, tou.a.ana 09701
,m.,.m n9n, FIGURE 2-2 on.c .
TRANSMISSION LINE ROUTES 2-19
, .\
%'f
.ma T
,y /
/
S N
- 3 O _
~ -
p - I _ 2 T _ A _ s s OC
. %v n u
Ro G f . o n g _
~
# O
^
~
, # I G
=
= g _
,'. =
= R
; r t , .
Y c . ,
't i -
N _ ,. _?
~~
a ~ .
'% - . ,'s '\'
~
3 i _ . ze s,* t
*s
%2 "
1 0 2
.2%(
( ' (,' % p
~g-
, . 1'
/ - .
e ss
- i' -
a g r
/4 '
( .,
,() r-g;*
~ .
~
~
I .
~
m
/. .
~
Y ~ M
~ .
t a _ y m_""'
\ ;
{
, e ,
I PLANT N 1
+#
,9 5DW-1[7 / , l l ODw-8 l
U MW-l' DW-2 e - 2 g i I MW-6 g MW-2 DW-3! hDW-4 O DW-6 MW-3 DW-5 eMW-5 E'E. MW-4 i O 200 400 600 l SCALE IN FEET GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION UNITS 1 & 2 FIGURE 2-4 I LOCATION OF CONSTRUCTION l DEWATERING AND OBSERVATION I 2-21 WELLS (PERCHED)
\
.m i
T i
/ -
}
N N OO S
/. 5 I I T T
*M- .
4 f 2 E R I A S C OO P L
- U E
%A G D N y - I O F T I L T
- A A
- - S T
~ -
,. ] - S
'.,s, -
. , g_ :.p..,'
1 - lh a, 9
\j -
~
~
N
~
[q - ~..'.,
*s
'.Q -
'. , C iI
's,'
~ n 1 -
' / i -
l ' i ,- y* N L ,,::... . gi l" .
, { , -
'l -
! g -
' ~
- , 2 2
. 2O A
~
1 - 2
... /
- M_ .-
j
%9 '
m.' ."
.^-
.= %,
d *
/ .,
e - w
=
9}' _ N
~
~
- f
;; 1 1d - - 2___
=
\ l
I w< l n f I o
, - T
'l e f;,. A//o wtstcannett,,) 3e'g y/ g,, l l d?* ~ ~ 4
.3 ~ , ,,
i -
--j J g "
L dd55 -- 8 5 maoison l l
' L .-
j i _ .3 ~ t , *e me 8
""*1 MM .
.m. DELHI [ hornew !
7-g-_._ l T LLutAn _ _ f- - c y h 80'50" s ,v - - 1 [ 1 i
/ /
e % aAT O y US00 m BaNKIN Y' Q ' W j f, C., -- - - 4$ a
- e/ sono j e 1 tatowtLL y, g [ \h g'}
i 1 s wrLLTost ' y f ,
,/ t . _ __ _ _ _
e _ _ _ . - - isonut /
. . , trusas y , , ,, 3 $ , ,
('5 ?"(
' ' simpson T h s., 1.,oum. #
\ t-
- , ' 17 ad - a TERM
g caTAN Uta
.. ' .h. .
( Itr n - c '
*g
.avr -
._- }' __
yassom n o
+ n taa' s L __ _ ____ d l f
/ sa navy i v e aiocaca qIA .pggg W
,, z. .y c to in g&- c ,a 'j f g ,
e, acans g .. - - v y LNi,ftff g j Vh
'p.7 \
, l LOUISIANA h , y i inson .e sefs. 8,' , g,Y#
'e MISS IPPI ; ~ /im/ kolo 1 0
6 e M M owire GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION UNITS 1 & 2 sovact: oni.w w , , . m nem on i w=y . mw nem FIGURE 2-6 j SALT DEPOSITION CONTROL LOCATIONS , 1 l 2-23 l l I I
. ?'
a \ t y ].f,
. M
/ E
' b T
/ S Y
S 7
- L N Z,
g y -- 2 E R A C I G I T O A
- % ky ~ U G
O L C O _ d
-- I O L F R _
- O
~
E T E s, M
/-
, . s
,5 ;1
[- i .
!E
.-*g'-
M _ g p.
;l'. . -
_N, (( N~ / <g
\'_s,..e,'.
tI x/ '
,s.
g _. / .,. % ~ -
,, w
~
'?
ll
/o- ,
.,r \, '
k ,
# y\ .
** 4
- l - / , 2
- a c
~ f _.
. ss 2 i '
p 3 v n
- %, g o
e s .- [f . l- y'
% o - -
j r o e t ~
~ dt
- e
~ ' , - / #h
[I il~l _. ,i M ,, f . 4 ., ~. ,
'- =
N [. . 4
~.
j
- ~
.~-
- I
~ ',y^
_~ _ -
.~ _ - g
,~
} \
\
a- .
SECTION 3.0 OBSERVATIONS AND DISCUSSION J20RPT870224 1
l 3.1 SMOKE CONTROL-Environmental Surveillance Program personnel certified by the Mississippi Department of Natural Resources to evaluate visible emissions conducted inspections of the burn pit in 1986. During the year no opacity violations were noted. No smoke control problems were identified during 1986. Based on 1986 monitoring, the operation and construction of GGNS have contributed insignificant smoke emissions to the environment surrounding GGNS. 3.2 EROSION CONTROL Stabilization and revegetation of the majority of disturbed areas on the GGNS site have been accomplished. The only disturbed areas remaining which have not been completely stabilized are the laydown and Unit 2 construc-tion areas. Major construction areas associated with Unit 1 have been properly stabilized. Monthly grab samples are collected as required by the GGNS NPDES Permit from the outfalls of Sediment Basins A & B for total suspended solids (TSS) analysis. Samples are collected at times considered to be representative of the entire month and average runoff conditions. Normally, samples are not collected if prevailing meteorological conditions (such as heavy rain) could skew analysis results. Analysis results are presented in Table 3-1. l J20RPT870224 1 l l l
l Results from 1986 samples are consistent with TSS results from previous operational years. The annual average TSS values for both basins are similar. This indicates that overall the basins are operating at a similar efficiency. 3.3 TRANSMISSION LINE SURVEYS (1986) The semiannual aerial surveys of the GGNS transmission lines identified no major problem areas during 1986. Grand Gulf Nuclear Station transmission lines have well established vegetation. A detailed summary of the semiannual surveys is provided as Appendix I. Stabilization of soil and vegetation in GGNS tran mission line right-of-ways has progressed well and sufficient ground cover is now available to preclude future sr.r:ous erosion problems. Past and present semiannual transmission line surveys have established the following: o Conrtruction practices were effective in minimining environmental impact o Erosion and vehicular damage caused by hunting and logging encroachment over the years has haen minimal and caused no lasting problems o Past remedial action required to control erosion has been effective. 3.4 CHEMICAL AND SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT Solid Waste Solid waste generated at GGNS during 1986 did not present any unanticipated problems or adversely affect the environment. Office waste, rubble and debris were incinerated or buried on site without incident. Solid J20RPT870224 2 A
't 9 waste activities at GGNS during 1986 were in compliance with Mississippi Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Pollution Contrcl, " Nonhazardous Waste Management Regula-tions" issued September 1964. Chemical and Licuid Waste GGNS did not incur any serious problems _ or incidents with chemical and liquid waste control in 1986. Chemicals of a nonhazardous nature (resins, cement slurry, Tech-Sil non-leaded sealants, charcoal and filters) were successfully disposed of on site. Chemicals which were suitable for reuse were recycled through local contractors and nonprofit organizations. Nonhazardous liquid wastes (borated water, glycol, chiller water, and cooling water) were disposed of in the GGNS Resin Pond or discharged-through National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System outfalls and reported as appropriate. Hazardous Waste The Mississippi Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) inspected the Hazardous Waste Storage Area and related activities on April 9, 1986. The purpose of the inspec-tion was to confirm regulatory compliance with the GGNS Hazardous Waste Management Permit. One item of non-compliance was identified by this inspection. The drum storage area was observed to have hairline cracks in the concrete base. Repairs to these cracks were completed by June 16, 1986. No other noncompliances were identified. l J20RPT870224 3
Hazardous waste generated at GGNS during 1986 did not present any unanticipated problems or result in any non-compliances of the Hazardous Waste Management Permit. Hazardous waste shipments for 1986 went to one of the following facilities: o Chemical Waste. Management - Emelle, Alabama o ENSCO - Eldorado, Arkansas o Rex Brown Steam Electric Station - Jackson, Mississippi (waste oil only) Each shipment was properly manifested and signed copies are available upon request. One spill involving sulfuric acid was detected at GGNS in March 1986. The spill was reported by telephone to the National Response Center and the Mississippi Department of Natural Rt urces. A follow-up written report (Appendix II) was sent to the MDNR, Environmental Protection Agency and Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The March 1986 spill was an underground spill of sulfaric acid caused by deterioration of delivery pipes. The spill is currently stationary in an area adjacent to and under the northwest side of the Water Treatment Building. In excess of 6,000 gallons of acid / water mixture
-l were initially recovered from a series of wells. Recovery l operations are still under way and may continue for some time. Future spills of this type are not anticipated 1
I J20RPT870224 4
because a different type of piping is now used. No environmental impact outside of the affected area has been observed. Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) No known exposure or'offsite release of PCBs occurred in 1986. 1 3.5 LAND MANAGEMENT AND WILDLIFE
, One endangered species, the American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis), was observed in Sediment L
Basin B during 1986. Alligators have been known to inhabit , both Hamilton and Gin Lakes and their tributaries. . During the 1986 bow hunting season (October 1986 through January 1987) 20 deer were killed. There were 101.3 hunting hours per deer killed for a hunter success ratio of 3.6% for the season. Based on field observations by Environmental Surveillance Program personnel, the 1986 operation of GGNS had no apparent ecological effect on the GGNS wildlife , population, i 3.6 GROUNDWATER Regional Groundwater
; Regional groundwater monitoring data is presented in Table 3-2. Water levels occurred at elevations consistent with those of previous years. Fluctuations in well water 2 elevations were attributed to flooding of the Mississippi ,
J20RPT870224 5 4 n - v .- - . . - - - . - , - - m - - # ,- e-,
l 1 River. The 1986 data was consistent with preoperational j and previous operational data. A hydrograph for each regional well is provided in Appendix III. Perched Aquifer i Perched groundwater data is presented in Table 3-3. A ' hydrograph for each perched aquifer well is provided in Appendix III. As indicated in Table 3-3, no water level exceeded 109.0 ft MSL during the 12 scheduled surveillances. However, on an unscheduled surveillance, I DW-8 water level exceeded 109.0 ft MSL by 1.7 ft. This-excursion above 109.0 ft ic discussed in the next paragraph. Dewatering well-8 (DW-8) received increased surveillance in the first quarter of 1986 because the water level had
- exceeded 109.0 ft MSL on previous occasions. On such an I unscheduled surveillance, a groundwater level of 110.7 ft
- MSL was recorded on February 6, 1986. The DW-8 pump had l
] failed due to an inward leak through a gasket. A new pump l was installed on February 11, 1986, and a temporary pump i kept the water level below 109 ft MSL in the interim. No additional excursions above 109 ft MSL were detected during 1986. A report of this occurrence was made to the NRC in correspondence (AECM-86/0202) dated March 20, 1986. Rainfall data is presented in Table 3-4. J20RPT870224 6 l l E
1 3.7 NPDES l The 1986 monitoring results for all permitted outfalls were_ reported in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) reports. The upriver temperature data required by the permit was also included in each report. The Mississippi Departsfat of Natural Resources (MDNR) and the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission received copies of these reports. An application for reissuance of the GGNS NPDES permit was submitted to the MDNR and the NRC in correspondence (APO-86/0705) dated June 27, 1986. A list of requested permit modifications was also included. Several items noted during 1986 and included in the NPDES reports are summarized in the following: o On April 24, the temperature recorder at Outfall 001 experienced a mechanical problem resulting in eight hours of erratic readings. The problem was a loose connection inside the recorder caused by instrument vibration. To prevent recurrence of this problem, visual checks of the recorder were increased until repairs were completed. o The July pH reading for Outfall 014 (9.28) exceeded the maximum limit (9.0) established by the permit. The cause for the high pH was unknown; however, l l pH sample results for June and August were in the 6 to 9 range established by the permit. J20RPT870224 7
I l 1 o The November 18 analysis of a sample collected from Outfall 007 on November'14 revealed a total , i suspended solids (TSS) concentration of 105.5 mg/1. This concentration resulted in exceeding the daily average and daily maximum limits allowed by the permit. A detailed description and corrective action was provided to the MDNR and the NRC in correspondence (APO-86/1186) dated November 24, 1986. o Four routine discharges of. diesel cooling water were recorded during the year. All parameters of the discharge were within NPDES limits. The following describes the. discharges: Date Quantity ~ Source 9/5 1250 gal Division I 9/6 360 gal Division III 10/27 180 gal Division III 11/30 1250 gal Division II o Three discharges were recorded to support activities during Refueling Outage I. The following describes the discharges: Date Quantity (gal) Source 9/9 10,000,000 Circulating Water System 10/25 80,000 Standby Service Water Basin B 10/26 120,000 Standby Service Water
-Basin A All discharges were within NPDES limits.
J20RPT870224 8 l l l
) . . _ _ . , . . - . . _ , - - - . . . _ _ - . _ . . _ ___ _,_. - _ ~ __ . _ _ , . , . - . , , _ _ . , _ , , . , , . , _ . _ . . .
3.8 THERMAL MONITORING , Thermal monitoring was conducted in February, June and September 1986 by Environmental Surveillance Program ) personnel. The results were organized so that temperature changes could be noted at specific distances from the river bank. No limit imposed by the NPDES Permit was exceeded. A summary of thermal monitoring conducted through 1986 is provided as Appendix IV. 3.9 COOLING TOWER DRIFT During 1986, cumulative salt deposition samples were collected for four quarterly periods. Replicate samples were taken at four locations (stations 1, 2, 5 and 6) as
- described in Section 2.9.
Table 3-5 gives the calculated salt deposition rates (SDRs) for the eight monitoring sites in the GGNS Cooling Tower Drift Program. These SDRs form the bases for the statistical analysis required by Section 4.2 of the EPP. This analysis was performed by GGNS Nuclear Plant Engineering and is presented in Appendix V. Rainfall data collected at each sampling site is provided as Table 3-6. 3.10 METEOROLOGICAL DATA Meteorological data for the 1986 reporting period was i included in the Semiannual Effluent Release Reports 4 submitted via AECM-86/0263 and AECM-87/0050 to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission on September 2, 1986 and February 27, 1987, respectively. Data contained in these reports is summarized in the following tables: J20RPT870224 9
1 o Joint Frequency Distribution, 50 Meter Level (Table 3-7) o Joint Frequency Distribution, 10 Meter Level (Table 3-8) o Percent Bad Data Report (Table 3-9). 3.11 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATIONS During 1986, no unreviewed environmental questions were found, and no changes were made to the EPP. Twenty-nine environmental evaluations were recorded by Radiological and Environmental Services in 1986. All evaluations were routine matters within the scope of expected activities. No environmental consequences have been observed as a result of the activities being evaluated. A completed copy of each 1986 environmental evaluation recorded by R&ES is included in Appendix VI. An analysis, interpretation and evaluation of the environmental impact 1 of each change, test or experiment is made in each 'l environmental evaluation. Table 3-10 summarizes each evaluated item. 1
)
l i i l J20RPT870224 10
TABLE 3-1 1986 TSS ANALYSIS RESULTS (I) SEDIMENTATION BASINS A & B Collection Sedimentation Basin A. Sedimentation Basin B Date (Outfall 013) (Outfall 014) 01-09-86 8.6 1.0 02-18-86 14.2 17.6' 03-18-86 5.9 16.3 04-16-86 61.0 96.0 05-08-86 27.0 25.0 06-13-86 11.1 13.7-07-10-86 17.2 14.7 08-20-86 36.0 14.0 09-23-86 34.1 54.3 10-07-86 59.2 72.4 11-19-86 28.6 31.8 10-86 36.3 96.7 'I Yearly Average 28.3 37.8 (1)-Analysis results expressed as ag/1. Data obtained from NPDES data sheets. J20RPT870224 11
- -~. -~. - , , . - . - - . - - . , . - - .
TABLE 3-2 1986 REGIONAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA
=======_===_=============___==================================================_
3 Well No. Year Formation 1 Min 2 (Month) Max 2 (Month) Average I I l OW4 1986 A l 68.8 DEC l 70.8 JUL l 69.9 I I I I i l OW4A 1986 A l 66.5 SEP l 72.3 MAY l 69.8 I I I OW29A 1986 T l 64.2 SEP l 69.9 JAN l 66.8 l l 1 OW209A 1986 T I 90.5 DEC l 91.2 AUG l 90.8 I MAR I I I i l P5 1986 C l 74.3 OCT l 76.4 JUN 1 75.7 I I JUL I I I l OW7 1986 T l 69.6 OCT l 75.0 JUL l 73.2 l l l P4 1986 C l 58.6 OCT l 62.5 JUN l 60.8 I AUG l l l l l OW69A 1986 A I 65.2 SEP l 69.0 APR l 67.3 l l l OW202 1986 T l 76.3 OCT l 79.1 JUN l 77.6 I I l OWS 1986 T l 73.4 JAN l 77.0 AUG l 75.0 l l l OW10 1986 C I 100.9 NOV l 107.2 JUN I 103.7 I I l P209 1986 C l DRY ALL l DRY ALL l DRY l YEAR l YEAR l fA= Alluvium;C=Catahoula;T=TerraceDeposits 3 Water Level Elevation (Feet Above MSL) Average Elevation for Non-Dry Readings (Feet Above MSL) J20RPT870224 12
-- - _ _ _ _ . _ _ -. - - _ _ . _ _ m . _. . _ . .- ._ . __ _
~ _.
4 1 TABLE 3-3 1 ' 1986 PERCHED GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA
- j MONITORING WELL-WATER LEVEL (f t)- DEWATERING WELL-WATER LEVEL (ft)
Month Date MW1 MW2 MW3 MW4 MW5 MW6 MW7 DW1 DW2 DW3 DW4 DW5 DW6 DW7 DW8 l I JAN 01/30/86 l 98.6 96.6 101.5 103.3 102.1 105.6 . 87.7 l 87.7 100.1 98.2 97.8 101.5 .103.8 106.6 108.3 ' l I
, FEB 02/27/86 l 98.3 96.6 101.3 103.1 101.0 105.4 88.0 1 87.9 99.9 98.2 97.5 101.2 105.4 106.1 108.1 .<'
l l MAR 03/27/86 I 98.4 96.6 101.2 103.1 101.6 105.3 88.0 l 86.5 99.9 98.2 97.8 101.3 105.5 106.4 107.1 I l l APR 04/30/86 I 98.2 96.5 100.9 102.8 101.5 105.2 88.0 l 87.9 99.8 98.1 97.9 100.9 104.8 106.2 107.5 4 l l MAY 05/29/86 I 99.0 96.6 99.6 105.5 101.7 105.9 86.3 l 85.9 101.2 97.9 97.9 98.8 105.9 106.4 106.7 l l JUN 06/20/86 l 98.4 94.8 99.7 103.9 102.2 105.6 87.9 l 87.9 99.9 98.0 97.6 101.6 105.4 10G.7 107.0 l l JUL 07/24/86 l 98.2 96.3 99.6 103.3 102.0 105.0 87.1 1 86.9 99.8 97.9 97.6 104.3 103.3 106.0 106.8 I I AUG 08/25/86 l 98.2 95.4 100.7 102.6 101.6 104.4 88.0 l 88.0 99.7 98.1 97.9 98.1 104.0 105.1 107.1 I l SEP 09/18/86 I 98.0 96.4 100.6 100.9. 101.4 DRY 88.0 l 88.0 99.6 98.0 97.9 100.7 103.6 104.6 107.0 1 1. OCT 10/31/86 l 97.8 92.5 100.7 103.3 101.3 102.8 87.6 l 87.4 99.4 94.4 96.4 101.2 103.2 96.6 106.2 I I I NOV 11/28/86 l 98.0 92.7 101.1 105.4 101.6 103.2 87.6 l 87.5 99.8 96.0 94.8 101.1 103.0 97.1 106.9
)
l l DEC 12/12/86 l 98.2 94.3 101.2 103.4 101.6 103.8 86.1 I 86.0 99.6 97.8 97.7 101.3 103.0 96.8 106.2 2 s 1 ] Water Level Mean Sea Level (M.S.L.) x J20RPT870224 13 i
TABLE 3-4 1986 PRECIPITATION MEASUREMENT GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION OBSERVED AT SITE II) MONTH INCHES . JANUARY 0.95 FEBRUARY 1.53 MARCH 2.97 APRIL 3.59 MAY 13.29 JUNE 6.15 JULY 1.29 AUGUST 2.65 SEPTEMBER 4.41 OCTOBER 5.51 NOVEMBER 8.56 DECEMBER 6.75 TOTAL 57.65 I Rainfall measured adjacent to the GGNS Meteorological System J20RPT870224 14 i
TABLE 3-5 SALT DEPOSITION (1986) SDCa86 Period Calcium (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 ads 1 992.70 1776.03 1186.35 362.86 sdsla 1392.06 1712.78 1523.49 386.03 sds2 270.21 163.97 102.89 146.35 sds2a 344.93 122.06 81.59 118.41 sds2b 324.90 138.17 86.35 100.79 sds3 1195.62 711.40 781.03 187.94 sds4 805.71 171.87 364.76 156.98 sds5 5490.87 1364.44 1456.19 172.38 sds5a- 5513.89 1345.30 1189.40 164.44 sds5b 5990.95 1407.97 1357.87- 161.11 sds6 625.79 125.87 320.48 97.14 sds6a 1255.56 168.73 333.37 105.40 sds7 1654.29 61.89 46.67 76.51 sds9 415.62 50.95 229.37 132.70 SALT DEPOSITION (1986) SDC186 Period Chloride (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 sds1 494.76 1588.65 259.84 223.49 sdsla 519.52 1758.57 297.94 213.97 sds2 129.84 560.48 141.43 215.56 sds2a 190.97 525.94 145.56 271.11 sds2b 156.35 650.95 165.08 239.37 sds3 284.70 605.81 329.68 233.02 , sds4 130.57 694.95 247.14 285.40 sds5 2366.43 1419.14 577.30 223.49 sds5a 3283.02 1202.76 589.68 223.49 sds5b 2655.08 1168.16 600.95 220.32 ! sds6 340.16 701.43 194.76 274.29 sds6a 441.43 682.38 198.25 252.06 sds7 118.94 822.05 123.33 233.02 sds9 1146.43 323.02 213.81 271.11 i l I l 3-15 I
l l I TABLE 3-5 (CONT.) SALT DEPOSITION (1986) SDFe86 Period . Iron (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 sds1 172.63 511.67 :380.79 136.51 sdsla 349.68 418.33 265.87 133.81 sds2 (1) 689.05 81.14 222.38 sds2a 83.89- (1) 126.19 173.81 sds2b 105.20 408.97 109.14 98.41 sds3 167.89 383.52 189.05 262.70 sds4 40.66 152.65 108.41 599.52 sds5 323.34 .(1) 229.05 ~ 239.68 sds5a 312.94 1738.70 194.41 80.95 sds5b 390.90 917.62 223.52 177.14 sds6 179.25 550.00 95.08 283.33 sds6a 65.05 250.00 280.57 320.48 sds7 36.68 385.14 160.95 477.30 sds9 1136.90 225.56 296.90 140.48 SALT DEPOSITION (1986) SDF86 Period Fluoride (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 sds1 5.59 20.71 2.86 3.65 sdsla 5.36 15.87 2.22 3.49 sds2 0.86 8.25 2.16 4.29 sds2a 0.31 8.32 2.22 4.44 sds2b 1.18 8.02 2.32 3.97 sds3 1.79 6.16 2.30 3.81 sds4 1.26 8.22 2.22 3.97-sds5 16.07 11.97 4.13 3.65 sds5a 20.68 12.44 4.51 3.65 sds5b 18.17 12.13 4.06 3.65 sds6 2.06 9.21 1.27 3.81 sds6a 2.10' 9.21 2.02 4.13 sds7 0.65 7.84 1.27 3.81 sds9 1.95 2.22 3.02 4.44 (1) Biased 3-16 l
I TABLE 3-5 (Cont.) SALT DEPOSITION (1986) SDNo286 Period Nitrate (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 sds1 78.13 133.02 6.67 93.02 sdsla 7.70 63.17 5.40 81.59 sds2 121.16 45.56 27.49 89.84 sds2a 186.83 76.13 28.25 31.11 sds2b 185.42 56.43 29.52 56.35 sds3 25.07 46.98 6.51 80.32 sds4 139.12 58.19 6.03 83.49 sds5 23.23 .39.37' 5.40- 69.21 ads 5a 11.41 53.71 4.41 77.14 sds5b 21.21 44.25 5.21 63.33 sds6 22.22 69.84 7.30 72.06 sds6a 15.90 65.08 6.33 55.56 l sds7 85.56 100.40 61.27 55.56 sds9 40.40 21.27 16.11 78.73 SALT DEPCSITION (1986) SDPo486 Period Phosphate (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 ' sds1 15.33 18.65 21.90 17.94 sdsla 15.16 17.86 20.00 17.14 sds2 9.37 19.05 9.56 21.11 sds2a 12.11 19.21 11.11 26.67 sds2b 12.48 19.64 6.63 19.84 sds3 23.58 13.81 9.76 72.38 sds4 10.79 18.97 8.57 23.81 sds5 22.44 18.10 14.29 21.90 sds5a 20.62 18.89 10.48 21.90 sds5b 26.70 19.68 11.27 25.87 sds6 11.90 21.43 14.29 26.98 sds6a 12.70 21.43 10.08 33.65 sds7 8.27 18.02 15.87 31.11 sds9 12.37 10.32 20.08 45.71 3-17
TABLE'3-5 (CONT.) SALT. DEPOSITION-(1986) SDMg86 Period Magnesium (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 ' sds1 470.63 700.87 218.73 82.38-sdsla 462.64 650.08 ~214.29 86.67-sds2 49.94- 96.98 26.29 22.06 sds2a 79.54 102.03 24.44 27.62 sds2b 72.41 101.87 24.13 (1) sds3 236.79 247.75 141.35 32.06 sds4 127.37 79.54 89.21 33.33 sds5 1407.70 526.70 242.22 26.83 sds5a 1598.25 479.11 205.94 26.83 sds5b 1674.92 507.49 227.97 26.03 64.92 15.56 : sds6. 214.33 69.84 sds6a' 218.41 84.13 72.94 21.27 sds7 124.13 43.29 18.10 15.56 sds9 76.56 39.05 44.05 32.38 SALT DEPOSITION (1986) SDNa86 Period Sodium (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 sds1 645.24 1331.75 329.21 169.52 sdsla 332.02 1232.38 302.54 150.95. sds2 331.21 290.00 108.41 -175.08 sds2a 236.05 339.75 106.35 157.62 sds2b 335.13 298.02 116.57 160.32 sds3 350.70 526.48 272.78 217.94 sds4 265.17 348.65 171.11 158.10 sds5 2107.06 1095.52 648.57 185.40 sds5a 2330.87 1027.94 458.86 173.49 sds5b 2336.83 1064.41 540.51 143.81 sds6 188.25 304.76 145.56 176.67 sds6a 287.46 304.76 193.79 168.73 sds7 256.98 279.43 66.98 135.40 sds9 112.98 133.02 135.79 157.62 (1) Biased 3-18
. r - , . r,_ ._
TABLE 3-5 (CONT.) SALT DEPOSITION (1986) SDSo86 Period Sulfate (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 sds1 -4232.17 4455.08 995.71 58.57' sdsla 4604.56- 4661.67 803.97 55.40 sds2 697.'76 1055.71 414.16 57.46 sds2a 660.49 -1020.70 252.86 60.16 sds2b 672.19 (1) 330.19 23.97 sds3 1253.43 1120.00 962.30 61.75 sds4 859.99 1051.63 701.11 52.06 sds5 10996.29 1977.33 1827.46 205.40
.sds5a 12602.28- 3672.25 1653.75 141.90 sds5b 12972.84 3938.83 1811.33 112.86 sds6 1593.61 1373.33 556,19 (1) sds6a 1668.03 2011.43 522.68 490.32 sds7 426.10 835.43 233.17' 523.97 sds9 461.90 345.40 414.68 10T4.44 SALT DEPOSITION (1986)
SDTDS86 Period Total Dissolved Solids (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 sds1 8969.05 16182.54 4301.59 1317.46 e sdsla 9152.78 14551.59 3571.43 1634.92 sds2 1544.44 2349.21 1895.24 2261.90 sds2a 1479.68 3879.37- 1444.44 (1) sds2b 1826.19 1632.37 2163.49 1523.81 sds3 3875.40 6092.~06 3769.84 555.56 sds4 1870.16 3620.63 -2428.57 1015.87 sds5 25525.00 11858.73 5857.14 5761.90 sds5a. 28716.27 16793.65 5698.41 9452.38 sds5b 26436.51 14741.27 5573.02 3873.02 sds6 3115.08 9539.68 1253.97 6209.52 sds6a 4033.33 8825.40 988.89 10396.83 l sds7 857.94 6304.76 1015.87 10253.97 sds9 1146.43 3811.27 2000.00 5206.35-(1) Biased 1 3-19 P u
TABLE 3-6 1986 SALT DEPOSITION RAINFALL DATA Station No. Date Inches SDS #1 03-31-86 _ 5.30 SDS #2 03-31-86 5.55 SDS #3 03-31-86 5.20 SDS #4 03-31 5.10 SDS #5 03-31-86 4.70 SDS #6 03-31-86 5.35 03-31-86
- SDS #7 SDS #9 03-31-86 7.15 SDS #1 07-01-86 22.90 SDS #2 07-01-86 22.10 SDS #3 07-01-86 19.20 SDS #4 07-01-86 22.50 SDS #5 07-01-86 21.60 SDS #6 07-01-86 21.95 SDS #7 07-01-86
- SDS #9 07-01-86 20.60 SDS #1 09-30-86 6.65 SDS #2 09-30-86 6.40 SDS #3 09-?O-86 6.40 SDS #4 09-30-86 8.25 SDS #5 09-30-86 5.90 SDS #6 09-30-86 6.35 SDS #7 09-30-86 6.90 SDS #9 09-30-86 6.90 SDS #1 01-02-87 18.70 SDS #2 01-02-87 19.10 SDS #3 01-02-87 16.75 L
SDS #4 01-02-87 19.20 SDS #5 01-02-87 18.45 SDS #6 01-02-87 17.90 SDS #7 01-02-87
- SDS #9 01-02-87 20.35 No rainfall data available from SDS #7 J20RPT870224 20 I
+
o STABLE 3-7 1986 JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION . TOTAL FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION PERIOD OF RECORD: 01/01/86, 000 -- 01/01/87, 000 WIND SPEED (M/S) AT 50-M LEVEL 18 AVG 0-2 3-5 16-8 9-11 12-14 15-17 AND UP TOTAL SPEED N 3.6 3.8 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 - 7.5-' .2 100: 3.7 2.2 .0 .0- .0 .0 .0 ' 5.9 .2 NE 2.8 1.7 .0 .0 .0 '0
. .0 4.5 .1 ENE- 2.3 1.9 .0 .0 .0- .0 .0 4.3 .1 D E 2.5 3.7 .1 .0. .0 .0 .0 6.3 .2 1-ESE 2.7 3.1 .1 .0 .0' .0' .0 7.9 .3
- R SE 3.2 5.5 .6. .0 .0 .0 .0 9.3 '3 W E SSE 2.9 4.7 .5 .0 .0 .0 .0 8.1 .3 I C S 3.9 4.3 .3 .0 .0 .0 .0 :
8.5 .3 N T SSW 3.6 3.0 .4 .0' .0 .0 .0 6.9 .2 D I SW 3.7 2.5 .4 .0 .0 .0 .0 6.7 .2 0 WSW 3.1~ .9 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 4.1- .1 NW 2.4 .7 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 3.1 .1 WNW 3.4 .7 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 4.2 .1 NW 2.7 2.0 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 4.9 .1 NNW 3.3 2.8 4 .0 .0 .0 .0 6.5 .2 CALM 3.3 1.0 TOTAL 50.9 45.8 3.2 .1 .0 .0 .0 100.0 .2 , 220. HOURS OF BAD OR MISSING DATA OR 2.5 PERCENT FOR 8760 HOURS. 4 t 4 3-21 J20 MISC 87021602 - 1 t
-,, , - n , . , . , - - . - - . , . - - . - - ,-.r.r, -- r---e ,- - .r-e e , n,--,.,
-.V.'. /
4 TABLE 3-8 l 1986 JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION
-TOTAL FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION PERIOD OF RECORD: 01/01/86, 000 -- 01/01/87, -000' WIND SPEED (M/S) AT 10-M LEVEL
-18 AVG 0-2 3-5 6-8 9 12-14 15-17' AND UP TOTAL SPEED N- 7.3 1.0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0' 8 .' 3 .2 NNE 5.4 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 5.5 .1 NE 5.2 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 5.4 .1 ENE 5.5 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 5.6 .1 D E 4.5 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 4.5 .1-i.- I ESE 3.4 .0 .0 .0 ~. 0 .0- .0 3.5 .0 R - SE 4.6 1.3 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 6.0 .1 W E SSE 5.2 .8 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 6.0 .1 4 I C S- 6.3 1.1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 7.5 .1 N'T SSW 5.2 .9 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 6.1 .1 D.I SW 4.1 .3 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 4.4 .1 0 WSW 3.0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0- .0 3.1 .0 N' W 2.4 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 2.4 ' .0
'WNW 3.5 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 3.6 .0
- NW 3.4 .6 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 4.0 .1 NNW 5.2 '1.1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 6.3 .1 aC.
A LM 5.2 17.9 TOTAL 92.4 7.6 .0 .0 .0- .0 .0 100.0 .1 i . 220. HOURS OF BAD OR MISSING DATA OR 2.5 PERCENT FOR 8760 HOURS. 1 5 1 i l l e } 1 3-22 J20 MISC 87021602 ' ' i 1
a =8 % ,4-" a A y d TABLE 3-9 1986 PERCENT BAD DATA REPORT
' PERCENT BAD DATA REPORT
- REPORT COVERS 8760 HOURS HOURS , PERCENT 50M DIRECTION 9. .10.
SOM WIND SPEED 54. .62 10M DIRECTION 9. .10 10M WIND SPEED :54. .62 TEMPERATURE 13. .15 DEW POINT 946. - 10.80 DELTA T 171. 1.95 PRECIPITATION 23. .26 i T i t ? 3-23 i J20MIEC87021602 - 3
., -m,,- .-- ,-e. , , .- <-,, ,v..,,,~., ,,,-.~,.rm,. .,-..,,.-v , -, , --,,,r.m.---.-. .n n-r,-,-p , ,+-.- v - , - ., . - - , , .
