ML20154P153
| ML20154P153 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 09/26/1988 |
| From: | Wigginton D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20154P137 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8809300127 | |
| Download: ML20154P153 (4) | |
Text
.
7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COPNISSION OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION, UNIT 1 DOCKET NO. 50-285 QVIR0hMENTALASSESSPENTANDFINDINGOF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT CONCERNING EXEMPTION FROM
_10CFR50.54(wM5M1}
The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Comission) is considering issuance of an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(5)(1) to Oraha Public Power District (the licensee) for the Fort Calhoun Ststion Unit 1, located at the licensee's site in k'ashington County, Nebraska.
Ehv1R0h[EhMLASSESSMENT Identification of_ Proposed Action:
On August 5, 1987, the NRC published in the FEDERAL REGISTER a final rule amending 10 CFR 50.54(w). The rule increased the amount of en-site property damage insurance required to be carried by NRC's power reactor licensees. The rule also required these licensees to obtain by October 4, 1988 insurance policies that prioritized insurance proceeds for stabilization and decontamination after an accident and provided for pa>went of proceeds to an independent trustee who would disburse funds for decontamination and cleanup before any other purpose.
Subsequent to publication of the rule, the NRC has been inforred by insurers who offer nuclear property insurance that, despite a good faith effort to obtain trustees required by the rule, the decontamination priority and trusteeship
\\
8809300127 880926 PDR ADOCK 05000285 P
2 provisions will not be able to be incorporated into policies by the time required in the rule.
In response to these comments and related petitions for rulemaling, the Coreission has proposed a revision of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(5)(i) extending the implementation schedule for 18 months (53 FR 36338, September 19, 1988). However, because it is unlikely that this rulemaking action will be effective by October 4,1988, the Commission is issuing a temporary exemption fromtherequirerentsof10CFR50.54(w)(5)(1)untilcorpletionofthepending ruler.akingextendingtheimplerentationdatespecifiedin10CFR50.54(w)(5)(1),
but ret later than April 1, 1989. Upon conpletion of such rulemaking, the i
licensee shall comply with the provisions of such rule.
The Need for The Proposed Action:
The exerption is needed because insurance complying with requirerents of t
10 CFR 50.54(w)(5)(1) is unavailable and because the temporary delay in implementation allowed by the exemption and associated rulemaking action will permit the Corrission to reconsider on its merits the trusteeship provision of IC CFR 50.54(w)(4).
Environmental Impacts of_the Proposed _ Action:
With respect to radiological impacts on the environment, the proposed exerption does not in any way affect the operation of licensed facilities.
Further, as noted by the Commission in the Supplementary Inforretion I
accorpanying the proposed rule, there are several reasons for concluding that delaying for a reasonable time the implementation of the stabilization and i
decontanination priority and trusteeship provisions of Section 50.54(w) will not adversely affect protection of public health and safety.
First, during the i
I
period of delay, the licensee will still be required to carry $1.06 billion insurance. This is a substantial ancunt of coverage that provides a signift-cant financial cushion to licensees to decontaminate and clean up after an accident even without the prioritization and trusteeship provisions. Second, nearly 75% of the required coverage already is prioritized under the decontam-ination liability and excess property insurance language of the Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited-!! policies.
Finally, there is only an extrerely small prob-ability of a serious accident occurring during the exemption period. Even if a serious accident giving rise to substantial insurance claims were to occur, NRC would be able to take appropriate enforcement action to assure adequate cleanup' to protect public health and safety and the environment.
The proposed exemption does not affect radiological or nonradiological effluents fror the site and has no other nonradiological irpacts.
Alternatives to the,['rpppsed, Actjpn:
It has been concluded that there is no neasurable impact associated with the proposed exemption; any alternatives to the exemption will have either no environnental impact or greater environnental impact.
Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of any resources beyond the scope of resources used during norinal plant operation.
Agencies and Pep ons Consulted:
The staff did not consult other agencies or persons in connection with
)
the proposed exerption, i
l
s 4
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 exemption.
For information concerning this action, see the proposed rule (53 FR 36338),
and the exemption whis.t-is being processed concurrent with this notice. A copy of the exemption will be available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW, Washington, D.C., and at the W. Dale Clark Library, 215 South 15th Street Omaha, Nebraska 68102.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 26th day of September 1988 FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 6
David L. W nton, Acting Director Project Directorate - IV Division of Reactor Projects - !!!,
!Y, Y and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reacter Regulation I