ML13303A634
| ML13303A634 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 10/04/1978 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13303A632 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7810160231 | |
| Download: ML13303A634 (6) | |
Text
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPRAISAL BY THE DIVISION OF SITE SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS SUPPORTING EXTENSION OF CONSTRUCTION PERMITS No. CRPR-97 AND CPPR-98 SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT NOS.
2'AND 3
-ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPRAISAL Description of Proposed Action' By letter of March 31, 1978 the applicants, Southern Cal fornia Edison Company (SCE) and 'the San Diego Gas and Electric Company (.DG&E), filed a request with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) tojextend the completion dates specified in Construction Permits No. CPPR-97 and.
CPPR-98 for the San Oijofre Nuclear Generating Station, UnIt Nos. 2 and 3 (SONGS 2'& 3).
The action proposed is the issuance of an brder providing for an extension of the latest completion dates of the co truction per mits from January 1, 1979 to and including June-l 1980 fa Unit 2 and from January 1, 1980 toJune 1, 1981Vfor Unit 3. The NR( taff has re viewed the application and found that good cause has been shown for the
_irequested extension of the completion dates specified in Construction Permits CPPR-97 and CPPR-98 for SONGS 2 & 3 (see attache afety' Evaluation by the NRC staff).
Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action SA. Need for the Facility The SONGS 2 & 3 are now scheduled to begin commercial operation in October 1, 1980 for Unit 2 and January 1, 1982 for U'ift 3. As part of the operating licensing review of these plants the,', taff has closely followed the applicants' need for generating capacity," Examination of the most. recent information regarding loads and resources indicates that the conclusion reached in the Final Environmental Statement, Construction 'Permfiit Stage (E-CP),
puliished in h-Marco,- 1973 regarding need for this plant is still valid.
The overall staff's conclusion that the plant should be constructed is unaffected by the extension of the construction permit.
B. The FES-CP for SONGS 2 & 3 includes an assessment of p6tential environ mental, economic, and community impacts due to site preparation and plant construction. In addition, (1) the staff's review of-the inspection reports prepared by' the Office of Inspectioh and Enforcement as a result of 'periodic inspection visits to the SONGS 2 & 3 site, and (2) staff's discussions with individuals and local and state officials
-787'f 01 2-3/
-- 2 DSE:E--2 DSE:EP-2 SURNAME OL h_
_4ncan H
N 10/2/78 CE/ 17 66 NRC FORM 318. (9-76)
NRCM 0240 U. s. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICEt 1976 - 626-624
-2 held at the time of operating licensing review of the units did not identify any adverse impacts on the environment or the surrounding community which were not anticipated and adequately discussed in the FES-CP or which were significantly. greater than those discussed in the FES-CP.
C. Impact on Terrestrial Environment Land Use The FES-CP (Sect. 4.2) discussion on the impact that construction of SONGS 2 & 3 will have on the terrestrial environment is still'valid.
The impacts of site preparati7on on land use are assoctated almost exclusively with the excavation of the San Onofre Bluff. About 16.4 ha (40.5 acres) of the San Onofre Bluffs have bein excavated, and no further excavation is anticipated.
Much of this excavated material was deposited at Japanese Mesa, on Camp Pendleton Marine Base north and across from SONGS.
Thirty-four hectar es (84 acres) of the 50.6-ha (125-acre) mesa is being used for equip ent storage, fabrication shops, and as a contractor's-lay down area. Some of the excavated soil was deposited as a mound along the western edge of the mesa to reduce the. visual impact of the area as seen from highway. 1-5.
Visual inspections of the plant site boundary and the bluffs adjacent
'to the site are conducted biweekly.
Two instances of:erosion were encountered, and appropriate corrective action was Implemented to reduce these. Impacts.
To date, construction of theplant has had no significant-impact on offsite land use., Land use changes that. occurred offsite consist primarily of an increase In housing developments.
In A few cases developments were built nearly adjacent to the transmission line corridors (ER, Sect. 3.9.1.2).
