ML20058E342
| ML20058E342 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 11/12/1993 |
| From: | Dudley R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058E332 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9312060269 | |
| Download: ML20058E342 (5) | |
Text
=
l 7590-01 i
VRITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY 1
SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION. UNIT I DOCKET N0. 50-206 i
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT i
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an exemption from 10 CFR 50.120. The exemption wot1d be granted to the Southern California Edison Company (the licensee) for the San Onofre Nuclear i
Generating Station, Unit I located in San Clemente, California.
[NVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Action:
t The NRC, on its own motion, is considering granting an exemption from the training program establishment, implementation, and maintenance requirements of 10 CFR 50.120. The licensee in its letter dated August 2, 1993, provided j
information supporting this action.
r The Need for the Proposed Action:
San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit I permanently ceased power operation in November 1992, fuel has been moved from the reactor to the spent fuel pool, and the licensee has developed detailed plans to decommission the j
i facility. The proposed exemption would relieve the licensee from the training requirements of 10 CFR 50.120. However, it would not relieve the licensee i
i from previous requirements or commitments to train and qualify facility personnel, i
i I
9312060269 931119 PDR ADOCK 05000206 P
PDR 1
E
I i
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:
The proposed action does not have any effect on accident risk and the possibility of environmental impact is extremely remote.
The licensee submitted a safety analysis in their letter of August 2, 1993, which analyzed the most credible accidents with the fuel stored in the spent fuel pool. The licensee noted that the only accidents in Chapter 15 of the Updated final Safety Analysis Report which remain credible for this facility are a fuel handing accident and a loss of offsite electrical power t
event. The licensee noted the likelihood of the fuel handling accident is much less than if the plant cere operational, since fuel movement will probably occur only one more time in the next 20 years, as compared to
{
approximately every 18 months when the plant was operating. The licensee in its letter dated November 5,1993, requesting approval to remove SONGS 1 from the site offsite emergency plan, provided the results of a fuel handling accident based on current plant conditions. The results of this new analysis are a two-hour dose to the thyroid of 0.5 mrem and a two-hour whole body dose of 1.3 mrem, at the exclusion area boundary. Thus, the consequences of the limiting design basis accident for the SONGS 1 facility are significantly less than.10 CFR Part 100, and significantly less than the EPA protection action guidelines of.1 to 5 rem. Further, the licensee stated that the consequences of a loss of offsite power are minimal since electrical power will not be needed to prevent boiling in the spent fuel pool.
j i
l l
1 1
i
- -4 l
r i
Based on the staff review of the licensee submittals, the staff concludes that the environmental and safety consequences of accidents which may potentially result in a radiological release are greatly decreased given the permanently shutdown and defueled status of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1.
In addition, the level of personnel activity at San Onofre _
Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1 is low compared to an operating reactor facility and the existing training programs are deemed acceptable, given the low level of activity at the site and the shutdown and defueled status of the plant.
The continuation of the existing training program requirements and l
l commitments is sufficient to assure safety of a permanently defueled facility i
l and does not increase the probability or consequences'of any accidents. No changes are being made in the types of any effluents that may be released i
offsite and there is no significant increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure onsite.
1 Accordingly, the Commission concludes that the proposed action would l
result in no significant radiological environmental impact.
l With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed action i
does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
I l
a p
T' T
i
}
i e
. 1 i
Alternative to the Prooosed Action:
Since the Commission concluded that there are no significant environmental effects that would result from the proposed action, any alternatives with equal or greater environmental impacts need not be j
evaluated.
The principal alternative would be to deny the action. This would not reduce environmental impacts of plant operation and would not enhance the protection of the environment nor public health and safety.
Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in previous reviews for the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1.
Aaencies and Persons Consulted:
The NRC staff consulted with the State of California regarding the environmental impacts of the proposed action.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, the NRC staff -
concludes that the c oposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.31, not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action.
. -. - -.. ~. -
,,,,,i
j 0 i for further details with respect to this action, see the licensee letter dated August 2,1993, which is available for public inspection at the l
Commission Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW., Wash!ngton, DC 20555, and at the local Public Document Room at the Main Library, University of l
California, Post Office Box 19557, Irvine, California 92713.
j Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day of Noveaber 1993.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION r
Richard F. Dudley, Jr., Acting Director Non-Power Reactors and Decommissioning Project Directorate Division of Operating Reactor Support l
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation I
i I
t t
i i
i l
i
-