ML19081A075

Attachment 1: Responses to Requests for Additional Information

ML19081A075
Person / Time
Site:	HI-STORE
Issue date:	03/15/2019
From:	Holtec
To:	Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
References
5025041
Download: ML19081A075 (52)

Text

Attachment1toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page1of52

ERGEN1:Provideanupdateofthestatusofproposed,pending,andapprovedlicenses, authorizations,andpermitsspecificallyfortheproposedHoltecCISF.Theinformationprovidedshould identify(i)theissuingagency;(ii)thetypeoflicense,permit,orapprovalneeded;and(iii)thecurrent statusofsecuringthelicense,permit,orapproval.

InadditiontotheinformationprovidedinERSection1.4(ApplicableRegulatoryRequirements,Permits, andRequiredConsultations)andERTable1.4.1(Holtec,2017b),provideintabularformatthecurrent status(i.e.,issued,underreview,yettobesubmitted)ofFederal,State,Tribal,orlocalapprovals, authorizations,andpermitsthatwouldbenecessaryforconstructingandoperatingtheproposedCISF.

Also,verifythattheproposedrailspurisnotacommoncarrierlineandthereforewouldnotrequirea permitfromtheSurfaceTransportationBoardtoapprovetheconstructionandoperationofthe proposedrailspurthatwouldservicetheproposedCISFinaccordancewith49USC10901.This informationisneededtocompletethedescriptionoftheproposedactionandevaluateits environmentalimpacts.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b),and(c),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheaffectedenvironment,andcontainsufficientdatatoaidtheNRCin itsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse

Section1.4wasrevisedtoprovidediscussioninregardtotheRailSpurbeingdesignatedasanoncarrier privatespur.Therefore,itwillnotrequireapermitfromtheSurfaceTransportationBoard(STB).Section 1.4wasalsorevisedtoclarifypermittingrelatedtotheRailSpurcrossingNM243,aswellasthe reroutingofLagunaRoadCR55.Table1.4.1wasrevisedtoaccuratelyreflectallrequiredPermits.

Thefollowingtabledetailsthestatusofeachrelatedpermitorauthorization.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page2of52

ActivityCovered Agency NPR*

InitialSurvey Complete Yettobe Submitted Under Review Issued Comments Federal LicenseApplication NRC

SubmittedMarch31,2017 LandUsePermit BLM

SeeROCinAppendixA(Cisneros)

EndangeredSpeciesAct USFWS

Surveyscomplete,informalconsultationconducted (AppendixBofER).NoT&Especiespresent.

Permitting/Authorizationfor RailSpur STB

RailspurisanoncarrierprivatespurandnotunderSTB jurisdiction.

State NationalHistoricPreservation Act NewMexicoState Historic PreservationOffice

Surveyscomplete,informalconsultationconducted (AppendixCofER).Twoprehistoricsitesidentifiedas eligibleforlistinginNationalRegisterofHistoricPlaces (NRHP).Avoidanceisrecommended.

NM243RailRoadSpurROW Crossing NMDOT

Holtecwouldapplyforthepermitpriortoconstruction.

AirQualityPermit NMED

SeeRAIERAQ2 GeneralConstructionPermit NMED

Holtecwouldapplyforthepermitpriortoconstruction.

GroundwaterDischarge Permit/Plan NMED

Holtecwouldapplyforthepermitpriortoconstruction.

NationalPollutantDischarge EliminationSystem(NPDES)

IndustrialStormwater NMED

Holtecwouldapplyforthepermitpriortoconstruction.

NPDESConstruction StormwaterPermit NMED

Holtecwouldapplyforthepermitpriortoconstruction.

HazardousWasteGeneration andStorage NMED

Holtecwouldapplyforthepermitpriortoconstruction.

EnvironmentalProtection Agency(EPA)Notificationof HazardousWasteActivityto obtainanEPAIdentification Number NMED

HoltecwouldapplyfortheIDnumberpriortogeneration ofwasteduringfacilityconstructionandoperation.

PetroleumStorageTank Registration NMED

Holtecwouldregisterstoragetanksasrequired.

Local RerouteofLagunaRoad LeaCo.Road Department

SeeAppendixA;noauthorizations/permitsrequiredas roadisonprivateland.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page3of52

RAIERPA1:Giventhemaximumcapacityofthecanistersidentifiedintheinitiallicenseapplication forallphases,provideinformationonwhetheranincreaseintheamountofSNFstoredatthesite fromthe5,000MTU[5,512tons]to8,680MTU[9,568tons]wouldchangeanycharacterizationofthe proposedactionsimpactsacrossallresourceareas(e.g.,landuse,publicandoccupationalhealth,air quality,andcostbenefit)aspresentedintheER.

TheER(Holtec,2017b)statesthatupto5,000MTU[5,512tons]wouldbestoredattheCISFforPhase1 andforeachphaseupto20phases.However,thecertifiedmaximumcapacityfortheproposedHoltec Umaxcanistertypecouldbeupto8,680MTU[9,568tons]ofSNFfora40yearlicenseterm.The evaluationofimpactsacrossallresourceareasshouldberevisedasneededtoaddresstheincreased capacityofthefueltobestoredattheCISF.Forexample,thecostbenefitanalysesinERChapter9 (Holtec,2017b)shouldberevisedtoaddressthemaximumamountoffuelthatcouldbestoredfor Phase1aswellascumulativelyforallphases(fullimplementation).CurrentcostestimatesinERTable 9.2.1to9.2.6(Holtec,2017b)arebasedon5,000MTU[5,512tons]forPhase1and100,000MTU

[110,231tons]forfullimplementationwiththeestimatedcostfortransportingSNFbasedon$26,000 perMTU.However,basedonthepotentialcanistermaximumcapacity,ifalltwentyphasesstore8,680 MTU[9,568tons],thecostfortransportingSNFwouldincreasefrom$5.2billion,asstatedin theER,toover$9billion(seeERTable9.2.6).

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b),(b)(1),and(c),whichrequires thattheERincludeadescriptionoftheaffectedenvironment,discusstheimpactsoftheproposed action,andincludeconsiderationofthebenefitsandcostsoftheproposedaction anditsalternatives.

HoltecResponse TheinformationpresentedintheERforPhase1isbasedon500canisters.Dependingonthetypesof canistersstored,themetrictonsofuraniummaydiffer.Therefore,forthefirstphase,withthelarge capacitycanistersfromthecurrentHISTORMUMAXcertificate,500canistersistheequivalentof8,680 MTU.Forfuturephases,whichmayincorporatesmallercapacitycanisters,theexpectedmetrictonsof uraniumwouldbelower,closerto5,000MTUorevenlessinsomecases,therefore,theoverallcapacity ofthesiteafter20phasesis100,000MTU.Holtecisnotrequestingenvironmentalreviewofmorethan 100,000MTU,andhasevaluatedtheenvironmentalimpactsofthattotal.Itshouldbenotedthatthe Phase1valueswerebasedonnumberofcanisters,andthishasbeenupdatedinChapter9.

RAIERPA2:Provideadditionalinformationontheanticipatedrailspur.Thisinformationshould include:

ThestatusofanyFederal,State,andlocalpermitsorapprovalsthatwouldberequiredto constructandoperatetherailspur.ERTable1.4.1(Holtec,2017b)listsaBureauofLand Management(BLM)permitrequirement,buttextinERSection1.4.2.6(Holtec,2017b)also statesthataNewMexicoDepartmentofTransportationpermitwouldberequired(seealso GEN1).

Descriptionandlocation(figure)containingtherevisedlocationoftherailspurincludingany additionalconstructionstructures(e.g.,cattlecrossings)thatareneededtocomplywithBLM requirements.

Thevolumeofsoilthatwouldbeexcavatedduringconstructionandpotentiallystockpiled duringoperationoftherailspurandavailableinformationonthedispositionofthestockpiled soil.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page4of52

Anassessmentoftheenvironmentalimpactsthatconstruction,operation,and decommissioningoftherailspurwouldhaveonallresourceareas(i.e.,landuse, transportation,geologyandsoils,waterresources,airquality,ecology,historicandcultural resources,noise,visualandscenic,etc.).

Anymitigationmeasuresthatwouldbeimplementedtoreducetheenvironmentalimpacts associatedwithconstruction,operation,anddecommissioningoftherailspuronallresource areas.

Anyenvironmentalmeasuresandmonitoringthatwouldberequiredduringconstruction, operation,anddecommissioningoftherailspurtocomplywithanyapplicableFederal,State, andlocalrulesandregulations.

ERSection1.3(Holtec,2017b)statesthatanapproximately15.9hectares[39.4acres]oflandwouldbe disturbedaspartofrailspurconstructiontodeliverSNFtotheproposedCISFfromtherailmainline.

TheERprovideslimitedinformationontheconstruction,operation,anddecommissioningactivities associatedwiththerailspur.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(b)(1),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheproposedactionanddiscusstheimpactsoftheproposedaction.

HoltecResponse:

Forastatusofallpermits,seetheresponsetoRAIERGEN1.Table1.4.1wasrevisedtoclarifythe permitsrelatedtotheRailSpur.Figure2.2.1wasupdatedtoshowthecurrentlystakedraillinelocation, asagreedtobyBLM.Section1.3wasupdatedtoincludeestimatedvolumesofexcavatedmaterial, alongwithadditionaldiscussiononstockpilingofsoilonsite.Chapters4,6,and7havebeenupdatedto clarifythattherailspurwastakenintoconsiderationwhenassessingenvironmentalimpacts,mitigation measures,andsitemonitoring.

RAIERPA3:Provideadditionalinformationontheanticipatedconcretebatchplant.Thisinformation shouldinclude:

Apubliclyavailablefigurewiththelocationandsize(acreage)oftheconcretebatchplant showingitslocationwithrespecttotheproposedCISF.[Figures2.2.2and2.2.3intheER (Holtec,2017b)havebeenredacted,andarethereforenotconsideredpubliclyavailable.]

Thedesignoftheconcretebatchplant(descriptionofmajorcomponents)andassociated infrastructure(accessroads,pipelines,utilities,etc.).

Identifyiftheconcretebatchplantisstationaryormobile,andclarifyiftherewillbeoneor twoconcretebatchplants.

Anystateandlocalpermitsorapprovalsthatwouldberequiredtoconstructandoperatethe concretebatchplant.

Adescriptionofconstruction,operation,anddecommissioningactivitiesfortheconcrete batchplantandananticipatedscheduleforconstruction,operation,anddecommissioning.

Localnaturalresources(suchasgroundwaterandgeologicmaterials)andmanpowerneeded toconstructandoperatetheplant;andwhetherornotconstructionandoperationworkers forthebatchplantarealreadyincludedintheresourceimpactsanalysisintheER (transportation,socioeconomics,etc.).

Amountoflandthatwouldbedisturbedduringconstructionandoperationoftheconcrete batchplantandassociatedinfrastructure.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page5of52

Anassessmentoftheenvironmentalimpactsthatconstruction,operation,and decommissioning(currentlynotincludedinERdiscussion)oftheconcretebatchplantwould haveonallresourceareas(i.e.,landuse,transportation,geologyandsoils,waterresources, airquality,ecology,visualandscenicandhistoricandculturalresources,noise,etc.).

Anymitigationmeasuresthatwouldbeimplementedtoreducetheenvironmentalimpactson allresourceareasassociatedwithconstruction,operation,anddecommissioningofthe concretebatchplant.

Anyenvironmentalmeasuresandmonitoringthatwouldberequiredduringconstruction, operation,anddecommissioningoftheconcretebatchplanttocomplywithstateandlocal rulesandregulations.

InERSection2.2.2.6(Holtec,2017b),Holtecindicatesthataconcretebatchplantmaybeused tofacilitatestoragemoduleconstructionandfutureexpansion.Theconcretebatchplantwould belocatednorthoftheparkinglotoutsideoftheprotectedarea.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(b)(1),which requiresthattheERincludeadescriptionoftheproposedactionanddiscusstheimpactsofthe proposedaction.

HoltecResponse:

Figures2.2.2and2.2.3havebeenrevisedforpublicavailability.Section2.2.2.6hasbeenupdatedto provideadditionalinformationaboutthemobilebatchplant,includingfootprint,components, productionrate,andpermitting(Table1.4.1wasspecificallyupdatedtoclarifytherelatedpermits).It shouldbenotedthatasecondbatchplantwillonlybemobilizedifproductionrateswarrantthe addition.Additionally,theoperationofthemobilebatchplantwas,infact,includedinthemanpower estimatesprovidedforconstructionofthefacility.SimilartotheresponseprovidedinERPA2,Chapters 4,6,and7havebeenupdatedtoclarifythattheconcretebatchplantwasincludedwhenassessing environmentalimpacts,mitigationmeasures,andsitemonitoring.

ERPA4:Provideadditionalinformationontheuseofheavyhaultrucksandtheconstruction, operation,anddecommissioningofanintermodalfacility(asatransportationoptioninsteadofarail spur).Thisinformationshouldinclude:

ThestatusofanyFederal,State,andlocalpermitsorapprovalsthatwouldberequiredto constructandoperatetheintermodalfacility;specifically,anyadditionalBLMpermitsneeded iftheintermodalfacilityisconstructedonBLMland.Thisinformationshouldalsobeincluded aspartoftheresponsetoRAIGEN1.(seealsoGEN1).

Descriptionandlocation(includingoneormorefigures)containingthelocation,size(acreage) oftheintermodalfacility,andanyadditionalaccessroadsorconstructionstructuresrequired tocomplywithBLMguidelines.

Thedesignoftheintermodalfacility,includingadescriptionofmajorcomponents,and associatedinfrastructure(e.g.,accessroads).

Thevolumeofsoilthatwouldbeexcavatedduringconstructionandpotentiallystockpiled duringoperationoftheintermodalfacilityandavailableinformationonthedispositionofthe stockpiledsoil.

Anassessmentoftheenvironmentalimpactsthatconstruction,operation,and decommissioningoftheintermodalfacilitywouldhaveonallresourceareas(i.e.,landuse, toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page6of52

transportation,geologyandsoils,waterresources,airquality,ecology,historicandcultural resources,noise,visualandscenic,etc.).

Anymitigationmeasuresthatwouldbeimplementedtoreducetheenvironmentalimpacts associatedwithconstruction,operation,anddecommissioningoftheintermodalfacilityonall resourceareas.

Anyenvironmentalmeasuresandmonitoringthatwouldberequiredduringconstruction, operation,anddecommissioningoftheintermodalfacilitytocomplywithanyapplicable Federal,State,andlocalrulesandregulations.

InformationonthetransportationroutestheheavyhaultruckswouldusetoaccesstheCISF, includingafigureoftheproposedroutes.

ThroughouttheER(Holtec,2017b),construction,operation,anddecommissioningofarailspurare discussed,whichwouldprovidetransportationforthesiteaccessportionoftherailroute.However,ER Section4.9.3.1(page433)statesthatintheeventthatarailspurisnotconstructed,transportationof theSNFforthefinal6.1km[3.8mi]tothesitewouldbeaccomplishedbyheavyhaultrucks.Holtec shouldclarifywhethertheproposedactionincludestwopossiblemethodsfortransportingSNFfromthe existingraillinetotheCISF.Iftheproposedactionincludestheuseofheavyhaultrucksandan associatedintermodalfacilitytotransfertheSNFcasksfromthemainraillinetotheheavyhaultruck, provideadiscussionofenvironmentalimpactsassociatedwiththeconstruction,operation,and decommissioningoftheintermodalfacilityanduseofheavyhaultrucks.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(b)(1),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheproposedactionanddiscusstheimpactsoftheproposedaction.

HoltecResponse

Holtecisnolongerpursuingtheuseofheavyhaultrucksforthetransportofspentnuclearfuelfromthe mainraillinetotheCISF.Anydiscussionrelativetothisoptionhasbeenremovedfromthereport.The proposedactiononlyconsiderstheuseofarailspur.Section8.1.9hasbeenupdatedtoclarifythatSNF transportationisviarailwaysystems.

ERPA5:Clarifytheprojectschedulebyprojectyearsothateachprojectphase(120)clearlyidentifies whichprojectstages(i.e.,construction,operation,decommissioning)areactiveforeachphaseover theentirelicensedlife.Foreachprojectstage,detailwhatactivitiesareoccurringandwhat equipmentisinuse.

ERSection1.3andERTable1.3(Holtec,2017b)provideascheduleofproposedconstructionstagesfor allphasesoftheCISF.ThescheduleinERTable1.3doesnotidentifyhowtheoperationor decommissioningstagesareincorporatedintotheprojectschedule.Also,thescheduleonlyaddresses thefirsthalfofthefortyyearlicenseperiodanddoesnotdescribepotentialoverlapbetweenthe operationanddecommissioningstages.Theevaluationshouldaddresswhethertheoverlapofstages (construction,operation,anddecommissioning)amongthephases(120)affectsthedirectorindirect impactstoanyresource.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(b)(1),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheproposedactionanddiscusstheimpactsoftheproposedaction.

