710
AEC-NJ-741936-0
PUBLIC LANDS PROJECT
NORTHWESTERN UNIV.
2040 SHERIDAN
EVANSTON, IL. 60201
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT
BY THE
DIRECTORATE OF LICENSING
U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
RELATED TO THE
OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION
JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
DOCKET NUMBER 50-219
NEPA COLLECT
Transportation Lil
Northwestern University L
Evanston, IL 60201
3 5556 031 325889
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
This Draft Environmental Statement was prepared by the U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission, Directorate of Licensing
1.
The action is administrative.
2.
The proposed action is the issuance of a full-term operating
license to the Jersey Central Power and Light Company for con-
tinuing operation of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station,
a nuclear power reactor located 10 miles south of Toms River,
NJ, in Ocean County. The station has generated electricity since
1969, under a provisional operating license (Docket No. 50-219).
The station employs a boiling water reactor nuclear steam supply
system to produce up to 19 30 megawatts thermal (MWt).
turbine-generator uses the heat to provide 620 MW (net) of
electric power.
The exhaust steam is cooled by a once-through
system using water from Barnegat Bay.
3.
Summary of environmental impact and adverse effects:
• Periodic kills of fish, attracted to the warm discharge canal
water, occur during winter shutdowns of the station.
(Sect. 5.5.2.4)
• Construction and operation of the intake-discharge canal
changed the flows of Oyster Creek and South Branch Forked
River from alternating to unidirectional flows, changing the
typically estuarine streams to ones of constant bay salinity
throughout the canal. This has eliminated spawning and nur-
sery areas used by many marine organisms, and has caused the
introduction of boring marine organisms into the canal.
(Sect. 5.5.2 and Sect. 5.2.2.1)
• Erosion of the banks of the canal has caused excessive silting
and sedimentation in the lower reaches of the canal. (Sect.
5.2.2.3)
.
Heat discharged to the bay is limited by the condition that
the temperature in the canal is not to exceed 95°F measured
at the U.S. Route 9 bridge. This heat may reduce the pro-
duction of fish by about 5000 lb. annually and cause a signi-
ficant loss of winter flounder and zooplankton. (Sect. 5.5.2)
Impingement on intake screens results in the significant annual
loss of 32,000 blue crabs and 24,000 winter flounder, in an
area heavily used for sport fishing. (Sects. 5.5.2.2 and 8.3)
ii
Annually about 150 tons of zooplankton, 100 million fish larvae,
and 150 million fish eggs are lost by passage through the
station's condensers. (Sects. 5.5.2.3 and 8.3)
.
About 80 acres of freshwater marshland and 45 acres of salt-
water marshland were lost. The saltmarsh represents a loss
of 48 tons/yr of primary productivity to an ecosystem utilized
by about 75 species of fish. (Sects. 5.5.2.1 and 8.3)
.
About 350 acres of pine barrens were disturbed by construction
activities and converted to station uses. About 290 acres of
spoils and cleared areas on the site will remain denuded for
many years. (Sect. 4.1)
About 75 acres of cedar swamp forest, a unique biological
habitat, were lost along the transmission line right-of-way.
Corridor views of the line are visible from the parkway north-
bound and three local highways. (Sects. 3.8 and 5.1)
O
Consumptive use of groundwater and surface water is insigni-
ficant. Groundwater quality is not impaired. (Sects. 3.3,
4.2 and 5.2)
.
Chemicals discharged with the effluent water are diluted to
innocuous levels, with the possible exception of copper.
(Sect. 5.5.2.5)
• No significant environmental impacts are anticipated from
normal releases of radioactive materials. Normal operation
results in an estimated 410 man-rem/yr dose to the 1980
population within 50 miles. Normal background for the same
population results in an integrated dose of 563,000 man-rem/
yr. (Sect. 5.4)
4.
Principal alternatives considered:
.
• Deferring retirements of fossil-fueled power plants.
• The use of a new oil-fueled plant to replace the station.
The use of the station's full dilution pump capacity to main-
tain effluent cooling water below 87°F.
iii
.
The use of an ocean intake and discharge system.
.
The use of a wet cooling tower with either saltwater or fresh-
water makeup.
.
The use of a cooling lake.
O
The use of a spray pond.
5.
The following Federal, State and local agencies are being asked
to comment on this Draft Environmental Statement:
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Department of Agriculture
Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers
Department of Commerce
Department of Health, Education and Welfare
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Department of the Interior
Department of Transportation
Environmental Protection Agency
Federal Power Commission
State of New Jersey
Ocean County Commissioners.
6.
This statement was made available to the public, to the Council
on Environmental Quality, and to the other specified agencies
in July 1973.
7.
On the basis of the analysis and evaluation set forth in this
statement, after weighing the environmental, economic, technical,
and other benefits of the station against environmental and other
costs, and considering available alternatives, the conclusion is
that the action called for under NEPA and Appendix D to 10 CFR 50
is the conversion of Provisional Operating License DRP-16 to a full-
term operating license subject to the following conditions for
protection of the environment:
A. License Condition
.
The applicant will make improvements in the canal, including
stabilization of the banks, that are effective in minimizing
transport of silt and sedimentation in and below the canal.
iv
B.
Technical Specification Requirements
(1)
Prior to the issuance of a full-term operating license, the
applicant will define a comprehensive environmental monitoring
program for inclusion in the Technical Specifications which is
acceptable to the staff for determining environmental effects of
plant operation. The program will include the following:
The applicant will utilize the full capacity of the station's
three dilution pumps when the temperature of water in the
discharge canal exceeds 87°F, measured 1 ft below lower low
water at the U.S. Route 9 bridge over the discharge canal.
(Section 5.2.2.4)
The applicant will install appropriate controls, and employ
operating procedures and measures, that will minimize the
probability of fish kills resulting from plant shut down
during the winter. (Section 5.5.2.4)
.
The applicant will study ways to reduce the number of fish
impinged on the traveling screens at the cooling water intake
structure. (Section 5.5.2.2)
(2)
If, in the course of time, harmful effects or irreversible
damage due to plant operation are detected, the applicant
will provide both an analysis of the problem and a proposed
course of action to alleviate the problem.
V
FOREWORD
This draft statement on environmental considerations associated with
the proposed issuance of a full-term operating license for the Oyster
Creek Nuclear Generating Station was prepared by the U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission, Directorate of Licensing (staff) in accordance with the
Commission's regulation, 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix D, implementing the
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA).
The NEPA states, among other things, that the Federal government has
the continuing responsibility to use all practicable means, consistent
with other essential considerations of national policy, to improve and
coordinate Federal plans, functions, programs, and resources to the end
that the Nation may :
.
• Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of
the environment for succeeding generations,
O
Assure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive and
aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings,
.
Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment
without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesir-
able and unintended consequences,
0
Preserve important historic, cultural and natural aspects of our
national heritage, and maintain, wherever possible, an environ-
ment which supports diversity and variety of individual choice,
.
Achieve a balance between population and resource use which will
permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life's
amenities, and
• Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the
maximum attainable recycling of deplet able resources.
Further, with respect to major Federal actions significantly affecting
the quality of the human environment, Section 102 (2)(C) of NEPA calls
for preparation of a detailed statement on:
(i)
The environmental impact of the proposed action,
(ii)
any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should
the proposal be implemented,
(iii)
alternatives to the proposed action,
l
1
vi
1
(iv)
the relationship between local short-term uses of man's environ-
ment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productiv-
ity, and
(v)
any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources
which would be involved in the proposed action should it
be implemented.
Pursuant to Appendix D of 10 CFR Part 50, the staff prepares a detailed
statement on the foregoing considerations with respect to each applica-
tion for a full-term operating license for a nuclear power reactor.
When application is made for a full-term operating license, the applicant
submits an environmental report to the staff. In conducting the required
JEPA review, the staff meets with the applicant to discuss items of
information in the environmental report, to seek new information from
the applicant that might be needed for an adequate assessment, and gen-
erally to ensure that the staff has a thorough understanding of the pro-
posed project. In addition, the staff seeks information from other
sources that will assist in the evaluation, and visits and inspects the
project site and surrounding vicinity. Members of the staff may meet
with State and local officials who are charged with protecting State and
local interests. On the basis of all the foregoing, and other such
activities or inquiries as are deemed useful and appropriate, the staff
nakes an independent assessment of the considerations specified in
Section 102 (2) (c) of the NEPA and Appendix D of 10 CFR Part 50.
The
evaluation leads to the publication of a draft environmental statement,
prepared by the staff, which is then circulated to Federal, State and
local governmental agencies for comment. Interested persons are also
invited to comment on the draft statement.
After receipt and consideration of comments on the draft statement, the
staff prepares a final environmental statement, which includes a discus-
sion of problems and objections raised by the comments and the disposi-
tion thereof; a final benefit-cost analysis which considers and balances
the environmental effects of the facility and the alternatives available
for reducing or avoiding adverse environmental effects, as well as the
environmental economic, technical, and other benefits of the facility;
and a conclusion as to whether, after weighing the environmental,
economic, technical and other benefits against environmental costs, and
considering available alternatives, the action called for is the issuance
or denial of the proposed full-term license or its appropriate condition-
ing to protect environmental values.
vii
Single copies of this statement may be obtained by writing the Deputy
Director for Reactor Projects, Directorate of Licensing, U.S. Atomic
Energy Commission, Washington, D.C. 20545.
Mr. R. B. Bevan, Jr. is the Environmental Project Manager for the AEC
for this statement (Area Code 301, 973-7241).
1
1
1
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
i
FOREWORD
V
.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
xiii
LIST OF TABLES.
xiv
1.
INTRODUCTION.
1-1
.
.
.
1.1
1.2
STATUS OF PROJECT, REVIEWS, AND APPROVALS.
RELATED FACILITIES
1-1
1-1
2.
THE SITE
2-1
.
.
.
.
.
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
.
.
STATION LOCATION
REGIONAL DEMOGRAPHY, LAND AND WATER USE.
HISTORIC AND ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES
GEOLOGY.
SURFACE AND GROUNDWATERS
2.5.1 Surface Water
2.5.2 Groundwater
2-1
2-5
2-7
2-9
2-10
2-10
2-14
.
.
.
2.6
2.7
.
.
METEOROLOGY.
ECOLOGY. . .
2.7.1 Terrestrial
2.7.2 Aquatic .
2-14
2-16
2-16
2-22
.
.
3.
THE STATION
3-1
.
.
.
.
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
.
EXTERNAL APPEARANCE.
REACTOR AND STEAM-ELECTRIC SYSTEM, FUEL INVENTORY.
STATION WATER USE. .
HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM.
3.4.1 System Components
3.4.2 System Operation.
3-1
3-1
3-4
3-8
3-8
3-12
.
.
O
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
3.5
.
.
.
RADWASTE SYSTEMS ..
3.5.1 Liquid Wastes
3.5.2 Gaseous Wastes.
3.5.3 Solid Wastes. .
3-13
3-13
3-24
3-28
.
.
.
3.6
.
.
.
.
CHEMICAL AND BIOCIDE EFFLUENTS
3.6.1 Water Treatment Effluents
3.6.2 Biocides.
3.6.3 Effluents from Boiler Corrosion Prevention.
3.6.4 Cleaning Solutions and Laboratory Effluents
3-30
3-30
3-33
3-34
3-35
.
.
3.7
O
.
.
SANITARY AND OTHER EFFLUENTS
3.7.1 Sewage Treatment Wastes
3.7.2 Effluents from Trash Racks.
3.7.3 Storm Drainage.
3.7.4 Boiler and Diesel Engine Emmissions
3.7.5 Condenser Tube Corrosion Products
3-35
3-35
3-36
3-36
3-36
3-36
.
.
3.8
TRANSMISSION FACILITIES.
3-38
4.
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF SITE PREPARATION AND PLANT
AND TRANSMISSION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION.
4-1
.
.
.
4.1
4.2
4.3
.
.
IMPACTS ON LAND USE.
IMPACTS ON WATER USE
ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS
4.3.1 Terrestrial
4.3.2 Aquatic .
4-1
4-1
4-1
4-1
4-3
O
.
.
.
.
4.4
EFFECTS ON COMMUNITY
4-4
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF OPERATION OF THE PLANT AND
TRANSMISSION FACILITIES
5-1
.
5.1
5.2
.
IMPACTS ON LAND USE.
IMPACTS ON WATER USE .
5.2.1 Impact of Release of Heat to the Bay.
5.2.2 Impact of Plant Operation on Oyster Creek
5-1
5-2
5-2
5-3
•
.
.
.
.
5.3 RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT ON BIOTA OTHER THAN MAN.
5.4 RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT ON MAN . .
5.4.1 Impact of Liquid Releases
5.4.2 Impact of Gaseous Releases.
5.4.3 Impact of Direct Radiation.
5.4.4 Population Dose from All Sources.
5.4.5 Evaluation of Radiological Impact
5-6
5-6
5-9
5-9
5-12
5-13
5-14
.
.
.
.
.
х
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
.
.
.
5.5 NONRADIOLOGICAL EFFECTS ON ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS.
5.5.1 Terrestrial Ecosystems.
5.5.2 Aquatic Ecosystems.
5-16
5-16
5-16
.
.
5.6
5.7
.
.
EFFECTS ON COMMUNITY
TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS.
5.7.1 Principles of Safety in Transport
5.7.2 Transport of New Fuel .
5.7.3 Transport of Irradiated Fuel.
5.7.4 Transport of Solid Radioactive Wastes
5-29
5-29
5-29
5-30
5-32
5-32
.
.
.
.
.
.
6.
ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAMS. .
. 6-1
.
.
.
6.1
.
•
.
.
PREOPERATIONAL PROGRAMS.
6.1.1 Meteorology
6.1.2 Ecology
6.1.3 Environmental Radiation
6-1
6-1
6-1
6-1
•
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6.2 OPERATIONAL PROGRAMS
6.2.1 Meteorology
6.2.2 Chemicals
6.2.3 Ecology .
6.2.4 Environmental Radiation
6-1
6-1
6-2
6-2
6-3
.
.
O
6.3
.
.
.
RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS AND STUDIES
6.3.1 Ecology .
6.3.2 Environmental Radiation
6-6
6-6
6-7
.
.
7.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF POSTULATED ACCIDENTS.
7-1
.
.
7-1
.
7.1
7.2
1
1
1
.
.
.
1
.
.
PLANT ACCIDENTS.
TRANSPORTATION ACCIDENTS INVOLVING RADIOACTIVE
MATERIALS.
7.2.1 New Fuel.
7.2.2 Irradiated Fuel
7.2.3 Solid Radioactive Wastes.
7.2.4 Severity of Postulated Transportation
Accidents
7-6
7-7
7-8
7-8
.
.
.
•
7-9
.
.
8.
IMPLICATIONS OF THE PROJECT
8-1
8.1
THE REQUIREMENT FOR POWER.
. . 8-1
8.1.1 The Requirement for Power in the Service Areas
of the Applicant and NJPL .
8-1
xi
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
8.1.2
8-7
Requirement for Power in the General Public
Utilities Service Area
Requirement for Power in the Mid-Atlantic
Area Council
8.1.3
8-7
.
8.2
.
O
.
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC EFFECTS
8.2.1 Employment
8.2.2 Education.
8.2.3 Taxes .
8.2.4 Recreation
8.2.5 Research.
8-12
8-12
8-12
8-12
8-13
8-13
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
.
CONSEQUENCES OF POWER AVAILABILITY
UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY
IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF
RESOURCES
8-13
8-14
8-15
.
8-17
9.
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT
9-1
.
9.1
9-1
9-1
ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES AND SITES
9.1.1 Alternatives Not Requiring the Creation of
New Generating capacity. .
9.1.2 Alternatives Requiring the Creation of
New Capacity .
9.1.3 Alternative Sites
.
9-4
9-5
9.2
.
.
.
ALTERNATIVE PLANT DESIGNS
9.2.1 Alternative Cooling Systems
9.2.2 Alternative Chemical Systems
9.2.3 Alternative Biocide Systems
9.2.4 Alternative Radwaste Treatment
9.2.5 Alternative Transmission Corridors
9-7
9-8
9-24
9-25
9-25
9-25
.
0
.
.
10.
BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS.
.10-1
.
10.1 SUMMARY OF BENEFITS (PRESENT STATION)
10.1.1 Direct Benefits.
10.1.2 Indirect Benefits.
.10-1
. 10-1
.10-1
.
xii
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
10.2
10-4
+
1
10-4
.
i
SUMMARY OF COSTS (PRESENT STATION).
10.2.1 Capital Cost and Related Resource
Commitments
10.2.2 Operating cost and Related Resource
Commitments
10.2.3 Land Utilization
10.2.4 Aesthetics
10.2.5 Water Pollution
10.2.6 Air Pollution
.
10-4
10-4
10-5
10-5
10-5
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10.3 BENEFIT-COST BALANCE.
10.3.1 Benefit-Cost Differential Analysis.
10-6
10-6
>
Appendix A - Licenses, Permits and Approvals.
'. A-1
Appendix B - Phytoplankton Organisms Recorded From Barnegat
B-1
Appendix C Bibliography.
C-1
Appendix M - Meteorological Data
M-1
Bay
.
-
.
.
.
.
1
1
1
!
1
1
.
i
1
1
xiii
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
.
.
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
.
.
.
OCEAN COUNTY.
TOPOGRAPHY OF THE SITE VICINITY, PRECONSTRUCTION.
MARSHLANDS IN THE SITE VICINITY, PRECONSTRUCTION.
RESIDENT POPULATION DISTRIBUTION, 1970 AND 2010 .
RESIDENT AND SEASONAL POPULATION DISTRIBUTION
1970 AND 2010, 10-MILE RADIUS . .
SAMPLING ARRAY FOR 1965 SURVEYS OF WATER QUALITY
AND BOTTOM SEDIMENTS. .
BARNEGAT BAY SALINITY PROFILES. .
NEW JERSEY PINE BARRENS VEGETATION.
2-6
2.6
.
2-11
2-13
2-18
2.7
2.8
.
.
.
.
3.1
.
3-2
3-3
3-6
3-7
3-9
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
.
.
.
OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION VIEWED FROM THE
SOUTHEAST
STATION VIEW FROM THE PARKWAY
SIMPLIFIED FLOW SYSTEMS FOR WATER AND CHEMICALS
CURRENT STATION VICINITY.
CANAL EROSION UPSTREAM FROM STATION
INTAKE STRUCTURE PLAN AT CENTERLINE OF RECIRCULATION
TUNNEL.
INTAKE STRUCTURE SECTION
LIQUID RADIOACTIVE WASTE SYSTEM
GASEOUS RADIOACTIVE WASTE SYSTEM
TRANSMISSION LINE ROUT ING
.
•
O
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.10
3-10
3-11
3-15
3-25
3-29
.
.
4.1
4.2
STATION FOUNDATION EXCAVATION
CANAL EXCAVATION AND SPOILS HANDL ING
4-2
4-2
.
5.1
.
GENERALIZED EXPOSURE PATHWAYS FOR ORGANISMS OTHER
THAN MAN. .
GENERALIZED EXPOSURE PATHWAYS TO MAN.
AVOIDANCE TEMPERATURES FOR CERTAIN FISHES
LETHAL TEMPERATURES FOR CERTAIN FISHES.
5.2
5.3
5.4
.
5-7
5-8
5-26
5-27
.
.
6.1
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION MONITORING STATIONS
6-5
.
8-2
8.1
8.2
8-6
8.3
GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES SYSTEM .
POWER FORECAST, NEW JERSEY SUBSIDARIES OF GPU INSTALLED
SUMMER CAPACITY AND PEAK LOAD COMPARISON CURVES
FORECASTED OR ACTUAL PEAK LOADS AND INSTALLED SUMMER
CAPACITIES WITHIN THE GPU SYSTEM 1966-1981.
MID-ATLANTIC AREA COUNCIL (PJM) FORECAST OF INSTALLED
SUMMER CAPACITY AND PROJECTED PEAK LOADS 1972-1981.
8-8
.
8.4
8-10
.
+
xiv
LIST OF TABLES
Page
2.1
.
O
.
2-8
2-12
2-15
2-17
2-17
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
.
.
.
2-20
2-21
.
2.7
2.8
INCORPORATED PLACES AND UN INCORPORATED PLACES OF
1000 INHABITANTS OR MORE.
CHARACTERISTICS OF BARNEGAT BAY
SUMMARY OF ATLANTIC CITY CLIMATOLOGICAL CONDITIONS.
PERCENT OCCURRENCE OF OYSTER CREEK WIND DIRECTIONS.
PERCENT OCCURRENCE OF OYSTER CREEK WIND SPEED RANGES.
REPRESENTATIVE PLANTS FROM UPLAND AND LOWLAND
VEGETATION TYPES.
REPRESENTATIVE VERTEBRATE ANIMALS
FRESHWATER FISH SPECIES INDIGENOUS TO OYSTER CREEK AND
THE SOUTH BRANCH FORKED RIVER PRIOR TO PLANT
CONSTRUCTION. .
BENTHIC ALGAE FOUND IN 50% OR MORE OF 1965-68
COLLECTIONS
PRELIMINARY LIST OF ZOOPLANKTERS COLLECTED IN
BARNEGAT BAY. ..
FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF DOMINANT BENTHOS
SHELLFISH CATCH IN BARNEGAT BAY
FINFISH COLLECTED IN THE BARNEGAT BAY AREA (1966-68).
COMMERCIAL FINFISH CATCH IN BARNEGAT BAY.
2-22
2.9
2-23
.
.
2.10
.
2-25
2-27
2-28
2-29
2-31
2.11
2.12
2.13
2.14
.
.
3-5
3.1
3.2
.
3-17
3-20
3.3
3.4
3-21
3.5
WATER USE BY STATION COMPONENT.
CALCULATED ANNUAL RELEASES OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL IN
LIQUID EFFLUENTS FROM LIQUID WASTE SUBSYSTEMS OR
STATION ...
LIQUID WASTES PROCESSED IN LIQUID WASTE SYSTEM
PRINCIPAL CONDITIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS USED IN ESTIMATING
RADIOACTIVE RELEASES FROM STATION ..
CALCULATED ANNUAL RELEASE OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS IN
LIQUID EFFLUENTS FROM STATION
CALCULATED ANNUAL RELEASES OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS IN
GASEOUS EFFLUENTS FROM STATION.
GASEOUS WASTES RELEASED FROM PLANT
SOLID WASTES SHIPPED FROM PLANT
ESTIMATED CHEMICAL RELEASES TO THE CIRCULATING WATER
DISCHARGE CANAL
DEMINERALIZER REGENERANT RELEASES
EMISSIONS FROM BOILER AND DIESEL ENGINES.
3-23
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
3-27
3-29
3-31
3.10
3.11
3-32
3-33
3-37
.
XV
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Page
5.1
5-10
.
5.2
5-11
5.3
5-14
.
5.4
BIOACCUMULATION FACTORS FOR CHEMICAL ELEMENTS IN
MARINE SPECIES.
RADIATION DOSES TO INDIVIDUALS FROM LIQUID AND GASEOUS
EFFLUENTS RELEASED FROM THE OYSTER CREEK STATION.
ANNUAL DOSE TO THE TOTAL POPULATION WITHIN 50 MILES OF
THE OYSTER CREEK STATION DUE TO LIQUID EFFLUENTS. ..
CUMULATIVE POPULATION, ANNUAL MAN-REM DOSE AND AVERAGE
ANNUAL DOSE IN SELECTED CIRCULAR AREAS AROUND THE
OYSTER CREEK STATION DUE TO GASEOUS EFFLUENTS
SUMMARY OF SCREEN CENSUS RESULTS.
PERCENTAGE OF EGGS HATCHING FROM INDIVIDUALS COLLECTED
AT INTAKE AND OUTFALL
COMPARISON OF MACRO-ALGAE AT OYSTER CREEK AND STOUTS
CREEK FOR SEVERAL POPULATION PARAMETERS
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF TRANSPORTATION OF FUEL AND
WASTES TO AND FROM A TYPICAL LIGHT-WATER-COOLED
NCULEAR POWER REACTOR .
.
0
5.5
5.6
5-15
5-19
.
5-21
0
5.7
5-24
5.8
5-31.
6.1
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY MONITORING PROGRAM FOR
OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR ELECTRIC GENERATING STATION. .
.
6-4,
7.1
7.2
7-2
CLASSIFICATION OF POSTULATED ACCIDENTS AND OCCURRENCES.
SUMMARY OF RADIOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF POSTULATED
ACCIDENTS
.
7-4
8.1
.
.
8.2
8.3
8-4
8-5
.
O
THE INSTALLED CAPACITY WITHIN SYSTEMS OF THE
APPLICANT AND NJPL.
APPLICANT'S AND NJPL'S LOAD, CAPACITY, AND RESERVE.
ACTUAL OR EXPECTED GROWTH RATES AND RESERVE MARGINS FOR
THE GPU AREA FROM 1966 THROUGH 1980 FOR SUMMER PEAK
LOAD REQUIREMENTS
PROJECTED GROWTH RATES AND RESERVE MARGINS IN MAAC
POWER POOL FOR THE YEARS 1972 THROUGH 1981.
INCOME REALIZED FROM SALE OF ELECTRICITY GENERATED
AT OYSTER CREEK DURING 1971
8.4
8-9
8.5
8-11
.
8-14
.
xvi
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Page
9-2
9.1
9.2
9-3
9.3
9-4
9-6
9.4
9.5
9-7
.
RETIREMENT PLANS WITHIN MAAC FROM 1972-1981. .
PLANT CHARACTERISTICS FOR GPU PLANTS BEING RETIRED
THROUGH 1976 (Oyster Creek and all GPU Fossil Plants).
STACK DISCHARGES FROM A FOSSIL PLANT WITH A RATING
OF 620 MWe
COSTS OF PRODUCING POWER FROM ALTERNATIVE SOURCES.
NONRADIOACTIVE RELEASES TO THE ATMOSPHERE FROM
ALTERNATIVE POWER SOURCES. .
ADDITIONAL RELEASES TO ATMOSPHERE FROM RUNNING DILUTION
PUMPS TO MINIMIZE DISCHARGE CANAL TEMPERATURES
AQUATIC BIOTA ENTRAPPED AND KILLED IN OCEAN INTAKE
AND DISCHARGE SYSTEM
AQUATIC BIOTA ENTRAPPED AND KILLED ANNUALLY BY INTAKE
SALTWATER COOLING TOWER SYSTEM
ADDITIONAL CHEMICAL RELEASES TO THE ATMOSPHERE
RESULT ING FROM THE USE OF A SALTWATER COOLING TOWER.
9.6
9-10
9.7
9-12
.
9.8
9-15
9.9
9-15
.
.
10.1
10.2
10.3
10.4
BENEFITS FROM THE STATION AS NOW OPERATING
REGIONAL PRODUCT (Jersey Central Service Area)
OYSTER CREEK ALTERNATIVES.
DIFFERENTIAL EVALUATION-OYSTER CREEK ALTERNATIVES.
10-2
10-4
10-7
10-9
.
.
.
1-1
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
STATUS OF PROJECT, REVIEWS, AND APPROVALS
The completely constructed Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station has
generated power since December 1969. The amended provisional operating
license permits station operation up to a power level of 1930 MWt at a
levelized, installed annual capacity of 620 MWe (Ref 1, p. 11.1-1). On
March 6, 1972, the Jersey Central Power and Light Company (applicant)
applied for a full-term operating license and submitted the required
environmental report. On April 24, 1972, the AEC determined that the
provisional license would continue in effect until the AEC has made
a determination on the application for a full-term license. The Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) will conduct a public hearing on the
application.
On March 26, 1964, the applicant applied for the station construction
permit and operating license. During October 14-16, 1964, the Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board conducted a public hearing at the Toms River,
NJ Town Hall on the application. Provisional Construction Permit CPPR-15
was issued by the AEC December 15, 1964.
Under Amendment No. 3 (dated January 25, 1967) the applicant requested an
initial operating license at a power level of 1600 MWt with a rated capa-
city of 515 MWe net. On April 9, 1969, the AEC issued Provisional
Operating License DRP-16 authorizing thermal power levels up to 5 MWt
and on August 1, 1969 amended the license to 1600 MWt.
On May 5, 1970, the applicant requested under Amendment No. 55 authority
to operate the plant at 1690 MWt. On December 2, 1970, the AEC amended
the license to permit station operation at 1690 MWt.
Under Amendment No. 65 of December 31, 1970, the applicant requested
permission to increase the power level to 1930 MWE. On November 5, 1971
the AEC amended the license to permit operation at the higher power
level.
Numerous other licenses, permits and approvals were required in construct-
ing and operating the station (Ref 1, p. 12.0-2). These are listed in
Appendix A. The stipulation concerning thermal discharge is being reviewed
and will require the applicant to apply for state certification that the
plant meets water quality standards.
1.2
RELATED FACILITIES
In June 1970, application was made by Jersey Central Power and Light
Company to construct and operate the Forked River Nuclear Station Unit
1-2
No. 1, to be located less than 1 mile west of the Oyster Creek Station.
A final environmental statement on the proposed Forked River Station has
been issued by the AEC, and the issuing of a construction permit awaits
the decision of the ASLB. The AEC Directorate of Licensing (staff) is
aware of no further plans the applicant may have for future power gener-
ating facilities in the Oyster Creek area. The Newbold Island nuclear
generating facility has been proposed by another applicant for con-
struction, about 40 miles northwest of the Oyster Creek site.
1-3
REFERENCES
1.
>
Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Oyster Creek Nuclear Gener-
ating Station, Environmental Report, March 6, 1972, Amendment 68
to "The Application for Construction Permit and Operating License,'
Docket No. 50-219, March 26, 1964.
.
>
Hereafter in this statement, when a reference is cited two or more times
in a given section, the citation will appear in the body of the text and
will be enclosed in parentheses. The citation in the text will state
the number of the general work referenced at the end of the section,
followed by the specific volume, section, page, figure, table, appendix,
or supplement number, or other appropriate identification, e.g., (Ref.
2, p. 5.3-1), or (Ref. 1, Appendix C, Response B3).
>
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2-1
2.
THE SITE
2.1
STATION LOCATION
The Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station is located in Ocean County,
New Jersey, 2 miles inland from Barneget Bay. The 1416-acre site is
owned by the applicant. It is situated partly in Lacey Township and,
to a lesser extent, in Ocean Township. The site is about 60 miles South
of Newark, 9 miles south of Toms River and 35 miles north of Atlantic
City. The Garden State Parkway bounds the site on the west. Overland
access to the site is provided by the Central Railroad of New Jersey and
U. S. Route 9, both passing through the site and separating a 661-acre
eastern portion from the balance of the property west of the railroad and
highway. The station is about 1/4 mile west of the highway and 1-1/4 miles
east of the parkway. The site property extends about 3-1/2 miles inland
from the bay; the maximum width in the north-south direction is almost
1 mile. Figure 2.1 relates the site to the more pertinent features of
the county.
The site location is part of the New Jersey shore area with its relatively
flat topography and extensive freshwater and saltwater marshlands. The
South Branch Forked River runs across the northern side of the site, and
Oyster Creek partly borders the southern side, Those features are shown
in Figures 2.2 and 2.3, based upon maps prepared by the New Jersey Depart-
ment of Conservation and Economic Development and by the United States Coast
and Geodetic Survey, prior to station construction.
2.2 REGIONAL DEMOGRAPHY, LAND AND WATER USE
While the state's population increased by 18.2% from 1960 to 1970, the
county increased by 92.6%, and Lacey and Ocean Townships increased by
137.9 and 141.3%, respectively. The region adjacent to the bay is one
of the state's most rapidly developing areas.
1
The resident population distribution within 10 miles during 1970 and 2010
is shown in Figure 2.4 (Ref 2, Subsection 2.2.1). The 1970 resident pop-
ulation within 10 miles of the site is estimated to be 45,000 and, by
2010, is expected to be 156,000, corresponding to a growth rate of 4%/yr.
In addition to the resident population, a sizeable seasonal influx of
people occurs during the summer. The influx resides almost exclusively
along the waterfront. Figure 2.5 shows the resident and seasonal popula-
tion distribution for 1970 and for 2010 within a 10-mile region surrounding
the site (Ref 2, Subsection 2.2.1). Within 10 miles of the site, the
resident plus seasonal population is expected to show a yearly growth rate
of 3.5%.
2-2
MONMOUTH
CASSWUE O
LAKEWOOD
PT PLEASANT
MONTOLOKING
GARDEN STATE PARKWAY
1
1
LAKEWOOO
OF NEW JERSEY
FORT DOX
US NAVAL
AIR STATION
LAKEHURST
RAILROAD
TOMS RIVER
SOUTH TOMS RIVER
ISLAND COATES POINT
HEIGHTS
CENTRAL
PINEWALD KESWICK ROAD
BRANCH
PINE BEACH TOMS R
JAKES
BEACHWOOO
OCEAN GATE
BAYVILLE
DOVER
BAMBER
LAKE
DOUBLE TROUBLE
PINEWALD
WATERWAY
HACEY
LACEY ROAD
CEDAR CREEK
e
BAANEGAT BAY
o
OCEAN
NORTH BRANCH
FORKED RIVER LANOKA
HARBOR
STOUTS
BARNEGAT
CREEK
PINES
EES
STATE
GAME FARM
INTERCOASTAL
BURLINGTON
MIDOLE BRANCH
ISLAND BEACH STATE PARK
BRANC
FORKED R
SOUTH BRANCH
OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT
ATLANTIC OCEAN
.WARETOWN
OYSTER CREEK
BARNEGAT INLETS
BARNEGAT LIGHT
STATE PARK
STASYONO
BARNEGAT
|
1
!
เรีวิว
MARVEY CEDARS
MANAHAWKIN
MANAMAWKIN CAUSEWAY
LONG BEACH ISLANO
1
my
TUCKERTON
20,000
10,000
FEET
ATLANTIC
FIGURE 2.1
OCEAN COUNTY
2-3

20
1009
10
30
LACEY RD.
40
20
8060
50
NORTH BRANCH
DEERHEAD LAKE
STOUTS
CREEK
9
052
90
WRANGLE CREEK
658
L. BARNEGAT
50
40
STATE GAME FARM
80
30
10
o
MILLE
POND
FORKED RIVER
70
TIDE MARSH
60
PARKWAY
MIDDLE BRANCH
EFORKED R.
50
అంతరంగా
MILE
30
20
40
STATE
10
SOUTH BRANCH
SITE
BARNEGAT BAY
20
20-
OYSTER CREEKS
a
50
GARDEN
301
10
20
50
40
50
60
4.5
10
-70
40
30
50.
ESEDGES
WISLANDE
-103
བབ་
80
20
507
60.
FIGURE 2.2
TOPOGRAPHY OF THE SITE VICINITY, PRECONSTRUCTION
2-4
CEDAR CREEK
NORTH BRANCH
STOUTS CREEK
GARDEN STATE PARKWAY
FORKED RIVER
MIDDLE BRANCH
FORKED RIVER
SITE BOUNDARY
SOUTH BRANCH
PLANT SITE
BARNEGAT BAY
SOYSTER CREEK
WARETOWN
* FRESHWATER MARSHLAND
SALTWATER MARSHLAND
2 CRANBERRY BOG
MOX
MILE
CLAM ISLAND)
BARNEGAT
FIGURE 2.3
MARSHLANDS IN THE SITE VICINITY, PRECONSTRUCTION
2-5
N
TOMS RIVER
NNW
NNE
GILFORD PARK
NOTE:
RADIUS IN MILES
10
ACCUMULATME 1970 | 226 2,514 5,433 8,319 9,835 45,586
TOTAL
2010 11.228 13,702 29,433 45,266 51,988 156,571
BEACHWOOD
PINE BEACH
OCEAN GATE
NW
19.224
60.860
SEASIDE PARK
NE
KEY
31 ESTIMATED 1970 POPULATION
223 ESTIMATED 2010 POPULATION
제용
​2.992
28.977
2,077
8.400
ISLANO BEACH
600
8
의
​WNW
유
​567
ENE
&la
(
2,986
BARNEGAT BAY
의
​이여
​이
​이이
​이유
​300
1.420
요
​6
190
1.026
SO
133
1.050
2.916 645
18
3.670
196
FORKED RIVER
1000 20
으
​1.7267
2,51
1388
202
1001
2.301
75 263
406 1,367
158
853
305
225 1.647
162/22412150
24
이
​이
​W
Door
으로
​이이​이이​이이
​o
스
​olo
21
응
​10
O IO
ATLANTIC OCEAN
E
오
​92
2"
ISLAND BEACH STATE PARK
으이
​의
​이어
​240
olo
L210 WARETOWN 10
이
​22
1.01
이용
​212
1.146
2.338
이이
​10
178
2.300
.239
6.685
이이
​BARNEGAT UGMT
WSW
128
,
188
1.015
ESE
1.881
7,309
860
2.084
HƏVƏB 9N01
SW
1,224
MARVEY CEDARS
SE
O
2
3
MANAKAWKIN
8
MILES
1
SSW
FRAZIER PARK
SSE
BAY SIDE
FIGURE 2.4
RESIDENT POPULATION DISTRIBUTION, 1970 AND 2010
2-6
N
TOMS AIVER
NNW
NNE
GILFORD PARK
NOTE:
RADIUS IN MILES
4 5 10
ACCUMULATIVE 1970 789 8,257 16,635 23,672 27,642 97,315
TOTAL
201014,264 34,564 78,554 104,523 124,554 277,877
BEACHWOOD
PINE BEACH
NW
OCEAN GATE
36.707
61,480
19.504
39,700
SEASIDE PARK
NE
KEY
31. ESTIMATED 1970 POPULATION
223 ESTIMATED 2010 POPULATION
지용
​4011
15,844
161
PISLAND BEACH
8
WNW
음
​ENE
19
O
937
3.773
21
562
1.419
2.981
7.663
1,604
391
3.000
8.661
1,892
2.110
6.606
10.632
$79
FORKED RIVER
3.126
1.364
193 977
7.366
756
880
4.265
18.
2.866 693 3.296
456
2462 2.740
220 743
1,188
1,336
BARNEGAT BAY
'이
​육
​이
​웅
​OIO
Ble
(이
​이
​1,293 3.202
26
140
이이​이이
​OIO
3
18010
큵
​.
읆
​이
​이
​7o
10
0
E
ATLANTIC OCEAN
오
​8
\o-o
733
SLANO BEACH STATE PARK
20
이​.
y
응
​010
18
1.040,
332 362 3.616
010
의​.
16
384
OIO
363
1,771
1.200 WARETOWN
600
980
679 5,292
3.866
이
​010
이
​340
275
WSW
2.290
12.398
oh
BARNEGAT LIGHT
592
3,197
104
581
869
4,352
ESE
1.805
6.993
HO
3,888
18.207
1.692
6.557
LONG BEACH
SW
2,491
11.816
MARVEY CEDARS
SE
3
MANAHAWKIN
MILES
SSW
FRAZIER PAAK
SSE
BAY SIDE
FIGURE 2.5
RESIDENT AND SEASONAL POPULATION DISTRIBUTION 1970 AND 2010
2-7
The extent of the transient population influx is indicated by the fact
that in 1971 600,000 people visited Barnegat Light State Park and Island
Beach State Park, both across the bay on the barrier beach, a few miles
east of the site (Ref 2, p. 2.2-5).
There are no cities within 10 miles of the site having a permanent popul-
ation greater than 10,000. The municipalities and unincorporated places
with a population greater than 1000 are listed in Table 2.1.1
Philadelphia is 50 miles WNW of the site and Staten Island is 50 miles
to the north. Their suburbs add significantly to the total number of
people within 50 miles. For example, there are only 513,000 inhabitants
within 30 miles of the site but 3,483,000 inhabitants within 50 miles.
Ocean County has relatively little manufacturing. In 1960, about 17% of
employed individuals were in manufacturing, compared to a state-wide
average of 36%.4
In 1960, 6.9% of county land was used for agriculture. In 1964, the figure
had fallen to 4.8%. 3 The Agricultural Census of 1969 shows a 7,249 agri-
cultural acreage compared to 15,400 in 1964. Fifty nine percent of the
land is forested, 15.2% is in public lands, 4.6% is in roads, and 14.1% is
in residential use. (Ref 2, p. 2.2-12). A large portion of the land is
a part of the New Jersey pine barrens.
.
Water in the site vicinity is used for recreation, shipping, irrigation,
and as a potable supply. Saltwater fishing, boating, skiing, and bath-
ing are popular pastimes in the area. Freshwater streams, including
Forked River and Oyster Creek, are used for fishing and boating. Some
shipping occurs on the Intracoastal Waterway running through the bay.
Within 10 miles of the station there are 12 acres under irrigation, all in
4
Berkeley Township. Fourteen wells 50 to 350 ft deep, within 5 miles of
the station, provide major supplies of potable water for residents and
the public (Ref 2, p. 2.2-22).
2.3
HISTORIC AND ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES
The applicant identified 47 historic places in the county (Ref 2, p. 2.3-4),
including two recognized in the National Register of Historic Places:
5
Hangar Number 1 at the Lakehurst Naval Air Station, about 20 miles NNW of
the plant, and Barnegat Lighthouse, 6 miles SE. In addition to these two
places, the Historic Sites Section of the New Jersey Department of Envi-
ronmental Protection recognizes the Manahawkin Baptist Church, 9 miles SW.
2-8
TABLE 2.1
INCORPORATED PLACES AND UNINCORPORATED PLACES
OF 1000 INHABITANTS OR MORE
Distance
From Site
(Miles)
Direction
From
Site
Municipality
Population
Barnegat Light
7
ESE
554
Beachwood
9
N
4,390
Forked River
1
NNE
1,422
Gifford Park
10
NNE
4,007
Island Beach
8
ENE
1,397
Harvey Cedars
8
SSE
314
Manahawkin
9
SSW
1,278
Ocean Gate
9
NE
1,081
Pine Beach
9
NNE
1,395
Seaside Park
10
NE
1,432
South Toms River
9
N
3,981
Toms River
10
N
7, 303
TOTAL
28,554
2-9
The site includes no historic places. The station and transmission line
do not intrude upon or otherwise affect the setting and significance of
any historic place. In addition, the Curator of Cultural History of the
New Jersey State Museum found no evidence of archaeological sites within
the station property bounded by the South Branch Forked River, the park-
way, and the bay (Ref 2, p. 2.3-6). The State Liaison Officer for Historic
Preservation has not identified any adverse effects of station operation
upon State cultural and historical resources.
2.4 GEOLOGY
The plant site lies on the Atlantic Coastal Plain which continues about
40 miles northeast of the site to the Fall Zone marking the beginning of
the more varied topography of the Piedmont Province.
O
More than 200 borings were made in the site vicinity to define its strati-
graphy. The two surficial layers were correlated with the Pleistocene
Cape May Formation. The upper compact sand layer extends about 16 ft below
the surface starting at elevation 23 ft above MSL. The second layer con-
sists of stiff clay-silt with a 10 to 17-ft thickness. Underlying the
surficial layers is the Upper Tertiary Cohansey Sand formation, a 50 to
65-ft thick layer consisting of dense medium to coarse sand. The underlying
Kirkwood Formation varies in thickness from 10 to 54 ft and consists of grey,
fine-to-medium sands with clay interbedded near the top of the layer. Similar
interbeds of clay and dense sand were encountered at 190 to 250 ft below
grade. The total thickness of such clay-sand lenses probably is less than
10 ft over the entire profile to that depth.
While the deeper sediments are highly consolidated, the first evidence
of hard rock is indicated at 1800 to 2000 ft below grade, an estimate
based upon seismic profiling and a deep test well drilled on Island
Beach. The geology and seismic history of the region predicts insigni-
ficant ground motion during the life of the station.
2.5
SURFACE AND GROUND WATERS
2.5.1
Surface Water
Moderate rainfall, combined with relatively flat topography, results in
a large portion of the region surrounding the site being in a swampy,
poorly drained condition. The mean surface runoff from the area was
estimated grossly at 360 cfs. Based upon the mean evaporation rate of
32 in./yr for Ocean County, and the average annual precipitation of
42 in./yr, the implied drainage area was estimated at approximately 700
square miles.
2-10
Freshwater reaches of Oyster Creek and the South Branch Forked River are
characteristic of cedar swamp and pine barren drainages of the Atlantic
Coastal states. They drain about 7.5 and 2 square miles, respectively.
The immediate site area is drained by two basins which converge into
Oyster Creek and Forked River. Both freshwater streams drain into the
bay. The Middle Branch and North Branch Forked River are located still
farther north of the site. The Toms River Basin and the Cedar Creek
Basin also drain into the bay north of the site. Cedar Creek, shown in
Figure 2.3, is of particular interest, because the applicant has used it
as an example of conditions typical of Oyster Creek and Forked River
before station construction.
The flow of the Forked River drainage is estimated to be less than 5 cfs.
Definite flow records are not available, but on the basis of a few USGS
samples, the average discharge of the South Branch is estimated at 3 cfs.
For Oyster Creek, flow records for 1966-1969 reflect a mean daily flow of
about 25 cfs with a maximum of 125 cfs and a minimum of 12 cfs. The Toms
River Basin has an average flow of 200 cfs and the Cedar Creek Basin has
an average of 108 cfs.7
The sum of those drainages is not greatly differ-
ent from the estimated net drainage for the general area.
The lower reaches of the South Branch Forked River and Oyster Creek pro-
bably were under tidal influence up to the middle of the site for the
South Branch and up to U.S. Route 9 for Oyster Creek. The quality of
Oyster Creek water was relatively unaffected by saltwater intrusion to
a a point 2500 ft east of the highway. The South Branch showed 0.047 ppt
sodium and potassium at the highway (Ref 2, p. 2.5-7).
On a particular day in June 1965, water temperatures at Station A on
Oyster Creek ranged from 60°F at the surface to 71 °F at the bottom. On
the same date, temperatures at Stations G and H on the South Branch ranged
from 65-70°F at the surface to 70-78°F at the bottom. The location of
the stations is shown on Figure 2.6.
8
Such temperature inversions result
from the layering of cooler fresh water upon the warmer but denser salt
water (see p. 2-32). Such layering is common in estuaries of this type.
The bay is shallow with an average depth of 5 ft and a maximum depth of
20 ft. It has a surface area of approximately 1.8 x 109 square ft and a
volume of 9.5 x 10 cubic ft. The intertidal volume is 7.9 x 108 cubic ft.
Most of that volume is associated with Barnaget Inlet, forming a break
to the ocean in the barrier beach, the bay's eastern boundary. The bay
is about 30 miles long from Point Pleasant on the north end to Manahawkin
Causeway on the south end, and 4 miles wide at its greatest width.
inlet is about 20 miles south of Point Pleasant. Flow characteristics
in the south end of the bay, where there is a second break to the ocean,
are strongly affected by tidal circulation and wind currents.
2-11
74°10'
39°50'
F
M
'1
H
kruh
za
FORKED
RIVER
SAND
SOUTH BRANCH
INTRA COASTAL
WATERWAY
PO
M
Re-
WC
OYSTER CREEK
A
Ti
E
L
MUD
B
-N-
SAND
к
ve U
39°48'
ruer
Yo
WARETOWN
CREEK
OYSTER CREEK CHANNEL
FIGURE 2.6
SAMPLING ARRAY FOR 1965 SURVEYS OF WATER QUALITY
AND BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
2-12
The bay's salt content is 12 ppt at a point 9 miles north of the site
and 32 ppt near the southern end of the bay. Thus, the bay water has
been characterized as ranging from near brackish at the north end to
near seawater at the south end. The pattern seems to be consistent
with the known freshwater drainage pattern and the known tidal condi-
tions. Salinity profiles for the bay (Figure 2.7) indicate that Oyster
Creek and Forked River exert a small and intermittent effect on the
bay's salinity regimen. 6 The principal characteristics of the bay are
summarized in Table 2.2.
