[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 41 (Thursday, March 2, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11689-11692]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5137]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-410]


Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation; Environmental Assessment and 
Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. 
NPF-69, issued to Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (the licensee), for 
operation of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit 2 (NMP-2), 
located in Oswego County, New York.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    This Environmental Assessment has been prepared to address 
potential environmental issues related to the licensee's application to 
amend the NMP-2 operating license dated July 22, 1993, as supplemented 
January 9, 1995. The proposed amendment would increase the licensed 
core thermal power from 3323 MWt to 3467 MWt, which represents an 
approximate increase of 4.3% over the current licensed power level. 
This request is in accordance with the generic boiling water reactor 
(BWR) power uprate program established by the General Electric Company 
(GE) and approved by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff 
in a letter from W. Russell, NRC, to P. Marriotte, GE, dated September 
30, 1991. Implementation of the proposed power uprate at NMP-2 will 
result in an increase of steam flow to approximately 105% of the 
current operating limit, but will require no changes to the basic fuel 
design. Core reload design and fuel parameters will be modified as 
power uprate is implemented to support the current 18-month reload 
cycle. The higher power level will be achieved by expanding the power/
flow map and by increasing, slightly, reactor vessel dome pressure. The 
maximum recirculation flow limit will not be increased over the 
preuprate value. Implementation of this proposed power uprate will 
require minor modifications, such as, resetting of the low set safety 
relief setpoints, as well as the calibration of plant instrumentation 
to reflect the uprated power. Plant operating, emergency, and other 
procedure changes will be made where necessary to support uprated 
operation.
    The proposed action involves NRC issuance of a license amendment to 
uprate the authorized power level by changing the operating license, 
including Appendix A of the license (Technical Specifications). No 
change is needed to Appendix B of the license (Environmental Protection 
Plan--Nonradiological).

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would authorize the licensee to increase the 
potential electrical output of NMP2 by approximately 45 megawatts and 
thus would provide additional electrical power to service domestic and 
commercial areas of the licensee's grid.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The ``Final Environmental Statement (FES) related to operation of 
Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit No. 2'' was issued May 1985 
(NUREG-1085). By letter of July 22, 1993, the licensee submitted the 
proposed amendment to implement power uprate for NMP2, which is the 
subject of this environmental assessment. Section 11.3 of the NMP2 
power uprate licensing topical report (GE report NEDC-31994P, Revision 
1) which was submitted as Enclosure 3 to NMPC's July 22, 1993, 
submittal, provided an environmental assessment of the proposed power 
uprate. Some environmental effects will remain the same, while power 
uprate may nominally increase others. Actual effects are at worst 
proportional to the approximately 5% increase in turbine steam flow. 
Increased core flow has no discernable effect on the environmental 
assessment.
    The licensee provided information regarding the nonradiological and 
radiological environmental effects of the proposed action in the July 
22, 1993, application and in its supplemental information dated January 
9, 1995. The NRC staff has reviewed the potential nonradiological and 
radiological effects of the proposed action on the environment as 
described below. [[Page 11690]] 

