31558 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 120 / Thursday, June 20, 1996 / Notices

Name: Special Emphasis Panel in

Engineering Education and Centers.

Date/Time: July 9–10, 1996, 8:00 a.m.–5:30

p.m.

Place: National Science Foundation, Room

375, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA

22230.

Type of Meeting: Closed.

Contact Person: Mary Poats, Program

Manager, Engineering Education and Centers

Division, National Science Foundation,

Room 585, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,

Arlington, VA 22230.

Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and

recommendations concerning concept papers

submitted to NSF for financial support.

Agenda: To review and evaluate concept

papers submitted to the Combined ResearchCurriculum Development Program.

Reason for Closing: The concept papers

being reviewed include information of a

proprietary or confidential nature, including

technical information; financial data, such as

salaries; and personal information

concerning individuals associated with the

proposals. These matters are exempt under 5

U.S.C. 552b. (c) (4) and (6) of the Government

in the Sunshine Act.

Dated: June 17, 1996.

M. Rebecca Winkler,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 96–15784 Filed 6–19–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M

Committee of Visitors of the Advisory

Committee for Geosciences; Notice of

meeting

In according with the Federal

Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–

463, as amended), the National Science

Foundation announces the following

meeting.

Name: Advisory Committee for

Geosciences; Committee of Visitors for the

Geology and Paleontology, Petrology and

Geochemistry and Hydrological Sciences

Programs (1755).

Date and Time: July 10, 11, & 12, 1996;

8:00 a.m.–6:00 p.m.

Place: Room 730, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,

Arlington, VA.

Type of Meeting: Closed.

Contact Person: Dr. Ian D. MacGregor,

Section Head, Special Projects Section,

Division of Earth Sciences, Room 785,

National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson

Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone:

(703) 306–1553.

Purpose of Meeting: To carry out

Committee on Visitors (COV) review,

including examination of decisions on

proposals, reviewer comments, and other

privileged materials.

Agenda: To provide oversight review of the

Geology and Paleontology, Petrology and

Geochemistry and Hydrological Sciences

Programs.

Reason for closing: The meeting is closed

to the public because the Committee is

reviewing proposal actions that will include

privileged intellectual property and personal

information that could harm individuals if

they were disclosed. If discussions were open

to the public, these matters that are exempt

under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4) and (6) of the

Government in the Sunshine Act would be

improperly disclosed.

Dated: June 17, 1996.

M. Rebecca Winkler,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 96–15785 Filed 6–19–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M

Special Emphasis Panel in

Geosciences: Meeting

In accordance with the Federal

Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–

463, as amended), the National Science

Foundation announces the following

meeting:

Name: Special Emphasis Panel in

Geosciences (1756).

Date & Time: July 9 and July 10, 1996; 8:30

a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Place: Room 680, National Science

Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,

Arlington, VA 22230.

Type of Meeting: Closed.

Contact Person: Dr. Richard A. Behnke,

Head, Upper Atmosphere Research Section;

Division of Atmospheric Sciences; Room 775;

4201 Wilson Boulevard; Arlington, VA

22230; telephone number (703) 306–1518.

Purpose of Meeting: To provide and make

recommendations concerning the National

Space Weather Program (NSWP) proposals.

Agenda: To review and evaluate the

National Space Weather Program (NSWP)

proposals.

Reason for Closing: The proposals being

reviewed include information of a

proprietary or confidential nature, including

technical information, financial data, and

personal information concerning individuals

associated with the proposals. These matters

are exempted under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and

(6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.

Dated: June 17, 1996.

M. Rebecca Winkler,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 96–15780 Filed 6–19–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M

Special Emphasis Panel in Networking

& Communications Research &

Infrastructure; Notice of Meeting

In accordance with the Federal

Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–

463, as amended), the National Science

Foundation announces the following

meeting.

Name: Special Emphasis Panel in

Networking and Communications Research

and Infrastructure (#1207).

Date and Time: June 10–11, 1996; 8:30 a.m.

to 5:00 p.m.

