ML20052G873
| ML20052G873 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 05/06/1982 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17319B330 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8205190104 | |
| Download: ML20052G873 (3) | |
Text
-.
/
'o UNITED STATES i
g y'
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
{..
.[e
' WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
~
~
%,.....J
~
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE ~OF NUCLEAR REACTOR ~ REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 54 TO FACILITY OPERATING ~ LICENSE NO. DPR-58 AND AMENDMENT NO. 40 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR.
, INDIANA AND MICHIGAN ELECTRIC COMPANY DONALD C. COOK NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT NOS.1 AND 2
' t.:
DOCKET NOS. 50-315 AND 50-316
==
Introduction:==
.c By letter dated November 4,1981, as supplemented January 18, 1982, t'he Indiana and Micftigan Electric Company (.the licensee) proposed to amend Appendix B to Facility Operating Licenses DPR-58 and DPR-74 for the Donald C.
Cook Nuclear Plant Unit Nos. I and 2 (the Plant). The proposed amendment would delete the Appendix B Environmental Technical Specifications in their entirety and replace it with new Appendix B Environmental Technical Specifi-cations consisting of two parts; Part I Radiologic,al and Part II Nonradiological, Environmental Protection Plan.
Eart I represents a restructuring of the Radiological Environmental Technical Specifications (RETS) in a manner that facilitates revising it during the ongoing review Based on Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50. Among other things, this review would relocate the Radiological Environmental Technical Specifi-cations in Appendix.A to the licenses.
Part II represents a revision of the nonradiological Technical Specifications (NRETS) which would eliminate all water quality related items in favor of an Environmental Protection Plan (EPP).*
Our ' evaluation of the Januar'y 18, 1982 submittal is not complete therefore items 4.1.1.3 Erosion and 4.1.1.4 Scour Studies will remain. They will be retained in the old Appendix B now called Environmental Technical Speciffcations Part III Non Water Quality, Non-Radiolo.gical.
Evaluation The RETS have been under review for compliance with Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50 for some time. When this review is complete the new RETS will be incorporated into Appendix A Technical Specifications. This current review is merely to actermine that the requirements of the existing RETS have'not been changed by.the restructure into a section separate from Appendix B NRETS.
The restructure into a separate section is for convenience, both now for concur.*ent review of Appendix B ncn-radiological matters and for later relocation of the RETS. We have reviewed Part 1 of Appendix B Techni' cal Specifications and find that the requirements have not been reduced in effectiveness.
820bi90104 820506 PDR ADOCK 05000315 P
The NRETS contain certain water quality related conditions.
In a memorandum dated December 7,1979, from Howard K. Shapar to Harold R. Denton, it was stated that:
"The NRC's role in the water quality area is limited to the weighing of aquatic impacts as part of its NEPA coit-benefit balance in its '
licensing decision.
That role does not extend to including any conditions of its own in the Itcense for the protection of the aquatic envi ronment. Rather, EPA or those states to whom permitting authority
' 1.s has been delegated have been given exclusi.ve responsibility for water quality protection and the regulation of water quality lies in the NPDES permit system."
... ope' rating conditions on non-radiological aquatic matters and other non-radiological aquatic monitoring requirements are now the exclusive ' concern of EPA and permitting states and are not the responsibility of the NRC."
This memorandum also recommended that:
...for those existing licenses where the facility holds an effective NPDES permit, existing limiting conditions of operation or other non-radiological aquatic monitoring requirements he deleted as a matter of law. Since the deletion of these conditions would be a ministerial action required as a matter of law, no environmental impact assessment need be prepared as a condition precedent to taking the action."
The Plant has an NPDES permit (No. MI 0005827) and therefore the non-radiological aquatic monitoring requirements are now the exclusive concern of EPA. The NRC does have responsibility of Being aware of power plant performance as it effects environmental matters. Consequently, the non-radiological water quality matters, whi'a not controlled by the NRC, are monitored.
This is accomplished by, ti..
PP. The EPP has certain requirements which enable the NRC to perform its required environmental assessments. These are strictly reporting of information as contrasted to the limiting conditions of operation which have been deleted. We have reviewed the proposed EPP submitted by the licensee.and find that it satisfies the requirement of keeping the NRC.
-12 informed of appropriate environmental matters concerning the plant.
O
> ^
e 3
Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendments do not authorize a change to effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in' power level and will not result in any significant envirorsnental impact. Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendments involve an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of 1,
environmbntal impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environ-mental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
' Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the amendments do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and do not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the amendments do not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and secu ity or to the health and safety of the public.
Date: May 6, 1982 l
l O
2 l
l 1
-