ML051440479
| ML051440479 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 05/24/2005 |
| From: | Emch R Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs |
| To: | Gannon C Carolina Power & Light Co |
| Guerrero, C, NRR/DRIP/RLEP, 415-2981 | |
| References | |
| TAC MC4641, TAC MC4642 | |
| Download: ML051440479 (17) | |
Text
May 24, 2005 Mr. Cornelius J. Gannon, Vice President Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Carolina Power & Light Company Post Office Box 10429 Southport, NC 28461-0429
SUBJECT:
ISSUANCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING
SUMMARY
REPORT ASSOCIATED WITH THE STAFFS REVIEW OF THE APPLICATIONS BY CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, INC (CP&L) FOR RENEWAL OF THE OPERATING LICENSES FOR BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. MC4641 AND MC4642)
Dear Mr. Gannon:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) conducted a scoping process January 12, 2005, through March 11, 2005, to determine the scope of the NRC staffs environmental review of the applications for renewal of the operating licenses for Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2 (BSEP). As part of the scoping process, the NRC staff held two public environmental scoping meetings in Southport, North Carolina, on January 27, 2005, to solicit public input regarding the scope of the review. The scoping process is the first step in the development of a plant-specific supplement to NUREG-1437, ?Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (GEIS), for BSEP.
The NRC staff has prepared the enclosed Environmental Scoping Summary Report identifying comments received at the January 27, 2005, license renewal environmental scoping meetings.
No comments were received by letter or electronic mail. In accordance with Section 51.29(b) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 51.29(b)), you are being provided a copy of the scoping summary report. The transcripts of the meetings can be found as an attachment to the meeting summary issued on March 11, 2005. The meeting summary is available for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland or electronically from the Publicly Available Records (PARs) component of NRCs document management system (ADAMS) under Accession Number ML050730184. ADAMS is accessible from the NRCs Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html, which provides access through the NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room (PERR) link (note that the URL is case-sensitive). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRCs PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
C. Gannon The next step in the environmental review process is the issuance of the draft supplement to the GEIS scheduled for September 2005. Notice of the availability of the draft supplement to the GEIS and the procedures for providing comments will be published in an upcoming Federal Register notice. If there are any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at 301-415-1590 or via e-mail at rle@nrc.gov.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Richard L. Emch, Jr., Senior Project Manager Environmental Section License Renewal and Environmental Impacts Program Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos.: 50-325 and 50-324
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/encl: See next page
C. Gannon The next step in the environmental review process is the issuance of the draft supplement to the GEIS scheduled for September 2005. Notice of the availability of the draft supplement to the GEIS and the procedures for providing comments will be published in an upcoming Federal Register notice. If there are any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at 301-415-1590 or via e-mail at rle@nrc.gov.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Richard L. Emch, Jr., Senior Project Manager Environmental Section License Renewal and Environmental Impacts Program Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos.: 50-325 and 50-324
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/encl: See next page DISTRIBUTION: See next page ADAMS Accession nos.: ML051440479
- 1. Letter w/Summary Report, Svc. List Document Name:E:\\Filenet\\ML051440479.wpd OFFICE RLEP:DRIP:GE RLEP:DRIP:LA RLEP:DRIP:PM RLEP:DRIP:SC:ES NAME C. Guerrero M. Jenkins R. Emch A. Kugler DATE 05/09/05 05/06/05 05/24/05 05/24/05 OFFICE OGC NAME M. Lemoncelli DATE 05/18/05 OFFICIAL AGENCY COPY
DISTRIBUTION: Ltr. To C. Gannon, Issuance of Environmental Scoping Summary Report, Re:
Bruncwick Steam Electric Plant, Units, 1 and 2, Dated: May 24, 2005 Adams accession no.: ML051440479 PUBLIC Hard Copy RLEP/Environmental R/F E-Mail F. Cameron OPA RidsOgcMailCenter ACRS/ACNW W. Borchardt D. Matthews/F. Gillespie A. Kugler P.T. Kuo J. Wilson C. Guerrero S. Hernandez R. Emch S. Mitra B. Mozafari RIDSRgn2MailCenter M. Lemoncelli, OGC RidsNrrAdpt P. Fredrickson, R II R. Hannah, R II E. DiPaolo, SRI J. Austin, RI M. Parkhurst (PNNL)
RidsNrrAdpt B. Keeling, OCA
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Units 1 and 2 cc:
Mr. Steven R. Carr Associate General Counsel - Legal Department Progress Energy Service Company, LLC Post Office Box 1551 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-1551 Mr. David R. Sandifer, Chairperson Brunswick County Board of Commissioners Post Office Box 249 Bolivia, North Carolina 28422 Resident Inspector U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 8470 River Road Southport, North Carolina 28461 Mr. John H. ONeill, Jr.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 2300 N Street NW Washington, DC 20037-1128 Ms. Beverly Hall, Section Chief Radiation Protection Section, Division of Natural Resources N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources 3825 Barrett Dr.