TABLE 3-10 1986 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
SUMMARY
Identifying Number Description ODCM, Revision 7 Administrative changes to update ODCM Tables 2.2-3 and 2.3-1 to provide agreement with the 1985 Land Use Census. SE-009/86 Temporary alteration to System P33(PASS) to allow sampling and analysis capability during post-accident conditions until maintenance is completed on reactor coolant and atmospheric gamma detectors. The temporary alteration bypasses highly radioactive fluid (post-accident) around unshielded detectors under maintenance. SE-010/86 The PASS in-line gamma isotopic detectors, both for air and water (described in FSAR 9.3.2.2.4) are inoperable. DCP 85/4068 has been initiated to restore capability. NUREG 0737 backup grab sample capability is availab]e. SE-011/86 The PASS in-line chloride detector (described in FSAR 7.7.1.11.4.2 - 9.3.2.2.4) is inoper-s able.i.DCP 85/4068 has been initiated to restore capability. NUREG 0737 backup grab sample capability is available. SE-012/86 This temporary alteration bypasses the PASS gas stripper which is inoperable in order to restore system capability to meet NUREG 0737 and FSAR (Section 9.3.2.2.4) minimum requirements (pH, conductivity, oxygen). DCP 85/4068 has been initiated to restore gas stripping capability. S&EE 008/86 Upstream HEPA filter banks are not tested (FSAR CR-86-03) using DOP following painting in ventilation zones communicating with the equipment, as DOP will not detect filters clogged with paint fumes. J20RPT870224 24
i TABLE 3-10 ' (Cont.) 1986 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
SUMMARY
i Identifying Number Description i S&EE 027/86 Provide alternate condensate resin position; i (FSAR CN 3448) i.e., capability to replace resins rather than regenerate. Also, changed residual capacity-1 from 50% to 25%. (Items 124 - 127 only) l S&EE 034/86 Physical relocation of the PSW Chemical (MWO-F62136) Addition System to the contractor parking lot and changing the location of the injection piping tie-in point to PSW. S&EE 038/86 Updates CWS biocide treatment and adds NPDES (FSAR CN 3310) to the list of abbreviations. l S&EE 039/86 Same as S&EE 027/86 except it is not limited I (FSAR CN 3448) to Items 124 - 127. S&EE 054/86 Editorial changes to the description'of the ' (FSAR CN 3405) site area map and boundaries for establishing effluent release limits. S&EE 088/86 Evaluate the addition of a reference to the
^
(FSAR CN 3300, chemical feed tank for the plant chilled water l $ Item 079) system. S&EE 089/86 Condensate analyses as described in the UFSAR (FSAR CN 3372, and Regulatory Guide 1.56, Rev. 1, are Item 0379) incorrect and are being changed to show analyses to be in accordance with plant procedures. I S&EE 093/86 Added a statement requiring resin capacity for 4 (FSAR CN 3364, the condensate demineralizers to be determined Item 0367) in accordance with plant procedures. i ', S&EE 094/86 The requirement to perform capacity (FSAR CN 3364, verification on the condensate deep beds j Item 0369) semiannually was not carried through from the FSAR to the UFSAR. This change reinstates this requirement. 1 i l J20RPT870224 25 1 f i 1
TABLE 3-10 (Cont.) , 1986 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
SUMMARY
Identifying Number Description S&EE 096/86 Clarifies respiratory training program (FSAR CN 3406, requirements. Change complies with 10 CFR 20, Item 1688) Regulatory Guide 8.15, NUREG 0041 and is consistent with current program requirements. S&EE 097/86 Reflects current management organization and (FSAR CN 3406, specifies that plant design changes are Item 1617) reviewed by GGNS General Manager and Radiation Protection Manager, thus complying with Regulatory Guide 8.8. S&EE 102/86 Temporary alteration adding a lockable self-(MWO 63580) closing door in the opening of the east / west wall that separates the liner storage area and the radwaste truck bay. Installation was required to comply with Technical Specifica-tion 6.12.2 " Reasonable Enclosure Construc-tion" for very high radiation areas. ODCM, Revision 8 Addressed changes requested by the NRC regarding projected dose and dose to the public. ODCM, Revision 9 Allowed the use of Plant Service Water or Circulating Water as the source of dilution water for liquid radwaste discharges. PCP, Revision 2 Addressed a request by NRC to clarify and , accurately describe processing procedures and , methods for radwaste preparation. ODCM, Revision 10 ODCM, Revision 10 was necessary to address administrative changes as a result of the 1986 l Land Use Census, correct administrative and i typographical errors, and modify the direct-radiation dose calculation methodology. 1 i l l J20RPT870224 26 i l 1
- -. . , . ~. -. . ._ _ - _ _ . - _ _ . _ _ - _ _ _
_ . _ . _ _ - . ____,1
TABLE 3-10 (Cont.) 1986 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
SUMMARY
Identifying Number Description S&EE 111/86 Temp Alt. adds lockable screen door in the (TA 86-0026) opening on 133' Turbine Building into the SJAE Rooms to comply with Tech Spec 6.12.2
" Reasonable Enclosure Construction" clause cf very High Radiation Areas.
S&EE 112/86 Removal of Turbine Bldg. 17 line wall to make l railbay accessible during outage. S&EE 124/86 Evaluate the construction of a berm around (MWO 3933A) the acid storage tanks at SSW Basins. S&EE 152/86 Change chemical controls for the Standby Service Water Systems to include , non-oxidizing biocides (Specifically BETZ 3641 & 3608) as a replacement or alternate to sodium hypochlorite. S&EE 153/86 Proposed change to SSW chemical treatment I program. Because of poor corrosica control l with present use of NaOCl and Betz 434, propose to use MSP03, a molybdate based l corrosion inhibitor similar to BETZ PL3200 l currently in use for diesel jacket cooling l water. S&EE 158/86 Installation of Acid Feed System will allow for a more restrictive control of circulating water chemistry which will improve condenser . performance. l i S&EE 159/86 Changes to the chemical treatment program and l chemical vendor for the Circ Water (N-71) and l Plant Service Water (P-44) Systems to inlcude: ) Calgon Products PCL-402 dispersant, PCL-361 1 I Surfactant, and H-434 &/or H-130 non-oxidizing biocides. J20RPT870224 27
l SECTION 4.0 ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS l J20RPT870224 1
4.1 EPP CHANGES There were no changes or requests for changes to the GGNS Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) during 1986. Also, there.are no license amendments, either pending or planned, which would change the EPP. In 1986, tv EPP was implemented as written. 4.2 EPP NON-COMPLIANCES There were no EPP non-compliances during 1986. Sampling and surveillance activities were successfully conducted according to the EPP schedule. The required monitoring program was conducted without a reportable deviation. 4.3 NON-ROUTINE REPORTS One unusual or important event occurred.during 1986. This event involved the underground release of sulfuric acid caused by deteriorated piping. The release was detected in March 1986. In excess of 6,000 gallons of , acid / water mixture were initially recovered from a series i of wells. Recovery operations are still under way and may continue for some time. Future spills of this type are not anticipated because a different type of piping is now being used. No environmental impact outside of the affected area has been observed. i 1 J20RPT870224 1 _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ . _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . __ . _ _ _ _ . _ . . . _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ ___..__m_. ____..- ._
1
. l i
A summary report of this event was provided to the Mississippi Department of Natural Resources and the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in correspondence via
.(APO-86/0468) dated April 18, 1986. A copy of.this report is provided in Appendix II.
4.4 POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT UNREVIEWED ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES There were no potentially significant unreviewed environmental issues encountered in 1986. -Changes in station design and operation, tests and experiments did not result in an unreviewed environmental question. j Changes, tests and experiments were made in accordance i with the EPP, Paragraph 3.1, Plant Design and Operation. Paragraph 2.11 provides a discussion of how the EPP, Paragraph 3.1, is implemented. Activities at GGNS during I 1986 which were related to the EPP, Paragraph 3.1, are discussed in the AEOR, Section 3.11. Completed 1986 I environmental evaluations are included as AEOR, Appendix VI. I i I J20RPT870224 2 .i i
i i = l
-l 4
APPENDIX I SEMIANNUAL TRANSMISSION LINE SURVEYS i 1 I s J20RPT870224 - I.i
)
i I MEM0 TO: Mr. Dodds Hennington l I FROM: Mr. T. E. Reaves, Jr.
SUBJECT:
Aerial Survey of Transmission Lines Associated with Grand Gulf Nuclear Station (GGNS) FILE: 0290/15320 PMI/86- 7317 On June 20, 1986, the first semiannual aerial survey of the GGNS transmission lines was conducted by Ms. R. R. Jackson, Mr. G. E. Anderson, and Mr. L. K. James. The results are as follows: e 500 KV r;GNS to Baxter-Wilson The 1985 surveys identified erosion problems at Towers #24 and #52. These two problems have stabilized and the natural revegetation along the entire line is excellent. No problems were identified, e 500 KV GGNS to Franklin Substation The minor erosion problem reported in November 1985 created by logging trucks no longer exists, and the erosion problem at angle towers #192 and #193 has stabilized and requires no further action. This area is in good condition, e 115 KV GGNS to Port Gibson Transmission Line No problem areas were observed along the entire line. Natural revegetation is well establsihed. e 500 KV Ray Braswell Transmission Line No erosion problems were noted in this area. If there are any questions concerning the results of these surveys, please contact Ms. R. R. Jackson at 949-9217. TrA TER:bcb 8/15/86 cc: (See Next Page) i PENV AERIAL SURVEY - 1 m
PMI/86- 7317 l Page 2 J l l cc: Mr. T. H. Cloninger Mr. O. D. Kingsley, Jr. Mr.'C. R. Hutchinson 4 Dr. L. R. McKay J
- Ms. R. R. Jackson i i
Mr. G. E. Anderson File NS) j
- File R&ES) '
File ENV) 4 File Central) [ 2 ] 4 i i i 4 i , 6 4 PENV AERIAL SURVEY - 2 4
- - , . ~~ -,
, , _ . . . . . , - . . - . . , . , - , . - . , . ------e
,, e. . . , ,
e l l MEM0 T0: File FROM: Ms. R. R. Jackson
SUBJECT:
Aerial Survey of Transmission Lines Associated with Grand Gulf Nuclear Station (GGNS) NSIM-87/ 0048 DATE: January 20, 1987 On November 26, 1986, the second semiannual aerial survey of the GGNS transmission lines for 1986 was conducted by Mr. G. W. Guider, Mr. F. M. Lehmann, Mr. J. Bankston and Mr. L. K. James. The results are as follows: e 500 KV GGNS to Baxter-Wilson Steam Electric Station The initial 1986 survey identified no problem areas with this transmission corridor. Revegetation continues to be excellent at this time. This line continues in good condition with no recommendations at this time. e 500 KV GGNS to Franklin Substation The initial 1986 survey identified no problem areas with this transmission corridor. This line continues in good condition with no recommendations at this time, e 115 KV GGNS to Port Gibson Substation No problem areas were observed along this corridor, e 500 KV GGNS to Ray Braswell No problem areas were observed along this corridor. Another survey is scheduled for Spring 1987. If there are any questions concerning the results of these surveys, please contact 4 Ms. R. R. Jackson at (601) 949-9217. ( RPJ:beb . l cc: (See Next Page) i PENV AERIAL SURVEY - 1
NSIM/87- 0048 Page 2 cc: Mr. M. D.'Hennington Mr. G. E. Anderson Mr. G. W. Guider File (NS) File (R&ES) File (ENV) File (Central) [2] 1 I l i i 4 J f I k I 1 1 l 1
, PENV AERIAL SURVEY - 2
- - .. _.- _ --. . _ _. ._, ._. _ __ . . ~ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ . . _ , . _ . . _ _ . - _ .. _. _ . - _ . . -
[ APPENDIX II SPILL REPORT l J20RPT870224 - II-i , i l
rm, MISSISSIPPI POWER & LIGHT COMPANY _j ]L _ Helping Build Mississippi N P. O. B O X 16 4 0, J A C K S O N, MIS SIS SIP PI 39215-1640
~ ~
April 18, 1986 om[idi SUIssu Mr. Charles S. Chisolm, Director Mississippi Department of Natural Resources Bureau of Pollution Control Post Office Box 10385 Jackson, Mississippi 39209
Dear Mr. Chisolm:
SUBJECT:
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Unit 1
~
File: 0260/15330 Underground Spill of Sulfuric Acid AP0-86/0468 Attachment I is a summary report for the underground spill of sulfuric acid at Grand Gulf Nuclear Station (GGNS). The spill was confirmed on the afternoon of March 23, 1986. No adverse environmental effects have occurred because of the spill. The following is a discussion of the incident. BACKGROUND , Grand Gulf Nuclear Station uses 98% sulfuric acid in water treatment activities associated with plant operations. Acid is delivered to the site in bulk quantities and is stored in a tank south of the Water Treatment Building. The acid is fed to the acid day tank located inside the Water Treatment Building by means of an underground pipeline. An acid shipment was delivered to the acid storage tank on March 21, 1986. Radiological & Environmental Services' Environmental Surveillance Program (ESP) personnel were notified by the Shift Superintendent at 9:30 p.m. on March 22, 1986 that the plant could not account for approximately 2000 gallons of 98% sulfuric acid. Plant personnel conducted a search to determine if the acid had been spilled or released to a plant system. As a result of the search, an area on the west side of the Water Treatment Building became suspect when a vibration was observed as air was injected into the acid line. On March 23, 1986, ESP personnel were notified of the suspect area and were requested to report to the site so excavation could begin. Acidic soil with a pH of 1 was detected at approximately 1:00 p.m. J20AP086041802 Member Middle South Utilities System
AP0-86/0468 MISSISSIPPI POWER & LIGHT COMPANY Page 2 HAZARD ASSESSMENT _ Personnel probing for the leaking pipe and/or pool of underground acid were outfitted with acid resistant clothing, footwear, goggles, face shields and gloves. A nearby dewatering well was checked and it was determined that water in the well had a neutral pH. Water was checked in Basin "B" and at National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Outfall 001 (Discharge Basin) and a neutral pH was found. It was then assumed that the acid was in a pocket beneath the Water Treatment Building. CONTROL AND COUNTER MEASURES A temporary acid feed line was established to provide acid to the acid day tank in order to minimize disruption to the operating facility. Digging of sand and backfill material continued until late in the afternoon on March 23, 1986. Sloughing of backfill material into the excavated hole prompted officials to cease operations at 6:00 p.m. on March 23, 1986. The Shift Superintendent notified the NRC of the spill at approximately 5:00 p.m. Consequently, the National Response Center was notified at 5:15 p.m. that an underground spill had occurred. The Mississippi Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) was also notified of the spill at this time. Mr. Bob Rogers with the MDNR responded as the On-Scene Coordinator on the morning of March 24, 1986. Mr. Rogers suggested that an underground spill recovery team be brought to the site. O&H Materials Company from Findlay, Ohio, was mobilized and called to Grand Gulf Nuclear Station to conduct the acid recovery. CLEAN-UP AND DISPOSAL The acid contaminated soil excavated in the area of the suspected spill was taken to the Spoils Area where it was neutralized with sodium bicarbonate and lime. The mixture met pH limits of between 6 and 9 and was disposed of in an onsite burial pit. Representatives of MP&L, Bechtel, O&H Materials, and the MONR
- decided to place recovery wells around the suspected pocket of pooled acid and to pump the acid to the surface by means of a series of well points. The recovered acid would then be used in the water treatment process or be neutralized and disposed of in the Low-Volume Waste Basin. Recovery operations are currently underway and indications are that this will be a lengthy task.
1 J20AP086041802
AP0-86/0468 MISSISSIPPI POWER & LIGHT COMPANY Page 3 CAUSE Sulfuric acid is pumped from the acid storage tank to the acid day tank in the Water Treatment Building. After each acid transfer, line pressure into a nearbyis relieved by allowing 4 inch drain line shared (acidwith leftdomestic in the supply water)line to flow which goes to the chemical waste sump in the Water Treatment Building. Over a period of years the acid blowdown into the 4-inch drain line completely ate away the cast iron drain line. ACTIONS TO PREVENT RECURRENCE As a result of possible damage to existing underground piping, the following actions are being taken. e Acid supply line piping is being changed from carbon steel to , a special acid resistant pipe, Carpenter 20, which is an acid i resistant alloy. e A temporary acid supply system is being used to eliminate acid blowdown into the drain line until a permanent system is developed. e Other piping in the area of the Water Treatment Building will be integrity checked. CONCLUSION , The pocket of acid was located by drilling a series of wells and taking soil samples. The acid / water solution is being pumped out of the ground into a holding tank. Monitoring and pumping will continue until it is determined that a pH solution of 4.5 to 5.0 exists for a continuous 48-hour period. To date, approximately 6000 gallons of acid / water mixture has been recovered. At this time no environmental damage has occurred and none is expected. If you have any questions about this report, please contact Dr. L. R. McKay, Manager, Radiological & Environmental Services, at (601) 969-2432. Sincerely, TER:aly Attachments cc: (see next page) J20AP086041802
i AP0-86/0468 . MissIO2iPPI POWER Q Ll2HT CCMPANY page 4 l cc: Mr. O. D. Kingsley, III (w/a) Mr. M. L. Crawford (w/a) Mr. T. H. Cloninger (w/a) Mr. J. D. Barlow (w/a) Mr. J. E. Cross (w/a) Ms. G. R. Whitney (w/a) Mr.. J. G. Cesare, Jr. (w/a) Mr. F. M. Lehmann (w/a) Mr. J. V. Parrish (w/a) Mr. Bob Rogers (MONR) (w/a) Dr. L. R. McKay (w/a) Ms. R. R. Jackson (w/a) Mr. G. E. Anderson (w/a) l Mr. G. W. Guider (w/a) File (NS) (w/a) File (ENV) (w/a) File (R&ES) (w/a) File (Central) (w/a) [ 6 ] U. S. EPA, Region IV (w/a) { Regional Administrator (EPA) 345 Courtland St., N.E. Atlanta, Georgia 30365 Mr. Al Smith, Chief (w/a) Environmental Emergencies and Response Branch U. S. EPA, Regional IV 345 Courtland St., N.E. Atlanta, Georgia 30365 Dr. J. Nelson Grace (w/a) Regional Administrator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta St., N.W. Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Mr. Clarence Hickey (w/a) U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop P314 Washington, D.C. 20555 J20AP086041802
O I l l e
- l l
1 I 1 ATTACHMENT I ,
SUMMARY
REPORT < i l l l PENV SPILL ATT I - 1
O
- ATTACHMENT I ENVIRONMENTAL INCIDENT REPORT
, o Name, address and phone number of owner or operator:
- Mississippi Power & Light Company Post Office Box 1640 Jackson, Mississippi 39215 - 1640 (601) 949-9217 e Name, address and phone number of facility:
- Grand Gulf Nuclear Station (GGNS)
Grand Gulf Road Port Gibson, Mississippi 39150 (601) 437-5260 e Date, time and type of incident:
- March 23, 1986
- Incident occurred intermittently over an undetermined period of time
- 98% sulfuric acid was released from system piping and pooled underground in the vicinity of the Water Treatment Building l
e Name and quantity of material (s) involved: I
- 98% sulfuric acid
- Approximately 2000 gallons e Assessment of actual or potential hazards to human health or the environment (if applicable):
- There were no actual or potential hazards to human health as a result of this incident. There have been no actual environmental hazards and potential hazards are being eliminated through pumping of recovery wells, o Estimated quantity and disposition of material recovered from the incident:
- Total quantities are not known at this time.
- As of April 16, 1986, approximately 6000 gallons of acid / water mixture has been recovered from pumping activities.
L. R. McKay N[ V Manager, Radiological & Environmental Services i i PENV SPILL ATT I - 3
A APPENDIX III WELL HYDROGRAPHS l l l J20RPT870224 - III-i l l l
LIST OF REGIONAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS OW4 OW69A OW4A OW202 OW5 OW209A OW7 P4 OW10 P5 OW29A P209* l
- Monitoring Well P209 was dry during 1986.
1 1 l J20RPT870224
^
\
l l O E O O W
\ 99~gE'2C E ~
08'2C~UE , W - 99~gy'It \ j Z ~ W 9g'VT~gI X - 99,7E'Or W \ gg ' 'OC pj 9e I
<E0 ~ '
6 W - 99~9'6 Z b
~
00'22~g g W 99~9~g w w* 99~gg,d % O W m - 99,7T~g w l z H
~
O'l2~g & g a W E 99~ET~g at O w H> 99,OE~g cc 4 3&
~
08'91-g gO E 99~e-g a 99~gg,V O - 99,V'p 1 - LD 99'Tg,E , 99~z,g 3 - , 4 99~gy,2 l Z ~ 99 w g O - H 99,pd'T e J l ~ W $
- w. ,
00'OT~g ; a . . . . O CE w
<C 3:
1 1 o E o ; U W
~
j 99~9g,UI E - i 99~g 'EI y -
\
Z - 99~ S'II W 9g,VT~gg 1 - 99~gE~gg W ~ 14 g8'lT~gI DM - 99-g'OT ' U) I ~ 43 g8'6t~6 l Wo - 99~g'6 Z ~ J 99~22 9 m JJ - 99,9'8 l WW W
>x -
99~gg,l O W - Jo 99,IT~z w i 2 - 99~4g,9 z
~
GH gg'Et-g
~
WG Q as Ho - 99,oE~g a 4W ~ 3H l gg'9t~g oZ - 99~g,S Zo 99'9t~p
~
DE 99~p o - 99,re E 99,g,g 4 99~rg,2 Z - o 99't~e H 99-py,I
\
O w d 4 - 99,Of-7 j g Qj i i e i a t O E} m, W 3:
O E O O W \ 98~gg' E - 99~g7 ) y - 99~gy'IT Z . W gg,VT~gg
; E -
99-7E~og ^ W gg
'0I i
f - 99,g
* ~
00'6y 6 W o - 99,8'6 Z J - 99~ 98~ d i g $
> t 99~gg'l U W e -
99~gI'd d Z 0 g H
~
sg'42,9 5 W$
~
NG'Er~g Q Q >--
~
#8'OE~g $
g H - 99,97,E Oh - 98-g,g 51 O 9e~er, 99,p'V ! E - CD 88-73,E 99~z,g 4 98~Tg,2 Z - 99 we O - H 99,#2-1 m >
~
N0'Ol~g W $
- m. . ,
a . . . E w m F-3:
O g o U 9 99~92~yg g - 99~2t~yg p - 99~92~gg 2 - W - 99~kr~gg W 99~tE~0g
& N _
99~lt~og Wh - 99'E~0T y C 99-St~6 99~9-g
% J -
J d 99-22~9 en y . 99-g,g y - W w - 99~92 z o Jz . 99~tt z y 90 gg,g g C g 99'El-g W Q - y 99~0g~g 1
- 4. &
[ 3 99~9t~g z . 99-a-g O 2g O 90-9g~p p . 99-p~p C
* \ _
gg,7g_ i . 99~z~g J . 99~gg_g 2 - 99~z~g O _ e4 90-pg,7 g e g. > - . ' 99~0t~y a a k
= 8 C'
- t
<t i .## ' _,,.,e-Y"""~ _ , , - , . - " * " _ , , , < ~
- i l
l c E o O W - 99~9g,UI E - 99,y 'EI I w - 99~gg it Z ~ w gg'VT~gI E - 99~yE~og W
- Eo gg'lt~OT 3+ -
99~U'OT (n i ~ 43 99'6t~9 WO - 99,9'6 E - 3 99-gg 9 m JJ - Ww 99~9~9 $
>E 99'gg,4 <t C
W ~ sg'IT~g J (.D e Z - 99~gE'9 z
~
i EH ~ WE gg'St~g @
&O - w 99~oE~g 1 4 >-- ~
l 3H f gg'95~g oZ I 99~g'S ZO 1
"'3 E
~
g9'9f-p I
~
99'p~p w - 99~gy,E j 3 99'g~g 4 99'Ig,2 Z - 99'4-g o - H 99~pO'T C.D W d> i _ 99,OT~t g w. . . . . i m 8 8 8 w kx l
O E O U w - 99~gy'UI E - 99,UT~gg 99~9g,IT Z ~ W 9g'VC~gE 1 - 99,g Eo 4h l
~
N9'6t~g
$O
~ '
99~9~g
~ '
ad -
$~?;" m
- > W -
99~gg'l $ W # - O 99,IT-g a J e '
~
00'l2~g 6 g Z wy ~ O'Es g Q QOH
~
#9'0E~g 99~gg,E y$
O - 99~g,g 5g O 99~9t~, 99,p'V E e - 99,7y i 99 g 4 99~gg'E 2 - 99,l~g o m - 99,pg'I O d 4 - W > 99,Or,g g w. . . i . i O O O m
<t x
O E O O W 1 99~9g'El E - 99 2T~ y - 99,gy'gg Z - It W 9g,VT~gg K - 99~g C 4h
~
UG'St~g jo -
~
99~g~g
/ $~'f;8 ad -
m Q W *W - 99~gg'l Q d 99,7I'd a LO x HZ
~
gg'42-g 5 w G
~
#9'Et~g Q w
&o 4
99~OE~g cr 3&
~
#9'9t~g C g -
99 g,g hO O E
\
99~gT~p 99,>~k 1 90'tg,g
~
LO 99,g
< ~
99~gg'E Z - 9g,l'8 O m - 99,p 'I LD w d i - 99,ot~g g w. . . . . O O O 5 # Q
=
O E O U ~ W \ 99~9g'2T E . sg'2T~gI p 99,gy IT Z . W gg,Vi~gy E - 99,gE~og W m . sg hO I'Or n gg'E~og g g }a 99~gg
&O -
99'9~g aj : $:"";9 g
~
O'92~z $
&3 J
~
g41~z w w ~ g9't&~g 5 g ~Z - 99-er~g Q W 6- E
- W O 96,Oc~g a 4 Y -
3 #9'9t~g lml -
$'"A 99~V~p g
G 99'ty,g 99,g, 4 99~ty,2 Z . 99'4,3 O m - 99,p 'I G W d 99,Ot-g g w. . . . . . 8 8 8 tix i
O 1 O O w ~
#9'92~EI 1 -
99-y p.- - 2 - 99~9 fI w 99 pI~tt E - w< - 99~te'0C C CD 99'lI~og Do - 99~g OI c.n N ~ 4 l 9g'6t~g w3 - 99~g,6 EO - 99-gg~0
.-.I - I -
99 y'8 @ w _a -
>W ~
80'S2 l
- W5 -
99,7I 4 _J co EZ CD ~ 00'l2 g 5 a wH 99~Er g < V- 1 - 99~og'S @
<O ~
E& Sg'9t~g OH - 99,g'S ZZ ~ DO 00'9t~p OE - 99,p'V 1 ~ t.D SO't2~g g 88-4 g 4 99~tg~U Z - 99,l'8 O H - c.o .a W 99~#2~t w
~
#9'0s~g g @, i . i . .
8 8 8 5 # 4
- =
8 O O w - 99~gg'UT E - 99 ET~ 98~gy'gg Z ~ It w 9g'Vt~gI 1 - 99,yE~og w gg bw (n I
~
99?g0I OT 4 (1. g9'6T g 99 g, y - 99 gg 9 Jw m wz 99,9-9 s< 99-gg l O W (D - JZ 99,IT 4 m EE { ~$U'9 h 4 WO g
'ET-g W t-- F-4g t 99'OE-g a: ,
~
3Z 09'9t~g l C - 99,d'S 1 x ~
#9'91.p O -
99,V~p m w - 99,gy_ y 99~l~g
< ~
99,gy'O Z - 99,l~2 O ~ 5 W
.a w
'*2-t
-0,_,
l e m. . . . . . O O O 4 x
O E O U W - 99~gy'91 E - 99 y
- YI 99~gy,,It Z ~
W gg'VC-gI Z - 99-gC-og W gg'lt-gI
~
E
~3 D -
99,g'Of U) l ~ 4 G. 9O'6t-6 W - 99,O'6 ZJ - J 99~gy,O m JW - . W3 99 9'8 N 1 99~gy'l < O WW - 99'It-g JZ e i x - 99-gO'9 z
~
EE ~ U WQ gg'OT-g g i
> ~ >-- -
4H ~ 99~oO'S CE 3Z 00'91-g l O' g - 99~,-,p w - 99-Te, y 99-4-p 4 99,gg'O 1 Z - 99't-g o m - 99,p 'I , G rd - w g
- w. . . . . i 99,OT-g CE w W
s
., .-r._ _ - - - - - - . _ _ _ , - -
l l t
- I l
LIST OF PERCHED OROUNDWATER WELLS MONITORING WELLS DEWATERING WELLS i MW1 DW1 MW2 DW2 MW3 DW3 MW4 DW4 l MW5 DW5 MW6 DW6 MW7 DW7 DW8 [ l i J20RPT870224
V E L E S I S A B N _ G I S S E T D C N E D E M6 V - E8 O R9 N U1 S T A) C O E1 M - W P - E LM S E( V G EL U A LL - E RW L U _ E J 6 TG 8 G - AN N 9 1 N I - WI U D R J A E DO R NT Y A Y UI M R D ON RO R A GM P S E A T DR A C EO R I HF A M O t C I R B E E E C A P L F P S - E V N E - - - - - - - A X. L 5 A 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 J L R1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 9 9 e 8 B E A T _ A : W E T O N l ll lllll l !jj!1l, lll lI ll!l!lll llll
Wl WI m Z cn !0 6-- C o to Z Q W l I LD > Wm I EG l E Dw CD l s
<C - o O
WN l I I I o. l 2 JZ l I w l W-
> I WJ l
> 8 4
JJ W I 1x W F- f.D l I k u) m
<Z l m @
-' ~
ym ~ T ' l 00 l m ZH > 3 DH l g e Q OZ , CO I < ' OI m l Ec tu : om l 4 M l WO m ; ! IL l g Q o I m E l W l B d
-c l a. z 1 l G
w i it i i i i i y M l
~
J in o in o o o3 '.b
. )
tS m tS
- m m0 0 S S w .c
.t ..
h 1 9 l l
!S I WI m
en in s a a z g W I Ie I WQ o l Tm l z De CD I w
<- U Wm I l Z l x I Q-l > I e a
WI 1 -t yJ W I 1x W l e F- O to m l <z l @ oo l l k Q W zH >- DH l y h l oz go l < OZ l E M
+4 p oa 1 5 Wo cr -
It I -j 9 o ; A T g W l 3 .c gj l % G. il . . i i i y 5 "E g- S 8 8 8 8 8 8' d 19 9
l l l PERCHED GROUND WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS FOR MONITORING WELL (MW-4) 1986 WATER LEVEL 115 - DESIGN BASIS ELEV. 110 - 105 - 100 - 95 - 90 - 85 - 80 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1986 l NOTE : A BLANK SPACE INDICATES A DRY READING
I PERCHED GROUND WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS FOR MONITORING WELL (MW-5) 1986 WATER LEVEL 115 - DESIGN BASIS ELEV. l 110 - 105 - 100 - 95 - 90 - 85 - 80 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1986 NOTE : A BLANK SPACE INDICATES A DRY READING
a.- - A PERCHED GROUND WATER LEVEL MEASUR MENTS FOR MONITORING WELL (MW-6) 1986 WATER LEVEL 115 - DESIGN BASIS ELEV. 110 - WELL BOTTOM 105 - 100 - 95 - 90 - 85 - 80 . JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1986 NOTE : A BLANK SPACE INDICATES A DRY READING
PERCHED GROUND WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS FOR MONITORING WELL (MW-7) 1986 WATER LEVEL 115 - DESIGN BASIS ELEV. 4 110 - 105 - 100 - 95 - 90 - 85 - 80 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1986 NOTE : A BLANK SPACE INDICATES A DRY READING
i PERCHED GROUND WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS FOR MONITORING WELL (DW-1) 1986 WATER LEVEL 115 - DESIGN BASIS ELEV. 110 _ ______________________ i 105 - 100 - 95 - i 90 - 85 - 80 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1986 NOTE : A BLANK SPACE INDICATES A DRY READING
PERCHED GROUND WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS FOR MONITORING WELL (DW-2) 1986 WATER LEVEL 115 - DESIGN BASIS ELEV. 110 - 105 - 100 95 - 90 - 85 - 80 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1986 NOTE : A BLANK SPACE INDICATES A DRY READING
PERCHED GROUND WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS FOR MONITORING WELL (DW-3) 1986 WATER LEVEL 115 - DESIGN BASIS ELEV. 110 - 105 - 100 - 95 - 90 - 85 - 80 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1986 NOTE : A BLANK SPACE INDICATES A DRY READING
PERCHED GROUND WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS FOR MONITORING WELL (DW-4) 1986 WATER LEVEL 115 - DESIGN BASIS ELEV. . 110 - 105 - 100 - 95 - 90 - 85 - 80 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1986 NOTE : A BLANK SPACE INDICATES A DRY READING
I PERCHED GROUND WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS FOR MONITORING WELL (DW-5) 1986 WATER LEVEL 115 - DESIGN BASIS ELEV. 110 - 105 - 100 - 95 - 90 - 85 - 80 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1986 NOTE : A BLANK SPACE INDICATES A DRY READING t
PERCHED GROUND WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS FOR MONITORING WELL (DW-6) 1986 WATER LEVEL 115 - DESIGN BASIS ELEV. 110 - 105 g N 100 - 95 - 90 - 85 - 80 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1986 NOTE : A BLANK SPACE INDICATES A DRY READING
t' 'l PERCHED GROUND WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS FOR MONITORING WELL (DW-7) 1986 WATER LEVEL 115 - DESIGN BASIS ELEV. 110 - 105 - 100 - 95 - 90 - 85 - 80 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1986 NOTE : A BLANK SPACE INDICATES A DRY READING
PERCHED GROUND WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS FOR MONITORINT WELL (DW-8) 1986 WATER LEVEL 115 - DESIGN BASIS ELEV.
~~~~
1to _..._ UNSCHEDULED SURVEILLANCE 105 - 100 - 95 - 90 - 1 85 - 80 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1986 NOTE : EXCURSION EXPLAINED IN SECTION 3.6
APPEFDIX'IV i THERMAL MONITORING
SUMMARY
1 i 1 J20RPT870224 - IV-i
I i THERMAL MONITORING
SUMMARY
BACKGROUND Grand Gulf Nuclear Station's NPDES Permit requires that GGNS effluents and the Mississippi River mixing area be monitored to determine what effects, if any, will result from GGNS' heated discharge into the river. The NPDES Permit states: l "The receiving water shall not exceed a maximum water temperature 4 change of 2.8'C (5.0*F) relative to the upriver temperature, outside a mixing zone not exceeding a maximum width of 60 ft from the river edge and a maximum length of 6000 ft downstream from the point of discharge, as measured at a depth of 5 ft. The maximum water temperature shall not exceed 32.2*C (90*F) outside q the same mixing zone, except when ambient temperatures approach or exceed this value." Monitoring is conducted semiannually (once in winter and once in summer) when at least one unit is operating at a minimum of 25% power. f To initiate the thermal monitoring program and obtain baseline data, the river bank was surveyed to establish and permanently naark 72 reference points 100 ft apart. Sixty-six of the reference points are located downstream of GGNS' discharge into the river, and the remaining six are located upstream of the discharge (Figure 1). Calibrated digital thermometers are used to obtain temperatures at a depth of 5 ft and at the surface. At each reference point, measurements are taken 100 ft from the river bank, then at 10.ft intervals until reaching the bank. This provides 20 temperature' data points for each reference point. DATA DEVELOPMENT
- Table I was tabulated from the data found in the 1982 through 1986 Thermal Monitoring Reports. It summarizes environmental conditions and plant operational data for each thermal acpitoring period.
i i 3 Table 2 compiles data for each summer thermal monitoring performed from H 1982.through 1986. This table depicts the average temperature (surface and 4 5 ft) for: l o Specific survey points - first upstream (#5) and downstream (#6) survey points . o Groups of survey plints - points 1-4 (upstream), 7-11, 12-29, 30-48
% and 49-66.
l' T t t a PENV TM
SUMMARY
- 1
i l i 1 Temperatures for each group were averaged for each ten foot interval for sixty feet extending from the eastern shoreline. The temperatures averaged for June and September 1986 monitoring differed for the following points and distances:
~
June 1986 Points 30-48 @ all distances - average based on eight of nineteen points-Points 49-66 @ all distances - average based on four of eighteen points i j Sentember 1986-1 Points 30-48 @ all distances - average based on ten of nineteen points l Points 49-66, No readings taken l Table 3 was derived by the same method as Table 2 for the winter. I monitoring periods. The temperatures averaged for the February 1983 winter monitoring differed for the following points and distances:
- 1 i Points 1-4 @ 10 ft - average based on two of four points i 1
l Points 1-4 @ 20 ft - average based on three of four points l Points 12-29 @ 10 ft - average based on seventeen of eighteen points Points 49-66 @ all distances - average based on six of eighteen points i These differences were caused by missing survey pins, high river level and i i obstructions. l DISCUSSION The Grand Gulf Nuclear Station thermal monitoring program was established j to compare semiannual winter and summer preoperational baseline data to data during plant operation. Tables 1 through 4 provide a summary of the , monitoring data collected from September 1982 through September 1986. Summer Data l The data collected over the summer. periods from 1982'through 1986 i exhibited minor variation. The greatest temperature differential between J the first upstream point (#5) from the discharge point and the first downstream point (#6) was 0.6*C. The greatest temperature difference between surface level and the five foot depth was 1.0*C. i 1 1 PENV T.5 SIX%RY - 2 , 1
.A thermal plume was detected during the June 1985 monitoring. Tha pluma was located in the barge slip prior to entering the mixing zone (Table 4).
