ML20205T309: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) StriderTol Bot insert |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) StriderTol Bot change |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Action: | ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Action: | ||
In accordance with the licensee's application dated July 5, 1988, as modified October 10, 1988, the proposed amendment would modify Big Rock Point t | In accordance with the licensee's application dated July 5, 1988, as modified October 10, 1988, the proposed amendment would modify Big Rock Point t | ||
Plant Technical Specifications by replacing the requirement to partial-stroke test the Reactor Depressurization System (RDS) depressurizing valves quarterly with a requirement to full-stroke test all four depressurizing valves each refueling outage. | Plant Technical Specifications by replacing the requirement to partial-stroke test the Reactor Depressurization System (RDS) depressurizing valves quarterly with a requirement to full-stroke test all four depressurizing valves each refueling outage. | ||
The proposed amendment is necessary because the currently required partial-stroke test has been found to be both a less-than-optimum test of valve operability and a substantial contributor to the causes of RDS depressurizing valve pilot valve leakage. That leakage, in turn, has been the cause of a substantial proportion of the plant's forced outages. | f The Need for the proposed Action: | ||
8911140208 Gs1104 | The proposed amendment is necessary because the currently required partial-stroke test has been found to be both a less-than-optimum test of valve operability and a substantial contributor to the causes of RDS depressurizing valve pilot valve leakage. | ||
That leakage, in turn, has been the cause of a substantial proportion of the plant's forced outages. | |||
Because, in general, a plant in a stable state is inherently less public risk than a plant in a changing state, those cooldowns and heatups have created unnecessary public risk. | |||
The proposed full-stroke test cycle, although with less frequent testing, does provide the optimum test of valve operability with less inherent risk to the public. | |||
8911140208 Gs1104 FDR ADOCK 0500 3 | |||
P | |||
2-1 Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action: | 2-1 Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action: | ||
Based upon the analysis contained in the Safety Evaluation to be issued | Based upon the analysis contained in the Safety Evaluation to be issued i | ||
with the proposed amendment, the proposed action will not involve a significant change in the probability or consequences of any accident previously evaluated. | |||
previously determined, nor does the proposed amendment otherwise affect radiological plant effluents. Therefore, the Comission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed arsndment. | Consequently, any radiological releases would not be significantly greater than i | ||
previously determined, nor does the proposed amendment otherwise affect radiological plant effluents. | |||
environmental impacts associated with the proposed amendment. | Therefore, the Comission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed arsndment. | ||
I With regard to nonradiological impacts, the proposed amendment does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. | |||
l Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed amendment. | |||
~ | |||
Alternative to the Proposed Action: | Alternative to the Proposed Action: | ||
Because the Comission has concluded that there are no significant | Because the Comission has concluded that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action, there is no need to examine alternatives to the proposed action. | ||
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action, there is no need to | Alternative Use of Resources: | ||
examine alternatives to the proposed action. | This action does not involve the use of resources beyond the scope of resources used during normal plant operation 7 | ||
Alternative Use of Resources: | Agencies and Persons Consulted: | ||
This action does not involve the use of resources beyond the scope of | The Comission's staff has reviewed the licensee's request and did not | ||
resources used during normal plant operation | [ | ||
The Comission's staff has reviewed the licensee's request and did not | |||
consult other agencies or persons. | consult other agencies or persons. | ||
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT | FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT I | ||
The Comission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed amendment. | I The Comission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed amendment. | ||
I i | |||
I t | I t | ||
.-----,--..---,~w-- | |||
r | r v | ||
~ | |||
3-o Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, the Commission concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. | |||
For further details with respect to this action, see the requests for amendment dated July 5, 1988, and October 10, 1988, which are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and a the North Central Michigan College, 1515 Howard Street, Petoskey, Michigan 49770. | For further details with respect to this action, see the requests for amendment dated July 5, 1988, and October 10, 1988, which are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and a the North Central Michigan College, 1515 Howard Street, Petoskey, Michigan 49770. | ||
Dated at Rockvilla, Maryland, this 4th day ofwovember 1988. | Dated at Rockvilla, Maryland, this 4th day ofwovember 1988. | ||
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION di Marti | FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION di Marti rg lio Acting Assistant Director for Regions III and V Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation | ||
.}} | |||
Latest revision as of 02:45, 7 December 2024
| ML20205T309 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 11/04/1988 |
| From: | Virgilio M Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20205T290 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8811140208 | |
| Download: ML20205T309 (3) | |
Text
'
7590-01 l
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO>NISSION CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-155 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 for the Big Rock Point Plant, located in Charlevoix County, Michigan, and operated by Consumers Power Company (the licensee).
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Action:
In accordance with the licensee's application dated July 5, 1988, as modified October 10, 1988, the proposed amendment would modify Big Rock Point t
Plant Technical Specifications by replacing the requirement to partial-stroke test the Reactor Depressurization System (RDS) depressurizing valves quarterly with a requirement to full-stroke test all four depressurizing valves each refueling outage.
f The Need for the proposed Action:
The proposed amendment is necessary because the currently required partial-stroke test has been found to be both a less-than-optimum test of valve operability and a substantial contributor to the causes of RDS depressurizing valve pilot valve leakage.
That leakage, in turn, has been the cause of a substantial proportion of the plant's forced outages.
Because, in general, a plant in a stable state is inherently less public risk than a plant in a changing state, those cooldowns and heatups have created unnecessary public risk.
The proposed full-stroke test cycle, although with less frequent testing, does provide the optimum test of valve operability with less inherent risk to the public.
8911140208 Gs1104 FDR ADOCK 0500 3
P
2-1 Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:
Based upon the analysis contained in the Safety Evaluation to be issued i
with the proposed amendment, the proposed action will not involve a significant change in the probability or consequences of any accident previously evaluated.
Consequently, any radiological releases would not be significantly greater than i
previously determined, nor does the proposed amendment otherwise affect radiological plant effluents.
Therefore, the Comission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed arsndment.
I With regard to nonradiological impacts, the proposed amendment does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact.
l Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed amendment.
~
Alternative to the Proposed Action:
Because the Comission has concluded that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action, there is no need to examine alternatives to the proposed action.
Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of resources beyond the scope of resources used during normal plant operation 7
Agencies and Persons Consulted:
The Comission's staff has reviewed the licensee's request and did not
[
consult other agencies or persons.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT I
I The Comission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed amendment.
I i
I t
.-----,--..---,~w--
r v
~
3-o Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, the Commission concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
For further details with respect to this action, see the requests for amendment dated July 5, 1988, and October 10, 1988, which are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and a the North Central Michigan College, 1515 Howard Street, Petoskey, Michigan 49770.
Dated at Rockvilla, Maryland, this 4th day ofwovember 1988.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION di Marti rg lio Acting Assistant Director for Regions III and V Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
.