ML11347A394

From kanterella
Revision as of 11:59, 12 November 2019 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Response to Request to Extent Public Comment Period for Columbia Generating Station License Renewal Environmental Review
ML11347A394
Person / Time
Site: Columbia Energy Northwest icon.png
Issue date: 12/20/2011
From: David Wrona
License Renewal Projects Branch 2
To: Pollet G
Heart of America Northwest
Doyle D, 415-3748
References
Download: ML11347A394 (5)


Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 December 20, 2011 Mr. Gerry Pollet, Executive Director Heart of America Northwest 1314 NE 56th St Ste 100 Seattle, WA 98105-2665 SUBJECT- RESPONSE TO REQUEST TO EXTEND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR COLUMBIA GENERATING STATION LICENSE RENEWAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Dear Mr. Pollet:

This is a response to your request that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) extend the public comment period for the draft supplemental environmental impact statement regarding license renewal of Columbia Generating Station (NUREG-1437, Supplement 47). The NRC believes that the public comment period was adequate and decided not to extend it.

As set forth in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 51.73 (10 CFR 51.73), the NRC established the time period for comments on a draft environmental impact statement to balance the goal of ensuring openness in the regulatory processes with the goal of ensuring that the NRC's actions are effective, efficient, realistic, and timely. The regulations require a 45-day comment period. Also, the NRC will, to the extent practicable. grant extensions of time for up to 15 days. The Environmental Protection Agency notice (76 FR 54767) was published on September 2, 2011, and the comment period ended on November 16, 2011. This included the required 45-day period plus two 15-day extensions for a total of 75 days.

The reasons given in your November 15 request to extend the pUblic comment period are outside the scope of the environmental review which is described in the draft supplemental environmental impact statement. These issues are summarized below with a bnef statement about why each is not within the scope of this review.

  • The NRC conducted a special Inspection at Columbia Generating Station (September 26 - 29 and October 31 - November 2, 2011) to review the circumstances surrounding three events in which operators inadvertently drained reactor coolant from the plant's reactor vessel during a recent refueiing outage. More information about thiS inspection is available in NRC press release IV-11-043 dated September 26,2011 (htt(:?:lIpbadupwsnrc.gov/docs/M1.1126/ML11269A059Qdf). The report from this special inspection is not complete at this time, but it will be puolicly available upon issuance.

You requested an extension to be able to review this report. This special Inspection and its results relate to current operating issues and are net within the scope of the license renewal environmental revIew. While license renewal focuses on managing the effects of aging on certain structures, systems, and components, current operating issues such as these are addressed on a continuous and ongoing ba5is through the NRC's reactor oversight process

G. Pollet -2

  • Heart of America Northwest requested public records from Energy Northwest regarding the potential use of mixed oxide (MOX) fuel at Columbia Generating Station. Energy Northwest adjusted the anticipated deadline for completion of your request from September 23 to December 21, 2011, due to the large volume of records. You requested an extension to the comment period to allow time to review these records.

Internal documents from Energy Northwest about the potential use of MOX fuel are not within the scope of this environmental review. On page 2-2 of the draft supplemental environmental impact statement, the NRC acknowledged that it was aware of newspaper articles published in February 2011 about the potential use of MOX. The NRC further stated:

At this time, the NRC has not received notification from Energy Northwest on its plans to use MOX fuel in the future. The staff notes that a change in the type of fuel used at [Columbia Generating Station] will require a thorough evaluation by the NRC on the safety and environmental impacts associated with the new fuel prior to receiving approval for its use.

More information about the MOX program is available at http://www.nrc.gov/materials/fuel-cycle-fac/mox/licensing.html.

  • Energy Northwest issued a notice of unusual event (event number 46739) about a hydrogen burn that took place on April 7, 2011. This notice was later retracted by Energy Northwest. More information about this event is available at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/event status/eventl2011 12011 0411 en.html#en46739. You cited a lack of information about this event as a reason to extend the comment period. This event is a current operating issue and is not within the scope of the license renewal environmental review.
  • You stated that a lawsuit filed by Babcock and Wilcox against Energy Northwest on November 14, 2011, includes claims that there was more radiological contamination than expected. You requested an extension to allow the public to comment on this as it relates to the plant's maintenance programs, safety status, and suitability to operate until 2043. Current plant conditions and radiological contamination in the reactor are current operating issues and are not within the scope of the license renewal environmental review.
  • On November 10, 2011, Energy Northwest notified the NRC of a loss of functionality of the Technical Support Center emergency filtration system following maintenance because the replacement gaskets were too small (event number 47429). More information about this event is available at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc collections/event-status/event/2011/20111114en.html#en47429. You requested an extension to allow time to review this information. This event is a current operating issue and is not within the scope of the environmental review.

Your letter will be treated as a formal comment and will be included in the final supplemental environmental impact statement.

G. Pollet -3 If you have any questions regarding this letter or the proposed Columbia Generating Station license renewal, please contact Daniel Doyle, project manager, at 301-415-3748 or bye-mail at daniel.doyle@nrc.gov.

Sincerely, David J. Wrona, Chief Projects Branch 2 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-397 cc: Listserv

G. Pollet - 3 If you have any questions regarding this letter or the proposed Columbia Generating Station license renewal, please contact Daniel Doyle, project manager, at 301-415-3748 or bye-mail at daniel.doyle@nrc.gov.

Sincerely, David J. Wrona, Chief Projects Branch 2 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-397 cc: Listserv

Letter to G. Pollet from D. Wrona dated December 20, 2011

SUBJECT:

RESPONSE TO REQUEST TO EXTEND COMMENT PERIOD FOR COLUMBIA GENERATING STATION LICENSE RENEWAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DISTRIBUTION:

HARD COPY:

DLR RF E-MAIL:

PUBLIC RidsNrrDlr Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb2 Resource RidsNrrDlrRarb Resource RidsNrrDlrRapb Resource RidsNrrDlrRasb Resource RidsNrrDlrRerb Resource RidsNrrDlrRpob Resource DWrona ACunanan DDoyle LSubin,OGC ICouret, OPA WWalker, RIV JGroom, RIV BMaier, RIV VDricks, RIV