ML20154P374
| ML20154P374 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Maine Yankee |
| Issue date: | 09/27/1988 |
| From: | Wessman R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20154P363 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8810030042 | |
| Download: ML20154P374 (4) | |
Text
- _ _ _ _
e 7590-01 llNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGl'LATORY COMMISSION MAINE YANKEE ATOMIC COMPANY MAINE VANKEE ATOMIC POWER STATION DOCKET NO. 50-309 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT CONCERNINr, EXEMPTION FROM 10 CFR 50.SA(wi(5)(i)
The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission It he Comission) is censidering issuance of an exemption from the requirerents of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(5)(1) to Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company (the licensee) for the, Maine Yankee Atemic Power Station located at the licensee's site in Lincoln, County, Haire.
ENVIROWENTAL ASSESSME Identification of Proposed Action:
On August 5, 1987, the NRC published in the FEDERAL REGISTER a final rule 4
amending 10 CFR 50.5A(w). The rule increased the amount of on-site preperty j rfamace insurance required to be carried by NRC's power reactor licensees. The rule also reouired these licensees to obtain by October 4,1988 insurance policies that prioritized insurance proceeds for stabilizatien and decontamiaation after l an accident and provided for payment of proceeds to an independent trustee who would disburse funds for decontamination and cleanup before any other purpose.
Subseeuent to publication of the rule, the NRC has been infomed by insurers whn offer nuclear property insurance that, despite a good faith effnrt to obtain trustees required by the rule, the decontamination priority and trusteeship gDR81oo3oo4p gno997 g ^ DOCK 0500o309 PNU
e :
.\ ,
?.
T provisions will not be able to be incorporated into' policies by the time required in the rule. In response to these coments and related petitions for rulemakina, the Comission has proposed a revision of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(5)(il e extending the implementation schedule for 18 months (53 FR 26338, September 19, ;
f 4
1088). However, because it is unlikely that this rulemaking action will be effective by October 4,1988, the Comission is issuing a temporary exemption 3
from the recuirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(5)(1) until completien of the pending rulemaking extending the implementation date specified in 10 CFR 50.54(w)(5)(i),
l but not later than April 1, 1989. Upon completion of such rulemaking, the f
licensee shall comply with the provisions of such rule. :
i l The Need for The Proposed _ Action: l The exemption is needed because insurance complying with requirements of !
4 10 CFR 50.54(wl(Siffl is unavailable and because the temporary deley in implementation allowed by the exemption and associated rulemaking action will l pemit the Comission to reconsider on its merits the trusteeship provision of j 10 CFR 50.54(wi(41 i Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action: l 4
With respect to radiological impacts on the environment, the proposed I
exemption does not in any way anect the operation of licensed facilities, j I
Further, as noted by the Comission in the Supplementary Infomation i
acccepanying the proposed rule, there are several reasons for concluding that ;
delaying for a reasonable time the implementation of the stabilization and ,
j decontamination priority and trusteeship provisions of Section 50.54(w) will not j adversely affect protection of public health and safety. First, durina the l
l '
4 i I I
)
t ,
3 period of delay, the licensee will still be required to carry $1.06 billion insurance. This is a substantial amount of coverage that provides a signifi-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 extremely 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 af#ect radiological nr nonradiological effluents from the site and has no other nonradiological impacts.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action:
It has been concluded that there is no measurable impact associated with the proposed exemption; any alterratives to the exemption will have either no environmental impact or greater environmental impact.
Alternative l'se of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of any resources beyond the scope of resources used during nortnal plant operation.
Agencies and Persons Consulted:
The staff did not consult other agencies or persons in connection with the proposed exemption.
.y .
4 FINDINr. OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, the Comission concludas that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the Comission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed exemptier.
For information corcerning this action, see the proposed rule (53 FR 363381, and the exemption which is beinq processed concurrent with this notice. A copy of the exemption will be available for public inspection at the Comission's Public Document Roem, 2120 L Street, NW, Washington, D.C., and at the v'iscasset Public Library, High Street, P.O. Box 367 Wiseasset, Maine 04578.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 'l" - day of s g . : ,
, 1988.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMNISSION M e Richard H. Wessman, Director Pro.iect Directorate I-3 Division of Reactor Projects, 1/II
. _ _ _