ML20054H225

Forwards Comments on Des from State Dept of Ecology & State Parks & Recreation Commission.Testimony Will Be Provided to State Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council During Contested Case for Project

ML20054H225
Person / Time
Site:	Skagit
Issue date:	06/14/1982
From:	Moos D WASHINGTON, STATE OF
To:	Norris J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8206230125
Download: ML20054H225 (7)

Text

o

$ +

(5, DONMD W WXM JOHN SP[llMAN ~

i Ccatrnor ...- Drecor STATE OF WASHNGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Afad Stop PV-Il e Olyrqva, Washalgton 965(M e (2th) 45'HGX)

June 14, 1982 O

f Mr. Jan Norris Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comrniesion Washington D. C. 20555

Dear Mr. Norris:

Thank you for the opportunity to review the draft Environmental Impact Statement for the construction of Skagit/Handord Nuclear Project, Units 1 and 2. We have coordinated the review of this document with other state agencies. The only agency comment letter we received is from the State Parks and Recreation Commission. Their letter is attached. Also attached are the detailed staff comments from the Department of Ecology.

We will also be providing testimony to the State Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council during the contested case for these projects. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Charles Lean, Assistant Attorney General (206) 459-6161) or Mr. Greg Sorlie, Environmental Review Section (206) 459-6016).

Sin e y, g g _ g

/

irector DWM:tf cc: Mr. Charles Lean, Assistant Attorney General o0S Mr. Greg Sorlie, Environmental Review Section 8206230125 820614 PDR ADOCK 05000522 D PDR

CONM_.TS_FROM THE DEPAR*lHENT__OF ECOLOGY Water

1. Pages 4-24 -- 4-25. The FERC requirement of 36,000 cfs is based on cooling water requirements and is not related to protection of instream resources. The Department of Ecology (WDOE) and the various fishery agencies have each provided fish and wildlife- based flow recommendations to the Northwest Power Planning Council. Those flows are in excess of 36,000 cfs. (See attached sheets). While it is too soon to predict the Council's recommendations, there is evidence that flow releases in excess of 36,000 cfs from Priest Rapids may be required during part (or all) of the year.

2. Pages 4-39. The statement is made that "The preliminary use of Columbia River water for 80 km (50 miles)" downstream . . . are irrigation and municipal water supplies. . . This list of " primary uses" is incomplete due to its exclusion of fish utilization. The Hanford Reach is the last unimpounded reach of the mainstem Columbia River and provides the major spawning area for the remnant of the historical natural salmon and steelhead runs. Fishery agencies have repeatedly emphasized to WDOE the importance of maintaining the natural genepool to insure that hatchery fish are not excessively inbred, potentially causing a lack of resistance to disease and other problems. The importance of this reach for saluon production should be discussed in more detail in this statement.

3. Page 4-41. Again in the discussion of downstream water uses, no mention is made of fish and wildlife uses.

4. Pages 4-48. The fact that spawning occurs upstream means that the fish must pass the discharge location. In a stream in which " temperature standards are exceeded during the later summer. . ." (Pages 4-30), the impact of any additional thermal impacts should be carefully evaluated and avoided whenever and wherever possible.

5. Pages 6-1. 6.1.1 (3). This item would best be located under a heading of " Water Resources" instead of " Water Quality."

6. Scheduling of the installation of intake and discharge strpeture should be timed to minimize water quality impacts arising from solids loss and turbidity. The recommendation to relocate the intake / discharge site some 2500-4000 feet downstream should be evaluated (page 4-65).

7. Requirements covering water quality impacts will be included in the site certification agreement and/or NPDES permit. All state water quality standards are expected to be met at the edge of the dilution zone.

8. Aquatic monitoring programs outlined under Section 5 appear to be adequately designed and fairly extensive. The importance of the impingement /

entertainment studies and plume evaluation should be stressed.

SOLID WASTE It is unclear what type of on-site waste disposal methods will be used during construction. Also, a storage and spill contingency plan should be developed for both construction and operational phases.

AIR The air pollution impacts from this proposed project would appear to be relatively small. Although most of the potential impacts are mentioned in the draft EIS, there are two potential impacts that should be considered.

1. Use of any open burning during the construction phase.

2. A possible future short-term nitrogen dioxide standard.

n. If open burning is to be permitted during the construction phase, provisions should be included to minimize emissions and for restricting the time of open burning.

b. Emissions from the standby diesel generators may approach a one hour NO2 standard if and when such a standard is established. The provision for separate tests of the stand-by diesel generators because of S02 impacts may prevent any violation of a short term nigrogen dioxide standard.

c. The draf t EIS notes that fugitive emission controls will be l

used during the construction phase. Since the need for fugitive emission controls will be influenced by localized meteorological conditions,a provision should be included to minimize fugitive emissions by employment of reasonable measures when ordered by EFSEC or a representative of EFSEC during adverse meteorological conditions.

