ML16172A008

Environmental Site Audit Plan Regarding Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3

ML16172A008
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	07/08/2016
From:	Keegan E Division of License Renewal
To:	Chisum M Entergy Operations
Keegan E, NRR/DLR, 415-8517
References
CAC MF014, DLR-16-0149
Download: ML16172A008 (16)

Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 July 8, 2016 Mr. Michael R. Chisum Site Vice President Entergy Operations, Inc.

Waterford 3 17265 River Road Killona, LA 70057-3093

SUBJECT:

ENVIRONMENTAL SITE AUDIT REGARDING WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 3 (CAC NO. MF7014)

Dear Mr. Chisum:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is reviewing Entergy Operations, Inc. (Entergy),

application for renewal of the operating license for Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 (Waterford 3). As part of the environmental review, an environmental site audit will be conducted at Waterford 3, by NRC staff, during the week of July 18, 2016. The environmental audit activities will be conducted in accordance with the enclosed environmental audit plan (Enclosure 1).

To aid in developing the site-specific supplemental environmental impact statement to NUREG-1437, "Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, the NRC staff requests the information described in the enclosed environmental audit needs list (Enclosure 2) be made available, to the extent possible, during the environmental site audit. The NRC staff transmitted this information to your staff, Leia Milster, by e-mail on June 16, 2016.

If you have any questions, please contact me by telephone at 301-415-8517 or by e-mail at Elaine.Keegan@nrc.gov.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Elaine M. Keegan, Sr. Project Manager Environmental Review and Projects Branch Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-382

Enclosure:

1) Regulatory Environmental Audit Plan

2) Environmental Audit Needs List cc: Listserv

July 8, 2016 Mr. Michael R. Chisum Site Vice President Entergy Operations, Inc.

Waterford 3 17265 River Road Killona, LA 70057-3093

SUBJECT:

ENVIRONMENTAL SITE AUDIT REGARDING WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 3 (CAC NO. MF7014)

Dear Mr. Chisum:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is reviewing Entergy Operations, Inc. (Entergy),

application for renewal of the operating license for Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 (Waterford 3). As part of the environmental review, an environmental site audit will be conducted at Waterford 3, by NRC staff, during the week of July 18, 2016. The environmental audit activities will be conducted in accordance with the enclosed environmental audit plan (Enclosure 1).

To aid in developing the site-specific supplemental environmental impact statement to NUREG-1437, "Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, the NRC staff requests the information described in the enclosed environmental audit needs list (Enclosure 2) be made available, to the extent possible, during the environmental site audit. The NRC staff transmitted this information to your staff, Leia Milster, by e-mail on June 16, 2016.

If you have any questions, please contact me by telephone at 301-415-8517 or by e-mail at Elaine.Keegan@nrc.gov.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Elaine M. Keegan, Sr. Project Manager Environmental Review and Projects Branch Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-382

Enclosures:

1) Regulatory Environmental Audit Plan

2) Environmental Audit Needs List cc: Listserv DISTRIBUTION: See next page ADAMS Accession no.: ML1616172A008 OFFICE LA:DLR PM:RERP:DLR BC:RERP:DLR NAME IBetts EKeegan JDanna DATE 6/23/2016 7/ 8 /2016 7/ 8 /2016 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

Letter to M. Chisum from E. Keegan Dated July 8, 2016 DISTRIBUTION:

HARD COPY:

DLR RF E-MAIL:

PUBLIC RidsNrrDlr Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb2 Resource RidsNrrDlrRerb Resource RidsNrrDlrRarb Resource RidsNrrDlrRasb Resource RidsNrrDlrRsrg Resource RidsNrrPMWaterford Resource EKeegan JDanna PClark YDiaz-Sanabria JLindell VDricks, RIV LUselding, RIV BMaier, RIV FRamierez, SRIV CSpeer, RIV DMcIntyre, OPA

LICENSE RENEWAL ENVIRONMENTAL AUDIT PLAN WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 3

1. Background

On March 30, 2016, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) received the Entergy Operations, Inc. (Entergy), application for renewal of operating license for Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 (WF3). In support of the application and in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 51 and Part 54, Entergy also submitted an environmental report (ER) for WF3.

