ILLINOIS POLLUTION

CONTROL

BOARD

October

12,

1984

ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY

)

(CLINTON POWER STATION),

)

)

Petitioner,

)

)

PCB

84—135

)

ILLINOIS

ENVIRONMENTAL

)

PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

)

Respondent.

OP:tNION AND

ORDER

OF THE BOARD

(by B.

Forcade):

On August 29,

1984,

the Illinois Power Company

(“IPC”) filed

a request for variance from certain Board regulations that affect

water discharges from their Clinton Power Station to Clinton

Lake.

IPC requests variance from effluent limitations for total

suspended solids

(TSS)

and total iron (“Iron”),

in order to

conduct pre-operational flushing of process piping systems at the

nuclear-fueled electric generating station prior to loading the

station with nuclear fuel.

Specifically, IPC requests variance

from the TSS and iron effluent limitations of

35

Ill. Mm. Code

304.124,

and from the requirements of

35

Ill. Mm. Code 309.102

which prohibits the discharge of contaminants except in compliance

with the Environmental Protection Act, Board regulations and

conditions of

an

NPDES permit.

IPC requests variance until the

date when nuclear fuel is loaded at the station or until

September

1,

1989, whichever is sooner.

At the time of filing

this petition,

IPC also filed

a motion for prompt consideration

stating

that

delays

in

pre-operational

requirements

could

force

delays

in

fuel

loading;

each

day

of

delay

will

cost

in

excess

of

one

million

dollars

(Pet.,

¶3).

On

October

1,

1984,

the

Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Agency

(“Agency”)

filed

a

recommendation

that

variance

be

granted,

with certain conditions,

from 304.124

(TSS and iron) until

December

31,

1986,

or until nuclear fuel loading whichever is

sooner,

On October

5,

1984,

IPC

filed

a

response

to

Agency

recommendation

that

accepted

all

conditions

(including

the

1986

date), but pointed out that the

Agency

had

not taken a position

on IPC~srequest from 309.102.

IPC

believes that procedurally a

variance from that Section is also required even though the

substance

of

the request is the TSS

and

iron

limitations of

304.124.

IPC’s October

5,

1984,

filing

also

renewed

the motion

for prompt consideration.

No objections were received by the

Board

and no hearing was held.

In view of

the Board’s disposition

of this matter within four days of the last filing, the motion

for prompt consideration is moot.

60-271

---

—2—

IPC is a public utility, headquartered

in Decatur,

Illinois.

It has a service territory of approximately 15,000 square miles

and employs approximately 4,000 people.

IPC provides electric

service to approximately 530,000 customers and gas service to

approximately 382,000 customers.

The station, which presently is

under construction,

is a nuclear-fueled electrical generating

station designed to generate 933 net megawatts of electricity.

It

is

located

near

Clinton,

Illinois, on Clinton Lake.

Various

effluents

are

discharged from the station to Clinton Lake

pursuant

to

the conditions of

a NPDES permit.

The station is

scheduled

to

begin fuel loading

in January,

1986,

and

to begin

commercial operation in Novermber,

1986,

at which time it will

employ approximately 900 people.

To meet these scheduled dates

for commencement of fuel loading and of commercial operation,

approximately 6,600 personnel currently are employed on

site,

and

three shifts a day are working on the construction

(Pet.,

¶ 1—3).

One important aspect of the construction being done at the

station is the flushing of certain process piping

systems upon

their

completion

in order to test their integrity for operational

use.

Several

of these flushes have been conducted in the past

and were

of

such nature that the waters used in flushing could he

routed through the station~ssedimentation ponds for treatment,

prior to discharge to waters of the State.

These flushes were

covered by the terms of

a new—expired NPDES Permit No.

1L0036919,

which was issued on October 21,

1977,

by the United States

Environmental Protection Agency to IPC.

Prior

to the expiration

of this permit,

on July 31, 1980,

IPC filed with IEPA an appli-

cation for renewal, with the consequence, because of the

provisions of Section 12(f)

of the Environmental Protection Act,

IlL

Rev,

Stat,

1983,

ch.

111½,

§ 1012(f),

and 40 C.F.R.

S

i22~6(d) (1983),

that the permit was continued in effect and will

be in effect until

such time

as

final

administrative

action

is

taken on the permit application.

