ML20083A007
| ML20083A007 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 12/15/1983 |
| From: | Sugarman R DEL-AWARE UNLIMITED, INC., SUGARMAN & ASSOCIATES |
| To: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8312200127 | |
| Download: ML20083A007 (30) | |
Text
_ -. . _ __ _
Dyv r ,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA f1~
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of )
) . _ . .
Philadelphia Electric Company ) Docket No. 50-352-OL
) 50-353-OL (Limerick Generating Station, )
Units 1 and 2 )
REQUEST FOR LATE FILED CONTENTIONS Intervenors, Del-AWARE et al. request the admission of late filed contentions, as follows:
v-30 The Commission's draft environmental impact statement discloses an inadequate and inappropriate reliance on findings of the DRBC with respect to adequacy of water, which are totally inconsistent with that agency's 1983 statements in the Interstate Water Management Plan, and in the staff analyses regarding the enlargement of reservoirs in the system, as well as the relaxation of the salinity standard.
These documents show, contrary to the staff analysis, that there is a shortage of water in the Delaware River, and l thereby undermine the basis for granting j water to a facility which is not needed.
- At the same time, no analysis has been -
- made as to the need for the facility.
v-31 The staff's analysis of the impacts of the diversion on the east branch of the Perkiomen is totally inadequate and fails to discucs the information that has become available since 1973, for example, in the Environmentdl Hearing Board and PUC hearings regarding the proposed diversion.
v-32 The action of the Bucks County commissioners on November 18, 1983, in passing the ordinance, with the intent, inter alia, of implementing the results of the referendum of May 18, 1983, B312200127 831215 PDR ADOCK 05000352 Q PDR e
z
i .
- calling for a halt to the project, and the action of the Bucks County Common Pleas Court on December 6, 1983, denying applicants Motion for Preliminary Injunction which would have barred the Commissioner from any implementation of the ordinance, demonstrates that the applicant has no available supplemental cooling water system, and therefore no prospect of operating the plant properly. It further demonstrates that the operating impacts of the diversion as a whole should be regarded as attributable to the operation of the facility, and that construction impact should be so attributable as well, since the applicant's motion makes it clear that there would be no pumping station facility were it not for the applicant's alleged damages.
- 2. The bases of these contentions, respectively, are as follows:
v-30 DRBC staff analyses of proposals for reservoirs, EPA and DRBC staff analysis of relaxation of salinity standards, all issued between July and September, 1983.
v-31 Testimony of Messrs. Phillippe, Kaufmann, Beemer, Steacy, Tourbier before the Pennsylvania PUC and Environmental Hearing Board.
v-32 Ordinance and Opinion.
- 3. Justification for present date of filing (applicable to all three proposed contentions): The facts alleged in these proposed contentions were all discovered subsequent to the Board closing the record on the supplemental cooling water contentions. To the extent that they were available, they were brought to the Board's
g t-attention prior to its ruling of March 8, 1983. That ruling determined that the matters at issue had been finally determined, and would not be subject to relitigation. That appeared to foreclose all further oppcrtunity for consideration of these matters before the . Licensing Board, and accordingly, intervenors have sought to address them before the Appeal Board. However, at oral argument on December 5, 1983 the Appeal Board suggested that these matters might be further litigable before the Licensing Board by way of late filed contentions, notwithstanding the Licensing Board's decision, and statement that its ruling was final and not relitigable, and apparently notwithstanding that the matter appears to be cut of the jurisdiction of the Licensing Board by reason of the appeal'.
In order not to be further trapped by the impenetrably obscure procedures of the NRC, intervenors therefore file these contentions at this time, so that they will not be deemed to hav'e waived them in the event they might be presented after action on the previous Partial Interim Decision. .
i 4.
Need for intervenors to litigate these is.eues: the i
need is obvious. The Board is well aware of the staff's refusal to consider or develop any issues contrary to the
! interest of the applicant, and to intervenors' knowledge, l applicant has not even given f
the Board notice of the
{
enactment of the Ordinance, much less of the DREC action.
l l
l L
~.
- Staff took no notice of these actions, despite their having been raised to the staff and to the Appeal Board.
- 5. Prejudice: The prejudice, if any, is to the intervenors, who once more have to relitigate issues which under this Commission's mandate, the staff and respectfully, this Board and other Commission organs are statutorily obliged to look into. Instead, intervenors have been required to expend valuable personal and private resources in trying to do the job of the Commission.
- 6. Intervenor believes that resolution of the foregoing issues is absolutely essential to the appropriate and responsible discharge of this Commission's responsibilities.
- 7. Intervenors are not aware of any requirement that documentation be attached to requests for contentions, and further believe that the Board has not so required previously. Nevertheless, as surplusage, in anticipation of tne claim of failure to provide basis, intervenors attach hereto copies of the Bucks County ordinance, the Court's Opinion denying PECo's Motion for Preliminery Injunction, the DRBC staff analyses referred to, and EPA's comments on i the DES to the staff of August 15, 1983. If there is further documentation l
l l
l t
- required, intervenors respectfully request that they be advised of such documentation before the Eoard acts.
Respectfully submitted, g
5] < l ~~ s ,
N ROBERT J. SUGARMAN Counsel for Intervenors Del-AWARE Unlimited, Inc.
Of Counsel:
SUGARMAN & DENWORTli 121 South Broad Street Suite 510 Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 546-0162 Date: December 15, 1983 0
e j'
l I - - - . - - .
y ca.= _e 64 h % J ev se e. ,a ORD N ANCE NO. 59 AN ORDlh ANCE S!CNIFYING THE INTENTIONS OF BUCNS COUNTY TO ACQUIRE THE PitOJECTS OF THE NESHAMINY WATER RESOURCES AUT!!ORITY UNDER THE PROV:SIONS OF THE f.1UNICIPal)TY AUTHORITIES ACT OF 1945.
f;1: IT ENACTED AND ORDAISED by the ::caid o' Ocur.ty Cornminners of Bucks C~ nty, Pensylvcma. AND IT IS HEREBY ENACTED AND CRDAINED by the cuth rity of the E:rd of Cern n!rsioners as fcMews:
Sectien 1. On &ne 13, Itss, by Ordir:ance No.11 of Bus.s Cr.nty, the E::rd of Cemrnin c 'rs cf Bucks County, Pennsylvania estab!!shed a mur.!cipal cuthority under the prov nns of the Municipality Authorities Act of !!45 f;et of f.::y 2,1945, P.I M2, F.s r. mended) known as the Neshaminy Wr.ter Resources Authority.
Section 2. The initicI projects which the Neshaminy Water Resources Authority reas authrized to undertake included: to acquire, build, construct, imp.ove, maintain ed e; crate, cwn, lease, either in the capacity of lessor or lessee, flood control projects, low head darns, water wcrks, water supply works, water distribut on systern, Ickes and oppurtenant parks, recreation grounds end facilities.
Secti 3. The Nes5arniny Wat*r Rercurces .'.u'hr,rity was < riginally create 1 by the Eveks County Cernrnissioners in part because of then appli able :imits on long-
[ term borrowing by a County, which limits could be lawfully evaded >y the crestion of a municip! nuthority.
Scetion 4. Since the time when the Nesharniny Water Re ources i.uthority was w;;cnized, changes in epplicable law, including the Local Gover . ment Unit Debt Act, 1.2ve occurred which rnake any bor owings of the Meshaminy 6ater Resources Authority a part of the stated end acknowledged deM of t$a Cou ,y of Bucks, thereby elim .eting cne of the u!ginal purposes for which the Neshaminy 'fater Rese' rces Authority was crcutcd.
hetica 5. The Ncshaminy Water Resources /.uthority has est-tl:3hed es its first
,:Qct the constr"etien and acquisition of facilities for the control cf fMods, develop-ent of water resources, the conservation of soil, and assistence to secreatirn. Ir. eluding
- n 12 v.quisitien of reservcirs fer the parrrses of water supp*.y end r o<: tcnt.ol :nd the construction of one or more intokes cnd pumping stctiens to take
- tcr fro
- n t':e Cel ware Riser, and the construction of parks ord recreational facilities Mfning curie.in cf the reservoirs. The project, subsequent to its initial design has
- u.9 i d to .:xtude construction of a water trestrnent plant and cerinin pumping
- 'bS f. . c% .cd water.
? - -
/ , ,
~
r ./
Section 6.
The project, as underteken by the Neshnminy deter Resources A !:rsty, is either completed or contracts hLve been awarded which are a substantial step to.md co:r.pletion of the project.
Section 7.
Bucks County now desires to acquire the project, pursuant to Sect!on
- l(A) cf t!.c Municipality Authorities Act.
Secticn 8.
The reasons for Bucks Cour.ty's !ntentien to acgire the project
- 1:'e the reults of n referendum gestion on the May 17, 1983 primary bal:ot, ths urr s c f the Bucks Ctanty Commissioners over the terrns of certain contracts which 1
@rc the issuan;e of bonded debt for a Icnger term than is thought possible or
- r.c
- icn.,
a,ud their desire to have direct control o[er the terms and financial lepect i
t' the p;ojcet.
Scetion 9.
Bucks County assumes all of the obligations, contracts, assets. and
- =hich cf the Neshaminy ifater Resources Authority with respect to the project.
-d tt.e per.per officers of tie County are authorized and directed to take such actions Art execute such documents es are necessary to assume all ob!igations incurred in connection
- th the project.
Section 10. All t,onded indebtednta previously incu'rred by the Nesha:niny ifater
.~. css rccs icthority shall, upon adoption of this Ordinance, be secured by the full faith
- c cret:st of the County of F Jcks.
I Section !!. All ordinances and resolutions, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith k
o hcreby repealed or rescinded.
L*lLY FiiESENTED AND ENACTED at a meeting of the Board of Comre!ssioners re Oc.uty of $seks Pennsylvania, held the
- day of , 1983.
- cst:
Elaine P. ZetticR, Chairrnan W C I.E r-! Cicrk ' r.
A crew L.14;; n
- 7. *.}
\ Cirl'C'W.^: ~
Board of County Commissioners i
L l
l I
k t
y .
/ ,a-I
/ ; _, Me r s
. ' ' 'i U .'!I L O $ I A li C 3 -
. I
' . .,'[
3 Dr A N D . .' . u , T 5'#Eiii FHIL A DE L FH; A. f:C *. '. 5Y C A b * ' 25 f..' l ? .". , t.
. 93 Dr. Eajerier Auluck, P.E., P r o j C-C t "333O?r>
Of fi ce of 'uci car Ec-ctor 7, aletion U.S. Nucl e a r Eegul a t or y Co.- -i s . i cn h'ashington, D.C. 20555
Dear Dr. Aul ock :
EPA has compl eted its review of the draft EI S for operation of the Lirerick Generating Station, as recuired under Section 3C9 of the C] can Air Act. In general, the document is acceptable with certain excepticns enumerated in the attached t e ch n i cal corrents. As a result of the review, the draft EIS is rated EK-2, which r.e a n s that the environmental reservations are related to insuf fi ci ent i n f or a.a t i on . Tne attached' sheet d es cr ibes i.h e rating systec used by 'PA and is enc 1csed for your i n for ma t i on .
In late 1980 and early 1981, the EPA EIS review staff met with the DRBC and PaDER several times to clarify environmental issues related to the Neshaminy Creek Wa t e r sh ed Plan and Water Supply Plan. Tne issues discussed had been raised in a letter to DRBC, dated September 26, 1980, and supplemented in subsecuent meetings. Tne issues included analysis of flows, population and water use projections, water conservation controls, and the r ela tionship of the Philadelphia Electric Company needs (described in Docket No. 79-52-CP) as it relates to components of th e NWRA watershed and water supply plans.