MINIMUM INSTANTANEOUS FLOWS - COLUMBIA RIVER PROJECTS (1,000 cubic feet./second)

WELLS &

ROCKY REACH PRIEST MCNARY & THE GRAND

• ClllEF* ROCK ISLAND RAPIDS JOHN DAY DALLES COULEE JOSEPH & WANAPUM*

10 50 20 20 Jan 10 10 to 50 2t) 20 Feb 50 10 10 50 50 M.i e 20 50 50 70 Apr 1-15 20 30 50 70 10 16-25 20 50 50 70 70 26-30 20 50 50 70 70 May 20 50 50 70 70 June 1-15 20 20 50 50 50 16-30 10 20 50 50 50 Jul 1-15 10 10 50 50 50 50 16-31 50 10 50 50 50 Aug 20 36 50 50 Sep 10 20 36 50 50 Oct 1-15 10 50 50 16-31 10 20 50 10 10 50 50 50 Nov 10 50 20 20 Dec 10 -.

• As providcol in WAC 113-563-050(1), the minimiun inst antancons linws set forth in t his subsci L insi . ire subject to a rcInrtion ut up in twenty-1ive priscast ifnring low Ilow years, except that s ei sio i .ise s.hnti the outIlow Ieom P sent it.spials Dam he l e e.e4 than 'lh,000 eft. Fue Ihe e can h l o om t;r.inil Conlee t hriingh W.ninpum, minimum i n s t .in t u neenits f lows, t.h.e l l be

.i n showes above, os .is necessary to maintain minimum f lowr; ( r.nh,gre t to l low innoll neljutelment ) .it priest Ha p i els , whichever is higher.

Hl N lPltitt avl:RAGl'. !) ail.Y l 1.tNS - C01.1111111 A RIVI.R l'Ito.ll:t:11;

( 1,000 e taleir li et / set e.iul)

IU M:K bl.i.l.S 1. ISl.ANI) 1.H A N O '- fil l F.!' ROCKY b. l'R I F.ST .lollN Till:

( ollt.l.l' .idSl.'l'il '- 10', A Cll .'- WANAl'titl' liAl'llt.*: ?lt'NAR) l'AY liAl.1 f.!:

)in in so 10 lo s.o e en i.o I le to .li lo /o e.O . .i t . .li ti e. in .o to lo e.o a.o i.e Al.s l - l ', '. t l 'o. 40 10 100 14til 1. 'e -

16 ,", t.o e,o ein lo l ', o l *> o i t.o

. t . - 10

'80 t ilo ll0 I[H Poti  ;'H O 801'

11. . , Iou l I'i i to I'40  ;'o . *;* O .<.e s .

I see I - l '. F.o i l fl l10 llH /00  ;' 00 .' 0 0

14. - to e.o t40 Ho Ho I?u l .> 0 I ;'u lut 1-l' s.o Mit 80 ft0 1 'O l .'O l .'o li. il 'lo 100 110 l10 liso 160 140 Acn n'. 'He 9, 4 ", 170 f .> o I ;'o S. p 40 J.o 4n 4n e.u N. on os t I - I 's to l's 40 40 60 H 'i 'to ite Il ~10 $5 40 70 (>0 M5 90 Hi.v 10 10 10 10 (in 60 f0 th i lo .to :10 70 tiu 60 t0 11.. r I li.- s c.si li trom t;r .in.1 Cou l ce L lirongli Wanapum, m i n i minn .i v e r.i r.c el.ii t y f l . .e . . lea l l 1.c .i t .;luiwn .il..,ve , or as tierer:sa r y to m.iint.iin minimum II.ws 4 . ..il p i t to l . . . .. o niil l .sell ut;t ment i .i t l'i n est R.igii els , kle i e lieve t et le i p,fic r . A:: lie ..v i eleil isi kM' l 7'l-56'l-050( l ), t lie m a esimimi .sve rage- it.: i l y f li.ws ?.r e le.e t te i n I lli t. subsci t inii are subjest to. reiliit t i oti e.1 up t ii t weest y- t s ve pri e rnt slut itig low flow yeaes, exrept that in no Case sli.nll Ilu ..usIlok Irom l's n es t R.s p i els l).im ler less Lli.e sa *)6,000 iIs.

,s "~e,

RECEIVED R

KXN SPfllM AN Goverrww 4

, gy } f }98 N T\TTEN

, , . - Drector STATE OF WA9WuTON WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 7150 0eanwaterlane. KY-11 e Olynyia. Wastungton 98504 e (206) 753-575S May 13, 1982 35-2650-1820 DEIS - Related to the Construction of Skagit/Hanford fluclear Project, Units 1 and 2 (E-2361)

Barbara Ritchie NEPA Coordinator Department of Ecology PV-11

Dear Ms. Ritchie:

The staff of the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission has reviewed the above-noted document and does not wish to make any coment.

Thank you for the opportunity to review and coment.

Sincerely, d

David W. Heiser, E.P., Chief Environmental Coordination sh l

l l

l

-o- ,

r

~_, _ _ . - - .

- St J Washington

.fg ,,+ John Spenman, Governor g(9Q .:d7~ . .7,,7

&y<,  : p,- . r. -r ..:

"h

,.~

DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY I J'W h .4

, . , /d OiN !:

g.,,, gg g3 gg ,{(g ,,3 .

'O, Is ,v 9 -S

• lb@m t .._ __:

Mr. Jan Norris Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington D. C. 20555

• ---wg 9

4.$

S

/