ML20029D647
| ML20029D647 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 04/22/1994 |
| From: | Weiss S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20029D640 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9405090155 | |
| Download: ML20029D647 (6) | |
Text
-
~
7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGVLATORY COMMISSION SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY SAN ON0FRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION. UNIT 1 DOCKET NO. 50-206 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 140.11(a)(4) to i
Facility Operating License No. DPR-13, a possession-only license held by the Southern California Edison Company (SCE or the licensee). The exemption would apply to the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1 (SONGS 1), a permanently shutdown plant located at the SCE site in San Diego County, i
4 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of ProDosed Action:
l The proposed action would grant an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 140.ll(a)(4) to the extent that SONGS 1-would be exempted from participation in the industry retrospective rating plan (secondary level financial protection).
The licensee requested the elimination of its required participation in a letter dated February 2, 1993.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
SONGS 1 was permanently shut down in November 1992, and defueling of the reactor completed in March 1993. Upon licensee certification of the defueling on March 9, 1993, Amendment No. 150 to facility Operating License No. DPR-13 became effective, changing the license to a possession-only license. The exemption addresses withdrawal from participation in the industry retrospective rating plan.
9405090155 940504 PDR ADOCK 05000206 P
pg
. Since SONGS 1 no longer contributes as great a risk to the retrospective rating plan participants as does an operating plant, this reduction in risk should be reflected in the indemnification requirements to which the licensee is subject. Approval of this request would allow a more equitable allocation of financial risk.
Environmental Impact of the Procosed Action:
The The proposed action does not involve any environmental impacts.
proposed exemption is in a subject area, changes in surety, insurance and/or indemnity requirements, for which the Commission in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10) has determined that a license amendment would meet the criteria for categorical exclusion from the need for either an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement.
Since the proposed action does not involve a change in plant operation or configuration, there is reasonable assurance that the proposed action would not increase the probability or the consequences of an accident or reduce the margin of safety, no changes would be made in the types or quantities of effluents that may be released offsite, and there would be no significant increase in the allowable individual or cumulative radiation exposure.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that this proposed action would result in no significant radiological environmental impact.
With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed action does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has nc other environmental impact. Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant non-radiological impacts associated with the proposed ' action.
1 ;
t Alternatives to the Proposed Action:
h
~
Since t'>< ;)mmission has concluded that there are no measurable environmental impacts associated with the proposed action, any alternative with equal or greater environmental impacts need not be eva'.
ted.
The principal alternative would be to deny the action.
This would not 1'
4
(
reduce environmental impacts of plant operation and would not enhance the i
protection of the environment nor public health and safety.
I Alternative Use of Resources:
i This action does not involve the use of resources not previously i
I considered in the Environmental Assessment related to the conversion of the j
Provisional Operating License to a Full Term Operating License issued to Southern California Edison Company for the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1, on September 16, 1991.
Aaencies and Persons Consulted:
The NRC staff consulted with a representative of the State of California 1
regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 1
l The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact i
j statement for the proposed exemption.
l Based upon the foregoing environmental a'ssessment, the Commission concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
I i
?
I
.w
,---,-,,.,..w-
,-w.,
- -. v wg +
y arm
=+m-,--w
i
).
- i i
i For further details with respect to this action, see the licensee I
application to amend Indemnity Agreement No. B-31,. dated February 2,1993, i
which is available for public inspection at the Commission Public Document Room, Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555, and at the Local Public Document Room at the Main Library, University of California, Post Office Box 19557, Irvine, California 92713.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of Apri? 1994.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Seymour H. Weiss, Director Non-Power Reactors and Decommissioning Project Directorate Division of Operating Reactor Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation I
m-r-
l p
pa areg?g
- 4. g
- E UNITED STATES 8
E" "E
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION k.....,/
WASHINGTON. O.C. 20555 4001 l
b Docket Nos. 50-206, 50-361, and 50-362 Amendment to Indemnity Aareement No. B-31 Amendment No. 19 Effective May4,1994, Indemnity Agreement No. B-31, between Southern California Edison Company, San Diego Gas and Electric Company, City of Riverside, California, and City of Anaheim, California, and the Atomic Energy Commission, dated June 3, 1966, as amended, is hereby further amended as follows:
Item 2a of the Attachment to the Indemnity Agreement is deleted in its entirety and the following substituted therefor:
ltem 2 - Amount of financial protection I
a.
$1,000,000 (From 12:01 a.m., June 3, 1966, to 12 midnight, March 26, 1967, inclusive) 574,000,000 (From 12:01 a.m., March 27, 1967, to 12 midnight, January 31, 1969, inclusive) 582,000,000 (From 12:01 a.m., February 1, 1969, to 12 midnight, February 29, 1972, r
inclusive)
$95,000,000 (From 12:01 a.m., March 1, 1972, to 12 midnight, February 28, 1974, inclusive) l
$110,000,000 (From 12:01 a.m., March 1, 1974, to 12 midnight, March 20, 1975, inclusive)
$125,000,000 (From 12:01 a.m., March 21, 1975, to 12 midnight, April 30, 1977, inclusive)
4
. $140,000,000*
(From 12:01 a.m., May 1, 1977, to 12 midnight, April 30, 1979, inclusive)
$160,000,000*
(From 12:01 a.m., May 1, 1979, to 12 midnight, June 30, 1989, inclusive)
$200,000,000*
(From 12:01 a.m., July 1, 1989)
FOR THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.lsl/
b Ant W. Gody, C I n,fpec on and Li ens'ng Policy Branch Pr gr Management olicy Development a
Analysis Staff Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Accepted
, 1994 Accepted
, 1994 By By Southern California Edison San Diego Gas and Electric Company Company Accepted
, 1994 Accepted
, 1994 By By City of Riverside, California City of Anaheim, California l
- and, as of August 1,1977, the amount available as secondary financial protection, except that no participation in the secondary financial protection program shall be required with respect to a reactor which has been permanently shut down, and where the licensee's authority to operate the unit as a power reactor has been removed by the Commission.
i