License Exemption Request for NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC; Seabrook Station, Unit 1, 14304-14307 [2014-05498]
Download as PDF
14304
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 49 / Thursday, March 13, 2014 / Notices
2. Category of Respondents
In its evaluation forms, the NTSB will
generally seek information only from
attendees of each course. The NTSB will
have the contact information for each
attendee, because such information is
required when registering for Training
Center courses.
3. Maximum Burden Hours
The NTSB plans to distribute the
evaluations to attendees of each
Training Center course. The NTSB offers
12 courses per year including multiple
iterations. Among all courses, the NTSB
estimates a total of 600 non-Government
attendees complete courses in any given
year. As a result, the NTSB estimates it
will distribute approximately 600
Training Center evaluation forms each
year. Each evaluation form will take
approximately 11 minutes to complete.
The NTSB seeks to emphasize these
estimations are approximate, as they are
depend on the number of courses the
NTSB offers in the Training Center.
Some courses may be cancelled due to
low registration. In addition, only
Government employees may choose to
attend other courses. As a result, the
NTSB can only provide an approximate
estimate of the number of attendees per
year.
4. Use of the Information Collected
Feedback from attendees of NTSB
Training Center courses is extremely
important to the NTSB. The NTSB plans
its course offerings based on the level of
interest from potential attendees and on
the degree to which attendees have
found useful the information they
learned during such courses. As a result,
evaluations of NTSB Training Center
courses will influence future course
offerings. The NTSB will rely upon the
provision of completed course
evaluations to assist with the planning
of course offerings.
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
5. Public Input Regarding the
Information Collected
The NTSB does not generally obtain
public input concerning the scope of, or
specific questions on, NTSB Training
Center evaluation forms.
6. Internal Procedures
Lastly, the OIRA Administrator’s
memorandum describing generic
clearances recommends agencies
describe the procedures it will
undertake to ensure information
collections to which the generic
clearance applies will comply with the
Paperwork Reduction Act, applicable
regulations, and the terms provided in
the generic clearance. The NTSB Office
of General Counsel plans to provide
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Mar 12, 2014
Jkt 232001
internal guidance to agency personnel
who offer courses and distribute course
evaluations at the NTSB Training
Center. Such guidance will include this
publication, as well as the OIRA
Administrator’s memorandum
discussing generic clearances, upon
OMB approval of the clearance. The
internal guidance will include specific
instructions concerning use of
evaluation forms, and explain the
applicable provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act and its implementing
regulations.
C. Description of Burden
The NTSB has carefully reviewed
previous questionnaires it has used to
obtain information from attendees of
courses the NTSB Training Center
offers. The NTSB assures the public that
these questionnaires have used plain,
coherent, and unambiguous terminology
in its requests for feedback. In addition,
the questionnaires are not duplicative of
other agencies’ collections of
information, because the NTSB
maintains unique authority to offer such
courses concerning investigations of
transportation events. 49 U.S.C.
1113(b)(1)(I).
In general, the NTSB believes the
evaluation forms will impose a minimal
burden on respondents: As indicated
above, the NTSB estimates that each
respondent will spend approximately 11
minutes in completing the evaluation.
The NTSB estimates that a maximum of
240 respondents per year would
complete an evaluation. Although the
NTSB may distribute evaluations to
perhaps as many as 600 people, historic
response rates indicate only 40 percent
of the evaluations will be returned
completed. However, the NTSB again
notes this number will vary, given the
changes and demand for course
offerings at the NTSB Training Center.
D. Request for Comments
In accordance with 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A), the NTSB seeks feedback
from the public concerning this
proposed plan for information
collection. In particular, the NTSB asks
the public to evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is
necessary; to assess the accuracy of the
NTSB’s burden estimate; to comment on
how to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and to comment on how the
NTSB might minimize the burden of the
collection of information.
The NTSB will carefully consider all
feedback it receives in response to this
notice. As described above, obtaining
the information the NTSB seeks on
these evaluations in a timely manner is
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
important to course offerings at the
NTSB Training Center; therefore,
obtaining approval from OIRA for these
collections of information on a generic
basis is a priority for the NTSB.
Deborah A.P. Hersman,
Chairman.
[FR Doc. 2014–05531 Filed 3–12–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7533–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–443; NRC–2014–0043]
License Exemption Request for
NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC;
Seabrook Station, Unit 1
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Exemption; issuance.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is issuing an
exemption in response to a June 25,
2013, request from NextEra Energy,
Seabrook, LLC, requesting an exemption
for the use of a different fuel rod
cladding material (Optimized
ZIRLOTM).
