AEP-NRC-2018-72, Donald C. Cook. Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 - License Amendment Request to Revise Operating Licenses DPR-58 and DPR-74, Appendix B, Environmental Technical Specifications, Part II, Non-Radiological Environmental Protection Plan

Donald C. Cook. Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 - License Amendment Request to Revise Operating Licenses DPR-58 and DPR-74, Appendix B, Environmental Technical Specifications, Part II, Non-Radiological Environmental Protection Plan

ML18348A579
Person / Time
Site:	Cook
Issue date:	12/11/2018
From:	Lies Q American Electric Power, Indiana Michigan Power Co
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
AEP-NRC-2018-72
Download: ML18348A579 (13)

Text

m INOIANA Indiana Michigan Power MICHIGAN Cook Nuclear Plant POWER One Cook Place Bridgman, Ml 49106 A unit ofAmerican Electric Power lndianaMichiganPower.com December 11, 2018 AEP-NRC-2018-72 10 CFR 50.90 Docket Nos.: 50-315 50-316 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001

SUBJECT:

Donald C. Cook. Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 License Amendment Request to Revise Operating Licenses DPR-58 and DPR-74, Appendix B, Environmental Technical Specifications, Part II, Non-Radiological Environmental Protection Plan

Dear Sir or Madam:

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90, Indiana Michigan Power Company (l&M), the licensee for Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant (CNP) Units 1 and 2, proposes to amend Facility Operating Licenses DPR-58 and DPR-74. l&M proposes to modify the Operating Licenses, Appendix B, Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS), Part II, "Non-Radiological Environmental Protection Plan," for CNP Units 1 and 2. The amendment request updates the CNP Environmental Protection Plan to reflect a Michigan state requirement to obtain and maintain a Renewable Operating Permit for the possession and operation of specified stationary sources of air pollutants.

Enclosure 1 provides an affirmation statement pertaining to this letter. Enclosure 2 provides l&M's evaluation of the proposed change. Enclosure 3 to this letter provides a mark-up of the affected Operating Licenses, Appendix 8, ETS, Part 11, Non-Radiological Environmental Protection Plan pages reflecting the proposed changes.

l&M requests approval of the proposed amendment by October 31, 2019. The proposed amendment will be implemented within 60 days of Nuclear Regulatory Commission approval.

Copies of this letter and its enclosures are being transmitted to the Michigan Public Service Commission and Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.91.

• There are no new or revised regulatory commitments in this letter.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission AEP-NRC-2018-72 Page2 Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Michael K. Scarpello, Regulatory Affairs Director at (269) 466-2649.

Sincerely, t;~J~

Q~elies Site Vice President MOS/mil

Enclosures:

1 Affirmation 2 Evaluation of Change to Appendix B, Environmental Technical Specifications, Part II, Non-Radiological Environmental Protection Plan 3 Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant Operating Licenses DPR-58 and DPR-74, Appendix B; Environmental Technical Specifications, Part II, Non-Radiological Environmental Protection ,

Plan (Marked to Show the Proposed Changes) c: R. J. Ancona - MPSC R. F. Kuntz, NRC Washington, DC MDEQ - RMD/RPS NRC Resident Inspector K. S. West, NRC Region Ill A. J. Williamson - AEP Ft. Wayne, w/o enclosures

~

E"'!closure1 to AEP-NRC-2018-72 AFFIRMATION I, Q. Shane Lies, being duly sworn, state that I am the Site Vice President of Indiana Michigan.

Power Company (l&M), that I am authorized to sign and file this request with the Nuclear Regulatory .Commission on behalf of l&M, and that the statements made and the matters set forth herein pertaining to l&M are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.

Indiana Michigan Power Company r;~A-~

Q.~elies Site Vice President SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS l\ DAY OF De.teN\be_, , 2018

~ : DPublic

• Notary -~

My Commission Expires O \ \~\ \ ~0~5 l ~*~** * *.

......~

• ' ' '*. * * '.' ** c. ~.

Enclosure 2 to AEP-NRC-2018-72 Evaluation of Change to Appendix B, Environmental Technical Specifications, Part II,

• Non-Radiological Environmental Protection Plan *

1.0 DESCRIPTION

.. ;................................................... :..................... :........ :.............:............. 2

2.0 PROPOSED CHANGE

• ...... :............................................................................................. 2 *

3.0 BACKGROUND

.......... :.....-....................................................................................; ......... 3

4.0 TECHNICAL ANALYSIS

............................... :............................ :.................... ,................ 3 5.0 REGULATORY SAFETY ANALYSIS ..................... :.................... :.................................... 4

6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

S ........................................ :...... ,......................... 6

7.0 REFERENCES

........... :.......... :...........................................................................:............. 6

- ' :., . '. \ ' --~.:.

