ML19206A154
| ML19206A154 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 11/28/1977 |
| From: | Ballard R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Regan W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7904180337 | |
| Download: ML19206A154 (5) | |
Text
4 3.,.
..m!I
-i,
- Y4 z C'. "
, c ' i.,'..-/. F T. :
tili:.7 h. '
.20, C'..i e f, E.S ' rr L_..ta l
'. ; -; ts t.1.:.
c. _
c.:. e,.:.,.
.u..
.v 2.v.
a..
.s
. i;5'S s.
s_.
3.:
<*.,.a.,
..is.
~
- 1.. _.
.__s..,
4,.
.-.s r..._,
t..,....,a c.. C '
- r..,.
.,c..
.:. i b,u. < vva.-
r.- ; r 's -.... -
- . E-c c.L. ;
- ~ ~ --' -
. T '.'.l
'. u'. ' i L. 6 ; '. R.
...... c i.., ' ; t,, l
- g..._..1.,,
..l.,_
..t
. u s.. u... L;.. m t. I t i 1..
.,., i i. - - -
.tg g
.-,,. >. 1
- q. ;-
u
.._s.
I:1 c:3,we to a ver3cl rcc.est fec:1 J..::rris, fl., fer i;a..:ile
~'
Islard.acl _ar haticn Unit 2 ('i; !),
S'l ::as r.wie..cd the cu..r.n ts a de by J. t. !:ec.% o f u,P, by - :. a tc.
- a O t:d : r. u.. e r 7, l 'c 7 7.
T.e.::v cr *.:er 17, 1277 v;r:. ica c f th e T2.1 ETS
,e nt !.o
- u i r : JE3
~
..w. _ s to "...
m' '. "..a ' i c A,,,..,..
..a. i, e.,.. z c.;,.. g.
.r..
s
- t. 'u'.- -. o <.
' c t. i 'i. < ~.. w,... ~. m=
".;.. "... '. t.. :- -
^'o u.._, a'.,r m.
^
Cridnal sir.ed iv h..,td L Bs!Nrd 4 i_.
. n..._:, c
.), r-i m;N i rC*If S#:
- tI.
., [ ': C,e d l '. *
- S., r. f. y t Cl.'is !ou of Zi h Sity r:1 Uwirc: ar.tal J ni; sis
,."._.t..
- .e..
4 ' e &.. a... J e.:.
cc:
v.
c.crris C. T.,illu s
' N:'
' ' ',7, C M DISTRIBUTION:
l*
DCCKETS h '?;.rs ESB READING H. ->.: r t.s o :1 ET READING RSALLARD 7904180 33'
)
(
k
(
m
-1' 2,,, u.,
--:d DSE d$,;,3 / 7.
DSE:ESB
---~
. se
.gerkson; cit u ard
,n
.a n
,.... o 11/23/77 11/.-f/ 77 mm e
,.4, hU{g g
- D f** L. h
s
_4
" Station location" could be interpreted to apply only to a single locus in the horizontal sampling grid but would not necessarily be cognizant of the vertical distribution of sampling Iccations.
14 Page 62 5.7.2 Changes in Permits and Certifications Agree. This c.;.~nent reflects a concern that t.as resolved at the AC5ETS r eting held cn 10/27/77.
k il53 ;?3bi
- sary under our MOU obligations wherein NRC is cocrdinating with EPA in the evaluation of the 316(b) demonstration being prepared by TMI.
10.
Page 42 4.5 Herbicide Acclications Disagree. The text of the TMI ETS has been modified to clarify the intent of this requirerant.
Adcotion of the DCR suggestion would constitute an unjustified expan-sion of the requirement being imposed.
li. Page 53 5.5 Procedures Agree. The TMI ETS text has been modified to accomodate this concern.
12.
Page 56 5.5.4 Changes in Procedures, Station Design or Ooeration Agree. This is the information requested by the ACSETS at its 10/27/77 meeting.
It has been supplied by Ms. Jane Mapes of OELD and incorporated into the ETS prior to receipt of the D0R comments. OELD modified the language slightly to make clear that staff testimony at hearings and adjudicatory decisions constitute review of environ-mental questions.
- 13. Part P We assume this connent refers uo paragraph D on Page 56.
We disagree with the suggestion because it would narrow the scope and not fulfill the intent of the requirement.
h
. 6.
Fage in Eases Disagree. DDR's attention should once again be directed to Table 5.2 of Section 5.3.3 wherein it is clearly shown that the pH effluent limit applicable to TMI is 6.5 to 9.0.
That secticn also states that the staff accepts the critaria as tsing ccnsistent with the protec ticn and propagation of "a balanced ir,digenous population."
7.
Paces 15 and le Biocide Disagree. The analysis made in the Supplement to the FES does not support imposing a LCO for total residual chlorine.
The monitoring program being required is necessary to supplement the NPDES requirements and not because the staf f analysis indicates an intolerable environmental impact.
8.
.Pages 18 and 19 Water Quality Analysis Disagree. The requirement to sample copper and zinc is imposed in order to support a balanced water quality monitoring program that will conform with established professional standards of performance.
9.
Page 24 Ichthyolankton Disagree. Review of staff testimony presented at the hearings clearly supports the need for this monitoring program. The monitoring program is further made neces-
-~
e.
a s
ESC RESPONSE TO DDR CC!G',ENTS ON TMI-2 ETS TRANSMITTED TO V. A. MOORE ON 11/7/77 Responses are keyed to headings used by D0R to identify each comment 1.
Page 8, Section 3.1.B Agree.
The TMI ETS text has been nodified to acco.nodate this cencern.
2.
Page 9, Sectica 3.1.la(1)
Disagree. This issue has been discussed at length by the ACSETS in sessions during which DCR personnel participated.
The ACSETS has determined that there is value to users of the ETS to make each specification stand alone.
It is the intent of the language commented on here to satisfy this de tennina tion.
3.
Page 10, Section 3.1.la(1)
Agree.
The TMI ETS text has been modified to accomodate this concern.
4.
Pages 11 and 12 Disagree. This comment does not consider the hearing record of staff testirony which includes thi tempera-ture -ise in its review.
5.
Second paragraoh of previous comment Agree. The TM1 ETS text has been modified to accomodate this concern.
..@4_N" 2