ML19256A628
| ML19256A628 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 12/28/1978 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19256A621 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7901090110 | |
| Download: ML19256A628 (6) | |
Text
.
I*
EflVIRONMEf4TAL IMPACT APPRAISAL BY THE DIVISION OF SITE SAFETY AND ErlVIRONMEitTAL AllALYSIS SUPPORTIfiG EXTEf1SION OF CONSTRUCTION PERMITS flo. CPPR-97 AND CPPR-98 SAN.ONOFRE fiUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT NOS. 2 AND 3 EfiVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPRAISAL Description of Proposed Action By letter of fdarch 31, 1978 the applicants, Southern California Edison Company (SCE) and the San Diego Gas and Electric Company (SDGSE), filed a request with the fluclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to extend the completion dates specified in Construction Permits fio. CPPR-97 and CPPR-98 for the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station,, Unit Nos. 2 and 3 (SOf4GS 2 & 3).
The action proposed is the issuance of.Jn order providing for an extension of the latest completion dates of the c'onstruction p'er-mits from January 1,1979 to and including June 1,1980 for Unit 2 and from January 1,1980 to June 1,1981 for Unit 3.
The NRC staff has re-viewed the application and found that good cause has been shown for the requested extension of the completion dates specified in Construction Permits CPPR-97 and CPPR-98 for SONGS 2 & 3 (see attached Safety Evaluation by the llRC staff).
Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action A.
.ieed for the Facility The SONGS 2 & 3 are now scheduled to begin commercial operation in October 1,1780 for Unit 2 and January 1,1982 for Unit 3.
As part of the opera..ing licensing review.of these plants the staf f has closely followed the applicants' need for generating capacity.
Examination of the most recent information regarding loads and resources indicates that the conclusion reached in the Final Environmental Statement, Construction Permit Stage (FES-CP), published in March 1973 regarding need for this plant is still valid.
The overall staff's conclusion that the plant should be constructed is unaffected by the extension of the construction permit.
B.
The FES-CP Por SONGS 2 & 3 includes an assessment of potential environ-mental, econcmic, and comuunity impacts due to site preparation and plant construction.
In addition, (1) the staff's review of the inspection reports prepared by the Office of Inspection and Enforcement as a result of periodic inspection visits to the SONGS 2 & 3 site, and (2) staff's discussions with individuals and local and state officials
~ ~
7901090no
- held at the time of operating licensing review of the units did not identify any adverse impacts on the environment or the surrosucing community which were not anticipated and adequately discussec in tric FES-CP or which were significantly greater than those discussed in the FES-CP.
C.
Impact on Terrestrial Environment Land Use.
af The FES-CP (Sect. 4.2) discussion an the impact that constr'iction SONGS 2 & 3 will have on the terrestrial environment is still valia.
However, several transmission line route modifica(ions have been made or proposed since issuance of the constructiqn permits tirat were not evaluated by the staff in the Final Environmental State-ment, Ccnstruction Permit stage. The environmental impacts associated with the transmission line route modifications are evaluated below.
The impacts of site preparation on land use are associated almost exclusively with the excavation of the San Onofre Bluff. About 16.4 ha (40.5 acres) of the San Onofre Bluffs have been excavated, and no further excavation is anticipated. Much of this excavated material was deposited at Japanese Mesa, on Camp Pendleton Marine Base north and across from SONGS.
Thirty-four hectares (S4 acres) of the 50.6-ha (125-acre) mesa is being used for equipment storage, fabrication shops, and as a contractor's lay down area.
Some of the excavated soil was deposited as a mound along the western edge of the mesa to reduce the visual impact of the area as seen from highway I-5.
Visual inspections of the plant site boundary and the bluffs adjacent to the site are conducted biweekly. Two instances of erosion were encountered, and appropriate corrective action was implemented to reduce these impacts.
To date, construction of the plant has had no significant impact on offsite land use. Land use changes that occurred offsite consist primarily of an increase in housing developments.
