ML19210A674
| ML19210A674 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane, Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 01/12/1971 |
| From: | Gilbertson W PENNSYLVANIA, COMMONWEALTH OF |
| To: | Morris P US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7910310478 | |
| Download: ML19210A674 (10) | |
Text
, rgmana DATE or DOCUMENT:
DATE RECERVED No.:
Commouvealth of PennsT tandated 1-M-Tl 105 1
LTR.
MEMO:
~ PORT:
Q T H ER:
g a
Wesler R. Gilbertson
- x T0:
O RIG.;
CC:
oTH EfL 1
Dr. Feter A. 3tarris ACTION =ECa$$ARY h
CONCURRENCE O
o^rE ^~swEaEo:
NO ACTION NECE$$ ART O O
Co==E~r av:
CLAS$4F:
POST OFF4E FILE CQQE; U
50-289 (ENVIRO FIIE)
Rec. ~e DEsCRaPTION: ( Must B e Unclassified )
REFERRED TO DATE RECElvED BY DATE Ltr re our 10-28-70 Itr.. furnishing comments on Enviro Rpt for Three Mile W
1"19'Il Island Unit f I....and trans:
"/A P*"""
("/*E * ")(*4E E
- returned to 016)
DISTRIBUFION:
leportconsistingof8seFof
- a q p '21-S comments...consiuting of pages 1 th-t gg, Compliance (2)
Henderson Felton
%_rm.
"P DO N0~ FVOVi RE -.
~ N k" f h h b b M
- ~ "
OK for release per F. Karas's telecon E. Dube of 1-19-71.
P.Nove(2) h4 = /4 W.,
105 fod u.s.uouc zuznot cougiss' "
MAIL CONTROL FORM roRM AEC.saes i s**
- u.s. aovER~uf ~ T Ri~ Tiwa orriC E: i. 7 o.3 2.i..
}
'{D D
L, 1490 131
e
~
ggwEALTH or PENNsg N
A CO (4
Mr
'~.
.x h,i, % h.W~
s
,l*i r' L
e, w...v.* s. %.
WQJ'%#A DEPARTM ENT O F H EALTH
- p. o. sox so ELLSWORTH R. B RCwNELLER. M.D.
SECRET ARY CF HE ALTH H ARRISBU RG 17120 Peter A. Morris, Director Divisio J ?.e ictor Licensing United 5+ r.tes Atomic lnerrj Conmission
achir.cton, D. C. 2C514 5 Regulatory p;r, cy, Re: USAEC Docket I:o. 50 2S9; Three Mile Island Euci dr Station Unit I Gentlean:
This is in response to your October ES,1970 recuest for con ents on the environnental impact of the icove f acility, and on the Environmental Report from State c;encies of the State affected by the constrv: tion and operation of the facility.
This facility is under construction on Three File Island on the Suce.uthsnna River, Londonderry Townshi,9, Dauphin Corr.ty, Connornictith of Fennsylvania.
Cur co ments on this facility are contained in the attached Staff P.epo-t, submitted for your attention and consideration.
Thank you.
Very truly yours, M.5
'vh
'clesley 2. bilbe-tson Deputy Secret try for Enviroru-ntal Protectir.
Enclosure 9**D
" D'G" Y "t WW oJ AN p\\W / fbi o
s g.:
cccHE3 WC
(
~~
385$\\)l0 ">
1490 132
{8 8
S.k 00CM N
!/
g \\g i
/
JCS
STAFF REFORT Cl! Tr'EE !!IIE, ISL'. lid :'UCID.R STATICN U iIT I It' T C rp r 7 e ;
This report is. prepared for sub.Tission to the United States Atori.c Enerry Corissten, persuant to the Invironcental Policy Act of 1969, and in response to the Division of Reactor Licensing reglest for coments, dated October 28, 1970.
The cor.ents developed by affected State A;encies within the Cor.on;tealth are dir cted toward the environcents in,cact of the facility and tot.'ard the Environmental Report develope:1 by the applicant.
Theco=.entsiEcludedinthisreportarethosereceivedintheOffice of Radiological Health and the State Plannin; Board on or before Decerter 31, 1970.
D
~D
- D
~ W \\T
~
d 9].kI oc G
1490 133
i
,r,
CO:HT3 GI "'J : EFTO:E!Tal R"PlRT
~
\\/
x Kost State Agencies providing input to this report indicate a N,.