,t*****

J

-~---  :. \ *. -::*

"~ . .' *. *, . . ~ .- , '

-' ~ .l '

".* ~* * 'I * .*.;*./*'- **  :~~.* * * ' * .- * ' '>,

- -. Enclosure 2 to'JXEP-NRC-2018-72 . ~* ..,

. . :. -.* Page 2.

. '?

,-~ , '

• . ! ,*. 1.0 . DESCRIPTION .

. This l~tter 'is a request by Indiana Michigan Power Company (l&M) to amenc;f Facility Operating .

• Licenses DPR-58 and DPR-74 for Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant (CNP) Units 1 and 2. The proposed

• _change modifies the

• Operating . Licenses, Appendix B, Environmental* *

' *. Technical Specification (ETS), Part li,"'Non-Radiological Environmental Protection Plari," (EPP).

,, ,_. ..* *. _, . The* amendment request updates the CNP EPP to reflect. a Michigan state requirement to obt~in

• * .-- and maintairi a *Renewable* Operating Permit for the possession and operation of specified stationary sources of air pollutants, . . .

..,; .

• 2.0 , *. PR.OPo'SED CHANGE

.._*..The. proposed activity - is a revision to .the. licensing basi~- as* described in the Technical -

Specification_ (TS), Appendix B, ETS, PartU, Non-Radiological EPP. The specific proposed

_ changes are shown in Enclosure 3. * * * *

. *The changejn the table of contents as anew section header 3.4.

.. The change in .Section 2.0 replaces "Prior to issuance of this EPP, the requirements remaining .

. in the ETS were" with, "Requirements remaining in the ETS were incorporatecl into this EPP and

- * ..:* . subsequently . ~. amended. . Requirements in effect are." *

• The first' change in Section 2.2 replaces "The terrestrial issue is the need for controlled use of

• .. : herbicides 'if such are used for *maintenance of transmission rights-of-way. NRC requirements

• • • with regard to this terrestrial issue are specified in Subsectori* [sic] 4._2." with, "The use of herbicides, if such are used for maintenance of transmission rights-of-way, shall be controlled

.*. consistent with regulatory requirements. The requirements. with regard to this terrestri'al issue

.are specified in Subsection 4.2."-

• .. The *second . change in' Section 2.2 adds.- the following. "The operation_. of specified stationary sources* of air pollutants requires that Indiana* Michigan Power Company obtain a Renewable

'_. Operating* Permit (ROP) pursuant to Title V ofthe federal Clean Air Act of 1990 and Michigan's

• .*._Administrative Rules for Air Pollution Control pursuant to Section 5506(1) of the Natural

.. _ . Resources and Environmental Protection Act, Act _451 of 1994. Specified stationary sources

• >*-* . - subject to the _ROP program are- defined by the applicable Administrative Rule and include

.:,-* * ._. sources suc.h

• as: diesel. generators, stationary engine-driven pumps, and buildin*g heating

... , b9ilers ... Related effluent monitoring and limitations are.contained in the effective ROP (Title V.

• .. : :* *. -' *

• Permit) issu~d by the permitting authority." .- . .- .

- \_ -*::"-_':_-._.:.""_ .The. ct:iang~*-* in Section 3.0,

• Consist~~cy R~quirements, adds a new section 3.4, Reporting* .

• • *_ * .'.,*.:*:*,*':.Related to the. Renewable Operating Permit:* The new ,section 3.4 states that, 'The NRC shall *

.' *.:. **_ ._, . . :-be 'provided with a copy' of the current ROP within 30 days of approval." . **: - . . ** . ** . . ., _

',._;***.* ** 1. *. "

~ .. ' .:_/* :.. ~ .. *t . .

r,.,*

, \ ... ' *,,._' *,; ~:* I,*

' .~ ... ' .

• ... Page 3 .*

• ' *,' ;. . . . , \*; */.' :: ... *** * ' *- l

• 3.0 .BACKGROUND .

