2015/12/01 Turkey Point COL Hearing - FW: FPL Letter L ...1 PMTurkeyCOLPEm Resource From: Comar,...
159
1 PMTurkeyCOLPEm Resource From: Comar, Manny Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 9:59 AM To: TurkeyCOL Resource Subject: FW: FPL Letter L-2015-280 Dated 11-18-2015: Observations on the DEIS Comments Submitted by Other Parties Attachments: L-2015-280 Dated 11-18-15 Other Parties DEIS Comment Observations.pdf From: Orthen, Richard [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 7:58 AM To: Williamson, Alicia ; Hughes, Brian ; Burkhart, Lawrence ; Wert, Leonard ; Maher, William ; Comar, Manny ; Hoeg, Tim ; 'Clouser, Megan L SAJ' Subject: [External_Sender] FPL Letter L-2015-280 Dated 11-18-2015: Observations on the DEIS Comments Submitted by Other Parties U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Re: Florida Power & Light Company Proposed Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 Docket Nos. 52-040 and 52-041 Observations on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) Comments Submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and/or U.S. Army Corps of Engineers by Other Parties References: 1. NUREG-2176, Environmental Impact Statement for Combined Licenses (COLs) for Turkey Point Nuclear Plant Units 6 and 7; Draft Report for Comment, February 2015 2. City of Miami letter to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) dated July 17, 2015, NUREG-2176 -City of Miami's Amended Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Combined Licenses (COLs) for Turkey Point Nuclear Plant Units 6 & 7 (NRC-2009-0337) 3. City of South Miami letter to NRC dated May 20, 2015, NUREG-2176 4. Elected Officials letter to NRC dated May 22, 2015, NRC-2009-0337 Turkey Point Expansion 5. Friends of the Underline email to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) dated May 15, 2015 6. Citizens/Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) email to ACOE dated May 15, 2015 7. CBD, Miami Waterkeeper (MW), National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA), South Florida Wildlands Association (SFWA), and Tropical Audubon Society (TAS) [‘CBD et al.’] letter to NRC dated May 22, 2015, Comments on Turkey Point Expansion, NRC-2009-0337, 2009-02417 (SP-MLC) 8. Sierra Club letter to NRC dated June 22, 2015, Comments on Turkey Point Expansion, NRC- 2009-0337, 2009-02417 (SP-MLC)
Transcript of 2015/12/01 Turkey Point COL Hearing - FW: FPL Letter L ...1 PMTurkeyCOLPEm Resource From: Comar,...
-
1
PMTurkeyCOLPEm Resource
From: Comar, MannySent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 9:59 AMTo: TurkeyCOL ResourceSubject: FW: FPL Letter L-2015-280 Dated 11-18-2015: Observations on the DEIS Comments
Submitted by Other PartiesAttachments: L-2015-280 Dated 11-18-15 Other Parties DEIS Comment Observations.pdf
From: Orthen, Richard [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 7:58 AM To: Williamson, Alicia ; Hughes, Brian ; Burkhart, Lawrence ; Wert, Leonard ; Maher, William ; Comar, Manny ; Hoeg, Tim ; 'Clouser, Megan L SAJ' Subject: [External_Sender] FPL Letter L-2015-280 Dated 11-18-2015: Observations on the DEIS Comments Submitted by Other Parties U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555-0001
Re: Florida Power & Light Company Proposed Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 Docket Nos. 52-040 and 52-041 Observations on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) Comments Submitted to the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission and/or U.S. Army Corps of Engineers by Other Parties
References: 1. NUREG-2176, Environmental Impact Statement for Combined Licenses (COLs) for Turkey
Point Nuclear Plant Units 6 and 7; Draft Report for Comment, February 2015 2. City of Miami letter to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) dated July 17, 2015,
NUREG-2176 - City of Miami's Amended Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Combined Licenses (COLs) for Turkey Point Nuclear Plant Units 6 & 7 (NRC-2009-0337)
3. City of South Miami letter to NRC dated May 20, 2015, NUREG-2176 4. Elected Officials letter to NRC dated May 22, 2015, NRC-2009-0337 Turkey Point Expansion 5. Friends of the Underline email to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) dated May 15, 2015 6. Citizens/Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) email to ACOE dated May 15, 2015 7. CBD, Miami Waterkeeper (MW), National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA), South
Florida Wildlands Association (SFWA), and Tropical Audubon Society (TAS) [‘CBD et al.’] letter to NRC dated May 22, 2015, Comments on Turkey Point Expansion, NRC-2009-0337, 2009-02417 (SP-MLC)
8. Sierra Club letter to NRC dated June 22, 2015, Comments on Turkey Point Expansion, NRC-2009-0337, 2009-02417 (SP-MLC)
-
2
9. Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (SACE) letter to NRC dated May 22, 2015, Comments on Turkey Point Expansion, NRC-2009-0337, 2009-02417 (SP-MLC)
10. Seminole Tribe of Florida letter to Department of the Army dated October 5, 2015, Turkey Point Nuclear Plant Transmission Line Corridors THPO#: 0006365
11. Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) Letter L-2015-253 to NRC dated September 30, 2015, Observations on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) Comment Letters Submitted to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission by the U.S. Department of the Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency
FPL provides, as attachments to this letter, its observations on certain comments submitted to the NRC and/or ACOE on the DEIS for the proposed Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 COLs (Reference 1) by the following other parties:
• City of Miami (Reference 2) • City of South Miami (Reference 3) • Elected Officials (Reference 4) • Friends of the Underline (Reference 5) • Citizens/CBD (Reference 6) • CBD et al. (Reference 7) • Sierra Club (Reference 8) • SACE (Reference 9) • Seminole Tribe of Florida (Reference 10)
As was done for the U.S. Department of the Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency comment letters (Reference 11), FPL initiated its examination of these comment submissions to assist the NRC and ACOE in their evaluation and disclosure of environmental impacts of the project in the final EIS (FEIS). Accordingly, the attached FPL observations are intended to assist in the preparation of a complete, accurate, and timely FEIS, which is currently scheduled for publication by October 2016.
Richard F. Orthen | Principal Licensing Engineer | New Nuclear Projects Office: 561.904.3787 | [email protected] NextEra Energy, Inc. | Florida Power & Light Company 1540 Endeavor Drive | NT3/JW | Jupiter, Florida | 33478
-
Hearing Identifier: TurkeyPoint_COL_Public Email Number: 1114 Mail Envelope Properties (8b10ff1317d54805b0e6323e26eda76c) Subject: FW: FPL Letter L-2015-280 Dated 11-18-2015: Observations on the DEIS Comments Submitted by Other Parties Sent Date: 12/1/2015 9:59:26 AM Received Date: 12/1/2015 9:59:31 AM From: Comar, Manny Created By: [email protected] Recipients: "TurkeyCOL Resource" Tracking Status: None Post Office: HQPWMSMRS05.nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 3938 12/1/2015 9:59:31 AM image001.gif 1422 image002.jpg 4286 L-2015-280 Dated 11-18-15 Other Parties DEIS Comment Observations.pdf 1612958 Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date: Recipients Received:
-
L-2015-28010 CFR 52.3
November 18, 2015
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionAttn: Document Control DeskWashington, D.C. 20555-0001
Re: Florida Power & Light CompanyProposed Turkey Point Units 6 & 7Docket Nos. 52-040 and 52-041Observations on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) CommentsSubmitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and/or U.S. Army Corps of Engineers by Other Parties
References: 1. NUREG-2176, Environmental Impact Statement for Combined Licenses (COLs)
for Turkey Point Nuclear Plant Units 6 and 7; Draft Report for Comment, February 2015
2. City of Miami letter to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) dated July 17, 2015, NUREG-2176 - City of Miami's Amended Comments on DraftEnvironmental Impact Statement for Combined Licenses (COLs) for Turkey Point Nuclear Plant Units 6 & 7 (NRC-2009-0337)
3. City of South Miami letter to NRC dated May 20, 2015, NUREG-21764. Elected Officials letter to NRC dated May 22, 2015, NRC-2009-0337 Turkey
Point Expansion5. Friends of the Underline email to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) dated
May 15, 2015 6. Citizens/Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) email to ACOE dated May 15,
20157. CBD, Miami Waterkeeper (MW), National Parks Conservation Association
(NPCA), South Florida Wildlands Association (SFWA), and Tropical Audubon Society (TAS) [‘CBD et al.’] letter to NRC dated May 22, 2015, Comments on Turkey Point Expansion, NRC-2009-0337, 2009-02417 (SP-MLC)
8. Sierra Club letter to NRC dated June 22, 2015, Comments on Turkey PointExpansion, NRC-2009-0337, 2009-02417 (SP-MLC)
9. Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (SACE) letter to NRC dated May 22, 2015,Comments on Turkey Point Expansion, NRC-2009-0337, 2009-02417 (SP-MLC)
-
Proposed Turkey Point Units 6 and 7Docket Nos. 52-040 and 52-041L-2015-280 Page 3 Attachment 1: FPL Observations on the City of Miami Comment Letter Dated
July 17, 2015Attachment 2: FPL Observations on the City of South Miami Comment Letter Dated
May 20, 2015Attachment 3: FPL Observations on the Elected Officials Comment Letter Dated
May 22, 2015Attachment 4: FPL Observations on the Friends of the Underline Comment Email
Dated May 15, 2015 Attachment 5: FPL Observations on the Citizens/CBD Comment Email Dated
May 15, 2015 Attachment 6: FPL Observations on the CBD et al. Comment Letter Dated
May 22, 2015Attachment 7: FPL Observations on the Sierra Club Comment Letter Dated
June 22, 2015Attachment 8: FPL Observations on the SACE Comment Letter Dated May 22, 2015Attachment 9: FPL Observations on the Seminole Tribe of Florida Comment Letter
Dated October 5, 2015
cc: PTN 6 & 7 Project Manager, AP1000 Projects Branch 1, USNRC DNRL/NRORegional Administrator, Region II, USNRC Senior Resident Inspector, USNRC, Turkey Point Plant 3 & 4
-
Pro
pose
d Tu
rkey
Poi
nt U
nits
6 a
nd 7
Doc
ket N
os. 5
2-04
0 an
d 52
-041
FPL
Obs
erva
tions
on
the
City
of M
iam
i Com
men
t Let
ter D
ated
Jul
y 17
, 201
5
L-20
15-2
80A
ttach
men
t 1 P
age
1 of
44
No.
