ML072060536

Y020070137 - Letter from P. Musegaas and V. Tafur to B. Pham on Acceptance Review for Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2 and 3, License Renewal Application

ML072060536
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	07/25/2007
From:	Bo Pham NRC/NRR/ADRO/DLR/REBB
To:	Musegaas P Riverkeeper
Pham B, NRR/DLR/REBB, 415-8450
Shared Package
ML072060528	List: ML072060536
References
Y020070137
Download: ML072060536 (4)

Text

July 25, 2007Phillip MusegaasRiverkeeper Staff Attorney 828 South Broadway Tarrytown, NY 10591

Dear Mr. Musegaas:

I wish to express my appreciation for your letter dated June 4, 2007, in which you raised variousconcerns regarding the NRC's acceptance review of the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 2 and 3 License Renewal Application (LRA), submitted by Entergy Nuclear Operations,Inc. (Entergy) on April 23, 2007. In your letter, you stated that Entergy's Indian Point LRA does not comply with regulatoryrequirements in the areas of impacts on aquatic ecology and analysis of groundwater contamination. Specifically, you stated that, with respect to aquatic ecology, the Environmental Report (ER) fails to meet the requirements set forth in Sections 51.45 and 51.53(c) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) because (1) current specific information preparedby the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) has not been evaluated regarding aquatic ecology, in particular entrainment, impingement and thermal discharge impacts; (2) important plant and animal habitats-except for endangered and threatened species-have not been evaluated; and (3) the analysis of available alternatives for reducing or avoiding adverse environmental effects on aquatic resources is grossly incomplete.

In addition, you stated, with respect to ground water contamination, that Entergy's conclusions in the ER "are unsupported by the facts and [are] at odds with the publically stated opinions of both NRC and NYSDEC staff involved in the ongoing groundwater leak investigation."We have carefully reviewed the concerns raised in your June 4, 2007, letter, and consideredthem during our acceptance review. While we understand your concern that the information in the ER was not adequately comprehensive, the staff has determined that Entergy has submitted sufficient information in accordance with 10 CFR Sections 51.45 and 51.53(c) to enable the staff to undertake a review of the application, and that the application is therefore acceptable for docketing. The staff's acceptance determination does not constitute a determination that a renewed license should be issued, and does not preclude the staff from submitting such requests for additional information as the staff may determine are appropriate or necessary, as its review proceeds. As you may know, the NRC staff's environmental review process involves an environmental site audit and affords the staff the opportunity to request an applicant to submit additional information to supplement the ER, as necessary. The information you presented in your letter, and the source of that information, will be considered by the staff during the course of its review to ensure that the NRC's environmental impact statement for license renewal is based upon appropriate data. The concerns set forth in your letter would also be considered, as appropriate, as environmental scoping comments during the staff's preparation of an environmental impact statement.

P. Musegaas- 2 -Again, I understand the concerns raised in your letter and wish to assure you that the NRC staffcarefully considered the applicability of your comments during its acceptance review, and that your comments will also be considered during the environmental review process. Your early participation in the NRC review process is appreciated.Sincerely,/RA/Bo M. Pham, Senior Project ManagerEnvironmental Branch B Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulationcc:Victor TafurRiverkeeper Staff Attorney 828 South Broadway Tarrytown, NY 10591

Pkg: ML072060528; Incoming: ML071730115; Ltr: ML072060536 C:\FileNet\ML072060536.wpd OFFICEPM:REBB:DLRLA:DLROGCBC:REBB:DLRD:DLR NAMEBPhamSFigueroaEwilliamsonfor STurkRFranovichPTKuoDATE07/25/0707/25/0707/24/0707/25/0707/25/07

Letter to P. Museegas from B. Pham, dated July 25, 2007

SUBJECT:

RESPONSE LETTER TO P. MUSEEGAS (Y20070317)DISTRIBUTION:HARD COPY: DLR RFE-MAIL:PUBLICRidsEdoMailCenter RidsSecyMailCenter RidsOgcMailCenter RidsNrrWpcMail RidsRgn1MailCenter RidsNrrDlr RidsNrrDlrRlra RidsNrrDlrRlrb RidsNrrDlrRlrc RidsNrrDlrReba RidsNrrDlrRebb

---

BPham RFranovich KGreen JCaverly RAuluck MKowal JBoska ECobey, RI GMeyer, RI MMcLaughlin, RI NMcNamara, RI RBarkley, RI GBowman, RI CHott, RI RConte, RI MCox, RI DJackson, RI BWittick, RI NSheehan, RI OPA DScrenci, RI OPA SBurnell, OPA DMcIntyre, OPA RShane, OCA UShoop, OEDO LRakovan, OEDO