HoltecResponse toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page7of52

Table1.3wasrevisedtoclarifytheprojectscheduleandbetterrepresenttheoverlapofConstruction andOperatingstagesforeachofthe20phasesoftheproject.Anotewasaddedtoclarifythat Decommissioningactivitieswilloverlapwiththefinalyearsoftheoperationonlystage.Asstated throughoutthereport(e.g.section4.0)theoverlapofeachconstructionstagewithoperatingstagesof previouslyconstructedphasesisaccountedforintheassessment.

ERPA6:Clarifytheinconsistenciesregardingtheassumptionsoftitle(ownership)forthefuel transportedtotheHoltecCISF.

ERSection3.9(Holtec,2017b)statesthattheU.S.DepartmentofEnergy(DOE)wouldberesponsiblefor transportingtheSNF;however,thefootnoteinSARTable1.0.2(Holtec,2017c)statesthattheCISF wouldnotbeconstructedunlessanagreementwiththeuser/payerforstoringtheusedfuel(DOE and/oranuclearplantowner)hasbeenestablished.Additionalinformationisrequiredifsomeofthe transportationwouldbecarriedoutbyprivateentities.Forexample,theERstatesthatforthe transportationworkerdosethattheDOEadministrativedoselimitof5mSv/yr[500mrem/yr]wouldbe implemented.However,theDOEdoselimitislessthantheapplicablenonDOEOccupationalSafetyand HealthAdministrationworkerdoselimitof50mSv/yr[5,000mrem/yr](29CFR1910.1096).Clarify whetherHoltecisrelyingsolelyonDOEastheuser/payeroftheusedfuel,orifHoltecanticipates contractingwithprivateentities.Additionally,ifHoltecanticipatescontractingwithprivateentities, clarifywhetherstatementsconcerningDOEandtransportationshouldincludethepossibilityforprivate transport.Forexample,ERSection4.9.3.1(IncidentFreeImpacts)describesDOEcoordinationwith FederalagenciesandsupportforemergencyresponsetrainingtoStates,Tribes,andlocalemergency respondersalongtransportationroutesandalsoreferstoaDOEadministrativeworkerannualdoselimit of5mSv[500mrem].Clarifytherolesandresponsibilitiesapplicabletoownershipandtransportationof SNFandclearlystatewhatdifferenceswouldexistbasedonownershipoptions.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(b)(1),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheproposedactionanddiscusstheimpactsoftheproposedaction.

HoltecResponse

ItappearsthatthequestionreferstoanearlierrevisionoftheHISTOREenvironmentalreport.Section 3.9,startinginRev3(datedNovember2018),articulatesthatDOEorutilitylicenseesareoptionsin agreementwiththelicensedasreferenced.Additionally,inthatsamerevision,Paragraph4.9.3.1was updatedtoprovidetherequirementsfortransportationbyareactorlicensee.TheevaluationsintheER encompassfueltransportationandownershipbyeitherDOEoraprivateentity.

ERPA7:VerifythecorrectthelatitudeandlongitudecoordinatesareprovidedintheER.

ERSection2.2.1(Holtec,2017b),DescriptionoftheProposedSite,statesThecenteroftheproposed CISFacilitysite(hereafter,Site)isatlatitude32.583northandlongitude103.708westThis coordinateisnotlocatedwithintheproposedCISFboundaries.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(b)(1),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheproposedactionanddiscusstheimpactsoftheproposedaction.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page8of52

HoltecResponse

Section2.2.1hasbeenupdatedtoreflectthecorrectlongitudeandlatitude.

ERLU1:ProvideinformationontheapplicabilityoftheStateofNewMexicolaw,regulation,ororder thatprohibitsoilandgasdevelopmentwithindesignatedpotashminingareas.

ERSection3.1.1(Holtec,2017b)statesthatpast,presentandfutureoilandgaswellsexistorwould occuronsitewhileERSection3.1.2(Holtec,2017b)statesthat,Furtheroilandgasdevelopmentisnot allowedbytheNewMexicoOilConservationDivisionduetothepresenceofpotashoreontheSite.

Clarifywhichlawsareapplicableforoilandgasdevelopmentwithinandsurroundingtheproposedsite.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(b)(1),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheaffectedenvironmentanddiscusstheimpactsoftheproposed action.

HoltecResponse

Sections3.1.1and3.1.2havebeenrevisedtoclarifythediscrepanciesforoilandgasdevelopmentwith thefollowinginformationtakenintoconsideration.Figure3.1.5hasbeenaddedtoshowSecretarys PotashArea.

Background:

In1939,theSecretaryoftheInteriorestablishedtheSecretarysPotashArea(SPA),undertheauthority oftheMineralLeasingAct.Initially,theSPAwithdrewapproximately43,000acresfromoilandgas leasinganddevelopmentfortheexpresspurposeofpotashdevelopment.In1951,theSPAwas expanded,andthemanagementpolicywaschangedtooneofconcurrentdevelopmentbytheoiland gasandpotashindustries.Today,theDesignatedPotashArea(DPA)coversatotalareaof497,630acres (includingtheproposedHoltecsite),andincludes350,617acresofBLMmanagedsurfaceacres,and operatesunderthe2012SecretarysOrder,authorizedonDecember3,2012.

OnDecember3,2012,theSecretaryoftheInteriorannouncedaSecretarialOrdertopromoteorderly andsafedevelopmentofoilandgasandpotashresourceswithintheDesignatedPotashArea(DPA)in southeasternNewMexico.The2012Orderprovidesproceduresandguidelinesformoreorderlyco developmentofoilandgasandpotashdepositsmanagedbytheUnitedStateswithintheDPAthrough safe,concurrentoperations.Industryusesdrillingislandswithinadevelopmentareafromwhichallnew drillingofvertical,directional,orhorizontalwellsthatnewlypenetratethepotashformationsare allowed.TheBLMestablishesdevelopmentareaswithintheDPAinconsiderationofappropriateoiland gastechnology,suchthatwellscanbedrilledfromadrillingislandcapableofeffectivelyextractingoil andgasresources,whilemanagingtheimpactonpotashresources.(DOI/BLM2012)

ConcurrentdevelopmentofoilandgasandpotashintheDPAhasledtoalonghistoryofconflict betweenthetwoindustries.The2012SecretarialOrderaddressesnewtechnologiesandotherissues associatedwithoil,gas,andpotashleasinganddevelopmentwithintheDPA.Therevisionsaredesigned topromotetheefficientdevelopmentoftheresources,whileminimizingconflictbetweenthe industries,andensuringsafetyofoperations.(Rutley2012)

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page9of52

TheStateofNewMexicorecognizestheneedforregulatoryguidelineswithintheSPAandaccordingly promulgatedR111OrdergoverningdrillingandpluggingactivitieswithintheSPA.TheoriginalOrderR 111Ahasundergonenumerousrevisionsinresponsetochangingconditionsandevolvingrelationships withintherespectiveindustries.Thelatestiteration,OrderR111PwasissuedbytheStateofNew MexicosOilConservationCommission,undertheauthorityoftheEnergy,Minerals,andNatural ResourcesDepartment.ThemostrecentorderamendmentwasissuedonApril21,1988,toamend previousordersrelatedtomanagementoftheKnownPotashLeasingAreainordertoclarifyoverlapping leaseholdinterestsandconfusionrecordingtheboundariesoftheKnownPotashLeasingArea.BLM InstructionMemorandumNo.NM2011003wasissuedonOctober1,2010,toprovideguidanceonthe processingofoilandgasapplicationsforpermitstodrillwithintheSPA.Theseinterimguidelineswill guideBLMdecisionsonissuingpermitsuntilcompletionofareviewofpotashenclavestandardsandan economicevaluationofpotashgradeshavebeencompleted.(DOI/BLM1986)

TheU.S.DepartmentoftheInteriorrecognizedthesignificanceofimplementingandmaintaining consistentregulatorycontrolswithinSPAandcorrespondinglyadoptedR111guidelinesintheir managementofoilandgasexploration/developmentwithintheSPA(FR,Vol.51,No.208,October28, 1986).

Observations/Conclusions:

BLM(2012)issuedNoticeOil,Gas,andPotashLeasingandDevelopmentWithinDesignatedPotashArea ofEddyandLeaCountiesNewMexico(77FR71814;pp.7181471818;December04,2012).Section 6(e)(3)prohibitspotashmining/extractionwithin1/2mileofgaswellsorwellswithbottomholelocations belowtheBoneSpringsformationor10,000feetbelowgroundsurface.Althoughseveraldrillislands areoutsideoftheHoltec/ELEAdesignatedboundary,thisstipulationprovidesaneffectivebufferwhich mitigatesanypotentialminingactivityintheorezonebelowthesubjectpropertyandreducesthe dimensionofavailableoretoaquantitythatisnoteconomicallyviable.

AdditionalimpedimentstoaccessingpotashorebelowtheHoltec/ELEApropertyare:

1. Theorebelowthepropertyissurroundedbyleasesonthreeoffoursidesownedbycompeting potashcompanyMosaic.Theotherborderingmineralsareunleasedandcurrentlysubjectedto activeoilandgasdrilling.Thisconsignsthisoretoalandlockedscenarioandrendersit inaccessiblewithout(costly)newverticalshaftsordissolutionmining.Coresfromthearea indicateaninsufficientamountoforeavailabletomakeeitherventurecosteffective.

2. MineralLesseeIntrepidPotashhassignedawaiver,voluntarilyagreeingtorefrainfromany effortstoaccessthesubjectore(Jenarvis/HoltecInternational2017)

3. LegalaccesstotheorebelowthesubjectpropertyisadjudicatedbytheNewMexicoStateLand Office(Stateminerals).TheNewMexicoStateLandofficeiscurrentlyindiscussionswithHoltec Internationalregardinganagreementinprincipletoretireanypotash,unencumberedby regulatoryrestrictions,inperpetuity.

Multiagencyadministrativeinstitutionalcontrols,provideahighdegreeofcertaintythatdrillingand/or miningactivitiesarecloselymonitored,regulated,andwillnothaveadetrimentaleffectonthe constructionandoperationoftheHoltecfacility.

Forreference,SecretarysPotashAreaisshowninthefigurebelow.NotethattheCISFacilityislocated inSection13,Township20South,Range32East.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page10of52

References:

1. Rutley,J.S(2012);ProcessforAPD,DrillingIsland,andDevelopmentAreaReviewintheDPA; U.S.DepartmentoftheInterior,BureauofLandManagement;Retrievedfrom https://www.blm.gov/programs/energyandminerals/miningandminerals/nonenergy leasablematerials/potash

2. StateofNewMexico,EnergyMineralsandNaturalResourcedDivision,OilConservation Commission(September16,2003);CaseNo.9316;R111P

3. U.S.DepartmentoftheInterior,SecretaryoftheInterior(December3,2012),OrderNo.3324; Oil,Gas,andPotashLeasingandDevelopmentWithintheDesignatedPotashAreaofEddyand LeaCounties,NewMexico

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page11of52

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page12of52

ERLU2:ProvideapubliclyavailablecopyoftheagreementbetweenHoltecandIntrepidMiningLLC (Intrepid)concerningthecontrolofmineralrightsandpotashminingontheproposedprojectsite.

ERSection3.1.2(Holtec,2017b)notesthatIntrepidownstwopotashmineswithin10km[6mi]ofthe proposedsite.TheIntrepidNorthmine,locatedtothewest,isnolongeractivelyminingpotash underground.TheIntrepidEastmine,locatedtothesouthwest,isstillminingpotashore.ERSection 3.1.1(Holtec,2017b)statesthatHoltechasanagreementwithIntrepidsuchthatHolteccontrolsthe mineralrightsonthesiteandIntrepidwillnotconductanypotashminingonthesite.Acopyofthis agreementshouldincludethetermsoftheagreement,includingthedurationandgeospatialcoverage oftheagreement.

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c),whichrequiresenvironmentalreportsto containsufficientdatatoaidtheNRCstaffinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse

HoltechasattachedtheagreementbetweenHoltecandtheIntrepidMiningLLC(intrepid)tostatethat Holteccontrolsthemineralrightsforthesite.

ERLU3:Provideadescriptionofrecreationalactivitiesthatmayoccurwithinandsurroundingthe projectarea,suchashuntingandoffroadvehicleuse,andanymeasuresthatwillbeimplementedto restrictormitigatethepotentialimpactsoftheproposedactionontheseactivitiesoverthelifeofthe project,especiallygiventheproposedsitesproximitytopublicuseroadsandareas.

SARSection2.1.4(Holtec,2017c)statesthatlanduseintheareaoftheproposedprojectincludes limitedrecreationalactivities.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(b)(1),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheaffectedenvironmentanddiscusstheimpacts oftheproposedaction.

HoltecResponse

Section3.1.2oftheERwasrevisedtoincludeadiscussionoftherecreationalactivitiesinthevicinityof thesite.Ingeneral,thesiteiscurrentlyprivatepropertyandwillremainprivatepropertyonce purchasedbyHoltec.ThesiteisdesignatedOffLimitsandtrespassingisprohibited.

ERLU4:Provideafigurethatidentifiestheextentofexistingandproposedpipelinesthatcrossthe proposedprojectarea.Thefigureshouldnotonlyshowtherouteofthepipelineswithintheproposed projectarea[asdepictedinERFigure3.1.2(Holtec,2017b)andSARFigure2.1.21(Holtec,2017c)]but alsotherouteofthepipelinesoutsidetheproposedprojectareatoadistanceofatleast10km[6mi].

SARSection2.2.2(Holtec,2017c)presentsinformationonpipelinesthatcrosstheproposedproject area,includingtheowner/operator.ERFigure3.1.2(Holtec,2017b)andSARFigure2.1.2(Holtec,2017c) showtherouteofthepipelineswithintheproposedprojectareabutthefiguresdonotshowthe owner/operatorofthepipelinesortherouteofthepipelinesoutsidetheproposedprojectarea.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page13of52

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b),(b)(1),and(c),whichrequires thattheERincludeadescriptionoftheaffectedenvironment,discusstheimpactsoftheproposed action,andcontainsufficientdatatoaidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse

Figure3.1.4wasaddedtoChapter3illustratingthepipelineswithin10kmoftheproposedCISFacility.

ERLU5:Provideadescriptionofanyspecificmeasuresthatwillbeimplemented(e.g.,thatHoltec commitstoimplement)tomitigateimpactsofsurfacedisturbanceandanyotheranticipatedimpacts resultingfromconstruction,operation,anddecommissioningofallcomponentsoftheproposedCISF describedinERSection2.2.2(Holtec,2017b).

ERSection6.1(Holtec,2017b)presentsageneraldescriptionofproposedmitigationmeasuresto minimizelanduseimpactsfromconstruction,operation,anddecommissioningoftheproposedCISF.ER Section6.0statesthatmitigationmeasurespresentedinERSection6.1maynotnecessarilybe implementedfortheproposedCISF(Holtec,2017b).Clarificationofmitigationmeasurecommitments fromHoltecshouldbeclearlyidentifiedintheER.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(c),whichrequiresthat theERdiscusstheenvironmentalimpactsoftheproposedactionandalternativesavailableforreducing andavoidingadverseenvironmentalimpacts.

HoltecResponse

Chapter6wasrevisedtodiscussactionablemitigatingmeasuresforeachsubsection,thatincludea clarificationonbestmanagementpractices.Additionally,alllistedmitigatingmeasuresnolonger distinguishbetweenrequiredandvoluntary;allactionsarerequired.

ERLU6:Providethememorandumofagreement(MOA)betweenHoltecandEddyLeaEnergy Alliance,LLC(ELEA)coveringthedesign,licensing,construction,operation,decommissioning,and purchasetermsofthesiteandtheapprovalbytheNewMexicoBoardofFinanceforthesaleofthe sitetoHoltec.TheMOAwillneedtobemadepubliclyavailableinorderforNRCtoreferencethe documentintheEIS.IfthefullMOAcannotbemadepubliclyavailable,providearedactedorsimilar versionthatcanbemadepubliclyavailableandthatcontainstheneededinformation.

SARSection2.1.2(Holtec,2017c)notesandprovidesreferencesto(i)aMOAsignedinApril2016by ELEAandHolteccoveringthedesign,licensing,construction,operation,anddecommissioningofthesite andthetermsbywhichHolteccouldpurchasethesiteand(ii)anactionbytheNewMexicoBoardof FinanceapprovingthesaleofthesitetoHoltec.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c),whichrequiresthat theERcontainsufficientdatatoaidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse Holtechasattachedthememorandumofagreement(MOA)betweenHoltecandEddyLeaCounty Alliance,LLC(ELEA)coveringthedesign,licensing,construction,operation,decommissioning,and purchaseitemsofthesiteandtheapprovalbytheNewMexicoBoardofFinanceforthesaleofthesite toHoltec.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page14of52

ERTR4:Clarifytheanalysisofoffsitetransportationincidentfreedoseestimatesforworkers(e.g.,

vehiclecrewmembersandescorts,inspectors,railyardworkers).

ERSection4.9.3.1(Holtec,2017b)addressesradiologicalimpactstoworkersduringSNFtransportation byreferencingastatementaboutanadministrativedoselimitinapriorDOEimpactanalysisofSNF transportationfromU.S.powerplantstoaproposedrepositoryatYuccaMountain,Nevada(DOE,2008).