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609-7721 Mr. David H. Hinds Plant General Manager Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Carolina Power & Light Company Post Office Box 10429 Southport, North Carolina 28461-0429 Public Service Commission State of South Carolina Post Office Drawer 11649 Columbia, South Carolina 29211 Ms. Margaret A. Force Assistant Attorney General State of North Carolina Post Office Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Mr. Robert P. Gruber Executive Director Public Staff - NCUC 4326 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-4326 Mr. T. P. Cleary Director - Site Operations Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
Post Office Box 10429 Southport, North Carolina 28461-0429 Mr. Norman R. Holden, Mayor City of Southport 201 East Moore Street Southport, North Carolina 28461 Mr. Warren Lee Emergency Management Director New Hanover County Department of Emergency Management Post Office Box 1525 Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1525 Mr. Chris L. Burton, Manager Performance Evaluation and Regulatory Affairs PEB 7 Progress Energy Post Office Box 1551 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-1551 Mr. Edward T. ONeill Manager - Support Services Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Carolina Power & Light Company Post Office Box 10429 Southport, North Carolina 28461
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Units 1 and 2 Mr. Allen K. Brittain Superintendent, Security Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
P.O. Box 10429 Southport, North Carolina 28461-0429 Mr. Michael Heath Brunswick Steam Electric Plant P.O. Box 10429 Southport, North Carolina 28461-0429 Mr. Talmage B. Clements Manager - License Renewal Progress Energy P. O. Box 1551 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Mr. Fred Emerson Nuclear Energy Institute 1776 I Street, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20006-3708 Ms. Ilene Brown NCUW William Randall Library 601 S. College Rd.
Wilmington, NC 28403-5616 Ms. Cynthia Tart 3404 E. Yacht Dr.
Oak Island, NC 28468 Ms. May Moore, Commissioner Brunswick County P.O. Box 249 Bolivia, NC 28422 Ms. Hilary Snow The State Port Pilot 114 E. Moore Southport 28461 Mr. Ken Raber North Carolina Eastern Municipal Power Agency P.O. Box 29513 Raleigh, NC 27626 Ms. Vicki Soltis 5134 Minnesota Dr.
Southport, NC 28461 Ms. Pat Woods 3700 Players Club Drive Southport, NC 28461 Mr. Joe Woods 3700 Players Club Drive Southport, NC 28461 Mr. Rob Gandy, City Manager City of Southport 201 E Moore Street Southport, NC 28461 Mr. Jerry Thrift, Vice President Brunswick Community College P.O. Box 30 Supply, NC 28462-0030 Mr. J. Steven Johnson, Director Brunswick County Economic Development Commission Post Office Box 158 25 Courthouse Drive NE Bolivia, NC 28422 Mr. J. Leslie Bell, AICP, Director Brunswick County Planning Department P.O. Box 249 Bolivia, NC 28422 Mr. Pete Benjamin Ecological Services Supervisor Raleigh Field Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Post Office Box 33726 Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Process Summary Report Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2 Southport, North Carolina May 2005 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Rockville, Maryland
Introduction On October 18, 2004, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) received an application dated October 20, 2004, from the applicant, Carolina Power and Light (CP&L) (doing business as Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.) for renewal of the operating licenses for Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2. The Brunswick plant is located in southeastern North Carolina, approximately 2.5 miles north of Southport near the mouth of the Cape Fear River. As part of the application, CP&L submitted an environmental report (ER) prepared in accordance with the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 51 (10 CFR Part 51).
