Arizona Public Service Company, et al.; Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3; Exemption, 37064-37066 [E9-17790]
Download as PDF
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
37064
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 142 / Monday, July 27, 2009 / Notices
of radioactive source and byproduct
material.
7. An estimate of the number of
annual responses: 894 (273 NRC
Licensees [68 NRC responses + 205 NRC
Recordkeepers] + 621 Agreement State
Licensees [349 Agreement State
responses + 272 Agreement State
recordkeepers]).
8. The estimated number of annual
respondents: 340 (68 NRC Licensees +
272 Agreement State Licensees).
9. An estimate of the total number of
hours needed annually to complete the
requirement or request: 65,418 total
hours [20,769 for NRC Licensees (16,067
hours for reporting and 4,702 hours for
recordkeeping) and 44,649 for
Agreement State Licensees (26,923
hours for reporting and 17,726 hours for
recordkeeping)].
10. Abstract: 10 CFR Part 40
establishes requirements for licenses for
the receipt, possession, use and transfer
of radioactive source and byproduct
material. The application, reporting and
recordkeeping requirements are
necessary to permit the NRC to make a
determination on whether the
possession, use, and transfer of source
and byproduct material is in
conformance with the Commission’s
regulations for protection of public
health and safety.
A copy of the final supporting
statement may be viewed free of charge
at the NRC Public Document Room, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Room O–1 F21, Rockville,
Maryland 20852. OMB clearance
requests are available at the NRC
worldwide Web site: https://
www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doccomment/omb/. The
document will be available on the NRC
home page site for 60 days after the
signature date of this notice.
Comments and questions should be
directed to the OMB reviewer listed
below by August 26, 2009. Comments
received after this date will be
considered if it is practical to do so, but
assurance of consideration cannot be
given to comments received after this
date.
NRC Desk Officer, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(3150–0020), NEOB–10202, Office of
Management and Budget, Washington,
DC 20503.
The Acting NRC Clearance Officer is
Tremaine Donnell, (301) 415–6258.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day
of July 2009.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:02 Jul 24, 2009
Jkt 217001
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Tremaine Donnell,
Acting NRC Clearance Officer, Office of
Information Services.
[FR Doc. E9–17789 Filed 7–24–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2009–0316; Docket Nos. STN 50–528,
STN 50–529, and STN 50–530]
Arizona Public Service Company, et
al.; Palo Verde Nuclear Generating
Station, Units 1, 2, and 3; Exemption
1.0
Background
The Arizona Public Service Company
(APS, the facility licensee) is the holder
of Facility Operating License Nos. NPF–
41, NPF–51, and NPF–74, which
authorize operation of the Palo Verde
Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS, the
facility), Units 1, 2, and 3, respectively.
The licenses provide, among other
things, that the PVNGS is subject to all
rules, regulations, and orders of the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC,
or the Commission) now or hereafter in
effect.
The facility consists of three
pressurized-water reactors located 55
miles west of Phoenix, in Maricopa
County, Arizona.
2.0
Request/Action
Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), Part 55,
‘‘Operators’ Licenses,’’ specifies the
requirements and procedures governing
the issuance of licenses to operators and
senior operators of utilization facilities
licensed under the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954, as amended, or Section 202 of
the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974,
as amended, and 10 CFR part 50, part
52, or part 54 of the Commission’s
regulations. Section 55.11, ‘‘Specific
exemptions,’’ of 10 CFR states that the
Commission may, upon application by
an interested person, or upon its own
initiative, grant such exemptions from
the requirements of the regulations in
this part as it determines are authorized
by law and will not endanger life or
property and are otherwise in the public
interest.
The specific requirements for written
examinations and operating tests for
senior operator candidates are described
in 10 CFR 55.43, ‘‘Written examination:
Senior operators,’’ and 10 CFR 55.45,
‘‘Operating tests,’’ respectively. 10 CFR
55.47, ‘‘Waiver of examination and test
requirements,’’ provides the criteria
under which the Commission may
waive any or all of the test
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
requirements, upon application by a
facility licensee.
