[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 153 (Thursday, August 7, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46054-46057]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18179]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-423]


Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.; Millstone Power Station, Unit 
3; Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 
Related to the Proposed License Amendment To Increase the Maximum 
Reactor Power Level

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

SUMMARY: The NRC has prepared a final Environmental Assessment (EA) as 
its evaluation of a request by the Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., 
(DNC or the licensee), for a license amendment to increase the maximum 
thermal power at the Millstone Power Station, Unit 3 (Millstone 3), 
from 3,411 megawatts thermal (MWt) to 3,650 MWt. The NRC staff did not 
identify any significant impact from the information provided in the 
licensee's stretch power uprate (SPU) application for Millstone 3 or 
from the NRC staff's independent review. Therefore, the NRC staff is 
documenting its environmental review in a final EA. The final EA and 
Finding of No Significant Impact are being published in the Federal 
Register.
    The NRC published a draft EA and finding of no significant impact 
on the proposed action for public comment in the Federal Register on 
June 4, 2008 (73 FR 31894). There were no comments received by the 
comment period expiration date of July 7, 2008.

Environmental Assessment

    The NRC is considering issuance of an amendment to Renewed Facility 
Operating License No. NPF-49, issued to DNC for operation of Millstone 
3, located in New London County, Connecticut. Therefore, as required by 
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 51.21, the 
NRC is issuing this final environmental assessment and finding of no 
significant impact.

Plant Site and Environs

    Millstone 3 is located in the Town of Waterford, Connecticut, about 
40 miles east of New Haven and 40 miles southeast of Hartford, 
Connecticut. Millstone 3 is located on Millstone Point between the 
Niantic and Thames Rivers. The site sits on the edge of the Long Island 
Sound and Niantic Bay and is approximately 20 miles west of Rhode 
Island.
    The site is approximately 525 acres including the developed portion 
of the site, which is approximately 220 acres in size. In addition to 
Millstone 3, the site includes the shutdown Millstone Power Station, 
Unit 1 reactor and the operating Millstone Power Station, Unit 2 
reactor.
    The site includes approximately 50 acres of natural area and 
approximately 30 acres of recreational playing fields licensed to the 
Town of Waterford. Approximately 300 acres of the site are outside the 
land developed for the power station. The transmission lines that 
connect the Millstone Power Station to the New England grid along with 
the switchyard equipment are owned and maintained by the Connecticut 
Light and Power Company.
    The exclusion area coincides with the site property boundary. The 
nearest residences are approximately 2,400 feet from the reactors. The 
region, within 6 miles of the site, includes parts of the towns of 
Waterford, New London, Groton, East Lyme, and Old Lyme.

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would revise the Millstone 3 renewed facility 
operating license and technical specifications to increase the licensed 
rated power by approximately 7 percent from 3,411 MWt to 3,650 MWt. The 
proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application dated 
July 13, 2007, as supplemented by letters dated July 13, September 12, 
November 19, December 13 and 17, 2007, January 10, 11, 14, 18, and 31, 
February 25, March 5, 10, 25, and 27, April 4, 24, and 29, May 15, 20, 
and 21, and July 10, and 16, 2008. The proposed SPU would be 
implemented during the scheduled fall 2008 refueling outage.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action permits an increase in the licensed core 
thermal power from 3,411 MWt to 3,650 MWt for Millstone 3, providing 
the flexibility to obtain a higher electrical output from the Millstone 
Power Station. The proposed action is intended to provide an additional 
supply of electric generation in the State of Connecticut without the 
need to site and construct new facilities or to impose new sources of 
air or water discharges to the environment. The proposed action is 
intended to supply approximately 85 megawatts of additional electric 
capacity in a region of the New England Independent System Operator 
(ISO-NE) system where peak loads generally exceed local generation 
capacity.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The licensee has submitted an environmental evaluation supporting 
the proposed SPU and provided a summary of its conclusions concerning 
the radiological and non-radiological environmental impacts of the 
proposed action.
Non-Radiological Impacts
Land Use Impacts
    The proposed SPU would not affect land use at the site. No new 
construction is planned outside of the existing facilities, and no 
expansion of buildings, roads, parking lots, equipment storage areas, 
or transmission facilities would be required to support the proposed 
SPU. The proposed SPU would not require the storage of additional 
industrial chemicals or storage tanks on the site.

