[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 142 (Tuesday, July 24, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38442-38443]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-18381]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-331]


Nuclear Management Company, LLC; Duane Arnold Energy Center; 
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-49, 
issued to Nuclear Management Company, LLC (the licensee), for operation 
of the Duane Arnold Energy Center (DAEC) located in Palo, Iowa. 
Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this 
environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would change the license to allow refueling 
activities in accordance with a revised thermal-hydraulic analysis 
based upon use of advanced core designs employing advanced fuel, 
increased fuel burnup, increased cycle length, and increased reload 
batch size. The revised analysis also corrects several input parameter 
discrepancies in the existing analysis.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application for amendment dated November 17, 2000, as supplemented by 
letters dated February 16 and April 9, 2001.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is needed to support DAEC plans to pursue 
advanced core designs beginning with Cycle 18, including the use of 
General Electric (GE)-14 fuel, increased fuel burnup, increased cycle 
length, and increased reload batch size. The proposed action revises 
the thermal-hydraulic analysis for the spent fuel pool (SFP) submitted 
to the NRC by letter dated October 3, 1997. The proposed action also 
corrects discrepancies made in the existing thermal-hydraulic analysis.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    NUREG-0800, ``Standard Review Plan,'' provides criteria related to 
the design and performance of the spent fuel pool. Regulatory Guide 
1.13, ``Spent Fuel Storage Facility Design Basis,'' provides methods 
acceptable for the licensee to implement General Design Criteria 61 of 
Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50 which requires that fuel storage and 
handling systems be designed to assure adequate safety under normal and 
postulated accident conditions. NRC memorandum, ``Office Technical 
Position for Review and Acceptance of Spent Fuel Storage and Handling 
Applications,'' dated April 14, 1978, and modified by Addendum dated 
January 18, 1979, provides key design criteria and regulatory guidance 
for new spent fuel storage racks.
    The licensee submitted a revised thermal-hydraulic analysis, which 
included maximum SFP temperatures, minimum time-to-boil after loss of 
forced cooling, and local water and fuel cladding temperatures. The 
licensee calculated the maximum bulk SFP temperatures for the following 
three cases: (a) Planned full core offload scenario with full core 
discharge beginning at 60 hours after reactor shutdown, with one train 
of the fuel pool cooling and cleanup (FPCCU) system in operation; (b) 
planned full core offload scenario, the same scenario as case (A) 
except that two trains of FPCCU are in operation; and (c) unplanned 
full core offload scenario consisting of a normal refueling outage of 
36 days, followed by 45 days of full power operation and a subsequent 
unplanned discharge of the full core to the SFP beginning 60 hours 
after reactor shutdown, with two trains of FPCCU in operation. Based on 
its review, the NRC staff concluded that the methodology and 
assumptions used by the licensee to calculate the decay heat loads and 
to calculate the SFP bulk temperatures met the intent of the applicable 
NRC guidelines. The maximum SFP bulk temperatures of the revised 
hydraulic analysis are below the onset of boiling and are below the SFP 
temperatures approved by the NRC staff for the current thermal-
hydraulic analysis.
    The licensee also evaluated the effect of a complete loss of forced 
cooling to the SFP, which was assumed to occur when the SFP was at the 
maximum SFP bulk temperature. The calculated minimum time from the loss 
of pool cooling at peak pool water temperature until the pool boils for 
the worst case was 3.8 hours for the revised analysis, which was a 
slight decrease from the 4.5 hours of the current analysis, but still 
substantially longer than the 2 hours required to align the emergency 
service water system to provide makeup water to the SFP. In addition, 
various other sources of emergency makeup water would be available in 
less than 2 hours. Based on its review, the NRC staff concluded that in 
the unlikely event that there is a complete loss of cooling, the 
licensee is capable of aligning the makeup water from various sources 
to the pool before boiling begins and that makeup water will be 
supplied at a rate which exceeds the boil-off rate, and that

[[Page 38443]]

cooling the SFP by adding makeup water in the unlikely event that there 
is a complete loss of cooling to the SFP conforms to NRC guidance.
    The NRC staff has completed its evaluation of the proposed action 
and concludes that the proposed revision to the thermal-hydraulic 
analysis complies with the applicable regulatory documents and will 
allow for the continued safe storage of spent fuel.
    The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability 
or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of 
any effluents that may be released off site, and there is no 
significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. 
Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts 
associated with the proposed action.
    With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed 
action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. The 
proposed action does not involve any physical features of the plant or 
procedure changes involving a potential nonradiological release. It 
does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other 
environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant 
nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed 
action.
    Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered 
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). 
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 different resources 
than those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement 
for the DAEC dated March 1973.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    On July 11, 2001, the staff consulted with the Iowa State official, 
Mr. D. McGhee of the Department of Public Health, regarding the 
environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no 
comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes 
that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the 
quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC 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 November 17, 2000, as supplemented by letters 
dated February 16 and April 9, 2001. Documents may be examined, and/or 
copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One 
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 
Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically 
from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) 
Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC web site, 
http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html. Persons who do not have access 
to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located 
in ADAMS should contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference 
staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail at 
[email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of July 2001.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Carl F. Lyon,
Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate III, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 01-18381 Filed 7-23-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P