ML042180051
| ML042180051 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  (DPR-024) |
| Issue date: | 07/30/2004 |
| From: | Stacey Imboden NRC/NRR/DRIP/RLEP |
| To: | Knorr J, Mckinney K Nuclear Management Co, We Energies |
| Imboden S, NRR/DRIP/RLEP, 415-2462 | |
| References | |
| Download: ML042180051 (2) | |
Text
StaceImboen - Fwd: Re: FW: Pt Beach - Issue ReaU gTnmet-P From:
Stacey Imboden To:
Jim.knorr@ nmccoxcom; Kris.mckinney~we-energies.com Date:
7/30/04 2:17PM
Subject:
Fwd: Re: FW: Pt Beach - Issue Realignment Kris and Jim, We came across an issue in the ER that was identified as Cat 2, but it should really be a Cat 1 issue for Point Beach. See attached email between NRC and LANL.
- Thanks, Stacey
Stacev Imboden - Re: FW: Pt Beach - Issue Realianment
_-U Pang 1 From:
Stacey Imboden To:
Allyn Pratt Date:
7/30/04 1:26PM
Subject:
Re: FW: Pt Beach - Issue Realignment I agree what what you have presented here. The standard is based on the usage, not the capacity of the wells. This should be a category 1 issue for Point Beach. Let's reflect that In Appendix F and I will notify NMC about the error.
Thank you for picking up on thatil Great jobl
>>> 'Allyn Pratt" <pratLa6 lanl.gov> 07/30/04 10:24AM >>>
Stacey - While preparing the draft Appendix F for Pt Beach (Issues not in Scope), I have found an error in disposition of two issues that are related.
The ER identified that the Category 1 issue "Ground-water use conflicts...
for plants that use < 1 00gpm was NOT APPLICABLE The ER identified that the Category 2 issue "Ground-water use conflicts...
for plants that use > 1 00gpm" was APPLICABLE On review of the ER, page 2-11 identifies that the plant uses about 6.5 gpm (on average). Similarly on page 4-11 the ER identifies that while the plant has a capacity of >100 gpm, they only use 6.5 gpm (average). The plant interpreted that capacity was the metric. However, 10 CFR Part 51, Subpart A Appendix B Table B-1 clearly identified that use is the appropriate metric. If you agree with this assessment, we suggest that the plant be informed and we will execute the change in Appendix F of the draft SEIS.
Please call if you have any questions.
CC:
Paul Schumann; Ted B. Doerr