ML043490658
| ML043490658 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 11/09/2004 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Dam W, NRR/DRIP/RLEP, 415-3407 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML043490646 | List: |
| References | |
| +sispmjr200511 | |
| Download: ML043490658 (30) | |
Text
Preliminary Results of Environmental Review D.C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 Nuclear Regulatory Commission November 9, 2004
Purpose of Todays Meeting 3/4 Discuss NRCs license renewal process 3/4 Describe the environmental review process 3/4 Discuss the results of our review 3/4 Provide the review schedule 3/4 Accept any comments you may have today 3/4 Describe how to submit comments 2
D.C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 License Renewal 3/4 Operating licenses expire 3/4 October 2014 for Unit 1 3/4 December 2017 for Unit 2 3/4 Application requests authorization to operate D.C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 for up to an additional 20 years 3
NRCs License Renewal Review 3/4 Safety review 3/4 Safety evaluation 3/4 Plant inspections 3/4 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) 3/4 Environmental review 4
License Renewal Process Onsite Inspection Inspection Activities Report ACRS ACRS Review Report Safety Review Safety Safety Evaluation Review Report License Renewal Agency Application Hearings* Decision on Application Draft Environmental Scoping Comments Final Supplement Review Activities On Draft Supplement To Generic To GEIS EIS (GEIS)
Formal Public *If a request for hearing is granted Participation 5
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 3/4 NEPA requires Federal agencies to use a systematic approach to consider environmental impacts 3/4 Commission has determined that an environmental impact statement will be prepared for a license renewal action 6
Decision Standard for Environmental Review To determine whether or not the adverse environmental impacts of license renewal for D.C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 are so great that preserving the option of license renewal for energy planning decisionmakers would be unreasonable.
7
Environmental License Renewal Process Application Federal Register Submitted Notice of Intent October 2003 February 2004 Environmental Review Requests for Additional Scoping Site Audit Information Process March 2004 March 2004 Draft Supplement Final Formal to the GEIS Supplement to Public September 2004 the GEIS Participation May 2005 8
Team Expertise Atmospheric Science Radiation Regulatory Protection Compliance Socioeconomics/ Terrestrial Environmental Justice Ecology Nuclear Safety Aquatic Land Use Ecology Archaeology/Historical Resources Hydrology 9
Analysis Approach Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS)
Category 1 Issues Category 2 Issues GEIS: Impacts Same GEIS: Analyze Potential At All Sites Impacts At All Sites New Issue New and YES YES Perform Site-Site- Validated Significant Specific Analysis New Issue?
Info?
NO NO Adopt the No Further GEIS Conclusion Analysis 10
How Impacts are Quantified 3/4 NRC-defined impact levels:
3/4 SMALL: Effect is not detectable or too small to destabilize or noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource 3/4 MODERATE: Effect is sufficient to alter noticeably, but not destabilize important attributes of the resource 3/4 LARGE: Effect is clearly noticeable and sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the resource 3/4 Consistent with the Council on Environmental Quality guidance for NEPA analyses 11
Information Gathering License Renewal Application Staffs Public Site Audit Comments Supplemental EIS Federal, State,
& Local Social Agencies Services Permitting Authorities 12
Environmental Impacts of Continued Operation 3/4 Cooling System 3/4 Transmission Lines 3/4 Radiological 3/4 Socioeconomic 3/4 Groundwater Use and Quality 3/4 Threatened or Endangered Species 3/4 Cumulative Impacts 3/4 Accidents 13
