Financial Protection Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Parts 50 and 140

RIN 3150-AF79

Financial Protection Requirements for Permanently Shutdown

Nuclear Power Reactors

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend

its regulations to allow nuclear reactor licensees to reduce onsite and

offsite liability coverage during permanent shutdown of the reactors if

they meet specified reactor configurations. This proposed amendment

would reduce the level of insurance coverage commensurate with the risk

reduction after the appropriate spent fuel cooling period following

permanent shutdown of the reactor.

DATES: The comment period expires January 13, 1998. Comments received

after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the

Commission is able to assure consideration only for comments received

on or before this date.

ADDRESSES: Send comments by mail or addressed to the Secretary, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Attention:

Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff.

Hand-deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,

Maryland, between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm on Federal workdays.

You may also provide comments via the NRC's interactive rulemaking

web site through the NRC home page (http://www.nrc.gov). This site

provides the availability to upload comments as files (any format), if

your web browser supports that function. For information about the

interactive rulemaking site, contact Ms. Carol Gallagher, (301) 415-

6215; e-mail [email protected]

Certain documents related to this rulemaking, including comments

received and the environmental assessment and finding of no significant

impact, may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street

NW., (Lower Level), Washington, DC. These same documents also may be

viewed and downloaded electronically via the interactive rulemaking

website established by NRC for this rulemaking.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George Mencinsky, Office of Nuclear

Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC

20555-0001, telephone: (301) 415-6206, e-mail [email protected]; Stephen

Lewis, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone: (301) 415-1684, e-

mail [email protected]; Ira Dinitz, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001,

telephone: (301) 415-1289, e-mail IPD[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The current regulations governing insurance coverage for nuclear

power reactors are contained in 10 CFR 50.54(w) and 10 CFR 140.11.

These regulations do not take into consideration the reduced risk

associated with permanently shutdown plants. The exemption process

allows reduced insurance coverage for these plants.

Consideration of whether financial protection coverage should be

reduced for permanently shutdown plants must take into account the

preservation of the solvency of the organization responsible for

maintaining and decommissioning these facilities in the unlikely event

of a nuclear incident. In addition, consideration would be given to

timely payment for valid damage claims by members of the public and

minimization of the likelihood that Federal Government indemnity would

be exercised for satisfaction of claims for damages.

The regulations in 10 CFR 140.11 require that the licensees of

facilities designed to produce substantial amounts of electricity, a

rated capacity of 100,000 kWe or more, must have and maintain a primary

insurance coverage of $200 million from private sources to protect

against offsite liability. In addition, licensees must maintain

secondary financial protection in the form of private liability

insurance available under an industry retrospective rating plan. The

current maximum obligation for secondary financial protection for a

licensee in this plan is $75.5 million with respect to any nuclear

incident. Thus, the total financial protection for offsite liability

for any incident would be the primary layer of $200 million, plus the

secondary layer of $75.5 million multiplied by the number of licensed

power reactors with a rated capacity of 100,000 kWe or higher.

Under 10 CFR 50.54(w), power reactor licensees must obtain

insurance coverage from private sources to provide protection against

onsite damage in the event of an accident. These monies would allow the

licensee to stabilize and decontaminate the reactor and reactor station

site in the event of an accident. The minimum amount of insurance

coverage is the lesser of $1.06 billion or the maximum amount of

insurance generally available from private sources.

This proposed rule is part of the NRC effort to eliminate

unnecessary regulatory burdens for power reactor facilities that are

permanently shutdown and in the process of decommissioning. This would

complement other amendments for decommissioning, such as the final rule

that was published in the Federal Register (61 FR 39278) on July 29,

1996, which clarified the procedures leading to permanent shutdown and,

eventually, to the termination of an operating license for nuclear

power reactors.

This proposed rule would also address a petition for rulemaking

(PRM-50-57) submitted by the North Carolina Public Staff Utilities

Commission. The petition requested reduction or, preferably,

elimination of the $1.06 billion of insurance for onsite reactor

stabilization and accident decontamination that is required by 10 CFR

50.54(w) when all nuclear fuel has been removed from the site. The

petitioner also requested that the offsite primary and secondary

liability coverages required under 10 CFR 140.11(a)(4) be reduced or,

preferably, eliminated for shutdown reactors when no nuclear fuel is on

the reactor site.

The proposed rule does not address the financial protection

requirements for

[[Page 58691]]

Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations (ISFSIs). This subject

will be addressed after efforts dealing with technical and licensing

issues for ISFSIs are resolved in areas of safeguards requirements,

emergency planning, and potential fuel storage handling activities.

