|
---|
Category:INTERVENTION PETITIONS
MONTHYEARML20055A3551982-07-12012 July 1982 Amended Contention 59.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20052A4541982-04-22022 April 1982 Submittal of Contention 58 Re Applicant Conduct on Reporting Violations at Plant.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20039B5721981-12-15015 December 1981 Response Opposing R Alexander 811130 Untimely Petition to Intervene.Strong Grounds Necessary to Reopen Record on Financial Qualifications Not Shown & Requirements for Untimely Intervention Not Met.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20003H8021981-04-23023 April 1981 Intervenor Jf Doherty Contention 56,stating That Reactor Trip Sys Unprotected Against Pipe Break to Scram Discharge Vols from Hydraulic Control Units.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20003A5581981-01-26026 January 1981 Contentions 50 & 55 in Response to NUREG-0470,Suppl 2, Draft Suppl to Fes Re Const of Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station,Unit 1. Site Je-3 Superior to Applicant Choice W/Less Environ Impact ML20062L2941981-01-15015 January 1981 Contention 51 Re Designation of Site Li-3 as Superior Site, Contention 52 Re Ability of Govt to Decide Issues of Wildlife Habitat & Contentions 53 & 54 Re NUREG-470,Suppl 2. Certificate of Svc Encl ML19336A7361980-10-27027 October 1980 Response in Opposition to Jf Doherty Untimely Contention 50. Intervenor Failed to Establish Connection Between Design & Alleged Safety Concern of Coolant Circulation Degradation. Certificate of Svc Encl ML19331D9241980-08-28028 August 1980 Response in Opposition to W Schuessler,S Doggett & Tx Pirg 800813 Reworded Contention Except Portion Re Capability of Plan W/Location.Remaining Portions Do Not Comply W/Aslb 800724 Order.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19338C3861980-08-15015 August 1980 Consolidation of Contentions Re Emergency Evacuation Plans. Alleges Failure of Environ Rept,Psar,Fes & SER to Comply W/ Regulations Re Evacuation During Class 9 Accidents. Designates Wj Schuessler as Lead Party ML19323D7621980-04-22022 April 1980 Response in Opposition to Jf Doherty Contentions 48 & 49. Intervenor Failed to Justify Untimeliness & to State Good Basis for Conteniton 48.Contention 49 Is Inappropriate for Consideration Due to Class 9 Policy.W/Certificate of Svc ML19323B6961980-04-0707 April 1980 Contentions 48 & 49 Alleging That Facility Should Be Designed W/Control Rod Drive Return as Addl Safeguard & That Containment Should Have Core Ladle as Described in NUREG- 0054 ML19309G1181980-04-0707 April 1980 Brief in Response & Opposition to Fh Potthoff Appeal of ASLB 800310 Order Rejecting Contention 6 Re Biomass Farm Alternative.Intervenor Failed to Include Sufficient Bases for Allegation.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19309H6581980-04-0707 April 1980 Amend to 790525 Contention 17,adding ATWS for Consideration W/Power Excursion Accidents Re Reactivity Effect ML19305E1481980-03-31031 March 1980 Response in Support of R Potthoff Appeal Re Denial of Petition to Intervene.Potthoff Contention Should Be Regarded as Allegation That EIS Did Not Address Biomass Conversion. W/Certificate of Svc ML19309E4101980-03-27027 March 1980 Response in Opposition to Intervenor Jf Doherty 800312 Untimely Contention 47.Good Cause Re Relationship of New Info to Analyses of Turbine Missile Generation Probability & Damage to Equipment,Not Met.W/Certificate of Svc ML19294B0971980-02-10010 February 1980 Response to Applicant & NRC Briefs Re R Alexander 800206 Appeal.Restates Interests as Affected Family & Urges Aslab to Grant Intervention ML20148C9071978-10-11011 October 1978 Petition for Leave to Intervene by Houston Chapter of Natl Lawyers Guild,Inc ML20148B7651978-10-11011 October 1978 Petition to Intervene in CP Proceedings.Accident at Facility Could Cause Tremendous Loss of Life.Even Low Levels of Radiation Can Cause Cancer or Genetic Damage ML20147C6961978-09-29029 September 1978 Response to Amended Petition for Leave to Intervene Filed by W. E.Rentfro.Holds That Amended Petition Fails to Meet the Requirements of I0CFR2.7J4(b) & ASLB Order of 780814 & Should Be Denied 1982-07-12
[Table view] Category:RESPONSES & CONTENTIONS
