ML19261B175

Responds to NRC 781103 Ltr.Sees No Merit in Meeting W/Attorneys for NRC & PA Power & Light.Citizens Against Nuclear Dangesr Are Prepared to Go Directly to Public Hearings

ML19261B175
Person / Time
Site:	Susquehanna
Issue date:	12/04/1978
From:	Lemanowicz I CITIZENS AGAINST NUCLEAR DANGERS
To:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML19261B169	List: ML19261B168 ML19261B175
References
NUDOCS 7902140130
Download: ML19261B175 (3)

Text

. -

.n

&n o

Tms DOCUMENT C0tlTAltlS JAN 2 91979 POOR QUA N J y.

Docket No. 50-549 M2f0RANDUM FORr W111'== H. Regan, Jr. , Chief Environmental Projects Branch 2, DSE FROM Robert B. Saanrorth, Section Imader Aquatic Resourcas Section Environmental Specialists Branch, DSE SU3 JECT CREENE COUNTY FINAL ENVIROIOGCiTAL STATEMENT INPUT We have completed our review of the teetf==y on environmental noise levels in the vicinity of tbs preposed location for the Greana Comity Nuclear Plant as requested by the Environmental Project Manager (EPM), S. Bajwa.

- This tastimony was propered by maial A. Driscoll of the State of New York Department of Public Service and transmitted to the EPH by latter from John & Smolinsky os November 2 , 1978..

We find that the tastimony incorporatas the following features in its scope and analysis: Ambient sound levels for locations near *he proposed plant sits and transportation /acesse routes are quantified. Noise sensitive land uses near these locations are identified. Plant construction and opera-tional phase sound levels are estimated according to level and character (e.g., likely presence of pure tones). Likaly impacts for these plant phases are qealitatively estimated based on comunity response criteria which are themselves based on U. S. Environmental Protaccion Agency normalized day air,ht equivalant sound levels. On-site coise sources considered in the analysis include construction equipment, cor-site concrets batch plant, public address system, blasting activities, cooling towers.

' ansformers and pia =p house equipment. Off-site noise sources considered n the analysis include workar comemter traffic, material delivery and construction supply traffic, construction of improved access to the site and ambient noise levels. Escoimeendation for mitigation of off-sita noise levels is also provided, with an objective of min 4=f-ing impacts

, as determined by EPA community response criteria.

After evanhation of this testimony, we find that the scope of the analysis is conglete. The methodology and criteria employed to quantify community response to plant induced changes in off-site sound levels are widely known and routinely empicyed in these types of investigations. The 790214og34 orrecs >

eunmaus h D ATs >

NRC FORM 318 (9 76) NRCM 0240 W u.s. .ovanmuswv enewfine orrtess se7s-sas sa4 , _ , _

r ; E ""~{'

ic?Sshta{*12E' "D' Greene County Noise Analysis Review I

The State of New York Depart =ent of Public Service has conducted an analysis of the likely effects that construction and operation of the Greene County Nucleir Plant would have on the acoustic environment at either the Cementon or Athens site. The analysis consisted of three parts: an evaluation of the applicability, completeness and accuracy of the applicant's analysis; an assessment of the i= pacts on the acoustic environment that would be expected to occur from plant construction and operation; and a determinaticn of the necessary mitigative actions that should be :.aken by the applicant to reduce predicted adverse noise impacts attributable to the plant. The methodology employed considered hearing damage, activicy interference (i.e. , sleep interference, speech interference) and annoyance for evaluating the effects of noise on people and the environment.

The typical background noise character of the areas surroundin: the Cementon and Athens sites were determined based on an evaluation of applicant submitted data, combined with additional sound level =onitoring data collected Lf State personnel. Consideration of noise sensitive land -

uses was included in establishing the baseline scnitoring network and in the subsequent inpact analyses for the plant construction ar.d operation phases. For he Cementon site, noise sensitive land uses censist of residential areas in Smith Landing, Germantcwn and Catskill, and St. Ma ry 's Schcol in Saugerties. The am'cient sound levels for these sites are descrf:ec by the State in Table 1.

