ML15275A130

Summary of the Site Audit Related to the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 License Renewal Environmental Review

ML15275A130
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	10/07/2015
From:	Michael Wentzel License Renewal Projects Branch 2
To:	Halpin E Pacific Gas & Electric Co
Wentzel M,NRR/DLR,4156459
References
DLR-15-0459, TAC MF4019, TAC MF4020, FOIA/PA-2016-0438
Download: ML15275A130 (5)

Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 October 7, 2015 Mr. Edward D. Halpin Senior Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer Pacific Gas and Electric Company Diablo Canyon Power Plant P.O. Box 56, Mail Code 104/6 Avila Beach, CA 93424

SUMMARY

OF THE SITE AUDIT RELATED TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF THE DIABLO CANYON POWER PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2, LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION (TAC NOS. MF4019 AND MF4020)

Dear Mr. Halpin:

On September 29-October 1, 2015, a review team consisting of staff from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and contractors from the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory participated in a site audit in San Luis Obispo, California, related to the environmental review of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP), Units 1 and 2, license renewal application. The primary goal of the site visit was to review documentation and gather information to ensure that the environmental requirements for license renewal, as codified in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 51 were met, in accordance with the issued audit plan (ML15243A582). The enclosure is a list of representatives from NRC and personnel from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) and its contractors who participated in the site audit.

The audit began on September 29, 2015, with an entrance meeting to introduce participants and discuss logistics of the audit. Following the entrance meeting, the environmental review team participated in general and resource-specific site tours and discussions of DCPP with PG&E staff, and its contractors. The general site tour provided an overview and orientation of the site areas relevant to the environmental review. Resource-specific tours were conducted for geologic environment; water resources - groundwater and surface water; aquatic resources; terrestrial resources; historical and cultural resources; and air quality and noise resources.

During the remainder of the site audit, the environmental review team examined data used by PG&E in preparation of the environmental report and met in smaller groups with PG&E representatives to address the staff specific audit needs identified in the audit plan. These groups participated in various activities, including documentation review and interviews with cognizant personnel.

In addition, the team reviewed the PG&E process for identifying new and significant information (information that could challenge the generic conclusions reached in the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (GEIS), NUREG 1437). The staff will document its independent evaluation in the plant specific supplement to the GEIS.

At the conclusion of the site audit, the environmental review team summarized the status of the review with PG&E representatives during the exit meeting. Most of the team's questions identified in the audit plan or during the audit were answered through the conduct of the audit.

Those that were not will be answered by PG&E, as it responds to a request for additional information (RAI) letter to be issued subsequently. The RAl letter will also identify documents requested by the team during the site audit. These documents will be made publicly available in the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.

While the NRC review team did not identify any significant environmental issues during its site audit or during the meetings with other participants, the team indicated that the environmental review was ongoing and that any additional information necessary to support the review would be formally requested via the RAI process, during the course of the review.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Michael J. Wentzel, Project Manager Projects Branch 2 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/encl: Listserv

ML15275A130

• concurrence via email OFFICE LA:DLR*

PM:RPB2:DLR BC:RPB2:DLR PM:RPB2:DLR NAME IBetts MWentzel JDanna MWentzel DATE 10/ 5 /15 10/ 6 /15 10/ 7 /15 10/ 7 /15 Letter from M. Wentzel to E. Halpin dated October 7, 2015

SUMMARY

OF THE SITE AUDIT RELATED TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF THE DIABLO CANYON POWER PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2, LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION (TAC NOS. MF4019 AND MF4020)

DISTRIBUTION:

HARD COPY:

DLR RF E-MAIL:

PUBLIC RidsNrrDlr Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb2 Resource RidsNrrDlrRerb Resource RidsNrrDlrRarb Resource RidsNrrDlrRasb Resource RidsNrrDlrRsrg Resource RidsOgcMailCenter Resource RidsNrrPMDiabloCanyon Resource MWentzel JDanna RPlasse YDiaz-Sanabria SLingam CKanatas, OGC JLindell, OGC THipschman, SRI JReynoso, RI GMiller, RIV DMcIntyre, OPA LUselding, OPA WMaier, RIV AMoreno, OCA

ENCLOSURE LIST OF PARTICIPANTS DIABLO CANYON POWER PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SITE AUDIT September 29-October 1, 2015 PARTICIPANTS ORGANIZATION Russell Chazell U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

Kevin Folk NRC William Ford NRC Briana Grange NRC Robert Hoffman NRC Nancy Martinez NRC Michelle Moser NRC Jeffrey Rikhoff NRC Michael Wentzel NRC Tom Anderson Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL)

Valerie Cullinan PNNL Tara ONeill PNNL Bryan Cunningham Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E)

Tom Esser PG&E Mike Fry PG&E Terry Grebel PG&E Andrew Heffner PG&E Tom Jones PG&E Jim Kelly PG&E Kelly Kephart PG&E Sally Krenn PG&E Chris Madugo PG&E Lindsey Miller PG&E Gina Morimoto PG&E Michelle Olsofsky PG&E Trevor Rebel PG&E Tyson Smith PG&E John Steinbeck PG&E Dan Stocks PG&E Joseph Sun PG&E Mike Taggert PG&E Alia Vosburg PG&E Marty Wright PG&E