MONTHYEARML20055A3551982-07-12012 July 1982 Amended Contention 59.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20052A4541982-04-22022 April 1982 Submittal of Contention 58 Re Applicant Conduct on Reporting Violations at Plant.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20039B5721981-12-15015 December 1981 Response Opposing R Alexander 811130 Untimely Petition to Intervene.Strong Grounds Necessary to Reopen Record on Financial Qualifications Not Shown & Requirements for Untimely Intervention Not Met.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20003H8021981-04-23023 April 1981 Intervenor Jf Doherty Contention 56,stating That Reactor Trip Sys Unprotected Against Pipe Break to Scram Discharge Vols from Hydraulic Control Units.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20003A5581981-01-26026 January 1981 Contentions 50 & 55 in Response to NUREG-0470,Suppl 2, Draft Suppl to Fes Re Const of Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station,Unit 1. Site Je-3 Superior to Applicant Choice W/Less Environ Impact ML20062L2941981-01-15015 January 1981 Contention 51 Re Designation of Site Li-3 as Superior Site, Contention 52 Re Ability of Govt to Decide Issues of Wildlife Habitat & Contentions 53 & 54 Re NUREG-470,Suppl 2. Certificate of Svc Encl ML19336A7361980-10-27027 October 1980 Response in Opposition to Jf Doherty Untimely Contention 50. Intervenor Failed to Establish Connection Between Design & Alleged Safety Concern of Coolant Circulation Degradation. Certificate of Svc Encl ML19331D9241980-08-28028 August 1980 Response in Opposition to W Schuessler,S Doggett & Tx Pirg 800813 Reworded Contention Except Portion Re Capability of Plan W/Location.Remaining Portions Do Not Comply W/Aslb 800724 Order.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19338C3861980-08-15015 August 1980 Consolidation of Contentions Re Emergency Evacuation Plans. Alleges Failure of Environ Rept,Psar,Fes & SER to Comply W/ Regulations Re Evacuation During Class 9 Accidents. Designates Wj Schuessler as Lead Party ML19323D7621980-04-22022 April 1980 Response in Opposition to Jf Doherty Contentions 48 & 49. Intervenor Failed to Justify Untimeliness & to State Good Basis for Conteniton 48.Contention 49 Is Inappropriate for Consideration Due to Class 9 Policy.W/Certificate of Svc ML19323B6961980-04-0707 April 1980 Contentions 48 & 49 Alleging That Facility Should Be Designed W/Control Rod Drive Return as Addl Safeguard & That Containment Should Have Core Ladle as Described in NUREG- 0054 ML19309G1181980-04-0707 April 1980 Brief in Response & Opposition to Fh Potthoff Appeal of ASLB 800310 Order Rejecting Contention 6 Re Biomass Farm Alternative.Intervenor Failed to Include Sufficient Bases for Allegation.Certificate of Svc Encl ML19309H6581980-04-0707 April 1980 Amend to 790525 Contention 17,adding ATWS for Consideration W/Power Excursion Accidents Re Reactivity Effect ML19305E1481980-03-31031 March 1980 Response in Support of R Potthoff Appeal Re Denial of Petition to Intervene.Potthoff Contention Should Be Regarded as Allegation That EIS Did Not Address Biomass Conversion. W/Certificate of Svc ML19309E4101980-03-27027 March 1980 Response in Opposition to Intervenor Jf Doherty 800312 Untimely Contention 47.Good Cause Re Relationship of New Info to Analyses of Turbine Missile Generation Probability & Damage to Equipment,Not Met.W/Certificate of Svc ML19294B0971980-02-10010 February 1980 Response to Applicant & NRC Briefs Re R Alexander 800206 Appeal.Restates Interests as Affected Family & Urges Aslab to Grant Intervention ML20148C9071978-10-11011 October 1978 Petition for Leave to Intervene by Houston Chapter of Natl Lawyers Guild,Inc ML20148B7651978-10-11011 October 1978 Petition to Intervene in CP Proceedings.Accident at Facility Could Cause Tremendous Loss of Life.Even Low Levels of Radiation Can Cause Cancer or Genetic Damage ML20147C6961978-09-29029 September 1978 Response to Amended Petition for Leave to Intervene Filed by W. E.Rentfro.Holds That Amended Petition Fails to Meet the Requirements of I0CFR2.7J4(b) & ASLB Order of 780814 & Should Be Denied 1982-07-12