10 CFR Part 51 contains the NRC requirements for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. Section 51.53 outlines requirements for preparation and submittal of environmental reports to the NRC.
Section 51.53(c)(3) was based on the findings documented in NUREG-1437, ?Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants, (GEIS). The GEIS, in which the staff identified and evaluated the environmental impacts associated with license renewal, was issued for public comment. The staff received input from Federal and State agencies, public organizations, and private citizens. As a result of the assessments in the GEIS, a number of impacts were determined to be generic to all nuclear power plants. These were designated as Category 1 impacts. An applicant for license renewal may adopt the conclusions contained in the GEIS for Category 1 impacts in the absence of new and significant information that may cause the conclusions to fall outside those of the GEIS. Category 2 impacts are those impacts that have been determined to be plant-specific and are required to be addressed in the applicants ER.
The Commission determined that the NRC does not have a role in energy planning decision-making for existing plants, which should be left to State regulators and utility officials.
Therefore, an applicant for license renewal need not provide an analysis of the need for power, or the economic costs and economic benefits of the proposed action. Additionally, the Commission determined that the ER need not discuss any aspect of storage of spent fuel for the facility. This determination was based on the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and the Commissions Waste Confidence Rule, 10 CFR 51.23.
On January 12, 2005, the NRC published a Notice of Intent in the Federal Register (70 FR 2188), to notify the public of the NRCs intent to prepare a plant-specific supplement to the GEIS to support the review of the renewal application for the Brunswick operating licenses.
The plant-specific supplement to the GEIS will be prepared in accordance with NEPA and 10 CFR Part 51. As outlined by NEPA, the NRC initiated the scoping process with the issuance of the Federal Register Notice. The NRC invited the applicant; Federal, State, Tribal and local government agencies; local organizations; and individuals to participate in the scoping process by providing oral comments at the scheduled public meetings and/or submitting written suggestions and comments no later than March 11, 2005. The scoping process included two public scoping meetings held on Thursday, January 27, 2005 at the Southport City Hall in Southport, North Carolina. The NRC announced the meetings in local newspapers (The Wilmington Star-News, and the State Port Pilot), issued press releases, and distributed flyers locally. Both sessions began with NRC staff members providing a brief overview of the license renewal process and the NEPA process. Following the NRCs prepared statements, the meetings were open for public comments. Seven (7) commenters provided oral statements that were recorded and transcribed. There were no comment letters (related to the license renewal application) received by the NRC. The meeting transcripts for the afternoon and evening meetings (accession numbers ML050730221 and ML0050730231, respectively) are available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRCs document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
The scoping process provides an opportunity for public participation to identify issues to be addressed in the plant-specific supplement to the GEIS and highlight public concerns and issues. The Notice of Intent identified the following objectives of the scoping process:
Define the proposed action Determine the scope of the supplement to the GEIS and identify significant issues to be analyzed in depth Identify and eliminate peripheral issues Identify any environmental assessments and other environmental impact statements being prepared that are related to the supplement to the GEIS Identify other environmental review and consultation requirements Indicate the schedule for preparation of the supplement to the GEIS Identify any cooperating agencies Describe how the supplement to the GEIS will be prepared.
At the conclusion of the scoping period, the NRC staff and its contractor reviewed the transcripts and identified individual comments. All comments and suggestions received orally during the scoping meetings were considered. Each set of comments from a given commenter was given a unique alpha identifier (Commenter ID letter), allowing each set of comments from a commenter to be traced back to the transcript.