By letter dated February 6, 2009, APS
requested a one-time exemption, in
accordance with 10 CFR 55.11,
‘‘Specific exemptions,’’ from the reactor
operator licensing examination waiver
requirements of 10 CFR 55.47(a)(1).
Specifically, the facility licensee
requested that Mr. Mark A. Sharp be
exempted from the requirement to have
extensive actual operating experience at
PVNGS (or a comparable facility) within
2 years before the date of application
(i.e., December 10, 2008), so that he
would not have to take and pass an
NRC-administered written examination
and operating test as a requirement for
re-licensing as a senior reactor operator
at PVNGS.
Mr. Sharp (Docket No. 55–31662) was
the holder of Senior Reactor Operator
License No. SOP–43795 from December
6, 1996, until December 11, 2006. The
license authorized Mr. Sharp to
manipulate the controls of the PVNGS
facility and to direct the licensed
activities of licensed operators at the
facility. Mr. Sharp’s license was
terminated at the request of facility
management when he resigned his
employment with APS.
By letter dated December 10, 2008,
and in accordance with 10 CFR 55.31,
APS submitted a new license
application (NRC Form 398, ‘‘Personal
Qualification Statement—Licensee’’) on
behalf of Mr. Sharp. In that letter, APS
requested, pursuant to 10 CFR 55.47(a),
that the NRC waive the requirement for
Mr. Sharp to take and pass an NRCadministered licensing examination
(including both the written examination
and operating test) normally required by
10 CFR 55.33(a)(2) to approve an
operator license application. In support
of the request, APS stated that Mr.
Sharp had previously been licensed at
PVNGS for approximately 10 years, had
extensive actual operating experience at
the facility, had re-enrolled in the
licensed operator requalification
training program and made up the
training that he had missed during his
absence, and had passed the recently
administered written requalification
examination and operating test. As
holder of the PVNGS facility operating
license by which Mr. Sharp was
previously employed and where his
services would again be utilized, APS
also provided the certifications of past
performance and current qualifications
required by 10 CFR 55.47(b) and (c).
By letter dated January 29, 2009, the
NRC notified Mr. Sharp that his request
for a waiver of the written examination
and operating test had been denied
because he did not satisfy the
E:\FR\FM\27JYN1.SGM
27JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 142 / Monday, July 27, 2009 / Notices
experience requirements stated in 10
CFR 55.47(a)(1). Although there was no
question that Mr. Sharp had extensive
operating experience at PVNGS, he had
no actual operating experience at
PVNGS (or any comparable facility)
within the 2-year period immediately
prior to the date of his application. The
NRC letter informed Mr. Sharp that
PVNGS could request an exemption
from the requirements of 10 CFR
55.47(a)(1) in accordance with 10 CFR
55.11. The NRC letter did not
specifically address the requirements of
10 CFR 55.47(a)(2) and (3); however, the
NRC staff found no reason to reject
APS’s certification that Mr. Sharp
would continue to competently and
safely discharge his responsibilities and
that he had learned the procedures for
and was qualified to operate the PVNGS
facility.
Following receipt of the NRC letter of
January 29, 2009, APS submitted the
February 6, 2009, exemption request,
which further explained the facility
licensee’s need for the requested action.
NRC Inspection Report 2008–002, dated
May 9, 2008, had identified a violation
involving the excessive use of operator
overtime that resulted from a failure of
APS to maintain a sufficient number of
licensed operators at PVNGS. In order to
increase its staff of licensed reactor
operators as part of its corrective action
for that violation, APS has been seeking
to re-license individuals who had been
previously licensed at PVNGS, and has
increased the number of students in its
licensed reactor operator training
classes.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
3.0
Discussion
Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.11, the
Commission may, upon application by
an interested person, or upon its own
initiative, grant such exemptions from
the requirements of the regulations in
this part as it determines are authorized
by law and will not endanger life or
property and are otherwise in the public
interest. The requested action would
exempt Mr. Sharp from meeting the
waiver requirement in 10 CFR
55.47(a)(1) for an applicant to have had
extensive actual operating experience
within 2 years of the date of an operator
license application. Mr. Sharp’s last
actual operating experience at PVNGS
(or a comparable facility) occurred on
November 7, 2006, which was more
than 2 years before the date on which
APS submitted his current license
application (December 10, 2008);
therefore, the exemption would
effectively extend the waiver criterion
specified in 10 CFR 55.47(a)(1), by
approximately 1 month.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:02 Jul 24, 2009
