ML13309B402
| ML13309B402 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 03/29/1984 |
| From: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Baskin K SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13309B401 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8404120087 | |
| Download: ML13309B402 (3) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, 0. C. 20555 RtEEIV ED March 29, 1984
- APR 31984 Mr. Kenneth P. Baskin, Vice President NUCLEAR LICENSING Southern California Edison Company 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue P.O. Box 800 Rosemead, CA 91770
Dear Mr. Baskin:
The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, is initiating a study of its environmental functions and processes. This effort will include review of NRR's institutional authority and requirements, current processes, overall historical experience, and an assessment of the accuracy of selected past environmental analyses and projections. An analysis of the comments concerning representative environmental statements will be included to characterize NRR progress in meeting the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. A comprehensive report will then be prepared which also reflects input from other federal agencies, representative utilities, and other participants in the EIS process.
Because of Southern California Edison Company's experience with the NRC licensing process, I would appreciate your assistance in this study. I propose an informal meeting at your headquarters during April between cognizant people from your staff and Dr. Harold Berkson from NRR, who is coordinating the study. The enclosed talking points would serve as a guide in the exchange of views and to secure your insights into the environmental review process. If this is agreeable, Dr. Berkson can work out the meeting details with his counterparts from your staff following your response to this letter. Please identify the Southern California Edison Company's point of contact in your response and provide a telephone number and address where he can be reached. Dr. Berkson can be reached at (301) 492-8970.
Thank you for your cooperation in this study. Your help will add greatly to its usefulness.
Sincerely, Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
As stated K.P.Baskin J.M.Curran F.C.Jackley D.8.Schone H.B.Ray W.C.Moody I.L.Mathis P.A.Croy J.G.Haynes J.A.Beoletto M.O.Medford F.R.Nandy D.E.Nunn R.M.Rosenblum D.F.Pilmer R.L.Phelps M.P.Short M.Merlo R.WKrieger NRC/CON Files 8404120087 a
o0 0
PDR ADOCK 05000361 P -PDR
POTENTIAL TALKING POINTS
- 1. What is your overall assessment of the NRC environmental review process?
- 2. What environmental work is required or useful outside the CP/OL FES process?
- 3. Define the NRR/industry/other federal agency/state environmental role concerning operating reactors?
- 4. Should the current EIS/EIA be changed in content, structure, application or scope for future reviews.under NEPA? How can NRC improve its activities in the environmental area?
- 5. What is the relationship between environmental and safety issues? To what extent does the EIS deal with safety matters? Is this an appropriate mix?
- 6. Estimate the resource and time requirements imposed by NRC's environmental process.
- 7. How can NRC optimize the application of all resources of all parties involved in the EIS/EIA process to achieve the desired results?
- 8. Were the investigations for the ER and the concerns addressed in the EIS the correct ones? If not, what should have been examined?
- 9. How accurate were the predictions of environmental impact that were made in the EIS?
- 10. Were the monitoring programs and follow-up verification studies the correct ones for elucidating and minimizing impacts and issues of concern?
- 11.
Were the environmental hearings properly focused? Were all relevant matters properly identified, examined, and resolved? Were non-environmental issues considered excessively?
- 12. -To what extent does the environmental assessment process influence siting and design decisions? Those of the NRC? Of others?
- 13.
How useful (i.e., influential) is the required alternative site assessment in selecting a site? Do you know of any site selections or changes based on the environmental evaluation process?
- 14.
(Utilities only) Did your environmental assessments persuade you to change your design or processes independently? Did you change your original design or processes primarily to avoid possible disagreements with NRC, other regulatory bodies or potential intervenors?
- 15.
How and to what extent have the lessons learned from the NEPA process concerning environmental impacts changed power plant design, construction and operation? Is current practice to the point where environmental concerns are accommodated as a matter of course?
- 16. What has been your experience in working with NRR technical, administrative and management people?