Table 1 identifies the individuals providing comments and the Commenter ID letter associated with each persons set(s) of comments. The individuals are listed in the order in which they spoke at the public meeting.
Comments were consolidated and categorized according to the topic within the proposed supplement to the GEIS or according to the general topic if outside the scope of the GEIS.
Comments with similar specific objectives were combined to capture the common essential issues that had been raised in the source comments. Once comments were grouped according to subject area, the staff and contractor determined the appropriate action for the comment.
The staff made a determination on each comment that it was one of the following:
a comment that was either related to support or opposition of license renewal in general, or to Brunswick specifically, or that makes a general statement about the license renewal process. It may make only a general statement regarding Category 1 and/or Category 2 issues. In addition, it provides no new information and does not pertain to 10 CFR Part 54 (requirements for renewal of operating licenses for nuclear power plants).
a comment about a Category 1 issue that provided new information that required evaluation during the review, or provided no new information a comment about a Category 2 issue that provided information that required evaluation during the review, or provided no such information a comment that raised an environmental issue that was not addressed in the GEIS, a comment regarding Alternatives to the proposed action, a comment regarding safety issues within the scope of 10 CFR Part 54, but out of the scope of 10 CFR Part 51, a comment outside the scope of license renewal (not related to 10 CFR Parts 51 or 54),
regarding emergency response and planning operational safety issues terrorism a comment that was actually a question and introduces no new information.
Each comment is summarized in the following pages In those cases where no new information was provided by the commenter, no further evaluation will be performed.
The preparation of the plant-specific supplement to the GEIS (which is the SEIS) will take into account all the relevant issues raised during the scoping process. The SEIS will address both Category 1 and 2 issues, along with any new information identified as a result of scoping. The SEIS will rely on conclusions supported by information in the GEIS for Category 1 issues, and will include the analysis of Category 2 issues and any new and significant information. The draft plant-specific supplement to the GEIS will be available for public comment. The comment period will offer the next opportunity for the applicant, interested Federal, State, Tribal and local government agencies; local organizations; and members of the public to provide input to the NRCs environmental review process. The comments received on the draft SEIS will be considered in the preparation of the final SEIS. The final SEIS, along with the staffs Safety Evaluation Report (SER), will provide the basis for the NRCs decision on the Brunswick license renewal.
TABLE 1 - Individuals Providing Comments During Scoping Comment Period Commenter ID Commenter Affiliation (If Stated)
Comment Source A
Norman Holden Mayor, City of Southport Afternoon Scoping Meeting B
Paul Fisher Alderman, City of Southport Afternoon Scoping Meeting C
Mike Reaves President, Brunswick Community College Afternoon Scoping Meeting D
Connie Majure-Rhett Greater Wilmington Chamber of Commerce Afternoon Scoping Meeting E
Karen Sphar Southport-Oak Island Chamber of Commerce Afternoon Scoping Meeting F
May Moore Brunswick County Commissioner Evening Scoping Meeting G
Cynthia Tart Director of Communities and Schools in Brunswick County, Chairman of County Parks and Recreation Board Evening Scoping Meeting Brunswick Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 Public Scoping Meeting Comments and Responses The following pages summarize the comments and suggestions received as part of the scoping process, and discuss their disposition. Parenthetical numbers after each comment refer to the Commenters ID letter and the comment number. Comments can be tracked to the commenter and the source document through the ID letter and comment number listed in Table 1.
Comments are grouped by category. The categories are as follows:
- 1. General Support of Nuclear Power
- 2. Questions about the License Renewal Process
- 3. General Support of License Renewal at Brunswick Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2
- 4. Comments Concerning the Environment
- 5. Comments Concerning Socioeconomics
- 6. Comments Concerning Plant Operations and Safety
- 7. Comments Concerning Waste Management Comments
- 1. General Support of Nuclear Power Comment: I firmly believe that the future generation of electricity should be geared towards nuclear plants. (B-5)
Response: This comment is supportive of nuclear power and is general in nature. The comment provides no new information; therefore, it will not be evaluated further.
