Exelon Generation Company, LLC; Amergen Energy Company, LLC; Braidwood Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2; Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2; Clinton Power Station, Unit 1; Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 1, 2, and 3; Lasalle County Station, Units 1 and 2; Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2; Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station; Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 1, 2 and 3; Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2; Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1; and Zion Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2; Exemption, 38672-38673 [E6-10622]
Download as PDF
38672
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 130 / Friday, July 7, 2006 / Notices
ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE
SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND
THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES:
The following are routine uses for
information maintained on JSC
Exchange Operations employees only:
(1) Provide information in accordance
with legal or policy directives and
regulations to the Internal Revenue
Service, Department of Labor,
Department of Commerce, Texas State
Government Agencies, labor unions; (2)
provide information to insurance
carriers with regard to worker’s
compensation, health and accident, and
retirement insurance coverages; (3)
provide employment or credit
information to other parties as requested
by a current or former employee of the
JSC Exchange Operations; and (4)
standard routine uses 1 through 4
inclusive as set forth in Appendix B.
The following routine use for
information maintained on participants
in social, sports, or wellness activities
sponsored by the Exchange: (1) Patron
usage is provided on employees of JSC
contractors to their employer
organizations, and (2) standard routine
uses 1 through 4 inclusive as set forth
in Appendix B.
POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING,
RECEIVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND
DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:
Hard-copy documents and electronic
records in systems on secure JSC
Servers.
RETRIEVABILITY:
For JSC Exchange employees, records
are retrieved by name and filed as
current or past employee. For
Scholarship applicants, records are
retrieved by name. For participants in
social, sports, or wellness activities
sponsored by the Exchange, records are
retrieved by name and employer.
SAFEGUARDS:
Hard-copy records are located in
locked metal file cabinets with access
limited to those whose official duties
require access. Electronic records are
maintained in a password protected
system, with access limited to those
whose official duties require access.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:
All records are disposed of in
accordance with NASA Retention
Schedules, Schedule 9 Item 6/E.
Personnel records of JSC Exchange
operations employees are retained
indefinitely in Agency space to satisfy
payroll, reemployment, unemployment
compensation, tax, and employee
retirement purposes. For successful
15:46 Jul 06, 2006
Jkt 208001
SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:
Manager, Exchange Operations,
NASA Exchange-JSC, Location 5, as set
forth in Appendix A.
NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE:
Individuals may obtain information
from the System Manager.
RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURE:
Same as above.
CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES:
The NASA regulations for access to
records and for contesting contents and
appealing initial determinations by the
individual concerned appear in 14 CFR
part 1212.
RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:
STORAGE:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
applicants under the JSC Exchange
Scholarship Program, records are
maintained until completion of awarded
scholarship and are then destroyed.
Records pertaining to unsuccessful
applicants are returned to the
individual. For participants in social,
sports, or wellness activities sponsored
by the Exchange, records are maintained
for stated participation period and are
then destroyed.
For employees of the JSC Exchange
Operations, information is obtained
from the individual employee, the
employee references, insurance carriers,
JSC Space Medical Division, JSC
Security, employment agencies, Texas
Employment Commission, credit
bureaus, and creditors.
With respect to the JSC Exchange
Scholarship Program, the information is
obtained from the parents or guardians
of the scholarship participants.
For current and past civil servant
employees of the Johnson Space Center
(JSC), current and past JSC contractor
employees, current and past Exchange
Operation employees, current and past
military personnel or others assigned to
JSC (per an IPA, MOU, etc.), current and
past Civil Servants and Contractors on
TDY from other NASA centers, spouses
and dependants of any of the defined
above and any other personnel
authorized to use the Exchange services,
participate in social, sports, or wellness
activities sponsored by the Exchange
and other similar activities, information
is obtained from the individual
participant or their parent or guardian if
it is a child under the age of 18.
John W. McManus,
Acting Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. E6–10653 Filed 7–6–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510–13–P
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. STN 50–456 and STN 50–457;
STN 50–454 and STN 50–455; 50–461; 50–
10, 50–237, and 50–249; 50–373 and 50–
374; 50–352 and 50–353; 50–219; 50–171,
50–277, and 50–278; 50–254 and 50–265;
50–289; and 50–295 and 50–304]
Exelon Generation Company, LLC;
Amergen Energy Company, LLC;
Braidwood Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2;
Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2;
Clinton Power Station, Unit 1; Dresden
Nuclear Power Station, Units 1, 2, and
3; Lasalle County Station, Units 1 and
2; Limerick Generating Station, Units 1
and 2; Oyster Creek Nuclear
Generating Station; Peach Bottom
Atomic Power Station, Units 1, 2 and
3; Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station,
Units 1 and 2; Three Mile Island
Nuclear Station, Unit 1; and Zion
Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2;
Exemption
1. Background
Exelon Generation Company, LLC,
and AmerGen Energy Company, LLC
(the licensees) are the holders of the
Facility Operating License (FOL) Nos.