City
of M
iam
iCom
men
t(bo
ld te
xt a
pplie
d fo
r em
phas
is)
FPL
Obs
erva
tion
(bol
d te
xt a
pplie
dfo
r em
phas
is)
1C
ity o
f Mia
mi l
ette
r dat
ed J
uly
17, 2
015
Am
ende
d C
omm
ents
, P
age
2, 5
thP
arag
raph
“Com
men
t 1:
The
final
Env
ironm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent s
houl
dcl
arify
the
Nuc
lear
Reg
ulat
ory
Com
mis
sion
’s a
sses
smen
tof t
he s
itese
lect
ion
anal
ysis
con
duct
ed b
y FP
L.
Tabl
es 9
.3-5
and
9.3-
6 of
FPL’
s E
nviro
nmen
tal
Rep
ort
com
pare
Turk
ey P
oint
with
the
alte
rnat
e si
tes
acro
ss a
ran
geof
crite
ria. A
sno
ted
abov
e, th
e D
EIS
des
crib
es s
ome
of th
ese
crite
ria.
With
inTa
ble
9.3-
6,en
title
d “C
andi
date
Site
Ran
king
s,” t
he T
echn
ical
A
naly
sis
Com
posi
teR
atin
g/Sc
ore
for
each
can
dida
te s
iteis
com
pare
d ag
ains
t se
vera
l cat
egor
ies,
all
of w
hich
appe
ar to
begi
ven
equa
l wei
ght.
Thes
e ca
tego
ries
incl
uded
land
acq
uisi
tion,
site
layo
ut,
publ
ic a
ccep
tanc
e, a
nd p
oliti
cal
cons
ider
atio
ns.
How
ever
,th
e sc
ore
that
mat
ters
mos
t with
inth
is fr
amew
ork,
the
relia
bilit
yof
elec
trica
l gen
erat
ion,
is a
lso
the
met
ricon
whi
ch T
urke
y Po
int s
core
d th
elo
wes
t com
pare
d to
all a
ltern
ativ
e si
tes.
G
ener
atin
g ad
ditio
nal a
ndre
liabl
e ba
selo
ad p
ower
is th
e pr
imar
ym
otiv
atio
n fo
rcon
stru
ctin
g th
e ad
ditio
nal r
eact
ors.
Hen
ce,t
he fi
nal
Env
ironm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent,
as a
dec
isio
n-m
akin
gto
ol, s
houl
dcl
arify
the
ratio
nale
for p
roce
edin
g w
ith th
e Tu
rkey
Poi
nt s
ite d
espi
te
the
low
sco
reon
relia
bilit
yof
ele
ctric
al g
ener
atio
n.”
“Com
men
t2:
The
final
Env
ironm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent
shou
ld
expa
nd
its d
iscu
ssio
nof
the
crit
eria
tha
t m
ake
Turk
ey P
oint
a
suita
ble
site
in c
ompa
rison
to th
e al
tern
ativ
esco
nsid
ered
by
FPL.
As
note
dab
ove,
the
Turk
eyPo
int
site
does
not
appe
arto
rate
Alte
rnat
ive
site
s se
lect
ed fo
r com
para
tive
revi
ew in
the
NR
C
NEP
A pr
oces
s ar
e su
bjec
ted
to a
det
aile
d se
quen
tial t
wo-
part
test
to d
eter
min
e w
heth
er a
ny o
f the
m a
re “o
bvio
usly
su
perio
r” to
the
prop
osed
site
(U.S
. Nuc
lear
Reg
ulat
ory
Com
mis
sion
, NU
REG
-155
5, E
nviro
nmen
tal S
tand
ard
Rev
iew
Pl
an, S
ectio
n 9.
3, S
ite S
elec
tion
Proc
ess,
Rev
isio
n 1,
Jul
y 20
07).
The
test
requ
ires
NR
C to
firs
t det
erm
ine
whe
ther
“th
ere
are
envi
ronm
enta
lly p
refe
rred
site
s,” a
nd, i
f so,
then
co
nsid
er th
e “e
cono
mic
s, te
chno
logy
, and
inst
itutio
nal f
acto
rs
amon
g th
e en
viro
nmen
tally
pre
ferre
d si
tes
to s
ee if
any
is
obvi
ousl
y su
perio
r to
the
prop
osed
site
”. Th
e pr
opos
ed s
ite
prev
ails
if th
ere
is n
o “o
bvio
usly
sup
erio
r” si
te.
FPL
also
ana
lyze
d th
is is
sue
in it
s se
para
te 4
04(b
) al
tern
ativ
e an
alys
is.S
eeFP
L’s
Sect
ion
404(
b)(1
) alte
rnat
ives
an
alys
is fo
r add
ition
al in
form
atio
n fo
r doc
umen
tatio
n of
the
ratio
nale
for s
elec
tion
of th
e Tu
rkey
Poi
nt s
ite a
s th
e pr
efer
red
site
and
leas
t env
ironm
enta
lly d
amag
ing
prac
ticab
le
alte
rnat
ive.
Ref
eren
ce –
Tur
key
Poin
t Uni
ts 6
& 7
404(
b)(1
) Alte
rnat
ives
An
alys
is (O
ctob
er 2
011)
.
Spe
cific
ally
rela
tive
to th
e G
lade
s si
te, S
ectio
n 9.
3.3.
1 of
P
art 3
of t
he C
OLA
fully
eva
luat
es th
e G
lade
s si
te a
s a
pote
ntia
l alte
rnat
ive
usin
g th
at tw
o-pa
rt te
st, a
nd S
ectio
n 9.
3.3,
com
parin
g al
l of t
he s
ites,
con
clud
es:
The
deci
sion
to lo
cate
two
addi
tiona
l nuc
lear
pow
er u
nits
at
the
Turk
ey P
oint
site
was
bas
ed o
n a
com
paris
on o
f fou
r
-
Pro
pose
d Tu
rkey
Poi
nt U
nits
6 a
nd 7
Doc
ket N
os. 5
2-04
0 an
d 52
-041
FPL
Obs
erva
tions
on
the
City
of M
iam
i Com
men
t Let
ter D
ated
Jul
y 17
, 201
5
L-20
15-2
80A
ttach
men
t 1 P
age
2 of
44
No.
City
of M
iam
iCom
men
t(bo
ld te
xt a
pplie
d fo
r em
phas
is)
FPL
Obs
erva
tion
(bol
d te
xt a
pplie
dfo
r em
phas
is)
high
lyon
man
yof
the
site
sele
ctio
ncr
iteria
spec
ifica
llym
entio
ned
in
the
DEI
S.
From
the
City
’s p
ersp
ectiv
e, T
urke
y P
oint
is a
poor
site
for t
hepl
acem
ento
f tw
onu
clea
r rea
ctor
sth
at w
ill p
resu
mab
ly o
pera
te fo
rth
em
ajor
ityof
the
21st
Cen
tury
. Tur
key
Poi
nt’s
pro
xim
ityto
larg
epo
pula
tion
cent
ers,
two
natio
nal p
arks
, the
com
para
bly
few
ev
acua
tion
rout
es a
vaila
ble
to n
earb
yre
side
nts,
its
loca
tion
atop
a
sing
le s
ourc
e aq
uife
r, an
dth
e si
te’s
vul
nera
bilit
yto
ext
rem
e st
orm
su
rges
are
only
the
mos
t obv
ious
reas
ons
toqu
estio
nFP
L’s
choi
ce.
