ML16029A074

Comment (48) of Scott Hicks on Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Fermi 2 and Request for Concurrence Under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act

ML16029A074
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	12/07/2015
From:	Susan Hicks US Dept of Interior, Fish & Wildlife Service
To:	David Wrona Rules, Announcements, and Directives Branch, Plant Licensing Branch III
References
80FR68881 00048, ER-15-0627
Download: ML16029A074 (2)

Text

~United States Department of the Interior

.~~FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE * ,*o

• East Lansing Field Office (ES) gLi INREPLY REFER TO:

2651 Coolidge Road, Suite 101 East Lansing, Michigan 43823-6316 vL

• J '

ER 15-0627 December 7, 2015 i*~~* "

David J. Wrona, Chief' ..... ,, ..

United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission...i ,.,, i-.,

Environmental Review and Guidance Update Branch.............. ... "::;".. ... ..

Division of License Renewal -i .....

Office of New Reactor Regulation i']'::

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 ".........

Re: Submittal of'Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Fermi 2 and request for concurrence under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.

Dear Mr. Wrona:

• Weare responding to your October 28, 2015 letter and Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the proposed license renewal for the Fermi 2 power plant. Fermi 2 is a single-unit, nuclear-powered, steam-electric generating facility that began commercial operation in July 1985 and has a current license that expires in March 2025. Renewing the license will allow Fermi 2 to operate until March 2045. The Fermi site is located on approximately 1,260 acres along the western shore of Lake Erie, Frenchtown Township, Monroe County, Michigan and is owned and operated by Detroit Edison (DTE).

Fermi 1 is non-operational and will be decommissioned; Fermi 3 has been proposed.

You have requested our comments on the Draft SF1S and concurrence pursuant section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ES A) in regards to your determination of the effects of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission' s (NR.C) relicensing of Fer-mi 2. You have submitted the SEIS in fulfillment of your obligation to prepare a biological assessment of the proposed action on federally-listed species that may be within the project area and are submitting a copy for our review.

Of the nine federally listed-species which may occur within the project area, you have determined "no effect" on four species, based on habitat. They are the Kamer blue butterfly (Lycaeides melissa samuelis);

Northern riffleshell (Epioblasma torulosa rangiana);Snuffbox mussel (Epioblasm triquetra); and Rayed bean (T/illosafabalis). We agree with-this determination, although our concurrence on your determination of no effect is not required.

You have determined that license renewal of Fermi 2 may affect but is not likely to adversely affect the remaining five species; Red knot (Calidris cariutus); Piping plover (Charadriusmelodus); Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis);Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis); and Eastern fringed prairie orchid (Platantheraleucophaea). We concur with your deternination for the following reasons:

s' No new construction or other ground-disturbing activities, changes in operations,, or changes in existing land use conditions in natural areas are anticipated because of license renewal.

SUNSI Review Complete S Template = ADM - 013 E-RIDS= ADM-03 S Add= E'. /*~ca (e_.a /U

• Continued maintenance and repair activities will be limited to previously disturbed areas of the Fermi site.

As such, any effects of the, action are insignificant and/or discountable.

In~regards to the Draft SEIS, this office has no further comments.

This precludes the need to for further action on the proposed Fermni 2 license renewal as required by the ESA. However, if the project is modified or new information about the project becomes available that

• indicates listed or proposed species may be present and/or affected, consultation with the Service should be reinitiated. We further advise that should any species occurring in the project area become federally-listed or proposed, the licensee should reevaluate its responsibilities pursuant ESA. Since tbreatened and endangered species data is continually updated, we suggest the licensee annually request an updated federal-list of the species occurring in the project area.

Questions regarding our resource protection recommendations should be directed to Mr. Burr Fisher at 517/351-8286 or burr_fisher@fws.gov.

Sincerely,

'*¢*/*

' *, Scott Hicks

, Field Supervisor

~United States Department of the Interior

.~~FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE * ,*o

• East Lansing Field Office (ES) gLi INREPLY REFER TO:

2651 Coolidge Road, Suite 101 East Lansing, Michigan 43823-6316 vL

• J '

ER 15-0627 December 7, 2015 i*~~* "

David J. Wrona, Chief' ..... ,, ..

United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission...i ,.,, i-.,

Environmental Review and Guidance Update Branch.............. ... "::;".. ... ..

Division of License Renewal -i .....

Office of New Reactor Regulation i']'::

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 ".........

Re: Submittal of'Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Fermi 2 and request for concurrence under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.

Dear Mr. Wrona:

• Weare responding to your October 28, 2015 letter and Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the proposed license renewal for the Fermi 2 power plant. Fermi 2 is a single-unit, nuclear-powered, steam-electric generating facility that began commercial operation in July 1985 and has a current license that expires in March 2025. Renewing the license will allow Fermi 2 to operate until March 2045. The Fermi site is located on approximately 1,260 acres along the western shore of Lake Erie, Frenchtown Township, Monroe County, Michigan and is owned and operated by Detroit Edison (DTE).

Fermi 1 is non-operational and will be decommissioned; Fermi 3 has been proposed.

You have requested our comments on the Draft SF1S and concurrence pursuant section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ES A) in regards to your determination of the effects of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission' s (NR.C) relicensing of Fer-mi 2. You have submitted the SEIS in fulfillment of your obligation to prepare a biological assessment of the proposed action on federally-listed species that may be within the project area and are submitting a copy for our review.

Of the nine federally listed-species which may occur within the project area, you have determined "no effect" on four species, based on habitat. They are the Kamer blue butterfly (Lycaeides melissa samuelis);

Northern riffleshell (Epioblasma torulosa rangiana);Snuffbox mussel (Epioblasm triquetra); and Rayed bean (T/illosafabalis). We agree with-this determination, although our concurrence on your determination of no effect is not required.

You have determined that license renewal of Fermi 2 may affect but is not likely to adversely affect the remaining five species; Red knot (Calidris cariutus); Piping plover (Charadriusmelodus); Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis);Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis); and Eastern fringed prairie orchid (Platantheraleucophaea). We concur with your deternination for the following reasons:

s' No new construction or other ground-disturbing activities, changes in operations,, or changes in existing land use conditions in natural areas are anticipated because of license renewal.

SUNSI Review Complete S Template = ADM - 013 E-RIDS= ADM-03 S Add= E'. /*~ca (e_.a /U

• Continued maintenance and repair activities will be limited to previously disturbed areas of the Fermi site.

As such, any effects of the, action are insignificant and/or discountable.

In~regards to the Draft SEIS, this office has no further comments.

This precludes the need to for further action on the proposed Fermni 2 license renewal as required by the ESA. However, if the project is modified or new information about the project becomes available that

• indicates listed or proposed species may be present and/or affected, consultation with the Service should be reinitiated. We further advise that should any species occurring in the project area become federally-listed or proposed, the licensee should reevaluate its responsibilities pursuant ESA. Since tbreatened and endangered species data is continually updated, we suggest the licensee annually request an updated federal-list of the species occurring in the project area.

Questions regarding our resource protection recommendations should be directed to Mr. Burr Fisher at 517/351-8286 or burr_fisher@fws.gov.

Sincerely,

'*¢*/*

' *, Scott Hicks

, Field Supervisor