Certain other pre—operational

pipe

flushes, which have been identified

as critical path

milestones

in the start—up schedule for the station, cannot be

handled in the same manner

as those prior flushes (Pet~, ¶ 4—6).

To deal with the flushes,

IPC requested a provisional

variance from the Agency.

The Agency recommended to the Board

that a provisional variance be granted with conditions

and

on

June

14, 1984,

the Board granted the provisional variance

in

PCB

84-75.

One additional purpose of this provisional variance

flushing was to acquire data on the quality

of effluent

discharged into Clinton Lake to determine if Board regulations

for TSS and iron would be exceeded.

The outside ring header

subsystem of the fire protection system was flushed on June 19,

1984,

and June 20,

1984.

This subsystem consists of

a 14--inch

primary ring header,

a 12—inch secondary ring header,

and

numerous

smaller

lines that service the many buildings at the

station,

These ring headers were flushed by ~mping

untreated

water from Clinton Lake through the lines.

Grab samples of the

flushwater discharges were gathered during both days of this

flushing.

These were manually composited,

and composite

pollutant concentrations were determined.

The

80-272

---

—3—

results

show

that

on

the

first

day

of

flushing,

June

19,

1984,

the

flush

waters

exceeded

the Board

‘

s

effluent

limitations

of

15

mg/i

for

TSS

and .2.0

mg/i

for

total

iron.

The

composite

of

.11

grab

samples

indicated

a

level

of

140

mg/i

of

TSS

and

32

mg/i

of

total iron.

However, on the

second

day of

flushing,

June

20,

1984,

the

flush

waters

were

well

within effluent limitations:

the

composite

of

all

grab

samples

indicated

a

level

of

9.2

mg/i

of TSS and 0.98 mg/i of total iron

(Pet.,

¶

iO,

ii).

Flushing of the Division In

subsystem

of the safe

slmtdown

service

water

system began

on July i9,

1984, and was to have been

continued

on

July

20

and

July

24-26,

i984.

This

subsystem

consists

of

piping

associated

with

diesel

generator

IC

and

switch

gear

heat

removal

condensing

piping.

The

flush

could

not

be

completed,

however,

because

on

July

24,

1984,

the

pimp

being

used

f ailed,

necessitating

the

suspension

of

the

flush.

Flushing

of

the

subsystem

resumed

on

August

1

and

was

continued

through

August

2,

i984.

However,

flushing

could

not

be

completed

in

accordance

with

the

operational

protocol.

Data

was

collected

concerning

the

quality

of

the

flush

waters

that

were

discharged

on

July

i9-20

and

August

1-2,

1984.

The

data

indicated

that

on

July

i9,

i984,

the

first

day

of

flushing,

the

Board’s

effluent

limitations

for

TSS

and

iron

were

exceeded

as

45

mg/i

of

TSS

and

5

•

2

mg/i

of

iron

were

discharged.

However,

on

the

remaining

three

days

of

the

flush,

effluent

limitations

were

met

with

one

exception:

on

July

20,

i984,

flush

waters

with

concentrations

of

24

mg/i

TSS

and

i.0

mg/i

of

total

iron

were

discharged; on

August

1,

i984,

flush

waters

with

concentrations

of

i2

mg/i

TSS

bnd

0.66

mg/i

of

total

iron

were

discharged;

and

on

August

2,

i984~ flush

waters

with

concentrations

of

13

mg/i

TSS

and

0.67

mg/i

of

total

iron

were

discharged.

For

the

flushing

operations

conducted

to

date

there

has

been

substantial

variation

in

effluent

quality,

making

accurate

prediction

of

future

flushing

concentrations

impossibie.

Despite

the

flushing

which

has

already

occurred,

IPC

miii

need

to

conduct

more

flushing

to

demonstrate

the

integrity

of

the

piping

systems

to

the

Nuclear

Regulatory

Coasi ssion

before

fuel-

ioading

will

be

allowed.

Since

these

fiushings

will

occur

before

fuel-loading,

no

question

of

accidental

radiological

contamination

is

before

the

Board.