Inad
ditio
n:Th
e ex
istin
g po
wer
pla
nt in
frast
ruct
ure
has
dem
onst
rabl
y im
pact
ed th
e B
isca
yne
Aqu
ifer a
lread
y,Th
e co
olin
g ca
nals
’ con
tinui
ng p
robl
ems
with
sal
inity
, te
mpe
ratu
re in
crea
ses,
and
alg
ae b
loom
s re
veal
the
di
fficu
lties
of
oper
atin
g a
pow
er p
lant
at
Turk
ey P
oint
whi
le
min
imiz
ing
env
ironm
enta
l dam
age,
and
FPL’
s re
ques
ts to
div
ert l
arge
am
ount
s of
fres
hwat
er to
Tur
key
Poi
nt c
ome
with
in th
e co
ntex
t of a
regi
on th
at c
urre
ntly
lack
s su
ffici
ent f
resh
wat
er re
sour
ces
for E
verg
lade
s re
stor
atio
n an
dfa
ces
a di
min
ishi
ng s
uppl
y fo
r pub
lic c
onsu
mpt
ion.
Sin
ce F
PL h
as n
ot s
tate
d th
at it
inte
nds
to re
plac
e th
e ex
istin
g re
acto
rs w
ith th
e ne
w re
acto
rs c
onte
mpl
ated
in th
is a
pplic
atio
n, it
islik
ely
that
pla
cing
add
ition
al re
acto
rs a
t the
site
will
onl
y co
nstra
in
effo
rts to
reso
lve
thes
e is
sues
.
In c
ontra
st, t
he G
lade
s al
tern
ativ
e si
te is
:
alte
rnat
ive
site
s: a
gre
enfie
ld s
ite in
sou
th-c
entra
l Gla
des
Cou
nty,
a g
reen
field
site
in s
outh
ern
Oke
echo
bee
Cou
nty,
an
FPL-
owne
d fo
ssil
pow
er p
lant
site
in w
este
rn M
artin
C
ount
y, a
nd a
n FP
L-ow
ned
nucl
ear p
ower
pla
nt s
ite in
ea
ster
n S
t. Lu
cie
Cou
nty.
The
FP
L ev
alua
tion
soug
ht to
de
term
ine
whe
ther
any
of t
he a
ltern
ativ
e si
tes
are
envi
ronm
enta
lly p
refe
rabl
e to
the
Turk
ey P
oint
site
to s
ite a
pa
ir of
new
nuc
lear
pow
er u
nits
to in
crea
se g
rid c
apac
ity in
so
uth
Flor
ida.
The
eva
luat
ion
proc
ess
was
con
sist
ent w
ith
the
spec
ial c
ase
note
d in
NU
RE
G-1
555,
Sec
tion
9.3(
III)(
8),
and
cons
ider
ed th
e ad
vant
ages
alre
ady
pres
ent a
t exi
stin
g nu
clea
r fac
ilitie
s w
ithin
the
RO
I.
As
desc
ribed
in S
ectio
n 9.
2, b
ased
on
FPL
know
ledg
e an
d ex
perie
nce,
23
pote
ntia
l site
s w
ere
initi
ally
iden
tifie
d fo
r co
nsid
erat
ion
(12
gree
nfie
ld s
ites,
2 e
xist
ing
nucl
ear p
ower
pl
ant s
ites,
and
9 e
xist
ing
non-
nucl
ear p
ower
pla
nt s
ites)
. A
para
llel s
ite id
entif
icat
ion
proc
ess
invo
lvin
g a
GIS
regi
onal
sc
reen
ing
anal
ysis
was
als
o co
nduc
ted,
and
6 a
dditi
onal
po
tent
ial g
reen
field
site
s w
ere
iden
tifie
d. T
hese
site
s w
ere
then
eva
luat
ed b
ased
on
a ra
nge
of p
erfo
rman
ce c
riter
ia a
ndw
eigh
ted
scor
es. A
fter t
hree
suc
cess
ive
stag
es o
f qua
litat
ive
and
quan
titat
ive
eval
uatio
n, 2
4 si
tes
wer
e de
term
ined
to b
e le
ss fa
vora
ble,
and
the
top
five
site
s w
ere
iden
tifie
d. T
akin
g in
to c
onsi
dera
tion
the
resu
lts o
f eac
h ev
alua
tion
cond
ucte
d (in
clud
ing
satis
fyin
g th
e ov
eral
l bus
ines
s ob
ject
ives
for t
he
FPL
CO
L pr
ojec
t), th
e Tu
rkey
Poi
nt s
ite w
as s
elec
ted
as th
e pr
opos
ed s
ite fo
r FPL
’s n
ew n
ucle
ar p
ower
gen
erat
ion
proj
ect,
and
the
Gla
des,
Mar
tin, O
keec
hobe
e 2,
and
St.
-
Pro
pose
d Tu
rkey
Poi
nt U
nits
6 a
nd 7
Doc
ket N
os. 5
2-04
0 an
d 52
-041
FPL
Obs
erva
tions
on
the
City
of M
iam
i Com
men
t Let
ter D
ated
Jul
y 17
, 201
5
L-20
15-2
80A
ttach
men
t 1 P
age
3 of
44
No.
City
of M
iam
iCom
men
t(bo
ld te
xt a
pplie
d fo
r em
phas
is)
FPL
Obs
erva
tion
(bol
d te
xt a
pplie
dfo
r em
phas
is)
Loca
ted
furth
er fr
om m
ajor
pop
ulat
ion
cent
ers,
Wou
ld e
xper
ienc
e fe
wer
impa
cts
from
sea
-leve
l ris
e or
ext
rem
e st
orm
sur
ge,
Nea
r onl
y a
smal
l por
tion
of B
ig C
ypre
ss N
atio
nal P
rese
rve,
Cou
ld d
raw
its
cool
ing
wat
er fr
om a
gro
undw
ater
sou
rce
that
is
gene
rally
not
use
d fo
r oth
er p
urpo
ses
due
to th
e sa
linity
of t
hat
wat
er.
DE
IS a
t 9-5
7. T
he p
rimar
y dr
awba
cks
to p
laci
ng th
e re
acto
rs a
t thi
s si
teap
pear
to b
e th
at it
wou
ld im
pact
uni
que
farm
land
and
it w
ould
re
quire
a v
aria
nce
from
the
loca
l com
preh
ensi
ve p
lan.
DE
IS a
t 9-
53 a
nd 9
-55.
Com
pare
d to
the
prob
lem
s pr
esen
ted
by o
pera
ting
addi
tiona
l rea
ctor
s ne
ar th
e cr
itica
l and
pro
tect
ed e
cosy
stem
s at
Tu
rkey
Poi
nt, t
hese
issu
es s
eem
min
or.
Ther
efor
e, th
e fin
al E
nviro
nmen
tal I
mpa
ct S
tate
men
t wou
ld b
enef
it fro
m a
n ex
pand
ed d
iscu
ssio
n of
the
crite
ria th
at le
d to
Tur
key
Poin
t’s
sele
ctio
n as
the
final
site
for t
he n
ew re
acto
rs. F
or e
xam
ple,
FP
L ha
s st
ated
that
usi
ng re
clai
med
wat
er p
rovi
ded
by M
iam
i-Dad
e C
ount
y as
the
prim
ary
sour
ce o
f coo
ling
wat
er is
a b
enef
icia
l fea
ture
. Thi
s m
ay b
e a
com
pellin
g re
ason
to p
lace
the
new
reac
tors
in M
iam
i-D
ade
Cou
nty;
how
ever
,ift
hati
sth
e ca
se it
sho
uld
be e
xpla
ined
m
ore
dire
ctly
and
thor
ough
ly.
On
this
poi
ntin
par
ticul
ar,i
tis
wor
thno
ting
that
Mia
mi-D
ade
Cou
nty
has
begu
nef
forts
to s
uppl
emen
tits
fre
shw
ater
sup
ply
with
desa
linat
edw
ater
from
the
Upp
er F
lorid
anA
quife
r.Ad
ditio
nal
saltw
ater
intru
sion
will
only
forc
e lo
cal g
over
nmen
ts to
impo
se
stric
terw
ater
cons
erva
tion
mea
sure
s. L
ikel
ycl
imat
ech
ange
Luci
e si
tes
wer
e id
entif
ied
as th
e to
p al
tern
ativ
e si
tes.