A transect of the barge slip was performed to determine the extent of the plume. The plume extended 70 ft out from the mouth of the barge slip and curved upstream for 60 ft (due to addy currents) before dissipating. However, the temperature of receiving water did not increase more than
-0.3*C.
A thermal plume similar to the one observed in June 1985 was also observed in June and September 1986. Receiving water temperature did not increase more than 0.5'C during the June and September 1986 monitoring. No significant thermal plumes were detected in the mixing zone downstream ' of the discharge point. Winter Data Data was ' collected for two winter periods,1983 and 1986. The greatest , - temperature differential between the first upstream point from the discharge point and the first downstream point was 0.5'C. The greatest temperature difference between the surface and the five foot depth was 1.9*C. A barge slip' plume similar to June 1985 was also detected during February 1966 monitoring. PREOPERATIONAL-OPERATIONAL MONITORING A ccmparison of preoperational and operational thermal monitoring data 1 (Table 4) establishes that the turbulence and volume of the Mississippi River 4 mix the heated discharge'and cause little temperature variation. Average preoperational (baseline) and operational thermal monitoring data were similar. As shown in Table 4, the only area detectably influenced by the GGNS heated discharge was the barge slip and the associated entry into the Mississippi River. 1 CONCLUSION l 1 Examination of the thermal monitoring data indicates the Mississippi River supplies a volume of water sufficient for dissipating the heated discharge j within the required mixing zone. Consequently, continued thermal monitoring j of the Mississippi River is not necessary. Thermal monitoring has also j established that the potential effects of discharging heated water from GGNS ' have been effectively minimized by the utilization of a cooling tower as a primary means of heat dissipation. , l i PENV TM SD! MARY - 3 1
~-, ._.
I l
/
j'/////'//////)'/' b b%%% / 'Ab%%'/l *
//! i
- . s%z%zmxxy
- . szzzw//nzs,
~' 6%%%%Y 4%%7i ;
. :, N5555$'/ '
- . RMMMWlQg
, ~. _ ~
W#] ////4 .
~
& m s'~
5 ~' N 5 kN}'kkY[//) B : R&i kMW4Yr i
~
- ' KNW h%i'4V' ,]
- . EMMS!M 9,1 l le _ . , @0&MWWZZ21 MNM%i'6%%'4!
L. s *. &.N.s- - - s e W4% %%1 l g
=
H 3tL.' rltcS . s NWU .. e . - -- . - , o - o - o - o - . - . - o-_o I E J j jj ! l 1I l. I = i 1 R i i I I!I = l l l l I O. i l I' l I I I I I .I II I lg e a a a g e
Iw 6 0 8 0 9 0 9 0 6 1 0, 5 0 0 1 5 / 4 _ 2 5 1 0 6 7 5 0 6 2 2 8 5 B 1 1 6 R E 4 E F T N E E E I L L L W 3 8 0 B B B A A A 9 0 5 4 L L L 1 4 - 0, 0 I I I 5 9 - 1 4 A A A 1 1 V V V B 0 2 A A A - E 8 N N N F U U U 3 6 - 8 0 6 - 9 0 1 4 5 2 2 - 1 0, 2 0 7 9 / _ 7 6 4 3 7 3 _ T 5 7 5 P 7 8 2 3 9 _ 6 _ E 2 2 S 6 6 8 0 8 9 0 0 7 0 0 2 1 0, 5 0 0 9 / 2 8 9 6 5 6 5 E 7 2 3 0 9 l t 3 2 8 1 8 _ U 6 2 J Y R 1 A 5 8 0 6 E f 9 0 9 3 9 4 0 2 U 1 0, 6 7 1 / S ) 0 0 3 9 3 9 4 A E 7 2 4 3 G T N 7 2 8 2 6 1 NA R U 5 2 IT) E J E R M L OL M B TA U 2 A IT S 4 _ T Ndr 8 9 0 0 5 0 0 7 O 5 2 2 MU G 1 0, 8 0
- 2 1
. 3 3
8 3
/
2 E 0 5 - 9 7 L ( 1 2 1 A N 0 2 7 M U 8 2 R J E li E _ T L 3 B 8 0 5 A _ 9 0 2 L - 1 2 - 6 9 0, 0 1 I / Y 5 7 - 0 8 1 A 2 L 8 1 3 1 1 V U 4 A 1 J N 3 U 2 E E E _ L L L 8 B B B 9 0 A A A 1 0 L L 8 5 L 0, 5
- I I I T 8 6 0 3 3 A A A _
P 6 1 - 2 2 V V V E 4 A A A S N N N U U U
)
. r p C' e m ( ) w
) e m p
o s T . T
/ ) p g t ) t m ( g )
S n) t R 't f % n e E f ( ( e T r i m p
. f
( i e l p T E e r b 1 v og m5 M w g e m 0 i o( e/ Te A o a w A 0 R C R t o n c A l F S P e g e g t o ew go ra ef P ad vr r r t a a e e n r) r w rw iu v v a e e o eo rS p( i i l v C" v l vl U R R P A( A F AB
TABLE 2 THERMAL MONITORXNG SUMMARV (SUMMER) DATE DISTANCE FROM EASTERN SHORELINE (FT) j 10 1 20 t 30 6 40 i 50 I 60 f AVERAGE TEMPERATUREaC, SURFACE /5 FT { 1-4 SEPT 1982 27.3/26.0 27.3/26.0 27.3/26.0 27.3/26.0 27.3/26.0 27.3/26.0 i JULY 1983 30.8/30.8 31.0/30.7 30.9/30.6 30.8/30.6 30.8/30.6 30.8/30.6 JUNE 1984 27.1/27.0 27.1/27.0 27.1/27.0 27.1/27.0 27.1/27.0 27.1/27.0 JUNE 1985 26.5/26.2 26.5/26.2 26.5/26.2 26.5/26.2 26.6/26.2 26.6/26.2 JUNE 1986 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.5 28.7/28.5 28.7/28.5 SEPT 1986 26.3/26.3 26.3/26.3 26.2/26.3 26.2/26.2 26.1/26.1 26.1/26.1 SEPT 1982 27.4/26.0 27.3/26.0 27.3/26.0 27.3/26.0 27.3/26.0 27.3/26.0 5[y) JULY 1983 31.0/30.5 31.0/30.5 31.0/30.5 31.0/30.5 31.0/30.5 31.0/30.5 JUNE 1984 27.0/26.9 27.0/26.9 26.9/26.9- 25.9/26.9 27.0/26.9 26.9/26.8 JUNE 1985 26.6/26.2 26.6/26.2 26.6/26.3 26.6/26.3 26.6/26.3 26.6/26.3 JUNE 1986 28.9/28.9 28.8/28.8 28.8/28.8 28.8/28.8 28.9/28.8 28.9/28.9 SEPT 1986 26.6/26.6 26.6/26.6 26.6/26.6 26.5/26.6 26.4/26.7 26.4/26.4 SEPT 1982 27.3/26.2 27.3/26.2 27.3/26.2 27.3/26.2 i 27.3/26.2 27.2/26.3 1 6(2) JULY 1983 31.1/30.7 31.0/30.6 31.1/30.6 31.1/30.6 31.0/30.6 31.0/30.6 JUNE 1984 27.1/27.0 27.1/27.0 27.1/27.0 27.1/27.0 27.0/27.0 27.0/27.0 JUNE 1985 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 JUNE 1986 28.6/28.5 28.6/28.5 28.6/28.5 28.6/28.5 28.6/28.5 28.6/28.5 SEPT 1986 26.1/26.1 26.1/26.1 26.1/26.1 26.1/26.1 26.1/26.1 26.2/26.1 ' SEPT 1982 27.5/26.3 27.4/26.3 27.4/26.2 27.4/26.2 27.4/26.2 27.3/26.2 7-11 JULY 1983 31.5/30.9 31.2/30.7 31.2/30.6 31.1/30.6 31.0/30.6 31.0/30.6 JUNE 1984 27.1/27.1 27.1/27.0 27.1/27.0 27.1/27.0 27.1/27.0 27.1/27.0 JUNE 1985 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 JUNE 1986 28.6/29.5 28.6/28.5 28.6/28.5 28.6/28.5 28.6/28.5 28.6/28.5! SEPT 1986 26.2/26.2 26.1/26.2 26.1/26.2 26.2/26.2 26.2/26.2 l 26.2/26.2 l SEPT 1982 27.5/26.4 27.4/26.3 27.3/26.3 27.2/26.3 27.2/26.3 27.0/26.3 i 12-29 JULY 1983 31.9/31.5 32.0/31.0 31.8/30.8 31.7/30.6 31.7/30.6 31.5/30.6 ' JUNE 1984 27.4/27.3 27.4/27.3 27.4/27.3 27.2/27.3 27.2/27.2 27.2/27.2 JUNE 1985 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 JUNE 1986 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.6 28.6/28.6 SEPT 19S6 26.4/26.4 26.3/26.2 26.2/26.2 26.2/26.2 26.2/26.2 26.1/26.1 SEPT 1962 26.9/26.1 26.8/26.1 26.8/26.1 26.8/26.1 26.8/26.0 26.6/26.0 , 30-48 JULY 1983 31.1/30.8 31.1/30.8 31.1/30.6 31.1/30.6 31.1/30.6 31.2/30.6 JUNE 1984 27.2/27.2 27.2/27.2 27.3/27.2 27.3/27.2 27.3/27.2 27.2/27.2 JUNE 1985 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 (3) JUNE 1986 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.6I (5) SEPT 1986 26.3/26.3 26.3/26.3 26.2/26.2 26.2/26.2 26.2/26.1 26.1/26.1 I SEPT 1982 26.6/26.0 26.6/26.0 26.7/26.0 26.6/25.9 26.6/25.9 26.6/26.0 i 49-66 JULY 1983 30.9/30.7 30.9/30.7 30.9/30.7 30.9/30.7 30.8/30.7 30.8/30.6 JUNE 1984 27.2/27.2 27.2/27.2 27.2/27.:2 27.2/27.2 27.2/27.2 27.2/27.2 JUNE 1985 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 26.3/26.2 i JUNE 1986 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.6 28.7/28.6 I (4) (1)Firstupstreampoint (2) First downstream point (3) Data based on eight points (4) Data based on four points (5) Data based on ten points PENV TM
SUMMARY
TBL 2 - 1
=. .- . . . . .-. --_
TABLE 3 T.1ERMAL MONITORING
SUMMARY
(UTN1ER) DISTANCE FROM EASTERN Sil0 RELINE (FT) DATE 10 l 20 1 30 l 40 1 50 l 60 AVERAGE TEMPERATURE C, SURFACE /5 FT 1-4 FEB 1983 (3)7.5/6.3 I4)7.4/6.3 7.3/6.3 7.4/6.3 7.4/6.3 7.3/6.3 FEB 1986 6.4/6.3 6.4/6.3 6.3/6.2 6.3/6.2 6.4/6.2 6.4/6.1 S III FEB 1983 7.9/6.4 7.8/6.4 7.8/6.3 7.6/6.2 7.5/6.2 7.5/6.2 FEB 1986 6.6/6.5 6.6/6.5 6.5/6.4 6.5/6.4 6.6/6.4 6.6/6.5 6 I2) FEB 1983 7.'4/6.1 7.4/6.1 7.4/6.1 7.4/6.1 7.4/6.1 7.4/6.1 FEB 1986 6.1/6.2 6.1/6.1 6.1/6.1 6.1/6.1 6.1/6.1 6.1/6.1 7-11 FEB 1983 7.6/6.2 7.6/6.2 7.5/6.2 7.5/6.2 7.5/6.1 7.5/6.1 FEB 1986 6.2/6.2 6.2/6.2 6.2/6.2 6.1/6.2 6.1/6.2 6.1/6.1 12-29 FEB 1983 7.9/6.6 7.8/6.5 7.8/6.4 7.7/6.4 7.7/6.4 7.7/6.4 FEB 1986 6.4/6.4 6.3/6.3 6.2/6.2 6.2/6.2 6.2/6.2 6.2/6.2 30-48 FEB 1983 8.3/6.4 8.3/6.4 8.2/6.3 8.2/6.3 8.2/6.3 8.2/6.3 FEB 1986 6.4/6.4 6.3/6.3 6.3/6.3 6.2/6.2 6.2/6.2 6.2/6.2 49-66 FEB 1983(5) 8.1/6.3 8.1/6.3 8.1/6.3 8.1/6.2 8.1/6.3 8.1/6.3 FEB 1986 NO DATA NO DATA NO DATA NO DATA NO DATA NO DATA (1) First upstream point (3) Data based on 2 points (5) Data based on 6 points (2) First downstream point (4) Data based on 3 points PENV TM StfMMARY TRL 3 - 1
TABLE 4 THERMAL MONITORING
SUMMARY
(HARGC SLIP PLUME) SUMMER WINTER reoperational Operational Preop. Operat. PARAMETER SEPT 1982 JULY 1983 -JUNE 1984 JUNE 1985 JUNE 1986 SEPT 1986 FEB 1983 FE8 1986 Ambient 28.3 30.6 19.2 23.3 29.0 26.1 11.5 20.0 Temperature (*C) Outfall 001 23.5 18.9 27.1 29.9 36.7 34.4 14.4 26.1 Temperature ( *C) Discharge Outlet 24.8/25.8 23.3 N/D 31.0 35.0/35.0 N/D 6.9 22.8 Temperature (*C) Barge Slip PT 1 24.8/26.2 28.2 N/D 30.8 33.4/33.6 35.0/35.0 7.0 22.8 Temperature ( *C) Barge Slip PT 2 24.9/25.8 29.0 N/D 30.8 33.1/33.5 35.0/35.0 6.7 21.4 Temperature (*C) Barge Slip PT 3 25.1/25.8 30.0 N/D 30.0 29.9/28.5 35.0/35.~0 6.5 16.1 Temperature ( *C) Barge Slip Outlet 25.4/25.7 31.0 27.0/26.9 29.7 28.6/28.5 N/D 6.4 6.1 to the Miss. River Temperature (*C) Upriver N/D 31.2 27.2/27.0 26.4 28.5/28.6 26.3/26.3 N/D 6.0 Temperature (*C) (SURFACE /5 FT.) N/D - No Data pr#Hf Ta4 CetuMADV Tpl 4 - 1
Il 4 t U l 1 APPENDIX V i SALT DEPOSITION t l STATISTICAL ANALYSIS i i i i t i 1 4 4 8 l l J20RPT870224 - V-i 1
?
.- , - __ . . . . . - - , - . , . . . ~ . - _ . - - - - . , - . _ _ . - . - - ,
_ - . - . _ - . _ - . - -. . . - - . - - - - - - - - - - . .-- _- - ~ ~ l STATISTICAL ANALYSIS 1 OF GRAND GULF DEPOSITION DATA Discussica The Grand Gulf Nuclear Station (GGNS) has an extensive network of monitoring stations used for assessing plant impacts and for gathering basic data, including meteorological. Salt deposition samplers (SDS) have been installed at ) seven nearby site stations and one distant control site. During 1986, cumulative
~
s samples were collected for four quarterly periods. Replicate samples were taken i at two sampler locations (stations 2 and 5). For each sample, analyses have been conducted on ten salt parameters: sodium, iron, calcium, fluoride, j nitrate, chloride, magnesium, sulfate, phosphates, and total dissolved solids j (TDS). Table 1 gives the salt deposition rates provided by environmental, which
- form the bases for the statistical analyses discussed below.
j l Quantitative estimates of the precision of the data and the relative importance i of the various factors which can potentially influence salt deposition rates can
; be obtained. The former can be quantified by estimating confidence limits for the various data; the latter by statistically analyzing the data by Analysis of l j Variance (ANOVA). The present statistical analysis uses a two-factor ANOVA which (
i involves calculating F-factors and conducting significance tests for the major j potential influences (period, location and the interaction of the two). i j The basic statistical model selected for the analysis is as follows: 1
* * * * +
ij k i j ij 'k(ij ) where D = basic SDR (Salt Deposition Rate) data M = mean SDR Pg = contribution due to sampling period
= contribution due to sanpling location L) j = contribution due to sampling period and location PLg ) interactions j
e f k(ij) = err r due to sampling, analytical, etc. techniques and other, unaccounted for, factors Interactions and " experimental" error can be separated in a multiple-factors experiment only if multiple observations are taken at various combinations of. i sampling periods and sampler locations. Determining confidence limits for the basic SDR data depends on the estimate of " experimental" error for the model;
! this estimate, in turn, depends on the availability of replicate samples. Since
- the latter were obtained only for SDS locations 2 and 5, this statistical j analysis will consider only these two locations.
i i NCIREP STATISTICAL ANALYSIS 1
- _ __ _ _ _ _ - . . . _ ___ . __ _ _ . _ _ - - , _ _ _ _ . __. _ . _ _ - ~ _ -
2 For simplicity's sake a complete balanced block design will be considered; that is three replicate SDRs for each combination of periods (four) and locations (two), or a total of 24 SDR data points for each constituent. The actual data block is incomplete since some SDR data are either not available or are obviously biased. Pseudodata points have been estimated based on available data for the same sampler to complete the data block by minimization of the error-sum-of-squares for the model. This is generally a good approximation for a data block with only a small number of missing data points. Table 2, giving the SDR data, includes these pseudodata points. Calculation Number CC-N1000-87008 was performed for this analysis. Basically one calculates the sum-of-squares for each of the factors of interest (period, location, period-location interaction, and error). Then the F-factors for period, location and period-location interaction relative to basic error are determined as well as an estimate of the confidence limits for the average SDR for any given period and location. For the purposes of this analysis, 95% confidence limits and 95% significance critic' l aF-factors have been considered. Using standard student -t and F distribution tables, other levels of significance are l readily determinable, if required. Table 3 summarizes the results of this analysis. i As noted earlier, it is necessary to use replicate SDRs to separate " experimental error" (error between the replicates) from interaction influences. The use of composition in ANOVA instead of salt disposition rates may aid in this process as well as provide additional information regarding potential sources of the salt. Composition for an individual parameter (e.g. for sodium, of location 2, period 1, and rep ~icate 1) is determined by dividing the value of the salt I deposition rate for the parameter by the sum of the corresponding values for all other constituents other than TDS. A two-factor ANOVA with three replicates is then conducted for two locations (2 and 5) and four periods. Table 4 provides a summary of the ANOVA based on composition. Resn't of the ANOVA (Table 3) for sampler locations 2 and 5 (with replicate samples) show interaction of sampling period and location on some of the SDRs. As noted earlier, multiple observations are required to separate interaction and
" experimental" error. Even when multiple observations are not available, ANOVA analysis can still be performed to evaluate the main effect of an individual factor. Therefore, the two-factor ANOVA (without replicates) can be performed for the other sampling locations (other than 2 and 5) to evaluate the effect of location and period. Table 5 shows salt deposition data (five locations, four periods) for the ANOVA analyses without interaction. This ANOVA calculation was also performed in calculation number CC-N1000-87008.
To analyze impacts of environmental factors such as rainfall, wind speed, prevailing wind direction and resultant wind direction, regression analyses may be performed as follows: (1) Cumulative rainfall for the period versus the salt deposition rate for that period (for all salt deposition rates for sampler locations 2 and 5) (2) Average wind speed for the period versus the salt deposition rate for that j period (as above) i NCIREP STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
3 t 3 (3) Prevailing wind direction for the period versus salt deposition rates for that period (as above) (4) Resultant wind direction for the period versus the salt deposition rate for , that period (as above) 1 , For each of the four sampling periods, data for rainfall and the frequency ~ distributions for wind speed and direction have been obtained by reduction of the GGNS weather data. Table 7 summarizes these four' environmental factors. Data points for a regression analysis on a SDR parameter consist of data pairs ", as follows - an environmental factor for a period and corresponding SDR value of j the parameter for the period. The SDR data from sampler locations 2 and 5 were used for the regression analyses. Table 8 gives the correlation coefficients ! (for each SDR parameter with each environmental factor) as obtained from the regression analyses. CONCLUSIONS l (1) The results of ANOVA (Table 3) based on salt deposition rates indicate the following:
- Sampling period has significant influence on all SDR parameters.
j Sampling location has significant influence on all SDR parameters. i Interaction of sampling period and locations has significant influence j on all SDR parameters. 1 (2). If sources of the deposited salt were the same and variations in SDR were j only due to sampler location, period, and their mutual interaction, then j the composition of SDR samples for different periods and locations would be j similar to each other and ANOVA based on composition would be expected to 4 show no dependence on the three factors. However, no clear trend is evident I in this ANOVA analysis. Therefore, there are other salt sources in addition i to the cooling tower or other factors affecting the deposition greatly (Table 4). (3) ANOVA results (Table 6), assuming no interaction between period and l location, indicated the following: t i Sampling period had an influence on 7 of 10 SDR parameters. ; Sampling location had an influence on only one SDR parameter. j
- The greater number of sampling locations used in this analyses appears to reduce the influence of sample location and period.
{ (4) Results of linear regression analyses (Table 8) indicate the following: 1 Correlation coefficient for iron and phosphate showed significant correlation from rainfall. NCIREP STATISTICAL ANALYSIS d
4 (4) (continued) Prevailing wind direction had a significant correlation on sodium, calcium, magnesium, and sulfate. The average wind speed and resulting wind direction showed some linear correlation with all parameters. Recommendations
- 1. Results of 0.00 should be avoided. The result should be reported at the detection limit of the method.
- 2. A qualitative, semi-quantitative or quantitative phenomenological model describing salt deposition in a general sense should be developed to utilize the monitoring program's data appropriately. Which of the three models is developed should depend on the uses of the analytical results,
- the precision and sensitivity required in assessing impacts, and the criticality relative to Grand Gulf Nuclear Station licensing.
- 3. To obtain better quantification of random sampling / experimental errors, replicate samples should be obtained at all locations and analyzed using exactly the same analytical methods.
- 4. Based on SDR data from the past four years, the sampling program should be re-evaluated to make the program more effective.
- 5. To determine the effect of the cooling tower, data on circulating water composition may be used in conjunction with the SDR and data on the cooling tower operating conditions and duration.
- 6. A generalized block design should be formulated for ANOVA. Along with a phenomenological model, this will provide a means by which impacts due to plant operations can be estimated more precisely.
i NCIREP STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
i TADLE 1 4 i SALT DEPOSITION (1986) ' SDCa86 Period Calcium (ag/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 l
- J sdal 992.70 .1776.03 1186.35 362.86 sdsla 1392.06 1712.78 1523.49 386.03 sds2 270.21 163.97 102.89 146.35 sda2a 344.93 122.06 81.59 118.41 i ads 2b 324.90 138.17 86.35 100,79 1 sd=3 1195.62 711.40 781.03 187.94 ads 4 805.71 171.87 364.76 156.98 >
i sds5 5490.87 1364.44 1456.19 172.38 j sds5a 5513.89 1345.30 1189.40 164.44 1
- ads 5b 5990.95 1407.97 1357.87 161.11 ads 6 625.79 125.87 320.48 97.14
- sds6a 1255.56 168.73 333.37 105.40 >
sds7 1654.29 61.89 46.67 76.51 1 sds9 415.62 50.95 229.37 132.70 . i 4 l i SALT DEPOSITION (1986) i SDC186
! Period Chloride (mg/m sq.)
1 Ending' 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 l ads 1 494.76 1588.65 259.84 223.49-sdsla 519.52 1758.57 297.94 213.97 l sds2 129.84 560.48 141.43 215.56 1 sds2a 190.97 525.94 145.56 271.11 sds2b 156.35 650.95 165.08 239.37 j sds3 284.70 605.81 329.68 233.02 sds4 130.57 694.95 247.14 285.40 i ads 5 2366.43 1419.14 577.30 223.49 i sds5a 3283.02 1202.76 589.68 223.49 sds5b 2655.08 1168.16 600.95 220.32 . ads 6 340.16 701.43 194.76 274.29 sds6a 441.43 682.38 198.25 252.06 j sds7 . 118.94 822.05 123.33 233.02 1 sds9 1146.43 323.02 213.81 271.11 i i I l l l __ m._.. ---, . - , . . _ . . ,
,. r r , ,c- -
..r ,, . - ,..
TABLE 1 (CONT.) SALT DEPOSITION (1986) SDFe86 Period Iron (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 sdal 172.63 511.67 380.79 136.51 sdsla 349.68 418.33 265.87 133.81 ads 2 (1) 689.05 81.14 222.38 sds2a 83.89 (1) 126.19 173.81 sds2b 105.20 408.97 109.14 98.4r ads 3 167.89 383.52 189.05 262.70 sds4 40.66 152.65 108.41 599.52 sds5 323.34 (1) 229.05 239.68 sds5a 312.94 1738.70 194.41 80.95 sds5b 390.90 917.62 223.52 177.14 sds6 179.25 550.00 95.08 283.33 sds6a 65.05 250.00 280.57 320.48 sds7 36.68 385.14 160.95 477.30 sds9 1136.90 225.56 296.90 140.48 SALT DEPOSITION (1986) SDF86 Period Fluoride (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 sds1 5.59 20.71 2.86 3.65 adsla 5.36 15.87 2.22 3.49 sds2 0.86 8.25 2.16 4.29 sds2a 0.31 8.32 2.22 4.44 sds2b 1.18 8.02 2.32 3.97 sds3 1.79 6.16 2.30 3.81 sds4 1.26 8.22 2.22 3.97 sds5 16.07 11.97 4.13 3.65 sds5a 20.68 12.44 4.51 3.65 sds5b 18.17 12.13 4.06 3.65 sds6 2.06 9.21 1.27 3.81 sds6a 2.10 9.21 2.02 4.13 sds7 0.65 7.84 1.27 3.81 sds9 1.95 2.22 3.02 4.44 (1) Biased 1 I i l 1
TABLE 1 (Cont.) SALT DEPOSITION (1986) SDNo286 Period Nitrate (mg/m sq.) Endin's 3_31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 sdal 78.13 133.02 6.67 93.02 sdsla 7.70 63.17 5.40 81.59 sds2 121.16 45.56 27.49 89.84 sds2a 186.83 76.13 28.25 31.11 sds2b 185.42 56.43 29.52 56.35 ads 3 25.07 46.98 6.51 80.32 sds4 139.12 58.19 6.03 83.49 sds5 23.23 39.37 5.40 69.21 sds5a 11.41 53.71 4.41 77.14 sds5b 21.21 44.25 5.21 63.33 sds6 22.22 69.84 7.30 72.06 sds6a 15.90 65.08 6.33 55.56 sds7 85.56 100.40 61.27 55.56 sds9 40.40 21.27 16.11 78.73 SALT DEPOSITION (1986) SDPo486 Period Phosphate (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 ads 1 15.33 18.65 21.90 17.94 sdsla 15.16 17,86 20.00 17.14 sds2 9.37 19.05 9.56 21.11 ads 2a 12.11 19.21 11.11 26.67 sds2b 12.48 19.64 6.63 19.84 sds3 23.58 13.81 9.76 72.38 sds4 10.79 18.97 8.57 23.81 ads 5 22.44 18.10 14.29 21.90 sds5a 20.62 18.89 10.48 21.90 ads 5b 26.70 19.68 11.27 25.87 sds6 11.90 21.43 14.29 26.98 ads 6a 12.70 21.43 10.08 33.65 sds7 8.27 18.02 15.87 31.11 sds9 12.37 10.32 20.08 45.71 ( l l 1
l TABLE 1 (CONT.) SALT DEPOSITION (1986) SDMg86 Period Magnesium (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87
------~~- ---- - ---- ----- ;3;i ii5:ss i55 si Eis is si!si i sdsla 462.54 650.08 214.29 86.67 sds2 49.94 96.98 26.29 22.06 sds2a 79.54 102.03 24.44 27.62 sds2b 72.41 101.87 24.13 (1) ~
ads 3 236.79 247.75 141.35 32.06 ads 4 127.37 79.54 89.21 33.33 sds5 1407.70 526.70 242.22 26.83 sds5a 1598.25 479.11 205.94 26.83 sds5b 1674.92 507.49 227.97 26.03 sds6 214.33 69.84 64.92 15.56 sds6a 218.41 84.13 72.94 21.27 sds7 124.13 43.29 18.10 15.56 ads 9 76.56 39.05 44.05 32.38 SALT DEPOSITION (1986) SDNa86 Period Sodium (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01 86 9-30-86 1-02-87 sds1 645.24 1331.75 329.21 169.52 sdsis 332.02 1232.38 302.54 150.95 sds2 331.21 290.00 108.41 175.08 sds2a 236.05 339.75 106.35 157.62 sds2b 335.13 298.02 116.57 160.32 sds3 350.70 526.48 272.78 217.94 ads 4 265.17 348.65 171.11 158.10 sds5 2107.06 1095.52 648.57 185.40 sds5a 2330.87 1027.94 458.86 173.49 1064.41 540.51 143.81 sds5b 2336.83 ads 6 188.25 304.76 145.56 176.67 l I sds6a 287.46 304.76 193.79 168.73 l l ads 7 256.98 279.43 66.98 135.40 l sds9 112.98 133.02 135.79 157.62 I (1) Biased l i l l l l
TABLE 1 (CONT.) SALT DEPOSITION (1986) SDSo86 Period Sulfate (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02-87 sds1 4232.17 4455.08 995.71 58.57 sdsla 4604.56 4661.67 803.97 55.40 sds2 697.76 1055.71 414.16 57.46 sds2a 660.49 1020.70 252.86 60.16 sds2b 672.19 (1) 330.19 23.97 sds3 1253.43 1120.00 962.30 61.75 sds4 859.99 1051.63 701.11 52.06 sds5 10996.29 1977.33 1827.46 205.40 sds5a 12602.28 3672.25 1653.75 141.90 sds5b 12972.84 3938.83 1811.33 112.86 sds6 1593.61 1373.33 556.19 (1) sds6a 1668.03 2011.43 522.68 490.32 sds7 426.10 835.43 233.17 523.97 sds9 461.90 345.40 414.68 10T4.44 SALT DEPOSITION (1986) SDTDS86 Period Total Dissolved Solids (mg/m sq.) Ending 3-31-86 7-01-86 9-30-86 1-02 87 sds1 8969.05 16182.54 4301.59 1317.46 sdsla 9152.78 14551.50 3571.43 1634.92 sds2 1544.44 2349.21 1895.24 2261.90 sds2a 1479.68 3879.37 1444.44 (1) sds2b 1826.19 1632.37 2163.49 1523.81 sds3 3875.40 6092.06 3769.84 555.56 sds4 1870.16 3620.63 2428.57 1015.87 sds5 25525.00 11858.73 5857.14 5761.90 ads 5a 28716.27 16793.65 5698.41 9452.38 sds5b 26436.51 14741.27 5573.02 3873.02 sds6 3115.08 9539.68 1253.97 6209.52 sds6a 4033.33 8825.40 988.89 10396.83 sds7 857.94 6304.76 1015.87 10253.97 sds9 1146.43 3841.27 2000.00 5206.35 (1) Biased i j
TABLE 2 SALT DEPOSITION DATA - REPLICATE SAMPLES 1
> Sodium Calcium Chlorides ag/m2 / Period ag/m / Period ag/m2 / Period 1
Period Ending Sampler #2 Sampler #5 Sampler #2 Sampler #5 Sampler #2 Sampler #5 331.21 2,107.06 270.21 5,490.87 129.84 2,366.43 , 3/31/86 236.05 2,330.87 344.93 5,513.89 190.97 3,283.02 1 335.13 2,336.83 324.90 5,990.95 156.35 2,655.08 290.00 1,095.52 163.97 1,364.44 560.48 1,419.14 7/1/86 339.75 1.026.94 122.06 1,345.30 525.94 1,202.76 298.02 1,064.41 138.17 1,407.97 650.95 1168.16 t 108.41 648.57 102.89 1,456.19 141.43 577.30
- 9/30/86 106.35 458.86 81.59 1,189.40 145.56 589.68 116.57 540.51 86.35 1,357.87 165.08 600.95 175.08 185.40 146.35 172.38 215.56 223.49 1/2/87 157.62 173.49 118.41 164.44 271.11. 223.49 160.32 143.81 100.79- 161.11 239.37 220.32 1
I 4 i i NCTRRP SAT.T TAMT.ES 7
b-h TABLE 2 (continued) SALT DEPOSITION DATA - REPLICATE SAMPLES , Fluorides Magnesium Iron ag/m2 / Period ag/m2 / Period ag/m2 / Period Period Ending Sampler #2 Sampler #5 Sampler #2 Sampler #5 Sampler #2 Sampler #5-0.86 16.07 49.94 1,407.70 95.14 323.34 3/31/86 0.31 20.68 79.54 1,598.25 83.89 312.94 1.18 18.17 72.41 1,674.92 105.20 390.90 8.25 11.97 96.98 526.70 689.05 1,229.63 , 7/1/86 8.32 12.44 102.03 479.11 566.59 1,738.70 8.02 12.13 101.87 507.49 408.97 917.62 2.16 4.13 26.29 242.22 81.14 229.05. 9/30/86 2.22 4.51 24.44 205.94 126.19 194.41 2.32 4.06 24.13 227.97 109.14- 223.52 4.29 3.65 22.06 26.83 222.38 239.68 1/2/87 4.44 3.65 27.62 26.83 173.81- 80.95 1 3.97 3.65 24.99 26.03 98.41 177.14 I i n i NCTRFP RAT.T TART.F9 7
TABLE 2 (continued) SALT DEPOSITION DATA - REPLICATE SAMPLES Phosphates Nitrates Sulfates ag/m2 / Period ag/m2 / Period mg/m2 / Period Period Ending Sampler #2 Sampler #5 Sampler #2 Sampler #5 Sampler #2 Sampler #5 9.37 22.44 121.16 23.23 697.76 10,996.29 3/31/86 12.11 20.62 186.83 11.41 660.49 12,602.28 12.48 26.70 185.42 21.21 672.19 12,972.84 19.05 18.10 45.56 39.37 1,055.71 1,977.33 7/1/86 19.21 18.89 76.13 53.71 1,020.70 3,672.25 19.64 19.68 56.43 44.25 1,071.50 3,938.83 9.56 14.29 27.49 5.40 414.16 1,827.46 9/30/86 11.11 10.48 28.25 4.41 252.86 1,653.75 6.63 11.27 29.52 5.21 330.19 1,811.33 21.11 21.90 89.84 69.21 57.46 205.40 1/2/87 26.67 21.90 31.11 77.14 60.16 141.90 19.84 25.87 56.35 63.33 23.97 112.86 i ~. I NCIREP SALT TABLES 2
TABLE 2 (continued) SALT DEPOSITION DATA - REPLICATE SAMPLES TDS mg/m2 / Period Period Ending Sampler #2 Sampler #5 1,544.44 25,525.00 3/31/86 1,479.68 28,716.27 1,826.19 26,436.51 2,349.21 11,858.73 7/1/86 3,879.37 16,793.65 1,632.37 14,714.27 1,895.24 5,857.14 9/30/86 1,444.44 5,698.41 2,163.94 5,573.02 2,261.90 .5,761.90 1/2/87 1,928.49 9,452.38 1,523.81 ^3,873.02 i e WPTDFD C AT T TART FS 9
TABLE 3 -
SUMMARY
OF ANOVA (BASED ON SALT DEPOSITION RATES) Average 95% Confidence F-Factors Deposition Interval For Period for Location For Interaction Parameter ag/m2 / Period ag/m2 / Period Calc (2) Crit (3) Calc (2) Crit (3) Calc (2)- Crit (3)
- 1. Sodium 615.32 77.16 367.18 3.24 938.09 4.49 265.06 3.24
- 2. Calcium 1,150.64 2 137.91 746.90 3.24 1,830.14 4.49 638.76 3.24
- 3. Chlorides 746.77 213.90 62.28 3.24 169.23 4.49 65.87 3.24
- 4. Fluorides 6.73 2 1.04 111.47 3.24 275.35 4.49 136.87 3.24 P
- 5. Magnesium 316.76 i 61.35 293.52 3.24 657.86 4.49 264.90 3.24
- 6. Iron 367.41 2 195.72 32.60 3.24 17.72 4.49 6.25 3.24
- 7. Phosphates 17.45 2 2.77 31.12 3.24 16.72 4.49 9.20 3.24
- 8. Nitrates 56.33 22.31 17.40 3.24 33.42 4.49 22.15 3.24
- 9. Sulfates 2,426.24 649.86 166.45 3.24 307.29 4.49 144.53 3.24
- 10. TDS 7,674.54 1,862.99 62.00 3.24 334.28 4.49 64.22 3.24 ,
NOTES
. 1. For all samples (4 periods, 2 locations, 3 replicates)
- 2. Calculated F-Factor (Relative to mean square for error)
- 3. 95% critical F-Factor
.I
".?
