ML20023E264
| ML20023E264 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 06/10/1983 |
| From: | Purple R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20023E261 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8306150257 | |
| Download: ML20023E264 (5) | |
Text
7590-01 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the !!atter of
)
)
YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY
)
Docket No. 50-29
)
(Yankee Nuclear Power Station)
)
EXEMPTION I.
Yankee Atomic Electric Company (the licensee) is the holder of Facility Operating License No. DPR-3 which authorizes operation of the Yankee Nuclear Power Station. This license provides, among other things, that it is subject to all rules, regulations and orders of the Commission now or hereafter in effect. The facility is a pressurized water reactor rated at 600 megawatts thermal and is located at the licensee's site in Franklin County, Massachusetts.
1.,
II.
The regulation,10 CFR 50.54(w), requires that each consnercial power reactor licensee shall, by June 29, 1982, take reasonable steps to obtain on.
site property damage insurance available at reasonable cost and on reasonable terms from private sources or to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Comission) (NRC) that it possesses an equivalent amount of protection covering the facility, provided, among other things, that "this insurance must have a minimum coverage limit no less than the combined total of (1) that offered by either American Nuclear Insurers (ANI) and Mutual Atomic Energy Reinsurance Pool (MAERP) jointly or Nuclear Mutual Limited (NML); plus (ii) that offered by Nuclear Electric' Insurance Limited (NEIL), the Edison Electric Institute (EEI), ANI and MAERP jointly, or NML as excess property insurance."
B306150257 830610 PDR ADOCK 05000029 J
7590-01
, On June 28, 1982, the licensee filed a Request for Exemption from provision "(ii)" of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1).
In support of this request, the licensee submitted a study indicating that decontamination and cleanup costs following a Three Mile Island, Unit 2 (TMI-2) type accident would not exceed
$350,000,000 in 1982 dollars. The licensee indicated that it would obtain primary property insurance covering damages up to $460 million (subsequently increased by the carrier to 5500 million) but that it did not believe that coverage in excess of $500 million was justified at this time.
In reviewing Yankee Atomic's exemption request, the staff determined that additional information was required.
This information was solicited by letter to the licensee dated August 13, 1982. The licensee has responded to this request by letter dated April 22, 1983.
Because of the additional information provided by the licensee in its April 22nd letter, the Commission is able to consider the exemption request on its merits.
In its study,- Yankee Atomic has evaluated a hypothetical ac-cident causing a fission product release similar to that which occurred at TMI-2. The licensee then calculated the quantity of radionuclides available for release as a function of core thermal power and contrasted this to the TMI-2 accident.
In addition, the company indicated, "To account for the pos-sibilities of accidents more severe than the one studied at THI-2, however, the fission product concentrations, and hence the costs, were not reduced for i
l the Yankee study and were conservatively assumed to be the same as the TMI-2 case."* Detailed, item-by-item THI-2 decontamination costs were then used as a basis for estimating decontamination costs after an accident at Yankee.
- April 22,1983 letter to Dennis M. Crutchfield, NRC, from J. A. Kay, Yankee Atomic Electric Company, Enclosure A (" Demonstration Study of the Yankee Plant"), p. 6.
I
7590-01
- t. '
. The assumptions and methodolgy used by the licensee in its study provide a reasonable attempt to estimate decommissioning costs and appear to De compatible with findings of a study developed for the Commission (Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning Reference Light Water Reactors Following Postulated Accidents, NUREG/CR-2601, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, November 1982). This report considers three accident scenarios with a THI-2 type accident considered to be of intermediate severity. The information developed from these scenarios indicated that although there is some relationship between size of a reactor and accident cleanup costs, certain of the major costs involved with accident cleanup -- such as de-fueling a damaged rpactor, activities te maintain a facility in cold shutdown, and construction of new treatment facilities -- are not strictly power level dependent. The licensee has indicated lower expected costs overall for cleanup of Yankee because of its small size, but has correctly indicated those steps in the cleanup process where cost is not directly related to core size. Yankee Atomic's total estimate, less $20 million in decommissioning cost included in its study, is $338.7 million.
The licensee has also indicated that it has contracted various parties to obtain either insurance or some other method of protection such as a line or letter of credit to obtain the $67 million excess protection required at time of its exemption request.
(The current requirement is $68 million.)
The cost would range from $201,000 to $850,000 per year depending on the method and carrier chosen. When such excess insurance or protection is not recaired to cover the costs of cleanup of a naximum credible accident, the NRC staff agrees with the licensee's assessment that the cost of such insurance protection is too burdensome.
7590-01 4-In sum, the Commission believes that the licensee has provided adequate justification for being exempted from the excess insurance require-ments of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1)(ii). Although a close relation between reactor size and accident decontamination cost has not been found to exist as yet, sufficient information is available to determine that decontamination and cleanup costs occurring as a result of an accident at a reactor of Yankee's small size would, with a reasonable degree of assurance, be covered hy
$500 million insurance.
Accordingly, the Commission has determined that pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12 an exemption is authorized by law and will not endanger life or property or the common defense and security and is otherwise in the public interest. Therefore, the Commission herehy approves the following exemption:
The licensee is exempt until further notice from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1)(ii), with respect to excess property insurance offered hy Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL), the Edison Electric Institute (EEI), knerican Nuclear Insurers
( ANI), and Mutual Atomic Energy Reinsurance Pool (MAERP) jointly, or Nuclear Mutual Limited (NHL).
The licensee continues to be required to maintain, at a minimum, total primary insurance coverage or equivalent protection offered hy ANI and MAERP jointly or NML pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1)(i).
N e
-y.
y
---.r
, y
7590-01
, The NRC staff has determined that granting this exemption will not result in any significant environmental impact and that pursuant to 10 CFR 551.5(d)(4) an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with this action.
This exemption is effective upon issuance.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e,' *= -
s.-
Robert A. Purple, Deputy Director Division of-Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 10th day of June,1983.
_.