ML20099D116: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) StriderTol Bot insert |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) StriderTol Bot change |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| number = ML20099D116 | | number = ML20099D116 | ||
| issue date = 03/01/1985 | | issue date = 03/01/1985 | ||
| title = Ack Receipt of | | title = Ack Receipt of Transmitting Des.Comments on Cooling Sys,Aquatic Considerations & Groundwater Monitoring Listed | ||
| author name = Blanchard B | | author name = Blanchard B | ||
| author affiliation = INTERIOR, DEPT. OF | | author affiliation = INTERIOR, DEPT. OF | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
| contact person = | | contact person = | ||
| document report number = ER-85-139, NUDOCS 8503110525 | | document report number = ER-85-139, NUDOCS 8503110525 | ||
| title reference date = 01-11-1985 | |||
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, INCOMING CORRESPONDENCE, OTHER U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCY/DEPARTMENT TO NRC | | document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, INCOMING CORRESPONDENCE, OTHER U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCY/DEPARTMENT TO NRC | ||
| page count = 2 | | page count = 2 | ||
| Line 17: | Line 18: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:, | {{#Wiki_filter:, | ||
United States Department of the Interior | SS 4O. United States Department of the Interior OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C. | ||
20240 2 | |||
Cooling System | 5/139 MAR 1 1985 George W. Knighton, Chief Licensing Branch No. 3 Division of Licensing Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Dear Mr. Knightoin Thank_ you for your letter of January 11, 1985, transmitting copies of the draft environmental impact statement (OLS) for Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 2, Beaver County, Pennsylvania. Our comments are presented according to the format of ttm statement or by subject. | ||
di?::harge water temperature during the opergtion of bgth Units 1 and 2. The dischargC temperature differential above ambient of 1.3 C to 15.9 C and maximum change of 22 would seasonally exceed the Pennsylvania State Water Quality Standards for water temperature of discharges into warmwater fishery areas. .This standard was set to protect indigenous fishes and aquatic resources against thermal shock. The final statement should discuss the alternatives that were considered to reduce the temperature differential in the heated discharge and present the rationale for choosing the selected method of discharge. | Cooling System The draft statement indicates on page 4-5 that there would be an increase in the 1 | ||
di?::harge water temperature during the opergtion of bgth Units 1 and 2. The dischargC e | |||
temperature differential above ambient of 1.3 C to 15.9 C and maximum change of 22 would seasonally exceed the Pennsylvania State Water Quality Standards for water temperature of discharges into warmwater fishery areas..This standard was set to protect indigenous fishes and aquatic resources against thermal shock. | |||
The final statement should discuss the alternatives that were considered to reduce the temperature differential in the heated discharge and present the rationale for choosing the selected method of discharge. | |||
Aquatic Biologists of the State College, Pennsylvania, Field Office of the Fish and Wildlife Service have collected two skipjack herrings upstream from the Beaver Valley plant site. Up until this time, the skipjack herring was thought to have been extirpated from the area. Therefore, the final statement should be revised to reflect the occurrence of the skipjack herring within the proposed project area. | Aquatic Biologists of the State College, Pennsylvania, Field Office of the Fish and Wildlife Service have collected two skipjack herrings upstream from the Beaver Valley plant site. Up until this time, the skipjack herring was thought to have been extirpated from the area. Therefore, the final statement should be revised to reflect the occurrence of the skipjack herring within the proposed project area. | ||
Groundwater Monitoring Note 7 of Table 5.6, Preoperational Radiological Monitoring Program for Beaver Valley, Unit 2, indicates that there will be no radiological monitoring of ground water on the site, because the current hydraulic gradient is northwest toward the river. We suggest that during operation, pumping from the onsite wells will cause changes in the gradient direction that would make radiological monitoring as well as chemical and biological monitoring advisable at the site. Application of the aquifer characteristics given in the B503110525 850301 | Groundwater Monitoring Note 7 of Table 5.6, Preoperational Radiological Monitoring Program for Beaver Valley, Unit 2, indicates that there will be no radiological monitoring of ground water on the site, because the current hydraulic gradient is northwest toward the river. We suggest that during operation, pumping from the onsite wells will cause changes in the gradient direction that would make radiological monitoring as well as chemical and biological monitoring advisable at the site. Application of the aquifer characteristics given in the i | ||
B503110525 850301 8@ | |||
PDR ADOCK 05000412 D | |||
PDR | |||
statement on pages 5-41 and 5-42 indicates that the reversal of gradient will be appreciable and ground-water travel within the cone of depression will be accelerated. | statement on pages 5-41 and 5-42 indicates that the reversal of gradient will be appreciable and ground-water travel within the cone of depression will be accelerated. | ||
This issue should be reevaluated. | This issue should be reevaluated. | ||
We hope these comments will be helpful to you. | We hope these comments will be helpful to you. | ||
Sincerely, y,gg | Sincerely, y,gg (614& f&i Bfuce Bla hard, Director Environmental Project Review v | ||
t}} | t}} | ||
Latest revision as of 06:41, 13 December 2024
| ML20099D116 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 03/01/1985 |
| From: | Blanchard B INTERIOR, DEPT. OF |
| To: | Knighton G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| ER-85-139, NUDOCS 8503110525 | |
| Download: ML20099D116 (2) | |
Text
,
SS 4O. United States Department of the Interior OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C.
20240 2
5/139 MAR 1 1985 George W. Knighton, Chief Licensing Branch No. 3 Division of Licensing Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Dear Mr. Knightoin Thank_ you for your letter of January 11, 1985, transmitting copies of the draft environmental impact statement (OLS) for Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 2, Beaver County, Pennsylvania. Our comments are presented according to the format of ttm statement or by subject.
Cooling System The draft statement indicates on page 4-5 that there would be an increase in the 1
di?::harge water temperature during the opergtion of bgth Units 1 and 2. The dischargC e
temperature differential above ambient of 1.3 C to 15.9 C and maximum change of 22 would seasonally exceed the Pennsylvania State Water Quality Standards for water temperature of discharges into warmwater fishery areas..This standard was set to protect indigenous fishes and aquatic resources against thermal shock.
The final statement should discuss the alternatives that were considered to reduce the temperature differential in the heated discharge and present the rationale for choosing the selected method of discharge.
Aquatic Biologists of the State College, Pennsylvania, Field Office of the Fish and Wildlife Service have collected two skipjack herrings upstream from the Beaver Valley plant site. Up until this time, the skipjack herring was thought to have been extirpated from the area. Therefore, the final statement should be revised to reflect the occurrence of the skipjack herring within the proposed project area.
Groundwater Monitoring Note 7 of Table 5.6, Preoperational Radiological Monitoring Program for Beaver Valley, Unit 2, indicates that there will be no radiological monitoring of ground water on the site, because the current hydraulic gradient is northwest toward the river. We suggest that during operation, pumping from the onsite wells will cause changes in the gradient direction that would make radiological monitoring as well as chemical and biological monitoring advisable at the site. Application of the aquifer characteristics given in the i
B503110525 850301 8@
PDR ADOCK 05000412 D
statement on pages 5-41 and 5-42 indicates that the reversal of gradient will be appreciable and ground-water travel within the cone of depression will be accelerated.
This issue should be reevaluated.
We hope these comments will be helpful to you.
Sincerely, y,gg (614& f&i Bfuce Bla hard, Director Environmental Project Review v
t