NCTREP RAT.T TART.ES 2
'a .
I TABLE 4 -
SUMMARY
OF ANOVA (BASED ON. COMIbSITION) F-Factors 1 For Period , For Location For Interaction Parameter F1 72 F-Crit Fli F2 F-Crit F1 F2 F-Crit i
- 1. Sodium 367.18 16.14 3.24 938.d9 12.18 4.49 265.06 6.46 3.24
- 2. Calcium 746.90 75.66 3.24 1,830.14 312.73 4.49 638.76 42.51 3.24
- 3. Chlorides 62.28/ 17.98,, 3.24 169.23 3.60 4.49 65.87 1.52 3.24 g
- 4. FJourides 59.66 _3.24 275.35 32.08 4.49 136.87 6.45 3.24 s 11)1.47
- 5. Magnesium 293.'52 14.73 3.24 657.86 56.26 4.49 264.90 7.76 3.244
- 6. Iron 32.60' 19.85 3.24 -
17.72 9.65 4.49 6.25 0.52 3.24
- w. .
- 7. Phosphates _31.12, 96.82 3.24 ,- 16./2 27.26 4.49 9.20 1.12 3.24
- 8. . Nitrates 4
17.40 s 24.32s 3.24 33.42 40.27 4.49 22.15 13.78 3.24
- 9. Sulfates 166.45 65.57 -3.24 307.29 5.52 4.49 144.53- 3.01 3.24
; Notes
- 1. F1 is the F-factor for ANOVA based on salt deposition rates
- 2. F2 is the F-factor for ANOVA based on composition
- 3. F-Crit is 95% critical F-factor 1
l
TABLE 5 SALT DEPOSITION DATA (SINGLE SAMPLE) Sodium Deposition Rate (mg/m2/ Period) Period
- Ending SDS #1 SDS #3 SDS #4 SDS #6 SDS #7 3/31/86 513.11 350.70 265.17 242.97 256.98 7/1/86 1,283.03 526.48 348.65 304.76 279.43 9/30/86 316.16 272.78 171.11 171.38 66.98 1/2/87 160.50 217.94 158.10 172.74 135.40 Calcium Deposition Rate (ag/m2/ Period) 3/31/8*. 1,208.98 1,195.62 805.71 991.98 1,654.29 7/1/86 1,744.69 711.40 171.87 148.85 61.85 9/30/86 1,365.36 781.03 364.76 326.99 46.67 1/2/87 374.62 187.94
- 156.98 101.35 76.51 Chlorides Deposition Rate (mg/m 2/ Period)
, 3/31/86 507.29 284.70 130.57 394.06 118.94 j 7/1/86 1,675.76 605.81 694.95 691.97 822.05 9/30/86 263.92 329.68 247.14 196.51 123.33.
1/2/87 218.78 233.02 285.40 263.41 233.02 l e i i i i I t i i urvoc. c... ...,,c e t .- - - _
i 4 TABLE 5 (continued) SALT DEPOSITION DATA (Single Sample; FLUORIDES DEPOSITION RATE (mg!.a 2 / Period) ' ] Period Ending SDS #1 SDS #3 SDS #4 SDS #6 SDS #7 1 3/31/86 5.48 1.79 1.26 2.08 -0.65 7/1/86 18.45 6.16 8.22 9.21 7.84 9/30/86 2.56 2.30 2.22 1.69 1.27 1/2/87 3.57 3.81 3.97 3.97 3.81 2 MAGNESIUM DEPOSITION RATE (ag/m / Period) 3/31/86 466.60 236.79 127.37 216.38 124.13 I 7/1/86 675.95 247.75 79.54 77.32 43.29 9/30/86 216.52 141.35 89.21 69.05 18.10 ! 1/2/87 84.55 32.06 33.33 18.64 .15.56 IRON DEPOSITION RATE (ag/m 2 / Period) 3/31/86 275.75 167.89 40.66 129.97 36.68 7/1/86 467.34 383.52 152.65 427.20 385.14 9/30/86 328.40 189.05 108.41 209.48 160.95- _
, 1/2/87 135.17 262.70 599.52 302.48 477.30 i
~
i l
. I W('vDFD C AT T TART FC 9
A TABLE 5 (continued) SALT DEPOSITION DATA (SINGLE SAMPLE) PHOSPHATES DEPOSITION RATE (mg/m 2 / Period) Period Ending SDS #1 SDS #3 SDS #4 SDS #6 SDS #7 3/31/86 15.24 23.58 10.79 12.31 8.27 7/1/86 18.26 13.81 18.97 21.43- 18.02 9/30/86 20.97 9.76 8.57 12.36 15.87 1/2/87 17.54 72.38 23.81 30.50 31.11 NITRATES DEPOSITION RATE (ag/m 2 / Period) 3/31/86 55.51 25.07 139.12 19.32 85.56 7/1/86 104.13 46.98 '58.19 67.50 100.40 9/30/86 6.07 6.51 6.03 6.83 61.27 1/2/87 87.49 80.32 83.49 64.34 55.56 SULFATES DEPOSITION RATE (mg/m 2 / Period) 3/31/86 4,422.29 1,253.43 859.99 1,631.24 426.10
- 7/1/86 4,559.54 1,120.00 1,051.63 1,722.19 835.43 9/30/86 904.93 962.30 701.11 539.70 233.17 1/2/87 57.01 61.75 52.06 833.22 523.97 4
e i I
.i STPT D FM c AT T TARTWC 9
1 k i !
^
I I TABLE 5 (continued) SALT DEPOSITION DATA (SINGLE SAMPLE) , 2 j TDS DEPOSITION RATE (ag/m / Period) 1 . !
- Period 4
Ending SDS #1 SDS #3 SDS #4 SDS #6 SDS #7 1 3/31/86 9,061.38 3,875.40 1,870.16 3,603.57 852.94 e 7/1/86 15,388.69 6,092.06 3,620.63 9,189.48 6,304.76 - 9/30/86 3,953.40 3,269.84 2,428.57 1,129.24 1,015.87 1/2/87 1,484.70 555.56 1.015.87 8,563.07 10,253.97 l i i i I i i l i i . ! l j
- I 1
i a , 4 i .r 1 i , r - 4 I j NCTREP SALT TARLES 2
I . 1 i l ] TABLE 6 -
SUMMARY
OF ANOVA ! (NO INTERACTION BEIVEEN PERIOD AND LOCATION) l I
. Average 95% Confidence F-Factors -
i Deposition Rate Interval For Period For Location f ! Parameter ag/m2/ Period ag/m 2/ Period Calc (2) Crit (3) Calc (2) Crit (3) i 1. Sodium 310.72 203.51 4.26 3.49 2.76 3.26
- 2. Calcium 623.87 408.61 5.95 3.49 3.22 3.26 I
i 3. Chlorides 416.02 1 242.96 10.44 3.49 1.62 3.26 t I 4. Fluorides 4.52 i 2.50 13.19 3.49 2.22 3.26-
- 5. Magnesium 150.67 -1 115.50 4.06 3.49 5.53 3.26 -
I
- 6. Iron 262.01 1 156.68 -3.25 3.49 0.15 3.26
- 7. . Phosphates 20.18 i 12.71 3.77 3.49 0.92 3.26
- 8. Nitrates 57.98 i 32.44 4.27 3.49 1.36 3.26
- 9. Sulfates 1,137.55 il,007.25 3.45 3.49 2.96 3.26 l
- 10. TDS 4,676.46 i3,852.22 2.40 3.49 1.29 3.26 i
NOTES }
, 1. For all samples (5 locations 4 periods)
- 2. Calculated F-factors (relative to mean square for errors) i
- 3. 952 critical F-factors 1
i NCIREP SALT TABLES 2
_ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . . ..._.____..__ . . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - . _ _ . _ _ __ . _ . _ . . ________,_.__.m. _ __. _. _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . , _ _ _ . - _ _. . 1 i l-l - TABLE 7 - ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS RAINFALL, AVERAGE PERIOD IN./ PERIOD WIND SPEED PREVAILING WIND DIV 7) RESUg f WIND ENDING SDS #2 SDS #5 M/SEC DECREES DIV DEGREES 1 ' 3/31/86 5.55 4.70 3.48 337.5 160.7 7/1/86 22.10 21.60 2.87 157.5 134.5 9/30/86 6.40 5.90 2.56 225.0 96.7 1/2/87 19.10 18.45 3.04 90.0 123.5 . } l NOTE:
- l. Degrees from North = 0 in clockwise direction i
i ) l i a I i. l I i NCIREP SALT TABLES 2 __________m ___ ____ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ ___+r ___ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ ___ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ - - - s_ e
_ . ~ m . . - _ ._.____.__.__m _ _.. . . ~ . . .. .._ .__ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ . . . . . . . _ _ _ _ . , - . . _ . _ . . . j l 1 TABLE 8 -
SUMMARY
OF RECRESSION ANALYSES I j Correlation Coefficient Based On 4 I' AVERAGE WIND PREVAILING RESULTING
. PARAMETER RAINFALL SPEED WIND DIRECTION WIND DIRECTION
- 1. Sodium -0.28 0.46 0.52 0.53
- 2. Calcium -0.39 0.46 0.57 0.46
- 3. Chlorides -0.20 0.41 0.44 0.49 1
- 4. Fluorides 0.07 0.32 0.23 0.46 I
- 5. Magnesium -0.33 0.47 0.53 0.52 j 6. Iron 0.52 -0.11 -0.21 0.17
- 7. Phcsphates 0.54 0.39 -0.46 0.37
- 8. Nitrates 0.03 0.55- 0.18 0.53
- 9. Sulfates -0.36 -0.14 0.56 0.52 I'
- 10. TDS -0.18 0.41 0.28 0.47 9
l W I T t 1
,t j
' WCIREP SALT TABLES 2
tu_ 4 4 - _ _.m m .4- a_u .-d..+---_
- 4au . 4 - , us .. .*m ,m t' .
t i APPENDIX VI ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATIONS e 1 4 i J k i i ll I I I a i h { i I i I i j J20RPT870224 - VI-i 1
- l f
I
I
- c-
- GRAND CULF NUCLEAR STATION UNIT ONE CHANGES, TESTS OR EXPERIMENTS ,
SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM Originator J. D. Barlow /R&ES
Description:
ODCM, Rev. 7 is accessary to j Document Evaluated ODCM, Rev. 7 address administrative changes in the ODCM References RETS, 3/4.11 1984 Land Use Census as a result of the 1985 Land Use Census. SP-R-10 1985 Land Use Census Attachments N/A 1 i I. SAFETY EVALUATION [ ] Not Applicable
~
TECHNICAL SIECIFICATIONS A. [ ] YES [X] NO 1. Implementation or performance of the action described in the evaluated require a change to the GGNS Unit One Technical Specifications. Basis: Changes to the ODCM do not require a change to the GGNS Technical Specifications. The ODCM is referenced by the GGNS Technical Specification with changes to the ODCM controlled by Technical Specification 6.14.2. UIntEVIEWED SAFETY QUESTION . B. Implementation or performance of the action described in the evaluated doctament will: [ ] YES [X] NO 1. increase the probability of occurrence of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: The method of dose calculation is consistent with previous revisions of the ODCM. Consequently, the possibility and probability of an accident remains unchanged. [ ] YES [X] NO 2. increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: Same as 1 above.
- [ ] YES [X] WD 3. increase the probability of a malfunction of equipment important to safety 1 previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis
- The changes made in the 00CM,
- Revision 7, do not address equipment operation.
i s 1 J31 MISC 860512 - 16 ,
[ ] YES [X] NO '
- 4. increase the consequences of a malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: Same as 3 above.
[ ] YES [X] NO 5. create the possibility of an accident of a different type than any already i evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: Same as I above. [ ] YES [X] NO 6. create the possibility of a malfunction of equipment important to safety different than previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: Same as 3 above. [ ] YES [XI NO 7. reduce the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any technical spec-ifications. Basis: Bases for the technical specifications are unaf fected by this change. II. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION l l liot Applicable ~ i ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN j A. [ ] YES [X] NO 1. will require a change in the Environmental Protection Plan. Basis: Offsite dose calculations are not within the scope of the EPP.
- 8. UNREVIEWED ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION -
[ ] YES [X] NO 1. concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement , (FES) as modified by the NRC staf f's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental impact ap-praisal, or in any decisions of the ASLB. Basis: Calculations comply with ! Regulatory Guide 1.109 and GCNS RETS 3/4.11. Therefore there can be no significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated l in the FES. [ ] YES [X] NO 2. concerns a significant change in ef fluents or power level (in accordance with 10CFR51.5(b)(2)). Basis: The same effluent limits are imposed by ODCM, Revision 7, as in previous revisions. Therefore a significant change in i ef fluents or power level can not occur. I 1 J31 MISC 860512 - 17
[ ] YES [X] NO 3. cerceres a matter est previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified - in B.I. above, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact. Basis: Public radiation exposure, including direct radiation and radioactive effluent releases, was reviewed and evaluated in Section 5.9.1.1.2 of the FES. A (
,J/g- 5-gg F absete'd by/Date/
Reviewed / Approved: rfi2., . b ~ b Supe'rvisor/DatG JUN 0 51986 - Reviewed / Approved: Manager /Date //
-----------------------------.---.---........-----------..........-------......--V........----..--------.----.......
PLANT SAFETY REVIEW COMMITTEE REVIEW 0A Reviewed / Approved: hy ' [b.4- b . Chairman, F5%Cht Ye "V -
' fa NUCLEAR SAFETY AND COMPLIANCE REVIEW Revicved: Reviewed / Approved:
Reviewing Engineer /Date Manager, Nuclear Safety and Compliance /Date RADI! LOGICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES REVIEW Reviewed-Reviewing dNI-e Reviewed / Approved: h d - Jaces Reviewed / Approved: 7/,y/ff, SupervisoV, r/mj gt, Manager,Radiolpical& Engineer /Date Environmental Environmental Services /Date Services /Date i i J31 MISC 860512 - 18
a.-- --- . - - _ ADMN8STRAT8VE PROCEDURE f GRA$ GU2.F W . CZ. EAR STAT 80N l 01-S-06-24 l Revision 7 l l Attachment I lPage 3 of 4 l 2 l l
/KrITII/ SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVAI,UATION FORM
- Q PART I /MXRET/ D0C. EVALUATED
'Yba*)*. Nf *
- f. caaB /MDOCN0/ EVALUATION NO. bl 00 I
Wwk De<==. eat
- agEF/ RETERENCES 3G OTS(e /MSYSN0/ SYSTEM EFFECTED f 33 DESCRIPTION Te _= NMe f 73 durthe elle.J fQA RECORD l
.ra sla.a maJ a..f.s/r e - A11 J.wd. a.e4- l RT -814.33 l
! mPJer4 r LW s mL'l .f.w. M1 in l NON-QA RECORD l .
<- l.4.J a reacfar c .la.4 - J .mu.&aric l INITIALS l
~ ' -. Ja& eb 1 . 7.- . AM. 'Avestric h I hEu,4 rwa..fivid (e.4 iniarA % 2 '
HNO. OF FAGES l
- t0ATT l
. 4:alded 1&Ms .a.Jae n.aMese es .
H 1 PART II SAFETY EVALUATION
. YES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERTORMAhCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
' ~
g (a) Requires a change BASIS Saw. AM. **TJ 7-I 3 oara.,,ro the GGNS Technical Specifications.lm IAMmHus if Anat*5,' *%+.
# (b) Increases the probability of occurrence of an accident previously evalu ted&4 in eau the neto'de TSAR. 8 enalvs,' r DerAfe alah P'JAL '04etsbra-I BASIS 'fe'a.a. AA. wolf ns s} bes nefthe SetteJe N# Yoh!of,arfaccident
*t' *WWYe*'sspreviously of ** **
- th 'd*U.
l 1 g (c) Increase consequenc $es evaluated bas 1SYe.'."UDil oorhu .se.om ewL,% dok psenled des IN% eF Ax>m cnJ7 Wee 4' reed ch 4.,,'eo,/ /w/ need./ ,,e .f
,,Ad- (d) CreatesthepossiSilityofanac t of a different tyP* /eche,/
- than any evaluated in the TSAR 1 ASIS %. Alf heI noi nNor Ne 1wthe.e. ts' fthv eu bb =AY Sg- E e
J'telle 4. 3.1.1 nelbes adf soin0s fe. Amssoh.Ic'kt of a nLeninkeled seeott,esr . g (e) Increases the probability of occuret(ce of arealfunction of TSAR. j equipment important to safety l BASISL.. AlA. dea, ad nNer No_sut+te, e aluate prevfously/t sa g thel son ok MA
.nsW. ,,o,La.
l l 9 $.2 *i and data d e4N *nh W' h StSth *e,ee'notko i g (f) Increases the consequences of i malfunction of equipedhtf important to safet y TSAR. ' BASIShs.Af.Mai44!aheviouslyevalatedinth edesv4=,bfVe,r. Asem,ia.shea/w k l g (g) perer4'] Create thepet possibility 4-neet'itst.reyhi.4 of a maftfbaction 'per on a AutR, different gyg y.V i type l
! he FS than any evaluated .
1 BASIS %e. A//. last m./previously al/or Na sv in .rIn e d., eue d a/f b d /'J e t, f,J .t .3 I
- p. we - +< .at i,+.c na .z.,rr.a , ca,,,t. a padefinedinthebasisforan .sp.4QL.
_ [ (h)y, Reduces,the margin of sa technical specifications. BASIS .5"ur4sm. it as+ O s. Lesl fC# I eav KrcA $Nt.t ubohA t.soll vi ed.oet erreenoh of Jefsly .
- Additional sheets may be used add attached as/necessary.
I 2 01 S 06-24 ATT*I l I
ADM2NISTRATIVE PROCEDURE GRA'iD G7.7F .WCZ. EAR STAT 80N l 01-S-06-24 l Revision 7 l l Attachment I lPage 4 of 4 l l 1 i SATETY ENVIRONMEWAL EVALUATION FORM
- M-dw8 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION PART III ESS 30 IMPLEME!GATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State o. local
/d VI (a) environnenalregulatJons
- BASIS "78'e. 4 . der Asf _.SI dev SaWraaM8ebJ rfelob, f .
I I [ (b) Results in all measurable environmental effects being confined to onsite area previously disturbed during site preparation and plant construction. BASIS h e. ///. dez r Asa a M[ da vu'enaseA4 i
/ (c) Requires a change if t)e Environmental Protection flan. .
8ASI5 'fonae. N. der net d2=u anJ! E91r1sa alna-onarrr er has:1 I %f V _[ (d) Concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FIS, environmental BAS!$ ingactspyr Tom. A mr,aisal, or in any decision of the Ip.leic 1-r naf L met! emwM- Is I I
/ (e) Concerns a significant change in effluents or power level (in accordance with 10CTRS1 8ASI$ 'Gwea. Al4. Lr ad.5 da- Op)sa. (2)e). $$$*th er Bkat.!" $t*6Y . !
V / I
/ '
(f) Concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant EASIS adverseenvirofentalispec. L a. Al dae.r as n$sk ta*TO'htuente" . W$ 11/h4l44 Y kUAYh.e$ i1 -l7d(p ' WIRC 4 /' DATE
/MORIQV IGINATOR ITATE' Dk-OVID l Gb0h DATE 7 SRC t
DATE
\
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
01 5 06-24 ATT I
~
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE GRANQ GUII .WCLEAR STATION l l 01-S-06-24 l Revision 7 l l l Attachment I lPage 3 of 4 l l l l I
/ W ITLE/ SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- SQ09,$/ EVAINATION NO. /// 4,
,P,jg,,,1 /M D0C. EVALUATED FJ4A l IMEREF/ RETERENCES @Mtin #737 /M5YSN0/ SYSTEN EFTICTED I33 O't+S.3) i DESCRIPTION 'fla Mrr ,, .4n.a. e. ,. ,. '
/refoe,*e Jahr4 es . A.M Ar MF ../ l On RECORD l l
u 4de //am,LJ ik prAA. 9.1.2.2.44 l R" -914 33 l
. . DcP #f/de6 sl Aas laan l '80N-0A 1 1 CORD l ars ek L
/ /k +dd Ja ra.rb ene L7.W/. NoAK6 0737 l 14ITIAL ,
l ; L k e rd s. a a A -- L IA w in l NO. OF ' AGES l , mu/U LC. . ' ' I l DATE l PART II SAFETY EVALUATION
. g,,5 g IMPLEME W ATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRISED AB0VE:
' ~
g (a) Requires a , change to the GGNS Technical Spgeifications. SASIS -rfa sk-l,ne daheder.r nrs nel da:rentred ik 1a* d fan"e.T . i I g (b) Increases the probability of occurrence of an accident previous 1 evaluated in t)g TAAR.
- EASIS 14re .!b.dn de na4 aWeef Ms anelv.rd of ' ' ev necoAsf ;
evslosied oh Ma FSMK . g (c) Increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated BASI 7Ke e,,eer of en ases'/edan wd $tgris4,sa//v d4t/c /edebt n .%e,pi, teamfle,. capekliQ nrte.fr .Mg, tsgererea.sn1"rl o f NutEG 04 $7 l i r _ g (d) Cremes the possibility df en accident af a different type BASIS Yo e = #re/.ry.rd.a eesendI>, o.w/ do n./ cMa. i-
*NA f*.croholity e F en eter'deshef .<Wh<}ed th MA. /*JAA. . ,
j ,,,,,,,, g (e) 'Increasear the probability of occurence of a malfunction of g e er e a y ,p e, fa nd -ke BASIS - VW ,5 f*Cs+y evalverfud on Ms. f*SstnE . g (f) Intresses the consequences of a salfunction of equipment
/
i important to safe y previoual ev lusted in,the on ed. rome Te AR.s6.wY4el~ $3 5 3 SASIS 'K a deleshrt Ana 4 r'efvefel th M s. Pf A A . V/ / Jg' (3) Create the possibility of a malfunction on a different type J than any evalua ed rYvi usly inva these TSajt 3 , SA}IS *1X L u ena s. et h emet. hon *Naredwf*4*1Y*nlY* ns+ ste<te Ms uikli 6 e 48,1ves or nnl % , of the basis N v# o any *r- .[,, w+ g (h) Reduces the marSia i safety as defined SASIS e a earene'f/Eebdrlti $d- battN 8-i OW Te cd .5"bs.C T. j
- Additional sheets any be used ind attached as necessary.
l i 01 5 04 14 ATT'I I-t
e . .. . 1 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDt:RE GRASQ Gt,"LF W CLEAR STAT 80N f l 01-S-06-24 l Revision 7 l l l Attachment I lPage 4 of 4 l l I I I SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- l !
$$ ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION I
PART III YES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERTORMANCE OF Tite ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
/_ (a) Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State or local environnen al egulations b d N n BASIS 1h t{e et. r-r de ne enV in VIN A mla I
% alt-h'on s .
[,_ (b) Restrits in all measurable environmental effects being confined to onsite area previously disturbed during site preparation BASIS e e rr v e. n s q$h eh & fAV)hmwe . _ A_ (c) Requires a change in the Environmental Protection Plan. BASIS A_ (d) Concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and
' Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental impact appraisal, or in any decision of the ASLB.
BASIS _M (e) Concerns a significant change in effluents or power level (in accordance with 10CTR51.5 (b) (2) ). BASIS
!d_ (f) Concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact.
BASIS m J n .1 l . . - *- / 4!8h / 4 k
/2"f7'3h
'FSRC DATE
/MOWlG/ ORIGL TOR DATY h / / 4 ,
/ (
DATE APPRO O DdTE' / SRC
) *Ad itional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
l l 1 l 01-5-06-24 ATT I
ADMZN8STRATIVE PROCEDURE GRAND GUII NUCLEAR STATZON l 01-S-06-24 IRevision 7 l l l Attachment I lPage 3 of 4 l ' l l i l I
/MTITLE/ SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- P'SA S /MDOCN0/ EVALUATION NO. o// d E /MXREF/ DOC. EVALUATED r
/MXREF/ REFERENCES NUMG 0737 /MSYSN0/ SYSTEM EFFECTED F33 3
DESCRIPTION 74e FM5T '/n-l.ne cl/er.*de de1eshe l QA RECORD l (d=ur L2 in F$nA 1.'1. l. R. 4. 2. . 4. 3.1.3 4) l is samarmbla. DCP $5'/4pB8 Aas l RT -B14.33 l been Ilai4infe_d 'fe cartermicam A//nVv, l NON-QA RECORD l l INITIALS l NUMG #137 backva arab s= Lama. I NO. OF PAGES l ca na kil% ir adWM& . l I I l. iDATE l 1 PART II SAFETY EVALUATION i
. YES NO IMPLEMElfrATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
l
,g/ (a) Requires a change to the , echnica ocificat ons BASIS .Ta-/sind. el/ar,*/z cada ei n /s s *s tussa si.I4z2 of.
f ,_,_ [ (b) Increases the probability of occurrence of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR. }eebe doet ora l e5f }bt-1 BASIS *TXe PMC .564em elle d de de Analyss's of' Aeny eyelva+sd essidasi on 'the FSMK. _ / (c) Inctease the condequences of an accident previously evaluated BASIS
~7' L a co 2 Yuances O$ nn acesYtnh ore nef enertA$sY anb 'lbs jr0
- Jea.ple cMeridE capabile met.fm fe regv.'nments af AMti6 0737.
i / (d) Creates the posbibili y of an accidet of a different type than any evaluated in the FSAR BASIS -fL /a.nar=_kla Jefecbe of' es neto' doesdest" nef net eMY #vsh eM'en
~ e<<!iveted m 4 UM,'. en/ dodJ b onel crels}s ins pessobil; l _ 2 (e) Increases the probabili of occurence of a malfunction of j j equ paent important to safety previo
* &usly evaluated in the FSAR.eneteb BASIS e * *sererable dskshe }es a e s W ' I tu, . raft,4y walvsted ok ine f.fAK .
I (f) Increases t.he consequences of a malfunction of equipment important to safety previ usly eval t in the FSAR.
) *ntev5mlah*IEsper$**
BASIS TAs in*rarAUL Okr 44 46 8 V' '
.h se eAlesied a Me FinA ,
1 g (3) Create the esibility of a selfunction on a different type than any evaluated . e possEboYElu 'kr BASI 5 "TAs ok*9ernUe.r dtYpr dess no4 viously ven ain the ]FS I
'fsilwt! er neelfvneWan of any *Heer egro>owento l
j / (h) Reduces the sargin of safety as defined is the basis for any technical specificatio . BASIS 74e de+*ckr is no e.htl*Y'Y* bel'Sbf I
*"Y i '
Tech Specs .
- Additional sheets may be med and attached as necessary.
l' I
;- . 3 ;
01-5-06-24 ATI*I .i I I _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ - _ . _ _ . _ - . . _ _ _ _ . - - _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ , . _ . . , _ _ , . _ _ . _ , , , _ _ _ . . . - . _ _ , _ _
~ - - -- - - - - -
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE GRAND GUZE .WCLEAR STAT 20N
., I l 01-S-06-24 l Revision 7 l l Attachment I lPage 4 of 4 l 1
l l 1 , SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- PART III ENVIRONMEWAL EVALUATION YES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
g_ (a) Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State or local > env ro e BASIS be+} achr'ntal dans regul tre e tihoed An1f envif% men twlsb, nT a .
' %J <
g_ (b) Results in all measurable environmental effects being confined to onsite area previously disturbed during site preparation BASIS L def #f'
- 8" DV8ba e
//h_ (c) Requires a change in the Environmental Protection Plan.
BASIS A/h_I (d) Concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental impact appraisal, or in any decision of the ASLB. BASIS
- (e) Concerns a significatt change in effluents or power level (in accordance with 10CTRSI.S (b) (2) ).
BASIS (f) Concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact.
- / ,a l BASIS __ .
WU ' I 'zdWBG ik0$L&$ ONb i%IN6 ' ~
~
/MOR K/ ORI NATOR D'ATF /ffRC ' DATE Y AM / h/ $
D4TEf ' SRC I DATE APP p '
\
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
01-S-06-24 ATT I
GRA. ) GtEF NUCZ, EAR STAT 80N ADM1N85TRATIVE PROCEDURE 9 l 01-S-06-24 l Revision 7 l l Attachment I lPage 3 of 4 l 1 l
/?frITLE/ SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- PART I /MXREF/ DOC. EVALUATED & 009 /MDOCN0/ EVALUATION NO. 8/Z- h R s4 K 9 3 1.2. 4
/MXREF/ REFERENCES MAMGP 073"7 /MSYSN0/ SYSTEM EFFECTED f33 D455 SCRIPTION nes .sM---- wkUris .~,m Ts,ms. AM. dvan5fes ldr. 6/s. l'Q& RECORD l An ordsY Jn #4.rJL.a avsw e,,4 cu 17/.'Ja -fp l 'RT -B14.33 l
-,,f meet, a 317 -d '
#r4A thJrM. l lNON-QA RECORD l 9.3.2.t.41 m,k.b_-. ree.,44h.a,rfs (eH. l l INITIALS l INO. OF PAGES l s net.fekifv'. envaamt e5 7 A f / M a L 's l LW i..%,f,J '% resJaca. adt aJr,*.ssia l lDATE l
" 'l d i Capa&dsfy.
PART II SAFETY EVALUATION .
. TES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
g (a) Requires a ch gotot,heGGJSTechnica)$pecificptions. BASIS iMSS elet. enrott' tt n0T do.,sto.tfed W 'fach Seeer .
" { I lI
_,,,,, 2 (b) Increases the probability of occurrence of an accident previously evaluated in t BASIS & ' fears. Afl. Ars nor)e F)Jt.n1Yesi / 4% 'anabrsolr e $ev e aces'ded M 44e. f.SMt. . _ / (c) Increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR. BASIS "'59. Alf. Asht .tyt-/IE** h Apsd. /5Mf Ag/ AAM6 875"/ n 8.
.Tf not & s'de n t eveisq% oed n(eer esf Mersoft
- tooy oo.e .
(d)' resteT; A dryofanaccidentofadifferenttype th any evaluated in the SAR BASIS 7b m p . M . 6spe st aan s A d ft$ti$ era-}>tr W 39e*f N Y'.C fyden. mad ' rethre ' 7sVf- , g (e) Increases the prob ility f occurence of a malfunction of eviously* eval ted in the FSAR j equ eat to saf BASIS W"Rf * $ A*
- en ed harda $ 'N * *E 0t acQ - M 'e' . 44 8 s/4'dI T salfunction of equipmentdag 4*/' Vedr****
(f) Inch Mid Se ( e a usted in the rtant to safety reviously BASIS rews . M}. er se e on edw)n, AR. swo dd S ~fb h nipe a fret nom { dietJ hof hereds We Cont *f**c' f *ld %
/ (gf C$ges e ibility of a malfunction on a differtat type than any evaluat d previougly in the FS BASI 5 Taean N. ft 6 fes **k*& C*pe$s'o $> Canflvm f.AS. MnWa.l '
j o.id rMus+ tar NtE stess G Mu'a'syrfeLe -
,V_, (h) Reduces the margin df safety as dei ned in the basis for any technical specification .
BASIS 'fZn. %s. AN. saar no be? N #f' f
- Additional sheets sa us d a s k o b necessary.
01-5-06-24 Arr*I
)
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCECtlRE GRahy Gl.*LF NUCLEAR STATION l 01-S-06-24 l Revision 7 l l l Attachment I lPage 4 of 4 l I I I SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- JY-Me9 PART III ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 35 20 IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State or local [ (a) environmental r lations BASIS b o. M . .ye==rnel e S femt GA V $sa m son h ff r swithon /
,/ .
in all s;easurable environmental effects being confined v (b) Res to onsite area previously disturbed during site preparation BASIS andm lant constru
. A//. *
-f tion.MoY d h h $$ W $9 earth .
(c) Requir s a change in the Environmental Protection Plan. _M _ BASIS
~
_M (d) Concerns a satter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FIS) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the TES, environmental impact appraisal, or in any decision of the ASLI. BASIS (e) Concerns a significant change in effluents or power level (in accordance with 10CTRS1.5 (b) (2) ). BASIS _k (f) Concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact. BASIS Af , ! a l # Y Ll N Y / Y h I 14 .
' ' DATE RIGINATOR 'DATE IPSRC
/MORIJlf/
NN /YS l's / SRC DATE UATE PROVED
\
- Additional sheets say be used and attached as necessary.
l 01-5-06 24 ATT I .. i s
. . - _ - . .. - - - - - - . ..-. - . - - ~_ - - - - - . . - - - - - -
l ). t
-%- t3 4 .. 4 LAND OUIE NUCLEIR STATION .
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCED i : .n. 4.ru. j m *. j
.,s..
