ML20032E089
| ML20032E089 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 11/17/1981 |
| From: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Matuszeski W COMMERCE, DEPT. OF, NATIONAL OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8111190629 | |
| Download: ML20032E089 (2) | |
Text
-
r DISTRIBUTION:
I i-M NRC Docket ft NOV181981:4t!
LPDR Y[E" b apar/Engelhardt Docket Nes. 50-361 Y
and 50-3C2 Christenbury/Scinto
\\ (ber ' #
Olmstead
[1,.
Rutberg f: oven
"'91.
Vogler Chandler Chron HDenton tir. Willian l'atuszeski ECase Acting Assistant Administrator D0L Office of Coastal Zone !!anagenent Hassell Pational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Wright-United States Departrent of Comeerce Chan-Washington, D.C.
20235 FMiraglia
'HRood
Dear ftr. Matuszoski:
This is in reply to your recent letter advising the Concission of its right under 15 C.F.R. 9 930.54(c) to submit connents on the desire of the California Coastal Conaission to review the pending request for a low-pover license subnitted by the Applicants for San Onofre fluclear Generating Station, Unit 2.
Y3ur letter, which attaches a' copy of a letter dated October 8,1931, from t'ary L. Itudson, Staff Counsel, California Coastal Cornission, giving notice of the California Coastal Connission's intentions, was received on Novecher 2, 1981.
We have reviewed the appropriate orovisions of the Coastal Zonc l'anagenent Act of 1972,16 U.S.C. 51456, and the inplecenting regulations of the National Oceanic and Atnospheric Adninistration (il0AA),15 C.F.R. Part 930, in the context of the licensing actions related to San Onofre Nuclear Cenerating Station, (50i!GS) Units 2 and 3 which are pending Sefore this agency.
For the followino reasons, we believe that review of this natter by the California Coastal Cornission is not warranted.
The initial appitcation for operating licenses for S0tlGS was filed on ficvenber 30, 1976 and docketed by the Staff on March 23, 1977 Notice thereof was published in the Federal P.ccister on April 7, 1977, 42 Fed..
Reg. 10460. The California Coastal llanagenent Progran was approved by the Acting Associate Administrator for Coastal Zonc !!anagerent on behalf of the r
Secretary of Connerce on novenber 7, 1977, 42 Fed. Reg. 60585, approximately 11 ronths after receipt and a nonths af ter docketing of the SONGS' i
application.
In that the prohibitions and requirenents of the Coastal Zone -
itanagecent Act only apply to applications _ for a federal license or pemit filed "[a]f ter final approval by the Secretary [of Comerce] of a state's -
i nanagenent progran... " (16 U.S.C. 5 1456(c)(3)(A)), it would not appear that the present application for an operating license - filed prior to the Secretary's approval of California's progran - falls within the provisions of the Act. This view is, we believe, consistent with your fgency's reculations which provide that "[t]he tern ' applicant' reans any individual, public or private corporation, partncrship, association or other entity organized.or citiz ~ 9 t% ' m ' e' q ttate
- 'lle t.7r,
mtprgrr omcc)
.... y..q..
.. h.....'...
suamue) 8111190629 811111
. f..
d...
PDR ADOCK 05000361 y
L
..g.y..
o von om>
NRC FORM M OG-80) NRCM 024o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- uscda mtem
Y 4 approval, files an application for a federal license or remit to conduct an activity affecting the coastal zone " 15 C.F.R. $ n30.52.
Our view that the current application is " grandfathered" is not altered by the fact that the California Coastal Connission has only expressed a desire to review the recently filed request of Southern California Edison Cenpany, g al. to operate SONGS at low power. The notion requesting such authority pursuant to 10 C.F.R. ! 50.57(c) is not, as discussed below, an application for a new or different activity, or a rajor anendrent of the activity for which authorization is scught in the initial application.
See 15 C.F.R.
5 930.51(b)(1).
Rather, such rotion is simply a reans by whicn the Applicants nay be granted authority to operate, for a linited period of tire, at power levels short of full power.
Specifically, as provided by 10 C.F.R.
% 50.57(c), the rotion was nade as part of the full power operating license application proceeding for the purpose of pemitting the earlier correncenent of activities which otherwise would be included arong the activities authorized by the full power license and does not enlarge or alter then; in the case of S0i!GS Unit 2, the low-power operating license would pemit the leading of fuel, initial criticality, start-up testing at zero pcuer and low-power testing at levels not in excess of 5% of rated power.
In the absence of a lou power license, these sane activities would be perfomed, tnough at a later date, following issuance of a full power license.
Finally, with regard to the question raised in Ms. Uudson's letter of October 8,1981, as to whether the application is for a " listed" or "urilisted" activity under 15 C.F.R. S 930.54, it would appear to us that this application should be considered a " listed" activity.
The languace of the California Coastal Managenent progran c.<pressly lists, with respect to fmC activities, "[p]ernits and licenses required for siting and operation of nuclear pwer plants". This language, in our view, enconpasses arplications for operating licenses, and, as discussed above, operating licenses linited to low power.
However, irrespective of the determination of whether the cctivity is " listed" or " unlisted," in light of our view that tSis application is grandfathered, ve believe that review by the California Coastal Ccenission is unwarranted, l
Sincerely, Harold Centon Director, Office of fluclear "cactor Regulation cc: Michael Fischer Charles R. Vocher, Esq.
\\
0/
,e OELD W onico
...............LChandier:a
.......OELD 8....
. RR.
N so-o EChristenbury EC,a,,
, _HDe
- n..
11/..\\,Q.../81 l l /..d...../81,
.. /../6 11/.t.. /_81 11 mo rac ronu ata om emcu cm OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usamm-a rm