ML20058K562
| ML20058K562 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 07/17/1972 |
| From: | Byerly T AGRICULTURE, DEPT. OF |
| To: | Muller D US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9102120489 | |
| Download: ML20058K562 (3) | |
Text
e
'\\
5'i
[tt'. 4 g
DFPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 4
's 8
1 orrict or tsc srcRcTAny WASHIN GTON. D. C. 2025o 50-263 l %.
July 17, 1972 J, a 2.
\\
i' Mr. Daniel R. Muller Assistant Director for Environmental Projects Directorate of Licensing
~
Atocic Energy Commission Washington, D. C.
20545
Dear Mr. Muller:
We have had the draft environmental statement for the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 1, reviewed in the relevant agencies of the Department of Agriculture.
Comments of the Soil Conservation Service and the Forest Service, both agencies of the Department, are enclosed.
Sincerely,,.
f
]
/7 Q't.i dt T. C. BYERLY Assistant Direct r Science and Edue tion Enclosures 91021204e9 7po737 CF ADOCK 05C00263 ie-CF b
l
The Soil Conservation Service statenent on Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, Northern States Power Cor:pany, Minn.
The draft environmentdLstatement for the project appears to be a very thorough document. We are glad to learn a systen of nonitoring the effect of the thernal pollution is underway. It appears to us a qualified research agency could nake a valuable contribution in the direction and interpretation of the monitoring. We are especially concerned about the effect the increased water temperature night have on animal and plant life in the river.
m i
f12 i
.;< t '-
6,-
s.
e soc m-
o 5
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRIGULTURE i
FOREST SERVICE
/
4 Re: Draft Environmental Statement s;,,
~
Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant i
a
_ As you requested we have reviewed the subject statement relating to the conversion of a provisional operating license granted to the I
Norchern States Power Company to an operating license for the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant.
The plant site is located on the Mississippi River about 3 miles northwest of the town of Monticello in Wright County, Minnesota.
The statement indicates that 220 acres of land uas removed from agriculture use as a result af plant construction. The statement does not report how much land was used for transmission lines.
In each case we believe the statement should provide the acreage of woodland that was cleared.
Environmental considerations involved in the location, construction, and maintenance of the transmission lines are presented. Houever, the statement does not discuss methods used for disposal of waste vegetation cleared from land acquired for new lines. The question could be asked--is Northern States utilizing non air polluting practices alternative to open burning in disposing of vegetation cleared from rights-of-usy?
On page V-32, reference is made to the environmental radiction monitoring progrce which is also well described in the supplemental environmental report. Houever, v^
recommend that provisions for smolementing the monitoring program be made more clear.
6 l
t 9
l