In a few cases, developments were built nearly adjacent to the transmission line corridors (ER, Sect. 3.9.1.2).*
The greatest impact on the transportation facilities at San Onofre due to construction-related activities is the increased congestion on highway I-5 during shift changes. Little or no congestion occurs during morning shift changes in both incoming and outgoing traffic, but a 20- to 30-min. delay occurs for outgoing traffic during evening
- Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3.
, changes (ER, Suppl. 2, Item 27). flovement of heavy equipment from the Del fiar Boat Basin to the station site creates a temporary adycr50 impact to people using San Onofre State Park because the park is temporarily closed during these equipment moves.
To minimize this impact, all equipment moves occur during off-peak months (ER, Supp. 2, Item 27).
Section 3.9 of the Applicant's Environmental Report-Operating License Stage, describes the modific.ations associated with the transmission lines.
Construction of the proposed Talega Substation and the proposed transmission lines is not expected to create any significant adverse impacts.
The Talega Substation will be constructed on a 2-ha (5-acre) site that will require 4 ha (10 acres) to be grated. Therefore, small amounts of natural wildlife habitat will be tempo.rarily or per;nanently destroyed. About 35.4 km (22 miles) of new transmission lines will be constructed, and an additional 196.3 km (122 miles) will be retro-fitted to operate at either 'O or 230 kV.
No new rights-of-way will be required. Construction vf additional towers and access road extensions, however, will require a total of 5.2 ha (12.8 acres) of land. The new lines proposed be SCE will cross about 0.5 km (0.3 mile) of prime and unique farmlands (those areas with land use capabilities of class I or class II). Exact placement of the towers has not been indicated, but with an average of towers per kilometer (4.8 towers permile)andabout93m2(1000ft})pertowerbase,only0.014ha (0.034 acre) of prime and unique farmlands will be taken out of production by tower bases. These towers will be placed in existing rights-of-way bounded on each side by other existing transmission linc.; therefore, a minimal amount of additional land for access roads will ae required. The new trausmission line proposed by SDG&E (from SONGS to Talega Substation) is located entirely on Camp Pendleton flarine Base and will require 0.76 ha (1.88 acres) of land for tower bases and access road extensions.
Terrestrial ecology Terrestrial ecological impacts on the SONGS 2 & 3 site and vicinity have not been more serious than predicted in the FES-CP. A relatively small amount of wildlife habitat was lost due to excavation of the bluffs.
Similar habitat is adjacent to the site, so it is possible that most of the animal populations emigrated to these areas.
Impacts on the terrestrial ecology along the transmission line corridors will be primarily short-term. The relatively small amount of land 5.2 ha (12.8 acres) required for tower bases and access road extensions makes it unlikely that any significant long-term adverse impact will occur to the terrestrial ecological characteristics of the area. Con-struction of additional towers could lead to an increase in the number of raptors along the transmission line corridors because these birds often use the towers for nesting platforms and as perches for hunting.
This increase is unlikely to occur, however, because the applicant presently discourages nesting by periodically removing the nests.
- fio ndangered animal species in the vicinity of the site have bucn or are expected to be affected adversely by the construction activities.
The California brown pelican, which was observed several time:, On tr.e beach adjacent to the construction arec, is not easily disturbed by human activity; decline of this specics is believed to be caused by pollutants such as DDT. Recent reports indicate that the status of this species is improving in the Pacific states since strict pesti-cide laws have been enacted.l A nesting colony of the California least tern is located on Camp Pendleton Marine Base near the Del Mar Boat Basin, a facility used by the applicant to move heavy equipment.
Construction schedules and equipment delivery dates werc altered to avoid disturbing the nesting terns in the sanctuary during nesting season. Also, the nesting colony during the breeding season is a restricted area for all nonauthorized personnel.2~.From a careful review of the habitat requirements for other endangered s'pecies whose' ranges include Orange and San Diego counties, the staff believes that such species are not likely to be affected by the construction activities.
