[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 194 (Thursday, October 5, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59472-59473]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-25562]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-266 AND 50-301]


Nuclear Management Company, LLC; Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 
1 and 2 Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
issuance of an exemption from certain requirements of Title 10 of the 
Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Part 50, Section 50.60, for 
Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-24 and DPR-27, issued to the 
Nuclear Management Company, LLC (the licensee), for operation of the 
Point Beach Nuclear Plant (PBNP), Units 1 and 2, Facility Operating 
License Nos. DPR-24 and DPR-27, respectively, located in the town of 
Two Rivers, Manitowoc County, Wisconsin.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would exempt the licensee from certain 
requirements of 10 CFR 50.60 to allow the application of American 
Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME 
Code), Section XI, Code Case N-641, for determining the pressure-
temperature (P-T) limit curves, the power-operated relief valve 
setpoint for low temperature overpressure protection (LTOP), and the 
LTOP effective temperature.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application for an exemption dated July 14, 2000.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    ASME Code Case N-641 is needed to (1) determine stress intensity 
factors for postulated circumferential defects in circumferential 
welds, and for postulated axial defects in plates, forgings, and axial 
welds; (2) use the K<INF>IC</INF> fracture toughness curve shown in 
ASME Code, Section XI, Appendix A, Figure A-2200-1, in lieu of the 
K<INF>IA</INF> fracture toughness curve of ASME Code, Section XI, 
Appendix G, Figure G-22101, as the lowest bound for fracture toughness; 
and (3) determine the LTOP system effective temperature on a plant-
specific basis consistent with ASME Code, Section XI, Appendix G. Also, 
ASME Code Case N-641 is needed to revise the method used to determine 
the RCS P-T limits since continued use of the present curves 
unnecessarily restricts the P-T operating window. Therefore, 
application of the code case will relax the LTOP operating window and 
reduce potential challenges to the reactor coolant system power-
operated relief valves.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC staff has completed its evaluation of the proposed action 
and concludes that the exemption described above would provide an 
adequate margin of safety against brittle failure of the reactor 
pressure vessels at PBNP, Units 1 and 2.
    The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability 
or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of 
any effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant 
increase in occupational or public radiation

[[Page 59473]]

exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological impacts 
associated with the proposed action.
    With regard to potential nonradiological environmental impacts, the 
proposed action does not involve any historic sites. It does not affect 
nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impacts. 
Therefore, there are no significant nonradiological impacts associated 
with the proposed action.
    Accordingly, the NRC staff concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

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. 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 Final Environmental Statement for PBNP, 
Units 1 and 2.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on September 22, 2000, the 
staff consulted with the Wisconsin State official, Ms. S. Jenkins 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 14, 2000, which is available for public 
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, One White Flint 
North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. 
Publically available records are accessible electronically from the 
ADAMS Public Library component on the NRC Web site, http:\\www.nrc.gov 
(the Electronic Reading Room).

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of September, 2000.

    For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Beth A. Wetzel,
Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate III, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 00-25562 Filed 10-4-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P