ML20074A789

Memorandum Supporting West Valley Agricultural Protection Council,Inc Supplemental Motion for Declaration That NEPA Analysis Inadequate & for Continuance.No Attempt Made to Identify/Analyze Salt Drifts.W/Certificate of Svc

ML20074A789
Person / Time
Site:	Palo Verde
Issue date:	05/06/1983
From:	Berlin K BERLIN, ROISMAN, KESSLER & CASHDAN, WEST VALLEY AGRICULTURAL PROTECTION COUNCIL, INC.
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
NUDOCS 8305160080
Download: ML20074A789 (6)

Text

,, .

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of ) e, ,

) '/ -

ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY ) Docke Nos. STN 50-529 (Palo Verde Nuclear Generating ) p? } %r V\ 50-530 Station, Units 2 and 3) ) cj g

WEST VALLEY AGRICULTURAL PROTECTION COUNCIL,' INC. ' S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION FOR DECLARATION THAT NEPA ANALYSIS IS INADEQUATE AND FOR CONTINUANCE OF PROCEEDINGS In the course of discovery in this proceeding, West Valley Agricultural Protection Council, Inc. (" West Valley") has asked numerous interrogatories designed to elicit data concerning the amount and effects of salt deposition on crops grown in the vicinity of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station ("PVNGS").

These interrogatories directly relate to West Valley's claim that the environmental analyses performed in connection with licensing PVNGS fail to meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA"), 42 U.S.C. 4331 et. seq. The recently received responses from Joint Applicants to West Valley's First Set of Interrogatories provide further reinforcement as to the limited analysis of salt drift and its impacts undertaken by Joint Applicants and the NRC Staf f. The absence of additional data in the responses beyond the sparse analysis previously set forth in the Environmental Reports (ER) and Statements (EIS) is striking and I

highly relevant to the Board's decision on West Valley's pending Motion. West Valley therefore has submitted its Supplemental Motion to bring these further indicia of inadequate NEPA analyses to the Board's attention 8305160000 830506 a PDR ADOCK 05000529 O PDR =

L

2 The following examples are representative of the unavailability of further illumination concerning salt drift from Joint Applicants' interrogatory answers:

West Valley's First Set of Interrogatories, Nos. 15 and 16, sought Joint Applicants' view as to the completeness of the environmental evaluation of salt drift quantity and deposition patterns and any citations to the Environmental Reports, Statements or the record demonstrating complete consideration of salt drift quantities and patterns. In answer (No. 16), Joint Applicants could identify only:

1) ER-CP, figure 3.3-1

2) ER-OL, figure 3.3-11/

Then, in answer to an interrogatory asking for documents concerning choice of the " FOG" model to describe salt drift deposition patterns, Joint Applicants identified none (No. 22).

Yet the ability of that model to predict salt drift deposition rates under PVNGS conditions plainly should have been addressed in any full environmental reports.

Interrogatory No. 29A requests information concerning Joint Applicants' monitoring program, including plans to monitor spray and evaporation pond salinities and salt particle emissions from the cooling towers and ponds. Joint Applicants responded:

1/ The relevant portions of West Valley's First Set of Interrogatories and Joint Applicants' responses is attached as Exhibit 1.

l 3 l l

"a) (ii) and (iii). There are no plans to monitor salinity of the spray ponds and evaporation ponds for the purpose of determining drift salinity, b) (i) , (ii) and (iii). There are no plans to implement a monitoring program to monitor drif t mass or drift droplet size distribution or the size and quantity of salt particles emitted from the cooling towers, spray ponds or evaporation ponds" (emphasis added).

Interrogatories No. 33 and 35 ask whether Joint Applicants have considered or are considering water desalinization as a salt drift mitigation strategy. Joint Applicants responded that they had never considered such a strategy.

Similarly, in response to interrogatories No. 37 and 39, Joint Applicants state that they have not in the past considered nor are they at present considering blowdown treatment or water recirculation as salt drift mitigation strategies.