A review of Table 2.2 suggests a large, shallow bay with sluggish turnover,
prohibiting rapid dispersion of discharge effluent. The principal tidal
exchange is through Barnegat Inlet and to the south via Manahawkin Inlet.
TABLE 2.2
1
CHARACTERISTICS OR
BARNEGAT BAY
Length
30 miles
Maximum Width
4 miles
Surface Area
41,300 acres
Average Depth
5 ft
Maximum Depth
20 ft
Volume
195,000 acre-ft
Tidal Range (Bay)
3.5 ft
Tidal Range (Oyster Creek Mouth)
0.5 ft
Tidal Cycle
12.7 hr
Tidal Flow
18,100 acre-ft
Effluents discharged into the bay mix ultimately with ocean water, sub-
ject to flow and mixing conditions dictated by wind and tidal forces.
At the central portion, the vertical salinity profile is relatively con-
stant, indicating that tidal mixing is the principal factor in salinity
distribution. The tidal effect is further reduced north of the inlet,
and the vertical salinity distribution in the north end of the bay
reflects the freshwater dilution from the drainage basins. The tidal
range at the mouths of Oyster Creek and Forked River is reduced to 6 in.,
reflecting the attenuation due to reduced tidal influence.
2-13
0
13 15 17
19
20 21 23
25 26
27
28
29
30 31 32
1
2
3
4
5 AUGUST
0
14 15
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28
29
30
31
1
2
3
15-16 AUGUST
4
0
20 2122 23 24 25
26
27
28 29
30
31
1
15
쓰
​2
3
12
LÜD
20
PUTERE
4
0
21-23 AUGUST
13
METERS
15 16
19
20 21 23 24 25 26
27 28
29
30
31
1
2
3
27 AUGUST
4
0
18 19 20
24 25
26
27
28
29
30 31
1
2
3
2 SEPTEMBER
4
0
12
19 20
22
24 25 26 28
29
30 31
31
1
i u
2
3
Forked Oyster
River Creek
14-15 SEPTEMBER
4
3
0 1 2
1
Toms River
4 5 6
8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
1 1
1
MILES
Manahawkin
SALINITY (PPT) WITH DEPTH TOMS RIVER TO MANA HAWK IN BAY, 1963
Bay
FIGURE 2.7
BARNEGAT BAY SALINITY PROFILES
2-14
The water temperature of the bay responds readily to air temperature
changes due to its shallowness. The vertical temperature profile appears
to be relatively flat with only transient changes being observed. The
applicant's preconstruction water quality data taken on Oyster Creek and
the South Branch Forked River (Ref 2, p. 2.5-7) as well as those taken on
the bay are marked by a fairly high degree of variability such that useful
conclusions are difficult to make.
2.5.2
Groundwater
The general area of the coastal plain of New Jersey has an abundant nat-
ural groundwater supply, particularly in the county and at the site where
at least five bodies of fresh groundwater are known to exist in various
geologic formations. The groundwater head is sufficient to cause a net
flow toward the bay. Quaternary deposits of the upper 300 ft of gravels,
excluding the alluvium and sand of the top 50 to 75 ft, have been developed
to a limited extent. Flow tests on wells in the area have registered
flows up to 2.8 cfs of generally high quality water. Other important
aquifers have been developed, with flows up to 5 cfs, in the Raritan for-
mation at depths below 5000 ft.
In general, the groundwater in the area is of high quality and exhibits
low artesian pressure throughout the year. Most freshwater supplies in
the general area come from wells 34 to 350 ft deep. The major source of
replenishment of the groundwater supply is precipitation and there is
relatively little runoff in the area (Ref 2, p. 2.5-11).
2.6
METEOROLOGY
The site is located in a zone of transition between continental and
coastal climatic influences. While the climate is mainly continental,
the influences of the Atlantic Ocean can be seen throughout the year.
This review takes into account climatological records for Atlantic Citylo
and Pleasantville (Ref 2, p. 2.6-2), both about 35 miles from the station,
as well as micrometeorological data from the applicant's tower 1200 ft
WSW of the plant. 27
A summary of the climatology for the region based on the Atlantic City
records is presented in Table 2.3. Summer temperatures are moderate and
the humidities high as a result of the ocean influence, July is the
warmest month with a mean daily maximum air temperature of 84°F. The
record high temperature at Atlantic City is 102°F in August, 1948, based
on 20 years' data. The Pleasantville records are based on 31 years' data
and show a maximum of 106°F in July 1936. The winters are generally
2-15
TABLE 2.3
11
SUMMARY OF ATLANTIC CITY CLIMATOLOGICAL CONDITIONS
Normal Air
(°F) Temperature(a)
Daily Daily
Max. Min. Mean
Extreme Air Precipitation(a)
Temperature(b) Normal
(°F)
Total Snow
High Low (in.) (in.)
Wind (c)
Relative Mean
Humidity(c) Hourly
1 a.m. 1 p.m. Speed
(% (%) (mph)
Month
Direction
42.9 26.6
34.8
73
-8
3.56
4.4
75
58
12.6
WNW
January
February
43.3 26.7
34.7
73
-4
3.13
3.3
75
58
12.3
W
March
49.7
32.4
41.1
87
9
3.91
3.5
73
52
13.1
WNW
April
60.3 41.7
51.0
89
24
3.41
0.3
72
46
12.9
S
May
71.0 51.5
61.3
96
32
3.51
0.0
79
49
11.0
S
June
79.2 60.7
70.0
100
42
2.83
0.0
85
53
10.0
S
83.8 66.3
75.1
98
52
3.72
0.0
85
55
9.7
S
82.2 65.1
73.7
102
49
4.90
0.0
88
58
9.2
S
July
August
September
October
67.2
97
35
3.31
0.0
86
57
10.1
ENE
76.0 58.4
66.5 47.8
57.2
90
26
3.20
T
83
52
10.8
W
November
55.5 37.9
46.7
84
16
3.66
0.3
79
55
12.2
W
December
45.1 28.1
36.6
72
-7
3.22
2.8
76
59
11.9
WNW
(a) Climatological standard normals (1931-1960)
(b) Based on 20 years of data
(c) Based on 5 years of data
2-16
mild and humid with the coldest months being January and February, each
with a mean daily minimum of 35°F at Atlantic City. The record low tem-
peratures for the area include -8°F at Atlantic City in January 1961, and
-23°F at Pleasantville in January 1942.
The average range of relative humidity in January is from 77% at 0700
EST (Eastern Standard Time) to 58% at 1300 EST. In July the range is
from 83% to 55% for the same hours.
On the average, rainfall is well distributed over the year. August has
the greatest average rainfall (4.90 in.) and June the least (2.83 in.).
The pattern of rainfall is quite variable from year to year, particularly
in the autumn months. Extremes in precipitation range from a record min-
imum of 0.15 in. in October 1963 to a maximum of 13.09 in. in July 1959.
Summer precipitation is associated mainly with thunderstorms, while
coastal storms bring much of the precipitation during other seasons.
Hurricanes and smaller tropical storms can cause heavy rainfall in the
late summer and autumn. Winters at the site are less severe than those
inland, because of the ocean's influence. Rain constitutes most of the
winter precipitation.
The total snow fall is about 13 in. per season,
but it soon disappears.
The annual percent occurrences of wind direction and speed based on data
collected at Oyster Creek are given in Tables 2.4 and 2.5. Nine hurri-
canes passed within 100 miles of the site between 1935 and 1967. Wind
speeds of up to 91 mph were reported at Atlantic City based on 31 years'
records. An estimated return period for a tornado is 2170 years, based
on the fact that six tornadoes occurred in a one degree square encompassing
the site from 1953 to 1963.
The diffusion climatology shows 61.2% stable, 32.2% neutral, and 6.6%
unstable values, based on onsite tower temperature data taken at the 12
and 400 ft levels. 27
2.7
ECOLOGY
Information about the site prior to station construction must be derived
mostly from survey-type data or the literature in view of the limited
extent of preconstruction study. Quantitative terrestrial information
is unavailable. The following description is based on an estimate of
what the site was probably like prior to construction.
2.7.1
Terrestrial
The general area is typical New Jersey pine barrens described originally
by Harshberger. 11 Figure 2.8 shows the principal vegetation types con-
stituting the pine barrens of the coastal area.
2-17
TABLE 2.4
PERCENT OCCURRENCE OF OYSTER CREEK WIND DIRECTIONS (a)
Annual
Percent
Annual
Percent
Direction
Direction
N
NNE
NE
ENE
E
ESE
SE
SSE
3.0
2.0
3.3
5.5
5.8
4.2
4.4
4.6
S
SSW
SW
WSW
W
WNW
NW
NNW
6.2
6.3
5.5
8.8
10.8
12.4
10.9
6.2
(a) Based on 75 ft wind direction data 27
TABLE 2.5
PERCENT OCCURENCE OF OYSTER CREEK WIND SPEED RANGES (a)
Speed Range (mph)
Annual Percent
0-3(b)
4-7
8-12
13-18
19-24
Over 25
26.1
44.4
22.7
6.0
0.7
0.1
(a) Based on wind speed data at 75 ft above ground surface, 196827
(b) 124 hours of calm are included in total of 7323 hours.
2-18

ASBURY PARK
POINT PLEASANT
PENNSYLVANIA
NEW JERSEY
OCEAN
DELAWARE
THE SITE
BURLINGTON
GLOUCESTER
CAMDEN
ATLANTIC OCEAN
ATLANTIC
CUMBERLAND
ATLANTIC CITY
V
SALEM
UPLAND FOREST
SALTWATER MARSH
LOWLAND FOREST
VIZ NON FOREST
CULTIVATED LANDS
APPROXIMATELY 10 MILES
FIGURE 2.8
NEW JERSEY PINE BARRENS VEGETATION
2-19
The undisturbed vegetation within a 5-mile radius of the station and adja-
cent to much of the transmission line right-of-way is typical of the
pine barrens. Upland vegetation types include hardwood, mixed pine-
hardwood, and pine forests. Lowland types are white cedar swamps and
saltwater marsh. The extent of marshlands in 1953 is shown in Figure 2.3.
Nonforested land includes open water, housing developments, commercial
property, and a small amount of farmland. of the nearly 40,000 acres
within the 5-mile radius, about 62% is upland forest and 32% nonforested. 12
The 755 acres of the site west of U.S. Route 9 are believed to have included
originally examples of each vegetation type except saltwater marsh. The
upland forest types are dominated by oaks and pitch pine, with a diverse
understory of shrubs and herbaceous species. Examples of plants constitut-
ing upland and lowland vegetation types are given in Table 2.6 (Ref 2,
Table 2.7-4). Cedar swamp is the least abundant vegetation type but
ecologically most important because it represents a unique habitat and is
restricted in distribution. A major change in the appearance of the pine
barrens observed by the staff is a gradual disappearance of swampland.
Many cedar trees were observed dying or dead in the general vicinity
of the station, apparently due to land drainage prior to commercial
development.
.
Field surveys have noted 24 species of land vertebrates and 57 species
of nesting birds and waterfowl within a 5-mile radius of the site.
Table 2.7 lists representative vertebrates (Ref 2, Table 2.7-5). Evi-
dence of the pine barrens tree frog also was noted. The species is
endemic to cedar swamps and thus is considered "rare and endangered" by
14.
the International Survival Service Commission. A wood turtle (Clemmys
insculpta) was observed on the site in an upland forest habitat and is a
rare species in New Jersey.
15
Wildlife of recreational importance found
within a 5-mile radius of the site include, squirrel, fox, beaver, and
deer. The most prominent game animal at the site is the white-tailed
deer. A few red squirrels and gray squirrels are found on the site.
Muskrat and other small mammals are common in open areas near water, and
a few beaver are trapped by local residents in coastal marshes of the
bay. Gray fox, mink, raccoon and weasel have been considered common to
the pine barrens. 16
Important game birds located on and near the site include bobwhite quail
and waterfowl. Ruffed grouse commonly utilize hardwood forest habitats,
but apparently are not abundant on the site due to unsuitable habitat.
Coastal marshlands and estuaries, including the bay, are within the
Atlantic flyway and are attractive to migrating waterfowl. Canada
goose, American brant, teal, widgeon, redhead, gadwall, canvasback,
2-20
TABLE 2.6
REPRESENTATIVE PLANTS FROM UPLAND AND LOWLAND VEGETATION TYPES
.
HARDWOODS
Quercus velutina
Quercus coccinea
Quercus alba
Kalmia latifolia
Sassafras albidum
Pteris aquilina
Black oak
Scarlet oak
White oak
Mountain laurel
Sassafras
Bracken fern
MIXED PINE-HARDWOOD
Pinus rigida
Quercus spp.
Nyssa sylvatica
Sassafras albidum
Kalmia spp.
Vaccinium corymbosum
Amelanchier canadensis
Pitch pine
Oaks
Black gum
Sassafras
Laurels
Highbush blueberry
Shadbush
PINE
Pinus rigida
Quercus spp.
Myrica pennsylvanica
Acer rubrum
Sassafras albidum
Prunus serotina
Pitch pine
Oaks
Bayberry
Red Maple
Sassafras
Black cherry
WHITE CEDAR SWAMP
Chamaecyparis thyoides
Ilex glabra
Parthenocissus quinquefolia
Magnolia virginiana
Chamaedaphny calyculata
Vaccinium corymbosum
White cedar
Inkberry
Virginia creeper
Sweetbay magnolia
Leatherleaf
Highbush blueberry
SALTWATER MARSH
Hybiscus palustris
Asclepias incarnata
Ipomoea lacuxosa
Solidago sempervirens
Baccharis halimifolia
Vaccininium corymbosum
Sassafras albidum
Osmunda regalis
Rose mallow
Swamp milkweek
Morning glory
Seaside goldenrod
Groundsel bush
Highbush blueberry
Sassafras
Royal fern
Sedges
Carex spp.
2-21
TABLE 2.7
REPRESENTATIVE VERTEBRATE ANIMALS
AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES
Hyla cinerea
Terrapene carolina
Coluber constrictor constrictor
Green frog
Eastern box turtle
Eastern black racer
MAMMALS
Sylvilagus floridanus
Procyon lotor
Tamiasciurus hudsonicus
Sciurus caroliniensis
Microtus pinetorum
Ondatra zibethicus
Scalopus aquaticus
Eastern cottontail
Raccoon
Red squirrel
Gray squirrel
Pine Vole
Muskrat
Eastern mole
BIRDS AND WATERFOWL (nesting within 5 miles of site)
Bonasa umbellus
Colinus virginianus
Chordeiles minor
Tyrannus tyrannus
Progne subis
Mimus polyglottos
Dendroica pinus
Pipilo erythrophthalmus
Spizella pusilla
Ardea herodias
Ruffed grouse
Bobwhite quail
Common nighthawk
Eastern kingbird
Purple martin
Mockingbird
Pine warbler
Rufous-sided towhee
Field sparrow
Great blue heron
greater scaup, and lesser scaup are some of the more abundant waterfowl
reportedly utilizing the bay. Moreover, mallard and black duck are
considered permanent residents and were observed on site by the staff.
Osprey, an endangered species, is not known to nest in the vicinity.
The red-shouldered hawk is thought to nest within the site environs and
is considered rare (status undetermined). 15
2-22
1
2.7.2 Aquatic
Oyster Creek and Forked River have three ecologically different zones:
a fresh water section, an area that yaries between fresh and saltwater
and a lower estuarine segment. Little information is available on the
fauna and flora of the freshwater zone except for a fish species list
(Table 2.8) and the fact that brown trout, Salvelinus fontinalis, were
18
once stocked in Oyster Creek. The tabulated species are common to the
small, moderate temperature streams of the Northern United States coastal
plain. No follow-up study was conducted on the trout stocking and the
fate of the stocked fish is unknown.
1
TABLE 2.8
FRESHWATER FISH SPECIES INDIGENOUS TO OYSTER CREEK AND
THE SOUTH BRANCH FORKED RIVER PRIOR TO PLANT CONSTRUCTION18
Chain pickerel
Redfin pickerel
Yellow bullhead
Eastern creek chub sucker
Eastern pirate perch
Mud sunfish
Orangespotted sunfish
Golden shiner
Fusiform darter
American eel
Esox niger
Esox americanus
Ictalurus natilis
Erimyzon oblongus
Aphredoderus sayanus
Acantharchus pomotis
Lepomis humilis
Notemigonus crysoleucas
Etheostoma spp.
Anguilla rostrata
In the freshwater-saltwater zone where low summer oxygen levels occur,
small benthic populations were found. Hydrogen sulfide odor was notice-
able in both stream sediments, but was much more extensive in Oyster
Creek where no benthic organisms were found during the summer.
When pres-
ent, the fauna included representations of both estuarine (amphipods,
isopods and polychates) and freshwater (oligochaetes and midge larvae)
environments. Temperature inversions in Forked River indicate that
pronounced stratifications due to density differences exist at times
during the year, and the reducing sediments are indicative of a slow flush-
ing rate for the bottom water.
8
Most of the biological investigative efforts have been centered in the
lower reaches, or estuarine zone, and the adjacent section of the bay.
2-23
The area is typical of east coast tidal waters in that it is bordered
by a saltmarsh, has a relatively small tidal amplitude, contains both
sand and mud bottom areas, and in shallower regions has a dense growth
of rooted aquatic plants. Such estuarine areas are recognized as being
among the most fertile regions in the world and are complex systems that
must be considered as a single unit.
19
The estuarine zone and the adjacent bay waters had abundant stands of eel
grass, Zostera marina and widgeon grass, Ruppia maritina, both of which
are important primary producers providing food for aquatic organisms and
waterfowl.19
The benthic algae proved to be very diverse and abundant
with 119 species being identified from collections made between June 1965
and June 1968. Of the 119 species identified, only 16 (Table 2.9)
occurred over 50% of the time. Ulva lactuca, Ceramium fastigiatum,
Gracillaria verrucosa, and Agardheilla tenera dominated the collections. 20
Phytoplankton demonstrated a seasonal cycle of species occurrence and
abundance common to temperate estuaries. A bloom of diatoms, mainly
Thalassiosira nordenskioldi, Detonula spp. and later Skeletonema costatum,
occurred with the vernal light increase and disappearance of ice, and
continued until higher temperatures plus increased numbers of copepods
caused reduction.
Peak summer and fall temperatures were accompanied by dinoflagellate
dominance after which diatom numbers increased as the water temperatures
TABLE 2.9
BENTHIC ALGAE FOUND IN 50% OR MORE OF 1965-68 COLLECTIONS 20
Ulva lactuca
Agardhiella tenera
Ceramium fastigiatum
Champia parvula
Gracilaria verrucosa
Polysiphonia harveyi
Acrochaetium sp.
Polysiphonia negrescens
Gracilaria foliifera
Codium fragile ssp. tomentosoides
Entocladia veridis
Polysiphonia denudata
Enteromorpha intestinalis
Callithamnion sp.
Enteromorpha linza
Desmotrichium undulatum
.
2-24
decreased in late fall and early winter. Appendix B lists the phytoplank-
tons collected in the bay during 1968.20 The mean net productivity of
the study area for the 9-month period from May 1968 to February 1969 was
20.95 mg/m3/hr of daylight which is similar to other values reported
for temperate estuaries. 21-23
The applicant's zooplankton studies were not extensive, but do provide
data on seasonal occurrence and abundance. As is true in other bays
along the mid-Atlantic coast, Acartia spp. was the dominant copepod.
Its abundance was greatest during the late winter and spring, and lowest
in the summer at the time of high water temperatures and increased num-
bers of Ctenophores and Cnidarians (jellyfish). The numbers of adult
(
Acartia decreased from about 10,000/m3 in April 1967 to near zero in
Jume, rose to about 1000/m3 by October, and fluctuated around that level
utii December when they began to increase to a peak of over 100,000/m3
in March 1968.20
During the summer, Mnemiopsis leidyi, with densities up to 1,000/m3, was
the most important zooplankter. In early autumn it was gradually replaced
by Beroe crata, and both species had disappeared by mid-October. With
the disappearance of the two Ctneophores (Mnemiopsis and Beroe), roti-
fers (Asplanchna and Synchasta) and the tintinnid (Favella) become impor-
tant, until winter, when copepods again dominated. The preliminary list
of zooplankters (Table 2.10) includes organisms (mysids, amphipods, and
cumacids) that are found mainly on the bottom and not in the plankton.
Their presence indicates either natural turbulence near the bottom or,
more likely, turbulence caused by operation of the plankton sampling
gear. Information on their occurrence is important since all are impor-
tant fish food items.
20
Benthic collections in Oyster Creek, Forked River, and the bay produced
a total of 170 animal species, the dominant forms being Pectinaria
gouldii, Mulinia lateralis, and Tellina agilis. No standing crop esti-
mates are available; however, T. agilis occurred in 35% of the samples
while the next 8 most frequently collected organisms were present only
in 3 to 7% of the collections (Table 2.11).20
Six species of benthic invertebrates (hard clams, Mercenaria mercenaria;
soft shelled clams, Mya arinaria; bay scallops, Aequipectera irradians;
blue mussels, Mytelus edulis; oysters, Crassostrea virginica, and blue
crabs, Callinectes sapidus) are of sport and commercial importance in
the bay. The commercial catch of oysters, bay scallops, and mussels was
low in 1969 in comparison to their peak years, whereas the landings of
hard crabs and soft-shelled clams were about one-half their previous
heights (Table 2.12).24 Hard clam landings were fairly stable from
2-25
TABLE 2.10
PRELIMINARY LIST OF ZOOPLANKTERS COLLECTED IN BARNEGAT BAY20
1.
Protozoa
5.
Nemathelmia
(a)
Unidentified Nematodes
6.
Chaetognatha
-
Sagitta elegans
7.
Rotifera
Foraminifera
Pulvinulina sp.
Radiolaria
Unident, Radiolarian
Infusoria -
Amphileptus qutta
Chilodon cucullus
Condylostoma sp.
Dactylopusia brevicornis
Diophrys appendiculatus
Paramecium sp.
Zoothamnium sp.
Unident. Hypotrich protozoans
Tintinnoida
Favella sp.
Tintinnus sp.
Unident, Tintinnids
Asplanchna sp.
Synchaeta sp.
Unidentified Rotifer
Unident. Rotifer Egg 18-1
8. Polychaeta
Undifferentiated
Trochophores (a)
Undifferentiated
2.
tiated
Porifera
Setigers(a)
Unclassified Statoblasts
9. Arthropoda
(a)
3.
Coelenterata
Cnidarian Blepharoplasts
Cnidarian Planula
Aecuora sp.
Cyanea capitata
Obelia geniculata
(a)
Perigonemus
(Arachnida) Hydrobates sp.
(Crustacea)
Calanoid Copepods, including:
Acartia Tonsa (clausii)
Centropages spp.
Eurytemora sp.
Temora longicornis
Tortanus discaudatus
Harpacticoid Copepods(a)
Undifferentiated Nauplii
Various Copepodid stages
Undifferentiated Copepod eggs
including Evrytemora
Brachyuran Zoea -
Balanus (Eburneus) Nauplii
Cladocera
4. Ctenophora
Beroe ovata
Mnemiopsis leidyi
(a) Hold and Tycho-Plankters indicated
2-26
TABLE 2.10 (Continued)
(a)
Unidentified Amphipqaş
Unidentified Mysids
(a)
Unidentified Cumacid
Ostracods
10. Mollusca
(a)
Gastropod Veligers
(a)
Pelecypod Veligers
11. Polyzoa
Bryozoan Statoblasts
(a)
12. Echinodermata
(a)
Pluteus Larvae
13. Chordata (Tunicata)
14. Oikepleura Doicia
(pisces)
Anquilla Americana
(post-elver juveniles)
Undifferentiated Fish Larvae
(a) Hold and Tycho-Plankters indicated
2-27
TABLE 2.11
FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF DOMINANT BENTHOS 20
(%)
Tellina agilis
Idothea bactica
Neopanope texana
Mulinia lateralis
Billium alternatum
Mitrella lunata
Pectinaria gouldii
Maldanopsis elongata
Glycera dibranchiata
34.8
7.2
6.1
4.9
4.1
3.7
3.5
3.4
3.1
1964 to 1969 despite the increased number of acres closed to fishing
because of domestic pollution. Data on the importance of the 6 species
as sport animals are not available. However, one of the bay's major
recreation attractions is the availability of hard clams and crabs.
.
A total of 57 species of finfish were collected between October 1, 1966
and September 30, 1968 (Table 2.13).25 As occurs in other middle Atlantic
estuaries, the seasonally abundant bait fishes (Atlantic silverside and
bay anchovy) were the most nume rous species collected and comprised over
50% of the total catch. Three sport species (northern puffer, silver
perch, and winter flounder) ranked in the top 10% during both collection
years and a total of 13 other sport species appeared in the collections.
Standing crop and population size estimates are very difficult to make from
haul seine collections because of the great variability that exists in
seining efforts; therefore, the only information that can be derived from
those data are species composition and relative abundance.
The estuaries are known to be prime spawning and nursery grounds for many
marine fishes, but the extent of their dependence on specific estuarine
areas has not been studied. Therefore, large species lists are expected
to be produced from regular seining operations. The variability in abun-
dance and mobility of fishes prevent any direct inference as to the impor-
tance of specific areas for continued fish population development. Thus,
the protection of those areas is of vital concern until their importance
is characterized.
TABLE 2.12
SHELLFISH CATCH IN BARNEGAT BAY24
Pounds (shell weight)
Hard Clams
Hard Crabs
Oysters
Bay Scallop
Soft Clams
Mussels
Shrimp
1960
2,616,000
175,600
152,810
0
0
0
3,800
1961
1,752,000
61,500
73,500
653,520
0
0
4,300
1962
1,576,000
4,600
86,310
3,646,890
0
0
5,800
1963
1,792,000
10,000
26,810
2,739,000
0
0
6,000
1964
2, 217,600
2,200
0
3,763,020
0
0
2,000
2-28
1965
2,386,400
68,800
0
955,020
0
0
4,600
1966
3,986,400
64,800
10,500
1,746,000
27,500
108,000
0
1967
16,200
17,500
855,000
82,500
0
0
2,984,000
2,794,400
1968
13,100
21,000
168,000
60,500
0
0
1969
2,679,200
65,200
14,000
0
33,000
0
0
2-29
TABLE 2.13
FINFISH COLLECTED IN THE BARNEGAT BAY AREA (1966-68) 25
Species
No. Captured
Species
No. Captured
Alewife (a)
American eel(a)
Northern pipefish
Northern sea robin
1,407
8
(a)
American shad
Atlantic herring
Atlantic menhaden
Atlantic needlefish
Atlantic round herring
Atlantic silversides
8
98
1
1,405
7
242
Orangespotted sunfish
Oyster toad fish
271
Pollock
3
69,594
Rainwater killifish
Red grouper
Roughtail stingray
157
1
1
Banded killifish
Bay anchovy
Black dr um
(a)
Blueback herring
Bluefish
Butterfish
416
25,950
2
81
153
1
110
3,126
2
6
Chain pickerel
Crevalle jack
Cunner
1
2
14
1
Sheepshead minnow
Shorthorn sculpin
Silver perch
Smallmouth flounder
Spot
Spotted burrfish
Spotted seahorse
Squirrel hakļa)
Striped bass
Striped blenny
Striped burrfish
Striped killifish
Striped mullet
Summer flounder
20,169
Fourspine stickleback
(a)
Gizzard shad
Golden shiner
Grubby
3
1
13
1
4
3
1,506
2
1
Hogchoker (a)
6
52
Horse-eye jack
Tautog
Threespine stickleback
Tidewater silversides
118
48
1,977
Lookdown
13
Mummichog
Naked goby
Northern kingfish
Weakfish
White mullet
(a)
White perch
Window pane
Winter flounder
2
1,940
64
247
1
155
17
1,296
(a) Migrants
2-30
Commercial fish catch statistics (Table 2.14) identify four species (eel,
winter flounder, alewife, and white perch) that were taken in commercial
quantities in 1969.24
During the 9-year period previous to 1969, three
other species (shad, mullet, and Tautog) were taken commercially, but had
no reported landings in 1969. The total commercial fishery value for the
bay in 1969 was $215,328.26
Early life stages (eggs and larvae) of fish are the most susceptible to
environmental changes resulting from steam electric station operations.
Of the 57 species collected, 24 potentially use the bay area as a spawn-
ing and early nursery grounds. The majority of those have demersal eggs,
i.e. those that sink to the bottom or are attached to a fixed object,
and would be less susceptible than pelagic eggs which float; however, all
of the larvae spend time in the water column; and, therefore, are vulner-
able to entrainment.
Migration to areas of salinities different from their adult habitat is a
spawning pattern exhibited by many species of fish. In the bay, eight
such species were collected (Table 2.13) and all but one, the American eel,
are anadromous or move to areas of lower salinities. The American eel
matures in freshwater or the upper reaches of the estuary and then migrates
to the ocean for spawning. Four of the remaining seven species, American
shad, blueback herring, alewife, and gizzard shad, migrate into fresh-
water while the others, white perch, striped bass, and hogchokers, move
to the region of the saltwater-freshwater interface. Thus, any changes
that would eliminate the existing salinity gradient or block passage
between the salt and freshwater environments would reduce or eliminate
Oyster Creek's and Forked River's potential as spawning grounds.
Menhaden are known to use all of the estuaries along the east coast as
nurseries 28 ,29 and are probably more abundant in Barnegat Bay than the
seining data indicates (Table 2.13). In general, larvae move into the
Middle Atlantic States bays and estuaries from October to June where they
transform into juveniles and remain for about six months. 29 Adults appear
to prefer temperatures between 15° and 20°C and are generally found in
the coastal waters south of the 10°C isotherm.
30
Studies indicate that
the larvae and juveniles can tolerate temperatures down to 3°C29 while
the adults avoid temperatures below 10°C. Although no records are avail-
able, it is probable that larval and juvenile menhaden were found in
Barnegat Bay throughout the year and adults were present in the summer
and early fall.
2-31
TABLE 2.14
COMMERCIAL
FINFISIL CATCH IN BARNEGAT BAY24
(15)
(Winter Flounder)
Black Back
(Black Fish)
Tautos
Year
Shad
Mullet
Eels
Alewives
W. Perch
Mixed
1960
0
0
8,200
23,100
0
0
7,000
0
1961
0
0
12,600
27,300
0
0
17,000
0
1962
0
0
6,700
12,300
4,900
0
8,500
0
1963
0
18,000
6,400
18,100
0
0
4,700
400
1964
500
16,000
29,000
22,300
6,600
0
12,000
0
1965
200
9,400
35, 400
12,500
1,800
100
10,900
0
1966
0
7,900
51,900
35,200
5,800
200
6,900
0
1967
100
13,600
38, 100
32,800
3,030
100
10,400
0
1968
0
10,200
42,300
24, 300
4,300
0
18,900
0
1969
0
0
70,000
2,100
200
0
4,100
0
2-32
REFERENCES
1. U.S. Bureau of the Census, New Jersey Final Population Counts,
PC (VI)-32. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C.,
1970.
2. Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating
Station Environmental Report, March 6, 1972, Amendment 68, to the
'Application for Construction Permit and Operating License,"
Docket No. 50-219, March 26, 1964.
3. U.S, Dept of Commerce, County and City Date Book, pp 242-251, 1967.
4. Cooperative Extension Service, "Farm Vehicle Application Summary, Ocean
County, NJ.," College of Agriculture and Environmental Science, Rutgers
University, New Brunswick, NJ," 1971.
5. National Register of Historic Places, Federal Register 5451,
March 15, 1972.
6. J.H. Carpenter, 1967. Concentration Distribution for Material Dis-
charged into Barnegat Bay. Amendment ll, June 21, to the "Appli-
cation for Construction Permit and Operating License," March 26, 1964.
Docket No. 50-219.
7. U.S. Geological Survey, 1950 to present, Compilation of Surface Waters
of the United States, Part 1-B, "North Atlantic Slope Basins 1950-1960,"
Supplemented by Annual Surface Water Reports, 1961-present.
>
8. C. B. Wurtz, A Biological Study of Barnegat Bay, Forked River and Oyster
Creek in the Vicinity of the Oyster Creek Plant, Prepared for Jersey
Central Power and Light, Docket No. 50-219, 1965.
9. U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, Tidal Tables; High and Low Water Predic-
tions, 1969.
10. USDC, ESSA, Environmental Data Service, "Local Climatological Data,
Atlantic City, NJ." 1963.
11. J. W. Harshberger, 1916, The Vegetation of the New Jersey Pine-Barrens,
Dover, New York, 1970.
12. C. B. Moses, and L. R. Swain, Environmental Effects of Salt Water Cooling
Towers: "Potential Effects of Salt Drift on Vegetation, Mimeo, pp 45,
Jersey Central Power and Light, Docket No. 50-219, 1971.
2-33
REFERENCES
(Continued)
13. W. R. Clark, R. Rogers and L. J. Wolgast, The Effects of Salt Drift
on Land Dwelling Vertebrates, Mimeo, p 86 Jersey Central Power and
Light, Docket No. 50-219, 1971.
14. Survival Service Commission, "International Union for the Conservation
of Nature and Natural Resources," Red Data Book, Morges, Switzerland
1970.
15. New Jersey State Museum Science Notes No. 4, "Rare and Endangered Fish
and Wildlife of New Jersey,"
16. P.F. Connor, "Notes on the Mammals of a New Jersey Pine-Barrens Area,"
Jour. Mammalogy vol 34, pp. 227-234, 1953.
17. F.C. Bellrose, "Waterfowl Migration Corridors East of the Rocky Moun-
tains in the United States," Ill. Nat. Hist. Surv., Biol. Notes vol 61,
p 24, 1968.
>
18, C. B. Wurtz, "Discussion of Possible Biological Influences of Heated
Discharges from the Oyster Creek Generating Station," Jersey Central
Power and Light.
19. E.P. Odum, The Role of Tidal Marshes in Estuarine Production, New York
State Conservation Department, Division of Conservation, Information
Leaflet No. 2545, 1961.
20.
R. E. Loveland, et al, The Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of the
Benthic Flora and Fauna of Barnegat Bay Before and After the Onset of
Thermal Addition, Fifth Progress Report, Jersey Central Power and Light
Company, 1969.
21. D.A. Flemer, "Primary Production in the Chesapeake Bay," Chesapeake
Science, vol 11, no. 2, 1970.
22. R.G. Stross and J.R. Stottlemyer, "Primary Production in the Patuxent
River," Chesapeake Science, vol. 6, 1965.
23. G. W. Thayer, "Phytoplankton Production and the Distribution of Nutrients
in a Shallow Unstratified Estuarine System Near Beaufort, N.C.,"
Chesapeake Science, vol. 12, no. 4, 1971.
2-34
REFERENCES
(Continued)
24. E. A. LoVerde, Letter to Mr. Romme of Jersey Central Power and Light
Bureau of Commercial Fisheries (now National Jarine Fisheries Service),
September 18, 1970.
25. C. B. Wurtz, Barnegat Bay Fish, Jersey Central Power and Light, 1969.
26. E. A. LoVerde, National Marine Fisheries Servicii, PO Box 143, Toms
River NJ, 08743, phone 201-349-3533, 1972.
27. Meteorological data taken at Oyster Creek Station, 1968.
(See Appendix M, this statement)
28. A. L. Pacheco and G. C. Grant, 1965. Studies of the early life
history of Atlantic menhaden in estuarine nurseries. Part 1.
Seasonal occurrence of juvenile menhaden and other small fishes
in tributary creek of Indian River, Delaware, 1957-58. U.S. Fish
Wildl. Serv., Spec. Sci. Rep. Fish. 504, iii + 32 pp.
29. J. W. Reintjes and A. L. Pacheco 1966. The relation of menhaden to
estuaries. In Roland F. Smith, Albert H. Swartz and William H.
Massman (editors). A symposium on estuarine fisheries, pp. 50-58.
Amer. Fish. Soc., Spec. Publ. 3.
30. J. W. Reintjes. 1969. Synopsis of biological data on the Atlantic
menhaden, Brevoortia tyrannus. U.S. Fish Wildl. Service. Circular
320.
3-1
3.
TIE STATION
3.1
EXTERNAL APPEARANCE
The closest view of the station is from the southeast, on U.S. Route 9.
The view, shown in Figure 3.1, consists mainly of the 368-ft stack, the
140 ft high reactor building, the lower rise turbine building and the
two-story office building. Tree plantings along the access road and the
highway help bridge the gap between the neutral colored station and
its surroundings.
From other directions along the highway the presence of the station is
less obvious because of natural trees and the applicant's pine tree plant-
ings from the Cyster Creek canal to the South Branch Forked River. Motor-
ists see only the higher portions of station structures.
From the parkway northbound, the station including the switchyard is vis-
ible, but is a much smaller part of the general view as shown in Figure 3.2.
The station is not generally visible from the parkway southbound.
From the nearest residences, 2/3 mile north of the station, the higher
elements of station structures are visible.
Boaters on nearby waters and visitors to Island Beach State Park, 6 miles
away, similarly may be aware of the higher elements of the station. Again,
the stack is the most obvious structure.
3.2
REACTOR AND STEAM-ELECTRIC SYSTEM, FUEL INVENTORY
The station utilizes a boiling water reactor designed and fabricated by
the General Electric Company. The turbine-generator, with a name plate
rating of 640 Me and a stretch rating of 670 Ne, was supplied by the
same firm. Burns and Poe, Inc., functioned as the architect-engineer.
Reactor fuel consists of cylindrical slightly enriched uranium dioxide
pellets, sealed in Zircaloy-2 tubes to form fuel rods. Water is used
as the coolant and moderator for the reactor. Because this is a direct
cycle reactor, the reactor coolant water is heated in the reactor,
flashed to steam in the steam dome of the reactor pressure vessel located
above the reactor core, and sent directly to the turbine.
Low grade
steam exhausting from the turbine is condensed and returned to the
reactor by way of the feedwater pumps. Waste heat from the condenser
is discharged to a coolant canal.
The station operates with a nominal thermal efficiency of 32%, typical
of light water reactors.
3-2

FIGURE 3.1
OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION VIEWED FROM THE SOUTHEAST
3-3

နောင်တ
FIGURE 3.2 STATION VIEW FROM THE PARKWAY
3-4
Juring 30 years' operation, the station will consume up to 11.5 metric
tons of uranium-235 (U-235) (Refl, Appendix C, Response F10). At any
given time, the reactor core has an inventory of 110 metric tons of ura-
nium as uranium dioxide. The li-235 inventory is about 3 metric tons.
The rest of the uranium inventory consists mainly of U-238 with traces
of 1-236. In addition to the U-235 fissionable inventory, there is on
the average almost 1 metric ton of plutonium of which some 58% is Pu-239.
3.3
STATION WATER USE
The sys-
A simplified form of station water use is shown in Figure 3.3.
tem utilizes water from the bay, the South Branch Forked River, a deep
well and, in emergencies, Oyster Creek. Table 3.1 lists the principal
uses by station components and flow rates under normal conditions, at full
power operation. Oyster Creek was dammed above its discharge into the
canal to form an 8-acre reservoir area known as the fire pond, providing
water for fire protection and emergency service.
A bajor stated concern of the State with regard to the operation of the
station is that consumptive use of freshwater supplies in the area be
kept to a minimum. Reflecting that concern, it is the staff's opinion
that the station has been designed and is operated in a manner such that
consumptive use of freshwater is minimal.
.
3.4
HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM
The station's once-through cooling system utilizes a semicircular canal,
dredged by the applicant from the South Branch Forked Piver on the north,
across an intervening ridge, to Oyster Creek on the south. The canal,
shown in Figure 3.4, is some 5 miles long and had an initial average depth
of 10 ft. Cooling water is taken from the bay near the north end of the
canal, passed up the dredged South Branch, circulated through the conden-
sers, and returned to the bay via the discharge side of the canal. Bay
water, drawn from the canal, also supplies the pumps which dilute heat in
condenser effluent water and the component cooling systems in the turbine
and reactor buildings.
Operation of the canal has altered the natural site hydrology in a num-
ber of ways.
Salinity at the South Branch-canal junction averages 15 ppt
and at the station intake, 17 ppt (Ref 1, Appendix C, Response A10). A
potential exists for intrusion of saltwater of the canal into nearby
groundwater. The potential was reduced by constructing freshwater canals
3-5
TABLE 3.1
WATER USE BY STATION COMPONENT
Water Source
Station Component
Flow Rate
Steam Condenser
Barnegat Bay-South
Branch Forked River
450,000 (gpm)
10,000
Turbine Building
Component Cooling
12,000
Reactor Building
Component Cooling
Heat Dilution
0-780,000
Deep Well
Makeup Demineralizer
17,000 (gal/day)
Sanitary Use
1,000
Laundry
300
Heating Boiler
2,000
Demineralizer Rinse
900
Filter Back Flush
13,400
3-6

EMERGENCY FIRE SUPPLY WATER
DISCHARGE CANAL
eleme
BAY
SLUDGE
REMOVAL
TO BAR
SEWAGE
TREATMENT
DILUTION WATER
0-780.000 GPM
Naoci
10.000 GPM
<1 mg CI/
TURBINE
LAUNDRY
1000 GPD
REACTOR
Ull
12.000 GPM
<1 mg CL /
CONTAINMENT
SPRAY
1000 GPD
MAIN
CONDENSERS
CLOSED
CW
SYSTEM
DISCHARGE
TUNNEL
<02 mg CIL
PLANT WASTE DISCHARGE LINE
2000 GPD
17.300 GPD
300 GPD
2000 GPD
HEATING
BOILER
INLET CANAL
900 GPD
CLOSED
CW SYSTEM
450.000
GPM
RADWASTE
10.000
GPM
12.000 GPM
HS0,-68 b/DAY
NaOH 32 b/DAY
13.400 GPD
BACKWASH
FILTERS
17.900 GPD
35.000 GPD
MAKEUP
DEMINERALIZERS
FROM BARNEGAT BAY
CHLORINE
1000 7000 ID DAYU
DEEP WELL
FIGURE 3.3
SIMPLIFIED FLOW SYSTEMS FOR WATER AND CHEMICALS
3-7

FORKED RIVER (TOWN)
LAKE BARNEGAT
STATE
GAME
FARM
NORTH
MIDDLE
BRANCH
BRANCH
FORKED
RIVER
PARKWAY
NORTH
AUXILIARY CANAL
BRANCH
DRAINAGE
CANAL
TRANSFER PIPE
YACHT BASIN
SOUTH
STATE
SOUTH AUXILIARY
CANAL
OYSTER
CREEK
STATION
DREDGE SPOIL AREAS
GARDEN
BARNEGAT BAY
F.R. SITE
CREEK
YACHT BASIN
SITE BOUNDARY
9
OYSTER
HIGHWAY
FIREPOND
31
0.5
WARETOWN
MILES
CURRENT STATION VICINITY
FIGURE 3.4
3-8
north and south of the intake side of the main canal, as shown in Figure 3.4.
The increased flow of water into the south end of the bay, as a result of
operating the canal, has had some effect on the bay's salinity profile.
A third alteration is the reversal of flow in the South Branch Forked
River. Another major alteration resulted from damming Oyster Creek to
form the fire pond. Another dam, approximately at the westernmost point
of the canal, allows for diversion of the total flow of the system through
the station condensers or, alternately, diversion of part or all of the
flow around the circulating pumps by means of dilution pumps and an out-
fall in the dam.
3.4.1 System Components
The water intake structure is divided into two sections, each with three
trash racks, three traveling screens, a screen wash system with a pump, a
service water pump, two emergency service water pumps and two circulating
water pumps. Elements of the structure are shown in Figures 3.6 and 3.7
(Ref 1, Figures 3.5-1, 3.5-2). A tunnel is provided from the discharge
so that heated water can be brought back to the intake as required to
prevent system icing during winter operation.
The circulating water system consists of four coolant circulating pumps,
circulating water intake, circulating water discharge line, condenser
backwash system, and the connection of the circulating water system to
the component cooling system of the turbine and reactor buildings. The
intake and discharge tunnels are 10.5 ft square (see Figure 3.8). The
condenser is divided into six sections, each with a 72-in. intake line
and a 72-in. discharge line.
The dilution water system consists of intake and discharge structures
and three low speed, 260,000 gpm axial flow dilution pumps, with 7-ft
diameter impellers. Trash racks provide equipment protection.
sent, the dilution system is operated only intermittently.
At pre-
The service water system provides cooling water to the component cooling
system of the reactor building. It can be used to provide water to the
turbine building component cooling system but, in normal operation, the
system is cooled directly by the circulating water system. The service
water system employs two 6000 gpm (13.3 cfs each) pumps, both of which
are required for full operation. The component cooling systems provide
a heat sink for various pieces of operating equipment throughout the sta-
tion. The service water system discharges into the station waste dis-
charge line.
3-)

CAJAL EROSIO! FRO!! UPSTREA!!
FIGURE 3.5
3-10
6 TRASH
RACKS
6 TRAVELING
WATER
SCREENS
2 EMERGENCY
SERVICE
WATER PUMPS
TROUGH
FOUR CIRCULATING
WATER PUMPS
N
1
1
Doctoras
SERVICE
O WATER
PUMP
a
1
INTAKE
CANAL
O SCREEN
WASH PUMP
여
​O SERV.
10'-6" SQ CIRC. WATER
SUPPLY TUNNEL TO
TURBINE BUILDING
WATER PUMP
钟
​pondo
4 STOP
6 STOP
6 'STOP
LOGS
LOGS
LOGS
SCREEN
ICE CONTROL
WASH
2 EMERGENCY
RECIRCULATION
DISCHARGE SERVICE WATER
FROM CIRC. WATER
PUMPS
DISCH. TUNNEL
FIGURE 3.6
INTAKE STRUCTURE PLAN AT CENTERLINE
OF RECIRCULATION TUNNEL
3-11
CIRCULATING
WATER PUMP
GANTRY
RAIL
CRANE
EL. -15.0"
GANTRY
{ CRANE
| RAIL
TRASH
RACK
TRAVELING
WATER
SCREEN
SERVICE WATER
& SCREEN
WASH PUMP
EL 6'-0"
IN
NORM. HW
EL +-6
EL :'.8"
MIN. LW
EL. -1°
1
SLUICE GATE
RECIRCULATION.
TUNNEL
EL -18° -0"
+
FIGURE 3.7
INTAKE STRUCTURE SECTION
3-12
3.4.2 System Operation
The coolant flow in the canal system can be as much as 1,252,000 gpm
(2780 cfs) at a velocity of less than 2.0 fps. If no dilution pumps oper-
ate, the flow in the circulating water system is 460,000 gpm (1020 cfs).
Because the bay has an average depth of 5 ft and the canal was dredged to
an average depth of 10 ft, substantial turbulence can take place at the
canal mouth. The velocity increase produces momentum jet mixing which
substantially increases mixing in the bay and results in silt being depos-
ited at the mouth of the canal.
At a power level of 1930 IiWt, the temperature difference of the cooling
water across the condenser is 23°F with all circulating water pumps run-
ning. The intake temperature has averaged 58°F since startup.
3.4.3
Thermal Discharge Standards
Thermal discharge standards for the Oyster Creek Station are defined in an
agreement between the applicant and the State of New Jersey Department of
Public Utilities, Board of Public Utility Commissioners, Docket No. 652-60.
This agreement provides, among other things, that the station shall operate
in such a manner that water in Barnegat Bay does not exceed 95°F at a
given point in the bay. Under certain operating circumstances it is
necessary for the dilution system to operate in order that the station
not exceed the 95 °F limit. The applicant has agreed with the State that
the dilution pumps will be operated when the temperature, as measured
at a buoy in the bay, reaches 95°F (Ref. 1, p. 5.1-2). The applicant
states that, as a matter of practice, the dilution system is operated
when water in the canal reaches 95°F, as measured at the railroad bridge
just south of the station outfall. The applicant states further that
operation of only one (of the three) dilution pumps has enabled the
station to meet the 95°F limit.
