ML24260A122
| ML24260A122 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 09/14/2024 |
| From: | Luster T State of CA, California Coastal Commission |
| To: | Jones T NRC Region 4, Pacific Gas & Electric Co |
| References | |
| Download: ML24260A122 (1) | |
Text
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY G A V I N N E W S O M, G OVERNOR CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION ENERGY, OCEAN RESOURCES AND FEDERAL CONSISTENCY 455 MARKET STREET, SUITE 300 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105-2421 VOICE (415) 904-5200
September 14, 2024 Mr. Tom Jones Senior Director - Regulatory, Environmental and Repurposing Pacific Gas & Electric Company Diablo Canyon Power Plant P.O. Box 56 Avila Beach, CA 93424
VIA EMAIL: tpj2@pge.com
RE: Incomplete Consistency Certification for Pacific Gas & Electric Companys (PG&Es)
Requested Nuclear Regulatory Commission License Renewal for Diablo Canyon Power Plant, San Luis Obispo County.
Dear Mr. Jones:
Thank you for your letter received here on August 16, 2024, responding to our information request letters of December 7, 2023, May 2, 2024, and June 19, 2024, regarding PG&Es incomplete consistency certification application, which we initially received on November 8, 2023. PG&Es most recent letter included some of the information needed to complete your application and stated that you plan to soon provide some of the currently missing information. At this point in our review, however, your application remains incomplete, for the reasons provided below. Pursuant to the Coastal Zone Management Acts (CZMA) implementing regulations at 15 CFR 930.58, we will need the information requested herein and in those previous letters to allow the Coastal Commission to adequately consider any likely coastal effects of the proposed federal action. Accordingly, and pursuant to 15 CFR 930.60(a), the Commissions si x-month review period has not commenced and will not commence until we receive the missing necessary data and information. 1
We are happy to discuss our information requests with you and would appreciate the opportunity to coordinate with you on these requests herein prior to your next submittal.
Concurrent Review Process As noted in our previous letters, the development associated with the proposed license extension will be subject to the Commissions review and approval of a coastal development permit (CDP). We expect to conduct the federal consistency review and permit review concurrently, which follows the Commissions typical approach in matters involving both types of reviews. Because federal consistency and CDP reviews of the same project raise a number of overlapping issues, concurrent review promotes
1 As noted in our previous letters, Senate Bill 846 requires PG&E to submit a complete application. It states, in relevant part: Notwithstanding any other law, the state agency shall take final action on the application or request to extend the operations of the Diablo Canyon powerplant within 180 days of submission of a complete application or request. [emphasis added]
Proposed PG&E NRC license renewal for Diablo Canyon Power Plant Notice of Incomplete Consistency Certification - September 14, 2024
expediency, would allow both matters to be heard in a single combined hearing, and would avoid placing additional demands on the publics time and resources needed to participate in multiple hearings. Moreover, much of the information that PG&E provides as part of its application for a consistency certification will apply to the information needed for a CDP application, Please note, too, if we are able to concurrently review both applications, it will allow the application fee that PG&E submitted in December 2023 for its consistency certification to also serve for its CDP review. A delayed CDP application submittal requiring separate review would require its own permit fee.
Required Information Requests and Analyses
Requirements of Other Resource Agencies: Thank you for providing information about the status of reviews and approval s that PG&Es proposed relicensing and extended operation will need from other agencies (including the State Lands Commission, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). If any of those reviews or approvals result in changes to the project as it is currently proposed, please provide a description of those changes for our consideration as part of our CD and CDP review.
We also understand that you recently informed San Luis Obispo County of several known and potential development activities PG&E plans to implement as part of its extended operation -
i.e., a new retaining wall, slope stabilization, and others -that will require CDPs from the County. Please provide descriptions of these planned activities.
Minimizing risks and ensuring structural stability (CCMP Section 30253): Thank you for providing part of the updated seismic analyses we had requested previously. Based on what weve received thus far on these issues, we have two remaining information requests: 1) completion of the requested updated analyses, and 2) application of the updated seismic information to the non-nuclear safety related components at DCPP.
- 1) Updated seismic analysis: As you know, the Diablo Canyon Independent Peer Review Panel (IPRP) reviewed PG&Es 2024 Diablo Canyon Updated Seismic Hazard Assessment, Response to Senate Bill 846. The IPRP prepared peer review comments that focused on seismic source characterization and ground motion estimates, which are summarized in an August 2024 IPRP report.
