|
|---|
Category:General FR Notice Comment Letter
MONTHYEARML14364A0122014-12-22022 December 2014
Comment (00011) of Anonymous Individual on Southern California Edison Company; San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3; Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report
ML12032A0272011-12-19019 December 2011
Comment (4) of Raj Rana, on Behalf of Himself, on NUREG-1482, Rev 2, Appendix B
ML11354A1102011-12-14014 December 2011
Comment (74) of Lois Duvall & Faith Ruffing on Behalf of Themselves Supporting Draft Supplement 47 to the GEIS for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings for the License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11334A0682011-11-16016 November 2011
Comment (69) of Kris Watkins on Behalf of Tri-Cities Visitor & Convention Bureau, Supporting Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station Operated by Energy Northwest
ML11325A3172011-11-16016 November 2011
Comment (60) of Thomas Buchanan, on Behalf of Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility, on Relicensing Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A1812011-11-16016 November 2011
Comment (62) of Theodora Tsongas Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants
ML11325A1822011-11-16016 November 2011
Comment (63) of Laurence Vernhes Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plant
ML11325A3152011-11-16016 November 2011
Comment (59) Jill Reifschneider Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings for the License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A3182011-11-16016 November 2011
Comment (61) of Allison O'Brien on Behalf of Us Dept of the Interior, on Re-licensing of Columbia Generating Station
ML11334A0692011-11-16016 November 2011
Comment (70) of Christine B. Reichgott on Behalf of Us Environmental Protection Agency, on Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Renewal of Columbia Generating Station License
ML11325A3102011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (54) of Gerry Pollet, on Behalf of Heart of America, on Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings for the License Renewal of Columbia Generating Stati
ML11325A2462011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (50) of Delbert Mccombs, Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants & Public Meetings for License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A3082011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (52) of Leslie March, on Behalf of the Sierra Club, Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings for the License Renewal of Columbia Generating
ML11325A3092011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (53) of Janice Castle Opposing Relicensing of Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A1842011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (65) by James W. Sanders on Behalf of Benton Pud, Supporting Renewal of the Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A1832011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (64) of Julie Longenecker on Behalf of Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, on Draft Supplemental EIS for License Renewal of the Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A2472011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (51) of Eric Adman, Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings for License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A3132011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (57) of Mary Twombly Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants
ML11325A3112011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (55) of Chandra Radiance on Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings for the Licenses Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A3142011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (58) of Charles Johnson, on Behalf of Himself, Opposing Relicensing of Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A3122011-11-15015 November 2011
Comment (56) of Hafiz Heartsun, on Behalf of Himself, Opposing Re-Licensing of Columbia River Generation Station
ML11325A2452011-11-14014 November 2011
Comment (49) of Susan Nash, Opposing NRC-2010-0029-0015, Notice of Availability of Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings for License Renewal of Columbia Gener
ML11325A2442011-11-14014 November 2011
Comment (48) of Steven G Gilbert, on Behalf of Himself, Opposing License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11325A2432011-11-14014 November 2011
Comment (47) of Jacqueline Sorgen on Behalf of Himself Opposed to Notice of Receipt and Availability of Application for Renewal of Columbia Generating Station Facility Operating License
ML11325A2422011-11-12012 November 2011
Comment (46) of Louisa Hamachek, Opposing NRC-2010-0029-0015, Energy Northwest, Columbia Generating Station; Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings
ML11325A1902011-11-10010 November 2011
Comment (66) of Michelle Caird on Behalf of Inland Power and Light Co., Supporting License Renewal of the Columbia Generating Station
ML11334A0662011-11-10010 November 2011
Comment (67) of Stephen Posner on Behalf of the State of Washington Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council on Columbia Generating Station Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement - Supplement 47
