ML19290D492

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Submits Comments & Recommendations Re Util & 800131 Meeting W/Natl Park Svcs,Usgs & Util in Indianapolis In.Util Proposed Changes to Monitoring & Mitigation Program Should Be Disapproved
ML19290D492
Person / Time
Site: Bailly
Issue date: 02/08/1980
From: Hulman L
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Ballard R
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML19221A733 List:
References
SECY-79-344, NUDOCS 8002220053
Download: ML19290D492 (2)


Text

a w

n - m,--.

..., CO,M

[ m1QL,,b-h 3 !,M. w... _t DISTRIBUTIO!l:

DOCKET FILES (50-367)

MRR RDG HM8 ROG Oocket ilo. 50-367 i

Ronald L. Ballard, ChiefEnvironnental Projects Branch No MEMORANDUM FOR:

L. G. Hulman, Chief 1

Hydrology 41eteorology Branch, DSE FROM:

l BAILLY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CONSTRUCTION DEWA l

SUBJECT:

MONITORING AND HITIGATION PROGRN4 i

l result of The following cmments and recocriendation on the subject are af attend j

j letter and o in Indianapolis on January 31, I

27, 1979 reviewing the Pemittee's Decemberwith the National Park Service tion de-l 1980.

The Pemittee has proposed significant changes to the construc i

l d to minimize watering monitoring and mitigation program whic i

The.

1.

i tablished by l

t proposal will not, in our opinion, ameliorate the ef i

for two I

l reasons:

t The 1 biting action levels of drawdown at the Pemittee's prope i

line will not meet the National Park Service goal; and a.

the The proposed mitigation program cannot supply sufficient w affected aquifer to accomplish its intended purpose.

b.

liminate any National Park SeEice has stated they want to minimize or eIn my view i

impacts; the impacts of construction dewatering.

2.

tradictory to NRC's common practice of allowing non damag ng issued. Furthemore, practice upon which the Construction Pemit EIS wa identified.

tion The National Park SeNice's conclusion that there dicated on dewatering impacts almost a mile from the reactor site is p 3.

USGS numerical mddeling studies.

not in the pubite domain, but the USGS has agreed to a h

e upon USGS the data and analyses in their local office, subject to c an headquarters review.

elsewhere.

8002220 % 3

V'

, [ll b;);;g[iSG,n ql n

Ronald L. Ballard,;_..f, 4.

The primary bases for the conclusion of dewatering effects approxinately a mile from the plant is the absence.of an aquifer confining layer in the vicinity of the location in question. The USGS, and to my knowledge no noe else, has dada to support such a conclusion. The USGS and.1ational Park Service plan to attempt to verify the assumption in the future (possibly by FY 81).

I recernend that the Pemitteels proposed changes to the monitoring and mitigation program be disapproved. Eurthemore, I reco:nend that I&E monitor construction dewatering activities to assure that the Pemittee adequately meets his CP requirenents, and has not violated reporting require-ments. Finally, as a matter of clarification, I was informed by the Pemittee's representative at the January 31 meeting that anomalies in the Novenber 1979 data supplied to us in support of the Construction Pemit were caused by testing of the mitigation program and by a landslide in the southwest corner of the excavation.

0:*iginal 51 nod)Z L.G.Enl nn L. G. Hulman, Chief Hydrology-Meteorology Branch Division of Site Safety and Environmental Analysis cc:

H. R. Denton R. C. DeYoung H. D. Thornburg, I&E W. E. Kreger W. Regan L. Hubenstein P. Crane, OGC R. P. Geckler S. Goldberg, OELD M. D. Lynch W. H..Hendrickson, Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore W. Bivins ADDRESS FOR HENDRICKSON Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore Route 2, Box 139A Chesterton, Indiana 46304 DS HM8 OFFECE h svANwEh. Ldh

km.

02/08/80 0,,c y, NR F RM 3)$ 9 76) NRC%t 324 D'8 5 GOVE AN"ENT DQtNTING OFFICE: 1979 289 369