Discussion

Several different configurations for permanently shutdown reactors

are being established that encompass anticipated spent fuel

characteristics and storage modes during the period between permanent

shutdown and termination of the license. They are as follows:

Reactor Configuration 1: the reactor is defueled, permanently

shutdown, and spent fuel in the spent fuel pool is susceptible to a

zircaloy cladding fire if the spent fuel pool is drained accidentally.

This configuration encompasses the period from immediately after the

core is offloaded to just before the decay heat of the hottest

assemblies is low enough that no rapid zircaloy oxidation will take

place, and the fuel cladding will remain intact with no gap release if

water in the spent fuel pool is lost.

Reactor Configuration 2: The reactor is defueled, permanently

shutdown, and spent fuel is in the spent fuel pool but is not

susceptible to a zircaloy cladding fire or gap release caused by an

incipient fuel cladding failure in the event the spent fuel pool is

drained accidentally. In this configuration, the spent fuel can be

stored long-term in the spent fuel pool without the possibility of

initiating a zircaloy fire or significant fuel cladding failure. In

addition, the site may contain a radioactive inventory of liquid

radwaste, activated reactor components, and contaminated structural

materials. The radioactive inventory during this configuration may

change depending on the licensee's proposed shutdown activities and

schedule.

Reactor Configuration 3: The reactor is permanently shutdown and no

spent fuel is in the reactor or the spent fuel pool. All spent fuel has

been removed to an offsite or onsite dry storage independent spent fuel

storage installation (ISFSI) or to a DOE high-level repository. The

remaining radioactive inventory depends on the decommissioning status

and may include liquid radwaste, activated reactor components, and

contaminated structural materials.

Reactor Configuration 4: Same as reactor configuration 3, except

the reactor site has no significant mobile sources of radioactivity

such as contaminated liquids (less than 1000 gallons).

There are potential onsite and offsite radiological consequences

that could be associated with the onsite storage of the spent fuel in

the spent fuel pool for some time after permanent shutdown. In Reactor

Configuration 1, in the event of a complete loss of spent fuel pool

coolant inventory such as from a beyond-design-basis earthquake

scenario, there is a potential for overheating the fuel by decay heat.

This sequence could result in a zircaloy cladding fire that may have

significant onsite and offsite consequences.

To prevent fuel rod cladding failure leading to a zircaloy-cladding

fire if all spent fuel pool water is lost, the rod cladding temperature

must not exceed 565 deg.C. The rod cladding temperature is an important

factor that must be considered in modifying the financial protection

requirements for permanently shutdown reactors.

In Reactor Configuration 2, the spent fuel has decay heat

sufficiently low that the cladding will remain intact even if all spent

fuel pool water is lost. However, if there are significant sources of

radioactive material stored onsite, it would be appropriate to maintain

an adequate level of onsite insurance coverage. Although the offsite

consequences are negligible in the Reactor Configuration 2 , because

the spent fuel pool is operational and an inventory of radioactive

materials exists onsite, an appropriate level of offsite financial

protection is required to account for the potential for significant

judgments or settlements from litigation that might be instituted and

to protect the Federal government from indemnity claims.

In Reactor Configuration 3, when spent fuel is no longer stored in

the spent fuel pool, the potential for a radiological incident is

primarily in mobile sources of radioactivity onsite at permanently

shutdown nuclear reactors. The offsite cleanup costs were found to be

negligible for Reactor Configuration 3, but as was noted in Reactor

Configuration 2, an appropriate level of offsite financial protection

is still required to account for the potential for significant

judgments or settlements from litigation that might be instituted and

also to protect the Federal government from indemnity claims. Because

the level of risk has decreased vis-a-vis the Reactor Configuration 2

by having no spent fuel in the spent fuel pool, the level of offsite

financial protection required is being reduced by taking into account

only the mobile radioactive inventory onsite.

In the Reactor Configuration 4, with no significant amount of

mobile sources of radioactivity such as contaminated liquids onsite,

there is no need to maintain the same level of insurance coverage for

onsite or offsite financial protection as in Reactor Configuration 3.

The basis for the transition from Reactor Configuration 3 to Reactor

Configuration 4 is the point at which there is less than 1000 gallons

of liquid radwaste stored onsite. A limiting value of 1000 gallons has

been considered because it constitutes approximately a factor of 500

reduction in volume from the large volume tank used as the basis for

the Reactor Configuration 3 limiting event.