TheERstatesthattheDOEanalysisdeterminedannualdosestoworkerswouldbemaintainedbelowa DOEadministrativelimitof5mSv[500mrem].TheERthenconcludesthetransportationimpactsofthe proposedHoltecCISFwouldnotexceedthisestimate.ClarifyhowtheDOEadministrativelimitwould limitdosestoallworkersconsideringthatsomeworkers(inspectors,railyardemployees)wouldnotbe employedbyDOE.Additionally,ifapplicabledependingontheresponsetoRAIERPA6,clarifythe extenttowhichworkerdoseestimateswouldbeaffectedifentitiesotherthanDOEwereresponsible fortransportingtheSNFtotheCISF.

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c),whichrequiresanalysesin environmentalreportstobequantitativetothefullestextentpracticableandcontainsufficientdatato aidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse TheERreportusestheDOEanalysistodeterminethedosesincurredbyworkersinvolvedinthe transportationofcanisterstotheCISF.TheDOEevaluationdeterminedthatdosesarelessthan500 mrem/year.BecausethetransportationofthecanisterstotheHISTOREfacilityoccursundersimilar assumptionsastheDOEstudy,itcanalsobeconcludedthatdosestotransportationworkersareless than500mrem/year.ThisnumberisaDOEadministrativelimit,butforeithertheDOEorprivateentity option,thedosetoworkerswouldbeunderthatsameestimate,asthenumberofworkersand transportationimpactsareexpectedtobesimilar.NotethatasdiscussedintheresponsetoRAIERPA 6,Paragraph4.9.3.1wasupdatedinRevision3oftheERtoclearlyidentifyprivateentityshipment requirements.

ERTR5:ProviderailtrafficinformationfortheBurlingtonNorthernSantaFe(BNSF)Carlsbad Subdivisionline.

ERSection3.9.2(Holtec,2017b)providesrailtrafficinformationfortheTexasNewMexicoRailroadline.

However,theproposedspurwouldconnectwiththeBNSFCarlsbadSubdivisionline.Thesame informationshouldbeprovidedfortheBNSFCarlsbadSubdivisionline.

Thisinformationisnecessarytoevaluateimpactsontransportationresourcesandisneededin accordancewith10CFR51.45(b),whichrequiresthattheERincludeadescriptionoftheaffected environment.

HoltecResponse

Section3.9.2wasrevisedtoprovidetheamountofrailtrafficontheBNSFrailspurservicingtheIntrepid Northfacility.

ERTR6:Describetheimpactonlocaltrafficpatternsandvolumeifheavyhaultruckswereusedto transportSNFfromanearbyraillinetotheCISF.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page15of52

ERSection8.19(Holtec,2017b)statesthattheproposedactionwouldnotchangetrafficpatternsor trafficonexistingroadsifaheavyhaultruckwereused.Clarifytheimpactsthatwouldbeanticipated fromtheheavyhaultruckoptionforlocalSNFtransportation,considering whetherexistingroadsornewlyconstructedroadswouldbeusedandhowtrafficwouldbemanaged whenshipmentsarebeingmade.Ifexistingpublicroadswouldbeused,wouldtrafficmanagement actions(e.g.,roadclosures)beimplementedonpublicroadswhenshipmentsareoccurringtoaddress thepotentialimpactsofslowmovinglargetrucksontrafficsafety?Further,ifexistingroadsareused, wouldimprovementsbemadeoradditionalimpacts(e.g.,increasedwearandtear,maintenanceand rehabilitationcosts)beanticipatedduetotheincreasedweightoftheheavyhaultrucksontheseroads?

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b),whichrequiresthattheER includeadescriptionoftheproposedactionandassessmentofimpacts.

HoltecResponse

Holtecisnolongerpursuingtheuseofheavyhaultrucksforthetransportofspentnuclearfuelfromthe mainraillinetotheCISF.Anydiscussionrelativetothisoptionhasbeenremovedfromthereport.The proposedactiononlyconsiderstheuseofarailspur.Section8.1.9hasbeenupdatedtoclarifythatSNF transportationisviarailwaysystems.

ERTR7:ProvideadditionalinformationabouttheSNFtransportationroutinganalysis.

ERpage432(Holtec,2017b)states,WebTRAGISwasusedtodeterminetheroutelengthand populationdensitywithnoattributionorreference.Informationregardingassumptionsintheanalysis shouldbeprovidedincludingthestudyauthor,versionofthecode,andpopulationdata.

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c),whichrequiresanalysesin environmentalreportstobequantitativetothefullestextentpracticableandcontainsufficientdatato aidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse

Section4.9.3.1hasbeenrevisedtoclarifythesourceoftheWebTRAGISanalysis.Additionaldiscussionis providedbelow.

TheincidentfreeradiologicaltransportationanalysisintheEnvironmentalReport(HI2167521)tiers fromtheanalysispreparedfortheproposedWCSCISF(WCS2016).ThatanalysisutilizedRADTRAN, version6.02,tocalculatetheradiologicalimpactsoftransportingradiologicalmaterials(NRC2014a).

DetailedsupportingdocumentationfortheWCS2016transportationanalysisiscontainedinWCS2016 1.ThepertinentinformationfromAttachment41isfurtherdiscussed,asappropriate,as follows.

TheroutingcodeWebTRAGIS(usedintheWCS2016analysiswhichisthebasisfortheHoltec EnvironmentalReportanalysis,andinmostRADTRANanalyses)providesroutingdataintwodifferent forms:(1)combinedrural,combinedsuburban,andcombinedurbanroutesegments(links)and populationdensitiesforeachstatetransited,and(2)amuchmorepreciseoutputthatprovidesrural, suburban,andurbansegmentsfornodetonodedistances,from115kmlong.Thesecondmethodwas toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page16of52

usedintheWCSanalysis(andthereforeisthebasisfortheHoltecanalysis)becauseitidentifiesthe receptorpopulationmuchmorepreciselythanthestatetostateroutingdata.However,thisoutput consistsofseveralhundredlinksandcanhavemorethanathousandlinksandtheRADTRANgraphical userinterface(RadCat)cannotaccommodatemorethan60linksinasingleanalysis.Inordertotake advantageoftheincreasedprecision,theinputtoRADTRANfortheWCSanalysisusedasHoltecsbasis usedaunitriskfactor(URF)approach,structuredinthesamewayastheinputtoNUREG2125(NRC 2014a),asfollows:

1.Aunitriskfactor(URF)radiationpopulationdosewascalculatedbytheRADTRANcode.TheURF populationdoseisthedosetoapopulationdensityofonepersonpersquarekilometer(km2)onarural, asuburban,andanurbanlink,eachonekilometerlong.Thisunitpopulationdensitywasalsousedto calculatedosesatrepresentativestops(additionalinformationrelatedtotheURFfortheHoltecanalysis isfoundintheresponsetoRAIERTR8).

2.Populationdoseisthencalculatedforeachlinkandeachstopusingaspreadsheetthatallows multiplicationoftheunitrisksbylinklengthandlink(orstop)population.

TheWCSandHoltecanalysesevaluatedSNFtransportationforbothshutdownreactorsitesaswellas operatingreactorsites.Attachment41of(WCS2016)liststheroutingparametersfortheshutdown reactorsitesandalsoprovidessummarizedresultsfortheshutdownsites.

Foroperatingreactorsites,theWCSanalysisthatformsthebasisfortheHolteccalculationassumedSNF wouldbealongthreerepresentativeroutes:(1)fromtheeastcoasttotheCISF(assumedtobefrom MaineYankeeNuclearPowerPlanttotheCISF);(2)fromthewestcoasttotheCISF(assumedtobefrom theSanOnofreNuclearGeneratingStation[SONGS]totheCISF;and(3)fromtheCISFtotheassumed repositoryatYuccaMountaininNyeCounty,Nevada.Rural,suburban,andurbanroutesegmentswere analyzedseparately,andtheresultingcollectivedoseswereadded.TheroutingcodeWebTRAGIS, developedbytheOakRidgeNationalLaboratory(ORNL)wasusedtoanalyzetheroutes.Thesectionof theWebTRAGISoutputusedinthisstudywasRouteDensityByState,whichprovidesthelengthand residentpopulationdensityofeachroutesegment.(Note:TheWCSCISFtransportationanalysiswas basedonthereceiptof40,000MTUsofSNFinapproximately4,000canistersfromdecommissioned shutdownsitesandoperatingreactorsites,whichis2.5timeslessthantheHoltecproposaltoreceive 100,000MTUsofSNFinapproximately10,000canisters.Consequently,theHoltecanalysisaccountsfor thatgreateramountofSNFtransportationfortheHoltecCISF).

SpecificinformationregardingtransportationdistancesandpopulationestimatesusedintheWCS transportationanalysisareprovidedinthetablesintheAttachment41of(WCS2016).Theinformation isprovidedfortransportationfromshutdownreactorsites;however,theinformationprovidedalso coverstherepresentativeroutesusedforthetransportationanalysisof40,000MTUsofSNF(forthe WCSCISF)andthe100,000MTUsofSNF(fortheHoltecCISF).Onceagain,itmustbenotedthatthe HoltectransportationanalysistieredfromtheWCSanalysis,andthus,thepopulationsegmentsand populationdensitieswouldbethesame.RuthWeinerofSandiaNationalLaboratoryislistedasthe studyauthorfortheWCSTransportationAnalysis.

References:

NRC2014a NRC.SpentFuelTransportationRiskAssessment(NUREG2125).January2014.

WCS2016 WasteControlSpecialists(WCS).WCSConsolidatedInterimSpentFuelStorageFacility EnvironmentalReport.May2016.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page17of52

ERTR8:ProvideadditionalinformationtosupporttheERassertionthatincidentfreetransportation riskcalculationsarebounding.

ERpage432(Holtec,2017b)states,Usingthemaximumdoserate(10mrem/hratadistanceof6.5 feetfromthecask)assuresthatthedosescalculatedbyRADTRANboundthoseoftheproposedSNF shipmentstoandfromtheCISFacility.ConsideringtheRADTRANtechnicalmanual(Weineretal.,

2014)describesnumerousinputparametersanddatavalues,explainhowsettingthisoneparameterin RADTRANtoaboundingvalueassuresthecalculationresultsareboundingorclarifythestatementto moreaccuratelyconveyhowthisandotherparameterselectionsaffectthedegreeofconservatism incorporatedintotheanalysis.Theresponseshoulddescribeanyotherimportantparametersthatare settoboundingvaluesaswellasparametersthataffectthedoseresultsthatarenotbounding.

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c),whichrequiresanalysesin environmentalreportstobequantitativetothefullestextentpracticableandcontainsufficientdatato aidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse

Section4.9.3.1hasbeenrevisedtoclarifytheconservatismsassociatedwiththeanalysisparameters.

Additionalinformationontheconservatismofeachparameterisprovidedbelow.

TheRADTRANmodelestimatesthetotaldosetothepopulationalongthetransportationroutefor normal(nonaccident)operations.Inordertoestimatethetotaltransportationdose,thefollowing parametersareneeded:(1)doseratefromthematerialbeingshipped;(2)transportationroute;(3) populationdensitiesalongtheroute;and(4)numberofshipmentsofmaterial.

Withrespecttoparameter#1(e.g.,doseratefromthematerialbeingshipped),theHoltec transportationanalysiswasbasedonaconservative(maximum)doserateof10mrem/hourata distanceof6.5feetfromthecask(thisisthemaximumDOTregulatorydoserateforSNFshipment).

Usingthisconservativedoserateassumptionasaninput,theRADTRANcodegenerateswhatisknown astheunitriskfactor(URF)radiationpopulationdose.TheURFradiationpopulationdoseisthedose toapopulationdensityofonepersonpersquarekilometeronarural,asuburban,andanurbanlink, eachonekilometerlong.FortheHoltecanalysis,theURFradiationpopulationdoseforoneshipmentof SNFalongtherepresentativetransportationrouteswasestimatedat1.79x103mrem.

Withrespecttoparameter#2(e.g.,transportationroute),theHoltecanalysisassumedSNFwouldbe alongthreerepresentativeroutes:(1)fromtheeastcoasttotheCISF(assumedtobefromMaine YankeeNuclearPowerPlanttotheCISF);(2)fromthewestcoasttotheCISF(assumedtobefromthe SanOnofreNuclearGeneratingStation[SONGS]totheCISF;and(3)fromtheCISFtotheassumed repositoryatYuccaMountaininNyeCounty,Nevada.Overall,theserepresentativeroutesprovideda conservativeestimateofthedistanceSNFwouldbetransported,especiallyconsideringthatmostSNFto betransportedwouldoriginateintheeastandcentralUnitedStatesatdistancesmuchlessthanthatof therepresentativeeasternroute.

Tobemeaningfulandprovideimpactfulinformation,theURFradiationpopulationdosemustbeapplied acrosstransportationroutesandpopulationdensitiesalongthoseroutes.Asexplainedintheresponse toRAIERTR7,theroutingcodeWebTRAGISwasusedtoprovideroutingdataalongtherepresentative routesusingthemostpreciserural,suburban,andurbansegments.Consequently,forparameter#3 toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page18of52

(e.g.,populationdensitiesalongtheroute),theHoltecanalysisusedthemostpreciseinformation available.

TheRADTRANcodeintegratestheURFradiationpopulationdosewiththepopulationdensitiesalong therepresentativeroutestodeterminethetotalpopulationdoseforashipmentofSNFalongthat specificroute.Then,usingthetotalnumberofshipments,thetotaltransportationdosecanbe calculated.Forparameter#4(e.g.,numberofshipmentsofmaterial),theHoltecanalysiswasbasedon anestimateofthenumberofshipmentsthatwouldberequired.

Insummary,Holtecusedthetermboundinginthetransportationanalysistoreflecttheuseof:(1)a conservative(maximum)doseratefromtheSNF,and(2)conservativedistancesassumedforSNF transportation,andusedaccuratevaluesforthenumberofcanisters.

ERTR9:Providetechnicalbasesfortheapplicabilityofothercitedtransportationriskanalyses.

ERSections4.9.3and4.9.4(Holtec,2017b)describeotherpasttransportationanalysesandthe conclusionsofthestudies.Providedetailonthemethods,assumptions,andsimilaritiesofthecited analysestoexplaintheirapplicabilitytotheproposedaction.

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c),whichrequiresanalysesin environmentalreportstobequantitativetothefullestextentpracticableandcontainsufficientdatato aidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse

ERSection4.9.3citesthefollowinganalysesinvolvingSNFtransportation:WCS2016,NUREG1714,and DOE2008.Asummaryofeachdocumentregardingtheirapplicabilityisprovidedbelow.

1.

WCS2016:seeresponseRAIERTR7andRAIERTR8,whichdetailstheWCS2016analysis andexplainsitsapplicabilitytotheHoltecanalysis.

2.

NUREG1714:Theproposedactioninvolvestheconstructionandoperationoftheproposed PrivateFuelStorageFacility(PFSF)atasitelocatedinthenorthwestcornerofthe ReservationandanewraillineconnectingtheexistingUnionPacificrailroadtothesite.The proposedPFSFwouldbedesignedtostorealifetimecapacityofupto40,000MTUsofSNF.

For200shipmentsofSNFannuallytothePSF,NRCdeterminedthatthetotaldose associatedwithtransportationwouldbe23personremperyear(NRC2001,Table5.5).The NRCconcludedthat,TheresultsshowthattheestimatedLCFsassociatedwiththe transportofSNFwouldbesmall.ThisresultisconsistentwithHoltecsresults.

3.

DOE2008:TheDOEevaluatedthepotentialimpactsoftransportingupto70,000MTUsof SNFtotheYuccaMountainrepositoryfromnuclearpowerplantsacrosstheU.S.TheDOE determinedthattransportationimpactswouldresultinatotaldoseof1,1001,200person remtothepopulationalongthetransportationroutes(DOE2008,Table64).Thoseresults correlatewellwiththeresultspresentedTable4.9.1oftheHoltecEnvironmentalReport(HI 2167521),whentheresultsinthattable(whichrepresenttheimpactsoftransporting5,000 MTUs)areintegratedtoaccountforasimilaroverallquantityofSNFtransport.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page19of52

ERSection4.9.4citesthefollowinganalysesinvolvingSNFtransportation:NUREG2125,NUREG2157, NUREG/CR6657,NUREG0170,NRC2001,andDOE2008.Asummaryofeachdocumentregardingtheir applicabilityisprovidedbelow.

4.

NUREG2125:Thepurposeofthisstudywastoanalyzetheradiologicalrisksoftransporting SNFinroutinetransportationandtransportationaccidents,usingthelatestavailabledata andmodelingtechniques.Thestudyconcludedthefollowing:

o Theaverageradiationdosetomembersofthepublicfromroutinetransportationof radioactivematerialsisafractionoftheexistingbackgroundradiationdose.

o Theradiologicalriskfromaccidentsintransportingradioactivematerialsisverysmall comparedtothenonradiologicalriskfromaccidentsinvolvinglargetrucksorfreight trains(NRC2014a).

TheseconclusionsareconsistentwiththeresultsintheHoltecEnvironmentalReport(HI2167521).

5.

