[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