96-145. Consumers Power Company Big Rock Point Plant; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 4 (Friday, January 5, 1996)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 422-423]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-145]
    
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    [Docket No. 50-155]
    
    
    Consumers Power Company Big Rock Point Plant; Environmental 
    Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
    
        The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
    considering issuance of an exemption from certain requirements of 10 
    CFR Part 50, Appendix J, Paragraph III.D.1.(a), Type A Tests, to the 
    Consumers Power Company (CPCo or the licensee), for operation of the 
    Big Rock Point Plant (BRP), located in Charlevoix County, Michigan.
    
    Environmental Assessment
    
    Identification of the Proposed Action
    
        The proposed action would allow an exemption from the requirement 
    of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, [Option A], Paragraph III.D.1.(a), for a 
    one-time schedular extension for the Type A test (containment 
    integrated leak rate test (ILRT)) of approximately 12 months, from the 
    1996 refueling outage to the 1997 refueling outage.
        The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
    application for exemption dated November 8, 1995.
    
    The Need for the Proposed Action
    
        The current ILRT requirements for Big Rock Point as set forth in 
    Appendix J, are that a set of three Type A tests must be performed at 
    approximately equal intervals during each 10-year period service 
    period. Also, the third test of each set shall be conducted when the 
    plant is shut down for the 10-year plant inservice inspections (ISI). 
    The previous Type A test was performed in Feburary 1992. The first of 
    the fourth 10-year period Type A tests is currently scheduled to be 
    performed in January 1996.
        The licensee has requested a schedular exemption from the 
    requirement in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, [Option A], Section 
    III.D.1.(a) to perform certain Type A tests at ``approximately equal 
    time intervals.'' Specifically, the proposed exemption would allow CPCo 
    to delay the Type A test until the January 1997 refueling outage. The 
    interval between the Type A tests would increase from 47 months to 59 
    months.
    
    Environment Impacts of the Proposed Action
    
        The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action 
    and concludes that the proposed one-time exemption would not increase 
    the probability or consequences of accidents previously analyzed and 
    the proposed one-time exemption would not affect facility radiation 
    levels or facility radiological effluents. The licensee has analyzed 
    the results of previous Type A tests performed at the Big Rock Point 
    Plant to show adequate containment performance. The licensee will 
    continue to be required to conduct Type B and Type C local leak rate 
    tests which historically have been shown to be the principal means of 
    detecting containment leakage paths with the Type A tests confirming 
    the Type B and C tests results. It is also noted that the licensee 
    would perform a general inspection of accessible interior or exterior 
    surfaces of the containment structures and components although it is 
    only required by Appendix J to be conducted in conjunction with Type A 
    tests. The NRC staff considers that these inspections, though limited 
    in scope, provide an important added level of confidence in the 
    continued integrity of the containment boundary.
        The change will not increase the probability or consequences of 
    accidents, no changes are being made in the types of any effluents that 
    may be released off site, and there is no significant increase in the 
    allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. 
    Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant 
    radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed 
    exemption.
        With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed 
    exemption does involve features located entirely within the restricted 
    area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. It does not affect nonradiological 
    plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Accordingly, the 
    Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological 
    environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption.
    
    Alternatives to the Proposed Action
    
        Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable 
    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 proposed action. 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 Related to 
    the Operation of Big Rock Point Plant.
    
    Agencies and Persons Consulted
    
        In accordance with its stated policy, on November 20, 1995, the 
    staff consulted with the Michigan State official, Mr. Dennis Hahn of 
    the Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section, Office of 
    the Department of Public Health, 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 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 action. 
    
    [[Page 423]]
    
        For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
    licensee's letter dated November 8, 1995, which is 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 North Central Michigan College, 1515 
    Howard Street, Petoskey, MI 49770.
    
        Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of December 1995.
    
        For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    Linh N. Tran,
    Project Manager, Project Directorate III-I, Division of Reactor 
    Projects--III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
    [FR Doc. 96-145 Filed 1-4-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    
    

Document Information

Published:
01/05/1996
Department:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Entry Type:
Notice
Document Number:
96-145
Pages:
422-423 (2 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket No. 50-155
PDF File:
96-145.pdf