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID
NRC–2014–0043 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of
information regarding this document.
You may access publicly-available
information related to this document
using any of the following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2014–0043. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422;
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
technical questions, contact the
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document.
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may access publicly
available documents online in the NRC
Library at https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/adams.html. To begin the search,
select ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and
then select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS
Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC’s Public
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
ADAMS accession number for each
document referenced in this document
(if that document is available in
ADAMS) is provided the first time that
a document is referenced.
• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and
purchase copies of public documents at
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13MRN1.SGM
13MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 49 / Thursday, March 13, 2014 / Notices
the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
G. Lamb, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, telephone: 301–415–3100; email:
John.Lamb@nrc.gov.
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
I. Background
NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC
(NextEra or the licensee) is the holder of
Facility Operating License No. NPF–86,
which authorizes operation of the
Seabrook Station, Unit 1 (Seabrook).
The license provides, among other
things, that the facility is subject to all
rules, regulations, and orders of the NRC
now or hereafter in effect. The facility
consists of a pressurized-water reactor
located in Rockingham County in New
Hampshire.
II. Request/Action
Pursuant to § 50.12, of Title 10 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
‘‘Specific exemptions,’’ the licensee has,
by letter dated June 25, 2013 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML13183A056),
requested an exemption from specific
requirements of 10 CFR 50.46,
‘‘Acceptance criteria for emergency core
cooling systems [ECCS] for light-water
nuclear power reactors,’’ and 10 CFR
Part 50, Appendix K, ‘‘ECCS Evaluation
Models,’’ to allow the use of fuel rod
cladding with optimized ZIRLOTM alloy
for future reload applications. The
regulations in 10 CFR 50.46 contain
acceptance criteria for the ECCS for
reactors fueled with zircaloy or
ZIRLOTM fuel rod cladding material. In
addition, Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50
requires that the Baker-Just equation be
used to predict the rates of energy
release, hydrogen concentration, and
cladding oxidation from the metal/water
reaction. The Baker-Just equation
assumes the use of a zirconium alloy,
which is a material different from
Optimized ZIRLOTM. The licensee
requested the exemption because these
regulations do not have provisions for
the use of fuel rod cladding material
other than zircaloy or ZIRLOTM.
Because the material specifications of
Optimized ZIRLOTM differ from the
specifications for zircaloy or ZIRLOTM,
a plant-specific exemption is required to
support the reload applications for
Seabrook.
The exemption request relates solely
to the cladding material specified in
these regulations (i.e., fuel rods with
Zircaloy or ZIRLOTM cladding material).
This exemption would provide for the
application of the acceptance criteria of
10 CFR 50.46 and 10 CFR Part 50,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Mar 12, 2014
Jkt 232001
Appendix K, to fuel assembly designs
using Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel rod
cladding material. In its letter dated
June 25, 2013, the licensee indicated
that it was not seeking an exemption
from the acceptance and analytical
criteria of these regulations. The intent
of the request is to allow the use of the
criteria set forth in these regulations for
application to the Optimized ZIRLOTM
fuel rod cladding material.
III. 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. Under 10
CFR 50.12(a)(2), special circumstances
include, among other things, when
application of the specific regulation in
the particular circumstance would not
serve, or is not necessary to achieve, the
underlying purpose of the rule.
A. Special Circumstances
Special circumstances, in accordance
with 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), are present
whenever application of the regulation
in the particular circumstances is not
necessary to achieve the underlying
purpose of the rule. The underlying
purpose of 10 CFR 50.46 and Appendix
K to 10 CFR Part 50 is to establish
acceptance criteria for ECCS
performance. The regulations in 10 CFR
50.46 and Appendix K are not directly
applicable to Optimized ZIRLOTM, even
though the evaluations described in the
following sections of this exemption
show that the intent of the regulation is
met. Therefore, since the underlying
purposes of 10 CFR 50.46 and 10 CFR
Part 50, Appendix K are achieved
through the use of Optimized ZIRLOTM
fuel rod cladding material, the special
circumstances required by 10 CFR
50.12(a)(2)(ii) for the granting of an
exemption exist.
B. Authorized by Law
This exemption would allow the use
of Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel rod
cladding material for future reload
applications at Seabrook. As stated
above, 10 CFR 50.12 allows the NRC to
grant exemptions from the requirements
of 10 CFR Part 50. The NRC staff has
determined that granting the licensee’s
proposed exemption would not result in
a violation of the Atomic Energy Act of
1954, as amended, or the Commission’s
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14305
regulations. Therefore, the exemption is
authorized by law.
