ML20210J813

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Environ Assessment & Finding of No Significant Impact Re Proposed Action to Change Licenses to Reflect Change of Name of CPSES Licensee from Texas Utilities Electric Co
ML20210J813
Person / Time
Site: Comanche Peak  Luminant icon.png
Issue date: 08/02/1999
From: Gramm R
NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20210J817 List:
References
NUDOCS 9908050113
Download: ML20210J813 (3)


Text

I' 7590-01-P UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY DOCKET NOS 50-445 AND 50-446

.l COMANCHE PEAK STEAM Fl FCTRIC 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 license amendments to Facility Operating Licenses Nos. NPF-87 and NPF-89, issued to Texas Utilities Electric Company (TU Electric, or the licensee), for operation of the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES), Units 1 and 2, located in Somervell County, Texas.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Proposed Action:

The proposed action would change the licenses to reflect the change of the name of the CPSES licensee from " Texas Utilities Electric Company."

The Need for the Prooosed Action:

The proposed action is needed to accurately reflect the legal name cf tho licensee. The CPSE3 licensee has already changed its name for business purposes.

EnvironmentalImoacts of the Prooosed Action:

The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed act{on and concludes that the proposed action is solely administrative in nature and will not increase the probability or consequences of accidents, no channes are being made in the types of any effluents that may be release'd off site, and there is no significant increase in occupational or 9908050113 990802 DR ADOCK 05000445 PDR

f; 2

public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed action does not involve l

l any historic sites. It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

Altematives to the Proposed Action:

As an attemative to the propossd action, the staff considered denial of the proposed j

action (i.e., the "no-action" alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmentalimpacts. The environmentalimpacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar.

l Alternative Use of Resources:

This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for CPSES, Units 1 and 2.

l Aoencies and Persons Consulted:

In accordance with its stated policy, on June 24,1999, the staff consulted with the Texas State official, Arthur C. Tate, of the Texas Department of Health, Bureau of Radiation Control, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments.

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT l

On the basis of the environmental assessment, the Commission concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.

L I

1 3

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 application dated May 14,1999, 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 University of Texas at Arlington Library,702 College, P.O. Box 19497, Arlington, Texas.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of August,1999.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION h

Robert A. Gramm, Chief, Section 1 Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation f