W3F1-2002-0048, Ses - Annual Environmental Operating Report - 2001

Ses - Annual Environmental Operating Report - 2001

ML021280523
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	04/25/2002
From:	Peters R Entergy Operations
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
W3F1-2002-0048
Download: ML021280523 (2)

Text

Entergy Operations, Inc.

17265 River Road teW Killona, LA 70066 Tel 504 739 6650 W3F1-2002-0048 A4.05 PR April 25, 2002 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

Waterford 3 SES Docket No. 50-382 License No. NPF-38 Annual Environmental Operating Report - 2001 Gentlemen:

Attached is the 2001 Annual Environmental Operating Report for Waterford 3. This report is submitted pursuant to Subsection 5.4.1 of the Environmental Protection Plan (Appendix B to the Operating License).

Should you have any questions regarding this report, please contact Oscar P. Pipkins at (504) 739-6707. There are no commitments contained in this submittal.

Very truly yours, R.D. Peters Acting, Director Nuclear Safety Assurance RDP/OPP/cbh Attachment cc: E.W. Merschoff, NRC Region IV N. Kalyanam, NRC-NRR J. Smith N.S. Reynolds.

NRC Resident Inspectors Office

Attachment to W3F1-2002-0048 Page 1 of 1 WATERFORD 3 2001 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT This report describes implementation of the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) for the calendar year 2001, and provides the information required by the EPP.

A. Summaries and analyses of the results of the environmental protection activities required by EPP subsection 4.2:

This section of the EPP provides protection of the two cultural resource areas on the Waterford 3 site. There were no activities which affected either the Plantation Overseer's House site or the Plantation Quarter's site, during this reporting period. Both sites are eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.

B. EPP noncompliances and the corrective actions taken to remedy them:

There were no noncompliances with the requirements of the EPP during the reporting period.

C. A discussion of changes in station design or operation, tests, or experiments made in accordance with the EPP subsection 3.1 which involved a potential significant unreviewed environmental question:

During the reporting period, there were no station changes or evolutions requiring an environmental evaluation to ensure that a potential significant unreviewed environmental question did not exist:

D. Nonroutine reports submitted in accordance with subsection 5.4.2:

During the reporting period, there were no non-routine reports submitted in accordance with subsection 5.4.2.