Tu
rkey
Poi
nt is
revi
ewed
at l
engt
h in
oth
er s
ectio
ns o
f the
E
R. T
his
sect
ion,
Sub
sect
ion
9.3.
3, d
escr
ibes
the
eval
uatio
n of
the
alte
rnat
ive
site
s ba
sed
on re
conn
aiss
ance
leve
l in
form
atio
n. A
com
paris
on o
f the
env
ironm
enta
l im
pact
s fro
m c
onst
ruct
ion
and
oper
atio
n fo
r the
pro
pose
d si
te a
nd
each
of t
he to
p al
tern
ativ
e si
tes
is p
rese
nted
in T
able
s 9.
3-19
and
9.3
-20.
The
impa
ct s
umm
arie
s pr
esen
ted
in th
ese
tabl
es in
dica
te th
at e
nviro
nmen
tal i
mpa
cts
at th
e G
lade
s,
Oke
echo
bee
2, a
nd S
t. Lu
cie
site
s w
ould
, in
gene
ral,
be
high
er th
an th
ose
at th
e Tu
rkey
Poi
nt a
nd M
artin
site
s. T
he
mag
nitu
de o
f est
imat
ed im
pact
s at
Mar
tin a
nd T
urke
y P
oint
ar
e si
mila
r, w
ith e
ach
site
hav
ing
MO
DE
RA
TE v
ersu
s S
MA
LL im
pact
s in
one
or t
wo
of th
e re
sour
ce a
reas
ev
alua
ted,
with
Tur
key
Poi
nt h
avin
g an
adv
anta
ge (S
MA
LL
to M
OD
ER
ATE
ver
sus
LAR
GE
) in
the
Tran
spor
tatio
n re
sour
ce a
rea.
Ove
rall,
esp
ecia
lly g
iven
the
reco
nnai
ssan
ce
leve
l inf
orm
atio
n us
ed in
dev
elop
ing
thes
e es
timat
es, n
eith
er
Turk
ey P
oint
nor
Mar
tin w
ould
be
expe
cted
to h
ave
sign
ifica
ntly
less
env
ironm
enta
l im
pact
. The
refo
re, b
ased
on
thes
e an
alys
es, F
PL
conc
lude
s th
at n
o al
tern
ativ
e si
te is
en
viro
nmen
tally
pre
fera
ble
to th
e pr
opos
ed T
urke
y P
oint
si
te; a
ccor
ding
ly, n
o al
tern
ativ
e si
te is
obv
ious
ly s
uper
ior t
o Tu
rkey
Poi
nt a
s th
e pr
opos
ed s
ite fo
r its
new
two-
unit
nucl
ear p
ower
pla
nt.
Add
ition
ally
, FP
L al
so a
naly
zed
thes
e sa
me
alte
rnat
ive
site
s,
incl
udin
g th
e G
lade
s si
te fr
om a
tech
nica
l/log
istic
al
prac
ticab
ility
sta
ndpo
int,
in it
s se
para
te 4
04(b
) alte
rnat
ives
-
Pro
pose
d Tu
rkey
Poi
nt U
nits
6 a
nd 7
Doc
ket N
os. 5
2-04
0 an
d 52
-041
FPL
Obs
erva
tions
on
the
City
of M
iam
i Com
men
t Let
ter D
ated
Jul
y 17
, 201
5
L-20
15-2
80A
ttach
men
t 1 P
age
4 of
44
No.
City
of M
iam
iCom
men
t(bo
ld te
xt a
pplie
d fo
r em
phas
is)
FPL
Obs
erva
tion
(bol
d te
xt a
pplie
dfo
r em
phas
is)
scen
ario
sfo
rth
ere
gion
indi
cate
that
redu
ctio
nsin
rain
fall
will
furth
erta
xth
e av
aila
ble
fresh
wat
er s
uppl
y. S
ee V
asub
andh
uet
al.,
C
limat
eS
cena
rios:
A F
lorid
a-ce
ntric
Vie
w,
STA
TE U
NIV
. S
YS
TEM
OF
FLO
RID
A (N
ov. 2
011)
(citi
ng E
nfie
ldet
al.,
Mid
-C
entu
ryE
xpec
tatio
ns fo
r Tro
pica
l Cyc
lone
Act
ivity
and
Flo
rida
Rai
nfal
l); s
ee a
lso
Clim
ate
Cha
nge
and
Wat
er M
anag
emen
t in
S
outh
Flo
rida:
Inte
rdep
artm
enta
l Clim
ate
Cha
nge
Gro
up, S
OU
TH
FLO
RID
A W
ATE
R M
AN
AG
EM
EN
T D
ISTR
ICT
(N
ov.
2009
).H
ence
,th
e am
ount
of r
ecla
imed
wat
er a
vaila
ble
from
Mia
mi-D
ade
Cou
nty
will
dec
line
over
tim
e an
d w
illno
tbe
avai
labl
e fo
r use
as
cool
ing
wat
er fo
r muc
hof
the
oper
atin
glif
e of
Tur
key
Poin
tNuc
lear
P
lant
Uni
ts 6
&7.
Acc
ordi
ngly
,th
e fin
al E
nviro
nmen
tal I
mpa
ct
Sta
tem
ent m
ust d
irect
ly e
xpla
in th
e ra
tiona
le fo
r app
rovi
ng T
urke
y P
oint
as
the
site
of t
he n
ew re
acto
rs.”
anal
ysis
and
FPL
con
clud
ed a
fter t
hat e
valu
atio
n th
at:
Five
alte
rnat
ive
site
s w
ere
eval
uate
d pu
rsua
nt to
40
CFR
P
art 2
30 to
det
erm
ine
thei
r pra
ctic
abilit
y to
ach
ieve
the
over
all P
roje
ct p
urpo
se. T
he p
ract
icab
ility
eval
uatio
n de
mon
stra
ted
that
the
thre
e in
land
alte
rnat
ives
[inc
ludi
ng th
e G
lade
s si
te, s
ee §
5.2.
1] a
re n
ot p
ract
icab
le a
ltern
ativ
es fo
r m
eetin
g th
is o
vera
ll P
roje
ct p
urpo
se, a
s di
scus
sed
in
Sec
tion
5.1.
The
two
prac
ticab
le s
ites,
Tur
key
Poi
nt a
nd S
t. Lu
cie,
wer
e th
en e
valu
ated
bas
ed u
pon
the
crite
ria
pres
ente
d in
40
CFR
Par
t 230
to d
eter
min
e th
e LE
DPA
site
. Th
is e
nviro
nmen
tal e
valu
atio
n de
mon
stra
ted
that
the
Turk
ey
Poi
nt s
ite is
the
LED
PA
site
that
fulfi
lls th
e ov
eral
l Pro
ject
pu
rpos
e. In
add
ition
, due
to it
s pr
oxim
ity to
a re
clai
med
w
ater
sou
rce
of s
uffic
ient
vol
ume
to s
uppo
rt tw
o nu
clea
r un
its, t
he T
urke
y P
oint
site
pro
vide
s a
uniq
ue o
ppor
tuni
ty to
pr
ovid
e ad
ded
envi
ronm
enta
l ben
efit
thro
ugh
the
reus
e of
w
aste
wat
er. I
n se
lect
ing
to u
se re
clai
med
wat
er fr
om M
iam
i-D
ade
Cou
nty
as th
e pr
imar
y co
olin
g w
ater
sou
rce,
FP
L w
ill
prom
ote
wat
er c
onse
rvat
ion
thro
ugh
reus
e of
a c
ritic
al
regi
onal
reso
urce
, whi
le h
elpi
ng to
div
ert t
reat
ed w
aste
wat
er
from
oce
an o
utfa
ll an
d re
duce
dee
p w
ell i
njec
tions
. Sel
ectio
n of
this
pro
ject
site
allo
ws
the
Cou
nty
to a
void
a m
inim
um o
f $1
22 m
illion
of a
dditi
onal
cap
ital c
osts
that
Cou
nty
Wat
er
and
Sew
er c
usto
mer
s w
ould
oth
erw
ise
pay.
Add
ition
ally
, FP
L w
ill co
mpe
nsat
e th
e C
ount
y fo
r ope
ratio
ns a
nd
mai
nten
ance
cos
ts e
stim
ated
to b
e ap
prox
imat
ely
$200
m
illion
ove
r the
firs
t 40
year
s of
pla
nt o
pera
tion.
Ref
eren
ce –
Turk
ey P
oint
Uni
ts 6
& 7
CO
L A
pplic
atio
n P
art 3
-
Pro
pose
d Tu
rkey
Poi
nt U
nits
6 a
nd 7
Doc
ket N
os. 5
2-04
0 an
d 52
-041
FPL
Obs
erva
tions
on
the
City
of M
iam
i Com
men
t Let
ter D
ated
Jul
y 17
, 201
5
L-20
15-2
80A
ttach
men
t 1 P
age
5 of
44
No.