These meetings resolved our technical concerns regarding the K4EA portion of the diversion proposal and resulted i r. our ,
conclusion that the potent i al bene fi ts t o be derived from the diversion, as claimed in the various Dock e t s , far outweighed any pot ential adverse impacts. Tn i s is the position EPA took in a letter dated February 17, 1981 to Governor Tribbet of Delaware, who was then the U.S. Commissioner of DR30.
The majority of the following comments are concerned with radiation and cooling water with regard to its sources and receiving streams. In some cases the radiation information is incomple t ely addr essed while in other places it is present-ed in a way that is confusing to th e reader. Tne major d e fi ci enci es regarding radiation are: a) treatment of EPA standards, b) a lack of information on postulated accidents, and c) a lack of information on decommissioning.
e.**
- k %
+
-u y
. T.f. N ical C. - wa t s fadiation Concerns:
, } A most important concern is the treatment of the -:P A standards for the uranium fuel cycle given in 40 CFR 190. These standards are f3eet.ingly addressed on pages 5-38 and 5-48, 49.
The standards are incomp3etely described and are addr essed only by the vague statement that "under normal cperatiens the Limerick facility is capable of cp2 rating within these standards." This statement does not state whether or not the plant actually will oper a t e wi thi n the stand +rds, and :aor e importantly only a part of the standezd is referenced by the DEIS. At t a ched .i s a copy of 40 CFR 190 for your information.
In a careful study of the DEIS, we have found that inforcation is supplied on pages 5-64 and D9-Dil which rosy be compared to the EPA standard, but the information is not presented in an understandable format and there is some questien as t o wh e th er the standard for release of' krypton-SS will be met. The EPA standards should be directly and ecmpletely addressed in the EIS in tabular form so that projected relcases may be directly comp 3 red to the standard. The standard is a ppl i ca bl e only to normal operations.
In addition, there is a lack of information on pos tula t ed accidents and on th e radwaste sys+em. On pages 5-61 it is stated that NRO's review of the utility's probabilistic risk assessment has not yet been completed and "will be f a ct or ed
, into the NRO staff's analysis . . . to fulfill the requirement of this section of the DES." The radwaste issues are to be addressed in Chapter 11 of the SER. Both of these issues are an integral part o f th e environmental impacts of the plant and should be consi6ered as a part of the NEPA process. No final EIS should be issued before th es e issues are reviewed by EPA and supplemental comments provided to NRC.
As a final note on th e radiological portion o f th i. s review, th e ,
impacts of decommissioning are only briefly mentioned in passing. At least a general order of magnitude of these impacts should be discussed, th ough specific numerical estimates of the impacts are probably not yet availabJe.
Hydrology and Cooling Water:
Information presented in the document regarding hydrology i s in agreement with information available to the EPA technical staff. However, some serious questions have been raised over the cooling wa ter sources and uses.
e
7 -
. !. .d in
. / c :s are 2 s i . . .: # . . . , ; r. ' . <:- .e i t ' . : . -
P. .; ; 10 i
,1 i' fi. n .' c a t-1? 4 .1 a . ..I .1 : 1 a 4.7.4
' '. . s r . Of < 'li, M ? co is n * *'.e D.. )
2; -)
,. .i'i ': n: 31 r . ' a .f
- 6 .Y D w i l l he d i . .> t t .. d t o T. i 'e r i ' k -
W"c 'r r a i:. i ..of
- Thble 4.1 shcws a n.a x i mu .r. Llow of 3) :*GD f t .' m the 20ld"310/
Fe r ki c:T.e n . This apparent inconsistency should be explained.
ficm P39e 4-12 indica t es a maximum Perkicnen i s expected. !iowever, wi thisthdrawal does not r ate r.atch of 41. 9 .':0D with the maxii um flow of 46 ".GD diverted to Limerick, as S t a t ed On i .iG 4-10, nor does it match the flows in Table 4.1 for the Tarkie.en. .igain the apparent incensi st e ncy d euid be explained.
These inconsistencies ray be serious, with i;plicaticns reaching from operation of the Point Pi c a r .: n t <iiversions all ,
the way to the range These of possible could impact effects theupon 3radshaw the final reservoir, receiving stream.
the East Branch of the Perkiomen Creek, the Perkiomen Creek, the Schuylkill at the confluence with the Perkiomen, and downstream.
Section 4.2.4 should detail the current mod thconditions o r ou g ETyof-'tMn those is streamsPer to receive diversion example, virtually nothing isorincluded water regarding done. the ficod plain, end the ccnditions of the riparian habitat in chapter 5 no mention is made of the effects under extreme He agree that conditions, e.g., high flows of short duration.
diverted water will result in negligible effects most of the time and furthermore will probably havebebeneficial should t ho r oughly ef expl_a fects i,ned.
ecologically. Tiov e v e r , ext _remes
! In addition, very little i s it.e n't i o'rdd regaroing N s.~ effects of
~~
~
the_eny,i_r cinT5b~nTa1 miiTi ea t ions o f f76ws~ 4 t o--25 Ti die s~n or rna1.
You have included they information are well L'r3E fToUs within the are-below erosion the hichest limits, but flows and that should go beyond merely the water quality conditions.
disclosure ~
The answers are probably available and deserve inclusion, if only by reference. .
In addition, no mention is made of the effects the Pennsylvania If only Public Utility Commission decision regarding unit two.
one unit.is ever operated, what are the implications for the cooling water budget both from the Point Pleasant diversion and the Schuylkill? Since this possibility has been disr egar ded, we have no way of estimating any aquatic impacts.that Ifmay only one result f rom dif f ering operational configurations.
unit is ever brought on-line, In this alternative case, diversion sources ofof cooling water into water may be available.
the East Branch of the Perkiomen may be unnecessary.
d
' ' ^ ~
+ - - , e g , . - , - ,., ,,.wa ,--e
= --.mn --.v- ,. --- -
.^**
. :s y..- t i o f t h e c w: .s t ' c.N. t p S . i n .2 ,t. 3 in f*. . -
acd with the o n e o f r .s *
"at. : .m
- .t c
. f., -
- 2 "e
- et.d Morrill Creek faci)i:v.
- 4 ; t i e .!1 y , all l' e
, r a:f i fi ca t ions o f thi s ar e unknc.en',
releases fr om that facility will ::, ebut that facility is it :, e ; r:s a ppa r . :, t th$t
) d .:.c be n c e h d .
necessary for the s ucessful cp*rotion U:S th+n what 3cwe.ct, if t he "errill cr eekconting2ncy has been ; 1 :c. n e d in C.2 of the 07;n fr. ant s app:5 a r fheility is precluded? rnis as - ent thrit 2:
's the 2 23 aware. to be crucial to future aat2r 'I'M ell as other l a. ty 'n .
.T.: oleling' i '. . e r.alinity
. c. a
. t inivrthe.aDM craterof2a.
ti on ware, ir.diesc i t es that: :"rw t i n u i.s-- . n..g. to update
..s eial._ly w i t h--.r e c S_: 6 W ihe-cbject3ve for___Olel e m we cp2 rat 2 c .a1 2000 is understand it, the latest s a l :._n a t.y . . _ _
~~ci;v er s i on s .
. odes o*
M e t i ng a,e ;O rgtpoundsen yrcu hi_c i_s): '. a u nj e r eu t :sr e r) t and configura tion of tnese projectsApca r ently a need ex_ iers t'it sc..a objective. t ol a d iiist-~
alternatives Aside :o ac~nseve th e salinity I
. examine th e = , still to consider and quite aDF3C h a s a plethora of from the fact that few years i
part of the Point the d e ma ndu r b.y._Lir e r i ck_.a r e to develop and co an t.
P ] e a s a.n t certainly a T._rre c-r nth ene s adeliberations overairc th esi son. 2-ad.s_e r t. .a i n.. . . t.o. . _b e aarefore, l i n s.
a 3 i n i .t. y 3 r r u e .__.
plant . . _ -
future may effectare related and the overall basin' sty 2ssue and'op_..2 r a t ,i .
Sections 5.3 or 5.3.2.3the operation of the Limerick water budget into the p) ant.
salinity expected f r om and the EIS should should in clincl ud eude di scussions regardin.g the LGS as well asthe various operationalinformation on the impacts 4
con fi gura t i ons , both for An apparent for the dans and diversions.
4.3.2.1 inconsistency exists stated that (p.no 4-3)changes and 5.3.2.2 (p. 5-2). in statements under Section occured while on page 5-3in the overall scheme In theforfi water rs t case it is the design have taken place. it is stated that several changes use has in changes have been made Tn e reviewers tions, however no informationto a ccommoda t e waassume t e r cuali.implica-that ty these is presented to tell why s uch '
changes f or wha t appea were rne,cessary and why such drastic to be incremental i rnpr ove men t efforts s. were needed hand, i mpr ovperhaps er en t s than these aredesign efforts have been On the other document e >.pr e s s ed . made for larger r
! should discuss design changes discarded If this is so, then'the and why.
O e
.m , . . , _ , , - - - ~ , , _ . . . _ .e 4,-m, - - - . - - . - . - - . . . _ _ . _
- . .-= *
\ e 1 , . > u '
,,e *
- 'ei 51 i a * '
. .t ._ ..
.i: . .
cf :f e f .; t i t- 2,...:. .it ly d ' t i. n is t ?. . e . w i . .. t 1; p: ovi r,g the Ic-er putt. ion o f
- . i e Etst ' ranch.
, In !ectirn 5.3.2.3, cyr a t. i c n o f t.h b d i v e r s i on and its e nv i t on ..'n t a l t f f e c t. s are d i :.cu s sed .
It is t.c.d c r s t e ad tha t crece the diver s ion o f w.s t er to 1.imerich i s bc ,;.:n the f i c.t3 wilI b2 a i n t a i n..d ;o that, x t. r e e.c s in fl uct.u t t ion of wa ter 10 VI'I s in th e s t r e a :s used for div.:rsion will b? woi ded . ~2cu m r, ao nantion is .-Ide of how the diversion wi!1 he o,Serat.ed uo t '- 'i t flesh fic:!s r ecul ting f r c m. ; hor t duraticn/high inte- si ty s tumsw. ll :,ot be. .exscerbat.d. . There may be no.c r: e nor ec5c~ir n h e r e , but s c.m e .i t t e n t. i c n should be p id t o th e possibilit.y, e s.e.e c i a ll y in l i :h t of'the lack o f r i .ca r. i a.q habitat along th e s t r e n:s o f th e a r ea . In other words, nach c i the flood plain in the area has been changed so that it is acw dedicated to griculture or to activities oth er than flood way.
. Ai r Cc n c e.r n...s. :
Under air impacts on page 5-24, the emissions are estimated to be ** l e s s than E?A de minimus l e v e l. s " for cartain pollutants.
These de minimus levels ar e probably those used for PSD purposes. No information is given on th e actusi off-s:te ambient concentrations th a t will result. '.~ nile the low .
emissions will most likely result in very small impacts, th i s does not Justify the complete lack of any numerical data to ba ck up thi s assertion. At a minimum, annual and maximum 24-hour emissions should be,given. A simple model could th en be run to estimate off-site. concentrations. If th es e are truly as small, this will reinforce the conclusion that th e impacts are too small to be s igni fi cant .
