ML18100A533

Application for Amends to Licenses DPR-70 & DPR-75,modifying Section 4.2.1, Aquatic Monitoring, of Environ Protection Plan

ML18100A533
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	08/06/1993
From:	Public Service Enterprise Group
To:
Shared Package
ML18100A534	List: ML18100A533 ML18100A535
References
LCR-93-23, NLR-N93114, NUDOCS 9308130072
Download: ML18100A533 (6)

Text

Public Service Electric and Gas Company Joseph J. Hagan Public Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 609-339-1200 Vice President

• Nuclear Operations AUG 0 6 1993 NLR-N93114 LCR 93-23 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Gentlemen:

LICENSE AMENDMENT APPLICATION CHANGES TO SECTION 4.2.1 "AQUATIC MONITORING" OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-70 AND DPR-75 SALEM GENERATING STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NO'S. 50-272 AND 50-311 This letter submits an application for amendment to Appendix B of Facility Operating License DPR-70 and DPR-75 for Salem Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, and is being filed in accordance with 10CFR50.90. The proposed changes modify Section 4.2.1, "Aquatic Monitoring", of the Environmental Protection Plan. Attachment 1 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. Attachments 2 and 3 contain marked up Appendix B pages which reflect the proposed changes for Units 1 and 2 respectively.

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 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,

~l 1 I Affidavit Attachments (3)

. 130012 i ~g~e1 ~886fZ~&~~~k2 D

AUG 06 1993 Document Control Desk 2 NLR-N93114 C Mr. T. T. Martin, Administrator - Region I U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Mr. J. C. Stone, Licensing Project Manager U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Mr. s. Barr (S09)

USNRC Senior Resident Inspector (Acting)

Mr. K. Tosch, Manager IV NJ Department of Environmental Protection Division of Environmental Quality Bureau of Nuclear Engineering CN 415 Trenton, NJ 08625

NUCLEAR LICENSING WORK ~NDARD LICEN I CHANGE REQUESTS AND LICE~E AMENDMENTS NUCLEAR DEPARTMENT LICENSE CHANGE REQUEST APPROVAL FORM unit._____sa_1_e_m_u_ni_*t_s_1_a_n_d_2____________________________________________~

Initiating Department Licensing & Regulation

---

~

Ini tia:ting Dept Sponsor Engineer Jennifer Griffin Nuclear Licensing Sponsor Engineer Howard Onorato

---

~---------------

Tech Spec Numbers~~s_e_ct_i_on_**_:4_.2_._1_o_f_A~pp_e_nd_i_x_B____________________________

Tech Spec Title/Subject Appendix B, "Environmental Protection Plan", Section 4.2.1 - .;:t.<<1';*:,~ :,_1:;-

Aquatic Monitoring DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE:

See Attached Nuclear Licensing Date -/tJAs Initiating Dept Sponsor.....,:~~~':t::.::::._~~"=t;...tt:;:.::::_-.,.,, Date 7/t2/13

• Initiating Dept Mana Date J /;-tit J Manager - OSR~=-~~ ~ .......:;...._--~:y_-=--=---------------- Date B/~/'ii.

Date ,JJ/V"/J.J Mtg #'?.?-.??.? Date ~?-.?

Date e--/9-?

L May 29, 1992 Page 10 of 13 Rev. o

REF: NLR-N93114 LCR 93-23 STATE OF NEW JERSEY SS.

COUNTY OF SALEM J. J. Hagan, being duly sworn according to law deposes 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 Salem Generating Station are true to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.

Subscribed and Sworn~o before m:

this {..fJ bl'- day of tJd t;fu+/- , 1993

~.

~1414t,J1ff: Cb~

Notary Publi~~ New Jersey My Commission expires on Pr 21, 1998

LICENSE .AMENr.MENT APPLICATION ClIANGES 'IO SECI'ION 4. 2 .1 "AQUATIC K>NI'IORING11 OF 'IllE ENVIRONMENrAL PROl'.ECI'ION PIAN FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-70 AND DPR-75 SAUM GENERATlNG STAT.ION, UNIT'S 1 AND 2 NIR-N93114 IX>CKEI' NO Is. 50-272 AND 5~311 UR 93-23 I. Description of the Proposed Cl1ame The proposed changes modify Section 4.2.1, "Aquatic Monitoring", in Appendix B of the Salem, Units 1 and 2, Facility Operating Licenses (Environmental Protection Plan) as shown in the attached marked up copy.

II. Reason for the Proposed Cllanc.Je Under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, a Section*7 consultation :was reopened to discuss the occurrence of impinged sea turtles on the Salem Generating station circulating water trash bars. On January 2, 1991, following discussions including the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the NRC, and PSE&G, the NMFS issued a biological opinion. The biological opinion included an incidental take statement (ITS) 'Which outlined specific measures that the NMFS felt PSE&G should take to facilitate observance and rescue of impinged sea turtles at the Salem and Hope Creek intake structures. The measures outlined in the ITS were subsequently incorporated into the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP). as requested by the NRC (Amendment Nos. 129 and 108 for Units 1 and 2 respectively). On May 14, 1993, the NMFS issued a revised Section 7, consultation, biological opinion 'Which included a revised ITS. The NRC issued the dOCl.Ililent to PSE&G on June 2, 1993 with a request for PSE&G to make appropriate changes to the Salem 1 and 2, Technical Specifications.

m. Justification for the Proposed Cllanc.Je The proposed changes to the Salem 1 and 2 operating licenses are administrative in nature and would in no way affect plant operation or the accident analyses. As mentioned above in Section II, the NRC *has requested that the EPP be amended to reflect the latest version of the ITS.

Page 1 of 2 LCR 93-23 Changes to Section 4.2.1 of the EPP NLR-N93114 IV. Significant Hazards Consideration Evaluation PSE&G has, pursuant to 10 CFR 50. 92, reviewed the proposed amendment to detennine whether our request involves a significant hazards consideration. We have detennined that operation of the Salem Units 1 and 2, in accordance with the proposed changes:

1. Will not. involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously eValuated.

'!he proposed changes.would increase the time frame and, after a station related mortality, the frequency of sea turtle monitoring and reporting requirements in.the.Envirornnental Protection Plan (Appendi.X B to the facility operating license). '!he changes are administrative in nature and would in no way affect the initial

. conditions, assumptions, or conclusions of the Salem Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, accident analyses. In addition, the proposed changes would not affect the operation or perfonnance of any equipment assumed in the accident analyses. Based on the above infonnation, .we*conclude that the proposed changes would not significantly increase the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. *

2. Will not create the possibility of a new or different kirxi of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

'!he proposed changes are administrative in nature and would in no way illlpact or alter the configuration or operation of the facilities and would create no new modes of operation. We therefore conclude that the proposed changes would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident.

3. Will not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

As indicated in the discussion of Criterion 1, the changes are administrative in nature and would in no way affect plant or equipment operation or the accident analyses~ We therefore conclude that the proposed changes would not result in a significant reduction in a margin of safety. *

v. Conclusion Based on the preceding discussion,. PSE&G has concluded that the proposed changes to the Operating License Specification$ do not involve a significant hazards consideration insofar as the changes: (i) do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, (ii) do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, and (iii) do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

Page 2 of 2