The State contends that areas in the bay having a temperature exceeding
86°F are unsuitable for finfish and thus significantly reduce the use
of that area by fish and fishermen. The applicant contends that a
temperature limit of 95°F is "permissible," and will not significantly
affect the use of that area by finfish and fishermen.
The applicable portion of the Rules and Regulations Establishing Surface
Water Quality Criteria of the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection, dated June 30, 1971, imposes the condition:
5
"No heat may be added except in designated mixing zones, which
would cause temperatures to exceed 85°F..." (Section 3.4.6(b))
3-13
The applicant's current position with resard to the above requirement
is expressed by the following partial quotation from a letter to
Mirs. Elizabeth S. Bowers of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
from i!r. George F. Trowbridge, Counsel for the applicant, dated april 6,
1973:
"You will note that the State's temperature criteria (Section
3.4.6(b)) relate to temperature limits outside a "designated
mixing zone." No mixing zone has, however, as yet been designated
by the State either for Oyster Creek or for dyster Creek and
Torked River combined, although applicant has proposed a definition
of a mixing zone to the State for its approval. Until the State
has designated a mixing zone, the State has not completed the neces-
sary regulatory actions required to establish temperature licita-
tions and there is no way to apply the present criteria to the
discharges from Ovster Creek and forked River."
The applicant will be required to utilize the full capacity of the dilu-
tion system when the water in the discharge canal exceeds 86°F, as measured
at the U. S. Route 9 bridge over the discharge (2n3l.
3.5 RADIOACTIVE WASTE SYSTEMS
During the operation of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, radio-
active material is produced by fission and by neutron activation of
corrosion products in the reactor coolant system, Small amounts of
gaseous and liquid radioactive waste enter the waste streams which are
processed within the plant to minimize the radioactive nuclides that
ultimately are released to the atmosphere and inte Barnesat Bay. The
waste treatment systems described in the following paragraphs are
designed to collect and process the gaseous, liquid, and solid waste
which might contain radioactive materials.
The waste handling and treatment systems installed at the station are
discussed in the Final Safety Analysis Report, dated January 1967, and
in the Environmental Report, dated March 1972. In these documents, the
applicant has prepared an analysis of his treatment systems and has
estimated the annual radioactive effluents. The following analysis
is based on our model, adjusted to apply to this plant and uses some-
what different assumptions. Our calculated effluents, therefore, are
different from those of the applicant. The model used, however, results
from a review of data from operating nuclear power plants.
3.5.1
Liquid Wastes
The liquid radioactive waste treatment system consists of the process
equipment and instrumentation necessary to collect, process, monitor,
3-14
and discharge potentially radioactive liquid wastes from the plant.
The liquid wastes are treated on a batch basis to permit optimum control
and release of radioactive liquid waste. Before release of any liquid
waste, samples are analyzed to determine the type and amount of radio-
activity in the batch. Based on the analysis, the waste is either
released under controlled conditions to Barnegat Bay through the circu-
lating water discharge canal or retained for further processing. Pro-
tection against inadvertent discharge of liquid radioactive waste is pro-
vided for by redundancy in valving, by instrumentation for detection and
alarm in case of radioactivity above a predetermined level, and through
procedural controls. Two radiation monitors in the discharge line down-
stream of the discharge valves provide an alarm in the event of a release
exceeding a preset limit.
The liquid radwaste system is divided into four subsystems in order that
the liquid waste may be segregated and processed according to source. The
four subsystems are (a) Low Conductivity Waste Control Subsystem, (b)
High Conductivity Waste Control Subsystem, (c) Chemical Waste Control
Subsystem, and (d) Detergent Waste Subsystem. A flow diagram of these
systems is shown in Figure 3.8.
3.5.1.1
The Low Conductivity Waste Control Subsystem
Low conductivity (high purity) liquid waste from piping and equipment
drains is collected in the dry well equipment drain sump, the reactor
building equipment drain tank, and the turbine building equipment drain
sumps. This liquid waste is transferred from the initial collection
points to the waste collector tank (30,000 gal. cap.). Liquid waste
from the fuel pool, reactor cleanup system, adsorption chambers, spent
resin and filter sludge dewatering, low conductivity condensate demineral-
izer backwash, and the Chemical Waste Control Subsystem is also trans-
ferred to the waste collector tank for treatment. From the waste col-
lector tank the liquid is processed through a precoat filter (waste
collector filter) and the mixed bed waste demineralizer. The processed
liquid is collected in one of two waste sample tanks (30,000 gal. each).
The liquid collected in the waste sample tank is sampled and analyzed.
Based on the results of the analysis, the liquid is either transferred
to the condensate storage tank or collected in the waste sample tank
for further processing. Unreclaimed treated liquid waste is discharged
into the circulating water discharge canal.
Our evaluation assumed that 50,000 gpd of low conductivity (high purity)
waste will be processed through the Low Conductivity Waste Subsystem.
3-15

REACTOR
TURBINE
CONDENSER
CLEAN-UP SYSTEM
FILTERS
DE MINERALIZER
CONDENSATE
DEMINERALIZERS (7)
MAKE-UP
WATER
CONDENSATE
STORAGE
TANK
REGENERANTS,
RINSES
RADIATION
MONITOR
HIGH CONDUCTIVITY WASTE
FLOOR DRAINS FROM DRYWELL AND REACTOR,
TURBINE AND RADWASTE BUILDINGS, ETC.
FLOOR DRAIN
COLLECTOR
TANK
10,000 gal.
FILTER
FLOOR DRAIN
SAMPLE TANK
(2)
10,000
gal
CHEMICAL WASTE
LABORATORY DRAINS, SAMPLE DRAINS, ETC
DECONTAMINATION
WASTE
NEUTRALIZER
TANKS (2)
12,000 gal.
RAD WASTE
EQUIPMENT
DRAIN SUMP
LOW CONDUCTIVITY WASTE
EQUIPMENT DRAINS FROM DRYWELL AND REACTOR,
RADWASTE AND TURBINE BUILDINGS, ETC
WASTE
COLLECTOR
TANK
30,000 go!
FILTER
WASTE
DEMINERALIZER
WASTE SAMPLE
TANKS (2)
30,000
gol.
DETERGENT WASTE
CASK CLEANING
PERSONNEL DE CONTAMINATION
DRUMMED
WASTE TO
OFF.SITE
DISPOSAL
LAUNDRY
DRAIN TANK
2000 gal
SOLID WASTE
DISPOSAL SYSTEM
SPENT RESIN AND FILTER SLUDGE
TANKS, CENTRIFUGE AND DRUMMING
STATION
WASTE
CONCENTRATOR
15 9 pm
CONCENTRATED
WASTE TANK
460,000 gpm
SLURRIES
DISCHARGE
STRUCTURE
INTAKE
STRUCTURE
LIQUID
BARNEGAT
BAY
FIGURE 3.8 LIQUID RADIOACTIVE WASTE SYSTEM,
OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION
3-16
The system provides approximately one day of decay time to liquid pro-
cessed through it based on the tank volumes and average flow rate. The
calculated annual release of radioactive material in the liquid effluent
from this system is shown in Table 3.2.
The applicant plans to make some modifications in the routing of several
effluent streams in order to reduce the volume of liquid waste that is
processed through the Low Conductivity Waste Subsystem. The effluent
from the dry well, reactor building equipment drains, and the dry well
sump will be piped into the reactor cleanup system. This will reduce
the system throughput by 6,000 gpd. The effluent from the conductivity
cells will be piped to the main condenser hot well. This will reduce
the throughput by 5,000 gpd.
We conclude that the modified Low Conductivity Waste Subsystem will have
adequate capacity to process liquids generated in this system.
3.5.1.2
The High Conductivity Waste Control Subsystem
High conductivity (low purity) liquid waste consists primarily of floor
drains. The waste is collected in the radwaste building floor drain sump,
the reactor building floor drain sumps, the turbine building floor drain
sumps, and the dry well floor drain sump. The waste liquid collected in
these sumps is transferred to the floor drain collector tank (10,000 gal.
cap.) in the radwaste building. From this tank the liquid is processed
through a precoat type filter and collected in one of two floor drain
sample tanks (10,000 gal. each). The liquid is transferred from the
floor drain sample tank to a waste neutralizer tank for processing with
the chemical wastes in the Chemical Waste Control Subsystem.
Our evaluation assumed that 7,900 gpd of high conductivity waste liquid
will be processed through the High Conductivity Waste Subsystem. Approxi-
mately 3-1/2 days of decay time is provided to the high conductivity waste
liquid. Table 3.2 lists the calculated radioactivity released from the
High Conductivity Waste Subsystem.
The applicant plans to replace the sump pumps feeding the Low Conductivity
Waste Subsystem. The present pumps utilize a water seal system that
requires seal injection water. The replacement pumps will not require
seal water and it is estimated that this will reduce the system through-
put by 2,000 gpd.
3-17
TABLE 3.2
CALCULATED ANNUAL RELEASE nr PADINACTIVE MATEPTAL
IN LIOIID EFFLUENTS FROM THE LIOUIT RADLASTE SUBSYSTEMS
FOR OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATINO STATION!
Suhsystem
Lolly Purity
High Purity
Chemical
Total
Annual Releases, Ci/vr*
5.0
0.001
25.0
n.002
*These values are normalized to compensate for treatment downtime and exnected
operational occurrences.
3-18
Decantate from the centrifuge in the Solid Waste System flows into the
High Conductivity Waste Subsystem. The centrifuge decantate contains
a very fine powder that is used as a solidifying agent in the drumming
process. The filter in the High Conductivity Waste Subsystem is not
adequate to prevent particles of this fine powder to bleed through.
As a result, the releases from the Chemical Waste Subsystem have a
higher radioactivity level than expected.
Since the filter installed in the High Conductivity Waste Subsystem does
not provide a satisfactory effluent, the applicant plans to modify this
system to reduce the radioactive releases.
3.5.1.3
Chemical Waste Control Subsystem
Chemical wastes consist of laboratory drains and condensate demineralizer
regeneration solutions. These wastes have high conductivities and variable
concentrations of radioactive material. The wastes are collected in one
of two waste neutralizer tanks (12,000 gal. each) along with the waste
transferred from the floor drain sample tanks in the High Conductivity
Waste Control Subsystem. The liquid collected in the waste neutralizer
tanks is sampled, analyzed and is neutralized. The liquid is then pro-
cessed througir the waste concentrator (15 gpm cap.). The condensate
from the waste concentrator is routed to the waste collector tank in the
Low Conductivity Control Subsystem for processing.
.
Our evaluation assumed an average flow rate of 1,800 gpd of chemical
waste liquid will be processed through the Chemical Waste Subsystem.
Approximately 3-1/2 days of decay time is provided to the chemical waste.
The calculated radioactivity released by the Chemical Waste Subsystem is
listed in Table 3.2.
There have been operational difficulties with the waste concentrator in
this system. The difficulties are attributed to the high solids content
of the decantate from the centrifuge and the ineffectiveness of the filter
used in the High Conductivity Waste Subsystem. The high solid content
of the centrifuge decantate has led to tube plugging in the waste concen-
trator and the subsequent unavailability of this equipment during main-
tenance. The outage of the waste concentrator severely reduces the system's
capacity to adequately treat the liquid waste, and it has been necessary
on occasion to truck low level liquid waste offsite for disposal.
The applicant has a program in effect to improve the performance of the
Chemical Waste Treatment Subsystem. Included in the program is a search
for better filter aids, an investigation into the use of different solidi-
fying agents, replacement of the demister in the waste concentrator,
3-19
procuring a spare waste concentrator tube bundle to reduce downtime for
mechanical tube cleaning, and the installation of a second centrifuge in
the Solid Waste System.
We conclude that the Chemical Waste System as now operated is not ade-
quate. Increased waste concentrator capacity and increased availability
of the processing equipment would significantly reduce the radioactive
liquid released from this system.
3.5.1.4
Detergent Waste Subsystem
Liquid waste from the laundry operation and waste from the shipping cask
decontamination station are collected in one of two laundry drain tanks
(2,000 gal, each). Since these wastes are expected to contain very small
amounts of radioactive material, they are discharged without treatment.
The wastes released through the Detergent Waste System are expected to
contain negligible amounts of radioactive material. The average flow
rate of waste liquid is assumed to be 800 gpd. We conclude that the
Detergent Waste Subsystem is adequate.
3.5.1.5
Evaluation
For our evaluation we assumed that 22 million gallons per year of liquid
waste will be processed. We further assumed that 50% of this will be
recycled. This recycle value was estimated considering the reported
operating data tabulated in Table 3.3 and the capacities provided in
the liquid waste processing system. Table 3.4 lists the principal
assumptions used in our evaluation of the radwaste system.
Using the conditions and assumptions in Table 3.4, we have estimated
the annual release of radioactive material in liquid effluents, exclusive
of tritium, to be less than 5 Ci/yr; however, to compensate for equipment
downtime and expected operational occurrences the release rate has been
normalized to 5 Ci/yr. Based on experience from operating reactors, we
estimate that about 20 Ci/yr of tritium will be released to the environ-
ment. Tables 3.5 and 3.2 list the calculated radioactivity releases
from the liquid radwaste system. In comparison, the licensee estimates
a liquid release of radioactivity of 5 Ci/yr, but no tritium release
estimate was made. Actual release data are shown in Table 3.3.
The activity releases listed in Table 3.3 are about twice the value
estimated by the applicant and by our evaluation. This difference may
be attributed to operational difficulties the applicant has experienced
with the operation of the waste concentrator.
3-20
TAPLE 3.3
LIOTIN NISTE PROCESSEN I" DARIPASTE SVSTE"
Volume
Processed
(inó gal.)
Volume
Discharged Fraction
(10 cal.) Discharged
Activitv
nischarged
Curies
Plant
Factor
Report Period
Mav-Dec, 1969
"A
8.7
TA
2.0
2.10
Jan-June, 1970
"А
6.7
14
7.2
2.54
Julv-Dec, 1970
7.8
7.1
0.91
11.2
1.71
Jan-June, 1971
7.5
3.9
0.52
8.8
n. 81
Julv-nec, 1971
6.5
2.5
n.38
3.3
n.57
Jan-June, 1972
5.1
2.0
0.39
n. 9
0.63
Julv-Tec, 1972
2.2
0.55
9.2
non
3-21
TABLE 3.4
PRINCIPAL CONDITIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS USED IN ESTIMATING
RADIOACTIVE RELEASE FROM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION
Power Level
1930 MWt
Plant Factor
0.80
Fission Product Release Rate from Fuel to Coolant
Equivalent to 100,000 uči/sec for a 3400 MWt Reactor
After 30 Minutes Decay
57,000 uči/sec
Total Steam Flow
6
7.26 x 10° 1b/hr
4.2 x 10
105
1b
Weight of Liquid in System
Weight of Steam in System
1.5 x 10
104
1b
Cleanup Demineralizer Flow
1.9 x 10
105 10/hr
Leaks
Reactor Building
500 lb/hr
Turbine Building
1700 lb/hr
Gland Seal Flow
7260 lb/hr
Partition coefficients
Steam/Liquid
0.01
Reactor Building Liquid Leak
0.001
Turbine Building Steam Leak
1,0
Air Ejector
0.005
Gland Seal
1.0
3-22
TABLF 3.4 (Cont'd)
Fraction of Iodine Getting Through the:
Condensate Demineralizer
n.nl
Cleanup Demineralizer
n.1
Reactor Building Filter
1.0
Turbine Building Filter
1,0
Gland Seal Filter
n.nl
Air Fiector Filter
1.0.
Holdun Times
Gland Seal ras
n.n29 hr.
Air Ejector ras
1.0 hr.
(1
(1.)
necontamination Factors
I
rs, Rh
Mo, TC
Y
Others
Low Cond. Waste
192
10
192
in
10
192
High Cond. Waste
225
195.
195
in5 105
105 106
5
.
Chemical Waste
10
105
195
(1) fac
Factors are for demineralizers plus waste concentrator except for
Low Conductivity Wastes which are for demineralizers only.
3-23
TABLE 3.5
CALCULATED ANNUAL RELEASES OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS IN LIQUID
EFFLUENTS FROM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION
Nuclide
Ci/yr
Nuclide
Ci/yr
Na-24
0.03
I-132
0.03
Mn-56
0.07
I-133
0.48
Fe-59
0.02
Cs-134
0.06
Co-58
0.12
I-135
0.2
Co-60
0.01
Cs-136
0.02
Sr-89
0.07
Cs-137
0.05
Sr-90
0.004
Ba-140
0.13
Y-90
0.03
La-140
0.04
Sr-91
0.15
W-187
0.09
Y-91
0.61
Np-239
0.02
Sr-92
0.009
Total
25 Ci/yr
220 Ci/yr
Y-92
0.39
Tritium
Y-93
1.25
Mo-99
0.33
I-131
0.14
Te-132
0.02
3-24
Although our evaluation indicates a release of less than 5 Ci/yr, actual
performance of the equipment indicates that our "as low as practicable"
radioactivity discharges are not met. State-of-the-art technology is
available to reduce radioactivity released from the liquid sources. Due
to the performance difficulties experienced with the liquid waste system
in operation and maintenance of the equipment, we conclude the liquid
waste treatment system does not control releases to as low as practicable
and is not acceptable. The applicant has committed to proposing a system
that will meet the "as low as practicable" requirement.
3.5.2
Gaseous Wastes
During power generation, radioactive material is released from the plant
to the atmosphere in gaseous effluents which include low concentrations
of fission product and activation gases, halogens (mostly iodines), tri-
tium contained in water vapor, and particulate material. The system for
the treatment of radioactive gaseous waste and ventilation paths are
shown schematically in Figure 3.9.
3.5.2.1
Waste Gas System
The major source of gaseous radioactive waste during normal plant operation
is the off-gas from the main steam condenser air ejectors. Off-gases from
the main condensers consist of hydrogen and oxygen from decomposition of
water, moisture, air from inleakage, and trace concentrations of radio-
active krypton, xenon, and iodine. There are three main condenser shells
and each shell is served by a two stage steam jet air ejector. The
noncondensible gases from the air ejector condensers are vented into a
delay pipe where a minimum holdup of one hour is provided, to allow for
the decay of the short-lived radioactive gases. The gases vent from the
delay pipe through a high efficiency particulate filter to the 368-feet
stack. Gamma radiation monitors in the air ejector discharge line auto-
matically close isolation valves when radiation reaches a preset level.
During startup, before steam is available to operate the steam jet air
ejectors, noncondensible gases are removed from the main condensers by
means of mechanical vacuum pumps . These pumps exhaust through the 1.75
minute holdup pipe to the stack.
The turbine gland seal is supplied with primary steam, and it is therefore
a contributory source of radioactivity. The exhaust from the turbine
gland seal system is passed through a gland seal condenser. Noncondensibles
are exhausted through the 1.75 minute holdup pipe to the stack for dis-
persion. Delay time provided in the holdup pipe allows for decay of the
major activation gases (N-16 and 0-19).
3-25
368 ft ABOVE GROUND

2 STAGE AIR
EJECTOR
I-HO
HOLDUP PIPE
w
-D
FROM MAIN
CONDENSER
MECHANICAL
VACUUM
PUMP
1.75 MIN.
HOLDUP PIPE
TURBINE GLAND SEAL
CONDENSER EXHAUSTER
WASTE GAS SYSTEM
PAC
STANDBY GAS TREATMENT SYSTEM
(2 TRAINS 2700 scfm each)
65,000 sctm
ra
REACTOR
BLDG.
DRYWELY
STACK
-SUPPRESSION CHAMBER
ROOF FANS - 36,000 scfm
82,400 scfm
TURBINE BLOG
回
​15,000 sctm
자
​RAD. WASTE
FACILITY
- 女
​VENTILATION SYSTEM
LEGEND
P: PREFILTER
A: HIGH EFFICIENCY PARTICULATE FILTER
C: CHARCOAL ADSORBER
FIGURE 3.9
GASEOUS RADIOACTIVE WASTE SYSTEM, OYSTER
CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATITIG STATION
3-26
1
Other than the one hour holdup time and filtering, the noncondensible
gases from the air ejectors receive no treatment. As a result the air
ejectors are the major source of radioiodine and noble gas releases to
the environment. State-of-the-art technology is available to reduce
radioactive releases from this source.
3.5.2.2
Ventilation System
1
The turbine building, reactor building, and radwaste building ventilation
systems are once-through systems with air passing from relatively clean
areas to areas of higher radioactivity potential. Normally the venti-
lation air in the reactor building is discharged to the main stack without
treatment. In the event of abnormal air activity levels, however, this
air is routed through the standby gas treatment system prior to release
through the main stack. The standby gas treatment system consists of a
prefilter, a HEPA filter, a charcoal adsorber, and a second HEPA filter
in series. Radwaste building ventilation air is exhausted through a
prefilter and a HEPA filter and released to the atmosphere through the
stack.
1
!
Ventilation air from equipment areas and lower levels of the turbine
building is exhausted to the atmosphere through the stack without treat-
ment. Ventilation air from the upper regions of the turbine building is
exhausted through roof mounted exhaust fans to the atmosphere without
treatment.
1
1
1
The primary containment (dry well) is normally a sealed volume during
operation. During periods of refueling or maintenance, however, it
may be necessary to purge the dry well and suppression chamber. The
purge gas from this operation normally is vented up the stack; but, if
radioactivity levels should be above a predetermined level, the purge
gas is passed through the reactor building standby gas treatment system.
After passing through this system, the purge gas is released to the stack.
The Ventilation System provides for the release of radioactive gaseous
effluent at an activity level that is acceptable. We conclude, therefore,
that the Ventilation System is adequate and acceptable.
3.5.2.3 Evaluation
Table 3.6 lists the calculated annual release of radioactive materials
in the gaseous effluents based upon the conditions in Table 3.4. The
applicant calculated a noble gas release of about 32,300 Ci/yr but did
not calculate an iodine release rate.
3-27
TABLE 3.6
CALCULATED ANNUAL RELEASE OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS
IN CASENUS EFFLUENT FROM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION
CURIES PER YEAR
Nuclide
Reactor Bldg.
Turbine Bldg.
Gland Seal
Air Fjector
Total
Kr-83m
a
11
48
34,000
34,000
Kr-85m
a
19
80
69,000
69,000
Kr-85
a
a
a
429
420
Kr-87
a
56
240
149,000
140,000
Kr-88
a
61.
260
203,non
203,000
Kr-89
210
a
620
2
830
Xe-131m
a
a
a
36
36
Xe-133m
a
1
5
50n
500
Xe-133
a
33
140
142., non
142,009
Xe-135m
a
97
389
29,000
30,000
Xe-135
a
95
410
389, non
380,000
Xe-137
a
360
1,1nn.
29
1,500
Xe-138
a
300
1,200
113,იიი
114,000
Total noble gas
а
1,200
4,500
1,11n, non
1,120,000
I-131
0.15
· 0.53
0.023
11.2
11.8
T-!33
0.062
3.04
n.13
62.8
66.0
1
3-28
Table 3.7 contains the actual recorded noble gases and iodine releases
from May 1969 through December 1972. These recorded values compare
favorably with the values calculated in our evaluation.
Based on our model and assumptions, we calculate an expected whole body
dose at or beyond the site boundary to be less than 5 mrem/yr. The dose
to a child's thyroid at the nearest cow which is located 17 miles away,
through the pasture-cow-milk food chain, is approximately 5 mrem/yr.
Since available technology has not been applied to reduce the radioactivity
level of the air ejector, the gaseous radwaste system does not meet our
"as low as practicable" guidelines. The applicant has committed to pro-
posing a system for augmenting the present gaseous radwaste system to
insure compliance with our "as low as practicable" guidelines. The staff
will evaluate the system when the applicant submits the necessary
information.
3.5.3
Solid Waste
1
The solid waste system handles wet solid wastes such as spent demineralizer
resins, waste concentrator bottoms, and filter sludges and dry solids such
as spent filter elements, contaminated tools and rags. The solid wastes
are packaged in 55-gallon steel drums for temporary onsite storage and
shipment to permanent offsite storage.
Spent resins and filter sludges are pumped as a slurry from their re-
spective sources to a centrifuge where they are dewatered and discharged
by gravity to a hopper below the centrifuge. From the hopper, the material
is transferred to steel drums. Waste evaporator bottoms are put into
steel drums and mixed with a drying agent.
Dry wastes such as air filters, paper, rags, contaminated clothing, small
tools and equipment parts, and solid laboratory wastes are compressed into
steel drums to reduce volume.
Filled drums are capped and stored temporarily to await shipment by truck
to the offsite storage facility. Packaging, monitoring, labeling, and
shipping are done in compliance with AEC and DOT regulations.
3.5.3.1
Evaluation
The licensee estimated that the solid waste disposal system will process
filter cake and concentrator bottoms containing 876 curies each year. The
licensee made no estimate of the amount or activity of resins expected to
3-29
TABLE 3.7
GASEOUS WASTE RELEASED FROM PLANT
Curies
Halogen* I-131
Plant
Factor
Report Period
Nohle Gases
T-133
Mav-Dec, 1969
7,039
0.003
0.10
Jan-June, 1970
43,460
n.13
0.54
July-Dec, 1970
68,300
n.18
-
0.71
Jan-June, 1971
242,900
0.7
-
-
0.81
July-Dec, 1971
341,599.
1.3
2.1
0.57
Jan-June, 1972
606,200
-
2.8
2.3
0.63
July-Dec, 1972
260,100
-
3.5
4.8
ņ.90
*Prior to Julv 1971 halogens were not reported by isotone.
3-30
be produced. We estimate that approximately 900 drums of spent resins
and filter sludges, and 600 drums of dry wastes will be shipped offsite
annually, with a total activity of 2,700 Ci after 180 days of decay.
Table 3.8 shows the volumes of solid waste and the activity control
shipped from the plant from May 1969 through December 1972.
Based on the performance of the solid radwaste system to date and on
our evaluation of the quantities of solid waste that are expected to be
generated in this plant, the provisions for handling the waste, and
shipment in accordance with AEC and DOT regulations, the staff concludes
that the solid radwaste handling system is adequate and acceptable.
3.6
CHEMICAL AND BIOCIDE EFFLUENTS
The operation of a typical thermal power station requires the use of cer-
tain chemicals which ultimately are discharged into the waste effluent.
The chemicals serve various functions including (1) the production of the
high purity water needed for steam generation, (2) slime control in the
cooling water circuit, (3) corrosion prevention, (4) decontamination and
cleaning, and (5) laboratory uses.
Station waste effluent water is discharged into the bay via the plant waste
discharge line and the circulating water discharge tunnel. Table 3.9
lists the estimated average and maximum daily discharge of chemical wastes,
along with the estimated average increase of chemical species in the cir-
culating water discharged and in the plant waste discharge line, shown in
Figure 3.3. A discussion of significant chemical waste effluents is
given below.
3.6.1
Water Treatment Effluents
The 17,000 gal of high purity water needed daily for the steam genera-
tion system are produced by pumping filtered well water through ion
exchange beds, which remove sodium, calcium, magnesium, chloride, bicar-
bonate, and sulfate ions from the water. When the ion exchange beds
are exhausted, the beds are treated with sulfuric acid and sodium hydro-
xide solutions to remove the chemicals. The spent regenerant acid and
caustic solutions with the removed chemicals are rinsed to the plant
waste discharge line. The quantities of principal chemicals released in
regenerating the two demineralizer trains are summarized in Table 3.10
(Ref 1, p. 3.7-1).
.
The spent regenerant solutions are not neutralized prior to discharge
from the station; however, they are diluted immediately by the 22,000-8pm
3-31
TABLE 3.8
SOLID WASTE SHIPPED FROM PLANT
3
Report Period
Volume, ft?
Activity, Ci
May-Dec, 1969
1,073
0.4
Man-June, 1970
4,400
1.5
July-Dec, 1970
3,300
1.5
Jan-June, 1971
678
3.8
Julv-Dec, 1971
4,086
1.6
Jan-June, 1972
4,322
4.2
resin
353
1,256
July-Dec, 1972
solid
10,713
40.5
3-32
TABLE 3.9
ESTIMATED CHEMICAL RELEASES TO THE CIRCULATING WATER DISCHARGE CANAL
07(e)
Normal
Concentration in
Cooling Water Inlet
mg/liter
12,680
Concentration Increase
in Cooling Water(a)
mg/liter
Average
Maximum
Release
Release
Rate
Rate
(b)
0.18
0.36
Average
Addition
1b/day
9)
1000
Source
Compound
Chlorine
Ionic
Species
Chloride
Cooling Water
Biocide
<0.210)
0
<0.2
Chlorine
residual
Sewage Treatment
Chlorine
--
Chloride
12,680
Chlorine
residual
0
681h)
Demineralizer
Sulfuric Acid
0.012
321h)
Sulfate
Sodium
Sodium Hydroxide
1,820
7,130
6.95
Regenerant
Wastes
0.0034
0.82(c)
0.27(d)
6.88(c)
7.04(0)
PH
6.95
0.22(g)
0.021i)
Boiler
Sodium
7,130
Trisodium Phosphate
Sodium Hydroxide
Sodium Sulfite
0.01(i)
Blowdown
0.25 (9)
0.25(9)
Sulfite
0.01()
0.7
Phosphate
Copper
0.02 - 0.10(f)
Inconclusive
Condenser Tube
Corrosion
Copper
(a) Assuming 460,000 gpm circulating water flow and neglecting all freshwater flows
(b) 2000 lb/day chlorine use, (Ref 1, App. C, Response B6).
(c) 178 lb of sulfuric acid rinsed from cation exchanger in 1 hour
(d) 84 lb of sodium hydroxide rinsed from anion exchanger in 1 hour
(e) Ref 1, Table 3.4-1
(f) Ref 1, Appendix C, Response B4
(9) Ref 1, Appendix C, Response B6
(n) Ref 1, p. 3.7-1
li) 10-minute blowdown, every 3 days
3-33
TABLE 3.10
DEMINERALIZER REGENERANT RELEASES
Bed
Type
Units
in
Use
Days/
Cycle
Sulfuric Acid
lb/cycle 1b/day
Sodium Hydroxide
1b/cycle 1b/day
Cation
2
6
178
59
Anion
2
6
84
28
Mixed
2
18
76
9.
40
4
Total Daily Average
68
32
cooling water flow in the plant waste discharge line. A shift of
+ 0.7 pH unit from the normal pH value of 6.95 may be observed in the
plant waste discharge line effluent during certain portions of the regen-
eration cycle, but the further dilution and buffering action of the cir-
culating and dilution waters immediately reduces the pll shift to less
than + 0.1 pH unit in the canal.
3.6.2
Biocides
Liquid chlorine is injected into the six circulating water inlet connec-
tions to the main condensers and into the inlet header of the service
water system to control the growth of marine organisms on the heat
exchanger surfaces, and thus maintain the design flow and heat exchanger
efficiencies. In order to subject the fouling organisms to effective
chlorine concentrations, and vet minimize its concentration in the water
returned to the bay, chlorine is injected for 30-minute periods sequen-
tially into each of the 6 main condenser connections and the service
water header on a continuous 3.5-hour-on 0.5-hour-off cycle. The amount
of chlorine used is dictated by the requirements of the individual cir-
cuits and by seasonal variations, with the warmer summertime water
requiring larger additions to compensate for the more rapid ingrowth of
fouling organisms. The daily chlorine addition ranges from 1000 to
2000 lb (Ref 1, Appendix C, Response B6).
>
The chlorine addition rates at the multiple injection points are adjusted
to match the existing chlorine demand of the circulating water, such that
the total residual chlorine, measured at the outlet of each treated circuit,
3-34
.
is maintained at less than 1 mg/liter (Ref 1, p. 3.5-8). In sequentially
treating the six main condenser circuits, the chlorinated discharge from
one circuit is mixed thoroughly in the discharge tunnel with the unchlor-
inated water from the other five circuits, resulting in a dilution of the
residual chlorine to values less than 0.2 mg/liter. The residual is
reduced further in the tunnel by the normal chlorine demand of the unchlor-
inated cooling water discharged from the other five circuits, which has
been found to vary approximately from 0.1 to 0.7 mg/liter with a 1-minute
contact time. The approximate travel time of the cooling water in the
discharge tunnel is also about one minute. The total residual chlorine
of the main condenser discharge has been found to be about 0.1 mg/liter
as it flows into the discharge canal (Ref 1, Appendix C, Response B3).
The service water systems to the turbine and reactor buildings are
treated in sequence with the main condenser circuits, and are also con-
trolled to maintain the chlorine residual at less than 1 mg/liter at the
outlet of the circuit. The service water systems discharge into the
canal via the plant waste discharge line, and the total residual chlorine
at that point has been found to be about 0.1 mg/liter (Ref 1, Appendix C,
Response B3).
Due to the presence of ammonia in the circulating water, chloramines will
be formed during or subsequent to the chlorination and release of the main
condenser and the service waters into the discharge canal. While no data
were available on chloramine concentrations in the discharge waters, the
analytical method used to measure residual chlorine includes the chlora-
mine contributions. The reported ammonia concentrations of the inlet
cooling water, which range from 0.04 to 0.2 mg/liter (Ref 1, Table 5.3-1),
suggest that the residual chlorine concentrations of the discharged waters
probably consist mainly of chloramines.
3.6.3 Effluents from Boiler Corrosion Prevention
An auxiliary oil fired boiler is operated continuously to supply steam
for various heating needs throughout the station. Since untreated well
water is used as feed makeup for the boiler, small amounts of trisodium
phosphate, sodium hydroxide and sodium sulfite are added to the feedwater
to prevent corrosion and scale formation in the boiler tubes. To avoid
buildup of those chemicals in the boiler water, due to steam and con-
densate leakage, a small portion of the boiler water is blown down to
the discharge canal and fresh feedwater is added periodically. The amounts
and kinds of chemicals thus added to the discharge canal are shown in
Table 3.2.
3-35
3.6.4
Cleaning Solutions and Laboratory Effluents
Effluent solutions from the regulated shop, the laundry, personnel decon-
tamination stations, and equipment cleaning stations are routed to the
discharge canal via a laundry drain holdud tank. The effluents are routed
either directly to the plant waste discharge line or to the radwaste
evaporator system depending upon the analysis of samples taken of the
holdup tank contents or the indication of the radiation monitor attached
to the discharge line to the canal. Condensates resulting from effluent
routed to the evaporator are discharged to the plant waste discharge
line, after evaluation of condensate samples.
Similarly, laboratory effluents are collected in a drain tank. They can
be routed either to the discharge canal via the waste neutralization tank
and floor drain filter, or to the radwaste evaporator system for process-
ing as necessary.
While the applicant did not specify the amounts and kinds of chemicals
contained in the cleaning solutions and laboratory effluent solutions
released to the discharge canal, it can be inferred from other station
usages that the quantities released can be assumed to be negligible
when added to the natural concentrations of similar materials in
seawater.
3.7
SANITARY AND OTHER EFFLUENTS
3.7.1
Sewage Treatment Wastes
Domestic and sanitary wastes from the unrestricted nonradioactive areas
of the plant are discharged to a packaged sewage treatment facility,
designed to remove a minimum of 90% of the biological oxygen demand
(BOD) of the incoming waste water. The aerobic system utilizes the
activated sludge process and treats about 1000 gal/day of raw wastewater.
Rubbish is screened from the raw sewage as it flows continuously into
an aeration tank where it is air sparged for approximately 24 hours
before outflowing into a settling tank. Scum and settled solids from
the settling tank are returned to the aeration tank for additional
treatment while a sodium hypochlorite solution is injected into the
clarified effluent to kill any remaining pathogenic bacteria prior to
release into the plant waste discharge line. Chlorine injection is
used to maintain about 1.5 mg/l of total residual chlorine in the dis-
charged waste water.
Rubbish collected by the raw sewage screens and about 1000 gal/yr of
excess sludge collected in the settling tank are removed periodically for
3-36
disposal by licensed contractors. The operation of the sewage treatment
plant is in the charge of a licensed operator.
3.7.2
Effluents from Trash Racks
The debris collected on the trash racks of the circulating and dilution
water intake structure is routinely raked up the inclined bars into
appropriate containers and periodically collected for onsite, land fill
disposal. The traveling screens are arranged in an endless loop, with
the upper end of the loop rising above the water surface of the intake
structure. A water spray system, directed onto the back side of the
exposed screens flushes the accumulated fish, crustaceans, aquatic plants
and debris from the screens and into a sluiceway leading to the discharge
canal.
3.7.3
Storm Drainage
No provision has been made to collect and process the storm water runoff
from any of the areas of the station. However, generally the site has
been graded to slope to the northeast, where a shallow ditch collects and
routes the area runoff to the circulation water inlet canal. Switchgear
and transformer yards are paved with coarse sand and gravel, and readily
absorb and retain any oil leaks or spills.
3.7.4
Boiler and Diesel Engine Emissions
Combustion products are released to the atmosphere by a small oil-fired
boiler operated continuously to satisfy certain heating needs of the sta-
tion, and by two diesel driven emergency electrical generators, operated
periodically during emergency procedure testing operations. Emissions
from those sources are given in Table 3.11.2
3.7.5
Condenser Tube Corrosion Products
An increase in the copper concentrations of the circulating water may
occur as a result of the erosion of the aluminum-bronze alloy, main con-
denser tubes by the abrasive action of the sediment in the circulating
water. The condenser tube erosion is greater than anticipated, due to
eddy currents around mussel shell fragments that become lodged in the
tubes. Analysis of cooling water samples taken before and after passage
through the main condensers was inconclusive in indicating the magnitude
of the increase of the copper content of the cooling water (Ref 1, Appen-
dix C, Response B4).
3-37
TABLE 3.11
EMISSIONS FROM BOILER AND DIESEL ENGINES2(a)(h)
Average Emission
tonyr
Boiler (c)
Diesels (d)
Maximum Emission
lb/hr
Boiler(e)
Diesels (f)
Emission Type
Particulates
2.5
0.05
1.8
2.6
SO2
13.2
0.16
9.3
8.4
CO
0.013
0.84
0.01
45.
Hydrocarbons
0.6
0.14
0.44
7.4
NO2
32.9
1.4
23.2.
74.
Aldehydes
0.3
0.01
0.22
0.6
Organic Acids
0.2
0.01
0.16
0.6
(a)
Ref 1, Appendix C, Response B7
(b)
Number 2 fuel oil with n.3% sulfur used for both boiler and
diesel equipment
(c)
Total yearly fuel consumption: 625,000 gal
(d)
Total vearly fuel consumption: 7250 gal
(e)
Maximum rate of fuel consumption:
221 gal/hr (December-January)
(f)
Maximum rate of fuel consumption:
200 gal/hr
3-38
3.8
TRANSMISSION FACILITIES
The 230 kV transmission line runs 11.1 miles to the Manitou Substation at
Toms River. The route is generally parallel with the parkway. The 240-ft
wide right-of-way passes through about 7 miles of pitch pine forests and
most of the remainder passes through white cedar swamp forests. Figure
3.10 shows the routing, affected roads and other features.
From the station, the 1.2 mile section to the parkway contains very
sparse vegetation, although a relatively complete cover exists on the
route as it crosses the parkway. The crossing generally conforms with
Federal Power Commission (FPC) guidance. The routing parallels the park-
way for 3.3 miles, with an intermediate pitch pine screening consistent
with FPC guidance. 3 Over the next 5.4 miles, the routing passes through
the western part of Double Trouble State Park, a recreation and wildlife
reserve with five commercial cranberry bogs and a lake, all east of the
routing. After crossing Pinewald-Keswick Road the routing avoids a
cranberry bog at Jake's Branch and parallels Dover Road for about 0.5 mile
before crossing it. Finally, the route continues northward 1.2 miles from
the Dover Road crossing to the substation.
The applicant's vegetation control program calls for selective herbicide
treatment every
4 to 5 years. Small amounts of commercial 2,4-D, 2,4,5-T,
pichloram or dicamb a preparations in water or fuel oil are hand applied
to the bases of undesirable species. Ammonium sulfamate is used instead
of 2,4,5-T in wet areas that may contribute to drinking water supplies
for humans or livestock. Principal species controlled are maple, oak,
sassafras, and black cherry. Retardants are being withheld from road
crossings, in order not to delay the regrowth of screening. The appli-
cant states that only vegetation posing a fire hazard along the routing
or a hazard to the line is removed. The maintenance road crosses ten
streams. The entire program is managed by the applicant's forester who
is a tree expert certified by the State of New Jersey, Department of
Environmental Protection.
The 123 to 158-ft high towers are of standard design. They have aged to
a non-reflecting surface. The insulators have a brown color. Trans-
mission line approvals are listed in Appendix A.
3-39
DOVER TOWNSHIP
-N-
TOMS RIVER
SOUTH
TOMS RIVER
TOMS R.
BEACHWOOD
PINE BEACH
DOVER RD
PINEWALD-KESWICK RD
BERKELEY TOWNSHIP
DOUBLE
TROUBLE
LACEY TOWNSHIP
GARDEN STATE PARKWAY
LACEY RD
CEDAR CREEK
LANOKA HARBOR
DEER HEAD LAKE
NORTH BRANCH
LAKE BARNEGAT FORKED
RIVER
STATE GAME FARM
MILL POND
MIDDLE BRANCH
FORKED R.
BARNEGAT BAY
SOUTH BRANCH
ALANT SITE
SITE BOUNDARY
OCEAN TOWNSHIP
OYSTER CREEK
WARETOWN
MILE
FIGURE 3.10
TRANSMISSION LINE ROUTING
3-40
REFERENCES
1.
>
Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Oyster Creek Nuclear Gener-
ating Station Environmental Report, March 6, 1972, Amendment 68, to
the "Application for Construction Permit and Operating License,"
Docket No. 50-219, March 26, 1964.
2.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Programs .
"Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (AP-42)," Research
Triangle Park, NC. 1972.
>
3.
Federal Power Commission Order No. 414, "Protection and Enhancement
of Natural, Historic and Scenic Values in the Design, Location,
Construction, and Operation of Project Works," November 27, 1970.
4.
State of New Jersey, Department of Public Utilities, Board of Public
Utility Commissioners - Proposed Finding of Fact, Conclusions and
Recommendations, Oyster Creek Nuclear Plant Docket No. 652-60.
5.
>
Rules and Regulations Establishing Surface Water Criteria, New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection, June 30, 1971.
4-1
4.
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF SITE PREPARATION AND PLANT AND
TRANSMISSION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION
4.1
IMPACTS ON LAND USE
A total of about 350 acres were disturbed by site preparation and con-
struction. About 290 acres were cleared or covered with dredge spoils.
Excavation for the canal and station structures resulted in raised ele-
vations of the nearby land that received the spoils. During the construc-
tion phase, some 228,000 cubic yards of material were excavated. One
view of the excavation can be seen in Figure 4.1. Of that amount, some
80,000 cubic yards was used as backfill and the rest to build up the
site evaluation to 21 ft above MSL or dumped in the spoil area north of
the station. In addition to the above excavation, the 1966-7 canal
dredging created more spoils. A view of the dragline excavation of the
canal is shown in Figure 4.2 (Ref 3, Appendix C, Response A4).
In the construction of the 11.1 miles of transmission lines from the plant
to the Manitou substation, the full right-of-way was clear-cut, except
that the clear-cutting was restricted to the 40 ft at the parkway
crossing, and 160 ft from the parkway to the Lacey Road crossing. About
2 miles of white cedar swamp forest were removed during clear cutting.
In cooperation with the State, the applicant prepared the stump land for
grass seeding and supplied the seed for grass restoration. Screening
has not yet developed over the wide clear-cut areas.
The impacts of construction on the land were not serious, the land having
been committed beforehand to station use.
4.2
IMPACTS ON WATER USE
The construction impacts were not significant. The normal flows of
Oyster Creek and South Branch Forked River were interrupted temporarily,
but man's use of the streams in the vicinity has been quite limited.
No saltwater intrusion into the groundwater system was noted.
4.3
ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS
4.3.1
Terrestrial
Part of the disturbed area now is occupied by the physical station, but
much land is essentially barren. Localized areas were seeded with grass,
but poor soil fertility and wind action have held that type of revegetation
4-2

FIGURE 4.1 STATION FOUNDATION EXCAVATION

FIGURE 4.2 CANAL EXCAVATION AND SPOIL HANDLING
4-3
to a minimum. Gully erosion occurred in some areas and undoubtedly con-
tributed to shoaling in the canal, thus requiring the applicant to consi-
der redredging the canal. The spoil area at the building site apparently
consisted of cedar swamp forest or land that was cleared prior to the
applicant's ownership. Destruction of cedar swamp forest represents a
loss of unique habitat and possible loss or displacement of tree frogs
and other inhabitants. The staff also observed large barren areas of
spoils near the canal's north shore. Spoils areas are identified in
Figure 3.4. Some of the areas once were marshland as shown in Figure 2.3.
The change represents a reduction in habitat for waterfowl and small mam-
mals, particularly muskrat. The area also abounds with frogs, although
it is not the habitat of the rare and endangered pine barrens tree frog.
.
Saltwater cooling water pumped through the canal introduced saltwater
into the former freshwater drainages of Oyster Creek and the South Branch
Forked River. In the case of the main stem of Oyster Creek, the dam
creating the fire pond prevents saltwater intrusion. The dam probably
helps maintain stable freshwater conditions and prevents dessication of
the adjacent cedar swamp forest. Assessing the effect of saltwater intru-
sion on terrestrial forms is difficult. The staff noticed no obvious
changes at the time of the site visit although change probably has
taken place. The applicant's ownership of the land adjacent to the
water courses, however, has prevented commercial exploitation such as
that present on the Middle and North Branches Forked River.
The applicant is aware of the ecological significance of cedar swamps.
He preserved them, or avoided them, during transmission line construction
whenever practicable. Right-of-way clearing for that portion of the
transmission line traversing the applicant's property has had a
considerable effect on the land and vegetation within the 240-ft-wide
strip. In those areas where the surface was completely denuded or
covered with dredge spoils, revegetation has been very slow. The
applicant states that regarding the area has reduced the erosion problem,
but clearly erosion has not been eliminated.
4.3.2 Aquatic
Construction activities related to the site were completed over 3 years
ago. Therefore, any environmental effects have been modified by time
and station operation.
Site excavation and canal dredging would have caused the normal suspended
sediment load to be increased and, therefore, would have increased the
amount of siltation in the lower reaches of Oyster Creek and Forked River
and the adjacent bay area. No quantitative data are presented by the
applicant on the benthic animals and plants in the regions before and
4-4
immediately after construction. Release of noxious material such as
hydrogen sulfide, heavy metals and pesticide residues into the aquatic
environment also may be expected to have occurred during dredging. Evi-
dently hydrogen sulfide was present? but no information is available on
the metals or pesticides in the dredged sediments or any changes in
the level of those materials in surrounding biological communities during
or after dredging.
Temporary changes in phytoplankton production due to turbidity and nutri-
ent release from dredging activities occurred but would have had no lasting
effects on the bay ecosystem. The addition of highly organic sediments to
the water column could have reduced the dissolved oxygen level signifi-
cantly and caused mortality among animals in the affected area; however,
that also was a temporary condition and studies have shown that both
dredged and spoils areas are repopulated rapidly.?
During dredging, benthic biota deposited on land can be assumed to have
been killed. A change in the substrate also can be assumed; however,
one of the dominant organisms, Pectinaria gouldii, which was abundant
before construction, has recolonized the South Branch Forked River
indicating that the change did not eliminate all existing species.
Again, quantitative data are unavailable to assess any change in total
benthic biomass in the area affected by construction (Ref 3, p. 4.0-3).
The widening and deepening of the lower reaches of both streams and the
currents produced by station pumping changed the current and hydrographic
situation completely. Instead of an estuarine region of low velocity
oscillating tidal action, a relatively high flow single direction current
of uniform salinities was created. Thus, any migratory species that
require the former type conditions for successful passage are excluded
from Oyster Creek and the South Branch Forked River. Migratory fish spe-
cies known to inhabit the bay (Table 2.13) would, therefore, be affected
by the change.