Ceneral dissatisfaction uith the contents of the 2nviron" ental Report as subcitted. The dissatisfaction stens fr n an apparent avo dance of the use of specific cuantiaed statetents of impact.
- 1) The ne;ci.=a probable off-site rediation dose resulting from routine plant operations should be included.
- 2) The soecific fraction of 10 CFR o radiceffluent concentrations, t
as well as the fractions of federal water qunlity standards criteria present in the effluent should be included in the report.
- 3) Specific meteorological data to support statements on the effects of cooling tower emissions as corpared to inversion height should
.be included, as well as dispersion isoplettes and wind roses.
The Environ: ental Report appeared to be directed to non-technical groups since it deals in generalities, anticipatory statements and non-specific terminology. If the report is intended for regalatory a encies, this purpose would best be served by the use of more specific language.
It is recognized that this docucent would not satisfy its intent if it were expanded to resemble the docunents submitted in application to the AEC for construction and operation of the facility, -
but less direction to the general public and nora direction to those regaired to conment on it would better serve the purposes of the Environmental Report.
g 0 *D)3 3 A9
_b 6 6'
1490 134 to
C0:0SES ON E?NIR0!"CITAL DIPACT Listed below are ' specific comments and recommendations as pertains to this facility:
- 1) The Bureau of Air Pollution Control recommends that the Applicant
. obtain accurate records of the past history of fog formations at Harrisburg-York and Olmsted State Airports, and maintain a record of future fcg formations for a reasonable period of time so that a comparison can be to evaluate effects of the cooling towers after they go into operation.
- 2) The Eureau of Sanitary Engineering (Sanitary Water Board) requires the securing of a Sanitary Water Board Permit by the Applicant in advance of plant operation. The application must include specific informat*on concerning th a concentration and total activity release and will be judged as to its adherence to State standards.
- 3) The State soil and Water Conservation Commission recommends that Ldequate consideration be given the control of soil erosion and resultant sediment occurring during construction and operat.c: of the plant.,The Commission would be pleased to discuss this with the Applicant.
4)_ The Office of Radiological Health requests that the Applicant keep the Agency informed of the development of Emergency Plans, and the results of environmental surveillance activities of radiological importance.
==
Conclusions:==
None of the Agencies responding presented specific objections to the construction and operation of this facility.
1490 135
s e : ~ =.m e n o.O s. v. un..
o s.w n.e,
In reply refer ::
WCE January !.,
1971 Cc=ents on Environmental Impact Statements for: (1) Three Mile nd ' ' N
=cn Island, and'(2) Limerick Nuclear Generating Stations.
.,,9 c....,7
,V
,, j. :
(QI
,,'. Ll: a p'%./ 3[8.7f".J Honorable I-ving Hand tj F
9 Executive Director State Plnnning Board
- .\\,
[
- p.,
- y. ;
2.'.
,yj C.H. McConnell, Chief Engineer C
_ CQlfsG 'i..$ /hf y
T Department of Forests and Waters
' K'L:.':V The following concentary en the subject Statements is in resp:nse to your request to Mr. Skovron, who forwarded it to this office for reply.
Three Mile Isinnd Nuclear Potter Station Our review of this report indicates that certain incensistencies exist. For instance, the last ti,,o sentences of the third paragraph en page 4 strongly imply that thermal discharge li-its are nonexistent in Pe=sylvarda's water quality standards. Paragraph iv - Industrial '..*e ste on page 28, h:vever, indicates knowledge of Pennsylw.nia's thermal discharge require:ents.
The Statement only acknowledges the existence of the Olmsted State Airport within the close prey 4mity of the Staticn. Actually, the sta i:n is under the principal approach pattern for landing aircraft which is at about 1,000 ft. above the station. With the planned increase in air traffic, the probability of an accident also increases. We feel that'such irc'ormation chould be included in the Statement.
The Statement cnits mentien of the Eoroughs of Highspire and Steelton as populaticn centers within the 10-nile radius of the Station.
This c=ission leaves the impressien that pop.tlation density upstree- '- - the station is less than it actually is.
(The Statement mentions only Harrisburg at 10 miles away, and Middletown at 2 miles.'
Also, the Statement neglects te mention the industries within the vicinity of. the statien.