Transmission Facilities

    The proposed SPU would not require any new transmission lines, 
transmission line conductor modifications, or new equipment to support 
SPU operation and would not require changes in the maintenance and 
operation of existing transmission lines, switchyards, or substations.
    The licensee did not provide an estimate of the increase in the 
operating voltage due to the proposed SPU. Based on experience from 
SPUs at other plants, the NRC staff concludes that the increase in the 
operating voltage would be negligible. Because the voltage would not 
change significantly, there would be no significant change in the 
potential for electric shock.
    The proposed SPU would increase the current. The National Electric 
Safety Code (NESC) provides design criteria that limit hazards from 
steady-state currents. The NESC limits the short-circuit current to the 
ground to less than 5 milliamperes. The transmission lines meet the 
applicable shock prevention provision of the NESC. Therefore, even with 
the slight increase in current attributable to the SPU, adequate 
protection is provided against hazards from electrical shock.
    There would be an increase in current passing through the 
transmission lines associated with the increased power level of the 
proposed SPU. The increased electrical current passing through the 
transmission lines would

[[Page 46055]]

cause an increase in electromagnetic field (EMF) strength. However, 
there is no scientific consensus regarding the health effects of EMFs 
produced by operating transmission lines. Therefore, the licensee did 
not quantify the chronic effects of EMF on human and biota. The 
potential for chronic effects for these fields continues to be studied 
and is not known at this time. The National Institute of Environmental 
Health Sciences (NIEHS) directs related research through the U.S 
Department of Energy. A 2003 NIEHS study published in Environmental 
Health Perspectives, Volume 111, Number 3, dated March 2003, titled 
``Power-Line Frequency Electromagnetic Fields Do Not Induce Changes in 
Phosphorylation, Localization, or Expression of the 27-Kilodalton Heat 
Shock Protein in Human Keratinocytes,'' by Biao Shi, Behnom Farboud, 
Richard Nuccitelli, and R. Rivkah Isseroff of the University of 
California, contains the following conclusion:

    The linkage of the exposure to the power-line frequency (50-60 
Hz) electromagnetic fields (EMF) with human cancers remains 
controversial after more than 10 years of study. The in vitro 
studies on the adverse effects of EMF on human cells have not 
yielded a clear conclusion. In this study, we investigated whether 
power-line frequency EMF could act as an environmental insult to 
invoke stress responses in human keratinocytes using the 27-kDa heat 
shock protein (HSP27) as a stress marker. After exposure to 1 gauss 
(100 [mu]T) EMF from 20 min to 24 hr, the isoform pattern of HSP27 
in keratinocytes remained unchanged, suggesting that EMF did not 
induce the phosphorylation of this stress protein. EMF exposure also 
failed to induce the translocation of HSP27 from the cytoplasm to 
the nucleus. Moreover, EMF exposure did not increase the abundance 
of HSP27 in keratinocytes. In addition, we found no evidence that 
EMF exposure enhanced the level of the 70-kDa heat shock protein 
(HSP70) in breast or leukemia cells as reported previously. 
Therefore, in this study we did not detect any of a number of stress 
responses in human keratinocytes exposed to power-line frequency 
EMF.

