[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 89 (Friday, May 8, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25526-25527]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-12280]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 amendment 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 in
Montgomery and Chester Counties, Pennsylvania.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would approve the implementation of a plant
modification to support the installation of replacement suction
strainers for the emergency core cooling systems (residual heat removal
and core spray) pumps at LGS, Unit 1.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application for amendment dated October 6, 1997, as supplemented by
letter dated February 2, 1998.
The Need for the Proposed Action
On May 6, 1996, the NRC issued NRC Bulletin 96-03, ``Potential
Plugging of Emergency Core Cooling Suction Strainers by Debris in
Boiling Water Reactors'', that requested addressees to implement
appropriate procedural measures and plant modifications to minimize the
potential for clogging of emergency core cooling system (ECCS)
suppression pool suction strainers by debris generated during a loss-
of-coolant accident (LOCA) and requested that addressees report to the
NRC whether they intend to implement the requested actions.
In response to the above cited bulletin, the licensee proposed a
plant modification to install replacement suction strainers in the
emergency core cooling (ECCS) pumps. The replacement strainer surface
areas, which are substantially larger than the currently installed
strainers, are required to reduce potential strainer clogging due to
debris in the suppression pool following a postulated loss-of-coolant
accident.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action
and concludes that the installation of the replacement strainers in the
ECCS pumps reduces potential strainer clogging due to debris in the
suppression pool following a loss-of-coolant accident and does not
change the manner in which the plant is being operated or the
environmental impacts of operation. The proposed action involves
features entirely within the protected area as defined in 10 CFR Part
20.
The change will not increase the probability or consequences of
[[Page 25527]]
accidents, no changes are being made in the types of any effluents that
may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in the
allowable individual or collective 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 involves 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 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. 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 the
Limerick Generating Station, Unit 1.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on April 10, 1998, the staff
consulted with the Pennsylvania State official, Mr. David Ney of the
Bureau of Radiation 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 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 6, 1997, as supplemented by letter
dated February 2, 1998, which are 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.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of May 1998.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert A. Capra,
Director, Project Directorate 1-2, Division of Reactor Projects--I/II,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-12280 Filed 5-7-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