... v -.
.4 i...
e. l 01-S-06-24 Revisuon 7 l Attachaeat ! p
- Page a J ,
I 1 ! /MYTfE/SAFETYENVIRONMENTALEVALUATIONFORM* I l PARI. I M 00C. EVALUATED . se M EVALUATION NO. M L, ,. ,. @/ 1 REFERENCES
*e. y . * * .s N d d N
- N M SYSTEN EFFECTED g j
" . n e r e q . ,s y g, gps , .
s ,r#- r. * ! . - T.1[h DESCR!Pr!ON 87D76P#t AlrAP pKarmf lRAMrJm*t " v t
**'T; Mfner snsred senmanan sas swd Ed .' 5 l *V Gn K RORn 1~ i v.;,. R" - 14. l3 .\ i
*$ . * ?J&'!** p mas,,, rants 4 As's.rma rasranaf
.fid F
."* N N -< n El CORD
, /
l 4 -
'~ Af4mase f Asa A TAdLr tief- AN + " tv9l rig L u A l j t,, ' .- -
- H ' *, *T MD. Q ' P'"E [
, , ,, ? h; .'.,,s .g7 i g .pp.3 natt l t
* ', 'm g . . . l
..p p . * '*.***W...'S t .y i
1 r j. . . v. . . 8 , e S. , ,. htN,8.T,* I ! 1:, . ,n l&EI,ll.
, .. .g.' , -5.4;#i.,.7"@4,M;
..?
- SAFETY EValdATIONdp, pe. .+sy... u.y.1~ y,'.,.. a * . -
i I . ;. ; R1 E C , INFLEMENTATION OR PERFORNANCE 0F.TR ACTIVITY DESCRISED A80VE: I 1 : . .v : % v vm>.w ms, A u . *, % nm -unt WW'W.wn a 9cM. i .' ' ' e - , y' l g . . (a)i Requires a-shange.to the 00NS deshaleel.Spesifications.4 !
~ ' . .',%.SAstS t Am r -s c r.s
- draa nn*A l.tri Ae9 re sasraensens rr) h
- l .
? .....a. , i. . ,,. ..
. . . . .. .g. :,4 . 3, ,, , , , . . . ..,
* '9
,- ,,,,,,,, g, P(b)s" Increases the probability et essurresseaef. as assident ;
- l l i ., g . . ., eJ <previously evaluated in the FSAR. 'rs @;
- c J- -
j
.>.? m n '. SAsts rms m > mary Aumazu.s a-m-e (Jfr Attrdafennwoner:g)
. y .. . .
3 _ M (c) !acrease the'sensequences of as assident previously evaluated in the FSAR. ' 's ' Mt ? ': j l
.- SASISTMr wean .~ss AranAra' normaatsu Andre c/ Arnam;pyg i
_ ,,,,,,,, (4),'-Creates the possibility of as assidentr of a differest type than'any evaluated la the FSAat. - 4
.nt-J 1
' SASIS' nn.no.a.,e....- marwde maner Aes saananarse f. ,,ten unrr e an ATTArenmaar.2)- "
. , ,3 g,,. .
ig g (e)T !acreases the probability of esaurense of a malfuasties of - { oggpeemt important to safety previously evaluated la the FSAR. { s ghSEE~Tyr sn a _^xary rr na,.e~ ~ r_ggggnaae g , sara,,,,= q,y t ..t.. *
, . .j
- $8 ./ q'*y 9 i f. .. , , , . . , .
i _ g# jf14Ineksasesi,the esasequesses of a malfuastion of equipeest' .- I i ' *"iishrtant .te safety prevleusly evaluated la the FSAR. j SA818 -fe, m .*~,m aar m. i eaanaas /.tas *, trA sp _- -r.r) I 'A afd - 3+1 . . t. * -
,,k(
(3) : Create the possibility of a selfuasties os a different type. than any evaluated previeuely la the FSAR. SAS1S on nw ma n uas maaatt A os r,oraanaose derthere afnrpurus3) } (h) Reduses the eersia of safety se defined La the basis for any l technical specifications. o SAsis *rkt neansM a .rArrrs sn mr 1sAus ne has nadre acarnemeer.5) {
- Additional sheets say be used'and attached as assessary.
I ' )- l
* . E ,].
- 01-5-06-24 ATT'I j i
f i i ! 5 l
._ 4 .
ADMINISTRAfIVE PROCECURE GRr.'D gut.F NUCLEAR STATION , l Revision 7 l l 01-S*06-2I. .lPage , ! O ' _ Attachment I SATETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION PART III g5 20 IMPLEMENTATION OR PERTORMANCE OF THE ACTIVIT A !s required to achieve compliance with Tederal, State or local'g
(a) environnen al regulations n's Pra ey Wedas$ d /* sea l W/PW W SASIS Alo fin ese .
,.' .... Y
- Results la a'11' measurable,,envirossental effects being confined
,,g, ,,,,,,,,
(b) to onsite area previously disturbed during site preparation
- s' /da r'.s de 4Id rb' BASIS #
6 re A ' hJ e Y / ** * * (* tci W
~~~~ 1 (c) Requi es a change in the Environmental A1s Protection Arfe"4=e*2CePJan. ih t' 8 ASIS A od WFPW #P*7*unik * . . . . &c.a s . . , . ,. ,
d'oConcerns iJeV an.r%ct' 1 (5
. a matter which may result in a significant
,,g, (d) increase in any adverse enviroasental impact previously * !
evaluated is the Final Kavironmental Stateneat,(TIS) as. nodified by the any staff's testimony to the Atomic Saf deel ion of th ASL3 5 r d o l$ 61r>c7lc/ 8 ASIS AeAn im _% pact appraisal .J TLeOe' ssn U **/:
' /
1
*~,, .,
Concerns a sisatficant change in effluents or power level (in E,, (e) esd,'e.2 Ys'c. acc rdance with 10CTRS1 S (b) (2) ). A2etNell.1e 8AStS *e A 2)P aMa// 1(Wdulte **t'feCY'rcf . l 19'(,J a,f $i dfff %0d'ht (f) Concerns a satter not previously reviewed and evaluated in I
,,,g, documents specified.in (d) above,.which may have a significant J4 adverse envfroamental Lapact . ..n .s.r/ tn'a w -la / . ./n p.1 e-/ .a W av ASIS de w $ '} / O V// / 4 J.. . b C asR4 t$ e h <
1b/f f
*b Ak % ' * , pv V' DATE P I R1 210,R,,},G/ Okl0.4AT$t,,,u,y,CATE',,j;p,i,j,y
~ * ' e' Y f
> N- W } ...
- DATE APPROVED
},,,i.)f$",'cDATEm...v...,,SRC ly
' . s m ,,'. . , . . ,
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
)
e' g s g.;T L,EshveA4) TitMM0 3*flTY JuAsur tr.o*Aloikfd f**Vrdeswg Mea.nrO Q 'b WrebstpodTk 79 j l
' 015 06 24 ATT !
&/l/$
k/} v j' f irAc u ra r 1 (qc- og $l% \ l l A. EFFZcstneY *rfJYrN6 of AteN sAppry $ flared Fre rfst YAArd6 TJ hoY /OOfl~aWd.TM 4eN3 s4MTyT TKMHrtAL $ff a = 7FrcAr.rmas frfr/fdr 23 MAde~ TN PJAd. 7Adtr 1.+'~ /y 70 PAdT Q OF 34A404 TrCHMreAL T63r rsod F736 //-1. hw. Evfd , No enA8sas AAf ArGerste. OULY AH (2Cffffs;d TO T o s z r r a J 6 . 5. 0. O F e* T 4 D T 3 'BrrNoT4 kid. I ' I: i 2i S 'S THr H etM fztred '8Ayx UPurtrAm of 7Nr CHAncent ArscAdid-Zs Amr e rete rested o.trad Def Atty.186 TA2HrrN6 i TA/ veprrtA Trad wrs commons (ArrS6Trnas e s/oa sAffTY fitArt# Spirist. Yke pfirer eV. ?>4rNr AnU on Ynt U/s74fAm
- ht/h Frtrrt *8Mx 7$ ear of PbrrwirnL Clos erps ott sesos.us I care rar-pstrrA s&Act taHre4 tsaute cease Au rasenrAJr
- ca rne estredrarrA t 'perssvar Acheos rnr.s patrrn AS/J
.TH rutas A talJ W' ""/%)sJ Coactit& YH000* H TMV I frirfi sw. suce rar macwn uAicue ce ruase-FreicA4 s4 p.cr Apprerre Me treardro catArcr2ve/crra ,
' Fod Cross ed ei teAors prirer.1 ss oNty TapstArff 87 416N Osttr/rerr4c 7wessutos neAass rwose f.reress oa FAer Atw f<w itrfore u erAo fs.m rne cearnos deem As t.acu e e ac Rd. v.>sr ca.Fearets et/Tr/rpt i.oserwe, flor Ae/$'A t- l l Shrte car /Arred,7Ht Dr.tsse rarnr or YMrse psLress
- ts srzet. Mr(7Mfars* oder 20 CHAMf 10 7'Mr N.strorutry '
ott conseavepers of /4 Accrwr As Mrussust.f cdAbutrrs Ty rne is/A A A g r N T A o d d e. f d . , a l
.y. , . . . .p .1,,
l ).8 *
- d 'h 6
- 0. 67*/cf TATHf ps4*e6 Do Nor. /ffl*cr THt' #fcHApreA L 1 JfAttA6e' of TMF v/sitw prM FELifft EfM fpA Ydt*
c6.resses. Dessa .ywrr~r ss .srris. sirr, no sufw f A T L VA F ttfe M J f it f E d rdQ DaJe f d. i L 1 i.
rUs@ L *f
- W l% 4 - 12'l 9Hly G"'1'.~J O'**I fC"'?. SII.IZ.S '.5 4w s_ . . _ . ._ _ AD.'!IN.ISTF.ATIVE PROCED"Tt! . -. . a
.a IRevisten 7
-a.
l 01 5 06. :. l . T l A::sch cet I l Fate 3 of I. l
.y .
w y.
..-..7,...,
. .w l l l.;.
.,..,.,..9 s n -
/rQ/ !ATETY ENVIRONME'tTAL EVAI,UATION FORM * : ,. 4
. . . . .s . .-:- . >...
~... .. n. . . . . . . . . .
.Q . . . . . .
4,
~
.*t 'pW_ '/MDoCN0/ EVA.I,UATION NO. e H ~ ---._ W PART T = hCGJ.7/ _. !OC. . .EV.A.INATED
_ . . . . . 'cN _ . i .
..y /MsnN3/ ST.",TD1 EFTE"IID N -E ~ 7.t~. .T[5
- . .. ...~..>.-/
. . .. . w m.eErf .
, 1 n.r d rscr5 M cu n
.ree:.:... n.r; . ,x . . y Ws..,v a R ... . . . , >.v. .r , . . . , . . .. ..., . .
*.. ,.r., . . . . . . 7.. A. . . .:.
q y.y . ;, .:e .ntsCEPTION . ruar wt W# emm
- v.e ,,,',,,. . --a 7
...w.
* %r. .
e 1. . .h ; @q, @q 04 uccan
.....+2..- 4. m.o.,,,,.ru w w m te cm mo. m a Fl
'# !M --
er-sn.n - l;h y 1 7.a 2p* :.:r.m~ya.a cmr wr nomireern
.w.
, .-- . . . .. . .- . non-oa uconD . tw. p .R.<q '
.. g .ev.:;-e n ;.3
. . , , . ... .4 ---a. .el t + u INrTIAI.S l' pt.f4# .d f*7* .,77.*~~~ g;.,, . . r . _
- 9. f I - '
NO. OF P&GES - l mud '
-{.; .' y .i: . %j N. btf:[.:.'.< .
-- ***~ . l . ayATt : ~~
- 4e s
. .. .., . . . . v
-p;PT T!
- J .l.% J?U. SATITT EVAI.UATION . ,' ...V
..' -a- / l h,, ."..
.,,.. . i
.s.
. a .. . ;.. a. < u . . ..
a"- . :. - 4 . . IE3 .No. .IMPI.EMDfTATION OR FIP.TCIMANCE OF THE ' alm.u DESCRISED A20VE: - , . . . 4- . t 6 ,*4*. s . ;,r c. . - Wo .y.d.; .:- ' l
,~N(,,,, eW). Requizee a change to the GGNE;Tarinacar Specifications. .
'f ;<; .W'M Yl ?
. %., ,F.}.lp' . ......g.-
, . . 3Asts-. % .e k m,3 ecietcore W.T"e Aa. wo'Vn ehua e rttve'ed &9" L.' M.
,e, 4 i n, . , ;4!p ~0 f. ' .
e .* 2s? s G a @ d M m (444 M ,4u.et ' N m a h '...
-'i.-- t i>"1 .
l V. . .,/,,e,,er. -.(b)t .> 6.. tar.resses the . 11ty of. occurrence ei an accidear.. . .
,..m. Sr.*iTr.W. g & ly .svaluated in .the FSAR.s.sm tem ww.m ~C.F. .1. b ,'s i Ta! "-tJ
- M. >.
. ? . . ~~"* , , M.W -
4
- i . T ".,Ba3I.A.,: o_.le.M e eda rA wea;'M,.W WL %% %"25 K a'W.A h,*4 L 4..;.y.r;(9,h.
w.q : .;., ,e
. , ..~.,.f. - .
j
,. . ' " . _ . - W .mg (sblacreasa.the 6.ng. 5.
6 rdegr. qw@of > - as $ bii.m ,,uae*3aa.Adet-CacW previonair evaluated Mst cn gWg f. '
,,,,. . . . . 4 'or.._ ~ .in the FEAR. ..,.,~in ai,6,'a/.f,'r.;;.;.< pro..#.
. . ......,e,.i .
. . e i. r .
d'E ' ' ' * . . f ' ;3 ASIS _ b m, m' b6dd, L. O m e i W a'i n r n tm W , T M. for , M. .-~.e,L ' i M4GPM t.sm ous 6 w.4. dWnsaa.s U. % . h A.i M ay
- m . (d) Creates the possibility of an g' M
- o a different t
- r.t."f. .< e - '. .
. r . than any.,waluated .ta the tsar. a r.g m. ; -v ; . . . >
.;mm.%.
,M M. .%,
A d , A dp Mgc.s>* 4 . .. m
. .O' *j nasts acre 4. ,,/ ,.d,4 ec Ma in ,
. ....r. ..:e. >, y. ..g; . ! , ; . . . . o . ... - .,.,.,., ,.. s .. 4.. - .g ..e..,.......... . - . . -
m a:d Imeresses the probability of occurence of a malfunction of, VJ 9 .. m.. t.$uac,
. .. y
..s. e a<,v..
e.-..'.,,,,_,,, ..
\ m '
d(e) J'd M
. ;"v.-b,e.:. 3 g~c '. ,'u..n.C ' estmipmentA.rtant,.te, , me sd,afe,previonaly evaluated4la u.w the F(AR.?ih
- +- e,eaw.n, . w.I l
, ,v. ;j...L':.'} 'Tusts u 4/.[" " yg,,,Q,, y ,fQg ,,Qyz.;Q f,4,.f Q. s ,.rt
<a e .u af.ty cM ,,wtualy entut.d la the -~r FRAR.M;%m MhW/ JQ- %j MQ),&. AT:; ussa L4,U,W:f .'
..'p :rq A.- Q .u.w. 8%.s:.**.: r '. ;-
- n.%%.rmsa.b.tf .%, w j T.P.f Q.r .;h G.4*.*,*#.W'.ti f;a;,)(.G.gd. '. p~ . ~ m .Y:; pe ts w
. s)l.. Create the poseihility\of a.malfusstiam en a differes(type QM :a j.7 /, j any evaluated previsualy in themm.. , p.C m,,pf. w$tor :ha .Q m 'Pr:0-
. c
' -than ,n M > CG Awr.%:
,.. s 3...? ,: .. ,. 1.... nants .
' m
.% .c l
Q : . esI e . N' .r.w. 4.'
.%g'aq.g..c:yQ2:. .Eadmaan w m e kthe sM dessia . j e .:... of ufsty defined la the beata.for amyg$
.p f. t ',9 .(h) ' ., f.pe g
t uhalu t spesiftutt n.1, e + st, sr. :uun .,g e,p y w .s M W. .xe y. g; d,j.: m q .<, W 3c
;.~,4 ,s,m,pt .wyd w
, a < mm.,
sh es.+ yE"~ndele m m n a 1 8,9.'.M.,.."L*Addahal .o.usza m- m # ar% t
'.n . '1 *%e. ;,.*.
4 '/ and astmh.4..= m a e. . . .
..*f . . .f .
i b'. - -. . 6,g.;
's. ' '
w
.m . mn: v..:
. . ~ "67 y *. .+ N}iA .
' -l+ j l
e's . v . n e* ; m* .M' :d. : v.. c '.'*M"j.
*. . l.{. l.**
e s 3 e
.s 4-z
'.t' a I. ..
t . .;
.t. ,y,r.
.t. . 3 4 2 , .c .... . .. * .?a .
i M .' - ! '
.s'...' '
.W "I. .6' .J1
. p9.U '2. .
. .m.c .% . 015+04'14'ATT
. Y ....e" .-
- 1. '. .u .. o . C. V..' .
. ',a Q '.. u. .d.U':'s*
,a C.?-.' ?t.
i . . Jh. ' G4t. Q. .. g;t. , :,;..;j;$ . Q . i,....'.<. w .6,.Q:q ::s*< . . . . .
. : gg
;t.w.? ....p, 1
.%g<....d.,.48/.....e.....
nes,m. 4p j . . .?. ,. a. . g.
..e. . . .
- . . .~ .
.....~.'.c ..
_..____.-,.___--_.-------._,_,._-.-,.-__--.--_.-,m
~ ,- .- r - . , . . . . _
.._..-b
. . - . ~ - . . . _ _ _ . ,
,ir.A*;;' c'"5 . NUCLEAR STATION -- --m-<c-----
....%=
,n
,c l 01-S-06-24 i R.v t. . ~ 7
-~
q T. ~~--- . - -- i A -, l_ Attach er,t I l ;, age b. \
~-
l f '
'~ J ~ . SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAI. EVALUATION FOR.Tr '.Y -
. . L ... ... . t'.n PART III
. .. I. -_ ENVIRONMENTAI, EVALUATION JL
. 3 . -*y . -
; -j.-f;)j YES No IMPI.E.*EVTATION OR PERTORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DT.5CRIBED ABOVE: ! .L'Mll
.-. ..;a
. .. "' .. . . m
, (a) is required to achieve compliance with Tederal, State or local. .I"Q;;.g W_'
l y environmental regulations , gy : ,; mfg, A20 &
. ' ' .s". . :.3'Aggg ' eM N te+ Cotwred git ~Me dre s . I~Td,m ,;.m.c. . . g; ~5..M
.n..w.1 . .....t.<. ,s ", .- .. . ..
;t,c i . e .' . * ? ;. v ... ..: .
. .? .. %
.m. :
l . . M . _* ~2' ~c:6.(b);Results"la all measurable environmental offacts biing 'coifined 77'J..N$ Md.
. . , r.'
-to omaite area previously disturbed during site preparation ~ . ""'.' .-1
-- g.: and plant conatruch.
* *' '- - - 'fl
,;r. . - s q ' M SAsIs o%A annki,u d-Kn t W1i-wG i:
i .
~
I.~- 4~ -
, s
""'~
j (c) Requiren a change in the Envirag ental Protection Plan. . :.. R W e CC.e d et w 0 M lu+,(+ rwl.cX m _TW4{ A
^
BASIS ef l' ~
. . Q l. -
7 . l _,,,,,, ,I,, . p 4d) Concaras a matter which may result in a significant . t 7. ; % g . ' Q., . 'yp y
. . : .b;is. increase la any adverse' environmental impecs. previsualy ,;ji. y$ L"
# ?; - ,
4 M
....J: : 2..evala'ated.La Enviroommatal the Einal,a Statementtestimony (FIS) as to the Atomic ,.
Sa
, ' , . . _ ye. . . .c and m ad by the staff )
i; .. ' . ? . .MZ ' -
. .e J .h:4. Licaesing Board (ASI.B), supplements to the FES, environmental .E/;'W~.j='.';.. j < , , g v" ; $t. .M -" tapact appraisali er is any of the ASI5.~.TM,wiu e :' 4. M;' s ;
e n. a b oe. (m h a-
;. RA313 Mrh co(M_ M LA o sn> e Tcha- %.4 b b .
4 w$ 0:( (. W ..:.,# - . . -
. ..w. \. .; .; r;.., % yy @~:c g.cy m ..:g y -: ..
q I '
-O.m.: .I:...<,,,,w-~m..,m.. M o (e) Canceras a. significant change in effi
?.', .-7 .
. . . .. e t
- " Eastsaccordance with 10CF151.5 m >< M(b) (2) ). r %M.
s'.,"e;.-. X ':: 4;r.,. D ., W l i Mru cfp 0cr4cc14t t' se M ' ',"l$.:.N.:-
~ ~ ;-- - .
., s n y . .. ,
, ... ~... a;< ,..
A,g-
. / . .: (f)* Cascaran a matter not previously reviewed and' evaluated in..'.aM.7.~1 .?,i.? a - .. .,.,
l : . ... * ):1 . docuamata specified La (d) above, which may have a significant. .,".ete.g.7 . :
! W . I;'.y*; ' . adverse environmental ! !' A . . '
! ]N... .;%s?l.s .,: ' 3AsI3 no. -Sk c4yw d -Qtau c ("Mctd 09d'.,W . ?"M.dD,p.D.k '
I
/MORI
/
GINATQE . ;. r,;n. ,.,, . DAIL .., ,.g. Wze. N h.' -*
'l .
. ., % DAIT. , -
7 ..
..",....%,.... / . ,
.s , , . - . .,
l pp . . ' . . ":E ff.24,,Tl e.
. : ..,i.....'s.... . */ , " r , .%. ... :.g.,. .. . ; i
. sac e . .w.r "; j l raoVED .. . m , ,,. n . .u 2 samm < - DATE . , .
. mW&. M; 2:he;,.iaused ;; '.:... u. . >t as ..mesessary. s.. .:.s.. :. , .. . J ' . , + :. . .::.;#: 'q, and. attaahad l \ * . . . ~ 'y . . r; . '. M. fp -
i
' &.. Additional :.' 1 sheets may WiWb~* 1.n"N1'mn aG' w>~ ; "m' W ?** %'C' Ul.$gfp'l W.f
- .;: . p;.mt%VW.:
i ye..K,.%Q}.W: ,,.;,..~.-- > a e: N .n.. w c .:. m m , .. ' m..r .:.y4 q;Y ~- s.,<;e.,. . .y A L. ;a... a u. n.: ..... .v . ;,.w . :, . . . , . :. u . ..,. .: . .....,. ~.u.. .. ., ., x
.r.
. w***, a. .'... .. " * * ' . . . '* .. .
...a .
ye ' *:. .
. .~.* W [s * :s . '.s 4 w r g\}/..J.Nr 7.d, X.'r..
a 1:;
- t % ., , ; s u* **i' ,. .n. h. a % up ,: . ... e i , i . 3 . '.J .,,$, ..'*i ' 41 C.Q . $*p ,e ';.N* . %,
'. a.h ;r*q,M.
l , f.w( ~.x' a4 -
..,:* Mal u. w ';.' % :
A* . j *
. )[a,.8n.s..e $ Mlh.lQ,h~yL.e.l..t d. . -- -.',#- ..,y?* ' . ~ . ' .' .. '. . .! .... . .. ~ a . .. ...s.-'. c.' 41 ,.y@. C. ,..,. .j.g/. c,j',W. [;5
.',A.'C '
. , . r s l.M'.7
~
..o .' ..,a .
- x. .
. *W '%s ? 15 '.% 4,yg* . . . . - . .~ 4 ', ' . -l.- : ~.~,. m 5 .m ? * '.N.*:*;*..' (
. ...g.
W l'? .,,6.% . f... M. a ; w
- t'y i. .'o.'t.,l 6 4., i*: . .nh . . ; . : M. . *%.u-
% ~'-: ;, h .
W W. .;.. d%o k i S '. .. *l,s*N'.L'*
.9 .
- 9. .o ..N. .**. $.. !!&. p 4;. ..'?e. j i ,
. .y , , ,
h, s':, h.'. s i -a . i!/ ,;,1 ,,
. 4 :.
#y
* '. ' : { *a '. . ' ' . *" fl p.-
313 04 24 AT.T <7 4 '
. .,1 e
. .q .. '+
. . .>. .(g 6
,., . .. ., c.c.., h,*, .? .g. . '
. t- . .,
. . b =. $ y. , . -
- 3- . . , . .. gg
~
i $ - . -
. a...a... r . -
-. t. . . ~ . - -
* * . . * * ,.. ,, . s , . .p.,,.......... ,
- a. .
,...,.,..., 3,a. 7,,,4 m.. a l
ND GULF NUCLEAR STATICN ADMINISTRATIVE PRCCE*,'CRE l 01-S-06-24 IRevision 7 l l Attachment I lPage g of 4 l l 8 455 l 4/re/H 1
/MTITLE/ SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- I ! '
PART I /MXREF/ DOC. EVALUATED H Wo. R,7.1 % /MDOCN0/ EVALUATION NO. h .i L
/MXREF/ REFERENCES FEAT 9.26 /MSYSN0/ SYSTEM EFFECTED P44 ]
DESCRIPTION 3 11 atvauAram coocrAus Puvuest *m - A n aa e r vom as wcma ichi l IQA RECORD l j lRT -B14.33 Anam .t .n/crs u ro reas mTwArmet ana r ,m(, l l tar Awh cww r o6 Tw se e Asreiw o r Ts+E l NON-QA RECORD l mLiserrea erprad Tu-rea Po,sr +n Ria . l : INITIALS l l INO. OF PAGES l l lDATE l PART II SAFETY EVALUATION
. YES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
_ 1 (a) Requires a change to the GGNS Technical Specifications. BASIS h1 Ada me cWNicAr._ ADMfod Mew Ane der 4dma n ,o TEtt4. iffCS _ 1 (b) Increases the probability of occurrence of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR. B ASIS L ~- , my -,e m.,um - - - --i m tre.,a m..pr to n,w Ara swuc w a et
.a csse seu so.or waasss ano mees our unensa seueur peoenafuross.
_ 1 (c) Increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR. ,,.jft go,,43,, srAe 3.ta al al B ASIS Autnur anc sa run me an u,, sm.e,ne '*tW "* w remu=w.vanoum msw .e .w.or.-= ae~ser-e~1. rsvsrc m wir __ -_ n= Amekvn m ... ;u,twp, red .
,X,' 4"(d) Ne*aG's#ffeMs's'ibiIlly"oT YacUfeN f *a dilferent type than any evaluated in the FSAR BASIS ?.aweam,s .s var sevisurar i vra.m> re,.>r <=ver s. sa.o ace, mar ser.,a.dess 0,Prademar Mm( 7 pow. Aaneuseo ens Twg FJArt .
,,,X, (e) Increases the probability of occurence of a malfunction of g' BASJS
'NM ._- r,dB 4*e*E*ed*e18.b*,8
_ - r. . c
-- - . _ .= ra Y ca.ahte.4#ss. Any sam'y asares puren get tan.vrast lip, V,jpu,s ,vggQ 1 gFg,.g.g sapswpga.s
- m rm,_ siegrao.
en .J,9 ,s.r fy ins os 1,,,e or
,X , (f) Increases the consequences of a malfunction of equipment in g ytagt t wa.,we, y sfgty,nesmer g gup1w,y7aguated in the FSAR.
B 8dlgSIS " a ,=,,n,r eeuwo meawsur antsArve,J.Tyrs e,w.,4 g
- e. fesucas ne new on.uras,e4wur tem ecunwr AoAtvsrs su twe FrAe,
,,,,_ 1 "(g)8f-Create the possibility of a malfunction on a different type than any evaluated previously in the FSAR.
BASIS Ale .A., nr,ar.< r- se m eier aan cas,erso ay wrA cmar. f5Ae p,wes knewsst W Nur AnterN.
,X_ (h) Reduces the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any technical specifications.
BASIS IMt.,a ersem or aer weests As r_sa resnar,rr no sersrv pewrien Ano is per tseosana t+t rara seurswa e,p rus #4.aur.'
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
1 01-S-06-24 ATT'I
; GUFF .WCI. EAR STATION ADMINIS~3ATIVE PRCCE'";RE bVA!U 4. b k . I b
l 01-S-Oe-24 IRevision 7 l l Attachment I lPage 4 of 4 l l l SAFEIT ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- PART III. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION g "NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE: ;.
1_ (a) Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State or local environmental regu.ations BASIS A f2 & : 1. so , af i=* A *f=A as L A m um: D fa,Y Q
.G,7,Vf ikhs J Co~hef + -f-_^ _-esu a,, &
X _ (b) Results in all measurable environmental effect ing confined to onsite area previously disturbed during site preparation and plant constructio . BASIS R +nJ.it4.b 'Ad. $AJ sn fr + rA/ L o y,J/ -silf Q tas.!co'M t co d h%},
~J (c) Requires a change in the Environmental Protection Plan. '
BASIS Tid d oS2d eb #De W ; _d (d) Concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as ,, modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and b Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental impact appraisal, or in any decision of the ASLB. BASIS afr19 s.-_h .x 1 . 1 4 4 - - L ' / n J J G $> ic'b
% GMdr W re'dnesf 4el,w Con &f( }.as5se,ificant change in /ef fluents or t ptrab'AU4 doA -
_ _A (e) cerns a sign er ' level (th - accordance with 10CFRSI.S (b) (2) '). c oct .* m 5 w . m On. o- D'fo p BASIS A u %_ .3 N _ A- = _ g _g gs .g~+ - _ 4 (f) Concerns a matter not previodsly reviewed and evaluated in docueents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant adverjeenvironmentaljapact. BASIS / L :,. d A Z,C& we. n x_e M A ~ - ) r j e/n~ - g & S V W (o /
/MORIG/ ORIGINA QR DATE PSRC DATE Gs- / O /
apt 96VED DATE ' SRC DATE \
- Additional sheets may be us.ed and attached as necessary.
01-S 06-24 ATT I ( I
GRAND GUI.T NUCLEAR STATION ADMINISTRATIVE PRCCIOCRE l 01-S-06-24 IRevision 7 l l Attachment I lPage 3 of 4 l l l l l
/MTITLE/ SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM * ,
PART I /MXREF/ DOC. EVALUA'IT.D gaccM33sC /MDOCN0/ EVALUATION NO. 033 , __
.iu. co> e . t
/MXREF/ REFERENCES cw#me FtAC. /MSYSN0/ SYSTEM EFTECTED t7f )
1 1 1 DESCRIPTION N Aw.ur eu es- w _e uicw " cres cem wir-et cere c.seetw Armb atc( l IQA RECORD l erra Nrc im -rcr,treurw Pcer,fAtut l lRT -B14.33 l Aw0 tu Ate w Atsr A pp5 n r iMPnss l lNON-QA RECORD l Tc Tyr usr cF AS ci i M AEECN AT@* l IINITIALS l l INO. OF PAGES l l lDATE l . PART II SAFETY EVALUATION M N,0 IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE: se (a) Requires a change to the GGNS Technical Specifications. . BASIS TAF e see atAn h m Arfst >.Me.u B ice i O E P0e n t 15 bt? SAFET*y psr .,ww ry.,o e.ci cc vMo m Mcts w'Ec2
/ (b) Increases the probability of occurrence of an accident .,
previously evaluated in the FSAR. '
- f. '
BASIS Rc Ac t i64tM Am c\ ske twA io % M A51. c,.cr:rg 4 4 _j -tk te.ce -tremu {rtcyt % cin,tuAnyt Mt 5 y$ eg . y 6 _ _V (c) Increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR. BASIS Ot Ac t semM c ,re. .uo,
? J ,.', & 4rs b , . 4- a re AnlMJ 4t-
/ ta A%.s. i:9#2--
Y' (d) . Creates the possibility of an accident of a different type than any evaluated in the FSAR: BASIS E .'eci Ac lesnitsa d (- neAr SetCek Pr ( n.+.M wd tom E +
,j nc t 4,Wct usw eptes.t cw c s Q p wriwwu._. ;
_ _V (e) Increases the probability of occurence of a malfunciion of.. j equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the F:1,AR . ; BASIS RJr Acw IreM,mu& m M n e 4 e EC,>c4 % 4,- c '.14 en t,ev, . Aq (f) Increases the consequences cf a malfunction of equipment imp rtant to safety previously evaluated is the FSAR. BASIS K_ Jer A L hak u n 4 M ock s C Lc_b u , IA,,n el effe.4 ,cM " (3) Create the possibility of a malfunction on O different t e than any evaluated previously in the FSAR. BASIS he; Ar_ &c.#4am_4 ,Js M .s4 o 044 , cht. 99 rmet,,,ca_. g +
/
m eqv@* c.f 84o.bek I _ S (h) Reduces the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any I BASIS technical 6 e e-sp(ecifications. AT <Wu(c l
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
#4 A NWMehib :
01-S-06-24 ATT T o>-+ em= . .
GRAND GULF NUCIZAR STATZON ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE 3 l 01-S-06-24 IRevision 7 l
.'l Attachment I lPage 4 of 4 l l I i '
SAFETY ENVIRCNMENTAL EVALUATION FCF11* PART III ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATICN y giO_ IMPLEMENTATION OR PERTORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE: X (a) Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State or local environmansal regulations
- s. BASIS /% .J J,/'m4h m- - aA rb es,- a, Am e r A 4- 1 ,
s (9.* fake-S buf .a *='+ A,nysva / a % 3-(_ (b) Results in all measurable envir ntal effects being confined to ensite (sea previously disturbed during site preparation and BASIS <*/. :<d plant construction. w&okJt m is. L i!)& L use6C2 A M .'.S fai,aais p.sn & c(w As-gc ' X (c) uires 4' change in the Environmental Protection Plan. BASIS Req( %- safdt: fe Lr areuS Js w J.L & FAD _1 (d) Concerns a matter which me[ result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environzeatal Statement (TES) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the ITS, environmental impact appraisal, or in any dk.ision of the ASLB. 8 ASIS OL 1J szNa,, am a6 JA A a2 ts. .. dow*h _1 (e) Concerns a signific t change in effluents or power level (in accordance with 10CTRSI.S (b) (2) ). BASIS Dev A antAu/ - . n ,-/: . _ - ,, n .e,jJ/. . A - ,sna*O o , , - _1 (f) Concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact. SI5 fM . . $ A.46% sorse M&& ,3 e/M iAfU
~
/J
/MORIG/ ORIGI?]p R m /
DATE
}$_ iY PSRC ' " i-
~
i
/
DATE 25 f 2/2, I b / D&TE SRC DATE APPROVED G '
\
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
g.
