ML20059C288
| ML20059C288 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 12/29/1993 |
| From: | De Agazio A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059C291 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9401050076 | |
| Download: ML20059C288 (4) | |
Text
-
C i
7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NORTH ATLANTIC ENERGY SERVICE CORPORATION. ET AL.
SEABROOK STATION. UNIT NO. 1 i
DOCKET NO. 50-443 i
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF l
NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering-issuance of an order authorizing a transfer of ownership and an amendment to the facility Operating License No. NPF-86 issued to North Atlantic Energy l
Service Corporation (North Atlantic /the licensee) for operation of the Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1, located in Rockingham County, New Hampshire.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Proposed Action:
The proposed action would approve the transfer of ownership of Vermont l
Electric Generation and Transmission Cooperative, Inc's. (Vermont) 0.41259 percent share of Seabrook 1 to North Atlantic Energy Company (NAEC). A license amendment would be issued to change the footnote on page 1 of Facility Operating License No. NPF-86 by deleting Vermont, as one of the entities for which North Atlantic is authorized to act.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
4 In 1990, Vermont filed a claim against Public Service Company of New f
Hampshire (PSNH) with the United States Bankruptcy Court which was then hearing a petition from PSNH for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. Vermont's claim sought redress for damages which-were 9402050076 931229 PDR ADOCK 05000443 P
J
- 1 i
alleged to have been incurred while PSNH had been the managing agent for j
Seabrook 1.
In November 1990, the two parties arrived at a settlement which included an agreement by PSNH or its designee _to purchase Vermont's I
share of Seabrook 1 subject to obtaining the necessary approvals from all 4
regulatory agencies.
Subsequently, the Bankruptcy Court issued an order approving the stipulation that PSNH and Vermont had filed describing the settlement.
In June 1992, in accordance with the Plan of Reorganization for PSNH i
that was confirmed by the Bankruptcy Court, Northeast Utilities (NU) acquired PSNH in merger transactions and, after receipt of NRC approval, NAEC (a newly-i formed and wholly-owned subsidiary of NU) acquired PSNH's interest in the Seabrook 1.
As the successor to PSNH's interest in Seabrook 1, NAEC is obligated to purchase Vermont's interest in Seabrook Station. The transfer of Vermont's ownership share in Seabrook 1 to NAEC will consumate the settlement entered into by Vermont and PSNH.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:
The proposed action would approve the transfer of ownership of 0.41259 percent of Seabrook 1 from Vermont to NAEC.
The transfer will.not involve any changes to the Seabrook 1 staff, to the facility itself, or in the manner by which Seabrook 1 is operated.
The Commission has evaluated the environmental impact of the proposed action and has determined that the probability or consequences of accidents would not be increased by the transfer of ownership, and that post-accident radiological releases would not be greater than previously determined.
Further, the Commission has determined that the transfer of ownership would
'I f
i !
i not affect routine radiological plant effluents and would not increase occupational radiological exposure.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated I
with the proposed action.
l With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the transfer of ownership would not affect nonradiological plant effluents and would have no i
other environmental impact.
Therefore, the Commission concludes that there l
are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Alternative to the Proposed Action:
Since the Commission has concluded that the environmental effects of the proposed action are not significant, any alternative with equal or greater
[
environmental impact need not be evaluated.
The principal alternative would be to deny the requested approval.
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 identical.
Alternative Use of Resources:
Tiiis action does not involve the use of resources not previously-considered in the Final Environmental Statement Related to Operation of Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2, dated December 1982.
Aaencies and persons Consulted:
The NRC staff consulted with the State of New Hampshire and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action.
The State of New Hampshire and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts had no comments on the proposed action.
l
i l
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 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. Accordingly, the Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed license amendment.
For further details with respect to this action, see the request for approval dated August 27, 1993, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, T'.20 L Street, NW; Washington, DC 20555, and at the local public document room located at the Exeter Public Library, 47 Front Street, Exeter, New Hampshire 03833.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of December 1993.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Albert e Agazio, Actin D' ctor l
Project Directorate I-4 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i
.