ML19343D504
| ML19343D504 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 04/13/1981 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19343D500 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8105050038 | |
| Download: ML19343D504 (2) | |
Text
.
k 5
f
?
a t,
h ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPRAISAL BY THE DIVISION OF LICENSING SUPPORTING EXTENSION l
0F CON 5IRUCTION PERMIT 5 N05. CPPR-106 AND CPPR-107 LIMERICK GENERATING STATION, UNIT 5 1 ANJ 2 DOCKET N05. 50-352 AND 50-353 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPRAISAL Description of Proposed Action By letter dated February 23, 1981, the permittee, Philadelphia Electric Co.,
(PECo), filed a request with the Nuclear Regulatory Commisssion (NRC) to extend the completion dates specified in Construction Permits CPPR-106 and CPPR-107 for the Limerick Generatina Station, Units 1 and 2.
The action proposed is the issuance of an order providing for an extension of the latest completion date of Construction Pemit CPPR-106 from April 1,1981 to October,1985, and of CPPR-107 from April 1,1982 to October,1987. The NRC staff has reviewed the application and found that good cause has been shown for the requested extension of the completion date specified in Con-struction Permits CPPR-106 and CPPR-107 for Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 (see attached Safety Evaluation by the NRC staff).
Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action A.
Need for Plants The Limerick Cenerating Station Unit 1 is now scheduled for corrercial operation in 1985 and Unit 2 in 1987. Examination of the rost recent information regarding resources and economics indicates that these plants are still needed.
In the time frame of 1985 and 1987, the emphasis will be on reduced operating costs.
The overall staff's unclusion that the plant should be constructed is unaffected by the extension of the construction permits.
I B.
Cocaunity and Economic Impact 1
The Final Environeental Statement Construction Permit Stane (FES-CP) published in November 1973 for Limerick Units 1 and 2 includes an 1
810 sos o os
- n<cti l
. g..
S' "O
...l.
.l.
- m y i
j
. l.
.h w: :: e. n c _ v:v mc C F FI C I A L n.:.t.~ n C C ? r
a cssc: scent cf pctential environmental, economic, and community impects due to site preparation and plant construction.
In addition, the staff's review of the inspection reports prepared by the Office of Inspection a6d Cnforcemant as a result of periodic in:pection: ct the Lim.crich site and staff's discussions with individuals and local and state officials did not identify any adverse impacts on the environment or thu surrounding community which were not anticipated and idequately discussed in the FES-CP or which were signficantly greater than those discussed in the FES-CP.
C.
Assessrent of Impacts The only effects possibly resulting from the requested extensions would be those due to transposing the inpacts in time er extending the total time the local community is subjected to temporary construction i= pacts.
This in the staff's view will not result in any significant additional impact. The staff concludes that environmental impacts associated with construction of the plant described in the FES-CP are not affected by the proposed extension. Thus, no sicnificant change in impact is expect-ed to result from the extension.
Conclusion and Basis for Negative Declarzi.lon On the basis of the foregoing analysis and the NRC staff evaluation, it is concluded that the impacts. attributable to the proposed action will be con-fined to those already predicted and described in the Commission's FES-CP issued in 1973. Having made this conclusion, the Commission has further concluded that no environmental impact stat,ement for the proposed action need be prepared, and that a negative declaration to this effect is appro-priate.
Dated: April 13,1981 P00ROR8101
~.
...i.
- ...,5 - *
'g '
l e
g I
l l-h
.l.
j vw.....-,.-.
_..._,