Jkt 217001
As described in the December 10,
2008, license application and in APS’s
February 6, 2009, exemption request,
Mr. Sharp was away from the PVNGS
and the licensed operator requalification
training program for a period of 19
months, from November 2006 to June
2008. Since returning to PVNGS, Mr.
Sharp has completed the following
training and experience activities:
• Through a process involving selfstudy and one-on-one instruction, Mr.
Sharp made up all of the licensed
operator requalification training that he
had missed during his absence. Since
completing that training, Mr. Sharp has
rejoined and remains current in the
PVNGS licensed operator requalification
training program.
• Mr. Sharp spent a total of 104 hours
on shift as an operator under
instruction, including 20 hours as a
non-licensed operator performing plant
walk-downs and tours, 36 hours as a
Reactor Operator, and 48 hours as a
Control Room Supervisor.
• In September and October 2008, Mr.
Sharp took and passed the regularly
scheduled licensed operator written
requalification examination, simulator
operating test, and walk-through (job
performance measure) operating test.
• Since returning to the site in June
2008, Mr. Sharp has been working as a
Senior Reactor Operator certified
classroom and simulator instructor at
the PVNGS. This position requires
detailed knowledge of the facility and
its operating procedures at a level
comparable to that required of a
licensed senior reactor operator, and
involves routine interaction with the
facility’s operating staff.
The NRC staff accepts the facility
licensee’s certification that Mr. Sharp
discharged his responsibilities
competently and safely in the past and
is capable of continuing to do so.
Similarly, the NRC staff accepts the
facility licensee’s certification that Mr.
Sharp has learned the operating
procedures for and is qualified to
competently and safely operate the
PVNGS facility. Therefore, based on
these certifications and the additional
information provided by APS in support
of Mr. Sharp’s experience and
qualifications, the NRC staff has
concluded, pursuant to 10 CFR 55.11,
that granting this exemption from the
waiver criterion of 10 CFR 55.47(a)(1),
will have a negligible effect on plant
safety and will not endanger life or
property.
The NRC staff has also concluded,
pursuant to 10 CFR 55.11, that granting
this exemption to the waiver criterion of
10 CFR 55.47(a)(1), is authorized by law
and is otherwise in the public interest.
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37065
Section 55.11 of 10 CFR allows the NRC
to grant exemptions to the regulations in
10 CFR part 55, and the NRC has
determined that the granting of the
proposed exemption will not result in a
violation of the Atomic Energy Act of
1954, as amended, or the Commission’s
regulations. Therefore, the exemption is
authorized by law. As noted in the
exemption request, Mr. Sharp only
exceeded the waiver criterion of 10 CFR
55.47(a)(1), for extensive actual
operating experience within the
previous 2 years, by 33 days; thus, the
granting of the exemption in this
instance would effectively extend that
criterion by only a brief time. APS has
had a shortage of licensed operators for
PVNGS that resulted in an excessive use
of operator overtime, which in turn led
to the issuance of an NRC notice of
violation and the establishment of an
on-going activity in the corrective action
program. Worker fatigue, at PVNGS and
in the nuclear industry, in general, is of
serious concern to the NRC and
prompted the Commission to amend 10
CFR part 26 in March 2008 to include
new requirements for facility licensees
to establish written policies for the
management of fatigue for all
individuals who are subject to the
licensee’s fitness-for-duty program,
including licensed reactor operators.
The new regulations, which are
scheduled to go into effect in the fall of
2009, are expected to increase the
number of licensed operators that
facility licensees will need in order to
maintain minimum shift staffing
requirements without exceeding workhour limits.