Place: Room 1175.

Type of Meeting: Closed.

Contact Person(s): Mark Luker, CISE/NCRI,

Room 1175, National Science Foundation,

4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA

22230, 703–306–1950.

Purpose of Meeting: The Network Access

Point/Routing Arbiters (NAP/RA) Reverse

Site Visit is to provide advice and

recommendations concerning proposals

submitted to NSF for financial support.

Agenda: To review and evaluate Network

Access Point/Routing Arbiters (NAP/RA)

proposals as part of the selection process for

continuing awards.

Reason for Closing: The meeting is closed

to the public because the panel is reviewing

proposal actions that will include privileged

intellectual property and personal

information that could harm individuals if

they were disclosed. If discussions were open

to the public, these matters are exempt under

5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the

Government in the Sunshine Act.

Dated: June 17, 1996.

M. Rebecca Winkler,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 96–15782 Filed 6–19–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M

Advisory Committee for Social,

Behavioral & Economic Sciences;

Notice of Meeting

In accordance with the Federal

Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–

463, as amended), the National Science

Foundation announces the following

meeting.

Name and Committee Code: Advisory

Committee for Social, Behavioral & Economic

Sciences (#1171).

Date and Time: July 10–11, 1996, 9:00 a.m.

to 5:00 p.m.

Place: Room 970, National Science

Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,

Arlington, VA 22230.

Type of Meeting: Closed.

Contact Person: Dr. Paul G. Chapin,

National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson

Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone:

(703) 305–1731.

Purpose of Meeting: To carry out

Committee of Visitors (COV) review,

including examination of decisions on

proposals, reviewer comments, and other

privileged materials.

Agenda: To provide oversight review of the

Linguistic Program.

Reason for Closing: The meeting is closed

to the public because the Committee is

reviewing proposal actions that will include

privileged intellectual property and personal

information that could harm individuals if

they are disclosed. If discussions were open

to the public, these matters that are exempt

under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c) (4) and (6) of the

Government in the Sunshine Act would be

improperly disclosed.

Dated: June 17, 1996.

M. Rebecca Winkler,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 96–15781 Filed 6–19–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 120 / Thursday, June 20, 1996 / Notices 31559

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Docket No. 50–243

Northeast Nuclear Energy Company et

al., Notice of Consideration of

Issuance of Amendment to Facility

Operating License, Proposed No

Significant Hazards Consideration

Determination, and Opportunity for a

Hearing

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) is

considering issuance of an amendment

to Facility Operating License No. NPF–

49 issued to Northeast Nuclear Energy

Company, et al. (the licensee) for

operation of the Millstone Nuclear

Power Station, Unit No. 3 located in

New London County, Connecticut.

The proposed amendment would

revise Technical Specifications (TS)

Table 3.3–1 to allow Millstone Unit No.

3 to change operational modes with

both Shutdown Margin Monitors

inoperable, and to revise Action

Statements 5(a) and 5(b) to reference the

locked valve list in TS 4.1.1.2.2.

Before issuance of the proposed

license amendment, the Commission

will have made findings required by the

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended

(the Act) and the Commission’s

regulations.

The Commission has made a

proposed determination that the

amendment request involves no

significant hazards consideration. Under

the Commission’s regulations in 10 CFR

50.92, this means that operation of the

facility in accordance with the proposed

amendment would not (1) Involve a

significant increase in the probability or

consequences of an accident previously

evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of

a new or different kind of accident from

any accident previously evaluated; or

(3) involve a significant reduction in a

margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR

50.91(a), the licensee has provided its

analysis of the issue of no significant

hazards consideration, which is

presented below:

The proposed changes do not involve a

[significant hazards consideration] SHC

because the changes would not:

1. Involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequence of an accident

previously evaluated.

The proposed changes to Technical

Specification 3.3.1, Table 3.3–1, Action 5(b)

would allow Millstone Unit No. 3 to change

Modes with the Shutdown Margin Monitors

(SMMs) inoperable while in compliance with

the Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO)

governing this condition.