NUREG2157:ThisGenericEnvironmentalImpactStatementforContinuedStorageofSpent NuclearFuel(GEIS)addressedtheenvironmentalimpactsofcontinuingtostoreSNFata reactorsiteoratanawayfromreactorstoragefacility.IntheGEIS,NRCconcludedthat, Radiologicalimpactstothepublicandworkersfromspentfuelshipmentsfromareactor havepreviouslybeenevaluatedbytheNRCandwerefoundtobesmall(NRC2014b).This conclusionisconsistentwithHoltecsresults.

6.

NUREG/CR6672:Thisreportreexaminedtherisksassociatedwiththetransportofspent nuclearfuelbytruckandrailandcomparedtheresultstothosepublishedinNUREG0170 andtheModalStudy.Thereexaminationconsideredtransportbytruckandrailinfour genericTypeBspentfuelcasks.Thereportconcludedthat,comparisonsdemonstratethat bothofthesestudiesmadeanumberofveryconservativeassumptionsaboutspentfuel andcaskresponsetoaccidentconditions,whichcausedtheirestimatesofaccidentsource terms,accidentfrequencies,andaccidentconsequencestoalsobeveryconservative.The resultsofthisstudyandthepreviousstudiesdemonstratethattherisksassociatedwiththe shipmentofspentfuelbytruckorrailareverysmall(NRC2000).Thisconclusionis consistentwithHoltecsresults.

7.

NUREG0170:Preparedin1977,thisFinalEnvironmentalStatementwaspreparedin connectionwithNRCreevaluationofitsregulationsgoverningtransportationofradioactive materialsinordertoprovidesufficientanalysisfordeterminingtheeffectivenessofthe presentrulesandofpossiblealternativestotheserules.TheNRCstaffdeterminedthat, theenvironmentalimpactsofnormaltransportationofradioactivematerialsandtherisks attendanttoaccidentsinvolvingradioactivematerialshipmentsaresufficientlysmallto allowcontinuedshipmentsbyallmodes(NRC1977).Thisconclusionisconsistentwith Holtecsresults.

8.

DOE2008(seenumber#3above).

References:

DOE2008 U.S.DepartmentofEnergy(DOE).FinalSupplementalEnvironmentalImpactStatement foraGeologicRepositoryfortheDisposalofSpentNuclearFuelandHighLevel RadioactiveWasteatYuccaMountain,NyeCounty,Nevada(DOE/EIS0250FS1).June 2008.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page20of52

NRC1977 NuclearRegulatoryCommission(NRC).FinalEnvironmentalStatementonthe TransportationofRadioactiveMaterialbyAirandOtherModes(NUREG0170).

December1977.

NRC2000 NRC.ReexaminationofSpentFuelShipmentRiskEstimates.(NUREG/CR6672).March 2000.

NRC2001 NRC.FinalEnvironmentalImpactStatement(EIS)fortheConstructionandOperationof anIndependentSpentFuelStorageInstallationontheReservationoftheSkullValley BandoftheGoshuteIndiansandRelatedTransportationFacilityinTooeleCounty,Utah (NUREG1714).December2001.

NRC2014a NRC.SpentFuelTransportationRiskAssessment(NUREG2125).January2014.

NRC2014b NRC.GenericEnvironmentalImpactStatementforContinuedStorageofSpentNuclear Fuel(NUREG2157).September2014.

WCS2016 WasteControlSpecialists(WCS).WCSConsolidatedInterimSpentFuelStorageFacility EnvironmentalReport.May2016.

ERGS1:Provideadditionalinformationontheregionalphysiographicfeaturessurroundingthe proposedCISFsite,includingafigureshowingthephysiographicfeaturesandadescriptionofthe geologicandhydrologicprocessesresponsibleforformationofthefeatures.

PhysiographicfeaturesintheregionoftheproposedCISFincludetheQuerechoPlains,LowerPecos Valley,LlanoEstacado,MescaleroRidge,LagunaValley,GramaRidge,NashDraw,ClaytonBasin,andSan SimonSwale(ELEA,2007).Clarifythedescriptionofthesefeatures,someofwhicharementionedinthe ERandSAR[e.g.,seeERSection3.5.1(Holtec,2017b)andSARSection2.4.1(Holtec,2017c)].

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(c),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheaffectedenvironmentandcontainsufficientdatatoaidtheNRCinits developmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse:

Section3.3.1.3hasbeenaddedandincludesadditionalinformationontheregionalphysiographic featuressurroundingtheproposedCISFsite.Figures3.3.9through3.3.12havealsobeenaddedto provideavisualrepresentationoftheadditionalinformation.

ERGS2:Provideinformationtoevaluatethepotentialforenvironmentalimpactscausedbyinduced seismicityfromdeepwellinjectionofwastewateratorneartheproposedCISF.Thisinformation shouldincludethenumberandlocationofinjectionwellswithina10km[6mi]radiusoftheproposed projectarea.Foreachidentifiedinjectionwell,provideinformationonthegeologicformationthat wastewatersarebeinginjectedinto,thedepthandthicknessofthetargetedgeologicformation,and injectedwastewatervolumes.

ERSection3.3.2.1(Holtec,2017b)statesthatrecentseismicitysoutheastandwestoftheproposed projectareaissuspectedtobeinducedbyinjectionofwastewaterfromnaturalgasproductioninto deepwellsorwells.Therequestedinformationwouldbeusedtoassessthepotentialforinduced seismicitytoimpacttheproposedCISF.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page21of52

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(c),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheaffectedenvironmentandcontainsufficientdatatoaidtheNRCinits developmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse:

Section3.3.2.1oftheEnvironmentalReport(HI2167521)statesthatinducedseismicityfromdeepwell wastewaterinjectionmayaccountforearthquakesbetween2.54.0magnitude(basedonWIPP monitoringnetwork).Section3.3.2.2providestheprobabilityofamagnitude5.0earthquake(greater thaninducedseismicity)within30milesofthesiteinnext50yearstobe~2%.Section3.3.2.3statesthat accordingtoUSGS,thePGAofanearthquakewith2%probabilityofexceedancein50yearsis~0.06g (2,500yearreturn).AccordingtoTable4.3.3oftheHISTORESAR,PGAoftheCISFDesignBasis Earthquake(10,000yearreturn)is0.15gandtheOperatingBasisEarthquake(1,000yearreturn)is 0.10g.Additionally,PerTable4.3.3oftheHISTORESAR,theDesignBasisEarthquakefortheHISTORE UMAXISFSIstructurehasahorizontalPGAof1.0g,whichismorethansixtimesgreaterthanground motionattheproposedsite.Therefore,inducedseismicityoffromdeepwellwastewaterinjectionis boundedbybothDBEandOBEforthefacilityandwillnotimpacttheCISF.

ERGS3:Provideinformationonthepotentialimpactsassociatedwiththedisposition(stockpiling, reuse,ordisposal)ofexcavatedsoilsfromconstructionoftheproposedCISFandassociated infrastructure,includingtherailspurorintermodalfacility(seealsoRAIPA4).Ifsoilswillbe stockpiled,provideinformationonthelocationsandestimatedvolumeofsoilstockpiles,and mitigationmeasures(includinganymeasuresthatmayberequiredbyNewMexicoEnvironment DepartmentregulationsorBLM)thatwillbeimplementedtoavoidandreducesoillossesdueto stormwaterrunoffandwinderosion.Ifsoilswillbedisposed,provideinformationontheestimated volumeofsoiltobedisposed,thelocationofpotentialdisposalfacilities,andhowsoilwillbe transportedtothedisposalfacilities.

Provideinformationassessingthepotentialimpactofthedisposition(stockpiling,reuse,ordisposal)of excavatedsoilsfromconstructionoftheproposedCISFandinfrastructuredescribedinERSection2.2.2 (Holtec,2017b),includingfortherailspurorintermodalfacility.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(c),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheaffectedenvironment,discusstheimpactsoftheproposedaction, andcontainsufficientdatatoaidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse

Section2.2.2.8hasbeenrevisedtoincludediscussiononthequantitiesofexcavatedmaterialsforthe UMAXandallassociatedinfrastructure.Concurrently,additionalinformationwasaddedonhowthe excavatedmaterialswillbehandled(reuseortruckedoffsite).Itshouldbenotedthatstockpilingis alsodiscussedinChapter4,whileerosionmitigationmeasuresarediscussedinChapter6.

ERGS4:Provideinformationonthemitigationmeasuresforspillpreventionandstormwater managementthatwillbeimplementedduringoperationtoprotectsoilsfromradiologicaland nonradiologicalcontamination.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page22of52

ERSection4.3.3(Holtec,2017b)statesthatmitigationmeasuresforspillpreventionandstormwater managementwouldbeappliedduringoperation,asdescribedinChapter6.Identifyanddescribeany operationalmitigationmeasurestowhichtheapplicantiscommitting.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(c),whichrequiresthat theERdiscusstheenvironmentalimpactsoftheproposedactionandalternatives availableforreducingandavoidingadverseenvironmentalimpacts.

HoltecResponse

Section6.3hasbeenupdatedtoincludethedevelopmentofaStormwaterPollutionPreventionPlan (SWPPP).Additionally,thedevelopmentofaSpillPrevention,Control,andCountermeasuresPlanwas addedasamitigatingmeasure.

ERGS5:Provideadditionalinformationonthebestmanagementpractices,acceptablemethods,and acceptablemeansthatwillbeimplementedtominimizepotentialimpactsongeologyandsoilsduring construction,operation,anddecommissioningoftheCISFandassociatedinfrastructure(including constructionoftherailspurorintermodalfacility)describedinERSection2.2.2(Holtec,2017b).

ERSection6.3(Holtec,2017b)statesthatbestmanagementpracticeswouldbeusedtomitigateerosion impactsduetositeclearingandgrading,acceptablemethodswouldbeusedtostabilizedisturbedsoils duringconstruction,andacceptablemeanswouldbeusedtostabilizeclearedareasnotcoveredby structuresorpavement.Describethespecificmeasures(e.g.,acceptablemethodsandacceptable means)thatwillbeimplemented.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(c),whichrequiresthat theERdiscusstheenvironmentalimpactsoftheproposedactionandalternatives availableforreducingandavoidingadverseenvironmentalimpacts.

HoltecResponse

Chapter6wasrevisedtodiscussactionablemitigatingmeasuresforeachsubsectionthatincludea clarificationonbestmanagementpractices.Additionally,alllistedmitigatingmeasuresnolonger distinguishbetweenrequiredandvoluntary;allactionsarerequired.

ERWR1:ProvideinformationabouttheseasonalityofwaterinLagunaGatunaandLagunaPlata, waterdepththatistypicalwhenthelagunascontainwater,andmonthly,quarterlyorotherseasonal informationonhowmuchwaterthelagunascontainoverthecourseofayear.

ERSection3.5.1(Holtec,2017b)identifiesLagunaGatunaandLagunaPlataasephemeralplayasand statesthatsurfacerunofffromtheproposedCISFsiteflowsintoLagunaGatunatotheeastandLaguna Platatothenorthwest.Provideinformationregardingwhenandhowmuchwatertheplayasmay intermittentlycontain.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(b)(1),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheaffectedenvironmentanddiscusstheimpactsoftheproposed action.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page23of52

HoltecResponse

Section3.5.1.1hasbeenaddedtospecificallydiscussthedetailsoftheLagunas.Thepresenceof measurablewaterineitherplayaispredominantlycontingentonprecipitationevents,therefore calculationstopredictwaterretentionoverthecourseofacalendaryearwouldbespeculative(based onaverageannualprecipitationratesof13.1annuallyinCarlsbadand15.7inHobbs).Thewettest monthsormonsoonmonthsarehistoricallyJulyandAugust.Precipitationeventsusuallyoccurinthe formoferratic,unpredictable,andsometimesviolentthunderstormswhichcanleaveseveralinchesof rainfallinarelativelyshortperiodoftime.Waterqualityinbothplayasandtheirrespectiveintermittent salinesprings,isconsideredhypersaline(Davis&Hopkins,1992).

ERWR2:ToassisttheNRCindescribingtheaffectedenvironment,provideadditionalinformationon thesitespecificfloodinganalysispresentedinSARSection2.4.2(Holtec,2017c).Theadditional informationshouldincludeinputdata,outputresults,andfiguresillustratingthemaximumextentof floodingacrosstheanalyzedareasuchthatNRCcouldreplicateorotherwiseindependentlyverifythe analysis.

SARSection2.4.2(Holtec,2017c)providesageneraldescriptionofasitespecificfloodinganalysisofthe proposedCISFsiteforamaximumprecipitationeventconductedwithESRIArcGISsoftwarewith3Dand SpatialAnalystextensionsandpubliclyavailableGISdata.ProvidedetaileddatatosupporttheNRC staffsvalidationandverificationoftheresultsoftheanalysis.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)(1),whichrequiresthattheER containsufficientdatatoaidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse

SARSection2.4.2wasrevisedtoclarifythesourcesofeachpieceofinputdata.Asdiscussedinthis section:

TheAreaofInterest(AOI)isdefinedastheboundaryofthesite.AllotherGISdatafortheanalysis wereidentified,derived,and/oracquiredfrompubliclyavailabledatasources.Thisdataincludeda DigitalElevationModel(DEM)oftheAOI[2.4.9],onefootcontoursofthearea(derivedfromthe DEM),hydrologicunitboundaryforthe12digitsubwatersheds(HUC12)[2.4.10],andtheNRCS soils[2.4.11]presentintheAOI.AlsoderivedfromtheDEMwasaTriangularInterpolatedNetwork (TIN)layerusedinthepolygonvolumecalculations.AlldatawereprojectedintotheNAD83,UTM Zone13Ncoordinatesystem.

Additionally,Figure2.4.11wasaddedtotheSARtoshowtheLagunaWatershedsdevelopedfromthe inputdataaswellasthefloodedareafor7.5RainEvent.

Sources:

2.4.9 U.S.GeologicalSurvey(USGS),NationalGeospatialProgram.3DElevationProgramDigital ElevationModelResolution1/3arcsecond(10meters).https://nationalmap.gov 2.4.10 NewMexicoResourceGeographicInformationSystem.HydrologicUnitBoundaryNewMexico HUC12Boundaries,http://rgis.unm.edu/

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page24of52

2.4.11 U.S.DepartmentofAgriculture,NationalResourcesConservationService.NRCSWebSurvey.

https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx

ERWR3:ProvideadditionalinformationonconsumptivewaterusefortheproposedCISFincluding activitiesthatwillconsumewater(e.g.,dustsuppressionoruseinconcretebatchplant)andthe estimatedamountofwaterconsumedbytheseactivities.Inaddition,provideinformationonthe capacityoftheCityofHobbsWaterDepartmenttomeetwaterdemandsfortheproposedCISFand whetheranylocalorStatepermitsorauthorizationswillberequiredtoacquirewaterfromtheCityof HobbsWaterDepartment(orothersources),andthestatusofthosepermits.

ERSection4.10.1(Holtec,2017b)statesthatpeakpotablewaterrequirementsfortheCISFwouldbe76 L/min[20gal/min]duringconstruction,operation,anddecommissioningandthatpotablewaterwould beprovidedbytheCityofHobbsWaterDepartmentfrommunicipalwellswithdrawingwaterfromthe OgallalaAquifer.Provideinformationontheamountofwaterthatwillbeconsumedbyspecific activitiesduringconstruction,operation,anddecommissioning.Inaddition,provideinformationonthe capacityoftheCityofHobbsWaterDepartmenttomeetwaterdemandsfortheproposedCISFor whetheranypermitsorauthorizationswouldberequiredtoacquirewaterfromtheCityofHobbs.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(c),whichrequiresthat theERdiscusstheimpactsoftheproposedactionandcontainsufficientdatatoaidtheNRCinits developmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse:

Section4.10.1and4.10.2wererevisedtoclarifyandprovideadditionaldetailspertainingtothe consumptivewaterusefortheCISF.Section4.10.1wasalsorevisedtonotethatwaterwouldbe suppliedbytheCityofCarlsbadviatheirDoubleEagleWatersystem.AletterfromtheCityofCarlsbad CityAdministratorstatingthecity'sabilitytomeetandsupplytheCISFwaterdemandhasbeenattached totheEnvironmentalReportasAppendixI.

ERWR4:Provideadditionalinformationabouttheexistingpotablewatersupplypipeatthe proposedCISFsiteincludingafigureshowingitslocationinrelationtofullbuildoutoftheproposed CISF,originandterminus,sourceofwater,materialconstruction,size(e.g.,widthordiameter),and deliverycapacity(e.g.,maximumflowrate).Inaddition,provideinformationonanymeasuresthat willbeimplementedtomitigateimpactsofthewatersupplypipeonconstruction,operation,and decommissioningactivities.

ERSection4.10.1(Holtec,2017b)statesthatanexistingpotablewatersupplypipeisalreadyinplaceat thesiteandthatnonotableconstructionwouldberequiredtoprovidewatertotheCISF.Discuss potentialimpactsassociatedwithuseofthewatersupplypipe.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b),(b)(1),and(c),whichrequires thattheERincludeadescriptionoftheaffectedenvironment,discusstheimpactsoftheproposed action,andcontainsufficientdatatoaidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page25of52

HoltecResponse:

Section4.10.1hasbeenrevisedtoclarifythattheexistingpotablewaterpipelinewhichbisectsthesite isownedbyIntrepidMiningLLCandservicestheirIntrepidEastFacility.Intrepidisawareoftheneedto relocatethispipelineandHoltecwillcoordinatewithIntrepidtoreroutethispipelinearoundtheSite priortothebeginningofconstruction.Thepipelineisasurfacepipelineandwouldrequirenosignificant constructiontoreroute.