Finally, on page 5-15, first pa r a g r a ph , the last sentence states that " Actions to mitigate th ese . cot en t i a l i m.0a c t s (from cooling tcwer chlorination) should be considered . . .". Tnis statment constitutes a recommendation to the utility and is out of place in an EIS.
It weuld be more appropriate to discuss what will be done, what are th e alternatives and what citigative actions will be implenanted.
d e ._--r-,~w w . ..,_...-_.~.v.,~.-.
. ...m.,....-.._ _ ,
- .5.'i. .~. . d."f -T. . . "--W.Ye- r?-4F C .
.-rc -= r+x ___. :- - _._....=-__....n...-
.. _ , _ _ . , _ _ = _ . - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ~
s /. i-I ,.
... y.a z .: : . .
- ., r e .. . a -
- .a . e .1 s ~d
- . *1 *i i '.. '
.. n tisd i t . !vr . n *. $ .:n .
s- .
1) 1 On ,: rg e 4 3 7 .ac n t i e n is made of the c.uus bility c, i t.,e crisonee of Nis in the Delaware.
' c:n. ". ? c i a l ly i n lijht of 1.he fact th a t aThis n = 3is.1. e1 r y 1. *.a l y ,
' h e 7 :.r t J er vi s f a r ca , . f a r ups t r e a m ef t h e11 f i .1. r . f .: 1 .;
div.raien # r, t t. .
- 2) . '.e d r.c u r. o n t contains scme very assured s t a t e .e n t. s -
re ji: ding 'he ul ti=s t e i : pr c "e r.c- n t in q.. alii. of 'ac stra- 's
,- - '.s .? . . ...3 .:
- 2. . 7.,
.. . . 1.. . ... .. . . . c., ...:..
...2 I s i f.h ' cp yr '.
- i n o f t h e d : v ,
- 1 i on s' Ou l'1 be ca:r;ed : ,.-.s..y:
. . . . . . - , . ~ . . . . . p- -- .2 .
at fcr al1
- .cenunity.
.: r v e t r r s c : n t .. i r.ed in t.he drait 5:S as u211 as for 1.h e fi t.h 4, A good start has been :::de, as described in Sc-e t i en of the trcphic levels in all the streams.
Tn i s should be expanted
- nto cperation. an:. cen t. i n u e o. as t.ne caverss. on 2s cc.rpl e t eo. a n c. p2 aced ,
3)
Sectica 5.3.2.3 describes t.h e nontherr.al water quality a nti ci pa t t-d for the Bradshaw facility and th e Del a wa r e . A cstate :-d i m =ent e nis nade that facilit.
t ec.ntrolling t.h e reservoir as ell as will act as both a a p5cuphorcus sink.
- if raction
- - e v e whi r , no eent ch will ion is ra d e 2egarding the ncnsatt3 able pass threugh the reservoir and n.ay negate
- a ny phos,.:h or ous control cl a i r.e d as a benefit of th e reservoir.
, . erhaps some reassessments are in order if the modelling for receiving ph o sphor ou sstr . eam water quality has not included this source of I
In addition. we failed to see any statements coverioc retention time in the'Eradshaw f a ci li ty. Information ircz other sources indicates that sediment lot of totalcontrol is not
- schieved with c.ay.flows greater than cacacitv fl ow r.r o u a.n tar
- However, ni ..~
t..s :. s an o.nt2 mum raoure that is
-idjusted on a case-by-case basis.
4 In any event, - the claims
-f aa dcili e by the ty should be NR ' for sediment control using the Bradshaw substantiated statistically in the fi nal EIS.
- 4) Tne r.e x t-t o-l a s t t
induced shock will adversely .ca r a craPh a f fect on .oace 5-25 states that
- reti ck Transmission corri dor. " Perhaps biota this is a along the
.: .c o : r a .rTn scribes i c a l error just*the opposite. because the remainder of th e pa r a g r a ph
.en this sect 2On n e e c.s to 3ne rewritten.
However, if this is not an error, d
w_
.a-
./ , .
1
. * .,=- V ;
y ,.
73t.h r j 2do
- r. c s.s..?p in t he c003 ing wa t.er di seus s i c r:s , f. h e d o e u r,a n t.
_oe s. . . ]or
" ,,_ 2is pres.ntation of t.;,e is
_ 3 t e r 3 2.h e t .nd the
' de f 2 c2 cnci es erf o f I f
, 'S.__ya t er byget in t 'ne wa t er" a r c a of ccacern are:
,94 e i ncons i =;t ^nci es , b) tha range of 4, g t:a t i c.., in,es a3tro.,_.s a t er_ et snofe,,_c fl ow sefor~di xtre fs f' 5r ing cPera t ing cor. fi cGra tc) i ons ,
.a. n t.: .: v e r r,1 -. r.
~
,ay occur e.er rhcrt 13 t s a r. c- r.ce:v:nc 70 "e'
....e - .a ..
. ,-. . . , .4 4
. <.. <...., 2 . (c n c u a l a. t.y i .:pr ey e. ,2n t in t.h e .
o f - >~> c,n F ed: : c m a n Cr c-ek . ' e. .- . - - -
,y <- - . .i t a n,-]2 r CS { ec ,
the2 n 7nese are theJrN'.-.. t- . '. : $ r .;- s
~
pc.lut2cn cencernscor.nents snd c-re fo2): ed
}. s-~ .c.e air a nd other mi nor . poi n t s .
b'c a s t a f {pr ecia t e the op or 7s , coopera ti on. p:>r t uni ty t o r c ti c-w the dar.; . ant and your If any point s require f u r '.h er discussion
^aV2ea caar212 achn. cation, He p3 ease contact Mr. Robert I,3vis of the E:s can be reached on 215-597-4333.
Thank you.
4 Sincerely, j ,
f0!/ .
h ' N s'W .x Henry Brubak e r C h i e f ,7 :..nalysis and Services Section ,
Enclosure (s) e.
l 4
i i
t l-i l
i 9
l r
+ - . - - . , -,y - - - = . , , - - , - -, . , - - - , , , , - --
UNilED S1h5 CNVlfsONT.tCNTAL PROTEC; f YI b ~,
. .? - ",s GCNCY e +, m - c e, r. .. ~, v,. 'O__ }q:-
.a
~
rhaaM;.5;a, Pa.19106
\
N %
h u ,.
" , 'g cy:
Tr1p Report' EPA-DRBC Staff Mtg.
On Limerick-Pt Pleasant Dec. 18, 1980 F /* db At DR3C Headcuar ters . oATE:
T Hou: Ed Geismar'
) .
. , . , , De
, .c e.-b e'-
2-) '
f.- <
Basin Commission ' Coordinator M h-M '
To:
Nicholas DeBenedictis, Director OIRPA Both in view parties of newagreed that meetines was"very rewar di developments. ng and timely a.
NRC will do EIS on operation of Limerick ,
- b. It light in view of NRC action.is proposed that D73C a newDock NWPA Docket D-65-76CP (8) while Approval a could be given to given to the PECO Docket D-79-52CP pending NRC EIS"ByCondit this route NWRA could move ahead now construct cnly .
what is needed for NWRA. All aspects to racility would be held in ct.beyance. of the Nuclear
____ Items Dis' cussed and Findings: .
- a. .
need for an EIS joining the Pt. EPA rc.T.ained emphatic concerning e o
- b. P2easant and Limerick porjects.
We determined that the comsumptive use listed in the be 35 mgd which is equivalentNegative Declaration erick should by Hansler -
to 54 cfs. This error
. accounts (consumed) for by ccmment on the largT'Emount of wasteby ourLimerick. used Hansler 46.2 maximum mgd. Actual figures are 38.5 average to
- c. .
Upper North Branch Neshaminy.DR3C errosion, Our will clarify our (45 concern mgd) to 6f disc stream blow out, concern was related to provide us with information flooding,.etc.relative DR3C says they will assurance were concerned thatover.
they have covered the environmentt1 issues weto ene .
d.
indicatesPopulation the project projections figurs were resolved. Our comparison for 1980. are within 2% of consensus figures e.
concern over secondary impactsLand to a new use issues involvedOurconsidera de_ scribed by the DRBC in their reports. water bank was not planning agencies they dealt with DRSC will revisit '
a t t c.7p t to matrix (S tate - county - local) and
- quicients. envirenemtal sensitive areas.for our .
EXHIBIT E -
.. ~ .
_7_
d . U
/
,<. e .
- e
- f. Conservation DRBC in their r eport, issues other were not generally considered by than what they (the DR5C) would do in case of a drought of for DR3C said this ,was a State & seme other however, local issue water saving reasons.
DESC has implemented groundwater use. means in Bucks A.nd Montgcmery Counties to censerve I think on this issue EPA could request Sta te (PA) to insist censervation designs. that building ccdes and local ordinances include CRBC would back us in dealings with Limerick EIS on consservation israes. Randy r.: quested that DR3C be a cooperating agency to NRC in pr epartion of EIS.
- g. EPA said EIS once again. they will r eview Merrill Creek positicn in the selected reservoir It was (of 11 stated sites) that toMerrill Creek provi6e waterwas forthe all existing Plan.
and -new power facilities per the DRBC Pcwer Siting Merrill is required even if Limerick is not built.
conjunction with this discussion we were reminded that the In Schuylkill flow was the governering factor as to whether watet is taken from the Delaware for Limerick. However, water would come frcm the Delaware most of the time.
- h. Ne questioned per capita use of water in area.
DRSC
- dindustries idn' t really in NWA. DRSC used their consultants figures, small k6ow*why it was so hig.h except for numerous probably residential only. They will check.
^
responsible.
- i. On blasting issue we said the DRBC will be present a problem. Their consultants assured them blasting would not PARTICIPANTS DR3C EPA H. Ecwlett E. Geismar W.
D. Everett Thursht.y R. Pamponio -
E. Johnson A. !f$1nnes F. Thoumsin O
e 9
9 e
0 a
O
, er
/ * -
/*
<, l..'.n.,
/l -
Y Cr
't, -
,) .-
./ '
'4i-1 .n 73,er ..n ,
..> - ]
Trcpr'ed * ...d .ats to c. y;e.e utve
.s f..
to Ecvise the T.? criptiens cf the 70cks p l U.N. :. !J. ' ' ,* :I s ! m Francis E. Valter, Prcept er , a nd Ca r. :e n t vi ) ; e p r o,', . c t s Tu ;'<.s h : 2.id Pr e i.t e t' T. r: the early 1920s t.n t i l the 2:-l a v a : e */ 3 '. cy f: - .d di r a.c t e r cf I 'r 5 5, .a -f us plans -ere c :. :r i d e r ed to .wsnint t '.e c;; f r n 's ester n; ply ritrage by c : n s t r uc t i":g a ii n ste: dz in the v i c i r i t ;. of the Veter Cip. Although s:re thcqht was gi .en t o incorporat ing a c on v e n tT.i der.a r.w e 1
hydt:pe-er facility to ;;oduce scoe energy, the main st : das proposals dvring this carly period Jatted cajor f 3 cod control and recreation features and were not culti purpese in today's centext. A plan prc:sted by the Interstate Corni s s i on on the Del a va re River 3 sin (INCODEL) to build a large sin stem vater supply dzm at Val;ack Land, a short distance upstream of the Tater Cap, fell just short of approval in the early 1950s in a c3cse Pennsylvania Senate vote. In August of 1955, the Oelaware =ain stes and upper t ri buta ri e s were s t ri cken by the vorst flood esent ex pe rienced to da t e f el::.ing back-to-back hurricanes , Connie and Di a ne , J-ss than a week apart. -..e death toll was 99 persres, all on t ribot a ri es , and d3: age nee..!cd !!00 tillion (ly35 prices), -c i e than a t.:a r t e r of it on the main sit: below the '4 a t e r Cap. The =unicipalities of 3elvidere. Easton, Phillipsburg, Frenchto n, Nrv ' ope, Lambertv113e, Yardley, Trenton, d
lurlington, and Bordento n vere amoog the da: age centers. As a result, Congress di rect ed the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers to make an extensive sursey of the basin's needs.
