Luminant Generation Company LLC; Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2; Draft Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Related to the Proposed License Amendment To Increase the Maximum Reactor Power Level, 23503-23505 [E8-9456]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 84 / Wednesday, April 30, 2008 / Notices The NRC Clearance Officer is Margaret A. Janney, (301) 415–7245. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of April, 2008. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Gregory Trussell, Acting NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information Services. [FR Doc. E8–9449 Filed 4–29–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment Request U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of information collection and solicitation of public comment. rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES AGENCY: SUMMARY: The NRC has recently submitted to OMB for review the following proposal for the collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The NRC published a Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period on this information collection on January 28, 2008. 1. Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: Extension. 2. The title of the information collection: 10 CFR Part 75—Safeguards on Nuclear Material, Implementation of US/IAEA Agreement. 3. Current OMB approval number: OMB 3150–0055. 4. The form number if applicable: Not applicable. 5. How often the collection is required: Reporting is done when specified events occur. Recordkeeping for nuclear material accounting and control information is done in accordance with specific instructions. 6. Who will be required or asked to report: Licensees of facilities on the U.S. eligible list who have been selected by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for reporting or recordkeeping activities. 7. An estimate of the number of annual responses: 8 (2 responses for reporting + 6 recordkeepers). 8. The estimated number of annual respondents: Six, two of which perform both reporting and recordkeeping and VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:09 Apr 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 four of which perform recordkeeping only. 9. An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to complete the requirement or request: 2,400 (6 Respondents x 400 hours per response). 10. Abstract: 10 CFR Part 75 requires selected licensees to permit inspections by IAEA representatives, give immediate notice to the NRC in specified situations involving the possibility of loss of nuclear material, and give notice for imports and exports of specified amounts of nuclear material. These licensees will also follow written material accounting and control procedures, although actual reporting of transfer and material balance records to the IAEA will be done through the U. S. State system (Nuclear Materials Management and Safeguards System, collected under OMB clearance numbers 3150–0003, 3150–0004, 3150–0057, and 3150– 0058.) The NRC needs this information to implement its responsibilities under the US/IAEA agreement. A copy of the final supporting statement may be viewed free of charge at the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room O–1 F21, Rockville, MD 20852. OMB clearance requests are available at the NRC worldwide Web site: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/ doc-comment/omb/index.html. The document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 days after the signature date of this notice. Comments and questions should be directed to the OMB reviewer listed below by May 30, 2008. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given to comments received after this date. Nathan J. Frey, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150–0055), NEOB–10202, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. Comments can also be e-mailed to Nathan_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov or submitted by telephone at (202) 395– 7345. The NRC Clearance Officer is Margaret A. Janney, (301) 415–7245. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of April. 2008. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Gregory Trussell, Acting NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information Services. [FR Doc. E8–9452 Filed 4–29–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 23503 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50–445 and 50–446] Luminant Generation Company LLC; Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2; Draft Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Related to the Proposed License Amendment To Increase the Maximum Reactor Power Level U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). AGENCY: Notice of opportunity for public comment. ACTION: SUMMARY: The NRC has prepared a Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) as its evaluation of a request by the TXU Generation Company LP (subsequently renamed Luminant Generation Company LLC, the licensee), for a license amendment to increase the maximum thermal power at the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES), Units 1 and 2, from 3458 megawatts thermal (MWt) to 3612 MWt at each unit. The NRC staff did not identify any significant impact from the information provided in the licensee’s stretch power uprate (SPU) application for CPSES, Units 1 and 2 or from the NRC staff’s independent review; therefore, the NRC staff is documenting its environmental review in a draft EA. The draft EA and Finding of No Significant Impact are being published in the Federal Register with a 30-day public comment period. Environmental Assessment The NRC is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF–87 and NPF–89, issued to Luminant Generation Company LLC, for operation of the CPSES, Units 1 and 2, located in Somervell County, Texas. Therefore, consistent with Section 51.21 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), the NRC is issuing this draft EA and finding of no significant impact. Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action would revise the CPSES, Units 1 and 2 operating licenses and technical specifications (TSs) to increase the licensed rated power by 4.5 percent from 3458 MWt to 3612 MWt. The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee’s application dated August 28, 2007, as supplemented by letters dated October 24, 2007, and January 10, 29, 31, February 21, 26, 28, and March 6, 2008. E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM 30APN1 23504 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 84 / Wednesday, April 30, 2008 / Notices The Need for the Proposed Action The proposed action permits an increase in the licensed core thermal power from 3458 MWt to 3612 MWt for the CPSES, Units 1 and 2, providing the flexibility to obtain a higher electrical output from the CPSES, Units 1 and 2. rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The licensee has submitted an environmental evaluation supporting the proposed SPU and provided a summary of its conclusions concerning the radiological and non-radiological environmental impacts of the proposed action. Radiological Impacts The licensee evaluated the impacts of the proposed SPU on radioactive liquid waste production, processing, discharge into the environment, resultant dose to members of the public, and impact to Squaw Creek Reservoir (SCR). There will be an increase (approximately 6.5 percent for long-lived activity) in the equilibrium radioactivity in the reactor coolant, which in turn will result in a maximum increase of 6.5 percent in the radioactivity content of the liquid releases since input activities are based on long-term reactor coolant activity. Tritium levels are also expected to increase by 6.5 percent in the discharged liquid. This will result in increased aqueous tritium concentrations in the SCR. The evaluation shows that even with the small increase in the radioactivity being discharged into the environment, the projected dose to the maximally exposed member of the public, while slightly increased, will remain well below the As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) criteria in Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50. Also, the tritium concentration levels in SCR will remain well below the reporting limits in the CPSES Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), which is based on NRC reporting criteria. The licensee evaluated the impacts of the proposed SPU on gaseous radioactive wastes. Gaseous radioactive wastes are activation gases and fission product radioactive noble gases, which come from radioactive system leakage, process operations including volume control tank (VCT) venting, gases used for tank cover gas, and gases generated in the radiochemistry laboratory. The evaluation shows that the proposed SPU will not significantly increase the inventory of gases normally processed in the gaseous waste management system. This is based on there being no change to plant system functions and no change to the gas volume inputs. VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:09 Apr 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 The activity of radioactive gaseous nuclides present in the waste gas system will increase as a result of the SPU. This is due to the increased levels of gases in the reactor coolant system and the actions performed in the VCT. However, the operation of the waste gas system will not change and will continue to allow for decay of the short-lived radionuclides. Tritium will remain the largest component of the gaseous effluents, the largest contributor being from evaporation from the Spent Fuel Pools. The proposed SPU will result in an increase (approximately 9.5 percent for noble gases, 6.6 percent for 1–131, and 6.5 percent for long-lived activity) in the equilibrium radioactivity in the reactor coolant, which in turn increases the activity in the gaseous waste disposal systems and the activity released into the atmosphere (estimated to increase by 9.5 percent for noble gases, 6.5 percent for particulates including Tritium, and 12.6 percent for iodines). The evaluation shows that even with the small increase in the gaseous radioactivity being discharged into the environment, the projected dose to the maximally exposed member of the public, while slightly increased, will remain well below the ALARA criteria in Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50. While the SPU will slightly increase the activity level of radioactive isotopes in the reactor coolant system and the volume of radioactive liquid generated from leakage and planned drainage, there will only be a minimal effect on the generation of radioactively contaminated sludge and resin solids processed as radwaste. The currently installed radwaste system and its total volume capacity for handling solid radwaste will not be affected. For the long-term operation of the plant with the SPU, the dose to an offsite member of the public from the onsite storage of solid radwaste was estimated to increase by approximately 7.2 percent. This is based on several assumptions: (1) The current radwaste decays and its dose contribution decreases; (2) the stored radwaste is routinely moved offsite for disposal; (3) the radwaste generated post SPU enters into storage; and (4) the plant capacity factor approaches the target of 1.0. The radiation dose from direct shine is cumulative based on the waste generated and stored onsite from all units over the plant’s lifetime. CPSES ODCM contains the requirements to ensure compliance with the radiation dose limits in 10 CFR Part 20 and the Environmental Protection Agency’s 40 CFR Part 190. Therefore, while a small increase in offsite radiation dose is PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 expected, it will remain within regulatory limits. The radiation exposure to plant workers from the SPU is expected to be kept to a minimum based on the design features at CPSES, Units 1 and 2, and the Radiation Protection Program. The design features include: (1) Shielding, which is provided to reduce levels of radiation; (2) ventilation, which is arranged to control the flow of potentially contaminated air; (3) an installed radiation monitoring system, which is used to measure levels of radiation in potentially occupied areas and measure airborne radioactivity throughout the plant; and (4) respiratory protective equipment, which is used as prescribed by the Radiation Protection Program. The Radiation Protection Program contains procedures for all radiological work performed at CPSES, Units 1 and 2 to ensure doses are maintained ALARA and are in compliance with regulatory limits in 10 CFR Part 20. Non-Radiological Impacts With regard to potential nonradiological impacts of the proposed SPU, the proposed action does not result in any significant changes to land use or water use. The proposed SPU would increase the temperature of water discharged from the plant at the discharge point, Outfall 001, into the SCR by 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) and would increase lake evaporation by approximately 6 acre-feet per