#en
,g 4 J-01-5-06-2f. ATI I +
L [#
'1
.L - - - a
6 k A/Ha,A +k. F5m2 doeo nef eakat. accis& , keruau. iaa:>/aig & bioc<cle- hu/imed- W e6es u Y USG- blOUh 0AfrY h& 4ios c. 4,&dL 6D -Ma.- 2% jos s, Wa.- offs-a6 g fo&~j s> cow K 4Ae /w/. 6 -A&u_.) reesas deuwt .sencu a/ sans a pey A
<J a .- mw sQ e 4wp me saa sa a _a a~e c6 fucf & Nh Decwdy, & Ch/s.ip.e ,gdhcEi effe/fx
& wLb pw/ a k th{w c4 fioacle -
OWQ ~ a>ds An Lo p - pL+ .,p k -MsD hpocac;ce cm q a w - u essa) a s
& msa ;+ ww An A-o y , g u-ca a v fe s p b p' A p&w/ -
m y NS , GRA.<D GUIE NUCIIAR STATICN ADMINIS 3ATIVE PRCCE:';RE l 01-S-06-21. IRevision 7 l l Attachment I lPage 3 of 4 l 86
. g(,
I
/MTITLE/ SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- PART I /MXREF/ ** ' DOC. EVALUATED CN d 39/P /MDOCNO/ EVALUATION NO. i a
' oJPV9-4 m
/MXREF/ REFERENCES F3M + C4 3'NW /MSYSE / SYSTEN EFFECTED A/-2 2. i
. l DESCRIPTION EVALUATE WE NeksE0 1 ;
cuAmes to mE F$ AE As- bEsc2sEEO l QA RECORD l e ckid 3449 (ATT AttRE D) 6 l RT -814.33 l , l NON-QA RECORD l l INITIALS l l NO. OF PAGES l l 'DATE l l PART II SAFETY EVALUATION l
)
ES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE: . ! I V (a) Rsquires a change to the GGNS Technical Specifications. BASIS . S es Atr ATc w EO
/ (b) Increases the. probability of occurrence of an accident ,
I previously evaluated in the FSAR. , BASIS S E'E AfrAOGO i V (c) Increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated l in the FSAR. l BASIS <re ATTATeoEO ! d' (d) Creates the possibility of an accident of a different type than any evaluated in the FSAR: BASIS sEs Arwrc
- W
- J
/ (e) Increases the probability of occurence of a malfunction of l equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR.
BASIS sse ArrrTe ws0
/ '(f) Increases the consequences of a malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR.
BASIS SEe. Acr4rese0 li (g) Create the possibility of a malfunction on a different type than any evaluated previously in the FSAR. BASIS eM ATrArt Wr-O V (h) Reduces the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any technical specifications. BASIS SEE ATTATCtWD
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
I l i 01-5-06-24 ATI T
/
ADMINZSTRATIVE PROCEDURE: ,
'D GCLF NUCZ. EAR STATZON l
l 01-S-06-24 (Revision 7 l l Attachment I lPage 4 of 4 l l / i t SAFETY ENVIRON?ESTAL EVALUATION FORM
- g i PART III ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION i ES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF '11tE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
./ (a) Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State or local environmental regulations BASIS Tr m uer eseeto.urec* skcs ee- F 4 4' W 4ta u m s REDect
/ (b) Results in all measurable environmental effects being confined to onsite area previously disturbed during site preparation and plant construction.
BASIS Nos.m -ncAwo er wt N-21 sx stem Am McT EE mrctrO
/ (c) Requires a change in the Environmental Protection Plan.
BASIS t+tt ue twner w mulce: cetensE C Aw. 1 (d) Concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and , Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental l impact appraisal, or in any decision of the ASLB. BASIS Ner tex-ec-o m m @ TAe ABc4 (rpptaa sowM _ l (e) Concerns a significant change in effluents or power level (in accordance with 10CFRS1.S (b) (2) ). BASIS <re A ceW ec Peepewo c mse s A-vr An at:0 J
^ / (f) Concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant
~
1 adverse environmental impact. ASIS NC- T M c w A u ,;: se e cc e9 Aner PtA u r 9t:2 FCC W MLC I ws s. . g c# ' 9_ex. tee 6 EFreuf.nra irtgytwfp'ADb-
/ Os> /.,l'K.<./ / 4-7-2 /M Ull Ihll-k-
/MORIG ORIGINATOR DATE /FSRC ' N FV g DATE
/ Eb /
DATE D&TE SRC PROVED l
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
ne l 01-S-06-24 ATI I
i SAFETY 'VIRONMENTAL EVALUATION EVALUATION h"0. h b hN ' (# i Part II a) There is no Technical Specification reference covering remaining CL- capacity or regeneration of Condensate resin. There is no reference to specific activity content of the resin itself. A b) Changes #0124, 0125, 0126, & 0127 addresses reducing remaining operating Cl- capacity from 50% to 25%. The 50% remaining capacity is based on sea water cooling and we have fresh water cooling at GGNS. This is a conductivity reduction of approximately a factor of 20. With this reduction of remaining capacity _by a factor of 2 we will still be able to prevent Rx water C1 from exceeding 200 ppb with a tube leak of 50 gpm as described in. change 0124. Changes 0128, 0129, 0130 and 0131 reflect changes to the activity levels in the condensate resin and waste streams due to decreasing the remaining capacity from 50 to 25%. Overall activity will remain the same but higher specific activity on the resin itself will result. This is calculated to be a 4 fold increase as shown in change 0130 & 0131. This is based on the activity being trapped on the resin and no regeneration taking place. If no regeneration is going to be done the tank / evaporator bottom failure analysis done in FSAR 15.12 would not apply or be adversely effected because they would not be used. Part II ,,, a--
.)
c c) As explained in above the postulated tank / evaporator failure consequences and likelyhood will not be effected as there should be less activity in these streams if this change is implemented and we do not regenerate this resin. We will also be able to surpass the water quality specified for a 50 gpm leal due to the concentration difference of Cl- in the leakage water. i d) The accident / design criteria are clearly defined in the FSAR. 1 e) No operating equipment sequences or procedures will be changed. l f) See e) above. ; I g) This change will not effect system operating performance or I design.
~
h) All Tech Spec limits for Cl , conductivity, and pH on the reactor vessel still apply and will not be changed. PHPC SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVAL - 1
ADMINISTRATZVE PROCE0t.TG IRAND GUII NUCLEAR STCION
~
l 01-5-06-24 l Revision 7 l l Attachment I iPage 3 of 4 l l 1 l l [ l /WITI.E/ SAFETY ENVIRONMEWAL EVAI.UATION FORM
- I PART I /MXREF/ DOC. EVALUATED F.5%R /MDOCN0/ EVALUATION NO.
/hXREF/
REFERENCES CAJ# 3407 /MsySN0/ SYSTEM EFFECTED A//A DESCRIPTION d Al4 3407 eYeats 4 0426. o418. . d's429
,J74erfal 'e b . ,e l+m 4Aa l
l IQA RECORD IRT -B14.33 l l '
)
ar, l INON-QA RECORD l Ascu/n4/ m a t 44a V.r.Ve' dre a neeO l INITIALS l ( K,,&c 1.f./. O ..J bdv=Ju/er ' l lNO. OF PAGES l l Jae es hLI.'til.a e4"4lvo.<+ release. l l DA'IE l f/m/+r (SeefL 2. l. l. l') . Se e. l aneched po e .
' SAFETY EVALUATION PART II .
l l YES NO
~
IMPILMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE: i l
~ [ (a) Requires a change to the GGNS Technical S BASIS EL%s tal elaoroes ss 6 tit 345 frpecifications.
4essinolayasfa as the probability be of conds}Mt occurren e of an accidentas% Y-ech-[S~ chop e er l l _ [ (b) Inc previously evaluated in the FSAR. V l BASIS r+ sak,s Jas-na he n.f a/kek/Lv Mareych es Nde 44;I, of an attMa st we et arcretsaff
.MspIncreasytheconsequencesofanaccidentpreviouslyevaluated
_ g (c) in the FS tabnor4lfS5 Jacl15" O$ $s f.CfA 0A*pN /b usas $be fWME BASIS ~7Ne nets dtAmiNant *+ sets ho.divy Qee T*ds Speer) fra all deia en/celefrinf '{o g (d) Creates the possiti'lity of an adcident of a different type M/,'c .j dhh / k6 ( e C, as #4 ef. BASIS P fV tous ' ff , f g (e) Increases the probability of occurence of a malfunction of ; 4 a sf, BASIS is TW /
' V/ f g (f) Increases the consequences of a malfunction of equipment important gsafety previously evaluated in the FSAR.
BASIS dI2 e (c ) g (3) Create the possibility of a malfunction on a different type than y evalustaji previousJy in theJSARA5KNl V Q,S. BASIS fle T H h m T / 640.'ons M f" a rt net / J VI (h) Reduces the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any BASIS eJ a J 4./e M S eeT 1 /$. 5"4 7. 45 /
-NWN>t NL nr k o f,$~a g f f eggg*
- Additional sheets may be used and at ed as neces ary 1
01-S-06-24 ATT'I h=4hp ee- .
.m - , - , ,,
GRAND GCIJ NUCIIAR STATICN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE l 01-S-06-24 IRevision 7 l l l Attachment I lPage 4 of 4 l I I i SAFEU ENVIRON? ENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- I
)
l PART III ENVIRON' ENTAL EVALUATION 1 ES @ IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE: [ (a) Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State or local environmental regulations ' ) BASIS CAO Ae f ma El- F14A soortl' a Con 15len
/ *# ODCM- M woh NCA fees 1_ (b) Results in all measurable environmental effects being confined to onsite area previously disturbed during site preparation BASIS to cu7 nr FS A d evabe Y 4Cr' Y ^ h off. #1*
nNec+ed Anf NLFL ckna e s'
~ / (c)
'fde t )a exange in theen o
ntpf en.t Protection BASIS Requires >ro ceo r rl*ec Jeck.k/Plan. o $$VP. J / [ (d) Concerns a macter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse envizcamental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Aromic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the EES, environmental BASIS e e fs c e s- sv sfo be*-ft- t$tef . or po$ s / /8 V der15)(in&AFht W-n _ [ (e) konce$f rns a8+sVh9 significant orrW o kluents change e accordanc wig 10CTR51.5 ( ) 2) BASIS Alo narrrex *maa f~ (/ / ' / rr/k)tm(~ tt/~r a 4Ck .
,,,,,,,, (f) Concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant adverse envi onmental 4mpact.
BASIS We e seopr 4avs //o th//hnmA 2
/ rpscf .
% &A i 646
@/ 0 "fNATOR DA '# "
Vl PSRC W ll L 7 M ' " ' i6%f4 DATE A & p0VED DATE z% SRC i DATE \
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
01-S-06-24 A'IT I M~Y/M
A%cAwf cM 3kr Ev&dds do. OIA % Dese<. 'o W 2-fe.N.4of26 - f*S#A z. l./. 2., ga,Je,,ca 3, de/*/cd s<lrce dese<,j-k o 4 " sale h v.J 7 " & no+ pac T<d Spes (seeAlu. '
/.#)y fsnx z.t.I, z., r<,,fes,c e 13, aus a cle, 4k+, b ,
sh+cw,& . ' l
.I-le- #o n 6 - Fs4A 2,J./. 2, Se.denc= 1s', car <-e+s -lc<,,,,',,a 1y l in order- -1, he ce>,s:s t<,,f wi% & w.cd,g af +h4 rske seek . 1 Z-fen # o421 - FSkK 2./. /. 3 , fedene a. I, cweechs ferma, loy in o<dt< % be ce,,s,%+ w % 'Ced Cps .
GR1NDGUZENUCLEARSTATION ADMZNIS-'RATIVE PRCCEDURE l 01-S-06-24 QRevision 7 l 1 l Attachment I lPage 3 of 4 l 1 I I
/MITLE/ SAFETY ENVIRONMEWAL EVALUATION FORM
- I PART I /MXREF/ DOC. EVALUATED (( /MDCCN0/ EVALUATION NO.
F5at.C W T3cc
/MXREF/ REFERENCES nnuc44 1 /MSYSN0/ SYSTEM EFFECTED 9-71 cr5M secrkt.9.LV.I.
DESCRIPTION TVAGArf THE ADamed CF A MffffM2 wrHEtunteraccrr9 l 10A RECORD l TMAiz fet' ruc ftsw: eunu=D w4ny _usmet, l lRT -B14.33 l rais or nrennmxrro xErre en l lnon-oA RECORD l CDdwn trnrso kn rdmrM Aafftf l l1NITIALS l MJ Tine t)PTAf CNo l lNO. OF PAGES l l IDATE l PART II SAFETY EVALUATION ES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
/ (a) Requires a change to the GGNS Technical Specifications.
BASIS /li h se:Apfsti s'ir //p/r 3/A'S
/
_ g (b) Increases the probability of occurrence of an accident previously eyaluated in the FSAR. . - BASIS /In/ A'-HrM/r/ds n}rt1 N1Mit th~tvbt/k" Et lbi ETAk f/ _ g (c) Increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated BASIS At D km4 w e k I'tf A J f k r H id N e l /11 kh's 5 n tt g .taircret scrr.etain / (d) Creates the possibility of an accident of a different type th any - l BASIS /c.DhvaluatedintheFSAR:tts f w % c h !!f d s/a /2ttif k h M k//1rs l k g awnot mera<s aewa<ue (e) Increases the probability of occurence of a malfunction of i BASIS equipment 7)ir rlhnor/ important 711lltol safety previously evaluated ne}-Njdent1/nute-1 in the FSAR. for1,finf;ff I ' ' kMCNi>1 ktconsehences BW nfGMf!Jf. 1 _,,,,,,,, I (f. Increases the of a malfunction of equipment 8 ASIS important .to w "f/rif t'/v_ii safety,
/ 11/< f Ot/t/r evaluated prejviously n s../ /pf, in rMrf thelc dr FSAR.kGerriccff cudd faal 6/r# cts ctwytatau:thakt4of 4< Ma rysusu.
_gg (3) Create the possibiliYy of a malfunction on a different type than any evaluated previously in 3be FSAR. / BASIS -tri;< e,An w i no;//irehnet <vcd?ar erasifrutar ' g (h) {~e//%ntta<cd duces the margin stofanv' s&fety trap /tbi. in the basis for any as defined technical specifications. BASIS ~7/A1 w eSe'tzt rr 17t / retJ/ r r l lrt fjf'b ?!/rf
' /
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
I i 01-S-06-24 NIT'I
GRAND GUIJW . CIIAR STATION ADMINISTRATIVE PROCI::URE ' , l 01-S-06-24 IRevision 7 l l Attachment I lPage e of 4 1 1 I l SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- PART III ENVIRONSEhTAL EVALUATION Q NO, IMPLEME.VTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
/ (a) Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State or local environmental result.tions BASIS //ef tyM& 51nera d-lb0 /1lbi/L
/ (b) Results in all measurab e avironmental effects being confined to onsite area previously disturbed during site preparation BASIS and
, %cktei plant construction ton 1 llAf f. k $i t)M & lCc b
/
,,_,, I (c) Requires /a changej in the BASIS Mo GOW/W /A)Environgental E fr Protection Plan.
_g (d) Concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental BASIS impactappraisal,olrin,anydecisionoftheASLB. dof #C Hf*W rH (2 m / W Elf ri bet C [ _ g (e) Concerns a significant change in effluents or power level (in accord gce with 10C 1 p BASIS LUtU m /~ 1 Jth.5 (b) J2) ).D/dHf AJ/ff7d4A++e
/
g (f) Concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (d) abcve, which may have a significant adverseenvironmentalJmpac. BASIS /%2rA1 }c Adim7lA tiuWs/k rnM'ffkrtbr 22ner( of S-/ } h / 0- ' l
/MORIG/ ORIGINATO DATE PS$C' 1VV 4 DATE l
.Ne / 5 l W /
" APPROVED DATE SRC DATE j G
\
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
1 l l 1 01-S-06-24 ATT I 00 SS
ADMINISTRATZVE PROCEDURE l GKANDGULFNdCLEARSTATION l 01-S-06-24 (Revision 7 l lPage 3 of 4 l l l Attachment I l l I f
/MTITLE/ SAFETY ENVIRONMESTAL EVAEUATION FORM Q
- l l
t)FSAC.&{$. 1 !
% -lv /MDOCN0/ EVALUATION NO. '
PART I /.TutET/_ DOC. EVALUATED (44.Cd VI7h Mem A 4 OUT'T /MSYSN0/ SYSTEM EFFECTED N Z7- l
/MXREF/ REFERENCES REa6ah0E \.54 Psq i szc s s McA 2. f 1
DESCRIPTION EvAs.we ne Patewo l 10A RECORD l uFsAf eaA%c. AwATcwo 5:r e sAFEW l lRT -B14.33 l 1 f aud FRtrieretttF*w = Frects.1 l lNON iOA RECORD l tINITIALS l l l l INO. OF PAGES w , IDATE l l SAFETY EVALUATION PART II ) HS NO IMPLEMEhTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBE ) l j
/ (a)
BASIS Requires a change . to the GGNS Technical Specifications.(%M - 3
. 4 4 , ,
g (b) Increases the probability of occurrence of an accident E ' previously evaluated in the FSAR. b : BASIS (bAoud acrN rechrsmuk ne,' tut eMorw teed 'a 4(ww FSAf-.hsde't l , l o.Mp the consequences of an accident previously evaluated Increase l (c)
,,,,g, ce/tAcal-n* ekcovd Mr t:5$.
in the FSAR. I i BASIS Rtdotn Dt-Mu u,dldet JOcrtua l l and ttuu4kre' n%%t b\cucw Creates the possibility of an accident of a,different type W eMWw5- l I l V (d) i than any evaluated in the FSAR: esked BASIS do W .m&m h AAirmd k ..#',uWu & e ter acrik ra ,,c u d m b TdcMFO' dors % a. web # owytta wh*. W A(p".y' * % V (e) Increases i the progability of occurence of a salfunction of ,g l equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR. ,9,p,
- h BASIS Thi., Av.um -N ed+cetn o<.od Le AA.rrtuT.m er,tdomh ce,- ' i cu.4 mu At cw_ c% .acp.g.me auts.h.
j (f) Increases the consequentes of a salfunction of squipment important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR.nu,wh l oh- h1aa BASIS h tunv uuc.u ioct
/ (3) hsb ewd eteccs.htt(erinhPSAc. 5e.t%pt w ceasurckpurig than any evalt.ated previously in the FSAR.ce w d 4 u ette e c 1 k ee BASIS A n4 ccwokw.ok c)<rwuf a5ku.e.d
/ (h) Reduces the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any .
technical specifications. .
-h.u cal g pecgg,emgf BASIS Feu det, e-d N .,et-n"L h On- ese t.1re amd I's bc <nosb ds fibckr t,ca.kr k. = .
rkOEM
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necess I 01-5-06-24 ATT*I
- - - -~ ... ._
-N.4.>,g
-- % .* --g., , - - , , , . - -
y a. . - + - . - - . , , , e - _ .m. ..m, - . , ,
l l l GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ' i i l _0,1,,S -0 6 - 24 IRevision 7 l l Attachment I lPage 4 of 4 [ l l I SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- l PART III ENVIRON > ENTAL EVALUATION E NO IMPIDEhTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE: l
/ (a) Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State or local environmental regulations BASIS fie+ revered ,*u n ua et Nu nlvrw - ,
((rh (b) Results in all measurable environmental effects being confined to onsite area previously disturbed during site preparation I and plant construction. BASIS O- 77 wd% e-u(Ie(le oeu'e,- hicck_ 8 i
/ (c) Requires a change in the Environmental Protection Plan.
BASIS tir.+ eeder-m AA F9P _g (d) Concerns a matter which may result in a significant I increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the staff's testimony'to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental impact appraisal, or in any decision of the ASLB. BASIS ed cecer-eri Iu aus h ctkce_ 3 C.) V (e) Concerns a significant change in effluents or power level (in accordance with 10CTRS1.5 (b) (2) ). BASIS (p W unt ef4-Ock Oktu-f e#mlna. t s _ 2 (f) Concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant I adverse environmental impact. I BASIS us H et hn ce aua eSu M u fca us.tkel udnE 0 ts L- / WI M- I k#
/ ?k/3 h l MORIG/ ORIGI R DATE PBEC
- V d DATE h~,b / $ 2ff} b J !
~ PPRDVED A DATE SRC DATE G \
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
01-S-06-24 AIT I
$A $
GG UFSAR , Regulatory Guide 1.56, Rev. 1 (July 1978) Maintenance of Water Purity in Boiling Water Reactors Project Position - Comply, with the following exception:
Reference:
Regulatory Position C.1, para. 2 of the Regulatory Guide. The condensate sampling sy' stem serves no safety function and is not addressed in the plant Technical Specifications; however, a chemical analysis is performed for chlorides, silica, iron, copper, nickel, chrome, turbidity, and others as deemed neces-sary for efficiency and performance checksf The conductivity of the condensate is continuously monitored to provide indi-cations of dissolved impurities, The feedwater is routinely analyzed for turbidity in order to ensure feedwater quality commensurate to that of the reactor coolant. FSAR Subsections - 5.2.3.2.2, 7.7.2.8.2, 10.4.6
^w dont Aji.nistrdNe.
GS r ekssi ncamn, bcedure s aMe dred b Lsed on System l l 1
/)/ff/
f Rev. 0 3A/1.56-1 e ee o e.. - ,,,em ,,
, , _ _ ~
a ADMfNfSTRATfVE PRCCEOCRE GRMD JCI$ NUCLEAR STATION l 01-S-06-24 IRevision 7 l l Attachment I lPage 3 of 4 l I I l
/MTITLE/ SAFEIT ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- PART I /'CatEF/ DOC. EVALUATED FM f cu s3Mf /MDOCN0/ EVALUATION NO.
/MXREF/ RE NCE) Co A eM 3 Y.4 /MSYSN0/ SYSTEM EFFECIED P-n / M2 2.
FW- Wrrsut ostricm DESCRIPTION tre,1 p arp TAMEdra iAiro esem2 ic A e.'t (,w clirr-01 Mc l QA RECORD l
- psA e t l RT -814.33 l l
l NON-QA RECORD l l 1 INITIALS l l lNO. OF PAGES l l IDATE l PART II SAFETY EVALUATION ES NO IMPLEMENIATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE: L (a) Requires a change to the GGNS Technical Specifications. BASIS Ra a %c.tner n ud n e salu<k rmmuuk r, ev ar t ccAhtt:.0 ' b d 1 eckwM O SPct@crt4icnS .
/ (b) Increases the probability of occurrence of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR.
l BASIS O h ,u 4 m n,,A n'u A t ei s mt . v-4r ew u d Ef ct.a j oc.6 6a.u.W d % ceusdw i:1h62 du6 4Medi.v.uaL br[i AMih (c) Increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR. ' BASIS Ch sea. .d.N n.. A n, nk o > nuav AAcC4. u a te b , a'i,-
,,,u3c.5 h(& n e-4o m6a.ht bdeke chansty GW6 t of a different t'ype -
l'
/ (d) Createptfie possibility of an acciden%cdcL ScWahj-gky(' irs"L j than any evaluated in the FSAR l
BASIS PacC centu c_ r 4- C Artec ,wo AmeAl c.WA, me , edeu McT" ) I (e) In a i cc en e ! n equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR. [ BASIS uh u mat- c:Fr: t e r- s cA JMm-- A-Ecme.c re Psexa.m,5 l ] AwD NMSou (T oastA NcT cacw AH c::vd.ue.,r 6mresench CC
} g/ (f) Increases the consequences of a malfunction of equipment 60(iEe%GrmePir.;,
important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR. D' BASIS h Losm o s mMu- monrN Au m tum. et n Arnutk redir
- Oct@ctc W 45dr$ h ui.t b h'cu,dtk o,.(V<,tstdte.t ro.k4cch, Jet.4 @**d'*o t
l ,__, L[ (3) Crdate the possibility of a malfunction on a different type tR FiAC'i . than any evaluated previously in the FSAR. BASIS 'O Oa Cnu in, s, - d -40% an,du eM ad.Inebcat1eg.u,,
- l l 4-Jtc:tcLc:Woii as (Wow (h) SAakkh6DCnrti Reduces the margin oct Y@ safety as defined in the basts for anyf.44 k r.tM 1
l ,_,_ teah nical specifications. BASIS We kem ., - s - O c.r ete. d o c del ark o Neet cuw
- Additional sheets sa t N $[e'cYssary.
I 01-5-06-24 ATT 1 i i
, . - - , - - . , _ _ = - - _ - - . . . , - - . . . - - - - . - - . . . . - .-
ADMINISTRATIVEPRECECURE* GRAND GUIS NCCLEAR STATION . I l 01-5-06-24 IRevision 7 l l Attachment I iPage e of 4 l 1 I
) SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- PART III ENVIRONMEN"I'AL EVALUATION ES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
(a) Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State or local environmental regulations BASIS (vt Onel W <tu ake m eta ac4 eev a,-#X h n um, e-f -[(w i cLLwi Q 'l ( U i / (b) Results in all measurable environmental effects being confined to onsite area previously disturbed during site preparation and plant construction. i J BASIS d1s
--Ru L3-' L q < b N 1v4 m ,te,me f _e h(4w 4-(OML ' / (c) Requires a change in the Environmental Protection Plan.
BASIS nt N- em9 c+ A u 14 < < n0+ C
/ (d) Concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, savironmental impact appraisal, or in any decision of the ASLB.
I BASIS net em!MM as 4tu n LC-t
/ (e) Concerns a significant change in effluents or power level (in l __
accordance
,Mlk ar4- withS10CFRSI.S Le4 n(b) Ca(2) u' )f- Q.L(boun,e <
BASIS I \ . y __,, _ (f) Concerns a satter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact. BASIS . n r4 er,M 4 > A Iu a i u f MNu n owc
/MC .
~
nu f/ CRIGINAhn - i r- a-n DATE
\ N iV/~ HAf b-In-[(b PSRC' l[ DATE
/ lot / f.;2. E _y f DATE SRC DAIT j
AQ0VED l l
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
' l l i 01-5-06-24 ATT I I DGK i
i M. $1 -22 Sec M % 6. l. l jf FSAR UPDATE A n- rs .es3
- ~4 A 6cy'
" " *= 2 (y yfyjg 6 -t 9 .gs-ll cI , e,
- -m. -
'o,30/
. . . _ . N
,o fThe initial total capacity of the new anion and cation deminer-\=
/ {
/ alizer resins used in the condensate demineralizers
- k5 % shall l be t b -
'""""#^~'g
/
% preparej LGaMc fn- testing,1 ' t^
~
e phen 1 j f 4': erple titr: tion ';; tion) er 5::h titretion & ': icn) N # d p^ int- en/ 4ergpze
=*e nd r. lyze _ nd 2.: r**"It-
.za pt pert _
} 2h.T ; e 5ples anassg:d. 0:p::ity is ic ficd ;;;.icrf. lly.-
s
^ ~ f
\g " - ==== = - === w % ,_
( ( U 0 __ {N ' .ma
! At least once per shift the radwaste operator will I read and record each condensate demineralizer inlet At least once per day the e**
radwaste operator will calculate the resin depletion N,, T I and outlet conductivity.
/ that has occurred in each operable condensate demin- 4 %
eralizer during the previous 24 hours by a formula ,,e y that is a function of conductivity change, total \ on sa dem g ra er flo anLa reckopd' Weed . AC or ( o account or laborn Orv ana vsis on rees depletion). At least onceG:;;ry j hy-c%_radwaste s g supervisor will calculate the total resin depletion - _ using the results from above and determine if resin 7 av1 bj q ,4to i / i I l re; n:::n en)is necessary. Figure 2 of Regulatory Guide 1.56, Rev. 1, July 1978, or a similar such
!I figure shall be used to determine quantities of the .
j principal ion (d a fe.1 @ likely to cause demineralizer breakthrough. /
} The accuracy of the alculation of resin capacity is
\ k periodically checked by measurements made on condensate /
l cleanup demineralizer resin samples taken when the ,*
/ g demineralizer units are ramnved fra ervice for
\ cleaning or regeneratiop /qce edd,
.p l
* *- w
~ f? $
l GRAND Jdt.F NUCLEAR STATZON ADMINISTRATIC PRCCE';CRE l 01-S-06-24 l Revision 7 l l l Attachment I lPage 3 of 4 l l l I
/?frITLE/ SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- l 0% 6 PART I /MXREF/ DOC. EVALUATED M NU/ /MDOCN0/ EVALUATION NO.
. l
/MXREF/ REFERENCES Trw G(9 /MSYSN0/ SYSTEM EFFECTED P2Z DESCRIPTION EWt.JA rt not D>HA)
CC ne "r Scs tri u arp r s is cr*nic i- l l0A RECORD l \ M<r,trr4 ;e -->re esx w_saw - rene rs.<j l lRT -814.33 l l
. l lNON-QA RECORD l )
l l INITIALS l l INO. OF PAGES l l lDATE l PART II SAFETY EVALUATION l M NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE: l J _ 2 (a) Requires a change to the GGNS Technical Specifications. BASIS ke r- ev W r'#d bst 4 cob s4#cs e i __ 2 (b) Increases the probability of occurrence of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR. i BASIS NcG1 ,F a Antm.s eta 10 h'el itvts e e stw or_4 he.1ru + - I t/ (c) i$Increas Cws gcbbrQ@ch%cM Pthe n"dquarte.es 'ofdstt,.ggN* an' accident previously %L. co. evaluated
.; A rw e c- pxp'tk in the FSAR.
BASIS K C /,.. t/clo u r e.# O k e e _ttu M n ei o,. % u- A b_ x t ; 3 itc ti miWcwd s,6s ctu4 cths acub cac0 at h A C AA 6 *. tic M ""' _,,, 2 (d) Createsthepossibilityofanacciden)Wsof a different Type " ^ than any evaluated in the FSAR i BASIS Ws c\%r s, besc n t ta n .Lhe_ can .w.dn t mdisrad nr. Ntsin hcw bbc C4d4 \o ed eturcdiewd.LA.b$ ekcupalko'b N s./ (e) Increases the probability of occurence of a malfunction of" # " TCy/ 'f I' equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR. { BASIS toc h 4 m_,.or. < ~1f e.J- AC ct % s k ta d e r en., w +-
/ ef a stice to cdi4 6* scout.44 (f) Increases the consequences of a malfunction of equipment rtant to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR.
BASIS 's
. ebn z ,, / A ~ Listfr d f.ce+ c,rk.,1C &c,.1%u;o4 u cdse,
' Ot twq- teo.mteed cru.wct c<wM 4%utor avd L a ck .
ca,. (3) Create th& possibility of a malfunction on a different type than any evaluated previausly in the FSAR. BASIS 7ftes c h n e se r A <-< L oc k a 4. f'.v e + /Lk eu k . , t u s ih. cf.J tcthr,a V hd idA.fActt Cclottt c-t Cctu.t.t c2 wseb.h.,achtiw (h) Reduces the margin of safety as defined in the basis to any ctq kO I technical specifications. ! BASIS isc h o n u m e\ bo kc)3 s nor s I
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
\
01-S-06-24 ATT'I
. - ~ _ . -
_ _ . _ - . , ,y_ _ _ - . , , . , . -,_,,_,g. 7
- r-GRAND GCLF NUCI2AR STATION ADMINISiRATIVE PROCEC'.'RE l 01-S-06-24 IRevision 7 l l Attachment I lPage 4 of 4 l l l 1 SAFETY ENVIRONMESTAL EVALUATION FORM
- PART III ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATICN E NO IMPLEMESTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
V (a) Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State or local lations BASIS environmental 17 d e m ot u e ref Ai n att c:7kt hi-f - (b) Results in all seasurable avi onsental effe~ts c being confined to onsite area previously disturbed during site preparation and plant construction.
- BASIS /U-2 '2 s ti @ r u It MWnr Annsn/J $/tsh ib'in
/
/ (c) Requires a change,in the Environmental Protection Plan.
BASIS prefn-ver.nf iA) 2$ (d) Concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the staf f's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental or in any decision of the ASLB. 8ASI5 impact l'107appraisal,/ tmM ts ,% nxea e-10; /rA *< (e) Concerns a significant chan/ /ge in effluents or power level (in accordance with 10 1.S . BASIS w i4 ere l(b).jfh (2) ).k A<ft2't'/tr ny (f) Concerns a matter not previous y revi ed and e luated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact. BASI
- ni~ (?u .s m s m r saju Y lw 2atcf ekt's ,,t /
t+1 k40 C ' fis Yl'LL 4// v t/fi j ssute:R
;t
~
AC /
/MCRIG/ ORI IN TOR DATE PSRB ' \g d /I 6 /
APPROVED DATE SRC Q DATE l
\
- Additional sheets any be used and attached as necessary. ;
I l I 01-S-06-24 ATT I dfYlff __m, . - , - . .
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCECCRE GRAND GUIS NUCI2AR STATICM l 01-5-06-24 l Revision 7 l l Attac!unent I (Page 3 of 4 l l l i !
/MTITLE/ SAJETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM *
/MDOCN0/ EVALUATION NO. L PART I /MXREF/ DOC ALUATED OFS A Fl.
WW ( on it. 5.b.8.l ) e S D 'l3/MSYSN0/ SYSTEM EFFECTED Nd
/MXREF/ REFERENCES 1]P DESCRIPTION VFSAR chenee.4..,. cladser -QA RECORD l
#er m.*,darv P,.+,,R o h M . l RT -814.33 l re afn i tc- CAanae m/al/e bl m.*M l NON-OA RECORD l 1esor12o . #na 4.Jdt' d.If b.J NostF6, l
- l l l INITIALS l co 41 e f.*r %a.*rbf a.1/M oment '
l l INO. OF PAGES 'l
. . . e. swa,/n in tf.
lDATE l
' Y F l SAFETY EVALUATION PART II ES NO IMPLEMENIATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
~ [ (a)
BASIS Requires a change to the M ad w'nic,Lrdsbe GGN}S r m,as dascTechnical nof e ec Specifi stic 's. b 4Af T-ech .Sinees. g (b) Increases t/ he probability of occurrence of an accident previous}y evaluated in t,he FJytd0rf not ' Affech 4M env f , 89Jr fil.J N CA BASIS 'f$r ch dens / ' ' f/ / or o ei-n:hbns. Increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated [ (c) 8 ASIS ar ebtf Moh 4kWh M~ R$frenY ' WSM ffJ'U 0 CloWto1W4n Alyf/J .
- g (d) Creates the possfnility of an accident of a different type than any 9ealuated in the FSAR:
t BASIS S s_ (b ) . l' g (e) Increases the probability of occurence of a malfunction of rtant to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR. equi ont g '(f) Increases the consequences of a malfunction of equipment important J gsaf9tz previously evaluated in the FSAR. BASIS 8e e_ tb ) IC 1 _ [ (3) Create the possibility of a malfunction on a different type than any evp1 gated previously in the FSAR. BASIS M e_ ib1 (h) Reduces the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any ions. . tejcicall BASIS Ih a c asao specific .st c nol *Scl N beltJ h A "Tec4 MCf .
- Additional sheets say be used and attached as necessary. }
01-5-06-24 ATT*I
l GRAND GtJLF NUCLEAR STATION ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE j 01-S-06-24 l Revision 7 l l Attachment I lPage 4 of 4 l l l , i SAFETY ENVIRONMEWAL EVALUATION FORM
- l PART III ENVIRON'!EWAL EVALUATION E $ IMPLEME.WATION OR PERFORMAliCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
,,_ [ (a) Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State or local BASIS envicomentallregulationsNach u as nr as ne hl /hv> NAM \
v _ (b) Results in all asasurable environmental effects being confined to onsite area previously disturbed during site preparation and plant construction. BASIS Se [a.) (c) R2 quires a go in the Environment Protectio 1 BASIS S w s no f99 1/ < 5 a .f a e
, u (d) Concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and i
Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental impact apprajsgl, or in any decision of the ASLB. BASIS _C e (a J
' (e) Concerns a significant change in effluents or power level (in accord ce w 2 ).