Some spoil was deposited along the edge iſ saltmarsh and along the
retaining wall of Baywood Farms; thus removed 45 acres of ? und from pro-
duction (Ref 3, p. 4.0-2). Assuming 2,000 gms/m²/yr of net production
for an estuarine area, 4 the staff calculates that the spoiling caused a
loss of 48 tons/yr of primary production to the bay ecosystem. If that
represented the only wetlands lost to the Barnegat Bay system it would
be insignificant; however, the amount of wetlands already destroyed by
filling and other activities within the bay makes any additional losses
significant.
4.4
EFFECTS ON COMMUNITY
Noise, dust movement, and the influx of workers at peak periods had
community impacts typical of practices at the time. Any impacts
associated with construction of the station have disappeared with
completion of the project.
4-5
REFERENCES
1.
C. B. Wurtz, Discussion of Possible Biological Influence of Heated
Discharges from the Oyster Creek Generating Plant, N.J.
2.
G. O'Neal and J. Sceva, The Effects of Dredging on Water Quality
in the Northwest, Environmental Protection Agency, Seattle,
Washington, 1971.
3.
Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Oyster Creek Nuclear
Generating Station Environmental Report, March 6, 1972,
Amendment 68, to the "Application for Construction Permit and
Operating License," Docket No. 50-219, March 26, 1964.
4.
E. P. Odum, The Role of Tidal Marshes in Estuarine Production,
NY State Environmental Conservation Department, Information
Leaflet No. 2545, 1961.
5-1
5.
.
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF OPERATION OF THE PLANT AND
TRANSMISSION FACILITIES
5.1
IMPACTS ON LAND USE
The siting and operation of the station has not preempted the land
from some other high value or unique commercial use that may exist.
A preponderance of land around the region is vacant. Thus removal
of the site property from other land uses has a minimum impact.
There is no agricultural use of the land. The site is located well
away from densely populated areas. About 350 acres of the applicant's
property are utilized by the station and transmission line. Presently,
some 25 acres are occupied by structures and cannot be used as
wildlife habitat. The remaining 325 acres of disturbed land, including
the fire pond, represents a habitat trade-off. Some species have
adapted to the change while others probably have not.
The applicant's current policy towards transmission line right-of-way
maintenance is one of selective tree removal with herbicides. Thus
the land is available for multiple use and does provide some added
wildlife habitat for browsing species.
.
The New Jersey Highway Authority, as operator of the parkway, agrees
with the staff that the applicant has made provisions for a minimum
impact of the transmission line right-of-way on the aesthetic qualities
of the parkway (Ref 1, p. 3.2–1). Moreover, the applicant recently
modified the vegetation control program such that regrowth is permitted
at primary and secondary road crossings and may be expected to provide
visual barriers within the next few years. About 30% of the 35-acre
parcel between the switchyard and the parkway essentially lacks
vegetative cover and soil erosion is evident. The remaining portion
is covered with low growing shrubs and herbs. A tunnel view, as shown
in Figure 3.2, exposes the switchyard from the parkway northbound, but
other views of the corridor, towers and lines are not distracting. The
3.3-mile section of the corridor parallel to the parkway and extending
to Lacey Road includes 17 acres of white cedar swamp. Appropriate methods
of vegetation control are used in maintaining the corridor. of the
possible views of the corridor from Dover Road and Pinewald-Keswick Road,
one out of four is screened. Nearly 160 acres were clear-cut in that
vicinity, including 58 acres of white cedar swamp. Regrowth of vegetation
has been slow. The right-of-way does not interfere with Double Trouble
State Park. The staff is aware of no interference with railroad signal
devices.
5-2
Beyond Manitou, transmission lines cause no significant increased environ-
mental impact due to carrying power from the station. Radio interference
and corona discharge are voltage dependent, with the voltage being the same
as before imposition of the station load. Continued erosion from canal
banks has contributed to shoaling in the canal. Denuded and spoil areas
have been slow to revegetate under the means used thus far, creating a
distinct adverse aesthetic impact. Periodic redredging and spoil deposi-
tion, if continued, will contribute adversely to the aesthetic impact of
the site.
The impact of fogging and icing on the land surface surrounding the
station and discharge canal has been observed to be very small.
5.2
IMPACTS ON WATER USE
The impact of the station on groundwater is minimal or nonexistent.
Evidence indicates no intrusion of saltwater, in part due to the
secondary canals along the intake side of the main canal. The
sanitary waste system is fully acceptable. Intrusion of discharged
wastes, as well as salt, is prevented by the net groundwater flow
toward the bay.
5.2.1
Impact of Release of Heat to the Bay
4.
The release of heat from the station makes a significant impact on the
waters of the bay. Early studies help define the pattern of disposition
of the thermal load. Review of 1963 dye tests reveals a primary water
flow toward Barnaget Inlet. Other flows were up and down the western
shore of the bay. In overview, the net result is the establishment of
an approximate three-leaf clover pointed toward the inlet. With the
station operating, 1971 temperature profiles formed a similar pattern
(Ref 1, Figure 5.1-1).
>
>
In order better to understand the impact of the release of heated
water into the bay, the staff independently analyzed the discharge
heat pattern, using techniques generally applicable to similar heat
discharge systems. The regional aspects of bay hydraulics, because
of its sluggishness and shallowness, are difficult to model analyti-
cally and it was not attempted. In any case, direct simulation, if
done accurately, would do no more than confirm the known experimental
data and would increase only marginally the reported general under-
standing of the current situation (Ref 1, p. 5.1-4). Rather, analy-
tical models were used to develop representative discharge plumes
5-3
which could exist under the 4.62 x 109 Btu/hr heat load, the discharge
rate of 460,000 gpm without dilution pumps, and the 23°F temperature
drop across the condensers.
First, the staff concluded that one portion of the thermal plume seems
to feed rather constantly into the station intake, a result of prevailing
long shore current during certain times of the day, and a result of
the low velocity of the discharge canal. Second, the bay is, in general,
too shallow for optimum dispersion of the heat using momentum entrain-
ment techniques. With an average bay depth of 5 ft, an original canal
depth of 10 ft, and a sluggish discharge velocity, the heat dissipation
system currently used does not appear to be nearly optimum. Finally,
the ability of the bay to disperse the waste energy, either by transport
to the ocean or by heat transfer from the surface, does not nearly match
the station heat discharge. The net result is a permanent upward dis-
placement of bay temperatures a few degrees in the region of the station
discharge and Barnegat Inlet.
•
The extent and variety of available commercial and sport fishing has been
reduced to some extent, as discussed in Subsection 5.5.2. Transportation
on the bay and streams remains unaffected. The impact on biological
resources of the regional waters, although they are related to man's use
of the water resources, will be considered in Subsection 5.5.2.
Release of chemicals from the station makes no significant impact on
water use, except possibly in the case of copper as discussed in
Subsection 5.5.2.5.
5.2.2
Impact of Plant Operation on Oyster Creek
Operation of the station has had a significant impact upon that portion
of Oyster Creek which serves as an extension of the plant's discharge
canal. There are problems due to heating of the canal water, fogging,
shipworms, silting, and cold shock to fish following power diminution or
shutdown in winter.
5.2.2.1 Impact of Heated Water in the Canal
The applicant has an agreement with the State of New Jersey that the
plant will not discharge water at a temperature greater than 95°F
23
measured at a designated buoy in Barnegat Bay. This agreement permits
the water temperature to exceed 95°F in the part of the canal where
boating marinas are located. According to marina representatives in
5-4
>
interviews with AEC regulatory inspectors (Ref 32, p. 28,29), water
temperatures as high as 104°F in the canal were measured and recorded
in July 1972. In addition to the discomfort of marina patrons during
hot summer weater from the humid atmosphere over the heated water, it
is reported that there has been increased damage to the interiors of
boats due to mildewing and condensation.
Another problem resulting from the heated canal water is fogging.
Marina representatives state that occasional severe fogging affects not
only marina operations, but accidents on the U.S. Route 9 bridge over
the canal have been narrowly averted when motorists suddenly entered
the dense fog cloud over the canal (Ref 32, p. 29).
Another problem aggrevated by the heated canal water is the prolifera-
tion of shipworms in the canal, discussed below.
5.2.2.2 Shipworms in the Canal
In the construction and operation of the Oyster Creek Station intake-
discharge canal, the flows in South Branch Forked River and in Oyster
Creek were changed from alternating to unidirectional flow such that
the estuarine nature of the streams was lost, and the water has become
of constant bay salinity throughout the canal. Aside from eliminating
spawning and nursery areas formerly used by anadromous fish and other
marine organisms (see Sect. 5.5), the change has allowed the invasion of
shipworms (Teredo navalis and Bankia gouldi) into the canal. These
organisms are actually small boring clams which thrive in saline waters,
particularly at elevated temperatures. Upon metamorphosis from planktonic
form, they attach to submerged wooden structures and bore into the wood.
According to marina representatives, shipworms had never been a problem
in the marinas located in the canal prior to operation at the Oyster Creek
Station. Since that time, investigation by AEC regulatory inspectors have
confirmed that there has been damage to boats and pilings in the marinas
from shipworm infestation (Ref 32, pp. 28, 29).
5.2.2.3 Silting and Sedimentation in the Canal
The canal banks were originally dredged with a design slope of 1-1/2 to
1, vertical to horizontal. Since construction, the banks have undergone
intense erosion due to runoff from local rains, discharge of groundwater
into the canal, and the pump-induced flow in the canal. One view of the
erosion can be seen in Figure 5.1 (Ref 1, Appendix C, Responses A5 and
A8). Erosion takes the form of vertical gully formation,
The process
has not been halted except when bulkheads have been installed by other
property owners along the canal.
.
5-5
Marina representatives state that silting and sedimentation resulting
from the erosion have become a serious problem in the continued operation
of the marinas. In interview with AEC regulatory inspectors, spokesmen
for the marinas demonstrated evidence of their contentions, and concluded
that the rate of silting had grown to such proportions that continued
operation of the marinas would soon become uneconomical (Ref 32, pp. 29,
30) unless the damage due to silting is stopped.
5.2.2.4 Staff Conclusions
As the plant is presently operated there are undesirable effects associated
with heated water in the canal, as has been described in Sects, 5.2.2.1 and
5.5. Reducing the effluent water temperature by operation of the dilution
system would aggrevate the silting problem described in Section 5.2.2.3.
Also, the applicant states that he cannot operate the dilution system at
near full capacity without damage to condenser tubes due to scouring by
suspended silt.
In a letter dated January 23, 1973 concerning the operation of the Oyster
Creek Station, the Department of Interior says, in part:35
"We are concerned for the canal banks instability which contribute
to the sediment problems and also results in a rather unsightly
condition.
Increased canal flow caused by the operation of the dilution water
pumps further compounds a canal bank instability problem and sedi-
ment transport problem. The applicant ... plans to handle the
canal sediment problem by continuously dredging the canal for the
life of the plant.
This approach does not solve the variety of problems caused by the
sediment.... Canal stabilization should be given top priority to
allow operation of the cooling water system as planned."
The staff agrees with this position, and finds that continued operation
of the station under existing conditions is not satisfactory. Prior
to issuance of a full term operating license it will be necessary for
the applicant to stablize the erosion of canal banks by riprapping or
otherwise lining the canal walls to prevent further erosion. The appli-
cant will operate the dilution system at full capacity when the water
in the discharge canal exceeds 87°F, as measured at the U.S. Route 9
bridge over the discharge canal.
.
5-6
5.3
RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT ON BIOTA OTHER THAN MAN
Exposure pathways for organisms other than man are shown in Figure 5.1.
Terrestrial organisms in the environs of the station receive approximately
the same external radiation dose as those calculated for man (Subsection
5.4). The organisms receive internal dose dependent on the foods they
consume. Animals and birds, such as muskrats and ducks, that consume
100 g/day of algae from the discharge canal receive an internal dose of
about 23 mrad/yr.6 Animals such as racoons that consume 200 g/day
of crustaceans and mollusks from the discharge canal receive an internal
dose of about 1 mrad/yr. Birds such as herons that consume 600 g/day of
fish from the discharge canal receive an internal dose of 1 mrad/yr.
Marine organisms such as algae entrained in the condenser cooling water
receive an external dose of about 6 x 10 mrad/hr. The internal dose
to algae living in the canal is about 130 mrad/yr. Crustaceans and
mollusks living on the bottom sediments in the cooling water outfall
receive a dose of about 80 mrem/yr, about 50% from radionuclides deposited
in the bottom sediments. A fish living in the discharge canal receives a
dose of about 6 mrad/yr mainly from ingested radionuclides.
Annual doses on the order of those predicted for marine organisms (fish,
crustacea and mollusks) living in the discharge canal are well below the
chronic dose levels that might produce demonstrable radiation damage
to marine biota. 7 Inasmuch as the releases of radionuclides from the
station are substantially less than releases that have accrued in the
past at several major nuclear facilities where studies have detected no
adverse effects on marine populations and because the estimated doses
8
to marine organisms are very much less than those expected to cause radia-
tion damage, the marine organisms living in the discharge canal are not
expected to be affected adversely by the concentrations of radionuclides
added by the station. Annual doses on the order of those predicted for
terrestrial animals and birds consuming marine organisms are greater than
those anticipated for man, but no detectable effects are expected from
those doses.
5.4
RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT ON MAN
During routine operations of the station, small quantities of radio-
active materials are released to the environment. The AEC licensing
and inspection program is conducted to assure that radioactive releases
stay well within 10 CFR 20 limits and that radiation doses to people in
the vicinity are as low as practicable in accordance with 10 CFR 50.36.a.
The staff estimates the release of radionuclides in the liquid and gase-
ous wastes to be as listed in Tables 3.5 and 3.6, respectively.
Bioaccumulation factors used for radionuclides in marine species are
listed in Table 5.1. 9
Exposure pathways to man are shown in Figure 5.2.
.
5-7
Oyster Creek Station
Gaseous Effluents
Liquid Effluents
Submersion
Inhalation
Consumption
Direct
Irradiation
Seafood
Consumption
lle
Plant
Consumption
Ingestion
Immersion
6
Immersion
This
Ingestion
Ingestion
)
Immersion
Ingestion
Direct
Irradiation
FIGURE 5.1
EXPOSURE PATHWAYS FOR ORGANISMS OTHER THAN MAN
5-8
Oyster Creek Station
Gaseous Effluents
Liquid Effluents
Irradiation
Direct
Submersion
Inhalation
Immersion
Direct
OO
Deposition
(Boating, Swimming)
Irradiation
Fuel Transport
Shoreline Irradiation
(Beach, Fishing)
Ingestion
Seafood Consumption
FIGURE 5.2
EXPOSURE PATHWAYS TO MAN
5-9
5.4.1 Impact of Liquid Releases
The liquid effluent from the station is released into the condenser
cooling water which flows through a two and one-half mile long discharge
canal emptying into the bay (Ref 1, p. 2.5-8). On the basis of available
data, which do not permit sound conclusions as to the annual flow
characteristics of the bay, the staff estimates that about 40% of the
discharge water is drawn into the intake canal. 10
A concentration factor
was calculated for each radionuclide to account for the partial
recirculation and equilibrium conditions. The factors range from 1 for
very short half-life radionuclides to about 1.7 for most other radionuclides.
The factors are based on an annual average canal flow rate of 1100 cfs (Ref 1,
Appendix C, Response C4), which includes condenser cooling water and
dilution pumping water and a cycle time from the outfall to the intake
of approximately 10 hours.
.
Station effluents are not expected to affect the groundwater with its
net flowsoutheastward into the bay (Ref 1, Section 2.5.3). The indi-
vidual most likely to receive the highest radiation dose from the
station liquid effluent is a fisherman who spends a considerable amount
of time on and near the discharge canal in the vicinity of the U.S. Route 9
bridge, about 2500 ft below the outfall and who consumes seafood har-
vested from canal water. Assuming he consumes 18 kg/yr of fish, 18
kg/yr of crustacea, and 9 kg of mollusks 24 hours after harvest from
the canal, his total body dose is about 0.09 mrem/yr. Further, assuming
that he spends 500 hr/yr on the canal bank, 100 hr/yr in a boat har-
vesting his seafood and 100 hr/yr swimming in the canal at that location,
he would receive an additional total body dose of about 0.02 mrem/yr.
Those doses and doses to other organs are given in Table 5.2.
Total body doses to individuals using the bay would be about one-tenth
of those discussed above as the nonrecycled effluent is mixed in the
bayand flushed to the ocean with the tides. 4 Thus an individual who
uses the bay-side beach of Island Beach State Park for 500 hr/yr and
who swims in adjacent water for 100 hr/yr receives a total body dose
of about 0.002 mrem/yr. A person who boats on the bay for 100 hr/yr
receives a total body dose of about 0.00003 mrem/yr.
5.4.2 Impact of Gaseous Releases
Radioactive gaseous effluent from the station is contained within the
off-gas system for a minimum of 30 minutes (Ref 1, Figure 3.6-3). The
gases are discharged through filters which remove over 99% of the
.
5-10
TABLE 5.1
BIOACCUMULATION FACTORS FOR CHEMICAL ELEMENTS IN MARINE SPECIES
(pCi/kg per pCi/liter)
Element
Fish
Crustacea
Mollusks
Algae
H
Na
Mn
Fe
Co
Sr
Y
Mo
Tc
I
Cs
Ba
La
W
Np
1
1
3,000
1,000
100
1
30
10
10
20
30
3
30
10
10
1
1
10,000
4,000
10,000
1
100
100
100
100
50
3
100
10
10
1
1
50,000
20,000
300
1
100
100
100
100
10
3
100
100
10
1
1
10,000
6,000
100
20
300
100
1,000
10,000
10
100
300
100
6
5-11
TABLE 5.2
RADIATION DOSES TO INDIVIDUALS FROM LIQUID AND GASEOUS EFFLUENTS RELEASED
FROM THE OYSTER CREEK STATION (a)
(mrem/yr)
Annual
Exposure
Pathway
Skin
Total Body
GI Tract
Thyroid
Bone
Fish (b)
18 kg
0.012
0.13
0.20
0.01
(b)
Crustacea
9 kg
0.05
0.5
0.5
0.012
Mollusks
(b)
9 kg
0.03
0.3
0.5
0.03
Shoreline (b)
500 hr
0.023
0.02
( (0.02)
(c)
(0.02)
(0.02)
Swimming (b)
100 hr
0.001
0.0006
(0.0006)
(0.0006)
(0.0006)
Boating (b)
100 hr
0.0006
0.0003
(0.0003)
(0.0003)
(0.0003)
Air Submersion (b)
700 hr
0.33
0.20
(0.20)
(0.20)
(0.20)
Inhalation
(b)
700 hr
0.001
d
Air Submersion (a)
8766 hr
0.52
0.31
'(0.31)
(0.31)
(0.31)
Inhalation(d)
8766 hr
0.015
Milk (child)
(e)
365 liter
5.6
(a) Assuming releases listed in tables to be supplied in Section 3.5
(b) Activities on the discharge canal at U.S. Route 9 bridge
(c) ( ) Indicates internal dose from external exposure
(d) Nearest residence
(e) From cows pastured 17 miles N of the station
5-12
.
.
particulate material (Ref 1, p. 3.6-4). All off-gases are discharged
from the 368-ft high stack (Ref 1, Figure 3.6-3). Annual average atmo-
.
spheric dispersion factors (x/0) for released gases were calculated
using meteorological data estimated by the staff and the Pasquill
12
modell for atmospheric dispersion. Doses to individuals and the
population from gaseous radioactive materials were estimated using the
X/Q values, the estimated 1980 population distribution and releases
given in Table 3.5.5. The dose at a point 100 ft. from the stack due
to submersion in air is more than 10 orders of magnitude less than
the dose at the nearest residence because of the elevated releases. The
nearest residence is located about two-thirds of a mile north of the
stack where X/Q is 1.6 x 10-9 sec/m3. The total body dose due to air
submersion at that location is estimated to be 0.31 mrem/yr and the skin
dose is estimated to be 0.52 mrem/yr. The dose to the thyroid due to
inhalation of radioiodine at that location is about 0.015 mrem/yr. The
fisherman spending 700 hr/yr at the Highway 9 bridge across the discharge
the dose at the nearest residence because of the elevated releases. The
nearest residence is located about two-thirds of a mile north of the
stack where X/Q is 1.6 x 10-9 sec/m3. The total body dose due to air
submersion at that location is estimated to be 0.31 mrem/yr and the skin
dose is estimated to be 0.52 mrem/yr. The dose to the thyroid due to
inhalation of radioiodine at that location is about 0.015 mrem/yr. The
fisherman spending 700 hr/yr at the Highway 9 bridge across the discharge
canal where X/Q is 1.3 x 10 8 sec/m3 receives a total body dose of 0.20
mrem and a skin dose of 0.33 mrem/yr.
>
The applicant reported that there are no cows within 10 miles of the
stack and that the closest cow is pastured 17 miles north of the stack
(Ref 1, p. 2.2-15). If a child were to drink 1 liter/day of milk from
cows grazing 10 months/yr at the nearest existing dairy where the value
of x/Q is 3.6 x 10-9 sec/m3, the dose to the child's thyroid would be
5.6 mrem/yr.
The vegetable and meat pathways are not a consideration as the nearby
land is unproductive. There are about 100 acres of alfalfa within
10 miles of the station, a cranberry bog about 6 miles north of the
station and few, if any, crops raised for human consumption in the
vicinity (ER p. 2.2-15).
O
5.4.3 Impact of Direct Radiation
Direct radiation from the outside liquid radwaste surge tank was esti-
mated assuming a continuous content of 0.7 Ci of activity emitting
1 MeV gamma radiation per disintegration. No credit for shielding by
the tank was taken, but the tank is shielded from the south and east by
5-13
buildings. Exposure to the public will be limited to the northwest
quadrant and the northeast octant. The closest exposed public access to
the facility will be the U.S. Route 9 bridge over the intake canal.
dose from direct exposure to the tank to persons fishing 700 hr/yr in
that area is 0.0006 mrem/yr.
Because of the design of a boiling water reactor (BWR) generating
facility, radioactive primary cooling water is used to turn the tur-
bines. The station turbines are in an unshielded building and some
radiation penetrates the turbine housing. Measurements taken at the
site were analyzed to provide data for calculating exposures at various
locations within the vicinity of the station. 13,14 The dose to a fisher-
man at the Highway 9 bridge over the discharge canal due to radiation
from the turbine building is about 0.2 mrem for 700 hr/yr.
5.4.4
Population Dose from All sources
For dose calculations, the 1980 population within 50 miles of the station
was determined from a linear extrapolation of the estimated 1970 and
2010 populations (Ref 1, Figures 2.2-1 through 2.2-8). The resident and
seasonal populations were weighted to provide an annual average population.
Total radiation dose from liquid effluents to the population was calcu-
lated for two major pathways, seafood consumption (fish, crustacea and
mollusks) and recreational activities (shoreline, swimming and boating).
Seafood consumption in the region is estimated to be 2.1 kg of fish,
0.85 kg of crustacea and 0.15 kg of mollusks per person per year.15
Ten percent of the seafood is assumed to be harvested from water
diluted to 10% of the discharge canal effluent after 8 hours' decay and
consumption of seafood is estimated to occur 24 hours after harvest.
The resultant total body dose to the 4.5 million people living within
50 miles of the station in 1980 will be about 0.27 man-rem/yr from sea-
food consumption.
External exposure to the population was calculated assuming that the
average person spends 10 hr/yr boating, 5 hr/yr swimming and 10 hr/yr in
shoreline activities in and near the bay where the water contains 3% of
discharge canal effluent after 8 hours' decay. From those activities
the total body dose to the 1980 population within 50 miles of the sta-
tion is estimated to be 0.28 man-rem/yr. A summary of those doses is
presented in Table 5.3.
5-14
TABLE 5.3
ANNUAL DOSE TO THE TOTAL POPULATION WITHIN 50 MILES OF
THE OYSTER CREEK STATION DUE TO LIQUID EFFLUENTS (a)
Total Body Dose
(man-rem/yr)
Pathway
Annual
Exposure
Fish
9.45 x 105 kg
0.062
Crustacea
3.38 x 105 kg
0.19
Mollusks
6.75 x 104 kg
0.019
Shoreline
4.50 x 107 hr
0.27
Swimming
2.25 x 107 hr
0.0031
Boating
4.50 x 107 hr
0.0031
Total
0.55
(a)
Assuming releases given in Table 3.5.
The total body dose to the 1980 population within 50 miles of the sta-
tion from gaseous effluent is estimated to be 410 man-rem/yr. Values
of the annual cumulative population dose and the average individual dose
to the total body for various distances from the station are given in
Table 5.4.
5.4.5 Evaluation of Radiological Impact
Based on conservative estimates, the total dose from all pathways
received each year by the approximately 4,500,000 people who will be
living within 50 miles of the station in 1980 will be about 410 man-rem
during normal station operation. By comparison, the individual natural
background radiation dose of about 0.125 rem/yr in New Jersey16 results
in an integrated dose of about 563,000 man-rem/yr to the same population.
Therefore, routine station operation contributes only a small increment
to the radiation dose that area residents receive from natural back-
ground. The increment will be unmeasurable, since fluctations of the
natural background dose may be expected to exceed the small incremental
dose contributed by the station.
5-15
TABLE 5.4
CUMULATIVE POPULATION, ANNUAL MAN-REM DOSE AND AVERAGE ANNUAL DOSE
IN SELECTED CIRCULAR AREAS AROUND THE OYSTER CREEK STATION DUE
TO GASEOUS EFFLUENTS (a)
Cumulative
Radius
(miles)
Cumulative
Population
(1980)
Cumulative Dose
(man-rem/yr)
Average Dose
(mrem/yr)
1
830
0.72
0.87
2
8,400
9.0
1.1
سیا
3
18,000
21
1.2
4
25,800
28
1.1
5
30,100
32
1.1
10
94,400
84
0.89
20
380,000
180
0.47
30
776,000
230
0.30
40
1,810,000
300
0.17
50
4,490,000
410
0.092
(a)
Assuming releases given in Table 3.6
5-16
5.5
NONRADIOLOGICAL EFFECTS ON ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
5.5.1
Terrestrial Ecosystems
Routine operation of the station has not produced a measurable impact
on the terrestrial ecosystem. Major influences were associated with
habitat removal and disturbances during construction phases. A repeti-
tion of construction impact will occur when the canal is redredged
(probably in 1973) and spoils are placed on terrestrial habitats. The
amount of dredge spoils and the area they will cover are not known at
this time because the required amount of dredging has not been deter-
mined. However, assuming a worst-case situation, in that the amount
and type of land covered will be similar to the original dredging opera-
tion, another 40 acres of saltwater marsh adjacent to the canal could
be eliminated. As stated in section 5.2, the staff believes that
periodic dredging is not a satisfactory plan in the long term, and
that the canal should be suitably lined to reduce the need for such
periodic dredging.
Vegetation control within transmission line rights-of-way leaves herbi-
cides in soil as long as 12 months, but proper methods of application
and use in small amounts should minimize the likelihood of environ-
mental buildup or contamination of aquifers.
5.5.2 Aquatic Ecosystems
Operation of the station has the potential to affect the aquatic
environment in the following ways:
Changing the current velocity and direction in the lower
reaches of Oyster Creek and South Branch Forked River,
.
Altering the salinities that exist in the lower reaches of
Oyster Creek and South Branch Forked River,
Entrapment of organisms on the screens protecting the station's
water intake,
Mechanical and physiological damage to the organisms passing
through the condenser tubes,
Creation of a thermal plume within the discharge canal and the
bay, and
The discharge of toxic chemicals via the effluent waters into
the bay.
5-17
5.5.2.1
Current and Salinity Changes
The currents in the lower reaches of Oyster Creek and South Branch
Forked River have been changed from alternating directional flows with
maximum velocities of 0.3 fps 17 to unidirectional flows of almost
2.0 fps (Ref 1, p. 3.5-1). The hydrographic regimen has been changed
from a typical estuarine situation to one of constant salinity throughout
the canal at levels similar to those of the bay. The higher current ve-
locities replaced the sluggish, nearly anaerobic environment that existed
prior to station construction 18 with an aerobic, strong current area
with sufficient oxygen for the growth and development of filter feeders.
Studies sponsored by the applicant found the canal to be thickly populated
by dense communities of Mulinia lateralis, a filter feeding clam, and
Pectinaria gouldii, a deposit feeding worm.
19
Oyster Creek, which was
freshwater to about 2500 ft downstream of U.S. Route 9, 17 is now saltwater
from its entrance into the discharge canal above the highway to its mouth.
The change has resulted in the intrusion of marine forms such as shipworms
and barnacles to the docking areas just east of the highway. The conse-
quences of this intrusion are discussed further in Sect. 5.2.2.2. The
total cost of the damage caused by those organisms has not been estimated
by the applicant or by the staff.
The elimination of the low salinity regions in the lower reaches of
Oyster Creek and Forked River has eliminated areas used by many species
of marine organisms for spawning and nursery activities. However, data
are not available on the importance of the two regions to the bay sys-
tem as a whole and no dollar value can be estimated. The same is true
for anadromous fish which, because of present currents and stream con-
figurations, are not able to pass into the upland portions of the
streams.
The loss of 45 acres of saltwater marshland represents a significant
adverse effect upon many aquatic species of value. A monetary repre-
sentation of the loss to sport and commercial fishermen is difficult to
make.
However, in the nutrient rich saltmarshes more than 75 Atlantic
Coast species, including commercially important menhaden and striped
bass, spend some part of their lives.
5.5.2.2 Entrapment on Intake Screens
The rotating screens that serve to preyent items larger than 3/8 in.
from entering the condenser tubes accumulate live organisms as well as
trash, The material is washed from the screens into a flume that empties
into the discharge canal.
5-18
The applicant's studies on the intake structure emphasized a census of
the numbers of fish and crabs impinged on the rotary screens and trans-
ported by way of the trash flume to the head of the discharge canal.
On 19 sampling dates (between April 11 and July 1, 1971), 95 samples
21
were collected. Identification of all specimens was made as well as
counts of both living and dead individuals. Thirty species of fish
represented by 703 total individuals were collected over the sampling
period; 38% of the individuals survived. Fish were impinged against
the screens at an average rate of about 24/hr. The number of individ-
uals of each species varied widely, as did the degree of mechanical
damage by screen transport. Hard crabs and winter flounder were the
most abundant sport and commercial species collected; however, their
immediate death rate was relatively low at 5% and 13%, respectively.
Table 5.5 presents information on the species found, the numbers of
living and dead specimens, the percent of kill for each species, and
the numbers of fish and crabs entrapped per sampling hour. The percent
mortality is likely not valid where sample numbers are small.
>
To estimate the organisms lost each year due to their being trapped on
the intake screen, the staff made these assumptions:
1.
The average number of crabs collected per hour occurs for a period
of 6 months.
2.
The average number of fish trapped per hour occurs year around.
0
3.
One hundred percent mortality occurs among winter flounder trapped
and released into effluent waters over 87°F.22
The number of crabs lost is: impingement rate times hours in 6 months
times screen mortality rate; or 147 crabs/hr times 4,380 hr times 0.05
equals 32,000 crabs/yr. The number of winter flounder killed is:
impingement rate times hours the effluent is over 87°F; or 4.5 fish/hr
times 4,380 hr equals 21,822 fish/yr plus the impingement rate times
remaining hours in a year times the screen mortality rate; or
4.48 fish/hr times 4,380 hr times 0.13 equals 2,551 fish/yr, totaling
24,000 winter flounder/yr. The number of other species killed is:
impingement rate times hours per year times screen mortality rate; or
20 fish/hr times 8,760 hr/yr times 0.62 equals 110,000 fish/yr.
Estimates of the total crab and fish populations in the bay are not
available; therefore, no direct assessment of ecological effect can be
made. However, the removal of 32,000 crabs/yr and 24,000 winter
flounder/yr from a heavily used sport fishing region is, in the opinion
of the staff, a significant adverse impact. About mid-1973 the New
5-19
TABLE 5.5
SUMMARY OF SCREEN CENSUS RESULTS21
Percent
% Dead
Entrapment/
S Sampling hr
Alive
Dead
Total
Spiny dogfish
Blueback herring
Alewife
Atlantic herring
Atlantic menhaden
Bay anchovy
American eel
Atlantic needlefish
Banded killifish
Mummichog
Pollock
Fourspine stickleback
Threespine stickleback
Northern pipefish
Spotted seahorse
Black sea bass
White perch
Bluefish
Crevalle jack
Silver perch
Weakfish
Longhorn sculpin
Crested cusk-eel
Atlantic silverside
Windowpane
Smallmouth flounder
Winter flounder
Hogchoker
Northern puffer
Oyster toadfish
Blue crab
1
2
2
0
1
2
0
1
1
3
0
3
4
73
5
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
3
1
0
112
5
16
32
4028
0
11
4
23
0
208
2
32
1
0
2
3
8
37
3
0
7
7
1
1
1
0
1
49
0
2
17
0
12
1
198
1
13
6
23
1
210
2
33
2
3
2
6
12
110
8
1
8
7
1
1
1
1
1
52
1
2
129
5
28
33
4226
0
85
67
100
0
99
100
97
50
0
100
50
67
34
38
0
88
100
100
100
100
0
100
94
0
100
13
0
43
3
5
0.35
0.45
0.21
0.80
0.35
7.30
0.69
1.15
0.069
0.10
0.069
0.21
0.42
3.82
0.28
0.035
0.28
0.24
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.035
0.035
1.81
0.035
0.069
4.48
0.17
0.97
1.15
146.89
5-20
Jersey Fish and Game Commission plans to publish the results of recent
studies on the sport fishing effort and the catch rate in the bay.
The remaining fish trapped on the screens are dominated by three
species: bay anchovy, northern pipefish and Atlantic silverside, all
of which are extremely abundant, making the 110,000 deaths/yr a small
percentage of the total population.
The impact caused by transferring impinged winter flounder from the
intake canal to the heated effluent canal can be reduced significantly
by lowering the maximum permissible effluent canal temperature. A maxi-
mum of 87°F, the winter flounder avoidance breakdown temperature,
22
would reduce mortality significantly and also result in other environ-
mental benefits which are discussed elsewhere in this statement.
5.5.2.3 Effects of Passage Through the Condenser Structure
Organisms small enough to pass through the traveling screens are sub-
jected to a maximum increase in temperature of 23°F for from 1 minute to
2 hours, the total exposure time and temperature being dependent on the
operation of dilution pumps . If dilution pumps are in operation the
exposure to a 23°F increase will be limited to 1 minute (Ref 1, Appendix C)
after which the AT will be 18.2°F with 1 dilution pump in operation,
13.4°F with 2, and 8.6°F with 3. The time exposed will be changed by
a factor of approximately 0.8 for each pump operating.
The applicant sponsored studies to determine the effects of passage
through the condensers and down the effluent canal on a number of
planktonic organisms. The final results of those studies have not been
reported in Rutgers Progress Reports 1 through 7 but are expected to be
in Report 8, which is not available at this time. Therefore, discus-
sion of effects related to condenser passage is based on previous stud-
ies conducted elsewhere and the limited amount of information available
from the applicant.
Phytoplankton, zooplankton, ben thic larvae, and fish eggs and larvae
constitute the four major groups of organisms passing through the con-
densers and potentially affected by station operation. Depending upon
the organism, the ambient temperature, the resulting temperature, the
length of exposure time, and the synergistic effects of other factors,
the passage through the condensers and canal may be beneficial, non-
effectual or detrimental to the bay's ecosystem.
Phytoplankton provides the basic energy source to the marine ecosystem
and any change in its species composition or production has a potential
to affect the entire system. Unfortunately, little is known about the
5-21
ultimate effect of changes that occur at the basic energy source, and
therefore, we can record only observable changes and make predictions
from previous experience and basic ecological theories.
Studies of the direct effects of passage through the condensers were made
during most of the June through October 1970 period, when samples were
taken at the mouths of the intake and discharge canals and analyses
made for cell count, chlorophyll and productivity. When five available
dates were compared for the two sample sites, productivity at the out-
fall averaged 92.3 mg 02/m3/hr less than the intake. Chlorophyll a
dropped from a mean of 7.6 ug/liter at the intake to 6.93 vg/liter at
the outfall, compared to 10.6 at the intake and 12.9 at the outfall
during 1969 prior to plant startup; a difference of +2.23 ug/liter
(Ref 1, p. 5.1-14).
.
Cell counts at the intake averaged 143.3 cells/10 microscope fields,
and at the outfall 115.6. Most of the observed difference resulted
from the decrease of microflagellates (intake 127.6; outfall 98.5 cells
/10 fields), but a decrease in dinoflagellates, particularly naked
forms, was also detected (mean counts 7.6 intake, 3.0 outfall). The
absence of species present in the water after transit slightly depressed
phytoplankton diversity between the two sampling stations (Ref 1,
p. 5.1-15).
Those results indicate that some phytoplankters are lost and production
is reduced but much more detailed data are needed to specify the extent
of the loss due to passage through the heated condenser tubes.
Zooplankters serve as the intermediate link between the phytoplankton
and the larger forms such as shrimp and finfish. Copepods are the
most numerous and consistently present member of the zooplankton and as
such are considered extremely important to the food chain. In the
laboratory, copepod eggs showed no decrease in viability until tempera-
tures over 86°F were reached, at which time a drastic decline in hatch-
ability occurred (Ref 1, p. 5.1-16). There was no effect on hatchability
of eggs collected from copepods that had passed through the condenser,
as shown in Table 5.6 (Ref 1, p. 5.1-16).
TABLE 5.6
PERCENTAGE OF EGGS HATCHING FROM INDIVIDUALS COLLECTED
AT INTAKE AND OUTFALL
No. Eggs
% Hatching
Intake
75
73
Outfall
75
78
5-22
Ambient temperature during the test was not given. No data were pre-
sented on the effects of passage of adult and larval copepods. From
another study, Acartia tonsa, a copecod common to that area, were found
to suffer 100% mortality when exposed to temperature above 86°F for 1
to 2 hours.
24
All of the economically important benthic organisms in the bay have
planktonic larvae which would be subjected to entrainment through the
station's cooling system. While no information was provided on the
effects of the station on those forms, oyster larvae are known to have
a 50% mortality when exposed for 1 hour to a temperature of 95°F, and
Mulinia larvae mortalities increase sharply between 93 and 98°F. 25
Results of applicant sponsored studies to evaluate the effects on the
viability of fish eggs passing through operating condensers are incon-
clusive at this time (Ref 1, p. 5.1-17).
Calculations on the potential effect of entrained organisms have been
made by the staff. The calculations were done with station operation
data from the applicant and zooplankton density data from studies of
Sandy Hook Bay, N.J., 26 Delaware Bay27 and Patuxent River estuary, Ma. 28
.
To calculate the amount of zooplankton killed, an average figure of
1.0 cc/m3 settled volume of zooplankton was used. That probably is a
low estimate as the range for Delaware Bay and Patuxent River Estuary
is 0.1 to 1.4 cc/m3 and the average for Sandy Hook Bay is 1.8 cc/m3.
The pumping rate for the station is 460,000 gpm, of which one-sixth is
chlorinated at a level that results in 1.0 mg/1 free chlorine and there-
fore one-sixth of all animals passing through the condenser are assumed
to be killed. The annual zooplankton kill is equal to the volume of
water pumped/yr times 1/6 times volume of plankton/volume of water, or
150 m3/yr (expressed as displacement volume) or approximately 150 tons,
assuming full rate station pumping every day during the year. Using the
same calculations but substituting fish eggs /m3 and fish larvae/m3 for
zooplankton displacement volume, the station is killing approximately
150 million eggs/yr and 100 million fish larvae.
Those figures are conservative and do not take into account mortality
caused by heat alone during the warmer months. However, the staff's
opinion is that if the effluent temperature is kept below 87°F,
mortality caused by heat addition would be insignificant for most
zooplankters.
5-23
5.5.2.4
Plume Effects
For about 4 months of the year the temperature of an area in the bay
exceeds 87°F (Ref 1, Appendix C, Response F15). The staff conservatively
estimates the average size of the area to be about 100 acres, based
upon the limited amount of data available (Ref 1, Figure 5.1-1). In
such an area, most normal bay organisms are stressed or in some cases
killed. Organisms most likely to be affected are the phytoplankton,
zooplankton and benthos. Finfish, other than larval forms, are able to
avoid the region whenever temperatures become unfavorable. However, as
several recent incidents have demonstrated, the heated water can serve as
an attraction during the cold months and if the temperature increase is
not maintained or it eventually drops below the normal limits of migrant
species, the fish will be killed by the cold water. Since January 1972,
there have been at least three reported incidents of winter fish kill in
or below the discharge canal following plant shut down.
Studies sponsored by the applicant have shown some changes in the
phytoplankton abundance and species composition in the region of the
outfall; however, because of normal seasonal and annual variations, the
changes were considered insignificant (Ref 1, p. 5.1-8). An estimate of
the loss of production can be made using an oxygen production loss of
92 mg/m3/hr (Ref 1, p. 5.1-14) due to passage through the condensers and
assuming that the waters reaching temperatures over 87°F have a similar
average decrease in production. This means that 400,000 m (100 acres
x 1 meter) have a decreased production of 92 mg/m3/hr for 1460 hr
(1/3 yr x 12 hr daily daylight) which equals 5.4 x 10 10 mg/02/yr. One
gm O2 evolved equals 21.16 g protoplasm produced.
.
3
>
Thus, the conversion from biomass of phytoplankton (1.2 x 109 g/yr)
g
to fish reasonably may be made using that ratio to yield an approximate
equivalent of 5000 lb of fish/yr. The total commercial catch for the
bay in 1969 was 76,400 lb (Table 2.17), making the production loss,
about 6%, if most of the phytoplankton had been converted to commercial
fish. This loss, in combination with other losses described in this
section are, in the staff's opinion, a significant environmental impact.
If the outfall temperature is kept below 87°F as previously discussed,.
the decrease would approach zero and have essentially no effect on the
bay in terms of decreased production.
Data are not available to calculate the effect of the plume on zooplank-
ters or fish larvae.
Benthic algae studies sponsored by the applicant show that although the
maximum diversity increased slightly at Oyster Creek between 1969 and
19 70, evenness decreased, indicating that there was a shift towards
5-24
dominance by a few species, a condition common in stressed environments.
The populations at Stouts Creek, the control area, had an increase in
diversity, maximum diversity and evenness between the August samplings
in 1969 and 1970. The findings are presented in Table 5.7.
Results of the benthic fauna studies for the first postoperational per-
iod thus far indicate a diminishing of the dominant genera of benthic
organisms, Pectinaria and Mulinia, in the region of Oyster Creek. 31
From 1969 to 1970, Pectinaria showed a general increase at all sampling
TABLE 5.7
COMPARISON OF MACRO-ALGAE AT OYSTER CREEK AND STOUTS CREEK
FOR SEVERAL POPULATION PARAMETERS
Oyster Creek
August 1969 August 1970
Stouts Creek
August 1969 August 1970
Diversity
1.0240
0.8220
0.6880
0.9190
Maximum Diversity
1.3860
1.9460
1.3860
1.79 20
Evenness
0.7390
0.4320
0.49 70
0.5130
stations except Oyster Creek. The increase was especially favorable at
Forked River, but a decrease of 78% was found at Oyster Creek. Results
are not available to determine whether the decrease is related to thermal
discharge. Mulinia almost totally disappeared from Oyster Creek, accom-
panied, however, by a decline in abundance of the population throughout
the bay. The decrease may be a natural cyclic process and not related to
thermal discharge from the station (Ref 1, p. 5.1-10 and 11).
detailed analysis of the benthic data is expected in Rutgers University
Progress Report 8, which is not available at this time.
The thermal plume may influence the finfish by avoidance of or attraction
to certain temperatures, influence of the food supply, or effects on
spawning (either through changes in maturation time or direct effects on
spawn).
Laboratory studies 22 were under taken to define the "upper avoidance
temperature" (summer temperatures which are actively avoided by fish) and
"upper avoidance breakdown temperature" (summer temperatures that cause
5-25
.
loss of locomotor ability when fish are exposed for 1 hour or less).
The studies tested 11 species of estuarine fish and two species of
estuarine invertebrates (Ref 1, p. 5.1-11).
Summer water temperatures unacceptable to the several estuarine fishes
are presented in Figure 5.3. Water temperatures above those levels will
be actively avoided by the species tested. Estuarine waters with tempera-
tures above 87°F will be an unacceptable environment for the majority of
important fish species. Results in Figure 5.4 show that continued expo-
sure of fish to those temperatures will cause death of most of the
important estuarine species. Most of the studies were conducted with
young-of-the-year or small individuals of the fish species and have
demonstrated an inverse relationship between fish size and upper avoidance
temperatures. Large individuals of the examined species may avoid actively
temperatures lower than the levels presented, especially species such as
striped bass, winter flounder and bluefish, that attain considerable size
during their lifetimes (Ref 1, p. 5.1-12).
The study series considered the effect of temperature on grass shrimp
and blue crab. Adult grass shrimp, an important member of the estuarine
food chain, showed a mean avoidance temperature of 89.7°F and an avoid-
ance breakdown temperature of 97.5°F. The blue crab, an important sport
and food species, showed an avoidance temperature of 99.5°F and an
avoidance breakdown temperature of 104°F. With a longer acclimation
period, the temperatures may be increased. Avoidance behavior by blue
crabs may not occur until the temperature nearly reaches the lethal
breakdown temperature (Ref 1, p. 5.1-12).
The net effect of the warmed water on the area immediately adjacent to
the discharge appears to be one of attraction of useful game and commer-
cial fish with the exception of the winter flounder. If a food supply
is adequate, the fish remaining in the warmed water would be expected to
grow faster.
At present, the length of time individual fish remain in
the warmed water area is not known, nor whether they are attracted by the
warmed temperature alone, or by a combination of factors which may include
a greater availability of food organisms. On the other hand, one species,
the winter flounder, appears to avoid the discharge area. Winter floun-
ders prefer cooler water, as can be seen in Figure 5.3. The species,
when young, avoids temperatures above 80°F and may avoid temperatures
even lower than 80° as adults (Ref 1, p. 5.1-13).
Temperature changes often play a part in sexual maturation of fish. In
addition, the amount of daylight interacts to influence gonad development
and timing of spawning activities. To date, no effect of the thermal
plume on the spawning activity of fish has been identified. The normal
5-26
MEAN
SHEEPSHEAD MINNOW
UNACCEPTABLE SUMMER WATER
TEMPERATURES BASED ON
AVOIDANCE TEMPERATURES
DETERMINED IN THE PRESENT
STUDY. (Ref 1, Figure 5.1-3)
MUMMICHOG
STRIPED KILLIFISH
CREVALLE JACK
|
WHITE PERCH
FISH SPECIES
NORTHERN KINGFISH
ATLANTIC SILVERSIDES
BLUEFISH
UNACCEPTABLE
SUMMER
WATER
TEMPERATURES
NORTHERN PUFFER
SILVER PERCH
STRIPED BASS
WINTER FLOUNDER
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
SUMMER WATER TEMPERATURES OF
FIGURE 5.3 AVOIDANCE TEMPERATURES FOR CERTAIN FISHES
5-27
MEAN
SUMMER WATER TEMPERATURES WHICH WILL
RESULT IN THE DEATH OF ESTUARINE
FISHES AFTER SHORT EXPOSURE TIME
(1 HOUR OR LESS), BASED ON UPPER
AVOIDANCE BREAKDOWN TEMPERATURES
DETERMINED IN THE PRESENT STUDY.