City
of M
iam
iCom
men
t(bo
ld te
xt a
pplie
d fo
r em
phas
is)
FPL
Obs
erva
tion
(bol
d te
xt a
pplie
dfo
r em
phas
is)
-ML
1431
1A28
3 E
nviro
nmen
tal R
epor
t (R
ev. 6
), S
ectio
n 9.
3.3;
see
als
o FP
L’s
Sec
tion
404(
b)(1
) Alte
rnat
ives
Ana
lysi
s (O
ctob
er 2
011)
.
In a
dditi
on, t
he 9
0 M
GD
recl
aim
ed w
ater
allo
catio
n fo
r Uni
ts
6 &
7 is
tota
lly in
depe
nden
t of t
he B
BC
W re
clai
med
wat
er
allo
catio
n an
d do
es n
ot re
duce
that
allo
catio
n.2
City
of M
iam
i let
ter d
ated
Jul
y 17
, 201
5A
men
ded
Com
men
ts P
age
4, 2
ndP
arag
raph
“Com
men
t 3: T
he fi
nal E
nviro
nmen
tal I
mpa
ct S
tate
men
tsho
uld
expa
nd th
e si
te s
elec
tion
scor
ing
crite
ria to
incl
ude
sea-
leve
l ris
e re
silie
nce.
Ext
rem
e hi
gh w
ater
leve
ls m
ade
poss
ible
by
sea-
leve
l ris
e an
d in
tens
e st
orm
s ca
n af
fect
sal
twat
er in
trusi
on in
to g
roun
dwat
er
reso
urce
s, th
ereb
y af
fect
ing
the
regi
onal
avai
labi
lity
of fr
eshw
ater
. Th
ere
are
obvi
ous
safe
ty im
plic
atio
ns fo
r sto
rm s
urge
s ne
ar th
e re
acto
r site
as
wel
l. Fo
r the
se re
ason
s, re
silie
nce
agai
nst p
robl
ems
asso
ciat
ed w
ith s
ea-le
vel r
ise
shou
ld b
e in
corp
orat
ed in
to th
e si
te
sele
ctio
n sc
orin
g cr
iteria
.”
FPL
also
ana
lyze
d th
e in
land
site
s in
its
sepa
rate
404
(b)
alte
rnat
ive
anal
ysis
. The
inla
nd s
ites
wer
e de
term
ined
by
FPL
to b
e te
chno
logi
cally
and
logi
stic
ally
impr
actic
able
. Th
eref
ore
a co
nsid
erat
ion
of w
heth
er o
r not
the
inla
nd s
ites
wer
e en
viro
nmen
tally
less
dam
agin
g be
caus
e th
ey p
rovi
de
supe
rior s
ea le
vel r
ise
prot
ectio
n w
as n
ot n
eces
sary
.
Ref
eren
ce –
FP
L Tu
rkey
Poi
nt 4
04(b
)(1) A
ltern
ativ
es
Ana
lysi
s (O
ctob
er 2
011)
.
Add
ition
ally
, the
pot
entia
l effe
cts
of s
ea le
vel r
ise
and
stor
m
surg
e ha
ve a
lread
y be
en a
ppro
pria
tely
add
ress
ed a
nd
min
imiz
ed in
the
Pro
ject
des
ign
as d
escr
ibed
in F
PL
Obs
erva
tion
onC
ity o
f Mia
mi C
omm
ent N
o. 1
2 be
low
.
-
Pro
pose
d Tu
rkey
Poi
nt U
nits
6 a
nd 7
Doc
ket N
os. 5
2-04
0 an
d 52
-041
FPL
Obs
erva
tions
on
the
City
of M
iam
i Com
men
t Let
ter D
ated
Jul
y 17
, 201
5
L-20
15-2
80A
ttach
men
t 1 P
age
6 of
44
No.
City
of M
iam
iCom
men
t(bo
ld te
xt a
pplie
d fo
r em
phas
is)
FPL
Obs
erva
tion
(bol
d te
xt a
pplie
dfo
r em
phas
is)
3C
ity o
f Mia
mi l
ette
r dat
ed J
uly
17, 2
015
Am
ende
d C
omm
ents
Pag
e 5,
1st
Par
agra
ph
“Com
men
t 4: T
hefin
al E
nviro
nmen
tal I
mpa
ctS
tate
men
t sho
uld
incl
ude
anan
alys
is o
falte
rnat
ives
to th
e ra
dial
colle
ctor
wel
lba
ckup
cool
ing
syst
em th
at a
re le
sslik
ely
toad
vers
ely
impa
ct th
e B
isca
yne
Aqu
ifer.
The
DE
IS a
ckno
wle
dges
that
“[r]e
mov
ing
rela
tivel
y la
rge
volu
mes
of
wat
er fr
omth
ein
land
aqu
ifer c
ould
low
erth
ew
ater
tabl
ein
the
inla
ndpo
rtion
of th
e aq
uife
r, af
fect
ing
exis
ting
wat
er-s
uppl
y w
ells
and
incr
easi
ng s
altw
ater
intru
sion
toth
e B
isca
yne
aqui
fer.”
DE
ISat
5-
13. I
n ad
ditio
n, it
sta
tes
that
“the
vol
ume
of w
ater
that
wou
ld b
e re
mov
ed [b
y th
e ra
dial
col
lect
or w
ells
] fro
m th
e in
land
aqu
ifer i
s di
fficu
lt to
pre
dict
with
cer
tain
ty b
ecau
se it
dep
ends
on
seve
ral
hydr
ogeo
logi
c fe
atur
esan
dpa
ram
eter
s th
at a
re in
com
plet
ely
quan
tifie
d.” D
EIS
at 5
-14.
Acc
ordi
ngto
the
DE
IS,t
hehi
ghes
t est
imat
ed “v
olum
e of
grou
ndw
ater
that
cou
ld b
ere
mov
ed f
rom
the
Bis
cayn
e aq
uife
ris
4,50
0 gp
mdu
ring
[radi
alco
llect
or w
ell]
oper
atio
n . .
. .
”D
EIS
at
5-15
.Thi
s am
ount
s to
abo
ut6.
48m
illio
n ga
llons
ofw
ater
per
da
y fr
omth
e B
isca
yne
Aqu
iferd
urin
gth
era
dial
col
lect
or w
ells
oper
atio
n an
dab
out3
88,8
00,0
00 g
allo
ns a
nnua
lly.
Dur
ing
the
prop
osed
pro
ject
’s li
fetim
e, M
iam
i will
like
ly fa
ce d
win
dlin
g su
pplie
s of
pot
able
wat
er a
s w
ell a
s fu
rther
diff
icul
ties
prev
entin
g flo
odin
g an
d sa
ltwat
er in
trusi
on. C
onsi
derin
g th
ese
chal
leng
es,
388,
800,
000
gallo
ns a
ppea
rs t
o b
e a
rel
ativ
ely
larg
e w
ithdr
awal
of w
ater
from
the
Bis
cayn
e Aq
uife
r. FP
L’s
mos
t rec
entf
ilings
bef
ore
Alte
rnat
ives
to th
e pr
imar
y an
d ba
ckup
coo
ling
wat
er
syst
ems
prop
osed
at t
he T
urke
y P
oint
site
wer
e ev
alua
ted
in
the
Envi
ronm
enta
l Rep
ort a
t Sec
tion
9.4.
FP
L al
so a
naly
zed
alte
rnat
ive
cool
ing
wat
er c
onfig
urat
ions
in it
s se
para
te
404(
b) a
ltern
ativ
e an
alys
is.
Ref
eren
ce –
Tur
key
Poi
nt U
nits
6 &
7 C
OL
App
licat
ion
Par
t 3
- ML
1431
1A28
3 E
nviro
nmen
tal R
epor
t (R
ev. 6
), S
ectio
n 9.
4; s
ee a
lso
FPL’
s S
ectio
n 40
4(b)
(1) A
ltern
ativ
es A
naly
sis
(Oct
ober
201
1).
The
FPL
grou
ndw
ater
mod
el d
emon
stra
tes
that
the
RC
Ws
will
utiliz
e sa
line
grou
ndw
ater
app
roxi
mat
ely
20 -
40 fe
et
bene
ath
the
botto
m o
f Bis
cayn
e Ba
y. T
he e
xtre
mel
y lo
w
inta
ke v
eloc
ity (0
.000
02 ft
/sec
) thr
ough
the
subs
trate
will
not
affe
ct ti
dal c
ycle
s or
fres
hwat
erflo
w in
to B
isca
yne
Bay.
