N.S. Savannah; Exemption From Certain Security Requirements, 65542-65544 [2011-27279]
Download as PDF
65542
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 204 / Friday, October 21, 2011 / Notices
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Part of this proposed action meets the
categorical exclusion provision in 10
CFR 51.22(c)(25), as part of this action
is an exemption from the requirements
of the Commission’s regulations and (i)
there is no significant hazards
consideration; (ii) there is no significant
change in the types or significant
increase in the amounts of any effluents
that may be released offsite; (iii) there is
no significant increase in individual or
cumulative public or occupational
radiation exposure; (iv) there is no
significant construction impact; (v)
there is no significant increase in the
potential for or consequences from
radiological accidents; and (vi) the
requirements from which an exemption
is sought involve safeguard plans.
Therefore, this part of the action does
not require either an environmental
assessment or an environmental impact
statement. This environmental
assessment was prepared for the part of
the proposed action not involving
safeguards plans.
Need for Proposed Action
The NRC revised 10 CFR 73.55
through the issuance of a final rule on
March 27, 2009 (74 FR 13926). The
revised regulation stated that it was
applicable to all Part 50 licensees. The
NRC became aware that many Part 50
licensees with facilities in
decommissioning status did not
recognize the applicability of this
regulation to their facility. Accordingly,
the NRC informed licensees with
facilities in decommissioning status and
other stakeholders that the requirements
of 10 CFR 73.55 were applicable to all
Part 50 licensees. By letter dated August
2, 2010, the NRC informed Exelon
Nuclear, the ZNPS license holder at that
time, of the applicability of the revised
rule and stated that it would have to
evaluate the applicability of the
regulation to its facility and either make
appropriate changes or request an
exemption.
Section 73.55 requires that licensees
establish and maintain physical
protection and security for activities
involving SNM within the 10 CFR part
50 licensed area of a facility. The
proposed action is needed because the
permanently shut-down and defueled
status of the facility changes the security
that is necessary to protect against
radiological sabotage or diversion. The
proposed action will allow the licensee
to conserve resources for
decommissioning activities.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The NRC has completed its evaluation
of the proposed action and concludes
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:11 Oct 20, 2011
Jkt 226001
that exempting the facility from certain
physical protection security
requirements will not have any adverse
environmental impacts.
The proposed action will not
significantly increase the probability or
consequences of accidents, no changes
are being made in the types of any
effluents that may be released off site,
and there is no significant increase in
occupational or public radiation
exposure. Therefore, there are no
significant radiological environmental
impacts associated with the proposed
action.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed
action does not involve any historic
sites. It does not affect non-radiological
plant effluents and has no other
environmental impact. Therefore, there
are no significant non-radiological
environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that
there are no significant environmental
impacts associated with the proposed
action.
Environmental Impacts of the
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
The alternative is the no-action
alternative, under which the staff would
deny the exemption request. This denial
of the request would result in no change
in current environmental impacts. The
environmental impacts of the proposed
action and the no-action alternative are
similar, therefore the no-action
alternative is not further considered.
Conclusion
The NRC staff has concluded that the
proposed action will not significantly
impact the quality of the human
environment, and that the proposed
action is the preferred alternative.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on July 21, 2011, the staff consulted
with the Illinois State official of the
Division of Nuclear Safety, Illinois
Emergency Management Agency,
regarding the environmental impact of
the proposed action. The State official
had no comments.
The NRC staff has determined that the
proposed action is of a procedural
nature, and will not affect listed species
or critical habitat. Therefore, no further
consultation is required under Section 7
of the Endangered Species Act. The
NRC staff has also determined that the
proposed action is not the type of
activity that has the potential to cause
effects on historic properties. Therefore,
no further consultation is required
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
under Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
The NRC staff has prepared this EA as
part of its review of the proposed action.
On the basis of this EA, the NRC finds
that there are no significant
environmental impacts from the
proposed action, and that preparation of
an environmental impact statement is
not warranted. Accordingly, the NRC
has determined that a Finding of No
Significant Impact is appropriate.
IV. Further Information
For further details with respect to the
proposed action, see the licensee’s letter
dated December 2, 2010, [ADAMS
Accession Number ML103400569].