C. No Undue Risk to Public Health and
Safety
Section 10 CFR 50.46 requires that
each boiling or pressurized light-water
nuclear power reactor fueled with
uranium oxide pellets within
cylindrical zircaloy or ZIRLO cladding
must be provided with an ECCS that
must be designed so that its calculated
cooling performance following
postulated loss-of-coolant accidents
(LOCAs) conforms to the criteria set
forth in paragraph (b) of this section.
The underlying purpose of 10 CFR 50.46
is to establish acceptance criteria for
adequate ECCS performance. As
previously documented in the NRC
staff’s safety evaluation dated June 10,
2005 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML051670395), of topical reports
submitted by Westinghouse, and subject
to compliance with the specific
conditions of approval established in
the safety evaluation, the NRC staff
found that Westinghouse demonstrated
the applicability of these ECCS
acceptance criteria to Optimized
ZIRLOTM. Ring compression tests
performed by Westinghouse on
Optimized ZIRLOTM (see WCAP–
14342–A & CENPD–404–NP–A at
ADAMS Accession No. ML062080569)
demonstrate an acceptable retention of
postquench ductility up to 10 CFR 50.46
limits of 2200 degrees Fahrenheit and
17 percent equivalent clad reacted.
Furthermore, the NRC staff concluded
that oxidation measurements provided
by the licensee by letter LTR–NRC–07–
58 from Westinghouse to the NRC, ‘‘SER
Compliance with WCAP–12610–P–A &
CENPD–404–P–A, Addendum 1–A,
‘Optimized ZIRLOTM,’ ’’ dated
November 6, 2007 (public version is at
ADAMS Accession No. ML073130560),
illustrate that oxide thickness and
associated hydrogen pickup for
Optimized ZIRLOTM at any given
burnup would be less than both
zircaloy-4 and ZIRLOTM. Hence, the
NRC staff concludes that Optimized
ZIRLOTM would be expected to
maintain better postquench ductility
than ZIRLOTM. This finding is further
supported by an ongoing LOCA research
program at Argonne National
Laboratory, which has identified a
strong correlation between cladding
hydrogen content (caused by in-service
corrosion) and postquench ductility.
In addition, the provisions of 10 CFR
50.46 require the licensee to
periodically evaluate the performance of
the ECCS, using currently approved
LOCA models and methods, to ensure
that the fuel rods will continue to satisfy
E:\FR\FM\13MRN1.SGM
13MRN1
14306
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 49 / Thursday, March 13, 2014 / Notices
the 10 CFR 50.46 acceptance criteria. In
its letter dated June 25, 2013, the
licensee stated that for LOCA scenarios,
where the slight difference in Optimized
ZIRLOTM material properties relative to
standard ZIRLOTM could have some
impact on the overall accident scenario,
plant-specific LOCA analyses using
Optimized ZIRLOTM properties will
demonstrate that the acceptance criteria
of 10 CFR 50.46 have been satisfied.
Granting the exemption to allow the
licensee to use Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel
rod cladding material in addition to the
current mix of fuel rods does not
diminish this requirement of periodic
evaluation of ECCS performance. Thus,
the underlying purpose of the rule will
continue to be achieved for Seabrook.
Paragraph I.A.5 of Appendix K to 10
CFR Part 50 states that the rates of
energy release, hydrogen concentration,
and cladding oxidation from the metalwater reaction shall be calculated using
the Baker-Just equation. Since the
Baker-Just equation presumes the use of
zircaloy clad fuel, strict application of
this provision of the rule would not
permit use of the equation for the
Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel rod cladding
material for determining acceptable fuel
performance. However, the NRC staff
previously found that metal-water
reaction tests performed by
Westinghouse on Optimized ZIRLOTM
(see Appendix B of WCAP–12610–P–A
& CENPD–404–P–A, Addendum 1–A)
demonstrate conservative reaction rates
relative to the Baker-Just equation.
Thus, the NRC staff determined that the
application of Appendix K, Paragraph
I.A.5 is not necessary to achieve the
underlying purpose of the rule in these
circumstances. Since these evaluations
demonstrate that the underlying
purpose of the rule will be met, there
will be no undue risk to the public
health and safety.