(Ref 1, Figure 5.1-4)
SHEEPSHEAD MINNOW
MUMMI CHOG
STRIPED KILLIFISH
WHITE PERCH
FISH SPECIES
SILVER PERCH
NORTHERN KINGFISH
SUMMER
TEMPERATURES
LETHAL AFTER
SHORT EXPOSURE
TIME
ATLANTIC SILVERSIDES
STRIPED BASS
NORTHERN PUFFER
BLUEFISH
WINTER FLOUNDER
85
90
95
100
105
110
SUMMER WATER TEMPERATURES OF
FIGURE 5.4 LETHAL TEMPERATURES FOR CERTAIN FISHES
5-28
cyclic variation in the population size of each species is so great that
any effect is probably not measurable (Ref 1, p. 5.1-13). Further, the
extent of the plume is small compared to the rest of the bay and any
local changes would be difficult to detect.
The attraction of finfish to the warm water areas during the cold months
has been generally considered a benefit until the recent kills of menhaden
caused by a sharp drop in effluent temperatures. The attraction of warm
water species to the areas during periods of falling temperature serves
to prolong the sport fishing activities but also traps the fish by iso-
lating them from their normal routes south because of the surrounding
cold water. If the effluent waters remain above the lower tolerance
level and food is available, the population should survive until the next
spring or summer. Unfortunately, reduced station loads and shutdowns
for maintenance often reduce the effluent temperature to lethal or shock
temperature and the fish have no escape. The phenomenon resulted in the
death of 100,000 to 1,000,000 fish at Oyster Creek in January 1972
(Ref 1, p. 5.1-23). Since that time there have been other reported
incidents of large numbers of fish killed in or below the discharge
canal following plant shutdown in winter.
.
The staff finds these recurrent fish kills to be an unacceptable condition
of plant operation. The applicant will be required to install appropriate
controls and institute operating procedures that will minimize or eliminate
Such fish kills following winter shutdowns.
5.5.2.5
Chemical Discharges
>
The quantities of all released chemicals except copper are low enough
such that dilution by the cooling water renders them harmless. Experi-
ence has shown that copper released by power stations, although at unde-
tectable levels, is concentrated by shellfish, particularly oysters, in
quantities that can cause mortalities or render the oysters unfit for
human consumption. While the applicant shows no difference between
copper concentrations in intake and effluent waters (ER Appendix C,
Response B4) the staff's opinion is that representative species of shell-
fish should be collected from the discharge area and throughout the bay
and analyzed for copper content on a quarterly basis for at least
3 years to determine if copper content in the organisms is correlated
with their location in respect to the station effluent.
Under proper application, the chlorine affects only those organisms
passing through the condenser bank receiving chlorination (see Sub-
section 5.5.2.3). At times of low chlorine demand, a residual of approxi-
mately 0.1 mg/liter results at the discharge outlet, but this is
consumed within 5 minutes in the canal (Ref 1, Appendix C, Response B2).
.
5-29
5.6
EFFECTS ON COMMUNITY
The station provides electricity and pays 6% of the local taxes imposed
by Ocean and Lacey Townships.
11
The station taxes help educate community
children and supply other required services.
About 100 individuals are employed permanently at the site. The total
annual salary of $1.2 million is spent largely in the local area. Some
staff members lecture at schools and civic meetings, improving the local
understanding of nuclear energy.
5.7 TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS
5.7.1 Principles of Safety in Transport
The transportation of radioactive material is regulated by the Department
of Transportation (DOT) and by the AEC. The regulations provide protec-
tion from radiation to the public and to transport workers. This protec-
tion is achieved by a combination of standards and requirements applicable
to packaging, by limitations on the contents of packages and on radiation
levels from packages, and by procedures to limit the exposure of persons
under normal and accident conditions.
Reliance for safety in transport of radioactive material is primarily on
the packaging. The packaging must meet regulatory standards 33 established
according to the type and form of the materials used for containment,
shielding, nuclear-criticality safety, and heat dissipation. The standards
provide that the packaging shall prevent the loss or dispersal of the
radioactive contents, retain shielding efficiency, ensure nuclear-
criticality safety, and provide adequate heat dissipation under normal
conditions of transport and under specified accident-damage test condi-
tions. The content of packages not designed to withstand accidents are
limited; thereby, the risk from releases that could occur in an accident
is limited. Also, the contents of the package must be so limited that
the standards for external-radiation levels, temperature, pressure, and
containment are met.
Procedures applicable to the shipment of packages of radioactive material
require that the package be labeled with a unique radioactive-materials
label. In transport, the carrier is required to exercise control over
radioactive-material packages, including loading and storing in areas
separated from persons and limiting the aggregations of packages to
limit the exposure of persons under normal conditions. The procedures
that carriers must follow in case of accident include segregation of
damaged and leaking packages from people and notification of the
shipper and DOT. Through an intergovernmental program, radiological
assistance teams are available to provide equipment and trained persons,
if necessary, in such emergencies.
5-30
Within the regulatory standards, radioactive materials are required to be
safely transported in routine commerce by use of conventional transporta-
tion equipment with no special restrictions on speed of vehicle, routing,
or ambient transport conditions. According to the DOT, the record of
safety in the transportation of radioactive materials exceeds that for any
other type of hazardous commodity. The DOT estimates that about 800,000
packages of radioactive materials are currently being shipped in the United
States each year. The best available information indicates that no known
deaths or serious injuries to the public or to transport workers have
occurred thus far as a result of radiation from a radioactive-materials
shipment.
Safety in transportation is provided by the package design and by limita-
tions on the contents and external radiation levels and does not depend
on controls over routing. Although the regulations require all carriers
of hazardous materials to avoid congested areas wherever practical to do
34
so, in general, carriers choose the most direct and fastest route.
Routing restrictions that require use of secondary highways or of a
routine other than the most direct route may increase the overall environ-
mental impact of transportation as a result of increased accident fre-
quency or severity. Any attempt to specify routing would involve
continued analysis of routes in view of the changing local conditions as
well as the changing of sources of materials and delivery points.
5.7.2 Transport of New Fuel
The nuclear fuel for the reactor at the Oyster Creek Station is slightly
enriched uranium in the form of sintered uranium dioxide pellets. These
pellets are stacked and sealed in Zircaloy-2 tubes to form 12 ft long
fuel rods. The fuel rods are fabricated into individual fuel assemblies
of 49 rods. The reactor core contains 560 fuel assemblies.
In each year
of normal operation, about one-fourth of these (140) will be replaced.
At present, fuel assemblies are supplied by the Exxon Nuclear Corporation
facility in Richland, Washington. These are shipped by truck in AEC-DOT-
approved containers. About four truckloads, each containing 10 assemblies,
will be required annually for replacement fuel.
Table 5.8 lists the radiological doses expected to result from exposure
due to transportation of new fuel to the plant site of a typical light
water power reactor.
5-31
TABLE 5.8.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF TRANSPORTATION OF FUEL AND WASTE TO AND FROM A
TYPICAL LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR
Normal Conditions of Transport
Unirradiated fuel and return of empty containers
Irradiated fuel and return of empty containers
Shipments per year (number)
12 truckloads
120 truckloads, 20 railcarloads, or
10 barges
46 truckloads or 11 railcarloads
Solid radioactive wastes
Environmental impact
Negligible
Heat, weight, and number of shipments
Radiation Doses
Estimated dose
range to exposed
individuals
(millirems/year)
Persons exposed
(number)
Cumulative
dose to exposed
population (man-rems/year)
b
Recipient
Transport workers
200
0.01 to 300
3
General public
Onlookers
Along route
2
1,100
600,000
0.003 to 1.3
0.0001 to 0.06
Data supporting this table are given in the Commission's "Environmental Survey of Transportation of
Radioactive Materials to and from Nuclear Power Plants, dated December 1972.
b
bThe Federal Radiation Council has recommended that the radiation doses from all sources of radiation
other than natural background and medical exposures should be limited to 5,000 millirems/year for
individuals. As a result, the occupational exposure should be limited to 500 millirems/year for
individuals in the general population. The dose to individuals due to average natural background
radiation is about 130 millirems/year.
Man-rem is an expression for the summation of whole body doses to individuals in a group. Thus, if
each member of a population group of 1,000 people were to receive a dose of 0.001 rem (1 millirem),
or if two people were to receive a dose of 0.5 rem (500 millirems) each, the total man-rem dose in
each case would be 1 man-rem.
•
5-32
5.7.3 Transport of Irradiated Fuel
Fuel assemblies removed from the reactor will contain some of the
original U-235, which is recoverable. As a result of the irradiation
and fissioning of the uranium, they will contain, in addition, large
amounts of fission products and some plutonium. After removal from
the core, the irradiated fuel assemblies will be placed under water in
a fuel pool to cool thermally and to allow radioactive fission products
to decay. The amount of radioactivity that remains in the fuel will
depend on the time after removal from the core. After at least 3-
month storage in the pool, the fuel assemblies will be loaded in AEC-
DOT-approved casks for transport to a fuel-reprocessing plant. Table
5.8 indicates the radiological doses expected to result from exposure
due to transportation of irradiated fuel from a typical light water
power reactor.
5.7.4 Transport of Solid Radioactive Wastes
Waste concentrates such as demineralized resins and evaporator bottoms
are mixed with cement and vermiculite in 55-gal drums. The estimate is
made that about 900 drums of such waste, having a radioactivity of about
2,700 Ci, will be shipped offsite each year. In addition, some 600 drums
(55-gal) of dry waste, having a radioactivity less than 15 uCi/drum,
will be shipped off-site annually. The total radioactive solid waste
requires about one truck shipment per month.
1
The applicant plans to ship solid radioactive wastes by truck to approved
burial locations. Table 5.8 shows the radiological doses expected to
result from transportation of solid radioactive wastes to the burial
site from a typical light water power reactor.
5-33
REFERENCES
1. Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Oyster Creek Nuclear Gener-
ating Station Environmental Report, March 6, 1972, Amendment 68,
to the "Application for Construction Permit and Operating License,' "
Docket No. 50-219, March 26, 1964.
2. J. E. Carson, "The Atmospheric Consequences of Thermal Discharges from
Power Generating Stations, Annual Report of Radiological Physics
Division for 1971, Argonne National Lab. 7860, Part III, August 1972.
3. Millstone Point Company, Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Environmental
Report, Operating License Stage, Amendment 1, October 11, 1972.
9
4. J. H. Carpenter, Concentration Distribution for Material Discharged
into Barnegat Bay, June 21, 1967, Amendment 11, to the "Application
for Construction Permit and Operating License, Docket No. 50-219,
March 26, 1964.
5. Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Forked River Nuclear Station
Unit 1 Environmental Report, Construction Permit Stage, Docket
No. 50-363, January 21, 1972.
6. R. S. Booth, S. V. Kaye, M. J. Kelly and P. S. Rohwer, A Compendium of
Radionuclides Found in Liquid Effluents of Nuclear Power Stations,
ORNL-TN-3801, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, In
Preparation.
7. Panel on Radioactivity in the Marine Environment, Radioactivity in
the Marine Environment, Committee on Oceanography, National Research
Council, National Academy of Science, 1971.
8. Ibid., A. H. Seymour, Chapter I, Introduction.
9. A. M. Freke, "A Model for the Approximate Calculation of Safe Rates of
Discharge of Radioactive Wastes into Marine Environments, Health
Physics, vol. 13, p. 743, 1967.
10. Pritchard, Carpenter, Recirculation and Effluent Distribution for
Oyster Creek Site, June 21, 1963, Amendment 11, "Application
for Construction Permit and Operating License," Docket No. 50-219,
March 26, 1964.
11. Ocean County Board of Taxation, Abstract of Ratables, Toms River, NJ,
1972.
5-34
REFERENCES
(Continued)
12. D.H. Slade, ed., Meteorology and Atomic Energy, USAEC Div. of
Tech. Information, Washington, D.C., 1968.
>
13. W.M. Lowder and P.D. Raft, Environmental Gamma Radiation Exposure
Rates from Nitrogen-16 in the Turbines of a Large BWR Power Plant,
USAEC Report HASL-TM-71-19, Health and Safety Laboratory, . USAEC, New
York, N.Y., October 1971.
>
14. W.M. Lowder, P.D. Raft and C.V. Gogolak, Environmental Gamma Radia-
tion from Nitrogen-16 Decay in the Turbines of a Large Boiling Water
Reactor, USAEC Report, HASL-TM-72-1, Health and Safety Laboratory,
USAEC, New York, N.Y., 10014, February 1972.
15. M.M. Miller and D.A. Nash, Regional and Other Related Aspects of
Shellfish Consumption: Some Preliminary Findings, From the 1969 Con-
sumer Panel Survey, U.S. Department of Commerce, Circular 361, 1971.
>
16. "EPA Lists Background Levels by States," Nuclear News, vol. 15, no. 1,
. 1
Pp. 47-48, 1971.
17. State of New Jersey, Department of Public Utilities, Board of Public
Utility Commissioners, "Proposed Finding of Fact, Conclusions and
Recommendations, Oyster Creek Nuclear Station," Docket No. 652-60.
18. C.B. Wurtz, A Biological Study of Barnegat Bay, Forked River and
Oyster Creek in the Vicinity of the Oyster Creek Station,
December 3, 1965.
19. R.E. Loveland, et al, The Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of
the Benthic Flora and Fauna of Barnegat Bay Before and After the
Onset of Thermal Addition, Fifth Progress Report, Jersey Central
Power and Light Company, 1969.
National Geographic,
20. S.W. Hitchcock, "Can We Save Our Salt Marshes?"
vol. 141, no. 6, p. 729, June 1972.
21. C.B. Wurtz, "Fish and Crabs on the Screens of the Oyster Creek Station
during 1971," Prepared for New Jersey Central Power and Light Co.,
Morristown, N.J., January 14, 1972.
22. J.J. Gift and J.R. Westman, Response of Some Estuarine Fishes to
Increasing Thermal Gradients, Dept. of Environmental Research,
Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N.J., 1971.
5-35
REFERENCES
(Continued)
23. State of New Jersey, Department of Public Utilities, Board of Public
Utility Commissioners - Proposed Finding of Fact, Conclusions and
Recommendations, Oyster Creek Nuclear Plant Docket No. 652-60.
-
24. D.R. Heinle, "Temperature and Zooplankton," Chesapeake Science,
vol. 10, nos. 3 & 4, pp. 186-209, 1969.
>
25. W. Rosenberg and V. Kennedy, Personal Communication, NRI University
of MD, Halloway Pt., MD.
26. L.E. Sage and S.S. Herman, "Zooplankton of the Sandy Hook Bay Area,
N.J.," Chesapeake Science, vol. 13, no. 1, March 1972.
27. L.E. Cronin, J.C. Daiber and E.M. Hulbert, "Quantitative Seasonal
Aspects of Zooplankton in the Delaware River Estuary," Chesapeake
Science, vol. 3, pri 63-93, 1962.
28. S.S. Herman, J.A. Mihursky and A.J. McErlean, "Zooplankton and Environ-
mental Characteristics of the Patuxent River Estuary," Chesapeake
Science, vol. 9, no. 2, June 1968.
>
29. R.P. Morgan, II and R.G. Stross, "Destruction of Phytoplankton in the
Cooling Water Supply of a Steam Electric Station," Chesapeake Science,
vol. 10, nos. 3 & 4, pp. 165-171, 1969.
30. E.P. Odum, Fundamentals of Ecology, Third Edition, W.B. Saunders Co.,
1971.
31. R.E. Loveland, et al., The Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis
of the Benthic Flora and Fauna of Barnegat Bay, Seventh Progress
Report, Rutgers University, October 1970.
32. U. S. AEC Regulatory Operations (Region I) Report No. 50-219/73-03,
April 26, 1973.
33. 10 CFR 71; 49 CFR 173 and 178.
34. 49 CFR Section 397.1(d).
35. Letter, W.W. Lyons, Deputy Assistant, Secretary of the Interior, to
D.R. Muller, ADEP, Directorate of Licensing, AEC Regulatory,
January 23, 1973.
6-1
6.
ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAMS
6.1
PREOPERATIONAL PROGRAMS
6.1.1 Meteorology
The meteorological program was based on data from the 400-ft tower located
about 1300 ft west of the station stack. Wind speed and direction were
measured at 75 ft and 400 ft by Aerovane wind sensors. Air temperature dif-
ference measurements were made at 75, 200 and 400 ft relative to a 12-ft
level where ambient air temperature was recorded. All temperature sen-
sors were resistance elements in an aspirated solar radiation shield.
Rainfall was also recorded.
Although much of the data from this program are of doubtful accuracy, an
improved program is being implemented (see Sect. 6.2.1).
6.1.2 Ecology
Qualitative and quantitative studies were performed from 1965 through
1969. Qualitative studies prior to dredging included benthos, finfish,
and water quality of Oyster Creek and South Branch Forked River. After
dredging had occurred, studies were conducted on the plant and animal ben-
thos in the canal and bay, as well as the finfish in the bay near the
station. Quantitative studies included the bay's phytoplankton, primary
productivity, and zooplankton.
6.1.3
Environmental Radiation
The 1966 to mid-1969 program and results have been described (Ref 1,
pp. 5.5-1 through 12).
2
6.2
OPERATIONAL PROGRAMS
6.2.1 Meteorology
The present program is a continuation of the preoperatfonal program. The
applicant identified an improved program for implementation in the near
future. The staff's opinion is that the new program will conform with
AEC Safety Guide No. 23, Onsite Meteorological Programs
6-2
6.2.2
Chemicals
The program was initiated in 1971 to insure compliance with standards set
in accordance with the Refuse Act of 1899, and to provide data for evalu-
ation of possible effects of chemical discharges on the biota of the bay.
Representative samples of the canal inlet and discharge are analyzed for
phosphorus, nitrate, total nitrogen, ammonia, chlorine, sulfate, zinc,
chromium, iron, soluble and insoluble solids, volatiles, hardness,
turbidity, Kjeldahl nitrogen, and dissolved oxygen. Results of 1971
sampling have been reported (Ref. 1, Table 5.3-1).
6.2.3 Ecology
Where possible, the preoperational programs were continued until the pre-
sent. Other programs were initiated by the applicant to 1) determine the
avoidance and lethal temperature of some estuarine fish and crustaceans;
2) determine the effect of shock temperature increases on copepod eggs;
3) determine the effect of passage through heated condensers on copepod
eggs, fish eggs and larvae, and phytoplankton numbers and phytosynthesis;
4) investigate the mortality caused by impingement on the intake screens ;
and 5) investigate the reason for the menhaden remaining in the effluent
canal and methods to prevent them from remaining. Results of the studies
have been made available through a series of reports by C. B. Wurtz and
Rutgers University. The final Rutgers report has not been received by
the staff, but upon its completion a five-member board, composed of two
state representatives, one university member, and two applicant consul-
tants, will review the results and recommend future studies.
To assess the station impact on the bay, a good estimate of the existing
flora and fauna is needed, so that calculated and measured changes can
be compared to the whole and judged as to their effect on the system.
The staff's opinion is that the following information is needed to com-
plement the existing data:
1) Monthly standing crop estimates of the zooplankton population for
the bay as a whole and the waters pumped through the condensers
with detailed information on copepods, bivalve larvae, fish
eggs and fish larvae,
2) Mortality caused to each of the above groups by passage through
the condensers and exposure to elevated temperatures during pass-
age along the effluent canal,
3) Change in yearly biomass production of commercial, sport, and
noncommercial benthic organisms in the region of the bay affec-
ted by the thermal plume,
6-3
4)
Mortality to organisms impinged on the intake screen and trans-
ferred into the heated effluent canal on a monthly basis when
effluent temperatures are below 70°F, and weekly when effluent
temperatures are above 70°F,
>
5)
Copper content of shellfish throughout the bay,
6)
Year-around data on condenser passage effect on phytoplankton in
terms of net change in species composition and biomass produced,
7)
Population estimates for the important sport and commercial fish,
and shellfish found in the bay.
Aquisition of the above information will permit comparing calculated and
measured changes to the whole and judging their effects on the system.
6.2.4
Environmental Radiation
Liquid radwaste discharges are surveyed by two radiation monitoring
devices located in the liquid radwaste discharge line. The monitors
automatically alarm in the event of a release exceeding a present limit
(Ref 1, p. 3.6-2). Samples of liquid radwastes in the waste sample tanks
routinely are analyzed for radioisotopic content prior to discharge.
.
Solid radwastes are monitored after packaging for off plant shipment
(Ref 1, p. 3.6-10).
.
Grab samples of gaseous radwastes from the main condenser air ejector
are analyzed both before and after holdup and filtration (Ref 1, p. 3.6-4).
All off-gases from the station are directed to the stack. Gases leaving
the stack are monitored continuously to determine the amount of radio-
activity released and periodically are analyzed to determine the rela-
tive composition of particulates and halogens. Additional analyses are
performed to determine isotopic composition of the released gases (Ref 1,
pp. 3.6-6 and - 7). Isolation valves automatically close when radiation
released reaches a preset level (see sect. 3.5.2.1).
>
The operational environmental radiation monitoring program is a continu-
ation of the preoperational program, and a description of the various
types and methods of sampling is summarized in Table 6.1 (Ref 1, pp. 5.2-2
and -3). Results of the environmental radiation monitoring program during
plant operation are reported in the AEC required semiannual reports of
3
operation. The applicant's radiological monitoring program has been in
6-4
TABLE 6.1
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY MONITORING PROGRAM FOR
OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR ELECTRIC GENERATING STATION
Type of Monitoring
Method
Stations
Sampling Frequency
Analyses
Atmospheric
Radiation (Radiogas)
Film Badges
171a)
Change badges every Milliroentgen Exposure
4 weeks
Change filters every Gross Beta every 2 weeks
2 weeks
Gross Alpha every 12 weeks
Air Particulate
Continuous-Fixed
Filter
5 (6)
5(b)
Fallout
Soil
Vegetation
Rain Water
Domestic Water
Wells
Grab Sample
Grab Sample
Continuous
5(b)
5(b)
Every 4 weeks
Every 4 weeks
Every 4 weeks
Gross Beta each sample
Gross Beta each sample
Gross Beta each sample
Grab Sample
6
Every 4 weeks
Gross Beta each sample
Gross Alpha each sample
K-40, Ra-226, Ra-228,
Uranium, Tritium every
12 weeks
Surface Water
Barnegat Bay
Oyster Creek
310)
Grab Sample
Grab Sample
Every 4 weeks
Every 4 weeks
1
South Branch of
Forked River
Grab Sample
1
Every 4 weeks
Gross Beta each sample
Gross Alpha each sample
K-40, Ra-226, Ra-228,
Uranium, Sr-90, 1-131,
Tritium, Cs-137, CO-58, 60,
Zn-65, every 4 weeks
Gross Alpha each sample
Gross Beta each sample
Silt (bottom material)
Grab Sample
5(d)
Every 12 weeks
Marine Life
Clams
Grab Sample
310)
Every 4 weeks
Gross Alpha each sample
Gross Beta each sample
K-40, Sr-90, 1-131,
Cs-137, Co-58, 60, Zn-65;
Every 12 weeks
Foodstuffs
Crops (when
available)
Grab Sample
3
Every 12 weeks
Gross Beta each sample
Sr-90 each sample
(a) One station onsite and 16 stations at various directions and distances within 20 miles of plant
(b) One station onsite and 4 stations within several miles of plant
(c) Samples taken from an area north of plant discharge, in the vicinity of the plant discharge,
and from an area south of the plant discharge
(d) Samples taken at same locations as surface water
6-5
14
5281
(70)
LAKEWOOD
NEW EGYPT
(539
15
(70
TOMS RIVER
AGILFORD PARK
35
16
28
BARNEGAT PINES
2
PARKWAY
26
1
27
FORKED
23
RIVER?
18
FORKED R
119
120
211
22
WARETOWN
25
8
(534)
29
BARNEGAT
STATE
22
(563)
(539)
Lai HARVEY
MANAHAWKINI
CEDARS
12
CEDAR RUN
GARDEN
17
WADING RIVER
I MONITORING STATIONS
10
5
MILES
FIGURE 6.1 ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION MONITORING STATIONS
6-6
operation for several years. Data from this program indicate that no
radiological environmental problems have resulted from releases of
radionuclides from the Oyster Creek plant. However, although this pro-
gram met AEC requirements at the time the specifications were written,
it does not meet the later more-stringent guidelines as stated in Regu-
latory Guide 4.1. Sample collection and rigorous analyses are now required
independently of the measured effluents. This type of program is designed
to provide data that are necessary to assist in verifying projected or
anticipated concentrations of radioactivity and associated public expo-
sures. The significance is determined by comparing the results of the
preoperational and operational programs. In the preparation of technical
specifications for long-term operation of the plant, the staff will
evaluate the radiological monitoring in the light of these guidelines.
6.3
RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS AND STUDIES
6.3.1 Ecology
Sandy Hook Laboratory (Dept. of Commerce, Natural Oceanographic and
Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, Middle
Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Center) is conducting several research
programs in the bay environs. The programs are federally funded and are
expected to be completed in 1973–74. The titles are:
Effects of thermal additions on benthic algae
Effects of thermal additions on colonization and survival of
benthic organisms
Benthic survey of the New Jersey Coastal waters
Resource assessment of the surf clam population in the near
shore waters of the New Jersey coast.
An ecological survey of the New Jersey coastal area is being conducted by
Ichthyologist Associates as part of a program dealing with the siting of
a power station off the New Jersey coast. The program includes some sam-
pling sites in the bay, but the main area of research is from Manahawkin
Causeway south to Absecon, N.J. A summary will be available in the spring
of 1973.5
New Jersey's Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Fish,
Game, and Shellfish, Bureau of Fisheries, Marine Fisheries Section, com-
pleted a 1-year study of the finfish of the bay and related physical and
chemical parameters in December 1972. Publication of results is planned
for mid-1973.
1
6-7
6.3.2 Environmental Radiation
The State of New Jersey and the Environmental Protection Agency have been
involved in monitoring the environs near the Oyster Creek site. State of
New Jersey data obtained in 1970 have been summarized by Dr. David
McCurdy6 of the New Jersey Bureau of Radiation Protection as follows
(Ref 1, pp. 5.5-9 and 11):
"The environmental radiation surveillance program conducted around
the Oyster Creek facility has not reyealed any significant increase
in radioactivity levels in the immediate vicinity of the plant.
Radioactivity concentrations during 1970 in surface water, soil, veg-
etation and sediment samples collected at established sampling sta-
tions were consistent with levels found in previous years."
"Monitoring of the external gamma-ray dose from radioactive noble
gas es by environmental film badges revealed background levels for
all exposure periods, except during the second calendar quarter of
1970 when accumulated doses of the order of 10 millirems were mea-
sured at four monitoring stations located south of the facility.
No
accumulated doses were measured at these sites prior to or subsequent
to this exposure period. The highest accumulated dose measured out-
side the facility's exclusion boundary was 20 millirems, at a station
2 miles south of the plant. All measured doses were below recommended
radiation guides established by the Federal Radiation Council."
"Analysis of marine specimens from Barnegat Bay has revealed the
accumulation of trace amounts of radionuclides in clams, blue crabs,
algae, and one species of aquatic plant. Specific radionuclides
found in clam specimens were ruthenium-106, cobalt-60, and mangan-
es e-54, in quantities several orders of magnitude less than radio-
activity guides established by the U. S. Public Health Service for
shellfish."
>
"Radionuclide concentrations in the edible parts of crabs were of
the same magnitude as those found in clams. In addition to the
radionuclides found in clams, traces of zinc-65 and cesium-137 may
also be present in crab specimens."
"Analysis of marine vegetation in Barnegat Bay has indicated the
accumulation of manganese-54, cobalt-58, and cobalt-60 in two spe-
cies of algae (Codium fragile, and Ulva lactuca) and in the aquatic
plant Zostera marina. This plant was found to concentrate the radio-
nuclides to a greater extent than the two species of algae. Speci-
mens of the plant collected near the Oyster Creek and Forked River
inlet into the Bay had radioactivity concentrations statistically
greater than specimens collected elsewhere in the bay.'
6-8
"Gamma-ray analyses of water samples collected along the Oyster Creek
estuary downstream from the facility's liquid waste discharge canal
have not revealed the presence of radionuclides, other than naturally
occurring potassium-40, in concentrations greater than the minimum
sensitivity of the counting instrument (4 pCi/liter). Levels of
tritium in water samples taken at the 12 established collection sta-
tions average less than 4 pCi/ml (+200% at the 95% confidence level)
during 1970. Tritium concentrations below the outfall of the Oyster
Creek facility were no greater than concentrations measured in fresh-
water streams in this area. Although levels fluctuated around the
minimum sensitivity of the counting instrument, average concentrations
were less than one thousandth of the maximum permissible concentra-
tion allowed for offsite streams.
.
On February 2, 1972, Dr. McCurdy summarized the environmental surveillance
data obtained during 1971. No radioactivity attributable to the Oyster
Creek Station has been detected in well water, surface water from Oyster
Creek, the bay or Forked River, or in air, soil, vegetation, fruits, or
vegetables. Radioactivity attributable to the Oyster Creek Station has
been detected in aquatic vegetation (especially Gracilaria and Zostos
marina), shellfish (clams and crabs), and bottom sediment that is rich
in organic material, Predominant radionuclides attributable to the Oyster
Creek station were cobalt-60, cobalt-58, and manganese-54. Concentrations
of those radionuclides in shellfish were similar to levels measured in
1970 and were less than the naturally occurring potassium-40 levels
(Ref 1, p. 5.5-11).
The State of New Jersey is now under contract with the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency to continue the surveillance of the Oyster Creek site.
The first Quarterly Progress Report4 confirms the findings in the above
reports. The EPA staff also obtained independent samples in mid-July
for analysis in EPA Laboratories.
6-9
REFERENCES
1. Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Oyster Creek Nuclear Gener-
ating Station, Environmental Report, March 6, 1972, Amendment
No. 68 to the "Application for Construction Permit and Operating
License, Docket No. 50-219, March 26, 1964.
2. Jersey Central Power and Light, Letter to Dr. P. Morris, Director
Division of Licensing, Docket No. 50-219, April 9, 1970.
3. Jersey Central Power and Light Co., Oyster Creek Nuclear Gener-
ating Station Semi-Annual Reports, No. 1-6. Docket 50-219. 1969-1972.
4. Environmental Radiation Protection Program of the Oyster Creek Nuclear
Generating Station, Sponsored by the U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Arlington Contracts Operations, Contract No. 68-01-0527, 1972.
5. Dr. D. Thomas, Project Leader, Ichthyologist Associates, Box 7-10,
RD2, Absecon, NJ 08201.
6. D. McCurdy, and J.J. Rosso, Environmental Radiological Surveillance
Program, New Jersey State Department of Environmental Protection,
(data obtained in 1970), 1971.
7-1
).
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF POSTULATED ACCIDENTS
O
7.1
PLANT ACCIDENTS
A high degree of protection against the occurrence of postulated accidents
at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station is provided through correct
design, manufacture, and operation and the quality assurance program used
to establish the necessary high integrity of the reactor system, as con-
sidered in the Commission's Safety Evaluations and their supplements.
Deviations that may occur are handled by protection systems to place and
hold the plant in a safe condition. Notwithstanding this, the conservative
postulate is made that serious accidents might occur, in spite of the fact
that they are extremely unlikely; and engineered safety features are
installed to mitigate the consequences of these postulated events.
The probability of occurrence of accidents and the spectrum of their
consequences to be considered from an environmental effects standpoint
have been analyzed using best estimates of probabilities and realistic
fission product release and transport assumptions. For site evaluation
in the Commission's safety review, extremely conservative assumptions
were used for the purpose of comparing calculated doses resulting from
a hypothetical release of fission products from the fuel against the
10 CFR Part 100 siting guidelines. The computed doses that would be
received by the population and environment from actual accidents would
be significantly less than those presented in the Safety Evaluation.
The Commission issued guidance to applicants on September 1, 1972,
requiring the consideration of a spectrum of accidents with assumptions
as realistic as the state of knowledge permits. The applicant's
response was contained in the "Environmental Report" and Amendments 1
and 2 thereto, submitted by Jersey Central Power and Light Company.
The applicant's report has been evaluated, using the standard accident
assumptions and guidance issued as a proposed amendment to Appendix D
of 10 CFR Part 50 by the Commission on December 1, 1971. Nine classes
of postulated accidents and occurrences ranging in severity from trivial
to very serious were identified by the Commission. In general, accidents
in the high potential consequence end of the spectrum have a low occur-
rence rate and those on the low potential consequence end have a higher
occurrence rate. The examples selected by the applicant for these cases
are shown in Table 7.1 and are reasonably homogeneous in terms of
probability within each class.
Staff estimates of the dose which might be received by an assumed
individual standing at the site boundary in the downwind direction,
7-2
TABLE 7.1
CLASSIFICATION OF POSTULATED ACCIDENTS
AND OCCURRENCES
Class
AEC Description
Applicant's Example(s)
1.0
Trivial Incidents
Not considered
2.0
Main steam system leakage
Small releases outside
containment
3.0
Radwaste system failures
Liquid release from sample tank
Gas release from holdup pipe
sample line failure
Liquid waste storage tank failure
Small release of fission products
to reactor coolant (unspecified
cause)
4.0
Fission products to
primary system
5.0
Fission products to primary
and secondary systems
Not applicable to BWR
6.0
Refueling accident
Fuel assembly drop
Heavy object drops onto fuel in core
7.0
Spent fuel handling
Fuel assembly drop in fuel storage
pool
Heavy object drop onto fuel rack
Fuel cask drop
8.0
Accident initiation events
considered in design basis
evaluation in the SAR
Loss of coolant (small pipe break)
Logs of coolant (large pipe break)
Break in instrument line from primary
system that penetrates containment
Rod drop accident
Main steamline break (small break)
Main steamline break (large break)
9.0
Not considered
Hypothetical sequence of
failures more severe than
Class 8
7-3
using the assumptions in the proposed Annex to Appendix D, are presented
in Table 1.2. Staff estimates of the integrated exposure that might
be delivered to the population within 50 miles of the site are also
presented in Table 7.2. The man-rem estimate was based on the pro-
jected residential and seasonal population within 50 miles of the
site for the year 2010,
To rigorously establish a realistic annual risk the calculated doses
in Table 7.2 would have to be multiplied by estimated probabilities.
The events in Classes 1 and 2 represent occurrences which are anti-
cipated during plant operation; and their consequences, which are
very small, are considered within the framework of routine effluents
from the plant. Except for a limited amount of fuel failures, the
events in Classes 3 through 5 are not anticipated during plant operation;
but events of this type could occur sometime during the 40 year plant
lifetime. Accidents in Classes 6 and 7 and small accidents in Class 8
are of similar or lower probability than accidents in Classes 3 through 5
but are still possible. The probability of occurrence of large Class 8
accidents is very small. Therefore, when the consequences indicated in
Table 7.2 are weighted by probabilities, the environmental risk is
The postulated occurrences in Class 9 involve sequences of
successive failures more severe than those required to be considered in
the design bases for protective systems and engineered safety features.
The consequences could be severe. However, the probability of their
occurrence is so small that their environmental risk is extremely low.
Defense in depth (multiple physical barriers), quality assurance for
design, manufacture and operation, continued surveillance and testing,
and conservative design are all applied to provide and maintain the
required high degree of assurance that potential accidents in this class
are, and will remain, sufficiently small in probability that the environ-
mental risk is extremely low,
very low.
Table 7.2 indicates that the realistically estimated radiological
consequences of the postulated accidents would result in exposures
of an assumed individual at the site boundary to concentrations of
radioactive materials within the Maximum Permissible Concentrations
(MPC) of Table II, Appendix B of 10 CFR Part 20. Table 7.2 also shows
that the estimated integrated exposure of population within 50 miles
of the plant from each postulated accident would be much smaller than
that from naturally occurring radioactivity. The exposure from naturally
occurring radioactivity corresponds to approximately 15,000 man-rem per
year within 5 miles and approximately 960,000 man-rem per year within
7-4
TABLE 7.2
SUMMARY OF RADIOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF POSTULATED ACCIDENTS1/
Estimated Fraction
of 10 CFR Part 20
Limit at Site
Boundary2
Estimated Dose
to Population
within 50 mile
radius, man-rem
Class
Event
1.0
Trivial Incidents
3/
3/
2.0
3/
Small releases outside
containment
3/
3.0
Radwaste System failures
3.1
0.26
37
Equipment leakage or mal-
function
3.2
1.0
150
Release of waste gas
storage tank contents
3.3
Release of liquid waste
storage tank contents
<0.001
0.13
4.0
Fission products to primary
system (BWR)
4.1
Fuel cladding defects
3/
31
3/
4.2
Off-design transients that
induce fuel failure above
those expected
0.011
3.8
5.0
N. A.
N. A.
Fission products to primary and
secondary systems (PWR)
6.0
Refueling accidents
6.1
Fuel assembly drop into core
<0.001
0.31
6.2
Heavy object drop onto fuel
in core
0.002
2.5
7.0
Spent fuel handling accident
7.1
<0.001
0.55
Fuel assembly drop in fuel
storage pool
7.2.
<0.001
1.0
Heavy object drop onto
fuel rack
7.3
Fuel cask drop
0.39
54
7-5
TABLE 7.2 (Cont'd)
Estimated Fraction
of 10 CFR Part 20
Limit at Site
Boundary2/
Estimated Dose
to Population
within 50 mile
radius, man-rem
Class
Event
8.0
Accident initiation events
considered in design basis eval-
uation in the safety analysis
report
8.1
Logg-of-coolant accidents
inside containment
Small break
<0.001
<0.1
Large break
0.002
26.
8.1(a)
<0.001
<0.1
Break in instrument line from
primary system that penetrates
the containment
Rod ejection accident (PWR)
8.2(a)
N. A.
N. A.
8.2(b)
0.013
4.5
8.3(a)
N. A.
N. A.
Rod drop accident (BWR)
Steamline break (PWR's-outside
containment)
Steamline breaks (BWR)
8.3(b)
Small break
0.009
1.3
Large break
0.046
6.5
17
The doses calculated as consequences of the postulated accidents are
based on airborne transport of radioactive materials resulting in both
a direct and an inhalation dose. Our evaluation of the accident doses
assumes that the applicant's environmental monitoring program and
appropriate additional monitoring (which could be initiated subseuqent
to an incident detected by in-plant monitoring) would detect the
presence of radioactivity in the environment in a timely manner such
that remedial action could be taken if necessary to limit exposure from
other potential pathways to man.
21
Represents the calculated whole body dose as a fraction of 500 mrem (or
the equivalent dose to an organ).
These releases are expected to be a fraction of 10 CFR Part 20 limits
for either gaseous or liquid effluents.
.
3/
7-6
50 miles of the site. These estimates are based on a natural background
of 0.125 rem per year.
When considered with the probability of occur-
rence, the annual potential radiation exposure of the population from
all the postulated accidents is an even smaller fraction of the exposure
from natural background radiation and, in fact, is well within naturally
occurring variations in the natural background. It is concluded from
the results of the realistic analysis that the environmental risks due
to postulated radiological accidents are exceedingly small.
7.2
TRANSPORTATION ACCIDENTS INVOLVING RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS
Based on recent accident statistics,
193
a shipment of fuel or waste may
be expected to be involved in an accident about once in a total of 750,000
shipment-miles. Based on regulatory standards and requirements for package
design and quality assurance, results of tests, and past experience, Type
B packages are likely to withstand all but very severe, highly unusual
accidents. The probability of a Type B package being breached is low,
so low that detailed consideration is not required in this analysis.
Although the consequences of a release could be serious, the probability
of occurrence is small, and, therefore, the risk or impact on the environ-
ment is very small.
Provisions in transportation regulations are designed to assure maximum
containment of wastes and minimum contamination from wastes in accidents.
Shipments of wastes are likely to be made by exclusive-use truck, which
means that the vehicle is loaded by the consignor and unloaded by the
consignee. In most cases the shipments are made in closed vehicles.
Since the shipment is exclusive-use, the shipper can provide specific
instructions to carrier personnel regarding procedures in case of accidents.
Commission and Department of Transportation regulations4 provide specific
instructions to carriers for segregating damaged and leaking packages,
keeping people away from the scene of an accident, and notification of
the shipper and the Department of Transportation.
Each package containing radioactive material is labeled with the radio-
active material label, a distinctive label which identifies the material
and provides a visual warning. The regulations5 specify placarding on
the outside of the truck for identifying the presence of shipments of
large quantities of radioactive materials. An extensive program has been
carried out over the past several years by which emergency personnel,
including police departments, fire departments, and civil defense offices,
have been advised of procedures to follow in accidents involving radio-
active materials and other hazardous materials. Specific instructions
with regard to radioactive materials have been provided through the AEC's
efforts as well as those of carrier organizations such as the Bureau
7-7
of Explosives of the Association of American Railroads, the American
Trucking Association, and the Air Transport Association. An intergovern-
mental program to provide personnel and equipment is available at the
request of persons (truck drivers, police, bystanders, or other persons)
at the scene of such accidents.
The waste itself is confined either in the form of solidified materials,
such as concrete, or compacted solids. The low level of radioactivity
in the waste together with the form of the waste serves to minimize the
contamination in the unlikely event that there is a spill in an accident.
The procedures prescribed by existing applicable regulations, together
with the other precautions discussed above, are considered by the Commis-
sion to be adequate to mitigate the effects of infrequent accidents which
might occur involving shipments of wastes from the station.
7.2.1 New Fuel
Under accident conditions other than accidental criticality, the pelletized
form of the nuclear fuel, its encapsulation, and the low specific activity
of the fuel limit the radiological impact on the environment to negligible
levels.
The packaging is designed to prevent criticality under normal and severe
accident conditions. To release a number of fuel assemblies under condi-
tions that could lead to accidental criticality would require severe
damage or destruction of more than one package, which is unlikely to
happen in other than an extremely severe accident. The probability that
an accident could occur under conditions that could result in accidental
criticality is extremely remote.
If criticality were to occur in a transportation accident, persons within
a radius of about 16 feet from the accident would receive a fatal or
near-fatal exposure unless shielded by intervening material. Exposure
levels drop off rapidly with distance (exposure is approximately 20 rem
at a radius of 50 feet), and are of the order of 100 mrem at a radius of
100 feet from the accident. No detectable radiation effects are expected
at distances greater than 100 feet. Although there would be no nuclear
explosion, heat generated in the reaction would probably separate the
fuel elements so that the reactions would stop. The reaction would not
be expected to continue for more than a few seconds nor to recur. Residual
radiation levels due to induced radioactivity in the fuel elements might
reach a few roentgens per hour at three feet and there would be very little
dispersion of solid radioactive material.
7-8
7.2.2 Irradiated Fuel
Effects on the environment from accidental releases of radioactive mate-
rials during shipment of irradiated fuel have been estimated for the
situation where contaminated coolant is released and the situation where
gases and coolant are released.
(a) Leakage of contaminated coolant resulting from improper closing of
the cask is possible as a result of human error, even though the
shipper is required to follow specific procedures which include tests
and examination of the closed container prior to each shipment.
Such an accident is highly unlikely during the 30-year life of the
plant.
Leakage of liquid at a rate of 0.001 cc per second or about 80 drops/
hour is about the smallest amount of leakage that can be detected by
visual observation of a large container. If undetected leakage of
contaminated liquid coolant were to occur, the amount would be so
small that the individual exposure would not exceed a few mrem and
only a very few people would receive such exposures.
(b) Release of gases and coolant is an extremely remote possibility. In
the improbable event that a cask is involved in an extremely severe
accident such that the cask containment is breached and the cladding
of the fuel assemblies penetrated, some of the coolant and some of the
noble gases might be released from the cask.
In such an accident, the amount of radioactive material released would
be limited to the available fraction of the noble gases in the void
spaces in the fuel pins and some fraction of the low level contam- .
ination in the coolant. Persons would not be expected to remain near
the accident due to the severe conditions which would be involved,
including a major fire. If releases occurred, they would be expected
to take place in a short period of time. Only a limited area would
be affected. Persons in the downwind region and within 100 feet or
so of the accident might receive doses as high as a few hundred
millirem. Under average weather conditions, a few hundred square feet
might be contaminated to the extent that it would require decontam-
ination (that is Range I contamination levels) according to the
standards of the Environmental Protection Agency.
5
7.2.3 Solid Radioactive Wastes
It is highly unlikely that a shipment of solid radioactive waste will be
involved in a severe accident during the 30-year life of the plant. If
a shipment of low-level waste (in drums) becomes involved in a severe
7-9
.
accident, some release of waste might occur, but the specific activity
of the waste will be so low that the exposure of personnel would not be
expected to be significant. Other solid radioactive wastes will be
shipped in Type B packages. The probability of release from a Type B
package, in even a very severe accident, is sufficiently small that,
considering the solid form of the waste and the very remote probability
that a shipment of such waste would be involved in a very severe accident,
the likelihood of significant exposure would be extremely small.
In either case, spread of the contamination beyond the immediate area is
unlikely and, although local cleanup might be required, no significant
exposure to the general public would be expected to result.
7.2.4 Severity of Postulated Transportation Accidents
The events postulated in this analysis are unlikely but possible. More
severe accidents than those analyzed can be postulated and their conse-
quences could be severe. Quality assurance for design, manufacture, and
use of the packages, continued surveillance and testing of packages and
transport conditions, and conservative design of packages ensure that
the probability of accidents in this latter potential is sufficiently
small that the environmental risk is extremely low. For those reasons,
more severe accidents have not been included in the analysis.
7-10
REFERENCES
1.
Federal Highway Administration, 1969 Accidents of Large Motor Carriers
of Property, December 1970.
2.
Federal Railroad Administration, Summary and Analysis of Accidents on
Railroads in the U.S., Accident Bulletin No. 138, 1969.
.
1
3.
U.S. Coast Guard, Statistical Summary of Casualties to Commercial
Vessels, December 1970.
4.
49 CFR Sects. 171.15, 174.566, and 177.861.
5.
Federal Radiation Council, Background Material for the Development
of Radiation Protection Standards; Protective Action Guides for
Strontium-89, Strontium-90, and Cesium-137, Report No. 7, May 1965.
2
.
1
1
8-1
8.
IMPLICATIONS OF THE PROJECT
8.1
THE REQUIREMENT FOR POWER
The requirement for power is considered in three service areas, all
including the service area of the applicant. The first area is that of
the applicant combined with New Jersey Power and Light (NJPL) together
representing nearly half of the area in New Jersey. The two companies
currently file joint stockholder reports and state combined reserve needs.
The second area is that of the General Public Utilities System (GPU) con-
sisting of the above companies together with two utilities servicing
nearly half of the area in Pennsylvania. The applicant's service area
and the GPU service area are shown in Figure 8.1. The third area is the
Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland Interconnection, termed the Mid-Atlantic
1
Area Council (MAAC) by the Federal Power Commission (FPC). Across the
country, such councils were organized to coordinate regionally the opera-
tion of utilities and the consideration of reserve generating capacity.
The coordination provides the customers of each utility more reliable elec-
tricity and allows each utility to maintain lower reserves.
8.1.1 The Requirement for Power in the Service Areas of the Applicant
and NJPL
O
Within the combined service area there is both an installed capacity
requirement and a required mix of power sources. The applicant states
that about 40 to 50% of its electric demand is continuous (Ref 2, p. 8.2-12).
To meet the demand, about 50 to 60% of its plants should produce low cost
base load electricity. Plants meeting that requirement, such as Oyster
Creek, can justify relatively high installation costs. Energy demands for
peak periods of the day represent part of the remaining load. Plants meet-
ing that requirement operate about 4000 hr/yr and are characterized by
low installation costs and high power production costs. The residential
user is the chief customer for that capacity, and pays more than the large
Industrial user for the seryice. For about 2000 hr/yr high seasonal peak
periods occur, during which less efficient plants are operated. They are
characterized by generally high operating costs and very low installation
costs.
At the present time, the applicant maintains minimum reserves during the
winter, Howeyer MAAC experiences minimum reseryes in the summer. Since
the reserve margin in the larger area is overriding, mainly summer reserve
margins will be considered in this subsection for consistency with those
following.