In Reactor Configuration 4, if the licensee has cleaned the site to

unrestricted release levels and is awaiting a confirmatory survey for

terminating the license, the necessary level of onsite insurance

coverage at this stage would be less than when 1000 gallons of liquid

radwaste were stored onsite. Under these circumstances, the onsite

coverage could be further reduced or eliminated to account for

negligible onsite consequences. However, for offsite financial

protection requirements, although the offsite consequences are

negligible, some level of public liability financial protection must be

maintained as long as there remains in effect a nuclear reactor license

issued pursuant to 10 CFR part 50 under the authority of Section 103 or

104 of the Atomic Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2133, 2134). See Section 170a

of that Act (42 U.S.C. 2210a). Section 170 is commonly referred to as

the ``Price-Anderson Act.''

Proposed Regulatory Action

The proposed amendments would adjust the onsite insurance coverage

requirements and the offsite financial protection requirements for

permanently shutdown reactors based on limiting the spent fuel cladding

temperatures for accidents involving loss of spent fuel pool water and

the amount of onsite radioactive inventory such as liquid radwaste in

post shutdown modes. The insurance amounts are based on the estimated

cost of recovery from limiting hypothetical events for specific reactor

configurations.

The proposed amendments would also address ``rated capacity'' in 10

CFR 140.11 as used in Section 170a of the Atomic Energy Act to indicate

that a permanently shutdown nuclear reactor has a ``rated capacity'' of

zero.

The proposed financial protection requirements are as follows.

Reactor Configuration 1--Fuel in spent fuel pool not sufficiently

cool.

[[Page 58692]]

--The requirements for onsite insurance coverage and offsite financial

protection remain as presently specified in 10 CFR 50.54(w) and 10 CFR

140.11, respectively.

Reactor Configuration 2--Fuel could tolerate a complete loss of

water in the spent fuel pool.

--The onsite insurance coverage requirements is $50 million. The amount

of $50 million is to recover from a postulated accident in the spent

fuel pool.

--The offsite financial protection requirement is $100 million, based

on the potential for significant judgments or settlements resulting

from litigation despite negligible offsite consequences.

Reactor Configuration 3--No fuel in spent fuel pool, risk dependent

on radioactive inventory at plant site in decommissioning status.

--The onsite insurance coverage requirement is $50 million. The amount

of $50 million is the estimated amount needed to recover from a

postulated onsite event of a rupture of a large slightly contaminated

liquid storage tank.

--The offsite financial protection requirement is $50 million, based on

the potential for significant judgments or settlements resulting from

litigation that might still be instituted despite negligible offsite

consequences; however the liability risk is considered less than in

Reactor Configuration 2.

Reactor Configuration 4--No fuel in the spent fuel pool and no

significant source of mobile radioactive material.

--The onsite insurance coverage requirements is either $25 million or

is eliminated. The amount of $25 million is based on the possibility of

having to clean up onsite contamination from an accidental rupture of a

less-than-1000-gallon contaminated liquid storage tank during shutdown

activities. Elimination of onsite insurance coverage would be warranted

when a licensee is awaiting a confirmatory survey for license

termination.

--The offsite financial protection requirement is $25 million, based on

the potential for claims arising from asserted offsite consequences.

This would minimize the possibility that Federal Government

indemnification would be required. As noted above, the Atomic Energy

Act does not allow a 10 CFR part 50 licensee to drop this coverage

entirely, only to reduce it.

Discussion

This proposed rule would allow power reactor licensees to reduce

their onsite insurance coverage and offsite financial protection

requirements during permanent shutdown without resorting to the

exemption process. The level of financial protection would be

determined for permanently shutdown reactors at a level that coincides

with their actual configuration stage.

During Reactor Configuration 1, licensees would be required to

maintain onsite insurance coverage and offsite financial protection at

the levels currently required by 10 CFR 50.54(w) and 10 CFR 140.11,

respectively. This is because the radiological consequences during this

stage of permanent shutdown approximate the magnitude of a severe core

damage accident.

After allowing the spent fuel to cool down to the point that the

maximum spent fuel cladding temperature will not exceed 565 deg.C in

the event of a loss of water in the spent fuel pool (Reactor

Configuration 2), power reactor licensees would be allowed under 10 CFR

50.54(w) to reduce their onsite insurance coverage from $1.06 billion

to $50 million. The reason for this reduction in insurance coverage is

that the rapid clad oxidation event of Reactor Configuration 1 is not

possible. Insurance coverage requirements for Reactor Configuration 2

are based on the fact that there is a possibility for a fuel handling

accident in the spent fuel pool, and significant amounts of mobile

radioactive sources remain onsite that have a potential for release

during this period. The $50 million coverage would be adequate to clean

up the site in the event of a fuel handling accident, an accidental

release of cooling water from the spent fuel pool, or a rupture of a

large slightly contaminated liquid storage tank.

