[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 188 (Thursday, September 26, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50513-50514]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-24694]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-361 and 50-362]


Southern California Edison; San Onofre Nuclear Generating 
Station, Units 2 and 3; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No 
Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. 
NPF-10 and NPF-15, issued to Southern California Edison (the licensee) 
for the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS), Units 2 and 3, 
located in San Diego County, California.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    By letter dated December 6, 1995, the licensee proposed to change 
the technical specifications (TSs) to allow an increase in fuel 
enrichment (Uranium 235) up to 4.8 weight percent. The present TS 
permit a maximum enrichment of 4.1 weight percent.

Need for Proposed Action

    The licensee intends to load fuel into the core during Cycle 9 and 
subsequent refueling outages which does not currently meet the TSs. By 
increasing the fuel enrichment, the licensee will implement the fuel 
strategies developed for SONGS Units 2 and 3.

Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action

    The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed 
revision to the TSs and concludes that storage and use of fuel enriched 
with U-235 up to 4.8 weight percent at SONGS Units 2 and 3 is 
acceptable. The safety considerations associated with higher 
enrichments have been evaluated by the NRC staff and the staff has 
concluded that such changes would not adversely affect plant safety. 
The proposed changes have no adverse effect on the probability of any 
accident. As a result, there is no increase in individual or cumulative 
radiation exposure.
    The environmental impacts of transportation resulting from the use 
of higher enrichment and extended irradiation are discussed in the 
staff assessment entitled ``NRC Assessment of the Environmental Effects 
of Transportation Resulting from Extended Fuel Enrichment and 
Irradiation.'' This assessment was published in the Federal Register on 
August 11, 1988 (53 FR 30355) as corrected on August 24, 1988 (53 FR 
32322) in connection with the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 
I: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. As 
indicated therein, the environmental cost contribution of an increase 
in fuel enrichment of up to 5 weight percent U-235 and irradiation 
limits of up to 60 Gigawatt Days per Metric Ton (GWD/MT) are either 
unchanged, or may in fact be reduced from those summarized in Table S-4 
as set forth in 10 CFR 51.52(c). These findings are applicable to the 
proposed amendment for SONGS Units 2 and 3. Accordingly, the Commission 
concludes that this proposed action would result in no significant 
radiological environmental impact.
    With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed

[[Page 50514]]

changes involve systems located within the restricted area as defined 
in 10 CFR Part 20. It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents 
and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, the Commission 
concludes that there are no significant nonradiological environmental 
impacts associated with the proposed amendment.
    The Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility 
Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration 
Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing in connection with this 
action was published in the Federal Register on April 10, 1996 (61 FR 
15997).

Alternative to the Proposed Action

    Since the Commission concluded that there are no significant 
environmental effects that would result from the proposed action, any 
alternative with equal or greater environmental impacts need not be 
evaluated.
    The principal alternative would be to deny the requested amendment. 
This would not reduce environmental impacts of plant operation and 
would result in reduced operational flexibility.

Alternative Use of Resources

    This action does not involve the use of any resources not 
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for SONGS 
Units 2 and 3, dated April 1981 (NUREG-0490).

Agencies and Persons Contacted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on September 19, 1996, the 
Commission consulted with the California State official, Mr. Steve Hsu 
of the State 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 this action, see the 
application for license amendment dated December 6, 1995. Copies are 
available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document 
Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555, 
and at the temporary local public document room located at the Science 
Library, University of California, Irvine, California 92713.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of September 1996.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mel B. Fields,
Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-2 Division of Reactor Projects 
III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-24694 Filed 9-25-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P