[Table view] Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20063N7471982-10-0606 October 1982 Motion for Termination of Proceedings.Util Decided to Cancel Plant.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20063N7591982-10-0606 October 1982 Withdrawal of Application for CP ML20055A7221982-07-15015 July 1982 Memorandum & Order Denying Jf Doherty 820615 Submittals, Treated as Motion to Reconsider ASLB 820602 Order.Motion Untimely Filed & Failed to Show Significance or Gravity of Issues ML20055A3551982-07-12012 July 1982 Amended Contention 59.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054L4521982-07-0202 July 1982 Response Opposing J Doherty 820615 Motion to Reopen Record to Add Contention 59.Motion Fails to Establish Timeliness &/Or Significance of Issues Sought to Be Raised.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054L5531982-07-0202 July 1982 Response Opposing Doherty 820615 Motion to Reopen Record to Add Contention 59.Motion Should Be Considered Motion for Reconsideration of ASLB 820602 Order.Timeliness & Significance of Issues Not Established.W/Certificate of Svc ML20054J9371982-06-28028 June 1982 Response Opposing J Doherty 820615 Request to Reopen Record. Request Improper & Insufficient to Support Relief.Commission Rules Cannot Be Circumvented by Refiling Same Argument After ASLB Ruling Issued.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054F9861982-06-15015 June 1982 Motion to Reopen Record to Take Evidence on Contention 59. Gravity of Issues Warrants Reopening ML20054G0171982-06-15015 June 1982 Contention 50 Re Brown & Root Deficiencies in Quadrex Rept. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20053D0861982-05-24024 May 1982 Response in Opposition to Util 820519 Motion to Strike Doherty Contention 58 Re Applicant Conduct on Reporting Violations.Contention Should Be Treated as Such,Not as Motion.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20052H8621982-05-19019 May 1982 Motion to Strike J Doherty Reply to Applicant 820507 Response to Doherty 820422 Motion to Add Contention 58. Commission Rules Do Not Allow Reply.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20052H4441982-05-14014 May 1982 Reply Opposing Applicant 820507 Response to J Doherty 820422 Motion to Add Contention 58.Contention Should Be Admitted W/Amends.Aslb Should Judge Conduct of Applicants. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20052F3121982-05-0707 May 1982 Response Opposing J Doherty 820422 Motion to Add Contention Re Alleged Failure to Rept Design Defects.Substantively, Motion Is Motion to Reopen Record & Stds Have Not Been Met. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20052D1221982-04-29029 April 1982 Findings of Fact on Supplemental Issues to Tx Pirg Addl Contention 31 Re Technical Qualifications.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20052A4541982-04-22022 April 1982 Submittal of Contention 58 Re Applicant Conduct on Reporting Violations at Plant.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054E0561982-04-21021 April 1982 Supplemental Findings of Fact on Tx Pirg Addl Contention 31 Re Technical Qualifications.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20050J1111982-04-0606 April 1982 Answers to Second & Third Sets of Interrogatories,Questions 29 & 8 Respectively,Re Quadrex Rept.Certificate of Svc Encl. Related Correspondence ML20050E2961982-04-0505 April 1982 Answers & Objections to Seventh Set of Interrogatories. Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20050E2891982-04-0505 April 1982 Answers & Objections to Doherty Sixth Set of Interrogatories.Related Correspondence ML20050C4211982-04-0202 April 1982 Objections to Request for Admissions.Requests Untimely, Irrelevant to Issues Before ASLB & Extremely & Unduly Burdensome.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20050C4081982-03-31031 March 1982 Answers & Objections to Fifth Set of Interrogatories. Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20050C4791982-03-29029 March 1982 Answers & Objections to Jf Doherty Fourth Set of Interrogatories Re Tx Pirg Contention 31 & Quadrex Matters. Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20042C6181982-03-29029 March 1982 Response Opposing J Doherty 820315 Motion for ASLB to Subpoena Quadrex Corp Employee Witnesses as ASLB Witnesses. Request Is Based on Misperception of Scope of Reopened Hearings.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20042C6431982-03-29029 March 1982 Motion for ASLB to Call DE Sells as Witness for Tx Pirg Addl Contention 31 & Quadrex-related Matters.Testimony Needed to Explain Why NRC Did Not Immediately Obtain Quadrex Rept. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20050C5091982-03-26026 March 1982 Response to Jf Doherty 20th & 21st Requests for Documents. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20050C5041982-03-26026 March 1982 Testimony of Lj Sas on Tx Pirg Addl Contention 31 Re Quadrex Rept.Rept Raises No Issue as to Whether Ebasco Can Properly Engineer Project.Prof Qualifications Encl ML20050C5011982-03-26026 March 1982 Supplemental Testimony of Jh Goldberg on Technical Qualifications.Brown & Root Terminates Due to Lack of Engineering Productivity,Not Due to Allegations in Quadrex Rept ML20042C5201982-03-25025 March 1982 Motion to Compel Discovery from Applicant & to Postpone Evidentiary Presentations at 820412 Hearings.Applicant Objections to Interrogatories Unsupported & Necessitate Hearings Be Delayed.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20049K0671982-03-25025 March 1982 Reply to Tx Pirg 820315 Addl Proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20049K0801982-03-25025 March 1982 Answers & Objections to Interrogatories.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20042C5481982-03-23023 March 1982 Fourth Set of Requests for Admissions Re Quadrex Rept & Tx Pirg Contention 31.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20049K0841982-03-23023 March 1982 Answers & Objections to Third Set of Interrogatories. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20049K0941982-03-23023 March 1982 Answers & Objections to Second Set of Interrogatories. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20042A4791982-03-17017 March 1982 Response Opposing J Doherty 820310 Motion for Postponement of 820412 Hearings.Sufficient Grounds Not Provided to Justify Delay.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20042B2351982-03-17017 March 1982 Seventh Set of Interrogatories Re Tx Pirg Addl Contention 31 & Quadrex Rept Matters.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20042B2381982-03-15015 March 1982 Sixth Set of Interrogatories Re Tx Pirg Addl Contention 31 & Quadrex Rept Matters.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20042B2451982-03-15015 March 1982 Motion for Subpoena of Quadrex Corp Employees.Testimony Necessary for Clear Understanding of Brown & Root Deficiencies Despite Util Supervision & Specific Steps Needed to Correct & Prevent Problems.W/Certificate of Svc ML20041F0761982-03-10010 March 1982 Fourth Set of Interrogatories Re Tx Pirg Contention 31 & Quadrex Rept.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20041F0871982-03-10010 March 1982 Motion for Postponement of 820412 Hearing on Tx Pirg Addl Contention 31 & Quadrex-related Matters.Addl Time Needed to Complete Discovery.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20049J6571982-03-0808 March 1982 Answers to First Set of Interrogatories Re Tx Pirg Contention 31 & Quadrex Matters.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20041E1001982-03-0505 March 1982 First Set of Interrogatories & Request for Production of Documents.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20041E1071982-03-0505 March 1982 First Set of Interrogatories & Request for Production of Documents Re Tx Pirg Contention 31.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20041E1181982-03-0505 March 1982 Third Set of Interrogatories Re Tx Pirg Contention 31 & Quadrex Rept Matters.Related Correspondence ML20041E1201982-03-0505 March 1982 Motion for Order Directing Applicant to Provide Forthcoming Bechtel Quadrex Rept Review.Rept Pertinent to Remaining Issue.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20041E1741982-03-0505 March 1982 Brief Opposing R Alexander Appeal from ASLB 820112 Order Denying Petition to Intervene.Aslb Did Not Abuse Discretion in Denying Petition.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20041E0711982-03-0404 March 1982 Second Set of Interrogatories Re Tx Pirg Contention 21 & Quadrex Rept Matters.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20049H8881982-03-0101 March 1982 Response Opposing D Marrack 820213 Motion for Review of Dates for Reopening Hearings & Continuance.No Commission Regulations or Atomic Energy Act Provisions Require Applicant Irrevocable Commitment.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20041B5381982-02-22022 February 1982 Reply to Intervenors Proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20041C0671982-02-22022 February 1982 Response Opposing Tx Pirg 820209 Motion for Addl Time to File Proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusion of Law.Motion Mooted by Tx Pirg Filing Proposed Findings on 820212. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20041B5421982-02-17017 February 1982 First Set of Interrogatories Re Tx Pirg Contention 31 & Quadrex Matters.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence 1982-07-02
[Table view] |
Text
.