The greatest impact on the transportation facilities at San Onofre due to construction-related activities is the increased congestion on highway 1-5 during shift changes. Little or no congestion occurs during morning shift changes in both incoming and outgoing traffic, but a 20- to 30-mn delay occurs for outgoing traffic during evening changes (ER, Suppl. 2, Item 27). Movement of heavy.equipment from the Del Mar Boat Basin to the station site creates a-temporary adverse impact to people using San Onofre State Park because the park is temporarily closed during these qquipment moves. To minimize this Simpact, all equipment moves occur during off-peak ronths (ER Suppl.2, Item 27).
- Environmental Report, Operating License Stage, San Onof r Nuclear gpnpratnng Stati Inits 2 ard 3.
OFFICE I
SURNAME 0
DATEMN NRC FORM 318 (9-76)
NRCM 0240
- u.
S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE1 1976-* 626 624
3 Construction of the proposed Talega Substation and the proposed trans mission lines is not expected to create any significant adverse impacts.
The Talega Substation will be constructed.on a 2-ha (5-acre) site-that will require 4 ha,(10 acres) to be graded.) Therefore, small amounts of. natural wildlife habitat will be temporarily or permanently destroyed.
About 35.4 km (22 miles) of new transmission lines will be constructed, and an additional 196.3 km (122 miles) will be retrofitted to operate at either 220 or 230 kV. No new rights-of-way will be required. Con struction of additional towers and access-road extensions,;however, will require a total of 5.2 ha (12.8 acres) of.land. The new lines,.
proposed by SCE will cross about 0.5 km (0.3 mile) of prime and unique farmlands (those areas with land use capabilities of class I or class-Il). -Exact placement of the towers-has not bee indicated, but with an: average of 3 towers per kilometer (4.8 towers.per-mile) and about 93 m2 (1000 ft 2 ) per tower base, only 0.014 ha (0.034 acre) of prime and unique farmlands will be. taken out of production. by tower bases. These towers will be placed in existing rights.of-way bounded on each-side by other existing transmission lines; therefore, a minimal amount of additional land for access roads wilI be required.
The new transmission line proposed by SDG&E (from SONGS to Talega Substation) is located entirely on Camp Pendleton Marine Base and will require 0.76 ha (1.88 acres) of land for tower bases and access road extensions.
Terrestrial ecology Terrestrial ecological impacts on the SONGS 2 & 3 site and vicinity have not been more serious than predicted in the.FES-CP. A relatively small amount of w~ildlife habitat was lost due to excavation of the bluffs. Similar habitat is adjacent to the site, so It is possible that most of the animal populations emigrated to these -areas. -Impacts on the terrestrial ecology along the transmission linecorridors will be primarily short-term.
The relatively small amount of laind [5.2 ha (12.8 acres). required for tower bases and access road extensions makes it unlikely that any significant long-term adver e impact will occur to the'terrestrial ecological -characteristics of the -area. Con struction-of additional towers could lead to an increase in-the number of raptors along the transmission itne corridors because these birds often use the towers for nesting platforms and as perches for hunting.
This increase is uni ly to occur, however, because the applicant presently discourages nesting by periodically removing the nests.
No endangered animal species in the vicinity of the site have been or are expected to be affected-adversely by the construction activities.
The California brown pelican, which was observed several times on the beach adjacent to the construction area, is not easily disturbed by IF~CE J-SURNAME).
DAi
- D A T E
)
0 S I I
O F F I C E_ 1_
_ __-_62 6 -6 "
NRc FRMn 38 (9-76) aRc 0240
- U3
- 9. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICEs 1976-GG.2 626
4 human activity; decline of this species is believed to be caused by pollutants such as DDT-Recent reports indicate that the status of this species is improving in-.the-Pacific states since strict pesti cide.laws have beenenacted., A nesting colony of the-California least tern is located on Camp Pendleton Marine Base near the Del Mar Boat Basin, a facility used by the applicant to move heavy equipment. Construction schedules and equipment delivery dates were altered to avoid disturbing the nesting terns in the sanctuary during nesting season. Also, the'nesting colony during the breeding season is a' restricted area for all nonauthorized personnel.2 From a careful review of the habitat requirements for other endangered species whose ranges include Orange and San Diego counties, the staff believes that such species are not likely to be affect d by the con struction activities. Furthermore, no known onsite hbitats are used by endangered species, and no habitats adjacent to or ithin the transmission line right-of-way have been classified by state 'or Federal authorities as critical to any endangered species (ER, Suppl. 1, Item 22)
D. Impacts on Aquatic Environment Effects on water use The major impact on water use resulting from construcion of SONGS 2'& 3 is related to the construction of the offshore conduitsystem. The presence of the construction trestle will present an bstruction' to coastal navigation. However, the shallowness of this region prohibits large vessels from using this: area, so this impact wil be restricted to small craft and will be only temporar, untiltthe restle is removed.