Furthermore, no known onsite habitats are used by endangered species, and no habitats adjacent to or within the transmission line right-of-way have been classified by state or Federal authorities as critical to any endangered species (ER, Suppl. 1, item 22).
D.
Impacts on Aquatic Environment Effects on water use The major impact on water use resulting from construction of SONGS 2 & 3 is related to the construction of the offshore conduit system.
The presence of the construction trestle will present an obstruction to coastal navigation. However, the shallowness of this region prohibits large vessels from using this area, so this impact will be restricted to small craft and will be only temporary, until the trestle is removed.
The dredging operation for the lay down of the buried conduit systems will enhance the natural turbidity near the ocean bottom. This will produce an occasionally visible brownish discoloration at the surface.
This impact is being monitored and recorded by means of weekly aerial photographic surveys.
Effects on aquatic biota The potential effects on aquatic biota from construction were discussed adequately in the FES-CP. The conclusion remains that no permanent adverse effects are anticipated.
This conclusion is based on the soundness of the programs adopted ' y the applicant to identify i:" pacts and to initiate corrective measures (ER, Sect. 4.5) and on the results of the Enviranmental Technical Specifications (ETS) monitoring program for Unit 1.
Three primary sources of potential impact to the marine environment could result from 50flGS 2 & 3 construction:
(1) erosion, (2) dredging,
and (3) dewatoring discharge. All of these sources are covered by adequate cor'.rol programs (ER, Sect. 4.5).
The program asscciated with erosion ;qvolves close surveillance of the area of potential influence and corrective action if erosion is discovered.
Tne program associated with dredging is especially extensive and involves (1) recording the volume and location of sand disposed on the beach, both naturally through erosion of the bluffs and that resulting from conduit construction, (2) aerial photography to compare the area of visual turbidity before and af ter construction, (3) intertidal area mapping before and af ter construction to detennine the amount of innundation and subsequent re-exposure of the rocky substrate from sand disposal and natural conditions, (4) beach and bottom profiling, (5) San Onofre Kelp Bed mapping and diving observations, and (6) intertidal sand and cobble sampling.
The progr,am associated with dewatering discharge is in accordance with waste discharge requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control BoaYd, San Diego-Region, as outlined in the NPDES permit (ER, Appendix 12C).
The results of the current data indicate the absence of any significant detrimental impact to the San Onofre marine environment due to con-struction activities.
E.
Radiation Exposure to Construction Workers During the period between the operation of Unit 1 and the startup of Units 2 and 3, the construction personnel working on Unit 2 uill be exposed to sources of radiation from the operation of Unit 1, and the construction personnel working on Unit 3 will be exposed to sources of radiation from the operation of Units 1 and 2.
The applicant has estimated the integrated dose to construction personnel to be 6.6 man-rems.
Estimated values for other LWRs have ranged from 5 to 500 man-rems.
F.
Assessment of Impacts The only effects posc'~ly resulting from the requested extension would be those due to transposing the impacts in time or extending the total time the local community is subjected to temporary construction impacts.
This in the staff's view will not result in any significant additional impact. The staff concludes that environmental impacts associated with construction of the plant described in the FES-CP, are not affected by the proposed extension. Thus, no significant change in impact is expected to result from the extension.
m.
Conclusion and Basis for Negative Declaration On the basis of the fo.egoing analysis and the NRC staff evaluation, it is concluded that, with the exception of impacts noted above, i 'ich are judged insignificant, the impacts attributable to the proposed action will be confined to those already predicted and described in the Commission's FES-CP issued in 1973.
Having made this conclusion, the Commission has further concluded that no environmental impact statement for the proposed action need be prepared, and that a negative declaration to this effect is appropriate.
REFERENCES
~
~
1G. Seymour, Brown Pelican Wildlife Leaflet, California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, Calif.
2 San Diego Gas and Electric Company, Nuclear Power Plant Siting, Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base, San Diego, Calif., April 1977.
e
-