ML19276F578: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
Line 17: Line 17:
=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:s  .
{{#Wiki_filter:s  .
             .            [gg
             .            [gg h
                          .
h
                                "
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE The Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology Washington, D.C. 20230
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE The Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology Washington, D.C. 20230
                           \,,h/  (202) 377xnn 4 33 5 April 2, 1979 Mr. William H. Regan, Jr.
                           \,,h/  (202) 377xnn 4 33 5 April 2, 1979 Mr. William H. Regan, Jr.
Line 34: Line 31:
                   //    <j-ju;du, K C OltJQ
                   //    <j-ju;du, K C OltJQ
           .?
           .?
      -
all~re
all~re
     'Sidnep Deputy As  R.histant Secretary for Environmental Affairs
     'Sidnep Deputy As  R.histant Secretary for Environmental Affairs
Line 44: Line 40:


   ,.                                                                    .          _ - .      . ~ . .
   ,.                                                                    .          _ - .      . ~ . .
        '
            .
   ; h,[,*[ * .
   ; h,[,*[ * .
          ,
                                         , 'M UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE i- .
                                          ''
                                         , 'M
                                        ,
* UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE i- .
%-
            --
                                    %
:
                                      .
wa      .
wa      .
National Occanic and Atmo :pheric Mministration l
National Occanic and Atmo :pheric Mministration l
Y      .i'p' e  r:AnouAL MArm suaEs LL;w.r:t Federal Building, 14 Elm Street Gloucester, Massachusetts            01930 March 15, 1979                FNE62:RR TO:          EC - Richard Lehman
Y      .i'p' e  r:AnouAL MArm suaEs LL;w.r:t Federal Building, 14 Elm Street Gloucester, Massachusetts            01930 March 15, 1979                FNE62:RR TO:          EC - Richard Lehman
   ,                            4 4/. J A A u7 /            fMR 2 81979 THRU: /*+-    7 - Kenneth, Roper s
   ,                            4 4/. J A A u7 /            fMR 2 81979 THRU: /*+-    7 - Kenneth, Roper s k@ps F .              _  <A_ --
  '
k@ps F .              _  <A_ --
PROM:        FNE - Robert W. Hanks
PROM:        FNE - Robert W. Hanks


==SUBJECT:==
==SUBJECT:==
NMFS Comments on Draft Supplement to FEIS - Pilgrim Nuclear Power Sta'-ion Unit No. 2 -- DEIS #7902.31 The Draft Supplement to the FEIS that accompanied your memorandum of March 1, 1979, has been received by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for review and comment. The supplement has been reviewed and the following comments are offered for your consideration:
NMFS Comments on Draft Supplement to FEIS - Pilgrim Nuclear Power Sta'-ion Unit No. 2 -- DEIS #7902.31 The Draft Supplement to the FEIS that accompanied your memorandum of March 1, 1979, has been received by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for review and comment. The supplement has been reviewed and the following comments are offered for your consideration:
General Comments
General Comments The repeated assertions in the supplement that anticipated impact to the fishery at the Rocky Point site is neglibic should be more qualified, given the uncertanties of projecting long-term impacts. Fish kills have occurred at the Rocky Point site during operation of Unit No. 1, and although they are not large enough to indicate significant impact on the fisheries at this time, they are matters of serious . concern to the NMFS.
!'
Moreover, although the level of analysis is sufficient for I            the present purpose, further investigation, review and comment would be required should the future bring about proposed develop-ments of any of the alternative sites for power plant or other purposes.
The repeated assertions in the supplement that anticipated impact to the fishery at the Rocky Point site is neglibic should be more qualified, given the uncertanties of projecting long-term impacts. Fish kills have occurred at the Rocky Point site during operation of Unit No. 1, and although they are not large enough to indicate significant impact on the fisheries at this time, they are matters of serious . concern to the NMFS.
<
Moreover, although the level of analysis is sufficient for I            the present purpose, further investigation, review and comment would be required should the future bring about proposed develop-ments of any of the alternative sites for power plant or other
'
purposes.
                      -- --
Specific Comments Page 38, para. 2: The statement appears here that there is the possibility that the shortnose sturgeon exists in the Merrimack River. The NMPS feels there is a high probacility that shortnose sturgeon can be collected in the Merrimack River, given the presence of the shortnose in estuaries connecting to the river.
Specific Comments Page 38, para. 2: The statement appears here that there is the possibility that the shortnose sturgeon exists in the Merrimack River. The NMPS feels there is a high probacility that shortnose sturgeon can be collected in the Merrimack River, given the presence of the shortnose in estuaries connecting to the river.
Pages 119-126: This section includes several statements about potential impacts to the shortnose sturgeon, and refers to the NMFS threshold determination, which " revealed a probable sC.%
Pages 119-126: This section includes several statements about potential impacts to the shortnose sturgeon, and refers to the NMFS threshold determination, which " revealed a probable sC.%
N " ',?
N " ',?


