ML20082G479
| ML20082G479 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 04/04/1995 |
| From: | Bateman W NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20082G483 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9504130271 | |
| Download: ML20082G479 (4) | |
Text
+- c;
},;
.f 1
7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT. UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-275 AND 50-323 ENVIRONMENTAL-ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT-The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an exemption from Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-80 and DPR-82, issued to Pacific Gas and Electric Company (the licensee), for operation of Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos.1 and 2, located in San Luis Obispo, California.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Proposed Action:
The proposed action would grant schedular relief from the Section IV.F.3 of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E requirement for a biennial, full-scale emergency preparedness exercise.
The action would allow the licensee to postpone its.
1995 full-scale exercise until 1996 and subsequently conduct these exercises in even-numbered years.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application for exemption dated October 17, 1994.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
The proposed action is needed to support the State of California's request to reschedule the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant (DCPP) offsite biennial exercise because currently both nuclear utilities (Pacific Gas and Electric Company and Southern California Edison) conduct their biennial, full-scale exercises in odd-numbered years, which creates a hardship for the 9504130271 950331 PDR ADOCK 05000275 P
State in terms of manpower and finances. The change would allow the State to participats in one exercise each year instead of two exercises every other year.
Environmental Imoacts of the Proposed Action:
The proposed exemption would not adversely affect the response capabilities of the licensee and governmental agencies. The most recent DCPP offsite exercise was conducted in 1993, and there were no issues identified which required immediate corrective actions.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), by letter dated March 2, 1995, informed the NRC that such a schedule change would have no adverse implications on public health and safety. The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that the intent of Appendix E,Section IV.F.3 to ensure site emergency preparedness is maintained is met.
Therefore, the change will not increase the probability or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types or amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite, i
and there is no significant increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that l
there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed action does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
4
myO f,
s.7 %
nt Alternatives to the Procosed Action 1-Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable environmental impact associated with the proposed action, any alternatives with equal or l
greater environmental impact need not be evaluated. As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action. LDenial of. the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts and would result in a hardship to the State of California.
The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for Diablo Canyon Nuclear.
Power Plant, Unit Nos. I and 2.
Aaencies and Persons Consulted:
In accordance with its stated policy, on March 27, 1995, the staff consulted with the California State official, Mr. Steve Hsu of the Department of Health Services, regarding.the environmental impact of the proposed action.
The State official had no comments.
FINDING 0F NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission concludes that i
the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of. the human environment. Accordingly, the Commission has determined not to prepare an envi amental impact statement for the proposed action.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee's letter dated October 16, 1994, which is available.for public
' inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, The Gelman Building,
+
a
, 4.,
1 2120 L Street, NW, Washington, DC, and at the local-public document room located at the California Polytechnic State University, Robert E. Kennedy Library, Government Documents and Maps Department, San Luis Obispo, California 93407.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of April 1995.
i FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
?
/
y
.A &..
fhCCi_un William H. Bateman, Director Project Directorate IV-2 Division of Reactor Projects III/IV i
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation s
9