ML19257A604

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 60 to License DPR-46

ML19257A604
Person / Time
Site:	Cooper
Issue date:	12/07/1979
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML19257A602	List: ML19257A601 ML19257A604 ML19257A605
References
TAC-11959, NUDOCS 8001040730
Download: ML19257A604 (2)

Text

.

f***Gv UNITED STATES

+

8,y )

e, h

h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

,-, c

.C WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

J

/

%..%r p ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPRAISAL BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 60 TO LICENSE NO. OPR-46 NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT COOPER NUCLEO STATION DOCKET NO. 50-298 Description of Proposed Action A letter from Nebraska Public Power District (the licensee) requesting the deletion of the Aquatic Surveillance, Study and Evaluation Program (Section 4.1.1.1) of the Appendix B Environmental Technical Specifications was submitted on July 10, 1979.

The deletions requested in the July 10, 1979 letter included Water Quality Studies, Periphyton, Aquatic Macroinvertebrates and Benthic Organisms, and the Fisheries Studies.

Evaluation Pre-operational studies for Cooper Nuclear Station began in 1969.

Post-operational studies have been conducted since 1974.

After reviewing the Annual Environmental Operating Reports for the years 1973 through 1978, we find that the licensee has complied with all monitoring requirements and has submitted annual reports as set forth by the ETS.

In addition, after discussions with the state and the utility, we find that the licensee has completed all monitoring requirements of the NPDES pennit including those required under Section 316(a) and 316(b) of the Clean Water Act.

Since the licensee has satisfactorily completed all monitoring and reporting requirements, we recommend that Section 4.1.1.1 on " Aquatic Surveillance, Study, and Evaluation Program" be deleted from the Appendix B ETS.

It is our belief that it would be a needless expense and would not provide a useful service for the utility to continue with any further monitoring as stated in Section 4.1.1.1.

In a related request on May 25, 1979, the licensee requested that all of Appendix B of the Cooper Nuclear Station be deleted and reliance for environment protection be in accordance with the NPDES perr'it.

1690 315 3001040

_2_

We plan to conduct a comprehensive review of the licensee's five-year report data to determine if currently unidentified yet significant effects from plant operation have occurred in the site vicinity.

We will also contact local resource agencies to determine if they can identify outstanding environmental problems.

Our review is designed to determine whether we can establish that the concerns expressed in the FES, which supported issuance of the license, have been satisfied and that no significant effects have occurred.

At that time we will act on the licensee's May 25 request.

In summary, we conclude that the surveillance programs in Section 4.1.1.1 may be deleted from the ETS on the basis that the ETS requirements have been fulfilled and that deletion of the remainder of the ETS be delayed until we have completed a review.of the monitoring data. Upon completion of our review we will address deletion of the remainder of the ETS.

Conclusion and Bases for Negative Declaration On the basis of the foregoing analysis, it is concluded tt.6 there will not be a significant environmental impact attributable to the proposed action other than has already been predicted and described in the Commission's FES for the Ceoper Nuclear Station.

Having made this conclusion, the Commission has further concluded that no environmental impact statement for the proposed action need be prepared and that a negative declaration to this effect is appropriate.

Dated:

December 7, 1979 1690 316 I

e