  * -
        .
      -
.        .
     . .    ~
     . .    ~
                ,
2 impact" but stated that dat,    vailable were insufficient to form a complete biological opinion. The NMFS feels that additional information is still needed, and that it is un-justified at this stage for the DEIS Supplement to conclude that, " Losses associated with impingement should have no effect on resident or anadromous species" (p. 124), or "...no detectable impact to the Holyoke Pool population of shortnose sturgeon will occur"(p. 126).
2 impact" but stated that dat,    vailable were insufficient to form a complete biological opinion. The NMFS feels that additional information is still needed, and that it is un-justified at this stage for the DEIS Supplement to conclude that, " Losses associated with impingement should have no effect on resident or anadromous species" (p. 124), or "...no detectable impact to the Holyoke Pool population of shortnose sturgeon will occur"(p. 126).
RR:837-9206:djh:3/15/79 cc: F7(3)b FNE FNE71
RR:837-9206:djh:3/15/79 cc: F7(3)b FNE FNE71
                                    .
                                                                       *}}
                                                                       *}}

Latest revision as of 17:08, 1 February 2020

Forwards Comments by NOAA on Suppl to Fes.Requests Qualification of Assertion That Impact to Rocky Point Fishery Is Negligible
ML19276F578
Person / Time
Site: 05000471
Issue date: 04/02/1979
From: Galler S
COMMERCE, DEPT. OF
To: Regan W
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 7904060229
Download: ML19276F578 (3)


Text

s .

. [gg h

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE The Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology Washington, D.C. 20230

\,,h/ (202) 377xnn 4 33 5 April 2, 1979 Mr. William H. Regan, Jr.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Environmental Projects Branch 2 Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Regan:

This is in reference to your draft supplement to the final environmental impact statement entitled " Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Unit No.2". The enclosed comments from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are forwarded for your consideration.

Thank you for giving us an opportunity to provide these comments, which we hope will be of assistance to you. We would appreciate receiving seven copies of the final statement.

Sincerely,

~

! c ' ') ,- ,

// <j-ju;du, K C OltJQ

.?

all~re

'Sidnep Deputy As R.histant Secretary for Environmental Affairs

Enclosure:

Memo from NCAA-National Marine Fisheries Service T

cfb s\

79040602:23

,. . _ - . . ~ . .

h,[,*[ * .

, 'M UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE i- .

wa .

National Occanic and Atmo :pheric Mministration l

Y .i'p' e r:AnouAL MArm suaEs LL;w.r:t Federal Building, 14 Elm Street Gloucester, Massachusetts 01930 March 15, 1979 FNE62:RR TO: EC - Richard Lehman

, 4 4/. J A A u7 / fMR 2 81979 THRU: /*+- 7 - Kenneth, Roper s k@ps F . _ <A_ --

PROM: FNE - Robert W. Hanks

SUBJECT:

NMFS Comments on Draft Supplement to FEIS - Pilgrim Nuclear Power Sta'-ion Unit No. 2 -- DEIS #7902.31 The Draft Supplement to the FEIS that accompanied your memorandum of March 1, 1979, has been received by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for review and comment. The supplement has been reviewed and the following comments are offered for your consideration:

General Comments The repeated assertions in the supplement that anticipated impact to the fishery at the Rocky Point site is neglibic should be more qualified, given the uncertanties of projecting long-term impacts. Fish kills have occurred at the Rocky Point site during operation of Unit No. 1, and although they are not large enough to indicate significant impact on the fisheries at this time, they are matters of serious . concern to the NMFS.

Moreover, although the level of analysis is sufficient for I the present purpose, further investigation, review and comment would be required should the future bring about proposed develop-ments of any of the alternative sites for power plant or other purposes.

Specific Comments Page 38, para. 2: The statement appears here that there is the possibility that the shortnose sturgeon exists in the Merrimack River. The NMPS feels there is a high probacility that shortnose sturgeon can be collected in the Merrimack River, given the presence of the shortnose in estuaries connecting to the river.

Pages 119-126: This section includes several statements about potential impacts to the shortnose sturgeon, and refers to the NMFS threshold determination, which " revealed a probable sC.%

N " ',?

. . ~

2 impact" but stated that dat, vailable were insufficient to form a complete biological opinion. The NMFS feels that additional information is still needed, and that it is un-justified at this stage for the DEIS Supplement to conclude that, " Losses associated with impingement should have no effect on resident or anadromous species" (p. 124), or "...no detectable impact to the Holyoke Pool population of shortnose sturgeon will occur"(p. 126).

RR:837-9206:djh:3/15/79 cc: F7(3)b FNE FNE71