    To date, there is not sufficient data to cause the NRC staff to 
change its position with respect to the chronic effects of EMFs. If, in 
the future, the NRC staff finds that, contrary to current indications, 
a consensus has been reached by appropriate Federal health agencies 
that there are adverse health effects from electromagnetic fields, the 
NRC staff will recommend the Commission change its current position 
regarding EMF.
Water Use Impacts
    Millstone 3 uses a once-through cooling water system, discharging 
its cooling water into an existing quarry, and then to Long Island 
Sound. The proposed SPU would increase the temperature of water 
discharged from Millstone 3. Temperatures at the discharge point would 
range from 50.5 [deg]F in January through February to 90.6 [deg]F in 
August through September. The maximum expected discharge temperature at 
100 percent power under SPU conditions is 94.5 [deg]F. Under all SPU 
conditions, Millstone Power Station will continue to operate in 
conformance with the existing National Pollution Discharge Elimination 
System (NPDES) permit conditions. The site NPDES permit limits the 
maximum temperature of the circulating water discharge to the quarry to 
98 [deg]F, the maximum change in temperature from Niantic Bay to the 
quarry to 24 [deg]F, and the maximum temperature of water entering Long 
Island Sound at the quarry cut is 105 [deg]F. The discharge is not 
allowed to increase the temperature of Long Island Sound beyond the 
plant's 8,000-ft radius mixing zone by more than an average of 4 [deg]F 
and not to exceed a maximum of 83 [deg]F. The maximum temperature rise 
across the condenser under SPU conditions is 19.5 [deg]F, which remains 
below the NPDES permit limit of 24 [deg]F. With the ocean temperature 
at its design maximum temperature of 75 [deg]F, the circulating water 
discharge temperature increases to a maximum of 94.5 [deg]F during 
normal 100-percent power operation, which remains below the NPDES 
discharge limit of 98 [deg]F. Because the increase under SPU conditions 
remains well below the facility's NPDES permit limits, the NRC staff 
determined that this increase is not significant and is bounded by 
previous NRC analysis of thermal discharge as documented in the 
``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear 
Power Plants: Regarding Millstone Power Station, Units 2 and 3,'' dated 
July 2005. No effects on the aquatic or terrestrial habitat in the 
vicinity of the plant, or to endangered or threatened species, or to 
the habitats of endangered or threatened species are expected as a 
result of the increase in thermal discharge.
Socioeconomic Impacts
    The socioeconomic impacts associated with implementing the proposed 
SPU at Millstone 3 include a minor positive contribution in relation to 
the contribution of the overall outage scope to local and regional 
economies. The proposed SPU has a small positive impact on the 
continuation of employment of the local population with the associated 
expenditures for goods and services. The amount of future property tax 
payments are dependent on the future market value of the units, future 
valuations of other properties in these jurisdictions, and other 
factors according to the licensee's proposed SPU amendment, dated July 
13, 2007.
    No measurable changes in the character, source, or intensity of 
noise generated at Millstone Power Station are expected as a result of 
the SPU, either inside or outside the plant.
Historic and Archaeological Resources at and Near Millstone Power 
Station
    There are 181 properties in New London County listed in the 
National Register of Historic Places, with 62 falling within a radius 
of 6 miles of the Millstone Power Station site, according to the 
licensee's proposed SPU application, dated July 13, 2007. The licensee 
also performed an archaeological records search for the Millstone Power 
Station site according to the licensee's proposed SPU application, 
dated July 13, 2007. The proposed SPU is not expected to impact 
historic or archaeological resources.
Summary
    The proposed SPU would not result in a significant change in non-
radiological impacts in the areas of land use, transmission facility 
operation, water use, socioeconomic factors, or historical or 
archaeological resources.
Radiological Impacts
Liquid Radioactive Waste and Offsite Doses
    The licensee evaluated the impacts of the proposed SPU on 
radioactive liquid waste production, processing, discharge into the 
environment, resultant dose to members of the public, and impact to the 
quarry and Long Island Sound into which water is discharged. There will 
be a small increase (approximately 9.1 percent for long-lived activity) 
in the equilibrium radioactivity in the reactor coolant, which in turn 
will result in a maximum increase of 9.1 percent in the radioactivity 
content of the liquid releases, since input activities are based on 
long-term reactor coolant activity. Tritium levels are also expected to 
increase by 9.1 percent in the discharged liquid. This will result in 
increased aqueous tritium concentrations in the quarry. The releases, 
excluding tritium, would remain bounded by Table D-4a (Calculated 
Release of Radioactive Materials in Liquid Effluents from Millstone 
Unit 3) of the ``Final Environmental Statement [FES] related to the 
operation of Millstone Nuclear

[[Page 46056]]

