ML18139A615

Discusses Review of Draft EIS for Steam Generator Repair. Radiation Dosage to Residents Near Plant & Proposed Method for Disposal of Liquid Effluents Should Be Addressed.Comment Classified as L0-2.Definition of Codes Encl

ML18139A615
Person / Time
Site:	Surry
Issue date:	07/31/1980
From:	Pomponio J ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8008050344
Download: ML18139A615 (2)

Text

e e UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION Ill 6TH AND WALNUT STREETS PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19106 JUL 3 1 1980 Director Division of Site Safety and Environmental Analysis U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555 Re: Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Steam Generator Repair, Surry Power Station, Unit No. 1, Virginia Electric and Power Company

Dear Sir:

We have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the above referenced repair and have classified it as L0-2 in EPA's Reference Cate-gory. We have enclosed a copy of the Definition of Codes for the General Nature of EPA Comments to provide a more detailed description of this rating, While we have no major objections to the project as described, we have two comments which should be addressed in the final EIS,

1. While "The doses to the population within 50 miles will be less than 5 man-rem to the thyroid or total body from liquid effluents and less than 2 man-rem to the thyroid or total body from airborne effluents," it would seem that these doses would be distribued over sharply declining gradient as the distance from the plant increases out to 50 miles. The dosage to residents near the plant should be addressed,

2. The proposed method for disposal of liquid effluents not stored for re-use and its impacts should be addressed, We hope that we have been of assistance to you in meeting your responsi-bilities under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, If we can be of further assistance, or if you have any questions, please contact us.

Sin/lely~OQ~L,M:

~Pomponi(

EIS & Wetlands Review Section Enclosure

~00805031/'f ' p

. "\>-

e.

Definition of Codes for the General Nature of EPA Connnents Environmental Imoact of the Action. -

LO--Lack of Objections EPA has no objections to the proposed action as described*

in the draft impact statement or suggests only minor.

changes in the proposed action.

ER--Environmental Reservations

.EPA has reservations concerning the environmental effects of certain aspects of the proposed-action~ EPA believe&* ..

that further study of suggested alternatives or modifica-*

tions is required and has asked the originating Federal agency to reassess these aspects.

EU-Environme~tally Unsatisfacto:r:y .

EPA believes that.the proposed action is unsatisfactory*

because of its potentially harmful effect on the cnvirc;>~*

ment *. Furthermore, the Agency believes that the potentia1*

safeguards which might be utilized may not adequately pro-**.

tect the environment from -hazards arising from this

• action. The Agency*recomrr.ends that alternatives to the.-:-

action be analyzed further (including the possibility*

of no action at all).

Adequacy of the Impact Statement.*

Category 1-Adequate.*

The draft-impact.statement adequately sets forth*the-environmental impact of the proposed project or action.. as,*

well as alternative~*reasonably available to the project

• or action-- *

• Category 2--Insufficient information.

EPA believes that the draft impact .statement does ~ot.

• contain sufficient information to assess fully the . .

environmental ir.lpact of the proposed project or action.

However, from the information submitted, the Agency is**

able to make a oreliminarv determination oi the impact

• • on: the _environme~t. EPA has requested that the* originator*

provide the i~formation that was not included in.the*

• draft statement. *

~tegory 3~Inadequate-EPA believes that the draft-impact statement does not adequately assess the environmental impact of the pro-posed project or action, or that the statement inadequately analyzes reasonably available alternatives. The Agency has ..

requested more information and analysis co~cerning the potential environmental hazards and-has asked that sub-stantial revision be made to the draft statement.

If a draft imoact statement is assigned a Category l, ordinarily no rating will be made of the projector action;,

since a basis docs not generally exist on which to make**

such a determination. *