Nuclear Management Company, LLC; Monticello Nuclear Generating Station; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 70996-70997 [E6-20751]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
70996
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 235 / Thursday, December 7, 2006 / Notices
1114 of the Bankruptcy Code as
authorized representatives of current
and future salaried retirees.
(o) ‘‘Salaried Trust’’ means the trust
established under the Trust Agreement
between the Salaried Board and the
Salaried Trustee, effective May 31, 2004.
(p) ‘‘Salaried VEBA’’ means the Kaiser
Aluminum Salaried Retirees VEBA and
its associated voluntary employees’
beneficiary association trust.
(q) ‘‘Shares’’ or ‘‘Stock’’ refers to
shares of common stock of reorganized
Kaiser, par value $.01 per share.
(r) ‘‘Stock Transfer Restriction
Agreement’’ means the agreement
between Kaiser and National City Bank,
acknowledged by the Hourly
Independent Fiduciary with respect to
management of the Kaiser’s Stock held
by the Hourly Trust.
(s) ‘‘Trusts’’ means the Salaried Trust
and the Hourly Trust.
(t) ‘‘USW’’ means the United Steel,
Paper and Forestry, Rubber,
Manufacturing, Energy, Allied
Industrial and Service Workers
International Union.
(u) ‘‘VEBA’’ means a voluntary
employees’ beneficiary association.
(v) ‘‘VEBAs’’ refers to the Hourly
VEBA and Salaried VEBA.
The availability of this exemption is
subject to the express condition that the
material facts and representations
contained in the application for
exemption are true and complete and
accurately describe all material terms of
the transactions. In the case of
continuing transactions, if any of the
material facts or representations
described in the applications change,
the exemption will cease to apply as of
the date of such change.
In the event of any such change, an
application for a new exemption must
be made to the Department.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 4th day of
January 2006.
Ivan L. Strasfeld,
Director of Exemption Determinations,
Employee Benefits Security Administration,
U.S. Department of Labor.
[FR Doc. E6–20729 Filed 12–6–06; 8:45 am]
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 4510–29–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:29 Dec 06, 2006
Jkt 211001
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–263]
Nuclear Management Company, LLC;
Monticello Nuclear Generating Station;
Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact
Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an exemption from Title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part
50 (10 CFR 50), Appendix J, for Facility
Operating Licenses No. DPR–22, issued
to Nuclear Management Company
(NMC) for operation of the Monticello
Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP),
located in Wright County, Minnesota.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt
NMC from requirements to include
main steam isolation valve (MSIV)
leakage in (1) the overall integrated
leakage rate test measurement required
by Section III.A of Appendix J, Option
B; and (2) the sum of local leak rate test
measurements required by Section III.B
of Appendix J, Option B.
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
September 15, 2005, for exemption and
amendment to the operating license (the
latter action is not the subject of this
notice).
The Need for the Proposed Action
Section 50.54(o) of 10 CFR Part 50
requires that primary reactor
containments for water-cooled power
reactors be subject to the requirements
of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50.
Appendix J specifies the leakage test
requirements, schedules, and
acceptance criteria for tests of the leaktight integrity of the primary reactor
containment and systems and
components which penetrate the
containment. Option B, Section III.A of
Appendix J requires that the overall
integrated leak rate must not exceed the
allowable leakage (La) with margin, as
specified in the Technical
Specifications (TS). The overall
integrated leak rate, as specified in the
Appendix J definitions, includes the
contribution from MSIV leakage. By
letter dated September 15, 2005, the
licensee requested an exemption from
Option B, Section III.A, requirements to
permit exclusion of MSIV leakage from
the overall integrated leak rate test
measurement.
Option B, Section III.B of Appendix J
requires that the sum of the leakage
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
rates of Type B and Type C local leak
rate tests be less than the performance
criterion (La) with margin, as specified
in the TS. The licensee’s September 15,
2005, letter, also requests an exemption
from this requirement, to permit
exclusion of the MSIV contribution to
the sum of the Type B and Type C tests.
The above-cited requirements of
Appendix J require that MSIV leakage
measurements be grouped with the
leakage measurements of other
containment penetrations when
containment leakage tests are
performed. The licensee stated that
these requirements are inconsistent with
the design of the MNGP facilities and
the analytical models used to calculate
the radiological consequences of designbasis accidents. At other nuclear plants,
the leakage from primary containment
penetrations, under accident conditions,
is collected and treated by the
secondary containment system, or
would bypass the secondary
containment. However, at MNGP, the
leakage from the MSIVs is collected and
treated via an alternative leakage
treatment (ALT) path having different
mitigation characteristics. In performing
accident analyses, it is appropriate to
group various leakage effluents
according to the treatment they receive
before being released to the
environment, i.e., bypass leakage is
grouped, leakage into secondary
containment is grouped, and ALT
leakage is grouped, with specific limits
for each group defined in the TS. The
proposed exemption would permit ALT
path leakage to be independently
grouped with its unique leakage limits.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The proposed action will not
significantly increase the probability or
consequences of accidents. The NRC
staff has completed its evaluation of the
proposed exemption and associated
amendment and finds that the
calculated total doses remain within the
acceptance criteria of 10 CFR 50.67 and
General Design Criterion 19, and there
is no significant increase in
occupational or public radiation
exposure. The NRC staff thus concludes
that granting the proposed exemption
would result in no significant
radiological environmental impact.