NPF–72 and NPF–77 for the Braidwood
Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (Braidwood),
which consists of two pressurized-water
reactors (PWRs) located in Will County,
Illinois; NPF–37 and NPF–66 for the
Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2
(Byron), which consists of two PWRs
located in Ogle County, Illinois; NPF–62
for the Clinton Power Station, Unit 1
(Clinton), which consists of a boilingwater reactor (BWR) located in DeWitt
County, Illinois; DPR–2, DPR–19, and
DPR–25 for the Dresden Nuclear Power
Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 (Dresden),
which consists of three BWRs located in
Grundy County, Illinois; NPF–11 and
NPF–18 for the LaSalle County Station,
Units 1 and 2 (LaSalle), which consists
of two BWRs located in LaSalle County,
Illinois; NPF–39 and NPF–85 for the
Limerick Generating Station, Units 1
and 2 (Limerick), which consists of two
BWRs located in Montgomery County,
Pennsylvania; DPR–16 for Oyster Creek
Nuclear Generating Station (Oyster
Creek), which consists of a BWR located
in Ocean County, New Jersey; DPR–12,
DPR–44, and DPR–56 for the Peach
Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 1,
2, and 3 (Peach Bottom), which consists
of three BWRs located in York and
Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania; DPR–
29 and DPR–30 for the Quad Cities
Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2
(Quad Cities), which consists of two
BWRs located in Rock Island County,
Illinois; DPR–50 for the Three Mile
Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (Three
E:\FR\FM\07JYN1.SGM
07JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 130 / Friday, July 7, 2006 / Notices
Mile Island), which consists of a PWR
located in Dauphin County,
Pennsylvania; and DPR–39 and DPR–48
for the Zion Nuclear Power Station,
Units 1 and 2 (Zion), which consists of
two PWRs located in Lake County,
Illinois. The licenses provide, among
other things, that the facilities are
subject to all the rules, regulations, and
orders of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC, Commission) now or
hereafter in effect.
2. Request/Action
Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), Section
50.54(a)(3), requires that changes to the
quality assurance program description
that do not reduce commitments must
be submitted to the NRC in accordance
with the reporting requirements of 10
CFR 50.71(e).
The regulation at 10 CFR 50.71(e)(4)
requires that revisions to the final safety
analysis report (FSAR) be submitted
annually or six months after a refueling
outage, provided the interval between
updates does not exceed 24 months. As
an alternative, the licensees propose
that changes to the quality assurance
program that do not reduce
commitments be submitted on a 24month calendar schedule, not to exceed
24 months from the previous submittal.
The exemption would apply to each of
the licensees’ plants identified above.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
3. Discussion
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, the
Commission may, upon application by
any interested person or upon its own
initiative, grant exemptions from the
requirements of 10 CFR part 50 when (1)
the exemptions are authorized by law,
will not present an undue risk to public
health and safety, and are consistent
with the common defense and security;
and (2) when special circumstances are
present. Special circumstances are
present whenever, according to 10 CFR
50.12(a)(2)(ii), ‘‘Application of the
regulation in the particular
circumstances would not serve the
underlying purpose of the rule or is not
necessary to achieve the purpose of the
rule’’. Operational quality assurance
programs are generally described in
Chapter 17.2 of a licensee’s Updated
Safety Analysis Report (USAR) or,
alternately, in a topical report
incorporated into the USAR by
reference. The licensees’ quality
assurance program, described in the
Quality Assurance Topical Report
(QATR), is common to the 21 units
requesting the exemption. Compliance
with 10 CFR 50.54(a)(3) would require
these changes to be submitted annually
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:46 Jul 06, 2006
Jkt 208001
or after a refueling outage for each of the
licensees’ units.
The licensees stated that the proposed
exemption is strictly administrative and
does not reduce commitments or
effectiveness of the quality assurance
program as described in the QATR, and
does not adversely affect plant
equipment, operation, or procedures.
The exemption will not alter the manner
in which changes to the common QATR
are evaluated in order to ensure that
there is no reduction in commitment.
Changes to the common QATR will be
reviewed through the existing
applicable administrative and
programmatic control processes to
ensure that QATR changes are properly
evaluated and implemented. The
methods and procedures used to
evaluate changes to the common QATR
are not changed or modified.
The underlying purpose of the rule is
to ensure that periodic submittals
required under 10 CFR 50.54(a)(3)
would allow the NRC staff to provide
regulatory oversight of changes to the
licensees’ quality assurance program,
and to ensure that the changes are
consistent with the regulations.
The exemption requested by the
licensees only extends the reporting
period, and does not exceed the time
period between successive updates
established by 10 CFR 50.71(e).
