Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co.,

[Federal Register: September 23, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 184)]

[Notices]

[Page 50929-50930]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

[DOCID:fr23se98-107]

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. 98-25413Filed9-22-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P.