Documents related to this action,
including the application and
supporting documentation, are available
online in the NRC Library at https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
From this site, you can access the NRC’s
Agencywide Document Access and
Management System (ADAMS), which
provides text and image files of NRC’s
public documents.
If you do not have access to ADAMS,
or if there are problems in accessing the
documents located in ADAMS, contact
the NRC Public Document Room (PDR)
Reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–
415–4737, or by e-mail to
pdr.resource@nrc.gov. These documents
may also be viewed electronically on
the public computers located at the
NRC’s PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
MD 20852. The PDR reproduction
contractor will copy documents for a
fee.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 12th day
of October, 2011.
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
Keith I. McConnell,
Deputy Director, Decommissioning and
Uranium Recovery Licensing Directorate,
Division of Waste Management and
Environmental Protection, Office of Federal
and State Materials and Environmental
Management Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011–27332 Filed 10–20–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–238; NRC–2011–0222]
N.S. Savannah; Exemption From
Certain Security Requirements
1.0 Background
The U.S. Department of
Transportation, Maritime
E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM
21OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 204 / Friday, October 21, 2011 / Notices
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Administration (MARAD) is the licensee
and holder of Facility Operating License
No. NS–1 issued for the N.S. Savannah
(NSS) currently located in the Port of
Baltimore, Maryland. The NSS was the
world’s first nuclear powered merchant
ship. The NSS was operated in
experimental and commercial
demonstration service throughout the
1960s.
The ship was removed from service in
1970. In August 1971, the reactor was
defueled. The fuel was stored in a
‘‘spent fuel pool’’ inside MARAD’s
Refueling Facility, located at the Todd
Shipyard in Galveston, Texas. The
refueling facility was licensed by the
state of Texas under an agreement with
the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC).
On November 3, 1972, all 36 Core I
spent fuel elements were returned to the
AEC and transferred by the AEC for
reprocessing at its Savannah River Site
in South Carolina.
On May 19, 1976, the operating
license for the NSS was amended to a
possession-only license.
2.0 Action
Section 50.54(p)(1) of Title 10 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)
states, in part, ‘‘The licensee shall
prepare and maintain safeguards
contingency plan procedures in
accordance with Appendix C of Part 73
of this chapter for affecting the actions
and decisions contained in the
Responsibility Matrix of the safeguards
contingency plan.’’
Part 73 of 10 CFR, ‘‘Physical
Protection of Plant and Materials,’’
provides in part in section 73.1(a), ‘‘This
part prescribes requirements for the
establishment and maintenance of a
physical protection system which will
have capabilities for the protection of
special nuclear material at fixed sites
and in transit and of plants in which
special nuclear material is used.’’ In
Section 73.55, entitled ‘‘Requirements
for physical protection of licensed
activities in nuclear power reactors
against radiological sabotage,’’
paragraph (b)(1) states, ‘‘The licensee
shall establish and maintain a physical
protection program, to include a
security organization, which will have
as its objective to provide high
assurance that activities involving
special nuclear material are not inimical
to the common defense and security and
do not constitute an unreasonable risk
to the public health and safety.’’
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC or the Commission)
revised 10 CFR 73.55, in part to include
the preceding language, through the
issuance of a final rule on March 27,
2009 (74 FR 13970). The revised
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:11 Oct 20, 2011
Jkt 226001
regulation stated that it was applicable
to all Part 50 licensees. The NRC
became aware that some Part 50
licensees with facilities in
decommissioning status did not
recognize the applicability of this
regulation to their facility. Accordingly,
the NRC informed licensees with
facilities in decommissioning status and
other stakeholders that the requirements
of 10 CFR 73.55 were applicable to all
Part 50 licensees. By letter dated August
2, 2010, the NRC informed MARAD of
the applicability of the revised rule and
stated that it would have to evaluate the
applicability of the regulation to its
facility and either make appropriate
changes or request an exemption.
By letter dated November 8, 2010,
MARAD responded to the NRC’s letter
and requested exemptions from the
security requirements in 10 CFR part 73
and 10 CFR 50.54(p).
3.0 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 or safety, and are
consistent with the common defense
and security; and (2) when special
circumstances are present. Special
circumstances are present when, for
example, application of the regulation
in the particular circumstances would
not serve the underlying purpose of the
rule or when compliance would result
in costs significantly in excess of those
incurred by others similarly situated.