6 y r 9 -
/\F 4'.N
- ~
', ' T Tl A /h U-'
D*~]D o v.s m e &
g ;au 'I(j JJ .
Y g g, yggy -
, L -
c.
UITITED STATES OF AMERICA 0% ~
[;9d U.E O 3 dg , r- 'i NUCLEAR REGULAT3RY COMMISSION q 47~.". /pgI A .
W ay N
%a#
ke \ wew f a
.D"4 /-
, E.f_ FORE THE ATCMIC SAFETY AITD LICENSING UAR s-n 4 /
.phe atter/of ,
HUSt',2rMITING & PC' DER COMPANY Docket No. 50 a66 OP (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating )
Station, Unit 1)
JOHN ?. DOHERTY'S CONTENTIONS 55 John F. Doherty, Intervenor pro-se in the above Construc-tion License proceeding now files these Contentions in resconse to Staff's release of NUREG-470, Suop. No. 2, " Draft Supplement to Final Environmental Statement related to the Construction of Allens Creek Nuclear Generating 3tation, Unit No. 1,"(hereafter:
Draft). This document was available according to Staff on December 17,1930.MHence, Intervenor has treated his obligation to file Contentions based on the Draft as granting his 30 days from December 12, 1930. He further bases his right to file these on new infor=ation provided by the Draft. The Board in its Order of December 17,1980 (p. 2), stated, " Staff advised that the second Supplement to the FES would be issued soon(TR. "310-15) and the 3 card observed and Staff agreed that said issuance might Generate amendments to petitions to intervene. . . " (TR 1818) .
CONTENTION 95, Intervenor contends that for che reasons listed below the site designated Je-3 in the Draft is a superior site, eith less environmental i= pact for the same benefit, as the site proposed bv Aoplicant in :lallis, Texas. Hence, said Je-3 site must be used for the proposed boiling water reactor to fulfill the aims of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Intervenor does not contend that necessarily each of the belaw reasons is sufficient to conclude the Je-3 site is environ = ental 17 superior and hence preferable, but rather that a combination of so=e or all of the reasons do sc.
n 2/ I; Was announced at 25 Fed. ?er. 79,sa. p%
B10 2 04 0 'A% g 6#/
o .
- Q Con:ention SS Farts (a) to (C)
(a) Intervenor contends Staff has erred in its caelulations, of the amount of land to be taken for power line transmission ri; hts-of-way for site Je-3 Using 73 miles as transmission line length, and using a 150 foot wide right-of-way a mini-mum recommended in Tnble 4.1 of Manarement of Transmission Lines Rirht-of-way for Fish and 'dildli'e, f Vol 1, pg. 24, (Dept. of Interiory Fish & Wildlife Service, (1979), the tynical right-of-way for a 345 kv line is15-170 ft or 18.2 - 20.6 acres permile. Using 15 ft/ mile this would require 1,328 acres, which is 442 acres less than staff estimates, and 523 acres less than required by ACNGS (Draft, Sec. 2.3.1.2, Fg 2-23)
(b) Intervenor contends the Draft did not consider the pos-sibility (and hence erred) of meander cut-off (as a result of flooding) on the Brazos River at a p6 int approximately 1.1 miles upstream from a point marked "31" in Figure S. 2.3 (Fage S. 2-8) of :he Final Supple =ent to the Environmental Impact Statement. (The Special-Fre-Eear'ing. Conference of 10/16/79, pp. 984-939, covering a Bishoo Contention has more on thid. If the Brazos River takes this new courso, construction of a picelinato the nake-up pumphouse in encess of two miles would be recuired. In addition, a mile of oiping from the spillway to the 3razos, would prob?.bly be re 'lired unless the prior spillway were closed and a new one constructed. An additional impact would be down-time for the ACMGS, caused by low cooling pond water level while the new make up oipin6 and other facilities were constructed. Intervenor contends failure to include this in the comparison between Je-3 " makeup and discharge pipeline' impacts (Draft, Table 2.10, Fase 2-58) and ACNGS was in error and that the Je-3 site is superior to the ACMGS site with regard to environmental impacts caused by makeup and discharge pipelines.