The proposed action does not affect
non-radiological plant effluents or
historical sites, and has no other
environmental impact. Therefore there
are no significant non-radiological
impacts associated with the proposed
exemption.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that
there are no significant environmental
E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM
07DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 235 / Thursday, December 7, 2006 / Notices
impacts associated with the proposed
action.
Alternative 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
exemption 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
This action does not involve the use
of any resources not previously
considered in the MNGP Final
Environmental Statement dated
November 1972, as supplemented on
August 31, 2006 (Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for
Nuclear Plants for License Renewal,
Regarding MNGP).
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on October 5, 2006, the NRC staff
consulted with the Minnesota State
official, Mr. Steve Rakow, regarding the
environmental impact of the proposed
action. Mr. Rakow had no comments.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the environmental
assessment, the Commission concludes
that the proposed action will not have
a significant effect on the quality of the
human environment. Accordingly, the
Commission has determined not to
prepare an environmental impact
statement for the proposed action.
For further details with respect to this
action, see the licensee’s letter dated
September 15, 2006. 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 O–1 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, https://
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 pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day
of November, 2006.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:29 Dec 06, 2006
Jkt 211001
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Peter S. Tam,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing
Branch III–1, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6–20751 Filed 12–6–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–482]
Notice of Acceptance for Docketing of
the Application, Notice of Opportunity
for Hearing, and Notice of Intent To
Prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement and Conduct the Scoping
Process for Facility Operating License
No. NPF–42 for an Additional 20-Year
Period; Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating
Corporation; Wolf Creek Generating
Station, Unit 1
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC or the Commission)
is considering an application for the
renewal of operating license NPF–42,
which authorizes the Wolf Creek
Nuclear Operating Corporation
(WCNOC), to operate the Wolf Creek
Generating Station (WCGS), Unit 1, at
3565 megawatts thermal. The renewed
license would authorize the applicant to
operate the WCGS, Unit 1, for an
additional 20 years beyond the period
specified in the current license. WCGS,
Unit 1, is located in Burlington, Kansas,
and its current operating license expires
on March 11, 2025.
On October 4, 2006, the Commission’s
staff received an application from
WCNOC, to renew operating license
NPF–42 for WCGS, Unit 1, pursuant to
title 10, part 54, of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR part 54). A notice
of receipt and availability of the license
renewal application (LRA) was
published in the Federal Register on
October 18, 2006 (71 FR 61512).
The Commission’s staff has reviewed
the LRA for its acceptability and has
determined that WCNOC has submitted
sufficient information in accordance
with 10 CFR 54.19, 54.21, 54.22, 54.23,
and 51.53(c), and that the application is
acceptable for docketing. The
Commission will retain the current
Docket No. 50–482, for operating license
NPF–42. The docketing of the renewal
application does not preclude requests
for additional information as the review
proceeds, nor does it predict whether
the Commission will grant or deny the
license.
Before issuance of the requested
renewed license, the NRC will have
made the findings required by the
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
70997
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
(the Act), and the Commission’s rules
and regulations. In accordance with 10
CFR 54.29, the NRC may issue a
renewed license on the basis of its
review if it finds that actions have been
identified and have been or will be
taken with respect to: (1) Managing the
effects of aging during the period of
extended operation on the functionality
of structures and components that have
been identified as requiring aging
management review; and (2) timelimited aging analyses that have been
identified as requiring review, such that
there is reasonable assurance that the
activities authorized by the renewed
license will continue to be conducted in
accordance with the current licensing
basis (CLB), and that any changes made
to the plant’s CLB will comply with the
Act and the Commission’s regulations.
In addition, the Commission must find
that applicable requirements of subpart
A of 10 CFR part 51 have been satisfied,
and that matters raised under 10 CFR
2.335 have been addressed.
