Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 8, 1995 / Notices 7589

environmental impact of the proposed

action. The State official had no

comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

Based upon 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 amendment.

For further details with respect to this

proposed action, see the licensee’s letter

dated April 7, 1994, as supplemented

November 4, 1994, which are available

for public inspection at the

Commission’s Public Document Room,

the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street,

NW., Washington, DC, and at the local

public document room located at the

Russell Library, 123 Broad Street,

Middletown, Connecticut 06547.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day

of February 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Phillip F. McKee,

Director, Project Directorate I–4, Division of

Reactor Projects—I/II, Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 95–3086 Filed 2–7–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

[Docket No. 50–20]

Environmental Assessment and

Finding of No Significant Impact

Regarding Proposed License

Amendment; Changing Expiration Date

of Amended Facility Operating License

No. R–37 Massachusetts Institute of

Technology

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) is considering

issuance of a license amendment

extending the expiration date of

Amended Facility Operating License

No. R–37 (the license) for the

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

(MIT or the licensee) Research Reactor

(MITR) from May 7, 1996, to August 8,

1999. This recaptures construction time

between May 7, 1956, the issuance date

of Construction Permit No. CPRR–5 and

June 9, 1958, the issuance date of the

license, and between May 24, 1974, the

date reactor operations were terminated

to modify the reactor under

Construction Permit No. CPRR–118, and

July 23, 1975, the date of issuance of

Amendment No. 10 to the license which

authorized a return to reactor operation.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

By application dated March 31, 1994,

as supplemented on September 29, and

November 4, 1994, MIT requested that

the expiration date of Amended Facility

Operating License No. R–37 be extended

from midnight, May, 7, 1996, to

midnight, April 24, 2001. MIT has

requested that four periods of time be

recaptured:

(1) The period from May 7, 1956, the

date of issuance of CPRR–5, until June

9, 1958, the issuance date of the license,

or July 21, 1958, the date of initial

criticality.

(2) The period from July 21, 1958,

until June 1, 1959, during which the

first reactor (MITR–I) was operated

infrequently at low power for startup

testing.

(3) From May 24, 1974, the date the

reactor was shut down to perform

modifications to the facility under

Construction Permit No. CPRR–118,

(CPRR–118 was issued on April 9, 1973,

but component acquisition problems

delayed the reactor shut down until

May 24, 1974) until August 14, 1975,

the date of initial criticality of the

modified reactor (MITR–II). The NRC

issued Amendment No. 10 to the license

on July 23, 1975, which authorized

operation of the modified reactor.

(4) The period from August 14, 1975,

until April 15, 1976, during which the

modified reactor was operated

infrequently at low power for startup

testing.

The staff has determined that the time

between May 7, 1956, the issuance date

of Construction Permit No. CPRR–5 and

June 9, 1958, the issuance date of the

license, and between May 24, 1974, the

day reactor operations where terminated

to modify the reactor under

Construction permit No. CPRR–118, and

July 23, 1975, the date of issuance of

Amendment No. 10 to the license which

authorized a return to reactor operation,

represents time that was not available to

the licensee due to construction. This

period of time is 1188 days, which

when added to the expiration date of the

Amended Facility Operating License of

May 7, 1996, results in a extended

expiration date of August 8, 1999.

The staff has also determined that the

time (a) between July 9, 1958, the

issuance date of the license, through

July 21, 1958, the date of initial

criticality, to June 1, 1959, the end of

low power testing, and (b) between July

23, 1975, the date of issuance of

Amendment No. 10, through August 14,

1975, the date of initial criticality for the

modified reactor, to April 15, 1976, the

end of low power testing, cannot be

added to extend the expiration date of

the license. This is because this time

was authorized by NRC in the license

for reactor operation, was available to

the licensee for operations and, after

initial criticality in both cases, was used

by the licensee for low power testing. A

license term of 40 years from the date

of issuance of the operating license is

permitted by NRC regulations,

specifically 10 CFR 50.51. Commission

approval of the proposed amendment

would be consistent with recent NRC

actions for nuclear power reactors.

Need for Proposed Action

The granting of this request would

allow the licensee to operate the facility

for approximately three years and three

months beyond the current license

expiration date, thus recapturing

construction periods. Over 30 similar

extensions have been issued to other

licensees. Without issuance of the

proposed license amendment, an

application for license renewal would

be required to be developed and

submitted before the expiration of the

current license on May 7, 1996, or the

MITR would be shut down and a

decommissioning plan required to be

developed and submitted.

Environmental Impact of the proposed

Action

The anticipated impact of the facility

on the environment was evaluated in

the Environmental Impact Appraisal for

the MITR dated July 23, 1975. This

appraisal was prepared for the issuance

of Amendment No. 10 to the license,

which authorized a return to operation

for the facility at a power level of 5

MW(t), after modifications were

completed to the reactor as authorized

by construction permit No. CPRR–118.

The descriptions in and findings of that

appraisal are still valid. That appraisal

concluded that there will be no

significant environmental impact

associated with the licensing of the

MITR to be operated at 5 MW(t).

The licensee has not requested any

changes to the facility as part of this

amendment request. The environmental

effects of accidents which were

discussed and considered negligible in

the 1975 appraisal have not changed.

Operating data is available to replace

the estimates of the environmental

effects of facility operation in the 1975

appraisal. The actual environmental

effects of facility operation from July 1,

1984 (FY 85), to June 30, 1994 (FY 94),

were obtained from the licensee.