As part of the license renewal review, the NRC staff will conduct an environmental audit at WF3.

This audit is conducted with the intent to gain understanding, to verify information, and to identify information that will require docketing to support the basis of the licensing or regulatory decision. Specifically, the NRC staff will identify pertinent environmental data, review the facility and area, and obtain clarifications regarding information provided in the ER. Per NRC guidance, the NRC staff prepares a regulatory audit plan that provides a clear overview of audit activities and scope, team assignments, and schedule.

2. Environmental Audit Bases License renewal requirements are specified in 10 CFR Part 54, Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants. Licensees are required by 10 CFR 54.23 to submit an ER that complies with the requirements in 10 CFR Part 51, Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions, as part of the license renewal application. Review guidance for the NRC staff is provided in NUREG-1555, Standard Review Plans for Environmental Reviews for Nuclear Power Plants: Supplement 1 -

Operating License Renewal.

NRC staff is required to prepare a site-specific supplement to NUREG-1437, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants. During the scoping process required in 10 CFR Part 51, NRC staff is required to define the proposed action, identify significant issues which must be studied in depth, and to identify those issues that can be eliminated from further study.

3. Environmental Audit Scope The scope of this environmental audit for the WF3 license renewal is to identify those issues which are significant and those issues which can be eliminated from further study and to identify the environmental resources that must be adequately described and evaluated in the site- specific supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Audit team members will focus on reviewing the documents and requested information listed in the WF3 Environmental Audit Needs List (Enclosure 2) and discussing the information with plant personnel subject matter experts.

4. Information and Other Material Necessary for the Environmental Audit As described in the Site Audit Needs List (Enclosure 2).

ENCLOSURE 1

5. Team Assignments by Discipline The environmental audit team members and their specific discipline assignments are listed i n the following table:

Environmental Review Team Members Discipline Team Members Environmental Project Manager Elaine Keegan Alternatives Robert Hoffman Aquatic Resources Michelle Moser Cumulative Impacts Robert Hoffman Environmental Justice Jeffrey Rikhoff*

Geologic Environment William Ford*

Groundwater Resources William Ford*

Historical and Cultural Resources Jeffrey Rikhoff*

Human Health Elaine Keegan Land Use and Visual Resources Briana Grange Meteorology, Air Quality, and Noise Nancy Martinez Microbial Hazards Michelle Moser Socioeconomics Jeffrey Rikhoff*

Special Status Species and Habitats Briana Grange Surface Water Resources Kevin Folk Terrestrial Resources Briana Grange Waste Management William Rautzen

• William Ford and Jeffrey Rikhoff will not be attending the site audit.

6. Logistics The environmental audit will be conducted at WF3 starting on Tuesday, July 19, 2016. An entrance meeting will be held with plant management at the beginning of the audit. An exit meeting will be held at the end of this audit.

7. Special Requests The NRC staff requests the applicant make available the information identified on the

Environmental Audit Needs List. Plant staff who are subject matter experts in the disciplines listed on the Environmental Site Audit Needs List should be available for interviews and to provide tours which have been identified on the Environmental Audit Draft Schedule (Enclosure 3).

8. Deliverables A report should be issued by the NRC staff to the applicant within 90 days from the end of the environmental audit.

WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 3 LICENSE RENEWAL ENVIRONMENTAL SITE AUDIT NEEDS LIST The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has reviewed Appendix E, the environmental report (ER), of the Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 (WF3) license renewal application (LRA).

Please be prepared to discuss the following issues and make the following information available during the environmental site audit.

1. AIR QUALITY and NOISE (AQ)

Meteorology and Air Quality AQ-1 Have field tests concerning ozone and nitrogen oxides emissions generated by high voltage transmission lines been conducted near WF3 in-scope transmission lines? If so, please provide this information.

AQ-2 Provide a copy of annual reports pertaining to WF3s air permit submitted to Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LADEQ) for the most recent five years.

AQ-3 ER Table 3.2-3 states that annual emissions presented are based on fuel usage. Clarify if particulate matter (PM10) emissions provided in Table 3.2-3 include particulate emissions from the two auxiliary component cooling water (ACCW) wet mechanical draft cooling towers.