Power Station, Unit 3,'' dated December 1984, which estimates liquid 
effluent releases, excluding tritium, of about 0.56 curies per year. 
The licensee's evaluation estimates the annual average release of 
tritium to be 1,100 curies based on values from 2001 through 2005, 
which is reasonable and consistent with the value reported in the 
``Generic Environmental Impact Statement [GEIS] for License Renewal of 
Nuclear Plants'' (1996).
    The evaluation shows that even with the small increase in the 
radioactivity being discharged into the environment, the projected dose 
to the maximally exposed member of the public, while slightly 
increased, (2.61E-03 millirem (mrem) for the Whole Body and 1.26E-02 
mrem for the Critical Organ) will remain well below the ``as low as is 
reasonably achievable'' (ALARA) guides on design objectives in Section 
IIA of criteria in Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50 (3 mrem to the total 
body and 10 mrem to any organ).
Gaseous Radioactive Wastes and Offsite Doses
    The licensee evaluated the impacts of the proposed SPU on gaseous 
radioactive wastes. Gaseous radioactive wastes are activation gases and 
fission product radioactive noble gases which come from radioactive 
system leakage, continuous degasification, volume control tank (VCT) 
venting, gases used for tank cover gas, and gases generated in the 
radiochemistry laboratory. The evaluation shows that the proposed SPU 
would not significantly increase the inventory of gases normally 
processed in the gaseous waste management system. This is based on no 
change to the plant system functions and no change to the gas volume 
inputs occurring under SPU conditions.
    The activity of radioactive gaseous nuclides present in the waste 
gas system will increase as a result of the SPU. This is due to the 
increased levels of gases in the reactor coolant system and the actions 
performed in the VCT. However, the operation of the waste gas system 
will not change and will continue to allow for decay of the short-lived 
radionuclides. Tritium will remain the largest component of the gaseous 
effluents, the largest contributor being from evaporation from the 
spent fuel pools. The proposed SPU will result in a small increase 
(approximately 9.5 percent for noble gases and 9.1 percent for 
particulates, iodine, and tritium) in the equilibrium radioactivity in 
the reactor coolant, which in turn increases the activity in the 
gaseous waste disposal systems and the activity released to the 
atmosphere.
    The evaluation shows that even with the small increase in the 
gaseous radioactivity being discharged into the environment, the 
projected dose to the maximally exposed member of the public, while 
slightly increased (2.03E-02 mrem to the total body or 2.11E-02 mrem to 
the skin), will remain well below the ALARA guides in Appendix I to 10 
CFR Part 50 (annual dose: 10 millirads for gamma radiation in air, 20 
millirads for beta radiation in air, 5 mrem to the total body, and 15 
mrem to the skin).
Solid Radioactive Waste and Offsite Doses
    Solid radioactive waste (radwaste) includes solids used in the 
reactor coolant system operation, solids recovered from the reactor 
coolant systems, and solids in contact with the reactor process system 
liquids or gases. While the SPU will slightly increase the activity 
level of radioactive isotopes in the reactor coolant system and the 
volume of radioactive liquid generated from leakage and planned 
drainage, there will only be a minimal effect on the generation of 
radioactively contaminated sludge and resin solids processed as 
radwaste. The currently installed radwaste system and its total volume 
capacity for handling solid radwaste will not be affected. The activity 
of radwaste would increase proportionately to the increase in long 
half-life coolant activity, which would be bounded by a 9.1 percent 
increase under SPU conditions. This increase remains well below the 
solids activity level of 9,100 curies identified in Table 5-21 (Summary 
Table S-3 Uranium Fuel Cycle Environmental Data) of the FES for 
Millstone 3. This table takes into account the environmental factors of 
the fuel cycle as related to the operation of the Millstone 3 facility. 
The increase in solids volume generated is expected to be minor under 
SPU conditions (139.7 curies).
    For the long-term operation of the plant under SPU conditions, the 
dose to an offsite member of the public from the onsite storage of 
solid radwaste is estimated to increase by approximately 10.22 percent. 
This is based on several assumptions, which are: (1) The current waste 
decays and its contribution decreases; (2) stored radwaste is routinely 
moved offsite for disposal; (3) waste generated post-SPU enters into 
storage; and (4) the plant capacity factor approaches the target of 
1.0. The radiation dose from direct shine is cumulative based on the 
waste generated and stored onsite from all units over the plant's 
lifetime. The Millstone Power Station Offsite Dose Calculation Manual 
contains the requirements to ensure compliance with the radiation dose 
limits of 40 CFR 190 and 10 CFR 20.1301. Therefore, while a small 
increase in offsite radiation dose is expected (0.17 mrem to the whole 
body in a year; the pre-SPU whole body in a year was approximately 0.12 
mrem), it will remain within regulatory limits of 40 CFR 190 and 10 CFR 
20.1301.
Occupational Radiation Doses
    The radiation exposure to plant workers from the SPU is expected to 
be kept to a minimum based on the design features at the Millstone 
Power Station site and the Radiation Protection Program. The design 
features include: (1) Shielding, which is provided to reduce levels of 
radiation; (2) ventilation, which is arranged to control the flow of 
potentially contaminated air; (3) an installed radiation monitoring 
system, which is used to measure levels of radiation in potentially 
occupied areas and measure airborne radioactivity throughout the plant; 
and (4) respiratory protective equipment, which is used as prescribed 
by the Radiation Protection Program. The Radiation Protection Program 
contains procedures for all radiological work performed at the 
Millstone Power Station to ensure doses are maintained ALARA and in 
compliance with regulatory limits in 10 CFR Part 20.
Fuel Cycle and Transportation Impacts
    The environmental impacts of the fuel cycle and transportation of 
fuel and waste are described in 10 CFR 51.51, Table S-3 (Uranium Fuel 
Cycle Data), and 10 CFR 51.52, Table S-4 (Environmental Impact of 
Transportation of Fuel and Waste To and From One Light-Water-Cooled 
Nuclear Power Reactor), respectively. An NRC generic EA (53 FR 6040, 
dated February 29, 1988) evaluated the applicability of Tables S-3 and 
S-4 to a higher burn-up fuel cycle and concluded that there would be no 
significant change in environmental impact from the parameters 
evaluated in Tables S-3 and S-4 for fuel cycles with uranium 
enrichments up to 5 weight percent uranium-235 and burn-ups less than 
60,000 MW days per metric ton of uranium-235 (MWd/MTU).
    The proposed SPU would increase the power level to 3,650 MWt, which 
is below the reference power level of 3,800 MWt for Table S-4. The fuel 
enrichment and burn-up after the SPU will continue to be no greater 
than 5 weight percent uranium-235, and the fuel burn-up will be 
maintained less than 60,000 MWd/MTU. The NRC staff concludes that the

