[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 221 (Thursday, November 16, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57604-57605]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-28311]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-352]
Philadelphia Electric Company, Limerick Generating Station, Unit
1; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR
Part 50, Appendix J (hereafter referred to as Appendix J) to Facility
Operating License No. NPF-39 issued to Philadelphia Electric Company
(the licensee), for operation of the Limerick Generating Station (LGS),
Unit 1, located at the licensee's site in Chester and Montgomery
Counties, Pennsylvania.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would allow an exemption from Appendix J,
Section III.D.1.(a), which requires a set of three Type A tests (i.e.,
Containment Integrated Leakage Rate Test) to be performed at
approximately equal intervals during each 10-year service period and
specifies that the third test of each set be conducted when the plant
is shutdown for the 10-year inservice inspection (ISI). The exemption
would allow a one-time test interval extension from the current
scheduled 62 months to approximately 89 months. It should also be noted
that the licensee previously was granted a similar exemption on
February 8, 1994 (59 FR 5758). This 1994 exemption allowed the licensee
to perform it's third Type A test during the 10-year plant ISI
refueling outage by extending the test interval 15 months. The licensee
requested that the current exemption request supersede the previously
granted exemption.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application for exemption dated June 20, 1995.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to allow the licensee to realize cost
savings and reduced worker radiation exposure. Subsequent to the
licensee's submittal, a rulemaking was completed (see 60 FR 49495
September 26, 1995), which allows the Type A test to be performed at
intervals up to once every 10 years (the actual period is based on
historical performance of the containment). However, because the
licensee's outage is scheduled to begin in January 1996, there is
insufficient time for the licensee to implement the amended rule prior
to the start of the outage.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed
exemption and concludes that this action would not significantly
increase the probability or amount of expected primary containment
leakage; hence, the containment integrity would be maintained. The
current requirement in Section III.D.1.(a) of Appendix J to perform the
three Type A tests would continue to be met, except that the time
interval between the second and third type A tests would be extended to
approximately 89 months.
The licensee has analyzed the results of previous Type A tests to
show good containment performance and will continue to be required to
conduct the Type B and C local leak rate tests which historically have
been shown to be the principal means of detecting containment leakage
paths. It is also noted that the licensee, as a condition of the
proposed exemption, will perform the visual containment inspection
although it is only required by Appendix J to be conducted in
conjunction with Type A tests. The NRC staff considers that these
inspections, though limited in scope, provide an important added level
of confidence in the continued integrity of the containment boundary.
Based on the information presented in the licensee's application,
the proposed extended test interval would not result in a non-
detectable leakage rate in excess of the value established by Appendix
J, or in any changes to the containment structure or plant systems.
Consequently, the probability of accidents would not be increased, nor
would the post-accident radiological releases be greater than
previously determined. Neither would the proposed exemption otherwise
affect radiological plant effluents. Accordingly, the Commission
concludes that this proposed exemption would
[[Page 57605]]
result in no significant radiological environmental impact.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed
action does involve features located entirely within the restricted
area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. It 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 exemption.
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. The
environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action
are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources
This proposed exemption does not involve the use of any resources
not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the
Limerick Generating Stations, Units 1 and 2, dated April 1984 as
supplemented on August 1989.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on September 26, 1995, the
staff consulted with the Pennsylvania State official, David Ney of the
Bureau of Radiation Protection, Department of Environmental Protection,
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 exemption 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 exemption.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the
licensee's letter dated June 20, 1995, 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 Pottstown Public Library, 500 High Street,
Pottstown, Pennsylvania 19464.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day of November 1995.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John F. Stolz,
Director, Project Directorate I-2, Division of Reactor Projects--I/II,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-28311 Filed 11-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-1-P
