ML19289E395

Notifies of Applicant'S Decision to Barge Reactor Pressure Vessel Up San Bernard River.Ltr to Tx Parks & Wildlife Dept Documenting Commitment Encl

ML19289E395
Person / Time
Site:	05000467, Allens Creek  File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png
Issue date:	03/12/1979
From:	Copeland J BAKER & BOTTS
To:	Cheatum E, Linenberger G, Wolfe S AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
NUDOCS 7904170377
Download: ML19289E395 (4)

Text

%:t., ,..,' , Q BAKER & BOTTS ONE SMELL #LAZA Houston, TEXAS 77oo2 w A S HINGTON O FFICE ON E M 229-12M TELEX 76 2779 1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVC N W TELECO M MU N!CATIO N wAS M!NGTO N. C. C. 2000 6 (713) 229-1523 HOUSTON TELEPHON E (202) 457- 5 50 0 (202)457-5536 w AS HINGTO N. D. C.

NRC PUBLIC DOCUMENT ROOM March 12, 1979 Sheldon J. Wolfe, Esq., Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 ,-, .. '

7,"'",4 K*

.j Dr. E. Leonard Cheatum f, l -

J'!q Route 3, Box 350A ' '

,- 'l # ir' Watkinsville, Georgia 30677

,. ,y' ,,,y'i#

'A b

Mr. Gustave A. Linenberger - "' , A >..

Atomic Safety and Licensing \., @" j Board Panel N .

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission  ! c d i i Washington, D. C. 20555 Gentlemen:

The Applicant and the State of Texas have.been meeting over the past few days in an effort to resolve con-cerns which have been raised by the State. The Board will recall that at the prehearing conference on November 17, 1978, Mr. Lowerre expressed concern over the method for moving the reactor pressure vessel to the site (Tr. 446-47).

Specifically, there had been a concern raised by several intervenors that the Applicant was planning dredging and channelizaticn of either the San Bernard River or the Brazos River in order to barge the reactor vessel to th'e site. 1/

In its response the Applicant explained that it had alternative means of getting the reactor to the site wit'w w whandelizine and dredging either the San Bernard or the Brazos, one of which was overland transportat, ion from an unloading point. 2_/ Specifically, the Applicant noted that:

1/ TexPirg Additional Contention 1; Hinderstein Contention 3; Michulka Contention 1.

2/ See, ' Applicant's Responue to Contentions Filed by Lois H.

Anderson, et al.", dated November 13, 1978, at p. 16.

~

7904170377

BAKER & BoTTs ,

Page 2 "To the extent petitioner argues that barge transport, in any case, would require dredging it is in error, since the San Bernard River is a federally maintained navigable waterway to a point well above any potential off-loading junc-tion for the ACNGS site."

As noted in the attached letter to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, the Applicant has now committed to barge the reactor pressure vessel up the federally maintained waterway on the San Bernard River. The barge will be off-loaded near F.M. 522 and transported overland to the site.

Very truly yours, (4

Gregory Copeland JGC/66 cc: All parties (w/ encl.)

Mcusion "

ao un)g-V- U hting ]o '

a g .i i & ower

?

\

Company .

ltl

. ).L,:! %

\ 4OA

'l \ Electric Tower o.<

d. RO. Box 1700 fly

-:- 9 W'i Y O\d Houston. Texas 77001 /N pe.H g

March 9,1979

)qy

'.2 p #s 3 AC -HL-TX-9 5 ,$ t s

Mr. Charles D. Travis g/l os Executive Director e Texas Parks & Wildlife Department 4200 Smith Schcol Road Austin, Texas 78744

Dear Mr. Travis:

On Wednesday, March 7, I met with several members of your staff and Mr. Rick Lowerre of the Attorney General's office to discuss Houston Lighting & Power Company's plans for site delivery of the reactor pressure vessel for the Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station.

The meeting was in response to questions which had arisen during proceedings before the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission on the Allens Creek project. Specifically, a question was raised as to whether HL&P proposed to dredge the Brazos River in order to move the reactor vessel on site by barge.

At the meeting on March 7, I explained the options that had been evaluated and that dredging of the Brazos River up to the site had been listed as a pctential option by HL&P's subcontractor, but had never been regarded as a realistic option by HL&P. I further explained that it was not a normal construction practice to determine the specific method of equipment delivery at this time. Nevertheless, as a result of the Department's inquiries, HL&P did undertake a further examination of this matter to determine the best alternative.

We have determined the best alternative would be to deliver the reactor via barge up the existing navigation channel of the San Bernard River to the vicinity of F. M. 522. The reactor will be unicaded on a barge unloading facility to be constructed adjacent to the San Bernard River and will be transported overland from this point to the Allens Creek site. It was agreed that this alternative would not only have an insig-nificant environmental effect but would also be the most feasible method of moving the reactor to the site.

.i f . 3 c. . . a v : ;uny

• s Mr. Charles D. Travis March 9,19 79 Acccrdingly, HL&P's purpose in providing this letter to you is to document our commitment to moving the reactor on site in the foregcing manner.

We appreciate the courtesies extended to us by your staff and the timely manner in which they responded to this matter.

Very truly yours, f l&

D. R. Betterton, Manager Environmental Protection Department DR B/a ns cc: J. G. Copeland Richard Lowerre

.