The SMMs are used only for the purpose

of providing an alarm to allow the operator

time to mitigate a boron dilution accident.

The LCO action to lock all dilution flow

paths provides adequate protection to

preclude a boron dilution event from

occurring. The administrative controls placed

upon the dilution flow paths per Technical

Specification 4.1.1.2.2 are the basis for not

having to analyze for a BDE in Mode 6.

Consequently, the SMMs are not required to

be operable in Mode 6.

With the dilution flow paths locked closed,

the SMMs are not required to provide an

alarm to the operators to allow them to

mitigate the event, and their continued

operation provides no added safety benefit.

The LCO for both SMMs being inoperable

does not require the plant to change Modes

and therefore permits continued operation of

the facility for an unlimited period of time.

The proposed Technical Specification change

will allow the plant to invoke Technical

Specification 3.0.4 and increase modes while

complying with the LCO action statements.

These action statements are summarized

below:

Positive reactivity operations via dilutions

and rod withdrawal are suspended. The

intent of this action is to stop any planned

dilutions of the RCS [reactor coolant system].

The SMMs are not intended to monitor core

reactivity associated with RCS temperature

changes. The alarm set point is routinely reset during the plant heat up due to the

increasing count rate. During cooldowns as

the count rate decreases, baseline count rates

are continually lowered automatically by the

SMMs. The Millstone Unit No. 3 boron

dilution analysis assumes steady state RCS

temperature operation. Plant cool downs,

although considered positive reactivity

additions, are allowed to be performed with

the SMMs inoperable as the SMMs provide

no protection during an RCS cool down. The

SMMs are designed to monitor for dilution

events, not reactivity additions as a result of

cool downs. Prohibiting an RCS cool down

as a result of entrance into this LCO action

statement could prevent the operator from

placing the plant into an overall safer

condition. As such, all RCS cool downs will

be allowed when the plant has entered this

action statement in an effort to place the

plant in a safer condition. With the

administrative controls placed on the

dilution flow paths, the BDE [boron dilution

event] is precluded and the effects of the cool

down are normal, anticipated core reactivity

changes are offset by higher RCS boron

concentrations.

All dilution flow paths are isolated and

placed under administrative control (locked

closed). This action provides redundant

protection and defense in depth (safety

overlap) to the SMMs. In this configuration,

a BDE cannot occur. This is the basis for not

having to analyze for a BDE in Mode 6. Since

the BDE cannot occur with the dilution flow

paths isolated, the SMMs are not required to

be operable as the event cannot occur and

operable SMMs provide no benefit.

Increase the shutdown margin surveillance

frequency from every 24 hours to every 12

hours. This action, in combination with the

above, provides defense in depth and overlap

to the loss of the SMMs.

It is concluded that Millstones Unit No. 3

can heat up from Mode 5 to Mode 3 while

complying with the technical specification

action statements of Technical Specification

3.3.1, Table 3.3–1, safely and without

increasing the probability or consequences of

an accident previously evaluated.

Thus, this proposed change will not

involve a significant increase in the

probability or consequences of an accident

previously evaluated.

2. Create the possibility of a new or

different kind of accident from any accident

previously evaluated.

The proposed change will allow Millstone

Unit No. 3 to change modes while complying

with the LCO action statements. These action

statements provide adequate protection to

preclude a BDE from occurring. Changing

Modes without the SMM OPERABLE will not

create a new or different accident from any

previously analyzed. The SMMs are used

solely for the purpose of detecting a BDE by

providing the operator with 15 minutes of

mitigation response time. With the event

precluded, (the dilution flow paths locked

closed) the SMMs provide no additional

safety benefit while in operation. Since their

only function is to provide a 15 minute

response time, their inoperablity [cannot]

create the possibility of a different accident

from occurring.

Based on the nature of the change, the

change does not introduce any new failure

modes or malfunctions and it does not create

the potential for a new unanalyzed accident.

