[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