ML20247K656
| ML20247K656 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 05/25/1989 |
| From: | Yandell L Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247K660 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8906010357 | |
| Download: ML20247K656 (4) | |
Text
_
'i t
t t.
n 7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I
NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY l
1 DOCKET NO. 50-263 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING 0F l
1 NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclehr' Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering.
. the issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. -DPR-22 granted.
4 to the Northern States Power Company (the licensee).for operation of the Monticello Nuclear Generation Plant, located at the licensee's site in Wright a
County, Minnesota.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Proposed Action:
The proposed action would revise the plant Technical Specifications to extend the Maximum Average Planar Linear Heat Generation Rate (MAPLHGR) for fuel types P80RB265L and BP8DRB265L, and permit the plant to operate beyond
'he current MAPLHGR exposure limit of 40,000 mwd /MTV, to 45,000 mwd /MTV.
t The proposed action ic in accordance with the licensee's application dated January 31, 1989, as amended February 3, 1989.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
The proposed amendment is needed so that the licensee can extend the length of the current plant operating cycle (Cycle 13) through to August 1989, i
and meet expected power demands during the peak load summer months of 1989.
gqem W4t
.P
4' ~,
. Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action:
The Commission's staff has evaluated the safety consideration associated with the proposed amendment, including the methodology used by the licensee to analyze the impact of extending the MAPLHGR, and the results of that analysis..
The staff has concluded from this evaluation that reactor operation with the proposed MAPLHGR extension is acceptable in that:
- 1) the thermal and
. mechanical considerations for increasing MAPLHGR to the 45,000 mwd /MTV limit were calculated using conservative NRC-approved methodology; 2) the licensee's analytical ~results showed that the fuel peak clad temperature'is less than 1 percent under loss-of-coolant-accident (LOCA) conditions; and 3) the proposed exposure increase (8.3 kW/ft at 45,000 mwd /MTV) meets the requirements set forth in 10 CFR 50.46 of the Commission's regulations.
The proposed amendment will have no adverse effect on the probability of any accident; does not involve any increase in fuel burnup rate or change the mix of fission products that might be released in the event of serious accident; and thus will not significantly affect the consequences of serious accidents. No changes are being made in the types or amounts of any radiological effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts of reactor operation with the requested MAPLHGR increase, the proposed change involves systems located within the restricted area, as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 of the Commission's regulations. The proposed change does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact.
I
\\
The " Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment and Opportunity for Hearing" in connection with this action was published in the Federal Register on February 22, 1989 (54 FR 7621).
No request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene was filed following publication of this notice.
Alternative to the Proposed Action:
Since the Commission has concluded there are no significant environmental effects that would result from the proposed action, any alternative with equal or greater environmental impacts need not be evaluated.
Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, dated November 1972.
Agencies and Persons Contacted:
The Commission's staff reviewed the licensee's request and did not consult other agencies or persons.
FINDING 0F N0 SIGNIFICANT IMPACT TheCommissionhasdeterminednottoprepareanenvihonmentalimpact statement for the proposed license amendment.
Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, we conclude that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
For further details with respect to this proposed action, see the application for amendment dated January 31, 1989 and supplement thereto dated February 3, 1989, which are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, Gelman Building, 2120 L Street NW, Washington, DC, and at
{
b
l
, z..' '. '
- L_.
( '.,.. -the Minneapolis Public Library, Technology and Science Department, 300 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this '25thday of May 1989, l
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION k
Lawrence Yandell, Acting Director Project Directorate III-1 Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V
& Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
..________.___._____________--_____.______._._-_____w