[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 134 (Monday, July 14, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37630-37631]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-18365]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-155]


Consumers Power Company; Big Rock Point Plants Environmental 
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. 
DPR-6, issued to Consumers Power Company, (CPCo, 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 revise the Facility Operating License No. 
DPR-6 and the Technical Specifications (TS) appended to Facility 
Operating License No. DPR-6 for the Big Rock Point Plant. Specifically, 
the proposed action would amend the license to reflect the change in 
the licensee's name from Consumers Power Company to Consumers Energy 
Company.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application for amendment dated April 30, 1997.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is to revise the company name in the license to 
reflect the corporate name change that occurred on March 11, 1997.

Environment Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed changes 
to the license and TS. According to the licensee, the name change will 
not impact the existing ownership of the Big Rock Point Plant or the 
existing entitlement to power and will not alter the existing antitrust 
license conditions applicable to CPCo or CPCo's ability to comply with 
these conditions or with any of its other obligations or 
responsibilities. As stated by the licensee, ``The corporate structure 
remains the same, and all legal characteristics remain the same. Thus, 
there is neither a change in the ownership, state of incorporation, 
registered agent, registered office, directors, officers, rights or 
liabilities of the Company, nor the function of the Company or the way 
in which it does business. The Company's financial responsibility for 
the Big Rock Point Plant and its sources of funds to support the 
facility remain the same. Further, this name change does not impact the 
Company's ability to comply with any of its obligations or 
responsibilities under the license.'' Therefore, 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 offsite, 
and there will be 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 action.
    With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed 
action is administrative in nature and does not involve any physical 
features of the plant. Thus, 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 action.

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 for the Big 
Rock Point Plant.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on June 13, 1997, the staff 
consulted with the Michigan State official, Dennis Hahn, of the 
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Drinking Water and 
Radiological Protection Division, regarding the environmental impact of

[[Page 37631]]

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.
    For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letter dated April 30, 1997, 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 7th day of July 1997.
    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. 97-18365 Filed 7-11-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P