ERWR5:ProvideinformationonbaselinegroundwatersamplingfortheproposedCISF.Specifically, provideinformationonwhetherbaselinegroundwatersamplingwouldbeconductedpriorto constructionand,ifso,providedetailsofthebaselinegroundwatersamplingprogramincluding samplinglocations,samplingintervals,andconstituentsandparameterstobeanalyzed.

ERSection4.5.5(Holtec,2017b)statesthatimpactstogroundwaterduringdecommissioningwouldbe minimal.Samplingwouldalsobeintegraltothedecommissioningprocesstodemonstratethatany residualimpacts,ascomparedtobaselinesamplingresults,meetNRCandEPAguidelines.Provide informationregardingthebaselinegroundwatersamplingprogramandanyresults.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(c),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheaffectedenvironment,discusstheimpactsoftheproposedaction, andcontainsufficientdatatoaidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse:

Section4.5.1hasbeenrevisedtonotethatabaselinegroundwatermonitoring,sampling,andtesting programwillbeimplementedpriortothestartofconstruction.Additionally,AppendixJhasbeenadded toprovidedetailsoftheprogramincludingsamplinglocations,intervals,andtheconstituentsand parametersthatwouldbeanalyzed.

ERWR6:Provideadescriptionofanyspecificenvironmentalmeasuresthatwillbeimplementedto mitigateimpactstogroundwaterandsurfacewaterduringconstruction,operation,and decommissioningoftheproposedCISF.

ERSection6.5(Holtec,2017b)presentsalistofmeasuresthatcouldbeimplementedtomitigate groundwaterandsurfacewaterimpactsfromconstruction,operation,anddecommissioningofthe proposedCISF.Proposedcommitmentstotheenvironmentalmeasureswillbeusedintheimpacts analysis.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(c),whichrequiresthat theERdiscusstheenvironmentalimpactsoftheproposedactionandalternativesavailableforreducing andavoidingadverseenvironmentalimpacts.

HoltecResponse:

Chapter6wasrevisedtodiscussactionablemitigatingmeasuresforeachsubsectionthatincludea clarificationonbestmanagementpractices.Additionally,alllistedmitigatingmeasuresnolonger distinguishbetweenrequiredandvoluntary;allactionsarerequired.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page26of52

ERWR7:Provideadditionaldescriptionsofanyplannedorexpectedstormwatermanagement facilitiesoractivities.

ERSection1.4.2.1(Holtec,2017b)andothersectionsoftheERrefertostormwaterpermitsthat wouldbeneeded,includingthoseapplicabletopointsourcedischargeofstormwater.ERSection4.5.3 (Holtec,2017b),describeshowstormwaterrunoffwouldflowintothenearbydrainagesofLagunaPlata andLagunaGatuna.Describeanyadditionalstormwatermanagementfacilitiesoractivitiesthatare proposedorexpected.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(b)(1),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheaffectedenvironmentanddiscusstheimpactsoftheproposed action.

HoltecResponse:

TheHISTOREsitewillrelyonsurfaceflowandordrainageculvertsforrainwaterrunoff,whichasstated willdraintothelagunas,withthemajorityflowingtoLagunaPlata.Atthistime,thereisnoexpected needforanadditionalstormwatermanagementfacility.

ERECO1:Providetheacreagesofvegetatedlandbytype,bareland,existingdisturbedareassuchas roads,andopenwaterhabitat(e.g.,LagunaGatuna)withintheprojectboundaryoftheCISF.Clearly identify,usingsimilarcategories,theacreagesthatwillberevegetatedorreclaimedafter decommissioning.Thisinformationcouldbeprovidedinatable.

ERAppendixB(Holtec,2017b)notesthenumberofacresthatwouldbedisturbedandstatesthatthe siteiscomposedofmesquiteuplandscrublandhabitat.Inadditiontoidentifyingtheoverallhabitat type,informationisneededregarding(i)thespecificvegetativecommunitiesthatarepresentatthe site,(ii)howmanyacresofeachvegetativecommunitywouldbedisturbed,(iii)dominantspecieswithin eachvegetativecommunity,and(iv)theamountoftotalandrelativevegetativecover.Thisinformation isneededtodescribetheaffectedenvironmentandassessthepotentialenvironmentalimpactsthat construction,operation,anddecommissioningoftheCISFwillhaveonecologicalresources.

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)(1)and(2),whichrequirethattheER includeadescriptionoftheproposedactionanddiscusstheimpactsoftheproposedaction.

HoltecResponse:

AppendixHhasbeenaddedtoprovideadetailedassessmentofthespecificecologicalsitesand vegetativecommunitiespresentattheSiteaswellashowmuchofeachwillbedisturbed.Additionally, sections3.4.2.1,4.4.1,and4.4.7havebeenrevisedtoreferencethisdetailedassessment.

ERECO2:Provideanyupdatedinformationonbaselineecologicalsurveysforlandwithinthe proposedCISFprojectboundary.Specifically,confirmwhetheradditionalwildlifeandvegetation surveyswillbeconductedpriortoconstruction.Ifso,providedetailsofthetypesofsurveysthat wouldbeconductedandanestimatedtimeofcompletion.Inaddition,clarifyBLMregulationsand requirementsforwildlifeandvegetationsurveysonBLMownedland(proposedrailspurlocation)as wellaswildlifeandvegetationsurveysrequiredbytheNewMexicoDepartmentofGameandFish andtheNewMexicoEnvironmentDepartment.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page27of52

ERSection3.4statesthatanecologicalsurveywasconductedinMarch2007onapproximately407ha

[1,005ac]ofthe421ha[1,040ac]parcel.Aonedayconfirmatoryecologicalsurveywasconductedin October2016ofthe133.5ha[330ac]areathatisproposedtobedisturbedoverthelifeofthe proposedCISFprojectincludingconstructionoftheaccessroadandrailspur.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(c),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheaffectedenvironment,discusstheimpactsoftheproposedaction, andcontainsufficientdatatoaidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse:

Section3.4providesthebaselinecharacterizationoftheecologicalcommunitiesintheareaandatthe Site.Asnoted,theecologicalsurveyperformedin2007providesthebasisforthisassessment.The resultsfromtheconfirmatorysurveyperformedin2016wereconsistentwiththefindingsfromthe2007 survey.Duetothelackofchange,itisassumedthattheseresultswillnotchangepriortothestartof construction.Atthistimetherearenoplanstoperformadditionalecologicalsurveys.Thisbeingsaid, additionaldiscussionandinformationhasbeenaddedintoSections3.4.3.1(seeresponsetoRAIERECO 1)and3.4.3.2.

ERECO3:ClarifythestatusofthedeterminationofjurisdictionalwetlandsbytheU.S.ArmyCorpsof EngineerswithintheproposedCISFprojectboundary.

ERSection3.5.1statesthattherearenoriparianhabitatsorwetlandsatthesite.Provideinformation regardinganybaselinewildlifetrappingorcaptureandreleasesurveys,nestingbirdsurveys,amphibian orreptilesurveys,orwetlandsurveysperformedatthesite.Also,clarifywhether,basedontheNational WetlandInventory,anyriverinehabitat,freshwaterpondhabitat,and/orlakehabitatispresentwithin theproposedprojectarea.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(c),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheaffectedenvironment,discusstheimpactsoftheproposedaction, andcontainsufficientdatatoaidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse:

ERSection3.5.1hasbeenclarifiedtonotethattherearenoU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers(USACE) jurisdictionalwetlandsatthesitepertheELEAGNEPSitingStudyReportsection2.5.2.

AsnotedinSection3.5.1,WatersoftheU.S.aredefinedwithintheCleanWaterAct(CWA),as amended,andjurisdictionisaddressedbytheU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA)andtheU.S.

ArmyCorpsofEngineers(USACE)(33CFRPart328).Forthesakeofthisreport,onlyUSACEdesignated wetlandsareincluded.Thatbeingsaid,theNationalWetlandsInventoryhasbeenreviewed.TheNWI showstwofreshwaterponds,onelakehabitat,andoneriverinehabitatwithintheproposedproperty.

ItshouldbenotedthatpertheNationalWetlandsInventory(NWI)DataLimitations,Exclusions,and PrecautionstheNWImapsarepreparedfromtheanalysisofhighaltitudeimageryandAmarginof errorisinherentintheuseofimagery;thus,detailedonthegroundinspectionofanyparticularsite mayresultinrevisionofthewetlandboundariesorclassificationestablishedthroughimageanalysis.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page28of52

Additionally,theU.S.Fish&Wildlifestatesthatregulatoryagencieswithjurisdictionoverwetlandsmay defineanddescribewetlandsinadifferentmannerthantheNWI.

Theseclassificationswithaccompanyingmapsarefurtherexplainedbelow:

LakeHabitats:

Name MapReference Acres ClassCode LagunaGatuna (Salt)

L2937 391.73 L

Classificationcode:L SystemLacustrine(L):TheLacustrineSystemincludeswetlandsanddeepwaterhabitatswithallofthe followingcharacteristics:(1)situatedinatopographicdepressionoradammedriverchannel;(2)lacking trees,shrubs,persistentemergents,andemergentmossesorlichenswith30percentorgreaterareal coverage;and(3)totalareaofatleast8hectares(ha)(20acres).Similarwetlandsanddeepwater habitatstotalinglessthan8haarealsoincludedintheLacustrineSystemifanactivewaveformedor bedrockshorelinefeaturemakesupallorpartoftheboundary,orifthewaterdepthinthedeepestpart ofthebasinequalsorexceeds2.5m(8.2ft)atlowwater.Lacustrinewatersmaybetidalornontidal,but oceanderivedsalinityisalwayslessthan0.5ppt.

FreshwaterPonds:

MapReference Acres ClassCode L3024 1.79 PUBF L2981 0.32 PUBF L3006 16.31 PUBF Classificationcode:PUBF SystemPalustrine(P):ThePalustrineSystemincludesallnontidalwetlandsdominatedbytrees,shrubs, persistentemergents,emergentmossesorlichens,andallsuchwetlandsthatoccurintidalareaswhere salinityduetooceanderivedsaltsisbelow0.5ppt.Italsoincludeswetlandslackingsuchvegetation,but withallofthefollowingfourcharacteristics:(1)arealessthan8ha(20acres);(2)activewaveformedor bedrockshorelinefeatureslacking;(3)waterdepthinthedeepestpartofbasinlessthan2.5m(8.2ft)at lowwater;and(4)salinityduetooceanderivedsaltslessthan0.5ppt.

ClassUnconsolidatedBottom(UB):Includesallwetlandsanddeepwaterhabitatswithatleast25%

coverofparticlessmallerthanstones(lessthan67cm),andavegetativecoverlessthan30%.

WaterRegimeSemipermanentlyFlooded(F):Surfacewaterpersiststhroughoutthegrowingseasonin mostyears.Whensurfacewaterisabsent,thewatertableisusuallyatorverynearthelandsurface.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page29of52

RiverineHabitat:

MapReference Acres ClassCode R14 N/A R4SBC

Classificationcode:R4SBC SystemRiverine(R):TheRiverineSystemincludesallwetlandsanddeepwaterhabitatscontainedwithin achannel,withtwoexceptions:(1)wetlandsdominatedbytrees,shrubs,persistentemergents, emergentmosses,orlichens,and(2)habitatswithwatercontainingoceanderivedsaltsof0.5pptor greater.Achannelisanopenconduiteithernaturallyorartificiallycreatedwhichperiodicallyor continuouslycontainsmovingwater,orwhichformsaconnectinglinkbetweentwobodiesofstanding water.

SubsystemIntermittent(4):ThisSubsystemincludeschannelsthatcontainflowingwateronlypartof theyear.Whenthewaterisnotflowing,itmayremaininisolatedpoolsorsurfacewatermaybeabsent.

ClassStreambed(SB):IncludesallwetlandscontainedwithintheIntermittentSubsystemoftheRiverine SystemandallchannelsoftheEstuarineSystemoroftheTidalSubsystemoftheRiverineSystemthat arecompletelydewateredatlowtide.

WaterRegimeSeasonallyFlooded(C):Surfacewaterispresentforextendedperiodsespeciallyearlyin thegrowingseason,butisabsentbytheendofthegrowingseasoninmostyears.Thewatertableafter floodingceasesisvariable,extendingfromsaturatedtothesurfacetoawatertablewellbelowthe groundsurface.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page30of52

Figure1:Mapofprojectareashowinghydrologyfeatures toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page31of52

Figure2:MapofprojectareaaspresentedinNWIWetlandsMapper

Sources:

U.S.Fish&Wildlife,NationalWetlandsInventory(NWI)WetlandsMapper.https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/Mapper.html

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page32of52

ERAQ2:Clarifyandexplaintheneedforanairpermit.

ERSection1.4.2.3andERTable1.4.1(Holtec,2017b)statetheonsiteconcretebatchplantrequiresan airpermit.Incontrast,ERSection4.6.1(Holtec,2017b)statesnoairpermitswillberequiredbecauseof thelowestimatedemissionlevelswhichincludeemissionsfromtheconcretebatchplant(seeERTables 4.6.1to4.6.2).Clarifytheinconsistencyregardingtheneedforanairpermitalongwithanexplanation forthisexpectation.

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(d),whichrequiresthattheERincludea descriptionofthestatusofcompliancewithapplicableenvironmentalqualitystandardsand requirements,includinglimitationsandrequirementswhichhavebeenimposedbyFederal,State, regional,andlocalagencieshavingresponsibilityforenvironmentalprotection.

HoltecResponse:

BackgroundonNAAQS&NMAAQS:

PerNMEDPermittingRegulationsasstipulatedby20.2.72and20.2.73NMAC(Ref.2),airqualitypermits arerequiredforstationarysourcesemittingamountsofcriteriaairpollutantsinexcessofmaximum allowableconcentrationlimitsasrequiredbytheNAAQSandNMAAQS.

NAAQS NMAAQS CO CO NO2 NOx SOs SO2 PM H2S Pb ReducedSulfur(excludingH2S)

NonmethaneHydrocarbons(NMHC)

Reducedsulfur,usuallyreferredtoasTotalReducedSulfur(TRS)compounds,canincludecarbonyl sulfide[COS],carbondisulfide[CS2],hydrogensulfide[H2S],methylmercapton[CH4S],dimethylsulfide

[(CH3)2S],anddimethyldisulfide[(CH3)2S2](Ref.4and6).

NMHCareasubsetofnonmethanevolatileorganiccompounds(NMVOC),whichareotherwise identicaltoVOCs,exceptfortheabsenceofmethane.NMVOCsarehighlyvariedinchemical compositionbutdisplaysimilarbehaviorsintheatmosphere.Methaneisnotasignificantindicatorofair quality,andthereforeexcludedfromconsideration(Ref.1).

RepealofTSPStandard:

Untilrecently,NewMexicoretainedtheTotalSuspendedParticulates(TSP)standardtoprotectthe publicfromlargerparticulates(dust).TSParemeasuredregardlessoftheirsizeandincludeallairborne solidandlowvaporpressureliquidparticleshavingaerodynamicparticlesizesfrombelow0.01100µm andlarger.ThoughlistedinTable3.6.6asaNMAAQS,theNMEDAQBdeterminedthatthestateand federalairqualitystandardsforPM10andPM2.5aresufficienttoprotectpublichealth.The EnvironmentalImprovementBoardunanimouslyapprovedtorepealtheTSPstandard,effective November30,2018.Subsequently,toaddressairqualityaffectedbydust,areaswithhistorically toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page33of52

documentedorknownseasonalexceptionaleventsarenowrequiredtohavedustmitigationplans.

Forexample,DonaAnaandLunaCountiesinsouthernNewMexicowereidentifiedbytheEPAasareas tobecoveredbymitigationplans.TheAQBdevelopedadustmitigationplanandultimatelyadoptedthe FugitiveDustControlRule,applicableonlytoDonaAnaandLunaCounties,andeffectiveJanuary1,2019 (Ref.3).

Stationaryvs.MobileEmissionSources:

Asmentioned,forpermittingpurposes,emissionsthresholdsareconsideredonlyiftheyoriginatefrom astationarysource.Thoughmobilesourcesandcumulativeemissionswereanalyzedforvariousstages oftheproposedproject,theseemissionsarenotrelevanttotheNMEDairpermittingrequirements(Ref.

3)asper20.2.72and20.2.73NMAC(Ref.2)(excerptsbelow).

20.2.72.200NMACAPPLICATIONFORCONSTRUCTION,MODIFICATION,NSPS,ANDNESHAP PERMITSANDREVISIONS:

A.Permitsmustbeobtainedfromthedepartmentby:

(1)Anypersonconstructingastationarysourcewhichhasapotentialemission rategreaterthan10poundsperhouror25tonsperyearofanyregulatedair contaminantforwhichthereisaNationalorNewMexicoAmbientAirQuality Standard.Ifthespecifiedthresholdinthissubsectionisexceededforanyone regulatedaircontaminant,allregulatedaircontaminantswithNationalorNew MexicoAmbientAirQualityStandardsemittedaresubjecttopermitreview.