The proposed insurance coverage requirement for Reactor

Configuration 2 does not take into account the reduction in radioactive

decay of the spent fuel assemblies with the passage of time during that

period. The insurance coverage requirements are based on the

conservative assumption of a fuel handling accident shortly after the

transition to Reactor Configuration 2. Adjusting insurance requirements

during Reactor Configuration 2 based on the decay level of the spent

fuel would be burdensome from a regulatory standpoint, as opposed to

selecting a bounding figure to encompass any unexpected events

concerning the spent fuel pool.

In Reactor Configuration 2, the offsite financial protection

requirements set forth in 10 CFR 140.11 would be reduced from $200

million to $100 million for the primary liability coverage, and the

licensee would be allowed to withdraw from the secondary liability

coverage under Price-Anderson.

In Reactor Configuration 3, when all the spent fuel has been

removed to an onsite or offsite dry storage ISFSI or to a DOE high-

level repository and the onsite radioactive inventory is greater than

1000 gallons, the onsite insurance coverage requirements would be $50

million under the proposed 10 CFR 50.54(w). This amount is based on the

fact that there are still mobile radioactive sources onsite that have

the potential to contaminate the site. The maximum cleanup costs

associated with Reactor Configuration 3 are estimated at approximately

$50 million. The conservative limiting event is the rupture of a large

contaminated liquid storage tank that causes soil contamination and the

potential to contaminate groundwater. The offsite financial protection

requirements under the proposed Section 140.11 would be reduced from

$100 million to $50 million, and the licensee would not be required to

maintain secondary liability coverage under the Price-Anderson Act for

Reactor Configuration 3. With no spent fuel in the spent fuel pool, the

risks of offsite contamination have been reduced considerably for this

configuration.

In Reactor Configuration 4, there are no significant mobile sources

of radioactivity, such as liquid contaminants, onsite. Thus, the

potential for onsite and offsite radiological impacts is limited. In

this situation, onsite insurance coverage requirements either would be

$25 million or would be completely eliminated under the proposed 10 CFR

50.54(w). The amount in each case would be based on information

provided by the licensee and evaluated by the staff for the particular

circumstances of the shutdown reactor. The $25 million onsite insurance

coverage would be required if liquid radwaste remained stored onsite,

usually 1,000 gallons or less of radwaste, that may be susceptible to

an accidental spill and the consequent need for cleanup of the

contaminated site. Elimination of required onsite insurance coverage

would be based on the licensee's submittal of its terminal radiation

survey to the NRC stating that the site has been cleaned to

unrestricted release levels and is awaiting a confirmatory survey for

termination of the license. In either case, the onsite and offsite

consequences would be negligible.

[[Page 58693]]

In Reactor Configuration 4, the required offsite financial

protection would be reduced to $25 million to account for the

continuing potential for claims based on asserted offsite consequences.

A minimum of $25 million in coverage would minimize the possibility

that Federal Government indemnification would be required and would be

consistent with the requirements of Section 170 of the Atomic Energy

Act that power reactor licensees maintain some level of public

liability financial protection. The licensee would not be required to

maintain secondary liability coverage under Price-Anderson for Reactor

Configuration 4.

In addition, ``rated capacity'' would be addressed in 10 CFR part

140 to indicate that permanently shutdown nuclear power plants have

``zero'' rated capacity. The effect of this amendment would be to allow

the NRC to permit reduction of the primary liability coverage and

elimination of the requirement for participation in the secondary

liability coverage for nuclear power plants that had made the

certifications under 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1)(i) and (ii). However, for

reasons stated above, the NRC does not propose to permit this reduction

and withdrawal until a reactor has entered the Reactor Configuration 2.

At that point the NRC proposes that the reactor no longer be subject to

the requirements to maintain primary financial protection in the

``maximum amount available at reasonable cost and on reasonable terms

from private sources'' or to participate in the secondary financial

protection public liability system under Section 170 of the Atomic

Energy Act. The Commission has already approved, in response to site-

specific requests, these adjustments in the primary and secondary

public liability insurance regime, and this clarification in part 140,

as requested by the Commission, places into the Commission's

regulations a statement that a permanently shutdown nuclear power plant

is no longer considered to have any ``rated capacity.''