BASIS m e h 10CFRSI.S
- 4, rvr- r(b)/( er )f e c -
(f) Concerns a matter not pre iously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant adverse envfrqnmental impact. BASIS Gs (a )
~
,A. ,I f, /
o-N A i rArbs
/j!OggG/ ORIGINATOR DA'II fu PSKC /)l i L/l/U % K i h 4 0 4 ()
DATE W / SS i / AP@ DATE ' SRC '" DATE
\
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
t 01-S-06-24 ATT I
ADM!NfSTRATIVE PROCEXRI SRAND GL*LF NUCLEAR STAT'sCN l 01-S-06-24 IRevision 7 l l Attachment I lPage 3 of 4 l 1 l
/MTIT*.E/ SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- PART I /MXREF/ DOC. EV UFSAR t%s eu vthATED(aetion n.o.s.t>/MocCN0/ <t w ,
M/4EVALUATION N
/MXREF/ REFERENCES 1194d 6(R 4(r@MSYSN0/ SYSTEM EFFECTED AW-LS i DESCRIPTION DFSA A chanee_ reflech M=f* Y mamaaament ar. MMan mar l fQA RECORD l
'M .Coes ( & a.J. IlT MnJe c.ac.W4 r 'au/ ll lRT -B14.33 l I
dka4 f..+ J.<,'a , L. mans Arfe rev fNON-QA RECORD l L, a bc Sena,M #fanmVer and Andden l lINITIALS l i Efec.h' . #1mnaame- /Mk.% c a Ass l lNO. OF PAGES l
' fDATE I w /A Aca . . LiW @. al . l PART II SAFETY EVALUATION g NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
~g (a) Requires a change to the pGNS Technical SpecificatAons.
BASIS UfSM chan e<. reflects T4'ch
- Gee*oranen'tAfo'en ' no *Ntr T4th G ss %re eMec-fed.
(b) Increas the probability of occurrence of an accident previousl BASIS Gm. ae.y Er aevaluated2.an**d1+rn&ve ip thecus FSAR.lv and Ots noY d$ech /nnh f t previously evaluated _ / (c) I s t$a on once of i in the FSAR BASIS ~1h LAnnas Et *lnn'nESNk onlV AN & M* bcf or 4l !" any Vfshit'/fSMA sesNed a*wipft.
~
(d) CIeates the possibility of an accident of a different type j than ye 1 ated in the FSAR .
' I f
i _ I (e) Increases the probability of occurence of a malfunction of equ t rtant to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR. l l l l _ / (f) Increases the consequences of a malfunction of equipment safe previously evaluated in the FSAR. BASIS importanttpM 8e c ( e s g (g) Create the possibility of a malfunction on a different type than any epgluated previously in the FSAR. I BASIS Me Ill g (h) Reduces the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any l i l BASIS technical,
'7% d cMaspecif st cationsseJ nef M Ma 84Jsh_O anV 74'd hk .
/ '
%/
- Additional sheets say be used and attached as necessary. l l
01-S-06-24 ATT'I l l l l
GRAND GUIJ NUCLEAR STATION ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEOURE . l_01-S-06-24 IRevision 7 l l Attachment I (Page e of 4 l l l 1 i SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- l PART III ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION YES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF TE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
_ [ (a) Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State or local en,v4roamenta) regulations
)
BASIS CA nn a e. Aes no e S k on Ne RMNnenf. v p (b) Results in all seasurable environmental effects being confined [ [ TAI /d6 to onsite area previously disturbed during site preparation and p J BASIS etce1ruction.A6 EPP sehbnr e / Geled . g (c) Requires a chapge in the Environmental Protection P1pa. f Ere (a) - No EPP see k t o+ fee-k d
~
BASIS g (d) Concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as j modified by the staff's testimony to the atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental impac3epraisa(,orinanydecisionoftheASLB. 1 BASIS / e et ) )
/ (e) Concerns a significant change in effluents or power level (in l accordance withg 10CFRS1.S (b) (2) ). are el key )
BASIS ((~o r n n o T,v eko,e t-(f) Concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in l documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant l adversy enviroquental impact. BASIS f Ge A) Je i t I a 4 & A i l A c/sc H I L /l f i(kl0 h, M / ORIG 1NATOR DATE PSI,C' ' V /~ FM DATE s24' /Sf2kl "
) l QVED DATE ' SRC DATE \
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
I I 01-5-06-24 ATT I 4
; . GRAND GUIJ NUCLEAR STATION ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEXRE l 01-S-06-24 IRevision 7 l l Actachment I lPage 3 of 4 l l l
/wrITI.E/ SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVAI,UATION FORM
- I PART I LgRET/ DOC. EVALUATED 7Efay A/f /MDOCN0/ EVALUATION NO. /8 L / $ -
#: E'-cazz.
/MXREF/ REFERENCES Dct 84/co45 /MSYSN0/ SYSTEM ETTECTED V'I O e/ 4 $/t W MDENIPTION~)
I <Ar4. m 4e e -~. fai w,1W R//m . m A AL.Jc E ,14 hrs.. //,k #l ca aEC0a0 l l tr -814.33 l _ Wall ~ .4. r-.M w.% f.M4 .rned , l NON-QA RECORD l 4.12. , 2. 68 A a& ra n A la. #Ades h INITIALS l r.=rfvur #en "rJmo.re fu 14arv /Fg , ljl NO. OF PAGES l
/ ads % Waa. Aru r . '
a l DATE l l PART II SATETY EVALUATION l
. YES NO IMPII. MENTATION OR PERTORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
' ~ [ (a)' Re uires a change tg the GGNS Technical, ecifi tions.
BASIS o k)$ At m l;oonslieur d!I Ye WJ $*lA* S
- no le#sr pr.ech JF (b). Increases the.probabil yo are occurrence of an accident a H eefed.!
BASIS ' al 6 l J 9 k h 9rs 0l0n hJlff $ * !" , j ? Ont{ fihW dCill01Y'*1 9 iS _ _. (c)(/I %lL' crease thensequences co& /)Cf &Cf.9f'" of an accident qlltfprov usly evaluated , 1$a 2bkkn 0l h /nY s3 g Mrfoneh.SA , 8ASSI (df Cre'ates Me. the owepossM* /4 ity of an accident of a different type 6ehk # lh _ [ than any g alupted in the TSAR: BASIS & fh l , -- (C) I I g (e) Increases the probability of occurence of a salfunction of l equ e to safety previously evaluated in the TSAR. g '(f) Increases the consequences of e malfunction o'f equipment as ty previously evaluated in the TSAR.
.,_, [ (3) Create the possibility of a malfunction on a different type t an al ed previously in the TSAR.
(b) Reduces the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any 1
,-S 2'sze."rm s.- +~.+ si .,
seis e ev ras .saacs. A &
- Additional sheets may be used and attdched as nece6sary.
1 01-5-06-24 ATT'I
- - - my----.mww-*ry - - . - ' - - - - - - - - - - r -- .,- ---- - y-. , . , ,.,, ,-
GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE l 01-S-06-24 1 Revision 7 l l Attachment 1 lPage 4 of 4 l l l
) SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- PART III ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION g No IMPLEMEVTATION OR PERFORMANC'd 0F THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
_g (a) Is required to achieve' compliance with Federal, State or local environmental rep l1ptipna ff j EASIS TZ1 *Teme R/t- A d1 Me fYtt&/ *4 Yd-FAVNoe % "
,y/ / .
(b) Results in all measurable environmental effects being confined to onsite area previously disturbed during site preparation and plant congtruction. BASIS mGs [a 1 .
~
(c) Requires a hange'in the Envir antal Protection P an. BASIS . Or_ - nn 6~ff r auf rf ev/n 4 y _I (d) Concerna a matter which may result in a si increase in any adverse environmental impact previously ficant evaluated in the Final Environmental statement (FES) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental imp pra , or in any decision of the ASLB. _[ (e) Concerns a significant change in effluents or power level (in Se fin ) ~u(th BASIS accordance ' Ar 10CFRS1.5 svi h%r1 c()) (2) ). h
/ /
V W klh*
/
_[ (f) Concerns s'satter not previously r' viewed e and evaluated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant adv a environmental impact.' BASIS e [N I . ./ , , Yf
/ ORI I l9l "' $Y $
PSRC' ' ' ' IbNbf APPRdVED ~ g u ATOR
, DMT/ ~ '
id/tohd DATE SEC i DATE DATE s .: -
\
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
S 01-S-06-24 ATI I hh
GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION UNIT ONE ,
. CHANGES, TESTS OR EXPERIMENTS SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM Originator J. D. Barlow /R&ES
Description:
ODCM, Rev. 8 is necessary to Document Evaluated ODCM, Rev. 8 address changes requested by the NHC in References RETS, 3/4.11 correspondence dated April 2, 1986 MAEC-86/0094 (MAEC-86/0094). Attachments N/A I. SAFETY EVALUATION [ ] Not Applicable TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS 1 A. [ ] YES [X] NO 1. Implementation or performance of the action described in the evaluated require a change to the GGNS Unit One Technical Specifications. Basis: Changes to the ODCM do not require a change to the CGNS Technical Specifications. The ODCM is referenced by the GGNS Technical Specification with changes to the ODCM controlled by Technical Specification 6.14.2. 4 UNREVIEWED SAFETY QUESTION B. Implementation or performance of the action described in the evaluated document will: [ ] YES [X] NO 1. increase the probability of occurrence of an accident previously evaluated in - the FSAR. Basis: The method of dose calculation is consistent with previous revisions of the ODCM. Consequently, the possibility and probability of an accident remains unchanged. [ ] YES [X] NO 2. increase-the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: Same as 1 above. GRAND GULF, UNIT 1 Rev. 8 - 08/86 J36PMI86052201 - 18
[ ] YES [X] NO 3. increase the probability of a malfunction of equipment important to safety .
. previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: The changes made in the ODCH, Revision 8, reflect the installation of equipment in the Turbine Building Ventilation System. This equipment installation decreases the probability and consequences of a malfunction or accident because it improves the effluent air quality.
[ ] YES [XI NO 4. increase the consequences of a malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: Same as 3 above. [ ] YES [X] NO 5. create the possibility of an accident of a different type than any already evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: Same as 1 above. [ ] YES [X] NO 6. create the possibility of a malfunction of equipment important to safety different than previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: Same as 3 above. [ ] YES [X] NO 7. reduce the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any technical spec-ifications. Basis: Bases for the technical specifications are unaf fected by. this change. II. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION [] Not Applicable , ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN A. [ ] YES [X] NO 1. will require a change in the Environmental Protection Plan. Basis: Offsite dose calculations are not within the scope of the EPP. B. UNREVIEWED ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION [ ] YES [X] NO 1. concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse . environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the NRC staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental impact ap-praisal, or in any decisions of the ASLB. Basis: Calculations comply with Regulatory Guide 1.109 and CGNS RETS 3/4.11. Therefore there can be no significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the FES. GRAND GULF, UNIT 1 Rev. 8 - 08/86 J36PMI86052201 - 19
~
[ ] YES [X] NO 2. concerns a significant change in effluents or power level (in accordance with , 10CFR51.5(b)(2)). Basis: The same ef fluent limits are imposed by ODCM, Revision 8, as in previous revisions. Therefore a significant change in ef fluents or power level can not occur. [ ] YES [X] NO 3. concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in B.1. above, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact. Basis: Public radiation exposure, including direct radiation and radioactive effluent releases, was revipwed and evaluated in Section 5.9.1.1.2 of the f FES. In , n h 8-v Y- K Eva fuatEb'y/Date/ Reviewed / Approved: k QCco m 8-II- 3 (o Supervisor /Dag Reviewed / Approved: V AUG 121986 Manager /Date . PLANT SAFETY REVIEW COMMITTEE REVIEW Reviewed / Approved: . /
/Cliairman, PSRWDat'e V V d[
NUCLEAR SAFETY AND COMPLIANCE REVIEW Reviewed: Reviewed / Approved: Reviewing Engineer /Date Manager, Nuclear Safety and Compliance /Date RADIOLOGICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES REVIEW R. viewed: b Y 'N Reviewed / Approved: h h). !so.s.n Reviewed / Approved: 07N Reviewing // Superv$for, / Manager,Radioygical& Engineer /Date Environmental Environmental Services /Date Services /Date GRAND GULF, UNIT 1
~
Rev. 8 - 08/86 J36PMI86052201 - 20
'l GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION UNIT ONE .
CHANGES, TESTS OR EXPERIMENTS
. SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM Originator J. D. Barlow /R&ES
Description:
ODCM, Rev. 9 is necessary to Document Evaluated ODCM, Rev. 9 . allow the use of Plant Service Water or References , Technical Specifications ,_ Circulating Water as the source of dilution 3/4.3.7.11 & 3/4.11 water for liquid radwaste discharges. Attachments _ N/A I. SAFETY EVALUATION [ ] Not Applicable
~
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS A. [ ] YES [X] NO 1. Implementation or performance of the action described in the evaluated require a change to the GGNS Unit One Technical Specifications. Basis: Changes to the ODCM e do not require a change to the GGNS Technical Specifications. The ODCM is referenced by the GGNS Technical Specification with changes to the ODCM/ controlled by Technical Specificat(bn 6.14.2. UNREVIEWED SAFETY QUESTION B. Implementation or performance of the action described in the evaluated document will: [ ] YES [X] NO / 1. increase the probability of occurrence of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: The method of dose calculation is consistent with previous revisions of the ODCM. Consequently, the possibility and probability of an accident remains unchanged.
.' [ ] YES [X] NO 2. increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR.
Basis: Same as 1 above. GRAND GULF, UNIT 1 /
l [ ] YES [X] NO 3. increase the probability of a malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: Radioactive liquid effluent s - . s , , monitoring instrumentation will be maintained as required by Technical
~
~] Specification 3/4.3.7.11. As a result, the probability and consequencies of a malfunction of equipment important.to safety are not increased.
~
i [ ] YES [X] NO 4. increase the consequences of a malfunction of equipment important to safety / previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: Seme as_3 above. , [ ] YES [X] NO 5. create the possibility of an accident of a differe type than any already evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: Same as 1 above. [ ] YES [X] NO 6. create the possibility of a malfunction of equipment important to safety different than previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: Same as 3 above. [ ] YES [X] NO 7. reduce the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any technical spec . ifications. Basis: Bases for the technical specifications are unaffected by this change. II. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION [] Not Applicable , c ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN A. [ ] YES [X] NO 1. will require a change in the Environmental Protection Plan. Basis: Offsite dose calculations are not within the scope of the EPP. B. UNREVIEWED ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION [ ] YES [X] NO 1. concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the NRC staff's test.imony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental impact ap-praisal, or in any decisions of the ASLB. Basis: Calculations comply with Regulatory Guide 1.109 and GGNS RETS 3/4.11. Therefore there can be no significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the FES. GRAND GULF, UNIT 1 J200DCM86081902 Rev. 9 - 08/86
4 0 [ ] YES [X] NO 2. concerns a significant change in effluents or power level (in accordance with - 10CFR51.5(b)(2)). Basis: The same effluent limits are imposed.Jy ODCM. Revision 9, as in previous revisions. Therefore a significantschange in effluents or power level can not occur. [ ] YES [X] NO 3. concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in B.1. above, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact. Basis: Public radiation exposure, including direct radiation and radioactive effluent releases, was revj.ewed and evaluated in Section 5.9.1.1.2 of the FES. [ TA aTifatefby/Date/ dh4-6Y Reviewed / Approved: . h C,kt , g /g .1 1 - I'4, ' Supervisor /Dkle Reviewed / Approved: M EIE PLANT SAFETY REVIEW COMMITTEE REVIEW (q) % Reviewed / Approved: / *- - Cha'i'rman', PSRWDit(g/"
..__________ ...____ .....___...._____ ........_________ ._________.........___________ A ' " _ ...________....____
NUCLEAR SAFETY AND COMPLIANCE REVIEW R: viewed: Reviewed / Approved: Reviewing Engineer /Date Manager, Nuclear Safety and Compliance /Date RADIOLOGICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES REVIEW R: viewed: [i' b # $ Reviewed / Approved: thf/d+% Reviewed / Approved: Reviewing g// Supervis6r, 1 Manag'er, Radiologicaf & ' Engineer /Date Environmental Environmental Servi &s/Date Services /Date GRAND GULF, UNIT 1 J200DCH86081902 Rev. 9 - 08/86
__ _ _ _ . _ _ - . . . _ _ _ __ _ __ __ ..m m_ _ . _ ... _ ___ _ .
- i. ,
I NLS-SE-86-0038 i GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION UNIT ONE j CHANGES, TESTS OR EXPERIMENTS 1 ' SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM i Originator C. C. Krupa/R&ES Description GGNS PCP,' Revision 2 has: Document Evaluated PCP, Rev. 2 been drafted in response to MAEC-86/0101. ; ! References MAEC-86/0101 There have been no changes to the radioactive waste processing methods.
- Attachments GGNS PCP, Rev. 2 This revision is to clarify and
- . Attachment I accurately describe processing procedures
- Explanation of Changes and methods in use at GGNS.
in Rev. 2 of GGNS PCP I. SAFETY EVALUATION [] Not Applicable 4 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS . i A. [ ] YES LXJ NO 1. . Implementation or performance of the action described in the evaluated ! will require a change to the GGNS Unit One Technical Specifications, ! . Basis: Changes to the PCP do not require a chance to the GGNS-Technical Specifications. The PCP is referencec by the GGNS Technical i Specification with changes to the PCP controlled by Technical
- Specification 6.13.2.
i- UNREVIEWED SAFETY QUESTION B. Implementation or performance of the action described in the evaluated i document will: ) [ ] YES [X] NO 1. increase the probability'of. occurrence of an accident previously
~
evaluated in the FSAR. . Basis: The methods of processing radioactive waste are consistent with previous revisions of the PCP. The probability of an 3 accident remains unchanged. I- [ ] YES [X] NO 2. increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in 4 the FSAR. j Basis: The UFSAR/FSAR accidents' analyzed in Chapter 15 are not. 1 affected by this PCP revision. 4- [ ] YES [X]N0 3. increase the probability of a malfunction of equipment important
'to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR.
Basis: The Mobile Solidification Station is described in'Section I 11.4.2.2.1 of the UFSAR. The probability of a malfunction of equipment important to safety has not increased. The PCP 4 revision includes administrative changes only; no important safety equipment is affected by these changes. J20 MISC 86100201
4 [ ] YES [X] N0 4. increase the consequences of a malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: The consequences of a malfunction of important safety equipment are not affected by these changes. [ ] YES [X ] N0 5. create the possibility of an accident of a different type than any already evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: Same as B.3 above. [ ] YES [X] N0 6. create the possibility of a malfunction of equipment important to safety different than previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: Same as B.3 above. [ ] YES [X] N0 7. reduce the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any technical specifications. Basis: Basis for the technical specifications are unaffected by this revision. II. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION [] Not Applicable ENVIRONMENfAL PROTECTION PLAN A. [ ] YES LXJ N0 1. will require a change in the Environmental Protection Plan. Basis: The Process Control Program is not within the scope of the EPP. B. UNREVIEWED ENVIR0 MENTAL QUESTION [ ] YES [X] N0 1. concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the NRC staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental impact appraisal, or in any decisions of the ASLB. Basis: The Process Control Program, Revision 2 is consistent with the management system described in Section 4.2.5 of the FES. Consequently, there will be no adverse environmental impact. [ ] YES [X] NO 2. concerns a significant change in effluents or power level Basis: Effluent characteristic will remain as previously evaluated in the FES. No change in power level or volume of Radwaste shipped offsite will occur as as result of this revision. J20 MISC 86100201
[ ] YES [X] N0 3. concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in B.1. above, which may have a signi-ficant adverse environmental impact. Basis: The GGNS Radioactive Waste Management System was evaluated in Section 4.2.5 of the FES. 0 0_ OJs_.N - l /O/r'/ /g 6 ~ Evaluated by/Date Reviewed / Approved: .88fy / /o//d(, 3up rvisor/Da
/0 Reviewed / Approved: Id Manager /Date
(/ ________________________________________________________________L_____ _____ ______________________ PLANT SAFETY REVIEW COMMITTEE REVIEW Reviewed / Approved: ,' ///27/[,__/w.. /[?-/5 g
. Ch6irdian, PSRC/Date NUCLEAR SAFETY AND COMPLIANCE REVIEW Reviewed: Reviewed / Approved:
Reviewing Engineer /Date Manager, Nuclear Safety and Compliance /Date RADIOLOGJ4LA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES REVIEW OCT 211986 Reviewe -
./ .nwReviewed/Approvedd[/1 f41ch,.m-u-s6 C Reviewed / Approved:
' viewing gbpervisor, Manager, Radiological & (/
Engineer /Date Environmental Environmental Services /Date Services /Date i i J20 MISC 86100201
.. .- .-. , - -.--- _ - - . - - ~_ - - __ . - - - - - ~ _ - -.. - - - . - .-- -
"* -~
.7 GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION UNIT ONE '
CHANGES, TESTS OR EXPERIMENTS SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM 4 Originator' J. D. Barlow /R&ES
Description:
ODCM, Rev. 10 is necessary to Document Evaluated ODCM, Rev. 10 address administrative changes in the ODCM
' References RETS, 3/4.11 1985 Land Use Census .as a result of the 1986 Land Use Census, SP-R-10 1986 Land Use Census correct administrative and typographical Attachments N/A errors, and modify the direct radiation dose -
' calculation methodology. 3' I. SAFETY EVALUATION [ ] Not Applicable TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
- - A. [ ] YES [X]N0 1. Implementation or performance of the action described in the evaluated require a l
change to the GGNS Unit One Technical Specifications. Basis:' Changes to the ODCM ;
- do not require a change to the GGNS Technical Specifications. The ODCM is i referenced by the GGNS Technical Specification with changes to the 00CM controlled by-Technical Specification 6.14.2.
' ~ UNREVIEWED SAFETY QUESTION f B. Implementation or performance of the action described in 'the evaluated document will:
- []YES [X]NO -1. increase the probability of occurrence of an accident previously evaluated in -
the FSAR. Basis: The method of dose calculation is consistent with previous - revisions of the ODCM.- Consequently, the possibility and probability of an accident remains unchanged. ' [ ] YES [X]NO 2. increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR. , Basis: Same as 1 above. , [ ] YES .[X] NO 3. increase the probability of a malfunction of equipment important to safety i previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: The changes made in the ODCM, Revision 10, do not' address equipment operation. 4
'J20 MISC 86093003 - 1 l
[]YES [X]N0 4. increase the consequences of a malfunction of equipment important' to safety ! previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: Same as 3 above. [ ] YES [X] N0 5. create the possibility of an accident of a different type than any already
-evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: Same as 1 above.
[ ] YES [X]N0 6. create the possibility of a malfunction of equipment important to safety 1 different than previously evaluated in the FSAR. Basis: ~Same as 3 above. [ ] YES [X]NO 7. reduce the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any technical spec - ifications. Basis: Bases for the technical specifications are unaffected by this change. i II. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION [] Not Applicable ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN , t
- A. [ ] YES [X] NO 1. will require a change in the Environmental Protection Plan. Basis: Offsite dose calculations are not within the scope of the EPP.
l. 4 i B. UNREVIEWED ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION [ ] YES [X]N0 1. concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse
- environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the NRC staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental impact ap-j praisai, or in any decisions of the ASLB. Basis
- Calculations comply with Regulatory Guide 1.109 and GGNS RETS 3/4.11. Therefore there can be no significant . increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated .
1 in the FES. [ ] YES [X]N0 2. . concerns a significant change in effluents or power level. i Basis: The same effluent limits are imposed by ODCM, Revision 10, as in i previous revisions. Therefore a significant change in effluents or power level can not occur. l i J20 MISC 86093003 - 2 .
[ ] YES [X]N0 3. concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in B.l. above, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact. Basis: Public radiation exposure, including direct radiation and radioactive effluent releases, was reviewed and evaluated in Section 5.9.1.1.2 of the FES. ( l p /
/ // 2F-JPf aTUhted by/Date[
Reviewed / Approved: 171k Supervisor /D 4CIAsh !/ A- /- 8% Reviewed / Approved: Mk,/ DEC 0 01986 Manager /Date // __-____-__-______________---_-____--____-____---_____-______--_--___________--M___---__-__-__-__--___-------------- PLANT SAFETY REVIEW COMMITTEE REVIEW j Reviewed / Approved: hhq Il
/ Chairman,PSRC/Date
\
# [
~
IMod
/
__-_-____-_--_-_-___----___--____-__----_____-_--__----_---_________----______--_-___Q--_---__--_------_-_----__-__ NUCLEAR SAFETY AND COMPLIANCE REVIEW Reviewed: Reviewed / Approved: Reviewing Engineer /Date Manager, Nuclear Safety and Compliance /Date RADIOLOGICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES REVIEW Reviewed: NI0 9' 657 Reviewed / Approved: (la., k s-yr7 Reviewed / Approved: b Reviewing '
/ Manager, Radiprogical &
Supervist(r{ EnvironmeMa l Environmentalyiervices/Date Engineer /Date Services /Date [ J20 MISC 86093003 - 3
3
,-,AND GUI.F SUC*. EAR STATIDN AD.!!N:3 Rn;';I ,:gc;;;,33 l 01-S-06-26 (Revisten 7 l l Attachment I l Pass 3 of 4 l I I V EVAI,UATION FORM
- I
/MTITLE/ SAFETY ENVIRONME.TAL
/MDOCN0/ EVAI,UATION NO. / ///f'(,
PART I /MXREF/ DOC. EVALUATED W A M F/ REFERENCES Mwo (4 NSN$$YSN0/ / SYSTEM EFFECTED t.A.10
-~~ DCR $6(09i Cu,,M. A 4 d.J,h DESCRIFTION Tf'Ava eLY Aass a tu c fit -
TCAAs/ Aur i './ w ( aso.,ew su d3 ' l %E ', CORD l lt/Mewc A .(d - u re ' rn, f374 f/ sq l t"- ilk 33 l Tu ca t v ,du 7E< u IAC t lE.1& . A a mA M $JN-tm1 ACORD l ru tmAt 'ess.amn .w>
- eh d4., sf naa/ l INIT L ,
l
- st a na .ww aten s l lU . U RIES l l DATE l FART II SAFITT EVALUATI0tt IMPLEMENIATION OR PERF0EMANCE Oy TEE ACTIVITT DESCRIBED ABOYE:
Ud N0 1 (a) Requires a change to tha GGNS Technical Specifications. BASIS 1&ckrn>/ kawn af twcM tac rs2.b 2.n crea Ked JhtE; d A C 4 M 4'c 7JI4 ' _,,,, 1 (b) Increases the probability of occurrence of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR. BASIS TSL Aaso+ sal e{ rn.s ad aks 4,e f/McT as/ nL.c wsrt%t g E4vipnt,ar nst gets serr AFMey n, AtrsA. os.y etna atssaw.er,nt.yst3 _ 1 (c) Increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated
- FS BASISinthgh.AR.TNe Mft Aeso4wu of foot n a sne 4_ snAt& ffAM) Y5 SWsCL4,44 gewucugs #7Wi, wa u, ,* ^Jt' At4T(144
_ 1 (d) Creates the possibility of an accident of a different type l BASIS thananbevaluatedintheFSAR: se r (ch l i 1 (e) Increases the probability of occurence of a malfunction of i rtant to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR. equi BASIS X A., [ C. 1 _,,,,,, 1 (f) Increases the consequences of a malfunction of equipment safety previously evaluated in the FSAR. importyg: BASIS 3C4t#J C.
,,,,,,. 1 (s) Create the possibility of a malfunction on a different type BASIS than 3CL any(B) (c.T evaluated previously in the FSAR.
,,_, 1. (h) Reduces the margia of safety as defined in the basis for any technical specifications.
BASIS 11R emf ((T af tws Amst. Assf AJr- 4A'AffT" di A s 4,,,,,,
- Additional sheets may 9M%. be used 4Atsi and Grattiahed
&/ TEI'W $*'LJ as necessary.
01-5-06-24 ATT'I - e. 6
--,e--,-,---,,-,,g e ,,,m e ----wne--,----m-- e ~-w~r-, ----e ~ . . - - - , , , e ---w --,-na --.--- e v - - - - - * ~ - - - - - - - - -
i GRAND GULF NCCI. EAR STATION ADMINIS R.CIE PRCCE URI l 01-S-06-24 IRevision 7 l l Attachment I lPage 4 of 4 l l l
) /// SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- PART III ENVIRONMEh"fAL EVALUATION g,1 $ IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
_1 (a)~ is required tt achieve compliance with Federal, State or local environmental regulations -
- SASIS TDL Tfm Att lins um E/dWet ov 14. twJews..h-U 1_ (b) Results in all measurable environmental effects being confined to easite area previously disturbed daring site preparation and plant construction.
BASIS tri ( Ah 1 _ g (c) BASIS Requires TfL Mavc change I.P i@s C 4the Environmental wa.1 hei m/ha Protection Plan. e
'_1 (d) Concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse enviremmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Envireemental Statement (FES) as modified by the staff's testissay to the Atomic Safety and
, Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental
' impact '
BASIS St (A\ appraisal, or in any decision of the ASLB. -
- _ $ (e) Concerns a significant change in effluents or power level (in accordapce with 10CFRS1.5 (b) (2) ).
BASIS rre (A\ wths utN(ru A/ beill"~ f l _ 1 (f) Concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant advers3 environmental impact. S S SMlAh aa in . . k h a>> & 17b Y D43 TSRC' ' " V'
/
DATE
/MORIG/ ORIGINATOR
- I b I DA17.
muve.D D&TR' - SEC
)
- Additional sheets any be used and attached as necessary.
4 l 01-5-04-24 ATT I ,, o }
l l GRAND GUIS NUCLEAR STATION AD2iINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE l l 01-S-06-24 IRevision 8 l l l Attachment I lPage 3 of 4 l l l
/MTITLE/ SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM * .
4 PART I /MXREF/ . DOC. EVALUATED W797 /MDOCN0/ EVALUATION NO. b 1.V.V il. REFERENCES @,h_u G,n% 3.r.4 /. t. //M8YSN0/ SYSTEM EFFECTED U/0 8
/MXREF/ . Requires a change to the FSAR _ If Yes, C/R No.
DESCRIPTION aF "Tl4fds4 AMr. fy LM A/4LL. W MAKE l QA RECORD l Os u_a n Ars&S > = "A & l RT =B16.33 l t NON-QA RECORD l ^
"ll INITIALS l f l NO. OF PAGES l l DATE l PART II SAFETY EVALUATION YES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
(a) Requires a ch e e GGNS Technical Specifications. .' BASIS 42 e
'(b) Increases the probability of occurrence of an accident . ._
previouslyevagtepigtheFSAR. Go BASIS ~ %. r a
! (c) Increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated BASIS , =
(d) Creates the possibility of an accident of a different type BASIS -s (e) Increases the probability of occurence of a malfunction of
- equipmentimportaptto afety previously evaluated in the TSAR.
BASIS C. m J .__= l i (f) Increases the consequences of a malfunction of equipment important to na stygpreviously evaluated in the FSAR. BASIS <_ # 1 (gI'* Create the possibility f a malfunction on a different type
- than any evalu d r osisly in the FSAR.
BASIS <.u _ (h) Reduces the margin of safety as' defined in the basis for any BASIS > b .i . a , G/ ORIGINATOR
/ ds DATE PSRC ~W 54.d
/
DITE h
- /hih *
/
$ PROVED DATE SRC DATE f
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
01-5-06-24 ATT I -
//yW (a.) Pe.wu \ of M u ,s.,. y n 1. - ia a at ~ .-i-cm h 4. u.s.-( h b <.~l s.c.4..J-.-3 p . N,~ . , ,., ,
c' t. ' ' * * - =' :h O ' 5 6S . ..-f, . =4,. u'- - >P '-v i.> I- y* a. 5 L. G 5. .
/ ** L_ l Q 40 T4.4 -. J.- p t'.. wc4i. ,
(k) k+ M s W A= _ s Jn , s. v. f i . a.. t T ,. s . L .17 ,s 4 -n c.c.,qs,A r b+L_ ,. _. . i V; J'., s.11. .r., , teeo4 e4 -M I.- w
- f<l -.-4 '
-u.--
aeensa sr I;le llL. ,( ..( ns ssI s us s ,3 <r .- l ; g'
, or r.. a m, y s, ~ 4 . ,
- u :
, 'L s , a z= L u.J/ suss eas +l + 1ca. e n .c.c s .. & .- ~ ( :
3
+<es 44 + -n. + ,-4. va ~ s , td. y a -4rf .fr.- : .sA:, . .:+i g s - 1( + ra.x, s. - 4. as,- .SY. :
t ' s sae~4.. >s k .t.l. 4 ~ ~ o + s..l.<. - l os , JL & L -+ h. n <
-E .sla,C4i -
i
.+kas,n -k q an.$ A Jes,3- , -
t B.,, /4 y I w .Jna< , s w<es u~ o ,r. s . . (N<, y .
- Lab.,s ~(- Messa s U, n d 4. s-JL L P m ss , n .
Bece,s< % -< e . .g- -s .o., e./)n Acc.ro s<.y +h. Sac., .y p w- , , - a, r. , .
+a 2. o i. . - -<c 0,) kS & .s 0 ) $s-e.4,.,.
-/-{ <
' . r - p L +
-/ve {>. $.laf. y as n a.<c
.,., n JaL.'~..J 1
. g =. s,~
.C, <.:A,
- C&4.- .4 46_. T. ,4. _
w d t' .a, - SL,.u.~x". -96. 4.sv ::,In6 e . 4&. . E./ M ..y
! pr. -
ve,s4 (\ *n .g e , s g 4 ,~ se.#.<ss s sGQ. r< U3 O d < , a-* se 9 -. FSA#1 't.4.$4.1 I O M' 1^## () l a.,(,,. ta.# mu j a
. ~.. . .
(e.) 1.4 Jne. .J
=k..,~ 4 Jt 'T -6. ~ 8s . /J. y e e 4.- <
. , , . a.s % 1 . y -0. 4 ~ ,,r- 9<_LA br r,~., A .rf 44. O l. < l.( , 4 . f. - - ~.
-c c .JL. p., LL. I , y .-f q - .g M --c.-6.-.-
16 C /'* % -- t . .a
- am
') k- l of W D l.- ~ 4 - .,
%7 a . g ,.. t - a., y e t % , a. J- ~y c.g. , A.
s a.nx + ensy-. q s.(, a -b L <<-e. . A s2.y ea W \ l L
@ u -w +5yn .-e- (.-t. +, J y .y -. a e - n ,4 . ,
. n< u < a 3 - u.g < ~ ~ A .-E + n t. - -x < . m , ( f $ ^ m-* 4*~ *-~L e *W I Yo &fv. A e s $ + Sn sae+g nc 5. .s -,,-.ht. a- sL , 44 ., A Tc. L c .cz p ,,
'_]. te ,
e A $, - A n - ms < .. ./4 4 ~ j, i i I
..s l 1
I
?
I I 1 t, i B I
GRAND GUI.F NUCLEAR STAT 10N ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE l 01-S-06-24 Revisico 8 l l Attachment I Page 4 of 4 l I l
//2((g SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- PART III ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION e
_YES, N0 IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED AB0VE:
~
(a) Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State or local environmental regulations l SASIS r w gj,s,yg,a -fk_ BL en J w.,e. W h.m' w eJ erk m'[diee-myg Elk -rn,/ A4&__]ldY' n -re N.
