ML19273C115

Comments on Amends 13 & 14 to Environ Rept.Nonradioactive Floor & Equipment Drainage Should Not Be Treated at Sewage Treatment Plant.Addl Info Re Toxicity of Arsenic & Barium Should Be Provided

ML19273C115
Person / Time
Site:	05000502, 05000503, 05000504, 05000505, 05000506, 05000507
Issue date:	08/20/1979
From:	Druckenmiller H WISCONSIN, STATE OF
To:	Burstein S WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CO.
References
1630, NUDOCS 7908270417
Download: ML19273C115 (3)

Text

-

. . . - . .-- ~- -. -. - . . - - . . .

)

• 9'Siete j of Wi.co in \ D ART M EN T OF N AT U R AL R E SO U R C ES Anthony L ful uswrsy l

Box 7921 i MAOisoN wtSCoNSIN 53707 August 20, 1979 IN REPLY REFER TO: 1630 I

Mr. Sol Burstein Wisconsin Electric Power Company 231 W. Michigan Avenue  !

Milwaukee, WI 53202 l 4

Dear Mr. Burstein:

We have completed our review of Amendments 13 and 14 for the Haven Nuclear Power Plant Environmental Report. Our questions and comments are as follows:

Page 3.6-5, Paragraph 4 - Your plan to discharge nonradioactive floor and equipment drainage to the sewage treatment plant is questionable since the treatment of such wastes need cnly be in the form of suspended solids or soil and grease removal and not biological treatment. These wastewaters would contribute to hydraulic loading, but not necessarily to the B00 5 lcading and could be treated / disposed of in a different manner than through the STP.

Page 4.1-9, Paragraph 1 - Where would the 121,000 cubic yards of material proposed to be removed from the shoteline be disposed?

Page 4.1-22, Items 2 and 4 and Paragraph 1 - Additional information on the toxicity of arsenic and barium and related potential disposal problems at this site should be provided. This dredged material may be classified as a toxic and hazardous substance according to proposed Federal guidelines on these substances. This would place severe restric-tions upon disposal of these sediments and further investigation and planning may be required for disposal of the material.

Page 6.1 When would the preoperational studies be conducted and what would they consist of? What, if any, aquatic studies are planned during the period of delay that has been scheduled for the Haven project?

What are the through screen velocities of the circulating pump intakes?

Page 14.3-3, Paragraph 2 - Where would the debris from the screens and trash racks be disposed of?

7

\cP 9 790.827c m $'0 i

I

~

S. Burstein August 20, 1979 Page 2 ,

Page 14.3-5, Paragraph 3 - Please specify the uses of the 550 gpm (max.) of domineralized water makeup. The section indicates (as does Figure 14.3.3-1) the use for "in plant systems" but a specific break down is not given.

Page 14.3-3, Paragraph 3 - a. Please specify what "other plant com- - ,

ponents" are supplied by the service water system, other than the

• reactor plant component cooling heat exchangers (also shown in Figure 14.3.6-3, but not in Figure 14.3.3-1) . b. What are the through-screen velocities of the service water intakes?

Page 14.3-6, Paragraphs 3 and 4 Why are the turbine plant component cooling and service water systems to be chlorinated, but not the main condenser cooling systems?

Page 14.3-7, Paragraph 4, Items 1 and 2 - Please quantify the projected solids accumulation since the proposal now states that the storage life has been increased to a 10 year period and the water usage has been decreased.

Page 14.10-2, Paragraph 1 - Desides cost, what other factors (such as environmental degradation) were considered when selecting the condenser temperatures for a once-through cooling system.

Page 14.10-18, Paragraph 3 - Please discuss the attraction and entrainment potential during those time periods when the fixed screens have been removed from the main cooling water intakes and warm water is recycled to keep the intake icef ree.

Page 14.10-13, Cooling System Selection Section - Department comments on this section will primarily '1 presented to WEPCo in our review of the 316(a) and 316(b) reports. 7 ..relbminary review of these documents is presently ongoing.

Table 14.10.2 Please evaluate the annualized investment costs for the intake alternatives listed. Also indicate costs of combined systems that were proposed (conventional traveling screens with removable fixed mesh screens, etc.) .

Single Unit Supplement Page 53.9-1, Transmission Facilities Section - The Department's wetland policy (NR 1.95, Wis. Admin. Code) is presently being revised. If more restrictive wording of the Code is adopted, this could affect any proposed plans that would impact wetlands.

Page 53.9 More detailed descriptions of substation construction activities and the existing environment are necessary before potential 2nvironmental impacts can be assessed.

S. Burstein August 20, 1979 Page 3 Table 5.ll.1-1A, Item 4.8 - Any change in amount of structural fill necessary and transportation of this material should be quantified.

Our continuing review of the .ven project will be suspended following completion of our preliminary review of the 316(a) and 316(b) reports -

and receipt of your responses to this review letter. For concurrence on when we shall proceed with work on the EIS, you should submit a current schedule as soon as possible. We will then consult with the Public Service Commission so'a review and EIS schedule can be established. Due to the anticipated delay of the proposed Haven project, and thus our plans to postpone procaeding with the EIS process, the Department may require additional studies (especially in the aquatic area to supplement and update baseline data during this interim " delay" period.

J Should you have any questions, please contact Anita Sprenger of my staff at (608)266-8299.

Sincerely, Burea of Environmental impact

>%Cr t , ,t s s~

Howard S. Druckenmiller Director cc: G. Nelson - SED W. Gillen - PSC y . Cota - NRC B. Fran - EPA, Region V S. T. Su - WEPCo Rajendra K. Sharma - Argonne J. Fassum - U.S. F&WS J. Dunn - CCE