In 19 (.0, the Corps 'Keport on tbg Cceprehensive Survey of the k'ater Kesources of the Delavare Ri v e r Easin^' was co:pleted and recc 7. ended a series of federal and state reservetr p r oj e c t.5 , Leystone of which -n the 22,000 acre multi purpose lake behind a dam located five miles upstream of the Water Cap at Tocks Island.
The lake was seen also as the c e r't ra l fearure of a 60,000 acre Na ti onal Recreation Area. In 1961, the r egi on 's f r.u r Covernors, as efeebers of the new Delavare Rive r Easin Cc: .f rs i on (D73C), threv full support to the proposed Tocks Island project and other features of the Corps' report. In 1962, the Easin Cc ci s si on 's Co:prehensive Plan for the region's water future was adcpted with Tocks Island, inr2,uding the National Ke:reation Area, its key ec:ponent. DR3C action was f ellowed by Congressional authori:ation of Tocks Island (but not t'ee National T.ecreation Area), .nd seven cc pinion reservcir projects which included the modifications to the Fro:pton and Francis E. Walter (t hen known as Eear Creek) projects. In 1963, Congress app r op ri a t ed t.he initial f unds f or the Corps to begin post authorization design of Tocks Island.
In 1965 the basin's uorst drought reached its cost intense level
'as ocean salts, coving up-river, threatened to contaminate fresh water supplies in the Phila delphi a -Ca c. den rr,e t r opoli t a n a r ea . In the absence of adequrte storage, DREC imposed emergency measures and enacted formulae 1/
- cinted as MD $22, 57th Cong. 2nd Sess.
EXHIBIT F
. I-
- < b
,,,, ..s e *: st'.g of sitsbic .,tr *
- .; s ' .- t - .n '.v ;rk
. , s ys. ' ' ',,j.r , ,.',
d a v:. . e ..;4. scir jstc a nd t'.e J : en t a ci : 5: :
s.
In 1974, as urged by the I:7. 4 C , C o n ,;; c r s c:dered the Corps of rngine.crs to r.ak e a c'4 year cc prehensive r e -s : e ty of the e-ri.e Tec t. s Is!and project. hi :. Ic-study c :. r. c ! t. k d that tcc?-ically . i ., bl e water supply alternatives to the Tocks project existed, but that the re:arise cost, benefit, and e .viron::.cntal i : pact s of t hen a: t a rnatives ne<.ded t o he reselved.
On Jul y N , 19 75 the D.: b' Cr.e: n o r s , in a 2 to 1 vo: e , ree: cr/ed tr at Cr.ng r e s s not fund a Tacks Is: sad picjact c:ns.ruc-icn 5 : .* r t . ?o positicn was t. den en hether this project r?ruid be f e r ..t he: Ic-4, ..d it re. ains t oday as an aut' orir.ed project .
In 1976, the U. S. Water Eescurces Council f r.ded the O ^ 1.v-> r e Eiver lasin Cc:pr ehensive (k eel 5) Study to review the en:fre C :; r c he n-sive Plan, including prescot and projected de: ands for water within the Easin, a ec:pariren of these d e z.a n d s wit h available water supply, and the deveJepoent of appropriate nessures to keep the supply and demand in balance.
I. ate in 197E, Congress incorporated into the ?atienal Vild.
Scenic and Eecrtatienal E' vers Syste: the 35 .ile !'i d d 3 e Ce l a'va r e that is the Pennsylvania-?ev .'ersey brunda ry in the ::elawa re Water Cap :a:f onal Eecreation i:: pound. ent) .
Area (the reach of the river that would for= the Tocks IslaFd The river was d e s i gt.a t e d as scenic frc= .".11 ford to Sha nee
,___a_nd as recreational from there to the Water Cap.
Eecause hydrologic and storage conditions in the Delaware Ri v er Easin changed substantially over the core than two decades after the U. S.
Suprerae Court Decree of 1954, late in 1978 DF3C called upon the parties to the Decree "to enter into serious good faith discussions to establisn the arrangements, procedures, and criteria for canagement of the waters of the Delaware Easin consistent with the Cc= pact." Tne drought emergency of the mi d-19 60s and the decirfon of 1975 not to proceed at that time with construction of the Tocks Island dam were major background events gi vi ng rise to the Cor.=ission action.
In 1981, the Final Report and Environmental 1:cact State:ent of the level B Study was cc=pleted. Tne report analyzed current and projected conditions on supply and de=ind and set forth certain propesals for indifying *the Co::ission's Co:prehensive Plan. During the study, all of the projects ghat had been identified in the URS /.Ma di ga n-P r a e ge r Tocks Island report as possible aJ ternatives to Tocks Is:and were. restudied, as well as a review of the project, already included in the D?lC Cc=prehensive Plan. The Final Level B Report offered a Preferred Pl an which included those policies and physical features of the Cc:prehensive Plan which were found to be in need of a change. --
2/
Comprehensive Study of the Tocks Island Lake Project and Al ternatives -
URS/."adigan -
Praeger, Inc./Conklin & Rossant, -
July 1975.
I I
,.~.~~ 5$ Q p'
-~~- rcd - t*.e he;.di g of *0.4t.:: , 5 t,,,, . a 3 e N c j e .- t 9 ,
. t'..
2 31 3 ; p f*
7: 3n prc id.ed tht the c virce..rtal asp.mts
. of the 7 . .w. c i s E.
- t. d n i g t ,, ,
'p rcj e c t modification, the Tr c:;.p t on pr oj ec t .:e di f i c .* t i o n , the Ca c.n c.n :, v i g ) ,
project modification, the Wckettstown project and t he P.c r r i ll Creek project should be ther:ughly investigated and, if fcund a.: c c p t a bl e , th3e construction of said projects should be expedited. Also, the Aquashicola, Evansburg, Nevark, Tocks Island, and Trexler projects should be retained in the Cc:prehensive Plan for possible develop =ent af ter yea r 2000.
The " Good Taith" negotiations progressed, using in f or: a t i on and data p r t.vi de d by the L. vel E Study, including a cv, :. r e cc .;rchcnsi.e salinity :2dal of the estuary that %d Men utiliud for the Final L vel B effort. The negotiators also gained valuab3e e s. p e r i e n c e and s cater insight into d r ough t -c.p e r a t ing capa bili t i e s during the 1980-1931 drought.
The " Good Faith" nagoti a ti ons concluded in February 1953 with publi ca tion of the report entitled Interstate Water Ma na g es.en t Reco::endations or the Pa r ti es to the U. S. Suprece Court Cecree of 1954 to the Celavare River
' Iasin Comi s s i on Pursuant to Corrission ResoJution 7S-20. That docu:ent incorporates many reco sendaLions contained in the 1981 Level B Study Report. Ten of the fourteen " Good Faith" recon =endations are . identical to Level B Study Report recocstedations, and the other four are Level B elements slightly modi fi ed to reflect experience and infor=ation gained during the drought of 1980-1981. Tne five parties agreed upon enlargen.ent by the federal government of the existing trancis . -alter reservoir in the Lehigh valley by the end of 1990 and Frccpton reservoir.in the La_ckavaxen valley by the end of 1995. Both are in Fennsylvania. New York City's Cannonsville reservoir in Delaware County, New York, is to be enlarged, if determined to be practicable by feasibility and environmental studies, by New York State .by 1990, and a proposed power- company icpoundment on the site of a scaller reservoir on 7:errill Creek in Warren County, New Jersey, is endorsed for completion by the end of 1986, if found environmentally feasible.
The long planned F.ackettstown reservoir on the Musconetcong River in northuestern New Jersey was eli=1nated from consideration after being dropped from that state's water supply master plan in 1981 due to poor subsurface conditions. The state is seeking an alternative source.
Regarding Tocks Island, Recommendation 9 in the " Good Faith" report provid es : "The parties are agreed that the prcposed Tocks Island project should be held in reserve status for develop ent after the year 2000 if needed for water supply. The Cec =ission should amend its Comprehensive Plan by adding an updated description of the Tocks Island project."
Francis E. Walter and Pro =pton Projects The modifications of the Francis E. Walter and Pro =pton prcjects ,
existing single purpose Corps of Engineers flood control projects , were incorporated into the DRBC Comprehensive Plan in 1962. These projects were reviewed in the Level B Study, which reco=. ended that construction be expedited for both, if fourd environ =entally acceptable.
_3_
~
L
- d. D e v;erience of accent Ja cu ;ht s his undersc(red the n. . d Sr ines sased var er st orage, wat er .=upply and flev . tug ..:n: ati cn c y sci ty in : '.e celavare Sasin. The Eesin is esen new in a deficit c:.dir!cn in
- r ms of .
fiev required to :<et the year 2000 salinity ecntiel cbj.*cti.e pre; ed in
- tecc
- endation 1 of the 'Cood Faith ~ Report, esen thc :gh the p:c; -d int erie standard of' ISO eg/l chlorides could be met at t'.is point in t i- e.
't:v auga..n ta t i on facilities are needed to ;.r c vi de fc: : last g;cuth :nd achicve ent of the 150 ppe chloride standard by the year 2000. The c;nservation ueasures p r <.; c s e d in Rec:- ;-fr.2.ns 10, 1:, rd 12 of he
%c.d Faith" taport -i l l be an f :pe, r t . n t .: :;c t m n a g ". e st 1: 21 and -i l l pertly effset incretsir.g use, but -i ll not suffice 4 :re.
With recurrence t oday cf a dr:u;ht equal in sa.e.ity to that of the 1960s, system cperation of the basin's existing in;su :ir.ent s could maintain a ficv at Trenten cf sbrut 2,500 c f s, including t he ef f ects of the proposed reduced diversions, f1 :.v objectives at Mentague, and conservation r e c c =;.:e nded by the parties. i*nder the ispact of increased depletive use, as projected in the level 3 Study, that capability vill drop to slightly less than 2,300 cfs by the ycar 2000 if no new flow augzentation of watet-supply sources are developed before that date.
T.u s e levels of capability ecntrast sharply ith the esti.ated 2,000 efs that vill be needed to ceet the stricter , car 2000 calinity cbjective under projected conditions 17 years hence. Even with allevance for the approxi=ations inherent in these nu=bers, the conclusion is inescapable that the existing water storage, vater supply and fl ow augmentation facilities in the basin are insufficient to cope with the i= pact of drcught by the year 2000. Measured against the year 2000 salinity objective (150 mg/l of chloride at F.iver Mile CE) the present shortfall is about 50 cfs. Eevever, currently (19e3) the Trenton flow-capability is about 110 cfs greater than that requirad to meet the interim salinity objective (ISO mg/l of chloride at R.iver Milt 98). If depletive water uses increase as projected, and no new facilities are develeped, this shortfall vould increase to about 600 cfs by the year 2000, even with the imposition of rigorous water conservation ceasures. Recom-mendation 5 in the "Cood Faith" Report provides that the Parties agree to endorse and promote modifications of Valter and Proepton prcjects for water supply and flow augmentation f or salini ty cont rol.