Also, pursuant to 10 CFR 73.5, ‘‘Specific
exemptions,’’ the Commission may,
upon application of any interested
person or upon its own initiative, grant
exemptions from the regulations in Part
73 as it determines are authorized by
law and will not endanger life or
property or the common defense and
security, and are otherwise in the public
interest.
The purpose of the security
requirements of 10 CFR part 73, as
applicable to a 10 CFR part 50 licensed
facility, is to prescribe requirements for
a facility that possesses and utilizes
SNM. By the end of 1972, all spent fuel
at the NSS had been returned to the
AEC for reprocessing. Since the license
defines the facility as the reactor and
associated components located aboard
the ship, the removal of the spent Core
I fuel from the ship is equivalent to
removing all SNM from the NRC
licensed site other than that contained
in plant systems as residual
contamination.
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65543
The remaining radioactive material of
concern (i.e., reactor vessel, piping
systems, and ship structures) for the
NSS is in a form that does not pose a
risk of removal (i.e., an intact reactor
pressure vessel) and is well dispersed
and is not easily aggregated into
significant quantities. With the removal
of the fuel containing SNM, the
potential for radiological sabotage or
diversion of SNM at the 10 CFR part 50
licensed site was eliminated. Therefore,
the continued application of the fixed
site physical protection requirements of
10 CFR part 73 to the NSS would no
longer be necessary to achieve the
underlying purpose of the rule.
Additionally, as has been noted at other
decommissioning nuclear power
facilities, with the removal of the spent
nuclear fuel from the site, the 10 CFR
part 50 licensed site would be
comparable to a source and byproduct
licensee that uses general industrial
security (i.e. locks and barriers) to
protect the public health and safety. The
continued application of fixed site
physical protection requirements of 10
CFR part 73 would cause the licensee to
expend significantly more funds for
security requirements than other source
and byproduct facilities that use general
industrial security. Therefore,
compliance with the fixed site physical
protection requirements of 10 CFR Part
73 would result in costs significantly in
excess of those incurred by others
similarly situated. Based on the above,
the NRC has determined that the
removal of the fuel containing SNM at
the 10 CFR part 50 licensed site
constitutes special circumstances. The
possession and responsibility for the
security of the SNM was transferred to
the AEC and is no longer the
responsibility of the licensee. Therefore,
protection of the SNM is no longer a
requirement of the licensee’s 10 CFR
part 50 license. With no SNM to protect,
there is no need for the physical
protection requirements of 10 CFR part
73, which includes a safeguards
contingency plan or procedures,
physical security plan, guard training
and qualification plan, and cyber
security plan for the NSS, 10 CFR part
50 licensed site. The requirements for
protection of safeguards information,
physical protection of SNM in transit,
and records and reports remain
applicable.
4.0 Conclusion
Accordingly, the Commission has
determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR
50.12(a), an exemption is authorized by
law, will not present an undue risk to
the public health and safety, and is
consistent with the common defense
E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM
21OCN1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
65544
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 204 / Friday, October 21, 2011 / Notices
and security based on the continued
maintenance of appropriate security
requirements for the remaining SNM
contained in plant systems as residual
contamination. Additionally, special
circumstances are present based on the
removal of the spent nuclear fuel from
the 10 CFR part 50 licensed site.
Therefore, the Commission hereby
grants MARAD an exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(p) for the
NSS.
The Commission has also determined
that, pursuant to 10 CFR 73.5, an
exemption is authorized by law, will not
endanger life or property or the common
defense and security, and is otherwise
in the public interest based on the
security requirements for the spent fuel
containing SNM no longer being the
responsibility of the licensee. Therefore,
the Commission hereby grants MARAD
an exemption from the fixed site
physical protection requirements of 10
CFR Part 73 for the NSS. The fixed site
physical protection requirements of 10
CFR Part 73 are delineated in §§ 73.20,
74.40, 73.45, 73.46, 73.50, 73.51, 73.54,
73.55, 73.56, 73.57, 73.58, 73.59, 73.60,
73.61, 73.67, Appendix B and Appendix
C. The requirements for protection of
safeguards information, physical
protection of SNM in transit, and
records and reports, contained in these
or other sections of Part 73 continue to
apply. To the extent that the licensee’s
request for an exemption from 10 CFR
part 73 included requirements other
than the fixed site physical protection
requirements, that request is denied.