Within 60 days after the date of
publication of this Federal Register
notice, any person whose interest may
be affected by this proceeding and who
desires to participate as a party in the
proceeding must file a written request
for a hearing or a petition for leave to
intervene with respect to the renewal of
the license. Interested parties must file
requests for a hearing or a petition for
leave to intervene in accordance with
the Commission’s ‘‘Rules of Practice for
Domestic Licensing Proceedings and
Issuance of Orders’’ described in 10 CFR
part 2. Those interested should consult
a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which
is available at the Commission’s Public
Document Room (PDR), located at One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852 and is
accessible from the Agencywide
Documents Access and Management
System’s (ADAMS) Public Electronic
Reading Room through the Internet at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. Persons who do not have
access to the Internet or who encounter
problems in accessing the documents
located in ADAMS should contact the
NRC’s PDR reference staff by telephone
at 1–800–397–4209, or 301–415–4737,
or via e-mail at PDR@nrc.gov. If a
request for a hearing or a petition for
leave to intervene is filed within the 60day period, the Commission or a
presiding officer designated by the
Commission or by the Chief
Administrative Judge of the Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board Panel will
rule on the request and/or petition, and
the Secretary or the Chief
E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM
07DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 235 (Thursday, December 7, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70996-70997]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-20751]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-263]
Nuclear Management Company, LLC; Monticello Nuclear Generating
Station; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 50 (10 CFR 50), Appendix J, for Facility Operating
Licenses No. DPR-22, issued to Nuclear Management Company (NMC) for
operation of the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP), located in
Wright County, Minnesota.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt NMC from requirements to include
main steam isolation valve (MSIV) leakage in (1) the overall integrated
leakage rate test measurement required by Section III.A of Appendix J,
Option B; and (2) the sum of local leak rate test measurements required
by Section III.B of Appendix J, Option B.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated September 15, 2005, for exemption and amendment to
the operating license (the latter action is not the subject of this
notice).
The Need for the Proposed Action
Section 50.54(o) of 10 CFR Part 50 requires that primary reactor
containments for water-cooled power reactors be subject to the
requirements of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50. Appendix J specifies the
leakage test requirements, schedules, and acceptance criteria for tests
of the leak-tight integrity of the primary reactor containment and
systems and components which penetrate the containment. Option B,
Section III.A of Appendix J requires that the overall integrated leak
rate must not exceed the allowable leakage (La) with margin, as
specified in the Technical Specifications (TS). The overall integrated
leak rate, as specified in the Appendix J definitions, includes the
contribution from MSIV leakage. By letter dated September 15, 2005, the
licensee requested an exemption from Option B, Section III.A,
requirements to permit exclusion of MSIV leakage from the overall
integrated leak rate test measurement.
Option B, Section III.B of Appendix J requires that the sum of the
leakage rates of Type B and Type C local leak rate tests be less than
the performance criterion (La) with margin, as specified in the TS. The
licensee's September 15, 2005, letter, also requests an exemption from
this requirement, to permit exclusion of the MSIV contribution to the
sum of the Type B and Type C tests.
The above-cited requirements of Appendix J require that MSIV
leakage measurements be grouped with the leakage measurements of other
containment penetrations when containment leakage tests are performed.
The licensee stated that these requirements are inconsistent with the
design of the MNGP facilities and the analytical models used to
calculate the radiological consequences of design-basis accidents. At
other nuclear plants, the leakage from primary containment
penetrations, under accident conditions, is collected and treated by
the secondary containment system, or would bypass the secondary
containment. However, at MNGP, the leakage from the MSIVs is collected
and treated via an alternative leakage treatment (ALT) path having
different mitigation characteristics. In performing accident analyses,
it is appropriate to group various leakage effluents according to the
treatment they receive before being released to the environment, i.e.,
bypass leakage is grouped, leakage into secondary containment is
grouped, and ALT leakage is grouped, with specific limits for each
group defined in the TS. The proposed exemption would permit ALT path
leakage to be independently grouped with its unique leakage limits.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability
or consequences of accidents. The NRC staff has completed its
evaluation of the proposed exemption and associated amendment and finds
that the calculated total doses remain within the acceptance criteria
of 10 CFR 50.67 and General Design Criterion 19, and there is no
significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. The
NRC staff thus concludes that granting the proposed exemption would
result in no significant radiological environmental impact.
The proposed action does not affect non-radiological plant
effluents or historical sites, and has no other environmental impact.
Therefore there are no significant non-radiological impacts associated
with the proposed exemption.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant
environmental
[[Page 70997]]
impacts associated with the proposed action.
Alternative 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 exemption 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
This action does not involve the use of any resources not
previously considered in the MNGP Final Environmental Statement dated
November 1972, as supplemented on August 31, 2006 (Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for Nuclear Plants for License Renewal,
Regarding MNGP).
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on October 5, 2006, the NRC
staff consulted with the Minnesota State official, Mr. Steve Rakow,
regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. Mr. Rakow
had no comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the environmental assessment, the Commission
concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect
on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the Commission
has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the
proposed action.
For further details with respect to this action, see the licensee's
letter dated September 15, 2006. 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 O-1 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, https://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 pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of November, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Peter S. Tam,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III-1, Division of
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-20751 Filed 12-6-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
