[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 107 (Monday, June 5, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32376-32377]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-8651]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-263]


Nuclear Management Company, LLC; Monticello Nuclear Generating 
Plant; 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-22, 
issued to the Nuclear Management Company (the licensee) for operation 
of the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP), located in Wright 
County, Minnesota. Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR) Sections 51.21 and 51.32, the NRC is issuing this 
environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would be a conversion from the current 
Technical Specifications (CTSs) to the Improved Technical 
Specifications (ITSs) format based on NUREG-1433, ``Standard Technical 
Specifications General Electric Plants BWR/4,'' Revision 3, dated June 
2004. The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application dated June 29, 2005, as supplemented by letters dated April 
25 (two letters), May 4, and May 12, 2006.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The Commission's ``Proposed Policy Statement on Technical 
Specifications Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors'' (52 FR 3788), 
dated February 6, 1987, contained an Interim Policy Statement that set 
forth objective criteria for determining which regulatory requirements 
and operating restrictions should be included in the technical 
specifications (TSs) for nuclear power plants. When it issued the 
Interim Policy Statement, the Commission also requested comments on it. 
Subsequently, to implement the Interim Policy Statement, each reactor 
vendor owners group and the NRC staff began developing standard TSs 
(STSs) for reactors supplied by each vendor. The Commission then 
published its ``Final Policy Statement on Technical Specifications 
Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors'' (58 FR 39132), dated July 22, 
1993, in which it addressed comments received on the Interim Policy 
Statement, and incorporated experience in developing the STSs. The 
Final Policy Statement formed the basis for a revision to 10 CFR 50.36 
(60 FR 36953), dated July 19, 1995, that codified the criteria for 
determining the content of TSs. The NRC Committee to Review Generic 
Requirements reviewed the STSs, made note of their safety merits, and 
indicated its support of conversion by operating plants to the STSs. 
For MNGP, NUREG-1433 documents the STSs and forms the basis for the 
MNGP conversion to the ITSs.
    The proposed changes to the CTSs are based on NUREG-1433 and the 
guidance provided in the Final Policy Statement. The objective of this 
action is to rewrite, reformat, and streamline

[[Page 32377]]

the CTSs (i.e., to convert the CTSs to the ITSs). Emphasis was placed 
on human factors principles to improve clarity and understanding.
    Some specifications in the CTSs would be relocated. Such relocated 
specifications would include those requirements which do not meet the 
10 CFR 50.36 selection criteria. These requirements may be relocated to 
the TS Bases document, the MNGP Updated Safety Analysis Report, the 
Core Operating Limits Report, the operational quality assurance plan, 
plant procedures, or other licensee-controlled documents. Relocating 
requirements to licensee-controlled documents does not eliminate them, 
but rather places them under more appropriate regulatory controls 
(i.e., 10 CFR 50.54(a)(3), and 10 CFR 50.59) to manage their 
implementation and future changes.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC staff has completed its evaluation of the proposed action 
and concludes that the conversion to ITSs would not increase the 
probability or consequences of accidents previously analyzed and would 
not affect facility radiation levels or facility radiological 
effluents.The proposed action will not increase the probability or 
consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of 
effluents that may be released off site. There is no significant 
increase in the amount of any effluent released 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 because 
no previously undisturbed area will be affected by the proposed 
amendment. The proposed action does not affect non-radiological plant 
effluents and has no other effect on the environment. Therefore, there 
are no significant non-radiological environmental impacts associated 
with the proposed action.
    Accordingly, the NRC staff concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action and, thus, 
the proposed action will not have any significant impact to the human 
environment.

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives 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 application 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

    The action does not involve the use of any different resources than 
those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for 
MNGP dated November 1974.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    On April 18, 2006, the NRC staff consulted with Mr. Steve Rakow of 
the Minnesota Department of Commerce regarding the environmental impact 
of the proposed action. The State official agreed with the conclusions 
of the NRC.

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 June 29, 2005, as supplemented by letters dated 
April 25 (two letters), May 4, and May 12, 2006, and the information 
provided to the NRC staff through the joint NRC-Monticello Nuclear 
Power Plant ITS Conversion Web page. 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 01F21, 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/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 by e-mail to [email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day of May 2006.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Terry A. Beltz,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III-1, Division of Operating 
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-8651 Filed 6-2-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P