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
D. Consistent With the Common Defense
and Security
The licensee’s exemption request is
only to allow the application of the
aforementioned regulations to an
improved fuel rod cladding material. In
its letter dated June 25, 2013, the
licensee stated that all the requirements
and acceptance criteria will be
maintained. The licensee is required to
handle and control special nuclear
material in these assemblies in
accordance with its approved
procedures. This change to the plant
configuration is not related to security
issues. Therefore, the NRC staff
determined that this exemption does not
impact common defense and security.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Mar 12, 2014
Jkt 232001
E. Environmental Considerations
The NRC staff determined that the
exemption discussed herein meets the
eligibility criteria for the categorical
exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)
because it is related to a requirement
concerning the installation or use of a
facility component located within the
restricted area, as defined in 10 CFR
Part 20, and the granting of this
exemption involves: (i) No significant
hazards consideration, (ii) no significant
change in the types or a significant
increase in the amounts of any effluents
that may be released offsite, and (iii) no
significant increase in individual or
cumulative occupational radiation
exposure. Therefore, in accordance with
10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental
impact statement or environmental
assessment need be prepared in
connection with the NRC’s
consideration of this exemption request.
The basis for the NRC staff’s
determination is discussed as follows
with an evaluation against each of the
requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(i)
The NRC staff evaluated the issue of
no significant hazards consideration,
using the standards described in 10 CFR
50.92(c), as presented below:
1. Does the proposed exemption
involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change would allow the
use of Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel rod
cladding material in the reactors. The
NRC approved topical report WCAP–
12610–P–A and CENPD–404–P–A,
Addendum 1–A ‘‘Optimized ZIRLOTM,’’
prepared by Westinghouse, addresses
Optimized ZIRLOTM and demonstrates
that Optimized ZIRLOTM has essentially
the same properties as the currently
licensed ZIRLO®. The fuel cladding
itself is not an accident initiator and
does not affect accident probability. Use
of Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel rod
cladding material will continue to meet
all 10 CFR 50.46 acceptance criteria
and, therefore, will not increase the
consequences of an accident.
Therefore, the proposed change does
not involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed exemption
create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any
accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The use of Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel
rod cladding material will not result in
changes in the operation or
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
configuration of the facility. Topical
Report WCAP–12610–P–A and CENPD–
404–P–A demonstrated that the material
properties of Optimized ZIRLOTM are
similar to those of standard ZIRLO®.
Therefore, the Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel
rod cladding material will perform
similarly to those fabricated from
standard ZIRLO®, thus precluding the
possibility of the fuel cladding
becoming an accident initiator and
causing a new or different type of
accident.
Therefore, the proposed change does
not create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed exemption
involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change will not involve
a significant reduction in the margin of
safety, because it has been demonstrated
that the material properties of the
Optimized ZIRLOTM are not
significantly different from those of
standard ZIRLO®. Optimized ZIRLOTM
is expected to perform similarly to
standard ZIRLO® for all normal
operating and accident scenarios,
including both LOCA and non-LOCA
scenarios. For LOCA scenarios, where
the slight difference in the Optimized
ZIRLOTM material properties, relative to
standard ZIRLO® could have some
impact on the overall accident scenario,
plant-specific LOCA analyses using the
Optimized ZIRLOTM properties
demonstrate that the acceptance criteria
of 10 CFR 50.46 have been satisfied.
Therefore, the proposed change does
not involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety.
Based on the above, the NRC staff
concludes that the proposed exemption
presents no significant hazards
consideration under the standards set
forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), and,
accordingly, a finding of no significant
hazards consideration is justified (i.e.,
satisfies the provision of 10 CFR
51.22(c)(9)(i)).
Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(ii)
The proposed exemption would allow
the use of Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel rod
cladding material in the reactors.
Optimized ZIRLOTM has essentially the
same properties as the currently
licensed ZIRLO®. The use of the
Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel rod cladding
material will not significantly change
the types of effluents that may be
released offsite, or significantly increase
the amount of effluents that may be
released offsite. Therefore, the provision
of 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(ii) is satisfied.
E:\FR\FM\13MRN1.SGM
13MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 49 / Thursday, March 13, 2014 / Notices
Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(iii)
The proposed exemption would allow
the use of the Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel
rod cladding material in the reactors.
Optimized ZIRLOTM has essentially the
same properties as the currently
licensed ZIRLO®. The use of the
Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel rod cladding
material will not significantly increase
individual occupational radiation
exposure, or significantly increase
cumulative occupational radiation
exposure. Therefore, the provision of 10
CFR 51.22(c)(9)(iii) is satisfied.
Conclusion
Based on the above, the NRC staff
concludes that the proposed exemption
meets the eligibility criteria for the
categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR
51.22(c)(9). Therefore, in accordance
with 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental
impact statement or environmental
assessment need be prepared in
connection with the NRC’s proposed
issuance of this exemption.
