ML13326A734
| ML13326A734 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 03/11/1983 |
| From: | Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Dietch R Southern California Edison Co |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13326A735 | List: |
| References | |
| LSO5-83-03-016, LSO5-83-3-16, NUDOCS 8303170170 | |
| Download: ML13326A734 (5) | |
Text
DISTRIBUTION March 11, 1983 Docket NRC PDR.
Local PDR ORB Reading NSIC Docket No. 50-206 DCrutchfield LSO5-83-03-016 HSmith (2)
WPaulson OELD ELJordan Mr. R. Dietch, Vice President JMTaylor Nuclear Engineering and Operations LJHarmon (2)
Southern California Edison Company LSchneider 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue RDiggs Post Office Box 800 TBarnhart (4)
Rosemead, California 91770 ACRS (10)
SEPB
Dear Mr. Dietch:
KEccleston JZwetzig, Reg. V
SUBJECT:
DELETION OF WATER QUALITY TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS WJohnston San'Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit No. 1 (Proposed Change Nos. 94, 108 and 118)
The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 67 to Provisional Operating License No. DPR-13 for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit No. 1. This amendment consists of changes to the Technical Specifications in response to your application dated January 7, 1983.
Your application supersedes your request dated October 15, 1980.
By issuance of this amendment your request of January 5, 1982 (Proposed Change No. 108), which pertains to the allowable phosphate discharge limit, is no longer applicable and, therefore, will not be reviewed.
The amendment deletes Section 2.0 of the Appendix B Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS) which pertain to the non-radiological water quality related requirements, as required by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
Your basis for the requested deletion of water quality limits and monitoring programs is that these aquatic requirements are now under DS the jurisdiction of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as established by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972. Therefore, water quality conditions in existing reactor operating licenses should be removed as a matter of law where the licensee holds, as you do, an effective National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
We concur in the deletion of the aquatic requirements and will rely on the NPDES permit system which is administered by EPA for regulation and protection of the aquatic environment. However, the NRC staff still wishes to remain informed about any changes in your NPDES permit and any violations of this permit. Accordingly, as discussed with your staff, OFFICEk 70303117003000206
.01 SURNAME..
R
.D C
5 ( P R
..**************...*.....o......
P DATE oAT m
oOF A
EO CUO83..............
R-C FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RE'CORD COPY
-~USGPO.
1981-335-960
Mr. March 11, 1983 you have agreed to provide NRC with a copy of any changes to the NPDES discharge permit and any permit violations requiring notification to the permitting agency at the time this information is reported to or received from the permitting agency. This information is to be submitted to the appropriate Regional Administrator with a copy to the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
Please confirm this commitment in writing within 30 days of receipt of this letter.
We discussed with your representative our plan to delete the subject ETS without approving your Environmental Protection Plan.
We and your representative mutually agreed with this proposal.
We have determined that the deletion of these water quality requirements is a ministerial action required as a matter of law, and will not result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and pursuant to 10 CFR §51.5(d)(4) that an environmental impact statement or.negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
Since the amendment applies only to deletion of water quality requirements, we have concluded that:
(1) the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evalu ated, does not create the possibility of an accident of a type different from any evaluated previously, does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety, and therefore does not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
A copy of the Notice of Issuance is also enclosed.
Sincerely, Original signed by Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #5 Division of Licensing
Enclosures:
- 1. Amendment No. 67 to DLIUORB #5*
DL.
License No. DPR-13 DCrutchfield Fmir
- 2. Notice of Issuance 2/28/83
~
- SEE PREVIOUS TIS IUE FOR CONCURRENCE_______
cE wnclosures D 0 DL:
RB #2* DE: AD/MQE*
oFFICE SURNAME..
K..
WPa L
- Qhander Kccieston Wdohnston 2/28/2/83 2/8/33 2/14/83 2/23/83 3/2/83 NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USGPO: 1981-335-960
Mr. R. Dietch 2
We concur in the deletion of the aquatic requirements and will rely on the NPDES permit system which is administered by EPA for regulation and protection of the aquatic environment.