The roodi f i ca t ion s to both the Walter and Prcepten projects would involve converting the existing single purpose f3ood control projects (with i incidental recreation) to culti purpose projects for f i c.o d ecntrol, water
( supply, lov flow augeentation f or water quality cont rol and fer recreation.
The existing authorized fl ood control storage in each p r cj e ct would be preserved at both projects.
Co parative data on the present and proposed cocified project -
, (preli=1 nary) at each site are as follows:
l
- t, -
t
/7t
. .- . 3 V P r a r.c i s E. V31ter Projget Prer.ent Proposed
- sdified Protect Proi.et Cap cities, in acr'e-feet ~
Ticed Control 10S,700 105,700 Vat er Supply & Lcv Flev Aug. O E9,500 Inactive 2,000 2,D30 Elo.stien, Top of Peel (251)
PJeod control 1,450 1,181 Vater Supply 6 Lev TJev Aug. 0 1,425 Inactive 1,300 1,300 Pro:pton Project Present Preposed "odified Project Project Capacities , in acre-f eet j
Flood control 45,500 20,300 Vater Supply & Lev Flev Aug. 0 30,900 Inactive 3,500 500 Elevation, Top of Fool (es1)
Flood Control 1205.0 1205.0 Vater Supply & Low Flow Aug. 0 3180.0 Inactive 1125.0 1112.0 1/
20,300 acre-f eet of storage for reservoir design flood (elev. 1168.1);
28,200 acre-feet of additional storage to spillway crest.
With regard to the flood control storage in the Pro =pton Project, the Reservoir Design Fl ood , whi ch is defined by the Corps of Engineers as the maximum flood that can be co=pletely contained by"a reservoir, was deter =ined by the Corps, and when routed through reservoir storage, required 20,300 acre-feet of flood control storage at Prompton. This amount of flood control storaEe then was the econctically justified storage upon which the dcunstream flood control benefits were based. The cagnitude of the Reservoir Design Plood is several times greater than any floof ever j actually experienced at the site and has a return frequency of greater than l 100 years. However, due to the physical features of the dae site, the das
( vas constructed higher than would nor ally be required since it proved more economical to raise the dam than to construct an e>. pensive spillway at a lower elevation. As a result, 28,200 acre-feet of additional storage, in addition to the 20,300 acre-feet required for flood control, was provided in the Prompton project.
I 1
. - . . yf f,, ,
,,.s..s in IMS
.4 t :.e ys of E :;i . t r s , ' n i es
- t' e f k i?! 7' : -
, t ., . n , c b- l ' ' i ~ d ' s I : ' : 's :
".t d di t i : r. 31 f:o:id control 5:: age in Prc:ptun se: <.ir abs e that new authordred (20,.~00 acre-feet c y:31 t c 6.4 inches of runoff) for dca.estres: protection is cc < t d-cred unvarranted for the fell: !ng reasons:
(1) The sajor da age center of Bonerdale is cc:7 a short distance d:vnstrea: and the e c chi r.e d effect of the Frc.:pton and Advin pr ojerrs ill elf-i ete all f ced di age s in t:is a r e r. <sccpt for ,+;y i n f r <: ra n t f :.:ds such as t' ese % i .; 7'sk f::-s ir. ocess of }00 ycar recur:cnt events.
(2) Even if da rging flevs should c.ccur as a result of ur. cont r ol J e:: f.1 :2 d:-mstres. cf Frc:pton T.eser.e3r, the re3 esses fre: the re:ervoir could be kept to a cinieu: so as not to aggravate or increase the flood conditions.'
Tr.ese prior conclusions vill, of course, be reviewed by the Corps during the fortheo ing enviror. ental and updated detailed design studies.
7ne Corps vill prepare the r.e c e s s a ry I.vironrental Irpact St a t ements for both the 7: v.ci s E. L'al t er a nd Pre :p t s: prcj ets.
The folleving table shows the control pool, the taxi =u: amount of f2ood axf=u: elevation of the flood
~~ control storage used, and the percentage of the authorized flood control storage (20,300 acre-feet) used during indicated, the taxi u:
each of the 23' years that Prc=pton has been ic operation. *As storage used in any year percentage of the 20;300 acre-feet of flood control to date was 23.2 percent in year 1973.
Tr cr.p: on Keservoir, la ch a va x en Fd v e r , Pa., Design Men.orandu: No. II, General Design February 106S. Memorandu=, U.S. Ar=y Engineers Di s t ri c t , Philadelphia -
j .
4 4 4 i
.- (, -
, _ . - . - . _ ..-- m -- . _ _ - - _ .--, ., , ,- ,. . . . . _ , _ , , _ . . - . , , , - - , , -
-a,.r * ~
,M.
o* . )"% .#
yS d
'J L i l ' . *. : :,n o f t '. a -,:* tied 71 cod Cent. o1 5t :ra;e (>C,300 ,cr e -it ) in 7 .;..:n : cj set Elevation of
.2 n n u a l .'S:.:i cum Flcsd Cont r ol Terecnt of Flood Cent.rol Tool S:crage Used A :: Lori,ed il .d Tear (ft s1) ( .s : r e - f e e t ) C ..t:el 5 : c ra 31[O7d 15'20 1125.0 500 4.1 1 1131.19 1920 9.4 2 1131.06 1554 9.1 3 1131.25 2177 10.7 4 1133.45 1549 14.0 5 1127.93 620 4.0 6 1125.50 1002 4.9 7 1130.40 1568 7.7 8 1129.65 1302 6.4 9 1131.30 1946 9.6 1970 1130.80 1736 '6.
1 1130.18 1476 7.3 2 1133.02 2665 13.1 3 113 E. 54 4704 23.2 4 1131.56 2055 10.1 5 1132.80 2576 12.7
.- 6 !!31.01 1824 9. 0 7 1133.04 2677 13.2 8 1130.23 1497 7.4 9 1133.07 2609 13.2 .
1980 I!29.iB 1254 6.2 1/ 1137.98 1
1/ 4513 22.2 2 1137.93 4496 22.1 2/ 1130.10 1442 3 7.1
/
1/ on top of' emergency drought water supply pool at elev. 1135
'/
through April 16.
It is also ' portant to note ther releases f rom a codified Frompton prcject vill not reduce the a t:ou n t of releases required by N:v York City to coet
- the Mcntague for=ula.
, Canr.cnsville Proiect i
The Cannonsville Reservoir was added to the Ceoprehensive Plan in Addenduz No. 1, adopted July 25, 1962. Modification of Cannonsville was
, prepcsed in the report of the Te cpo r a ry State Coc.=1 s s i on on the *'ater Supply Needs of Sou thea s t e rn New York, December 1973, and reco= mended in the Level s report. The reservoir level vould be increased approxi=ately eight feet by the addition of flashboards or, gates on the spillvay. This vould incresse stor. ige by. approx *:ately 13.1 billion gallons.
r - - - - . - , . .
p W"~
- hec .
' tfan 6 in the "Ceod Faith" o r ,trt pre vi 'e s t ! .t L 1.e c .n e of 'cv York en:oge the Cannenevilje h<er.cir in ds are Cauaty,
- n Yor k , i f d e t e r :f r.. d t o be practiest e by feasit Ii ty cad e.vir:,rrtntal studies.
Subj ect to the outcoce of these studies, construction r-houl d be cceplet ed by 1990. T. e requirements of Section 1115 of t he U.
S. Su p r e:..e Cnurt *:acree of !?S? relating to excess releases sheuid be valved as to the s ddit f or.al storage' included in the Cannonsville codification project.
Additiensi project yield steuld be used pri:arily to saf nt ain conservation re3 cases. Secondary purperes should he to support the Montague flow obj ec ti ves and diversicas to Mew York Ci ty wi t bin the l i:-i t s of the 1054 U.S. Supre:e Court Occree.
Pre construction studies of the Ca r.r.cn s vi l l e
- dification right also acad to 1:pr:.ed re: case - rks relative to the censerva tico reJ esse program.
Specifically, it is preposed to:
Mend the Cc:prehensive Plan as f o13cvs:
1.
Celet e in i ts entirety, the description of the Eear Creek Project (la t e r renaced Francis E. Walter) on pages 13, 14, and 15, and insert, in lieu thereof, the description of the Francis E. Walter Project in Appendix A.
2.
Odete in its entirety, the description of the Prr,.pten Project on pages 8 and 9 and insert, in 2feu thereof, the description in Appendix E.
- 3. Delete in its ~ entirety,' the description of the Cannonsville Reservoir contained in Addendu: No. I to the Cc:prehensive Plan--Phase 1, adoted July 25, 1962, and insert, in Ideu-thereof, the description in Appendix C.
- 4. Delete in its entirety, the description of the Tocks Island Project on pages 9, 10, and 11 and insert, in lieu thereof, the description in Appendir D.
These as,endeents shall take ef fect !==ediately.
Appendix A - Proposed Revised Comprehensive Plan Description of Francis E.
Walt er Froject Appendix B Proposed Revised Comprehensive P an Description of Proepton Project Appendix C - Proposed Re vi s ed Co:prehensive Plan Description of Cannons-ville Project Appendix D - Proposed Re vis ed Comprehensive Plan Description of Tocks Island These appendices are included in the attached Delaware P,1ver Easin Cc . Ission's Motice of Public Mearings of July 1, 1953.
-3_
' ~ .>
t i..
- .t.% N % 0 .- .. c a r;<
. .#' , ; '.' 0.^.
- -a s .u.s r, .v .
UV O***E'*******= '*"'7 '
- 4 . .- 3 i- .. .;.
,..,g g4g g,:pt*G A~.***.A N '** **'*
,. ; g .g u t E . D C N W C .3f H 826 SOU'N340AC C#Et.T
~~ P l 4 t L*. O ."
. :.? *. : * ,m e; ., * ; L Y * . :A19 07 uu 3 coc u . m .s c- . c . -r - -~-' n ": : s- m. ~ c.*
..,.,,,ec:ne cc. t
- C2;:TIFIED :'.A J L . ..:C _ . , . . .
s~uly 22, I;23 Frcedom of Information Officer U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- a shing t on , DC 20555 RE
- Freedom of Infol..ation Act 0:ar Sir:
_ Fursuant to the Freedom of Inf ormation Act, I request copies of all me.mor a n d a , analysis, and correspondence between the without staff of the SRC and any other federal agency, including, limitation, U.S. Fish T.
Wildlife Service, regarding the testimony
- of U.S. Fish and Wildlife employees before the Operating License Board and/or the U.S. District Court, regarding the Application cf Philadelphia Electric Company for the Limerick generating sta-tion, Application and Docket Nos. 50-352, 50-353. This recuest specifically includes but is not limited to correspondence and analyses between the legal staff, including but not limited to Ann Hodgdon, Esquire, and all other agencies, created between October 1952 and June 1983. .
It is anticipated that it may be contended that this material is related or comes within an exemption to FOIA relating to l i ti g a,t ion. In response, and anticipa ting such response, I hereby assert that the litigation matters to which the documents may have been relevant were complete, with respect to the testi-many involved, at the tis.'.e the cor respondence and other documents we re e rr:a t ed, and therefore do not qualify as being within the scope of such comments or documents.
- In view' of the urgent nature of this transaction, it is and that requested that the time limits of FOI A be complied with, a response be furnished within ten days hereof.
EXHIBIT G
r
)
. ./ . ..
.. f,,,g e.c:.~.,'. 1xo..m__ o t t 1 c c r 2 ,
.. = . . ! y. y. ,
1 .- - 3
...e Thank you for your consideration.
