[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 235 (Thursday, December 7, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70996-70997]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-20751]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-263]
Nuclear Management Company, LLC; Monticello Nuclear Generating
Station; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 50 (10 CFR 50), Appendix J, for Facility Operating
Licenses No. DPR-22, issued to Nuclear Management Company (NMC) for
operation of the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP), located in
Wright County, Minnesota.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt NMC from requirements to include
main steam isolation valve (MSIV) leakage in (1) the overall integrated
leakage rate test measurement required by Section III.A of Appendix J,
Option B; and (2) the sum of local leak rate test measurements required
by Section III.B of Appendix J, Option B.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated September 15, 2005, for exemption and amendment to
the operating license (the latter action is not the subject of this
notice).
The Need for the Proposed Action
Section 50.54(o) of 10 CFR Part 50 requires that primary reactor
containments for water-cooled power reactors be subject to the
requirements of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50. Appendix J specifies the
leakage test requirements, schedules, and acceptance criteria for tests
of the leak-tight integrity of the primary reactor containment and
systems and components which penetrate the containment. Option B,
Section III.A of Appendix J requires that the overall integrated leak
rate must not exceed the allowable leakage (La) with margin, as
specified in the Technical Specifications (TS). The overall integrated
leak rate, as specified in the Appendix J definitions, includes the
contribution from MSIV leakage. By letter dated September 15, 2005, the
licensee requested an exemption from Option B, Section III.A,
requirements to permit exclusion of MSIV leakage from the overall
integrated leak rate test measurement.
Option B, Section III.B of Appendix J requires that the sum of the
leakage rates of Type B and Type C local leak rate tests be less than
the performance criterion (La) with margin, as specified in the TS. The
licensee's September 15, 2005, letter, also requests an exemption from
this requirement, to permit exclusion of the MSIV contribution to the
sum of the Type B and Type C tests.
The above-cited requirements of Appendix J require that MSIV
leakage measurements be grouped with the leakage measurements of other
containment penetrations when containment leakage tests are performed.
The licensee stated that these requirements are inconsistent with the
design of the MNGP facilities and the analytical models used to
calculate the radiological consequences of design-basis accidents. At
other nuclear plants, the leakage from primary containment
penetrations, under accident conditions, is collected and treated by
the secondary containment system, or would bypass the secondary
containment. However, at MNGP, the leakage from the MSIVs is collected
and treated via an alternative leakage treatment (ALT) path having
different mitigation characteristics. In performing accident analyses,
it is appropriate to group various leakage effluents according to the
treatment they receive before being released to the environment, i.e.,
bypass leakage is grouped, leakage into secondary containment is
grouped, and ALT leakage is grouped, with specific limits for each
group defined in the TS. The proposed exemption would permit ALT path
leakage to be independently grouped with its unique leakage limits.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability
or consequences of accidents. The NRC staff has completed its
evaluation of the proposed exemption and associated amendment and finds
that the calculated total doses remain within the acceptance criteria
of 10 CFR 50.67 and General Design Criterion 19, and there is no
significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. The
NRC staff thus concludes that granting the proposed exemption would
result in no significant radiological environmental impact.
The proposed action does not affect non-radiological plant
effluents or historical sites, and has no other environmental impact.
Therefore there are no significant non-radiological impacts associated
with the proposed exemption.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant
environmental
[[Page 70997]]
impacts associated with the proposed action.
Alternative to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff considered
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no action'' alternative).
Denial of the exemption would result in no change in current
environmental impacts. Thus, 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 MNGP Final Environmental Statement dated
November 1972, as supplemented on August 31, 2006 (Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for Nuclear Plants for License Renewal,
Regarding MNGP).
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on October 5, 2006, the NRC
staff consulted with the Minnesota State official, Mr. Steve Rakow,
regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. Mr. Rakow
had no comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of 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 licensee's
letter dated September 15, 2006. 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 O-1 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 29th day of November, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Peter S. Tam,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III-1, Division of
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-20751 Filed 12-6-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P