ML062610236: 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 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:Page 1 of 3 Doris Mendiola -OCNGS EIS comments From: Eugene Creamer <kb2gz@optonline.net>
{{#Wiki_filter:Page 1 of 3 Doris Mendiola - OCNGS EIS comments From:       Eugene Creamer <kb2gz@optonline.net>             4 To:         <OysterCreekEIS @nrc.gov>                                                           _7C Date:       09/11/2006 12:43 AM                   "7/ /   04/-/c"                             r-
4 To: <OysterCreekEIS  
@nrc.gov>
_7C Date: 09/11/2006 12:43 AM "7/ / 04/- /c" r-


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
OCNGS EIS comments 7i 1 .7 42 II Ti CA)Michael Masnik, Environmental Project Manager Thank you for coming to the New Jersey Shore and explaining the NRC's Environmental Impact Statement process for the proposed Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station life extension.
OCNGS EIS comments                                         7i 1               . 7 42           II Ti                     CA)
I -commented at the July 12, 2006 public meeting and noted the following:
Michael Masnik, Environmental Project Manager Thank you for coming to the New Jersey Shore and explaining the NRC's Environmental Impact Statement process for the proposed Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station life extension. I-commented at the July 12, 2006 public meeting and noted the following:
The Atomic Energy Commission issued a final EIS for OysterCreek Nuclear Generating Station in 1974. Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station ascended to operation in 1969 and the EIS is an "after the fact" EIS.Figure 2-3 (OCNGS site boundary map), on page 2-4, delineates both Oyster Creek and the South Branch Forked River west of the Station with dotted lines. (Usually, dotted lines indicate watercourses of an intermittent nature). The USGS quad for the area delineates both streams with solid blue lines, well beyond the Garden State Parkway to the west.The NJDEP maps indicate that both streams are watershed of the Pinelands National Reserve, file://C:\temp\GW  
The Atomic Energy Commission issued a final EIS for OysterCreek Nuclear Generating Station in 1974. Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station ascended to operation in 1969 and the EIS is an "after the fact" EIS.
}00001 .HTM/-_kX:5-3 09/11/2006 Page 2 of 3 FF I,'IW Section 2.1.7- Power Transmission System is silent with respect to the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station output power transformer(s)  
Figure 2-3 (OCNGS site boundary map), on page 2-4, delineates both Oyster Creek and the South Branch Forked River west of the Station with dotted lines. (Usually, dotted lines indicate watercourses of an intermittent nature). The USGS quad for the area delineates both streams with solid blue lines, well beyond the Garden State Parkway to the west.
......Location, ownership, responsibility, secondary containment?
The NJDEP maps indicate that both streams are watershed of the Pinelands National Reserve,
Section 2.2.2 -Water Use. The statement regarding "less than 100,000 gallons per day" on lines 27 & 28, page 2-19, is incorrect.
                                                                      /-_kX:5  -              3 file://C:\temp\GW }00001 .HTM                                                         09/11/2006
The 100,000 gpd is a regulatory threshold in accordance with N.J.A.C. 7:19- 1.4 of the New Jersey Water Supply Allocation Rules.Also, Section 2.2.2 references NJDEP permits and metering for on-site water wells and is silent regarding the proposed continuous diversion of the entire South Branch Forked River fresh watershed (the product of a federal initiative).
 
In my opinion, all water resources should be identified and quantified because the proposed action has direct impacts.The discussion about the applicant's alternative closed loop cooling system was shallow because it failed to link any air pollutant emissions with cooling water quality.ile://C:\temp\GW 100001.HTM 09/11/2006 fi& n Page 3 of 3 I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the draft EIS. Please contact me if you have any questions or require clarification.
Page 2 of 3 I,
Eugene Creamer PO Box 543 Belmar, NJ 07719 kb2gz@arrl.net file:/C:\temp\GW  
FF
}0000 I.HTM 09/11/2006 c:\temp\GW}OQOQ1 .TMP Page 1 c:\temp\GW)00001.TMP Page 11 Mail Envelope Properties (4504E952.C12
                      'IW Section 2.1.7- Power Transmission System is silent with respect to the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station output power transformer(s) ......Location, ownership, responsibility, secondary containment?
: 2: 64530)
Section 2.2.2 -   Water Use. The statement regarding "less than 100,000 gallons per day" on lines 27 & 28, page 2-19, is incorrect. The 100,000 gpd is a regulatory threshold in accordance with N.J.A.C. 7:19- 1.4 of the New Jersey Water Supply Allocation Rules.
Also, Section 2.2.2 references NJDEP permits and metering for on-site water wells and is silent regarding the proposed continuous diversion of the entire South Branch Forked River fresh watershed (the product of a federal initiative). In my opinion, all water resources should be identified and quantified because the proposed action has direct impacts.
The discussion about the applicant's alternative closed loop cooling system was shallow because it failed to link any air pollutant emissions with cooling water quality.
fiile://C:\temp\GW 100001.HTM
              &
n                                                                        09/11/2006
 
Page 3 of 3 I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the draft EIS. Please contact me if you have any questions or require clarification.
Eugene Creamer PO Box 543 Belmar, NJ 07719 kb2gz@arrl.net file:/C:\temp\GW }0000 I.HTM                                                           09/11/2006
 
Page 1 c:\temp\GW}OQOQ1 .TMP c:\temp\GW)00001.TMP                                                                         Page 11 Mail Envelope Properties       (4504E952.C12 : 2: 64530)