Thus, this proposed change does not create

the possibility of a new or different kind of

accident from any accident previously

evaluated.

3. Involve a significant reduction in a

margin of safety.

The proposed Technical Specification

change does not reduce the margin of safety.

The proposed change will allow Millstone

Unit No. 3 to increase Modes without the

SMMs OPERABLE. However the plant would

only perform the Mode increase with

Technical Specification administrative

controls in place that essentially preclude

that accident from occurring. In the proposed

plant configuration, there is no added safety

benefit from having the SMMs OPERABLE

during the Mode increase. As such, there is

no reduction in the margin of safety.

Thus, this proposed change does not

involve a significant reduction in a margin of

safety.

The NRC staff has reviewed the

licensee’s analysis and, based on this

review, it appears that the three

standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are

satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff

proposes to determine that the

amendment request involves no

significant hazards consideration.

The Commission is seeking public

comments on this proposed

determination. Any comments received

within 30 days after the date of

publication of this notice will be

considered in making any final

determination.

Normally, the Commission will not

issue the amendment until the

expiration of the 30-day notice period.
31560 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 120 / Thursday, June 20, 1996 / Notices

However, should circumstances change

during the notice period such that

failure to act in a timely way would

result, for example, in derating or

shutdown of the facility, the

Commission may issue the license

amendment before the expiration of the

30-day notice period, provided that its

final determination is that the

amendment involves no significant

hazards consideration. The final

determination will consider all public

and State comments received. Should

the Commission take this action, it will

publish in the Federal Register a notice

of issuance and provide for opportunity

for a hearing after issuance. The

Commission expects that the need to

take this action will occur very

infrequently.

Written comments may be submitted

by mail to the Rules Review and

Directives Branch, Division of Freedom

of Information and Publications

Services, Office of Administration, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001, and

should cite the publication date and

page number of this Federal Register

notice. Written comments may also be

delivered to Room 6D22, Two White

Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike,

Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to

4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Copies of

written comments received may be

examined at the NRC Public Document

Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L

Street, NW., Washington, DC.

The filing of requests for hearing and

petitions for leave to intervene is

discussed below.

By July 22, 1996, the licensee may file

a request for a hearing with respect to

issuance of the amendment to the

subject facility operating license and

any person whose interest may be

affected by this proceeding and who

wishes to participate as a party in the

proceeding must file a written request

for a hearing and a petition for leave to

intervene. Requests for a hearing and a

petition for leave to intervene shall be

filed in accordance with the

Commission’s ‘‘Rules of Practice for

Domestic Licensing Proceedings’’ in 10

CFR Part 2. Interested persons should

consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714

which is available 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 Learning

Resources Center, Three Rivers

Community-Technical College, 574 New

London Turnpike, Norwich,

Connecticut, and the Waterford Library,

ATTN: Vince Juliano, 49 Rope Ferry

Road, Waterford, Connecticut. If a

request for a hearing or petition for

leave to intervene is filed by the above

date, the Commission or an Atomic

Safety and Licensing Board, designated

by the Commission or by the Chairman

of the Atomic Safety and Licensing

Board Panel, will rule on the request

and/or petition; and the Secretary or the

designated Atomic Safety and Licensing

Board will issue a notice of hearing or

an appropriate order.

As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a

petition for leave to intervene shall set

forth with particularity the interest of

the petitioner in the proceeding, and

how that interest may be affected by the

results of the proceeding. The petition

should specifically explain the reasons

why intervention should be permitted

with particular reference to the

following factors: (1) The nature of the

petitioner’s right under the Act to be

made party to the proceeding; (2) the

nature and extent of the petitioner’s

property, financial, or other interest in

the proceeding; and (3) the possible

effect of any order which may be

entered in the proceeding on the

petitioner’s interest. The petition should

also identify the specific aspect(s) of the

subject matter of the proceeding as to

which petitioner wishes to intervene.