The petition for rulemaking submitted by the North Carolina Public

Staff Utilities Commission would be substantially granted in that the

insurance requirements would be significantly reduced, as requested.

However, the petition could not be fully granted because of the Price-

Anderson statutory provisions that do not allow licensees who continue

to hold 10 CFR part 50 licenses to drop the offsite public liability

coverage entirely.

Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability

The Commission has determined under the National Environmental

Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in

subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, that this rule, if adopted, would not be a

major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human

environment, and therefore, an environmental impact statement is not

required. The proposed rule change would allow licensees to seek

reductions in onsite and offsite insurance coverage following permanent

shutdown if they meet specified reactor configurations because of the

reduced risk associated with permanently shutdown reactors. The

proposed rule change would require no changes in hardware, procedures,

organization, or operation of nuclear power reactors. It would not

affect the safety requirements for nuclear power reactors because of

the significantly reduced risks to the public health and safety in

Reactor Configurations 2, 3, and 4 and it would not affect the

likelihood, magnitude, or consequences of accidents at the permanently

shutdown nuclear power reactors. Although the proposed rule change

would reduce the level of financial protection available to pay for

environmental or other consequences that may result from accidents at

permanently shutdown nuclear power reactors, the Commission considers

the reduced required insurance and financial protection coverage to be

fully adequate and commensurate with the reduced consequences of

potential accidents at permanently shutdown nuclear reactors and that

the environment will not be negatively affected. Accordingly, the

Commission has determined that the proposed rulemaking would have no

significant impacts on the quality of the environment.

The environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact

on which this determination is based are available for inspection at

the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level),

Washington, DC. Single copies of the environmental assessment and the

finding of no significant impact are available from George Mencinsky,

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6206.

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

This proposed rule does not contain a new or amended information

collection requirement subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing requirements were approved by the

Office of Management and Budget, approval numbers 3150-0011 and 3150-

0039.

Public Protection Notification

The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to

respond to, an information collection unless it displays a currently

valid OMB control number.

Regulatory Analysis

The Commission has prepared a draft regulatory analysis on this

proposed regulation. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of

the alternatives considered by the Commission. The draft analysis is

available for inspection in the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street

NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC. Single copies of the draft analysis

may be obtained from George Mencinsky, Office of Nuclear Regulatory

Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-

0001, telephone (301) 415-6206. The Commission requests public comment

on the draft regulatory analysis. Comments on the draft analysis may be

submitted to the NRC as indicated under the ADDRESSES heading.

Regulatory Flexibility Certification

As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C.

605(b)), the Commission certifies that this rule, if adopted, will not

have a significant economic impact upon a substantial number of small

entities. The proposed rule only affects NRC power reactor licensees,

which are not ``small entities.''

Backfit Analysis

The NRC has determined that the backfit rule, 10 CFR 50.109, does

not apply to this proposed rule because the backfit rule is limited in

scope to construction and operation of nuclear reactors. This rule

would only apply to reactors that have permanently ceased operations.

Therefore, a backfit analysis is not required because these amendments

do not involve any provisions that would impose backfits as defined in

10 CFR 50.109(a)(1).

List of Subjects

10 CFR Part 50

Antitrust, Classified information, Criminal penalties, Fire

protection, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,

Nuclear power plants and reactors, Radiation protection, Reactor siting

criteria,

[[Page 58694]]

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

10 CFR Part 140

Criminal penalties, Extraordinary nuclear occurrence, Insurance,

Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants

and reactors, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of

the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization

Act of 1974, as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 553, the NRC is proposing to

adopt the following amendments to 10 CFR parts 50 and 140.

PART 50--DOMESTIC LICENSING OF PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION

FACILITIES

1. The authority citation for Part 50 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 102, 103, 104, 105, 161, 182, 183, 186, 189, 68

Stat. 936, 937, 938, 948, 953, 954, 955, 956, as amended, sec. 234,

83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2132, 2133, 2134, 2135, 2201,

2232, 2233, 2236, 2239, 2282); secs. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88

Stat. 1242, as amended 1244, 1246, (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846).

Section 50.7 also issued under Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat.

2951 (42 U.S.C. 5851). Sections 50.10 also issued under secs. 101,

185, 68 Stat. 955, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2131, 2235); sec. 102, Pub.

