[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 224 (Monday, November 23, 2009)]
[Pages 61177-61178]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-28090]



[Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446; NRC-2009-0510]

Luminant Generation Company, LLC; 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

[[Page 61178]]

issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-87 and 
NPF-89 in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(10 CFR), Section 50.90, issued to Luminant Generation Company LLC (the 
licensee), for operation of the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station 
(CPSES), Units 1 and 2, located in Somervell County, Texas. Therefore, 
as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC performed an environmental 
assessment. Based on the results of the environmental assessment, the 
NRC is issuing a finding of no significant impact.

Environmental Assessment

    Identification of the Proposed Action:
    The proposed action would change the legal name of the plant from 
``Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station'' to ``Comanche Peak Nuclear 
Power Plant.''
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application dated February 11, 2009.
    The proposed change also removes the Table of Contents from the 
Technical Specifications (TSs) and places it under licensee control; 
deletes TS, TS, TS, TS 5.6.10, and several 
footnotes from Tables 3.3.1-1 and 3.3.2-1 and TS 3.4.10 since these TSs 
and footnotes are no longer applicable to CPSES, Unit 1 or Unit 2 
operation; renumbers TS to TS 3.2.1, TS to TS 3.2.3, 
and TS to TS 5.5.9; deletes several topical reports from the 
list of approved analytical methods used to determine core operating 
limits in TS 5.6.5; and corrects various minor editorial errors in the 
TSs. However, these amendments change a requirement with respect to 
installation or use of a facility component located within the 
restricted area as defined in 10 CFR part 20. The NRC staff has 
determined that these amendments involve no significant increase in the 
amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that 
may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in 
individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The 
Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that these 
amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has 
been no public comment on such finding published in the Federal 
Register on April 7, 2009 (74 FR 15772). Accordingly, these amendments 
meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 
CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact 
statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection 
with the issuance of these amendments; therefore, this environmental 
assessment applies to only the plant name change.
    The Need for the Proposed Action:
    The proposed action is necessary to reflect the legal change of 
name of the plant from Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station to Comanche 
Peak Nuclear Power Plant.
    Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:
    The NRC has concluded in its evaluation of the proposed action that 
since this action is for a plant name change only that (1) there is a 
reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not 
be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities 
will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and 
(3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common 
defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
    The details of the staff's safety evaluation will be provided in 
the license amendment that will be issued as part of the letter to the 
licensee approving the license amendment.
    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 offsite. There is no significant 
increase in the amount of any effluent released offsite. 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 any foreseeable impacts to land, air, or water 
resources, including impacts to biota. In addition, there are also no 
known socioeconomic or environmental justice impacts associated with 
such proposed action. 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 resources than 
those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for 
the CPSES, Units 1 and 2, NUREG-0775, dated September 1981 and 
Supplement dated October 1989.
    Agencies and Persons Consulted:
    In accordance with its stated policy, on August 13, 2009, the staff 
consulted with the Texas State official, Alice Rogers, Inspection Unit 
Manager, Texas Department of State Health Services, regarding the 
environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no 

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 
    For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letter dated February 11, 2009. Documents may be examined, 
and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), 
located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 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 send an e-mail to [email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of November 2009.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mohan C. Thadani,
 Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of 
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E9-28090 Filed 11-20-09; 8:45 am]