Withinthissubsection,thepotentialemissionratefornitrogendioxideshallbe basedontotaloxidesofnitrogen; 20.2.73.200NMACNOTICEOFINTENT:

A.Applicability:

(1)Anyowneroroperatorintendingtoconstructanewstationarysourcewhich hasapotentialemissionrategreaterthan10tonsperyearofanyregulatedair contaminantor1tonperyearofleadshallfileanoticeofintentwiththe department.

Therefore,onlyemissionsfromtheproposedconcretebatchplant(CBP)shouldbeconsideredforair permittingrequirements.

ProposedCBP(Ref.3):

Asanindustryspecificstandard,theNMEDclassifiesconcretebatchplantsasminorsourcefacilities.

Minorsourceshavethepotentialtoemit(PTE)>10poundsperhour(PPH)or>25tonsperyear(TPY)of criteriapollutants.However,facilitieswhichemitlesspollutantsthancitedforaminorsourcepermit butemitmorethan10TPYofanyonecriteriapollutantneednotapplyforanairpermit.Thesefacilities muststillreporttheiremissionsandbeissuedaNoticeofIntent(NOI).Furthermore,forfacilitieswith PTE<10TPYofanycriteriapollutant,neitheranairpermitnorNOIisrequired.

BasedonemissionsdataprovidedfortheproposedCBP,theonlystationarysourceofcriteriaair pollutantsintheproposedproject,anairpermitisnotrequired(NPR)asemissionlevelsforeachcriteria airpollutantarewellbelowthe10PPH/10TPYthreshold(Table4.6.1andTable4.6.2).Airquality dispersionmodelingisnotrequiredandHoltecisnotrequiredtosubmitfurtherinformationon emissionstoNMEDforNPRdetermination.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page34of52

Summary:

ShouldtheCBPexceedthestatedboundinglevelsof10PPHor10TPY,Holtecmustsubmitan applicationforanairqualitypermit,asdetailedbelow.

GeneralConstructionPermitforConcreteBatchPlants(GCP5):emissionsover10PPH/25TPY foranysinglecriteriaairpollutant NoticeofIntent(NOI)only:emissionslessthan10PPH/25TPYforanysinglecriteriaair pollutant

Section1.4.2.3andTable1.4.1havebeenrevisedtoclarifythepermittingrequirementsbasedonthe informationpresentedabove.

Sources:

1. EuropeanEnvironmentAgency.https://www.eea.europa.euWebsiteaccessedFebruary2019.

2. NewMexicoAdministrativeCode(NMAC).2019.NewMexicoStateRecordsCenterand Archives.CommissionofPublicRecords.

3. NewMexicoEnvironmentDepartment(NMED)AirQualityBureau(AQB).

https://www.env.nm.gov/airquality.WebsiteaccessedFebruary2019.

4. SamplingofAmbientAirforTotalSuspendedParticulateMatter(SPM)andPM10UsingHigh Volume(HV)Sampler.June1999.CompendiumofMethodsfortheDeterminationofInorganic CompoundsinAmbientAir.CompendiumMethodIO2.1.EPA/625/R96/010a

5. U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA).NationalAmbientAirQualityStandards(NAAQS).

www.epa.gov/criteriaairpollutants.WebsiteaccessedFebruary2019.

6. U.S.EPAAirEmissionMeasurementCenter(EMC).EMCPromulgatedTestMethods.Method 16A-TotalReducedSulfurImpinger.www.epa.gov/emc.WebsiteaccessedFebruary2019.

ERAQ3:Clarifywhattheboundinglevelsofairemissionsareforcriteriapollutantsbyaddressingthe followingtopics:

Clarifytheemissionlevelestimatesassociatedwitheachstage(construction,operation, decommissioning)foreachphaseoverthelicensedlifeoftheproject,includinganyoverlapof stagesandphases EnsuretheERairqualityassessmentdistinctlyaddressescriteriapollutants[e.g.,carbon monoxide,nitrogendioxide,particulatematter(PM2.5andPM10),sulfurdioxide].

IftheemissionlevelscurrentlyintheERarenotbounding,revisetheemissionlevelsandassociated impactanalysesaccordingly.

Specifyingoverlapofprojectstages(i.e.,construction,operation,anddecommissioning)andphases (Phases120)isanimportantconsiderationforidentifyingtheboundingemissioninventory.Bounding thepeakemissionlevelsrelatestoboththemaximumpotentialimpactandthelevelofimpactanalyses conductedintheER.Theapplicantdidnotconductairdispersionmodelingorfurtherimpacts evaluationbeyondwhatispresentedintheERSection4.6.1(Holtec,2017b)becauseestimatedemission levelswerebelowathresholdof10poundsperhour[per20NewMexicoAdministrativeCode(NMAC) 2.72]and10tonsperyear(20NMAC2.73).However,theestimatedprojectlevelemissionsinERTables 4.6.1to4.6.4(Holtec,2017b)areclosetothesethresholds(9.24poundsperhourand9.94tonsper year)andifphasesoccursimultaneouslythesethresholdsmaybeexceeded.Iftheinitial(Phase1) toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page35of52

constructionstageoccurssimultaneouslywitheitherthePhase2constructionorPhase1operation,the maximumemissionlevelscurrentlydescribedintheERwouldbeexceededalongwiththeNMAC thresholdsthatwereusedtojustifythelevelofanalysisintheER.Sincetheairemissionestimatesfor Phase1construction[seeERTables6.4.1and6.4.2,(Holtec,2017b)]andsubsequentPhases2to20 constructiondiffer[seeERTables6.4.3and6.4.4,(Holtec,2017b)],ensureanyrevisionstoERTable1.3 anddeterminationofboundingemissionlevelsreflectthisdistinction(seeRAIPA5).

Foremissionlevelsbystage,ERTables4.6.1and4.6.2(Holtec,2017b),provideestimatedemission levelsforPhase1(initialconstruction).ERSection4.6.1.2(Holtec,2017b)statesthatPhases2to20 constructionemissionlevelsareestimatedat15percentofthePhase1initialconstructionemission levels.TheNRCstaffassumesthatoperationstageemissionscanbecalculatedbysubtractingthePhase 2to20constructionestimatesfromtheemissionestimatesinERTables4.6.3and4.6.4.ERSection 4.6.1.4(Holtec,2017b)doesnotquantifydecommissioningemissionsbutstatesthattheseemissions areexpectedtobesimilarorlessthanthosefromconstruction;however,itisnotclearwhetherthis referstoinitialconstruction(Phase1)orsubsequentconstruction(i.e.,Phases2to20).If decommissioningemissionsareatinitialconstructionstagelevels(i.e.,Phase1)thenoverlappingwith theoperationstageemissionlevelswouldexceedthemaximumemissionlevelscurrentlydescribedin theERandalsoexceedtheNMACthresholdtheapplicantusedtojustifythelevelofanalysesintheER.

TheERairqualityassessmentshouldaddresspollutantsotherthanfugitivedust(e.g.,carbonmonoxide, PM2.5,NOx,andSOx).ERSections4.6.1.1and5.2(Holtec,2017b)statethatfugitivedustistheprimary airemissionassociatedwiththeproposedaction.However,ERTables4.6.2to4.6.4(Holtec,2017b)note thattheproposedactiongeneratesmorecarbonmonoxideandnitrogenoxidesthanparticulatematter.

Anaccuratecharacterizationoftheboundingemissionlevelsfortheproposedactionisneededinorder fortheNRCstafftodeterminewhetherthecurrentestimatesintheERareboundingandbelowthe thresholdvalues.IftherevisedboundingemissioninventoryexceedstheNMACthreshold,providean analysisofimpactsforthesenewemissions(i.e.,emissionlevelsgreater thanoriginallyanalyzedintheER).Forexample,ifairdispersionmodelingisnotwarranted,provide justification.

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(b)(1),whichrequiresthattheER includeadescriptionoftheproposedactionanditspotentialimpactsontheenvironment.

HoltecResponse

Section4.6.1.1wasrevisedtoclarifythatduringtheconstructionstageofPhase1,theprimarysourceof emissionsisfugitivedustandengineemissions.Notethatfugitivedustemissionslevelsarerepresented inTables4.6.1through4.6.4asPM.ConstructionStageofPhase1wouldbecompletedbeforeany operationsactivitiesbegin.Thescaleofconstructionofeachsubsequentphasewouldbeconsiderably lessthattheconstructionofphase1.Assuch,itisassumedthattheconsiderablyreducedconstruction activitiesforPhases220wouldresultin15%oftheemissionsforphase1construction(see"ongoing construction"rowinTables4.6.3and4.6.4).AsstatedinSection4.6.1.2,OperatingStageemissionsare independentofthenumberofOperatingphases.Therefore,Table4.6.3and4.6.4areboundinginthat theyconsidertheOperatingStageemissionsaswellastheconcurrent(overlapping)emissionsfromthe ongoingconstructionstagesofphases220.Additionally,itshouldbenotedthattheairquality assessmentdoesaddresspollutantsotherthanfugitivedust.Tables4.6.1through4.6.4illustratethat CO,NOX,SO2,PM10,PM2.5,VOC,CO2e,andPM(fugitivedust)haveallbeenconsidered.Lastly,allSNF toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page36of52

wouldberemovedfromthesiteandoperationsactivitiesceasedpriortothestartofdemolition activities(decommissioningrelatedemissions).Section4.6.1.4hasbeenrevisedtoclarifythis.This sectionwasalsorevisedtostatethatdemolitionemissionswouldbesimilartoPhase1construction emissions.Thisisconservativeasitisreasonabletoassumethatinnovationsandimprovementsto constructionequipmentwillbemadethatwouldfurtherreduceemissionslevelsinthemultipleyears priortodecommissioning.

AsdiscussedaboveinthisresponseandintheresponsetoRAIERAQ2,dispersionmodellingisnot requiredbecausenocriteriapollutantwillbegreaterthan10poundsperhourand10tonsperyearin anyyear.

ERAQ4:Providethedetailedinformation(e.g.,calculations,inputs,sources,activities,and parameters)usedtogenerateeachoftheemissioninventoriesinERTables4.6.1to4.6.4(Holtec, 2017b).Ensurethatalloftheappropriateemissionsourcesfortheproposedactionareincludedin theseemissioninventories.Revisetheemissioninventoriesaswellastheassociatedimpactanalyses intheERasappropriate.

ERSection4.6(Holtec,2017b)providesalimiteddescriptionofhowtheemissioninventorieswere calculated.DetailedinformationaboutthesourcesofallairemissionsisneededforNRCto independentlyverifytheemissioninventories.

Thisinformationisneededtoconductatechnicalreviewofthecalculations.Thisinformationin neededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c),whichrequiresanalysesinenvironmentalreports tobequantitativetothefullestextentpracticableandcontainsufficientdatatoaidtheNRCinits developmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse

TheattachedExcelfilesprovidethedetailedinformation(e.g.,calculations,inputs,sources,activities, andparameters)usedtogenerateeachoftheemissioninventories(ERTables4.6.1to4.6.4).Notethat therequiredinformationforRAIERAQ7isalsoincludedintheExcelfileswiththeadditionof HazardousAirParticulateslevels.

ERAQ5:Provideadetaileddescription,toincludeafigure,ofthedistancefromairemissionsources toreceptors(e.g.,potashmineworkers,residences).Theinformationshould:

ClarifywhetherthedistancestoresidencesidentifiedintheERSection2.2.1(Holtec,2017b) arefromtheproposedsiteboundaryorthecenteroftheproposedsite.

Considertheactivitiesandpotentialairemissionsources(e.g.,therailspurandthe intermodalfacility)thatoccuroutsideofthe420.9hectare[1,040acre]siteboundaryofthe proposedHoltecCISF.

Accountforreceptorsotherthanresidences(e.g.,workersatthepotashmine)identifiedinER Section2.2.1(Holtec,2017b).

ERSection2.2.1(Holtec,2017b)specifiesthedistancefromtheproposedHoltecCISFtoresidencesin severaldirections.ClarifyifthismeasurementisfromthecenteroftheCISFpropertyortheboundary.

Theenvironmentalimpactanalysisofairemissionsourcesandreceptorswillincludeallidentified residencesandtheirspatialrelationshiptoallprojectemissionsources(CISF,railspur,concretebatch plant,intermodalfacility).Becausetheconstructionandoperationoftherailspurorconstructionand toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page37of52

operationoftheintermodalfacilityoccuroutsidethe420.9hectare[1,040acre]siteboundary,clarify howclosethesesourcesareto(i)theresidencesdescribedinERSection2.2.1and(ii)otherreceptors suchastheIntrepidMiningFacilitywhichmightbeclosertorailspurorintermodalfacilitythanthe nearestresidenceistotheproposedHoltecCISF.Furthermore,clarifywhethertheconcretebatchplant isastationaryormobileplantthatwouldberelocatedoverthelifetimeoftheprojectincludingbeyond the420.9hectare[1,040acre]acreHoltecCISFprojectboundary.Understandingthedistancebetween airemissionsourcesandpotentialreceptorsisanimportantconsiderationwhenassessingairquality impacts.

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(b)(1),whichrequiresthattheER includeadescriptionoftheproposedactionanditspotentialimpactsontheenvironment.

HoltecResponse

Inanyandallscenarios,theannualemissionwillbelessthan10TPYofanycriteriapollutantas indicatedbyTables4.6.1thorough4.6.4.Giventhisfact,modellingofreceptorswasnotperformedand isnotrequired.Distancestothenearestresidenceandotherpotentialreceptors,suchasworkersat potashmines,areprovidedintheERinChapter3.Distancesarefromtheapproximatecenterofthe Holtecsite.Theconcretebatchplantisnotapermanentfacility,butisamobiletypebatchplant.While inuseattheSite,thebatchplantwouldbelocatedasshownonFigure2.2.3oftheER.

ERAQ6:Forthecumulativeimpactsassessment,supplementtheregionalcharacterizationoftheair emissionsbyaddressing:

Futureregionalairemissionsconsideringthelifespanoftheproposedaction(notjustcurrent emissionlevels)

Pollutantsotherthanfugitivedust

ERSection3.6.2(Holtec,2017b)characterizestheareascurrentNationalAmbientAirQualityStandards attainmentstatusandprovidesrecentpollutantemissionlevelsforLea,Eddy,Roosevelt,andChaves Counties.ERSection5.1.2(Holtec,2017b)statesthatforpurposesofthecumulativeimpactassessment, theexistingnonnuclearactivitiesareassumedtocontinueatcurrentlevels.Thebasisforthe assumptionthatnonnuclearactivitiescontinueatcurrentlevelsorprovideinformationrelatedto futureairemissionlevelsintheregionforthenonnuclearactivitiesshouldbeprovided.Inaddition,the cumulativeeffectsanalysisinERSection5.2(Holtec,2017b)onlyconsidersfugitivedustbasedonthe statementthattheproposedactionsprimaryairemissionwouldbefugitivedust.However,the emissionestimatesinERTables4.6.2and4.6.4(Holtec,2017b)indicatethattheproposedaction generatesmorecarbonmonoxide,nitrogenoxides,andvolatileorganiccompoundsthanparticulate matter.Thecharacterizationofregionalairemissionsshouldaddresspollutantsotherthanfugitivedust.

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b),whichrequiresthattheER includeadescriptionoftheaffectedenvironment.

HoltecResponse

Theemissionsfromallcriteriapollutantswouldbelessthan10TPYduringboththeinitialconstruction andduringthephasedconstructionandoperations.Alloftheotherprojectsconsideredinthis cumulativeimpactanalysishaveeitherbeenconstructedorwouldbeconstructedbeforetheCISF constructionbegins.Allairemissions,includingfugitivedust,wouldbeemittedsporadicallyandthen toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page38of52

disperseduetothemeteorologyofthearea.Thiswouldresultinminimalshortterm,ifany,cumulative impactsfromairemissions.Thebasisfortheassumptionthatnonnuclearactivitiescontinueatcurrent levelsisbasedonthefactthattherearenoplannedorforeseeabledevelopmentsoractivities,inthe publicdomain,thatwouldcauseasignificantchangefromthecurrentrates.

ERAQ7:Clarifytheboundinglevelsofairemissionsforvolatileorganiccompounds(VOCs)andnon radiologicalhazardousairpollutants(HAPs)byaddressingthefollowingtopics:

Clarifytheemissionlevelestimatesassociatedwitheachstage(construction,operation, decommissioning)foreachphaseoverthelicensedlifeoftheproject,includinganyoverlapof stagesandphases CharacterizethepotentialimpactsoftheproposedactionsemissionsforVOCsandnon radiologicalHAPs.