Reporting of routine and administrative
changes to the quality assurance
program that do not reduce
commitments for each of the licensees’
units over a 2-year period is not
consistent with the underlying purpose
of the rule, nor is it necessary to achieve
the purpose of the rule. Therefore, the
NRC staff concludes that, pursuant to 10
CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), special
circumstances are present.
The NRC staff examined the licensees’
rationale that supports the exemption
request and concluded that the
alternative reporting cycle of 24 months
for submitting QATR changes specified
under 10 CFR 50.54(a)(3) provides
adequate control and is consistent with
the underlying purpose of 10 CFR
50.54(a)(3).
Based on the foregoing, the NRC staff
concludes that the changes specified in
10 CFR 50.54(a)(3) are administrative
and routine in nature. Also, the NRC
staff concludes that the requested
exemption would not result in any
significant reduction in the effectiveness
of the quality assurance program
implemented by the licensees.
Therefore, the NRC staff concludes that
the proposed exemption would not
present an undue risk to the public
health and safety.
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38673
4.
Conclusion
Accordingly, the Commission has
determined that pursuant to 10 CFR Part
50.12, the exemption is authorized by
law, will not present an undue risk to
the public health and safety, and is
consistent with the common defense
and security. Also, special
circumstances are present. Therefore,
the Commission hereby grants the
licensees an exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(a)(3) for
Braidwood, Byron, Clinton, Dresden,
LaSalle, Limerick, Oyster Creek, Peach
Bottom, Quad Cities, Three Mile Island,
and Zion stations.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the
Commission has determined that the
granting of this exemption will have no
significant effect on the quality of the
human environment (71 FR 29359).
This exemption is effective upon
issuance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day
of June 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Catherine Haney,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6–10622 Filed 7–6–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. STN 50–454 and STN 50–455]
Exelon Generation Company, LLC;
Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2;
Exemption
1.0 Background
The Exelon Generation Company, LLC
(Exelon, licensee) is the holder of
Facility Operating License Nos. NPF–37
and NPF–66 which authorize operation
of the Byron Station Unit 1 and Unit 2,
respectively. The licenses provide,
among other things, that the facility is
subject to all rules, regulations, and
orders of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC, Commission) now or
hereafter in effect.
The facility consists of two
pressurized-water reactors located in
Ogle County, Illinois.
2.0 Request/Action
Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section
50.12, ‘‘Specific exemptions,’’ Exelon
has requested an exemption from 10
CFR 50.44, ‘‘Combustible gas control
system for nuclear power reactors’’; 10
CFR 50.46, ‘‘Acceptance criteria for
emergency core cooling systems [ECCS]
for light-water nuclear power reactors’’;
E:\FR\FM\07JYN1.SGM
07JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 130 (Friday, July 7, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38672-38673]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-10622]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. STN 50-456 and STN 50-457; STN 50-454 and STN 50-455; 50-
461; 50-10, 50-237, and 50-249; 50-373 and 50-374; 50-352 and 50-353;
50-219; 50-171, 50-277, and 50-278; 50-254 and 50-265; 50-289; and 50-
295 and 50-304]
Exelon Generation Company, LLC; Amergen Energy Company, LLC;
Braidwood Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2; Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2;
Clinton Power Station, Unit 1; Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 1,
2, and 3; Lasalle County Station, Units 1 and 2; Limerick Generating
Station, Units 1 and 2; Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station; Peach
Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 1, 2 and 3; Quad Cities Nuclear
Power Station, Units 1 and 2; Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit
1; and Zion Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2; Exemption
1. Background
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, and AmerGen Energy Company, LLC
(the licensees) are the holders of the Facility Operating License (FOL)
Nos. NPF-72 and NPF-77 for the Braidwood Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2
(Braidwood), which consists of two pressurized-water reactors (PWRs)
located in Will County, Illinois; NPF-37 and NPF-66 for the Byron
Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (Byron), which consists of two PWRs located
in Ogle County, Illinois; NPF-62 for the Clinton Power Station, Unit 1
(Clinton), which consists of a boiling-water reactor (BWR) located in
DeWitt County, Illinois; DPR-2, DPR-19, and DPR-25 for the Dresden
Nuclear Power Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 (Dresden), which consists of
three BWRs located in Grundy County, Illinois; NPF-11 and NPF-18 for
the LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2 (LaSalle), which consists of
two BWRs located in LaSalle County, Illinois; NPF-39 and NPF-85 for the
Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 (Limerick), which consists
of two BWRs located in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania; DPR-16 for
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (Oyster Creek), which consists
of a BWR located in Ocean County, New Jersey; DPR-12, DPR-44, and DPR-
56 for the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 (Peach
Bottom), which consists of three BWRs located in York and Lancaster
Counties, Pennsylvania; DPR-29 and DPR-30 for the Quad Cities Nuclear
Power Station, Units 1 and 2 (Quad Cities), which consists of two BWRs
located in Rock Island County, Illinois; DPR-50 for the Three Mile
Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (Three
[[Page 38673]]
Mile Island), which consists of a PWR located in Dauphin County,
Pennsylvania; and DPR-39 and DPR-48 for the Zion Nuclear Power Station,
Units 1 and 2 (Zion), which consists of two PWRs located in Lake
County, Illinois. The licenses provide, among other things, that the
facilities are subject to all the rules, regulations, and orders of the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, Commission) now or hereafter in
effect.