IV. Conclusions
Accordingly, the Commission has
determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR
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 NextEra
an exemption from the requirements of
10 CFR 50.46 and Appendix K to 10
CFR Part 50, to allow the use of
Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel rod cladding
material at Seabrook. As stated above,
this exemption relates solely to the
cladding material specified in these
regulations.
This exemption is effective upon
issuance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day
of February 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michele Evans,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2014–05498 Filed 3–12–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. MC2014–21 and R2014–6;
Order No. 2009]
New Postal Product
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:33 Mar 12, 2014
Jkt 232001
The Commission is noticing a
recent Postal Service filing requesting
the addition of PHI Acquisitions, Inc. to
the market dominant product list. This
notice informs the public of the filing,
invites public comment, and takes other
administrative steps.
DATES: Comments are due: March 27,
2014. Reply comments are due: April 3,
2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
electronically via the Commission’s
Filing Online system at https://
www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit
comments electronically should contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section by
telephone for advice on filing
alternatives.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Corcoran, Acting General Counsel,
at 202–789–6820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Notice of Filings
III. Ordering Paragraphs
I. Introduction
On March 5, 2014, the Postal Service
filed a request pursuant to 39 U.S.C.
3622 and 3642, as well as 39 CFR 3010
and 3020, et seq., to add a PHI
Acquisitions, Inc. (PHI) negotiated
service agreement to the market
dominant product list.1
Request. In support of its Request, the
Postal Service filed six attachments as
follows:
• Attachment A—a copy of
Governors’ Resolution No. 14–02,
authorizing a negotiated service
agreement with PHI;
• Attachment B—a copy of the
contract;
• Attachment C—proposed
descriptive language changes to the Mail
Classification Schedule;
• Attachment D—a proposed data
collection plan;
• Attachment E—a Statement of
Supporting Justification as required by
39 CFR 3020.32, which the Postal
Service also is using to satisfy the
requirements of 39 CFR 3010.42(b)–(e);
and
• Attachment F—a financial model,
which the Postal Service believes
demonstrates that the agreement will
have a net value of approximately
$10.748 million.2
1 Notice of the United States Postal Service of
Filing Contract and Supporting Data and Request to
Add PHI Acquisitions, Inc. Negotiated Service
Agreement to the Market-Dominant Product List,
March 5, 2014 (Request).
2 This Attachment is also referred to as
‘‘Attachment X’’ in the Request. Request at 12.
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14307
In its Request, the Postal Service
identifies Bruce Allen, Manager, Pricing
Innovation as the official able to provide
responses to queries from the
Commission. In his Statement of
Supporting Justification, Mr. Allen
reviews the factors and objectives of
section 3622(b) and (c) and concludes,
inter alia, that the agreement will
provide an incentive for profitable mail;
will enhance the financial position of
the Postal Service; will increase mail
volume; will not imperil the ability of
Standard Mail to cover its attributable
costs; and promotes the use of
intelligent mail. Id., Attachment E at 1–
3.
The Postal Service believes that the
PHI negotiated service agreement
conforms to the policies of the Postal
Accountability and Enhancement Act
and meets the statutory standards
supporting the desirability of this
special classification under 39 U.S.C.
3622(c)(10). Request at 3. In particular,
the Postal Service believes the
agreement has the potential to enhance
the Postal Service’s financial position,
and it will not cause unreasonable harm
to the marketplace. Id.
Related contract. The Postal Service
indicates that the agreement is designed
to increase the total contribution the
Postal Service receives from PHI
Standard Mail Carrier Route Flats
volume and revenue by generating new,
incremental Standard Mail Carrier
Route Flats volume and revenue. Id. at
6–7. The Postal Service describes the
agreement and its four main
components: (1) A volume threshold, (2)
a volume threshold adjustment, (3) a
volume commitment, and (4) rebates on
qualifying Standard Mail Carrier Route
Flats volume.
Specifically, the volume threshold is
based on the amount of PHI’s total
volume for all four categories of Carrier
Route Flats (Saturation, High Density
Plus, High Density, and Basic), as well
as Flats Sequencing System (‘‘FSS’’)
Flats with a full-service IMb
barcode.3 Id. The baseline for the
volume threshold is PHI’s total volume
for these categories over the four
quarters from October 1, 2012 through
September 30, 2013. For the first year of
the agreement, the threshold is the
baseline volume. Id. For years two
through five of the agreement, the
threshold is the previous year’s annual
volume growth times the adjustment
factor plus the previous year’s volume
threshold. Id. at 7–8.