We discussed with your representative our plan to delete the subject ETS without approving your Environmental Protection Plan. We and your representative mutually agreed with this proposal.
We have determined that the deletion of these water quality requirements is a ministerial action required as a matter of law, and will not result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and pursuant to 10 CFR $51.5(d)(4) that an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
Since the amendment applies only to deletion of water quality requirements, we have concluded that: (1) the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evalu ated, does not create the possibility of an accident of a type different from any evaluated previously, does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety, and therefore does not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Acopy of the Notice of Issuance is also enclosed.
Sincerely, Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #5 Division of Licensing
Enclosures:
- 1. Amendment No.
to License No. DPR-13
- 2. Notice of Issuance cc w/enclosures:
See next page
- SEE PREVIOUS TISSUE FOR CONCURRENCE DU
- 5. DL: 0R #5* OELD*
DL: ORB #5 DL: AD/SA DL: OR'B #2 DE.
g OFFICE) 4****
H
- *c Wa
-i[LOhandler DCrutchHeld FMirag la KEccleston 0 ohnston sURNAME e............
8 3 2/14/83 2/23/83
/{8 3
/
/83...;/k2'83..
/..
/8Z?:Z3 DATE0
.R.
- 2*****
2/14/*3
/23/.83***
NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL R15CORD COPY us(o: 181-33s-e
Mr. R. Dietch
- 2 We discussed with your representative our plan to delete the subject EI$ without approving your Environmental Protection Plan. We and your representative mutually agreed with this proposal.
We will be c ing you later to e additional inf on pertaia to Paragraph 3 of icense amendment c rel~tes t
.97-425, Waste Ac 1983.
We have determined that the deletion of these water quality.requirements is a ministerial action required as a matter of law. We have also deter mined that these changes do not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level, a nd will not result in aIy significant environmental impact. Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and pursuant to 10 CFR §51.5(d)(4) that an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environmental impact apprais a1 need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendments Since the amendment applies only to deletion of water quality requireK ments, we have concluded that: (1) the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously eva'Uated, does not create the possibility of an accideit of a type different from any evaluated previously, does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety, and therefore does not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) thereis reaaOnable assurapnce that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; A copy of the Notice of Issuance is also enclosed.
Sincerely, Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #5 Division of Licensing Enc: osures:
- 1. Amendment No.
to Io
{/4 License No. DPR-13
- 2. Notice of Issuance cc w/enclosures:
Se next pa e OFC DL:~ #5 D#5 OELD
.)L: ORB #5 DL: ADISA oFFICE f. I..................
r.....
HSRiMcc WP son
)Crutchfield FMiraglia S U R A M E....
/3
.8
/AT 8
/83 3/83 3
/
/83
/
/83~
DATE
- ............. H 31....0........FF CI L.R C*
NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL R ECOR D COPY USGPO: 1981-335-960
Mr. R. Dietch March 11, 1983 cc Charles R. Kocher, Assistant General Counsel.
James Beoletto, Esquire Southern California Edison Company Post Office Box 800 Rosemead, California 91770 David R. Pigott Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe 600.Montgomery Street San Francisco, Califorfia 94111 Harry B. Stoehr San Diego Gas & Electric Company P. 0. Box 1831 San Diego, California 92112 Resident inspector/San Onofre NPS c/o U. S. NRC P. 0. Box 4329 San Clemente, California 92672 Mayor City of San Clemente San Clemente, California 92672 Chairman Board of Supervisors County of San Diego San Diego, California 92101 California Department of Health ATTN:
Chief, Environmental Radiation Control Unit Radiological Health Section 714 P Street, Room 498 Sacramento, California 95814 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX Office ATTN:
Regional Radiation Representative
.215 Freemont Street San Francisco, California 94111 Robert H. Engelken, Regional Administrator Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region V 1450 Maria Lane Walnut Creek, California 94596