year. The expected thermal increase would raise the average daily temperature at Outfall 001 from 95.6 °F to 97.1 °F, which remains well below the daily average temperature of 113 °F and daily maximum temperature of 116 °F specified in CPSES Texas Pollution Discharge Elimination System (TPDES) permit. Because this increase remains well below the facility’s TPDES permit limits, the NRC staff determined that this increase is not significant, and is bounded by previous analysis of thermal discharge as documented in the Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of CPSES, Units 1 and 2 (September 1981). No effects on the aquatic or terrestrial habitat in the vicinity of the plant, or to endangered or threatened species, or to the habitats of endangered or threatened species are expected as a result of the increase in thermal discharge or change in annual lake evaporation. The proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historical or archaeological sites. The plant will be modified by replacing the high-pressure turbines at both units. All proposed plant changes will occur within the existing buildings, E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM 30APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 84 / Wednesday, April 30, 2008 / Notices and no proposed equipment upgrades require any additional equipment that will be visible from outside the existing power station. The proposed action will not change the method of generating electricity or the method of handling any influents from the environment or non-radiological effluents to the environment. Therefore, no changes or different types of non-radiological environmental impacts are expected as a result of the proposed amendment. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. The details of the staff’s safety evaluation will be provided in the amendment that will be issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving the amendment to the facility operating licenses and technical specifications. 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 resources than those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of CPSES, Units 1 and 2, dated September 1981. rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES Agencies and Persons Consulted In accordance with its stated policy, on April 22, 2008, the staff consulted with the Texas State official, Alice Rogers of the Texas Department of Health, 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 application dated August 28, 2007, as supplemented by letters dated October 24, 2007, and January 10, 29, 31, February 21, 26, 28, and March 6, 2008. Publicly available records are accessible electronically via the Agencywide Document Access and Management VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:09 Apr 29, 2008 Jkt 214001 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 send an e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Additionally, 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, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The comment period expires May 30, 2008. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is only able to assure consideration of comments received on or before May 30, 2008. DATES: Submit written comments to Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop T– 6D59, Washington, DC 20555–0001. Written comments may also be delivered to 11545 Rockville Pike, Room T–6D59, Rockville, Maryland 20852 from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays. Copies of written comments received will be electronically available at the NRC’s Public Electronic Reading Room link, http://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/adams.html, on the NRC Web site or at the NRC’s PDR located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. 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 at 1–800–397–4209, or 301–415–4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. ADDRESSES: The NRC is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF–87 (Unit 1) and NPF– 89 (Unit 2) issued to Luminant Generation Company LLC, for the operation of CPSES, Units 1 and 2, located in Somervell County, Texas. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Balwant K. Singal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Mail Stop O–8B1, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001, by telephone at (301) 415–3016, or by email at Balwant.Singal@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of April 2008. PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 23505 For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Balwant K. Singal, Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E8–9456 Filed 4–29–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Sunshine Federal Register Notice AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETINGS: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. DATE: Weeks of April 28, May 5, 12, 19, 26, June 2, 2008. PLACE: Commissioners’ Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. STATUS: Public and Closed. Week of April 28, 2008 Monday, April 28, 2008 9:30 a.m. Briefing on Reactor Materials Issues (Public Meeting). (Contact: Ted Sullivan, 301 415–2796). This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov. Tuesday, April 29, 2008 1:25 p.m. Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (Tentative). a. AmerGen Energy Company, LLC (License Renewal for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station), Docket No. 50–219–LR, Citizens’ Petition for Review of LBP–07–17 and Other Interlocutory Decisions in the Oyster Creek Proceeding (Tentative). b. Oyster Creek, Indian Point, Pilgrim, and Vermont Yankee License Renewals, Docket Nos. 50–219–LR, 50–247–LR, 50–286–LR, 50–293– LR, 50–271–LR, Petition to Suspend Proceedings (Tentative). This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov. 1:30 p.m. Meeting with Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes (Public Meeting). (Contact: Ashley Tull, 918–488–0552. This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov. Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:30 a.m. Briefing on Materials Licensing and Security (Public Meeting). (Contact: Tomas Herrera, 301 415–7138). This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov. E:\FR\FM\30APN1.SGM 30APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 84 (Wednesday, April 30, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23503-23505]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-9456]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446]