Of particu s-interest are the steel plants in Steelten,'.hich require signifi:snt quantities of coolin;; water from the Susquehanna River., We suggest that the Sta erent include a discussicn of these relationships to the statien's operatien. The Statement should include some idea of the impact of the station's operation en the other generating plants in the vicinity, i.e., the fossel-f;el plant at Middletown and the ' fork Haven h -dro plant. The Middletown plant has 'reen cited recently as a major source of air pollution.
Not being knowledgable in the subject, we car at ec=ent en the radiation from the plant. However, it does not a pear that there is definite proof, at least not in the report, that there will not be adverse atnespheric results from the cocling tower emiscienc.
This matter c.as en1;c 'ceen :c;ched 1490 136 DO@p fp m g
/ C~
. January 4, 1971 upon lightly and concluded,by bland statements that there will be no adverse effects because of tue height of the towers. There have been reports cf densa fogs in Connecticut Valley since the operation of the Connecticut Yankee pis.n:
which also has ecoling towers.
As stated in the report the coeling tower " blowdown" water and the equipment cooling water will be cooled by mechemi:al draft cooling tewers and discharged into the Susquehama River. Since there is no =ention nade of any effort to separate the mineral concentrate of the cooling water befere discharge into the river, it seems important that this mineral concentrate be identified in the report.
Limerick Generatine Statien This is an envircraental report for the const:uction per=it stage.
The report is quite thorough, however, as it includes the environ: ental 1 pacts of operation.
In cocparing with the Statement for the Three Mile Island 2 clear Station, the Limerick report is much more detailed, and includes Pennsylvania's water quality standards for thermal pollution. Both reports are dated Ceteber 1, 1970.
It is essential that the Limerick station cooling discharge rest water qualiny standards established by the Sanitary Water Board. The res; critical time would occur during the su=mer months of low flow. Tha " uence of releases frem the Blue Marsh Reservoir may have some significance en the Limerick disch. ves. We suggest that the report elaborate on this.
Our review of the report's outline of pollution controls during construction (pp. 57-60) shows that the applicant is well aware of this proble=.
In the matter of erosion control, however, we feel the plan cutlined (early installation of storm drains) is incomplete.
The scheduling of initie.
grading operations (stripping of topsoil) is also important. This shof.d be done so as to keep the a cunt of stripped areas to a =ini=un during earthwerk operations.
Also, cut or fill earth slopes shculd be made erosion-resistant shortly after ccmpletion. Since sediment is defined as a pollutant in Pennsylvania streams, we recccmend that such procedures be included in the report as abats-ment controls.
One important variance from the procedure of the Three Mile Isis d station is noted.
At Limerick there will be no cooling of the tower "blowde="
water and the equipment cooling water before release to the Schu'ylkill.
This does not seen consistent as the Schuylkill is a =uch smaller stream than the Susquehanna.
10 BRO'g.490.g 1
37 n
uadu
- - ~.
a m
CCwedONW2 ALTH OF PENMSV LV ANI A e=
c a.se t f 4 0, December 22, 1970,,
x
/
su es = C v' Comments on Three Mile Island Environmental Report 4
George Burns State Planning Board
)/l Arthur A. Socolow
/
""3"'
Bureau of Topographic & Geologic Survey
(
e As per Mr. Irving Hand, I am submitting to you my comments on the environmental report of the Three Mile Nuc'ler.r Station. I would hope that any comments which you plan to forward to the Atomic Energy Commission will reach them prior to the 60-day time limit which began with the announcement of the environmental report in the November 6, 1970 issue of the Federal Register; the (
!ays is thus up on January 6,1971.
I
/
cc: Irving Hand
\\
i i
14.90 138
.m.
/ C $__
1
~
COMMENTS UPON ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT - OPERATING LICENSE STAGE -
THREF MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION M
i D**D b#
GENERAL COMMENT
S:
. W6 T
The environmental report as it now stan'ds appears to be written for the layman and is lacking important glarititathe data. There ai ; far too many generalized conclusions and such non-specific words as "it is anticipated... ", "will be negligible", "well within the standards", "are expected to have no impact", and other non-specific phrases that imply faith rather than scientifically analyzed conclusions.
SPECIFIC COMMENTS:'
Page 1: It is stated here "This report serves to provide a summary description of the stations and environmental features and an assessment of the stations of environ-me ntal impact". As will be noted in the following, many of the environmental features either are not listed at all or are dealt with in non-specific, non-qtantitati/# terms.