AQ-4 In support of NRCs greenhouse gas, climate change, and cumulative impacts analysis provide the following:

A.) Long-term meteorological information from the data recorded at WF3s meteorological facility. The meteorological data should include the most recent 30 years for which the data are available:

1. mean monthly and annual temperatures

2. mean monthly precipitation and annual precipitation B.) Has a river warming trend been observed in the Mississippi River during the period of plant operations? Please provide any study(s), relevant information, or historical and current data that covers the last 20 years that support the conclusions reached (e.g., mean annual, seasonal, and/or or monthly water temperature trend for the period of record).

AQ-5 Provide copies of new and significant review(s) identified in the ER (e.g., meetings, consultations, Entergys in-house process for reviewing and evaluating environmental issues which could potentially be new and significant information) Entergy documented pertaining to Air Quality Category 1 issues.

ENCLOSURE 2

AQ-6 Provide a copy of the following references cited in the ER:

a. Entergy. 2015i. WF3 Air Emissions CalculationsCriteria Pollutants, Hazardous Air Pollutants, and Greenhouse Gases. Correspondence CEO 2015-00017. April 6, 2015.

b. WF3. 2004a. Waterford 3 Air Permit 2520-00091-00. April 19, 2004. LP&L (Louisiana Power & Light Company). 1978. Environmental ReportOperating License Stage, Waterford Steam Electric Station Unit No. 3, Vols. 1, 2, and 3.

c. Entergy. 2014h. Entergy Nuclear Fleet Procedure EN-MA-128, Refrigerant Management Program, Revision 5. June 25, 2014.

Noise AQ-7 Provide copies of new and significant review(s) identified in the ER (e.g., meetings, consultations, Entergys in-house process for reviewing and evaluating environmental issues which could potentially be new and significant information) Entergy documented pertaining to the one Noise Category 1 issue.

AQ-8 Provide a copy of the following references cited in the Environmental Report:

a. LP&L (Louisiana Power & Light Company). 1978. Environmental ReportOperating License Stage, Waterford Steam Electric Station Unit No. 3, Vols. 1, 2, and 3. (note:

only Section 2.7.2.1, noise discussion).

Air Quality and Noise Meeting: Provide a subject matter expert to discuss the air quality portions of the ER and who can discuss the following aspects of facility operations: (1) sources of air pollutants operating at WF3 and (2) air permits and emission inventories. This breakout session would be used as needed to resolve or clarify any immediate outstanding data needs or questions arising from the site visit.

2. ALTERNATIVES (AL)

AL-1 Identify the available acreage and location(s) on the Entergy Louisiana, LLC property that would be suitable for siting replacement power generation. Please identify possible locations during the site tour.

AL-2 Provide the basis for estimated cooling water withdrawal and consumption requirements associated with the replacement power alternatives to support the statement that water withdrawals would be a fraction of that required by WF3's once-through cooling system, and water consumption as a result of cooling tower evaporative losses would be insignificant compared to the volume of water flowing in the Mississippi River.

AL-3 Provide the following references for review:

a. ENERCON 2015b,

b. Entergy 2015g; and

c. Lanning 2014

Alternatives Meeting: Please provide for a breakout meeting with Entergys subject matter expert(s) and/or the contractor(s) responsible for writing the replacement power portions of the ER. This breakout session would be used as needed to resolve or clarify any immediate outstanding data needs or questions arising from the site visit.

3. AQUATIC RESOURCES (AR)

AR-1 In Section 3.6.6.2, on page 3-119 of the ER, Entergy states that a review of the data collected for the WF3 plant ecological study conducted from 1975 to 1976 suggests that the common-to-abundant species documented during the study are not significantly different from those found 30 years later. (Entergy 2007, page 2-3). In the source document (Entergy 2007, page 2-3), Energy (2007) compares data from Baker (1991) and data collected from 1975 to 1976. These data sets are approximately 15 years apart, whereas the ER states that Entergy compared datasets 30 years apart. Please clarify which data Entergy reviewed and provide a copy of the data Entergy used to compare the common-to-abundant species over time.

