ML20151C395
| ML20151C395 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 07/08/1988 |
| From: | Perkins K Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20151C399 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8807210342 | |
| Download: ML20151C395 (4) | |
Text
,
O 7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING COMPANY, ET AL.
DOCKET NO. 50-440 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Cossnission (the Comission) is considering t
issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-58 issued to The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, Duquesne Light Company, Ohio Edison Company, Pennsylvania Power Company and Toledo Edison Company (the licensees), for operation of the Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No.1, located in Lake County, Ohio.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Action The proposed amendment would revise the Environmental Protection Plan in Appendix B of the Technical Specifications (TS) relating to the surveillance requirements for the monitoring of Corbicula. The principal change is a shift in the sampling area from the off-shore lake bottom adjacent to the Perry intake and discharge structures to sampling of sediments in the Perry raw water systems. The 3ampling procedures at the Eastlake Power Plant to detect the presence of Corbicula are also revised to use a hand dredge in lieu of SCUBA divers and suction devices.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensees' application for amendment dated October 2,1987, i
The Need for the Proposed Action The proposed change to the TS is required in order to take advantage of research conducted within the last few years which should improve the detection capability for the presence of Corbicula over that which currently exists.
8807210342 880711 PDR ADOCK 05000440 P
PNU
2-Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The Comission has cor.pleted its evaluation of the proposed revision to Technical Specifications. The proposed revision would provide a more effective and direct method for detecting the presence of Corbicula. This would reduce the likelihood of blockage of the Emergency Service Water System due to growth of water-borne organisms. Therefore, the proposed change does not increase the probability or consequences of accidents.
No changes are being made in the ty M s of any offluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Accordingly, the Comission concludes that this proposed action would
, result in no significant radiological environmental impact.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed change to the TS involves a change in sampling location from offshore lake bottom to a location within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. This would have less nonradiological impact than the current program. Additionally, use of a hand dredge instead of SCUBA divers with suction devices is proposed at the Eastlake Plant sampling location. The size of the hand dredge is small and the sampling frequency (semi-annually) is such that any additional impacts resulting from this change are considered very minor.
It does not effect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, the Comission con-cludes that there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed amendment.
The Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment and Proposed No Significant Hazards Detennination in connection with this action was published in the Federal Register on March 9,1988(53FR7604). No request.for hearing or petition for leave to intervene was filed following this notice.
~
4 Alternative to the Proposed Action Since the Commission concluded that there are no significant environmental effects that would result from the proposed action, any alternatives with equal j
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 a less effective Corbicula monitoring program than proposed.
Alternative Use of Resources This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statements for the Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, dated August 1982.
Agencies and Persons Consulted l
The NRC staff reviewed the licensees' request and did not consult other agencies or persons.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact state-ment for the proposed license amendment.
Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, we conclude that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
I
?
4 For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated October 2,1987 which is available for public inspection at the Consnission's, Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. and at the Perry Public Library, 3753 Main Street, Perry, Ohio 44081.
s Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8 day of July 1988.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION Kenneth E. Perkins, Director Project Directorate III-3 Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special t'rojects
.