• The .EPP . was

• established - during : i~itial*. plant* licensing. . The regul~t~ry. basis for the *

.. establishmel1l of. the EPP' was 10 CFR 50.36(b), "Environmental conditions:", This regulation requires* that*any obligations iri the environmental area identified by the Nuclear Regulatory

• commission (NRC) during their operating. license* review be i_ncluded* in an attachment to the.

• license. * * *

• Operation :ci the facility is. governed by the environmental requirements: of:other Federal (i.e.,.<

the Environmental Protection* Agency (EPA)), state; and local .agencies arid must comply with the

• applicable.:* protection regulations:... Changes to applicable regulations established a requirement for l&M to obtain. and maintain the ROP .. The NRC relies on these agencies to *

• regulate the nuclear generating stations.in environmental matters. No environmental protection

.. requirem~hts established. by other agencies are being reduced by the proposed.modification of

. Appe~dix 13 of CNP's Operating Licenses. * *. _* . * '* . . . *. .

4.0 TECHNICAL ANALYSIS

4.1. Specific Analysis and Justification *

. Table of contents

• .The new 3.4 section title is_ being added for format consistency. This change is administrative in.

nature .

. .* Section 2.0*.',.

• Environmental Protection Issues

. The introduction to this section . of the EPP is being changed to reflecf the addition of a requirement to Section 2.2 that was not contained _in the Appendix

• B ETS

• when those

\ ~ ....

req*uirements:were incorporated into the original EPP .. *.

.. 'sectioii2.2/.

Terrestrial *Issues

• The minor change in the first. paragraph of Section 2.2 is grammatical in nature. The change is neces$ary to reflect the addition of *a paragraph - a new requirement - to Section 2.2:

Th~ substant.ive diange . in.* Section 2.2 is the addition reflecting the* State of Michigan *

.requirement that l&M obtain and maintain an ROP pursuant to Title V of the federal Clean Air Act of* 1990 and Michigan's Administrative Rules for Air Pollution Control pursuant to Section 5506(1.) oflhe Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of 1994.

• The additi~~- cl this* requirem*ent to' Section 2.2 of the EPP is consistent with the guidance

. provided in the November 20, 2008, Memorandum, H. Brent Clayton; Chief /RA/, Environmental

.....* ' ;. Technical. !{upport- Branch, Division of Site an.d Environmental Reviews, Office of New .Reactors *

',*, ,, .-'-::*. to' *scot( C/Flanders, Director, Division of Site and Environmental Reyiews. Office' of New***

. ,. * :*Reactors [ML083180815] .. : . . *.*: .. *: * . * * ** > *,*

. . '. :,* .. i:(}\; />: .: . .* ~: . ; .* . . :. .. '

- .,.. . *"{

,.",r;

Enclosure 2 fo AEP-NRG:-2018-72 Page 4 ..

Section 3.0 Consistency Requirements **

The change to this section is limited to the addition of a new Section 3.4,. "Reporting Related to the Renewable Operating Permit."

The new s*ection 3.4 requires that the licensee keep the NRC informed regarding the approval of the ROP under the State of Michigan ROP Program by stating that, "The NRC shall be provid~d with a copy of the current ROP within 30 days of approval."

The addition of this requirement to Section 3.0 of the EPP is also consistent with the guidance .

provided in the November 20, 2008, Memorandum, H. Brent Clayton, ..Chief /RN, Environmental Technical Support Branch, Division of Site and Environmental Reviews, Office of New Reactors to Scott C. Flanders, Director, Division of Site and Environmental Reviews Office of New Reactors [ML083180815].

5.0 REGULATORY SAFETY ANALYSIS 5.1 No Significant Hazards Consideration Indiana Michigan Power Company (l&M), the licensee for Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant (CNP)

Units 1 and 2, has evaluated the proposed changes to the Operating Licenses, Appendix B, Environmental Technical Specification (ETS), Part II, "Non-Radiological Environmental Protection Plan," using the criteria in 10 CFR 50.92, and has determined that the proposed changes do not involve a significant hazards consideration. The following information is provided to support a finding of no significant hazards consideration.

The proposed change would revise Appendix B, ETS, Part II, "Non-Radiological Environmental Protection Plan," of the Operating License for each unit to add a requirement of the state of Michigan to obtain and maintain a Renewable Operating Permit (ROP) for the possession and operation of specified stationary sources of air pollutants. Additionally, the proposed change adds a reporting requirement for the ROP and makes minor administrative changes that support the ROP change.

Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability of occurrence or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

Response: No.

The Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) is concerned with monitoring the effect that plant operations have on the environment for the purpose of protecting the environment and has no effect on any accident postulated in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR).

