ML20198F519

From kanterella
Revision as of 01:02, 22 November 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Site Analysis Branch Responses to Federal,State & Local Agency Comments on Des
ML20198F519
Person / Time
Site: Columbia Energy Northwest icon.png
Issue date: 11/06/1972
From: Harold Denton
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To: Muller D
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
References
CON-WNP-0897, CON-WNP-897 NUDOCS 8605280531
Download: ML20198F519 (3)


Text

't

' M L L /.l d Docket No. 50-397 a Daniel R. Muller, Assistant Director for Environmental Projects, L HANFORD NO. 2 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT COMMENTS In response to W. R. Regan's request of October 26, 1972, attached are the responses of the Site Analysis Branch to pertinent Federal, State and local agency comments on the Hanford No. 2 Draft Environmental Statement.

Original signed by H. R. Denton Harold R. Denton, Assistant Director for Site Safety Directorate of Licensing

Enclosure:

As stated cc: w/o enclosure A. Giambusso W. Mcdonald cc: w/ enclosure S. H. Hanauer J. Hendrie W. P. Gammill W. R. Regan L. G. Hulman E. H. Markee DISTRIBUTION:

L: Docket File 50-397 L:Rdg.

L:SAB L:AD/SS 8605280531 721106 PDR ADOCK 05000397 D PDR AB L:SAB L : AD / Sk',

L:SAB  ; L orr u p . . . . . . . . .. .

.gj. , _ ,,

L an WP H RDe trY on EHMarkee:ba . mill oarr , .11/d/.7 2  ! 11/...b..../ 7 2.. 11/y../72 11/,jy /72 __

uniPwtM s erM a . ot t n i Form All-S t s t Res 4 '

L AECM 02 0 t.

1 s  !

. I f

Page 4, paragraph 1 - The meteorological assumptions are stated in the proposed Annex to Appendix D of 10 CFR Part 50.

~

f

/

s 1 HANFORD NO. 2 - AGENCY COMMENTS ON DES RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON HYDROLOGY PREPARED BY L. G. HULMAN Two letters contain comments on hydrology in general, the Corps of Engineers and the Department of Com=erce.

The Corps of Engineers comments related to hydrology

~~

are relevant. Those by the Department of Commerce suggest a discussion of the effects on the plant of floods. We consider this also a topic which should be discussed in the FES and may be readily prepared using the PSAR and PSE. It is also noted that safety aspects limit the likelihood of the plant being shut down because of floods, and assure safety ~ in the event of very severe flood events.

./