[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