Nonradiological Environmental Assessment

    Power uprate will not change the method of generating electricity 
nor the method of handling any influents from minor effluents to the 
environment. Therefore, no new or different types of environmental 
impacts are expected.
    The NRC staff reviewed the nonradiological impact of operation at 
uprated power levels on influents from and effluents to Lake Ontario. 
NMP-2 utilizes a closed-loop circulating water system and a natural 
draft cooling tower for dissipating heat from the main turbine 
condenser. Other equipment is cooled by the service water system. The 
cooling tower and service water system are operated in accordance with 
the requirements of the State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 
(SPDES) Permit No. NY-000-1015, which was issued by the New York State 
Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) on October 26, 1994, 
and became effective on December 1, 1994. It expires on December 1, 
1999. This new discharge permit was issued by New York State since the 
previous permit had expired.
    The withdrawal of cooling water from Lake Ontario is expected to 
increase slightly due to the increased heat loads. Emergency system 
flows are expected to remain generally unchanged. Increased heat loads 
are expected for nonsafety related loads such as the main generator 
stator coolers, hydrogen coolers, and exciter coolers. These systems, 
as well as other systems (e.g., RHR heat exchangers, emergency diesel 
generator coolers, and spent fuel pool heat exchangers) noted in 
Section 6 of the July 22, 1993, submittal are expected to require 
additional cooling and an increase in flowrate. The increase in water 
intake to the cooling tower is due to increased evaporation in the 
cooling tower. The increase in flowrate is expected to be small and 
within a nominal 5 percent increase. Conservatively assuming a 5 
percent increase in the withdrawal rate, the intake approach flowrate 
velocity is expected to increase from 0.5 fps to 0.53 fps. Observations 
by the licensee have shown fish impingement to be very low and in most 
cases nonexistent. The NYSDEC has evaluated the potential effects of 
the current intake flowrate and has concluded that no special aquatic 
studies are required to assess the biological impact. No aquatic 
studies were included in the licensee's new SPDES discharge permit 
which was effective December 1, 1994. The licensee has stated that 
because the current intake flowrates are low and the aquatic impacts of 
withdrawal are minimal, an increase of 5 percent is not expected to 
result in a significant impact, if any impact at all. The NRC staff 
agrees with the licensee's assessment and does not expect any 
significant impact due to the 5 percent increase in withdrawal 
flowrate.
    The licensee does not expect an increase in the cooling tower 
blowdown. The cooling tower blowdown rate is controlled by total copper 
concentration in the circulating water system and the economic use of 
water treatment chemicals. The current blowdown rate is approximately 
40 percent of the designed rate and is restricted to ensure compliance 
with the total copper concentration limitation imposed by the SPDES 
permit and by economic use of water treatment chemicals. The licensee 
has stated that if the blowdown rate was increased by 5-10 percent in 
order to evaluate cooling tower efficiency and to reduce the cycles of 
concentration of natural salts in the circulating water system, the 
copper limitation could still be met and the flowrate impact would be 
less than design. In addition, the NYSDEC has evaluated the service 
water and cooling tower blowdown based on the original design 
flowrates, as well as the state of the art technology of the discharge 
diffuser. The NYSDEC has concluded that no thermal measurements or 
thermal plume studies are necessary because of the low flowrates and 
the design of the discharge structure. Therefore, the licensee 
concluded that because the withdrawal rate is currently low and the 
cooling tower blowdown rate is currently below original design, the 5 
percent increase in water withdrawal or an increase in blowdown is not 
expected to result in any additional environmental impact since any 
increase in flowrate is expected to be no more than the original system 
design. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's assessment and 
concludes the increased flowrates will not result in a significant 
increase in environmental impact.
    The licensee has conservatively estimated that the power uprate 
will result in an annual increase in dissolved solids from water 
passing through the soil in the area of the Energy Center of 
approximately 0.012 ppm. Since even the most sensitive species are not 
affected by soil salinization of less than 1,280 ppm, it is highly 
unlikely that even salt-sensitive species would be measurably affected 
by this additional deposition rate during operation of the NMP-2 
cooling tower at power uprate conditions. Therefore, the NRC staff has 
concluded that the increase in cooling tower drift due to the proposed 
power uprate will have no significant increase in environment impact 
and would still be well below the levels of concern to local soil and 
vegetation.
    Nonradiological effluent discharges from other systems were also 
considered. Nonradiological effluent limits for such systems as floor 
and equipment drains are established in the SPDES permit. Discharges 
from these systems are not expected to change significantly, if at all, 
because operation at uprated power levels are governed by the limits in 
the SPDES permit. Thus, the impact on the environment from these 
systems as a result of operation at uprated power levels is not 
significant.
    With the exception of the cooling tower, all other significant 
noise producing equipment associated with the service water and 
circulating water systems are located inside buildings and/or well 
below grade where the noise level would have little, if any, 
environmental impact. There is no expected increase in cooling tower 
noise levels associated with the proposed power uprate since there are 
no plans to increase its flow rate as part of the proposed power 
uprate. The main turbine and generator will operate at the same speed 
and thus will not contribute to increased offsite noise. Although the 
main station transformers will operate at a slightly (approximately 4.3 
percent) increased kilovolt-ampere level, the slight increase will 
cause an insignificant increase in the overall noise level. Therefore, 
the NRC staff has concluded that the outside noise level increase will 
be insignificant.
    The licensee has stated that the proposed power uprate will not 
require any changes to the SPDES discharge permit nor to the NMP-2 
Environmental Protection Plan. The NRC staff agrees with this 
assessment and, therefore, we have concluded that the proposed power 
uprate will have an insignificant impact on the nonradiological 
elements of concern.

