Jump to main content.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Diablo Canyon Nuclear Powe

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

 

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Diablo Canyon Nuclear Powe



[Federal Register: April 11, 1995]







NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323]

 


Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power 
Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2; 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, fullscale 
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 State in terms of manpower and 
finances. The change would allow the State to participate in one 
exercise each year instead of two exercises every other 
year. [[Page 18430]] 



Environmental Impacts 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, 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 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.



Alternatives to the Proposed Action



    Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable 
environmental impact associated with the proposed action, any 
alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be 
evaluated. As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff 
considered denial of the proposed action. Denial 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, Units Nos. 1 and 2.



Agencies 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 of No Significant Impact



    Based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission concludes 
that 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 environmental 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, 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.



    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William H. Bateman,

Director, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor Projects III/
IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-8872 Filed 4-10-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.