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
Crieation Date From: Created By: OCNGS EIS comments 09/11/2006 12:41:41 AM Eugene Creamer <kb2gz@optonline.net>
OCNGS EIS comments Crieation Date          09/11/2006 12:41:41 AM From:                    Eugene Creamer <kb2gz@optonline.net>
kb2gz@optonline.net Recipients nrc.gov TWGWPOO1 .HQGWDOO1 OysterCreekEIS Post Office TWGWPOO1 .HQGWDOO1 Route nrc.gov Files MESSAGE TEXT.htm image001.jpg Mime.822 Options Expiration Date: Priority: ReplyRequested:
Created By:              kb2gz@optonline.net Recipients nrc.gov TWGWPOO1 .HQGWDOO1 OysterCreekEIS Post Office                                                               Route TWGWPOO1 .HQGWDOO1                                                     nrc.gov Files                             Size              Date & Time MESSAGE                           2193              09/11/2006 12:41:41 AM TEXT.htm                         10016 image001.jpg                     178150 Mime.822                         257982 Options Expiration Date:                 None Priority:                         Standard ReplyRequested:                   No Return Notification:             None Concealed  
Return Notification:
Concealed  


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
Security: Size 2193 10016 178150 257982 None Standard No None No Standard Date & Time 09/11/2006 12:41:41 AM Junk Mail Handling Evaluation Results Message is eligible for Junk Mail handling This message was not classified as Junk Mail Junk Mail settings when this message was delivered Junk Mail handling disabled by User Junk Mail handling disabled by Administrator Junk List is not enabled Junk Mail using personal address books is not enabled Block List is not enabled}}
No Security:                         Standard Junk Mail Handling Evaluation Results Message is eligible for Junk Mail handling This message was not classified as Junk Mail Junk Mail settings when this message was delivered Junk Mail handling disabled by User Junk Mail handling disabled by Administrator Junk List is not enabled Junk Mail using personal address books is not enabled Block List is not enabled}}

Revision as of 15:03, 23 November 2019

2006/09/11-Comment (12) of Eugene Creamer on Nrc'S Environmental Impact Statement for Renewal of License for Oyster Creek
ML062610236
Person / Time
Site: Oyster Creek
Issue date: 09/11/2006
From: Creamer E
- No Known Affiliation
To:
NRC/ADM/DAS/RDB
References
%dam200612, 71FR34969 00012
Download: ML062610236 (4)
v • d • e


Text

Page 1 of 3 Doris Mendiola - OCNGS EIS comments From: Eugene Creamer <kb2gz@optonline.net> 4 To: <OysterCreekEIS @nrc.gov> _7C Date: 09/11/2006 12:43 AM "7/ / 04/-/c" r-

Subject:

OCNGS EIS comments 7i 1 . 7 42 II Ti CA)

Michael Masnik, Environmental Project Manager Thank you for coming to the New Jersey Shore and explaining the NRC's Environmental Impact Statement process for the proposed Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station life extension. I-commented at the July 12, 2006 public meeting and noted the following:

The Atomic Energy Commission issued a final EIS for OysterCreek Nuclear Generating Station in 1974. Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station ascended to operation in 1969 and the EIS is an "after the fact" EIS.

Figure 2-3 (OCNGS site boundary map), on page 2-4, delineates both Oyster Creek and the South Branch Forked River west of the Station with dotted lines. (Usually, dotted lines indicate watercourses of an intermittent nature). The USGS quad for the area delineates both streams with solid blue lines, well beyond the Garden State Parkway to the west.

The NJDEP maps indicate that both streams are watershed of the Pinelands National Reserve,

/-_kX:5 - 3 file://C:\temp\GW }00001 .HTM 09/11/2006

Page 2 of 3 I,

FF

'IW Section 2.1.7- Power Transmission System is silent with respect to the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station output power transformer(s) ......Location, ownership, responsibility, secondary containment?

Section 2.2.2 - Water Use. The statement regarding "less than 100,000 gallons per day" on lines 27 & 28, page 2-19, is incorrect. The 100,000 gpd is a regulatory threshold in accordance with N.J.A.C. 7:19- 1.4 of the New Jersey Water Supply Allocation Rules.

Also, Section 2.2.2 references NJDEP permits and metering for on-site water wells and is silent regarding the proposed continuous diversion of the entire South Branch Forked River fresh watershed (the product of a federal initiative). In my opinion, all water resources should be identified and quantified because the proposed action has direct impacts.

The discussion about the applicant's alternative closed loop cooling system was shallow because it failed to link any air pollutant emissions with cooling water quality.

fiile://C:\temp\GW 100001.HTM

&

n 09/11/2006

Page 3 of 3 I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the draft EIS. Please contact me if you have any questions or require clarification.

Eugene Creamer PO Box 543 Belmar, NJ 07719 kb2gz@arrl.net file:/C:\temp\GW }0000 I.HTM 09/11/2006

Page 1 c:\temp\GW}OQOQ1 .TMP c:\temp\GW)00001.TMP Page 11 Mail Envelope Properties (4504E952.C12 : 2: 64530)

Subject:

OCNGS EIS comments Crieation Date 09/11/2006 12:41:41 AM From: Eugene Creamer <kb2gz@optonline.net>

Created By: kb2gz@optonline.net Recipients nrc.gov TWGWPOO1 .HQGWDOO1 OysterCreekEIS Post Office Route TWGWPOO1 .HQGWDOO1 nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 2193 09/11/2006 12:41:41 AM TEXT.htm 10016 image001.jpg 178150 Mime.822 257982 Options Expiration Date: None Priority: Standard ReplyRequested: No Return Notification: None Concealed

Subject:

No Security: Standard Junk Mail Handling Evaluation Results Message is eligible for Junk Mail handling This message was not classified as Junk Mail Junk Mail settings when this message was delivered Junk Mail handling disabled by User Junk Mail handling disabled by Administrator Junk List is not enabled Junk Mail using personal address books is not enabled Block List is not enabled

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML062610236&oldid=2186377"