95-31300. Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station, Unit No. 1; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 248 (Wednesday, December 27, 1995)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 66995-66996]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-31300]
    
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    [Docket No. 50-285]
    
    
    Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station, Unit No. 1; 
    Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
    
        The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
    considering issuance of an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 
    Part 50, Section IV.F.2.c of Appendix E regarding a biennial emergency 
    preparedness exercise for Facility Operating License No. DRP-40, issued 
    to Omaha Public Power District, (the licensee), for operation of the 
    Fort Calhoun Station, Unit 1, located in Washington County, Nebraska.
    
    Environmental Assessment
    
    Identification of the Proposed Action
    
        The proposed action would grant a schedular exemption from the 
    requirement of Section IV.F.2.c of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, which 
    requires that each licensee perform a biennial emergency preparedness 
    exercise, including offsite plans with full participation by offsite 
    State and local authorities. This action would allow the licensee to 
    extend the biennial interval until the first quarter of 1996.
        The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
    application for exemption dated December 8, 1995, as supplemented by 
    letter dated December 15, 1995.
    
    The Need for the Proposed Action
    
        The proposed action is needed because the Federal Emergency 
    Management Agency (FEMA) was not able to support the licensee's 
    previously scheduled biennial full exercise as result of the federal 
    impasse over the 1996 Federal Budget. Without the exemption, FEMA will 
    not be able to complete its required biennial assessment of the 
    licensee's ability to ensure adequate protection can and will be taken 
    in the event of a radiological emergency.
    
    Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
    
        The proposed exemption would not adversely affect the response 
    capabilities of the licensee and State and local authorities. The 
    Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and 
    concludes that the intent of Appendix E, Section IV.F.2.c to ensure 
    offsite emergency preparedness is maintained, has been met. Therefore, 
    the change will not increase the probability or consequences of 
    accidents, no changes are being made in the types or amounts of any 
    effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant 
    increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational 
    radiation exposure. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there 
    are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with 
    the proposed action.
        With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed 
    action does involve features located entirely within the restricted 
    area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. It does not affect nonradiological 
    plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Accordingly, the 
    Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological 
    environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
    
    Alternatives to the Proposed Action
    
        Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable 
    environmental impact associated with the proposed action, any 
    alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be 
    evaluated. As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff 
    considered denial of the proposed action. 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
    
        This action does not involve the use of any resources not 
    previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) for 
    the Fort Calhoun Station, Unit 1, dated August 1972. 
    
    [[Page 66996]]
    
    
    Agencies and Persons Consulted
    
        In accordance with its stated policy, on December 19, 1995, the 
    staff consulted with the Nebraska State official, Ms. Cheryl Rodgers of 
    the Department of Health, regarding the environmental impact of the 
    proposed action. The State official had no comments.
    
    Finding of No Significant Impact
    
        Based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission concludes 
    that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the 
    quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the Commission 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 December 8, 1995, and supplemental letter dated 
    December 15, 1995, which are available for public inspection at the 
    Commission's Public Document Room, The Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, 
    NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document room located at 
    the W. Dale Clark Library, 215 South 15th Street, Omaha, Nebraska 
    68102.
    
        Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of December 1995.
    
        For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    L. Raynard Wharton,
    Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor 
    Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
    [FR Doc. 95-31300 Filed 12-26-95; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    
    

Document Information

Published:
12/27/1995
Department:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Entry Type:
Notice
Document Number:
95-31300
Pages:
66995-66996 (2 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket No. 50-285
PDF File:
95-31300.pdf