C Page 3: The last paragraph states "It is anticipated there will be no increase of ground level fog or ice from the cooling tower operation". Yet, no data is presented as to the meteorological conditions and dew point data for the site to dispel the anticipation by many that at certain times the cooling towers will create condensation clouds. This is particularly important in view of the proximity of the Olmstead Airport runway only two miles away.
3 Page 4: No mention is made in the first paragraph as to the chemical composition of the " blowdown" which is to be bled off. Nor, is there any indication of the quantities anticipate d.
It is stated that the released water will be co61eil "except in an emergency".
What is the definition e' an emergency? Does it mean equipment failure, weather emergency manpowe r emergency, economic emergency, national emergency, or what?
Fage 4: Paragraph four states that studies are now being conducted "in order to confirm that the aquatic environment will not be significantly affected". What is the mean-ing of "significantly affected"? If the studies are just now being made, how can paragraph five already state "It is the conclusion of the applicants that the intake and discharge of cooling water... will not adversely affect the fish populction... or any other aspect of
~
the a quatic ecology in the area".
It is unscientific to reach conclusions prior to the com-pletion of testing.
/
Pace 5: It is stated."It is anticipated... the radioactive gaseous and liquid relea se s will be a very small percentage of the limits as specified in 10 CFR Part 20".
Anticipation is not enough' Has it been accurately and specifically computed?
Pace 5: It is stated "The plant operating procedures will be such that radiological releasco will be maintained at as low a Icvel as practicable, consistent with safe 1)lant ope rations ". What will the icvel of radic, logic t1 releascs actually be when consistent win safe plant operation? It is further stated "It is expected, therefore, that at these low levels, i
1490 09
s 2
the re will be no adverse effects... ". What low level? They are never quantified.'
What is meant by " expected"? Was it ever calculated or is it just a hope?
Page 6: The.first paragraph states "It is the conclusion of the applicants that there will be no adverse environmental effects... ". This statement is inconsistent with the last paragraph of page 5 which states that tests are being conducted now "To provide a basis for determining any possible radiological effects on the environment". The con-clusion is also inconsistent with paragraph 4 of page 4 which states "that only now is the local biology being studied.
Page 6: Item 4 neglects to provide copies of pre-operational radiological surveys to appropriate state agencies. It speaks of providing copies "to the Secretary of the Interior for evaluation prior to project operation". How much prior? Would there still be-time to modify the proposed opera' tion if the survey so indicated?
(
Page 7: The first paragraph states that the liquid discharge will contain only trace quantitice of inorganic salts "well within the federal water quality standards for drinking water". But what are the actual trace quantities ?.
__a ce 9: The last paragraph states that there will be 'no significant adverse effect Pa on the enjoyment and use of the surrounding area".
What is meant by significant? Will there be insignificant adverse effects?
It is to be noted that nowhere in the report, and particularly in the section on background information, is there any comprehensive data on meteorological conditions in the reactor area. This is a major omission which should promptly be corrected. There have been suggestions made by many that the cooling towers will have a significant impact upon meteorological conditions. The effect of the towers in adding heat and water vapor to the area must be spelled out. The few paragraphs on page 22 are inadequate for a mean-ingf.tlassessment of the reactor's impact on the local meteorology.
Pace 26: The first paragraph atates that the monitor surveying the effluent and radwaste will be sufficiently downstream to measure a "homogenous mixture". However, the zone in the river closer to the plant which will not have a "homogenous mixture" could have major environmental impact; it could serve as a real biological barrier in the river.
In summary, the report lacks concise presentation of data, specific indication of basis of conclusions, and too many equivocating, anticipatory, and unsubstantiated con-clusion s.
1490 140
)
9
m GF F P..N a v L 4 A.
4.-
COtt esta... <
tj A.p t s 2 gf Lccanbcr is, 1970
- v...w s
.._s.,
n.w. f ew.o, 4..vc w.
...a.
.a.
polit = 21.c0: Co., c: c.l.
e W
. ra z e n
.....,... S.
\\s
'\\
y:2
.co.
b C e-....a.
(
,o a...,., a
,...,, c....,, i c....-. t.,3,
i c
Thonca M. Ccrusky, Director C-
/g Offica of audiologicci hacith
,.f)
([
T
?>
b f'.,
v Doc.ald A. Lazc.rchik, 7i".2 dor C
~
N
\\
Livision of Indus:ric2.cs:es it ll / /
./
.t......~..t...,
c o uby.,,s.: w.
Ac...t,/c.
. o c,g, uo, s
- o Co.
c.
m s
..v
. w..
