ML20045G821
| ML20045G821 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 07/07/1993 |
| From: | Hagan J Public Service Enterprise Group |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20045G822 | List: |
| References | |
| LCR-93-15, NLR-N93095, NUDOCS 9307160032 | |
| Download: ML20045G821 (5) | |
Text
__
Public Seixe Dectoc and Gas owmany Joseph J. Hagan Public Sennce Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 609-339-1200 Vice President - Nuclear Operanons JUL 0 71993 NLR-N93095 LCR 93-15 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Gentlemen:
LICENSE AMENDMENT APPLICATION REMOVAL OF PAGES 4-la AND 4-lb FROM ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-57 HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION DOCKET NO. 50-354 This letter submits an application for amendment to Appendix B of Facility Operating License NPF-57 for the Hope Creek Generating Station and is being filed in accordance with 10CFR50.90.
The proposed changes remove Pages 4-la and 4-lb of Section 4.2.1,
" Aquatic Monitoring", from the Environmental Protection Plan. contains a detailed description of and justification for the proposed change.
Based upon the justification provided, PSE&G believes that the proposed change does not involve a significant hazards consideration pursuant to 10CFR50.92. contains marked up Appendix B pages which reflect the proposed change.
Pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.91(b) (1), a copy of this submittal has been sent to the State of New Jersey as i
indicated below.
Upon NRC approval, please issue a license amendment which will be effective upon issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days of issuance.
This latitude permits appropriate procedural modifications necessary to implement the proposed changes.
Should you have any questions or comments on this submittal, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely, i
Affidavit Attachments (2) 19011A 9307160032 930707 e-d/
DR ADOCK 05000354 fjd PDR O
'l l/g
JUL 0 71993 Document Control Desk 2
NLR-N93095 C
Mr.
T.-T.
Martin, Administrator - Region I U.
S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Mr.
S.
Dembek, Licensing Project Manager U.
S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North 2
11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Mr.
T. P. Johnson (SO9)
USNRC Senior Resident Inspector Mr.
K. Tosch, Chief NJ Department of Environmental Protection Division of Environmental Quality Bureau of Nuclear Engineering CN 415 Trenton, NJ 08625 W
Wm W
+
REF: NLR-N93095 LCR 93-15 STATE OF NEW JERSEY
)
)
SS.
COUNTY OF SALEM
)
J.
J. Hagan, being duly sworn according to law dep.?,es and says:
I am Vice President - Nuclear Operations of Public Service Electric and Gas Company, and as such, I find the matters set forth in the above referenced letter concerning the Hope Creek Generating Station are true to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.
l y_
Subscribed and Sworn to before me this 9N day of LLbC/
1993 O
C
'\\LM1JLtd 4 FI A di t A NotaryPubli'cbfNewJersey KIMBERLY JO BROWN l
NOTARY Putt!C OF NEWJERSEY My Cennission Erpires Apri 21,1998 My commission expires on l
1 l
F l,
l l'
1
,s
ATTAQEDTT 1 Pf010GED QWGES 70 THE DWDUMENIAL PEDIECTIm PIAN LIO2EE AMDDEff APPLICATION RIMNAL OF PAGES 4-la AND 4-lb HM HNDUEDflAL PB071r. tim PIAN IDPE GEEK GDIERATIIG STATIN FN'TT PIY OPERATDC LICE 2EE NPF-57 NIR-N93095 DOCKET NO. 50-354 IIR 93-15 I.
Deccription of the FmxcxA 01ame The proposed change removes Pages 4-la ard 4-lb of Section 4.2.1,
" Aquatic Monitorirg", frun Appendix B of the Hope Creek Facility Operating License (Environmental Protection Plan).
II.
Reason for the Proposed Chame Under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, a Section 7 consultation was reopened to discuss the occurrence of impirged sea turtles on the Salem Generatirg Station circulating water trash bars. On January 2, 1991, followirg discussions includirs the National Marine Fisheries Service (IMFS), the NRC, and PSE&G, the IMFS issued a biological opinion. The biological opinion included an incidental take statement (TIS) which outlined specific measures that the INFS felt PSE&G should take to facilitate observance and rescue of inpinged sea turtles at the Salem and Hope Creek intake structures. The measures outlined in the ITS were subcoquently incorporated into the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) as requested by the NRC (Amendment 43). On August 4, 1992, the IEFS issued a revised biological opinion ta which PSE&G made comments via the NRC.
i On February 18, 1993, the NRC issued a response to PSE&G's cnuments concurring that the August 4,1992 ITS relieves Hope Creek frun the monitoring requirement contained in Appendix B of the Hope Creek license.
On June 2,1993 the NRC issued to PSE&G a revision to the August 4,1992 biological opinion. The June 2, 1993 revision states that "besides normal cleanirgs, monitoring Hope Creek is no larger rwm3y".
i j
III. Justification for the Proposed 01ame The proposed change to the Hope Creek operating license is administrative in naturn ard would in no way affect plant operation or safety. As j
indicated in Section II above, the NRC has concurred that the revised ITS issued by IMFS has relieved Hope Creek of the previously imposed nonitoring requirements.
Page 1 of 2 i
l Nttachnant1 LCR 93-15 Removal of Pages 4-la and 4-lb from the EPP NLR-N93095 IV.
Sjanificant Hazards Cbmideration Evaluaticn PSE&G has, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.92, reviewed the proposed amendment to determine whether our request involves a significant hazards consideration. We have detennined that operation of the Ikape Creek Generating Station in accordance with the proposed charges:
1.
Will not involve a significant increase in the probability or u m ijoences of an accident previously evaluated.
'Ihe proposed change would remove the sea turtle monitoring arx1 reportirg requirements frun the EnviivuueL21 Protection Plan (Appendix B to the facility operatirq license). 'Ihe change is administrative in nature and would in no way affect the initial conditions, assumptions, or conclusions of the Hcpe Creek accident I.
analyses. In addition, the proposed change would not affect the operation or performance of any equipment a=wd in the acx:ident analyses. Based on the above inform tion, we conclude that the proposed change would not significantly increase the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2.
Will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of nmirinnt from any accident previously evaluated.
'Ihe proposed change is administrative in nature and would in no way impact or alter the configuration or operation of the facility and would create no new modes of operation. We therefore conclude that the proposeu changes would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident.
3.
Will rot involve a significant rwhrtion in a margin of safety.
As indicated in the discussion of Criterion 1, the change is administrative in nature and would in no way affect plant or equipment operation or the accident analyses. We therefore conclude that the proposed change would not result in a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
V.
Omolusion Bascr1 on the precedirq discussion, PSE&G has concluded that the proposed i
charge to the operating License specifications does not involve a l
significant hazards consideration insofar as the change: (i) does not I
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, (ii) does not create the possibility of a new or different kirri of accident from any accident previously evaluated, and (iii) does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Page 2 of 2 t
__-_;