ML20246D133
| ML20246D133 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/30/1988 |
| From: | Sniezek J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Jordan E Committee To Review Generic Requirements |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20245H200 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-53FR36338, RULE-PR-50 AC26-2-07, AC26-2-7, NUDOCS 8905100135 | |
| Download: ML20246D133 (1) | |
Text
_
/8C 2 6 DEC 3 01988 M NEMORANDUM FOR: Edward L. Jordan, Director DISTRIBUTION: T7013l Comittee to Review Generic Requirements PT5B R/F TMurley i
FROM: James H. Sniezek,' Deputy Director DNash Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation e RWood PMAS Rdg
SUBJECT:
REVIEW 0F DRAFT FINAL RULE ON EXTENDING THE JSnierek IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD FOR CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE PROPERTY INSURANCE RULE (650.54(w)(5)(1))
Enclosed for CRGR consideration is a draft final rule that would delay for 18 months implementation of $50.54(w)(5)(1). This section of the property insurance rule requires licensees to purchase by October 4,1988 property insurance that contains language both pricritizing insurance proceeds for payment of accident stabilization and decontamination costs and requiring that such proceeds be paid to an independent trustee for proper disbursement.
As explained in Frank Gillespie's memorandum to you dated September 26, 1988, this rule is necessary because insurers were unable to change their policies i by the required date and have been unable to find anyone to act as trustee. 1 The Comission accepted the trusteeship provision as added by OGC at a very late stage of the 1987 property insurance rulemaking against the advice of staff. As a result, there was no public comment period offered on the merits I
of the trusteeship provision. The 18-month delay would allow the NRC to defer provisions of a rule with which licensees cannot comply.
To prevent power reactor licensees from being in non-compliance despite their l good-faith efforts to obtain insurance containing the required provisions, NRR has issued to every power reactor licensee a temporary exemption from the I
schedule requirements of 550.54(w)(5)(1) up to April 4, 1989. To forestall l the need for possible further exemption action with its concomitant additional ;
resource burden on staff, we ask that the CRGR give expedited consideration to l this draft final rule. Because this rule would only codify the requirements as i they presently exist (with the schedular exemptions in place), I do not believe CRGR review is necessary. I would appreciate your prompt response so the staff can proceed expeditiously with the rulemaking or CRGR review.
Original signed by James H. Sniezek James H. Sniezek, Deputy Director i Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
- 1. Draft Final Rule Package (15 copies)
- 2. SECY-88-230 (PROPERTY INSURANCE RULE)
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE f l