8-2

MONTROSE
SCRANTON
SUSSEX
NEW YORK
UNION
WILKES-BARRE
FRANKLIN
NEWTON
PASSAIC
POMPTON LAKES
YARDS CREEKS
LONGWOOD VALLEY
STROUDSBURG
BERGEN
WARREN
MORRIS
BOONTON
• HAZELTON
PORTLAND
HOPATCONG
HACKETTSTOWN ESSEX
BANGOR
HUDSON
MORRISTOWN
WASHINGTON
LIM
NAZARETH
BERNARDSVILLE
SUMMIT
EASTON
MUNTEADON SOMERSET
GILLETTE
Z GILBERT
HAMBURG
NU
TOPTON
FLEMINGTON
READING
SAYREVILLE KEYPORT
ALLENTOWN
OLD BRIDGE
RED BANK
TITUS
MONMOUTH
BOYERTOWN
HIGHTSTOWN
LONG BRANCH
MERCER
FREEHOLD
ASBURY PARK
MIDDLESEX WERNER
PT PLEASANT
COOKSTOWN
WRIGHTSTOWN
PHILADELPHIA.
OCEAN
TOMS RIVER
SEASIDE PARK
BURLINGTON
DELAWARE
OYSTER CREEK
GLOUCESTER
CAMDEN
NEW JERSEY
SALEM
KOM PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC
ATLANTIC
METROPOLITAN EDISON
CUMBERLAND
CAPE MAY
NEW YORK
TOWANDA
MANSFIELD
Oіно
• WILLIAMSPORT
SHAWILLE
• NEW CASTLE
PENNSYLVANIA
PUNXSUTAWNE
PHILIPSBUR
STATE COLLEGE
KEYSTONE
LEWISTON
INDIANA
EDENSBURG
HOMER CITY
HUNTINGDONS
IEMAUGH
• PITTSBURGH
SEWARDS
HARRISBURG
LEBANON
EYLER
CRAWFORD
HNSTOWN
3 MI ISLANDT
SHIPPENSBURG
DILLSBURG
YORK HAVENO
WEST VIRGINIA
SOMERSET
BEDFORD
YORK
GETTYSBURG
HANOVER
WEST VIRGINIA
MARYLAND
NJP&L
JCP&L
FIGURE 8.1 GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES SYSTEM
8-3
Within the service areas of the applicant and NJPL there are 23 small
plants capable of producing 628 MWe and 7 larger plants supplying 1262 MWe.
A list of those plants is shown in Table 8.1. Based on an installed capa-
city of 1890 MWe, the continuous 50 to 60% load varies from 945 MWe to
1134 MWe. The last two columns of the table show the cumulative summer
installed capacity in the area starting first with the large plants. In
one column, Oyster Creek heads the list, in the other Oyster Creek is
as s umed to be shut down. In order to meet a continuous Load of 945 MWe
within the applicant-NJPL area, all the small plants and some of the com-
bustion turbines would have to be base loaded. The high operating cost of
those units would make their operation impractical. Power would have to
be procured from other sources. The importance of Oyster Creek for supply
of continuous power without outside purchases is clearly evident.
.
.
The other aspect of power production which is of great concern is relia-
bility. The applicant and NJPL are required by law to provide low cost
power to the customers they serve (Ref 2, p. 8.2-10). The FPC has stated
that the probability of a power shortage should be less than 1 day in
10 years (Ref 1, Section 3C). In addition, FPC states that a reserve mar-
gin of 20% is normally sufficient to attain the required system reliabil-
ity. The 20% value was adopted by MAAC as a recommended reserve until
the time when a more precise reliability calculation may be made.
.
Since August 14, 1969, according to the applicant, a 20% reserve require-
ment has been used as a basis for planning reserves within the MAAC area.
The 20% reserve is measurable even though GPU's contractural agreement
with MAAC requires only 10% (Ref 2, p. 1.3-6). Herein, the requirement
for power will be judged on the basis of a 20% reserve for the applicant-
NJPL area.
Figure 8.2 and Table 8.2 show the actual and projected summer installed
capacities and peak loads for the New Jersey subsidaries of GPU from 1966
to 1980 (Ref 2, App. C, Response F9). The Keystone station in western
Pennsylvania is included since the applicant has one-sixth ownership.
The effect of shutting down Oyster Creek in 1973 is shown as the dashed
line under the installed capacity curye (Figure 8.2). Without Oyster
Creek, the summer peak load will continue to exceed the installed capacity
curye between 1973 and 1977. The demand yery likely could not be met from
other sources within MAAC since summer represents a time at minimum reserye.
Thus, the reliability of the applicant-NJPL seryice would suffer ff Oyster
Creek were not available:
.
8-4
TABLE 8.1
THE INSTALLED CAPACITY WITHIN SYSTEMS OF JCPL AND NJPL
Cumulative
System Capacity
Including
Oyster Creek
(MWe)
Cumulative
System Capacity
Without
Oyster Creek
(MWe)
Summer
Capacity
Units
Large Plants
Oyster Creek
600
600
Keystone 1
137
737
137
Keystone 2
136
823
223
Sayreville 4
128
1001
401
Sayreville 5
128
1129
529
Gilbert 3
72
1201
601
Werner 4
61
1262
662
Smaller Plants
Sayreville 1,2,3
84
1346
746
Gilbert 1,2
52
1398
798
Werner 1,3
44
1442
842
Combustion Turbines
& Hydro
Gilbert C1-C4
92
1534
934
168
1702
1102
Glen Garner Al-A4,
B5-B8
Yards Creek 1-3
165
1867
1267
Reigel 1
23
1890
1290
8-5
TABLE 8.2
THE JCPL PLUS NJPL LOAD, CAPACITY, AND RESERVE
Summer
Peak Load
Installed
Capacity
(Summer Rating)
Reserves
MW
%
Year
1966
1125
770
-355
-31.6
1967
1190
734
-456
-38.3
1968
1455
884
-571
-39.2
1969
1604
1036
-568
-35.4
1970
1727
1701
-26
-1.5
1971
1880
1892
12
0.6
1972
2144
2270
126
5.9
1973
2398
2514
116
4.8
1974
2680
2788
108
4.0
1975
2969
3201
232
7.8
1976
3306
3408
102
3.1
1977
3682
3983
301
8.2
1978
4101
5053
952
23.2
1979
4567
5369
802
17.6
737
1980
5087
5824
14.5
9-8
6000
FPC RECOMMENDED
20% RESERVE MARGIN
FOR INSTALLED CAPACITY
OVER PROJECTED PEAK LOAD
5000
4000
INSTALLED CAPACITY
WITH OYSTER CREEK
PROJECTED PEAK LOAD
(MWe)
3000
2000
ACTUAL PEAK LOADS
INSTALLED CAPACITY
WITHOUT OYSTER CREEK
AFTER 1972
1000
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
CALENDAR YEAR
FIGURE 8.2 POWER FORECAST, NEW JERSEY SUBSIDARIES OF GPU INSTALLED
SUMMER CAPACITY AND PEAK LOAD COMPARISON CURVES,
8-7
8.1.2 Requirement for Power in the General Public Utilities Seryice Area
.
The requirements of the GPU area are shown, based upon ayailable informa-
tion on the past and future area requirements.',,
1 3 4
The installed and
projected power requirements in the GPU system are shown in Figure 8.3
and Table 8.3. A dashed line shows the installed capacity curye if Oyster
Creek were shut down in 1973 (Figure 8,3). Also shown are the summer
peak load requirements projected by GPU and the system average growth
curve projected by MAAC. The GPU curve is higher and is probably a good
representation of their actual requirements. They expect their peak load
to shift to the summer by 1980, increasing the summer peak faster than
the system average.
The two dotted lines show the ideal installed capa-
city curves which are required to meet system reliability requirements.
Using either GPU or MAAC projections, GPU needs Oyster Creek.
8.1.3
Requirement for Power in the Service Area of the Mid-Atlantic
Area Council
At the present time, GPU constitutes about 15% of the installed capacity
in MAAC, in which Oyster Creek represents about 2% of the total installed
capacity. MAAC at the present time, acts as an essentially isolated ele-
ment in the power supply system of the country. The interties with other
regions can compensate for momentary unbalances, but there are not enough
links to transfer all the power needed during serius shortages in MAAC.
Thus, reliability within the area must be considered. In particular, the
20% reserve requirement must be satisfied.
>
Figure 8.4 and Table 8.4 give the projected installed capacity and peak
load requirements for MAAC.
1
In Figure 8.4, the 20% reserve guideline is
shown along with a dashed line indicating the effect of shutting down
Oyster Creek. Through 1973, there is less than a 20% reserve margin even
with Oyster Creek operating. With Oyster Creek shut down, the margin drops
2% and does not exceed 20% until 1975. After 1974, there is sufficient
MAAC reserve to permit shutdown of Oyster Creek if no delays are encountered
for plants planned, or currently under construction. If every plant will
have been delayed more than 6 months, the 20% reserye goal will not be met
in MAAC without construction of additional plants. Even if only a few
plants will have been delayed the system will require Oyster Creek opera-
ting to insure adequate system reserves through 1981.
Based on the analysis presented here, there is a current requirement for
Oyster Creek. The applicant and NJPL require it to meet their base load
8-8
RECOMMENDED 20% RESERVE
SUGGESTED BY FPC USING
THE MAAC SYSTEM AS A
BASE AVERAGE PROJECTED
GROWTH RATE
文
​6000
SUMMER PROJECTED PEAK
LOAD BASED ON THE MAAC
SYSTEM AVERAGE PROJECTED
GROWTH RATE1
4000
SUMMER PROJECTED PEAK
LOAD BASED ON GPU
GROWTH ESTIMATES
12,000
GPU PROJECTED
20% RESERVE
10,000
INSTALLED CAPACITY
WITH OYSTER CREEK
8000
INSTALLED CAPACITY
WITHOUT OYSTER CREEK
(MWe)
2000
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
CALENDAR YEAR
FIGURE 8.3 FORECASTED OR ACTUAL PEAK LOADS AND INSTALLED SUMMER
CAPACITIES WITHIN THE GPU SYSTEM 1966-1981
8-9
TABLE 8.3
ACTUAL OR EXPECTED GROWTH RATES AND RESERVE MARGINS FOR THE GPU AREA
FROM 1966 THROUGH 1980 FOR SUMMER PEAK LOAD REQUIREMENTS
(a)
GPU Estimates
Reserve
Peak Load
With
_ (MWe) Oyster Creek
Installed
Capacity
(MWe)
Calendar
Year
Reserve
Without
Projection Based On MAAC Growth Rate (b)
Reserve
Reserve
Peak Load
With
Without
(MWe) Oyster Creek Oyster Creek(%) (C)
Oyster Creek(%) (C)
1966
1967
1968
1969
1971
1970 (d)
1972(a)
2673
2851
2995
3996
4380
4986
5711
6693
6956
7836
8394
9034
10120
11015
11415
12665
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
2921
3061
3540
3868
4071
4326
4934
5379
5863
6377
6954
7583
8269
9022
9851
10760
-8.5
-6.9
-15.4
+3.3
+7.6
+15.2
+15.7
+24.4
+18.6
+22.9
+20.7
+19.1
+22.4
+22.1
+15.9
+17.7
+3.6
+13.2
+8.4
+13.5
+12.1
+11.2
+15.1
+15.4
4816
5235
5693
6189
6718
7279
7879
8491
9169
9892
+18.5
+27.8
+22.2
+26.6
+24.9
+24.1
+28.4
+29.7
+24.5
+28.0
+6.1
+16.3
+11.6
+16.9
+16.0
+15.9
+20.8
+22.6
+18.0
+22.0
. +9.7
+12.1
(a) Ref. 3 p. 1-8
(b) This projection for GPU obtained from MAAC area average growth rate (Ref. 1, Section 2 and 3).
(c) Assumes Oyster Creek shutdown in 1973.
(d) Entries below this line are projections, not actual reserves.
8-10
A
PROJECTED INSTALLED CAPACITY
WITHOUT OYSTER CREEK
FPC RECOMMENDED 20%
RESERVE INSTALLED
CAPACITY OVER PEAK LOAD
PROJECTED PEAK SUMMER LOAD
1982
1984
1986
1988
80,000
70,000
PROJECTED MAAC INSTALLED
CAPACITY WITH LO DELAYS
AND WITH OYSTER CREEK
60,000
(MWe)
50,000
40,000
30,000
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
CALENDAR YEAR
FIGURE 8.4 MID-ATLANTIC AREA COUNCIL (PJM) FORECAST OF INSTALLED SUMMER
CAPACITY AND PROJECTED PEAK LOADS 1972-1981'
8-11
PROJECTED GROWTH RATES AND RESERVE MARGINS IN
MAAC POWER POOL FOR THE YEARS 1972 THROUGH 1981 (a)
Winter Requirements
Calendar
Year
Installed
Capacity
(MWe)
Peak
Loads Reserve With
_(MWe) Oyster Creek %
Reserve Without
Oyster Creek % (b)
Installed
Capacity
(MWe)
Peak
Loads Reserve With
(MWe) Oyster Creek %
Reserve Without,
Oyster Creek % (6)
+44.5
+44.5
+50.5
+48.1
+56.5
+54.3
+60.8
+58.7
+56.3
+55.4
+58.3
+56.8
+56.1
+54.5
+61.9
+60.4
+61.1
+59.6
TABLE 8.4
Summer Requirements
1972
34589
29090
19.9
+19.9
36110
24985
1973
38272
316 30
22.0
+19.1
40445
26880
1974
42494
34 380
24.6
+21.8
45328
28960
1975
48512
37385
30.8
+28.1
50253
31260
1976
51105
40600
26.9
+24.4
52790
33770
1977
55723
43955
27.8
+25.4
57570
36315
1978
59127
47605
25.2
+22.9
61007
39070
1979
65805
51315
29.3
+27.1
67799
41880
1980
70400
55380
28.1
+26.0
72394
44945
1981
76739
59710
29.6
+27.5
78789
48165
+63.5
+62.1
(a) Reference 1, Section 2 and 3
(b) Starting in 1973
8-12
requirements. The GPU system requires the generating capacity of Oyster
Creek to meet the 20% reserve margin being required of all utilities in
the regional power pool. MAAC requires Oyster Creek to satisfy FPC
reliability requirements.
8.2
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC EFFECTS
Operating the station affects the local region in a very direct manner.
It has some effect, through the use of electricity generated at the sta-
tion, on the entire region of the country. This subsection will discuss
only the social and economic effects of station operation on the local
region. Subsection 8.3 will discuss the consequences of power availabil-
ity on a regional basis.
8.2.1 Employment
The station has a permanent operating staff averaging 100 people with an
annual payroll of $1.4 million. Since the average size family is 3.17
people in the State of New Jersey, an estimated 317 people receive their
basic support from the station operation. Another $1.3 million is paid
for wages and services of outside contractors. Thus a total of
$2.7 million/yr is expended as a result of station operation.
8.2.2 Education
Nearly $1.4 million has been spent on education and training of staff per-
gonnel. In addition, about 285 people visit the station each year for tech-
nical discussions with the operating staff. The applicant estimates that
about 25 lectures are given each year by the operating staff and that about
20 people attend each lecture.
8.2.3
Taxes
During 1971, station operation resulted in the applicant's paying Federal,
State and local taxes. Real estate taxes at the local level for land and
buildings were paid at the rate of $1.94/$1,000 of assessed evaluation in
1971. Taxes paid in Lacey and Ocean Townships totaled $42,429, about 6%
of the total taxes collected in those townships. 6
Taxes were paid to the State of New Jersey in three tax categories. A
gross receipts tax of 7.5% was levied against the taxable sales revenues
of $83.04 million applicable to the station, totalling $6.2 million in
taxes. A franchise tax applicable to transmission lines located on pub-
lic highways amounted to 5% of the taxable sales revenue. That tax is
8-13
applied only to the 70.2039% of the GPU lines located in New Jersey. Sta-
tion operation accounted for $2.9 million of that tax. A surtax was lev-
ied at the rate of 12.5% of the combined gross tax receipts and franchise
tax to yield another $1.1 million in taxes. Thus the State taxes derived
from the station totalled $10.2 million in 19 70.
Although Federal income tax is applicable to profits received from station
operation, the GPU subsidiaries file a joint return. In 1971, the appli-
cant received a tax credit of $408,496 from the Federal government. If
the station were taken as a separate entity, there would be a $2.6 million
a
payment to the Federal government, estimated by the applicant (Ref 2,
p. 11.1-7).
8.2.4
Recreation
The applicant estimates an increase in fishing activity along the canal
of 2300 man-days (Ref 2, p. 11.1-12). Assuming each visit lasts 1.5 hr,
there are 9 200 visit days/yr. The Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife
7
estimates that each individual spends $7.02/day while fishing; a return
of nearly $65,000 to the local area resulting from fishing. The $7.02/day
figure includes transportation, tackle, auxiliary equipment, lodging,
licenses and other significant expenses. The full value of a recreation
man-day considerably exceeds $7.02 since, if asked, a sport fisherman
would state some value for the time he spends on fishing trips and pre-
parations for them.
8.2.5
Research
During plant construction, $414,000 was spent on environmental studies of
the surrounding environs. At the present time $27,000/yr is being spent
for radiation surveys and meteorology (Ref 2, p. 11.1-8).
>
.
8.3
CONSEQUENCES OF POWER AVAILABILITY
Electricity is used in homes, offices, schools and factories which support
additional jobs and produce goods further adding to the economy.
In 1971, the station generated 3.825 x 109 kW-hr. Table 8.5 presents rev-
x
enues received by the two GPU New Jersey subsidiaries attributed directly
to the operation of the station.
8
The total operating revenues of the
applicant's system were $140 million, including $83 million from the sta-
tion. Thus 59.3% of the applicant's revenue was realized from station
operation. In terms of the two subsidiaries, station revenue was 43% of
the total. In terms of GPU, station revenue was 16% of the total.
8-14
TABLE 8.5
IN COME FROM SALE OF POWER GENERATED
AT OYSTER CREEK DURING 1971 8
Total
Amount Used
(MW-hr)
Average
Sale Cost
(c/kw-hr)
Total
Revenue Realized
($ millions)
Customer
Residential
1,543,921
2.65
40.91
Commercial
919,580
2.51
23.08
Industrial
1,240,932
1.32
16.38
All Others
120,507
2.21
2.67
Total
(All Users)
3,825,000
2.17
83.04
In 1971, 507,013 residential customers bought 3.528 x 109 kW-hr from the
New Jersey subsidiaries. Using the 3.17 persons per household figure, the
station met the power requirements of about 700,000 people.
8.4
UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The present operation of the station results in a number of unavoidable
adverse effects upon the land and within the water resources in the
vicinity.
Transmission line corridors have an adverse aesthetic impact, as viewed
from the parkway and three local highways. About 75 acres of cedar swamp
forest was lost along the transmission line right-of-way. Some 290 acres
of spoils and cleared areas on the site will remain denuded for many
years, although they are not very noticeable from viewpoints at ground
level. Wildlife habitat was reduced 25 acres now occupied by station
structures. The eroded canal banks are somewhat unsightly, and continuing
erosion contributes to the need for redredging about every 4 years.
Redredging the canal and related corrective actions will cause a tempo-
rary increase in suspended solids, adversely affecting the local
aquatic fauna.
>
Canal construction has resulted in a loss of 45 acres of saltmarsh repre-
senting a loss of 48 tons/yr of primary productivity to an ecosystem that
8-15
is utilized by approximately 75 species of marine fish. Spoils from
redredging may cause the loss of additional marsh if not properly controlled.
In addition about 80 acres of freshwater marshland were lost.
Current and salinity changes in the lower reaches of Oyster Creek and
South Branch Forked River eliminated areas used by many marine organisms
and anadromous fish for spawning and nursery activities. Available data
are insufficient for estimating the size of the loss.
Mortality caused by impingement and subsequent passage into the heated
effluent canal results in an annual estimated loss of approximately
32,000 blue crabs and 24,000 winter flounder, a significant loss to an
area heavily utilized for sport fishing.
Passage through the steam condensers causes a loss of phytoplankton that
cannot be quantified with existing data. In addition, about 150 tons/yr
of zooplankton and 150 million fish eggs/yr are lost due to passage
through the condensers.
Temperature plume effects in the bay may eliminate about 5000 lbs/yr of
fish production or, if all is converted to commercial fish, some 6% of
the annual commercial catch. Plume effects may also result in the loss of
ben thic fauna, but available data are not sufficient for a quantitative
estimate. Periodic winter kills of fish accustomed to warm temperatures
will occur during station shutdown if the resulting continued flow of
circulators is permitted to cause sudden temperature drops or the occur-
rence of temperatures not normally experienced by the fish.
8.5
SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY
On a scale of time reaching into the future through several generations,
the life span of the station would be considered a short-term use of the
natural resources of land and water. The resource, which will have been
dedicated exclusively to the production of electrical power during the
anticipated life span of the station, will have been the land itself and
the uranium consumed. No significant commitment of water for consumptive
use will have been made. Some deterioration of the quality of water in
the bay is attributable to station effluents, as discussed in Section 5.
>
Approximately 50 acres of the site is committed to the production of elec-
trical energy for the next 30 to 40 years. Most of the site retains its
original biological productivity, modified by the restrictive nature of
an industrial operation. Some areas were shifted to aquatic environments
when the canal was built. About 350 acres was denuded or covered with
dredge spoils, requiring perhaps 50 to 100 years for natural restoration to
the extent and kind of vegetation originally present. Possibly the dredge
spoil areas never will support the former kind of vegetation. At some
8-16
Many
future date, the station will have become obsolete and be retired.
of the disturbances of the environment will cease when the station will have
been shut down, and a rebalancing of the biota will have occurred.
Thus,
the "trade-off" between production of electricity and most small changes
in the local environment discussed in Section 5 is reversible. Recent
experience with other experimental and developmental nuclear plants
demonstrated the feasibility of decommissioning and dismantling such
plants sufficiently to restore the sites to their former uses. The degree
of dismantlement, as with most abandoned industrial plants, will take into
account the intended new use of the site and a balance among health and
safety considerations, salvage values, and environmental impact.
The AEC's current regulations contemplate detailed consideration of
decommissioning near the end of a reactor's useful life. The licensee
will initiate such consideration by preparing a proposed decommissioning
plan which will be submitted to the AEC for review. The licensee will
be required to comply with AEC regulations then in effect and decomiss-
ioning of the facility may not commence without AEC authorization.
To date, experience with decommissioning civilian nuclear power reactors
is limited to six facilities which have been shut down or dismantled:
Hallam Nuclear Power Facility, Carolina Virginia Tube Reactor (CVTR),
Boiling Nuclear Superheater (BONUS) Power Station, Pathfinder Reactor,
Piqua Reactor, and the Elk River Reactor.
>
There are three alternatives which can be and have been used in the decom-
missioning of reactors: (1) Remove the fuel (possibly followed by decon-
tamination procedures), seal and cap the pipes, and establish an exclusion
area around the facility; the Piqua decommissioning operation was typical
of that approach; (2) in addition to the steps outlined in (1), remove
the superstructure and encase in concrete all radioactive portions which
remain above ground; the Hallam decommissioning operation was of that
type; (3) remove the fuel, all superstructure, the reactor vessel and
all contaminated equipment and facilities, and finally, fill all cavities
with clean rubble topped with earth to grade level; that procedure is
being applied in decommissioning the Elk River Reactor. Alternative
decommissioning procedures (1) and (2) would require long-term surveil-
lance of the reactor site. After a final check to assure that all reactor-
produced radioactivity will have been removed, alternative (3) would not
require any subsequent surveillance. Possible effects of erosion or
flooding will be included in those considerations.
The applicant estimated the cost of permanently shutting down the station
after 30 years' operation at $4,635,375 to $25,215,125, on a 1972 cost
basis. The minimum cost is based upon the assumptions that other nuclear
power stations will have been operating on the site and that the present
station's operating license will be changed, upon decommissioning, to a
8-17
"possession only" license. Moreover, no annual cost is shown for main-
taining the shut down station in a safe condition because the applicant
plans to assign such cost to the station(s) then operating. The maximum
cost assumes all structures will be leyelled to grade and no onsite burial
of radioactive materials, thus requiring no annual surveillance cost. The
applicant provided a cost breakdown for numerous aspects of decommis-
sioning under both the minimum and the maximum cost preliminary plans
(Ref 2, Appendix C, Response F19). If the minimum cost plan eventually
were to be pursued, any anticipated groundwater effects from radionu-
clides in entombed plant components readily can be specified.
.
Returning the site to its original condition was not included. The value
of the 25 acres or so thus made available for other uses probably would
not justify the added expense. Analysis of dismantling cost experience
to date indicates that an amount equal to 10-15% of the original construc-
tion cost (perhaps $12 million) would be required to accomplish such
restoration at the Oyster Creek site.
In benefit-cost considerations, future decommissioning costs should be
discounted to obtain their present worth. At a discount rate of 8.75%/yr
without escalation for 30 years of operation, costs incurred at the end
of that operating period would be divided by 10.5 to determine their
present worth. Including escalation would give a somewhate smaller divisor.
Thus, even if the station area were to be restored to its original condition,
the present worth of the future costs involved would be in the range of 3%
to 7% of the original construction cost assuming decommissioning costs may
escalate at a 3%/year. Including decommissioning costs would not alter
any other conclusions of the benefit-cost analysis, Section 10.
The staff concludes that the benefits derived from a somewhat modified
station operation in serving the electrical needs of the area will out-
weigh the short-term uses of the environment in its vicinity.
8.6
IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES
Numerous resources are involved in construction and operation of the
station. Resources include the land upon which the facility is located,
the materials and chemicals used to construct and maintain the station,
fuel used to operate the station, capital and human talent, skill, and
labor.
Major resources to be committed irreversibly and irretrievably due to the
operation of the station are essentially the land (during the life of the
station) and the uranium consumed by the reactor. Only that portion of
the nuclear fuel which is burned up or not recovered in reprocessing is
irretrievably lost to other uses. That will amount to about 11.5 metric
tons of uranium-235 assuming a 30-year life-time for the station and taking
8-18
>
no credit for the amount of fissionable plutionium produced (Ref 2,
Appendix C, Response F10). Most other resources are left either undis-
turbed, or committed only temporarily during construction or during the
life of the station, and are not irreversibly or irretrievably lost.
Of the land used for plant buildings, only the small portion beneath the
reactor, control room radwaste and the turbine-generator buildings appears
to be irreversibly committed. Also, some components of the facility such
as large underground concrete foundations and certain equipment are, in
essence, irretrievable due to practical aspects of reclamation and/or
radioactive decontamination. The degree of dismantlement of the station,
as previously noted, will be determined by the intended future use of the
site, which will involve a balance of health and safety considerations,
salvage values, and environmental effects.
The use of the environment (air, water, land) by the station does not
represent significant irreversible or irretrievable resource commitments,
but rather a relatively short-term investment. The biota of the region
have been studied, and the impact of the station is identified in
Sections 4 and 5. In essence, the significant short-term annual loss
consists of an estimated 24,000 winter flounder and 32,000 crabs impinged
on intake screens, 150 tons of zooplankton including 150,000,000 fish
eggs and 100,000,000 fish larvae by the condensers, up to 5000 lb of fish
production from the thermal plume in the bay, and an unknown amount of
benthic fauna from the plume.
Should an unanticipated, further significant detrimental effect to any
of the aquatic biotic communities appear, the required monitoring pro-
grams would detect it, and corrective measures would then be taken by
the applicant.
Irretrievable wildlife resources lost annually are associated with the
approximately 50 acres of land committed to power production. The land
however was not in its natural state at the time the applicant took pos-
session and the loss of wildlife habitat cannot be attributed entirely
to the station. The conversion of about 40 acres of saltwater marsh and
80 acres of freshwater swamp to spoil areas represents irreversible loss
of those habitats but creation of an equal amount, though of less value,
of terrestrial habitat. About 15 acres of land will be required for main-
tenance of the station when decommissioned.
The staff concludes that the irreversible and irretrievable commitments are
acceptable when compared with the benefits gained.
8-19
REFERENCES
1.
Mid-Atlantic Area Council, Report to Federal Power Commission under
Order No. 383-2, Docket No. R-362, 1972.
2.
.
Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Oyster Creek Nuclear Gener-
ating Station, Environmental Report, March 6, 1972, Amendment 68 to
the "Application for Construction Permit and Operating License,"
Docket No. 50-219, March 26, 1964.
3.
Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Forked River Nuclear Station
Unit 1 Environmental Report Construction Permit Stage, January 21,
Docket No. 50-363, 1972.
4.
.
General Public Utilities Corporation, Annual Report 1971, In letter from
Jersey Central Power and Light Company to AEC, Docket No. 50-219,
April 5, 1972.
5.
O
U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States,
92nd Edition, Washington, D.C. 1971.
6.
Ocean County Board of Taxation, Abstract of Ratables, Toms River, NJ,
1972.
7.
.
1970 National Survey of Fishing and Hunting, Bureau of Sport Fisheries
and Wildlife, U.S. Dept. of Interior, 1971.
8.
Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Annual Report 1971, In JCPL
letter to AEC. Docket No. 50–219, April 4, 1972.
9-1
9.0
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT
9.1
ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES AND SITES
The discussion of alternative energy sources considers alternatives not
requiring new generating capacity and those that do require new generat-
ing capacity. Finally, alternative station sites are discussed.
9.1.1
Alternatives Not Requiring the Creation of New Generating Capacity
Plants may be operated beyond scheduled retirement to eliminate the need
to create new generating capacity. Within GPU, current plans call for
the retirement of 11 units with a total installed summer capacity of
246 MWe between now and 1981.1 Of that capacity, Saxton 2 and 3 and
Williamsburg 1 and 5, with a combined summer capacity of 84 Mwe, will be
removed in the second quarter of 1974. Eyler 5,6, and 7, having a total
summer capacity of 54 Mwe, and Crawford 1-4, with a summer capacity of
108 Mwe, will be retired in the fourth quarter of 1976. In the MAAC
region, 1604 MWe of installed capacity will be retired prior to 1981.
1
A list of the plants that will be retired is shown in Table 9.1 The tab-
ulation shows the plants being retired in 1972 and 1973 have a total
installed capacity exceeding the Oyster Creek output. The effect of
keeping those plants running and shutting down Oyster Creek will be dis-
cussed in the following paragraphs. Since information was not available
on the MAAC plants, available information on GPU plants is used as rep-
resentative of MAAC economics, heat rate, and emissions.
In terms of economics, the applicant provided information on GPU plants
being retired from its system during 1972-1981. Their performance char-
acteristics during 1971 are shown in Table 9.2 (Ref 2, Appendix C,
Response F11). Also shown are the characteristics of Oyster Creek (Ref 2.
Appendix C, Response B7) and combined characteristics of all the fossil
plants in GPU (Ref 2, p. 8.2-5). The power cost for the Williamsburg
plant probably is representative of the older plants when running at high-
use factors. The heat rate for low-use factors usually is higher than
for high-use factors, because of spinning reserve needs and frequent
load adjustments.
The effect of operating the marginal plants does not end with economics.
Since the heat rate of the older plants represented by Williamsburg aver-
ages 14,349 Btu/kw-hr, 2610 MWt must be generated to produce 620 MWe.
Oyster Creek generates 1930 MWt. The difference of 680 MWt must be
absorbed by the environment. In addition, the son, SO and particulate
S02
X
9-2
TABLE 9.1
RETIREMENT PLANS WITHIN MAAC FROM 1972-19811
Summer
Installed
Capacity
(MWe)
Cumulative
Total Capacity
Retired
(MWe)
Retirement
Date
(Quarter-Year)
(a)
Utility
Plant Name
PS
30
46
323
PEC
PEC
PP&L
PS
PP&L
DP&L
PEC
DFC
PS
PEC
PFC
PEC
ACEC
GPU
GPU
PS
ACEC
PS
GPU
GPU
ACEG
PEC
PEC
Essex 6
Delaware 6
Barbadoes 1
Hoffwood 15-16
Kearny 1-6
Stanton 1-4
Vienna 1-4
Chester 1-4
Delaware 2,4,5
Essex 2,3
Richmond 10, 11
Schuylkill 5,8
Peach Bottom 1
Missouri Ave 7
Saxton 2,3
Williamsburg 1,5
Burlington 1-4
Missouri Ave 6
Essex 4,5,7
Crawford 1-4
Eyler 5,6,7
Deepwater 3,4
Richmond 12
Chester 5,6
30
16
21
27
100
99
30
120
78
54
73
43
40
31
48
36
45
29
112
108
54
106
160
144
lst-72
2nd-72
4th-72
4th-72
4th-72
4th-72
4th-72
4th-73
4th-73
4th-73
4th-73
4th-73
4th-73
lst-74
2nd-74
2nd-74
4th-74
1st-75
4th-75
4th-76
4th-76
1st-78
2nd-78
4th-80
731
762
846
891
920
1032
1194
1300
1460
1604
(a) ACEG = Atlantic City Electric Company
DP&L = Delmarva Power & Light Company
GPU - General Public Utilities Corporation
PP&L = Pennsylvania Power & Light Company
PEC Philadelphia Electric Company
PS = Public Services Electric & Gas Company
9-3
TABLE 9.2
PLANT CHARACTERISTICS FOR GPU PLANTS BEING RETIRED THROUGH 1976
(Oyster Creek, and all GPU Fossil Plants)
(a)
Combined
Characteristics
of
Four Stations
Oyster
Creek
Average for
All GPU
Fossil Plants
Plant Name
Eyler
Crawford
Saxton
Williamburg
Number of Turbo
Generator Units
3
4
2
2
11
1
96
Installed Capacity (MWe)
84.0
116.7
39.1
30.0
269.8
620
4,606
Year Installed
1919-41
1924-47
1923-26
1916-44
1916-47
1969
1916-71
Fuel
Oil
Coal/Oil
Coal
Coal
Coal/Oil
Nuclear
Coal/0il
1971 Average
Use Factor %
13.14
27.16
16.01
67.78
25.70
70.43
50.24
Average Heat Rate
Btu/kw-hr
19,670
16,357
28,638
14,349
18,945
10,350
10,865
Average 1971 Fuel Cost
¢/106 Btu
65.35
61.63
42.12
33.64
48.34
12.56
44.0
Average Energy Cost
(Mills/kw-hr)
Fuel Cost
12.86
10.08
12.06
4.83
9.16
1.30
4.79
Operation and Maintenance
Cost
11.28
5.15
14.54
4.91
6.90
.73
1.70
Total Production Cost
24.14
15.23
26.60
9.74
16.06
2.03
6.49
(a) Ref. 3 Appendix C, Response F-11
9-4
discharges must be based on a 2610 MWt plant instead of an efficient coal
or oil fired plant with a total heat rate below that of Oyster Creek.
Table 9.3 shows the releases from the older plants and the average from
GPU, assuming the releases and MWt levels are proportional (Ref 2,
p. 8.2-5).
Also shown for comparison are the EPA standards for new plants,
TABLE 9.3
STACK DISCHARGES FROM A FOSSIL PLANT WITH A RATING OF 620 MWe
EPA Standards F96), 3
GPU
older Units
(Metric tons/yr)
(a)
GPU
Average Discharges
(Metric tons/yr)
Oil-Fired Plants
(Metric tons/yr)
Release
SO2
26,500
20,000
14,000
NOX
5,300
4,000
5,200
х
Particulates
2,100
1,600
1,700
Ash
14,000
(a) Ref 3, p. 8.2-5
.
(b) 152,000 Btu/gal oil, 0.85% sulfur and 1.5% ash
assuming 152,000 Btu/gal oil having 0.85% sulfur and 1.5% ash. The GPU
average is acceptable except for so2 which is 40% above the EPA standard.
However, operating the older plants would result in exceeding all EPA
standards, a situation that is unacceptable if it can be avoided without
creating worse problems.
9.1.2
Alternatives Requiring the Creation of New Capacity
In Subsection 8.1, the requirement for Oyster Creek power was demonstrated.
The previous subsection shows that the station could not be replaced by
deferring retirements of old plants until late 1973. Table 9.3 shows that
the old plants do not meet EPA standards for pollutant releases from
new plants.
In this subsection, the alternatives requiring the creation of new gen-
eration capacity will be discussed. About 3 years are needed to replace
the installed capacity of Oyster Creek with combustion turbines, 5 years
9-5
1
with an oil or coal plant and 7 years with a nuclear plant. Those are
the alternatives, since satisfactory base load hydroelectric sites are
not available. 24
The bonds and stock sold to raise the capital for Oyster Creek still have
to be paid off, thus the costs for alternatives must include the Oyster
Creek capital expenses.
Table 9.4 summarizes the costs for alternatives
which could replace Oyster Creek (Ref 2, Appendix C, Response F2), and
Table 9.5 their emissions (Ref 2, Appendix C, Response B7). Since the
applicant plans on 13,000 Btu/1b coal, emissions would be lower.
.
The coal plant location was assumed at Oyster Creek. Therefore the
applicant's transmission cost was not used. A value of $0.816/106 Btu
was used as the fuel cost (Ref 2, Appendix C, Response F1). The reason
for not using the mine mouth site data provided by the applicant is based
on its stated requirement that more generating capacity is needed in New
Jersey to insure system reliability.
In the cost analysis on the bottom of Table 9.4, a replacement power
cost of 6.1 mills/kw-hr was used for GPU, based on the 7.7 mills/kw-hr
reported production cost.' From that cost, a 2.2 mills/kw-hr cost of
not operating Oyster Creek was subtracted to obtain 5.5 mills/kw-hr, which
was escalated 5%/yr to obtain the 6.1 mills/kw-hr figure for 1973. That
escalation factor was used throughout the period required to start up the
various alternative plants. To obtain the present worth of the replace-
ment power, an effective discount rate of 1.0875/1.05 was used. Dis-
mantling costs, which could total $25 million, have to be experienced soon
after Oyster Creek is shut down. Those costs are not shown in the analy-
sis summarized in Table 9.4.
Based on the Table 9.4 comparison none of the alternatives appears to be
economically viable. The combined cycle plant has the most favorable cost
of the alternatives mainly because less replacement power is needed. The
applicant states and staff concurs that combined cycle plants are not
designed for base loading (Ref 2, p. 8.2-12). For that reason the oil-
fired plant (the next most viable fossil power source) will be carried
through the benefit-cost section for comparison purposes.
9.1.3 Alternative Sites
The applicant considered several other sites. Some were eliminated because
they were too close to metropolitan areas. Others, such as the Salem site,
in southern New Jersey, were eliminated from consideration because the
site offered no advantabe over the Oyster Creek site already owned by the
applicant. A complete site selection analysis by today's standards was
not made.
9-6
TABLE 9.4
COSTS OF PRODUCING POWER FROM ALTERNATIVE SOURCES
ces(a)
Oyster
Creek
Combined
Cycle
Plant Characteristic
Nuclear
Coal
Oil
Startup Date
1969
1980
1978
1978
1976
Capacity, MWe
620
620
620
620
620
Capacity, MWt
1930
1930
1660
1660
1900
Total Investmentbat
Time of Startup
90
607(c)
413(c) 349 (c)
278(c)
Desired Return on
Investment (%/yr)
13.5
13.5
13.25
13.25
13.0
Annual Retust on
Investment
12
82
55
46
36
Annual Operation, Main-
tenants
enance and Insurance
Cost
(b)
Annual Fuel Costs
2.4
3.1
2.9
2.2.
3.9
5.6
5.9
34.0
37.8
40.4
Total Annual Costs
For The First, Year
Of Operation
(b)
Total 1973 Costs
Ebyea
20
91
92
86
80
20.5
89
84
77
74
Cost of Replacement Power
at 6.1 mills (ky-hr, esca-
lation 5%/yr
215
146
146
83
Present Worth of Replace-
ment Power during Con-
struction Using, 8.75%
%
Discount Rate
-
156
116
116
73
(a) Ref 2, Appendix C, Response F2
(b) In $ millions
(c) Includes Oyster Creek
9-7
TABLE 9.5
NONRADIOACTIVE RELEASES TO THE ATMOSPHERE FROM
ALTERNATIVE POWER SOURCES
Material
Released
Oil-fired Discharges
(metric tons/yr)
Coal-fired Discharges
(metric tons/yr)
268,3
Nuclear Discharge)
(metric tons/yr)
SO2
14,000
21,000
13
NO
х
5,100
12,000
33
Particulates
1,700
1,700
2.5
Ash
14,000
240,000
13
(a) 152,000 Btu/gal oil, 0.85% sulfur, 1.5% ash
(b) 10,000 Btu/1b coal, 14% ash
(c) (Ref 2, Appendix C, Response B7).
The requirement for an eastern site appears valid. Almost 37% of the GPU
load is in New Jersey.
4
Of GPU's installed capacity of 5226 Mwe, only
1
1759 Mwe, or 34%, are in New Jersey, including Oyster Creek. If a west-
ern site had been selected, the 620 MWe provided by Oyster Creek would
have to be transported to an eastern load.
If selecting an alternative site were required, the costs shown for the
several alternative types of power plants are applicable for any
alternative site in New Jersey. Alternative sites would impose construc-
tion impacts in addition to those already experienced at Oyster Creek.
Siting the plant at an alternative site is not considered by the staff
to be a viable alternative at this time.
9.2
ALTERNATIVE PLANT DESIGNS
This subsection will look first at alternative methods of cooling the
present station. That will be followed by a consideration of alternative
chemical, biocide and radwaste treatment systems. Finally alternative
routes for the transmission corridor will be discussed.
9-8
)
9.2.1 Alternative Cooling Systems
Any alternative cooling system must dispose of 4.62 x 109 Btu/hr of heat
and provide 460,000 gpm (1020 cfs) of water to the steam condensers.
Each alternative will be described and its environmental impact presented.
The impact will be discussed first in terms of economics then in terms of
the effects on land, water and air quality in the station environs.
Finally the effects on the local community will be analyzed. The more
favorable alternatives will be carried through the benefit-cost section.
The alternatives to be discussed include running the dilution pumps,
constructing an ocean intake and discharge system, and installing cooling
towers or ponds. The use of several water makeup sources, for the wet
cooling tower alternatives, and alternative intake structures also will
be discussed.
9.2.1.1 Dilution
At the present time, three 800 hp dilution pumps, each with a capacity of
260,000 gpm (578 cfs) have been installed to augment the flow in the intake
and discharge canals. The applicant estimates that the total cost of the
dilution system is $1.6 million (Ref 2, p. 11.2-15).
The dilution alternative requires running the dilution pumps as necessary
to maintain the water temperature in the discharge canal, measured at the
U. S. Route 9 bridge, at or below 87°F. Under rare circumstances maintaining
the temperature below 87°F will be impossible, even with all dilution pumps
running. Under such .circumstances, operating at reduced power would be
required to prevent the discharge temperature from exceeding 87°F.
purposes of our cost analysis, derating of the station was assumed for 49
full-power hr/yr.
In order to maintain a discharge temperature below 87°F, the applicant
estimates that all three pumps would have to be run annually for 28 days,
two pumps for 33 days, and one pump for 50 days (Ref 2, Appendix C,
Response A2). In terms of power requirements, that is equivalent to
running one pump for 4800 hours. Since each pump is rated at 800 hp,
600 kW would be required for each hour of operation. The average pro-
duction cost differential between alternative power sources and Oyster
Creek is 6.1 mills/kw-hr (Subsection 9.1.2). Thus, additional system
9-9
.
annual fueling costs of $17,500 would result because of the increased
operation of the dilution pumps. In addition, for 49 full-power hours,
the plant would have to be shut down to meet the discharge temperature
limit. Thus, under the assumptions of this cost analysis, $185,320
would be spent annually to produce power at other plants while Oyster
Creek is derated.
Station maintenance costs are not expected to increase as a result of the
increased time the dilution pumps would be run. The applicant estimates
that about $100,000/yr is currently being spent on canal maintenance
(Ref 2, Appendix C, Response F16). Running the dilution pumps the equiva-
lent of one pump for 4800 hours at 260,000 gpm would represent a total
additional flow of 75 billion gal/yr. The condenser system discharges
460,000 gpm (1020 cfs) for 7000 hr/yr or 193 billion gal/yr. Thus running
the dilution pumps would result in a 40% increase in average canal flow
rate and an approximate proportional increase in the erosion rate. For
that reason bulkheading the intake and discharge canal west of U.S. Route 9
would be required. The cost of such lining is estimated by the applicant
to be $596,000. The lining would reduce yearly erosion rate by 75% (Ref 2,
Appendix C, Response F16), cancelling any erosion increase resulting from
the increased use of dilution pumps.
Approximately 3 acres of land would be temporarily disturbed as a result
of the canal improvements to reduce silting. That would have an insignifi-
ct on the terrestrial biota since the available wildlife habitat
would not be significantly reduced.
As a result of the augmented flow, additional aquatic biota could be
entrained in the additional cooling canal flow from the bay. However,
the additional flow would pass through the dilution pumps designed to
minimize damage to entrapped aquatic biota. Thus, augmented flow would
not cause significant increased damage as a result of fish entrapment.
By maintaining the discharge temperature below 87°F, some adverse envi-
ronmental effects can be reduced. Dilution pumping to maintain canal
temperatures below 87°F would eliminate or greatly reduce winter flounder
and zooplankton mortalities during the warmer months. The upper toler-
ance level for those organisms is approximately 87°F and maintenance of
lower temperatures should decrease the mortality rate nearly to zero.
In addition, bay regions exposed to temperatures above 87°F are not suit-
able habitats for most of the aquatic biota in the bay. The fish pro-
ductivity loss of up to 5000 lb/yr (Subsection 5.5.2.4) could be avoided
if the bay temperature could be kept below 87°F at all times.
9-10
The applicant is currently studying methods of reducing fish kills
which have been experienced following sudden winter shutdowns (Ref 2,
Appendix C, Response E7). Dilution pumping programmed automatically
could be used in the fall to reduce the temperature differential between
the canal and the bay, encouraging the menhaden to follow their natural
tendency to migrate south.
Running the dilution pumps would not influence significantly the present
effects of station operation on the atmosphere. The amounts of radionu-
clides and chemicals released would be unchanged. However, an additional
3 million kW-hr would have to be generated to run the dilution pumps and
another 29 million kW-hr generated should the station have to be derated
to avoid release of water above 90°F. Assuming the 32 million kW-hr
would be generated by oil-fired plants, Table 9.6, gives the additional
quantities of chemicals released to the atmosphere at some other electrical
generating station.
>
TABLE 9.6
ADDITIONAL RELEASES TO ATMOSPHERE FROM RUNNING DILUTION
PUMPS TO MINIMIZE DISCHARGE CANAL TEMPERATURES
Product
3
Metric tons/yr
SO
502
90
NO
х
40
Particulates
10
Ash
90
In terms of effects on the local community, running the dilution pumps
creates froth in the discharge canal which is a source of complaints
from area residents. While log booms have been only partially successful
in abating the foam, other foam abatement measures are available.
In terms of recreational impact, running the dilution pumps should
minimize the periods when excessively high temperatures occur in the
discharge canal, and thus fishing should be improved. The dilution pump
operation cannot be heard over the current background noise.
9-11
9.2.1.2
Ocean Intake and Discharge System
The system would consist of a large diameter pipe extending about
7.5 miles from the ocean across the barrier beach, up the existing
intake canal to the condenser intake and a companion pipe running out
the discharge side of the existing canal, across the barrier beach at
Island Beach State Park and extending some 2000 ft into the ocean. The
pipes, made of reinforced concrete, would be some 14 ft inside diameter
for the portion crossing the bay. The discharge side could neck down
to 12 ft inside diameter for the run into the ocean. The wall thickness
would be some 12 in. The design flow rate would be 460,000 gpm (1020 cfs).
The discharge would operate by using the existing circulating pump sys-
tem. The present fish and trash screens could also be used in the
alternative system. The applicant estimated an $83 million installed
cost for a discharge system for the proposed Forked River unit. 5 The staff
estimates a similar cost for constructing the dual ocean intake and discharge
system for Oyster Creek. The annual maintenance cost of the system is
expected to be the same as the cost of the present system.
