02-30999. TXU Generation Company, LP; Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-87 and NPF-89, issued to TXU Generation Company, LP, for operation of Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES), Units 1 and 2, respectively. CPSES, Units 1 and 2, are located in Somerville and Hood Counties, Texas. Therefore, as required by Section 51.21, the NRC is issuing this environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

The proposed action would change the CPSES Facility Operating Licenses as follows: Section 2.C.(4)(b) would be changed to be consistent with the license conditions stated in the NRC Order and Safety Evaluation dated December 21, 2001, which approved the direct transfer of ownership interest and operating authority for CPSES to TXU Generation Company LP; Section 2.E which requires reporting any violations of the requirements contained in Section 2.C of the licenses would be deleted. Additionally, Technical Specification Table 5.5-2 “Steam Generator Tube Inspection,” Table 5.5-3, “Steam Generator Repaired Tube Inspection for Unit 1 Only,” and Section 5.6.10, “Steam Generator Tube Inspection Report,” would be revised to delete the requirement to notify the NRC pursuant to 10 CFR 50.72(b)(2) if the steam generator tube inspection results are in a C-3 classification.

The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application dated July 25, 2002.

The Need for the Proposed Action

The proposed action is needed to make the facility operating licenses consistent with the license conditions stated in the NRC Order and Safety Evaluation dated December 21, 2001, and to delete unnecessary reporting requirements.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that the proposed amendments are administrative in nature.

The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released off site, and there is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

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

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the “no-action” alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

The action does not involve the use of any different resource than those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of CPSES, Units 1 and 2, dated September 1981.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

On September 24, 2002, the staff consulted with the Texas State official, Mr. Arthur 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

On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC 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 letter dated July 25, 2002. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/​reading-rm/​adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to [e-mail].

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of November, 2002.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Robert A. Gramm,

Chief, Section 1, Project Directorate IV, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.