[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 147 (Tuesday, July 30, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39672-39673]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-19319]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316]


Indiana Michigan Power Company; Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, 
Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Environmental Assessment and Finding of No 
Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an exemption from certain requirements of 10 
CFR 70.24 for Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-58 and DPR-74, issued 
to Indiana Michigan Power Company, (the licensee), for operation of the 
D. C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, located in Berrien County, 
Michigan.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the requirements 
of 10 CFR 70.24, which requires a monitoring system that will energize 
clearly audible alarms if accidental criticality occurs in each area in 
which special nuclear material is handled, used, or stored. The 
proposed action would also exempt the licensee from the requirements of 
10 CFR 70.24(a)(3) to maintain emergency procedures for each area in 
which this licensed special nuclear material is handled, used, or 
stored to ensure that all personnel withdraw to an area of safety upon 
the sounding of the alarm and to conduct drills and designate 
responsible individuals for such emergency procedures.
    This environmental assessment has been prepared to address 
potential environmental issues related to the licensee's application of 
April 8, 1996.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    Power reactor license applicants are evaluated for the safe 
handling, use, and storage of special nuclear materials. The proposed 
exemption from criticality accident requirements is based on the 
original design for fuel storage and handling at the D. C. Cook Nuclear 
Plant, Units 1 and 2. The exemption was granted with the original Unit 
2 Special Nuclear Material (Part 70) license, but it expired with the 
issuance of the Part 50 license when the exemption was inadvertently 
not included in that license. Therefore, the exemption is needed to 
clearly define the design of the plant as evaluated and approved for 
licensing.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC staff has completed its evaluation of the proposed action 
and concludes that there is no significant environmental impact if the 
exemption is granted. Inadvertent or accidental criticality will be 
precluded through compliance with the Cook Technical Specifications, 
the geometric spacing of fuel assemblies in the new fuel storage 
facility and spent fuel storage pool, and administrative controls 
imposed on fuel handling procedures. Technical specification controls 
include reactivity requirements (e.g., shutdown margins, limits on 
control rod movement), instrumentation requirements (e.g., power and 
radiation monitors), and controls on refueling operations (e.g., 
refueling boron concentration and source range monitor requirements.) 
Geometrically, the spent fuel pool is designed to store the fuel in an 
array that precludes criticality. Existing technical specifications 
require the effective neutron multiplication factor, Keff, to be 
maintained less than or equal to 0.95. The new fuel vault has also been 
analyzed to maintain keff less than or equal to 0.95, including 
uncertainties, under full water density flooded conditions and less 
than or equal to 0.98 under optimum moderation conditions.
    In summary, the training provided to all personnel involved in fuel 
handling operations, the design of the fuel handling equipment, the 
administrative controls, the technical specifications on new and spent 
fuel handling and storage, and the design of the new and spent fuel 
storage racks preclude inadvertent or accidental criticality. In 
accordance with the NRC's Regulatory Position in Regulatory Guide 8.12, 
Revision 1, ``Criticality Accident Alarm Systems,'' dated January 1981, 
an exemption from 10 CFR 70.24 is appropriate.
    The proposed exemption will not affect radiological plant effluents 
nor cause any significant occupational exposures. Only a small amount, 
if any, radioactive waste is generated during the receipt and handling 
of new fuel

[[Page 39673]]

(e.g., smear papers or contaminated packaging material). The amount of 
waste would not be changed by the exemption.
    The change will not increase the probability or consequences of 
accidents, no changes are being made in the types or amounts 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 involve features located entirely within the restricted 
area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. It 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 NRC 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.

Alternative Use of Resources

    This action does not involve the use of any resources not 
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for D.C. 
Cook, Units 1 and 2, dated August 1973.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on July 8, 1996, the NRC 
staff consulted with the Michigan State official, Dennis Hahn, of the 
Michigan Department of Public Health, Nuclear Facilities and 
Environmental Monitoring, 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 the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letter dated April 8, 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 Maud Preston Palenske Memorial Library, 
500 Market Street, St. Joseph, Michigan 49085.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of July 1996.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John B. Hickman,
Project Manager, Project Directorate III-1, Division of Reactor 
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-19319 Filed 7-29-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P