[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 227 (Wednesday, November 25, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65265-65266]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-31499]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-305]
Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Wisconsin Power and Light
Company, Madison Gas and Electric Company, Kewaunee Nuclear Power
Plant; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR
50.60 to Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Wisconsin Power and
Light Company, and Madison Gas and Electric Company (the licensee), for
the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant located in Kewaunee County, Wisconsin.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
By application dated August 6, 1998, the licensee requested an
exemption from certain requirements of 10 CFR 50.60, ``Acceptance
criteria for fracture prevention measures for lightwater nuclear power
reactors for normal operation,'' and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G,
``Fracture Toughness Requirements.'' The proposed action would permit
the licensee to use American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
Code Case N-588 for analyses used to develop reactor pressure vessel
(RPV) pressure-temperature (PT) limits, and the low temperature
overpressure protection (LTOP) system pressure setpoint .
Note: The application also encompassed the proposed use of Code
Case N-514; however, this assessment applies only to N-588.
The Need for the Proposed Action
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.60(a), all lightwater nuclear power reactors
must meet the fracture toughness requirements for the reactor coolant
pressure boundary as set forth in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G. Appendix
G of 10 CFR Part 50 defines PT limits during any condition of normal
operation, including anticipated operational occurrences and system
hydrostatic tests to which the pressure boundary may be subjected over
its service lifetime, and Appendix G.IV.2. specifies that these PT
limits must be at least as conservative as the limits obtained by the
following methods of analysis and the margins of safety of the ASME
Code, Section XI, Appendix G.
By application dated August 6, 1998, the licensee submitted an
exemption request to enable use of ASME Code Case N-588. Code Case N-
588 provides benefits in terms of calculating PT limits by revising the
Section XI, Appendix G, to assume that a circumferential flaw, rather
than an axial flaw, exists in each circumferential weld in a reactor
vessel. This reference flaw is a postulated flaw that accounts for the
possibility of a prior existing defect that may have gone undetected
during the fabrication process. Any significant, undetected flaw in a
circumferential weld in the beltline region of an RPV would be
circumferentially oriented thereby having a lesser effect than an
assumed axial flaw.
The effect of the change in reference flaw orientation for
circumferential welds, in the calculation of PT limits, is to expand
the resulting PT ``operating window.'' For Kewaunee, this larger
operating window will eliminate the current requirement to disable one
reactor coolant pump during conditions of low reactor coolant system
temperature.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The staff has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and
concludes that it is acceptable because, with the application of Code
Case N-588, the RPV will continue to be adequately protected against
the possibility of brittle fracture. The proposed action will not
increase the probability or consequences of accidents, no significant
changes are being made in the types of any effluents that may be
released offsite, and there is no significant increase in the allowable
occupational or public radiation exposure. The staff has concluded that
there is no significant radiological
[[Page 65266]]
environmental impact associated with the proposed action.
The proposed action does not affect nonradiological plant effluents
and has no other environmental impact. Accordingly, the Commission
concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts
associated with the proposed action.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
Since the staff has concluded that there is no significant
environmental impact associated with the proposed action, any
alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be
evaluated. As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff
considered denial of the action (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 which was
issued December 20, 1972.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on November 19, 1998, the
staff consulted with Ms. Sarah Denkins, of the Public Service
Commission of the State of Wisconsin, regarding the environmental
impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
Based upon the environmental assessment, the staff concludes that
the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality
of the human environment. Accordingly, the staff 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 August 6, 1998, which is available for public
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, The Gelman
Building, 2120 L Street, NW, Washington, D.C., and at the local public
document room located at the University of Wisconsin, Cofrin Library,
2420 Nicolet Drive, Green Bay, Wisconsin 54311-7001.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of November 1998.
For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William O. Long,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate III-1, Division of Reactor
Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-31499 Filed 11-24-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