Si r;cere 3 fi
%d '
F.obert J. 5 .; ; - t . . a n s
p
. . a.,.- i o cc: .
.s n n .,.. o c. goon, ~_ squire i
e i
t l ,i t
t
e
_.- r i . r. . .
IGXi'Ol,00n!Ci 01 1Gmp0fGfy illjUlh
_,_. . , e, e , n=.o e
. , , ,, t,. . ...aa.e . * . ,
= ., . . . s. *. . . . . ... ., . e.
. .... e
- e e CCT.TY et a t Ch t a-f EL a"% E P. - ~ ' - *^ W1 'Ot*a A 1 - te %- ! la t .e ... e d . :e ! :
Zar: Ires at. ELs L. %steEN at.d I"t l e ** * ** e Oe t- .te .1 *
- le se: !v:2 2 5:' .
T a
? are,! e.a, It * *i s' at at *
- e e ** e e.at g* - es e tt?t Lt te)S li.*t f e:.. ? :3 t & ; e, e:**,t a'.,-.g.
. rael,F e e.& t 5e cM - te f 5.f.abue e c. - ee c = e
- e c. < n< e r, ..e - m rr1 be f. :> r* I . L o a 4 S! ? i?.StNI E A. Pa e sae-A. A. 'aa n fe . ** s e a. 1+
s.e t a ve n,e t' e so rt e r e a!. sen. g t-e, r.e *tai Is,'s?
e-L ist 9:,a::r c.1 eam I ge.eo ,t e{-:stre et et e tw er. -- <e i to 5 4ca- e' O 'er*. t* P r 4 C. . ** f ;* . **ere e Pa. f " ree;4et
- e te est ;g-t + r e ee. e a-f( e e=d C. :t-1 e , s . ,, . e . , ; e . . e,.e Wes e.. r.. ,* *c * ., -. a<?.rr>f.-,e.~.e,e
- d,: r-a g s.,' *r,,4 e s.?
e .e) utee e Ce,. .e . s a,.g rc.q ;.,v .. r.e o
.. e c.C- . 4e: e v e rsee .t.v e.,.. .e ....n..-.
e s. n e ve ce .f . re :e . ee, F
.c; i, toe
- :.F ..e,e t rf u s
- f.;e .L e c. . :>.g,as its g 6 r .* u.s. . e : ^.
? F.% e.6:ath .n .: et see .a L g s -rn t s: r . rt*/
e 1: e es
..f s ea c r.t a try.t reit. . .e e.: v e t e.-c t e-
.f t ;, st) :se e .ep 1 e;ce.. re .c e .c.: c .,e- e y e ;.u -
e..> te e uga e -e e a. .ara . :;a .mr.,.Er.e ; .-tv,e
}, s. a ny P* e P A: to".*g .: e 5 v st -
V a,;.e .F.e.t n .co s : .a A. e, s ,ceier : t:eri .i4,-:- 7 :-l.
e-s r.ex ci .'f .r.:.:.we.e e e e .-e,t . t aef e tram.e a t6 .n.,-f ee e ep. e,c c.arc e,sa-t,o a, a : 8T ts 1.ie Fa eM .WS 1r e ' . .: ; e cy
- wq ear. te.'s s .e. t p a r * . t .!. ,t/s ea 6e v e7 ca . ea..?s t ! a
- ). e ."tv. .a. e a e.re.r.:
- e t e' 164f art e' a t ; - e s *; : . . . . *t
- t ( A t 4? Va At* See fmer* s6oae ..g.- ..w Je * " ". ? e 'a
- - f te g . . e f,'e a..g y
...e . . . . . . .t. 7 L U:. p.:..r 3 a fe:s a f -
a , e a . e.r.re,v u s te? .,a g . .. r. ts 24 rs. : te .. .s ta et . t
-e a ee -o r,9.: -- ne n,.; .<; ~e e .e r : c.:.:ve e a:. e v f c(. e:e e c. s. e e. e.r v e e < cee
~ r e. e e : .- .c- p e-- ,e . , . ..e au: :,.
e ' t;.-: e .--et t: 1, e s . : *'. o %.. . s * ? s W . .*
- I n.. e * :: . r- y
. ;; r,,; e r. a.n. ; c.e s. 4.~.a.y L- e *
- s r t e'.reie t t 1 e
- e : ." ta, es a. 6 .."hre* ..; r. .e ; a::;*
. e a t; e to ee t* e alese leg eI r.g t.: = ttes e:*fes "e;4 -ge tee t s;n t*
f fye .aj .;) 4: W ;.:fDe ts ea.6 *!2 seea's? ?a: 6 !I fa basaye? n,tteit e-** .n r .
. ee e ; e wt.re :: .t e :++.e:e e? e L*;n. e* ei e e-t C,s u.
- *4r er l' af t 6.;; ;*:a-- e ee rte, e,.
Ue N rata-o e* e e a" C .e
..yeoe?1.no 'es. r*. t tr.e F i*.1 C ." . '. .' ?4, g F e rf .s a -
. . :: ar; .eg 4 2 s ater t' e g.*; :: e ... . .e !r. .e:.y.38 ?-t ?J VP- 6: it se t *er C t. t e e? 4.t e- tsP. a* e . --( *e settee 1,1 e ea i et !:s . .* t! 3.us r: *. r?f t t'te *t e C .? ? S' .t,+s* ees ;*-.)
.".} 4
- b . . e, .;g ;e; P4:
, ,t,i 3 we~ ',a- - ... , r ,. ,.,,;, e.s
- . 3cc--p..e9 . . , . .e - , . . . , . *g
- e ,*e f 5 e t as A t-,, v 4 se m ae J e A. ,A- .t a ea t .e- i ee* *: a- ! . . .A . . r*6 ..a .e. t re e ...p. 41; L 5 t 6 J.4 -t) C:-L ;"a :.s t!:A J.e *;#3 e' fe f Se I Ci 14 ! 3:L E t .
- e: .;n 2e 4112 k e,.';) a* a;;traJer, saa P.ede tart
- e "hee*L,v ; ?e J* .'re ree kin:'s*re,A Ir 1 - vg . gg.ee
^ g e-tet A les eg
. er.*% e - .-e U '*
- Te *- e .*4 u* .4%
f re a f f e F ee ' .e-ee (g f, - e a e.f416 es .gPa
,few"..
- a le fr forseeftee:f *.f:*. al ; t,rsrater 3 lota 45 toe f.gir , e/ 4 ( '5: F r = * : *** 4 :: - e F a f- * ? :* = a".
-:rg a: 1.e e .-Jg f .aa :r?.a E e :.r.e P6 ,1,17 O n em L e C-* C * -*?:'- m s aor s" Cr49 . fe.rt C:.r. *4 t: .r.. e s;.;y L g t a* ts Oc ; n y + 7 T 2*' t o.i t'e: , e B.m st t:.et f:s rm: e rt te ".....t" i t. . s ee is ye e ; ..
ot s.crt ;t a ! a! sem ' e!'.as e-2 e U4 ase '6a*3 e s*er Te g#e e g ta m.i : P a f. .s t .g eftee :s e. %t e w e , se r , . 3 v . .: :.'r ar e s e e re-c r.es t, ee ce . .:, :a iv. e. -et.v e e.r. 2 e.
c e t ear w e ee ,?
tt *- -
te r :e .e : e e tr e r ee er tse r s r ust u ve:cre . : ae e rt: r Ceae re: t a e f: a .i; c: ec .e
-. r 3e ere ie t-se .ex r tr! ; 6*Fs*3tr re-et head that r e*da rse re; reeettrg on t se .r; r- e-t v e. - er r (*;# t y F E sC'C sity a t Ft ses** * ? e ,ef 66ttPJ ea a to:*g enttne-8 est) Pe r et)
- Pltt
- t!! ret to C .9-) b t ** 4- e ie, .. .t see.w ee L ev.:- rg e $er g triet y E. .e *m resee n. f- a t: *s p4e er.). de t te amt e
- er i t : gia **e see Pe-A' O.e ? ovg e. 3s*se e se passe *ted as s' ore these er r een* tr.d s; eCJ.f lega r.ght (9.eets tr f a.*J ge g-t aC EL.getP.
te a'? v U a y a .*!*.".to
- e* 6e the a.? ort k. the p.a7:t*r a .i a ser se,4 geg este la s kirk It osag t'er t.ase see.a es The e3. I ECO arc :Pe fat
- a e .-e f4 es he ee esssei: 17.e 7%L-;J's rgM ene so e4?D !. et 8' the 7 at;." s er.:artst in th settet'e See ire entet by the "Co. sty
. sienup siest Tra snee see e regn t le e +e-:M) a* * . .t he s , :E e et C.et:re.s ofs ar.
Is.e e;L ;s* e!!M e et.at is It ie.8ts egs 1) t*e e ee emetre.e ptye-t aeef fae.s*a-a
.c,m:;a;oS 3 ev a an t en suse.or, Cc.
re,- t.n;.yTv.a.n?
se e it onea*!
-et.** rrasf i,c4 e=se*vie se a:r:
er mereaft e eseer.st.e re. ?.e fer., e* 5.res av.re e 'eA. s.e, n $Nr*
s as ee .'st.r eee eee-ec seeg seeacetiiceaee;.se e f.+.*t3 1,e* L*e peer aa e' the p stt.aff I.coeCa L Pep te :eCJ. .
t a a of
- tt* C.*
- w.r e's Ftreet sat e t'a si li e B rseet s'ste of t>* retart time Os ttle reeere Itese ete sesoral S a-re . r* ? c ' e . .r e a a t t. teare est.* **se
- as sf as et et se ts.ee the a ." fa *H g haves To t ys *!2 am 1H C*ar;f a f . q.' 4 64 terfef 24 Cuty te a nkest te**e le ave.ma tre f s". S : e. e r es v41 vere raf bee me e m ** to -*r* e ee ' e e isr e n t r ,-
- er.r9 a f Se * !' ga*1r** e' the A.'PeitF. e ;"aSte = ttP. LSe Lea: Ce e F e-t t nst P e r *8 *e s's; t' e g Ige . - ;
- e f .*1; rei.*J tt de m.t..* to O rt; act 2e A!! e* ar-L *# 7674. P L 13e ta%e a f i e e." .r.,reeec.Sg el crie d e'eset t; tse e e-?-L.c y e" s? e- ver .re: rg"s t-ser
. he f: I c ur 3 t) P f f * :e* se; pae perm.' a e e' L e 1 P ted f stes a*4 Per.a :.- ** gry tt U.e ese. ;t.et by t o Ca.t:p of A e;;
m . ? tle*'se.e**e'.f C; L e .L.;c
. e uFese* e t eoss Cs .* 3 s e, v a Cs e ..est agnit ei tsrgame-l ef t o tit: et' ga?tas e' tae a: ;< asy s sty s:-+. se f.~
e s set est f. . ++ Vs r era st'4t essi Ir t*:e ease a* i s' ?!e sero-d r te ee'at s e e 9:e . a *Lm 6: pge Iges *c'p.ats.
-e* a Je F
.,f reed r the C .M; me
- te Isee o.or le of Za De Ca. tty s.- e! =!:P U.e pe>
m 0%, : ejer e ci a e W.4 art. ee rat' e te g re e e.eer. ; mpr'.t* e ;,-! 1 : i s tap y'. ems s' a reb * # t7 tr'e.tg ; e tLor. etts, *11; *hmse**.* efdl **e y :8*f-'ee s'r# ti e.*e? Is V e 1698 o the
. eer eefs'.**e.s L-tec Cet4*e e e sit t*..? , . e sta' s:f- oa.ie ne e*it ee.ee peen te e here the-a' to at 6 gent s.eteset*y to seemethe estfie-st3 art t*st e'. ,ttue s tr ' ;. e s'se t o te e. .- ass t-;.7 stict er me* te es:r.;* Ja'.e! le* bF eeru! tate af e6*TP4,le seeilterved feewe8 bybyt*ea er*. act ar e'L e s a.
