View source for TXX-9111, Application for Amend to License NPF-87,deleting Incorrect 10CFR51.5(b)(2) Ref in Environ Protection Plan Section 3.1, Plant Design & Operation

{{Adams
| number = ML20081K435
| issue date = 06/24/1991
| title = Application for Amend to License NPF-87,deleting Incorrect 10CFR51.5(b)(2) Ref in Environ Protection Plan Section 3.1, Plant Design & Operation
| author name = Cahill W
| author affiliation = TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC)
| addressee name = 
| addressee affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
| docket = 05000445
| license number = 
| contact person = 
| document report number = TXX-91114, NUDOCS 9106270207
| document type = OPERATING LICENSES-APPLIATION TO AMEND-RENEW EXISTING, TEXT-LICENSE APPLICATIONS &amp; PERMITS
| page count = 5
| project = 
| stage = Request
}}

=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:__      . . . . _ . . . . _ . . . . _ . _ . . . . . _ _ . _ _ .
7
                                                     '*TO
                                                     ~
_           ;          Log # TXX 91114 File # 235 Ref. # 10CFR50.90 TUEl EC7RIC                       10CrR50.91 10CFR50.92 Milliam J. ( shlit. Jr.
i errunit i A e hrudent June 24, 1991 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C.            20555 S'J DJ E CT :      COMANCHE PCAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION (CPSES), Unit 1 DOCKET NO. 50-445 LICENSE AMENDMENT RE0 VEST (OL 91-001), CORRECTION TO THL UNIT 1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN (EPP)
SECTION 3,1 Gentlemen:
Pursuant to 10CFR50.90, Texas Utilities Electric Company (TV Electric) hereby requests an amendment to its Operating License No. NPF-87 by incorporating the attached proposed change to the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) for Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES) Unit 1.
The proposed change deletes the incorrect Code of Federal Regulation reference
[i.e, 10CFR Part 51.5(b)(2)) as specified in EPP Section 3.1                           Plant Design and Operation.
TV Electric has reviewed the attached proposed amendment pursuant to 10CFR50.92 and determined that it does not involve a significant hazards consideration.
The basis for this determination is provided in Attachment 2.
The CPSES Station Operation Review Committee (50RC) and Operations Review Committee (ORC) have reviewed and approved the proposed change.
il v
nFm!? Me..-
4- 8 ,,s oi  s1, - i.,'' s> o ll... , - >>>e>
L,h                 l i
P                         F I!R

i TXX-91114 Page 2 of 2 In accordance with 10CFR50.91(b). TV Electric is providing the State of Texas a copy of this proposed amendment.
Sincerely, 4William 1 4J. h$  /?
ll, Jr. ::7 C
RSB/gj Attachments 1.                                         Affidavit
: 2.                                 Proposed Environmental Protection Plan change and Significant Hazards Consideration Evaluation (10CFR50.92),
c - Mr. R. D. Hartin Region IV Resident inspectors. CPSES (3)
Mr. J. W. Clifford, Project Manager U.S. NRC Office of NRR Washington, D.C. 20555 D. K. Locker Bureau of Radiation Control Texas Department of Health 1100 West 49th Street Austin. Texas 78704

Attachment I to TXX-91114 Page 1 of 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NVCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION in the Matter of                         )
                                               )
Texas Utilities Electric Company         )             Docket No. 50 445
                                               )
(Comanche Peak Steam Electric            )
Station, Unit 1)
A F F 10 A,y,ll William J. Cahill, Jr. being duly sworn, hereby deposes and says that he is Executive Vice President. Nuclear of TV Electric, that he is duly authorized to sign and file with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission the attached proposed change to the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Unit 1 Environmental Protection Plan, Section 3.1; that he is familiar with the content thereof; and that the matters set forth therein are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief.
WilliamJ. Cat /11,Jr.
Executive Vice President Nuclear STATE OF TEXAS         )
                               )
COUNTY OF DALLAS        )
Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, on this            24th day of June            ,
1991, v' ,va &&~
Notary Public

Attachment 2 to TXX-91114
    * .Page 1 of 2 PROPOSED CPSES UNIT 1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN CHANGE I. BACKGROUND Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES) Unit 1 Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) Section 3.1, Plant Design and Operation, currently states that "A proposed change, test, or experiment shall be deemed to involve an unreviewed environmental question if it concerns:      (1) a matter which may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the FES-OL, in environmental impact appraisals, or in any decisions of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; or (2) a significant change in effluents or power level (in accordance with 10 CFR Part $1.5(b)(2)]: or (3) a matter, not previously reviewed and evaluated in the documents specified in (1) of this Subsection, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact."
As revised by 49FR9381, dated March 12, 1984, the reference to 10CFR51.5(b)(2) had been deleted and is no longer a valid Code of Federal Regulations reference and should be deleted f rom the stated paragraph.
: 11. DESCRIPTION AND DETAILED DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED EPP CHANGE REQUEST lt is proposed to revise the CPSES Unit 1 EPP Section 3.1 to delete "[in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51.5(b)(2)]." This change is consistent with the current 10CFR51.5 and will not change the intent of the paragraph.
111. SAFETY EVALUATION The proposed change deletes an inappropriate reference to 10CFR51.
IV. NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION TU Electric has evaluated the no significant hazards consideration involved with the proposed changes by focusing on the criteria set forth in 10CFR50.92(c) as discussed below:
Does the proposed change:
: 1. Involve a significant increase in the probability of an accident previously evaluated.
The proposed change does not alter any of the assumptions used in the safety analysis for CPSES Unit 1. The change provides for the deletion of a reference which no longer exists in 100FR51. but does not alter the intent of the paragraph to which the reference applied.
Therefore, the proposed EPP change has no effect on the probability or consequences of accidents previously evaluated for CPSES Unit 1.

Attachment 2 to TXX-91114       .
    - Page 2 of 2 PROPOSED CPSES UNIT 1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN CHANGE
: 2. Create the possibility of a new or different Lind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
The proposed change updates the EPP to the current 10CFR51.5 and does not create a new mode for failure or alter the probability of failure of an component or system for CPSES Unit 1.
: 3. Involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety Specific criteria for evaluating a proposed change, test, or experiment to determine if an unreviewed environmental question txists remains intact in the EPP,                 This change would only remove an 11 correct ref erence to 10CF R51.L(b)(2).             This change, however, does not lessen the requirements provided in the EPP for evaluating proposr a changes, tests, or experiments.
In addition, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has provided the guidance concerning the application of the standards f or determining whether a significar.t hazards consideration exists by providing certain examples (51 FR 751, March 6,1986) of amendments that are considered not likely to involve significant hazards consideration.                  Example (vii) relates to a change to conform a license to changes in the regulations, where the license change results in very minor changes to facility operations clearly in keeping with the regulations, in this case, the proposed change described above is similar to example (vii) in that the deletion of the inappropriate regulation reference will bring the EPP into conformity with the current regulations.
Therefore, based on the above evaluations, TV Electric concludes that the activities associated with the above described change satisfies the no significant hazards consideration standards of 10CFR50.92(c) and, accordingly, a no significant hazards consideration finding is justified.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSE0VENCES TV Electric has evaluated the proposed changes and has determined that the changes do not involve (i) a significant hazards consideration, (ii) a significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite, or (iii) a significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
Accordingly, the proposed changes meet the eligibility criterion for categorical exclusion set f orth in 10CFR51.22(c)(0).                 Therefore, pursuant to 10CFR51,22(b). an environmental assessmeat of the proposed changes is not required.
__-___-__ - _}}