3 FSS Flats are included in the event FSS Flats
become a category or sub-category during the term
of the negotiated service agreement. Id. at 7.
E:\FR\FM\13MRN1.SGM
13MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 49 (Thursday, March 13, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14304-14307]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-05498]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-443; NRC-2014-0043]
License Exemption Request for NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC;
Seabrook Station, Unit 1
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Exemption; issuance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing an
exemption in response to a June 25, 2013, request from NextEra Energy,
Seabrook, LLC, requesting an exemption for the use of a different fuel
rod cladding material (Optimized ZIRLO\TM\).
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2014-0043 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You
may access publicly-available information related to this document
using any of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2014-0043. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-
3422; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may access publicly available documents online in the NRC
Library at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the
search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and then select ``Begin Web-
based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's
Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-
4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number
for each document referenced in this document (if that document is
available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that a document is
referenced.
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents at
[[Page 14305]]
the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John G. Lamb, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001, telephone: 301-415-3100; email: John.Lamb@nrc.gov.
I. Background
NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC (NextEra or the licensee) is the
holder of Facility Operating License No. NPF-86, which authorizes
operation of the Seabrook Station, Unit 1 (Seabrook). The license
provides, among other things, that the facility is subject to all
rules, regulations, and orders of the NRC now or hereafter in effect.
The facility consists of a pressurized-water reactor located in
Rockingham County in New Hampshire.
II. Request/Action
Pursuant to Sec. 50.12, of Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), ``Specific exemptions,'' the licensee has, by
letter dated June 25, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No. ML13183A056), requested
an exemption from specific requirements of 10 CFR 50.46, ``Acceptance
criteria for emergency core cooling systems [ECCS] for light-water
nuclear power reactors,'' and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix K, ``ECCS
Evaluation Models,'' to allow the use of fuel rod cladding with
optimized ZIRLO\TM\ alloy for future reload applications. The
regulations in 10 CFR 50.46 contain acceptance criteria for the ECCS
for reactors fueled with zircaloy or ZIRLO\TM\ fuel rod cladding
material. In addition, Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50 requires that the
Baker-Just equation be used to predict the rates of energy release,
hydrogen concentration, and cladding oxidation from the metal/water
reaction. The Baker-Just equation assumes the use of a zirconium alloy,
which is a material different from Optimized ZIRLO\TM\. The licensee
requested the exemption because these regulations do not have
provisions for the use of fuel rod cladding material other than
zircaloy or ZIRLO\TM\. Because the material specifications of Optimized
ZIRLO\TM\ differ from the specifications for zircaloy or ZIRLO\TM\, a
plant-specific exemption is required to support the reload applications
for Seabrook.
The exemption request relates solely to the cladding material
specified in these regulations (i.e., fuel rods with Zircaloy or
ZIRLO\TM\ cladding material). This exemption would provide for the
application of the acceptance criteria of 10 CFR 50.46 and 10 CFR Part
50, Appendix K, to fuel assembly designs using Optimized ZIRLO\TM\ fuel
rod cladding material. In its letter dated June 25, 2013, the licensee
indicated that it was not seeking an exemption from the acceptance and
analytical criteria of these regulations. The intent of the request is
to allow the use of the criteria set forth in these regulations for
application to the Optimized ZIRLO\TM\ fuel rod cladding material.
III. 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. Under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2),
special circumstances include, among other things, when application of
the specific regulation in the particular circumstance would not serve,
or is not necessary to achieve, the underlying purpose of the rule.
A. Special Circumstances
Special circumstances, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii),
are present whenever application of the regulation in the particular
circumstances is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the
rule. The underlying purpose of 10 CFR 50.46 and Appendix K to 10 CFR
Part 50 is to establish acceptance criteria for ECCS performance. The
regulations in 10 CFR 50.46 and Appendix K are not directly applicable
to Optimized ZIRLO\TM\, even though the evaluations described in the
following sections of this exemption show that the intent of the
regulation is met. Therefore, since the underlying purposes of 10 CFR
50.46 and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix K are achieved through the use of
Optimized ZIRLO\TM\ fuel rod cladding material, the special
circumstances required by 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) for the granting of an
exemption exist.
B. Authorized by Law
This exemption would allow the use of Optimized ZIRLO\TM\ fuel rod
cladding material for future reload applications at Seabrook. As stated
above, 10 CFR 50.12 allows the NRC to grant exemptions from the
requirements of 10 CFR Part 50. The NRC staff has determined that
granting the licensee's proposed exemption would 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.