- g: tr .g:: 4 s o. me es s ages set s neli r esse be se s'ded te; .rse.en: e* Ce *e.s er A"sL s s'e- aS e = ? C e .-
- eerep stor. De e.g te of Ibe 3'ar:allf are T** es.rt L9 a* t'!, m as '.eC=e tentemed "at f-t m t'e. *e.s
,L f,;
.eL s'_:=g g. tee I' m
?s' t' w a;ent it e* emat met lease emness greater me.P sof te s:ene es e*f ar;%J Sectaar.14.
y;.3 m all be C. e by Ps' svg It t'at k) 311. et E.e n'v.sr ;a *) A w'.he=r nes - t a -le.
- r,*.- . le ' a 4g ' t.- - eees it f4-
. . ;;# o .-J f E;%
g-stt;rg it one ese e D aen. 858 Pa 48 SS Act m. P 4,f test t*st eet*a:t ttgeV4r sit See- eat L ea' ?t7i'<*3 4*fV;7 .tPe t. *a4.g* r re) be
( gje Al. - i D4 osa sla be: apet t a the t ;
- e ;st; e* ym aat, o ,.ee m e t.ee ie .lt ecto-e
( A nD.mme .e.r. i .e,e ees racethe e
,,n,e .e,eee:c.
- a . t- m r: s so, .e:r - m . as : i,*ie s i> <e erm e6 is ei.e ine iese. 6..a,s, ._,...4*_
t'.ai II le o ne kr3 in g M*eit L- of ane 9 9.*c s g .es Tro r e'.*3 ease E sse-?.a.Dy -
he 5 ?t:is at ( At des's C;P t*e tse.tsas.ae m. %
..t pre, a at .e *am s Lte* ee.it e4-;e*ee et e? t} Co oreagee 42a l'ai g*seief
- ..eW#~
Ut efea'. ge ner.
P.*Jtee le iete c'e'$ gf.t"e.*g ing) ,
ef f.*) o n. 16 ree.h t) re?.e'*g tee se et t*.:* y o' eres:*8 'U4 7 7Ue p;1:f' a!l)
- !-et Une As .
. g -eq r.. dB Va9 f: [*T;ert) re ee P4 . essa ,
I h-.ee es t's:t e 4No se tre) e sa'af L--'e L 3*r. m. ;e' ftr.e det:sle4.-ides's et' t.a' d ve'3 F
- ar ts O
- a* *gef e rr' ;V e** f eel t; eettet sit~s a e* r e Ao s%suea -
CPf g*es* 6 ete's we l'.nts.;aJ A.LW eve-t ee la *.
.t . 't* is9:e as t*e ee .e--L aben e.s'. I'4.e sL' r'.a, *
- s* a r*P4 3 7lea tr r :.,= * *et as t' et
- t. t.*.e no ..re ' etra: o . .e**t ts te e.s'Ja.?
true.
et. nor..i g e i. r e e-- B e r>
l
. a ra- e.a t.. y ee ;, re e.,r.re : - emi . - .
I te. e e t , e.te: :, .s a r..:: e a cergt! !?e te s W* sw, t 44' A.D . *Pt e a . ! 8.:t *"**~D****** 4 r s.t e 8 het * ." . *
. 6-g re.ra'est e p e L*L 47 F;rkat ts t 's. P4 set J **! e t'.takra .;<* the st;;
- et?.'C.- re e. .st, ..te .s.e r .a-%,t,.at,os
.. e6** vn.e. ;r . . r..t. i.f .e . 7 . '. e .r :. eet ;, . e.e,
, ,9.. .
_-e . ova z . m .cn a Ta..keo.ver ..
- o,.rdie.n.c. e uohel.d g* -.l r ,. "- - - - - ;
i e .
r -deu- M 1 . n t: . y"* . ! r * :.e p
- .1 ter el lec l' at ft ars of .
-y ,3 4, l v.S n.a s Q ' P U E
- e .ca'e De W.% r#s Icard of for'f! cps "f *.rge ring dar-age s", (f. the y,';g'3 g
.:it) t, react.ed (tntracts for the will ctA ge in Jarbary aben the - ,g , gggg, . ,-
..'er sys'em mere not enough to, . term of I'.s, chaltman, Joseph E. .
- #ify 1.adrg the to. art trterfert . Johnson. empires. The commis . T_,. ,g 1 ,,, 4
...,,e:--..
' s13 the action of 'anc3er branch stor.ers f.an to replace Johnson .,
eif gcc.er . ment. . . - e- l- m1'.h safneone e 1:*bg to t ack 1.*.e m .
y, , .
A pdge does not hase the power In theb e!! orts to *".arNate," the g~*, ,e-".=' j,r,f,;,M'yy
- to s*.se d:en a et. state **earept I Tject. -
f,r ects'lt.:*.1.."11 rt =*oss. es en %3'.h tmo c'J.er
- fMWy" k o!es 'a -
e we :: e.,reses the et.siste un.
, , y," ! g g*g .
o ite fi,e em .t cr i card. tt.s t- old (,lt e t'if C . ."1 U.e I h O bg ,*yL
,r .=-.3=.=w *1 -
. .y c, r e.;, gt ** e 1.s ta*ks sef a tf a e 4rit) of F.F % P. A's r .e m- .
i s' ' , g r i e t l e d tansa>er or tis. ry. the esiur.ty
- ght'ast.C ~.at %
/
e r S EFo. tn Ltde theit r's 11.e h r less l g. ,s tre o t-Un f !) C 2 ,'e " .' d I CII
'/. d e e
.g y .g a S- ? L ?ls e, en t
- ? n.. .a. e * *'.tgy e h te g't.t .f es. N. '+% e y. II A
.l+-
s6
<e' "*V ; ,_ . m, , , 's j, v.H ,}
} -
o .Qh :; m, ,
- ?
.< . . . ~
- - e .4 ,h M pg. b 4 .gS 'N""Q*
- gf p y f^ , Ny \ {.
l
/
. . w.- - .- , . . ..w ,
ii%JnCliOn On PUinplCikOOVer O'idinOnCO s,
e.+
. , ' '/. ... ra!. .+< e- r. : s e.m.
. ,,;,va. e n t w . v. swesn . a.e c ..- e. . .t . r:m, = w. c.a . .. . .. . . .M,: .s. . . .. r..
c reu ...- e.
.;a c.:.v w c .r. ... n.e n u. e:.v . > -e . . c .x.,u r . ,e . , . - .., j , . . - . - ,
. se.s g.:s .:
e ,e .:
. i.e - m .;..u
- .n r v c n .. a u. u,.
..:s i . i. ... . . i. i c :e..,,ow, c,u.ca .i.u,e 2. ,r.
,e r.a.
c., ., -
.. l ;,.,,- ,,
g.p;;4.; ,: g, ..
- :.c.4
. :s m:.2..:::ca :r i.::- r w,a 4 s. . .
es- c.. .or
- t c: e. -
t.re.e.-ne
- .n .ic .e.-
c -:i. se: e en h., m.<
m; .C. i.,. .
. , *., ,,, .,m. ,; g .
r.n w ue n,..
.i v.
.uc a e, ,, t.;..c, ;A. _
8 . .
c.., ;g,..,,;, g,.
r .
. ; .r. .,+.,
.. ,n v e, :: :q . , ..+ u.:e.:.e:-r. c..ir.t..e..,.-
- u. c q-
.x 4.: .c .-m. t.&c. _ _<..e ,. , :gc.3 , . ,c:c
- . e.-
we c se.
.:u. .- c. v 1e .t-; e.--.
- m. s ew: .. c.r r eencn.--, e. ;. c. .
sn, . .. , . . ,
cv .
,- : 2:r. Le - . . .
- c. c .u. . m. . n :. w s, .< .; e.
w.t r.a,
- . . . c i.
,e m . . ., c , c
, s a n ..% .e. . .. y ,
- . : .- .2. cen..,n c e,a. v.m.. nee . p, . ...,ee . . .n. :e.u. :r:.
.. . e ,c w. e . . ,, . 7;- n..c....; . , , . .,.,
c..~...n .s.
,.c..-...t......., t. -c c .-
e_4 z.*un . . .. c.4,.-
. ..u .
._.g...,,$..,..,,. .
- n. q.c .i. 3-e.. s.- -u.. t-c e,rs .e e :e e...cr.e. .. =-r..> e,c.:. .- ; m .3
.e ::- . :r . . . -
n.e
.- u- p. c .r..v:-n, u
- c. . t.:1
.,r .
3,,c.,*c : , . ., ,. . ..,c...,.,,-....e.e t !;e.e :.
2.-
,..ts c:e.cc.ea..k.r,..:
r -
- i. .. . e... t. .cee
- c. .nu u, . c, . . . , . , . ......,,2,.,,.8,.6 .
.:- . ;c :
. . :. . . , . .e . .we ra e t ...w
- .r !. e. e. .v.e .r
,e.e. e. >. e c . ...,.,..u .
. .o c s. ,.: r. er,..;,,
. .,w..
,y,,..,. -.. - , .. .
- c. a. .ce.-w. e ..t.s me ee ;
K,.,. ,,._ .,,; ;. , , .
u...-r.
-e . ..- - m u: , u n .r. . ., n. . _
., ~ , . . .cy ..;,-.
- .,. ,.,. , _ , c.
- :. ,e = .2.-
c- ...n . .. .:
r.e :. n. . -u..-- ...,.,3,.,m,..,g,..,,..,,,,.,
er - .- - c....n, . .. nw ,c. ..-
. . er :m s - .v. .. ... :. ...,. :_.a .: c. :,c.e ....m re .-u c.r ...r. . ..
a.t.. un i :.n. .tr.a
.s .. e. , - . . , ., _,. . . . , , ..
a -- a . . . c. ,o. . , c ..
- ec - .;: 4: ,e, a
. . . . . ..c, . . .u. - < r..c-
. . n. .
, .. . . . . a. .m.: ir .s s c. . . 7. . .e.r . . v, : .s.
c.-%
r : ue e. m .c -m tr . . .
. ,e . , ,.
- c. , 3. .
,,,m,
,,,,,t,..,,. ,;., .
r.
- e. .. . .r.
.g
-;.. .e -s..e: r. c., c .se . _ .24 .c: e, e. .. ic .. r e.,a,e. u.
...-.,2,,c... :
- . .c . r. .. ..ow o
- s
- -- . ~ , .
.,a e. u. .u.,,, ..
. , .c,r. - c se e,.- : .- .s.- .
. . r.
. e. .s. ; :. .,. , , . ,
. a.
r . .v-
- c. n. e.. . .y , e u.c..
- e. .cu. e :- e .:
- c. e.,.. .. .:. ;: ;.. .,c..e .a.m m.3 >. ...c. v : . . e,.e em.r i.r.a. e .e ,, .. ,. , . .<. . i., . .n . , , . , .
. c. , , , , , , ,
- : e..
.. ;e o..
...r.. c
- n .
.ar...
- r. . . , .,.o.,: tw .r. L-
. f i, . : ts. c .r
- . u..-
- n
~. v r.
.. : s.3 re . nr en:r.e
-e
..3.
