[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 32 (Friday, February 15, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7206-7207]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-3751]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-247]


Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Indian Point Nuclear Generating 
Unit No. 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant 
Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
issuance of an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR) part 50.60(a) for Facility Operating License No. 
DPR-26, issued to Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., (ENO or the 
licensee), for operation of the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit 
No. 2 (IP2), located in Westchester County, New York. 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 provide an exemption from the 
requirements of 10 CFR 50.60(a). The exemption would permit the use of 
the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel 
Code (ASME Code), Section XI, Code Case N-640, ``Alternative 
Requirement Fracture Toughness for Development of P-T [Pressure and 
Temperature] Limit Curves for ASME Section XI Division I,'' and ASME 
Code Section XI Code Case N-588, ``Alternative to Reference Flaw 
Orientation of Appendix G for Circumferential Welds in Reactor Vessels, 
Section XI, Division I,'' in lieu of 10 CFR part 50, appendix G, 
paragraph I.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the Consolidated Edison 
Company of New York, Inc. (Con Edison), the former licensee of IP2, 
request for an exemption dated July 16, 2001. On September 6, 2001, Con 
Edison's interests in the license was transferred to Entergy Nuclear 
Operations, Inc. (ENO). By letter dated September 20, 2001, ENO 
requested that the NRC continue to review and act on all requests 
before the Commission which had been submitted before the transfer. 
Accordingly, the NRC staff has acted upon Con Edison's application 
dated July 16, 2001, as supplemented by an ENO letter dated January 11, 
2002.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action provides relief from unnecessary restriction of 
the P-T operating window defined by the P-T operating and test curves 
developed in accordance with ASME Code, Section

[[Page 7207]]

XI, Appendix G procedure. ASME Code, Section XI, Appendix G procedure 
was conservatively developed based on the level of knowledge existing 
in 1974 concerning reactor pressure vessel materials and the estimated 
effects of operation. Since 1974, the level of knowledge about these 
topics has been greatly expanded. This increased knowledge permits 
relaxation of the ASME Code, Section XI, Appendix G, requirements via 
application of ASME Code Case N-640 while maintaining the underlying 
purpose of the ASME Code, Section XI, Appendix G procedure. The 
restriction of the P-T operating and test curves developed in 
accordance with ASME Code, Section XI, Appendix G procedure would 
challenge the operations staff when operating at lower temperatures.
    Continued operation with P-T curves developed in accordance with 
the ASME Code, Section XI without relief would unnecessarily restrict 
the P-T operating window for IP2. This would constitute an unnecessary 
burden that can be alleviated by the application of ASME Code Case N-
588 in the development of the proposed P-T curves. Implementation of 
the proposed P-T curves as allowed by ASME Code Case N-588 would not 
reduce the margin of safety originally contemplated by either the NRC 
or ASME.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and 
concludes as set forth below, there are no significant environmental 
impacts associated with the use of the alternative analysis methods to 
support the revision of the P-T curves.
    The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability 
or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of 
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. 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

    The action does not involve the use of any different resource than 
those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for 
the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 3, dated September 1972.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    On January 31, 2002, the staff consulted with the New York State 
official, Ms. Alyse Peterson of the New York State Research and 
Development Authority, 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 July 16, 2001, as supplemented by letter dated 
January 11, 2002. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, 
at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), 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 System (ADAMS) Public 
Electronic Reading Room on the internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.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 by e-mail to [email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of February 2002.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Joel T. Munday,
Acting Chief, Section 1, Project Directorate 1, Division of Licensing 
Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 02-3751 Filed 2-14-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P