... a.
m...
-.v_e...
.. _.-,,.,. o..
_e. c c _ o e.... e...c
-..a.
,.7, ci.s e. u.. __3,/
...e...
Encrgy Connission, uc hc.vc curscrily encnincd the por:icn of :hc ecpor.
declin; uith ucs:c we. cr dischc.r;cs cnd finc no cchnicci rcc.acn for objec ion.
F.cucver, beccuse of the wording of the A cnic Encr;y Cennicsicn's noticc, pothcps an objectica in principic chculd bc ncdc en the oc;i: :hc: the
- ccrd pcznit.
.cu thc.
conpcny hc.s not yet obtcined c Scnitc.ry Ec.:c: '
.....,~...w u? p.~ 4. C ~.~. -. ', '. ~. '..
t..
'.'.~..vi ~. o..~... :c~1 "aap o ~..
'.o-
~ c~ c.4.~.
w' '..,j*
- Atc >c %..c,,,y Co _4ss.o
_e..t...
,.1d
.w.
.w o.c.,.ey.1vo.,n.
d~ ~.a..
. / r..,..
4 a.
_.o.
.a 3
..2..:..,.,... p o,,e
.......,.,-.?......e, c. :,. 2 -
< s i.,a t.,.o u. j.. a dis..a.on.
- n...,
.c~....,
_a s
29 of the report as enc of thccc to be ob:c.ined, but, unliha o;;.c of
.h c o c c...< s 1< s. c i, o t..,...
,_s a,., u,.,..
c.c
.._.e..
m.m s
therefore cculd be scid to duplicccc :he duricd' ::ica =d func:icn of a
the Atonic Encr;y Cennission in considcrin; the Environnon:ci,Icport.
3
~ )\\
D""
D 3..
.a oc w
1490 141 lc
C G %.C h..A T H s, # #67.
8 - -
v A. t.b l -
14.J
.2.v as w,,.:.. v.
.c,....,......w.u.....a V:
-,_,,2...,,.~..w..3
-r..,
.Nw y _ w.f w..v..v..
u,.,.....f.
7 u..,,.-w
.....7
--.w jv -.......
-m i 1 g
,p.
....._...,.s.~..
ww av.
vyv
.c,... s. :w..
...a
... ~..' L -. ;,.... -
<~....;a...
. i,. r...v s
.a a c Ts
. v _.
%..w,
,-: w v.
=.
0 gi i / n. s s.v...,...f...v :.. ~
,.._., 1,w,....
,a c-
_v
....v.
w
%...; _r C v.
.www__wm_
O
'~N / \\
/
L.
u,g N
.,.w uc,.2C S. _;
..wa
.r s
.e.,.,
o O E..,_3 4 v. a w.
. v.
\\
/.-
- 4..... w.s 5
_ y _:.m..,
e v
ro, s
u
. Y, n
/,
A-
-~ :
f
,X.e C..
- V O
-s
., e,
n,,'
w
"' e o
st v.<.. 4 Su.,
.a g.
wwwv
- c
.,v c. _ w
/4 OO 3[ T' j
(.,.
a Aom 4
u _.... a.L v a,
...S<.-
,6 j
y b) r.c q
.A Soil COnServa eOs cirector uy
./. N g
.j s.,
p v i l'
\\
I a
a....... u w
%..a V a-c n..../ _:e,..,,.c. _
., O :w.
O.: u s..e au<s, VO
-.. :.. c
..h e.
u... :..
ui
.w a
~:
L C, a w,..,s,.;.u :
Cv......_.,a_,.,...
.n tu..u, O.:.:. : w,i., a-O: _ u.. v.
S..,
c., v, :_.1 wG
..uw.
m
..e wv.
w waw.
4.%.. w, C C.. a" # G' w". c."i. _4O ". C _#
Vv: A 3,
a,. ~,.syww a uO
%, w.
- m. s..C,,
,.1 a.,".C w
4.
w c
w u
N
. v
- O.... %...e C.... _.,
n P O, _* L.
4 O, C v-4.
1..,s s a w, e a..c.. _;,s..
.%.v,_v
.. a w we w.
4
..w-v_
... w
.., a. :...
m..s A
.c,. %,.~a. g.,.......
- s., - C O u.3
- m. v. n,4
~ u.f.
.. u G C ) w.
..g v%
e.
m=.
n V..w
.. s w v.