Part of this licensing action meets the
categorical exclusion provision in 10
CFR 51.22(c)(25), as part of this action
is an exemption from the requirements
of the Commission’s regulations and (i)
there is no significant hazards
consideration; (ii) there is no significant
change in the types or significant
increase in the amounts of any effluents
that may be released offsite; (iii) there is
no significant increase in individual or
cumulative public or occupational
radiation exposure; (iv) there is no
significant construction impact; (v)
there is no significant increase in the
potential for or consequences from
radiological accidents; and (vi) the
requirements from which an exemption
is sought involve safeguard plans.
Therefore, this part of the action does
not require either an environmental
assessment or an environmental impact
statement.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21, 51.32, and
51.35, an environmental assessment and
finding of no significant impact related
to the part of this exemption not dealing
with safeguards plans (i.e.;
transportation of SNM, interaction with
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:11 Oct 20, 2011
Jkt 226001
emergency planning, and background
checks) was published in the Federal
Register on September 23, 2011 (76 FR
59174). Based upon the environmental
assessment, the Commission has
determined that issuance of this
exemption will not have a significant
effect on the quality of the human
environment.
These exemptions are effective
immediately.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day
of October 2011.
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
Keith I. McConnell,
Deputy Director, Decommissioning and
Uranium Recovery Licensing Directorate,
Division of Waste Management and
Environmental Protection, Office of Federal
and State Materials and Environmental
Management Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011–27279 Filed 10–20–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2009–0323]
Standard Format and Content of
License Applications for Mixed Oxide
Fuel Fabrication Facilities
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Regulatory guide; issuance.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC or Commission) is
issuing a revision to regulatory guide
(RG) 3.39, ‘‘Standard Format and
Content of License Applications for
Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication
Facilities.’’ This guide endorses the
standard format and content for license
applications and integrated safety
analysis (ISA) summaries described in
the current version of NUREG–1718,
‘‘Standard Review Plan for the Review
of an Application for a Mixed Oxide
(MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility,’’ as a
method that the NRC staff finds
acceptable for meeting the regulatory
requirements of Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 70,
‘‘Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear
Material’’ for mixed oxide fuel
fabrication facilities.
ADDRESSES: You can access publicly
available documents related to this
regulatory guide using the following
methods:
• NRC’s Public Document Room
(PDR): The public may examine and
have copied, for a fee, publicly available
documents at the NRC’s PDR, O1–F21,
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): Publicly available documents
created or received at the NRC are
available online in the NRC Library at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. From this page, the public
can gain entry into ADAMS, which
provides text and image files of the
NRC’s public documents. If you do not
have access to ADAMS or if there are
problems in accessing the documents
located in ADAMS, contact the NRC’s
PDR reference staff at 1–800–397–4209,
301–415–4737, or by e-mail to
pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The regulatory
guide is available electronically under
ADAMS Accession Number
ML100280809. The regulatory analysis
may be found in ADAMS under
Accession Number ML111780401.
• Federal Rulemaking Web Site:
Public comments and supporting
materials related to this regulatory guide
can be found at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching on
Docket ID NRC–2009–0323.
Regulatory guides are not
copyrighted, and NRC approval is not
required to reproduce them.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sabrina Atack, Mixed Oxide and
Uranium Deconversion Branch, Special
Projects and Technical Support
Directorate, Division of Fuel Cycle
Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone:
301–492–3204; or e-mail:
Sabrina.Atack@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The NRC is issuing a revision to an
existing guide in the agency’s
‘‘Regulatory Guide’’ series. This series
was developed to describe and make
available to the public information such
as methods that are acceptable to the
NRC staff for implementing specific
parts of the agency’s regulations,
techniques that the staff uses in
evaluating specific problems or
postulated accidents, and data that the
staff needs in its review of applications
for permits and licenses.
