[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 184 (Wednesday, September 23, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50930-50931]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-25409]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-155]
Consumers Energy Company (Big Rock Point Nuclear Plant);
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission or NRC) is
considering issuance of an exemption from certain requirements of its
regulations to Facility Operating License No. DPR-6, a license held by
the Consumers Energy Company (Consumers or the licensee). The exemption
would apply to the Big Rock Point (BRP) plant, a permanently shutdown
and defueled reactor power facility located at the Consumers site in
Charlevoix County, Michigan.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed exemption would modify emergency response plan
requirements due to the permanently shutdown and defueled status of the
BRP facility.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated September 19, 1997, as supplemented or modified by
letters of October 29, 1997, and March 2, July 30, and August 28, 1998.
The requested action would grant an exemption from certain requirements
of 10 CFR 50.54(q) to discontinue offsite emergency planning activities
and to reduce the scope of onsite emergency planning.
The Need for the Proposed Action
On June 26, 1997, Consumers certified that it would permanently
cease reactor power operations at its BRP facility. On August 30, 1997,
the reactor was shut down. By letter dated September 23, 1997, the
licensee certified the permanent removal of all fuel from the reactor
vessel. In accordance with 10 CFR 50.82(a)(2), upon docketing of the
certifications, Facility Operating License DPR-6 no longer authorizes
operation of the reactor or emplacement or retention of the fuel into
the reactor vessel. In this permanently shutdown and defueled
condition, the facility poses a reduced risk to public health and
safety. Because of this reduced risk, certain requirements of 10 CFR
50.54(q) are no longer required. An exemption is required from portions
of 10 CFR 50.54(q) to allow the licensee to implement a revised
Defueled Emergency Plan (DEP) that is appropriate for the permanently
shutdown and defueled reactor facility.
Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action
Before issuing the proposed exemption, the Commission will have
concluded that the granting of the exemption from certain portions of
10 CFR 50.54(q) is acceptable, as described in the safety evaluation
accompanying issuance of the exemption. The proposed action will not
increase the probability or consequences of accidents, no changes are
being made in the types of effluents that may be released offsite, and
there is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation
exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
[[Page 50931]]
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed
action 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 action.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
Since the Commission has concluded that there is no significant
environmental impact associated with the proposed action, any
alternative with equal or greater environmental impact need not be
evaluated. The principal alternative to the proposed exemption would be
to deny the request (no-action alternative). Denial of the exemption
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 resources not previously
considered in BRP's Environmental Report for Decommissioning, dated
February 27, 1995.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on December 18, 1997, the NRC
staff consulted with Mr. David W. Minnaar of the State of Michigan,
Radiation Protection Section, Drinking Water and Radiological
Protection Division, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality,
regarding the environmental impacts of the proposed action. The State
official had no comment regarding environmental impacts of the proposed
action.
Finding of No Significant Impact
Based on 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.
For further details with respect to this action, see licensee
letters dated September 19, and October 29, 1997, and March 2, July 30,
and August 28, 1998, which are all available for public review at the
Commission's Public Document Room, Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW.,
Washington, DC, and at the Local Public Document Room, North Central
Michigan College, 1515 Howard Street, Petosky, MI 49770.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of September 1998.
Seymour H. Weiss,
Director, Non-Power Reactors and Decommissioning Project Directorate,
Division of Reactor Program Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-25409 Filed 9-22-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