Luminant Generation Company LLC; Comanche Peak Steam Electric 
Station, Units 1 and 2; Draft Environmental Assessment and Finding of 
No Significant Impact Related to the Proposed License Amendment To 
Increase the Maximum Reactor Power Level

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

ACTION: Notice of opportunity for public comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The NRC has prepared a Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) as 
its evaluation of a request by the TXU Generation Company LP 
(subsequently renamed Luminant Generation Company LLC, the licensee), 
for a license amendment to increase the maximum thermal power at the 
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES), Units 1 and 2, from 3458 
megawatts thermal (MWt) to 3612 MWt at each unit. The NRC staff did not 
identify any significant impact from the information provided in the 
licensee's stretch power uprate (SPU) application for CPSES, Units 1 
and 2 or from the NRC staff's independent review; therefore, the NRC 
staff is documenting its environmental review in a draft EA. The draft 
EA and Finding of No Significant Impact are being published in the 
Federal Register with a 30-day public comment period.

Environmental Assessment

    The NRC is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility 
Operating License Nos. NPF-87 and NPF-89, issued to Luminant Generation 
Company LLC, for operation of the CPSES, Units 1 and 2, located in 
Somervell County, Texas. Therefore, consistent with Section 51.21 of 
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), the NRC is 
issuing this draft EA and finding of no significant impact.

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would revise the CPSES, Units 1 and 2 operating 
licenses and technical specifications (TSs) to increase the licensed 
rated power by 4.5 percent from 3458 MWt to 3612 MWt. The proposed 
action is in accordance with the licensee's application dated August 
28, 2007, as supplemented by letters dated October 24, 2007, and 
January 10, 29, 31, February 21, 26, 28, and March 6, 2008.

[[Page 23504]]

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action permits an increase in the licensed core 
thermal power from 3458 MWt to 3612 MWt for the CPSES, Units 1 and 2, 
providing the flexibility to obtain a higher electrical output from the 
CPSES, Units 1 and 2.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The licensee has submitted an environmental evaluation supporting 
the proposed SPU and provided a summary of its conclusions concerning 
the radiological and non-radiological environmental impacts of the 
proposed action.

