[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 129 (Thursday, July 6, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35239-35240]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-16542]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 5-278]


PECO Energy Company; Public Service Electric and Gas Company; 
Delmarva Power and Light Company; Atlantic City Electric Company; Peach 
Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 3; Environmental Assessment and 
Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an exemption to the PECO Energy Company, et al. 
(the licensee) for the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS), Unit 
3, located in York County, Pennsylvania.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

    The proposed action would grant an exemption from 10 CFR Part 50, 
Appendix J, Section III.D.1.(a). Section III.D.1(a) requires a set of 
three Type A tests (i.e., Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test 
(CILRT)) to be performed at approximately equal intervals during each 
10-year service period and specifies that the third test of each set 
shall be conducted when the plant is shut down for the performance of 
the 10-year inservice inspection (ISI). The request involves a one-time 
schedular exemption from the requirements of Section III.D.1(a) that 
would extend the PBAPS, Unit 3 Type A test service period and allow the 
three Type A tests in the current service period to be performed at 
intervals that are not approximately equal. Hence, this one-time 
exemption would allow the third, Unit 3, Type A test to be performed 
during refueling outage 11, scheduled to begin in September 1997, 
approximately 70 months after the last Unit 3 test, thereby coinciding 
with the 10-year plant ISI refueling outage.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application dated November 21, 1994.

Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is required in order to allow the third Type A 
test to be performed during the eleventh Unit 3 refueling outage 
scheduled to begin in September 1997, concurrent with the 10-year plant 
inservice inspections. Without the exemption, the licensee would be 
required to perform a Type A test during both refueling outage 10, 
scheduled to begin in September 1995 and refueling outage 11. 
Performing the Type A test during two consecutive refueling outages 
would result in increased personnel radiation exposure and increased 
cost to the licensee. With the exemption, the third Type A test would 
be performed during the eleventh Unit 3 refueling outage which would 
thus align the start of the third 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, 10-year 
service period with the start of the third 10-year ISI period.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The Commission has completed the evaluation to the action and 
concludes that this action would not significantly increase the 
probability or amount of expected primary containment leakage. The 
performance history of Type A leak tests at PBAPS, Unit 3, demonstrates 
adequate margin to acceptable leak rate limits. No time-based failure 
mechanisms were identified that would significantly increase expected 
leak rates over the proposed extended interval. The three historical 
Type A test failures at PBAPS, Unit 3, in April 1977, September 1981 
and August 1983, were determined to be activity-related failures, which 
would not be related to an extended test interval. Thus radiological 
release rates will not differ from those determined previously and 
would not be expected to result in undetectable leak rates in excess of 
the values established by 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J.
    Consequently, the probability of accidents would not be increased, 
nor would the post-accident radiological releases be greater than 
previously determined. The proposed action does not otherwise affect 
radiological plant effluents or increase occupational radiation 
exposures. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that this proposed 
action would result in no significant radiological environmental 
impact.
    With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed 
action does involve features located entirely within the restricted 
areas as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. It does not affect non-radiological 
plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Accordingly, the 
Commission concludes that there are no significant non-radiological 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

Alternatives 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 or greater environmental impacts need not be 
evaluated. The principal alternative to the action would be to deny the 
request. Such action would not reduce environmental impacts of plant 
operation and would result in increased radiation exposure to plant 
personnel. 

[[Page 35240]]


Alternate Use of Resources

    This action does not involve the use of any resources not 
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the 
Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, dated April 1973.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on June 27, 1995, the staff 
consulted with the Pennsylvania State official, Stan Maingi, of the 
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, 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 this proposed action, see the 
licensee's letter dated November 21, 1994, 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 Government Publications Section, State 
Library of Pennsylvania, (REGIONAL DEPOSITORY) Education Building, 
Walnut Street and Commonwealth Avenue, Box 1601, Harrisburg, 
Pennsylvania.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of June 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. 95-16542 Filed 7-5-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M