Development of careful maintenance programs is essential to continue satisfactory performance of drift elimination systems.

Yet when asked to describe the maintenance plans for PVNGS (No. 47), Joint Applicants responded that they have no such plans as yet.

Interrogatory No. 51 asked for the identities of individuals connected with the project with knowledge of alternative cooling tower drift elimination systems. Joint Applicants state that no one with NUS, Bechtel, or even APS itself, had such knowledge, identifying only individuals at Marley, the cooling tower vendor.

The answer to Interrogatory No. 52 acknowledges that Joint Applicants had been involved in no studies of PVNGS area crop

t ., ,

4 salt tolerances before completion of the Environmental Statement--

Operating License; Joint Applicants further acknowledge (in answer to Interrogatory No. 55) that their only information on such tolerances is set forth in the ER-CP, Section 5.4.2, and its accompanying reference No. 35.

These examples suggest that Joint Applicants have not and do not take the " serious environmental issue" (Memorandum and Order of December 30, 1982 at 13) seriously at all. Since the NRC staff has come forward with no additional data on salt deposition beyond that set forth in the ER and EIS, we can only assume there is nothing the Joint Applicants and NRC staff can add at this point to cure the EIS deficiencies. It appears that apart f rom the newly initiated Crop Study sponsored by Joint Applicants, no attempts have been made to identify and analyze salt drift amounts, patterns, and effects in any meaningful fashion.

West Valley therefore urges that the Board address the

paucity of data on this important environmental issue by ruling that the NEPA analysis on PVNGS was inadequate and that these proceedings should be continued until those defects are remedied.

Respectfully submitted, Dated:

Kenneth Berlin Attorney for Intervenor West Valley Agricultural Protection Council, Inc.

2550 M Street, N.W.

Washington, D. C. 20037 (202) 429-8501

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA W

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION gqU BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICE NG BOAAD g aa,. + 3 .

) .3 c . d Ig In the Matter of ) h t, A 3 k1 3

) '.- ,"

ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY ) Docket'Nos.g. STN ' 29

)

' .- f.y50-530 (Palo Verde Nuclear Generating ' '

)

Station, Units 2 and 3) )

)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing Motion for Modification of Discovery Schedule and Memorandum in Support and Supplemental Motion for Declaration That NEPA Analysis Is Inadequate and For Continuance of Proceedings and Memorandum in Support have been served upon the following noted persons by deposit in the United States mail, properly addressed and with postage prepaid:

Robert M. Lazo, Esq., Chairman Warren Platt, Esquire Administrative Judge Snell & Wilmer Atomic Safety & Licensing Board 3100 Valley Center U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm. Phoenix, Arizona 85073 l Washington , D.C. 20555 I Ms. Lee Hourihan Dr. Richard F. Cole 6413 S. 26th Street Administrative Judge Phoenix, Arizona 85040

, Atomic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm. Docketing and Service Section Washington, D.C. 20555 Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

Dr. Dixon Callihan Washington, D.C. 20555 Administrative Judge Union Carbide Corporation P. O. Box Y Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830

_ 203 -

Lynne Bernabei, Esquire Edwin J. Reis, Esquire The Institute for Policy Studies Office of the Exec. Legal Dir.

1901 Q Street, N.W. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

Washington, D.C. 20009 Washington, D.C. 20555 Rand L. Greenfield Lee Scott Dewey, Esquire Assistant Attorney General Office of the Exec. Legal Dir.

P. O. Drawer 1508 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.

Sante Fe, New Mexico 87504-1508 Washington, D.C. 20555 Arthur Gehr, Esquire Snell & Wilmer 3100 Valley Center Phoenix, Arizona 85073

" ~ "

Dated: ~' /9 * ~" / -

Geri L. Kelly Secretary to:

Kenneth Berlin Attorney at Law Suite 500 2550 M Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20037 (202) 429-8501 Attorney for Petitioner i

West Valley Agricultural Protection Council, Inc.

l l

l I

_ _ _. .__ ____