[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 12, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55313-55314]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-26489]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-155]


Consumers Energy 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 amendment to Facility Operating License No. 
DPR-6, issued to Consumers Energy Company (the licensee). The amendment 
would revise Appendix A Technical Specifications (TSs) for the Big Rock 
Point (BRP) Plant, a permanently shutdown nuclear reactor facility 
located in Charlevoix County, Michigan.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

    The proposed action would make changes to the TSs by deleting (1) 
the definition Site Boundary and its use throughout the TSs, (2) Figure 
5.1-1, the BRP site map, (3) TS 5.1.1 paragraph numbering, and (4) 
other site-specific information describing the site and site boundary. 
The proposed action would also make editorial or administrative changes 
to TSs 6.6.2.5.g, h, and j and 6.6.2.6.b for the above four changes. 
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application 
for amendment dated May 11, 1999, as supplemented by letters dated June 
3 and July 28, 1999.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would, for item (1) above, remove from the TSs 
a definition that is not needed because Site Boundary is defined in 10 
CFR Part 20. The TSs and Part 20 definitions are equivalent. For item 
(2), TS Figure 5.1-1, the BRP site map, is equivalently represented in 
the licensee-controlled Final Hazards Summary Report (FHSR) and this 
type of site-specific information is not required to be in TSs under 10 
CFR 50.36a requirements. Furthermore, this change to the TSs is 
consistent with NRC guidance in NUREG-1433, ``Standard Technical 
Specifications, General Electric Plants, BWR/4.'' In concert with 
Section 50.36a requirements, NUREG-1433 provides guidance in 
determining a minimum set of standard requirements for permanently 
shutdown reactor facilities. Item (3) is administrative in nature in 
that it removes TS paragraph numbering due to the removal of site-
specific information as described in Item (4). Item (4) would delete 
certain site-specific information from the TS description of the BRP 
site. Most of this site-specific information is already contained in 
the licensee's FHSR. This information includes distances from the 
reactor centerline to the nearest site boundary. The information that 
is not currently in the FHSR will be placed in the FHSR as committed by 
the licensee in its letter of July 28, 1999. Regarding the last item, 
editorial and administrative changes were necessary as a result of the 
four changes made above.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed 
amendment to the BRP TSs and concludes that issuance of the proposed 
amendment will not have an environmental impact. The proposed change in 
TS site-specific information is consistent with the regulations and 
regulatory guidance and is considered editorial and administrative in 
nature. The licensee does not propose any disposal or relocation of 
nuclear fuel or any changes to structures, systems, components, or site 
boundaries.
    The proposed action 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 occupational or public radiation exposure. 
Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts 
associated with the proposed action.
    With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed 
action does not involve any historical sites. It does not affect non-
radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. 
Therefore, there are no significant non-radiological environmental 
impacts associated with the proposed action.
    Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered 
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``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 environmental reviews for the BRP plant.

Agencies and Persons Contacted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on June 7 and August 9, 1999, 
the staff consulted with the State of Michigan official, Mr. David W. 
Minnaar, Chief, Radiological Protection Section, Drinking Water and 
Radiological Protection Division, Michigan

[[Page 55314]]

Department of Environmental Quality, regarding the environmental impact 
of the proposed action. The State official had no comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    On the basis of 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 May 11, 1999, as supplemented by letters dated 
June 3 and July 28, 1999, which are available for public inspection at 
the Commission's Public Document Room, The Gelman Building, 2120 L 
Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the Commission's local public 
document room located in the North Central Michigan College Library, 
1515 Howard Street, Petoskey, Michigan 49770.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of October, 1999.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michael T. Masnik,
Chief, Decommissioning Section, Project Directorate IV & 
Decommissioning, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of 
Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 99-26489 Filed 10-8-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P