[[Page 46057]]

Millstone 3 SPU is bounded by the analysis of the environmental effects 
of the transportation of fuel and waste as described in the ``Extended 
Burnup Fuel Use in Commercial [Light Water Reactors] LWRs; 
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact,'' dated 
February 29, 1988 (53 FR 6040).
Summary
    Based on the NRC staff review of licensee's submission, it is 
concluded that the proposed SPU would not result in a significant 
increase in occupational or public radiation exposure, and would not 
result in significant additional fuel cycle environmental impacts. 
Accordingly, the NRC staff concludes that there would be no significant 
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff considered 
denial of the proposed SPU (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). 
Denial of the application would result in no change in the current 
environmental impacts. However, if the proposed SPU were not approved, 
other agencies and electric power organizations may be required to 
pursue alternative means of providing electric generation capacity to 
offset the increased power demand forecasted for the ISO-NE regional 
transmission territory.
    A reasonable alternative to the proposed SPU would be to purchase 
power from other generators in the ISO-NE network. In 2008, generating 
capacity in ISO-NE consisted primarily of Combined-cycle generators: 
combined-cycle generated 37.8 percent of ISO-NE capacity; fossil--29.9 
percent; nuclear--13.6 percent; hydroelectric--10.4 percent; combustion 
turbine--7.4 percent; diesel--0.7 percent; and miscellaneous--0.2 
percent. This indicates that the majority of purchased power in the 
ISO-NE territory would likely be generated by a combined-cycle 
facility. Construction (if new generation is needed) and operation of a 
combined-cycle plant would create impacts in air quality, land use, and 
waste management significantly greater than those identified for the 
proposed SPU at Millstone 3. Millstone 3 does not emit sulfur dioxide, 
nitrogen oxides, carbon dioxide, or other atmospheric pollutants that 
are commonly associated with combined-cycle plants. Conservation 
programs such as demand-side management could feasibly replace the 
proposed SPU's additional power output. However, forecasted future 
energy demand in the ISO-NE territory may exceed conservation savings 
and still require additional generating capacity. Furthermore, the 
proposed SPU does not involve environmental impacts that are 
significantly different from those originally identified in the 1984 
Millstone Power Station FES for operation.

Alternative Use of Resources

    The action does not involve the use of any different resources than 
those previously considered in the ``Final Environmental Statement 
Related to the Operation of Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 3,'' 
dated December 1984, or the ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement 
for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants: Regarding Millstone Power 
Station, Units 2 and 3,'' dated July 2005.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on July 11, 2008, via 
electronic mail, (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS) Accession No. ML081980598), the NRC staff consulted with the 
Connecticut State Official, Mr. Denny Galloway of the Department of 
Environmental Protection, regarding the environmental impact of the 
proposed action. The state official did not submit 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 13, 2007, as supplemented by letters dated 
July 13, September 12, November 19, December 13 and 17, 2007, January 
10, 11, 14, 18, and 31, February 25, March 5, 10, 25, and 27, April 4, 
24, and 29, May 15, 20, and 21, and July 10 and 16, 2008. Publicly 
available records are accessible electronically via 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 by e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ccbca8be8ca2beafe2aba3ba"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1a6a7e685a746879347d756c">[email protected]</span></a>. Additionally, documents may 
be examined and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room 
(PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, 
Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 30th day of July, 2008.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John G. Lamb,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch I-2, Division of 
Operating Reactors, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E8-18179 Filed 8-6-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>