Accident probabilities or consequences

• are not affected in any way by obtaining an environmental monitoring permit. and reporting required by the EPP.

• The revision of portions of Appendix B of the Operating Licenses will not impact the design or operation of any plant*system or component. No.environmental ,protection requirements established by other federal, state, or local agencies are being reduced by this license amendment request.

' ~ . ..

.*~*.,_:* *' ~.

' >. ~ . ' * * ~.*.. * - ,"\. : * **

~ .'. ~:-. *..' ' ;*,

. *. -r****-, ..

~ - ~ ' ' - ' .' '

• : _;- :' . .~:..

' ' ',. . ... . : . . . ~ . . :,~ .... ': . ~ . *

.. ' -~ . . ~ - - -.

\. *'

Enclosure 2 to AEP-NRC~2018~72 -* * . -.<.,

Pages**-

,_ ... **,, . .,.; .. ,. ' . :~ . -~ ~ .c

- ~*

, Therefore; the proposed changes do not involve a significant .increase in the probability or -

• ...,.* consequences of an accident-previously evaluated.* * ,.

. *~ . ' ': *-.,_.

• Does the proposed change create the.possibility of a new oi.differen{kind of accidentfrom any

• . fJCCident previously evaluated? * -. >- * . _ * -

_ Response: No.

. Obtaining* an e*nvironmental nionitorihg permit* and reporting have no effect:*on *accident, .

initiation. -:The revision to portions of Appendix 8' of the Operating Licenses will not impact *-

the design or operation of any plant system or ~omponent. There will be no impact upon the type or amount of a~y effluents released from CNP .. * '. - *.;*

• Therefo-re, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a 11ew or, different kind of accident from* any accident previously evaluated. * *

• Does the proposed change involve. a significant reduction in a *margin of safety?

Response: No. .

The change to add permit and reporting requirements and other administrative revisions has

- no impact on margin of safety. Environmental evaluations will continue to be performed, when* necessary, on changes to* plant design or operations to -assess the effect

• on environmental protection.

• Therefore; the proposed changes do not involve

,-* ' ~ .

a significant reduction i-n a. margin. of safety.

• 5.2

• Applicable Regulatory Requirements/Criteria

. The proposed changes have been evaluated to determine* whether applicable regulations and requirements continue to be met CNP has determined that the proposed changes do.

not require an exemption or relief from any regulatory requirements, other than stated in the

• operating Licenses, and do not affect conformance with- any plant-specific design criteria differently than described in the UFSAR. The regulatory basis for the establishment of the

- EPP was 10 CFR 50.36b, "Environmental conditions."

• This regulation requires that any obligations in* the* environmental area identified by *the Nuclear *Regulatory* Commission during their Operating License review be included in an attachment to the license._ The conditions are. derived from .information contained

• in the: environmental report .anc;:l any

• supplements to the environmental report submitted, as required . by 10 CFR 51.50 .

~ *.. , .-* . --~-~ .. '

. --~-. : -*:*  :.

. . :. ' :.: :',, -~ ,. .

.'\..* ' ' * .', l. I  ;* '!

' ~.' ..

,**1:**.::,*.***

• ,':-;*.:,:. *_:'<:... Enclosure 2/,?:_AEP-NR~>-2018-7i* . ~; .. . ._+*.-: '

,_'. ,7-1 .

and 51.53. CNP remains bound by other federal,

• state, and local agency e*iwironmental

_protection regulations.:. None of these regulatory requirements*-will be affected by modifying

• Appendix *. ..

B of the '

Operating Licenses.

6.0 ,ENVIRONMENTAL .CONSIDERATIONS .

• This submittal changes the current EPP. with respect to State of Mlchigan ROP requirements,*

• .. and related reporting requirements.* The *proposed amendments_ do not involve: *

• (i)

• Asignificant hazards consideration, .. : * * ; *. , * .

(ii) A significant change in- the types of or significant increase in the amounts of.any -

• effluents that may be released offsite, or .. ** . *

(iii) A significant increase in individu.al or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.

• Accordingly, the proposed amendments meet the eligibility criterion for categorical exclusion set forth ih 10 CFR 51.22(c)(1 O); "Criterion for categorical exdusion; identification of licensing and regulatory actions eligible for categorical exclusion or *otherwise not requiring environmental

. review."

Therefore, in accordance with 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement,. or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with this proposed amendment.

7.0 REFERENCES

None .