(c) Intervenor contends the Draft is in error in its conclusion environmental impact on terrestrial soecies from a plant at the Je-3 site would be the same as that of the ACNGS with
1
" T FS D
p
.. .U.L O wc c Contention 95 Parts (c) to (4) regard to threatened or endangered terrestrial species, on Table 2.10, Fase 2-58. The Final Supple =ent to the Final Environmental Impact Statement, (Table S. 2-5, Fase 5. - 7) lists six cnec'.es from the " Endangered and Threatened 'ilildlife and Flants," list from 1977, for ACMGS, but the Draft centions but two species, the red wolf mad the alligator, and the Coastal Site Comnarison Recort by Tera Corporation (Nov. 1980) lists but three others: Eskimo Curlew, Brown Felican and Southern Bald Eagle, none of the three of which are believed to inhabit the specific site (Tera Study, pg. Je-3 ?). Hence intervenor contends the Je-3 site is sucerior because die in-pact to endan ered or threatensd terrestrial species is less at Je-3 than at ACNGS.
(d) The Draft has speculated considerably in the impact to the "onsite" area in its terrestrial ecology analysis. First, although it references the circular mechanical draf't cooling towers of the FES of the Blue Hills Station, on pg. 2-38, it states a' require =entifor three of these " towers" while the Blue Hills Station FES (EUREG-0449, pg. 3-7 requires but two such units. Next, it is unclear fro: the text if the-Draft considered a cooling lake or a coolin5 tower in arriving at the conclusion on site impacts would be the same at Je-3 as at ACNGE (Draft, Table 2.10, pg 2-58). Intervenor thus con-tends the onsite i= pact will be less at Je-3 site than ACSGS site.
(e) Intervenor contenis since the cooling towers for the Je-3 site will acc.omplish the same task as a cooling lake for the ACNGS site, these two different cooling systems must be com-pared for "onsite impacts",(Draft, Table 2.10, pg. 2-58).
Intervenor contends the use of circular sechanical draft cooling towers as described in UU23G-0574, " Final Environ-mental Incact Statement Related to selection of the prefe= red closed cycle coolint system at In.dian Point Unit Co. 3, (Dec.
1979, Sec. 2.4.3 3) at the Je-3 site would have less irract at that site than a cooling lake at ACUGS, because of less land use, less visual i=cact, and less loss of habitat for protection of terrestrial fauna.
-a-D*fD "D .$ 3 ;
oh.b.
"> 6 5 3 Contention 55 (Continued, Parts (f) to ( h)
(f) Intervenor contends the Draft erred in concluding the ACNGS site superior to the Je-3 in aquatic ecoloc7 and water use, because the conclusion is based on being able to determine but a of 9 catatories (Drsft, Table 2.11, Pg. ?-61). Hence, Staff has not" adequately wei-hed the relevant environmental factors in deciding whether and how to o ford.'ard with the pro. ject."
Conservation Society of Southern Vermont v. Secretarv of Trans-nortation, 362 F. Supp. 6?7,633 (D.C. Yt. 1973) affir=ed 5C8 F2d 927 (2nd Cir. '97a), vacated a23 U. 3. 3C9,(1975).
(g()1 )Intervenor c .ntends terresterial habitat the effect and quality, of transmission lines (2) endangered on species will ce greately nitigated by use of a sinrle 3a5 kv connection from the Je-3 site and the Cedar Bayou unit of applicant.
'ower requirements at the P. H. Robinson unit of applicant could then be shifted from Cedar 3avou to P. E. Robinson via the existing 345 kv line between these two applicant clants (Draft, Fig. 2.7, Page 2-13). Use of this plant would make the Je-3 site of less environmental i= pact in these two characteristics than ACNGS in these two character-istics on its site.
(h) Intervenor contends Staff's conclusion the impact on habi-tat quality (Draft, Table 2.11, Page 2-61) will be greater for site Je-3 than ACNGS is in error, because it is based heavily on a " Personal Communication" (Ref. 10, Pg. 2-69, referring to a statement on Pg. 2-39) which is (a) too vague for the significance accorded it, and (b) a private record unavailable to interested persons for pur70se of comment.
Information on habitat quality does not appear to be so
- rare as to make such coccunications the l7nch pin of an imoortant determination. Hence the determination is unsupoorted even in this somewhat cursory first look at sites.
Respegpf'ly"baitted, v.
ochn F. Doher.7 Certificate of 3ervios Inclosed.
I I
l
- m
.