. t.:,n c u
.. s f.,. ,c: e s.# ar = e. : . . 33 .,. . . . er e., e u.. , . . .. - e.t .n o. . .. : . ., ., ... ..
- . .m. . - . w .n; t.-r ,~u.:.c wa .c r ic..--c ~ . - e.:e ea m.e,ac.e i.
e.- 1-c :: er n.i
.s :..e, .uc s ...rre..o c.. r,..- . .e.>:
.e .n P m i
- c. : -.......,.,n .,. .,
.%..,.*c : cc.= ..e , .sr .r. ., . nr e .i.c. c .nwu , . . . , u, g c.,
e.ce,.
4 e ,~.t
.r..a..r....,
u r . .- ...# . ic er e: r..c e .e,a 4, . ,-.
- e. :r. . .e.s m.r c. :+ re c. e.c.
- rc. ., a: . .
..-...n,e....m.,,,. :,
- , v. ,.c , . ei.
. .; 3eu ...: .r..,
- c. .. t . cerr.ue .cc .,,u
.-eee e i.n 4. r..t nc . c. .- c. .- , .. u : rm .. s-e. <. i. .u.s- .. m a w rc ..: c..r es. e. .,.,..:..,,.,c.-
- n. u : c,c.er.
t
.. -.mr- e .e= . e ,.r c.e .. ..,#u=..., e e. . ;. c . n-c=
., 3..,. cw t . cr
. ..u .c,t. ea,
- w
- e. r:ne r e.nn
- - c.:
u..sa.:.c. a.a e i. . -e .
- m :. .. n. .y ....c w .r..<..n.e,,,..,. c. r . .. .. ..., u, , r.
, c . , ..,.n.. te e.. se
- .c.nL. .e. s.- . .= ca e.e. uc.aa.s..ro. e ..
- u..,tc .,,.m s.s e.naee o em c. s :... . . u,i.et. s, c . ..ee.
n:r.sm as cc,-=.%. :.x m
cr a:o in .-c,c.. . .. .-mc .: .e . e u c. (.....c,. u .. e.t:;
un m.e,.m .c.a u ow.t:4 r,e are.v ut 6.rz.
c.z a.e
.-ec. ,t n r.vo, s.o s .in ter.ce. ut . t.- e r r e e. ~.,.u.
- e. -
,.. w.,3 e r.se,4
,v.e,s.,c.
,5: i . :, .
.a tu r..rc e.s m t.c.- e m. o..m,, a..ruce e s . m i . c.. m..,e p .e
,c s ,a.a. :.
e es 3 u . . . ,r . :.. r. nr.
. e. .,et..:;.u ,. u .-: > , r.3 u. a. n . .=rn : ,~r.,.
o a: ic.; ui ..:a3 e : es ,.; ;,eu,. wwu. u c e- v : u w.,m, r-. *r. r...i e.w>e 5ei .. r ; . .ae c37 . e. r. .,.u. s c. e. .n.
i e.ere m es-n..cc,i-.u. e i .im ..
c .u.: . c. c.u. e .e.: .: n c,r-a. . rn 3 u. :- cry.-.c .
. : c.r r .:. .-ar.w r.. .u..c.: .: ,e t
r,cc, u c-e:.: .u.
o,r ut ,n c.w,c,1.v.a.co.,c..c eue cyt 3 -r c.
nc:
-2 c . c e. rc w.; 3. w .. ec o e.u= e ..ni. e
-. r_ n. . cc., r n. e .e e., a. e. tr s .e- ~:r- 4. u.tu,t-cer 2.no<a. .e.c...c: .e m- r :3. .u = r.m
. , ..d -e re,.. c
.,..a.e
,e - c.t w.i. tsvrc.r. m..er. .e nc-s . -.= h.n e> :< e
,. er w.e . =i e e., . ...o e . .e> i.er-rw ia re s u
.r... u cie m .-,
,. .c.23.:- ! u e w m, acw i.c r.:i . >n ,. e. .
e
. -- c .. .v =sc. , ,- re.-4.u, n u . e.cm.w=
- =, i - t,s.r> a m. s.
n i oc i- .n
= efe.c...m:.e w ; c c >.a. r
~ , u e: , -r . n t-. .: u e4 r -
...,.,m.c,ee.,i,.
a cnm e.: ~ .e: rs ,i>u re. o.m. mu .w. : c
- e. . n.e u.3i.v
. ..3=
u r r sm.c.a a-.s
~ .4-
- m. e . :.m n.u,. .uv
. re , <..... e. c.=a. a ru . ,r:~. n
.s.t.e nuo ii: p..n.
,een - r
.. c. m. v. en . .. v. . u r scr w.,..
i n.,
wr.r..me - en. m.. .r
. .ia.ii i n.t ve.>
.. w ,e .v.-c.
.us s......-
in. r.c . t...r i v......c.e..u.a.,....
- t. 6 . .
.. c< s
./ r.:.mu ..a
- i. . c :- . ..a - . - <w
- r. c .= -evne
- . ; . . . c... r. t.. ro i,m....m t
t.ce.t..mrt.e:
< w.:=,. e . c ,
. m.w. .e,: .c -e :eu ro. .e n.m.a,m .-cer, ne n r . .e
>>r w..e . .,. ;-s.c e.n..;.ss -
w mc r e ,a.. e, n r. m u m na ro.wrw r3,c.
- r=
. . .e =wt ea i.1., mt -7 ].e . . .,o,, < *2 s .
.. .. r.e : n.3.
m a t,. n er..r, v e 9. 1.c... . o u new e e.. sv.> ..r.s,. c .. w., .w ce s . :. m . r
- .. .v..- e ,.::.n,
. u .v e....t i n>e.- c..ec. c , e e.=r e
s n,e.e..r . a ec w m.: ear :w,we5,;.v e .e ee.n .,: e .,.n. .c. c e.... ,.. u.s
. . r.i i i .: .:
. r; - erce.c..es m
..w u e,. cc
.. ..u. r.3 .en... =, n :. -o
., . -re :. =re e. e r. o,= rsns es,e-.e-.r = cue w e ..
<.ca,.u r-n .e. . .c a.
- e. ,e n.v., e,
- . . ce . ,c
.n..c.w .e c .,. u . . -
1 .
w c. . . .~. no.sr .. >. s : rn nie e, nim.e. i .. nn.rn..=e
. we a r rn. a. . m i
. .. . ,. .n:.u . , i.s ev.
.r r- cw..,.r cr :: e. cs.. >
.w 3.. u. . e .e.
,a.,r exw.m n w ,.om, . , , -: i. ;
., - . . . . - - . . . - - ~ -m
- - ,' . S . .
v
.. # -h . .
.,'\
V .; ,m,.
- b. .s.'
7,
. O . . ...L..--
.~ _
.\ -N
. .T.) kd
\ . - /. -*
. ,,/
~ .,2 .
. -~- - {,j. --
p cn com.macts, Acchssoriesb conme! pd.-QWq.s .
s
- , - - - ' - , - - g"
-., . vcr .,
,s.
. . .w c. Tc
' . . . l(\ V..N'.3.
yX -
-1.' - , $ ' , /
r 4?_ <*
.. ~. .. ,~e -p~
- U T E R .-
"m > 3' .
. .. . i n. : .. y .. -+.n- q (m.3 - '
a:g.g g...m, - .T.isN. c. m'n' i.Wc a.-
n ~: .
' .5 1 .
f4 p. p o.A- .
.c. ,, s ..
g y .j .
a., .-
- s. s,
-..L..-c.--.s.la_u.en..-- .-
.?r 4' ., . s'. s
,t.. 3. .
CN --- ' 4*+ . - r-r.ra ts. .e **.e.,
. . eun. c ** ur < e .n
--:-e._..
f __.-- .;'x.:e.2
.. .._? _=e_- t6 :a e s ams:r svm - g '. .. .
- g. :. y)
- 'W==-=--- l
~l.QW1 g,m;. ..f ~~ jl) ' ~~~ '1 Gib.da.. 7/
a
-: . ._.3 . - . C .- ** ic mi i A eitt
, , .a% . mj/
g ; O_ , f ",, i
..,e.,..e. q.
..~...e
. .f o. .t.r4
. n..
, l, , - .-~
.. .~- - s. ... . ..;
i.4... -- . . . . , xa
.. e a w e og , n.: o. ,. A.. e -*1 ,
'r*.
-y . .1 .
. b
- -~
UMITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
. ;], Dip-In the matter of )
PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY Docket Nb. d0-IF52gl 45
) 50-353 (Limerick Generating Station, ) U. .:..
Units 1 and 2 ) 00$f-i;/ihk'
) iR.1Ec?
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing REQUEST TO SUBMIT LATE FILED CONTENTION by mailing acopyofthesametothefollowingpersonsthisLbthdayof December, 1983.
Judge Lawrence Brenner (2) Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Docketing and Service Section Judge Richard F. Cole Office of the Secretary Atomic Safety and Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Board Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Washington, D.C. 20555 Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Ann P. Hodgdon, Esq.
Counsel for NRC Staff Judge Peter A. Morris Office of the Executive Atomic Safety and Licensing Legal Director Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 %
Washington, D.C. 20555
~
Atomic Safety and Licensing Steven P. Hershey, Esq.
Board Panel Community Legal Services, Inc.
. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Law Center West Nortn Commission 5219 Chestnut Street Washington, D.C. 20555 Philadelphia, PA 19139 Philadelphia Electric Co. Angus Love, Esq.
ATTN: Edward G. Bauer, Jr. 101 East Main Street Vice President & Norristown, PA 19401 General Counsel 2031 Market Street Mr. Joseph H. White, III Philadelphia, PA 19101 15 Ardmore Avenue Ardmore, PA 19003 Mr. Frank R. Romano 61 Forest Avenue Director, Pennsylvania Ambler, PA 19002 Emergency Management Agency Basement, Transportation and Mr. Robert L. Anthony Safety Building Friends of the Earth of Harrisburg, PA 17120 the Delaware Valley 106 Vernon Lanc, Box 186 Mr. Marvin I. Lewis Moylan, PA 19065 6504 Bradord Terrace Philadelphia, PA 19149 Phyllis Zitrer, Esq.
Limerick Ecology Action Martha W. Bush, Esq.
P.O. Box 761 Kathryn S. Lewis, Esq.
762 Queen Street City of Philadelphia Pottstown, PA 19464 Municipal Services Bldg.
15th and JFK Blvd. -
Charles W. Elliott, Esq.
Brose and Postwistilo Spence W. Perry, Esq. -
1101 Building lith & Associate General Counsel Northampton Streets Federal Emergency Easton, PA 18042 Management Agency 500 C Street, S.W., Rm. 840 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Washington, D.C. 20472 DER
( 505 Executive House Thomas Gerusky, Director f P.O. Box 2357 Bureau of Radiation l -
Harrisburg, PA 17120 Protection Department of Environmental Jay M. Gutierrez, Esq. Resources
- U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 5th Floor, Fulton Bank Bldg.
! Commission Third and Locust Streets Region I Harrisburg, PA 17120 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 l
. . ~.....:. ..-.: :z ... :. :
Troy Conner Zori G. Ferkin
- Conner & Wetterhahn Comrronwealth of Pennsylvania
, 1747 Pennsylvania Ave. Governor's Energy Council Washington, D.C. 20006 P.O. Box 8010 1625 N. Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17105 n '
5f(, y ROBERT J. SUGARMAN Counsel for 'intebvenors Del-AWARE Unlimited, Inc.
I b
J ..
e b
G 6
. --. . , . _ _