ML19331A355
| ML19331A355 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 08/20/1971 |
| From: | Lowenstein R CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.), LOWENSTEIN, NEWMAN, REIS, AXELRAD & TOLL |
| To: | Goodman C, Hall D, Murphy A Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8007160922 | |
| Download: ML19331A355 (3) | |
Text
.
~
~. '. ~..
^~
c3 DUCKET NUMbtg e-n" q
esoa. a wn, Is,5 -Wt 30 v
LAW OFFICES LOWENSTEIN. AND NEWMAN 1100 CONNECTICUT AVENUC. N. W.
4 D
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036 202 ass-7ses
" j,* ",,', ' *'",',"
c' ugust 20,1971 g
,g 4
g
\\\\
. n = ~e c.suanruan ya 19 i
~S 9-
\\
i AUG231971y g m n e, s.==
9 PIM8
- HL"48 g
g CTR-
/
6 4
col to Arthur W. Murphy, Esq., Chairman Dr. Clark Goodman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Professo-of Physics Columbia University School of Law University of Houston Box 38, 435 West 116th Street 3801 Cullen Boulevard New York,New York 10027 Houston, Texas 77004 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS Dr. David B. Hall Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory POOR QUAUTY PAGES P.O. Box 1663 Los Alamos, New Mexico 87544 In the Matter of Consumers Power Company Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-329 and 50-330 Gentlemen:
Our. letter of August 18, 1971 made reference to the AEC's Interim Guidance on Modification in Appl'icant's Environmental Reports and indicated that a copy was enclosed.
A review of our. file indicates that copies of'the Interim Guidance document were, however, inadvertently omitted in the transmittal.
Accordingly, enclosed is a copy of the referenced document.
Respectfully, U
'tAA -
(f[@
LOWENSTEIN AND EWMAN Attorneys for Applicant Consumers Power Company I
8007160 @ g n
osure cc:
William J. Ginster, Esq.
James N. O'Connor, Esq.
James A. Kendall, Esq.
Myron M. Cherry, Esq.
Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.
Algie A. Wells, Esq.
Thomas F. Engelhardt, Esq.
Stanley T. Robinson, Esq.
Irving Like, Esa.
___.__ __._ ___M__ilton R. Wessel, Esq. -
/
y DOCKET NUMBER t
h**l S
Wah N & UIE fE US ~~32' inn 6 97 AUG2 31971 *.q August 4,1971 i
TNd.Eg l
enen -
g CAD r3 INTERIM CUIDANCE ON MODIFICATION IN APPLICANT'S ENVIRONM g,
REPORTS AND AEC STATEMENTS UNDER NEPA in its decision of " July 23, 1971, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in litigation involving the Calvert Cliffs nucicar power plant. directed the Atomic Energy Commission to revise in several respects its rules implementing the National Environmental Policy The Commission is presently preparing appropriate regula-The Commission will be reeval.
Act of 1969.
tions' to. implement the Court's decision.
uneing the NEPA environmental statements previously issued in connection with its licensing activitics and those in preparation in order to prepare supplemental NEPA statements which meet the requirements of the Court In the meantime applicants for construction permits and decision.1/
operating licenses for nuelcar facilitics should revicu their environmental reports previously submitted in light of the Court decision and develop supplemental information, where indicated, to conform to the Court decision In this regard the " Guide to the Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Plants" which the AEC issued for interim use and comment in February 1971 should be carefully followed.
be given to the following in your review.
~
Complete information aust he included on thernal and other effects of the facility with respect to water quality as discussed in Sections 1.
2.3.2, 2.3.3, 2.3.4, 2.3.5 and 2.3.6 of the Draf t Guide.
In those cases where once thru cooling is proposed, alternative lined methods of heat dissipation (including costs) must be discussed as out 2.
in Section 2.5, Paragraph 4, of the Draft Guide.
The completeness of information on environmental effects of the facility such as land use compatibility (Section 2.3.1 of the Draft Guide 3.
d be aesthetics (Section 2.3.9 of the Draft Guide), and recreation shoul reviewed and all reicvant information included.
A detailed analysis of the need for power which will be generated subject to licensing must be included in each environ-4.
Alternative methods of.
in the nuclear unit mental report (Section 2.1 of the Draf t Guide).
h ld generating the power as discussed in Section 2.5 of the Draf t Guide s l
be discussed and analyzed.
J i
January 1,'
-- Interim guidance for holders of operating licenses issued s nce 1/
1970, will be issued at a later dape.
9 e
G r -,, -,,.
~,.*,--3
O
)
. 4 2 --
5.
In the Court decision, there is a discussion of the cost-benefit balancing which must be carried out in each detailed statement issued by the AEC.
To assist the AEC in making this balance, detailed information should be provided on the need for the power produced at the facility subject to licensing, any significant environmental impact incurred in producing the power and the alternatives availabic (including cost) for reducing or avoiding' the environmental impact.
The differences in the balance between benefits and environmental impact of the various alternatives identified above should bu discussed t.nd analys:ed.
O e
4 e
4 e
G e
6 e
4 e
l s
l e
G G
e 4
e 8
e 4
e a
w
. - ~ - - - -,
- - -.... -,.