ML11263A095
| ML11263A095 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem, Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 08/17/2010 |
| From: | Susco J Division of License Renewal |
| To: | Bulavinetz R, Logan D, Jeffrey Rikhoff Division of License Renewal |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2011-0113 | |
| Download: ML11263A095 (1) | |
Text
Perkins, Leslie From:
Susco, Jeremy Sent:
Tuesday, August 17, 2010 4:13 PM To:
Bulavinetz, Richard; Logan, Dennis; Rikhoff, Jeffrey; Beissel, Dennis Cc:
Imboden, Andy
Subject:
FW: ACTION: Salem/Hope Creek scoping comments FYI since there has been some confusion about this: There is no due date associated with this. The due date is whatever due date Charles gave to you for your DSEIS input. I just wanted to make sure that as the tech reviewers for AECOM's work, that you are aware of the scoping issues brought up by the public and that they are addressed as needed.
Dennis L/Rich: As long as we discuss the effects of the estuary enhancement program, we have fulfilled our obligation to the comments.
Jeff: I recommend that you briefly glance through the socio section. All of the comments are grouped for you in Section 6. You don't have to do any digging.
Dennis B: I recommend that you briefly glance through the 1st half of comments in Section 4 regarding Artificial Island.
- Thanks, Jeremy From: Susco, Jeremy Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 1:58 PM To: Balsam, Briana; BeBault, April; Beissel, Dennis; Bulavinetz, Richard; Klementowicz, Stephen; Logan, Dennis; Moser, Michelle; Rautzen, William; Rikhoff, Jeffrey; Travers, Allison; Ghosh, Tina; Gallucci, Ray Cc: Imboden, Andy; Eccleston, Charles; Imboden, Andy
Subject:
ACTION: Salem/Hope Creek scoping comments I am helping Charles finish up with the Salem/Hope Creek scoping summary report and Appendix A to the SEIS. As you are reviewing your sections of the draft SEIS, please make sure that following items are addressed (as appropriate) in your section of the SEIS. I have attached the scoping summary report that contains all the comments and response broken down by area.
- 1) Aquatic/terrestrial ecology: multiple comments related to the quality and quantity (lack thereof) of S/HC's data, effects of the estuary enhancement program
- 2) Hydrology/Postulated accidents: plants are sited on Artificial Island
- 3) Socioeconomics: many comments related to the plant's effect on the area through taxes, education, philanthropy, and employment Thanks and let me know if you have any questions, Jeremy Jeremy Susco Project Manager U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (301) 415-2927 ieremv.susco(cDnrc.clov I