That peer review report identified several information needs regarding seismic issues related to Diablo Canyons geologic stability during its proposed extended operations. Those issue areas included better assessing fault slip rates used in PG&Es analyses, better weighting and accounting for recent increases in slip rate estimates for some of the faults that could affect Diablo Canyons geologic stability, and addressing uncertainties in the models used in the analyses. The IPRP recommended that PG&E conduct additional geologic investigations to better characterize some of the potential seismic sources and to reduce uncertainties about their possible effects on Diablo Canyon. The IPRP also recommended that PG&E conduct a comprehensive study of all fault studies conducted in the region subsequent to those referenced in its 2015 seismic hazard report, and that PG&E
2 Proposed PG&E NRC license renewal for Diablo Canyon Power Plant Notice of Incomplete Consistency Certification - September 14, 2024
identify how those more recent studies affect its current Diablo Canyon seismic hazard assessment. The IPRP also recommended that PG&E recalculate its ground motion hazards using results of these updated seismic source characterization analyses.
The IPRP expects PG&E to provide a written response to its review within 60 days, after which the IPRP may submit a subsequent report addressing PG&Es response and providing updated conclusions and recommendations. Please provide PG&Es response to the IPRP recommendations for completing this requested analysis.
- 2) Applying updated seismic information: We had previously requested that PG&E use the updated seismic information to identify what improvements or upgrades it will need to conduct on various components at DCPP, such as transmission towers and equipment, substations, shoreline structures, and others, to ensure structural stability and reliability. Please provide this information.
Public Access and Recreation (CCMP Sections 30210 through 30224): We had previously requested that PG&E provide analyses of several aspects of public access and recreational opportunities that would be affected by DCPPs extended operations. Your most recent letter provided some of the requested information; however, the provided analyses are incomplete.
For example, we had asked that PG&E evaluate the public access and recreation effects on the current or reduced Owner Controlled Area (OCA) remaining in place during extended operations. Your recent letter declined to provide that analysis, instead stating there was no need, as the Commission had previously determined that effects on public access to Diablo Canyons shoreline areas were controlled by the permanent presence of DCPPs Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI). However, that Commission decision was based on evaluating those access effects over just a relatively small proportion of the Diablo Canyon lands that would be affected by extended DCPP operations. We had also asked whether PG&E would address ongoing adverse effects on public access and recreation by requesting removal or reduction of the offshore security zone near DCPP, though we have not received a response.
Absent the requested analysis by PG&E, we will conduct our own to evaluate known or potential impacts and any needed mitigation. As in CDP reviews, in federal consistency reviews, the Commission can include conditions for mitigation of impacts if it is not included in the application. 15 C.F.R. § 930.4(a).
Protection of Marine Biological Resour ces (CCMP Sections 30230 and 30231): Thank you for the information regarding PG&Es payments into the states Once-Through Cooling Mitigation Fund. We had also requested that PG&E identify the mitigation projects its payments had funded. Please provide those descriptions. As noted in our previous letters, those projects do not necessarily constitute adequate mitigation to achieve Coastal Act conformity and do not address the need for biological resource mitigation for the proposed 20-year license extension period. Thus, as part of our review, we will be evaluating impacts that require mitigation.
Dredging (CCMP Section 30233): We had previously requested that PG&E provide an evaluation of changed oceanographic conditions and expected future sedimentation rates in the DCPP intake cove to help identify whether additional dredging may be needed during the upcoming period of extended operations. We understand from your August letter that you will be providing the requested analysis soon.
3 Proposed PG&E NRC license renewal for Diablo Canyon Power Plant Notice of Incomplete Consistency Certification - September 14, 2024
Commercial and recreational fishing (CCMP Section 30234.5): As requested previously, please provide an evaluation of fishing opportunities that would otherwise be available near DCPP and describe what measures PG&E would implement to protect fishing opportunities during an extended licensed operating period.
Closing Again, thank you for your attention to these requests. As noted previously, we are happy to discuss these with you and answer any questions you may have.
SincerelySincerely,,
ToTom LustermLuster Energy, Ocean Resources, and Federal Consistency Division
4