The

additional

subsystems

which

IPC

requests

to

fiush

are

the

following:

The

segment

of

the

fire

protection

system

which

is

contained

in

the

diesei

generator

building;

The

segment

of

the

fire

protection

system

which

is

contained

in

the

containment

and

auxiliary

control

buiiding;

The

segment

of

the

fire

protection

system

which

is

contained

in

the

control

building;

---

Divisions

I

and II of the same shutdown service water

system;

The

statio&s

chilled

water

system, which is contained

throughout

the

power

block;

and

The

component cooling water

system, which is

contained

in

the

control

building.

In

each

case,

the

volume of flush water

is quite large,

typically

one-half

million

to fifty million gallons.

These

volumes

are

too

large

to be

conveyed

through the

existing

floor

drain

system

to

IPC~ssedimentation ponds for treatment before

discharges

Since many of the flush discharge

points

are

far from

the

ponds,

thousands

of feet of hose would have to be laid,

blocking

roadways and presenting a

danger

of rupture.

Moreover,

the

total

volume

of

flows

would

exceed

the

treatment

capacity

of

the

present

system,

The

cost

and

delays

for

creating

temporary

addtional

capacity

would

be substantial

(Pet.,

11

39—41),

IPC

and

the

Agency

anticipate

there

will

be

minimal,

if

any,

adverse

environmental

impact

resulting

from

the

proposed

flushing

operations~

First,

the

flushing water will

be

withdrawn

from

Clinton

Lake

which

has historically had a high level

of TSS:

1.0

mg/I

to

68

mg/I

from

1978

through 1983.

Thus,

the amount of TSS

in

the

effluent

from

prior testing does not reflect the amount

of

TSS

added

to

Clinton

Lake,

although

exact

calculation

of

the

amount

added

would be

impossible.

Also,

the

TSS

added

would

be

predominantly

inorganic

in

nature

(rust),

Second,

any elevated

levels

of

iron

would

be

predominantly

in

the

form

of

ferric

oxide

or

rust

which

is

relatively

insoluble

in

water

and

would be

expected

to

settle

to

the

bottom

of

Clinton

Lake,

The

small

amount

of

ferrous oxide, which is soluble in water,

should be

rapidly

oxidized to ferric

oxide

in

the

alkaline

aerobic

condition

of

Clinton Lake

and

would

again

settle

to

the

bottom,

Third,

the

elevated

levels

of TSS

and

iron

from

prior

flushing

occurred

primarily

during the initial stages or “first fiush~.

Since

IPC

has agreed to convey the maximum feasible amount of first flush

to

the

exi~ting

treatment

system

through

all

existing

(and

reasonable~ available

temporary)

piping

systems,

the

total

amount

of

pollutahts

added,

as well as

any

shock

loading,

should

be

greatly

re~.ueed,

Last,

the

discharges

will

not

be

a

continuous

event, but

a series of

discrete

events which appear

to

result~ in

less than seventy million gallons in total

(Pet,,

¶ 22—25,

Exhibit

A,

Rec,,

¶ 22),

The

Board

finds that the station cannot become operational

until

the

flushing

is

completed,

the existing treatment system

cannot

handle

the

total

flushing

volumes,

and

that

construction

of

additional

sufficient

temporary

treatment

capacity would

impose

an

arbitrary

or unreasonable hardship when balanced

6O~274

---

*

against the minimal adverse environmental impact which might

occur.

The

Board

will

impose,

as conditions of this variance,

the

termination

date,

first

flush treatment requirements and

monitoring requirements to which IPC and

the

Agency have agreed.

The

Board has reviewed IPC~srequest for variance from

Section

309.102.

That section prohibits discharges of contaminants

or

pollutants

to

the

waters of the state except in compliance

with

the

Act,

Board

regulations and provisions and conditions of

NPDES

permits.

In

a normal variance situation where the permittee

seeks to

discharge

at levels above those contained

in the

applicable

NPDES

permit,

no variance from this section would be

required~the Agency would be expected to modify the NPDES permit

conditions in accordance with the Board Order,

Therefore, to the

extent

that

IPC

requests

relief from this section for currently

permitted

outf aIls

that relief is denied as unnecessary.

However,

to the extent IPC requests to discharge from outfails that do not

presently

have an NPDES permit, relief from Section 309.102 would

be required.

IPC

and

the

Agency

have

both

included

copies

of

the

draft

NPDES

permit

which

may

be

issued

to IPC in the future.