Cooling System Impacts 3/4 Category 2 Issues 3/4Entrainment of Fish and Shellfish in Early Life Stages 3/4Impingement of Fish and Shellfish 3/4Heat Shock 3/4 Preliminary findings 3/4Impacts are SMALL 3/4No additional mitigation required 14
Radiological Impacts of Normal Operations 3/4 Category 1 issues 3/4 Radiation exposures to the public 3/4 Occupational radiation exposures 3/4 Preliminary findings 3/4 No new and significant information identified 3/4 GEIS concluded impacts are SMALL 15
Threatened or Endangered Species Aquatic Mussels Animals Insects and Plants
- 1. white cats paw 1. Indiana bat 1. Karner blue pearlymussel 2. bald eagle butterfly
- 2. northern 3. piping plover 2. Mitchells satyr riffleshell 4. Copperbelly 3. Pitchers thistle
- 3. clubshell water snake 4. small whorled pogonia Preliminary findings: Impacts are SMALL No additional mitigation required 16
Impacts to Groundwater Quality 3/4 Process wastewater and sanitary wastes are discharged to onsite absorption ponds and sewage lagoons 3/4 Preliminary findings 3/4 Impacts are SMALL 3/4 No additional mitigation required 17
Cumulative Impacts of Operation 3/4 Considered impacts of renewal term operations combined with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions 3/4 Evaluated to end of 20-year renewal term 3/4 No significant cumulative impacts 18
Other Environmental Impacts Evaluated 3/4 Uranium Fuel Cycle and Solid Waste Management 3/4 Decommissioning 19
Alternatives 3/4 No-action 3/4 Alternative energy sources 3/4 New generation (Coal, Natural Gas, Nuclear) 3/4 Purchased electrical power 3/4 Other alternatives (Oil, Wind, Solar, Conservation) 3/4 Combination of alternatives 3/4 Environmental effects of alternatives in at least some impact categories reach MODERATE or LARGE significance 20
Preliminary Conclusions 3/4 GEIS Conclusions on Category 1 issues adopted.
3/4 Impacts resulting from Category 2 issues are of SMALL significance.
3/4 Impacts to groundwater quality resulting from onsite disposal of process wastewater and sanitary wastewater would be SMALL.
3/4 Environmental effects of alternatives may reach MODERATE or LARGE significance. 21
Postulated Accidents 3/4 Design-basis accidents 3/4 Severe accidents 3/4 Severe accident mitigation alternatives (SAMAs) 22
SAMA Evaluation Process 3/4 Characterize overall plant risk 3/4 Identify potential improvements 3/4 Quantify risk reduction potential and implementation costs 3/4 Determine whether implementation of any of the improvements is required to support license renewal 23
Preliminary Results of SAMA Evaluation 3/4 194 candidate improvements considered 3/4 Set reduced to 72 by multi-step screening process 3/4 Detailed cost/benefit analysis 3/4 Identified 16 SAMAs 3/4 Grouped into 5 areas of risk reduction 24
Preliminary Results of SAMA Evaluation 3/4Potential cost-beneficial SAMAs not related to managing the effects of aging 3/4 Not required to be implemented as part of license renewal 25
Conclusions 3/4 Impacts of license renewal are SMALL for all impact areas.
3/4 Impacts of alternatives range from SMALL to LARGE.
3/4 The staffs preliminary recommendation is that the adverse environmental impacts of license renewal for D.C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 are not so great that preserving the option of license renewal for energy planning decisionmakers would be unreasonable.
26
Environmental Review Milestones 3/4 Draft EIS issued - 9/24/04 3/4 Comment period - 9/24/2004 to 12/08/04 3/4 Issuance of Final EIS - May 2005 27
Point of Contact and Reference Documents 3/4 NRC contact: Bill Dam (800) 368-5642, Ext. 4014 3/4 Documents located at local libraries 3/4 Bridgman Library 3/4 Maud Preston Palenske Memorial Library 3/4 Draft SEIS can also be viewed at the NRCs Web site (www.nrc.gov) at: www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1437/supplement20/
28
Submitting Comments 3/4 By mail: Chief, Rules and Directives Branch Division of Administrative Services Mailstop T-6D59 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 3/4 In person at: 11545 Rockville Pike Rockville, Maryland 3/4 E-mail: CookEIS@nrc.gov 29
30