Th
e ra
dial
col
lect
or w
ells
will
with
draw
wat
er fr
om a
sal
ine
aqui
fer t
hat w
ill be
rech
arge
d fro
m th
e su
rface
. The
revi
sed
[gro
undw
ater
] mod
el in
dica
tes
sim
ilar r
esul
ts a
s th
e pr
ior
mod
el w
ith re
gard
to th
e so
urce
of w
ater
repo
rting
to th
e ra
dial
col
lect
or w
ell s
yste
m: a
ppro
xim
atel
y 97
.8 p
erce
nt o
f the
aq
uife
r rec
harg
e w
ill or
igin
ate
from
the
boun
darie
s re
pres
entin
g Bi
scay
ne B
ay, a
ppro
xim
atel
y 2.
0 pe
rcen
t will
orig
inat
e fro
m th
e bo
unda
ries
repr
esen
ting
the
cool
ing
cana
l sy
stem
and
app
roxi
mat
ely
0.2
perc
ent w
ill be
from
bo
unda
ries
repr
esen
ting
prec
ipita
tion
onsh
ore.
The
refo
re, t
he
radi
al c
olle
ctor
wel
ls w
ill no
t with
draw
fres
h gr
ound
wat
er. T
he
radi
al c
olle
ctor
wel
ls w
ill ha
ve n
o ad
vers
e im
pact
on
that
-
Pro
pose
d Tu
rkey
Poi
nt U
nits
6 a
nd 7
Doc
ket N
os. 5
2-04
0 an
d 52
-041
FPL
Obs
erva
tions
on
the
City
of M
iam
i Com
men
t Let
ter D
ated
Jul
y 17
, 201
5
L-20
15-2
80A
ttach
men
t 1 P
age
7 of
44
No.
City
of M
iam
iCom
men
t(bo
ld te
xt a
pplie
d fo
r em
phas
is)
FPL
Obs
erva
tion
(bol
d te
xt a
pplie
dfo
r em
phas
is)
Flor
ida’
s P
ublic
Ser
vice
Com
mis
sion
indi
cate
that
the
new
reac
tors
ar
e no
w p
lann
ed to
ent
er s
ervi
ce c
lose
r to
2027
. Aro
und
that
tim
e,
Mia
mi-D
ade
Cou
nty’
s W
ater
and
Sew
er D
epar
tmen
t pro
ject
s th
at
dem
and
for w
ater
will
be
muc
h cl
oser
to c
apac
ity.S
ee S
FWM
D
Indi
vidu
al U
se P
erm
it fo
r MD
WA
SD
Per
mit
Num
ber 1
3- 0
0017
-W(E
xhib
its 8
A, 9
, and
23)
. The
refo
re, t
he in
crea
sed
dem
and
plac
ed
on th
e B
isca
yne
Aqu
ifer r
eser
ves
by th
e ra
dial
col
lect
or w
ells
co
uld
adve
rsel
y im
pact
bot
h su
pply
and
man
agem
ent o
f thi
s sc
are
reso
urce
in th
e co
min
g de
cade
s. S
ee D
EIS
at 2
-176
.
Mor
eove
r, w
ithdr
awin
g w
ater
from
the
Bis
cayn
e Aq
uife
ris
not a
ne
cess
ary
cons
eque
nce
of s
iting
the
new
reac
tors
at T
urke
y P
oint
.Th
ego
al o
fthe
fina
lEnv
ironm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent
isto
bala
nce
the
need
toim
plem
ent
an a
ctio
n ag
ains
t its
impa
ct o
n th
e
surro
undi
ngen
viro
nmen
t. In
this
inst
ance
, tha
t nee
dis
for
addi
tiona
l bas
eloa
d po
wer
, an
d no
t fo
r an
y sp
ecifi
c fa
cilit
y co
ntem
plat
edin
FPL’
s ap
plic
atio
n.Fo
r ex
ampl
e, W
ork
Ord
er #
2,Ta
sk 1
, Ini
tial W
ater
Sour
ce A
ltern
ativ
e Te
chni
cal R
evie
wR
epor
t, Se
ctio
n5.
0 (p
ages
3-4
)in
dica
ted
that
oper
atin
gth
era
dial
col
lect
or w
ells
for
use
as
a ba
ckup
coo
ling
syst
em
rank
edfo
urth
inFP
L’s
anal
ysis
ofco
olin
g op
tions
. In
con
tras
t,dr
awin
gco
olin
g w
ater
from
the
“Bou
lder
Zon
e”(a
Sout
hFl
orid
a in
ject
ion
zone
) ra
nked
sec
ond
inth
isre
port
. FP
L’s
resp
onse
to
NR
C R
AI N
umbe
r EI
S 9.
4-2
(RA
I 577
0) in
dica
ted
that
this
optio
nw
as n
ot s
elec
ted
beca
use
the
Bou
lder
Zon
e is
pla
nned
for
use
as
an
inje
ctio
nzo
ne f
or w
aste
wat
er.
How
ever
,thi
sdo
esno
t add
ress
why
the
third
ran
ked
optio
nw
as n
ot s
elec
ted
or v
ette
dfu
rthe
r.
porti
on o
f the
Bis
cayn
e Aq
uife
r tha
t sup
plie
s fre
sh d
rinki
ng
wat
er. T
he in
duce
d se
abed
vel
ocity
cal
cula
ted
by th
e re
vise
d m
odel
is s
till v
ery
smal
l, ap
prox
imat
ely
0.00
002
ft/se
c(6
.2 ×
10-
4cm
/sec
).
Ref
eren
ce –
Gro
undw
ater
Mod
el D
evel
opm
ent a
nd A
naly
sis,
U
nits
6 &
7 D
ewat
erin
g an
d R
adia
l Col
lect
or W
ell S
imul
atio
ns
Rev
isio
n 3,
Bec
htel
Pow
er C
orpo
ratio
n D
ecem
ber 2
012.
Reg
ardi
ng th
e st
atem
ents
“Thi
s am
ount
s to
abo
ut6.
48m
illio
n ga
llons
ofw
ater
per
day
from
the
Bis
cayn
e A
quife
rdu
ring
the
radi
al c
olle
ctor
wel
lsop
erat
ion
and
abou
t38
8,80
0,00
0 ga
llons
ann
ually
,” an
d “T
here
fore
, the
in
crea
sed
dem
and
plac
ed o
n th
e B
isca
yne
Aqui
fer r
eser
ves
by th
e ra
dial
col
lect
or w
ells
cou
ld a
dver
sely
impa
ct b
oth
supp
ly a
nd m
anag
emen
t of t
his
scar
e re
sour
ce in
the
com
ing
deca
des,
”the
radi
al c
olle
ctor
wel
ls w
ill w
ithdr
aw
wat
er fr
om a
sal
ine
aqui
fer t
hat w
ill be
rech
arge
d fro
m th
e su
rface
. The
revi
sed
[gro
undw
ater
] mod
el in
dica
tes
sim
ilar
resu
lts a
s th
e pr
ior m
odel
with
rega
rd to
the
sour
ce o
f wat
er
repo
rting
to th
e ra
dial
col
lect
or w
ell s
yste
m: a
ppro
xim
atel
y 97
.8 p
erce
nt o
f the
aqu
ifer r
echa
rge
will
orig
inat
e fro
m th
e bo
unda
ries
repr
esen
ting
Bisc
ayne
Bay
, app
roxi
mat
ely
2.0
perc
ent w
ill or
igin
ate
from
the
boun
darie
s re
pres
entin
g th
e co
olin
g ca
nal s
yste
m a
nd a
ppro
xim
atel
y 0.
2 pe
rcen
t will
be
from
bou
ndar
ies
repr
esen
ting
prec
ipita
tion
onsh
ore.
Th
eref
ore,
the
radi
al c
olle
ctor
wel
ls w
ill no
t with
draw
fres
h gr
ound
wat
er. T
he ra
dial
col
lect
or w
ells
will
have
no
adve
rse
impa
ct o
n th
at p
ortio
n of
the
Bisc
ayne
Aqu
ifer t
hat s
uppl
ies
-
Pro
pose
d Tu
rkey
Poi
nt U
nits
6 a
nd 7
Doc
ket N
os. 5
2-04
0 an
d 52
-041
FPL
Obs
erva
tions
on
the
City
of M
iam
i Com
men
t Let
ter D
ated
Jul
y 17
, 201
5
L-20
15-2
80A
ttach
men
t 1 P
age
8 of
44
No.
City
of M
iam
iCom
men
t(bo
ld te
xt a
pplie
d fo
r em
phas
is)
FPL
Obs
erva
tion
(bol
d te
xt a
pplie
dfo
r em
phas
is)
Like
wis
e, li
miti
ng th
e a
naly
sis
in t
he D
EIS
to
onl
y th
e p
ropo
sed
ra
dial
col
lect
or w
ells
as
a ba
ckup
coo
ling
syst
em is
not
the
“har
d lo
ok” r
equi
red
by th
e N
atio
nal
Env
ironm
enta
l P
olic
y A
ct (
“NE
PA
”).Th
is b
acku
p co
olin
g sy
stem
is e
asily
one
of
the
mos
t con
cern
ing
pa
rts o
f th
e T
urke
y P
oint
Nuc
lear
Pla
nt U
nits
6 &
7 a
pplic
atio
n.