Revision 1 of Regulatory Guide 3.39
was issued with a temporary
identification as Draft Regulatory Guide,
DG–3038. This guide endorses the
standard format and content for license
applications and integrated safety
analysis (ISA) summaries described in
the current version of NUREG–1718,
‘‘Standard Review Plan for the Review
of an Application for a Mixed Oxide
(MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility,’’ as a
E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM
21OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 204 (Friday, October 21, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65542-65544]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27279]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-238; NRC-2011-0222]
N.S. Savannah; Exemption From Certain Security Requirements
1.0 Background
The U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime
[[Page 65543]]
Administration (MARAD) is the licensee and holder of Facility Operating
License No. NS-1 issued for the N.S. Savannah (NSS) currently located
in the Port of Baltimore, Maryland. The NSS was the world's first
nuclear powered merchant ship. The NSS was operated in experimental and
commercial demonstration service throughout the 1960s.
The ship was removed from service in 1970. In August 1971, the
reactor was defueled. The fuel was stored in a ``spent fuel pool''
inside MARAD's Refueling Facility, located at the Todd Shipyard in
Galveston, Texas. The refueling facility was licensed by the state of
Texas under an agreement with the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). On
November 3, 1972, all 36 Core I spent fuel elements were returned to
the AEC and transferred by the AEC for reprocessing at its Savannah
River Site in South Carolina.
On May 19, 1976, the operating license for the NSS was amended to a
possession-only license.
2.0 Action
Section 50.54(p)(1) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(10 CFR) states, in part, ``The licensee shall prepare and maintain
safeguards contingency plan procedures in accordance with Appendix C of
Part 73 of this chapter for affecting the actions and decisions
contained in the Responsibility Matrix of the safeguards contingency
plan.''
Part 73 of 10 CFR, ``Physical Protection of Plant and Materials,''
provides in part in section 73.1(a), ``This part prescribes
requirements for the establishment and maintenance of a physical
protection system which will have capabilities for the protection of
special nuclear material at fixed sites and in transit and of plants in
which special nuclear material is used.'' In Section 73.55, entitled
``Requirements for physical protection of licensed activities in
nuclear power reactors against radiological sabotage,'' paragraph
(b)(1) states, ``The licensee shall establish and maintain a physical
protection program, to include a security organization, which will have
as its objective to provide high assurance that activities involving
special nuclear material are not inimical to the common defense and
security and do not constitute an unreasonable risk to the public
health and safety.''
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission)
revised 10 CFR 73.55, in part to include the preceding language,
through the issuance of a final rule on March 27, 2009 (74 FR 13970).
The revised regulation stated that it was applicable to all Part 50
licensees. The NRC became aware that some Part 50 licensees with
facilities in decommissioning status did not recognize the
applicability of this regulation to their facility. Accordingly, the
NRC informed licensees with facilities in decommissioning status and
other stakeholders that the requirements of 10 CFR 73.55 were
applicable to all Part 50 licensees. By letter dated August 2, 2010,
the NRC informed MARAD of the applicability of the revised rule and
stated that it would have to evaluate the applicability of the
regulation to its facility and either make appropriate changes or
request an exemption.
By letter dated November 8, 2010, MARAD responded to the NRC's
letter and requested exemptions from the security requirements in 10
CFR part 73 and 10 CFR 50.54(p).
3.0 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 or
safety, and are consistent with the common defense and security; and
(2) when special circumstances are present. Special circumstances are
present when, for example, application of the regulation in the
particular circumstances would not serve the underlying purpose of the
rule or when compliance would result in costs significantly in excess
of those incurred by others similarly situated. Also, pursuant to 10
CFR 73.5, ``Specific exemptions,'' the Commission may, upon application
of any interested person or upon its own initiative, grant exemptions
from the regulations in Part 73 as it determines are authorized by law
and will not endanger life or property or the common defense and
security, and are otherwise in the public interest.
The purpose of the security requirements of 10 CFR part 73, as
applicable to a 10 CFR part 50 licensed facility, is to prescribe
requirements for a facility that possesses and utilizes SNM. By the end
of 1972, all spent fuel at the NSS had been returned to the AEC for
reprocessing. Since the license defines the facility as the reactor and
associated components located aboard the ship, the removal of the spent
Core I fuel from the ship is equivalent to removing all SNM from the
NRC licensed site other than that contained in plant systems as
residual contamination.
