[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 93 (Wednesday, May 14, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26573-26574]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-12592]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-311]


Public Service Electric & Gas Company, Philadelphia Electric 
Company, Delmarva Power and Light Company, Atlantic City Electric 
Company, Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2; 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 Nos. 
DPR-70 and DPR-75, issued to Public Service Electric & Gas Company 
(PSE&G, the licensee), for operation of the Salem Nuclear Generating 
Station, Units 1 and 2 (Salem Units 1 and 2).
    The facility consists of two pressurized water reactors located at 
the licensee's site in Salem County, New Jersey.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

    The proposed action would change Technical Specification Table 3.3-
5, ``Engineered Safety Features Response Time,'' to extend the 
Containment Fan Cooler Unit (CFCU) response time from 45 to 60 seconds.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licenses application 
for amendment dated October 25, 1996, as supplemented by letters dated 
December 11, 1996, January 28, March 27, and April 24, 1997.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is needed to make the Technical Specifications 
(TSs) consistent with the as-built plant. The as-built plant has a 
longer response time for the CFCUs than that identified in the TSs 
because (1) a 1976 plant modification added time delays to

[[Page 26574]]

valves that isolate non-essential service water loads in response to an 
accident signal, and (2) the licensee failed to consider the impact of 
CFCU service water outlet valve sequencing delays on overall post-
accident system performance. The 1976 modification was implemented to 
limit the potential for water hammer of the service water system during 
the isolation of the non-essential loads.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The radiological environmental impact of the proposed action has 
already been evaluated and approved by the staff. In support of 
Amendment No. 190 for Unit 1 and Amendment No. 173 for Unit 2, issued 
February 6, 1997, the staff performed its own analysis of the offsite 
doses resulting from a Loss of Coolant Accident. The staff's analysis 
was performed using the CFCU response time in the proposed action and 
the staff concluded that the offsite doses are within the applicable 
dose acceptance criteria of 10 CFR Part 100. 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 
effluent 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. The principal alternative to the action would be to deny the 
request. Such action would not change any 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 related to 
the operation of Salem Nuclear Generating Station Units 1 and 2,'' 
dated April 1973.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on April 14, 1997, the staff 
consulted with the New Jersey State official, Richard Pinney, of the 
Department of Environmental 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 letters dated October 25, 1996, December 11, 1996, January 
28, March 27, and April 24, 1997, and Amendment Nos. 190 and 173, dated 
February 6, 1997, 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 Salem Free Public Library, 112 W. Broadway, Salem, New Jersey 
08079.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of May, 1997.

    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. 97-12592 Filed 5-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-U