Sin
ce th
e fin
al E
nviro
nmen
tal I
mpa
ct S
tate
men
t m
ust
inde
pend
ently
ass
ess
the
impa
cts
of
the
Env
ironm
enta
l Rep
ort
subm
itted
by
FP
L, i
t sh
ould
als
o c
onsi
der
othe
r ap
proa
ches
to
prov
idin
g co
olin
g w
ater
to th
e re
acto
rs. T
he D
EIS
has
alre
ady
acco
mpl
ishe
d th
is ta
sk fo
r som
e of
the
inla
nd a
ltern
ativ
e si
tes
by
asse
ssin
g po
tent
ial c
oolin
g sy
stem
s ot
her t
han
thos
e pr
opos
ed. T
he
final
Env
ironm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent m
ustd
o th
e sa
me
for T
urke
y P
oint
.”
fresh
drin
king
wat
er.
Ref
eren
ce –
Gro
undw
ater
Mod
el D
evel
opm
ent a
nd A
naly
sis,
U
nits
6 &
7 D
ewat
erin
g an
d R
adia
l Col
lect
or W
ell S
imul
atio
ns
Rev
isio
n 3,
Bec
htel
Pow
er C
orpo
ratio
n D
ecem
ber 2
012.
In a
dditi
on, w
ater
in th
e aq
uife
r und
erly
ing
the
Turk
ey P
oint
fa
cilit
y is
not
an
unde
rgro
und
sour
ce o
f drin
king
wat
er. T
he
TDS
conc
entra
tion
is n
atur
ally
(with
out a
ny in
fluen
ce fr
om th
e IW
F) a
bove
10,
000
mg/
l. Th
e cl
oses
t USD
W w
ithin
this
aq
uife
r tha
t cou
ld s
uppl
y dr
inki
ng w
ater
is a
ppro
xim
atel
y 4
mile
s in
land
from
the
Turk
ey P
oint
faci
lity.
Reg
ardi
ng e
valu
atio
n of
the
third
rank
ed a
ltern
ativ
e w
ater
so
urce
des
crib
ed in
Wor
k O
rder
#2,
Tas
k 1,
Initi
al W
ater
Sou
rce
Alte
rnat
ive
Tech
nica
l Rev
iew
Rep
ort,
(Low
er
Flor
idan
Aqu
ifer),
SC
A A
ppen
dix
10.9
, Wat
er S
uppl
y A
ltern
ativ
es a
nd W
ater
Con
serv
atio
n P
lan
Turk
ey P
oint
U
nits
6 &
7, p
age
4 st
ates
, “W
hile
the
Low
er F
lorid
an A
quife
r al
tern
ativ
e w
as o
ne o
f the
five
alte
rnat
ives
with
a lo
w s
core
ba
sed
on th
e sc
reen
ing
crite
ria (s
core
16)
, thi
s al
tern
ativ
e w
as re
com
bine
d w
ith th
e Bo
ulde
r Zon
e al
tern
ativ
e at
the
end
of th
is p
hase
of t
he s
tudy
bec
ause
of l
imite
d in
form
atio
n on
this
zon
e.”
Ref
eren
ce –
SC
A A
ppen
dix
10.9
, Wat
er S
uppl
y A
ltern
ativ
es
and
Wat
er C
onse
rvat
ion
Pla
n Tu
rkey
Poi
nt U
nits
6 &
7.
-
Pro
pose
d Tu
rkey
Poi
nt U
nits
6 a
nd 7
Doc
ket N
os. 5
2-04
0 an
d 52
-041
FPL
Obs
erva
tions
on
the
City
of M
iam
i Com
men
t Let
ter D
ated
Jul
y 17
, 201
5
L-20
15-2
80A
ttach
men
t 1 P
age
9 of
44
No.
City
of M
iam
iCom
men
t(bo
ld te
xt a
pplie
d fo
r em
phas
is)
FPL
Obs
erva
tion
(bol
d te
xt a
pplie
dfo
r em
phas
is)
4C
ity o
f Mia
mi l
ette
r dat
ed J
uly
17, 2
015
Am
ende
d C
omm
ents
Pag
e 6,
2nd
Par
agra
ph
“Com
men
t 5:
The
final
Env
ironm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent s
houl
dgi
ve g
reat
erw
eigh
tto
the
pote
ntia
l for
adve
rse
impa
cts
to
envi
ronm
enta
llysi
gnifi
cant
reso
urce
sin
its
risk
anal
ysis
.
Ope
ratio
nof
the
radi
al c
olle
ctor
wel
ls w
ould
rem
ove
wat
er f
rom
Bis
cayn
e B
ay, t
he F
PL in
dust
rial w
aste
wat
er fa
cilit
y(a
lso
refe
rred
to
as c
oolin
g ca
nals
), an
dth
e B
isca
yne
Aqu
ifer
in a
n ar
ea a
djac
ent
to B
isca
yne
Nat
iona
l P
ark.
DE
IS a
t 2-
27.
It is
als
o w
orth
notin
gth
atth
ere
is a
plu
me
of h
yper
salin
e w
ater
inth
epo
rtion
of th
eB
isca
yne
Aqu
ifer
unde
rnea
thth
eFP
Lin
dust
rialw
aste
wat
er fa
cilit
y.
The
DEI
S a
ckno
wle
dges
this
fact
and
pre
dict
sth
at s
ome
ofth
e hy
pers
alin
ew
ater
wou
ld b
e dr
awn
into
the
radi
al c
olle
ctor
wel
l sy
stem
, whi
ch “
may
cha
nge
the
area
affe
cted
byth
ehy
pers
alin
epl
ume.
” D
EIS
at 5
-15.
Ther
efor
e,th
em
ostd
irect
ris
k to
the
surr
ound
ing
envi
ronm
ent
ofop
erat
ing
the
radi
al c
olle
ctor
wel
ls w
ould
be a
n in
crea
se
inth
e am
ount
of s
altw
ater
intr
usio
n ca
used
byre
mov
ing
grou
ndw
ater
fro
m t
hein
land
port
ion
ofth
e B
isca
yne
Aqu
ifer.
DE
IS a
t 5-2
7.
Sim
ilarly
,the
inte
rmitt
ent u
sage
ofth
e ba
ckup
coo
ling
syst
em“c
ould
resu
lt in
an
incr
ease
of h
yper
salin
eflo
win
toth
e aq
uife
rbe
neat
hth
e ba
y th
atco
uld
mig
rate
into
the
bay
whe
nth
e [ra
dial
co
llect
or w
ell s
yste
m]i
sno
tope
ratin
g.” D
EIS
at G
-29.
The
intro
duct
ion
ofth
ishy
pers
alin
ew
ater
into
Bis
cayn
eB
ay m
ay
See
also
FPL
Obs
erva
tion
onC
ity o
f Mia
mi C
omm
ent N
o.
10 b
elow
.
Reg
ardi
ng th
e st
atem
ent,
“The
refo
re,t
hem
ost d
irect
risk
toth
e su
rroun
ding
envi
ronm
ento
fope
ratin
g th
era
dial
co
llect
or w
ells
wou
ldbe
an
incr
ease
inth
e am
ount
ofsa
ltwat
er in
trusi
on c
ause
dby
rem
ovin
ggr
ound
wat
er f
rom
the
inla
ndpo
rtion
ofth
e B
isca
yne
Aqu
ifer.
DE
IS a
t 5-2
7,”
DE
IS S
ectio
n 5.
2.3.
2 G
roun
dwat
er-Q
ualit
y Im
pact
sR
adia
l Col
lect
or W
ell I
mpa
cts
stat
es,
“As
disc
usse
d ab
ove,
ope
ratio
n of
the
RC
Ws
coul
d re
mov
e so
me
grou
ndw
ater
from
the
inla
nd p
ortio
n of
the
Bis
cayn
e aq
uife
r, th
ereb
y re
sulti
ng in
an
incr
ease
in th
e am
ount
of
saltw
ater
intru
sion
into
the
aqui
fer.