AR-2 In Section 3.6.6.2, on page 3-119 of the ER, Entergy states that, no comprehensive ichthyofaunal surveys have been conducted on the LMR [Lower Mississippi River] in at least the past 30 years (Schramm 2004, page 307). Clarify whether Entergy is aware of any ichthyofaunal or entrainment surveys that have been conducted on the LMR since 2004.

AR-3 Describe the cleaning and maintenance procedures at the intake and discharge structures on the Mississippi River, including the frequency of dredging, physical cleaning, and other maintenance procedures.

AR-4 Clarify whether Entergy has conducted any thermal plume modeling or field studies to characterize the size and temperature of the WF3 thermal plume in the Mississippi River. In addition, describe any thermal modeling or field studies that have occurred to characterize the thermal plume at Waterford 1 or 2.

AR-5 In Section 2.2.2.1, Entergy states that the traveling screens associated with the intake structure are being replaced with MultiDisc screens in an effort to minimize condenser biofouling. Describe whether Entergy expects any differences in impingement and entrainment rates based on the use of the MultiDisc screens during the period of extended operations, as compared to the historically used traveling screens. For example, describe any differences in mesh size, through screen flow, or any other operational or design features that would differ between the traveling screens and the MultiDisc screens.

AR-6 In Section 4.6.1.1.3, Entergy estimates impingement rates at WF3 by extrapolating the impingement rates determined at Waterford 1 and 2 based on field studies at those units. Describe any differences in the through screen flow, traveling screens, or any other operational or engineering differences between the units that could influence impingement rates.

AR-7 In Section 4.6.1.2.3, Entergy states that In LDEQ's [Louisiana Department of Environmental Qualitys] evaluation, the combined thermal discharges from Waterford 1 and 2, WF3, and Little Gypsy were considered with respect to the cooling tower operations of a downstream facility, Union Carbide. Provide documentation of LDEQ's evaluation.

AR-8 Provide a copy of the following documents:

a. Louisiana Power & Light, April, 1979. Demonstration under Section 316(a) of the Clean Water Act. Waterford Steam Electric Station Unit No. 3,

b. Louisiana Power & Light, April, 1979. Demonstration under Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. Waterford Steam Electric Station Unit No. 3,

c. Espey, Huston and Associates, Inc. 1977. 316(b) Demonstration Study at Waterford Unit 1 & 2.4. Annual Data ReportWaterford Power Plant Units 1 and 2, Screen Impingement Studies, February 1976 through January 1977.

d. Annual Data ReportWaterford Power Plant Units 1 and 2, Screen Impingement Studies, February 1976 through January 1977.

Aquatic Resources Meeting: Please provide a breakout meeting with the applicant's subject matter expert(s) and/or the contractor(s) responsible for writing the aquatic resources portion of the ER and who can discuss the above information requests.

4. Cumulative (CU)

CU-1 Please provide name, description, location, and status of any additional past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects or actions that have been identified since the applicants' ER was prepared.

CU-2 Please identify the distance and direction from WF3 to the known or reasonably foreseeable projects discussed in this section.

CU-3 Please provide a reference for the discussion presented on page 4-42 regarding the proposed AM Agrigan urea plant.

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE (EJ) - No questions at this time GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENT - No questions at this time GROUNDWATER RESOURCES GW-1 Provide copies of any updated hydrogeologic characterizations that have been prepared for the site since 2007.

GW-2 The ER states that no groundwater is withdrawn at WF3 but other portions of the ER indicate that groundwater dewatering could be necessary at the site, such as associated with new construction. Clarify whether operational groundwater dewatering is conducted at WF3 at present. If so, identify the methods of dewatering, points of withdrawal, the average daily volumes, and the method of disposal of dewatering flows.

HISTORICAL and CULTURAL RESOURCES Sensitive cultural resources information, such as archaeological site location information, should be withheld from public disclosure and guidance described in Section 304 of the National Historic Preservation Act should be followed.