Radiological Impacts

    The licensee evaluated the impacts of the proposed SPU on 
radioactive liquid waste production, processing, discharge into the 
environment, resultant dose to members of the public, and impact to 
Squaw Creek Reservoir (SCR). There will be an increase (approximately 
6.5 percent for long-lived activity) in the equilibrium radioactivity 
in the reactor coolant, which in turn will result in a maximum increase 
of 6.5 percent in the radioactivity content of the liquid releases 
since input activities are based on long-term reactor coolant activity. 
Tritium levels are also expected to increase by 6.5 percent in the 
discharged liquid. This will result in increased aqueous tritium 
concentrations in the SCR.
    The evaluation shows that even with the small increase in the 
radioactivity being discharged into the environment, the projected dose 
to the maximally exposed member of the public, while slightly 
increased, will remain well below the As Low As Reasonably Achievable 
(ALARA) criteria in Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50. Also, the tritium 
concentration levels in SCR will remain well below the reporting limits 
in the CPSES Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), which is based on 
NRC reporting criteria.
    The licensee evaluated the impacts of the proposed SPU on gaseous 
radioactive wastes. Gaseous radioactive wastes are activation gases and 
fission product radioactive noble gases, which come from radioactive 
system leakage, process operations including volume control tank (VCT) 
venting, gases used for tank cover gas, and gases generated in the 
radiochemistry laboratory. The evaluation shows that the proposed SPU 
will not significantly increase the inventory of gases normally 
processed in the gaseous waste management system. This is based on 
there being no change to plant system functions and no change to the 
gas volume inputs.
    The activity of radioactive gaseous nuclides present in the waste 
gas system will increase as a result of the SPU. This is due to the 
increased levels of gases in the reactor coolant system and the actions 
performed in the VCT. However, the operation of the waste gas system 
will not change and will continue to allow for decay of the short-lived 
radionuclides. Tritium will remain the largest component of the gaseous 
effluents, the largest contributor being from evaporation from the 
Spent Fuel Pools. The proposed SPU will result in an increase 
(approximately 9.5 percent for noble gases, 6.6 percent for 1-131, and 
6.5 percent for long-lived activity) in the equilibrium radioactivity 
in the reactor coolant, which in turn increases the activity in the 
gaseous waste disposal systems and the activity released into the 
atmosphere (estimated to increase by 9.5 percent for noble gases, 6.5 
percent for particulates including Tritium, and 12.6 percent for 
iodines).
    The evaluation shows that even with the small increase in the 
gaseous radioactivity being discharged into the environment, the 
projected dose to the maximally exposed member of the public, while 
slightly increased, will remain well below the ALARA criteria in 
Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50.
    While the SPU will slightly increase the activity level of 
radioactive isotopes in the reactor coolant system and the volume of 
radioactive liquid generated from leakage and planned drainage, there 
will only be a minimal effect on the generation of radioactively 
contaminated sludge and resin solids processed as radwaste. The 
currently installed radwaste system and its total volume capacity for 
handling solid radwaste will not be affected.
    For the long-term operation of the plant with the SPU, the dose to 
an offsite member of the public from the onsite storage of solid 
radwaste was estimated to increase by approximately 7.2 percent. This 
is based on several assumptions: (1) The current radwaste decays and 
its dose contribution decreases; (2) the stored radwaste is routinely 
moved offsite for disposal; (3) the radwaste generated post SPU enters 
into storage; and (4) the plant capacity factor approaches the target 
of 1.0. The radiation dose from direct shine is cumulative based on the 
waste generated and stored onsite from all units over the plant's 
lifetime. CPSES ODCM contains the requirements to ensure compliance 
with the radiation dose limits in 10 CFR Part 20 and the Environmental 
Protection Agency's 40 CFR Part 190. Therefore, while a small increase 
in offsite radiation dose is expected, it will remain within regulatory 
limits.
    The radiation exposure to plant workers from the SPU is expected to 
be kept to a minimum based on the design features at CPSES, Units 1 and 
2, and the Radiation Protection Program. The design features include: 
(1) Shielding, which is provided to reduce levels of radiation; (2) 
ventilation, which is arranged to control the flow of potentially 
contaminated air; (3) an installed radiation monitoring system, which 
is used to measure levels of radiation in potentially occupied areas 
and measure airborne radioactivity throughout the plant; and (4) 
respiratory protective equipment, which is used as prescribed by the 
Radiation Protection Program. The Radiation Protection Program contains 
procedures for all radiological work performed at CPSES, Units 1 and 2 
to ensure doses are maintained ALARA and are in compliance with 
regulatory limits in 10 CFR Part 20.