The next NRC licensing examination
at PVNGS is currently scheduled for
November 2009. Delaying Mr. Sharp’s
opportunity to be re-licensed until that
time would not serve the best interests
of APS or the surrounding public, and
the cost of preparing, approving, and
administering a special licensing
examination for Mr. Sharp would be
substantial for both APS and the NRC,
without a commensurate benefit to
either party or the public. Therefore, the
NRC has determined that the granting of
this exemption is in the public interest.
4.0
Conclusion
Accordingly, the Commission has
determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR
55.11, granting an exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR 55.47(a)(1) to
allow Mr. Sharp to be eligible for a
waiver from the NRC licensing
examination requirements, is authorized
by law and will not endanger life or
property and is otherwise in the public
interest.
E:\FR\FM\27JYN1.SGM
27JYN1
37066
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 142 / Monday, July 27, 2009 / Notices
Therefore, the Commission hereby
grants APS an exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR 55.47(a)(1) for
Mr. Mark A. Sharp, an applicant for a
senior reactor operator license at the
PVNGS.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the
Commission has determined that the
granting of this exemption will not have
a significant effect on the quality of the
human environment (74 FR 34803;
dated July 17, 2009).
This exemption is effective upon
issuance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day
of July 2009.
For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Joseph G. Giitter,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E9–17790 Filed 7–24–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY
CORPORATION
Submission of Information Collection
for OMB Review; Comment Request;
Qualified Domestic Relations Orders
Submitted to PBGC
Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation.
ACTION: Notice of request for extension
of OMB approval.
AGENCY:
Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation (‘‘PBGC’’) is requesting that
the Office of Management and Budget
(‘‘OMB’’) extend approval, under the
Paperwork Reduction Act, of the
collection of information in PBGC’s
booklet Qualified Domestic Relations
Orders & PBGC (OMB control number
1212–0054; expires August 31, 2009).
This notice informs the public of
PBGC’s request and solicits public
comment on the collection of
information.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
DATES: Comments should be submitted
by August 26, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation,
via electronic mail at
OIRA_DOCKET@omb.eop.gov or by fax
to 202–395–6974.
A copy of PBGC’s request may be
obtained without charge by writing to
the Disclosure Division of the Office of
the General Counsel of PBGC at the
above address or by visiting that office
or calling 202 326 4040 during normal
business hours. (TTY and TDD users
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:02 Jul 24, 2009
Jkt 217001
may call the Federal relay service toll
free at 1 800 877 8339 and ask to be
connected to 202 326 4040.) The request
is also available at https://
www.reginfo.gov. The current QDRO
booklet is available on PBGC’s Web site
at https://www.pbgc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jo
Amato Burns, Attorney, Legislative and
Regulatory Department, Pension Benefit
Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20005–4026, 202–
326–4024. (TTY and TDD users may call
the Federal relay service toll-free at 1–
800–877–8339 and ask to be connected
to 202–326–4024.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PBGC is
requesting that OMB extend its approval
of the guidance and model language and
forms contained in the PBGC booklet,
Qualified Domestic Relations Orders &
PBGC.
A defined benefit pension plan that
does not have enough money to pay
benefits may be terminated if the
employer responsible for the plan faces
severe financial difficulty, such as
bankruptcy, and is unable to maintain
the plan. In such an event, PBGC
becomes trustee of the plan and pays
benefits, subject to legal limits, to plan
participants and beneficiaries.
The benefits of a pension plan
participant generally may not be
assigned or alienated. However, Title I
of ERISA provides an exception for
domestic relations orders that relate to
child support, alimony payments, or the
marital property rights of an alternate
payee (a spouse, former spouse, child,
or other dependent of a plan
participant). The exception applies only
if the domestic relations order meets
specific legal requirements that make it
a qualified domestic relations order, or
‘‘QDRO.’’
ERISA provides that pension plans
are required to comply with only those
domestic relations orders which are
QDROs, and that the decision as to
whether a domestic relations order is a
QDRO is made by the plan
administrator. When PBGC is trustee of
a plan, it reviews submitted domestic
relations orders to determine whether
the order is qualified before paying
benefits to an alternate payee. The
requirements for submitting a QDRO are
established by statute.