~~-
X b)* nisults in 111 seas {krable environmental offacts \onfined I
'A .to onsite area pesviously disturbed during site preparation Nj and plant construction. ,
BASIS A --- ' .14t __e t Jae - L. unah., m _ u v_0 m = % % 3, % l 'l p @ w:wwwa.ma==*=~w.= wa - s44am w% e . \ i
~[ (c Requires a change in the Environmental Protection Plan.
SASIS -rL mraw-_- & J LF Lwik bAM a M L/4 ~ /,.3 & FAP (d) Concerns a matter which may result in a significant , increase in any adverse eavironmental impact previously
; evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified'by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and , Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental. .,
l
! impact appraisal, or in any decision of the ASLB.
- l l BASIS J a.- h B 4&o.,c
/ (e) Concerns a significant change in affluents or power level.
SASIS -1L; ekkeb /w .n /- JJ r A- o llA4 Sshec h A $nc of po w , v- sv _ ,,1, . (f) Conteras a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact. BASIS TL., , L_e_- Aeo mk 2 AJ ' s a i m a ; e a o.r b
%o Lw ~*i na
/MORIG! ORIGINATOR DATE N 'W F5RQ lAlJAF i 8g-g, 'V DATE
. k t/Y / / b'I(*N DATE SRC
/
DATE
] /yPROVED 4
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
I i i . j I. I 01 5 06-24 ATT I ) i
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE G"AND GULF NUCLEAR STATION l 01-S-06-24 l Revision 8 l l Attachment I lPage 3 of 4 l j l 1 l
/PrTITLE/ SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM * ]
PART I /MXREF/ DOC. EVALUATED D 2AM A- /MDOCN0/ EVALUATION NO. /1M/4 l
/MXREF/ REFERENCES htL t.2.l.L /MSYSN0/ SYSTEtt EFFECTED N yr/
d
* )
92.4 Requires a change to the FSAR _ _ If Yes, C/R No. DESCRIPJION Eto.sla/, M Au>e/,J d a/ f0 /ww Snosud7 J/, ,e m. ',.4 l QA RECORD l j D* , a e l RT -814.33 l 1 [Teka.an' L"_:JM.o a M- C C L1J .. l NON-QA RECORD l ; l INITIALS l l .NO. OF PAGES l l lDATE l PART II SAFETY EVALUATION YES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE: .
~
g (a) Requires a change to the GGNS Technical Specifications.
,4 *L n. g .C &
BASIS A Kct1&L sws ,.A, n F m isn--> v
> s n 'a i
g (b) Increases the probability of occurrence of an accident previously evaluated in the TSAR. aASIS & > Jue D bu,, sLs/) A.M & Mssidi/h - pakro% towfa wwM c% A '
,,,,,,, (c Increase the con qu nces an accident previously evaluated in the TSAR.
BASIS C.1/h)- - 2 b eve' _g (d) Creates the possibility of an accident of a different type than any evaluated in the TSAR. l
/h) it/a.th BASIS <"a e m
_g (e) Increases the probability of occurence of a malfunction of
- equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the TSAR.
SASIS % , fM n Lea u . & Wm i > ~ 9,/ ~& nomj.* .C f 1 w pis. ' dr 4 4s.4.5 #-o.acorW u S _/ (f Inc e'ases the onseq ences of a malfunction of equ een important to saffty previously evaluated in the TSAR. BASIS Ava s te)<h h
/i (g) Create the possibility of a malfunction on a different type
'than an evaluated previously in the TSAR.
8 ASIS M' rsk! . lee 1 .
- a M aa> $,2*t$1 fA" AM h u*a -{/4.
bevrs &M c/r .%'Lt=% e1 ca.ks%ss>M4 _ / (h) Reduces the earsin of a faty defined in the basis for any technical specifi ukationsk $ .dle- ( 40,)e.'sd SASIS M imA4 GA./.>>/b /t%,y L
' /MOR)C/
c 2 2 P 7'% % 5 2 " ~ ~ 7 I N' RIGlNATOR DATE PSRC
' ' Hl A # is 4 DATE AIM I $/Y'N /
DATE pfROVED DATE SRC
- Additional sheets say be used and attached as necessary.
01 5-06-24 ATT I
1, ' GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE l 01-S-06-24 Revision 8 l l Attachment I Page 4 of 4 l
/% (( SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVU fAYT5ifT6Rn*
PART III ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION TJE NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED AB0VE: Is required to achieve compliance dith Federal, State'er local N ha) envi tal re lations
~
BASIS 6 M is AJ J5 A_-O _ Imi- 4 ed /4h N CoMk /fes t a enw 6st &.r$rwuS Jle(s M ce 6 to % fe.h e d ^ ## [_ (b) Resu ts in all measurable environmental effecta be to easite area previously disturbed during site preparation confined te plant construction. SASIS a
.- nJtd A~...o Ne b /A ed Al.h g o:Anef j h essac -
JP jaj (c) Requires a change in the Environmental Protection plan. g4, BASIS d/V (d) Concerns a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FIs, environmental * -- impact appraisal, or in any decision of the ASLB. BASIS
,,Jf)& (e) Concerns a significant change in effluents or power level. l BASIS JV (f) Concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact.
IS ..A , tf ,
%n h ftfDNI ORIGINAIOR '
ehunDATE 1
'l I S][C '
h' % B T 194r 4 DATE Am / Y i p viD Dm SmC Dm
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
. e. .
4 g 9 O e 58 h 01-S-06-24 Aty y
as . .
~' . ,
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE GRAND GUIE NUCLEAR STATION l 01-S-06-24 IRevision 8 l l Attachment I lPage 3 of 4 l ) I i
/MTITLE/ SATETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM
- PART I /IEETI DOC. EVALUATED FIA f /MDOCN0/ EVALUATION NO. N .
P. 2. ,1 /MSYSN0/ SYSTEM EFTECTED /
/M/ . REFERENCES Requires a change he FSAR ,*f,, If Yes, C/R No. b h i
DESCRIPTION Ck.... ek-.*D w h.js. C.,. 4Le_ l n _JL w a .rdL, w *=r.
- 1 / Ja l QA RECORD RT =B14.33 l o ., . V */, . . . L .*L (La,.4f JL RET 2 l
'r m
- ncot)u,, . ,,,C , _ f. ;,. .ph,gg;. ' l NON-0A RECORD l L -. t /.& . l INITIALS l l
M. e. J,.: NO. OF PAGES e v' l l l ' DATE l SAFETY EVALUATION l PART IT YES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE:
/ (a) Requires a change to the GGNS Technical Specifications.
Je r rek 1.D e ArJ2 C. % fftJ r,it;;s, BASIS crs~/ -L A Ga J. 4,.+ l j / (b) Increases previouslythe probability in theofFSAR.occurrence
~7X~a of tL9an accidentJ( Jre.** flt ea%, ...A
~~
evaluated 4 ;ft dr4t y BASIS wf.d'Ib ( 4L. ma n.7 _ L LC c +A. L '.C.f
- J J# .#
hiAn rN.s ccul TecJ 5 bL.*.;C fI..Lp.) 1 1d.% . I
,_,,, 2 (c) Increase the conse,quences ,of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR.
BASIS & ch,.J c.M. _ ( 1rtJ r 3far .m (M Td t u.T c,% .u.'.k d . ) u s e. er +l.:a es%. C Las;da." 4L,A) J cJ, s. +L 1' .
,,,,,,,, _/ (d) Creates the possibility of an accident of a different type than any evaluated in the FSAR.
BASIS rk_ M ,/, . L . L,k;lai .., ,_ J ,I ,* iaaJ .~ 95c4 (-. 6 /rst 3 IffM *1 st a.1 utalk. 'un Ar$Qgmu' U sul. l (e)% Increases
. c..s us.1; t I[e .;*.'
- 4 h .*- yn k.*
- La 6 % % probability of occurence of l l
! / ! equipment important SASIS n>lA ram u. nw'a to& safety p)reviously
' s f* u4. ', . vir &evaluated in the TSAR., e.- Jis)
' L,etc.L. (ueo,, cas,ue.d' 'Aasis. R<t.JosA kn/f /.Gr. ** ~ l 3 Les .
/ (f) Increases the consequences of a malfunction of equipment important to safety prw iously evaluated in the FSAR.
BASIS w e.Xmt.L .c ,J.. .dt- at. D s,.t- L. 0:,t] ~ n. -..S L.il t 6a d. d
- w/JtO L.id Ja, .n.3 d' t'em. .- /us. escrreti, a.,s.
- 4f' , tA.type Tel.E a j a --
t V (3) CreaD the possibility of a malfunction on a diffe than any evaluated previously in the FSAR. ' i EAS15 KL.,11 , A.ea . a _ + .s i.:;+ - r,).;l.7.t;>. U, e-rs,.3 .M*a.xt, :. ? p.d L/4. ,e p +.d tu 4 -ft'.. .x. af ". ~~eu%4 4..JC
/ (h) Reduces the margin of safety as defined in'the basis for any ' technical specifications.
BASIS STA/ej /1 s ,h i .!Il u.T 4af hd sce, c ., s ,'., . f S. , fl.. PA s.dT "n:%,T'" "" TTdh 3k#Tr *11nk l
'""~. i i " DATE
@ ~ ORIGINATOR DATE PSIC\ VV 4r / hk I SRC DATE
- ASPROVED DATE '
i
- Additional sheets say be used and attach'ed as necessary.
m.e.u.,t. m s l I I l
GRAND 23UI.F . NUCLEAR SIAT20N ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
]
l 01-S-06-24 Revision 8 l l l Attachment I Page 4 of 4 l ; 1 I f /6~ jP/ SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAI EVALUATION FORM
- PART III INVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION j l YES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITT DESCRIBED ABOVE: l
/ '(a) Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State 'or local i environmental regulations -
A .th ) ci so .m i. Psw ci WD + 4., f /..t BASIS Uu- et c Ef. 3c+/ syst.' s .: r<fd per w erou yJ&f.
/ (b) Results in all asasurable environmental effects being confined -
to easite area previously disturbed during site preparation and plaat construction. . SASIS s w ; w ~ S Ja<J r k ..) .lsd u w'M eJ. k ~k '"/ c m .* 4 ..e.s Q.a & wut.1) &- k.w'A *tt <ted ..b L m
/ (c) Requires a change in the Environmental Protection Plan.
a c. .f AfL W/*Tsas % ,/,,,g( BASIS B er ~.7 A c- A f p P. j *ft~ 4 v- u.% 4 ~ sQ aa tu w p- .s en.
-~
7 (d) Concerns a matter which may result is a.si ficant ' increase is any adverse envirosuneatal impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmenta( ~~ impact appraisal, or in any decision of the ASLB. EASIS w:r! ..+ k. 4,4 % L erLa) 19 1% w.% E o em 6 4,ma .
. A.0. m.Jll L r J J . Cm.ht,is J.U A- c.:n.tal prDE J /.:;.b .
(e) Conceras a significant change in affluents or . EASIS /%r Jn at? ! p:0,c A .Is], e t.*. A:. eL a.9 .rse level. ~. s $ ..QJ L j chy .- tfVL a r .-. <t h 4.,,,4 ",M 9 jc,.,v- 4.de 6/' k m&M ' . (f) Concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact.
. BASIS tief Lm ,,. .) w . ,. d .~ % f .
h ~e Y- , I ie '?-9G '"~ Y /kN&Q g ORISINATOR DATE PSRC DATE Au/L / #lm/h - D#fE' SRC i DATE pauvr.u !
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
- -r-f 1
f . ! 01-5-06-24 ATT I
o *
.. .. . j ADMINISTRAT!VE PROCEDURE GRAND GUIE NUCLEAR STATIos l 01-S-06-24 l Revision 8 l 1 l Attachment I lPage 3 of 4 l i
1 l l i I /MTITLE/ SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM *
~
PART I /MXREF/ DOC. EVALUATED ? . . '.k /MDOCN0/ EVALUATION NO. 1
! /MXREF/ REFERENCESf$hk (dof186 9.1.(.}/MSYSN0/ SYSTEM EFFECTED MI f
Requires a change to the FSAR I C/R No. h I Yes No 4 i DESCRIPTION 2.senal el fr 370) QA RECORD l casme.1 -h 4.- a scKr*& . A .. l RT -814.33
# - - -- *_. sa e s J JffL e,.s :+- l NON-CA RECORD l
l i j m' # Aoct -~J Este 474 o l 12 . .a m r P af 3 e .l tit' % ' l l INITIALS l c.r, .d . .:.L.L*:f.e elm *J % f.h ps.tzao l NO. OF PAGES l l c_.,ndf , .ss4 4, Lub :.. A d casAl.s wt., . l DATE l V SA r,ai EVALUATION 4 PART II 1 ES NO IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE: l
/ (a) Requires a change to the GGNS Technicail Specifications.
BASI 5 5sw cL -.' .1 eAJ +- ..IJ, - i -1 L r.. . - v n (b) Increases the probability of occurrence of an accident . previously evaluated in the FSAR. 1 I BASIS MC3, .* L SIW rA ../ .,* 1/ ,,.'ac.w ed._ ).2)tb.IJ74) u ! bnet.aA43.g44.,. t-w.i esq..=.Te 'c. c.sii N%.
' / (c) Increase the consequ(ences of an accident previously evaluated in the FSAR. nu,.W ___l I *** *#f' WH m4 .@.d rkTa rm
..-h% ' rsa( 'A /.,,'er.
- J.. JJb-4 . th.'// M *M m#
BASIS c., N .- ryII .R . A .- I Creates the possibility of aft accident 'of a different type *M- s. ** " UW .
! (d) than any evaluated in the
.r ,' FSAR. M a, A ,l, m /., h*s 748~ ./, .
BASIS h 4 M.A l L..- c., c cw.,. v i t c q w u..rfsw .sewe<,w v.saa. ,e .4.Lff- ! j (e) Increases the probability of occurence of a malfunction of it ***-* i l 1 equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR. BASIS We m r'.t eLJi . ,e.sa. e.el.' L"/.f .f sras g. ,4 e, l oyC J cs, ye'ne.,* - /,4. Dees urt cmt.tr - . % t . y ,,// / -fpjf- ) j (f) Increases the consequences of a malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR. , BASIS Qi .,.f ,J t.1_ fr - - - 4 /.-: .4 .L E 4 Ad . hecme. .ay .vysic 4*t. ' m., s3sl P ,i - '
- a ew'44D.e.r4-m+b d.
(3) Create the possibility of a malfunction on a differentYyh*d '' + I'*@- l
/
' than any evaluated previously in the FSAR. . BASIS that u.+ em /eA L-1 h-
. N~. A. n ,& m ol.& sfes .
s Co.;t.e.% / 4e.tF o /y srw rystk .9 g (h) Reduces the sargin of safety as defined in the basis for any - - technical specifications. sd *N j a,e 4., .s l BASIS EL 1J u.t _"A w. A ., _ ... L - o.w
/ 7 m3 r (, '"
, /
DATE l PSRC '
$/ IGINATOR DATE
{' hWie / Y)h6 DATE SRC
/
DATE I
@ 07ED
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
v l 01-5-06-24 ATT I i i
^ - - * - *--w- m-n._ n._._ ,.,__ ,, _ _, _
a GRAND GUIh' NUCIIAR STATION ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE l 01-S-06-24 Revision 8 l l Attachment I Page 4 of 4 l 1 I SAFETT ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION FORM * 'l PART III s ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Y_E5 jio IMPLEMENTATION OR PERTORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED AB0VE: - / ' (a) Is required to achieve compliance with Federal, State or local ~ environmental regulationa
- BASIS f u C lm .,;f m'ad L.-- ..J h I,4 is . mal L 1ht.
" st.t. f:#a , w:h k %. AiMA wie,..,2J. ",: ,. (
v
/ (b) Besults in alI measurable environmental effects being codfined to easite area previously disturbed during site preparation BASISand Um, plaat .rf ru.o.mLO k.
construction.d / roo..m;.eM L T+.t EPA ,. f st.. U Aan ~~ ov'ess-%. 5d' *tt % a., Men a+ she *~ *c ErN. . , - . / (c) Requires a change in the Environnestal Protection Pl,n. BASIS (d.'d Iv 4 ., ht - EPP V (d) Concerns a matter which may result is a significaat increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental ' - impact appraisal, or in any decision of the ASLB. * -- BASIS E.L.AJ -b La m ut % We n .,, e * *. a # 6. M d
=J i , O , u J . T.< 4 a C ,4 4 4.r
/ (e) cConcerns BASIS v. .E*1
,.ctr,4/w a significant x.
- p. .seA+I.Jechan .,42:ke=in
-e ,*,it # 28%-4 i#Le t v.t.,4/
effluents or power level.//.M
/ ettaand 14. Ele eD C 6
/ (f) c,Concernsamatteradtpreviously 4.e:: red.a s ei Md u.74e presa.asSviewed and evaluated in documents specified in (d) above, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact. a EASIS +1e sla A ' $ .J er1A. .Le r~en. U =*#*i W
~
GINATOR
, I 7 K DATE PSRC
)
h Il0"l$[f
~
DATE
/MORIG(/
d N deu / DW
/
DATE p VED SRC
- Additional sheeta may be used and attached as necessary.
. . -- .r.
. l 1
I a . I
- i I
l . 01-5-06-24 ATT I I i
. - ,---- ....-_%--~__---_-.--,---.-r_em +.e.,-,_,_, -,-_..,_..__,-._.,_,.._,___---,___.--._,m__,,-,n , , _ . _ _ . . _
4 GRAND GUIE NUCIIAR STATION \ ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ' l 01-5-06-24 IRevision 8 l
. l Attachment I lPage 3 of 4 l ;
l I I
/MTITLE/ SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAI. EVAI.UATION TORM*
DOC. EVAI.UATED mun-tE/V /MDOCN0/ EVAI.UATION No. b E /MXREF/ L
/MSYSN0/ SYSTEM EFTECTED &'ll
/MXREF/ PiFERENCES F3AA. 3.41.1 Requires a change to the TSAR _,,, 1 If Yes, C/R No. M Yes No DESCRIPTION tast%dsA eP adoPanD 3m '
QA RECORD l m Ass A s m g a a g e a sidee n de l RT -814.33 l c: msat er eItu a das s.aram <=.,=hre l_ NON-0A RECORD l uww uit im/As.w cs;tasssr4 mrMem6cs. l l INITIAI.S l i l NO. OF PAGES l l HDATE l SAFETY EVAI.UATION ) PART II ! g5 g .IMPIZMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE: . U 1 (a) Requires a change to the GGNS Technical Specifications.
~
is n.4 n M . , u n.) la G A que s. BASIS C/c. me.tev-W31'A444 rima sP Ac.sp rest sylitan w 6sa. W P 4tevias q fgc8 JP64'CydadatsS. ' * * - I _,,, 1 (b) Increases the probability of occurrence of an accident )7 previously evaluated in the FSAR. l BASIS -ft:s ele.u, ,s. L J:[, s ...*(k. ... t . .I 4Ls Le m. ed.d %
"#N'
~[ he in the FSAR. Aat; c f a d on W 5 ia h a ns. n 4 off.c.k.A %
,_.Jil not enu n.,m:se_ n .m s..si.
p
- f. d .- <.6,; red k s ha t- g BASIS 1h adl Led O m4fs\*~, c6 ass;4es\s c% sat 'ss k %n}y'Fs44.
,,__,, L (d) Creates the posibility of an accident of a different type than an j
BASIS udf y,.evaluated A m - mf. ti, in the FSAR.et..ts.u.dn.sc.<ed n , .s se..a .1, A wn.<;o s J;ffusM b m. b us.- Mt.4r.sd in Et. f %C l (e) Increases the probability of occurencemalfunction of a/vr544 of j _,, 4 equipment important to nafety previously evaluated in the FSAR. i BASIS sad. Ink. .t IL, a.>:1 a.11:l:n n .L .J :.. 4. LL4 t. A r_ a st.,,el k
/mtvu d e24.i. ante.v- or ib ased oded;m sA sitt ..t f.it safe ha
- ,,,,,,, ,d ,, (f) Increases the consequences of a salfunction of equipment 1
BASIS important nas,,.f:e ktot safety6. previously 1...Aevaluated 1..lh luinatt thea.& FSAR.L Ad qr.,;A l oip o?er=%en This c 4 4 eens4em b s. 4
.549 esM*4 Create the poss bility of a malfun% ction on Pedon a different no astype a ana j -,,,,,,,, J4, (3) than any evaluated previously in the FSAR.
BASIS h ne w n., t. led v . .me:c,( es,. ar L, A L die ri - . .f3AR]v)83#,
' O b.*lvua s.<s noF o&thd..
(h) Reduces the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any i l _,, technical specifications. BASIS Mnritadsfe L s n.1n1tl,) u s, etra de, tu, L< s 6 a.aisn* nyiP,J4 % gfw.s hn/-14 Nn'M-J r ( ugu.( i Gr ' ORIGINATOR s
<.C.yk,n / ,i ,u -w.
DATE PS{Ci u/f' t DATE fp lbl / lY SRC
~
/
DATE A DATE i ~PPyVED
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
4 01-3-06-24 ATT I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .___.,,_ _ _ _ . _ _ .__ ,-.- ~. _ _. _ _ __ ___.______-.___._ _ _ . - _ _ _
. __ _ -. _ . _ _ . _ _ ._.- _ -_ .__ . _ ~ - _ _ _ _ _
! GAAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE l 01-S-06-24 Revision 8 l ' l Attachment I Page 4 of 4 l i i I g g SAFETY ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION TORM* PART III ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
- i j YES,S N0, IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED AB0VE:
_1 (a) IsrequiredtoachievecompliancewithFedergi,Sgte'orlocal *0 ** 4 M 10 environmental regulations TW M tant *S RASIS c.;,.e .A k eaa. , v.tw m llL - 0 4
- ,1, _
(b) Results in all measurable environmental effects being confined
.to easite area previously disturbed during site preparation
! and plant construction. 1 BASIS Em 4,d 1:1 L-at Im L L el,* 1 h J n u nt i d L L .__ ! be. cm bia " N ib ' % b M t-j _1 (c) Requires a change in the Environmental Protection Plan. BASIS u4 ewL. .el a L OD j _ ,,1, (d) Conceras a matter which may result in a significant c, 1 increase in any adverse environmental impact previously
~
evaluated in the Final Environmental Statenest (FES) as modified by the staff's testimony to the Atomic Safety and I Licensing Board (ASLB), supplements to the FES, environmental. . . _ impact appraisal, or in any decision of the ASLB. BASIS a n ta mw net:L b u.,L. .a u 1 A mats h*: km.c. ! covi*wr Aenk;\ im$ set 6% t&d Wiau's k e*le.is4.. d _ ,,i,_ (e) Conceras a significant change is affluents or power level. l BASIS hs 43, at0,.1 n. h ., m t,m,ls u.,.d 4 L a . L ,L _ w w ,flg c.xM nor ors e(fluids-(f) Concerns a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in l _ jl,_ .
- documents specified in (d) above, which may hats a significant I BASIS adversa M eo
- cd environmental L Ahlew ,impact. me u e d,c rs d .. , doeo. ,ds 7
outtmed tw ) eg b t.
\m\jU ' _ /n_m-n fi i ,
u} N/l5/P
//H446 i ORIG ORIGINATOR DATE a uC '
' V "
DATE b/b / I / DATE I Ar g nu DATE SRC
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as necessary.
4 *
- e . .
D 0 0 4 N k ' 01-S-06-24 ATI I 1 i l * \
) -
~
~- ~
k
..q.X g
- 7. .(= ,
-~.,_-
, . , t .. . . s . ,- ,
. cs ,
N; 'l
, .l ADifINIS'!1ATIVI"PROCEDUtr - l GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION
* + . . u. r " l 01-5-06-24 l Revision 8 l' Y ' ,
l Attachment I lPage J of 4 l l
'E ' ld. "
l I l i
.t M.
' Wa* }
/MTITII/ SAFETY ENVIRONMEN' TAI, EVALUATION FOP 2t,*
/MXREF/ DOC. EVALUATED /MDOCNO/ EVALUATION No. / S #4 ,
PART I REFERENCES MA R M.(3.3 . /MSYSN0/ SYSTEN EFTECTED Af *7/ @M , .
/MXREF/: ,e.
s Requires a change to the FSAR '1 _ If Yes, C/R No.go j31, 32 Yes No DESCRIPTION Clea-as $. Yk clas edd - 4 LA arvaJ e 2 el 1 J u. d.e l l I Qh RECORD R -B14.33-l l 4,h 'ch rA D. M s) . 1 Ms +- L./, . wsto.(e.v4 hsh_a fa i LL. ! NON-GA RECORD l.-^
' N.m b-* peu.40s "r. *. RL 3t.1 *, ll INIT W 3 [
NO. OF PAGES' l Lt.a +..J w.4tas.=eAJ #-tsa l ,
-es/Jr. L kc. 4 n . (a-' ' ') l..,
l DATE s
. . e ,,.T 9 SAFETY EVALUATION PART II IMPLEMENTATION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE ACTIVITY DE .
YES EO D. UA. .:: * %.?"}.}
~
k(- N ,3.c Requires a change to the GGNS Technical Specificationseld (a) jf , 3 ASIS Cke...J e +.0: % -et. Mes L.,ia_ u/.'G> J : c.* A n.# aJJesand i 66**83TItais L ' ' S'.b a' '-[1 '[, ..Y :- em . Tafm. M te.l. A J. 6 (b) Increases th4 probability of occurrence of as accidder:5 -
~~"" .=2$
previously it s.stm evaluated tr em - hi # in a r*the L 4- FSAR. t., o vdt'7f- Fle cAs eQ*J c.t44a BASIS - 4,.s. Re re' er k.* %=a.s A. " " .G % JJE,en"ve lees (c) 4*Inbesase the consequences of an 'eccident previously' evaluated f,
--~
in the FSAR. 3L..tA M =M d e 8 h*"'O W. c.1 '#L "I .ih
***' J./
* '**#' 'I*b 6' 3 =-.
7 " , dk BASIS d..lJ y L d% .A& '
. '~
i.4c6. (irs,%.,wasNu,D N wA) ., t.g.Idifferent typee#.J attpd .Y.' Creates the possibility of an accident of
,X,, (d) cle d.A1 si. M. M fq8E l
"""~
than any evaluated in the FSAR. u u. ef 4 un, BASIS rdt.1,Tt 44.,.L L 1 4C.1 L .c L.M w f -
.,r #--. L- l e, ggf,(,). !
u v v
,g , (e) Increases the probability of occurence of a salfunction of
- equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the,Q FSAR.
. . K ,gh*,,, A BASIS um. # #ist cl. .i.h aL..ll .A e - wd- ,,.,
sk,1J 8.annfit Ms. e4%AJ 83 :tc a tk J. tLTri t'6 l.*=i c.p*(*f.*.,,3 , g (f)' Increases the consequences of a malfuHetion of equipsfont important to safety previously evaluated in the FSAR. i
- BASIS *Tf-- L *J . 4 .. +,.R 6 1.,4 as 1 e4.#.ka s.an.
l 1.'A are. r% ,a.ta a p c .,e .
- a r.
- m R.
.2f., (3) p.e n .%.y a .i AA
-Create the. possibility of a ma h etion os a dib erent type '
than any evaluated previously in the FSAR 4 3 ASIS n m ,L .i0. .t a l r- ~ + dd 'h rh, M,h. *a.
. 6.d.
'+ G=.J'it 8* dH486
<b cla ".A 4,emt p p.y , i g ev.g.~m %=.Ap n asis for any (h) Reduces the sargIn of Dafety as deffhed Liid
~ l2L, technical specifications.*T h eles=. *.lJ an. c.aafMk.,
***R f' L*4Li ara,d eheanfg .
'b BASIS J eu,..-d1
- L l' - sFsJ .
. t .*.H .# M s,.at:".
$Yk / VM/.
I
?! N3 VV ll$(e DATE~
/MORIG/(,,JRIG TOR DATE hb / //(h
//
SRC
/
.. DATF.
DATE . APPR @ ~
- Additional sheets say be used and attached, as necessary.Y'g-L 01 5-06-24 ATT I ,
1(b seu..ntu TL muok Pd %3- is sc.As. [k'.d%-/r*ryk.j sel:1 aluiya.& useg s: :.l.e. h -+L 8CET3. 1tS / wL:L '.-t ia h nf<<.. .T+ ;> . e.k .Ag
,&.LL. -
S ~i. P.l , .,- I.E g 4 Jt, i, - ft.a
. ., A %;. Lt._ ws/ 4.,k M ..i.t_
s,. Pwv c.A wb p r,.: 'JtJJ (l.3 sf :fy ec. *.a. 3 L. Jti. m : r.t l. L * ; J
. .t 4 cmd.l',lk Q '
1L fra ,, C L W r C , .l. ', % C.,,;g y sait; r .r.J. -< nw , c1. L 3 w .i , (e u ) ,' a t. . 7),,_ CALGoa3 P u.- x I i, T.4 t.*/.ld es. + - whid .1L l .uel
- cddi '.4l. ib. Pa-4ea
-tr .ssls+ : %:3 esw 't- cx w.1;? ks.+ . + ys el u, . 7f.J d s a .9. wlIl
[ 7f . cL l A s.J t.& d t* A. ect- m l.lA
.L ql %. m .E
%, p,.4jd L BETz G ==. . - sk.+ Emi kai<.
~7kl.: ebl i: ,, - fi. JL. .,.J. us Wg ;
- o. - +.a. +L 4. .'qsihL .e .L ~ R. .Ls 4+<.' .
l D,t, p.4+ i. .u w..ep. J w , . A Lil. ) L.~- l e A 6 t. :. A e 4 spa,.l~.dt,w~ , s.4 w Q I Am ,
.g #-43 + m.J.l.l.c.th J . 9.~. L. ,".,
- c. yA , usa.sh 4L s <. .: W rz x o s .Al,d, L ,
kw 5 u.osfy k., # d u -h c M en,',.li.ly d p *L i ., p I.3 sgit r. T A<. . # J. 4 4 # # e r< .d :t- '
.w.J.,il-
. / ';ft dE.d2 mt r .2 % ail L. os d.JK 3 m
L 10l {
. % M0.lY b -K.k.' p,L ul EtL BE7z Wof.
~71t 6 .9. c.l d A p @ G % is CAL.GorJ H - 13 e m.Lc.t;.uA. . TL;t .c
-m146.,g 1.:. a A . % t.,:..:.3 . . ;,,- e. q . L . T k L ( (
cLJl. G astiW ) 'ii te .~J w A .
,. %. a . . *-
i+.',~ .fSW m.a. n.s # k milk. L :41. ut t %. cA w& sg t , Lt. d.JJ f.m p LL . W1. et#. .
;. %k ML. TX.*n c. G : t :a p.p l s u l1 _ ;, og+.LA ap.u l Af- ca Lw H- +3 4 .d. ..'.
h .~~ iuf, , Ju L pS . , J L f it; m J/(/
- L. :.% M . (9: ,Q e-nst ,;tt L A .
Q uw ku .lf. 4 of -th.x
.y~.9. L %. %+% Et A dt,,dd. .t. 6Gv4, w.VL,L -#,_
/. k d r s y s'J .
~
t.. l.. f!
.i t'
l l
7- '
'.# 4.'i,- MGEF NUCIJR STATION '
.MatINI8IRATIVEPROCIDOREYV' a l
. ,1 l_01-S-06-24 Revisios 8 I l__Attac; ct I l Page 4 of 4 ~l l-
/.ff/g' ,
SAFETY ENVIRONIENTAL EVALUATION FORN* -l PARy III ' ENVIR0lOElffAL IVALUATION TES NO
~
IMPt2MENIATION OR PERFORliANCE OF TIE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED ABOVE: 1 (a) Is required to achieve compliance"with Federal, State or local RASISenvimatal c.b ='d CJJ. regulations.,H Pl.;t Kv.*.ai. Wdp
- C.h. wrfp @/
eb.i.b is 91J km % NPe(s piAY.W. M 43ddde ~ % Au L - %IAL . A > M. m A- (b) Resulta in air messarlble environmental effectw being c,onfined to easite area previously disturbed darias site preparation BASIS and l-t plant construction. NI AA. te%As s# h niemie.te is 3 L +g isags _1+ , _.1 .. .)d.' 4. a,.a 1,29, .i aL t.
- J A. ..*g. & 4 21; k % s. pt.* b _' h. . in .'
_1 (c) Requires a change in the Eavironmental.Protectise Flam5 . . , . BASIS Q.es t .f6ut Hia_ s .l M * " et a w - -- il a.,J t.Q h p w'4 4
,,,,,,,,,,g, (d) Conceras a. a8Edrwhich matter .i a .u.It may 4; result sa a ei as asenaaer.*c.baM increase is any adverse environmental impact: previserly f
#. 3 p. *
*,,7 "*
- evaluated in the Final Environmental StatemeneL(FES) as' -
modified by the staff's testimesy to the Atautu Saastr and 4.' j - Licensias Board (ASIB), sapp h ==*a to the FIEgiempissementil'. & -.'p. - impact, appraisal, or in any decisies of.the ASERE' 4.T +' EASIS Une M* %. a.en .L.) I': ts L 01 Li _ W 4j i. aGL
~
Ad?
.4 y th etAi..t' 5'
- 21. (e) Conceras a signific A. 73:Gi.its 6eCA A .-
change is affluents.es gewer-level..- ,l. BASIS t il// L.a. -. LL. t . J W % f-
- A. a 9 th i
,,,,,_ g. (f)*JnConcerns X A h ah matter'not sth h
- m prev b.2
,iously ,s., w
*A
. % c.4(Irctv M owed and evaluated is.-
docuneata specified in (d) above, which may have a significaat e adverse environmental impact. ' A BASIS u, .f .M - e L L
- Os _f _yd * . 4 gr ...{ ,,:0 L ,. digi-
a-
- a- 'M4 i- +8 FE:r, -
gf GINATOR DATE PSRC ' V ~' DATE muyza Y / t' % / DATE ' SRC DATE
- Additional sheets may be used and attached as nedessary.
r
- r:. . .
- g o *
, o
- e .
4 e e e s=*, 9 9 f
. +
+ 4 01-5-04-24 ATT I
j EYETEMEl%EJNiiY 89EEDEAECEE,ItUC. OtMR D Krmy.JR f' [Yf$cns April 30, 1987 ' ' t U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission Washington, D. C. 20555 Attention: Document Control Desk Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station i Unit 1 Docket No. 50-416 ( License No. NPF-29 Annual Environmental Operating Report for 1986 AECM-87/0090 ,
; 1 In accordance with Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Facility License NPF-29, 1 t
Appendix B (Environmental Protection Plan), attached is the Annual Environ,nental Operating Report for the period January 1 through December 31, 1986. If further information is required, contact this office. ' You s ruly, ii
'( N -9 ODK:bms -
Attachment cc: Mr. T. H. Cloninger (w/a) Mr. R. B. McGehee (w/a) Mr. N. S. Reynolds'(w/a) Mr. H. L. Thomas (w/o) Mr. R. C. Butcher (w/a) '
'I Dr. J. Nelson Grace, Regional Administrator (w/a) "
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II,: 101 Marietta St., N. W., Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 ( /g
\
t ' P O Cx 2rE l Sort; mam yr;gyy' l (ecy ww)
~
- J16AECM87042802 - 1 L}}