C. No Undue Risk to Public Health and Safety
Section 10 CFR 50.46 requires that each boiling or pressurized
light-water nuclear power reactor fueled with uranium oxide pellets
within cylindrical zircaloy or ZIRLO cladding must be provided with an
ECCS that must be designed so that its calculated cooling performance
following postulated loss-of-coolant accidents (LOCAs) conforms to the
criteria set forth in paragraph (b) of this section. The underlying
purpose of 10 CFR 50.46 is to establish acceptance criteria for
adequate ECCS performance. As previously documented in the NRC staff's
safety evaluation dated June 10, 2005 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML051670395), of topical reports submitted by Westinghouse, and subject
to compliance with the specific conditions of approval established in
the safety evaluation, the NRC staff found that Westinghouse
demonstrated the applicability of these ECCS acceptance criteria to
Optimized ZIRLO\TM\. Ring compression tests performed by Westinghouse
on Optimized ZIRLO\TM\ (see WCAP-14342-A & CENPD-404-NP-A at ADAMS
Accession No. ML062080569) demonstrate an acceptable retention of
postquench ductility up to 10 CFR 50.46 limits of 2200 degrees
Fahrenheit and 17 percent equivalent clad reacted. Furthermore, the NRC
staff concluded that oxidation measurements provided by the licensee by
letter LTR-NRC-07-58 from Westinghouse to the NRC, ``SER Compliance
with WCAP-12610-P-A & CENPD-404-P-A, Addendum 1-A, `Optimized
ZIRLO\TM\,' '' dated November 6, 2007 (public version is at ADAMS
Accession No. ML073130560), illustrate that oxide thickness and
associated hydrogen pickup for Optimized ZIRLO\TM\ at any given burnup
would be less than both zircaloy-4 and ZIRLO\TM\. Hence, the NRC staff
concludes that Optimized ZIRLO\TM\ would be expected to maintain better
postquench ductility than ZIRLO\TM\. This finding is further supported
by an ongoing LOCA research program at Argonne National Laboratory,
which has identified a strong correlation between cladding hydrogen
content (caused by in-service corrosion) and postquench ductility.
In addition, the provisions of 10 CFR 50.46 require the licensee to
periodically evaluate the performance of the ECCS, using currently
approved LOCA models and methods, to ensure that the fuel rods will
continue to satisfy
[[Page 14306]]
the 10 CFR 50.46 acceptance criteria. In its letter dated June 25,
2013, the licensee stated that for LOCA scenarios, where the slight
difference in Optimized ZIRLO\TM\ material properties relative to
standard ZIRLO\TM\ could have some impact on the overall accident
scenario, plant-specific LOCA analyses using Optimized ZIRLO\TM\
properties will demonstrate that the acceptance criteria of 10 CFR
50.46 have been satisfied. Granting the exemption to allow the licensee
to use Optimized ZIRLO\TM\ fuel rod cladding material in addition to
the current mix of fuel rods does not diminish this requirement of
periodic evaluation of ECCS performance. Thus, the underlying purpose
of the rule will continue to be achieved for Seabrook.
Paragraph I.A.5 of Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50 states that the
rates of energy release, hydrogen concentration, and cladding oxidation
from the metal-water reaction shall be calculated using the Baker-Just
equation. Since the Baker-Just equation presumes the use of zircaloy
clad fuel, strict application of this provision of the rule would not
permit use of the equation for the Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel
rod cladding material for determining acceptable fuel performance.
However, the NRC staff previously found that metal-water reaction tests
performed by Westinghouse on Optimized ZIRLOTM (see Appendix
B of WCAP-12610-P-A & CENPD-404-P-A, Addendum 1-A) demonstrate
conservative reaction rates relative to the Baker-Just equation. Thus,
the NRC staff determined that the application of Appendix K, Paragraph
I.A.5 is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule in
these circumstances. Since these evaluations demonstrate that the
underlying purpose of the rule will be met, there will be no undue risk
to the public health and safety.
D. Consistent With the Common Defense and Security
The licensee's exemption request is only to allow the application
of the aforementioned regulations to an improved fuel rod cladding
material. In its letter dated June 25, 2013, the licensee stated that
all the requirements and acceptance criteria will be maintained. The
licensee is required to handle and control special nuclear material in
these assemblies in accordance with its approved procedures. This
change to the plant configuration is not related to security issues.
Therefore, the NRC staff determined that this exemption does not impact
common defense and security.