L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332). Sections 50.13, 50.54(dd),

and 50.103 also issued under sec. 108, 68 Stat. 939, as amended (42

U.S.C. 2138). Sections 50.23, 50.35, 50.55, and 50.56 also issued

under sec. 185, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2235). Sections 50.33a,

50.55a and Appendix Q also issued under sec. 102, Pub. L. 91-190, 83

Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332). Sections 50.34 and 50.54 also issued

under sec. 204, 88 Stat. 1245 (42 U.S.C. 5844). Sections 50.58,

50.91, and 50.92 also issued under Pub. L. 97-415, 96 Stat. 2073 (42

U.S.C. 2239). Section 50.78 also issued under sec. 122, 68 Stat. 939

(42 U.S.C. 2152). Sections 50.80-50.81 also issued under sec. 184,

68 Stat. 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2234). Appendix F also issued

under sec. 187, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2237).

2. In Sec. 50.54(w), paragraph (5) is added to read as follows:

Sec. 50.54 Conditions of licenses.

* * * * *

(w) * * *

(5) For the specified reactor configurations during permanent

shutdown, licensees shall maintain the following insurance requirements

notwithstanding paragraph (w)(1):

(i) For Reactor Configuration 1: when the reactor is defueled,

permanently shutdown, and the spent fuel cladding temperature in the

spent fuel pool is 565 deg.C or greater for a postulated loss of spent

fuel pool cooling event, the insurance coverage must be as specified in

paragraph (w)(1).

(ii) For Reactor Configuration 2: when the reactor is defueled and

permanently shutdown, no operating reactors are on the site, and the

spent fuel cladding temperature in the spent fuel pool does not exceed

565 deg.C for a postulated loss-of-spent-fuel-pool-cooling event, the

minimum insurance coverage limit for each reactor must be $50 million.

(iii) For Reactor Configuration 3: when the reactor is defueled and

permanently shutdown, no operating reactors are on the site, no fuel is

in the spent fuel pool, and the radioactive liquid inventory onsite is

1,000 gallons or greater, the minimum insurance coverage for each

reactor must be $50 million.

(iv) For Reactor Configuration 4: when the reactor is defueled and

permanently shutdown, no operating reactors are on the site, no fuel is

in the spent fuel pool, and the radioactive liquid inventory onsite is

less than 1,000 gallons, the minimum insurance coverage for each

reactor must be $25 million. For sites awaiting license termination, no

insurance coverage is required if the licensee has completed its

terminal radiation survey and the site is ready for the confirmatory

survey for license termination.

* * * * *

PART 140--FINANCIAL PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS AND INDEMNITY

AGREEMENTS

1. The authority citation for Part 140 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: Secs. 161, 170, 68 Stat. 948, 71 Stat. 576, as

amended (42 U.S.C. 2201, 2210); secs. 201, as amended, 202, 88 Stat.

1242, as amended, 1244 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842).

2. In Sec. 140.11(a), remove ``and'' at the end of paragraph (3),

change ``.'' at end of paragraph (4) to ``; and'' and add paragraph (5)

to read as follows:

Sec. 140.11 Amounts of financial protection for certain reactors.

(a) * * *

(5) For the specified reactor configurations during permanent

shutdown of nuclear power reactors (such reactors being classified as

having zero electric power level rated capacity) that were covered

during their operation by paragraph (a)(4):

(i) For Reactor Configuration 1: when the reactor is defueled,

permanently shutdown, and the spent fuel cladding temperature in the

spent fuel pool is 565 deg.C or greater for a postulated loss of spent

fuel pool cooling event, in the amount as specified in paragraph

(a)(4).

(ii) For Reactor Configuration 2: when the reactor is defueled and

permanently shutdown, no operating reactors are on the site, and the

spent fuel cladding temperature in the spent fuel pool does not exceed

565 deg.C for a postulated loss-of-spent-fuel-pool-cooling event, in

the amount of $100 million for each reactor.

(iii) For Reactor Configuration 3: when the reactor is defueled and

permanently shutdown, no operating reactors are on the site, no fuel is

in the spent fuel pool, and the radioactive liquid inventory onsite is

1,000 gallons or greater, in the amount of $50 million for each

reactor.

(iv) For Reactor Configuration 4: when the reactor is defueled and

permanently shutdown, no operating reactors are on the site, no fuel is

in the spent fuel pool, and the radioactive liquid inventory onsite is

less than 1,000 gallons, in the amount of $25 million for each reactor.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of October, 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John C. Hoyle,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 97-28679 Filed 10-29-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P