2. Request/Action
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section
50.54(a)(3), requires that changes to the quality assurance program
description that do not reduce commitments must be submitted to the NRC
in accordance with the reporting requirements of 10 CFR 50.71(e).
The regulation at 10 CFR 50.71(e)(4) requires that revisions to the
final safety analysis report (FSAR) be submitted annually or six months
after a refueling outage, provided the interval between updates does
not exceed 24 months. As an alternative, the licensees propose that
changes to the quality assurance program that do not reduce commitments
be submitted on a 24-month calendar schedule, not to exceed 24 months
from the previous submittal. The exemption would apply to each of the
licensees' plants identified above.
3. Discussion
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, the Commission may, upon application by
any interested person or upon its own initiative, grant exemptions from
the requirements of 10 CFR part 50 when (1) the exemptions are
authorized by law, will not present an undue risk to public health and
safety, and are consistent with the common defense and security; and
(2) when special circumstances are present. Special circumstances are
present whenever, according to 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), ``Application of
the regulation in the particular circumstances would not serve the
underlying purpose of the rule or is not necessary to achieve the
purpose of the rule''. Operational quality assurance programs are
generally described in Chapter 17.2 of a licensee's Updated Safety
Analysis Report (USAR) or, alternately, in a topical report
incorporated into the USAR by reference. The licensees' quality
assurance program, described in the Quality Assurance Topical Report
(QATR), is common to the 21 units requesting the exemption. Compliance
with 10 CFR 50.54(a)(3) would require these changes to be submitted
annually or after a refueling outage for each of the licensees' units.
The licensees stated that the proposed exemption is strictly
administrative and does not reduce commitments or effectiveness of the
quality assurance program as described in the QATR, and does not
adversely affect plant equipment, operation, or procedures. The
exemption will not alter the manner in which changes to the common QATR
are evaluated in order to ensure that there is no reduction in
commitment. Changes to the common QATR will be reviewed through the
existing applicable administrative and programmatic control processes
to ensure that QATR changes are properly evaluated and implemented. The
methods and procedures used to evaluate changes to the common QATR are
not changed or modified.
The underlying purpose of the rule is to ensure that periodic
submittals required under 10 CFR 50.54(a)(3) would allow the NRC staff
to provide regulatory oversight of changes to the licensees' quality
assurance program, and to ensure that the changes are consistent with
the regulations.
The exemption requested by the licensees only extends the reporting
period, and does not exceed the time period between successive updates
established by 10 CFR 50.71(e). Reporting of routine and administrative
changes to the quality assurance program that do not reduce commitments
for each of the licensees' units over a 2-year period is not consistent
with the underlying purpose of the rule, nor is it necessary to achieve
the purpose of the rule. Therefore, the NRC staff concludes that,
pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), special circumstances are present.
The NRC staff examined the licensees' rationale that supports the
exemption request and concluded that the alternative reporting cycle of
24 months for submitting QATR changes specified under 10 CFR
50.54(a)(3) provides adequate control and is consistent with the
underlying purpose of 10 CFR 50.54(a)(3).
Based on the foregoing, the NRC staff concludes that the changes
specified in 10 CFR 50.54(a)(3) are administrative and routine in
nature. Also, the NRC staff concludes that the requested exemption
would not result in any significant reduction in the effectiveness of
the quality assurance program implemented by the licensees. Therefore,
the NRC staff concludes that the proposed exemption would not present
an undue risk to the public health and safety.
4. Conclusion
Accordingly, the Commission has determined that pursuant to 10 CFR
Part 50.12, the exemption is authorized by law, will not present an
undue risk to the public health and safety, and is consistent with the
common defense and security. Also, special circumstances are present.
Therefore, the Commission hereby grants the licensees an exemption from
the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(a)(3) for Braidwood, Byron, Clinton,
Dresden, LaSalle, Limerick, Oyster Creek, Peach Bottom, Quad Cities,
Three Mile Island, and Zion stations.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the Commission has determined that the
granting of this exemption will have no significant effect on the
quality of the human environment (71 FR 29359).
This exemption is effective upon issuance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of June 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Catherine Haney,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-10622 Filed 7-6-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P