ML20217Q565
| ML20217Q565 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 05/04/1998 |
| From: | Capra R NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20217Q569 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9805080191 | |
| Download: ML20217Q565 (4) | |
Text
4 7590 01-P UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
PHILADELPHIA ELECTRICCOMPANY DOCKET NO. 50352 t
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 l
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 modifmations to minimize the potential i
9805080191 980504 PDR ADOCK 05000352
- P PDR m
i 3
2 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 requiaxi to reduce potential strainer clogging due to debris in the suppression pool following a postulated loss-of-coolant accident.
EnvironmentalImoacts of the Prooosed Action:
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed scilon and concludes that the installation of the replacement strainers in the ECCS pumps reduces potential struiner 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 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. N does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Accordingly, the Commission concludes tast there are no significant nonradiological envlienmental impacts associated with the prnposed action.
r-i
~
3-Alternatives to the Procesed Aeolan:
Since the. Commission has concluded there is no measurable environmentalimpact l
associated v 'd the proposed action, any attematives with equal or greater environmental impact
~ need not be evaluated. ' As an altomative 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 environmentalimpacts of the proposed action and the altemative action are
- similar, i
- Attemative 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.
Acencies 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 environmentalimpact statement for the proposed action.
i 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 Gelrnan Building,2120 L d
i-4 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 M. O.-
Robert A. Capra, Director Project Directorate 1-2 Division of Reactor Projects - t/Il Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l
I l