The remaining radioactive material of concern (i.e., reactor
vessel, piping systems, and ship structures) for the NSS is in a form
that does not pose a risk of removal (i.e., an intact reactor pressure
vessel) and is well dispersed and is not easily aggregated into
significant quantities. With the removal of the fuel containing SNM,
the potential for radiological sabotage or diversion of SNM at the 10
CFR part 50 licensed site was eliminated. Therefore, the continued
application of the fixed site physical protection requirements of 10
CFR part 73 to the NSS would no longer be necessary to achieve the
underlying purpose of the rule. Additionally, as has been noted at
other decommissioning nuclear power facilities, with the removal of the
spent nuclear fuel from the site, the 10 CFR part 50 licensed site
would be comparable to a source and byproduct licensee that uses
general industrial security (i.e. locks and barriers) to protect the
public health and safety. The continued application of fixed site
physical protection requirements of 10 CFR part 73 would cause the
licensee to expend significantly more funds for security requirements
than other source and byproduct facilities that use general industrial
security. Therefore, compliance with the fixed site physical protection
requirements of 10 CFR Part 73 would result in costs significantly in
excess of those incurred by others similarly situated. Based on the
above, the NRC has determined that the removal of the fuel containing
SNM at the 10 CFR part 50 licensed site constitutes special
circumstances. The possession and responsibility for the security of
the SNM was transferred to the AEC and is no longer the responsibility
of the licensee. Therefore, protection of the SNM is no longer a
requirement of the licensee's 10 CFR part 50 license. With no SNM to
protect, there is no need for the physical protection requirements of
10 CFR part 73, which includes a safeguards contingency plan or
procedures, physical security plan, guard training and qualification
plan, and cyber security plan for the NSS, 10 CFR part 50 licensed
site. The requirements for protection of safeguards information,
physical protection of SNM in transit, and records and reports remain
applicable.
4.0 Conclusion
Accordingly, the Commission has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR
50.12(a), an exemption is authorized by law, will not present an undue
risk to the public health and safety, and is consistent with the common
defense
[[Page 65544]]
and security based on the continued maintenance of appropriate security
requirements for the remaining SNM contained in plant systems as
residual contamination. Additionally, special circumstances are present
based on the removal of the spent nuclear fuel from the 10 CFR part 50
licensed site. Therefore, the Commission hereby grants MARAD an
exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(p) for the NSS.
The Commission has also determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR 73.5,
an exemption is authorized by law, will not endanger life or property
or the common defense and security, and is otherwise in the public
interest based on the security requirements for the spent fuel
containing SNM no longer being the responsibility of the licensee.
Therefore, the Commission hereby grants MARAD an exemption from the
fixed site physical protection requirements of 10 CFR Part 73 for the
NSS. The fixed site physical protection requirements of 10 CFR Part 73
are delineated in Sec. Sec. 73.20, 74.40, 73.45, 73.46, 73.50, 73.51,
73.54, 73.55, 73.56, 73.57, 73.58, 73.59, 73.60, 73.61, 73.67, Appendix
B and Appendix C. The requirements for protection of safeguards
information, physical protection of SNM in transit, and records and
reports, contained in these or other sections of Part 73 continue to
apply. To the extent that the licensee's request for an exemption from
10 CFR part 73 included requirements other than the fixed site physical
protection requirements, that request is denied.
Part of this licensing action meets the categorical exclusion
provision in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25), as part of this action is an
exemption from the requirements of the Commission's regulations and (i)
there is no significant hazards consideration; (ii) there is no
significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts
of any effluents that may be released offsite; (iii) there is no
significant increase in individual or cumulative public or occupational
radiation exposure; (iv) there is no significant construction impact;
(v) there is no significant increase in the potential for or
consequences from radiological accidents; and (vi) the requirements
from which an exemption is sought involve safeguard plans. Therefore,
this part of the action does not require either an environmental
assessment or an environmental impact statement.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21, 51.32, and 51.35, an environmental
assessment and finding of no significant impact related to the part of
this exemption not dealing with safeguards plans (i.e.; transportation
of SNM, interaction with emergency planning, and background checks) was
published in the Federal Register on September 23, 2011 (76 FR 59174).
Based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission has determined
that issuance of this exemption will not have a significant effect on
the quality of the human environment.
These exemptions are effective immediately.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of October 2011.
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Keith I. McConnell,
Deputy Director, Decommissioning and Uranium Recovery Licensing
Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection,
Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011-27279 Filed 10-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P