The pumping requirement is estimated to be 4000 hp (or 3059 kW) for each
hour of station operation. The present system requires 4000 hp for nor-
mal operation. Thus, no increase in electrical generating requirements
is expected.
No information is available on ocean temperatures adjacent to the bay,
however they should be significantly lower than bay temperatures. Thus,
a net decrease in the station heat rate should be realized. The resulting
cost decrease was not included in the analysis. The costs of producing
electricity using the ocean cooling system are therefore conservatively,
estimated to be the same as those for current production.
In terms of land use, construction would disrupt approximately 300 acres
of land along the pipelines. Upon completion of pipeline construction,
the land could be allowed to revert to its original state within a few
years, assuming there are tree plantings in the disturbed areas.
Ocean intake and discharge of cooling water would reduce impingement
because of the decreased density of finfish in the coastal waters. The
long intake canal with high velocity would no longer be present, and
design modifications could reduce intake velocities at the intake
entrance. In addition, fewer organisms would be pumped through the
condenser because of the decreased densities of plankters that exist
in coastal waters. Table 9.7 gives an estimate of the organisms that
would be entrapped in the ocean cooling system.
9-12
TABLE 9.7
AQUATIC BIOTA ENTRAPPED AND KILLED
IN OCEAN INTAKE AND DISCHARGE SYSTEM
0
Very low in comparison to
existing system
Finfish Lost
Menhaden
Winter Flounder
Other Species
Crabs
Zooplankton
(chlorine and temperature)
Primary Productivity
(plume effects)
91 tons
0
Plume effects would be negligible because of the increased volume and
lower temperature of the water into which the effluent would empty.
Effects can be reduced further by high turbulence jet discharge nozzles.
With the same AT as in the existing case the increased exposure time during
transit to the ocean would cause a higher mortality rate due to heat than in
the existing case, but the increased mortality rate would be more than offset
by the decreased densities mentioned above. The chemical and radioactive
releases currently added to the bay would be discharged to the ocean.
Because of the lower density of aquatic biota in the ocean, the dose to
man from the radioactive discharges would be reduced accordingly. The
dose to man is estimated to be 0.06 man-rem/yr instead of the present
0.55 man-rem/yr.
.
In terms of atmospheric effects, the amounts of radioactivity, SO2, NOx
and particulates added to the air would be unchanged from the base case.
Since the heated water would be discharged several hundred feet off
shore, local atmospheric effects would occur away from shore.
Oyster Creek would possibly revert to a freshwater stream thus changing
the current biota distribution living in the discharge canal. The intake
and discharge system would eliminate the relatively good fishing currently
realized in the discharge canal. In terms of noise and aesthetics the
intake and discharge tubes would have an effect only during the construc-
tion phase.
The staff finds that the cost of replacing the existing cooling system
with an ocean intake and discharge system does not warrant the gains to
be expected.
9-13
9.2.1.3 Natural Draft Saltwater Cooling Tower
A hyperbolic natural-draft cooling tower is considered to be a viable
alternative cooling system. A single tower 400 ft high would be
adequate for a 23°F approach design. It could employ either salt or
freshwater makeup.
The applicant reported an analysis for a saltwater cooling tower. The
design could have nearly the same characteristics as that using fresh-
water makeup. More than 90% of the station waste heat load would be
dissipated by the tower and the remaining heat load would be discharged
to the canal. The tower would be designed to have an average evaporation
rate of 9000 gpm (20 cfs). A blow down flow rate of 18,000 gpm (40 cfs)
would be required to prevent excessive salt buildup in the system. Thus
27,000 gpm (60 cfs) would have to be withdrawn from the intake canal to
account for the blowdown and evaporation losses from the system (Ref 5,
Appendix B, Attachment 5).
The 27,000 gpm (60 cfs) withdrawal would be less than 6% of the present
flow rate with no dilution pumps running. The flow rate in the discharge
canal would be less than 4% of the present flow. The lower flow would
change the composition of the present cooling water from that which is
+99% bay water to a stream which might be as low as 80% bay water. The
remaining water would be made up from the flow of Forked River which is
essentially freshwater. In addition the dilution of the chemical and
radioactive wastes would be reduced by a factor of 25 or more, resulting
in a higher dose to man from fish caught in the discharge canal. The
dose to man would total 13 man-rem/yr instead of the present 0.55 man-rem/yr.
For that reason and also for the uncertainty in the effect of the lower
flows on the biological balance in the discharge canal, this alternative
includes running the dilution pumps to simulate a 460,000 gpm (1020 cfs)
flow in the intake canal.
One estimate of the installed cost of a saltwater tower is $13 million
with an annual maintenance cost of $20,000 (Ref 3, p. 11.2-15). The flow
across the condenser would remain at 460,000 gpm. However additional
pumping would be needed to raise the water part way up the cooling
tower. Additional pumps with an estimated installed rating of 5400 hp
would be needed. During operation they would reduce the net output of
the station 4 MW. A more severe consequence in going to a closed cooling
system would be the loss in station efficiency resulting from the change
in the temperature of the water used to condense steam at the back end
of the turbine. The average wet bulb temperature during the summer
at Oyster Creek is 67°F (Ref 5, p. 6-13). Using a cooling tower designed
for a 23°F approach results in an inlet temperature to the condensers
of 90°F, about 15°F above the average summer inlet temperature to the
condensers using the current design (Ref 2, p. 2.5-5). During the
summer typical once-through cooling systems operate with a back
pressure of approximately 2.0 in. of Hg(abs), corresponding to an
9-14
average condensing temperature of 100°F. If the condensing temperature
is raised another 15°F the back pressure increases to 3.5 in. of Hg(abs),
resulting in a loss of from 10 to 21 MWe for a 600 MWe turbine.
6
The
applicant estimates a 12 MWe loss at the higher condenser temperature
(Ref 2, Appendix C, Response A13). The applicant's figure will be used
in all the cooling tower analyses. Adding the pumping loss and the
efficiency loss together results in a net loss in station output of 16
Mwe. With this alternative the station would still operate at 1930 MWt,
with the same fueling costs. The lost capacity would have to be replaced
with additional installed capacity at $80/kW/yr instead of the replacement
cost of 6.1 mills/kw-hr used for other alternatives (Ref 2, Appendix C,
Response F8). Thus the capability to generate 16,000 kWe of electricity
would have to be installed elsewhere. Based on the $80/kW/yr figure
provided by the applicant, an additional cost of $1.28 million/yr would
be added to the generating costs for the system.
In terms of land use, less than 10 acres of land would be needed for the
cooling tower, making a very small effect on the land use within the site.
The use of saltwater in the cooling tower would add to the salt deposi-
tion rate to the land downwind from the cooling tower. The applicant
states that less than 0.005% of the salt associated with the cooling
water in the tower would be entrained in the air stream from the jet. The
increase in ground level concentration of salt was estimated to be less
than 10% of the natural sea-salt concentration for the site (Ref 6,
p. 4-131). The increase should have no measurable influence on the ter-
restrial biota.
Since 97% of the heat would be dissipated by evaporation, the heat load
on the bay would be greatly reduced. In addition, instead of drawing
460,000 gpm (1020 cfs) into the condenser system, only 27,000 gpm (60 cfs)
would be required. The amount of aquatic biota killed in the condenser
system would be reduced accordingly.
Quantity estimates of aquatic biota that would enter the inlet to the
cooling tower supply water appear in Table 9.8. Since all water in the
cooling tower loop would pass through the condenser, the death of all
entrapped biota is assumed. This alternative, if required, would have two
effects on the atmosphere. Since power would have to be generated at
other fossil locations, additional chemicals would be discharged to the
atmosphere. A total of 112 x 106 kW-hr (7000 hk x 16,000 kW) of electricity
would be lost from the system. Table 9.9 gives the quantities of additional
material that would be dissipated into the air, from a plant supplying the
lost power:
The releases are typical of an oil-fired plant meeting EPA
standards.
3
9-15
TABLE 9.8
AQUATIC BIOTA ENTRAPPED AND KILLED ANNUALLY BY INTAKE
SALTWATER COOLING TOWER SYSTEM
Finfish Lost
Winter Flounder
Other Species
Manhaden
1400
6000
0
Crabs
2000
Zooplankton
(chlorine and temperature)
50 tons
Primary Productivity
0
(plume effects)
TABLE 9.9
ADDITIONAL CHEMICAL RELEASES TO THE ATMOSPHERE RESULTING FROM
THE USE OF A SALTWATER COOLING TOWER
Product
Metric tons/yr3
SO2
330
120
NO
х
Particulates
40
Ash
330
9-16
The physical presence of the plume in the sky, along with the possibilities
of increased fogging and icing constitute the major local atmospheric envi-
ronmental impacts that will be considered relative to the operation of a
natural-draft cooling tower at Oyster Creek.
The visual impact of the plume is expected to exist locally most of the
year considering the high persistence of relatively high humidities indi-
genous to the coastal region. However, the plume usually would evaporate
completely before contacting the ground. Observations and theoretical
analyses indicate that plumes generally rise from a hundred to a few
thous and meters above their release points and dissipate within a few
miles or less, but infrequently plumes may extend downwind a distance as
great as 20-30 miles. 7-13
The plume, under certain restricted conditions,
could have a maximum width of up to 2 miles and a maximum depth of up to
1000 ft. Although the plume could infrequently reach the nearest air-
port 7 miles north, it should never interfere with normal operations.
Observations have shown that despite theoretical predictions to the con-
trary, natural-draft cooling tower plumes rarely, if ever, have been
observed to reach ground level. 14 Although the actual frequency of inter-
section of the plume and the ground is expected to be rare, the local
atmospheric potential for initiating ground fog as the result of natural
draft cooling tower operation has been calculated to be 2% based on the
frequencies of a saturation deficit of less than 0.1 gm/m3 in the absence
of ground fog.
15
The combined potential for both initiating and enhancing
ground fog is 14% based on hourly observations of fog at Atlantic City.
Minor precipitation attributable to cooling towers has been reported.
Precipitation initiation and production does not appear to be common,
although not enough is known to predict the exact interaction with nat-
ural precipitation processes. Ground icing from a 400 to 500 ft natural-
draft cooling tower plume is expected to occur very rarely, if at all.
Operating experience on other units indicates that icing from drift or
the condensed plume at ground level is not significant. In addition,
only a few hours per year of ground fog at the point of maximum impact
have been indicated by other studies and operating experience. Objects
which are high enough to be in the visible plume can expect some icing,
when temperatures are sufficiently low. The applicant has estimated
that the maximum icing potential on structures higher than 200-250 ft
would be 10 hr/yr for the 10° sector to the WSW of the cooling tower.
The placement of a cooling tower on the site would require the recalcu-
lation of the diffusion climatology with respect to stack releases of
9-17
radioactive gases, the result of the interaction of flow between the
tower and the stack. The staff assumes ground level releases instead
of elevated releases when there are significant flow obstructions nearby.
One possible solution would be to release the gases into the cooling tower.
The dose to man from artificial radioactivity would be at or below the
dose from the present releases, with proper design and location of the
tower.
The visual impact of a 400 x 400 ft hyperbolic cooling tower is signifi-
cant particularly in very flat regions such as southern New Jersey.
days of good visability, the tower could be seen for several miles. The
operation of the tower should not add significantly to the background
noise of the current operating station which is very quiet.
Considering the economic cost of replacing the present cooling system with
a natural draft salt-water cooling tower and the additional cost of annual
operation of the system, the staff does not see the expected environmental
benefits to warrant such a replacement.
9.2.1.4
Natural Draft Hyperbolic Cooling Tower
Using Toms River Makeup Water
The use of a freshwater makeup source for the cooling tower would elimi-
nate potential salt deposition and would result in simplified tower inter-
nals. A makeup supply of 13,500 gpm (30 cfs) was used as a requirement
for all freshwater towers. Based on the applicant's estimates for the
proposed Forked River station, the estimated cost of the pipeline from
Toms River is $11.25 million excluding the cost of damming Toms River and
the cost of impoundment for low flow periods (Ref 5, p. 6-15). The total
installed cost of the tower is estimated to be $9.1 million plus $10,000
for annual maintenance of the tower and pipeline. The electrical require-
ments and turbine penalties for using freshwater would be the same as
those previously described for the saltwater tower. Thus $1.28 million/yr
would have to be spent by the applicant to produce the additional elec-
tricity lost from his grid as a result of using a freshwater cooling tower.
The heat addition to the bay would be the same as that for the saltwater
tower and would be only 3% of the total heat discharged from present
operations. Since only a very small blowdown flow would occur from this
alternative, the chemical and radioactive wastes would not be diluted,
resulting in a higher chemical composition in the discharge canal and
also resulting in an increase in the radiation dose man receives from the
operation. The population could receive 70 man-rem/yr as a result of
using freshwater cooling towers with a 5500 gpm (12 cfs) blowdown rate.
If the dilution pumps are run to simulate present conditions, the dose
would be reduced to the present 0.55 man-rem/yr. The cost of simulating
that flow with the dilution pumps, using 6.1 mill/kw-hr electricity,
would be $44,000/yr. Pump maintenance would be part of the overall sta-
tion maintenance and therefore no additional costs would be incurred as
a result of running the pumps.
9-18
In terms of land use, the cooling tower and associated facilities would
occupy less than 10 acres. The land withdrawal would have a very small
effect on the terrestrial biota and wildlife. The land is currently
vacant and would not be used for another purpose during the station's
operating life. During construction of the 9.5-mile pipeline, less than
400 acres of land might be temporarily disturbed. The land could then
be allowed to revert nearly to its natural state within a few years,
assuming tree plantings in the disturbed areas.
The atmospheric effects of using freshwater are the same as those from
saltwater. Since additional electrical requirements would be the same as
for the saltwater tower, the chemical releases to the atmosphere also
would be the same. The effects on the community of using a natural draft
freshwater cooling tower would be the same as for the saltwater alterna-
tive. If the dilution pumps were not run the reduced flow in the dis-
charge canal could change the balance of aquatic biota and thus the suc-
cess of a fisherman. If the dilution pumps were run to simulate the
present system, without heat, the fisherman would probably observe no
change and perhaps even a slight improvement from the present operation.
This alternative would not result in any increase in the background noise
level. The visual impact of the freshwater tower would be about the same
as that of the saltwater tower . It would be very noticeable but not
necessarily displeasing to the eye.
Available data are insufficient to evaluate the detrimental effects upon
freshwater aquatic life as a result of the impoundment, the intake struc-
ture, and the significant stream flow diversion.
9.2.1.5
Natural Draft Hyperbolic Cooling Tower With Sewage Plant
Effluent Makeup Water
A large regional sewage treatment plant has been proposed for the Toms
River area toward the end of the 1970 decade. The effluent could be
treated and piped to the station for cooling tower makeup water.
The total cost of the cooling tower is estimated to be $20.3 million and
the pipeline is similar to the estimate for the alternative, which con-
sidered using Toms River water. The maintenance costs and power costs
would be similar to those of the case using Toms River water. However,
additional chlorination would be required before the effluent could be
used for cooling. The additional water treatment is estimated to cost
$0.15/1000 gal or $850,000/yr (Ref 5, p. 6-20). The turbine penalties
9-19
and pumping requirements would be the same as those of the previous two
alternatives. Approximately $1.28 million/yr would have to be spent to
make up power losses in the system from this alternative. If the dilu-
tion pumps were run to minimize the concentration of wastes in the dis-
charge canal, another $44,000/yr in system cost increases would result.
An additional annual maintenance cost of $10,000 for the freshwater
cooling towers was charged to this alternative.
In terms of water use, sewage effluent would represent a cost to the
applicant but a benefit to the surrounding aquatic ecology.
As with the other alternatives, there would be a reduction in the heat
load on the bay by a factor of about 30. The amount of chemical wastes and
and radioactive wastes dumped in the bay would remain unchanged. Thus,
there would tend to be a concentration of waste in the discharge canal
if the dilution pumps were not run to simulate a large discharge flow.
The atmospheric effects of a freshwater cooling tower using sewage efflu-
ent would be the same as those for a fresh water cooling tower using Toms
River makeup water. The plume should have no effect on the terrestrial
biota if the plume should come in contact with the ground. The radioactive,
particulate and chemical discharges to the air would be the same as those
from the saltwater cooling tower.
The effects on the community of using this alternative would be the same
as those for previous cooling tower alternatives. If dilution flow were
not used some change in the fishing pressure in the discharge canal might
be observed. The operation should be quiet. A noticeable odor from the
use of sewage effluent should be present within the plume. The odor
would be similar to that sensed in chlorinated pools.
The environmental gains to be expected from replacing the present cooling
system with a natural draft hyperbolic cooling tower, using either Toms
River water or sewage plant effluent as makeup water, do not seem to the
staff to warrant the additional cost of installing and operating such a
replacement system.
9.2.1.6
Freshwater Lake Using Makeup From the Regional
Sewage Treatment Plant
Based upon studies performed by Johns Hopkins University, a 1.1 square
mile (704-acres) freshwater cooling lake is a possible alternative
station cooling system. 18-20 The lake would have a double vinyl liner
to prevent seepage.
Vertical vinyl curtains would be used to prevent
mixing and to provide a long flow channel. The lake could employ treated
sewage effluent in order to minimize the consumptive use of freshwater.
9-20
The lake area would first be cleared, excavated, and shaped by conven-
tional construction techniques. A 10 mm vinyl liner would be laid down
and covered with about 1 ft of sand for protection and to fix the liner
in place. A second liner could then be placed on top of the protective
sand barrier to decrease potential leakage.
A lined lake of that size has not yet been built and maintained. The
largest known lined lake is some 60 acres in size. While the cost of
construction of such a facility can be estimated, the operational and
maintenance costs cannot be judged based on known experience.
The estimated installed cost of the lined lake and associated equipment
is $26.1 million, plus $540,000 annually for maintenance and $17.3 mil-
lion for the pipeline and right-of-way from the regional sewage treatment
plant in Toms River to the site. Additional pumps estimated totally at
5300 hp would have to be installed. They would require 4 MW of power.
The additional use of power would add costs to the system at a rate of
$80/kw/yr.
In terms of land use the alternate would require about 700 acres. In
addition, another 300 acres of land along the estimated 9.5-mile supply
line to the plant would be disrupted temporarily during construction.
There would be some adverse effect upon the terrestrial biota due to the
large loss in acreage.
In terms of water use, the station uld utilize a sewage effluent con-
taining no aquatic biota resulting in no station entrapment lo ses. The
staff's opinion is that the effect of the reduction of freshwater makeup
to the bay would be very small. By using the cooling lake the heat load
on the bay would be reduced to about 3% of its present value. All other
releases to the bay would be unchanged. As with the previous alternatives
the dose to man resulting from the radioactive discharges would be signifi
cantly higher for the cooling lake options if dilution pumps were not run.
At a cost of $44,000/yr dilution pumps can be run during station operation
in order to simulate present operation and achieve the resultant large
dilution of radioactive and chemical discharges.
In terms of atmospheric effects, the use of a cooling lake would increase
the potential for localized fogging and icing during certain atmospheric
conditions. Steam fog would be formed when the water on the pond is suf-
ficiently warmer than the air over the water. Observations at existing
cooling ponds indicate that the fog initiated i3 "thin, wispy, and usually
does not penetrate inland more than 100 to 500 ft."
11 14
During natural
9-21
.
occurrences of widespread fog, the cooling lake might tend to intensify
the fog locally. Remoteness from roads and bridges would be required to
avoid the adverse effects of fogging and ice riming. The location of the
parkway would be an important consideration in the siting of a cooling
lake near the present site.
Other atmospheric effects would remain unchanged, compared to the base
case. The amount of released radionuclides, so,, NO
ΝΟ and particulates
would be similar to the releases from the cooling tower alternatives.
The effect of a cooling lake on the community can be expressed both in
terms of recreational impact and aesthetics. If the dilution pumps are
not run to simulate the current water characteristics in the discharge
canal, the fishing may become poorer. Under conditions of off-standard
operation, the use of sewage effluent may produce a noticable odor
downwind. Depending on its extent, the lake could be aesthetically dis-
pleasing. In terms of noise and attractiveness, the lake probably would
be no less aesthetically pleasing to the community than the present sta-
tion operation and would offer a good recreation potential.
Considering the initial estimated $43 million cost, the estimated 700 acres
of extra land, and the lack of operating and maintenance experience for
a lake anywhere near the size required, replacing the present system with
a lined freshwater lake using make up from the regional sewage treatment
plant does not seem to the staff to be a justifiable or desirable alterna-
tive when weighed against the environmental gains expected from such a
replacement.
9.2.1.7
Freshwater Spray Pond Using Makeup From the Regional
Sewage treatment Plant
A long, narrow spray pond is a possible coolant system alternative. A
pond 1.5 mile long, 200 ft wide, and 8 ft deep was considered. It would
employ powered floating spray modules. Each unit, essentially independent
of the others, would have a pump, motor and four spray nozzles. The units
considered are of recent development. The spray pattern would be some
40 ft in diameter and 20 ft high. For a pond designed with a 23°F approach,
some 270 spray units would be required. In order to limit spray plume
drift, the units would be designed to produce relatively large droplets
of some 0.25 in. in diameter. Documented operation shows existence of fog
and fine mist 300 to 500 ft downwind for winds in excess of 15 mph. For
that reason a buffer zone of 400 ft would appear justified.
.
The pond would have a double vinyl liner to minimize leakage. The pond
would be shaped, a vinyl liner laid down, a 1 ft sand cover would be put
in place, and a final liner laid down.
9-22
A number of similar ponds have been proposed and accepted for nuclear
power stations. Some will be added to existing stations. The modules
are being tested for saltwater use. For this station, with a 23°F
approach, the blowdown rate for the pool would be 18,000 gpm (40 cfs)
and the makeup rate would be 27,000 gpm.(60 cfs). Thus, some 9000 gpm
(20 cfs) of water would be evaporated. The parameters are identical to
those for the natural draft cooling tower as the two systems would per-
form in a similar manner.
.
One estimate of the installed cost of such a system, exclusive of the
makeup water pipeline is $8.6 million with $270,000 annually for main-
tenance, although that figure seems low in view of maintenance experience
to date. The costs were obtained by applying a scaling factor of 0.6 to
the applicant's Forked River cost estimates (Ref 5, p. 6-15).
If sewage
effluent were used, the cost of the pipeline would be an additional $9.6
million.
>
.
The cost of operating the system would be substantial. The spray pumps
and auxiliary equipment would total 21,700 hp or 16 MW of power. In
addition, the plant would lose 12 MWe of output capacity because of the
higher turbine back pressure. Using the $80/kW/yr system cost for lost
power (Ref 2, Appendix C, Response F8) results in an additional system
expense of $2.24 million/yr to generate the lost energy.
In terms of land use, the spray pond would require 200 acres. Thus the
effect on terrestrial biota would be intermediate between the present
operation and the alternative requiring a 700-acre lake. The effect
should be minor.
In terms of water use, the effect of using sewage effluent for cooling
instead of discharging it into the bay was discussed in Subsection
9.2.1.6. By using the spray pond, the heat load on the bay would be
reduced to 3% of its present base value. All other releases to the bay
would be unchanged. As with previous alternatives, if dilution pumps
are not run, the dose to man resulting from the radioactive discharges
would be 70 man-rem/yr, which is significantly above the 0.55 man-rem/yr
currently discharged. The lower dose would prevail if the dilution pumps
were run to simulate the current water conditions in the discharge canal.
As with previous alternatives, the cost of running the dilution pumps
would be $44,000/yr. In addition to reducing the radionuclide concen-
trations the chemical discharge concentrations would also be reduced from
their present level.
9-23
In terms of atmospheric effects, although a smaller area would be required,
the actual problems of the freshwater spray pond would be concentrated
compared to the previously discussed freshwater or effluent-fed cooling
lake. The excess energy would be dissipated in a smaller area and the
frequency and severity of effects can be expected to be greater. In
addition, the spray system would produce drift droplets predominantly
larger than normal fog droplets, adding considerably to the potential for
wetting and icing. The problem of the proximity of the parkway would be
much more critical. Up to 0.25 in. of rime ice at 1000 ft from a spray
cooling canal at Dresden, Illinois, was observed after a particularly
cold night. The riming was observed only on vertical surfaces, and no
ice was observed on a road 600 ft downwind.
14
The use of a spray pond does not influence other atmospheric plant releases.
However as a result of the loss in net electrical generating capacity,
additional s02, NO
so
and particulates would be released at other stations.
X
The releases would be about double those of Table 9.9. Radioactive releases
would be about double those of the base case.
>
O
In terms of effects on the community, not running the dilution pumps could
cause reversion to the original state of Oyster Creek. The area would
lose the relatively good fishing currently observed. There could be a
strong odor from the spray pond which could be aesthetically displeasing,
but that would not be ordinarily likely under the aerobic conditions
expected. In terms of noise and attractiveness, the pond would be no
less aesthetically pleasing to the community than the present plant oper-
ation, although opinions no doubt would vary.
Considering the moderately large initial costs combined with large operating
costs in terms of lowered plant efficiency and additional pumping power
expenditure, the staff does not consider that replacing the present system
with a freshwater spray pond using make up from regional sewage treatment
plant effluent is a desirable alternative when weighed against the expected
environmental gains from such a replacement.
9.2.1.8 Dry Cooling Towers
The use of dry (fin and tube heat-exchanger) cooling towers is a possible
alternative. One estimate is that from four to six towers would be
required. Assuming a tower diameter of 500 ft and 200-ft spacing, the
land requirement is estimated to be from 340 to 450 acres. The capital
cost is estimated to be $30 to 35 million, more than twice the cost of
comparable evaporative (wet) towers. In addition, the station would
require a 6-to 9-month shut down for rebuilding of the turbine to accept
higher mass flow rates and higher back pressures.
The cost increase of power to the consumer resulting from the use of dry
cooling towers has been presented as less than 4.5%, but the method of
evaluation overlooks the serious losses in thermal efficiency.
9-24
in the heat energy requirements could range from 6% during the winter to
as high as 13% in summer. Despite the relatively low price of nuclear
fuel, the consumption of from 6% to 13% additional fuel is not considered
a viable option in view of the energy shortages predicted. Furthermore,
the environmental effects of a rising air column of from 300 to 600 mil-
lion cfm that has been warmed about 30°F has not been evaluated in terms
of potential weather modifications. Consequently, despite a trend in
Europe toward the use of dry-tower systems for small peaking units, the
staff sees no near-term potential for the use of either induced or natural-
draft dry cooling towers for units the size of Oyster Creek. Any poten-
tial environmental constraints are in addition to the resulting economi
penalty estimated by the staff to range from 0.35 to 0.58 mills/kw-hr.
Dry cooling towers are therefore considered an unacceptable alternative
under present state of technology and for cost reasons.
9.2.1.9
Other Cooling Alternatives
For the proposed Forked River Station, a desalination plant and the con-
struction of a well field were considered as alternative water supplies.
Both were rejected in the Forked River review because of their expense
and also are rejected here. The use of a 700 acre saltwater lake and a
200 acre saltwater spray pond also were rejected. Present day technology
cannot demonstrate that the saltwater reservoirs can be isolated from the
freshwater aquifers below them. Saltwater intrusion into freshwater aqui-
fers is unacceptable. 5
5
Mechanical draft saltwater cooling towers were not considered to be a
suitable alternative because the salt deposition is a greater problem
than with natural draft towers.
9.2.1.10 Alternative Intake Structures
Fish entrapment losses could be reduced greatly by 1) lowering the pre-
sent 2 fps velocity at the condenser intake to 0.5 fps and 2) diverting
fish toward the dilution pumps. The staff will require that the appli-
cant study costs of modifications directed toward reducing the number
of fish impinged on the traveling screens at the cooling water intake
structure.
9.2.2 Alternative Chemical Systems
Chemical wastes which consist largely of demineralizer regenerant waste
may be evaporated to produce essentially pure water for station use and
9-25
>
a salt cake for disposal. Since the objective of the evaporation step
is to avoid disposal of the waste salt to a receiving water, land burial
is the presumed method of disposal. However land disposal poses some
risk with regard to groundwater contamination in most areas. Perpetual
containment of the salt in a burial site would be difficult to assure in
most areas with rainfall comparable to that of the site. The method does
not compare favorably with disposal in the ocean where enormous quanti-
ties of the same salts are already present.
9.2.3 Alternative Biocide Systems
Mechanical scouring methods such as sponge balls or brushes are possible
biocide alternatives. Because of the growth of mussels on the heat
exchanger tubes the success of mechanical scouring methods is questionable.
Mechanical methods are not likely to remove the firmly attached mussels.
Sponge balls or brushes might become lodged against the mussels and would
be difficult to remove. All mechanical methods proposed to date have
caused relatively high heavy metal releases.
9.2.4 Alternative Radwaste Treatment
The applicant estimates a $4 million cost for an alternative radwaste sys-
tem. Considered under alternative C, Section 11.0 of the applicant's Envi-
ronmental Report, the system consists of an additional radwaste evaporator,
a catalytic recombination subsystem, and a charcoal absorption off-gas
holdup subsystem. The applicant estimates a 100-fold reduction in radio-
active gaseous releases, indicating a proportionate reduction in the inte-
grated population dose. The additional waste evaporator would require
another package boiler, doubling the present S02, NO and particulate
releases. All other effects would be the same as those of the base case.
x
9.2.5 Alternative Transmission Corridors
The transmission lines travel almost directly from the site to the Manitou
Substation, the closest large substation in the applicant's system. Since
the route is reasonably direct, passes through essentially unpopulated
lands, and does not pass close to any historical sites, consideration of
alternative routes for an existing line seems unwarranted. For the same
reasons, underground transmission, if technically feasible in marshland,
appears to be an unacceptable alternative.
9-26
The present system has some adverse aesthetic impact on man's use of the
environment. A small portion of the immediately available biological
habitat was disturbed. However, minimization of the environmental impact
of the transmission corridor beyond the applicant's current plans appears
not to be warranted.
9-27
REFERENCES
1. Mid-Atlantic Area Council, Report to Federal Power Commission under
Order No. 383-2, Docket No. R-362, 1972.
2. Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Oyster Creek Nuclear Gener-
ating Station, Environmental Report, March 6, 1972, Amendment 68 to
the "Application for Construction Permit and Operating License,"
Docket No. 50-219, March 26, 1964.
3. Federal Register, vol. 36, no. 247, December 23, 1971.
4. General Public Utilities Corporation, Annual Report 1971, In JCP&L
letter to AEC. Docket 50-219, April 5, 1972.
5. Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Forked River Nuclear Station
Unit 1, Environmental Report, pp. 4-115, January 21, 1972.
6. L. G. Hauser, K.A. Olsen, R.J. Budenholzer, "An Advanced Optimization
Technique for Turbine Condenser, Cooling System Combination," American
Power Conference, 33rd Annual Meeting, Chicago, Illinois, 1971.
7. G. E. McVehil, Evaluation of Cooling Tower Effects at Zion Nuclear
Generating Station, Final Report to Commonwealth Edison Company,
Chicago, Illinois, by Sierra Research Corporation, Boulder, Colorado,
1970.
8. Sierra Research Corporation, Atmospheric Effects of Cooling Tower Plumes,
Northern States Power Company, Sherburne County Generating Plant,
Final Report to Black and Veatch Consulting Engineers, Kansas City,
Missouri, 1971.
9. Pollution Control Council, A Survey of Thermal Power Plant Cooling
Facilities, Pacific Northwest Area, 1969.
10. Preliminary Report, Effect of Cooling Tower Effluents on Atmospheric
Conditions in Northeastern Illinois, Circular 1000, Illinois State
Water Survey, Urbana, Illinois, 1971.
11. D. J. Broehl, Field Investigation of Environmental Effects of Cooling
Towers for Large Steam Electric Plants, prepared for Portland General
Electric Company, Portland, Oregon, 1968.
12. 12. G. F. Bierman, G. A. Kunder, J. F. Sebald, and R. F. Visbisky, "Character-
istics, Classification and Incidence of Plumes from Large Natural Draft
Cooling Towers, presented at the American Power Conference 33rd Annual
Meeting, Chicago, Illinois, p. 24, April 22, 1971.
9-28
REFERENCES (Continued)
13. R. F. Visbisky, G. F. Bierman, and C. H. Bitting, Plume Effects of Natural
Hyperbolic Towers, Interim Report, prepared by Gilbert Assoc. Inc.,
Reading, Pennsylvania, for Metropolitan Edison Co., p. 9, 1970.
14. J. E. Carson, "The Atmospheric Consequences of Thermal Discharges from
Power Generating Stations," Annual Report of Radiological Physics
Division for 1971, Argonne National Lab. 7860, Part III, August 1972.
15. Dames and Moore, "Meteorological Effects of Alternative Cooling Sys-
tems for Oyster Creek," January 1972, (Correction of ER Ref Title 8.3-3).
16. USDC, ESSA, Environmental Data Service, "Local climatological Data,
Atlantic City, NJ," 1963.
17. AEC, Safety Guide No. 3, Assumptions Used for Evaluating the Poten-
tial Radiological Consequences of a Loss of Coolant Accident for
Boiling Water Reactors, November 1, 1970.
18. D. K. Brady, W. L. Graves and J. C. Geyer, Surface Heat Exchange at
Power Plant Cooling Lakes, Cooling Water Studies for Edison Electric
Institute, Report No. 5, Johns Hopkins University, November 1969.
19. J. R. Edinger and J. C. Geyer, Heat Exchange in the Environment,
Cooling Water Studies for Edison Electric Institute, Project No.
Johns Hopkins University, June 1, 1965.
P-49,
.
20. J. C. Geyer, et al., Field Sites and Survey Methods, Cooling Water
Studies for Edison Electric Institute, Report No. 3, Johns Hopkins
University, June 1968.
21. J. F. Walko, "Controlling Biological Fouling in Cooling System"
Chemical Engineering, October 30, 1972.
22. S. Shair, "Industrial Microbiocides for Open Recirculating Cooling
Water Systems" Presentation at International Water Conference of the
Engineers Society of Western Pennsylviana Pittsburg, Pennsylvanna,
October 29, 1970.
23. J. R. Schieber, "Cooling Tower Blowdown and Boiler Blowdown as Waste
Water Problems" Industrial Process Design For Water Pollution Control,
Proceedings of Workshop, San Francisco, CA, March 1970.
24. U.S. AEC Final Environmental Statement Related to the Forked River
Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Docket No. 50-363, p. XI-1, Feb. 1973.
10-1
10. BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS
The benefits and costs of producing electricity using the Oyster Creek
Nuclear Generating Station are summarized below. The benefit-cost balance
is given for the station as now operating and for alternatives to the
present operation. The balance is made only on future costs, allowing
comparison of benefits which can be realized in the future to their
economic costs.
10.1
SUMMARY OF BENEFITS (PRESENT STATION)
The benefits of the station, as now operating, are summarized in Table 10.1.
Direct benefits result from increased employment and power availability,
while indirect benefits result from the particular location of the station.
The local region receives additional taxes, educational opportunities,
research on the local environment, and increased recreational opportunities.
10.1.1
Direct Benefits
The direct benefits are derived simply from the sale of electricity,
regardless of the power source. At an annual capacity factor of 80%,
the station is capable of producing 4.3 x 109 kw-hr. Based on the
1971 distribution, 40.4% is used by residential customers, 24% by
commercial users, 32.4% by industrial users and 3.2% by all other users.
X
>
In terms of annual monetary return, residential users would pay $46.5 million,
commercial customers $26.3 million, industry $18.7 million, and all other
users $3 million. Total sales returns from the station would be $94.5 mil-
lion/yr, at an annual capacity factor of 80%.
10.1.2
Indirect Benefits
Taxes
Construction of the station added $90 million worth of facilities to the tax
base plus an estimated 130 additional residences in surrounding communities,
worth about $4 million. That assumes the new jobs are additive, but only
about two-thirds results in construction of new residences. The net effect
has been a 6% increase in tax revenues for Lacey and Ocean Townships. The
resulting increase in local, State, and Federal tax payments is estimated
to be about $10 million/yr.
10-2
TABLE 10.1
BENEFITS FROM THE STATION AS NOW OPERATING
Direct Benefits
4.3 x 109
X
620 MWe
Expected 'Average Annual Generation in kW-hr
Capacity in kW
Expected Annual Delivery of Electrical Energy
in kw-hr
Commercial and Industrial
Residential
Other
Expected Steam Sold
Expected Delivery of Other Beneficial Products
Revenues from Delivered Benefits:
Electrical Energy Generated
Steam Sold
Other Products
2.5 x 109
1.8 x 109
1.3 x 108
0
0
$94,500,000
0
0
Indirect Benefits
Taxes (Federal, State, local)
Research
Regional Product
Environmental Enhancement:
Recreation
Navigation
$10,000,000/yr
Improved knowledge
of thermal
effects on
marine life
Indeterminable
9,200 user-
days/yr
9,200 user-
days/yr
Provides navi-
gation guide
Insignificant
change
Insignificant
change
Insignificant
change
Insignificant
change
200 jobs
Improved general
knowlege of
nuclear plants
SO2
NO
х
Particulates
Others
Employment
Education
10-3
Research and Education
Construction and operation of the station contributes to increased public
knowledge of nuclear reactors and their effects. The cumulative total of
the time spent by individuals attending or giving lectures about station
operation is approximately 0.4 man-yr each. Over $400,000 has been
spent investigating the ecology of the environs and the effect of waste
heat on biota. Prior to the start of construction, detailed knowledge
of the bay's ecology was essentially nonexistent.
Regional Product
The applicant provided the information given in Table 10.2 from which
the regional product can be obtained. Based on those data and an 80%
capacity factor, the service area realizes a regional product of over
$3 billion annually as a result of station operations.
people without electricity would be unable to produce the goods and ser-
vices currently available in the region. The assumption is probably not
completely accurate. The correct value lies somewhat below $3 billion.
For that reason, no value was placed in Table 10.1 for the regional
product.
Recreational Benefits
>
The land east of U.S. Route 9, adjacent to the intake and discharge canal,
is open to public fishing. The local area may realize as much as
$70,000 annually from such recreation. Blue crab is the primary species
being fished and appears to thrive in the heated discharge water.
Employment
The permanent work force for the station is about 100 persons. On the
basis of one service or support job created for each industrial position,
a total increase of 200 jobs occurs. Construction of the station elim-
inated about 350 acres of vacant cedar swamp land, which was never a
source of employment.
10-4
TABLE 10.2
REGIONAL PRODUCT
(a)
(Applicant Service Area)
Disposable
Households in
Applicant
Service Area
Income per
Disposable
Income
No.
County
Household 3
1
Burlington
8,479
$ 11,949
101,316,000
2
Essex
31,815
14,088
448,210,000
دیا
3
Mercer
9,345
12,380
115,691,000
4
Middlesex
53,784
12,075
649,442,000
5
Monmouth
135, 236
12,003
1,623,166,000
6
Morris
32,957
15,458
509,449,000
7
Ocean
51,474
9,030
464,810,000
8
Passaic
20,616
11, 242
>
231,698,000
9
Somerset
11,403
13,478
153,690,000
10
Union
8,579
15,133
129,826,000
Disposable Income for Service Area
$4,427,298,000
Net Income Attributable
to Oyster Creek Station =
$4,427, 298,000 x 74.2% =
$3,285,055,0.00
(a) Ref 2, p. 11.1-4
10-5
10.2
SUMMARY OF COSTS (PRESENT STATION)
10.2.1 Capital Cost and Related Resource Commitments
Construction of the station cost about $90 million. A distribution between
labor and materials typical for nuclear plants shows about $20 million for
labor, $17 million for site materials, and $34 million for factory equipment.
Permanent resource commitments include the construction materials used,
particularly materials in and around the reactor. They probably will be
unavailable for other uses for decades because of creation of long half-
life radioisotopes through neutron activation.
The land west of U.S. Route 9, occupied by the reactor and turbine buildings
probably is committed permanently to industrial use. Demoliton and removal
of the massive concrete foundation and shielding structures would be more
costly than the present value of the land. Obsolescence of the existing
facilities, however, does not preclude modification of the buildings and
contents to accommodate future industrial activities.
10.2.2
Operating cost and Related Resource Commitments
The operating cost for the station is estimated to be about $8,300,000
annually, including nuclear insurance. About one-half is labor costs
and the rest is mostly materials. The fuel elements are Zircaloy clad
uranium oxide rods with stainless steel support and guide mechanisms.
Miscellaneous operating materials include items such as office supplies,
protective clothing and water treatment chemicals. Maintenance materials
are typical, e.g., oils, greases, paints and repair parts.
>
10.2.3 Land Utilization
>
The land within the site has characteristics similar to the vacant land
in the surrounding environs. Except for the land east of 9, there
is little demand for land within the site. The land east of the highway
not committed permanently to power production could be sold for as much
as $40,000/acre. About 40 acres of that land was saltmarsh an important
part of the bay's ecology. As a result of construction, the land was
covered with dredge spoils, resulting in a loss to the bay's ecology
of 40 tons/yr of primary productivity. Since the covered saltmarsh is
not committed permanently to residential use, it will revert to its
original state in 10 to 20 years. After that time, the present
environmental cost will disappear.
10-6
10.2.4
Aesthetics
Main Plant Buildings
The station is an obvious industrial complex of imposing size when
viewed from the beaches and nearby residences. The tall stack,
conspicuously painted to assure notice by air traffic, precludes
camouflaging and attracts attention. Erosion and inadequate reveget-
ation around the intake and discharge canal call attention to the
industrial character of the station, detracting from any pleasing
aesthetics and suggesting need for restorative action by the applicant.
Transmission Lines
The new transmission lines required for the station traverse forest
lands in Lacey and Berkeley Townships. The transmission corridor runs
11 miles north to Maintou Substation. In the immediate vicinity of
the station, the lines are difficult to observe from outside the site
boundary. The remainder of the lines are visible primarily at road
crossings and to a very small number of residents immediately adjacent
to the corridor. Growth retardants are being withheld near road cross-
ings to encourage regrowth. The aesthetic impact of the line is minor.
10.2.5
Water Pollution
The primary chemical impurities released to the bay are sodium sulfate,
sodium hydroxide, sulfuric acid, and chlorine. Since sodium sulfate is
a soft chemical found in all natural waters, the net effect on the
seawater quality is negligible. The discharge of sodium hydroxide and
sulfuric acid without immediate neutralization is currently practiced.
The high flow rate through the condensers dilutes the harmful releases
before they can do significant environmental damage. The chlorine
concentration is low enough to have an insignificant effect. Radio-
isotopes released to the bay with the projected radwaste facilities
are estimated to cause a negligible integrated radiation dose of about
0.55 man-rem/yr. The thermal discharges of the current once-through cool-
ing system result in a significant loss of 500 tons/year of primary pro-
ductivity and up to 5000 lb of fish/yr. The losses resulting from excessive
temperatures in the poorly mixed thermal plume region can be mitigated by
making full use of the discharge canal dilution system when the discharge
temperature exceeds 87°F.
10.2.6
Air Pollution
There will be no significant release of particulates or noxious chemical
compounds to the atmosphere. The package boiler supplying process steamm
for the waste concentrators runs continuously. The emergency diesel gen-
erators are run during periodic testing of emergency electrical equipment
10-7
The resultant annual releases are estimated to be about 13.2 tons of so,
So
2'
37.9 tons of NO and 2.5 tons of particulates. Radioactive gaseous
releases will result in an integrated 1980 population dose within 50 miles
of 410 man-rem/yr, compared to the natural background dose of 563,000 man-
rem/yr to the same population.
10.3
BENEFIT-COST BALANCE
>
The alternatives of not providing the power or importing power from
other utilities are not considered viable. As explained in Section 8,
not providing the power would reduce the applicant's reserve capacity
to less than the anticipated load requirements until after 1976 and
would also reduce the generating reserve of the entire MAAC Power Pool
to 20%. That assumes no delays in other plants coming on line. The
purchase of sufficient power to replace the station is not possible
within the MAAC system. Abandoning the station would by no means be
in the regions best interests. There are, however, some alternatives
that could be used to minimize adverse environmental effects.
In Section 9, many alternative subsystems to the present station were
discussed. Several, such as air cooling of the back end of the turbine,
are not carried through the benefit-cost balance because they are either
technically or economically unfeasible. In this subsection, the present
station alternately fueled with oil and coal is summarized and compared
with the present station and with the alternative subsystems. Seven
alternate cooling systems are included. They consist of increased use
of dilution pumps, an ocean intake and discharge system, a cooling tower
using three sources of make-up water, and two alternatives which use a
freshwater lake and spray pond. The three sources for make-up water for
the cooling tower cases are saltwater, Toms River water, and sewage
effluent from a regional sewage treatment plant considered for location
near Toms River. The freshwater lake and spray pond would use sewage
effluent. However, by taking the difference in cooling tower costs bet-
ween the use of Toms River and sewage effluent makeup, the increased costs
of the lake and pond using Toms River makeup may be estimated. Table 10.3
presents the summarized data for each of the alternatives in reference to
the present station.
10.3.1
Benefit-Cost Differential Analysis
Analysis of the above information reveals that alternatives considered
have essentially the same benefits. As a result, the comparison of the
alternatives can be made solely on the basis of costs; the alternatives
with minimum environmental and economic costs are the most desirable ones.