That

draft

permit

specifically

lists and imposes conditions on all

outf

ails

of

concern

in

this

proceeding.

However, neither party

has

included

a

copy

of the currently applicable NPDES permit

so

that the Board can

determine

if

this

proceeding

concerns

new

outfails.

Consequently,

the Board will grant a variance from

309.102 only to the

extent

of

currently

unpermitted

discharges.

This Opinion constitutes the Board~sfindings of fact and

conclusions of law on this matter,

ORDER

Illinois Power Company, Clinton Power Station,

is hereby

granted

a variance from35

Ill. Adm. Code 304.124

(Total

Suspended

Solids and Total

Iron only) and 309.102,

subject to the following

conditions:

1.

The variance from Section 304.124, Total Suspended Solids

and Total

Iron only,

shall apply only to the following

flushing operations and outfails:

Flush

Discharge

Event

Point

A~

Portions of the

(1)

to

intake

fire

protection

structure

system located

in

from inside

(i) diesel

headers

generator building,

(2)

to storm drains

(ii) containment

from hose stations

and

auxiliary fuel

buildings,

and

(iii)

control building

60-275

---

B.

Divisions

I and II of

007

safe

shut

down

service

water

system

C,

Station chilled water

Intake structure

system

D.

Component cooling

Intake structure

water System

E.

Integrated flush

002(b)

of

Station systems

F.

Reactor core

Storm drains

isolation cooling

system

G.

Division III of

007

safe shutdown

serv ice

water

system

H,

Operation of

safe

007

shutdown

service

water system

2.

The variance

from

Section 309.102 shall

apply only to those

discharge

points

listed

above

that

presently

have

no

NPDES

permit.

3.

This variance shall expire when nuclear fuel loading begins

at

the station or

December

31,

1986,

whichever

is

earlier.

4.

1PC shall treat the maximum

feasible

portion

of

‘~first

flush~

flows for the fire protection system,

the chilled water system

and the

component

cooling

water

system

at the station utilizing

existing

treatment facilities,

as well

as existing

and

reasonably

available

temporary pimps

and

piping.

5.

IPC

shall monitor the discharges covered by

this

variance

by

taking

24~hourcomposite samples each day that discharge

occurs,

Those

samples shall be analyzed for pH, oil and grease,

total iron and total

suspended solids.

6.

IPC

shall monitor the lake water used for these flushes prior to

its

use by 24—hour

composite

samples.

In

such

monitoring,

the

waters of

Clinton

Lake

shall

be

analyzed

for

pH,

oil

and

grease,

total iron and

total

suspended solids.

7.

The results of the above-referenced analyses, along with flow

data and

dates

and

times

of

each

discharge,

shall

be

sent to

Roger Cruse within ten

(10)

days

after

the

last

day

of each

flushing event,

At the same time~,progress towards completing

remaining flushes shall be reported.

The appropriate documents

shall be sent to the following address:

60-276

---

-7-.

Illinois Environmental Protection

Agency

Division of

Water

Pollution

Control

Compliance Assurance

Section

2200 Churchill Road

Springfield,

Illinois

62706

Attention:

Roger Cruse

8.

Within

forty—five

(45)

days of today’s Board Order,

IPC shall

execute

and

forward

to

the

Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Agency,

Division

of

Water Pollution Control, Compliance Assurance

Section,

2200 Churchill Road,

Springfield,

Illinois 62706

(Attention:

Carol Morrison),

a Certificate of Acceptance

and

Agreement to be bound by

all terms and conditions of this

variance,

This fortyfive

(45) day

period

shall be held in

abeyance for any period this matter is being appealed.

The

form

of

the certificate

shall be as follows:

CERTIFICATE

I,

(We), __________________________________,

having read

the order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board

in PCB 84—135,

dated October

12, 1984, understand and accept said order,

realizing

that

such

acceptance

renders

all

terms

and

conditions

thereto binding and

enforceable.

Petitioner

Title

Date

By:

_______________________

Authorized Agency

IT

IS SO ORDERED,

I,

Dorothy M

Gunn,

Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control

Board,

hereby

certify

that the above Opinion and Order was

adopted

on

the

~

day of

~

1984

by

a

vote

of

~.

D&h~Ier~~9~

Illinois

P0

lution

Control

Board