A.a w w
.yw w
--h o.'. c. s~ '.s-C" c...f C v -. -
' c.m.4..' " " y "
.4 3 O
e- '. u- "w.4On O.
"%..c'
- c.... e-
.O w
r w.
f w' a w.'..:.. w S C.#.#... 2 .' +w-..%.. u-.....,t c."..
. w' c.a L. e S '.. O p' c^ N s*.*."
u' v.;, v.-.
"cr 0.1 q.
C at,.e v.. e s.....
e O C C.... Cm,,:,g COna-
..,C
_:C
_u
-.a
.,,SS.
A e
ww w
- . w j_vwe
- v. w w
%.>;w._
C O,,is 1 C O,..,
C ea w
OV.:ng c.
C c,
...s.. C.:.S.. b._.. a c.. C, W.:. _- v s
- k...
- 4
.ua.
w..
w w
CONS t,,.uct AOn--in
.:c.w,,u, S uC n
,.O.e.
.:..:... :.&us aO dv,.s:..:
OAy
.?
..'.s.
se.
...u
.m w
y
.c_s I n t..G S u. COnd pc._ ag. -%..
O _.:
.e, c w ;
7, y. y, 3D O uw.
- n. s...,,. O c-v c._ _ e
- w.. c
. c. y n
... g.. 3 O :
.c v Cu.t C.
- 6.,
n.-u
., g w.
Sland
,.,,.O u unc.
t.,.Q
- c. a p.u f:
so v.
w w
.uy
.a - - u _ v O c.,........ :w s.,..
G w,.,,,. :..s_c.w g 5 4.v,,n.
uk..e
,.e O,.t On 4 %..G v.4.. 3 4.C..
9 vaw w.ss m.
y w
~
A
-e S..O s~.1 A a..e v
'a v,
_ C wCC-..< n u con"'.O1 O=.
m- ~ d A' ~..~.."w c.m.
...v~,.,:...-
wa
- c. a
. w v* o n S "6. w's w e C'.
.#.*'.*.~... C'.#. a,"w e.' 'f a~ u ]' u w* c '".""w o.;,,. ' - ~.~. a-O f any
,D'u' Oj eC"w
- .'n a' *i...i S aS are the abOVG-r.Ont1CnOC
.C r O 9 G C O S.
- c. a.,.,,:. e v o,.S.,-,n, u _c..
v,, v-..,... _a S _:
The Statu, SOI C n...,., w
.aw
_v mends that adequate Consideration be given to the c':Ovo-r.cntiensi
... C c g., : :. :.... _.
u w
- s..., O S w, c,..
uae givc,..
pO ton ;,.,
p..OO, c..a c.
C
_u..c. u
,-v
...a m
Co- '.. o u ' V %" ' C '.'.
'w,...._'S.., _:,..
.0w-_
tSv. vyO '-'w
- C S "w, "w e.=., O '.'
~~; ".. c. w- - --
s-u..w U. ' "on o f _ s.; a v^...
"w.4 '/C a-C.:.
"w".. s>'.i..;.... '.. ;--
C a" i.. c a "'...i. a-N be,o'ewSGd *wO
.v-
~ ~ ~
Board Or the electric COr.panies involved.
cC: Mr. Early
- 5.,
/
1 1490 142 s
n M
/ 6d
i
- r
%. e. of
.s i.
9*
weCu......u s.
..p
_ % V.
s
-... w.m. A..e 1.-",. y....
,2.c y. 6c, g 0.y.2 1
3 3
9.
v.
w.
.w.
v C...,/ - -* %.. e e... 4 1.
.T c.* u.. a
.A 1
r*
..e..,Cy C..A A.u.
.T J. S w-
..y..
..u C. e.... y, D,.o..,.
..w.v.c e
. ~.s
.m.o ' m' c 3 ' C u. =.co..*.
C ".-e O'.
~ A.-
i.
g O
m.,
yo.. e 5.s.
.u. _u. s.c.u.a,
s.,..C.
4
.n.,
_U
....u
<u. a..en A,. oa Cv...y - s.- n.
D.sv.s.4Cn O:
Eureau Of Air PCllutiCn CCn rC'
~
j s
.u.
...e c-.~--
u...' ----'e '. w - >. s' e-. * - ' = - -
- -* a 1 ",. ave. e,/.* m~.e"
+.%. 4 e.
.. m ose 4..
- .,C.#..g a 3 v,w.
w..
e., s.