The dredging operation for the lay down-of-the buried.,'conduit systems will enhance the natural turbidity near the ocean'bottom. This will produce an occasionally visible brownish discoloration at the surface.
This impact Is being monitored and recorded by means of weekly aerial photographic surveys.'
Effects on aquatic biota The potential effects on aquatic biota from construction were discussed adequately in the FES-CP. The conclusion remains that no permanent adverse effects are anticipated...This concluston.is based on the soundness of the programs adopted by the applicant to identify impacts and to initiate corrective measures (ER, Sect. 4.5) and on the results of the Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS) monitoring program for Unit 1.
Three primary sources of potential impact td the marine environment could result from SONGS 2 & 3 construction: (1) erosion, (2)
- dredging,
........................... 1 I.....
SURNAME->
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~..
SURAME NRC FORM 318 (9-76) NRCM 0240
- U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1976 - 626.624
-5 and (3) dewatering discharge. All of these sources are covered by adequate control programs (ER, Sect. 4.5). The program associated with erosion involves close surveillance of the area of potential influence and corrective action if erosion is discovered. The program associated with dredging is especially extensive and involves (1) recording the volume and,location of sand disposed on the beach, both naturally through erosion of the bluffs and that resulting from conduit construction, (2) aerial photography to compare the area of visual turbidity before and after construction, (3) intertidal area mapping before and after construction to. determine thel amount of innundation and subsequent re-exposure of the rocky substrate-from sand disposal and natural conditions, (4) beach and bottom profiling, (5)
San Onofre Kelp Bed mapping and diving observations, and (6) intertidal sand and cobble sampling. The programassociated with dewatering.discharge is in accordance with waste discharge requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego.
Region,.as outlined in the NPDES permit. (ER, Appendix 12C).
Theresults of the current data indicate the absence f any significant detrimental impact, to the Sai Onofre marine environment due to con struction activities.
E. Radiation Exposure to Construction orkers During the period between the operation of Unit I and the startup of Units 2 and 3, the construction personnel working on Unit 2 will be exposed to sources of radiation from the operation of nit 1, and the construction personnel working on Unit 3 will be-exposed to sources of radiation from the operation of Units 1 and 2. The applicant has estimated the integrated dose to construction personnel to be 6.6 man-rems.
Estimated values for other LWRs have ranged from 5 to 500 man-rems.
F. Assessment of Impacts The only effects possibly resulting from the requested" extension would be those-due to transpostng the impacts in time or extending the total time the local community is subjected to temporary construction impacts.
This in the'staff's view will, not result in any significant additional impact. The staff concludes that environmental impacts associated with construction of the plant described in the FES -CP, arenot affected by the pro osed extension. Thus, no significantfchange n impact is expectedkto result from the extension.
N R
R 3
A....................
Z...............................
NRC FORM 318 (9-76) NRCM- 0240
- Ua'S.
GOVERNM ENT PRINTING OFFICE, 1976 -6264244
-6 Conclusion and Basis for Negative Declaration On the basis of the foregoing analysis and the NRC staff evaluation, it is concluded that, with the exception of impacts noted above, which are judged insignificant, the impacts attributable to the proposed action will be confined to those already predicted and described'.in the Commission's FES-CP issued in 1973. Having made this conclusion, the Commission has further concluded that no environmental impact statement for the proposed action need be prepared, and that a negative declaration to this effect is appropriate.
REFERENCES G. Seymour, Brown Pelican Wildlife Leaflet, California Dartment of Fish and Game, Sacramento, Calif.
2San Diego Gas and Electric Company, Nuclear Power Plant Siting, Camp.
Pendleton Marine Corps Base San Diego, Calif.,.April 1977.
OFFICE >
SURNAME>
(.
NRC FORM 318 (9-76)
NRCM 0240
- 5. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, 1978 -626-624.