To simplify the process, PBGC has
included model QDROs and
accompanying guidance in a booklet,
Qualified Domestic Relations Orders &
PBGC.—The models and guidance assist
parties by making it easier to comply
with ERISA’s QDRO requirements when
drafting orders for plans trusteed by
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
PBGC. The booklet does not create any
additional requirements.
PBGC is not making any substantive
revisions to the current QDRO booklet.
One definition has been conformed to a
change under the Pension Protection
Act of 2006 and several references have
been updated.
The collection of information has
been approved through August 31, 2009,
by OMB under control number 1212–
0054. PBGC is requesting that OMB
extend approval of the collection of
information for three years. An agency
may not conduct or sponsor, and a
person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
PBGC estimates that it will receive
895 domestic relations orders annually
and that the average annual burden of
this collection of information is 2105
hours and $495,060.
Issued in Washington, DC, this 21 day of
July, 2009.
John H. Hanley,
Director, Legislative and Regulatory
Department, Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation.
[FR Doc. E9–17873 Filed 7–24–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7709–01–P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. MC2009–27 and CP2009–37;
Order No. 231]
Priority Mail Contract
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: Commission Order No. 231,
which addresses a new Priority Mail
contract, was inadvertently submitted to
the Federal Register for publication in
the Notices category. It appeared in that
category on July 16, 2009 (74 FR 34598).
Order No. 231 should have been
submitted for publication in the ‘‘Rules’’
category, as this would have effectuated
an intended change in the Code of
Federal Regulations. The Commission is
withdrawing the referenced Notice
document and is submitting Order No.
231 for publication in the appropriate
category.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen L. Sharfman, general counsel,
202–789–6820 or
stephen.sharfman@prc.gov.
Judith M. Grady,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–17811 Filed 7–24–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P
E:\FR\FM\27JYN1.SGM
27JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 142 (Monday, July 27, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37064-37066]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17790]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2009-0316; Docket Nos. STN 50-528, STN 50-529, and STN 50-530]
Arizona Public Service Company, et al.; Palo Verde Nuclear
Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3; Exemption
1.0 Background
The Arizona Public Service Company (APS, the facility licensee) is
the holder of Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-41, NPF-51, and NPF-
74, which authorize operation of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating
Station (PVNGS, the facility), Units 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The
licenses provide, among other things, that the PVNGS is subject to all
rules, regulations, and orders of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC, or the Commission) now or hereafter in effect.
The facility consists of three pressurized-water reactors located
55 miles west of Phoenix, in Maricopa County, Arizona.
2.0 Request/Action
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Part 55,
``Operators' Licenses,'' specifies the requirements and procedures
governing the issuance of licenses to operators and senior operators of
utilization facilities licensed under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, or Section 202 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as
amended, and 10 CFR part 50, part 52, or part 54 of the Commission's
regulations. Section 55.11, ``Specific exemptions,'' of 10 CFR states
that the Commission may, upon application by an interested person, or
upon its own initiative, grant such exemptions from the requirements of
the regulations in this part as it determines are authorized by law and
will not endanger life or property and are otherwise in the public
interest.
The specific requirements for written examinations and operating
tests for senior operator candidates are described in 10 CFR 55.43,
``Written examination: Senior operators,'' and 10 CFR 55.45,
``Operating tests,'' respectively. 10 CFR 55.47, ``Waiver of
examination and test requirements,'' provides the criteria under which
the Commission may waive any or all of the test requirements, upon
application by a facility licensee.
By letter dated February 6, 2009, APS requested a one-time
exemption, in accordance with 10 CFR 55.11, ``Specific exemptions,''
from the reactor operator licensing examination waiver requirements of
10 CFR 55.47(a)(1). Specifically, the facility licensee requested that
Mr. Mark A. Sharp be exempted from the requirement to have extensive
actual operating experience at PVNGS (or a comparable facility) within
2 years before the date of application (i.e., December 10, 2008), so
that he would not have to take and pass an NRC-administered written
examination and operating test as a requirement for re-licensing as a
senior reactor operator at PVNGS.