ML11334A0702011-11-0808 November 2011
Comment (71) of Commissioners on Behalf of Mason County Pud Supporting Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetings for the License Renewal of Columbia Generatin
ML11308A0302011-11-0101 November 2011
Comment (2) of Tom Clements on Behalf of Friends of the Earth, on Draft Strategic Plan About Testing of Plutonium Fuel (MOX) Made from Weapons-Grade Plutonium Required for NRC to License MOX Use in Boiling Water Reactors
ML11318A2562011-10-25025 October 2011
Comment (45) of William Gordon, Et. Al., on Behalf of Franklin Pud, Supporting Energy Northwest'S License Renewal for Columbia Generating Station
ML11305A0132011-10-19019 October 2011
Comment (43) of Henry T. Bernstein on Behalf of Himself, Opposing the Relicensing of the Columbia Generating Station
ML11305A0122011-10-18018 October 2011
Comment (42) of Diana Thompson on Behalf of Public Utility District No. 2 of Pacific County in Support of Energy Northwest'S Application to Renew Columbia Generating Station'S License for an Additional 25 Years
ML11291A1352011-10-16016 October 2011
Comment (38) of Linda on Behalf of Self Opposing the Renewal of Columbia Generating Station License
ML11293A0432011-10-13013 October 2011
Comment (41) of Leo Bowman, Shon Small & James Beaver on Behalf of Benton County, Wa, Board of Commissioners, Supporting the Relicensing of the Columbia Generating Station
ML11293A0422011-10-11011 October 2011
Comment (40) of the Board of Commissioners for Mason County Public Utility District, Supporting the Renewal of Columbia Generating Station'S Operating License for an Additional 20 Years
ML11291A1572011-10-0505 October 2011
Comment (37) of Ken S. Berg on Behalf of Us Dept of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, on Columbia Generating Station License Renewal Informal Consultation
ML11280A1162011-10-0404 October 2011
Comment (31) of Unknown Individual Opposing License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11280A1172011-10-0404 October 2011
Comment (32) of Scott Mcdonald on License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11280A1152011-10-0303 October 2011
Comment (30) of Holly Graham Re Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11280A1102011-10-0101 October 2011
Comment (27) of Carol Hiltner Opposing Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11280A1092011-09-30030 September 2011
Comment (26) of Kathleen Wahl on NRC-2010-0029, Energy Northwest, Columbia Generating Station; Notice of Availability of Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal
ML11280A1082011-09-30030 September 2011
Comment (25) of Martin Mijal Re Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11279A2462011-09-29029 September 2011
Comment (18) of Judy Ginn on Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11280A2002011-09-29029 September 2011
Comment (22) of Theodora Tsongas Re Columbia Generating Station; Notice of Availability of Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal
ML11280A2032011-09-29029 September 2011
Comment (24) of Lonn Holman Re Draft Supplement 47 to Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Columbia Generating Station
ML11280A1202011-09-28028 September 2011
Comment (35) of Don C. Brunell, on Behalf of Association of Washington Business, Supporting License Renewal for Columbia Generating Station
ML11279A2412011-09-28028 September 2011
Comment (13) of Tom May Requesting Regional Hearings on the Draft EIS for Relicensing of Columbia Generating Station
ML11279A2432011-09-28028 September 2011
Comment (15) of Kathleen Bushman on NRC-2010-0029 - Energy Northwest, Columbia Generating Station; Notice of Availability of Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public
ML11279A2452011-09-28028 September 2011
Comment (17) of Anne Moore on NRC-2010-0029 - Energy Northwest, Columbia Generating Station; Notice of Availability of Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and Public Meetin
ML11279A2402011-09-28028 September 2011
Comment (12) of Gary Petersen of Tridec on NRC-2010-0029 - Energy Northwest, Columbia Generating Station; Notice of Availability of Draft Supplement 47 to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants and
2014-12-22
[Table view] |
Text
Gallagher, Carol From: Julie Longenecker [julielongenecker@ctuir.org]
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 3:19 PM To: Doyle, Daniel Cc: Ellen Kennedy; Teara Farrow Ferman; Audie Huber; Julie Longenecker
Subject:
FW: Comments of the EIS for the License Renewal for the Columbia Generating Station
- Dan, Below are the comments from the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR), Cultural Resources Protection Program (CRPP) Richland Office, on the Draft Supplemental EIS for License Renewal of the Columbia Generating Station for Public Comment. Thank you for your phone calls and correspondence in August and September.
I understand the deadline for comments is Nov. 1 6 th, but ifyou have any questions regarding the comments below, please call or email me today or tomorrow at (541) 429-7977, iulielongenecker@ctuir.org and we can get them straightened out. If I am not available, please call Ellen Kennedy at (541) 429-7976, Ellenkennedv@ctuir.org.