Non-Radiological Impacts

    With regard to potential non-radiological impacts of the proposed 
SPU, the proposed action does not result in any significant changes to 
land use or water use. The proposed SPU would increase the temperature 
of water discharged from the plant at the discharge point, Outfall 001, 
into the SCR by 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F) and would increase lake 
evaporation by approximately 6 acre-feet per year. The expected thermal 
increase would raise the average daily temperature at Outfall 001 from 
95.6 [deg]F to 97.1 [deg]F, which remains well below the daily average 
temperature of 113 [deg]F and daily maximum temperature of 116 [deg]F 
specified in CPSES Texas Pollution Discharge Elimination System (TPDES) 
permit. Because this increase remains well below the facility's TPDES 
permit limits, the NRC staff determined that this increase is not 
significant, and is bounded by previous analysis of thermal discharge 
as documented in the Final Environmental Statement related to the 
operation of CPSES, Units 1 and 2 (September 1981). No effects on the 
aquatic or terrestrial habitat in the vicinity of the plant, or to 
endangered or threatened species, or to the habitats of endangered or 
threatened species are expected as a result of the increase in thermal 
discharge or change in annual lake evaporation. The proposed action 
does not have a potential to affect any historical or archaeological 
sites.
    The plant will be modified by replacing the high-pressure turbines 
at both units. All proposed plant changes will occur within the 
existing buildings,

[[Page 23505]]

and no proposed equipment upgrades require any additional equipment 
that will be visible from outside the existing power station. The 
proposed action will not change the method of generating electricity or 
the method of handling any influents from the environment or non-
radiological effluents to the environment. Therefore, no changes or 
different types of non-radiological environmental impacts are expected 
as a result of the proposed amendment.
    Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. The details 
of the staff's safety evaluation will be provided in the amendment that 
will be issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving the 
amendment to the facility operating licenses and technical 
specifications.

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 resources 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

    In accordance with its stated policy, on April 22, 2008, the staff 
consulted with the Texas State official, Alice Rogers of the Texas 
Department of Health, 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 application dated August 28, 2007, as supplemented by 
letters dated October 24, 2007, and January 10, 29, 31, February 21, 
26, 28, and March 6, 2008. Publicly available records are accessible 
electronically via the Agencywide Document 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 send an e-mail to 
pdr@nrc.gov. Additionally, 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, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

DATES: The comment period expires May 30, 2008. Comments received after 
this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the 
Commission is only able to assure consideration of comments received on 
or before May 30, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to Chief, Rules and Directives 
Branch, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Mail Stop T-6D59, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Written comments may also 
be delivered to 11545 Rockville Pike, Room T-6D59, Rockville, Maryland 
20852 from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays. Copies of 
written comments received will be electronically available at the NRC's 
Public Electronic Reading Room link, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html, on the NRC Web site or at the NRC's PDR located at One 
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 
Maryland 20852. 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 at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, 
or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NRC is considering issuance of an 
amendment to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-87 (Unit 1) and NPF-89 
(Unit 2) issued to Luminant Generation Company LLC, for the operation 
of CPSES, Units 1 and 2, located in Somervell County, Texas.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Balwant K. Singal, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation, Mail Stop O-8B1, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by telephone at (301) 415-3016, 
or by e-mail at Balwant.Singal@nrc.gov.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of April 2008.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Balwant K. Singal,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of 
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E8-9456 Filed 4-29-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P