ML20211N089
| ML20211N089 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 02/09/1987 |
| From: | Knighton G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20211N059 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8702270441 | |
| Download: ML20211N089 (5) | |
Text
yy?
a:
[
+ -lS.c U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I
e a,,
ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY, ET AL.
u
. f, PALO VERDE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT 3
/
DOCKET NO. STN 50-530 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an extension to the latest construction completion date specified in Construction Permit CPPR-143. Construction Permit CPPR-143 for the Palo Verde Nuclear-.
Generating Station, Unit 3 was issued to Arizona Public Service Company (APS),
et al.* on May 25, 1976, with the latest construction completion date as November 1, 1986. ThePaloVerdeNuclearGeneratingStation(PVNGS)islocated in Maricopa County, Arizona.
Environmental Assessment
~
Identification of Proposed Action:
/
The proposed action would amend the construction pemit by extending the-
~
1atest construction completion date from November 1,1986, to December 31, 1987. The proposed action is in response to the applicants' request dated September 8, 1986.
W-
- The other Construction Pemit holders are the Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District, El Paso Electric Company, Southern California Edison Company, Public Service Company of New Mexico, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, and Southern California Public Power Authority.
8702270441 870219 PDR ADOCK 05000530 A
PDR A
,e s,,- - - - --
r-~
--w-wa.nwr-, -
~ w g
ra.
'F
~~
?t, ;;
~
k&~
- v., -
,e
- g %.p-t 7~ '.
p.
O s
h' E
r Te Need for the Proposed Action:
The proposed action.is needed because Unit 3 will not be ready for fuel
. ;y M,."< loading until the end of the first quarter of 1987. The delay in completion of 7; ~ Palo Verde Unit 3 beyond November 1, 1986, is due to the following factors:.
- ?'
1.
PVNGS, Units 1, 2, and 3 have been constructed on a sequential
/
schedule with planned minimum and maximum spacings between units of one and two years, respectively. -Acts beyond the control of the
/
('
permit holder have resulted in delays in construction, testing and x
opera'tions, to assure safety of Units 1 and 2.
This has resulted in
,a modifications and delays impacting the sequential schedule for com-pletion of Unit 3.
2.
'Although construction of PVNGS Unit 3 is essentially complete with I
the pre-operational program currently in progress, additional time-will be required for completion in a safe manner.
e 1
APS stated that extension of the latest date for completion of PVNGS s.
~..,
.s Unit 3 to hecember 31, 1987, will preclude the need for requesting further F
amendments of CPPR-143 if there should be any slippage in the expected Unit 3 fuel loa' date due to unforeseen circumstances.
d
?
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:
The environmental impacts associated with construction of the facility have bean previousIy discussed and evaluated in the NRC staff's Final Environmental Statement (FES)issuedinSeptember1975(NUREG-75/0708) and in the Final
. Supplement to the FES (FES Supplement) issued in February, 1976 (NUREG-0036) u for,the PVNGS construction permit stage.
s
+
d
Since the proposed action involves ' extending the construction permit, radiological impacts are not affected by this action. The impacts that are involved are all non-radiological and are associated with continued construction.
As a result of the review of the Final Safety Analysis Report to date and considering the nature of the delays, the NRC staff has identified no area of significant safety consideration in connection with the extension of the construction completion date for Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 3.
The only change proposed by the applicant is an extension of the latest construction completion'date to December 31, 1987. This extension of the construction and testing period would not change the activities already considered by previous Commission safety reviews of the facility, considered in the FES and FES Supplement and authorized by the construction permit, other v
than to extend the latest date by which construction must be completed. There are no new significant impacts associated with the extension.
Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of resources not previously considered in the FES or the FES Supplement for the PVNGS discussed above.
f Acencies and Persons Contacted:
The NRC staff reviewed the applicants' request and applicable documents referenced therein that support this extension. The NRC did not consult other agencies or persons.
9.
Finding of No Significant Impact:
The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for this action. Based upon the environmental assessment, we conclude that this action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
For details with respect to this action, see the request for extension, dated September 8,1986, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. and at the Local Public Doc'ument Room in the Phoenix Public Library, Business, Science, and Technology Department,12 East McDowell Road, Phoenix, Arizona 85004.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 9th day of February,1987.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5eorge. Knighton irector PWR Pr ject Direc orate No. 7 Division of PWR Licensing-B
EXTENSION OF CONSTRUCTION COMPLETI0F DATE FOR PALO VERDE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT 3 DISTRIBUTION ket File )
onu run LPDR PD7 Reading File MDavis EAlicitra
-JLee(5)
FMiraglia/FSchoreder-JSaltzman, SP IDinitz, SP
-OPA HDenton RVollmer WLamb RDiggs JPartlow BGrimes EJordan LHarmon TBarnhart(4)
IBailey JScinto, OGC Antitrust Lawyer, CGC ACRS(10) i
{
l
[
.