Thank you, Julie Longenecker
Subject:
Comments of the EIS for the License Renewal for the Columbia Generating Station
" Include a description of the cooling tower plume in Section 2.2.8.4 Visual and Aesthetic Resources. This plume is quite visible from many places in the region depending upon the time of year and is within the viewshed of both Rattlesnake Mountain and Gable Mountain, traditional cultural properties that are important places to the CTUIR. Include a discussion of this plume and an analysis of potential visual impacts to these properties in the Historic and Archaeological Resources sections.
" CTUIR Cultural Resources Protection Program (CRPP) would like to receive a list of artifacts recovered from 45BN257 during archaeological excavations that occurred prior to the construction of the intake and outfall structures. According to the EIS, these are currently stored within DOE's Hanford Site Cultural and Historic Resources Program Collection.
- CTUIR CRPP recommends that CGS lands be re-surveyed for cultural resources since it has been over 30 years since they were surveyed. CRPP recommends that that this become a condition of the relicensing activity or that a separate PA be developed by NRC and Energy Northwest in consultation with Tribes and SHPO.
" CTUIR CRPP recommends that area next to the Columbia River be monitored annually for cultural resources.
Archaeological material may continue to be exposed. CRPP recommends that that this become a condition
- of the relicensing activity or that a separate PA be developed by NRC and Energy Northwest in consultation with Tribes and SHPO.
- On page 2-67, lines 30-32 describe several artifacts as having been observed in the vicinity of the current locations of the intake and outfall structures prior to construction. Although the artifacts were not recorded as part of a site, what happened to these artifacts? Provide a list of these artifacts and confirm if these artifacts were collected and if they are stored with the artifacts from 45BN257 within DOE's Hanford Site Cultural and Historic Resources Program Collection.
- Will these collections be maintained by DOE for ENW and are there agreements in place that direct DOE to protect these collections? Who is responsible for their protection?
- P 2-68, line 27 state that a 1999 survey recorded 45BN706 (lithic core) and 45BN760 (anvil stone). Confirm if these artifacts were collected and if not, how is Energy Northwest protecting them? If so, were they added to DOE's collection?
3 E1-or- 09/Difi-63 D,o6P, 010-)
- P.2-68, line 32 indicates that two lithic flakes were observed in the general location of 45BN257. Confirm if these artifacts were collected and if not, how is Energy Northwest protecting them? If so, were they added to DOE's collection?
" As the leasee, is it Energy Northwest's responsibility is it to maintain archaeological site records, collections etc.
for the CGS site? Or is it DOE's? Is there an agreement or procedure in place that governs this? CTUIR CRPP recommends that a formal agreement be developed to clarify roles and responsibilities of Tribes, Energy Northwest, NRC and DOE on the CGS site regarding human remains, archaeological sites, collections and cultural resources compliance. CRPP recommends that this agreement be part of the condition of the NRC relicensing activity or that a separate PA be developed by NRC and Energy Northwest in consultation with Tribes and SHPO outlining these.
- P. 4-27, line 26-28 indicates that tribes suggested that Energy Northwest work with tribes to develop cultural resources training for Energy Northwest staff. What is the status of this training and when will it occur? CTUIR recommends that this be a requirement as part of the license renewal or be addressed in a PA developed by NRC in consultation with Tribes and SHPO outlining these.
" The CTUIR CRPP would like to receive and review Energy Northwest's cultural resources protection procedure and be formally consulted on the implementation of this procedure. Does the procedure call for coordination and/or consultation with CTUIR CRPP? CRPP recommends that this procedure be part of a separate PA developed by NRC and Energy Northwest in consultation with SHPO and Tribes.
" The CTUIR CRPP would like to meet with the Energy Northwest personnel who oversee the implementation of the cultural resources protection procedure as well as establish a long-term consultation process and relationship between local staff at Energy Northwest and CTUIR CRPP.
" p.4-27-4-28 of the EIS mentions the MOA for Energy Northwest's communication facility located on Rattlesnake Mountain that was signed by DOE, Energy Northwest and SHPO. CRPP would like to remind Energy Northwest and DOE of stipulation B.2 in the MOA committing Energy Northwest and DOE to evaluating technologies as they become available that enable relocation of this facility off of Rattlesnake Mountain. CRPP recommends that this MOA be tied to the NRC relicensing conditions, as operation of the communications facility is part of the relicensing action either as a condition of the license or through the development of a PA by NRC and Energy Northwest in consultation with Tribes and SHPO.
" P. 2-68, line 37- the survey was completed by the CTUIR not for the CTUIR.
2