- 2. Questions about the License Renewal Process Comment: I think the one question that we all would ask is assuming that the license is renewed in 14 and 16, 20 years down the road, what happens next? Do you renew again, or do you have to mothball this plant? And I think the area would be very concerned about where that would leave us. (F-4)
Response: If the licensee desires, based on a variety of economic and structural factors, current regulations do allow the opportunity to renew the operating license again for another 20 years. The decision to apply would be up to the licensee, and could be made up to 20 years before the end of the licenses, which in this situation would be around 2016 and 2014 for Units 1 and 2, respectively, if the current licenses are renewed. This comment requests information about the license renewal process, and provides no new information; therefore, it will not be evaluated further.
- 3. General Support of License Renewal at Brunswick Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 Comment: [T]he plant means so much to the City of Southport, and we really need to see it relicensed....But ladies and gentlemen, you are the ones that make the decision. I'm up here, and I would get on my knees if I could get back up, to beg for you to please relicense the Brunswick nuclear plant. (A-1)
Comment: I strongly recommend that you renew the license for the Brunswick plant. By doing that, I think you'll go into a win-win situation. (B-4)
Comment: I'm here today to support the Brunswick nuclear plant and their application for license renewal....I strongly encourage you to support their [Brunswick] application. (C-1)
Comment: On behalf of the 1,650 companies that are members of the Greater Wilmington Chamber of Commerce, I would like to voice my very strong support for the processes, products and people of Progress Energy's Brunswick Nuclear Plant....Without a doubt, this facility and this company is an impressive one. Relicensing should be an obvious outcome of your work. (D-1)
Comment: [T]hank you for the opportunity to speak favorably about the license renewal application for Progress Energy's Brunswick plant....We are grateful to have the plant and Progress Energy as part of our community. We encourage the NRC to look favorably on this license renewal. (E-1)
Response: These comments are supportive of license renewal at Brunswick and are general in nature. The comments provide no new information; therefore, they will not be evaluated further.
- 4. Comments Concerning the Environment Comment: Environmentally, the plant has contributed to the ongoing study of marine life in our area, and they take great pride in the protection of that marine life. (E-3)
Comment: The nuclear power plant is environmentally clean....We have good fish. We have good birds. We have clean water. We have clean air. We'd like to keep it that way, and we feel that Progress Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission have worked to make this happen for us, and it's been a big help for us. (F-4)
Response: These comments are supportive of the impact of Brunswick on the environment and are general in nature. The comments provide no new information; therefore, they will not be evaluated further.
- 5. Comments Concerning Socioeconomics Comment: [The plant means so much] Not only to Southport, Southeastern North Carolina, but for the whole state of North Carolina because all of you are aware of the economy....But when the nuclear plant came to Southport, things really began to prosper. (A-2)
Comment: This plant has a huge impact on our local economy - $901 million in 2003, 14 percent of our region's economic output. Economies don't start and stop at county lines, but if you go a few miles up the river to New Hanover County where my office is, the impact is still huge....Then there are the contributions this company makes that are harder to quantify but equally valuable to this region. (D-3)
Comment: [T]he plant has an overwhelming economic impact on the economy of our area.
...Not only has the plant been good for the economy, the employees of the plant are active in our community. (E-2)
Comment: This plant provides stable and excellent paying jobs to that workforce.
(E-4)
Comment: They have done an enormous thing for our tax base since the 70s when the power plant began being constructed....Its not as an enormous a part of our tax base as it was in 1970 or 75, obviously, but its still quite a large part of the money that both the town of Southport and the County of Brunswick counts on, so that is an issue. (F-2)
Response: These comments are supportive of the impact of Brunswick on the local economy and are general in nature. The comments provide no new information; therefore, they will not be evaluated further.
