ML20063P151

Advises That Des Is Rated LO-1.Normal Operation of Facility Will Not Have Significant Impact on Environ.No Addl Info Needed

ML20063P151
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	10/06/1982
From:	Scott Moore ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
To:	Jubbour K Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
4PM-EA-JM, NUDOCS 8210130117
Download: ML20063P151 (2)

Text

J

• * %q j y UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

%,we / REGION IV 4PM-EA/JM 345 COURTLAND STREET ATLANTA. GEORGIA 303 6 5 t

OCT 0 61982 Dr. Kahtan N. Jubbour

(

Project Manager Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

[

4 Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Dr. Jubbour:

We have reviewed the Draf t Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) related to the operation of Catawba Nuclear Station Units 1 and 2 in York County, South Carolina. Our review of the DEIS indicates the document does an adequate job in discussing the environmental impacts of the proposed Catawba facility. Additionally, our review indicated that the Catawba facility should be capable of operating within the limitations of Section. 40 CFR (19a) (Environmental Radiation Standards for Nuclear Power Facilities Operation), and shauld have only a minimal impact on water quality. In this latter I area, our attached technical comments are of an editorial nature.

( Therefore, we have rated the DEIS LO-1; i .e. , we do not believe the normal operation of the f acility will have a significant impact on y the environment and we do not need any additional information to complete our review.

Sincerely yours, I

t ' "

Shepp N. Moore, Chief Environmental Review Section Environmental Assessment Branch Enclosure 4

COO 1  ;

l

'B210130117 821006 l PDR ADOCK 05000413 I PDR j ll -_

1

s

6-j 'A <

Te chnical- Comments lf 1. . The applicable NPDES outfall serial number should be

! added to those: sections of the DEIS discussing the. specific :

l_

waste source. This .will allow the reviewer to more readily

. compare the NPDES permit ' requirements-with the text. -This includes:-

l (a) Section 4.2.5, page 4-5; NPDES No. 00 5.

(b) Section 4.2.6.2, page 4-6; NPDES No. 001.

(c) Section 4.2.6.3, page 4-7; NPDES No. 00 2.

(d) Section 4.2.6.4, page 4-8, NPDES No. 003.

I

!. (e)- Table 4.4, page 4-28; NPDES Nos. 001 and 00 2.

(f) Table 4.5, page 4-29; NPDES No. 002.

l 2. Section 4.2.6.2,. page 4-7. Applicant's plan to-holdup i cooling tower blow-down should assure compliance with South-i Carolina's water quality standards. In this regard, we suggest j modification of the NPDES permit condition at reissuance to allow release of total residual chlorine f or more than two hours per day.

j. 3. Appendix 2 (also Table of Contents) should be relabled l

" NPDES Permit" since it is an effective permit and not a j " preliminary draft."

--__-- __________.