. **:.;*: :*.:,t' *, , _.:.. *=\. . ,'*,*,-.

'.'*,\

\ *--_'. ,,

• ,r: *. ,;* .,

.,_ '~*-*-

• • '";~ . '

. .- . .,-.* *.*\ *_ ...:

Enclos~re. 3. to AEP-NRC-2018-72

.*; /.

DONALD C.::coQK NUCLEAR PLANT OPERATING LICENSES.DP.R-58 AND DPR-7'.4, APPENDIX B, ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS, PART II/

. NON-RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN (Marked to Show the. Proposed .Ch~nges)

APPENDIX B ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN DONALD C. COOK NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1 and 2 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN (NON-RADIOLOGICAL)

TABLE OF CONTENTS lnse~

j3.4 Reporting Related to. the Renewable Operating Permit. _ 3-2 Section 1.0 Objectives of the Environmental Protecti n Plan 1-1 2.0 Environmental Protection Issues 2-1 2.1 Aquatic Issues 2-1 2.2 Terrestrial Issues 2-1 3.0 Consistency Requirements 3-1 3.1 Plant Design and Operation 3-1 3.2 Reporting Related to the NPDES ermits and State Certification 3-2 3.3 Changes Required for Complianc with Other Environmental Regulations 3-2 4.0 Environmental Conditions 4-1 4.1 Unusual or Important Environmental Events 4-1 4.2 Environmental Monitoring 4-1 5.0 Administrative Procedures 5-1 5.1 Review and Audit 5-1 5.2 Records Retention . 5-1 5.3 Changes in Environmental Protection Plan 5-1 5.4 Plant Reporting Requirements 5-1 Amendment Nos.~ & ~ .

APPENDIX 8 insert ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN Requirements remaining in the ETS were incorporated into this EPP and subsequently amended.

Requirements in effect are:

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ISSUES In the FES Operating License dated August 1973, the Staff considered the

• environmental impacts associated with the operation of the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant (CNP). Certain environmental issues were identified which* required study or license conditions to resolve and to assure adequate protection of the environment. The Appendix B Environmental Techn_icc!I Specifications (ETS) accompanying the licens~

• ncluded monitoring programs and other requirements to permit resolution of the issues.

P-rior to issuaRS....Q...Gf this EPP-, tho roqu!remeRts-re-ff'.a+Ring in the ETS * ~

2.1 Aquatic Issues Effluent limitations and monitoring requirements are contained in the effective NPDES or Groundwater permits issued by the federal or state permitting authority. The NRC will rely on these agencies for regulation of these matters as they involve water quality and aquatic biota.

2.2 Terrestrial Issues

""'(--:fhe terrestria.Lissue is t-h us. f herbicide~/ such are used for maintenance of transmission rights-of- c . requir~ts with regard to this terrestrial issue are specified in Subsect~4.2.

~!li1Sell'i.1:

,shall be contr~lled consistent with I\

• Iregulatory requirements The operation of specified stationary sources of air pollutants requires that Indiana Michigan Power Company obtain a Renewable Operating Permit (ROP) pursuant to Title V _of the _Jederal Clean Air Act of 1990 and Michigan's Administrative Rules_ for _Air Pollution Control pursuant to Section 5506(1) of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, Act 451 of 1994. Specified stationary sources subject to the ROP program are defined by the applicable Administrative Rule and include sources such as: diesel generators, stationary engine-driven pumps, and building heating boilers.

Related effluent monitoring and limitations are contained in the effective ROP (Title V

. Permit) issued by the permitting authority.

2-1 Amendment Nos. ~ & ~a

APPENDIX 8 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN 3.2 Reporting Related to the NPDES Permits and State Certifications The NRC shall be provided with a copy of the current NPDES permit or state certification within 30 days of approval. Changes to the NPDES permit or state certification shall be reported to the NRC within 30 days of the date the change is approved.

3.3 Changes Required for Compliance with Other Environmental Regulations Changes in plant design or operation and performance of tests or experiments that are either regulated or mandated by other federal, state, or local environmental regulations are not subject to the requirements of Section 3.1.

However, if any environmental impacts of a change are not evaluated under other federal, state, or local environmental regulations, then those impacts are subject to the requirements of Section 3.1.

.Insert 13.4 Reporting Related to the Renewable Operating Permit.

I Insert The NRC shall be provided with a copy of the current ROP within 30 days of approval.

3-2 Amendment Nos. 342- & 298