Comment: And we have a great relationship with Progress Energy and the Brunswick plant here for community relations....It's a definite asset to the community. We have an outstanding relationship, in my opinion, with the plant out there and Progress Energy. (B-2)
Comment: [T]hey have been and continue to be a good corporate partner with the college....
We also in the past have had a wonderful relationship with them in providing education, both there on the site as well as having students from there coming on our campus. (C-2)
Comment: Without a doubt, Progress Energy is among the best corporate citizens I have ever had the pleasure of working with. But as important as that is, the human capital invested in our region by employees of Progress Energy....Our community is better because of these corporate and individual efforts. (D-4)
Comment: I'm delighted to be here on behalf of Progress Energy. They've been a wonderful corporate neighbor in Brunswick County....They've worked with us on fire and rescue and security, which is important....Progress Energy lets us use their media center. They work with us on school programs. They're a source of employment of many friends and neighbors of mine, so it's been an excellent neighbor and a great addition to the county. (F-1)
Comment: [I]n a partnership with a lease agreement with Progress Energy, we now have a park here in the Southport/Oak Island area, and without the partnership with Progress Energy, that would not be possible. (G-2)
Response: These comments are supportive of the relationship of Brunswick with the community and are general in nature. The comments provide no new information; therefore, they will not be evaluated further.
Comment: They [Brunswick] have enabled vast improvement to our school system. (F-3)
Comment: I've been here for 35 years, and I've seen, as May has said, what an impact the company has had on the community, the jobs it's provided, the educational resources it's provided in the schools. (G-1)
Comment: And if I could mention something as a plea...The plant sitting here has so many resources as far as education for our children, and they are our future....[I]f we had some of those resources in the schools working with our science teachers, you know, what could we be teaching our children, our future, about nuclear plants in their area, about their future, about jobs that are there? So I would encourage just the connection there, to -- to work on it and to strengthen it to better educate our children and just join forces with 'em. (G-3)
Response: These comments refer to the supportive relationship of Brunswick with the local schools, encourage additional support, and are general in nature. The comments provide no new information; therefore, they will not be evaluated further.
- 6. Comments Concerning Plant Operations and Safety Comment: I think if you look at the operations of the Brunswick plant, you'll find why we talk about operations. It's always something nice to talk about because it's always way up here.
They are the world leaders and that's documented. (B-1)
Comment: [I]n the City of Southport we're very comfortable with the nuclear plant out here, and we're proud of their operating record and safety record. (B-3)
Comment: I have personally visited the plant on several occasions and have confidence in the personnel that work there....I view the Brunswick nuclear plant as a clean and safe industry, one that is sensitive to the environment. They do an excellent job of keeping the public informed about drills and other safety issues. (C-3)
Comment: The plant is a safe, well-run, efficient facility. (D-2)
Response: These comments address the Brunswicks operational safety record and are general in nature. The comments provide no new information and do not pertain to the scope of license renewal as set forth in 10 CFR Parts 51 and 54; therefore, they will not be evaluated further.
- 7. Comments Concerning Waste Management Comment: I am completely comfortable with the safety of how we store spent fuel. However, I urge the federal government to get along with the Yucca Mountain project. (B-6)
Response: This comment is in support of how spent fuel is handled at Brunswick and encourages completion of a permanent waste storage facility. The comment provides no new information and does not pertain to the scope of license renewal as set forth in 10 CFR Parts 51 and 54; therefore will not be evaluated further.
Summary The preparation of the plant-specific supplement to the GEIS takes into account all the relevant issues, if any, raised during the scoping process that are described above. The comments received were supportive of the renewal of the Brunswick operating licenses. Concerns related to the environmental license renewal review of Brunswick are considered during the development of the draft SEIS for Brunswick Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. The draft SEIS will be available for public comment. Interested Federal, State, and local government agencies, local organizations, and members of the public will be given the opportunity to provide comments to be considered during the development of the final SEIS. Concerns identified that are outside the scope of the staffs environmental review have been or will be forwarded to the appropriate NRC program manager for consideration.