[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 150 (Friday, August 4, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39973-39974]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-19197]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446]
Texas Utilities Electric Company; Comanche Peak Steam Electric
Station, Units 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos.
NPF-87 and NPF-89, issued to Texas Utilities Electric Company (TU
Electric, the licensee), for operation of the Comanche Peak Steam
Electric Station (CPSES), Units 1 and 2, located in Somervell County,
Texas.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of Proposed Action
The proposed amendment would consist of revisions to 10 CFR part 20
references to recognize the new section numbers, revise definitions to
ensure consistency with 10 CFR part 20, and change administrative
controls for reporting and recordkeeping to maintain compliance with
the new 10 CFR part 20. The changes would revise the limitations on
concentrations of radioactive material released in liquid effluents and
the limitations on the dose rate resulting from radioactive material
released in gaseous effluents and reflect the relocation of the prior
10 CFR 20.106 requirements to the new 10 CFR 20.1302. These changes are
in response to the licensee's application for amendment dated August
12, 1994, implementing the new 10 CFR part 20.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed in order to retain operational
flexibility consistent with 10 CFR part 50, appendix I, concurrent with
the implementation of the revised 10 CFR part 20.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action,
in regard to the actual release rates as referenced in the Technical
Specifications as a dose rate to the maximally exposed member of the
public, and concludes that the change will not increase the probability
or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types 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 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.
[[Page 39974]]
Alternative Use of Resources
This action does not involve the use of any resources not
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the
CPSES, Units 1 and 2, dated October 1989.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on July 20, 1995, 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
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 this action, see the
application for amendment dated August 12, 1994, which is 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 University of Texas at Arlington Library,
Government Publications/Maps, 702 College, P.O. Box 19497, Arlington,
TX 76019.
Dated Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of July 1995.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Chandu P. Patel,
Project Manager, Division of Reactor Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-19197 Filed 8-3-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
