[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 184 (Wednesday, September 23, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50929-50930]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-25413]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-213]


Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company (Haddam Neck Plant); 
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission or NRC) is 
considering issuance of an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 
50.54(w) and 10 CFR 140.11 regarding financial protection requirements 
to Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company (CYAPCo or the licensee) for 
the Haddam Neck Plant (HNP) located in Middlesex County, Connecticut.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed exemption would allow an exemption from the 
requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w) regarding the amount of onsite property 
insurance required for the licensee and from the requirements of 10 CFR 
140.11 regarding the amount of offsite liability insurance required by 
the licensee.
    By letter dated September 26, 1997, the licensee presented the 
results of an analysis of the capability of spent fuel stored in the 
spent fuel pool (SFP) to heat up in the absence of cooling water. The 
licensee provided information that as of October 1, 1997, the spent 
fuel could not heat up above 538  deg.C in the absence of any cooling 
water. In order to achieve the results presented, the licensee had to 
arrange the spent fuel in a configuration consistent with the analysis.
    By letter dated October 7, 1997, the licensee requested the 
exemption on the basis that HNP is permanently shut down and defueled, 
and, therefore, the potential risk to public health and safety is 
substantially reduced. The requested action would allow CYAPCo to 
reduce onsite insurance coverage to $50 million and offsite coverage to 
$100 million for HNP.
    By letter dated December 18, 1997, the licensee stated that 
movement of the spent nuclear fuel into the configuration consistent 
with the fuel heat-up analysis had been completed on October 23, 1997.

[[Page 50930]]

Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed exemption is needed because the licensee's required 
insurance coverage significantly exceeds the potential cost 
consequences of radiological incidents possible at a permanently 
shutdown and defueled nuclear power plant with spent fuel that will 
have cooled for two years on July 22, 1998.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC's evaluation of the proposed exemption from 10 CFR 50.54(w) 
and 10 CFR 140.11 indicates that issuance of the proposed exemption is 
an administrative action and will not have any environmental impact. 
The HNP facility permanently ceased reactor power operations on July 
22, 1996, and completed the permanent transfer of all reactor fuel to 
the SFP on November 15, 1996. The licensee maintains and operates the 
plant in a configuration necessary to support the safe storage of spent 
fuel and to comply with the facility operating license and NRC's rules 
and regulations.
    No changes are being made in the types or amounts of any 
radiological effluents that may be released offsite. There is no 
significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. 
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant 
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
    With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed 
exemption does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no 
other nonradiological environmental impact.
    Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant 
radiological or nonradiological environmental impacts associated with 
the proposed exemption.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    Since the Commission has concluded that there is no significant 
environmental impact associated with the proposed exemption, any 
alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be 
evaluated. The principal alternative to the action would be to deny the 
request, thereby requiring the licensee to maintain insurance coverage 
required of an operating plant (no-action alternative); such an action 
would not enhance the protection of the environment. Denial of the 
application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. 
The impacts of the proposed action and the alternative are similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

    This action does not involve the use of any resources not 
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for HNP 
issued in October 1973.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy on August 19, 1998, the NRC 
staff consulted with the Connecticut State Official, Mr. D. Galloway, 
Department of Environmental Protection, regarding the environmental 
impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    On the basis of the environmental assessment, the staff concludes 
that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the 
quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the Commission will not 
prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed exemption.
    For further details with respect to the proposed exemption, see 
letters from the licensee dated September 26, October 7, and December 
18, 1997, which are available at the Commission's Public Document Room, 
2120 L Street, NW., Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 and at the Local Public 
Document Room, Russell Library, 123 Broad Street, Middletown, 
Connecticut 06457.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of September 1998.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Micheal T. Masnik,
Acting Director, Non-Power Reactors and Decommissioning Project 
Directorate, Division of Reactor Program Management, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-25413 Filed 9-22-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P.