E. Environmental Considerations
The NRC staff determined that the exemption discussed herein meets
the eligibility criteria for the categorical exclusion set forth in 10
CFR 51.22(c)(9) because it is related to a requirement concerning the
installation or use of a facility component located within the
restricted area, as defined in 10 CFR Part 20, and the granting of this
exemption involves: (i) No significant hazards consideration, (ii) no
significant change in the types or a significant increase in the
amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite, and (iii) no
significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation
exposure. Therefore, in accordance with 10 CFR 51.22(b), no
environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be
prepared in connection with the NRC's consideration of this exemption
request. The basis for the NRC staff's determination is discussed as
follows with an evaluation against each of the requirements in 10 CFR
51.22(c)(9).
Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(i)
The NRC staff evaluated the issue of no significant hazards
consideration, using the standards described in 10 CFR 50.92(c), as
presented below:
1. Does the proposed exemption involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change would allow the use of Optimized
ZIRLOTM fuel rod cladding material in the reactors. The NRC
approved topical report WCAP-12610-P-A and CENPD-404-P-A, Addendum 1-A
``Optimized ZIRLOTM,'' prepared by Westinghouse, addresses
Optimized ZIRLOTM and demonstrates that Optimized
ZIRLOTM has essentially the same properties as the currently
licensed ZIRLO[supreg]. The fuel cladding itself is not an accident
initiator and does not affect accident probability. Use of Optimized
ZIRLOTM fuel rod cladding material will continue to meet all
10 CFR 50.46 acceptance criteria and, therefore, will not increase the
consequences of an accident.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously
evaluated.
2. Does the proposed exemption create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The use of Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel rod cladding material
will not result in changes in the operation or configuration of the
facility. Topical Report WCAP-12610-P-A and CENPD-404-P-A demonstrated
that the material properties of Optimized ZIRLOTM are
similar to those of standard ZIRLO[supreg]. Therefore, the Optimized
ZIRLOTM fuel rod cladding material will perform similarly to
those fabricated from standard ZIRLO[supreg], thus precluding the
possibility of the fuel cladding becoming an accident initiator and
causing a new or different type of accident.
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a
new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed exemption involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change will not involve a significant reduction in the
margin of safety, because it has been demonstrated that the material
properties of the Optimized ZIRLOTM are not significantly
different from those of standard ZIRLO[supreg]. Optimized
ZIRLOTM is expected to perform similarly to standard
ZIRLO[supreg] for all normal operating and accident scenarios,
including both LOCA and non-LOCA scenarios. For LOCA scenarios, where
the slight difference in the Optimized ZIRLOTM material
properties, relative to standard ZIRLO[supreg] could have some impact
on the overall accident scenario, plant-specific LOCA analyses using
the Optimized ZIRLOTM properties demonstrate that the
acceptance criteria of 10 CFR 50.46 have been satisfied.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant
reduction in a margin of safety.
Based on the above, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed
exemption presents no significant hazards consideration under the
standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), and, accordingly, a finding of
no significant hazards consideration is justified (i.e., satisfies the
provision of 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(i)).
Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(ii)
The proposed exemption would allow the use of Optimized
ZIRLOTM fuel rod cladding material in the reactors.
Optimized ZIRLOTM has essentially the same properties as the
currently licensed ZIRLO[supreg]. The use of the Optimized
ZIRLOTM fuel rod cladding material will not significantly
change the types of effluents that may be released offsite, or
significantly increase the amount of effluents that may be released
offsite. Therefore, the provision of 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(ii) is
satisfied.
[[Page 14307]]
Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(iii)
The proposed exemption would allow the use of the Optimized
ZIRLOTM fuel rod cladding material in the reactors.
Optimized ZIRLOTM has essentially the same properties as the
currently licensed ZIRLO[supreg]. The use of the Optimized
ZIRLOTM fuel rod cladding material will not significantly
increase individual occupational radiation exposure, or significantly
increase cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Therefore, the
provision of 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(iii) is satisfied.
Conclusion
Based on the above, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed
exemption meets the eligibility criteria for the categorical exclusion
set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Therefore, in accordance with 10 CFR
51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment
need be prepared in connection with the NRC's proposed issuance of this
exemption.
IV. Conclusions
Accordingly, the Commission has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR
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 NextEra an exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.46 and Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50, to allow
the use of Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel rod cladding material at
Seabrook. As stated above, this exemption relates solely to the
cladding material specified in these regulations.
This exemption is effective upon issuance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of February 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michele Evans,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2014-05498 Filed 3-12-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P