Mr. Sharp (Docket No. 55-31662) was the holder of Senior Reactor
Operator License No. SOP-43795 from December 6, 1996, until December
11, 2006. The license authorized Mr. Sharp to manipulate the controls
of the PVNGS facility and to direct the licensed activities of licensed
operators at the facility. Mr. Sharp's license was terminated at the
request of facility management when he resigned his employment with
APS.
By letter dated December 10, 2008, and in accordance with 10 CFR
55.31, APS submitted a new license application (NRC Form 398,
``Personal Qualification Statement--Licensee'') on behalf of Mr. Sharp.
In that letter, APS requested, pursuant to 10 CFR 55.47(a), that the
NRC waive the requirement for Mr. Sharp to take and pass an NRC-
administered licensing examination (including both the written
examination and operating test) normally required by 10 CFR 55.33(a)(2)
to approve an operator license application. In support of the request,
APS stated that Mr. Sharp had previously been licensed at PVNGS for
approximately 10 years, had extensive actual operating experience at
the facility, had re-enrolled in the licensed operator requalification
training program and made up the training that he had missed during his
absence, and had passed the recently administered written
requalification examination and operating test. As holder of the PVNGS
facility operating license by which Mr. Sharp was previously employed
and where his services would again be utilized, APS also provided the
certifications of past performance and current qualifications required
by 10 CFR 55.47(b) and (c).
By letter dated January 29, 2009, the NRC notified Mr. Sharp that
his request for a waiver of the written examination and operating test
had been denied because he did not satisfy the
[[Page 37065]]
experience requirements stated in 10 CFR 55.47(a)(1). Although there
was no question that Mr. Sharp had extensive operating experience at
PVNGS, he had no actual operating experience at PVNGS (or any
comparable facility) within the 2-year period immediately prior to the
date of his application. The NRC letter informed Mr. Sharp that PVNGS
could request an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 55.47(a)(1)
in accordance with 10 CFR 55.11. The NRC letter did not specifically
address the requirements of 10 CFR 55.47(a)(2) and (3); however, the
NRC staff found no reason to reject APS's certification that Mr. Sharp
would continue to competently and safely discharge his responsibilities
and that he had learned the procedures for and was qualified to operate
the PVNGS facility.
Following receipt of the NRC letter of January 29, 2009, APS
submitted the February 6, 2009, exemption request, which further
explained the facility licensee's need for the requested action. NRC
Inspection Report 2008-002, dated May 9, 2008, had identified a
violation involving the excessive use of operator overtime that
resulted from a failure of APS to maintain a sufficient number of
licensed operators at PVNGS. In order to increase its staff of licensed
reactor operators as part of its corrective action for that violation,
APS has been seeking to re-license individuals who had been previously
licensed at PVNGS, and has increased the number of students in its
licensed reactor operator training classes.
3.0 Discussion
Pursuant to 10 CFR 55.11, the Commission may, upon application by
an interested person, or upon its own initiative, grant such exemptions
from the requirements of the regulations in this part as it determines
are authorized by law and will not endanger life or property and are
otherwise in the public interest. The requested action would exempt Mr.
Sharp from meeting the waiver requirement in 10 CFR 55.47(a)(1) for an
applicant to have had extensive actual operating experience within 2
years of the date of an operator license application. Mr. Sharp's last
actual operating experience at PVNGS (or a comparable facility)
occurred on November 7, 2006, which was more than 2 years before the
date on which APS submitted his current license application (December
10, 2008); therefore, the exemption would effectively extend the waiver
criterion specified in 10 CFR 55.47(a)(1), by approximately 1 month.
As described in the December 10, 2008, license application and in
APS's February 6, 2009, exemption request, Mr. Sharp was away from the
PVNGS and the licensed operator requalification training program for a
period of 19 months, from November 2006 to June 2008. Since returning
to PVNGS, Mr. Sharp has completed the following training and experience
activities:
Through a process involving self-study and one-on-one
instruction, Mr. Sharp made up all of the licensed operator
requalification training that he had missed during his absence. Since
completing that training, Mr. Sharp has rejoined and remains current in
the PVNGS licensed operator requalification training program.
