ML082190564
| ML082190564 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  (NPF-014, NPF-022) |
| Issue date: | 07/21/2008 |
| From: | Arguto W Environmental Protection Agency |
| To: | Rulemaking, Directives, and Editing Branch |
| References | |
| 73FR24093 000001, NUREG-1437 S35 | |
| Download: ML082190564 (3) | |
Text
d OSO Sr4*
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION III l
stf 1650 Arch Street IC_
l
~
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029 14[
g PRO-*llve
"_5"j
- ')
2)",..}.
July 21, 2008 N.)
Chief, Rulemaking, Directives and Editing Branch (37///O U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop T6-D59 7,3-Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Re: EPA Review and Comments on Draft Generic Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DGSEIS) for the Susquehanna Stream Electric Station, Units 1 and 2 (Report Number NUREG-1437, Supplement 35)
Dear Sir/Madam:
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 3, reviewed the above-referenced document pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA),
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). regulations (40CFR Parts 15 00-1 508),. and Section 309 of the Clean Air Act. The purpose of the letter is to provide the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC),.with-EPA's comments regarding the potential impacts of the:reneywal.of the operating license (OL): for the Susquehanna Stream Electric -Station, Units,1 ýand 2.,.j As you. are aware,,the proposed action of renewing the OL for a 20-year period (i.e., until July 17, 2042,'Unit 1 and March 23,:2044, Unit 2).would maximize the use of existing assets.: If the OLs are renewed, State regulatory agencies and Pennsylvania Power and Light Company - Susquehanna, LLC (PPL) will ultimately decide whether the plant will continue to operate based on factors such as the need for power or other matters within the State's jurisdiction or purview of the owners. If the OLs are not renewed, then the units must be shut down at or before the expiration dates of the current OLs, which are July 17, 2022, for Unit 1, and March 23, 2024,for Unit 2.
PPL Susquehanna, LLC operates Susquehanna Stream Electric Station, Unit 1 and 2 in northeastern Pennsylvania under NRC OLs NPF-014 and NPF-022, respectively.
The facility has two General Electric-designed boiling-water reactors, each-with a current power level of 3439 megawatts thermal (MW(t)) and a net power of 1135 megawatts.
electric (MW(e)); though the facility'has recently.received approval for an, extended power uprate allowing an increase of each'unit's power level to 3552 MW(t), or approximately 1300 MW(e) per unit. The plant cooling is provided by a closed-cycle heat dissipation *system that dissipates heat primarily to.theair.'Unit/ -1and 2 producer.
electricity'to supply the needs of roughly 2 million homes-.-
- As part of~the NEPA: review process, EPA has developed a set of criteria for rating,
I' Draft GSEIS. The two part criteria system rates Draft EISs from both an environmental and adequacy perspective. The rating system provides d basis upon which EPA makes recommendations to the lead agency for improving the Draft GSEIS (see attachment for additional information about the EPA rating system criteria or at:
www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/comments/ratings.html). Based on our review of the DGSEIS for the Susquehanna Stream Electric Station, Units l and 2, EPA has rated this DGSEIS as EC-l Environmental Concerns, Adequate Information. In the DGSEIS the NRC staff concluded that the potential impacts on historic and archaeological resources could be moderate and have made'recommendations to PPL to mitigate impacts by:
- 1. developing and implementing improved procedures or by examining the entire plant site for historic and archaeological resources
- 2. include Section 106 training to PPL staff to ensure that informed decisions are made when considering the effects of projects
- 3. any changes made to the, historic and archaeological resources assessments should be coordinated with the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission Further, the DGSEIS indentified EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Pollution Prevention Clearinghouse can be used as a source for opportunities for waste minimization and pollution prevention. EPA concurs with the above NRC's staff recommendations.
EPA appreciates the opportunity to submit comments on the DGSEIS. EPA welcomes the chance to continue working with NRC. My staff is ready to continue to participate, as necessary, to assist NRC in the completion of the NEPA analysis for this project. Please feel free to contact me or Kevin Magerr at 215 814 5724, if you wish to
'discuss these comments further.
Sincerely, William Arguto, NEPA Team Leader Office of Environmental Program 2
SUMMARY
OF RATING DEFINITIONS ANDTFOI F
IO)W-iP ACTION Environmental Ipniact of the Actign LO-Lack of Obiections The EPA review has not identified any potential environmental impacts requiringsubstantivechanges to the proposal: The review may have disclosed opportunities for application of mitigation measures that could be accomplished with no more than minor changes to the proposal.
EC-Environmental Concerns The. EPA review has identified environmental impacts that should be avoided in. order to fully protect the
.environment. Corrective measures may require changes to the preferred alternativeor application of mitigation.
measures that can reduce the environmental impact. EPA would like to work with the lead agency to reduce these
- impacts.
EO-EnvironmentalObiections The EPA review has identified significant environmental impacts that must be avoided to provide adequate protection for the environment. Corrective measures may require substantial changes to the preferred alternative or considerationof some other project alternative (including the no action-alternative or anew alternative). EPA intends to work with the lead agency to reduce these impacts.
EU-Environmen tallvUnsatisfactoir The EPA review has identified adverse environmental impacts that are of sufficient magnitude that they are unsatisfactory fromthe standpointof environmental quality, public health or welfare. EPA intends to work with the lead agency.to reduce these impacts. If the potential unsatisfactory impacts are not corrected at the final EIS stage; this proposal will be recommend. for referral to the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ).
Adeauacv of the Impact Statement Categorv I -Adeauate EPA believes the draft EIS adequately sets forth the environmental impact(s) of the preferred alternative and those of the alternatives reasonably available to the project or action. No further analysis or data collection is necessary, but thereviewer may suggest the addition of clarifying language Or information.
Cateaorv 2-Insufficient Information The draft EIS does'not contain sufficient information for EPA to fully assess environmental impacts that Should be avoided in order to filly protect the environment, oi" the EPA reviewer has identified new reasonably available alternatives that are within the spectrum of alternatives analyzed in the draft EIS, which could reduce the environmental impacts of the action. The identified additional information, data, analyses, or discussion should be included in the final EIS.
Cate2orvn3-lnadeauate EPA does not believe that the draft EIS adequately assesses potentially significant environmental impacts of the action, or the EPA reviewer has identified new, reasonably available alternatives that are outside of the spectrum of altematives analyzed in the draft EIS, which should be analyzed in order to reduce the potentially significant environniental iinpacts. EPA believes that the identified additional information, data, analysis, or discussions are of such a magnitude that they should have full public review at a draft stage. EPA does not believe that the drdft EIS is adequate for the purposes of the NEPA. and/or Section 309 revi6w, and thus should be formally revised and made available for public comment in a supplemental or revised draft EIS. On the basis of the potential significant impacts involved, this proposa)i could be a candidate for referral to the CEQ.
- From EPA Manuial 1640, "'Policy and Procedures for the Reviewof Federal Actions Impacting the Environment."