ML20128B573

Environ Assessment & Finding of No Significant Impact Re Proposed Exemption from 10CFR50.44(c)(3)(iii) Re RCS High Point Vents

ML20128B573
Person / Time
Site:	Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png
Issue date:	06/25/1985
From:	Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20128B550	List: ML20128B545 ML20128B573
References
NUDOCS 8507030290
Download: ML20128B573 (3)

Text

7590-01 I

UNITED STATES NIlCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-155 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND fit'DIFG OF

~

N0 SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an exemption from requirenents of 10 CFR 50.44(c)(3)(iii) to Consumers Power Company (the licenseei for the Big Rock Point Plant, located at the licensee's site in Charlevoix County, Michigan.

ENVIR0tlMEt1TAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Action:

The proposed action would grant an exemption from the requirement of 10 CFP 50.44(c)(3)(fii) which requires that high point vents be provided to the reactor coolant system, for the reactor vessel head, and for other systems reouf red to maintain adequate core cooling if the accumulation of noncondensible gases would cause the loss of function of these systems.

The Need For The Proposed Action:

I Although the licensee has already installed vents on the emergency

{ condenser in responte to this regulation, these vents are not operational 1

because the installation of seismic supports and test connections and the development of operating procedures have not been completed.

By letter dated April 19, 1983 Consumers Power Company reouested an exemption frem the requirements of 10 CFR 50.44(c)(3)(iii) on the basis

{ that the energency condenser is not used or needed to niticate the corsequences of accidents which might result in the generation of l noncondensible gases.

I p l{

P l

7590-01

- ?. -

Environmental Inpacts of the Proposed Action:

Since the emergency condenser is not normally used (no credit taken for its use in the licensing analysis for the Bio Pock Point Plant) in accident scenarios which night result in the generation of significant amounts of noncondensible gases, the proposed exemption will not cause post-accident radiological releases to differ from those determined previously, and the proposed exemption does not otherwise affect facility radiological effluents or occupational exposures. Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with this proposed exemption.

With regard to potential nonradioloofcal impacts, the proposed exemption "

.does not affect plant nonradiological effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, the Commission concludes there are no measurable radiological or nonrediological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exerrption.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action:

Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable environmental impact associated with the proposed exemption, any alternatives with equal or greeter environmental impacts need not be evelueted. The principal alternative to the exemption would be to require the emergency condenser l Vents to be fitted with seismic supports and test connections and for operating procedures to be developed and implemented. Such actions would not enhance the protection of the envirorrent and would result in diversion of utility engineerino resources from other work of higher safety significance.

i l

7590-01 Alternative Use of Resources:

This action does not involve the use or resources beyond the scope of resources used during normal plant operation. .,

Acencies and Persons Consulted:

The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's request and did not consult other agencies or persons.

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statenent for the proposed exemptien. Based upon the environmental assessment, the NRC staff 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 proposed action, see the licensee's letter dated April 19, 1983. This letter is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., and at b' orth Central Michigan College,1515 Harvard Street, Petosky, Michigan 49770.

Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, tlhii25ttr day of June 1985.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISS10t'

~

Dennis . r tc ie d, ssi tant Directcr for Safety Assessme Division of Licensing Office of Nucleer Reactor Regulation