How
ever
, the
revi
ew
team
det
erm
ined
that
the
volu
me
rem
oved
from
the
inla
nd
aqui
fer w
ould
be
a sm
all f
ract
ion
of th
e pu
mpe
d vo
lum
e, a
nd
base
d on
the
relia
bilit
y of
the
com
pone
nts
of th
e re
clai
med
-w
ater
sys
tem
, the
RC
Ws
wou
ld b
e ca
lled
into
use
in
frequ
ently
and
for d
urat
ions
muc
h sh
orte
r tha
n th
e 60
-day
m
axim
um a
llow
ed p
er y
ear u
nder
the
FD
EP
fina
l Con
ditio
ns
of C
ertif
icat
ion
(Sta
te o
f Flo
rida
2014
-TN
3637
). Th
is li
mite
d us
e gr
eatly
redu
ces
pote
ntia
l RC
W im
pact
s on
sal
twat
er
intru
sion
.”
As
stat
ed in
SC
A C
ompl
eten
ess
resp
onse
5-M
DC
-C- 2
, 3, 4
, 5,
8, 9
, 10,
11,
12,
14,
15,
16,
17,
19,
22
and
23 (F
ifth
Rou
nd)(h
),“T
he d
esig
n of
the
radi
al c
olle
ctor
wel
ls m
inim
izes
ons
hore
im
pact
s be
caus
e th
ey a
re lo
cate
d ap
prox
imat
ely
1,80
0 ft
-
Pro
pose
d Tu
rkey
Poi
nt U
nits
6 a
nd 7
Doc
ket N
os. 5
2-04
0 an
d 52
-041
FPL
Obs
erva
tions
on
the
City
of M
iam
i Com
men
t Let
ter D
ated
Jul
y 17
, 201
5
L-20
15-2
80A
ttach
men
t 1 P
age
10of
44
No.
City
of M
iam
iCom
men
t(bo
ld te
xt a
pplie
d fo
r em
phas
is)
FPL
Obs
erva
tion
(bol
d te
xt a
pplie
dfo
r em
phas
is)
irrep
arab
lyda
mag
eor
dest
roy
loca
lsea
gras
sbe
ds, a
criti
calh
abita
tfo
r sev
eral
end
ange
red
spec
ies.
A s
imila
r pat
tern
occ
urre
din
the
fall
of19
87, c
ausi
ng a
n ab
rupt
and
wid
espr
ead
mor
talit
y ev
ent i
n th
e Fl
orid
a B
ay s
eagr
ass
com
mun
ity.
See
http
://tin
yurl.
com
/Sea
gras
sHab
itatR
esto
ratio
n201
3at
11-
12
, 14
-15.
Sea
gras
sm
orta
lity
cont
inue
d du
e to
hyp
ersa
line
cond
ition
sin
Flo
rida
Bay
thro
ugh
1995
and
had
neg
ativ
eco
nseq
uenc
es fo
r a
varie
tyof
mar
ine
life.
Id.
The
DEI
S a
lso
note
s th
atth
ere
is t
he p
oten
tial
for
adve
rse
effe
cts
on th
reat
ened
spe
cies
, in
clud
ing
Am
eric
ancr
ocod
iles,
that
inh
abit
the
FPL
indu
stria
l was
tew
ater
faci
lity
due
to s
alt d
rift a
nd d
epos
ition
from
coo
ling-
tow
er o
pera
tion
whi
le th
e ra
dial
col
lect
or w
ells
are
bei
ng u
sed.
DE
IS a
t 5-5
4.
Furt
herm
ore,
ther
eis
the
pote
ntia
lfor
the
entr
ainm
ento
fm
icro
scop
ic o
rgan
ism
s an
d la
rvae
.
Due
toth
em
yria
d ris
ks p
rese
nted
byth
era
dial
col
lect
or w
ells
and
the
vuln
erab
le n
atur
e of
the
surr
ound
ing
ecos
yste
m,
the
final
E
nviro
nmen
talI
mpa
ct S
tate
men
t sho
uld
plac
e ad
ditio
nal e
mph
asis
on a
void
ing
the
pote
ntia
l for
adv
erse
impa
cts
to,a
ndpl
ace
addi
tiona
l wei
ght o
n pr
otec
ting,
env
ironm
enta
lly s
igni
fican
tre
sour
ces.
As
note
din
Com
men
t4,
this
may
com
e in
the
form
of
an a
ltern
ate
back
upco
olin
g sy
stem
pro
pose
dby
the
revi
ew te
am
staf
f.”
seaw
ard
of th
e re
gion
al s
hore
line
(i.e.
, the
sho
relin
e ex
clud
ing
the
Turk
ey P
oint
pen
insu
la).
Ope
ratio
n of
the
radi
al c
olle
ctor
wel
ls c
anno
tcau
se a
n ad
vers
e im
pact
on
salin
ity in
trusi
on in
the
Bis
cayn
e A
quife
r bec
ause
the
radi
al
colle
ctor
wel
ls a
re lo
cate
d se
vera
l mile
s se
awar
d of
the
salin
ity tr
ansi
tion
zone
bet
wee
n fre
sh a
nd s
alt w
ater
in th
e B
isca
yne
Aqu
ifer.
The
hydr
aulic
gra
dien
t in
the
Bis
cayn
e A
quife
r wes
t of t
he re
gion
al s
hore
line
that
is c
reat
ed b
y th
e ra
dial
col
lect
or w
ells
will
be
smal
l and
dire
cted
offs
hore
. As
the
radi
al c
olle
ctor
wel
ls a
re s
eaw
ard
of th
e sa
linity
tran
sitio
n zo
ne in
the
aqui
fer,
the
only
impa
ct o
n sa
linity
intru
sion
wou
ld b
e po
sitiv
e, a
s di
scus
sed
in 1
stR
ound
Res
pons
es
SFW
MD
-B-1
5 an
d S
FWM
D-B
-89
(Oct
ober
200
9).”
Ref
eren
ce –
SC
A C
ompl
eten
ess
resp
onse
5-M
DC
-C- 2
, 3,
4, 5
, 8, 9
,10,
11,
12,
14,
15,
16,
17,
19,
22
and
23 (F
ifth
Rou
nd)(h
).
Reg
ardi
ng th
e st
atem
ent“
The
DEI
S a
lso
note
s th
atth
ere
is
the
pot
entia
l fo
r ad
vers
eef
fect
s on
thre
aten
edsp
ecie
s, i
nclu
ding
Am
eric
ancr
ocod
iles,
that
inh
abit
the
FP
L in
dust
rial w
aste
wat
er fa
cilit
y du
e to
sal
t drif
t and
de
posi
tion
from
coo
ling-
tow
er o
pera
tion
whi
leth
e ra
dial
co
llect
or w
ells
are
bei
ng u
sed,
”no
adve
rse
impa
cts
will
occu
r to
Am
eric
an c
roco
dile
or t
he w
ater
s of
the
ENP,
BN
P an
d BB
AP fr
om c
oolin
g to
wer
drif
t dep
ositi
on a
ssoc
iate
d w
ith th
e Tu
rkey
Poi
nt U
nits
6&7
Pro
ject
. Th
e de
posi
tion
impa
cts
to
Amer
ican
cro
codi
le w
ere
dire
ctly
add
ress
ed in
the
SCA
Sect
ion
6.1.
4 an
d no
adv
erse
impa
cts
wou
ld o
ccur
from
usi
ng
-
Pro
pose
d Tu
rkey
Poi
nt U
nits
6 a
nd 7
Doc
ket N
os. 5
2-04
0 an
d 52
-041
FPL
Obs
erva
tions
on
the
City
of M
iam
i Com
men
t Let
ter D
ated
Jul
y 17
, 201
5
L-20
15-2
80A
ttach
men
t 1 P
age
11of
44
No.
City
of M
iam
iCom
men
t(bo
ld te
xt a
pplie
d fo
r em
phas
is)
FPL
Obs
erva
tion
(bol
d te
xt a
pplie
dfo
r em
phas
is)
eith
er tr
eate
d re
clai
med
wat
er o
r sal
twat
er. T
his
conc
lusi
on
was
bas
ed o
n an
alys
es s
ubm
itted
for a
ppro
val o
f the
Site
C
ertif
icat
ion
(PA
03-4
5A3)
and
the
fede
rally
app
rove
d Pr
even
tion
of S
igni
fican
t Det
erio
ratio
n (P
SD) P
erm
it is
sued
by
FD
EP (R
efer
ence
– F
DEP
Pro
ject
No.
025
0000
3-01
3-AC
; PS
D-F
L-40
9).
The
anal
yses
dem
onst
rate
that
atm
osph
eric
de
posi
tion
will
not h
ave
an a
dver
se e
ffect
on
wat
er q
ualit
y or
te
rrest
rial a
reas
incl
udin
g im
pact
s to
the
Amer
ican
cro
codi
le.
See: S
ite C
ertif
icat
ion
Appl
icat
ion
Sec
tions
6.1
.4 a
nd
App
endi
x 10
.2.5
SC
A C
ompl
eten
ess
Res
pons
es:
oFD
EP