HC-1 Provide a copy of the 2014 Phase 1A Literature Review and Archaeological Sensitivity Assessment of the Waterford Steam Electric Station Unit 3, Killona, St. Charles Parish, prepared by Coastal Environments, Inc., September 24, 2014.

HC-2 Provide a copy of Entergy Nuclear Fleet Procedure EN-EV-121, Cultural Resources Protection Plan, Revision 3. December 5, 2013.

HC-3 Provide a summary description of any other administrative controls and environmental procedures in place for land-disturbing activities at WF3 (e.g., trenching, clearing, and digging). Describe how inadvertent cultural resource discoveries are treated HUMAN HEALTH - No questions at this time LAND USE and VISUAL RESOURCES LU-1 Section 3.1.1 of the ER describes an agricultural lease to Raceland Raw Sugar LLC for approximately 660 acres of land within the Entergy property. Does Entergy anticipate continuing to lease this land for agricultural purposes during the proposed 20-year license renewal period?

LU-2 Provide a copy of the ER reference - Entergy. 2014c. Agricultural Lease and Security Agreement, Entergy Louisiana, LLC and Raceland Raw Sugar LLC. July 31, 2014.

Land Use Meeting: Please provide for a breakout meeting with Entergy's subject matter expert(s) and/or the contractor(s) responsible for writing the land use and visual resources portions of the ER or who is otherwise knowledgeable on this topic. This breakout session would be used as needed to resolve or clarify any immediate outstanding data needs or questions arising from the site visit. If possible, please combine this breakout meeting with the breakout meeting request for Aquatic Resources, Terrestrial Resources, and Special Status Species & Habitats.

MICROBIAL HAZARDS MO-1 Describe any cleaning processes, such as the use of biocides or other chemicals, to minimize contamination and biological growth within the cooling water system. Provide a description of the chemical injection system, including the chemicals used and frequency with which the circulating cooling water is treated.

MO-2 Provide a copy of any correspondence to State health-related agencies regarding the potential for Waterford 3's thermal effluent to promote the growth of thermophilic microorganisms in the Mississippi River.

MO-3 Provide a copy of the following ER reference:

ENERCON. 2014. Record of Phone Conference between Dr. Ratard, Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals, and D. Bean, Enercon Services, Inc.Primary Amebic Meningoencephalitis. June 23, 2014.

Microbial Hazards Meeting: Please provide a breakout meeting with the applicant's subject matter expert(s) and/or the contractor(s) responsible for writing the microbial hazards portion of the ER and who can discuss the above information requests.

SOCIOECONOMICS SOC-1 Provide Entergy Louisiana, LLC property tax payment information for the year 2015, if available, similar to the data provided in Table 3.8-4 of the ER.

SOC-2 Section 3.8.5 states, Other than taxes, no other significant payments are made by Entergy Louisiana, LLC to St. Charles Parish as it relates to WF3. Besides St.

Charles Parish, describe any other sizeable annual support payments (e.g.,

emergency preparedness fees and payments or fees because of the independent spent fuel storage installation), one-time payments, or other forms of non-tax compensation (if any) provided to local organizations, communities, and jurisdictions (e.g., state, municipalities, townships, villages, incorporated places, and school districts) on behalf of WF3.

SOC-3 Section 3.8.5 states, Entergy Louisiana, LLC anticipates that continued fluctuations in the company's assessed value and tax rates will impact the tax payments to St.

Charles Parish; however, Entergy Louisiana, LLC does not expect these changes to be notable or significant changes to future property tax payments. Besides local fluctuations in assessed value and tax rates, please provide information about any anticipated changes in state and local tax laws, tax rates or tax payment adjustments that could result in notable future increases or decreases in property taxes or other tax payments on behalf of WF3.

SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES and HABITATS SS-1 Provide a copy of the following ER reference:

Entergy. 2014e. Threatened and Endangered Species Survey, Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3. December 30, 2014.

SS-2 In Section 3.6.11.3 of the ER, Entergy uses a June 24, 2015 email from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (reproduced beginning on p. B-17 of the ER) to support its statement that no essential fish habitat (EFH) has been designated within the vicinity of WF3. However, the email does not specifically state that no EFH has been designated within the vicinity of WF3. Please further describe how Entergy determined that EFH need not be evaluated for the proposed WF3 license renewal keeping in mind the meaning of adverse effects to EFH defined at 50 CFR 600.910.