Similartocriteriapollutants,identifyingtheoverlapofprojectstages(i.e.,construction,operation,and decommissioning)isimportantforestablishingtheboundingemissioninventory(seeRAIAQ2)inorder toevaluatethemaximumpotentialimpact.Forexample,ERTables4.6.1through4.6.4(Holtec,2017b) donotincludenonradiologicalHAPsanditisunclearifemissionlevelsforVOCsarebounding.Theair qualityimpactassessmentinERSection4.6.1(Holtec,2017b)doesnotaddressimpactsfromVOCsor nonradiologicalHAPs.ERTables4.6.1to4.6.4(Holtec,2017b)indicatethattheproposedaction generatesmoreVOCsthananyotherpollutant.QuantificationofthelevelsofnonradiologicalHAPs generatedbytheproposedactionisaconsiderationintheimpactassessment(e.g.,comparisonof projectemissionlevelstoStateand/orFederalregulatorythresholdsforHAPssuchas40CFR61).

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(b)(1),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheproposedactionanditspotentialimpactsonthe environment.

HoltecResponse

SeetheresponsetoRAIERAQ3forclarificationofemissionlevelestimatesassociatedwitheachstage andtheirpotentialimpacts.TheattachedExcelfilesprovidethedetailedinformation(e.g.,calculations, inputs,sources,activities,andparameters)usedtogenerateeachoftheemissioninventories(ERTables 4.6.1to4.6.4).NotethattherequiredinformationforRAIERAQ4isalsoincludedintheExcelfileswith theadditionofHazardousAirParticulateslevels.

ERAQ8:Provideadescriptionofthespecificmeasuresthatwillbeimplementedtomitigateair effluentemissionsfromtheproposedactionandifanymitigationmeasureswereaccountedforinthe emissioninventorydocumentedinERTables4.6.1to4.6.4(Holtec,2017b).Thedescriptionofany mitigationmeasuresincorporatedinthetablesshould:

Identifyanymitigationmeasuresincorporatedintotheseestimates Specifytheeffectivenessofthemitigationmeasure Providethebasisfortheeffectivenessofthemitigationmeasure

ERSections1.4.2.3and6.6(Holtec,2017b)describethattheapplicantwillimplementbestmanagement practicestomitigateairemissions.However,thespecificmitigationmeasuresthatareconsideredbest managementpracticesarenotidentified.Clarifywhetherallofthesespecificbestmanagement practices,oronlyasubset,willbeimplemented.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page39of52

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(c),whichrequiresthat theERdiscusstheenvironmentalimpactsoftheproposedactionandalternativesavailableforreducing andavoidingadverseenvironmentalimpacts.

HoltecResponse

AsdiscussedintheresponsetoRAIERMM1,Chapter6hasbeenrevisedtoclarifycommitmentsto mitigationmeasures.Mitigationmeasuresaregenerallyqualitativeversusquantitative.The implementationofthesemeasuresmayormaynothavemeasurableimpacts,butareinstead,best managementpracticesthatcanbeimplementedtominimizepotentialeffectsonthesurrounding environment.Itshouldbenotedthatmanyairemissionpublications,includetheEPAsAP42,statethat wateringactivitiestomitigatefugitivedustcanreducetheseemissionsupto90%.Thatbeingsaid,the datapresentedinERTables4.6.1through4.6.4donotaccountforanyreductionsasaresultof implementingthesemitigationmeasures.

ERCC1:Addressthefollowingaspectsofclimatechangeastheyrelatetotheproposedactions greenhousegasemissions:

Describeanyrelevantregional,state,orlocalgoalsorlawsthataddressclimatechange, greenhousegasemissionlevels,orboth.

Disclosewhetheranymitigation,projectdesign,oradaptationmeasureswillbeimplemented toaddressgreenhousegasemissionsresultingfromproposedactionactivities Describeanyareaswheretheenvironmentalimpactsofclimatechangeoverlapwiththe potentialenvironmentalimpactsoftheproposedactiononresources(e.g.,waterusageand availability)

ERSection4.6.1(Holtec,2017b)assessesthattheamountofgreenhousegasesgeneratedby theproposedactionhasaminimalimpactsincetheprojectsestimatedemissionlevelsare belowtheFederalreportingstandardin40CFR98.2.Clarify(i)whetherthereareanyotherrelevant regional,state,orlocalgoalsorlawsthataddressclimatechangeand(ii)whetheranymitigation, projectdesign,oradaptationmeasureswillbeimplementedtoaddressgreenhousegasemissionsfrom theproposedaction.Additionally,addresswhetherthereareanyareaswheretheenvironmental impactsofclimatechangeoverlapwiththepotentialenvironmentalimpactsoftheproposedactionon resources(e.g.,waterusage/availability,ambientairtemperature,etc.).

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)through(d),whichrequirethat theERinclude:adiscussionoftheimpactsoftheproposedaction;alternativesavailableforreducing andavoidingadverseenvironmentalimpacts;andadescriptionofthestatusofcompliancewith applicableenvironmentalqualitystandardsandrequirements,includinglimitationsandrequirements whichhavebeenimposedbyFederal,State,regional,andlocalagencieshavingresponsibilityfor environmentalprotection.

HoltecResponse

Foranexhaustivelistofregional,state,andlocalgoalsandlawswhichaddressclimatechangeand greenhousegasemissions,seetheattachedfile.Therehavebeenseveralnotablepoliticalactions relatedtoreducinggreenhousegasemissionsinNewMexico.TheNewMexicoLegislaturepasseda statewideRenewableEnergyPortfoliolawin2004whichrequiresutilitiestoprocure20%oftheir electricityfromrenewablesourcesby2020.Additionally,ExecutiveOrder05033wasissuedbythe toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page40of52

Governorin2005toreducegreenhousegasemissionsby10%of2000levelsby2020andby75%by 2050.In2015,NewMexicowas37thintheUnitedStatesforstatewidecarbondioxideemissions,with 50.7millionmetrictonsofcarbondioxideemissions(seeFigurebelow).

Source:EIA2019.

ThetablebelowpresentsNewMexicocarbondioxideemissionsfrom1980until2016.Asshowninthe table,carbondioxideemissionsinNewMexicohavedecreasedsincepeakingin2005.Electricpower generationisthelargestsourceofcarbondioxideemissions,accountingforapproximately47%ofall statewideemissions.Othersourcesofcarbondioxideemissionsare:transportationactivitiesat29%;

industrialactivitiesat15%;residentialactivitiesat5%;andcommercialactivitiesat4%(EIA2019).

Year CarbonDioxideEmissions(millionmetrictons) 1980 44.8 1990 53.7 2000 58.6 2005 60.5 2010 53.8 2015 50.7 2016 48.7

Greenhousegascompoundsaretypicallyevaluatedatsiteswithstationaryequipmentthatemitmore than25,000tonsperyearofcarbondioxideequivalent(40CFR98,Section98.2).Thoughemissions fromactivitiesattheCISFSitewouldbefromnonstationarysources,thegreenhousegasemissions wouldbewellbelowthisminimalstandard;thus,impactsofgreenhousegasemissionsfromthisproject onairqualitywouldbeminimal.AsshowninSection4.6oftheER,theCISFwouldemitlessthan2,500 tonsofcarbondioxideequivalentinanyyear,whichisafactorof10lessthantheregulatorythreshold andamountstoanincreaseinstatewideemissionsbylessthan4.7x103percent(basedon2016 toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page41of52

emissionsconvertedtotons).Assuch,thegreenhousegasemissionsfromtheCISFwouldbe insignificant.

Theonlymitigationmeasureidentifiedthatwouldbeinplacetominimizeanypotentialcarbondioxide emissionswouldbeconstructionphasebestmanagementpractices(suchaswatering)wouldbeusedto minimizefugitivedusts.

Therearenonotableareaswheretheenvironmentalimpactsofclimatechangeoverlapwiththe potentialenvironmentalimpactsoftheProposedActiononresources(e.g.,waterusageand availability).

References:

EIA2019 EnergyInformationAgency(EIA).StateCarbonDioxideEmissionData.Availableat:

https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/state/.AccessedonJanuary23,2019.

ERSOC1:Provideanestimateofindirectandinducedjobsthatwouldbegeneratedintheregionof influenceoverthelicensedlifeoftheproposedproject.

ERSections4.8.1and4.8.2(Holtec,2017b)statethatapproximately80constructionrelatedworkers includingoversightandmanagementareexpectedduringPhase1,and,whencombinedwiththe operatingworkforce,thetotalnumberofannualworkersattheCISFcouldbeasmanyas135during Phases220.Inadditiontotheestimateofdirectjobsrelatedtotheproject,provideinformation regardingbothindirectandinducedjobsassociatedwithproposedproject.

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)(1),whichrequiresthattheERincludea descriptionoftheimpactsoftheproposedaction.

HoltecResponse

Holtecdoesnotexpecttheretobesignificantcreationofindirectorinducedjobs.Asstated,ifany indirectorinducedjobsarecreated,theERassumesthattheywouldbefilledbyemployeesalready existingintheROIworkforce.Section4.8.1and4.8.2havebeenrevisedtoclarifythis.Webelievethisto beaconservativeassumption,asanyindirectorinducedjobsthatmightbecreatedwouldbeaboonto thelocaleconomy.

ERSOC2:Toinformtheanalysisoftheenvironmentalandothercostsandbenefitsoftheproposed action,provideanyavailableinformationconcerningannuitypaymentsmadetoLeaandEddy Counties,andthecitiesofHobbsandCarlsbadregardingtheSNFstorageattheHoltecCISF.

Describeanyestimatedannuitypayments(i.e.,monetarycompensation)thatwouldbeprovidedbythe applicanttoLeaandEddyCountiesandthecitiesofHobbsandCarlsbadassociatedwithoperatingthe CISF.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)(1),and(c),whichrequiresthat theERdiscusstheimpactsoftheproposedaction,andincludeconsiderationofthebenefitsandcostsof theproposedactionanditsalternatives.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page42of52

HoltecResponse

Thecombinedestimatedannuitypaymentswillbeintherangeof$15,000,000to$25,000,000overthe lifeofthefacility.

ERNOI1:Provideestimatesofnoiselevelsthatwouldbegeneratedduringconstructionand operationoftheproposedCISF,specificallyforconstructionandoperationofthe concretebatchplantandrailspur.

ERSection4.6.2(Holtec,2017b)providesnoiseestimatesforconstructionandoperationactivities.To supporttheNRCstaffsevaluationofpotentialnoiseimpactstooffsiteandonsitereceptors,provide additionalinformationtoassessimpactsfromnoisegeneratedfromtheconstructionandoperationof eithertheconcretebatchplantortherailspur.

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(b)(1),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheaffectedenvironmentandadiscussionofthe impactsoftheproposedaction.

HoltecResponse

Noiselevelsassociatedwiththeconstructionandoperationoftheconcretebatchplantwouldbe consistentwiththelevelsprovidedforotherheavyconstructionequipmentthatwillbeusedattheCISF.

MentionofthebatchplantisspecificallyaddedtoSection4.6.2andTable4.6.5alongwithanadditional referenceaddedinChapter10tothe"ConstructionNoiseHandbook"(preparedfortheFederalHighway AdministrationinAugust2006).Additionally,languageontheconstructionandoperationofthenewrail spurhasbeenaddedtoSection4.6.2.

ERPOH1:Provideadditionalinformation(includingafigureofreceptorlocations)regardingthe locationandorientationofreceptorsusedinpublicdosecalculationsrelativetothelocationofthe loadedcasksattheCISFfacility.

ERSections4.12.2and4.12.2.1(Holtec,2017b)providealimiteddescriptionofthepublicdose calculationsfortheproposedactionandcitetheSARanalysesandsupportingdocuments.Provide informationaboutthepositioningofmodeledpublicdosereceptorlocationsrelativetotheconstructed andloadedCISF.Afigureoftheproposedfacilityshowingthelocationsofloadedcasksandthe surroundingenvironmentwherereceptorsarelocatedshouldbeprovided.

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c),whichrequiresanalysesin environmentalreportstobequantitativetothefullestextentpracticableandcontainsufficientdatato aidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse AsingleHISTORMUMAXVVMmodelisusedfortheMCNPshieldingwithF5ringdetectortalliesat variousdistancesinconcentriccirclesfromthecask.Thedoseratefromthearrayofcasksiscalculated summingdoseratesfromthegridofxandylocationsofeachHISTORMUMAXVVM.Thedoseratesfrom thearrayofloadedHISTORMUMAXVVMsateachdistancefromthearrayisthemaximumpossibledose rateofanypossiblereceptorlocation(atthespecifieddistance)fromthenearestcask.Themethodology ismorespecificallydetailedintheupdatedHISTORECISFacilityFSARChapter7(Shielding)Proposed toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page43of52

Revision0GandintheupdatedHI2177599Revision1HISTORECISFacilitySiteBoundaryDoseRates CalculationsforHISTORMUMAXSystem.

ERPOH2:ProvidedocumentationoftherevisedsourcetermmodelingusedintheERpublicdose calculations.

ERSections4.12.2and4.12.2.1(Holtec,2017b)providealimiteddescriptionofthepublicdose calculationsfortheproposedactionandcitetheSARanalysesandsupportingdocuments.TheNRCstaff reviewoftheavailabledocumentationofthedesignbasisfuelusedforthedosecalculationsindicates thatthefuelcharacteristics(e.g.,burnup,coolingtime,enrichment)documentedinSARTable7.1.1 (Holtec,2017c)representchangestothedesignbasisfuelusedinthereferencedsupporting calculations;documenttheapplicablesourcetermcalculations(e.g.,runningSAS2HorSCALE).

InformationprovidedinresponsetothisRAIshouldidentifyanysignificantdifferencesintherevised sourcemodelingfromthereferencedUMAXFSARmethodsthatcouldaffectthepublicdosecalculation results.

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c),whichrequiresanalysesin environmentalreportstobequantitativetothefullestextentpracticableandcontainsufficientdatato aidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse SourcetermsusedfortheHISTORECISFacilityShieldingcalculationsnowdirectlyreferencesourceterms generatedfornewlyaddedReference[7.4.2]intheHISTORECISFSAR.Gamma,Neutron,andCobalt60 sourcetermsarenowprovidedinTable7.1.2throughTable7.1.5fortheHISTORECISFacilitydesignbasis FuelAssemblyburnup,initialenrichment,andcoolingtimecombinationshowninTable7.1.1.

ERPOH3:ProvideadditionalinformationabouttheERpublicdosecalculationmethodsandresults.

Specifically,providethefollowinginformationregardingthesitespecificpublicdosecalculation methodsandresultsfortheloadedCISF:

Descriptionofthesitespecificdosecalculationmodelgeometry Documentationofthesitespecificmaterialspropertiesthataffectshieldinganddose calculationsincluding,butnotlimitedto,concreteandthesoilthatsurroundsthesubsurface storagemodules,andincludingacomparisonofanygenericorgeneralmaterialproperties usedincalculationswithsitespecificorexpectedvalues Documentationofdosecalculationmethodsandresultsforthethreesourcetermsthatwere modeled(neutron,decaygamma,and60Co)

Documentationofvariancereductiontechniquesthatwereappliedtoeachuniquesource termanddosecalculation(e.g.,maximallyexposedindividual;nearestresident)

MCNPinputfilesforeachsourcetermmodeledandthecomputingplatformused Relativeerrorsorvariancereportedforalldoseresults Anexplanationforthedifferenceinthereporteddistancefromtheneareststoragecaskto siteboundary{400m[1,310ft]}andthereceptorannualoccupancytime(2,000hr)reported inthereferencedSARTable1.0.1(Holtec,2017c)andwhatissimilarlyreportedforthepublic receptorintheERSection4.12.2.1(Holtec,2017b)asamaximallyexposedindividual locatedatthenearestfencelineat100m[328ft]fromthestoragepadsforfulltime occupancywhichisfurtherclarifiedinERSection4.12.2.3(Holtec,2017b)asfortheentire year.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page44of52

ERSections4.12.2and4.12.2.1(Holtec,2017b)providealimiteddescriptionofthepublicdose calculationsfortheproposedactionandcitetheSARanalysesandsupportingdocuments.

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c),whichrequiresanalysesin environmentalreportstobequantitativetothefullestextentpracticableandcontainsufficientdatato aidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse AdditionalinformationfortheERpublicdosecalculationmethodsandresultsareprovidedbelowto addresseachbulletedrequest,below.

[a]. SitespecificgeometryisnowprovidedinFigure7.4.4intheHISTORECISFSARforthe500UMAX VVMsinthefirstphaseoffacilityconstructionandinFigure4.12.1intheEnvironmentalReport for10,000UMAXVVMs.SeealsotheresponsetoRAIERPOH1.

[b]. MaterialPropertiesarenowmoreclearlyandextensivelyprovidedinTable7.3.1oftheHISTORE CIS Facility FSAR (Proposed Revision 0G). Generic material properties that previously were included in the HISTORM UMAX FSAR Table 5.3.2 that are used in the HISTORE CIS Facility ShieldingcalculationsarenowdirectlyplacedintoTable7.3.1oftheHISTORECISFacilityFSAR (ProposedRevision0G).SinceHISTORECISFacilityshieldingmaterialpropertiesareconsolidated intoasingletable(Table7.3.1,ProposedRevision0G),theneedforacomparisonbetweengeneric orgeneralmaterialproperties(listedintheHISTORMUMAXFSARTable5.3.2)andsitespecific orexpectedvalues(Table7.3.1,Rev.0)isobviated.

