ML20097F049
| ML20097F049 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 11/17/1995 |
| From: | Marcus G NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20097F054 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9602150123 | |
| Download: ML20097F049 (4) | |
Text
7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY DOCKET NOS. 50-266 AND 50-301 POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an exemption from certain technical requirements of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50 for operation of the Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. I and 2, located in Manitowoc County, Wisconsin (Facility Operating License Nos.
DPR-24 and DPR-27, respectively, issued to Wisconsin Electric Power Company, the licensee).
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Proposed Action:
The proposed action would grant an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.F.2., for annually exercising the onsite Emergency Plan at the Point Beach Nuclear Plant in the year 1995.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application for exemption dated October 6, 1995, as supplemented November 3, 1995.
$$821gggg g as 3
P
~_
4 i
. 1 The Need for the Pronosed Action:
The proposed action is needed to allow the licensee to begin loading dry cask storage containers in December 1995 in order to minimize the time that Point IBeach will not have the capacity for a full-core offload. The licensee has stated that emergency response personnel who would be' involved in the emergency exercise will be involved in oversight of the process for loading the dry cask storage containers. Therefore, the licensee anticipates the 1995 1
emergency exercise to have a negative impact on the oversight of the storage of spent fuel in the independent spent fuel storage installation at the Point Beach plant.
4 Environmental Imoacts of the Proposed Action:
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that the one-time action is acceptable because the licensec has demonstrated excellent performance in the emergency preparedness area during the last two Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) periods and has performed an emergency drill in August 1995 involving major elements of the Point Beach Emergency Plan with no significant deficiencies.
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 is no significant increase in the allowable e
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 does involve features located entirely within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has
. no other environmental impact. Accordingly, the Comission 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 Point Beach.
Aaencies and Persons Consulted:
In accordance with its stated policy, on November 3,1995, the staff consulted with the Wisconsin State official, Ms. Sarah Jenkins, of the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no coments.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based upon the environmental assessment, the Comission concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the Comission has determined not to prepare an envirr.arental impact statement for the proposed action.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee's letter dated October 6,1995, as supplemented by letter dated
',. l.-
- November 3,1995, 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 local public document room located at the Joseph P.
Mann Library, 1516 Sixteenth Street, Two Rivers, Wisconsin 54241.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of November 1995.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION N
Gail H. Marcus, Director Project Directorate III-3 Division of Reactor Projects - III/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i
_