The staff believes that this aaseline description is adequate as a basis for subsequent estimation of the likely impacts that the plant construction and operation phases will have on the acoustic environment in the vicinity of the Cementon and Athens sites.

The site development and plant construction phases have been evaluated by the State as to the likely changes to the offsite acoustic environment.

Consideration of effects was characterized by use of daytime and nighttine equivalent sound levels and the day-night equivalent sound level for general cn-site activities and by use of the predicted L io, or noise level exceeded 10 percent of the time, for construction traffic.

On-site construction activity, materials delivery traffic, concrete batch plant truck traffic, worker transportation traf fic, access route improvement work, blasting activities, public address system use, equipment cleanup and tne effects of distance,(ground cover and topography on attenua-tion of the noise levels from these activities were considered in the analysis. The resultant expected sound levels at various locaticns around the Cementon and Athens sites are shown in Table 1. Implicit in this analysis are applicant commitments to limit on-site construction activities -

to dayti=e weekday hours except during extended concrete pours when the hours will be extended into the evening. The duration of these pours is expected to be relatively short, on the order of 2 weeks each. Also

included are commitments to limit blasting peak sound pressure levels to 128dB, at the nearest residence and public add ess system sound levels to 10dB above ambient for the area it serves. Chemical processes will be used for cleaning system components at the end of the construction period rather than steam cleaning and venting.

Impacts estimated as a result of the predicted construction phase noise levels are shown on Table 1. These impacts are consistent with the expected results when considering the estimated noise levels and the criteria presented in the EPA Levels Document.2 Hearing damage is not anticipated for any of the surrounding locations. Traffic related to construction activities would likely cause speech interference at residences near access routes for both sites. Because the road improvement option ascociated with the Cementon site could change nighttime traffic patterns, unrelated to plant construction, sleep interference at residences near this alternate may also occur. Consideration of the annoyance effect of onsite construction activities was given to both sites by use of the normalized day night ecuivalent sound level, as detailed by EPA2 . Co=munity response charactericed as "no reaction" and " sporadic complaints" would be expected for the Ce=enten and Athens sites, respectively. -

The i= pact estimation criteria used in the State's analysis are consistent 2

with the criteria presented in the EPA Levels Document and are acceptable to the staff.

_e_

Day-night equivalent sound level estinates for the plant operational phase at the identified noise sensitive land use points around the Cementen and Athens sites were used as bases for the impact appraisals by the State.

These estimates were normalized using factors presented in the EPA Levels Document2 , accounting for the ambient acoustic character of the area in question, presence of natural or mechanical draf t cooling towers and presence of pure tores from such plant sources as trans forme cs or mechanical draft cooling towers. The numerical values of the normalizec day-night equivalent sound levels for the noise sensitive land use areas around the sites and the resultant like l:. c c== uni t; reactions are presented in Table 1.

Additional noise impacts from intermittently operated on-site sources are not predicted to occur during the operational phase. This is based on applicant commitments to ef fectively silence steam dumping and limit public address system usage to daytime operation and its sound level to 10dB above amb ien t for the area being served.

Mitigation of noise related impacts during the construction and operation phases has been recommended by the Statel .

These mit . gative measures are believed necessary by the State to provide an acoustic environment during plant construction and operation that will be consistent with the character of the ambient environment, with levels commensurate with speech co=munication and sleep and with available power plant and censtructica noise centrol techniques. The e s tima t e d imp ac t s auring plant construction and eperatien if these measures are empicyed are ._ an Table 2.

The bases used by the State to predict the operational phase noise levels f rom various plant sources and the criteria employed to estimate impacts and likely community response to these noise levels are considered adequate and reasonable by the staff. The mitigative measures recommended by the State can reasonably be expected to reduce noise levels f rom the sites and the attendant adverse effects on nearby residents. The staff concludes that the impact of the construction and operation of the preposed plant on the nearby accustic environment can reascnably be expected to be minimized with employment of the citigative measures rcccamended by the State.