Special Species Meeting: Please provide for a breakout meeting with Entergy's subject matter expert(s) and/or the contractor(s) responsible for writing the special status species and habitats

portions of the ER or who is otherwise knowledgeable on this topic. This breakout session would be used as needed to resolve or clarify any immediate outstanding data needs or questions arising from the site visit. If possible, please combine this breakout meeting with the breakout meeting request for Aquatic Resources, Terrestrial Resources, and Land Use & Visual Resources.

SURFACE WATER RESOURCES SW-1 Provide a summary of the volume of surface water withdrawn from the Mississippi River over the last 5 years, including monthly volumes and annual totals.

SW-2 Provide a copy of Entergy's March 2015 NPDES/LPDES permit renewal application for Permit No. LA0007374, which was due to expire in October 2015. Also, provide any available documentation from LDEQ that the renewal application was accepted as administratively complete.

SW-3 Provide copy of WF3 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (current version)

SW-4 Clarify the nature of the low-volume and chemical wastewaters, referenced in ER Section 3.5.1.1.1, which are pumped to the aboveground concrete holding basin and transferred to Waterford 1, 2, and 4 for processing. Specifically clarify whether this wastewater is limited to steam generator blowdown and that this discharge corresponds to NPDES/LPDES internal outfall 401. If this wastestream differs from the source attributed to outfall 401, describe the source of this wastewater, volume and frequency of the transfers, and whether chemical analysis is conducted.

SW-5 Provide copies of NPDES/LPDES Discharge Monitoring Reports for the last 2 years (2014 and 2015), inclusive of 2016 year to date.

SW-6 Identify and describe any Notices of Violation (NOVs); nonconformance notifications; or related infractions received from regulatory agencies associated with NPDES permitted discharges, sanitary sewage systems, groundwater or soil contamination, as well as any involving spills, leaks, and other inadvertent releases (e.g., petroleum products, chemicals, or radionuclides) received since 2014. Include self-reported violations.

Provide copies of relevant correspondence to and from the responsible regulatory agencies.

SW-7 Section 2.2.2.1 of the ER states that the CWIS is designed to provide 1,080,000 gallon per minute (gpm) of circulating cooling water to the plant. However, it is also stated that the intake structure houses four circulating water pumps, each with a capacity of 250,000 gpm, in addition to three service water/screen wash pumps, each with a capacity of 3,000 gpm, for a total maximum withdrawal rate of 1,009,000 gpm. Please clarify the apparent discrepancy.

Surface Water Meeting: Please provide for a breakout meeting with Entergys subject matter expert(s) and/or the contractor(s) responsible for writing the surface water hydrology and quality portions of the ER and whom can otherwise discuss the plant's intake and circulating water systems, effluent discharges, and affected water resources. This breakout session would be

used as needed to resolve or clarify any immediate outstanding data needs or questions arising from the site visit.

TERRESTRIAL RESOURCES TR-1 Section 3.6.10 of the ER describes studies and monitoring of ecological resources on the Entergy property. However, no terrestrial vegetation or wildlife surveys are described prior to the October 2014 threatened and endangered survey. Verify that no other terrestrial vegetation or wildlife surveys have been conducted on or near the Entergy property related to WF3 construction or operation. If any such studies have been conducted, describe and provide copies of those studies.

TR-2 Provide copies of the fleet procedural controls described in Section 9.6 of the ER related to ensuring that environmentally sensitive ecological areas are accounted for and protected during operation and maintenance activities and project planning.

TR-3 Describe Entergy's landscape maintenance activities, including Entergy's procedures for maintaining in-scope transmission line rights-of-way as well as general grounds maintenance.

TR-4 Provide a copy of the terrestrial resource and special status species and habitats sections of the following ER reference:

LP&L (Louisiana Power & Light Company). 1978. Environmental ReportOperating License Stage, Waterford Steam Electric Station Unit No. 3, Vols. 1, 2, and 3.