.v e: Aa C...e 4 g u..s e..e.-.S
- s. : -.. 4,.......i Ah 4. S e p C, A.
A S c' e : s. C ie _ s.,,
a 2.
4.yv.
C.)O. 4 g. C..in., a paw s.,
O, C
.A.eca s.-.c.-. i.w..
u..
-.As.
v.,< ? scy.
3 A
a,.
Aco 3
.. u
..... a o
C v.
- 4.e. g
.A-w c.
A.s.e e.. :
4,,a-s. m.c.a ne4-g...
Ah e e, 4 A.
15 4 a4
-A.ea.
...c.A.
.e
..e v.
v..
...vu o
. v....a..
.w4,
- e. s..e.
1 1,/ C w C,o..
c.
....s i s 3,. - A c.,,
A hu n A.w.3
- 4. Va.... L..w: c t C'#0 S
,.eu w
.. v.. o
,2 u
.s.. 3.. A.
eA w 2.u _ u;
.w..,.
AG :. v-A 4 -.,n A..w.e CaA w.u.-a
- e.. e a 2.. V e.
n -. 1., A s,, u
.a
..v.3...
...s u
.v..
o a.
v.
+, w S.,a. n A r..,..a.e A..w. s.
4.nVO e4
..S A w.a A
- .... a.
e,,,
y 0,.,..
. u.
.v.,.,...cse. c.
v
.S
.s
.a.....
a.v
..a u..C' "'.e p ;....c o-o v o. '.'.. -,, v-.. c- - S
- - ~ ~ - 3 S.h.CU ' d un.*..Va--e ' C.. O,C c-"ov-/s
"...e-
-c
.s.
..nu. O.1 e
- O p e.o.e A,,,.
A.e on e. Va S. v,
C...-,, v.1... a : C.. :.,
...y, A
4
...-~.
w
.a
., s a...y
.u.j wo.....c w.
vm
- v. c...e w: a a..
,%. 4. c h
..a,'/
a :* :. q q.,
A,,'.e On...S... a.eoo a :....,, vy e 3_ :. v-., c.,, ueye a.
,3
...u
..yv.
directiCn.
p - e e.4 =%.A.,, 4.a2 A.e..
A.w.o A
- 11....' C
- e..e., C C 4 2 A J - e.,
n1 + w.OU g.. A.h.e O p C. A,,, C 4
b ya3 3
....s s
w...
.v.
O g. C..,._. 4.a e a.
. : y.. _ :,,,..,.,.*-..C C v-./ a.,.
- e. V e.. C w.,
.:. C.
- k. Owe VO.,., C v,., d a-4 e.
.w......u..
..w u
opO,. A iOo. C :. A.k.e S e C Col 4 r.g C...e
. n 3 A.
cm.3, C.
e As.C A.w..e
- w-a.1 a C.,,
A
.o w a
..w s,, -
S h 0., d u. o'.#C..
- .v^~.~...'.'.#C"'.
v- #.- I. C"u" e
.#.^. 4 k.
~.' V, v v. "w.- "* t.# #... - - C.
- ...".,3 e
w w.1 e A. a* s-y _..e se,,,u..e A
- 2.,. - S.X
...,..w.
-m3 w-w...
4 airpo.+S.
A ne WeaA,.w.O d u-A,3 v oc
.. c i
_ a. e.. -.e...a.
e.,.c
> e L A i v-,. u.,. i.euc...e de./,. y pc, -a e...,.A1..
. C Au.-
e.,
,v
.w bu 3. -YO.4. A4.pc t' i..d 4. w- '. e s #..u'.
- .. e ' e....e,
". o s4. '....'
"_. 5 1
y, e.. e..
v.
b1Cr. s
'.~.o...*..*.e-c o' '.".c o.e '.,. - ~.. '. C n- '... 3 C e~,~. S - c
- e. v c..' C =.
=...u
' '... e s
v y
du..' w 's.Y.S pe. 4.Cd (v'.3 e ve..'
C.
".... ' '.. " - '. '.H...
~.e.e.--u, 2
.s a
f.
4
...=. cu.
.s. e.
pC.e r.cle A w.u, A.
A s.u, og e.,..
- 4 e-
.s.e s e - - - r,..........
... w v. _.. 3
..... c o
...v.
v.
sw' V u.....,
..e._Ov O.v3.Cos.
ww a.sa..C n
- ,e,.,G.e.Cy O:.
.1 CL,d :C.. 10 S
.u
.. v
...o.