8 fb TABLE 1 - SUt9tARY OF MAJOR fl0ISE IMPACTS OF Tlin PROJECT AS Th0 POSED Existing Prodicted Project Location of Ambient - dB Site / Phase Maximura Impact Sound Levels - dB Impact L b b 10 90 eq mm l0 I'dn I#~d a ect Total P,q 3

Cc:qenton Construction Germantown 35-41 50 45 So Construction Traffic lione o St. tury's School 51 -

85 Saugerties Speech interference Alternativ9 ID for 175 people.

Suburban Way 42 71 Speech and sleep Catskill interference for 10 8

Operation people.

Germantown 35-41 pi 43 49 64 Widespread complaints

,. 205 s

due to pure tones.

AUienn .

Crnstruction a

Route 20 30-35 51 46 56 Sporadic complaints Construction Traffic Route 28 50 7

67 Speech interference Operation for 59 people.

Route 74 30-35 43 49 69 Widespread complaints 230 due to pure tones.

• P - equivalent 100% impacted population in the '

noise sampling area. ,

Source: Ref. Ill 6

s s .: <<, 1,t.:.ns.~.>.* n ; ** v: s

.; i,g -

.g TABLE 2 - Sl4 NARY OF MAJOR PJOISE IMPACTS OF' Tl!E PliOJECT WITil ADDITICilAL BECOtNENDED NOISE ATTENUATIO!3 Existing Predicted Project, Location of Ambient - dB Sound Levels - dB Impact Site / Phase Maximur:: Impact L b mm et i 10 90 10 eq dn dn Total P,q Cer :ent on construction Germantown 35-41 50 45 50 lione O Conntruction Traffic St. Mary's School 51 IJone Saugerties Alternative IB Suburban Way 42 !Jone Catskill i Operation Germantown 35-41 43 49 54 tione 0 li! '

a Afhen.s construction Route 28 30-35 SL 46 56 Sporadic complaints  ?

Construction Traffic Route 28 50 IJone if direct access to 9W.

0;.cra tion Route 74 30-35 43 49 59 Sporadic complaints. 42

• P - equivalent 100% impacted population in the -

"9 noise sampling area.

.l tio u rce : Ref. #1 -

I k # ,9 8. . g E. [I 's '[ 0 % 8 f'[ - 9  % N8* %, g g gge g g ,

References

1. Lettcr to Singh S. Bajwa, Environmental Project Manager, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission from John H. Smolinsky, Acting Chief, Generating Facilities Planning and Certification Section, Office of Environmental Planning, New York State Department of Public Service, :iovember 2,1978, re: Daniel A. Driscoll Case 80006 testimony on environmental noise.

2. Information en Levels of Environmental Noise Recuisite to Protect Public Health and L' elf are with an Adecuate Margin of Safety; U.S.

Envir< nmental Protection Agency, 550/9-74-004, March 1974

% " g is William H. Ragan, Jr. JAN 2 91979 recomenended mitigative measures ars judged to be reasonable, to be within the current state-of-the-art and to be capable of minimizing off-sita plant related noise levels such that adverse couantnity reaction to noise near the Cementon site would not be expected. We do not believe that additional analysis of this subject area is necessary for the purposes of our NEPA review. We rococmend that a aussnarycof the State analysis be incorporated into the Greene County FESo We have prepared such a sunstary outlining the scope, basis for analysis end pertinant results (see attachment). This summaary has been informally transmitted to the EFE This review was conducted by J. Lehr.

CriSL=L3Lan;ityT.cx::9 ::.zza7gy Robert 3. Sausrorth, Section Leader Aquatic Besources Section Envirommental Specialists Branch Division of Site Safety and Enviremmental Analysis Attach === t t Greene County Moise Analysis Review ees V. A. Moore

% L. Ernst J. Seolinsky, NYDPS (w/o att.)

D. Driscoll, NTDPS G. Imar H. Bajwa J. C. I4hr DISTRIBUTION:

Dockets ,

NRR Rdg ET Rdg ESB Rdg RBSa:aworth orrie. DSE:ET:ESB DSEg .ES.B.

e u . - = >- JCLehr:.us. . a tu.

o ., .1/26/79._ _lif //79_. _

NRC FORM 318 (!> 76) !GLCM O240 W va e. oovanument pasmripe orreces so7e-sam