ML20136B469

Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Disposal of Low Level Radwaste Onsite.Nrc Analysis Fails to Take Into Account Effect of Proposed Disposal Method on Lake Erie Which Bounds Davis Besse

ML20136B469
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	11/06/1985
From:	Hanson A Sierra Club
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
References
FRN-50FR41265, RULE-PR-50-MISC 85-01, 85-1, NUDOCS 8511200216
Download: ML20136B469 (3)

Text

- -

Westem Lake Erie a SIERRA CLLB RECEIVED IN THE RULES AND PROCEDURES BRANCH NOVEMBER 14, 1985 No. 85-01 November 6, 1985 DSO 1 i

Rules and Procedures Branch 80 b E  ! a 6 b~

Office of Administration U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 RE: Docket No. 50-346, Toledo Edison /CEI Environmental Assessment 50 Federal Register 41265 -

To Uhom It !!a y Concern:

On October 9, 1985 at 50 Federal Register 41265, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission proposed the approv al o f a procedure put forth by the Toledo Edisor Company and Cleveland Electric Illuminating, operators of thu Davis Besse Nuclear Power Station, to dispose of low-level radioactive waste on-site. In that notice the Commission announced its intention to find that the proposed disposal method had no signifigant impact on the environment and that therefore, an enviromental impact statement would not be necessary.

The Western Lake Erie Sierra Club objects to this proposed decision. The Commission's analysis fails to take into account the effect the proposed disposal method may have on Lake Erie which bounds Davis Besse and serves as the major source of drinking water for the communities of Toledo and Cleveland, Ohio.

This is a major source of human impact which has, apparently, been disregarded. In addition, there is no mention of the impact the proposal may have on the natural habitats proximate to Davis Besse. The power station's neighbors are the Crane Creek State Park and the Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge. Besides being protected wildlife habitat, these two areas are important northern Ohio recreation resources. The people of northern Ohio l stand to lose from this proposal by the e f f ects it may hav e on both their drinking water and their recreational areas.

Questions also remain as to whether the buried waste would have lost its radioactive properties by the time the plant is de-commissioned. This proposal is based on the theory that it wil1 reduce occupational exposures at the nuclear power station.

However, the Western Lake Erie Sierra Club believes it serves no purpose to reduce exposures at one location merely to spread the risk over an even larger popoulation, N i0 kd

• g0 e s ti 6 - l'lIsiss' __ _ _ _ -

so 6 __ __ _

e .

. N.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

dlO Y\AI2d D Anastasia Hanson ( 'k Conservation Chairperson, Western Lake Erie Sierra Club 2349 Densmore Toledo, OH 43606 B

2