Any person who has filed a petition for

leave to intervene or who has been

admitted as a party may amend the

petition without requesting leave of the

Board up to 15 days prior to the first

prehearing conference scheduled in the

proceeding, but such an amended

petition must satisfy the specificity

requirements described above.

Not later than 15 days prior to the first

prehearing conference scheduled in the

proceeding, a petitioner shall file a

supplement to the petition to intervene

which must include a list of the

contentions which are sought to be

litigated in the matter. Each contention

must consist of a specific statement of

the issue of law or fact to be raised or

controverted. In addition, the petitioner

shall provide a brief explanation of the

bases of the contention and a concise

statement of the alleged facts or expert

opinion which support the contention

and on which the petitioner intends to

rely in proving the contention at the

hearing. The petitioner must also

provide references to those specific

sources and documents of which the

petitioner is aware and on which the

petitioner intends to rely to establish

those facts or expert opinion. Petitioner

must provide sufficient information to

show that a genuine dispute exists with

the applicant on a material issue of law

or fact. Contentions shall be limited to

matters within the scope of the

amendment under consideration. The

contention must be one which, if

proven, would entitle the petitioner to

relief. A petitioner who fails to file such

a supplement which satisfies these

requirements with respect to at least one

contention will not be permitted to

participate as a party.

Those permitted to intervene become

parties to the proceeding, subject to any

limitations in the order granting leave to

intervene, and have the opportunity to

participate fully in the conduct of the

hearing, including the opportunity to

present evidence and cross-examine

witnesses.

If a hearing is requested, the

Commission will make a final

determination on the issue of no

significant hazards consideration. The

final determination will serve to decide

when the hearing is held.

If the final determination is that the

amendment request involves no

significant hazards consideration, the

Commission may issue the amendment

and make it immediately effective,

notwithstanding the request for a

hearing. Any hearing held would take

place after issuance of the amendment.

If the final determination is that the

amendment request involves a

significant hazards consideration, any

hearing held would take place before

the issuance of any amendment.

A request for a hearing or a petition

for leave to intervene must be filed with

the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention:

Docketing and Services Branch, or may

be delivered to the Commission’s Public

Document Room, the Gelman Building,

2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, by

the above date. Where petitions are filed

during the last 10 days of the notice

period, it is requested that the petitioner

promptly so inform the Commission by

a toll-free telephone call to Western

Union at 1–(800) 248–5100 (in Missouri

1–(800) 342–6700). The Western Union

operator should be given Datagram

Identification Number N1023 and the

following message addressed to Phillip

F. McKee: petitioner’s name and

telephone number, date petition was

mailed, plant name, and publication

date and page number of this Federal

Register notice. A copy of the petition

should also be sent to the Office of the

General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Washington,

DC 20555–0001, and to Lillian M.

Cuoco, Esq., Senior Nuclear Counsel,

Northeast Utilities Service Company,

P.O. Box 270, Hartford, CT 06141–0270,

attorney for the licensee.

Nontimely filings of petitions for

leave to intervene, amended petitions,

supplemental petitions and/or requests

for hearing will not be entertained
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 120 / Thursday, June 20, 1996 / Notices 31561

absent a determination by the

Commission, the presiding officer or the

presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing

Board that the petition and/or request

should be granted based upon a

balancing of the factors specified in 10

CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendment dated June 3, 1996, 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

Learning Resources Center, Three Rivers

Community-Technical College, 574 New

London Turnpike, Norwich,

Connecticut, and the Waterford Library,

ATTN: Vince Juliano, 49 Rope Ferry

Road, Waterford, Connecticut.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day

of June 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Vernon L. Rooney,

Senior Project Manager, Northeast Utilities

Project Directorate, Division of Reactor

Projects—I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 96–15730 Filed 6–19–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[Docket No. 50–339]

Virginia Electric and Power Company;

Notice of Withdrawal of Application for

Amendment to Facility Operating

License

The United States Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) has

granted the request of Virginia Electric

and Power Company (the licensee) to

withdraw its October 17, 1995,

application for proposed amendment to

Facility Operating License No. NPF–7

for the North Anna Power Station, Unit

No. 2, located in Louisa County,

Virginia.