10-8
TABLE 10-3
OYSTER CREEK ALTERNATIVES
EXISTING PLANT
ENERGY SOURCES
ALTERNATE COOLING METHODS
COOLING TOWER 23° APPROACH
FRESHWATER LAKE
OIL FIRED STATION
WITH ONCE
THROUGH COOLING
MODIFIED RAD
WASTE SYSTEM
WITH ONCE
THROUGH COOLING
COAL FIRED STATION
WITH ONCE
THROUGH COOLING
OCE AN INTAKE
AND
DISCHARGE SYSTEM
700 ACRE POND
SEWAGE EFFLUENT
SPRAY POND
SEW AGE EFFLUENT
DILUTION
SALTWATER
TOMS RIVER
SEWAGE EFFLUENT
103.8
1102
90.5
1102
1273
109.7
149
413
13.25
13.5
13.5
135
15
15
13.5
13.08
13.5
13.5
12.7
23.3
12.2
140
149
149
12.1
172
14.8
2.9
2.8
50
2.7
5.5
28
2.2
5.2
5.6
5.6
34.0
5.6
5.6
56
56
5.6
5.6
37.8
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE EXCEPT DURING
CONSTRUCTION
NO CHANGE FROM
BASE CASE
POSSIBLE EFFECT DUE
TO ACER AGE LOST
NO CHANGE FROM
BASE CASE
NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGE
AFTER REVEGETATION
NO CHANGE FROM
BASE CASE
NO CHANGE FROM
BASE CASE
NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGE
AFTER REVEGETATION
NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGE
AFTER REVEGETATION
PROBABLE EFFECTS DUE TO
ACER AGE LOST
POSSIBLE EFFECTS DUE TO
ACER AGE LOST
SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION
U
0
0
SAME AS BASE
CASE
1400 INDIVIDUALS/YR
0000 INDIVIDUALS YR
2000 INDIVIDUALS/YR
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
ODI
50 TONSIYR
0
0
0
0
0
- 23 MW
91 MW
1310 MW
-23 MW
23 MW
23 MW
NONE - 1310 MW TO
OCEAN
055 MAN-REMSYR
0
0.55 MAN-REMS/YR
0.55 MAN-REMSYR
0 55 MAN-REMS/YR
0.55 MAN-REMS/YR
055 MAN-REMS/YR
0
055 MAN-REMS/YR
NONE -0.06 MAN
REMS/YR TO OCEAN
10 TONS/YR
18 TONS/YR
18 TONS/YR
18 TONS/YR
18 TONS/YR
18 TONS/YR
18 TONS/YR
18 TONS/YR
18 TONS/YR
NONE
18 TONS/YR TO OCEAN
410 MANREM/YR
4.4 MAN REM/YR
410 MAN-REM/YR
410 MAN-REMYR
410 MAN-REM/YR
410 MAN-REM/YR
410 MAN-REM/YR
410 MAN-REM/YR
NOISY
QUIET
QUIET
QUIET
QUIET
QUIET
111 MILES
QUIET
ILI MILES
QUIET
ILI MILES
QUIET
11.1 MILES
ILI MILES
11. I MILES
ILI MILES
ILI MILES
ILI MILES
ILI MILES
INCLUDES COSTS RESULTING FROM ADDITIONAL POWER REQUIREMENTS AT $80/KW/YR
OYSTER CREEK
BASE CASE
SIGNIFICANT COSTS OR
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
COSTS ALL COSTS IN A MILLIONS
CAPITAL COSTS
DESIRED RETURN ON INVESTMENT
LYRI
89.9
12.5
RETURN ON INVESTMENT
a)
ANNUAL OPERATING COST
ANNUAL FUELING COST
LAND USE
SHORELINE USE
752 ACRES
452 ACRES
352 ACRES
32 ACRES
302 ACRES
X2 ACRES
652 ACRES
352 ACRES
302 ACRES
1052 ACRES
LAND REQUIREMENT
REDUCTION IN MLDLIFE
HABITAT
100 ACRES
ACRES
400 ACRES
2 ACRES
35 ACRES
25 ACRES
352 ACRES
25 ACRES WITH TEMPORARY
DISTURBANCE DURING
CONSTRUCTION OVER 300
ACRES
35 ACRES WITH TEMPOR
AR Y DISTURBANCE DUR
ING CONSTRUCTION OVER
ADDITIONAL 400 ACRES
35 ACRES WITH TEMPOR
AR Y DISTURBANCE DUR
INC CONSTRUCTION OVER
ADDITIONAL 800 ACRES
735 ACRES WITH TEMPOR
AR Y DISTURBANCE DUR
ING CONSTRUCTION OVER
ADDITIONAL 900 ACRES
200 ACRES WITH TEMPOR
AR Y DISTURBANCE OUR
ING CONSTRUCTION OVER
ADDITIONAL 800 ACRES
EFFECT ON TERRESTRIAL BIOTA
NO EFFECT
NO CHANGE FROM
BASE CASE
NO CHANGE FROM
BASE CASE
NO CHANGE FROM
BASE CASE
WATER USE
EFFECT ON AQUATIC BIOTA
WINTER FLOUNDER
OTHER FISH
CRABS
MENHA DEN
200PLANKTON
KILLED BY CHLORINE
KILLED BY TEMPERATURE
BAY PRODUCTIVITY
24.000 INDIVIDUALS YR
110,000 INDIVIDUALS YR
2,000 INDIVIDUALS Y
105-100 INDIVIDUALS/YR
150 TONS/YR
10 TONS YR
500 TONSIYR
1310 MW
O TONS/YR
110 MW
1040 MW
MEAT ADDITION TO BAY
1040 MW
055 MAN-REMS/YR
ARTIFICIAL RADIOACTIVITY
RELEASED TO BAY
RELEASES TO THE BAY,
18 TONS/YR
Na₂SOA
AIR USE
ARTIFICAL RADIOACTIVITY
RELEASED IN THE AIR
410 MAN-REMNR
PARTICULATE RELEASES
CHEMICAL RELEASES - S02
NOX
ATMOSPHERIC EFFECTS FOGGING
ICING
EFFECT ON COMMUNITY
AESTHETIC
2.5 TONS/YR
1) 2 TONS YR
229 TONS YR
NONE
NONE
1.700 TONSIYR
13.000 TONSYR
5,200 TONS/YR
NONE
NONE
1.700 TONS YR
20.500 TONS YR
11.800 TONS YR
NONE
NONE
5.0 TONS YR
22.0 TONS YR
66. TONS/YR
NONE
NONE
2.5 TONSIYR
13 2 TONS/YR
229 TONSYR
NONE
NONE
10 TONS/YR
40 TONS YR
40 TONS YR
NONE
NONE
40 TONS YR
30 TONS/YR
120 TONS TYR
- 10% INCREASE
IN FREQUENCY
40 TONS/YR
330 TONS YR
120 TONS YR
10% INCREASE
IN FREQUENCY
40 TONS YR
330 TONS YR
120 TONS/YR
- 10% INCREASE
IN FREQUENCY
49 TONSIYR
330 TONS/YR
120 IONSTYR
-10% INCREASE
IN FREQUENCY
40 TONSTYR
330 TONS YR
120 TONSIYR
- 10% INCREASE
IN FREQUENCY
MEDIUM IMPACT
MINOR IMPACT
MEDIUM IMPACT
MEDIUM IMPACT
MINOR IMPACT
MINOR IMPACT
MINOR IMPACT
MINOR IMPACT
MAJOR IMPACT FROM
COAL HANDLING
FACILITIES
MINOR IMPACT AFTER
CONSTRUCTION
MINOR IMPACT
AFTER
CONSTRUCTION
PROVIDES
ACCESSIBLE
FISHING LOCATION
RECREATIONAL IMPACT
PROVIDES ACCESSIBLE
FISMING LOCATION
PROVIDES
ACCESSIBLE
FISHING LOCATION
PROVIDES ACCESSIBLE
FISHING LOCATION
QUIET
NOISE
QUIET
ILI MILES
TRANSMISSION LINES
(INCLUDED WITH TEMPERATURE EFFECT
10-9
The analysis considers only future costs. Although the sunk costs for
the existing facilities are not relevant here, they are real costs that
must be considered and repaid if an alternative is chosen in preference
to the present design.
The three alternatives selected for the final analysis and their signifi-
cant costs are summarized in Table 10.4. Because the various capital and
operating costs occur at different times, a present worth calculation
was used. Each of the monetary costs represents the amount of money
that must be invested early in 1973, at 8.75% interest to provide the
funds necessary to cover the related expenditure during the following
30 years; i.e., to the assumed end of the useful life of the station.
Alternative costs are shown differentially relative to the present
station.
The second column of Table 10.4 lists the remaining costs for the refer-
ence case and the related environmental impacts. The final cost of
$90 million, is not considered in the analysis. Thus, no capital costs
are shown for the reference case. Annual fuel and operating costs are
estimated at $8.3 million which, during the 30-year evaluation period,
are equivalent to a present capital cost of $87 million. The remainder
of the column shows the environmental impact of the present station.
The third column shows the differential costs associated with an oil-
fired plant. Its capital cost, if construction started early in 1973,
is estimated to be $349 million, equivalent to the $271 million present
cost during the 5-year construction period. During the 5-year delay
period, replacement power would have to be supplied by operating oil-
fired plants at a $26 million annual cost in 1973. Experience indicates
that the cost will escalate at 5%/yr. Combining the escalation factor
and the 8.75% discount rate results in a capitalized cost of $116 million
for the 5 years. Fuel and operating costs during 25 years for the oil
are $176 million more than the reference case, reflecting the higher fueling
costs for oil. The reminder of the column shows that the environmental
impact for the oil plant would be undesirably higher than for the refer-
ence case. The remaining columns are the results of similar analyses
of the costs and environmental impacts for the other listed alternatives.
In the case of dilution pumping, the cost over and above the reference
case, on a present worth basis is less than $800,000. The predominant
expense is the $600,000. cost of improving the stability of the intake
and discharge canal. By not running the dilution pumps to prevent
discharges higher than 87°F, a habitat which could produce the equivalent
of 5000 lb of fish/yr is lost.
10-10
TABLE 10.4
DIFFERENTIAL EVALUATION-OYSTER CREEK ALTERNATIVES
DIFFERENTIAL COST OF ALTERNATIVES
MONETARY COST
($MILLIONS)
REFERENCE CASE
(EXISTING DESIGN)
NATURAL DRAFT
SALTWATER TOWER
OIL FIRED PLANT
DI LUTION
0
0
271
21
0.6
0
13
6
CAPITAL COSTS
CAPITAL (INCLUDING STANDBY COSTS)
INTEREST COST DURING DELAY @ 6%
CAPITALIZED ANNUAL COST
REPLACEMENT POWER
FUEL AND OPERATING COSTS
TOTAL PRESENT WORTH
0
87
116
176
0
0.2
13
14
87
584
0.8
46
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
REFERENCE CASE INPUT
DIFFERENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FROM REFERENCE CASE
LAND USE
LAND PERMANENTLY COMMITTED
352 ACRES
100 ACRES
NO CHANGE
RECREATION
NO CHANGE
NO CHANGE
IMPROVED FISHING AND
PUBLIC ACCESS TO SALT-
WATER
10 ACRES
LARGE LANDMARK COULD
SERVE AS NAVIGATION
AID
SHORELINE USE
NO CHANGE
NO CHANGE
NO CHANGE
ADDITIONAL SALTWATER
SHORELINE WITH PUBLIC
ACCESS
PROJECT OWNED ACRES
1416 ACRES
NO CHANGE
NO CHANGE
NO CHANGE
WATER USE
COMMERCIAL
NONE
NO CHANGE
NO CHANGE
AQUATIC RESOURCES
ADVERSE IMPACT DUE TO
IMPINGEMENT, MECHANICAL
DAMAGE, CHLOR I NATION,
REDUCTION IN HABITAT AND
THERMAL SHOCK
POSSIBLE WATERWAY USE
BY OIL BARGES
REDUCED IMPACT CAUSED BY
20% REDUCTION IN AMOUNT OF
HEAT DISSIPATED
ELIMINATES LOSS IN BAY
SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN
PRODUCTIVITY FROM THERMAL DAMAGE TO AQUATIC BIOTA
PLUME AND REDUCES DAMAGE DUE TO IMPINGEMENT, TEMP-
TO AQUATIC BIOTA FROM ERATURE, AND THERMAL SHOCK
THERMAL SHOCK
RECREATION
IMPROVED FISHING
INCREASED POSSIBILITY OF
OIL SPILLS
SLIGHT IMPROVEMENT IN
FISHING POSSIBLE
DISTINCT IMPROVEMENT
IN FISHING POSSIBLE
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT OF
LARGE TOWER
AESTHETICS
NO CHANGE
NO CHANGE
WASTE PRODUCTS
MINOR IMPACT FROM STACK
AND BUILDINGS
3.0 MAN-REMS/YR
18 TONS OF Na2SO4/YR
13 TONS OF SOZ/YR
33 TONS OF NOX/YR
2.5 TONS OF PARTICULATES/YR
NO RELEASE OF ARTIFICIAL RADIATION
NO CHANGE IN Na2SO4 RELEASES
13,600 TONS OF SO2/YR
5200 TONS OF NOX/YR
1736 TONS OF PARTICULATES
NO CHANGE IN RADIATION
AND Na2S04 RELEASES
96 TONS/SO2/YR
36 TONS/NOIR
15 TONS/PARTICULATESTYR
NO CHANGE IN RADIATION
AND Na2SO4 RELEASES
370 TONSISO2/YR
140 TONS/NOX/YR
48 TONS/PARTICULATES/YR
10-11
The other alternative considered in Table 10.4 is the saltwater cooling
tower, requiring about 6 months to complete. During that time, the
station would be shut down and replacement power, totaling $13 million
would have to be procurred. The remaining costs would be associated with
the loss in turbine efficiency and the capital cost of the cooling tower.
Those costs total $25 million on a present worth basis.
Based on the comparison of alternatives, the dilution alternative appears
desirable. The applicant will be required to make full use of the dilution
pumps when the temperature in the discharge canal exceeds 87°F as measured
at the U.S. Route 9 bridge over the discharge canal. The applicant contends
that the station operation would deteriorate as a result of condenser
failures if the dilution pumps were run so as to maintain an 87°F discharge
temperature. This contention has not yet been supported by evidence
provided by the applicant.
In any event, the applicant will be required to make improvements in the
canal, including stabilization of the banks, that are effective in minimizing
erosion and silt transport, so that the dilution system can be utilized as
intended.
In conclusion, the staff finds that items of slight to moderate environmental
impact are associated with operation of the Oyster Creek Station. These
have been identified and discussed in appropriate sections of this statement.
A monitoring program recommended by the staff will, prior to issuance of a
full-term operating license, provide for continuing surveillance of these
effects, and corrective action will be required to mitigate any unacceptable
impacts.
>
The benefits derived from the continued operation of the Station (principally
four billion kilowatt-hours of electricity per year), however, far exceed
the actual or expected environmental costs of the Station.
Based upon the foregoing consideration of environmental costs weighed against
the benefits to be derived from the plant, the staff recommends that,
subject to certain conditions of plant operation for protection of the
environment, the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station be issued a full-
term operating license.
10-12
REFERENCES
1. Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Annual Report 1971, In JCP&L
letter to AEC, Docket No. 50-219, April 5, 1972.
2. Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Oyster Creek Nuclear Gener-
ating Station, Environmental Report, March 6, 1972, Amendment 68
to the "Application for Construction Permit and Operating License,"
Docket No. 50-219, March 26, 1964.
3. "Survey of Buying Power," Sales Management Inc., New York, vol. 107,
no. 2, July 10, 1971.
APPENDIX A
LICENSES, PERMITS AND APPROVALS
A-1
TABLE A-1
LICENSES PERMITS AND APPROVALS ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION AND
OPERATION OF THE OYSTER CREEK STATION (Ref. 1, p. 12.0-2)
Federal Title/Purpose
Number
Authority
Date Issued/Received
CPR
Provisional Construction
Permit
December 15, 1964
Atomic Energy
Commission
DPR
April 9, 1969
Provisional Operating
License
Atomic Energy
Commission
August 1, 1969
Amendment No. 1
(1600 MW)
Amend. No. 1
to DPR-16
Atomic Energy
Commission
Amendment No. 2
(1690 MWt)
Amend. No. 2
to DPR-16
December 2, 1970
Atomic Energy
Commission
Amendment No. 3
(1930 MWt)
Amend. No. 3
to DPR-16
November 5, 1971
Atomic Energy
Commission
SNM-1037
Special Materials Storage
License
October 3, 1967
Atomic Energy
Commission
29-12773-01
Byproduct Materials
License
May 15, 1968
Atomic Energy
Commission
August 17, 1966
Dredging Permit for
Oyster Creek
Department of the
Army Corps of
Engineers
A-2
TABLE A-1 (Continued)
Federal Title/Purpose
Number
Authority
Date Issued/Received
August 17, 1966
Dredging Permit for
Barnegat Bay
Department of the
Army Corps of
Engineers
250 OXO 3 000522
Discharge of Plant Effluent
(Refuse Act of 1899)
Department of the
Army Corps of
Engineers
Application filed
Oct. 7, 1971; pending
EA-OE-65-307
July 29, 1970
Determination of No Hazard
to Air Navigation Meteor-
ological Tower
Federal Aviation
Administration
-
State of
New Jersey Title/Purpose
May 23, 1966
Reconstruction of State High-
way 9 Bridges over Oyster
Creek and Forked River
Department of Con-
servation and Eco-
nomic Development
(DCED) and High-
way Department
DCED
September 11, 1967
Construction of Railroad
Bridges over Oyster Creek
and Forked River
Encroachment Permit for
Railroad Bridges
DCED, Division of
Water Policy and
Supply
A-3
TABLE A-1 (Continued)
State of
New Jersey Title/Purpose
Number
Authority
Date Issued/Received
Agreement Concerning the Plan
for Implementation of Protec-
tive Action Guides
Department of
Health
January 12, 1970
Deep Well Drilling Permit
33-1095
September 2, 1964
DCED, Division of
Water Policy and
Supply
4381
May 23, 1966
Encroachment Permit for
Highway Bridges
DCED, Division of
Water Policy and
Supply
66-42
July 13, 1966
Dredging Permit for
Barnegat Bay
DCED, Bureau of
Navigation
P-241
May 20, 1965
Diversion Permit for
Excavation Dewatering
DCED, Division
Water Policy and
Supply
66-28
Dredging Permits in
Estuaries (3)
July, 1966
DCED, Bureau of
Navigation
E-3-259
September 21, 1964
State Highway 9 Access
Permit
Highway Depart-
ment Bureau of
Maintenance
S-1-68-3144
March 12, 1968
Sewage Treatment Plant
Permit
Department of
Health
A-4
TABLE A-1 (Continued)
State of
New Jersey Title/Purpose
Number
Authority
Date Issued/Received
Building Safety Permits Certi-
fication of Plan Approval
DCED,
Bureau of
Engineering and
Safety
Reactor Building Foundation
14580
November 9, 1964
14581
Elevated Water Tank
Foundation
November 9, 1964
Elevated Water Tank
14830
December 30, 1964
Turbine Building
15711
July 28, 1965
Circulating Water Structures
15712
July 28, 1965
16968
April 22, 1966
Reactor Building and Office
Building
19343
July 14, 1967
All Buildings Mechanical
Equipment
72091
Mechanical and Electrical
Work
July 14, 1967
66-49
>
Dredging Permit for Channel
from Intracoastal Waterway
to Oyster Creek
DCED Bureau of
Navigation
Riparian Grant
DCED
A-5
TABLE A-1 (Continued)
State of
New Jersey Title/Purpose
Number
Authority
Date Issued/Received
Stipulation Concerning Thermal
Discharge and Other Environ-
mental and Safety Matters
Docket No.
652-60
February 14, 1966
Public Utilities
Commission
62-191
1963
Anchorage of CAN Buoy in
Barnegat Bay (Temperature
Monitoring)
DCED, Bureau of
Navigation
Ocean County
County Bridge Reconstruction
Agreement
Ocean County Board
of Freeholders
Lacey Township
Building Permit
969
Department of Permits October 27, 1964
Licensing and Zoning
37
Department of Health
October 27, 1964
Permit for Sewage Treat-
ment Plant
Others
Railroad Crossing Agreement
Lease No.
8427
January 12, 1968
Central Railroad of
New Jersey
A-6
TABLE A-2
APPLICATIONS, PERMITS AND MAJOR FILINGS FOR TRANSMISSION
RIGHTS-OF-WAY (Ref. 1, p. 3.2-10)
.
Title
Agency
Status
1.
Eas ements for use of right-of-way; Order
permitting condemnation.
State of New Jersey, Dept. of
Public Utilities, Board of
Public Utilities Commissioners
Approved
April 21, 1967
2.
Permit for crossing of Garden State Park-
way at the Oyster Creek Site
New Jersey Highway Authority
Garden State Parkway
Approved
Oct. 25, 1965
3.
New Jersey Highway Authority
Resolution 66-3 entitled, Resolution
Authorizing Conveyance of Certain Parcels
to the Jersey Central Power & Light
Company; Deed: Book 2563, p. 138-142
Approved
Jan. 27, 1966
Feb. 10, 1966
4.
Easement Agreement for Double Trouble
Tract, Deed: Book 2623, pp. 176-180
State of New Jersey Dept. of
Conservation and Economic
Development
Approved
Feb. 24, 1966
5.
Two easements for rights-of-way in the
Berkeley Township, Deed: Book 2654,
pp. 19-22 and Book 2493, pp. 155-162
Township of Berkeley in the
County of Ocean in the State
of New Jersey
Approved
Dec. 23, 1966
6.
Right-of-Way Grant from Borough
of South Toms River, Deed: Book 2504,
p. 305-309
Borough of South Toms River,
in the County of Ocean in the
State of New Jersey
Approved
July 12, 1965
7.
Right-of-Way Grant from the Township of
Lacey for Several Parcels in the Vicin-
ity of Barnegat Pines, Deed: Book 2567,
Pp. 438–440.
Township of Lacey in the County
of Ocean in the State of New
Jersey
Approved
March 3, 1966
A-7
REFERENCES
1.
Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Oyster Creek Nuclear Gener-
ating Station, Environmental Report, March 6, 1972.
APPENDIX B
PHYTOPLANKTON ORGANISMS RECORDED FROM
BARNEGAT BAY, NEW JERSEY
B-1
TABLE B.1
ALPHABETICAL REGISTER OF PHYTOPLANKTON ORGANISMS RECORDED
FROM BARNEGET BAY, N.J.
Achnanthes longipes
Actinoptychus undulatus
Agmenellum sp.
Amphidinium spp.
A. carteri
A. fusiforme
A. sphenoides
Amphiprora incompta
A. surirelloides
Amphora sp.
Aphanothece sp.
Asterionella japonica
Biddulphir spp.
B. arctica
B. biddulphiana
B. favus
B. granulata
B. vesiculosa
Bipedomonas sp.
(a)
Calycomonas gracilis(a) (3 forms)
Campylodiscus sp.
C. fastuosus
Carteria sp.
Cerat aulina bergoni
Ceratium bucephalum
C. fusus
C. macroceros
C. minutum
Ceratium tripos(a)
Chaetoceros spp.
C. approximatus
C. boreale
curvisetum
C. debilis
c. decipiens
C. dichaeta
c. didymus
C. fragile
C. secundus
C. simile
C. simplex
C. subtile
Chlamydomonas
Chroomonas sp.
Cocconeista)
Cochlodinium helicoides
Coscinodiscus spp.
C. angstii
C. centralis
C. excentricus
C. radiatus
Crylptomonas spp.
(a)
Cyclotella nana
c. meneghiniana (a)
Cymb ella spp.
Detonula spp.
D. confervacea(a)
D. cystifera(a)
Dinophysis sp.
D. acuminata
D. acuta
D. ovum
Diploneis sp.
D. crabro
Diplopsalis lenticula
Distephanus speculum
Ditylium brightwelli
Ebria tripartita
Eucampia groenlandica
E. zodiacus
(a)
(a) Particularly important species, seasonal dominants or ubiquitous
members
B-2
TABLE B.1 (Continued)
.
.
Euglena spp.(a)
Eutreptia sp.
(a)
Fragillaria sp.
F. crotonensis
F. cylindrus
Glenodinium sp.
G. danicum
G. foliaceum
Gleocystis gigas
Gomphonitzschia sp.
Goniodoma sp.
Gonyaulax sp.
G. digitale(a)
G. polygramma
G. scrippsae
G. Spinifera(a)
G. tricantha
Grammatophora spp.
Guinardia flaccida
Gymnodinium spp.
G. incoloratum (a)
G. nelsoni
punctatum
G. splendens (a)
Gyrodinium spp.
G. dominans
G. pellucidum
G. pingue
Gyrodinium resplendens
Hemidinium sp.
Lauderia glacialis
Leptocylindrus sp.
L. danicus
L. minimus
Licmophora
Litnodesmium undulatum
Lytgya sp.
Massartia sp.
Melosira sp.
M. borreri
M. granulata
M. juergensii
M. nummuloides
Nannochloris sp.(a)
N. atomus
Navicula spp.(a)
N. crucicula
N. distans
N. (Schizonema) gravelei
N. gregaria
N. monilifera
N. nummularia
N. peregrina
Nematodium sp.
N. armatum
Nitzschia sp.
N. closterium(a)
N. paradoxa
N. seriata
Noctiluca miliaria
Ochromonas sp.
Oscillatoria spp.
Ostreopsis monotis
Paralia (melosira) sulcata
Pediastrum sp.
Peridinium spp.
P. brevipes
P. claudicans
P. depressus
P. excavatum
G
.
(a) Particularly important species, seasonal dominants or ubiquitous
members
B-3
TABLE B.1 (Continued)
P. granii
P. leonis(a)
P. pallidum
P. roseum
P. triquetra
P. trochoideum(a)
Peridinopsis rotunda(a)
Phormidium sp.
Pinnularia sp.
P. ambigua
Pleurosigma (Gyrosigma) sp.
P. fasciola
Pleurosigma formosa
P. marinum
Polykrikos sp.
P. barnegatensis
P. hartmani
P. kofoidi
Prorocentrum micans (a)
P. redfieldi(a)
P. scutellum
P. triangulatum (a)
Pyramimonas sp.
P tetrarhynchus
P. torta
Rhab donema adriaticum
Rhizosolenia sp.
R. alata
R. cylindrus
R. delicatula
R. fragillima
R. semispina
R. setigera(a)
R. stolterfothii
Scenedesmus quadricaudata
Schereff lia dubia
Schizonema (navicula) gravelei
Skeletonema costatum(a)
Spirodinium fissum
Spirulina sp.
Striatella unipunctata
Surirella sp.
S. smithii
Synedra sp.
S. hennedyana
Tabellaria sp.
Thalassionema sp.
T. frauenfeldii
T. nitzschiodes
Thalassiosira spp.
T. condensata
T. gravida
T. hyalina
T. nordenskioldi (a)
T. pacifica
T. rotula
Thallassiothrix longissima
Zygnemopsis
.
MISCELLANEOUS
-
Chlorococcales
Ciliate algal swarmers
Cyanophyta misc.
Cysts mostly dinoflagellate
Diatoms (unidentified)
Dinoflag. (unidentified)
Microflagellates
Zoospores, Algal
(a) Particularly important species, seasonal dominants or ubiquitous
members
B-4
REFERENCE
1. R.E. Loveland, Fifth Progress Report (Subsection 2.7.2).
APPENDIX C
BIBLIOGRAPHY
C-1
BIBLIOGRAPHY
CHEMICAL RELEASES
American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, and
Water Pollution Control Federation, Standard Methods for the Examination
of Water and Waste Water, 13th Edition, 1971.
Environmental Protection Agency, Process Design Manual for Upgrading
Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants, 1971.
Sawyer, C. N., Chemistry for Sanitary Engineers, McGraw Hill, 1967.
Weber, Jr., V. J., Physicochemical Processes for Water Quality Control,
Wiley-Interscience, 1972.
METEOROLOGY
Climatic Atlas for the United States, USDC, ESSA, Washington, D.C., 1969.
Huschke, R. E., Glossary of Meteorology, American Meteorological Society,
Boston, Mass., 1959.
List, R. J., Smithsonian Meteorological Tables, Sixth Revised Edition,
Smithsonian Institution, City of Washington, 1958.
New
Pasguill, F., Atmospheric Diffusion, D. Van Nost and Company, Ltd.,
York, 1962.
Sacramento Muncipal Utility District, Rancho, Seço, Nuclear Generating
Station, Unit 1, Environmental Report, Appendix 3C, "Meteorological
Effects of Cooling Towers, January 11, 1971.
BIOLOGY
Arthur, J. W. and Eaton, J. G., "Chloramine Toxicity to the Amphipod Gam-
marus pseudolimnaeus and the Fathead Minnow Pime phales promelas," J. Fish.
Res. Board of Canada, vol. 28, pp. 1841-1845, 1971.
Bureau of Water Management, Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources, Lansing,
Michigan, Chlorinated Municipal Waste Toxicities to Rainbow Trout and
Fathead Minnows, October 1971.
C-2
Costlow J. D. and Bookout C. G., "Temperature and Meroplankton," Chesa-
peak Science, vol. 10, nos. 3 and 4, pp. 253-254. September-December 1969.
>
Flemer, D. A., Hamilton, D. H., Keefe C. W., and Mihursky, J. A., The
Effects of Thermal Loading and Water Quality on Estuarine Primary Pro-
duction, University of Maryland, Natural Resources Institute, Ref. No. 71-6,
December 1970.
"Power
Hamilton, Jr., D. H., Flemer, D. A., Keefe, c, W., Mihursky, J. A.,
Plants: Effects of Chlorination on Estuarine Primary Production," Science,
vol. 169, pp. 197–198, 1970.
June, F. C. and Reintjes, J. W., Survey of the Ocean Fisheries off Delaware
Bay, Special Scientific Report-Fisheries No. 222, August 1957.
Kennedy, V. S. and Mihursky, J. A., "Upper Temperature Tolerances of Some
Estuarine Bivalves," Chesapeake Science, vol. 12, no. 4. pp. 193–204,
December, 1971.
>
Kennedy, V, S., and Mihursky, J. A., "Effects of Temperature on the Respira-
tory Metabolism of Three Chesapeake Bay Bivalves, Chesapeake Science,
vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1-22, March 1972.
.
Marshall, W. L., "Cooling Water Treatment in Power Plants," Industrial
Water Engineering, February-March, 1972.
McErlean, A. J., Mihursky, J. A., and Brinkley, H. J., "Determination of
Upper Temperature Tolerance Triangles for Aquatic Organisms," Chesapeake
Science, vol. 10, nos. 3 and 4, pp. 293-296, September-December, 1969.
>
McLean, R. I., "Chlorine Tolerance of the Colonial Hydroid Bimeria Franc-
iscana," Chesapeake Science, vol. 13, no. 3 pp. 229-230, September 1972.
>
Odum, E. P., The Role of Tidal Marshes in Estuarine Production, New York
State Conservation Department, Division of Conservation, Information
Leaflet No. 2545, 1961.
Parker, F. L. and Krenkel, P. A., Engineering Aspects of Thermal Pollution,
Vanderbilt University Press, 1969.
Pearce, J. B., "Thermal Addition and the Benthos, Cape Cod Canal,
Chesapeake Science, vol. 10, nos. 3 and 4, pp. 227-233, 1969.
Pritchard, D. W., "Estuarine Circulation Patterns," Proc. Amer. Soc.
Civil. Eng., vol. 81 (Separate 717), pp. 1-11, 1955.
.
.
C-3
Roosenburg, W. H., "Greening and Copper Accumulation in the American
Oyster, Crassostrea Virginica, in the vicinity of a Steam Electric
Generating Station, Chesapeake Science, vol. 10, nos. 3 and 4, pp. 241-252,
September-December, 1969.
RADIOLOGICAL RELEASES
Bunch, D. F., ed., Controlled Environmental Radioiodine Tests Progress
Report Number Two, USAEC Report IDO-12053, Idaho Falls, ID.
Fletcher, J. F. and Dotson, W. L., Hermes--A Digital Computer Code for
Estimating Regional Radiological Effects from the Nuclear Power Industry,
USAEC Report HEDL-TME-71–168, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland,
Washington, December 1971.
Honstead, J. F., Recreational Use of the Columbia River-Evaluation of
Environmental Exposure, USAEC Report BNWL-CC-2299, Pacific Northwest
Laboratories, Richland, WA, October 1969.
International Commission on Radiological Protection, Report of ICRP
Committee II on Permissible Dose for Internal Radiation, ICRP Publica-
tion No. 2, Pergamon Press, New York, 1959.
>
-
Ng, Y. C., et al., Prediction of Maximum Dosage to Man From the Fallout
of Nuclear Devices - IV, Handbook for Estimating the Maximum Dose from
Radionuclides Released to the Biosphere, USAEC Report UCRL-50163 Part IV,
Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, Livermore, CA, 1968.
Radiological Health Handbook, Revised Edition, Bureau of Radiological
Health, U. S. Dept. of Health, Education and Welfare, January 1970.
Soldat, J. K., "The Relationship between 1-131 Concentrations in Various
Environmental Samples," Health Physics, vol. 9, p. 1167, 1963.
Soldat, J. K., "Environmental Evaluation of an Acute Release of I-131 to
the Atmosphere," Health Physics, vol. 11, p. 1009, 1965.
Soldat, J. K., "A Statistical Study of the Habits of Fishermen Utilizing
the Columbia River Below Hanford," Environmental Surveillance in the
Vicinity of Nuclear Facilities, Charles Thomas, Springfield, Ill., 1970.
HYDROLOGY
Cooling Towers, 1972, Prepared by Editors of Chemical Engineering Progress,
a CEP technical manual, American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New
York, NY.
C-4
Hauser, L. G., Oleson, K. A. and Budenholzer, R. J., "An Advanced Optimi-
zation Technique for Turbine, Condenser, Cooling System Combinations,
Presented at the American Power Conference, Chicago, IL., 1971.
Patterson, W. D., Leporati, J. L. and Scorpa, M. J., "The Capacity of
Cooling Ponds to Dissipate Heat, Presented at the American Power Con-
ference, Chicago, IL., 1971.
Rossie, J. P., "Dry-Type Cooling Towers for Steam Electric Generating
Plants," Presented at the 68th National Meeting of the American Institute
of Chemical Engineers, February 28-March 4, 1971, Houston, Texas.
>
Smith, E. C. and Larinoff, M. W., "Power Plant Siting, Performance, and
Economics With Dry Cooling Towers," Presented at the American Power Con-
ference, Chicago, IL., 1970.
U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, Directorate of Licensing, Preliminary
Draft Environmental Statement for Forked River Nuclear Station Unit 1,
New Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Docket No. 50-363, 1972.
ALTERNATIVES AND BENEFIT-COST
Cecil, L. K., ed., Water Chemical Engineering Progress Symposium Series,
vol. 67, no. 107, 1971.
Federal Power Commission, Statistics of Publicly Owned Utilities in the
United States 1968, FPC S-200, December 1969.
Hitchcock, S. W. and Curtsinger, W. R., "Can We Save Our Salt Marshes?"
National Geographic, vol. 141, no. 6, p. 729, June 1972.
Hull, A. P., "Reactor Effluents: As Low as Practicable or As Low As
Reasonable, Nuclear News, November 1972.
Control:
01ds, F. C., "SO2
August 1971.
Focusing on New Targets," Power Engineering,
Rossie, J. P., Cecil, E. A. and Young, R. 0., Cost Comparison of Dry Type
and Conventional Cooling Systems for Representative Nuclear Generating
Plants, TID 26007, March 1972.
Sagan, L. A., "Human Costs of Nuclear Power," Science, yol. 177, no. 4048
August 11, 1972.
Yenger, K. E. and Hoffman, L., "The Physical Desulfurization of Coal
Major Considerations For so Emission Control," Proc. of American Power
Conference, Chicago, IL.,
1971.
C-5
(a)
GENERAL
Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Application for Construction Per-
mit and Operating License, March 26, 1964.
Ammendment 3, vol. I, Facility Description and Safety Analysis
Report, January 25, 1967.
Preliminary Safeguards Summary Report, January 25, 1967.
Amendment 6, July 27, 1967.
Amendment 11, vol. IV, Facility Description and Safety Analysis
Report, September 6, 1967.
Amendment 23, October 31, 1967.
Amendment 49, November 29, 1968.
Amendment 55, May 5, 1970.
Amendment 65, December 31, 1970.
Letters
From General Public Utilities Corporation to AEC transmitting the
Press Release, "General Public Utilities Announces Steps Taken to
Increase Generating Capacity," December 31, 1968.
From State of New Jersey (Hughes), urging that an operating license
be issued to Jersey Central at the earliest possible date (HDR-2008)
January 20, 1969.
To Mrs. R. Rippere, Mrs. Ralph Allocca, Mr. R. B. Litch and
Mrs. James M. Baker (replying to their January 23, January 22,
January 17 and January 21, 1969 letters), January 29, 1969.
From Robert B. Litch, Executive Secretary of Federation of Conser-
vationists, United Societies, Inc. (FOCUS) requesting that issuance
of an operating license for Oyster Creek be withheld pending ans-
wers to questions on thermal pollution, environmental effects,
etc., April 10, 1969.
(a)
All General items are in Docket No. 50-219.
C-6
To Wayne M. Morris, in response to Senator Muskie's request trans-
mittal report on Oyster Creek Unit 1 Station as prepared by DRL
with attached September 9, 1969 letter request from Senator Muskie
and Wayne Morris's November 20, 1969 letter to Senator Muskie,
November 13, 1969.
To Jersey Central Power and Light transmitting Change No. 1 to
Technical Specifications to authorize extension of the fuel clad-
ding safety limit, based on a minimum critical heat flux ratio of
1.0 to include the region of operation between 5% core coolant
flow and 20% core coolant flow; Safety Evaluation, Figure TS-1,
November 13, 1969.
>
From Jersey Central submitted in response to the November 6, 1969
letter regarding control rod drives, March 6, 1970.
To Senator Harrison A. Williams, Jr., referring to the memo of
May 20, 1970 with referral letter of May 14, 1970 from Elson P.
Kendall, Union County Legal Services, Corporation, Elizabeth, NJ,
expressing concern regarding the economics of nuclear power
(Oyster Creek), July 8, 1970.
To Senator Clifford P. Case referring to the memo of October 9, 1970
with referral letter of October 4, 1970 from Miss Catherine Gramlich
concerning effects on marine life and transmitting Oyster Creek's
Environmental Studies and Facilities Nuclear Power and the Environ-
ment, and Miss Gramlich's letter, November 18, 1970.
From Jersey Central transmitting 1970 Annual Financial Report for
Jersey Central, 1970 Annual Financial Report for General Public
Utilities, April 2, 1971.
>
To Jersey Central Power and Light transmitting Amendment 3, Safety
Evaluation, Appendix A-ACRS Report and Federal Register Notice,
November 5, 1971.
From Jersey Central Power and Light requesting change to Technical
Specifications for License DPR-16 and transmission of Change
Request 10 for POL DPR-16 requesting an increase in the allowable
radioactivity in radwaste storage tanks, December 22, 1971.
"DRL's Hazards Analysis in the Matter of Jersey Central," September 23, 1964.
Safety Evaluation by the Division of Reactor Licensing USAEC, Decem-
ber 23, 1968.
APPENDIX M
METEOROLOGICAL DATA
1
>
1
1
Mti
1968 Oyster Creek Tower.
Joint-Frequeney Distribution-of-Wind Speed and Direetion (75 ft)
by Temperature Difference Group (AT 400 ft-12 ft)
Temperature Correction = 0.715.; Speed Corrected to 33 ft
LAPSE RATEI DEG F7100FT) LESS THAN OR EQUAT TO-1,0
ESE
SE
S
SSW
SSE
0
0
1
SW
0
0
0
0
1
3
1
2
Ooo
Woooool
0
3
0
O
onloo
2
0
WSW
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
2
50
SPEED N NNE NE ENE E
LE_2.0 1
0
0
0
LE
3,5 2
0
1
1
LE 7,5 9
1
0
1
LE 12,5 0
1
1
LE 18,5
HE 24,5
0
LE 32.5
QT 32,5 0
0
0 0
TOTAL 12 1
2 3
PERCENT 10.1
2,5
AV SPL 4,5
2,7 5,0 5,2
AVERAGE SPEED FOR THIS YABLE EQUALS
No No o
0
O O
oool
OVOOONNNO
0
0
0
0
0
5
WNW
VN NNU TCIAL PERCENT
0
3 2,5
2
0
2 12 10,1
2 5
11
34,5
2
6
42,0
1
1
9
2 13 10,9
0
0
0
0 0,0
0
0
0 0,0
0
0
0
0
0 0,0
7 20
33
119 0,0
5,9 16,827,7 18,5 100.0
7,3 10,0 10,5 7,2
0
Ooo
ook
0
NOWOO
0
0
2
1,7
1,7
0
2
1.7
8,6
22
0
0
0
0.0
0.0
0
3
2,5
6,5
1,7
3.
7,9
8,1
1,7
6,9
LAPSE RATE (DEG F/100FT) GREATER THAN
•1.0 BUT LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
WNW
SSE
0
0
S
0
NW
0
0
2
WSW
0
0
2
wlo o'rnid
SSW
0
0
1
1
0
ONOOOOO
SW
0
0
0
2
0
NO
0
2
5
1
oonno
20
5
ESE SE
0
0
0
0
7
2
2
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9 T“
1,3 5,6
8,6
8,7
SPEED N NNE NE ENE E
LE 0,0
0
LE 3,5
2
0
2
0
LE 7,5
2
2
LE 12,5 1
2
5
LE 18,5 0
LE 24,5
LE 32,5
0
0
GT 32,5 0
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
5
2
3
6
PERCENT 4,0
1,6
2.4 1,8 6,5
AV SPC
5,9 2,1
5,9
7,6
AVERACE SPEED FOR THIS PABLE EQUALS
Onno
ܫܘܚܝܕܘܘ ܘܘܘ
OMONO
2
8
7
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
U
NNW TCIAL PERCENT
0
0 0,0
2 8 6,5
3
29,8
5 62 50.0
1 17 13,7
0
0 0,0
0
0 0,0
0
0 0,0
11 12य 0,0
8,9 100.0
0
0
*5
0
0
8
6,5
32
18
2
1,6
13,8
2
1,6
1.3
2
1,6
:::
trisors
3,2
7,7
25,8
9,8
14,5
11,3
1.0
7,2
LAPSE RATE
DEG F7100FTT GREATER THAN
2,9 BUT LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO **,8
SSE
SSW
SE
0
1
SW
0
WSW
0
0
1
S
0
1
2
7
3
NW
0
0
WNW
0
0
12
21
.ܝܙܘܫܝ.
0
2
16
0
0
7
19
SPEED N NNE NE ENE E
LE 0,0
0
1
0
0
LE 3,5 2 2 0 0
1
LE 7,5 5
3
LE 12,5 3
3
LE 18,5
0
LE 24,5
0
1
LE 32,5
0
0
GT 32,5 0
0
0
0
TOTAL
10 6
5
7 16
PERCENT 4,2 2.5 2,1
3.0 6,8
AV SPC 6,1
5,5 10,0 7,5
AVERAGE SPEED FOR PLIS TABLE EQUALS
。
ESE
0
1
10
10
0
0
0
0
21
8,9
1,7
9,0
Oo
NNW ICTAL PERCENT
0 1
12 5,1
5 75 31,8
120 50,8
1 22 9,3
2,5
0
0,0
0
0 0.0
11
236
0,0
7477100,0
1,8
0
0
0
0
0
JOO
0
0
13
5,5
10,3
0
18
7.6
9,5
0
0
0
5
2,1
9,6
0
0
9
3,8
7,0
0
0
0
17 43
7,2 18,2
10,0 10,6
0
0
0
35
14.5
10,2
5,9
1,8
2,5
9,1
M-2
Table
(Cont'd)
LAPSE RATE DEG F/100FT) GRETTER THAN
78 BUT CESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
SSE
S
SSW
0
WSN
0
WW
2
LE
ESE
0
12
92
48
5
SE
3
12
99
15
bnam
61
60
3
Oo
on on
3
60
105
17
32
53
SW
0
15
30
18
2
0
0
NOO
39
83
SPEED
NNE NE ENE E
0.0 0 1
0 0 0
LE 3,5 11 21
24 12 16
LE 7,5 24
30
60 99 103
LE 12,5
2 26
100
LE 18,5
1 2 25 13
LE 24,5 0
0
5
LE 32,5
1
GT 32,5
0
0
TOTAL 45 55 114 245 224
PERCENT
1,9 2.3
1,8 10,4 9,5
AV SPC 5,6 4.0
6,2 8,5 7,7
AVERAGE SPEED FOR PET'S PABLE EQUALS
47
WNU
1
1
8
52
80 13J
45 67
21
2
0
0
185
284
1,8 12,0
9,9 10,8
NWN TOTAL PERCENT
1 10
15 200
875
908 38,5
20 977 4010
247 10,5
1,2
8 13
0
0
0,0
91 2361 0.0
319 T00,0
6,8
0
0
0
0
178
136
0
0
197
6,3
157
6,6
105
7,5
6.4
5,8
1,1
107
4,5
8,1
65
2,8
6.3
173
7,5
9,8
8,2
8,5
8,1
LAPSE RATE (DEG F/100FT) GREATER THAN
•13 BUT LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
ESE
SW
NW
SE
1
33
SSE
0
45
83
2,1
T6
25
53
S
1
50
111
21
5
0
78
SSW
5
69
13T
25
16
0
o
12
63
94
17
1
0
0
NOVAN
SPEED
NNE NE ENE E
LE 0.0
5
3 3 6
LE 3,5 47 27 32 40
TE 7,5 26 22
592 56
LE 12,5
12
15 26
LE 18.5 2
0 10
LE 24,5 0 0 0
0
LE 32,5 0
1
GT 32,5 0 0 0
0
TOTAL 92 60
12T 151
PERCENT 3,2 2.1 3,3 4,2
5,2
AV SPC
3,9 5.0 5,6 5,99
AVERACE SPEED FOR THIS TABLE EQUALS
ono a
15
.
WSW W WNW
2 7
59
58 55
125 161 ITT
49 87 95
30 41
2
0
0
0 U
0
0
246º-340 375
8,6 11,8 13,0
5,8
6,8
7,0
NNW TOTAL PERCENT
5 59
762 26,5
1030 1977
19
478
16,6
2 143 510
1
0
1 To
0
0 0,0
T12-2017
070
5,3 100,0
5,1
O
OOO
0
0
0
0
0
OO
TOT
75
TO
0
0
0
319
11,1
6,1
0
0
0
51
9T
93-
136
3,2
188
6,5
5,2
179
6,2
2,8
4,3
250
8,7
5,4
5,7
TT BUT LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO
2,7
SSE
S
WNW
3
11
42
21
ESE
0
11
3
1
0
SE
1
25
5
1
0
50
27
16
7104
TAPSE RATE (DEG F7100FTS GREATER THAN
SPEED N
NNE NE ENE E
LE
0,0 2
2
1 0
LE 3,5
27
10 16
LE 1,5
0
2
3
LE 12,5 0
0
D
LE 18.5
0
0
0
0
LE 24,2 0
0
0
LE 32.5 0 0 0 0
GT 32,5 0
0
0 0
TOTAL 33 13
15
18
PERCEAT 2,7 1,1 1,2 1,5
T.2
AV SPC
1,7 2,8 2.6 2,4
AVERAGE SPEED FOR THIS TABLE EQUALS
NW
11
67
69
2
0
61
ya
0
0
DooOONWNN
ܬܙ
SSW
SN WSW W
1 3
3
2
54 58 60 52
28 66
164 123
0 o
J
2
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0 09 0
0
63
127 230 179
6,9 10,5+*19,0 17,8
3,4
3,8
4,5
aoeo
1
0
NNW TCTAD PERCENT
2 36 3,0
572 74,9
61 618 51.
0
0
1
0 0,0
0 0
0,0
0 0
0,0
113 1208 0.0
9,7 100,0
3,8
Oo
0
0
0
15 32
1,2 2,6
3,1 2,9
3,9
0
108
8,9
11
35
279
3,0
2
0
0
149
12,3
3,6
3,6
3,4
66
28
0
2
ig
LE
arrrrr
BOOooan
1
1
0
0
0
0
11
1
0
12,5
16.5
LE 24,5
32,5
GT 32,5
TOTAL
PERCENT
AV SPE
AVERAGE
OOOOON
1. VUOOOOO
OOOOOON
VOOOO
2
0
0
0
CONOOOO
WOOOOO
0
0
0.0
0,0
0
0
0
0
230
19,0
35
13
1.2
32
2.6
2.9
33
2.7
2.4
SPEED
179
UN
1.1
1.7
149
12.3
0
113 1208
9,4 100,0
127
10.5
2.8 2.6 2.
TABLE EQUALS
3.0
TIS
FOR
3.9
Table
(Cont'd)
LAPSE RATE (DEG F1100FTGREATER THAN
2,2
ESE
0
WNW
INN
0
SE
2
2
0
0
0
1
20
SSW
0
13
1
0
SSE
1
5.
0
0
0
0
SW
1
13
10
0
0
WW
0
63
9
0
28
16
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
SPEED N
NNE NE ENE E
Lelal
0
1
LE 3,5 19 9 7
LE 1,5
2
0
2 1
0
LE 12,5 0
0
DE 18,5
0
LE 24,5
0
LE 32,5
0
GT 32.5 0
0
0
0
TOTAL 23
9 10 5
7
PERCENT 5,8 2.3 2,5
1,3 1,8.
AV SPL 2,1 2.1 2,1
2,6 1,8
AVERAGE SPEED FOR THIS PABLE EQUALS
ooooo
0,0
0.
OOO
WSW
1
17
34
0
0
0
0
0
52
13,1
4.2
0
0
0
DDT
NNW TCIAL PERCENT
15 3,8
37254 63,8
17 129
32,4
0
0
0,0
0
0
0 0,0
0
0 00
0
0 0,0
55 398
0,0
13,8 100,0
3,2
0
Oo
0
0
0
0
0
8
2.0
2,5
0
14
3,5
1,5
3,3
3.2
0
0
0
12
18,1
2,9
1.0
1,3
24
6.0
3,6
1,5
1,7
0
55
13,8
4,3
2,4
12,1
3,1
M-3
i
{