ML20198F310
| ML20198F310 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Satsop |
| Issue date: | 03/13/1975 |
| From: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Muller D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| CON-WNP-1244 NUDOCS 8605280470 | |
| Download: ML20198F310 (6) | |
Text
...
t P
MAR 131975
~
Daniel R. Muller, Assistant Director for Environmental Projects PJ, REVIEW OF DRAFT ENVIRONIDTAL STATEMENT PLANT NAIE: WPPSS 3 & 5 LICENSDIG STAGE: CP DOCRET NUM3ERS: 50-508 and 50-509 RESPONSIBLE BRAUCII: Environmental Projects Branch No. 4 PROJECT MANAGER:
J. A. Norris DATE REQUEST RECEIVED BY ESB: NA REQUESTED COMPLETI0ti DATE: March 11, 1975 DESCRIPTION OF RESP 0;iSE: Changes Suggested REVIEW STATUS: Environmental Specialists Branch Review Couplete As requested, we have reviewed and commented on the draft environmental statement. The draft statement is adequate; however, ninor suSgested changes are provided in the enclosure.
The reviewers vero C. Cears, If. Masnik and R. Sat: worth.
M SitRed by N. R. Dentos
, Harold R. Denton, Assistant Director for Site Safety Division of Technical Review Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Enclosare:
As stated cc: See next page.
)
j 8605280470 750313 Y
PDR ADOCK 05000508 D
PDR i
e
i
\\
Daniel R. Muller
".2 ~
MAR 131975 t
cc: w/o enclosure
,A. Giambusso W. Mcdonald
.J. Panzarella l
- SS Branch Chiefs cc w/ enclosure
.S. Hanauer F. Schroeder TR Asst. Directors A. Kenneka W. Regan R. Ballard J. Norris G. Gears R. Sauvorth M. Masnik t
DISTRIBUTION Docket File 50-508/50a NRR:Rdg ESB:Rdg 9
on res
- TR:ESB fES..
.vaname
- MTMasn b
-. R limed.
.HRDht 6n..._
_3/10/75.
..... 3/.... /.75....... _3L\\. 15 o a v.
- rena AIC.)l3 (Rev. 9 5)) AICM 0240 W v.e.sov musm? Palatine errocas sete.sas.tes
i SPECIFIC COM1ENTS ON WPPSS 3 & 5 DES Summary and Conclusions Section 2 should read "will employ two pressure water reactors each producing up to 3800 megawatts thermal (MWt)".
Steam turbine generators will use this heat to provide 1240 MWe (net) per unit of electrical power capacity.
Section '3 should include a scatement similar to the following:
"The utilization of the Ranney intake system is expected to cause negligible levels of impingement and entrainment".
Section 7 should include a statement similar to the following: " Prior to cleanup operations described in 3.7.3, the applicant should submit a proposed plan for the disposal of all cleaning and wetting agents that reflect adequate concern for environmental impacts."
Section 2.2.2 On page 2-9, first paragraph, state the reference source for the sentence ending with "... intensive food production." (Second line)
Section 2.2.2 In Table 2.7, page 2-23, explain why coliform data for the Chehalis River is missing.
Tables 2.9 and 2.10, page 2-25, should be referenced.
(
m.
O
, Section 2.7.1 On page 2-30, first paragraph the generic epithet of Canis latrans is spelled incorrectly.
On page 2-30, fourth r ragraph, the spotted owl (Stirix occidentalis) is not included on the U.S. List of Endangered Fauna (May, 1974 -
U.S. Department of the Interior). This list may take precedence over previous lists. Please establish the current status of this species.
Section 2.7.2.3 In the second paragraph, last sentence, the word ammocetes should not be capitalized.
In the third paragraph support or reference the statement "The macroinvertebrates sampling results point to a diverse and abundant fauna."
In Table 2.11, the specific epithet of Richardsonius balteatus is spelled incorrectly.
j Section 3.7.3 I
There is no indication that the phosphate and wetting agents will be removed in the chemical treatment system. The review should consider ultimate disposal of these effluents. We recommend that the applicant submit his plan for disposal of cleaning wastes to NRC for comment prior to performing this operation.
i
h
. Section 4.1.2 On page 4-3, fourth paragraph, the loss of 1500 acres, if considered only a minor impact, should be addressed more thoroughly. It is not sufficient to consider this impact as minor based solely on
" prior experience".
Esction 4.3.1
> Ft
.2mnt on page 4-5, fifth paragraph, predicting possible increases in hunting pressure on game animals due to the influx of constructica personnel must be supported or referenced.
Section 4.3.1.1 Does WPPSS have any authority over the construction, operation, and maintenance of these transmission lines? The control of these activities should be clearly defined.
Has the possibility of scheduling construction activity of tcansmission lines been considered in an effort to minimize the impact on
+
anadromous fishes?
i l
Section 4.4.2 On page 4-8, first paragraph, it is expected that most workers will commute within 70 adles of the site. Are there temporary facilities l
(e.g. trailer parks) near the site which could be utilized by some i
of these workers? What would be the associated effects of these j
temporary residents upon community resources?
l L
E
0
, Section 4.5.1 On page 4-12 point number 11 does not include point number 6 as a comitment. Please explain.
Section 5.1.2 On page 5-2, second paragraph, are there regulations which prohibit the flying of planes beneath BPA power lines?
Section 5.2.1 Removal of 60 cfs from the Chehalis River during periods of low flow may move the salt wedge upstream near the vicinity of the Ranney collectors. The applicant, in anticipation of this and several related impacts has made provisions to purchase 70 cfs of flow from the Wynoochee River during low-flow periods. Can the Wynoochee River w1th a mean flow of 1,662 cfs and a minimum of 3.8 cfs provide this additional flow?
t L