The proposed amendment would

have revised the Technical

Specifications pertaining to the

minimum number of steam generators

required to be inspected during the first

inservice inspection following steam

generator replacement.

The Commission had previously

issued a Notice of Consideration of

Issuance of Amendment published in

the Federal Register on November 27,

1995 (60 FR 58406). However, by letter

dated February 19, 1996, the licensee

withdrew the proposed change.

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendment dated October 17, 1995, and

the licensee’s letter dated February 19,

1996, which withdrew the application

for license amendment. The above

documents are available for public

inspection at the Commission’s Public

Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW.,

Washington, DC, and the Alderman

Library, Special Collections Department,

University of Virginia, Charlottesville,

Virginia 22903–2498.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 7th day

of June 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Bart C. Buckley,

Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate

II–1, Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office

of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 96–15729 Filed 6–19–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[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 amendment

to Facility Operating License No. DPR–

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 issue an

amendment to allow an increase in the

initial nominal Uranium-235 (U–235)

enrichment limit for fuel assemblies

which may be stored in the spent fuel

pool. 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

amendment dated February 1, 1996.

The Need for the Proposed Action

The licensee intends to store

unirradiated fuel with a maximum

initial enrichment of 4.5 w/o U–235 in

Region 1 of the spent fuel pool during

the next refueling outage (Refuel 17).

Spent fuel will be stored in Region 2 of

the spent fuel pool. At present, fuel with

a maximum initial enrichment up to 4.2

weight percent of U–235 can be stored

in Region 1 and Region 2 of the spent

fuel pool.

Environmental Impact of the Proposed

Action:

The Commission has completed its

evaluation of the proposed revision to

the technical specifications (TSs) and

concludes that the use of fuel with a

maximum enrichment of 4.5 w/o U–235

would not significantly increase the

probability or consequences of any

accident previously analyzed. The

proposed amendment would increase

the allowable fuel enrichment from 4.2

w/o to 4.5 w/o U–235 in Region 1 of the

spent fuel pool and modify the burnup/

enrichment restrictions imposed on fuel

stored in Region 2 to include fuel with

an enrichment up to 4.5 w/o.

The environmental impacts of

transportation resulting from the use of

higher enrichment and extended

irradiation are discussed in the staff

assessment entitled ‘‘NRC Assessment

of the Environmental Effects of

Transportation Resulting from Extended

Fuel Enrichment and Irradiation.’’ This

assessment was published in the

Federal Register on August 11, 1988 (53

FR 30355) as corrected on August 24,

1988 (53 FR 32322) in connection with

the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant,

Unit 1: Environmental Assessment and

Finding of No Significant Impact. As

indicated therein, the environmental

cost contribution of an increase in fuel

enrichment of up to 5 weight percent

U–235 and irradiation limits of up to 60

Gigawatt Days per Metric Ton (GWD/

MT) are either unchanged, or may in

fact be reduced from those summarized

in Table S–4 as set forth in 10 CFR

51.52(c). These findings are applicable

to the proposed amendment for the Ft.

Calhoun Station, Unit 1. Accordingly,

the Commission concludes that this

proposed action would result in no

significant radiological environmental

impact.

With regard to potential

nonradiological impacts, the proposed

changes involve systems located within

the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR

Part 20. It does not affect

nonradiological plant effluents and has

no other environmental impact.

Therefore, the Commission concludes

that there are no significant

nonradiological environmental impacts

associated with the proposed

amendment.

The Notice of Consideration of

Issuance of Amendment to Facility

Operating License, Proposed No

Significant Hazards Consideration

Determination, and Opportunity for a

Hearing in connection with this action

was published in the Federal Register

on March 13, 1996 (61 FR 10396).

Alternative to the Proposed Action

Since the Commission concluded that

there are no significant environmental

effects that would result from the

proposed action, any alternative with

equal or greater environmental impacts

need not be evaluated.