[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 8 (Tuesday, January 13, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2012-2013]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-680]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323]
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit
Nos. 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant
Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an exemption from title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) part 50, section 50.68 for Facility Operating
License Nos. DPR-80 and DPR-82, issued to Pacific Gas and Electric
Company (the licensee), for operation of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant
(DCPP), Unit Nos. 1 and 2, respectively, located in San Luis Obispo
County, California. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is
issuing this environmental assessment and finding of no significant
impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the requirements
of 10 CFR 50.68, ``Criticality Accident Requirements,'' for handling
the 10 CFR part 72 licensed contents of the Holtec HI-STORM 100 Cask
System.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated October 8, 2003, as supplemented on November 25,
2003.
The Need for the Proposed Action
10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) sets forth the following requirement that must
be met, in lieu of a monitoring system capable of detecting criticality
events:
Plant procedures shall prohibit the handling and storage at any
one time of more fuel assemblies than have been determined to be
safely subcritical under the most adverse moderation conditions
feasible by unborated water.
The licensee is unable to satisfy the above requirement for
handling of the 10 CFR part 72 licensed contents of the Holtec HI-STORM
100 Cask System. Section 50.12(a) allows licensees to apply for an
exemption from the requirements of part 50 if the regulation is not
necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule and other
conditions are met. The licensee has stated that compliance with 10 CFR
50.68(b)(1) is not necessary for handling the 10 CFR part 72 licensed
contents of the cask system to achieve the underlying purpose of the
rule.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and
concludes
[[Page 2013]]
that the exemption described above would continue to satisfy the
underlying purpose of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1). The details of the staff's
safety evaluation will be provided with the letter to the licensee
approving the exemption to the regulation.
The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability
or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types or
amounts of effluents that may be released off site, and there is no
significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure.
Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts
associated with the proposed action.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed
action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does
not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other
environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant
nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed
action.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative).
Denial of the application would result in no change in current
environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action
and the alternative action are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources
The action does not involve the use of any different resource than
those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for
the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, dated May 1973.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
On December 15, 2003, the staff consulted with the California State
official, Mr. Steve Hsu of the Radiologic Health Branch of the
California Department of Health Services, regarding the environmental
impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes
that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the
quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC 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 8, 2003, as supplemented on November
25, 2003. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the
NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North,
Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically
from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS)
Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site,
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have
access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents
located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by
telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to
[email protected].
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of January 2004.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Stephen Dembek,
Chief, Section 2, Project Directorate IV, Division of Licensing Project
Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 04-680 Filed 1-12-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P