[c]. The principal calculational approach, including principal assumptions and methodologies, are directlytakenfromtheHISTORMUMAXFSAR,andareincorporatedbyreference,asstatedin Section7.0oftheHISTORECISFacilityFSAR.SourcetermsusedfortheHISTORECISFacility ShieldingcalculationsnowdirectlyreferencesourcetermsgeneratedfornewlyaddedReference

[7.4.2]intheHISTORECISFSAR(ProposedRevision0G).Gamma,Neutron,andCobalt60source termsarenowprovidedinTable7.1.2throughTable7.1.5fortheHISTORECISFacilitydesign basisFuelAssemblyburnup,initialenrichment,andcoolingtimecombinationshowninTable 7.1.1.

[d]. TheuncertaintyanalysisandvariancereductionisdetailedinSection5.4ofReference[1.0.6]in the HISTORE CIS Facility FSAR. A new sentence is placed in Subsection 4.12.2 of the Environmental Report to reference the location of the more detailed description of the uncertaintyanalysisandvariancereductiontechniques.Additionally,ReferenceHoltec2016cis addedfordirectreferencetotheHISTORMUMAXFSARinChapter10.

[e]. MCNPinputfilesareprovidedintheHISTORECISShieldingCalculationPackagesHI2177599and HI2177600.Relativeerrorsarereportedwithintheshieldingcalculationpackagesandassociated resultsfiles,butusethesameformatastheHISTORMUMAXFSARwhichdonotproviderelative errorsintheSARdoserateresultstables.

[f]. Thestatementwiththenearestfencelineat100metersiscorrected.Themaximallyexposed publicindividualisassumedtobeatthesiteboundary,whichis400meters(1312ft)fromthe nearestloadedUMAXVVM.Thewordingfortheentireyearischangedtofor2000hoursper year.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page45of52

ERPOH4:ProvidethedocumentationofthepublicdosecalculationsintheERthatarebasedonthe fullboundinginventoryof10,000canisters.

ERSection4.12.2.1(Holtec,2017b)providespublicdoseestimatesforamaximallyexposedindividual, nearestresident,andlocalpopulationbasedonoperationoftheCISfacilityatitsmaximumcapacity.

ERSection4.2.12(Holtec,2017b)statesthat(a)llradiologicalestimatesarebasedonthebounding capacityoftheCISfacility,whichis100,000MTUsconsistingof10,000UMAXstorageunits.The reportedmaximallyexposedindividualdoseiscitedtotheSARwhilethenearestresidentand populationdoseshavenocitation.ThepublicdosecalculationsinSARChapters7and11(Holtec,2017c) arelimitedtoasinglephaseof500canisters(SAR7.4.2.1,Holtec,2017c).Nodosecalculationswere identifiedintheSARthatwerebasedonthefullinventoryof10,000canisters.

Thisinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c),whichrequiresanalysesin environmentalreportstobequantitativetothefullestextentpracticableandcontainsufficientdatato aidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse Table4.12.4andFigure4.12.2areaddedtotheEnvironmentalReport,whichprovidethedoseratesasa function of distance from 10,000 Loaded HISTORM UMAX VVMs. Shielding Calculation Package HI 2177599hasbeenupdatedtoRevision1(Newlyaddedreference[7.4.2]oftheHISTORECISFacilityFSAR) andincludesdocumentationoftheseupdatedshieldingcalculations.

ERCB1:Clarifythesourceforthenoactionalternativescenario3costestimate.

InERSection9.2.1(Holtec,2017b),thesourceofthescenario3estimateof$500millionperyearis attributedtopage37ofaGovernmentAccountabilityOfficeReport(GAO,2014).TheNRCstaffhave reviewedthatdocumentandwereunabletolocatetheestimatedvalueof$500millionperyear.

Therequestedinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c),whichrequiresthatthe environmentalreportincludeconsiderationofthebenefitsandcostsofthealternativesaswellas containsufficientdatatoaidtheNRCinitsdevelopmentofanindependentanalysis.

HoltecResponse:

Thereferencefortheestimatedliabilityof$500millionperyearisfoundonpage37oftheintheGAO Reportentitled,NuclearWasteManagement:KeyAttributes,Challenges,andCostsfortheYucca MountainRepositoryandTwoPotentialAlternatives(GAO2009).Thisreferencehasbeenaddedinto Chapter10.AllreferencestoGAOreportshavebeencorrectedinChapter9(GAO2009versusGAO 2014).

ERCB2:ClarifythediscrepancyintheestimatedcostfortheHoltecCISFconstructionstageinthe applicationdocumentsandrevisetheERasappropriate.Provideaconsistentcostestimateforthe constructionstage,byphase,tosupportanalysisofthecostsandbenefitsassociatedwiththe proposedaction.

InERTable9.2.4(Holtec,2017b)estimatesPhase1constructionstagecostsat$222.3millionandfull implementation(i.e.,Phases1to20)constructionstagecostsat$2.1billion.Incontrast,thedocument HISTORECISFacilityFinancialAssurance&ProjectLifeCycleCostEstimates(Holtec,2017d)estimates toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page46of52

Phase1constructionstagecostsat$182.9million,butdoesnotprovideanestimateforfull implementation.Explainthedifferencebetweenthesetwodocuments.

Therequestedinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c),whichrequiresthatthe environmentalreportincludeconsiderationofthebenefitsandcostsoftheproposedaction.

HoltecResponse

ThisdiscrepancywasnotedinthepreviousroundofRAIsubmissions.HoltecReport,HI2177593 "ProjectLifeCycleCosts"hassincebeenupdatedtomatchthevalueslistedintheEnvironmental Report.

ERCB3Clarifythediscussionofthenetbenefitsornetlossesattributedtotheproposedaction.

InERSection9.2.3(Holtec,2017b)theintroductiontothediscussionofnetbenefitsstatesthatthe proposedactionwouldresultinsubstantialnetbenefitscomparedtocostsunderbothPhase1and Phase120(fullimplementation).However,subsequenttextinERSection9.2.3statesthatunderthefull implementation(Phases120)ofScenario2,thediscountedcostsfortheproposedactionaregreater thanthediscountedcostsforthenoactionalternative.Morespecifically,ifnoadditionalnuclearpower plantsshutdown(i.e.,Scenario2)theproposedactionincursanetlossratherthananetbenefitwhen thecostsarediscounted.TheNRCstaffrequestsclarificationofthenetbenefitsandnetlossesto analyzethecostbenefitoftheproposedaction.

Therequestedinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c),whichrequiresthatthe environmentalreportincludeconsiderationofthebenefitsandcostsoftheproposedactionandits alternatives.

HoltecResponse:

Section9.2.3hasbeenrevisedtoclarifynetbenefitsattributedtotheproposedaction.

ERCB4Identifywhopaysforthecosts(e.g.,transportingtheSNF,construction,operation,and decommissioningtheCISF)describedinERSection9.2(Holtec,2017b)associatedwiththeproposed action,includingwhatcoststheFederalgovernmentwillpayorcoststhatHoltecexpectstobe reimbursedbytheFederalgovernment.

IntheER,Chapter9(Holtec,2017b)describesthecostsassociatedwiththevariousaspectsofthe proposedactionsuchasdevelopingtheCISF,transportingtheSNF,andoperatingtheCISF.However, theanalysisdoesnotidentifywhowouldberesponsibleforthesecosts.TotheextentHoltechas evaluatedmorethanoneoptionconcerningownershipoffuel(i.e.,SNFtitle),thentheanalysisshould alsoaddresshowthoseoptionsaffectresponsibilityfortheidentifiedcosts(e.g.,construction, operation,decommissioning),aswellasanyimplicationsforthecomparisonofthecostsandbenefits associatedwiththeproposedaction,anyoptionswithintheproposedaction,andnoactionalternative.

Therequestedinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c)whichrequiresthatthe environmentalreportincludeconsiderationofthebenefitsandcostsoftheproposedactionandits alternativesaswellascontainsufficientdatatoaidtheCommissioninitsdevelopmentofan independentanalysis.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page47of52

HoltecResponse ThecostsdescribedinERSection9.2arebasedonthecoststoconstruct,operate,anddecommission thefacility.Thesesamecostswillapplytoeitheroptionoffuelownership.Theentitythatretainstitleto thefuelwhowillentersintothecontractforuseoftheHISTORE,perCondition17ofthelicense.The costsoutlinedinSection9.2applytowhicheverentityentersintothecontract.

ERMM1:Holtecshouldidentifyallmitigationmeasurecommitmentsthatwouldbeimplementedto reducetheenvironmentalimpactsonallresourceareas.

AsaddressedinotherresourceareaspecificRAIs(PA2,PA3,PA4,LU8,GS3,GS4,AQ7,andCC1),

Holtecshouldidentifyallmitigationmeasuresthatwouldbeimplementedtoreducetheenvironmental impactsassociatedwithconstruction,operation,anddecommissioningoftheproposedCISF.ERChapter 6(Holtec,2017b)describesmitigationmeasuresthatcouldpotentiallybeimplementedtoreduce environmentalimpactsoftheproposedactionandreferstoERChapter4(Holtec,2017b)forthespecific impactsofuseofthemitigationmeasures.ThelanguageisinconsistentbetweentheERchapters regardingwhetherthelistedmitigationmeasureswouldbeimplemented(i.e.,implementedmitigation measuresthatcanbeaccountedforintheimpactanalyses).Specifically,ERChapter6should(i)listall mitigationmeasuresforeachresourceareathatarerequiredbyFederal,State,orlocalregulations,(ii) identifyallmitigationmeasurescommittedtobeimplemented,(iii)asapplicable,indicatewhich mitigationsmeasureshavebeencreditedintheimpactanalyses(andtowhatextent),(iv)asapplicable, statetheexpectedeffectivenessoftheimplementedmitigationmeasures(e.g.,forairquality),and(v) distinguishmitigationcommitmentsthatwouldbevoluntaryversusthoserequiredaspartofa regulation.Forexample,anapplicantcouldchoosetoimplementamitigationeventhoughitisnot required(e.g.,usingengineswithhighertierratings,whichproducelessemissions).

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(b)and(b)(1),whichrequiresthat theERincludeadescriptionoftheproposedactionanddiscusstheimpactsoftheproposedaction.

HoltecResponse

Chapter6hasbeenrevisedtoclarifycommitmentstomitigationmeasures(removedlanguageon voluntaryactions).Mitigationmeasuresaregenerallyqualitativeversusquantitative.The implementationofthesemeasuresmayormaynothavemeasurableimpacts,butareinstead,best managementpracticesthatcanbeimplementedtominimizepotentialeffectsonthesurrounding environment.TheresultsofChapter4areindependentoftheuseofthemitigationmeasuresdescribed inChapter6.Therefore,allmitigatingmeasureswouldbeconsideredpositiveandwouldfurtherreduce theimpactsasdescribedinChapter4.

ERCI1:Provideadditionalinformationonpast,present,andreasonablyforeseeablefutureactions thatmayresultinapotentialforcumulativeenvironmentalimpactswithinan80km[50mi]radiusof theproposedCISF.

IntheERSection5.2(Holtec,2017b)statesthatnonnuclearactivitiesarelimitedtooilandgas explorationanddevelopmentactivities,mineralextraction(potashmining)activities,livestockgrazing andagriculturalactivities.TheNRCstaffrequestverificationthatnonewwindenergyprojectsor transportationprojectsareplannedforthe40yearcumulativeimpactanalysistimeframewithinan80 km[50mi]radiusoftheproposedCISFsiteboundary.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page48of52

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c),whichrequiresthat theERcontainananalysisofcumulativeimpactsthatmayresultfromtheproposedaction.

HoltecResponse

Section5.1.2hasbeenrevisedtoclarifytheactivitiesintheareaofthesitethatcurrentlyexist.

Additionally,ithasbeenclarifiedthatnoknownsignificantneworplanned,forthereasonably foreseeablefuture,nonnuclearprojectswilloccurinthesurroundingprojectarea.Additional informationspecifictowindenergyprojectandtransportationprojectsisprovidedbelow.

TransportationProjects:

PertheNewMexicoDepartmentofTransportation,currentlyplannedtransportationprojectsinthe vicinityofthesitearelimitedtoexistingroadwayandbridgerehabilitationandupgrades(NMDOT 2019).ThisisfurthersupportedbytheinformationpresentedintheNewMexico2040Plan(NMLRP 2015).Additionally,accordingtobothLeaCountyPublicWorksDepartment(LCPW2019)andEddy CountyPublicWorksDepartment(ECPW2019)plannedtransportationprojectsarelimitedtoexisting roadwayandbridgerehabilitationandupgrades.

CurrentWindEnergyProjects:

PertheinformationmadeavailablebytheAmericanWindEnergyAssociation(AWEA)WindIQ InteractiveWebMapanddataobtainedfromtheAWEAwebsite,therearethreeexistingonline(in operation)windprojectswithin80kmoftheproposedprojectboundary(Table1andFigure1).There arenonewwindprojectsunderdevelopmentorconstructionwithin50milesoftheproposedproject boundary.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page49of52

Table1:WindProjectsLocatedwithin50milesofproposedHoltecCISFproject ProjectSpecifications Anderson GainesCavern Wildcat MapReferenceNo.

3 38 111 FirstYearOnline 2014 2012 2012 State NewMexico Texas NewMexico County Chaves Gaines Lea Distance&Directionfrom proposedCISF 31.25miles NNW 39.6miles ENE 36.7miles NE Latitude,Longitude 33.020166 103.861647 32.688551 103.062453 32.955401 103.279578 Owner(s)

GoldmanSachs (100%)

TexasDispatchable Wind1,LLC(100%)

ExelonGeneration(51%),

Unknown(49%)

Developer(s)

BayWar.e.WindLLC TexasDispatchable Wind1LLC KairosEnergy TurbineRadius(m) 1.65,2 2

2.1 HubHeight(m) 80 78 90 RotorDiameter(m) 100,82 97 97 Phase AndersonWind Project GainesCavernWind Project WildcatWindProject PhaseCapacity(MW) 14.95 2

27.3 TurbineCount 8

1 13 TurbineOEM Vestas Gamesa Suzlon TurbineModel V1002.0,V82 G972.0 S97

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page50of52

Figure1:Mapshowingwindenergyprojectsinrelationtotheprojectlocation,10kmbuffer,and80km buffer(AWEA2019)

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page51of52

Figure2:Locationsofwindenergyprojects(AWEA2019)

References:

AWEA2019 AmericanWindEnergyAssociation,AWEAWindIQInteractiveWebMap,Availableat:

http://gis.awea.org/arcgisportal/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=663f1edd000d4b9b 8e8177a5b62be7a2.AccessedonJanuary23,2019.

toHoltecLetter5025041 HISTORERAIPart4Responses Page52of52

ECPW2019 EddyCountyNewMexicoPublicWorksDepartment,Availableat:

https://www.co.eddy.nm.us/163/PublicWorks.AccessedonFebruary28,2019.

LCPW2019 LeaCountyNewMexicoPublicWorksDepartment,Availableat:

https://www.leacounty.net/p/departments/publicworks.AccessedonFebruary28, 2019.

NMDOT2019 NewMexicoDepartmentofTransportation,NMDOTRoadConstructionandStudy Projects,Availableat:http://dot.state.nm.us/content/nmdot/en/Projects.html.

AccessedonFebruary28,2019.

NMLRP2015 NewMexicoDepartmentofTransportation,NewMexico2040Plan-NMDOTsLong Range,MultiModalTransportationPlan,Availableat:

http://dot.state.nm.us/content/nmdot/en/Planning.html.AccessedFebruary28,2019.

ERCI2:Provideadditionalinformationtosupporttheanalysisofthecumulativeimpactsofboth nuclearandnonnuclearpresentandreasonablyforeseeablefutureactivitiesforallresourceareas.

IntheERSection5.2(Holtec,2017b)providesinformationonthecumulativeimpactsofnuclearand nonnuclearactivitiesinthe80km[50mi]radiusoftheproposedCISF.Specifically,theERdiscusses only4(landuse,airquality,transportationofnuclearmaterials,andhealthandsafety)ofthe13 resourceareasevaluatedaspartoftheEIS.TosupporttheNRCstaffsanalysisofthepotential cumulativeimpactsoftheproposedaction,addresspotentialcumulativeimpactsrelevantthe remainingresourceareas,includinganevaluationoftheenvironmentalimpactsofnuclearactivities

[e.g.,WasteIsolationPilotPlant,theNationalEnrichmentFacility,InternationalIsotopesIncorporated FluorineExtractionProcessandDepletedUraniumDeconversionPlant,andWasteControlSpecialists existinglowlevelwastefacilityandproposedCISF]andnonnuclearactivities[e.g.,oilandgas explorationanddevelopmentactivities,mineralextraction(potashmining)activities,livestockgrazing, andagriculturalactivities].

Thisadditionalinformationisneededinaccordancewith10CFR51.45(c),whichrequiresthattheER containananalysisofcumulativeimpactsthatmayresultfromtheproposedaction.

HoltecResponse

Section5.2hasbeenclarifiedtostatethatthereisminimalpotentialforcumulativeimpactsofthe proposedactiontotheabovereferencedresourceareas.Nonetheless,additionalinformationhasbeen addedtoaddresseachoftheseresourceareasinsupportofthisstatement.