Radiological Environmental Assessment

    The licensee evaluated the impact of the proposed power uprate 
amendment to show that the applicable regulatory acceptance criteria 
relative to radiological environmental impacts will continue to be 
satisfied for the uprated power conditions. In conducting this 
evaluation, the licensee considered the effect of the higher power 
level on liquid radioactive wastes, gaseous radioactive wastes, and 
radiation levels both in the plant and offsite during both normal 
operation and post-accident.
    The floor drain collector subsystem waste collector subsystem both 
receive [[Page 11691]] inputs from a variety of sources (e.g., leakage 
from component cooling water system, reactor coolant system, condensate 
and feedwater system, turbine plant cooling water system, and auxiliary 
steam system). However, leakages from these systems are not expected to 
increase significantly since the operating pressures of these systems 
are either being maintained constant or are being increased only 
slightly due to the proposed power uprate.
    The largest single source of liquid radioactive waste is from the 
ultrasonic cleaning of the condensate demineralizers. These 
demineralizers remove activated corrosion products which are expected 
to increase proportionally to the proposed power uprate. However, the 
total volume of processed waste is not expected to increase 
significantly, since the only appreciable increase in processed waste 
will be due to the slightly more frequent cleaning of these 
demineralizers. Based on a review of plant effluent reports and the 
slight increase expected due to the proposed power uprate, the NRC 
staff has concluded that the slight increase in the processing of 
liquid radioactive wastes will not have a significant increase in 
environment impact and that requirements of 10 CFR part 20 and 10 CFR 
part 50, appendix I, will continue to be met.
    Gaseous radioactive effluents are produced during both normal 
operation and abnormal operation occurrences. These effluents are 
collected, controlled, processed, stored, and disposed of by the 
gaseous radioactive waste management systems which include the various 
building ventilation systems, the offgas system, and the standby gas 
treatment system (SGTS). The concentration of radioactive gaseous 
effluents released through the building ventilation systems during 
normal operation is not expected to increase significantly due to the 
proposed power uprate since the amount of fission products released 
into the reactor coolant (and subsequently into the building 
atmosphere) depends on the number and nature of fuel rod defects and is 
not dependent on reactor power level. The concentration of activation 
products contained in the reactor coolant is expected to remain 
unchanged, since the linear increase in the production of these 
activation products will be offset by the linear increase in steaming 
rate. Therefore, based on its review of the various building 
ventilation systems, the NRC staff has concluded that there will not be 
a significant adverse effect on airborne radioactive effluents as a 
result of the proposed power uprate.
    Radiolysis of the reactor coolant causes the formation of hydrogen 
and oxygen, the quantities of which increase linearly with core power. 
These additional quantities of hydrogen and oxygen would increase the 
flow to the recombiners by 4.3 percent during uprated power conditions. 
The offgas system was originally designed for 105 percent of warranted 
steam flow which would not be exceeded during operation at the proposed 
uprated power level. Therefore, no changes will be required in the 
offgas system and since the offgas system will be operated within the 
originally evaluated design conditions, there will be no environmental 
impact that was not previously evaluated.
    The SGTS is designed to minimize offsite radiation dose rates 
during venting and purging of both the primary and secondary 
containment atmosphere under accident or abnormal conditions. This is 
accomplished by maintaining the secondary containment at a slightly 
negative pressure (more negative than or equal to -0.25 inch water 
gauge) with respect to the outside atmosphere and discharging the 
secondary containment atmosphere through high-efficiency particulate 
air (HEPA) filters and charcoal absorbers. As noted in the Updated 
Safety Analysis Report (USAR), the SGTS charcoal absorbers are designed 
for a charcoal loading capacity of 10 mgI/gC and get the design 
requirements for 30-day and 100-day loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) 
scenarios. The proposed power uprate would increase the post-LOCA 
iodine loading by 4.3 percent but the charcoal loading would still 
remain within the 10 mgI/gC loading and therefore, there would be no 
significant increase in environmental impact.
    The licensee has evaluated the effects of the power uprate on in-
plant radiation levels in the NMP-2 facility during both normal 
operation and post-accident. The licensee has concluded that radiation 
levels during both normal operation and post-accident may increase 
slightly (at most, proportional to the increase in power level). The 
slight increases in in-plant radiation levels expected due to the 
proposed power uprate are not expected to affect radiation zoning or 
shielding requirements. Individual worker occupational exposures will 
be maintained with acceptable limits by the existing as low as is 
reasonably achievable (ALARA) program which the licensee uses to 
control access to radiation areas. Therefore, the NRC staff has 
concluded that the slightly increased in-plant radiation levels will 
not have a significant environmental impact.
    The offsite doses associated with normal operation are not 
significantly affected by operation at the proposed uprated power level 
and are expected to remain well within the limits of 10 CFR part 20 and 
10 CFR part 50, appendix I. These limits are imposed by Technical 
Specifications 3/4.11.1, 3/4.11.2, 3/4.11.3, and 3/4.11.4, which will 
not be changed by the proposed power uprate. Therefore, the NRC staff 
has concluded that the offsite doses due to normal operation at the 
proposed power uprate conditions will not result in a significant 
environmental impact.
    The dose evaluations for design basis accidents were performed for 
issuance of the current operating license based on 105 percent of the 
current rated power level. The proposed power uprate would be within 
the assumptions used during original licensing of the plant and, 
therefore, there will be no increase in environmental impacts over 
those evaluated in the NRC staff's Final Environmental Statement 
related to the operation of Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit No. 2 
(NUREG-1085), May 1985.
    The NRC staff has concluded that the NRC's FES (NUREG-1085) is 
valid for operation at the proposed uprated power conditions. The NRC 
staff also concluded that the plant operating parameters impacted by 
the proposed uprate would remain within the bounding conditions on 
which the conclusions of the FES are based.
    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's reevaluation of the 
potential radiological and nonradiological environmental impacts for 
the proposed action. On the basis of this review, the NRC staff finds 
that the radiological and nonradiological environmental impacts 
associated with the proposed small increase in power are essentially 
immeasurable and do not change the conclusion in the FES that the 
operation of NMP-2 would cause no significant adverse impact upon the 
quality of the human environment.
    Accordingly, the Commission concludes that this proposed action 
would result in no significant radiological or nonradiological 
environmental impact.

Alternative to the Proposed Action

    Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable 
environmental impact associated with the proposed action, any 
alternative with equal or greater impact need not be evaluated. The 
principal alternative would be to deny the requested amendment. Denial 
would not significantly reduce the environmental impact of plant 
operations, but would restrict operation [[Page 11692]] of NMP-2 to the 
currently licensed power level. Denial of the amendment would prevent 
the facility from generating the approximately additional 45 MWe that 
is obtainable from the existing plant.

Alternative Use of Resources

    This action does not involve the use of any resources not 
previously considered in the ``Final Environmental Statement related to 
the operation of Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit No. 2,'' dated 
May 1985.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    The Commission's staff reviewed the licensee's request and 
consulted with the New York State official regarding the environmental 
impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comment 
regarding the NRC's proposed action.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    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.
    Accordingly, the Commission has determined not to prepare an 
environmental impact statement for the proposed license amendment.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated July 22, 1993, as supplemented January 
9, 1995. These documents are available for public inspection at the 
Commission's Public Document Room, The Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, 
NW, Washington, DC 20555 and at the Reference and Documents Department, 
Penfield Library, State University of New York, Oswego, New York 13126.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of February 1995.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Ledyard B. Marsh,
Director, Project Directorate I-1, Division of Reactor Projects--I/II, 
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-5137 Filed 3-01-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M