[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 123 (Wednesday, June 25, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36134-36135]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-14315]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-305]
Dominion Energy Kewaunee, Inc.; Kewaunee Power Station;
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an amendment pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, Section 50.90, for Facility Operating
License No. DPR-43, issued to Dominion Energy Kewaunee, Inc. (the
licensee), for operation of the Kewaunee Power Station (KPS), located
in Kewaunee County, Wisconsin. 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 revise the facility operating license by
removing condition 2.C(5), ``Fuel Burnup,'' which had limited the peak
rod average burnup to 60 gigawatt-days per metric ton urnanium (GWD/
MTU) until completion of an NRC environmental assessment supporting an
increased limit. The proposed action would allow an increase of the
maximum rod average burnup to as high as 62 GWD/MTU. The licensee has
procedures in place to ensure that maximum rod burnup will not exceed
62 GWD/MTU.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated July 2, 2007.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action to delete the license condition for fuel burnup
would allow a higher maximum rod average burnup of 62 GWD/MTU, which
would allow for more effective fuel management. If the amendment is not
approved, the licensee will not be provided the opportunity to increase
maximum rod average burnup to as high as 62 GWD/MTU and allow fuel
management flexibility.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
In this environmental assessment regarding the impacts of the use
of extended burnup fuel beyond 60 GWD/MTU, the Commission is relying on
the results of the updated study conducted for NRC by the Pacific
Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), entitled ``Environmental Effects
of Extending Fuel Burnup Above 60 GWD/MTU'' (NUREG/CR-6703, PNNL-13257,
January 2001). Environmental impacts of high burnup fuel up to 75 GWD/
MTU were evaluated in the study, but some aspects of the review were
limited to evaluating the impacts of the extended burnup up to 62 GWD/
MTU because of the need for additional data on the effect of extended
burnup on gap release fractions. All the aspects of the fuel-cycle were
considered during the study, from mining, milling, conversion,
enrichment and fabrication through normal reactor operation,
transportation, waste management, and storage of spent fuel.
The amendment would allow KPS to extend lead rod average burnup to
62 GWD/MTU. The NRC staff has completed its evaluation of the proposed
action and concludes that such changes would not adversely affect plant
safety, and would have no adverse affect on the probability of any
accident. For the accidents that involve damage or melting of the fuel
in the reactor core, fuel rod integrity has been shown to be unaffected
by extended burnup under consideration; therefore, the probability of
an accident will not be affected. For the accidents in which core
remains intact, the increased burnup may slightly change the mix of
fission products that could be released in the event of a serious
accident, but because the radionuclides contributing most to the dose
are short-lived, increased burnup would not have an effect on the
consequences of a serious accident beyond the previously evaluated
accident scenarios. Increases in projected consequences of postulated
accidents associated with fuel burnup up to 62 GWD/MTU are not
considered significant, and remain well below regulatory limits.
Regulatory limits on radiological effluent releases are independent
of burnup. The requirements of 10 CFR 50.36a and Appendix I to 10 CFR
Part 50 ensure that any release of gaseous, liquid or solid
radiological effluents to unrestricted areas is kept ``As Low As is
Reasonably Achievable.'' Therefore, NRC staff concludes that during
routine operations, there will be no significant increase in the amount
of gaseous radiological effluents released into the environment as a
result of the proposed action, nor will there be a significant increase
in the amount of liquid radiological effluents or solid radiological
effluents released into the environment.
The proposed action will not change normal plant operating
conditions. No changes are expected in the fuel handling, operational
or storing processes. There will be no significant changes in radiation
levels during these evolutions. No significant increase in the
allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure is
expected to occur.
The use of extended irradiation will not change the potential
environmental impacts of incident-free transportation of spent nuclear
fuel or the accident risks associated with spent fuel transportation if
the fuel is cooled for 5 years after being discharged from the reactor.
The PNNL report for the NRC (NUREG/CR-6703, January 2001), concluded
that doses associated with incident-free transportation of spent fuel
with burnup to 75 GWD/MTU are bounded by the doses given in 10 CFR
51.52, Table S-4 for all regions of the country, based on the dose
rates from the shipping casks being maintained within regulatory
limits. Increased fuel burnup will decrease the annual discharge of
fuel to the spent fuel pool, which will postpone the need to remove
spent fuel from the pool.
NUREG/CR-6703 determined that no increase in environmental effects
of spent fuel transportation accidents are expected as a result of
increasing fuel burnup to 75 GWD/MTU.
The proposed action does not affect non-radiological plant
effluents, and no changes to the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System permit are needed. No effects on the aquatic or
terrestrial habitat in the vicinity of the plant, or on endangered and/
or threatened species and their habitats are expected. The proposed
action does not involve any historical or archaeological sites.
The proposed action will not change the method of generating
electricity or the method of handling any influents from the
environment or non-radiological effluents to the environment.
Therefore, no changes or different types of non-radiological
environmental impacts are expected as a result of this amendment.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. For more
detailed information regarding the environmental impacts of extended
fuel burnup, please refer to the
[[Page 36135]]
study conducted by PNNL for the NRC, entitled ``Environmental Effects
of Extending Fuel Burnup Above 60 GWD/MTU'' (NUREG/CR-6073, PNL-13257,
January 2001, ADAMS Accession No. ML010310298). The details of the
staff's safety evaluation will be provided in the amendment that will
be issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving the
amendment.
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
Kewaunee Power Station, dated December 1972.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on June 12, 2008, the staff
consulted with the Wisconsin State official, Mr. Jeff Kitsembel, of the
Public Service Commission, 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 2, 2007 (ADAMS Accession No. ML071860075).
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
O1 F21, 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.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 send
an e-mail to [email protected].
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this day of June 2008.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Justin C. Poole,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch 3-1, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E8-14315 Filed 6-24-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P