Mr. Sharp spent a total of 104 hours on shift as an
operator under instruction, including 20 hours as a non-licensed
operator performing plant walk-downs and tours, 36 hours as a Reactor
Operator, and 48 hours as a Control Room Supervisor.
In September and October 2008, Mr. Sharp took and passed
the regularly scheduled licensed operator written requalification
examination, simulator operating test, and walk-through (job
performance measure) operating test.
Since returning to the site in June 2008, Mr. Sharp has
been working as a Senior Reactor Operator certified classroom and
simulator instructor at the PVNGS. This position requires detailed
knowledge of the facility and its operating procedures at a level
comparable to that required of a licensed senior reactor operator, and
involves routine interaction with the facility's operating staff.
The NRC staff accepts the facility licensee's certification that
Mr. Sharp discharged his responsibilities competently and safely in the
past and is capable of continuing to do so. Similarly, the NRC staff
accepts the facility licensee's certification that Mr. Sharp has
learned the operating procedures for and is qualified to competently
and safely operate the PVNGS facility. Therefore, based on these
certifications and the additional information provided by APS in
support of Mr. Sharp's experience and qualifications, the NRC staff has
concluded, pursuant to 10 CFR 55.11, that granting this exemption from
the waiver criterion of 10 CFR 55.47(a)(1), will have a negligible
effect on plant safety and will not endanger life or property.
The NRC staff has also concluded, pursuant to 10 CFR 55.11, that
granting this exemption to the waiver criterion of 10 CFR 55.47(a)(1),
is authorized by law and is otherwise in the public interest. Section
55.11 of 10 CFR allows the NRC to grant exemptions to the regulations
in 10 CFR part 55, and the NRC has determined that the granting of the
proposed exemption will not result in a violation of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, as amended, or the Commission's regulations. Therefore,
the exemption is authorized by law. As noted in the exemption request,
Mr. Sharp only exceeded the waiver criterion of 10 CFR 55.47(a)(1), for
extensive actual operating experience within the previous 2 years, by
33 days; thus, the granting of the exemption in this instance would
effectively extend that criterion by only a brief time. APS has had a
shortage of licensed operators for PVNGS that resulted in an excessive
use of operator overtime, which in turn led to the issuance of an NRC
notice of violation and the establishment of an on-going activity in
the corrective action program. Worker fatigue, at PVNGS and in the
nuclear industry, in general, is of serious concern to the NRC and
prompted the Commission to amend 10 CFR part 26 in March 2008 to
include new requirements for facility licensees to establish written
policies for the management of fatigue for all individuals who are
subject to the licensee's fitness-for-duty program, including licensed
reactor operators. The new regulations, which are scheduled to go into
effect in the fall of 2009, are expected to increase the number of
licensed operators that facility licensees will need in order to
maintain minimum shift staffing requirements without exceeding work-
hour limits.
The next NRC licensing examination at PVNGS is currently scheduled
for November 2009. Delaying Mr. Sharp's opportunity to be re-licensed
until that time would not serve the best interests of APS or the
surrounding public, and the cost of preparing, approving, and
administering a special licensing examination for Mr. Sharp would be
substantial for both APS and the NRC, without a commensurate benefit to
either party or the public. Therefore, the NRC has determined that the
granting of this exemption is in the public interest.
4.0 Conclusion
Accordingly, the Commission has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR
55.11, granting an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR
55.47(a)(1) to allow Mr. Sharp to be eligible for a waiver from the NRC
licensing examination requirements, is authorized by law and will not
endanger life or property and is otherwise in the public interest.
[[Page 37066]]
Therefore, the Commission hereby grants APS an exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR 55.47(a)(1) for Mr. Mark A. Sharp, an applicant
for a senior reactor operator license at the PVNGS.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the Commission has determined that the
granting of this exemption will not have a significant effect on the
quality of the human environment (74 FR 34803; dated July 17, 2009).
This exemption is effective upon issuance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of July 2009.
For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Joseph G. Giitter,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E9-17790 Filed 7-24-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P