..e.
w.
s v,a c-
'1 +. iS C,/,.OCC e
a.As. C.,..
A L.u..,,.w.
Cu.4s.....Cm..A.. ou
.s-p2.
...e 3
C v,.
,/
...e
...y v..
.A.
, -,... O.
A. s.v., e.
s.. C A. a.-.4
..c-4... ; :
.k. m A. 0.,,/ L.e : g :..-,...u A 4.,.
w r a e. A.
.=
y.
.v
.w..s
,v y.
a c a -,,.,, 0 2
A4....,
u l l.,w. +..,., vg
- .v- _. -.,.4..e.
ewC.a' O.e susu.
.u
.v..
- v.. a u.
ye
.w v.
.v
. :- A A s. 3 ovv..
A.-..e_...
A.p.u
- a w v..y,,u. 4.. S v-,. Cun tJu3 a3 e,/ u 9.. - _..uc c..eu S
v.
..co u ou 3
aI.O A,L.ey 90 4 A. O Cp0 62 A
i.
.va.
.Ve-n..., A e.. :
.3 a.
n.,.
- o. u.. e.e.o..
.e 0... 4.. a.,. n:
nO ova 1.L. -
- 4 -. O :.
ds.s v.
..a u
.v.
s
,.o o v. v 31,.. -
.a.3 n c.-
.<.1..-
o,.v.
ew A w.
A w.c, L..:m e. 4., -.:
.a3 4-
.2:
w.
,,,,... a
.~u t
.v v.
.a
. s. O 3
.w
.v..c..a.
1490 143 3
l0,N
.:)
m OMMONWCALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA O....
i s..,
- Review of Enviren= ental Impact Statements January 5, 1971 c f 'm,.
-ketropolitan 3disen Cc=pany 2nvironmental Report for the Threa Mile Island ::uclear Power Station,
/D' so.n c r, Units 1 and 2
-Philadelphia Electrical Cenpany Environmental h!
{g'~ii],0 g
- S-Report for the Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 G
,lkK 11,IM #
'g\\.
i u,
.,.2 TO Honorable Irving Hand
.s Executive Directer O
\\')g,[ S,///
State Planning Scard t/
D N.. gf ' /
v'...,.-
/D
"---- y William J..lewer -
'F*
g ]/
Deputy Executive Director f
Pennsylvania Historical and Huseum Cc. mission 4
The Environmental Impact Statement, as submitted by Metropoliten Edison Cocpany for the operating license sta;e of the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, providas an excellent reference'to positive action taken by Meti politan Edison Ccapany to avoid an adverse effect en the historical integrity of the irmediate project area.
The rich pre-history of the site was recognized during early planning stages and tha ecmpany cooperated fully with the Pennsylvania Hictorical and Husau Cecnission in salvage archaeology pricr to site excavation.
It is significant te note that requirements of the National Historic Preservaticn Act are acknowledged and that the U:.tienal Rerister of Historic Places was censulted tg determine historic sites in the immediate and surrcunding project area. This procedura should be routins with a reference to the procedure required in the environmental impact statement.
Concern for the historical environment of a project area shculd go beycnd historic sites included in the Natienal ReTister of Historic Places. This cculd be accomplished through censultatien with ths Pennsyl-vania Historical and Museum Cc:rmission and by inviting the Cermission's ce==ents during early planning stages.
Construction of a generatin; plant cay in itself affcet cur natural and man-made environment but the greatest impact may result frca the location of transmissien corridors.
It would be n. cat hhlpful and scre meaningful if impact statements would present a total picture by tapping the generating site and proposed transmission corridors for review and cc:nent during early planning stages.
e e
1490 144
/ o f'
Honcrable Irving Hand January 5, 1971 The Environmental Report, as submitted by the Philadelphia Electric Cc pary for the construction parait stage of the Limerick Generating Station, r.1kes no ::ference to concideration given the historical environment of the project area. As stated above, ccaments en consideration given to the historical integrity of the area should be routine in environ-mental impact statements with particular reference to the Ltional Re-ister of Historic Places and consultation with the Pennsylvania Historical and Fuseu.:t Cc= iscica.
The Limerick Generating Statien site has been reviewed by cur staff and we knca of no advarse effects construction of the station will have on the historical inte;rity of the project area.
h'e cannot, however, coccent en the effect of necessary tranc ission lines.
'd k I0.0oTofgsi m
1490 145
/ d[
.f