TR-5 In Section 3.6.11.2.4, p. 3-159 of the ER, Entergy states that no known bald eagle nests occur on the Entergy property. However, in a June 18, 2015, letter from the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF) (reproduced beginning on p. B-16 of the ER), the LDWF states that "the proposed project may potentially impact a Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocphalus) nesting site located within the project site." Please explain these seemingly contradictory statements and clarify if a bald eagle nest exists on the Entergy property. If such a nest exists, please describe any related coordination with State and Federal agencies, BMPs, or protection plans, as applicable.

Terrestrial Resources Meeting: Please provide for a breakout meeting with Entergy's subject matter expert(s) and/or the contractor(s) responsible for writing the terrestrial resources portions of the ER or who is otherwise knowledgeable on this topic. This breakout session would be used as needed to resolve or clarify any immediate outstanding data needs or questions arising from the site visit. If possible, please combine this breakout meeting with the breakout meeting request for Aquatic Resources, Special Status Species & Habitats, and Land Use & Visual Resources.

WASTE MANAGEMENT WM 1 Provide the following documents:

a. Entergy. 2015a. Entergy Nuclear Fleet Procedure EN-EV-106, Waste Management Program, Revision 6. November 3, 2015.

b. Entergy. 2015b. Entergy Nuclear Fleet Procedure EN-EV-104, Waste Minimization,

Revision 4. January 27, 2015.

c. Entergy. 2015c. Entergy Nuclear Fleet Procedure EN-EV-112, Chemical Control Program, Revision 15. March 3, 2015.

d. Entergy. 2015d. Entergy Nuclear Fleet Procedure EN-IS-111, General Industrial Safety Requirements, Revision 13. July 29, 2015.

e. Entergy. 2015e. Entergy Nuclear Fleet Procedure EN-IS-123, Electrical Safety, Revision

16. August 7, 2015.

f. Entergy. 2016a. Entergy Response to WF3 License Renewal Project Request for Information. Response to RFI ENTG2.2-001, WF3 Hazardous Waste Generation 2010-2014. February 18, 2016.

WM-2 Since WF3 is subject to the reporting provisions of 40 CFR Part 110 as it relates to the discharge of oil in such quantities as may be harmful pursuant to Section 311(b)(4) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Any discharges of oil in such quantities that may be harmful to the public health or welfare or the environment must be reported to the National Response Center. In section 9.5.1.5 of the ER, the applicant discusses reportable spills, and states that for the 5 year period of 2010-2014 there were no reportable spills: Provide the most current records to see if there have been any reportable spills which would trigger this notification requirement since the ER was written.

SITE AND IMMEDIATE VICINITY TOUR.

Air Quality and Noise:

a. During the tour of the immediate vicinity of WF3 please identify nearby noise sensitive receptors, including the nearest resident.

b. Tour/visit of major air emission sources at WF3

c. Tour/visit of major noise sources at WF3 Alternatives: During the site tour identify the available acreage and location(s) on the Entergy Louisiana, LLC property that would be suitable for siting replacement power generation.

Groundwater, Aquatic Resources, and Surface Water:

a. Tour of the WF3 site and adjacent WF 1, 2, 4 site and immediate vicinity, including the WF3 shoreline and levee and intake and discharge pipeline routings, as well as the Bonnet Carre Spillway structure.

b. The team would also like to visit the following water supply and effluent management features and major support facilities: intake canal, intake structure, water treatment building; discharge structure, sewage treatment plant and outfall location to 40 Arpent Canal, yard oil separator, and other observable NPDES/LPDES outfall locations; the ultimate heat sink/component cooling water system structure; and groundwater monitoring well locations.

Terrestrial Resources: Provide a tour that includes the following:

a. the industrial portion of the site, including the in-scope transmission lines; onsite switchyard; reactor containment building, reactor auxiliary building, fuel handling

building, turbine building, and other major buildings

b. portions of the site that represent the various types of natural habitats on the site, including forested areas and the various wetlands types identified in Section 3.6.5.1 of the ER, and

c. agricultural fields within the site boundaries