[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 29 (Monday, February 14, 2005)]
[Pages 7527-7528]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-2786]



[Docket No. 50-336]

Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., Millstone Power Station, Unit 
No. 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 50, section 68, ``Criticality 
Accident Requirements,'' subsection (b)(1) for Facility Operating 
License No. DPR-65, issued to Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (the 
licensee), for operation of the Millstone Power Station, Unit No. 2 
(MP2), located in New London County, Connecticut. 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 exempt the licensee from the requirements 
of 10 CFR 50.68, ``Criticality Accident Requirements,'' subsection 
(b)(1) during the handling and storage of spent nuclear fuel in a 10 
CFR part 72 licensed spent fuel storage container that is in the MP2 
spent fuel pool. The proposed action is in accordance with the 
licensee's application dated November 5, 2004.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    Under 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1), the Commission sets forth the following 
requirement that must be met, in lieu of a monitoring system capable of 
detecting criticality events:

Plant procedures shall prohibit the handling and storage at any one 
time of more fuel assemblies than have been determined to be safely 
subcritical under the most adverse moderation conditions feasible by 
unborated water.

    Section 50.12(a) allows licensees to apply for an exemption from 
the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 if the regulation is not necessary 
to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule and other conditions are 
met. The licensee stated that compliance with 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) is not 
necessary for handling the 10 CFR Part 72 licensed contents of the cask 
system, which is designed to preclude conditions for accidental 
criticality events, to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and 
concludes that the exemption described above would continue to satisfy 
the underlying purpose of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1). The details of the NRC 
staff's safety evaluation will be provided in the exemption that will 
be issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving the exemption 
to the regulation.
    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 offsite. There is no significant 
increase in the amount of any effluent release off site. 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 non-radiological impacts, the proposed 
action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does 
not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other 
environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non-
radiological 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 resources than 
those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for 
the MP2 dated June 1973.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    On December 23, 2004, the staff consulted with the Connecticut 
State official, Michael Firsick, of the

[[Page 7528]]

Department of Environmental Protection, 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 
    For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letter dated November 5, 2004. 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 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 at 1-800-
397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or send an e-mail to [email protected]. (Note: As 
of the date of issuance of this letter, public access to ADAMS has been 
temporarily suspended so that security reviews of publicly available 
documents may be performed and potentially sensitive information 
removed. Please check the NRC Web site for updates on the resumption of 
ADAMS access.)

    Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of February 2005.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Darrell J. Roberts,
Chief, Section 2, Project Directorate I, Division of Licensing Project 
Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 05-2786 Filed 2-11-05; 8:45 am]