ML20117N833
| ML20117N833 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 06/20/1996 |
| From: | Steven Bloom NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20117N838 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9606250010 | |
| Download: ML20117N833 (4) | |
Text
-
. c l'.
7590-0)
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY DIABLO CANYON POWER PLANT. UNITS 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 certain requirements of its regulations for Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-80 and DPR-82, issued to Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E,'the licensee), for operation of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP), Units 1 and 2, located in San Luis Obispo County, California.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action would allow a one-time extension of 3 months to the l
period for filing the subsequent revision to the FSAR to 9 months, rather than i
6 months, after the completion of the Unit 2 seventh refueling outage.
l The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application dated May 7, 1996, for exemption from certain requirements of 10 CFR 50.71,
" Maintenance of records, making of reports."
l The Need for the Proposed Action l
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.71(e)(4), the licensee must file subscquent l
revisions annually or 6 months after each refueling outage provided the interval between successive updates to the FSAR does not exceed 24 month:.
The revision must reflect all changes up to a maximum of 6 months prior to the date of the filing.
J 9606250010 960620 PDR ADOCK 05000275 p
PDR 4
I
. Currently, licensees file their revision to the FSAR 6 months following the completion of their Unit 2 refueling outage.
The licensee proposes a one-time exemption to allow Revision 11 of the FSAR update to be. filed 9 months, rather than 6 months, after the completion of the Unit 2 seventh refueling outage. The reviska will meet the i
requirement to be current to within 6 months of the time of the filing.
An exemption from certain requirements of 10 CFR 50.71(e)(4) is required to allow PG&E to complete its comprehensive review of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant FSAR update to ensure its completeness and accuracy and to incorporate any inaccuracies into Revision 11 of the FSAR update.
Environmental Imoacts of the Proposed Action The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action. The j
change will not increase.the probability or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of any effluent that n:ay be released off site, and there is no significant increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the pronosed action does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and would have no other environmental impact. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
~
l 1 i
Alternatives to the Proposed Action i
l Since the Commission has concluded that the environmental effects of the l
l proposed action are not significant, any alternatives with equal or greater 1
environmental impact need not be evaluated.
The principal alternative would be to deny the requested exemption.
Denial of the exemption would result in l
no change in current environmental impacts.
The environmental impacts of the l
proposed action and the alternative action are identical.
l Alternative Use of Resources This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statements for the Diablo Canyon Power Plant dated May 1973.
Aaencies and Persons Contacted:
i In accordance with NRC policy, on June 18, 1996, the staff consulted with the California State official, Mr. Steve Hsu of the Radiologic Health l
Branch of the State Department of Health Services, regarding the environmental l
1mpact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments.
FINDING 0F N0 SIGNIFICANT IMPACT l
Based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the l
human environment. Accordingly, the Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee's letter dated May 7,1996, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, The Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, 4
h i
i 1
I i NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document room located at the l
California Polytechnic State University, Robert E. Kennedy Library, Government Documents and Maps Department, San Luis Obispo, California 93407.
i j
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of June 1996.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Steven D. Bloom, Project Manager j
Project Directorate IV-2 Division of Reactor Projects III/IV 4
l Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 4
l l
?
j