Environmental surveys within a

quarter mile of the facility detected an

average (averaged because readings are
7590 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 8, 1995 / Notices

from multiple monitoring stations)

annual radiation exposure as follows:

Year (FY)

Average

readings

(mrem)

1994 .............................................. 0.4

1993 .............................................. 0.5

1992 .............................................. 0.2

1991 .............................................. 0.1

1990 .............................................. 0.1

1989 .............................................. 0.2

1988 .............................................. 0.2

1987 .............................................. 1.2

1986 .............................................. 1.8

1985 .............................................. 2.2

Annual airborne effluent releases

from the facility are given in the next

table. FY 94 is presented in two half

years periods because amendments to

10 CFR Part 20 became effective on

January 1, 1994, which changed the

regulatory limits for release

concentrations to the environment for

certain radionuclides. Total curies

released during FY 94 is comparable to

past years. The percent of Regulatory

Limit column represents the percent of

the regulatory limit for concentration of

radionuclides in air after taking into

account dilution from the release point.

Year (FY)

Stack

release

(curies)

% of

regulatory

limit

1/1/94 to 6/30/94 ............. 398 21.7

7/1/93 to 12/31/93 ........... 275 4.1

1993 ................................ 923 6.0

1992 ................................ 728 4.9

1991 ................................ 684 4.4

1990 ................................ 542 3.5

1989 ................................ 1529 9.8

1988 ................................ 2627 17

1987 ................................ 4223 30

1986 ................................ 3797 26

1985 ................................ 4076 26

Annual liquid effluent releases are as

follows:

Year (FY)

Total

activity

(curies)

1994 .................................................. 0.025

1993 .................................................. 0.007

1992 .................................................. 0.036

1991 .................................................. 0.121

1990 .................................................. 0.080

1989 .................................................. 0.110

1988 .................................................. 0.072

1987 .................................................. 0.098

1986 .................................................. 0.288

1985 .................................................. 0.099

Low level solid waste shipped from

the facility is given in cubic feet and

total activity in curies. Increased

shipments in FY 1994 and FY 1993

represent an effort by the licensee to

remove solid waste from the facility

before waste disposal site closures

prevented future shipments of low level

solid waste.

Year (FY) Cubic

feet

Total

activity

(curies)

1994 .................................. 457 0.925

1993 .................................. 210 0.218

1992 .................................. 127 0.011

1991 .................................. 116 0.125

1990 .................................. 192 0.035

1989 .................................. 135 0.053

1988 .................................. 60 0.003

1987 .................................. 112 0.082

1986 .................................. 75 0.097

1985 .................................. 120 0.067

These releases are well within

regulatory limits and will not have a

significant impact on the environment.

Releases for the proposed license

extension are estimated to continue at

levels well within regulatory limits.

Alternative Use of Resources

One alternative to the proposed

amendment request is to deny the

request. If the request is denied, the

MITR would be shut down or an

application for license renewal would

be developed and submitted before

expiration of the current license on May

7, 1996. Shutting the reactor down

would result in the loss of an

educational tool for the training of

students and the conduct of research in

many areas including medical therapy.

If the request is denied and the licensee

proposes to renew the license, resources

would have to be expended on the part

of the licensee and the Commission

sooner than if the request for license

extension is granted. Denial of the

application would result in no change

in current environmental impacts.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

The NRC staff consulted no other

agencies or persons in reviewing the

request from the licensee.

Finding of No Significant Impact

The Commission has determined not

to prepare an environmental impact

statement for the proposed action based

upon the foregoing environmental

assessment. The Commission concludes

that the proposed action will not have

a significant effect on the quality of the

human environment for the reasons set

out above.

For detailed information with respect

to this proposed action, see the

application for amendment dated March

31, 1994, as supplemented, the Safety

Evaluation prepared by the staff, the

Negative Declaration Regarding Facility

Operating License R–37 for the

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Research Reactor dated July 23, 1975,

and the Environmental Impact

Appraisal for the Massachusetts

Institute of Technology Reactor dated

July 23, 1975. These documents are

available for public inspection at the

Commission’s Public Document Room,

2120 L Street, NW., Washington, D.C.

20555.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day

of February 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Seymour H. Weiss,

Director, Non-Power Reactors and

Decommissioning Project Directorate,

Division of Project Support, Office of Nuclear

Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 95–3087 Filed 2–7–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

Advisory Committee on Reactor

Safeguards; Subcommittee Meeting on

Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena

The ACRS Subcommittee on Thermal

Hydraulic Phenomena will hold a

meeting on February 15 and 16, 1995,

Room T–2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike,

Rockville, Maryland.

The meeting will be closed to public

attendance to discuss Westinghouse

proprietary information pursuant to (5

U.S.C. 552b(c)(4)), with the exception of

a 1–2 hour session on Thursday,

February 16, 1995, that will be open to

the public.

The agenda for the subject meeting

shall be as follows:

Wednesday, February 15, 1995—8:30 a.m.

until the conclusion of business; and

Thursday, February 16, 1995—8:30 a.m.

until the conclusion of business.

The Subcommittee will continue its

review of the Westinghouse COBRA/

TRAC thermal hydraulic code. The

purpose of this meeting is to gather

information, analyze relevant issues and

facts, and to formulate proposed

positions and actions, as appropriate,

for deliberation by the full Committee.

Oral statements may be presented by

members of the public with the

concurrence of the Subcommittee

Chairman; written statements will be

accepted and made available to the

Committee. Electronic recordings will

be permitted only during those portions

of the meeting that are open to the

public, and questions may be asked only

by members of the Subcommittee, its

consultants, and staff. Persons desiring

to make oral statements should notify

the cognizant ACRS staff engineer

named below five days prior to the

meeting, if possible, so that appropriate

arrangements can be made.